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;.~.>^ -^^ '\^^-

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.

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-
<lressed the Senate, and, by a sort of protestation against any conclusion fiom
his silence, nut forward the objection. The recent Free Trade Convention
at Philadelphia, it is well known, weie divided on the question; and although
the topic is noticed in their address to the public, they do not avow their own
beli/f \\v,it the Anujrican System is unconstitutional, but rrprcsoif that .wr/tis
the opinion of respectable i)ortions of the American People. Anofher address
to the People of the United Stales, from a high source, during the past year,
ticating this subject, does not asscii the opinion of the distinguished autlujr,
but .i/afcs that of others to be that it is unconstitutional. From which 1 infer
that he did not, himself, believe it unconstitutional.

[Here the ViccPresideiil iiittM-pose(i,aiul remarked tlial, if (he Senator from
Kentucky alluded to liim, lie must say that his (tpiuioii was, that the measure
was unconstitiilioiuil. ]

When, sir, I iMtiiteiided with you, Side hy side, and with perhaps less zeal
than you exhibited, in ISKi, I did not understand you then to consider the
policy forbidden by the constitution.

['Ihe Vice President a^ain interposed, and said that the constitutional ques-
tion was not debated at that time, and that he had never expressed an opinion
contrary to that now intimated.]

I give way -with pleasure to these explanations, which I hope will always be
made when I say any thing bearing on the individual opinions of the Chair.
I know the delicacy of (he position, and symputliise with the incumbent, who-
ever he may be. It is true, tlie (luestion was not debated in 181 G; and why
not? Because it was not debateable; it was then believed not fairly to arise.
It never has been'niade, as a distinct, substantial, and leadin;^; point of objec-
tion. It never was made until the discussion of the tariff of lS-21,* when it
was rather hinted at, as against the spirit of the constitution, than formally
announced, as being contrary to the provisions of that instrument. What was
not dreamt of "before, (»r in. 181 G, and scarcely thought of in 1824, is now made,
by excited imaginations, to assume the imposing form of a serious constitu-
tional barrier.

Such are the origin, duration, extent, and sanctions of the policy which we
are now called upon to subvert. Its beneficial eilects, although they may
vary in degree, have been felt in all parts of the Union. Ton()ne, I verily
believe, has it been prejudicial. To the North, every where, testimonies are
borne to the high prosperity which it has diffused. There, all branches of
industry are animated and flourishing. Commerce, foreign and domestic,
active," cities and towns springing up, enlarging and beautifying; navigation
fully and profital)ly employed, and the whole lace of the country smiling with
improvement, cheerfulness, and abundance. The gentleman from South
Carolina has supposed that we, in the West, derive no advantages from this
system. He is mistaken. Let him visit us, and he will find, from the head
of La Belle Riviere, at Pittsburg, to Anierica, at its mouth, the most rapid and
gratifying advances. He v/ill behold Pittsburg itself. Wheeling, Portsmouth,
Maysville, Cincinnati, Louisville, and numerous other towns, lining and or-
namenting the banks of that noble river, daily extending their Limits, and
prosecuting, with the greatest spirit and profit, numerous branches of the
manufacturing and mechanic arts. W he will go into the interior, in the
State of Ohio, he will there perceive the most astonishing progress in agricul-
ture, in the useful arts, and in all the improvements to which they both di-
rectly conduce. Then let hin^ cross over into my own, my favorite State,
and contemplate the spectacle which is there exhibited. lie will perceive
numerous villages, not targe, but neat, thriving, and some of (hem highly or-
namented; many manufactories of hemp, cotton, wool, and other articles.
In various parts of the country, and especially in the Elkhorn region, an end-
'ess succession of natural parks; the forests thinned; fallen trees and under-
5row;th cleared away; large herds and flocks feeding on luxuriant grasses:
ind interspersed with comfortable, sometimes elegant mansions, surrounded
')y extensive lawns. The honorable gentleman from South Carolina says,
.hat a profitable tratle was carried on from the West, through theSeleudagap,
Ml mules, horses, and other live stock, which has been checked by (he opera-
jon of (he tanfi'. It is true that such a trade was carried on between Ken-
ucky and South Carolina, mutually beneficial to both parties; but, several
/ears ago, resolutions, at popular- meetings, in Carolina, were adopted, not to
purchase die produce of Kentucky, by way of puiiishinent for her attachment
the tariff. They must have supposed us as stupid as the sires of one of the
iescriptions of the stock, of which that trade consisted, if they imagined that
Jieir resolutions would aftect our principles. Our drovers cracKed their
whips, blew tiieir horns, and passed the Seleudagap, to other markets, where
setter humors existed, and equal or greater profits were made. I have heard

* Ml*. Clay has been since reminded tliat the objection, in the sunie way, was first
urged in the debate of 1820.

of your successor in the House ol Representatives, Mr. President, this anec-
dote; that he joined in the adoption of those resolutions, but when, about
Christmas, lie applied to one of his South Carolina neighbors to purchase the
regular supply of pork, for the ensuing year, he found that he had to give two
prices for it; and he declared if that were the patriotism on which the reso-
lutions were based, he would not conform to them, and, in point of fact, laid in
his annual stock of pork by purchase from the first passing Kentucky drover.
That trade, now partially resumed, was maintained by the sale of Western
productions, on the one side, and Carolina money on the other. From that
condition of it, the gentleman from South Carolina, might have drawn this
conclusion, that an advantageous trade may exist, although one of the parties
to it pays in specie for the productions which he purchases from the other;
and, consequently, that it does not follow, if Ave did not purchase British
tabrics, that it might not be the interest of England to purchase our raw ma-
terial of cotton. The Kentucky drover received the South Carolina specie,
or, taking bills, or the evidences of deposite in the banks, carried these
liome, and disposing of them to the merchant, he brought out goods, of foreign
or domestic manufacture, in return. Such is the circuitous nature of trade
and remittance, which no nation understands better than Great Britain.

Nor has the system, which has been the parent source of so much benefit
to other parts of the Union, proved injurious to the cotton growirtg country.
1 cannot speak of South Carolina itself, where I have never been, with so
much certainty; but of other portions of the Union in which cotton is grown,
especially those bordering on the Mississippi, I can confidently speak If
cotton planting is less profitable than it was, that is the result of increased
production; but I believe it to be still the most profitable investment of capi-
tal of any branch of business in the United States. And if a committee were
raised, with power to send for persons and papers, I take upon myself to say,
that such would be the result of the inquiry. In Kentucky, 1 know many
individuals who have their cotton plantations below, and retain their resi-
dence in that State, where they remain during the sickly season; and they
are all, I believe, without exception, doing well. Others tempted by their
success, are constantly engaging in the business, whilst scarcely any comes
from the cotton region to engage in western agriculture. A friend, now in
my eye, a member of this body, upon a capital of less than seventy thousand
dollars, invested in a plantation and slaves, made, the year before last, six-
teen thousand dollars. A member of the other House, I understand, who,
without removing himself, sent some of his slaves to Mississippi, made, last
year, about twenty per cent. Two friends of mine, in the latter State,
whose annual income is IVom thirty to sixty thousand dollars, being desirous
to curtail their business, have offered estates for sale, which they are willing
to show, by regular vouchers of receipt and disbursement, yield eighteen
per cent, per annum. One of my most opulent acquaintances, in a county
adjoining to that in which I reside, having married in Georgia, has derived a
large portion of liis wealth from a cotton estate there situated.

The loss of the tonnage of Charleston, which has been tlwelt on, does not
proceed Irom the tariff; it never had a very large amount, and it has not been
. able to retain what it had, in consequence of the operation of the principle of
i'ree trade on its navigation. Its tonnage has gone to the more enterprising
and adventurous tars ol the Northern States, with whom those of the city of
Charleston could not maintain a successful competition, in the freeilom of
the coasting trade existing between the different parts of the Union. That
this must be the true cause, is demonstrated by the fact, that, however it may
be with tlieport of Ciiarle8ton,()ur coasting tonnage, generally, is constantly
increasing. As to the foreign tonnage, about one half of that which is eiigag
ed in the direct trade between Charleston and Great Britain, is English;
proving that the tonnage ol South Carolina cannot maintain itself in a com-
petition, under tlie free and equal navigation secured by our treaty with that
Power.

When gentlemen have succeeded in their design of an immediate or gradu-
al tlestruction oi' the American System, what is their substitute? Free trade !
Free trade! Tlie call lor free trade, is as unavailing as the try of a spoiled

ihild, in its nurse's arms, f()r the moon or the stars tliat glitter in the firnia
ment ot" heaven. It never has existed; it never will exist. 'I'rade implies,
at least, two parties. To be free, it should be fair, equal, and reciprocal.
But if we throw our ports wide open to the admission of foreign productions,
tree of all duly, what ports, of any other foreign nation sfiall we find opcii to
the free admission of our surplus produce? We may break down all barriers
to free trade, on our part, but tlie work will not be complete until foreign
Powers shall have removed theirs. There would be freedom on one side,
and restrictions, prohibitions, and exclusions, on the other. 'J'he bolts, and
the bars, and the chains, of all other nations, will remain undisturbed. It is,
indeed, possible, that our industry and commerce would accommodate them-
selves to this unequal and unjust state of things: for, such is the flexibility of
our nature, that it bends itself to all circumstances. The wretched prisoner,
incarcerated in a gaol, after a long time, becomes reconciled to his solitude,
and regularly notches down the passing days ()f his confinement.

Gentlemen deceive themselves. It is not free trade that they are recom-
mending to our acceptance. It is, in ettect, the British colonial system that
we are invited to adopt; and, if their policy prevail, it will lead, substan-
tially, to the recolonization of these States, under tlie commercial dominion
of Great Britain. And whom do we find some of the principal supporters,
out. of Congress, of this foreign system.^ Mr. President, there are some fo-
reigners who always remain exotics, and never become naturalized in our
country: whilst, happily, there are many others who readily attach them-
selves to our principles and our institutions. The honest, patient, and indus-
trious German, readily unites with our people, establishes himself upon some
of our fat land, fills his capacious barn, and enjoys, in tranquillity, the abun-
dant fruits which his diligence gathers around him, always ready to fly to the
standard of his adopted country, or of its laws, when called by the duties of
patriotism. The gay, the versatile, the philosophic Frenchman, accommo-
uating himself cheerfully to all the vicissitudes of life, incorporates himself,
without difficulty, in our society. But, of all foreigners, none amalgamate
themselves so quickly with our people as the natives of the Emerald Isle.
In some of the visions which have passed through my imagination, I have
supposed that Ireland was, originally, part and parcel of this continent, and
that, by some extraordinary convulsion of nature, it was torn from America,
and, drifting across the ocean, was placed in the unfortunate vicinity of
Great Britain. Tiie same openheartedness; the same generous hospitality;
the same careless and uncalculaling indifference about human life, character-
ise the inhabitants of both countries. Kentucky has been sometimes called
the Ireland of America. And 1 have no doubt that, if the current of emigra-
tion were reversed, and set from America upon the shores of Europe, instead
of bearing from Europe to America, every American emigi'aut to Ireland
would there find, as every Irish emigrant here finds, a hearty welcome and a
happy homel

hut, sir, the geutlem:\n to whom I am about to allude, although long a
residv-nt of this country, has no feelings, no attachments, no sympathies, no
punciples, in common with our People. Near fifty years ago, Pennsylvania
took him to her bosom, and wanned, and cherished, and honored him; and
how does he manifest his gratitude? By aiming a vital blow at a system en-
deared to her by a thorough conviction that it is indispensable to her prospe-
rity. He has filled, at home and abroad, some of the highest offices under
this Government, during thirty years, and he is still at heart an alien. The
authority of his name has been invoked, and the labors of his pen, in the form
of a memoiial to Congress, have been engaged, to overthrow the American
system and to substitute the foreign. Qo home to your native Europe, and
there inculcate, upon her *overeigns, your Utopian doctrines of free trade,
and when you have prevailed upon them to unseal their ports, and freely ad-
mit the produce of Pennsylvania, and other States, come back, and we shall
be prepared to become converts, and to adopt your iaith.

A Mr. Sarchet also makes no inconsiderable figure in the common attack
upon our system. I do not know the man, but I understaud he is an unnatu-
ralized emigrant from the island of Guernsey, situated in the channel which

divides France and Endand. The principal business of the inliabitants is that
of driving a contraband trade with the opposite shores, and Mr. Sarchet, edu-
cated in that school, is, I have been told, cliietiy engaged in employing his
wits to elude the operation of our revenue laws, by introducing articles at less
rates of duty than they are justly chargeable with, which he effects by vary-
ing their denominations, or slightly changing their forms. Thi<5 man, at a
former session (»f the Senate, caused to be presented a memorial signed by
some 150 pretended workers in iron. Of these a gentleman made a careful
inquiry and examination, and he ascertained that there were only about ten of
the denomination represented; the rest were tavern keepers, porters, mer-
chants' clei'ks, hackney coaclynen, &c. I have the most respectable author-
ity, in black and white, for this statement.

[Here Gen. Hayne asked, M'ho.^ and was he a manufacturer.' Mr. Clay re-
plied. Col. Murray, of New York, a gentleman of the highest standing for
honor, piobily, and veracity; that lie did not know whether he was a manu-
facturer or not, but the gentleman might take him as one.*]

Whether Mr. Sarchet got up the late petition presented to the Senate, from
the journeymen tailors of Philadelphia, or not, 1 do not know. But I should
not be surprised if it were a movement of his, and if we should find that he
has cabbaged from other classes of society to swell out the number of signa-
tures.

To the facts manufactured by Mr. Sarchet, and the theories by Mr. Galla-
tin, there was yet wanting one circumstance to recommend them to favorable
consideration, and that was the authority of some high name. There was no
difficulty in obtaining one from a British repository. The honorable gentle-
man has cited a speech of n)y Lord Goderich, addressed to the British Par-
liament, in lavor of free trade, and full of deep regret that old England could
not possibly conform her practice of rigorous restriction and exclusion, to her
liberal doctrines of unfettered commerce, so earnestly recommended to foreign
Powers. Sir, said Mr. C. I know my Lord Goderich very well, although my
acquaintance with him was prior to his being summoned to the British House
of Peers, We both signed the convention between the United States and
Great Britain of 1815. He is an honorable man, frank, possessing business,
but ordinary talents, about the stature and complexion of the honorable gen-
tleman from South Carolina, a few years older than he, and every drop of
blood running in his veins being pure and unadulterated Anglo-Saxon bk«)d.
If he were to live to the age of Methuselah, he could not make a speech of
such ability and eloquence as that which the gentleman from South Carolina
recently flelivered to the Senate; and there would be much more fitness in
my Lord Goderich making quotations from the speech of the honorable gen-
tleman, than his quoting, as authority, the theoretical doctrines of my Lord
Goderich. We are too much in the habit of looking abroad, not merely
for manufactured articles, but for the sanction of high names, to support favor-
ite theories. I have seen, and closely observed, the British Parliament, and,
without derogating from its justly elevated character, I have no hesitation in
saying, that in all the attributes of order, dignity, patriotism, and eloquence,
the American Congress would not suffer, in the smallest degree, by a com-
parison with it.

1 dislike this resort to aulhorily, and especially /orei5"n and interested au-
thority, for the support of principles of public policy. I would greatly prefer
to meet gentlemen upon thcjbroad ground of fact, of experience, and of reason;
but, since they will appeal to British names and authority, I feel myself com-
pelled to imitate their bad example. y\llow me to quole from the speech of a
member of the British Parliament, hearing the same family name with my
Lord Goderich, but whether or not a relation of his, 1 do not know. The
member alluded to wa^ arguing against the violation of the treaty of Methuen
— that treaty, not lesslatal to the interests of Portugal than would be the sys-
tem of gentlemen to the best interests of America — and he went on to say;

• Mr. CI:iy sul)«cq\icntly (mdcrstood fhut CoK Mtirray was a mercl»ant.

*' // was idle for us to endeavor lo persuade other nations to join with us in
adopting the principles of what was called ''free trade. ^ Other nations knew,
as icdl as the noble Lord opposite, and those who acted luith him, what we '
meant by ''free trade? fcas nothing' more nor less than, by means of the great
advantages we enjoyed, to ge.t a monopoly of all iheir markets for our nianu-
J'uciares, and to prevent them, one ajid all, frma ei;er becoming niamifactur-
ing nations. \\ lieti ilie system ot lociprocify and Tree tiado liail been pro-
posed to a Ficiuh ambassador, bis remark was, tbat tlic plan was excellent in
tlieory, but, to make it lair in practice, it woubl be necessary to defer tbe at-
tempt to put it in execution lor Iiaif a century^ until France sbould be on the
same footing witli Great Britain, in marine, in manufactures, in capital, and
the many other peculiar advanla^^es which it now enjoyed. The policy that
France acted on, was that of encouraj^ing its native manufactures, and i^ was
a wise policy; because, if it were freely to admit our manufactures, it would
speedily be reduced to the rank of an agricultural nation; and therefore a
poor nation, as all must be that depend exchi.sively upon agriculture. Ame-
rica acted too upon the same principle with France. America legislated for
futurity — legislated for an increasing population. America, too, was prosper-
ing under this system. In twenty years, America would be independent of
England for manufactures altogether. ***** Hut since
the peace, France, Germany, America, and all the other countries of the
world, had proceeded upon the principle of encouraging and protecting native
manufactures.''

But I have said that the system nominally called "free trade," so earnest-
ly anil eloquently recommended to our adoption, is a mere revival of the Bri-
tish colonial system, forced upon us by Great Biitain during the existence ot
our colonial vassalage. The whole system is fully explained and illustrated
in a work published as far back as (he year 1750, entitled "The trade: and
navigation of Great Britain considered, by Joshua Gee,"' with extracts from
which 1 have been furnished by the diligent researches of a friend. It will
be seen from these, that the South Carolina policy now, is identical with the
long cherished policy of Great Britain, which remains the same as it was when
the thirteen colonies were part of the British empire. In that wock the author
'"contends — •

"1. That mimufactures, in the Amencan colonies, should be dlscourag-ed or pro-
hibited.

" Great Britain, with its dependencies, is doubtless as well alile to subsi.^ witliin
itself as any nation in Europe : We have an enterprising' People, iit for all the arts of
pcivce and wiir: We have provisions in abundance, and those of the best sort, and are
able to raise sufficient for doul)lc tlie number of inhabitants: We hrivc llie very best
nrAterials for clothing', and want noUiing' either for use or even for luxury, bnt what
\vc have at home or miglit have tioin our colonics: So that we might malce such an
intercom-se of trade :\mOng- ourselves, or between iis and them, as would maintiiin a
vast navig-ation. Bnt we ought always to Icecp a watchfid eye over our colonies, to re-
strain thcni from setting' up an}' of the manufactures which are carried on in Britain;
and any such attempts should be crushed in the beginning: for, if thcv are suffered to
grow up to m:iturlty, it will be difficult to suppress them." — P.ages 177, 8, 9.

" Our colonies ;irc much in the same state Ireland was in, when they began the Wool-
len manufactory, and, as their numbers increase, will fall upon manufactures for clotli-
Ing themsrfh-es, if due care be not taken to find employment for them in raising" sucli
productions as may enable tiiem to fm-nish themselves with all their nccesaarks from
us."

Then it was the object of this British economist to adapt the means or
wealth of the colonists to the supply required by their necessities, and to
make the mother country the only source of that supplJ^ Now it seems the
jfolicy is only so far to bo reveised, that we must continue to import necessa-
ries from Greav Britain, in order (o enable her to purchase raw cotton from us.

" I should, therefore, think, it worthy the care of the Go\ernnient to endeavor, by
all possible means, to encourag^c them in raising of silk, hemp, flax, Iron, [ijC/"onl}' pig",
to be hammered in EngUmd] pot ash, &c. by giving' them competent bounties In the
beginning, and sending- ever judicious and skilful persons, at the public charg-e, to

assist and instruct tliem in the most proper methods of management, wliich, in my
apprehension, would lay a foundation for establishing the most profitable ti-ade of any
we have. And considering- the commanding situation of our colonies along the sea
coast; the great convenience of navigable rivers in all of them; the cheapness of land
and the easiness of raising provisions; great numbers of People would transport them-
selves thither to settle upon such improvements. Now, as People have been filled
with fears that the colonies, if encoiu-aged to raise rough materials, would set up for
themselves, a little regulation would remove all those jealousies out of the way. I'hey
have never thrown or wove any silk as yet that we have heard of: Therefore, if a law
was made to prohibit the use of every throwster's mill, or doubling or horsling silk
witli any machine whatever, tliey would then se7id it us raw: And, as they will have
the providing rough materials to themselves, so shall we have the manufacturing of
them. If encouragement be given for raising hemp, flax, &c. doubtless they will
soon begin to manufactm-e, if not prevented: Therefore, to stop the progress of any
such manufacture, it is proposed that no weaver there shall have liberty to set up any
looms without first registering at an office kept for that purpose, and the name and
place of abode of any journeyman that shall work with liim. But if any particular in-
habitant shall be incUned to have any linen or woollen made of their own spinning,
they should not be abridged of the same liberty tliat they now make use of, viz. to
ciiiTy to a weaver (who shall be licensed by the Governor) and have it wrought up for
the use of the family, but not to be sold to any person in a private manner, nor exposed
to any market or fair, upon pain of forfeiture.

*' And, inasmuch as they have been supplied with all their iron manufactures from
hence, except wliat is used in the building of ships and other country work, one half
of our exports being supposed to l)e in NAILS — a manufacture which they allow has
never hitherto been can-ied on among them — it is proposed they shall, /»?• time to come,
never erect the manufacture of any under the size of a two shilhng nail, horse nails
excepted; that all slitting mills and engines, for drawing wire, or weaving stockings,
be put down; and that every smith who keeps a common forge or shop, shall register
his name and place of abode, and the name of every servant which he shall employ,
which licence shall be renewed once eveiy year, and/)«y for the liberty of working
at such trade. That all negroes shall be prohibited from weaving either linen or woollen,
or spinning or combing of wool, or working at any manufacture of iron, further than
making it into pig or bar iron. That they also be prohibited from manufacturing hats,
stockings, or leather, of any kind. Tills limitation will hot abridge the planters of any
privilege they now enjoy. On the contrary, it will turn their Industry to promoting
and raising those rougli materials.

The author then piopa»esthattlie Board of Trade and Plantations slinuld be
iurnished with statistical accounts of the various /}pnni7/ec? inanufactiu-es, to
enable tliem to ericourage or depress the industry of the colonists, and pievent
the danj^er of interference with British imhistry.

«' It is hoped that this method would allay the heat that some people have shown, ,for
destroying the iron works on tlic plantations, and pulling do\vn all their forges — taking
away, in a violent manner, their estates and properties — preventing the imsbandmen
from getting their ploughshares, carts, and other utensils, mended; destroying the ma-
nufacture of ship building, by depriving them of llic liberty of making bolts, spikes,
and other things proper for carrying on tliat work, by which article returns are made
for purchasing our woollen manufactiu'cs." — Pages 87, 88, 89.

Such is the picture of cohmisis dependent upon the mother country lor
their necessary supniies, dra^y;n by a writer who v/as not ainonj; l|ie number
of those who desired to (k'bar iheni the jneaiisof building a vessel, erecting a
forge, or mendins a ploughsliaic,but vvlio was willing to promote their growtli
and |)r()speri(y, as far as was consistent witli the paramount interests of the
manufacturing or parent State,

"2. The advantages to CJrcat llritalii from keeping the colonists dependent on her
for their essential supplies.

" If we examinr into tlie riirnnistnnees of llie Inliabitants of oiii' plantations and our
own, it willap])e3r Ibat not onr-fourfh part of tlieir product rcdoinuis to []\eir own pro-
fit for, out of all tlial conies here, tliry only carry back clotliing and other accommo-
dations for tlieir famllicsi ail of which is of the tnerrli:ni(lit;e and ujanufHctin-c of this
kins^doin."

After showing how this system tends to concentrate all the surplus of ac-
quisition over absolute expenditure, in England, he says:

««A11 these advantages we receive by the plantations, besides the mortgages on the
planters' estates, and the high interest they pay us, whicli is very considerable; and,
therefore, veiy great care ought to be taken, in regulating all affairs of the colonists,
that tlie planters be not put under too many dijjicultits, but encouraged to go on
cheerfully.

"New England, and the northern colonies, have not commodities and products
enough to send us in return for purchasing their necessary clothing, but are under
very great difficulties; and, therefore, any ordinary sort sell with them. And, when
they have grown out of fashion with us, they are new fashioned enough there."

Sir, I cannot go on with this disgusting detail.* Their refuse 'goods; their
old shop-keepers; their cast off clothes, good enough lor us! Was there ever
a scheme more artfully devised by which the energies and faculties of one
People should be kept down and rendered subservient to the pride, and the
pomp, and the power of another! The system then proposed differs only from
that which is now recommended, in one particular; that was intended to be -
enforced by power, this would not be less effectually executed by the force
of circumstances. A gentleman in Boston, (Mr. Lee) the agent of the Free
Trade Convention, from whose exhaustless mint tliere is a constant issue of
reports, seems to envy the blessed condition of dependent Canada, when com-
pared to the oppressed state of this Union; and it is a fair inference, from the
view which he presents, that he would have us to hasten back to the golden
days of that colonial bondage, which is so well depicted in the work from
which I have been quoting. Mr. Lee exhibits two tabular statements, in one
of which he presents the high duties which he represents to be paid in the ports
of the United Stiites, and, in the other, those which are paid in Canada, gen-
erally about two per cent, ad valorem. But, did it not occur to him, that the
duties levied in Canada are paid chiefly on British manufactures, or on arti-
cles passing irovn one to another part of a common empire; and that, to pre-
sent a parallel case, in the United States, he ought to have shown that im-
portations made into one State from another, which are now free, are subject
to the same or higher duties than are paid in Canada?

I will now, Mr. President, proceed to a more particular consideration of
the argument, urged against the protective system, and an inquiry into its
practical operation, especially on the cotton growing country. And as I wish
to state and meet the argument fairly, I invite correction of my statement of
it, if necessary. It is alleged that the system operates prejudicially to the
cotton planter, by diminishing the foreign demand for his staple: that we can-
not sell to Great Britain, unless we buy from lier; that the import duly is
equivalent to an export duty, and falls upon the cotton grower; tiiat South
Carolina pays a dispioportionate quota of the public revenue: that an aban-
donment of the protective policy would lead to an augmentation of our ex-
ports ot an amount not less than one hundred and fifty millions of dollars:
and, hnally, that the South cannot partake ot the advantages of manufac-
turing, it there be any. Let us examine these various proposUions. in detail.
1. Ihatthetoreign demand tor cotton is diminished; and that we cannot sell
to (jieat Britain unless we buy from her. The demand of both our great fo-
reign customers is constantly and annually increasing. It is true, th.Tt the ra-
tio ot the increase may not be equal to that of production: but this is owing
to the tact that the power ot producing the raw material is much greater, and
IS there ore constantly in advance oK the power of consumption. A single
tact will Illustrate. The average produce of laborers engaged in the cultiva-

lon ul c^)tton may be estimated at live bales, or iifteen hundred weight to the
haml. Supposing the annual average consumption of each individual who
uses cotton cloth to be ive pounds, one 'hand can produce enough of the l•a^^
material to clothe three hundred.

The argument comprehends two errors, one of fact, and the other of piiiui
pie. It assumes that we .lo not j,, fact purchase of (i.eat H.ilain. What is

'S« Appendix 1), far the residue of U,e quotation ^vhich wa. iutende.l t„ l,c mad..

the true state of the case? There are certain, but very few articles which it is
thought souikI policy req'iires that we hhould manufacture at home, and on
these the tariff operates. But,with respect to all the rest, and much the lar°;er
number of articles of taste, fashion, or utility, they are subject to no other
than revenue duties and are freely introduced. 1 have before me from the
treasury a statement of our imports from England, Scotland, and Ireland, in-
cluding fen years, preceding the last, and three quarters of the last year, from
which it will appear that, al (hough there are some fluctuations in',the amountot'
the diiVercnt years, the largest amount imported in any one year lias been
mKe the tariff of 1821. and that tiie last year's importation, when the returns
of tl;e fourth quarter shall be received, will probably be the greatest in the
whole term of eleven years.

Now. if it be admitted that there is a less amount of the protected articles
imporied from Great Britain, she may be, and piobably is. compensated for
tlie deficiency, by the increased consumption in America of tlie articles of her
industry not falling within the scope of the policy of our protection. The
establishment of manufactures among us excites the creation of Avealth,and
this gives new powers of consumption, which are gratified by the purchase of
foreign objects. A poor nation can never be a great consuming nation, [ts
poverty v.ill limit its consumption to bare subsistence. • '^

Tlie erroneous principle which the argument incbides, is. that it devolves
on us the duty of taking care that Great Britain shall be enabled to purchase
from us without exacting from Great Britain the corresponding duty. If it be
true, on one side, that nations are bound to shape their policy in reference to
the ability of foreign Powers, it must be true on both sides of the Atlantic.
And this reciprocal obligation ought to be emphatically regarded towards the
nation supplying the raw material, by the manufacturing nation, because the
ijidustry of the latter gives four or five values to what had been produced by
tlie industry of the foimcr.

But, does Great Britain practise towards us upon the principle? which we are
now required to observe in regard to her.^ The exports to the United kingdom,
as appears from the same treasury statement* ju«t adverted to, during eleven
years, from 1821 to 1831. and eKclusive of the fourth quarter of the last yeai',
fall shoit of the amoutit of imports by upwards of forty-six millions of dollars,
and the total amount, when the returns of that quarter are i-eceived, will ex-
ceed fifty millions of dollars! it is surprising how we have been able to sus
tain, for so long a time, a trade so very uneciual. AVe must have been abso-
lutely ruined by it. if the unfavorable balance had not been neutralized by
more profitable connnerce with other parts of the world. Of all nations
Great Britain has the least cause to complain of the trade between the two
countries. Ourimports from that single Power are nearly one third of the
entire amount of our importations from all foreign countries together. Great
Britain constantly acts on the maxim of liuying only what she wants aiul can-
not produce, and selling to foreign nations the utmost amount she can. In
conformity with this maxim she excludes articles of prime necessity produced
by us — (^(fually if not more necessary than any of her industiy which we tax,
although the admission of those articles would increase our ability to purchase
fi-om iier, according to the ai;2unient of gentlemen.

If we purchased still less from Great liritain than we do, and our conditions
were reversed, so that the value of her imports from this country exceeded
that of her exports to it, she would only Ihen l)e compelled to do what we
liave so long done, ami what South Carolina does, in her trade with Ken-
tucky, make up for the unfavorable balance by trade with other ()laces and
countries. How does she now dispose of the one hundred and sixty millions
of dollars' worth of cotton fabrics, which she annually sells? Of that amount
the United Slates do not purchase five per cent. What becomes of the other
ninety-live per cent.? is it not sold toother Powers, and would not then-
:narkets remain if ours were totally shut? V.ould she not contimie, as she
now finds it her interest, to pinchase the raw material fr<m» us, to supply
those markets? \V(Mdd she be guilty of the folly of depriving herself of mar-

*See iippandix, E.

kets to the amount of upwards of $150,000,000, because we refused her a
market for some eight or ten millions?

But if there were a diminution of the British demand for cotton equal to
the loss of a market for the few British fabrics which are within the scope of
our protective policy, the question would still remain, whether the cotton
planter is not amply indemnified by the creation of additi(mal demand else-
where? With respect to the cotton -grower it is the totality of the demand,
and not its distribution, which affects his interests. If any system of policy
will augment the aggregate of the demand, that system is favorable to his in-
terests, although its tendency may be to vary the theatre of the demand. It
could not, f(-)r example, be injurious to him, if, instead of Great Britain con-
tinuing to receive the entire quantity of cotton which she now does, two or
three hundred thousand bales of it were taken to the other side of the chan-
nel, and increased, to that extent, the French demand. It would be better
for him, because it is always better to have several market;^ than one. Now,
if, instead of a transfer to the opposite side of the channel, of those two or three
hundred thousand bales, they are transported to the Northern States, can that
be injurious to the cotton grower? Is it not better for him? Is it not better to
have a market at home, unaffected by war or other foreign causes, for that
amount of his staple?

If the establishment of American manufactures, therefore, had the sole
eftect of creating a new, and an American, demand for cotton, exactly to the
same extent in which it lessened the British demand, there would be no just
cause of complaint against the tariff. The gain in one place would precisely
equal the loss in the other. But the true state of the matter is much more
favorable to the cotton grower. It is calculated that the cotton manufactories
of the United States absorb at least 200,000 bales of cotton annually. I be-
lieve it to be more. The two ports of Boston and Providence alone, received,
during the last year, near 110,000 bales. The amount is annually increasing.
The raw material of that two hundred thousand bales is worth six millions,
and there is an additional value conferred by the manufacturer, of eighteen
millions; it being- generally calculated that, in such cotton fabrics as we are
in the habit of making, the manufacture constitutes three fourths of the value
ol the article. If, therefore, these twenty-four millions' worth of cotton fa-
brics were not made in the United States, but were manufactured in Great
Britain, in order to obtain them, we sliould have to add to the already enor-
mous disproportion between the amount of our imports and exports, in the
trade with Great Britain, the further sum of twenty four millions, or, deduct-
ing the price of the raw material, eighteen millions! And will gentlemen tell
me how it would be possible for this country to sustain such a ruinous trade?
From all that portion of the United States" lying north and east of James
river, and west of tlie mountains, Great Britain receives comparatively
nothing. How would it be possible for th" inhabitants o( that largest portion
ot our territory, to supply themselves with cotton fabrics, if they were brought
trom England exclusively? They could not do it. But for the existence of
the American manufacture, they would be compelled greatly to curt,ail their
supplies, if not absolutely to sutler in their cimiforts. By its existence at
home, the circle of those exchanges is created which reciprocally diffuses
among all, who are embraced within it, the productions of their respective
industry. The cotton grower sells the raw material to the manufacturer- he
buys the iron, the bread, the meal, the coal, and the countless number of'ob-
jects ol his consumption, from his fellow citizens, and they, in turn, purchase
his hiorics. Putting it upon the ground merely of supplying those with ne-
cessary articles, who could not otherwise obtain them, ouglit tiiere to be from
any qiiai-ter, an objection to the only system by w liich that object ran be ac
comphshed? But can there be any tloubt, with those who will lefiect, tiiat
the actual amount of cotton consumed is increased by the home manufacture^
The main argument of gentlemen is founded upon the idea of mutual abilitv

rt^sil tino- ti-nin irtiifnnl ov/>lini.r/oo Tl.^,- ,.,»., 1.1 i\ :,,u „„ ,i.-i-. , ■- . ■'

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

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.

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

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 produc<a\^a thou-
sand speculative solutions of the fact, but the fact itself will remain undis-
turbed. Let us look into some particulars. The total consumption of bariron,
in the United States, is supposed to be about 146,000 tons, of which, 112,866
tons arc made within the country, and the residue imported. The number
of men employed in the manufacture is estimated at 29,254, and the total
number of persons subsisted bv it, at 146,273. The measure of protection
extended to this necessary article, was never fully adequate until the passage
of the act of 1828; and what has been the consequence? The annual increase
of quantity, since that period, has been in a ratio of near twenty-five per
cent, and the wholesale price of bar iron in the Northern cities, was, in 1828.
$105 per ton, in 1829, $100, in 1830, $90, and in 1831, from $85 to $75— con-
stantly diminishing. We import very little English iron, and that which we
do, is very inferior, and only adapted to a few purposes. In instituting a com •
parison between that iid'erior article and our superior iron, subjects, entirely
different, are compared. They are made by different processes. The Eng-
lish cannot make non of equal quality to ours, at a less price than we do.
They have three classes, best-best, and best, and ordinary. It is the latter
which is importexl. Of the whole amount imported, there is only about
4,000 tons of foreign iron that pays the liig-h duty: the residue paying only a
dutj' of about thirty per cent., estimated on the prices of the importation of 1829.
Our iron ore is superior to that of Great Britain, yielding often from sixty to
eighty per cent., whilst theirs produces only about twenty-five. This tact is so
Avell known, that I have lieard of recent exportations of iron ore to Enghind.*

It has been alleged, that bar iron, bein^ a raw material, ought to be admitted
tree, or with low duties, for the sake of the manufacturers themselves. But I
take this to be the true principle, that, if (»ur country is producing a raw mate ■
rial of prime necessity, and, with reasonable protection, can produce it in
sufficient quantity to supply our wants, that raw material ought to be protect-
ed, although it may be proper to protect the article also out of which it is
manufactured. The tailoi- will ask protection for himself, but wishes it de-
nied to the grower of wool and the manufacturer of broad cloth. The cotton
planter enjoys protection for the raw material, but does not desiie it to be ex-
tended to the cotton manufacturer. The shipbuilder will ask protection for
navigation, but does not wish it extended to the essential articles which enter
into the construction of his ship. Each, in his proper vocation, solicits pro-

* Se« Appendix, O, for a statcraeiit of the iron ])roduccfl in a single county, &c. &c.

tection, but would have it denied to all other interests which are supposed t©
come into collision with his. Now, the duty of the statesman is, to elevate
himself above these petty conflicts; calmly to survey all the various interests,
and deliberately to proportion the measure of protection to each, according to
its nature and to the general wants of society. It is quite possible that, in the
degree of protection which has been aftbrded to the various workers in iron,
there may be some erior committed, although I have lately read an argument
of much ability, proving that no injustice has really been done to them. li
there be, it ought to be remedied.

The next article to which I would call the attention of the Senate, is that
of cotton fabrics. The success of our manufacture of coarse cottons is gen-
erally admitted. It is demonstrated by the fact that they meet the cotton fa-
brics of other countries, in foreign markets, and maintain a successful com-
petition with them. There has been a gradual increase of the export of this
article, which is sent to Mexico and the South American Republics, to the
Mediterranean, and even to Asia. The remarkable fact was lately commu-
nicated to me, that the same individual who, twenty-five years ago, was en-
gaged in the importation of cotton cloth from Asia, for American consump-
tion, is now engaged in the exportation of coarse American cottons to Asia,
for Asiatic consumption! Ancl my honorable friend from Massachusetts, now
in my eye, (Mr. Silsbeej informed me that, on his departure from home,
among the last orders which he gave, one was for the exportation of coarse
cottons to Sumatra, in the vicinity of Calcutta! I hold in my hand a state-
ment, derived from the most authentic source, showing that the identical de-
scription of cotton cloth, which sold, in 1817, at twenty-nine cents per yard,
was sold, in 1819, at twenty-one cents; in 1821, at nineteen and a half cents;
in 1823, at seventeen cents; in 1825, at fourteen and a half cents; in 1827, at
thirteen cents; in 1829, at nine cents; in 1830, at nine and a half cents; and
in 1831, at from ten and a half to eleven. Such is the wonderful cft'ect of
protection, competition, and improvement in skill, combined! The year 1829
was one of some suffering to this branch of industry, probably owing to
the principle of competition being pushed too tar; and hence we observe a
small rise in the article the next two years. The introduction of calico print-
ing into the United States, constitutes an important era in our manufacturing
industry. It commenced about the year 1825, and has since made such as-
tonishing advances, that the whole quantity now annually printed is but little
short of forty millions of yards — about two-thirds of our whole consumption.
It is a beautiful manutacture, combining great mechanical skill with scientific
discoveries in chemistry. The engraved cylinders for making the impres-
ai»n require much taste, and put in requisition the genius of the fine arts of
oJesign and engraving. Are the fine graceful forms of our iiiir countrywomen
less lovely when enveloped in the chintses and calicoes produced by native
industry, than when clothed in the tinsel of foreign drapery.''

Gentlemen are, no doubt, surprised at these lacts. They should not under-
rate the energies, the enterprise, and the skill, of our fellow -citizens. I have
no doubt they are every way competent to accoin|)lish whatever can be cftect-
ed by any other People, if encouraged and protected by the fostering care ot
our own Government. Will gentlemen believe the fact, which I am autho-
rized now to state, that the United States, at this time, manufacture one half
the quantity of cotton which Great Britain did in 181 C! We possess thi-ee great
advantages: 1st. The raw material. 2d. Water power instead of that of steam,
generally used in Kngland. And 3d. The cheaper labor of females. In Eng-
land, males spin with the mule and weave; in this country women and girls
spin with the throstle and superintend the power loom. And can there be any
employment more appropriate.'* W\w has not been delighted with contemplat-
ing the clock-work regularity of a large cotton m-»nul;u tory? I have often vi -
sited them, at Cincinnati and other places, and always with increased admi-
ration. The women, separated from the other sex, w()rk in apartments, large,
airy, well warmed, and spacious. Neatly dressed, with ruddy complexions,
and happy countenances, they watch the work before them, mend the broken
threads, and replace the exhausted balls oi- broaches. At stated hours they
are called to their meals, and go and return with light and cheerful step. At

night they separate, and repair to their lespective houses, under the care of a
mother, guardian, or friend. " Six (hiys shalt thou labor and do all that thou
hast to do, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God." Ac-
cordingly, we behold them, on that sacred day, assembled together in His teni-
ples, and in devotional attitudes and with pious countenances, offering their
prayers to Heaven for all its blessings, of which it is not the least that a sys-
tem of policy has been adopted by their country, which admits of their obtain-
ing comfortable subsistence. Manufactures have brought into profitable em-
ployment a vast amount of female labor, which, without them, would be lost
to the country.

lu respect to woollens, every gentleman's own observation and experience
will enable him to jud^e of the great reduction of price which has taken place
in most of these articles, since the tariff of 1824. It would have been still
greater, but for the high duty on the raw material imposed for the particular
benefit of the farming interest. Jiut, without going into particular details, I
shall limit myself to mviting the attention of the Senate to a single article of
general and necessary use. "The protection given to flannels in 1828 was fully
adequate. It has enabled the American manufacturer to obtain complete pos-
session of the American market; and now, let us look at the effect. I have
before me a statement from a highly respectable mercantile house, showing
the price of four descriptions of flannel, during six years. The average price
of them, in 182G, was thirty-eight and three-quarter cents; in 1827, thirty-eight;
in 1828, (the year of the tariff) foriy-six; m 1829, thirty-six; in 1830, (not-
withstanding the advance in the price of wool) thirty-two; and in 1831, thir-
ty-two and one-quarter. Tiiese facts require no comments.* I have before
me another statement, of a practical and respectable man, well versed in the
flannel manufacture in America and England, demonstrating that the cost of
manufacture is precisely the same in both countries; and that, although a yard
of fiannel, which would sell in England at fifteen cents, would command here
twenty-two, the difference of seven cents is the exact difference between the
cost in the two countries, of the six ounces of wool contained in a yard of
fiannel.

Brown sugar, during ten years, from 1792 to 1802, with a duty of one and
a-half cents per pound, averaged fourteen cents per pound. The same arti-
cle, during ten years, from 1820 to 1830, with a duty of three cents, has aver-
aged only eight cents per pound. Nails, with a duty of five cents per pound,
are selling at six cents. Window glass, eight by ten, prior to the tariff of 1824,
sold at twelve or thirteen dollars per hundred feet; it now sells for three dol-
lars seventy-five cents.

The gentleman from South Carolina, sensible of the incontestable fact of
the very great reduction in the prices of the necessaries of life, protected by
the American System, has felt the full force of it, and has presented various
explanations of the causes to which he ascribes it. The first is the diminished
producti(m of the precious metals, in consequence sf the distressed state of
the countries in which they are extracted, and the consequent increase of
their value relative to that of the commodities for which they are exchanged.
But, if this be the true cause of the reduction of price, its operation ought to
have been general, on all objects, and of course upon cotton among the rest.
And, in point of fact, the diminished price of that staple is not greater than
the dimuniti(m of the value of other staples of our agriculture. Flour, which
commanded, some years ago, ten or twelve dollars per barrel, is now sold for
five. The fall of tobacco lias been still more. The Kite foot of Maryland,
which sold at from sixteen to twenty dollars per hundred, now produces only
four or five. That of Virginia has sustained an eaual decline. Beef, pork,
every article, almost, produced by the farmer, has decreased in value. Ought
not South Carolina then to submit quietly to a state of things, which is gen-
eral, and proceeds from an uncontrollable cause.'' Ought she to ascribe to the
"accursed" tariff what results from the calamities of civil and foreign war,
raging in many countries.''
But, sir, I do not subscribe to this doctrine implicitly. I do not believe

• See Appendix, letter H, for the woollen manuractorios in a single county.

that the diminished production of tlie precious metals, if that be the fact, sa-
tisfactorily accounts for the fall in prices: For, I think, that the augmentation
of the currency of the world, by means of banks, public stocks, and other fa-
cilities arising out of exchange and credit, has more than supplied any defi-
ciency in the amount of the precious metals.

It is further urged that the restoration of peace in Europe, after the battle
of Waterloo, and the consequent return to peaceful pursuits of lar^e masses
of its population, by greatlj^ increasing the aggregate amount of effective labor,
had a tendency to lower prices; and undoubtedly such ought to have been its
natui'al tendency. The same cause, liowever, must also have operated to re-
duce the price of our agricultural produce, for which there was no longer the
same demand in peace as in war — and it did so operate. But its influence on
the price of manufactured articles, between the general peace of Europe in
J 815, and the adopticm of our tariff in 1824, was less sensibly felt, because,
perhaps a much larger portion of the labor, liberated by the disbandment of
armies, was absorbed by manufactures than by agriculture. It is also con-
tended that the invention and improvement of labor saving machinery have
tended to lessen the prices of manufactured objects of consumption; and un
doubtedly this cause has had some effect. Ought not America to contribute
her quota of this cause, and has she not, by her skill and extraordinary adap-
tation to the arts, in truth, largely contributed to it?

This brings me to consider what, I apprehend to have been, the most effi-
cient of all tne causes in the reduction of the prices of manufactured articles—
and that is, competition. lAy competition, the total amount of the supply is
increased, and by increase of the supply, a competition in the sale ensues,
and this enables the consumer to buy at Uiwer rates. Of all human pmvers.
operating on the affairs of mankind, none is greater than that of competition.
It is action and reaction. It operates between individuals in the same nation,
and between different nations. It resembles the meeting (if the mountain
torrent, grooving, by its precipitous motion, its own channel, and ocean's tide-
Unopposed, it sweeps every thing before it; but, counterpoised, the waters,
become calm, safe, and regular. It is like the segments of a circle or an
arch; taken separately, eacli is nothing; but, in their combination, they produce
efficiency, symmetry, and perfection. By the American System tliis vast
power has been excited in America, and brought into being to act in co-opera-
tion or collision with European industry. Europe acts within itself, and with
America; and America acts within itself, and with Europe. The consequence
is. the reduction of prices in both hemispheres. Nor is it fair to argue, from
the reduction of prices in Europe, to her own presumed skill and labor, ex-
clusively. We affect her prices, and she affects ours. This must always be
the case, at least in reference to any articles as to which there is not a total
non-intercourse; and if our industry, bv diminishing the demand fov her sup-
plies, should produce a diminution in the price of those supplies, it would be
very unfair to ascribe that reduction to her ingenuity, instead of placing it to
the credit of our own skill and excited industry.

Practical men understand very well this state of the case, whether they
do or do not comprehend the causes which produce it. I have in my pos-
session a letter from a respectable merchant, well known to me, in which he
says, after complaining of the operation of the tariff of 1828, on the articles to
which it applies, some of whicli he had imported, and that, his purchases hay-
ing been made in England, before the passage of that tarifi' was known, it
produced sucli an effect upon the English mai-ket, that the articles could not
be re-sold without loss, he adds: "for it rfa//i/ appears that, when additional
duties are laid upon an article, it then l)ecomes loive}\ instead of higher^
This could not probably happen, where the supply of the foreign article did
not exceed the home demancl, unless, upon the supposition of the increased
duty having excited or stimulated i\w measure of the hon\e production.

The great law of price is determined by supply and demand. Whatever
afliects either, affects the i)rice. If the supply is increased, the demand re-
maining the same, the price declines; if the demand is increased, the supply
remaining the same, the price advances; if both supply and demand are un-
diminished, the price is stationary, and the price is influenced exactly in propwr-

tion to the degree of disturbance to the demand or supply. Itisthereforeagreat
error to suppose that an existing or new duty ?iccessart/i/ becomes a compo-
nent element, to its exact amount, of price. It the proportions of demand
and supply are varied by the duty, either in augmenting the supply, or dimin-
ishing the demand, or vice versa, price is affected, to the extent of that varia-
tion. But the duty never becomes an integral part of the price, except in
the instances where the demand and the supply remain, after the duty is in\-
posed, precisely what they were befoie, or the demand is-increaseil, and the
supply remains stationary.

Competition, therefore, wherever existing, whether at home orj abroad, is
the parent cause of cheapness. If a high fluty excites pioduction at home,
and the quantity of the domestic article exceeds the amount which had been
previously imported, the price will fall. This accounts for an extraordinary
fact stated by a Senator from Missouri. Three cents were laid as a duty upon
a pound of lead, by the act of 1828. The price at Galena, and the other
lead mines, afterwards fell to one and a half cents per pound. Now it
is obvious, that the duty did not, in this case, enter nUo the price: for it
was twice the amount of the price. W'hdi produced the fall ? It was sti-
mulated production at home, exerted by the temptation of the exclusive
possession of the home market. This state of things could not last. Men
would not continue an unprofitable pursuit^ some abandoned the business, or
the total quantity produced was diminished, and living prices have been the
consequence. But, break down the domestic supply, place us again in a state
of dependence on the foreign source, and can it be doubted that we should
ultimately have to supply ourselves at dearer rates.** It is not fair to credit the
foreign market \yith the depression of prices produced there by the influence
of our competition. Let the competition be withdrawn, and their prices
would instantly rise. On this subject, great mistakes are committed. I have
seen some most erroneous reasoning, in a late report of Mr. Lee, of the Free
Trade Convention, in regard to the article of sugar. He calculates the total
amount of brown sugar produced in the world, and then states that what is
made in Louisiana is not more than two and a half per cent, of that total.
Although his data may be questioned, let us assume their truth, and what
might be the result.^ Price being determined by the proportions of supply and
demand, it is evident that, when the supply exceeds the demand, the pric
will fall. And tiie fall is not always regulated by the amount of that excess.
If the market, at a given price, requiretl five or hfty millions of hogsheads of
sugar, a surplus of only a few hunclred might materially influence the price,
and diffuse itself throughout the whole mass. Add, therefore, the eighty^or
one hundred thousand liogsheads of Louisiana sugar to the entire mass pro-
duced in otlu'r parts of tlie world, and it cannot be doubted that a material
reduction of the price of the article, throughout Europe and America, would
take place. The Louisiana sugar substituting foreign sugar, in the home mar-
ket, to the amount of its annual produce, would Force an equal amount of
foreign supr into other markets, which being glutted, the price would neces-
sarily decline, and this decline of price would piess portions of the foreign
sugar into competition, in the United States, with Louisiana sugar, the price
of which would also be brought down. The fact has been in exact conformity
with this theory. Rut now let us suppose the Louisiana sugar to be entirely
withdrawn from the general consumption— what then would happen? A new
demand would be created in America for foreign sugar, to the extent of the
eighty or one hundred thousaiul hogsheads made in Louisiana: a less amount,
by that quantity, would be sent to the European markets; and the price w(»uld
consequently every where rise. It is not, therefore, those who, by keeping on
duties, keep down prices, that tax the People, but those who, by repealing du-
ties, would raise prices, that really impose buithens upon the People.

But it is argued that, if, by the skill, experience, and perfection, which we
have acquired, in certain branches of manufacture, they can be made as cheap
as similar articles abroad, and enter fairly into competition with them, why
not repeal the duties as to those articles: And why should wc.^ Assuming
the truth of the supposition, the foreign article would not be introduced in a
regular couri,b of trade, but would remain excluded by the possessiion of thi;

home market, which the domestic article had obtained. The repeal, therefore,
■vvoukl have no legitimate effect. But might not the foreign article be im-
ported in vast quantities, to glut our markets, break down our establishments,
and ultimately, to enable the foreigner to monopolize the supply of our con-
sumption.^ America is the greatest foreign market for European manufac-
tures. It is that to which European attention is constantly directed. If a
great house becomes bankrupt, there, its storehouses are emptied, and the
goods are shipped to America, where, in consequence of our auctions, and
our custom-house credits, the greatest facilities are afforded in the sale of
them. Combinations among manufacturers might take place, or even the
operations of foreign Governments miglit be directed to the destruction of
Gur establishments. A repeal, therefore, of one protecting duty, from some one
or all of these causes, would be followed by flooding the country w'ith the fo-
reign fabric, surcharging the market, reducing the price, and a complete pros-
tration of our manufactories; after which the foreigner would leisurely look
about to indemnify himself in the increased prices which he would be enabled
to command by his monopoly of the supply of our consumption. What Ame-
rican citizen, after the Government had displayed this vacillating policy,
would be again tempted to place the smallest confidence in the public faith,
and adventure once more in this branch of industry.''

Gentlemen have allowed to the manufacturing portions of the community
no peace; tliey have been constantly threatened with the overthrow of the
American System. From the year 1820, if not from 1816, down to this_time,
they have been held in a condition of constant alarm and insecurity. Nothing
is more prejudicial to the great interests of a nation than unsettled and vary-
ing policy. Although eveiy appeal to the National Legislature has been re-
sponded to, in conformity with the wishes and sentiments of the great majority
of the People, measures of protection have only been carried by such small
majorities, as to excite hopes, on the one hand, and fears on theotlier. Let
the country breathe, let its vast resources be developed, let its energies be fully
* put forth, let it have tranquillity, and, my word for it, the degree of perfection
in the arts which it will exhibit, will be greater than that which has been pre-
sented, astonishing as our progress has been. Although some branches of our
manufactures might, and, m foreign markets, now do, fearlessly contend with
similar foreign fabrics, there are many others, yet in their infancy, struggling
with the difficulties which encompass them. We should look a.t the ivhole
system, and recollect that time, when we contemplate the great movements of
a nation, is very different from the short period which is allotted for the dura-
tion of individual life. The honorable gentleman from South Carolina well and
eloquently said, in 1824, "No great interest of any country ever yet grew up
*'in a day; no new branch of industry can become firmly and profitably esta-
"blished, but in a long course of years; every thing, indeed, great or good, is
"matured by slow degrees; that which attains a speedy maturity is of small
"value, and is destined to a brief existence. It is the order of Providence, that
" powers gradually developed, shall alone attain permanency and perfection.
" riiusmustitbe with our national institutions and national character itself."

I feel most sensibly, Mr. President, how much I have trespassed upon the
Senate. My apology is a deep and deliberate conviction, that the great cause
under debate involves the prosperity and the destiny of the Union. But the
best requital I can make, for the friendly indulgence which has been extend-
ed to me by the Senate, and for which I shall ever retain sentiments of last-
ing gratitude, is to proceed, with as little delay as practicable, to the conclu-
sion of a discourse which has not been more tedious to the Senate tlian ex-
iiausting to me. I have now to consider the remaining of the two proposi-
tions which I have already announced. That is,

2dly. That, under the operation of the American System, the products of
our ai^riculture command a higher price than they would do without it, by the
creation of a home maiket; and, by the augmentation of wealth produced by
manufacturing industry, wliich enlarges our powers of coiisumpti(m both of
domestic and foreign articles. The importance of the home market is among
tlie established maxims which are universally recognised by all writers and
all men. Ilouever some may differ as to the lelative advantages of the ib-

reign and the home market, none deny to the latter great value and high con-
sideration. It is nearer to us; beyond the control ot" foreign legislation; and
undisturbed by those vicissitudes to which all inter-national intercourse is
more or less exposed. The most stupid are sensible of the benefit of a resi-
dence in the vicinity of a large manufactory, or a market town, of a good
road, or of a navigable stream, which connects their farms with some great
capital. If the pursuits of all men were perfectly the same, although they
would be in possession of the greatest abundance of the particular produce of
their industry, tliey might, at the same time, be in extreme want ol other ne-
cessary articles of human subsistence. The uniformity of the general occu-
pation would preclude all exchanges, all commerce. It is only m the diver-
sity of the vocations of the members of a community that the means can be
found for those salutary exchanges which conduce to the general prosperity.
And, the greater that diversity, the more extensive and the more animating is
the circle of exchange. Even if foreign markets were fieely and widely
open to the reception of our agricultural produce, from its bulky nature, and
the distance of the interior, and the dangers of the ocean, large portions of
it could never profitably reach the foreign market. But, let us quit this field
of theory, clear as it is, and look at the practical operation of the system of
protection, beginning with the most valuable staple of our agriculture.

In consitlernig this staple, the first circumstance that excites our surprise
is the rapidity with which the amount of it has annually increased. Does not
this fact, however, demonstrate that the cultivation of it could not have been
so very unprofitable.^ If the business were ruinous, would more and more
have annually engaged in it.'' The quantity in 1816 was eighty-one millions
of pounds; in 1B26 two hundred and four millions; and, in J 830, near three
hundred millions! The ground of greatest surprise is, that it has been able
to sustain even its present price \vith such an enormous augmentation of
quantity. It could not have done it but for the combined operatioji of three
causes, by which the consumption of cotton fabrics has been greatly extended,
in consequence of their reduced prices: 1st, competition; 2d, the improve-
ment of labor-saving machinery; and 3dly, the low price of the raw ma-
terial. The crop of 1819, amounting to eighty-eight millions of pounds, pro-
duced twenty-one millions of dollars; the crop of 1823, when the amount was
swelled to one hundred and seventy-four millions, (almost <louble that of
1819) produced a less sum, by more than half a million of dollars; and the
crop of 1824, amounting to thirty millions of pounds less than that of the pre-
ceding year, produced a million and a half of dollars more.

If there be any foundation for the established law of price, supply, and de-
mand, ought not the fact of this great increase of the supply to account, satis-
factorily, for the alleged low price of cotton.'' Is it necessary to look beyond
that single fact to the tarirt— to the diminished produce of the mines furnishing
the precious metals, or to any other cause, for the solution.'' This subject is well
iinderstotul in the South; and, although I cannot approve the practice which
has been introduced, of quoting authority, and still less the authority of news-
papers, for favorite theories, I must ask peimission of the Senate to read an
article from a Southern newspaper.* [Here General Hayne requested Mr.
Clay to give the name of the authority, that it might appear whether it was
not some other than a Southern paper expiessing Southern sentiments. Mr.
Clay stated that it was from the Charleston City Gazette, one, he believed,
of the oldest and most respectable prints in that city, although he was not
sure what might be its senjtiments on the question which at present tlivides
the people (»f South Carolina.] The article compiises ? full explanation of
the low price of cotton, and assigns to it its true cause — increased production.

Let us suppose that the home demand for cotton, which has been created
by the American System, were to cease, and that the 200,000t bales, which

* See Appendix, I, for the ai-ticle refeiTecl to.
•j- Mr. ('l.^t stated that he assumed tlie quantity which was g-enci-aliy computed,
but he beUevcd it much ^-eatcr, and subsequent information justifies his belief. It
appears, from the report of the Cotton Committee, appointed by the New York Con-
vention, that partial returns sliow a consumption of upwards of 250.0(>0 bales; that

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.

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<:?<rtn4'- a home market for its rich and abundant products; by
employing the water power \\*ith which we are blessed: by stimulating and
protecting our native industry, in all its forms; we shall but nourish and pro-
mote the prosperity of commerce, foreign and domestic.

I have hitherto considered the question in reference only to a state of
peace; but a season of war ought not to be entirely overlooked. We have
enjoyed near twenty years of peace; but who can tell when the storm of war
shall again break forth? Have we forgotten, so soon, the privations to which,
not merely our brave soldiers and our gallant tars were subjected, but the
whole community, during the last war, for the want of absolute necessaries?
To what an enormous price they rose? And how inadequate the supply was,
at any price? The statesman, who justly elevates his views, will look behind,
as well as forward, and at the existing state of things; and he will graduate
tiie policy, which he recommends, to all the probable exigencies which may
arise in the republic. Taking this comprehensive range, it would be easy to
show that the higher prices of peace, if prices were higher in peace, were
more than compensated by the lower prices of war, duri^ig which supplies of

all essential articles are indispensable to its vigorous, eft'ectual, and glorious
prosecution. I conclude this part ot" the argument with the hope that my
humble exertions have not been altogether unsuccessful in showing —

1. That the policy which we have been considering ought to continue to
be regarded as the genuine American System.

2. That the free trade system, which is proposed as its substitute, ought
really to be considered as the British colonial system.

3. That the American system is beneficial to all parts of the Union, and
absolutely necessary to much the larger portion.

4. That the price of the great staple of cotton, and of all our chief produc-
tions of agriculture, has been sustained and upheld, and a decline averted by
the protective system.

5. That, if the foreign demand for cotton has been at all diminished, by the
operation of that system, the diminution has been more than compensated in
the additional demand created at home.

6. That the constant tendency of the system, by creating competition among
ourselves, and between American and European industry, reciprocally acting
upon each other, is to reduce prices of manufactured objects.

7. That, in point of fact, objects within the scope of the policy of protection
have greatly fallen in price.

8. That, if, in a season of peace, these benefits are experienced, in a season
of war, when the foreign supply might be cut oft", they would be much more
extensively felt.

9. And, finally, that the substitution ot the British colonial system for the
American System, without benefitting any section of the Union, by subjecting
us to a foreign legislation, regulated by foreign interests, would lead to the
prostration of our manufactures, general impoverishment, and ultimate ruin.

And now, Mr. President, I have to make a few observations on a delicate
subject, winch I approach with all the respect that is due to its serious and
grave nature. They have not, indeed, been rendered necessary by the speech
of tlie gentleman from South Carolina, whose forbearance to notice the topic
was commendable, as his argument, throughout, was characterized by an
ability and dignity worthy of him, and of the Senate. The gentleman made
one declaration, which might possibly be misinterpreted, and, I submit to
him, whether an explanation of it be not proper. The declaration, as re-
ported in his printed speech, is, ""the instinct of self interest might have
" taught us an easier way of relieving ourselves from this oppression. It want-
*'ed but the will to have supplied ourselves with every article embraced in
" the protective system, free of duty, without any other participation on our
*'part than a simple consent to receive them." [Here General Hayne rose,
and remarked that the passages, which inmiediately preceded and followed
the paragraph cited, he thought, plainly indicated his meaning, which related
to evasions of the system, by illicit introduction of goods, which they were
not disposed to countenance in South Carolina.] I am happy to hear this ex-
planation. But, sir, it is impossible to conceal from our view the tacts that
there is great excitement in South Carolina; that the protective system is
openly and violently denounced in popular meetings; and that the Legisla-
ture itself has declared its purpose of resorting to counteracting measures-;-a
suspension of which has only been submitted to, for the purpose of allowing
Congress time to retrace its steps. With respect to this Union, Mr. Presi-
dent, the truth cannot be too generally proclaimed, nor too strongly inculcat-
ed that it is necessary to the whole and to all the par/s— necessary to those
parts, indeed, in ditterent degrees, but vitally necessary to each; and that
threats to disturb or dissolve it, coming from any of the part«, would beciuite
as indiscreet and improper, as would be threats from the residue to exclude
those parts from the pale of its benefits. The great principle, which lies at
the foundation of all free Government, is, that the majority must govern;
from which there is or can be no appeal but to the sword. That majority
ought to govern wisely, equitably, moderately, and constitutionally, but go-
vern it must, subject only to that terrible appeal. If ever one, or several
States, being a minority, can, by menacing a dissolution ot the Union, suc-
ceed in forming an abandonment of great measures, deemed essential to the

interests and prosperity of the whole, the Union, from that inoment, is prac-
tically gone. It may linger on, in form and name, but its vital spirit has fled
forever! Entertaining these deliberate opinions, 1 would entreat the patriotic
People of South Carolina — the land of Marion, Sumpter, and Pickens — of
Rutledge, Laurens, the Pinckneys, and Lowndes — of living and present
names, which I would mention if they were not living or present — to pause,
solemnly pause! and contemplate the frightful precipice which lies directly
before them. To retreat may be painful and mortifying to their gallantry and
pride, but it is to retreat to the Union, to safety, and to those brethren, with
whom, or with whose ancestors, they, or their ancestors, have won, on fields
of glory, imperishable renown. To advance, is to rush on certain and inevi-
table disgrace and destruction.

We have been told of deserted castles, of uninhabited halls, and of mansions,
once the seats of opulence and hoi^^pitalilv, now abandoned andmouldering in
ruins. I never had the honor of being in South Carolina; but 1 have heard and read
of the stories of its chivalry, and of its generous and open hearted liberality. I
have heard, too, ofthestru^glesfor power between the lower and upper country.
The same causes which existed in Virginia, with which I have been acquainted,
I presume, have had their influence in Carolina. In whose hands now are the
once proud seats of Westoyer, Curl, Maycox, Shirley,* and others, on James
river, and in lower Virginia.'' Under the operation of laws, abolishing the
principle of primogeniture, and providing the equitable rule of an equal dis-
tribution of estates among those in equal degree of consanguinity, they have
passed into other and stranger hands. Some of the descendants of illustrious-
families have gone to the far West, whilst others, lingering behind, have con-
trasted their present condition with that of tiieir venerated ancestors. They
behold themselves excluded from their fathers' houses, now in the hands of
those who were once their fathers' overseers, or sinking mto decay; their ima-
ginations paint ancient renown, the fading honors of their name, glories gone
by; too poor to live, too proud to work, too high-minded and honorable to re-
sort to ignoble means of acquisition, brave, daring, chivalrous, 7.vhat can be
the cause of their present unhappy state.^ The ""accursed" tarift' presents it-
self to their excited imaginations, and they blindly rush into the ranks of
those who, unfurling the banner of nullification, would place a State upon its
sovereignty!

The danger to our Union does not lie on tlie side of persistence in the Ame-
rican Svstem, but on that of its abandonment. If, as 1 have supposed and be-
lieve, the inhabitants of all North and East of James river, and all West of the
mountains, including Louisiana, are deeply interested in the preservation of
that Systeni, would they be reconciled to its overthrow.^' Can it be expected
that two-thirds, if not three-fourths, of the People of the United States would
consent to the destruction of a policy, believed to be indispensably necessary
to their prosperity.^ When, too, this sacrifice is made, at the instance of a sin-
gle interest, which they verily believe will not be promoted by it.^ In estimat-
nig the degree of peril which may be incident to two opposite courses of lui-
man policy, the statesman would be short-sighted who should content himself
with viewing only the evils, real or imaginary, which belong to that course which
is in practical operation. He should lift himself up to the contemplation of
those greater and more certain dangers which might inevitably attend the
adoption of the alternative course. What would be the condition of this
Union, if Pennsylvania, and New York, tliose mammoth members of our
confederacy, were firmly persuaded that their industry was paralysed, and
their prosperity blighted, by the enforcement of the British Colonial Sys-
tem, under the delusive name of free trade.^ They are now tranquil, and hap-
py, and contented, conscious of their welfare, and feeling a salutary and rapid
circulation of the products of home manufactures and home industry through-
out all their great arteries. But let that be checked, let them feel that a fo-
reign system is to predominate, and the sources of their subsistence and com-
fort dried up; let New England and the ^^'est, and the Middle States, all feel

* Aslo Shirley, >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.

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-
<lily accommodate their industry to any policy, provided, it be settled. They
supposed this was fixed, and Ihey submitted to the decrees of Government.
And the progress of public opinion has kept pace with the development of
the benefits of the system. Now, ail New England, at least in this House,
(with the exception of one small, still voice) is in favor of the system. In
1824 all Maryland was against it; now, t!ie majority is for it. Then, Louisi-
ana, with one exception, was opposed to it: now, without any exception, she is
in I'avor of it. The march of public sentiment is to the South. Virginia will
be the next convert; and, in less than seven years, if there be no obstacles from
political causes, or prejudices industriously instilled, the majority of Eastern
Virginia will be, as the majority of Western Virginia now is, in favor of the
American System. North Carolina will follow later, but not less certainly.
Eastern Tennessee is now in favor of the system. And, finally, its doctrines
will pervade the whole Union, and the wonder will be, that they ever should
have been opposed.

I have now to pioceed to notice some objections which have been urged
against the resolution under consideration. With respect to the amendment,
which tlie gentleman from South Carolina had olfeied, as he has intimated his
pur|)ose to modify it, I shall forbear, for the present, to comment upon it-
It is contended that the resolution proposes the repeal of duties on luxuries,
leaving those on necessaries to remain, and that it will, therefiire, relieve
the rich, without lessening the burthens of (he poor. And the gentleman from
.South Carolina has careiully selected, for ludicrous elfect, a number of the
unprotected articles, cosmetics, perfumes, oranges, &c. 1 must say, that
(his exhibition of the gentleman is not in keeping vvilli the candor which he
has generally di^l>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;

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-

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

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

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

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.

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

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

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

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

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

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.]

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.

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.

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

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.

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

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

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

Vv^^

V.i-

^^^#1