Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1844-06-21
Repon To REDUCE The Thrift.

ports, accompanied by report, in which they say
The committee, in the bill herewith reported by them,
endcavoed arrange the duties with reference this principle
H. adapted TO reycnu at rates from
varying from them chiefly in those instances where national in
peace, Gas in of on) when ii was thought that
higher lower of duty would be of advantage
when some branch "duy %s uryo b s
port W. a. I'd Ses I'D Cong pare s.
In adjusting the several duties they have generally conformed
unless Sc P%o o oIF S on for & n was to
hct of lsls.-Sane pGge6.
Iaring Tea and Coffee.
They also propose to fix moderate specific duty, equal
about 30 per the value upon TEAS upon
FEE which were nude duty free by the of the last
Same, pago6.
Duty on Hool.
manufactured exceeding cents cos per pound FREE
exceeding March 3, 1884, IS per Murch q
1885, 25 and after that date Is per cent-page7
By the then existing Tariff wool not exceeding
cents cost was free, but all other was subject to
duty of cents pound and 40 per cent-equal
to SO per cent. This committee then, including
Mr. Polk, proposed in the brief space of t,co gears
TO REDUCE THE DUTY ON WOOL from SO to
Is per cent-to take off MORE THAN TWO
THIRDS OF THE DUTY!!l
Duty on WooNens
Woolen worsted and wooen twist and yarn same as on
cloths generally Except blankets wos,ed carpet
until 1884, per eentwsarch p 1885 80 per- oeni
AMI thereafter 20 Being
iy on wool. Same Report, page7.
By the then existing Tariff the duty was so per
cent; the proposed REDUCTION was therefore
80 per cent, being MORE THAN ONE.HALF.l
Speech Of Mr.. Polk.
Jan. 81, 1888, Mr.. Polk took the floor in defence
of the bill reported by his committee, and in his
speech he said:
1t appears from this testimony thai the duties wool
tyoe per cent , Be- sufficient protection, provided ere be
fully and y eoscie and that the %anuct"ers cosa
and especially of coitcns would BIO able continue theft
business prcfabg at the reduced duty Of ceive and half per
cen. on the rival foreign article.
of the United States condition under the
1916 and 1894 and also the 1876 qgsrdd Asa ample
tho duty ppsa C wool ms
FpED iSS EsS8R VERY VIZ S wool Of 9 e
quality, such produce imported The kinds chiefly
imported are either the South American WOOL costing
than dollar tho pound neither which do Produce
NY ODn opinion Is that WOOL SHOULD BE
DUTY FREE but as woogrowers think otherwise have
Cong. Deb. vol o. p INA
Feb 3 1882 Mr. Everett Of Vermont moved postpone the
bill to the lth, rejected 81 IA Mr. Polk voted NO.
House Journal, page 202.
Feb ., 1885,, amendment for gradual reduction of
the dny on wool 20 as to ssse at cent pound and % pc,
No-Same, page 3O3
Feb H. 1883, test vote taken motion lay the
hill the table, and the motion ost-aycs "a, ia.
air. Polk voted NO. Game, page 3ls. o
CONCLUSIONS FROM THESE PREMISES.
We have thus traced the history of this locofoco
measure to ruin the Tariff and we find the FACTS
20 be that JAMES X. POLK united in reporting
bill abandoning the interests Of the farmer, the
manufacturer the mechanic and the American la
borer to utter destruction within the space of two
years. He would not even allow the incidental
protection of bare revenue Tariff for at the very
moment he was proposing to reduce the duty on
wool more than TWO THIRDS he went for rails
ing nearly one quarter of the requisite revenue by
duty on the accessories Of life ,0hich zoe DO NOT
HAISE-we mean, tea and coffee! As to the man.
Iacturers-the heartless monopolists, the Patriot
styles them-he cuts them down more than one
half but makes up something, by reducing the duty
n, The rdo MATERIAL the farmers WOOL in far great
er proportion-in other words, "favors the "mo-
nopolsts" at the expense of the wool-grower. This
abominable bill he unites in reportng,-he advo-
Gates it on the floor of Congress-he votes for il
throughout, and against all attempts to increase the
duties But all this time, Mr.. Cay's compromise
bill is not yet heard offs not yet introduced; it
was not that which elected these exhibitions of Mr..
Folks hostility-and we therefore say that the in
uendo Of the ,auiot however it was intended, is
utterly false. Folks speech was made three ,ceeks
before the compromise was introduced. We leave
he locooco bill to destroy the Tariff in the House
on the 18th of Feb. 1888, triumphant with major
ty of 80 on a test vote. Now let us turn TO the
PROCEEDINGS IN THE SENATE.
Jan. ls 1885, Jackson his Null.
6caon and called upon Congress TO enforce the laws against
South Carolina Senate JgETaaiS q hdt date
JAM 2I 1888, Mr.. wilkins reported bill to provide for the
collection of duties, commonly called the VOICE BlLLsans
page ll3.
Feb g. 1885, Mr. Pondexter moved lay he bill on table,
Chat is, virtually reject H. and therefore vote
motion LOST, ayes IL, noes Do
We thus find in the House bill for the utter
and almost immediate destruction of the Tariff,
sustained on test vote on the lth of Feb. by
majority of 30; and in the Senate the FORCE
BILL sustained on the 9th of Feb. on test ques-
ton, by a vote of more than two to one. Fho is
the Patriot, who will have the courage to throw
himself into the breach and breast these majorities
in both Houses ?-,0llat can be done To avert the
calamities that threaten to fall upon the land?-
,chat can save the four hundred millions of capital
invested in the production and manufacture of the
raw material--save the farmer, the manufacturer,
the mechanic and the laboring man of every con-
diton from being sacrificed to the cupidity of Brit
ish monopolists-save ffatricidal war, which would
array State against State, kindred against kindred,
and bury the Union itself in bloody grave? We
say that HENRY CLAY was the man--the COM
! promise the measure-to do this. Let us see.