The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1851-05-22


Secession and Smuggling.
Mr.. Senator BUTbER, of South Carolina, en-
joys the reputation of heightened and honor
able gentleman; and his speech before the late
convention of the delegates of the Southern
Rights Associations of South CAROLINA fully
greet that he shares to such an extent in the
prevailing infatuatlon of his State, though he
is not the man most likely to remain unaffected
IN a general excitement. We are perhaps
rather surprised that he has failed to go full
lengths with the immediate secessionists or
that he is disposed to raise any remonstrance
against their proceedings. But with the
good sense and conclusiveness of his Objec-
tons to separate secession, it seems to us
that every reasonable man in his State ought to
be satisfied. 1t seems to us that ON the case as
he has presented it he is fully warranted in the
strong language he uses when he says 81
make the broad remark, that there is not a
public man in South Carolina, sensible of a re-
sponsible trust, and foreseeing the inevitable
consequences of separate secession, that would
put the State on the trial of that experiment,
if the act were to operate exclusively on the
State ITSELF"
Another point of MIR: BUFFERS speech de-
serves attention. In the spirit of a rather OBJ
lique and oss-grained morality, Mr.. RHErr
exhibited to the commercial interest of the
State the advantages that Gin the event of Sc
cession) they could derive from an active and
lucrative system Of smuggling. "Ten per
cent. duties on imports" Mr.. RHETT thought,
would enable Charleston to undersel the
United States twenty per cent; that this
would make secession profitable to the farmers
and planters, while their merchants, with the
aid of brisk smuggling trade along the South
Carolina frontier, would do better business
than ever. Twenty per cent, "said Mr..
RHETT, exultingly, and with as keen a sense
of the temptations Of the almighty dollar
as ever stimulated a pedlar in contraband
laces twenty per cent. will not stop goods
on an imaginary frontier. 1t gives immense
activity to bales and boxes, as well as to
mems wits 1t will not destroy our mer-
chants. 1t will make our trade pretty nearly
as free in going out as in entering our State"
Such were the hucksterng inducements held
out to men who were understood to have as
ssmbled to devise remedies for high political
grievances, in the sentiment of an outraged
and indignant people. Only ten per cent. du-
ties, and what could be made by smuggling
thrown in! We might be surprised at this, if
we could be surprised at any infatuation in a
gentleman who thinks he can reconcile with
his oath as Senator the attempt to excite
United States.
This sentiment Of Mr. RHETT was treated
by Mr.. BUTLER with the scorn that it was well
calculated to excite in any man of reflection
and honor. We annex his observations on the
argument in favor of secession, drawn from the
idea of "thrifty smuggling"
at s contended that under the operations Of free
trade more would come in and in come way or
e other ii would find its way out. Now, if South
Carolina was n separate sovereignty, with a
free port, there is no doubt she might attract
a greater commerce than now comes to her ports
provided il could find a market out of her bor-
ders. But could it find its way out without vio-
lating the revenue laws of other nationsi II
sweet We might introduce as much com
merce please, and send 1t to Savannah
river. under what some would call brisk free
trade, but what, in the estimation of others
whose rights would be involved, would be re-
'garded as smuggling carried across the borders
in violation OF their laws. IL would be an &C
knowledgcd right of the Federal Government to
regard South Carolina as a stranger and TO place
her commerce going into the ports of the States
{ in the Union under embargo, and, so far as
concerns Georgia and North Carolina, to regard
'as ports of entry those places only which com
municate by water with the ocean, such as
Savannah and Wilmington. That Government
might not establish ports at Augusta and Char
: otte, or the North Carolina line. Under this
view, commerce could come into Charleston;
but how could it get out without the pro-
! cess Of smuggIing' At the interior points in
dictated it could not, without smuggling.
then put the proposition, would capitalists
import goods into Charleston in opposition to
the Federal Government, under the supposi-
ton that they could make profit on them
through the operations of thrifty smuggling
: But in a commercial the State might be dis
posed to take all advantages, and it might be
to the interest Of Georgia and North Carolina to
have ports of entry at Augusta and near Char
lotto. What then? Could goods pay ten per cent.
in Charlotte and forty at these places, in competi.
'tion with trade through Savannah and Will
inington paying duty of thirty or forty per
cent? Certainly not. will not dwell on this
view of the subject any longer, az do my friends
the justice to say that they have much higher
aim-one whose dignity Of purpose may give
{ heir movements different character"