onamehv, upholding oar commercial ma ris; and maritime power. It is also a b vjJ of prace wiih foreign nations, con fcjtutirig a stronger preventive -of war V!-n anT!i3 or TLivie?. fbrts ct rum anient?. At present prices, our cotton crr-p will yield an annual r""",:ct of 72,000,000f and tne uianufaelured fcbric $5O4,GOO,G0, urcLLing Drcfi equal, and can only be accomplised by ad-valorem duties. As to fraudulent in voices and undervaluation, these dangers are believed to be arrested effectually by the stringent provisions and severe penal ty of the 17th section of the trrill of 1812; and now one-half the revenue is collected from ad-valorem duties. At least two-thirds of the taxes impos ed by the present tariff arc paid, not into :mds "horn Lie working climes -ail deeply of would be injured bv any disturbance, trrcwinj: out of a state of war, to the direct and adequate jupply to raw material. If our manufactures consume 40U.0C0 bales, it would cost thcin 612, OOlU'00, whilst seilinff the manufactured fabric for $81,000,000; and they should be the hst to virile ia imposing heavy taxes upon Jthat interest which supplies lhern with ihe raw material cut of which xhey realize such immense profits. Ac companying the drawback of the duty on coUcn-lWfing f hould be the repedof the duty on foren cotton, wnu-ii i? mopcra sh e and delusive, and not desired bv the domenic produce, The condition of our foreign relation, it is said, should suspend the reduction of the tariff. No American patriot can de sire to arrest our onward career in peace and proipcrity; but if unhappily, such should be the result, it would create an incr?ned necessity for reducing our pre sent high draies, in order to obtain suffi cient revenue to meet increased expendi tures. The duties for the quarter, end- ihe 30ih September, 1841, yielded $2, OlljRSS 90 jere of revenue than the smarter ending 30th September, 185 showing a very considerable decline of ahe revenue, growing out ol a uimmined importation of the tidily-protected arti- , clrs L"u lomcst.! hitie. tire becoming dead letters, except for prohibition, and. if not reduced, twill v.I; imaiely compel fheir advocates to resort to direct taxation to support the go vernment. In the event of war, nearly ill the hiirh d-ities woild brcorne prohibi tory, fr r.-iii the increased ri.-k and cost of tmp'ortairms; and if there .be, indeed, in ' opinion of any, a serious danger of sue;; an occurrence, it appeals most Stron gly to their patriotism to impose the low er, revenue duties on all article?, as the on'iy means of securing, at such a period, aut conviueraliciueome from the tariff. The "Secretary here recommends that the rate of duty on luxuries be fixed at the highest rerenue standard, lie alleges thai the protective system does not in crease the wajes of labor that the sys tem is to augment (lie profit of capital, and not the wages of labor and that the re sult of the system must be, in a series of year?, as the power of manufacturing ca pital is augmented from time, to time, to bring the wages of labor under "its -control, and ultimately ta reduce those wages, so as to increase the pofit of capital. The report continues; broad tu thousands ol ! jjJP treasury,- but to the protected classes. ccniulists, and wages to hundreds of thou-; The revenue from imports last year cx- $ 1 A - A - . r n VH IT 1 1 1 1 C" AT This, in itself, is a heavy tax; but the whole tax imposed" wpon the people by the present tariff is not less than eighty one millions of dollars -of which twen-ty-scven millions of dollars are paid to the government upon the imports, and Ibr-ty-four millions. to the protected classes, in enhanced prices of similar domestic ar ticles. In illustration of this position, it is al leged that the duty is not paid by the for eign producer, but by the consumer; and that the duty constitutes as much a part of the price as the cost of production. The making of laws to increase the profits of particular pursuits is opposed, and the vie w taken that "legislation for classes is against tho doctrine of equal rights, and repugnant to the spirit of the constitution." The argument of countervalmg the ef fect of foreign tariffs by our own is an swered. It is contended that the manu facturers who urge this argunent arc not the party injured by these tariffs, but the great interests of agriculture, commerce, and navigation; and that, injured as these interests may be by foiragn tariffs, they ask no countervailing tariffs at home to de crease the injury. The report says: "Let our commerce be as free as our po litical institutions, duties onlv, open world, and nation after nation will soon follow our example. If we reduce our tariff, the party opposed to the corn-laws of England would soon prevail, and ad mit all our agricultural products at all times freely into her ports, in exchange for her exports. And if England would now repeal her duties upon our wheat, flour, Indian corn, and other agricultural products, our own restrictive system would certainly be doomed to overthrow. If the question is asked. Who shall be gin this it is answered by the fact, that England has already abated her duties up on most of our exports. She has repeal ed the duty upon cotton, and greatly re duced the tariff upon her bread-stuffs, provisions, and other articles; and her present bad harvest, accompanied by a re duction of our tariff, would lead to the re peal of her com laws, nrtd the unrestric ted admission, at all times, of our agri cultural products." The report goes on to state that the ma nufacturing interest is opposed to a recip rocal free trade with foreign nations, and instances the rejection of the Zoll-Vericn treaty and their support of a proluniory tariff, which, it is alleged, is a double ben- to the firmer and planter a benefit to the former, in nearly a monopoly to the linmn mnrL'fl. ;)Ti(! in n1nnrft rJn rC i rnrrrrvp snhstitutio'.i of their , . rivals. Indeed, many of these mimums are a hctihous value, assu med by law, instead ol the real value; and operation of ill luinimums maybe illus trated by a single example. Thus by the tariff of. 18 12, a duty of 30 per cent, ad- valorcmls elcvied on ati manufactures of cotton: but the law further provides that r-otictti -ewus "jitit .dved. .colored, printed. or stained, not exceeding in value Iwcnvy cents per fquarc yard, shall he valneu at Sweaty cents per square yard." If, then. the leal value of the xlieapest cotton iroods is but four cents a .square vard, it is placed ry the laT at the false value of twenty cents per square yard, and the du ty levied on ine fictitious vaiue - raising it five limes -higher on the cheap article jronSGUicd by the poor, than upon the line snide purchased by the more wealthy. Indeed, ihe House document JVo. 300, of ihe 1st session cf the 2Sth Congress, this 'difference, by actual importation, -was 03 per cent, between the cheaper and the fi r.tr .articles -of the 20 per cent, lnmimum, 131 per cent, on the -30 per cent, mini mum, on the CO per cent minimum, and vS 1 per cent, on the 75 per cent, minimum. This difference is fouuued on actual im portation, and shows an average diserimi TiaUrn against the poor on cotton imports of 82 per cent, beyond what the tax vould be if assessed upoR .the actual val nc. The operation of the specific duty -presents a similsr discrimination against the poor and in favor of the rich. Thus, r.pon salt, the fluty is not upon the value, but eight cents a bushel, whether the arti cle be coarse or iir.t showing, by the S3me document, from actual importation, a discrimination of per cent, against .the cheap, arid in favor -of the fmer arti cle: aad this, too greater or 'less extent, is ihe veffect of all specific duties. When we consider that 62,802,021 71 of the revenue last year was collected by mini annm duues, and 613.31 1 .085 4f"by spe. icifiC .duties, ' -cliscrimmation against the cheaper article must amount, by estimates founded on the same document, to a tax oT $5,103,422, exacted by minimums ard fspeciilc duties .annually from the poorer classes, by raising .thus the duties on Let us wiiii revenue fmr norts to all the the tariff of 1812, our trade in foreign imports re-exported abroad afforded large and profitable employment to our mer chants, and freight to eur commercial ma rine, both for the inward and outward voyage; but, since the last tariff, this trade is being lost to the country. The total amount of foreign imports re-exported, during the three years since the last tar? iff, both free and dutiable goods, is 633, 384,394 being far less than in any three years (except during the , war,) since 1793, and less than was re-exported in anv one of eidit several years. This result is attributed to the combined result of the cash duties and the tariff. If the cash duties are retained, as it is bVlieyed they should be, the adoption of the-Warehousing system is recommended,"' by which the foreign imports may be kept in store by the government, until they axe required for re-exportation abroad, or con consumption at home in wdich latter contingency, rmd at the time when for that purpose they are taken out of these stores for consumption, the duties are paid, and, if re-cjx ported, they pay uo duty, but only the expense of storage. The favorable effect of the bill allow ing a drawback of our duties on foreign exports carried through our ports to pa nada is shown, and an extension of the system recommended, so as to permit the exportation of Canada goods in transit through our- own ports to foreign countries. I A reduction and graduation of the price ot public lands unsaleable at prerent rate3, in favor of settlers and cultivators, is re commended, as one of the means of in creasing the revenue. It is .alleged that such reduction of the price iu favor of the settlers would increase the wages of Ja bor. The "constitutional treasury is earn estly recommended, having no power to make loans or discounts, or issue any pa per, and confined to the use delusively. of gold and silver. In connection with the "treasury of the constitution, the location ol a branch of the mint at New York is recom mended as a place for keeping .safely the vast amout of revenue collected at N. York, and also a means of increasing the coinage, and the circulation of gold and silver. The coast survey is rapidly progressing having been extended eastward to the eastern coast of Massachusetts, and south ward nearly to tho dividing line between Maryland and Virginia, on the Chesa peake. Two new centres of operation have been opened in North Carolina and on the Gulf of Mexico. The importance of the light house system is referred to, and the a'Jention of Congress called to the fact that from the Chesapeake to the Capes cf Florida, our coast is badly ligh ted. The report concludes by refarring to the importance of charts of the exploring expedition, and announcing that a report is in preperation in relation to the banks and currency, and other statistics. we purchase and consume ten dollars worth of "British agricultural produce, converted into cloth, iron, and other goods home market noth- You did not go this length, but confined it to luxuries. "Numprmis niher misstatements are Fpoken of. Why are they not pointed ; to one dollar's worth of the same articles ,? WW ro;ihpv? Hp art? mv ! she takes from us. Yet, according to the statements are any ot them untrue? 1 1 report, to the farmer the foreign market is re-affirm them, and challenge contradic tion. I said that the Secretary had pro nounce the protect ive policy to betoi constitutionah against the authority of Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Monroe and Jackson, who all, over and over again asserted the power and recommended its exercise by Congress for the protection of American manufactures. Is this a mis representation? . When, the pupular voice shall be heard in tones of thunder, denouncing this new and unheard-of doctrine, shall we be then told that this too "never entered into the conception of the President or Secrcta- whole question, and I trim they will be furnished.. Bat vrhv ti.,.. i . i .i tariff of 1912? Has yi; t 1 i i 11 nt rcplenisned your bankrupt Treasury, ,es uLd vor currency, mum up the ite amr ukC people irom utter prostration? :s not given employment to labor, nnrk it every thing and the tng. - - - The report says that protective duties are levied exclusively for the benefit of the rich monopolists, at the expense of the farmers and laborers. Now, I con- ; that in nothing I have said do I intend r tend that just the reverse of this is the j be personally offensive to the Secretary of truth. That the practical effect of pro- j the Treasury, for whom, from an early tcction is to increase jhe number of manu- j acquaintance, I have ever cherish ed sm- teem. to the farmer, and prosperity to the whol country? And what harm has u tj0r " and why disturb it? ' ' In conclusion, I wish it understood facturing establishments, and thus destroy j timents of personal respect and cste monopoly by promoting compeli.ion; and j But when I see him, or any man. aiir .i a i j : l . i i ...t i i ... .. . '- wnan conceive to be a mortal blown at ry ' I said that the Secretary had deuounced the tariff of 18 12 as "too unjust and une qual, too exorbitant and oppressive, too clearly in conflict with the fundamental principles of the Constitution." Is this a misrepresentation? I said the Secreta ry had asserted (I used his own wortls) that "experience proved that, as a gener al rule, twenty per cent. ad valorem will yield the largest revenue." Experience proves this, docs it, when the fact is no torious that in 1812 (the only lime we had .any experience of a 20 per cent, ad valorem duty) the revenue was not half what it has since been, and is now under the protective tariff of 1842? Is this an "egregious mistake? And, it so, who made it? I said that the Message pre scribed a ruinons. and anti-American rule in relation to revenue, which, if adopted by Congress, would not only check all future investments, but prostrate every branch of mechanical ami manufacturing industry wherever wiuxual labor and not labor-savin sr machinery was extensive ly employed. Here is the rule in the words of the Message; "As long as Congress may generally increase tle rate of duty on a given arti cle and the revenue is increased by such increase of duty, they are within the rev enue standard; when they go beyond that point, and, as they increase the duty, the revenue is diminished or destroyed, the act ceases to have for its object the raising of revenue for the support of Govern ment, but is for protection merely..' In other words, whenever the Ameri- that by withdrawing labor from agricul ture to manufactures, yon not only di minish the supply, but at the same time increase the demand for agricultural pro duce, and of course increase its price; whilst, on the other hand, by increasing manufacturing establishments you in crease the supply of manufactured goods, and of course reduce their price, so that the farmer is thus enabled to sell for more and buy for less. If demand and supply regulate price, this conclusion is inevitable. Yet the report says "the tar iff is a double bent fit to the manufactu rer and a double loss to the farmer." The Secretary of State (Mr. Bucha nan) understood this much better, when he sent a toast some time since to the manufacturers ol Pittsburg to this effect. The election of James K. Polk has saved the manulacturers from being ruined and overwhelmed by excessive competition. He was right. It certainly did favor the invested capital, the monopolists, by checking competion, and thereby keeping down the wages of labor and the produce of the farmer, which would, in a different aiming tnc vital interests ot my ' State and my constituents, no personal, no carthlv con sideration can prevent me from intcrno sing my arm, feeble as it may be, to ward off the blow. A. STEWAKT. TurnpiSse Election. THE Stockholders in the SoT5eret and Bedford Turnpike road com pany will take notice that ar. election will be belt? t the house of James Phif son, in Allegheny township, on the 1st Monday (5ih day) of January next, ui elect one President, six Manngers, and one Treasurer, to conduct tho affairs of said company the ensuing year. BENJAMIN KIMMEI,. novlS President. IC7 Bedford Inquirer publish 5 times and charge Company. ! i . L.JLU,....L..i. - Ail" Cumberland r&arlict. Flour, Wheat, Rye, per barrel, per bushel, result, have been enhanced in price by an (j'0Tn increased demand. This1 is illustrated by Qal, mv, iuvi uiu at i uwi;uit, OUUllJV UVIVIC I l'.-, ine larm oi ibis, me laborers m the lac- Annje, T5iE TA2tin Horse of Represetatives,Dcc.11,1815 their fabrics; and a loss to the latter, in a j To the Hon. Robfrt J. Walker payment of those high prices, and in to tal or partial exclusion from the foreign market. The report adds! The num ber of manufacturing capitalists who de rive the benefit from the heavy taxes ex tracted by the tariff from the twenty mil lions of people, does not exceed ten thou sand. The whole numbep (including the working classes engaged in our manufac tures) deriving any benefit from the tariff, docs not exceed 100,000, of whom not more than 10,000 would still have been hrdujrht into this pursuit by the last tariff. But this small number of -10,000 would still have been i:i the country, consuming our agricultural products; and in the at tempt to secure them as purchasers, so small a number, and not consuming one hulf the supply of many counties, the far mer and planter are asitcd to sacrifice the markets ef the world, containing a popu lation of eight hundred millions, disabled from purchesingour products by our high duties on all they would sell in exchange. The farmer and planter would have the home market without a tariff, and they would have the foreign market also to a much greater extent, but for the total or partial prohibition of the last tariff. The report goes on to speak of the great variety of our agrieultunproducts, which to be consumed -must lind a for eign market, or be greatly depressed in value. If on our reduction of duties, England repeals her corn laws, nearly all Europe must follow her example, or give to her manufacturers advantages which cannot be successfully encountered in most of the raarkets of the world. The report adds: The tariff did not raise the price of our bread-stuffs; but a bad harvest in England does giving us for the time that foreign tnarket which we would soon have at all all times, by that repeal of the corn laws which iStcretar)t of the Treasury. Sir: lam assailed in the official of this morning, on account of the remarks I made day before yesterday in debate on the Message and your Report on the Fi nances. The article purports to be editorial, but, from the manner in which it speaks of your motives and intentions, I infer that it has emanated from you, and there fore I feel called upon to notice it. This article affirms that "it never en tered into the conception either of the President or Secretary to recommend ex- c:sis. ow l Know not, nor can me official know, what entered into your conception; but 1 know i is your report, and no language can make it plainer than it is. Here are your own words, as quo ted at the time: "In accordance with these principles, it is believed that the largest practicable por tion of the ajnirefrale revenue should be raised by maximum revenue duties upon luxuries whether grown, produced, or manulactured at home or abroad." - Thus the same duty is proposed to be levied on the articles indicated, "whether grown, produced, or manulactured at home or abroad" In reply, it is said that "a duty is not an excise," and, therefore, the Secretary did not recommend an excise. This is disputing about words: but I take it that a duty levied on manufactures made '- broad is an impost, and that levied on manufactucs made at is an excise. So that a duty may be an excise. But the name the word ex cise it seems is objectionable. You may change the name, but this will not change the thing. The recommendation is to levy a duty on "luxuries, whether rown. produced, or manufactured at a uuty "home" rnnst follow the reduction of nur 1-,- - . , , . , . to i tilllies. lillT H hl Ct iron, -Cfnfl0 ...:.u I . I 1 M A- i ,.i I : , , ' "vuu-oiuu.-, iic yvuu ,nuint or aoroau. o lii'jenuuy can cx- ihe cheaper article above what thev ! n Wi-t ; t.'.,i i .. . i .i , , ? J .: be if the duty wcTe -assessed; variably falls; nccnase the increased wpon ae actual value, if direct tax-J sum which, in that event. EnaJTwl J r .1 ii, i - ' cs were mzue specme, mey woum oe in-j pay for our breadstuff we will take not u.-i .ui, i mi .liuiudi ui. oi uur- m maauiactnres, hut only in specie- and ly dodars as assessed on anl houses, nvhfcaut respect to their actual value, ma lting the owner of the Jmrnble tenement ir cabin pay alax-cf thirty dollars, and he owner of the costly mansion a tax of iat thirty dollars on IhcnT :respective hou .bZ6, it would only iliffer in degree, but not in principle, from the same unvarying eneciile duty .on cheap as on fine articles. If anv Lscriminatia idnnald be made, it ::0!iid be the reverse cf the specific duty, vr.ti. of the miuimums principle, by cs 'israj a maximum stmdaurd, a'ove :vhicii value the duty on Che finer articles -J hc.U;d r;3 fcigluET, and Jjclow -vhtii .hey tshouli'&e lower cr? the cheaper" article. jTLe iax vpozi lhx- aciail vlue is the most not -having it to spare, she brings down, ven to a greater extent, the price of our cotton. Hence (he result, that a bad har vest in England reduces the aggregate price of our exports, often turns the ex changes against ns carrying ocr specie a broail, and inflictmg a serious blow on our prosperity. Foreign nations cannot far a scries cf years import more man they ex port; and, if we crosc our markets against the'r imports by high duties, thcy&must buy less of oar exports, or give a lower pric?, or boGu Trior to the "30th of June, 1812, a cre dit was given for the payment of duties; since which date, they have Wen collec ted in cash. Before 7 ihe cash duties and ! plain this away, and the only escape is"t i "withdraw or mobify it." Yet my cal ling this "an excise" is pronounced to be an "egregious misrepresentation" Now, if there be a misrepresentation ' in the case, I submit who is guilty of it? As in the case of the 12 per cent, rev enue standard recommended in your cir cular, which, when exposed, the official said the Secretary had copied "verbatim", from anoldcirculnr of 1832, so, in this, case, the Secretary may have copied this suggestion from Mr. McDcffie's letter, bo highly eulogized in the official, in which he recommends the adoption of this very rule to levy the same doues on domestic and foreign goods. This Mr. McDiTriE, however, says, "is a great concession to the manufactures; for, in strict justice, he thinks the whole of the duties should be taken off the foreign and can mechanic or . manufacturer begins to supply the market, and imports and reve nue are consequently diminished, the du ty ought to be reduced so as to pnt down the American and let in the foreigner. This is his rule.-,. Now, I said this was ;i precisely such a rale as Sir Robert Peel would recommend for our adoption; it was a rule that ,.would guaranty the A merican market to the foreigner forever, or until American labor was grounedown and degraded to the half-starved and wrctchnd condition of the serfs and pau pers of Europe; and that the American masses, thus deprived of the means of educating their children, would be obliged to work, as in Europe, from the cradle to the grave, and that their moral and politi cal condition would in the end be no bet ter than theirs. : Such most clearly must be the practical and inevitable operation of this rule, , if carried out. And are these the benefits and blessings this Administration has in reserve for the "poor man?" I said they were. Was this a misrepresentation? v I sub mit the question with confidence to the good sense of the American people. I said that in your report, for the first time in an official form, hail promulgated the doctrine of "free trade," which is op enly and distinctly avowed; and to enforce the argument, reference is mads to tne "free trade" existing among the States; and it is declared that "reciprocal free trade among nations would best promote the interests of all;" that "the manufac turing interest opposes reciprocal jree trade with foreign - nations;" "and if it desired reciprocal free trade with other nations, it would have desired a very dif ferent tariff from that of 1812." These are your positions, and I inferred that you were in favor of "free-trade." Was this too an "egregious misrepre sentation? I said that the policy recommended by this Administration, if carried out, would be ruinous to Pennsylvania, because her iron and other manufactures were carried on mostly by manual labor, and not, as in New England, by labor saving ma chinery, and that therefore, to induce the investment of capital and the aquisilion of experience, she must be protected a gainst a free competition with the depres sed and low priced labor of Europe. Your report represents the foreign mar ket as all important to the farmer, whilst the home market you consider cf small comparative consequence; yet it appears from official documents that our annual exports uf agricultural products (deduct ing cotton, tobacco, and rice) have not for a series of years exceeded an average of ten millions of dollars a year, whilst the domestic market amounts to more than fifty times that sum. Massachusetts, it is ascertained, imports and consumes an nually thirty-three millions of dollars worth of agricultural products of the other Slates, whilst Great Britain, from whence we import about fifty millions of dollars worth of manufactured goods annu ally, (one half of the whole value of which consists of agricultural prodece, raw material, and the subsis tance of labor) does not take, of all the agricultural pro ductions of the United States, (excluding tones were put on hr-lf work, and of course half pay: and almost immediately after its passage ihey were restored to full work and full pay. It is for the sake of the laborer and the farmer, therefore, that I advocate the protective policy, and not lor tne "rich monopolists the onlv class that will be benefited bv the course ol this Administration in the check their policy wlil give to competition and new : . i i r i i m .i linraujiuuus ui capital, wane me "poor laborer ana the larm er w ill be .the only sufferers. I submit to every man of practical com mon sense whether such must not be the result. And yet we are gravely told by both the Message and Report that pro tec five duties operate exclusively for the benefit of the rich capitalists, at the ex pense of the "poor laborer and the far mer!" But, finally, this whole question, so interesting to the American people, turns upon a simple question of fact. "Do'pro lective duties ultimately increase or re duce the price of the articles on which they are levied?" Now the message and the report as sume (but fail to prove in . a single in stance) that protective duties have increas ed prices, and are therefore oppressive and burdcnsome;whiIe, on the other hand, I assert, and am ready to prove by your own documents, by every prices-current and every merchant in the country, that the prices of protected goods have been reduced uy competition sinoe the odious minimums and specific euties were first imposed for protection in 1816 to one half one-third, one-fourth, and in some instances to one-sixth part of what they were at that time, as in the case of coarse cottons, glass, iron, nails, fcc.; yet. in the face of these undeniable facts, it is assert ed thai the duty (nine cents a yard 150 percent.) is added to the price of the do mestic as well as the imported goods, and is paid by the consumer, and that the ti 77 .1 - i -poor man, is mus laxea on ins coarse cotton goods 82 per. ctmore lhanthc rich whon the lact is admiled that the poor man now gets a better article made at home, and paid for in labor or produce, at one fourth of the price he paid in 1816. when the minimum duties were first im posed; while, on the other hand, the wa ges of labor and the produce of the far mer, Hour, gram, meat, &c, have under went little or no reduction of price, ow- 1112: to me increased demand nrodueod hv the increase of manufactures. Such has been the effects of protective duties, Hut revenue duties, levied on articles not produced or manufactured at home, may and do generally increase prices, because they do not produce competition and increased supply. But to the facts. I call for the proof. Show me the evidence that in a single in'statnee protective duties have permanently increased prices. This you assert and I deny. This is an issue of fact, and not of argument. Produce, then, your evidence that protective duties have permanently increased prices, and men go on and denounce protection as much as you please, as plunder, robbery. and oppression. But first vonr ft M. . J J ..w and then make your argument. As a lawyer I ask you, sir, would any court . ri . j ..1.. J ui vmiiMcnuora loierate lor a moment the course you pursue? You bring a suit a gainst A, who denies your claim; are you ai iioeny to assume the lacts without proof, to bejust as you want them, and then make your speech and ask a ver dict? Surely not. Yet such is the course pursued on this great question. You and your friends- assume, without proof, that protective duties increase pri ces, and then contend that the "poor man" and the farmers are oppresed and pmnuercu oy tne tarifl. ftow, if this be i 11 toes pph 44 dried 44 Peaches dried 44 Butter, per pounJ, Beef, 44 Veal, 44 Chickens, per dozen, Eggs, 44 Stone Coal, per bushel. $3 00 a 5 50 1 00 a I 10 55 a 0 60 7J a C 8Q 55 a 0 40 31 a 0 37 51 a 0 27 57 a 0 50 I CO a 1 S3 15 a 0 IS 3 a 0 1 3 a 0 5 1 5 a 1 50 10 a 0 12 7 0 8 BANK NOTE LIST. Pittsburgh, Pa. CORRECTED WEEKLY cotton, tobacco, and rice,) two and a found to he tmtrue in point of fact,and that half millions of dollars worth a yean thus ; tho reverse is true, that they reduce prices estimating one-half the value of our im- j jad of coarse lessen burdens, then what ports to consist of agricultural produce . oecomcs of all your argument and converted into goods, it follows that we ! speeches against the oppression of the import and consume . about 'twenty-five j tariff.' They fall lifeless to the ground. ";" rigui to assume yoor tacts, and pall on voq for the proof. millions of British agricultural produce in the form of manufactures, whilst she takes STANDARD GOLD AND SILVER Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh, Banlis, Philadelphia Banks, Girard Bank United States Banfc, Bank of Germantown Monongahela Bank Brownsville Bank of Gettysburg Bank of Chester Countf Bank of Cliambersburg Bank of Delaware, Bank of Susquehanna County Bank of Montgomery County Bank of Northumberland Bank of Lewistown Bank of Middleton, Carlisle Bank Columbia Bank and Bridge Co. Do leslown Bank Erie Bank Franklin Bnk, "Washington Farmers' Bank Reading Farmers Bank Bucks County Farmer's Drover's Bank Waynesb'gpar Farmers Bank Lancaster par Lancaster Co. Bank Lancaster Bank Harrisburg Bank Honesdale Bank Lebanon Bank Miners' Bank Pollsville Wyoming Bank Northampton bank York Bank Slate Scrip, Exchange bank Fitts, Mer. and Manf's B Issued by solvent Banks Oh'o. Mount Pleasant Slcubenville, (F.& M.J St. Clairville Marietta New Lisbon Cincinnati bjnks, Columbus Circleville ZaucsvilLa Putnam Wooster Massilloa Sandusky Geauga Nor walk Xenia Clevelawl Bank Dayton Franklin Bank of Celucibuf, Chillicothe Sciota Lancaster Hamilton Granville Commercial Bank of Lake Erie, Farmers Bank of Canton Urbaua, Indiana, State Bank and branches, Slate Scrip, Illinois, par par par 39 par ft 1 par par par par I 1 I pa par 1 1 par par -4 1 4 i par 1 i i 1 ! W 44 44 5 10 1$ 45 11 20 49 I 3 Slate Bank Slate baak Memphis 40 Shawnetown Missouri. Teanctser, 3 j Other solvent banks 5 Aorth Carolina. All solvent banks South Carolina, ' All sol Tent banks New England, New England New Fork, New York city par J Other banks Virginia, put oil the Aacncaa manufacturer. .'less than two and a half fronts; so that' The facts; lie , at the fcuadaUon cf the ' Wheeling and Brunches, y 91
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers