The North-Carolinian., 1859-03-12

our people !; it is the prime source OF our wealth.
and power nation. Our cotton Is the great
motive power Of trade it is the king OF COM
merce and manufactures !; it is the currency OF
nations always in demand always redeemabie
| in silver, gold, or what you will\We ask for 1t
and our other products no protection but We
ask to be let alone. 1et sir, this great interest
OF the people is to be fettcred and burdened 10
build up much smaller one, and which is prl'i-
clpally confined to section thus repudla-
ting the principle of the greatest good to the
greafest number, that still more important
principle of equal and exact justice to all. Is
TINS, Sir, right is it justice! Will not such a
policy, in the future in the past, meet with
the indignant rebuke of the American people,
involving the party that dares advocate it in
1irretreyabRe dissolution and ruin
But, sir, it is commended by sotue of thc-uhore
Jealous of the protectionists, with more zeal
than discretion, that the duty does not enhance
the price of the article. Need this be answered
Is it not absurd upon it's face l will let the
great advocates Of protection speak for them
selves MIR. Clay, in 1888, said ::
'.In general it may be taken rule that the duty
upon article forms portion OF its price"
Mr.. Adams, as chairman of the Committee
OIL Manufactures in 1882, made report, irom
which the following extracts are taken
.sThe doctrine that duties of mpost cheaper the
price the articles upon which they are levied
to conflict with the first dictates OF common eensr 1t
is certainly contrary the natural OF things
that addition to the cost should be reduction OF
the price Of an article"
Again, sir, in the report, he says:
But the duty upon the article from abroad enabled
the domestic producer o into competition with
the importer from abroad. SO long This compet
ton continues the duty operates bounty or pre-
/ MUM to the domestic manufacturer The duty con
stitute> part OF the prce OF the whole mas o1 me
article in the market. By whom it pald: e rta nly
by the purchaser OF the article whether OF foreign or
domestic manufacture. Upon one it l. bounty up
the other a burden and repeal OF the tax must
operate equivalent reduction Of the price Of the
article. whether foreign or domestic.
. In 1924 Mr.. Webster said
ITO begin with iron. The amount of own
manufaet lures is. L think seventeen thousand tons
: The present duty the imported article is fifteen
dollars per ton and as this DUTY causes o, eoufs'
equivalent augmentato on III the price OF the home
manufacture the whole increase OF price is equal to
$40. annually. which the consumer has to pay,
above what he could supply himself at with
the and this to support business that can not
: support itself"
d Again. sir, it is urged that should not
IT only increase the present tariff, but that we
should return to specific duties. 1t is said that
l. it is the only mode by which We can prevent
!. frauds upon the revenues. Now, sir, il this
were true still it would be entitled to but little
weight, unless it could be clearly shown that
e the advantages thus derived were of more i'm
s portance aud therefore to be more regarded
than the wrongs and Injustice inflicted upon the
: taxpayer by a system of specific duties.
II A specific duty, as l understand it, is one
: that is levied upon a given class OF articles,
h without regard to valuation. For example
d we will suppose a quantity Of bI Ioadcloths i'm
e ported into the United States which were o
!, different value and ranging according to quail
ity from one to ten dollars per yard duty
# Of one dollar per yard is levied upon the whole
. SO that ten yards of the cloth at ten dollars
e would have to pay as much as and ne more
: than the article at ten dollars per pard.
~ From this it will be that were we, il
~ raising revenues to coufne ourselves to specific
Il duties, it would operate very nnequally and un
!. Justly upon the consumer. The poor man who
for want of means, would pay a tax to tn
o. Government of one hundred per cent; while
-, he who had the ability to purchase the hlghtS
h priced article, would pay duty Of only ten pc
~ cent 1t is universally conceded, that IN layn!
ot IL direct tax upon the people, 1t should be a
g. in proportion to the value Of property and n
man would dare assert before the people. tina
"a the man who owned small tract OF land wort
w. $780, should pay much tax upon 1t as
H. who had one worth So 900 900. He would nc
~. do it because, in the first place, it would b
r, wholly impracticabe, the tax might reach
~ point so as to render the poor man utterly un;
re BILE to pay it and in the next place he wouI
w. not do it, because 1T would be obviously unJus
ON and oppressive.
ba Now sir in laying imports. which are but
ID substitute for direct taxes, and which are. an
oo must be- paid by the consumer, suppose it Wi
Le not be denied, they ought to be SO levied as
to approximate nearly as possible this unlVe
ar sally admitted prllciple III ulFecI taAatioh
Ia then this be So it is in direct violation OF til
is principle to levy specific upon articles witho
ed regard to quality or value to require him wi
av is only able to purchase al article OF small va
Nv ue to pay the same tax to the government
I'll; he who with more means, was able ana tho"S
ex- prope- to buy an article of the highest pri
i'm and best quality in short, to require 'ne III
who has q tract of land worth only sooo,
of pay Just as much as his more wealthy heiSho'
ich with a tract worth s. 100000.
to To avoid this, ard to apply the pr'ncipie
;v. Just laid down. Of taxation IN proportion
n;s property, the Democratic party has lnhu5u
nd the present policy of an I'D c~<orem tar'n' VIM
rar levies the tax in proportion to the value OF
1 article so that the lower the goods the 10"
nd will be the tax.
;u' ;o' The next question that claims our attent'
",l u is the present tariff. 1t is urged by many
his are opposed to both protection and specinc
, r ties, that there exists a present necessity ior
,n reyi isal and Increase. The Secretary OF
'oe' Treasury. in his report to Congress, est.ma
"a" that the total deficit in the Treasury lof
pu' H. fiscal year ending 3Oth OF June, looo,
NJ amount to 81 7,9l4, SIG. This sum, as the Sec
snr tary very properly remarks, should oe PROVE
ou' for in some way, either by an increase o'
tariff. or by cutting down the eApeho't"
etz9 Here the alternative is presented ana
.eded ouestion as to which course we shall ADOPT
but comes of serious moment to our cohSli'ue'
esent aud demands at our hands the most serious
wv, earnest consideration. 1t is queSt'o" y, /
'need ING the taxes upon the people, OF t"creas