The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1841-08-05

low rate of duty
Mr. S. had been party to the act, noticing then
a member. He had nothing TO do with II. lie oiu
not speak from any knowledge recollection OF ms
own He spoke from the legislative history, open
equally TO all, and clear upon lts face II was mann
testify in accordance with the Message OF the Pfesi-
dent in which Message gentlemen Would hnu, as Nc
had already said, line OF Discrimination drawn DC
tween articles which interfered with our own manu-
features and articles which did not, for the purpose o
protection Then the whole policy OF That Congress
OF 1882 10 reduce duties TO an amount .qua' "
the demands of the Government, by taxing 'heh ~
from class Of articles which did not interfere w'h
our own manufactures. Did that Congress take up
the whole list of imported articles and examine sun
ply which OF them, IN mere fiscal view, or IN POM u
convenience the best suited bear the imposition
OF duty Not at all Did they mean, for example,
10 discriminate between articles ofluxury and articles
OF necessity Certainly not, I he act took OIL or
lowered the duty silks and wines and left the duty
salt. No; lis single object in leaving certain arll'
ces free TO reduce the revenue leaving the whole
of IL upon articles which nertered with produce
manu- features. Mr. 5. did not intend now TO say
whether this was night or wrong but only that such
the fact BY the act of July 1882, then, Con
gress Ii xed what amount OF revenue should DC grant
ed as adequate meet the indispensable wants OF the
Government II anticipated those wants Just as tfuy
as Congress could now anticipate what would prooa
bly, be the income OF any gwen year bo'h points
adJusted-the amount necessary for an economl-
cal administration OF the Government, and no" IL was
To be raised. The given by that act was un-
deTsood to be the amount.
Then, said Mr. s., after this history, let come to
the compromise act Ii found this law of 1882 ON the
statute book, but not yet in actual operation II was
to take effect the Sd of March: What was the OBJ
ject of the proceedings of be I'd of March, 1888 that
is, the compromise act To settle by compromise II
you please, the controversy which had arisen II was
not to settle the revenue not 10 decide where II should
| come from, or how much it should be- For il it had
been what oul hi Congress to have done One OF
two things either suffer the high duties to stand as
they were fixed by the law Of 1882, or, when they
took them off give adequate equivalent upon other
articles reduced made free by the act fully 1889,
to keep up the OF revenue. But did they
do So Without intending 10 reflect on any party, !
say lst That as respected revenue and expenditure,
1t was an act OF hasty legislation What was II passed
for I! It's very name Indicates Was IT TO Xix a re-
venue II was not. To regulate permanently the
tariff Of this country Ii not it passed to
settle dispute which had arisen and had now come
to crisis On the Sd of March 1888 the act of July,
1882, was TO begin It's operation Mr. s. cared not
who was the master spin, who devised the measure,
what the motives which led To its adoption and he
would not now say whether he should have voted for
the bill against 1t should he express OPT
Mon IN relation TO the further than to repeat that,
SO tar as revenue was concerned 1t was an act OF has
ty legislation the law did refer to the thing to be
acted on, but referred 10 something else. lie cared
not however, what were the motives Of those who
passed it II had answered the purpose for which II
intended, he glad il had done But TO
proceed the ID Of March, 1888 Congress passed
what had been famiarly designated as the force bill
1t placed in the edition of the laws little after
the compromise act, one act Intervening That bill
its passage and that it would pass there
no doubt, and what it might produce man could
very precisely say. He to whom its execution was to
be committed was not man to halt in mid career he
no halfw man he went for middle mea-
sures There might have been many who, though
they friendly to the policy Of protection, might
still feel some msgylngs when they saw the sword Of
the law placed in the hand Of such man al the head
of the military force Of the United States they might
very naturally have felt dread of its effect, both
public account and on account of individuals impli-
Gated so to be obnoxious to its vengeance And
this feeling might especially have operated on those
who opposed to the then Administration and
who disrus ed President Jackson They would feel
some>iear at seeing great mass OF power and popu
larity Gf, indeed these two words not here the
i same) united in one man, and still further extended
and strengthened by the support of all who approved
the proclamation and the force biil-of all who de-
sired the triumph of the laws.
Thus, from various feelings and consderat ions,
men might have concurred in the passage of the com
promising law of the I'd March, 1888. They wished
to afford escape from crisis. If they chose, in SO
doing, 10 90 further and TO give to South Carolina the
point OF honor, Mr.. ). had no objection to make
to it; he would not reclaim the concession. But
when gentlemen came 10 speak of the bill as TO it's
effect, permanently, upon the national revenue and
national welfare, It was quite another thing. Con-
slider what its effect has been and now is. The law
Of July, 1882, had fixed the revenue at a equal
to the wants of The Government. The act of 1888
did not adapt itself TO this it did not subject duty
article which had been free from duty under the law
Of 1882 but left them still free and unproductive 1t
laid no duty tea or coffee, AMI did not raise the
duty silks wine. 1t took from the higher duties
reserved 10 per cent upon the excess beyond 70 per
cent IN the first two years 10 per cent in the next
two years and until il had taken of 40 per
cent OF the excess. In two years all remaining
duty was to come off which exceeded 20 per cent
What was the operation and result of this arrange
menl We can ascertain sufficiently for the present
purpose. The late Secretary Of the Treasury told
Congress al the last that the reduction each
OF the two last periods would be and a half mil
lions of dollars that is, five millions for the two pc
RODS. These two reductions sx-enths Of the
whole. Now, If six-tenths were equal 10 five mil
lions of dollars the remaining four-tenths must give
$3 1873 900. What followed? The revenue lost by
this act during the first reduction PERIOD upwards of
$500 900 in the second, the same amount; and SO
on, TIL at the end the reduction amounts to nearly
nine millions year. He begged gentlemen to recur
to the view already given OF the act of 1852 II that
act fixed true basis for system of revenue 10 meet
the wants of the Government and the necessities of
the country, 1t followed that the amount to be raised
could not be reduced without injury to the public
service. And what had Congress done Taken
of nine millions of dollars and added nothing to sup
ply its place. And now here for the fist time, the
end OF nine years, Congress was taking steps 10 cor
rect that obvious error which had been operating with
cumulative force for years past 1t could not BE eiec-
tually corrected until II was ascetaned how much the
public service would require And facts had recently
come out which showed conelusvey that the actual
wants OF the Government had not been exaggerated
IN 1882 for just IN proportion as the reduction under
the compromise had taken effect in the proper
ton had the national finances become deiangcd until
il had been ascertaned that, in the four years past,
the Government had expended thirty.one millions
more than the revenue, being nearly eight millions
year SO that there not only need to restore the
nine millions by which the revenue had been reduced,
but, after that restoration, Government might still be
unable to get Along, the having fallen off from
other causes and debts contracted by Treasury notes
and n other Wi The had lost r9v-