Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1841-02-11

changed A new Administration is about to run lis
course In the accusation of parsimony and meanness
now no more than in the imputation oil extravaganza
formerly was Justice regarded towards the present Ad
ministraton But the purpose now is to prepare us
for the glorious advent Of that enlarged economy whcn
will take every harbor, creek road and rlver and the
whole body of claims your files, within ITS capaclous
folds Then will the debt Of forty millions OF dollars,
so strenuousy contended for by the gentleman from
New York, into brilliant existence But as yet,
we have the majority; and intend, whilst taxing care
that no money shall be expended than an economical
administration of the Government requires, al the
same time to place ample means within the controi OF
the succeeding Administration, to maintain the ialln
of the Government in every obligation imposed upon
it by our appropriations. Our views OF duty WIZ not
allow us to do more-it will not allow us 10 90 ess'
Seeing the repeated and resolute efforts on tue part
of gentlemen in spe of facts to make out by figures
the necessity Of additional means fo tue use OF the
Government was at loss to understand the purpose
If an Extra Session Of Congress was wanted, TO Keep
up the chase whilst the blood was warm ,nere was
The Treasury bill to be repealed, and the
establishment of United States Bank, to justify the
measure, at least to those who had placed them IN
power. But the mystery was solved yesterday, N
the Senate, by the frank declarations OF d'stn-
gushed Senator, about to occupy, If rnmor be true,
the highest seat in the councils of the ensuing ad
ministration He declared that his purpose was to
abstract from the Treasury the four millions annual
IL accruing from the public lands by giving them
to the States, and to supply the vacuum oy taxation
Indebtedness in the Government is thus virtually gwen
up and the proposed scheme oftaxation on silk, and
other productions of France, is distinctly united with
the project of distribution understand this: 1t SEN
sble and manly; although, | think, unwarranted by
the Constitution, and will be FATAL by its corruptng in
fuences TO our whole frame of Government.
Mr. Chairman. am not opposed to tax on luxu-
res. On the contrary, shall be prepared, when the
time arrives If any discrimination IS admitted IN our
duties 10 go as far as any in the policy of reev
ing the necessities of life from taxation and raising all
the revenue may require by imposts on iuxurIes-
But am not prepared to tax any thing to replace mo-
ney which may be taken from the Treasury 10 be gwen
TO the States A giving Government is essentially
tyranny Free Governments are hduclary, not absolute
in their character and have right to expend money but
for the purposes they organized 10 uh Largesses
10 the people have proved 10 be The price OF their IL
berries or the instrument by which they have been
overthrow. Under circumstances, therefore, will
aid policy which all history proves to be so fatal to
liberty But If were prepared to adopt 1t, should
not supply the vacuum IN the Treasury would occa
sion by tax on particular Injuries, imported chiefly
BY the productions Of the South, and leave those free
of duty which are imported by the productions of other
portions of the Union. Tax all Injuries tax none
The trade between France and this country which it
is proposed burden, carried almost exclusively
BY the cotton, rice and tobacco Of the South hold
in nv hand table carefully compiled, showing the
ports and imports between France and the u s., from
the year 1885 to the year 1889 inclusive-(See Az
Thus the whole direct export trade is carried al
most entirely by our staples; and undoubtedly, they
contribute also largely 10 the indirect trade by which
the mportatons from France effected, consisting of
an average OF from three TO ten millions OF dollars
{See b.
OF worsted and worsted-suf goods, we also imported
q million and half average; Of linen, about halfa mil
lion; and of specie, about million. Whilst of manu-
featured cotton goods, we imported scarcely one mil
lion a year Thus showing that this lucrative trade,
whilst is beneficial to the South does not come into
competition with the cotton manufactures of the North
Its bearing the navigation interess-that great in
terest which, unless crippled crushed BY nnwise
legislation, destined TO be the buwark of our nation
al independence-is also most remarkable Nearly the
whole trade is carried BY shipping, will
be seen by the following table.-(See CO.
This is the trade il proposed TO cut up by duty;
almost prohibtory, Of 20 per cent silks, and the
other productions of France in proportion 1t would
seem be manifest, that, heavy duty is laid the
imports Of any commodity, it must affect the value of
the production with which the imports are affected If
do not take the productions Of France, how can she
take ours? And, if you burden them with taxes, must
she not take less cotton and tobacco, take them at
less price This would seem too clear for argument.
But my colleague (Mr Thompson) has found an ar
gument in advocating this scheme of taxation, which
proves, to his entire satisfaction, that staples can
not be affected by any duties we may impose 1t is
this: Taxation on luxuries does never diminish the
consumption of them. Put wine, he says, at six
dollars bottle, and it will sell as freely as at one.
This is bold assumption, and may be true some
times with prohigate coxcomb; but certainly con-
ficts with all the preconceived notions OF political
economy. 1t only be true upon the supposition
that our means for purchasing and consuming
unlimited; fact would all be glad TO know and
feel If they lmited-then, however diminished,
whether by taxation, conhagration any other cause,
our consumption must be diminished with them. The
genteman's doctrine, if true, will also lead to the
Portable conclusion that taxation never affect con-
sumption, and will be burden at all If 1t cannot
diminish the consumption of suPerluilies and luxures,
how can it diminish that Of necessities Necessities,
sha
be consumed, because implicated with existence itself;
and if luxuries will also be equally consumed, whether
taxed or free,-then the consumption Of people will
always be the same, under any form of taxation. 1t
has hitherto been supposed that taxation, being de-
prvation of the means Of consumption, would dimn-
ish consumption, especially those articles which men
could do wthout-the Injuries superauities of life
But my colleague goes further. He contends that
the South will absolutely be benefited by cutting off
our silk trade with France 1t will induce, or rather
compel the women of America TO wear cotton instead
of silk gowns, and thus increase the demand for our
raw cotton.
Throwing out of consideration the fact, that if we
consume cotton fabrics instead of silk, the supply Will
not be from France her small expectation of cotton
goods this country clearly shows, the gentleman TO
make his position good, would have to prove that the
raiue of silk and cotton fabrics is the same If silk
lace or silk gown is worth ten times more than sml
lar commodities of cotton, it is clear that consuming
The same quantities of each will not equalize the trade
gown purchased and imported by his cotton the girls
must wear out ten gowns in its stead This would re.
ouire an unusual activity of notion and wardrobe far
outnumbering that of the Dutch girls, with their wool
len pe,coats, so udicrousy described 10y Washington
Irving in his Knickerbocker. If British cotton goods
equal quantity, substituted in markets for the
silks of France, will cut off the demand for our cotton
exactly the proportion that silk is more valuable than
cotton.
Nor can we see any thing in excluding French silks
from our markets which will increase the consumption
ofraw cotton in France The twenty millions of raw
cotton purchased by her silks and other manufactures
is worked up into eighty hundred millions of
the manufactured article, which is consumed almost
entirely in France This is the consumption resulting
from our cotton imported into France Now, if the
gentleman destroys trade with France, and she is
forced to supply herself with cotton else where in
sequence Of refusing to receive her manufactures
in return it is obvious that, TO repay the Southern
planters for the diminished consumption of the twenty
millions of their cotton, he must produce mar
he, oreiphty or a hundred millions for the manufac-