Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1832-09-07
RORERT ". HAYNE

ROBERT Y. HAY NE,
TO Committee of The STATE Rights and Free
Trade Party, embracing rplyto Col. Dray-
toms late dddreSs.
TcoNrINUEp.1
Putting on, Of view other clear Indications of the
spirit by which the late Congress animated i'm
the arrangement of the Tariff, there four dis
tnct propositions made by myself in the Senate
all cordially and zcalousiy supported by the South
crn memberships fate of which left not a shadow
OF doubt on my mind as TO the real imcnts of the
Tariff party, or tho principles intended to be en-
bodied in the new Bill. The first was my amend
ment to Mr.. Clny's Resolution, by which pro.
posed to bring down the duties gradually to the
revenue standard, adjusting them on the protected
and unprotected articles principles of perfect
equality. My proposition treated by the Tariff
party as scheme to destroy the manufacturers, by
picdging Congress to the ultimate abandonment OF
tie protecting system, which it was declared had
become the settled policy of the country. 1t
was said that while immediate reduction
to the revenue standard would be ''suddcD destruc-
ton to the manufacturers" gradual reduction
would be IA slow poison" and my proposition
rejected. My next motion was, TO add to the clause
OF the Bill imposing duty of l6 cents yard upon
tlanncs, rRovTso thatthe duty shouid in no
cecd 81 per cent mud in my possession docu-
ments derived from mercantile men, who had long
been engaged in the sale both of the foreign and
domestic article, showing that lannels of the de-
scripiion used by the great of the laboring
people in both countries, could be purchased in
England at cents, equal to 10 or IL cents the
squire yard, making the proposed duty on coarse
hannels used by the poor l60 per cent, while on
the finest description OF nannels used by the rich
the duty but % per cent. Yet this proposition
cas rejected, on the round that duty of so per
cent. was nsuihcient for the eifcctual protection
oil the American manufacturer of hannes, while
the discrimination between the fine and the coarse
article justified on tho ground that it was the
coarse 1annels which chiefly manufactured in
| this country. was unable to construe this vote
In any other way than that the protecting system
was TO be maintained lnyiolatc, however unjustly,
unequally and opprcssively it might operate upon
the communty for surely if there be any one
and foreign productions which the people at
large, and especially the poor, have a right
to obtain subject to the smallest possible amount
OF taxation, II is an article like flannes, which is
essential to the comfort health and safety of their
families an article too, in relation to which, the
manufacturers had long enjoyed complete mono
! poly, and must have acquired skill from ample ex-
Pcrlencc 1t Is true that TIE duty this article
| has been reduced from % to 1G cents but on the
| coarse hannels this reduction is merely nominal,
the duty still exceeding 100 per -, and being
actually proEibitory, and surely it make no
difference whether prohibition be effected by
duty of so 200 per cent. Aly next proposition
was to strike out that fraudulent device The mini
NUNS on COttons, by which an article costing 5 or
D cents yard, was to "be deemed and Ia
ken to have cost 35 cents" and to pay
duty accordingly. My colleague Mr.. McDuffie
had attempted the thing in the other
House, combining his motion to those coarse
SotlOhS only winch MT. Appl0tOn and others,
had declared could enter into successful. com.
petition, with British cottons in all the markets
of the world, and which of course no longer stood
IN need OF protection at home. II has been assert
ed that in the Bill "the minimum principle
has been given up" This however is not the case
On wOoLLEN GOODS tho minimums have been
abolished, and an equivalent advantage secured or
intended to be secured to the manufacturers by
intilcing upon the importers o, this article the
griovous imposition of cash duties, by change in
the valuation Of tho pound sterling, Ca measure by
the bye bearing with peculiar hardship upon the
! trade with England,) and by increasing the duty
| upon woollons costing more than thirty five cents
| from iorty-hvc TO fifty per cent. But with
| regard to coTToNs, the mnmums have been
! retained, and yet with regard to this art
| Gle, II was not pretended to be denied that from
| tho skill acquired, the command of the raw mate
! rial at the cheapest rates, the time had come if
| it ever to arrive, when the minimum principle
| (under which ths duties up to upwards of 100
/ per cent? might be safely abolished My motion
/ to strike out the minimums on cottons, (which
would have left the duty that article at 25 per
cent? accompanied by provision that the duty
cottons should be reduced to Is per centun,
0d U1tDrem--a motion which induced to
III Ike in order to show to our opponents that we
claimed no protection for this great staple Of the
South beyond that which to be derived from
free trade and unrestricted industry Ny motion
fGiied entirely. 1t said, that though coarse
cottons did not stand in need of any protection
At This time, yet it wise ''lo keep up the fem
ccs," by which a runous foreign competition might
be kept out. In this vote, thought I saw unc.
quyocai indications Of Il fixed and settled purpose
on the part OF our opponents never to suffer any,
of the outworks OF their system to be demo.
lrsbcd. My last proposition was, that general
prOrisO should lie inserted at the end Of the Bill
declaring that the duties imposed by il shouLd in no
cGse cUcccd hVDdred per cent. | knew that
the principle which the Tariff party in Con-
gress acting, was, that "adequate protect
ion" was to be afforded, no matter at what cost
My object in making this motion, therefore, was to
obtain recognition of the principle, that if any
manufacture could not be carried on without pro.
tecting duty ercecdipg buudred per- cent that
it not the policy Of the country that il should
be sustained, or that our opponents should be dr-
To the distinct assertion of the contrary prn-
ciplc and to the admission at the same time, of the
fact that there manufacturers which would
enjoy protection of than 100 per
cent. under the Bill, and to which
such amount Of protection was deemed
Of this description, there could Of
course he no possible objection to it in any
thor view, ard must d" my opponents tie jus.
tee 10 say,that where our demands did not come
into conilirt with their own immedi tic interest,
4 ey have ~ all times 1nauifested fnOst praise.
worthy disposition to- comply with our wishes.
In making this motion stooI prepared to show.
that the duties under ,ne new Bill TIC inferior
qualities oG salt aud sugar, common English
rolled ron, on variety of articles Of rjware
on coarse nnnuts and rououS, mud many other
: rejected articles, exceeded 100 per cent, and
distinctly Submitted the qucs ion whether protcc
ton was To I've carried UP To amount exceed
ing one hundred per cent THIS motion MetDise
f0iied. II was in consequence, ~ believe, Of
the disposition manifested by the majority in re
latlon to these several motions. that Mr.. TaZe-
well of Virginia, who had with great pains pre-
pared Hi'l which he had Intended TO offer as