Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1849-01-04


and invested with power. The delegates of this
power, for the sake of the ready payment Of their
salaries, as Presidents, Senators, Representatives
&c, prefer tariff to direct taxation, for these
reasons. Direct taxes require time for colIec-
ton, and might be, yes are, Objectionable to the
wealth which clothes these officers with power.
tariff tax goes directly in the first place, 10 the
pockets of wealth. If Il does not pay duties, its
goods are confsh Il Wealth must, and does
pay, before i it caRsell goods and get the prof
its it aims after. "-Having paid the duties the
amount is added 10 the cost of the goods and
eventually wealth expects the consumer to re-
fact then that it is for the interest of importers
to pay the duties on goods immediately in order
to place them in market is a security to govern
ment and reason why it "profers a tariff on
its own account"
But pass to notice his second charge, i. e.
inaccuracy and inconsistency" To make out
his case he quotes from the following science,
leaving out the part in brackets; which, as the
reader will notice, refers back to something al
ready said as necessary qualification The
whole object of protection is to benefit the rich
at the exPGpse of the poor, las IhaUc already in
timated." q had allusion TO the motives Of those
who advocate protection. These, said, were
selfshness, the love of money" &C.,
Mark,-I did not say that this was the whole
object of tariff, but of protooti.,rr, slrnpiy.
must retort upon S. that his habit Of confcund-
ing has led him to mistake my reasoning" And
81 beg of him to understand that when speak
of" protection, make distinction between it
and tariff. He has " COMPOUNDED" the two.-
The term tariff embraces both revenue and pro.
lection as genus embraces the species. A tar
if may, in the abstract, be made up of either
alone, though such tariff would not find sup.
porters. Now then, "what becomes of his Imy7
assertion that tariffs, (mark did not say protec-
tion,) are the subject of bargain between gov
ernment and rich menu Answer. In the bar.
gain or compromise government looks out fol
revenue, rich men for protection. And in the
adjustment of tariff rates, the great question has
always been, how can revenue be secured aCitl
protection, or vice versa. And here comes up {
multitude of conflicting interests from all part
of the country each clamorous for high protec
ton, and each jealous that others will get mort
than itself. The result, invariably, is a compro
mise" There is no other possible way TO settl
tariff.
But he says that shave shown that protec
ton does answer other ends than beneftting tn
rich" How? lie ascribes home manufac
lures and the growth of villages and cities t
protection" Well, ifI did, showed this ais
was for the benefit of the rich. Who own hes
cities and villages? Is it not the rich? D
they not lay out the land which they purchase
for mere song, into building lots, and bull
houses for rent or sale at enormous prices
r it not fact that with the growth of these cite
their real estate is consequently increasing
} value, and that the rich are in this way GROWN
richer while the poor who cannot own a tent
ment have to hire of them? Look at the thron
of poor aborers who have been seducod by ia
4 acious hopes of being able to better their COZ
, dtion, to leave their homes where they were a
! readakoing well, 4 go to these cities 4 villa!
. how many are suffering for want of Il
.cal comforts of life, and tell me
uq better off for protec
hown thai -protei
nd forf 1a5or."-
ersng the coul
Eyed in maniac