The daily crescent. [volume] ([New Orleans, La.]) 1848-1851, 1850-12-30

| The Treasury Report published some startling
facts in relation to the exports and imports Of thI.
country. Thus, in the fiscal year ending June
1851, the imports were SITS, l36.3ls, and the tx.
ports were S1j1, SOS, 72O leaving balance against
of $50 PAT 598. The advocates of trade seize
| upon this unlucky phrase" balance against u.s.
to read long lectures on the ignorance of Mr.
Corwin. 1t is but fair, however to ascertain what
ulearfn attaches tins phrase. n a pr. ~4,sl.;
paragraph he says Our revenue, as already
stated, must be mainly dependent on duties on i'm
| ports. These imports from abroad can only be
paid for by exports made up Of the products of our
| labor, or in the precious metals. If our imports
shall exceed the value Of exports abroad in any
given year, to the extent of such excess do we Gre
ate foreign debt" Here then is his explanation
lie does not mean to say that the lventy-seveu
millions are necessarily q debt, but only SO much
Of this sum as exceeds the value of the exports
abroad. merchant loads his ship with cotton
which here costs him 100000 on its arrival in
Liverpool, he sells for Sl25 900. He invests this
IN English goods which he brings back At the
customhouse they appraised at their value at
the place Of export. OF this sum no portion is 10
l be charged as balance against us--because the
cargo has not exceeded in the value of the ex-
port at the foreign market. But if his cargo in
Liverpool has cost more than his cotton realizes
he owes that surplus. So the same principle
applies to the trade of the country If the imports
cost more than the exports produce, to that extent
IS the balance of trade against US and this is all
| that Mr.. Corwin contends for. The excess Of i'm
| ports last year was S27000,OOO. How much OF
this sum is to be considered profits? We are
/ inclined to believe that this sum may well be
| treated as the profits on commercial exchanges o.
| three hundred millions. We only have examined
| this plain import Of his language, and shown tina
by the balance of trade, he does not mean tina
the excess Of imports over exports necessarily
shows losing business. But the returns of thi.
year show, that while the exports only equal
those Of last year, the imports for the first quartz
show an increase of $4,000, 900. AT this rate thu
baIanCe-sheet IN June, 1852, will exhibit export
| Sl5O,OOOOOO, imports S2jO,OO0 900 Will it b.
contended that all Of this difference is the profit
of trade At least $l0O,OOOO0O Of it will be
debt which the labor OF this country will owe t.
the labor Of foreign countries. How many year
can we afford to keep up this state of affairs
Must We not inevitably become bankrupt ? Ha
not the past taught the severe lesson, that an
excess Of importatons over the value of our GRO
| ducts in the foreign market, is attended with com
mercIal revulston and its consequent train of ruin
The advocates of the protective system at this day
! do not attempt to support the positions of the
| Republican party of l6. Calhoun and Clay. anc
| the leaders who had overthrown the FcderaEsts
and broken down the influence of New England
avowed and carried into practice, the protection O
American manufactures, against the arguments o
| Webster, and the votes of the Northern States
| But, now, Corwn and the manufacturing Interest,"
/ A IN for u
yield, with determinations, by which raw product,
used in our factories shall be admitted duty free
| aud by specific instead Of ad valorem duties We
| propose in future numbers to give the history o
| the Protective System, from the first Congress to
the present day. This will show that it is not a
distinctive feature of either party, and thus expose
the attempt made by the friends of lree-trade, to
iasten their theories on the Democratic party