Page images
[blocks in formation]

opinion, it will be found, if we take a comprehensive and statesmanlike view of our whole Confederacy, that there is, in truth, no necessary conflict of interest between the North and the South, or the East and the West. The very diversities of soil, of climate, of population, and of production, which, at the first view, might be supposed to create antago. nist interests, are, when rightly considered, the most fruitful sources of strength, and union, and harmony. Providence seems to have wisely ordained that, as we are separated by the broad Atlantic from the eastern hemisphere, we should have all the elements of national greatness, and wealth, and power, within our own borders. We have a climate and a soil adapted to every constitution, to every production, and to every occupation. We have all the elements of national prosperity, vegetable and mineral, in the greatest abundance; and all that is necessary for their full development, is a liberal and enlightened system of legislation. Who can unroll the map of this great Confederacy, and cast his eye over its extended surface, without feeling emotions of pleasure and of pride, mingled with sentiments of gratitude to the great Disposer of Events, for the magnificent inheritance which he has been pleased to bestow upon us? Let him, then, contemplate, for a moment, the separate and distinctive characteristics impressed upon each geographical division by the hand of the Creator himself, and how will these sentiments be strengthened and invigorated! Then let him reflect upon the mutual relations and dependence of each division upon the other, and of the capacity of each to minister to the wants of the others; and how profoundly must he be penetrated with a sense of the wisdom and the beneficence of Hinn “whose hands prepared the dry land" If we look to the extreme South, we find a broad belt of territory, stretching from the Gulf of Mexico to the Rocky Mountains; which, whilst it yields its rich tributes of sugar and other productions of a tropical climate, to supply the wants of more northera regions, furnishes to them in return a market for their cotton, and breadstuffs, and live stock, and manufactures of every description. Advancing a step northward, the broad fields of the cotton region are spread before our eyes. Here we see the planter busily employed supplying the wants of the sugar country, and the grain-grow. ing, and grazing, and manufacturing districts, by producing the raw material; which, when worked up into the various fabrics, is to furnish them the means of comfort and luxury. In return, he receives from those districts his sugar, his provisions of all descriptions, and the manufactures which are essential to his enjoyinent.

Progressing yet another step towards the north, we behold the unlimited resources of the middle country and great West—the grain-growing and grazing region—whose flocks and herds spread over a thousand hills; and whose fields, surpassing Egypt in fertility, can produce an amount of breadstuffs, and of the other necessaries of life, which knows no limit but the absence of all further demand. But the farmers and the graziers must be furnished with their sugar, their molasses, their cotton, and their manufactures and merchandise; and where can they look so naturally for their sup. plies as to those parts of the country which consume their wheat and corn, and pork and beef?

When we turn our eyes to the extreme north, we find a country with a less genial climate, and a soil whose comparative sterility discourages the labor of the husbandman. But even this less favored region possesses its peculiar advantages. It is blessed with a population hardy, industrious, intelligent, and adventurous. Its wealth consists in the labor

of its citizens; and hence they are found to be de

voted to manufactures, to commerce, and to the sea: and, whilst they derive their supplies mainly from the more southern divisions of the Union, they repay them with the products of their manufactories and their fisheries, and by merchandise imported from foreign markets. These diversities of climate, and soil, and population, necessarily produce diversities of production and occupation among the inhabitants of the various districts. Through them, the Supreme Ruler has ordained that there shall be a natural division of labor. The laws of nature forbid that the great staples of one district should be produced in another. Thus, there is no danger of rivalry springing up between them; on the contrary, the wants of one are supplied out of the abundance of the others. A mutual interchange of superfluities naturally, takes

place, and thus a commercial intercourse is generated, beneficial to all; and, as if it had been the design of Heaven to facilitate this profitable exchange of commodities, we see the Father of Rivers— commencing his course near the northern boundary of the Union, flowing thence nearly due south, through the heart of all the grand divisions, to the Gulf of Mexico–bisecting this vast continent, and furnishing a channel of commercial intercourse between the various districts unequalled upon the face of the globe in extent and excellence, and binding them all together by ties of interest as broad, as deep, and as strong, as the current with which his mighty volume of waters rolls onward to the ocean' When we undertake to legislate for a country like this, we should look at it as a whole, and not confine our views to mere local or sectional interests. We should indulge a catholic spirit—a spirit of onlarged patriotism, which can embrace in its grasp the whole Confederacy, from the St. Lawrence to the Sabine. We should look at the great interests of the nation, not as something separate and distinct from each other, but as constituting parts of a grand system, intimately connected together, wisely fitted to each other, and, when properly brought into action, working harmoniously together, and mutually giving and receiving nutriment and support. When I have suffered myself to be lost in the contemplation of the wide extent of our confederacy, with its members reaching from the Atlantic to the Rocky mountains—with its rivers and lakes, and canals and railroads, and other channels of internal communication, penetrating into every part of it, I have almost imagined it to be some vast animal organization, whose life blood, supplied by agriculture and manufactures, is thrown out from the great centre of the system in New York, and transmitted through the various arteries of commercial intercourse, diffusing health, and vigor, and vitality to its remotest extremities! Let us, then, hear no more, Mr. Chairman, of local interests upon this subject; let us remember that the prosperily of the nation is made up of the prosperity of its parts. Let us recollect that the cottongrower is interested in the manufactures of the North, and that the manufacturer of the North is interested in the growth of cotton in the South; and that the prosperity of both is, in turn, intimately connected with the welfare of the graingrowing and sugar districts. For of what use is it to either district to have a large surplus of its products, if the other districts have nothing to give in exchange for it? Of what avail is it to have merchandise, if there is no market for it? But if gentlemen, discarding these enlarged and American views of the subject, will insist upon treating this question as a sectional one, however unwilling I may be so to regard it, I shall not shrink from the discussion of it in that aspect. I must be pardoned, however, if, before I enter upon the argument, I require that the o parties to the controversy shall be presented to the country. I cannot consent that this shall be treated as a question between Massachusetts and South Carolina; nor between New England and the extreme South; nor yet between the manufacturers and the cottongrowers. I insist that if there is to be a sectional division, the middle country and the West—the grain-growing and grazing and tobacco districts— shall have their appropriate position assigned to them. I have the honor to represent a district situated in the heart of Virginia, which has a deep in. terest in this question; and I claim that it shall be heard by its Representative, before judgment is pronounced. What, then, is the natural position of my district in regard to this question? This inquiry will be best answered by ascertaining the amount and character of its productions; and I have accordingly prepared, from the official returns, the fol. lowing tabular statement of the principal staples which are cultivated by my constituents: Statistical Table exhibiting some of the products of the 17th Congressional District of Virginia.

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

From this table it clearly appears, that though my constituents cultivate tobacco to some extent, their great staples are wheat, rye, Indian corn, oats, hogs, neat cattle, sheep, horses, and mules. These are the principal articles which they raise for market. They are, therefore, interested in obtaining for these articles the highest possible price. How is this to be effected? It is a well settled principle, that it is the relation between the supply and the demand which regulates the price of every article. If the demand be large, and the supply small, the price will he high; and, on the other hand, if the demand be small, and the supply large, the price will be low. No one will venture to dispute these propositions. Let us now give them a practical application. My constituents are interested in having the demand for their commodities as great as possible—or, to state the proposition in another form, they are interested in having as many consumers and as few producers of their staples as possible. How is this effected? Obviously, by inducing the people of the North, who are engaged in the same occupation, to turn their attention to other branches of business, such as manufactures, commerce, and navigation; for thereby we not only get rid of their competition as producers, but we gain them as customers, to buy and consume our productions. This simple view of the case shows very clearly where our interest lies.

Now, let us look for a moment at the interest of the cotton-planting States, and see how far it coincides with that of Western Virginia. From the statistical tables furnished to us from the Department of State, I find that my district alone produces considerably more wheat than the whole State of South Carolina, and within a fraction of as much as the four States of Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Arkansas taken together. The following table shows the whole amount produced in each of those States:

South Carolina - 968,000 bushels of wheat.

Alabama - - 828,052 do
Mississippi - - - 196,626 do
Louisiana - - 60 do
Arkansas - - 105,878 do
Whole amount of the
four last named - 1,130,616

These States, it is apparent, are obliged to buy their supplies of breadstuffs; and we know that they are also dependent on the Western and Middle States for their beef and pork, and horses and mules, and various other articles, which cannot well be raised in the southern country. As the cotton-planter is compelled to purchase these ar. ticles, he is of course interested to get them as low as possible. He, therefore, will wish to see as large a supply, and as small a demand for them, as possible—or, in other words, it is his interest to have as many producers and as few consumers as he can. He will naturally wish, therefore, to see the manufactories broken down, and the population of the North devoted to agricultural pursuits, so as to come into competition with us, and bring down the price of the products of our farms. Suppose, for a moment, that the eight hundred thousand people now engaged in the manufactories were suddenly to cease their operations, and to become farmers: what would be the consequence? Would it not cause a complete prostration of the farming interests? The effects on prices would be most disastrous in two ways; for the farmers would have not only to meet the competition of these 800,000 producers, but they would lose them as consumers. But how would this operate on the cotton interest? It would have exactly the opposite effect. It would enable the planter to buy his supplies at the lowest possible rate. Thus, it is apparent that, if we look at this matter as a sectional question, without regard to 27th Cong. ... 3D Sess.


The Tariff Bill—Mr. A. A. H. Stuart.

H. of Reps.

more expanded and statesmanlike considerations, the interest of the cotton planter on the one hand, and that of the farmer and grazier on the other, are di. rectly opposed—the one being the seller, and the other the buyer, of particular commodities.

If then, Mr. Chairman, this subject of the tariff

is to be treated as a question between the North and the South, it is plain that the interests of my constituents are much more strongly allied to those of the North than the South. The same remark is applicable, in its fullest extent, to every other district in Western Virginia, and to many, if not to all parts of the eastern division of the State. It will not, therefore, be a matter of surprise to any one, if, in case the question assumes that aspect, I am found co-operating with the Representatives of other graingrowing and grazing districts, in endeavoring to foster the interests of the farmer, by preserving and enlarging the home market. There are many considerations in support of the principles of this bill, which I had proposed to submit to the committee if I had obtained the floor in an earlier stage of the debate. But, as other gentlemen have anticipated me in regard to them, I shall forbear from repeating them, and proceed to examine some of the arguments which have been urged by gentlemen on the opposite side of the question. Among other things, we are told that a tariff will tend to raise the price of merchandise, and thereby in pose a burden on the farmers and others who consume it. This is, to some extent, true; but do not the farmers receive an equivalent for this burden, in the blessings of a Government which protects them in the full enjoyment of the rights of person and property, and in the increased price of the {{...". of their labor? What is the proportion etween the outlay of the farmer for articles which are subject to duty, and the whole amount of the sales of his crops! Suppose it to be one-half; if he pays ten per cent. additional price for his goods, and receives from the improved home market but five per cent. increase on the price of what he has to sell, is it not plain that he is fully compensated? But this is not the only advantage to the farmer. He is, benefited not only in his income, but his capital is also greatly augmented in value. Let me illustrate this idea by an example. A farmer raises on his land 1,000 bushels of wheat, which, in the present condition of the country, is worth 30 cents per bushel, or $900 in the aggregate. Let us then suppose that, by the passage of the tariff bill, and the consequent improvement in the home market, the value of wheat is increased to ten cents per bushel. what are the benefits which will accrue to the farmer? In the first place, he receives the ten cents o: bushel, which is equal to an addition of $100 to is income; and, in the next place, the value of his land (which is his capital) is greatly enhanced. The amount of this enhancement may be estimated by treating the $100 as the additional annual profit arising from it; and, as $100 is the amount which a capital, of $1,666 66 would yield at six per cent, we will not be far out of the way if we assume that sum to be the measure of the increased value of the land. If the owner wished to sell or to lease it, would he not require a much larger price or rent, if is annual proceeds were worth $1,000, than if they were worth but $900? But there is another consideration connected with this branch of the subject, which must not be overlooked. The duties on merchandise fall principally on articles which are not indispensable, and are paid by the wealthier classes. The man who wears fine broadcloths, and dresses his wife and daughters in silks and velvets, and walks on rich Turkey or Brussels carpets, and drinks his costly wines, pays hundreds of dollars; whilst the farmer in the country, who owns property of equal value, but does not choose to indulge in such extravagant tastes, pays comparatively nothing. This is a mat!er which every man can regulate for himself, and if he thinks proper to purchase the articles which are subject to taxation, he incurs the tax voluntarily, and has no one to blame but himself. But it is said that many of the articles subject to o!y are indispensable to the comfort of a family. This is true. But does any gentleman pretend that the Government can be supported without money? e must raise revenue from some quarter; and o: true question is, not one of taxation or no taxation, but whether we will have the revenue collected in. directly by duties on foreign goods, or by direct taxos and exciseson our lands and workshops Bulls usexamine the operation of the duty upon

some few articles which are indispensable, and see how wisely the system is adjusted to conser a benefit on the farmer, by way of compensation for the burden which it imposes. The first that I will mention is the duty on foreign wool and woollens. These are indispensable articles, and the tax on them is a burden to the farmer. But does not this tax, at the same time, have the effect of increasing the value of the wool which he shears from his own flocks? and is he not thereby, in many instances, more than compensated? But it is thought to be very hard that iron and salt, which enter into the consumption of the poorer classes, should be subject to duty. Here, again, those who make the objection overlook the fact, that the iron-works and the salt-surnaces bring large sums of money into the country, and supply extensive markets to the farmers, which frequently repay them a hundredfold for the very small increase in the price of their salt and iron. Let us look at the provisions of the present bill, and see what additional burdens they impose upon a sarmer, who ar.nually consumes 100 pounds of iron and six bushels of salt. The duty upon bar iron, prior to the 1st of January last, was $21 per ton, or about ninety-four cents per 100 lbs., and the duty on salt about 45 cents per bushel. Under the present bill, the duty upon bar-iron is $27 50-per ton, or about $1 22 per 100 lbs., and the duty upon salt is eight cents per bushel; so that, in the worst aspect you can view it, the increased tax which the farmer pays on his 100 lbs. of iron is 28 cents, and on his six bushels of salt 21 cents; making the aggregate of 49 cents per annum ! And to compensate for this, he has the advantages of the withdrawal of the labor of thousands of operatives from raising the very articles which come into competition with his own, and of the market which they will furnish for his produce. But I deny that the proposition is universally true, that the price of articles is necessarily enhanced by laying an increased duty on them. The effect of the increased duty is to enhance the price

for a time; but it eventually stimulates our own

citizens to engage in the manufacture of the protected articles; and experience, which is better than all reasoning, has shown that, in almost every instance, an increased duty has, in the end, been followed by a diminished price. Let us take, by way of illustration, the articles of coarse cotton cloths and nails, omitting many others which have been already referred to in this debate. About the close of the last war with England, the most indif. serent imported coltons were worth from 17 to 20 cents per yard. The tariff of 1816 imposed a heavy protecting duty on them, which has been continued to the present time, and which induced our citizens to enter into the manufacture; and now a better article can be had for from 6 to 8 cents a yard.

But the most conclusive evidence of the fallacy of the notion, that every duty upon an article of importation produces an increase of its price equal to to the addition of the duty, is found in the article of nails. Nails were, until very recently, subject to a duty of five cents per pound; and, of course, if the doctrine which I have stated was correct, we should expect to find the price of nails equal to the cost in the soreign market, the cost of freight and insurance, the profit of the importer, and the amount of the duty; but, to the utter confusion of the supporters of that doctrine, the prices current exhibit the fact, that, while the duty continued, the nails could be bought for 44 cents per pound—or less than the amount of the duty The fallacy of the

reasoning of those who contend that an additional

duty necessarily produces an increased price, consists in an utter disregard of the most important fact, that a protective duty, instead of creating a monopoly in favor of the home manufacturer, tends to destroy the foreign monopoly, by stimulating domestic competition But I am admonished by the rapid flight of time not to dwell too long upon this topic. I will take this occasion, however, to state, in a very few words, my idea of the general principles which should govern us in the arrangement of our system of imposts. In my opinion, our duties should be laid with a view to revenue and to incidental protection, but not to prohibition. We should carefully examine into the exact condition and wants of every interest; and we should extend to all, as sar as we can, the fostering aid of a parental Government. But we should have no pet interests. Equal protection should be given to all. How is this equality to be aimed; i.i. by auniform advaiorem duty in


all cases? Certainly not; for that would produce the very inequality which you are seeking to avoid. One manufacture may have arrived at a high degree of perfection, and may be able to enter into competition with the fabrics of other nations, without any aid from legislation; whilst another, being in its infancy, may require the most careful protection. A duty of ten per cent. ad valorem would exclude foreign cottons from your markets, whilst a duty of twenty per cent. would not afford adequate protection to your woollens. It is the province of the statesman to obtain precise information in regard to all these interests, and to adapt his legislation to the varying circumstances and condition of the country. If he should find that Great Britain, by her superior machinery, greater skill, larger capital, and cheaper labor, has an advantage over our manufacturers of 30 percent. in woollens, of 20 per cent. in iron, and of 10 per cent. in cottons, is it not obvious that a uniform ad valorem duty on these articles would have a most unequal operation? In such a case, it would seem to me, that equality and justice would require that the protection should be proportioned to the wants of the various branches of manusacture, and that the duties on the articles named should be laid at 30 20, and 10 er cent, respectively, instead of being uniform: hen competition would ensue—the ingenuity of both nations would be taxed to find out new and cheaper modes of manufacture, and, in a few years, the price of the article would be brought down to the iowest point at which it could be afforded.

But suppose that, instead of thus graduating your duties, you were to adopt the principle of my Southern friends, and impose a uniform duty of 20 per cent.: you would exclude the foreign cottons altogether, and thus give the home manufacturer a monopoly. You would place the iron manufaeturer upon a fair ground of competition with the foreign producer; and you would afford no protection to the woollen manufacturer, who would be compelled to discontinue the business, and leave it to be monopolized by Great Britain' And thus, instead of destroying one monopoly, you would establish two I will now leave this branch of the subject, and proceed to consider the great argument against a tarist, which has been urged through all time, and has been put forth, in every modification, by various gentlemen in this debate. I allude to the allegation, that every duty laid upon an imported article operates as a tax upon the (consumer, for the benefit of the domestic manufacturer. I have already had occasion to show that this roposition rests, to some extent, upon an unsound o by exhibiting facts to prove, in the first place that it is not true, in all cases, that an increase duty causes an increased price; and, secondly, that if it does, such increase is not equal to the enhancement of duty. But there are other views of the subject, to which l invite the attention of the committee. If it be true, that every duty or tax which is imposed upon an article os merchandise, either in its raw state, or in its progress through the various stages of manufacture, or in the form of an impost duty, constitutes, an addition to its price, which must be paid by the person who buys and consumes it—does it not follow, by parity of reasoning, that every bounty granted upon an article of merchandise, at any time up to the period of its consumption, must tend to diminish, to that extent, the price to be paid by the consumero. Or, to state the proposition in a more condensed form: if every tax on an article is a burden to the consumer; is not the correlative proposition equally true, that every bounty upon an article is a benefit to the consumer? No gentleman will pretend to deny that the second branch of the proposition is an inevitable deduction from the first: but to what consequences does this lead us? It proves that all the bounties which England gives upon her exported glass, and other articles which are the subjects of bounty under her laws, are not benefits conferred on her glass manufactures, &c., but mere gratuities to the American consumers! It proves, also, that our whole system of drawbacks and fishing bounties is radically wrong, and, instead of benefiting our own citizens, whose interests they were intended to promote, amount in effect to donations to strangers ; Yet every intelligent man knows that such results do not ensue; and hence we are authorized to inser that the theory of the gentlemen must be unsound. - But I propose to subject this theory to another 27th Cong.... 3D Sess,

simple practical test. Its advocates say that the consumer pays all the taxes imposed upon an article of merchandise, because the tax becomes incorporated into the price of the article, and con‘stitutes part and parcel of it; and, consequently, he who buys the article and consumes it, pays the tax as well as the cost of production, and the other elements which, in the aggregate, make up the price. If this be true, I presume it will be conceded that it is a matter of indifference when the tax is laid, where it is laid, or how it is laid. It may be laid upon the raw material or upon the fabric. It may be laid as an excise duty, or an export duty, in England; or it may be laid as an impost duty in one of our ports; provided the amount is the same, it makes no difference to the consumer; he has to pay it at any rate, and it is a matter of no concern to him who gets the benefit of it. Now, if this proposition be true in regard to goods imported into this country, there can be no good reason why it should not be #.'. true in regard to articles exported from it. The principle is the same, and the inversion of the course of trade cannot affect it. I then submit it to the advocates of that doctrine to insorm this committee what is to prevent this Government, by a very slight change in its fundamental law and commercial policy, from levying all its expenses upon citizens of foreign countries. Suppose that, by an amendment of our Constitution, we should authorize Congress to lay export duties, and that in ursuance of that authority our Government should impose export duties upon those articles which Europe can obtain nowhere else—such as cotton, tobacco, and flour—taking care not to lay them so high as to be prohibitory: according to the doctrine of Southern gentlemen, these duties would all fall upon the consumers of the articles in Europe, and thus we could saddle the expenses of our Government upon foreign nations, and relieve our own people from taxation altogether! The producers of cotton, and tobacco, and flour, surely could not object to such a tax! They would not have a dollar of it to pay; for, according to their own doctrine, it would only tend to enhance the price in the foreign market, and the consumer would have it all to pay ! But suppose such a measure were gravely submitted for the consideration of Congress: do you think Southern gentlemen would agree to it? This would bring their faith in their theories to a practical test; and I think I hazard but little in saying they would reject the proposition with scorn. Yes, sir, highly as they prize the blessings of this Union, they would sooner see it sundered forever than submit to such an imposition ut the distinguished gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. Pickens] has taken occasion, in the course of his remarks, to repudiate, or rather to qualify, this favorite doctrine of his friends. He now admits that the whole duty is not paid by the consumer, but contends that it is equally divided between the producer and the consumer. Is the o true in this modified form? If it is, we ave only to adapt our legislation to it; and, by a judicious arrangement of our revenue system, we can collect one-half of the expenses of the Government from foreigners, by export duties, and the other half by imports; and not a dollar need be drawn from the pockets of our own people! But I cannot leave this point without invoking the attention of those gentlemen who have expressed a preference for a system of direct taxation over the impost system, to the important concession in favor of the latter which is contained in the roposition of the gentleman from South Carolina, §: PickeNs.] Whilst every one must admit that irect taxation falls exclusively on our own citizens, he admits that one-half of all the taxes levied indirectly by a system of imposts is paid by foreigners! When these gentlemen bring forward their project for direct taxation as a substitute for the impost system, the only question, according to the genileman from South Carolina, for the people to decide, will be—whether they preser to bear the whole or the half of the taxation necessary for the support of Government!

[blocks in formation]

The Tariff Bill—Mr. A. H. H. Stuart.

supply, the market will be glutted, and the producer must reduce his price, so as to lose the amount of the increased duty. But if the supply be small, and the demand great, then the producer may exact a higher price, so as to cover the increased duty. The truth of these propositions is very clearly illus. trated by a reference to our coffee-trade. At the extra session of the present Congress, a bill passed the House of Representatives imposing a duty of two cents per pound upon coffee; and when the news reached #. Janeiro, the price of coffee immediately declined two cents per pound. The reason of this was, that there was a large supply on hand; and the holders were obliged to take what they could get for it, and submit to the loss of the amount of the anticipated duty. But suppose, on the other hand, there had been a small supply: is it not obvious that the holders of coffee might have exacted two cents in addition to the former price, so as to meet the new duty? It may not be amiss, whilst I am on this point, to advert to another fact connected with the coffee-trade. Some years ago, Congress removed the duty upon coffee altogether; and what was the result? The increased deman thereby created kept up the price to the old standard; and our citizens were deprived of the benefit of the tax, without receiving any equivalent advantage. The withdrawal of this tax was, therefore, a bounty to the producer. If, on the other hand, the tax had been io at the extra session, it would have (fallen as the facts which I have mentioned clearly prove) entirely on the producer; for the de cline in the foreign value was exactly equal to the anticipated duty; and we should have received the tax, and paid no more for our coffee. But we are told by the opponents of this bill, that the system of imposts operates unequally, and confers exclusive benefits upon some portions of the Union at the expense of others. This is a grave charge, and one which merits profound investigation; for I hold it to be the duty of the Government to look with an impartial eye to the interests of the whole country. o therefore, felt called on to bestow much care in the examination of the practical operation of our whole revenue system, and of our commercial relations, upon all §. dis. serent sections and interests of the Union. The

result of that investigation is a thorough conviction

that a variety of circumstances have conspired to give to the cotton-growing States most important advantages over other divisions of the Confederacy. Their representatives are by no means insensible of this fact, as is evident from the tenacity with which they adhere to them. And if we sift the subject to the bottom, it will be found that, whilst South Carolina is so eloquent, through her representatives on this floor, in denouncing exclusive advantages and partial benefits, she is herself in the full fruition of them ' and however unconscious her champions may be of the fact, I apprehend that their zeal in opposition to this bill is not a little stimulated by the apprehension that it may have an unfavorable influence on her exclusive privileges, and diminish the peculiar protection which is now afforded to her interests. Strange as the proposition may seem to Southern gentlemen, I maintain that no tariff bill which has ever passed has conferred an amount of protection and of partial benefit on the North, equal to that which, under our present commercial system, is enjoyed by the South; and I will proceed at once to prove it.

In Pof the investigation of this topic, it is necessary to have a distinct understanding of the meaning which is to be attached to the term protectwon. I mean by it—not merely the encouragement and aid which any branch of industry receives from our own laws and our own commercial regulations, but also the advantages which it derives from foreign legislation and foreign policy. A benefit may be conferred, or an injury inflicted, upon any of our great interests, just as effectually by an act of the British Parliament, or by an order in council, as by a law of Congress. In order, then, to have a correct idea of the true condition of any of our great interests, we must examine all their relations. We must look abroad, as well as at home; for we would have a very imperfect knowledge of the actual state of affairs, if we confined our views to our own legislation, without regard to that of other nations. ->

What, then, is the present policy of Great Britain in regard to the various interests of our consederacy, and what are the effects of that policy on them? It requires but a very superficial examination to show that, in regard to most of them, her

H. of Reps.

interests and her policy are directly opposed to ours. The principal interests of Great Britain are her commercial and navigating, manufacturing, agricultural, and colonial interests; and her system of policy is carefully adapted to the promotion and encouragement of all of them, by imposing onerous duties, restrictions, and prohibitions intended to prevent the competition of similar interests of other countries with those of her own subjects. It is not my purpose, Mr. Chairman, to enter into a dicussion of the wisdom or justice of that policy. All that I propose is, to examine briefly the effects of it upon the different sections of our confederacy. Our commercial, navigating, and manufacturing interests belong generally to the North and Eas. and hence the restrictive measures of Great Britain, which are designed ... her commercial, navigating, and manufacturing interests, fall principally upon our Northern and Eastern States The great agricultural districts of the United States lie in the Middle and Western States, and hence the burdens of the English corn laws, and other measures, intended to sustain her own agriculture, are felt most severely by the people ofthe Middle and Western States. The sugar interest of the United States is limited to the single State of Louisiana, and, as a necessary consequence, that State is more injuriously affected than any other by the duties and restrictions which Great Britain has established for the protection of the sugars of her own colonies. It thus appears plainly, that, in regard to all these branches of our national industry, England has interests which are adverse to ours; and that those interests have induced her to adopt a system of policy which is in a high degree injurious to the prosperity of the United States. But there is one greatstaple of our country which, for the present at least, stands in a different relation to the interests of England; and hence we perceive that her policy in regard to it is exactly the reverse of what I have shown it to be in reference to all others. I refer to the article of cotton. That does not come at present into competition with any English interest. Great Britain has not yet perfected the establishment of a cotton interest of her own in India; and she is not ready, therefore, to bring her restrictive system to bear upon ours. It is ob. vious, however, from all the signs of the times, that this exception from her general policy, which she makes in favor of cotton, will be of short duration; for I perceive from a table which has been published in most of the newspapers, that the amount of East India cotton imported into England in the first sixteen weeks of the year 1841, was but 46,289 bales, and for the corresponding period of the present year the amount was 92,688 bases, being an increase of more than 100 percent.; whilst the increase upon the importations from America was but 15 per cent. For the present, however, our cotton is essential to the prosperity of her manufactures; and hence she makes a virtue of necessity, and receives it subject to a very small duty. Having thus taken this review of the British policy, I ask what is the effect of it upon the various interests of our nation? Is it not to oppress the industry of the Northern, Middle, Western, and extreme Southern States, with heavy burdens, and to confer peculiar benefitson the cotton-growing States? Does not the cotton interest, under the existing commercial regulations between this country and Eng. land, possess exclusive privileges? Does not the product of that region # a hearty welcome in the British ports, whilst those of every other part of the Union are met with restrictions, exactions, and Poio If this be not an exclusive privi. ege, will gentlemen tell me what constitutes one? Is it not a preference given to the productions of one part .P our country over those of all others? And are we tamely to acquiesce in this policy of a foreign nation? or. that such an unjust advantage É. been secured to one part of the Union over the others, by a treaty stipulation, or by our own legislation: would the country submit to it? No, sir! A flame of indignation would pervade the nation from one end to the other! The whole land would resound with denunciations of the injustice and iniquity of such partial legislation, and “repeal or revolution” would be the battle-cry of an incensed people! o And !. because this result is produced by a for. eign Government, to promote its own interests, we are told, in effect, that it is our duty to submit to the unequal operation of the laws of England! What,

sir, is the argument of the South, to induce the

27th Cone.----3D SEss. The Tariff Bill—Mr. A. H. H. Stuart. H. of Reps.

•other sections of the Union to bow their necks to || the South, on the ground that she cannot, even in- The amount of duties levied on them

the yoke? When stripped of all its specious dis- || directly, sustain the institution of slavery by deal- was - - - - 113,500,000

guises, it amounts to nothing more nor less that this: “If our Government should impose duties on English merchandise, England will no longer buy our cotton | We must, therefore, insist that the Northern, Middle, and Western States shall give up their manufactures, cease to make their own supplies, and consent to buy them from England, that England may be the more able to give us a

good price for our cotton”

Thus it is attempted to make all the agricultural, manufacturing, commercial, navigating and fishing interests, subservient to the cotton interest'

There is a great principle of national independence which j behind this question, which it behooves us to consider well before we act. If any foreign nation has a right to make discriminations in favor of the productions of one part of our country, with a view to promote her own domestic interests, may she not make discriminations for the urpose of striking down the interests of another part? and if we are not at liberty to adopt a countervailing system, may she not, thereby, obtain com3. control over our domestic policy? If she can iscriminale for one purpose, may she not do so for any and all purposes? If she can do so to favor one State, she can do so to injure another. Suppose, then, that England, from motives of resentment towards New York, because of the interference of her citizens in the Canadian disturbances, were to make a discrimination in her commercial policy against the trade from New York: would this nation submit to it? Or suppose that England were to hold this language to Mississippi: “You have repudiated your State debts, and, until ou make provision for their payment, we shall evy a discriminating duty on all cotton grown h Mississippi, to raise a fund to pay the interest to your creditors s” Would not every son of that É." State be ready to shed the last drop of his lood, before he would submit to such an assumption of power by England? Would she not at once invoke the aid of the national arm to redress the injury done to her citizens by such an odious regulation ? Yet, I ask gentlemen, if the policy of Great Britain does not now create a discrimination against the o of three-fourths of the States in favor of the other fourth, just as effectually as if her laws had been framed to produce that result? It matters not what the motive may be, the effects are the same; and our duty to guard against those effects is not the less imperative because they may not have proceeded from an unfriendly feeling.

But there is one other form in which I wish to p. this subject to my friends from the South.

very gentleman upon this floor has, no doubt, had occasion to advert to the course of the English Government, for many years past, in regard to the subject of slavery and the slave-trade; and there are but few who have not been filled with disgust at the hypocrisy and insincerity by which it has been marked. We all know that England introduced slavery into the United States; and that her refusal to aid in suppressing it was one of the wrongs which impelled this country to a declaration of independence. She wanted, the slaves here for the interests of her commerce and manufactures. She wanted them to produce the raw material, and to supply a market for her fabrics. She also encouraged the introduction of slaves into South America, and actually entered into a contract by which she obtained the monopoly of the slave-trade to Brazil. This also was done to promo e hor commercial interests. Recently, however, she has conceived the idea of building up a cotton interest of her own in India; and hence she is smitten with a sudden feeling of humanity, and a holy horror of the slave-trade; and her cruisers are spread over the African seas, to suppress the cruel traffic in human beings, which for years she had monopolized The object is plain enough. She no longer has an interest in promoting the growth of cotton in Brazil, and hence she feels no desire to supply the labor that is to produce it. But this is not all. She is looking ultimately to the Indies for her cotton; and when the culture is firmly established there, her policy will then be directed against the cotton of America, which is the product of slave-labor. And I venture to predict, that, the first moment she feels she can do so with safety, she will be seized with another spasm of simulated philanthropy, and exclude from her ports the cotton of

ing in the productions that uphold it ! Are Southern gentlemen now prepared to establish a precedent which shall justify such an impertinent interference with their domestic institutions by a foreign nation? Are gentlemen prepared to admit the right of England to prescribe indirectly, as one of the terms of our commercial intercourse, that the Southern slaves shall be liberated? If they are, then are they justified in maintaining the doctrine that we are not at liberty to meet, by counter legislation, the unjust discrimination which the policy of England has made between the different sections of our Union. All the consequences which I have adverted to, plainly follow from the doctrine of acquiescence in foreign legislation. What I desire above all things is to meet these attempts of England at the threshold, and to assert the power of our own Government to regulate our own affairs, and to protect the industry of our own people. I, for one, am for adopting an enlarged system of policy, which shall break down all exclusive privileges, whether secured by our own or foreign laws, and extend to all parts of the country equal protection and encouragement.

I hope now, Mr. Chairman, that we shall hear no more from Southern gentlemen of exclusive privileges, since it is obvious that the whole tendenc of their votes here is to sustain the exclusive advantages which they now enjoy under the partial legislation of England!

But, Mr. Chairman, we are to'd by the eloquent gentleman from South Carolina, [Mr. PickENs, that the system of retaliation and restriction is opposed to the spirit of the age, and unworthy of an enlightened people. He has represented the genius of commerce as a beautiful maiden; freed from all the restraints of an antiquated governess, panting for the largest liberty, and ready to unfold her bright pinions to the winds of heavens, and fly to the uttermost parts of the earth! He has then poured forth torrents of denunciation upon those who would load her graceful limbs with cruel setters! Sir, I will continue the beautiful simile of the gentleman, and say to him, far be it from my purpose to fasten iron chains upon the fair creature of his fancy! I propose not to enslave her, but merely to impose on her that restraint, and afford to her that protection, which is necessary to save her from the dangers with which her pathway is beset !

We have heard a great deal, Mr. Chairman, in the course of this discussion, about “free trade.” Sir, what is it? A mere phantom an idle dream of visionary theorists: Is it attainable? Is it practicable? Will any other nation adopt it? Has any other nation ever adopted it? No! Why talk about it, then? The doctrine is predicated upon a motion of what men and naticns ought to be, instead of what they are! Like the wild conceit of the perfectability of man, it seizes upon the minds of its votaries, and causes them to lose sight of the existing state of things in the contemplation of some dim visions of futurity. , Sir, speculative philosophy is one thing—practical legislation is another. We were sent here to legislate for this, nation as it is.

, We must look at the actual state of things at home

and abroad. We must look to the vices and follies of mankind, as well as to their virtues; and we must shape our legislation so as to attain, not the greatest possible good, but the greatest practicable good. Have other nations manifested a desire to meet us upon the basis of free trade? Let the table of comparative tariffs on your desk answer the question What is the aggregate of your import. ations into this country? and what is the amount of duties which you collect upon them?

The whole importation of 1841 was - $127,945,000 The whole amount of duties, was - 14,487,000 Being at the rate of 113 per cent.

What, on the other hand, is the whole amount of your products exported to other countries, and what is the amount of duties which they collect upon them? Upon this point we have not precise information; but I have an estimate which has been prepared with great care by a highly skilful gentleman, who has collected abroad a large body of commercial facts for the Government. I have reason to believe that it is not far from the truth. According to that—

The whole amount of exportations in 1841 was - - - - $91,000,000

Being at the rate of 124 per cent.

[blocks in formation]

And yet, in the face of these most ruinous restrictions and exactions, we are invited to throw open our ports to the merchandise of those whose ingenuity is tasked to the utmost to devise new modes of extortion from us. But we are told that a change is about to take place in the o of England, and that she will soon adopt the principles of free trade, and it behooves us to meet her in the proper spirit. For my part, sir, before I would be willing to change the olicy of this Government to meet the views of 2ngland, I would require rather more substantial evidences of her intentions, than mere empty professions. Her system of sree trade is well defined in the following extract from the speech of one of her statesmen. Mr. Robertson, in a recent debate in the House of Commons, in which he said:

“It was idle for us to endeavor to persuade other nations to join with us in adopting the principles of what was called free trade. Other nations knew as well as the noble lord opposite, and those who acted with him, that what we meant by free trade was nothing more nor less than, by means of the great advantages we enjoyed, to get a monopoly of their markets sor our manufactures, and to prevent them, one and all, from ever becoming manufacturing nations.”

That is exactly her policy. She knows she has more capital, better machinery, cheaper labor, greater mechanical skill, and a more extensive marine than any other nation on earth; and that, owing to these circumstances, no other nation can come into fair competition with her; and hence she endeavors to delude them by the senseless cry of free trade.

I have been surprised, Mr. Chairman, that there has been, during the whole course of this debate, an apparent acquiescence upon the part of all who have adverted to the subject, in the idea that, if all nations would adopt the principles of free trade, it would be their true policy. Sir, I deny the doctrine, out and out; and I wish, as far as my feeble blow will avail, to strike the axe directly to the root of the tree. I maintain that what is called free trade—that is, trade unrestrained by commercial regulations, or imposts, or taxes of any kind—would be the most unequal trade that could possibly exist, and would lead to the establishment of the most absolute dominion of some nations, and the most slavish subjection of others. In order to give equal advantages under such a system, you must adopt the principles of national agrarianism—you must make all nations equal in all respects—you must endow them with the same intelligence, the same industry, and the same mechanical skill—you must give them equal capital, equal machinery, equal water-power, and equal amounts of all the

elements of national wealth. They must be equal

ly refined and civilized, and have equal facilities for the transportation of their commodities to and from their markets. The slightest disparity in any of these respects, or in geographical position, or in any of a thousand other incidents which might be named, would destroy the balance of the system, and 27th Cong.......SD SEss.

The Tariff Bill—Mr. J. H. H. Stuart.

H. of Reps.

inequality in wealth and power would immediately ensue. How could a nation having no machinery compete with one like Great Britain, whose steam wer is probably ten times as great as the comined animal power of her whole population? How could there be equality between an inland nation without a bark to bear her flag, and the “Ocean Queen,” whose canvass whitens every sea? How can there ever be fair competition—freedom of trade between power and weakness-—between wealth and poverty—between knowledge and ignorance—between industry and idleness? Sir, the notion is preposterous. You had as well oppose the helplessness of childhood to the matured power of manhood, as to place the infant manufactures of the United States in competition with those of England! Adopt the system of free trade, and the dream of Pharoah will be reversed; the fat kine will devour the lean—the more powerful nations will swallow up the trade of the weaker. ‘The people who have the advantages of local position, of industry and intelligence, will soon assert their natural superiority, and become rich and prosperous at the expense of the less favored and the less sagacious. e have, upon our own continent, a specimen of free trade in all its deformities. Between the United States and the Indian tribes, the most perfect freedom of trade exists, unrestrained and untrammeled by any restrictions or duties; and what has been the result? Has there been that mutuality of benefit which the advocates of free trade promise to all who will adopt its principles? Have the Indians grown rich and prosperous under the benign influence of a commerce freed from all the shackles imposed by antiquated and exploded o or has the whole intercourse between the parties to it been a system of fraud, extortion, and plunder on the one side, and oppression, ruin, and annihilation on the other? There is yet another example of free trade upon this continent, to which I will barely advert upon this occasion. I refer to the trade between the various States of this Union, which, under the provisions of our Constitution, must, through all time, remain free. Many of the Southern politicians have imagined, from time to time, that the Northern States have, from some cause, obtained an undue advantage over them in the commerce of the country, and they have occasionally held conventions and suggested various restrictive measures, to restore to themselves their due proportion. All these means have failed, and they have persuaded themselves that the injury results, in a great measure, from the restrictions imposed by the General Government on our foreign commerce. Without pretending to solve this important problem, I will take the liberty of suggesting the inquiry whether the effect which they deplore may not flow from a cause very different from the one assigned; and whether, in point of fact, it may not be the perfect freedom of trade between the States of this Union, and not the restrictions upon so figh commerce,

which has enabled the North to use her natural advantages in such a way as to gain the ascendenc over the South! There is one fact which I will refer to, in this connexion, which may be eatitled to consideration. Before the adoption of the Federal Constitution, when each State regulated its own commerce, there was no such concentration of trade at one or two points, as we now find. Even Virginia then carried on a large direct trade; and we are told by tradition, that Yorktown—a village which, but for its proud historic associations with the close of our o; struggle, would hardly find a place upon the map of the Ancient Dominion—was once the port through which Philadelphia received the larger portion of her supplies of foreign merchandise. I have now, Mr. Chairman, finished what I proFo to say upon the general merits of the bill. ut I cannot take my seat without adding a few words in regard to the deep interest which the State of Virginia has in the success of the measure now under consideration. It is my deliberate conviction, that she will derive more benefit from it than any other State of the Union; for there is no other State which has such a variety of interests to be o Many States possess advantages over er in some respects, but where will you find one which combines so many of the elements of wealth, of greatness, and of power? She is situated in the very heart of the confederacy. She has a seacoast, including the bay, unrivalled in extent; and her western border is, for hundreds of miles, washed by the waters of the Ohio. Her shores" are deepl indented with bays, and inlets, and creeks, . ing every facility for navigation. The Ohio, the Potomac, the James, and half a score of other navigable rivers, have their sources in her mountains, and, radiating as from a common centre, wind their way for hundreds of miles through her territory, imparting fertility to her soil, and supplying, at the same time, the power to drive the most extensive machinery, and the best possible channel for trans. porting the manufactured fabrics to market. Her soil is adapted to the growth of almost every vegetable production known to our country. Wheat, rye, Indian corn, oats, tobacco, hemp, flax, potatoes, and every species of grass and fruit known to tem. perate climates, attain the highest degree of perfection within her borders. Her mineral wealth is no less diversified than abundant. She possesses gold, and silver, and copper, and iron, and lead, and salt, and gypsum, and coal, to an extent that would seem almost incredible to one who had not taken some pains to acquire particular information on the subect. J Her forests atound in the best lumber, and her mountains afford pastures for sheep, which will enable her, almost without an effort, to supplant Vermont in the wool-trade; for whilst, in the frozen regions of the North, the flocks must be fed half the year, in our more genial climate they can generally find the means of subsistence for


themselves, in the luxuriant growth of the mountains. . In regard to water-power too, she has pecu. liar advantages, not only in its extent and general diffusion over her territory, but from the fact that machinery is so little liable to be interrupted in the winter by ice. The same remark is applicable to her canals and navigable streams, which are frequently not closed at all during the winter, and never for more than a few weeks. If any gentleman wishes to see a specimen of the natural advantages of Virginia, let him visit her

metropolis. . Where will he find such a combination of all the natural advantages for a great manufacturing city as Richmond presents? Inexhaust

ible supplies of coal and iron are found in the immediate neighborhood of the city. The James River Canal, which already penetrates 150 miles into the interior of the country, and is destined at no distant day to form the most convenient line of connexion between the seaboard and the Ohio, affords not only the means of access to the inland markets, but supplies an almost unlimited extent of water-power, to impel the machinery necessary for every species of manufacture. Various lines of railroads, extending in every direction, invite the trader of the surrounding country, by fur. nishing the most, convenient and speedy means of effecting the exchanges of the products of agriculture for the fabrics of the merchant and the manufacturer. Her central position and proximity to the Southern and Southwestern country, where cotton is produced, and a large market for manufactures is found, must give her decided advantages over the manufacturing towns of the North, which are obliged to encounter the expense of the double transportation of the raw material to the North to be manufactured, and of the fabric to the South to be consumed. Her manufacturers will also enjoy another important-advantage, from the fact #: they will be enabled to throw their fabrics into the market without delay; and thus their capital will always be actively employed, instead of being idle during the long periods of the transit of the raw material fronn the South to the North, and back again. Give Virginia, then, the benefit of this bill, and you will soon see factories springing up on all her water-courses; you will see her coal-fields explored; her rich mines opened up; her commerce revived; her agriculture invigorated; her capital increased, not merely by the gradual accessions of her own industry, but by the influx from abroad, which her superior natural resources will invite. Give her, I repeat, the benefit of this bill; and you will diffuse prosperity through all her borders; her citizens will no longer be compelled to leave the home of their childhood in search of a precarious subsistence in the Far West; the tide of emigration will cease; and the proud Qld Dominion will again, at no distant day, assume her appropriate position in the front rank of the members of our glorious confederacy.

« PreviousContinue »