vast interests affected-these things were out of place. None were more amazed, or SO thoroughly dismayed, at the passing of the Act, as the merchants of New York; none were more incredulous, than the Americans residing in London and Liverpool, most of whom, scouted the idea of such a measure being inflicted on the community. Is it wonderful, that the people of the South should object, to be governed after this manner?

This tariff, indeed, has not been defended in this country-that could hardly be attempted; it has been excused, on the plea that it could only be regarded as an act of eccentric fatuity, and that it would be rectified, immediately upon Congress assembling again. Congress has assembled, and has added to the measure, but in the opposite direction by rendering it more restrictive and protective than before. Here, then, we have the most modern specimen of American legislation, and a complete illustration of some of the results of those institutions. What conviction forces itself upon the mind? We are considering what the Union really is-its intrinsic, not its reputed value. These are some of its fruits. Strong evidence it is, to what extent eighty years of its working, have debilitated legislative talent. What a declension is here from the capacity and from the justice of Washington's age! It is plainly apparent, that the institutions of the Union, have either extinguished political ability and

judgment, or banished them from the government, delivering up the destinies of a magnificent empire into the hands of those, whose inexperience, incapacity, and self-seeking, are displayed in legislation such as this.

An American writer, in extenuation of the Northern party, has recently offered another excuse. Admitting, as he does, that the affair was a bribe, given to induce the State of Pennsylvania to change sides, he allows for it, on the ground that New England and New York, when they agreed to give the bribe, did not expect they would have to make the payment. They had not calculated on the Southern members being absent, and that this would enable the measure to pass. It was intended, therefore, both to bribe the State, and cajole it-to obtain the benefit, and escape the payment. We cannot see that this improves the affair. The State sold herself, and changed sides, and had a fair right to her price. When a bargain is based upon injustice to others, it does not seem to mend it, that the parties to it, should hope to delude each other. When making this arrangement, we are not told, how much thought was bestowed upon the interests of the Souththe intended victims or whether much was given, to hundreds of manufacturers in this country, whose accustomed industry was to be paralyzed.

There are those who have argued, that, admitting all the follies of the measure, it could not have caused or influenced secession, inasmuch

as the movement of the cotton States had already occurred. But the border States were wavering in indecision, at the moment selected for this measure-selected by those, who ought to have been well aware of the protests of the South, of the pretext for their own revolution, and of the nullification within their own remembrance. The cotton States had indeed seceded previously; but why? Because, as we have seen, political power had passed into the hands of the North, and they anticipated from the change, an utter disregard of their interests, and a course of policy opposed to the spirit of the Constitution, and to their rights under it. Was it possible to offer to the world, more prompt or convincing proof, than this tariff affords, that their apprehensions were well founded?

The leading supporters of the Union, bring forward another argument. They say, granted all this, still the tariff question was no sufficient ground for breaking up the Union. No one appears to have made the assertion thus disputed. Revolutions are never the result of mercantile calculations alone. Material interests may be sacrificed, for very long periods, without provoking them, but all that time, the electric fluid will have been accumulating, though it seems to be generated at the instant of discharge. This is but one of the alleged grievances of the South, and of all the least exciting, for questions of political economy, address themselves to the reason

those which arouse the passions, make revolutions.

Yet though, perhaps, the least active agent in causing the disruption, it seems,-taking it alone, -quite as sufficient, as that which produced the revolt of the colonies from this country. Here is a course of preferential and unjust taxation, persevered in, and that on a great scale, for thirty years, against reiterated protests. On that occasion, there was a duty of threepence per pound on tea, -trivial in amount,-and imposed for the profit of no special class, but for the general good. Nor was it imposed for remote objects, but to defray in part the expenses of a war entirely American, which had resulted to the benefit of the colonies, in the conquest of Canada, and left over, a debt not justly chargeable to the British taxpayer alone. When that trifling duty is contrasted, with the history we have narrated of the tariff question, it would seem as if, in this subject alone, the South had graver justification, than that which is held to have warranted the first revolution.

To this it will be replied, that the duty on teain itself a small matter-embodied a great principle-" Taxation without representation." In passing the Morrill tariff, there was taxation, in the absence of representation. But passing that point, and fully admitting the principle announced, we think another may be found as great,-the principle of justice. Taxation without representation, was held to violate the British Consti

tution, although great cities in England were so taxed. Is it not a violation of the American Constitution, so to impose taxation, that it shall benefit one portion of the Union, at the expense of the other? The people of the South appear to have the same cause, as regards the fact, to an infinitely greater degree; and as regards the principle, they seem to have one above any theoretical deductions a principle-embodied in a compact legible by all, and acknowledged by men, where no Constitutions exist-the principle of justice.

A tariff question may appear to be one, unlikely to be mingled with any kind of sentiment. Between two sections of a community equally prosperous, this would be the case. But circumstances

may exist, that will render it a source of strong feeling also. Senator Benton remarks on the

tariff of 1828: "The South believed itself impoverished to enrich the North, by this system; and certainly, an unexpected result had been seen in these two sections. In the colonial state, the Southern were the richer part of the colonies, and they expected to do well in a state of independence. But in the first half century after independence, this expectation was reversed. The wealth of the North was enormously aggrandized; that of the South had declined. Northern towns had become great cities, Southern cities had decayed, or become stationary; and Charleston, the principal port of the South, was less considerable than before the revolution. The North