.3 "tilM=« , LV:r JLI A^CX'V'V^ \s's'a Class. Book. .^- 7/^//- ADDRESS TO. TIIS PEOPLE eF ^T, iimi^si^*^^ F^finif^m. Br The Hon. WILLIAM ELLIOTT, (illARLF.SToy, S. G. 1833. ^ "x \ E 3 Si ^< •3 . *i i' 3 3 fc Ji^lJL^ Fellow Citizens. — Your refusal at the late public meeting to postpone the resolutions then offered, until they who were op- posed to them, could procure the oflicial docunients necessary to explain and enforce the grounds of their opposition, denied them virtually the right of discussion. The most common-place reso- lutions introduced in our Legislative assemblies, having been read for general information, are postponed to a future day, that mem- bers may be prepared for their discussion : but you have passed upon the most important resolutions that have ever been submit- ted to'you, since the adoption of the Constitution, resolutions of the most solemn import, that may irreversibly affect the fate of our government — -of republican institutions — ^of ourselves — of posteri- ty — with a precipitancy incompatible with a full and thorough un- derstanding of their character and consequences. You had pre- judged the question ; you had come there not to deliberate, but to record your settled opinions — and I forbore to press my objections because I cleaily perceived that they would be held obtrusive, Nevertheless the relation in which 1 stand to you niakes it proper that you should know them. I have not the vanity to think that they can shake your fixed determinations; but I scorn to with- hold them (believing them to be just) because they may be wn- popular. I appeal then from these your decisions — adopted in moments of excitement, and from ex parte representations — I ap- peal from these decisions prompted by your passions, to the nobler convictions of yovu' reason. I appeal from the spirit of party — to the higher and holier principle of Patriotism— and may God incline your hearts to pursue the right. We all of us hold a Tariff of protection in equal detesta- tion — we differ as to the remedy. We likewise agree in this, that however it may conform to the letter — it violates the spirit of the Constitution ; but we differ most widely as to the degree of injury which this system inflicts upon the South. When I consider the gross exaggerations of the Press, and the fevei of excitement into which it lashes the public mnd, I cannot be surprised at your ea- gerness to adopt any meusiue, that professes to be a remedy. You feel that your former prosperity has departed — that your ao-riciiUure languishes — that the debts coiiiracted in more fortunate times hang oppressively upon you, and baffle all your elTorts for their extin- guishment. In the mean time thousands and thousands of acres of "virgin soil of unequalled fertilily have been opened in the West, to the culture of cotton — yon have been rivalled in your peculiar sta- ple — and money — the medium in which your debts aie to be paid, has appreciated from thirty to fifty per cent throughout the world; yet you arc taught to ascribe all your suflerings to the Tariff ! Bo very obvious and indisputable has this oppression become — so completely has it been brought home to you — that you are as per- suaded as if you saw it — that the manufacturer actually, invades your bains, and plunders you of 40, out of every 100 bales thai, you produce. The doctrine I have last alluded to — that, as producers, you lose foriy out of every hundred bales by the operation of the Tariff, originates with a man of distinguished talents w^io supports all his opinions with wonderful force of reasoning, and fertility of illustraiion. But no talents, however distinguished, can sanctify error, and I propose to expose to you the fallacy of this argument ; t.he more readih', because many of you have confessed that yoU give it implicit credit. The theory is based on the ad*mitted principle of political economy, " that the imports of a country are purchased by the exports, and' one year with another w^ill balance ^ach other-" It next assumes that the products of the coimtr)'^ with which these imports are purchased, are chiefly grown by the Southern planters ; that an average duty of 40 per cent, being levied on the foreign articles for which these Southern products are exchanged, is in fact equivalent to a like tax on the products themselves ; that it is of little consequence, whether the duty be levied on the raw material which purchases, or the foreign product w^hich is purchased — that it amounts substantially to xhc same thing to the Southern producer who is thus taxed 40 bales out of every lun^.dred that he produces. This theory would be imdoubtediy true if the planter con- sumed all the foreign articles purchased with the raw materials that he produced ; but its inherent defect consists in this — that it ascribes to the planter, a continuity of interest in the property after he has sold it : it unhappily forgets that when he has sold it, and been paid for if, it is no longer his but (mothers. The burthen, or strictly speaking, the liability to burthen, is transferred with the property ; and passes from purchaser to purchaser, until it is dis- tributed throughout the covnitry and finally settles on the consu- mer. Were it true that the planter pays for all — then every Lawyer, Physician, Merchant, Mechanic — not a planter — would consume all foreign commodities dutyfree — and where would be il}eir oppression under the Tariff? Yet were I to say to any hpn- 5 est mechanic who, having earned liia money hy his daily lafcor, had paid it away for a coat with the duty charged as an item of its price, "Sir, you did not pay that duty — you mistake the matter — you are under a delusion — I the planter made you a present of the. whole amount of duties charged on i(," would he not he incensed at such a bold attempt to impose on his understanding 1 Yet 'the 40 baies theory supposes this absurdity ! What is the common sense question 1 If the planter ships his whole crop to Liverpool, converts the proceeds into foreign merchandise, imports and consumes the whole, then, and in that case only, he pays the 40 per cent — loses his 40 bales. But what •planter does this 1 not one ! if, as often happens, he invests a tenth or twentieth of his crop in foreign manufactm^es — on that tenth or twentieth, as the case may be, he paj's his 40 per cent, but on the reiiiainder of his shipment, he pays nothing. With this remainder . he may pay a foreign debt, support his son in a foreign educa- tion, or pinchase a bill of exchange, by which his money is remit- ted home -without paying one cent of duty. But the Planter does not visually ship : he sells in his own -markets — is paid for his hundred and not for sixty bales — at a price regulated by the price at Liverpool — and let us mark the significant fact — that price has never been influenced one cent by the American Tariff!! Who purchases the cotton 1 The merchant — and henceforth the risks and habilities are his, not the planter's. We will suppose it to be the Northern merchant ; he freights his ship with his cot- tons, exchanges them for foreign goods fit for the Norths* n mar- ket, and enters them at a Northern poit. The duty charged at the Custom House is added to the cost of the imported article, and is merged in its market price. If the article cannot sell, the burthen of tiie duty falls on the merchant : if it can, it falls on him who buys, and thus the burthen is distributed among all the people of the North who consume the articles on which the duties are charged. Now the merchant hnows that he pays the duty at the Custom House — do we pay it likewise 1 Is it twice paid-1 Now though you and I, fellow citizens,. may*have grown the identi^-al cottons with which these'foreign goods were purchased, it is clear that we did not pay the duties, because I liave shown they were paid by another. No more does the South, as producers, pay the duties on all the articl^.s purchased with her products, but on such portion of them only as she herself consumes. Our cotton is the %nere medium of exchange, and in performing this function, is no , more taxed tlian a Mexican dollar would be. It is bought and remitted to Europe in preference to specie, or a bill of exchange, because one will freight a ship, which the other will not. I have now shown you, that this duty, which it is assumed,falls imavoidably on the planter, may be evadad by a bill of exchange, or by a remittance in specie; it can likewise be avoicled in whole or in part by tlie importation of foreign commodities which are Jwiy free. Is it not degrading tlie pianier to a cond;iion of mere idi( cy, to suppose that he wiU voluntarily charge himself with a burthen that lie so easily may avoid 1 He need not pay it unless he desnes it — if he desires it, let him be indulged. And now, fellow-citizens, Jet me ask you, whether you are still convinced, that tx^s producers,}' o\\ bear ali the burthens of government 1 If so, then should 1 congrat- ulate you — then since 1828, you have been relieved of ten millions of taxes — then should you rejoice at the removal of such an enor- mous burthen fiom your peculiar industry ! But you do not re- joice — you are not conscious of thi.s very decided relief ! and why % for the best possible reason — because you never sustained the en-, tire burthen. You bore but a portion of the burthen, and Jiave only a share in the relief 1 invite your scrutiny. If the argu- ment I have just advanced be founded in error, let the error be ex- posed ; but if there be no error, yield me your assent to the infer- ences that must necessarily follow — that you are not burthened as producers — but consumers — that these burthens being there- fore, to a certain extent, voluntary, are to the same extent avoid- able — that they fall not heavier on us, than on the other agricul- tural States, whose products are not the basis of foreign exchanges —that if it be not disgraceful in them to deliberate on their condi- tio, it is not disgraceful in us — (hat there is nothing, in fine, so deplorable m our situation, or excessive in our sufferings, as to for- bid us to examine the tendency of such measures, as are offered to us as remedies ! It is a calm, manly, and unprejudiced examina- tion that I claim at your hands. It is due to the noble institutions you enjoy ; it is due to the sacrifices of those who bequeathed thenr to you. But if, despising my counsel, you abandon yourselves to the guidance of a blind and furious party zeal, as surely as you live, you will one day repent it. The stoim of excitement will pass away — objects will lio longer be viewed through a false and disfiguring medium — your true position will be understood— you will remember my friendly caution, and look back with regret. But will you look back from the same point 1 Will you then, as now, be free to choose your course 1 When you have struck forward the ball of revolution, can you prescribe its path, and regulate its motion? When your voice has shaken and loosened the impending avalanche, can your voice arrest it? France ! Poland ! plead for me ! Remove the glistening veil that conceals the ghastly features of Civil War ! Lay bare your gash- ed and bleeding bosoms ! Breathe into the ear of this too excited people, a tythe of the untold withering horrors that you have wit- nesseil and bid them pause ! Admonish them, at least, to under- stand the true extent of their injuries — and the true character of their remedy — before they fling themselves recklessly forward in- to the vortex of revolution ! It is fit we should review the ground we occupied in ISSs^ and admit, that ui many of our anticipations of nijuiy we have been deceived. We feared that England would refuse to take onr coitons — she has not refused. We teared that she would re;aliate our tax on her manufactures by a tax on our raw materials — she has not retaliated, for her own sake — it would have enabled her rivals to undersell her. Presuming her inability to sell, we pre- sumed a like inability to buy from us. We estimate aright nei- ther the extent, nor the flexibility of her commercial resources. While Congress dammed out her commodities in one directiv^n, they flowed in upon us in another, and we found, by experience, that in the face of a system deemed piohibitory, she returned us the full amount of the products, which she still cont nued to pur- chase of us without stint, (more circuitously indeed, and therefore at some slight mutual loss, but she did make the return.) We feared that the revenue wouid fail — that the public debt would be fastened immoveably upon us, and that direct taxation would be superadded to our other burtliens! Again we were wrong: the revenue increased beyond the wants of government, and tlie great difficulty has been to reduce it. What then, am 1 a TarilT ma a? No, fellow-citizens — I scorn and detest the system — but I condemn it for what it is, and not for what experience tells me it is not! There are cases, I admit, in which the duty would fall heavily on the producer. If the use of all cotton manufactures, domestic and foreign, were prohibited in the United States — while the 250,000 bales now manufactured at home, where transferred to the Liver- pool market — ihe relations between supply and consumption wouid be so materially changed, as to produce a sensible fall in the price of the raw material, which we, as producers, would feel, in common with the producers all over the globe. Or, if England had been in condition to retaliate on us, we might have been tax- ed out of her markets, and again we should have suffered as pro- ducers. But the first of these suppositioais is a political impossi- bility — and the injury involved in the second, it has been our good fortune to escape. The peculiar oppression then of the South con- sists in this — -that she is essentially and necessarily agricultural, and that the bounties ^ven to maiuifacturing industry, in which she cannot participate, are given at her expense — not as a producer —•the burthen that she suffers as such, is too unimportant to be taken into the estimate — but as a consumer is she wronged: and though the North is likewise a consumer, and pays on the foreign fabrics she consumes, she gains a profit on all the like commodities that are taxed out. This profit does not equal the full amoun\ of duties cha,Yged at the Custom House ; the difference between the protective duty and the revenue duty, is its precise measure. This Sitm, char o-ed upon all (be pnUected domestic goods, whch hove gone to displace tlie like foreign articles, is the measure of the- burthen imposed by the manufacturer on the country at large : and a like sum, levied upon the like commodities that enter into the consumption of the South, is the measure of the burthen im- posed upon the South. I shall not presume to estimate the amount of this burthen — the materials for such a calculation are wanting- — l)ut be it great or be it small the burthen is uncompensated and destructive of that equality which should exist fyuong the States. Is this burthen reduced under the present bill 1 How un- sound must be the condition of public sentiment when honorable men dill'er, not onl}^ in their opinions, but find it impossible to agree even in their facts ! This act bears to my mind, even on its face, the evidence of a decided reduction. Yet both of our Sena- tors and six of our Representatives have told us in their Address, "That the burthens of the protective duties are decidedly increase ed." Now, in the absence of an official estimate from the Trea- suiy department, of the actual amount of reduction, (on which, whe)i it arrives, we are forwarned by our immediate representative in Congress, no reliance whatever is to be placed,) we must resort to the act itself. And here we shall see convincing proofs, that the protecting system has lost ground, and that we are decidedly gainers Ijy the new bill — first and principally in the abolition of the minimum duties on v.'oolSens, &c. — secondly, in the diminu- tion of the actual rate of the duties on negro cloth, iron, sugar, and cotton bagging. We have now received the expected document, and as for the honor of republican government, I cannot believe that our func- tionaries would issue an intentionally deceptive statement, I shall adopt it and rely on it till it is falsified. It appears then, that on tlie following articles these deductions have been made * Woollens, . 554,589 Cottons, 360,280 Iron, - 384,739 Sugar, , 392,883 1,592,491 Some allowance must be made for cash duties, and the valuatioa of the pound sterling at ^4 80 on the onef hand, and for the abo- lition of the ten per cent., now added, on the other.- These allow- ances nearly balance one another, and the difierence will reduce the above to something less than one million and a half. This does not embrace the reduction on hemp, on unprepared wool, and on other articles, including cotton bagging, on which last mentioned article the reduction is 30 per cent. In addition to this — there is the reduction made by the Act of 1S30, on the protected articles of salt and molasses, amounting to |J.051,121, all of which is so much ta- ken from the Act of 1828, and a positive decrease of the protecting system. And this repeal of nearly three millions on the articles *'' chiefly received in exchange for the staple proclucf ions of the Southern States," amounts, our members teh us, "to an aggregate increase of the burthens of taxation, beyond what they were in 1828 of one million of dollars," as they believe! Your burthens increased? Pay nothmg on the unprotected articles — puy less on every protected article — pay far less on such as you especially and exclusively use, Und yet pay more in the aggregate ! Unmeasured assertion ! Is it an increase of burthen to pay 30 per cent, less on your cotton bag- ging — 40 per cent, less on your coarse negro blankets, and to ob- tain your negro cloth at a duty of one cent and three-fourths per yard, instead of 14, and in some cases 22 1-2 cents under the Tariff of 1828] The reality of the reduction on negro cloth has been denied. Hear the evidence of the Banner of the Constitution, the staunch advocate' of free trade princi43les, edited by a man whose skill in political economy and comprehensive knowledge of commercial operation is unsurpassed in our country. Extract — " The present duty on wooUen cloths called ph^in?, which constitute the chief clothing of the blacks, in the slave hol- ding States, if it costs not exceding 33 1-3 cents the square yard is 13 cents per square yard: if it exceed 33 1-3 cents, tlie duty is 22 1-2 cents per square yjjrd. The neio bill reduces all thai costs 35 cents and less, to 5 per centum, which can in no case exceed 1 3-4 cents per square yard. This is unquestionably a great reduction, and will be sensibly felt at the South.^^ But aie ice without our advantage in the removal of dutiee from the unprotected articles 1 I deny it. Broadly to maintain this assertion, is to deny, in effect, that our citizens are consumers of coffee and tea, as well as the people of the North; and that a sa- vingto us is as substantial abenefit. Will not the removal of duty from coffee, and the reduction on West India sugar, have an enli- Tening eflcct on Southern exchanges. Is there not tlie flour of Vir- ginia, the rice of Carolina and Georgia an i the limiber of all the South, to be exchangedfor these productions of West Indian indus- try 1 And whence comes this impulse but from the act just passed? Nor have we less interest in the reduction of duties on French pro- ductions. The low rate of 10 per cent, on silks, and G cents a gallon on wines, encourage in this country, the consumption of those articles, which will indirectly stimtdate the consumption in France of those Southern products for which they are exchanged, viz. of rice, and sea-island cotton, recently placed by treaty on the favored footing of a light specific duty. I ask you now, fellow^ citizens, whether our iDurthens have Iseen increased ? It is here plain that we have obtained a most substantial reduction from ihe oppressive Tariff of 1828, a reduction on the protected as well as fbe unprotected aiiicAes, and which generally estimated to extend lo 12» may safely be assumed to uniount to 10 millions of dollars. Ten 2 10 Snillions of tlollavs ammally saved to the people ; and this "an ni- trease of buithens," this an additional curse! Happy for my country if all her curses weigh like this ! Is the relief sufficient 1 By no means ; it halts far short of that degree of concession, with which the South should be satis- fied. I do not ask you to abandon your detennined opposition, but to select and adopt such remedies as will trvdy aftbrd you the relief you seek. I ask )a)U not to adopt a lemedy worse than the dis- ease ! Aye but the principle ! (he principle is retained in the new act, and we arc submissionists to stop at any thing short of its im- mediate and total abandonment. Fellow citizens, if we are bound to resist the lightest presumed encroachment on our rights, we should have begun the struggle 16 years ago ! Have we been slaves and submissionists since then ! In' 1816 the principle of protection was distinctly introduced, it was then engrafted on our polity, and by the hands of Southern Statesmen. From the com- mencement of our government, it was j ecognized at least as an mcident; in 1816 it took the form of a substantive, distinctive le- gitimate principle. Hear Mr. Calhoun. "Manufactures fostered, the farmer will find a ready market for his surplus produce, and what is al- most of equal consequence a certain and cheap supply of all his wants." "It will beneceesary to add as sOon as possible, a system of internal improvements." "He firmly believed that the country is prepared, even to maturity for the introduction of manufactures. It will introduce a new era in our aifairs, in many respects highly advantageous, and'ought to be countenanced by the Government.^* *'But if manvifactures are so far established, and if the situation of the country is so favorable to their growth, where is the necessity of affording them protection 1 It is to put them beyond the reach of contingency r See speech of Mr. Calhoun, April 22, 1816. Here then were the barrierg»of the Constitution overleaped ! Here was the breach effected, through which the manufacturer ever since has entered todes}X)il the South ! In 1828, this protective system had reached its extreme point of injustice— from this point, the baffled spirit of monopoly has been compelled to recoil. In 1830 a reduc- tion was effected on the improtected articles. In 1852, a reduc- tion on the protected as well as the unprotected ! Have the man- ufacturers receded from choice] No, from compulsion ! Theirs is a blind rapacity that prevents them from seeing, that in a timely and liberal concesson lies their true interest. They have been beaten back by the agency of political causes ; and who will under- take to decide that these causes shall have no further influence 1 It is true that divisiou is introduced into their ranks. At all events let us not forfeit the good opinion of such of oin- countrymen as think us right in our principles, by the unconstitutional and objec- tionable expedients, by whicU we seek to establish them. The 11 tiuest wisdom is tliat wliicli weighs well its means before it adopts them. But you have determined, fellow citizens, to adopt these dan- gerous expedients. You have instructed yom' delegates to call a ■ convention, and should that call fail, to nullify, b}^ the Legislature, the Tarift'law of 1832. Four years ago, we were as a band of bro- thers, united heart and hand in a struggle against oppression. This disastrous doctrine is introduced, and where are we now. Split iiilo bitter factions — burning with mutual jealousies — and treasuring up for each other that deep resentment that should have been directed solely against our oppressions ! The foundations of long established friendship have been broken up, the closest arid dearest human ties have been dissolved, and sons of the same hon- ored parents no longer clasp the hand of affection around the do- mestic hearth ! Such are the first fruits of this pernicious heresy ! by its fruits should you judge it. It is nearly four years, since, in an evil hour, the doctrine of Nullification was first submitted to the Legislatm-e. I was then a member. It came recommended to us as constitutional doc- trine, avouched by the distinguished names of Jeflerson and Madison. The Virginia and Kentucky resolutions were printed and distributed among the members — the genius of Mr. Cal- houn was exerted in the "Exposition" to apply the principles of these resolutions to the existing oppression, and the powerful dia- lectic of Harper, and the glowing eloquence of Preston, were employed in their defence. Animated by a just indignation against this nefarious scheme of plunder, I was predisposed to give to every measuse which purported to be a remedy, the most favorable recep- tion. I was predisposed to believe, that with its efficiency for exter- nal protection — this complex machine of our Government, contain- ed within itself a secret spring — which judiciously touched — se- cured likewise the rights of the minority, and of the States. .With these prepossessions, if the question had been put, on Nullifica- tion by the Legislature, for which that body was surely competent if the measure were constitutional, I might have voted for the measure. It was taken on convention and lost. But none of these prepossessions iiould long survive the test of a calm and deliberate examination. It appeared on reflection, that this theory of a Slate veto, however captivating as an abstraction, would prove most fallacious and pernicious too, in practic-e : that applied to a law for laying duties, conforming to the letter of the constitution (however violatory of its spirit) it could result only in violence ; that a State that, in such a case, shovdd assimie to apply the principle, must necessarily seek for redress, by a violation of the Constitiit ioci*~^a breach of faith towards her co-State?, and an jS.ee ConstjtutJon, eev.. 7 ai^d 10, Art. 1. 12 irtfiingcment of their rights secured to them by the compacf. Thia doctrine involved a furtlier diflicuhy that seemed insuperable. It supposed the power in the Nullifying State, to coujpel the call- ing a convention of the State?. Is tJicre any such power found in the Constitution? There is not. But it is the reserved right, it is said, of any State to call a Convention— granted — then is it equally the reserved right of every State to refuse — and we end as we began. Time, that steady corrector of the errors of human speculation, has enabled me to fortify these deductions of reason by the authority of an illustrious name — Mr. Madison, the author of the Virginia '* Report," the adviser and fellow l^xborer of Jefferson — in the preparation of the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions — has dis- tinctly declared that the principles of tliose resolutions, did not, and weic not intended to apj)ly to a law Jor laying duties : and Mr. Jefferson, if alive and consistent with himself, must confirm this decision, by .the declaration — ^Hha,i the fundamental defect of th-5 confederation was that it gave to every State Legislature — a »ie^- ative on every act of Congress " — an opposition irreconcileably at variance with the doctrine of a veto. You have been told that Nullification is a peaceful and con- stitutional remedy. As iuck it has been recommended to you : as «Mc/i you have embraced it. I admonish you — with no unfriendly voice — ^that it is not what it seems! You have been told that you have only to nullify, to gain instant relief from your oppressions ; "the Juries would do the rest." Fellow citizens — it is not so. — You have but plunged into greater difficulties ! You see in that single act commerce emancipated — Charleston a free port — pro- perty appreciated — agriculture rejoicing — while visions of long lost prosperity fill your imaginations, and lure you to the execu- tion ! Fatal delusion ! Your Free Port would be blockaded — your agriculture depressed — your property depreciated — your capital seeking elsewhere a safer investiiient — yovu- burthens under the Ta- riff aggravated — and your hands reeking perhaps with the deadly stains of civil war ! The Constitution declares that Congress shall have power to lay duties, ^c. provided such duties shall be uni-' form; and that no advantages shall be given to the ports of one Sf ate over those of another. By that single act, .you violate the Constitution — destro)'^ the revenue' — and invade the rights of the co-States. You reclaim, without the consent of the other parties to the compact, the powers which you delegated to Congress ; but for every dollar of the duties that you remit at Charleston, except you ha\e first seceded in due fonn, depend upon it, you make res- titution. Be the State in the Union, or out of it — be it peace or war — eventually you must restore it, were it a million ! But such a free trade system could not long endure. It would destroy 'he revenue. The President who signed the law, is bound b} oa h to see it eji;ecuted; and, however disposed to be iadulgeot, Copgress^ 18 tlie co-States, will compel him to perform his duty. The law must be enforced, or swift ruin would overtake them. When this ruiu is brought home to them, will they stop to inquire whether it lias been aifected through the intervention of Juries ? Will tlicy care I They will feel that they must act, or be involved in utter destruc- tion — and they will act. What merchant would send his ship to any other sea-port, when he would save 20 or 30,000 dollars on a for- eign cargo by sending his ship to Charleston 1 The foreign com- merce of every other sea-port would be swept away at a blow. Picture to yourself the condition of New York, if suddenly stripped of that foreign commerce by which the great mass of her popula- tion subsists ; look at the thousands who would be thrown out of employment and consigned to want. Realize for a moment the indignation that would pervade all classes of her citizens — listen to the execrations that would fill the mouths of her starving pop- ulation. Picture to yourself the like exasperation felt in every important sea-port in the Union^ and communicated by a necessary sympathy to the States to which they belong, and ask yourselves whether they would calmly submit to so flagrant a wrong. They would arrest the evil — by lohalever agency — they would arrest it — and Charleston would be blockaded. Foreign ships would pay the duties off the bar, or be warned off to such ports as collected the duties determined on by Congress. Can you raise that blockade] Can you drive off the naval force thi3t will be employed to enforce the general will of the co-States'? You cannot. Aye, but it is sometimes said, England can. England the ally of South Caro- lina against her sister States! England will raise the blockade! I cannot repress my indignation at so atrocious a suggestion. What ! the sons of those gallant sires, who stood up manfully against British oppression — wading through seas of blood — endur- ing" imprisonment and chains! — the sons of such sires call in the British sword to settle quarels among themselves ! — call them in virtually to-recolonize us! Far from the honored tombs of their fathers, let the bones of such sons rest ! What right has England to interfere in such a dispute ? Is Carolina known at her Court as an independent nation] Has she sent her ministers and con- suls ] Has she treaties of alliance with England ] England and foreign nations know only the "United States," — know and re- spect " her stars and stripes," — they know her un(|uestionable right to collect her revenues, and enforce her municipal regula- tions, without the interference of any foreign power whatever. England could not interfere — but if she desired it — urged by the disposition to dismember the empire, whose towering fortunes threatened to overtop her own — what Southern man could brook it] Look at Portugal — high minded men of Carolina — and be- hold the freedom of a small State that accepts the protection of a great one ! Look at Portugal and accept of British protection ! 14 Could you, without utter insanity, submit yonr peculiar interests to iier direction 1 Read the debates of tlie Imperial Parhament — tho abolition speeches of Lord Cliancellor Brougham. Read the res- olutions of the Jamaica Assembly, and accept of British protec- tion ! You cannot. But you are told that this blockade need not be apprehended : that no sooner has Charleston been declared a free port, than other cities will throw open their ports, to enjoy tlieir portion of tlie liberated commerce. Fellow citizens, this ar- gument, which I have heard confidently urged by men of the pu- rest patriotism and soundest judgment, but shows us how prone we are to deceive ourselves ! Are those States to which the prin- cipal sea-ports belong, free trade States? No, they are TariffStates! What infatuation then, to suppose they will defeat their cherished policy, by flinging open their ports to foreign commerce, when their whole struggle is to close them ! Where then do you stand? You have drawn down upon yourselves the very embarrassments, which, if your free port system had gone into effect, you would have inflicted upon the other commercial States. You have di- vested yourselves of your foreign commerce. You must receive all foreign supplies, through other ports than your own, and you will still pay your Tariff duties, saddled with the charge of an addi- tional freight and commission. With these emlmrrassments thrown upon your exchanges, it will not be unreasonable to expect a high- er rate of taxation adopted within the State, to meet the extraor- dinary position in which she will be placed. I think 1 have shown you that this remedy of Nullification is not only dangerous but abortive. It will be for you, before you adopt it, to reflect, whether, by an ineffectual effort to redress your- selves, you will not have given greater permanency to oppression. What remedy then, you will naturally ask, should we adopt 1 that, I reply, which was embodied in the resolutions we so unani- mously passed in 1828. " That having no longer any confidence in the magnanimity or justice of Congress, we should find relief from the oppressions of the Tariff" only in the action of Slates op- posed to such visurpation." This was then your opinion, then and now it is mine. From the unsustained effort of a single State can you hope for triu'uph 1 For neaily four years has there been an unceasing struggle to establish, within this State, the principle of Nullification, a struggle sustained by so much talent, character and zeal, as in any better cause would have ensured success. Are we unanimous yet ? Has any other State been converted to the doc- trine ? In one only of the Confederacy has the question been dis- tinctly made, and ihere it continues undecided. In how many years moving at such a rate, will you be in a condition to effect your re- lief? You address yourselves to the minority and ask them "why thev still cling to their opinions, why do they not, by withdraw- mg all opposition allow you to apply your remedy ?' Yet that ren^- 15 edy, it has been shown, will be not only inefficient but mischevioug. With how much greater force would the minority retort by requir- ing you to sacrifice your particular tenets fo the harmony of the South ! This is a Southern question. Nullification is not the creed of the Southern States. Yet it is these States only, acting' in unison, who are strong enough to apply the remedy. A confer- euce of the aggrieved States was heretofore suggested by Jefierson as a remedy against the incroachmentof Congress. Adopted at the present moment, and embodying, as such an assemblage would, the public sentiment of the united South, its decrees would be irresistible. All discordance within should be harinonized and oiu- external position would indicate a strengh in no other way to be acquired. The secession of a single State might be borne by the manufacturing interest with very becoming philosoph)^ The se- cession of the Southern States is an idea they would contemplate with dismay. It would leave them to exert their dextrons talen(s of taxation upon themselves. I will not dwell upon the objection so often urged against this Convention,that it would tend to the dissolution of the Union. The purpose for which it would be assembled would be a different one — and to suppose, because tjiey have the strength to affect such a pur- pose, they must of necessity so disloyally abuse it, is but a sorry compliment to our countrymen. FelJow citizens, in offering these views, I am aware that I op- pose myself to the strong current of your long cherished opinions, I can scarcely hope therefore that they will be received without prejudice. Should they induce you to review and reverse your former decisions, I shall rejoice at it. Should they not, the only consolation that will remain to me, will be that of having faith- fully and fearlessly discharged my duty. WM. ELLIOTT • Beaufort^ 22d August, 1832* iiss;