{"character_count": 1788, "word_count": 331, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9243999719619751], "ccnet_perplexity": [1983.4000244140625], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
Can there be one man in the Union who does
not feel in5ued by 50 low an appeal TO his gno
rance, scfshncss and envy as the foregoing? Is
there one man who docs not knoD that the reason
why gems and pea:!s arc taxed 50 low is the
simple and Obvious one that higher duty would
only cause the articles IN question to be snug
eled They can be whipped into any hogshead
Of sugar or salt, and slipped through the Custom
house unpcrccived. Beside, those iii the first list
arc all articles ,rhich do not IN competition
,sith The grod0ci$ Of oar o,ca Industry, OH which
the duties should be lower than on the other class
Many Of them are grossly misstatcd-thosc on
Wines and on SILK robcs for instance. On
both these articles, the Mckay Tariff bill, sup.
ported by the Loco-Foco who represents Orange
County. proposed great reductions.


Or lhe ether hand, the articles put in the list
as " consumed by NJ. Poik's supporters" wretch
cd humbu5 > are nearly ali articles produced OF
rivalcdin this Country, though the duties on them
arc grossly exaggerated by The Telegraph. But 10
ma,;.r-Dacs tho man wait Beef and Pork
cheaper than they now arc, that he complains
Of the dGtv as high? Does he ao, ,now that his
own party proposed 10 rcduc" the duty on raw
Sugar only from - to cents a pound Docs
he want salt chcapenc,? or Shoes Docs he
mn, know that most OF the articles Inc has sci down
rs 50 enormously "taXed," arc now i9'eer haiD
Mcy eccr ,re,e undef a io'e TariGi Such is
certainly the fact We have given the proof Of
ii repeatedly, and no man has g''insayed 1t. A
Ncwbur.i, merchant o 'iic highest standing has
also communicated 10 the Gazette the following
table % the comparative prices Of ti.esc exorb.-
t,n,y taxed articles in loi2 when the Tariff
uas IoWestl and al present Here il is