The Caledonian. [volume] (St. Johnsbury, Vt.) 1837-1867, 1846-05-02


imposed by the corn laws. Hence Lord
Ashhurton vefyTastly argues, we must he ov-
crwhelmned ifthe corn laws nre repepledi
and this great atyantage, now enjoyed by
Canada and tlrc United States, of importing
flour and grain at about one fourth of the du-
~ paid by importers from the Baltic IL Black
seas. Repeal the corn laws--put them ON an
cquul footing with us, and Is not the question
settled, and the market lost to our grain and
flour in all time 10 GOMEZ Nothing can be
,cleurer. ~
And vet gentlemen exult in the prospect Of
Tho repeal of the corn laws, and are ready to
sacrifice the whole of our manufactures and
home markets to bring il about. Such will
he the operation of the repeal of the corn
laws on American agriculture,and such is the
statement of Lord Ashburton, who perhaps
knows MS much about'the matter as the learn
cd gentleman from Virginia. But this is not
all. The opinion of Lord Ashburton is sus-
timed by the most intelligent merchants in
Great Britain. Such is the uniform tenor of
the testimony recently taken before select
committee ofthe House of Commons. on this
subject. Henry Cleaner Chapman, one of the.
witnesses, aud one of the most intelligent
men in the kingdom, says; "Repeal the corn
laws, and the growing trade with Canada and
the Western States of America will be crushed
by the cheaper production ofthe Baltic and
the Black Sea; consequently he adds, n
merica, Canada, and British shipping, would
receive severe and decisive blow" by the
repeal ofthe corn laws. But still the gentle
man from Virginia eXults in the prospect OF
the repeal of the corn laws, aud boasts ofthe
market il will open TO our Western farmers,
To whom, however, he will not give one dol
lar for their rivers and inprovements-no a
cent-but is anxious TO seduce them into this
British free trade trap; but he would say to
the West "tneo danaos," trust your friends,
and beware ofyour enemies. Look at the
boosted foreign market, what is iP Conn.,
pnratively nothing Look at facts. The ag-
ricutural productions of the United Statese
exclusive of cotton and tobacco, is estimated
Mt one thousand millions per year. Our ex-
ports to all the world amounted last year to-
Sll,l95,5l5. Ofthis Great Britain took a.
bout two and half All the rest was con-
sumed Mt home. So the foreign markets OF
tho world amounted 10 IL millions, and the
home market to $50 millions. Yet the gen.
tlenlan had pronounced the foreign markets
every thing to farmers, and the home markets
comparatively nothing But Another fact
Our exports of manufactures last year, inclu-
ding those of wood, amounted TO S13,429,.
IG6. Assuming, as in the case of British
manufactures, that one-half their value is
made up of American agricultural produce,
then we export nearly screen millions of dol
lars worth of agricultural produce in the
form of manufactures, which does not gur or
iniure the foreign markets, for our -four and
grain, in its original FORM. To use familiar
illustration: Western farmers send their corn,
hay, and oats, thousands of dollars worth, ev-
cry year to the Eastern market, not in its
rude and original form, bun in the form OF
hogs and horses; they give their .hay-stncks
life and legs, and make them trot to market,
with the farmer on their hack. "a laugh. -
So the British converted their produce. not
into hogs aud horses, Int into cloth and iron,
aud send il here for sale. And viewing the
subject in this light, he could demopstrate
that there was not State IN the Union that
did not now consume .fUe. dollars worth of
British agricultural produce TO one dollar
worth she consumes oftheirs. Time would
not permit hilnto go into details; but he
would furnish the elements from which any
one could make the calculation. Assuming
that consumption and expectation arr in pro-
portion to population, then we import 80
millions of British goods, and 25 millions
one hafis agricultural produce. We export
10 England agricultural produce Excluding
cotton and tobacco) 21-2 millions. Divide
these sums, IS and 2'l-2 millions, by 223, the
number of Representatives, and II gives
SlI2,10S as the amount of British agricultu-
each Congressional district and S11,2l0 AS
their export to Great Britain of agricultural
produce. This gives the proportion of ten
TO one. Yet gentlemen IRE not satisfied, and
wish still further to increase the import OF
British goods, and still further destroy the A
merican farmers and mechanic and laboring
man to favor foreigners. To show the eff
feet upon currency, az we'll rs agriculture,
suppose the gentleman from Virginia (Mr
Bayly) wants new coat; he goes to a British
importer and pays him 20 dollars, hard mon
.ey, and hard to get. England takes none of
your rag money. A laugh.) Away II goes
IN quick time. We see no more oft, as far
MS circulation is concerned, the gentleman
might as well rave thrown it IN the fire. i
want coat go to the American manu-
iacturer and buy 800 worth of American
.broadcleti. (He"Nvears no other, and he
would compare coats with the gentleman on
the spot.) "a laugh.) Well the manufacturer
the next day, gave it to the farmer for wool;
he gaveit to the shoemaker, the halter, and
hlacksmitlf; they gave it back to the farmer
for meat and bread; and here il went from
Lone to another. sY0uanight perhaps see his
,i,usy and busting 800 note five'or six times in
the course of a day. This made money
plenty. But where was the gentlemans hard
money. Vanished; gone to reward and en-
rich the wool growers, and farmers, shoe
,nlkers, hatters, and blacksmiths of England
Now 90 for supporting the American farm
ers and mechanics and the gentleman goes
for the Brtish--that's the difference. Can
, the gentleman deny itP There are but two
sides in this matter, the British and the H.
sncrican side; and the simple question is,
which side shall we take? The great strug-
g!e is between the British aud american. farm
-ers and mechanics for the American market,