DEC. 15,1828.] Drawback on Refined Sugar. [H. OF R. ported sugar are nearly $1,700,000. The gentleman from it. It was possible, indeed, that, some years hence, enough New York [Mr. STORRS] says the business is so small that sugar might be raised in this country for our own conit is hardly worth discussing. It is, indeed, insignificant sumption; but should we not, in the mean while, act wisein amount now, and must be so as long as your laws make ly for our present interest? Should a gainful commerce a discrimination against it; but the object of this bill is to not be cherished? And because its benefits were not place our citizens upon a just equality with their foreign very general, nor very great, were we therefore to derivals, and thus to enlarge their business, and add to the stroy it? He had always considered it a sound maxim of wealth and prosperity of the nation, without injury or government ever to legislate for the existing state of inconvenience to any man. things, and not to modify the system until it became neMr. DRAYTON said he was in favor of this bill. Its cessary to do so. The drawback system was beneficial operation was not injurious to any, while it produced a now; and as long as this should be the case, he was for benefit (not indeed to any large amount, but still a great letting the law alone. When it was actually found to benefit) to the commerce and navigation of the United check the industry of the country, then it would be time States. How [asked Mr. D.] are we to pay for the sugar enough to repeal it. It was the great defect of the tariff on which we refund this duty? Certainly by our native law that it was legislation in futuro. Its provisions were products: for there is no way of paying for imports but contended for, not because the manufactures concerned by exports. This benefits our agriculture. Then we do now exist, but because, at some future time, after a have the transport of the goods-this benefits our com- lapse of years, they may exist, and become commensumerce and navigation; while, at the same time, we intro-rate with the demand. Mr. D. concluded by saying that duce into the country a species of manufacture which he had not been able to refrain from making these few otherwise would not exist. Against a bill so evidently ben- observations. He considered the present as a wise bill, eficial, and productive of no ill effect to any, he was at a one of the few which he had heard in that House, respectloss to perceive what valid objection could be brought. ing either commerce or manufactures, which injured noHe would briefly notice one or two which had been sug-body, directly or indirectly. gested. The gentleman from New York [Mr. STORRS] Mr. McDUFFIE said, that, in the few words he intendhad said that the effect of the bill would interfere with the ed to submit in reply to what had been said on the other growth of domestic sugar. But how was this possible? side of the question, he would confine himself to the exIf, instead of sugar, the drawback was granted on coffee, planation of the actual operation of the proposed meaor on any other article not raised in the United States, it sure, with a view of showing that it is not a drawback, would as much interfere with the domestic product of but a bounty upon exportation, which it provides. He coffee as of sugar. Why would it not interfere with the believed there was no other instance in the legislation of growth of coffee? Because none was grown within the this country in which a drawback was allowed, after an United States. And why would it not interfere with the imported article had changed its character, as well as its growth of sugar? Because enough was not raised in the owner; being not only transferred from the importer, but United States to supply our home consumption, and there-manufactured into a new article. When the raw material fore competition was out of the question. Competition is converted into a manufacture, it is, to all intents and could not exist unless the imported article was put on a purposes, consumed, and is as fairly a subject of taxation footing with the domestic. But the duty on the foreign as any other article which enters into the consumption of was equal to one-third of its value. Competition was the country. therefore out of the question. Sugar raised here did not The policy of the drawback system cannot be fairly sell merely at the cost of production, but at a price in extended to manufactures of which the raw material is which the duty was included; and as the foreign article produced in the United States as well as imported from was saddled with a duty of three cents a pound, the do-abroad. If we had no brown sugar in the country but mestic bore the same price, and that three cents was clear what we import, it would be obvious that the price of profit. Our own sugar, as every one knew, was used ex- the article would be increased by the duty imposed upon clusively in its raw state. All the refined sugar in the the importation, in a degree proportioned to the duty. It United States was manufactured from the foreign article would also be certain that the Government could not be alone. If it were not, we should necessarily import the exposed to fraud and imposition by having to pay a drawrefined article from abroad. That would pay the duty, and back upon refined sugar made of the domestic raw material. this duty would be paid by the consumer; whereas, by al-But where the raw material is produced at home as well lowing its importation with drawback, the article is ob- as imported, the drawback not only opens a door for a tained cheaper, while all our domestic sugar is raised ex- fraudulent substitution of the domestic for the foreign clusively for consumption in other ways. The effect was material, but it destroys the only legitimate ground upon unavoidable. We manufactured a new article of exporta- which a drawback can be claimed. Mr. McD. said he tion. This produced importation, the importation paid would not pretend to argue seriously from the absurd duty, and the duties augmented the revenues of the Go-paradox of the manufacturers, that high protecting duties vernment. The effects of the system were all beneficial, reduce the price of the article subjected to them. But he and injured nobody, and why should it be objected to on was equally far from contending, on the other hand, that mere abstract principles? the price of an article is raised by a sum equal to the du It had been asked, why should we not extend this prin- ty imposed upon its importation in all cases. There are ciple to other articles of a similar kind? The reason was some articles which we can produce cheaper in the Unitvery simple. It would not be for our interest to do so.ed States than they can be produced in any other part There was no drawback on wool, for instance, because of the world; and these are the productions of Southern the country could raise enough for its consumption. If agriculture. The cotton planter produces the great stait did not, and could not, then competition was at an end. ple of the Southern States cheaper than it can be proIt had been observed that this system had been pursued duced in any other part of the world, because, by a sysfrom the commencement of the Government. This surely tem of unjust and oppressive legislation, by Congress, he was a strong ground of presumption that the system had has been reduced to such a point of depression as to rebeen found to work well. But the House had been told ceive not more than an average of from ten to fifteen that now there was a change of circumstances. Sugar cents a day for the labor of his slaves. The sugar plantwas now raised in the United States, which had not for-er, owing to the duty imposed upon the importation of merly been the case. This was true; but he questioned foreign sugar, and to the smallness of the number who the logic of the argument which had been founded upon have yet embarked in the business of making sugar, real VOL. V.-14. H. OF R.] Internal Improvements.-Drawback on Refined Sugar. [DEC. 16, 1828. Resolved, That Congress does not, under the constitu The resolutions were read, and ordered to lie upon the table. DRAWBACK ON REFINED SUGAR. The bill increasing the amount of drawback on sugars refined within the United States, being the unfinished business of yesterday, again came up. ized, he understood, 500 dollars per annum for every effi- the right to execute a complete system of internal imcient laborer he employs; and he knew one gentleman provements. who had realized, in one year, as much as 800 dollars. It is obvious, from this state of facts, and from the great tion, possess this power. abundance of sugar lands in the country, that the capital of cotton planters, and other Southern slave-holders, will become rapidly invested in the more profitable business of sugar planting. The result will be, at no distant period, a full supply of the consumption of the United States, from our own domestic resources, and a fall in the price of sugar. Competition will inevitably reduce the present enormous profits of the sugar planter, and, in the Mr. GILMER remarked, that, as he was not very consame proportion, the price of the article. He had no hesi- versant with commercial subjects, he should not have entation in saying, that, if the protecting duty were repeal-gaged in the discussion of this bill, but that the origin of ed, the sugar business would be the most profitable branch the allowance of a drawback upon refined sugar had not of Southern agriculture; and he therefore regarded that du- been stated, nor the operation of the present allowance ty as the most excessive and gratuitous of all the bounties fairly represented to the House. We have been told that of the protecting system. the allowance of drawback upon sugar refined within the What, then, is the inference from all this? It is appa- United States had been coeval with the constitution. We rent that the price of brown sugar, in the United States, de- were not, however, informed of any difference in the po pends more upon the domestic than upon the foreign supply. licy which produced the first law upon this subject, and What is erroneously pretended by our woollen and cotton that which is the evident object, for the passage of the manufactures is strictly true of our sugar planters. They present bill. The first law allowing a drawback on refincan make sugar cheaper than any other sugar planters in ed sugar was passed in 1794, and was entitled “An act the world. Under a system of free trade they could suc-laying duties upon snuff and refined sugar.” The duties cessfully contend with the whole world, and would drive to be collected by virtue of this act were to be appropri the West India sugars out of the markets of Europe. ated to the payment of the public debt. In order to seUnder these circumstances, a drawback upon refined su- cure to the Government the highest possible revenue from gar, founded upon the idea that the price of brown sugar this excise upon refined sugar, a heavy duty was laid upon in the United States is increased three cents a pound by imported refined sugar. The entire supply of that article, the impost duty, would be as unwise as a drawback upon for domestic consumption, was thereby given to the sugar woollen cloth, founded upon the idea that the price of raw refiners. For the purpose of enabling them to furnish wool in the United States is increased fifty per cent. by that supply, and, at the same time, to avoid the consequenthe impost duty laid upon foreign imported wool. In ces of a great surplus in the market, by which the refines both cases the impost duty would undoubtedly increase would be less able to pay the excise, a drawback was althe price of the article subjected to it. But no one who lowed them, equal to the excise and the duty upon the understood the question could seriously believe either that raw sugar imported, upon all refined sugar exported. the price of brown sugar would be raised three cents a They were allowed the benefits of the foreign market, pound, or that, in the other, the price of raw wool would that they might be the better enabled to pay a tax imposed be raised fifty per cent. Upon the whole, Mr. McD. by the Government upon the home consumption. Mr. G thought the existing drawback of four cents on refined observed, that, from our proximity to the West Indies, and sugar amply sufficient, and he hoped it would not be in- the circumstance that the most essential supplies of the sugar creased. islands were drawn from the United States, a large quantity of sugar was brought into the United States for exportation; so that the sugar refiners were enabled, very soon, not only to supply the home market, but to transport a considerable quantity for the foreign market. The internal duty upon refined sugar ceased after the 30th of Mr. HALL, of North Carolina, rose and said, that the January, 1802. In 1813, an internal duty, of four cents, resolutions which he was about to present had been sug- was again laid upon sugar refined within the United States; gested by a bill which he found on his table-the Cumber- and for the same reason as before, a drawback was allowland Road bill-the provisions of which he believed con- ed upon exportation. By the act of 1816, the duties uptrary to the constitution, and the fundamental principles on refined sugar were continued, and the drawback inof our political institutions. It was not his purpose, him- creased. By the act of 1817, the duties upon refined self, to go into a discussion of the abstract constitutional sugar were repealed. By the act of 1818, the drawback question. But if it should be thought proper by others, the resolutions might offer an option to the House, in discussing the question separately from the bill. If this [Here the debate closed for this day.] TUESDAY, DEC. 16, 1828. INTERNAL IMPROVEMENTS. should not be done, [Mr. H. said] the resolutions would yet serve him as a protest against the bill and its principles. Mr. H. then offered the following resolutions: Resolved, &c. That the People of the United States, in the formation of their Governments, did not alienate their sovereignty. Resolved, That the rights of jurisdiction and soil are the essential attributes of sovereignty. Resolved, That the power to execute a system of internal improvements, within the States, involves the right of jurisdiction and soil. Resolved, That the power to make Roads and Canals, within the jurisdictional limits of the States, and to make laws for their preservation and protection, and to erect toll gates, and to enforce the collection of tolls, involves allowed by the act of 1816, of four cents a pound, upon refined sugar exported, was again re-enacted. Mr. G. observed, that the act of 1818 was the first which allowed a drawback upon refined sugar, unconnected with an internal duty. Mr. G. said, he had been thus particular, in order to show more clearly that the gentleman from New York [Mr. CAMBRELENG] was mistaken, in supposing that the policy now contended for had been adopted during the first administration of the Government. He said, he would now attempt to show that the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. SERGEANT] was mistaken, in supposing that the export of refined sugar had decreased in consequence of the drawback being no more than four cents. The export of refined sugar entitled to drawback was, 1819, 1820, $58,993 47,788 18,044 DEC. 16, 1828.] 1821, 1823, 1824, 1825, 1826, 1827, Drawback on Refined Sugar. $156,527 55,187 57,908 50,017 168,991 236,744 [H. OF R. sented the great cities upon the Atlantic, [Mr. GoRHAM, from Boston, Mr. CAMBRELENG, from New York, Mr. SERGEANT, from Philadelphia, Mr. BARNEY, from Baltimore, and Mr. DRAYTON, from Charleston.] These gentlemen, no doubt, represented the interests of their constituents; but, [Mr. G. said] it would be well worthy of consideration, whether that interest was not, in this instance, peculiar, From which statement it appeared, [said Mr. G.] that so and such as had little connexion with the interest of the far from the export having lessened by the operation of nation. The manufacture of refined sugar for exportathe present law, more refined sugar was exported during tion, and almost entirely that for home consumption, must the last year than any other year since the passage of the necessarily be confined to the large importing cities upon law in 1818. Mr. G. observed that he supposed the ob- the seaboard, because sugar is too heavy an article to be ject of the drawback at present allowed, was, to enable carried into the country, refined, and then returned for the refiners so to extend their business, as always to have exportation. Mr. G., therefore, felt himself authorized to an ample supply for the home market, and in case of the say, that the great object of this bill was, to give employ. accumulation of any great surplus, to enable them to ex-ment to an increased capital and labor, in the cities on the port without loss. This object was fully attained by the Atlantic. Mr. G. said that he had admitted that the conpresent duty. But, said Mr. G. that object was a very sequences of the passage of this bill would be an increase different one from what the advocates of this bill wish to of wealth. But, said he, wealth is not the sole source of effect by its passage. They desire so to model our reve- the strength of a Government, or the happiness of a peonue laws as to direct thereby the application of a portion ple. He doubted, himself, whether any manufacture, of our capital and labor to the manufacture of an article within the United States, solely for foreign exportation, for exportation out of materials of foreign growth. Hi- and created by the forced action of the laws, would be therto, the advocates for the encouragement of domestic beneficial to the country. He believed that such an intermanufactures, by means of our revenue system, have con-est would always require as great an expense to defend it fined their views to the supply of the home market, of as it was worth. such manufactures as were made of materials the growth Mr. G. then observed that his great objection to the pasor production of our own country. The present bill goes sage of the bill was the inducement it held out for the accufarther. It designs the creation of a manufacture of fo- mulation of capital and labor in the cities. He said he had reign materials, and for the foreign markets. He said, not become a convert to the doctrine of the present Secrethat, whenever the situation of the people of the United tary of the Treasury, that it was the business of the GoStates enables them to manufacture for the foreign mar-vernment to depress the labor of the country, or that it was ket, without the aid of the Government, they will have its true policy to draw population from the country into the right to do so; and the Government cannot constitu- the towns, that, by the more minute division of labor, tionally restrain them. But the Government [Mr. G. said] profits might increase. The Secretary was right, [he said] had no right to create a manufacture by bounties, nor was if the accumulation of wealth was the sole object of our it politic to do so, if it had. The Government, he said, support of Government. It might sometimes become a had the power to lay imposts, and to regulate commerce question whether wealth or liberty was most valuable to a with foreign nations. There was no other power granted people. Mr. G. said he supposed, from the Secretary's to it by the constitution, by which the bill could be pass- opinions, that he would prefer wealth. He thought difed. The creation of a manufacture within the United ferently himself. He believed that the freedom of a naStates cannot be considered a regulation with any foreign tion depended upon the high sense of individual indepennation. And it would be equally absurd [Mr. G. said] to dence felt by all classes of the people. It had been genecall a bounty of five cents a pound upon refined sugar rally thought that we owed success in our Revolutionary exported, an impost or a tax for the purpose of revenue. struggle to the love of liberty engendered by agricultural But, [Mr. G. said] he did not intend to enter at large into habits. And it is still the opinion of many of the wisest men of the discussion of this part of the subject. He wished it not the age, that the continuance of our free institutions will deto be agitated during the present session. The question of pend upon the continuance of the virtuous habits and inpolicy he considered of great importance, not so much dependent feelings which belong to the people of the from any consequences that would follow from this parti- country. He asked, if that were so, whether it was our cular bill, but from the principle it would recognize, and policy to force capital and population into our cities, which the practice that would follow, in relation to other subjects. might otherwise go to the improvement of our agriculMr. G. admitted that this bill would not affect injuri- ture? For himself, he thought not. And he was sorry to ously the productions of domestic sugar, and that its gene- think that the honorable member from New York [Mr. ral effect would be to add some wealth to the country. He CAMBRELENG] was, in the present instance, departing from admitted that the five cents bounty to be paid, must, how- his usual democratic course. ever, be previously secured by the Government, from the Mr. G. again repeated, that it had not been his object duties on raw sugar, which would not otherwise be import- to discuss at large either the unconstitutionality or im ed. Mr. G. said it might seem, from this admission, that policy of the bill. He had only intended, upon rising, to he ought not to apply the term "bounty" to the five cents show that the gentleman from New York [Mr. CAMBREto be paid upon exportation rather than drawback. He LENG] was mistaken, when he informed the House that the justified himself from the circumstance of this five cents present bill adopted no new policy, and that the same prinbeing paid in a manner that would not authorize the pay- ciple was recognized as sound, soon after the present Goment of a drawback upon any other article; and he called vernment went into operation; and also to show that the upon the gentleman from New York [Mr. CAMBRELENG] gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. SERGEANT] was misto say whether this was not so. The sugar which the refiners taken, in saying that the export of refined sugar had deuse is not imported nor entered for the benefit of draw-creased under the operation of the present law, allowing back. They refine, indiscriminately, from the mass of su- but four cents a pound upon the exportation of refined sugar. gar imported for the home market, and do not send it He thought he had fully succeeded in that object. abroad until some favorable foreign market is offered. Mr. SILAS WOOD, of New York, observed, in reply, Mr. G. said there was one circumstance with which he that the gentleman from Georgia was certainly mistaken had been particularly struck; and that was, that all the in supposing that drawback in relation to the present artizealous advocates of this bill were gentlemen who repre- cle was intended for revenue, by way of excise. At the H. OF R.] Drawback on Refined Sugar. [DEC. 16, 1828. time the law was originally passed, there was an excise duty with it would, in his apprehension, be both politic and as well as an impost, and if the object had been to raise just. a revenue from refined sugar, by way of excise, when Mr. WEEMS said he was in favor of the bill, and the impost was remitted by granting a drawback, the ex- would briefly assign the reasons which induced him to supcise duty would of course have been continued; but the fact was the reverse. The excise duty was remitted as well as the impost. The object of the law was entirely different: it was intended to foster and increase the commerce and navigation of the country. port it. He considered the carrying trade as important to agriculture, and held it to be a duty of Congress to encourage it-not, indeed, by granting it a premium; but he did not consider the drawback allowed to sugar refiners as a premium at all. He entirely concurred in the very able The article of sugars forms an essential article in our view of the subject which had been presented by the gentle commerce. Our exports to the West Indies, by which man from Maine [Mr. SPRAGUE.] It was merely a paying we paid for them, amounted to upwards of $4,000,000, back to the importer what he had paid in the shape of duty. and three-fourths of these exports consisted of the pro- It could make no difference to the Treasury whether the ducts of agriculture; there was not an article in all our Government paid this back to the importer himself or to a list of imports which tended more directly to encourage third party. The importer, when he sold it to that third the agriculture of the country. It furnished a market party, would, of course, include in its price the duties he for three millions of dollars' worth of our own products, had paid; and when the article left the country, the duty and a vast proportion of that amount consisted of bulky ought to be remitted to whoever happened to be the holdarticles, such as lumber, live stock, and fish, the transpor-er. He could see no reason why such a manufacture tation of which gave employment to much tonnage, so ought to be encouraged; would to God that all the parthat this branch of trade gave encouragement at once to tiality lately exhibited by the Government in the encourage. the agriculture, commerce, and navigation, of the country. ment of manufactures could be justified on ground as From the beginning of the Government the policy of the solid as this. drawback system had been to make the drawback equal Mr. W. said that he viewed the subject as a farmer. to the duty; but experience had proved that such was not He did not pretend to be versed in all the depths of comnow in fact the case. The duty was three cents per mercial science, but he was in favor of this branch of busipound upon the raw sugar, and including what was lost ness, because it carried from our shores the surplus products in the process of refining, every pound of clarified sugar of agriculture; it carried away our flour, butter, lard, and a required two pounds of the raw material. The loss in re-variety of other articles. The sugar which came in in exfining was found to amount to something less than a cent; change employed the industry of our own citizens; and all to indemnify the refiner, therefore, the drawback ought they asked of the Government was, that it would not make to be something more than five cents. The bill, however, them pay for thus benefiting the country. Another beneficial fixed it at five; and in so doing, it but continued the policy effect was this, that the surplus of imported sugar, over that heretofore invariably pursued from the foundation of the which was refined, went into the consumption of the counGovernment. For want of this equality the business was try, and thus helped to reduce the price to the poor confound to languish, and the true reason why it had not sumer. He confessed his astonishment at the arguments flourished and increased of late years, as it had done former- adduced in opposition to the bill, by the gentleman from ly, was, that the Government was drawing from the pocket New York, [Mr. STORRS] and the gentleman from South of the refiner a portion of the proceeds of his industry-it Carolina, [Mr. McDUFFIE.] One of them had told the was sharing with him the profits of his business. In all House that it would crush the growth of American sugar. other commercial countries the drawback fully equalled the while the other as strenuously contended that it would give duty paid; the consequence of which was, that sugar re-a premium to the sugar grower. He thought that the arfiners were able to undersell, and actually do undersell, guments of one of the gentlemen furnished a sufficient those of the United States, and thereby monopolize the fo- reply to those of the other. reign market. In Great Britain this branch of manufacture was husbanded with assiduous care, as furnishing valuable branch of commerce; its amount there, fluctuated from 20,000,000 to 28,000,000 of dollars, averaging Mr. CAMBRELENG said, that the question had been so 24,000,000 annually; and while they import 24,000,000 of ably debated, he should have offered no remark upon it, but dollars' worth of the article in a raw state, they export in for the very extraordinary opposition the bill had encounthe same state only seven millions, while of refined sugar tered, and the importance of the principle on which a dethey export the same amount of seven millions, the ba-benture system was founded. Gentlemen had debated lance going to home consumption. Now the British manu- the question as if some new principle was about to be facturer is less favorably situated than the American, for introduced into our laws. By adverting to the laws he is at a greater distance from the sugar market; and yet, they would be satisfied of their mistake. Mr. C. gave a there, they export by millions, while we only by thousands. brief sketch of the legislation on the subject, from 1794 Why cannot we manufacture as much of the article as the to 1818, to show that, whenever the attention of Congress English? The true reason is, that the English manufac-had been directed to it, they had uniformly sanctioned turer has his whole duty remitted, while the American the policy of allowing a drawback on exportation equal only has a part; the one enjoys his whole profit--the other to any internal excise that may have existed, and also, a shares his profit with the Government. If, then, the drawback equal to the impost levied upon the foreign raw effect of this bill will be to encourage a branch of business material consumed in the manufacture of refined sugar. favorable at once to manufactures, to commerce, and to In every law, anterior to the late war, the drawback was agriculture, why would gentlemen refuse a bill so evident- always double the impost duty on the raw material. ly advantageous to the country? As things stood, while revising our laws in 1816 and 1818, this rule was departed Great Britain exported seven millions, we exported but from. The duty on the raw material was placed at three twenty-seven thousand. The business, therefore, was in a cents, in 1816; in 1818, the drawback on the refined was languishing state; nor could any one wonder at this, when fixed at four cents only, instead of six, which would have he considered that the Government were retaining in their been allowed according to our ancient rule. The refiners own hands nearly one-third of the duty. The manufae- petitioned for the restoration of this rule. The subject turers had invested a large capital in buildings. Their had been twice before the Committee of Ways and Means, business was beneficial to the country, and injured and a bill, substantially the same as that now under connobody. Their request was reasonable, and to comply sideration, had been twice reported by that Committee, in a Mr. JOHNSON, of New York, demanded that, when the question was taken, it should be taken by yeas and nays; and they were ordered by the House. In DEC. 16, 1828.] Drawback on Refined Sugar. [H. or R. whether to supply his wants or to purchase the surplus produce of his labor. Are these not democratic principles? Would the gentleman from Georgia substantially refuse the American refiner the privilege of seeking a market for the surplus produce of his labor? What becomes, sir, of his doctrines of free trade? 1825 and 1826. It was a mere question of inquiry, before such change. This bill, sir, can do no injury to any interthe Committee on Commerce, as to what should be the est, while it removes a restriction on an export trade; makes rate of drawback. They were satisfied that five cents a small addition to our Treasury, without adding one cent might be allowed, with perfect security to the revenue to the price in consumption; increases an existing manuand justice to the refiner. facture; enlarges the market for our agricultural producThe Committee had not attached any great importance tions; and extends the navigation of the country. to the bill, but the House had made it important, by ques- I have no disposition [said Mr. C.] to prolong this debate; tioning the policy of such debentures. He thought, when but I cannot avoid noticing some of the extraordinary docthe practical effect of drawbacks of duty on raw materials trines which gentlemen have advanced. The gentleman was understood, the advantage of them would be admitted from Georgia asks whether I have abandoned my ¡demoon all hands. What is, [said Mr. C.] the proposition now cratic principles. Sir, I have ever been the advocate of before us? Our sugar refiners have been for forty years en- the principles of free trade. I will strike off a restriction gaged in supplying our own consumption: they have the whenever I can reach it, whether it be on exportation or means of enlarging their establishments, and propose to importation. And if I cannot strike it off, I will relieve you to do so, for the purpose of refining for exportation, our industry from its operation. I wish every man in the provided you will permit them to export their manufac- country to have the market of the world open to him, ture free from our consumption duties; in other words, provided you will allow them a drawback on the refined sugar equivalent to the duty you impose on the raw material. They merely ask you to remove a restriction on our export trade. Can any advocate of the principles of free trade oppose their petition? Suppose you refuse to allow the debenture? You merely keep this branch of I regret very much, sir, to find this measure opposed by industry as it has been kept for twenty years-restricted the gentleman from South Carolina, [Mr. MCDUFFIE] with to your own market; while the refiners of Great Britain, whom I have been so long associated in resisting restrictions France, the Netherlands, and the Hanse Towns, opposed and vindicating the doctrines of free trade. If that gentleby no such restriction, will be employed in furnishing man had not entirely mistaken the nature of the question, this manufacture for exportation as well as for their own he certainly never would have opposed the principle of consumption. Take off the restriction, and your refiners this bill. He assumes, that the refiner does not pay the will gradually share in this trade. The number of our duty while he receives a bounty from the Government of five refining establishments will be increased; our importations cents per pound on his manufacture. He is mistaken, sir, of the raw material for refining will be enlarged; we shall both in his facts and his conclusion. The refiner not only gradually create a new branch of commerce, by adding pays the duty to the importer, but almost uniformly antianother article to our exports; each additional establish- cipates the payment of the bond. The gentleman has conment will make annual contributions to your Treasury, verted a mere drawback of impost into a positive bounty through the consumption duties on the Muscovado sugar to the refiner. This bill has nothing to do with the quesand molasses which are produced in refining, and on which, tion of bounties. It simply returns tot he refiner, on the exas yet, our laws do not allow any drawback upon expor-portation of the manufacture, the tax which you may have, tations; and by enlarging your importations of the foreign from necessity or from folly, imposed on the foreign raw raw material, you enlarge your market for the produc- material consumed. On what principle do you allow a tions of your agriculture and your forests. drawback of internal excise on your productions, when exCan any gentleman, who is willing to encourage industry, ported? Simply because other nations never can and never even at the sacrifice of other interests, and at the expense of will buy them when charged with your internal duties. the consumers, refuse to give his vote for a measure tend. They cannot buy any of your productions, the price of ing to produce such results, without levying any imposition which has been increased by your taxes, whether of imwhatever on the Treasury, or on the country? What in- post or of excise; whether on the raw material or on the terest is to be injured? Is Louisiana to be injured? Sir, manufacture. If you will have enormous duties on importhere is no portion of the country which will be more bene- tations, the debenture system is inevitable; it is the only fited by the measure. That whole region of country upon partial relief which we can ever obtain from the famous the Mississippi is in the immediate neighborhood of Cuba, American System. Gentlemen can now see one of the conand the Islands from whence we are to procure an addition-sequences of loading the industry of the country with heavy al supply of the raw material for the purpose of refining. imposts on raw materials, and on importations generally; Will not the exports of its productions be increased, in ex- they can see how their system is designed, not only to cut changing for the raw material? But the bill is to jeopard off importations, but to destroy the exportations of the the interest of the sugar planter. Sir, it is more profitable country. Under no debenture system can we ever relieve for the planter to continue, as he now does, to supply the our exports from the heavy tax the American System imwants of our vast and growing population, and to leave the poses upon them. We cannot engage in the foreign trade refiner to seek that raw material from abroad which it is in competition with other nations, except in such articles most profitable to apply to the uses of refining. If you re- as are produced in our own country. hope, sir, we shall fuse to pass the bill, you do not aid the sugar planter; the have a general revision of our revenue laws, when we are refiner will go on as he now does, to select from that which less under the influence of political considerations; and is imported, the small portion of white, dry, or crystalized when we may legislate with a just regard to the true intersugar which will yield him the largest result. The ope- ests of the country. In the mean time, I hope the gentleration of this measure is almost entirely external, and can- man from South Carolina will unite with me in removing as not sensibly affect the consumption of the country, which well as in resisting restrictions on our commerce, whether will still remain regulated by our domestic demand. What on the export or the import trade. We cannot oppose the bill influence can the small contributions to our consumption, without abandoning the doctrines of free trade. flowing from the few additional refineries which may spring Again, sir, he is equally in error about the carrying up under the influence of this bill, have upon the profits trade. He asks if that is to be exempt from taxation of the sugar planter, when contrasted with millions which That gentleman must certainly be aware that every thing a nation consumes? His income will never be diminished which enters into the manufacture of a ship is already most by enlarging or opening any new channel of trade; while heavily taxed: that our mariners are taxed-our ship the thousands around him will feel the benefits of every owners taxed. Would he make the navigating interest ai |