The Arkansas advocate., 1831-10-05
LITTLE. ke:1fA A VEDNEsDA1, oc'ToBER 5 1881.

} Ger to understand where the burdcn i,
 reality ultimately falls, falls ol that sunnosl
 ton 10 consider the protective, CT. as if,
 friends call 1t, the American System
 under its three-lold aspect of taxation oi protection, and Of distribution; or. al
 performing at the same time the seyera
 functions of giving q revenue to the G sernment, Of aiiording protection to cer tam branches Of domestic industry, ans furnishing it's appropriations; all o which are so blended ii their effects that It ls impossible 10 understand its true operation, without taking the whole into the estimate.
 Admitting then, as supposed, that he who consumes the article pays the tax lh the Increased price, ard that the bur- den falls wholly on the consumers, with out affecting the producers as a class. (which, by the by, is far from being true 1 except in the single case, if there be such one, where inc producers have a monopoly of an article, so indispensable ollie, that the quantity consumed can not be affected by any increase of price, and that considered in the light of tax merely, the impost duties fall equally on every section in proportion to its pop ulation--still when combined with it's other effects, the burden it imposes, as a tax, may be SC transferred from one section to the other, as to take it from one and place it wholly on the other.- Let us apply the remark to its operation as a system of protection.
 he tendency Of the tax. or duty. ot, the imported article is, not only to raise It's price, but alse, in the same propor ton, fliat of the domestic article of the sai11ic kl.s.d, ife. which purpose, when in- tended for protection, II is in fact laid {: and Of course, in determining where the system ultimately places the burdenin reality, this effect also must be taken in- to the estimate. Ii one of the sections exclusively produces such domestic ar tleles, and the other purchases them from it, then it is clear that, to the amount of such increased prices, the tax or duty on the consumption of foreign articles, would be transferred from the section producing the domestic articles to the ore that purchased and consumed them, unless the latter, in turn. be in- demnltled by the Increased price. Of tAe objects of it's industry, which none will venture to assert to be the case with the great staple of the country, which form the basis of our exports, the price of which regulated by the foreign and nof the domestic market. To those who grow them, the increased price of the foreign and domestic articles both. in consequence of the duty on the former, is in reality, and in the strictest sense, d tax, while it is clear that the ncreas- ed price of the latter acts as bounty to the section producing them, and that as the amount of such increased prices, on what itsells to the othersection is great CT or less than tie duty it pays on the imported articles, the system willin fact operate as q bounty or tax; if greater, the difference would be a bounty ifless, a tax.
 Again, the operation may be equal inevcry other respect and yet the pres sure of the system, relatively, on the two sections, be rendered very unequal by the appropriations or distributions If each section receives back what it paid into the treasury. the equality if ii previously existed viii continue; but if one receives back less and the other proportionally more than is paid, then. fI, n T; ff,ropco in ralafio,, f<> fho will be 10 the former loss and the lat ter gain; and the system in this aspect would operate to the amount of the diff ference. as contribution from the one receiving less than it paid to the other that receives more. Such would be in- contestibly its general effects taken in all it's different aspects, even on the the ory supposed to be the most favorable to prove the equal action of the sys- tenn, that the consumer Iaysi in the first l instance the whole amount of the tax. To show how, on this supposition, the burden and advantages of the sys- tern would actually distribute them selves between the sections, would car ry me too far into details; but feel as sured, after full and careful exan,i,;,-
 tion, that they are such as to explain
 what otherwise would seem inexplica- ble, that one section should consider ifs
 repeal a calamity and the other bles-
 sing; and that such opposite views should be taken by them, as to place
 them in state of determined conflict ir relation to the great fiscal and conner eial interests of the country. Indeed