Newspapers / The Newbernian, and North … / July 15, 1843, edition 1 / Page 2
Part of The Newbernian, and North Carolina Advocate (New Bern, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
TO THE PEOPLE OF THE EIGHTH CONGRESSION AL DISTRICT OF NOllTII CAROLINA. I have just received the address of Mr. A. H. Arrington, published in tho KepublU can of July 6th, and although I am bound lo fulfil the appointments published heretofore, I snatch a few moments to reply lo tho at tacks the iientJeman makes on me and to ex poso a few of his monstrous absurdities. It will be remembered that at an early day, 1 respectfully requested Mr. Arrington to infoim me where he was going, and that 1 would take his own time that wo might, in a manner becoming thoso not afraid of tho truihfc meet beforo the people. In reply he informed mo that he should reserve to himself (ho piiviledge of visiting such por tions of tho district, as suited his conveni ence and interest.' On the 18;h of May we separated. Being unable to ascertain where he was going, unwilling to dodge about these icn counties, lookins for one in pursuit of his 4 convenience and interest,' I made ap pointments and published them. For some weeks, four or five, ho remainoJ io Nash County, his fiicndi surprised at not hearing from him. What could bo the matter 1 The mystery is solved. After a month's labor, with the assistance of I know not how many he has published a now edition of that same old 4 liitlc speech,' which he read out of his 4 liltlo book' in Newbem, Grconvillf, Washington, Hyde, &,c. &x. &c. The mountain in labor, brought forth a mouse a mouse in labor, has brought forth a worthy oflspiing. Had Mr. Arrington confined himself in this address to a mere publication of what he h is tried to say before the people, I should not have deemed it necessary to waste time by replying to him but he has seen proper under circumstances not very cioditablo to him, to attack me, when it was more than probable, I might not sec what ho Ind written, time enough to reply to it. lie is mistaken : a few hours are quite enough to expose all that he has written parts of which he has been trying4 for two years to commit to memory, part of which Jig had written doivn in that well known lit tle book,' which he brought from Washing ion City. Let not Mr. Arrington or any of his fi "tends accuse me of dealing harshly. He has msicpri-scntcd my course, he has un worthily attacked an absent man he is firing from behind a tree at a foe, willing to meet him, in tho open fieldand while I cheer fully admit his right to examine my votes, I laim for myself, for my old constituents, tho right of self-defence. Mr. A. II. Arlington, (I da not know uhat his middle name is possibly Holland. Tl.cro w;:s once a candidate for Congress, of that name, whoso speeches, Mr. Arring ton must have .studied and whose conduct he endeavors to imitate. So for tho sako of brevity I shall call him Mr. Holland Arring ton.) Mr. Holland Arrington seems to think ihat his name wns brought before the peo ple by a respoctablo portion of tho Republi can party.' Ho is mistaken. He forced his nanio before them, nnd could not have been nominated had ho not refused to abido by the nomination, unless 4 a uniform and consist ent democrat' were nominated. Ho was not the choice of the convention that nominated him. Instead of giving a 'plain and concise statement as ho promised, of moasures to be ncted on, at tho next session of Congress, he parades a long list of charges selected from newspapers, abusing the last Congress. He tells us of much that he is 4 opposed to,' but iinle or nothing of what ho favors. He objects to a high tariff, but contends for u moderate tariff.' So do I. He i? opposed to a Bank of tho United States, but omits to state that ho contends for ihn odious sub-treasury already condemned by tho people. He is opposed to a Bank of ihe United States, aitnougu iv asnuigiun, Madison, and the Republican party in 18lG ivero in favor of such a Bank. Ho is op posed to internal improvements by the General Government whether they nro in T1Irhin. or on tho seaboard of North Carolina, or in our own Rivers. He seems to be opposed to every thing national : he ; Psneciallv opposed to me, and the only thing about which he seems to be concise, nlnin and exnlicil is, that he 4 contends' that "Mr Holland Amnion, ought to rcpre- vent the-eighth Congressional district in the next Congressbig rivers, wheelhorses and . ilm fiit-illj nan 5,11! He communicate :in,l iniprpsiinf information, when tie on nounces, that he has represented a district in ntir State for iwo veors. It would not have beet; known generally, had he not pub lished it. It gives htm pleasure to state that he has met the 44 entire approbation of those" whom he has represented. He is mistaken. He was not, as I understand, elected by demo crats : he was taken up by a portion of the Jnmnrmtsand the Whigs 10 near r.ir. Haw kins. He has never been a favorite with his nartv. n u van faithfullv remembered in Nash for his skill in managing the election in that ncainsl his county lrfivM'i; t own political friends. Before commencing his attack on the whigs for the expenditures, he says 4 the whig party "had a President of their own choice.' Ho neglects to say that President turned Traitor, that he, Mr. Arrington, was one of those who went up to see Mr. Tyler, in the darkness of the night, to thank him for vetoing the Bank of the Uni ted State, which he had promised to ap piove Yes, lie confessed in Newbern, he went to thank Capt. Tyler, and in Wash ington, he said before several hundred wit nesses, that the democrats would have nothing to do with him. that ho fTvIer.) tvoe ft Iratfnr f n Ilia lnmnp'ito k('nrM l-.a was a traitor to the Whigs.' Mr. Arrington says 44 an allusion has been frequently made to tho thirty seven millions of dollars, appropriated in 1836 and the im pression produced, that the whole of that sum had been expended," Sec. &c. I don't know where and when the allusion was made. But the people of this whole coun try know, tht in Mr. Van Buren's time, the expenditures of this government exceed ed 30 millions of dollars yearly. They know when tho reform administration com menced the expenditures were about 13 millions a year. But Mr. Arrington shall not dodge the truth in this manner, by re ferring to the appropriations of 1S3G. Mr. Van Buren's time commenced on the 4th of March 1837. Now let us see how he left matters. Mr. Arrington, it is presumed, voted for Mr. Van Buren and though he 4 prefers Mr. Calhoun, Ihe honest nullifier, he is 4 equally fond of Mr. Van Buren an Irish preference truly. He favors Mr. Cal houn and yet ho likes Vau Buren, just as well! I But I am ablo, without any great labor, to refute Mr. Arringion's charges against the Whifes, to expose his misrepresentations af ter a month's retirement. The intelligent people of this district understand this better than Mr. Arrington. In fact his charges are already answered. On the the 17th of March, 1842, I delivered a speech in the House of Uepresenta'ives in answer to char ges made against the Whig party, in which the truth was told ai.d has never bt cn contra- dicied. This speech was recently published I in the North Slate Whig, and those who imvu ui win iu;iu ii, win una an nmpio re futaiion of Mr. Arrington's charges. I make the following extract, to which I invite ihe attention of fair- minded men. The facts are obtained fiom public documents and will not bo denied part of them from Mr. Woodbury, nat a Whig but a Van Buren Democrat. Before I proceed to spr?ak of the alleged increase of expenditures of 1S41. J will giv a statement of our flnnnciii condition in 1837, the fust year of Van Buren's adminis i....... ...:n l : : 1 1 r tration, and contrast the state of utXihs then with our condition in 1841 : According to Mr. Woodbnry'B re port in December, 1333, tho o tnouut in the Treasury on the st of January, 1 837, was $ 10,337,633 3S But from this is to be deducted Ihe amount distributed oinong tho States, according to the act of July, 1836 29,101,644 07 This leaves in the Treasury on the 1st of January, 1S37, the Bum of (The fourth installment with $18,236,043 39 held in October, 1S37, amounting to $9,307,214 09, is part of the sum in the Treasury in January 1S37.) Then the bank of the United States paid on account of the etocU owned by the Govern ment, between January, 1837, and March, 1341, the sum of 7,073,531 40 $25,914,624 85 All this over and above the ordinary re- cants liom customs ana lands. i lie whole .4 of this twenty-five millions was expended during Mr. Van Buren's administraiion. Now-let us see what were the ordinary receipts and expenditures during tho years 1S37,1838, 1839, and 1840. The receipts and expenditures on all ac counts, including Treasury notes and exclu ding trust funds, and excluding payments by the late Bank of the United Stales, were as follows : Receipts. $21,232,008 09 32,292,934 lit 32.SG0.374 53 22.C27.124 24 Expenditure. 1S37 $31,000,003 39 1633 37,150,116 49 1539 30,004,212 86 1540 27,414,335 99 1S37 1833 1839 1810 $109,062,431 60 gi I32.7C3.7 IS 40 Receipts about one hundred and nine millions. Expenditures more than one hundred and thirty-' fo millions. Deduct whole amount of receipts from expendi tures Expenditures $12,768,713 40 Receipts 109,062,491 SO ,$23,706,226 60 Exhibiting an expenditure of more than twent yihree millions over and above le- ccipis from custotns and lands in four years of Mr. Van Buren s administration expend inff every vcr more than they received, and taking no means to raise revenue. And what makes ihe picture, more daik is the fact that, under the compromise act, the duties were continually decreasing. In 1S40 Mr. Woodbury said in h'i3 report : "Thu3 the progressive reduction of the present tariff, which has been going on since 1833, will, after December, 1841 take effect to a mnch larger extent than heretofore. Nearly two millions and a half tciil then It deducted at once. On the 1st of July afterwards at least tico millions and a half more of duties trill be deducted, making an aggregate in siz months vf quite five millions." And yet no measures were token to raise revenue", except to borrow money, by issuing Treasury notes, as they did in 1837, 1838, 1839, and 1840." Now, this statement cannot be impeach, ed. What a sad picture it presents of Mr. Van Buren's administration ! From this it will bo seen that he had more than IS -millions in the Treasury when he took charge ofaflYirs- How did he leave the govern. mem? According to the Reports of tico ! Secretaries of the Treasury, on the fourth of March, 1841, when Gen. Harrison com ' menced, there was not cut million of dollars in the Treasury ! Mr. Arrington admits Mr. Van Buren left a debt of more than eight millions-S, 381,555- to quote his own words, "ihe whole amount of ihe public debt, on tho 4th of March, 1S41, when the Whig parly took possession of the Gov eminent." What became of all these IS millions Mr. Van Buren found in the Treas ury ? Where is ii ? Echo answers, where 1 Ask Swartwout, Boyd, Harris, Hoyt. Will Mr. Arrington tell us what became of all this a,oney ? How many thousands did the "Democratic" Muliicauli Colonel, now the Democratic Treasurer of the last Legis lature, spend at the Branch Mint in Char lotte? According to tho Document No. 185, to which Mr. Arrington calls "particular atten tion," there were 26 millions of outstanding appropriations on (he 4th of March, 1841. According to Doc. No. 259, House of ltep resentatives, 2nd session, 27'h Congress, there were more than 33 millions of out standing appropriations ; and yet with a decreasing revenue, under ihe compromise act, as the extract just now made from Woodbury s report, fully shews, wo are told there were only 8 millions of debt! If the compromise act bro't less than 15 millions a year into the Treasury, if the public lands yielded less than 2 millions a year, what was to be done to meet 33 millions of char ges, demands, liabilities against the Gov ernment 1 Suppose the Government by the appropriations of a Van Buren Congress, was bound to meet payments amounting to 33 millions, and had less than 15 millions coming into the Treasury during the year. What do you call this deficit, if debt is not the proper word X Away with such non sense. The people cannot be thus deceived. It will bp obsorved from tho extract from Mr. Woodbury's report in 1840, that ''after December, 1841, the duties under the com promise act would he less and less.' Speak ing of December, 1841, he says: 4Nearly two millions and a half will then be deducted, at once. On the nrst of July afterwards, at least two millions and a half more will be deducted, making an aggregate, in six months of quite five millions.' This-explains how ihe debt seemed to increase in 1S41 and 1842, after the Whigs came into power. Mr. Atrington must unfairly refers to what he calls the 'first' year of the present Whig administration.' He knows the Whigs could not be bhimed for the laws passed for the acts of iho Van Buieo Congress, beforo March, 1341. We, the Whigs, are not responsible for the 'first year. Bui why does he keep hack ihe irntli t Why does he confine himself to the Jirst year X Because the truth will tell against him. By reference to the l)ib page of ihe circular which I issued to my constituents some months since, it will be seen fiom an extract taken from the report of the Committee, of Ways and Means, that in 1842, the second year, tho nppropriaiions'wrre les9 than iji 1841; and in 1843, the third year, the ap propriations made by a Whig Congress, but little exceeded 18 millions of dollars ! half the amount appropriated in 1839, by Mr. Van Buren's party ! Y t all this Mr. Arrinston carefully keeps out of sight ! When I read Mr. Arrington's address, I came to the conclusion that he had allowed too many of the Committee" who prepared it. to nut their ft users into the pie. Com- T pare the two extiads which I now quote. In the first column of his address, as pub lished in the paper, he says: 'The Dem- 'ocraiic part' just before they went out of oilicc, made appropriations lor tne year '1841, which amounted lo $20,844,561. 'and to avoid the necessity of an extra ses 'sion of Congress, gav authority to issue 'five millions of Tieasury notes, amounting Mo 25.84 4,? 6 1 (twentv-frve millions, eigh 'hundred and forty four thousand, five bun- dred and sixty-one dollars) for the service of tho year 1841. Here Mr. Arlington says that the outstanding appropriations when the Uemocrats weni out ot oince a mounted to $25,844,561. In the next column of his address, he says : 'By refer ence to tho ofiicul document last referred to (loose Doc. No. 185, 3d session, 27'h Congress) it will be seen that tho outstand ing appropriations, on the 4th of March 1841, (the day on which Mr. Van Buren's administration terminated) amounted to $26, 077,611.' II ere is a dMTerrnce of more lhan one million of dollars ! ! Who is right, the Secretary of tho Treasury, or Mr. Arring ton ? The Secretary of couise. The Sec retary doni know everv thinr. He don't know that c North Carolinians have a River, (the paradise of Terrapins, since tho Democratic Legislature passed the law) -flow ing between Hyde county and the banks, twenty-five or thirty miles wida ! But Mr. Arrington will be as remarkable for his fairness us for his extraordinary discove ries in finding big Rivers, and large public Dbts. Hear him: Immediately following the extract just made, Mr. Arrington, quot ing from Doc. No. 185 says, " And on tho 4ih of March 1843, the outstanding appropriations amounted to $31,589,337, (thirty one millions, five hundred and eighty nine thousand, three bundled and thirty seven dollars) a larger amount left outstanding bv the Whig administration, on the 4;h of March last, by upwards of four and a half millions, than at the close of lur. Van Bu ren's administration." Now what will the honest democrats think of Mr. Arrington, when thov learn, that in Doc. 185, from which Mr. Airington q-roted, immediately after the statement of the 31 millions out standing, the Secretary adds the following remark: ' Note. The amount of outstand ing appropriations on the 4th day of March, 1S43, includes appropriaiions for the half calendar year, ending the 30th June, 1843, and also for the fiscal year ondtng the 30;h ot June 1S44." And yel Mr. Arrington, by garbling a public Document, wishes to make the public beliere, that the SI millions outstanding appropriations on the 4th of March, 1843, were for a single year J ! Oh shame, where is thy blush ! Surely Mr. Ar rington in his figuring, could not have refer red to the table on tho outside of his little book. Or did some of the Committee write this, while he went to get his trunk from the boat, on its way to the Bnnks, after he understood he would have some one with him 1 After this exposure, I take leave of Mr. Arrington's extravagant expenditure of la bor, for so many weeks, in blundering through Doc. 185, to find out how much debt the whig paity created. I wonder Mr. Arrington did not suggest, as he did in his speech in Plymouth, that thewhig Congress in 1841, ought to have repealed the laws of ili3previous Congress, and thus saved the public money ! Of such a suggestion, the celebrated Mr. Holland seniort might justly have been proud. Mr. Arrington proceeds to explain his vote against the appropriation for fort Ma con, and what does he say ? Listen : As a separate measure, I should have given my vote cheerfully, fur the small appropriation for Fort Macon, &c. but I could not vote for the appropriation for Fort Macon, with out voting in favor of the entire bill." Amaz ing indeed ! Whoever before heard of vot ing for one fortification in a separate bill? The same bill contained appropriations for forts in Maine, Massachusetts, Virginia, South Carolina and Louisiana. What would the members from all these States say to such a proposition, if a member of Congress could be simple enough to make it? He would be laughed at, and some wag would ask him, " Does your mother know you are out!" The thing is too ridiculous to" speak of seriously. Why not vote in a separate bill,' for the pay of every company in the army of the United State? Why not vote in a separate bill, for the pay of every vessel or every sailor in the Navy 1 At the Extra Session, when there was constant ex pectation of war with England, Mr. Arring ton voted, according to my recollection, against a bill appropriating money fur re pairing fort Caswell, in North Carolina. One would have thought that, at such a mo ment, patiiotism would have prompted a North Carolinian to vote money for Forts, bearing the time-honored names of Caswell and Macon. Mr. Arrington, after wading through fi gures and making quotations from Docu ments, which he never read, and could not comprehend, if he had, after like a lost child in the wood. ' Where wilds immeasurably spread, Seem lengthening as we go," Proceeds to the consideration of ilm Ta riff. I have heard of a wild pOOV Oil the Banks, that when closely foiu-' mio Pdiiiplico sound, and attempted to swim across, rossihly, he thought he was in the River;' and I felt tho Siimo sympathy for the pony ns I did for Mr, Arrington, when 1 came to that part of his address, where he makes a plunge, with "regular desperation," into the Tariff. The water is evidently too deep for him. But ho does his best. He serves up the old wornotit arguments of the South Carolina disunion papers, in the best si)le he tan. The same arguments we see in the parly newspapers daily. While discussing the TaiilT, too, Mr. Arrington must refer to my votes, to what his op ponent' did, as he calls me. For my part, I do nol feel like one who has an 'opponent.' I have met him once since the 1 Stli of May, (and this is the 7th of July,) about 7 weeks ago, and then he came lo Greenville, after tiding as he most affectinglysaid, 4 half the night.' He had heard he was afraid to meet me; So he comes to Greenville, just to show he is not afraid, and forthwith goes right back again ! Referring to the Tariff law, he says : " liut lor mo passage oi mat odious mea sure, tho receipts from customs, for the year 1842, would have amounted to nineteen or twenty millions ot dollars. 1 ho I ariti law, (he correctly says,) went into operation on the 30ih of August, 1842 , and although not one year lias passed, no can tell now much it hrtS lost to the Treasury ! He says he is opposed to a high Protective tariff. So am I. The present Tariff is not a 'high protective Tariff.' It gives protection, as all Tariff laws have done, but it was passed for Revenue. Mr. Arlington says " but for the passage of the Tariff law, the Treasury would have received nineteen or Iwenij millions of dollars." Ilo does not know what he says. 1842 we had After the 30ih day of J une, no laio lor me collection oi duties. A large majority of Congress, of both patiies, thought so, and many of both parties said so; and if Mr. Arrington will look at the Journals of tho second session, he will find that on the 29ih of June, the acting President vetoed one Taiiff bill, and on the 30th June, Mr. Weller, a democrat, moved a suspension of the rules, to enable him to in troduce a bill, to extend the present laws for laying and collecting duiies on imports," and Mr. Arrington voted in the siffirma tivr. He then thooght, (if he thought at all,) that there was no law to collect revenue. mr. uoose.en anouier oeraocrai, one or t . r i. .i j e imv. iviiii.g.uu . incus, yyuu prueoieu 10 ,ne nouseoi ueprese.nauves several pen- uons uum .K,u, mduo moi.on simiur r to Mr. Weller s; and again, Messrs. We!- I --.. J T . I. ier, vriingion ano ivooseve.r, voiea in tne auiinidiive ; v triuu& utuer morions 01 a n I .? . r like character were made by democrats and whigs all concurring in the opinion that we had no law for the collection of duties ! When I voted for the tariff we had no late to raise money to pay the army or navy, ihe soldiers, pensions, or even to repair forts ! Pile country seemed to ba on the verge of dissolution. And yet a law, which is paving the debts and supporting the honor of the nation, by bringing money into the Treasury, is said by Mr. Arrington, to have caused a loss' to ihe Government 1 It was a Tiirifflaw, a law imposing du ties on articles, made in Foreign nations, that first enabled our government lo support a respectable station among the nations of the earth. In 1789, our Government went into operation, under our present consiilu jli jn, Georce Washington was President had taken an oath to support, protect and defend the Constitution.' IIere is a copy of the ti-.le of ihe first Ta niTlawpproved by George Washington the fourth day of July, 1789. ' on 'Whereas it is necessary, for the support of Government for the discharge of ihe debts of the Uniied States, and the tncour agemtnt and protection of manufactures, that duties bo laid on goods, wares and mer chandise imported ;' Be it enacted &c.&c. Genl. Washington thought the mechanics of our country ought to be protected the ira raets of our Constitution thought so. But the soap-locks the dandies of the present day think Washington was mistaken. Mr Jefferson said in 1S16 : "He, there fore, 'who is now against domestic manufac tures, 'must bH for reducing ut either to de pendence 'on foreign nations or to be clothed in skins, and to live like wild beasts in de.2S and caverns. I 'am not one of those. Experience has taught me, that manufactures are now as necessary to our Independence, as to our comfort. ' Mr. Arrington professes great love for Jefffcrsonian doctiines. If JeiTurson was right, Mr. Arringion is wrong : (a question which, I think, will bother a wheel-horse to seitle.) Genl. Jackson said in his Utter to Dr. Coleman, in 1824, when he was in the Senate of the United Slates, and voted for the tariff of that year, a higher tariff lhan that of 1842 : 'In 'short, wo have been too Ion subject to the policy of British merchants. It is lime we should become a little more Americanized, and instead cf feeding the paupers and laborers of England feed our own; or else in a short time, by continuing our present policy, we shall all bo rendered paupers ourselves. So spoke ihe Hero of New Orleans, who protected American laborers, by voting for the Tariff of 1824, as he protected the Beauty and booty,' from British bayonets, in IS 15. The taiiff of 1824, which Genl. Jackson voted for, imposed higher duties on sal;, boots and shoos, iron, nails, brown sugar, &c. &c, than did tho tariff of 1842. But says Mr. A. Holland Arrington, "if Mr. Stan'y was right, then ihe whole delegation fiom North Carolina were wrons.' Indeed! Then if Genl. Jackson was light, Mr, Stanly was right. If Genl. Jackson was light, Mr. Arrington is wrong. Hll. DUCiKI llclll VUVCU ill llic oiimii - bill of 1842. So Hid Wright of New York, tsuchanon is before the democrats, IT T I- . . . . .. t A '. r. tl.r, Q .... - t r, C,-t- 1 U is one of their candidates for the Prrsidency, lfi.v oa nominated, or if Silas V tight b nominated as Vice-President, with Calhoun, Mr. Arrington is pledged to support him. If Buchanan and Wright were iiht, so wa Mr. Stanly. Or does Mr. Airington intend to s;y, his opponent was wrong any how ! if a soft gentleman like Mr. Arrington, looking so 'bewitchingly simple,' as he does, can stand the comparison, does he n.tend lo stand up the stieam,like tho wolfin the fable, and 111 the lamb below, he muddies the water I But I wish the democrats of the district to ask Mr. Arlington was General Jackson right or wrong in his war upon Mr. Calhoun, in nullification days Is Mr. Arrington in favor of nullification, unless the tariff is re pealed at South Carolina dictation? In the month of April, Mr. Arlington had 'two first choices' for the Presidency afterwards he 'preferred Calhoun, but liked Van Buren equally well.' The nullifier democrats arc in favor of plain dealing; so Mr. Arrington had to s;iy, he preferred Mr. Calhoun he was his first choice. Mr. Calhoun boasts he is still a nullifier. Does Mr. A. approve of that South Carolina still threatens lo dissolve the Union. Is Mr. A rrington ready tor that 1 1 do not intend to speak with unkindness of all the nullifiers. Some of : them w ero as hontsl and honorable men as any in the country. Many cf tin tn now j know that their opinions were wrong. M.?ny 0f ihem I iespect: but they have not "two first choices for the Piesidency. General Jackson was in favor of the Tariff nnd the Union Oh, what shall Mr. Arlington do? Run with the hare and hold with the hounds, get back, to his 'two first choices,1 red out of his li'tle b-iok, say the whigs are Federal ists, refuse to support any nullifier for Con gress, say Ire is a firmer, lay low and keep dark, attack his opponent when he is nol present, and try to make his way to Congiess hv l ie strenPih of ns nurse ! j 0 -. , Mr. Arrington savs, undpr the present Tariff law, the lax on sugar, iron, salt, coaise cotton,' &c. &.c. has ' been increas ed. If he means lo sv. there was an in- crease afier 30th June, 1842, when there was no Tariff", he is right, but if he means to say there was an increase, comparing this with the l aril! ot 1824 or '28 he does nnt " i w sneaK truiy. i again invite attention to a table published on the 8th page of my circu lar, lor the proof of my assertion. iur. Arringion selects a tew articles, to K V A . a nrove tho ininstirn nf thn Taiiff law in 3V,ng dulies on sutj, arljcles as lie Sdys are 1 J ""i principally consumed by the South. How does hc It 0Ve thev aro consumed n.incioallv. bv xw South A Northern or Wesiern State, that hai a nonulalion of levcral hun- I dred ihousand more neonle than ours, must r r consume more. But to show the fallacy of, and expose this attempt at deception, give below table which shows the duties on certain ar ticles consumed bv the South. Let the facts speak for themselves. Let it be borne in mind that the fjllowing distinguished per. sons voted for the Tariff of 1824 : Andrew Jackson, Martin Var. Buren, Richard M. Johnson, John II. Eaton, and Thomas II Benton. The following voted for the Tariff of 1828, (called the bill of abominations by tho INulhhers) Martin Van Buren, Uicb ard M. Johnson, Trios. H. Benton, and John H. Eaton. 1832, ihe Tariff of '28 was reduced. The followinn persons voted for that Ian, and it is fair to suppose they were satisfied with the reduction. INnryU. - ! Connor Thomss H. Hall, M. T. Hawkins ho Jesse Speight. Hero is the table, containing some of Mr. Ar. ringtoa'a article' consamd by the South. w C3 C3 3" x a o n oo g a m oi o ire c C3 OO P r. 2 73 ff 3 c 09 o -t 3 5T o " o o a. 3 3 w cr e. a. o o o o" c tO a 9 " " ooo O O U -I -1 - - li a o 1 n C CW M C (O N U (n -a - v K K fO Cr - C9 v VI W VI 3 en t-! r P.ooo ft - o . re T-l " " m o an r - i - tbo 5 - a. c3 c . - o sr Ol w w C Ol Ui Ui w u ) t U tO Si" o O t' W tJ W - o o r: -o 5 Cuts or fV o r r- It 2 S. 2-5 C- 5 ET4 . o c o W W - Cl W V f u s w "" "O o BD n 2 "Q T3 -a a. " a S3 TJ r o a. fy O s X S t7 C . o O T a- S E ? ? r- c Hi to to Vi. m t OD W rf. tt- j- o n -a o a f o Oi OD k a r. o o n r. 3 " i -r T3 C o c i 72 O 5 c a c tr 3 Several f tho North Carolina poli!ician ai recommending "direct taxation," ard i ther oti; ocrots in Congrcs?, have favored it. 1 ntver hoard of a Whi yet lio approved it. Without Tariff, which taxes foreigners, ar.d the rich consu mers of foreign articles, e musl have direct taxa tion, which will bear, with intolerable force on Uk poor. Mr. Arrington says I vofod fnr a tariff, uhieh increases th tax upon a'l the common nresarin) of life. If Mr. Arringion vrote that, hs i juailiy of a departure fro --;- , .tingion eays tie is m favor of "mo-jVr x ate dutie?, such as will red-joe tlie tax, uon u the common necessaries of hfe, encbiir e xri. culture and commerce, thereby bring, inro iheTrea. ury, twentv millions a y-ar.' If he will cn!v en. courage agricuhure, commerce oik wnMich;r:s, I will rep with him. Why not 4,erie.urat' all? What strange arguments theso rnuJeruio Tariff men advance! The iar:fi of 1S1 1, IS J4, &c. were high Tariff, bccau9 the country was in debt, high tariffs to raise money. Ycf, iho Tariff of 1312, passed when lti ririin'ry 'ep ii debt, although lower than the Taiifia of 1 S2 1, Ur. fee. is too hi'b to raise inooty ! ! ! Cuiieistenry, thou art a j jvvcl ! Mr. Arrington pfrms n ihiiik I o'jnht to hn. voted as my colleague did. That c ore wnu ti suit him, better than me. Mr. Arrrnglon ih a happy mm, to save himself the trouble f lhinkii.;j and acting for himself. It is enough for ro to sav, in answer lo this charge, ihat I vottri aa 1 thought best for the country, for the inttrest tf uiy ccn stituents and the State. Bat my colleagues did not diff r with mp, be cause they thousht the tariff was too high, but because they hoped to be able i prevent Mr. Ty ler from cheating us out cf the public land nnnev, I thought differently. I hnew, or brlitvd I U?.mv, that a majority of Cor.pres?, Northern and Wp em Whi'8 and Drrr.ocrott-', weie determined to have a tariff. Many of buth patties ea d eo. I respected iho motives of my Whig coih;a ue?, they, I know, respect mine. Satisfied v.ith U i apprnoaxinn oi my own conetn-ncc, anu nv conf'itupnts, I have no hpologua lo make. After struggling dijsps rat.ly like one trying to graFp, in water loo der p fur I im, this eel (of a Tartfi,) by ihe tail, Mr. Arru.oiou tranches off, to the Uankiupt Ia.v. He thus misrepresent tha? lav "a 'prominent measure of Ihe Whig Crnpre-a athi- passspft of a Bankrupt law, which authorised debtor?, to repudiate at will, their hontct dtbte." This is an unworthy misrepresentation. In obedience lo public opinion the law w8 rcpahd. It wns for the benefit of honest d btor, rind pt T:ntfd f; audu!tnt assignments, in favor offavotitfl creditoia. Mr. Arrington eajs en attempt was made bv the Whig party at the. last Congress 'to deslrty" the Veto power. Thia is untrue. No mch at tempt was made, that I ever heard of, bv tl.t; Whie party. It cornea with a pood prace from ;t 'farmer,' republican, ice. &.c. always governed I y Republican principlrp, &c. tic. lo oppose miv modification cf the Veto power, ll-e prwer whicjj enables the rrceident to defeat the will rf tho Representatives of tlie people, which civea one vian, in this Republican Government, the power of a h-injr ! Mr. Arrinpton ia rpposfd to a U. G. Bank, both on the grounds of inexpediency and unconstitution ality. Well aa Mr. Arrington 'has always been governed by true Republican princip'ep," cs Lo tella u?, he ought to Udow what is conetituriona', whatnot. BuiGeorce Warhincion diffircd with Mr. Arlington. One was right, the other wror.i.' George Washington was the Trcudent ofti f? Convention which formed the Constitution. Pet- eibly, if he had read Mr. Arrington's argurncnle, l.e might have thought differently. Jainea Madison, acting under oith, said a Bank of the United States was constitutional. He wss called the 'Father of the constitution.' Mr. Ar rington differs with him. If Mr. Arrhiton n right, Mr. Madieon was wrong. Mr. Mdi'M was a Republican, governed by Republican' prin ciples, and his Administration, history te!!e u?, met the 'entire approbation of a Urge majority oi the countrv. The Supreme Court said, more th:a once, a bank of the United States is cone motions!; but Mr. Arrington says it is not. Of comae t! o Supreme Ccurt was "wrongr," ii Mr. Arrington iJ "right." In 1314, Gen. Tamer of Warnn, in the Senato from North Carolina, voted for a B and in 1S1G, when the Bank was cliart-cd u '3 vote of the North Carolina delegatiV -n cngrce stood 9 for the Bank, 3 against i' V C31 'v of Edgecombe, Bartlett Yan"S r Caswell, W. R. Kin2, (now Senator Ahf)u a"d Vft ' don NEdwardr, , v-rren.yoted for the Bank in 1816. Then it wa Kepubhcan meaaure. If to then, why not ' D.e R'Pr"0i,Can,6m ch.g so often ? J Wr Arr,n8ton nht' m "yne . -tJons now at issue are ibe same as wera u . the Federal and Republican parties, in T dart of old John Adams ? What nonsense 1 . .;r.,n infnrmi hfti A strict Rfr rnnnlon informs us, he is a strict con- struciioniet-that he is opposed to the exercise d a!I powers by the General Government excep tho6e expressly granted. Will he Bay wbre he finds power in the constitution to build li-hl-hou-ses, light-boats, and hospitals ? Of course, H must be opposed to the exercise of th"6 rownf by the Government. He would allow the 'consti tuiior.dl stumps' to remain in our rivers, until . sttnv! cf ,hQVc:-noFCthark8cci.!cl rtroovrihcrs!
The Newbernian, and North Carolina Advocate (New Bern, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
July 15, 1843, edition 1
2
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75