Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1846-04-17

assigned Tor II IN their case are uus''J . ,r,n,
as was most clearly shown by the gentleman llu ron
New York. IMr. Collin, whose good sense emu, emu
ties him 10 be hearJ ofener than ne 10 ~ M ,rh;ch
He took the case Of The Gleenham factory, wn'.I
was especially singled out BY tle Co .a,sc,;on
1912 as one showing the tssliy OF Plo.1,.:,
aud be proved, that Of their entire e1Pe"u ~ al
only twenty-four per cent. was loi lapo' ="
the other items OF eYpendiure-thc cosl lot wa,
Ter power and The site for line isctory,ln pI.s. -
The raw material, the amount oil taxes, .ne e I,
living, &C., they had The advantage .. .ne na;d
ish manufacturer. We'll, suppose lhey pai,u
twice as much for their labor, that "ouia ohty
make difference Of twelve per cent, which as
shall directly show, is less than Inc COS. VI ,u
porting without any duty. So, il trace was az
solutely free, they would still have tne ausdn1ass
OF their European competitor And II you 1ou,a
give them duty OF twelve per cent, .ney "ou,u
have the advantage OF their European coinpeti'oi,
even if he did NOT pay cent for labor! ana YET
il is pauper labor they lear!!
Now, sir, am the representative no. ony ~
my legislative but in my individual character, o,
both capital and labor. My constituents anu lhysell
cultivate our land with our labor ooliie u ''e'i
with their own hands, others by their slaves.
We ara more interested in The proh's OF
labor than OF capital. You cannot impair lne
profits of labor without injufing us. In ms re-
specl the southern planter and Inc ihdep'aaen'
free farmer, who cuvaes by his own LABOR ms
own land differs from nearly all other capitalists.
There is no antagonism with them, between Ia
Dor and capital; and this was The real philosophy
Of Mr. Jefferson's remark, that The democracy oi
The North were the natural allies VI Inc south
AS the representative of labor, and Inc owner OF
il to no inconsiderabe extent all ask IS 10 ne
permitted 10 compete with the pauper iaoof oi
Europe.
ISeyeral Western members "That Is all We
ask, too
This is all you need ask know your country
we'll. | am personally deeply interested IN IT,
In one sense | am western farmer as well rs
an eastern cne The only difference is. do not
there, as al home, cultivate my land withmy own.
labor. We have greatly The advantage VI En-
ropeans, and in fair competition We must gre; IL
ly oulslrip Them. Profits are divided bew' zen
capital and labor The more capital is 'Aled
my friend from lidiaDa before me culiYates,
which is as rich and productive as land csn be,
did not cost him $40 per acre.
Mr.. Kennedy. Ne; not five.
Mr.. Bayly. The same land in Ensla;d would
sell for five hundred. In England, gi ring capt.
,al three per cent, il would receive Sl5 before
abor could get cent. Whereas, here, giving
capital six per cent, labor would, receive all
over 80 cents.
But this is not our only advantage. Where is
our comparative freedom from 10 xaton our ge-
NAL climate, our natural advanta Ses in our bays,
rivers not navigaed by such rl;serable cral as
we have seen are used in Prussia and Poland,
bu, by magnificent s.eamboals2 Where are our
railroads and canals7 And, above all, where
are our glorious free institutions? Applause.
Bni. sir, we cannot reap he full benefit OF these
advantages until we navc removed the incubus
OF our restrictive SYSTEM We cannot expect 10
export our agricultural produce TO other coun-
tries, unless we will iynporl what they have 10
SELL II is physically impossible for you to e1-
port, unless you import. Our exports are about
one hundred millions annually. This export, if
ye import nothing, would drain Europe of il.
specie in one year; money would become scarce
there, prices would fall very low, and our export
of necessity cease. These are axioms in poi'i-
cal economy, which require no proof II is
equally true that ifyoa crharrass your imports,
YOU lessen the quantity and value Of your ex-
ports. The effect OF the Tariff of 1912 was 10
curlail both our exports and imports, and TO
knock down the price Of our agricultural pro-
duce Before turn 10 the facts 10 prove this last
position, desire 10 explain the reason Of il, and
can do this best by an illustration. Suppose mer-
chant OF N. York exports a hundred bushels OF
wheat 10 England there sells il and purchases with
the proceeds a,hundred yards Of cloth. Suppose
so cents will pay the cost OF expectation and i'm
| porlation and give The merchant fair profit;
| and suppose the merchant can sell the cloth in
this market for 81 50: il there is no duty, do
you not perceive he will be able TO give the far
ner 81 bushe for his wheal2 But suppose The
Government steps in and leviesa duty OF IS cents.
Gentlemen say this will not enhance the price oil
the cloth here their theory is that high duties
make lower, not higher, prices. Well. The cloth
will still be sold here for 81 so. The merchant
must still have, 10 cover the costs Of exporting
! and importing, SO cenls-,he Government will
claim 25, and there will be only IS lef for the
wheat. And Inc trade cannot 90 on il more j.
given. Blu, gentlemen will say that this i. tie
lallacious "forly-bale" theory. ! know it is the
"fouy-bale" theory; and believe it is 10 some
extent iallacous. But You must adpit II TO be
faacy, lha, the duty does not raise the price OF
the imported article, 10 prove il 10 be so. Adj
mil The truth of this latter lallacy and DEFY any
one to answer The "fory-bale" theory. Bu' sup.
pose the duty 10 raise the price Of the imported
article 10 the full extent of The duty, le, us then
see how The farmer would stand. AS before, 81
cents is the merchants share, IS The Govern
nenl's. 81 The farmers, and the article sells tor
ST. 15 But the farmer is but lille better of: he
is a consumer OF imported arlicl 5, as well as Inc
producer Of the articles OF export and although ne
does moi lose on This supposltion as producer, DC
does as consumer And as he Nils oolh capa-
IL
he gets Is cents worth less cloth for his wheat
than before the imposition Of the duty and 20
The extent you increase or lower The duty, Is ne
taxed more or less II is often very difficult
10 tell Ia wha. extent The duty tails upon me pro-
ducer OF the export or the consumer. u depends
| unon a variety Of circumstances, which are
constantly hucluains; and 10 The asrieu'tuIisl,
as have shown, The exact adjustment IS mat
Ter OF no erea, consequence. 10 this view mere
Is but one possible answer; and That -, mat tne
effect Of the duty is not 10 increase the price OF
The imported article in our market, but 10 lower
The nrice of it abroad. II this were lrue il would
mpoverish the foreigner; but do not see what
possible advantage, in commercial point OF
view, IL would be 10 US.
We would gel The article here al The same
price: The consumer would not be- injured; nor
would our manufacturer be benefited. But our
foreign customer would be impoverished, and
would be a worse customer for our exports. So
in that view, we would be injured. Bat IS II true
that the effect of the duty is TO compel the foreign
er to sell lowerl In England, for long time,
the pressure OF population has been SO great,
and the competition SO active That prices had
reached the lowest limit before the enactment OF
our tariff. Besides, the proportion which we take
OF British soods-and We take more of them
Than any other nation-in comparison with her
CONSUMPTION al home and her exports to her CO.
lonies and 10 other foreign nations than ourselves,
is very nconsideIable; and it's not probable thai,
to gain access TO our market, they would submit
TO reduction on the great mass OF her produc-
ton They would lose less by giving up orr
trade altogether. But il may be said that have
already proved that the price of The quantity
exported, which is fixed by The price in the TO-
reign market, fixes the prizes OF the entire produc-
ton. In the case Of the Agricultural of this
country ,ha, is SO; but in The case IN hand it is no!
So In the frsl place, our export Of agricultural
produce bears a much larger proportion TO
our entire production than The exports from
England 10 this country of her manufactures
does 10 the entire amount of her production, and
Of course exerls greater influence on the price.
In addition 10 this, The farmer cannot regulate his
supply with The demand. The farmers are cat
tered all over the land, and they cannot by com
bina,ons adjus, the supply 10 the demand. In
this country, where most OF The land is cultivated
by the labor OF the owner Of The soil. he has no
| other occupation than its cultivation, and he