Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1857-03-28

and America, of which Great Britain and the United
States produce wo-hirds-when you come to remember
that the advantages of cheaper capital which the foreign
producer possesses are daily diminishing with the in
creased faches OF intercourse and with constant
accommodations of wealth. how can the feal
such reduction of duty is proposed here 1t seems
to me idle that he should do So We know that
mile of railroad which is laid down is computed take
ninety tons of iron to make it, and every mile that
made requires annually eight tons of iron to repair it.
upon this estimate for the annual repair Of the twenty
one thousand miles of railroad that we're computed in
1906 to have been made in the United States and for the
construction OF three thousand miles of new road the
supposed annual addition there must be required yearly
IN this country alone about four hundred thousand
OF ron The railroad consumption of ren in the resi-
que OF the world must be very far greater We know,
too that this demand is constantly growing from the
increased of iron, not only for its accustomed pur-
poses but also from the of that material The
French estimate that for every fifteen hectares of arabic
Land there is an annual waste of fifty kilogrammes of
ron and for every fifty tons of shipping bathere must
be used ton of that metal and in the construction of
houses and also Of ships its constantly growing
In England it is already estimated as cheaper material
for shlp-buldlng than wood They say that the city
OF Gissgow alone they two hundred thousand
pig iron annually in manufacturing gaspipes and water
pipes and tubular bridges and matters of that sort In
Short If had time to go into the subject could show
think that it is inevitable that the demand for iron
must faster than the production and that this
increased production must mainly from Great Bril-
tain and the United States, but mainly from the United
States for Great Britain already begins to give proofs
being overtasked in the fact of the enhanced cost of
ducon which has been made by the recent additions
her annual make Of IRON Dangerous as is political pro-
phecy venture to say, that should there
merclal revulsion, financial revulson in years
from this time there will be talk of duty on iron as
raw material. The manufacturers Of iron may per-
haps, ask for duty manufactured iron but by that
time we ought to become exporters of the material
To show how unnecessarily sensitive these great in
teress sometimes found to the strange fact in
of iron pfar tnofo
the masters of Great Britain were very much alarm
ed for fear they should be injured by the competition
from iron made in Virginia. and they actually passed
law that of the plantations should manufacture iron
of any kind out of any sows pigs or bars what
soever under certain penalties.
Just as dle in my opinion, would be for Pennsylya
MIA to fear any injury from foreign competition under
far less duty than propose Is not known that since
the discovery of the hot blast the anthracite iron is the
cheapest in the world Cannot Pennsylvania Withstand
the whole world in competition of this Sort for where
else do you find such stores Of anthracite and of "
ing together In 1856 the production of anthracite
in this country compared with England was already
as three hundred and sixty thousand hundred and
forty thousand tons and there is every reason to hope
that we shall exhibit still marked superiority in
the future.
IT, then the iron interest has no reason to fear the
change here proposed, what other interest has, Is il
the sugar interests the sugar interest cannot stand
with protection of twenty per cent that twenty
three per cent which is of itself great profit let them
turn their labor and their lands to cotton which certain
y is profitable pursuit Let all those which cannot dc
well under such protection this change their pur-
suits at once for that of itself is evidence that they
should change The only loss would be that of machine
ry for their lands and their labor are suitable to the
culture of cotton-a most profitable occupation. The
loss even of the machinery would fall lightly them il
the change of pursuit gradually made But, in
point of fact understand that the sugar interest is
tent with twenty three per cent All those with whom
have conyersed have told that they content to
be placed where the other protected articles left
What other interest is there! Not the hemp cot
TONS The cottons receive the twenty-hree per cent
and need not dwell ON that because have talked with
many of the Gotten men, and they say they
ed. Is it the Wooen interest think can show that
with the changes made here the manufacturers of wool
len articles in far better position than they
under the old tariff Under the tariff of 1916 they paid
duty of thirty per cent. the material and they
received protection ranging from twenty to twenty-five
and thirty per cent the manufactured article Ipro-
pose to reduce the protection the manufactured art
Giles of wool to the rates of and nineteen per
cent and to reduce the duty wool to eight per
cent Under the tariff of 1876, them from the protection
of twenty per cent you must deduct the thirty per
on the raw MATERIAL supposed by the Secretary Of the
Treasury to constitute onethrd of its entire value that
is say ten per cent of the WHOLE that the protect
ing duty was equivalent only to ten per cent But under
my proposition the manufacturer of wooen receives
nineteen per cent from which deduction of onethird
OF eight per cent leaves little than sixteen Per
cent. The mode of calculation would show that
even the thirty percent duty of 1916 did not afford quite
as much pfoecuon as the twenty percent Guty
according to scheme So that the process which
benefits the manufacturer eheapens the price to the
sumer the manufacturer being benefited not because he
sells his cloth for more but because he buys his
terial for less
Not only this, but the wooen manufacturer is benefit
ed by some other changes which propose He gets his
dye-stus either free at reduced rate of duty That
is worth something to him. that he stands in better
position than he did under the tariff of 1886 Who else
then, is there to whom shall appea Is it the grower
OF the material of WOOL who is reduced from thirty
to eight per cent? acknowledge that if were to
suit my personal sympathy, have sympathy for
the of wool than the manufacturer but believe
that IN making this change while benefit the manu-
facturer and cheaper the commodity shall not nure
the woogrower; and will proceed briefly to give my
reasons for this opinion.
1t is manifest that if the wool grower demands protec
ton he admits that he cannot sell abroad. If he cannot
sell abroad he cannot sell at home unless there be home
market; that is unless the manufacturers of wool
succeed He depends them for that market, where
he has advantages in supplying it. Now, it is known
that with the thirty per cent on the material the
finer broadcoh factories have down. and that this
rate OF duty the material has crippled and re-
strained the progress of the woollen manufacturer
There to believe that by diminishing this duty
and allowing the manufacturers you will produce
still greater demand for domestic wool There is
to believe because the English history shows it.
When they took the duty from wool the manufacturers
were enabled to extend their operations the home de-
mand increased and the price with it. The is
that in order to for certain purposes the qualities of
wool which mostly produce, have to import finer
wool to mix with them We find it profitable, too, to
import the woods of South America, which, they say,
enable receive the dyes better than they would
without the admixture But it is obvious that the woods
which raise for the most part stand in danger of
foreign competition. The wool from sheep, whose
is valuable stand the competition of that from
sheep raised any where, if the is of value
where it is raised As proof of this fact we see that
hal ofa