The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-07-03
CON RES SION l..
DEFERRED DEBATE.
Housr Or RErREsrSrArlvEs, June 80, ls4t
THE TARIFF,


Mr.. BENTON having obtained the floor, remark
ed that be had always felt strong repugnance tc
participating in the discussions of this body, and
that fesling was not relieved by any Circumstance
peculiar 60 the present occasion He had reason "a
! lsc much embarrassment from the consideration tina
he was about TO attempt the discussion Of sublec
which had divided the first inieecs Of the country
for long time, and TO follow in that discussion, il
point of ume though not in the course of argument
The interesting, he would add, the respondent ef
fort of the gentleman from Vermont, Mr.. MARSH.
That gentleman had drawn with the hand of a mas
Ter most imposing picture Of the progress of tn,
mechanic arts and practical sciences, and delineated
Their agency in the development of the energy anC
enterprise Of the country. He also attributed tina
progress TO the stimulating influence OF the protec
n live policy. While he (Mr. b would not disguise
4 his admiration Of the grouping, he must dissen
from the conclusion Of the gentleman, aEd he would
venture to say that the great achievements referred
70, not attributable TO legislation, much less
10 restrictive legislation, but 10 the union of liberty
and labor which had made country the most
prosperous among nations in spite Of governmental
interposition.
He expressed his regret, too, that indisposton
had prevented him from attending the House yes
terday when his respected colleague, Mr. HUNGER.
FoRp, addressed the committee Having great con-
fdence in the Judgment experience, candor and sin
cerity of his colleague, he would have felt great
pleasure in listening TO him He desired to say that
II his views were, To any degree, in conflict
with those expressed by his colleague, they were
not designed reply-but his Impressions freely
stat d. without reference 10 the course of any indi-
yidual member of the House. He would here make
request, which, he believed, it was the custom of
the House TO grant without division. In the ear
ly part Of the present session. and while the resou-
ton Of notice to abrogate the convention Of 1918 in
relation to the Oregon territory was under conside-
ration he had mboded some views that subject
which he had failed to address to this body. What
he now asked was, permission 10 send those views
TO his constituents, who, upon questions Of public
import, had right to know even his unuttered
thoughts. Having promised thus much, he would
address himselfto the question in debate
The legitimate Office Of taxation is to supply adj
equate revenue TO enable government to discharge
the duties committed to it by the constitution.
As our own government can scarcely claim ex-
empion from the admitted propensity Of all govern
ments, to anticipate exhaust their annual resour
ces, it becomes matter Of public interest, in devil
sing Of taxation to limit the levies as near
as may be to the necessities Of the exchequer for
expenditures clearly warranted by the constitution
and consistent with frugal administration.
" IL more is collected than is sufficient for
this purpose il is history that Congress will not hes
tate to exercise doubtful powers to dispose of
the surplus. The deposlte act-that most disas-
trous of l836--is an instance strongly corrob-
oratve of this assertion. IL further proof were
necessary it could be found in the thousand schemes
that have, from time to time, occupied the attention
of Congress, have trumphed for brief hour and
have finally fallen into disrepute /, is the expe-
rience of this day that with present or prospective
SURPRISES locality, by process Of combination be-
comes nationality, and fifty projects rolled together
in one bill are irresistible, when it is more than
probable that any of them on its Individual
merits could not obtain a majority.
Would the national representation dare to part-
cpate in the scraRbe at the treasury of the nation
for local Improvements, if its responsibility were
perfect, or the constituent body understood the
process and its consequences
In theory our government is responsible 1t was
designed by its trainers to be equal, and the great
majority of the people desire that it should be
cheap. iii has in any degree become irresponsi-
BILE, or unequal, or profuse, 1t may be question
whether its denquencIes in these respects have not
resulted, in the main, from the deceptive form in
which its measures of taxation have been moulded
Without attempting any particular examination
OF this question: at this time, 1t may be proper to
observe, generally, that tariff in any form hereto
fore adopted, is a masked tax, not easily explicabIe
in its operation by those who bear it, and not I'M
like the devices of hereditary rulers to fleece the
public without its knowledge.
The taxing power Of this government is plenary
When reminded that in 1915 it raised
over $50, 100000 from the customs, and nearly
Sl20000 600 by direct taxes and excuses it is diff
cult to resist the conclusion that its control over the
private property and industry of the nation is as alb
solute as that of unlimited parliament.
The only way to avoid the evils consequent upon
the exercise of such formidable power is for the
people to compel the government to adopt the forms
oftaxaton that may be easily understood, and to hold
their representatives to strict accountability in ex-
penditures.
Even this precaution may fail. Ifthe discretion
OF Congress as to the objects of expenditure is the
only limit Of its power, it is quite possible that the
rights Of property and labor may require strong.
or safeguard IN an amendment of the constitution.
The present mode of taxation is by a tariff of du-
ties of mixed character; some protective some rev.
ha nrntn or fa,t,,s
mating. II is proposed by the Committee of WAYS
and Means to substitute for this scale of duties
looking to revenue as the chief object.
The main arguments presented in favor of the
existing system, as have been able to gather them
from the debate may be reduced to these general
propositions:
First. The protection of domestic labor against
the competition of the cheaper labor of foreign
countries.
Second. The provision of home market for do.
meshc - particularly agricultural productions
Third. The prevention of undue Importation of
foreign products, and the equalization of the exports
and imports.
There many other arguments adduced, of less
plausible import, but it is believed they all more
or less subsidiary to one the other of those emu
merated.
First, as to the protection ofAmerican labor The
object naturally commends itself to favor, but does
the measure effect the object If it does motif it
S"h 10 shoWh ndt greater IL by
1t than is avoided-the measure must be condemned.
Names cannot alter things; should they be per-
United to usurp the Office of reality.
Besides, this doctrine of protection hath about it
an occasional circumstance of suspicion. Though,
by way Of distinction and disguise denominated
American it is Of foreign origin. 1t is the child Of
arbitrary systems. Its achievements too as define
ated by friends, too marvellous for an age of
common sense and remind one Of the celebrated leap
in Rhodes. al don't much like that white heap von-
der" was the suggestion Of prudence wel-ma-
tured by contact with the world as it is Modern
rulers, whether arbitrary, legitimate, or elective
have found it convenient if not necessary to dis.
guise their exacons from their subjects or citizens
IN comely habilments. Their most oppressive
impostons are made under pretext of the public
good. The system of commercial restriction being
one Of their devices its transfer TO this country, in
spite OF the old alien law, and its rebaptsm
not sufficient to remove the faint of its natter
nifty.
When the wolf proposed to the sheep to put Of