Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1849-06-26

MIR IAIDLEY. Sune Year, SUI -
Inc Western States hal inspection 'a"s.
they ali have inspection laws anu uo NJ. - 81;
The ins peclion marks On The man ~,
Gle. They mus, however, nave Mana" ss;,v Tor
~ cure their bacon. Mr.. L. saw no necessly ~,
~ .i ;nsrsr,ion al salt as every manufacturer OIL
..lr was interested in establishing Ms o"H ''PN
talon. .,;on IN allow
"A, CONWAY 10 offer IN amendment ~ So
ION AZ by striking out all that relates 70 sal,
Mr.. FAULKNER thought the aiticie OF uou,
or any other article might be stricken iioiI ."e
hill with as much pfopriety as lhas OIL san.
;nsoection laws are designed TO elevate the s'dl-
dard OF articles in The foreign market. II we ie-
neal the inspection laws Of salt, we lower !nc
srlandard of The article. Mr.. +. read resoiu 'oh
at the General Assembly oil Virginia &c"
wears since, approving OF The pr'nc'pe Oh IN
speclion, on the petition 0! me san nndhe's.
Mr. GUODSON. In the Bible some I'VE or SIX
- arc snoken Of who were invited 10 figh; a
oonmon enemy. One OF them had go' the SAT-
irnm the enemy and refused 10 Highland mere
.op these gentlemen come to TAX us on salt winch
i very lille used in Virginia and is almost en-
,;reIv exported. He saw no reason for thus To-
snsc,;on tax on salt, which must fall upon Inc
MIR. PERROW was opposed 10 these innova.
,;ons in the law-but he saw especial reason io'
mol repeating the inspection on SAL. ne .naua'
wha salt words are owned BY one OF le" peI
SONS whose character as salt makers - e''ao.
lisbed. Ii The salt inspection IS Tepealea' ne"
manufacturers cannot compete win mem -o ~
II we retain the inspection laws, there VIII &C
room for competition. n,
Mr.. LAIDLEY. So far from the Ma
nawha SAT- Works being owned ny one ~
dividuaI. they are owned by from seventy 1--WE
10 one hundred persons, who own aooul Twelve
miles on each side Of the river MI. L. COZ
tended that The inspection brand on the sail was
of mn bsne6t in The sale Of the salt, for currency
was gwen 10 the Kanawha salt by the mapuiac
,prer's name. TINS gave reasonable guarantee
that The article would be meIchantable. Bu' the
motion did not necessarily repeal he inspection
bul left il Optt0nary with The nanutacturerio nave
The salt inspected. =,
MIR PERROW. The tax would letter fall
on The manufactured han on The producer hc-
cordins to the sen,Ieman's argument The manu-
,acfnrer', name would sell bis salt. This, Mr.
p said would secure the sale OF all SAL, boln
ooo3 and bad alike Mr.. p. said tina, il Inc in
necton OF salt was repealed, we had better re.
psa the inspection on -four, tobacco and every
hing else
MIR. BOOTH, as member, defended The &C.
lion OF the Revision Committee IN striking on'
The three sections on The inspection laws ne
only question is whether, an up-couniry miiler
wishing 10 sell his -four, shall be compelled 10
nav fonhle inspection, viz. on inspection in
Vxeinia. AMI also in Baltimore or any other
MACE on, OF The Stale. Moreover, ne IS
Subjected 10 two dinerent Standards, one here
and one on, of the Stale. he should not DC
forced 10 pay this double lax, but should be al
Logged 10 nave his -four inspected II he chose,
and if necessary his self-inteTest would guide
him. Mr.. B. could MT see the force Of Inc argu
menl ,hat he farmers were interested IN Inc IN
speclion laws On the contrary, II the miller
has 10 paw ,he Inspection tax ne is thereby DIS
ablcd from paying the farmer as much LOT ms
wheat as he would otherwise do. But The mosl
controlling consideration with the committee
was The imposslbii,y Q: making any general
law on this subject. The border counties would
ask TO be relieved from the tax, and Il was didl
cult 10 arrange any just system.
Mr.. CONWAY asked leave 10 withdraw his
amendment and Cf1er Inc three sectors emofac.
ing the inspection laws as for long tune eslao.
ishet. when had been stricken on! BY the Revi.
sion COMMITTEE.
Slr. LaIDLEY then moved TO amend the
first 0. these sections, by striking out the word
salt"
Mr.. SCOTT agreed with The gentleman !rom
Rsrkeley in his general views upon The advan-
faces OF lie inspection laWs.-but he repeated
MS opinion OF yesterday, that the inspection OF
cali was mater OF lille interest 10 US, iof
the section expressly limits The inspection 70
salt which is exported The manufacturers alone
are interested IN the character OF the article IN
foreign markets. We do not propose to take
from them The privilege OF having their salt IN
spec,ed-but leave il optional with them, 10 acl
according 10 heir judgment.
Mr.. HARPER. The simple question IS wh'-
rher il is good policy 10 enact law forcing lie
AGRICULTURAL and manufacturing interest !" De
taxed in his way. Mr.. h. thought the farmer
would be The loser. The inspection law has NTH
EMO been dead letter, and n On! not see AM
reason why ii should re revived. 10 all proba-
hiluy our -four bacon and lard Will remain with
- ,.,.h.n, ,v..oho.,or, ~hU ,uds iI'".U
ihen several Gays, 50 as 10 &c! his Own aflcies
off his hands II We are allowed 10 send oar ar
iicles directly TO mafke, abroad, we gam this
lime. The effect OF the inspection law IS 10 be-
nefil The merchant, al the expense oil Inc farmer
and manufactured Mr. n. proceeded 10 show
that il vas not he inspection, but The name and
character OF the manufacturer that gave Tepua-
taton 10 the article. Mr.. h. protested against
tins double tai on The farmer aud manufacturer.
Mr.. IRVlNG-The debate had shown lha. Inc
men, offered iscli provides thai The law shall not
apply 10 unc-halt the Stale. Mr.. ]. argued thai
The inspec ion Jaw would have an injurious e.
Tee; ior il makes all -four lha! passes The iDspec-
linn stand alike The argument oil The gentle
man from Fauquier IS jelo de Sc. he wishes
10 exclude sah though, II what we hear OF The
resources OF the Southwest be true, salt may
hereafter become as valuable as wheat II We
exclude salt, why should we not exclude flour
and every thing else2 Tobacco is not included
in this sectiou yet our tobacco stands higher
abroad than any other. Mr.. |. commended that
The exception, were larger than The rule.
MI. SMITH suggested that the second section
moved by Mr.. CONWAY should be so amended
as not 10 exempt from inspection -four and corn
meal manufactured in this STATE and carried 10
The District oi Columbia. Tbs movement ioT
the repeal OF the inspection laws comes irom the
miels who's screen reasons in their petitions Ia
Mr.. HERBERT The chairman OF the comme,
GA Agucuituie, showed) had been repn lated by
maj committee These mlilers had ieli the smar
OF the inspection laws, having teen nned ny inc
inspectors, aad hence heit movement Duties are
REQUIRED or and penalties imposed on, manuiac
tur.Is, and yeI gentlemen come forward and 60
away with t;.ese acquisitions ard virtually Iepea
me inspection laws, and The effect will BE- ha
milers will mix corn mea! with their h0ur, and
all articles Will be depreciattd MI. ). COME nGeu
tnat Virginia should protec her own interests, in
stead Of leaving he inspection 10 other States :
~ giving character acroad 10 her produces, and
10 pul inlo her treasury Instead OF that OF other
States The penalties under The Inspection avs
$500 hnes IN one year un!er he Hour inspection
a,uue) Mr. 5. appealed 10 Rcatienen, who las
Winler ialkcd 20 much q Stale PRIDE 70 come ~
now and protect Virginia Interests and pfoduc's,
nd not 10 cave i 10 lhe mercy Of ohcr States
In regard 10 The argument in favor Of excepting
The Border counties, MIR. S. argued that, il This
principle be adopted il would entirely defeat The
inspection laws, and Inc -four, &c, may be
carried through any one Stale TO any parI OF The
world
Mr.. GOODSON-Th question is on salt and
The gentleman talks OF nothing but Hour.
MIR. SMlTH-The gentleman appears 10 be
sailed MIR. 5. continued his argument. II We
allow our flour, &C., TO 90 10 Baltimore Tor inspec-
tion can We follow il gu! Il the Sale, force IL 10
b. inspected al Baltimore and prevent il from