Staunton spectator, and general advertiser. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 183?-1849, 1844-06-20
THE "FlIR PROPOSITION."-No. n.
THE TARIFF QUESTION.-Cosclvp

THE TARIFF QUESTION
AS we are sensible Of the propriety Of bringin,
our numbers on this important subje4to speed
close, we shall not undertake TO review the re
peated Recommendations Of the protective polio,
by MIR. Monroe. In six out vt eight annual mes
sages to Congress, no pressed ile subject mos
earnestly upon that body. We will give bmt ,
single extract from his last message, delivered OF
The I'd oil December, 1923, not because its recog
ntions of the duty of Government on this pon
are more distinct than those Of other messayes
but because of its immediate relation to the tariff
OF 1924. In that message, he says:
"Having communicated my views to Congress
at the commencement OF the last session. respecting
THE ENCOURAGEMENT WHICH OUGHT TO BE GIVEN To
our MANUFACTURERS; and the principles on which
It should be founded, have only TO add that these
views remain unchanged, and that the present
state OF the countries with which We have the
most Immediate political relations, and greatest
commercial intercourse, tends To confirm ihen-
! Under this Impression, i RECOMMEND A REVIEW
OF THE TARIFF FOX THE PURPOSE OF AFronDiNG
SUCH ADDITIONAL PROTECTION TO THOSE ARTICLES
WHICH WE ARE PREPARED TO MANUFACTURE, or
which are more immediately connected with the
defence and independence of the counry'
Here we would call the attention of our readers
to the MOTIVE AVOWED for the revision of
the tariff. Il. is EXCLUSIVELY FOR PRO
IECIlON! There is no alusion in il 10 REEVE
NUE.. There is no pretence that more money was
wanted tor the Government. There is nothing i'm
regard TO incidental protection. The sole purpose
is Observation-Disclosures PRoTEcTIoN-PRO-
| fECT1ON PER SIC, Independent Of rerenue!-
And this recommendation came from Virginia
President, but 20 years ago! And il was sent to
Congress, whilst JOHN G. CALHOUN and
WlLLiM ii. CRAWFORD were members of
his Cabinet and his official advisers!
| We have not word OF comment TO offer OH
these remarkable facts.
Congress responded promptly to the recommen-
datlons OF the Executive, and the tariff Of 1921
Tariff AVERAGING ABOUT 80 PER
CENT.-was the fruit Of It's deliberaion
This bill was passed by the House of Repre-
sentatives on the 10Th April, 1921, after strong
resistance, by vote Of lO7 to 1902. Its passaue
WAS accomplished by a unio!, Of the Middle and
Western States against the Northern and South.
ern. New ork, Pennsy lvania, Ohio and Ken.
lucky alone gave seventy five votes Tor it,, whilst
Maine, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts cast
but single vote each, in favor of it. The vote
OF massachusetts, stood: eleven against, and one
for il!
Among the Pennsylvania Delegation who vo-
Ted Tor II, were: James Buchanan, George Kre-
mer and Samuel Mexican. See Doc 2II, DID l42-
Sd.
This bill was acted on fin the Senate, on the 18th
May, 1924, and passed by vote of 25 tool.
The ayes and noes will be found in Doc. 2I4,
PIP l4O-IS, and upon examination OF them, il
will be ascerlained that MARTIN VAN BU-
KEN voted for the bill, and his colleague, Rufus
king, against II. Among those who voted for it.
VIII, also, be found the names of Mahlon Dicker-
son OF M, Richard NJ. Johnson, of ky, John
| IL. Eaton, and ANDREW JACKSON OF Tenn
and Thomas ii. Benton of Missouri And a.
mong the opponents of the measure were James
Barbour and JOHN TYL ER of Va, Nathaniel
Macon OF \. C., John Gaillard and Robert Y
Hayne OF s. c., and William X. King of Ala
from This vote II will be that the Southern
States had then assumed an attitude of hostility
10 the tariff, and our readers WILL also perceive
where the IN orthern Man with Southern Princi.
ples' stood at that time.
| In 1898, the "Bll of Abominations,'' as our
accomplished contemporary terms il, was passed.
vi the secret history OF that bill il is not our pur.
pose now TO speak. We have. abundant evidence
10 shew The truth OF Mr.. Clay's remark that the
n'anteuvres which led to its passage were dis
graceful 10 American Legislation. But as the
proof Is not .Diciai, and we are now speaking
from the record, we will not at this time 60 into
an examination OF the agency which Mr. Van Blu
rem had in concerning it. II any of our readers
are curious in such matters we beg leave 20 refer
them to the Hon. l.. w. 'iazeWell, who was pre-
sent, or the Hon. VIM. O. Goode, who, ,houoh
not an eyewitness, seems from his speech in the
Jackson caucus, in 1882, to have been very well
informed in regard to Mr.. Van Buren's agency in
The matter. These gentlemen will, without
doubt, take pleasure lii gratifying the laudable
curiosity ot those who may wish to prosecute the
enquiry.
| The tariff of 1928, like that of 1894, was pas
sed by combination of the Middle and W estern
States. New York gave 81 votes out of 33 for
| IL, ana among her representatives who sustained
II were John w. Taylor, and Silas Wight it,
pennsylvania cast an unanimous vote Tor il, and
amongst her representatives who were in favor of
1t were JAMES BUCHANAN, SAM'L. NC
4 MEAN, and GEO. WOLF. Ohio and kentuc-
Ky Went, also, in solid column for it,
| On the other Hand, Massachusetts cast eleven
out OF thirteen votes against il. Maine was u
unanimously against it, and Rhode Island Com
necticlt, New Hampshire and Vermont were d.
vded.
In the House the vote stood los to 81, and in
the Senate, 26 TO 2l.
Among those who voted for it in the Senate
were MARTIN VAN BUHLN, MAHLoN DIcKERsoN,
LOUIS McLANE, RICHARD Nj. JOHNSON john
ROWAN, john III. EAToN, and Thomas Ii. BtN-
TON See Doc. PA, p 1888.
In the roll OF the noes recorded the names
OF H. w. FAREWELL, NATHANIEL MACON, RoB-
ERT y. HAyNE, HueH l.. WHITE, joins 81 BnR-
RlEN, WIN. X. kING, &c.
The duties under this Tariff were upon an aver.
I ariif of 1912.
The next general revision OF the tariff took
place IN 1892. The bill of that year was prepar-
ed by John Quincy Adams, and was intended to
modify many of the odious features which had
been engrafted on the bill of 1898 by the Machi-
aveiian policy Of certain gentleman who prac-
Used fraud on Mr.. TazeweIl This bill was
entirely acceptable to the manufacturing interest,
and IT received also veIy strong support from the
Southern delegation in Congress. II was sup
ported by VIM. $. Archer, VIM. Armstrong, Jos.
W. ChiUn, N. II. Claiborne, Robert Craig Phil
E Up Doddridge, John Y. Mason, Lewis Maxwell.
t Charles FeD;on Mercer, Thomas Newton and
John Roane, Of the Virginia delegation, and il