than in 1841. English and French cloths and cassimeres in 1841 paid a duty of 38 per cent., and in 1843 paid 40 per cent., and were 20 per cent. lower than in 1841.

The list embraces many other articles of domestic and foreign dry goods, which had fallen in about the same proportion.

The importations of coin and bullion were, during the year ending September 30th, 1841, $4,988,633; in 1842, $4,087,016; in 1843, $23,741,641! the largest importation of specie that had ever been made in any one year. Large amounts, on the contrary, had usually been exported to pay balances against us in foreign countries. Of the amount of coin and bullion imported, $3,118,399 was exported; leaving more than 20 millions as the amount of importations over and above the amount exported.

It should be remembered, too, in the comparison of prices of goods, that in 1841, money was scarce, and the rate of interest high; and in 1843 money was more plentiful, and the rate of interest low.

A member of Congress from the State of Indiana, stated, at Washington, in the winter of 1843-1844, that "the tariff had reduced every thing the West had to sell, and had increased that of every thing that section had to buy," and having been repeatedly challenged to name one article, said salt had been increased 100 per cent. This led to an inquiry, by the editor of a New York city paper, who received statements of prices at three different points in that State, on the 1st of January, 1844. The statements came from unquestionable authority.

At Indianapolis, the Capital of the State, prices were as follows:

Hardware and cutlery had fallen since 1842, 10 per cent.

Nails were cheaper by 1 c. per pound.

Buttons had fallen 100 per cent.

Pins remained the same.

At South Bend, the prices were, according to the statement from that place, as follows:

Mackinaw blankets, per pair,...

Nails, cut, per 100 pounds,.....9 50 to 10 00

Heavy sheetings, wide, per yard,

brown shirtings,

Inch wood screws, per gross,..

Pins, per pack,.

7 00

81 871

621

80

Bar iron, domestic, per 100 lbs., 5 50 to 6 50 4 00 to 5 50 Swedes and English had fallen in the same ratio.

Steel, American, per cwt....

.12 50

Round rolled iron, under in., 10 00 to 12 50

10 00

9 00

The average on satinets, about 40 per cent. less than in 1842. On jeans, from 40 to 50 per cent. less. Domestic and foreign goods generally, 25 per cent. less.

The goods were transported from New York, in both years, by the same route.

At Lafayette, the current prices of the following articles

Cotton sheeting, good, per yard, 12 to

9 4 to 16 9 to

$1 87 2 25

5

10

The opening of the Wabash canal from Lafayette to Toledo, reduced the cost of transportation on Onondaga salt, and consequently its price; but it did not affect the Kanawha salt and bar iron, as they came down the Ohio river to the mouth of the Wabash, and thence up that river to Lafayette.

The following named articles and their prices were pub lished in the New York Prices Current for March, 1842, and March, 1844.

Several other kinds are quoted, showing a reduction of about 10 per cent.

Brass kettles imported from England, cost 37 cents per pound, in 1842. In 1844 a domestic article of a better quality was sold at the same price.

Smoothing irons, sometimes called sad irons, in 1842, 41 to 4 cents per pound; in 1844, from 3 to 3 cents.

CHAPTER XIV.

Attempt to revise the tariff in 1844. McDuffie's bill in the Senate, and debate thereon. Further effects of the tariff. Southern opposition.

ALTHOUGH a decided majority of Democrats had been elected to the new Congress, an attempt to reduce the tariff at its first session, 1843-1844, proved unsuccessful. The President made a slight allusion to the subject. He said, "the prominent interest of every important pursuit of life, requires for success, permanency and stability and legislation. These can only be attained by adopting, as the basis of action, moderation in all things," &c. "No one section of the country should desire to have its supposed interests advanced at the sacrifice of all others ;" and he recommended concession and compromise for the sake of union.

Mr. M'Duffie, of S. C., now in the Senate, at an early day [December 19,] introduced a bill, proposing, in substance, to revive the compromise act which had been suspended by the act of 1842.

Mr. Rhett, of the same State, on the 3d of January, introduced a resolution instructing the Committee of Ways and Means to report a bill of a similar nature. The resolution was rejected, 67 to 112. Whereupon,

Mr. Black, of Ga., offered a resolution of instruction to the same Committee, to report a bill revising the tariff, and imposing duties on the principle of revenue only, which was rejected by a majority of one vote: Yeas, 83; nays, 84.

One or two other members of the House made similar at tempts, with no better success. An indisposition to anticipate the report of the Committee of Ways and Means was alleged as a reason why some of the friends of a reduced tariff voted against the resolutions.

In the Senate, Jan. 9, Mr. Evans, from the Committee on Finance, reported two resolutions: 1st, declaring the bill to revive the act of 1833, to be a revenue bill within the meaning of the Constitution, and can not therefore originate in the Senate. 2d., that it be indefinitely postponed.

The debate continued until the 13th of February, when the report and resolutions were for the present laid on the table.

The debate was a few days after resumed, and continued u til the 31st of May, when

Mr. Allen, of O., moved to substitute for the resolutions the Committee on Finance, one declaring that "the dutie imposed by existing laws on importations are unjust, and ought to be reduced." Decided in the negative, 18 to 25.

The vote was then taken on the first resolution reported by the Committee, and carried: Yeas, 33; nays, 4; Messrs Haywood, of N. C., Huger and M'Duffie, of S. C., and Wood bury, of N. H.

Those who took part in the debate, which was mainly o the subject of protection, were Messrs. Evans, of Maine, Huntington, of Conn., Phelps, of Vt., Bates and Choate, of Mass., Simmons, of R. I., Berrien, of Ga., and Dayton, of N. J in opposition to Mr. M'Duffie's bill, and in defense of the tar iff; and Messrs. M'Duffie, of S. C., Benton, of Mo., Bagby of Ala., Wright, of N. Y., and Woodbury, of N. H., against a high protective tariff.

Mr. Berrien, who had not been an advocate of the tarif system, was opposed to disturbing the existing tariff. There had been since August, 1842, he said, a sensible improve ment in the condition of the country; whether because of that tariff, or in spite of it, was not a subject of his present inquiry. He stated the following facts :

1. The credit of the Government was prostrate, and has been redeemed. Its stock is again above par.

2. The treasury was empty; it is now replenished.

3. The commerce and navigation of the country have increased.

4. Its agricultural condition has improved.

5. There has been a marked improvement of our great sta ple.

6. A reduction in the prices of almost all, if not absolutely of every article of consumption.

7. To crown the whole, every branch of industry has been stimulated to increased activity, and confidence has been restored. These things, I apprehend, are true. The tariff of 1842 has been in efficient operation but little more than a year, and these effects have followed. Looking to this state of things, I ask, is this a time for excitement, for agitation, for interfering with the pursuits of industry? Is this a time for change, for such a change as the adoption of this bill would bring us?

Mr. Choate, in the course of his speech, said: The gen