{"character_count": 5878, "word_count": 1060, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9905999898910522], "ccnet_perplexity": [952.2000122070312], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
Hampshire with that attention which was due to
his political knowledge and experience He had
heard the Senator say that, if this was bill ex-
clusively for protection he would vote for it. Did
he understand the Senator correctly2


Mr. Woodbury. said he must have stated the
reverse, for the reverse was his meaning.


Mr. Critenden took it for granted that the Sen
ator's meaning was as he now says; but his
words were as he at first stated them. But,
he to understand that the Senator was opposed to
proection?


Mr. Woodbury. explained that, if he had said
what the Senator from Kentucky at first stated, it
was mistake; his meaning being the reverse
But in answer to the Senator as to his sentiments
with regard to protection, he would explain that
he was friendly to incidental protection-not to
that of one class at the expense of another but E.
quail protection to interest of the country as to
another, and not exclusive protection to favored
interests.


MIR. Crittenden. Then this thing of equal pro-
lection to all, can amount to nothing but protec-
ton to none There could be no such thing as
that sort of protection, and, so far it was all de-
luson to talk of fostering the industry of the coun-
try All protecting ALL in matter of this nature,
seemed to be strange anomaly, Who was to be
the protector, and who the protectedl He could
not with all the ingenuity he was master Of dis
Itinguish between the practicablity of the equal
protection to all of the Senator from New Hamp-
shire, and the free.trade doctrine of the Senator
from South Carolina There was just as much
sense in the as the other.


In reference to the assertion of the Senator from
New Hampshire-that nothing after all, would
relieve the treasury but rigid economy and re-
trenchment-Mr. G.. reviewed the expenditures
of Mr. Woodbury. administration, and contrastcd
these expenditures with those of the present Ad-
ministration He also referred to the vote given
by the Senator from New Hampshire on the rev.
enue bill Of 1892 and to the sentiments of the Sen
ator from South Carolina, as expressed in 1916.


He stated that he had with reluctance been driv-
en- to the conclusion of voting for this bill. He
could not be accused Of courting the favor Of the
Executive, by conforming to his will but he had
deeply weighed the condition of the Government;
and he could not bring himself to wound his coun-
try with a blow aimed at Mr.. Tyler.


The considerations which had influenced him
were-at first Difference to the decision of the
House of Representatives; next, the condition of
the country. He saw the whole country in
state of humiliation AMI distress--the manufacturers
ruined, the revenue suspended, the laboring inlus
try of the country reduced to misery and destitu-
tion; and he asked himself can anything be
done to relieve this distress Although we have
a bad President mischevous Presldent-yet
we have glorious country, and a glorious peo-
pie; and the question is, What can we do to raise
this country, and this people, from this dark mist
of distress 1t is not Mr. Tyler's country, or
Mr.. Tyler's Government; it is country, and
our Government: and for its sake, we should
come up proudly, and give our votes for its re-
lief


He denounced the President here, and would
denounce him everywhere, in language as strong
as respect for public decorum would warrant
He voted for this bill, with the intention Of also
voting for the bill on the table-for the repeal of
the sixth clause of the distribution act. Both bills
should 90 to the President Let his veto No. 5
and his veto Nc. come Who cared for his We
toes? He (Mr. c. cared nothing for them
His taste had become so reconciled to vetoes, that
they did not now seem half SO bitter to him he
once thought them Let both bills go to the
President, that he may have his wish gratifed-
of having the two measures separated, and let
him give either, or both his veto He could tell
the Senator from New York that the Presidents
acceptance of the one, and rejection of the other,
would not uproot the tree of distribution. Its
germ was alive and could not be killed by sus-
pended animation.


Who could look at this Senate, and know these
men, an1 then look at him who IS supposed capa-
bic of awing them, and say there was among them
one that could be intimidated by John Tyler p
EIe did not believe there an Office holder In
anv post office of the Union that would be so in
timidated Did he but knowthe sentiments of the
people of the United States, he would never have
driven his party to such exremltles as to have to
appeal to his and their opponents till they, in very
shame, were obliged to turn away from his endear-
ments


He had no personal unzindness to the Presi-
dent of the United States. 1t of Mr. Tyler
as public man he spoke and he Judged him only
in his official capacity, Never did his friends lay
on the altar of patriotism sacrifice more free and
undefIed than they did now in giving their votes
for this bill.


1t was not little painful to hear gentlemen op-
posite gIorving over the destruction of the great
measure of distribution. He was told it was but
a trifle to each State Well, he knew that the
share which would fall to his own State would be
sufficient to educate every widows son-every
poor mans son in the State. 1t was no such trifle
which would accomplish this But it was to be
dribbled away in appropriations among the thirty
millions of expenditures which, according to by
gone experience, might be expected to flow from
the public Golfers when the opposite party again
came into power, las they now anticipated and
the Senator from New Hampshire was again at
the head of the Treasury.
| He wished the country to know who it was that
went for direct taxes-for taking away protection,
and giving it to foreign industry; and who for
taking away from the education of the poor and
| land fund