JANUARY, 1833.] Reduction of the Tariff-Mr. Verplanck's Bill. States? [H. OF R. of justice, and expediency, and honor, admit, | more inquiry, that such a distribution of duties without more inquiry, that a tariff, producing works any sectional wrong to the planting fifteen millions of revenue, and effectually protecting domestic manufactures, will operate with any peculiar and sectional injustice and severity on the planting States. In the first place, before we venture against our recorded acts of the last session to take a matter of so much importance for granted, I say we ought to have before us for inspection, the project of a bill yielding fifteen millions, and so framed as to protect manufactures. No such bill was ever submitted to this Congress. This, from the Ways and Means, that committee tell us, will produce twelve and a half millions only, and it makes no attempt towards effectual protection. The tariff of last session, it is said, will produce twenty millions. What we ought to have, from some committee or some department, for analysis, is a tariff, put together by express instruction of this House in such a manner as to raise a revenue of fifteen millions, without injury to existing investments; and, as far as practicable, without injustice to any distinct section of country. Then, sir, there would be something definite to act upon; there would then be a specific plan of taxation before you, under which some imports would be free; some lightly and some heavily burdened; the articles would be enumerated and the rates fixed. We should know then the terms and conditions of the problem to be solved. We could then subject the planting States to a minute comparison with other States, in regard to their habits of consumption and production, with reference to a given scheme of finance. The question then would be, taking into account the character of the consumption and production which distinguish the two great divisions of the country, which of them, under this precise scale of duties will feel the heaviest burden, or will it fall in just proportion on each? I repeat, sir, the first step towards a proper trial of the question involved in the representation of the South, would seem to me to be to call on the Committee of Manufactures, or of Ways and Means, for a bill of this character. Until we can see, and can dissect such an one, I shall not admit, in deference to any abstract reasonings, however ingenious; to any declamation, however eloquent; to any complaints, however loud or general; that it may not be made to unite all the three requisites which must meet in a just popular, and permanent tariff; that is, that it brings no surplus into the treasury, encourage and save manufacturing investments, and do no local wrong to the South. But, sir, without waiting for the project of such a tariff, we know, to some extent what it must be; we know, in general, that it will lay a heavier duty on articles coming in competition with our domestic manufactures; and a lighter duty, if any, on articles not coming into competition with them, than the average of a mere uniform ad valorem revenue duty. And, now, is this House prepared to admit, without In considering this question, let the tariff first be regarded as a great indirect tax on consumption paid by consumers. I know that this view of the tariff is narrow and inadequate; it is, however, to a great extent, the true view of it, so far as you look to the burdens only which it imposes. It is a law laying taxes on consumption, which are paid by consumers. The question is, do these taxes fall disproportionately on the South? In this way of considering the subject, the only ground on which the alleged inequality of this tax, in its operation on the planting States, can be made out, is this: that those States consume a larger value of imported articles paying heavy duties under such a discriminating tariff, in proportion to their whole consumption or ability, than the other States; that they consume a larger value of imported sugar, woollen cloth, cotton cloth, articles and materials of occasional and extra dress, household furniture, mechanic tools, iron, steel, hemp, flax, cordage, chain cables, sail cloth, oil and dyeing materials, and the like, in proportion to their whole consumption, than the other States. Now, do the planting States, in point of fact, consume a larger amount of such articles than the rest of the Union, according to their ability? Sir, I utterly deny it. I assert the direct contrary. I tender an issue, and respectfully pray that the same may be inquired of by the country. In the first place, sir, it has been alleged on this floor that the planting States do not now, and never did, consume so large a value of all imported dutiable goods, in proportion to their numbers, as the other States. In particular, I recollect, that the gentleman from Rhode Island, (Mr. BURGES,) in his able speech at the last session, took this position very strongly. In the resolutions which he laid some days since on your table, he reasserts this position. He told us that the records of the treasury and customhouses will sustain him in it. They will show you, or rather you may collect from them, with reasonable certainty, the whose value of imported dutiable goods consumed year by year in the whole country, and the value of those consumed in the Southern States; the whole amount of duties collected on them all, and the amount collected on the portion consumed in the Southern States. The result of the examination will be, that the complaining States have never paid, from the organization of the Government to this day, an amount of the indirect taxes which have mainly borne the entire national expenditure, in just proportion to their numbers, their whole consumption, and their general ability. Sir, if the fact be so, it is a most important one. If it be so, that under no tariff, at no time, those States have paid a fair, constitutional proportion of tax, is it certain that under H. OF R.] Reduction of the Tariff-Mr. Verplanck's Bill. a protecting tariff of fifteen millions, they will pay more than their proportion? Is this so certain that you will take it for granted, without inquiry, and without trial, and prostrate your manufactures on the assumption? [JANUARY, 1833. to the Northern as to the Southern consumer; there is nothing sectional in the alleged grievance. I say, further, that all the leading American manufactures are, all things considered, rapidly and successfully establishing themselves; that the time is speedily coming when a protecting duty will be unnecessary, or rather will not be felt at all by the consumer in the price of articles; and that, therefore, within the sensible and temperate doctrine of Alexander Hamilton, and even of Mr. Gallatin, as expressed in the memorial of the free trade convention, presented to this Congress at its last session, the present temporary inconvenience ought to be submitted to by the individual, for the sake of that ultimate and certain compensation, a diversified, vigorous, and national manufacturing industry. I submit, therefore, sir, upon the whole, that we should not pass this bill, because it assumes that a tariff producing only the necessary revenue, cannot be constructed to give effectual protection to manufactures without injustice to the South; a position which I deny ; and which, let me say, we cannot admit consistently with our own solemn responsibilities to our constituents, to the nation, to that tribunal "at which nations themselves must one day answer." Sir, in this view, the resolutions for inquiry proposed by the gentleman from Rhode Island, seem to me eminently reasonable and proper. I submit that we should immediately call out all the evidence to this point contained in the treasury and custom-houses; and, in the absence of that higher proof, I shall hold that the gentleman has truly stated to us the result of it. I have thus far been considering the tariff as an indirect tax on consumption, paid by the consumers of imported dutiable goods. In that way of considering it, I never could comprehend the Southern sectional objection to it. To give color to that objection, it should be shown that the States which urge it, consume a larger value of imports paying the heavy rates of duty, in proportion to their whole consumption, which is always in proportion to ability, than the other States. Not a tittle of evidence, in proof of this position, was ever offered to this or any other Congress. The presumptions are all the other way; we utterly deny the position, and offer to unite in any mode of inquiry which can be suggested to ascertain its truth or falsehood. It is sometimes said, sir, that the consumer in the planting States pays a tax to the Northern manufacturer. This, like all violently metaphorical and incorrect language, is calculated to mislead the mind. It may be honestly, but never can be safely employed in any reasoning. Closely scrutinized, it means nothing, or nothing to this purpose. It means only that he who (instead of buying a foreign article, paying the price, and reimbursing the duty) buys a domestic article, pays a price perhaps somewhat enhanced, perhaps not at all so, by the circum-on them, will be various and secret, and all stance that the imported fabric is charged with a duty. It is delusive and mischievous to call this the payment of a tax. The article has never borne one; the vender paid none; the buyer reimbursed none. So far from this, he who substitutes the domestic for the foreign fabric, pro tanto, evades the tax. If, then, you buy of the Northern manufacturer, you diminish your contribution to the public burden; if you buy nothing of him, you still pay no more than your share. On what ground, then, do you complain of a protecting tariff as an indirect There is but one ground on which you can tax? You demand, instead of it, a tariff laying account for the vote you give for this bill, and an uniform ad valorem duty on all imports. it is, that South Carolina, has nullified every Well, why? You see that you do not now con-existing tariff. But you deny her right to nultribute more than your proportion of indirect tax to the federal treasury. Would you contribute less? Do you say, however, that the Southern consumer of domestic manufactures pays to the manufacturer a price enhanced by the imposi- | tion of duties on the similar imported manufacture; and that he thus bears a burden, though he does not pay a tax? I answer, first, that if the price is so enhanced, it is enhanced as well Mr. Chairman: There is one more general reason why this House should not now pass this bill, or any bill at all resembling it. That is a fatally bad measure in itself, that it disturbs and endangers all the manufacturing investments of the country, and sacrifices especially those of New England. This, sir, indeed, is enough to decide my vote. But if it were not quite so palpably and radically bad, I should hope it would be promptly rejected. Sir, the actual motives on which gentleman will perform the duty which this occasion devolves deserving respect. By me they shall not be impeached or questioned. Some, undoubtedly, will vote for the bill upon a consistent and avowed and settled hostility to the protective system. Some, perhaps, because their interests are spared, and those only of their neighbors and allies are sacrified. Some, again, upon an honest apprehension for the integrity of the Union. But, sir, the country, history, will stamp this proceeding as a concession to the sovereignty of South Carolina. lify the law; and you agree with the President; you agree with the people speaking through their local Governments, their primary asseinblies, and the press, as with a voice of thunder, that she must admit, though she were the fairest and dearest of the whole sisterhood of the States. You propose, then, to abandon a policy, sixteen, or rather forty years old; sanctioned by every President and every Congress; by the acquiescence of a large constitutional majority JANUARY, 1833.] Reduction of the Tariff-Mr. Verplanck's Bill. [H. OF R. of the people; by a long, splendid, and robust | Government. These are my views, and, if national prosperity; a policy to which, five accomplished, all will be well. months ago, you gave your sanction; to aban- By a fair and reasonable protection, I do not don it without inquiry, without instruction from mean prohibition, neither do I mean an insuryour constituents, yet against their known in-ance against the fluctuation of the market by an terests and presumed will; to abandon it, not to excessive influx; but merely such protection as justice, for you do not believe that justice de- will counteract foreign regulations, and commands it; not in deference to the opposition of pensate for the difference in the cost of a respectable constitutional minority, for that manufacturing. Is this not fair? Why should you have all along thought it your duty to dis- more be required, if protection alone is wanted, regard; but in deference to this strange, half- and when murmurs and discontents exist in the peaceable, half-forcible, wholly unconstitution- South? They say the operation is unequal; al interposition of a single State! that one branch of industry is taxed to support another, and that they are compelled to pay more than their just proportion as to the equality of duties on the manufacturing and nonmanufacturing States. I shall read an extract from the Federalist, a book of high authority: "When the demand is equal to the quantity of goods at market, the consumer generally pays the duty; but when the markets happen to be overstocked, a great proportion falls upon the merchant, and sometimes not only exhausts his profits, but breaks in on his capital. I am apt to think that a division of the duty between the seller and the buyer more often happens than is commonly imagined. It is not always possible to raise the price of a commodity in exact proportion to every additional imposition laid upon it. The merchant, especially in a country of small commercial capital, is often under a necessity of keeping prices down, in order to more expeditious sale. The maxim that the consumer is the payer, is so much oftener true than the reverse of the proposition, that it is far more equitable that the duties on imports should go into a common stock, than that they should redound to the exclusive benefit of the importing States. But is it not so generally true, as to render it equitable that these duties should form the only national fund? When they are paid by the merchant, they operate as an additional tax upon the importing States, whose citizens pay their proportion of them in their characters of consumers. In this view, they are productive of inequality among the States; which inequality would be increased with the increased extent of the duties. The confinement of the national revenues to this species of imposts would be attended with inequality from a different cause, between the manufacturing and non-manufacturing States. The States which can go farthest towards the supply of their own wants, by their own manufactures, will not, according to their numbers or wealth, consume so great a proportion of imported articles as those States which are not in the same favorable situation; they could not, therefore, in this mode alone, contribute to the public treasury in a ratio to their abilities. Sir, it is for those, if any such there are, who, out of this House, are pressing this bill along, from any motive of political ambition, to consider how it may affect the chances of public men for high office, thus to make nullification a triumphant and recognized part of our already sufficiently complicated system. It is for us, the members of this House, who believe "that the preservation of the General Government, in its whole constitutional vigor, is the sheet-anchor of our peace at home and safety abroad," and that "absolute acquiescence in the decision of the majority is the vital principle of republics, from which there is no appeal but to force, the vital principle and immediate parent of despotism: It is for us to pause long and anxiously before we do any thing to establish the precedent, fraught with all unimaginable and immitigable evil, that a small majority of a single State, whether of the fourth class, or the first, shall make the laws of this Union. Sir, in this view, our situation is undoubtedly one of interest and responsibility. Thank God, however, our duty is as plain as it is important. Sir, these unauthorized risings against the law, I will not call them what the law calls them, revolts, rebellions, treason, are among, I do not say the ordinary, but they are among the inevitable and not unfrequent perils which menace all human Governments. Remember, they are the same under our system that they are under every other. Our federal constitution, and our separation into States, may give them force, organization, complexity; but they do not change their nature. Essentially, here, and everywhere else, they are things irreconcilably antagonist to the rightful supremacy of the public will. Here, and everywhere else, there is but one of two alternatives for choice. They must be put down by the Government, or the Government must be put down by them. Mr. GILMORE, of Pennsylvania said: Great responsibility rests upon the action of this Congress. We have arrived at a critical period in our Government, where one misstep may seal our rain; a healing policy alone will answer, which I apprehend is contained in the bill under consideration. The bill proposes to reduce the duties to the wants of the Government, and so to arrange these duties as to afford a fair and reasonable protection to those great interests which have grown up under the faith of the Sir, I believe we have the power of protection, and I agree as to the expediency, at least so far as can be confined within the limits of a revenue standard. The first great interest which I shall notice, H. OF R.] Mr. Verplanck's Bill-South Carolina-Nullification and Secession. [JANUARY, 1833. the duties; it is always the case; but this is unavoidable. The national debt being paid off, the people will not submit to taxation or high duties, and suffer money to accumulate in the treasury. Bringing the protection to the revenue standard will give stability and uniformity to the system, and less protection will be required than where the system is shifting and changing. But it is apprehended that the proposed reduction would induce foreign manufacturers to glut the market at a present loss, with the hope of a future gain, by breaking down our establishments. This I consider without foundation, in consequence of the difficulty in dividing the loss among themselves. hundred millions of people. The labor-saving machinery used here is perhaps equal to the labor of four times our present population. It is evident, then, that the production may easily exceed the consumption, because population cannot keep pace. But I shall not enlarge, nor detain the committee longer. requiring protection, is iron. This I place on a footing different from other manufactures. It is the first necessary of civilized life," and contributes most to the wealth, the comfort, and the improvement of society." It is essential to the independence and defence of a nation. | It is a great national object, in which we are all interested. I have no practical experience as to the making of iron; but from the best information I can obtain, I believe the protection proposed by this bill will be sufficient, and in a short time it may be reduced, if not dispensed with entirely. Our beds of ore and banks of coal are inexhaustible. A coking company is formed in this country, and when the application of stone coal is perfectly understood, we The fact is, all the great branches of manucan make iron as cheap here as in any part of factures are already overdone. England alone the world. could supply the world. The labor-saving maIn England, in consequence of the encroach-chinery used there is equal to the labor of two ments on the forest in the year 1788, the quantity of iron made out of charcoal had dwindled down to thirteen thousand tons per annum. At that time coke was introduced into the blast furnaces, and in less than eight years it increased more than tenfold; and, at this time, they make annually to the amount of eight hundred thousand tons, being more than all the world besides. The honorable gentleman from Connecticut, my colleague on the Committee of Ways and Means, (Mr. INGERSOLL,) if I understood him correctly, seemed to insinuate that my course, in relation to this bill, was influenced by the favor shown to Pennsylvania on iron. Pennsylvania asks but equal justice; she claims no favor nor preference over her sister States. My colleague (Mr. CRAWFORD) thinks iron is not sufficiently protected, and can see no reason when we took the act of 1816, and its supplements of 1818, as the basis of our bill, that we did not put rolled iron at thirty dollars as it stood under the act of 1816. I say in reply, that I believe twenty-four dollars a sufficient protection for rolled iron, and is one step towards justice; the difference between hammered and rolled iron appeared unwarrantable; and even the justice of the discrimination may be doubted, if the expediency should not, as will be seen by the following letter: [Here Mr. G. read a letter from Mr. Stratford Canning, Minister of Great Britain, to Mr. Adams, Secretary of State, dated Washington, November 26, 1812.] But I shall proceed to notice the testimony taken before the Committee on Manufactures, in 1828. The following question was proposed to several witnesses, to wit: If wool be the same price here as in England, can the American manufacturer make the fabric as cheap as it is made in England? [Mr. Gilmore here quoted the written opinions of fifteen American manufacturers sustaining his views.] Sir, I have no doubt considerable embarrassment will be the consequence of a reduction of WEDNESDAY, January 16. South Carolina-Nullification--Secession. A message was received from the President of the United States, communicating the nullifying ordinance of the South Carolina convention, and other papers relating thereto, together with the President's own views, as to what was proper to be done in the existing posture of the Union in reference to that State. Mr. WILDE said it was obvious that the message just read was universally felt to be of the in the anxious countenances which surrounded most solemn importance. This might be scen him. We had arrived at a solemn crisis-a crisis of the most extraordinary character. It had, for the first time since the institution of the Government, been announced to Congress that one of the States of the Union had denied by the Chief Magistrate of the United States, the power of our laws. If we persevere in enforcing these laws, she claims the right of withdrawing from the Union. This right she has announced that she will exercise, and will reof the United States, peaceably if she may, and lieve her citizens from the operation of the laws with violence if that should become necessary. This was not the ordinary case of enforcing the execution of the laws upon private individ uals. The SPEAKER said, if the gentleman proposed to make any motion, he would be pleased to submit his proposition in writing. Mr. WILDE said his proposition was, that the message and the accompanying documents be printed; and that the further consideration of the subject be postponed until to-morrow, in order that gentlemen might, after due reflection JANUARY, 1833.] South Carolina-Nullification and Secession-The Tariff Bill. upon this momentous topic, come to its consideration with calmer feelings. Motion to postpone was negatived. [H. OF R. | true policy of the country ever since the foundation of the Government. Almost the first act of Congress, which was passed after the adoption of the constitution, was entitled, in part, "An act for the protection and encouragement of manufactures." The essential importance of this policy to the wealth and independence of the nation early attracted the attention of the father of his country, who was always alive to every thing which was calculated to promote its best interests; and who, in his Executive messages, pressed upon Congress the promotion and encouragement of it, with all the solicitude he felt for the future glory and prosperity of that country. In this his efforts have been seconded by all the distinguished men who have since filled the Executive chair down to the present period; each and all of whom have in some form or other, advocated and maintained, encouraged and enforced it, as the only true policy. Mr. ARCHER moved to refer the message and documents to the Committee on the Judiciary. The object of the message was to bring to the attention of Congress the necessity for certain laws. If Congress concurred in the views stated, he would put it to the House whether the Judiciary Committee was not the most proper to examine and report upon the subject. He had been surprised at the proposition to refer the message to the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union. Was that committee competent to digest and prepare the necessary measures? By such a reference every object of reference would be prostrated. The subject would be turned loose upon the wide field of debate only for the purpose of creating excitement. All that was suggested in the message as necessary, was certain additions and amendments to the revenue laws. For the purpose Eight years of actual experiment satisfied the of reporting these additions and amendments, people, and their representatives, that the prothe Judiciary Committee was the most proper. tection afforded our manufacturers by the law It was not, perhaps, very important whether of 1816, was insufficient to enable them successthe reference was to a standing or select com- fully to compete with foreign capital and skill, mittee. Either would fully and speedily ac- and with the pauper labor of Europe, and decomplish the object desired. But he hoped the termined them to carry out the principle of that reference would not be made to the Committee | law, by giving to the labor and enterprise of of the Whole on the state of the Union, unless our citizens, efficiency, ample encouragement, gentlemen desired to go into a protracted de- and protection. This determination produced bate without practical result. the enactment of the laws of 1824 and 1828, which did afford to our farmers, mechanics, and manufacturers all necessary protection and encouragement. Believing, then, the policy of the Government to be settled, fixed, and permanent, as evidenced by these various acts of legislation, hundreds, yes, thousands of millions of dollars have been vested by the people in the establishment of manufactories, and in the growth and culture of the raw material consumed in them throughout the country-the whole of which, there is too much reason to fear, will be sacrificed, if the bill reported by the Committee of Ways and Means, now under discussion, shall be adopted by Congress. Mr. IRWIN said, the standing committees were selected in reference to the duties they were ordinarily called on to perform. He would ask if this was an ordinary subject? It was one of the very highest magnitude, and should be sent to a committee raised with express reference to it, instead of being sent to one of the standing committees. He should therefore vote against its reference to the Judiciary Committtee. Mr. CAMBRELENG begged gentlemen to reflect that if the message was sent to the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, probably three weeks would be spent in debate upon it. All that was desired, was that a committee should report the necessary amendments to the present laws relative to the collection of the revenue. The whole subject was of a judicial nature. One great object was to obviate the replevin law of South Carolina and provide for enforcing the laws of the United States. In his opinion no course was so proper to effect this object, as the proposed reference to the Committee on the Judiciary. The reference was then made to the Judiciary Committee by a large majority of the House. Mr. CLAY moved the message and documents be printed, which was adopted, and twenty-five thousand additional copies were ordered. THURSDAY, January 17. Mr. MCKENNAN, of Pennsylvania said: Sir, the protective policy has been recognized as the And now, Mr. Chairman, permit me briefly to inquire what have been the practical operation and effect of this system upon the interests and upon the prosperity of the country? Commerce, contrary to the anticipations of its enemies, has flourished-the mechanic arts have been encouraged the laborer has experienced a greater demand and higher wages for his la bor-the farmer has been secured a steadier and a better market for his produce the planter of the Southern States has prospered-the manufacturer has prospered-the whole country, and all its parts have prospered, not excepting the very State which is now so loudly and so boldly presenting its complaints; whose flourishing condition is exhibited in the most glowing colors in the last annual message of her Executive; and besides all this, sir, under the operation of this very system, will shortly be exhibited to the world the extraordinary and |