New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1858-05-26


way with Lawrence, S!oHe & Co.. and was solemn
ly assured in reply tina, he bad not
5. He &C had 10 knowledge, no belief no sus.
picon, that any money was psid whether to Mem
bers Of Congress TO others, 20 procure tne modi
fcaton of the Wool duty, OF the passage OF the
Tariff Of 1857, down TO the appearance of Law
renee. Stone & Co.'S expose after their bank
ru,tcv. some tine in November or December last.
The Report, it appears, states that no testimony
was given by any one inconsistent with thi'' We
confidently add that, if Mes'rs Store and Matte'on
were questioned on the points covered by the above
they could not 60 otherwise than cobirm /! IN every
particular.
As to Mr.. Mattesons suggestions 70 Dir. Stone
whatever may have been their precise drlit' we
might regard them more seriously If the testimony
sdduced on former investigation did not show
that il i.-or we will more safely say rds-hls IN
1etsrste habit to treat legislative questions IN that
way His favoIite, his standing metaphor Is The >
He writes 10 warn his friend and constituent w.
r. Johnson Of machinations of outsiders against
his interest and suggests the expediency
Of cutting UP ard dividing certain factory
stock among those cOrmorants. lie tries 70
tell Reyerdy johnson that certain bill IS lost De-
yord remedy, and his way of stating 1t (accoroiog
10 bis own version is You couldn't pass
your bill for 500 0O0," or $780, 900 wouldn't
now pass it"-and so on. We presume then,
II at we ought to take his suggestions to Mr. Stone
as compliment, implying something of this sort:
eff tie special and Jealous support of The Journal
of Commerce is worth to you units of thousands
that of THE TRIBUNE would be worth tens OF
Z" thousands" We do not, of course, dispute the
estimate, but We protest against any such mode
of attesting his appreciation. 1t is not more Of
fensiye TO us than dscreditable to him, Member
of Congress dscOursing of measures on which he
is soon to act as representative of the People.
The Editor thus called before Committee,
through the acts Of others Of which be had no
knowledge over which he had no control, has been,
ever since he was old enough to write, Jealous
and active advocate of Protection to Home Manu-
features He was of course hostile to the Tariff OF
ls46 and especially to so much Of 1t as related to
Wool ard Woolens, which he felt and proclaimed
from the first to be inevitably ruinous to our Wooden
manufacture. To impose duty of thirty per cent.
on all Wool imported, yet allow that same Wool to
CT me in as Woolens at duties of thirty, twenty
and twenty per cent, was to expose the still young
| ard insecure Wooden interest Of this country to
gradual decline and ultimate prostration. So be-
lieyiDg, he has at all times advocated a
revision and modification of these duties, and IA
vored the change of last year, though he would
have much preferred its being made in another
way-ncreasing the duties on WOolens rather
than decreasing or abolisbing those on Wool. But
none of those connected with the Wooden or any
other Manufacturing interest ever offered to pay or
lend or give him anything even in days when bis
necessities were far more urgent than they have
recently been; and no one ever insulted him by a
suggestion that, in his Editorial advocacy Of Pro-
lection bis zeal could be stimulated or his efficiency
increased by money. Messrs. Lawrence, Stone &
| Co. certainly evinced more sagscity in their uni
formly, respectful course toward him than in thei
| questionable operations through WalcOtt & Co.