Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1844-10-25

greater peril than it is now encountering =
The tariff Of 1S42 saved the protected in
terests from prostration. Its benefits have
been felt in a revival of business, a restora
ton OF confidence, an adequate revenue, and
a general and healthful impulse to the labor
of the country. But in the midst Of these
successes, it is suddenly brought into peril
Twelve years ago the system of protection
was put in similar peril, by the coincident
action of notification on the one hand, and
betrayal by its professed friends on the other
That is the character of the present danger
Modification il is true, has lost much Of its
power but false principles, deceptive rea-
soning, and disguised enmity are as strong,
perhaps stronger than ever. This is Illus
trated in the success of efforts to confound
all Just distinctions in regard to protection,
and lead the unsuspecting to an incautious
committal Of the protective system to the
hands Of its enemies.
Thus we have the doctrine of protection
misstated and perverted, by declarations,
that il consists in " discrimination for the
purpose of rcucnue Only;" with protection
incident TO such discrimination and again,
that "the true limit Of the right and claim
to protection, is that rate of duty upon any
gicen article which will yield the largest
amount of reUenue." Beyond this, it is as
serted, the constitution gives no power TO
impose duties.
The hinge on which the whole protective
system turns is, the purpose for which DIS
ordinations are made in the adjustment of
a scale Of duties. If "revenue only" is the
purpose, every one familiar with the subject
can see that it may not afford adequate pro-
lection to any interest, since it is obvious
that duty on a given article, falling far
short of just protection to its rival Of Amer
lean production, may be the duty which will
yield the greatest amount of revenue from
that article, by reason Of its greater impor-
tation under the lower duty. To subject
the protected interests to the operation Of
such rule, is to commit them to mere
chance. If this is the "frne limit of the
right and claim to protection" it is limit
within which every protected interest in the
country may be crushed. The true doc
trine is, not discrimination for rCpenue, with
incidental protection, but tariff for revenue
with discrimination for protection. The
revenue purpose is to govern, when we are
considering the amount Of revenue 10 be
raised upon the whole of the importatcns.
No more revenue, in the aggregate, may be
raised, than shall be necessary to supply the
wants Of the government-making tariff,
in this sense, revenue tariff But while
this great revenue purpose is to be kept in
view, and its limit never exceeded, another
purpose is, also, to be kept in view, namely
that of SO disseminating between different
classes of articles, and between one article
~ ,Lo Il, ,bot
in the aggregate, we raise only the required
amount, we may, by the discrimination, i'm
pose high duties on articles needing strong
protection-moderate duties on those need
ing less protection, and no duties on such
as need no protection. This is discrmina-
ton for protection-the genuine doctrine,
of which discrimination for revenue, with
Incidental protection, is the counterfeit.
1t was this false doctrine which formed
the leading features in the report of the
committee of Ways and Means, at the late
session of Congress; and the bill reported
by that Committee, and which stands upon
the calendar of the House for its action at
the next session, was the legitimate result Of
that doctrine.
AS perpetual vigilence is the price Of lib
erty, SO is it emphatically the price of pro-
lection to our industry. We can well resist
the attacks Of the open enemies of the pro-
tective policy, but may find ourselves baf-
fed and fooled by the deceptive warfare of
its pretended friends. The Investigations
of this year, aided by the obvious benefits of
the existing tariff, will, it may be hoped,
result in firmly establishing correct prInci-
plies on this subject, and giving permanent
cy to the tariff, of which they form the
basis.
There is another subject of great impor-
lance which demands our attention; and
the more so because it is question in
which our rights as State, are directly in
voved / refer to the debated policy Of
distributing to the States the proceeds of
the sales Of the public lands.
The leading objection TO distribution
aside from its alleged corrupting influence
upon the States, which is not worth con-
sidering-is, that, by taking the amount of
the land sales from the treasury, we increase
the taxes for the support of government, and
thereby, in effect, tax the people for the
purpose of distribution,- In other words,
that we corrupt the people with their own
money. The argument rests upon errone-
Gus views of the effect Of tariff. II is well
known that an increase of duty does not,
necessarily, produce an increase price
IL the proceeds Of the lands are taken from
the treasury for distribution, necessity
will Of course be thereby created for raising
an additional sum, equal to that amount, by
duties on imports. But, il is well known,
in the first place, that an augmented duty,
il il has the effect Of increasing the domes-
tic supply Of rival articles, is, in effect, di-