[THE compromise tariff bill introduced by Mr. Clay, and
supported by him in the foregoing speech of the twelfth of
February, although favorably received by a majority, encountered
considerable opposition from various motives. Mr. Forsyth, of
Georgia, and others, met the proposition with sarcastic remarks,
while Mr. Webster, and other northern senators, objected to it
as surrendering too much of the protective system. To these
objections Mr. Clay replied as follows. The bill finally passed
the house of representatives (to obviate doubts as to its being
a revenue bill) on the twenty-sixth of February, by a vote of
one hundred and twenty to eighty-four, and the senate on the
first of March, by twenty-nine to sixteen.]
BEING anxious, Mr. President, that this bill should pass, and pass
this day, I will abridge as much as I can, the observations I am
called upon to make. I have long, with pleasure and pride, coöperated
in the public service with the senator from Massachusetts; and I have
found him faithful, enlightened, and patriotic. I have not a particle
of doubt as to the pure and elevated motives which actuate him. Under
these circumstances, it gives me deep and lasting regret, to find
myself compelled to differ from him as to a measure involving vital
interests, and perhaps the safety of the union. On the other hand,
I derive great consolation from finding myself on this occasion, in
the midst of friends with whom I have long acted, in peace and in war,
and especially with the honorable senator from Maine, (Mr. Holmes,)
with whom I had the happiness to unite in a memorable instance. It
was in this very chamber, that senator presiding in the committee
of the senate, and I in committee of twenty-four of the house of
representatives, on a Sabbath day, that the terms were adjusted, by
which the compromise of the Missouri question was effected. Then the
dark clouds that hung over our beloved country were dispersed, and
now the thunders from others not less threatening, and which have been
longer accumulating, will, I hope, roll over us harmless and without
injury.
The senator from Massachusetts objects to the bill under consideration,
on various grounds. He argues, that it imposes unjustifiable restraints
on the power of future legislation; that it abandons the protective
policy, and that the details of the bill are practically defective.
He does not object to the gradual, but very inconsiderable, reduction
of duties which is made prior to 1842. To that he could not object,
because it is a species of prospective provision, as he admits, in
conformity with numerous precedents on our statute-book. He does not
object so much to the state of the proposed law prior to 1842, during
a period of nine years; but throwing himself forward to the termination
of that period, he contends that congress will then find itself under
inconvenient shackles, imposed by our indiscretion. In the first place,
I would remark, that the bill contains no obligatory pledges; it could
make none; none are attempted. The power over the subject is in the
constitution; put there by those who formed it, and liable to be taken
out only by an amendment of the instrument. The next congress, and
every succeeding congress, will undoubtedly have the power to repeal
the law whenever they may think proper. Whether they will exercise it
or not, will depend upon a sound discretion, applied to the state of
the whole country, and estimating fairly the consequences of the repeal,
both upon the general harmony and the common interests. Then the bill
is founded in a spirit of compromise. Now, in all compromises there
must be mutual concessions. The friends of free trade insist, that
duties should be laid in reference to revenue alone. The friends of
American industry say, that another, if not paramount object in laying
them, should be, to diminish the consumption of foreign and increase
that of domestic products. On this point the parties divide, and
between these two opposite opinions a reconciliation is to be effected,
if it can be accomplished. The bill assumes as a basis adequate
protection for nine years, and less beyond that term. The friends
of protection say to their opponents, we are willing to take a lease
of nine years, with the long chapter of accidents beyond that period,
including the chance of war, the restoration of concord, and along
with it, a conviction common to all, of the utility of protection; and
in consideration of it, if, in 1842, none of these contingences shall
have been realized, we are willing to submit as long as congress may
think proper, to a maximum rate of twenty per centum, with the power
of discrimination below it, cash duties, home valuations, and a liberal
list of free articles, for the benefit of the manufacturing interest.
To these conditions the opponents of protection are ready to accede.
The measure is what it professes to be, a compromise; but it imposes
and could impose no restriction upon the will or power of a future
congress. Doubtless great respect will be paid, as it ought to be paid,
to the serious condition of the country that has prompted the passage
of this bill. Any future congress that might disturb this adjustment,
would act under a high responsibility, but it would be entirely within
its competency to repeal, if it thought proper, the whole bill. It
is far from the object of those who support this bill, to abandon or
surrender the policy of protecting American industry. Its protection or
encouragement may be accomplished in various ways――first, by bounties,
as far as they are within the constitutional power of congress to offer
them; second, by prohibitions, totally excluding the foreign rival
article; third, by high duties without regard to the aggregate amount
of revenue which they produce; fourth, by discriminating duties so
adjusted as to limit the revenue to the economical wants of government;
and, fifth, by the admission of the raw material, and articles
essential to manufactures, free of duty; to which may be added, cash
duties, home valuations, and the regulation of auctions. A perfect
system of protection would comprehend most if not all these modes of
affording it. There might be at this time a prohibition of certain
articles (ardent spirits and coarse cottons, for example,) to public
advantage. If there were not inveterate prejudices and conflicting
opinions prevailing, (and what statesman can totally disregard
impediments?) such a compound system might be established.
Now, Mr. President, before the assertion is made, that the bill
surrenders the protective policy, gentlemen should understand
perfectly what it does not as well as what it does propose. It impairs
no power of congress over the whole subject; it contains no promise or
pledge whatever, express or implied, as to bounties, prohibitions, or
auctions; it does not touch the power of congress in regard to them,
and congress is perfectly free to exercise that power at any time; it
expressly recognises discriminating duties within a prescribed limit;
it provides for cash duties and home valuations; and it secures a
free list, embracing numerous articles, some of high importance to
the manufacturing arts. Of all the modes of protection which I have
enumerated, it affects only the third; that is to say, the imposition
of high duties, producing a revenue beyond the wants of government.
The senator from Massachusetts contends that the policy of protection
was settled in 1816, and that it has ever since been maintained.
Sir, it was settled long before 1816. It is coeval with the present
constitution, and it will continue, under some of its various aspects,
during the existence of the government. No nation can exist, no nation
perhaps ever existed, without protection in some form, and to some
extent, being applied to its own industry. The direct and necessary
consequence of abandoning the protection of its own industry, would be
to subject it to the restrictions and prohibitions of foreign powers;
and no nation, for any length of time, can endure an alien legislation
in which it has no will. The discontents which prevail, and the safety
of the republic, may require the modification of a specific mode of
protection, but it must be preserved in some other more acceptable
shape.
All that was settled in 1816, in 1824, and in 1828, was, that
protection should be afforded _by high duties, without regard to
the amount of the revenue which they might yield_. During that whole
period, we had a public debt which absorbed all the surpluses beyond
the ordinary wants of government. Between 1816 and 1824, the revenue
was liable to the greatest fluctuations, vibrating between the extremes
of about nineteen and thirty-six millions of dollars. If there were
more revenue, more debt was paid; if less, a smaller amount was
reimbursed. Such was sometimes the deficiency of the revenue, that it
became necessary to the ordinary expenses of government, to trench upon
the ten millions annually set apart as a sinking fund, to extinguish
the public debt. If the public debt remained undischarged, or we had
any other practical mode of appropriating the surplus revenue, the
form of protection, by high duties, might be continued without public
detriment, it is the payment of the public debt, then, and the arrest
of internal improvements by the exercise of the veto, that unsettles
that specific form of protection. Nobody supposes, or proposes, that
we should continue to levy, by means of high duties, a large annual
surplus, of which no practical use can be made, for the sake of the
incidental protection which they afford. The secretary of the treasury
estimates that surplus on the existing scale of duties, and with
the other sources of revenue, at six millions annually. An annual
accumulation at that rate, would, in a few years, bring into the
treasury the whole currency of the country, to lie there inactive
and dormant.
This view of the condition of the country has impressed every
public man with the necessity of some modification of the principles
of protection, so far as it depends upon high duties. The senator
from Massachusetts feels it; and hence, in the resolutions which he
submitted, he proposes to reduce the duties, so as to limit the amount
of the revenue to the wants of the government. With him revenue is the
principal, protection the subordinate object. If protection cannot be
enjoyed after such a reduction of duties as he thinks ought to be made,
it is not to be extended. He says, specific duties and the power of
discrimination, are preserved by his resolutions. So they may be under
the operation of the bill. The only difference between the two schemes
is, that the bill, in the maximum which it provides, suggests a certain
limit, while his resolutions lay down none. Below that maximum, the
principle of discrimination and specific duties may be applied. The
senator from Pennsylvania, (Mr. Dallas,) who, equally with the senator
from Massachusetts, is opposed to this bill, would have agreed to the
bill if it had fixed thirty instead of twenty per centum; and he would
have dispensed with home valuation, and come down to the revenue
standard in five or six years. Now, Mr. President, I prefer, and I
think the manufacturing interest will prefer, nine years of adequate
protection, home valuations, and twenty per centum, to the plan of the
senator from Pennsylvania.
Mr. President, I want to be perfectly understood as to the motives
which have prompted me to offer this measure. I repeat what I said
on the introduction of it, that they are, first, to preserve the
manufacturing interest, and, secondly, to quiet the country. I believe
the American system to be in the greatest danger; and I believe it
can be placed on a better and safer foundation at this session than
at the next. I heard with surprise, my friend from Massachusetts say,
that nothing had occurred within the last six months to increase its
hazard. I entreat him to review that opinion. Is it correct? Is the
issue of numerous elections, including that of the highest officer
of the government, nothing? Is the explicit recommendation of that
officer, in his message, at the opening of the session, sustained, as
he is, by a recent triumphant election, nothing? Is his declaration
in his proclamation, that the burdens of the south ought to be
relieved, nothing? Is the introduction of a bill into the house of
representatives, during this session, sanctioned by the head of the
treasury and the administration, prostrating the greater part of the
manufactures of the country, nothing? Are the increasing discontents,
nothing? Is the tendency of recent events to unite the whole south,
nothing? What have we not witnessed in this chamber? Friends of
the administration, bursting all the ties which seemed indissolubly
to unite them to its chief, and, with few exceptions south of the
Potomac, opposing, and vehemently opposing, a favorite measure of
that administration, which three short months ago they contributed to
establish! Let us not deceive ourselves. Now is the time to adjust the
question, in a manner satisfactory to both parties. Put it off until
the next session, and the alternative may and probably then would be
a speedy and ruinous reduction of the tariff, or a civil war with the
entire south.
It is well known, that the majority of the dominant party is adverse
to the tariff. There are many honorable exceptions, the senator from
New Jersey, (Mr. Dickerson,) among them. But for the exertions of the
other party, the tariff would have been long since sacrificed. Now
let us look at the composition of the two branches of congress at the
next session. In this body we lose three friends of the protective
policy, without being sure of gaining one. Here, judging from present
appearances, we shall at the next session be in the minority. In
the house it is notorious, that there is a considerable accession
to the number of the dominant party. How then, I ask, is the system
to be sustained against numbers, against the whole weight of the
administration, against the united south, and against the increased
pending danger of civil war? There is, indeed, one contingency that
might save it, but that is too uncertain to rely upon. A certain class
of northern politicians, professing friendship to the tariff, have been
charged with being secretly inimical to it, for political purposes.
They may change their ground, and come out open and undisguised
supporters of the system. They may even find in the measure which
I have brought forward, a motive for their conversion. Sir, I shall
rejoice in it, from whatever cause it may proceed. And, if they can
give greater strength and durability to the system, and at the same
time quiet the discontents of its opponents, I shall rejoice still
more. They shall not find me disposed to abandon it, because it has
drawn succor from an unexpected quarter. No, Mr. President, it is not
destruction, but preservation of the system at which we aim. If dangers
now assail it, we have not created them. I have sustained it upon
the strongest and clearest convictions of its expediency. They are
entirely unaltered. Had others, who avow attachment to it, supported
it with equal zeal and straight-forwardness, it would be now free from
embarrassment; but with them it has been a secondary interest. I utter
no complaints; I make no reproaches. I wish only to defend myself now,
as heretofore, against unjust assaults. I have been represented as the
father of this system, and I am charged with an unnatural abandonment
of my own offspring. I have never arrogated to myself any such intimate
relation to it. I have, indeed, cherished it with parental fondness,
and my affection is undiminished, but in what condition do I find this
child? It is in the hands of the Philistines, who would strangle it.
I fly to its rescue, to snatch it from their custody, and to place
it on a bed of security and repose for nine years, where it may grow
and strengthen, and become acceptable to the whole people. I behold
a torch about being applied to a favorite edifice, and I would save
it if possible before it is wrapt in flames, or at least preserve
the precious furniture which it contains. I wish to see the tariff
separated from the politics of the country, that business men may go
to work in security, with some prospect of stability in our laws, and
without every thing being staked on the issue of elections, as it were
on the hazards of the die.
And the other leading object which has prompted the introduction of
this measure, the tranquillizing of the country, is no less important.
All wise human legislation must consult in some degree the passions
and prejudices, and feelings, as well as the interests of the people.
It would be vain and foolish to proceed at all times, and under all
circumstances, upon the notion of absolute certainty in any system,
or infallability in any dogma, and to push these out without regard
to any consequences. With us, who entertain the opinion that congress
is constitutionally invested with power to protect domestic industry,
it is a question of mere expediency as to the form, the degree, and
the time that the protection shall be afforded. In weighing all the
considerations which should control and regulate the exercise of that
power, we ought not to overlook what is due to those who honestly
entertain opposite opinions to large masses of the community, and to
deep long-cherished, and growing prejudices. Perceiving, ourselves,
no constitutional impediment, we have less difficulty in accommodating
ourselves to the sense of the people of the United States upon this
interesting subject. I do believe that a majority of them is in
favor of this policy; but I am induced to believe this almost against
evidence. Two states in New England, which have been in favor of the
system, have recently come out against it. Other states of the north
and east have shown a remarkable indifference to its preservation. If,
indeed, they have wished to preserve it, they have nevertheless placed
the powers of government in hand, which ordinary information must have
assured them were rather a hazardous depository. With us in the west,
although we are not without some direct and considerable indirect
interest in the system, we have supported it more upon national than
sectional grounds.
Meantime the opposition of a large and respectable section of
the union, stimulated by political success, has increased, and is
increasing. Discontents are multiplying and assuming new and dangerous
aspects. They have been cherished by the course and hopes inspired
during this administration, which, at the very moment that it threatens
and recommends the use of the power of the union, proclaims aloud
the injustice of the system which it would enforce. These discontents
are not limited to those who maintain the extravagant theory of
nullification; they are not confined to one state; they are coextensive
with the entire south, and extend even to northern states. It has been
intimated by the senator from Massachusetts, that, if we legislate
at this session on the tariff, we would seem to legislate under the
influence of a panic. I believe, Mr. President, I am not more sensible
to danger of any kind, than my fellow-men are generally. It perhaps
requires as much moral courage to legislate under the imputation of
a panic, as to refrain from it lest such an imputation should be made.
But he who regards the present question as being limited to South
Carolina alone, takes a view of it much too contracted. There is a
sympathy of feeling and interest throughout the whole south. Other
southern states may differ from that as to the remedy to be now used,
but all agree, (great as in my humble judgment is their error,) in the
substantial justice of the cause. Can there be a doubt that those who
think in common will sooner or later act in concert? Events are on the
wing, and hastening this coöperation. Since the commencement of this
session, the most powerful southern member of the union has taken a
measure which cannot fail to lead to important consequences. She has
deputed one of her most distinguished citizens to request a suspension
of measures of resistance. No attentive observer can doubt that
the suspension will be made. Well, sir, suppose it takes place, and
congress should fail at the next session to afford the redress which
will be solicited, what course would every principle of honor, and
every consideration of the interests of Virginia, as she understands
them, exact from her? Would she not make common cause with South
Carolina? and if she did, would not the entire south eventually become
parties to the contest? The rest of the union might put down the south,
and reduce it to submission; but, to say nothing of the uncertainty and
hazards of all war, is that a desirable state of things? Ought it not
to be avoided if it can be honorably prevented? I am not one of those
who think that we must rely exclusively upon moral power, and never
resort to physical force. I know too well the frailties and follies of
man, in his collective as well as individual character, to reject in
all possible cases, the employment of force; but I do think that when
resorted to, especially among the members of a confederacy, it should
manifestly appear to be the only remaining appeal.
But suppose the present congress terminates without any adjustment
of the tariff, let us see in what condition its friends will find
themselves at the next session. South Carolina will have postponed the
execution of the law passed to carry into effect her ordinance, until
the end of that session. All will be quiet in the south for the present.
The president, in his opening message, will urge that justice, as he
terms it, be done to the south; and that the burdens imposed upon it
by the tariff, be removed. The whole weight of the administration, the
united south, and majorities of the dominant party, in both branches of
congress, will be found in active coöperation. Will the gentleman from
Massachusetts tell me how we are to save the tariff against this united
and irresistible force? They will accuse us of indifference to the
preservation of the union, and of being willing to expose the country
to the dangers of civil war. The fact of South Carolina’s postponing of
her ordinance, at the instance of Virginia, and once more appealing to
the justice of congress, will be pressed with great emphasis and effect.
It does appear to me impossible that we can prevent a most injurious
modification of the tariff, at the next session, and that this is
the favorable moment for an equitable arrangement of it. I have been
subjected to animadversion, for the admission of the fact, that, at the
next session, our opponents will be stronger, and the friends of the
American system weaker than they are in this congress. But, is it not
so? And is it not the duty of every man, who aspires to be a statesman,
to look at naked facts as they really are? Must he suppress them? Ought
he, like children, to throw the counterpane over his eyes, and persuade
himself that he is secure from danger? Are not our opponents as well
informed as we are, about their own strength?
If we adjourn, without any permanent settlement of the tariff, in
what painful suspense and terrible uncertainty shall we not leave the
manufacturers and business men of the country? All eyes will be turned,
with trembling and fear, to the next session. Operations will be
circumscribed, and new enterprises checked or, if otherwise, ruin and
bankruptcy may be the consequence. I believe, sir, this measure, which
offers a reasonable guarantee for permanence and stability, will be
hailed by practical men with pleasure. The political manufacturers may
be against it, but it will command the approbation of a large majority
of the business manufacturers of the country.
But the objections of the honorable senator from Massachusetts are
principally directed to the period beyond 1842. During the intermediate
time, there is every reason to hope and believe that the bill secures
adequate protection. All my information assures me of this; and it is
demonstrated by the fact, that, if the measure of protection, secured
prior to the thirty-first of December, 1841, were permanent; or if
the bill were even silent beyond that period, it would command the
cordial and unanimous concurrence of the friends of the policy. What
then divides, what alarms us? It is what _may possibly_ be the state
of things in the year one thousand eight hundred and forty-two, or
subsequently! Now, sir, even if that should be as bad as the most vivid
imagination, or the most eloquent tongue could depict it, if we have
intermediate safety and security, it does not seem to me wise to rush
upon certain and present evils, because of those which, admitting
their possibility, are very remote and contingent. What! shall we not
extinguish the flame which is bursting through the roof that covers
us, because, at some future and distant day, we may be again threatened
with conflagration?
I do not admit that this bill abandons or fails, by its provisions, to
secure reasonable protection beyond 1842. I cannot know, I pretend not
to know, what will then be the actual condition of this country, and of
the manufacturing arts, and their relative condition to the rest of the
world. I would as soon confide in the forecast of the honorable senator
from Massachusetts, as in that of any other man in this senate, or in
this country; but he, nor any one else, can tell what that condition
will then be. The degree of protection which will be required for
domestic industry beyond 1842, depends upon the reduction of wages,
the accumulation of capital, the improvement in skill, the protection
of machinery, and the cheapening of the price, at home, of essential
articles, such as fuel, iron, and so forth. I do not think that the
honorable senator can throw himself forward to 1842, and tell us
what, in all these particulars, will be the state of this country,
and its relative state to other countries. We know that, in all human
probability, our numbers will be increased by an addition of one third,
at least, to their present amount, and that may materially reduce
wages. We have reason to believe that our capital will be augmented,
our skill improved; and we know that great progress has been made,
and is making, in machinery. There is a constant tendency to decrease
in the price of iron and coal. The opening of new mines and new
channels of communication, must continue to lower it. The successful
introduction of the process of cooking, will have great effect. The
price of these articles, one of the most opulent and intelligent
manufacturing houses in this country assures me, is a principal cause
of the present necessity of protection to the cotton interest; and
that house is strongly inclined to think that twenty per centum, with
the other advantages secured in this bill, may do beyond 1842. Then,
sir, what effect may not convulsions and revolutions in Europe, if any
should arise, produce? I am far from desiring them, that our country
may profit by their occurrence. Her greatness and glory rest, I hope,
upon a more solid and more generous basis. But we cannot shut our eyes
to the fact, that our greatest manufacturing, as well as commercial
competitor, is undergoing a momentous political experiment, the issue
of which is far from being absolutely certain. Who can raise the veil
of the succeeding nine years, and show what, at their termination, will
be the degree of competition which Great Britain can exercise towards
us in the manufacturing arts?
Suppose, in the progress of gradual descent towards the revenue
standard for which this bill provides, it should some years hence
become evident that further protection, beyond 1842, than that which
it contemplates may be necessary, can it be doubted that, in some
form or other, it will be applied? Our misfortune has been, and yet is,
that the public mind has been constantly kept in a state of feverish
excitement, in respect to this system of policy. Conventions, elections,
congress, the public press, have been for years all acting upon the
tariff, and the tariff acting upon them all. Prejudices have been
excited, passions kindled, and mutual irritations carried to the
highest pitch of exasperation, insomuch that good feelings have been
almost extinguished, and the voice of reason and experience silenced,
among the members of the confederacy. Let us separate the tariff from
the agitating politics of the country, place it upon a stable and firm
foundation, and allow our enterprising countrymen to demonstrate to the
whole union, by their skilful and successful labors, the inappreciable
value of the arts. If they can have what they have never yet enjoyed,
some years of repose and tranquillity, they will make, silently, more
converts to the policy, than would be made during a long period of
anxious struggle and boisterous contention. Above all, I count upon
the good effects resulting from a restoration of the harmony of this
divided people, upon their good sense and their love of justice. Who
can doubt, that when passions have subsided, and reason has resumed her
empire, that there will be a disposition throughout the whole union,
to render ample justice to all its parts? Who will believe that any
section of this great confederacy would look with indifference to
the prostration of the interests of another section, by distant and
selfish foreign nations, regardless alike of the welfare of us all?
No, sir; I have no fears beyond 1842. The people of the United States
are brethren, made to love and respect each other. Momentary causes
may seem to alienate them, but, like family differences, they will
terminate in a closer and more affectionate union than ever. And how
much more estimable will be a system of protection, based on common
conviction and common consent, and planted in the bosoms of all, than
one wrenched by power from reluctant and protesting weakness?
That such a system will be adopted, if it should be necessary for the
period of time subsequent to 1842, I will not doubt. But, in the scheme
which I originally proposed, I did not rely exclusively, great as my
reliance is, upon the operation of fraternal feelings, the return of
reason, and a sense of justice. The scheme contained an appeal to the
interests of the south. According to it, unmanufactured cotton was to
be a free article after 1842. Gentlemen from that quarter have again
and again asserted that they were indifferent to the duty of three
cents per pound on cotton, and that they feared no foreign competition.
I have thought otherwise; but I was willing, by way of experiment, to
take them at their word; not that I was opposed to the protection of
cotton, but believing that a few cargoes of foreign cotton introduced
into our northern ports, free of duty, would hasten our southern
friends to come here and ask that protection for their great staple,
which is wanted in other sections for their interests. That feature
in the scheme was stricken out in the select committee, but not by the
consent of my friend from Delaware, (Mr. Clayton,) or myself. Still,
after 1842, the south may want protection for sugar, for tobacco, for
Virginia coal, perhaps for cotton and other articles, whilst other
quarters may need it for wool, woollens, iron, and cotton fabrics; and
these mutual wants, if they should exist, will lead, I hope, to some
amicable adjustment of a tariff for that distant period, satisfactory
to all. The theory of protection supposes, too, that, after a
certain time, the protected arts will have acquired such strength
and perfection as will enable them subsequently, unaided, to stand up
against foreign competition. If, as I have no doubt, this should prove
to be correct, it will, on the arrival of 1842, encourage all parts of
the union to consent to the continuance of longer protection to the few
articles which may then require it.
The bill before us strongly recommends itself by its equity and
impartiality. It favors no one interest, and no one state, by an
unjust sacrifice of others. It deals equally by all. Its basis is
the act of July last. That act was passed, after careful and thorough
investigation, and long deliberation, continued through several months.
Although it may not have been perfect in its adjustment of the proper
measure of protection to each article which was supposed to merit it,
it is not likely, that, even with the same length of time before us,
we could make one more perfect. Assuming the justness of that act, the
bill preserves the respective propositions for which the act provides,
and subjects them all to the same equal but moderate reduction, spread
over the long space of nine years. The senator from Massachusetts
contends that a great part of the value of all protection, is given up
by dispensing with specific duties and the principle of discrimination.
But much the most valuable articles of our domestic manufactures,
(cotton and woollens, for example,) have never enjoyed the advantage
of specific duties. They have always been liable to ad valorem duties,
with a very limited application of the minimum principle. The bill
does not, however, even after 1842, surrender either mode of laying
duties. Discriminations are expressly recognised below the maximum, and
specific duties may also be imposed, provided they do not exceed it.
The honorable senator also contends that the bill is imperfect, and
that the execution of it will be impracticable. He asks, how is the
excess above twenty per centum to be ascertained on coarse and printed
cottons, liable to minimums of thirty and thirty-five cents, and
subject to a duty of twenty-five per centum, ad valorem; and how is
it to be estimated in the case of specific duties? Sir, it is very
probable that the bill is not perfect, but I do not believe that
there is any thing impracticable in its execution. Much will, however,
depend upon the head of the treasury department. In the instance of the
cotton minimums, the statute having, by way of exception to the general
ad valorem rule, declared, in certain cases, how the value shall be
estimated, that statutory value ought to govern; and consequently, the
twenty per centum should be exclusively deducted from the twenty-five
per centum, being the rate of duties to which cottons generally are
liable; and the biennial tenths should be subtracted from the excess
of five per centum. With regard to specific duties, it will, perhaps,
be competent to the secretary of the treasury, in the execution of the
law, for the sake of certainly, to adopt some average value, founded
upon importations of a previous year. But if the value of each cargo,
and every part of it, is to be ascertained, it would be no more than
what now is the operation in the case of woollens, silks, cottons above
thirty and thirty-five cents, and a variety of other articles; and
consequently there would be no more impracticability in the law.
To all defects, however, real or imaginary, which it may be supposed
will arise in the execution of the principle of the bill, I oppose
one conclusive, and, I hope, satisfactory answer. Congress will be in
session one whole month before the commencement of the law; and if,
in the meantime, omissions calling for further legislation shall be
discovered, there will be more time then than we have now to supply
them. Let us, on this occasion of compromise, pursue the example of our
fathers, who, under the influence of the same spirit, in the adoption
of the constitution of the United States, determined to ratify it, and
go for amendments afterwards.
To the argument of the senator from Massachusetts, that this interest,
and that, and the other, cannot be sustained under the protection,
beyond 1842, I repeat the answer, that no one can now tell what may
then be necessary. That period will provide for itself. But I was
surprised to hear my friend singling out iron as an article that would
be most injuriously affected by the operation of this bill. If I am not
greatly mistaken in my recollection, he opposed and voted against the
act of 1824, because of the high duty imposed on iron. But for that
duty, (and perhaps the duty on hemp,) which he then considered threw
an unreasonable burden upon the navigation of the country, he would
have supported that act. Of all the articles to which protecting duties
are applied, iron, and the manufactures of iron, enjoy the highest
protection. During the term of nine years, the deductions from the duty
are not such as seriously to impair those great interests, unless all
my information deceives me; and beyond that period, the remedy has been
already indicated. Let me suppose that the anticipations which I form,
upon the restoration of concord and confidence, shall be all falsified;
that neither the sense of fraternal affection, nor common justice,
nor even common interests, will lead to an amicable adjustment of the
tariff beyond 1842. Let me suppose that period has arrived, and that
the provisions of the bill shall be interpreted as an obligatory pledge
upon the congress of that day; and let me suppose, also, that a greater
amount of protection than the bill provides, is absolutely necessary to
some interests; what is to be done? Regarded as a pledge, it does not
bind congress for ever to adhere to the specific rate of duty contained
in the bill. The most, in that view, that it exacts, is, to make a
fair experiment. If, after such experiment, it should be demonstrated,
that, under such an arrangement of the tariff, the interests of large
portions of the union would be sacrificed, and they exposed to ruin,
congress will be competent to apply some remedy that will be effectual;
and I hope and believe that, in such a contingency, some will be
devised that may preserve the harmony and perpetuate the blessings of
the union.
It has been alleged, that there will be an augmentation, instead
of a diminution of revenue, under the operation of this bill. I feel
quite confident of the reverse; but it is sufficient to say, that both
contingencies are carefully provided for in the bill, without affecting
the protected articles.
The gentleman from Massachusetts dislikes the measure, because it
commands the concurrence of those who have been hitherto opposed,
in regard to the tariff; and is approved by the gentleman from
South Carolina, (Mr. Calhoun,) as well as by myself. Why, sir, the
gentleman has told us that he is not opposed to any compromise. Will
he be pleased to say how any compromise can be effected, without a
concurrence between those who had been previously divided, and taking
some medium between the two extremes? The wider the division may have
been, so much the better for the compromise, which ought to be judged
of by its nature and by its terms, and not solely by those who happen
to vote for it. It is an adjustment to which both the great interests
in this country may accede without either being dishonored. The triumph
of neither is complete. Each, for the sake of peace, harmony, and union,
makes some concessions. The south has contended that every vestige of
protection should be eradicated from the statute-book, and the revenue
standard forthwith adopted. In assenting to this bill, it waives
that pretension――yields to reasonable protection for nine years; and
consents, in consideration of the maximum of twenty per centum, to be
subsequently applied, to discriminations below it, cash duties, home
valuations, and a long list of free articles. The north and west have
contended for the practical application of the principle of protection,
regulated by no other limit than the necessary wants of the country.
If they accede to this adjustment, they agree, in consideration of
the stability and certainty which nine years’ duration of a favorite
system of policy affords, and of the other advantages which have been
enumerated, to come down in 1842 to a limit not exceeding twenty per
centum. Both parties, animated by a desire to avert the evils which
might flow from carrying out into all their consequences the cherished
system of either, have met upon common ground, made mutual and friendly
concessions, and, I trust, and sincerely believe, that neither will
have, hereafter, occasion to regret, as neither can justly reproach the
other with what may be now done.
This, or some other measure of conciliation, is now more than ever
necessary, since the passage, through the senate, of the enforcing
bill. To that bill, if I had been present, on the final vote, I should
have given my assent, although with great reluctance. I believe this
government not only possessed of the constitutional power, but to be
bound by every consideration, to maintain the authority of the laws.
But I deeply regretted the necessity which seemed to me to require
the passage of such a bill. And I was far from being without serious
apprehensions as to the consequences to which it might lead. I felt no
new-born zeal in favor of the present administration, of which I now
think as I have always thought. I could not vote against the measure;
I would not speak in its behalf. I thought it most proper in me to
leave to the friends of the administration and to others, who might
feel themselves particularly called upon, to defend and sustain a
strong measure of the administration. With respect to the series
of acts to which the executive has resorted, in relation to our
southern disturbance, this is not a fit occasion to enter upon a full
consideration of them; but I will briefly say, that, although the
proclamation is a paper of uncommon ability and eloquence, doing
great credit, as a composition, to him who prepared it, and to him who
signed it, I think it contains some ultra doctrines, which no party
in this country had ventured to assert. With these are mixed up many
sound principles and just views of our political systems, if it is to
be judged by its effects upon those to whom it was more immediately
addressed, it must be admitted to have been ill-timed and unfortunate.
Instead of allaying the excitement which prevailed, it increased the
exasperation in the infected district, and afforded new and unnecessary
causes of discontent and dissatisfaction in the south generally.
The message, subsequently transmitted to congress, communicating
the proceedings of South Carolina, and calling for countervailing
enactments, was characterized with more prudence and moderation.
And, if this unhappy contest is to continue, I sincerely hope, that
the future conduct of the administration may be governed by wise
and cautious counsels, and a parental forbearance. But when the
highest degree of animosity exists; when both parties, however unequal,
have arrayed themselves for the conflict; who can tell when, by the
indiscretion of subordinates, or other unforeseen causes, the bloody
struggle may commence? In the midst of magazines, who knows when the
fatal spark may produce a terrible explosion? And the battle once begun,
where is its limit? What latitude will circumscribe its rage? Who is to
command our armies? When, and where, and how, is the war to cease? In
what condition will the peace leave the American system, the American
union, and, what is more than all, American liberty? I cannot profess
to have a confidence, which I have not, in this administration, but
if I had all confidence in it, I should still wish to pause, and, if
possible, by any honorable adjustment, to prevent awful consequences,
the extent of which no human wisdom can foresee.
It appears to me, then, Mr. President, that we ought not to content
ourselves with passing the enforcing bill only. Both that and the
bill of peace seem to me to be required for the good of our country.
The first will satisfy all who love order and law, and disapprove the
inadmissible doctrine of nullification. The last will soothe those who
love peace and concord, harmony and union. One demonstrates the power
and the disposition to vindicate the authority and supremacy of the
laws of the union; the other offers that, which, if it be accepted
in the fraternal spirit in which it is tendered, will supersede the
necessity of the employment of all force.
There are some who say, let the tariff go down; let our manufactures
be prostrated, if such be the pleasure, at another session, of those to
whose hands the government of this country is confided; let bankruptcy
and ruin be spread over the land; and let resistance to the laws, at
all hazards, be subdued. Sir, they take counsel from their passions.
They anticipate a terrible reaction from the downfall of the tariff,
which would ultimately reëstablish it upon a firmer basis than ever.
But it is these very agitations, these mutual irritations between
brethren of the same family, it is the individual distress and general
ruin that would necessarily follow the overthrow of the tariff, that
ought, if possible, to be prevented. Besides, are we certain of this
reaction? Have we not been disappointed in it as to other measures
heretofore? But suppose, after a long and embittered struggle, it
should come, in what relative condition would it find the parts of
this confederacy? In what state our ruined manufactures? When they
should be laid low, who, amidst the fragments of the general wreck,
scattered over the face of the land, would have courage to engage in
fresh enterprises, under a new pledge of the violated faith of the
government? If we adjourn, without passing this bill, having intrusted
the executive with vast powers to maintain the laws, should he be able
by the next session to put down all opposition to them, will he not,
as a necessary consequence of success, have more power than ever to put
down the tariff also? Has he not said that the south is oppressed, and
its burdens ought to be relieved? And will he not feel himself bound,
after he shall have triumphed, if triumph he may in a civil war, to
appease the discontents of the south by a modification of the tariff,
in conformity with its wishes and demands? No, sir; no, sir; let us
save the country from the most dreadful of all calamities, and let us
save its industry, too, from threatened destruction. Statesmen should
regulate their conduct and adapt their measures to the exigences of the
times in which they live. They cannot, indeed, transcend the limits of
the constitutional rule; but with respect to those systems of policy
which fall within its scope, they should arrange them according to
the interests, the wants, and the prejudices of the people. Two great
dangers threaten the public safety. The true patriot will not stop
to inquire how they have been brought about, but will fly to the
deliverance of his country. The difference between the friends and
the foes of the compromise, under consideration, is, that they would,
in the enforcing act, send forth alone a flaming sword. We would send
out that also, but along with it the olive branch, as a messenger of
peace. They cry out, the law! the law! the law! Power! power! power!
We, too, reverence the law, and bow to the supremacy of its obligation;
but we are in favor of the law executed in mildness, and of power
tempered with mercy. They, as we think, would hazard a civil commotion,
beginning in South Carolina and extending, God only knows where.
While we would vindicate the federal government, we are for peace, if
possible, union, and liberty. We want no war, above all, no civil war,
no family strife. We want to see no sacked cities, no desolated fields,
no smoking ruins, no streams of American blood shed by American arms!
I have been accused of ambition in presenting this measure. Ambition!
inordinate ambition! If I had thought of myself only, I should have
never brought it forward. I know well the perils to which I expose
myself; the risk of alienating faithful and valued friends, with but
little prospect of making new ones, if any new ones could compensate
for the loss of those whom we have long tried and loved; and the honest
misconceptions both of friends and foes. Ambition! If I had listened to
its soft and seducing whispers; if I had yielded myself to the dictates
of a cold, calculating, and prudential policy, I would have stood still
and unmoved. I might even have silently gazed on the raging storm,
enjoyed its loudest thunders, and left those who are charged with the
care of the vessel of state, to conduct it as they could. I have been
heretofore often unjustly accused of ambition. Low, grovelling souls,
who are utterly incapable of elevating themselves to the higher and
nobler duties of pure patriotism――beings, who, for ever keeping their
own selfish aims in view, decide all public measures by their presumed
influence on their aggrandizement――judge me by the venal rule which
they prescribe to themselves. I have given to the winds those false
accusations, as I consign that which now impeaches my motives. I have
no desire for office, not even the highest. The most exalted is but a
prison, in which the incarcerated incumbent daily receives his cold,
heartless visitants, marks his weary hours, and is cut off from the
practical enjoyment of all the blessings of genuine freedom. I am no
candidate for any office in the gift of the people of these states,
united or separated; I never wish, never expect to be. Pass this bill,
tranquillize the country, restore confidence and affection in the union,
and I am willing to go home to Ashland, and renounce public service
for ever. I should there find, in its groves, under its shades, on its
lawns, amidst my flocks and herds, in the bosom of my family, sincerity
and truth, attachment, and fidelity, and gratitude, which I have
not always found in the walks of public life. Yes, I have ambition;
but it is the ambition of being the humble instrument, in the hands
of Providence, to reconcile a divided people; once more to revive
concord and harmony in a distracted land――the pleasing ambition of
contemplating the glorious spectacle of a free, united, prosperous,
and fraternal people!