The Ohio Democrat. [volume] (Canal Dover, Ohio) 1840-1900, 1842-08-11

es, since the dsle Of their original creniion 10
10 the present hour, hsve not coined a one
hundtelh portion Of the specie currency with
which lhepeople of the UnIon have beer bles
sed. Under the policy of the democratic adj
minisitations of Jackson and Van Buren,,
(from 1929 hl l840) surplus of more than
FORTY-SIX MILLIONS of gold and silver
have been brought from foreign countries 10
the United States, through the insIrumentallly
Of trade. And that amount is greater than the
united internal resources o! the Union have
produced since The year 1921.
Ills urged, however, that the United States
should enact protective tariff as a means of
defence and retaliation against the corn
laws of Great Britain. This argument s nei
ther sustained by sound policy nor would its
operation produce the ostensble design. Ev-
cry candid mind must acknowledge that The
tariffupon bread stuffs by which Great Bu~
ain 'Prolecs" her landed capitalists, starves
her poor, and discourages the Importation Of
American produce, it mus. be admitted, we
say, that the consequent injury 10 this coun-
try falls directly upon The people of OHIO aud
manner would retaIiatory tariff operate upon
The gain growing people Of our slate? Its op
Grafton is plain and its consequences Of easy
illustration. To punish Great Britain & pro.
teer Ohio industry; it is proposed to make The
English manufacturers (hrough The medium
ol tariff sell their goods to the people of
Ohio at a higher rate than they would other
wise have been asked, and al the same time
enable The New England manufacturer to raise
his prices in corresponding degree! Thus
il will be seen that instead of retaatory tar
iffbenefitling the people whose sales have
been injured by corn laws,they are made 10
pay higher price for The articles of their con-
sumption, and this forsooth, is called protec.
ting their industry and measure of self de-
fence To illustrate The inutility of tariff by
a case of easy occurrence; let an Ohio farmer
with 500 bushels Of wheat start for the sea-
board, embark for foreign port, each bushel
ofhis grain worth 81, 90 before entry, pay TO
foreign custom house 20 per cent. tariff. ex.
change his grain for six hundred dollars worth
Of British manufactures, reembark Tor the u.
States with his cargo, would he be injured or
benefited by tariff imposed upon the COM
modify for which he had bariered his grain g.
in which The profits off years labor were in
vestedl
But the advocates Of protective tariff; in
order 10 induce the agriculturaiet to agree 10
the passage of tariff by which he will be re-
qnired TO pay heavy per centage TO the sup
port Of the manufacturer, allege that it will op
crate benefcaly to The farmer because the
market for produce will be improved by the in
crease ofmanufactories. The argument when
reduced 10 a plain proposition, is simply the:
the manufacturer offers 10 buy more of the
farmers produce provided the farmer will pur-
chase his commodities al an advanced price,
or in other words, the farmer is to give the
manufacturer 80 per cent. more for his cloths
than they are worth, in order that The manu.
facturer may buy the farmers whea, with the
farmers money! If such is not the operation
ofthe tariff, or, If instead of operating wholly
in favor Of the manufacturer, il effects both
with an equal hand, then it may we'll be ask
ed how is either benefited neither having a.
nything added to his profits? But the gam is
in fact exclusively to the manufacturer, g. the
farmer by giving 80 per cent. advance 10 The
manufacturer, has reduced the profits of his
grain in The same amount.
(Continned on the third page.)