The daily Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1841-1845, 1842-07-23

persons and 10 much capital. lie believed tina :
not less than two millions Of yards Of carpeng were
| annually manufactured in the United States, ana
that if there were injurious legislation TO prevent
IL, the quantity would constantly and regularly IN
crease The wool used IN the manufacture OF foreign
production and of kind not raised at present al all
and not susceptible of being raised with profit AL
the present rate of mportatlons, the amount OF re-
venue to be obtained by the proposed duty would De
small and il would probably prove TO be much less
than anticipated, because the importation would De-
come less under the duty, in consequence oil
the diminution the duty would occasion IN carpet
manufacture, and the consequent dmlnution OF the
demand for the wool. Ii was, in fact proposition
to impose a tax to the amount Of the duty on the
manufacture of carpetng. He hoped, therefore, this
article would be left on the footing which now
stood.
The motion rejected
Mr. Cushing moved TO strike out FIVE cent from
the duty on coarse woods, and instead thereof to m
sert two per cent He sand that the Committee had
rejected his motion to make these woods free as they
stood under the COMPROMISE act They had also re-
iected the motion Of MIR. Brown to leave them at
duty of one per cent He, Mr.. c., would make one
| more effort against the proposed change, and IT
would be that, as the question now stood, the
change would be very serious one The Commute
of Ways aud Means have proposed to reduce the
ma xmum from eight cents to seven cents, and upon
| the motion of the gentleman from Vermont, MIR.
| Slade,) the Committee of the Whole have adopted
SIX cents the maximum Observe the effect OF THIS
| Woods which cost six cents and under, are to pay
duty OF five per cent. ad yalorem and woods when
cost six and quarter cents, seveD eight Genus,
which have heretofore been free, are TO pay duty
of thirty er ad valorem This duty of thirty
per cent on woods heretofore free must be runous to
the carpet manufacturers. Sir Robert Peel states
the true principle on this subject, lie says, ;" our
object has been, speaking generally, to reduce the
duties on raw materials, which constitute the ele-
ments of manufactures to an almost nominal amount
And this is the correct view of the subject Instead
of this, the Committee propose, not only duty but
| a very high duty, on this MATERIAL which is now
imported solely to meet the demands of manufacture
| ing industry.
| The motion rejected.
| Mrs FILLMORE havAx moved to strike out thirty
per cent ad vaorem from the duty fine wools and
insert instead thereof nine cents per pound and Mr.
| Arnold having moved TO amend the amendment by
| striking out nine cents and inserting twelve and
| hall cents perpound,
Mr. CUSHING opposed the motion. He said the
| proposition was monstrous sen woods costing
| Six and quarter cents, Mr. Arpold's $hotion would
be duty of two hundred pr cent ad valorem and
Mr. FImors duty of iry one hume hundred da ana fiji fifty
duty of more than hundred per cent the seven
cents and eight cents woods In this way the Com
mittee would get no these woods, as none
would ever be imported. They might as well at
once prohibit the importation of all such woods, and
| also pIOHlolt HidiuioSluic VI SaiPSN' III pi'
country
Mr. EyEaETT, of Vermont, having proposed scale
Of minimums for duty on wool, with the specific
duty of ten cents per pound on all woods costing less
| than thirty cents
Mr. Cushing opposed the motion. He did not OBJ
ject to the minimum principle, such, nor to spe-
| cfc duties On the contrary, he considered specific
duties incomparaby better than ad valorem duties,
in all cases when it could be applied; but he was
sorry to the woogrowlng interest trying to force
H. of he on
pense of the wool manufacturer. This project was
injurious to the Government, for would prohibit
importation it would do no good to the wool grow
en- for the liacturer could not afford to use hne
woods for the purposes for which he mad heretofore
used the coarse ones. The Committee would now
see how fallacous was the idea which had grown up
at the beginning of the session. under the motion to
refer the Tariff question TO the Committee Manu-
features They would how fallacious the
idea that the manufacturers only the manufacturers
chiefly called for protective duties. They would
also that when he details of Tariff came to be
arranged, It was not between Massachusetts and
South Carolina that coafct of interests existed but
much more between Massachusetts and Vermont
Whatever protection Massachusetts got for her man
ufacures she paid full consideration for, in the pro-
tective duty charged on the raw material which
she had to buy chiefly from the other States of the
Union.
Mr. cns~s sn %o ~ to amend t shs R Rs striking
broadcloths, casslmercs, &C, an" - oIoron
ner square yard MIR. G. said that TINS al Vaioreh
duty might perhaps suffice if it could be collected oH
this impossible If thsrs t6RR nsasls
uhg the New York Custon,-house, it was the per
petual recurrence of fraudulent importatons under
the system of ad valorem duties on fine woollens II
is bad system of the Government which is thus de-
irauded of its 1t is bad for the manufactI-
rer who does not get the protection he counts upon,
and 1t is bad for the honest importer, who is driven
out OF the market by the lower price at which the
fraudulent importer is able TO sell his goods
Mr. g. said he could not conceive why this bill
should make so much distinction between the inter-
ests OF Massachusetts and those of other States The
bill proposes heavy square yard duty of per
yard on cotton bagging, for the benefit of Kentucky
II proposes high protection in the form of specific
duties on the iron and coal of Pennsylvania. A
square yard duty aud a specific duty was proper
enough IN those cases, and specific square yard
duty is in like just and proper for the cloths
and cassimeres of Massachusetts.
~.