Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1832-09-07

as the Tariff of 1928 and the Tariff of 1882 The plain
dictates OF morality, well as of common sense,
require in all such cases after honestly using
utmost Efforts TO accomplish what right TO leave the
Sponsibty with those who having the power do justice,
yet resolve 10 commit injustice. freely admit that there
may be questions of eXpediency in which sound
discretion IN this respect must he exercised; butn questions
OF pTnce we have choose the lesser, avoid
the greater evil or in the language OF Holy Writ, do
evil that good may Of it," In the particular case
before the difference between refusing vote the
repeal OF the Tariff OF 1925 by voting for bill equally
Objectionable in prncple and actually pOtng for that
I@U, would be the same in my estimation remaining
borne down by an oppression forced upon in spite Of
our struggles, and ogng the chains ourselves by which
our liberty is manaccd" The difference between finding
ourselves in state of coonal vassalage, brought upon
us by the injustice OF others aud entering into compro-
mise To remain until from returning OF Justice
our oppressors shalt release What would
our ancestors have said OF proposition to effect partial
repeal OF the Stamp Act TO reduce the upon tea to
I'd pound, provided they would assent TO The provisions
Of The netc oil, ga choice OF evils | have read all
the lessons uculcated by the history of our Revolution i'm
vain ii such proposition would not have been most in
dlgnanly rejected from one end OF the country to the
other 1t would have been said said truly that such
compromise involved the admission of very point in
dispute, and would leave them without hope except i'm
inc tender mercies OF Parliament irresponsible them
thas been asserted by Col Drayton, that Mr. McDuf
he b contained as plain an admission of the protecting
principle by egislating Tor the continuance of
ectug items during single year, as by legislatng for
them all, without any limitation as 10 time" Ii appears
TO me- however, that there is manifest distinction between
OIL proVdng Tor the eventual REIMBURSEMENT of the pro-
ecng principle already introduced the Legislation of
the country and bill retaining that principle aud making
provision whatever for its abandonment Bnt in mi
case, Mr. McDues Bill was TO have gone into operation
Immediately, and before the public debt was paid. And
surely higher duties might, the soundes principles DO
imposed while there was charge of Sl2, 900 900 per
annm on the Treasury, than could be justified after that
charge was removed BY Mr. McDuiie's Bill the duties
on the protected articles were to be reduced to ~ 2 per
ct thereby securing an abandonment eventually OF the
principle OF observation-disclosures by the Bill duties
oil 40 and 90 per cent aud upwards, imposed upon
the articles after the final extinction Of the public
ntoft
cipe was secured, by the other, humby conceive il
has been established And there this further difference
between these two Bills that while the former as bill of
compromise would have satisfied tire South the latter is
saIlsi actory only TO the manufacturers.
VIII now proceed to notice certain alleged errors
which Col Drayton has kindly undertaken to point out in
the address OF the majority of the South Carolina Deaga-
uon Col Drayton commences his comments upon that
address, by lnimating that than accuracy
was 10 have been expected "because il must be presumed
to have been drawn up with the utmost deliberaon'-
and then goes 10 express his surprise at the statement
n'de IN the address. "ua the burdens of the protecting
uueS are dscuedy increased, estimating the cash duties
and diminished credits and they at an average
oil more than nifty per cent while the duties on the unpro-
eced articles, which upon every principle of equality
ma usuce should sustain the principal part the burdens
taxation are, with few nconsiderable exceptions en-
hFety 'GPedfed-wHEN (says COL d. THE AMOUNT
OF ALL THE DUTIES DECLARED NY THE ACT
OF 1852 ARE ESTIMATED IN THE STATEMENT OF
THE TREASURY, AT NO MORE THAN 800, 900 -
Now the authors of the address had committed so gross
anu aipaOe an error that into which Colonel Drayton
mas mere iaen, might have been urged as an excuse
Tor them, that though the principles on which the
address IS based, and the general character of the
new Blll had been maurely considered. vet as far
as related TO the details, it must of necessity have
been very hastily prepared inasmuch it written and
printed in the city OF Washington, after passage of the
new phi and before the adjournment OF Congress- which
as Col d. well knows, embraced period of only one OF
TWO days The authors OF the address not in suf
clcn aVor at the Treasury to be furnished with state
mcnt kindly prepared for their use-and vet Col Draw
ton, laborng under of these disadvantages after de
lay of several weeks, and the most careful preparaon
in hla han
s Voice from fe Nat il has been kened
sumed iCdS drawn up with the utmost
asserts THAT the amount of all the duties declared free by
'he act oil lSJ2 Is no more than 800 000,' when il ap
pears ON he lace OF the very statement itself on the al
hoy OF whch TINS most Extraordinary assertion has been
made that besides 10000, there are other articles de-
cared Tree by the act OF 1882! the amount of 70 less
man SZ1OSo3l, making together the sum of SO Os 63
Now, whatever errors the authors of the address NAV
nave committed, they have certainly committed none hal
so extraordinary unaccounable as that into which Col
Drayioh mas himself fallen into. He tells us expressly
mat his support OF the Ball depended entirely unor
me amount ana character of the proposed reductions
not passing strange therefore, that he should have given
ms Voe as we must now presume that he did, under the
lmp esson that the articles made free under the hill
amounted only TO lew hundred thousand deaths sher
IN rulh they amount TO upwards of So 000n :! This
certainly so extraordinary circumstance if he la,
not himself given the inormation il wouIc bov,
been credited in this community ICCoI DR. zion from,
careful examination OF the provisions of this BILL had as
cerained that embraced free articles TO the amount
$4,000 600, might this not have changed his views entire
measure: nnoIy
u, the prlIe oil opinion Tor we will not mputc TO him
'the lust oil power, shall not be suffered TO influence the
decision may we not hope that by careful re Examination
oil The provisions Of this Bill he will vet discover that
has no features OF compromise which ought TO render il
acceptable to the South In relation TO the other aeged
error said TO have been committed by the authors of The
address, In asserting that the "bdens of the DrOfecio
dWieS had boon increased, estimating the cash duties
and dtmniSed credits to amount which was beIeyed
TO be upwards OF million of dollars" il will he seen
from the very form of the expressions here used a,
wen as the whole scope and character of the address
that minute accuracy the amount Of reduction was
not aimed a and under the circumstances Of the case
must have been altogether unattanabe Oar onnosGon
to the Bill depended in no degree upon the
whether the Bill 10 effect inconsderabIe reduc
Io on the protected articles, increase the duty by
an equal amouna few hundred thousand dollars more
or less IN adjusting of 20 or 80 millions being
oil htilc Importance IN estimation" The general cha
racter oil the Bill was manifest its FACET had clearv
aggravated the inequality and Injustice of the system nv
greatly reducing taking off entirely the duties on The
unprotected articles, while the duties the protected ar
ucles remained substantially the same The amount ol
reduction the latter could not of course he
asceraned In the Senate it was not cained TO be more
man lew hundred thousand dollars; aud when against
ms mere was TO be set off acknowledged increase of
unes upon some articles, together with the introduction
OF new ana oppressive regulations, such as cash duties
diminished credits and change i'm the pound sterlug II
certainty cannot be considered strange that the authors nj
Tic address should have expressed the belief land
@ ho venture To do more) that taking all these into con-
sideration, 'the burdens Of the system bad
been Increased" IT, without the ADVANTAGE Of anv ne
treasury statement they have committed even greater
errors than those which have been laid TO their charge il
would certainly have been much more easily accounted
Tor than the mistake lately committed bv tbe Treasury IL
umdted amount OF reduction the single article of eof
t0iS-Or mat committed by Col. DraytOn himseC 10 ts1
amount Of three millions, which we have lust pointed NJ
La making estimates of this nature il is if1posible OBJ
ia lnrw Il. ~ al