The national era. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1847-1860, 1855-09-13
PROTECTION AND SLAVERY.
The Hon. Horace Greeley:

o. 1854. L observe several questions, WHICH
rou beg each Of your readers to answer for
himself. Among others, you ask if we cannot
zoo that "if we made cloth and iron and grew
suyar. for ourselves, we should stop the exhaust
49,, drain of gold?" You advocate the plan of
.l;muIating the production of these and other
c,mmoiies by the imposition of higher duties
On importation. / merely desire, at present, to
examine this subject, in some of its bearings,
with respect to the importation Of foreign sugar;
and am more DESTROYS to present my views
tbrouch the medium of the Tribune, because
suDpose most of its readers agree with you In
opinion respecting the protective policy. Yet
il cannot be doubted that your opposition to
Slavery. and the value of your paper IN other
rasnccts. have procured you many subscribers
who differ from you upon the subject of restrict
i've duties.
In the american Laborer, published by
Greeley X McElrath in l843, and devoted to
the cause of " protection to home industry" |
End several articles designed to show the neces-
s;tv Of protecting the sugar business, which
embrace a large amount of information in facts
and statistics. On page &C, the committee on
syq1r and sugar refning, of the Home Indus
try Convention, state, on the authority of a re-
mort hy the Secretary of the Treasury for 1910,
that sugar was imported from twenty different
countries. and says The great bulk of these
imnor.ationS, however, was from six of these
countries. viz: Danish West Indies, Dutch East
Indies Philippine Islands, Cuba and other
S,aui,h islands, and the Brazils. One hundred
.r5 twenty millions of these sugars, valued at
Si.jAe. 0D0. were imported from these six coun-
,r;.s. Or exports, during the same year, to
those markets, amounted to $1,000, O26." After
,.hilting the large amount OF agricultural prod
gets embraced in these exports, viz: $500, 1873,
And the great number Of men and vessels en-
Moved in the trade. the committee continue
az then. we deprive these countries of their
only means of paying US for such of our pro-
,lsrions rs thew require. they will look to other
mlra cts for supplies and the consequence will
be tina. our agriculturists will be the greatest
,ggerers and our commerce will be diminished
IN all its ramifcatiOns." AS the various
art.clcs which constitute these nine millions of
exports, as exhibited in the report, do not in
riule single dollar of the precious metals, in
any Of their forms, cannot conceive why such
a trAaic should be suppressed for the purpose
Of presenting the "exhausting drain OF gold.'
the advocates Of protection do not contend
.Lai. IN the absence of restrictive duties, our
supplies will be deficient in quantity or quality.
Aside from the Argument Of keeping our money
a; home. there are two others viz that 1t gives
increased employment to domestic labor, and
that It creates a home market. L would like 10
examine the system in reference to these claim
ID benefits, and perhaps | may, at some future
t;ne. but il seems to me more important 10
view it. az present, IN its bearings upon Amer
can Slavery; and, fortunately, we have in the
Lljorer some data upon which to base our cal
citations.
We are told (page 1881 that Louisiana,
IL,
lions. cannot produce sugar under % cents I;
while in the West India Islands, with their ge-
uial cline and cheap operations, Muscovadoes
can be Produced as to yield fair remune-
ration, at from y to 3 cents Bearing in
mlnd the facts here presented it Is plainly APP
parent that heavy duty is requisite to give
planters the control Of our market; and
the article quite naturally concludes by aver
rn", We can only be saved from actual ruin
by the revival of the tax of 1916 on foreign
sugars The tax here alluded to was 3 cents
per pound.
On page 2S4 we are told that " to supply the
Middle and Eastern States with this article
from New Orleans, requires as much shipping
to obtain it from the West Indies, and al
ior'ls to the shipper as good profit in one case
Is IN the other" The facts here embodied are
important: but think something would have
NH9dr can be as easily and chedpiy trans
posi,d to the Middle and Eastern States from
ne West htdieS, as from NtU Orleans"
The cheaper production in, and as cheap
transportation from, the West Indies, as from
Louisiana, enable us to comprehend readily
The competition to which the latter would be
subjected, in the absence of protective duties.
Her sugars must fall in price until they reach
a. low point as sugar of the same quality IN
Tie former Under 3 cent per pound duty, it
Is matter of little Importance to the New
lork merchant, whether he 90 TO New Orleans
aud pay six cents, or to Havana and pay 3
cents knowing that 2 more will be required of
han Al orr custOmhouse. Under this state of
iargS. It is evident that we. the consumers.
Contribute az much upon every pound of sugar
We purchase from Louisiana, to enrich our
Southern planters, or to stimulate them in pros
eruileg this business, as upon each pound of
'o7egngrOwn sugar, to replenish the national
treasury
How many are directly benefited by duties
On N.gar?
It is stated in the Laborer, pages lO7, los,
mat the sugar estates yet in operation y In
louisiana number 525." < That
Inc annual average crops do not exceed 10000
hogsheadS, or 70,000,0G0 pounds of sugar, and
:
o. sleh crop, at cents for sugar, and 20 cents
lor inOlasses would be $500 900
mat deducting expenses therefrom 10000
There would remain net S2,9OO,OOO
tariff of cents pound would give the
% planters 100000, an average of 81 1000
each, Ok one-half of the gross amount for which
their sugar sells.
Inc SUGAR planter appears to be a peculiarly
favored character His State gives him a mo-
1,,4oiy OF labor, that he may get it cheap-the
mon, monopoly Of market, that he may sell
nigh. If one FORCES the chains of the slave,
are they not riveted by the other? Could his
"'aie supply him with slaves and drivers, and
support them without any expense to him, and
rol'.ie the land and machinery necessary for
me production Of sugar, it would then only
tqi;'i the amount bestowed by the General Gov
Ghiaent in the shape of . cent duty. But
we State by no means does this: for we see, by
,ne laws OF Louisiana, that Every owner shall
y held to give his slaves the quantity of pro-
,fsipnS hereinafter specified, to wit one barrel
:. INDIAN corn, or the equivalent thereof, in
'g' peans, or other grain and pint of salt, and
- utiiVer the same to the slaves, in kind, every
Jo JI.,n' and never in money under fine of ten
"'.ars Tor every offence" Il Martins Digest,
P:'iV; GoodeTs Siace Code, D. 1885, The Lou
lana planter would be able to sell his corn
".d salt for labor, did the laborer enjoy his
aura .@ura right of selling his toll wheresoever
I I,u TO whomsoever he pleased but he would
r. 10 conform to current rates of exchange.
a, vary these rates as much as possible against
-. laooIer and in favor of the planter the
M nj cole Is brought into being. 1t is doubt.
rao "ne'herl the planter succeeds, at last, in
Fona by help of State law, more than /
M pS Per pound, which ought to have gone to
,i Iaoorer; which would be $1,000 to each