Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1844-07-12

every measure for sound national currency, with.
out which Protection is a mockery.
MR.. DILLINGHAM; ON MIR. CLAY AND
PROTECTION.
We were not present at the recent Locofoco
STATE Convention, but from what we learn, Mr.. Dill
lingham was the great man of the day-answering
we suppose, for the distinguished orators from
broad who were not present He is man natural
" possessing good share of sef.respect; we can
not but think, therefore, that he will look back to
his position and conduct that day a mournful in
stance Of the bad influence Of party zeal or per-
sonal ambition. In 1882, he was supporter of
HENRY CLAY and of Wing principles, against
most of the very men he was addressing on Thurs
day last-yet he stood there, denouncing those
principles, and insnuatng in the ears of that crowd
that Mr. Clay is a double faced politician--a man
who puts on "his Southern face" as occasion may
require. 1t would be enough for to say, that the
man who supports ]. X Polk the avowed anti-pro-
tectonist at the South and the pretended protec-
tionst at the North, should last of all bring that
reproach, il true; but we refer the reader to the
speech of Mr.. Clay hn'sef at Raleigh, N. c., lin
''''|" '~'NNNN'S''
of Mr.. Dillingham's ungenerous insnuation.
At recent date we believe Mr. Dillingham; has
claimed to be aboltionist-yet there he stood,
advocating the election of the man who is not only
supported at the South as an enemy of abolition,
but man who has voted against taking measures
to stop the accused slave-trade, and is now avow-
edly in favor of the immediate annexation of Texas!
Mr.. Dillingham; had returned fresh from Con-
gress. We think he ought to know that vast
majority of his party in both branches of Congress
have been talking against the doctrine of protec-
ton, and voting, too, in both branches in favor of
REDUCING the existing Tariff that friend, and
we believe not very distant neighbor of Mr.. Polk,
(Mr. Payne of Alabama,) declared on the floor of
the House that Mr. Polk believed the doctrine SHIELD
by the protectionsts of this Union was INIQUIT-
OUS"-that he (Polk) believed shat the Constitu-
ton authorized expressly the laying Of duties for
the sake of raising the necessary revenue for the
support of government, but at the same time he
condemned andrepudiated, as, far Mr.. P. knew,
the entire democratic party, with few exceptions,
did, the doctrine Of The Hhig party" this subject
of protection-and ." that Mr.. Polk expressly ad-
mitted and contended that the power to lay impost
duties revenue power, and, in the whole scope
of raising revenue, that that power unlimited,
BUT HE LAID NOT ONE FARTIIING FOR
PROTECTION--tha was a perversion of the
power, it was perverting power which was given
by the trainers of the Constitution for legitimate
object to an illegitimate object,-and it was upon
this ground that they ALL THE Locos) STOOD" We
think Mr. d. ought to know, also, that not only did
Sc I ,ollo
being IN Juror of protection, but that Mr.. Clay
friends avowed that he was so, and supported him
on that ground and that Mr. Clay himself has de-
clare', in direct opposition to the above views of
Mr.. ? ,lk, that he is in favor of DISCRIMINATE
ING FOR PROTECTION. We think that Mr..
ID. is certainly conscious that he himself found it
necessary various occasions to separate from the
great body of his oton party and from the support
ers of James X. Polk on this subject of protection
and uOte Nth The friends Of Mr.. Clay The rery Whg
party, which on Thursday last we arc told he abus-
ed And yet-yet, we are informed that Mr.. Dill
bingham absolutely argued to his Locofoco hearers
that James X Polk is as much in favor of protec-
ton as is Henry Cl,y!! Why, then, in the name
of wonder we ask,-was Mr.. Polk represented by
his friends in Congress to be Numerically opposed
to Mr.. Clay's views ?-Why did the Nulifers of
South Carolina publicly give the right hand of fell
lowshp to the Convention which nominated him
Why is Polk now sustained and Mr.. Clay most
bitterly opposed, by the ultra enemies of protec-
ton And why if the Locofoco party in Congress
is much in favor of protection as the Wings, or
more-if they oppose the present Tariff barely be
cause it is unequal and wants mendments-if they
: are really in favor of making it better-we ask
why did Mr.. Dillingham; VOTE WITH THE
WINGS on The Tariff generally, and AGAINST
his orn party? But enough; it is not pleasant fol
us so to deal with Mr.. Dillingham;, though we fee
that strict justice to Henry Clay, to the Wing par
ty and to him, would allow most searching and
severe review of the speech he delivered on Thurs
day last Whether he succeeds or is defeated as
+ candidate for Congress, do not believe that he
d will hereafter look back to his course on that occa
9 sion without conjunction.
q Tut! Tm!-The Freeman asserts that Mr.. Cay
accepted Mr.. Kings challenge to fight duel
This is untrue, Mr. Freeman the challenge wa
IS not accepted we come to this; Mr. Clay ha
n fought two duels, has repened Of it, and brough
forth the fruits Of repentance by voting for the la'
10 against duelng and not accepting Mr.. Kings chal
er enge. If he is duellist now, Birney is slave
10 holder.