New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1851-12-02
What i, our True Policy I:

What is our True Policy 3:
Z. sunpose our exports Of produce 10 have exceed
ed our imports BY $50 1900, ana 70 tlls hfn Oesh
added our receipts from Cali oTna, all turned INTO
coin end retained in the country, would us siate OF
things have been more nopelui 'ndh 'ha' h"" GA
isting ~
60 inquiries The Journal Of Commerce !;
and We are bound to suppose this question
to be honestly put, and that TIE Journal
supposes the persons " who mourn over the
amount of our imports to entertain ideas
similar to those here intended to be as
cribed TO them. If there are any who do
so. we do not know them, and if our neigh
bors suppose such to be the view of those
who advocate change in the commercial
policy Of the country, it shows that they have
much to learn. And as the question of the
character of that policy is one of much I'M
portance, we could wish tina: they should
study more carefully what are those views,
and refute them if they can. If they cam
not do so, let them unite with US. If they
can, we pledge ourselves to unite with
them in the maintenance of the present
system. or even with Mr. Walker in his eff
forts to remove the remaining "shackles "
upon trade.
We desire to see established the system
which makes the largest trade, internal and
external and here TIE Journal and our
selves, as we suppose, agree. Trade IS but
an exchange Of commodities, and neither
individuals nor nations can sell unless they
buy. They sell what they have in ex-
cess, he it gold, silver, iron, cotton, or cloth,
and they buy what they need; and we have
no more objection to the export of surplus
gold than to that of surplus wheat or cotton :;
and we should regard it quite as absurd to
refuse to sell gold that we could not use as
-four that we could not eat.
Having thus far agreed, the next ques-
ton is as to what is the policy that enables
us to sell to most advantage, and to make
ourselves the largest customers to those
who produce the commodities we desire to
buy--the policy that makes the largest
trade, and thus carries out most fully the
views of our neighbars. "Free trade, say
they, makes large trade" and increase in
the amount of trade is what they desire to
accomplishing so precisely it is with US.
TheJournal says that trade is increased in
amount by the policy of 1916, which renders
our people more dependent on foreign mar
kets, while by closing the outlets Of labor
III mills, mines and furnaces, it increases
the number of our farmers and the quantity
of commodities that must seek a market
abroad To this we object that it dimin-
isles the domestic trade, as is shown in
the fact that we now produce less iron by
100000 tuns than we did four years since,
ard that we work up less cotton by 100000
bales than we did three years since, and
that similar effects are observable in many
other departments of trade. Here, GER
tainly, is a great diminution in the amount
Of trade, and unless it be made up else
where, the object Of TIE Journa'-namely,
large trade-will not be accomplished. Is
it made upl Can il be ? Let US inquire,
and in this inquiry we beg The Journal to
join, for if it can prove its point, we hold our
selves prepared to unite with it in its advo-
cacy OF the policy of 1916.
The less cotton we work up, the more we
have to send abroad, and experience proves
that the mere we ship the less we get for it,
aEd the less is our power TO be customers
10 foreign nations. In evidence of this. we
oiler the following view of the operations
Of the past sixteen years
Crops 9rorr 7qal EP. Total vel. Arags Ep AZ. Val.
abe Bales. Bales
ISL to 1857 isCoOoe SOL SEQ Zoe OgO 900
1880 3i-3f0o 900 40 0et.0 900 100000 IS 500 90
1919 10 sG0C0o 2l0GC0Coe 1889 600 5000 CO.
1876 Sss...69e,CcQ 22 QQ000o llj,vS0 g 90 0O0