-...-: " ' - 'r"'" " " " ' 1 1 "' 1 ,,- 401 AND EWBEIKM COMMERCIAL, AOHICUILTlEJRAli AN MTESMAHY IMf ELMGEMCEK. LIBERTY... .THE CONSTITUTION. . . .UNION . ?t!k av ir as -P i; PUBLISHED, TII03IAS WATSON. At three dollars per annum pay able in advance. 1 " SPEECH OP MR. WEBSTER, 17 UPON THE TARIFF, delivered in the House of Representatives of the i . fc , . Untied States, April, 1824. "X CONTINUED, j Sir, J should not have gone into this prolix detail of opinions from any consideration of their special im portance on the "present occasion ; but, having hap pened to state, that such was the actual opinion of the government of England at the present time, and the Accuracy of this re presentation having been so confi dently denied, I have chosen to put the matter beyond doubt or cavil, although at trie expense 01 uiese teui jtw citations. I shall have occasion, hereafter, of re temiig more particularly to sundry recent British enactments, by way 01 snowing tue omgence ana ' spirit with which that government strives to sustain hy navigating- -nterest, by opening the widest possi rant'fo The enterprise of individual adventurers. riv.ta that I have not alluded to these examples of - i r . ' . l . l ' a foreign State an being nt to control our own poncy. I Yin' the general principle,. I acquiesce. Protection, L; "when carried to the point which ife now recommended, jf- Tut to entire prohibition, seems-tb me destructive : of a!l commercial intercourse between nations; We 'are urged to adopt the system upon general priiiei '. pies ; and what would be the consequence of the uni !" versal application of such a general principle, but that i liatiuns.' would abstain entirely--jfroin all intercourse uith one another. ? I do not admit the general prin ciple; oh the contrary, I think freedom of trade to be '.the funeral principle, and restriction the exception. Andat js tor every State, taking into view its own condition, to judge of the propriety, in any case, of making an exception, constantly preferring, as, I I . think' all wise governments willnot to depart, with out .urgent reason, from the general rule. There is another, point in the' existing policy of England, to which I would most earnestly invite the : attention of the" Committee, I mean the . warehouse system, orvvlmt we .visually call the system of draw hack. Very great prejudices 'appear to me, to exist with us, on that mihjp We stjera averse to the ex tension of the principle. The English government, on the' contrary; .appear "to ha vef carried it to the ex treme of liberality. I They haveiarrived, however,, at tiijeir present opinions, and present practice, by slow decrees. The transit system was commenced about - ihS year 1803, but the first law was partial and limi ted.' It admitted the importatiori-of raw material for ; exportation, but it excluded almost every sort of ma rwtactured goods. This was done lor the same rea son that we pYbpose to prevent the transit of Cana- 1 dfoh wheat t'li rough the United States the fear of nihh" the cometition of the foreign article with our -r own, m loreign markets; Better reflection, or more ' .'xperienee, has induced them to abandon that mode vf ivasoniiir, and-to consider all such means ot in . flufehciiiM" foreign markets as nugatory : since, in the nresent activc.i and eniichtenea state oi me wonu, ti.nt.ions will supply tiiemeiveo from the best sources, jand thc true policy of all producers, whether of raw nialeriak or of manufactured articles, is, not vainly - i j - '. 1. 1 nnt '.rf "Vir mnrL-fit to enueavor to Krejj umvi tmin w .....-.., but tto conquer them in it, by the qualify and tl :rhcnpiH of their articles. The. present policy oi Etudan !, therefore, is, to allure the importation of . i-onTinodituw into England, there'to be deposited in English wKrchouscSj thence to be exported ijh assorted and thus enable her to carry on a general ex- nil nnnrt.ers of the frlobe. - Articles of all kinds, with the single exception of tea, , may be ' ; brought into England, from any part of the world, "m foreign as well as British ships there warehoused, and again exported, 4 the pleasure of the owner, ' without thn payment of any duty, or government - ehanjbwliatever. . - . : , , While I am upon this subject 1 would take notice also of the recent proposition in: the English Parlia ment to" "abolili the tax on importea wool; ana it is observable that those wlio support this proposition, crive the same reasons as have been offered here, within the last week, against the duty which we pro pose on the ame article They say, that their manufacturers- require a chdap and; coarse wool, for the supply of the-Mediterranciih. aiid Levant trade, and thati without a more free 'admission of the wool of the continent, that, trade will .all fall into the hands ' of the Germans and Italian who. will carry it on ' through Leghorn and Trieste; While there is a duty "on foreign wool to protect ?the wool growers of England, there is on the other hand a prohibition on ve article, in aid of the manutMctiirers. ' J. tie ojvnion seems to ne gaming btremnh. that the true policy is t6' abolish both. .Laws have long existed in England, preventing 'the emigration of aitisans, and the exportation of machinery; but the policy of these, also, has become doubted, aucl an inquiry has been instituted in Par liament into tlw expediency of repealing them. As i to the emigration of artisans, say, those who disap prove the lawn, if that were desirable, no law could '" effect it ; and as to the exportation of machinery, let us icate -and. export it, as we wouiu any umei commodity, it v ranee is ueiermmcu w weave her own cotton, let us if we may, still have rhe benefit of-furnihing the machinery. I hav e stated these things, sir, to show what seems to be tlie general ;tone of thinking and reasoning on - these cubjects in that country, the example of which has, been so much pressed upon us. Whether the . . prcenf policy of England be right or wrong, wise or Unwise, it canrtot, it seems clearly to me, be quoted as-an authority for carrying further the restrictive -irUrid exclusive system, either in regard to manufac tures or trade. To re-establish a sound currency, to meet at once the shock, tremendous as it was, of - the fall of prices, to enlarge her capacity for foreign trade, to open wide the field of individual enterprise and competition, and. to say, plainly and distinctly, that thecountry must relieve itself from the embar , rassments which it fet, by economy, frugality and ' renewed efforts of enterprise ; these appear to be the general outline of the policy which .England has .pursued. j Mr. Chairmain : I will how proceed to say a few words! upon the topic, but, for the introduction of ' .which)' into this debate, I should not! have given the Committee, on this occasion, the trouble of hearing me. . Some days ago, I believe it was when we were settling the. controversy between the oil merchants : and the fallow chandlers, the Balance of Trade made its appearance 'in debate,- and. I must confess, sir,; that I spoke, of t, or rather fepoke to it, some what freelvl and'irreverentlv. I believe I used the hard namei -which have been imputed to me ; and I did it simply for the purpose of laying the spectre, and dri- ving it back to its tomb. Certainly, sir, when I cal led tbp old notion on this subiect nonsense, I did not suppose that I should offend any one, unless the dead should happen to hear me. AttUhe living generation I took it for o-ra'ntl. would think the term very pro perly applied. In this, however, I was mistaken. T-he dead and the living rise up togetner to can me to account, and I must defend myself as well as I am able. I . ' f f Let us inquire, then, sir, what is meant by an un favorable balance of trade, and what the argument is, drawn from that source. By an unfavorable ba lance; of trade. I understand, is meant that state of things in which importation exceeds exportation. To apply it to our own case, it tne vaiue oi gooas im ported, exceed the value of those exported, then the balance of trade is said to be against us, inasmuch as we have run in debt to the amount of this diffe- jrence. i here'ore, it is saiu, mat, n a. uauuu wuu nue long in a commerce like this, it must be rendered absolutely bankrupt, it is in tne conoition oi a man that buys more than he sells; and howcan such a traffic fie maintained without ruin? Now, sir, the whole tallacy of this argument consists in supposing that whenever the value of imports exceeds that of exports, a debt is necessarily; created to the extent of" the difference : whereas, ordinarily, the import is no more than the result of the export, augmented in va- i lue by ithe labor of transportation. The excess of imports over tne exports, in trutn, usuany snows tne gains, not the losses, of trade; or, in a country that not only buys and sells goods, but employs ships in carrying goods also, it shows the profits of commerce, and the earnings of navigation. Nothing is more certain than that in the usual course of things, and taking a series of years together, the value of our im ports is the aggregate of our exports and our freights. If the value of commodities, imported in a given case, did not exceed the value of the outward cargo, with which they were purchased, then it would be clear to every man's common sense, that the J voyage had not been profitable. If such commodities fell far short in value of the cost of , the outward cargo, then the I voyage would be a very losing one; and yet it would j present exactly uiai suue oi umigs, wiucn, accoru-i inir to the notion of a balance of trade, can alone indicate a prosperous commerce. On the other hand if the return cargo were found to be worth much more j t'nnii thp rntwnrd rarrro. while the merchant h than the outward cargo, whiie the merchant having paid for the goods exported, and all the expenses of the voyage, finds a handsome sum. yet in his hands, which he calls profits, the balance of trade is still against him, and. whatever he may think of it, he is in a very bad way. Although one individual, or all individuals gain, the Ration loses; while all its citi zens grow rich, the country grows poor.' This is the doctrine of the balance of trade. Allow me, sir, to give an instance tending to show how unaccountably individuals deceive themselves, and imagine them selves to be somewhat rapidly mending their condi tion, while they ought to be persuaded that, by that infallible standard, the balance of tradi, they are on the high road to ruin. Some years ago, in better times than the present j a ship left one of the towns of New England, with 70,lKX) specie dollars. She proceeded to Mocha, oh the Red Sea, and there laid out these dollars in coffee, drugs, spicee, &c. With this new cargo she proceeded to Europe; two-thirds of it were sold in Holland for 130,000 dollars, which the ship brought, back, and placed in the same bank, from the vaults of which she had taken her original outfit. The other .third was sent to the ports of the Mediterranean, and produced a return of 25,000 dol lars in specie, and 15,000 dollars in Italian merchan dise. These sums' too-ether make 170,000 dollars im ported, which is 100,000 dollars more than was ex ported, and is therefore proof of an unfavorable ba lance of trcutCy to that amount, in this adventure. We should find no great difficulty, sir, in paying off' our balances if thi were the nature of them all. The truth is, Mr. .Chairman, that all these obsolee and .exploded notions nad tneir origins m very misc. taken ideas oi the true nature oi commerce. ; 'Com merce is not a gambling among nations for a stake, to be won by some and lost by others. Ii lias not the tendency Hecessariiy to impoverish one of the parties to it, while it enriches: the other; all parties gain, all parties; make profits, all parties grow rich, by the operations of j ust and liberal commerce.! If the world had but one clime, and but one soil; if all men had the same' wants and the same means, on the spot of their existence, to gratify those wants;! then, indeed, what one obtained from the other by exchange, would injure one party in the same degree that it benefitted the other; then, indeed, there would be some founda tiojifor the balance of trade. But Providence has dwrsed our lot much more kindly. We inhabit a vffgous earth. We have reciprocal wants, and recj pYdcal means for gratifying one another's wants. This is the true ongih of commerce, wdnch is nothing , more than an exchange of equivalents! and from the rude barter of its primitive state, to the refined and complex condition in which we see it, its principle is uniformly the same ; its only object being, in every stage, to produce that , exchange of commodities be tween individuals and between nations, which shall conduce to the advantage and to the happiness of both. Commerce between nations has the same es sential character, as commerce between individuals, or between . parts of the same nation. Cannot two indivduals make ah interchange bf commodities which shall prove beneficial to both, or in which the balance of trade shall be in favor of both? If not, the tailor and the shoemaker, the Farmer and the smith, have .hitherto very much misunderstood their own infflest. And with regard to the internal trade rtf a coifrjtry, in which the same rule would apply as between nations, do we ever speak of such an ; inter course being prejudicial to one side because it is use ful to the other? Do we ever hear that, because the intercourse between New York and Albany is advan tageous to one of those places, it must therefore be ruinous to the other? j J May I be allowed, sir, to read a passage on this subject from the observations of a gentleman, in my opinion one of the most clear and sensible writers and speakers of the age upon subjects of this sort ? " There is no political question on wnicn tne preva lence of false principles is so general, as in what re lates to the nature of commerce and to the pretended balance of trade ; and there are tew which have led to a greater number of practical mistakes, attended with consequences extensively preiuaiciai to tne nap- piness of mankind., In this country, our parliamen tary proceedings,' our public documents-, and the works of several able and popular writers, have com bined to propagate the impression that we are in debted for much oi our ncnes to wnat is caueu me balance of trade." " Our true policy would surely be to prqgss, as tjie object and guide of our commer cial system, that which every man who has studied the subject, must know to be the true principles of commerce, theXiiiterchange of reciprocal and equi valent benefit. We may rest assured that it isfhot in the nature of commerce to enrich one party at the expense of the other; - This is a purpose at which, if it were practicable, we ought not to aim; and which if we aimed at, we could not accomphsh" These remarks, I believe, ! sir, were written some ten or twelve years ago. They are in. perfect accordance with the opinions advanced in more elaborate trea tises, and now that the world has returned to a state, of peace, and commerce has resumed its natural channels, and different nations arenjoying, or seek ing to enjoy, their respective portions of it, all see the justness of these ideas; all seej that, in this da of knowledge and of peace, tliere can be no commerce between nations but that which shall benefit all wib are parties to it. , If it were necessary, Mr. Chairman, I might ask the attention of the Committee to recur to a document before us, on this subject, of the balance of trade. It will be seen by reference to the accounts, that, in the course of the last year, our total export to Holland exceeded two millions and a half our total import, Mr. Huskisson, President of the English- Board ofTrade, ; - " from the same country was but 700,000 dollars. 5 ow can any man be wild enough to make any inference from this of the gain or loss of our trade with Hol land for that year ? Our trade with Russia for the same year, produced a balance the other way ; pur import being two millions, and our export but half a million. But this has no more tendency to show that Russia trade a losing trade, than the other statement has to show that the Dutch trade has been a gainful one. Neither of them, by itself, proves any thing. Springing out of this notion of a balance of trade, there has been another idea, which has been much dwelt upon n the course of this debate ; that is, that we ought not buy of nations who do not buy of us ; for example, that the Russian trade is a trade disad vantageous to the country, and oughi to be discoura ged, because, in the ports of Russia,; we buy more than we sell. Now. allow me to observe, in the first place, sir, that we have no account showing how much we do sell in the ports of Russia. Our official returns show us only what is the amount of our direct exports to her ports. But then we all know that die proceeds ot other of our exports go to the same mar ket, though indirectly. We send our own products, for example, to Cuba, or to Brazil ; we there exchange them for the sugar andf the coffee of those coun tries, and these articles we carry to t. Petersburg, and there sell them. Again ; our exports to Holland and Hamburg are connected! directly or indirectly with our imports from Russia.4 What: difference does it make, in sense or reason, whether a cargo of iron be brought at St. Petersburg, by the j exchange of a cargo of tobacco, or whether the tobacco has been sold on the way, in a better market, in a port of Hol- land, the money remitted to England, and the iron paid for by a bill on London? There might indeed have been an augmented freight, there might have been some saving of commissions, if tobacco had been in brisk demand in the Russian market. But s1ill there is nothing to show that the whole voyage may not have been highly profitable. That depends upon the original cost of the article here,' the amount of freight and insurance to Holland, the; price obtained there, the rate of exchange between Holland and England; the expense, then, of proceeding to St. Petersburg, the price of iroir there, the rate of ex change between that place and England, the amount of freight and insurance home, and finally,, the value of the iron, when brought to our own market. These are the calculations which determintj; the fortune of the adventure, and nothing can be judged of ii, one way or the other, by the relative state of our imports or exports with Holland, England, or Russia. .i i I would not be understood to deny that it may often be ourf interest to cultivate a trade with countries that most require such commodities- as we can furnish, and wdiich are capable also of directly supplying our own wants. This is the simplest and most original form of all commerce, and is, no doubt, highly beneficial. And some countries are so situated,) doubtless, tliat commerce, in this original form, or something near it, may be all that they can, without considerable incon venience, carry on. Our. trade, for example, with Madeira and the Western Islands, has been useful to the country, as furnishing a demand for some portion of our agricultural products, which probably could not have been bought, had we "not received their pro ducts in return.' Countries situated st ill 'farther from the great marts and highways of the commercial world, may afford still stronger instances of the ne cessity and utility of conducting commerce on the original principle of barter, without much assistance from the operations of credit and exchange. All I would be understood to say is, that; it by no means follows that that must be a losing trade with' any country, from which we receive more of her products than she receives of ours. And since I was supposed the other day, in speaking upon" this1 subject, to have advanced opinions which not only this country ought" to reject, but which also other countries, and those the mOst distinghished for skill and success in com mercial intercourse, do reject, I will ask leave to refer again to the discussion which I first mentioned in the English Parliament, relative to the foreign trade of that country. " With regard," says the mover of the proposition, " to the argument employed against re newing our intercourse with the north of Europe, namely, that those who supplied us with timber from that quarter, would not receive British manufactures in return, it appeared to him futile ahd ungrounded. If they did not send direct for our Manufactures ' at home, they would send for them to Leipsic and other fairs of Germany. ' Were not the Russian and Po lish merchants purchasers there to a great amount ? But he would never admit the principle, that a trade wasi not profitable, because we were obliged to carry it on with the precious metals, or that we ought to re nounce it, because our manufactures' were not recei ved iby the foreign nation, in returrj for its produce. Whatever was received, must be paid for in the pro duce of our land and labor, directly or circuitously, and he was glad to have the noble Earl'sj marked concurrence in this principle." Referring ourselves again, sir, to the analogies of com mon life, no one would say, that a farmer or mechanic should buy oidy where he can do so by the exchange of his own produce, or of his own manufacture. Such exchange may be often convenient ; and, on the other hand, the cash purchase may be often more conve nient. It is the same in the intercourse oi nations. Indeed, Mr. Speaker has placed this argument on very clear grounds. It has been said, in the early part of the debate, that if we cease to import Eng lish cotton fabrics, England would no longer continue to purchase' our cotton. To this Mr. Speaker has replied, with great force and justness, that, as she must have cotton in large quantities, she will buy the article where she can find it best and cheapest ; and that it would be quite ridiculous in her, manufactur ing as she still would be, for her o-syn vast consump tion, and the consumption of millions in other coun tries, to reject our uplands, because; ;we had learned to manufacture a part of them for 'ourselves. And would it not be. equally ridiculous in us, if the com modities of Russia were both cheaper, and better suited to our wants, than could be found elsewhere, to abstain from commerce with her, because she will not receive, in return, other commodities which we have to sell, but which she has no occasion to buy ? Intimately connected, sir, with this topic, is ano ther, which has been brought info the debate ; I mean, the evil'so much complained of the exporta tion of specie. We hear gentlemen imputing the loss of market at home to a want of money, and this want of money to the exportation of the precious me tals. We hear the 1 ndia and China trade denounced, as a commerce conducted on our side, in a great measure, with gold and silver. These opinions, sir, are clearly void of all just foundation, and we can not too soon get rid of them . There are no shallower reasoners, than those political arid commercial wri ters, who would represent it to be the. only true and gainful end of commerce, to accumulate the precious metals. These are articles of use,j and articles of merchandise, with this additional circumstance be longing to them, that they are made, by the general consent of nations, the standard by which the value of all other merchandise is to be estimated. In re gard to weights and measures, something drawn from external nature, is made a common! standard, for the purposes of general convenience; jand this is pre cisely the office performed by the precious metals, in addition to those uses to whicfy as ;metals, they are t Marquis of Lansdowne. fLord Liverpool. capable of being applied. There may be of these, too much or tod little, in a country, at a particular time, as there may be of any other articles. When the market is overstocked with them, as it often is, their exportation becomes as proper and as useful as that of other commodities, under similar circumstances. We need no more repine, when the dollars, which have been brought here from South America, are despatched to Other countries, than when coffee and sugar take the same direction. We often deceive ourselves by attributing to a scarcity of money, that wnicn is tne result of other causes. In the course of una debate, the honorable member from Pennsylvania has represented the country as full of every thing but money But this, I take to be a mistake; The agricultural products so abundant in Pennsylvania, will not, he says, sell for money; but they will sell for money as quick as for any other article which happens to be in demand. They will sell for moni tor example, as easily as for coffee, or for tea at the prices which properly belong to those articles! The mistake lies in imputing that to want of money which arises from want of demand. Men do not buy wheat because they have money, but because they waut wheat. To decide whetlKr money be plenty or not, that is, whether there be a large portion of capi tal unemployed or not, when the currency of a coun try is metallic, we must look, not only to the prices of commodities, but also to the rate of interest. A low rate of interest, a facility of obtaining money on loans, a disposition to invest in permanent stocks, all of which are proofs that money is plenty, may never theless often denote a state not of the highest pros perity. They may, and often do, show a want of employment for capital; and the accumulation of spe cie shows the same thing. We have no occasion for the precious metals as money, except for the purposes of circulation, or rather of sustaining a safe paper circulation. And whenever there be a prospect of a profitable investment abroad, all the gold and silver, except what these purposes require, will be exported. For the same reason, if a demand exist abroad for sugar and coffee, whatever amount of those articled might exist in the country, beyond the .wants of its own consumption, would be sent abroad to meet that demand. Besides, sir, how should it ever occur to any body, that we should continue to export gold and silver, if we did .not continue to import them also? If a vessel take our own products to the Havana, or elsewhere, exchange them for dollars, proceed to China, exchange them for silks and teas, bring these last to .tne ports of the Mediterranean, sell them there for dollars, and return to the United States; this would be a voyage resulting in the importation of the precious metals. "But if she had returned from Cuba, and the dollars obtained there had been shipped di rect from the United States to China, the China goods sold in Holland, and the proceeds brought home in the hemp" and iron of Russia, this would be a voy age in which they were exported. Yet every body sees, that both might be equally beneficial to the in dividuals and to the public. I believe, dr. that.1 in point of fact, we have enjoyed great benefit in our trade with India and China, from the liberty of going from place to place all over the world, without bein oDiigeu mthe meantime, to return home a liberty not. heretofore enjoyed by the private traders of Eng land, in regard to" India and China. Suppose the American ship to be at Brazil, for exnmnle. she could proceed with her dollars direct to India, ahd, in to England, and then could only proceed in the di rect line from England to India. This advantage, our countrymen have not beeii backward to improve; and in the debate to which I have already so often referred, it was stated, not without some complaint of uie inconvenience oi exclusion, and the natural slug gishness of monopoly, that American ships were at that moment fitting out in the Thames, to supply France, Holland and other countries on the conti nent, with tea; while the East India Company would not do this of themselves, nor allow any of their fellow countrymen to do it for them. There is et another subject, Mr. Chairman, upon which I would wish to say something, if I miht pre sume upon the continued patience of the Committee. W e hear, sometimes, m the House, and continually out of it, of the rate of exchange, as being one proof that we are on the downward road to ruin. Mr. Speaker hirriself has adverted to that topic, and I am afraid that his authority may give credit to opinions clearly unfounded, and which ledto very false and erroneous conclusions. Sir, let us see what the facts are. Exchange on England has recntly risen one-or one and a half per cent, partly owing, perhaps, to the introduction of this bill ; into Congress. Before this recent rise, and for the last six months. I understand its average may have been about seven and a half per cent, advance. I0w, supposing this to be the real, and not merely, as it is, the nominal par of ex change, between us and England, what would it prove ? Nothing, except that funds were wanted, in England, for commercial operations, to be carried on either m England or elsewhere. It would not neces sarily show that we were indebted to England: for, if we had occasion to pay debts in Russa or Holland. funds in England would naturally enouo-h be required lor such a purpose. And even if it did prove that a balance was due England, at the moment, it would have no tendency to explain to us whether our com merce with England had been profitable or unprofita- uie. jdui u is not true, in point ot 'tact, that the real price oi exchange is seven and a half per centJ ad vance, nor indeed, that there is, at the present! mo ment, any advance at all. That is to sav. it is not true that merchants will give such an advance, or any auvauce, lur money in England, more than they could give for the same amount, in the enme currency, here. It will strike everyone, who reflects upon it,Jhat, if there were a real difference of seven Saiaiiaif per cent, money would be -immediately shipped to England ; because the expense of trans portation would be far less than that difference. Or, commodities of trade would be shipped, to Europe, and tne proceeds remitted to England. If it could so happen, that American merchants, should be willing to pay ten per cent, premium for money in England, or in oiner words, that a real difference to that amount, in the exchancre. should exist, ita pffpirta would be immediately seen in new shipments of our own commodities to Europe, because this state, of imngs would create new motives. A cargo of tobacco ior example, might sell at Amsterdam for the same pnee as before ; but if its proceeds, when remitted to Lionaon, were advanced as they would be m sucn case ten per cent, by the state of exchange, this would be so much added to the price, and would operatfe, therefore, as a motive for the exportation ; and in this way, national balances are, and always will be, ad justed. r To form any accurate idea of the true etate of ex change between two countries, we must look at their currencies, and compare the quantities of gold and silver which they mav respectively represent. This usually explains the state of the exchange ; and this will satisfactorily account for the apparent advance, now existing, on bills drawn on England. The En-o-lish standard of value is gold; with us, that office is Wormed by gold, and by siver also, at a fixed rela tion to each other. But our estimate of silver is ra ther higher, in proportion to gold," than most nations eives it : it is higher, especially, than in England, at 1 the present moment. The consequence is, that eil ver. 7 u.uLiiut viwi i.i cm iiit; i unuus ports of Europe, or America: while an English ship, if a private trader, beiner at Brazil, must first return -..-I.- : "j which remains a legal currency with. us, stays hei$ while the gold has gone abroad ; verifying the uni versal truth, that, if two currencies be allowed to exit, of different values, that which is cheapest will fill tip wnoe circulation. For as t much gold as will suffice to pay here a debt of a given amount we can wuj x fiuiQ more silver than; would be necessarv to, pay the same debt here; and from this different in the value of silver arises wholly, or in a great mea sure, the present apparent difference in exchange. Spanish dollars sell now, in England, for four shil lings and nine pence sterling per ounce; equal to one dollar and six cents. By our standard, the same ounce is worth one dollar and sixteen cents beinc a difference of about nine per cent. The true parol" exchange, therefore, is nine per cent. If a merchant here pay one hundred Spanish dollars for a bill pn England, at nominal par, in sterling money, that is,1 for a bill for 22 10, the proceeds of this bill, when paid in England, the legal currency, Will there pur chase, at the present price of silver, one hundred and nine Spanish dollars. Therefore, if the nominal ad vance on'English bills do not exceed nine per cent, the real exchange is not against this country ; in other words, it does not show that there is any pres sing or particular occasion for the remittance of funds to England. ; - As little can be inferred from the occasional trans fer of United States stock 1b England. Consideringj the interest paid on our stocks, the entire, stability of our credit, and the accumulation of capital in Eng land, it is not at all wonderful that investments should occasionally be made .hi our funds. As a sort; of countervailing fact, it may be stated that- English stock's arc now actually holden in this country, though probably not to any considerable amount. I will now proceed, sir, to state some objections which I feel, of a more general nature, to the course . of Mr. Speaker's observations. j He seems to me to argue the question as if all do mestic industry were confined to the production of manufactured articles ; as if the, employment of bur own capital and our own labor, in the occupations of commerce and navigation, were not as emphatically domestic industry as any other occupation. Some other gentlemen, in the course of! the debate have spoken of the price paid for every foreign manufac tured article, as so much given for the encourage ment of foreign, labor, to the prejudice of our own. But is not every such urticlerthe product of our own labor as truly as if we had manufactured it ourselves ? Our labor has earned it, and paid the priceforit. Ir is so much added to the stock of national wealth. If the commodity were dollar?, nobody would doubt the truth of this remark ; and it is precisely as correct hi its application to any other commodity as to silver. One man makes a yard of cloth at home; another raises agricultural products, and buys a yard of im ported cloth. Both these are equally the earnings of domestic industry, and the only questions that arisk in. the case are two: the first is, Avhich is the best mode, under all the circumstances, of obtaining' the articles; the second is, how far this first question is proper to be decided by government, and how far it is proper to be left to individual discretion, There is no foundation for the distinction whiclt at tributes to certain employments the peculiar appella tion of American industry; and it is, in my judg ment, extremely unwise, to attempt such discrimina tions. 'We are asked what nations have ever attained eminent prosperity without encouraging manufac tures? I may as what nation ever reached the like prosperity without promoting foreign trade? I re gard these interests as closely connected, and arh of opinion that it should be our aim to cause them to nounsii together. 1 know it would be very easy to promote manufactures, at least for a tinle, hut proba bly only for a short time,'if we might act in disre gard of other interests. We could cause a sudden transfer of capital, and a violent change in the pur suits c. men. We could exceedingly benefit some classes by these means. But what, then, becomes of the interests of others ? The power of collecting revenue by duties on Imports, and the habit of the government of collecting almost its whole revenue in that mode, ' will enable us, without exceeding the bounds of moderation, to give great advantages ta those classes of manufactures which we may think; most uselul to promote at home. What 1 object to is the immoderate use of the power exclusions and prohibitions;: all of which, as I think, not only inter- 1 .. i; j i . . iujjl me pursuits ui uiuiviauais, wnn great injury to themselves, and little or'no benefit to the country, bur also often divert our own labor, or, as it may very propeny be called, our own domestic industry, lrom those1 occupations in which it is well employed and well paid, to others, m which lfwiil be worse em ployed, and worse paid. Foe my part, I 'see very little relief to those who are likely to be deprived of their, employments, or who find! the prices of the com modities vhich they need, raised, in any of the alter natives which Mr. Speaker has presented. It is no thing to say that they may, if they choose, continue to buy the foreign articles; the answer is, the price is augmented : nor that they may use the domestic article; the price of that also is increased. -Nor can they supply themselves by the substitution of their own fabric. How can the agriculturist maWhis own iron ? How can the ship owner grow his own hemp ? But I have yet a stronger objection to the course of Mr. Speaker's reasoning; which is, that he leaves out of the case all that has been already dorke for the pro tection of manufactures, and argues the question ad if those interests were now, for the first time, to receive, aid from duties on imports. I can hardly express the surprise I feel that Mr.- Speaker should fall into the common modes of expression used ekewhere, and ask if we will give our manufacturers no protection. Sir, look to the history of our laws ; I.wk to the present state of our laws. Consider that our whole revenue, with a trifling exception, is collected at the custom house, and always has been ; and then say what pro priety there is in calling on the government for pro tection, as if no protection had heretofore been afford ed. The real question before us, in regard to all the important clauses in the bill, is not whether we I will lay duties, but whether we will augment duties. The demand is for something more than exists, and yet it is pressed as if nothing existed.- It is wholly forgotten that iron and hemp, for example, already pay a very heavy and burdensome duty,; and, in short, from the general tenor of Mr. Speaker's obser vations, one would infer that, hitherto, we had rather taxed our own manufactures than fostered them by taxes on those of other countire3. We hear of the fatal policy of the tariff of 1816 ; yet the law of 181 S was passed avowedly for the benefit of manufacturers, . and, with very few exceptions, imposed on imported articles very great additions of tax. inTsome impor tant instances, indeed, amounting to a prohibition. , Sir, on this subiect it becomes us at least to under stand the real posture of the question. Let Us not suppose that we are beginning thelprotection of ma- nuiactures, by duties on imports, wnat we are asnea . to do is, to render those duties much higher, and therefore, instead of dealing in general commenda tions oi the benefits oi protection, the inenas oi bill, I think, are bound to make out a lair each of the manufactures which they propose to bene fit. The government has already done much lor their protection, and it ought to be presumed to, ta e done enough unless it is to be and considerations applicable to each, that there is a necessity for doing more. . v; To be concluded zn our next.) i-

Page Text

This is the computer-generated OCR text representation of this newspaper page. It may be empty, if no text could be automatically recognized. This data is also available in Plain Text and XML formats.

Return to page view