SPEECH 
 
 . NILES, OF CONNECTICUT?, 
 
 THE TARIFF, 
 
 THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, MONDAY, JULY SO, 184G. 
 
 
 WASHINGTON: 
 
 PRINTED AT THE OFFICE OF 
 
 1846. 
 
niE TARIFF QUESTION. 
 
 e duties on Imports, and for i become more extensive and important. How blind 
 
4 
 
 lias furnished an ample revenue, yet not move than 
 was desirable, in the condition of the country, with 
 a debt of nearly $20,000,000. It has not only pro¬ 
 duced a sufficient but a steady revenue; for during 
 the three years it has been in operation, the revenue 
 has varied less than $1,000,000. The imports also 
 have exhibited great steadiness and uniformity. As 
 a revenue measure, therefore, there is no occasion 
 to change it, and especially at a time when the coun¬ 
 try is involved in war. But if anything was to be 
 done, the true course would have been a reason¬ 
 able and equitable modification of the act of 1812. 
 Had such a bill been prepared, I should cheerfully 
 have given it my support. But this bill introduces 
 new principles, it revolutionizes the whole system; 
 and should it become a law, the effect of it no one 
 can foresee. It is at best but an experiment; and no 
 one can tell what its practical operation will be, 
 either on the revenue, or the great interests of the 
 country which will be brought within its influ¬ 
 ent it seems to be assumed that this is an Ad- 
 
 Administration there is an obligation on me to 
 give it my support. If this assumption is correct, 
 if this is a measure of the Administration, I can 
 only say that I regret it, profoundly regret it; as I 
 fear it will prove disastrous to its authors, should 
 it become a law. How has it happened that 
 this has become an Administration measure ? No 
 Administration before ever assumed the responsi¬ 
 bility of hazarding its popularity on a tariff bill. 
 Neither General Jackson nor Mr. Van Buren ven¬ 
 tured upon so hazardous a course. The tariff 
 
 and diversified interests of the country, which are 
 supposed to be somewhat in conflict in the differ¬ 
 ent sections of the Union. And if the real or sup- 
 
 are in conflict, so far as they may be affected by a 
 tariff law, how can such a question be brousrht 
 within the province of patty? Are not the opin¬ 
 ions of the Democrats of the North and of the 
 South greatly at variance on this question ? Those 
 of the West'may vary a shade from either; indeed, 
 there are scarcely two States in the Union in 
 which the sentiments of the democracy are in per¬ 
 fect harmony on the subject of the tariff. How, 
 then, can an Adminislation, supported by some 
 States in every section of the Union, undertake to 
 control this question, without necessarily disinfect¬ 
 ing a portion of its friends? If it attempts to sus¬ 
 tain the views of one section, will it not come in 
 conflict with those uf another: 
 
 But if it was to attempt to settle this great ques¬ 
 tion of domestic policy, it is clear that it could 
 only be done on the principle of a reasonable com¬ 
 promise. Its policy should be national, not sec¬ 
 tional; and the measure it proposed should be mod¬ 
 erate, avoiding the extreme doctrines on both sides. 
 Is this such a bill: Far from it. On the contrary, 
 it is an extreme measure, based on new principles, 
 which, so far as I know, have never been recog¬ 
 nised in any State in the Union, except it be South 
 Carolina. The unqualified free-trade principles of 
 this bill are substantially the same as those set up 
 ill the State referred to, in opposition to the tariff 
 of 1823, and which produced that fearful agitation ; 
 
 is arrested by the Compromise 
 act of 1833. I have ever believed it inexpedient 
 and wrong to make the adjustment of the tariff a 
 party question. It is making the great interests of 
 the country the sport of political partisans, and to 
 rise or fall with the changing fortunes of the two 
 at parties which control the political destinies of 
 country. This Administration has no truer 
 more disinterested friend than I am; I have sus¬ 
 tained it, and will continue to sustain it; but on 
 
 Edmund Burke did to his constituents, the electors 
 of Bristol: “ I will maintain your interests against 
 -our opinions, with a constancy that becomes 
 te.” I will, if I can, save you from the conse¬ 
 quences of a measure, which, in my judgment, can 
 hardly fail of proving disastrous to you as well as 
 the country. And why has the Administration 
 brought forward this measure? Is it assumed that 
 the tariff question was one of the issues in the elec¬ 
 tion of 1844? That that question was involved in 
 that election, to a certain extent, may be admitted. 
 But did that contest involve this bill, or the prin¬ 
 ciples of this bill? Was that a question between 
 the doctrines of free trade and the protective policy, 
 so far as it is incident to revenue? No one, I think, 
 will hazard the assertion that it was. At the North 
 [uestion was between an ultra protective tariff 
 a moderate protective system, incidental to 
 revenue. It was a question, whether the tariff of 
 1842 should stand as it is, or be modified so 
 
 
 prohibitory and high duties, and render 
 nsistent with all the great interests of the 
 
 bill of that character: If I 
 have my support. But 
 the unqualified pr" 
 
 thoughtit 
 
 I regard it as a bill based on the unqua 
 ciples of free trade, and repudiating the entire pro¬ 
 tective policy. That such is its real character, it 
 is my purpose to endeavor to show, both in respect 
 to its principles and details. 
 
 Having, Mr. President, disposed of these pre¬ 
 bill before the Senate in its general principles and 
 in its details, and to state my objections to its pas¬ 
 sage. My first objection is in respect to l he lime 
 in which it is brought forward. Is the present a 
 suitable time to attempt to revise and readjust the 
 revenue and tariff system: The country is now 
 involved in a war; and although this war may be 
 deemed a small affair, it will, if it continues, be a 
 :ry expensive one. It is to be prosecuted with- 
 it the limits of the United States, in a country 
 here few supplies can be obtained; and every 
 
 very expensive. It has already subjcctcS us to a 
 heavy expense, and we arc now borrowing moncy 
 ..h on. ^Instead of li ^ n " 1 
 
 upon an untried system of revenue, at a tune when 
 there is so heavy a demand on your treasury? 
 But aside from the danger to the revenue, is this a 
 time to attempt to remoddle the revenue laws? 
 This should not be attempted, except under cir¬ 
 cumstances affording a rcsonable prospect of se¬ 
 curing permanency to your new law; and to do 
 this, the finances of the country must he in a set- 
 
8 
 
 It is the policy of all nations, where the 
 exist, to import raw materials free of duty. This 
 has been an important feature in the policy of Sir 
 Robert Peel; and he has, within a few years, re¬ 
 duced the duty on seven hundred and fifty articles; 
 and entirely removed it from four hundred and 
 thirty. Is not a tax on raw materials calculated 
 discourage rather than to encourage mechanical and 
 manufacturing industry and products? Is it not 
 subjecting our mechanics and artisans to disad¬ 
 vantages and burdens to which those of England 
 
 fact, a tax on labor, and calculated to give an a 
 vantage to foreign labor over American labor ... 
 our own markets ? Whether this was the design 
 or not, certainly such is the effect of the ' 
 
 This is a very strange policy; a - 
 
 protection to American industry. 
 
 ;e kind of 
 
 . , on, that in the two highest classes of 
 duties, and in the lowest, or free list, there is not 
 only no protection, but the principle is reversed. 
 In a system of incidental protection, the class 
 of the highest rate of duties are articles of the 
 description produced in the country; and the free 
 list consists of raw ^materials used in the arts. Ir 
 
 duty. And why is tobacco made an exception, 
 and protected by a higher rate of duty than any 
 other article ? Are tobacco and the manufactures 
 of tobacco entitled to special favor? Are they of 
 greater importance and utility than iron and wool¬ 
 lens? This bill, sir, has a strange southern squint; 
 it is constantly squinting at cotton and tobacco. 
 Perhaps, sir, I am wrong in saying that this bill 
 
 kind of fish preserved in oil; they are protected, one 
 by a duty of forty, and the other by a duty of one 
 hundred per cent. It may therefore be supposed 
 that if this bill should become a law, the sardine 
 business will hereafter be flourishing. Well, sir, 
 perhaps we should be thankful for small favors, 
 
 not abandoned: tobacco and sardines are certainly 
 ing trade in them, and that will be better titan 
 
 But, Mr. President, I maintain that the true 
 test by which we are to determine whether any 
 tariff bill contains any general principle of inci¬ 
 dental protection, is this: if it contains that prin¬ 
 ciple, the class of articles commonly called prt 
 ed articles, being of the description of like ar 
 produced in the country, must-bc subject to a rate 
 of duty above the general average rate of duty 
 
 cent., the average rate of duties required for rev¬ 
 enue. Where, then, is your discrimination in 
 favor of American productions and labor ? As I 
 have already stated, the discrimination is against 
 protection, as the two classes of the highest rates 
 of duty are articles not produced in the country. It 
 is true that under this bill the average rate of duty 
 is estimated at 231 or 24 percent., so that there 
 would be a shade of protection in the 30 per cent, 
 class. But this bill, as I shall attempt to show, 
 will not produce the required revenue for the ordi¬ 
 nary expenses of the Government, without an in¬ 
 crease of importations of thirty or forty millions, 
 which the country can neither pay for nor con¬ 
 sume. Nothing short of 30 per cent, as the aver¬ 
 age rate of duties, will give us the requisite amount 
 of revenue, as the importations of 1845 were large, 
 beyond the exports of the year, and requiring four 
 millions of specie to pay for the excess. It is 
 clear, then, that not one of the class regarded ns 
 protected articles, except tobacco, has even one 
 per cent, discrimination in its favor. 
 
 Mr. President, I will now proceed to examine,_ 
 ore in detail, the arrangement of the rates of 
 duties on different articles, and see how far, and 
 in what way, the productions and labor of the 
 country are taken care of. I will commence with 
 wool and woollens. The duty on wool unmanu¬ 
 factured is 30 per cent.; on manufactures of wool, 
 or of which wool is a component part, not other- 
 provided for, 30 per cent.; on carpeting 30 
 pc-r cent.; on baises, bookings, and ilannels, 25 per 
 cent.; on manufactures of worsted, or of which 
 worsted is a component part, 25 per cent.; oil 
 blankets of all kinds 20 per cent.; on woollen list¬ 
 ings 20 per cent. The average duty on the manu¬ 
 factures of wool is 25 per cent., and on wool un¬ 
 manufactured, 30 per cent. Tite discrimination 
 here is five per cent, against the manufactured 
 
 .. This is a sort of Irish principle of protec- 
 
 discrimination to favor the mamtfac- 
 cle, being ail advance one peg lower. 
 The wool and woollen interest is one ol the great 
 the country, and no other is entt- 
 
 _.favor or consideration. There is a 
 
 greater population now concerned in the growing of 
 
 merely a revenue duty. We have, then, to inquire 
 what is that average rate; and here, sir, we have the 
 statement of the Secretary of the Treasury, that in 
 1845, it was 29.90 per cent., a fraction short of 30 
 per cent. The highest class of protected articles in 
 this bill, with the. exception of tobacco, is 30 per 
 
 wool and the manufactures thereof Ilian there is 
 growing cotton. The States of Vermont, New 
 York, and Pennsylvania, are the great wonl-grow- 
 ' ig States; but the business is extending into 
 hio, and other States northwest of the Ohio river. 
 Inch at no distant day will he the great wool¬ 
 wing States in the Union. As sheep can be 
 intcrc'd without housing or much expense, woo! 
 
 1st -prairies of Buenos Ayres, and at eight or ten 
 ms a pound will afford a good profit. A friend 
 lately informed me of the sale of a lot of fifty thou¬ 
 sand pounds of wool from Ohio in the town of my 
 residence to a carpet manufacturer, being the first 
 lot ever received there from that State; and I learn 
 from a merchant in Chicago that five hundred 
 thousand pounds have been sent the present season 
 from that place to markets in tile eastern States, at 
 
 lc western section of New York on the line of 
 
10 
 
 age British papermakers, British printers and book¬ 
 binders, and British literature and politics. It is 
 our true policy to encourage a national literature 
 of our own, and as independent of that of England 
 as possible. This bill will leave the papermakcr only 
 that part of the market for printing-paper arising 
 front newspapers, periodicals, school books, &c. 
 The paper manufacture is an interest entitled to great 
 favor; its annual value is aboi^t $9,000,000, nearly all 
 
14 
 
24 
 
 I There can bo no peace, no quiet, until it is put at 
 ; 1-est: ami it will now be settled for the last time, 
 
 I so far as its principles are concerned. It is brought