Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

wise exceeded the estimates, and, indeed, have
gone beyond all former example. It is believ.
ed that, notwithstanding the large amount of
scrip and forfeited land stock that may still be
ausorbed in payments for lands, yet, if the sur-
veys now projected be completed, the receipts
from this source of revenue will not fall greatly
below those of the present year..
From all the information which
the Department has been a-
ble to obtain, the receipts in-
to the treasury during the
year 1832, may be estimated

[blocks in formation]

$30,100,000

Now, if from this amount there be taken the reduction under Mr. McLane's bill, we have remaining a revenue of $22,215,333

[blocks in formation]

Now, we will put the question fairly: is it possible to suppose, that the future receipts from customs, under the existing rates, could be four millions and a half less than the average receipts for the last six years? Is it not much more probable that it would be several millions greater? Upon the whole, we cannot bring our minds to entertain a doubt, that the average receipts for the period above mentioned, may be safely assumed as the very lowest standard for the future receipts from customs, at the present rates-say $22,500,000

To which add receipts from "old

internal revenue, direct tax,
postage, public lands, bank di-
vidends, & miscellaneous," say

And we have

as the annual receipts at the
present rates.

From which take Mr. McLane's
proposed reduction,

4,000,000 $26,500,000

6,310,516

But, it is objected that these receipts, like those of 1831, "will be made up, in part, and largely, too, of the duties on tea, coffee, &c. repealed by the acts of 1830.". Now, we should hold it to be impossible that any large amount derived from duties repealed in 1830 should enter into the receipts of 1832; but, whatever it may be, it will be seen, from the above extract from the treasury report, that the receipts of 1832 are estimated at After deducting "drawback, 'expenses of col- as the amount which would probably come into lection, &c." and $750,000 on account of these the Treasury, under Mr. McLane's bill, leaving repealed duties on coffee, tea, cocoa, and salt. an annual surplus, after paying "the authoriz But it is denied that either of these years ed expenditures of the Government," of seven present a just standard," by which to measure millions of dollars.

$26,500 000 And we have

$20,189,484

the future receipts from customs. The "usual We will briefly notice one or two other oband natural level," is assumed to be the re-jections to Mr. McLane's "comparative stateceipts of 1830, diminished by the whole amount ment."

of the duties taken off under the acts of 1830. 1st. Mr. McLane assumes as the basis of his The Treasury estimate would therefore stand calculation, the fiscal year ending on the 30th

thus:

Gross amount of duties in 1830, Deduct amount of duties reduced by act of 1830,

Deduct also "drawbacks," &c. stated in the Treasury estimate

at

September, 1830, instead of the calendar year, $25,370,328 ending on the 31st December, 1830. His calculations, therefore, are founded on a revenue of 4,665,491 only $26,370,328, instead of $28,382,795, thereby assuming a revenue less by two millions 21,704,837 than the proper amount; the period chosen being one obviously influenced by the depression. incident to the tariff of 1829, from which the 3,881,479 country was just beginning to recover in the last quarter of the year 1830; and from which it. $17,823,358 has been recovering more and more ever since.

And we have no more than as the estimated receipts into the Treasury, from customs, at the present rates.

How this can possibly be reconciled with the actual receipts from customs for the last six years, we are utterly unable to conceive. The statistical tables exhibit the following results. Receipts from Customs.

[blocks in formation]

2d. The next objection to Mr. McLane's statement is, that he makes the calculations on the accrued revenue, and not, as he should have done, on the receipts into the Treasury. The object in view, certainly was, to shew the amount of duties under the present tariff; the amount that would be levied under the proposed rutes, and the amount of taxation from which the people would thereby be relieved. This is attempted to be exhibited thus:

* These amounted, in 1831, to $4,385,816.

Amount of pro-
posed duties.
$15,394,318

Amount of preDifference. (being the estimated amount of the cash and aucsent duties. tion duties, the bounty on ships, &c. &c., which $26,370,325 $10,976,007 will unquestionably constitute clear additions Now, in addition to the fact which has been to the public burdens,) so that the relief to be shewn, that $4,665,491, of this proposed reduc- afforded to the country, should Mr. M'Lane's tion, has already taken place under the acts of bill become a law, cannot be justly estimated 1830, (whereby the estimated saving is reduced at more than $3,000,000, unless the view which from ten millions to six,) there is this further we have taken of this subject, be entirely erobjection to the statement, that it is founded on roneous.

the duties which accrued in the year selected by And should Mr. M'Lane's bill be modified as Mr. McLane, and not on the actual receipts into proposed by the Committees of Manufactnres, the Treasury, whereby the whole amount of the reductions effected, would amount almost "drawbacks, bounties to ships, expenses of to nothing.

collection," &c. has been (erroneously as we It is admitted that "the fact has been overconceive,) included in the calculation. The looked, that the reduction of $6,310,516 by Mr"drawbacks" &c. are estimated in Mr. McLane's McLane's bill, being upon a nett revenue of statement at $3,881,479. Whether this est-twenty-two millions, the same rate of reduction mate is founded on the present or proposed du- upon a larger revenue would give a larger reties, does not clearly appear. Assuming, howev-duction," the difference, however, would not er, $3,881,479 to be the amount of "drawbacks," be very important. On the estimated receipts &c. on $15,394,318, at the proposed rates, then of 1832, it would not exceed a million of dol(if there be no error in our calculation,) $5,770,- lars. We differ radically from the writer in the 479, would be about' the amount of "draw- Globe, when he assumes that it may be found backs," &c. on $26,370,328, at the proposed rates, impracticable to raise neither more nor less reveand as the amount of drawbacks," &c. consti- nue than may be required; and that it, therefore, tute, of course, no part of the duties collected, becomes indispensible to raise enough--or, in and form no part of the public revenue; the account for the year selected by Mr. McLane, should stand thus, (if we are correct in the calculation.)

Amount of present duties, deduct-
ing drawbacks,
Amount of proposed duties, deduct-
ing drawbacks,

Difference, being the amount sav-
ed to the people,
From which take the reductions
under the acts of 1830,

other words, that to guard against the possibility of a deficiency, we must take care to raise an amount that could in no event fall below, but would in all probability greatly exceed the "authorized expenditures" of the government. We $20,599,731 believe that a system of duties arranged on

sound principles, can be so adjusted, as to raise 11,512,839 neither more nor less revenue than may be re

quired. We do not mean that the receipts and 9,086,892 expenditures shall be exactly balanced at the

end of any particular year, but that, in a series 4,665,491 of years, they shall be so adjusted that there

And we have the nett amount of the proposed reduction, less than four millions and a half.

shall remain no surplus in the Treasury, and no $4,421,401 ordinary expenditure of the Government be unprovided for. The unexpended balances of appropriations always remaining in the Treasury at the end of every year, would constitute a If the amount of drawbacks be greater, the fund capable of being used in case of emergenamount of saving would be less. In every point cy, to which might be added, if necessary, an of view, it would seem to be certain, that if authority to borrow to a limited extent, should $6,310,516 be the true amount of Mr. M'Lane's an unexpected deficiency render such a meaproposed reduction, on the basis assumed, that sure necessary. We do not regard a deficienhaving formed that estimate on the duties ac- cy under such a government as ours, as an evil crued, (including the drawbacks,) instead of the at all to be deprecated, while we should considuties received, the amount of actual saving der a surplus in the Treasury as an event greatmust be less by upwards of a million and a half ly to be feared. Besides the temptation that of dollars, than is assumed. I would thereby be held out to extravagant ex

[ocr errors]

It requires no argument to show, that a duty penditures, the corrupting influence of public accruing on articles re-exported, and on which money left in the Treasury to be s rambled for, the duties are refunded, can constitute no part, and capable of being used as an instrument for either of the amount of revenue under the pre-party purposes, cannot be too carefully guardsent tariff, or of reductions under the proposed ed against. tariff. The actual reduction, therefore, under Mr. M'Lane's bill, being reduced on account of the "drawbacks," c., as abave stated, will leave only

As the amount, of relief from the public burdens, should Mr. M'Lane's bill,in its present form, become a law; from which ought to be deducted the further sum of about

With regard to the concluding suggestion of the writer in the Globe, "that if the duties under the proposed scheme would be at first too high, the task will remain of discovering how a 4,421,401 greater reduction can be made from the protected articles without ruin to the vast interests involved in them," the writer of this article will only say, that the Treasury scheme has been subjected to criticism merely as a revenue ineasure, and the moment protection and not reve

1,770,000

nue is declared to be its object, a standard is brain should be no more stifled than the issue of given altogether vague and uncertain, to be the womb;" and any design to fetter the mind brought to the test of sober investigation. If the by stratagem or force, to give it an unnatuara! iron masters, or the woollen manufacturers are and false character, to suit the times, should to be credited, a duty of 100 per cent. is indis- meet the severest disapprobation of all who pensably necessary to their protection, and even profess to be the true friends of freedom. The the cotton manufacturers, while proclaiming abridgment of the liberties of speech, contained their ability to export their productions to every in an act passed by Congress, was pronounced quarter of the habitable globe, and to overcome unconstitutional by the States, and thus nullicompetition abroad, still insist that they cannot fied; but I venture to assert, that it never enmeet foreign competition in our own markets, tered into the minds of one of the advocates of without a protection varying from twenty-five this bill,that the very essence of our liberties, the to upwards of one hundred per centum. The freedom of debate in Congress, was not sacred. grave question then arrives-Are the interests Destroy that privilege, annihilate that sacred of the agriculturists to be sacrificed to those right, and ere long, we may meet our friends of the manufacturers? Is the southern cotton in the street with anxious countenances, but planter, especially, (depending, as he does, afraid to speak, only through the pipe of a lialmost exclusively on foreign markets, for the censer. But we are told Congress ought to sale of his produtions,) to pay enormous taxes have passed laws defining the punishment of upon the articles which he receives in exchange such offences; & thus it is, gentlemen allow their for the fruits of his industry, in order to render prejudices to palliate an offence. Is it a justimore profitable the labor and capital of the ma- fication for an offence that Congress had not nufacturer? When we hear persons speaking passed an act covering the case? I have no inof "a compromise" in this matter-and in the clination to show what has already been decided, same breath insisting that the protection extend- that they had power; but surely there are some ed to the manufacturers, by duties beyond the things among us, the moral beauty and excelwants of the Government, must not be impair-lence of which, are so far superior to others, that ed, we confess we are unable to discover a guards rather invite danger than prevent it. Who single feature that looks like a compromise in would think of placing a guard to a church? such a proposition. And yet, the very existence of that church, sees Let the duties be reduced, (however gradu- ing that the liberty of conscience, and all the ally,) to the just revenue standard, and let the valuable blessings we enjoy, and the fruits of that manufacturers receive all the protection fairly freedom of debate, which should be held sacred incidental to such a system, and existing diffi- by every lover of liberty, and every friend to culties will be removed, and the country tran- his country. This is a subject of deep interest, quilized. Even this, however, would be a com- and will be much reflected upon, and only repromise very beneficial to the manufa turers, quires deliberation to condemn. The worst and greatly injurious to the agriculturists, espe- species of gag law, is that kind which intends cially of the southern States, for an ad valorem to intimidate representative freedom by the pis duty on all protected articles of fifteen per cent tol or the cudgel, and when we have so far dewould, with the addition of charges, freight, in-generated as to give countenance to such prac surance, &c. give to the American manufactu- tices, disorder and confusion must follow, and rer an advantage over the foreign, in our own the Goddess of Liberty will have flown from markets, of at least thirty per cent., and surely this her favorite abode. Mr. Editor, you have no candid man will deny, that if any manufac-said that you were not an alarmist. I believe it. ture cannot succeed with a protection equal to But, Sir, these are strange times. I have thought th rty per cent., it ought to be at once aban-highly of Andrew Jackson, and I have ascribed doned. But while duties are to be imposed, much of what I thought errors, to the head and ranging from twenty to upwards of one hundred not to his heart; but if he sanctions the practice per cent., and imposed not for revenue but pro- of violence upon the persons of members of Con tection, we must say, that if such a scheme is to gress, for the freedom of speech in debate, if it be a compromise, it is a compromise in which is true that he will carry his point by means adevery thing will be yielded on the one side, and equate to accomplish his purposes without renothing on the other.

FOR THE UNITED STATES TELEGRAPH.

gard to the character of those means, then I will ask, where is the freeman who would not put him down. Mr. Jefferson's rule was to "Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and bind the Union by justice, by kindness, and by to argue freely, according to conscience, above unremitting exertions to maintain and merit a all liberties." character for fair doings. The national name This was the language of a great and good was so exalted, that every man felt proud man; it has always been the language of free- that he lived at that day, and was an American. men. "To the pure all things are pure, not But how altered are we! How strangely unlike only meats and drinks, but all kinds of know- ourselves! If we travel up the channel of time, ledge, whether good or evil; the knowledge and look into the history of Rome or Greece, cannot defile, if the will and conscience be not and see a successful military commander returndefiled." The freedom of speech, and the lib-ed to his native home, at the helm of State, doing erty of the press, are rights tenaciously held by wrong, and frequently, too, not from any natural the people of this country. The issue of the propensity to do so, but pressed by the impar

[ocr errors]
[graphic]

tunity of his associates, their violence and the Philadelphia, on which to ground the charge of extravagance of their demands, we may find a a concerted "effort" with the late Secretary of parallel in this our day. Perhaps this picture is War, for any purpose whatever, as it was never over drawn, and too highly colored; but I do known to me that the late Secretary of War verily believe, it has not half the strength which ever wrote a line to, or received a letter from, the real condition of the present times demand; the Board at Philadelphia; nay, more, the only but I trust some spirits may rise up to shake this correspondence of his with the branch banks, nation to a peaceful and healthful reformation, which came to my knowledge, was an order to that we may once more behold the simplicity that at Portsmouth, N. H., to transfer the funds and virtue of our fathers. FRANKLIN.

FROM THE PHILADELPHIA SENTINEL.

GREAT SPRING, May 19th, 1832.

TO THE PUBLIC.

[ocr errors]

deposited there for the payment of pensions, to a State bank, which order, as soon as it was made known to me, being deemed contrary to law, I addressed a letter to the War Department, intimating my opinion to that effect. The case was afterwards, as I understood, subIn the report made to the House of Represen-milar opinion, when the order was revoked. mitted to the Attorney General, who gave a sitatives on the 14th inst. by the Hon. John Quincy Adams, late President of the United States, If there be any other correspondence of the there is contained the following paragraph: Secretary of War with the bank or its branchThe correspondence "The complaints made against the President es, I am ignorant of it.

er were disconcerted and laid aside."

of the Bank at Portsmouth, New Hampshire, in in relation to the ordinary business of thre War the summer of 1829, and the correspondence Department with the bank, was, of course, not between the Board at Philadelphia and the late submitted to the inspection of the Treasury De Secretaries of the Treasury and of War, form a partment, and never came under my notice. It portion of the documents relating to the books is due to the late Secretary of War, to state and proceedings of the bank called for by the that he cannot be responsible for any correscommittee, and communicated to them. They pondence of mine with the bank; he certainly are not noticed in the report of the chairman, that he ever saw a line of it. For this, whathad no agency in preparing it, nor do I know but, in the opinion of the subscriber, are more deserving of the attention of Congress, and of ever its character may be, I am alone responsithe nation, than any other part of the papers I disclaim the imputed concert of action, and all ble to the government and the nation, and while commented upon in the report. An effort, very thinly veiled, on the part of two of the Exe- responsibility for the acts of others, in which I had no agency, I shrink from none for my own cutive Departments of the General Govern- acts. I have therefore taken measures to have ment, to exercise a control, political and pecuniary, over the proceedings of the bank and its the correspondence with the Board at Philadelbranches, a control highly exceptionable in phia, growing out of the complaints against the President of the Bank at Portsmouth, N. H. principle, and even contrary to law, appears to him to be fully disclosed in those papers. He published as soon as possible, relying upon the will not permit himself to inquire into the mo- public intelligence alone for justice against a tives of the agents in those transactions. It is charge, for which, if true, I ought yet to be imsufficient for the protection of the public inter peached. In the mean time, as the poison conests, that the projected encroachments of pow-spreading abroad, I embrace this occasion tained in the paragraph above quoted is to deny the whole charge, so far as it relates It is manifestly the intention of Mr. Adams, in to myself, whether alleged to be founded the above paragraph, to charge the late Se-on facts or inferences, in the most unqualified cretaries of the Treasury and of War" with a terms; and only ask the favor of the public to concerted effort to exercise a control, political suspend its judgment until the whole corresand pecuniary, over the proceedings of the pondence has been read. bank and its branches," which he deems "highly exceptionable in principle, and even contrary to law." The two Secretaries are connected in the same member of a sentence, and the departments over which they presided, are, in The editor of Richmond Enquirer, calls this like manner, connected in another sentence. In a "* Nullifying Paper." Though our absence confirmation of this remark, their correspon- may cause this notice to appear rather unseadence with the Board at Philadelphia is intro-sonable, we do not mean that it shall give him duced as "an effort very thinly veiled," &c. the advantage which he may have sought. The Mr. Adams has doubtless seen the correspon- editor is welcome to all the benefits which may dence to which he refers, and he cannot be sus- result from a dexterous use of partisan slangpected of inadvertency in the manner of ma- we shall not be forced into an abandonment of king so great and serious a charge; still less of the Constitution, from the fear of a word. defect in the knowledge of the meaning of his The Enquirer has been forced, (very relucown language. tantly, we know,) to acknowledge that the docThe public will, therefore, learn with sur-trines which it now assails under the name of prise that there cannot be a word or expression nullification, are those advocated by Mr. Jefin any part of the correspondence of the late ferson and the republican party of 1798. This Secretary of the Treasury with the Board at fact is placed beyond all quibble or doubt, by

[graphic]

S. D. INGHAM.

FROM THE VIRGINIA TIMES.

[ocr errors]

CONGRESSIONAL

REMARKS OF

MR. MILLER, OF S. CAROLINA, Upon the motion to recede from the amendment made in the Senate to the Appropriation Bill, by striking out the outfit for a Minister to France.

the late publication of Mr. Thomas Jefferson for Martin Van Buren—all, all are well underRandolph. The Enquirer was once the advo- stood. In the name of common sense, have cate of the principles of the '98 School-it you not already turned summersets enough? now denounces Mr. Jefferson as a "nullifyer," and publicly declares its reprobation of the doctrines contained in the Kentucky resolutions of 1798, '99. The editor has doubtless been able to satisfy his conscience-he has yet to satisfy his country, for this abandonment of the principles of the republican party. The facts, circumstances, doctrines, were all known to him; and he had deliberately chosen his positionhe is, of course, entitled to use such weapons in support of himself, as his necessities may require. He has thought proper to resort to the influence of party slang, rather than to sound argument a circumstance which, while it discloses a conscious sense of the weakness of his position, shows his adroitness in the selection of the proper weapons.

Our course is a plain one: To know what was the faith of the Fathers of the Constitution, and to abide by it to the lust. We have taken the resolutions of Kentucky, penned by Thomas Jefferson, as containing the, philosophy of our political system-the true doctrines of the Constitution. They are to us as a chart and compass in our political voyage; and call them by what name you please, we shall abide by them still. We shall not inquire whether we please this or that party in our course. We would not give a fiddlestick for the good or ill will of Andrew Jackson or Henry Clay, or of their organized presses.

Mr. MILLER said, in moving to strike out so much of the appropriation as relates to the outfit of Minister to France, he had no intention or desire to intrench upon the powers of the President or the House of Representatives.

The question was purely one of legislation, over which both bodies had equal rights. The House of Representatives had as much right to insist on this appropriation, as the Senate had to amend the bill by striking it out.

What we are now to decide is, whether it is proper to make an appropriation for a minister to France, to be appointed during the recess. The Senate had stricken out this outfit and the the House had restored it. Shall we recede or adhere to our amendment? It is an ordinary question of legislation, involving none of the privileges of the Senate. The House of Representatives had the most unquestionable right to determine for itself, as a part of the legisla tive power, and so bad the President and Se

Ours is the cause of the peo-nate. ple and the States; the cause of the country and of human liberty; and we leave that of Jackson, Van Buren, and Clay, to those whose ambition is suited to the employment.

Each must put their own construction on the Constitution, and exercise their discretion and best judgment on such matters as come within the scope of action of each respective branch. The President had the right to put Again, we say, the editor of the Richmond his construction on the Constitution, and fill up Enquirer, upon a full view of the whole ground, a mission in the recess. The House of Reprehas taken his position in direct hostility to Mr. sentatives, in the exercise of its judgment, Jefferson and the republican party of 1798. might provide the outfit, assuming that the ExHis conscience is easy, and his readers arc, per- ecutive could fill up a vacancy, such as this haps, satisfied. All that we ask, is, that if he one, in the recess; and the Senate, had an should find that position hereafter, an unplea-equal right to act upon its views of the constisant one, that he turn no summersets upon us. tutional powers of the President, as well as Let him keep with the companions of his choice upon the expediency of providing now by law with the sedition law federalists, McLane, to fill the vacancy, either contingent or cerTaney, and the high tariff republicans, Vantain, as it may be, in the mission to France. Buren and Marcy. We mention this now, be- There was no reason for alarm on the score of cause we have lately seen indications of a pur-invasion of the powers of the Senate; we had pose to slide back, as does the otter, tail-fore- a double check upon the President; one legismost, upon the south; while his eyes are steads lative, and the other executive. We can either fastly fixed upon the north. This attitude is withhold the appropriation, or refuse to sancnot exactly respectful to those whom he keeps tion the mission, or confirm the minister. The in the rear, and we shall be compelled to no- powers of the Senate were ample for the protice, if he do not change it. Commendatory tection of its constitutional rights, if it were notices, and frequent extracts from that nulli- true to the States and itself. While he disfying paper, the Charleston Mercury-flatter-claimed any feeling of hostility towards the ing encomiums on the Hon. Nullifyer, Mr Hayne-soft praises of Messrs. Johnston and Bouldin-expressive caveats to the "SONS" of New York-increased zeal in professed hostility to the tariff, and painful travailings of spirit n regard to the whole south-coupled with th defence of McLane's tariff report-warm opp sition to P. P. Barbour, and anxious solicitude

Executive, or the other branch of the legislature, he was prepared to incur any and every responsibility incident to the refusal to recede from this amendment. This appropriation involved something of principle and something of fact. In the first place, has the President power to fill up a vacancy which may occur during the recess, in a foreign mission?

« ForrigeFortsett »