Staunton spectator, and general advertiser. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 183?-1849, 1844-06-20

was carried in tho House of Representatives by
vote Of ll9 to IS, and in the Senate by 90 to 16
The only fact connected with this vote to which
we would invite public attention, is that this grea
measure of peace and harmony was opposed b,
Mahlon Dickerson, George M. Dallas, William
wilkins. Samuel Smith, and Thomas II. Benton.
See Doc. 2ii, p 2O4-5. These gentlemen. i,
would seem, were 80 devoted to the protective
policy that they were determined to adhere TO is
! in it's most obnoxious form even at the hazard of
civil war and dissolution Of the Union itself-
Some of them, perhaps, would have been by no
means unwilling TO see Messrs. Calhoun, McDuf-
fs and Hayne strung up under the I'd section! :,
We come now TO the Tariff of 1912. This
bill was passed in the House of Representatives
by majority of ONE, and in the Senate by the
same meagre vote. Three Democratic Senators
voted for il, viz: Mr.. Williams Of Maine, Mr..
Wright of N. York, and MIR. Buchanan OF Pa
1t either of these gentlemen had voted against il,
itwoud have been lost. 1t is well known, also,
that they refused to when their names were
hrst called that they might ascertain whether it
could be carried without their aid, but finding It
could not, they severally directed the Clerk to re-
cord their names in favor of il. We have seen
most singular defence Of these gentlemen by
Mr.. Woodbury.. He says that although they vo-
ted for it they were really opposed to it. He
quotes from MIR. Buchanan, who said that the on
ly choice was between that bill and ma
tonal disgrace! Now here is a precious con-
tession truly! IL that or some other bill had not
been passed, what would have been the conse-
quence? The Compromise Bill with ,s 90 per
cent duties would have continued in force! What
then is the result Of Mr.. Woodbury's and Mr..
Buchanan's argument! 1t is plainly, that if the
Compromise Ac; had been suffered to remain in
force, the Government would have been without
adequate revenue and the nation disgraced!-
Here we have the very proposition which tho
Wings have been con,endlng for, proved by their
POLITICAL antagonists in a manner. which admits
If no reply! We thank you most kindly gem
lemen Tor thus doing our work to our hand, and
with argument and authority which
10 Democrat dare question! And yet in the face
1t all these things our venerable contemporary
will persist in declaring that the Wings were
guilty of fragrant breach of faith in departing
rom the Compromise Act, when, according 70
democratic showing, ADHERENCE TO 1T WOULD
lave BEEN FOLLOWED BY "NATIONAL DIsGRAcE"'
- we here close our review Of the history Of the
I'ariff question. We fear we have already ex.
ended our remarks too far. But the subject is
10 full OF interest, and the sources Of official in-
ormation accessible 10 so few OF our readers,
hat we thought ought TO incur the hazard of
icing tiresome rather Than omit any material
acts. Our work is now done. We have furnish-
ID the clue TO enable such of our readers as de-
ire to follow up the investigation more infinitely
o do SO, with comparatively little labor. live
ave awakened spirit of candid enquiry in the
minds OF the rising generaion-if we have dissr
aied single prejudice-or detected and exposed
single falsehood, we shall feel that our labors
re amply repaid. 4tt. h..; so
And now, by way OF a parting legacy to our
eaderS, who have followed through our, long
cries of numbers Of tile "Fair Propositions we
Her them the following extract from Gen. jack
on's message to Congress the 7th Dec. 1880.
condenses the whole constitutional argument
n favor of the doctrine Of protection into such
arrow limits and presents II with so much clear
ess and force, that ii deserves to be indeibly m-
rnted on the mind of every friend of The consti-
uiion and his country:
1.-The power to impose duties on imports orgin-
lily belonged TO the several States. Tile rightip
dust these duties, with pietU TO The encourage
lent IF domestc branches IF industry, as CONF
Iefeiy incidental 10 that po,cer, that a. is d6ituH TO
oppose The errstence IF The tuiAtOut Me ofher.--
The States have delegated their whole authority
ver imposts 10 the General Government, without
limitation restriction, saving the very inconsid-
rdbe reservation relating to their inspection
avs. This authority having thus entirely pas
led from The States, the righ. to exercise il for
he purpose of protection does not exist in them;
md consequently, if it be not possessed by the
ieneral Government, it must be extinct. Our
political system would thus present the anomaly
If people stripped Of Tie rig GIT to foster their o,u,
industry. and TO counie,aet Me most selfish and
hstruchve policy Which might be adapted Jy for
ig, nations. THIS SURELY CANNOT BIZ
TIE CASE. This indispensable power, thug
urrendered by the States, must be within the
cope OF The authority on The subject expressly
eiegated 10 Congress. In this concus AM
onfrmed as well by the opinions Of Presidentc
y ashington, Madison, and Monroe, who have,
ach, repeatedly recommended the exercise OF
his right under The Constitution, as by the uni-
orm practice of Congress, the continued acquesg
nee of the States, and the general understanding
t the people"