Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1850-10-04

maj .ne charge WI, 90 above stated and appears y
his controversy that Mr. Suaf, was cf'fn"ms n.sr Of
ea'nS ~ 49,, ,a. in letter dated stanton August
3oth ISIS and Ibieye in The " hp hesr% a - ,"'
aud, 50 tar "a / @n'"' '1S ~ JUSTICE
FoR THE ENQUIRER
c<n,ro, 7,r cpd his Secretory Of The Iredsurys als
c c n arreasing the Tariff uh r'er Of pro-
tec.me American manufacturers.
I, o,r ,irs, article we cited and reviewed lha Poiu" VI
scr.,,y Nor,dh's late report TO ConHress III ",l VIC
Observes ,ha, .n LAYING imposts ard duties IL WOMB
that the endearor ought 10 &c 70 . oossbc and as
the Secretary argued in favor OF prefecture laf' h
,hlished BIZ facts that the rte which He sus@es h ~;
foregoing extract proper guIae 10 DC mir
nesin dn,;es directly forbids Congress from conoF-
lis LEGISLATION in accordance win ms WISHES i ns
ted lucts 10 establish that as regards Tue nui
the amount Of capital and their great profits, Tue mahu.
ors wore nj all nersons in the country, engaged IN c no
lucrative uursus rhiie they rere rdsy jer'0f, o ."
numbers AMI capal The unprotected classes ana lu' nv
ecved more han ouje high profits upon their capa'
and labor rs were earned bv those engaged IN
Az We have more than four times as much oo'h VI e"p
and labor employed in agriculture as Is neVo'eu W
ac,nring il is direct contradiction TO common sens anu
The facts in the premises 10 suppose, That oy eeisIs
boun,e. m The latter class the expense oil the former
such . nonabe case of aiding o,,e:fh Of the people al
he exnrnsc of the remaining fouriti's, wolo nor oe NJ
tire departre from the RUE laid down ny oeciIs h,,
am I'm, ID, LAYING mposts and duties, II wond seem %
The eud,opor ought be regard the interest VI TIC "
propir not us little but rs nluca as ioss.ic. , -
4 Mpreli
d =, fovnr particular elias the prejudice OF OH
r inure particular class for the benrht oi o'hers -
manilesy unwisc and UNJUST Noth,n% ca" oe moFe ue
sructre Of the true interests Of the country Han See &C.
;lton xcent the refusal of really sautay legislation I'M
der an erroneous impression. that il might favor one caSs 10
the prejudice Of others, while III act Inc ueh VI " "9
MI classes and benefits nobody" ,,
Having shown the proportion of labor and capital engaged
ipall the great industrial pursuits OF the country " c"
pared their profits and finding that IN point o. numbers u
captu the interest represents os aoo on
fifth of entire capital and labo! thus empi!e
that in 1910 their profits were more than oo"'y as iE 40
those engaged in other pursus-we now propose " s'o'
,ho, Tariff of protection To encourage manufactures. can
not be imposed upon the people without clearly ana ohe
L. violating tho rules which the Secretary proposes as III
guides 10 control the action III Congress III laying uu'cs
hu, that such eislon imposes mos' enormous iareS upon
the community the peculiar benefit oil those engaged IN
manufactures. ,
secretary Meredith after promulgang the above rules as
ns and wise guides in imposing duties, should clearly ana
satisfactorily prove the country tat III MS pi"posu
crea, Of the present Tariff lie was acting Hlv wnln
hc limits and according their spirit This he has icd
T., do Oar design oi the facts htii reasons
yhch in our oinon demonstrate ha, 10 elevate the dl
ties according the demands al Secretary Alfeih w'hm
iy ara,aic existing inequalities OF burihens ana tene
MS ana tend swell set higher and higher the profits 81
IN plyed manufactures Even under tor ia't oi
duties imposed simply raise rceenae, the manufacturing
class receive benefits therefore, II we increase
the T,Iin h, receipts misi greatly exceed 'h"Se now
uccguns and 10 that extent viii protective laiih
tar the people for their ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ever ana above
what thew now receive under staple rcvcnh: da-
,i.s In = former article We showed that in the
Jne. States, according 10 the last census We had about
i've time" uuch, both OF labor and capital, employed
agriculture were engaged III manufactures, ana
ha tie profits "f employed III the latter win
less than hc the amount I'll capital were more hy s- ~
than ouJie profits al r0 following the former pnr-
suit with more than douj the capital These are f'cs OF
The cta; Importance and The inquiry ai>s, whence ms
great difference in profits! Ii this great disparity between
The profits of labor and capital employed IN manufactures
over that engaged agriculture results from aioding
travauan ssiisc hounrs the manufacturing classes
and oi the consumers through the medium OF
high ti,s granted TO favor The latter al the expense 81 the
llsffisl,
designed arOra particular class to the prejudice OF others
intr particular class ioI the bf! vi Others Is ma
nitSly uhriSe and unjust"
The manufactures conpin IL and therefore desire 10 ne
proiscted aaIins, The importation OF ireen goods which,
when pllced competition with III manufactures pur
chased by The im .ican tf home
fnude fabrics they sell better foreign articles cteap
err The ooec Of pr0tctire tl Is either Ia shut ont oi
competition, else II ieir goods are admitted To I'M
pose high them, as I" force the imr!tr
greatly 10 elevate his prices 50 that our American goods
may also be sold 10 home people at greatly higher
Tie design then OF Pr"feriio" Is to secure to our
manufacturers first monopoly Of cur none market ana,
secondly by thus imposing high duties upon imported arii-
cles 10 enable manufacturers 10 realize "sher pees-
These great benefits they call upon Congress !" confer mp
imposing gh upon imported goods which,
by increasing the Vi the foreign iaoric, enables them
in dispose OF their goods al higher rates and thus
the shape Of enhanced prices they ry upon Tie consnn
dre$ for their ACKNOWLEDGEMENT mus II Is
potectic tariff conf benefits upon the manufacturers ana
il results above shown, and j. therefore bun an indrec;
mode Of imposing oeS by Congress- 10 be collected and APP
Piled BY the manufacturers they may deem most adsd"-
ageous themselves We contend that duties levied upon
goods when imported enhances the price ooh n the
foreign and ali similar like domestic manufactured articles
in this country. II this were not true there IS more
folly than knavcry in advocating high Tor the purpose
OF proiecting manufacturers against cheap foreign fab
RIGS What protection asked for, i! not 10 preref
american markets being supplied with cheap foreign goods
other words force the IN Tins country ID
pay higher prices than they would have 10 pay our trade
uare!rictea! In support oi the position that iign
Tariff augmens the price OF both the foreign goods when
imported and of Ike similar American articles, agrceaby
to the design and intention Of its advocates invite
cr oneof the very highest hig authorities
In his celebrated report the Chairman ui the Committee
upon Manufactures No ASH and first session of the 22i
Congress- ix-PIcsdent J. z. Adams mantaned and con-
cusvey indicated this point In that report he maintains,
that
Ihe doctrine that duties Of impost cheaper The price Of
the articles upon which they levied seems conflict with
the first dictates OF common sense
al certainly contrary to the natural course OF thn!
that adonto The cost should be reduction Of The prize
of article.
'Bu the duty upon the articles imported from abroad
dbicd the domestic producer u enter into competition Win
importer from abroad So long as this competition con-
tinues the duty operates as bounty premium To the do
nestle manufictlrer Bur BY whom is it paid? Ccrainy
bv the purchaser of the article whether OF foreign or ri d.
1nesc manuiacture. The duty constitutes par: Of the
price oi the choe of the article in the narSct II ia
substantially raid upon the article OF domestic manufacture,
Vel upon li ii foreign production Upon one IL Is
boun;h upon the other burden and the repeat OF the tar
operate eYrlcnt reduction Of the price -! tie
article, whether of foreign or domestic.
lnc general and permanent effect must be 10 incr'sS;
the price o the article 10 the crten OF additional duty,
and it is then paid By The Ii it So ii
the general effect OF adding duty make the price
of the articles upon which it levied less, the
of the proposition would also be true: and the operation for
increasing the price o the domestic article would he
peal the duty the article imporedln experiment
which the friends ot internal industry eW not be desi
Of making
Here then is the hiehes, Iiy authority prore that
tariff o protection operates tar upon the consumers oi
this county, Tor the especial benefit Of tie manufacturing
classes
In farther support; Of the views have expressed and
which clearly demonstrated by EyPcsdent Adams,
aiduce few extracts from Investigation made into the
tariff policy by committee OF the British House of Com
mons over which Mr.. Hume presided.
In hat report Mr.. Hume states THAT your committee in
Investigating the subject 10 the amount OF duties levied
plea protection British manufactures have report
thai the does exceed half II million sterling"
John Bowring, Esq, J.. L. D.-cxumined 18th July
What, in your Judgment constitutes protecting duty
at appears 10 that erery duty is protecting duty
which excludes any foreign article coming in petition with
the home article which raises the price Of the article
by putting duty upon the foreign.
"Mr. Nllns. Is the purpose of imposing that protec
tive duy pei the consumer al home 10 CONSUME dear
article instead of that he could procure cheaper from
abroad
obviously is TO erclude the foreigner from the field Of
tnn inn