Daily Richmond Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1840-1842, 1842-09-08

The wants OF tho Treasury, so FAR az my action
can control H. shall be provided for by impcst duties
alone. I will resist every effort TO take back the
proceeds OF the public lands from the peop. Of the
States and restore them TO the ordinary Of the
General Government believe that We are called
upon by every consideration OF policy and justice to
devote the land fund to the benefit OF the States
shall adhere to that feature of the bill now under
consideration, which continues distribution, not
withdrawing the warning We have had that this
provision ensures Executive opposition 10 the bill
itself The course which the President has thought
proper pursue regard TO this question. imposes
additional cause, m my judgment, why Congress
shoud refuse to abandon the gcound which i, has
taken. The subject has become one now, involving
great fundamental principles hich lie the bottom
of our Institutions. IL is whether the legislative
department OF the Government shall perform, as
heretofore, the constitutional dutic, which belong to
IL, or yield up its functions and authority TO the
bidding OF Executive dictstion.
The question whether we shall subtract the pro-
reeds Of the public lands from the ordinary revenue
derived by customs or add them to the latter. is
question oil money-ot taxation, It you please; and
10 whom docs il belong, TO the Commons or the
Crovn1 The guardians of English liberty never
would surrender principle 80 vital as this; II re-.
mains to be seen whether an American Congress
will prove itself less watchful of popular rights.
shall vote, then, for a revenue bill, having re
ference in the amount to be collected by IT, alone
the ordinary, reasonable expenditures Of the Trea
stry.
Here now arises the question, whether in levyins
duties for revenue, tho power exists to distribute
such duties, as TO afford encouragement and Incl
dental protection to domestic interests and 1t
the power does exist, is II expedient and proper to
exercise IL. On this question. as on most others Of
disputablc character, there ultraisms ct opinion
on both sides which desire equally TO avoid. One
school Of politicians maintain, that all We can law
fully do. is TO ascertain the amount necessary to be
collected by imposs; take the average value oil TO-
reign goods imported into the country, and levy
upon Il a horizontal ad rai0rspi duty on all articles
alike of such per centage as will raise the required
I'm.
Another class contend, that il is both lawful and
cxpedient to levy duties without regard to the wants
OF The treasury, and 10 any amount over and be
yond those wants which may be found necessary TO
secure the productions Of homo labor and industry
from foreign rivalry. These are for protection per
can not concur in the policy last mentioned; for
the reasons which have already ir part stated
Whenever we augment the collections beyond the
revenue standard, surplus is created in the ueasu
ry which must be poured out either by resorting to
unauthorized modes of expenditure, or a correspond
ing increase in the expenses OF Government must
ensuc. The moment the line of healthy economy
IS passed, corruption and prohgacy begin. The
possession Of money, by private individual, be
yond his necessities, tempts aud prompts TO lndul
gences which are hurtful. Much more is this true
IA reference to Governments.
Again: it is not necessary that any such policy
should be adopted, in view even OF the end which It
proposes. The proper revenues OF the Government,
iudciously distributed, will always afford sufficient
protection TO the interests OF the country most re-
quiring il. Nor can / eoncedo TO horizontal ad
valorem tariff the merits which are claimed for it,
Some gentlemen speak OF such a system as but
another name for free trade. They describe il as a
system OF justice and equality; it is a tex having
relation TO the value Of the thing taxed. This may
all look pretty enough on the surface, but what
the fact Why, we ell know that no fixed ad va
loren duty in practice work with equal fairness
on the various dutiabe articles. Take the duty Of
30 per cent for example, and apply It TO a cheap ar
ticle Of foreign production, of the manufacture of
which, at price approximatng that OF the import
cd commodity, we have not the means. The duty
in such would very little affect the price OF the
foreign article and. at the same time, would lend
aid to the domestic production. On the other hand
the same duty imposed on another article, OF which
we have home supply at something like an equal
cost, would prove absndantlY protective.
There Is q large class Of articles, duty on which
Of 20 per cent. would be prohbitory. Ii would
protect some and prohibit others, and yet, 10 the
tmation OF particular gentlemen this is free trade
The truth is, cannot lay tariff of any kind,
whether nd valorem specific, without affecting
domestic industry, and comforting protection 10 some
extent.
Happily, there is at present no necessity OF going
into the question of protection in the abstract No
one proposes TO levy duties beyond the necessities
Of the Treasurysso far as | am aware. Still less
am inclined TO revive the controversy as TO the
portions OF the community upon whom the duties
fall, whether il be the producer consumer. will
leave all the learned theories upon this subject 10
those skilled in the mysteries OF political economy.
will only observe that If The duties are really paid
ultimately by the producer, this consequence would
follow, whether such duties are levied for revenue
solely OF ter protection. The object Of the duty
could lis effect; that If the fact be
by some teaOn 10 It's ItupUSIIIVr, ."e..~- that il
impost duty at all, the objection applying will
equal force to the impost, whatever be its pur
pose.
II, the other hand, the duty is paid by the con-
sumer-by him who uses the Goods-then is it o.
ell others the equal and JUS, mode Of taxation
for il 10 paid IN proportion to the ability TO pay
lie who has most means with which TO purchase
foreign commodities pays the largest sums TO the
Treasury, and thus the wealth OF the country, as il
thOuld do, paysih expenses Of the Government.
Without occupying more time on these mootet
points, shall endenvor to maintain, that in laying
duties for the support Of Government Congress hai
the power 10 discriminate as the amount of duty
particular articles and TO the selection Of du
liable articles, 50 as 10 afford encouragement and
protection TO the labor and industry of our own
country, incidental to revenue; and further, that
Congress has not only the authority, but it is an
obligatory duty resting upon us, as on American
legislature, thus TO exercise the taxing and COM
mercal power.
And first, Mr. Chairman, as to the constitutions
right so TO egislaie.
10 arriving at Just conclusions upon any question
Of construction, 1t is generally useful, and often es-
sential. 10 know the miscbiefs which were intend
ed TO bs provided against. The mind Of the law
giver is ascerained not only by the terms which he
employs, but by the condition Of things at the time
of the enactment.
Previous to the adoption of the Constitution, tht
separate States or Colonies through their legisla
lures had exercised the power, not only Of levynl
and collecting taxes but Of encouraging domes,
manufactures. As carly ns the year 1852 the Hous,
of Burgesses OF Virginia, enacted law for "the en-
coursgement OF manufacturing linen and wOoer
cloth, and the more speedy payment Of debts arc
leVIes." Revenue and protection were thus early
linked together From that period TO l7s6, a seri.I
Of acts are found scattered through the volumes o
"Henning's statutes" OF like character and purpose
some OF which, the legal political antiquarian vii
md amusing enough.
Under the articles Of confederation, the sam
State, supplied, IN part, her quota Of the genera
charge, by duties on imports and exports. In 1855
I'm act was passed imposing duty tea, hemp
and cordage, and on the tonnage Of vessels. By an
other act, OF The same year, duty was imposed o
three pence per bushel salt, four pence per gsI
Ion on wine, four pence 90 beer, ale and porter IL
addition 10 former duties. By another act of IN
same year, two per cent dd palorem was irnro,et
M addition 10 these duties all imporialions from
countries not having commercial treaties with IN,
United States. Examples Of similar legislation a N,
attempts 10 regulate the trade Of the separate Sta
with foreign countries, might be furnished from IN,
legislative history Of most Of the States. The ute
Impracticabiy Of such regulations by the separat
action OF the states, was the result demonstrate,
by every such attempt. IL was the mpossibility o
regulating commerce by State legislation that NOR
than all other causes combined, led 10 the adoption
Of the Federal Constitution. The General Gov
eminent may be said, emphateally, to have had IN
birth 10 the necessity Of power 10 regulate anC
render uniform our foreign commerce.