Staunton spectator, and general advertiser. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 183?-1849, 1846-10-08
COTTON.

From Communication to The Editors of the Nat lutl
The objection urged against the tariff 10 Tho,
rade rs reciprocal, and that consequently every
ent Of duty levied by us upon the foreign fabric of
o..oh imported Into this country recoiis upop the
otton grower, who is compelled either to sell his
otton Tor SO much less as the duty takes from the
ront Vi the manufacturer, or to withdraw from the
olelsn market SO much OF the cotton as would be
onsumed In that portion of the f,reign fabric
'hich Is substituted by the manufactures with
'nich the duty levied enables us to furnish onr
ewes AZ home. The argument sounds well. and
: nrst blush convincing; but we NAV readily find
he reason why pracncal results ialsify SO we'll
ouading theory. AS, in most cases of reason;pg
P''Ws' an 'he iacs relevant to the issue are not
brought before the mind. Those who uroe This
objection do not seem TO have inouired into two
very important matters of fact, viz !: how far the
people oil England are under the necessity of man
uiacturlng cotton and how far, by reduction of
duties IN any way bearing ON the manuf,c,nre
England Is capable OF reducing the cost of the IA,
oIic. hese ooIectors had, even as many as fifteen
or eighteen years ago, falsely assumed that the
cost OF fabrcaing in England was reduced IN its
est rates. we will inquire into this branch of
'he SUBJECT more fully presently Nor do these
same opjectors seem to have looked into another
question of fact equally Important, and that is.
whether our duties upon the imported fabric have
ever affected the amount of American cot,on CON
ment. that the protective duty takes from the Cot
ton grower So much OF the foreign market for his
raw cotton as 1t affords home market for the do
mesuc manufacture, it is palpable that it would at
the same time, give him home market for fully
the same amount OF raw cotton as il woud he i'm
Possiole ior us to fabrlcate without the materi-
al Besides, this home market must be- to the
extent OF 1T, much better than tho foreign if
the great profits OF factories are not the sheer
fabr,caftons of Southern politicians You will mar
don me ior saying that these politicians must have
great deal of material to work upon at home
or they would never send SO gross a fabric from
their political factories
history proves that England, the great cotton
manufacturer, mas never taken one pound the less
or our cotton on account of any increased protection
Oh our own manufactures, nor one pound the more
because OF any reduction of duties ON our mart =
.'he has gone on from year to year rapidly ncreas
ing the quantity OF her consumption of our staple
irrespective OF our duties. She seems to have act
eG under a stern necessity, which impels her. under
all circumstances, to manufacture this product of
our SOL. and beg for admittance at our ports with
the laorlcs OF her loom at any price, These state
menus are not loosely made. | write from the re-
cord, and to substantiate my position, refer to the
taoie respecting raw cotton to be found i'm the Ma
tional lnelligencer of September Sth taken chiefly
from McCulloch himself, the great champion of
free trade.
IL 1t Is asked why it is that the expansion of the
continued. H.
standing the continual reduction OF the price of the
fabric, perhaps we will find the true answer partly
IN the rapid development of this country itself
whose ineXhaustible powers of production act, by
means OF the cotton trade, Stimulus On the la
bor-craving population OF England which, in its
still increasing demands for our raw material reacts
Win v oitalc energy upon the productive spirit of
our people. Production manufacture and con-
sumption OF the fabric, have kept pace together
AS an outlet for the swelling manufacture, reduc-
ing prices Kept up continually expanding con-
sumption, and thus is explained the difficult pro-
oiem why production, in the midst of its almost mi
raculous expansion, but slowly abated its eXtrava-
Eaht profits. AS the improvements in machinery
together with the reducing prices of the raw mate
lia, enabled The manufacturer To continue his re-
auction OF price Tor the fabric, so likewise the i'm
provemen In the culture and the machinery for pre-
pairing the raw material for market enabled the
planter to lop from his prices and preserve his pans
out little impaired, which still continued and to
TINS day remain greater than those of any other
branch OF agriculture, with perhaps the exception
Of the culture of sugar
But wish to show you, by plain historic de-
tail, that this spendidly acting and reactng sys-
TEN between the manufacturer in England and the
producer IN America would long since have ceased
It's wondrous action but for the protective arm of
the American Congress.
In iI|4 England repealed the statute which
made 1t penal to manufacture any article acholly of
cotton and from that time till oO6 levied duty Of
oo sterdng upon every square yard manufactured
IN the realm In 1876 this ercise duty aoas raised
20 5sd per square yard. Besides this excise DUTY
an impost duty of 9s Id sterling per cwt was paid
upon raw cotton under the English tariff OF 1887,
which was raised to 9s. I'd under their tariff of
1919.
The truly wise men of this country, such as
washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison and after
them, even John G. Calhoun, Lowndes Clay, and
NIL at Ho,. Io.,o . =.
would be to the consumer of the fabric, as also to
the producer OF the raw material, if we could but
manufacture this cotton at home, and thus save
from eight to ten dollars per cwt on the cotton in
the coarser fabrics. Hence the protection of the
earlier Administrations; and hence, among other
reasons, the lively support which Lowndes and
calhoun gave to the tariff of 1916; and hence the
frequent urging of ;nis subject upon the consdera-
ton of Congress by Madison, and after him by
Monroe. Cur manufactures had taken some hold
during the restrictive system Of Jefferson and af-
forwards during the war; but, after peace was re-
stored, the flooding importations from England
seemed likely to overwhelm them in their infancy.
until, by the tariffs of 1924 and 1928, adequate
protection was given them. Now mark the effect
jackson, In his first message, believe it was adj
verts to the tariff of 1928 and accounts for the sin
GUAR failure in the predictions Of its opponents re-
speeding the prices of protected articles by the ex-
traordInary impetus given to manufactures thereby
increasing them so much as actually TO reduce the
price, notwithstanding the duty CThat mode of
accounting for low prices under high duties was
sound and true and republican in Jackson's mes
sage, but in the mouths of Wings now it is false
and absnrd-arstocraic, federal, British, or any
thing demagouge chooses to call it,
Now let us mark the effect of this same ssbil1 of
nominations" upon England, and we will soon sec
what lever we held upon her on this subject
The great competition with England which that
'oill' raised in our domestic manufactures so re-.