Wheeling times and advertiser. [volume] (Wheeling, Va. [W. Va.]) 1839-1849, 1846-07-18

fOR THE TIMES.
The Argus of the l. 9th inst. argues that the
proposed tariff bill of Sir Robert Walker, is a
good one because the duties on wines are in
creased aud the duties on Salt decreased. 1
want nothing better 10 prove that the Argus
Is opposed TO thc principles nd protective tar
III than thus hind al argument II he as mot
opposed tU protection let HIM saw So He has
been asked aud repeatedly osketi--nay. even
rhdlcnsed-to ap0r himself on his Head. Bu,
repeat the Iemark, that this talk about the
duties on wihes and salt proves his hostility 10
protection. eld his Willingness to deceive and
humbug his readers. In iaying duties on wines
no body ani no party has ever pretended tina,
the principle oi protection was seriously i'm.
vowed The manufacture OF wines i'm thi,
country issu limited aud 50 small as TO exclude
all zeal pretense OF protection when arranging
the duties On the article But has the Argus
heard OF any complaints from the wings and
tie friends at a protective tariff. because the
duty on vines and brdndies are increased.
The friends of protection do not complain
oi the Locoiocos Tor raising the duties or i'm
crcasng protection. what we complain of i,
that the Locoioco bill of Walker reduces the
duties on the goods which we manufacture
aud ~ depTiVvs our workmcn Of protection
to thclr lslsour, and subjects freemen Ia the
rulnous atj lnisc,icvous consequences of com.
polling tlIoHi To compete with the slaves and
slarvlinss ~ the mUnarcis OF the old world
BIT tie Argus boasts tll1t this bill reduces the
duty on salt. and 80 Is favorable To the labor.
aug man. This Is mere begging OF the ques
uon, protection lswrong IN principle then
the Argus Is right, but if protection is right
IN principle then the Argus is wrong; and
whether i, is right or wrong to protect am ar
| ticle with view TO protection. depends upor
the iact whether our people are engaged il
manufacturing TO an extent Justly to make i
1 AN object OF protection. But we do manuIac
iure salt most extensively, witness the exten
slre manufacture of salt in Pcnnsylvania. Nir
gina and New York and salt is am article O
such prime necessity that no wise man woul,
ever think OF leaving us dependant on foreign
ers Tor our supply. IL was TO secure the vot,
OF The New York locoiocos to Walkers meta
rlous bill that the enemies of protection wer
compelled To consent 10 enact protection L
S2me extent on salt. The bill as reported b,
walker aud the enemies of protection, Ian,
no duty on salt. This was of course injurious
TO the aborers at our own various salt works
and the Locos of New York not being vii
ling TO injure themselves, though willing e
nouSh to inJure others. would not vote Tor
! biil which took away all protection from th,
makers ol salt These fellows were willin,
l To sacrilce the iron interests of PENNSYLVANIA
ana Tue Woollen and cotton interests OF IN,
other States, if they could only save hei,
salt, and tlie free traders of the South iindin,
that they could, by promising office AM
by using the lash aud whip of party, bring il
the locos OF Ohio to the support of their bill
and that nothing then remained 10 SECURE tc
them The destruction Of the tariff of 1912. but
The support OF the Locos of New York. who
went tor protection TO their oicn salt makers
aud nothing else, concluded il was better TO
yield TO them, and so they turned ia and vo-
ted for a duty on salt. And let me here say.
that II The manufactures of Wheeling will on
~ pat a smart sPr'iRkiiHg of salt on thu tail
OF The Argus, and especially if they will add
Iit'le silver and gold dust along with it, they
ran catch the Argus and make il bawl louder
Tor the tariff, than ever certain lamily's gold
made it bawl FOR Thompson.