The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-07-25


tunately, the right Of government to interfere with
our religion Is taken away in the most emphatic
manner. But religion Is universal truth. ID
- unaffected by time, place, or circumstances
The true religion for man is the true religion OF
ALL lfit was not therefore, for its ranscendent i'm
portance, concerning as IL does mans eternal hap
piness, II would be filter subject for legislation than
The pursuits of industry, which are affected by soil
climate, habits, tastes and thousand things which
makes II peculiarly proper that individuals should
not be interfered with in them by government
Individual tastes, habits and interests Will always
direct them TO the pursuits which they had better
follow without the interference Of government
And am in favor ofleayng every man IN his industrial
Persuts, as in his religion, TO work out his own sal
yatlon IN his own way. Government is incompe-
tent 10 tins business and il cannot undertake il
without mischief What one Of my constituents
would allow me To regulate his private pursuisl II
he would not allow me, how much more RELUCTANT
would be DC 10 allowsa representative from Name
OF Psxssl And the same woad be the case with
thar ~ 70 one district would consent that liz
= pia n --@h their wants and hAb-
lis, should control them IN their pri~ste nnrsn,s
why should thsy oe more wilkins a's-N -.s should
There is no policy on earth so fatal, particularly
In free government, as that by which the people
are taught 10 look up to and lean upon government
too muCh. Adversely will sooner or later befall all
pursuits. Teach the people, on such occasions, To
eitizsDs butiearn them TO look up TO- and lean up
on, the government, and when disaster comes, they
call upon the government which Is powerless 10
aid without wrong 10 others, and you breed dis
content and disaffecton. This is particularly the
case with manufactures. In them there Is con-
slant tendency IN production TO outrun consump-
ton There is constant tendency TO embarrass-
menti and IL government ntereres at all, whenever
occurs, there N eamor, and il Is appealed TO for
more protection.
Before Congress determines to adhere 10 the iurs-
dieion protection, desire it to consider to what
Il will lead lfyou legislate all upon this matter
your legislation must and ought to- be complete. II
you take control Of the subject Of manufactures you
must sooner later pass all the laws incident TO it.
Well, what are theyf More than half of the egis-
alton Of Great Britain and other manufacturing
tons, relative TO manufactures, in regulating the
hours Of labor, the ages at which persons shall en-
gage in them, DC, &c. There is no necessity for
such legislation here as YET, but it will come. The
time will rapidly approach, II you perse-
we're in your present policy. When it does
what will you do' Have you any pow
err 70 enteralu any such legislation No
one will pretend that we have. Well, will you by
legislation drive and entice labor into pursuit, the
natural, indeed may say the inevitable tendency
Of which is 10 make such legislation necessary
when you have no authority to resort TO IT. Can
this be right Is 1t right to legisate for the protec
tion Of the capital connected with this pursuit. when
you have no power 10 legisate for the security OF
the labor engaged in III Will you say we will
cave this to the States' Then | say leave the
whole subject. 1
These views are so obviously correct, and they
are in such exact keeping with our system Of gov
eminent, that do not believe any one not person
ally interested would controvert them IL it moi
for series Of faacies which the ingenuity Of these
persons have enabled them to fasten upon the pub
nc mind As disagreeable as is the task, | desire
to expose some Of these. And the first which
shall notice two advocated by the gentleman
from Massachusetts,, Mr.. WINTHROP. I notice
them first as they are more Immediately connected
with the question of constitutional power which
have been discussing. That gentleman maintains
that "the real revenue tariff is the reasonable pro-
tectve tariff and to sustain this position he as.
signs these reasons:
on any abstract principles, arbitrary arrangement o.
duties, but on the ability OF the people to import and
ability Of the people what constitutes or causes the grea
difference between the operation OF tariff and another
tariff or between the operation OF the same tariff at differ
ent periods"
And to corroborate them, he reads the following
extract from the London Bankers Circular:
at is the which the aggregate imports into any
country may realize that constitutes the Of recIp
roca and beneficial exchange; and the amount which the
imports will realize, depends entirely the condition
power OF the community at large TO consume The pa
y object Of the government of every country should be
to devise of enarging the power of consumption by
an adequate remuneration for labor" -
Now, sir, readily concede the proposition tina,
"the productiveness of revenue system depends
on the ability Of the people to import and pay for
whatever they want from abroad" And | also ad-
nit that the course Of policy which confers this
ability upon the greatest number Of people promotes
that productiveness to the greatest extent. And
maintain that the converse Of this proposition is
true About these propositions the gentleman and
myself do not seem to differ. But does he not see
when he assumes that the protective policy confers
this ability to consume upon the greatest number
that he begs the question, and assumes the very
point in debated Now, sir, contend tina, the free.
trade policy confers this ability to the greatest ex
tent. And if am right in this, show that un-
restricted system possible is "the real revenue
tariff" admit that protective tariff will create a
larger capacity in the manufacturing capitalists ia
import and pay for whatever they want from abroad
by increasing their prosperity; and if they were the
country, the gentlemans argument would be conclu-
sive. But unfortunately for the argument, they are
but very small portion of the country. The cen
sus of 1910 showed that, out of population of up
wards of seventeen millions, only 79l,749 were en-
gagged in manufactures and trades; and as showed
in my argument on former occasion, Con the har-
Dor bill y in reply to another gentleman from Massa
chusetts, Mr., HupsoN,] more than half of the
whole number of these is of this latter class, who
are not benefited by protective tariff. And very
large portion of the ether half is composed Of the
operatives, VINO, as mas Deen frequently SHOWN III
this debate, get no better wages under protective
tariff than without it, and whose capacity to con
sumo, therefore, is not increased by it. admit that
the capacity Of the capitalist to consume is augment
ed by a protective tariff But they are an exceed
ngy small class, and class, too, whose ability to
consume, under small profits, is such as to en-,
able them to supply all their wants. And an In
crease of those profits rather adds to their clear gains
than to their consumption. They make more mon
| ey, but they expend but little more. They are en-
abed to add to their capital rather than their con-
sumption, by aprotective tariff. SO the gentleman
must see that such tariff adds very nconsideraby
to the capacity, even of the manufacturing class
for consumption. As to all the rest, who compose
the great mass Of the community, their capacity
for consumption is greatly impaired in the depres
sion Of their prosperity. But the gentleman may say
that here, too, ] am begging the question. WI
prove my position by his own admission. HI
maintains that the system which brings with it the
greatest amount of prosperity, creates the largest ca
pacity for consumption. l admit the truth of thi
| proposition. But he cannot avoid admitting thai
the converse Of it is true and that the system under
which the largest steady liability of the people to
import and pay for whatever they want from
abroad hasSunformy existed is the one which
BRINGS with il the greatest prosperity to the creates