Whole Xo. 803.
Tarborough) (Edgecombe County, J L) Saturday, July l7, 18U
Vol XniXo.kb.
The Tafborough Press
nr George HrtWAnn,
Is published weekly at Two Dollars and Fifty
CtPts per yar, if paid in advance of, Three
Dollars at the expiration of the subscription year.
For a") period less than a year, Twenty-floe
trnts per month. Subscribers are at liberty to
discontinue at any time, on giving notice thereof
ind paying arrears those residing at a distance
must invariably pay in advance, or give a respon
sible reference in this vicinity,
advertisements not exceeding a square vill be
inserted at One Dollar the first insertion, and 2f
cents for every continuance Longer ad yertUe-
iienls in like proportion. ;ourt uniersana ju
dicial advertisements 25 per cent, higher. Ad
vertisements must be marked the number of in
sertions required, or they will be continued until
otherwise ordered and charged accordingly.
Letters addressed to the tiditor must be post
paid or they may not be attended to.
SPEKCH OF MR. RIIETT.
On ihe suhjrct of taxation, delivered on
the general appropriation bill, in the
House of Representatives of the Con
gress of the United States, on the 19 th
"day of February. 1841.
Mr. Chairman: When I addressed the
Houe a fptv days sim e, I stated, 1 hat the
object of the proposed taxes on silks and
other luxuries, was not to provide for any
deficiency in revenue to meet the appropri
ate is of th enduing year, hut was intend -ed
to produce an excess of revenue lo he
distributed to the Slates. Such was the
purpose frankly avowed in the Senate, by
a distinguished Senator from Massachu
setts. The gentleman from Georgia (Mr.
Nesbit, who succeeded me in the debate,)
as my colleague (Mr. Thompson) had
done before, denied that any such inten
tion existed on the part of those who ad
vocated ihe new taxes. They were want
ed for ordinary expenditures, & for nothing
else; and, accordingly, gentlemen endea
vored to show an inimen.se deficiency in
the Treasury to justify their imposition.
Independent of the fallacies of the fiscal
statements relied on, any one, I thought,
who kept his ears open, could not easily
be deceived by such pretences. But now,
fir, the thin veil spread over the subject is
torn away. The gentleman from North
Carolina (Mr. STANLY) who moved the
taxes as an amendment to the Treasury
note bill, comes forward and distinctly de
clares, that his object in moving them,
was to provide the means for the payment
of our debt, as he calls it, due to the States
on account of the fourth instalment of the
deposile act, amounting to nine million
of dollars; and also for an annual abstrac
tion from the Treasury of some four or five
millions more, to be given to the Slates, as
'he proceeds of the salts of the public
lands. And, sir, lie must, indeed, be a
Sciolist in politics and the plundering pro
pensities ol human nature, who behoves,
that when the vaults of your Treasury are
pen lo the indebted States, these supplies
"ill constitute the limit of their demands.
The assumption of the debts of the Stales
by the General Government, amounting to
two hundred and sixty millions cf dollars,
and die completion of the mighty works of
internal improvement for whhh these
tebls were contracted, will naturally fol
low in the train of this poi teutons begin
J)m; and, accordingly, the gentleman
from Massachusetts (Mr. Adams) has al
Ki'ly distinctly intinnted tint this is the
consummation lo be attained. To meet
jhe immense liabilities such a policy will
impose, what excessive taxation on the
Sports must be laid, and what a mighty
U. must consequently overshadow the
south! And it was, sir, for pointing out
!h design"!, and opposing, in its incipien-
c' the laxlion by which it was proposed
Jo accomplish them, that the gentleman
ijom Georgia, (Mr. Nesbit.) I suppose, in
Vision lo me,spokeofMiltraists "
Mr. Chairm m. I slnll take the positions
P"rsued by the g-utlenmi from North Ca
roltna (Mr. stanly) ns ihe occasion of the
remarks I propose offering to the commil-
1 snail Uo this lor two reasons the
j, ' ,s a southern man, and the poi
0ns themselves are of the most pressing
ortance to the South: for, if the iiulica-
around us shall be realized, but a
months will intervene before we must
I uPu ihem. gives mc an occasion
t ?Veearnestly desired, to speak; and the
to e discusses aie just such as I wish
tntsn 01 t,ie at,ent'011 f my cons;itn
(j0 ' Ul,ller other circumstances, I should
as 1 have heretofore done leave others
10 Jl'c! his observations.
S,at e,,lrst position he assumes, that the
of thS ,ave a right to the fourth instalment
toe'sal p0sileacSor to the proceeds of
liUle e -lhe Public lanu9 wil1 bear bul
lamination. The Government,hav-
ing a surplus revenue, determined, instead
ot leaving it on deposite with tile banks,
corrupting them and the country, to de
nosite it in certain nronortions with the
States of the confederacy, providing In the
act the m inner and time in which it should
be returned by the State into the Treasu
ry of the United States, whenever needed
and called for by the Secretary of the Trea
sury. Three-fouiths of this surplus was
depo-ited with the States. The explosion
of the banks in ls37, and the consequent
wants of the Government, rendered it in
expedien, if it was possible, to deposite
with them the fourth i is a'rrt n And
now, sir, it is gravely contended, that the a
mount of money thus deposited, constitu
ting a m.-re trust for safekeeping, was a
ift, and that portion which was not de
ported, is a debt due to the States by this
Government. Suppose the banks with
whom the money had been previously de
posited had set up such a claim, what
vould the gentleman have tho't of it? Per
il ops he would have justified it in them, as he
no w does in his pretensions for the Slates.
Such ethics may be very goo I for public
jffurs, where moral principles are consid
ered as mere speculations; but, in private
life, all honest men would turn upon them
with abhorrence and contempt. Sir, there
is no debt due bv this Government to lhe
States, on account of the fourth instalment
of the deposite act; and when geatlemen
alk of its payment, they mean nothing
wore than that so much money raised from
the people by taxes h ll be distributed to
the States. And so also with the net pro
ceeds of the sales of public lands. Tney
know full well that there are, and can be,
oo net oroceeds from the only portion of
the lands to which lite States can have even
the semblance of a claim. The Virginia
cession, although perfectly clear, according
to my apprehension, in refuting any such
claim, constitutes the sole basis of their de
mand. This covers only the Stales lying
between the Mississippi and Ohio rivers;
and paying the revolutionary debt, which
is the that great purpose expressed on the
face of the cession, and the expenses inci
dent to the extinguishment of the Indian
title and the sale of the lands there will
not be, and cannot be, a dollar for distribu
tion. Do not gentlemen know this to be a
fact? The only portion of the public do
main which can produce any net revenue
at all to be distributed, are the lands which
have been purchased, and to which the In
dian title has been extinguished, by money
raised from the people through the cus
toms. To distribute the lands such taxes
have purchased, or the money resulting
from the sale ol lands such taxes have pur
chased, is ihe same as distributing the tax
es directly. Let gentlemen turn it as they
please, tlnir scheme for distributing the
lourth ins:almtnt, or the proceeds of the
public lands, amounts to this: money
raised by indirect taxation from the peo
ple, through the customs, by duties on im
ports, is to be distributed to the States.
That is the naked, unquestionable proposi
tion. Now, sir, to carry out this policy, sup
pose the taxes raised from the people by
duties on our imports to be equally paid by
them all over the Union and suppose, al
so, in your distribution of them to the
Slate, they are returned equally to the peo
ple; it will be difficult to discern the wis
dom ofsuch legislation. No Government
in the history of man has ever heretofore
raised money from the people to be given
biek to ilicm again; and if man by man
they received back dollar for dollar what
has been collected from them, what can
they gain? Il would only be a magnificent
experiment see hovv much money may be
made by changing il from one hand lo the
other. But the people, to carry this no
table scheme into effect, can never receive
back what they pay by taxation, because a
host of officeis imist be employed and paid
to colled the taxes from them and return
them to thtir possession. If the expenses
of our present revenue sysiem will be a
fair cri'crion of the cost of collecting and
dib'jrsing' taxes, it will amount to thiiteen
per cent, annually. Assess this on the
nine millions of dollars proposed lo be dis
tribute J to the people of the States under
the pretext of the fourth instalment of the
ih poile act, and il amounts to a loss by
the people of upward of a million of dol
lars. Make the same deduction on the
annual distribution of the four millions of
dollars it is proposed to distribute as the
proceeds of the sales of the public lands,
and il amounts to a loss of more than a hall
million yearly. 1 f Noi th Carolina, by the
distribution of the four millions, should re
ceive two hundred thousand, she would
pay for it two hundred and twenty six
thousand dollars, being a dead loss to her
people of twenty-six thousand dollars an- i
nually. If the gentleman proposes to ben-J
etit the people ot North Carolina by such
legislation, would il noi ne, 10 use ins own
chaste and classic language, "the most ri
diculous humbuggery?"
Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from
North Carolina insists upon it, that one of
gr?!j!!f Presented to the country
"-i'i ioauiiuu ui 4 Lai ill iin mnnr j.
a tana on
Now, sir, I have not been an indifferent
observer of events on this subject, being
deeply implicated wiih it; and 1 must con
fess my ignorance of the existence of any
such issue between the different parties in
the country. Of all the public men whom
the people have honored with their favor,
or trusted with their interest, there has been
but one, who either within this hall, or
out of it, has advocated a system of direct
taxation on the p3rt of the General Govern-1
ment. I am that man, as the gentleman!
from North Carolina has correctly said i
Wili he name another? (Mr. Stanly men
tioned Mr. Hubbard of Alabama, who rose
and disclaimed it.) The gentleman from
Alabama disclaims it. Who else? And
so will every other man, I fear, on this
floor, taken man by man. I am alone in
my opinions on (his subject, as the gentle
man from Georgia (Mr. Nesbit) truly af
firmed the other day in debate. Where,
then, is the justice of endeavoring to make
others responsible for my opinions? Both
of the leading presses in this city, represen
ting the two great parlies in the country,
simultaneously repudiated direct taxation
when I first maintained it here. No State
no party in any State, or in the Union,
i to my knowledge, has proposed or advoc.i
tel it to be exercised by this Government
But the gentleman gravely asserts, that di
rect taxation is one of the great issues in
the country.
Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from
North Carolina does not differ much from
me in his estimate of the effect of indirect
tixaiion on the different portions of the
Union. He did not show its good effect
on the South; but he did dwell with enthu
siasm on the vast and growing prosperity
of the North: and as he gazed, he thought
and his heart revolted as he thought
of ihe abominable project of direct taxation!
Why abominable, but that he believes this
prosperity to spring from and depend up
on our present system of indirect taxation,
which the other would overthrow? Now,
sir, in what way can any portion of the
country be benefited, in a pecuniary point
of view, by taxation? If it is equal on all,
it is a loss to all. Government does not
make money by taxation; on the contrary,
it takes it from the people, and destroys it
in supporting itself. If taxation is a gain
to any part ol the countn:, it can only be
so by an unequal contribution of the taxes,
or by receiving back in Government dis
bursements more than it pays by taxation.
By both these features of taxation may a
section of a country be benefited; and by
one or both of them must the gentleman
suppose the prosperity of the North to be
promoted. Now, is not such prosperity
fostered at the expense of others? Is it
any ihing more than an artificial benefit
occasioned by the operation of Govern
ment, whereby the property of one section
of the country is unjustly transferred to a
nother? If this result is produced by a
fair, necessary operation of the Govern
ment, acting within its acknowledged con
stitutional limitations, it is an evil to be
deplored, and, as far as possible, to be re
medied. But when it is produced by leg-
islalive action, designed distinctly (by pro
tective tariffs and other expedients) to ac
complish such an unequal distribution of
the benefits of Government, is it to be de
fended is it matter for exultation? What
of the suffering portion who pay the taxes
unequally, and receive back with reversed
inequality, the benefit of the public expen
diture: is there no sympathy for them? A
prosperity thus created and fostered by
iniustice. so far from being a cause for ex
ultation, is only worthy the execration of
, i
everv honest and enlightened man; and ifme in a speech delivered on the 4:h of Ju
. . ui; ,u 0,tnn., ri lv. 1829. to mv constituents, in which
UireCl taxation nuuiu nave ituutui. ui
checking it, by making the Government
iust and fair in its operation, and enabling
each to enjoy nis rigntiui snare ui me com
mon prosperity, it would be a blessing to
be earnestly desired. Prosperity by rob
bery, robbers only should be capable of
admiring. Under any sysiem oi inaireci
taxation, however fair, there will be an
incidental benefit to lhe manufacturers of
this country, in consequence of the enhan
ced price of the commodities imported a
benefit enjoyed by no other interest. But
a benefit lo them, although derived une
qually from us, is not, strictly speaking,
oppressive, where the tax is laid fof rev
enue, because it is constitutional. The
taxes may be partial, and therefore inex
pedient; put they are not morally wrong;
the other benefits which the constitution
confers, being, it is presumed, an equiva
lent for the unequal effects of such taxa
tion. But it is another thing, when the
taxes are not laid for revenue when this
inonnoiiir. bv indirect taxation, is deliber
ately and intentionally enhanced, with the
avowed purpose u w.-r--r---iy
of one portion of the Union at the ex
pense of another. It then becomes oppres
sive unconstitutionaloppression, and con
stitutes that protective policy, to which
the gentleman from North Carolina refers
.he prosperity of the northern States, and
Is! declares so e r.phatically. is not, and never
i snail np uMi. n..
North Carolina, it
seems may, at some future day, gain some
tiling by the policy. She has admirable
water power; her fisheries might net d
c.iciur:igmeni. 1 he attribute ot protec-
lion, it isclear, is that feature in indirect
taxation, which the gentleman most values.
Believing, therefore, not only that the
protective poiicy is unjust and oppressive
to the South, but utterly tiiiconsiitutioii d.
and in direct conflict with all those great
principles of liberty which have sanctified
our Revolution, I herd with surprise and
regret the affirmation of the gentleman
from North Carolina, that it was not a
bandoned, and never should be abandoned.
Hie tariff of 1833, I had b .en accus
tomed to hear, especially from the adher
ents of its distinguished author, had brought
healing in its wins to a broken constitu
tion, and at outraged and oppressed people.
Hut it seems, now, we have -made a nine
years' mistake. "-It would have bevn
cowardly," says the gentleman, -if ihe
principle had been conceded, because, I
presume, a minority (South Carolina, if
you please) resisted it.,) This was exact
ly the argument of Lord North in the
British Pai liameut, to the rcmsn.-ilaiicrs
ond resistance cf our ancestors; ami will
ever be the argument of proud tyrannies
in all ages. Do the oppressed submit?
they are taxed of course. Do I hey r sist?
it will be cowardly then to yield. "S7c
volo, sic jubeo" is a far belter method of
putting the gentleman's argument. The
principle, too, was all Lord North ulti
mately contended for. He laid a senile
tax a tax on a few luxuries knowing full
well that if the principle of taxation was
yielded, there could never, th reafter, be
a serious contest upon a mere question of
the degree of imposition. And thus, sir,
did the people ol South Carolina contend
only against the principle involved in a
protective tariff. It was, with them, not a
question of money, but of right of consti
tutional liberty. If we were wrong
then no concession, no modification of tire
tariff ought to have been made; bul if wc
were right, it was not only proper that Ihe
principle should be yielded, but, according
to my apprehension, it would have been as
cowardly as it would have been criminal,
not to have abandoned it. The basest cow
ardice is moral cowardice a fear of the
censure or contempt of others.
Mr. Chairman, in connexion with this
Great nuestion. anticipating a renewal of
the strife which formerly agitated the coun
try in consequence of the protective policy
he so upholds, the gentlemen from North
Carolina comes to his next great issue
which he says is presented to the country
a union or dissolution of the confedera
cy. (Mr. Stanly explained, and said he
did not say that any such issue was in the
country, but, that such was the issue be
tween Mr. Rhett and himself.) The gen
tlemen can make issues for himself, but
what right has he to make them for me?
Who, during this debate, has spoken of
the Union but himself? Who has men
tioned it with disrespect or censuie? W In
dues he proclaim it an issue wiih any out ?
1 1 is because he knows that his policy will
endanger it, and wishes, in anticipation, to
raise prejudices against those he would
oppress; and thus throw from himself upon
them lhe odium of endangei ing the Union?
This, sir, is the old device of soine nine
years past, which, worn out and cast aside
by all parties in South Carolina, is again
tricked up here for effeet, as the first pie
lude to a new protective tariff
To prove my opposition to the Union,
the gentlemen has quoted language used by
I
- j
speak of resistance to a protective tar: II,
and the resolutions lately passed by South
Carolina on the same effect. Why, sir,
had the gentlemen come to me, I would
with cheei fulness have given him far better
evidence than those papers afford to convict
me of desiring a dissolution of the Union.
I would have given him my address to my
constituents in 183S, in which I plainly
calculate the value of the Union, when as
sailed through its sides by northern aboli
tionists. 1 "there boldly maintain, that we
must have peace on this subject, or the
Union ought to be dissolved; and to thi
effect had prepared resolutions which I
published in the address, proposing a com
mittee of one member from each Male to
take into consideration the expediency of
amending the constitution or dissolving the
Union. Let the gentleman take these po
sitions, and, with abolitionists, make the
most of them. He may be assured lhat 1
am neither afraid nor ashamed of them, and
shall be prepared, whenever the emergen
cy arises here or elsewhere, to carry out
these opinions to their utmost consequen
ces. Does he suppose that any man, liee
himself, or worthy to represent freemen,
will hesitate to lesist oppression, or advo
cate a change in any form of Government,
when il fails the purpose for which it was
' established? When, instead of protection,
lit brings aggression In our institutions in-
j stead of equality in the eonfed -racy prac-
llCallv cu (init-s lis u. olhrr St :i nU ad
of liberty tears tip the heartless, irrespon
sible despotism .f a set tional majority over
tiie destinies of the South? Resis'ance to
a protective tar fl"; disuni-m, rather lhan
ab ditiou interference through this Govern
ment w th our doinet c institutions, 1 have
proclaimed, here and elsewhere, and now
pi. claim j.gain. L t the gentleman take
nd carry these sentiments to the people
ne i presents, and point to his own better
Mi'uai.N.sion, as a contract to thtse treasona
ble dtel nations, lie has tleclaied that if
North Caiotlna was u-vaded by federal
bayonets, to enforce a law declared consti
tulioual by the federal courts, he would
submit, although his native State summoned
him to her dclence; as if a law court in all
the exeat :ru tittles for liberty, has ever
t. j
yet been found but on the side of power!
Did Hampden's Appeal to the couits save
hi mi from paying ship money? And who
doubts that, in our Revolution, the courts
vouUl, at any time, have decided on the
ide of Uriiish pretcnsion? For my part,
I have neither the pajsive philosophy, nor
ihe constitutional principles of the gentle
man from North Carolina. The day that
i hostile foot is put on the soil of South
Carolina, to enforce any law on the part of
the conft-deiucy whatever the cause
right or wrong, 1 obey her behests, and
espouse her cause. By her my allegiance,
as well as my patriotism, will bid me stand;
and her fate, whatever it may be, will be
sulflciei.t for me. And how different is
the !aiigu.:gs of the gentleman from the
noble declaration of a distinguished son of
his native State! In lhe midst of our tariff
controversy, Governor Swain declared
that he knew of no highway for the march
of federal troops through the territory of
Nu'ih Carolina. But Governor Swain, I
presume, was neither a protective tariff
man, nor a federalist. He believed that
wc were oppiesscd, and sympathized with
our oppression; and he spurned the theory
that the sovtitign States of this confedera
cy were subordinate to the federal head,
and could constitutionally be dragooned
into submission, whenever resistance is
forced upon them by federal usurpations.
The sentiment of Governor Swain was
worthy the old republican State he repre
sented; and, 1 doubt not, if the federal
bayonets had been destined for the people
over whom he presided, instead of a sistel
State, whether backed by court decisions
or not, in obedience to her mandates he
would have summoned every brave and
free spirit within her borders to her de
fence, and on the confines of North Caroli
na would have met the aggression. There,
of course, the gentleman would not have'
been found; I mistake the spirit of even
the people he represents, if they would
have been as passive and submissive as his
principles might i t quire. They would
have seen that, in such a contest, there
could Lc no neutrality; that they must pro
tect her, or plunge their swords into the
bosom of their native Slate. Nor would
the consideration of the mere brute force
brought against them, have influenced
their determination. When the gentle-'
m-.n. comparing the numerical difference
of New York and South Carolina, spoke
of the ridiculousness and insolence 4of
South Carolina resisting such powtr," I
thought of the men who met at the Meck
lenburg convention. If in that grave and
bold assembly of freemen, some man of
popular statistics and enlarged patriotism,
had bi ought out bis tables showing the,
power of Great Britain, and the feebleness
of the colonies, and had spoken of the
"ridiculousness and insolence" of their re
sistance, what fate would have awaited
him? Lynching or the halter the whip
ping pot or death. What busiuess have
such creatures in the councils of men whose
determined end i liberty, and revolution
the s'ern means of obtaining il? And is it
at this day, after, the experience of our
Revolution, and the examples which all
the great struggles lor libeity have afford
ed in former times, that we are to hear of
numbers determining the wisdom and
propriety of resistance to tyranny? The
cause of justice the cause cf the people
has not always, it is tiue, prevailed but it ;
has triumphed often enough to make op-,
pressors tremble, even in the height and
gbry of their power, and ficemen hope,,
and strike again and fgain for their rights. '
Mr. Chairman, the gentleman has assert
ed that North Carolina is despised by Vir
ginia a.id South Carolina, and, therefore, C
suppose, he has deemed himself justifia
ble in assailing these State.
Despise Norlh Carolina! Who that haa
the aspiraticn of a freeman, can defpise a
republic, which for more than a half centu
ry, has maintained, and stiil maintains
liberty within her borders? Is freedom,
so rife in the world that those who possess
and preserve it, can be lightly esteemed?
What wrong. vhat usuip.uion has she ev
er perpetrated upon oli.er Stales, wl.icli
in States as with indivduals, constitute tho
onlv iust cause for rcpioach and shame.
lhat she need hang her head amongst