Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1833-06-11

10 Its Golfers II is ndle 10 speak of ,ts ,,,, s
me known results Of her measures were TO be
Sn,I 'oIa' advantages and exemption from common
her ports TO enoy free trade A the
expense Oh all the other ports in the Union
C. ss,e; IN reference to the right of the General
~ W ay eunes on mposts, that this estate has
never denied or resisted this right nor ,re ~
80 NOW 1t is matter of fact, that che not ony
"uhneu uuues Tor protection which she allie rod N he m
constitutional but also duties revenue nsrsv hsch
sue aam''ea to De consutionalshe the reore did DEM
The right OF the General Government TO Law Iu,s. on s
ports, by deeds however she NAV have ,in,,S ~.
oords; she did resist this c ht and even mn, On ~ ~
'0ur 10 render her resistance eecua and what she did
no. we presume, she must have thought of doing
.. lie denies that South Carolina Claims the rirht n
annui The Constitution and facs the United States ~
10 act contrary to that provision OF the Cons,ituon
ing the Constitution and the laws of the IJned S,.t..
made in pursuance thereof the supreme law of the land
ne a9es IN the very face the fact that South Caro-
una o"ned The Tariff laws OF 1928 1882 as well in
their revenue in their protective features and set nm
IN her Convention an authority over her own citizens su
preme over her own and the Federal Cons an
mority similar to that with which nation binds her own
cihzens by her construction of treaty with a foreipn
ed to omnpotence itself ' ~
o. lie insists that South Carolina claims snot the rpbt
OF Judging oil the delegated powers but these that are
reserved II Is utterly impossible Judge of the ono
wo9' at the same time judging OF the oiher- is tho
NAT Of nature that should be sowha God hath io;ned
together let no man put asunder.'
D. lie contends that in the Tariff of 1916 "rcyenue VIA,
the main object and protection but the ncidental His
own speech IN avor OF that entering wedge of the protec
1--WE SYSTEM proves the contrary The occasion on which
II was de'ivered was motion to strike from the Tariff
OF 1916 the minimum coons then for the first time
introduced which amounted TO prohibition apainst Tho
foreign fabric. Mr. Calhoun the sue S. of The motion
would leave our cotton establishments opposed to The
Of the cotton goods of the East Ipdics ,chich
IS ac6no,oiedged on all Sides they not capable of
eetg cifh success, tchou the proris0 proposed to be
STRICKEN out, by the motion under discussion
HE added, that IL was"a subject of vital Importance touch
s e security ana permanent prosperity 1.-THE counry;"
by means OF which, uder the fostering care of govern.
en the farmer will find ready market for his surplus
produce; and what so almost equal certain
and cheap oil his ,Dants; producing IN.
culture, IN t0hich it had the decided advantage of com.
n'eree and naugdtion and Calculated 10 bind iogeth
er more closely widely spread republic and to serve a.
" an efccual security against Z" DISUNION"-" the
sum of political dangers" against which " we ought
to be perpetualy guarded" The eioquence of Mr. ca
HoUN triumphed-the minimum duty was established
he corner stone OF the protective system was lad-ast
India cotton goods driven OF market by abso-
lutte prohibition, at the expense Of repenue and mono.
poly was secured To the home longer err
Posea 20 Jore,gm competition In the same year, in
another Speech MIR. CALHOUN declared, that il was
NE DUTY oil this country, as means of defence,
TO ENCOURAGE THE DOMESTIC INDUSTRY OF THE
COUNTRY that the question relating to manufac.
lures must not depend the abstract principle, that
industry, fgt TO pursue its course, toiH find
an its o,cn interest all the announcement that is ne
cesSdry, (prety language for the idsseS nou,
fare gentry OF the present illuminated or rather ha.
cnGfed era y and that laying the manufacturers en-.
irey out OF view, certain should be ex-
tended, at least, TO tooolen and cotton sanufac-
lures Who can read these extracts without being con-
WINGED OF the disingenuousness OF Mr. Calhoun, in at.
tempting to defend the consistency of support of the
arm oi'lolo, win ms present opinions! 1t will not do
Tor him TO come of with acknowledgment of error go
far as the minimum principle concerned for he adyo.
GATED the protection OF domestic industry, system
vital Importance TO the best interests of the country and
necessary TO the preservation of the Onion.
T. He says, in admitting, with aifectaon Of candor
that IN the obnoxious minimum principle, the protective
principle was admitted by the act of lS16"-"How this
was overlooked at the time, il is in my power to saw
Ii escaped my observation, which account for ony
on the ground that the principle then neo and that
my attention was then engaged by another important SUBJ
lecL Out OF his own mouth we will condemn him on
this point In the very first sentence of his speech in
1916, he held this language: The debate heretofore on
this subject has been the degree of protection which
ought TO be extended to cotton and wooen msnufac-
tures-all protesting TO be friendly those infant esa-
blshments, and TO be willing to extend them
encouragement. The present motion Ito strike out the
plnimum) assumes aspect. 1t is introduced pro-
tesedy the ground, that ought not to re-
ceive any encouragement" Its clear, the that 1876
the protective principle the old thing in which all
at one time, acquiesced, only differing about the degree
ard that opposition 10 it was regarded The norelfu
g. lie attempts 10 throw off share OF the re spons.
bility of his favor the Tariff of 1876 by saving
that 1t was given in common toh the almost entire South
ha all the Southern States voted with South Carolina in
avor oil the BILL History tells that the vote stood thus: