Carroll free press. [volume] (Carrollton [Ohio]) 1834-1861, 1846-08-21
From The Ohio Stale Journal.
Webster and McDuffiC on the Tariff.

Just before the final vote was taken on the Bri-
tish Tariff Bill, adopted a few days since in an
American Congress, passage of surprising in
terest sprungup between Mossrs. Webster and Nc
DufIie. SO pungent were the arguments and so
burning the invective of Daniel Webster, Mr..
McDufiic was compelled to break the profound
silence up to that time preserved by his friends,
and attempt a defence of what he and his friends
were about to do. How successful that attempt
was the reader can Judge. The following is an
accurate report of the debate from the columns
of the "Unioa," the official organ itself. If any
one desires to obtain correct conception of the
character of McKay's bill, we would advise
him not to lay this paper down until he has, at
least, carefully scanned the picture, drawn by the
master hand of the Massachusetts Senator:
Mr.. WEBSTER then addressed the Senate. He
said the question now before the Senate is in one
respect test question: as it has been described by
the honorable member from Missouri, Mr.. Ben
tony not exactly in the light in which he viewed
it, or in the sense in which he wished it to be un-
derstood, but in quite different sense-inanoth
er aspect altogether. We are here, sir, calling
ourselves every day democratic Congress, and
the majority of the body is said to beabout 10 pass
great democratic measure. suppose if any
meaning is attached to those terms, it is that it is
measure favorable to the masses-favorable to
the people-preferring the interests of the mass
es to the interests of the few-preferring the in
terests of the great body Of the people to those
who may be called the possessors of a high mea-
sure of wealth. Well, sir, what sort of bill
does the question now about to be taken show that
this ''great democratic measure" is!-or, what
sort of a measure is this popular democratic bill!
1t purports to be an "act reducing the duty on i'm
ports, and for other purposes" The title could
not describe the bill at all, if they did not indicate
that there were other purposes besides the mere
reduction of duties; and one Of those other pur-
poses is to enhance duties. The true mterpreta-
ton of the bill, therefore, is that il is an act for
reducing certain duties and enhancing certain 9TH
er duties on articles of importation. Now, sir,
let us see whether this is such bill as is preten-
ded-a bill in favor of the masscs-in favor of
the people Just look at the question now sub
mitted to the Senate This bill does reduce the
duties-on what? On what! Why, there may
be some articles on which the duties are reduced
for the benefit of the middling classes but the
great reduction of duties is on such articles as
read to you yesterday list from the letter of Mr..
Michel. You reduce the duty on spirits of all
kinds to the great extent which mentioned yes
terday You reduce the duties on spices to the
great extent which mentioned yesterday. You
reduce the duty on imported tropical fruits and
other fruits. You reduce the duty onready-made
clothing. You reduce the duty on rich and eX
pensive carpets. You reduce the duty on ricf
cut glass-every one Of them. And you saw
that this reduction keeps out of the treasury moro
than the whole of the duty laid upon certain 9th
or articles. But these are your reductions-youl
main reductions. They are all on articles O
luxury-of extreme luxury-spirits, spices, silks
costly carpets, rich cut-glass, ready-made cloth
ing, articles in which none of the middling class
es are interested, or in the habit of buying or u
sing. And now it is proposed to see whether yoI
will or will not, by the instructions of your com
mttee, continue the practice OF freeing the raw
material, upon which all the manufacturing ant
laboring people Of thecountry eama living whel
they get it, The question is now distinctly pu
to this Senate-on the raw material, which is II
come here and furnish employment and occupa
ton to the handlcraft throughout the counry--o
this you have raised the duty. Perhaps on al
these raw materials, but certainly on masses O
them, as | showed yesterday, you have raised tn
duty above the standard Of that tariff, which yo
say is an obnoxious Whig measure, and for tn
reduction of whose duties you stand pledged.
Now you are asked to send them to your com
mittee, with instructions in every case where tn
duty on the raw material, as proposed by this bill
exceeds the duty on the same raw material i'm
posed by the Wing tariff of 1912, to take it off
you won't doit-you won't doit! No. You in
dulgc in the luxury of taxing the poor man an