The Arkansas banner., 1843-12-23

ed, and the reduction made by 1t, fell short oi 9ir. McLean's recommendation by nearly S3,000,0 ,000-leaying the Government with an admitted surplus of revenue over its ne- cesslties, ot more than S5,000,000, and to thls extent, taxing the country not for revell- ue, but acknowledgedly for profectioa.- Much as the act of 1S32 conceded, so far as the amount of tax was reduced, 1t retained all the wee and odiousness of a Protecfire Td. rrW But the country was in no degree in- debted to Mir. Clay, for the reduction and modification, even to this poor extent, of the tariff of 1928 by that of 1882. On the 10th ol January, 1892, Mr. Clay offered the fol- lowing resolution
 < Resolred, That the existing duties upon articles imported from foreign countries. and not coming into competition with similar ar tlcles made or produced within the United States, ought to be forthwith abolished, ex- cept the duties on wines and silks, and that they ought to be reduced.''
 Here Is Mir. Clay's first C 'efort,o after his !" return to Congress in 183l,o to modify and reduce the duties contained in the act of 1928. The re6ecting reader will see at once, that this resolution retains every thing odious Tn the act of 1928. It tenaciously holds on to It's ultra protective features, and proposes to retam them undiminished and unrelaxed, by the new law proposed to be passed. On the l7th of January, 1S32, Mir. Hayne of South Carolina proposed, as an amendment. the following: After the word C countries,'' he moved to strike out all of Mr. Clay's re- solution, and to insert, (. be so reduced that the amount of the public revenue shall be sufficient to defray the expenses of Govern ment according to the present scale, after the payment of the public debt; and that allow ing a reasonable time for the GRADUAL RE- DueTIoN of the present high duties on the ar hcles coming into competition with similar articles made or produced within the United States, the duties be ultimately equa7ized- so that the duty on no article, shall, as compared with the value of that article, very materially from the general average' Thus by the pro- position of Mir. Clay, and the amendment moved thereto by Mir. Hayne, the issue was directly made, whether there should be a grdd1at and pro rata reduction and modifi- cation of the high duties imposed by the act of 1928, or whether the reduction as pro- posed by Mr. Clay, should be confined to the " articles imported from foreign countries, and not coming into competition with similar articles made or produced within the United States.o The high protective tariff advocates, were arrayed against those seeking gradual, safe, and easy reduction of the duties; and the debate in the Senate was conducted on these grounds. It terminated on the 20th of March, 1892, by the rejection of Mr. Hayne's amendment; the vote being ayes eighteen and noes twenty-three-Air. Clay voting mo- Two days afterwards, Mir. King, of Alabama, moved the indefinite postponement of the re- solution of Alr. Clay. This motion also fal- ed, by vote of lz to 29; Mr. Clay voting with the majority. A bill was sent from the House of Representatives to the Senate, great ly reducing the Tariff rates of 1928. This bill was greatly amended in the Senate, and followed out substantially, and in the main, the resolution offered by MT. Clay, on the 10th of January, 1892. It was returned to the House, where many of the amendments of the Senate were disagreed to. The Senate insisted on its amendments, and the result was committee of conference. That committee reported on the 12th of July, 1892, the iSciiiCiie ub WIliCl tilCl Iidd dlllNCu. l HIS report MT, Clay most bitterly opposed. A few examples will show the nature and ex- tent of this opposition The House bill pro- posed duty of fifty per cent. on coarse woolens. The Senate has amended 1t by n- creasing the duty to 57 per cent Mr. Clay voted to retain the high duty, and against the reduction to 50 per- cent. The House bill reduced the duty on cotton bagging to 35I cents per square yard, the Senate's amend- ment increasedi it to cents Mr. Clay voted against the recommendation of the Committee of Conference to reduce the duty to 3a cents. The House fixed the duty on sugar at 2J cents per pound the Senate increased it to 3 cents, and Mir. Clay voted against the re- ductlon recommended by the Conference Committee to 9 cents. On all these various questions MT. Clay voted in minority. The ultra Tariff men deserted him, and could not, with fairness and justice, go to the extremity to which he strove to carry them. These are but some examples of the votes of MT. Clay. Let any one look through the other votes of this gentleman, and they will be found sustaining every feature of the high protective Tariff of 1928, on the other great staples of iron and cotton goods. Whatever then of relief was given, by the act of 1892, to the country, surely cannot be attributed to Mir. Clay. Had his opinions prevailed, that bill would have been lost, and the odious Tariff of 1928 have continued to oppress and distract the country. It is most empty and shameless effort, to give Mir. Clay any, the least claim of merit, for the poor and insufi- cient reductions in the duties effected by the act of 1S32-an act of which, in his letter to Dr. Bronson, he would appear to speak now in terms of fcommendation-bu to the enact- ment of which, he gave his untiring opposi- tion, and expressed at the time the bitterest hostility. The next move made by Mir. Clay, on this distracting question, was the Compro- mise Bill of 1883. In July, 1882, Mir. Clay was strenuously opposed to Mr. Haynes pro- position, for a uniform and gradual reduction of the duties, and the adoption of an uniform rate of ad ralorem duties. In January, 1883, he becomes the ardent and jealous supporter of the principle of Mir. Haynes proposition,