Virginia free press. (Charlestown, Va. [W. Va.]) 1832-1916, 1844-09-05
aIR. CLAWS ABANDONMENT OF THE
PROTEcrIvE PRINCIPLE.


Protective PRINCIPLE.
Z An attempt is now'on foot to prove that
Mr.. Clay. at the period Of the Compromise
Act. bad formally proposed 10 abandon the
Protective Principle. The authority Of
Mr.. Webster is vouched 10 sustain this
fact
We in the first place are veto learn
whether Mr.. Webster has really ever
made :sfhe declaration imputed TO him
ADD in the second place, we are 10 inquire
whether. if Mr.. Webster made such a |
statement. il is 10 be credited agains, he
mass Of testimony, which goes TO prove
that Mr. Clay never did propose to give
up The principle. but that on the contrary,
MS introduction aud support OF the Com. 1
promise Bill was induced BY his desire to
save ;he Union and the Protective Princi
Eple.
The declarations OF the Msdisonian
newspaper, as to what Mr.. Webster has or
has not said. must be strengthened by
ther testimony before we shall place inn
pIieit reliance on them. When they are
10 strengthened. wesball make our second
iaquiry, as 10 whether Mr.. VS. state
nent is to be credited.
On this point. we would referlst, 10 Mr..
Clsys whole political life which has been
devoted to the support of the Protective
Principle-2d. 10 his own. speech when
The Compromise Bill was before the Sc
hsie-snd lastly. 70 the testimony Of wit.
sesses who were in Congress at the time
Of the passage Of the Bill, and who were
familiar with The motives Of its friends
and Supporters.
On the first head, we presume no in
ieIligent man would call for proof; for the
.isct that Mr.. Clay has been 10 Congress
fssnot whit more notorious than that he
mas from very early period of his poliii
zeal lie been an ardent frieRd Of The Pro-
lrctiye Policy; and that be has time
sod sgain declared that. not only the
prosperity Of this country. but is hdepen-
dence as Nation, depended on due sup
port aud projections being given 10 tomes-
aic industry. 90 the I'd heao. we refer to
40 The following extrac; from the remarks
of Mr.. Clay. when, he introduced the
COMPROMISE Bill:
L elm presenting the modification Of the tariff
laws which am now about 10 submit, have tico
great objects In vietc. My first object LOOKS TO
lsTHE TARIFF. ! am compelled TO express the o.
lpinIon, formed after the most deliberate refec-
dion, and on full survey Of the whole country,
that, whether Tightfully or wrnngfolly. THE Ia
RIFF STANDS IN IMMINENT DANGER.
~ il should even be preserved during this ses
sion, il must fall at the merit session. BY what
circumstances, and through what causes, has a.
ssen the pecessity for this change in The policy
Of our country, will not pretend now 10 elucidale
lowing TO variety of concurrent causes,
the tariff, ss il now exists, is in IMMINENT
tDANGER, andIf the system can be preserved
sbeyond the next session, it must be by some
means not within the reach Of human sagacity.
THE FALL or THAT POLICY, SIR. WOULD
BE PRODUCTIVE OF CONSEQUENT ES
icALAMIToUSI INDEED. When look,to the
variety of interests which are involved, to the
number Of individuals interested, the amount Of
capital invested, the value Of buildings erected,
and The whole arrangement Of the business for
Ethe prosecution of he various branches OF man
ufacluring art which have sprung up under the
sfosleTing care Of this government, cannot con-
template any evil equal 10 the sudden pverthTow
| Of ell those interests. History can produce no
parallel 10 the extent OF the mischief which
would be produced by such a disaster. The
peal Of the edct OF Nangz itself was nothing in
comparison with il. That condemned to exile
and brought 10 ruin great number Of persons.
/ The most respectable portion Of the population
Of France was condemned TO exile and ruin by
that measure. But in my opinion, Sir TIE stD-
DEN REPEAL OF THE TARIFF R0LIcY wouLD BRiHo
RUIN & DESTRUCTION ON THE WHOLE
PEOPLE OF THIS COUNTRY. There is no
evil. in my opinion, equal TO the consequences
which would result from such a catastrophe
/ Does this look like apreviousIy express
ed wish 10 abandon the Protective Prin-
ciple ~Supposing Mr.. Clay to have no
regard Tor the obligation Of truth. would
hs have dared TO have used such language
while Mr.. Websier--io whom he had pre-
/ viousiy declared his wish ITO abandon
protection sitiingin the Senate and
starring him 10 the fsce2 Let Us, howe
yer, look little further:
/ Ia the speech delivered BY Mr.. Clay on the
25ih IL February. 1884 be said-"he did moi
! fear any misconsirucliop of he pledge contain
led ia Ihe bill and be hoped III a. the manDf4c-
iurers would 60 on and prosper, confident that
The ABANDONMENT or PRoTEcTiSN WAS NEvER
1 IsrrNpED and looking ID more favorable times
fof . RENEWAL OF A MORE EFFICIENT
| TARIFF
|, Again. during the debsie which occur
red Immediately before the engrossment Of
the Compromise Bill:
[ aAir. Dallas then moved 10 amend The amend
| ment as made In commiiiee nf The whole. IN the
Third section by striking cot lhe words arhich sue
rs. the POINT % irhics ne daiies shall Be ulli.
sislg reduced, 70 be the revenue necessary 10 an
eeon6nicsl administration Of The goverBmeni.'i -
"A Discussion took place oD this motion. 10
4 which IL was commenced By Messrs Webster, Dali
las. Dsckerson and Buekner shat these words, Al
lTAOUGH NOT so INTENDED niGlfT be con-
snned BY SOUTHERN gentlemen. in 1912, as
an sban5OamsAi II he Pro:seiiss Principle aud :
design % he part II those who had introduced
this bi. 10 make Frsrnue alone The standard Of all
foinFs dalies % imports
MIR. Clayton snd Mr.. Clay regarded the LAM
gnses As a1ikerising no susk construction. and de-
sled thsi cry en. wouId bs iasa6sd 10 iafeIIinE