Baton-Rouge gazette. [volume] (Baton-Rouge, La.) 1819-1856, 1842-07-16
BATON UG E.
SATURDAY,, July I6, le42.

ATCRDAY Y, July 10, lc4Z.
The TARrrF.-A short time ago we published
two or three articles in favor Of a tariff. A
the time, we considered the arguments pre-
scented, irrefutahle. We still believe them SO
particularly as no cuunter-argu,nen has me
our eve. going to show their weakness or at
surdity. But the task was incomplete. Other
and not less cogent facts appear every day
demonstrating the pressing urgency, and the
absolute necessity of the tariff policy.
One OF these is, that foreigners, or those
Directly touched by a tariff, ny into a ragesand
even threaten us with war and annihi1ation
because we venture 10 talk of taxing their i'm.
pcltatlons. Why is thisl Are they SO deep
" interested in our welfare as to be ready, at
the point Of the bayonet, to compelu us to take
acorrect view of IA Are the mcnarcllies OF
France and England such admirers of our de-
mocratic institutions, as TO be ready to sacr1&
nee their treasure and blood to sustain them !
Or does this fact betray a different sentiment 7
"a sentiment of self.intereSt = IF the latter,
then must France aud England reap some
profit from orr frec-trade f~oolery, which, pro-
fit, they know. will revert to MS, the momcnl
we impose a proper tariff on the ARTICLES fur.
nisied BY them for our markets.-We are de-
mocratic enough 10 believe that the latter is
the most sane deduction from this prominent
fact.
Another fact that stares us III the face, but
which has not been sufficiently touched upon,
is, that a reasonable tariG viii rebound to
the interest OF the Cotton planter. Ifsthis be
true, (and we contend that il is as susceptible
of mathematical demonstration as any prob.
lem in Euclid,) then all opposition 10 the mea-
sure should cease for it was (ostensibly) to
favor the cotton interest, that the Compromise
Act was passed. A comparison Of the histo-
ry of the country previous TO and since the
passage Of that act, proves, however, that the
intended favor was no favor, but has brought
on the cotton planter the same evils it has
brought on other producers, viz: low prices
and a dull market. Previous to that act, and
under the tariff of '2s, the price of cotton, for
average lists, was from 10 to Il cents, The
blessings Of a one-sided free trade have been
developing themselves from year to year since,
and now just as the system arrives at maturi-
'y, the average price Of costca is from 8 to s
cents! 4
Such is the history of this important branch
of industry. The fact is apparent to all but
the causes from which this decline in cotton
proceeds, are not quite so evident as the de-
cline itself. These causes are traceable to
the laws that regulate trade. BY reducing
the tariff on cotton goods, we have taken the
first step to reduce the price of that staple.
We thereby enable the foreign manufacturer
to under-sell and break down the American
manufacturer whose labor and machinery is
more costly than the European. To effect
this object, it is necessary to adopt all possi-
bic measures to reduce the price ofraw cotton
itself. In the struggle for ascendency between
the foreign and domestic manufacturer, both
aim at this as an object of paramount i'm
portance. The effort is not without its results;
prices are reduced; the home competition
the foreign market is weakened and
the weaker that becomes, the greater is the
command foreigners possess over the prices
we are TO receive for our products. When
they have no competitors it is clear that they
fix their own prices. Having no other mar
ket, we are obliged to submit. {
To this roin! We arc fast vergins and ni-
cotton planters unite with all other class I
IS in demanding Of Congress a suitable. tariff q
IN foreign goods, they will soon find them
selves as sadly injured By this free trade hum Y
Jug, (Which, every one 'knows. is all on tne
ide of foreigners--ail in their favor), as arc p
ur manufacturers themselves. a
But it appears that such is already the fact. a
LET us see suppose the case of a planter who s.
old, under the tariff of 1928, 200 bales annu- il
lly at an average Of IL cents per ID. The Il
um total of his sales (400 lbs. TO the ba1e,) fl
'ould be $4,000. Taking the present average c.
Or the same cotton to be 8 cents, the sum to- u
Il would he, S6,400-making a difference of
|, 1900.
'No~fhePe it is eriHentttha at the reduction Of o'
lie tariff within the last ten years has, caused pS
Of $4,000. in the price of 200 bales OF
cotton. let as now see if the planter hi
axes up this sum in'his purchases of arti- p'
es maRufactured abroad, and reduced in
ice by a reduction Of a tariff. We will sup fir
'se that he annually pays for such arti-
es $4,000. (The estimate is large). With TIL
tariff at 20 per cent, 5000 of this sum, go,to
e treasury with the tariff at 40 per cent. CO
200 so TO the treasury that is, the planter wa
YES $500, in the purchase of his goods, by thj
ducins the tariff from 40 to 90 per cent, m,
nile he loses $4,000 on the sale of his cotton. tai
to use a homely phrase, looks very much rel
e saving at the faucet and losing at the bung- 81,
lie, fetit is true--literally true-deplora- :,
' srue. The cotton planter has the same -,
.erest in a reasonable tariff that the cotton
anufacturer has they are the stay and sup
IT of each other they must operate togeth-
and foE each others advantage, or both {"
suffer, lea
II
ELECTION RETURNS
FOR GOVERNOR. 10y