Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1845-05-23
From the \. Y. journal Of Commerc
The Truth I'm a NUTSHELL

x7eC TuuG-FFUUL rs u - lC IAoSe
perfect exemplificaiion of actual free trade
which the world ever saw, is TO be found
% these United States, considered as TWEEN.
y-six sovereign and independent COM
nunties. Each buys what il pleases Of
he others, and sells what they respective
y please to buy OF it, without let Or him
1rance-without the interference of Gus.
officcrs--without charges orb
duties of any kind. Is it not convenient
system? Is i, not a just one? Does III
not promote the interests Of all !
Apply the protective system to these
States, and each of them would lay duties
upon the products of each OF the others
New York would prohibit the admission
of wheat from the West, and of cotton and
wooIlen manufactures from New England:
or charge them with exorbitant duties, be-
cause she can produce her own wheat, and
manufacture her own cloths. Georgia
would prohibit the importation of sugar
from Louisiana. and elsewhere, because
she could grow her own sugar; and by
making the duty high enough, the business
would be eminentIy profitable TO the grow
ers, though eminenlly improbable TO the
consumers. Every State, instead of ex-
changing the commodities which she could
most naturally and adyantageously pro-
duce. would, by duties and prohibitions,
seek to exclude those foreign commodi-
ties. Thus al. would do W hat they could,
to invert the order of Nature,-raising Or
anges in Maine, and making ice in Loui-
slana.
Substitute 26 nations for the % Ameri-
can States, and we are prepared to see how
mutually beneficial would be a system of
free trade, if mutually adopted by those
nations. But it is said, other nations tax
our commodities, and we must tax theirs
IN return. Is this an honest argument, or
only a pretext? If the, former. then IN
proportion as other nation, relax their re-
strictiye system, we shall d. the same. II
the latter, We shall secretly ueprecate any
such change, and perhaps openly, ae~~Ors,ze
it, as in the case Of the BRUSH Ant-Corn
Law League. The grand object of thai
Association is The promotion Of free trade
more especially free trade in breadstnffs
and first of all in England herself The
value of breadstuffs imported into Grea
Britain and ireland. has amounted, on ar
average of the LAST IL years, to Sl7,C0o,'
coo per annum; and would have been still
greater but for the heavy duties. No ma
ton, perhaps, is SO deeply interested in :
repeal of those du,es--the very object o
the Anti-Corn Law League-as the United
States. Why then should we, or any o
Us, ally ourselves with the British corr
monopoIist, against the efforts of this mos
excellent and truly noble association?
But we mus, have revenue. Undoubt
eddy; and there is no mode Of raising it 81
little burdensome to the people, because
so little perceived by them, as by dute
on imports. We propose no other mod
Of raising it, except the three or four mil
, lions realized annually from the sales Q
public lands-we know Of none BETTER
,, Still, it is a mode which bears very har
upon men of small means, because it com
. pels them to pay almost as much per head
as the same number of rich men; whereas
!; the latter ought to pay in proportion t
their property. A man worth 1000 DO
E lars, probably consumes half as much {
dutiable goods, on an average, as ma
worth 100000 dollars. Consequently tn
! latter pays but twice as much for the SUI
r port of Government as the former; wherea
. he ought to pay hundred times as mucl
But waving all this, we agree that the NJ
cessary revenue, over and above the prt
= ceeds of land sales, is best raised by dutie
: On imports.
t The average annual expenditures of I'll
Government for many years past, hay
. been nearly or quite $780, 100000. If W
e should keep clear of wars and other extr
ordinary charges we may possibly redu'
them to S25,OOO.O0O. To do this, ho,
q ever, will require the most rigid econom
4 If we call the revenue from lands So 500
,r 900 annually, there will remain TO be raj
ed by duties on imports, s2l, 100000.
,, raise this amount. would require an ave
q age duty of twenty-one and half per Gel
/, ON 100000 of imports; which
y about the average Of our importations I
q the last four year. Nearly or quite on
- tenth Of our imports consist Of speci
o. which Of course is free of duty. Sund
other articles are necessarily free of dnt
c. or subject to less duty than 20 per Gel
Making these deductions. it would be fou
y that horizontal duty on all other articI
~ must be in the neighborhood of 25 p
RI cent, in order to afford the requisite re,
ne nue.. And the cost and charges of impr
1 I Il