ABSTRACT
In view of the fact that the motion of Mr. Fitzimons directly involved an increase of duties over and above the revenue standard fixed by Mr. Madison in his original bill, and his express avowal that it was his object thereby to foster and protect manufactures, its great significance will be perceived. The discussion and final adoption of it also become important. An attempt has been made to escape this conclusion, upon the alleged ground that this first bill, as introduced by Mr. Madison, was not protective, but was a revenue measure exclusively. That does not answer the allegation that the act as it stands upon the statute-book is protective. Not only was the question then pending settled in favor of protection, under his commanding influence, but when it again arose in other stages of the bill, it was invariably determined in the same way-everybody understanding distinction between duties levied for revenue only, and those for both revenue and protection.
