Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1842-01-01


tie manufacturers had enloycd tic protection, and II
must be continued that during The latter portion the
producers might have their s:a:e OF protection. Yet
Notwithstanding this protection OF the manufactures, re-
venue flowed torrents, ns0uc that to get rid OF t.,
Congress had pass the Distribution act Ifprotecton
II DESTROYED revenue how revenue 10 overflow
when protection was highest:
II Another illustration was found in the of silk
Previously to the late extra session. imported silk paid
n very small duty; it paid copper cent. Here was
protection TO certain extent. He put II TO The gentle
man to say whether he believed that that duty would
bring no revenue into the Treasury: Would any gen.
tlerian say this'
\ If duty of 20 or - per cent. laid TO protect
manufactures might diminish revenue to some extent
but not in the same proportion in which it protected
Il manufactures. And the total amount of
might wen be greater, consequence OF actually des
troynr all particular article, provided the
duties were iudclousy laid on the residue. BY proh
biting the importation OF that particular article, new
resources might be developed in our own country and
domestic industry hight receive an Indictment 10 act
witty which would produce general wealth and prospe
rtY and thus the OF the people be rendered better
able and willing 10 pay taxes and thus the revenue
be ultimately increased rather than diminished.
}, Bat the gentleman represented the parties in this
tariff controversy 10 be the Manufacturers rersus the
peop!c of the United States and he referred 10 the
census TO show that while the manufacturers were but
700 600 the people Of the United States amounted to
II 100000. Here 100000 against l7,OOo,0oO-
But did every that this mode OF stating the
case Unfair. was the lI,uuu,oUU al inOWfTs
j Did not that number include women include young
children include the lame? include the sick include
the dying while the 700 900 all III the vlgor and
activity OF life Were this fair comparison But,
further while the gentleman thus opposed all protec
ton 10 manufacturers, be was strong advocate Tor ell
couraging commerce.
/ Mr. RnETT. Did ask protection for commerce
! Mr.. HUDSON. No, and for obvious reason
commerce has il already. But the gentleman former
| speechcs--all his speeches-showed him strenuous
1 lad for
while the manufacturers amount to 100000, the mer
chants are but IL 000only sixth of the number
But MIR. H. here stated reasons why he had from his
own knowledge, confidence i'll the accuracy Of the
census There in Massachusetts III 900 returned
10 The Legislature as engaged IN manufactures OF all
kinds, without including number of small manuiac-
lures carried in families such as braldlng straw,
making palm leafha,s, &c; the census stated the mum
Der at -, 600.
But the gentleman went further: he insisted that
this number of 100000 too large because the ope-
ratvcs were not 10 be counted. And why. Because,
according 10 the gentleman they had no interest what
ever protection they sharing no part Of Tie profits
Mr. H. came from where these operatives were; and
he insisted that they had direct interest in pro-
lection the propretors Of the factories. So long
protection is continued the popreors continue TO pay
the wages; but not when It was withdrawn. The
gentleman had SAID the wages OF the operatives were
regulated not by protection but by the rate Of wages
4 around them. True, but the converse also true
The around them regulated by the wages of
the operatives in the factories. They were taken chief.
II " from the agricultural class, and when they were
| Withdrawn wages rose.
/ But MIR. r. denied that the parties in this contro.
versy were the manufacturers against the people, they
constituted part of the people, and the people had an
interest in then protection, and Just so was with mer-
/ chants.
/ The amount Of manufactured goods exported in
single year Sl2, 500 000-a larger amount than MI
the tobacco and rice Manufactures not only gave
employment TO foreign commerce-thcy fostered the
Tbara nal. hosttl ltv
but tile contrary, between manufactures and
/ Their interests and the same. Whoever set
the manufacturers 10 work, provided employment for
4 the merchants.
the protection of manufactures 1t seemed 10 be taken
for granted that all the protection given 10 manuac
lures much taken from agriculture; but It was
not so. Many agricultural articles protected
far more than any manufacturer thought Of ask
ing. Potatoes, oats, wheat flour, indigo cotton, pork
beef butter flax hemp and wool all covered with
heavy duties The potatoes Of Maine were protected
TO the amount Of 10 cents bnshel Repeal this duty,
and how long would the potatoes Of that State be found
lin our Southern cities Immediately would they be
supplaned by the potatoes Of Nova Scotia and, even
as things now stood, the TWO competing in The
same market Take the article of cheese; it sold
at the North at about 10 cents per pound and the duty
was nine cents, or ninety per cent. The article
made in Pennsylvania and Ohio, we'll in New
England Take of the duty, and the cheese Of England
and Germany would soon come in and supercede it.
But the great value of manufactures 10 the farmer
was the market they opened Tor his produce. Where
would the South md the West find market for their
cUfh Of which IL" gentleman from rginia
Mir Wisel so often talked 10 the House The ports
of Great Britain were shut against il. Where would
be the market for the -four and ot the South =
Their almost exclusive market was at the North.
There came into the State Of Massachusetts in a
wear four millions OF bushels of corn while all raised
within the State amounted TO but 100000 bushels ;
100000 barrels of orr and 900 casks Of rice were
also imported into the State Mr.. ii. said 10 the en-
tire grain growing interest every part Of the House
that the manufactures of the North ought to be dear
to them as 10 any Northern Yet gentlemen talked
about oihe manufacturers rsrsus the people Of the
United States.
Mr. H. went on further 10 observe that, if there
any one question of national policy before Congress III
q which the laborers of the Union had direct interest
this They were interested in il above all other
men. If gentlemen would have parties in tins conro
rcrsy the true parties g the Laborers The
ldlers" None were hostile 10 manufacturers but gen
( tlemen who themselves lived without labor. But he
denied there were any parties IN the case the whole
people interested.
Blu, 10 see The effect of manufactures the general
: prosperity suppose they all destroyed at blow
Then zoo 0G0 persons would all be turned loose the
other callngs in the community: they must come IN
among the laboreEs and ngrlcnlturls's. They would
naturally 60 TO the great West. Ana what would
be the consequence: Those products OF tie earth now
plentiful there almost to be drag would be made
still more abundant And where would they find
market Who would be prohted by such an ope
ration: These 100000 consumers would be con-
ver,ed into 100000 producers making difference Of
j, 100000 Would tins promote the interests Of agr-
culture: Surely not: its products would be a glnt
ard their best markets would be destroyed Suppose
the manufacture Of sugar should be abolished what
would be the effect The sugar plantations would be
converted INTO cotton fields, and the gentleman from
South Carolina would find still competition IN
his iavori,e staple, while his great Northern market
which consumed one-fourth Of his crop, would be
eone-lost. Meanwhile, the British experiments in
india and everywhere else where cotton would grow,
were proceeding: what would become Of the Southern
market for cotton in few year;
The gentleman from s. Carolina assumed that a
h protective duties were much bounty, and tax on
The people for the benefit Of the manufacturers Such
was lar from being the fact So far from it, that MIR
r. did not believe that, ordinarily, prices were in
creased by at NIL True, there was, and could be- no
absolute fixed rule 10 Judge by But here II should be