The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-07-30

stoned any material expense or saerhce 10 agrlcul
ture commerce. snos sy ioeys chiefly incidental q
necessary revenue resulted from distance from
the foreign consumers Of our productions and manu-
faetires Of our supplies.o Does this evidence OF
the prosperity of manufactures in country prior
10 the enactment of high protective duties, and OF
their steady 20 per centum increase, sustain gentle
men IN their assumption that the proposed reduction
Of duties will work the havoc predicted by It's OPP
ponents' Isl not true, also. that during the com
promise between 1888 and l642, when the whole
country knew that the tariff TO be gradually
duced below the present proposed rates, when Mr..
Clay himself denounced the suggestion Of unfaith-
tulness TO the compromise, that new investments
were made IN neutrality-suspicious. factories still
multiplied in the landi Has not the gentleman from
Virginia Mr. BArLrl just asserted that most OF
these establishments sprang up In his State during
the compromise And l believe many came into
existence, through the enterprise Of the people, in
my own State during that period - rr
No doubt, Mr.. Chairman, the high protective
tariff contributes to swell the profits Of the manu-
faetnrers, and 70 encourage their growth, but under
tho infeaes OF moderate protection, Incidental TO
revenue tariff, manufacturers can and ,ciu realize
those profits which will iHssre their substantial
prosperity and steady growth.
Away, then, with this panic eryt hat the modifea-
ton OF the tariff IL destruction 10 manufactures.
Is II not libel on the enterprisng character Of
people, and inconsistent with superior adyanta-
! ges Of soil, climate, and free government Such
is the character such the skill and indomable en-
ergy Of our people, thai Il the custom honses were
all abolished, fthe whole tariff system were swept
from the statute book, and new yet unproposed
scheme for raising revenue devised even then under
those discoungins signs, do not believe the pre-
dicted total destruction OF the business Of manuiac
turing would be the result. But who proposes an
abandonment Of the present system Of revenue from
eustoms Who proposes suen to reduce he duties as
l0t1 as they were when manufactures hourished in
10 0ff he kite, AMI air IL he
proposed bill, 80 much denounced as a cruel mon
ster, filled with concessions TO the interest Of man
pfacturerS Is 30 per cent with the cost Of impor-
taton added, no protection 10 the manufacturer OF
cotton, wool, iron, hats, and variety Of other
ticles needless TO be enumerated Is 20 per cent.
no protection TO the leather manufacturer and the
hemp groweR But | will not fatigue the committee
with extracts from the proposed BILL Letit be ex-
amined And, IN Illustration Of this point, hear the
following extract from memorial ola number OF
merchants in the city OF New York, presented TO
Congress in August, lS4l:
From much observation and long experience we are
satisfied that 20 perez the largest duty that pru.
dent to impose any article Tbs dH Is proee.
ton Of no forty per cent 20 doRsse nsSnafaeTssi
SeeSass IA addition 10 hs duy the erPsnsss Of importation
about and gha per esn and pre TO he ipOr.
Ter is probably about tori0s and hsLfpsr esnE"
But, sir, let US for moment turn our eye to Eng
land, where the restrictive policy has prevailed in all
its perfection and learn il the occasional relaxation
there too, has worked such fatal destruction or has
stimulated the industry OF the mechanic through fear
Of the competition Of his rival neghbor has reduced
prices, increased consumption, and aided the reye-
nue.. have before me "Porter's Progress Of the
Nation" a recent work from the British press
crowded with interesting facts and convincing argu-
ments on this subject. There, too, whenever the
British statesman, animated with a sense Of the in
justice of this policy, became bold enough to pro-
pose its relaxation, the same tocsin Of alarm was
sounded with which our ears quite familiar.
will not fatigue the committee with many references,
but ask their attention particularly TO the insructye
history Of the silk and wooilen manufactures, be-
cause French competition was in koss much dreaded
and protection against French importation had been
so long and inaexibly adhered to- that the sugges-
ton Of relaxation, of reducing the protective duties,
startled the nation into commissions of apprehended
ruin. But mark the facts, the instructive admoni-
tons Of history. ..--...r
The author to whom have referred-whose able
work has given him much ame-informs US that
The importation of silk goods manufactured other
ounriss was strictly prohibited in l16, and this system
continued in force during long series OF years.
By this prohibitory the English silk
legally secured in the exclusive possession Of the
home market from which in the then imperfect condition
peror fabrics oforeign looms Protected trades almost
invariably carried without that regard to economy in
the processes which is necessary in order to provide for
their extension by bringing the protected article within
reach of larger number Of consumers Hence arose
he use o. which must be confined to the richer classes
Heavy duties therefore imposed upon the Importation
material the cost Of which thus enhanced continued
beyond the reach of the multitude and the
consequently liable to considerable and violent vics
STUDIES from every change of fashion On the other
those manufacturers feeling themselves in their s
gal monopoly oith home market were without the neces-
sary stimulus to Improvement"
"ln 1924 says the author ths system here described
wholly changed The high duties reduced radi
cay and the prohibition Of the Importation of foreign man.
ufsctured goods was repealed. - -, .....
per ID thrown silk were reduced-the former to 3D.,
and the latter TO IT, cd III These rates have been still
as to admit foreign silk goods under scale
of duties adopted 90 .e- .7't
kets to the fabrics of other countries was firmly believed
and loudly asserted by many persons experienced in the
trade that such measure would bring certain ruin upon
the silk manufacturers of England who being accustomed
work for only the higher ranks of society had constantly
experience the evils attendant upon limited Market and
had been kept in dread of competition from without
The experience of few years has served show how
groundless these fears that by reducing the prices
their goods which they were enabled to do through the
reduction of the duty and the improvements in their
chinery, the market would be extended to include
among their customer by far the larger part of the popu
laton and that stimulated by the rivalry OF foreign manu-.
factnrers such improvements would be effected in the
petition with the most beautiful productions Of foreign
looms. ''
the trade the silk manufacture in all its branches has
spread itself into various districts. 81 I'd. ....
"The number Of silk mills in the townships Of Manches.
ter and Saliord which in 1920 than Ave- had
increased in 1882, to sixteen 81 '". ' I
Thus it appears that the reduction Of duties,
which produced such anticipation of certain runous
consequences, had no such effect; but, on the CON
trary the fear of foreign competition stimulated in
dusry, increased manufactures and reduced prices,
which encouraged consumption! The history of
woollen manufactures Is equally instructive and Gu
rous. volume might be filled with the singular
and remarkable statutes of protection this depart
men, evincing the commercial ideas Of other times.
In 1897 they enacted law prohibiting the wear Of
any cloth made beyond sea, and interdicting the
export of English wool. In 1877 their zeal grew
considerably, and they enacted that all persons
should be buried in woolen shrouds, and that cof-
fins should be lined with wooen cloth; and, to in
sure the rigid enforcement Of this patriotic statute il
became the duty Of the clergy occasionally on the
Sabbath to read to their flock, as they received the
benefit Of all forfeitures incurred by its violaonl
Hear the following extract from the same authors
From very early period the woollen manufacture has
been object Of the especial protection Of the English
government Originally indeed the lreest expectation Of
British wool allowed but in in 1860 II strictly pro
hibed and this law remained in force until 1898 The
prohibition grounded upon the belief that the long
nile or cotnbinH wool Of England superior