Litchfield enquirer., 1844-10-17

herexv. an opprcssiun, an inequality in tho ad-
ministratioun of the government but VIVA
was a protective tariff, in the proper sense oil the
tcrm3 Il was tariff, in nus Judgment, imposed
for the great purpose OF Supplying me govern
mont with revenue, a I'd so arranged as 10 pro-
tcc,, as far as they may be protected, all the
great interests of tho Countrywide main and
prinsipal object OF which should be revenue Tor
The public treasury. Even his southern friends
would tell him that they fspnd no fault wlta,
that-but what they understood by protective
tariff, would be tariff of duties imposed not TO
raise revenue for the treasury, but purely and
simply to protect certain favori,c and particular
interests TO the prejudice OF others. Neither was
Mr.. w. Tn favor az such tariff. Here then
was an explanation Of what Mr.. w. Meant by
a protective tariff. and of what his Southern
friend meant by free trade Where then was the
difference between us 1
Mr.. w. stated what his rule would be in ar.
ranging a revenue tariff. lie would by no means
lay The same rate Of duty on every article of i'm
portation, Tne thing was impractcable IN it
self: because one article would not bear ton per
cent. until YOU prohibited it and destroyed reve.
nue.-Another would bear SO per cont, and yet
tho trade hold up, from the nature OF the article
Il was absurd in revenue sense TO say put
uniform duty on BOTH Because do that, aud
YOU either tail to get tho revenue you want, or
YOU prohibit tho Importation altogether. Mr.
would ,hon discriminate according to the nature
Of the article, That would DO ono ground OF dis
mina,ion.-Ano,hc ground, every commnni-
ty consumed of foreign imported articles, por-
ton which arc really necessarles OF life, or hcVe
become so among all classes. Another portion
were emphaticaly luxuries. They woro Purchas
cd aud consumed 10 crafty taste, tho pride of
drcss, the pride Of living, the style OF our hous.
es. eouipagcs, sc. Would ho tax these two
classes alike 10 raise rcvcnuoi Would he tax
the necessnrics of life which every man, woman
and child must consume, and the luxuries OF tho
rich eaually?-No. He would Tux the necessa-
ries as lightly as he could, and secure the neces'
sary revenrc; andhe would tax the Injuries as
heavily as they could be without destroying rev.
enue by cutting up the trade. This was another
ground of discrimination. But there was an
other and a third ground. There were certain
interests in this country, whiec came IN compo-
tition with similar interests in foreign countries
and Mr. w would discriminate in reference
10 them. When an importation came in com.
petition with domestic article, he would raise
the tax on the foieign article, US far as revenue
required, TO favor the domestic. Bnt he would
not 90 so far as 10 defeat the object Of the whole
tho obtaining of revenue for the treasury
To see how far wo might go-take first tho az
rcultural Interest Of this section of tho country.
Where were the articles you could benefit by a
tariff What werc our principle staple articles?
Broad stufis were ono. Could you bcnoft the far
mcrs and growers ofbread stuifs by putting du-
" on foreign bread .stuifs? No. Why not3 Be-
cause we do not import brcud.stuifs but export.
We look for a market not merely to our own
country bnt to tho whole world, and We send our
flour 10 oil quarters Of the globc. What then
made the urice of our -four md where was it
made? In the great markets of our country--in
NJ York, Boston and Philadelphia principally
What governed the price Thereof Wac it the call
Of our own people or those towns for flour? No;
bnt the entire demand for -four in N. Y govern
ed the price thcre--as we'll tho demand for expor
ta,;on as for consumption. What good then
aid our duty on foreign -four and wheat do, when
foreign -four and wheat did not como thcre2
None whatever. Tho duty neither brought mon.
ev into the treasury nor the pockets of tho far
mer. Thia was no fault Of the law, but resulted
from the mpossibility Of protecting an article SO
n ! IN raso tho price Willie we regularly export.
ID n So with our beet We did not import
Loor for consn,nptior. We raised moro than our
,,v,, rcore wouId buv. and we looked to other
corntr;es for n market for our surplus Then tho
dnt mnder The present tariff 100 por cont. on tho
nresent mica nj beef. did our farmers no good.
Il could not. Follow on with your cheese. Tho
nroscnt ,or;fcimnosed a duty of nino cents q
ppnmnJ' WHARF was the farmer Of this or any
ppthor county of lie State, who could say that
his has had even the slightest effect on his
cheose ltl,is vear3 Iaughter0 Ayo, said Mr.. w.
| / Icnr II will nrove TO be true. that tho farmer
! viii ho r,aa ~ oet oven half Tho duty for tho
whole mice &c his cheese, So tho duty on these
articles was Of no practicable utility--not DO.
e,rse thn milf w. In Congress bt The Jaw but
bocanse wo -exported these articles, and they
tco,ofcre conld moi be protected. If thcn these
ar,;cias ,yero ont Of Tic roach of protection. SO
far The noricultural interest was beyond the
reneh Of protection. Where did tho farmer come
J within III On his wool. We never cxported
J vooI W. do not now. We did NOT grow as much