The Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1837-1867, 1844-01-08


industry. Every that such dscrmi
nation is very different from that which has respect
the single purpose of raising the twenty millions The
one would keep protection steadily ia view, and
cure it; the other would look revenue alone, and,
that secured, would leave protection take care of
itself.
have laid down these princples-which no in
telgent friend Of the pro ectve policy will undertake
to controveror the purpose of testing the doctrines
Of the great leader of LOcofocoism, we ind them
set forth in his letter, dated the 9th Of February
last, in reply to intenogatores addressed to him by
''the Democratic State Convention of Indiana held
at Indianapolis on the 9Th Of January ls43. 1t
Iains formal exposition, rather modification, Of
hgs views the subject of the protective policy; and
is probaby,to be the formula Of the party doctrines
this subjevs during the canvass Of 1874.
Mr. Van Buren, opens his exposition by referring
his letter TO 1.-THE Shocco Springs meeting in 1884,
in which he says he "distincty avowed u conviction
that the establishment Of commercial regulations with
II view to the encouragement Of domestic interests
is within the Constitutional power Of Congress- lie
goes on to say
''More than ten years have elapsed since that
municati"n was made; and during that entire period
the people Of the u. have paid large of du
ties avowedly imposed for the encouragement and
protection of domestic manufactures, with gradual
reductions according the provisions of the compro
mise act Of 1888. The unbiased sentiment Of the
country in respect to what is, under such crcum-
Stances the proper rule for legislative action upon this
subject has, think by the Of events, and the
progress Of opinion, been brought the conclusion
briefly expressed in Of the resolutions Of your
purposes only, and which UiH Incidentally protect
american industry"
Here, then, we have Mr. Van Buren's 'rule for
legislative action upon the subject" viz: 'diserimina
ton for receRye purposes ONLY, and which will Incl
deulaIly protect American industry Here is pro-
fessed protection. But what is iR Incidental protec
ton; and incidental discrimination. But what sort
ofdscrininalon' Discrimination for the purpose of pro
,ection' Oh no. No such purpose enters into his con
Temptation. lie takes, indeed. special to ex-
eIude it, by declaring thai discriminafg Est be yr
rsrsHue purposes, aud for revenue purposes only
So then we have Discrimination aud iaciisnfaI pro-
lection, all fair and NICE and ye, both rem
dered nugatory by qualification which expressly ex-
cludes every other purpose fom ihe rule Of egisla-
tom but that Of raising revenue, only.
That Mr.. Van Buren, intended to make u broad dis
tincton between a tariff for and tariff for
projection eil construction of the Lam
gusge of his rule Of legislation He is his own
exposition; for, little further in his letter, after
having discussed the general question to the rais-
ing Ofrevenue by mposGs compared with direct tax
alton, he says
'Of the great mass of opponents protective
tariff, there is not, far know, single State
district, that has taken grounds against
nue tariff"
So, them "rerenue tariff is very different thing
in his estimation, from ',protectiu tariff AS of
course it be, TO make it acceptable the great
of opponents TO u protective tariff aud yet
tariff discriminating FOR revenue purposes, is the
only tariff which this professed frned OF protection
IS willing to commit himself!
Tho view have taken fully confirmed by anoth-
er p6ssage in this remarkable letter Further on he
says-"of the constitutional power to make discriin-
nations have no doubt This looks like affirm
ing the doctrine Of the right discriminate for protec-
tion; for if he speaking of discrimination for
purposes only, why thus treat the right of dis
elimination as though it a solemn question
about which there dispute, and upon which he
deemed it important to say he had emo doubt" when
he well knew that the constitutional right to dis
ed by any body. He evidently intended that this
should to be affirmation Of the constitutional
right to discriminate for projections; aud yet, before
closing the paragraph he qualities it all AWAY. #
goes off in vapOr; for be proceeds thus
Equally clear il is, that the practice Of making
them DISCRIMINATORY has existed from the COM
meucement Of the government, and constitutes Il fea-
ture in every principal tariff bill which is to be found
upon our statute book. They Determinations are, in
deed, Indispensable 10 the successful operation of
every bill There he puts the revenue facet
whether the design be to guard against smuggling
the hand, when the nature of the article is such
to afford facilities for that practice, or the 9TH
err, to prevent loss 10 the Treasury by the imposition
Of duties higher than the value of the article will bear,
s thus prohibiting its Introduction into the country
Here is discrimination do,on lcdrd 10 prevent SNUG
Cling: and special care not to have duty imposed
which may. in any case amount TO prohibition, But
now comes a spice Of protection.
''If'' he proceeds sit be any time deemed neees
sary or conducive to the safety of the county
courage the manufacture home of the articles
sary 10 its defence in of war, nothing be more
proper than do by discrimination in favor of the
domestic manufacture ,inasnuch the object in view