The Charlotte journal. [volume] (Charlotte, N.C.) 1835-1851, 1846-09-18
NUMBER 80.
From tie Richmond Wing.
The Corn Eaw.-The TaritR-PrI-
ccs of Produce.

suits, an excellent article from the Auqust
; number Of SINNERS Monthly Journal Of
Agriculture, on the probable effect of tho
: repeal Of the British Corn Laws upon tho
u price Of American bread sluils. We ina.
=" glnc that very few observani men, If indeed
there be one, have not become ulreadv sat.
= :, Isfied that The hope Of an extensive and pro-
= fitoble market for the consumption of our
, wheat and flour consequent upon the mod.
i, Ification Of the British Corn Laws, will
: prove entirely deluslye. Equally falaci-
Gus will the result Of our own experiment
demonstrate that reasoning fof SO frequent
recurrence in the speeches and ESSAYS of
tho anll'proiective party in the South to
be, which is employed to convince the far
mer that his hitherto inadequate remure-
! ration has been the effect Of the "hinh du.
ties imposed by our own tariff, and that
their reduction therefore must lead to an
augmentation Of The profits upon the capi.
tai invested and the labor employed in the
cultivation Of the soil. Should prices, dur
ing the next twelve months, continue 10 bc
as low as they now are, in despite OF low
duties both in Great Britain md in the T..
States, the most obstinate believers in the
popular notion that the prices Of our apri
cultural staples are TO a great extent reg.
uiated by those duties, Instead Of bv the
natural law of demand aud supply, cannot
all 10 discover the cheat which has been
practsed upon them by men, who can only
md an excuse for the deception in the ia.
fatuated seryiity Of their oun minds. which
! refused In n,,fI Nh H., r.
plausible theory of a school of Political
Economists Of which the celebrated Adam
Smith was the founder-a theory which
may do very well for book worms, b,t
which can never be safely relied s,on in
practical life. As Blackwoods Magazine
well remarks, in an incidental alusion 10
the Science Of political Economy, as
taught by the author of the Wealth of Ma.
Hons "N neither it ever deserved the
name OF Science, or will ever deserve it.
may be grave question. Ii depends up.
on such multitude Of facts, and the facts
themselves vary so perpe'uay- 'prin-
Iclples derived from those facts are so fee.
bic and fuctuating-and common experi.
ence so proyoklngly contradicts, from day
TO day, the most labored conclusions that
every pew professor has a new theory, and
| every new theory turns the former into RI
dIcuIe, itself 10 be burlesqued BY The next
that follows. This at least is known, that
Fox declared his opinion Of the whole,
saying, that II was at once too daring 10
be Ineligible, and ton indefinite to be re.
ducible 10 practice Even in our day. no
two authors on tho subject agree. ANMe
successful measures of repeaue and finance
haze been adopted in utter defiance of its
dogmGs, while all modern ATTEMPTS to act
upon what are called its princi pies have
only convulsed commerce, shaken public
credit aud substituted fantastic visions of
prosperity for the old substantial wealth Of
England. These remarks Of Blackwood
are as sIrikingIy applicable to the course
Of events in the Uuited States as they are
on the other side of the water; and we
shall be most ugreeably disappointed if the
experimental tariff" of the present Adj
ministration do not add another to tho
practical exemplticatious we have already
had of the difference between Fact and
Theory.
While we do not doubt that the revenue
policy Of the government may exert, 10
limited extent, some influence upon the
prices Of produce, we believe at the same
time that Jpn other causes is the market
value of our staples mainly aud indeed al.
most entirely dependant-and especially
upon the law Of demand and supply. Su-
| perabundant production, for instance, with
a limited consumption, leads to low prices;
and, on the contrary, production not e.
! quail to the demand, at once occasions an
advanced price, in despite of all the tariffs
IN the world, not absolutely prohibiory.-
We have thus frequently seen our agricul.
tural staples commanding the highest pri.
ces under tariff levying the highest rates
OF duty upon foreign imports; ond on the
other hand, the very lowest prices under
the lowest rates Of duty.
We can very we'll perceive, indeed, as
one of the indirect results of the new tariff,
that the prices of some Of our staples mey,
and probably will, be actually reduced by
the reduction of duty. The question is
generally argued as if MANUFACTURES on
ly were protected by the taritf'of lS42, and
as if the small portion Of our population
tcnsaged in that branch Of industry were
alone interested in the maintenance of the
protective system. Hence the agricultur.
alists are arrayed in hostility to the manu-
(acturers as privileged class. Blu. moth
ing can be more erroneous. Iron, coal,
salt, lead, and copper, ought, for example,
rather 10 be classed with the products Of
agricultural than with those Of manuEactur.
ing iabor-and they constitute no unimpor-
tant items in the catalogue of dutied arti.
cles. Hemp and sugar also are leading
articles ln the protected list, and form no
small portion of the aggregate of our agri-
culumlweahh Cotton too, had a protection
of cts. per pound and although, like the
, coarse cotton fabrics, il has outgrown the
necessity Of protection, no ono can doubt
that to the encouragement afforded origl-
,naly hv that duty we own the unprece~