nly a sharp division on the party line but almost equally so
on the sectional line. Mr. Douglas, Mr. Rice of Minnesota, Mr.
Latham of California, and Mr. Lane of Oregon were the only Northern
senators who united with the compact South against the bill.
Senators from Virginia, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Arkansas
were still taking part in the proceedings. Mr. Crittenden of
Kentucky and Mr. Kennedy of Maryland were favorable to the policy
of protection, but on this bill they withheld their votes. They
had not abandoned all hope of an adjustment of the Disunion troubles,
and deemed the pending measure too radical a change of policy to
be adopted in the absence of the senators and representatives from
seven States so deeply interested. Andrew Johnson of Tennessee,
sympathizing warmly with the Republicans on all questions relating
to the preservation of the Union, was too firmly wedded to the
theory of free-trade to appreciate the influence which this measure
would exert in aid of the national finances.

The test vote in the House was taken on the 27th of February, on
a motion made by Mr. Branch of North Carolina to lay the bill on
the table. Only 43 votes were given in favor, while 102 were
recorded against this summary destruction of the measure. The
sectional line was not so rigidly maintained as it was in the House.
Of the hostile vote 28 were from the South and 15 from the North.
The Virginia delegation, following Mr. Hunter's example, voted
solidly in opposition. The Southern men who voted for the bill
were in nearly every instance distinguished for their hostility to
secession. John A. Gilmer of North Carolina, Thomas A. R. Nelson,
and William B. Stokes of Tennessee, William C. Anderson, Francis
M. Bristow, Green Adams, and Laban T. Moore of Kentucky, separated
from their section, and in their support of a protective tariff
openly affiliated with the North.

The Morrill Tariff, as it has since been popularly known, was part
of a bill whose title indicates a wider scope than the fixing of
duties on imports. It provided also for the payment of outstanding
Treasury notes and authorized a loan. These additional features
did little to commend it to those who were looking to an alliance
with the Secessionists, nor did the obvious necessity of money for
the national Treasury induce the ultra disciples of free-trade in
the North to waive their opposition to a measure which distinctly
looked to the establishmen