The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1853-10-25

thousand honest souls next morning to spare
them. We therefore declined, with Mr.. Hiram
Ketchum's awful libel suit hanging over our
head. Had we thought that he would plead
his own case, and that we should have been ex-
pected to be present our decision might possibly
have been different.
As it was, we resolved to run all risks, and
we now lay our case openly before the public,
and ask if 1t be not hard to be first bored, then
bullied, and finally threatened by Mr.. Hiram
Ketchum, as we have been. We are always
ready to be victmzed to a moderate extent
There are hosts of people in this city who go
about speechmaking and lecturing, and who
drop. into our Office with a column or
SO of solid nonpareil just as we are going
to press at night, and feel wofully injured if
we decline to receive their contribution; in
five cases out of six, we submit excluding valua-
BILE matter from our paper and advertising Mr.
A. or Mr.. B. who fancies he has swindled U.S.
There is gentleman named Dana, for instance,
who is we believe, the editor or one OF the
editors of the Times, and is constantly replying
to toasts to 'the Press" Now, really, Mr. Dana
never says nythng that he could bear to read
himself next day in print; and yet we are ex-
pected to serve all this up, or else, beware OF
Hiram Ketchum and his libel suits Then
again, New York contains another orator-aM Mr..
Raymond one of the attaches of the Tribune,
we are told-who likewise makes speeches and
delivers lectures. and has already taxed our
space to very severe extent. He. too, we
doubt not would like very much to sue us
when we don't give flowing report of some
what stagnant speech of his. So likewise, a
number of other mel of letters and men OF
words-all of whom seem impressed with the
notion that they have clear constitutional
right. first to make use of our space, whether
we like it or no; secondly, to abuse us for de-
clining to grant it at once; and thirdly to
threaten us with libel suits for our imperti-
nence. Hiram Ketchum is no solitary case; we
do wish he would bring on that libel suit so
that the world might be appraised OF our sorrows.
Revision of the Tariff-The SILK Duties.
There are provisions in the tariff which no
school of political economists can defend. Such
are the silk duties fair proportion Of the
thousands into whose dress silk enters in some
shape or other, are perhaps aware that they pay
for the luxury twenty-five or thirty per cent
more than they would do if the United States
government did not require to be supported;
but there are few who know that raw silk pays
fifteen per cent to that government, though we
produce none; and stranger STILL that three de-
scriptions of the manufactured article--thrown'
tram and organzine-are admitted on the same
terms as raw silk. The first of these two anom-
allies is easily explained.
For very nearly century, a delusion pre-
vailed on the subject of silk growing in the
United States. Scientific men wrote reports to
show that we ought not only to produce silk for
our own use but to export to England; learned
societies printed elaborate disquisitions on the
subject; Congress and the State governments Of
fered bounties for the production of cocoons,
and in some places, as at Richmond, it was made
penal not to have silkworms Thus stimulated,
farmers from Massachusetts to Savannah plant
ed mulberry trees. and fancied they were all
going to make colossal fortunes Yale College
took the worm under its special protection; and
Franklin planted row of mulberry trees
Strange to say. however, in spite of the scienti
| fc men and the learned bodies, old Yale
bounties, penalties and all, the produc
ton OF silk did not thrive. Georgia, Vir-
ginia, Pennsylvania and other States abandon
ed the attempt after the war and though Con-
necticut and Massachusetts persevered, the cul-
ture was on very diminished scale, and owed
it's existence to the bounties alone The fact was,
| it did not pay. The frost nipped the trees, and
the worms were lazy. From these and other
causes, silk-growing was dying natural
death, when singular incident revived it.
About $780, new species of mulberry tree
the 'Morus Multicaulis"-was introduced
into the United States and was hailed as the
long sought desideratum for silk culture. As
often happens, Wall street got hold of the
invention, and mulberry trees became fancy
stock. Every body owned or wished to own
| them They were to enrich the whole coun-
try, it was said The fver-which lasted
very short while-gave the death blow
to our silk-growipg. The Morus Multcaulis
did not succeed any better than the other spe-
cies of mulberry trees; and the stocks fell to
nothing People began to see, at last, that silk
growing had better he abandoned to countries
where the mulberry was indigenous, and where
less wheat was grown. Connecticut and Masga-
chusctts persevered for while, but without
better success The whole produce of the Unit
ed States in 1910, was only 6l552 lbs. cocoons,
about equal to $500 lbs. silk and that of Mas
sachusetts, during the five years, 1860, was
only 757 lbs on which the State bounty paid
the producers was S1,878. At the present day
a little sewing silk is still made at Mansfield,
Conn; but the whole annual yield of all the
worms in the country would. not keep large
actory going for day
The duty at present levied on raw silk was i'm
posed during the existence of the delusion above
sketched as measure of protection to home
producers. 1t was twelve and half per cent
1882 raised to twenty per cent during the