Litchfield enquirer., 1831-11-24
[Br REeUEsr;]

BY REQUEST.
 From the Ns,c- Havsn Herald.
 Mr. Woods0ard,-The votes l gave at the Convention lately held in Philadelphia. in which had the honor to represent the New Haven Chamber of Commerce. have been misapprehended by several of the editors of newspapers in this State. As the ayes & noes, although recorded on all questions of iInPOr- tance, did not. generally, accompany the pub Iication of their proceedings, the public had not the means of knowing the individual sem timents of the members who were present. Upon the motion of MT. Gallatin, for striking out certain parts of the address to the people of the United States, voted in the af6rma- tive and on the general question of approv- ing the address I voted in the negative. ! gave this vote because the address adopted the opinion that the tariff laws are unconsti- tutional. and some other sentiments in which ! did not concur. However honestly that o. pinion may be held by some, it has ever seem ed clear to me, that the power given to Con- gress Ofthe United States by our national Con- stitutiOn. to !" regulate commerce with for eign nations" cOnfers on them authority so to control that important branch of our public interests as in their judgment shall best pro- mote the general welfare. Ifthey have made bad law, we cannot pronounce it no Jaw, nor infer the want of power from the abuse of it. Such reasoning would authorize the national court to deny the cOnstitutionality of every act of Congress which, in their opinion, is un- wise. or injurious. Upon the wisdom or ex- pediency of a law the legislature only must decide; and the court, in ascertainlng its va lidity, cannot inquire whether It IS beneficial or hurtful ;n its tendency. On question of intent, that inquiry may aid in the construc- lion of a law, but can never be resOrted to to test its constitutionality.
 But upon the great principles on which the Convention was assembled. I fully concurred in their opinion. The impolicy of the tariff partialty, injustice and oppres- sion,-seem to me SO palpable, that am con- 6dent nothing more is necessary to create . union of public sentiment, among all who are not recipients of theii bounty, or associated with some political party for their support, han simply to understand their nature and operation. The several epithets which have lpplied to the tariff laws are not incOnsiderate- y adopted, and the propriety of each is sus- .eptible ofcertain demonstration. It is wOn- lerful tirat those laws are SO little understood ,ut there is mystery in their structure which i nisleads the public mind. The cotton law | peaks only of 25 per cent. but, by means l # what is called its minisuns, it imposes tax ising from 25 to l75 per cent. on most cotton 1 abrics. The woollens law, upon almost all .lOths which are worn for dress, nOminally l imposes a duty of IA cents the square yard on part under SS Is cts. original value, and of from 45 to 50 per cent. 0d valorem on the l rest. This would seem sufficiently extrava- gant. But, by reason of its -four minimums. it | actually taxes those articles from Az to 225 | per cent. In both instances the tax is heav- lest on the coarser goods-such as are worn | by the poor, and by persons in middling cir | cumstances. In 1927, when the duties were | less than at present, about seven-eighths of all the money paid by reason of the tariff on woollen goods went into the pOckats of the ] and one-eighth into the puhlic | treasury. Where the Government received l one hundred dollars. by reason of the tax, the received seven hundred. The l sum paid by the consumer on wOollens in that | year, over and above what accrued tO the | treasury, was. according to the best cOmpu- tations, more than twenty three millions of dollars, and surpassed, by more than mill ion, the whole nett revenue of the U. States on every other article upon which duty was imposed. Since that time the tariff of 1928 has been adopted, and, if we estimate the whole consumption of woOllsns tn the country at "A. millions, the proportion of money paid in consequence ofthc tax on woollens, in 1880. would be about "ne-twelfth to the government and eleven -twelfths to the manufacturers. | speak of sOoollens only. The amount paid to the unanufaetnrersi in that aud all other branch. es. by reason ofthe tax on importations. prob ably surpassed the whole national debt incur. \ red by the war of independence. By the statute of la38, those woOllen cloths worn for dress, the 6rst cost of which is Sl 25 the square yard, are subjected to ninety per cent. duty; and those baizes and Aannels which cost in the foreign markets from 10 to 20 cents the square yard. are taxed from fl2 to 4sS per cent. Where this rspacity will end. tt not checked by the public voice. it is im- possible to foretsll. Certain it is that it still fails shOrt of the claims set up in the memo rials OfSome ofths petitioners for protection.