Litchfield enquirer., 1844-02-08
SPEECH O. AiR. HUNTINGTON, |, lbe U S, Senate, yMarch 2lsf 1872.
EXTRACTS.


 Afer brief preliminary statement Mr. Hunt s,stoa proceeded to say,-i shall limit myself to lew remarks on the subject of flee trade, of the tar- i5f as connected with the compromise act, and of tie protection of the labor and industry of own citizens against the panpeE labor of foreign coun- tries.
 Much has been said and written respecting FLee 9r0de, and Protection and while the form- CT has been called by some glorious doctrine, and been pronounced, far as it has had trial m the United States, (being, it is sad partial one onlyO highly beneficial to the planter, the farmer, the manufacturer, the mechanic, the day laborer, and, indeed to all classes of our the lat ter it has been asserted, has proved injurious 10 manv if not most of the branches of industry, Tn addition to being partial, unjust, and oppressive propose to examine these points-that of free trade very cursorily and that of protection some- what more minutely-to see whether there be any foundation for these opinions.
 As to free-trade doctrine, an argument m its la yor has been attempted to be drawn from the tables of exports of domestic productions, from which 1t has been insisted that it appeared, while duties were falling, under the act of 1883, the exports were increasing and the inference was drawn, that by the operation of that act, the business of the manufacturer was becoming more profitable. Not withstanding it was well known, as q fact, that the profits during this period was not increasing, fhe Senator from Maine MT. Evans1 looked into the tables and gave complete and satisfactory an- swer to the argument showing that under the head of Erpoyis of Domestic .ManayGctaers, was placed Specie to the amount of several millions, and that although the value of these exports had increased, the profits had diminished. shall not 20 over these ground which has been so fully cccu- pied by another. wish, however, to look at tnis subject of free trade little further. And 1t will be we'll to ascertain if practicable, what is meant bv free trade. Does 1t mean entire, pefect recpro- city in trade or does 1t mean trade which IS to be allowed by freely to other nations, but which is denied by them to us a trade which IS all on one side-which practically opens our ports to the productions of other countries, but which shuts theirs to the productions ofthe United States Per- haps the definition of it given by member of the British Parliament will not be out of place. will read it:
 It was idle for us, he contended, to endeavor to persuade other nations to join with us in adopting the principles of what was called free trade Oth- nations knew, as well as the noble lord opposite and those who acted with him, that what we meant by free trade was nothing more nor less than, by means of the great advantages we enjoyed, to get a monopoly of all their markets for our manufac- lures, and to prevent them, and all, from ever becoming manufacturing nations"
 This is what Great Britain understands by free trade-that nation which talks the most loudly and eloQuentIy in its favor, but never adopts IL III prac- tice -
 The result of this free-trade system is exhibiting itself more and more in its deleterious effects upon our commercial and navigating interests Already have we suffered great deminution Tn our carry ing trade with the British colonies by the cornner- cial arrangement which went into operation m 1880; and now Great Britain and other nations are rapidly becoming the carriers of our productions from our shores to foreign countries. The recpro- city treaties founded the doctrine of free trade, which we have made with some of the Powers of Europe, are now improved by them to their gain, and our disadvantage.
 The effects of our present commercial arrange ment with Great Britain are well described in the following evtracts from the report of the Boston Chamber of Commerce, made m February, lS4l and printed by order of the Sen:c..1 tccee Senate document 234, 26th Congress, 2d session.)
 The argument allows the imposition, without limitation, of duties on our produce imported into the British colonies from the United States, and 4hat they may vary in different colonies that when imported into any colony, such goods may be naturalized, or considered products of that col ony, and transported to any other free of duty ;- that goods may be transported from one colony oi province to another, only by British vessels; that American vessels may bring to the colonies or provinces nothing but the products of the UStates.
 To avail herself of the advantages which such an arrangement offered, England immediately imposed heavy and, in some instances, prohibitory duties on our products when imported into the West ln- dies from the United States, and admitted the same
 
 <hrough the provinces.
 Such are the benefits to British navigation from the arrangement, that, as your committee are in- formed, Americans have become owners of British vessels to very considerable extent, Tn order to avail themselves of them.
 s Articles of our produce, to very large amount, are daily ordered to be skipped to the British prov nces; they are sent in British vessels ,.onsi'salS landed and naturaazed, and sent directly to the West Indian colonies; the vicinity of number of ports in the provinces where this can be effect cd (wthin two days sail from Boston,, renders this almost equivalent to direct voyage from our ports to the West Indies; and it is one in which Ameri- can vessels cannot participate. As may readily be supposed, every facility is given in such ports of naturalization. :
 There is another mode in which the arrangement avors British shipping, deserving of particular att tention. British vessels proceed to our southern ports: if freights to Europe be obtained they take lumber, return to the provinces, naturalize the cargo, aud carry it to England. The duty on this article thus carried, is so much less than on It's direct importation from the United States as en- tirely to preclude it's being carried in American vessels This is done to considerable extent; and your committee suggest that, II such discrimana, tion of duty on an article notoriousy not produced in the British provinces be consistent with the ex- isting arrangement, they can see no reason why similar duty may not be applied to our staples, so as to throw the whole carrying trade between the United States and Great Britain into hands of our commercial competitors.
 There is another mode in which the arrangement favors British shipping in the creation of what has been called the triangular voyage: Formerly, British vessels engaged in the colonial trade went to the colonies in ballast, or but partially laden they often remained there long time from the preparation of their cargoes, with which they re- turned to England Now, they take full treights to Al. frASUh kr the West Indies; and thence, iul freights to Eng land. Or. fheY proceed with freigMts from Eng