The Massachusetts spy, and Worcester County advertiser. [volume] ([Worcester, Mass.]) 1825-1831, 1831-08-31

tional quantity of these manufactures and make
her profits on them, whereas with us she would
get no market for her manufactures and so
make no Proht on them. Supposing she charg :
cd proht OF 10 per cent, for instance, on her
manufactures, 1t is evident she could afford to
give any nation who would take them. & ner
cent. more for their cotton and still be n oa;per
OF per cent. by the exchange. But il seems
10 me Impossible that England could purchase
the cotton OF US, even if she could procure it
no wneTe else, without paying for it by her
manufactures. IL she did not paw us in this
way, she must pay us with specie or tho pro-
ouce OF other countries. But as she has a use
ior all the specie she can at present command.
she cannot pay us in this way unless the de.
mana Tor her manufactures should be ncre ased
III the mining countries as Mexico, &c 20 the
same amount that she purchased OF u.s. 10 OBJ
tam the additional specie required for the pur-
pose. How this demand would be created in
Inese countries by any course of trade that we
should pursue towards England | am unable to
Pe'co'e. Sne cannot pay US in the produce of
olher countries, because she wants this produce
TO supply the wants of her own people-and be-
cause we can get as much of this produce now
as we want IN other ways, by the existing course
| Oh 'fade- 1t she were to give US the produce of
! other countries, her own ships must return
an Inc additional expense of the return vovape
So that while she would diminish her crno1ts
by not being able to sell US any of her manufac-
lures, she would diminish her imports in this
way by not being able to bring home all the
produce she gets in exchange for them of those
countries where she has still a market for her
manufactures. But even if she could and would
pay us specie for our cotton, we could make no
use OF 1t, for we can get as much as we want
MIR L..
oouth Amerlca-and if we were furnished with
an additional quantity, we could do nothing
with 1t except to give it in exchange for some
Of the manufactured goods of these countries
"nlch are excluded by our existing tariff
Inc next suggestion made by YOU is that the
amount of produce raised in the United States
since 1913, has increased notwithstanding the
restrictive system. How this fact is, / have
not the means of asccrtaining. But it will be
recollected that the population of the country
has increased vastly within this period, and the
quantity of produce required to supply this ad.
dltlonal population might make the amount
now raised much greater than it was in 1919.
and still there be less quantity exported than
there was at that time. The question fairly is,
whether there is so much raised and SO much
exported on the whole at this time, as there
would be, II the manufactured articles of FOREIGN
countries could be taken in exchange for it. 1t
seems to me obviously for reasons before stated
there cannot be.
admit with you, that the main question is,
whether the same quantity Of produce, or
rather the same amount of labor, will buy as
much of the articles the farmer stands in need
OIL under the restrictive system, as if it were
not in operation Now to this question re-
ply No, it will not buy as much, except, per-
haps, OF cotton goods of certain descriptions.
AS 1t regards articles made of wool, iron, and
hemp, and the article of sugar, the same guam
tlty cannot be procured by the same quantity of
produce or the money obtained for 1t, as could
be obtained if the foreign article of tho same
KIND were admitted without protecting duty
And If these articles of domestic production
could be procured as cheap as the foreign ones
without such duty, the protecting duty in ref
erence to them, would be wholly imperative
and void, and it would be of no consequence
whether it was repealed or not. If domestic
goods could be afforded as low as foreign ones
at present without such duty, why the anxiety
shown and the efforts made for the continuance
OF the present system of protection? There
would certainly be no need of them
Having, then, shewn before, that foreign man.
ulactures can only be introduced into this coun-
try or any part oft, in exchange either directly
or indirectly for the produce Of our country, il
is evident that these foreign manufactures, if
O.
mestic ones are more beneficial for the con.
sumption this country than the domestic ones
themselves, while this continues to be the case,
Tor greater quantity of them is obtained IN
exchange FOR the produce or labor of the coun
try, than could be Of the domestic ores And
where foreign goods cannot be obtained in ex-
change for the produce Of this country, they
cannot be obtained at all, since there is no 9th.
er way OF paving for them. In such a case,
then, there would be no need of protecting do.
nestle manufactures of the same kind by any
duties whatever, since they would be required
to supply the wants of the country which could
be supplied in no other way; and let the cost
of making them be what it might, and the price
put upon them ever SO high, they must find a
sale, Tor no foreign goods could come in COM
petition with them.
have no doubt myself, then, that the pres.
ent restrictive system is injurious to every sec.
ton OF the country, and every interest in il ex-
cept those particular manufactures protected by
1t, that could not exist without it. The South
will probably be cut off by it from foreign mar
ket, where tive-sxths Of their produce would go
to supply cotton goods for the world, and con.
fined to the market of this country. which will
probably never supply much more than our own
country. And New England would be in a con-
siderable measure cut off from the market Of
The South for its produce, because they could
not take much of it in exchange fer their sta
pie articles consumed here, and pay for the man.
uactured goods they would be obliged to pur-
chase here likewise
trust, therefore, that tho Agricultural i'm
terest of the County of Worcester, impressed
with a conviction of the unius, and pernicious
operation of the existing Tariff upon their own
prosperity and that of all the other agricultural
as we'll as commercial classes of the country,
Will send such delegation to Philadelphia as
will express their views and feelings in relation
to this subject. And hope measures vii, be
taken for calling meeting Of the sriends of
free Trade throughout the Cornty, to convene
Common Pleas here, for the purpose of choos-
ing such number of Delegates as shall be
thought e1pcdient.
A FRIEND TO FREE TRADE.
1~-Sxs>~~a~s--
THE PREsIDENcY. The New York Jour
nal of Commerce names Chief Justice Mar