Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1842-08-09
Friday, .Angust ., lei2.

Mr. PRESTON from The Committee Military At.
fairs TO whom had been referred "the bill IN relation 10
the reorganization Of the Army and for other purposes
reported tina, they had had the same under cons'dero
tion and had directed him to report hat, IN ther OPT
MON, the Senate should disagree TO the amendments
made thereto by the House, and ask Tor commune
of Conference He remarked that in both branches OF
Congress- there were dsagreeng votes with regard 10
the Army Appropriation BILL and that the bill just re-
ported had been introduced originally, tor le purpose
Of compromising these difficulties. The Senate haa
asked Committee Of Conference upon the d'sngreeihg
points on the Army Appropriation BILL and the House
had concurred in the suggestions and with view 10
make the result of the conference more complete, ano
ascertainng whether the existing disagreement could
be satisfactorily reconced, he proposed that both bills
should come before the same committee, as one was
intended 10 supersede the other.
The Report was concurred IN, and Comnittee Oh
Conference ordered 10 be appointed 10y the Cha'r.
TARIFF BILL.
The Senate then proceeded TO the consideration oI
the bill provide from Imports and to change
and modify existing laws imposing duties on imports
and for other purposes.
The question was stated, "Shall the bill be read
third time when
Mr. CALHOUN addressed the Senate for about an
hour and in the course Of his remarks, said that The
bill Of 1c2S had been called u bill OF abominal'ons ];
but bad that bill was, this bill was worse, be-
cause il was onerous The average duty under
this bill, as estimated by the Chairman oil the Finance
Committee about thirty-sx per cent al rat0Ttm
that of 1893, nearly forty-sx, according to the
best calculations which he had been able TO make
The difference between the two bills Ten per cent
ad raiorem. Other made 1t more onerous than
this In the first place, the cash cuties-which no
one estimated at more than four or five per cent
would bring the duties under this bill up to forty per
cent nd raiorcm Add to this specific duties lrices OF
foreign commodities had been much reduced within
the last fourteen years-and, prices were reduced,
specific duties must rise 0d raiOrem This bull was de-
signed To 90 into instant operaion-the act oil lo2o
gave three months notice. This bill throws The duties
| more unequally between the poorer and the richer
classes; but this was no, the only objection. 1t would
entirely supcrscde the Compromise act lie would
pass the fact of the breach Of express faith pledged
here by the author OF the Compromise act (alr Coy)
and the distinguished Governor OF Massachusetts,
(Mr. Davis who soemny pledged themselves that the
act, after having operated favoraby to the manulactu
refs of the North, should not be repealed when began
10 operate avoraby 10 the South lie would pass over
the fact that the proviso IN the Land act Which sus
ponds distribution III case duties shall 60 above twenty
per centun, 10 be violaed-a provso when was
inserted under positive pledge that it should be re-
spected If this bill should become law, It would oe
against the lights Of experience. In loSc, they hau
little experience the subjrct-hey had some little
under the protective Tariff Of l.24 but, since then
they had cloud Of experience, and they had not only
had high duty but reduced duty ard therefore they
had been enabled to compare results with long pc
riod Of years. and perceive lis operation In those years
the navigation, coustwse and foreign, and manuiac
lures, etner nearly
but under reduced duties, notwithstanding the adverse
circumstances of the times, the impulse given TO tht
industry Of the country never attained SO high point
Navigation too had increased, and what IS still more
consolaory our manufactures. lie commended that th
was no, revenue bill, but was one for protection
When they wanted revenue, the duty must be laid a
the lowest point; all above them would be exclusive
protection The chief difference between this act ant
that of 1928 was hs-he law of le2S, vas boldly ant
avowedly for protection. This bill for protection
in the guse Of one for revenue The former carriet
the dagger in tie hand the other concealed the weapon
in lis bosom. In conclusion, he said that, under TIT
banner of free trade an economical administration o
the Government, an entire separation of Bank ant
State low duties and strict adherence to the Constr
tuton the country would enjoy prosperity, liberty ant
happiness.
MIR BENTON addressed the Senate in opposition 1
the BILL and said that it would be paced precisely a
i, came from the House, and sent to the President
as to produce certain political results.
Mr. WALKER moved 10 recommt The bill to tn
Committee on Finance with instructions 10 substiiut
in the place of the duty tea and coffee, for reve
nue. on gold and silver ware above the value of on
hundred dollars-the tax not TO exceed thet propose
f 10 be derived by this act on Tea and coffee
: The question was taken, and the amendment was re
y ected-yess Is, nays 26, as follows:
Yeas-lessrs Allen, Benton, buchanan. Cu;hbe Fulton
King Linn, acRObes Sturgeon Walker, Williams "o0dbur
Seys~esr. Archer Barrow Bates BayaId, Berrien, choa
Kerr MansuG Merrick Miller Phelps, Preston, Rves Sin
mons, Smith OF Indiana, sprasue Tamadge "he ana "o0
bridse-N. Go, ~.
'. Mr. EVANS replied 10 the Senators from South "a
rolina and Missouri, particularly 10 the iormer VII
regard 10 the present state of the country UNDER TO-
= duties
a MIR. WOODBURY. made explanation in rejoiI
der TO the Senator from Maine.
" Mr. EVANS responded: and the question on Il
Of the bill was 'ses a. follows as''''
reo,-Me.srs Archer Barrow, Bates Bayard Chcate ciay,o
Conrad Crafts Crlrenden, Dayton Evans; Huntington Ne