Norwalk Gazette, Tuesday, May 18, 1824 · page 4

 

 
 
 

3.
Ir
a
4
r
3'

--n.-.- -‘ ..-. , ., ..U

MR. CLAY’S SPEECH.
(coi\'ct.Unr.n.)

5. But if the policy of protection be Wise:
the gentleman from Virginia, (Mr.-Barbotu'al
has made sotne ingenious calculations to pi'0V8
tltat the measure of protection, already exten-
ded, has been’ sufficiently great. \Vith 50""-3
few exceptions, the existing duties, of which
he has made an estimate, were laid with the
object of revenue, and without reference to
that ofencotlrageinent to our domestic indus-
try; and, altltotigli it is admitted that the in-
cideittal effect ofduties, so laid, is to promote
our manufactures, yet ifit falls short of com-
petent protection, the d_tities might as well not
have been imposed witlireference to that pur-
pose. A moderate addition may acconiplislt
this desirable end; and the proposed tariff is
believed to have this character.

9. The prohibiiory policy, it is confidently
asserted, is condemned by the wisdom of Eti-
rope, and by her most enlightened statesmen.
Is this the fact? \Ve call upon gentlemen to
show, in what instance a nation, that has en-
joyed its benefits, has surrendered it. [flere
Mr. Barbour rose, Mr. Clay giving way,and
said, tltat England had departed from it in the
C-hina trade, in allowing us to trade with her
East India possessions, and in tolerating otir
navigation to her West India colonies] With
respect to the trade to China, the tvltole a-
mount of what England has done is to modify
the monopoly of the East India Company in
behalfof one and a small part of her subjects,
to increase the coiuuierce ofanother, and the
greater portion of them. The abolition Oftlie
restriction, therefore, operates altogether a-
mong the subjects of England, and does not
touch at all the interests offorcigu powers.-
The toleration of our commerce to British In-
die is for the sake of the specie,with which we
mainly carry on that commerce, and which,
having performed its circuit, returns to Great
Britain in exchange for British iintntifacturcs.
The relaxation from the colonial policy,iit the
instance ofotir trade and navigation with the
VVest Indies, is antostt.titfortunat‘e example
for the honorable gentleman; for, it is an if
lustrious proof ofthe sitccess ofour restrictive
policy, when resolutely adhered to. Great
Britain had prescribed the terms on which we
were to be graciously allowed to carry on that
trade. The effect of her regulations was, to
exclude our navigation altoget|ter,aiid a coin-
plete n:onopoly.on the part oftlte British nav-
igation was secured. iVe forbade it, unless
our vessels should be allowed a perfect recip-
rocity. Great Britain stood out a long time;
but finally yielded, and ottr navigation now
fairly shares with hers in the trade. Have
geittleinen no other to exhibit than these tri-
fling relaxations from the prohibitor_v policy,
which do not amount to a drop in the bucket,
to prove its abandonment by Great Britain ?
Let them show us that her laws are repealed
which prohibit the introduction of our floitr
and provisions; of French silks, laces, porce-
lain, maitttfactnrt-.s ofbronzc, ntirror.<,wollciis;
and oftlic manufactures of other tiations;and
then we may be ready to allow, Great Britain
has really abolished lter proltibitory policy.—
iVe find there, on the contrary, that system
of policy in full aitd rigorous operation, and a
most curiously interwoven system it is, as she
enforces it. The object of protection is the
establishmeiit and perfection of the arts. In
England, it has accomplished its purpose, ful-
filled its end. If she ltas not carried every
hrancli ofmanufacture to the same high state
of perfection that arty other nation has, she
has succeeded in so many that she, may Sttfcl}
challengethe most ttnsltackled t'ompe.titloIi iit
€XCll(-tlitzffs. It is upon tltis very ground that
many of her writers rer.otnmend an a')andoi:-
rncntof the prohibitory system. It is to give
greater scope to British iitdustry and enter-
prise. It is upon the same selfish principle.

The object of the most perfect freedom of
trade, with such a nation as Britain, andlof
the most rigorous system ofproliibitioii with
a nation whose arts are in their infancy, may
both be precisely the same. In both. cases it
is to give greater expansion to native Industry,
they only differ in the theatres oftlteir ope-
ration. Tlie abolition of the restrictive sys-
tem by Britain, ifby it she could prevail tipon
otlter nations to imitate her example, would
have the effect ofextending the consitmption
of Britislt prodttce in other’ countries, where
her writers boldly affirm it coitld maintain a
fearless cotttpetion with the produce ofnative
labor." The adoption of the restrictive sys-
tem, on the part of the United States, by ex-
cluding the prodtice of foreign labour, would
extend the consttinptioit ofAmerican produce,
itnable in the infancy and unprotected state
ofthe artsto sustain a competition with for-
eign fabrics. Let ourarts breathe under the
shade ofprotection ; let them be perfected as
they are in England, and we shall then be
ready, as Engiami now is said to be, to put
aside protection, and to enter upon the frecst
exchanges. To what other cause, than to
their wltole proliibitorv policy. can you as-
cribe Britisli prosperity? It will ttot do to as-
sign it to that of her antiquity; for France is
no less ancient though much less rich and
powerful, itt proportion to the population and
natural advantages of France. As to the

poor rates, the tlteme ofso much reproach
without England, and of so uiuclt regret with-
in it, among her speculative \Vl‘llC‘l'S,. the sys-
tem was a strong proof no less of her utt-
boimded wealth than of her pauperistu.——-
‘What other itation can dispense, iii the form
of regulated charity, the enormous stun, I be-
lieve, of 10 or 12 millions sterling? 
Barbour stated it was reduced to 6; to wlitch
Mr. Clay replied,thathe entertained no doubt
ofthc benign operation of British protection

ofliomeindustry had greatly reduced it,witli-

in the few last years, by the ftill employment
of her subjects, of which her flourishing trade
bore evidence.] The number of British pau-
pers was the result of pressing the priitciple
nfpopnlation to its utmostliintts, by her pro-
ieciing policy in the creation of wealth, and
of placing the world under tribute to her in-
dustry. Doubtless the condition of England
would be better without paupers, ifin other
respects it remained the same. But in her
actual circumstances the poor system has the_
salutary effect ofan eqttalizing corrective of
the tendency to the concentration of riches,
prodticed by the geuitis of her political insti-
tutions and by her prohibitory system.

But, is it true, that England is convinced of

the impolicy of the prohibitorysySteiii,_?ind
would be desirous to abandon it? What
proof ltave wc_to that effect ? VVe are asked
to reject the evidence deducible front the set-
tled and steady practice of England, aitd to
take lessons in a school of philosophical wri-

ters, whose visionary theories are no where a-

dopted; or, if adopted, bring with them inev-

itable distress, im‘poverisliment, and ruin.—-
Let us hear the testimony of an illustrious
personage, entitled to the greatest attention,
because lte speaks after a full experiment of
the unrestrictive system made in his own em-
pire. I hope I shall give no offence in quot-
ing from a publication issued frotn “ the mint
of Philadelphia ;” from a work of Mr. Care)’:
of whom} seize, with great pleasure, the oc-
casion to say, that he merits the public grati-
tude, for the disinterested diligence with
which be has collected a large mass of highly
useful facts, and for the clear and convincing
reasoning with which be generally illustrates
them. The Emperor of Russia, in March,
Iiifisi, after about two years’ trial of the free
system, says, through Count Nesselrode :'

‘To produce happy effects, the principles
of coinmercial freedom must be geiterally a-
dopted. The state which adopts, while oth-
ers reject them, must condemn its own indus-
try and commerce to pay aruinous tribute 10
those of other nations.’ _

‘From a circulation exempt from restraint,
and the facility afforded by reciprocal excltan-
ges, almost all the governments at first resolv-
ed to seek the means of repairing the evil
which Europe had been doomed to stifle!‘ §
btit cxperience,and more correct calculations,
because they were made from certain data,
and upon the results already known of the
peace that had just taken place, forced tlietn
soon to adhere to the proliibitory systcin.’_

‘England preserved hers. Austriareutain-
ed faithful to the title she. had laid down, to
guard berselfagaiitsttlte rivalsltip of foreign
industry. France, with the. saiue VICW59 *1-
dopted the most rigorous means of precan-
tion. And Pritssia publislted a new tariff in
Octoberlast, which proves that she found it
impossible not to follow the exatuple of the
rest of Europe.’ _

‘ In proportion as the prohibitory system is
extended and rendered perfect in the coun-
tries, that state wliich pursues the contrary
svsteitt, makes, from day to day, s;tci'ifir‘Ps
more extensive and more considerable. * * 
It offers a continual encotirztgement to the
tnanttfactures ofother countries—and its own
manufactures perislt in the stt'uggle \\'lllCll
they are, as yet, unable to maintain.’

"It is with the. most lively feelings ofregret
we acknowledge it is otir own proper experi-
sauce which enables us to trace this picture.-—
The cvils which it details have been realized
in Russia and Poland, since the conclusion of
the act of the 7--l9 of December, 1818. Ag-
riculture without a market, industry ivitltotii
protection, languish and decline. Sj)C‘Clt3. is
exported, and the most solid conuncrcial
houses are shaken. The public prosperity
would soon feel the wound inflicted on private
fortunes, ifnctv regulations did ttot promptly
change the actual state of affairs.’

‘ Events have proved that our agriculture
and commerce, as well as our mantifztctnring
industry, are itot only paralyzed, btit brought
to the brink of rtiin.”

The example of Spain has been properly
referred to. as afi'ordiu2 a striking, proof oi’
the calamities which attends a state that .iban-
dons the care ofits otvn iute.rn:tl industry.—
Her prosperity was greatest \\ lieti the arts,
lnturglitstiieic by the Moors, fiotirinlicd most
in that kingdom. Then she. received front
England her wool,aud returned it in the man-
ufactured state ; and then England was least
prosper-ous, The two nations have i'eversctl
conditions. Spain, after the discover_v_ of A-
merica, yielding to an inordinate passiott for
me good Ofihe Indies, sought in their mines
that—\vealth which might have been better
created at liotite. Cart the remarkable dif-
ference in the prospt rity ofthe two countries,
he otlterwise explained than by the opposite
systems which they persued ? England, by a
sedulous attention to her lioitte industry, sup-
plied the means ofuu advantageous commerce
with her colonies. Spain, by an utter neglect
oflter domestic resources, confided altogether
in those which she derived from lter colonies,
and presents an instance of the greatest ad-
vcrsitv. Iler colonies were infinitely more
valuableltltait those of Etiglainl; and ifslic
had adopted a similar policy, it is unreasona-
ble to suppose that, in wealtli and power, she
would have sttrpasscd that of England? I
think the honorable gentleman front Virginia
does great injustice to the. Catholic religion,
in specifying that as one ofthc leading causes
oftlte decline of Spain. It is a religion en-
titled to great respect; and there is nothing
in its character incompatible with the hicliest
degree ofttational prosperity ? Is not France,
theiutost polished, in litany other respects the
most digfmgujcltefl stateofChristendom, Cath-
olic? Is not Flanders. the most populouspari
of Europe, also Catholic? Are the Catholic
parts ofSwit'/.erland and ofGermany less“pros—
perous than those which are Protestant r
10. The ncxt objection of the honorable
gentleman from Va. which I shall briefly no-
tice, is, that the manufactnriiig system is ad-
verse to the genius of our government, in its
tendency to the accumulation oflarge capitals
in a fe\V.l]:llltlS ; in tltecorruptinn ofthe public
morals, which is alleged to be incident to it ;
and in the consequent danger to the public
liberty. The first part oftlte objection would
apply to every lucrative htisiness,to c_om'mcrce,
to planting, and to the learned professions.-
\V'ould the gentleman introduce the system
of Lycurgus? If his principle be correct, it
should be it-.xtended to any and every vocation
which had a similar tendency. The enormous
fortunes in our couutry—-the nabobs of the
|and——have be.cn chiefly made by the profita-
ble pursuit oftltat foreign commerce. in ntore
propitious times, which the ltonorable gentle-
man would so carefully cherish. Imtnettse
estates have also been made in the South.-
The best security against the deuiorali'/.ation
of society, is the constant and profitable em-
ployment ofits members. The greatest dan-
ger to public liberty is front idleness and vice.
lfmanitfactures form cities,so does coininerce.
And the disorders and violence wbiclt proceed
from the contagion of the passions, are as
freqttent in one description of those commu-
rnuitities as in the other. There is no doubt
btit that the yeoinattry ofa country is the saf
est depository ofpublic liberty. In all time to
come,aud under any probable direction ofthc
labor ofotir population, the agricultural class
nittst be muclt the most numerous and power-
ful, and will ever retain, as_it ought to retain,
it preponderating influence in otir councils.-
The extent and the fertility ofour lands cou-
stitnte an adequate secttrity against an excess
in manufactures; and also against oppression

on the part of capitalists towards the laboring
portions of the cotntuuttity.

it. The last objection, with a notice of
which“ I shall trouble the contini ttee, is, that
the constitution does not authorize the pass-
age ofthe bill. The gentleman from Virginia
does not assert, indeed, that it isinconsistent
with the express provisions ofthat instrument,
but he thinks it incompatible with the spirit of
the constitution. If’ we attempt to protect A-
merican iiidustry against foreign policy and
the rivalry offoreigii industry,the constitution
presents an insuperablc obstacle. This con-
stitution iitust be a itiost singular instrument !
It seems to be made for any other people than
our own. Its action is altogether foreign.-
Congress has power to lay duties and iinposts
under no other liutitation whatever than that
oftlteir being uniform throughout the Uttited
States. But, they cart only be imposed, ac-
cording tothehonorable gentleman, for the
sole purpose ofrevenue. This is a restriction
which we do not find in the constitution. No
doubt the reventte wits a principal object with
the framers of the cottstitutiou, in investing
Congress with the power ; but, irt executing it,
may not the duties and iinposts be so laitl, as
to secure domestic interests? Or, is Congress
denied all discretion as to the amount or the
distribution ofthe duties and itnposts?
The gentleman frotu Va. ltas, however,cn-
tirely mistaken the clause of the constitution
on which we rely. It is that which gives to
Congress the power to regulate. conuuerce
witli foreign nations. The grant is plenary,
without arty limitation whatever,and includes
the_ whole power of regulation, ofwhicli the
siibjcct to be regulated is susceptible. It is as
lull and complete a grant ofthe potver,-.is that
is to declare war. Wltat is it regulation of
commerce? It implies the admission or ex-
clusion of the tibjetzts ofit, and the terms.—.
Under this potvér, some articles, by the exist-
ing laws, are adriitted freely; others are sub-
jected to t.lUlIi:S go high as to amount to their
proliibiitou; and various rates of duties are
applied to otherl. Under this power, laws of
total itoii—iuterc§nrse with some nations, anti
critbargoes, prolucing an entire cessattioit of
commerce with all foreign countries, have
been. from tiineto time passed. These laws,
I have no doubt met with the entire approba-
tion of the gen emau from Va. [tVlr. Bar-
bour said that he was itot iiiCottgi'css.] Wlier-
tever the gentlenttasi was, whether on his farm,
or in the pursuit of that profession of wlticb
he is an oruament,I have no doubt that he gave
his zealous support to the laws referred to.
The principlcofthe systein under conside-
ration has the sanction of some of thebest
and wisest men, in all agcs—in foreign coun-
l-|‘l_0s, as well as in our own; oftlie l1‘.tl'.vai'ds,
01 Henry the Great, of Elizabeth, ofihc Col-
”"—rts, abroad ; of otir Franklin, Jefletsoii,
-‘Iadison, Haitiiltott, at bonie. But it comes
l'(-’comrnended to us by a higher tll2l.lt0I'l‘._y than
ilrty ofthese,illustr.otts as they unquestionably
are——-by the master spirit of the age——that ex-
traordinary innit, who ltas thrown the Alexan-
ders and the Cresais infinitely farther behind
ltlln thantltey stood in advance of the. most
eminent of ' their piedt-:cessors~—tliat singular
titan who, whether he was seated on his im-
perial throne, deciding the fate ofn:ttions,and
ztllottiug kiugtlonts to tliciuembers ofhis fatn-
ily, with the same composure, if itot with the
same itffectioit, as that with which it Virginia
i‘urticr divides his plantations among ltt‘s"cliil-
(lien, or On the tttiscrable rock ofSt. Helena,
to tthitgh he was -COli(lClllllC(l by the cruelty
and by the inju:-‘tice of his unworthy victors,i::
equally an obj:-,ct of the utost intense admira-
tion. He appears to have coinpreheuded, with
the rapidity of iiituitiou, the true interests of
a state,und to have been able,by the turn ofa
single expression,to develop the secret springs
ofthe policy of cabinets. We find that Las
Cassas reports hint to said : g
‘ lie opposed the principles of ecoitotntsts,
trltich, he said, were correct in theory, tltoitgn
erroneous in their application. Duties, he
said, which were so severely condemned by
political economists, should not, it is true, he
an object to the "I‘rcas‘ury: They should be
the gtiaraiitee and protection of a nation, and
sltoiild correspond with the nature arid the ob-
jects of its trade. _ Ilolland, which is destitute
of productions and ittaiutfacttttes, and which
has a trade. only of transit and commission,
should be free of all fetters and barriers.
France, on the contrary, which is rich in eve-
ry sort of prodttctiou aitd mannfactures—
slioultl incessantly guard against the importa-
tions of a rival.
‘ Experience is the true wisdom ofuations.
And what do all the reasoning of economists
amount to ? They incessantly extol the
prosperity of England, and hold her tip asour
inodel ; but the Custom-House is more bur-
thensome and arbitrary in England than in
any other country. They also coitdentn pro-
liibitions; yet it was England set the example
ofproltibitions ; and they are in fact necessa-
ry with regard to certain objects. Ditties cau-
iiot adequately supply the place of prohibi-
tions: there will always be found means to
defeat the object of the legislator. In France
we are still very far behind on those. delicate
points which are still uuperceiverl or ill tinder-
stood by the mass of society. Yet, what ad-
vancement have we not made,——wh-at correct-
ness of ideas has been introduced by my grad-
ual classification ofagriculture, industry and
trade ; objects so distinct in themselves, and
which present so great and positive a gradua-
tion l “ lst.—.‘Ig‘rz'cu.lltrrc; the soul, the
first basis oftlie empire. 2tl.——]nditstr_y ; the
comfort and happiness of the population.—
Sd.—-Foreign Trade : the siiperrtbundauce,
the proper application ofthe surplus of agri-
culture aitd industry.”
‘Agriculture was continually improving
during the wltole course of the rcvolution.—-
Foreiguers thought it ruined in France. In
I814, ltotvever, the English were compelled to
adtnit that we had little or nothing to learn
from them.
‘ Industry or manufactures, and internal
trade, made immense progress during my
reign. The application ofcliemistry to the
manufactures caused them to advance with
great strides. Igave an impulse, the effects
of which extended throughout Europe.
‘Foreign trade,’wliich in its results is infin-
itely inferior to agriculture, was an object of
subordinate ituportaiice in my mind. Foreign
trade is made for agriculture aitd home indus-
'ry, and not the latter for the former. The
interests ofthese three fundamental classesare
diverging and frequently conflicting. Iai-
ways promoted them in their gradual grada-
tiou ; but I could not and ought not to have
raitked them all on an equality. Time will
unfold what I have done, the national resour-
ceswbich I created, and the emancipation

 

front theEnglish which I brought about. We

have now the secret oftlte commercial treaty
of 1783. France still exclaimsagainst its an-
thor ;but the English deiuatided it on pain of
resuming the _war. They wished to do the
saute after the treaty of Amiens; but I was
then all powerful ;'I was a hundred cubits
high. ‘I replied, that iftliey were in possess-
ion ofthe heights of Montmatre, I would still
refuse to sign the treaty. These words were
echoed through Europe.

"The,Englisli will itow impose sortie such
treaty on France, at least if popular clamour,
and the opposition of the mass of the nation,
do not force them to draw back. This thr:tl-
-Join would be an additional disgrace in the
eyes oftlia_t nation, which is now beginning to
acquire a just perception ofber own interests.

“ Vtfhen I came to the head of the
government, the American ships, which
were permitted to enter our ports on the score
oftheir neutrality,-brought us raw ntaterials,
and had the impudeuce to sail from France
witliottt freigltt, for the purpose of taking itt
cargoes of English goods in London. Tlicy
moreover had the insolence to make their pay-
ments, when they ltad arty to make, by giving
bills on persottsiit London. Hence the vast
profits reaped-by the English m:tnufactut'ers
and brokers, entirely to our prejudice. Iinade
a law that no American should import goods
to any amount without immediately exporting
their exact eipiivalent. A lottd outcry was
raised against this : it was said.I had ruined
trade. But what was tlte consequence? Not-
witltstanding the closing ofrny ports, and in
spite of the English, who ruled the seas, the
Aiuericans returned and submitted to my reg-
ulations. W-hat might liiot have done uti-
der more favorable circumstances ?

lwould trouble the cotntnittce with only
one other quotation, which I shall make frotn
L0we,and from hearing which the comuiittec
tnpst share with me in the mortification which
Itelt oit perusing it. The autltor says: ‘It is
‘l0“".?,1l)0V€ 40 years since the U. States ofA-
incrica were definitively separated from us,
and since their situation ltas afforded a proof
that the benefit ofiuercantile iittercoursc may
be retained, in all its extent, without the care
of governing, orthe expense of defending,
these once regretted provinces.’ Is there not
too tiiiicli truth in this observation? By ad-
liering to the forcig_tt policy,whicli I have been
thficiissiiig, do we not remain essentially Bru-
i.~.h,in every thing btit the foriu ofour govern-
ment ? Are itot our interests, otir iiidustry,
otir cotuinercc, so inodtfierl as to swell Britisli
pride, and to iiicrease British power.

Mr. Cliairntan, otir C0l|fC(iL‘.l‘iiCy compre-
licnds iiithin its vast limits great diversity of
lntercstsfagrictiltural,plantiitg,t'artitiitg,cimi-
tnerctal, navigatitig, fishing, ntanufacturing.
Duo one of these interests is felt in tltc same
degree,and clierislted with the saute solicitude
tnrougliout all parts of the Union. Some of
them are peculiar to particularsectioits of ottr
cotniitoii country. But all these great inter-
ests are confided to the protection ofoue gov-
ernmcnt——to the fate ofone ship; and a most
gallant ship it is, with a noble crew. If we
prosper, and are happy, protection must. be
extcitdcrl to all: it is due to all. It is the great
priiiciple on which obedience is demanded
front all. The South entertains one opinion,
and iuiagines that a modification oftlie exis-
ting policy or titeconmry,’ for the protection
of American industry, involves the ruin of
the South. The North, the East, the West,
hold the opposite opinion, and feel and cott-
template in a loitger adlteritnceto the foreign
policy, as it now exists,their ittter destruction.
is it trite, that the interests oftliese great sec-
tions of our country are irreconcilaliie with
each other ? Are we reduced to the sad and
afflicting dileuuna ofdetermining which shall
fall a victim to the prosperity oftbe other ?—
Happily, I thiult, tltere is no such distressitig
.tlteritaiive. If the Norili, the West, and the
East were formed into an lllt',lCj)Cntlf;‘.!'l( state,
uuassociatcd with the South, can there be a
doubt that the restrictive system would be car-
ried to the point ofprohibition of every for-
eigu fabric of which they produce the raw
tnatcrial, and which they could manufacture?
Such would be their policy, if they stood .t-
loiie; bin they are, fortunately,ccitiicctcd with
the South,wlnch believer its interest to require
kl free-adntission of foreign maiiufactut'es.—-
I‘lP1'e,lltell,lS2t case for mutual cottccssioit,for
fair compromise. The bill under considera-
tion presents this contproinise. It is a tttedi-
um ltetw.-':eti the absolute exclusion, and the
unrestricted admission of the produce of for-
eign indtistry. It sacrifices the interests of
neither section to that oftlte other ; neither, it
is trite, gets all that it wants, nor is subject to
all that it fears. But, it has been said, that the
South obtains nothing in this compromise.

Does it lose any thing? is the first question.
I have endeavored to prove that it does not,
by showing that it more transfer is effected in
the source of the supply of its constuuptioii
froiu Europe to America ; and that the loss,
whatever it may be,ot'tbe sale of its great sta-
ple in Europe, is contpeusated by the new
market created in Atiierica. But does the
South really gain nothing in this compromise?
The consuinption oftlte other sections though
somewhat restricted, is still left open by this
bill, to foreign fabrics pttrcltasetl by Southern
staples. So far its operation is beneficial to
South, and prejudicial to the industry of the
other sections, and that is the point of mutual
concession. The South will also gain by the
extended consumption ofits great staple, pro-
duced by an increased capacity to consume it
in consequence of the establishtneitt of the
liotiic market. But the South cannot exert
its iudttstry and enterprise in the business of
manufactures! W'lty not? The difiiculties
if not exaggerated, are itrtificial, and tnay,
tlicrefore, be surmounted. But can the other
sections embark in tlteplantiiig occupations
oftlie South? The obstructions wliich for-
bid them are natural, created by the immuta-
ble laws of God, and therefore itnconqucrable.

Other atid animating considerations invite
us to adopt tltc policy of this system. Its ini-
portance, in connexion with the general de-
fence in time ofwar, cannot fail to V be ditly
estimated. Need I recal to nitr paiitfttl rec-
ollection the sufferiugs, for the want of an ad-
equate supply ofabsolute it izessaries, to which
the defenders oftlteir coitntry’s rights and our
entire population were subjected during the
late war? Or to reinintl ‘the cotnmitce of
the great advantage oftlie steady and unfail-
ing source of supply, ttttalfect ed alilte in war
and in peace? Is not goverinncut called tip-
on, by every stimulating motive, to adopt its
policy totlte actual condition and extended
growth ofour great republic? At the corti-
ineucetnent ofottr Constitution, almost the

whole population of the United States was

confined between the Allegbany mountains

and the Atlantic ‘ocean. Since that epoch,

the western par-t of New-Yo,k, M-Pe,,n5yj,.a-
nia,of Virginia,‘ all t. e western states and
territories, have been principally -peoph,-d__
Prior to that period we had scarcely any intg.
rior. Au interior has sprting tip, as it were,
by enchautment. and along with it new inter.
ests and new relations, requiring the paromnix

be ind-‘zlified accordingly, so as tocomorehend
all, an'l sacrifice itone. And are weinot en.
c0iirag'c7d by the success of past experience,
in respect to the only article wlticli has beén
1ideq_iuuely pt-omctetl ?‘
predictions of the friends of the American

utost sangtiiiie hopes could have anticipated,
been completely realized in regard to that ar-
ttclc : and the consumption is now better and

was under thcprevalcnce oftbe forei-rnsystem.
' Even ifthe benefits oftlte policy livere lint-
tted to certain sections of our couittry, would
it not be satisfactory to behold Americitn iii-
dttstry, wherever situated, active, and tlirif'ty.,
rather than persevere in a course" which ren-"
ders tis suL-servient to foreign iudustrv ?' Brit
these benefits are two-fold, direct and collat-
eral, atid iii the one shape or the other they
will diffuse themselves throughout the Union,
All parts of the Union will participafe, more
or less, in both. As to the direct benefit, it is
probable that the North and East will enjoy
the largest share. But the iVe'st and the
South will also participate in them. '“

will divide with the Northern capitals the hu-
siness of mantifactiiring. The latter citv u-
nites more advantages for its successful pins-
ecution than arty other place I know; Zones-
ville, in Ohio, only excepted. And where the

joyed ofsupplying the raw material and pro-
visions for the consumption of artisaits. Is it
not most desirable to pttt at rest and prevent
the annual recurrence nftbis unpleasant sub-
ject, so well fitted by the various interests to
which it appeals, to excite irritatioit and to
produce discontent ? Can that be effected by
its rejection? Behold the mass of petitions
which lie on our table, earnestly entreating
the protecting interposition of Congress a-
gainst the rninotis policy which we are pursu-
mg. “'ill these petitioners, comprclieudiug
entire states and cotnniunities, cease in their.

Can you expect that these petitioners, and-\
others, in countless number, that will, if you
delay the passage of this bill, stipplicate your
mercy, should contemplate their substance
gradually tvithdi'awn to foreign coutitries,tlieir
i'tiiu, slow btit certain, without one expiring
effort? You think the measure iujurioiis to
you ; we believe our preservation depends
tipou its ‘adoption. Our convictions, mninni-
ly honest, are equally stronvr. Wltat is to be
done? I invoke that saving spirit of mutual
concession under which ottr blessed constitu-
tion was formed, and under which alone it
can be happily administered. I appeal to the
South—to the high minded, generous, and
patriotic Soutli——tviili wlticb I have so often
co-operated, itt attempting to sustain the lion-
()r,V}lllfl in vindicate tll8"?igl'ita of our count.-y_
Should it not offer, upon the altar ofthe pub-
lic good, sortie sacrifice ofits peculiar opin-
ions ? Ot tvltat does it complain ? A total
incapacity, produced by the foreign policy, to
purcltase, at any price, necessary foreign ob-
jects ofconsumption. In such an alternative,
inconvenient only to it, riiiuotis to us, can we
expect too mticlt front southern iiiagttztttiiititv?
Tliejiist and confident expectation ofthe pas-
sage oftltis bill has flooded the country with
recent importatious of foreign fabrics. Ifit
should not pass, they will complete the work
ofdostruction ofour domestic industry. If it
sliould pass, they will prevent. any considera-
ble rxse in the price of foreign commodities,
until otir own industry shall be able to Supply
competent substitutes.

To the friends ofthe tarifi'I would also anx-

iously appeal. Every arrangement ofits pro-
visions does not suit each ofyou ; you desire
some further alterations; you would make it
perfect. You want what you will never get.
Nothing htiinan is perfect. And I have seen,
with great surprise, a piece signed by a ment-
ber of Congress, published in the National
Intelhgencer, stating that this bill must be re-
jcctcd, and ajudicious tariff brought in as its
siiltstittite. Ajtulicious tariff! No member
ol‘Congress could have signed that piece: or,
ifhe did, the public ought not to be deceived.
lfthis bill do not pass, unquestionably no oth-
er can pass at this session, or probably during
this Congress. And who willgo home and
say that he rejected all the benefits of this bill
because molasses has been subjected to the
enormous additional duty of 5 cents per gal-
ion?
American policy, to yieid somcwltat of their
own peculiar wishes, and not to reject the
practicable in the idle pursuit after the unat-
tainable. Let tts imitate the illustrious exam-.
ple oftlie fratners ofthe Constitution, and,:tl-
ways reineinbering that whatever springs
from man partakes of his imperfections, ile-
peud upon experience to suggest, in future,
the necessary amendnteuts.
We have ltad great difficulties to encounter.
From some of these, or other causes, the bill
may be postponed, tliwarted, defeated. But
the cause is the cause of the country, and it
iuust and will prevail. It is founded in the
interests and affections of the people.
native as the granite deeply iinbosomed in our
motintaiits. And, in conclusion, I would pray
Goo, in His infinite mercy, to avert front our
co_nutry the evils which are impending over it,
and, by enlightening our councils, to conduct
us into that path which leads to ricbes,to great.
ness, to glory.‘ A

- ~.

THE TRUE

$l.'lié1.\.S@li’E@ 
Oi: Hieroglyphic Mottitor,
A new and iiuproved Edition, just received

and for sale at the Bookstore and Library.
May 10, lfilvi. 1’. PRICE_

FOR SALE,
Or to be 7'enled_/in‘ one Year,

HE Buildings and home lot, situate ad-

joining the Turnpike Road, between

Sangatuck and Norwalk, late the residence

of Col. Ozias Marvin, dcc’d, now belonging
to ltis heirs. Enquire of SETH T.uLon,_
Agent for said Heirs.“

Saugatuck, May 3, 1824 1!

Already have the -

liuuible prayt-rs by your lending a dcafcar ? ‘

It is as ~

V

cheaper supplied with coarse cottons, than it .

.'

-it

s.

\

Philadelphia, Baltimore, and Riclimond, 

r

(

direct bottefit does not accrue, that will be en.
7

4

O

Icall, tlterefore, upon the friends of '-

r'? .
protectionofgoveriiincut. Oiirpolicy should "K, .

system, in even a sltorter time than their _
i. ,