Liberty advocate. [volume] (Liberty, Miss.) 1835-1866, 1839-06-06
III 1888 ana appropriations for INTERNAL

IlIlHlSlTdllOn IN attempting w lh"HS ~ ~
ton responsible for obnoxious larlis'--l hese
votes will bear repetition as we ma lnem mort
IN detail in the Nashville Banner! Inc S,ruS
gle between the friends and opponents OF th'
Bill of 1924 ensuod in theSenate, Immediately
on It's coming up from the House
On the 28h April, Mr.. Mills made mouoi
to strike out the duty oCninety cents per nun
dred on iron, in bars or bolts, not manufactures
= in whole or in part, by rolling Among The
t yeas on this motion are the names OF baTD
d Macon, Holmes Of Maine, King OF Ala, Loyc
and Mills Of Mass, Clayton OF Delaware lay
Ior of Va, &c
II Among the NAYS, we find the names Of
EATON, JACKSON, and VAN BUREN,
: On the 9Th Of May, Mr.. King OF Ala, moved
e to strike out provision n\he first section
j. which declared among other things that all COT
Ton cloths whatsoever the original cost oil which
=, was less than thirty c4ts per square yard,
should be taken and deemed to have cost thirty
cents per square yard, and charged with duty
e accordingly. Nays, JACKSON, VAN BU-
Rem, &c.
I On the same day Mr. Macon moved TO strike
out the duty Of four and halt cents per square
yard on cotton baggng. Nays, EATON, JACh-
ISON, &c.
On May 7th Mr. Lloyd of Massachusetts,,
moved to strike out the duty Of three cents per
pound on iron cables or chains. Nays EATON,
JACKSON, &c.
MAY 10, Mr. Taylor Of Va moved to strike
out the duty of25 cents per bushel on wheat
on wheat -four so cents per hundred-on pota-
toes, ten cents per bushel. Nays EATON, VAN
IBUREN, JACKSON, &c.
,,o,;,r L,, NJ THoIbott 10 Il q tho 1D,V n
Iron at thirty.seyen dollars per ton Gen Jack
son voted in the affirmative, and that motion
having failed, he voted for the next highest sum,
Ithirty-fve dollars.
On a motion to increase the duties already
imposed on all foreign distilled spirits fifteen
per centum, Gen. jackson voted il the afiirma
tive.
Finally, the question being taken on theI
third reading OF the bill, the vote stood as
follows:
Yeas.-Mr. Barton, Bell, BENTON, Brown,
Chandler, D'Wolr DlCKERSON, EATON, Ed
wards, Fndlay, Holmes of Maine, JACKSON,
JOHNSON OF Ky, Knight, Lanman, Lowric,
M'llvaine, Noble, Palmer, Ruggles, Seymour,
Talbot, Taylor Of Indiana, and VAN b.
REN-24
Nays.-Nr. Barbour, Branch, Clayton FL
lott, Gailard, Hayne, Holmes of Miss, Henry
Johnson, J. S. Johnston, Kelly, King of Ala,
King of New York, Lloyd of Maryland, Lloyd
Of Massachusetts, Macon, Mills, PARROT, Smith,
Taylor, Of Va, Van Dyke, Ware, Will
lams-22.
We should think here was sufficient proof to
satisfy even the most obstinate that, the opposi-
ton are not so obnoxious to The charge of high
tariff ism as the party now in power-enough
to convince any rational being that, the Locolo-
co electioneerng cry of;ariff tariff, against ev-
cry opposition candidate that appears, is sheer
slang and humbug. 1t thus appearing that
JACKSON, VAN buren,, BENTON, JOHNSON, &c,
were the real instruments Of fastening a high
tariff upon the country, we should not think
that Virginia, or any portion Of the South,
would be longer imposed upon by the slang
of the Locoioco press in relation, at least to this
subject.
But we are also ind uced to notice Mr. Buchan,
ans relation TO this question, not because we
wish to attack or pursue that distinguished and
worthy gentleman, but to show how much ex-
posed the people are to imposition. The last
Richmond Enquirer contains long communi-
cation from Washington, the object of which
seems TO be to prove that "Mr. Buchanan, of
Pennsylvania, is not a Federalist,n although
he delivered that terrible ant-democratic
speech in 1916, and is supporter of this feder-
al Administration. In the course Oft, the fol-
lowing paragraph occurs;
"AS to the Tdr0".--When Mr.. B. was elected
to Congress, in 1921, few men in Pennsylvania
Of any party, would have hazarded their repu
tation for sanity, much less theirpoitical popu-
arity, by doubling that tariff for proteciion
was panacea for all evis--poIitcal as well
as physical. Yet, Mr.. Buchanan ioopardedI
both, by voting for the postponement Of the eel
ebrated Wooen's bill, as it was called in the
session Of '26-'27, for which he was denounced
throughout Pennsylvania, and in some the adj
joining States, not only for voting for the post.
poncment himself, bat having the influence toll
carry four or five OF the votes from Pennsyva.
MIA with him. You will find the remarks made
by him, in the United States Telegraph, of 18TH
April, 1928, and In the National IntelgencerI
u few days afterwards. 1t is true, he finally
voted for the Tariff bill Of 1928, but even then
more in accordance with the known wishes of
his constituents, than his conviction Of its being
sound national policy. His opinion was then
what it is now, viz: that protection should be
incidental; that as revenue for national pur
poses must be collected, it would be wise
to collect it from articles Of commerce, com
ing in competition with our own produc-
tons"
1t IS intended of course, that the people shall
infer from this, that Mr.. Buchanan was not con
WINGED that the tariff Of 1928, was "sound ma
tlonal pollcyj" and yet the conclusion admits
I hat he is i'm favor If IN RI II cc rro,oa,: WI