The Massachusetts spy, and Worcester County advertiser. [volume] ([Worcester, Mass.]) 1825-1831, 1828-04-23

On the whole, this minimum is placed at a
point where it'cannot fail in its practical opera
ton, to increase the embarrassments of those it
processes to relieve. It ought not, therefore, TO
be in the bill. The grent business of the coun
try does not range above the minimum OF 81 80,
aud, although there is much show of legislative
machinery above that, vet, it is almost unm-
portant. | shall not, therefore, trouble the
Committee with any remarks in reference to
IT, having shown, IS think, that the bill is OBJ
iectionable in two of its most essential features
ought not to pass unnotieed an argument Of
the gentleman from New York, [Mr. Wright
which was urged in support of it. The gentle
man said he considered it as proved, that the
/ manufacturer here could furnish cloth as cheap
as it could be afforded in England, provided he
/ could obtain the raw material on as good terms.
! He then estimated wool to cost here 60 per
cent. more can in Europe, az instituted an in
quiry to ascertain how much more yard of
cloth cost by reason of the additional expense
of wool, considering all other things as equal
between the American and English manufac-
turers. Having ascertained how much per
cent. the American manufacturer lost in this
way, he then inquired into the duties proposed
to be assessed upon imported goods, TO see
whether he had not a full equivalent by the pro-
lection thus afforded and, if | understood him
right, his figures show that greater per centage
was imposed in duties upon imported goods,
than would be lost by the manufacturer, in the
extra price he has to pay for wool, and thence
4 be concluded, that the provisions of The bill
were sufficient and ought to satisfy the manu-
! tacturer for the duties are more than an offset
/ to the increased price OF wool There are two
objections to this argument. In the first place,
I it assumes that wool viii remain at its present
prices in our market, although the farmer pro-
tests that he cannot afford it at these prices If
it should rise, as the frmer confidently expects,
! the rate of duty on c0hs will not rise with it,
and the proportions will be at once changed
and the balance may be found on the other side,
when there will be no protection. Secondly, II
proves too much for The same process of fig
ures will show that the law, as it now is affords
sufficient protection; md, therefore, that nc
legislation is necessary, The data assumed is
that wool here is worth 65 per cent. mo:c than
IN England, and that the wool is helf the value
of the cloth What in England costs dollar
is worth here one dollar and sixty five cents
Now suppose the wool in yard Of cloth to cost
a dollar and siXty-hye cents, the cloth itself is
worth three dollars and thirty cents, or double
that sum. This yard of cloth, as will appear by
I figures win cost the manufacturer thlfty-twe
and half per cent. more than it would if he
had the wool on the same terms as the English
manufacturer but the duty imposed on goods
as the law now is, is at least thiry-six and two
thirds per cent. and, therefore, affords greater
protection than the loss occasioned by the eX
ira price of wool. Yet, the gentleman admits
that the present law is insufficient. He admits
that both the manufacturer and wool grower
are depressed, and need The aid of the Govern
ment. The argument clearly proves too much
| and is tallaclouS as it leads to conclusions in
consistent with admitted premises, we cannot
therefore, rest upon it, as furnishing any suifi
Gent grounds for believing that the objection:
which have been taken against the bill are
invalid
The industry of our country ought not only
to stand on good footing as that of foreign
countries, but better. 1t is wise policy, ant
sanctioned by the practice of all prosperou:
commercial and manufacturing nations, to give
a reasonable protection and encouragement Il
home industry. 1t is indispensable to safety
and success. We have heard much of the
boosted free trade of England 1t is held out il
bold relief as an example of hberality meritng
imitation. The admirers of this system, who
are probably gratifed with it because it is Eng.
llsh, speak of it as if English industry was ex
posed TO free unrestrained competition with
all its rivals. Not so. England, with all hen
capital, skill, enterprise, and power, with al
her vast means of production which enables hel
iAob O44iJ W supply Ill6 UOBie But 10 OK
port woollens more largely than any other ma
ton, dare not expose this gigantic branch of in
dustry to free unconditional competition
: She protects 1t by duty of fifteen per cent or
the value OF goods in her own market not be
cause she enriches her treasury dollar by it
) not because her population use yard of for
| eign cloth but to secure her market from those
destructive fluctuations which would result
: from an influx Of foreign goods, whenever, from
the pressure OF the times, sacrifice of propert,
becomes Indispensable 1t is to save her from
participation in the distresses of France ant
) Germany, when there is a pressure in the mon
ey markets OF those countries. This is a wise
: and beneficial policy, as will appear by examin
ing II practically. Suppose for example, tina
we manufacture ;520.0GO 600 worth of woollen
, annually, which is full supply for our market
: There IS surplus of the same kind of goods il
5 the English market, which the holders mus
! dispose OF, and they throw in upon our $50 900
: O0O, S2,OUO,O0O. We then have surplus O
, ten per cent and goods must fall that much al
? ieast loss is occasloned to both parties VIZ
Z lose %2,VUO,000, while our competitor loses bu
: $2OO,OUO Nothing can illustrate more stronc
} y the wisdom OF giving to every branch of in
! dustry, some advantage over foreign connect
, ton, which will enable it to withstand Oh,
! changes OF the foreign market, and free it from
participation IN their distresses We ourh
; not to be satisfied, therefore, in placing oul
; manufactures on as good basis as the English
) but we should give them reasonable protection
J Having with as much brevity as possible
, touched upon the leading objections.to the bill
VIII barely advert to some of the ADVANTAGE.
which will result to the country from the en-
actDent of a salutary law, Ii was formerly as
serted that the navigation of the country woulc
be injured by the adoption of such measure
That opinion has, in great measure, been cor
: fected by an examination into the subject i
) IS certain, that much more tonnage will be EN-
: pioyed In transporting to this country, oil, dye
stuHs' ana other articles consumed by the man
uaclurefs, tnan is necessary TO transport all tht
woollen fabrics annually consumed in The comn
/, try Tonnage will, therefore, be increased a,
manufacturing increases. But this is not all