Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1848-07-27
For the Green Mountain Freeman.
FREE TRADE.
[REPLY TO "s.," BY A. H.B.l
"COme and let as reason together"
NUMBER 4.

NUMBER 4.
After writing thus much, the Freeman of June Is.
containing the conclusion of the reply of S. came to
hand He begins in this No. by quotation of mine
of April e. and asks care the facts in this extract
stated to show the operations of tariff" answer
No. They are stated to show that the rich have no
need of tariff. They have power enough and inAu-
ence enough without it. and therefore to add to that
power and influence by means of tariff is both I'M
just and oppressive to the poor. This was my idea
when writing the "extract" My remarks in this con-
necon were also of general tenor not intended tore.
fer to the United States in particular but to the con-
don Of the poor ,CRerever found well to the dis
position and power of the rich. And in speaking of
tariffs, had in view their generally principle and not
so much the application Of to any one country.
In the commencement of a preceding paragraph, l
supposed an equal distribution property to every in
dividual under our government" 1t should have been
"any instead of sour" to correspond with my general
design. I did not say that tariff would 'tie poor
men up to choice of starving or working" in 'this
country" any other; but simply that many poor men
are actually IN this condition never thought that
tariff was the only cause and there did not assign it
as the cause, but simply spoke of it as cause, which
helps to make and keep them poor I do not contend
that man should pay his hands so much "that hey
should grow rich and not himself" l SAID eff laws
were just and men were just and looked equally to the
benefit of all classes-every man would receive Just
compensation for labor, and every one who labored
would have competency" &c. Could say more?
Could say less? Is there chance to wrong any one
I;,,+ &c
Not wrong certainly. did not say that the laborers
would get 'rich" but that they 'would have compe-
tency" And pray, who will say they should not have
it? said also that if the rich 'paid just compensa
ton it would be utterly impossible to grow richer by
This means" e. by the poor mans labor | ask no
more than justice to the poor man. make objec-
ton to the fact that "rich men grow richer" provided
they do not a0rOng any If they can get rich by
other means, & have no doubt they CAM let them
do so.
S. says that "The south want tariff that will de-
fray the expenses of the government and prevent their
slaves being taxed" Just so. The south bears rule
and will have its own way, like spoiled child. 1t has
grown up by ruling its fostering protector the North;
and is not the least disposed to renquish her power
The South Meier will consent to be taxed and never
,Ou pan tar on her SLAVES. Mark this. They will
abolish slavery or dissolve the Union first The only
way to settle this question is to make an issue-tara
taxation or free trade and direct taxation slavery OF
no slavery We must get rid of tariffs altogether
believe we must press them as means to get rid Of
slavery. And as preparatory step to this ISSUE the
friends of liberty should examine the tariff in all of its
bearings, and be prepared to give it up. Those who
remain with the Wing party in the vain hope of see
ing the protective policy triumph, grasping at
shadow and will never reach the substance. Thost
who think that high protection be sustained
t in the United States, are wretchedly mistaken.
"Flucuation Is destructive of industrial interests"
e grant, and as long as we have tariffs shall hay
r fluctuations" s. cannot deny that very much of tn
fuctuaton in our past history has resulted directly for