^
HENRY CliAY,
JPV l>EFEIV€F. ii¥ THE A^IERICAIV 8VSTBW,
AGAIN»ST THE BRITISH COLONIAL SYSTEM:
AN APPENDIX .
DOCUMEN/TS REFKUUED TO I>J THE/SVKECH.
Dt-fivcrtd iiJ the Scnato of tiie United Slitlcsf Ffcbiii:uj^2tl, 3d, unil 6th, 1832.
WASHING ION:
I'HIVTED UY GAI.KS AMI SEATON.
J 833.
k\N;.~.>^ -^^ '\^^-
r^
SPEECH. • n^L^
Mr. Clay rose and addressed the Senate substantially as follows:
In one sentiment, Mr. President, expressed by the honorable gentlenian
from South Carolina, (General Hayxe) though, perhaps, not in the sense in-
tended by him, I entirely concur. I agree with him, that the decision on the
system of policy embraced in this debate, involves the future destiny of this
growing countrj'. One way, I verily believe, it would lead to deep and gen-
eral distress; general bankruptcy and national ruin, without benefit to any
part of the Union: The other, the existing prosperity will be preserved and
augmented, and the nation will continue rapidly to advance in wealth, power,
and greatness, without prejudice to any section of the Confederacy.
Thus viewing the question, I stand here as the humble but zealous advocate,
not of the interest of one State or seven States only, but, of the whole Union.
And never before have I felt more intensely the overpowering weight of
that share of respon^iibility which belongs to me in these deliberations. Ne-
ver before have I had more occasion, than 1 now have, to lament my want of
those intellectual powers, the possession of which might enable me to unfold
to this Senate, and to illustrate to this People, great truths intimately connect-
ed with the lasting welfare of my country, I should, indeed, sink,over-
whelmeil and subdued beneath the appalling magnitude of the task which lies
before me, if I did not feel myself sustained and fortified by a thorough
consciousness of the justness of the cause which I have espoused, and by a
persuasion, I hope not presumptuous, that it has the approbation of that Pro-
vidence who has so often smiled upon these United States.
Eight years ago, it was my pamful duty to present to the other House
of Congress, an unexaggerated picture of the general distress pers'ading
the whole land. We must all yet remember some of its frightful features.
We all know that the People were then oppressed and borne down by an
enormous load of debt; that the value of property was at the lowest point of
depression; that ruinous sales and 5:acrifices were every where made of real
estate; that stop laws and relief laws and paper money were adopted to save
the People from impending destruction; that a deficit in the public revenue
existed, which compelled Goveiiunent to seize upon, and divert ti-om its legi-
timate object, the appropriation to the sinking fund, to redeem the national
debt: and that our commerce and navigation were threatened with a complete
paralysis. In short, sir, if I were to select any term of seven years since the
adoption of the present constitution, which exhibited a scene of the most
wide spread dismay and desolaticm, it would be exactly that term of seven
years which immediately preceded the establishment of the tariff of 1824.
I have now to perform the more pleasing task ot exhibiting an imperfect
sketch of the existing state of the unparalleled prosperity of the countr}".
On a general survey, we behold cultivation extended, the arts flourishing, the
faceof thecountiy improved. o>ir people fully and profitably employed, and
the public countenance exhibiting tranquility, contentment, and happiness.
And, it v;e descenti into particulars, we have the agreeable ccmtemplation of
a People out oldeb*^; land rising slowly in value, but in a secure and saluta-
ry degre*'; :i ready, though not extravagant market for all the surplus pro-
duction;? of our industry; innumerable, flocks ami herds browsing and gam-
bolling on ten thousand hills and plains, covered with rich and verdant grasses;
our cities expanded, and whole villages springing up, as it were, by enchant-
ment; our exportsand imports increased and inci'ea^irig; our toiniage,* fo--
" See Appendix, A.
1080338
reign and coast\vise, swelling and fully occupied^ the rivers of our interior
animated by the perpetual thunder and lightning of countless steam boats;
the currency sound and abundant; the public debt of two wars nearly re-
deemed,: and, to croH-nall, the public treasury oveflowing, embarrassing Con-
gress, not to find su^ects of taxation, but to select the objects which shall be
liberated from the impost. If the term of seven years were to be selected,
of the greatest prosperity whicli this People have enjoyed since the establish
ment of their present constitution, it would be exactly that period of seven
years which immediately followed the passage of the tariff of 1824.
This transformation of the condition of the country from gloom and dis-
tress to brigJUness and profjperity, has been mainly the work of American
legislation, fostering American industry, instead of allowing it to be controlled
by foreign legislation, cherishing foreign indastiy. The foes of the Ameri-
can System, in 182-t, with great boldness and confidence, predicted, 1st. The
ruin of the public revenue and the creation of a necessity to resort to direct
ta-s-ation. The gentleman from South Carolina, (General Hayne) I believe,
thought that tlie tariff of 1824 M'ould operate a reduction of revenue to the
large amount of eight millions of dollars. 2d. The destruction of our navi-
gation. 3d. The desolation of commercial cities. And 4th. The augmenta-
tion of tiie price of objects of consumption and further decline in that of the
articles of our exports. Every prediction which they made has tailed — utter-
ly failed. Instead of the ruin of the public revenue, with which they then
sought to deter us from the adoption of the American System, we are now-
threatened with its subversion, by the vast amount of the public revenue pro-
duced by that System. Every branch of our navigation has increased. As
to the desolation of our cities, let us take, as an example, the condition of the
largest and most commercial of all ot them, the great Northern capital. •!
have, in my hands, the assessed value of real estate in the city of New York,
from 1817 to 1831.* This value is canvassed, contested, scrutinized, and ad-
judged by the proper sworn authorities. It is, therefore, entitled to full cre-
dence. During the first term, commencing with 1817, and ending in the year
of the passage of the tariff of 1824, the amount ol" the value of real estate
was. the first year, $57,799,435, and, after various fiuctuations in the inter-
mediate period, it settled down ut $52,019,730, exhibiting a decrease, in seven
years, of §5,779,705. During the first year of 1825, after the passage of the
tariff, it rose, and, gradually ascending throughout the uhole of the latter pe-
riod of seven years, it findlly, in 1831, reachetl the astonishing height ot
S95,71G,485! Now, if it be said that this rapid growth of the city of New
York was the effect of foreign commerce, then it was not correctly pre-
dicted in 1824, that the tariff would destroy foreign ommerce and desolate
our commercial cities. If, on the contrary, it be the effect of internal trade,
then internal trade cannot be justly chaigeable wilh'the evil consequences
imputed to it. The truth is, it is the joint effect of both principles, the do-
mestic industry nourishing the foreign trade, and the Ibreign commerce, in
turn, nourishing the domestic industry. No where, more than in New York,
is the combination of both principles so completely developed. In the pro-
gress of my argument, I will consider the effect upon the price of commodi-
ties, produced by the American System, and show that the very reverse ot
the prediction of its foes, in 1824, has actually happened.
Whilst we thus behold the entire failure of all that was foretold against the
System, it is a subject of just felicitation to its friends, that all their anticipa-
tions of its benefits have been fulfilled, or are in progress of fulfilment. The
honorable gentleman from South ('arolina has made an allusion to a speech
made by me, in 1824, in the other House, in support of the tariff, and to
which, otherwise, I should not have particularly ivleired. But I would ask
any one, who could now command the courage to peruse that long production,
whatprmciple there laid down is not true? what prediction then made has
been lialsified by practical experience."'
It is now proposed to abolish the system, to which we owe so inuch of the
public prosperity, and it is urged that the arrival of the period of the rcdemp-
•See Appendix, B, for the document referred to.
tion of the public debt h.i.s been conliclcntly looked to as presenting a suitable
occasion to rid the country of the evils with which the system is aljeged to
be fraught. Not an inattentive observer of passing events, I have been aware,
that, acnong those who w ere most eagerly pressing the payment of the public
debt, and, upon that ground, were opposing appropriations to other great inte-
rests, tliej-e were some who caretl less about the deljt than ll)e accomplishment
of Gtner objects. But tlie People of the United Estates ha\ e not coupled the
payment of ihcir public debt with the destruction of the protection of their
industry, against foreign hnvs and foreign industry. They have been accus-
tomed to regard tlie extinction of the public debt as. relief from a burthen,
and not as the infliction of acurse. If it is to be attended or followed by the
subversion of the American system, and an exposure of our establishments
aiid our productions to the unguarded consequences of the selfish policy of fo-
reign Powers, the payment of the public debt will be the bitterest of curses.
Its fruit will be like the fruit
" Of that forbidden tree, whose mortal taste
*' Brought death into the world, and all our woe,
"Witli loss of Eden."
If the system of protection be founded on principles erroneous in theory, per-
nicious in practice — above all, if it be unconstitutional, as is alleged, it ought
to be forthwith abolished, and not a vestige of it suftered to remain. But^ be-
fore we sanction this sweeping' «lenunciation, let us look a little at this system,
its magtiitude. its ramifications, its duration, and the high authorities which
have sustained it. We shall see that its foes will have accomplished compara-
tively nothing, after having achieved their present aim of breaking down our
iron-founderies, our woollen, cotton, and hemp manufactories, and our sugar
piantiuions. The destruction of those would, undoubtedly, lead to the sacri-
fice of immense capital, the ruin of many tiiousands of our fellovv citizens,
and incalculable loss to the whole community. But their prust'-ation would
not disfigure, nor produce greater effect upon the whole system of protection,
in all its branches, than the destruction of the beautiful domes upon the Cap-
itol would occasion to the magnificent edifice which they surmount. Why,
sir, there is scarcely an interest, scarcely a vocation in society, which is not
embraced by the beneficence of this system.
It comprehends our coasting tonnage and trade, fiom which all foreign ton-
nage is absolutely excluded.
ft includes all our foreign tonnage, with the inconsiderable exception made
by treaties of reciprocity with a few foreign Powers.
It embraces our fisheries, and all our hardy and enterprising fishermen.
It extends to almost every mechanic art: to tanners, cordvvainers, tailors,
cabinet-^naker^, hatters, tinners, brass-workers, clock-makerb, coach-ma-
kers, tallow-chandlers, trace-makers, rope-makers, cork-cutters, tobacconists,
whip-makers, paper makers, umbrella-makers, glass-blowers, stocking-weav-
ers, butter-makers, saddle and harness-makers, cutlers, brush-makers, book-
binders, dairv-n\en, milk-farmers, black smiths, type-founders, musical in-
strument-makers, basket-makers, milliners, potters, chocolate-makers, floor-
cloth makers, bonnet-makers, hair-cloth-makers, copper-smiths, pencil-ma-
kers, bellows makers, pocket book-makers, card-makers, glue-makers, mus-
tard-makers, lumber-sawyers, saw-makers, scale-beam-makers, scythe-ma-
kers, wood-saw-makers, and many others. The mechanics enumerated enjoy
a measure of protection adapted to their several conditions, varying from twen-
ty to fifty per cent. The extent and importance of some of these artizans may
be estimated by a few particulars. The tanners, curriers, boot and shoe-ma-
kers, and other workers in hides, skins, and leather, produce an ultimate
value per annum of forty millions of dollars; the manufacturers of hats and
caps produce an annual value of fifteen millions; the cabinet-makers, twelve
millions; the manufactureis of bonnets and hats for the female sex, lace, ar-
tificial flowers, combs, &c,, seven millions; and the manufacturers of glass,
five millions.
It extends to all lower Louisiana, the Delta of which might as well be sub-
merged again in the Gulf of Mexico, from which it has been a gradual con
quest, as now to be deprived of the protecting duty upon its great staple.
It affects tlie cotton planter* himself, and the tobacco planter, both of whom
enjoy protection.
The total amount of the capitalf vested in sheep, the land to sustain them,
wool, woollen manufactures, and woollen fabrics, and the subsistence of the
various persons directly or indirectly employed in the growth and manufac-
ture of the article of wool^ is estimated at one hundred and sixty-seven mil-
lion of dollars, and the number of persons at 150,000.
The value of iron, considered as a raw material, and of its manufactures,
is estimated at twenty-six millions of dollars per annum. Cotton goods, ex-
clusive of the capital vested in the manufacture, and of the cost of the raw
material, are believed to amount, aniuially, to about twenty millions ot dollars.
These estimates have been carefully made, by practical men, of undoubted
character, who have brought together and embodied their information. Anx-
ious to avoid the charge ot exaggeration, they have sometimes placed their es-
timates below what was believed to be the actual amount of these interests.
With regard to the quantity of bar and other iron annually produced, it is
derived from the known works the.nselvesj and I know some in Western
States which they have omitted in their calculations.
Such are some of the items of this vast system of protection, which it is
now proposed to abandon. We might well pause and contemplate, if human
imagination could conceive the extent of mischief and ruin from its total over-
throw, before we proceed to the work of destruction. Its duration is worthy,
also, of serious consideration. Not to go behind the constitution, its date is
coeval with that instrument. It began on the ever memorable 4th day of
July — the 4th day of July 1789. The second act which stands recorded in
the statute book, bearing the illustrious signature of George Washington, laid
the corner stone of the whole system. That there might be no mistake about
the matter, it was then solemnly proclaimed to the American People and to
the world, that it was necessary ibr " the encouragement and protection of
manufactures," that duties should be laid. It is in vain to urge the small
amount of the measure of protection then extended. The great principle was
then established by the fathers of the constitution, with the Father of his Coun-
try at their head. And it cannot now be questioned, that, if the Government
had not then been new, and the subject untried, a greater measure of protec-
tion would have been applied, if it had been supposed necessary. Shortly
after, the master minrls of Jefferson and Hamilton were brought to act on this
interesting; subject. Taking views of it appertaining to the departments ot
foreign affairs and of the treasury, which they respectively filled, they present-
ed, severally, reports which yet remain monuments ot their profound wis-
dom, and came to the same conclusion of protection to American industry.
Mr. Jefferson argued that Ibreign restrictions, foreign prohibitions, and fo-
reign high duties, ought to be met, at home, by American restrictions, Amer-
ican prohibitions, and American high duties. Mr. Hamilton, surveying the
entire ground, and looking at the "inherent nature of the subject, treated it
with an ability which, if ever equalled, has not been surpassed, and earnestly
recommended protection."
The wars of the French revolution commenced about this period, and
streams of gold poured into the United States through a thousand channels,
opened or enlaiged by the successful couunerce which our neutrality enabled
us to prosecute. AVe forgot, or overlooked in the general prosperity, the ne-
cessity of encouraging our domestic manufactures. Then came the edicts ot
Napoleon, and the Hritish orders in council; and our embargo, non-inter-
course, non-importation, and war, ibllowed in rapid succession. These na-
• To say notliing of cotton produced in otlicr forcig'n countries, the cultivation of
this article, of a very superior qiudity, is constantly extending' in the adjacent Mex-
ican provinces, and, but for tlie duty, probably a larg-e amount wovdd be introduced
into tlie United States, down Red river and along- the coast of the Gulf of Mexico.
j-See renort in Appendix, marked C. i
tional measures, amounting to a total suspension, for the pertod of their du-
ration, of our foreign commerce, att'orded tlic most efficacious encouragement
to American manufactures; and, accorilingly, they every where sprung up-
Whilst these measures of restriction and this state of war continued, the man-
ufacturers were stimulated in their enteiprises by every assurance of support,
by public sentiment, and by legislative resolves. It was about that period
(1808) that South Carolina bore'her high testimony to the wisdom of the poli-
cy, in an act of her I^egislaturc, the preamble of which, now before me, reads,
" Whereas the establishment and encouragement of domestic manufactures is
conducive to tlie interest of a State, by adding new incentives to indush-y,
and as being the means of disposing, to advantage, the surplus productions
of the agricidluriat: And whereas, in the present unexampled state of the
world, their establishment in our country is not onlv expedient^ but politic, in
rendering us independent of foreign nations." The Legislature, not heme
competent to aftbrd the most elKcacious aid, by imposing duties on foreign rival
articles, proceeded to incorporate a company.
Peace, under the treaty of Ghent, returned in 1815, but there did not re
turn with it the golden days which preceded the edicts levelled at our com
merce by Great Britain and B' ranee. It found all Europe tranquilly resum-
ing the arts and the business of civil life. It found Europe no longer the con-
sumer of our surplus, and the employer of our navigation, but excluding, or
heavily burdening, almost all the productions of our agriculture; and our ri-
vals in manufactures, in navigation, and in commerce. It found our country,
in short, in a situation totally ditterent from all the past — new and untried.
It becanje necessary to adapt oiu- laws, and especially our laws of impost, to
the new circumstances in which we found ourselves. Accordingly, that emi-
nent and lamented citizen, then at the head of the treasury, (Mr. Dallas)
was required, by a resolution of the House of Representatives, under date the
•23d day of February, 1815, to prepare antl report to the succeeding session of
Congress a system of revenue conformable with the actual condition of the
country. He had the circle of a whole year to perform the work, consulted
merchants, manufacturers, and other practical men, and opened an extensive
correspondence. The report which he made, at the session of 1816, was the
result of his inquiries and reflections, and embodies the principles which he
thought applicable to the subject. It has been said that the tariff of 1816, was
a measure of mere revenue; and that it only reduced the war duties to a
peace standard. It is true, that the question then was, how much, and in
what way, should the double duties of the war be reduced.^ Now, also, the
question is, on what articles shall the duties be reduced so as to subject the
amount of the future revenue to the wants of the Government.'^ Then it was
deemed an inquiry of the first importance, as it should be now, how the re-
duction should be made, so as to secure proper encouragement to our domes-
tic industry. That this was a leading object in the arrangement of the tariff
of 1816, I well remember, and it is demonstrated by the language of Mr. Dal-
las. He says, iu his report, "There are few, if any Governments, which do
'" not regard the establishment of domestic manufactures as a chief object of
" public policy. The United States have idways so regarded it. * ♦ *
*^ The demands of the country, while the acquisition of supplies from foreign
" nations was either prohibited or impracticable, may have afforded a sum-
" cient inducement for this investment of capital, and this application of labor;
" ^^\ l'^^ inducement, in its necessary extent, must fail, when the day of com-
"jKlilion returns. Upon that change in the condition of the country, the preser-
*' vation of the manutactures, which private citi/.ens, under favorable auspices,
'' have constituted the property of the nation, becomes a consideration ot gen-
*' eral policy, to be resolved by a recollection of past embarrassments; by the
" certainty of an increased difficulty of reinstating, upon any emergency, the
" manufactures which shall be allowed to perish and pass away," &.c. Tlie
measure ot protection which he proposed was not atlopted, in regard to some
leading articles, and there was great difficulty in ascertaining what it ought
to have been. But the piinciple was then distinctly asserteil, and fully sanc-
tioned.
8
The subject of the American System was again broudit'up in 1820, by the
bill reported by the Chairman of the Committee of Manufactures, ninv a
member of the "bench of the Supreme Court of the United States, and the
principle was successfully maintained by the representatives of the People?
but the bill which they passed was defeated in the Senate. It was revived in
1824, tiie whole ground carefully and deliberately explored, and the bill, then
introduced, receiving all the sanctions of the constitution, became the law of
the land. An amendment of the system was proposed in 1828, to the history
of which I refer with no agreeable recollections. The bill of that year, in some
of its provisions, was framed on principles directly adverse to the declared
wishes of the friends of the policy of protection- 1 have heard (without
vouching for the fact) that it was so fiamed, upon the advice of a prominent
citizen, now abroad, with the view of ultimately defeating the bill, and with
assurances that, being altogether unacceptable to the friends of the American
vSystem, the bill would be lost. Be that as it may, the most exceptionable
features of the bill were stamped upon it, against the earnest remonstrances of
the friends of the system, by the votes of Southern members, upon a principle,
I think, as unsound in legislation as it is reprehensible in ethics. 'Ihe bill
was passed, notwithstanding, it having been deemed better to take the bad along
with the good which it contained, than reject it altogether. Subsequent legisla-
tion has corrected very much the error then perpetrated, but still that measure
is vehemently denounced by gentlemen who contributed to make it what it was.
Thus, sir, has tiiis great system of protection been gradually built, stone
upon stone, and step by step, from the 4th of July, 1789, down to the present
period. In every stage of its progress it has received the deliberate sanction
of Congress. A vast majority of the People of the United States has approved,
and continues to approve it. Every Chief Magistrate of the United States,
from Washington to the pi-esent, in some form or other, has given to it the
authority of his name; and however the opinions of the existing President are
interpreted South of Mason's and Dixon's line, on the North they are, at
least, understood to favor the establishment of a judicmis tariff.
The question, therefore, which we are now called upon to determine, is not
whether we shall establish a new and doubtful system of policy, just proposed,
and for the first time presented to our consideration; but whether we shall
break down and destroy a long established system, patiently and carefully
built up, and sanctioned, during a series of years, again and again, by the
nation and its highest and most revered authorities. And are we not bound
deliberately to consider whether we can proceed to this work of destruction
without a violation of the public faith.^ The People of the United States have
justly supposed that tiie policy of protecting their industry, against /(>m^*«
legislation and/om^-n industry, was fully settled, not by a single act, but by
repeated and deliberate acts of Government, performed at distant and fre-
qent intervals. In full confidence that the policy was firmly and unchangea-
bly fixed, thousands up(m thousands have invested their capital, purchased a
vast amount of real and other estate, made permanent establishments, and
accommodated their iiulM^try. Can we expose to utter and irretrievable ruin
this countless nmltitude, without justly incurring the reproach ot violating the
national faith.''
1 shall not discuss the constitutional (luestion. Without meaning anv dis-
respect to those who raise it, if it be (hM)ateable, it has been sufiicientfy de-
bated. The gentleman from South Carolina sulfeicd it to fall unnoticed Irom
bis budget; and it was not until after he had closed his speech and resumed
liis seat, that it occurred to him that he had forgotten it, when he again ad-
lini.r/oo Tl.^,- ,.,»., 1.1 i\ :,,u „„ ,i.-i-. , ■- . ■'
18
four millions of cotton goods, Avhich we now make? To us? That has been
shown to be impracticable. To other foreign nations? She has already pushed
her supplies to them to the utmost extent. The ultimate consequence would,
then, be to diminish the total consumption of cotton, to say nothing now of
the reduction of price that would take place by throwing into the ports ot
Great Britain the two hundred thousand bales which, no longer being manu-
factured in the United States, Mould go thither.
2. That the import duty is equivalent to an export duty, and falls on the
producer of cotton.
[Here General Hayne explained, and said that he never contended that an
import duty was equivalent to an export duty, under all circumstances; he
had explained in his speech his ideas of the precise operation of the existing
system. To which Mr. Clay replied that he had seen the argument so stateti
in some of the ingenious essays from the South Carolina press, and would
therefore answer it. ]
The tramers of our constitution, by granting the power to Congress to lay
iniports, and prohibiting that of laying an export duty, manifested that they
did not regard them as equivalent. Nor does the common sense of mankind.
An export duty fastens upon, and incorporates itself with, the article on which
it is laid. The article cannot escape from it — it pursues and follows it wherever
the article goes; and if, in the foreign market, the supply is above or just equal
to the demand, the amount of the export duty will be a clear deduction to the
exporter from the price of the article. But an import duty on a foreign article
leaves the exporter of the domestic article free, 1st, to import specie; 2dly,
goods which are free from the protecting duty; or, 3dly, such goods as, being
chargeable with the protecting duty, he can sell at home and throw the duty
on the consumer.
But, it is confidently argued that the import duty falls upon the grower of
cotton; and the case has been put in debate, and again and again, in conversa-
tion, of the South Carolina planter, who exports 100 bales of cotton to Liver-
pool, exchanges them for 100 bales of merchandise; and, when he brings theni
home, being compelled to leave, at the custom house, forty bales in the form
of duties. The argument is founded on the assumption that a duty of forty
per cent, amounts to a subtraction of forty from the 100 bales of merchandise.
The first objection to it is, that it supposes a case of barter, which never occurs.
If it be replied that it, nevertheless, occurs in the operations of commerce,
the answer would be that, since the export of Carolina cotton is chiefly made
by New York or foreign merchants, the loss stated, if it really accrued, would
fall upon them and not upon the planter. But, to test the correctness of the
hypothetical case, let us suppose ihat the duty, instead of forty per cent, should
be 150. which is asserted to be the duty in some cases. Then, the planter would
not only lose the whole hundred bales of merchandise, which he had gotten for
his hundred bales of cotton, but he would have to purchase, with other means,
an additional fifty bales, in order to enable him to pay the duties accruing on
the proceeds of the cotton. Another answer is, that, if the producer of cotton
in America, exchanged against English fabrics, pays the duty, Xhs producer ot
those fabrics also pays it, and then it is twice paitf. Such must be the conse-
quence, unless the principle is true on one side of the Atlantic, and false on
the other. The true answer is, that the exporter of an article, if he invests
its proceeds in a foreign market, takes care t(» make the investment in such
merchandise as, when brought home, he can sell with a fair profit; and conse-
quently, the consumer would pay the original cost and charges and profit-
3. The next objection to the American System is, that it subjects South
Carolina to the payment of an undue proportion of the public revenue. The
basis of this objection is the assumption, shown to have been erroneous, that
the producer of the exports from this country pays the duty on its imports,
instead of the coiisunu'!- of (hose imports. The amount which South Carolina
really ctmtributes to the public revenue, no more than that of any otherState,
can be precisely ascertained. It depends upon her consumption of articles
paying duties, and we may make an approximation sufficient for all practical
purposes. The cotton |)lanteis of the valley of the Mississippi, with which I
am acquainted, generally expend about one third of their income in the sup-
port of their families and plantations. On this subjfct, I hold in my hands
19
a statement* from a friend ot mine, of great accuracy, and a member of the
Senate. According to this statement, in a cron of ten thousand dollars, the
expenses may fluctuate between two thousand eight hundred dollars and
three thousand two hundred dollars. Of this sum, about one fourth, from
seven to eight hundred dollars, may be laid out in articles paying the protect-
ing duty; tlie residue is disbursed for provisions, mules, horses, oxen, wages
of overseer, &c. Estimating the exports of South Carolina at eight millions,
one-tiiird is two millions six hundred and sixty-six thousand six hundred and
sixty-six dollars; of which, one fourth will be six hundred and sixty-six
thousand six hundred and sixty-six and two-thirds dollars. Now, supposing
the protecting duty to be fifty per cent., and that it all enters into the price
of tlie article, the amount paid by South Carolina would only be three hundred
and thirty-three thousand three hundred and thirty-three and one third dol-
lars. But the total revenue of the United States may be stated at twenty-five
millions, of which, the proportion of South Carolina, whatever standard,
whether of wealth or population, be adopted, would be about one million. Of
course, on this view of the subject, she actually pays only about one third of
her fair and legitimate share, I repeat, that I have no personal knowledge
of the habits of actual expenditure in South Carolina; they may be greater than
1 have stated, in respect to other parts of the cotton country; but if they are,
that fact does not arise from any defect in the system of public policy.
4. An abandonment of the American System, it is urged, would lead to an
addition to our exports of one hundred and fifty millions of dollars. The-
amount of one hundred and fifty millions of cotton, in the raw state, would
produce four hundred and fifty millions in the manufactured state, supposing
no greater measure of value to be communicated, in the manufactured form,
than that which our industry imparts. Now, sir, where would markets be
found for this vast addition to the supply .'' Not in the United States, cer-
tainly, noi- in any other quarter of the globe, F^ngland having already every
where pressed her cotton manufactures to the utmost point of repletion. We
must look out tor new worlds; seek for new and unknown races of mortals
to consume this immense increase of cotton fabrics.
[General Havne said that he did not mean that the increase of one hundred
and fifty millions to the amount of our exports, would be of cotton alone, but
of other articles. ]
What other articles P Agricultural produce — bread stuffs, beef and pork.'*
&c. ^Aere shall we find markets for them .'^ ^7«7/ic?- shall we go.'' To
whfit country, whose ports are not hermetically sealed against their admission .''
Break down the home market, and you are without resource. Destroy ^all
other interests in the country, for the imaginary purpose of advancing the
cotton planting interest, and you inflict a positive injury, without the smallest
practical benefit to the cotton planter. Could Charleston, or the whole South,
when all other markets are prostrated, or shut against the reception of the
surplus of our farmers, receive that surplus .►• Would they buy more than
they might want for their own consumption ? Could they find markets which
other parts of the Union could not ^ Would gentlemen force the freemen of
all. North of James river, East and West, like the miserable slave, on the
Sabbath day, to repair to Charleston, with a turkey undei- his arm, or a pack
upon his back, and beg the clerk of some English or Scotch merchant, living
in his gorgeous palace, or rolling iu his splendid coach in the streets, to ex-
change his " tntck''^ for a bit of flannel to cover his naked wife and children !
No I I am sure that I do no more than justice to their hearts, when I believe
that they would reject, what I believe to be, the inevitableeflfectsof their policy.
5. But, it is contended, in the last place, that the South cannot, from phy-
sical, ami other causes, engage in the manufacturing arts. I deny the pre-
mises, and I deny the conclusion. I deny the fact of inability, and, if it
existed, I deny the conclusion that we must, therefore, break down our ma-
nufactures, and nourish those of foreign countries. The South possesses, in
an extraordinary degree, two of the most important elements of manufacturing
nidustry — water power and labor. The former gives to our whole country a
most decided advantage over Great Britain. But a single experiment, stated
•See Appendix, F, for tlie statement referred to.
20
by the gentleman from South Carolina, in which a faithless slave put the torch
to a manufacturing establishment, has discouraged similar enterprises. We
have, in Kentucky, the same description of population, and we employ them,
and almost exclusively employ them, in many of our hemp manufactories.
A neighbor of mine, one of our most opulent and respectable citizens, has
had one, two, if not three, manufactories burnt by incendiariesj but he per-
severed, and his perseverance has been rewarded with wealth. We found
that it was less expensive to keep night watches, than to pay premiums for
insurance, and we employed them.
Let it be supposecj, however, that the South cannot manufacture; must
those parts of the Union which can, be therefore prevented ? Must we sup-
port those of foreign countries ? I am sure that injustice would be done to
the generous and patriotic nature of South Carolina, if it were believed that
she envied or repined at the success of other portions of the Union in branches
of industry to which she might happen not to be adapted. Throughout her
whole career she has been liberal, national, high minded.
The friends (»f the American System have been reminded, by the honorable
gentleman from Maryland, (General Smith) that they are the majority, and
he has admonished them to exercise their power in moderation, Themajonty
ought never to trample upon the feelings, or violate the just rights of the mi-
nority. They ought never to triumph over the fallen, nor to make any but a
temperate and equitable use of their power. Bu t these counsels come with an
ill grace from the gentleman from Maryland. He, too, is a member of a ma-
jority — a political majoritv. And how has the administration of that majority
exercised their power in this country .? Recall to your recollection the fourth
of March, 1829, when the lank, lean, famished forms, from fen and forest,
and the four quarters of the Union, gathered together in the halls of patron-
age; or stealing, by evening's twilight, into the apartments of the President's
mansion, cried out, with ghastly faces, and in sepulchral tones: Give us
bread ! Give us treasury pap ! Give us our reward ! England's bard was
mistaken; ghosts will sometimes come, called or uncalled. Go to the fami-
lies who were driven from the employments on which they were dependent
for subsistence, in consequence of their exercise of the dearest right of free-
men. Go to mothers, whilst hugging to their bosoms their starving children.
Go to fathers, who, after being disqualified, by long public service, for any
other business, were stripped of their humble places, and then sought, by the
minions of authority, to be stript of all that was left them—their good names —
and ask, what mercv was shown to them ! As for myself, born in the midst
of the Revolution, the first air that I ever breathed on my native soil of yir-
ginia, having been that of libertv and independence, I never expected justice,
nor desired mercy at their hantls; and scorn the wrath, and ilefy the oppres-
sion of power !
I regret, Mr. President, that one topic has, I think, unnecessarily been in-
troduced into this debate. I allude to the charge brought against the manu-
facturing system, as favoring the growth of aristocracy, lif it were true,
would gentlemen prefer supporting foreign accumulations ol" wealth, by that
description of industry, rather than in their own country? liut is it correct.^
The joint stock c(mipanies of the North, as 1 understand them, are nothing
more than associations, sometimes of hundreds, by means of which the small
earnings of many are brought into a common stock, and the associates, obtain-
ing corporate privileges, are enabled to prosecute, under one superintending
head, their business to better advantage. Nothing can be niore essentially
democratic or better devised to counterpoise the infiuence of individual wealtli.
In Kentucky, almost every manufactory known to me, is in the hands ot en-
terprising and self-made men, who have acquired whatever wealth they pos-
sess by patient and diligent labor. C(miparisons are odious, and, but in de-
fence, would not be made by me. liut is there more tendency to aristocracy,
in a maiud'actory, supporting hundreds of freemen, or in a cotton plantation,
witli its not less numerous slaives, sustaining, perhaps, only two white families—
that of tlie master and the overseer?
I pass, with pleasure, from this disagreeable topic, to two general proposi-
tions whicli cover the entire ground o(" debute. The first i» that, iindei- the
21
operation of the American System, the objects which it protects and fosters
are broii^jht to the consumer at cheaper prices than thev cotnmandefl prior to
its introduction, or than they nould command if it di(l not exist. If that be
true, ought not (he country to be contented and satisfied with the System, un-
less the second proposition, which 1 mean presently also to consider, is un-
founded? And that is, that the tendency of the .System is to sustain, and that
it has upheld, the prices of all our agricultural and other produce, including
cotton.
And is the fact not indisputable, that all essential objects of consumption,
attected by the tariff*, are cheaper and better, since the act of 1824, than they
were for several years prior to that law? T appeal, for its truth, to common
observation and to all practical men. I appeal to the farmer of the country,
whether he tloes not purchase, on better terms, his iron, salt, brown sugar,
cotton goods, and woollens, for his laboringpeople? And I ask the cotton plant-
er if he has not been better and moie cheaplv supplied with his cotton bag-
ging? In regard to this latter article, the gentleman from South Carolina was
mistaken in supposing that 1 complained that, under the existing duty, the
Kentucky manufacturer could not compete with the Scotch. The Kentuckian
furnishes a more substantial and a cheaper article, and at a more uniform and
regular price. But it was the frauds, the violations of law, of which I did
complain: Not smuggling, in the common sense of that practice, which has
something bold, daring, and enterprising in it, but mean, bare faced cheating
by fraudulent invoices and false denomination.
I plant myself upon this FACT, of cheapness and superiority, as upon im-^
pregnable ground. Gentlemen may tax their ingenuity and produc0 bales; that
28
the home market now absorbs, were thrown into the glutted maikets of fo-
reign countries, would not the effect inevitably be to produce a further and
great reduction in the price of the article? If there be any truth in the facts
and principles which I have before stated, and endeavored to illustrate, it
cannot be doubted that the existence of American manufactures has tended
to increase the demand, and extend the consuniption of the raw material; and
that, but for this increased demand, the price of the article would have fallen,
possibly one half, lower than it now is. The error of the opposite argument is,
in assuming one thing, wliich, being denied, the whole fails; that is, it assumes,
that the whole labor of the United States would be profitably employed, with-
out manufactures. Now, the truth is, that the system excites and creates la-
bor, and this labor creates wealtli, and this new wealth communicates addi-
tional ability to consume, which acts on all the objects contributing to human
comfort and enjoyment. The amount of cotton imported into the two ports of
Boston and Providence alone, (during the last year, and it \vas imported ex-
clusively for the home manufacture) was 109,517 bales.
On passing from that article to others of our agricultural productions, we
shall hnd not less gratifying facts. The total quantity of flour imported into
Boston, during the same ^ear, was 284,504 barrels and 3,955 half barrels; of
which, there were from \irginia, Georgetown, and Alexandria, 114,222 bar-
rels; of Indian corn, 681,131 bushels; of oats, 239,809 bushels; ot rye, about
50,000 bushels; and of shorts, 33,489 bushels. Into the port of Providence,
71,369 barrels of flour, 216,662 bushels of Indian corn, and 7,772 bushels of
rye. And there were discharged at the port of Philadelphia, 420,353 bushels
of Indian corn, 201,878 bushels of wheat, and 110,557 bushels of rye and bar-
ley. There were slaughtered in Boston, during the same year, 1831, (the
only northern city from which I have obtained returns) 33,922 beef cattle,
15,400 stores, 84,453 sheep, and 26,871 swine. It is confidently believed that
there is not a less quantity of southern flour consumed at "the North than
800,000 barrels — a greatei- amount, probably, than is shipped to all the foreign
markets of the world together.
What would be the condition of the farming country of the United States —
of all that portion which lies north, east, and west of James river, including
a large part of North Carolina, if a home market did not exist for this im-
mense amount of agricultural produce.^ Without that market, where could it
be sold.'' In foreign markets.^ If their restrictive laws did not exist, their ca-
pacity would not enable them to purchase and consume this vast addition to
their present supplies, which must be thrown in, or thrown away, but for the
home market. But their laws exclude us from their markets. I shall con-
tent myself by calling the attention of the Senate to Great Britain oy\\y. The
duties, in the ports of the United Kingdom, on bread stuffs, are prohibitory,
except in times of deartii. On rice, the duty is fifteen shillings sterling per
hunclred weight, being more than one hundred per cent. On manufactured
tobacco, it is nine shillings sterling per pound, or about two thousand per cent.
On leaf tobacco, three shillings per pound, or one thousand two hundred per
cent. On lumber and some other articles, they are from four hundred to one
thousand five hundred per ciMit. more than on similar articles imported from
British colonies- In the liiitish West Indies, the duty on beef, pork, hams,
and bacon, is twelve shillings sterling pei- hundred, more than one hundred
per cent, on the first cost of beef and purk in the Western States. And yet
Great Britain is the Power in whose behalf we are called upon to legislate so
that we may enable her to purchase our cotton ! Gfea Britain, that thinks onlyt
of herself in her own legislation! When have we experienced justice, much less
favor, at her liatids? When did she shape her legislation in reference to the in-
terests ol any foreign Power.'' She is a great, opulent, and powerful nation;
but haughty, arrogant, and supercilious. Not more separated from the rest of
the cotton inanufactiirc employs near 40,000 females, anclal)oiit. .'i,0()0 eliildreiii that
tlie total (lepeiulents on it arc 131, 489^ that the annual wajrcs paid arc $12,156,723;
tlieannual value of its products, S32,036, 760; the capital, §44, 914,984; the number of
mills,795; of spindles, 1,246,503; and of cloth made, 260,461,990 yards. This state-
ment docs not comprehend the Western manufactures.
29
the world by the sea that girts her island, than she is separated in feelings
sympathy, or friendly consideration of their welfare. Gentlemen, in suppos-
ing it impracticable that we should successfully compete with her in manu-
factures, do injustice to the skill and enterprise of their own country. Gal-
lant, as Great Britain undoubtedly is, we have gloriously contended with her,
man to man, gun to gun, ship to ship, fleet to fleet, and army to army. And
I have no doubt we are destined to achieve equal success in the more useful,
if not nobler contest for superiority in the arts of civil life.
I could extend and dwell on the long list of articles — the hemp, iron, lead,
coal, and other items, for which a demand is created in the home market, by
the operation of the American System: but I should exhaust the patience of
the Senate, ffhere, where, should we find a market for all these articles, if it
did not exist at home.*' What would be the condition of the largest portion of
our People and of the territory, if this home market were annihilated? How
could they be supplied with objects of prime necessity.'' What would not be
the certain and inevitable decline in the price of all these articles, but for the
home market? And allow me, Mr. President, to say, that, of all the agricul-
tural parts of the United States which are benefitted by the operation of this
system, none are equally so with those which border the Chesapeake bay, the
lower parts of North Carolina, Virginia, and the two siiores of Maryland.
Their facilities of transportation and proximity to the North give them decided
advantages.
But, if all this reasoning were totally fallacious — if the price of manufac-
tured articles were really higher, under the American System, than without
it, I should still argue that high or low prices were themselves relative — rela-
tive to the ability to pay them. It is in vain to tempt, to tantalize us with
the lower prices of European fabrics than our own, it we have nothing where-
with to purchase them. Jf, by the home exchanges, we can be suppHed with
necessary, even if they are dearer and worse, articles of American produc-
tion than the foreign, it is better than not to be supplied at all. And how
would the large portion of our country which I have (lescribed, be supplied,
but for the home exchanges? A poor people, destitute of wealth or of ex-
changeable commodities, has nothing to purchase foreign fabrics. To them
they are equally beyond their reach, whether their cost be a dollar or a guinea.
It is in this view of the matter that Great Britain, by her vast wealth — her
exerted and proteciedindastry — is enabled to bear a burthen of taxation which,
when compared to tliat of other nations, appears enormous; but which, when
her inunense riches are compared t(t theirs, is light and trivial. The gentle-
man from South Carolina has drawn a lively and flattering picture of our
coasts, bays, rivers, and harbors; and he argues that these proclaimed the de-
sign of Providence, that we should be a commercial People. I agree with
him. We differ only as to the means. He would cherish the foreign, and
neglect the internal trade. I would foster both. What is navigation with-
out ships, or ships without cargoes? By penetrating the bosoms of our moun-
tains, and extracting from them their precious treasures; by cultivating the
earth, and se<:?L'. Clay acknowledg-es his mistake, made in the warmth of debate.
It is yet the abode of the respectable and liospitablc descendants of its former opulent
proprietor.
32
that they too are the victims of a mistaken policy, and let these vast portions
of our country despair of any favorable change, and then, indeed, might we
tremble for the continuance and safety of this Union!
And need I remind you, sir, that this dereliction of the duty of protecting
t)ur domestic industry, and abandonment of it to the fate of foreign legisla-
tion, would be directly at war witli leading considerations which piompted the
adoption of the present constitution? The States, respectively, surrendered
to the General Government the whole power of laying imposts on foreign goods.
They stripped themselves of all power to protect their own manufactures, by
the most efficacious means of encouragement — the imposition of duties on ri-
val foreign fabrics. Did they create that great trust.'' Did they voluntari-
ly subject themselves to this self-restriction, that the power should remain in
the Federal Government, inactive, unexecuted, and lifeless? Mr. Madison,
at the commencement of the Government, told you otherwise. In discussing,
at that early period, this very subject, he declared that a failure to exercise
this power would be a "//•a?«Z" upon the Northern States, to which may now
be added the Middle and Western States.
[Governor Miller asked to what expression of Mr. Madison's opinion Mr.
Clay referred; and Mr. C. replied, his opinion, expressed in the House of
Representatives, in 1789, as reported in Lloyd's Congressional Debates.]
Gentlemen are greatly deceived as to the hold which this system has in the
affections of the People of the United States. They represent that it is the
policy of New England, and that she is most benefitted by it. If there be
any part of this Union which has been most steady, most unanimous, and
most determined in its support, it is Pennsylvania. Why is not that power-
ful State attacked? Why pass her over, and aim the blow at New England?
New England came, reluctantly, into the policy. In 1824 a majority of her
cdekgation was opposed to it. From the largest State of New England there
was but a solitary vote in favor of the bill. That enterprising People can rea-
layed; (hat he knows very well that (he duties upon these
;irliclt;s are (rilling, ami that it is of little (onsecjuence whether (hey are re-
pi'ale(i or ret.iiiuMl. IJotli systems, (he Anu'rican and (he foreign, compre-
hL-nd some articles which may be deemed luxuries. 'I'Ih; Senate knows that
(he unfirotected articles which yield (In; principal |)art()r the revenue, with
which this measure would dispense, are colU'c, lea, sjjices, wines, and silks.
Of all these articles, wines and silk"? alone can lie pronounced to be luxuries;
83
and, as to wines, we have already nititied a treaty, not yet promulgated, ^y
which the duties on (hem are to be considerably reduced. It the universality
of the use of objects of consumption determines their classification, coftee, tea.
and spices, in the present condition of civiliz,ed society, may be considered
necessaries. Even if they were luxuries, why should not the poor, by cheap-
enine their prices, if that can be effected, be allowed to use them .'' Why
should not a poor man be allowed to tie a silk, handkerchief on his neck, oc-
casionally regale himself with a glass of cheap P'rench wine, or present his
wife or daughter with a silk gown, to be worn on Sabbath or gala days ? I am
quite sure that I do not misconstrue the feelings of the gentleman;s heart, in
supposing that he would be happy to see the poor, as well as the rich, mode-
rately indulging themselves in these innocent gratifications. For one, I am
delighted to see the condition of the poor attracting the consideration of the
opponents of the tariff. It is for the great body of the People, and especially
for the poor, that I have ever supported the American System. It affords
them profitable employment, and supplies the means of comfortable subsist-
ence. It secures to them, certainly, necessaries of life, manufactured at
home, and places within tlieir reach, and enables them to acquire, a reasona-
ble share of foreign luxuries; whilst the system of gentlemen, promises them
necessaries made m foreign countries, and which are beyond their power, and
denies to them luxuries, which they would possess no means to purchase.
Tlie constant complaint of South Carolina against the tariff, is, that itchecks
importations, and disables foreign Powers from purchasing the agricultural
productions of the United States. The effect of the resolution will be to in-
crease importations, not so much, it is true, from Great Britain, as from
other Powers, but not the less acceptable on that account. It is a misfortune
that so large a portion of our foreign commerce concentrates in one nation;
it subjects us too much to the legislation and the policy of that nation, and
exposes us to the influence of her numerous agents, factors, and merchants.
And it is not among the smallest recommendations of the measure before the
Senate, that its tendency will be to expand our commerce with France, our
great Revolutionary ally — the land of our Lafayette. There is much greater
probability, also, of an enlargement of the present demand for cotton, in
France, than in Great Britain. France engaged later in the manufacture of
cotton, and has made, therefore, less progress. She has. moreover, no colo-
nies producing the article in abunrlance, whose industry slie might be tempted
to encourage.
The honorable gentleman from Maryland, (General Smith) by his reply to
a speech which, on the opening of the subject of this resolution, I had occa-
sion to make, has rendered it necessary that I should take some notice of his
observations. The iionorable gentleman stated tliat he had been accused of
partiality to the manufacturing interest. Never was there a more groundless
and malicious charge preferred against a calumniated man. Since this ques-
tion has been agitated in the public councils, although 1 have often heard from
him professions of attachment to this branch of industry, I have never known
any member a more uniform, determined, and uncompromising opponent of
them, than the honorable Senator has invariably been. And if, hereafter, the
calumny 'should bejrepeated, of his friendship to the American System, I shall
be ready to furnish to him, in the most solemn manner, my testimony to his
innocence. The honorable gentleman supposed that I had advanced the idea
that the per7nanent revenue of this country should be fixed at eighteen mil-
lions of dollars. Certainly I had no intention to announce such an opinion,
nor do my expressions, fairly interpreted, imply it. i stated, on the occasion
referred to, that, estimating the ordinary revenue of the country at twenty -five
millions, and the amount of the duties on the unprotected articles proposed
to be repealetl by the resolution, at seven millions, the latter sum taken from
the former would leave eighteen. But I did not intimate any belief tliat the
revenue of the country ought, for the future, to be permanently fixed at that
or any other precise sum. I stated that, after having effected so great a re
duction, we might pause, cautiously survey the whole ground, and deliber-
ately determine upon other measures of reduction, some of which I indicated.
Ana I now say, preserve the protective system in full vigor, give us tU« pro-
34
ceeds ot the public domain for internal improvements, or, if you please, partly
for that object and partly for the removal of the free blacks, with their own.
consent, from the Lnited States, and, for one, I have no objection to the re-
duction of the public revenue to fifteen, to thirteen, or even to nine millions
of dollars.
In regard to tiie scheme of the Secretary of the Treasury for paying off the
whole of the remaining public debt, by the 4th day of March, 1833, including
the three percent., and, for that purpose, selling the bank stock, I had re-
marked that, with the exception ot the three per cent., there was not more
than about four millions of dollars of the debt due and payable within this
year; that, to meet this, the Secretary had stated, in his annual report, that
the Treasury would have, from the receipts of this year, fourteen millions of
dollars, applicable to the principal of the debt: that I did not perceive any
urgency tor paying off the three per cent, by the precise day suggested; and
that there was no necessity, according to the plans of Ihe Treasury, assuming
them to be expedient and proper, to postpone the repeal of the duties on un-
protected articles. The gentleman from Maryland imputed to me ignorance
of the act of tiie 24th April, 1830, according to which, in his opinion^ the Se-
cretary was obliged to purchase the three per cent. On what ground the Se-
nator supposed I was ignorant of that act, he has not stated. Although, when
it passed, I was at Ashland, I assure him that I was not there altogether un-
informed of what was passing in the world. I regularly received the Register
of my excellent friend (Mr. Niles) published in Baltimore, the National In-
telligencer, and other papers. There are two errors to which gentlemen are
sometimes liable; one is to magnify the amount of knowledge which they pos-
sess themselves, and the second is to depreciate that which others have ac-
quired. And will the gentleman from Maryland excuse me for thinking that
no man is more prone to commit both errors than himself? I will not say that
he is ignorant of the true meaning of the act of 1830, but I certainly place a
different construction upon it from what he does. It does not oblige tne Se-
cretary of the Treasury, or rather the Commissioners of the Sinking Fund, to
apply the surplus of any year to the purchase of the three per cent, stock par-
ticularly, but leaves them at liberty " to apply such surplus to the purchase of
a7iy portion of the public debt, at such rates as, in their opinion, may be ad
vantageous to the United States." This vents a. discretionary authority, t<
be exercised under official responsibility. And if any Secretary of the Trea
SUIT, when he had the option of purchasing a portion of the debt, bearing a
higher rate of interest, at par or about par, were to execute the act by pur-
chasing the tiuee per cent, at its present price, he would merit impeachment.
Undoubtedly a state ol' fact, may exist, such as there being no public debt re-
maining to be paid but the three per cent, stock, with a surplus in the Trea-
sury, idle and unproductive, in wliich it might be expedient to apply that sur-
plus to the reimbursement of the three per cents. But, whilst the interest of
money is at a greater rate than three per cent, it would not, I think, be wise
to produce an accumulation of public treasure for such a purpose. The post-
ponement of any reduction of the amount of the revenue, at this session, must,
however, give rise to that very accumulation; and it is, therefore, that I can-
not perceive the utility of the poslponcment.
We are told by the gentleman from Maryland, that offers have been made
to the Secretary of the Treasury to exchange three per cents, at their market
price of 96 per cent, lor the bank stock of the Government at its market price,
which is about 126; and he thinks it would be wise to accept them. If the
charter of the bank is renewed, that stock will be probably worth much more
than its present price; if not renewed, much less. Would it be fair in Go-
vernment, wliilst the question is pending and undecided, (o make such an ex-
change.^ The diHi-rencc in value between a stock bearing three per cent, and
one bearing seven |)er cent., must be really much greater than the difference
between 96 and 126 per cent. Supposing them to be perpetual annuities, the
one would be worth more than twice the value of the other. But my objec-
tion t(i the Treasury plan is, thaf it is not necessary to execute it — to continue
these flulies, as the Secretary proposes. The Secretary has a debt of twenty-
four millions (o i)ay; he has, from the accruing receipts of this year, fourteen
35
millions, and we are now tokl by the Senator from Maryland, that this sum
of fourteen millions is exclusive of any of the duties accruing this year. He
proposes to raise eight millions by a sale of the bank stock, and to anticipate,
from the revenues receivable next year, two millions more. These three items,
then, of fourteen millions, eight millions, and two millions, make up the sum
requned, of twenty-four millions, without the aid of the duties to which the
resolution relates.
The gentleman from Maryland insists that the General Government has
been liberal towards the West in its appropriations of public lands for internal
improvements; and, as to fortifications, lie contends that the expenditures
near the mouth of the Mississippi, are for its especial benefit. The appropria-
tions of land to the States of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, and Alabama, have been
liberal; but it is not to be overlooked, that the General Government is itself
the greatest proprietor of land, and that a tendency of the improvements, wiiich
these appropriations were to effect, is to increase the value of the unsold pub-
lic domain. The erection of the fortifications for the defence of Louisiana was
highly proper; but the gentleman might as well place to the account of the
West, the disbursements for the fortifications intended to defend Baltimore,
Philadelphia, and New York, to all which capitals Western produce is sent,
and, in the security of all of which, the Western People feel a lively interest.
They do not object to expenditures for the army, for the navy, for fortifications,
or for any other defensive or commercial object on the Atlantic; but they
do think that their condition ought also to receive friendly attention from
tlie General Government. With respect to the State of Kentucky, not one
cent of money, or one acre of land, has been applied to any object of internal
improvement within her limits. The subscription to the stock of the canal at
Louisville was for an object in which many States were interested. The
Senator from Maryland complains that he has been unable to obtain any aid
for the rail road which the enterprise of Baltimore has projected, and, in part,
executed. That was a great work, the conception of which was bold and
highly honorable, and it deserves national encouragement. But how has the
Committee of Roads and Canals, at this session, been constituted? The Se-
nator from Maryland possessed a brief authority 10 organize it, and, if lam
not misinformed, a majority of the members composing it, appointed by him
are opposed both to the constitutionality of the power and the expediency of
exercising it.
And now, sir, I would address a few words to the friends of the American
System in the Senate. The revenue must, ou^ht to be reduced. The coun-
try will not, after, by the payment of the public debt, ten or twelve millions
of dollars become unnecessary, bear such an annual surplus. Its distribu-
tion would form a subject of perpetual contention. Some of the opponents
of the System understand the stratagem by which to attack it, and are shap-
ing their course accordingly. It is to crush the System by the accumulation
of revenue, and by the etlbrt to persuade the People that they are unneces-
sarily taxed, whilst those would really tax them who would break up the
native sources of supply and render them dependent upon the foreign.
But the revenue ought to be reduced, so as to accomodate it to the fact of
the payment of the public debt. And the alternative is or may be, to preserve
the protecting system, and repeal the duties on the wnpro/ec/erf articles, or to
preserve the duties on unprotected articles, and endanger, if not destroy, the
System. Let us then adopt the measure before us, which will benefit all
classes: the farmer, the professional man, the merchant, the manufacturer,
the mechanic; and the cotton planter moie than all. A ^ew months ago, there
was no diversity of opinion as to the expediency of this measure. All, then,
seemed to unite in the selection of these objects, for a repeal of duties which
were not produced within the country. Such a repeal did not touch our do-
mestic industry, violated no principle, oflended no prejudice.
Can we not all, whatever may be our favorite theories, cordially unite on
this neutral ground.^ AVhen that is occupied, let us look beyond it, and see
if any thing can be done, in the field of protection, to modify, to improve it,
or to satisfy those who are opposed to the System. Our Southern brethren
believe that it is injurious to them, and ask its repeal. We believe that its
36
abandonment w\\\ be prejudicial to them, and ruinous to every other section
of the Union. However strong their convictions may be, they are not stronger
than ours. Between the points of the preservation of the system and its ab-
solute repeal, there is no principle of union. If it can be shown to operate
immoderately on any quarter; if the measure of protection to any article can
be demonstrated to be undue and inordinate, it would be the duty of Congress
to interpose and apply a remedy. And none will co-operate more heartily
than I shall, in the performance of that duty. It is quite probable that bene-
ficial modifications of the system may be made, without impairing its effica-
cy. But, to make it fulfil the purposes of its institution, the measure of pro-
tection ought to be adequate. If it be not, all interests will be injuriously
affected. The manufacturer, crippled in his exertions, will produce less per-
fect and dearer fabrics, and the consumer will feel the consequence. This is
the spirit, and these are the principles only, on which, it seems to me, that a
settlement of this great question can be made, satisfactorily to all parts of our
Union.
APPBIlfDIX.
A.
M View of the Tonnage of the United States from 1815 to 1829.
Years.
Registered.
EnroUed and licensed.
Total.
1815
854,294.74
513,833.04
1,368,127.78
1816
800,759.63
571,458.85
1,372,218.53
1817
809,724.70
590,186.66
1,339,911.41
1818
606,088.64
609,095.51
1,225,184.20
1819
612,930.44
647,821.17
1,260,751.60
1820
619,047.53
661,118.66
1,280,166.24
1821
619,096.40
679,062,30
1,298,958.70
1822
628,150.41
696,548.71
1,324,699.17
1823
639,920.76
696,644.87
1,336,665.68
1824
669,972.60
719,190.37
1,389,163.02
1825
700,787,08
722,323.69
1,428,111.77
1826
737,978.15
796,212.68
1,534,190.83
1827
747,170.44
873,437.34
1,620,607.78
1828
812,619.39
928,772.50
1,741,391.87
1829
841,496.16
976,994.41
1,818,490.57
As the tonnage account was con-ected at the treasury, in 1839, the following deduc-
tions are to be made from that year.
Registered tonnage sold to foreigners, for 1829, . 14,093.22
Do. do. lost at sea, .... 17,692.88
Do. do. condemned as unseaworthy, . 11,454.70
Corrections by striking from the balance of outstanding
tonnage, vessels sold to foreigners, lost, and con-
demned in previous years, and heretofore credited, 166,315.74
Enrolled and licensed tonnage arising from the same
cause, ...... 358,136.12
Add to tliis the actual tonnage,
The apparent tonnages as above.
.557,692.61
1,260,797.81
1,818,490.57
As there are no data to ascertain when the correction should have been made, the only
mode of showing the comparative amount of tonnage, or rather the gradual increase
37
oetween 1815 and 1829, is by continuing' the eiTor to 1829, which had been included
in the preceding years.
But we want the returns of 1830 and 1831, to exhibit the prosperous state of the
coasting trade, during whicli periods it has rapidly advanced, and during the year 1831,
more vessels for the foreign and coasting trade have been built, than in any year
tince the adoption of the constitution.
This great change has been efl'ected in the coasting trade, by the extension of manu-
factories, viz. ships and brigs have been required, instead of schooners and sloops, to
transport cotton, rice, tobacco, flour, and the other great staples of agricultural indus-
try, from the Southern to the Middle and Northern States, and to convey the products
of manufacturing and mechanical industry of the latter to the former.* The freight
paid for cotton from New Orleans to Boston, the last year, 1831, for the supply of the
factories of Lowell, only, was over 52,000 dollars. The number of vessels employed,
including the repeated voyages, which entered into and departed from each State
and teri-itory during the year 1830, was 4,745; whose tonnage entered was 965,227,
and the departed 971,760, employing 43,756 seamen. This can only include such
vessels as are actually required to enter and clear at the custom houses; therefore, does
not present more than half that trade.
B.
Chronological Table of the values of Real Estate in the city of New York, during two
commercial periods, of seven years each.
1st Period. — Foreign Commerce, regulated by the Tariff of 1816.
1817, Real estate, assessed at .... ^57,799,436
1818, <« .« .... 59,846,185
1819, « .< .... 60,490,446
1820, .. '« .... 52,063,858
1821, " " - . . . 50,619,820
1822, .« .. .... 53,331,574
1823, " «' - - . - 50,184,229
1824, .. «. .... 52,019,730
Deci'ease in seven years, - $5,779,705
2d Period. — Internal Commerce with the Western States.
1825, (Erie Canal finished) .... $58,425,395
1826, «« .« .... 64,803,050
1827, «< .« .... 72,617,770
1828, .... .... 77,139,880
1829, .... .... 76,835,580
1830, (Part ofthe Ohio Canal finished) - - - 87,603,580
1831, .... .... 95,716,485
Increase in seven years, - $43,706,765
c.
V Report of the Committee on the Manufacture of Wool.
The committee, directed by the Convention of the friends of Domestic Industry,
convened in New York, in October last, represent to the permanent committee, that
the committee on the manufacture of wool forthwith issued circulars, with various in-
terrogatories, to the manufacturers of wool, in the several States represented in the
convention; that they have us yet received but partial returns, and ask leave of the
permanent committee for furtiier time to complete tlieir report. It Is much to be re-
gi-etted, that the requisition of tiie permanent committee cannot earlier be comphed
with, in submitting the actual returns; but, when it is considered over what an extent
of country these inquiries reacli, it is not surprising that information of such magni-
tude should require more time for the actual returns. From information ah-eady re-
ceived, and from calculations based upon that information, the committee are justified
in submitting the following as general results; in thus doing, they, with much confi-
• Tht cbiisuinpiKin of ilie coal ol" Vennsylvaiiia, in itie Nortlici-n iiuru, ha:* rtnuiifil
ihe coasliiig: trade, ami ihe ilem.md for mackerel and ollis^i- fish, in ihc Middle an<
I a vast increase ol
d Southern Statei
38
dence, believe that the amount will fall short of the actual returns, as to the extent and
manufacture of wool.
All which is respectfully submitted.
E, H. ROBBINS, Chairman.
No. 1.
The probable number of sheep in the United States is twenty millions,
and worth, on an average, two dollars per head, . . $40,000,000
The sheep farms, generaUy, do not support three sheep to the acre,
summer and winter through, although the land be pretty good, and
well managed. Of the twenty millions of sheep, it is supposed that
about'five millions are in the State of New York, having had 3,469, 539
in 1825, the latest returns at hand; and it is known, tliat many of these
sheep are fed upon lands worth from fifteen to thirty dollars per acre;
and, in Dutchess county, in which ai'e about five hundred thousand
sheep, the lands on which they are fed are worth about twenty-five
dollars per acre. It is then probable, that the average worth of land
in the tjnited States, capable of supporting three sheep to the acre,
through the year, are worth ten doUai's per acre; twenty millions of
sheep will require 6,666,666 acres, say 6,500,000 acres, at $10, 65,000,000
Capital in sheep, and lands to feed them, $105,000,000
The twenty millions of .sheep produce fifty millions of pounds of wool,
annually, theaverage value of which, for three years, 1829, 1830, 1831,
exceeded forty cents per pound, or, - - jf20,000,000
(The crop of 1831 was worth more than $25,000,000.)
The crop of wool, having reference to the whole quantity
made into cloth of various qualities, is wortii - 40,000,000
Which is about the gross annual product of wool and its manufactures
in the United States. If the woollen goods imported, valued at five
millions of dollars, be added, there will be allowed for each person in
the United States, three and a half dollars' worth of AvooUens per an-
num, including blankets, carpets, &c. as well as clothing.
The fixed and floating capital vested in the woollen manufactoiies of the
United States, such as lands, water rights, buildings, machinery, and
stock on hand, and cash employed, may be estimated at - 40,000,000
Capital directly vested in the growth and manufacture of wool, $145,000,000
The proportion between the amount of wool used in the factories, and
worked up by household industry, are as 3 to 2; and, on the average,
it will employ one person to work uj) one thousand pounds of wool,
annually, or fifty thousand persons in tlie whole.
It is reasonable to suppose that each laborer subsists two other persons,
say 150,000 in all, deriving a direct support from the woollen manu-
facture, whether household or otherwise.
Each person will consume at least twenty -five dollars' worth of agTicul-
tural products annually, is $3,750,000 worth of subsi.stence.
The average product of lands, cultivated for the supply of food, does
not exceed two dollars and fifty cents per acre yearly, after subsisting
the cultivators, and those dependent on tiicm; it will, therefore, re-
quire 1,500,000 acres of land to feed tliosc manufacturers and their de-
pendents, worth, say fifteen dollars per acre, is - • 22,500,000
Capital involved in the growth and manufacture of wool, in the U. S. $167,500,000
The annual value created by, or accruing to, agriculture, because of the growth and
manufacture of wool, may be thus shown.
Wool, ...-.- $20,000,000
Provisions to manufactures, .... 3,750,000
Fuel, timber, and other products of the land, suppHed, - - 500,000
Charges for transportation, and food of horses, and other animals, em-
ployed because of the factories, ... - 500,000
$24,750,000
39
The following should rightfully be added, to show the whole operation
of the woollen manufacture in the United States:
For every one hundred thousand pounds of wool manufactured, there is ,
a constant employment, equal to the labor of six men, in the erection
and repair of buildings, mill wrights' and blacksmith's work, and in
the building and repairing of machiner}', whether for wool worked up
in the factories or in families; say three thousand men, 'whose labor sub-
sists at least nine thousand other persons — twelve thousand in all, and
consume, each, twenty -five dollars' worth of agricultural produce an-
nually, is - ' . - - . . 300,000
$25,050,000
Making the whole number of persons employed, because of the manufacture of wool,
one hundred and sixty-two thousand, and requiring of the product of agiiculture, for
materials and subsistence, the very large amount, per annum, of twenty -five millions
and fifty thousand dollars.
No. 2.
The subject of the woollen manufacture might be much further pursued, as to the
employment of persons and capital in other various branches of industry connected
with it — making of iron; mining coal; the whale fishery; the foreign and coasting trade,
and all the dependent interest. The woollen manufacture is a great stimulant to the
whale fisheiy, consuming, annually, about 180,000 gallons.
The following statement will show its benefits to the navigating interest alone, inde-
pendent of the coasting trade.
A woollen factory, manufacturing one hundred thousand pounds of wool per annum,
into forty thousand jardsof 6-4 wide cloths, will require of the productions of foreign
countries, on which freights would accrue, as follows:
20 pipes of olive oil, from Leghorn, at $10 per pipe, - $200
100 boxes (of 100 pounds each) of oil soap, do. at$l, - 100
4,000 pounds of Bengal indigo, at three cents per pound, - 120
15 tons of dye wood, at $6, ... 90
3 tons madder, a^ $10, (Holland) ... 30
600 gallons Sperm oil, .... 200
Other articles of foreign production, - - 10
$750
The freight on the above forty thousand yards, from Europe to the United
States, is known to be, and is so set down at - - - 500
Gain to our navigation in freight, on the manufacture of every one hundred
thousand pounds of wool, ..... $250
D.
Joseph Ge^s work, published in 1750 — Colonial policij of Great Britain.
'■'■ 3. The means of presenting to Great Britain her manufacturing and commercial
ascendency.
' ' But as much as I am for making Gibraltai* and Port Mahon free ports, I cannot
yet be of their opinion, who are for having all the ports of England made free — all our
custom houses demolished — and all the products and manufactures of the world brought
in free of all duty, that we may send them out again, as free, to all other counti-ies;
alleging that this is the practice of Holland, the Hans Town, Hamburg, Leghorn, &c.;
and that it is by these means they have worked themselves into so vast and extensive
a ti-ade, in furnishing other People with foreign commodities. But these notions are
entirely wrong. For, as to the Dutch, they lay duties on their impoi-tations as well as
we. Sic.
" But, what is of the utmost consequence to us is, that, by laying high duties we are
always able to check the vanity of our People in their extreme fondness of wearing
exotic manufactures. For if it icere not for this 7-estraint, as our yieighbors give much
less ivages to their workrneji than we do, and consequently can sell cheaper, the Italians,
the French, and the Dutch, would have continued to pour upon us their silks, paper, hatt,
druggets, stuffs, ratteens, and even Spanish tvool clothes: [for they have the wool of
40
that country as cheap as we; and are become masters of that busine»s, by tlie great
encouragement they have given to able workmen fi'om other countries, to settle with
them:] and thereby have prevented the growth of those manufactures amongst us,- and
so might have reduced us to the low estate we were in before their establishment. And,
therefore, it will ever be a maxim, sti-ictly to be observed, by all prudent Govern-
ments, who are capable of manufacturing within tliemselves, to lay such duties on the
fbreigTi as may favor their own, and discourage the importation of any of the hke sorts
from abroad. By this means the French have, in our time, nursed up a woollen manu-
factory, and brought it to such perfection as to furnish themselves with all such wool-
len goods as they formerly bought of us to a very great value.- and are even become com-
petitors with us, ill foreign markets."
[It seems, then, that, at least so long as one century ago, the modern doctrine of
Free Trade had its advocates; and that France, following the example of Great Britain,
and rejecting this doctrine, pursued what is called the American System. The wealth
of power enjoyed by France and England, attributable mainly to the encouragement
which they afforded to their own industry, contrasted with the languor, debihty, aud
dependence, all around them, afford a practical demonstration of the wisdom and the
folly of these opposing doctrines.]
" The proper means to discourage the Importation of foreign manufactures and to
promote the increase of our ov/n, is to lay such duties on the foreign, as may encou-
rage our People to vie with them : and this we have formerly practised, in some instances
to our advantage. But we should go on fiu-ther, and advance the duties on all such
foreign manufactures which we might well supply ourselves with. In such a proportion
that our manufactures might be enabled to afford what they make cheaper than they
could be imported." — Page 172.
4. To- what point shall protection or encouragement be carried?
[Speaking of the encouragements necessary to colonial industry, to render Itacces-
sory to the British policy, our author says.]
" After all, it will hardly be possible to bring any of those improvements to the de-
sired perfection, without steady resolution In the Government to sustain and support
them, and, as it were, to carry them in theu- arms: for new enterprises will always be
subject to accidents and discouragements too difficult for private persons to surmount,
without the assistsmce of the public, as occasion may requii-e, of which we have a plain
instance in our attempt upon pitch and tar: for the encouragement whereof a large
bounty was given /o>- several years, till it came to be Imported in such vast quantities,
that we had not only enough for oiu' own consumption, but even to export to our neigh-
bors: from which great plenty we were ready to persuade ourselves that this business
was sufficiently established, and therefore, neglected the continuance of the boimty. Since
which, the Importation of those commodities from Russia, Sweden, and Norway, is re-
assumed, he. So that we are likely to be soon beaten out of that trade again, unless
we shall better secure it to ourselves, either by reneiving the bounty or advancing the
duty upon forelg-n pitch and tar."
[Such were tlic opinions of a writer, who looked with a keen and observing eye to
the great interests of ///s country; and who, instead of being misled by the wild theo-
ries of the day, was influenced by practical results, and the experience of ages.
I am not so ignorant or so presumptuous as to suppose, that these quotaltions can
add any thing to your information or research. But, upon this engrossing question,
1 was desirous to conU-ibute, if I could, an humble mite in support of measures upon
which I believe depend the prosperity and happiness of the whole Union.]
4i
E.
Statement of the annual amount of Export* and Importt, to and from England, Scot-
land, and Ireland, from the Ut of October, 1820, to the 30th June, 1831.
TEARS.
Exports.
Imports.
In th«
year endings
30tJbi Septembw,
1821,
$20,777,480
$25,087,108
1822,
24,498,347
34,806,287
1823,
21,866,939
27,935,141
1824,
21,620,179
28,088,317
1825,
37,102,978
36,713,246
1826,
21,991,875
26,131,969
1827,
26,392,306
30,287,113
1828,
23,060,669
32,811,210
1829,
24,291,693
25,279,489
1830,
26,329,352
23,519,214
In the
nine monthi
endiiig' SOtk June,
1831,
26,031,710
29,918,993
$273,963,528
$320,578,087
273,963,528
$46, 6 14, .569
TRKAsnnT Dbfabtkbitt, Registsr's Office, January 25, 1832.
T. L. SMITH, Register.
NoTK. The records do not exlubit the value of" imports, prior to the Ist October,
1820.
F.
The expenses of planting cotton in Louisiana may be estimated, upon a general
average, of less than one third of the crop, or of three cents a pound.
Plantations, of from five to ten thousand dollars a year, lost about one-tliird, for the
expenses of making the crop, including the ordinary and necessary expenses of plain
living for the support of the flunily.
In plantations yielding more tlian ten thousand dollars, the expenses beai- a less pro-
portion, and tliose less than five thousand dollars, a greater, to the amount of the crop.
At the present prices of lands and slaves, the latter of which are high, plantations
will yield ten per cent, and often upwards; and, when the capital is hu-ge, the profit
will be much greater.
It may be safely computed, that plantations yield a clear profit of seven per cent.,
and, in favorable yeiu-s, of ten per cent.
The above estimate is founded on nine and ten cents for cotton.
Of these expenses, it may be calculated that pork, and the wages of the overaeer,
compose one half. The overseers, in general, save netu'ly all their pay.
One half the remainder is made up of cotton bagging, cordage, liorses, mules, oxen,
and taxes.
The cotton bagging, and cordage is made of hemp, in Kentucky; is much stronger
and safer for baling than the foreign: and, besides, weighs much heavier. It now sells,
in consequence of the competition, at from sixteen to twenty cents. Tiie planters
estimate that, at these prices, it will, at ten cents a poimd, with the cordage, sell with
the cotton for as mucii as it costs.
About one fourth of the expenses of a plantation are for woollens, cottons, blankets,
shoes, hat.s, salt, sugar, coffee, medicine, iron, tools, &c. all articles paying duties, at
different rates.
In a crop of ten thousand dollars, the expenses may vary from two thousand eight
hundred to three thousand two lumdred dollars; of which it may be said, from seven to
eight hundred are for articles paying' duties. These expenses depend much upon
management and economy.
42
New York, October 31, 1831.
B. B. Howell, Esq.
Dear Sir: In conformity with your request, I herewith give you a statement of
the iron produced in Litchfield county, Connecticut, with the manufactures of iron
and steel in said county; to which I have added the other productions of the county,
as estimated by the delegates of the convention from that county. It may not be per-
fectly accurate, as a portion of it is founded upon conjectuie; but the total will rather
run short of, tlian oven'un, the true amount, as a very considerable list of articles,
each of small comparative value, are entirely omitted.
I am, very respecfully, your obedient servant,
JOHN M. HOLLEY.
Pig, and bar iron, &c.
Value.
$293,000
Manufactures of iron.
&c.
Scythes,
- $56,000
Hoes,
- 7,150
Axes,
- 26,500
Rat and mouse traps.
9,500
Shoe tacks, and sparables,
- 40,000
Shovels and spades, -
6,500
Augers,
200
Steel,
8,000
Pitchforks, -
- 20,000
Ploughs,
3,800
$177,650
Other productions.
Wool.
Woollen cloths,
$151,000
215,000
Cotton cloths.
- 15,000
Hats,
• 70,700
Carried forward,
$451,700
Value.
Brought forward,
$451,700
Shoes and boots.
- 112,000
Carriages and wagons,
. 38,000
Clocks,
- 382,000
Leather,
- 181,000
Cabinet work and chairs,
- 27,000
Cordage,
500
Machinery, part wood
and
part iron and steel.
19,000
Brick, clay furnaces.
and
marble.
- 38,200
flakes and brooms, -
5,000
Lime,
5,000
Musical instruments.
2,200
Buttons,
- 20,000
Cheese,
. 115,000
Butter,
- 17,600
$1,414,200
Pig and bar iron.
- 293,000
Manufactures of iron, &(
Total,
:. - 177,650
$1,884,850
H.
Mstract of returns of thirty-Jive Woollen Factories, in the county of Worcester, Massa-
chusetts.
Amount of capital invested, including the annual kverage amount of •"*to«^\^"^,^ood«
on hand. • •?2,3l0,uuu
Quantity of wool manufactured, very little of which is produced m Mas-
sachusetts, 2,530,000 pounds annually,
Annual quantity of broad cloths, . • • 542,000 yards. ^
" cassimercs, . • • 866,000
sattinct, . . 1,145,000 "
Average aiuuial value of goods, . • • ■ •
Aggregate amount of wages,
Articles of American production used in the above factories, besides
wool, sav cotton, for warps or sattiiicts, pot and pearl ashes, woad,
alum, vitriol, copperas, and other chemicals, glue pates, soap, Sig.
Teasels, lime, bran, fuel, leather for cards and belts,
a, 671,250
298,582
163,255
43
I.
Extract from laii article in the Charleston City Gazette, a^ied into the New Orleans
Emporium, January 4.
1st. The greatest fluctuation in the price of cotton was before the tariff of 1824.
2d. Cotton, hke every othar article of merchandise, has its fixed price, not in Ame-
rica, but in the market of the world, and depends upon the proportion between de-
mand and supply, just as corn, which, when it is scarce, sells high, and when plenty
sells low.
To illustrate how perfectly the price depends on the demand, it is stated that the
crop of 1819, amounting- to eighty-eight millions of pounds, sold for twenty-one mil-
lions of dollars? while the crop of 1823, amounting to one hundred and seventy mil-
lions of pounds, was sold for only twenty milhons of dollars! And this before the light
tariff of 1824. The cause of this difference in tlie price of cotton is found in the state
of the markets, which were hungry in 1819, and had not a great supply, bat were
overfed in 1823, and could hardly digest the crop of tliat year.
The price of cotton fluctuated before the present tariff, and, if the same causes of
fluctuation exist, they will produce the same effects, independent of the tariff. It is
true cotton has come to be sold at ten cents per pound, that used to bring twenty
cents. In this reduction of his profits, the cotton planter only shares the same with
the wheat grower. Flour is sold at five dollars per barrel, which formerly brought
eight and ten dollars; and the products of the earth generally are low, because they
are very abundant.
With respect to cotton, this is to be said further. No mode of investing money in
agricultural pursuits, this side of the sugar plantations, has affoi-ded so great an income
as the culture of cotton. So that has happened to the cotton planter, which happens
to all, viz: a diminution of his income, from the multitudes of those who adopted his
lucrative business.
To seek relief from this depressed price of cotton, by repealing the tariff law, is a
most inconsiderate step : for the tariff not only creates a new market for raw cotton, but
it also converts some of the finest countiy for growing cotton, into sugar plantations.
The tariff, by protecting domestic sugars, enables the Louisianian to raise sugar. Re-
-Tnove the tariff from sugars, and the Louisianian cannot compete with the West Indian.
Cotton he can raise to better advantage than the Carolinian. So the relief of the cot-
;on planter, sought by the repeal of the protecting tariff, would multiply cotton grow-
ers and cut off the northeastern market at one and the same blow. What a stroke of
nullifying policy that would be !
The price of any thing in market is governed by the stock in market; if that is
^eat, the price is low; if small, the price is high. AVhat ever has a tendency to con-
,!ume the stock, increases the price; and whatever has a tendency to increase the stock,
liminishes the price of that article in the market.
The terrible manufactures at the North do not add to the .stock of cotton; they di-
minish the stock, and raise the price in the market of the world. They consume vast
quantities of cotton, and clear the market of what might otherwise become a drug.
i repeal of the tariff law would wind up the Northern factories. When these cease
.0 be consumers, the price of cotton must fall lower than it now is.
*
\
w^
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA LIBRARY
Los Angeles r
This book is DUE on the last date stamped below.
fiEKEWAL JAN 171963
^f^rf^iYj^^-
APR^.f
m^
oS^
"963
S^^
n>»uRL JOTS %
Dpi
SEP 3 ,
.m-
v^i -C i) ^^,
JUN21
"T^-j
£ APR ems
RECEIVED
■ SEP 141983
CIRC. DEPT. URl.
RVC'O LO-Wl
5
Form L'J-50nil,'lil(BS"'>^_°'«M.14
1: ^ l7i^iVJ'2.''.'',v''J'^/
\A/'K^AA^r
UC SOUTHERN REGIONAL LIBRARY FACILITY
AA 001 165 023 i
4
Vv^^
V.i-
^^^#1