cent. tax was laid upon a large portion of the articles that had been made free by the compromise act. This did not meet the requirement, since in that year the value of free articles imported fell from sixty-six to thirty millions, while those dutiable increased less than eight millions. This did not, however, prevent Congress from passing a law to distribute the proceeds of the public land sales, pro rata among the several States. The law was to become inoperative if the compromise limit of twenty per cent. duties should be infringed. The tariff, therefore, became a question again in the following year. The wants of the government were made the basis of a new movement similar to that of the Harrisburg convention, and a "home league" was formed October 15, 1841, with the object of restoring the high rates. The proceedings of the home league were endorsed by Mr. Clay and the other friends of the "American policy." The President, in his annual message, December, 1841, called attention to the necessary revision of the tariff, advising a moderate increase, and a change of the home valuation principle. The debate upon this passage of the message again opened up the whole question of protection. The financial distress of the federal government made more revenue urgent, and the distress of the manufacturers was urged as a reason why those duties should be high. While urging high duties, however, to supply the government revenues, it was proposed to repeal that section of the land distribution act, which, by its operation, brought the land revenues back into the federal Treasury upon the violation of the compromise act.

In the Senate Messrs. Calhoun, Bagby, Benton, and Woodbury contended with Messrs. Clay, Evans and others, and in the House the debate was very general. Mr. Clay declared the government wants to be the paramount necessity, and appealed to the patriotism of all parties to supply them. Mr. Calhoun objected to the proposed tariff, that it was worse than that of 1828. The average rate was, indeed, ten per cent. less, but the substitution of cash duties for bonds or long credit, the substitution of specific for ad valorem rates on articles that had fallen in value, the home valuation of goods, the arbitary mode of collecting, and the fact that it went into operation immediately on its passage, all tended to enhance its injurious features. He said, "I shall not dwell on the fact that it openly violates the compromise act, and the pledges given by its author and by Gov. Davis, of Massachusetts, that if the South would adhere to the compromise while it was operating favorably for the manufacturers, they would stand by it when it came to operate favorably for the South. I dwell not on those double breaches of plighted faith, although they are of a serious character, and likely to exercise a very pernicious influence over our future legislation, by preventing amicable adjustments of questions that may hereafter threaten the peace of the country." The bill was passed with a clause repealing the clause of the land law which suspended the distribution of the public lands, making the distribution unconditional. For this it was vetoed, August, 1842, by John Tyler.

The debates were full, but with comparatively little excitement, and since the want of revenue was so apparent the bill became a law without the obnoxious clause. Messrs. Buchanan and Wright voting in favor of it for revenue reasons, but under protest. The law went immediately into operation. Among the changes that it introduced were the payment of duties in cash on the home valuation, by which the collector of the port where any

description of goods should be imported, was to cause to be ascertained the actual value of the article in the principal markets of the country where it was exported, and at the time of the export. To this value should be added costs and charges, including commissions, and the aggregate to be the value on which the duties are charged; all goods of wool imported in an unfinished state shall be valued as if entirely finished at the place of export. The appraisers, collectors, and naval officers were to have power to examine parties under oath in relation to values. These were some of the provisions that were considered very onerous. The tariff went into operation at a time of great general depression in the commercial world, and consequently, in a revenue point of view, it was not so successful as had been hoped. It did not, however, fail to revive the tariff issue at the general elections. The breach of the compromise was charged, but the passage was denied as a party measure. The average charge upon dutiable goods under it was thirty-three per cent., and it yielded an annual average of twenty-six million dollars.

The change of administration was in 1846 followed by the Mexican war, and views in respect of the tariff policy were again changed. The new administration proposed three important measures in relation to the duties; the first to abandon the protective theory in favor of a revenue theory, that is, to reduce the rates of duty, to levy them ad valorem only, to make the rates uniform, and to make them payable in cash; the warehouse system to facilitate the carrying trade; and the independent treasury, by which the cash duties were to be collected in gold and silver only.

The message of the President, December, 1841, remarked upon the importance of revenue rather than protection, and advised a reduction of existing rates as necessary to an increase of revenue. The Secretary of the Treasury made an elaborate report of the same tenor, recommending a revenue tariff, in opposition to a protective tariff, or the adjustment of the imports to such a point as would collect the largest revenue without checking the importation, or in other words, the course of trade. Such a bill was introduced from the committee of Ways and Means, by Mr. M'Kay, April 14, 1846. It made eight schedules, in one of which all liquors were charged seventy-five per cent. ad valorem, and all other goods under their respective schedules thirty per cent., twenty-five per cent., twenty per cent., fifteen per cent., ten per cent., five per cent. ad valorem, and the remainder free.

It was estimated that these duties would give an average of twenty-four per cent. on the dutiable imports, and greatly increase the sum of the duties by admitting of a larger trade. This bill was accompanied by the "warehouseing act," which provided for the payment of duties in cash, and that goods may be deposited in the public stores, subject to the order of the owner for one year upon the payment of duties; that goods in bond may be transported to any other port of entry and other provisions, tending to facilitate the operations of commerce. These bills again opened up the tariff discussion. But the former discussions had exhausted argument pro and con, and there could be little more said on the subject. Mr. Collamer defended the protective principle because "it was necessary to national independence," and the tariff of 1842, “because it gave revenue enough," and he denounced the abandonment as intended in this bill, of protection as a principle of national government. Mr. Rathbon opposed the new bill as "not likely to give sufficient rev

enue." The debate was very general, but the tariff passed the House July 3, by a vote of one hundred and fourteen to ninety-five, to go into operation December 1, 1846. The operation of the tariff was extremely simple, all articles not free being charged with ad valorem duties. The warehouse system was organized, as also the Independent Treasury system, and the course of trade soon adapted itself to the new regulation of specie payments. The tariff operated ten years and seven months, viz., from the 1st of December, 1846, to the 1st of July, 1857, and in accordance with the estimates it averaged twenty-four and one-half per cent. on the dutiable imports. The average duties under the tariff of 1842 had been twenty-six million dollars per annum. The average of the tariff of 1846 was fortysix million dollars per annum during its operation. It is to be borne in mind, however, that the effect of the gold discoveries by imparting great activity to trade in general, promoted larger aggregate exports from the country, which, since it had become a gold exporting country, could receive its pay only in those goods which were charged with duty. The same influence had also caused a rise in the value of commodities, and of course, a larger yield to ad valorem duties operating upon those higher values.

The same causes, which had imparted such activity to the import trade, had given animation to manufactures of all descriptions, and while the government treasury was overflowing with revenue, the general prosperity was apparently sound. The large revenue yielded by the tariff was in excess of the expenditures, and a considerable accumulation of gold took place in the Treasury vaults.

This was not quite in accordance with the sub-treasury law, which contemplated an amount of revenue no greater than the expenditure, so that the gold should pass through the treasury without stopping, thus keeping the specie currency active. The accumulation was felt to be an inconvenience, and the government sought to reduce it by the purchase of the outstanding stock at high premiums, but a permanent remedy was proposed in a reduction of the rates of duty upon all imported goods.

President Pierce, in his message of December, 1856, called attention to the annual report of Mr. Guthrie, Secretary of Treasury, in relation to the necessity of reducing the duties. The report set forth the large revenues in excess of the wants of the government, and argued that as all duties are a tax upon the people, they should be reduced when no longer required for the public service. It advised the placing of all materials that enter into manufactures, such as are free in Great Britain, upon the free list, and also salt as a necessity for Western provision packers.

A tariff bill was in accordance with these recommendations reported in the House January 14, and engaged discussion. Mr. Durfee, of Rhode Island, advocated free materials, but wished to discriminate in favor of American manufactures. There was but little general interest manifested in the country in respect to the proposed changes. The manufacturers of the East seemed more disposed to favor the free introduction of raw materials than to increase the tax upon the imported goods. The merchants of New York petitioned for a removal of the duties on sugar. The debate in the House went off until January, when it became more general upon the bill reported by the Committee of Ways and Means. Mr. Stanton, of Ohio, said it was very evident that the revenue must be reduced, but that the bill offered was a manufacturers' bill, intended to favor the wool manufacturers of the East at the expense of the wool

growers of the West. Mr. Washburn, of Illinois, wanted lead protected. Mr. DeWitt, of Massachusetts, favored the reduction of revenue by freeing raw materials. In the Senate Mr. Adams, of Mississippi, proposed making rail road iron free. In the House Messrs. Smith and Garnett, of Virginia, favored free trade. Mr. Letcher proposed a reduction of twenty per cent. on the tariff of 1846. Mr. Campbell, of Ohio, offered a substitute for the bill of which the general features were nearly the same as those of the committee of Ways and Means. This finally passed, one hundred and ten to eighty-four. Mr. Stanton, of Ohio, denounced it as passed by "fraudulent combination of those who favored the protection hemp, of sugar, iron, and the woollen manufactures of Massachusetts. was a blow at the wool grower."

It

In the Senate Mr. Hunter substituted a new bill with large reductions. This was opposed by Mr. Brodhead, of .Pennsylvania, who favored the House bills. Mr. Wilson, of Massachusetts, opposed it, because he said. the object was to reduce the revenue, and these reductions would increase it by tempting importation. Mr. Collamer, of Vermont, took the same view of it. Mr. Pugh, of Ohio, opposed both, he said, "the wool manufacturers seek to ruin the wool growers." Mr. Toombs favored larger reductions. Mr. Butler, of South Carolina, wanted the tariff abolished altogether. Mr. Toucey, of Connecticut, wanted the revenue diminished by adding largely to the free list. Mr. Hunter's bill finally passed, with an amendment by Mr. Douglas, that wool under twenty cents, foreign valuation, should be free. A committee of conference finally reported Mr. Hunter's bill with the free list of Mr. Campbell's. This passed the House one hundred and twenty-four to seventy-one, March 3d, to go into operation July 1st, 1857.

The effect of the tariff was to check importation in the spring, and to cause a great accumulation of merchandise in bond, to be released after July 1st. The important reduction from one hundred per cent to thirty per cent. on spirits, caused a large quantity to arrive, and the failure of the Louisiana sugar crop in that year, added very greatly to the effect of the reduction of the duty upon sugar, from thirty to twenty-four per cent. The elements of revulsion began to manifest themselves with the operations of the tariff, in the first months of which the goods in warehouse were put upon the market. The money pressure that followed came in aid of the designs of the projector of the tariff, in reducing the revenue, which fell from sixty-three millions eight hundred and seventyfive thousand nine hundred and five in the last year of the tariff of 1846, to forty-one millions seven hundred and eighty-nine thousand six hundred and twenty-one dollars, in 1858. This diminution of the customs added to that of the land sales under the reaction of speculation, carried the revenue far below the amount required for the wants of the government. This result once more brought with it the necessity for a revision of the tariff in order to restore the revenue. The circumstances that attended the session of 1860-61, were such as enabled the passage of the bill. reported by the Committee of Ways and Means with little debate or investigation, The act has restored the highest protective character to the tariff, replacing the ad valorem with complicated specific duties, and the bill went into operation at such short notice as caused it to operate upon goods ordered under the old tariff. There are generally existing circumstances that attend the operation of the tariff that may interfere with the revenue from it.

THE TARIFFS OF THE UNITED STATES.

Statement showing the Revenue collected each year from 1789 to 1860, the amount of Dutiable Imports and Free Goods imported annually, and the average rate of duty on Imports, annually.

1821.. 1822.

1823..

.18,475,703 57.... 10,082,313....52,503,411....62,585,724....85.6 ..24,066,066 43.. 7,298,708. .75,942,883.... 83,241,541....81.7 .22,402,024 29.... 9,048,288....68,530,979....77,579,267....82.7

1824.. May 22....General rise.....25,486,817 86.... 12,563,778....67,985,234....80,549,007....87.5

1825. 1826..

1827

.31,653,871 50.... 10,947,510....85,892,565....96,840,075....87.1 .26,083,861 97.... 12,567,769....72,406,708....84,974,477....34.6 .27,948,956 57.... 11,855,104....67,628,934....79,484,068....41.8

1828..May 19....Min. extended...29,951,251 90.... 12,379,176....76,130,648.... 88,509,824....89.8