Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1842-03-21
OBJECTIONS TO A PROTECTIVE TAR
IFF CONSIDERED
coNsTIrurIoNAL POWER.

1t has been shown that the constitutional poioer
to grant adequate protection is denied and it re-
mains for us to consider the grounds4Bn which
this denialis made In doing that, - may well
state very briefly the grounds for claiming right
and power in Congress to grant protection. Pro-
lection Of Agriculture, Commerce aud Nlanuiac-
lures or Domestic Industry, which embraces all
involves the existence of something dangerous
to these interests. VIVA, and whence is this dan
ger? 1t is the selfish and grasping policy of 9TH
er na,ions-un enemy from othout. If this enc
my is not checked We are warranted by the histo-
ny of the past in snying that our commerce can he
crowded from the ocean, The products of our soil
excluded from the markets Of the world our
own domestic manufactures Frustrated, thus cut
ting off even the home market of the agricultur-
list ; aud we may in fact he reduced to the cond-
ton of province-of England for instance
From tho necessity Of The case, then, the power Of
protection against so formidable an enemy must
national nation without the power oftakng care
Of itself That power, which belongs TO all ma
lions, does assuredly exist in this ; and i, will be
found that all necessary power is conferred upon
the general government by the federal consu-
on. There is the power to take of COM
merce directy-and indirectly, all other interests
connected with commerce, so far MS this car lie
done hy making treaties there is ample power
to meet all the commercial restrictions of other
countries, in the clause of the Constitution which
empowers Congress 4" to regulate commerce with
foreign nations !" there is ample power TO meet
the Tariffs OF Great Britain and every oher nation,
| eI,oIl
power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposi8,"
&c.-nnd finally, as the lust resort, there is the
power to compel other nations to respect
rights, by " declaring war;" Here, then, is con-
crrcd in direct TERMS all the powers essential to
protection and, as if to remove all doubt from
tue question, the state legislatures expressly
forbidden the exercise OF powers without which,
somewhere, protection is impossible. We rest the
question of power here, for The present, without
relying ut all upon the duty, imposed upon Con-
gress by the Constitution, to use these and all the
powers granted, =" far The common defence and gen
erai iOeLfare Of the U. s." If the power of pro-
lection is not granted 10 Congress 10 be found
no Where, - neither in the national nor state gov
ernmens. But the enemies of protection insist
that this does not meet the case, as the constitu-
ton does not assert, in specific terms The right of
protection. We answer, that the constitution does
specifically grant all powers essential TO protcc-
ton and having the poioer, it may assuredly lie
used for purpose necessary and beneficial as
this But the an-iariff men insist upon the OBJ
jection and advance the doctrine that Congress
may not use even its acknowledged powers with
the intent to give protection, without a specific
grant to that effect. We answer the doctrine is
absurd. Let us apply it TO other cases. Congress
has the power " 10 provide and maintain navy y
will it do to say that it may not exercise this pow
er with the intent of building steamships of war
"a species of vessels unknown when the Cons-
tuition was adopted? Congress is no where au-
horized, specifically, 10 make muskets and cannon
- shall we say, that il shall therefore the
warp power with the intent Of authorizing the con-
slruclion of national armoiics and foundries P
But this is no absurd lhan TO insist that the
treaty making power, the power to regulate COM
merce and the power to lay imposts and duties,
may not be used with the intent Of protecting the
most weighty interests of the country.
Finally, the enemies of protection assert that the
object oil imposing duties is TO raise rerenue, and
that only. On their own grounds of reasoning,
we can deny the right Of Congress 10 intend TO
raise revenue there is 10 more specific authority
to do that than there is to protect domestic indus
try. The constitution declares the objects of tax
es, duties, imposls, &c., to he 40 pay the debts
and provide for the common defence and general
welfare of the United States" With what pro-
priety, then, chn the anti-larih men Claim, that The
right to raise revenue is contained in the words
"to pay the debts, "-and at the same time deny,
that protection is embraced by the words "provde
for the common defence aud general welfare ?"-
The truth is, that the duty Of "payng the debts
carries with it necessarily the power OF raising
revenue-Jut not more necessarily Than does the
duty to "provide Tor tho common defence aud
general welfare" include protection to the great
interests of the country.
In conclusion we will barely remark that the
trainers of the Constitution, and those great states
men who put the government in motion, had no
constitutional difficulties, such as we have briefly
considered. They imposed duties and adopted n
policy, intending to protect domestic industry aud
develope the resources Of the nation they pursued
this policy Washington and his suecessors-per-
seyerinsly aud il not until modern date,
when new race of statesmen ~ had grown up,
that these objections began to Take root. lsit wise
to walk straight on in the old paths, Illuminated by
such lights as Washington, Jefferson, Madison,
Monroe, and Adams to follow the winding
way of Calhoun, among misty distractions, Tree
trade decisions, and the somewhn, dangerous ma
yes of Modification?
p3-Applcatiuns for admission of attorneys and
counseors TO the U. S. District Court may he
made At the extra session thereof 10 be holden on
the 22d lust. None can he admitted but those
who have heen for two years melnbers Of the bar
of the Supreme Court OF this state.