« ForrigeFortsett »
duction of foreign industry. It is, as if the taxes upon the productions of the planters, im-
gia, (Mr. WAYNE,) and myself, had formed a
oti If there were no such products in the United to the amount of $50,000, and convert them States as cotton, tobacco, orrice, would not the into cotton and wollen manufactures, and that protecting system be downright nonsense-a the manufacturing company produce, annually, mere impotent monument of human folly? How the same quantity and quality of cotton and could the people of the United States obtain wollen manufactures. Both these companies foreign manufactures, when they have nothing bring their respective goods into the markets wherewith to pay for them and what could be of Richmond, Charleston, and Savannah, with a more absurd and stupid than to prohibit the view to make sale of them. They are, in every importation of articles which could not possibly sense, competitors in the very same markets be imported, even if there were no prohibi- for the sale of the very same sort of manufaction?
Itures. If these views are not radically erroneous, It will not be denied that the planting comwe have now a distinct view of the real parties pany have as sacred a title to their manufacto this contest. They are not the foreign manu-tures, as the manufacturing company can posfacturers and the domestic manufacturers, (for sibly have to theirs. Nor can it be denied that these can come in conflict only in foreign mar- the manufactures of the planting company are kets,) but they are the planters of the south, as exclusively the productions of domestic inand the manufacturers of the north.
dustry as those of their rivals. There is not a To all the purposes of this argument, I am as single fibre in the whole mass that is not the truly a manufacturer of cotton and wollen goods production of American industry, Here, then, as the gentleman from Massachusetts, who sits are two American companies, each having proby my side. It is true, I do not manufacture ductions of their own industry, to the amount them by the same process, but it is one equally of $50,000, equally entitled to the protection of as lawful, decidedly cheaper, and certainly not the Government, and equally liable to be taxed less honest. I cultivate the earth, and convert for its support. Indeed, if either could be conits products into manufactures, by exchange, sidered as entitled to favor, it would be the while the gentleman from Massachusetts ac- goods of the planting company. First, because complishes the same object by turning spin- they could be sold cheaper, and would thus add dles and throwing shuttles.
more to the wealth of the nation; and, secondThe only material difference between the two ly, because the planting company would be in operations, is, that mine adds most to the wealth their own peculiar markets. of the nation, precisely in the degree that I can Yet, how would these two companies be resell my manufactures
cheaper than he can sell spectively treated, when they should come to his. But he has had the art to persuade the the southern custom houses with their respecGovernment that this circumstance, which tive productions? The manufacturing compashould make me the favored producer, is a rea- ny would be permitted to pass into the markets son why I should be heavily taxed with a view
of Virginia, South Carolina, and Georgia, with to exclude my cheap productions from the mar- their northern productions, without any trouble ket, and give a preference to his, at higher or expense, let, or hindrance, whatever. But, prices. I will now state a plain case, by way of prac. Virginia, the gentleman from Georgia, and my
the planting company, (the gentleman from tical illustration, which I never have known to self,) would be arrested in their progress by be presented to a popular audience without the collectors, who would inform them, I producing the most perfect conviction, that the doubt not, with ceremonious courtesy, "that protecting duties are oppressive and unequal they could not be permitted to enjoy the very
valuable privilege ofbringing their own produc-change for the staple productions of the southtions into their own markets-1 privilege forfern States, are the exclusive productions of the which they were entirely indebted to the pa-industry of these States, another obvious illusternal indulgence of the Federal Government, tration presents itself to elucidate the palapable without paying a duty (I will suppose) of forty injustice of this system. per cent
Let it be supposed that the people of the The whole of the duty would amount to the south made these goods by the use of machineenormous sum of twenty thousand dollars As
ry, in the same manner as they are made at the the goods of the manufacturing company would north, would they have a title to them any more have just passed in free of all duty, the ri- sacred than they now have to the imports acval company of planters would very naturally quired by purchase? This will hardly be preask the cause of this odious discrimination, and tended. Would they not be as lawful a subject particularly, why they were required to pay of taxation as our imports are now? Would forty per cent. when less than half that duty you not have precisely the same right to conwould supply an ample revenue to the Govern- tend that free manufacturing labor, at a dollar a ment! The collectors would, no doubt, reply, day, could not compete with slave labor at onein the true spirit of their vocation, “ you are fourth of the price, and, upon this ground, mistaken, gentlemen, if you suppose these high claim a protecting and discriminating excise duties are levied upon your productions merely duty of forty or fifty per cent.? There is not an for the sake of revenue. This is quite a se- iota of difference in the two cases, except in condary consideration. The great and patri- the mode of producing the southern manufacotic ground upon which they are levied, is, that ture, and the name of the duty levied upon it. : it is deemed quite injurious to the wealth and How, then, would stand the comparison? A prosperity of the free States of the north, that duty of forty or fifty per cent. would be im. you should undersell their manufacturers, even posed upon the productions of the south, while in your own markets, with the productions of the very same productions of the north, proyour own industry; and these duties are there- duced in the very same mode, would be abso. fore levied, by a provident and paternal Go- lutely exempted from all duty: I put it to the vernment, for the very purpose of excluding candor of this committee whether, if this were your productions, which would be ruinously the form in which these discriminating duties cheap without the duties, in order that your of protection were levied, there could be found more patriotic rivals may increase the national a freeman upon the face of the earth who would wealth, and provide for the common defence,' not cry out "cravens! dastards! base and deby selling the same sort of goods at much high-generate slaves!" to the people who would paer prices!!"
tiently submit to such a system? Sir, this scheme Suppressing, for a moment, the indignant of artfully disguised oppression would not have feelings which this characteristic colloquy is been borne for two years, if it had been origicalculated to excite, by the bare imagination of nally presented without the disguise, by which it
, I will command patience to go through with its true character and operation are concealed the illustration, and suppose that the company from its suffering victims. of planters submit to the outrage, both of the Is there any error in this mode of stating the, law and the commentary, and pay the twenty nature of this unjust and oppressive system? thousand dollars demanded as a tribute—what Am I laboring under some strange delusion? will be the respective conditions of the two If I am, I sincerely hope some gentleman will companies, when they come with their respec- be able to disenchant me. But, if I have any tive productions into the southern market reasoning faculties at all, a discriminating exTheir relative conditions may be briefly stated. cise duty, levied exclusively upon the manufacAnd mark the result which follows with a matures of the south, cxempting those of the north thematical certainty, which no ingenuity can entirely, would, in no solitary respect, be more Sevade or deny. Both of the companies offer. injurious or oppressive to the southern produing goods in the same common markets, will, as cers, than the existing system of protecting du
a matter of course, obtain the very same price ties is to the southern planters. for them. It follows as a corollary, that the There is another aspect in which the gross planting company will realize from the produc- inequality of this system bas been frequently tions of their honest and lawful industry, in presented, which carries, to my mind, the force their own peculiar markets,twenty thousand dol- and clearness of mathematical demonstration. lars less than the manufacturing company will No one would deny the monstrous and revolting receive for the same quantity of their produc- inequality and injustice of the system, if more tions, of the same quality!! And this ineqali- than one-half of the federal revenue were dity, Sir, is produced exclusively by the unright- rectly and palpably raised by export duties on eous and oppressive interference of this Govern- cotton and rice, the exclusive productions of ment, claiming for this very outrage upon the much less than one-fifth part of the federal poprinciples of eternal justice, the sacred title of pulation; and yet it is a fact, incontestibly veria protecting and paternal Government! Can fied by the annual statements from the treasury, any man deny this? Will any man, admitting it, that this proportion of the revenue is raised by dare to stand up and justify or defend it. protecting duties levied upon the very manu
If, Sir, I have been successful in proving that factures for which our cotton and rice are exthe imported manufactures obtained in ex- changed abroad.
Upon this state of facts, it is maintained that really did, in point of fact, carry their staples an import duty, actually levied upon the goods abroad, and exchange them for manufactures. received for our cotton and rice, is precisely But is said, with as much solemn gravity as if it equivalent, as it regards the planters, to an ex- had any thing to do with the question, that this port duty levied upon the cotton and
rice them- is not the real course of trade; that the planters selves. It will be at once perceived that this do not export their cotton, tobacco, and rice to question is conclusively settled by a proposition foreign markets, and obtain manufactures for already discussed and established; for, if the them, but that they sell them to the exporting manufactures received for cotton and rice are as merchants, who sell bills on Europe to the im. truly the productions of the planters as the porting merchants, who pvrchase the manufaccotton and rice itself, it is obviously immaterial tures with these bills, and sell them to the reto them whether the duties are levied on the tail merchants, who finally sell them to the conproductions of their industry, when they exist sumers. in the form of cotton and rice, or after they Now, this is a very fair specimen of that sort have been transmuted, by exchange, into manu- of rigmarole by which a conjuror puts the specfactures. The case has been often stated, of tators off their guard, when he is about to two cotton planters going to Liverpool to ex- shuffle his balls and practise a deception on change their cotton for such manufactures as are their senses. In the name of all that is rational, actually imported in exchange for cotton. Each, what difference does it make, as to the matter for example, takes an adventure worth ten in discussion, whether the planters are the exthousand, but one of them gives his bond for porters of their own staples, and the importers four thousand dollars, to secure the payment of of the manufactures received for them, or a 40 per cent, export duty, as he goes out, and whether these operations are performed by the the other gives his bond for the same amount, to agency of other persons! If the import du. secure the payment of a 40 per cent. import ties would throw a burthen upon them, as pro. duty, as he comes back. Now, it is self-evident, ducers, in the one case, it must equally do so that each will receive the same quantity of in the other. There is surely no legerdemain manufactures in Liverpool for his cotton, each in having their exchanges effected by the inter. will have the same amount of duties to pay to position of two or three separate sets of agents, the Government, and each will obtain the same by which
the planters can conjure off the burprice for his manufactures in the United States. then which all admit they would have to bear, They come out precisely even, with immaterial if they had effected these exchanges themselves. exception, that, if the voyage consumed two or The complexity of the process, like the jugo three months, the export duty bond would, of gling of the conjurer; the shifting of the agents, course, fall due that much earlier than the other. like the shuffling of the balls; may bewilder and I defy the ingenuity of man to make out any deceive the understanding or the planters, but other difference in the two cases, let them be they cannot possibly diminish their burthens, twisted and turned as they may. Now, it cer Let this process be analyzed, and the mystetainly requires no great powers of combination ry will vanish. It is agreed, then, that if the to perceive, that what would be true, in this planters made their own exchanges abroad, the respect, of the two cotton planters with cargoes manufactures they obtained for their staples worth twenty thousand dollars, would be equal- would be their own productions, and that an ly true of ali the cotton planters of the Union, import duty on these would be a tax upon them with cargoes worth thirty millions. But it has as producers, precisely as if an export or an exbeen said, by a very respectable authority, that cise duty had been laid upon their cotton, tothis argument cannot be true, because the cot.bacco, or rice. ton planter may sell his cotton in Europe, and
Now, watch close the process by which these consume the proceeds there, bringing nothing exchanges are actually effected, and see if you back in return. This is readily admitted. I can discover how the planters get relieved from have never alleged any thing so absurd as that their
burthens, as producers. The first step in an export duty, which is paid, is not a greater this complicated process, is a sale to the ex. burthen to the planter than an import duty, porting merchants for money. Here keep : which is not paid. My very proposition as-close look out, for we have reached the point sumes, however, what is true in point of fact, upon which the whole controversy turns. Ex. that protected
articles are imported in exchange amine and see whether the planters obtain any for cotton, and that protecting duties are actu- more money for their staples than they could ally paid upon them. If you dispute the fact, have realized for them, by sending them to EuI refer you to the treasury statements; if you rope on their own account, and making the exdispute the inference, I refer you to the com- change themselves. If they do not, it is con
I am aware, that, in answer to these views, burthen by selling here for cash, in place of which assume that the manufactures imported selling in Europe for manufactures. If they do, in exchange for agricultural staples are really then the exporting merchant has been guilty of the productions of the planters, and that, con- the singular folly of giving the planters just so equivalent to an export duty on the other, it is an imputation to which no one will suppose him frequently replied
that this would be all very to be liable. true, and quite indisputable, if the planters The truth is that the exporting merchant
cannot and will not give the planters a farthing a restriction on the exportation of those articles more for their staples than the planters could with which those silks would have been purhave themselves made out of them, by going chased. That if it benefit the English silk through the whole process of the exchange. manufacturer, it injuries, to at least an equal In a word, the value of cotton is the value of amount, in the whole, though tne injury is less the foreign manufactures it will purchase. perceptible, because more widely diffused, the These are, strictly speaking, equivalent values, cotton spinner, the cutler, or the clothier.". and convertible terms? In whatever degree, Again: “A restriction or prohibition of the therefore, an import duty upon these manufac- importation of any foreign commodity, occasions tures will diminish their excheageable value, in a loss to those persons who would have produced, the same degree, precisely, will such duty di- the English commodity with which the excluded minish the exchangeable value of the staples of foreign commodity would have been purchased; exportation with which they are, in point of it occasions, also, å loss to those who are forced fact, purchased.
to purchase the dearer or inferior English comThe controversy, then, disguise it as you modity" may, resolves itself into a competition between I will now quote a few passages from an arthe southern planters and the northern manu-ticle in the Westminister Review for 1830; an factures, for supplying the market of the Uni- article in which the doctrine I am maintaining ted States with certain descriptions of manu- are illustrated by a combination of wit and phifactures. And I take it to be the very clearestlosophy very rarely united in the discussion of of all propositions in political economy, that so abstruse a subject. the protecting duties must, in the very nature “Gloves may be had,' it shall be supposed, of things inflict an injury upon the southern from a French maker, for the value of two shilplanters at least equal to the benefit they con- lings a pair. An Englishman stands up, and fer upon the northern manufacturers. In truth says that he can make gloves of the same kind the injury inflicted in the one case, must be for three shillings and, therefore, for the engreater than the benefit conferred in the other. couragement of English commerce, it is expe.. The very ground upon which the protecting dient to pass a law to prohibit the introduction duties are demanded, is, that the cotton plant- of French gloves at two shillings, in order that ers can import and sell manufactures cheaper those who chose to wear gloves may be obliged than the domestic manufacturers can make and to take them from the Englishman at three." sell them. So far, therefore, as these duties“ When you buy a pair of French gloves, it is operate as a protection, they take away the em- clear they are paid for in something." "They ployment of a more productive class, and give are paid for, to the Frenchman, it may be, in it to one that is the less productive. If
, with a Sheffield goods. But if the glove maker proprotection of forty per cent. the manufacturers cures a law that gloves shall not be brought from can only make their ordinary profits, and if the France, it is plain that Sheffield goods must stop planters can maintain the competition even un. The glove maker may gain employment, and der this enormous discriminating duty, it is evi- trade, to the amount of two shillings, but it is dent that with mere revenue duties of 124 per equally plain that the Sheffield man must lose it." cent., the planters could sell at much lower the whole amounts to a plan for robbing a prices than the manufacturers, and at the same Sheffield man or a Birmingham, who can make time realize much higher profits.
what people will voluntarily buy, for the benefit *It follows that the benefit which protecting of the glover who cannot; for clipping the comrestrictions can confer upon the domestic manu-merce of some individual who lias ingenuity facturers
may be much less, but cannot possi- and skill enough to command a market, to add bly be greater than the injury inflicted on their to him who is without.” rivals, the southern planters. When I advanc. Here, it will be seen, that the author dised these opinions on this floor more than two tinctly assumes, that the principle injury proyears ago, they were supposed by many to in- duced by a restrictive law, is to those domesvolve a novel and visionary theory, which had tic producers “who would have produced the not been put forth by any book of authority. English commodity with which the foreign Butit is a curious fact, tending to illustrate the commodity would have been purchased," while Cotemporaneous development of these views in the injury to the consumer is comparatively this country and in England, that almost at the small. very time they were first publicly advanced I will now read a short extract, which ad. here, they were published there by two authors, mirably ridicules that bewildering confusion of who may be justly regarded as ornaments to ideas which induces many to believe that there this branch of political philosophy., Professor is some magic in a foreign exchange, which reSenior, of Oxford, in a course of lectures on lieves the domestic producer from the burthen political economy, published in 1830, distinctly of a protective duty or restriction. lays it down, " that it is impossible to encour “If a saving is to be made by the introducage the industry of one class of producers, by tion of steam coaches, no effectual opposition means of commercial restrictions without dis- can be made by the dealers in horses, because courageing to an equal degree, the exertions the public are sufficiently informed to know others. That every prohilition of importation that all they expend less in coach hire, will be is a prohibltion of exportation. That every expended upon something else instead; and, restriction on the importation of French silks is therefore, the loss of business to horse dealers