The Northern star, and farmers' and mechanics' advocate. [volume] (Warren, R.I.) 1830-1834, 1832-08-11


he made bis motion, that the additional
duty was, in 1928, imposedto compel the
members from the Eastern States to vote
against the act referred 70. : We did not
oppose the repeal, altheugh we did not
suffer 80 severely by the additional duty
as many were led 70 Believe we should.
Ifthen, one Of the few eots which have
passed intended for the benefit of the
West, or tho agriculture of kentucky,
has been repealed. LET tho gentleman
charge the repeal 10 thosew were main
" instrumental in eflecting Il, and not to
those who certainly wore not very clamo-
rous FOR its repeal. y ] presented / know
many rcmonstrances and memorials n
gainst this additional duty, but do not
now recollect that lever presented Pc
tition for its repeal. Tho gentleman from
Kentucky further complains Of the pro-
visions Of this bill, the reduction It pro-
poses ofthe duty on iron and hemp, which
will, AZ he contends, injuref % interest of
that part Of tho country which he repre-
sents. He ought to recollect the assur-
ances which he or his friends gave us in
1928, that ifthc encouragement at that
timo demanded was given, in a very few
years, we should have hemp Of better
quality than the imported hemp, and iron
also in abundance. All that he or his
friends required was granted but how
stand tho facts ! Hayc we ;at this time
the hemp or iron promised Sir, in
1928, ] was npprehcnsive that all which
was promised would not be realized..-
Have we at this time equal to the con-
sumption Of the country, or of a quality G.
quail to that imported, the hemp or iron
which was promised think lean with
safety say, that We have neither. IF then,
cir, the experiment has been tried, and
but little, If any thing, which was en-.
'pected, has been realized, ought gentle
men from the West, or any other section
ofthe country, complain Of the proposit-
ions which ntc contained in the bill In
1928, from tho measure which was at
that time before Congress, ! had reason
to believe we should at this time DO found
in tho same situation in which we aro now
placed. We had not at that time any as
surances which could be relied oh /, hat
with oil the encouragement which the act
Of that year held out, the country would
be supplied with either Of the protected
articles. Now, sir, in relation to hemp
or iron, is the country in better situation
than it was at that time 7 No one is pre-
pared, think; to say il is. But little
| Of the iron, as has been observed by the
gentleman from Maine, (Mr. Anderson, J
manufactured in this country, has been
found to be Of a quality equal to the i'm
ported iron none, perhaps, with the ex-
ccption OF Peru Iron, manufactured in
the State Of New York. And in regard
to hemp, it will not now be contended that
it is improved in quality, or that the guam
Itity has increased. Sir, what then should
be our course in relation to these articles;
if the experiment has been tried and
failed ? DO the caiises continue for the
increased duties ON either of these arti-
eles = They can bo, and ought to be re-
duccd, by those who belong to the pro-
tectivc policy Of tho country. In justifi-
cation of my own views heretofore,
would ask leave Just to recur to the testi-
thony which was before congress in 1928
AT that tim6, it appeared from the testi-
mony of gentleman from Kentucky, not
now member; (Mr. Clarke, that most
ofthe culture Of hemp in kentucky, was
confined to one county, { Woodford, J and
even in that, il was not attended to, when
the cultivators Of the soil could turn their
attention to any other business, which, in
their opinion, would bo more profitable !;
and, in regard to the quality of this hemp,
il was stated in the Senate, and TO prove
what was stated, letters were rcnd, that
so little confidence was placed on cordagc
manufactured Of Kentucky hemp, that all
the steamboats,, at that time, navigating
the Ohio and Mississippi were supplied
with their cordage, made Of imported
hemp, under contract with q house in
Boston. Mr.. Speaker, / must ask par
don Of the House for wandering from the
subject on which rose to make few
remarks only-to assign my objections to|
tho motion Of the gentleman from Vir-
ginia, and to reply to the arguments Of a.
mother gentlemen, (Mr. Wicklifc,) from
Kentucky. The gentleman last named
cannot reconcile with his sense Of Justice,
the discrimination which this section OF
the bill makes between registered Ses-