The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1852-09-22
ter mature it, and add such amendments as may be found

that il ha, been under discussion We are now at bah
past six o'clock in the evening and we have not ad.
onrned for dinner. wish II TO be borne IN mind that
This discussion has been with the friends Of the bill prin
cipally and il cannot be charged might be the infer
from remark which fell IRON the honorable sena-
tor from Connecticut, Mr. SMITH, that those opposed 70
the bill had occupied the time The friends OF the bill
have occupied the time OF the Senate in this discussion
For have been disposed to sit silently in my scat.
and when the bill matured TO form my own judgment
upon IT, not upon the speeches OF Others but upon what
the bill contained, and then give my vote upon i.
Sir the session Is lar advanced that is time
that engaged upon the appropriation bills and
think that Tomorrow we ought to take them up and
20 on with them. whether this bill be disposed Of
The bill should be defeated those who have aided in
It's defeat must bear the responsibility The honorable
senator from Connecticut has introduced political
naller into this debate He undertook TO discuss The
bill OF last year, and the circumstances connected
with It's defeat He undertook to discuss the veto Of
iormer bill, introducing topics which ought TO be re-
ped to; and the path which he pointed out fol-
lowed, be must have known, when he went into these
topics, that discussion OF them would occupy very
considerable part of the residue OF the session. I was
proessed friend OF the bill who introduced topics of
that kind What his purpose in doing SO Was il
to advance his bill! Why, any could have that
if that discussion followed up the bill must fail,
and that its would be owing only TO the orbear
ance OF those who opposed IT.
| desire to say word on the amendment which il is
proposed TO regard test question to the general
policy proposed by river and harbor bills. protest.
against any such conclusion from the vote that shall
give. shall vote against the amendment for other con-
sideraions think that the measure contemplated in
The amendment will effect the object proposed--hat
s the removing OF obstacles to commerce. u conem-
plates granting the consent Of Congress- in advance TO
such measures as the States may propose. 10 such laws
as the States may pass imposing duties on tonnage.
Having made that grant OF power, would be within the
ability OF OF two large States having great CONNER
| ela capitals, like New York for instance, by slight
Duty very large revenue without burdening
lncumbering commerce. thus obtaining much more than
would be necessary tor any purposes OF river and harbor
improvements; while on the other hand there are many
small ports requiring greater expenditures aud yet of
general Importance which, by raising The requisite rev.
III
it that while il would be competent tor US
Al the States should forward and present laws upon
the subject, there would be diculy 10 granting the
power advance For that reason shall against
the ame idment
Mr. HALE | do no, intend to occupy the time of
the Senate more than few moments But there is
pnncipe which TO be exceedingly vicious. and
whcn been advocated by two senators. and
against which | feel bound to protest, and which.
t,ink, the honorable senator from Michigan, when
ne looks into il, will not feel bound TO susain ] am
in favor OF this amendment. am not one Of those
ready 10 enter into any great combination TO carry
either the bill or the amendment; or believe that
the bill, alter the amendment which Is TO he Of
fered by the senator from New York, (Mr. SEwARD,l
providing Tor an an appropriation Tor Gslisnm, snail os
DelDg a general system think II will then take in
hirty out OF the thiry-one States. New Hampshire
will be let out. and she will the bill The honor-
able senator from Illinois suggests to me that New amp.
ste ought to be content inasmuch as she has been
membered 10 other ways. tLaughterl
M. DOUGLAS | wish that point to be distinctly
understood. When the senator from New Hampshire
complaining, some time ago, thatEew hampshire
mad lost member of Congress, suggested that State
having two candidates Tor the presidency oil whom
would certainly be elected ought TO be satisfied Laugh
teri
Mr HALE confess that so far as that is any con-
ISOLATION for me, | do not appreciate i. Laughter 1t
requires OF that faith which is the evidence OF
things not than possess make any consolation
out OF it, But, TO get back to the subject. wish say
that there has been sentiment advanced which want
the honorable senator from Michigan TO look at for
moment, because think isa vicious one and that
n, t.s N Al.
OF tonnage duties the increased burden goes upon
the producer OF the products Now, that is the
gumen, which the advocates OF high protective tariff
have always used to reconcile the people OF this country
it, They have said that the duties that imposed
upon imported manufactures ought not to disturb the peo-
p for the producer in England bears the burden and it
does 20 upon the consumer. think the honorable
senator will endorse that statement is just as ap
pcable the wheat OF Illinois 10 The caicoes OF Man
up the chcanery OF business legislation, you will
find that in the end The consumer pays the tax IL is one
OF the inevitable laws OF trade, established by all expe
enoe and cannot get nd OF IT, The price OF flour in
Chicago is four dollars barrel and il six dollars in
Dover What constitutes the dderence' Why. the two
dollars which the consumer IN Dover has TO pay are the
PROFIT and the expense and freight and charges attendant
upon that barrel OF -four in its passage from the large city
oil Chicago TO the humble village Of Dover. Th. Ia ac-
cording TO law Of trade; and il will be so always. The
asoy upon which II is attempted TO be proved tbatahe
producer pays the ought TO be exposed and resisted
The honorable senator from Connecticut, Mr.. Sarrnl
fell into The same error IN regard 70 our own produce
exactly reversed it, Nov, that is not true Men may
change; parties may changer and platforms may change
but this law OF trade remains the same and II will re-
main the And II is jus, as well TO look at the mat
ter il really is Those who the of the
produce the West have pay these charges, and there
is no use OF coneeang the fact
There is other faacy which wish TO expose, and
then shall SIT down for II is unpleasant work 10 ex-
pose faacies particularly when there are many 10 be
exposed and little time TO do in The senator from
Connecticut, in speaking Of the operation OF his system
applied to the large cities OF Baltimore Boston, New
York, aHd Philadelphia. said that they paid very largely
into that fund.- out Of which the general expenses OF the
government for Notifications, rivers and harbor, and
other purposes, came. But the rule applies there
that apples 10 the wheat sent from Chicago II is not
New York. il s not the monaires OF whom the senator
from Connectcu, spoke who pay and on whom this bur-
den falls Bot the inevitable law OF trade which
conpes the OF hour upon the board to pay
the price OF transportation, with all the taxes, tonnage
duties &c. conpels the in the West to pay the
duties upon those imports which 60 into Boston, New
York and Philadelphia.
For these reasons think that these gentlemen have
TAX On wrong view OF the operation OF this system.
confess that il strikes my mind favorably cannot
any great injustice that going TO operate by H. am
friend of the bill. am not rab,d, ranng friend but
rational friend OF it and would not enter into that
cited state OF feeling which the honorable senator from
Connecticut and the senator from Illinois displayed.
tried obtain The floor when the senator from Connec
tcui got through and il from impulse that rises
in my mind to sec whether could not practically bring
10 bear some OF the moderation that attends the conser-
vaiism OF third party 10 inierpose between these two
contestants fLaughler.1 | about 10 ask with the