Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1832-09-14
GENERAL HAYNES REIOINDER TO COLONEL
DRAYTON

DRAYToN
To the Editor If the Charleston lIercuyy
SIR-I beg leave 10 submit to the public through vour
columns lew observations in reply 20 Colonel Drayons
remarks in the Patriot OF Fay Col Drayton seems IN
think h'l the new fiI must be considered ~ Coa1-
PROMISE, because Ac Secretary Of the Treasury sol.
tered his BIZ as reasonable Sc1ce Of compromises and
Tor the hyetntnt Of existing di,rnuccs" bccat,e thar
scheme "waS declared p be the basis L,c Bill reported
by the Committee on Manufactures" and because n
majority OF The cs'fic uus ,.ncd their willingness to
accedo such ut compromise a, he has referred IN
IN his Address, AMI which he undcrsto3d from those with
whom he acted-ihc Intends of free trade were acgueSced
IN, &c Now, on ibis statement, / must remark FIRST
that Col Dnyton admits that "thcsc terms were i'm many
respects not earned INTO execution by the Act of 1922
Vert, that the Treasury scheme much more avora
Die to the South than the Bill reported 10y the Committee
OF MdhuacIfeS, especially IN Increase of the duty
"oolens from 30 per recommended bv The Sccrc
ary, to 90 per cent and also the change of the Mound
sterling And LuSty that il the Ire asury scheme is 10 he
considered as "thc basis OF the ' then there can
be no hope OF any further reductions, since it was explicit
ny declared by the Secretary himself that it was part of
ms scheme that the arrangement should be one '.PER-
ITS character, and NOT LIABLE TO CHANGE"
Col ID. still thinks however that there is some ground
Tor nope, inasmuch a. the improvements" (sma and
uhsauSlSc'ory as ne admits them TO beg were effected
"h0nSh the Bill containing them voted against bv
the nrmeSt friends o! protection and by six Of our Dele
gates in the House of Represent dves Now does Col
Draytoh suppose that Our prospects for further
cession would have been in any respect iinproved-
II these ''siS OF Delegates together with the
whole of ihe Georgia Delegation Gave onc) AMI large
proportion oil the Representatives. from the oher South
em Stles-incuding both Of the Senators from Virginia
and one from each Of the States of North Carolina,
Georgia. Alabama aud Aliss ppi, had acccdcd terms
OF compromise, ana voted tCiii 4la5Rs Clan Dckelson
and WebSter, for the Bill? II he thinks 90 am
persuaded he is greatly mistaken The truth it, that but
for strenuous and un"ompronising opposition TO the
new Bill its provisions would have been much worse
even than they are and there be any shadow Of ouna
ton for the long cherished hopes of Col Drayton il must
rest entirely upon the act-that the above mentioned
"ircnds Of free trade tcih ,cLom acted had no
lot part in this boosted compromise.
As 10 the implied oblea 'tO submit gtGeflJ 10 HE
neio BW, Col Drayon and those who acted With him
the best judges OF It's extent But will here take
the liberty of saving that though ga Representative can
not bind his successors IN another Congress- vet much
fear that all our future applications relief viii be met
by the declaration, thlt the South no right 10 COM
plain Of Bill passed by the Of their own Represen-
taves' or oreieve themselves from compromise
cd into between CHEESE friends OF free trade and ga
majority of the rcsinctonsis."
In relation 10 the "errOr, which charged upon Colo
mel Drayon Of his having down the amount of dTf
ces Dade free under the late Bill ut 500 600 when in
fact they amounted to 50 63I the Colonel SAYS h,t
ms expressions arewhen the amount OF all the duties
declared free by the of 1882 are estimated by the
Register oil the Treasury at no than 800, OO0 and
adds "hdt the duties upon ether articles declared 10 he
free not estimated but nsccriaincd from official data
andthercorc required cstimiton II admits how
that ior The sake OF ccarncs he ought have specified
the duHeS repeated which had been aSccrlncd from OIL
cal data IS vol those which had been estimated and
therefore had the necessary addition Inserted i'm the Ps-
OF" &C. Now wittall lne Difference TO Col Dr,yon I
must consider this explanation even more xlraorinary
than the original error How The amount Of dH duties
deciGTef tTee' could be embraced in an estimate while
made
cluded therein, Is entirely beyond my comprehension.
How GALL the duties made Free could I've embraced i'm
20 small part 10 me Nprabr. The point dispute
was not, what amount OF One articles made free under the
Act OF 1882, hal been cstimried. and what amount
especially enumerated" i'm the new Treasury statement
but whether the anh,r4 of the Address we're ght in nc
seriing that the duties had been "CntrelV repeG' on
very large proportion 81 TIC protected articles. Col Dmy-
ton expresses his surprise a "such assertion should
he 2zTrd rben The amount OF Hifhc duties deciorcdet
6y me net NJ 1892 c~nicd in the statement Of the
Treasury o no MORE Than 100 900" II is impossible
for language Doe more explicit II is here distinctly as
serted not at the article, "csmacd" in addition 10 ho.c
Especially rnuutrHtd 800 900 but that the iufic.
on ALI ne articles declared free was NO MORE than
S4OD,OO0 10" authors of The Address had a. Col d. sun
posed, greatly m1gutcd the amount of ee Articles and
TO correct hrr cror he refers TO the Treasury estimate ia
prove th't tir whole OF free articles under fine
ncw bU was 100000 and "o more" IL Is clear il,,
when writing hot part of h. Aldr.-s. Colonel Df,vt,u
must have overlooked tc Tact, hc ever acquainted
with 10, thai ta whIe 1mluui of articles made Tree m
der the new BIZ. sea. upwards of three millions IT..
teI' us now ih "hen Dr. gave bis vote Tor The Bll D.,
had not calculated what tc repealed duties would lpou
to- lie was deceived bv ihe in which the ur d,
Treasury statement was mad" ug, he would ccrlsnI,
never h1vc lii grave chrgc 10 hs colleapucg ,r
undertaken to prove o., hy ibis reference 10 sn estimate
whticvcr Co do "ith ,ie question haye never mpue,
10 Coi ID ytpu auy intentional This error has been
corrected by him "--lni derc I au quite willing lo lei
the matter rest The true amount Of The duties Inc un
projected articles t very different question Col Dizzy
ton submits calculation o -hcw hat these will amour
TO $i8j7jGt have heretofore estimated them AT So
227,3J3, and given lc grounds tlt estimate The dir
ference ascs from ry having taken into the account Col
DraytOus estimate Of reductions ON WooIlens Cotton
Begging, Hardware, &c estimated at S32f 0sg and Col
hitting them himself Thus be ssys, Ne finds in cs