American watchman and Delaware advertiser. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1822-1828, 1824-02-24

Mr.. Clay, (Speaker,) explained. IF an equiv
lent was given by the exclusion of the foreign arr
cle so as to give to our manufacturers the who
supply of the market, he would consent to tax
the domestic article equal to that now derived fro
the same foreign article.
Mr. M Dufie rejoined, lhat,if on the manufactul
of the domestic article was to be raised the amour
of duty now collected from the foreign article, b
could not conceive what the manufacturer could gal
10y such an argument.
Mr.. .nalLary objected to the statement produce
Iby MIR. Irimbte, as being unfortunate the perio
selected. The inquiry, to be fair, should have bee
lconhned to an ordinary and settled state of publ
affairs, and not to season Of distress in which tn
country had no commerce at all. The period fror
] 1905 to 1920, includes that Of the embargo. Bu
even then, the amount OF revenue from importc
spirits was double what it is at present. The gen
tleman includes, in his average, the year 1905, ii
which year alone, We imported twelve millions o
gallons but exclude this year, and the average viii
be nearly four millions. With all the embarrass
ments OF the war, we imported nearly as much a
we do now. The fair inference seemed TO be, tina
the present duty is sufficiently high. AS frenc
OF the bill, he wished to many causes of OBJ
lection as possible removed from its details
Mr.. Irinl6ts said he could only explain, and Their
have done. His friend behind him thought his sc
lection OF period for an average of the imports oil
spirits an unfortunate one. He thought the gentle.
mans selection an unlucky one. He compares one
period of the greatest distress with another OF the
greatest prosperity-but cannot consent to the fair
ness OF such proceeding. think we ought 10 com.
pare the most favorable with the most favorable peri
ods-& the most depressed with the most depressed
his alone will DC fair ground for estimate and
deduction. And on this principle, think the fact
will turn out to be- that the amount imported, in
stead OF being diminished by the tariff has been in
creased by for it will be found to be greater du-
ring the year 1916, and for four years Immediately
afterwards, than it was previously.
Mr.. L. made number OF other remarks in reply
to the comparative views of Mr.. .HcDAfe.
Mr.. .hatlary explained, in answer to MIR. Trim
6te-he thought that, for an average, number Of
years ought to be taken in succession--but either
all peace, or all in time Of war. And if, when
taken IN time of war, the average was greater than
il was in a time Of profound peace what stronger
argument was needed to shew that the duties ought
not to be increased
Mr.. Tod, Chairman of the Committee of Man
lactures' who had introduced the BILL rose and said
NAT ne was not so much opposed 10 the amendment
as ne was 10 the reasons advanced in support of it,
Not one argument had been urged, but what might
De urged with equal propriety against the whole
ariH The objection is, you prevent importation |
you cut oil trade Well, Sir, and what is the |
'bect OF the whole bill, but to protect home indus
~ oy preventing those lmporations which destroy
u Even the gentleman from South Carolina has
Urged the same objection He tells us whiskey re-
lulres no machinery or capital--no more do straw
comets. Dir, must protest against the mode o Fl
opposition which is pursued-if every member is
Q OBJECT 10 the bill the moment any of its proyi-
IONS affect himself or his constituents, not only
must TINS Dill be given up at once but domestic in
ustry must be lett without protection to the end OF
ime. ,
Mr.. Iced objected to the duty as calculated toll
"ouuce irsuos upon the revenue. There was no Il
rtIce on which the duties had so much been evadet
Europe' as this very article of spirits. If the
lll "as TO produce or encourage smuggling, he
hought 1t OF dangerous tendency. The statements
I the gentleman from Kentucky, (Mr. Trimble, Nj
ad gone to confirm his fears. He tells us that the t
Verage amount, since 1916, is nearly the same a, |
eiore that year | am by no means sure that the !
ctual importation has not increased, though the {
e'enue remains stationary. II was ON this point. I
ar. X SAID that ne wished most to be satisfied. d
MT 1racy explained in reply to MIR. Nc Luffe Ii
&c ala not wish to press any part Of the bill with.
VI discussion, but 10 try the general question frst
neither the House was disposed to Law duties ., iii
'r the protection OF manufactures and agriculture il
land, II this is settled in the affirmative then po
ITO the details OF the bill, and consider them tho
oughy' win view to make its provisions as equal
nd as beneficial as possible. He thought the prin f
lple OF the bill to be new one-he meant the /
rincIple OF taxing imports with the ayowed view s
protecting home industry. If The tariff was not r
be measure for revenue, but measure Tor |
rejection it ought to SO the plan of excluding
competition altogether. The argument Of the een I
eman from South Carolina, proved that at least c
ome alteration ought to be made in the duty on 1
'reign spirits. lie had shown that it diminished
Importation without discouraging the use of spirits.
the tariff was intended for protection, the duty /
as too low-i it was intended for revenue, il was
10 high. He thought that, in whatever part of the Q
riff we depart from revenue, as the object, we r
lgh, at once, TO go the whole length of excluding
ne foreign article. AS to the moral question, in 4