Herald of the times. [volume] (Newport, R.I.) 1830-1846, 1832-08-09
SPEECH OF THE
HON. ASHER ROBBINS,
In Senate, March 2, 1882.
Of Rhod -isiand.

uc DeHdte |eSuflCu the COnSintTH'lOt
Of the following resolution, submitted by
Mr. CLAY:
Resolved, That the existing duties up
on articles imported from foreign coun
tries, and not coming into competition
with similar articles made or produce,
within the United States, ought to be
,fc.Thwith abolished, except the duties OF
Wines and Silks, and that they ought to
be reduced.
Resolved, That the Committee on Fl
nance report bill accordingly.
The following modification of the reso.
luton, proposed by MIR. Hayne, being
the question Immediately before the Sc.
nate:
Strike out all after the word "coun-
tries" and insert as follows: "be so re.
duced that the amount of the public rev.
enue shall be sufficient to defray the ex.
penses of Government, according to thei
present scale, after the payment Of the
public debt; and that, allowing a reason.
able time for the gradual reduction Of the
present high duties on the articles coming
into competition with similar articles made
or Produced within the United States, the
duties be ultimately equalised, SO that the
duties on no article shall, as compared
with the value Of that article, vary, mate
rally, from the general average"
Mr.. ROBBINS, Of Rhode-island, ad.
dressed the Senate us follows:
The question before us, as take it, is
one of expediency. Is it expedient to
give to the industry Of the country the
market of The country, by means Of pro-
tccting duties, in preference to leaving
that market open to the equal competi-
tion of foreign industry without restric,
ton!
l know it has been urged here, ant
much insisted on elsewhere, that the ex'
pediency is not the only question; that &
prior and paramount question is, has Con
gress the power, the constitutional power
to do this?
il is not denied that Congress has
claimed and exercised this power, from
the commencement Of the Government to
this hour; that it is now in practical ope-
rstion, and that never, till since 1923,
has it been seriously, if at all, questioned,
by any party, at any time.
Il There arc two or three reflections
which, if duly weighed, | should thinl
would satisfy every rejecting mind tina
Congress, in exercising this power, ha'
not usurped undelegated power.
If the power Of taxation at Hbitmn ir
amount, be IN Congress, the exercise o
that power must be discretionary citl
Congress; and whether, in any given in
stance, it shall be exercised, or to wha
extent it shall be exercised, must alway.
be question of expediency, and never
can be a question OF constitutional right
Now, the power Of taxation is expressly
given to Congress, and given without
limitation, as to the amount ofrevenue tc
be raised by it. That amount is left to
the discretion of Congress.
Again: the regulation of commerce
with foreign nations is expressly given to
Congress, and given without restriction.
Now, u tariff Of duties on imports is strict
ly and literally regulation of commerce
with foreign nations; and, whether that
tariff shall be higher, or lower, or what
it shall be, must be a question Of expedi-
ency, and cannot be question Of con-
stitutional right.
Besides, this power, as has been well
stated, and ably argued by the honora.
bic gentleman from Tennessee, is essen
tial to national sovereignty; and to deny
it to our Government would be, so far, to
lay our country PROSTATE at the feet OF
every other sovereignty in the world. If
all other sovereignties could WELD this
power against us, (as undoubtedly, they
can, and do) and we could not WELD it
against them in self defence-but the
supposition is intolerable, and will not
carry out the idea, and depict the conse-
quences.
For what American, justly proud ofhis
nation, could brook, for a moment, the
idea Of crippled and subordinate sove-
reignty, that could not meet any other,
and every other national sovereignty,
with power against power, with preroga-
tive against prerogative, as an equalF-
National sovereignties, whatever may be
the form ofthe national government, have
all the same attributes; otherwise, they
would not be equal and independent SOW
ereignties. God forbid that this Govern
ment should ever admit the idea, or act
upon the idea, of being an inferior, and,
therefore, degraded sovereignty! IT,
then, you admit (and who will deny it')
that our Government may exert this pow
er against other governments, to vindi-
cate our equal and just rights, you give
up the whole controversy; for then you
admit the existence Of the power in the
Government. The power being admit