The southern press., 1852-05-15

Inc uuc IneOry OF kepuDhcdn u0sorhmons'
From Mr.. HuNrER's able and eloquent speech,
in opposition to an increased bounty TO the Col
Inns steamships, we extract the closing portion,
in which he exposes the specous sophistries of
the "higher lawyer" of New York.
The Republican party, as antagonized to the
Radical or Federal parties, yelling themselves
under what old party name they may, possesses
no more stalwart champion, nor truer expounder,
than the Senator from Virginia:
"If, then, there is any faith to be placed in hu-
man testimony-in the testimony of experienced
professional men-I think have shown that
such steamers as those OF the Collins line are
not fitted for war purposes have shown, also,
that if we look at it as mere post Office matter,
we cannot give these large sums which will not
be re1aid in the shape OF hostages without de-
parting from the practice which we pursue here
at home, where we make the business Of carry
ing the mail pay for itself. What other reason,
then, can be given for it, except that OF the es-
adjustment of commercial marine ! say
that il is building up commercial steam marine
by system of bounties and monopolies to en-
able these men, by money from the Treasury of
the United States, to carry freights and passen.
gers lower than other ships can carry them. |
say that it is system of bountes and monopo.
lies, because, in addition to all that they make
in the shape Of hostages, and from freghts and
passengers they require this large grant from
the government to enable them to procure
business which other individuals prosecute at
their own expense And thus in large branch
of the general business of the country yon
propose o give them special advantages. For
this sum is TO be given that they may thus be
enabled to carry freights and passengers lower
than other ships that might be called into exist
ence by private enterprise for the same purposes.
Now, can anybody show me an argument against
the protective system in any other form that
does not apply to this? know the Senator
from Texas Mr. RUsK said that this word
monopoly" has destroyed many good thing.
do not know what it has destroyed in this
, country 1t was used against the United States
E bank. / suppose the Senator does not regret
! its use in connection with that institution. 1t
. was used in relation to protective tariff !
know he does not regret it in connection with
that Then know of nothing else which this
term has ever been used to attack. ! say that
g all the objections which apply to a protective
tariff, as showed the other day, applied to this
system. You propose to give these vessels
bounty from the government to enable them to
carry freights and passengers at lower rates
than vessels which rely upon their own resources.
1t is true they say, that the British protect their
vessels, and therefore we must protect ours. Do
not the manufacturers say the same thng!-
But why should pursue this branch of the ar
gument any further? The truth of what say
is obvious upon its face. Now, | say that the
answer TO all these appeals should be the same
that is given in relation to the tariff. The bust
ness will either pay or il will not pay. Ii is
either set-sustaining or it is not If it will pay,
il is self sustaining; we believe that our people
are not afraid Of competition, but that they will
be as able to take a share of it as anybody. II
it be not self sustaining, then. the more of this
business which the English do, the more they
will lose by il, aud the less temptation and in.
ducement there is for US to enter into it.
But have been reproaehed with Ssing sec
toual argument in relation TO this matter
said that the same sectional argument which
applied against the protective system applied
against this, it We were to give New York
these lines Of steam communication, and refuse
them to other cities. ! say so again. Suppose
We should pass a law that we should pay out of
the Treasury Of the United States the freight
upon all goods carried into New York from
abroad; would not that he a bounty-a mono
poly given 10 New York Aud who would give
the sectional vote, he who voted this special
; privilege 10 New York, or he who voted 10 deal
equally by all sectious of the confederacy, and
all the cities Of the Union! Sir, am willing
10 do for New York all that would do for any
other city; but ] am not willing 10 do more |
do not believe she asks more than Justice She
certainly ought not 10 ask il. A sectional man,
in such Gaze, would be-not he who opposed
it, but he who favored it. Suppose it were pro.
posed that you should build line of railroads
; to connect with New York, and with no other
city on the coast of the Union, who would be
the sectional man, he who would vote for such
a system, or he who would oppose il!
This is no supposed case that am putting
IL so happened that during this winter some of
the iron masters of Pennsylvania were here
gentlemen who represented the great iron in
, terests Of the country and who believed IL was
not sufficiently protected. They were stating
their case TO me, and estimating tie various
/. elements which entered into the cost of home
made and foreign IRON | said 10 Them upon
/, looking over the list, did you make sufficient
. allowance for freights upon the foreign iron +!
Yes, said they, and too great an allowance
for, these steamers often bring iron almost as
: ballast They sometimes bring iron for little
or no freight. They are doing this business to
. an extent which becomes annoying 10 us. Now,
wish 10 know IL We 90 into this system Of
bountes by which we are TO pay the owners OF
: these steamers for their losses, and enable them
: TO carry freight and passengers upon their own
terms, If they will not bring goods into New
" York for q less price than they can be carried
at the same speed, anywhere else viii Phila.
: delphia have an equal chance-will Baltimore
! have an equal chance in the great business OF
= importation Why, suppose this government,
y were TO pass law saying they would pay on,
Of the treasury the freight upon all goods
brought TO New York, would they not all 90
!. there! Or suppose they should pass law, no,
: going to that extent, but still great way, say.
!, ing we will not pay the whole, but we, will pay
the half, would we not be giving preponder
ant advantage TO New York Would we moi
: be placing her in such position that no other
. city could rival or enter into competition with
her for the foreign trade What is il that we
: propose 10 do Why, sir, twice a week two Of