Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 182?-183?, 1832-03-16
Mr. Haynes Speech.
IN SENATE.
Monday, January l6.
DEBATE ON THE TARIFF.

anime Inc character 81 the protecting system.
And here, L shall assume, that the protec-
ton it extends to the American manuiac-
lures is something substantial, and affords
some advantage, be it more or less, to the
protected interests. shall take il for grant
ed, that il is intended 10 enable tie Ameri-
can manufactures 10 enter into that success
ful competition with the foreign which they
could not do without such protection that
the effect of the system is TO enable the A
merlcan manufacturer TO obtain more for his
goods than he could otherwise command =
In word, that ii affords substantial protec-
ton, and it is not like that extended to
cotton-a mere name. For, on this latter
point, let it be remembered, that the first
cotton produced in this country found mar
ket abroad; and that even now, nearly The
whole OF it is disposed of in Europe, where il
maintains successful competition against
all the world. 1t is idle, therefore, to talk of
the benefit of a protecting duty TO cotton, at
home. tits beyond all dispute, Sir, that, if
any duty be necessary TO protection, il can
only be, because it enables the manufactur-
er TO sell his goods for more than he could
| otherwise obtain for them. Now, In this
view ofthe subject, let us see how the ques-
ton will stand How must such a system
operate, First, on the different interests, and
Secondly, on the different sections of the
country? We will assume, that a particu-
lar manufacture cannot be produced in the
! country, within fifty per cent, as cheaply al
home, as the same article could be obtained
from abroad -; and that duty which, with
charges, should be equal to about fifty per
cent, was absolutely necessary 10 introduce
and to sustain it. Such duty must operate
as tar on every other class in the commu-
nifty, for the benefit of the manufacturer
and supposing it TO be imposed, not for reye-
nue., but protection, would be double tar
Suppose the value of the imported article to
be million of dollars, the duty would be
half million (; and iithe protection amount
ed to an equal sum, here would be tax of
million OF dollars imposed upon the whole
people, to secure bounty ofhalfa million to
one portion ofthem. But it is said the boun-
| ty is not confined to the manufacturers-that
other classes participate | admit that there
is circle embraced within the range of the
manufacturing influence, that partake OF the
benefits of the system.-Farmers, in the
neighborhood, who's supply the operatives with
iood-mechanics, who construct the build
ingsand machinery ply sicians,
lawyers and others, who make up a manu-
featuring village, all come in for share of
the gains, and constitute, in fact, the protect
ed class, which enjoy the benefits of the sys-
tenn but all other classes of the community
must obviously be laid under contribution
TO make profitable what would otherwise be
an improbable pursuit, and in the case as
Sumed, would be taxed 10 the amount of one
million OF dollars, TO secure the favored class
a bounty of half million. Now suppose,
! Sir, such system as this 10 be extended TO
ali the cottons, wollens, iron and sugar, made
in any country, and we will take that coun-
l.. al ~
pose further that cottons could not be profita.
bly, manufactured without protecting duty
of from twenty five 10 an hundred per cent
I-woollens from forty five TO two hundred per
cent-iron from one hundred to two hundred
per cent ,-sugar from one hundred 10 one
hundred and fifty per cent and that these du-
ties were accordingly imposed or these seve-
raj articles, amounting in the whole to the
sum Of nine millions OF dollars annually:)
that, in consequence of these duties the pro-
lection on all the cottOns manufactured in the
country was equal to three cents yard, and
amounted TO six millions of dollars per an
num-wollens to eight millions-iron TO one
million-and sugar a million and a half
producing as the result of the whole system,
a tax of nine millions or the foreign article
to secure bounty ofsixteen millions and a
half 10 the home manufacturers. Ihave sup
posed protection 10 he the exclusive object
of this system, and il then clearly follows
that all other classes would be taxed twenty
five millions of dollars per annum, in order
TO secure to the favored class a protection of
sixteen millions. The Government would
indeed, receive its nine millions, but il
would be an aggravation of the evils of the
system, that this amount should be levied
when il was not wanted, in order to secure
the protected classes in their monopoly. -
The rates of duty which have here assum-
ed, are those now actually imposed on the
protected articles (and which it is proposed
to retain as essential TO protection, ) and the
amount Of protection, enjoyed by the manu-
iactuTers is stated at the very lowest that has
ever been estimated by any person who has
undertaken TO examine the subject. II you
suppose half of the duty here stated TO be
necessary for revenue, this would not dimin-
ish the weight ofthe burden, though il would
lesseG to that extent The injustice Of the tax;
and LET gentlemen make any deductions they
please either from the duty imposed or the
bounty received, and il will make no differ
ence whatever, in the principle. Whether
il would he one million or twenty, lust so
far as the system is protective in its charac-
Ter, and imposes any tax upon the foreign
article, and affords any protection whatever
TO the domestic, is the system tax imposed
upon the other Classesto render profitable the
industry Of the manufacturers And when
this tax amount, as it unquestionably does
in tho case before US, at the very lowest esti-
: mate 10 twenty or thirty millions year, il
becomes scheme Of monstrous Injustice and
. lf,r.t LEI III =