New Orleans daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1851-1866, 1857-09-01

HON. MILES TAYLOR.
his votes n congrs.. sgalnst Sugar.

HON. MILES TAYLOR.
His Votes In Congress against Sugar.
Messrs. Editors. The Pioneer of Assumption, pub
ished at Mr. Taylors door, is out in editorial in
defence Of his votes iii Congress to reduce the duty
on foreign sugar Since the publication bears inter
nal evidence Of being er cathedra, it shall be re-
speetfnIy considered by " Americas
The facts in the case are not disputed on either
side. It is not denied that Mr.. Taylor did actually
vote to reduce the duty sugar while it is admitted
also, that he voted against MI. Campbels bill, which
wanted to keep the duty as before at 80 per cent.
Thus, the facts being fully conceded, are left to
contemplate the record, which shows Mr.. Taylor to
have voted one way when his speech had led US to
expect him to vote another
What does Mfr. Taylor say in justification of all
this He tells that unless he had voted to reduce
the duty the whole would have been taken off This
is grave mistake for it is no where to be found in
the record! What members may have said in their
speeches, and what members may have done in their
votes, are very different matters, and Mr. Taylor's
votes and speeches form an illustration The record
shows no action to have been taken in the House
to remove the duty-none whatever On the con
trary, the House was decidedly opposed to the re.
moval, and even went far as to show its opposi-
ton to all reduction of the duty on sugar and it
declared its opposition several votes and by large
najorities That there may baye been some indi-
yiduals, it is true who wanted the whole duty taken
off, as Mr.. Taylor says, and they may have been
:" Black Republican," "Know-N othings," besides
but they met with no encouragement in the House
but through the votes of Mr. Taylor and his friends
On every occasion Mr.. Taylor voted decidedly yea
when the question was against sugar. and decidedly
no when it was in its favor. Strange as this may
appear to us, nevertheless it is true on the Holy
Bible. The record shows it from beginning to end,
and challenge denial Of it.
And when the House adopted Mr.. Campbells bill,
which omitted all allusion to sugar and thereby left
the duty before at 80 per centun Mr. Taylor voted
aganstit. Yet be now says it was " uictory.' He
says it was more than rictory" because it passed
the House and did not touch sugar-but he voted
against it. Therefore | agree with Mr. Taylor fully
that it was indeed "a victory" and !" more than a
victory" not only over the Black Republicans, but a
victory over Mr.. Taylor's vote too!
This bill being now sent to the Senate, it was there
the reduction of duty sugar originated the House
never originated it. It was returned to the House
thus amended, and then Mr. Taylor votes forit. Why
in the name of common sense he voted against it at
first and why he voted for it at last, are questions
which remain unanswered, nor has he attempted to
answer them!
How did you imagine the existence Of the horrid
and formidable opposition to sugar. when on looking
around you, you must have felt secure in your own
body Of large majority your side of the question
The House had never sgniied its willingness even
to reduce the duty far less to repeal all duty until
the final vote to agree to the Senates amendment Of
Campbells bill, for which you voted. The record
declares all this Where then was the cause Of you,
nervous alarm! There was no cause, and if there
was cause for such deep apprehension, why did you
eoncede to reduce the duty at all, when the record
shows you could have resisted successfully that
duction in the House, had you joined the opposition
to it! Butyou would always vote for the reduction
The rock would as soon fly from its firm base, as you
would desert your fixed resolution. You cannot shut
your eyes to these facts. There they are. They are
facts, and you know them to be facts
have but adverted to your votes in Congress
Being one of your constituents, it is my right al
all times! I have extenuated nothing, nor have
I set down aught in malice. I cannot, therefore
number myself among the "traducers" of youl
course, If there are any. 1t is enough for me to ex
anime your political acts, without personalities
This shall do freely, and endeavor to show success
fully to the people how much yon have erred in you
regard for their interests by your votes in Congress
have never intimated that you would openly sacri
flee them. / could hardly believe this. But tina
you did serious damage to the interests of our suga
planters by your votes, cannot be doubted for on
moment by any unprecedented mind. ANERIcUs.
l