Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1832-06-12
=, FOR THE ENQUIRER.
Mr. CALHoUN-and the INDUSTRY -REGULATINo

Mr.. CALHoUN-and the INDUSTRY REGUIATINo
SYsTEM.-No. 2.
The doubts expressed in my recent communication as
10 the power OF facts evcn 10 conound Mr. Cahouns or
gans, have proved welgrounded Scarcely had the En-
quirer reached Washington, than il draws from the we'll
furnished and everready reservoir, stream of sopbrv
subcrfuge aud misrepresentation, sufficient of itself TO sink
any cause not already overwhelmed i'm disgrace
The consciousness OF its utter yorthlessness il
at the very first word My facts are met by miserable
attempt TO alsy the issue in relation TO which thew were
adduced Judging OF others by ITSELF and supposng them
equally adePin the trick OF writing letters to Themselves
the Telegraph treats my communication az proceeding
from the Editorial PEN The Enquirer is represented as
having brought as grave accusation against Mr. Cal
houn change OF views in relation to the Tariff and This
charge being substituted for that really brought the Tee
graph enters into argument prove that change of oni
mon IS consistent with honesty Of purpose This was not
e charge The offence which excited my indignation was
nnfTfh, not Inconsistency 1t was not change of views
IT was the bold denial Of a charge when chance had
taken place; Organs with whom Mr.. c. is known to be
n day ana hourly communication and consultation had
me eronteyt attempt TO make believe that his conn.
tenance been given to the principle Of Protection
on ,s point, determined that the public mind should be
no longer abused joined issue with them and brought
my proofs. How have they been met? by the wretch
cd suberuge Of changing the accusation into charge Of
change OF opinion and arguing upon this false issue
As further illustration of the candor of Mr. Calboun
this eiison Is Of value as few extracts will s,oyy
.poets CHANGED @ liz r9%s have been modified and
be M. undergone change Of views tho tariff tho
ever defended OF supported protective % distinct o ior
what truth-ioying hmidity The Telegraph on this
point only ventures we believe" / win be more
bold will risk n round assertion. am ready TO swear
That Mr. Calhoun "defended or supported pro,cc-
I'VE tarIf, rs distinct from tariff for repenue" And
why' Because upon such measure was ne ever called
on 10 vote But to the principle ne did give his zeaous
efforts Here - another notable piece Of egenemain
resulting IN another change of the issue. The proof That
MT u dd advocate the principle Of protection is met by
the modest "bce Of the Telegraph that he never adj
vocated such measure, as il never On Mr.. C's congress
s,on' career, at eas) presented for his support or
that Of any one else
nav the tariff Of 1916 really revenue tariff csnpot be
" oame from the Committee Of Means; IL goat
u,u VIC existing amount Of duties and fxod
usn tho public wants required with tho existing debt.
Isvenne ta II afforded m Incidental protection
81 tho incidental al
os, every public Teiocod-as universally m fba
% was due 10 the direction which
o NC VS. had given 10 The capital Of the country"
ulntlgg me tarih OF 1916 TO have been Greatly re-
venue tariff" does it follow that Mr. Cshoun's rsoso Cr
supporting the may have been because Of me
protection It aforded' grest deal Of sophisry is hid I'M
ger 'pls expression, influential protection II has been