Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1843-03-16
t'OL. xNl.-.sU. 81.


- " lq community % state tho probable quota which
Virginia would be required To cont fibule by .ect ,ax
Ia the Federal Treasury That would ofcnurse depend
upon The innpa expenditures OF the General tuyernneng
II ihose expenditures should amount 10 SIS QUO pei
aonon, the quota which Virginia would be called un,n
10 Isy would be dbom million sercn hundred tkos
AND dollars IT, however, its expenditures should by
lnoro eeonulnca administration vt it, affairs than he
history ol tie last fourteen years has Taught us Il, hurs
lar be reduced 80 low 81 .O00kuD then The annual
demand upon the people OF rania 10 be c,ectrd nv
tndefA Nai8als, would anodnt 70 one milton Tires
andta Hous66d dot,as--thc smaller sum tenp nearly
double The amount OF the State taxi Aro The people IL
rginla able to bear this additional urben2 AZ mid
,hry be willing Ia 10 sul Mould they nat he re.,iv,
under this double machinery of State and Federal Nd
gaiheerE following IN each others footsteps last
cleaning What The inst had ell2 That sagniuns States
man. john Rahdolpl Of l,aunle, drew a picture no,
less graphic aud trne Than APPALLING Of The effects Of \
system o direct taxation, which. ia addition to lis in
irnsle onusess and uppn ssun would scatter eayern
ocn silr'ndari's aver The whole face Vi the country
aad invest thu fedwal Executive. by this new and
powerful addition 10 his aieai overgrowu paronayo
Win IN almost t'enslihe nfluefcc public opinion
But NAV he said thai the Federal CIV crnn,ep, il
now supported by taxation as we'll the STATE Govern.
menis and that the only difference is drawn from tho
l@'Ie an lndirei tax npou production Even il this
proposition we're strictly true. This difference would he
vital ln Tie lrst Tar,, the payment oi an Indirect Tux
Is voluntary the pur of the coniyibulor-and il gen
orally tds uroa These hoarc able well as wiilinu
la A,gi tur So long the absolute ieccssaries II III
are exempt rum dntles is in the coinpess ii pos
sbly mudtl ianh Las ~ We may, that aty one of
or llaN clli4en hu compelled 10 nay apv pr,ion
ui HE revenue, against his own inclination MANY Il
them da mel pay lnllng; and ihcra arc thousands Il,
whom Fortune has dolrd out its nlts with n piuoard
hand whose contributions small til they arc un-
conio5ui thril abstraction even iron Their s.a,tv
meaus Vet stch persons could escape their equal
pionuua ul direct laN 1heeroat bulk aflhat small
nj Oh al o tax which IL paid under tariil law hv
rltaens Is drawn from tie poek,s OF w,a,thr
caas's. who eaa hes alor 10 hear the burhen but no.
10 Whatsoever extent they doso it OF their own.
ilee viii aud ray H. not only without difficulty, hut ii
hll=sln ignorance that they pay it at all But in tho
sneont n'arr We Confidently exness tho opinion that
large porp, ot the revenue derived ny lie federal GOV
tinnrhi Dom duties ~ imports Is paid by the yn
ploduerra duty upon Wuocls and cutlery and silks M
ing ilt >euslby at Leeds Al Sheffield and at Man
chester, rs n any point, hpaovefgiea the c0lsumptn
~ tUhef or All ol those articles ihis side vi the At.
hhilf / ma a}6isa mi2h be sngla,ngd and illusifa-
ledhy ~ nhef ~ aeiA aud arguments Nu il is abso-
lnely den"nsilacdlY uur observation Of Inc effect &c
all lho tariff laws thai have been enacted from 1916 tt,
H. sAoA lag cpnelasively thai the prices of dtatlo
commodities h~so hoi ouy not been enhanced 10 tho
consumer Ia The amount Of the duty imposed but in truth
hive moi been augmented at all in many instances. and
have been actually reduced III mnny Others This act
confirmed by the tables Of prices within any series or
years, aud is evoHchoI By the records Of tho Treasury
Department, well rs by the experience and osrva-
ol all nhh 1ho existing tariff which. though inp,,-
sing moderate duties many Of tn, principal at-
cles impacd even than he tariff Of 1924. and Tar nn,e
0lodpme than thai of 1873. furnishes daily eyidence
tbs rull--cSid,nc which IL palpabo the mind DC
every man who purchases dollars value Of tho rrouc-
tnns thus subject 10 duty. While. therefore, direct
tax mp iandS, negroes. mud other property Is p0sve
satisfaction rom every individuals actual resonn es-
M Indirect tan. ovd upon foreign capital and labor is
to great extent paid not by the Consumer but By ths
prolcer % tAearliclce ppo Which -he duties nps
Bcd. ''N3"''
II Is Gqnaded thai ,l, principle Of Indirect taxaiion
II carried too far. may have contrary tendency; and
hence, the Wing parry do not sustain the policy
OF p'ohibiory dais orq duties tof protection m q
primary object The position they assume is that thu
tariff should he aonsed with an aye primarily 10
cnne, i4d 50 DISCRIMINATING among Me articles npoa
,rhfcL Hie 9ditsaF imposed 10 afford incidental pro
ietion 10 domestici industry If. indeed we were in
loenccd by regulatory spirit towards foreign nations.
which bnrihcn American productions with exobiianl
taxes. we might, In The eplfi' o. Mr. Joisrsod's IL
Junction, be disposed to meet high duties VII
high duties, and prohibition with prohbition.'--
l}u We are willing 10 disencumher commence, ms tar AZ
may be consistent with sound and udi,ous policy. IN
rcercnce uM the grea, interests of the Cnon Of iuo
shachlta with which the regulations of European gov
cfnmsHlo have Ietlcrcd it, To this extent We go--uo
tafher. There may heiA the Wing ranks, tlers
among thrlr uppuuenls individuals who would push
the principle oi yloclion to dangerous extent: but
the gre body ot The party, aud he III whom they tseog
nzc tolr distinguished leader have long ago defia,d
Their postum upon this question. language precise
aud definite that no intelligent mind msundersanJ
il.
Il may 10 edd'd tbs t, while some Of the mos p,pn
mont memhers oil the demuc ate party have openly avow
cd ihcr h, slillty 10 The entire Custom House system,
and hove inscribed tie unlno0s words. "D1eo Idr,"
upon then banner have the strongest aud Goa
elusive evidence that hore many among lheIn. pr
hals jar the greier number. who Substantially concur
WIN the W higs IN the Just principle we have here as
suluod, 10 wit; IA Tariff. Gr Rercnuc. Nth hedeifdl
Pioicctiot" Why then, II may be asked, did ihty
oppose the Tariff Law enacted in the last session Of
Congress- Aud Why are they soelalnoruus id its
iepea! We are reluctant To attribute improper notiyei
to oppouents hut cannOi but queson their SIN
cery ia view uf the fact, that the Tariff of 1912 lev.s
Fighter ulics most OF tie principal articles than that
of S4 that OF lSS that Of 1882 ior more
n uLich many u tcm cheerfnly roied-and particular
~ in view OF lie additional aud striking fact, that. al
though they place their hostility TO tho Law Of
lei& 90 tic round that il l;s little reference TO rev.
ennr recognizes broadly Il G principle Of
poie, jon, hoy vo,,t against duty on Tea and CgS
fee. when ar pitteci,re artlcles-a duty which
would have yielded revenue Of about four mflldns of
dllas. and which, had it been imposed. would have
justified reduction TO that extent of the duties thu
protected articles, which coming into competition With
80 domestic production, would have been exclusively
Cor revenue aud thus compelling the majority Of Con
eress, by that opposlirnn To give The principle Of potec
ton. in the Law of Si2, broader basis and wider
scope--wih What prupriety can they NOW complain
that thai Law Is too protective in It's character and has
loo little reference 10 revenue in its prosisionsf
how al flv IN