HF 1755 C23 C-NRLF SB T7 lift <, J * CASSANDRAS of 1849 REYIEW OP SECKETARY WALKER'S REPORTS. 1849. REPRINTED 1859. WASHINGTON, July 16, 1849. Mr. Walker's report the great report of 1845 lays down the following principles, as he calls them : 1st. "That no more money should be collected than is necessary for the wants of Government, economically administered." Agreed to. 2d. "That no duty be imposed upon any article above the lowest rate which will yield the largest amount of revenue." What does Mr. Walker mean by this ? Are there two or more rates, high, low, and lowest, which would each yield the largest revenue" ? The principle, as laid down by Mr. Walker in the foregoing words quoted, would clearly imply so. . If that be his meaning, then certainly, the whole principle resolves itself into the more simple and intelligible phraseology of "adopting that rate of duty which shall induce the largest imports," for if it does not distinctly avow that and nothing else, it has no meaning ichatsoever. If, however, he means, what he does not say, to wit, that we should adopt " whatever rate of duty shall produce the largest revenue," it- only shows his proclivity to use clap-trap words, even at the hazard of being unintelligible, because this principle of his may induce a high rate of duty. It is certain that he does not mean very low duties, because he admits in his report that they would not tax the people to the extent necessary for the "wants of Government." . Again, this 2d "principle," as laid down, does not, upon annuncia- tion, challenge and receive universal assent; on the contrary, it is guilty of the unpardonable offence of challenging the not very flatter- ing quere of? What does he mean ? carrying home the conviction that 265 a writer, who with the utmostc are and preparation, condensing, simpli- fying, analyzing, and resolving a complicated system into its original elements, purporting to give a solution of a problem, proposes a prob- lem, in itself no less difficult and complicated than the original, and withal so ambiguously stated, as to allow many different solutions. The conviction is fastened upon the mind of every reader, that the ideas in the head of the promulger are as indistinct as is their annun- ciation. 3d. " That below such rate (?) discrimination may be made, de- cending in the scale of duties j or, for imperative reasons, the article may be placed in the list of those free from all duty." Again we ask, What does he mean ? It is assuredly not a " prin- ciple" deduced from the previous one, nor is it one in harmony and supporting it ; nor does, or can it, even run pari passu with it. On the contrary, it distinctly conflicts with it, and so far as any "princi- ple" is concerned, it would permit the practical annihilation of the principle first laid downj because, supposing Mr. Walker's rates of duty, (whatever rates he does mean,) under the first principle to be fixed, bringing in the greatest amount of revenue, just sufficient to meet the " wants of Government," he then permits you to discrimi- nate BELOW that rate, that is, for it can mean nothing else, you may reduce those rates still further, but not augment them. The conse- quence must be that the reduction of rates, below the rate, the "lowest rate" of duty necessary to raise the amount of the " wants of Govern- ment," would either increase or diminish that amount, and thus con- flict with the primary or vital principle of his whole theory. If, on the contrary, this discrimination "descending," would neither aug- ment nor diminish the amount, it Would conclusively follow, that, after having solved, or ascertained, under principle No. 2, the " lowest rate of duty, which would yield the largest amount of duty," his " prin- ciple," under head of No. 3, discriminating in a descending scale below the lowest rate of duty," would have the marvellous effect of producing just the same amount! the amount fi necessary for the wants of Government." It performs still greater wonders, because it allows, for " imperative reasons," a total abolition of duties on all arti- cles impressed under exactions of " imperative reasons," and still we shall have the exact amount necessary to meet "the wants of Govern- ment." If this principle under head No. 3, be not wholly inoperative, then that announced under head No. 2, is mere idle words, the entire virtue being in No 3. If principle No. 2 has virtue, then No. 8 must be powerless. The annunciation of No. 3, like that of No. 2, instead of claiming universal, unhesitating assent, as a " principle," at once, it bears stamped on its face, in the strongest characters, the features of an equivocal and difficult problem, requiring the closest attention to guess even at its meaning, and discouraging attempts at its solution. It has in it no trace of an axiom, or indisputable principle to com- mand acquiescence ; on the contrary, it is a seed of confusion from which truth or order can never spring. It either swallows up its pre- decessor, or is itself still-born. They cannot exist together. If the two together have really any meaning consistent, it is this : that discrimination may be made so long, or while it pursues the cal- culation, which at the " lowest rate of duty will produce the largest amount of revenue/' unless there be more than one "lowest rate of revenue" which "will produce the largest amount of revenue." No " discrimination" can be made, except such as will produce the " great- est revenue," and that discrimination is secured by the " principle" No. 2 j and vice versa, No. 1 would admit of several solutions, of which No. 2 would be the choice, and might as well have been adopted with- out the first having been stated. 4th. " That the maximum duties should be imposed on luxuries." This " principle," instead of being a sequitur, or in any way eluci- dating the previous ones, Nos. 2 and 3, or in any way appertaining to them, is an ingredient of discord. It adds another member, not to solve, but to complicate and perplex a problem, already rendered suf- ficiently difficult. It controls both Nos. 2 and 3, or it is a nullity. They must both be complied with and ciphered out, by putting the " highest" of the "lowest duty" upon "luxuries;" "discriminating" thus, but the " highest" duty, must be the " lowest" that will " produce the greatest amount of revenue." Another question, or rather several very difficult questions arise, to wit, "What articles are "luxuries" ? and Why should "luxuries" be put wholly beyond the reach of the people, by high taxes or the "high- est" duty? Does price, or scarcity, or both, constitute " luxury" ? Is it the duty of Government to put within reach of the people "luxuries?" Or is it the duty of Government to exclude the " people" from all enjoyment of "luxuries ?" What were " luxuries' ' some years since, are now the " ordinary enjoyments" of " the people." Are " luxuries" all those articles not " necessary" to the existence of the people ? Tea, coffee, spices of all kinds, are luxuries, under any oilier definition, that they are accessible to, and enjoyed by the universal people. i It is a " principle" of Mr. Walker's, but conveys to the mind of others, a problem, with meaning undefined and undefinable. 5th. " That all minimums, and all specified duties, should be abolished, and ad valorem duties substituted in their places, care being taken to guard against fraudulent invoices and under-valuation, and to assess the duty upon the actual market value." This "principle," like those preceding, can, upon its face, com- mand the assent of no one. Except the first, not one of the " prin- ciples" is a great, universally-admitted truth. It is a very difficult problem, requiring much labor and investigation to ascertain its results, and throwing out prominently in front the most serious ob- jections. If ingenuity had done its utmost to contrive a mode l>y winch the (C extremest" fluctuations of the market price could be caused ; this 5th principle of Mr. Walker would have been the device selected. , By this mode, as the market price of an article advances, Govern- ment, pari passu, piles on the ad valorem duty at " the actual market value." As the price recedes, Government, under this principle, with equal rapidity takes off the duty. Thus two elements are at work in causing the fluctuations of prices. If prices go up, the ad valorem drives them still higher. If prices recede, the ad valorem depresses them to the lowest price; while a fixed rate of duty is not only a certain data for commercial calculation, but also limits the fluctuations of price, to the single influence of the market price of the goods. It may also be considered as affording vastly greater opportunities to unscrupulous foreigners and fraudulent citizens to cheat the Govern- ment. It must inevitably be more complex, leaving the interests of Government at the discretion of poorly-paid appraisers, withdrawing the safeguard of a fixed rate. The opinions of appraisers and the different market values at different ports, will infallibly cause the levying of unequal duties in different ports, and consequently of doing injustice to some. To say the least, it opens, on the one hand, a tempting door of fraud to the shippers in foreign ports, and of oppres- sion by the Government. Because, Government being the sole judge of the value of goods, may disregard an invoice and place an excessive valuation on the goods : or it may, through negligence, or collusion of its humble, and poorly-paid appraisers, permit fraudulent invoices to pass; or, if honest and watchful, even, it is impossible, in a vast amount of instances, that they can detect fraud. There are so many channels through which the " discretion" of an officer may be approached without pecuniary or other revolting advan- tageous offers, such as personal confidence, and predilections towards certain individuals, which lulls them to sleep, or the dread of great political influence, which makes them fear to express distrust of what- ever invoices may be presented by such parties. These, and many other difficulties start up at the first statement of the " principle/' 6th. That the duty should be so imposed as to operate as equally as possible throughout the Union, discriminating neither for nor against any class or section." This, by itself, is intelligible enough, but is most strangely at vari- ance with No. 3, which says, " discrimination may be made," and with No. 4, which is wholly, and entirely, and purely a " discrimina- tion/' and not only a "discrimination," but so intended against the class" using luxuries." Is there any man, save Mr. Walker himself, so bold, and so saga- cious, as to assert that those six principles, avowed by Mr. Walker as the seed, or basis of his tariff, are homogeneous, or can by possibility be woven together ? Can any one so picture to his own mind its possible working ? or can any one perceive any possible benefit to any interest to the country ? The only " glimmer" of light shed forth, is the idea, of getting very low duties by an immense amount of importations, all, (except ad va- 6 lorem with its hosts of dangers,) of the other principles vanish, being inconsistent and impossible, in conjunction with the all-important Nos. 1 and 2. Mr. Walker must himself be fully aware that that is the only duty offered by his whole six principles. The other four, or perhaps 3, 4 and 5, are only intended to mislead with false hopes and to con- found. They are not and cannot be part and parcel of his great Tariff principles. Throughout his voluminous report, whenever he substantiates a feature of one " principle" he blots out a corresponding one of one or more of the others ; and when in great straits, he covers from the view, the Prophet of Khorazin the Walker Tariff with the " veil of Free Trade" behind whose fair folds, lies concealed the distorted and dis- cordant features of a " monster" Tariff. No section, class, or interest can read the principles of Mr. Walker, and receive the slightest conception of their working. Misgivings, doubts and fears must attach to all, and no one feel joyful with "in- telligent hope." The only forlorn loop upon which hope can hang is, that it proposes to levy as small a per cent, duty as possible. Liter- ally, substantially, and most truly, it permits no other " hope/' and this single " hope" may with painful truth and reality be said to lie at the bottom of this " Pandora's Box," filled with evils now being scatt2red broadcast over the land. WasJiington, July, 1849. Tt always affords us pleasure to give assent to any of the state- ments and doctrines avowed by Mr. Walker, to whom, notwithstand- ing the difference in our deductions from the same political axioms, we cheerfully accord the meed of merit due to his talents, and in our discussions we shall treat him with all consideration and due respect. Mr. Walker, in demonstrating the advantages of free trade thus happily states the case, that " it is clearly illustrated by the perfect free trade which exists among all the States of the Union, and by the acknowledged fact that any one of these States would be injured by imposing duties upon the products of others." This is the strong tariff doctrine out and out. The Tariff party contend that the perfect free trade among the States is the best incomparably of all commerce, and they propose to push its advan- tages still further ; to make that free trade flourish exceedingly, de- veloping to the uttermost the resources of each, unshackled by the restriction inevitable between alien nations. By a free trade among the States commerce is taxed only to the amount necessary to u meet the wants of our governments " a commerce with foreign countries has to Lear the burden necessary to the support of Loth governments. But there is another fact, striking and conclusive, in favor of free trade among the States, and it is this : it is the source from whence all internal improvements have sprung, causing in their course " the desert to blossom as the rose." We will illustrate by example, thus, The cotton, rice, &c., raised in the State of South Carolina, is shipped by vessels from Charleston or other ports to Europe, and by same conveyance returns are received ; the paths of these vessels are o'er the trackless deep, whose treacherous waters keep in constant peril, too often engulfing in a common ruin, the vessel, cargo and precious lives. From the moment of departure from one port to arrival at her destination, the restless waters, close following in her path, obliterate every vestige of her track ; and ten millions of vessels passing and repassing would leave no evidence, (save the scattered wrecks,) of the treasures of life and property that had passed along. But suppose from Charleston to Nashville or Memphis, a railroad were constructed, an exchange of products, cotton and rice taken from South Carolina to Tennessee, and in return receive the beef, the corn, wheat, tobacco, iron and manufactures of cotton. The advantages, or to enumerate a few of them only, would be the saving of life and property to the extent of trade thus diverted to the West to give immense value to lands, otherwise so far from market as to be value- less; this accessibility to market, would cause an influx of population ; the construction of the railroad itself, and the cars, engine and station- houses, would all bring laborers, mechanics, and persons of every occupation connected. To supply these, artisans and shop-keepers would come, and with all these would follow employ for the learned professions. Divinity, Medicine and Law, and last, though not least, the school-masters, printers and editors and the population thus increasing, would afford patronage to secure abundance and the best 8 of everything at the most reasonable rates. This traffic would neces- sarily give rise to travel back and forth, making the parties mutually acquainted, and knitting them together by the bonds of interest and good feeling. All these advantages are open and accessible, without the tax of a dollar beyond the sum which, of necessity, must be paid for the revenue of the government. Should the railroad pass through a mineral country, it would develop invaluable treasures, which would be worthless so long as a restricted trade with foreign nations should be preferred to a perfect free trade among the States. But there are other most important advantages intimately connected with this free trade among the States, inasmuch as to give rise to the most varied employments, from which the South is almost wholly excluded the exceptions being when they have adopted Tariff principles. As it now is, planting is almost the sole employment, giving rise to one set of ideas to every person, and by necessity, keeping people segregated, limiting communication and the subjects of investigation and dis- cussion narrowing the range of the mind to one pursuit. The rail- road with its host of advantages, would give employment to engineers, to mechanics and manufacturers, and the sons of planters could engage in those pursuits and in the professional occupations to which a largely increasing population would give rise. By that mode, and by that mode alone, can the mind of a people attain a full development. The teeming activity of mind springing from varied occupations is most strikingly apparent, in the records of the Patent Office, which are, almost exclusively, the monument of the great advantages flowing from this source. The mind of South Carolina, naturally so good, is, in relation to these matters, torpid, her name scarcely appearing among the inventors of useful and orna- mental improvements. If the policy of Mr. Walker had been pursued from the period of the last war, 1812, few, very few of the improvements, which have annihi- lated space, united population, and by diversifying occupation, rendering it profitable, would exist. Nor should we have had that full and free intercourse to which business gives rise, and in which, pleasure tempted by facility, so freely indulges, by which we have literally become one people. In this country alone, do the people speak one language throughout its length and breadth, and are knit together by ties of consanguinity and personal acquaintance. It is a fact, (existing in no other country save this,) of the truth of which any one, any where, may satisfy himself, that the majority of people are not resi- dents of the place of their nativity. Let any one, at parties or gatherings, large or small, ascertain the birth-place of those present, and it will be found that in most instances, a majority of those present are not of that place native born. The consequence of this is, that persons have relatives, friends and acquaintances in every State of the Union. South Carolina is the least striking example, she is sui generis. She has held out no inducement, (save the sea-board,) to settlers, she has the virtues and faults of pure Americanism. In Europe, throughout, even in those countries whose extent is less than that of a single State, adjoining provinces or counties are as alien to each other in blood, friendship and intercourse, as though they were purely foreigners to each other ; their very language is mutually unin- telligible ; and throughout Europe the vast mass of population con- tinue residents of the province or county of their birth. Internal improvements are gradually changing this unamiable aspect. But at present they are not linked together as we are, by the strong ties of consanguinity, intermarriages, and mutual acquaintance; they mingle and co-mingle not as we do, like waters, until we become one. Had we continued from 1816 to this time, as Mr. Walker'would have had us, " an agricultural people," we should have been strangers to each other. The business of agriculturalists keeps them at home, communications would have been rare and the glorious fabric of an educated, ingenious, intelligent and wealthy Republic which we are rearing, would have been a mere nation of farmers with only such limited advantages as flow from a single occupation. The mines of iron and coal would have lain dormant and valueless, while we should have paid Great Britain not only fqr the labor bestowed in the manufacture, but also for the ore of iron and the coal with which to manufacture it. All these things, properly understood, are undeniable, and result directly from the principles laid down by Mr. Walker himself. Let any person for one instant picture to himself the state of affairs invited by Mr. Walker ; and stated to be the best and natural con- 10 dition of affairs if left to free trade at one fell swoop manufactures and all the employments connected with them swept from existence here, and the persons thus engaged becoming agriculturalists. There is more food now raised than can be sold; to say nothing of augmenting a superabundance, what would be the other results ? The lines of communication, now supported by travellers, and those include nine-tenths of all of them, would fall into disuse from want of patron- age. The number of letters would diminish by millions, the cost of transporting the mail enormously increased, and the time taken .greatly extended. The telegraph would be almost useless-. The teeming ingenuity of mind now so fertile with resources for improve- ment would slumber for want of an object. Newspapers and periodi- cals would diminish three-fourths, at least the cost of printing increase education more imperfect and more expensive. The inter- communications almost ceasing, would leave us in ignorance to a great degree of each other, and the moneys spent and spending in the free- trade commerce between the States would be lost in the wide waste of the ocean. These are some of the consequences which must necessarily pre- sent themselves to the mind of all who will carefully scan the report of Mr. Walker. Washington, August, 1849. To the following great principle, embodying, as, undoubtedly, it does, the true policy, we claim attention. That there shall be Free Trade among all nations, in such articles as soil, climate, and other causes" shall respectively afford the ele- ments for producing and manufacturing lest and most cheaply. To the consideration of this cardinal principle we invoke the atten- tion of every individual in the land. So far as the influence of the National Government can affect the prosperity of the country, it is the very pivot. All other issues sink into insignificance when com- pared with this. The vacating and filling offices, are but incidents to the performance of Executive duties. If these be promptly and faithfully performed, it is, prima facie, abundant evidence that, in relation to the employees, the public good has been consulted; nor is it wise or just to attribute improper motives to acts whose results are 11 good ; the more especially as no reliable evidence can be had that the motives are bad, while the evidence, of good results, is manifest. If the offices be honestly and faithfully filled, it matters comparatively little, certainly no great national interest will be affected by it. Much latitude must be allowed, in this, to the discretion of the Executive, charged with, and responsible as it is, for the faithful performance of the duties entrusted. No man, therefore, who is not a hunter after office, or a partizan so bitter and prejudiced as to make party advan- tage the supreme law of his life, will permit himself to magnify into the importance of a vital principle, the question of employing sub- agents to perform the inferior duties under the Executive ; and to do this too at the expense of momentous interests. We say not this in vindication of changes made or to be made ; we mean to express no opinion as to their propriety j none is required at our hands. Our own opinion of such matters is, that if an individual appointed to any office of mere routine, performs intelligently, faithfully, and promptly its duties, recognizing no party during his continuance in office, that every party should recognize him as the faithful unobtrusive servant of the public, obnoxious to no one, acceptable to all. The only object of the foregoing remarks, is to secure consideration for the great question, presented in the opening of this article, with the single reference to its merits as a national and universal policy. The leading policy of the Administration will doubtless be, to bring into harmonious action, on this principle, the conduct of all nations. Sooner or later, it must came to pass. That each nation should devote itself to those pursuits in which it can excel all others, is so palpably undeniable, that if the proposition were made, ab initio, that is, if the resources of all nations were mutually before each, before any development should have taken place, there can be no doubt that all would agree to the proposition, to engage in the pursuits to success in which their resources were best adapted. How far interests which may have grown up under a different policy, may interfere with the successful negotiation on this principle, remains to be seen. But every approximation to it is desirable, and a disposition to a certain extent, may be hoped for everywhere. For instance, it would not be difficult to satisfy Spain that we can raise rice cheaper and better than can Cuba ; nor would it be very 12 difficult for Spain to convince us that Cuba can raise coffee cheaper and better than the United States. There are many articles the elements for the product and manufacture of which abound in some countries to a degree so superior as to defy competition in quality, quantity, and price. In all such cases there might be mutually little difficulty in adjusting, where enormous interests are not concerned in the unequal rivalry. The germ of the policy of the dominant party, as stated in the opening, is that of good seed, and legitimately, the fruit should be good. Foreign commerce should be limited to those articles, whose ele- ments for superiority do not exist among us. These will ever afford a great commerce to this country. "We have but to demonstrate and make known to the world the superior resources of this country, to attract multitudes of the inge- nious and industrious, who become alike consumers as well as pro- ducers. The simultaneous rush from all Christendom and from heathen lands to the tempting profits of California, is a clear indication how readily population flows to any point where profit is highly probable. The mines of California, however, allure to her shores a population not, in every respect, by any means desirable. But our fertile lands, our exceedingly rich minerals of iron, lead, copper and plumbago, together with coal, limestone and charcoal with which to manufacture them, hold out strong incentives to the ingenious and industrious mechanic, artisan, and manufacturer. Cotton and hemp, &c., tempt others, while the machinery necessary for the manufacture give earnest of good employment to the skilful in that branch of trade. All these in their turn give rise to thousands of steamboats and rail- roads, furnishing employment to millions. All these demands for labor, the surpassing advantages we possess in the elements of agriculture and manufactures, are but dimly known to the great masses of the skilful throughout the world. It will be one prominent object of the Administration to make known to all the world our excelling advantages, which will cause our country to be thronged with the industrious and ingenious. Hitherto, most unfortunately, there has existed abroad, only that shadowy information of our advantages, which tempted chiefly those 13 in desperate circumstances, or who from want of skill in any occupa- tion, could find no employment adequate to a support ; and lastly, very generally emptied the hospitals, penitentiaries and poor-houses on our shores, to an extent to give rise, in the minds of many, to an aversion to emigration altogether. Skilful mechanics, artisans, and laborers, who were always from their skill, industry and intelligence, sure of constant employment, have not come over in great numbers. They had no such detailed and reliable information as to give them assurance that their skill and industry would come to a good market. Had this information been freely and carefully circulated throughout Europe, Jn a form and under authority to guarantee authenticity, we should long since have had hundreds of thousands of the best workmen of Europe, whose intelligence, industry and probity would have recommended them to universal favor. As it has been, however, we have received many such to whom information has been specially sent, or who from some pressure were induced to acquire sufficient information to' justify a prudent man embarking for this land of promise. An industrious, intelligent and skilful population, induced ly accu- rate and full information of our superior advantages, would afford tenants for houses, consumers for produce; in return, by their skill and labor, would furnish fabrics, at the lowest prices and best quality, of all such articles as the elements of the country are best adapted to. A rapidly increasing population gives rise to new lines of connexion ; a large population giving rise to large consumption necessarily reduces the cost of production ; and the glorious free trade among all the States of this Union, will stimulate production to such an extent, as to compel other nations to adopt the same liberal course. Foreigners will continue to flock to this country, those whose for- tunes are so desperate that no change can make worse, will come with- out any special knowledge. The existing Administration will feel it incumbent on itself to try and secure for the country the immigra- tion of a useful and desirable population in lieu of the outpourings of alms-houses and penitentiaries. That the foreign residents and citizens of this country are all of that class, we are far from meaning to imply, but that large streams of such constantly flow in is beyond a doubt. 14 We have extended our observations beyond the length intended, and now postpone, for a subsequent number, some further views. Washington, August, 1849. The alpha and omega of Mr. Walker, is to encourage imports ; that is his great panacea, by which all evils of political economy are to be remedied, and from which alone is to flow every species of pros- perity. On the other hand, the opinion of the Tariff party is this, to stimulate production and exports, being well assured that imports will take care of themselves. By stimulating production in variety, quantity and quality, is a nation most surely enriched ; and when a nation or individuals obtain wealth, they are never at a loss to purchase what they want. Mr. Walker bothers himself most unnecessarily in contriving ways to secure large imports, while the aim of a discriminating Tariff is to secure to this nation the wealth which will always command the com- modities of the world. England has for ages pursued a protective policy, and yet her im- ports were enormous, because her productiveness was so. Mr. Walker uses curious arguments. We give some of them. He says : " If the question is asked, Who shall begin the work of reciprocal "reduction? 1st. It is answered by the fact, that England has " already abated her duties on most of our exports. She has repealed " the duty upon cotton, and greatly reduced the tariff upon our bread- " stuffs, provisions and other articles ; and her present bad harvest, " if accompanied by a reduction of our tariff, would lead to a repeal of " her corn laws, and the unrestricted admission, at all times, of our "agricultural products." (2nd.) We will answer Mr. Walker's first query by saying that the Tariff party is ready to carry out the great principle laid down by himself, without waiting or caring for reciprocity. They are now ready to have and to encourage "unrestricted commerce" in all commodities, the elements for the production and manufacture of which, as good and as cheap as anywhere else, do not exist in this country, but to suc- cess in which, " soil, climate and other causes" oppose insuperable 15 barriers. "We care not what restrictions they put on our produc- tions, it is the policy of a just Tariff to afford the people the best and cheapest of everything. All those commodities which can- not be successfully produced here, will be best encouraged by being admitted duty free. Is not this liberal legislation, far beyond anything proposed by Mr. Walker? In reply to the second part of the query, we state that England has done wisely ; she has adopted the Tariff doctrine, which shines like a jewel in the composite report of Mr. Walker. "Soil, climate and other causes/' present insuperable obstacles to England in rivalry with the United States in the productien of cotton, and therefore, and only therefore, has she repealed the duty on cotton. She has abated the duty on most of our exports, and " greatly reduced the duties on breadstuffs, provisions and other articles." We here see the distinction made, England graduates her duties, so as to render them no higher than is necessary to give to agriculture the full opportunity of testing the ability of her soil and climate to pro- duce as good and as cheaply as other nations. If other nations can furnish England with agricultural products at lower rates than her own soil, and she admits these products duty free, what is the inevitable result? Infallibly the utter ruin of agriculture and entireloss of value of land. This result is absolutely certain ; and yet Mr. Walker asserts that England would do this thing " by a reduction of our tariff." The truth is, that England has a debt of four thousand millions of dollars, the burden of which, in addition to the profits of her manufactures, must, in a great degree, be borne by her customers, and she dare pursue no policy which will change this state of things until her debt be wiped off. If England repeals her corn laws to all the world, she must simultaneously repeal a portion of her enormous debt. In page 13 of his report, Mr. Walker says : " The tariff did not raise the price of our breadstuffs, but a bad harvest in England does ! ! ! ! ! giving us for a time that foreign " market which we would soon have at all times by that repeal of the " corn laws which must follow the reduction of our duties." There is sequitur for you. This paragraph contains information 16 and a species of ratioticination which no one will contend is not alto- gether Mr. Walker's own. Mr. Walker further states, that, " While breadstuff's rise with a bad harvest in England, cotton " almost invariably falls ; because the increased sum which in that "event England must pay for our breadstuff's, we will take not in "manufactures, but only in specie; and not having it to spare, she "brings down, even to a greater extent, the price of cotton." The great national disaster of the failure of a crop in England, diminishes to an enormous amount her wealth, her ability to purchase. She is not only less able to purchase, but the scarcity of grain com- pels her people, in their poverty, to give a higher price for provisions ; these two demands together, disable the people of England from con- suming the usual quantity of cotton goods, reducing, of course, the demand for cotton; this is the reason why the price of cotton "al- most" always falls with a short crop in England. We take all we want, and bring home the remainder in specie, with which operation Mr. Walker is displeased. Are we never to have any more specie with our growing wants ? How shall we ever get specie, if after buy- ing all we want, we do not import the balance due us in specie ? Mr. Walker says, England has not got it " to spare." Pray, will Mr. Walker tell us who has got it to spare ?" Have we ? It is thus with Mr. Walker throughout. His report, his argument and illustrations are nearly all at variance with the good principles he lays down, and his "sequiturs" are very much in the style of the sailor, who asks, "Parlez vous Frangois?" "Oui Monsieur!" " Then lend me your gridiron." We will tell Mr. Walker how we can best enable England to purchase our cotton. It is by " unrestricted commerce" in those commodities which " soil, climate and other causes" must necessarily render us dependent upon those nations which have the superiority over us. Thus by free trade in tea, coffee, &c., we encourage the production of those articles, and enable those countries producing them to buy cotton goods of England. And this is actually the course of trade. In China, at Rio and other places, for the balance due those countries we give bills on England, and those bills are, in part, for the purchase of cotton goods by those countries from England. Let Mr. Walker's 17 twenty-five per cent, duty be laid upon tea, coffee, &c., in distinct violation of the only vital principle contained in his report, and he would soon find that the demand from those countries for English and other cotton manufactures would be diminished, thus diminishing of course the demand for raw cotton, and we should not be encouraging, for our own advantage, the production of these articles to the highest degree of quality, quantity and cheapness. We should check them. The judicious Tariff doctrines have reference to a universal circula- tion of commerce ; Mr. Walker looks only to the direct trade between this and other nations. We close this number with this simple propositon and issue. Let Mr. Walker demonstrate what articles or commodities, the ele- ments for the production of which as good and as cheap as other nations are not in the country, and our party will agree to have free trade in all such ; and to levy duty on the others only to the extent necessary for the wants of Government economically administered. Can Mr. Walker, and the supporters of his report, desire more ? Is this platform, not one upon which they can consistently and willingly plant themselves in common with a judicious Tariff party ? Washington, September, 1849. Does not this Walker Tariff profess to substitute English and other foreign manufactures for those of America ? Does not the success of this measure strike down the manufacturing interests of the country ? Is the term " Free Trade" so dear to the voters of the United States, as to render them wholly regardless of their own interests and that of the country ? If the manufactures of the United States become extinct by the floods of foreign labor let loose against them, will not the country lose the whole value of her iron and coal mines ? Will not all her improve- ments lose large amounts of tolls ? Will not these losses give rise to increased taxation ? Has not large amounts of foreign capital of neighboring States been expended in Pennsylvania, developing very greatly her resources, giving employment to many thousands of persons, erecting improve- ments in houses, canals, railroads, and giving value to all neighboring 2 V 18 property paying large taxes to the State, and large tolls in addition to her public works ? Would not a discriminating Tariff, taking the duty off tea, coffee, &c., and put upon foreign manufactures, if it hold forth the assurance of permanency, cause in a few years, the influx of millions of capital, and of thousands of laborers, manufacturers, &c , vastly augmenting the amount of revenue, and giving rise to new lines of communication, until the State shall be covered like a net work? Will not this augmented population give Pennsylvania a greater influence, a larger number of representatives in Congress ? Will not the decay of manufactures, under the blighting influence cf the Tariff of 1846, mildew the prosperity of the State ? Will not a judicious Tariff give employment to thousands who would remain in the State, but who will be compelled to leave it, as the decline of manufactures diminish the demand for mechanics, engineers, artisans, operatives, &c.? Mr. Walker, thus plainly, flatly, and without circumlocution, pro- claims his hostility to American manufactures, and the object of the Tariff of 1846 to put them down. Mark well the deliberate purpose to uproot manufactures f^gT"" He (Mr. Walker) doubts not that the manufacturers are sin- Merely persuaded that the system which is a source of so much profit to them is beneficial also to the country. He, (Mr. Walker,) euter- " tains a contrary opinion, and claims for the opponents of the system " a settled conviction of its INJURIOUS EFFECTS." Where is the man in Pennsylvania, with this declaration of the . author of the Tariff of 1846 staring him in the face, who will have the bare-faced effrontery to say that the Tariff of 1846 is favorable to the manufactures of Pennsylvania, or of any other State ? Let every paper in the State keep at the head of its columns this avowed purpose of the author of the Tariff of 1846, denouncing the manufactures of Pennsylvania and elsewhere as " INJURIOUS" and that the Tariff of 1846 is intended " To prevent the substitution of American manufactures for British goods." Mr Walker says the advantage of Free Trade "is clearly illus- 19 " trated by the perfect Free Trade which exists among all the States of the Union. 7 ' Can the United States get free trade any where except among them- selves? No. Mr. Walker says the trade among the States is the most valuable, because it is a perfectly free trade, and yet he seeks to break down that trade which is fostered and augmented by a tariff laying no more duty than the Tariff of 1846. Yet a discriminating Tariff admittedly and immensely increases this trade between the States, while the Tariff of 1846 is intended to "prevent the substitution of American fabrics for foreign goods." If American goods be substituted for foreign fabrics, they would be interchanged among the States, a commerce which Mr. Walker de- clares to be the best; but if foreign goods be substituted for American manufacture?, to that extent at least is this " perfect free trade among the States" diminished. And yet Mr. Walker himself by his Tariff of 1846, does not substitute even a foreign free trade, while he does diminish his own favorite free trade among the States. Washington, September, 1849. In stating the "platform" of the Walker Tariff of 1846, you are provided with the conclusive evidence of Mr. Walker himself, so that no one's faith or credulity is appealed to. The distinct issue avowed by Mr. Walker, is the EXTINCTION OF MANUFACTURES, and we proceed now to demonstrate this from his own reports. Mr. Walker plants himself upon the following great, and we admit, truthful principle of political economy. " Soil, climate, and other causes, vary very mu^h in different coun- " tries, the pursuits which are most profitable in each; and the pros- " perity of all of them will be best promoted by leaving them unrestrict- " ed by legislation, to exchange with each other < those fabrics and pro- " ducts which they severally raise most cheaply/" We will allow Mr. Walker himself to show which, in the opinion of the friends of the Tariff of 1846. are those articles which should be freed from " legislative restrictions," because our soil, climate, and other causes," will not permit the United States to produce them on favorable terms. 20 Mr. Walker's reports abound with evidence that the manufacturing interests must be abolished, because they can never furnish good and cheap fabrics. But to let him speak for himself, and for the advo- cates of the Tariff of 1846, we give his own words : " He doubts not that the manufacturers are sincerely persuaded " that the system which is a source of so much profit to them, is also "beneficial to the country. He (Mr. Walker) entertains a contrary " opinion, and claims for the opponents of the system, a settled conviction "of its INJURIOUS EFFECTS." The assertion in this, of Mr. Walker, that the system " has been a source of so much profit," is unsupported by facts. It is a matter of the most unquestionable notoriety, that the unhappy fluctuations in the Tariff have resulted in the failure of at least nineteen out of every twenty who were tempted to engage in them. Clear as is this declaration of a " settled" hostility to the " system" of manufactures, Mr. Walker, speaking in behalf of the advocates of the Tariff of 1846, takes good care that there shall be no misappre- hension as to their purpose, and the object of the Tariff of 1846, and we quote his own words it is, " to prevent the substitution of Ame- rican manufactures for foreign goods." Nothing can make the issue more clear than the foregoing. Mr. Walker, with that courage which is his most distinguished charac- teristic, although he has many eminent ones, marks and defines the purpose of the Tariff of 1846, and of its advocates. And that is, that the only desirable occupation for Americans, are, agriculture and such commerce as flows from an exchange of our agricultural products, for the fabrics and products of other nations. He says it would be " thus enabling our farmers and planters to sell their products for cheaper foreign manufactures." "Agriculture is our chief employment, it is best adapted to our situation, and, if not depressed by the Tariff, would be the most pro- fitable. Remove, then, from agriculture all our restrictions, and by its own unfettered power it will break down all foreign restrictions, and ours being removed, would feed the hungry and clothe the poor of our fellow-men throughout all the densely-peopled nations of the world. But now we will take nothing in exchange for these products but specie, except at very high duties." 21 We call particular attention to the developments in the above. The first conclusion is, that " agriculture would be the most profitable" em- ployment the people of this country could engage in, " if not depressed by the Tariff," which induces many to engage in other pursuits. Therefore it is that Mr. Walker, and the advocates of the Tariff of 1846, wish to banish manufactures, and compel all parties to engage in agriculture, the most profitable pursuit. It is the further purpose to cause a disruption, an extinction of that " perfect free trade among all the States of the Union/' and to divert the whole trade of the States into new channels of direct trade and commerce with foreign nations. We will now say nothing of the consequences of this sudden disconnection of interests and intercourse which must suddenly follow the consummation of the purposes of Mr. Walker and the advocates of the Tariff of 1846; nor will we calculate the fearful cost even pecu- niarily, at which this experiment of Mr. Walker must be tried. A cost involving the interests of manufactures in all its ramifications, touching incidentally and beneficially so many others to the extent of several thousand millions of dollars. Towns and cities have sprung up, canals and railroads have been made, steamboats have been built, and all these are distinctly doomed to be of the " things that were." Besides those directly concerned, the roads made for intercourse among the States will cease to be travelled by the most numerous class of passengers, the business men, and their receipts will fall off heavily. Again, upon the credit of the large amounts of real estate, machinery, the railroads and canals, enormous loans have been made ; much of this amount is owned by farmers, and by every other class in the community. And Mr. Walker and the advocates of the Tariff of 1846, will find that this dear-bought experiment will bring down a wide-spread ruin among others than those against whose interests they entertain a "settled conviction." Nor, again, do we now take into consideration the loss of life and pro- perty which will be annually incurred by diverting the " five hundred millions of dollars," the present amount of internal trade, as stated by Mr. Walker himself, from the safe channels' it now pursues, to the dangerous waters of the ocean, where the restrictions and losses are greater than any imposed by a discriminating Tariff. And the loss includes many, very many precious lives, and a total loss to all the 22 world, of the treasures of money and merchandise which go to the bottom of the ocean. This loss, which would be borne by the agricul- turists, and to which Mr. Walker would allure them, would be suf- ficient of itself to place manufactures on a firm basis, and by the price of that which will be sunk in the ocean by Mr. Walker's Tariff. Which is best, to sink the amount in the ocean, or to absolutely give it for the encouragement of manufactures? But Mr. Walker antici- pates that a trade with all the world, instead of with our own twenty millions of people, would augment the foreign trade to two thousand millions. How enormous must be the loss at sea, of life and property, on this amount ; and would not the total loss of property in this way, be quite as burdensome to commerce, as a duty to that extent f The risk is double, because produce is to be shipped across the ocean, and manufactures are to be shipped back. The losses which will thus inure to Mr. Walker's system will fall on somebody. Will Mr. Walker assert that the losses by shipwreck will all fall on other nations ? Will not the United States have their full share of it ? Again, the dangers by sea of injury to agricultural products, par- ticularly to grain and provisions, during a sea voyage, are, upon the great aggregate of exports, a most serious expense. We have the most abundant evidence that a very large proportion of Indian corn is seriously injured, and that scarcely a fourth of our grain and flour is delivered abroad in good order. But enough, for the present, on this point. Mr. Walker asserts in the paragraph quoted above : But now we will take nothing in exchange but specie, except at very high duties." The fact is, that a proper Tariff will, so far from admitting nothing " except at high duties," admit free of all duty, more articles than Mr. Walker himself proposes so to do! And further, Mr. Walker asserts and labors to prove that his Tariff has imported more specie and will import more than any other. So that as to the first assertion about receiving nothing except at high duties," we prove him wrong; and as to the import of specie, he absolutely per- spires in his labors, to prove his own assertion unfounded. While Mr. Walker thus complains of a judicious Tariff taking " nothing but specie," he also says, mark ye : 23 " There is nothing which will advance so surely the prosperity of the country, as an adequate supply of specie. There is no danger that we shall have too much gold and silver in actual circulation." Another extract from Mr. Walker will show what he means by the Tariff of 1842 taking "nothing but specie in exchange/' and the Tariff of 1846 taking goods at " lower duties." Under the Tariff of 1842, he says, in the year ending 1846, the specie received amounted to "$296,315." This is the Tariff which will take only specie ! The Tariff of 1846, as Mr. Walker states, received in 1847, $22,276,170." Without now undertaking to show the causes of this difference, we confine ourselves to its contradicting Mr. Walker's assertions. He alleges that the demand for our products under the Tariff of 1842, limits the sale of our agricultural products, because we " will take nothing but specie," and therefore the Tariff of 1846 is best. He proves it by showing that the Tariff which, he asserts, will in return take only specie, actually imported, net, only $296,315, while the Tariff of 1846 required foreign countries to pay us $22,276,170. We quote these only to show the contradictions of Mr. Walker, and how confused and uncertain his ideas. In another part of his report, Mr. Walker objects to a protective Tariff, requiring specie. He says : " England must pay for our breadstuff's, we will take not in manu- factures, but in specie, and not having it to spare, &c., &c" Thus we see again, that complaining that a just Tariff takes specie from England which she cannot spare, and then straightway undertakes to prove that his Tariff has taken six times as much. That is, England could not afford $12,660,312, but that she could spare $68,507,630. The report abounds with such hetorogeneous compounds, all of which, in their simple form, contradict the views he entertains. The only definite idea which exists in Mr. Walker's head, and which we presume has caused him to put forth such a mass of undi- gested material, is that Free Trade will give us the whole world as customers, which is better than entire Free Trade at home and restricted trade abroad; upon this idea he appears to have sought materials to give it the form and semblance of a theory. 24 Again, Mr. Walker thus proves that a " discriminating or protective Tariff" "will take in exchange nothing but specie." He says: "From the beginning of 1821 until the commencement of 1833, and from the 30th September, 1842, until 1st of July, 1846, our excess of imports of specie over the exports was $12,660,312, being an average annual gain of $791,216 in specie, during these sixteen years of high tariffs, whilst the excess of specie, during the eleven years of the compromise act of 1836, and low tariff of 1846, was $68,507,630, and the annual average gain of specie $6,227,967." It would he a very easy matter for us to correct the impression in- tended by Mr. Walker in this statement; but the purpose in quoting is simply to show the ingenious consistency of Mr. Walker and his remarkable success in proving that it was the Tariff of 1842, and all high tariffs, which would take in exchange nothing but specie." If Mr. Walker had stated that this large amount of specie was in return for bonds, he would put the matter in its true light, but he claims the specie as the result of his Tariff, which was to induce Europe to take our produce by exacting, not specie, but merchandise at low duties. We have sufficiently shown the " settled conviction of the injurious effects" of manufactures entertained by Mr. Walker and his coad- jutors. He and they may be right. It may be our policy to convert every man into an agriculturist, except enough to transmit produce and receive goods in exchange. It may be worth all the sacrifices which are required. But the evidence of such advantages should be very clear indeed. The policy of a just Tariff is comprised in a single paragraph. It believes in the superior advantages of multifarious employments. It believes the country possesses the elements of superiority in many branches of manufacture. It believes that these elements can be put into successful operation, without the addition of one dollar duty be- yond the amount which, under any tariff, must be raised for the wants of the Government. It believes that the way to secure more cheaply the fabrics and products which we cannot furnish, is to admit them duty free. It believes that by laying a " duty for revenue only," on those articles which we shall be able to produce on the best terms, 25 will give rise to multifarious occupations, bringing rapidly into success, ful operation the elements now dormant or half developed, and aug- menting to the uttermost, that most beneficial of all trades, a Free Trade among the States. Is not this platform worthy of consideration ? Besides the advan- tages which it offers, in order to carry it into operation, it is not necessary to begin with the extinction of interests amounting in value to thousands of millions. It has that margin in advance in its favor, it has the certain good to save that amount of interest from ruin. But the whole matter lies in a nut-shell, so far as laying duties is involved. The advocates of Free Trade, of the Tariff of 1846, require legis- lative restriction" upon all imports, tea, coffee, &c. The advocates of a just Tariff desire to limit the "legislative re- strictions" to foreign rival manufactures, and no duty upon tea, coffee, &c. Thus Mr. Walker will tax a man fifty cents on his tea and coffee, and fifty cents on his cotton, wool and iron, together one dollar. By taking the duty off iron, &c., and putting it on coffee, Mr. Walker breaks down iron manufactures and makes every one pay higher for his coffee. A just Tariff, instead of levying a duty of fifty cents on a man's coffee and tea, and fifty cents on his iron, wool and cotton goods, levies one dollar on his cotton, wool and iron goods, and nothing on his coffee and tea. It will thus be perceived that both levy a duty of one dollar, while the one crushes manufactures and the other fosters them into life and superiority. CONSISTENCIES OF* THE BRITISH TARIFF. Washington, October, 1849. " Soil, climate, and other causes, vary very much, in different countries, the pursuits which are most profitable to each, and the prosperity of all of them will be lest promoted, by leaving them, unrestricted ly legislation, to exchange with each other THOSE 26 " FABRICS AND PRODUCTS WHICH THEY SEVERALLY raise OlOSt " CHEAPLY " This principle, thus clearly laid down in Mr. "Walker's report, admits of but one interpretation, and that is, we should import, " unrestricted by legislation," or "duty free," all merchandise which can be produced cheaper by other nations than by the United States. For to illustrate his meaning to be " duty free" on all such articles, he adds in the next sentence : " This is clearly illustrated by the " perfect free trade, which exists among all the States of the Union/' With this principle and exemplification laid down, Mr. Walker advances the following recommendation : " A duty of 25 per cent, ad volorem on TEA AND COFFEE is again respectfully recommended ;" and he adds, " that the impost suggested would probably yield an annual revenue of Three Millions of Dollars." As Mr. Walker's principle proposes to admit duty free," those " fabrics and products which they (other nations) severally raise most cheaply," it follows, of necessity, that in his opinion, tea and coffee cannot be raised " most cheaply" by other nations, and is not there- fore in the category of articles " free of duty." And to encourage and stimulate the production of tea and coffee in this country, he proposes, in a free-trade Tariff, to levy a " protective duty" of $3,000,000 per annum ! ! If this be not true, the only legitimate conclusion in which Mr. Walker's principle and recommendation result, we shall be most truly thankful to any one who will trace them to a different one. It further follows that Mr. Walker does not object to " legislative 1 restrictions" upon " fabrics and products" which other nations cannot furnish more cheaply than we. Mr. Walker takes good care to leave no doubt as to the purpose of the party which imposed upon {Jie country the tariff of 1846, because he gives the reason in the following words : " to prevent the substitution of American rival fabrics for foreign goods." There it is for laboring men and voters ; the Tariff of 1846 is to " prevent the substitution" of the labor of American manufactures " for foreign goods." If it succeeds in preventing this substitution, then it destroys, in 27 toto, every manufacturing establishment in the country, closes every iron and coal mine, and compels all those engaged in any of these pursuits to starve, or to seek othdr occupations to which they are strangers. THE TARIFF. \Ve clip from the Union the following : The London Herald, not long ago, in one of its ruin arguments, wrote as follows : " The United States people have cotton wool at first cost, and per- " haps not using quite so much paste and gypsum, and devil's dust, " have beaten our mill-owners out of every market for coarser cot- " tons ; even out of our own markets in India, where American cottou- " shirting of equal quality may be had for less than half the English " price. This is the fruit of our free trade so far, which gives to " America a balance of very many millions a year wherewith to beat us " out of our own markets. As yet we have some small advantage in " the finer fabrics, and it is really to preserve this miserable advantage " that our agriculture, our colonies, and our maritime commerce, not " only the sources of our principal wealth, but also the military bul- " wark of our safety, are to be sacrificed ; and after all, this wretched " advantage we cannot keep long, for a little money and a little expe- " rience will enable the United States to beat us in the finer as in the 11 coarser fabrics. It is a remarkable and a significant fact, that all the " later improvements in cotton-weaving machinery have come from " the United States. Our cotton trade is doomed ; and the leaguers < can only accelerate its ruin by the rate at which they are driving it." Can anything be more conclusive of the benefits of a " discrimi- nating" Tariff? Suppose we had been blessed'' with a Walker Tariff, by which the " lowest duties" are to be placed on British manufac- tures and 25 per cent, added on Tea, Coffee, &c., would our manufac- tures have sprung up and ripened into such superiority as is attributed to them in this article? Who so bold as to aver it ? Have we not equally the elements for a successful competition in other manufactures of Cotton, Wool, Iron ? If so, is it not desirable that we should attain this superiority to supply, not only our own 28 people, but other countries? Will the " lowest duties" give such encouragement as to produce this result ? If, aye, will not the higher duties bring the consummation ab'out at a much earlier period? And loth systems raising to a dollar tlie same amount of revenue, is it not important to hasten the maturity of our manufacturing system, which costs only the amount which must be raised with or without them ? We have had a trial of the "lowest duties" in Pennsylvania; and we ask the laborers, whether the prices which the Iron producers and manufacturers now get, will enable them to pay as good wages as they could afford to pay under the Tariff of 1842 ? We ask them further, whether they can get for sale as large quantities as under the Tariff of 1842 ? and whether the diminished demand for American iron and diminished prices, do not compel the dismissal of large numbers of laborers directly and indirectly connected with iron man- ufactures ? 14 DAY USE RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED LOAN DEPT. This book is due on the last date stamped below, or on the date to which renewed. Renewed books are subject to immediate recall. *** 3 1967 TEB" LOAN DEPT.