Mississippi Democrat. (Carrollton, Miss.) 1844-18??, 1846-08-12


And Mr. Evans a prominent wing mem.
Ter Of the Financial committee, endorses
wha, Mr.. Webster stated.
Now lei as sec what Mr. Clay says on
this subject. And here, II viii be remem.
Tered, that NJ Clay had the lions share,
10 passing what was called the compro-
mise taui Of ls33,and that bill adopted the
ad valorem principle, and was in force IN
III ls42, and Mr.. Clay had closely watch.
cd lis operation.
10 ls4I, Mr.. Clay thus maintained tie
ad valorem system:
alle (Mr Clay maintained that the ad
rllorem foru ras he best. The specific
system maintains that articles Of different
values should pay the same duly. No re-
speci is paid TO values, but all have to pay
alike. lie admitted that there was one
objection 10 the ad yalOrem form-ihat Of
differences Of opinions as to real yaIuei
but he commended the ad valorem principle
could be carried on better than any other.
lie believed il was best, and where uni
form frauds could he better escaped than
under a different form. He quoted in
stances Of fraud under a different form.--
lie was therefore willing 10 adhere 10 the
JTiacipls Of he al rqlorea duty, even if
obliged 10 60 up to 33i per cent"
And in 1912, shen abou, to leave the
Senate, Mr.. Clay, ia a very able speech,
thus speaks in reference 10 the compro.
mise act:
"What are the other principles Of this
act! First, there is the principle, ihai a
fixed I'D yaloFe'n duty shall prevail and be
10 force at al times. For one, I an zil-
lag 70 abide By he principle. There are
certain vague notions aioal as 10 the NTH.
81 and necessity Of specific duties aud dis
ordinations, which, am persuaded, arise
from want OF a right understanding Of tb.
subject. We have had the al yalorem
principle practically 10 force ever since
the compromise act was passed, and there
has been no difficulty 10 administering tie
duties OF she treasury Oh tiIal principle.
"Cgmpaf- tie difference between the
specific anu tba a5 ,alofem system Of du.
lies, and maintain that The later is justly
eat.tlcl 10 the preference.
"Thc one principle declares that the
ju'y paid shu.l be upon the reaI value Of
lie articles faxed, HE specific principle
imposes an unequal duty Oh articles great
~ unequal in value.
"a say that, in theory and according 10
every sound principle Of justice Me ad "a.
loren system, IF taxation is entitled to The
preference"
Now, Tarihrcader do you consider Nh.
lay a public man, for it seems Mr.. Web.
ster docs not, and III whose opinion and
judgment have you most conference.-the. !
Clay or llr. Websler} The former has
been the consistent advocate Of protection
and has spent his lifc in building r2 the
protective system, Mr. Webster is an
eleventh hour advocate Of the principle
Mr.. Clay recommends the ad yalorem ia,
ties, aud Mr.. Webster pinimums and spe.
clfc duties.
But little reflection win soon give you
a clue 10 Mr. Webstcr's views. He ex,
planned himself in his speech in reply 10
Gen. Haync, on the tariff of 1898. lie
said that "yast amounts, many millions,
lad been invested in manufactures under
the induccment IF the act Of 1924, and
hence he was willing and dill vote to give
this manufacturing interest the further pro-
lection provided for Item IN the act Of
lS2S." When we're bis doubts about the
questionable" power Of Congress and his
former convictions as TO the injustice Of the
protective system which he had so ably
expressed in answer to Mr.. Clay, when
advocating the protective policy lenoun-
ced by Mr.. Webster, as the British policy,
and claimed by MIR. Clay as the "Amori.
can policy" Il is true, in orening the de-
bate in 1888, Mr. Webster did say "tlis
subject, is surrounded by embarrassmonls
on all Sides" aud no doubt he felt that the
arguments which he had SO ably delivered
against the protective policy, were an en-
barrossment IN his change. And Mr.. Web
ster like all late converts, soon oulstripped
the former friends of protection, and in
1912 had got rid Of embarrassment and
was ready to take all he could get. And
minimum and specific duties furnish higher
protection and are therefore in favor with
Mr.. Webster.
Can it be possible, that the Senate Of
the United States will, at the dictation