Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1832-01-24
GDe constitutional Ig11fG,
'sesissrs'@Y S;re,asas.g,. .se1s'. ga.
Us Our friend Of the Jcnarsonian apos,rophizcs
Mr. Clay in the following strain:

AMIR. CLAY.
"Ihs gentleman is very anxious To modify the
Tariff. He thinks that the duties on Tea arc OK
cccdingly enormous. TOO high on Wines also
and, we suppose, on piincnto. Now, Mr.. Clay,
don't trouble yourself these matters. w
poor people of the South can manage TO live
without tea and pmcnto. We want tho duties
modified Oh the articles which we comsnnc-tutics
which are grinding us into dust, while they pam
per your Capitalists ut our expense. Take of tho
dut les on Hemp, Iron, Wool and Cotton. But
no. These are your protected articles iorsooth.
And do you hope TO gull by taking tho duties
OH all the articles of luxury which you consume,
while you retain the duties on those articles
which the poor consume? Sir, We tell you you
cannot do it. The People understand this mat
ter You and yours may club together 20 Cypress
them But Notification will yet settle the matter
with you all. We tell YOU in the Language of
the play called Ciubfsts-'takc it off, or we'll
knock it off,
What does the Jcffcrsonian say to the duty on
salt? is that not necessary of lifc9 Is that not
'one of those articles which tho poor consumer
After bread and meat, is it not cnphaticaliy Tire
necessary of life? And yet, is not the JcGcrs6nan
4 strenuous advocate for the protection of salt!
is it not ono of its arguments i'll favor of this pro-
lection that the duty has made salt cheaper tho
poor; and an argument too, most unanswcraby
sustained by the operation OF the reduction of du
,ty in May last, well known TO have made salt
higher than it has been for many years?
These are certainly the opinions entertained by
the Jcfcrsonian, the subject of protecting suit
disntcrcstcd we are sure, notwithstanding certain
valuable Saline possessions in Kcnawla-sound
opinions they arc to minds, undoub:edly
Now, why should not tho same cause produce like
effects in other cases? Why should not protection
by developing domestic resources, and giving Sc
curity to enterprise, cheaper hemp, iron, wool,
and cotton, as it did salt? MIR. Clay says it ,vM
have that chcct-and although the idea seems ano-
'malous (and it seemed to strike tho witty gentle
man from Brunswick the other day much as if
some one had protested to him that fire would not
burn,) experience sustains Mr.. Clay's position.
This is his reason for clinging to the protective
policy; he would abandon that policy Tomorrow if
he was not firmly pursuadcd that it chcapcned the
protected articles eventually, to the consumer.
The capitalists and manufacturers, are to the great
body of the people, one to one thousand Their
political influence arraycd against the agricultural
interest, is inconsiderable-is comparatively no.
thing. Mr.. Clay is denounced as ambitious-in
lighting his way to tho Presidency, with an eye
that never winks Is it conceivable, if this be true
thst lie would be the advocate of policy that en-
'IlHhcd the capitalist, but ground and annililacd
TIE consumer? That he would offend the many
who can alone atchicvo for him the high destiny to
which he aspires, for the sake of gratifying and
favoring the fe,o who have no such ability? Ell.
Their then Mr. Clay is honest in pushing the pro-
.tective policy--cither he believes it the policy
tlIoiI benefits the Country-or his enemies have
falsely ascribed to him ambition which scruples
at nothing to advance itself. Boil! cannot he true