Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

To the Cithern of Twiggs county. A HANDBILL Hiving been conjured up in mv enemies, to misiepreseut my viovs and mislead your understanding, I con sider in exposition of my principles in relation to ae r * iff, without disguise or reservation, to be demanded by duty to you and justice to mysed. "First, then, I m iinta>n that the Tariff was in tended, by ibe majority that imposed it, to o perate against the South; but that being blessed by the God of Heaven with a soil and climate which .Jive as a combination of advaotiges, we mas', by using economy and pursuing our in terest, grow rich, in despite of the Tariff. Se condly, that we ought to raise and produce ev ery article tliai we can or home consump.ion, and at the same time cultivate the great staple ©f necessity which the North cannot grow and is therefore compelled to purchase;—that by a dopting such policy, it is impossible that we, who can produce almost every aiticle of neces siiy, shonld grow poor, while out Northren breihern become rich. Thirdly, ihat all that the Soudieri? people want to enable them to throw die whole weight ot the protecting du ties on the heads of their Northei n brethren is to adopt and keep up a rigid course of eron oim —by supplying the wants of our fami lies by our own labor ai;d skill, by raising our "Wn horses and mules, tanning our own lea'lier, making our own shoes, spinning our own cloths, weaving our own bagging, and manufacturing every article we can for out own consumption. Fourthly, such a plan would save ro the citizens of Georgia two or three mil lions ot dollars per annum; as the only articles that we would be compelled to purchase, are j:on, salt and coffee. Under such a regimen, the Southern people would in a short time stand on the pinnacle of independence, in defi ance of the unjust bearing of the obnoxious ta riff. Fifthly, 1 further maintain that, should the Southern people pursue the doctrine ofmy nullifying opponents, purchasing almost every article of domestic consumption, the more mo ney we save, the more cotton we must plant, that in twenty years, our lands will be worn out, anil that tariff or no tariff, we will bo tributary to the Northern Siates. The truth of this doc trine is demonstrated by the prosperity of such planters as make small crops of cotton, but are enter prising in the development of their own jvsomces. These men are independent of the tauff, and beyond the reacit of its effects.— Neither lawyer nor county officer handies their m niey—while on the contrary, tin- planter, who devotes his lands and labor to cotton, and purchases the prime articles of living, has been, and will always be, insolvent, with or without a to i iff- On this point, I challenge investiga tion. I will here introduce a few words relative to the influence of the tariff on the price of cotton. It is an undeniable fact that the price of any ar ticle is governed by the quantify of that article in market. Assuming this as a truth, I ask a candid community whether they can expect as high a price for their cotton now as they receiv ed some twelve or fifteen years ago, consider ing me vast increase in the quantity produced? If my recollection serves me aright, the amount of cotton exported to Liverpool fourteen years ago wi* 240,000 bags, but in the year 1830 was 1,000,000. Here, fellow-citizens, is the true c mse of'the present low price of cotton, and not the tariff as ihe nullifiers and seditious would have y*ru believe. Now, as I have a bove stated, if the people of Georgia and the other cotton growing States, will fabiicate the articles necessary to their own support, the quanuty of cotton exported must diminish but the article rise in price, and the value in money be nearly all retained in our own country: for the only articles of primary consumption that we cannot prepare, are iron, salt and coffee.— Such are my views of the tariff, and such are the only views that I have ever expressed, notwith standing the affidavits of Matthew Robertson, M.nks his dependent and kinsman, and his o ther adherents. Flie said Robertson swears that f, on the 4ih ol July l ist, said the “Tariff was the best thing for ihe Southern States that had ever been done.” To his asseveration f give an unqual ified denial, and am supported in my declara tion by the certificate of John E. Dennard, Robert Radford, Thomas Chivers, Benjamin L ine, and John Thompson, to which ihey are willing to be qualified. By this certificate, it is apparent that my language at Hayden’s store on the 4ili of July, in the presence of Mr. Rob ertson, was in strict accordance witli mv present exposition, and tliai Mr. Robertson lias gar bled and distorted it, to suit his own purposes. Fhe subserviency of Marks to the will and pleasure of Robertson is sufficient to account lor the testimony he has given or may in future give in any case in which R bertson may, from eanrice or hatred, take an interest. In relation to the affidavits of Dr. Terrell and Messrs. Griffin and H irrison, it will be perceived that they are decidedly ambiguous. They represent me as advocating the tariff, but avoid stating in what that advocacy consists.— If 'bey mean by advocacy , that the repeal of tile tariff should be effected by economy in the expenditures of the Southern people, and not v inciting single States to nullify laws of Con giess and dismember the Union, then indeed they are right. To the oath of Samuel Rogers, that on the 3d install,, n the house of Mr. Granberry, I was in favor of he lai iff,” I present the cer tificates of Robins Andrews, B ttlurn Oneal, James Avirett, Benjamin U. Kelly and J.dra E rnes, who are ill willing to swear to 'bat winch they ceriify. Ido not believe hat any other person present at that time, except Mr. H irdin, will charge me with such language; and as for Hardin, I care nothing. He is a de graded tool of my political opponent—one of those young gentlemen that have more frivoli ty in their manners ilmo sense in their brains Thus, fellow-citizens, have I been compell ed bv a conspiracy as malicious as unjust and as deprave las ungenerous, to lay the present exposition before you. Without equivocation or reserve, l have stated my views in relation to the tariff. The course pursued by mv ene mies in this matter is strange. I have been ar raigned at the bar of public opinion, for sup porting the very doctrines which a few years since were popular in this county. You all recollect that we convened in Marion soon af ter 'he passage of the Tariff in 1828, and ihat we adopted resolutions maintaining the very principles which i now avow. Why is all this political shuffling and manoeuvring? The means two yeais ago deemed wise, expedient, and patriotic, to counteract the tariff, will not now do for my political opponents. They have found a shorter way through the abstruse doctrines of nullification and separation. You have new, follow-citizens, my views and defence before you, and I shall be content with your candid and impartial decision. 7 , , H. H TARVKR. 1 wiggs county, Ga. Sept. 21, 1831. GEORGIA —Twiggs County. Wp certify, that, at a conversation, held at Hay den’s store, in Twiggs county, on thn 4th of July last between Matthew Robertson and Hartwell H. Tar ver, we were present; and heard the conversation; and do unequivocally declare that the following are the facts of that conversation: Colonel Tarver said that the tariff was intended to affect the South and that it was unjust to protect one branch of industry to the prejudice of another; hut that we had, it we pursued our own interest, a combination of advan tages over (lie Northern people; and that all the Southern people wanted, to destroy the prejudicial effed of the existing tariff', was economy. That we should make everything within ourselves for the support ot our own families, raise our provisions, ba con, pork, flour, corn; make cloths tor our own fami nes, cotton bagging, and raise our own horses and mules; and that such an economical course adopted and pursued by the South would induce, the Northern people to abandon the tariff We do further deny positively that Colonel Tarver ever said that the ta riff was Ihe best thing ever done for the South, is tes tified by M Robertson; and we heard the conversa tion; and Colonel Tarver never advanced any such an idea Given under our hands, this 14th Septem ber, 1831. J. E. DENNARD his ‘ ROBERT t RADFORD, mark THOMAS CHIVERS. BENJAMIN FANE. JOHN THOMPSON. Note. —Mr. Radford says tbfet there might be a small part of the latter part of the conversation that he might not havQ heard; but that he heard Robertson admit that cotton goods were lower than they were ever known before, and that all the Southern "people wanted was economy —the very thing contended for by Tarver. And Mr. Dennard further states, that the conversation there closed, by Tarver’s observing that if Robertson admitted that, Tarver was there done with him. GEORGIA — Twiggs County. We do hereby certify that vve were at Samuel M. Granberry’s on the 3d instant, and heard the whole of the conversation between H H. Tarver and Martin L. Hardin, and are clearly of opinion that Colonel Tarver did not advocate the tariff in that conversation; nor did he say that he was in favor of the tariff, as sworn to by Samuel Rogers. And, moreover, in said conversation, Hardin ac cused Tarver of being friendly to the tariff; to which charge Colonel Tarver gave the most prompt denial, and said that the tariff was intended to protect the Northern manufactories to the injury of the Southern States; but it we would adopt means within our con trol, we could counteract its evil effects, September 19 1831 ROBINS ANDREWS. JOHN EANES GEORGIA —Twiggs County. I do certify that I was present in the house of Sam uel M. Cranberry, on the 3d instant, and heard the whole conversation between Hartwell H. Tarver and Martin L Hardin on the subject of the tariff; and I do positively state that the said Tarver did not advocate the tariff, as certified by Martin L. Hardin; and I do furthermore state, that Colonel Tar ver did not say that he was in favor of the tariff, as testified by Samuel Rogers. Given under my hand, this 19th September, 1831. BRITTURN ONEAL. GEORGIA —Twiggs County. I hereby certify, that 1 was present at Samuel M. Granberry’s. on the 3d instant, and heard the whole conversation between H. H. Tarver and Martin L. Hardin, in the presence of B Oneal, and H H Tar ver did not advocate the tariff, as stated bv Martin L. Hardin; and moreover did not say he was in lavor of the tariff, as testified by Samuel Rogers. This certi ficate is not prompted bv feelings of friendship to wards Colonel Tarver: for I do not intend to vote for him at the next election This 19th September. 1831. his JAMES t AVIRETT. Attest, mark. D. Wimberly. GEORGIA —Twiggs County. I do certify that I was present at Samuel M. Gran berry’s, on Saturday, the 3d of this month, and heard the whole conversation, between H H. Tarver and Martin L Hardin; and 1 positively state, that Col. Tarver did not. in that conversation, advocate the Tariff, as certified by „said Hardin; and did not sv in that conversation, that he was in favor of the Tariff as testified by Samuel Rogers; and I hate had repeat ed conversations with Col. Tarver on the-subject, and have never heard him advocate the Tariff This 19tli tiept, 1831 BENJAMIN U. KELLY.