Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1843-12-08
J. c. CALHOUN AGAINST PROTECTION


Several weeks ago. we noted letter from Hon.
J. G. Calhoun 10 planter of Louisiana, as init
mating willingness, on his part SO to arrange the
tariff as to protect the produce Of slOve-labor.-
This was the inference pretty extensively drawn
from that letter, and now Mr.. Calhoun feels him
self forced to forbid the idea that he has swerved
one iola from his ultra hostility to The doctrine of
protection. lie goes for revenue duty merely
On sugar; and it is when an attempt is made TO
reduce that duty below the revenue Standard he
will resist t-not because sugar ought, of right,
to be protected but "bccause it is the product OF
slave Iabor"!!
The reader may very readily see what sort OF
Protection MIR. Calhoun would give TO the free
products of Vermont, tile protection of the wo'f
to the lamb, of course. Yet this man is promi
nent loco foco candidate for The presidency, and
the loco foco party, Including those in this State
who profess favor to proeclion,) are bound to
support him, if nominated Annexed is Mr.. Cal-
houns lost letter. which was addressed to the edi-
tor of the Richmond Enquirer. Had it appeared
previous TO the Louisiana election, we suspect the
result would have been somewhat different
FoRr Ill., Nov. ~, 1913.
" Dear Sir 81 write this TO correct the mistake
you made, in surprising that, IN my letter to a
gentlemen in North Carolina on the subject of
tariff, published in The Enquirer of the 9Th inst J
referred to my letter 10 Mr. Nicholas, OF LOUISE
ana, published in The same article. The letter
ierred TO wns TO Mr.. Delany, of Louisiana and
was in answer to one containing an inquiry sirni
lar 10 one addressed to the from North Carolina.
The answer to Mr.. Nicholas was to one on very
different subject If you had advertcd to dates,
you would have avoided the mistake. The North
Carolina letter refers 10 one recently written. 1t
is dated the oath September last and the letter TO
Mr.. Nicholas, 9Th May, 1912, more than 10
months before
81 regret the mistake. Unauthorized liberty
has been tuken with my letter to Mr.. Nicholas, by
printing portions in italics aud the word "protecL-
ing" in glazing capitals, calculated to make the
IMPRESSION that ], too, am an advocate OF the pro-
tective policy and that, too, by editors protesting
TO he opposed to protection and friendly to me- as
well as those in favor, and politically hostile to
me. by such means, hasy renders have been
tied 10 believe that admit The right Of protecting
The Louisiana sugar planters against foreign com
petition by The imposition Of du;ies on The foreign
article for that purpose, directly against the PLAIN
import of my letter. The protection Of which |
spoke expressly stated to be, not against foreign
competition, but against the machlIlBSons OF the
opponents Of slave labor | intended simply to
say, that would resist in dustirg The tariff, any
attempt TINT might be made TO take of or reduce
the duty, that foreign sugar ought fairly to pay,
on rerenue principles, on the ground o! discourage
ing the domestic article, because ioaS The product
Of SLAVE labor.
"What regret in your mistake, is, that it is
calculated to strengthen the false impression made
by the unauthorized italics and capital letters, not
only 10y publishing my letter with them, but still
more strongly, by publishing it as The one refer
red to in my North Carolina letter, in confrma-
lion and calculation of my opinion on The subject
Of protection.
"As it is my wish to be fully and explicitly
understood on that and all other pabc SUBJECTS,
must request you 10 publish what have written
in the Enquirer.
"Wnh respect, am, Sir, &c, &c.
J, c. CALHOUN.