Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1824-02-24

fOr-ign cotton would, when il began "a, rise
abovea certain value, come into successful
| competition with IL. There could be no Doubt
he said, that the whole additional cost of the
oagging would fall on those who make the
cotton
The argument of the Speaker, that the ad-
vantage of this dnty would be reciprocal. by
the Cotton Of the South being received in the
West IN exchange for the bagging, Mr. Mob.
pronounced To be an Elusive calculation. and
made some observations to shew that th- part
oil the country which he represented was al
ready tributary 10 Kentucky for her produce.
for which his constituents paid in specie, and
not In cotton, &c. The tax wuuld be an ac-
comnodation of the West wholly at the ex-
ptnse OF the South, lift even enabled them TO
supply the bagging. But, he added, that the
South could not take their baagiop. TIL. CIV.
pense of its transportation from kentucky
would be two or three times as great as that
oil IT'S transportation from Dundee ar Inser-
ness, and thai alone would give the latter AN
advantage over The former, unless The duty On
importation should amount 10 an actual uro-
| hibifion.
IL had been already well remarked, that
the proposition for this duty introduces a
principle into Legislation which never existed
before here, and which, he ventured 10 say,
had never before been introduced into the lie.
earth. What is it? The protection of man
ufact,Ires No; not the protection, hut the
| creation OF manufactures. He called upon
gentlemen to shew in the history Of the world,
an Instance IN which any nation had passed
law TO create new sort of indusry-to give
being to what did not ALREADY exist If This
was an article, of primary necessity, in "A ma.
tIonai view, or connected with the defence of
the country, &c. he would go as far 40 any
one In support of il. But, as a question of po-
lifical ecunumy, he argued, you can only pro-
tect what exists. Here, he said was an issue
between hemp and cotton. What is cotton
large item in commerce il has formed for
number oil years, on an average, one-ihird
psrt of the cxpuris ofthe country tits an ar
tics Of wei, hit, and bulk also, and it had there
fore. contributed one-tIird uf all that our
commerce has done Ia support The naval now
or of the country. Aud now Congress were
called upon Ia adopt a system which was Ia
strike from existence thai Item, and, indeed,
every other article of expnrialion- for, he
coDtendcd, on the principles If this bill, Con-
grrss coafd not stop until e, cry article Of con-
sumption was protected. And what, SAID he.
vii be the result Yon annihilate the cun,-
merce Of the United States. The principles
ot tins bull went To an extent never before
proposed. 10 reference to The particular ar
ticic now under consideration, the House was
called upon To jeopardize the great interests
oi The cotton-growing c0nntry--In sacrifice an
interest which had contributed 10 the wealth
oi tn" Unl"n, and mainly to the growth of
me commercial emporium of the United
States, upon miserable calculation of brn,p
aud cotton bagging, which never had any
place in the productive commerce of the coun.
Try. IL there was any value in The policy of
projections, let II be- confined, al least To- what
exists. Let us hold fast Ia the sources of our
wealth, the means of our revenue, Instead of
attempting to protect that which has no ex-
istence.
After replying TO the argument of the
Speaker, respecting the effect of Competitions
and c0niending that the argument was fatal
to this very duty, Mr.. McDusie called upon
gentlemen from those states " hich have no
particular interest in the article under discus
SION, invoking them, by the highest cunsidera-
lions, to intrrpose TO preserve ore interest of
this country from being sacrificed ie the other
He trusted they would decide upon it Justly.
and without regard To any principle of com
promise. He knew there were some MEM
bers OF the House who were disposed for the
protection ut existing manufactures, who
would NOT vote for this; and he trusted that
general odiun would not be cast on the bill
by retaining in it such clauses as this, WHICH
do not properly belong 10 il.
The example Of Great Britain had been re-
ferred to IN Debate, as to the policy of pro-
tectIng domestic manufactures. To the argu-
nent afforded by her example, Mr.. McDnfie
replied, that, u we look at the population of
that country, we shall find that her agricul-
t,ire will not sustain one-third part Of her pom
nlatlon. What, then, is the principle on
which she protects manufactures? The princi-
pie Of absolute necessity. Strike away her
manufactures, and you annihilaie tho nation
ulss., IN kar l..
Seven millions of her inhabitants cease to tx
list, il her manufactures are destroyed. II is
with her question of life and death and
many Ofthe sacrifices she makes are the re-
, suit Of his necessity. Can arguments of this
sort apply tO'us, with Uur almost unDounded
territory, sparse population, &c. /?
MI. NlcDuiFie concluded his nl,serva lions by
saying that he hoped that gentleman WHO en-
gagged in this discussion would nj least treat
u with gravity becoming its Importance,
The Chairman Of the Committee Of Man
uiaciures and the gentleman from Kentucky
! ON his left (Nlr. Trimble) seemed really dis
posed to make froIic OF this discussion. Mr..
hlcDuffe entrtated them iO consider IL more
gravely, and treat IL in a manner more becom-
ing The great interests hich were at stake
u the naval power aud commerce Of the
country were te be sacrificed and entonobed
here. in This bilL he hoped the House would
, 20 through the ceremony in gafb becoming
the occasion he trusted that, ri least, they
would not n eat il with insult and nockery.
Mr.. MARVIN, OF New York, rose to add
something to the few remarks which he had
made ON this subject, the other day. He en-
tered into y Train Of reasoning, which he pUr-
sued io some length, to shew that the consumer
Oi the cotton, and not The cOiion-grower, nc
Iu'lly pays the duty on the bsgging, whether
| it be cOnsunled abroad or At MISUNDERSTANDING