Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1824-06-29

'"e'S Hefe stateu. bit surely TINS ~ not thu
nrst lime we have heard il gra.ply asserted
hat Mr. Adams was the supporter eta tasiiI
"hssn looks beyond the constitutional object u
rstehue, and imposes |, tax ON one part ,,f IN,
INDUSTRY oi Tue country, To protect, To- encour
age, To swell the profits Of another and mucf
the smallest part Of that industry. That Mr.
adams Should, {" not merely for The purposes o.
'e,e,.ne, but with direct design to encuur.
age tue ~ manufactures Of the coun,ry,") be dis.
posed 10 impose tar I'M the great agricultural
'"'l<,'n'nercial interests, exclusively for the
"'snt VI the comparatively small manu-
'actunn6 interest," is proposition which his
'S' oealee IN this, part Of the country have
herrtotvre sfenu0usly denied.
we knew, that on this subject, NE shall
hear the common cant Of the day. that {" air
Adams IS not more objectionable on this score
than any Ut the other presidential candidates, -
1isat they all entertain the same opinions"
we shall see some most ingenious attempt tu
ir'ttrr away these siatements-just .s we
nave seen an attempt made 10 do away the
force OF Dir. IA own plain wOrds-when he
declared the Trainers Of the Constitution must
have been "ine6abiy stupid" not to have Civ
en- the power Of lettering the condition of
the people," But as they were not" ineffabIy
stupid"-trgo mr. Adams is an uiira Gds-
rustst IN hts exposition of the constitution
Some men will be found capable of denying
or asserting whsteveg at the moment, seems
calculated To promote the cause of him under
whose banner they have enlisted, and are de-
termined to fight on to the bitter end, whether
tney encounter truth and reason, or error aud
prejudice. So that we shan have assertion
and counter-assertion, not unlike that which
took place in November3ast, between the W:
f.fdlsof snd the Naffonat Journal. The
latter then recently established at Washing
ton, and warmly enlisted in the interests uf
Mr. Adams, declared that the former though
II had not yet reached that elevation of SLAM
der against DIR. Adams which distinguished
certain other papsrs," " seems still emulous to
attain the same distinction.'' Aud how was
this !? the Journal denied the Patriots asscr-
ton :" that Mr.. Adams stands on the same
ground with Mr.. Crawford, in relation 10 the
protection ofour. manusdEte res''; and stated in
terms moi To be snisuo@la akood that Mr.. A.
was in favor Of the fS},Et But, by way of
commencing Mr.. A. 20 tbs opposers of the
tariff, asked |" which 6f the heads of DEPART
menis, during the discussion of Baid,cin's b,l.
for new tar,H APP fuac8eL neasta 10 air.
CrawfUrd in his STING and freonent expires
sions of disopproboiios Of that bill ?" (Meao-
ing, we presume, Mr.. Calhoun!l
That Mr.. Crawford was opposed 10 the px
travagant tariff billof Mr.. Baldwin, we pre-
s1me his enemies will nut pretend to deny
We are certain of thsfact that he was not less
anfriendly to the bill brought in by Mr.. Tod.
He considered il INDUSTRIOUS bill in many res
pecIs. From bis Treasury reports and other
means OF information on which ne can rely
implicitly, we know that Mr.. Z. is opposed Ia
any tariff except witba rie,o 10 rerenue. The
old tariff was unequal and partial in its opera
hon. These inequalities he would have s9ual-
sed ON principles Of fairness and justice. MIR. &.
indeed stated it as probable that the effect of
The propo sed agmenta,ion' flor the sake
Of Revenue) /" would gradually lead TO an am
pie supply Of certain articles from our domes-
tic manufactures" But this was a COLLATERAL ef-
feet (springing from the great object Of raising
Tevenue) infinitely short ofthe policy which is
ascribed by the Editors Of the Sentiuei'' and
he JOurnal' to Mr.. Adams.