The republic. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1849-1853, 1849-10-20

taxes, in one form or another imposed the labor
and skill that produced them. An analysis Of these
costs is also adduced from Adam Smith, TO corrob-
crate the same fact. MIR. Cotton then proceeds
with our own public (treasury) documents in hand
from 1921 to l845 inclusive, 10 show, by the rule
above determined, what proportion Of our coasump-
ton of foreign products for this period was com
posed of taxes; and the result is astounding.
ssThe question remains says Mr.. Cotton, as
to hO,D pay these taxes, and 10 Aoio far they
are a burden TO To which il may be answered,
first, that SO far as we import what We want, and
what we'could not by protection otherwise our
selves produce as cheap or cheaper; and SO far as
we pay in our own products which we do not want,
thus far il is of no consequence, in commercial
point of view, whether in such trade we pay ten,
or twenty, or hundred millions of foreign taxes
year, or whether we pay none at all But,
secondly, these foreign taxes begin to affect as
soon, and far by system of protection we
can not only produce the same things, but produce
them at lower rates, if for want of protection
we obliged to depend on the supply Of these
wants from abroad II has been proved that pro-
lection chcapens manufactured articles but even if
it did not, and only afforded them at the same rates.
still should be unnecessarily subject to this
enormous system Of foreign taxation, the whole of
which would be 50 much loss to the country"
Mr.. Cotton then goes ON to consider the prospect
Of the tariff of 1876, item for item, laid down by
the Secretary Of the Treasury by which it was pro
posed to transfer production from home to foreign
parts, and then remarks:
consequently, the tariff of 1876 was not
based the increased wants of the country but
upon the transfer of production from the United
States to foreign parts, it follows, that be real
lied, there must be check of production at home,
by amount equal to the augmentation of i'm
ports from abroad that is, suppression Of home
production from sixty to seventy millions of dol
lars 1t is not a question whether we are capable
of producing all and each Of those articles under
system of protecton-for we in the habit of
producing them under the tariff of 1912; nor
whether can produce them as cheap-for that
also is decided in the affirmative 1t, therefore,
follows that by transferring the production of sixty
seventy millions Of dollars supply of wants
from home to other countries we not only njurc
our own people by deprving them of this aIndunt
of business, but subject ourselves to system of
foreign taxation for at least three fourths of this
amount; that is, for forty to fifty millions of
dollars! 1t is in such case, where can pro-
duce what we want-much more when we have
been in the habit of producing t-that we begin
to feel, cannot avoid feeling, the pressure, the
towering weight of this foreign taxation. 1t is
then that il becomes positive, real, palpable tax
without disguise, and with all its irresistible
Effects
This argument is pursued in great variety Of
statistical and other forms, which have space
to consider. The result of the whole is claimed
demonstration, brought out in chapter 25, page
403: that, the principle of the rule thus deduced
from facts, the United States have paid positive
tax to foreign parts since 1871, the principal OF
which would amount to $l,l04,0OO,000; and the
whole at six per cent, reckoned from the end OF
each year il lost, would be So, 205 000, 900
all which might have been saved to the country by
an adequate system of projections and the OF
which, capital, in this country, distributed along
the whole of this period, annually, it sacri-
/ feed, would have added to the wealth of the ma
ton by an amount which cannot easily be inn
agined.
have said that the principle of this argument is,
undoubtedly, a sound one, though the facts opera
ted upon by the rule, in the hands of different
persons, acting independently of each other, might
not show precisely the same amount of loss to the
nation. 1t might be more; it might be less Ger
tainy, in the application of this principle to the
same facts there is no escape from a similar re-
/ suit
1 What, then, Messrs. Editors, has been proved
/ by Mr.. Cotton, admitting that these arguments
are well sustained? for + have given but very
| imperfect view Of them in this and the preceding
article 1t is proved, first, that protective duties
are not taxes and next, that for lack of an ade-
quatc system of protection, from the formation Of
I our Government down to this time, we have paid
an annual tax to foreign nations, which, for its
amount, is even astounding to contemplate and
we are still paying that tax So subtle is the in
fuence of despotism, in its march upon the world
that they who robbed not aware of it il
| is hard to convince them of it But the argument
| snow made-the proof is given and, if the people
Of this country, who are profoundly interested
in it, do not open their eyes TO the truth, it must be
| their fault. AU REVOIR,
New YoRK, Oct IL, lS49