The party battles of the Jackson periodBowers, Claude G. (Claude Gernade)
History
The party battles of the Jackson period
Bowers, Claude G. (Claude Gernade)
Jackson, Andrew, 1767-1845; United States -- Politics and government -- 1829-1837
With Adams still laboring on his bill, McDuffie called his up with a
slashing speech. This prodigiously long philippic was historical in that
it tended to force the issue of Nullification a little earlier than its
sponsors had planned.
In the meanwhile the Administration measure, with McLane’s report, had
been submitted, providing for the repeal of the existing tariff after
March 3, 1833, and the reduction of the revenue to the financial
requirements of the Government. This contemplated the reduction of the
revenue to $12,000,000 a year, and the arrangement of the rates so as
sufficiently to protect the great interests involved.
Using the Administration measure as a basis, Adams thereupon prepared
his bill and report. In his statement the patriotic statesman,
indifferent to the clamor of party, or class, or section, shines forth
luminously. It may have been unnecessary to expose the protectionist’s
fallacy that raising the duties lowers the price of the domestic
product; equally unnecessary to warn the Southerners that a persistence
in their course would lead to appalling consequences, but he made these
points. In presenting his bill, Adams frankly explained that it was
based on the Administration measure, with some changes as to details.
With the Adams bill before it, the House made short shrift of the
McDuffie measure. The protectionists were in despair. The Legislatures
of Pennsylvania and Connecticut passed condemnatory resolutions, and
mass meetings were held protesting against reductions. An unsuccessful
attempt was made to substitute the Clay Senate plan. And yet Clay
himself was fairly well satisfied, and on its passage in the House wrote
that “with some alterations it will be a very good measure of
protection.”[413] At the time he wrote, however, he was convinced that
the alterations would be made in the Senate and accepted by the House,
and upon the failure of these plans to materialize hangs another story
of politics.
The Senate lost no time making amendments, and as it was now July, with
all anxious to adjourn, no time was wasted on unnecessary speeches, and
the amendments, which were numerous, were hurried through. In a few
instances, not many, the protectionists lost, but on the whole theirs
was the victory when the bill went back to the House. There a few of the
Senate amendments were accepted, but the majority were rejected and the
bill was thrown into conference.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account