Alabama state intelligencer., 1831-04-06

laWt Nltno'H interfering win any flEM created by the relief law. Besides if an indy dua has felin- pushed three or nUre quarter sections has three of them m possession, he could certainly of
 them under the relief law and under the ore. empti0n law. Both acts extend 10 him certain pyi- Sieges, the one as rellnqusheT, the other set tier on public lands, and he is certainly entitled to the benehts of both. Since receiving information that this construction has been placed the law
 have wriiten to the register to inquire CT him. off clally of the existence of such construction and ns soon as receive an answer, shall write on to le Secretary Of the Treasury and protest against ihe
 interpretation of the al variance with is most ob- yions provisions For the iniormatn of the public, 1 will publish his reply as soon il is received.
 should present, iellow-oitizens very imperfect outline of lle proceedings of Congress, not to bestow particular attention the tarlii-a subject at all times unpleasant because so intimately con nected with sense of continued wrongs and inju- rles received from brethren in other sections of The country. This Iaeasure, though frequently dis cussed, seems 10 be almost beyond the reach oi legs
 laiive concession compromise. While one DOT
 on of the Union ylews the protecting policy in- dlsPenshle ie helr pr9speriy and interest another reduce the planting states 10 the humble condition of "hewsrs of wood and drawers of water, for the bencf; of purse proud manufacturing arisocracy.
 The advocates of this system fell0w-citlzens lave been so gradual and it's operations indirect that few have examined it's tendencies, and calculated its injustice In what does il consistl In layng taXes | Ill the shape of dues ranging from len to two hun dred and twenty-five per cent on ariicleso o necessa- " consumption, imported from abroad, tor the aVoW- ed object of giving encouragement to ihe ilanuiac- turers of these articles a hone Yes, ielowoilzens, for sugar, coffee, salt, iron, and cotton bagsing, m fact every artIcle of indispensable necessity imported into the country, taxed ID order to raise he prlce, and by that enhancement of pT1ce, t0 render the manufacture of similar articles, profitable to those who have made investments o capital III such enler- | Iluon what of country do tlie weight of these duties fall Certainly mol upon those DOT | tions engaged Tn manufacturing labor; but upon those who, like the southern States. manufacture none of these articles, and who from their very coll dition are, necessarily consumers of them 30 lar these operate at all upon the tarlh States, they operate as bountes-whiie upon us they ali with the full weight of legislative buaiens In pro- portion the pfice of manufactured goods are ll- creased by the imposition oi dues IS manufacturing
 labor enhanced in value at the expense oi tie sUut- ern people, who having thelr capital vested Tn a- rcultura pursuits can manufacture none Of these aI | ticles and therefore, compelled to purchase
 them, at increased prlce. To illustrate tbls proposition let Us suppose that lie hat-nakeis Ill Ala bama, dissatisfied wnn the orolnmy prohs oi iaboi | and like the northern manufacturers, believed that l they were not making money as last us they could wish were to petition the legislature to lay duty O
 five dollars upon every hat brought into tie State for l sale. What would be the effect oi granting tis un- righteous requestl The merchant who paid tie dh7
 y of five dollars, would add five dollars to the piice of the hat Hats which selling at ten dollars would sell at fifteen. Tine hat-maker who furnished hats of the same quality, instead of selling them at the old price of ten dollars, would Immaculate ly demand of you fifteen dollars the market price and while you would be compelled to pay t,e dollars more for ihe hat his labor n making tie hat would ne enhanced precisely to the ene'su' oi live d0dis' Il What, tnen IS tax the hat buyer, operates as an unjust bounty the hat-naker. Sucn Is precisely the operation of the whole system, as between the manufacturing, and the southern States; and ths view of the subject explains the eageness with wnch some poltons oi the Union are perpetually camoring for an increase of taxes the greatest of blessings, while otners in the most earnest but hum ble manner, have begged for their reduction.
 But we are sometimes told by the apologlsts of this system of legislative plunder that the effect of duties lessen not to the price of these tlces; and as proof oi it, goods never sold cheap as they do Ut this time. To believe this, would De to admit the absurdlty, that the manufacturers, bent
 on their own desructlon were contlnualy petition ing for increase of dutes although the effect of these duties would be to lessen the price of their own labor; and that the merchant, although he pays an average duty of lortyive dollars in the hundred in addition to the first price of his goods, afford to sell them cheaper than if he paid no such duty
 It is said we can buy more with dollar now than I we could ten years ago. Grant it. but this result
 has been produced by adequate causes, even Tn de- spite of the tariff by condition oi universal peace linen having abandoned their arms and returned to workthereby lessenlng The aggregate price of la Dor throughout the woIld--by Improvements Ill ma chinery, which has essened the cost of production, and by the great reduction of paper money us the circulating medum-thereby enhancing the value of money. To test the effect of this system on prices, we should inqIire not whether we can purchase goods as cheap now us could ten years ago, but, whether we can purchase them cheap we could if the duties were taken oh Ii prices are not in creased by the tariff the very object of 1t IS defeat
 at the abolition of all duties. The most important ques- ton to the people Of Alabama IS, not whether we can buy much with dollar now, when we have but few dollars to give, we could ten years ago when money was plenty, but whether we can at this l time buy as much for bale of cotton as we could ten years ago. If we can buy us much we are just T us well of when cotton was selling at thirty cents. It Is matter oI no concern to whe- tler get ten thirty cents for our cOtton provd- ed we can buy much for the ten cents as we used to purchase with the thirty But the very fact that we cannot, proves that labor in making cotton IS reduced more in price than the labor of those l employed in manufacturing goods. The very es- sence of complaint is, that while our cotton has faen in price, the tariff has prevented manufactur- ed goods from cheapening in the same proportion
 | But, fellOw-citlzens, the inevitable tendency oi this system of oppression, consists not only ln en- hancng the price of manufactured articles, but in depressing the price of our cotton. So that the southern people sustain double injury-one in com mon with the other consumers, the other operating upon then exclusively as producers Who are tue purchasers of our cotton? The entire crop may be estimated at near million of bales-England and France purchase of this the rise of eight hundred thousand bales--England much tic largest portion. The remaining balance sold tothe manufacturers of the north. Is there any proposition more evident than that England, our best customer, cannot buy our cotton without selling her manufactured goods; and that 50 long as the tariff operates in excluding English manufactures from market we are driv-