The Port-Gibson correspondent., 1844-05-04

goods Smld MOI Be imported wien there
was 70 tarlG q au
viii you answsr that question neigh,
bor--or viii you back Out and say you
are mistaken -or will you 10 this asse
ion, IS YOU do, confess that your whig
friends ia Congress saw no necessity for
placing q high duty on low priced for
sipn fabrics, because such goods could
moi be imported eren whea there iOas no
tarif al aH,--but wishing 10 sport with
peoplesfanas -conspue time mike
long winded speeches at the rate Of 9
dollars day and roast beef, they deem
ed It, policy and pleasant 70 pass tariff
laws though fully satisfied Of their 'inu>
lility Our neighbor has 60. into pre-
dicament from which be will find il din !
culltb extricate himsslf-he is surroun
ded, and cannot we'll escape. But here.
him confess "that IL such goods Al such
prices are imported, then our argument
IS conclusive" !"
"To prove that some cotton fabrics
pay revenue duty Of 200 per cent, they
'ssuppose" the importation Of cot'on
goods "worlh only Z cents per square.
yard" Admit this absurd "supposilion"
TO be correct, and the argument is con>
clusive.n .
Now We will ask our neighbor to re-
fer 70 the report Of the committee Of
ways and means to the House Of Repre-
sentative or the present Congress-and
he will there find that cotton goods haze
actually been imported under the present
tariff which have paid duty Of from 50
10 IG0 percent,--fhat others have been
imported at duty Of from 81 TO 162
per cenr,--ihat woolen flannel has been
and is imported at duty Of from 40 10
100 per cent. Here neighbor we would
gently remind you, is the conviction that
follows your confession, you are con
yicted not spon the testimony Of Hon. r.
J. Walker, or the New York Herald,
(which is certainly good enough,l but
upon :hc testimony of a wise, we'll infor-
med committee, whose report is subjected
TO the all searching eye Of Congress,
and the nation, and who certainly would
not publish willingly batch Of lies. No
neighbor, this report is made up of sta
tistical facts furnished by the proper
offi:crs and is the whole truth and moths
ing bu, the trdth. As you plead guilty,
yolr sentence shall be light, you will
only be required TO respond TO the fol.
iowing charges.
1t. Yoh asserted in the outset Of this
con royersy that the highest rate Of du
ty UPON any article Of cotton goods was
80 ,,sr cent.
Are y,oa right or serpag -gailty or not |
g.i'f'y.
81. When we Informed sou that by
the minimum system duty Of 200 per
cent is levied on low priced cotton FAB
RIGS. you asserted that goods sufficiently
below the minimum system to pay this
duty are not imported, and that they
would not be, even were there no tariff
Do yoO believe this. If you do, it is
tantariount TO confession that your
Congress Of 1842 either placed an enor>
nous duty on these low priced fabrics TO
prevent their importation --or knowing
that such goods could not under any cir
cumstances be imported, expended thou
sands Of dollars in discussing and pas
sing law which they knew 10 beStotal
ly unnecessary. Which is your choice
neighbor guilty or not guilty.
Sd You assertindirectly in your last pa.
per that cotton goods cannot be and are
not manufactured in Manchester al the
low prices al which We supposed and ra,
ted thom. If not manufactured, why1
make any tariff in relation TO them.
Your whig Congress by the minimum
system supposes such goods made and
raises them TO 90 cents per yard. Are
you right and your Congress wrong
But we prove BY The report Of the
committee Of ways and means that low
priced cottotis are actually imported and
pay as high duty as we asserted, the
gentleman can read il in their report
We have the document and will loan ii
to him. Is the editor right, and The