The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1842-05-26

From the Richmond Enquirer
TO THE STATES RIGHTS REPUBLICANS
OF THE UNION
Fellow Citizens You are now told by the Fede-
raists that Protective Tariff necessary to regulate
the paper currency Of the United States Only a
short time ago. you must well recollect, N atonal
Bank was the grea pa for all the ills to which
the currency suhject-an especially was it essen
tial TO regulate our paper currency. You were then
told that National Bank alone could control the Is
sues of the State Banks-and that unless that was
done it impossible that the currency Of the Uni
ted States consisting Of the paper issued by the State
Banks, and Of gold and silver coin, could become
uniform and stable-ergo, National Bank, and no
thing but National Bank, could regulate our paper
currency This false hypothesis has, of late years,
been attempted be sustained too by assertions of
fact equally false 1t has been asserted (and repeat
ed again and again, till repetition has procured very
general credence for that which is not true, hat our
ing the existence of the late United SIa'es Bank
we meal the National Bank, not the Pennsyivahia
Bank-the currency of the United States was at all
times uniform and that exchange between the dlffe
rent States was always at par, or nearly So NOW, II
you will turn to any newspaper, or other register, CIV
ing table of the values of the notes OF the different
State Banks at different tines you Will hnd that
those values varied often and as materially during
the existence of the late National Bank, as at any
other period. As you may not have convenient ac-
cess to any such means of information we extract
from Report OF the secretary OF Inc TeasuIy, 10
the Senate in May 1888, few of the variations in
the values of the State Bank notes. during portion
of the time when the late National Bank was in full
operation merely samples OF the great vacillaons
which were them now, constantly occurring In the
value of these notes. The following the rates of
discount at which the notes of the Banks of the
States named stood in the different years men
toned In 1918, New York per cent. dis
count, Pennsylvania to 6, Maryland to 10,
North Carolina to g. In 1919, Massachu-
M
g. Georgia to 20. In 1920, New England generally
2to4 Virginia to g. North Carolina to TO- Ohio Is
to 26. In 1921, Maine aud New Hampshire 2 10 A,
Kentucky and Tennessee25 to SO Ia 1922, Maine 10,
other New England generally to A, North Carolina
2 to IL, Georgia to Ia. In 1924 and 1925, Name
10, other New England generally to g. North Caro-
lima to g., Tennessee Is TO 90 In 1926, New Eng
land generally b, New York. County banks) to
5, Louisiana s. Mississippi 10, &c. &c. These are
enough for purpose You here perceive, that dur
ing ten years, when the late National Bank was in
full operation the of the different State Banks
varied repeatedly in value, from par, to TO- TO- and
even 81 per cent. discount. As these notes formed
considerable part OF the currency of the nlted States
then, as similar notes do now, that currency was no
more uniform at that time, than II ID at present-in-
Decd it believed have been less uniform; and ex
change if paid tor in these notes of different values
was of course at par then than now through
out the Union Yet in the face of these facts it has
been asserted and you have been induced to believe
and exchanges nearly at par and the attempt has been
made to persuade you that National Bank, which
produced these happy effects then, will as certainly pro-
duce them again. Indeed, until recently, you have
been told that the only thing under Heaven that
could regulate the currency-that it was absolutely
necessary and alone proper for this purpose and upon
his very necessity based the argument in favor of
its conslitutionalty. That was the only remedy I'M
der the for the evils of deprecated currency.
Now, you told that high protective Tariff is the
cy, and that it is the sufficient and complete remedy
for these evils of paper circulation If so, by the
way, what becomes of the argument in favor of the
constitutionality of National Bank
But we are done for the present with National
Bank. We congratulate you, fellow-c .tizens, that
your wise political doctors have at last discovered
another remedy for these diseases of the body polite
that they have found out another means of curing
the disorders Of the currency and rendering 1t uni
form and stable--a high protective Tariff. We may
now hope at least that you will be permitted to choose
between the two medicines prescribed, and not be
compelled to swallow both and if so, we then only
have to fear, that the last will be found nauseous
and inefficient as the first, and perhaps, more
poisonous and destructive. Let examine it for
moment, and the arguments by which it is recon-
mended
1t is said, that high Protective Tariff prevents
cessve importations that in this manner are
made to import less OF their products from for eign
countries than we export of our own products to
them; and especially so in reference to Great Bri
tain, with whom trade represented to have been
particularly disadvantageous to in this respect
that this operation keeps the balance of trade in
favor and not only prevents the export of the pre-
cious metals, but causes them to be imported into
this country, in this way extending the specie basis
securing it against the fluctuations of sudden demands
from abroad, and of course preserving the paper
rency, which is based upon it, sound and trustworthy
and rendering it uniform and stable This, believe
is fair and correct, though concise statement of
the argument; and shall show that is both false
in theory and mistaken in fact 1t may be admitted
that the effect of high Protective Tariff is to dmi-
nish importatons though the present Secretary of
the Treasury, in recent communication to Congress,
says experience has shown that whilst this is the
first effect of Protective Tariff yet importations
very soon regain their former level. But, however
this may be, will admit that the first and last eff
feet of high Protective Tariff is to check the
import Of foreign products into our country; and we
affirm that its effect at the time is to diminish the
export of our products to at least great
tent. And this results necessarily from established
law of commerce. that trade between nations consists
In an exchange of products, and that nations will
rarely trade long together unless they mutually take
the products Of each other. If take less of the
products of foreign countries, they will and lake
less of our products in exchange. They DH do SO,
because their interest demands it and they must do
So because their ability to do otherwise is destroyed
And thus, if our imports are essened exports
and must be diminished, at The same time and by the
same But more direct effect of high pro-
tecve Tariff is, to depress domestic industry in all
occupations except in those which protected; and
the occupations which not protected furnish
the products for expectation, it lessons the amount of
those products which we have to export Hence it
diminishes exports to much greater extent than
il lessons imports. If this be So and we think
obvious, them under high protective Tariff, hall
inevitably import than we export; the balance
of trade instead of being kept in favor by it, will
be turned against the precious metals be sent out
of the country the specie basis contracted and the
paper currency, resting upon it, be rendered unsound
and unstable. II will be rendered no less vacillating
than unsound so far as it is effected at all by pro-
tectve Tariff, because another effect of such Ia