to a very light one. But this is not all. Most of the articles for which the exports of domestic manufactures are exchanged abroad, are subject to light duties; and the two principal ones (tea and coffee) for which they are chiefly exchanged, are admitted duty free. It is that, as he had stated, which makes the main difference between this and the vetoed bill. On the other hand, all the articles for which the agricultural products of the country, including provisions of every description, and the great staples of the country, are almost exclusively exchanged, are subject to high duties such as wines, silks, worsted, cottons, linens, cutlery, hardware, woollens and the other products of England and the continent. The bill, in short, is framed throughout with the greatest art and skill, to exempt, as far as possible, one branch of industry from all burdens and shackles, and to subject the other exclusively to them; and well may our political opponents raise their heads, amidst their many defeats, and exult at beholding a favorite measure-one, above all others, indispensable to their entire system of policy-about to be consummated; and that, unfortunately, by aid from our ranks. Who could have believed, but a few days since, that such an event would shortly occur?

It results from all that is stated, that this bill is so constructed as to give the greatest amount of protection, with the least of revenue, in proportion to the rates of the duties proposed, which all of the adroit skill of its authors could combine; and its result will be the least amount of revenue in proportion to the burden on the consumer. In that respect, there is no other bill ever passed to be compared to it; no, not that of 1816, nor 1824, nor 1828; nor even its immediate predecessor, the bill vetoed; for that fell far short, in consequence of the omission of the duty in this on tea and coffee. He hazarded little in saying that, if the duties it imposes on the protected articles were reduced two-thirds,

they would yield a third more to the treasury; and that for every dollar this bill puts into the public coffers, it will put three at least into the pockets of the manufacturers, unless (what would be worse, and which, he believed, would prove to be the case) it should annihilate that amount and more of the productive industry of the country, to the general impoverishment of the community.

But our political friends who are about (unfortunately, as he believed) to give this bill their votes, endeavor to console us by telling us it is a mere provisional measure, intended to meet present exigencies; and that it will be repealed or greatly modified in a short time after we get into power. They doubtless think so; but will it be the case? Can they, on reflection, seriously believe that the necessity, which they plead in excuse for their votes, will be less then than it is now ?

Do they really think that the manufacturers will be better able to bear a reduction of these high duties, about to be imposed, as it is alleged, to save them, than they are now to do without them? If they do, they will be wofully mistaken. We have had a good deal of experience on the subject. The effect of high duties is not to decrease the necessity of continuing them, but the reverse-to increase the necessity of raising them still higher. This bill itself furnishes some striking evidence of the fact. Among the articles on which it imposes the highest rates of duty, is that of coarse cottons-rates not less than 100 per cent. on some descriptions; and they are the very articles so highly favored by the tariff of 1816, under the minimum duty, which the Senator from Kentucky (Mr. Crittenden) so kindly brought to his recollection in the course of his remarks. We were then told (as we now are of this bill) that it was a mere provisional measure to protect an infant manufacture, which, in a few years would protect itself by its own intrinsic energy; and yet now, after more than a quarter of a century, the

manufacturers of the same articles come and ask a still higher duty, in proportion, than what they then did. Again: another favored article, at that period, was rolled iron-to protect which against the foreign, a duty of $30 per ton was laid on the imported; and now, also, its manufacturers come again, after so great a lapse of time, and ask a duty of $25 per ton; which is an ad valorem duty on the present cost greater than the rate per cent. in 1816-being not less than 100 per cent. He would add another item-that of cotton bagging and bale rope; on which the rate per cent. is much higher, as now proposed by this bill, than under the tariffs of 1824 or 1828; although we had then the same assurance as to it as we have now as to this bill-that it was provisional, and that the home market would soon furnish a cheaper and better article. In fact, the whole bill, taken in connection with the declarations of its advocates-that the manufactures must go down unless these duties are imposed -forms a volume of evidence that the whole effects of all past protection, from 1816 to this day, have been but to require still higher. It is, indeed, in the nature of the system, as he had proved when the vetoed bill was before the Senate, that every duty imposed had but the effect of requiring a still higher. The cry ever has been "more, more, more." The more it has been supported, the more it required to be supported.

Those, then, of our political friends who intend to vote for this bill, deceive themselves, in supposing they are imposing a provisional or temporary burden. It is easy to put on the burden, but it will prove hard to take it off-as we have had ample experience. The exigency under which they, unfortunately, suppose they are compelled to vote for it, will be as great-nay, greater—against repealing or reducing the duties it imposes, hereafter, as it is now to impose them. Instead of being less dependent, the operatives, who live by the bounties it grants, will be more numerous, and more de

pendent; and, if to refuse to impose these duties now would subject them to starvation, as we are told,—to repeal or reduce them hereafter would more certainly be followed (and that, to a greater extent) by the same effect.

He would tell those who were about to take the fatal step, that they were about to do what could not be undone short of the extreme medicine of the constitution; unless the excess to which it is proposed to push the system should bring an empty treasury into the conflict with protection, or the great advance of intelligence should teach the many that the whole scheme, with all its plausible catch-phrases, is but a device of the few to live on the products of their labor.

Such, at least, was his conception; and, he believed he might say that of the many friends around him, and who, with him, are opposed to this bill. And what are the motives which are held out to us to give it our support? We are told by its friends and advocates that its passage would settle the question. They say the country needs repose; and that its business and prosperity cannot be revived till it is attained. That may be admitted. But will the passage of this bill settle the question, and give repose? The very reverse. It will greatly increase the agitation. The principles involved in the controversy are so directly hostile, that the question can never be settled till one or the other shall permanently prevail. There is (and, in the nature of things, there can be) no compromise between those who hold that the power of levying duties was given only for the purpose of raising revenue for the support of the Government, and can constitutionally and honestly be exercised only for that purpose; and those who hold that, in laying duties for the wants of the Government, they may at the same time, be laid for the purpose of taking money from one portion of the community, to give to another. The great struggle between these conflicting principles now is, which shall gain the permanent ascendency. This bill, if it should pass, would, at

least for the present, give it to the side of monopoly, and against the side of equal rights; and if that ascendency become permanent-if its passage should settle the question, as its advocates fondly hope, in vain will be our victories at this and the extra session for popular institutions. The popular party, of which we are members, must go down; and our opponents, with their policy, and the form of government to which it must necessarily lead, will rise permanently in the ascendant. Justice and equality—justice rigidly enforced, and equality between citizen and citizen, State and State, and one portion of the country and another, are essential elements of our system of Governments, and of the party to which we profess to belong; and no system of policy can be admitted, which shall permanently depart from them without fatal consequences to both. Already, if we may judge from the declarations of the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Choate), and other advocates of this measure, the protective policy which this bill carries, so far, has made fearful changes for the worse in a large portion of the population of our country. According to their representations, the operatives engaged in manufactures which have been forced into existence by the system, depend for their bread on the passage of this bill. Is such a state of dependence on the movement of this Government consistent with the bold and independent spirit of freemen? Can a population be relied on to watch over and control its movements or resist its encroachments, when, whether they shall live or starve depends on the change of two or three votes in this or the other House-and this, too, depending, perhaps, on no higher consideration than the calculation of political chances? That any portion of our population should be in so low and dependent a condition, excited his commiseration. If such are the blessings of the system,-if it can so humble, in so short a time, the once proud, hardy, and independent yeomanry of New England,―he for one, would infinitely rather