Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1842-09-05


in the rcasuyas he says, in reference to tie bill
of ls.6.
Once more weast lar Mr.. E.yanss admirable efeeeA
aa attentive perus,l,
We leg leave to".rreet ,hc mistake II the Iyaeh
burg Nirgm!an. We do nr adopt the VI hig doctrine.
that high Tariff will prevent the eyppriafaa Of si,
and is iayorahie 10 sound currency Bat what e said
the oihrr dal about large orders being sent ont for ,esl,
goois-( 10 come IN duty fceJ WAS. that if all nlods
were 10 come lar time fler n aH ddg, aud under this
impression large orders sent cut f goods sudden aud
extraordinary change would for time pour an i'm
ncnse quantity ot foreign goods upon ts ANTICIPATING the
demand eyoninr several months il might produce Il
temporary taianer OF trade against us raise the pree Ut
Bills. and force an cXroHatian Of ne precious metals al
the very time hen the Banks wanted them The mos, Ia
carry ont their resuu zion. aiciBpid faguircr
The correction Of tie Enquirer dots tot Change the
character. or impair tie force Of lis previous argument
That argument demonstrated the tecessiyqf tarig of
d"s. aud the consequent mische # free t,ade under
existing circumstances. The argument is inconroycTli-
ble--and moi only So bu it is universally and ut al
'aes applicable. And, in estimation, it confates
every position adverse t. the incidentally protective poll
ry, which has now, we believe but few opn7aens in
any party. Ne give tin Enquirer, however the bon,-
TT OF It's explanation, in Us own language.
But the Enquirer viii not deny that the tariff bill
recently passed. will prevent the occurrence Of the evils
II SO orcbly depicted the necessary consequence Of
failure TO pass any bill the suhee-and il that be So
we respectfully enquire Of the editor OF that paper IA
king his own estimate of It's evils well as its benefits
lit does not carry in ltsefa compromising principle
ii the evils it will avert infinitely greater lhon
those it nnicl? If this be So why even ADMITTING
that the duties may be in some cases too high shall it be
50 rnthiesaIy assaulted!
II is said tobe worse ihan the tariff Of 1893 But we
think it is dcn1asrable by c5mplr5 N OF the two,
thatthis assertion is notrue--indeed in MANY of tie
leading articles. the duties are lower than they were
even in 1924. We have not time nor room. however
to show this to-day It shall be done however because
in the absence oisuch comparative statement, we are
wet! aware Of the Efforts that viii be made by those
who deal in round assertions, which, never iIvcstiaa-
ting fer themselves they borrow from some oracle Of
their party, distrt the true character Of the bill for
the purpose oieAciting unjust prejudces against it in
the public mind Thus Mr.. Calhoun the other day.
pronounced this bill verse than the tariff of lsg9 and
ever since the echo of his voice has been ringing in the
public ear--repeaed by menwho have never probably
seen either bill, and who have certainly never compared
lheml
o.; The Richmond Enquirer and ether Loco Foco
prints declare against the Tariff Bill recent
y passed by Congress and on the supposon that the
President would approve IT, they raise the lag Of " Re
Pcd Repeat" Very we'll This is all fair. If IA
majority of the people in favor Of its repeal and they
shall Indicate that fact by sending to Congress major
y Of members also favorable thai COURSE there can
be no objection to it, Iion popuii roc Del! We Ger
tainy prefer Repeat to ratification And, by the way,
memory is very ircacherous if the Enquirer did not
weeks since, copy from South Carolina paper par
agraph swearing by all the godsat oncc, that if this
bill should he ouaced by Congress the chraIy' ofhe
Palmetto State would strike it dead, tar they were
concerned. by another Ordinance Of Modification As
Mr.. Calhouns prospects fer tho RIesidencyor rather.
should say. for the honor OF being beaten candidate
io- that high olice--ncrcase and brighten, do they
sarnk from the enforcement Of their threat lest might
mar his fortunes 50 lately the ebb and now seemingly
the food tide? Does ambition conflict with rr6tciph
in l&42.-as il stimulated. If il did not give birth 10 it
years ago? However viii not be loo ln7nisi1e
On this delicate point.