H. OF R.

The Tariff Bill.

APRIL, 1824.

how would the principle laid down by the Speaker operate upon the Southern portion of our Union? If that were a separate confederacy, (which God forbid that it ever should be!) what power could restrain it from pursuing its own most obvious and decided interest, by having a free and unre

to our manufactures, instead of giving them a claim to the protection of this Government, I will acknowledge my entire ignorance of the subject. What, then, is the principal restriction of which we complain? It is the exclusion by Great Britain of our grain from her market. And what claim does this give our manufactures to the interfer-stricted intercourse with Europe? And when we ence of Congress? How does it operate against them? On the contrary, is it not perfectly apparent that it operates in a two-fold manner to give them an advantage over their British rivals? By raising the price of grain in England, it enhances the price of labor there; and by diminishing the price of grain here, it also diminishes the wages of the laborer here. As far, therefore, as labor enters into the price of manufactures, this very restriction (of British policy) is a direct encouragement to our manufacturing industry. But, perhaps gentlemen will say, it is the growers of grain whose interests require us to countervail this injurious restriction. But how do you propose to accomplish this object? The British Government injure our farming interest by excluding our grain and reducing its price! And we are called upon to relieve the farmer, not by increasing the price of the grain which he has to sell, but of the manufactures which he must purchase! Sir, there is more spirit than wisdom in such a policy as this: it defeats its own object.

are about to be deprived of this natural right, and to see our interests immolated at the shrine of a voracious idol, which devours every thing, and produces nothing, it ought not to be a subject of surprise that we oppose the measure as a direct invasion of our most essential rights. And, if I may be permitted to give an opinion as to the true interests of another portion of the Union, I would say, most confidently, that, if New York were a separate State, this would be a most unwise and ruinous policy for her to pursue. For, if there be a State in the Union more interested in foreign commerce than any other, it is New York; and I will add, if there be one more interested than all others, in the cotton trade of the South, that, also, is New York. Yes, sir, that commerce which the majority of her representatives now seem to contemn, is the true source of her prosperity and greatness; and there is no portion of that commerce so important as that which this measure is calculated to jeopardize, if not to destroythe carrying trade of the South. Without this, the city of New York, the great emporium of the Union, would be deprived of half its wealth, and

I will now offer a few remarks upon another view of this subject, to which our attention was called by the Speaker. He told us that this Gov-shorn of half its splendor. And here, sir, I will ernment ought to pursue, as nearly as practicable, say a word or two in relation to a view of this such a policy in relation to the different portions subject, which seems to have great weight with of the Union, as each of those portions would re- the gentlemen who represent the interior of the spectively pursue, if existing as a separate confed- State of New York. They believe that, by reareracy. Let us then inquire what would be the ing up manufactories, they will create a market relative situation of the principal subdivisions of for their grain: but, do they not perceive, that the Union, if each were free to legislate for itself. commerce furnishes a market for this article, much And I will first examine the probable condition more extensive than they can reasonably anticiof that subdivision which the Speaker himself pate from the manufactories they can create? represents the Western country. If that region The city of New York alone, nourished and suswere separated from the rest of the Union, and tained by the very commerce which this bill is formed a distinct confederacy, how would it stand calculated to destroy, creates, by its consumption, in relation to this very question? It would derive a more extensive market for the grain of the inits supplies of foreign manufactures principally terior than will be created by all the manufacturthrough the Atlantic States. I presume it would, ing establishments which this system will bring because it has done so heretofore, and it would into existence in half a century. Indeed, this idea continue to be the interest of the people to do so. of obtaining a market for grain, by forcing manWhat would be the result? What power would ufactures into existence-an idea which has made they have in regulating the imposts upon foreign a very strong impression upon the farming intermerchandise, and how could these imposts affect est in the Middle and Western States-can never their interests? It is obvious that they would be realized, but to a very moderate extent. In have no agency in regulating the tariff of duties, the existing state of the arts, manufactures are and would yet have to pay, indirectly, the amount made principally by machinery, which consumes of those duties, in the increased price of imported no grain-so that it would not, perhaps, be going articles they would consume. In a word, the too far to say, that the agents directly and indiWestern States would be tributary to the Atlan-rectly employed, by commerce, in supplying the tic States. When, therefore, the gentlemen from the West call upon us to adopt this measure for their benefit a benefit which I am sure they will never realize they require us to do what they could not themselves do, even if separated from the rest of the Union, unless indeed they would cut off all commercial intercourse, not only with Europe, but with the Atlantic States also. But

country with a given quantity of foreign manufactures, consume as much of the products of the soil, as would be consumed by the agents who would be employed in the fabrication of the same quantity of domestic manufactures.

While considering the operation of this measure upon the several divisions and interests of the Union, I hope I shall be excused for repeating,

with a view to further illustration, an idea which I advanced at an early stage of the discussion upon the details of this measure, the correctness of which, however, has been since repeatedly denied. stated, and I now deliberately repeat it, that the cotton of the Southern States, the great source of our prosperity, constituting one-third of the whole export of the Union, has reached that critical point in the competition with foreign cottons, when any material derangement of our commercial relations with Great Britain must inevitably expose us to the hazard of losing the market of that country, at least to a very considerable extent. If we cease to take the manufactures of Great Britain, she will assuredly cease to take our cotton to the same extent. It is a settled principle of her policy-a principle not only wise but essential to her existence to purchase from those nations who receive her manufactures, in preference to those who do not. You have, heretofore, been her best custom | ers, and therefore it has been her policy to purchase our cotton to the full extent of our demand for her manufactures. But, say gentlemen, Great Britain does not purchase our cotton from affection, but interest. I grant it sir, and that is the very reason of my decided hostility to a system which will make it her interest to purchase from other countries than our own. It is her interest to purchase cotton, even at a higher price, from those countries which receive her manufactures in exchange. It is better for her to give a little more for cotton, than to obtain nothing for her manufactures. It will be remarked, that the situation of Great Britain is, in this respect, widely different from that of the United States. The powers of her soil have been already pushed very nearly to the maximum of their productiveness. The productiveness of her manufactures, on the contrary, is as unlimited as the demand of the whole world. She, therefore, has no choice of pursuits. Her surplus capital and labor must be directed to manufactures, or remain idle and unproductive. A demand for her manufactures is, then, from the very necessity of her condition, the primary consideration, to which every other must be subservient in the regulation of her commercial relations. To say, therefore, that she will continue to purchase our cotton, because she can get it a little cheaper than other cottons, after we have ceased to purchase her manufactures, is to suppose that she will be utterly blind to her own necessities; that she will, in fact, abandon, where it is most indispensable, that very policy which the friends of this bill now call upon us to adopt, in a spirit of reckless speculation, without considering that our circumstances are the very reverse of those which render such a policy necessary to Great Britain. In fact, sir, the policy of Great Breat Britain is not, as gentlemen seem to suppose, to secure the home but the foreign market for her manufactures. The former she has without an effort. It is to attain the latter that all her policy and enterprise are brought into requisition. The manufactures of that country are the basis of her commerce; our manufactures, on the contrary, are to be the destruction of our commerce. And

|

H. or R.

yet, in a spirit of blind and undiscriminating imitation, we are called upon to follow the example of Great Britain, by adopting a policy which will produce a result precisely the opposite of that which she has experienced of her policy; or, in other words, we are required to adopt, in deference to British wisdom, a system the very reverse of that which British policy would pursue, under the same circumstances! It cannot be doubted that, in pursuance of the policy of forcing her manufactures into foreign markets, she will, if deprived of a large portion of our custom, direct all her efforts to South America. That country abounds in a soil admirably adapted to the production of cotton, and will, for a century to come, import her manufactures from foreign countries. Under these circumstances, it is obvious that Great Britain will use every effort to stimulate the industry of South America, by the various commercial advantages she has it in her power to present, and to make up, by this new trade, the loss she will have sustained in being deprived of ours. But I must hasten to bring my remarks to a conclusion, lest I should exhaust that indulgent patience which, I fear, I have already taxed too severely. A few words, and I shall have done.

It would be some consolation to me, sir, if I could believe that the heavy impositions, which must operate so oppressively upon the part of the Union I have the honor to represent, would produce an equivalent benefit to other portions of the Union. If my constituents must be sacrificed, it would in some degree soothe their injured feelings, if they could have this excuse, at least, for quietly submitting to their fate, hard as it is, and unjust as they believe it to be. But even this humble consolation is denied us. We are doomed to suffer, under a clear conviction that our sufferings will administer no relief to the distresses, whether real or imaginary, of any portion of our fellow-citizens. We are to be made the victims of a system "which not enricheth them, but makes us poor indeed❞—a system which wages war, not against our enemies, but our friends; not against the hostile regulations of other countries, but against the advantages of our natural position in the world, and the munificent bounties of an all-wise Providence-a system which has originated in discontent, and must inevitably end in disappointment. Against such a system I do most solemnly protest, as a palpable invasion of those rights and interests which I am charged to defend and protect. And I do beseech its advocates, as they regard the principles of justice, the interests of the Republic, or the mutual good will of its members, to pause before they give this bill the irrevocable sanction of their final vote. If, however, they should pass it, even with a majority of a single vote, I shall, as bound by my allegiance, submit to it as one of the laws of my country. I have endeavored, with zeal and fidelity, to discharge my duty as a Representative. I trust I shall never be found wanting in my duty as a citizen. I must take leave, however, to say one parting word to the authors of this measure; I thank God that, if mine is to be the suffering, theirs will be the responsibility.

YEAS-Messrs. Adams, Alexander of Tennessee, Allen of Tennessee, Allison, Barbour of Connecticut, J. S. Barbour, Bartley, Beecher, Blair, Bradley, Brown, Buchanan, Buck, Buckner, Cady, Campbell of Ohio, Cassedy, Collins, Condict, Cook, Crafts, Craig, Durfee, Eaton, Eddy, Edwards of Pennsylvania, Ellis, Farrelly, Findlay, Forward, Garrison, Gazlay, Harris, Hayden, Hemphill, Henry, Herkimer, Houston, Isacks, Jenkins, Johnson of Virginia, J. T. Johnson, F. Johnson, Kent, Kidder, Kremer, Lawrence, Letcher, Little, McArthur, McKean, McKim, McLean of Ohio, Mallary, Markley, Martindale, Marvin, Matlack, Matson, Metcalfe, Miller, Mitchell of of Pennsylvania, Patterson of Ohio, Plumer of PennPennsylvania, Moore of Kentucky, Morgan, Patterson The yeas and nays were accordingly ordered; Sandford, Scott, Sharpe, Sloane, Standefer, Sterling, sylvania, Prince, Richards, Rich, Rogers, Rose, Ross, and the House refused to lay the bill on the table-Stewart, Stoddard, Storrs, Strong, Swan, Taylor, Ten yeas 98, nays 110, as follows:

James Wilson, Henry Wilson, Wilson of Ohio, Wood,
Woods, and Wright.

NAYS-Messrs. Abbot, Alexander of Virginia, Allen of Massachusetts, Archer, Baylies, P. P. Barbour, Bartlett, Bassett, Breck, Brent, Burleigh, Burton, Cambreleng, Campbell of South Carolina, Carter, Cary, Clark, Cobb, Cocke, Conner, Crowninshield, Culpeper, Cushman, Cuthbert, Day, Dwinell, Dwight, Edwards of North Carolina, Floyd, Foot of Connecticut, Foote of New York, Forsyth, Frost, Fuller, Garnett, Gatlin, Gist, Govan, Gurley, Hall, Hamilton, Harvey, Hayward, Herrick, Hobart, Hogeboom, Hooks, Lathrop, Leftwich, Lincoln, Litchfield, Livermore, Livingston, Locke, Long, Longfellow, McCoy, McDuffie, McKee, McLane of Delaware, Mangum, Mercer, Mitchell of Maryland, Moore of Alabama, Neale, Nelson, Newton, O'Brien, Owen, Plumer of

New Hampshire, Poinsett, Randolph, Rankin, Reed,
Reynolds, Rives, Saunders, Sibley, Arthur Smith,
Alexander Smyth, William Smith, Spaight, Spence,
A. Stevenson, J. Stephenson, Taliaferro, Tattnall,
Thompson of Georgia, Tucker of Virgina, Tucker of
South Carolina, Vance of North Carolina, Warfield,
Webster, Whipple, Williams of Virginia, Williams
of North Carolina, and Wilson of South Carolina.

The main question was then put, to wit: Shall the bill pass? and passed in the affirmative-yeas 107, nays 102, as follows:

H. of R.

Mr. McLANE, of Delaware, presented a petition of sundry inhabitants of New Jersey, praying for the aid of Government, in improving and rendering safe the harbor of Newcastle, Delaware.-Referred to the Committee on Commerce. Legislature of the State of Maryland, incorporatReferred to the select committee, appointed on the ing the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal Company.5th of December last, on so much of the President's Message as relates to a connexion of the waters of the Chesapeake and Ohio, by means of a

Mr. KENT laid before the House an act of the

canal.

YEAS-Messrs. Adams, Alexander of Tennessee, Allison, Barber of Connecticut, Bartley, Beecher, Bradley, Brown, Buchanan, Buck, Buckner, Cady, Camp bell of Ohio, Cassedy, Clark, Collins, Condict, Cook, Crafts, Craig, Durfee, Dwight, Eaton, Eddy, Edwards of Pennsylvania, Ellis, Farrelly, Findlay, Forward, Garrison, Gazlay, Harris, Hayden, Hemphill, Henry, Mr MCLANE, of Delaware, from the CommitHerkimer, Holcombe, Houston, Jenkins, Johnson of tee of Ways and Means, to which was referred Virginia, J. T. Johnson, F. Johnson, Kidder, Kremer, the bill from the Senate, entitled "An act for the Lawrence, Letcher, Little, McArthur, McKean, McKim, relief of Thomas Hewes," reported the same withMcLane of Delaware, McLean of Ohio, Mallary, Mark-out amendment, and it was committed to a Comley, Martindale, Marvin, Matlack, Matson, Metcalfe, mittee of the Whole. Miller, Mitchell of Pennsylvania, Mitchell of Maryland, Moore of Kentucky, Morgan, Patterson of Pennsylvania, Patterson of Ohio, Plumer of Pennsylvania, Prince, Richards, Rich, Rogers, Rose, Ross, Scott, Sharpe, Sloan, Sterling, Stewart, Stoddard, Storrs, Strong, Swan, Taylor, Ten Eyck, Test, Thompson of Kentucky, Tod, Tomlinson, Tracy, Trimble, Tyson, Udree, Vance of Ohio, Van Rensselaer, Van Wyck, Vinton, Wayne, Whitman, Whittlesey, White, Wickliffe, James Wilson, Henry Wilson, Wilson of Ohio, Wood, Woods, and Wright.

Mr. NEWTON, from the Committee on Commerce, reported a bill to authorize the masters of vessels, in certain cases, to clear out either at the custom-house of Petersburg, or that of Richmond; which was read twice, and ordered to be engrossed and read a third time to-morrow.

tary Affairs, reported a bill concerning the allow-
Mr. HAMILTON, from the Committee on Mili-
lands; which was read twice, and committed to a
ance of pensions upon a relinquishment of bounty
Committee of the Whole.

Commerce were instructed to inquire into the ex-
On motion of Mr. MALLARY, the Committee on
pediency of establishing the city of Troy, in the
State of New York, as a port of delivery.

Mr. MOORE, of Alabama, laid the following resolution on the table for consideration to-morrow,

viz:

NAYS-Messrs. Abbot, Alexander of Virginia, Allen of Massachusetts, Allen of Tennessee, Archer, Bay lies, P. P. Barbour, J. S. Barbour, Bartlett, Bassett, Blair, Breck, Brent, Burleigh, Burton, Cambreleng, Camp bell of South Carolina, Carter, Cary, Cobb, Cocke, Conner, Crowninshield, Culpeper, Cushman, Cuthbert, Day, Dwinell, Edwards of North Carolina, Floyd, Foot of Connecticut, Foote of New York, Forsyth, Frost, Fuller, Garnett, Gatlin, Gist, Govan, Gurley, Resolved, That the Secretary of War be directed to Hall, Hamilton, Harvey, Hayward, Herrick, Hobart, communicate to this House such information as may Hogeboom, Hooks, Isacks, Kent, Lathrop, Lee, Left-be in the possession of the department, connected with wich, Lincoln, Litchfield, Livermore, Livingston, the circumstances under which it is alleged an error Locke, Long, Longfellow, McCoy, McDuffie, McKee, was committed in the location of 640 acres of land, reMangum, Mercer, Moore of Alabama, Neale, Nelson, served to George Harlin, by the 3d article of the treaty Newton, O'Brien, Owen, Plumer of New Hampshire, made with the Cherokee nation of Indians, on the Poinsett, Randolph, Rankin, Reed, Reynolds, Rives, 27th of February, 1819, with such explanatory remarks Saunders, Sandford, Sibley, Arthur Smith, Alexander as may be justifiable from all the circumstances of the Smyth, William Smith, Spaight, Spence, Standefer, I case; in reference to the supposed difference in the

value of the reservation as granted by the said 3d article of the treaty, and that which it is alleged was designed to be obtained by it.

Mr. LONGFELLOW laid the following resolution on the table for consideration to-morrow, viz:

Resolved, That the President of the United States be requested to communicate to this House the correspondence between this Government and France, relating to spoliations committed on American commerce between the years 1793, and 1800; and also, relating to the claims of France upon this Government, for not complying with the treaties of alliance and commerce of February 6, 1778.

Bills from the Senate of the following titles, viz: 1st. An act to provide for the sale of the warehouse at the former quarantine ground, near the English Turn, in the State of Louisiana, and for the erection of a dwelling-house at the Balize, in the said State, for the use of the boarding officer at that place, and for other purposes;

2d. An act supplementary to an act of Congress, passed on the 30th day of June, 1812, entitled "An act making further provision for settling the claims to land in the Territory of Missouri;" 3d. An act for the relief of Elijah Van Syckle of Philadelphia;

APRIL, 1824.

can demonstrate to be so, I trust no apology can be necessary for my requesting leave to present my vindication against those imputations, directly to your honorable body; in order that it may be conveyed to the nation through the same channel by which I have been assailed.

This is a right which, under similar circumstances, I should blest individual in the Union. In this case, it is due suppose, ought not to be denied to the humlately held, and that which I have now the honor to hold; and, owing to the peculiar circumstances of my case, it is emphatically demanded, on my account, by every principle of honor, and every regard to justice. Nor is it unprecedented in either House of Congress, in cases which certainly had no greater claim to such indulgence.

to the nation itself, in consideration of the station I

It will be seen that I was called upon by a committee of the House of Representatives of the last session, as a witness to testify before it; that I was subjected to an examination, which has not its parallel in the records of any free country; and that, after the lapse of about twelve months, and just as I was on the eve of my departure for a foreign country, an attempt has been made to impeach my credibility, on grounds which must have been, at all times since my testimony was given, within the command of the honorable gentleman by whom they have been so opportunely alleged.

4th. An act for the relief of Thomas Shields; 5th. An act for enclosing the burial ground of Christ Church, Washington Parish; were sever- the manner proposed, would be to overthrow the longTo refuse to permit me to repel such an attack, in ally read the first and second time, and referred-est established precedents, and to establish in their the 1st, to the Committee of Ways and Means; the 2d, to the Committee on the Public Lands; the 3d, to the Committee of Ways and Means; the 4th, to the Committee of Claims; the 5th, to the Committee for the District of Columbia.

place the odious, oppressive, unjust, and indefensible principle of allowing the credibility of a witness to be impeached, and yet denying to him the right to support it before the tribunal under whose authority he had been called on to testify.

But, independent of all considerations, in regard to myself, personally, I humbly conceive that your honorable body might well desire to receive my vindicatestimony, on your own account, in order to enable tion, and every corroboration which I can give to my you the more clearly to ascertain the truth of, and the more satisfactorily and correctly to decide upon, statements now before you, and not yet acted on.

ADDRESS OF NINIAN EDWARDS. The SPEAKER Communicated to the House an address of Ninian Edwards, late a Senator of the United States, from the State of Illinois, complaining that injustice has been done him in a report from the Secretary of the Treasury, accompanying the correspondence between the Treasury Department and the banks in the different States, Notwithstanding all the canting about an "A. B. upon the subject of the deposites of public money plot," the ingenious attempts that have been made, in said banks; exculpating himself, and also, pre- and the stratagems that have been adopted, by certain ferring certain charges against the said Secretary.newspaper editors and others, to mislead and deceive The address is as follows:

Speaker of the House of Reps.

To the honorable the House of Representatives of the
Congress of the United States:

the public mind into a belief that the committees, appointed at the last session on that subject, had thoroughly investigated all the statements made by a writer under the signature of A. B. in regard to certain suppressed documents; and that Mr. Crawford had been "triumphantly acquitted," in relation to the whole of them; I assert, without the fear of contradiction, that it is known to your honorable body that neither of those committees extended their investigations into those statements, beyond about four paragraphs, which were mere bagatelles in comparison with other letters and matters that were expressly charged, and incontestably proved, by the documents furnished by Mr. Crawford himself, to have been withheld, contrary to the resolutions of the House which required their production.

As certain proceedings at the last session of Congress, under the authority of the House of Representatives, and a recent report to your honorable body, by the Hon. Wm. H. Crawford, Secretary of the Treas- These important statements, and the matters and ury, seem to have been intended, and are calculated, things contained in my testimony, have neither been to cast upon me imputations injurious to my charac-investigated by any committee, nor acted on by the ter, which I know to be unjust, and which, I think, I | House; and if my testimony had been, it is now re