Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1850-01-25
rotection and the Treasury Report.
NEW York, Jan IA


In former article ON this sub{art no:,
some OF the absurdtes of the REASONING Of the OUT
ury report. believe showed that the the o.
raising the present rates of duties and thereto IN
Jred ,I,; our apores and exports to six hun.
surd-more especially the Secretary in anS9.S So
portion OF his report, seems to desire to rost;ot
portation, with view to encourage, as he torrss ~
our own industry. The idea that foreign eommo,On
Mou;a increase ~ increasing the rates of duty, or
placing still heavier restrictions upon it. is 1orot
one; and the honor of having discovered doctU;na
SO astonishing belongs to Pennsylvania wbio law
yer, member of Gen. TAYLoR's cabinet in tbe o"
1879 l assure the Secretary that in after t;Dmos
no one will claim priority of discovery but he will
be permitted to wear the honor while our rennh;r
lasts. P"e
We will now look into the report little turtle,
1t says: -'t
laying imposts and duties would seem that the en-
to be to regard the interests Of the whole p0os
not as as little but as much as possible. f'
Is not question Of assuming power not exactly
granted by the constitution ground that it NAV tend
to the attainment of therein expressed Hers
the power regulate commerce and the levy and
collect duties are expressly given and the only question is
whether they ought not to be exercised with view the
find obligation written in the constitution to lay tax.
e duties or mposts at the lowest rate that will yield the
81 it were true that duty laid given article with
view to encourage productions unlawful because
1t may operate by dscouraging mportatons, partial
Proh6on the proposition would be equally true Of every
DUTY lad with that INTENT whether above or below
the maximum rate But under the power reg
ulate commerce. is competent for Congress d.
rect and total prohibition of the importation any article
it can be no objection to act evyng duties that may
Regard the interests Of the people not as little
but as much as possible" If any one had ever de.
MED the justice of SO selfevident MAXIM it might
have been appropriate for the Secretary to have de-
elared its correctness. But it is maxim the truth
OF which is universally conceded no matter how en-
| roneous the method of its application advocated by
some may be, it may be like pettfoggng to reiterate
! it In the report.
AS the power to regulate commerce, and to Law
and collect duties and mposts is expressly given in
the constitution, the Secretary insists that the only
question is whether they ought or ought not to be
exercised for the general good" Will the Secreta.
ry inform who ever raised question of this char
acter, or who ever disputed that the power to tax
should be exercised for the general good? | never
heard any deny that all legislative power should
be exercised for the general good. If the Secretary
had said that there was difference ofOpinion wheth
er the general good would be best promoted by high
prohlb!tory duties or by low duties for revenue he
would have stated the question in issue fairly and
intelhglbly The real question is, whether high or
low taxes on imports give the greatest encourage
ment to the enlarged and diversified industry of
people. The Secretary is pettfogging law
yer, who, in the absence of argument acclaimed in
favor OF legisating for the general good and that
the interests of the whole people must be regar-
ded," M"Nnpolists always appeal to the people in
The secretary says he finds 'no obligation written
in the constitution to lay taxes Duties imposts al
the lowest rate that will yield the largest revenue
wiz ne tell us whether he finds any obligation writ
ten In that instrument authorizing the laying of tax
es, lmposts duties, at the highest rates that will
produce either the smallest largest amount of reve-
ne We would further inquire, whether the plain
intent of the power to lay tax does not imply that
it should produce something "To Law and coilectn
are the words in the institution Yet the Secreta
~ has doubt but that the power is clear that Con-
gress may establish rates Of duty high that inapo.
tation would be prohibited, when there would be
nothing to collect He says cit is competent for
Congress to enact total prohibition of the impOrta-
ton OF any article;' and that with such plenary
power there can be no objection TO any degree Of
partial prohibition that may result from duties on
} imported articles.
The creed of the democracy on tariff taxation is
that while the system is permitted to exist the rates
of duty should be based upon principles
They should be the lowest that will produce sufficient
revenue Though protection would result, were the
duties laid with reference to revenue, yet all branch
es of industry would be dealt equally WITH and there
would be the least possible restriction upon foreign
commerce
The Secretary adopts the estimate of his predeces
sor, which is probably very near correct that the
value OF the annual produce of the labor of our peo
pie is about S. 600 100000. He also estimates from
high British authority, that the value of the annual
produce of the labor of the people of Great Britain
and Ireland is about $2,500000000. The value of
the annual exports and imports of Great Britain and
Ireland is something $5OO,O00,00O, while that
of the United States is only about $500 100000 Ia
king the value of the annual produce of the two
lions basis of what the foreign commerce should
amount to in value should exceed that of Great
Britain and Ireland while theirs is about $500 0O0-
600, should be about $780, 100000. If their for
} eign commerce more extended than ours, in
proportion to the annual value of the labor it would
amount only to about $l8O0O0,000 annually; or, if
we make comparison the basis of the population
of the two nations the following is the result arrived
!, at by the Secretary:
Estimating the population of Great Britain and Ireland
at thirty millions and population at twentone millions
their foreign trade averages M 50 for each individual OUR
proportion to population it would be reduced from five hun
ded and twenty three hundred and twelve millions
foreign trade were as great in proportion to as
theirs would be sweed in amount from two hundred and
nineteen to three hundred and sxtyfour Millions
Now, let us examine the Secretarys inference from
these results We assume the correctness of the fig
ures and statements made. But the conclusions
drawn from them anything but favorable to the
Secretarys intellect. He has been extremely unfor-
tunate in his argument. Here his conclusions:
the Britain exports chiefly what she has
first brought the form in which it is ready for ultimate
market is almost coe1tensve with the civilized world.
"An history shows that where the workshops Of the
world there must be the mar of the world and the heart
wealth, commerce, and power"
, Curious logic this Let US analyze it. 1t is too
important not to be plainly stated, and Invested Of
all pettifogging. The Secretary says twenty mil
lions of American people produce each year S3,OoV
100000 of wealth by their industry, matter how
free, how much restricted, how much or LITTLE
!. foreign they have. Thirty millions OF Peo
pie in Great Britain and Ireland produce but 81
500,000,O00 of wealth each year, though their fcF
f eign commerce is greater than ours With ten mil
lions or onethird less population, we exceed them II
the annual production of wealth hye hundred NH
lions of dollars But singular enough our Secretar
insists that We with less population, and though
we produce many hundred millions OF uO cHcs
IL nfOFfS