Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1848-01-08
NATIONAL INTELLIGENCER.
FROM ouR EUROPEAN CORRESPONDENT.
LONDON, NOVEMBER g

Nv letter dated lst of October appeared in the
National nelligencer on the 22d Of that month, and
elected some observations from "A Constant Read
err in Philadelphia, which were inserted in the IN
,ellieeprer of the 2Sth. These observations were
more severely seasoned with intensity OF expression
than the occasion either called for justified; but,
as nv object is 10 deal with facts and SUBJECTS and
not with words these harsh expressions will re-
ceye no further attention from me than may serve
10 prove their entire inapplicabihty TO any thing
which have asserted.
The Note' which you were kind enough 10
append to the communication of" A Constant Read
err might be considered more than sufficient an
swer, and am personally obliged TO you for il but
will with your leave, carry out the subject little
further and endeavor to show tlat did not make
the statements which are objected TO unadyisedly,
and that have not trespassed on your confidence
with careless and unauthorized assertions.
Ii is objected to me that have said . European
ree.traders appear to limit their exertions 10 the
repeal of duties upon raw materials, and have
never in single instance spoken about lowering
the protection upon The manufactures OF their re-
spectve countries" 1t will be seen, upon refer
ring 10 my letter that this sentence forms part Of
my comment upon the proceedings of the European
Free-Trade Congress, which then sitting al
Brussels. | have not yet seen word in the pro-
ceedngs of that Congress which dsproves my as
scrtion What was done in the British Parliament
in the 9th and 10Th of Victoria, (lS46; can have
no reference to what was said at Brussels IN Sep
tenber Is47. 1t the utter that my observation aP-
Piled and my assertions charged with being contrary to
every thing like TRUTH because they not corroboaied by
the t1rp.ert need not say more upon this point
am further charged with having stated that neither Sir
Robert Peel Lord John Russell has relaxed for
an instant III his protection Of British manufactured re-
MI halls tod
the subject or British manufactures could be. protected by
no other means than the evyng high duties upon the i'm
porta,ion Of al foreign goods which into competition
with hem then should certainly appear to have asserted
mere than subautiae But neither of these is the
fact. said . The Anti-Conlaw League very useful
movement; il produced ncalcuahe good but to call Sir
Robert Peel Lord John Russell, freetradr, be-
he advocated that aluay reformation would be most
decidedly absurd seeing that neither has relaxed for
nstan, his protection Of British manufacture Certain
w. when these gentlemen voted for the repeal Of the corn
laws they were free-tradess far that went yet
giving VOTE they did rar in their protection Of Bi
sh manufacturers because by they intended to make bread
cheaper, and thereby aid IN their protection, by making
cGgs ioucr and enabling the manufacturers produce goods
less COST But the tariff Of Is 6 is adduced proof that
these hare RELAXED their protection of British
manufacturers and my assertion to the contrary is called "
tate this charge Can prove that the tariff of 1885, which
included the repeal Of the laws, diminished the protec
ton to British oAnuac,ures | think not All he can
prove is that duties diminished and others aoge.
Their repealed But duties not Guys protective accord
ing his showing; for he says nearly all the duties
levied foreign articles imported into Great Britain and
Ireland sdcy rereRue !" therefore il does
cessay follow that the dmnution repeal Of duty
is a withdrawal Of protection.
Facts and figures may be brought bear directly upon this
point What the amounted duty RENTED by tariff
Of 1916 upon the goods referred by your correspondent
The official returns show that in the year $780, (befor,
any Of the changes in the a under consideration
cuued the duties received upon the importation the cotton
linen, and woolen goods, which male free goods il
1916, was. 426, 70:
And the duties received in 1910 upon the impor-
tation Of al the other articles enumerated by a
Constant Reader, was. ............ E29l, S75
These duties reduced in 1916 TO-. 1921
Being reduction Of. ................... l36, col
And this amounting 10 ..........El6 3 49,
is the entire amount Of duties taken of the articles referred Il
(makng the Importation Of 1910 standard to amount
poratons) by the three alterations OF the tarG in s42
1885, and 1916 and II other notifications had been
made, Sir Robert Peel and Lord John RUSSELL both
hem would have relaxed in their protection OF British manu-
features to that amount, and mare, upon the articles
rated by your correspondent and he would have
victcd Of an inaecuracy But what is the other side
the case Briefly as.ioIlows
The amended tariffs Of s42 1915, and lsi6 which
made the reduction Of El63393 against the manufacturers,
made the following reductions in aeir fdror
In 1910 the duties paid the importation Of raw cot
ton, sheeps-wool, silk fax and hemp and dycs,u.
Gall articles used in the manufacture Of the goods upon
which the above mentioned duties emtied amounted
1858, s3I
There are now lin Is4D duties assessed upon a
similar importation, amounting to- ............ $40
Being remission Of duties materials Of Es55 81
in dror Of the manufacturers and 10 be placed in opposition
10 i63393 The other side, and han fire 70 one i
aid n proeciOn But this is small portion Of tn
protection which manufactures have received since 1910
through the successive notifications Of the tariff
Direct duties upon articles Of food have been RENTED sine
that time, taking the importaions Of 1910 a standard
amounting annually Observation-Disclosures. l2I32O
Salt provisions prohibited in isi0) are now
admitted duty fre,, under the tariff Of 1916, 10
an annual value Of. ..................... 10000
There were imported juy free, last year, (aIl
prohibited in ls4O,J A., SEQ horned cattle and
calves, 3,ls7 pigs and 81 400 sheep and lambs,
cstim"ted to he worth. ................... 100000
The average annual amount Of duty paid on
the importation Of corn ana a,uy for The vears