Ulloa*
* " An exciting scene characterized an attempt to pass a resolution
tendering the thanks of Congress to several general officers. Mr. Chase
of Tennessee, on the 21st of February, 1848. introduced certain resolu-
tions for that purpose. The question before the House was, ' Shall the
20
306 HISTORY OF THE
This was not only done, but substantial benefits
were conferred, with great liberality, upon the pri-
vate soldiers, in the shape of bounties and bounty
Ian lis.
main question be now put ?' when Mr. John Quincy Adams, in the attempt
toaddress the Speaker, was seized apparently with the agonies of death,
and was borne to the Rotunda, and thence to the Speaker's room, where
after lingering a few days he expired." ā Congressional Globe, 1st session
30//i Congress, p. 381.
POLK ADMINISIKATIOM. 307
CHAPTER X.
The Tariff. ā Opinions of Messrs. Clay and Polk upon that question.ā Mes-
sage of Mr. Polk. ā Report of the Secretary of the Treasury. ā Passage of
the Tariff of 1846. ā Arguments of the friends and opponents of free trade.
ā The Constitutional Treasury established. ā Discussions in the Constitu-
tional Convention ā Public Debt of the United States. ā Proposed Tax
upon Tea and Coffee.
The tariff was a prominent question in the presiden-
tial contest of 1844. The act of 1842 had violated
the principles of the compromise of 1833,* and the
exciting subject, instead of being put "to rest for
ever," was again to be decided by the American
people. The principles of the two candidates upon
this interesting and difficult question, were well de-
fined prior to the termination of their congressional
career. Mr. Polk was thoroughly committed to the
policy of a revenue tariff, and Mr. Clay, when the
compromise act was under discussion, pledged the
party favorable to protection, to a reduction of the
tariff to a revenue standard.-)- Previous to his nomi-
* " The present tariff law is sufficiently discriminating ; holds to com-
mon sense, and rejects the principles of the Compromise Act, I hope, for
ever." ā Mr. Webster's Speech at Faneuil Hall, September, 1842.
f " I am anxious to find out. some principles of mutual accommodation,
to satisfy, as far as practicable, both parties ; to increase the stability of
our legislation ; and, at some distant day ā but not too distant, when we
take into view the magnitude of the interests which are involved ā to bring
down the rate of duties to that revenue standard for which our opponents
308 HISTORY OF THE
nation for the presidency, Mr. Clay made a speech
at Raleigh, in which he advocated discriminating
duties for the protection of domestic industry.'"*
This was followed by his letter, in September, 1844,
to a whig committee in Pennsylvania, in which he
gave in his adhesion to the tariff of 1842. Alarmed
at the prospect of losing votes in the Southern
States, by his opposition to the annexation of Texas,
he saw certain defeat in the future, unless he could
rally to his support the people of the North. This
produced one concession after another, until he had
abandoned the ground which he occupied in 1833.f
No excuse can be offered for this palpable aban-
donment of principles which had been so solemnly
proclaimed ; and the words which he uttered in
Is:':;, arc a withering rebuke upon the course which
he subsequently pursued, and stamp in letters of
living tire upon his own forehead, the anathemas
which he fulminated in advance against others.
The course pursued by Mr. Polk during that
campaign, is by no means free from a just criticism.
have so long contended." ā Speech of Mr. Clay in the Senate on a Com-
promise Act, 1833.
* " Here is a basis for accommodation and mutual satisfaction. Let
the amount which is requisite for an economical administration of the
Government, when we are nol engaged in a war, be raised exclusively on
foreign imports ; and in adjusting a tariff for that purpose, let such discrim-
inations be made as will foster and encourage our own domestic industry.
All parties ought to be satisfied with a tariff for revenue, and discrimina-
tions for protection." ā Mr. Clay's Raleigh Speech.
f ā¢ā¢ When this was known, what Congress, what Legislature, would
mar the guaranty ? What man, who is entitled to deserve the character
of an American statesman, would stand up in his place in either House of
C in! disturb the treaty of peace and amity?" ā Mr. Clay's
Sj F bruary 12, 1833.
POLK ADMINISTRATION. 309
Several letters were addressed to him, soliciting bis
views upon the tariff question ; and the answer
which he gave to one of them, was the subject of
much discussion in every section of the Union.*
While it was admitted in several of the Southern
States, that Mr. Clay was in favor of discriminations
for the protection of home industry, it was at the
same time insisted that Mr. Polk entertained the same
views.f In Pennsylvania, it was argued by the
democratic party, that the two candidates occupied
the same platform upon the tariff question. J If the
principles which Mr. Polk really entertained were
misunderstood, owing to the phraseology of his Kane
letter, he was not himself altogether blameless for
* " Dear Sir : I have received recently several letters, in reference
to my opinions on the subject of the tariff, and, among others, yours of the
30th ultimo. My opinions on this subject have been often given to the
public. They are to be found in my public acts, and in the public discus-
sions in which I have participated.
" I am in favor of a tariff for revenue, such a one as will yield a suffi-
cient amount to the treasury to defray the expenses of the Government,
economically administered. In adjusting the details of a revenue tariff, I
have heretofore sanctioned such moderate discriminating duties as would
produce the amount of revenue needed, and at the same time afford reason-
able incidental protection to our home industry. I am opposed to a tariff
for protection merely and not for revenue." ā Letter of Mr. Polk to John
K. Kane, dated Columbia, Tennessee, June 19, 1844.
f The author was upon the democratic electoral ticket in Tennessee,
in 1844, and his opponent, while he admitted that Mr. Clay was in favor
of discriminating duties for the protection of home industry, would insist,
from the language of the Kane letter, that Mr. Polk was a protectionist to
the same extent as Mr. Clay.
\ " We therefore insisted that the one was as good a tariff man as the
other."ā Speech of James Thompson of Penn., July 1, 1846. CcngsneSr
stomal Globe, Appendix, 1st session 29th Congress.
Mr. Thompson was explaining the course pursued in that State in the
contest between Messrs. Clay and Polk.
310 HISTORY OF THE
the error which was committed by his supporters.
It is not to be disguised, that the English language
was of sufficient scope and flexibility to enable him
to define his opinions with more clearness and
greater precision. If he had stated that he was in
favor of a tariff discriminating alone in favor of re-
venue, there would have been no misconception of
his views. Or if he had expressed his preference
for such discriminating duties as would produce the
ai i mm it of revenue needed, ā protection flowing as a
necessary incident therefrom, every man of ordinary
understanding would have comprehended his mean-
ing. The voters in the North were deceived by the
use of language which had the effect of obscuring,
instead of more clearly defining his position. The
assertion that he had sanctioned such moderate dis-
criminating duties as would produce the amount of
revenue needed, was the statement of a met which
the record confirms ; and there he ought to have
stopped, because every one understands that pro-
tection flows as a necessary incident from a revenue
tariff. The statement that he was opposed to a
tariff for protection merely, and not for revenue,
should have been transposed, by asserting that he
was in favor of a tariff for revenue merely, which
Mould have endorsed the principles he had always
entertained, and which he subsequently enforced
\with his characteristic ability and energy.
The views which Mr. Polk entertained, were ex-
plained with precision and ability in his first annual
message.'" The principles which would govern his
* " The attention of Congress is invited to the importance of making
POLK ADMINISTRATION. 311
administration were proclaimed with great boldness,
and the odious features of the tariff of 1842 were
thoroughly investigated and exposed. Congress
suitable modifications and reductions of the rates of duty imposed by our
present tariff laws. The object of imposing duties on imports should be
to raise revenue to pay the necessary expenses of Government. Congress
may, undoubtedly, in the exercise of a sound discretion, discriminate in
arranging the rates of duty on different articles ; but the discriminations
should be within the revenue standard, and be made with a view to raise
money for the support of the Government."
" It becomes important to understand distinctly what is meant by a
revenue standard, the maximum of which should not be exceeded in the
rates of duty imposed. It is conceded, and experience proves that duties
may be laid so high as to diminish, or prohibit altogether, the importation
of any given article, and thereby lessen or destroy the revenue which, at
lower rates, would be derived from its importation. Such duties exceed
the revenue rates, and are not imposed to raise money for the support of
government. If Congress levy a duty for revenue of one per cent, on a
given article, it will produce a given amount of money to the treasury,
and will incidentally and necessarily afford protection or advantage to the
amount of one percent, to the home manufacturer of a similar or like arti-
cle over the importer. If the duty be raised to ten per cent., it will pro-
duce a greater amount of money, and afford greater protection. If it be
still raised to twenty, twenty-five, or thirty per cent., and if as it is raised
the revenue derived from it is found to be increased, the protection or ad-
vantage will also be increased ; but if it be raised to thirty-one per cent.,
and it is found that the revenue produced at that rate is less than thirty
per cent., it ceases to be a revenue duty. The precise point in the as-
cending scale of duties at which it is ascertained from experience that the
revenue is greatest, is the maximum rate of duty which can be laid for the
bona fide purpose of collecting money for the support of the Government.
To raise the duties higher than that point, and thereby diminish the
amount collected, is to levy them for protection merely, and not for reve-
nue. As long, then, as Congress may gradually increase the rate of duty
on a given article, and the revenue is increased by such increase of duty,
they are within the revenue standard. When they go beyond that point,
and as they increase the duties, the revenue is diminished or destroyed,
the act ceases to have for its object the raising of money to support Gov-
ernment, but is for protection merely."
" It does not follow that Congress should levy the highest duty on all
articles of import which they will bear within the revenue standard ; for
312 HISTORY OF THE
was urged to substitute ad valorem for specific and
m illinium duties. That portion of his message is a
masterly and unanswerable argument in favor of free
trade, and bore the impress of a comprehensive mind,
thoroughly imbued with the subject.
such rates would probably produce a much larger amount than the econo-
mical administration of the Government would require. Nor does it fol-
low that the duties on all articles should be at the same, or a horizontal
rate. Some articles will bear a much higher revenue than others. Below
the maximum of the revenue standard Congress may and ought to discri-
minate in the rates imposed, taking care so to adjust them on different arti-
cles as to produce in the aggregate the amount which, when added to the
proceeds of sales of public lands, may be needed to pay the economical ex-
penses of the Government. In levying a tariff of duties, Congress exer-
cise the taxing power, and for purposes of revenue may select the objects
of taxation. They may exempt certain articles altogether, and permit their
importation free of duty. On others they may impose low duties. In
these classes should be embraced such articles of necessity as are in gene-
ral use, and especially such as are consumed by the laborer and the poor,
as well as by the wealthy citizen. Care should be taken that all the great
interests of the country, including manufactures, agriculture, commerce,
navigation and the mechanic arts, should, as far as maybe practicable,
derive equal advantages from the incidental protection which a just system
of revenue duties may afford. Taxation, direct or indirect, is a burden, and
it should be so imposed as to operate as equally as may be on all classes
in the proportion of their ability to bear it. To make the taxing power
an actual benefit to one class, necessarily increases the burden of the
others beyond their proportion, and would be manifestly unjust. The
terms ' protection to domestic industry ' are of popular import ; but they
Bhould apply under a just system to all the various branches of industry
in our country. The farmer or planter who toils yearly in his fields, is
engaged in 'domestic industry,' and is as much entitled to have his labor
ā protected ' as the manufacturer, the man of commerce, the navigator, or
tin mechanic, who are engaged also in ' domestic industry' in their differ-
ent pursuits. The joint labors of all these classes constitute the aggre-
gate of tlic ā¢ domestic industry' of the nation, and they are equally entitled
to tli'' nation's ' protection.' No one of them can justly claim to be the
exclusive recipient of ' protection ' which can only be afforded by increas-
ing burdens on ' domestic industry' of the others." ā Message of Mr. Polk
to Congress, December, 1845.
POLK ADMINISTRATION. 313
The doctrines which were sustained by the Ex-
ecutive were enforced with consummate ability by
the Secretary of the Treasury. He made certain
principles the basis of his celebrated report against
the protective policy* That argument has been
submitted to the test of scrutiny and of time. The
most powerful advocates of the protective system
employed their energies in refuting his assumptions,
and controverting his facts. But his platform was
never abandoned; and like the sailor, whose eye is
fixed upon his compass amidst storms and tempests,
he adhered to his principles with an iron will, and
an inflexibility of purpose, which insured success
against all opposition.
On the 15th of June, 1846, the House of Repre-
sentatives proceeded to the consideration of a bill for
the repeal of the tariff of 1842. The debate upon
this bill was characterized by great power. Princi-
ples w r ere laid down, and facts adduced. Musty
* " 1st. That no more money should be collected than is necessary for
the wants of the Government, economically administered.
" 2d. That no duty be imposed on any article above the lowest rate
which will yield the largest amount of revenue.
" 3d. That, below such rate, discrimination may be made, descending
in the scale of duties ; or, for imperative reasons, the article may be placed
in the list of those free from all duty.
" 4th. That the maximum revenue duty should be imposed on luxuries.
" 5th. That all minimums, all specific duties, should be abolished, and
ad valorem duties substituted in their place, care being taken to guard
against fraudulent invoices and under-valuation, and to assess the duty
upon the actual market value.
" 6th. That the duties should be so imposed as to operate as equally as
possible throughout the Union, discriminating neither for nor against any
class or section."ā Report of the Secretary of the Treasury, December
3d, 1845.
314 HISTORY OF THE
volumes were examined, and the talents which were
concentrated in the House of Representatives were
devoted to the discussion of the subject. The city
of Washington was thronged by the manufacturers
and their agents, and every effort which ingenuity
could devise was exerted to defeat the passage of
the tariff of 1846. After a long discussion, the bill
passed the House of Representatives on the 3d of
-July, 1846, by a vote of 114 to 95.* Among the
number who voted for the passage of the bill there
was but one whig.
Although the bill had passed by a triumphant
majority through the House of Representatives, it
was destined to encounter a formidable opposition
in the Senate. The supporters and opponents of
free trade in that body were nearly equal. The
bill came very near being defeated by the unex-
pected resignation of William H. Haywood, of
North Carolina,f whose conduct produced a feeling
of indignation in the democratic party, and at once
elevated the hopes of the opponents of reform.
The contest became more exciting, and great anxi-
e1 \ was felt not only in Washington, but throughout
the country. The fate of the bill now depended
upon the vote of Mr. Jarnagin, a whig member of
the Senate from Tennessee, who had been instructed
* Congressional Globe. 1st session 29th Congress, p. 1053.
f "Washingtom City, July 26th, 1846.
"I hereby respectfully resign my scat in the Senate as one of the
Senators fr< .ā n North Carolina.
"I have the honor to be your obedienl servant,
"WILLIAM II. HAYWOOD, Jr."
Congressional Globe, 1st session 29th Congress, p. 1141.
POLK ADMINISTRATION. 315
to vote for a bill which embodied the principles of
the one then before the Senate. It was a matter
of great doubt whether he would not either openly
disobey those instructions, or manage in some way
to evade them. Contrary to the expectations of
those who placed a just appreciation upon the
general character of that Senator, he said he would
obey his instructions,* although the instincts of the
man were illustrated, when he hazarded its defeat
by intrusting the fate of the bill to the casting vote
of the Vice President.
A motion was made by Mr. Johnson, of Mary-
land, to commit the bill with instructions, and upon
that proposition the Senate was equally divided,
27 Senators voting for and 27 against the propo-
sition. It was decided in the negative by the cast-
ing vote of the Vice President.f If Mr. Jarnagin
had faithfully obeyed his instructions, Mr. Dallas
would not have been called upon to exercise the
duty which his position as presiding officer imposed
upon him, during that struggle.^ It was, however,
expecting too much from Spencer Jarnagin to sup-
pose he would pursue the path of duty with unde-
viating footsteps. The course which he adopted,
while it exemplified his own character, afforded the
* " But the leading features of the bill I am instructed to maintain, and
by voting against the bill I would vote against the principles which I am
instructed to support. I shall obey these instructions." ā Speech of Mr.
Jarnagin.
f Congressional Globe, 1st session 29th Congress, p. 1155.
\ " The President said that he was taken by surprise in consequence
of the course pursued by the Senator from Tennessee, [Mr. Jarnagin,]
who did not vote ; but as he was called upon to give the casting vote, he
would vote in the negative.'''' ā Ibid.
310 HISTORY OF THE
Vice President an opportunity of illustrating his
moral firmness by an act of bold and majestic gran-
deur, which stamped him as one of the distinguished
men of the a^e. When the bill was ordered to a
third reading, Mr. Jarnagin again refused to vote,
and the Senate was again equally divided, and the
fate of the measure was decided by the casting vote
of Mr. Dallas. Before proceeding to decide the
important question which was now under his con-
trol, and upon which so much interest and feeling
depended, the Vice President addressed the Senate*
* " The President rose and said :
" The Senate being equally divided on this important question, I may
be indulged in briefly stating the principal reasons. for the vote I am re-
quired by the Constitution to give.
" Fixcluded from any participation in forming or modifying the bill, I
am bound to sanction or condemn it exactly in the shape in which it
Btands. The responsibility is deeply felt. It belongs, however, to the
office assigned to me by my fellow-citizens, and will be assumed with
frankness, and, I hope, not unbecoming firmness. The consequences of
my decision, either way, may seriously affect the country. No one can
entertain, as to that, a profounder solicitude. But, after summoning to
my aid the best purposes and best lights that I can command, the conse-
quences, be they what they may, must be hazarded.
" The system for obtaining the revenue necessary to support their Go-
vernment is established, directly or indirectly, by the people of the United
States, within the limits, and agreeably to the prescribed forms of the Con-
stit ui ion. Whatever is ascertained to be their will on the subject, all
should undoubtedly acquiesce in. That there are known and approved
modes by which their will is expressed, cannot be questioned ; and the
public officer who reads that will with candor and integrity, may feel as-
sured that he conforms to the institutions of his country when he makes
it the guide of his conduct. To my mind ample proof has been furnished
that a majority of the people and of the States desire to change, to a great
extent, in principle, if not fundamentally, the system heretofore pursued
in assessing the duties on foreign imports. That majority has manifested
itselt' in various ways, and is attested by its representatives in the other
House of Congress, by whom this bill has been approved, and whose votes
POLK ADMINISTRATION. 317
The scene which was witnessed upon that occasion
was one of the most imposing that ever occurred in
that chamber. It was not known with certainty
undeniably indicate the popular sense in the large proportion of o i lt 1 ) ' ' - < ā 1 1
out of the twenty-eight States. In this Senate an analysis of the vote
before me discloses that while six States (Ohio, Virginia, New-Hampshire,
Georgia, Michigan and Maine) are equally divided ; eleven (Louisiana,
Pennsylvania, Delaware, Kentucky, Massachusetts, New-Jersey, Rhode
Island, Connecticut, Maryland, North Carolina and Vermont) are against,
and eleven (Arkansas, Missouri, Alabama, Illinois, Indiana, South Caroli-
na, Mississippi, New-York, Texas, Tennessee and Florida) are for the
change. Peculiarly situated as I am in my relation to the national legis-
lature, these impressive facts cannot be overlooked. In a case free from
constitutional objection, I could not. justifiably counteract, by a sort of offi-
cial veto, the general will.
" The struggle to exert without abatement the constitutional power of
taxation, in such a manner as to protect, by high duties on imports, many
of the productions of our own soil and labor from the competition of other
countries, has endured for more than thirty years. During that period, a
system of high taxation has prevailed, with fluctuations of success and
failure. It is as vigorously and as exactingly insisted upon now as ever;
and, indeed, it would seem, in some instances, as if the longer the advan-
tage of a particular tax was enjoyed, the stronger became the desire for its
oontinuance, and even its augmentation. And yet it ought to be remem-
bered that this exercise of the taxing power, by which the great mass of
consumers are made to swell the profits of a few branches of industry,
was originally intended to be temporary, to be continued only so long as
its continuance was necessary to the industrial independence and safety
of the whole people. Such was the language, the inculcation, the spirit,
in which it was proposed'and justified by its earliest and wisest friends.
The design was to foster feeble ' infanC manufactures, especially such as
were essential to the defence of the country in time of war. In this de-
sign the people have persevered until, with some, but not weighty, excep-
tions, these saplings have taken deep root, have become vigorous, expand-
ed and powerful, and are prepared to share the common lot of human pur-
suits, and to enter with confidence the field of free, fair, and universal
competition.
" The arrival of this period of time, long promised, has been anxiously
looked for by a large and justly respected portion of our fellow-citizens,