The Charlotte journal. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1835-1851, 1844-04-12

The true revenue duty-ihai Of 90 per cent.
yielding four millions Of revenue, or that o
40 per cent. yielding the same amount o
revenue. and imposing double The amount 0
burdens on the people Il seems TO me
impossible that any human mind can hest
tate between the two duties. tits self ev.
ldent, on the supposed hypothesis that &c
oil the 40 per cent. duty could be imposed
with no other design, certainly with no 9th.
err effect, than TO levy a contribution Of 2C
per cent on the mass Of the people, 20 sup
ply protective bounty Of 20 per cent 10
the manufacturers.
Bu, have conceded TOO much in The
above hypothesis for every practical mer.
chant will sustain the assertion, that 90 per
cent. will yield more revenue than 10
Bot what DO you say, SIR, 10 tina, immense
and 'ncaculable amount Of manufactures
consumed principally by The miGdie and
poorer classes Of the people Of the Omitted
States, upon which the duty is not merely
40, but 20, so. 100, l20, $50 per cent. =
Sir, II is worth While 10 explain, little in
detail, the true character Of the law which
exhibits so fair and yet so false a front
promising revenue and producing prohibi.
ton. A large proportion Of The prints and
calicocs CONSUMED 10 the United States,
and Of which every female Of the middle
and poorer classes is a consumer, cost, in
Manchester, from SIX to twelve cents
yaId but they arc charged with duties Of
from 10 to 100 per ceut. by the ingenious
conirlsanccs OF an artificial end false val1a.
ton. These Articles are used ty the wives
and daughters Of every farmer, planter, aud
laborer in the United States, who have no
false pride 10 prevent il (; and ii is difficult
10 estimate the immense quantity which
would be imported and consumed under a
moderate duty. But when these articles
come 10 tho custom house, the importer is
required 10 pay from .! 10 ) times the
original cost 90, 10 raise revenue, but to
exclude them altogether, aud give the DO.
nestle manufacturers the exclusive righ;
10 supply the market at their own prices.
But now come, sir, to tho question, Is
this revenue tariff If the Senate can be
satisfied that an average rate Of 20 per cent.
duty would yield more revenue than the
existing duties eau ;Aey, consistently With
their constitutional powcr--wilh any pflu.
cip,es Of sound policy aud without Vi
olaiug he principles Of everlasting luslIco,
permit their statute book 0 bo longer tar
uished by IaE imposing these unrshicous
burdens, 80, 'or tic legitimate purpose Of
rpising revenue, bit Tor taking money out
Of the pockets Of ahs class OF the conmuni.
IS and putting i Iu,o those OF another
Bot, sir an idea has 20; abroad = aud am
sorry . say that many Of the friends Of free
trade have been deceived and BETRAYED By
4, as many patriot soldiers have been by
the holding on, Of false colors--an idea
has obtained currency, thai, although you
ranuo, impose duties for any other purpose
but that Of revenue yet you may rebllully
impose revenue duties, "wilb rise dis
elimination, for the protection OF domestic
manufactures Sir, this is y part of the
new system % tactics 20 which the manu-
facturers have found Il necessary to resort.
They say one thing, and mean another
What Do they mean by "a wiss discriml-
nation J" Obviously a discrimination that
will exclude imports, and diminish revenue.
I" 4 uise discrimination ~ Pray what is
your whole system OF reveuue--leyled, as
II is, exclusively from duties on imports
but an enormous discrimination in favor Of
the manufacturers and their coniederates,
aud against all other classes
4 duty Of 30 per cent. on foreigu I'M
ports, while no corresponding duty is lmpos-
ed upon the domestic manufactures with
which tho foreign come IN competition,
would DO the most unequal system OF taxa
ton that exists IN the whole civilized world,
even If oil protective duties were repealed,
Yet VIC have made up our minds TO submit
TO this sy stem Of unequal taxation, By which
+ the whole manufacturing interest is not
only excepted from taxes, but receives
enormous bountlcs, by means Of the duties
/ imposed for rcyonue. And II IS IN the face
1 If all THIS that statesmen graycly talk OF
/ revenue duties, with a wise discrimination
IN favor OF domestic manufactures now
j propose 10 explain my view Of "a wise dis.
crlmiua,on 1t seems 10 be very pre-.
vahng idea, that tho South insists upon the
system Of horizontal duties. Now, sir, this
/ is very great mistake. For myself, in.
sist that determinations are proper and nc
cossary, with reference strictly TO consider.
atoms OF revenue. la my opinion, two
kinds Of discrimination belong properly to
our system Of revenue. The first is, to i'm
pose the highest rate Of duties upon those
imports which will yield given amount OF
revenue with the least burden to the PEG.
pie. The second is, 10 impose the highest
rate of duties npon articles consumed by the
eealthy, and the loves, upon those con.
sumcd by the poor, Nov, sir, tho SIMPLE
application OF those two princIples-'he JUS,
ice and policy of which would seem 10 be
almos, self evdent-~would reserve the
whole system of your legislation on this
subject. For whereas you lay duty OIL
100 Dor cent. on coarse fabrics, and only
80 per cent on the finer qualities. ! would
impose duty Of % per cent. on the more
rnsilv f,hrics md only y upOn Inferior