Nashville patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1858-1860, 1859-01-15
Gen jackson VS.. Gen. jackson.

Gen. JACKSON was ever IN FAVOR Oh tue pro-
tective policy he renowned and repudiated it
n his Farewell Address. 1t insists that the
doctrines of that Address are inimical and
santagonistic to 'the protective policy"
In his letter to Doct. COLEMAN, dated April
&c. 1924. while the tariff bill of that year was
under discussion in Congress. Gen. JACKSON
said:
.:Provilence has blessed us with the means
of national independence and national de-
fence. If we omit. or refuse. to use the gifts
which he has extended IN ne. we deserve not
the continuation of his blessing He has filed
our mountains and our plains with minerals
with lead. iron and copper. and given ms
climate and soil for the growing Of hemp and
wool These being the great materials OF
national defence they ought to have extended
to them adequate and fair protection. that
our manufacturers and laborers may he pla-
ced In a fair competition with those Of Europe,
and that we may have within ourO own country
asupply of those leading and important ar
ticles so essential in war.
We have been too long subject to the policy
of British merchants. 1t is time we should
become little more AmericGnized and instead
of feeding pauperS and laborers from England,
feed our own; or else in short time. 10y coli
tinuing our present policy, we shall all be
my opinion that a careful and judicious tariff
is much wanted flor what purposo?l to pay
our national debt and lwhGt Plse?l to afford
us the means within ourselves Through our
own manufactured on which the safety OF
our country and liberty depends; aud last
though not ieast. give proper distribution TO
our labour, which must prove beneficial to
the happiness, independence and wealth OF
the community
In this letter, it will be seen, Gen. JACK
son specifics lend, ron copper, hemp and 'coot
as articles which ought to have extended to
them fair aad adequate protection-they being
'.the great materials of our national defence"
ANY other article. which would come within
the same catrgory-"m materials of national
defence''-woud also, according to the princi-
pie laid down Ivy Gen. JACKSON, be entitled
to " fair and adequate protection
At the close of the letter, when Gen. JACK
son comes to speak of the purposes for whicha
careful and judicious tariffwas much needed
he does not say for '.revenue purposes"--he
does not say it was only wanted to pay off
the national drbt-but that it was wanted for
that purpose and to enable us to supply our
selves, by our own manufactures with all
the articles necessary for the national defence,
and still for n third ose,-''last though
not least, !" he says--the purpose, namely. of
giving "a proper distribution of our labor"
Now, here. with soldierly frankness, is the
protective principle avowed in the most ex-
plict language. There is no dodging-no
evasion-nO ambiguity. The strong, decided
profe-tire doctrines here ayowed and taught by
Gen. JACKSON admit of no possible miscon-
struction.
Are those doctrines, set forth in that
letter, unedr Gen. JACKSoN's hand Republican
doctrines or are they FclerdL doctrines?
But. argues the Union and american, if Gen.
JACKSON was ever in favor of protective prin
ciples, he renowned them at a subsequent pc
Rod of his life. Never mind about that nOW.
Surprising, for the sake of argument, that the
General did many years afterwards change his
opinions in this regard. that does not affect
the party character of the opinions them
selves, as he originally expressed them in the
Coleman letter? And our question to the
Union and american still recurs are those
opinions, as expressed in the Coleman letter,
aud as you understand them, Republican, or
are they Federal?
But il is certain that Gen. JACKSON had not
changed when he wrote his letter to Gov.
RAY, of Indiana, ON the 2Sth of February,
ls2s-he then being candidate for the Pres
idency, as he enclosed to the Governor a copy
of his letter to Doctor COLEMAN, and stated
that his opinions then on the subject of pro-
lection were precisely what they were when
the COLEMAN letter was written and when he
voted for the tariff of 1924.
1t is also certain that the General had not,
down to 1882, changed the opinions or re-
nounced the principles avowed in the COLE
MAN letter. for Mr.. GRUMPY. according to our
information, read that letter in the Senate. in
1882 and after reading il said: "The President
declares himself IN .fruor of he principle of pro-
t.ction. S-c." Mr.. GRUMPY added that he differ
Ell with Gen. JACKSON on that point, but that
was no reason why he '.should not place, his
(tle President's) opinions fairly betoretie Sen-
ale and he natiOn."
In 1921, when the COLEMAN letter was
written, and Gen. JACKSON voted for the
Tariff of that year, his name had been
brought forward by his friends a candidate
for the Presidency.
In 1923, when he wrote the letter to Gov.
RAY, he was also a candidate. and was elected
that year. lie nerer could hare been elected had
he been opposed 10 tie protectire policy. Nera.
Having been elected an advocate of the
protective policy, it is not to be supposed
that he would afterwards reRouRce IL! And
nothing but the most explicit language on
his part il appears TO us, will justify the
statement that he afterwards totally abjured
the principle In the extracts quoted by the
Union aud ARierioaH from his Farewell Adj
dress we can see nothing inconsistent with
the protection recommended by Mr.. BUCHANAN
in his late message-nothing inconsistent
with the policy of so assessing The duties in
the proposed revision of the present tariff
the prime object of which revision is to in
crease the revenue TO the economical Swants
of the Governments will afford '- fair aud
adequate protection TO borrow the language
of the COLEMAN letter, "to lead, iron. copper,
wool and hemp" and to such other articles as
may be considered as fairly embraced in the
category of materials necessary for the ma
tional defence, &c.
II, however, Gen. JACKSON did, at later
period of his life, repadiate the protective
principles which he So openly and maRfully
avowed in 1927 and in 1928, when u eandi-
date tor the Presidency principles,
among others, upon which he was elected to
the Prezidency--if we say, he chose To
change his Opinions, that change does not az
fect the party character of those oplnions as