The Middlebury people's press. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1841-1843, 1843-03-22

knowledge nothing but tie weakest kind OF
Incidental protection, and curse the tariff o.
The last session, because il is insufficient.
although left TO their own party, it would
have been diluted 10 nothing. These at
,cmpts of The leaders of his party 10 misiify
and distort so as to conceal the unpalatable
truth that they are the enemies Of protec-
lion in their zeal to subserve their southern
allies. M. Stearns very properly character.
ICES as miserable humbuggery Iu an ar
ticle in the last weeks Plowman he goes on
translating himself aad his party into a lam
guage which can be read and understood by
all men. No one can dispute that the pic
ture which he deliuates of The inconsistent
cy, treachery, and unnatural position OF the
pseudo democracy is true to the lfe' Alter
complaining of the withdrawal ofpatronage
because some paragraphs from the Boston
Post unfavorabie 10 a protective tariff had
found their way into his paper, he says -
Nothing is ever gained by cheating or
deceiving the people, id respect to measures
or men. We have endeavored to be inde-
pendent and aboveboard in our discussions
of the ffquestion to lay before our rea-
ders what is essential to the understanding
of its bearings without becoming the dog
NAUTICAL friend or opponent OF protection
As the discussion of the question has been
but recently revived, since the predomin-
ance of other important questions for four
teen years, it cannot be supposed that the
views of politicians would be settled upon
it at once. Our only object has been TO lay
before readers such matters as would ena>
bic them to adopt right views as to what is
practically expedient We wish to see the
democracy of Vermont above the awkward
predicament of committal in favor OF
protective tariff IN our state politics, and at
the same time going into the presidential
canvass 10 favor of Mr.. Calhoun. the avow-
ed Champion of free trade, or of Martin Van
Buren, whose organ, the Globe, would make
him out the neplus ultra of anti tariff Prln-
c;ples. Give as consistency somewhere.
lion consideration of this subject pro-
tective policy is Judged essential, give us
candidate for the presidency, whose views
accord with this position, and who at the
same time is opposed to United States
Bank and other federal measures. ana who
would not even carry this question to the
extravagant length contended TOR by The
wing party. Let explicit avowals or public
transactions be the basis of confidence IN
the candidates supported. Let humbuggery
be laid aside and political principles be dis
nd tSOlItIpal
philosophy and democrats will no longer
longer be disposed TO punish us for extrac-
ting articles from leading democratic jour-
Eals.
Along with the election Of Mr.. Calhoun
or Van Buren, tariff for protection cannot
be consistently advocated; but the doctrines
of free trade subject only to such lmposts
ms are necessarpfor the support oil govern"
ment and restrictions TO counteryall the
policy of foreign governments, must come
up for thorough discussion as connected
with the great national interest. And we
are not prepared to say that 1t will not
stand the test of such discussion. AT any
rate the democratic party will find them>
selves in the result occupying true and
natural position. We are aware that we |
nav be misconstrued by the wing papers
and represented as holding opinions differ
emf from our party in tIls state; but the |
careful reader will see that we have express |
sed no definite opinion, neither do we con-
ceive that the democratic party in Vermont |
have expressed any opinions, on the subject !
Ofprotection that are not based on contin'
gencies growing out of the ascending avow'
ed policy of the wing party. duty on
imports is a tax on the consumer. Congress
having taxed the northern farmer TO benefit
the Pennsylvania iron monger and the Mas
sachusetts manufacturer, the wool grower
and agricultnralist have certainly rig ht to
demand equal protection for their industry
as what they pay for, in behalf of that of
others.
But as protection is TO be paid for out of
the people, how much of the commodity it
would be best for the nation as d whole to
buy and what price it would be best TO pay
is still question for political economists.