Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1843-08-18
THE FRUITS.

THE FRUITS.
The Fruits of the Tariff trouble our neighhor
Of the Patriot. He cannot bear TO have all his
predictions falsifed-os they now daily falsd-
ed in the improving condition of every sort of
business; in the increasing demand for, aud i'm.
proving prices OF, almost all the products Of our
farmers and particularly Iasified in the immense
reduction in the imports of foreign wool. We do
not wonder, therefore, that our notice oil some Of
the fruits Of the Tariff has thrown him into lit
tie heat /; nor that he should attempt, in the man
ner lie does TO cvade the force of the facts which
We have presented. First the Patriot tieais us 10
Bit Of petfoggng, not to say trckery, in nn efor,
TO convict the Waterman of inconsistency. Sub
s,uniiay, HE Patriot charges lis with having Civ.
en- unqualified praise 10 the Tariff in AZ, and
thence accuses us of having changed our ground
when we recently said" we have never claimed
that the Tariff was nil that it should he. We
have insisted that while it was vast improve
ment upon the act which locofocosm enailed up
on us, time clone could deveope its good or its
evil" &c. Regarding this as nothing but an eff.
fort to cover up the main qneson-that is, the
fruits Of The Tdri6-by getting up contest about
something else, we should take no notice of il
were it not that The Patriot pretends to back up
its charge by quotation from the Watchnun-
One quotation only is given,-from few lines
upon the Tariff, which had been incidentally al
luded to as one of the fruits OF the faithful labors
OF the last Wing Congress-and q very essen
lal part of even this incidental paragraph is omit
ted. The only remark we have to make to that
quotation is, that we hope the Patriot intended no
unfairness. The fact is that we have not changed
our ground. In the COLUMNS of the Waichmnn,
in speeches and in private conversation, we have
maintained The same ground expressed by us in
the article which the Patriot pretends 10 answer.
We suppose lie Patriot has our files, and we re-
greet thai in this instance it has not made better
use Of them.
On the 25h July, '42 we thus spoke of the
Tariff, as first passed by the House, afer abiding
TO the amendments on wool:
"For these improvements let the woo-grower
remember that he is entirely indebted TO the Wings.
Our only regret is that higher protection IS not gran
ted but it ls evident that this is the best which
can now be had, owing on the one hand TO the
unreienting opposition Of the locOs, and oil the
other to the too moderate views Of The Southern
u
iocos oui Of The nert Congress. To that remedy ev
cry wool-grower who regards his own interests
will respond hearty Amen!
Again: Sept. 5, AZ in speaking of the duties
on wool, we expressed The identical sentiments for
which The Patriot now arragns us on charge oil
inconsistency:
I" But The farmers are told that this is not pro-
tecve enough. Perhaps this is trne I'VE do
ybpihpr % yes ct IN on uph or
not: nor can be knoi0h until IS tried. 1t does
give something aye, much more than The pres
ent law.
Thus much to show the entire falsily of the
PATRIOTS charge as to our "poston." We now
stand, and shall always stand, ready 10 judge this
or any other Tariff by lis fruits and we hold,
100, with the Wing party, that wherever expert
ence demonstrates the necessity of more protec-
ton, more should be given.
The DOCTRINE OF PRorEcTIoN.
In word, the Patriot may understand that we
go for Protection as a specific object, claiming the
constant guardianship of the government, That
was and is the Republican doctrine, and as it has
had the countenance Of every President from
Washington to J. Q. Adams, we apprehend we
never shall have occasion TO be ashamed Of it,
Nor shall we initiate the example of dishonest
demasogues, in clamoring for more Protection on
wool, while protection 10 other interests is Just as
clamoIously assaulted as being an enormous tax
upon the laboring and producing classes" There
is neither honesty, nor principle nor consistency in
such Il course ;-whoever pursues it, shows him.
self TO be an enemy to The cause OF Protection,
without the courage or the honesty 10 avow him
self Us such. Let ony interest in this vast coun-
try adopt That course-let it clamorously claim
protection for itself alone, las locofoco presses
profess to claim for wool, and deny it TO all other
inleresls-and how very cheering is the prospect
that such claim would be conceded to No
this is not our doctrines we hold that every pro-
duct of the soil, and of American Industry, has an
equal right TO Protection, and should receive
measure Of protection suited to its necessities
When, therefore, the Patriot asks US whether the
duty is high enough on salt and iron ,-(and it
treats the duties on these articles as an enormous
tax upon the labolng and producing classes, evil
DENLY with the intention Of prejudicng lis read
ers against any protection to the producers OF
these ariicles) we answer that we do not know.
or this, however we are sure iron and salt are
no more indispensable than aoOoI-we should no
more be dependant upon Great Britain for the one
Ehan the oIher-and the producers Of iron and