The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-06-03


in bounds, from the fact that another gentleman q
proprietor of rolling mill, informed me thatit cost
him S45 per 10 produce railroad iron, under the
disadvantage Of having TO buy the pig iron at a
profit Of $40 per ton to the manufacturer. tax Of
this character of from s35 to $40 per ton, upon all
the railroad iron used in this country, IN the shape
Of profits its manufacture, is burden that seri-
ousy retards the progress Of internal improve
ments, and the incident development Of the re-
| sources Of the country. The injustice OF
such tax, and the dishonesty Of i'm
posing it, under color Of protecting American
labor, il particularly manifest in the case of the
Mount Savage Company. This company has a
capital Of 81 100000. considerable amount OF
the stock is owned by SwartwouL and Is now held
by the United States government; but the largest
part is owned in England, several members Of the
| nobility being the principal parties. The prohibi-
tionists affect great anxiety TO withhold food from
| the mouths Of the "pauper labor" OF England; and
yet they have no objection TO the wealth Of the
country going abroad in large dividends line the
pockets of the nch Three years aga the iron trade
was very much depressed in England Railroad iron
could have been bought m any quaStity at S25 per
ton. Under the present tariff we are paying the
English owners ofthe Mount Savage Company $40
per ton bonus for the privilege Of manufacturing it
ourselves, at S35 per ton,
A high tariff increases the value Of all raw mate
rails, and not the wages Of labor. This makes
dieting interests, that are very injurious TO manufac-
lures. Thus a protectien-as it is called-given to
pig iron beges necessity for protecting the artisan
who, with cunning hands, mouds it into useful i'm
pements; and the protection given to yarns renders
corresponding one imperative, TO protect the labor
on the hnnd-loom that weayes il into fabric; and
so also the monopoly given to thepower.loom man
ufactories OF printing cloths destroys the ability Of
the calico printer who has TO buy the cloths he
prints TO compete with English manufacturers with
out tariff The whole system is stimulating, arti-
fetal, and vicious, and would eventually bring de-
structon upon the very interests il proposes 10 ben
eft. One Of its fatal workings was alluded 10 by
your faithful correspondent III" on Friday last-I
mean the financial troubles Of the calico printers.
The New Haven Palladium makes this statement:
"The sslco printers have seen hard times for the
last two nSPHt4, their goods having declined ma
terially, pa1 in consequence Of large lots having
been forced p auction, by the English manufac-
turers in New York, at thesmost they would bring,
in consequence of the pressure of the English money
market some time since. The imports, however,
recently have fallen off,"
Il is fact that the job calico printers have Of late
been suffering very severe losses. Several of them
have failed, and many have stopped their works;
but not from the causes assigned 10y the Palladium.
assert that there has not BEEN to my certain knowl
edge single case Of English prints sold at auc-
ton in New York this spring, except few pack
ages saved from the wreck OF the ship Henry Clay,
In damaged state. English calicoes are among
TUG many NY the nlgn taftf, HnO,
we except occasionally, when some Of the more
costly styles are Introduced for novelty Of pattern,
are not imported. But few years since, and thou
sands OF packages were imported every year into
the port of New York alone, and now doubt
whether there has been one hundred cases import
ed INTO the whole United States during the past
year The recklessness with which the statement
quoted above from the Palladium is made, ia pecu-
liar to the advocates OF prohibition, and yet no more
dishonest than II is to call the tariff OF 1S42 ere
venue tariff"
The true cause of the endorsements of the
calico printers is to be found in this very system Of
government interference with trade. II il known
that the making Of cotton cloths, and the printing
of them each n distinct business. There are
but four print works in the United States that manu.
facture their own cloths The cotton cloth is as il
were, the raw material in the business of the calico
printer. Unless he can obtain that material at fair
value, 1t Is impossible for him to carry his works
successfully. Now the misfortune Of the printers
has been that the manufacturers of cloths under the
tariff have had a monopoly IN the supply Of the
market, and the consequent result s that the manu-
featuring Of printing cloths has BEEN for three years
past, the most profitable of any description Of cot
ton goods, and although they can be produced
cheaper in this country than they in England,
the manufacturers actually exact from the calico
printer, from 80 to so per cent more for them than
they could have been procured at abroad. Several
printers have told me that their average losses this
spring nave UccH Just ABOUT as muCn per VarQ as
the extra profit they had to pay the manufacturer to
get the cloths Their fine prints cost them so high
to produce, that English ousiin de LANES came into
competition with them, and were preferred at the
small difference in price Mr.. Philip Allen, of
Rhode Island, highly intelligent man, and one of
the largest calico printers in this country, says if
government will allow him to procure his cloths
where he can get them cheapest, he will defy
any foreign competition, even without any ia
riff. l am told, that when called upon to send
samples of his calicoes to the exhibition at Wash
ington, his reply was that he would do go if
the committee would allow him to affix to them the
prices he paid for the cloth, and also some samples
with the prices Of English cloths, to show how much
cheaper he could have bought them abroad.
The prohibitionists, the high-tariff party are
called in France-and the name is opposite, whilst
that of protectoniss is deceptvc-the prohibition
lists Of the United States promised that the effect Of
the present tariff would be to cheaper the prices of
goods, increase the wages of labor and furnish a
profitable home-market for agricultural products.
To any one at all familiar with the science of poti-
cal economy, these promises known to be mis-
cradle pretexts. l have shown in previous commu-
nications, that the rate of wages has not been in
creased: also, that goods are no lower--that the
main articles Of cotton manufacture in this country
(sheetings and shirtngs) now cost the farmer from
10 to 20 per cent more than they did previous to the
tariff. The third and material benefit which 'pro-
lection" was to confer upon the countryside
CTeauon OF prOHtaDle OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES
| to be placed in the same category Of fiction.
The tariff has now been in operation four
years. The cotton-spinners and the iron men
have been coming money under its privileges, from
| the hrst day it went into operation. What
has it been doing in the meanwhile to benefit the
overtaxed farmer' Let us examine the following
statistics of the -four trade, which | take from the
| commercial columns Of the New York Tribune.
The Tribune, it is well known, has been and is the
most orclble and honest organ of the prohibition
lists. Its peculiar views on the subjects Of social
reform, community Of interests living within our
selves, and kindred vagaries, makes i the natural
advocate Of prohibitive tariff; for this policy of
"protecton," in its popular sense, is but extern
sion Of the same doctrinesil fact, national Four
erism but stripped Of the oily redeeming feature OF
that system--ihat of ENJOYING ian equitable distri-
button Of profits" The Tribune's commercial ar
ticles are perfectly reliable:
| "Ths following gives the prices of -four in the
first week of May for me last % years. 1t will be
| seen that it has never teen lower than now:
1924 1924 &c, i Iss "a 1870 $50 ~
1898 ~ ia IS rs is 1919 81