{"character_count": 3080, "word_count": 537, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9569000005722046], "ccnet_perplexity": [1615.0], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
Although cannot hope to give his remarks at any length in my narrow limits, will nevertheless attempt to give you gen. eral idea of his main arguments.

 He began by reference to the motion of Rhe,t, to instruct the committee adversely to discrimination. This, while it laid the axe at the very root, by denying in toto all pow CT of Congress to pass bill 10 Rsuke any dis crimination in f"vor of domestic industry, opened the subject in it's widest latitude for debate. Mr. Rhett, in reply to Mir. Linn of New York. who had contended th0t the pow CT given by Congress 10 control commerce, gave the power to lay duties for it's regula- tion, had denied this utterly, on tho sweep. ing assumption, that the righ, he meant was not the right to regulate, but the right to des- troy. This, Mir. Hudson said, was sum. mary way of deRsing with the subiect-for his part he understood tho constitution as giving tho entire regulation of commerce, even, If judged necessary and cXpcdient, to lis temporary destruction, for ultimate good. }e contended that 1t was not true that pro.

 ion was necessarily destructive to com H Re-the reverse was quite Gs true. Pro- teN< to a certain extent. benefited com. mefE This was especially the case when resofk eountervailing duties was called for. The eH I'D md nonintercourse net, as all knew. haN z decided to he constitutional, which wore t3 eowledged suspension or temporary d4&' >kliQN. of commerce.

 l1e pk9cee1 .1 eA4iE that our commerce MAn pH ;fAzI Milh &4aaA Britain. which k9H sia all is coQIa hasrass i. in various We{ V'1 in tho manner in which sH 2d against our fishe- asse f own. Our whale oil

 Aiuns wAlle on her own

 sn. This operated di.

 cf our commerce..

 l oonlended that tho doctrine of

 Congress could not, under tho cia de E0Nsiilution allowing duties to pc tald tor tho general welfare" lay duties " protection, Wns nothing less than the Oroad slsseFll0E. that nothing could be sub- Na'ied te tha discretion of Congress withou; H3 05lafiQn of tho constitution. Mir. H. in. s.s.ss's nat ns Congress had tho right expli. si.'y conceded of laying duties for the ends shaIein specified th6 whole subject was ab- soiuteiy the disposal of Congress. Congress nas Just as much right to protect American citizens against British manufacturers-Brit. lsn pauder laborers, and British discrimina. IpS duties, as against British arms He showed the nbsurdity ofthe position of Rheti, who con.ended that protection and prohibi. non were the same, and that duty less than destroyed revenue precisely as Y diminished importation. He denied that any such consequence necessarily followed. ne said Mir. Rhett's theory might be illustra. ca oy the arguments of q1ack doctor in lls part of the country. Blood. said this nedical abstractionist, is life; for if you take way all his blood you destroy his life-if 'on take away half his blood you take away l lalt ms life. and so on just in proportion as | ,ou take away his blood you take away the l 1me proportion of his life. Here. said Mir. 1 Hudson, amidst roors of laughter, in which |