Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The South and the Northern Tariff
Congressional Globe | 1861 | Senator Thomas Clingman

Posted on 02/26/2003 1:10:37 PM PST by GOPcapitalist

The South and the Northern Tariff - Speech of Senator Thomas Clingman, North Carolina, March 19, 1861 (Congressional Globe 36-2 p. 1476-77)

CLINGMAN: Mr. President, I admire the closing rhetoric of the Senator form Rhode Island (Simmons); but I want to call his attention to one or two questions which I put to him, and which he does not apprehend, but which I think are practical. The Senator attaches very little weight to the imports that go into the seven States that have seceded. He thinks it a matter of very little moment whether those States remain out or in. I endeavored to show him the error; but perhaps too hurriedly for him to apprehend my meaning; and I beg leave to recapitulate, for I think if there is a practical mind on the floor of the Senate, the Senator?s is one, and I want to see how he will get this Government out of the difficulty. I say to him, that I am as yet a representative of the Government of the United States, and shall faithfully represent what I believe to be in its interests, while I stand here. But let us see how this will affect the revenue. There were made last year about four million six hundred thousand bales of cotton. About two hundred thousand bales of it were made in North Carolina, and I suppose about as much in Tennessee, and about the same amount in Arkansas. There were very nearly four million bales of cotton made in the seven States that have seceded, worth fully $200,000,000. Very little of it was consumed in those States ? not more, perhaps, than three or four millions? worth ? and the rice crop exported exceeded that, and Louisiana made, I believe, about twenty millions? worth of sugar. I do not know what the amount of the sugar crop was last year; it has fluctuated; but it must have been at least that; it has sometimes been more. I think it fair, therefore, to assume that those seven States sent out of their limits from two hundred to two hundred and twenty million dollars? worth of produce. They get back a return in some way. It is not to be supposed it was given away. My friend from Texas suggests to me that they got it in wood-screws. No doubt they did get some of them; and they may have been gotten up in the State of Rhode Island, for aught I know. I was about to say that they must have got back $220,000,000 worth of products in some form. A portion of the money ? not very much ? went for horses and mules; and grain and other agricultural products, but much the larger amount of it went for articles that were dutiable. All of them were not actually imported, as many of them came from New England and elsewhere; but they were dutiable articles, and, but for the duties would have been furnished at a lower rate from abroad. I take it, therefore, that off the dutiable articles there must be twenty or thirty million ? certainly twenty million ? of revenue that would, in the ordinary course, be collected off those States with the tariff which we had last year.

Now, it is idle for the honorable Senator to tell me that the importations at Charleston and Savannah were small. I know that the merchants have gone from those cities to New York, and bought goods there; that goods are imported into New York are bought there, and then are sent down and deposited at Charleston, New Orleans, and other places. But, in point of fact, here is an enormously large consumption of dutiable articles, from one hundred to one hundred and fifty million. These people make their own provisions mainly, and cotton to sell, and do very little in the way of manufactures. Their manufactured goods came from the United States, or from foreign countries. I put the question to the honorable Senator, how much duty does he think this Government is going to lose by the secession of those States, supposing, of course, that they do not pay us any duties; for if New England goods are to pay the same duty with those of Old England, and Belgium, and France, we all know that the New England goods will be excluded, unless they make up their minds to sell much cheaper than they have been heretofore doing? I was curious, the year before last, in going through Europe, to ascertain, as well as I could, the value of labor and the prices of articles, and I was astonished at the rate at which goods may be purchased all over the continent, compared with similar articles here. The reasons they are not furnished as cheap here, is partly due to the circuitous trade. For example: houses in England purchase up articles in Belgium, France, Germany, and even Italy, and make a handsome profit; they then send them to New York, and handsome profits are made there by the wholesale dealers and, finally, they get down south, and in this way they are very high; but the tariff has also operated very largely. That Senator knows, as well as I do, and everybody knows, that if there be direct trade with Europe by these States; if goods are not to go around through New York, and not to pay duties ? and you may be sure they will not go there under his tariff, for nobody will pay a duty of fifty or seventy-five per cent. on what he imports, when he can send the goods to another port for fifteen or nineteen per cent. ? the result will be, that these States certainly will pay this Government no duties at all.

But it does not stop there. Merchants from my own State go down to Charleston, and lay in their goods. This Government, as things now stand, is not going to get any revenue from them. If goods are imported at Charleston at ten, or fifteen, or nineteen per cent. duty, whatever is paid will go into the coffers of the confederate States, and merchants will go down from my State and buy their goods there; and thus you lose a great portion of the North Carolina trade. It will be the same with Tennessee; it will be the same with the Mississippi valley. Now, what revenue are we going to get to support our Government under th epresent condition of things? The honorable Senator is very adroit in parrying questions. I asked him, when he spoke of the free list, if the manufacturers were willing that their chemicals, their dye stuffs, and coarse wool, that has been admitted free, should be taxed; and he replied, ?They are willing to have tea and coffee taxed.?

SIMMONS: The Senator will pardon me. I said, if we wanted money I would tax them, whether they were willing or not.

CLINGMAN: Exactly; but when pressed on that point, he turns it off on the tea and coffee. But, sir, we are legislating here for the United States ? all of us who are here, except by friend from Texas, who is kind enough to stay with us and help us legislate, until he gets official notice of the ordinance of his State. I thank him for his kindness. I think he is doing us a favor to stay here and help the wheels along. It needs the help of Hercules and the wagoner both to get us out of the mud. I want to know of honorable Senators on the other side of the Chamber how this Government is going to support its revenue next year. I think, if you have no custom-house between Louisiana and the Upper Mississippi, merchants up there will come down and buy their goods at New Orleans. If they learn that at New York they can buy goods under a tariff of fifty or seventy-five per cent., and that they can biy them at New Orleans under a tariff of only one third that, they will go down to New Orleans; and the result will be that we shall get very little revenue under the existing system. We may bandy witticisms; we may show our adroitness in debate; but this is a question which we have to look at practically. One of two things must be done: either you must prevent imports into those States, which I do not think you can do ? and I do not suppose there is a Senator on this floor who believes that, under the existing laws, the President has authority to do it ? or you must call Congress together, and invest him with some authority. If you do not do that, you must establish a line of custom houses on the border.

Is it not better for us to meet this question frankly on its merits? My apprehension, as I have already expressed it, is that the Administration intend, (I hope I may be deceived) as soon as they can collect the force to have a war, to begin; and then call Congress suddenly together, and say, ?The honor of the country is concerned; the flag is insulted. You must come up and vote men and money.? That is, I suppose, to be its policy; not to call Congress together just now. There are two reasons, perhaps, for that. In the first place, it would be like a note of alarm down south; and, in the next place, if you call Congress together, and deliberately submit it to them whether they will go to war with the confederate States or not, I do not believe they would agree to do it. Of course, I do not know what is the temper of gentlemen on the other side; but, though they will have a large majority in the next Congress, I take it for granted from what little I have heard, that it will be difficult to get a bill through Congress for the war before the war begins; but it is a different thing after fighting begins at the forts.

The Senator himself says they are going to enforce the laws and carry them out everywhere. I cannot tell what he means. In one part of his speech, I understood him to say that he was willing to let the seceded States alone; but towards the close of it, he spoke of enforcing the laws, and collecting the revenue everywhere. There is a very wide difference between these lines of policy. If you intend to let the confederate States stand where they now do, and collect their own revenues, and possess the forts, we shall get nothing, or very little, under the existing system. If on the other hand, you intend to resort to coercive measures, and to oblige them to pay duties under our tariff, which they do not admit that they are liable to pay, and to take back the forts, we shall be precipitated into war; and then, I suppose, we shall have a proclamation calling Congress together, and demanding that the honor of the United States shall be maintained, and that men and money shall be voted. I would rather the country should ace into this matter.

I shall not detain the Senate with a discussion about the tariff. I take it that we understand it, and I presume that the intelligent minds of the country understand its situation, and how much we shall get under it. The Senator form Rhode Island alluded to a remark which the Senator from New Hampshire made, that Rome lasted seven hundred years, and that, therefore, this Government must last seven hundred years; and he gave us some witty remarks about the sun not going down before breakfast. Mr. President, it is unfortunate that these analogies do not always run out; they will not hold good. I have read that Methuselah lived until he was more than nine hundred years of age. If a man who was something above ninety were told by his physicians that he was in very great danger of dying, that his constitution was worn out, and disease was preying on him, if he were to refer to the case of Methuselah, and say, ?I have not lived one tenth as long as he did; and, according to his life, I am now just before the breakfast of life,? it might be a very satisfactory argument, perhaps, to the man who used it, but I doubt whether anybody else would be consoled by it; I doubt very much whether his physicians would leave him under the idea that he had certainly eight hundred years to live. I am very much afraid that my friend from Rhode Island, when he rests on this declaration of the Senator from New Hampshire is resting on an unsubstantial basis, when he assumed that this Government must, of necessity, live as long as the Roman republic, and that the comparison of the sun does not hold good. However, I see the Senator from New Hampshire near me, and as he understands these things so much better than I do, I yield the floor.


TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: civilwar; lincoln; tariff
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260261-280281-300 ... 341-351 next last
To: GOPcapitalist
That's one. Now you just need 174 more.

...and as usual, Walt's criteria suddenly change upon having been met in their previous version.

The criterion never changed, you just ignored it because you can't meet it.

Lincoln was a one-issue man, and that issue after 1854 was slavery.

Walt

261 posted on 03/03/2003 5:41:57 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa (Be copy now to men of grosser blood and teach them how to war!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 260 | View Replies]

To: TexConfederate1861
and...since at the time, "confederates"composed 1/2 of the country, I would say that this would be significant!

Now that you know the actual population of the insurgent area, you should know that the area in rebellion was 10% larger in size than the loyal area. Consolidating the rebellion should have been relatively easy, but the rebels flubbed it.

Walt

262 posted on 03/03/2003 6:10:09 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa (Be copy now to men of grosser blood and teach them how to war!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 257 | View Replies]

Comment #263 Removed by Moderator

To: WhiskeyPapa
The criterion never changed, you just ignored it because you can't meet it.

Sure they did, just as they always do.

Your original criteria, found in post 251, stated the following:

"The only way you can show otherwise is in the contemporary record -- saying Lincoln appeared here and said thus and such on tariffs, not slavery. But you can't do that."

I met those criteria in post 252, but you changed them in 259 to state "Now you just need 174 more."

It is the same charade you played with rape, with murdered soldiers, with murdered civilians, with yankee slave traders, and with practically every other demand you ever make on this forum. You ride in here and demand that people dig up obscure details of history, such as rape victims names and dates, expecting nobody to take the time to do it. Assuming this to be so, you then declare that there were no rapes because nobody can name them, yet sure enough somebody comes along and names them, thus making you look like a fool. The second you realize this, rather than concede a defeat honorably or admit an error, you simply change the criteria and "name a rape victim" becomes "name rape victim under Sherman." "Name a confederate who was executed" becomes "name a civilian who was executed." And in this case, "identify a speech from Lincoln about the tariffs" becomes "identify 174 speeches from Lincoln about the tariffs." Your criteria constantly change, Walt, in what ammounts to nothing more than a bizarre and downright laughable attempt on your part to save face after you've been exposed as a fraud in front of your peers on this forum.

264 posted on 03/03/2003 9:58:25 AM PST by GOPcapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies]

To: GOPcapitalist
Sure they did, just as they always do.

Your original criteria, found in post 251, stated the following:

My origial "criteria" was quoting Dr. McPherson in saying that Lincoln was a "one issue man", the issue being slavery. I noted that the "dominant, unifying" theme of Lincoln's speechs was an opposition to slavery. To that end, Lincoln gave 175 speeches in the period 1854-60.

If you can show that tariffs played a "dominant, unifying" role in Lincoln's thinking, you need to show it in the record, and quoting one speech is not going to make that case.

Walt

265 posted on 03/03/2003 10:13:19 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa (Be copy now to men of grosser blood and teach them how to war!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 264 | View Replies]

To: GOPcapitalist
You can't invade your own country.

Your false god said you could and, by his own definition, did.

That is a flat lie. You quoted Lincoln:

"The words ``coercion'' and ``invasion'' are in great use about these days. Suppose we were simply to try if we can, and ascertain what, is the meaning of these words. Let us get, if we can, the exact definitions of these words---not from dictionaries, but from the men who constantly repeat them---what things they mean to express by the words. What, then, is ``coercion''? What is ``invasion''? Would the marching of an army into South California, for instance, without the consent of her people, and in hostility against them, be coercion or invasion? I very frankly say, I think it would be invasion, and it would be coercion too, if the people of that country were forced to submit." - Abraham Lincoln, February 11, 1861

Looks like you've contradicted your idol, Walt. Better go repent before he gets angry!

But the very next --sentence-- in this speech turns your interpretation topsy-turvy:

"But if the United States should merely hold and retake its own forts and other property, and collect the duties on foreign importations, or even withhold the mails from places where they were habitually violated, would any or all of these things be "invasion" or "coercion?" Do our professed lovers of the Union, but who spitefully resolve that they will resist coercion or invasion of a state? If so, their idea of means to preserve the object of their great affection would seem to be exceedingly thin and airy."

You cannot invade your own country, and Lincoln never said otherwise.

You posted this -exact-same-excerpt- before, and Non-Sequitur called you on it that time.

You will tell any kind of lie.

Walt

266 posted on 03/03/2003 10:27:12 AM PST by WhiskeyPapa (Be copy now to men of grosser blood and teach them how to war!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 264 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyPapa; 4ConservativeJustices; billbears; stainlessbanner; shuckmaster; Aurelius; PeaRidge; ...
If you can show that tariffs played a "dominant, unifying" role in Lincoln's thinking, you need to show it in the record

Will this do? BTW, I included it all chronologically to show that, unlike slavery, his tariff position was prominent and consistent throughout his ENTIRE career.

"My politics are short and sweel, like the old woman's dance. I am in favor of a national bank...in favor of the internal improvements system and a high protective tariff" - Abraham Lincoln, 1832

"To the Honorable Senate and House of Representatives in Congress assembled : The undersigned citizens of Sangamon County of the State of Illinois, respectfully request Congress to establish by law a TARIFF of duties, so as to prevent excessive importations of goods, and excessive exportations of specie; to create a Home market for agricultural productions; a Home demand for the skill and industry of our people; to raise revenue enough to relieve the nation from debt and to support the government, and so to foster our manufactures as to make our nation PROSPEROUS in Peace and INDEPENDENT in War." Abraham Lincoln along with 271 other signers, May 1842

"Resolved , That a Tariff of duties on imported goods, producing sufficient Revenue, for the payment of the necessary expenditures of the National Government, and so adjusted as to protect American Industry, is indispensably necessary to the prosperity of the American people. Resolved , That we are opposed to Direct Taxation for the support of the National Government. Resolved , That a National Bank, properly restricted, is highly necessary and proper to the establishment and maintainance of a sound currency; and for the cheap and safe collection, keeping, and disbursing the public revenue. Resolved , That the distribution of the proceeds of the sales of Public Lands, upon the principles of Clay's bill, accords with the best interests of the Nation, and particularly with those of the State of Illinois. Resolved , That we recommend to the whigs of each Congressional District of the State, to nominate and support, at the approaching election, a candidate of their own principles, regardless of the chances of success. Resolved , That we recommend to the whigs of all portions of this State to adopt, and rigidly adhere to, the Convention System of nominating candidates. Resolved , That we recommend to the whigs of each Congressional District to hold a District Convention on or before the first Monday of May next, to be composed of a number of delegates from each county equal to double the number of its Representatives in the General Assembly, provided each county shall have at least one delegate. Said delegates to be chosen by primary meetings of the whigs, at such times and places as they in their respective counties may see fit. Said District Conventions, each, to nominate one candidate for Congress, and one delegate to a National Convention, for the purpose of nominating candidates for President and Vice President of the United States. The seven delegates so nominated to a National Convention, to have power to add two delegates to their own number, and to fill all vacancies. Resolved , That A. T. Bledsoe, S. T. Logan, and A. Lincoln, be appointed a committee to prepare an address to the People of the State." - Resolution drafted by Lincoln and the committee, March 14, 1843

"By a resolution of a meeting of such of the Whigs of the State, as are now at Springfield, we, the undersigned, were appointed to prepare an address to you. [2] The performance of that task we now undertake. Several resolutions were adopted by the meeting; and the chief object of this address is, to show briefly, the reasons for their adoption. The first of those resolutions declares a tariff of duties upon foreign importations, producing sufficient revenue for the support of the General Government, and so adjusted as to protect American industry, to be indispensably necessary to the prosperity of the American People." - Lincoln's address to the People of the State with Bledsoe and Logan, 1843

"After Mr. Baker sat down, Mr. Lincoln was again called upon. He took up the three prominent principles of the Whig Party---The Tariff , a sound and uniform National Currency and the Distribution of the proceeds of the Public Lands. All these he illustrated so plainly and so forcibly, as to show that he not only understood these principles thoroughly himself and their beneficial bearing on the American people, but that he also possessed a most happy faculty of vindicating them and of urging their adoption before an audience in such a manner as to convince all present of their necessity." - The Burlington Hawk Eye, October 19, 1843

"Mr. Lincoln made some large statements, but I suppose they were true, for he had the document with him. He attempted to make the farmer believe that the high pressure tariff made every thing they bought cheaper, but said also he could not tell the reason, but that it was so, and I suppose that is enough for the huge farmer to know." - Account printed in the Illinois State Register, March 15, 1844

"That foremost in importance among these principles we recognize and affirm, that of providing a national revenue by a tariff of duties on foreign importations, so adjusted that while it will yield no more than is necessary for an economical and efficient administration of the federal government, will at the same time afford equal protection and encouragement to every branch of American Industry." - Illinois Whig Platform of 1844, drafted by Abraham Lincoln, William Kellogg, Jonathan Y. Scammon, William F. Bryan, Lincoln B. Knowlton, J. R. Cooper, Samuel H. Davis, John M. Smith, and William Broaddus

"Mr. Lincoln, of Springfield, Ill., addressed a large and respectable audience at the court house on Wednesday evening last, upon the whig policy. His main argument was directed in pointing out the advantages of a Protective Tariff." - The Rockport Herald, November 1, 1844

"[T]here was a respectable gathering of the citizens of our village, and Mr. Lincoln gave us a good speech. The Tariff was the principal subject, with which he showed himself to be thoroughly acquainted. In a most logical, argumentative effort, he demonstrated the necessity of a discriminating tariff, and the excellence of that adopted by the whig congress of 1842; and also that the consumer does not usually pay the tariff, but the manufacturer and importer." - The Illinois Gazette, July 5, 1846

"It appears to me that the national debt created by the war, renders a modification of the existing tariff indispensable; and when it shall be modified, I should be pleased to see it adjusted with a due reference to the protection of our home industry. The particulars, it appears to me, must and should be left to the untramelled discretion of Congress." - Abraham Lincoln, draft remarks, written circa March 1848

"But is there any doubt as to what he will do on the prominent questions, if elected? Not the least. It is not possible to know what he will, or would do, in every imaginable case; because many questions have passed away, and others doubtless will arise which none of us have yet thought of; but on the prominent questions of Currency, Tariff , internal improvements, and Wilmot Proviso, Gen: Taylor's course is at least as well defined as is Gen: Cass'. Why, in their eagerness to get at Gen: Taylor, several democratic members here, have desired to know whether, in case of his election, a bankrupt law is to be established. Can they tell us Gen: Cass' opinion on this question? (Some member answered ``He is against it'') Aye, how do you know he is? There is nothing about it in the Platform, nor elsewhere that I have seen. If the gentleman knows of any thing, which I do not, he can show it. But to return: Gen: Taylor, in his Allison letter, says "Upon the subject of the tariff, the currency, the improvements of our great high-ways, rivers, lakes, and harbors, the will of the people, as expressed through their representatives in congress, ought to be respected and carried out by the executive." - Rep. Abraham Lincoln in support of the Whig qualifications of presidential candidate Zachary Taylor, July 27, 1848

"What good thing, or even part of good thing has the country ever enjoyed, which originated with him? What evil thing has ever been averted by him? Compare his proofs of statesmanship with those of Mr. Fillmore, up to the times respectively when their names were first connected with presidential elections. Mr. Fillmore, if I remember rightly, had not been in Congress so long as Mr. or Gen. Pierce; yet he did acquire the distinction of being placed at the head of one of the most important Committees; and as its Chairman, was the principal member of the H.R. in manturing the tariff of 1842." - Abraham Lincoln, in opposition to Democrat presidential candidate Franklin Pierce, August 14, 1852

"The people of this city were addressed at the court house on Friday evening last, by Hon. A. LINCOLN, of Springfield. He showed up the inconsistency of the sham democracy on the question of internal improvements in such a manner that it is not to be wondered at that the friends of Pierce and King were dissatisfied. On the subject of the tariff he advocated the American side of the question, asking why, instead of sending a distance of 4,000 miles for our railroad iron, the immense iron beds of Missouri were not worked, affording a better article than that of English manufacture, and giving employment to American labor. On this point, he agreed with that distinguished democrat, Benton, who does not believe with the President of the Peoria Pierce Club, that a protective tariff is a tax on the poor for the benefit of the rich. After alluding to the evasiveness exhibited in the celebrated platform adopted by the Democratic National Convention, the speaker contrasted the claims of the respective candidates to the support of the American people. Gen. Pierce had been a member of the U.S. Senate for five years and of the Lower House four years, and if he is the possessor of the great civil qualifications claimed for him by his friends, where is the evidence? Instead of possessing eminent civil abilities, said Mr. LINCOLN, did not an examination of the record prove that he is not worthy of the extravagant praises now bestowed upon him by his partisan friends. His votes show that he was the steady, consistent enemy of western improvements, and judging of the future by the past, should Mr. Pierce be elected he would surely veto such internal improvement bills as the one recently passed by Congress." - Peoria Weekly Republican, September 24, 1852

"What is the reason that Kansas was not fit to come into the Union when it was organized into a Territory, in Judge Douglas' view? Can any of you tell any reason why it should not have come into the Union at once? They are fit, as he thinks, to decide upon the slavery question---the largest and most important with which they could possibly deal---what could they do by coming into the Union that they are not fit to do, according to his view, by staying out of it? Oh, they are not fit to sit in Congress and decide upon the rates of postage, or questions of ad valorem or specific duties on foreign goods, or live oak timber contracts; they are not fit to decide these vastly important matters, which are national in their import, but they are fit, ``from the jump,'' to decide this little negro question. But, gentlemen, the case is too plain; I occupy too much time on this head, and I pass on." - Abraham Lincoln, September 16, 1859

"My dear Sir: I am here, just now, attending court. Yesterday, before I left Springfield, your brother, Dr. William S. Wallace, showed me a letter of yours, in which you kindly mention my name, inquire for my tariff views; and suggest the propriety of my writing a letter upon the subject. I was an old Henry Clay tariff whig. In old times I made more speeches on that subject, than on any other. I have not since changed my views. I believe yet, if we could have a moderate, carefully adjusted, protective tariff, so far acquiesed in, as to not be a perpetual subject of political strife, squabbles, charges, and uncertainties, it would be better for us. Still, it is my opinion that, just now, the revival of that question, will not advance the cause itself, or the man who revives it. I have not thought much upon the subject recently; but my general impression is, that the necessity for a protective tariff will, ere long, force it's old opponents to take it up; and then it's old friends can join in, and establish it on a more firm and durable basis. We, the old whigs, have been entirely beaten out on the tariff question; and we shall not be able to re-establish the policy, until the absence of it, shall have demonstrated the necessity for it, in the minds of men heretofore opposed to it." - Abraham Lincoln to Edward Wallace, October 11, 1859

"'That, while providing revenue for the support of the General Government by duties upon imposts, sound policy requires such an adjustment of the imposts as to encourage the development of the industrial interest of the whole country, and we commend that policy of national exchanges which secures to the working men liberal wages, to agriculture remunerating prices, to mechanics and manufacturers an adequate reward for their skill, labor and enterprise, and to the nation commercial prosperity and independence.'" - Platform of the Republican Party adopted in August 1860 and endorsed by Lincoln, their nominee for President

"My dear Sir: To comply with your request to furnish extracts from my tariff speeches is simply impossible, because none of those speeches were published. It was not fashionable here in those days to report one's public speeches. In 1844 I was on the Clay electoral ticket in this State (i.e., Illinois) and, to the best of my ability, sustained, together, the tariff of 1842 and the tariff plank of the Clay platform . This could be proven by hundreds---perhaps thousands---of living witnesses; still it is not in print, except by inference. The Whig papers of those years all show that I was upon the electoral ticket; even though I made speeches, among other things about the tariff, but they do not show what I said about it. The papers show that I was one of a committee which reported, among others, a resolution in these words: ``That we are in favor of an adequate revenue on duties from imports so levied as to afford ample protection to American industry.'' But, after all, was it really any more than the tariff plank of our present platform? And does not my acceptance pledge me to that?" - Abraham Lincoln to James Hervey, October 6, 1860

"Yours kindly seeking my view as to the proper mode of dealing with secession, was received several days ago, but, for want of time I could not answer it till now. I think we should hold the forts, or retake them, as the case may be, and collect the revenue. We shall have to forego the use of the federal courts, and they that of the mails, for a while. We can not fight them in to holding courts, or receiving the mails. This is an outline of my view; and perhaps suggests sufficiently, the whole of it." - Abraham Lincoln, letter to Col. J.W. Webb, December 29, 1860

"The words ``coercion'' and ``invasion'' are in great use about these days. Suppose we were simply to try if we can, and ascertain what, is the meaning of these words. Let us get, if we can, the exact definitions of these words---not from dictionaries, but from the men who constantly repeat them---what things they mean to express by the words. What, then, is ``coercion''? What is ``invasion''? Would the marching of an army into South California, for instance, without the consent of her people, and in hostility against them, be coercion or invasion? I very frankly say, I think it would be invasion, and it would be coercion too, if the people of that country were forced to submit. But if the Government, for instance, but simply insists upon holding its own forts, or retaking those forts which belong to it,---[cheers,]---or the enforcement of the laws of the United States in the collection of duties upon foreign importations,---[renewed cheers,]---or even the withdrawal of the mails from those portions of the country where the mails themselves are habitually violated; would any or all of these things be coercion?" - Abraham Lincoln, February 11, 1861

"[I]f the consideration of the Tariff bill should be postponed until the next session of the National Legislature, no subject should engage your representatives more closely than that of a tariff . And if I have any recommendation to make, it will be that every man who is called upon to serve the people in a representative capacity, should study this whole subject thoroughly, as I intend to do myself, looking to all the varied interests of our common country, so that when the time for action arrives adequate protection can be extended to the coal and iron of Pennsylvania, the corn of Illinois, and the ``reapers of Chicago.''" - Abraham Lincoln, February 15, 1861

"The power confided to me, will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property, and places belonging to the government, and to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion--no using of force against, or among the people anywhere." - Abraham Lincoln, March 4, 1861

Sir: I shall be obliged if you will give me your opinion in writing whether under the Constitution and existing laws, the Executive has power to collect duties on ship-board, off-shore, in cases where their collection in the ordinary way is, by any cause, rendered impracticable. This would include the question of lawful power to prevent the landing of dutiable goods, unless the duties were paid." - Abraham Lincoln to Edward Bates, March 18, 1861

"Sir I shall be obliged if you will inform me whether any goods, wares and merchandize, subject by law to the payment of duties, are now being imported into the United States without such duties being paid, or secured according to law. And if yea, at what place or places? and for what cause do such duties remain unpaid, or [un]secured? I will also thank you for your opinion whether, as a matter of fact, vessels off shore could be effectively used to prevent such importation, or to enforce the payment or securing of the duties. If yea, what number, and description of vessels, in addition to those already in the Revenue service would be requisite?" - Abraham Lincoln to Salmon P. Chase, March 18, 1861

"At the beginning of that month, in the inaugeral, I said ``The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy and possess the property and places belonging to the government, and to collect the duties , and imposts.'' This had your distinct approval at the time; and, taken in connection with the order I immediately gave General Scott, directing him to employ every means in his power to strengthen and hold the forts, comprises the exact domestic policy you now urge, with the single exception, that it does not propose to abandon Fort Sumpter." - Abraham Lincoln to William Seward, April 1, 1861

"n answer I have to say, that having, at the beginning of my official term, expressed my intended policy, as plainly as I was able, it is with deep regret, and some mortification, I now learn, that there is great, and injurious uncertainty, in the public mind, as to what that policy is, and what course I intend to pursue. Not having, as yet, seen occasion to change, it is now my purpose to pursue the course marked out in the inaugeral address. I commend a careful consideration of the whole document, as the best expression I can give of my purposes. As I then, and therein, said, I now repeat: ``The power confided to me will be used to hold, occupy, and possess, the property, and places belonging to the Government, and to collect the duties, and imposts; but, beyond what is necessary for these objects, there will be no invasion---no using of force against, or among the people anywhere'' By the words ``property, and places, belonging to the Government'' I chiefly allude to the military posts, and property, which were in the possession of the Government when it came to my hands. But if, as now appears to be true, in pursuit of a purpose to drive the United States authority from these places, an unprovoked assault, has been made upon Fort-Sumpter, I shall hold myself at liberty to re-possess, if I can, like places which had been seized before the Government was devolved upon me.... Whatever else I may do for the purpose, I shall not attempt to collect the duties , and imposts, by any armed invasion of any part of the country---not meaning by this, however, that I may not land a force, deemed necessary, to relieve a fort upon a border of the country. From the fact, that I have quoted a part of the inaugeral address, it must not be infered that I repudiate any other part, the whole of which I re-affirm, except so far as what I now say of the mails, may be regarded as a modification." - Abraham Lincoln, in a message of disinformation to commissioners from the Virginia convention, Arpil 13, 1861

"By the President of the United States of America: A Proclamation. Whereas an insurrection against the Government of the United States has broken out in the States of South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, and the laws of the United States for the collection of the revenue cannot be effectually executed therein conformably to that provision of the Constitution which requires duties to be uniform throughout the United States: And whereas a combination of persons engaged in such insurrection, have threatened to grant pretended letters of marque to authorize the bearers thereof to commit assaults on the lives, vessels, and property of good citizens of the country lawfully engaged in commerce on the high seas, and in waters of the United States: And whereas an Executive Proclamation has been already issued, requiring the persons engaged in these disorderly proceedings to desist therefrom, calling out a militia force for the purpose of repressing the same, and convening Congress in extraordinary session, to deliberate and determine thereon: Now, therefore, I, Abraham Lincoln, President of the United States, with a view to the same purposes before mentioned, and to the protection of the public peace, and the lives and property of quiet and orderly citizens pursuing their lawful occupations, until Congress shall have assembled and deliberated on the said unlawful proceedings, or until the same shall have ceased, have further deemed it advisable to set on foot a blockade of the ports within the States aforesaid, in pursuance of the laws of the United States, and of the law of Nations, in such case provided. For this purpose a competent force will be posted so as to prevent entrance and exit of vessels from the ports aforesaid. If, therefore, with a view to violate such blockade, a vessel shall approach, or shall attempt to leave either of the said ports, she will be duly warned by the Commander of one of the blockading vessels, who will endorse on her register the fact and date of such warning, and if the same vessel shall again attempt to enter or leave the blockaded port, she will be captured and sent to the nearest convenient port, for such proceedings against her and her cargo as prize, as may be deemed advisable. And I hereby proclaim and declare that if any person, under the pretended authority of the said States, or under any other pretense, shall molest a vessel of the United States, or the persons or cargo on board of her, such person will be held amenable to the laws of the United States for the prevention and punishment of piracy. In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand, and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed. Done at the City of Washington, this nineteenth day of April, in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and sixty-one, and of the Independence of the United States the eighty-fifth." - Abraham Lincoln, April 19, 1861

The fact is, Walt, that the single belief that Abraham Lincoln consistently adhered to without any compromise for the entirity of his political career dating from the 1830's to his death is that of implementing and collecting the tariff. And the above is just a brief sample of his many speeches, writings, letters, and proclamations on that issue. Live with it.

267 posted on 03/03/2003 11:08:41 AM PST by GOPcapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 265 | View Replies]

To: WhiskeyPapa
But the very next --sentence-- in this speech turns your interpretation topsy-turvy

Nonsense. In the next sentence, he asserts that he will not invade or coerce, but that does not change his definition of the first few sentences. And according to that same definition, what Abe Lincoln did a few months later was both coercion and invasion. So once again you've contradicted your idol, Walt. Better go repent before he gets angry!

268 posted on 03/03/2003 11:13:11 AM PST by GOPcapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 266 | View Replies]

To: USConstitution
You may worship whatever Gods you like, but 9 old men and women can't prevent me from serving the Lord, or acknowedging Him.

Those justices can do whatever ol' Wlat a.k.a. "Whiskey Papa" says they can!

269 posted on 03/03/2003 11:34:40 AM PST by HenryLeeII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 263 | View Replies]

To: GOPcapitalist
Are you blind, stupid, or both, Walt? As I noted twice previously to you in the last day, and dozens of times before that, the Lincoln appeared at Pittsburgh on February 15, 1861 to make a speech. That speech was about tariffs and tariffs alone. Among its contents were the following words:

Here is the complete transcript of Lincoln's remarks in Pittsburgh on 2-15-61. As you will note, the first 25% of his "speech" was all about the secession crisis, or more specifically his reluctance to make pronouncements about it at that time and his confidence that it would be resolved if men on both sides "kept their cool". . The remainder was about the tariff issue, a subject of great importance to the people of Pittsburgh and one that people in that area expected him, or any national politician to talk about. You will note that Lincoln was equally non-committal in his words on the tariff promising only to follow the general principles of the party platform while saying that any tariff should be fair to all sections. He admitted freely that he did not understand the specifics of the bill before Congress and that he promised to study the issues. It is pretty obvious that the particulars of the tariff was not something Lincoln focused on much.

Now if you found Lincoln's short and mostly un remembered and obscure remarks (it's a stretch to call it a speech by the standards of that day---only about 1500 words) and yet could find no reference to the secession crisis in them, I can only ask "are you blind or stupid, or both'? Or do you just another neo-confederate propagandist whose mission in life is to distort every word the man uttered?

------------------------------------------------------------

From the Pittsburgh Dispatch Feb 16, 1861

Speech at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania February 15, 1861

Mayor Wilson and Citizens of Pennsylvania : I most cordially thank his Honor Mayor Wilson, and the citizens of Pittsburg generally for this flattering reception. It is [2] the more grateful, because I know that, while it is not given to me alone, but to the cause which I represent, yet it is given under circumstances which clearly prove to me that there is good will and sincere feeling at the bottom of it.

And here, fellow citizens, I may remark that in every short address I have made to the people, and in every crowd through which I have passed of late, some allusion has been made to the present distracted condition of the country. It is naturally expected that I should say something upon this subject, but to touch upon it all would involve an elaborate discussion of a great many questions and circumstances, would require more time than I can at present command, and would perhaps unnecessarily commit me upon matters which have not yet fully developed themselves. [Immense cheering, and cries of ``good!'' ``that's right!'']

The condition of the country, fellow-citizens, is an extraordinary one, and fills the mind of every patriot with anxiety and solicitude. My intention is to give this subject all the consideration which I possibly can before I speak fully and definitely in regard to it---so that, when I do speak, I may be as nearly right as possible. And when I do speak, fellow-citizens, I hope to say nothing in opposition to the spirit of the Consititution, contrary to the integrity of the Union, or which will in any way prove inimical to the liberties of the people or to the peace of the whole country.

And, furthermore, when the time arrives for me to speak on this great subject, I hope to say nothing which will disappoint the reasonable expectations of any man, or disappoint the people generally throughout the country, especially if their expectations have been based upon anything which I may have heretofore said.

Notwithstanding the troubles across the river, [the speaker pointing southwardly, and smiling] there is really no crisis, springing from anything in the government itself. In plain words, there is really no crisis except an artificial one! What is there now to warrant the condition of affairs presented by our friends ``over the river?'' Take even their own view of the questions involved, and there is nothing to justify the course which they are pursuing. I repeat it, then---there is no crisis , excepting such a one as may be gotten up at any time by designing politicians. [3] My advice, then, under such circumstances, is to keep cool. If the great American people will only keep their temper, on both sides of the line, the troubles will come to an end, and the question which now distracts the country will be settled just as surely as all other difficulties of like character which have originated in this government have been adjusted. Let the people on both sides keep their self-possession, and just as other clouds have cleared away in due time, so will this, and this great nation shall continue to prosper as heretofore. But, fellow citizens, I have spoken longer on this subject than I had intended in the outset---and I shall say no more at present.

Fellow citizens, as this is the first opportunity [4] which I have had to address a Pennsylvania assemblage, it seems a fitting time to indulge in a few remarks upon the important question of a tariff---a subject of great magnitude, and one which is attended with many difficulties, owing to the great variety of interests which it involves. So long as direct taxation for the support of government is not resorted to, a tariff is necessary. The tariff is to the government what a meal is to the family; but, while this is admitted, it still becomes necessary to modify and change its operations according to new interests and new circumstances. So far there is little difference of opinion among politicians, but the question as to how far imposts may be adjusted for the protection of home industry, gives rise to various views and objections. I must confess that I do not understand this subject in all its multiform bearings, but I promise you that I will give it my closest attention, and endeavor to comprehend it more fully. And here I may remark that the Chicago platform contains a plank upon this subject, which I think should be regarded as law for the incoming administration.

In fact, this question, as well as all other subjects embodied in that platform, should not be varied from what we gave the people to understand would be our policy when we obtained their votes. Permit me, fellow citizens, to read the tariff plank of the Chicago platform, or rather, to have it read in your hearing by one who has younger eyes than I have.

Mr. Lincoln's private Secretary then read section twelfth of the Chicago platform, as follows:

That, while providing revenue for the support of the General Government by duties upon imposts, sound policy requires such an adjustment of the imposts as to encourage the development of the industrial interest of the whole country, and we commend that policy of national exchanges which secures to the working men liberal wages, to agriculture remunerating prices, to mechanics and manufacturers an adequate reward for their skill, labor and enterprise, and to the nation commercial prosperity and independence.

Mr. Lincoln continued---Now, fellow-citizens, I must confess that there are shades of difference in construing even this plank of the platform. But I am not now intending to discuss these differences, but merely to give you some general ideas upon this subject. I have long thought that if there be any article of necessity which can be produced at home with as little or nearly the same labor as abroad, it would be better to protect that article. Labor is the true standard of value. If a bar of iron, got out of the mines of England, and a bar of iron taken from the mines of Pennsylvania, be produced at the same cost, it follows that if the English bar be shipped from Manchester to Pittsburg, and the American bar from Pittsburg to Manchester, the cost of carriage is appreciably lost. [Laughter.] If we had no iron here, then we should encourage its shipment from foreign countries; but not when we can make it as cheaply in our own country. This brings us back to our first proposition, that if any article can be produced at home with nearly the same cost as abroad, the carriage is lost labor.

The treasury of the nation is in such a low condition at present that this subject now demands the attention of Congress, and will demand the immediate consideration of the new Administration. The tariff bill now before Congress may or may not pass at the present session. I confess I do not understand the precise provisions of this bill, and I do not know whether it can be passed by the present Congress or not. It may or may not become the law of the land---but if it does, that will be an end of the matter until a modification can be effected, should it be deemed necessary. If it does not pass (and the latest advices I have are to the effect that it is still pending) the next Congress will have to give it their earliest attention.

According to my political education, I am inclined to believe that the people in the various sections of the country should have their own views carried out through their representatives in Congress, and if the consideration of the Tariff bill should be postponed until the next session of the National Legislature, no subject should engage your representatives more closely than that of a tariff. And if I have any recommendation to make, it will be that every man who is called upon to serve the people in a representative capacity, should study this whole subject thoroughly, as I intend to do myself, looking to all the varied interests of our common country, so that when the time for action arrives adequate protection can be extended to the coal and iron of Pennsylvania, the corn of Illinois, and the ``reapers of Chicago.''

Permit me to express the hope that this important subject may receive such consideration at the hands of your representatives, that the interests of no part of the country may be overlooked, but that all sections may share in common the benefits of a just and equitable tariff. [Applause.]

But I am trespassing upon your patience---[cries of ``no!'' ``no!'' ``Go on---we'll listen!''] and must bring my remarks to a close. Thanking you most cordially for the kind reception which you have extended me, I bid you all adieu. [Enthusiastic applause.]

Source: The Collected Works of Abraham Lincoln. Vol 4.

270 posted on 03/03/2003 12:06:11 PM PST by Ditto (You are free to form your own opinions, but not your own facts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 252 | View Replies]

To: Ditto
You will note that Lincoln was equally non-committal in his words on the tariff promising only to follow the general principles of the party platform while saying that any tariff should be fair to all sections.

Lincoln was a politician and, by his very nature, often dwelt in vagueness in his promises. Regardless, he made it very clear to that audience that he did support protectionism and pledged that the issue was of top importance to him. His other letters at the time indicate a firm committment to tariffs and in fact a no time in his career is there an indication that ever took any position other than protectionism.

He admitted freely that he did not understand the specifics of the bill before Congress and that he promised to study the issues.

Just a babe in the political woods, right? Sure. And Lincoln also claimed that he had never seen the first 13th amendment, despite being the person who solicited Seward to intoduce the thing in the first place. Lincoln had been a protectionist politician for almost 30 years at the time he made that Pittsburgh speech. For him to play a simpleton and pretend not to understand its details is as dishonest as they come.

271 posted on 03/03/2003 12:15:04 PM PST by GOPcapitalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 270 | View Replies]

To: GOPcapitalist
But the very next --sentence-- in this speech turns your interpretation topsy-turvy

Nonsense. In the next sentence, he asserts that he will not invade or coerce, but that does not change his definition of the first few sentences.

President Lincoln always said that the Union was unbroken:

"I hold that in contemplation of universal law and of the Constitution the Union of these States is perpetual. Perpetuity is implied, if not expressed, in the fundamental law of all national governments. It is safe to assert that no government proper ever had a provision in its organic law for its own termination. Continue to execute all the express provisions of our National Constitution, and the Union will endure forever, it being impossible to destroy it except by some action not provided for in the instrument itself."

3/4/61

Nothing in the 2/11/61 speech contradicts that. But you tried to say it did, and you got caught in a lie.

Walt

272 posted on 03/03/2003 12:17:53 PM PST by WhiskeyPapa (Be copy now to men of grosser blood and teach them how to war!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 268 | View Replies]

To: GOPcapitalist
And Lincoln also claimed that he had never seen the first 13th amendment, despite being the person who solicited Seward to intoduce the thing in the first place.

What is your source for that?

And are you claiming that the war was about tariffs? Do you really want to argue that one?

273 posted on 03/03/2003 12:20:09 PM PST by Ditto (You are free to form your own opinions, but not your own facts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 271 | View Replies]

To: GOPcapitalist
I [Lincoln]have not thought much upon the subject recently; but my general impression is, that the necessity for a protective tariff will, ere long, force it's old opponents to take it up;

--10/11/59

That's from the data you provide to show that the tariff was oh-so-important to Lincoln.

Walt

274 posted on 03/03/2003 1:36:10 PM PST by WhiskeyPapa (Be copy now to men of grosser blood and teach them how to war!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 267 | View Replies]

Comment #275 Removed by Moderator

To: USConstitution
His stance against westward/northward expansion of blacks is protectionist as well.

Lincoln is amply on the record as saying the Declaration of Independence applies to all men, everywhere.

That would seem to preclude the interpretation you are hinting toward.

Walt

276 posted on 03/03/2003 1:53:03 PM PST by WhiskeyPapa (Be copy now to men of grosser blood and teach them how to war!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 275 | View Replies]

Comment #277 Removed by Moderator

Comment #278 Removed by Moderator

To: GOPcapitalist
Lincoln had been a protectionist politician for almost 30 years at the time he made that Pittsburgh speech. For him to play a simpleton and pretend not to understand its details is as dishonest as they come.

Duh! He made his protectionist principles very clear in the speech. Much of the country, even southern men, agreed with the protectionist idea in order to nurture young industry and keep the US independent of European manufactures. What he said in his Pittsburgh remarks is that he was not familiar with the bill then pending in Congress.

Why do you have such a compulsion to grossly distort every word the man said?

279 posted on 03/03/2003 2:13:04 PM PST by Ditto (You are free to form your own opinions, but not your own facts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 271 | View Replies]

To: USConstitution
Why have a Constitution when 5 justices can overrule 280 million people?

Because 280 million "people" might decide that you should be a slave or that you should not be allowed to worship your God or that people who look like you should be sent to concentration camps.

Instead of using the Constitution as you screen name, you should try to read it some day and understand that the majority does not trump the Constitution and in the end, it is up to nine individuals to rule on what it says, even if 280 million think otherwise.

280 posted on 03/03/2003 2:20:02 PM PST by Ditto (You are free to form your own opinions, but not your own facts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 277 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 241-260261-280281-300 ... 341-351 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson