The Woodstock age. [volume] (Woodstock, Vt.) 1844-1845, 1844-10-03
VOLUME v.
POLITICAL.
Mr. WEBSTER'S SPEECH
AT FdNEUIL HALL, BOSTON,
OCTOBER 3. $500.

IN subject, which 80 many members u
il understood much better than himself
As it was a question, however, Of gener
al, and, as he thought, of very high impor
lance, he would beg leave to de,ain the
meeting tor few moments.
1t was. in the first place, necessary that
he should repeI any suggestions Of a feel.
ing unlrlendly to american manufactures
He believed there was no ground for sup.
posing lha, such feeling existed in an!
part Of the community 1t certainly did
not exis, with him. He thought it, there
fore, quite unj,s,ihabe, that those who
could not supper, the proposed Tariff
should he charged with hostility to D"mes'
tic Industry. There was power in names
and those " no had pressed the Tariff on
Congress, and On the country, had repre-.
secuted it as Immediately, and almost ex.
clusi, ely. connected with Domestic Indus
Try and National Independence. In his
opinion. no measure could prove more IN
furious To the industry IF the country, and
nmhing was more fancifnl than the npln-
ION that National Independence rendered
such a measure necessary. He certainly
thought it might be doubted. whether Con-
gress would not he acting somewhat a.
gansi the spirit aud intention Of the Con-
sIlution, in exercising power to control
essentially the pursuits and occupations Of
individuals in their private concerns-a
power, TO force great and sudden changes,
hnth of occupation and property, upnn in
dividnaIs not as incidental to the exercise
If any other power. hut as substantive
and direc, power. If such changes were
wrough, incidentally only, and were the
necessary consequence Of such imposis AS
Congress, for the lending purpose Of rev.
enue, should enact, then they could not be
complained of. But he doubted whether
Congress fairly possessed The power o''urn-
ing the incident into the pri"'ip0l. and, in
stead Of leaving manufacturers to the pro-
lection Of such laws as should be passed,
with primary rega'd to revenue. Of enact
ing laws, with the avowed object Of giving
preference t" particular manufactures, aud
with an entire disregard to I'LL the consider.
aiinns If revenue; and. instead of laying
such lmposts as would hest answer the
purpose Of raising n revenue, with the least
burden on the public, carrying the mpoSl
on certain articles 10 n burdensome ex-
cess, with a full knowledge that the in.
crease of duty will diminish the amount Of
revenue raised.
II would hardly be commended, that Con-
gress possessed that sort of general power
by winch it migm declare that particular
occupations should be pursued in society,
and that others should not. II such power
helnngcd to any Gwernmen, in this cnuu-
try. i, certainly did no, belong to the
General Gmernmem. The question was,
therefore, aud he thought it very serious
question. whether in lay ing duties unde'
the authority to lay imposts, obviously Civ.
Ell fr the purposes Of revenue, Congress
can, reasonably and fairly, lose sight OF
those purposes entirely, aud levy duties for
other objects. Congress may tax the land,
but. /, would he a strange proposition, il
Congress should he asked to lay land tax
f'r the direct purpose Of Withdrawing clpi-
tai from agriculture, and sending :hose ell
gagged in i, To other pursuits. The power,
however, exists IN one case as much as IN
The other. II is not easy, it must be con.
iessed. to draw n limit in sLch cases, and
therefore, perhaps, it must be presumed.
in all cases, that the pnwer was exercised
fr the legal purpose, the collection of reve.
nue.: aud, that whatever other consequent
rps ensund, must be regarded as incidental
aud consequential To the exercise of the
power. Still, il was question very 6i, in
his Judgment. to he considered by Con-
gress, whether i, was a fair and just eser-
else of pow er, to elevate the incidental far
sb"ve the primary object, or,,o speak more
properly, in pursue the latter in utter dis.
regard Of the former.
But, admitting the right Of Congression.
nj Legislation over these subjects. aud i"r
these purposes, to he quite clear,Ihe inquiry
was. is i, erped,ent To increase the duties
ur inposls Ia The extent proposed IN ihl'
bill! The inquiry was moi "heiher some
change might not uselully he made
There was M objection, he presumed. It
a revision Of the table OF duties. upon the
common prime: pies Of such revisi"ns. now
or at any time. But the House Of Repre-
srniatives had pr, it .a'rly to the people u
The United States. whether new Tariff Il
the erient proposed, aud On the principle
proposed, should he established And hi
hoped the people would give a distinct an
swer to this question. The principle o
the measure he understood to he. that ",
should encourage the manufacturers pro
posed most To he benefited by the bill ,prin
' cipally those Of wnnIlen aud cotton cloths
by prnhibitorv duties. That restrictions
such as we have never before imposed. shall
be laid on commerce. by way of bounty NJ
: particular manufactures. For his own par
he had surpassed Iha, restrictions IN trade
and commerce, in order to benefit pariicu
lar classes of manufactures, were now yer!
generally understood to he mIschIevons, ant
, Inconsistent with Just notions of p"li'lca
ec"non,y. They we're oftwo sorts. such
arises from treaty stlpnla,inns between ma
tons, and such a. each nation may GREAT
fm itself by It's duties OIL imPnrta'i"ns.-
The understanding beiaeen England am