The Massachusetts spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1831-1858, 1832-03-14


five purchased from Great Britain still less
than We do, and our conditions were reversed,
SO that the value OF her imports from this
country exceeded that Of her exports 10 II, she |
would only then be compelled to do what we !
have SO long done, and what South carolina |
does, in her trade with Kentucky, make up
for the uniavorable balance BY trade wih DINER
placss and countries. How does she no" ois-
nose III the one hundred ana sixty millions OF
dolIars' worth Of cotton fabrics, which she an
on,llr cells Orthat amount the United States
do not purchase five per cent. What becomes
Of Tho other niuety.five per cent: Is it moi
e,ld 10 other Powers, and would not their mar
ks,s remain if ours we're totally shut Would
she mn, continue. as she now finds it her
interest. TO purchase the raw material from us.
IN sonnly those markets Would she be gull
,v of The folly Of deprivng herself of markets
10 the amount of upwards Of Sl50,0O0,0 600, he
cause we refused her hiathet LOT some eighi
or ten millions
Rnt IL there were diminution Of tho Brit
;sh demand Cor cotton equal to the loss of a
MARKET for the few British fabrics which are
within the scope Of our protective policy, the
question would still remain, whether the cotton
Il. ,tcr is not amply indcmnified BY the crea-
lion of additional demand elsewhere With
respect to the cetton grower if is The tGfatty OF
The demand, and not lis distribution, which at
feels his interests. If any system of policy vii!
auqmsnt the aggregate of the demand, that
system is favorable 10 his interests. although
it's tendency NAV he to vary the theatre OF the
demand 1t could not, Tor example, be iD]uri-
GUS TO him. if. instead of Great Britain contin-
ming 10 receive the entire quantity of cotton
witch she now does, two or three hundred
,borsand bales of it were taken 10 the other
side of The channel, ana increased, TO that eN-
tent. the French demsnd. 1t would be better
- ka9k
eral markets than one. Now, If: instead of a
transfer, to the opposite side of the channel
Of those two or three hundred thousand
bales, they are transported TO thos North
ern States can that be injurious TO the cotton
grower? Is il not better for him? Is it not
better to have market at home, unaffected by
war or ether foreign causes, for that amount
of his staple?
If the establishment Of American manHfac
lures. therefore. had the sole effect of creating
new, and an American, demand for cot
ton, eIactlU to the same extent in which il
lessened the British demand, there would
be no inst cause Of complaint against the ia
riff. The gain in one place would he precisely
eouaI 70 the loss in the other. But the true
stnte o. the matter is much more favorable to
the cotton grower 1t is calculated that she
cotton manufactures of the United States ab
sorb al least 100000 bales of cotton annually
believe it to be more. The two ports of Bos-
ton and Providence alone, received, during the
last wear, near | 10 900 bales Tho amount is
annually increasing. The raw material of that
two iandred thousand bales is worth six mil
lions. and there is an additional value confer
red hv the manufacturer, of eighteen millions !;
i, being generally calculated that, in such cot
ion fabrics as we are in the habit of making.
the manufacture constitutes three fourths of
the value of the article. r., therefore, these
tyenty.tour millions worth of cation fabrics
were not made in the United States, but were
manufactured in Great Britain in order to OBJ
tain Them we should have In add 10 the already
enormous dsprnportion between the amount of
our imports and exports, in the trade with Great
Britain the further sum of twen,y-fnur mil.
lions or, deducting the price Of the raw mate
rial eighteen millions And will gentlemen
tell me how it would be possible for this coun.
try to sustain such ruinous trade' From all
TINT portion Of the United States living north
""Asast of James river, and west Of the noun.
,a!hs- Great Britain receives comparatively no.
tang. How wonid it he possible for tine inhab-
supply hehhseaeFTSSss S Win cotton fabrics r ito to
we're brought from England exclus;ve,v
the American manufacture, they would Be
compelled greatly 10 cnrtsil their supplies if
not absolutely TO suffer in their comforts By its
existence at home, the circle of those exchans.
all, who are embraced within Il, the nrodnc
tons of their respective industry The cotton
grower sells the raw material TO the manufac
fnrer he buys the iron, the bread, the meal
the coal, ard the countless number of effects
Of his consumption, from his fellow citizens
and they, in tnrn, purchase his fabrics. Put.
ting it upon the ground merely of SUPPLYING
those with necessary articles. who could moi
otherwise obtain them, ought there TO be. from
any quarter, an objection to the only system bv
which tina, object can be Accomplished Bn,
cln there be any doubt, with those who will re-
feet, that the actual amount ofcotion consumed
is increased by tho home manufacture The |
main argument of gentlemen is founded unon |
the idea Of mutual ability resulting from n,u,u |
al exchanges. They would furnish an ability |
TO foreign nations by purchasing from them.
and 10 our own people, by exchanges at home
If tho American manufacture were disconiinu !
ed, and that Of England were TO take its place. |
how would she sell the additional quantity of
twenty-four millions Of cotton goods, which |
we now make To US; That has been shown
to be impracticablc. To other foreign cations
She has already pushed her supplies to them
to the utmost extent. The ultimate conse. |
quence would, Then, be to diminish the total |
consumption of cotton, TO say nothing now of
the reduction Of price that would take Mace
by throwing into The ports Of Great Britain |
the two hundred thousand bales which. no Ion. |
ger being manufactured in the United Sfates /
would go ihither.
9 That the import duty is equivalent to an
export duty, and falls on the producer of cotton |
Here General Hayne explained, and said
that he never contended that an import dutv /
was equivalent TO an export duty, under all !
circumstances; he had explained in his speech /
his ideas of the precise operation Of the exist.
ing system. To which MIR. Clay replied tha,
ne had seen the argument: so stated in some of
the ingenious essays from the South Carolina
press and would therefore answer i'll
The trainers Of our constitution. BY granting
the power to Congress to lay imports, and pro
hibiting thai of laying export duty, mani
tested that they did not regard them as eqniva
lent Nor does the common sense OF mankind
An exsort duty fastens upon, and incorporates
itself with, the article on which it is laid. The
article cannot escape from tit pursues and
follows it wherever the article goes; and it, in
the foreign market, the supply is above or Just
equal to the demand the amount of the export
duty will be clear deduction to the exporter
from the price of the article. But an import
duty on foreign article leaves the exporter Of
the domestic article free lst TO import specie
2dIy, goods which are FREQ from the protecting
duty or, 3dly, such goods as, being cbargeable
with the protecting duty, he can sell al home
aud throw the duty on the consumer.
Bot, it is confidently argued that the import |
duty falls upon the grower If cotton: and the |
".-- las been put in debate, and sgain and
n!ain, in conversation, of the South Carolina
planter, who exports 100 bales Of cotton TO Liv.
erpool, exchanges them for 100 bales of mcr
cnanoise; and, when he brings them home he.