Martinsburg gazette. [volume] (Martinsburg, Va. [W. Va.]) 1833-1855, 1846-06-18

the present tariff, which yielded more than
T $4,000 900 Now what does our profound
Secretary Of The Treasury propose to do to I'M
prove the revenue7 Mark III He proposes
10 reduce the tariff 10 an average Of about ~
per cent which experience proves, he says,
viii give the highest rerenac, and yet this very
report shows the fact that a ~ per cent. tariff
in 1872 Welded only Sl2,1S00 900, while the
present tariff last year yielded 81 ,52e Coz
Thus, according 70 the Secretary, ttreire Is
more Tim tcenty- seren' A new discovery IN
arithmetic The new s.frce trade" system oil
finance says, "reduce the duties to increase the
revenue" doctrine not only urged upon
Congress by the Secretary and sthe Union,
his organ. but BIZ all the advocates Of this new
tariff Oh this floor. .Red9ce the duties 10 IN
crease the reyenue," Can any thing be more
absurd urged 10 the face Of the Fact, proved
by every official report on the finances from
the foundation Of the Government, that the
revenue has always gone up and gone down
as the tariff has gone up or gone DOWN.
Yet we are told ssreduce the duties TO increase
the revenue.v Are no duties fhe source Of
revenue and would il not be just as SEN
s;ble to say "reduce the revenue to increase
the revenue 2" Duties and revenue are con-
vertible terms. You want twenty-five mil-
lions from the tarifI-that sum must be raised,
no matter how YOU impose the duties and
why not so arrange them as 10 protect and sus-
tain your own national industry, thus making
taxation itself prolific Of benefits and blessings
to the people. :,
! On the subject Of the revenue, he would
venture to predict that il the system Of meas
lures recommended by the Secretary-the re-
! duction of the tariff, the change from specific
TO ad valorem duties, the Subueasury, and
| The warehousing svstem--were adopted, the
revenue next year would mol be half the
amount it will be this year. Mark the predIc-
ton. mot half"
! Who could deny the fact that with the raising
of the tariff. the revenue increased. and with
/ lis diminution the revenue fell of, till at last
under 20 per cent, which the Secretary con
sidered the very beau ideat-the very periec
/ ton of revenue systematic nett revenue
sank down TO less than thirteen millions Z
There was his theory-and there, alongside OF
it, stood his proof; and his proof utterly sub
verted his theory. Did 1t prove that reducing
duties to % per cent. raised the revenue TO its
highest 'point2 Just the reverse. 1t reduced
it to the very lowest point of Depression
While his theory said that 20 per cent. would
give the ''highest," his proof showed that it
gave the sslowest."
! And was not this a pretty time TO select for
the reduction of duties Now, when we had
Just entered into a war, whose duration no
man could predict or calculate? When we
went into war in 1872 we doubled the duties ::
now il was proposed to cut them down one
half What consummate proof of political
wisdom and financial ability was here exhibit
ed
There was another thing Of which the tariff
was an index, and that was the public prosper
| tn. When the people were poor they could
! not afford to consume Injuries; imports fell of,
and down went the revenue But when du-
ties were high and domestic competition was
excited, agriculture having abundant markets,
and labor iull and profitable employment the
people became prosperous they lived in com
/ fort; they could afford to pay for fine goods
and luxuries-and up went the revenue. Re
duce the tariff, break up American industry,
and you clothed the people in rags, and your
treasury became bankrupt. The national req
caue and the national prosperity went up and
down together, and were always coincident
with national protection.
Mr. S. went for high duties, and for impo-
sing them on the luxuries of the rich, and not
on the necessaries Of the poor. Encourage
American manufactures, and while ON the one
hand the poor man found plenty of employ
ment, on the other he got his goods cheap
/ He could clothe himself decently for a mere
trihe He wanted no foreign commodities but
his tea and coffee, and they Were free. The
poor man could now buy cloth for a fall suit
! from head to foot, for less than one dollar, of
substantial American manufacture. He had
himself worn in this hall garment Of tins
same goods, and il was 50 much admired that
more than dozen members had applied TO
| him for similar garments; and he had supplied
Senators and others; yet we are told the tariff
taxes and Expresses the poor. Put high reve-
nue. duties on vines, on brandles, on silks, on
laces, on jewellery. on all that the rich alone
consumed. and which the poor man did not
want. Take off the duties from the poor mans
necessaries, and give him high wages for his
work-that was the way 10 ditfuse happiness
and prosperity among the great body of the
people. That was sound democratic policy
He was for lifting up the poor. He was for
''leyelling upward" for increasing the domes-
TIC comfort Of cur own laboring population
the true democracy of the country. The rich
could pay, and ought to be made to pay, and
should pay the poor man could not. MIR. 5.
went for the system which elevated the poor
man in the scale of society; that promoted
Icquality that essential element in all free Gov
by hlting up the lower classes TO their level
The gentleman from Alabama and his friends
agocated policy which would have precisely
the opposite effect Their system would truly
make the erich richer and the poor poorer. p
The gentleman advocated a system whose di-
rect and undeniabe tendency was to destroy
competition, and thereby give a monopoly TO
the heavy capitalists. He would benefit those
very "miIlonaireS" of whose presence here
he complained so loudly.
The gentleman went for free trade for open.
ing our ports to the manufacturers of the
world for bringing in freely the pauper pro-
auctions Of Great Britain, to overwhem the
rising prosperity Of our own poor but indus
trious citizens. He went for crushing Amer
lean enterprise grinding down American Ia
Dor, and putting his countrymen on a footing
with the very sweepngs of the poor houses of
Europe; aud would, in the end bring them
down 10 their political, as well as their pecuni-
AIRY and moral condition. MIR. S. was for
cherShing American labor for giving it high
wages for surrounding it with the substan-
tial comforts of life. Which was the true
; friends of the PEoPLE7 And yet these "free
trade" advocates, from the Secretary down,
protested TO be the exclusive friends Of the
, In.,,,,,o,1 N,