Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1819-06-08

But II remains to be siiewn " hat induce
ment our usual customers will have to
take our products, IT we refuse to receive
their manufactures. A great deal of the
trade between nations is trade of barter.
Each country has some advantage from
climate, soil or situation, which enables
IL 10 engage in certain. branches of en-
ploynieDt with peculiar profit. The di-
rect exchange Of such articles as each
produces is an operation of reciprocal
dement,. Such is the nature OF trade, or
II would soon cease. Let one of the par
lies, however, decline 10 take III exchange
the commodities of the other, and the lie
OF interest that united them is dissolved.
Other markets will be sought where ST.
m!lar relations will be established.
HE question can our manufactures
prosper, Is one merely of individual i'm
teresi. Why is it in obedience to this
law that land is cultivated and manuiat-
lures neglected The amsw is al hand:
II Is that more can be made by such an
application of our capital and industry.
La this as III every other similar case, the
Tree and voluntary pursuit of individual
advantage Is the sure means oil PRONE
ing natonal wealth. Nature has herself
pointed out that Agriculture should be
The leading pursuit Of our country, de-
cause we possess boundless and fertile
lands that are cultivated with little la
Dor and expense of capital. Agriculture
must, therefore, yield the largest return
for our Industry and capital, or il would
cease 10 engross 80 large share of both
Attempts have been made, however, TO
prove that the policy ofGrcat Baitain in
protecting her manufactures deserves 10
be copied toy us; but in what circum
stances can The slightest parallel he found?
l. II III her dense population, her inn
meDse capital, her limited territory Is
not The reverse OF all this applicable to
us Now shift the population of the two
countries, and the industrious habits and
pursuits of both will be reversed. We
would become manufactures and the
manufacturers of gland, Scotland and
Ireland would become agriculiurisis.
But we are told that Great Britain re.
turRs 10 US theraw material of Cotton al.
most intellectually augmented in value,
and that this ~ a prohi, from the working
OF II up, entirely lost 10 us. But iIle true
state OF the question is, what are the ,ela
tive quantities OF labor aud capital res.
pectiyely engaged in these branches of
industry Ii the problem Is TO be reduced
TO one of political arithmetic, these are
properly among its elements. L; she, rs
Is asserted, levles a tribute OH us i'm the
shape of all annual remittance of specie,
anu that thlS is derived from the superior
value she gives 10 the rude material by
her manufacturing skill and capital -
surely II Is OF some Importance TO COM
pare and ascertain the quantity of labor
and capital lie Two nations respectively
employ, TIE one IN the raising. the other
In ibe manufacturing of cotton. If she
were 10 add even a hundred fold 10 the
value OF tie raw material. still she EN-
P'oys proporlIOnatc amount OF labor
and capital Ia manufacture her cotton i'd
brlcs. Now we employ d far less quaint
~ OF both 10 grow the cotton that we ex-
change Tor her manufactures, and this
may put The Two countries in this respecd
OIL level. The profit on The use Of CAPT
tai must be IN proportion TO the amount
invesied-ibe reward of labor must bear
a like proportion. Now i; is simply be-
cause we have not as large capital as
Great Britain Is able to invest in manu-
iaclures, thai we are content, and in fact
are Obliged, 10 employ less capital in
the cultivation of land. The productive
powers OF the soil stand in The tIace of
this deficient capital Ii is thus that ma
ture points irrcsislitly 10 thai employ.
operates with the interests of individuals
TO Increase the sum of national wealth.
Suppose now Tor moment that by Iegis
laiive interference We should succeed in
forcing manufactures, shall we be able 10
convert a large part OF our agricultural
mo manufacturing capital without a
much greater loss than any that Tan be
sustained VI our manu- iacIures are aban-
d0ned What Is 10 be done with our cot
ton fields, aud how shall We succeed i'm
putting the dlsiaff aud spindle into the
hands OF our slaves Ibid.
NO. III.
We have endeavortd 10 prove that Ma.
ture eIdIcates Agriculture as the primary
and most profitable pursuit of our ci,i-
Zens anu until all our most fertile terri
tory is fnlly peopled, manufactures can
moi, III the nature of things, attract an,
considerable portion OF our capital and
industry We should behold HE manu-
featuring interest tlUurIshing indeppud-
emily OF legislative protection, If such AN
application of our labor promised to Weld
a higher return than agriculture. Nature
herself has sci limits to our enterprise in
tins respect, and the barriers that she has
placed are not 10 be overthrow b, the
policy of man. II is "a question, we repeat.
of relative profit. The value Of labor is
higlierln agriculture Than in manufactures,
aud Tins determines its direction.
we are itJd, however, that the power
OF labor-savIng machinery makes Tie high
price or superior value Of our labor a
circumstance OF little consequence TO
The progress of manufactures but this
brings ns back 10 thevcry same point, for
what are these mechanical inventions but
the value Oiso much labor and capital
accumulated IN the course of years OF
progressive Improvement The aues.
ton thenls this, can we afford TO erect
Tue machinery at no greater Gust, admit