ator from Kentucky [Mr. CLAY] did not deny that such was the intention. Mr. R. was confident that it would not be contended any where that there ever had been any distinct recognition of a binding force in the compromise bill. Yet the Senator from South Carolina insisted that every friend to Southern interests was bound to go on and submit to every sacrifice required by that law, in the vain expectation that at a future day the compromise would be respected by those who were interested in the protected branches of industry. Mr. R. cherished no such expectation. He did not believe that one of those interested in the protective system recog nised any such bargain. They had acted wisely, with a sagacious regard to the interest of their constituents, cautiously abstaining from saying a single word which might imply that their hands were tied. The Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. WEBSTER] had, on the contrary, with great consideration, with a grave and solemn manner, and with the utmost precision of language, protested, at the last session, as an advocate of the manufacturing interests, against the compromise. Mr. R. had closely watched, during the present debate, to see whether any of the Senators who opposed the reductions suggest ed by the Committee on Finance would say any thing that looked like recognising a solemn bargain, signed, sealed, and delivered, between the North and the South, which would be violated by a repeal of these duties, and he had not heard such a word uttered by any of them. They opposed the reduction exclusively upon the merits. Was Mr. R. then, as a practical representative of the South, to be told that he must go on, and observe the stipulations of the compromise, on the part of the South, when he saw, from the most unequivocal evidence, both positive and negative, that the North meant to do no such thing? He had had positive evidence of it in the solemn protest of the Senator from Massachusetts, and he had had the most abundant negative evidence in the fact to which he had just alluded, that not a man who opposed the bill had placed his opposition on the ground of the compromise. Under such circumstances, he must be excused if he refused to pursue such a one-sided course of policy; and he hoped that gentlemen who as sumed to take the lead on Southern questions, and to speak in the name of the whole South, would not hold up him, and those who thought as he did, as faithless to their engagements, if they refused to follow such a lead.

One of the Senators from South Carolina [Mr. PRESTON] had said that he saw with the utmost clearness, from the indications around him, that the tariff interest was predominant in that body; that its opponents were the weaker party; and, therefore, that it would not be wise in them to open the question. Mr. R. would ask of that Senator, what were the indications to which he alluded? From the state of the vote, the fact was unquestionable that it was solely owing to the course pursued by that gentleman and his colleague that the tariff interest had the ascendency on that floor. The question was tried in the attempt to repeal the duty on porcelain and stoneware, and the ayes and noes on that question showed that it had been lost by the votes of those two Senators alone; the vote stood 24 to 20. If those gen. tlemen had voted otherwise, it would have stood 22 to 22, and the motion to strike out porcelain and stoneware from the bill would have been lost by a tie.

[Mr. PRESTON here explained, and thought there must have been a mistake in recording the vote, as he had not been present when the yeas and nays were called. He expressed a doubt whether articles charged with a duty of 20 per cent. were included within the compromise. He was rather under the impression that they were not included. Whatever the compromise was, he was for preserving it.]

Mr. R. resumed. He had examined the journal, and

[SENATE.

found the names of both the Senators from South Carolina among the 24 who voted for striking out. But whether the record was correct or not, Mr. R. greatly doubted that the tariff interest was in the ascendant. He had seen it for years losing its influence every moment, and he, for one, was not afraid to leave the tariff question open. He did not want any imaginary sanctuary to protect him while giving his vote on this occasion. He was not going to protect himself by artificial defences of this kind against the people of the United States. He was aware that the people had once been in favor of the protective policy, but he did not believe that they were so at this time. In the meanwhile he felt himself called upon to do his duty to a man who had been greatly misrepresented. He did not believe there was a man, individually, more favorable to the interests of the South, or who would do more to protect those interests, than the person who had been so rudely assailed in this debate. Mr. R. did not believe that he ever had been a friend to the high protective policy. He had watched his course and looked at his actions; and what had been his conduct? It had been often thrown in his teeth that he had voted for the tariff of 1828, under instructions from his Legislature. Mr. R. cared not for all that had been or could be said on that subject. Every body had witnessed the progressive march of public opinion in that gentleman's own State, under his sagacious guidance. Let gentlemen look at his speech, delivered at Albany before the tariff' of 1828 was passed; it would show that the whole bent of his mind was against a high tariff; and Mr. R. did not doubt that it had been the suspicions excited by the sentiments in that speech which had drawn forth from the Legislature the instructions under which Mr. Van Buren had afterwards voted. They were not in the dark as to the views and purposes of that individual, whatever might have been said about the degeneracy of poor old Virginia. They had had declarations, under sufficient guarantees, that he was opposed to this policy. He was not a man to run into abstractions, but was, in all his course of action, eminently wise and practical. His abstaining from mere abstract positions rendered his course of action effectual in bringing about good results. What was that individual doing at this time? Were not his personal and political friends acting at this moment in favor of Southern interests? The chairman of the Finance Committee, who had introduced the present bill, was well known to be on terms of intimacy with that gentleman. In fulfilment of the pledges he had given when here in his place, the individual in question was now proceeding in an effort to mitigate the pressure of the tariff system; and yet those who should have received him into their confidence, and hailed his course with thanks and praise, turned round and ungratefully repelled the proffered aid. It was "all talk." was "mere New York tactics." Nothing was meant by it. Did the Senator from South Carolina [Mr. CAL HOUN] wish to be understood as so utterly and irreconcileably opposed to that individual, that whenever he was for a measure the Senator from South Carolina was to be against it? And when he was against a measure, and was using his efforts to effect a reform in their legislation, was the gentleman from South Carolina still to oppose him, even when he was giving the South, the very thing they asked for? The Senator from New York had thus far acted for him in good faith, and had nobly redeemed his pledges to the South. Mr. R. anticipated with confidence that he would act out the course. reposed on the pledges of that person, both as to our domestic and other interests; and if any observations had been made by him privately, and not in the hearing of the Senate, (as Mr. R. had heard some anecdotes respecting him,) he claimed that he should be judged by his acts. When that gentleman and his friends said they

It

He

SENATE.]

[FEB. 23, 1837.

Mr. R. believed the measure now proposed to be a wise one. He was not, indeed, the advocate of an indiscriminate warfare against manufactures; he was not going to act in the spirit of a crusader against them. He respected the people of the North, who were so deeply interested in these establishents, as he did his own constituents. But he was not to be deterred from what he considered to be his duty by having a piece of parch ment held up before him, by being told that it was a compromise, and that he dare not ask the other party to observe it unless he observed it himself. The other party had expressly told him that they did not acknowledge the bargain; and why should he be held when they were not? At the same time, he was disposed to treat all the great interests of the country with caution and reverence, and, in legislating with regard to them, to tread as upon holy ground; not because he was in terror of a compromise, but because he held it wise not rashly to disturb existing interests. As an American patriot, he viewed with pride and exultation the wealth and prosperity of his brethren. He would not take an iota from it, if it could possibly be avoided. He was one, however, who believed that, notwithstanding the land bill, (should it become a law,) there would still be a surplus in the Treasury; and from stern necessity alone he was willing to reduce the revenue, though in so doing he could not wholly avoid affecting the interests of some of his fellow-citizens; and as he saw no means of lessening the national income so good and expedient as the prudent and catholic measures proposed by this bill, it should receive his support.

Mr. R., in conclusion, observed that he had said much more than he intended to say when he rose. The particular position he held there in reference to his own State rendered it his duty to be thus explicit, and he hoped would be received as his apology for so long detaining the Senate. As a representative of Virginia, he was willing to make a sacrifice of this salt tax in the name of his State. His constituents were largely interested in the manufacture of salt. He was aware that those of the honorable Senator from Massachusetts, who were also largely engaged in this manufacture, were in a different situation from most others. The salt manufacture in New York, Virginia, and Ohio, was sufficiently protected by nature. If, by any act of legislation on this subject, an injury was to be inflicted on any portion of the people of Massachusetts, Mr. R. should sincerely regret it. But let those concerned reflect that theirs was but a minor interest, when compared with the whole amount of capital embarked in this manufacture: while that whole amount was not less than eight or ten millions, the capital of Massachusetts was only two mil

lions.

Mr. R. could not see, for one, that the continuance of this duty was so very important to their prosperity. The honorable Senator who so ably represented them had assured the Senate that, should the duty be repealed, his constituents would come here with no whining petitions and complaints. Mr. R. believed

Mr. WRIGHT said that he did not rise to prolong this debate, certainly not to follow the example of the two Senators from South Carolina, by leading off the debate into the discussion of incidental subjects of a personal and wholly irrelevant character. His state of health, too, admonished him not to speak more than was absolutely necessary; yet he was compelled, by the necessity of the case, to say a very few words in reply to the remarks of one of the Senators from South Carolina, [Mr. CALHOUN]

In the first place, the Senate had heard the allegation of that Senator's strong suspicion that those who were in favor of this bill were not acting sincerely; and the remark seemed particularly aimed at the committee who had reported the bill. Mr. W. was sorry they stood so low in the Senator's opinion. But there was nothing to be done in the case. The Senator had a right not only to form his own opinion, but to promulgate it with a view to enlighten the Senate. Mr. W. had to deal only with facts; and what were the facts of this case? How came the committee with the subject? On the motion of that honorable Senator. And under what circumstances? With the utterance of a declaration about as charitable as some others in which he was in the habit of indulging-that the committee would make a mere demonstration, but would in fact do nothing. The Senator, however, was resolved that the committee should show what their intentions really were. The matter thus far was prophetic. He would now come to history. The Senator had done him the justice repeatedly to acknowledge that his personal exertions had not been wanting. The progress of the committee had been frankly communicated to that gentleman, so that they could not at least be accused of secrecy and disguise. Whether any unnecessary delay had occurred in reporting the bill was a matter for the judgment of the public.

For the truth of any allegations on this subject, he must refer to his humble credit here while he affirmed that the committee made what expedition they could. The bill was at length reported to the House as soon as it was prepared. But then the Senator asks, why was it not earlier taken up? Mr. W. said he knew it was unnecessary for him to answer that question before this Senate. What had been the declaration which he himself had made, on bringing this bill into the House? Did he not then remark that the land bill must be the chief reliance of the country for any very important reduction of the revenue, and that all that could be effected in respect to duties must bear a comparatively small proportion? And what bill had been before the Senate when the bill in question had been reported? Was it not the land bill? And to whom was it to be charged that the discussion of the land bill occupied the Senate for weeks? To the Committee on Finance? To any member of that committee? Let the Senate answer. And what had followed the land bill? Another bill of a public nature, and of a highly important character. On Thursday the Finance Committee had directed Mr. W. to ask for the printing of the tariff bill, and it was ordered by the Senate; but as the printing was not com

pleted in time for it to be brought in on Friday, he had then given notice that he should call up the bill on the Monday following. In compliance with this promise, he had accordingly moved on Monday that the bill be taken up, but a large majority of the Senate refused to do so. Mr. W. called it up the day following; and he would now ask, had the committee since then been chargeable with delaying its progress? Whence had come the leading prominent opposition to the bill? From a source, he must in candor say, he had not anticipated. Those who made the opposition to it had of course perfect control as to the manner in which the opposition was to be conducted; but he had deemed it proper to make this answer to what he must consider a somewhat ungenerous imputation. The Senator from South Carolina had thought proper to present the Senate with a full-length portrait of his humble self. What effect this might have in furthering or preventing the repeal of the salt duty, it was not for him to say. It was a matter he had nothing to do with. The fact that he had been a member of the Committee on Manufactures in 1828, and that he had supported the tariff bill passed in that year, was, he believed, not new. But to a single cautious remark thrown out by the gentleman, he should take the liberty to reply. The honorable Senator intimated that somebody had been deceived on that occasion; and, by coupling himself and his friend, when speaking of that deception, he seemed to leave the inference that Mr. W. had been a party to it. Mr. W. had been well aware of the course the bill was likely to take in the House of Representatives. Whether the other gentleman alluded to was so or not, he did not know; but this he knew: that the shape given to the bill was that preferred by every member from the South. There had been a conAlict as to principle between reporting a bill which should protect manufactures alone, and a bill which should extend the protection to the material which constituted the subject-matter of which the manu factured articles were composed, so as to extend the benefit to the agricultural interest also. An exceedingly amiable and worthy gentleman, since dead, [Mr. W. was understood as referring to the late Hon. Warren R. Davis, of South Carolina,] had been a member with himself of the committee who reported the bill, and that gentleman's name and his own would be found recorded together in the votes upon it. The gentleman alluded to had been utterly opposed to a tariff bill of any kind; but if any was to be reported, he had his choice between the alternatives, and preferred the insertion of protecting duties on the raw material. Mr. W. knew that that gentleman and all his associates were sanguine in the belief that if the bill should be thus framed, the New England members would vote against it, and it would consequently be lost. Mr. W. did all he could to undeceive them, but he could not succeed. The Eastern members did, in the course of debate, make use of expressions severe and harsh, almost beyond the limits of parliamentary rule; and this strengthened the Southern members if the belief that the bill could not pass. But he had told them repeatedly that the very men who thus denounced the bill would, on the final question, vote in its favor; and the event justified his prediction.

[Mr. DAVIS here interposed, and asked whether the Senator meant to say that he had voted for the bill.]

Mr. W. replied, that in his former remarks he had had no reference to that gentleman. There were insinuations here made which seemed to intimate a suspicion that some deception was intended by the authors of the present bill; but he thought, if the gentleman who had thrown them out would give the matter a little more reflection, he must himself become satisfied that the insinuation was unfounded. If not, however, it was but of

little moment.

[SENATE.

As to what had transpired here, whether in public proceedings or private conversations, he had nothing to do with it. It was years since the transactions took place, and many of the agents concerned in them had since passed off the stage of life; for himself, he was satisfied with the judgment which the country had pronounced upon his own course. He impugned that of no other gentleman.

There was another point on which he must be indulged in a word or two. The Senator had represented him as having stated that this article of salt had been introduced into the bill as a test question, whether the compromise was or was not to be adhered to. The Senator, it was true, had afterwards become satisfied of his mistake, and had corrected himself. What was it that Mr. W. bad said in relation to the compromise? He had stated that it had been the purpose of the committee, in framing the present bill, to seek as well among articles the duty on which was above 20 per cent., as among those under 20 per cent., for such as might be made free of duty, without disturbing any very important interest of the country. He had expressly said that he felt under no restraint whatever in going above 20 per cent. or below it, to find articles of this description, and had stated his opinion, that what was called the compromise act had the force of an ordinary law of Congress, and no more. He had made the same declaration at the time the compromise bill passed; and he believed the Senator from South Carolina had done the same. It was now his duty to show that there had been no magic about the introduction of this article of salt into the bill. He had run his eye cursorily over a table containing the long list of protected articles, and had found that the duty on those charged with 20 per cent. amounted to $1,325,000. Congress, by unanimous consent, had reduced the duty on wine one half since the compromise; yet wine before the reduction paid more than 20 per cent. Since then it paid less. The committee proposed a similar reduction in the duty on foreign spirit. That was now over twenty per cent. But if nothing must be touched but what was under twenty per cent., then there must be deducted from the bill $429,000 on this item. There had been already deducted $52,000 on worsted yarn, and $339,000 on earthenware; and now salt must go, and various other items would have to follow suit.

Mr. W. had not risen to argue the principle; on that every gentleman must satisfy his own mind. All he meant to say was, that if the Senate was to be guided by the rule which had been laid down, all hope of any reduction in the revenue was gone, and either there must be a surplus, and a consequent distribution till the year 1842, or the sale of the public lands must be stopped entirely.

He must be indulged in one more suggestion. The Senator from South Carolina had said that but for the compromise, the bill of 1832 would have produced an immense surplus. Mr. W. would ask the Senator whether, if the public lands had been retained, (as was then expected,) there would have been a surplus? None whatever. But Mr. . W had voted for the compromise. True. He hoped for that one vote, at least, the Senator would not blame him. That he had many faults he felt most deeply; but he should not now so far comply with some examples as to enter into a discussion of his own public or private conduct. He had voted for the compromise act for the sake of quieting the country. He had not then believed that there would be any troublesome amount of surplus in the Treasury, nor did he now believe that there would have been, but for the immense sales of the public lands, which was an event not anticipated by any body. He would now observe, in conclusion, that, as a member of the Finance Commit

tee, he had presented to the Senate the best bill he could. He had, indeed, been fully aware that it must disturb some domestic interests; but he defied the gentlemen who so loudly complained, to frame any bill which would not do so. There were some articles below 20 per cent. which the committee did not insert, because they believed it inexpedient to touch them, while there were others above 20 per cent. which they did insert, for the sake of the object to be accomplished, viz: some reduction in the revenue.

Mr. STRANGE observed that the very deep reverence he entertained for this body always rendered it exceedingly painful to him to address it; and this reason alone had often restrained him from rising in his place, and disclaiming sentiments and opinions uttered by the Senator from South Carolina, in the name of the whole South, in which he differed with him toto cœlo. But on

the present occasion he was compelled, both by duty and inclination, earnestly to protest against the practice into which that Senator had fallen-of assuming to speak for the whole South; in which general term the State he had the honor to represent was, of course, included. He was unwilling to see North Carolina tacked as a tail to any kite, or brought to act under any dictation. He was perfectly contented that South Carolina should be represented by the Senators she had herself chosen. They were signally able to represent her, and doubtless they fairly expressed her views upon this and all other subjects; but they had no right to speak in the name of the whole South; and, so far as North Carolina was concerned, he claimed for himself and his colleague the sole right of speaking for her upon that floor, as long as she herself thought proper to intrust them with that bonor. He was not for making invidious comparisons, but he hazarded nothing in saying that, in all of which man has reason to be proud, North Carolina was behind no State in the Union. She would act in all matters acdording to her own sense of right, and would, on no occasion, be either led or bullied. Among the characteristics of her people were prudence and good sense; but it had been his lot to witness on this floor language of much rashness and indiscretion, as he conceived, uttered in the name of the South. He would instance particularly some remarks of the Senator, uttered the other day, upon the subject of abolition, which he disapproved at the time, but refrained from objecting to, for the rea son before stated. He did not believe it either politic or proper, on every occasion of difference between us and our Northern brethren, to be throwing down the gauntlet of defiance, as had been done then. We assemble here from different portions of the Union, to confer together for the good of the whole. Far be it from him to advance the dangerous doctrine of the consolidationist, that each member of this body is the representative of the whole Union. No, no: each one is the peculiar representative of those who elect him; but in his representative capacity is governed, or rather should be, by the same laws of propriety, mutual concession, and common honesty, which govern individuals in their intercourse with each other. He was not so credulous as to believe that any mind can be altogether freed from the shackles of interest; but, with the high intellectual powers which in general characterize the members of the National Legislature, we may reasonably expect that sound and liberal views of public policy will control their deliberations. Instead, then, of arousing their passions by threatening denunciations, our appeals should be addressed to their reason, and to that sense of common interest which recognises the real good of the whole in the welfare of each and every part. These appeals would seldom be disregarded, while threats and defiance, if productive of no other evil, must tend to weaken the bonds of our Union.

[FEB. 23, 1837.

But to come to the matter more immediately under consideration: the Senator from South Carolina had made most extraordinary appeals to those representing Southern States; and assumed over them a sort of dictatorial power to which he, for one, was not disposed to submit. In one particular he and the Senator from South Carolina agreed; and that was, in holding a tariff for protection to be unconstitutional. For the maintenance of this position, it was, if he rightly understood the matter, that South Carolina bad placed herself in hostile attitude to the rest of the Union, and had nearly involved the country in the horrors of civil war. On one of the very few occasions on which he had heretofore addressed the Senate, he had remarked upon the great diversity of operation of human minds; by what various processes they arrive at the same conclusions, or wander into different results from the same premises; and of this the Senator from South Carolina and himself now presented an example. They agreed in the existence of an evil, but differed widely, very widely, as to the remedy. They were both opposed to a tariff for protection; but the Senator from South Carolina believed that the vote on the part of the Southern Senators to repeal the duty on salt would rivet the tariff upon them; while he, on his part, believed the object of removing the tariff most attainable by direct blows at each feature of the odious system.

He did not understand the Senator from South Carolina as objecting to present action upon any other ground than that of an act of Congress, which has been called in debate the compromise act; but, in relation to this, he solemnly warns the Southern Senators not to forfeit the vast advantages held under it by the South, for any benefit they may hope to derive from an immediate reduction of the tariff. But at the very moment the Senator speaks of a compact from which the South is deriving advantages, he disclaims being himself bound by it. If he is not bound by it, who is? By adhering to the terms of the act of 1833, he urges we will secure certain benefits to the South, while by disturbing it the manufacturing interests will be released from the pledges under which it places them. What pledges? If any pledge exists on their part, where is the evidence of it? Do any of the Northern gentlemen acknowledge themselves under any pledge? I have heard none; but I have listened with surprise to the Senator from South Carolina, insisting upon a compact binding on them, while on his own part he disavows any obligation. How can there be a compromise without parties? or how shall an obli gation be effectual on one side, and have no correspondent force on the other? The concession of the Senator seems to me utterly to destroy the character of the act of 1833, as a compact or compromise. It does not upon its face profess to have any such character, but stands upon the statute book like any other act of Congress, subject to modification or repeal at the pleasure of the law-making power. If, from any circumstance not appearing upon its face, it is entitled to more sacred regard than other laws passed at the same or any other session of Congress, let the circumstance be pointed out, let us have the proof of its existence. He could easily perceive, from the delicate position in which South Carolina stood immediately preceding the passage of this act, it might be viewed by her with peculiar interest, and demand from her the most profound respect, and exercise over her actions a sort of magic control; but no reason had yet been shown why to any other State of the Union it should be held as any thing more than an ordinary act of Congress. Its binding efficacy as a compact or compromise was disavowed on one side of the House, and not avowed on the other. But, independent of any obligation to respect this act, the Senator from South Carolina seems to think that, in