The Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1837-1867, 1844-10-28

the bill, Jelerson'H opinions obtained through
Benjamin Austin and were as follows; (See cores
ponbenee, vol 4, pages 2Sl aud 2st) Speaking OF
the occurrences under The iroe trade system, in the
close Of the last century,he says "Wbo could have
mngnedI that we should have been despoied of n
thousand ships, und hayo thousands Of citizens
reduced to Algerine saveryg Yet al thiahas taken
pace The BRITISH nterdicied to ouryessels all har-
hots Of the globe, without having frat proceeded to
of hers there paid tribute proporioned to
the cargo and obfnined her license proceed TO the
port Of destination The French declared them TO ho
Lawful prize, If they had touchedut the port, been
visited by the ship, Of tho enenly-nnlion Thus we
wero completely excluded from the oGcnn
Compare this state oc things with that Of SO, (whon
he wrote his notes on Vrginiu) and say whether ar
opinion founded in the circumstances Of that day
he fairly applied to those Of the present. 1--WE have
experienced what we did not then believe that therc
exists both proficiency and power enough to exclude
us from the field OF interchange with foreign naons
that, be independent for the comforts Of life,
must manufacture them ourselves. We must then
place the manufacturer by the side Of the ngricultur
ist The former question is suppressed, rather as
sumes form. The grand inquiry now is shall we
make our own comforts, go without them, at. the
will of foreign nation lie, therefore, Who is now
against domestic manufacturers must be for reducing
either TO dependence on that foreign nj on or TO
be clothed in SKINS aud to live like wild beasts in
dcns and cayerns. I am not one Of them. Expert
ancehas taught that manufacturers are now asnec-
cssnry 10 our own independence to our comfort;
and, il those who quote me for different opinion,
Ail keep peace with mo in purchasing nnthn, foreign,
without regard to difference Of price, il will not be
our fanlt if we do not soon have supply ut homo
equal to oas demand and wrest that weapon Of dis
ress ION the hand which has so long wantonly wie-
ded it, lit shall be proposed to 60 beyond orr sup
ply, the question Of 's5 will then recur, will
plus labor he proftably employed in the culture
Of The earth, in the abricnlions OF art' We have
time yet for consideration No one axiom he
laid down wise and expedient for all times and cir
cumstnncRs. Inatlention TO this is wist has called
for this explanation, which re ection would have
dered unnecessary with the candid, while nothing
will do it with thnse who the for Ter opinion
~ a stalking horse, 10 their dsoyul popen-
stcs keep in eternal vasqalogc 10 foreign and
unfriendlY people,"
Such were JeIerson's opinions, whom tho rounda.
tions -four present protective or discriminating po Icy
were being laid by the old republican Congress Let
not be said that the tariff of 1916 was tariff FOR
revenue, merely to relieve the country from its then
cmharrassments and heavy debt, and not for protec-
ton The face of the bill itself affords undoniable
proof, that it was not only intended for tariff for
revenue but that was also intended to operate as
tariff for protection If j, had been for revenue nero
w. it would huve imposed duties on all imports grad
uatng the duties according tho Of the impor-
ted article, TO raise the largest amount Of reve
une from tho smallest possible duties that would bring
the required revenue in accordance with the present
doctrine OF South Carolina politicians But the face
Of the bill proves that it imposed duties upon much
fewer number Of imported articles than does the tariff
of 1912 So ar(rom its spreading the duties out up
all importaiions the horizontal doctrine would
have them spread, confined and limited them to
smaller number ofnrticles, and made the duties
unequal than the present tariff does. For instance,
does the present tariff impose duty of two per
square foot on all by 10 window glass, consumed
by the poor man? That Of 1916 imposed duty Of
l-2 cents. Does the present tariff fix the minimum
valuation Of all cotton fabrics, ext ensiyely
ed by the poor every where, and which enter so u
Universally into the consumption Of the couutry, ut
minimum valuation Of 20 cents? The tariff Of ISl6
fixed the minimum valuation at % cents-thcreby
making the duty much higher cotton goods, worth
less than 10 ccuts, than the present tariff does 1t
also imposed higher duty upon sugar aud noises,
generally consumed by the poor, and many other
articles that might be mentioned. Ifthere should be
any doubt yet remaining in the minds Of any ndivid-
ua that the old republican tariff of 1916 was not, in
the proper sense Of the word u PROTECTIVE tariff.
and not intended to be so, that doubt will be re-
moved by turning TO the annual message of James
Madison, December 9th, 1915, Niles Register, vol.
8, page 256 in which that great statesman and iather
of the Constitution especially recommended tariff,
for and for protection to the very Congress,
which before the session closed, enacted it. Madison
proceeds: ''In adjusting the dates on npots 10 the
objects Of revenue, the influence of tho Tariff on man
ulacurers will necessarily present Itself for consider
alton, However wise the theory may be, which
leaves to the sagacy and interest of individuals the
application of their industry and resources, there are
in this as in other cases. exceptions to the general
rule.'' s..s ......
lie shows that the theory oflcaving things to reg
uate themselves, or ''the let aone theory, as it is
sometimes called true, that there are exceptions
the general rule and that the tariff policy is of
those exceptions. lie dives not into the of