..FREE TRADE.n
{"character_count": 1505, "word_count": 266, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9247999787330627], "ccnet_perplexity": [1157.4000244140625], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
There appears to be a settled detena1| on the part of the Feds, to misrepp$t position of the Democracy upon h'1 question. They are now endeavoringn' 4 meet the idea of free trade,' with thad' rect taxation" and palm it off upon the ! for the Democratic doctrine, when he!H nothing could be grosser misrepresenaa The term "ltee trade,n when used bFp clans, has no such meaning as thataiss to be given 1t by the Federalists, inc ting 1t with direct taxation, The DemS are not now, nor were they ever Tn a, ', that system of free trade, which w0l' molish the tariff entirely, and compel af' to direct taxation, for revenue to supPa Government.

 There are two grades or kinds O The one for REVENUE, with incldensl' ! lection; the othar for PROTECTION, gln9 nue as its incident.

 It is the former kind--the revenues11 of duties-for which the Democracy a'1 VI tending. It is the only kind aun0.1,| \ the Constitution, by justice, or y :? policy. It has been denomna'eu trade tariff, merely because 1t does "" the restrictive high duty policy ol 'nss s < tive system; which, while 1t pro's'ss s'sI trerests of manufacturers, not onlY .r, the mass of the people, but, to agf@m.r t.r letters and destroys American u ''Free trade and direct taxation

 another thing. It would cause us destruction of the tariff, and reso,'cc ton for the support of the Genefa' p,,, ment. For this the Democracy % contended; and the Fed that cha'se doctrine upon the Democratic paI1% s,1 culpably ignorant, or a wlllul lal''1 ,s,<|