Webster on protection: embracing numerous extracts from his speeches

LIBRARY or™, ' * UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. Deceived /Z^xZ^. ^ 189 JJT ^Accession No. . Class No. 4K£dB« WEBSTER ON PROTECTION EMBRACING NUMEROUS EXTRACTS FROM HIS SPEECHES BY REV. WILL C. WOOD, A. M. BOSTON PUBLISHED BY THE HOME MARKET CLUB 1894 EMBRACING NUMEROUS EXTRACTS FROM HIS SPEECHES BY REV. WILL C, WOOD, A. M., AUTHOR OF "PROTECTION CONSTITUTIONAL," u THE FIVE POINTS OF PROTECTION," uFivE PROBLEMS OF STATE AND RELIGION," "ART AND CHARACTER," "HEAVEN ONCE A WEEK," (EDINBURGH PRIZE ESSAY) AND VARIOUS HIS- TORICAL AND CRITICAL ESSAYS. BOSTON PUBLISHED BY THE HOME MARKET CLUB 1894 CONTENTS. PAGE. Artisans Made the Constitution, ........ 24 Capital and Labor, ........... 21 Clay, Calhoun and Jackson, ......... 34 Clay's American System, . . . . . . . • . . . 10 Coal and Labor, ............ 24 Comprqmise Tariff of 1833, ......... 36 Conclusions by Compiler, .......... 45 Consumption by Protected Labor, ........ 29 Duty of Government and Why the Union was Formed, . . . 22 England Not Our Model, . . . . . . . . . . 21 European Labor, Protection Against, ....... 23 Extracts from a Paper which Franklin Approved, ..... 5 Faneuil Hall and the Green Dragon Tavern, Voice of, ... 18 Farmers' Interest in Protection, ........ 25 First Tariff (1789), How Passed, 15 Franklin Before the Constitutional Convention, ..... 5 Free Trade's Criticism of Webster 6 Good Citizenship and Protection, ........ 32 Hancock, John, ............ 20 Historical Fact of Protection, 18 Importation and Protection, ......... 29 Importation, Extravagant, .......... 30 Ireland the Victim of Free Trade, ........ 31 Jackson's Wobbling Expressions, ........ 35 Minimum Principle, ........... 17-36 Motive of Protection Does Not Vitiate Tariff, 14 New Era of 1825, ........... 21 Prices, Free Trade Raises, 28 Prosperity Under Tariff of 1842, 38 Protection the Original American Policy,' 13 South and Protection, .......... 33 South Carolina, Attitude of, 16 Specific and Ad Valorem Duties, 21,37,42 Speeches on the Tariff by Webster, List of, . . . . . . 12 Wages and Prices — Seth Peterson, 26 Walker Tariff of 1846, Against, 39 Walker Tariff, Review of in 1848, 44 Webster as a Free Trader, and Why He Changed, .... 4 Webster's Economic Evolution, ....... 9 WEBSTER AND PROTECTION. BY REV. WILL C. WOOD, A. M. Webster was a Cyclopean builder of whatever he purposed and planned to build. He used granite boulders, whether he shaped and piled them into structures, or flung them from his catapults. Plymouth Rock and Bunker Hill were fit places and themes for his massive eloquence. His " Reply to Hayne" is a specimen of his mighty building. In the grand and final debate on protection, before the Amer- ican people, the next decade, or possibly prolonged through a quarter of a century before general conviction shall have been reached upon this important, this essential question — the pro- tection and prosperity of a nation's industries — the opinions of such a giant mind as Webster's will be worthy of thoughtful consideration. What did Webster build upon the subject of protection? This question, so interesting to Americans, especially at this period when the tariff is coming up for a new study, we will try to study and present. Autobiography is likely to be the truest biography, at least in a sincere person. Webster himself, on several occasions, made statements of a growth, of a change of his opinions on this great subject. One of these statements, in 1838, in reply to John C. Calhoun, is in these frank and plain terms : — When He Opposed Protection and Why He Changed* [Reply to Calhoun, U. S. Senate, March 22, 1838.] * I will state the facts, for I have them in my mind somewhat more fully than the honorable member has himself presented them. Let us begin at the beginning. In 1816, I voted against the tariff law which then passed. In 1824, I again voted against the tariff law which was then proposed, and which passed. A majority of New England votes, in 1824, were against the tariff system. The bill received but one vote from Massachusetts; but it passed. The policy was established. New England acquiesced in it, conformed her business and pursuits to it ; embarked her capital, and employed her labor, in manufactures ; and I certainly admit, that from that time I have felt bound to support interests thus called into being, and into importance, by the settled policy of the Government. I have stated this often, here, and often elsewhere. " As to the resolutions adopted in Boston, in 1820, and which res- olutions he has caused to be read, and which he says he presumes I prepared, I have no recollection of having drawn the resolutions, and do not believe I did. But I was at the meeting, and what I said on that occasion was produced here, and read in the Senate, years ago. " The resolutions, Sir, were opposed to the commencing of a high tariff policy. I was opposed to it, and spoke against it — the city of Boston was opposed to it — the Commonwealth of Massachu- setts was opposed to it. Remember, Sir, that this was in 1820. This opposition continued till 1824. The votes all show this. But, in 1824, the question was decided; the Government entered upon the policy; it invited men to embark their property and their means of living in it. Individuals thus encouraged have done this to a great extent ; and therefore, I say, so long as the manufactures shall need reasonable and just protection from Government, I shall be disposed to give it to them. What is there, Sir, in all this, for the gentleman to complain of? Would he have us always oppose the policy, adopted by the country, on a great question ? Would he have minorities never submit to the will of the majorities ? " I remember to have said, Sir, at the meeting in Faneuil Hall, that protection appeared to be regarded as incidental to revenue, and that the incident could not be carried fairly above the principal ; in other words, that duties ought not to be laid for the mere object of protection. I believe that if the power of protection be inferred only from the revenue power, the protection could only be incidental. " But I have said in this place before, and I repeat now, that Mr. Madison's publication, after that period, and his declaration that the convention did intend to grant the power of protection, under the commercial clause, placed the subject in a new and a clear light. I will add, Sir, that a paper drawn up apparently with the sanction of Dr. Franklin, and read to a circle of friends in Philadelphia, on the eve of the assembling of the convention, respecting the powers which the proposed new Government ought to possess, shows, perfectly plainly, that in regulating commerce, it was expected Congress would adopt a course which should protect the manufactures of the North. He certainly went into the convention himself under that conviction.* 4 'Well, Sir, and now what does the gentleman make out against * This remarkable paper of nearly 4,000 words is given as an Appendix to Webster's speech at the convention at Andover, November 9, 1843 ; the reader will find it in Webster's Works, vol. II, 186-189, with a foot note which says : " The paper from which these extracts are given is published in the American Museum, vol. I, p. 432, with the name of Tench Toxe, Esq., as its author. It is also incorporated into his work called " View of the United States of America, p. 4." Webster's reference to this paper and Franklin's connection with it, in this Andover speech, is in this paragraph : " Gentlemen, a native of Massachusetts, certainly inferior to none in sagacity and whose name confers honor upon the whole country, Dr. Benjamin Frank- lin, in 1787, indicated his sentiments upon these points in a very remarkable manner. The convention to deliberate upon the formation of the Constitution was held in Philadelphia, in May, 1787. Dr. Franklin was, if I remember right, the President, as the office was then called, of Pennsylvania, and was chosen also as a member of the convention. As the delegates were assembling, he invited them to a meeting at his house, on which occasion a paper on this sub- ject was read, which was subsequently printed, and to extracts from which I would call your attention. They will show you what were the sentiments of Dr. Franklin. They prove that far-sighted sagacity, which could discern what was then visible to so few eyes; and that wisdom, which pointed out a course so greatly beneficial." " At the time these opinions were sanctioned by Dr. Franklin, and indeed, till a very recent period, the manufacturers of the country were shop-workmen ; tailors, hatters, smiths, shoemakers, and others, who wrought in their own shops ; but still the principle is the same as if they were banded into corporations." Extracts from the Paper Approved by Franklin. " Our money absorbed by a wanton consumption of imported luxuries, a fluctuating paper medium substituted in its stead, foreign commerce extremely circumscribed, and a federal government not only ineffective, but disjointed, tell us indeed too plainly, that further negligence may ruin us forever." "The commerce of America, including our exports, imports, shipping, manufactures and fisheries, may be properly considered as forming one interest." 6 me in relation to the tariff ? What laurels does he gather in this part of Africa ? I opposed the policy of the tariff, until it had become the settled and established policy of the country. I have never questioned the constitutional power of Congress to grant protection, except so far as the remark made in Faneuil Hall goes, which remark respects only the length to which protection might properly be carried, so far as the power is derived from the authority to lay duties on imports. But the policy being established, and a great part of the country having placed vast interests at stake in it, I have not disturbed it ; on the contrary, I have insisted that it ought not to be disturbed." A Free Trader's Criticism. A biographical author of our day, a free trader, reckless in historical statement and criticism, ventures these sentences con- "The communication between the different ports of every nation is a business entirely in their power. The policy of most countries has been to secure this domestic navigation to their own people." " Such encouragement to this valuable branch of commerce [fisheries] as would secure the benefits of it to our own people, without injuring our other essential interests, is certainly worth attention. The convention will probably find, on consideration of this point, that a duty or prohibition of foreign articles, such as our own fisheries supply, will be safe and expedient." " Though it is confessed that the United States have full employment for all their citizens in the extensive field of agriculture, yet we have a valuable body of manufacturers already here, and as many more will probably emigrate from Europe, who will choose to continue at their trades, and as we have some citizens so poor as not to be able to effect a little settlement on our waste lands, there is a real necessity for some wholesome general regulations on this head." " Another inducement to some salutary regulations on this subject will be suggested by considering some of our means of conducting manufactures. Unless business of this kind is carried on, certain great natural powers of the country will remain inactive and useless. Our numerous mill-seats, for example, by which flour, oil, paper, snuff, gun-powder, iron-work, woollen cloths, boards and scantling, and some other articles, are prepared, or perfected, would be given by Providence in vain." "The encouragement to agriculture afforded by some manufactories is a reason of solid weight in favor of pushing them with industry and spirit." "A further encouragement to manufactures will result from improvements and discoveries in agriculture. There are many raw materials that could be produced in this country on a large scale, which have hitherto been very confined." ' If the facts and observations in the preceding part of this paper are admitted to be true and just, and if we take into consideration with them the acknowledged superiority of foreign commerce and the fisheries over our manu- factories, we may come to the following conclusions : — " That the United States of America cannot make a proper use of the natural advantages of the country, nor promote her agriculture and other lesser interests, without manufactures ; that they cannot enjoy the other attainable benefits of commerce and the fisheries, without some general restrictions and prohibitions affecting foreign nations." " It will not be amiss to draw a picture of our country, as it would really exist under the operation of a system of national laws formed upon these principles. While we indulge ourselves in the contemplation of a subject at once so interesting and dear, let us confine ourselves to substantial facts, and cerning Webster's change of opinion on the tariff. He is speak- ing of Webster's opposition to Clay's Compromise Act in 1833 : " Webster objected to the horizontal rate, and to an attempt to pledge future Congresses. He was now reduced, after having previ- ously made some of the most masterly arguments ever made for free trade, to defend protection by such devices as he could. Now he derided Adam Smith and the other economists. He first paltered with his convictions on the tariff, and broke his moral stamina by so doing. Many of the people who have been so much astonished at his sudden apostasy on slavery would understand it more easily if their own judgment was more open to appreciate his earlier apostasy on free trade." — [Wm. G. Sumner, " Life of Andrew Jackson." This is a tissue of misrepresentation. Luther might as well be accused of insincerity in the great religious change of his avoid those pleasing delusions into which the spirits and feelings of our countrymen have too long misled them. "In the foreground we should find the mass of our citizens the cultivators, (and what is happily for us, in most instances, the same thing), the independ- ent proprietors, of the soil. Every wheel would appear in motion that could carry forward the interests of this great body of people, and bring into action the inherent powers of the country. A portion of the produce of our land would be consumed in the families or employed in the business of our manu- facturers, a further portion would be applied in the sustenance of our merchants and fishermen arid their numerous assistants, and the remainder would be trans- ported by those that could carry it at the lowest freight (that is, with the smallest deduction from the aggregate profits of the business of the country) to the best foreign markets. "On one side we should see our manufacturers encouraging the tillers of the earth by the consumption and employment of the fruits of their labors, and supplying them and the rest of their fellow citizens with the instruments of their occupations, and the necessaries and conveniences of life, in every instance where it could be done without injuriously and unnecessarily increasing the dis- tress of commerce, the labors of the husbandmen, and the difficulties of chang- ing our native wilds into scenes of cultivation and plenty. Commerce, on the other hand, attentive to the general interests, would come forward with offers to range through foreign climates in search of those supplies which the manu- facturers could not furnish but at too high a price,' or which nature has not given us at home, in return for the surplus of those stores that had been drawn from the ocean or produced by the earth." " The foundations of national wealth and consequence are so firmly laid in the United States, that no foreign power can undermine or destroy them. But the enjoyment of these substantial blessings is rendered precarious by domestic cir- cumstances. Scarcely held together by a weak and half-formed federal consti- tution, the powers of our national government are unequal to the complete execution of any salutary purpose, foreign or domestic." " I have ventured to hint at prohibitory powers, but shall leave that point, and the general power of regulating trade, to those who may undertake to con- sider the political objects of the convention, suggesting only the evident pro- priety of enabling Congress to prevent the importation of such foreign com- modities as are made from our own raw materials. When any article of that kind can be supplied at home, upon as low terms as it can be imported, a manufacture of our own produce, so well established, ought not by any means to be sacrificed to the interests of foreign trade, or subjected to injury by the wild speculations of ignorant adventurers." 8 life. " Masterly arguments for free trade," — mostly one speech, that of 1824, a strong enough speech from the free trade point of view, but not a masterly, nor wholly consistent speech, mainly the development of statements and principles of English economists, a speech such as this comparatively youthful orator might make, from his studies of books, and from his connections with commercial New England. " Derided the economists," — of the English school, that is ; not Edward I., nor Cromwell, nor Colbert, nor Frederick the Great, nor Napoleon, nor Hamilton, nor any other who really ever made a nation great, though Webster did respectfully suggest that " his friends, McCulloch and Senior," did not appreciate American conditions. " Apos- tasy on free trade," " apostasy on slavery," " broke his moral stamina ; " only a complete anamorphosis of facts and right reason could produce such statements, which should forever shame the writer from using the quill again. In Webster's strenuous defence of protection, and of Jackson against Nullifi- cation— nullification of the tariff, be it observed, Southern nullification — he was as far as from pole to pole from the mood of compromise with the South or care for personal consequences, which some think came over him a score of years later. In fact, he told Clay he did not believe in his Compromise; " it was time to test the strength of the Union." No, Webster stood, at this time, like the Mount Washington of his native State, granite, unmovable. The South, certainly, felt, at this time, no compliance in the urbane belligerency of his speech. Calhoun, certainly, discerned no quiver of bending in his lofty plume. His horn was exalted. " Defend protection by such devices as he could ; " — and yet we venture to say that it would be hard to find a more compact mass of deliverances on the tariff, steadily in one direction, with more of direct vision into the facts and principles, with more indications of conviction of what he uttered, than in the speeches of Daniel Webster, extending over a period of twenty years, some of them conveying his sense of the magnitude and importance and vital concern of the subject to his countrymen, in such a manner as at times to be positively solemn. His Economic Evolution. And surely, there were adequate and sufficient reasons for that change of Webster, and for the permanence of that change. First, and more superficially, the revolution or transition in the interests and policy of his New England constituency, after 1824, from commercial to manufacturing pursuits, and then, too, the fact that the Whig party, then formed, to which Web- ster allie'd himself, promulgated protection and nailed it to the masthead for its perpetual policy. But then, there were deeper reasons for the profound change in his convictions, not only in his growing maturity of statesmanship, but also in the very facts and principles in the matter — the increasing belief that his great compatriot and compeer, Clay, had been intuitively right and broadly statesmanlike in his one persistent and consistent asseveration that protection and internal improvements were the "American System," resented by Webster at first, but fully sec- onded by him later; the fact that Hamilton, Franklin, Dallas, Calhoun, his great compeer of Carolina, and all the Presidents down to Jackson and including him, had declared protection the true American policy ; the very influential fact with Web- ster, the two letters of Madison to Cabell in 1828, and the later publication of Madison's papers, with his view of the constitu- tional grounds of protection in the "commercial regulations" phrase, and in connection therewith Webster's wider historical studies as to the extraordinary industrial ferment at the time of the Constitution's formation, which demanded protection as the prime or one of the prime things to be secured by that instru- ment, and which labor rejoiced at as having been secured and guaranteed therein; then, too, a clearer discernment of what the younger Webster, with many another inexperienced states- man, was unaware of, the more than rivalry, the hostility, the perpetual hostility, and, considering her insular position and colonial dependencies, the necessary hostility of Great Britain (until she shall revolutionize her policy) to our manufactures, to the manufactures of every other rival also, the world over ; and coupled with this a clear sense, a growing conviction, that without protection on our part that hostility must inevitably be successful and crushing to us, until or unless we shall be willing 10 — as Webster would never "have us, and resisted always — to submit our labor to the underpaid conditions of European labor ; observation, furthermore, of the effects of the successive tariffs of his time and of the hostile modifications of the tariff, like ebbs and flows of the tide ; and withal, a sense which Calhoun was one of the first and weightiest to express, in 1816, Webster then being present in the Senate, that protection was calculated to be one of the strongest bonds to bind together into one the distant parts of our Union, an idea by no means losing its potency with Webster, but growing and hardening, the rather, as he saw Calhoun later, repudiating and scouting that very protection in behalf of a constituency that would not allow its labor to enter manufactures, and determined to wreck the Union if they could not nullify protection : all these considera- tions and influences, besides others, cleared Webster's vision, expanded his view, and brought his judgment to rest on deeply grounded conviction. In his speeches after 1824, and increas- ingly, an expert on protection can see that, in the words of the Scotch phrase, Webster " kens what he is talking aboot." Clay's American System. Webster, it is true, came to his final convictions on protec- tion in a different way from Henry Clay. Clay's mind seems to have leaped to the conception of the " American System" with the inspiration of genius ; unless, possibly, that great man, Chancellor George Wythe of Virginia, one of the " Signers," and Clay's master in law, may have, sometime, dropped into his fertile mind the germ idea of it ; or, unless, again, possibly he may have caught it from Hamilton's great " Report." But the grand idea seems to be Clay's own ; and indeed, while in the Kentucky House, young Clay had moved that the whole legislature clothe themselves in American goods ; and, as early as 1810 he made his first speech in the United States Senate on " American Manufactures." "Mr. Clay was but a young man," says one, "when he had pretty much matured his 'American System.' It was a comprehensive, gigantic con- ception, opening a new era in the political history of the coun- try." The conception sprang full-formed, like Minerva from the head of Jove. But Webster, more deliberate in the move- 11 ments of his mind, like " a mammoth, treading at an equable and stately pace, his native cane-brake," was also precluded from an instantaneous conception of the " American System" by the veil of the agricultural and commercial surroundings of his early manhood, and by his favorite English economists. But, as we have seen, broader ideas of the American position developed conviction, no less deep because more slowly formed, in a direction quite different from the economic impressions and theories of his earlier years. Webster's mind seems, in one respect, to have changed front along the very line of the interesting Revolutionary story which he told at Pittsburg in 1833. He passed, in a word, from the exclusive commercial view to take, also, the manufacturer's view. " Some of the States," says Webster, " attempted to establish their own partial systems, but they failed. Voluntary association was re- sorted to, but that failed also. A memorable instance of this mode of attempting protection, occurred in Boston. The ship-owners, see- ing that British vessels came and went freely, while their own ships were rotting at the wharves, raised a committee to address the people, recommending to them, in the strongest manner, not to buy or use any articles imported in British ships. The chairman of this com- mittee was no less distinguished a character than the immortal John Hancock. The committee performed its duty powerfully and elo- quently. It set forth strong and persuasive reasons why the people should not buy or use British goods, imported in British ships. The ship-owners and merchants having thus proceeded, the mechanics of Boston took up the subject also. They answered the merchants' com- mittee. They agreed with them cordially, that British goods, im- ported in British vessels, ought not to be bought or consumed ; but then they took the liberty of going a step further, and of insisting, that such goods ought not to be bought or consumed at all (Great applause) . ' For,' said they, ' Mr. Hancock, what difference does- it make to us, whether hats, shoes, boots, shirts, handkerchiefs, tin- ware, brass-ware, cutlery, and every other article, come in British ships, or come in your ships ; since, in whatever ships they come, they take away our means of living?' ' (Speech at Pittsburg, Penn., July 9, 1833.) Before 1825, Webster talked for commercial New England; after that, for the manufactures, for all the industries, of the whole Union. 12 Webster, though a man naturally proud of his consistency, fully set his seal of approval on his change of opinions as late as 1846 : — "Mr. President, if it be an inconsistency to hold an opinion upon a subject at one time, and in one state of circumstances, and to hold a different opinion upon the same subject at another time, and in a different state of circumstances, I admit the change. Nay, Sir, I will go further; and, in regard to questions which, from their nature, do not depend upon circumstances for their true and just solution, I mean constitutional questions, if it be an inconsistency to hold an opinion to-day, even upon such a question, and on that same question, to hold a different opinion a quarter of a century afterwards, upon a more comprehensive view of the whole subject, with a more thorough investigation into the original purp-.ses and objects of that Constitution, and especially after a more thorough exposition of those objects and purposes by those who framed it, and have been trusted to administer it, I should not shrink even from that imputation. I hope I know more of the Constitution of my country than I did when I was twenty years old. I hope I have contemplated its great objects more broadly. I hope I have read with deeper interest the sentiments of the great men who framed it. I hope I have studied with more care the condi- tion of the country when the convention assembled to form it." List of Webster's Tariff Speeches. Webster's speeches which deal with protection are these : — Speech of 1814, mentioned by Lodge, and the famous one in Fan- euil Hall in 1820, neither of which have we seen. Speech in U. S. Senate, 1824. These belong to the " English" or free trade period. All the rest are made for the American policy ; from 1824 on, Webster stood everywhere and always for protection. Second Speech on the Tariff, U. S. Senate, May 9, 1828. Two Speeches on Foot's Resolution, Replies to Hayne, Jan. 20 and 26, 1830. Speech at National Republican Convention, Worcester, Mass., 1832. Reply to Calhoun, U. S. Senate, Feb. 16, 1833. Speech at Buffalo, June, 1833. Speech at Pittsburg, July 8, 1833. On Surplus Revenue, U. S. Senate, May 31, 1836. Reduction of Duty on Coal, U. S. Senate, Feb. 24, 1837. Sub-Treasury Speech, U. S. Senate, March 12, 1838. Reply to Calhoun, March 22, 1838. 13 At Niblo's Saloon, New York, March 15, 1838. General Effects of Protection, March 3, 1840. On Treasury Note Bill, Reply to Calhoun, March 30, 1840. Saratoga Mass Meeting, Aug. 19, 1840. Reception at Boston, Sept. 30, 1842. Andover Convention, Nov. 9, 1843. Albany Mass Meeting, Aug. 27, 1844. Whig Convention, Philadelphia, Oct. i, 1844. Convention at Valley Forge, Oct. 3, 1844. Against the Walker Tariff, U. S. Senate, July 25, 27, 1846. Public Dinner, Philadelphia, Dec. 2, 1846. Speech before Election, Faneuil Hall, Oct. 24, 1848. The object of this pamphlet is to group Webster's utterances on the tariff, for the convenient study and reference of the American people, to most of whom they will probably come with almost the force of a revelation and to all with the strength of prophecy. The compiler's only claim to merit is in allowing Webster to speak for himself, rather than in attempting to speak for him, and in bringing together for the first time specimen ex- cerpts from his great speeches during the twenty years of his greatest intellectual vigor and political influence, upon a subject as much in issue to-day as it was then and to the understanding of which nothing that is recent contributes more than these luminous passages from the past. Protection, the Original American Policy. Webster maintained, in opposition to Calhoun, that protection is the Original American Policy. The passage is extended, but foundational. It is part of his reply to Calhoun, "The Constitution Not a Compact," in the United States Senate, Feb. 16, 1833. " Sir, the world will scarcely believe that this whole controversy, and all the desperate measures which its support requires, have no other foundation than a difference of opinion upon a provision of the Constitution, between a majority of the people of South Carolina on one side, and a vast majority of the whole people of the United States on the other." "It was incredible and inconceivable, that South Carolina should thus plunge headlong into a resistance to the laws on a matter of opinion, and on a question in which the preponderance of opinion, both of the present day and of all past time, was so over- 14 whelmingly against her." "Sir, what will the civilized world say, what will posterity say, when they learn that similar laws have existed from the very foundation of the Government ; that for thirty years, the power was never questioned ; and that no State in the Union has more freely and unequivocally admitted it than South Carolina herself ? " The Motive of Protection Does Not Vitiate the Tariff. " The great object of all these laws is, unquestionably, revenue. If there were no occasion for revenue, the laws would not have been passed ; and it is notorious that almost the entire revenue of the country is derived from them. And, as yet, we have collected none too much revenue. The treasury has not been more reduced for many years than it is at the present moment. All that South Carolina can say is, that in passing the laws which she now undertakes to nullify, particular imported articles were taxed, from a regard to the pro- tection of certain articles of domestic manufacture, higher than they would have been, had no such regard been entertained. And she insists that, according to the Constitution, no such discrimination can be allowed ; that duties should be laid for revenue, and revenue only ; and that it is unlawful to have reference, in any case, to protec- tion. In other words, she denies the power of Discrimination. She does not, and cannot, complain of excessive taxation ; on the contrary, she professes to be willing to pay any amount for revenue, merely as revenue; and up to the present moment there is no surplus of rev- enue. Her grievance, then, that plain and palpable violation of the Constitution which she insists has taken place, is simply the exercise of the power of Discrimination. Now, Sir, is the exercise of this power of discrimination plainly and palpably unconstitutional ? "I have already said that the power to lay duties is given by the Constitution in broad and general terms. There is also conferred on Congress the whole power of regulating commerce, in another distinct provision. Is it clear and palpable, sir, — can any man say it is a case beyond doubt — that under these two powers Congress may not justly discriminate, in laying duties, for the purpose of coun- tervailing the policy of foreign nations, or of favoring our own home productions? Sir, what ought to conclude this question for- ever, as it would seem to me, is, that the regulation of commerce and the imposition of duties are, in all commercial nations, powers avow- edly and constantly exercised for this very end. That undeniable truth ought to settle the question; because the Constitution ought to be considered, when it uses well-known language, as using it in its well- 15 known sense. But it is equally undeniable that it has been, from the very first, fully believed that this power of discrimination was con- ferred on Congress ; and the Constitution was itself recommended, urged upon the people, and enthusiastically insisted on in some of the states, for that very reason. Not that at that time the country was extensively engaged in manufactures, especially of the kinds now existing. But the trades and crafts of the seaport towns, the business of the artisans and manual laborers, those employments the work in which supplies so great a portion of the daily wants of all classes — all these looked to the new Constitution as a source of relief from the severe distress which followed the war. It would, sir, be unpardon- able, at so late an hour, to go into details on this point, but the truth is as I have stated. The papers of the day, the resolutions of public meetings, the debates in the conventions, all that we open our eyes upon in the history of the times prove it." Webster shows that Calhoun misapprehended two incidents claimed to support his view ; one was that " a power to protect manufactures was expressly proposed, but not granted." Web- ster shows that the proposition Calhoun had in mind was " 'to establish public institutions, rewards and immunities' for the promotion of manufactures and other interests. The conven- tion," adds Webster, "supposed it had done enough — at any rate it had done all it had intended — when it had given to Con- gress, in general terms, the power to lay imposts and the power to regulate trade." Webster says that Calhoun also misunder- stood Mr. Martin, that he objected before the Maryland legisla- ture that the Constitution did not contain protection ; Webster shows that Martin's complaint was only that the power of pro- tection had been taken away from the separate States. How the First Tariff (1789) Was Passed. " I find," continues Webster, "that, having provided for the admin- istration of the necessary oaths, the very first measure proposed for consideration is the laying of imposts ; and in the very first committee of the whole into which the House of Representatives ever resolved itself on this, its earliest subject, and in this, its very first debate, the duty of so laying the imposts as to encourage manufactures, was ad- vanced and enlarged upon, by almost every speaker, and doubted or denied by none. The first gentleman who suggests this as the clear duty of Congress, and as an object necessary to be attended to, is Mr. Fitzsimons, of Pennsylvania ; the second, Mr. White, of Virginia; the third, Mr. Tucker, of South Carolina. 16 " But the great leader, Sir, on this occasion, was Mr. Madison. Was he likely to know the intentions of the convention and the peo- ple? Was he likely to understand the Constitution? " At the second sitting of the committee, Mr. Madison explained his own opinions of the duty of Congress, fully and explicitly. I must not detain you, Sir, with more than a few short extracts from these opinions, but they are such as are clear, intelligible, and decisive. " ' The states,' says he, ' that are most advanced in population, and ripe for manufactures, ought to have their particular interest attended to, in some degree. While these states retained the power of making regulations of trade they had the power to cherish such institutions. By adopting the present Constitution, they have thrown the exercise of this power into other hands ; they must have done this with an ex- pectation that those interests would not be neglected here.' ' Attitude of South Carolina. " In the same debate, Sir, Mr. Burk, from South Carolina, sup- ported a duty on hemp, for the express purpose of encouraging its growth on the strong lands of South Carolina. i Cotton ' he said, 4 was also in contemplation among them, and if good seed could be procured, he hoped might succeed.' Afterwards, Sir, the cotton seed was obtained, its culture was protected, and it did succeed. Mr. Smith, a very distinguished member from the same state, observed : ' It has been said, and justly, that the states which adopted this Constitution expected its administration would be conducted with a favorable hand. The manufacturing states wished the encouragement of manufactures ; the maritime states, the encouragement of ship- building ; and the agricultural states, the encouragement of agri- culture.' ' "And how, Sir, did this debate terminate? What law was passed? There it stands, Sir, among the statutes, the second law in the book. It has a preamble, and that preamble expressly recites that the duties which it imposes are laid ' for the support of Government, for the discharge of the debts of the United States, and the encourage- ment and protection of manufactures.' Until, Sir, this early legislation, thus coeval with the Constitution itself, thus full and explicit, can be explained away, no man can doubt of the meaning of that instrument in this respect. "Mr. President, this power of discrimination, thus admitted, avowed, and practised upon, in the first revenue act, has never been denied or doubted until within a few years past. It was not at all 17 doubted in 1816, when it became necessary to adjust the revenue to a state of peace. Certainly, South Carolina did not doubt it. The tariffof 1816 was introduced, carried through, and established, under the lead of South Carolina. Even the minimum policy is of South Carolina origin. The honorable gentleman himself supported, and ably supported, the tariff of 1816. He has informed us, Sir, that his speech on that occasion was sudden and off-hand, he being called up by the request of a friend. lam sure the gentleman so remembers it, and that it was so ; but there is, nevertheless, much method, arrangement, and clear exposition in that extempore speech. It is very able, very, very much to the point, and very decisive. And in another speech, delivered two months earlier, the honorable gentleman had declared ' that a certain encouragement ought to be extended, at least to our 'woolen and cotton manufactures." <k Sir, it is no answer to say that the tariff of 1816 was a revenue bill. So are they all revenue bills. The point is, and the truth is, that the tariff of 1816, like the rest, did discriminate ; it did lay duties for protection. Look to the case of coarse cottons, under the minimum calculation ; the duty on these was sixty to eighty per cent. Something besides revenue, certainly, was intended in this ; and, in fact, the law cut up our whole commerce with India in that article. '• It is, Sir, only within a few years that Carolina has denied the constitutionality of these protective laws. The gentleman himself has narrated to us the true history of her proceedings on this point. He says that after the passing of the law of 1828, despairing then of being able to abolish the system of protection, political men went forth among the people, and set up the doctrine that the system was uncon- stitutional. 4 And the people J says the honorable gentleman, 4 re- ceived the doctrine.' This I believe is true, Sir. The people did then receive the doctrine ; they had never entertained it before. Down to that period, the constitutionality of these laws had been no more doubted in South Carolina, than elsewhere. And I suspect it is true, Sir, and I deem it a great misfortune, that to the present moment, a great portion of the people of the state have never yet seen more than one side of the argument. I believe that thousands of honest men are involved in scenes now passing, led away by one-sided views of the question, and following their leaders by the impulses of an un- limited confidence. Depend upon it, Sir, if we can avoid the shock of arms, a day for reconsideration and reflection will come ; truth and reason will act with their accustomed force, and the public opinion of South Carolina will be restored to its usual Constitutional and patri- otic tone. 18 "But, Sir, I hold South Carolina to her ancient, her cool, her un- influenced, her deliberate opinions. I hold her to her own admissions, nay, to her own claims and pretensions, in 1789, in the first Congress, and to her acknowledgments and avowed sentiments through a long series of succeeding years. I hold her to the principles on which she led Congress to act, in 1816 ; or, if she have changed her own opin- ions, I claim some respect for those who still retain the same opinions. I say she is precluded from asserting, that doctrines which she has 'herself so long and so ably sustained, are plain, palpable and danger- ous violations of the Constitution." Protection the Historical Fact. At the Albany mass meeting, Aug. 27, 1844, amid a score of pages on protection, historical and argumentative, Webster says : — " This sentiment, gentlemen, continued to prevail through all the administrations which followed General Washington. It was regarded by Mr. Jefferson as a just principle of legislation, as he stated in the beginning of his administration in 1802, and still more distinctly just before the expiration of his term of office in 1808. I need not say that everybody knows that Mr. Madison, in 1810, 1812 and 1816, reiterated all these sentiments. " This is the history of the country on the great question of protec- tion. I speak of the fact, and assert it as an historical truth, proved from the journals of Congress, the messages of the Presidents, the acts of legislation, beginning with the second law ever passed and running through successive administrations, that it was held as the undoubted right of Congress, and no more the right than the duty, by just dis- crimination, to protect the labor of the American people." "I am for reciprocity treaties," says Webster. " No, I will not say treaties, but arrangements ; for the whole power over the subject lies with Congress, and not with the treaty-making power." The Voice of Faneuil Hall in 1785 and the Green Dragon Tavern in 1788. [Speech at Andover Convention, Nov. 9, 1843.] "Now, gentlemen, it so happened, that in the years of severe disas- ter between the peace and the formation of the Constitution, the mer- chants and mechanics of Boston had their attention called to the subject, and their proceedings, only a little earlier than the paper just referred to, [that of Tench Toxe, Esq., read at Franklin's house] 19 sprang from the same sense of necessity. I will trouble you to listen to some of them which I gather from the publications of that day. •'At a numerous and respectable meeting of 'the merchants, traders and others, convened at Faneuil Hall,' on Saturday, the i6th of April, 1785, the following, among other resolutions, were adopted : — " 'Whereas, certain British merchants, factors and agents from England are now residing in this town, who have received large quantities of English goods, and Jare in expectation of receiving further supplies, imported in British bottoms, or otherwise, greatly to the hinderance of freight in all American vessels," etc., "we the merchants, traders, and others of the town of Boston, do agree, — " ' First, that a committee be appointed to draft a petition to Congress repre- senting the embarrassments under which the trade now labors, and the still greater to which it is exposed ; and that the said committee be empowered and directed to write to the several seaports in this State, requesting them to join with the merchants in this town in similar applications to Congress, immedi- ately to regulate the trade of the United States agreeably to the powers vested in them by the government of this commonwealth," etc. "That the said committee be requested to write to the merchants in the sev- eral seaports of the other United States, earnestly recommending to them an immediate application to the legislatures of their respective States to vest such powers in Congress (if not already done) as shall be competent to the interest- ing purposes aforesaid, and also to petition Congress to make such regulations as shall have the desired effect.' " " So far the merchants. Now what said the mechanics, the arti- sans, the shop-workmen, to this? At an adjourned meeting of per- sons belonging to those classes at the Green Dragon Tavern, on Monday, the 25th day of April, 1785, the following resolutions, among others, were passed : — " 'Voted, that a committee be appointed by this body to draft a petition to the next General Court, setting forth the difficulties the manufacturers of this town labor under by the importation of certain articles (to be enumerated in the petition) and praying a prohibition, or that such duties may be laid as will effectually protect the manufacture of the same. ' " Voted, that we do bear our public testimony against sending away our cir- culating cash for foreign remittances, as this practice, we conceive, is calculated to impoverish the country.'" "Well, how did the merchants receive this? I will show you. Here is a letter, signed in their behalf, by that great patriot and prince of merchants, John Hancock. BOSTON, MAY 2, 1785. '"GENTLEMEN, — Your communications of the 26th ult. were interesting and agreeable. Our situation is truly critical. To the United States in Con- gress we look for effectual relief, and to them we have accordingly appealed. "'We shall cheerfully use what influence we have in promoting and en- couraging the manufactures of our country, etc. " 'We derive great support from that unanimity which appears to actuate our respective proceedings, and while that subsists, we can no more despair of the commerce, trade, and manufactures than of the liberties of America.' 20 John Hancock. "This state of things continued till 1788, when the Massachusetts- convention to consider the Constitution was held in Boston. Some of the most eminent persons who have shed lustre on the State were members of that convention, and many of them, as is well known, felt great doubts about adopting the Constitution. Among these were two individuals, none other than John Hancock and Samuel Adams, the proscribed patriots. But the energy, determination, perseverance and earnestness of the mechanics and tradesmen of Boston influenced even these wise and great men, and tended to, and did in an eminent degree, contribute to the ratification of the Constitution. Any man will see this who will look into the public transactions of that day. 4 'There was a particular set of resolutions, founded on this very idea of favoring home productions, full of energy and decision, passed by the mechanics of Boston. And where did the mechanics of Boston meet to pass them? Full of the influence of these feelings, they con- gregated at the headquarters of the Revolution. I see, waving among the banners before me that of the Old Green Dragon. It was there, in Union Street, that John Gray, Paul Revere, and others of their class, met for consultation. There, with earnestness and enthusiasm, they passed their resolutions. A committee carried them to the Bos- ton delegation in the convention. Mr. Samuel Adams asked Colonel Revere how many mechanics were at the meeting ; and Colonel Re- vere answered, 4 More than there are stars in heaven/ u The resolutions had their effect. The Constitution was estab- lished, and a universal burst of joy from all classes, merchants, manu- facturers and mechanics, proclaimed the exultation of the people at the thrice-happy event." 44 This ' grand procession ' took place ; and the artisans, mechanics, and manufacturers of Boston, together with the merchants and other classes, indulged in the hope, not more sanguine than the event warranted, that under the operation of the new national Constitution, prosperity would return, business revive, cheerfulness and content- ment spread over the land, and the country go forward in its career of growth and success." " But, Gentlemen, this sentiment and feeling were not merely the sentiment and feeling of Massachusetts. We may look at the debates in all the state conventions, and the expositions of all the greatest men in the country, particularly in Massachusetts and Virginia, the great Northern and Southern stars, and we shall find it everywhere held up as the main reason for the adoption of the Constitution, that it would give the general government the power to regulate commerce and trade." 21 The New Era of 1825. [Faneuil Hall, April 3, 1825.] " Let me rather say that in regard to the whole country a new era has arisen. In a time of peace the proper pursuits of peace engage society with a degree of enterprise