From the Richmond Enquirer
MR.. HAYWOOD AND THE RICHMOND
wHIG
{"newspaper_name": "The daily union.", "edition": "01", "page": "p2", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 3672, "word_count": 633, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9440000057220459], "ccnet_perplexity": [1132.0999755859375], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
WHIC.


lfanything were wanting to prove that Mr.. Hay
woods course was an abandonment Of the prinei-
pies Of The republican party, the highly wrought
sulogy Of yesterdays Wing upon the tariff views Of
Mr.. Haywood would make the point perfectly clear.
Mr. II. takes the position, that the new tariff dis
eliminates against home manufactures, and brings
forward long and numerous extracts from the mes
sages OF the different presldens 10 show that they
advocated protection" This was the old whig
game in Virginia in 1874. Everybody will remem-
Der the famous doc Iments-"The Fair Proposition, 4"
and "Fscts from the Reeord"-used by the wings
on all occasions, TO show that national bank and
protective tariff were republican measures The ar
guments then employed in defence Of a tariff for
protection were then fully exploded. The low av-
erage Of the early tariffs eontrasted with the
enormous duties ofthe tariff Of l642, and the "pro-
lection" OF the former period but mite com
pared with the enormous duties Of the latter. The
arguments could not then convince the people Of
Virginia. we have no fear that, though welded by
Mr.. Haywood, they will exert any influence now.
But admit that Washington, Jefferson, Madison,
&c, the advocates Of protection, the cir
eumstanees the same as at present. Then manu-
taeures were IN their infancy; now, under the par
ual favor OF Congress, they have attained pros
porous and hourishing growth. Indeed, Mr.. Clay
said there was no longer any necessity for "proec-
lon for the sake Of protecuonin and the mammoth
Tariff Fair last spring was intended to show that
manufactures could be made in this country cheap.
y and as well as abroad Then, foreign nations kept
IN full Vgor the restrictive system snd, by heavy du


es closed their ports TO our products this strong
tariff argument has been shaken down. Under the in
auence Of free trade, Great Britain has thrown open
her ports 10 our grain, and the last steamer brings
US the news that the heavy duties upon sugar have
also been removed. Do not all these facts essen
TALLY change the condition Of affairs since the earlier
history Of our republic And is it wise in blind.
y to adhere TO a system Of restrictions which, how
ever II may benefit small class Of the community,
has proved Of serious injury TO the great CONNER
cial and agricultural interests' The new tariff ex.
tends TO the manufacturers 25 or 30 per cent "pro-
lection" This, with the costs of transportation,
commissions, insurances, &c, amounting in all to
IS or 50 per cent, is ample enough to satisfy the
reasonable desires Of the tariffites.


. But we design not to enter into a discussion Of
the tariff. Our only object TO refer to the stri.
king fact that protective tariff paper holds up the
tariff arguments Of Mr.. Haywood in triumph, and
says:


I'VE, for one, are willing to 90 before the people
Of Virginia and the South upon the issue clearly
stated by Mr. Haywood"


The legislature which elected Mr.. Haywood ex-
pressy instructed him to against the protective
princple-and here nee his arguments seized
upon by whig paper unequivocay in favor OF
protection! Is II not evident that he has changed
his grounds since his election'


This issue Of a tariff for protection or one for rev.
eDue, has been over and over tried in Virginia, and
the revenue principle sustained. The same argu-
ments have been advanced in every variety Of
plausible form, but in vain. We have fear Of
the result now. The doctrine Of "protecton" is
gradually giving way throughout the world Strange
would il be if, under the circumstances which now
exist protection for the sake of protection" should
gain the ascendant.