Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 182?-183?, 1832-04-20

hect, that the actual amount of cotton con-
sumed IS increased by the home manufnc-
lure: he main argument of gentlemen is
FOUNDED upon the idea of mutual ability ro-
suitIng from mutual exchanges Theywould
furnish an ability TO foreign nations hy pur-
chasing from them, and 10 our own people.
by exchanges at home. If the Amerit an
manufacture were discontinued, and that of
England were 10 take lis place, how would
she sell the additional quantity of TWENTY
Jour millions of cotton goods, which we now
make: Ious: That has been shown 10 be
Impracticable. To other foreign naiions?-
She has already pushed her supplies to them
TO the utmost extent. The Ultimate conse-
quence would, then, be 10 diminish the total
consumption of cotton, TO say nothing now
oithe reduction ofprice that would take place
ny throwing into The ports of Great Britain
The two hundred thousand bales which, no
longer being manufactured in the U. States.
would go thiiher.
z That the import duty is equivalent 10
export duty, and falls on the producer of
cotton.
Here General Hayne explained, and SAID
that he never contended that an import duty
was equivalent 10 am export duty, under all
circumstances he had explained in his
speech his idea Ofthe precise operation ofthe
existing system. To which MIR. Claw re-
piled that he had seen the argument so stated
IN some OF The ingenious essays from the
South Carolina press, and would therefore
answer it,
The trainers ofour constitution, by grant
ing the power 10 congress 10 lay imports, and
prohibiting that of laying an export duty.
manifested that they did not regard them as
equivalent. Nor does the common sense of
mankind. An export duty f,stens upon,
and Incorporates itself with, the article on
which ii is laid. The article cannot escape
from lit pursues and follows il wherever
the article goes and if, in The foreign mar
ket, the supply is above or just equal 10 the
demand, The amount OF the export duty will
be clear deduction 10 the exporter from the
price OF the article, But an import duty on
foreign article leaves the exporter of ths
domestic article free, lst 10 import specie :.
2dly goods which are free from the protect
ing duty or, 3dly such goods as, being
chargeable with The protecting duty he can
sell at home and throw the duty on the con-
sumner.
But, tits confidently argued that tie import
duty falls upon the grower ofcotton; and tho
case has been put in debate, and again and
again, in conversation, of the South Carolina
planter, who exports 100 bales of cotton TO
Liverpool, exchanges them for 100 bales of
merchandise and, when he brings them
home, being compelled TO leave, at The Gus
tom house, forty bales in the form ofduties.
The argument is founded on the ASSUMPTION
that duty of forty per cent amounts 10 u
subtraction of forty from the 100 bales Of;
merchandise: The first objection 10 il is.
that IT suppoSes case of barter, which ne
yer occurs. lift be replied that it, neverthe-
less, occurs in the operations of commerce.
the answer would be that, since The export
OF Carolina cotton is chiefly made by New
York or foreign merchants, the loss stated.
if it really accrued, would fall upon them
and not the planter. But, 10 test the COR
RICHNESS OF the hypothetical case, let us sup
pose that the duty, instead of forty per cent.
should be 100; which is asserted 10 be the
duty in some cases. Then, the planter woEld
not only lose the whole hundred bales ofmer-
chandise, which he had gotten for his hun
dred bales Of cotton, but he would have 10.
purchase, with other means, an additional
fifty bales, i'm order 10 enable him 10 nav the
duties accrtling on the proceeds of the cot
ton. Another answer is, that, ifthe produ-
Ger OF cotton in America, exchanged against
English fabrics, pays the duty, the produ-
Ger OF those fabrics also pays il, and then il
is twice paid. Such must be the conse-
quencc, unless the principle is true on one
side of the Atlantic, and false on The other.
The true answer is, that the exporter OF an.
article, If be invests lis proceeds in foreign
market, takes care TO make the investment
in such merchandise as, when brought home.
he can sell with fair profit and conse-
quenily, the consumer would pay the origin
al cost and charges and profit.
8. The next oil lection To the American
System is, that il sui jects South Carolina TO
the payment OF an undue proportion of the
public revenue. The basis ofths oil iectionis
the assumption, shown 10 have been erro-
neous, that the producer Of the exports from
this country pays the duty on IFS imports, in
stead Of the consumer ofthosc imports Tho
amount which South Carolina really con-
tributes 10 the public revenue, no more than
that of any other Stale, can he precisely as
certained. II depends upon her consump-
lion OF articles paying duties, and we NAV
make an approximation sufficient for or
practical purposes. The cotton planters OF
the valley Of the Mississippi, with which
am acquainted, generally expend about ono
third OF their income in the support Of their
families and plantations. On this subject
! hold IN my hands statement Co from
friend Of mine, Of great accuracy, and
member Of The Senate. According 10 tbis
statement, in crop Of fen thousand dollars
the expenses may Auctuaie between Two
thousand eight hundred dollars and ibreo
thousand two hundred dollars. Oflbis sum.
about one fourth, from seven TO eight hun
dred dollars, may he laid out in articles nav
ing The protecting duty the residue is dis
bursod for provisions, mules, horses, oxen.
wages Of overseer, &c. Estimating the ex-