The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1842-05-26

amount greater than 1929 100000, before the adms-
| sion can all them in the argument but IL u sup
posed that our trade with Great Britain has since the
Compromise act been particularly disadyantageous TO
us in this respect We happen to have before US 2
comp ete table of our exports and imports to and
from the British dominlons, from the year 1871 70
1910, both inclusive, being period OF 20 years me
first II years embrace the period OF the High lari
policy and the last years Of comparative free trade
1t appears from this table that from 1921 TO 1884, i-
elusive the II tariff years, the whole OF our eNPois
to the British dominons amount in value 10 sSo3-
,9l3 and the whole OF our imports 10 e4@oo:o'
422 showing that during the IL tariff years we I'M
ported of British products in value about s42OOO
900 more than we exported of our own produe.s 70
the British dominions II also appears 'ha' from
1888 to1S40 inclusive, the years Vi eoinP 49,; u
free trade the whole of our exports 70 the plhis
dominions amount in value to Sli3 ana 'lo
whole of orr imports to S459 500 1896, showing that
during the wears of comparative Tree trade we eN
ported TO the British dominons, oil our own prouucc
in value about 900 900 more than we imported o'
British products. If the comparison IS confined 70
The wears of the highest tariffs, from 1924 to 1888
The result will be smilar-and il is nearly the same
if confined To Great Britain and Ireland alone, apart
from her colonies. II then that, IN reference
to Great Britain at least, high tariff makes our I'M
ports greater than our exports, thus turning Tue tauc
and exchanges against this country-whlist Tree
trade mikes our exports greater than our imports,
thus turning the trade and exchanges IN favor oil 'his
country Experience here again confirms what reason
teaches. But, after all, the material fact ~ TINS
discussion is, TO ascertain the comparative ihi-
mort and export of the precious metals during
these periods-for upon the result OF tins com
parson the whole argument OF our opponents
must stand or fall. We are informed, by the re-
port of the Secretary of the Treasury, that, from
the year 1921 to 1892, inclusive, the same tarln
period The whole amount OF specie exported from the
United States was 1854 is3 il4 and the whole amount
imported during the same period was SSl $3.50 ~
showing loss the United States IN IL Iarifi years
Of about 50 600 000-whst in the remaining years
the period OF flee trade from 1888 to lsil (or this
Report includes the year 1874 the whole amount OF
specie ported from the United States was 500 loo
sos, and the whole amount imported during the same
period was 500 li3 46 showing gain to the nlted
States in years Of free trade OF about $49 oUo wv
No doubt that this great excess IN the imports OF se
Gle above the exports, during the last years, is IN
some measure to be attributed TO the sale OF State
stocks in the foreign market-but II is believed that
to very great extent Is attributable to the increase
of the exports of our domestic products, during the
same time. II IL, OF any event, obvious that high
Tariff neither brings keeps specie IN the county
for during the Tallff years we certainly lost more
than $3 100000. And now what becomes OF this
new argument of the Federaliss IN favor OF Pro
| tective Tarh; 1t rested upon the assumption that
high Tariff brought the precious metals INTO the Un
ted States, or at least kept them here The TACT IS
that it send. them away. We respectfully ask for
this fact the attention of those particularly who have
suffered themselves To be mised by this argument
without a sufficient examination OF its truth. They
must be satisfied, we think that there is nothing in
this Federal dogma of high Protective larlti
regulating the currency So far as II can have any
influence at all upon the currency, II must have an IN
furious
We warn YOU fellow citizens against being i'm
posed on Ivy any seemingly new arguments either IN
favor of National Bank or Protective Iarh. Those
measures have been thoroughly examined and dis
cussed Gy at least wise and patriotic as tins
generation can show. They have been tried by the
Union and condemned. There is nothing new to be
said in then favor They the old Federal mea-
sures and must rest upon the old Federal prin-
cpes and reasons They have been and are still re-
commended to opponents chiefly because they ex-
tend the power of the General Government at the ex
pense of all the limitations IN your Constitution
They unite with that Government the great moneyed
Interests of the country. They make large class Of
wealthy capitalists dependent for their dividends upon
that Government alone; aud thus buy their support
for it, under all circumstances, right wrong. If
adopted, they will inevitably convert it into conso
dated Government resting upon moneyed aristocIacy
But we warn you still more earnestly against high
Protective Tariff; for, whilst it thus equally tends 10
! strengthen the General Government, it weakens the
States by arrayng them against each other in then
contests for their differing sectional interests fese
contests, in 1882, brought your happy Union TO the
very brink OF dissolution. If this measure be per
severed in il will inevitably similar resistance
attended with still greater danger your peace and
Liberties. Are you prepared 10 exchange your con-
federacy for desposm dissolution2 Can the warm
est advocates of Protective Tariff pretend that ii
will afford you any equivalent for either of these evils
no matter in which it may resut2 These are the
questions you have in reality 10 consider and we can
not doubt how you will decide them,
Another Centinel on The Watch T0r1r.