Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1831-08-09

hibed by facts than by reasoning. Before 10 adoption
Great Britain refused aud ccul not b. compelled 10 per
form the conjcns OF the treaty Of 1883 Spain
ed our Western se,ATs from the alton Of h kssis.
sippithe property end The pessops of our
captured opo" the ocean by African eors,irs from.
tiers wer" invaded and our w. eu and en- w re
mAsssered, by hostile Icdisns-our sommsre. was
prosua'o--our agriculture unprcduciiv,; ard thoua Ia
o'et"be'med With debt, cur revenue was rot eqral
To tho current eNpensss % the adm,ns ration. 10 1897
when the term OF Cfli-e Of the hrst President expired
Notwithstanding The difficulties n-sessaiiy incidental
10 new political systaw-no,wi bsandiug embsrras.-
i"R controversies with Great b sin-Dotwi hs,andips
The comp Kitty and de'icacy Of differences Wi y
Franse- notwithstanding the fury OF coniendirg par.
ties amorg our-slves-sommerce and agriculture
Observation-Disclosures were mere asng-our vessels
were unmOlesied by tbs pirates OF Barbary-,hr ride
ing slvages had been ecnpuered'he Tree cation Of
thu Mississippi had been acquired from Spain Grea,
Britain had sure ndsred her military post, will In our
tsri'ores-a sound currency had been estabhsh.d-
on ample revenue had been secured-an immense debt
had been funded, and sysem for It's gradual ex-
ungu;shment had tesn maured. That these ben. AZ
rs'ulted from tho Federal Constitution wa, peve,
douG cd-ihit he Confederation could not have pre-
served the Union OF the a,ss, little que
To sustain, therefore, that Constitution, 10 integrity
tie guard against assaults impa'riag is legim
functions, is wbat all mus. fsrveutly desire, who
prefer security and peace, To sebieness and discod
That the surren OF the Federal Constitution as in
va'iably, run smooth, cauno, with truth, be
Until iusrss shall be REQUESTED by pincipe-uu,
biiion shelf lie eoDouled by vrueunti passion shall
be guidsd by rea'ou-Uhh iut emeIt IN All be exemp,
nom error 'is oa'n 20 n-s'mr that any form Of gov
trhf-rn', proci-dn froW unnspired man. shall com
msnd unvesssl r-speci from he people, aud ensure
wise and partial OF it's powers by tho M
on whom its administration devolves. Holy writ in
srucs Ne, that even Theocfacy, enforced by tempo
raj rewards and punshme did not restrain the cho-
nation ot Cos troW d,obedic nee rebellion and ioa
try TIE United States, with government rsa,ed ty
ard for hum'p b'nse, have not escaped the agitation.
and turmois which no human institutions proven
Mcmen'ous question: have SOM shines arisen, which
shook Union 10 its csnire. shall no, notice all
these controversies, nor ihe the 10,
pcl,i theV leaf Al,
should coouoe more time than the ion for which
we have met would permit l shall eonhns myself 10
topic which now p'naiphy Engages the pubic mind,
end Offering uron /, such rsms ks appear 10 me 10
he pertinent. Tie Tariff Laws witch have been re- .
Gently passed, have besB loudly ard emphatic ally da
nounccd by several of the States and nv
South Carolina. Upon the numerous pamphlet. and
speeches which have been published and delivered a.
gainst them, shall make no observations, but shall
exclusively, refer TO he Exposition and Protest report.
ed by the Special Con muee OF the House OF Repre-
sentaves of South Carolina" which, on the 18Th De
cenber 1929, ordered 10 he printed. That eabo-
rate State Paper is believed to present all the
and, substantially all the arguments against SHE pro-
tecve system, and in favor OF the TO be adopt
ed in consequence OF it, which relied upon by those
formerly designated as "The State Rights and Jackson
Party, and now as "Ihe State Rights and Free Trade
Party ] he contents OF ''the Exposition" may be
classed under three heads Is, Arguments against The
consitutionay of 1.-The protective system.' 2dly An
enumeration OF the evils arising from it, 3dly. The
remedy recommended TO prevent its operation upon the
State OF South Carolina. will briefly submit TO Won
my views of these subjec's, in their order.
lsL The unconslitutonality OF ''the protective sys
tenn
iuiiy concur with the Special Committee, that the
Tariff Acts of 1924 and 1925 Unconstitutional but
altogether differ from them when they assert that spre.
vious to the adoption o: the present Tariff system by
winch they mean the Acts OF 1924 and 1929 there was
''no case in point of similar legislation shall here
alter show that this is Aware that all of those
who are present do not consider the acts which have
mentioned TO be unconstiu onal, will state soma nj
the reasons which have led me to differen, conclu
sion TTO b. continual