Vandalia Whig and Illinois intelligencer. [volume] (Vandalia, Ill.) 1832-183?, 1832-03-28


character shall be determined In the first place
then, the gentleman asserts, that the much abused
policy of 1924, he protecting tariff that year,
has filled our Golfers and enabled US to pay off the
public debit" a debt of Sl00,0o0,000 of prin-
cpal, and $l00O0000O of interest. Now, Sir,
if any thing is capable of demonstration, it may be
demonstrated, that the protecting system could not
by possibility, have contributed in the slightest de-
gree to produce this result. One would suppose,
indeed, that the very last merit which would be
ascribbed to this system, its tendency to fill
the s'public Golfers" 1t is unquestionabIy to a
tariff arranged and adjusted with single eye to
revenue, that we are to look for such result
The object of protecting tariff, as SUCH certain
~ is to diminish or exclude importations, and Of
course to lessen the amount of revenue derived
from duties. The very end and aim Of such a
system is, to substitute for the imported article,
paying tareS, to government-the domestic artl-
Gle paying uone-to transmute the duty into a
bounty to the manufactures; and, just so far as
this end is attained-that is to say Just far as
the tariff is protective, must it cut off the public
revenue. Do we not all remember, that the lead
ing argument in favor of the protecting provisions
of the tariff of 1924, was, that these were heces
sary, "to put down ruinous foreign competition !"
and did not one of the fathers of that bill pub
ilicly declare, "that the vital principle Of te sys
tenn was, that the nation should command lis own
consumption, and that when the nation did COM
mand its own consumption, importations and i'm
posts would cease" Sir, there are two distinct
features in the tariff of ls24--revenue and pro-
lection. 1t is the former that has filled your cof-
fers and paid off the public debt; and so fur as
the latter has operated at all, it must have dimin
shed the revenue, and delayed the candor Of the
gentleman, whether, if the protecting dutie, un-
der the tariff eff 1924 had been less, the revenue
would not have been greater, and that, too, with
out adding to, but the contrary, diminishing
the burthens of the people, since they would have
obtained the articles of their consumption, in
increased quantities, and at cheaper rate had
been relieved from the heavy tax which they have
been compelled to pay to the American mahufac-
turers2 Why, sir, the policy of 1924 actually
taxed to prohibition large amount of goods for.
mcrly imported. From a report made by the
Secretary of the Treasury, 1880, it appears that
these prohibited articles amount to about S,00O,-
600 per annum, being near one sixth part of the
whole of our imports. Has this part of the poll
Icy contributed to fill your Golfers? Sir, the case
is too plain for further argument, and tried by
this test, the policy must be utterly condemned.
| The next test by which the gentleman proposes
to try this system, ''the rich fruits which it has
scattered over the country" Sir, where are they
! to be found? Is it in the WEST? | appeal to the
gentlemen from that quarter We have heard a
great deal of the aourishing condition of the
manufacturing establishments elsewhere; but
where are the manufacturing villages, the joint
stock companies, the splendid dividends, and 9TH
er evidences prosperity to be found IN the West
l submit it to the candor of the gentleman, wheth-
er the benefits of the protecting SYSTEM so far as
the west is concerned, do not still rest in hope
whether the SYSTEM would be sustained day, il
1t were not for its supposed connection with IN
TERNAL IMPRovEMENTs-whether it is not indebt.
ed tor its popularity, in that quarter, to the un.
happy, the fatal marriage between the tariff and
internal improvements union which | vet hope
to see dissolved. 1t was left handed-an unlaw
iul marriage, and surely those whom God hat
not Joined, man may put asunder. Sir, there are
doubtless some hourishing manufactures scatter
ed here and there throughout the western countr,
chiefly confined, however, to situations beyonc
the reach OF foreign competition, and owing moth
ing to the protecting system. But the west has
not been rendered prosperous by these establish
ments. appeal confidently to their actual con
dition at this time. With regard to the gentle
man. S own State, will apply test which canno
deceive u.s. When the policy of PA was before
eaS, tie SENATOR from fAentuckY stood fOrtt
as its champion, and it was my lot to attempt t,
answer his arguments. 1t is true, sir, that hi
speech was made in the other House, and min,
on this floor but his argument had been sent fortl
as the manifesto of the party-it was printed il
pamphlet and laid on the tables of the Senators
and, embodying the views of the tariff party, i
was impossible for me to pass 1t over we'll re
member, therefore, that, on that OCCASION the gen
tleman argued, that Kentucky was to participant
in the protecting system by raising large quaint
ties OF hemp, and supplying the southern Stat
with cotton bagglng,-and he strongly insiste
that she was then only prevented from % dong
by the ruinous competition of the inconsiderabI
Scotch towns of Inverness and Dundee. An
what is it, Sir, that we hear now--after the laps
OF eight years? The old story repeated Ken
lucky still deprived of the benefits of the protec
ing system by those formidable rivals, Inverness
and Dundee. They still constitute s'the lion i
the path,' and foreign manufactures ever will b
"a lion in the path'' to those whose prosperit
depends on the protecting system We know
that the manufacture of cotton bagg,ng is sim
pie process, requiring hardly any skill or capital
and yet, the great State of Kentucky cannot ge
along with it. in consequence of the tormidabl
rivaiship of two miserable Scotch towns, the in
habitants Of which are said to be so poor an,
destitute, that they are obliged to import their flu
ell and send 70 Dantzic tyoIya hup5 rad ,,;Ioc -,