The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-07-08


What the principle which had always besR con.
,snded for in this and in the other houss That ashe
emulation Of capital and skill ths Manufacturers would
tand alone unaded by government in competition with
imported articles RON any qasrsr Now give US pms,
turers in every branch will sustain themselves
sinst foreign competition live can see our way clearly
nine years 10 come We can safely leave to Postsy to
''Bnt Il ths should be carried by common con
S SS Psseeri ,ss Transaction nsrraIs under what
circumstances the bill was passed. that was pseuyinE
to restore pssss and harmony 70 the county when all
this was known what Congress-what lesSalnre-wouh
the character Of an American Statesman would stand up
his place IN either house Of Congress and disturb this urea
~ Of peace and amity"
Such, then, were the views Of the danger of the
Tariff system, and Of the principle upon which 1t
might be allowed TO exist for nine years. entertained
by Mr.. Clay. Such was the final abandonment of
the system Of legisating with reference TO certain
local interests and such the solemn pledge that for
tho future duties should be laid for the sole purpose
of raising such revenue rs might be needed for an
economical administration Of the government. Did
all parties give in their adhesion 10 that compromise
Not only does the history of that time, which Mr..
Clay then appealed TO, chronicle the circumstances
under which the act passed tel us that all parties
18th Of Feb, lSt2 after his party had gained the as
tendency, said in the Senate OF the United States:
The compounds act had the sanction Of all the
manu- facturers except, as he had observed at that
time, Of The political maautaeiwers."
And who were the political anufacturers" who
refused sanction 10 this measure Of "peaee and ami
tyf" Perhaps the following resolutions, offered
the day after the introduction Of the compromise BILL
may shed some light on tho question.
On the 18th Of February, 1888, Mr. WEBSTER, in
pursuance Of notice given the 10Th, sent TO the
table the following resolutions
"R..sissd, That tn. annual revenues OF the country
ought not TO be allowed e exceed just estimate Of the
certsned with reasonable certainty that the rate OF duties
imports established by the act Of J.ly 1854 viii yield
their reduction and that In making this reduction just
gard should be had to the interests and opinions
preserve the integrity and harmony OF the Union and
provide for the common defence and promote the general
Bst whereas certain the dminution Of the rates
Of duties on some articles would increase instead OF reducing
the aggregate amount OF such articles and
where's in regard to such articles has been the policy
the country 20 protect slight reduction on one might
of the community while another might bear larger reduc
there are many seIs the dsts. on which might be rdU
eed or altogether abolished without producing other
Rsossd That in reducing the rates Of duties imposed
on Imports by the act Of lsh July aforesaid ia not wise
esntum on all articles, but that well the the
time of reduction ought be fixed respect the
the questions whether the proposed reduction will AFFECT
revenue aone or how far IL win operate njuriously
such essential in time Of and such also have
been established on the faith Of existing laws and above
wages and the earnings Of American manual labor
"esOlred That since the people OF the United
have deprived the State governments Of all power OF los
erng manufactures however indispensable in peace
commercial regulations by laying duties imports and
have transferred the whole authority to make such regua
States Congress cannot abandon such
comPatiby with its constitutional dutyi and therefore
"Roirsd That law ought to be passed the subject
of mposts containing stipulation, express or implied
Or giving any psgs o. assurance direct or indirect which
its constitutional powers In giving reasonable protection to
tons and maintaining the substantial independence Of the
United States"
The above resolutions, Mr. Chairman, though
long, will well repay consideration. When taken
in connexion with the resolutions of the same gen.
tleman in 1920, they will prove him to have been
one of che political manufacturers" alluded to by
Mr.. Clay, Compare the principles contained in the
two sets, sir, and it will be that the constitu
tional views Of this great "expounder OF the con-
s!itution" changed as the pursuits Of New England
changed; that in 1920, when New England had but
few manufactures, he declared that taxes imposed
| for the sole benefit Of any class of men
equally Inconsistent with the principles OF our con-
stituiion and with sound policy and that in 1888,
when New England had become great manufac-i
turing country, he expressed his belief That Con
| gress cannot surrender or abandon such power Of
| fostering manufactures" by ''aying duties or i'm
ports, compaubly with its constitutional duty"
That in 1890 he spoke Of the pretence that, "until
|
adopted, are and shall be, dependent foreign
for subsistence and Defence" as fallacious and
fancful;" while in 1888 he desired duties to be
imposed, shaving due regard, in each case,
to the questions" show far it would operate in u
| riously on those domestic manufactures hitherto
protected, and especially such essential in time
Of war; declaring them to be indispensable IT.
| peace war" and to be "mportant to national
Independence" In 1920, deeming singh bounes
| on such domestic manufactures as are principally
/ l..xx oGtnl a.
rather than personal industry" and in 1888 decar
ing the principle that the tariff benefciay affected
'the rates of wages and the earnings of American
manual labor" In 1890 maintaining that "the tariff,
and the principles on which it is avowedy
founded, would, if adopted, have a tendency to d-
minsh the industry, impede the prosperity, and cor
rupt the morals of the peoples" and in 1883, in his
place in the Senate, avowing that "a slight reduc
tom fthe rate of duty "upon one might produce
essential injury, and distress, large classes
OF the community;" and that the policy was neces-
sary "to give reasonable protection TO American in
dustry eounerva the policy of foreign nations and
maintain the substantial independence Of the United
States" How strangely at variance the different
views entertained Of the constitutional duty" of
Congress, and of the policy Of protection, at these
two periods of time by this "expounder Of the
siuton." At one period earnestly adhering
that sacred instrument and at the other grossly un
mindful of its stern obligations; at the one period
representing interest which required action Gin
consistent with the principles Of our constitutions"
at the other advocating interest which demanded
an abandonment" of his constitutional duty"
There is one principle, however, Mr.. Chairman,
which wish the followers of Mr.. Webster to OBJ
serve particularly in these two of resolutions.
1t is common to both, and the only one on which
he had not changed. In 1920 he declared that the
adoption ofhe tariff imposing duties for protection,
would compel the farmer to ''give more than he
now does for all he buys, and receive less for all he
sells" In 1893 he likewise says that "the dminu-
| IN npfth efeaO Of q would
revenue on such articles" The argument
urged to this committee in favor Of protection is the
very reverse--t is that protection will enable the
farmer to "give less than hewould without protection
for what he buys and TO receive for what he
scllsr also, that the "dminution Of rates of duty"
: contemplated by this bill will decrease instead of in
crease the revenue. On this point, will also here
quote Mr.. Clay, in 1888, who said, "it may be taken
as a rule, that the duty upon an article forms