OCR Interpretation

Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, February 07, 1844, Image 1

Image and text provided by University of South Carolina; Columbia, SC

Persistent link: https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn84026897/1844-02-07/ed-1/seq-1/

What is OCR?

Thumbnail for

- We will cling to the Pillars of the Temple of our Liberties, and if it must fall, we will Perish amidst the Ruins.)-,
V LU E l. *'." 1
Two Dollars and Fifty Cents. per annum.
if paid in Eidanc-Three Dollats iP not paid
before the expiration of Six Months from the
date of Subscription-and Four Dollars if not
paid within twelve Montl. Subscribers out
of the State are requited to pay in adnence.
" No subscription received for less than one
year; and no paper discontinnte'ttntil. all or
rearaties are paid, except at the option of the
Ail subscriptions will be continnrd unless
otherwise ordered before the expiration of the
Any person procuring five Subscribers and
becoming responsible for the same, shall re
ceive the sixth copy gratis.
Advertisements conspicuously inserted at
-62,j cents. per square. (12 lines. orless,) for the
first insertion, and 43J cents, for each continu
ance. Those published Monthly, or quarterly
ivill be charged. $1 per square for each inser
tion. A'dvertisements not having the number
of insertioms, marked on them. will be contin
ued;, until ordered out, and charged accord
- All Job work done for persons living at a
distance, must be paid for at the time the work
is:done, or the payment secured in the village.
All communications addressed to the Editor,
os? paid, will be promptly and strictly attend
ed to
Remarks of Mr. tic Duffie.
Is SE'NATE, Jan. 19.
The Senate then took up for considera
tion the report from the Comtnittee on Fi
nance, as follows :
January 9, 1S44.-Mr. Evans from the
Committee on Finance, reported the fol
lowing resolution.
Resolved, That the hill entitled " A
bill to-revive the act of the 2:1 March,
1833, usually called. the compromise act,
and to modify the existing duties upon for
eignimports. in conformity with its provi
sions," is a bill "for raising revenuh,"
within the meaning of the 7lth sectiron of
the 1st article of the Constitution. and
cannot therefore originate in the Senate ;
Resolved, That it be indefinitely post
M1r. McDuflie said, if one of the illusstri
ous franers.of the Constitution could have
presented himself tefore us in the debate of
yesterday, wih what utter astonishment
would he have found us construing a pro
vision, which was tinde to protect the
people of the United States from ijustice
and oppression, in such a manner ac to
make it a barrier against nur.y ctlhrt to free
the people from the rriost unjust and op
pressivesystem that was ever imposed on
them. The illustrious patriots who framed
this instrument had seen so mucia of the
abuse of the taxitig power, that they on
dleavored to rescue their posterity from ihe
evil. They therefore provided that all
bills raising revenue should originatl in the
House, more directly representing the peo
ple of the United States. The people
could not suppose that the framers of the
Coustitution would deal in mere idle
words. and that they would insert a cluse
with-no particular mnaning. What ra
tional construction could be given to the
clause except that it was intended to pre
vent unjust and unnecessary taxation
It.did nft prevent the Senate frotn putting
money into the Treasury, but froni taking
it:out of the pocke-ts of 'he people. R si
sinjg money unas nothing: but the design
*was to prevent us from raiisiing in such a
manner as to take it from the pockets of
the people. One of the gentlemen who
had taken part in the debate had let ot
what was the true vie~w of the questiotn.
The Senator, from New Hampshirte had
shown.beyond dispute that the Senate had
passed hills afft-.tng the revenue, and the
Senator fromn Connecticut head said truly
that they did niot raise sevenue by imipo
sing taxes. Suppose wte bad some moide
of aising revenue without a resort to im
posts; suppose we had somte maigic power
of- raising it-by stamapitng on the earth
swe could raise in that or aniy waey, except
-by imposine burdens tin thes people. .inm
-any other light the provision would appear
frivolous and nmeaning, consisting mere
ly in wsords. Btut let us look at the hill.
Is that, in any fortm or shape, a bill to raise
revenue 1. Is that its object or effect ?
It was absolu tely and essentially a hill re
pealing duties, and nothitng else; and yet
a coustruction had been assumed here for
the purpose of scouting it out of the Seni
.ate, and the people were to he told that we
-had no power to mitignte their burdetns.
-.J21;was contended by the Senat or from
.aine:. that duties -nust tbe collected under
'thebill iliit passed into a law. If this was
true. in any just serise, lie wouhl gi ve up
;the questioni. -How, can it tie said that a
'bill redtucitg duties fro'n fifty to thirty per
-cenit imposes- dtuties? The gentleman
isays if you repeal the other twenty per
-cent yotu would imrpose duties; that is to
'say, if the bill fails to repeal a part of the
duties, it inmposes the whole.- lie could
not compirehiend this reasoning.' Why.
sir,' an' act- repealiug duties, because it
~does -not repeal the whole, is an act .im
--posingpdluties! Hie had tnever seen any
-ting4ikr this, except the case ofthe sports
-riitiavnhiaving lost twenty dollars on a
-horserrace4 said.'be had lost forty tdollars;
for his own twenty was gone, anid the
n-eary hn exn~ctel to wyin, li id ot -
intend to go, fully into this question, but
he wished to vindicate the Constitutioi
frona this coust ruction.
The Senator from Pennsylvania. (Mr
Buchanan.) had asked whateTect a prop
osition would have to amend the bill by
increasing taxes ? Would it not, the Sen
ator asked, render the bill one of such a
character that the Senate could not origi
nate it? The answer was plain. No
amendmdent could become incorporated in
the bill which would throw it out of the
'jurisdiction of the Senate. We could .ot
add any thing to it that would have the ef
feet to impose taxes and increase duties.
He admitted that the ameudment would
he iuconsistent with the powers of this
body, and the Senate, he supposed, would
therefore exclude it or vote it down.. The
other question, proposed by the Senator
from Connecticut, (Mr. Huntington,) was
not for him to answer. The puzzle is
how the President would act when he had
occasion to return such a bill to the House
where it originated.- The President had
so many difficulties to contend with that
he might be prepared to meet this. He
must answer the question when the case
occurs. Bit if we send to the other House
a bill, and they amend it so as to alter its
chtaracter, it does not receive its character
of a tax- bill here, though it originated
here, but id-the House that has-the right
to give it that character. The whole pur
port of this clause was to prevent the Sen
ate -from originating money -bills-front
imposing burdens on the people. -
Mr. McDuffie here referred to the com
promise act, which was offered in the Sen
ate, and the decision upon which he re
garded as the most solemn one ever made
iii this country-one which gave peace to
the Union. - Never was there a more he
roic action than that of Mr. Clay on that
occasion, and it was done, too, while the
agents of the manufacturers were here de
nouncing him as a traitor. He had greatly
regretted that that distinguished statesman
had not been here again to interpose his
great influence. and extend the olive
branch of peace over the country, when
this compromise was broken. 'He regret
ted that he was not -here to vindicate it
from the foul and faithless innovation that
it received from the tariff of 1842. He
was not here, and I regret (said Mr. McD.)
to say that I have lately seen a letter from
him in the newspapers, in which, after
giving some general views which are in
accordance-with my own, he concludes by
saying that this monster of 1842 was a
very good nicasure in many respects ; that
it no doubt needed some amendment, but
in what particulars he was not prepared to
say, not having examined it with scrupu
ois exactness. Now, sir, I like the text
of the letter, but not the cbmmentary. I
had hoped. sir, that this eminent and influ
ential statesman would have used the
power that he possesses to do justice to
the South. and which every consideration
-,f justice and good faith required that he
should have (lone.
But there seems to be a desire, sir, on
the part of the Senator from Maine. to
strike from the statute book every vestage
of that crmpromise. The tariff of 1842
was no- doubt before the committee over
which he, with so much distin:tion, pre
sides, and he probably had an important
ami influential agency in passing it. That
act therefore, no dotbt. occupied a distin
quished place in the regard of the gentle
man. He occupied towards it a parental
relation, which always excited the strong
est syipatheis of the human heart. This
-,co')nts for his partiality to it, and he
rond not expect huin to give up the bant
ling; for the intensity of parental affection
was often increased by the very deformi
ties whtich excited the horror of every one
else. He would take oft'the veil and ex
po.en its defects. What was this illof
1842? It was a motngrel-one of those
mnonsters, fahled hy the gentius of antiqui
ty. with the head atnd body of man, and
the tail of a fish. It was called a bill to
provide reventie.- Falsehnoo. and decep
tion wvere thus stamped upon its br-ow. A
hill wholly prohibiting the imponrtation of
many classes of gowls was called a bill to
provide revenue. He had hefore him doc
oments from well informed 'practical mer
chants and other sources, showing that the
ditties, in'many instances, were one hun
d reid aud fifty per cent. On some descrip
tions or iron it was from seventy-fire to
one htundred and fifty percent, and even
two thtndlred per cent ; totally prohibiting
it. This was the dhuty imposed for revenue
on an article of universal consunmption.
Salt was another article used in equal
quantities by .the rich antd the poor, and of
the first necessity for all-what was the
duty on this article ? For every bushtel,
costing in Liverpool five or six cents, we
pay a doty of eight cents. [Mr. Benton
here snid it was now ten cents.] And~
this. sir, is a revenue law-a duty of two
hinaired per et. o0 salt. Those are reve
tnue duties-duties imposed for the purpose
of rnising arevenue for the General Gov
Havinmg adverted to the .prominent fea
tures of the bill, it was proper, that he
shoutld subhmit me "considerations in re
gard to t lie extent and character of its prin.
cipiles.. A qtestion of its constitutionality,
as well as of its expediency, *addressedl it.
self to every ind. What power have
you-to pass such a lawi ? - We' profess tr
act uder that' clause of the Constitutioti
whicht authorizes Congress to rnise reven
net forC the support of- 'he Governmetnt ?
He was's atishied it could be drawrr so dis
titnctly nis to satisfy every mind. He held
that'the iower of ICotngress wvas limited by
the Constitutioni, and that out- dutty was
it must be the lowest rate of duty, ad. va
lorem, which would yield the necessary
amount of taxation. E very Senator isuew
that any duty, however small, operated to
some extent as a prohibition. Twenty
per cent on Cotton Goods would not yield
quite as much revenue as anj higher rate
of duty. If that rate of duty yields four
millions, a duty of forty per. cent. would
yield no more; for it will exclude one half
of the amount of goods usually imported,
and impose the duty on the other half.
Both rates of duty would yield the same
amount of revenue. Many of those arti
cles paid a higher rate of duty than forty
per cent. On calicoes, the duty was forty,
seventy, eighty, a hundred, a hundred and
twenty, and a hundred and eighty per et.
Tlis shows very clearly the true character
of this law ; Calico cloths, which were
worn by all the poorer classes of the
whites, and even by every negro slave
for every planter gave his slaves at least
one calico gown to. wear on Sundays
paid such an amount of duty as to prohibit
them. Calicos costing four cents a yard,
and which could be sold here for five cis.
was by a most ingenious device of the
manufacturers, taken and deemed to have
cost thirty cents, and a duty of thirty per
ebut, ad valorem, was imposed upon that,
making the rate of duty one huudred and
eighty per cent. So it was with many
other articles. There was a clays of prints,
good enough to be used in every family,
that cost ten cents, and under the rule
adopted the rate of duty was ninety per et.
A large class of cotton goods, amounting
to ten millions in value, was utterly exclu
ded by this tariff. He also referred to the
duties on window. glass and other articles.
He camne now to the question, was this
a revenue tariff'? if the Senate was sat
isfied that a duty of twenty per cent.
would yield more revenue than a higher
rate of duty, then they must admit that shis
is not a tariff for revenue. It is .ihen a.
bill framed, not in accordance- with the
Constitution and the principles of ever
lasting justice, but for the purpose of ta
king money out of the pockets of one por
tion of the people and putting it in the
pockets of another portion.
But an idea was gotten up by which the
friends of free trade had been, in some
cases deceived-that, though duties must
be imposed for -the purpose of revenue
alone, yet, that we could discriminate in
favor of domestic manufacturers. 'This
was saying one thing and doing another
looking one way and rowing another. It
might be employed for giving the whole
law a most unjust character. Every rev
enue law was considered as if it was crea
ted entirely for Ehe benefit of manufactur
ers. We make, in my opinion, a vast
concession to the manufacturing interest
when we raise the whole amount of rev
enue from duties on imports alone. We
do what no other country on the face of
the globe does, when we raise our revenue
entirely from that source. But still, gen
tlemen gravely say, you must protect mat
ufactures. Let me tell them what would
be the trte mode of discrimination. He
wvould admit that discrimination was
proper in one sense. There were two
proper objects of discrimination. One was
to get the proper amount of re.venue from
the lowest rate of duty ; and the other was
to avoid, so far as possible, the imposition
of duties on articles universally used by
the poorer classes. The application of
these two rules would alone reverse the
whole system. It would take the duty off
from calicoes and put it on muslin, and the
reverse. That was the true discrimina
tion. Poverty ought. as far as possible,
to he exempt frotn the burthen of taxation:
H1e would begin a. ...e lowest rates, under
the minimum, and come up, increasing the
duties on the more co. !y articles.
There was one other discrimination
that he would make, amnd it would be in
favor of the imported article, and against
the article manufactured at home. He
would impose the highest rate of duty-on
the commodities manufactitred in the
Unuited States. If he imposed a duty of
thirty per cent. otn the foreign article, he
wvould imtipose a higher rate on the article
made athome. A duty of t wenty per cent
made on cotton fabrics to the amotunt of
ten millions would impose a burden of for
ty per cent. on the people of the United
States. If wye imnport twenty millions
worth of cotton, on which the duty is four
maillionis, we raise the price of thme cotminod
ity to the same amount. A duty ofm~ven
ty per cenit would give the same revenue
that a duty of forty per cent will give; but
it wvill impose a burden, not of fuur millions.
but of eight tmillions of the consumers.
H e went- into a variety of illustrations to
explain his vie'we otn this subject.
The dluty paying imports were about
foty millions. The amount ofgoods man
ufactured hero was a huundred and sisiy
millions, one-half of which camne in com
petition with thrcigri imports, and exclu
ded them to the amount of eighty millions.
The amount imported yielded to the Trease
ury about sixteent millions. What is the
burden which the s'stem imposes on the
people, unider the pretext of a revenue
law, for raising sixteen millionis? Wham
is the amotunt of bounty paid to the nmanu
facturcrs with a duty, he would not say of
forty per cent.. but of only twenty -per ct.
sutpposin~g the dIuties to he brought to thne
reventue stanidard ? Twenty por, et., on
eightty mnillions wotuld give sixtIeen imil
lions. The other eighty millionsetotally
prohibite-l mighut be taken at'len per, cent.
tmaking eight millions more Thtus twven
ty frour- mnillions would be put in the pock
ets ofi 66manufaciur-ers. Mr. McD. went
minutely into explanations on this sub
Mr. McD. said he bad made out an es
I timate of thearnount of Capitol, &c. em
ployed in manufactures. He would show
the .distressed condition of those manufac
tdrers wbo came. here begging for aid and
protection. He would show the amount
of the profits put in their pockets every
year by this system. The manufacturers
of cotton state their annual productions at
forty-six millions.
The raw material I suppose to be one
forth of the value of the manufactured ar
ticles. I concede half a dollar a day to
persons employed, and ten per cent on the
wear and tear of machinery; and the in
terest on the dead capital kept there I put
at ten millions. Let ma give you a pic
ture of their distress. The manufacturers
of Massachusetts are,'from the above data,
now living on the small profit ofthirty
four per cent. on the capital employed by
them, oiu the averge; but I have informa
tion that some of them are receiving forty
per cent. profit, and laying aside a hand
some contiugent fund. The average pro
fit on other manufactures doestot average
but twenty nine per cent. On rolled iron
it is thirty-nine per cent. on the capital
invested. The Senator from Pennsylva
nia could correct hiin if wrong. They re
ceived at' their furnaces two cents a
Mr. McD.ifie. That is distressing that
they. cant not live on a profit of thirty
nine~per cent. on their capital.
The Salt mad'e in^Virginia cost to make
it $40000, A profit of eighty per cent.
is. made on the capital if the salt sells at
twenjy five eta. a bushel. He made these
statements to show into 'whose pockets
these 'enormous bounties went. The
ground on iiicbh this system was origi
nlly supported:was, that it would protect
domestic industry from the competition of
foreign in'dustry., This was a .fallacy.
There could- be no competition between
the manufacturers here and those a broad.
The competition was between the dithr
eat branches 6f industry at home. - What
was it to our. manufacturers that at Bir
mingham they made three hundred mil.,
lions or, three hundred thousand millions
worth of goods.? It wa nothing till those
goods were brought into the United States
for consumption.
Another prominent argument in favor cf
the: protective system' was, that it helped
us to maintain our national independence.
If tlier.~wsa.Jny truth in this argument,
then it would strike a blow at once at our
foreign commerce, and abolish our navy,
which costs us nine millions of dollars a
year. National independence ! indepen
dent of whom ?
It is the language of depots-it is the
language of those who could live by plin
der-of those who war with the peace and
welfare of the human kind. Now, sir,
nothing under heaven so illustrates the
principles of Christianity as this mutal de
pendence of nations. It was this general
principle of harmony between nations, this
hood to keep the peace, that the taritFsys:
teat would break down. It was the only
foundation on which the peace and hapi
tuss of the world could rest. He cannot
be a Chrisrian who seeks to destroy this
band of fellowship between nations.
These remarks were not speculative, nor
were they madte for any vain object of display.
They referred to a state of things that was ac
tu:tily approaching. The system aimed at the
destruction of the commerce which temis to
hind us in relations of peace to ..ome into con
flict Yet. while destroying three-fourths of
our commerce with England and the rest of En
rope, we are rearing up a navy at the expense
of nine millions a year. We must build ships
to empoly workmen. A n:ost pathetic appeal
was lately mnade to us in behalf of workmen at
the navy yard foremployment; and the admin.
istration of the Government was denounced in
te publc printg because it would not k-ep
persons employe'd without authority of taiv. In
coiing to tthis city in thie cars f rotm Baltimore,
he beard this matter spoken of in such a man
ner as to lead one to suppose that the griev
ance was bevond endurance, andi that the peo
ple concerned would come te this Capitol and
drive us from our plac.es here. Th.as state of
feelitig naturally resnlted from the'spirit and
genius of this sys:em
Why maintain these splendid fleets scoutring
de Pacific. the coast of Africa, &c. for .the
sake of au paltry comimetrce of three millions ?
ryon must destroy foreign commerce, you
must also destroy thes navy. WVe must adopt
tho policy of the Chinese-as they were, not
as they ar-. You wat a navy to defend our
commierce. Against whom?7 Pirattes? En
land I for she is held tup as the bugbear when
ever you are asked for nappropriattionis. What
do you want this navy for ? To defend com
merce. von say. But the great enemy of com
merce i's not England. inor pirates. nor foreiggt
nations, bint here in this Capitol; and before
God. the dectarod that the would rather under
take to defend commerce from all those ene
mie than from this Congress.
It was also urged that the system would ben
efit farmners. How ? The circle within .which
the farmer could deal with the muannfietturers
beteficially was narrow. H~e would agree that
for a shubrt distance, it was a mutual monopoly.
t did not extend far because of distance. and
the difficulty oftransportattin prevented it.
Now, lie would tell the gentlemen that the
planters of the Soutii bear the s'ame relation to
Liverpooluand Matnchester-their naturail mar.
kets-that the Eastern farmers bear to the man
ufacturer, in their immediate vicinity. Dis
tance made ito differenee io the parties. Their
naturnl markets. which God gave them,* were
int Liverpool and Manchester, and Leeds and
Another idea was, that the system madle
mannfacturttes- chan per. The manufacturers
cannot compete, theystay, with the foreign matn
ufacturer, and therefore they. demand more
than twenty tier cent. ditty. This was concliu
sie, as far as we could judge from men's ac
tions, not tteir professions -that they could itot
sell articles cheaper th'm we -can '!import
them. If they could affor d to manufacture any
thing like as cheap as the foreign manutfactur
er, they.wouild not need atty higher dutty thant
tvnty per cent.
But it was said that by this system we would
relieve ourselves of the ignominy of paying
tribute to foreign nations. Yes, sir, a Presi
dent of the United States held up this com
merce with foreign nations as a degrading tri
bute. What could we expect when such prin
ciples were advocated by high authorities. The
foreign manufarturer could sell to us cheaper
by twenty percent than any other. If we buy,
we pay tribute, it is said. But the tribute is
on tne other side. Mr. Clay has said,-in a re
cent letter, that it was good policy to buy as
little of foreign nations as possible, and sell as
much as possible to them. This is the advice
gravely given to the most enlightened people
on the face of'the earth by one of its most dis
tinguished men. What would a horse-jockey
say if you tell him to give'his best horse in ex
change for the meanest he could get? We must
give all our best products for the smalldat quan
tity of foreign goods in exchange. What could
we do with all the precious metals in'the world
if we bought nothing with them? We would
be werse off than the Spaniards ever were,
with all their gold and silver, exporting nothing.
You mnust send money abroad, because you
prohibit ' buying abroad ; and foreign nations
*canot buy of you unless you buy of them..
Be. alluded now to the operation of the Sys.
tem on the exporting States. What was its
effect on our staples? Now, we would under
take to maintain that the value of those staples
was diminished in the proportion that the du
ties were increased. The value of exports was
the value you could receive in exchange for
diem. The amount received in exchange was
not to be estimated in money alone. Mr.
MlcDuflie went into some 'atements and cal
culations to illustrate this view. The iconse
quence of this selling every thming and buying
nothing was now severely felt by the people of
the South. They found themselves, with a de
lightful soil, with a valuable staple. which
clothes half the world cheaper than they can
be in any other way; with as industrious habits
as any peopke on the face of the earth, not ex
cepting those of Europe, they found themselves
laboring under embarrassments and. sinking
into poverty. The importation of 'specie into
the United States degrades irs 'value here, and
enhances it in Liverpool and Manchester, and
renders our products lower there. Do we not
receive a smaller amounit for our cotton in this
way ? Are not our means of enjoying life cur
tailed by this ditficulty of obtaining consumable
ommpodities? The idea of selling every thing
for gold and silver was the most gross delusion
over heard of in the world.
The amount of imports from France, En
gland, Germany, &c. excluded by this tariff
cannot be less than forty millions, and. who suf
Fers from it? The planters sustain the special .
burden arising from this prohibition. What
have we seen in Manchester lately ? A market
has been opened with India. It gave an instan
aneousstimuluts,to the trade. Suppose we
open our markets, would it not give instanta
neous proiperity to the South? We were ap
proaching a fearful crisis. In the Southern
States this was a matter of life and death. This
policy has created a hostile feeling against the
South-their peace, happiness, and very exist
mence-on the part of Great Britain. It had cut
off the trade between this trade and Great Bri
ain to such an extent as to destroy every friend
y feeling that springs from commercial recipro
iity; and the feeling of England had allied it
self with Eastern abolitionism against the South.
lie contended that the producing States were
in a state of colonial vassalage to the manufac
tirers. A large per centage was taken from
our pockets and put into those of the maufac
nrers. Suppose we were colonial dependen
cies of England. what would be our situation?
England miht compel us to trade with her
alone; but tiat would be the best market in the
world for us, and England could give us our
commodities cheaper than any other nation
:old do. But we were now compelled to
trade with our mother. or rather mother conn
try, on the most disadvantageous terms. We
were compelled to buy of New England and
tell to her-the worst market we could have.
He said that this was the only nation in the
world that derived its whole revenue from im
ports, England had excises, and income tax.
c., and, if lie remembered rightly the amount
hme derived from customs was only one-tenth
of the whole. Rather than that this policy
should continue, he would see every blade of
cotton nipped in the bud. Suppose he were
o introdue a bill to raise the revenue of the
[nited States by an excise dusty ofequal amount
o the impilort duty. Two hundred and forty
nillionis of cotton manumfaetirea would be the
mbject of taxation. It would yield, with a tax
f tao per cent., a revenue of twenty-four mik
ions of dollars. WVe have been paying a duty
f forty per cent. on our imported goods, andl
hey could not contiplaini if we laid this excise
dty on their products. They say it falls on
te constumer only. This would be equaml to a
dty only of thirty per cenit., on anm importation
of eighty millions.
Suppose we quit making cotton ? We can
not inakmi it at these prices. WV- cannot make
it to rot on our hands. What shall we do?
Suppose we manufacture ? Suppose we. who
are only receiving twelve and a halfents a day
for the labor of our slaves-and our Northern
fllow-citizens having made slaves of its all
suppose we abandon our-land, make no cotton,
and confer ona the umannfactirers of the Unmited
States thme inestimable blessings of having to
pay thirty cents a pound for~ cotton, instead of
three cents; suppose we become your rivals
int manufacturinig? We can havemsteami. water
power, and every advantage If we can make
half a dollar a day oii our operatives, and twon:
ty or thirty per cent on their productions, we
would be doing wvell. The Southern negro,
acclimated as lie is. is inuch mnore efficient than
the Mexican, and ten times omore so thtan the
East Indian. Slave labor, notwithstanding all
the European. economists tells us, who know
nothingabout it, is the cheapest labor in the
world. Suppose, then, we go to manufactur
ing and undersell you, making no more goods
than we can use-what would be the result ?
You of' -he North cannot .hear a competition
even with the free labor of Englaiud, much less
of slave labor; and a Senator fi-om Massachu
setts had declared here that southern liidustry
should never be brought into competition~ with
the free labor of the North. What would you
do 1 Would yen attempt to impose a discrimi
nating ditty of forty per cent between the 'pro
duce of the two species of labor ? Ifaliat were
attempted, would iiot the;South, patient as she
hd been, rise up against it?
Sir. I cnn conscien'tiotslisy, -that dattinig
the twenty-four yeaes that ihaee bu~oh conneict
ed withthis Goveirinnr, T have contemnploted
it with painfumlleehing. .I'have iiovi it only
by its exaction.or oppressins. 'I have sinee
1ino, felt o iterest ji the Government be
yond that of my connexion with'thbe' te:In
which-Ilive.. * - -
,He never should think of: the distinagtshed
Senator from Kentucky without the bghest
admiration. Whqn the compromise W65adO
ed he was disposed to say. "Lord, now tiest
thou thy servant depart in peace."
I then retired, said AMr..McD. ,jn
that I could spend my daysin peace, dl '
with every thing else- had seenadh bete.
And I can tell gentlemen now,thatiaeaonet
ing to come here agam,I wsinfluencIdbythe
hope that I might have some a~eao$ liseever
small, in effecting another adjuspz tif,.this
question. If that hope failedhm, he .eund
shake off the dust of his feet, and leave this
place forever. -
He warned the manufacturing States that It
would be for their interest to abandon'tbis flial
policy; for it wouldbe fatal to them. The'co
dition of things would-soon change. The great
West would combine with the .outh.againt
this monster of injustice-this god of Eastern
idolatry; aid it. wasa.nly necessary. to tear of
the-veal that concealed the monsterpa order to
expose its deformity to the people of the Unit
ed States.. He had attempted todithis? Thi
result he left toGod.
S'Mr. Calhoun's Addres.
From tie Charleston Mers.
January 3 1844.
To the Editors of the Charleston Mercury ~
We enclose to you for publication a let= -
ter to us and an address from'the Hon.J.
C. Calhoun to his friends gud supportery
giving his reasons for withholding-ish
name as a Candidate for the Presidbac,
from the Convention which is to Ossemb l
in Baltimore on the 4th .Monday jaday
next. 'A '
In-placing this document iefouiilandsy
,or publication, it is proper to: te;that
although transmitted to this Coinmiittee
to be through -them 'submitted to thro
lie, the absence 'f many of'its riembtls.
prevented the assemblage of a (Qddria$1
until this day,hep its publication wish
hrecied in accoidande with tbegwishes'of
Mr. Calhoun.
Four HILL, Dec. 21,1843
Gentlemen:-I herewith nclose jos i e
he organ- of those, who 'have niinated -
rae for the Presidenef is this Stater
ect to a Converitiongffiriy constittfs I:
Address to my politial.friends n -
porters, assigning mfy reasons for a t-e -r
titting my name togo before the proj ' ,.
Convention to be held in Saltid
Miay next,. t ransisit qt.:to xon
I deem it respectful and prope
it known to those towhom it is addre.sisd
through you, and in order to afford you an
>pporitnitf to take such me-asures ur'relaE
tion to it, as you mray .deem proper if Th-'
feed, you should deem any necessary:
All I haveto.reqcest is, that its publina
pion should not be unnecessarily d4layed:'
With great respect, I am, &c" &c
(Signed) J. C: CALHOUN.
Hon. Jacob Bond l'On . .
and other members of the Committee.;'
THF ADDRESs or Ma. CAiouw Tou' s
I have left it to you. my friends and sup-?
porters, through whose favorableestimate'
)f my qualifications, my-name has been.
presented to the people of the-Y United _
States for the office of Chief Magistrate,
o conduct the canvass on such -principles,
and in such manner, as -you may think
jest. But, in so doing, 1 did not waive
ry right to determine, on my individua
respnsibility, what course-'my dutywaih
compel me to pursue ultimately, nor bav&
[ been an iiattentive observer of the can -
vass and theiCourse you hate taken. 2 "'
It aftords me pleasure to be endbled-to
say,that on all leading~questions, gowin
aut of the canvass,. I hbeartiy -concurred
with you, in the groundlst you t'ook, end
especially in those relating to the modemin.
which the Delegates to the propoised Cod
vention to be held in Baltimore, should-be
appointed, and how they should'>ioto
You have, in' my o6pinion, conclusively -
shown, that they should be appoinited by
Districts and 'vote per' capitqp but y our
reasons, as conclusive as they are, hae '
proved'in vain. Already New Yoi-itaod
some other States have appointid5Dele.
gates, en masse, by State Cdunoisns
atnd one Stite (Virginia) has resolvidithiat
the-votes ofrher D~elegates should be given
by the majoritji, and be counted peifeapita. .
Their course wuld necessarilf overrule
that which you have so' 'ably supported.
should you go int o Convention'and -would
leavo you no olternative,'but to yield yours
and adopt theirsi, iptever much'-^ou may
he opposed to it on principle or to meet
them on the most unequa termis, wvith
divided against united and concentrated*
forces. -- .
The question then is, what course, un
der such circumstances, should.:be-adopt
edi And that question,you will-be com
pelled speedily to decide. The new-ap
proach nf' the time f'or meeting of/ the-pr
posed Convention will not admit of mnuck
longer delay. But-as .your coursa- may
depend-in lome degres on that-,'hieh' L
have-decided to take, I deem kfdelte the
relation subsistingubtwe ~ ~ hnk
mine knowna to you without'fdrhe 'delsy
,I, then, alter the most careful. andi de
liberate survey-of the ffolegroukl haire
decidJ'd, that- [cannot permit 'my bamn to
go before' the proposed Conventionu, don-.
stitnged as it must nw he, -conusitI
wiihthe principles, whieh hrave dvr~~
ded mny-public conduct.M ijt~
arc insuperable. As it'must b'asi1 . -
it is repugnant to all the prian '~,on
which, in my opinion, suceh a o
should he fdrngd.. What'liefe' principleb -
are, I shall'noiC'roceed lii-ialij toetate.
I hold, then, withyou, that the Conven

xml | txt