The Spartan, 1844-08-28

? ...?v ...WU9UIV. iK a great ^uimuai alliance took place between the East and West, one of the fruits of which was soon seen in the new attitude suddenly assumed by Massachusetts in regard to the protective system. Mr. Webster from being the leading opponent of that system all at once became its prominent supporter. Anc 4glX7 rcuun umnlj alio "Jbrtlmji alcVr g'TC" VJ inn dtsringuisheu statesman for sacrificing his constitu tional scruples, his principles of political economy of political justice, and of equal taxation, was thu it had beoOtne the interest of Massachusetts to sup port a system which, (to use hi3 own language u 1820,) was calculated to "favor great capitalists rather than personal industry or the owners o small capitals:" to make "the fanner give mon than he now does for all he buys, and receive les for all he sells and finally, "to diminish the in dustry, impede the prosperity, and corrupt the morals of the people." Such, sir, were the con elusive arguments urged in advance against tin tariff of 1824, and such the groat principles o justice and equality which Massachusetts sac rificed at tho shrine of her own pecuniary interesl Accordingly Mr. Webster voted for the tariff <j 1828, and has ever since been a prominent sup porter of the interest of "large capitalists." makin, "the farmer give more for all lie buys and receiv less for all he sells;" and at thesamu time "dimir ishing the industry, impeding the prosperity, an f*Orniptin^ l)io uf tlir jMlViplc* But the honorable senator from Massachusett [Mr. Bates] has selected certain votes given by tli representatives of the South, including myself, ii creasing the duties upon certain articles in the tari of 1828. Now, I will inform that senator that thoso vote were given to defeat that "bill of abominations, urged upon the country to promoto the special it

te rests of Massachusetts. We saw that this systei of protection was about to assume more gigant dimensions, and to devour the substance of tl: country, and we determined to put such iugrcd ents in the chalice as would poison the monster, ar commend it to his own lips. This is what is som times called "fighting the devil with fire," a polic which, though I did not altogether approve, adopted in deference to the opinions of those wi whom I acted. In 1832, the public debt havii been extinguished, the tariff of that year was pas ed, retaining all the more oppressive features the act of 1828, and relieving the manufaclurii f*raiT llnrrf -fl tli9 burden^, pf taxation,s iMnrf tmrin w^'ninnuuro u) wqatn-tjuioiina, st out of this grew the compromise of 1833, whit was regarded as a final adjustment of the cjuestit of protection, providing for a gradual reduction the duties'till they reached the revenue point 20 per cent. But in 1812 the manufactures aga besieged the Capitol ; and in violation of the fai solemnly plighted by the act of 1S33, induct i Congress to pass the present tariff, incomparab , more unjust and oppressive, as 1 shall hereafti show, than the tariff of 1S32. Having thus closed the historical review of tl protective system, I shall now proceed to auswi , some of the prominent arguments in favor of tl , tariff of 1842. And I shall first examine an argument of tl senator from Maine, which he ventures to dra from the historical facts I have disclosed. He sa 1 that, from 1789 to the present time, every increa of protective duties has invariably produced i increase of revenue, an increase of foreign coi werce, and a diminution of the price of inanufa tures. forcitru aud domestic. Now, sir I am ha py to meoi tho Jionorable senator upon u propositi! of fact so broad, tungible, and comprehensive. \> liat/A conn tkan ^

its; and a duty of 20 per cent.!" wa, a ^ie<l on that assumed value, tim w icduty.n disguise, of 25 cwti^rn 25 cents ml &o^,8C0-^fc9? lh of the honressed to Mr. Lowndes by a Mr. Briggs, ft manfacturer of Massachusetts, in a bi4b he states that duty of 5 cents was wholly i adequate to give le necessary .protection j and fewest into a calulation to show that ^ duty of w (Cents a square ard would be equal to an ad valorem duty of umething over 30 per cent. 1 ano. discovered, i an essay published by tliat si ne gentleman, this ict, which I regard as imports it : he stated that leneral Smith, of Maryland, w io was at that time tio representative of the merca tile interest, and rho supported the principles o fro." trade during is whole life, had said in his p ice that the actual ost of the coarse cotton manu ctures then made i England was about 24 4-5 co is?hv square yard, ["bus it appears that tho assume b value of cotton lanufactures in the act of 1816jo!rrcsnondcd with lie actual cost at that time in ( rant Britain. 1 am aware there was a coai ;? fcnd iliiosy fabric tien imported from the East Juliet, called humums, which cost abroad less llv^Vi cents a square * "1 R.tr X orn oUo AWftM) Uujcclu f the mint mum clause of the of 1816, was to xclude this article ; for there w4s then ft univeral opinion prevalent among statoSHienofall parties, liat the East India trade, waich operutod as a onstant drain of our speoie, was injurious, and uglit to be discouraged. Now Mr. President, what verft the principles tnbodied in the act of 1816 1 Did it involve the iritibiples of a permanent and increasing tariff of >rotection 1 or a permanent ana decreasing tarf for revenue ? Beyond all question, it was of lie latter ehamrfor ?r>rl ?? It- -

aw* w ovwii) viaviiy illUb U1W bWUipv/l Ui jr UUUC."J UI 1U f were 25 per cent., and that, after eight years hi ! elapsed, the nianufaturers caine to Congres ' though these temporary duties hud been prolong* ' till 1826, and declared that so far from being ah ' to undersell the foreign manufacturers with a pr ' tection of 25 per cent., they could not maintain t! ' competition unless the protective duties we 1 raised some 50 per cent, higher. This additior 1 protection was accordingly given. Did it prod u ! that reduction of prices which the senator frc ' Maine has told us invariably results from increas* f protective duties 1 Precisely the reverse. * less than four years, the manufacturers made a si ' more clamorous appeal to Congress, declaring tl ' they would be totally ruined and their cupitul ti \ nihdated, unless Congress would add 50 per cei 1 more to the protective duties. And upon thisal ' gation, the tariff of 1828 was passed, raising t * protective duties greatly above 50 per cent. ? i .1 c< . I . ? - .L. ...... IMMRV r fact, that in every stage of the progress of mar * factures, from 1816 to 1828, there hus been an i * creasing necessity for protective duties, clearly n 1 conclusively demonstrating that they were high * in 1828, as compared with tho price of forei? 1 manufactures, than they were in 1816. Whi * ever reductions, therefore, may have taken nla * in the price of domestic manufactures bctwet s 1816 and 1828, a still greater reduction took plu ' in tho price of foreign manufactures during t > same period. And if, as the manufacturers d t clared, double the rate of protective duties was r " quired in 1828 to enablo tho domestic inanufs

'g tlio wages ot labor, the pronts ot capital, ana n? is- price of the raw material?every one of the eleot ments constituting the coat of production; and yet, ig by aotne incomprehensible and supernatural proa sTpSs :h man delusion and superstition, I do not believe >h there can be found a more stupendous impostuto of than that which I have jtist exposed, of Mr. President, it was profoundly remarked by ?n a great mathematician, whose name I have forgolth ten, though I think he lived in the age of Archie :d rnedes, that two and two make four; and thouglt ly this proposition has been ably controverted by nr Dean Swift and other writers, I incline, after reviewing the whole arguments, to. agree with ie Sliakspeare, that "to prove that two and two er make four is a very pretty argument." It wa? also the remark of another great philosopher, that all the parts are equaL.to the whole; and converso?e ly that the whole is equal to all its parts. But w you will at once perceive that these great philosys ophers knew nothing of the profound mysteries of so the protective system. For it is an established m unci fundamental doctrine, upon which this great n- system reposes, that you may double all the parts c- and yet diminish the whole. What incalculable p- blessings would tbo honorable senators over the on way cuna-i upuu iite uur--lug ujjerailves ol" ro land, if they would reveal to thom this great dia16 covery ! ttd But when senators aro driven from all their oth's, er defences, they contend that this reduction of sd prices, under a system which increases the cost le of production, is produoed by the extraordinary o- stimulus given to domestic competition, by ex -

h?j, ul'iwu nuiimiiciiL, ?nu uounuicBs, mutual nfidonce, and the excitement of virtuous. and tender hope, are infinitely multiplied. Lord Verulam has truly said that marriage h. Ives griefs and doubles joy. It combines, in f\ct, and transfuses existence for each party; it Llends and identifies souls, so as to render cotn>. in to them their several susceptibilities of graduation and refinement; it creates new energies, .v d generous sympathies; now objects of endearment nnd reliance; numberless reflected and reciprocated fuvors of regard and respect. llut what gives it a superior character of inherent dignity und genuine enjoyment is the religious esconou peculiar to, it; the vein of duty which perv:.tes it; the consciousness of those who are suddenly allied in it, that they have ndopted a tie hall.1 tired by divine sanction, and aro fulfilling one of k. .. .. .*e vr The eostaoiesof courtship are dashed by fears, iealousics, misapprehensions, which are unknown to wedded partners of sound tninds and affectionate hearts, with them, all is trust and security; their faith is beyond the sphere of temptation or accident; their adversity, if misfortunes come, has onsolations derived from the most exalted sourc? i; from the invisible and holy world, as well as the present checkered scenes of human action. The qualified worship of an excellent fellowije.ng, natural and delightful as it is, involves something more rational and elevated, when the object ii a wife or husband, than when it refers to a more mistress or lover. In the first case, it assoc ates itself with duty, and implies an esteem the more proper and grateful as accompanied by intiMRli' Lii'iurliulun

connubial scheme should ascertain that ho has d'-awn a prize, before he indulges himself in solfvp ttulation, or welcomes the greeting of his friends. The analogy is not, however, exact?because it is iu the power of the bridal parties to .determine >?eir own fate, in a matyri|l decree. Life itself might lie equally styled a lottery, looking to the di versity of its chunces and the incertitude of its incidents; but it is, nevertheless, a positive blessbig with well constituted minds and healthful frames. So, likewise, is marriage, which should be undertaken as life is accepted,?-with stronger expectation of weal than wo:?with bright visions and cheerful resolutions; but, also with a spirit pf philosophical or christian submission to whatever Pipvidence may ordain to its course. The Greeks nfcde Hymen descend from Apollo, Urania, or T^liope. This origin from the fountain of harmony and light, and the twwRoblest of the muses, illustrates or shadows from the true character of thp espousals over which the garlanded god waves his ncr?, dying t?rdi, and" sheds His cetostml in flue nee. A Good Reason.?A few day sinco a grand jury out South ignored a bill against a huge negro for stealing chickens, and before discharging him from custody, the judge hade him stand a reproniand. Ho concluded as follows* "You may go now, John, (shaking his finger at at him.) let mo warn you never to appear here again." John, with dolight beaming from his big white eyes, and with a broad grin, displaying a row of beautiful ivory, replied: "I woudn't bin dlsunoc, Judge, only de consta blc fotcH me."

senator from Maine turns out to bo something les} than no act at all. v I now propose to expose the stereotyped.! fallacy that high duties s make low prices?Uv 1 the test of a philosophical analysis. The hoo-^ orable Senator front Maine has repeatedly said/: in the course of his debate, that the price of roan} u fact urea, as overy thing else, depends upon sup^ ply and demand. This is very true, as to thoa^fc temporary fluctuations in price which result front the accidental increase of the supply beyond thn demand, or of the demand beyond the supply.? But that Senator well knows that the permanent 1 price of every commodity deponds exclusively > upon the cost of production. No man will con* tinue to produce a commodity which will not t indemnify him for the expenditures incurred iaf , producing it. Now there are three great elements ? that constitute the price of every manufacture.? 1 The wages of labor, the profits of capital, and the 1 cost ot trio raw uiuienai. prupo?*? wr uu? - quire what is the effect of the protective system > on each of these three elements. And, first, is it > t not the avowed design and obvious effect of this - system to enhance the wages of the labor engagi ed in producing manufactures! The great and . boasted merit of the system is its tendency to prof teet labor by increasing the wages of the laborer, a ?not for a day or a year but permanently. Tako s away this merit, and you dissolve the charm by - which the people have been deluded, even in the J manufacturing States, and the whole fabric will - tumblo into ruins. I readily admit, what the man -