The Somerset herald and farmers' and mechanics' register. [volume] (Somerset, Pa.) 183?-1852, 1845-12-23
Ivol. 4.-No. 8.

had rendered the whole neighborhool
prosperous by the increased demand 70.
all the productions of the farmers.
+ Mr.. s. thanked the chairman of the
Committee of Ways and Means for his
document; it had furnished to him and 70
the country undeniable proof, from tba
highest authority, to what an extent PR
ces had beeu reduced, insomueh that tho
duty on one article, though reasonable at
first, had now risen TO three hundred ar
eighty-nine per cent. al Uai0rem brought
about solely by the reduction of price
MIR. s. deied escape from this position.
Let any gentleman take the reportand eN-
anime it, and the more they examine.
the more they would be convinced that
this was true explanation Of the who,
matter. Yet this was held forth for lha
purpose of exciting alarm; it furnished y
topic for popular defamation; it migh.
persuade the 'poor man. that he was
greatly oppressed, because he paid ajax T..
two hundred per cent. son his windo4.
glass fell to dollar per box, he would b.
taxed four hundred per cent, or if by anv
improvement in the manufacture H.
should be enabled to get his glass atfly
cents box, why then he would be paw
ing the enormous unheard of tax OF tig.if
hundred per cent. This same 'poor
man. of the Secretary sometimes wanted
to buy few nails, and The Secretary &
harmed him by the intelligence that nails
were taxed a hundred per cent. on the.r
value. SO they were, but what did lie
pay for them! He used to pay sixteen
cents pound, but this wicked oppressive
tariff had brought them down to four
cents. Now, who did not see that if 4
specific duty of four cents a pound en-
nails amounted now hundred per cent.
should nails be brought down to cent !
pound, the duty would be four hundred
per cent. What an oppression to egt
nails at penny pOund Surely the
'poor man" was likely to be utterly crusl-
ed and ruined.
Mr.. S. said he had wished to point out
some other Of the extraordinary doctrines
contained in this paper of the Secretary,
and there was one which startled the couIi-
try: it was covered up in cautions Ian
guage, but when the veil was drawn a
side, and the truth exposed. he again
warned gentlemen that it would startls
the country. The free trade Secretary
had recommended an EXCISE on Ameri-
can manufactures. Yes, that was the
protection he had provided for Americ2n
industry. it was to take off the duty from,
foreign manufactures, and put it on cur
own. Hear him:
"In accordance with these principles, it
IS believed that the largest practicable por-
ton Of the aggregate revenue should be
raised by maximum revenue duties upon
Injuries, whether grown, produced, or
manufactured at home or abroad"
Let mechanics and manufacturers hca~
that. Every American artisan shoulI
hear it. The duty was to be on tclci
&C., whether grown, produced, or manI-
featured al home or abroad" Here w2s
an American Secretary distinctly recom-
mending to levy the highest rate of reye-
nue. duties on goods manufactured nj
home. What else was an excise than a
tax on the manufactured goods of thi4
country! Yet this was the Secretlry-s
recommendation. How would American
manufacturers like it!
Both in the message and in the report
the Administration had given its own
definition of what, according to It's under
standing, was revenue standard Of duty;
and this was the language of the Pres
dents message:
''Thc precise point in the ascending
scale of duties at which it is ascertaine1
from experience that the revenue is great
est, is the maximum rate of duty which
can be laid for the bona fde purpose OF
collecting money for the support of Gov
ernment. TO raise the duties higher
than that point, and thereby diminish tie
amount collected, is TO levy them for p.o-
lection merely, and not for revenue. As
long. then, as Congress may gradually
increase the rate of duty on q given ar
ticlc, and the revenue IS increased by
such increase Of duty. they are within the
revenue standard. When they 90 be-
yond that point, and, as they increase the
duties, the revenue is diminished or de-
stoved, the act ceases to have for IFS OBJ
ject the raising Of money to support Coz
ernment, but for protection merely.
Here was the rule by which duties
were to be laid. The moment an Ameri-
can manufacturer had succeeded IN sup
plvinr our own market, and began to
thrive in his business, that would be a
proof that the duty was too high for reve-
nne: it was 10 longer a revenue duty bat
protective duty, and it must forthwith
be reduced. As the American furnished
more goods to the country, less foreigl
goods woul be imported, revenue woui''
be diminished, and the duty must come
down: that was the rule. And now ar.
s. would ask, under such rule as THIS,
whatman in his senses would i-ivest A dol-