Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1824-03-23

AZ" al" war; "hen capital, having no employ
mcnt IN commerce, was employed by the labor
saving machine. We are told the price has
been diminished since the peace, and so has the
value OF almost every other manufacture-iti is
the inevitable consequence of peace.
The honorable Speaker need not trouble him.
self about the "quo dnimo" of the act imposing
a duty upon cotton. Its cultivation was inevi-
table, with or without our law; it was the labor.
saving machine operating, not only indirectly
upon, and giving an impulse to, the industry OF
the world; the cause of the cultivation of the
cotton OF the South lies deeper than the surface
of our statute book.
But we arc told, our manufacturers are" cry
ing out to us for protection" This, Sir, is not a
question about Leghorn bonnets and our other
interests OF minor Importance. Gentlemen
would find less difficulty with measures of that
character. The origin of the measure propo-
sed, lies in another direction the question was
raised and IS persisted in by aportion ofour most
wealthy manufacturers If gentlemen will take
the trouble to examine the memorials, they will
ind, among those most prominent in" CRYING
out for protection" the name of Mr.. Slater, a
very respectable Englishman: one of the oldest
and most wealthy manufacturers in the country
one who has enjoyed a very large portion OF
this Legislative protection but who appears to be
still unsatisfied, and in his memorial, strenuously
recommends to us the policy of his native coun-
try; although his countrymen, after two centu-
rics experience, pronounce it to be a &c system
of error or a system of abusc.n
But, TO the question. What, in the aggregate.
is the measure proposedo To prohibit the i'm
portation of manufactures and other articles to
the vale of about thirty millions of dollars.
1t IS true, that we are told that a~certain portion.
but that small, will not be prohibited for some
time to come. The bill is admirably framed TO
accomplish the object in view, which is, as we
have been very frankly told by the Chairman of
the Committee to restore our country to that state
OF unparalleled prosperity it enjoyed during the
late Wharf.-The only period when, as he saws, our
manufactures were efficiently protected.
Is not this an undisguiscd war upon the COM
mcrce ofour country?
Suppose the government of Great Britain
had, by an order in council, threatened thus sud-
denly to destroy the employments of our mari
ners, to disturb an existing channel o four indus
try, and force its capital into manufactures
measure, in its operation, precisely similar to
that now proposed We should promptly resist
it, not only as violating our national rights, but
as inJuring the aggregate interests of our coun-
try. And yet, when we are called npon to per-
form n corresponding act upon ourselves, we are
very gravely told it is ~salutary amp wise.
1t is not necessary to advert to the practices
OF other governments, nor TO indulge in abstract
reasoning. The industry of evcry country must
be regulated and protected according to the cir
cumstances and condition of the country.
There IS nothing In our condition to REQUIRE
that we should, at this late day, search the duty
records of France and England, to mould our
laws In absurd conformity to their ancient sta
tutes-nothing to induce us to initiate the We
nerable tollics OF every age and every country.
There is neither wisdom, honor, nor profit, in a
counteryailing war of permanent monopoIies.
The prosperity of nations depends on their
natural advantages, and their constitutional Sc
curity of property and right. Measures, viola
ting either the one or the other, injure the ag-
gregate interests of the country. Such is the
character of the measure now proposed. The
manufacturing capital of a nation is formed
through the silent and compound accommodations
OF trade and navigation. When these channels
are permitted to contribute their accommodations
IN a natural way, the three branches flourish
together. Such is the actual condition ofthincs
IN New England, which is, and must continue
to be, IN defiance OF all our laws, the manufac-
turing district of this country. We may, by our
measures, accelerate the transfer of capital
from trade and navigation into the channel of
manufactures; but VIC shall not thereby employ
the most salutary means of enlarging our man
ufacturing industry, while we shall essentially
lnJure other and important interests.
There is nothing in the condition of oIr coun-
try calling for such Il measure. 1t is true that
in some portions there is distress; but gentle
men have mistaken the remedy. The measure
proposed will contribute no relief to the Interior:
the capital to he employed in these new manu-
features Is already gathered in the East; and,
wherever that accumulation exists, there must
be the theatre of the operation of this measure.
the causes of the distress of the interior
have also been mistaken. They arc, in some
measure, incidental TO every new country; but
they are also to be attributed to errors i'm legis-
lation-nOt here, but elsewhere. Wherever
laws agitate the security of property and right,
confidence is anniliilated, industry cannot flou-
risll.
We cannot view the industry of our country
in the aggregate, nor contemplate its astonish-
ing march during the last forty years, without
feeling satisfied of the wonderful influence of
constitutional government upon the industry of
nations. 1t is to this great cause, and not 10 a
ny of our ingenious regulations. that our rapid
national growth is to be attributed. In super
intending the operations OF industry in Il country
like ours, embracing every climate, every pro-
d%uction, every art, and every science, we should
cautiously abstain from any legislative act cal
culated to agitate its movements, lest we should
arrest Il wheel or disturb the harmony ofso mag
ni6cent a work.
But, continued Mr.. G. we are told that all
branches of industry have an equal claim to pro-
tectiou-that our Southern agricultural inter
est and OR commercial interest, have shared
the peculiar favor and protection ofgoyernment,
while our manufacturing interest has been ne
elected, and we are now called upon to legis-
late on the basis ofreciprocity.
Although this argument has been urged with
invinciblc gravity, yet, rs it regards our agri-
cultural interest, it cannot be deemed worthy a
serious reply. Our agricultural interest, i'll no
section of our country, has never been the sub
ject ofthis sort oflcgislative protection. What
o.o. $780, - -. A.. -.-.I4... - ,-- l.