Imagens das páginas
PDF
ePub

9th. To increase the proposed duty on sail duck one half cent per annum, until it amounts to 12 cents the square yard; and on all other flaxen and hempen manufac. tures 10 per cent. ad valorem, in addition to the present duties, except linens, on which the additional ad valorem duty was to be 15 per

cent.

10th To reduce the duty on molasses to 71⁄2 cents per gallon.

11th. To impose an ad valorem duty of 50 per cent. on vermicelli.

On the 5th of May, the bill and amendments were taken into consideration, and Mr. Smith moved to amend the first amendment by excepting the iron for rail-roads from the augmented duty on iron; which was agreed to by the senate, 23 to 22. The question then being taken on the amendment as amend. ed, it was lost, 18 to 24.

The second amendment, relating to currying knives, &c. was also rejected, 20 to 25. The amendment striking out the proviso in favour of woollens of less value than 33 cents, was also rejected, 22 to 24. The other amendments relating to imported woollens, were carried, 24 to 22, except that respecting blankets, which was decided in the negative by the casting vote of the chair.

The amendment augmenting the duty on hemp and flaxen manufactures, was rejected, 22 to 24. The amendment reducing the

proposed duty on molasses, was negatived, 21 affirmative, 25 nega. gative, after an animated discussion.

The amendment imposing a duty on vermicelli was also rejected, ayes 18, nays 24; and the senate adjourned.

May 6.-Mr. Kane offered an amendment, imposing a duty of 3 cents per lb. on lead in bars, pigs, or sheets; 4 cents. per lb. on lead shot; 5 cents per lb. on red or white lead, and on litherage, and lead manufactured into pipes. He said the western mines were capable of supplying the whole Union.

Mr. Rowan objected to the amendment, on the ground that the United States was the proprietor of those mines, and it was merely laying an additional duty in favour of government. He had voted for the duties on hemp, distilled spirits and molasses, on the principles of the American system; but he was opposed to it altogether, and in voting for it, he consulted the interests of his constituents, and not his private opinions.

The amendment was adoptedayes 29, nays 17.

Mr. Chandler moved to amend, by reducing the duty on salt, after June 1830, but it was negativedayes 19, nays 26.

Mr. Benton then moved to amend by laying a duty of 45 per cent. ad valorem on fur; which was negatived-11 ayes, 35 nays. Mr. Dickerson moved to further

amend by imposing on all iron in slabs, blooms, loops, or other form less finished than bar, or bolt iron, the same duty as on bar and bolt iron. This was carried-ayes 25, nays 21.

He then moved to increase the proposed duty on sail duck, half a cent yearly, until it amount to 12 cents the square yard; which, being amended on motion of Mr. Sanford, so as to exclude all tar, and other materials, except foreign hemp, from the benefit of the drawback allowed on exported cordage, was agreed to-ayes 28, nays 17.

May 7.-Mr. Parris moved to strike out the section abolishing the drawback on the exportation of distilled spirits.

This motion, after an animated discussion was rejected-21 ayes,

25 nays.

A motion to strike out the duty on molasses was rejected by the

same vote.

Mr. Smith, of Maryland, then moved to postpone the operation of the act, from the 30th of June, to the 30th of September, which was also decided in the negative by a similar vote.

8th. He then moved to impose a duty of 2 cents per lb. on sheath. ing copper; which was decided in the negative-19 ayes, 26 nays. The 15th of Nov. being then proposed as the time for the commencement of the act, the senate negatived it-22 ayes, 24 nays.

9th. A motion to strike out the duties on hemp, flax, cotton bag. ging, sail duck, molasses, and distilled spirits, was decided in the negative-10 ayes, 36 nays. Mr. Benton then proposed a duty of $1 per lb. on indigo.

Mr. Dickerson moved to amend the proposed duty on indigo, by increasing it 5 cents per lb. and 10 cents per lb. annually, until it should amount to 50 cents per lb. The senate being equally divided on this motion to amend, the Vice President decided in the negative. It was then determined, on motion of Mr. Dickerson, to amend by imposing a progressive duty of 25 cents per lb. on indigo, for 2 years, so as to make 50 cents duty.

The senate divided, on the mo. tion to strike out $1-24 ayes, 22 nays; and the motion, as amend. ed, was negatived-20 ayes, 24 nays. This proposed amendment being thus disposed of, Mr. Dickerson renewed his proposition to impose a duty of 5 cents, and then 10 cents, per lb. annually, until the duty amounted to 50 cents; which was carried-30 ayes, 14 nays.

A motion by Mr. Smith, of Maryland, to alter the duty on cordage, was rejected-ayes 17, nays 28.

12th. Mr. Benton offered several propositions to amend, which were rejected; as was a motion by Mr. Smith, of South Carolina, to strike out the duty on cotton bagging; a motion by Mr. Tasewell,

to strike out the duties on steel and lead; a motion by Mr. Foote, to strike out the additional duty on distilled spirits.

Mr. Smith, of Maryland, then moved to amend, by postponing the commencement of the additional duty on iron, to the 1st of September; which was carried-24 ayes, 23 nays.

Mr. Webster moved to strike out the section pointing out the duties of appraisers; which was negatived-16 ayes, 31 nays.

Mr. Woodbury moved to limit the increased duty on molasses, to such only as should be distilled. Negatived, 19 ayes, 28 nays.

May 13. Mr. Hayne moved an indefinite postponement of the bill. Mr. H. said, that the bill was calculated to sever the bonds of union. He frankly avowed that he was willing to introduce any thing into it that would destroy it.

The manufacturers were in a more flourishing condition than any other class, and the southern states, infinitely more distressed than the northern. If they could have foreseen, that the exporting states would have been taxed by duties on imports for the whole expenses of the Union, they would never have joined the confederacy.

He denounced the bill as partial, unjust, and unconstitutional, and entered a solemn protest on the part of the southern states, against its passage.

He was briefly replied to, by Mr. Webster, and the senate divided on the motion;-20 ayes, 27 nays; and the senate then passed the bill as amended-26 ayes, 21 nays.

The bill and amendments were then sent to the house of repre. sentatives, where, May 15, they were severally concured in, about 67 voting in the negative, and 114 in the affirmative. The bill thus became a law; and the discussions which had been sufficiently animated in congress, became more so when freed from the restraint of legislative decorum. The ultra opponents of the tariff, now endea. voured to show that the passage of this law was a violation of the federal compact; and that it was the duty of the southern states to act upon the subject, in their capacity of sovereign and independent states. If they remained quiet, their inevitable ruin was predicted. Great Britain, the principal consumer of their produce, would adopt retaliatory measures; and the closing of their chief market was pourtrayed, as the inevitable consequence of perseverance in this policy.

Upon the course of trade, as now established, viz. the exclusion of all our staples except cotton, rice, and tobacco, from British ports, and the admission of British manu. factures into the United States, capital was invested, and particular portions of the country, settled and

cultivated. Any proposition to disturb this commercial system was stigmatized as a violation of vested rights, and denounced as a tax upon the planter, for the benefit of northern and western capital. The diverting capital from commerce into manufactures, and supplying the consumers from domestic looms, would diminish the importations from Great Britain; and the loss of her market which now took four fifths of the cotton crop, would seal the fate of the south.

The inevitable consequence of this policy was urged, as a constitutional objection to the power of congress to pass laws having such objects in view. It was admitted, that congress might augment the imposts to any amount, but it must be solely with a view to revenue. The collateral effects of a revenue law, upon the course of trade, and the investment of capital, would render it unconstitutional, provided such effects were contemplated by congress at the time of passing it. The powers granted by the constitution were all intended for the general benefit; this was for the sole benefit of a particular section. Its advocates were called upon, to produce the grant to congress of any power to encourage manufactures; and it was denied, that any such effects could be produced under a power given for another purpose. This argument excluded such a grant, under the power of laying

impost. One of the chief motives in adopting the federal constitution, was to encourage foreign commerce; and this policy aimed to destroy it. Congress might pass any law for the purpose of regulating commerce; but this, having its destruction in view, was unconstitutional. The constitutional power to pass such laws being denied, and the authority of the federal judiciary to decide upon its validity being also questioned, a foundation was laid for resisting its execution. The state legislatures were designated as the proper bodies to devise the means of resistance, and various propositions were made, to defeat the object of the tariff policy.

In order to stimulate the public mind, to sustain them in the decided steps that were contemplated, the most inflammable topics were set forth in periodical publications, and in public orations; and were urged with all the vehemence and ardour, which characterizes advocates whose faculties have been ripened under the influence of a tropical

[blocks in formation]

as it was by cupidity and avarice. The federal judiciary was not to be depended on. It had too often shown its inclination, in favour of the constructive powers of the federal government, to be now selected as the arbiter of a question, in which the violation of the constitution was rather in spirit, than in the letter.

But it was not merely by argu. ments, that the passions of the citi. zens of the south were excited. The most exciting appeals were made to them, on the score of interest.

The entire loss of their cotton market was immediately to follow the adoption of the restrictive system; and this sacrifice of southern capital, was to be made solely for the benefit of the northern manufacturer. "It was time to calculate the value of the union." The southern states al. ready contributed a disproportionate share, for the benefit of common protection. The whole reve. nue derived from imposts was represented, as being paid by them. They furnished nearly all the exports of the union; and the revenue, it was said, must depend upon our ability to pay for the importations, and, therefore, it was a tax upon the south. Was it, then, to be endured, that a section of the union, which, for a fourth part of a century, had furnished nearly all the exports, and paid the revenue of the government-the transporta

tion of whose productions to market had been already burdened by a tax for the encouragement of the navigation of New-England; was it to be endured that it should be further taxed, for the exclusive be. nefit of the other sections of the country? The constitution, too, which was intended for the general welfare, and for the protection of federative rights, was made the mere instrument of oppression. With a numerical majority which each succeeding census would increase, the manufacturing states were determined to sacrifice the real interests of the south to their own imaginary interests; and in spite of arguments the most irrefragable, they prostrated, by mere dint of numbers, the representa. tion of the planting states in the national legislature.

If such disregard of their sec. tional interests were manifested in the infancy of the government; what, it was asked, would be the limit of its power, and the measure of its claims, when age and precedents, long acquiesced in, had strengthened its usurping hands?

All distinctions between the federal and state governments would be abolished, and swallowed up in its constructive powers; the rights and local interests of the states depended upon the mercy of congress; and the delicate relation between master and slave placed at

« AnteriorContinuar »