The Charlotte journal. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1835-1851, 1844-04-12
NUMBER rs.

and New OH do 10 the manufacturing es.
adjustments in their vicinity. Distance
makes no difference. Our natural mar.
kets-deryed, not from human charters,
! but from the providence Of God--are Man
chester, Birmingham, Leeds, and the 9th.
er manufacturing towns Of Europe
When you cut US Of from these, you per-
petraie the same injustice as if You were
to prohibit the Massachusetts farmer from
dealing with nei9hboring mandatory,
by a prohibiory duty on their exchanges.
There is another al gument, of which,,
believe, the manufacturers keep constant
supply stereotyped for the use of their Gus
toners; hat high duties upon foreign i'm.
ports diminish, instead Of enhancing, pr.
ces Now, this is one of those iucompre.
henslble paradoXes which they can sue
cessiully address only TO the blind faith OF
their followers.
They gravely tell US that a revenue du.
ty Of 20 per cent, which will certainly
enhance prices Of 20 per cent, will not
enable them TO maintain competition with
The rival manufactures but If you viii add
20 pei cent. more TO the duty, they can
sell their manufactures cheaper than tiev
could beforel Exclude the competitor
who undersells them, and they viii mme-
dlately be able to undersell him Now,
sir, if high duty produce low prices, it
would seem 10 follow that low duties would
produce high prices; and the manufactu-
rer should go streneousy for reduction.
But, if this argument must be grayeIy
Ia =,
elusive. If the manufacturer canno! oh.
tam remunerating prices with protection
OF 20 per cent, he can afford to sell at
lower prices but if he can afford to sell at
lower prices, he certainly does not require
more protection than 90 per cent will az.
ford him.
Another argument, Mr.. President, which
has been advanced, from very high quar-.
ter, in favor Of this system, is, that, by
excluding foreign manufactures, we relieve
ourselves from paying tribute to foreign
nations. Yes, sir; a President of the
United States, Mr.. J. Q. Adams,1 who
has filled various stations in the councils of
this country, and has made distinguished
figure IN them all, formally promulgate
this extraordinary denunciation against
foreign commerce, in one Of his annual
messages to Congress. Paying tribute to
foreign nations When we hear such
doctrines from such high authority, we
can scarcely wonder at the popular delu-
SONS which have so extensively prevailed
OH this subject. Now, sir, let US see in
what this tribute consist Foreign ma
tons furnish us market for domestic pro.
auctions which we cannot sell at home,
and they give us IN exchange manufactures
required for our consumption. But this
is not all: they supply us with these man.
uiactures 20, 30, and 40 per cent. cheap
er than we can obtain them from our do.
nestle manufacturers; and il is that which
constitutes the tribute, according 10 this
paradoxical theory. Now, sir, with be-
coming Difference think the tribute grows
out OF the very system here recommended,
and goes TO another quarter. The system
compels us 10 pay an average of some 3Oor
10 per cent. moro for domestic manufac.
lures than the price fol which we could OBJ.
tain the foreign, and common sense teach
es that this is an unjust and oppressive
tribute.
Gently propagated and am sorry TO say,
by distinguished statesman, the aelSnowl-
edged head Of one of the great political
parties of this country.
10 conclusion to the letter q, which
have already alluded, he says, in SUBJ
stance, that il is the true policy of this
country in regard to foreign commerce,
l,tx
possible" | confess, sir, | read this
with surprise. 1t throws the exploded
doctrines of the balance Of trade quite into
the shade. That would certainly be no
very sainlul commerce, in which we should
give much and receive little. 1t is pre-
cisely what even Alexander Hamilton de.
nominated :" a vain attempt to sell every
thing and buy nothing" If horse jock
ey we're advised 10 adopt similar policy,
and in all his exchanges, to give horse
of great value, and receive one compare
lively worthless, he would laugh in the
face of the adviser. But it cannot be sup
posed that the distinguished writer of the
letter in question meant so absurd thing
as TO advise his countrymen 10 give to for
eign nations more than we got from them.
He must have intended to recommend the
policy Of sending abroad as large an
amount of exports as possible, and OF receiy-
ING ia return as small proportion of con-
sumablc commodities, and as large a pro-
portion of gold and silver as possible
This whole theory grows out of the popu-
lar fallacy, that money, which is the mere
measure of the relative values ofthose con-
sumable commodities which constitute na-
tiona wealth, is itself not only the repre-
sentative, but the essence of wealth. NO
nation upon earth could carry on CON-
merce, exchanging the productions of their
industry for the precious metals tor ten
years, without sinking into poverty ard
wretchedness. Such nation would truly
represent tho folly of miser, who should
e q,