The Arkansas banner., 1844-03-06
tiquity-in head and face, a man body and

imposing duties on imports falsehood and deception stamped on the very front of it, A bill 10 proride reuenue, which lays an av- craze duty of 100 per cent. on several de- seriptions of imports that would come into the United States, to the amount of $40, ,00g,- 000 annually, under revenue iusy of 20 per cent, but which are now totally excluded oy these enormous duties. will not go iIi- to details; but state generally, that the du- aes on window glass range from 94 to IFS Per ceh'., making an average of of more than ioo per cent. on all descriptions; that the duties on many varieties of manufactured ron, embracing most of the tools and implc- ments necessarily used on every farm and plantation in the country, arc from 5to 15O
 per cent and more ad valorem; that the du- ty on raw iron, an article in universal use.
 is 1l2a per cent; that the duty on all those
 cotton manufactures which come under the
 miaissnm principle of valuation, (and which
 would be imported annually to the amount
 of ten or fifteen million of dellars under
 revenue duty of 20 per cent,) rango from 60 to l50 per cent. ontheir true value, that the
 duty on sultan article of universal use,
 consumed in almost equal quantities by the
 rich and poor, and extensively consumed by
 every farmer, not only for family purpose,
 but ten times more extensively for his live
 stock-is 8 cents per bushel, (the article cost
 ing only , or 6 cents in I.iverpool,) cqualt to
 I33A per cent. on tiiIc original cost.
 Now, sir, having advertcd to the promin-.
 cni features of the existing tariff, 1 propose to submit to the consideration of the Senate
 some general views with regard to the true
 character and extent e the revenue powers
 of this government and 1t is not only q
 practical question of expediency, but prac-
 tical question of constitutional power, ad-
 dressing itself te the conscience and judg-
 ment of every member of this body What.
 then, is the extent and the limitation of the
 power conferred by that clause which aathor- Izes Congress to raise revenue by the inpo- stion of duties' A bill is reported from the , Committee on Finance, and the title is Ca bill to provide revenue for the support of the go-
 yernment." To ascertain whether the bill
 itself conforms to the title, ask what is the
 line which distinguishes revenue from pro-
 tective duties , lsit practicable to draw such
 q line of discrimination with sufficient dis
 tinctness, to render it of any substantial util- ityi l think il is, sir, and shall now en-
 dcasor to present to the Senate rule on this subject. which l think every member will admit to be true in the abstract, whatever
 may be the difficulty in it's ract;cal applica-
 ton.
 hold then, MT. President, that under the , power of imposing duties to raise revenue, there is this limitation imposed, not only bv l. the Constitution, but by every consideration s of sound policy; and if # applies to one ar ticle imported, it equally applies to every other. The rule is this u revenue duty must be the lowest possible duty that will
 yield the largest, or the required amount of revenue. repeat the proposition, sir, (and
 ask the attention of the Senate to ii,) that n revenue duty shouldbe the lowest possible rate
 of imposition that would yield revenue require to support the government. 1 will illustrate this view. Every senator knows that any duty, however small, IS, to certain extent-
 n prohibilory duty. If you lay duty of 10
 per cent, 1t excludes very considerable
 amount ofimports If you lay a duty of 20
 per cent, 1t excludes still more and so on, progressively, till you reach the point of to-
 tai prohibition. New, sir. will suppose (as believe the truth to bel that duty ot 20 per cent. on cotton goods will yield as
 much revenue as any higher duty. To be
 more specific, will assume that, under
 revenue duty of 20 per cent. on foreign ma
 nuiactured cottons, the amount of twenty millions would be imported into the United States, on which a duty of 20 per cent. V ould
 yield revenue to the government of mil- lions of dollars and that every senator shall be satisfied that duty of 40 per cent. would
 yield precisely the same amount of revenue,
 and no more, prohibiting half the imports that would come in, if the duty were only 20 per cent
 Now, ask the Senate which of these is the true revenue duty--that of 20 per cent,
 yielding four millions of revenue, or that of Z 40 per cent, yielding the same amount of revenue, and imposing double the amount of ] burdens on tic people! It seems to me iln- possible that any human mind can hesitate
 between the two duties. It is self-eyidcnt, on the supposed hypothesis that 20 of the , 40 per cent duty could be imposed with no
 other design, certainly with no other eff feet, than 10 levy contribution of 20 per cent. on the mass of the people, to supply a
 protective bounty of 20 per cent to the ma
 nufacturers.
 But have conceded too much inihe above hypothesis; for every practical merchant will r sustain the assertion, that 20 per cent. will yield more revenue than 4O But what do
 you say, sir, to that immense and incaIcula- r ble amount of manufactures consumed t5riii- cipally by the middle and poorer classes of the people of the U. s. upon which the duty is nOa merely 40, but 70, 80, 100, I20, lS0 per ct. Sir, il is worth while to explain, little in detail, the true character of the law which exhibits so fair and yet so false front-pro- missing revenue and producing proh;bition.- \ large proportion of the prints and .calicocs consumed ill the United States, and of which every female of the middle and poorer clas-
 ses is a consumer, cost, in Manchester, from six to twelve cents yard; but they are chaTged wfrh duties of from 75 to l5O per cent. by the ingenious contrivance of an arr
 iiicial and false valuation These articles
 are used by the wives and daughters of eve