Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1830-05-28

dz, imported for consumption. How then, are the
burthens imposed by this Govern:rent-regardng the
impost duties mere system OF revenue-dsu hut
ed among the various States and sections Of this Union?
If shall succeed in shelving that the States engag-
ed in the production Of cotton, tobacco and rice,
taxed by the Federal Government in proportion the
amount of their export il will follow that those States
very nearly two-hirds of the whole of tho
Fedora revenue. II will also PILLOW, that the States
engaged in the production OF cotton and rice alone with
population Of little than millions, pay more
than one half of that revenue. | aware, sir, that
these propositions calculated 10 sartle those who
have not examined the subject a,tentivcy. Gentlemen
will think il scarcely possible that any population in
the world Could have existed, in olcrabe comfort
der such a weight of taxes. | Will proceed then, to
the proof of the proportion. that the exports Of tho
planting States indicate the proportion of Federal tixes
pail by these States taking fairly into view the entire
operation Of our fiscal system. And beg that those
gentlemen who are in favor ct the existing policy Will
examine my argument critically, and If they detect
any fallacv in it, That they will expose it TO this
mi'ee. My sincere desire is to arrive at the truth.
~ am in error IL Is my anxious wish that he
clearly pointed out very important, issues may proba
blv hang upon il,
productions in n,er ships, AMI import, in the
way the merchandise obtaire in exchange for it, would
any doubt exist that they ualy paid ioo the Trea-
sury amount OF taxes prorooaed TO their exporiss
Exporting productions to the Of thirty seven
millions OF dollars they would pay, assuming he
erage rate Of the du,i-s at forty per cent, Sl4
500, 000 while the States producing cotton ard rice
would pay twelve millions. Now, a, the importing
merchant is nothing mere than the agent of the plan
|
clearly p"rc iyed by dispensing with This agency
II tends confuse he inquirer, by Keeping ont OF view
the real parties 20 the proceeding The merchant
'rain'y bears his share of the burhens of
Federal taxaon hut the burthens of The planter are
in degree diminished by that fact assume, then,
that the planter is subjected 10 precisely the same bur-
them as planter, that he would be il he had NJ fac
tor commercial ageu but exported his own produce
himself aud imported what he obtained for il abroad.
Why then is il denied that he taxed in PROMOTION 10
the amount of hs ezporl 1t i'dsnied, Mr.. Chairman,
upon the assumed ground that the producer pays no
rart OF the tax, pr1dcer, hut that the Who'll. bur-
then falls upon the of the article subjected
TO impos, duties. Now, although shall hereafter
attempt to shew, the condition of the planter would be
ve7Y little better, even il II were true tina, the
mer rad IN whole tax, yet deem il important To re-
flute the common that indirect taxes, laid upon
production, fall ultimately and exclusively consuinp-
ton. ! know, Sir, that ndirec, taxes do not excu-
sively Testupon those classes from whom they actu-
ally levied. But upon what principle Of
mon sease can it be maintained that part OF Them
rests there?
Such an id,a would have been INDUCED for a
but for the disguised form in which tax
alton operates upon the community. To strip the sub
-c, stil further OF the disguise and confusion which
It i. enveloped will advance another step in the pro-
cess OF sinpihcatou maintain then, tina. an import
duty imposed upon these articles OF To- cgn merchandise
which receiv ed exchange the dome site produce
tons Of the planting States, is precisely equivalent i'm
the existing state OF our commercial relations ex-
port duty levied upon the productions of those States
very brief examination OF the actual of our COM
with Europe will satisfy the House that those ar
tices of merchandise which imported princi-
pally from Great Britain, France, and Holland, in
change for our cotton tobacco and rice are the ONLY
articles which can he obtained in hose countries the
productions send them. Wha:evtrimpost duty you
impose must sill continue to import the mercha1-
dise which il is levied, until the duty reaches the
point OF prohibition am aware that notion prevails,
and have recently seen it gravey mantanedi in
Der of the North American Review that il were to
prohibit absolutely aud entirely the importation of all
those articles which import from Europe in ex-
change for cotton, that Great Britain and France
would still continue purchase the quantity of that
tt haln fha a..
stead OF paying for il with me rchandise they would pay
for it with money This is argument OF plausi-
bili'y and may impose upon persons unacqu,ined with
the laws of commerce. and the functions OF money But
TO all familiar with these important subiects il
appear in other Sh than and palpable
ahsurdy. What, Sir s between nations hut
mutual exchange OF those articles Of intrinsic value
which are mutually produced and consumed by the ma
ons no carry it on? Great Britain for example,
purchase cotton, without giving for ii directly
Indirectly, the pro AUCTIONS OF her industry Having
mines Of gold and silver she pay in those
tails, until she obtains them fro other country in
exchange for the productions OF her industry. But
unless your duties increase the demand OF the countries
having gold and silver Mines for British merchandise
and also the demand OF the commercial world for spe ce
Great Britain neither sell any goods to the min
ing countries nor purchase any more specie from them
than she did before your prohibition. Your refusal to
take any hing but specie for British merchandise, there
FORE sTefu'nr TO take thing but that which she
not give. But the inquiry does not stop here. Suppose
Great British had inexhaustble mines of the precious
meals? There would still he wanting of the ndis-
change, to render il advantageous for us TO receive
specie in return for produce. We have no use
: for any specie, than we already possess. II
would he extreme folly to think Of importing specie
az an article Of consumpon in the United States. We
can neither eat it IL. IL il not article
'ha wsn'tor cOnsumpon Is principal use is the
ha's OF our circulating medium and for that purpose
The supply IL already ample which derive from our
direct trade with !h. mining countries Suppose the
staple States 10 import annually such consumate
folly may be imputed TO them, thirty, twenty
millions OF spaeio. What would they do with in OF
what value would We 10 heni We should have no de-
nand for hiieih part Of il in the United States
To what country then. should export II? To Mexico
or South America! They are the cOuatres from which
il originally To Great Britain, or France or Ho.
land? These the countries from which, upon the
supposon, should receive it, But even if we could
find foreign demand for this specie. what article could
we receive in exchange for IT, that excluded by
the principle Of your prOhb,ory systeml Sir, is by
conounding specie AZ article OF with spe-
Gle the representative of value that public yri-
tiers have fallen into the strange delusion which have
thus attempted TO expose. Specie article NJ trade
Is subject to the laws that apply any other ari-
Gle Of commerce. Iii only between The nation that
produce It., and those which require for actual USE
that It can be article Of profitable trade. between
all oilers, can other purpose than ha of
common circulating medium, by which the accidental
balances OF their annual eschlnges may be adjusted
and paid. | hihk, then, have sbewn that the only
articles receive sdvanageousy from the coun-
tries which consume agricultural s'aples are those
which produced by the industry of those Countries
the design Of the prohbiIory system TO exclude alto