Democratic standard. [volume] (Georgetown, Brown County, Ohio) 1837-1850, 1843-09-26
THE TARIFF.

mo pollHcal HueSuOn u IesS uhuet~
stood, and therefore more liable to misrep
sanitation, than that Of the tariff. The
whig journals advocate high tariff for
The proteclionOf American manufactur-
ers, and represent the democrats as be-
iOg opposed to PrOlectUg home industry,
because they oppose such high tariff
The difference between the two parties
on this subjsct, is simply this: The
wings desire to make protection the main
object ofAhe tariff The democratic
party desire that the leading object shall
be repeHEe for the support Of the gQ
ernmeDt; and are willing that manufac-
turers should have TIE advantage Of the
Incidental protection such tariff would
afford. Now, as tariffs an indirect mode
! Of levying taxes, ell that is thus raised
from the p eople, BY the whig policy,
over enough to support the government,
is so much tax paid by the mass to sup.
port few manufacturing establishments
in the eastern States, and 10 increase
the wealth Of the rich stockholders, ma.
ny Of whom are English capitalists, who
are always ready to IeSp the advantage
Of OpPre ssive laws, whether enacted in
Englandor America. This is the rea.
son why democrats oppose tariff for
protection, higher than is necessary for
the support Of government, As the gov-
ernment is for the benefit Of all, il should
protect all alike, and all will then cheer.
fully contribute TO It's maintainance; but
when the government compels the mass
to increase their contribution ios the
benefit Of the few, ,it ceases its protec
tisD, and becomes a tyraDnic oppres.
sor.
t.Butwe want home market for our sur
Plus agricultural produce" !" say the advo.
Gates Of high tariff for protection. II
we were by high tariff to exclude most
articles Of manufacture that are now i'm
ported from foreign countries, and cause
them 10 be manufactured in the United
States, where then would We get revenue
for the support Of governmental The same
lpsrty that would imPOSe such tariff, de-.
sire also 10 distribute The proceeds Of the
public lands among the States. They
would thus leave the treasury empty, and
the only resort then for revenue would be
to direct tGEGtioa; there would be no a.
Tentative left. And Jet this same party
accuse the democrats Of being 10 favor Of
direct taxation! How absurd!
live should, BY imposing an OPprsss.
live snd unjust tariff, so far encourage
manufacturers that more would be mans
uiaclursd in this country than could be
consumed here, where could We sell the
surPluss England would not buy from
as, because, according tothe statement
Of the high lariffites, she can manuiC.
ture much cheaper than we in America
can. We could not sell in other foreign
countries, because England could sue
cesSfully compete with us there, and
thus mOnOpolizs the carrying trade Ofthe
world. Our commerce, under such a
system, would languiSh and decay: The
tea and coffee, and what little else FLOR.
eign production We would consume il
this country, would be brought to us
in English vessels, and be bought Of Eng
lishmsn at their own prices.
A very large quantity Of our surplus
agricultural produces is now sold in Eng.
land and other manufacturing countries.
But under the protective policy proposed,
as we would buy but little Of their manu-,
features, they would buy but little Of our
surplus produce, but would 90 for bread
stuffs to countries wherein they could