New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1851-09-13
Who Pays the Duty

municatIon from a correspondent N regard
10 the opinions We have expressed IN refer
ence to tie tariff We give It a place, be-
cause ue dc rot fear to permit or readers
10 read both sides Of this important question,
and Judge for themselves. perfectly assured
that truth is great, and must prevail. and
that the more thoroughly the subject is
canyassed. the speedier and more certain
will be the establishment Of the verify
that protection Is the only road to perfect
freedom Of trade. In thus giving place to
the arguments of an opponent. notwith-
standing the length TO which they are
drawn out. our course Is widely different
from that Of his free trade friends Of The
Journal # Commerce. The P7sf and TIE
Union, 10 one Of which ever permits It's
readers to find in is columns a word on
this subject, that Is not in strict accordance
with the views of its editors, and this our
correspondent must admit.
He Is of opinion that the views We have
expressed are in opposition to the generally
received idea that price Is governed by the
relation of supply to demand, and that I'M
less that idea can be proved to be incOr-
rect. the consumer must necessarily pay
the duty on foreign goods imported. In
reply, we have TO say. that it IS precisely
because price tends to fall with increase OF
supply. and increased capability to sell,
that it IS, that the British producer of cot
tons, and woollens and iron does pay and
the domestic consumer of those commodI-
ties does not poy the duty. The object of
the whole British system Is that of secur-
inc a monopoly of the power to supply the
world with cloth and iron: and We all
know that the only reason with either
individuals or nations for desiring a mo-
nopoly, is that of furnishing a small
quantity at = large price. The OBJ
lect Of protection is that of abolish
ing monopoly and establishing competition.
thereby increasing the supply in the gen
eral market of the world. increasing the
number of sellers, and diminishing the
price That this object Is attained is
proved by the fact, that the production OF
iron. and of cotton and wooden cloths in
creased with wonderful rapdity under the
tariffs of ISIS and lsl2. with correspond
ING increase in the number of sellers. and
corresponding reduction of prices. except
so far as the price of iron was temporarily
affected by the great British railroad spec
ulation That this object is not attained by
the tariff Of 1916 Is proved by the fact, that
the domestic production Of iron, and of
cotton and wooden cloths is rapidly dimin-
ishlng, with corresponding diminutIon in
that when the supply shall have been still
further diminished by the ruin of those yet
engaged in maintaining competition, prices
must rise There is now a competition be-
tween the British and American purses,
and as the former is, perhaps, the deepest,
it must triumph, and then compensation for
past losses will be found in large aug
mentation of price
The greater the competition for the sup
ply of the world, the more rapid must be
the fall of price. This our correspondent
must admit If, now, we can discover
what il is that produces competition in pro-
duction we shall be certain to discover at
the same time what 1t is that produces
competition for sale, and fall of prices.
Our correspondent IS of opinion that that
object would be attained BY the abolition OF
Custom houses, whereas, we hold that such
a measure would destroy competition and
raise prices, and that it is only by aid of
protection that competition has been pro-
duced or can be maintained. To determine
which is right, let us look TO see where 1t
is that there has been tendency to growth
in the competition for the supply OF the
world with cloth or iron. Is 1t IN free
trade Ireland Certainly not. In India
Portugal? Canada Certainly not. Those
countries cannot manufacture for them
selves, and still less can they compete for
the supply of others Where, then, shall
it be found Is ii not in protected Ger
many, Belgium. France and in this country
As certainly iii The facts certainly seem
to favor our position.
Abolish protection here, and IN sN
months there would be scarcely cotton or
wooden mill, furnace. or rolling mill, at
work in the country. Would that increase
the competition for sale, without which
there can be no reduction OF price As
suredly not Abolish protection in Ger
many. Belgium or France, and the same