But, sir, it is proved, that the labor of manufacturing the same quantity of wool into cloth, can be done as cheap, and the Harrisburg Convention contend that labor is cheaper in the United States than in England. The table furnished by Mr. Dickinson, as well as the testimony of the witnesses, proves that the coarse cloths which will fall under the 1st and 2d minimums of the bill, will cost about two for labor and one for wool. This coarse wool is not now, but if it should become 65 per cent. dearer than in England, the following table will show at once the price in England and the United States of these cloths. [H. OF R which will be a practical exclusion of all, from one to two dollars a yard, a range of 100 cents, of the very best of our imports. And the 8th section, with the appraisal provided, will deter all imports from $2 40 to 2′50, a range of 10 cents. The lowest importing point will be at $2,01 the duty $1, which is an ad valorem of 49 2-10 per cent; the medium will be $2.20, the duty $1 will be an ad valorem of 45 4-10 per cent; and of the importing point, nearest the minimum, $2.40, the duty of $1 will be equal to an ad valorem duty of 41.6-10 per cent. The exclusions will be from $1 to $2, a range of 100 cents, and from $2.40 to 2.50 a range of 10 cents; making an exclusion through ranges of 110 cents, and permitting imports under this minimum, from 2 to 2.40, a range of 40 cents, under a duty equal on the average to 45 4-10 per cent. ad valorem, or of forty-nine cents on the dollar. Are these exclusions and heavy duties no protection? And do they not here operate, on that range, where threefourths in value of all our imports of woollens are made? The fourth minimum embraces a range of 81 50 from cloths costing $2 50 the square yard, to those costing 4 dollars. And is charged with a duty of 40 per cent. ad valorem on the $4, which is more than $1 76 duty on the square yard. This duty will exclude all imports from $2 50 to $3 52;-and the penalty of the 8th section and the appraisal will deter all imports from 13 90 to $4, further range of 10 cents,-and the importing range will be, per. square yard Lowest $3.53 Medium $3.72 Highest $3.90 duty equal to ad valorem. 176 equal 45.10 adva. 176 equal 43 adva, 176 equal 41 adva. 1.25 1.30 1.21 Near labor, 'These estimates are made for the medium and two extremes of the importing range under the two first minimums; and proved that under these, the protection is most abundant. The excess, is, in each case, or the price of the labor. Besides this excess, our manufacturer is constantly protected by the heavy charges which the importation adds to the cost of the foreign article, and so far as freight is concerned, these charges are heavy importation, as the goods are cheap, heavy, and coarse. Under the third minimum, cloths costing abroad, from $1 to 2 50 cents the square yard, will pay a duty of $1, The prohibited ranges will be 112 cents,-the. importing range will be 38 cents-at an average duty equal to more than 47 cents every dollar's worth of the cloth, or 43 per cent, ad valorem, which is 9 2-3 per cent. higher than the present rate of 33.3 per cent. Beyond cloths costing $4 the square yard, the bill proposes a duty of more than 49-4 cents on every dollar's worth of the im ported cloth-that is 45 per cent. ad valorem, which exceeds the present duty of 33-§ per cent. ad valorem by 11 2-3 per ad valorem. To recapitulate the exclusions which this bill will effect in practice, and sum them up against the ranges which it will leave for importations, we will suppose, that there now is not any woollens imported costing less than 20 cents the square yard, and that though not the whole, yet nearly the whole of our imported woollens, will, in the countries where made, cost not exceeding four dollars the square yard. The present importations of woollens if valued by the square yard, will then constitute a range of $3 80 cents, and these will cover more than nine tenths of the whole of milled cloths and flannels, baizes, carpets, and the like. Whole range of present imports By the first minimum from 20 to 45 cents a The 8th section will deter By the 2d minimum from 50 to 80 cents H. or R.] Tariff Bill. minimum in the bill, and in practice they cover all worth [MARCH 25, 1828. Venetian and Ingrain, and of 20 cents on other coarser carpetings. Most, if not all of these carpetings will come under the second minimum in this bill, and pay a duty of 40 cents the square yard. To render this certain in all of them, the committee have long since informed us, that they have agreed on an amendment-which will doubtless be adopted. And here, Mr. Chairman, I must notice one objection of my colleague [Mr. WOODCOCK] to this bill. He had heard two of the gentlemen on the Committee of Manufactures declare, that at the time they framed the bill, they believed all-and still believe that most of the carpeting alluded to, would pay the increased duty of 40 cents the square yard. He had heard them declare their intention to move an amendment to render this increase certain. Yet in his "candor," he complained of this defect in the bill, while he advocated an amendment, which, if the bill be defective in this respect, makes no provision whatever for carpets. His "candor" should have induced him to have imputed this defect in the amendment, either to the ignorance or intention of its supporters, among whom he has ranked himself—and I would have thanked him, if he had stated to which of these causes this defect should be imputed in the amendment, made after, it seems, the like defect in the bill had been discovered. Compared with this bill, the celebrated woollens bill of 1827, was weak, feeble, and defective. The woollens bill did not, in any case, affect to raise the rate of duty, except in so far as the minimums could do it. It had its minimums at 40, 150, 250, 400 and 600 cents the square yard, as the value of the cloths, but left the duty where it was placed by the tariff of 1824, at 33 1-3 per cent. ad valorem. This bill has its minimums at 50, 100, 250 and That act left the whole range of our imports open to 400 cents the square yard; it virtually excludes imports foreign competition, at a duty at its highest, of 33 1-3 per in more than two-thirds of the whole average of our imcent. ad valorem ; the very best (I had almost said the to-ports--and on the importing range raises the duty to an tal) of these imports, in a range of 380 parts, this bill pro-average ad valorem of 424 per cent. equal in addition to poses in practice, insofar as we can produce the article, to prohibit importations in 282 parts of the range. Commerce is forced from this ground, and manufactures invited to occupy it, under a duty and perils equal to fifty per cent.; and in the 98 parts where commerce is permitted to act, she is loaded and shackled with average chains, in the form of duties, to 424 per cent. ad valorem. That act, and that of March 1, 1823, regulating the col lection of duties, left a latitude in the invoice of imported goods, to 25 per cent. of their value: this bill leaves the 13th section of the act of March 1, 1823, unimpeached wherever it may be applicable, and narrows down the latitude of error in the invoice to 10 per cent of the value, and guards the minimums, by the terrors of the 8th section; that is, of the duty imposed on the minimum next above, and 50 per cent. of that duty. the minimums, to an increase in the rate of duty of 8 8-10 per cent. The woollens bill had no guard to the minimums, like that provided in the 8th section of this bill; and under it, the importer, with his invoice sanctioned by his oath, not questionable in practice, might graze the minimums; and the bill made no provision for an appraisal of the goods at their actual foreign value, nor did it, like the present, authorize the establishment of rules to secure fair appraisal. That bill left open the door to the frauds committed by the importation of unfinished goods, which under this bill, must be appraised as if finished. By that bill, too, the duty on blankets 25 per cent. and on hosie. ry, mits, caps and bindings, 33 1-3 per cent. were left as under the tariff of 1824. By this bill they are increased to an ad valorem duty of 35 per cent. Why, sir, I ask, has the bill of 1827 been abandoned by That bill left the appraisers to be guided, and in prac. its authors and supporters? In February, 1827, one short tice controlled, by the invoice of the goods, except in the year since, it was declared to be sufficient by the manualmost impossible case of a fraud proved, and so by put-facturers, in the various petitions with which they loaded ting it in the power of the importer to take perfect and secure advantage of a false invoice, below the real value of the goods, opened, or left open a door to frauds. This bill obliges the appraisers by all the ways and means in their power, to ascertain the true foreign value of the goods, even contrary to the invoice, and authorizes the President to make rules to secure a fair appraisal. That bill makes no provision for the appraisal of unfinished goods-and frauds are alleged to have been committed by importing them in a rough and unfinished state. But this bill provides that they shall be appraised as if they were finished. That bill left blankets at 25 per cent, ad valorem. This bill proposes to increase that duty to 35 per cent. ad valorem; as it does also the present duty of 33 on hosiery, mits, caps, gloves and binding. That act imposes a duty of 25 cents the square yard on these tables-by the committee of this House on Manfactures-by a large majority of this House who, by their repeated vote, and the previous question, and after the most solemn deliberation, and a debate of many weeks, supported and carried that bill; and surely the then minority thought the bill sufficient. One of my colleagues who then presided over the deliberations of this House, declared from the chair, to the House and the nation, at the moment when that Congress was about to separate, and under all the solemnity which such an occasion inspires, that if the domestic industry of the country was not sufficiently encouraged and protected, it was not the fault of this House. His allusions were obviously to the woollens bill, lost in the Senate: and the language and the occasion were a strong expression that the bill did afford all the protection to domestic industry which could | be required. Will the maufacturers now falsify every MARCH 25, 1828.] Tariff Bill. [H. OF R. the gentleman support the bill of 1827, and argue to induce Congress to support it? He The gentleman from Massachusetts, [Mr. DAVIS] declares that a crisis has approached, to the imminent hazard of our manufacturers, and that this bill is to give the fatal blow and sweep the board by their general destruction. He was a strong advocate for the woollens bill of 1827, and voted for it; and why does he now say that this bill is so much worse? Has he shown?-he cannot show any reason, nor adduce any fact in support of this change in his opinion. My colleague [Mr. WOODCOCK] declares that the bill is big with ruin to the manufacturer, and that it is different from what it professes to be. By its title it purports to be an act regulating duties on imports, and it is such. He declares it will ruin the manufacturer. imputed to his friend from Vermont [Mr. MALLARY] whose amendment he supports, a departure from which the lar risburgh Convention would have done, if they had acted on the subject of a duty on wool. While he recommends to us the Harrisburgh book as the manufacturers' Koran, it appears he had not read it himself. For the duty on wool, specified in the amendment of the gentleman from Vermont, is the very project of the Harrisburgh Convention. He did not say he would not vote for the bill, but seemed to suppose he might; and while he declares it is worse than the tariff of 1824, now in force, he appears inclined to vote for this bill, in the hope, as he declared, that next year it would be amended. Sir, if he really thinks this bill worse than the act of 1824, why should he vote for it? Why not retain, and next year amend that better act? Certainly, as a friend to protection, he ought not to vote for a worse bill. My colleague (Mr. MARTINDALE] sees in this bill the destruction and ruin of the manufacturers,and all his feelings are enlisted for the distressing fate of the Canton factory. That is the only negro cloth factory of which I can hear, and I do not think its distresses so great. If its capital be worth half a million, it will surely be able to defend itself; to make us the more sensible of the impending danger, he has converted that factory into 13 elegant Liverpool Packets, or double that number of West India Hulks, rotting for want of employment. That gentleman would go for the duty on wool, and advises the factory to employ cotton warps. This may be done, and in this way he may save the factory; cotton warps will be better than wool, which is half dirt, made into cloth, and I must say that I cannot feel very solicitious to protect factories of Smyrna dirt. But if the gentleman desires to give security, employment, and assured property, to the Canton factory, let him vote for this bill, and he will secure for the factory all he desires. thing they then stated? Will the Committee on Manufactures, three of whom then served on that committee, [Messrs. MALLARY, CONDICT, and STEVENSON, of Pa.] now repudiate their former judgment? Will those present, who were members of the 19th Congress, now declare that the judgment they then formed and the measure they then adopted, were illegitimate and of no worth? Why is the bill of 1827 deserted and forgotten? Why do the gentlemen who then, in argument and by their votes, declared that bills sufficient now ask so much more? Only one year ago, and that bill was, in the judgment of all, sufficient, and its loss was deplored as a public calamity. Has some malign influence deranged the judgment of those who supported that bill, and driven them to condemn it as of ne value? If that bill was sufficient then, must not this now have some merit? If then that bill was better than the act of 1824, is not this bill now better' I then considered that bill, and its trifling duly, deferred for more than a year on wool, as a gull and a trap to lure the agriculturist: yet it was certainly better for the manufacturer than the tariff of 1824, by all the force of the minimum principle incorporated in it. How then, can the authors and supporters of that bill say that this, which is so much more strong, cautious, and guarded, is of no worth? If that bill was meritorious, this is altogether and tenfold better. If gentlemen were then in error, I know it is their right and duty to correct them selves by a change of their opinion; but I ask them for the facts and reasons which justify their sudden change and total conversion. I have listened in vain to the arguments of the gentlemen from Vermont and Massachusetts, [Messrs. MALLARY and DAVIS,] to hear even asserted any new fact to give colour to their conversions. When and what are these facts? They do not even pretend that the condition of the manufacturer is different from what it was in 1827; and we know by his testimony, that he has increased his business in a laudable effort to sustain himself. Gen. tlemen who profess to be the exclusive advocates for the manufacturers, and who are such, if it is the business of the advocate to destroy his client, have added no new facts to the catalogue of their calamities, not asserted, and in almost the same terms, in 1827. The bill of 1827 held out sufficient protection until August, 1827. Then the judgment which formed it, and the wisdom which sup. ported it, were overset and defeated, not by facts or reasonings, but the resolutions of a Convention, who could not write out the reasons for their own resolves, but devolved the task on certain individuals. I ask the gentlemen, who have changed their minds, to give me the facts on which the change is founded. They have none. I challenge them to give them-none were developed between February and August, and the evidence on our When the gentleman from Maryland, [Mr. BARNEY] gives table, proves that none exists. The present bill is found. us a dissertation on our excellent constitution and happy ed on facts, rests upon the testimony of the witnesses, a form of Government, I always hear him with pleasure. foundation as solid and safe as the sworn evidence of the When he introduces his poney into the debate, I shall alwitnesses. It is not like the amendment built on hypo-ways leave him to the superior equestrian skill of my thetical assumptions, loose and remote inductions from false facts and newspaper assertions. It is in vain to build our legislation on such unstable foundations. This bill rests on the oaths of respectable men, who in matters of fact speak the truth, however erroneous their opinions may be. They stand uncontradicted in all the facts on which this bill rests, and it is our duty to believe them. And yet, sir, we are told by the monopolists, that this bill is worse than the tariff of 1824, and will ruin the manufacturer. Some of then demand a monopoly in turn, and all call for it by their support of an amendment which deserts protection and looks to monopoly. The gentleman from Vermont, [Mr. MALLARY] who is at the head of the Committee on Manufactures, declares that the bill will ruin the manufacturers, that it will destroy and not protect them; and goes into a long and elaborate argument to prove it. If he be correct, how could friend from Kentucky, [Mr. DANIEL.] But this bill could not escape the gentleman from Maryland. Finding nothing on earth with which to compare it, he was driven into the ocean for a proper comparison; and seeing there the ruins of our colonial trade, lost and destroyed by the folly and negligence of this administration, he compares it with a West India hulk, and declares it has not any one principle of buoyancy about it. While the other op. ponents of this bill complain that the duty it imposes on woollens are not enough, this gentleman declares that it is so loaded with duties that it must sink. They load, and he will scuttle the ship. Is this the manner in which the opponents of this bill divide in order to make a tariff? I have spoken in just terms of reprobation against royal monopolies. They are the parents of idleness and wickedness. They make their possessors ignorant, idle, un H. OF R.] Tariff Bill. [MARCH 25, 1828. tection. skilful, stupid, extortionate, and wicked in the extreme; can. My colleague Mr. BARNARD] has used an argument which I feel it my duty to notice. I noted his words at the time and believe I have them truly-the substance I know I have, and if I am wrong he is now present, and will correct me. He said: "Mr. Chairman, I will not say a bargain has been made between the gentlemen of the South, and the supporters of the bill, to defeat the whole measure: but I will say, that no arrangement between any high contracting parties' could more effectually secure its defeat, than the rejection of this amendment. It is perfectly well known and understood that the bill cannot and will not pass without the amendment." This bill is now denounced, and on what are these denunciations founded? On presumption without facts to support them. They are inferences, made not only without, but against evidence. They are founded in conjectestimony of the manufacturers themselves. They are tures, fugitive and theoretical, contradicted by the sworn founded in the dreams and delusions of a miserable theory, which interested cunning teaches credulity, but which experience denies-the odious doctrine of avowed monopoly and prohibition. For a proposition resting on no proved facts whatever, and And for what are we called upon to abandon the bill? wholly unsupported by testimony. There are no facts proved, nor even asserted, which can justify us in supporting the amendment against the bill; and yet we are requested to abandon the bill which affordsprotection to all, I will ask my colleague by whom it is "perfectly well the protection of the farmer--which leaves open the door for a proposition which proposes no increase of duty for known that the bill cannot pass without the amendment?" for the importation of coarse wool, and opens the door for and among whom is it perfectly well understood? Not the importation, by a practical reduction of duty on the surely by or among the supporters of the bill. I will not fine wool, and by the inverted minimum of eight cents, invibelieve that my colleague could have, in the presence of ting frauds. this House, and in the face of the whole country, intended proposition, which, in the minimums and duty it proposWe are invited to abandon the bill, for a to strike up a contract to defeat the passage of a tariff. Ies, is as blind and destructive, as it is selfish-a proposi know he could not. Yet I will say, that, if that gentle- tion which asks more than was asked at the last session— man had gone over to the gentlemen from the South and more than is necessary--more than was ever asked-till spoken to them in direct terms, he could scarcely have the Harrisburgh Convention;--a proposition which redone more than he has, by the strange argument he has gards no other class of society, than the manufacturer. used-be could not have done more if he had gone over Does he desire to live upon every other? Will he claim to them and said: "I know that my constituents ask for all for himself, and yield nothing to others? Will he creprotection, I will not be responsible-amendment after ate a desert, and thrive upon the ruin about him? The amendment shall be moved to rid me of my responsibility. amendment does no justice, but great injustice, to the I know that you and your constituents are opposed to wool grower. protection and a tariff. If the amendment does not suc- he will partake. He will not be satisfied with the crumbs He has been summoned to the feast, and ceed, you carry your end,—and in the end we will vote from the table of the manufacturer-a suicidal proposition with you to defeat the bill altogether"-Will he say to which would destroy the manufacturer, by destroying the opponents of the tariff, "vote against the amendments, those on whom he must depend. The amendment will and the bill will be defeated?" I ask my colleague to re- not and cannot succeed, without the aid of those, who review this argument of his, and frankly and fairly to come present the wool grower--and will his representative vote out, and repudiate it,--and declare that he will not and for a proposition, which leaves our wool market for coarse cannot maintain a pledge to the opponents of the tariff wools to the foreigner; and for fine wools, invites the for. that if they will defeat the amendment--they destroy the eigner to supply them by a virtual reduction of the duty? After denouncing the bill as destructive to the manu-sent wool growing districts, can be seduced to desert the Do gentlemen suppose, that those of us who reprefacturers, and when he had got to the confires, where the interest of our constituents, by the wishes of the HarrisChair was obliged to admonish him of the rules of order, burgh Convention? Nothing, it seems, will satisfy the -my colleague expressed a horror at the prospect of the monopolists. The farmer must not partake with them in usual division of opinion in the numerous delegation of the protection of government. They must have the whole our State,--and in the moderation of his temper, he asks--though the farmer, if he could keep wool where it is, why the State of New York should appear divided!—And in this instance who divides? Who were the authors of the division? Does my colleague suppose that the sup- vides sufficient protection to all. It secures the wool marSuch is the character of the amendment. The bill proporters of the bill should come over to him? Does he ket to the grower, and will stimulate all the energies of hope to succeed by such means to bring us over? De industry. It will enlarge the market to the manufacturer nunciations and threats cannot do it. He cannot move me several millions, remove his difficulties, reward his labors, nor any one of my colleagues by such means. He must perfect his skill, and in the end bless the country and im. convince and persuade he cannot alarm or terrify. Whe- prove our commerce, by the excellence, novelty, perfecther the amendment succeeds or fails, in the humiliations tion, and cheapness of his fabrics. If, after all they have of duty, we shall use our utmost endeavors, to procure said, and sworn, the manufacturers, by the moral force of that protection for the industry of the country, which good their numbers, shall cause the bill to be rejected, they men desire. The bill upon our table furnishes it, and in will injure their fortunes, impeach their sincerity, and in the greatest abundance. We have gone far, very far, in the general judgment, ruin their moral character. These this system of protection by duties;-and we ask him to nen, as if by one common voice, approved and recommend- · come to us-though gentlemen may desire to be the ad- ed the woollens bill of 1827. When it failed, they declared vocates of the lazy monopolists, they cannot induce us to its failure would be their ruin. Now, sir, they denounce join them. We ask them to come here, to the support of the this bill-not the manufacturers who consume American bill, and be the advocates of the industrious manufacturer. | material, for they approve of it; but the importing manuIn the spirit of kindness, I invoke gentlemen to come over facturers who consume not American but foreign materito us, to be content with what can be got at a fair and rea-al, denounce this bill. In this way they will convict themsonable protection. I have for one gone as far as 1 well selves of treachery and deceit. bill. or raise it a little, would be satisfied. MARCH 26, 1828.] Disbursing and Accounting Officers.—Tariff Bill. [The Chairman here asked Mr. HOFFMAN if he intended to apply these remarks as to the defeat of the bill to any member of the House, and Mr. HOFFMAN went on] [H. OF R. this or that party, or set of men. What madness? What folly? Is there a man, who desires to unite them with his political fortunes, let him be shunned as altogether rotten and corrupt? I ask the manufacturer who is absent, to separate his cause from party and politics, and from party an: political men? Will he rise and sink with them? Their union would be an incest like that of sin and death, so horrid that none but the poet can describe it, and their issue would be a brood, which would gnaw and prey upon the vitals of those who brought them into existence. Not at all. If the manufacturers shall by combining their numbers, cause the bill to be defeated, they err as to their interest, and in spirit contradict all they have heretofore said and done on the subject, and all classes will say that their confidence has been abused by the reputed distresses of the manufacturer. Why do gentlemen endeavor to force us from the bill, which is sufficient to try the hazardous experiment of the amendment? It Sir, we have a bill which is supported by the facts, is unwise to ask for a monopoly, which ought not be grant- sworn to by the witnesses. It covers all the wants of our ed. To get the bill through both Houses, is it wise to extended society. It gives ample protection to the manload it down and then employ the gentleman from Mary-ufacture of woollens and if it be faulty at all, it is, that it land [Mr. BARNEY,] to sink it? Is it prudent to strike out may give too much. It covers the wool grower and leaves of it, as is now proposed, all protection to the farmer, and commerce to flourish. We have a bill calculated to preexcite him against it! For the sake of the amendment; vent the numerous abuses so loudly complained of, and will gentlemen sacrifice every part of the bill? It will by which our treasury has been robbed of its revenue and protect the manufacturer, tranquilize the public passions, our manufactures of protection. It is not framed for a and tear these great interests from the lewd embrace of particular district or section, but will protect our industry party politics, and its passage will induce all classes of so- in every part of this extended republic. The more we ciety to go about their useful and accustomed labors. examine it, the more shall we feel that it opens a vast fiel and an extensive market for our manufactures. Gentlemen have pred cted that it will ruin them. The prediction is false-the dream and delusion of mad There is no necessity to add the differences of opinion about a tariff to the other passions, which convulse and agitate the public mind. There is no necessity to draw down into the arena of politics, the great interests of so many millions of our citizens, to exhibit them as gladia. tors for the public amusement. ness. It is not true. By the bill the manufacturers are protected; and the very gentlemen who have indulged in these denunciations and unfounded predictions, will, if the bill shall become a law, be compelled to admit that it is a national tariff, and affords to all the great interes s of the country, great, adequate, and abundant protection Mr. BATES, of Massachusetts, said, that he was desihe was himself a wool grower, and was firmly of the be lief that the bill was utterly destructive to the interests of that class of men-that it it put the knife to the jugular vein of every sheep in the country, and that its effects would be equally destructive to the interests of the manufacturers-a set of men on whose character the gentle. man from New York had made an attack of the most extraordinary kind. But as it was now late, (being near four o'clock) he would venture to move that the committee rise. My colleague [Mr. BARNARD] has said that he wished to save the bill from its friends. I join him in this request, save it from friends in this House, who would make it odious by depriving the wool grower of the little protection he enjoys; who, by calling for monopolies, alarm the prudent and excite opposition. Save it from friends, who de-rous of addressing the committee on this subject, because ny that protection is sufficient. Save it from those friends who would change the banners of protection where men are free for the banners of monopoly, when men are slaves! Save it from those who, though the bill gives duty enough and more than enough, to buy the wool, to make the cloth, are determined to reject it, unless we take up, and adopt the suicidal amendment of the Harrisburg Convention; and if we adopt it, the American is driven from our wool market and the foreigner will supply it. Save it from those friends, who ask so great a rate of duty and protection as to alarm men with a belief, that our manufacturers are insolvent; and that we are to engage in the impossible task of legislating insolvent men into a solvent condition. I deny this imputed insolvency. I say they are solvent. Protect them against the fluctuations of the market, and the difference in the price of wool, and you make them secure. That gentleman [Mr. BARNARD] says, save the pill from its friends. He has satisfied me that it is true, a man may be the worst enemy of his best friend. Such is the character of this amendment. It is the worst enemy of the manufacturer. It asks for a useless, a dangerous, an alarm ng monopoly, and would destroy the wool grower, without whom the manufacturer cannot, and by whose aid they must live. It rose accordingly, and reported progress. WEDNESDAY, MARCH 26, 1828. DISBURSING AND ACCOUNTING OFFICERS. The House resumed the consideration of the resolu tions heretofore moved by Mr. JoHN S. BARBOUR, proposing to amend the Constitution in such manner as to take from the President all agency in the appointment or dismission of accounting and disbursing officers, and, on motion, after some debate, the resolutions were committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union. THE TARIFF BILL. On motion of Mr. MALLARY, the House again resolv But, sir, I go further. Not in this House, for here ed itself into a Committee of the Whole House on the every thing must be treated as honorable and fair. Out State of the Union, to take into consideration the bill in of this House, save the manufacturer and wool grower alteration of the several acts imposing duties on imports. from all political conventions and party protections. These The amendment of Mr. MALLARY pending. are restless and changing. Let the great interests of man- Mr. BATES said he rose to address the committee upon ufactures and domestic industry rise superior to the chang the bill under consideration; and with the more reluc ing vicissitudes of politics and party-superior to any tance, because, having been absent from the House dumomentary passion. Let them rest on the rock of our ring several days of the discussion, confined by indisposi public judgment, and let them never be shaken. If they tion, he should be exposed to the danger of repeating what are to be dragged down into the arena of politics, the may have been better said by those who had preceded cause of American industry is ruined. Shall our domes- him, and of taking his positions with less accuracy, and tic industry, with a capital of two or three hundred mil-sustaining them with less power than he otherwise might lions of dollars, involving the happiness and subsistence have done. And did he now think, with the gentleman of many millions of our people, be bound to the car of from New York, [Mr. WRIGHT] that it is questionable |