couragement. He had adopted the modes of expression used elsewhere, and asked if we would give our manufacturers no protection. The real question was, not whether duties should be laid, but whether they should be augmented. It was forgotten that iron and hemp, for example, already paid a burdensome duty; yet, from the general tenor of the speaker's observations, one would infer that we had hitherto taxed our own manufactures rather than fostered them by taxes on those of other countries.

The poverty of Spain had been attributed to the want of protection to her own industry. That it was owing to bad government and bad laws was true. But these very laws were bad because they were restrictive. If prohibition were protection, Spain would seem to have had enough of it. Nothing could exceed the barbarous rigidity of her colonial system, or the folly of her early commercial regulations. Unenlightened and bigoted legislation, the multitude of her holidays, miserable roads, and restrictive laws, he believed had been the principal causes of the bad state of her productive industry. And any partial improvement in her condition had been the result of relaxation.

Mr. Webster next went into an examination of the bill as to its probable effects upon some of the great interests of the country; and first, as to the foreign trade. It was lamentably true, as the speaker had stated, that there had been a falling off in the tonnage employed in that trade. What did the bill propose for relief ? Nothing but new burdens. It proposed to diminish its employment, and at the same time to augment its expense hy subjecting it to heavier taxation. The shipping interest, as appeared from a statement he had submitted to the committee, paid annually more than half a million of dollars in duties on articles used in the construction of ships; to which it was proposed to add nearly fifty per cent

Some of the clauses of the bill Mr. W. approved ; to others he strongly objected; and most of all, to that which proposed to raise the duty on iron, an article of great importance to the shipping interest, which he represented. The annual consumption of the article had been estimated at 50,000 tons; the duty on which, at $15 per ton, amounted to $750,000; increasing by so much the price of an absolute necessary of life. It was now proposed to raise the duty to $22,50 per ton, which would be equal to $1,125,000 on the whole annual consumption. The only mitigation of this burthen imposed for the benefit of the producers of the article, was in the prospect that the price of iron would be reduced by this domestic competition after the importation should be prohibited. But it was casy to show that it would not fall; and the result would be, that the $1,125,000 would be constantly augmented by the in

a

creased consumption of the article, to support a business that could not support itself. It was of no consequence to the argument that this sum would be expended at home : so it would be if the people were taxed to support any other useless and expensive establishment.

The price of iron at Stockholm was $53; to which add the duty of $15, and as much more for freight, insurance, &c., and the cost would be $83 in the American market. But the price at the mine in which it was produced, was only about $40 per ton ; so that the present duty, with the expense of transportation, already gave the American manufacturer an advantage of 100 per cent. Why, then, could not iron be manufactured at home? The answer was to be found in the different prices of labor. These were higher here than in any other civilized state; and this fact was the greatest of all proofs of general happiness. We had been asked whether we would allow to the serfs of Russia and Sweden the benefit of making iron for us. He would inform the gentleman that these serfs did not earn more than seven cents a day. And he asked whether we had any labor in this country that could not be better employed than in a business yielding to the laborer only seven cents a day. There was no reason for saying that we would work iron because we had mountains that contained ore. He said the true inquiry was, whether we could produce the article at the same, or nearly the same cost as that at which we could import it. The reason why our citizens should not be compelled to manufacture our own iron was, that they were far better employed. It was an unproductive business; and they were not poor enough to be obliged to follow it.

The effect of the bill in its operation on hemp, was also considered. The aggregate amount of duties on the hemp and iron used in the construction of a vessel of 359 tons burthen, was stated to be $1056; and, with the contemplated increase, it would be $1400. While we were proposing to add new burthens to the shipping interest, our great commercial and maritime rival was pursuing a very different line of policy. It was the sentiment of the government of England, that the first of all manufactures was the manufacture of ships; and very important regulations favorable to this interest had been adopted within the last year.

Mr. W. concluded by saying, that there were some parts of the bill which he highly approved; that in others he acquiesced; but that those to which he had stated his objections appeared to him so destitute of all justice, so burthensome and so dangerous to that interest which had steadily enriched, gallantly defended, and proudly distinguished us, that nothing could prevail upon him to give the bill his support.

CHAPTER XXV.

ELECTION OF MR. ADAMS.—THE ALLEGED COALITION BETWEEN ADAMS AND

CLAY.-PROPOSITIONS FOR RETRENCHMENT AND REFORM.

The presidential election of 1824 was one of deep and general interest throughout the union. The names of at least six candidates had been presented: Messrs. Adams, Crawford, Jackson, Clay, Calhoun, and Clinton. The names of the two last, however, were subsequently withdrawn

The practice which had prevailed since 1808, of making nominations by the republican members of congress, had become unpopular. The original and legitimate object of a caucus was to enable the friends of certain principles or measures to concentrate their suffrages. For such purpose a caucus had become unnecessary. All the candidates were regarded as republicans, and as holding to the same general principles. Old party lines, as respected measures of public policy, had become obliterated. The people were not so much divided upon measures, as in the choice of men. And when political contests are merely for men, caucuses are likely to become instruments of corruption and intrigue. It was also objected, that, as the public sentiment in some of the states had designated certain individuals as candidates, the members of a congressional caucus might defeat the wishes of their constituents. And although it was desirable to avoid a resort to the house of representatives for the election of a president, the candidates were so numerous, and the attachment of the people to their respective favorites was so firm, as to preclude the belief that a caucus nomination would at all increase the chances of an election by the people. The object of a caucus was the nomination of Mr. Crawford; which had few advocates beyond the circle of his particular fricnds.

Not only was the public feeling on this subject expressed in meetings of the people; formal action was taken upon it by the legislatures of several of the states, whose decisions were communicated to their representatives in congress. The newspaper press, too, took an active part in the discussion. A leading paper opposed to a caucus, was Niles' Register. The National Intelligencer, the Albany Argus, and the Richmond Enquirer, were among its prominent advocates.

A caucus, or, as it was termed, “a meeting of the republican members of congress," was held on the 14th of February, 1824. Of the 258 members, only 68 attended. The number in attendance being so

was de

small, a motion was made to adjourn to the 20th of March; but, a majority being opposed to the adjournment, the meeting proceeded to ballot for a candidate for president. Of the 68 votes given, Wm. H. Crawford received 64; John Quincy Adams, 2; Andrew Jackson, 1; and Nathaniel Macon, 1. For vice-president, Albert Gallatın received 57 votes.

From a brief history of congressional caucuses in Niles? Register, (vol. xxv, pp. 244, 258,) the following facts appear :

In February, 1800," certain federalists”—members of congress, it is presumed—held a meeting in the senate-chamber to consult on matters relating to the ensuing presidential election. This caucus nounced in the Philadelphia Aurora, a republican paper, as a “jacobinical conclave;" for which, and for other statements, its editor, William Duane, was arrested, and brought to the bar of the senate to answer for his "false, defamatory, scandalous, and malicious assertions," &c. Soon after, there was a meeting of a few members, who pledged themselves to the support of Messrs. Jefferson and Burr. This meeting is said to have been caused by a complaint on the part of northern republicans, that Mr. Burr had not been duly supported by the party at the south, in 1797.

The first "regular republican caucus" appears to have been held on the 25th of February, 1804. Its chief object was to fix upon a candidate for vice-president. Mr. Jefferson, however, was named for reëlection, and George Clinton for vice-president.

On the 19th of January, 1808, a meeting of the republican members of congress to nominate candidates for president and vice-president, was called by Stephen R. Bradley, a senator from Vermont. The circular in which the call was made commenced thus: “In pursuance of the powers vested in me, as president of the late convention of the republican members of both houses of congress, I deem it expedient," &c. The meeting was to be held on the 23d of January, 1808. The issuing of this call in this mandatory style, was indignantly denounced by several members as a usurpation of power ; and a large portion of the members refused to attend; unwilling, as was remarked, “to countenance, by their presence, the midnight intrigues of any set of men who may arrogate to themselves the right, (which belongs only to the people,) of selecting proper persons to fill the important offices of president and vice-president.

The meeting was attended, however, by ninety-four members of both houses-only one from the state of New York. Mr. Madison was nominated with apparent unanimity, though Mr. Monroe had been sup. ported, out of doors, by a stroug party of men, among whom were some who were unfriendly to the policy of Mr. Jefferson. These differences in the republican party grew to such extent, as almost to produce the political ejection of Mr. Monroe; a fate actually experienced by De Witt Clinton four years afterward, for permitting his name to be used against that of Mr. Madison. Through the efforts of Mr. Jefferson and others, who deprecated a rupture in the party in the state of Virginia, a reconciliation was at length effected.

The next congressional caucus was held on the 18th of May, 1812, at which 82 members attended; the whole number of republican members of both houses being 133. All the votes given at this caucus were for Madison. The caucus of 1816 was held on the 16th of March, and was attended by 118 out of the 141 republican members. Mr. Clay, of Kentucky, and Mr. Taylor, of New York, offered resolutions declaring it inexpedient to proceed to a nomination; but the proposition was negatived. Mr. Monroe received 65 votes, and Mr. Crawford, 54. In 1820, no caucus was held—there being no organized opposition to the republican party.

As had been apprehended, the nomination made by the caucus in 1824, failed of securing to Mr. Crawford that advantage which former nominees had derived from regular republican nominations. So odious had this system become, that the nomination was believed to have actually diminished rather than increased his strength as a candidate.

The whole number of votes of the electoral colleges, was 261; of which there were given for Jackson 99, Adams 84, Crawford 41, Clay 37. John C. Calhoun received for vice-president 182 votes, against 78 for all others. The electors having failed to elect a president, that duty devolved upon the house of representatives; the election to be made from the three candidates having the bighest numbers of votes, and the vote to be taken by states. The election by the house took place on the 9th of February, 1825, immediately after the canvass of the electoral vote. Mr. Adams received the votes of 13 states, General Jackson 7 states, and Mr. Crawford 4 states. Mr. Adams having a majority of the states, he was declared elected for four years from the 4th of March, 1823.

A committee appointed by the house for that purpose, informed Mr. Adams of his election, and reported the fact to the house the next day, with the following answer :

“GENTLEMEN : In receiving this testimonial from the representatives of the people and states of this union, I am deeply sensible of the circumstances under which it has been given, All my predecessors in the high station to which the favor of the house now calls me, have been honored with majorities of the electoral voices in their primary colleges. It has been my fortune to be placed, by the divisions of sentiment prevailing among our countrymen on this occasion, in competition, friendly and