Litchfield enquirer. [volume] (Litchfield, Conn.) 1829-current, 1844-01-11
HON. PERRY SMITHS VOTES on THE DE
: TAILS OF THE TARIFF.

position 20 the present exeettenS tafll which has
already donsso much loFthe prosperity Of the coun
Try. We observed that he not only opposed the bin
on itsnal passage. but that in arranging its detaiIs
he cooperated with the nuIlifers and free traders Of
the Souih, and thus compromised the honor and in
tefests of Connecticut With q view to lay before
our readers the proofs under this last head we have
recently examined the record, and now invite Partic
uar attention to the following votes BY this represen
tative OF the Hartford Regency in the u s, Senate
the bill ITO provide revenue from imports and TO
change and modify existing laws imposing duties on
imposts and for other purposes being under eOnsid
Grafton. ss 5
l. On amendment reported by the Committee on
Finance to reduce the duty on cotton bagging from
TO and half cents per square yard Teas FL
Nays 26. Among the former was the Hon. Perry
Smith of Connecticut.
Q. Onamendment reported by the same comp1ittee
TO reduce the duty on bar iron from II to ls dollars
per ton: Yeas % Nays rs. In the affirmative the
Hon. Perry Smith of Connecticut st
3. On amendments BY same committee to reduce
the duty on rolled iron from 2750 to "a dollars per
ton: Yeas M--Nays rs. Hon. Perry Smith ia the
affirmative.
A. On motion Of Mr. Evans that the duty on relied
iron should be IS and not "a dollars per tons Yeas
23-Nays %. Among the last we find the Hon.
Perry Smith.
S. On amendmentreporte by hecommittee afore-5
said to strike from the bill the duty Of two cents per
pound on sheet copper and sheathing metal; Yeas
'l4-Nays3s. In the affirmative as usual the Hon.
Perry Smithl oa
6. on motion, BY Mr.. Benton. that on admission
free Of duly BY any foreign state nation Of the
grain, -four sailed provision and manufactured to-
bacco OF the United States. all the duties imposed
by the act on articles Of the growth or manufacture
Of such foreign state or nation should to
20 per cent ad valoren: Yeas 16,--Nays Is. Here
we again have in the affirmative Hon. Perry Smith
T. On motion, by Mr. Benton, 70 strike out the du-
" on pins Of Accents per pack: Yeas l9--Nays 81
AS Thomas Humbug Benton made the motion, there
fore in the affirmativeisthe Hon. Perry Smith!
%. On motion Of MI. Wrightto substitute for spe-
ciic duties protecting amply the cut glass business
mere revenue ad valorem duty Yeas 2o--Nays ~
Inathe affirmative the Hon. Perry Smith
9. On motion Of Mr.. Wright to substitute for du.
ty of $3.50 per pound oil manufactures Of silk 20
per cent. nd valorem.. Yeas Nays Is. In the af-
firmative the Hon. Perry Smith! #
10 On motion of Milking to deprive certain cot
ton goods such asveye.s mole skins, iustians buff
falc cloths &c. offhe protection secured by the bill
Yeas n Nays ~. In the affirmative Perry Smith!
y Ii. On motion Of Mr.. Benton ditto as to mied
or nlled cloths known BY the name OF plain kerseys
and Kendall cotions:" Yeas 18--Naysl9. In the af
firmative the Hon. Perry Smith ~
70. Onmotion of Mr.. Benton to lay stamp TAX s.
on all bnnk piper Of te country duty of3O cts.
on each piece of paper constituting the currency and
an annual tax Of Is cents on the same for each year
tits continued in circulationn !! can anti small bill
law with vengeance I'D Yeas = Nays ". In the
affirmative as mightbe expected Hon. Perry Smith.
\ ID. On motion Of Mr.. Evans 70 put tea and cot
fee into theiree list and thus exempt them from
duty: Yeas % Nays IS. Here we find the honor
able Senator voting n the negative unwilling that
the old ladies' should sip their tea aad coffee without
paying tax 10 the government!
IA. Onmotion Of Mr.4Allen to put salt into the
free list, and thus to annhilats al blowhe manu-.
facture Of this article throughout the Union; Yeas
T-Nays 81. In the affirmative the Hon. Perry
Smith! Verify, SALr will not safe party which
could make she man iii the corner u 8. Senator
We observe on examination of the record thar on
was absent from his seat or il present did not deign
to vote 1t is possible we may hereafereall the at
tention Of the public to his derilections Of duty in
this respect But in the above exposition one can
fail to understand his motives or 10 appreciate Alright
his conduct. lnssevefal instances his votes on a.
mendments il successful would have proved fatal TO
the BILL How could the Kentucky Senators Messrs.
Crittendcn ana Morehouse; have voted for il If Mr.
Smith had broken down the protection on cotton bag
ging, in the manufacture ofwhch that State is deep
ly interested or Mr. Wright in case Salt had been
made free article, and this business Of the high
est importance to tie State Of New York, had been
ruined? To arrange the details ola Tariff is mat
ter Of great difficulty, and nothing is easier than
defeat aneasure this sort ifshe adjustment of du
ties shall do injustice to any one branch Of business
or any one section Of the Union. But his votes on
the clauses Of the bill touching iron and the protec-
ton to be extended to that important branch Of ma
.ional industry were by far the most extraordinary
He knew he was opposing the true interests Of his
constituents. particularly portion OF those who re-
side in the county Of Litchfeld. He himself had
long been engaged in the iron basiness az princi-
pal in an incorporated company. % horrible though
he took 70 sell his stock about the time he went
10 Washington, and shortly after the company failed
and tunibled into ruins. AN know this who were
present in our courts al che trial Of the cause Perry
Smith vs.. F. J. Fennl which involved the validity of
notes given for the transfer Of his stock they being
defended on the ground of fraud and want Of consid
Grafton Does any man believe who knows any thing
OF Perry Smith. that he would have resisted as be