The Charlotte journal. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1835-1851, 1842-10-20
From the Carolina Hatchman.

Mr.. Editor There is so mnch mis-
conception about the Tariff and such gross
taIsehoods put forth on the subject, aud By
those too, who fought hard for the highest
toned Tariff men that we wish, humble as
We are TO state our humble opinions. We
are opposed TO what is called horizontal
tariff, that is, the same duty On all articles,
because, ifii be burden, It will fall equal
Is on the rich and poor. Tie man who
wears fine clothes, carries fine watch,
dresses his family in fine silks and his
house with fine curtains and carpets, and
drinks his fine wines, according 10 that kind
Of Tariff would pay no more duty to-
wards the support Of Government, than
the one who moves in the humble walks
Of life. We are in favor of discriminating
duties, that is, such as are higher on some
articles than on others, because we think
Injuries ought 10 pay more than necessa-
rles, and because in this way, incidental
protection can lie given to our own manu-
factories, and because il is our duty, rs
nation, when foreigners impose high duties
on our products, TO measure out retaliation
upon them. We know that nccessaries
must pay some duty or the Government
could not be supported, and direct tax
yeuld be the consequence. We are not
IN favor Of q tariff that would tax one
branch Of industry for the benefit Of anoth.
er. We are in favor Of tariff high e.
nough 10 support the Government proper.
! " administered, because it is the easiest
way to support the Government. The tax
We pav Is voluntary, no man being COM
PEELED TO pay it. II is the way Govern.
mcnt has always been supported except in
case Of war or other great emergency
We are opposed 10 direct tax, because
it would be oppressive, beyond any tariff
we hive ever had, because il would create
swarm Of officers and thereby increase
the already oyershadowng power of the
President, and because it would be collect
ed in hard money if the Democrats get in
10 power, 10 the certain ruin of the coun.
Try. As to the Public Lands, we are, and
always have been in favor Of dividing the
proceeds of them among the States since
The old debt was paid of, for which they
were IN part bound. The contes, now is,
whether the money arising from the sales
of the Public Lands should 90 into the
United States Treasury or be divided a.
moGg the States. If the people were
rightly informed on this question there
would be but one opinion. The Public
Lands since the debt before mentioned was
paid of belongs 10 the States and not 20
Congress, and it the money were divided
among tho States, they would lay it oui in
helping to school the poor children Of the
country, making turnpike roads, so the far
mers would have less work to do on our
I roads and nave better ones 10 get their
produce 10 market. The money too might
be applied To lessen our State taxes. The
truth i, if il were not for the tax the diff
! terent Banks pay into the State Treasury,
and the interest annually accrmng on the
stock the people owns in these Banks, our
State tax would be Just about double what
+ they are. 1t is not generally known, but
) il ourht 10 be known that the people owns
+ the one-third OF the stock in the Bank oil
the State aud the Cape Fear Bank and cv-
erv individual stakeholder paws to the
i State twenty five cents per year on every
/ hundred dollars he has in the Bank. Now
If the Banks were pat down as some con-
tend, We should lose all its revenue, a.
mourning to betweenfitv and seventy thou
sand dollars. Let any Justice ofthe Peace
t,,rn IN the etatempnt anneyed tn tho act nj
assembly and he will sec what the State
/ Treasury derives from the Banks.
4 FARMER.