The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1844-01-10

rant-M~now curling i into a spiral--then twisting
it into the shape OF the letter S. anon tickling
his own nose with it, shooting il out horizontal-
sly, then perpeudicuarly, and pointing itftarcss-
~ in every direction Of the compass.
In'his letter TO cCommilee of the Indiana
Convention, in February last, he laid himself
out at full length upon this ques ion, covering as
much ground as possible. Yet, so hard is it 10
please every body, even that letter was com
planned of. The friend and spokesman of Mr.
Van Buren,, in the Democratic Review OF the
present month, in the article on the Democratic
Nomination, upon which we commented day
or two ago, alludes TO the Indiana letter in these
: terms-"His Indiana letter, against which we
50 often hear il charged, that there is nothing
satisfactory on this subjecl [of The Tariff that
itplays found and round the compass OF opin-
ion, without any definite indication of any fixed
point of doctrine The writer in the Review
admits hat there is some ruth in these com
plants and that the Indiana letter sis marked
with somewhat less of that lucid force and di-
rectaess which have usually distinguished Mr.
Van Bprens communications of this character"
somewhat less of thar blunt and brief sincerity
which placed him, in public opinion, at the head
of the non-commiua school of politicians.
Weythink that this writer. in the excess ofhis
candor, does injustice to Mr.. Van Buren,
There is no want of ''lucid force" in that par
ofihe Indiana letter relating TO the Tariff. That
islo say, each sentence taken by Itself is sufh-
cienty explicit and ineligible; and reader
who could not place the various opinions in such
collocation as to suit his particular TASTE would
hardly find any thing to please his eye in the in
fnitely varied and brilliant changes Of kaei-
doscope.
Thefriends ola ProiectiveSTarif surely have
no reason to quarrel with the Indiana letter.
Mr.Yan Buren, says:
my views in relation to the protective system
were also called for by the Shocco Springs meeting
in 1892, and freely given conviction that the es-
adjustment of commercial regulations with view
to the encouragement Of domestic interests is within
the cons itutona power of Congress, was on that oc
casion distinctly ayowed. But holding this opinion,
], at the same time, denied the propriey Of exercs
ing this power in a calculated Cypress any
portion of my elIow.citizens or TO advance the in
tttcct, VI VI bnion az tlt Aptii1c VI
another |, on the contrary, affirmed it 10 be the du-
ty Of those who entrusted with the Administration
Of the Federal Government, TO direct its operations
in the best calculated to distribute equally
as possible its burdens and blessings among the eye
raj States and the People thereof"
The constitutional point is here conceded in
the broadcast and most satisfactory terms il
COVERS not merely protection of vested interests,
ip manufactures but "eacourage ment of do.
nestle interests" # is rue; that be would not
have this power Of encouragement exercised so
as to Cypress any portion Of the Peope; but
who has ever professcd a desire or intention so
to exercise III The most rabid high-lariiT man
could not fad fault with this Limitation; more
particularly when he finds, in another part Of
the letter. a suggestion Of 'The expedency Of
the adoption by Congress al any lime. Of ten
porary measures OF retaliation, when likely 10
be efieclual in counIc'acliug foreign legislation
injurious % American interests What more
could The warmcst fri, nds Of the American Sys-
tenn desire, for instance, than that this country
should reta.e the prohibilory policy If Great
Britain, by adopting a. similar policy with re-
spect to her manufactures
The naughty high tariff man being thus ap-
peased, the more humble advocate Of incidental
protection comes in forh his share of smiles and
appreciation. Indeed this very numerous class
seem to be particular fayorites with Mr. Van
Buren,. After dwelling at length on The fact
that tariff for revenue purposes only, would
necessarily have the effect Of protecting and en-
couraging manufactures, he d, clare, that the
most consderae Of the domestic manufacturers
are satisfied with this measure of protection, "
and says
This advantage 10 One manufacturer is not, it is
true, the object Of, but only incidental TO, tariff for
revenue Still it is not, on that account, the less
beneficial 10 him.
The position assumed by your convention, aud in
which fully concur, is, that the incidental protec-
ton thus derived is all the legislative favor which
can at this day be conferred upon the manufacturer
without great injustice 10 other interests
But then lest there should be some scbi>ma,ic
dit renee between The advocates Of incidental
protec ion and the friends of discrip,i,afiao
tariff, he goes for determination also, whatever
that may mean. Hear him:
or the constitutional power to make discrmina
ton, have no doubt Equally clear it is that th,
practice Of making them has existed from the com
uencement of the Government, and constitutes 3
'eaiure in every principal tariff bill which is TO b,
bund up n our slaute-book. They are, indeed, in