Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1860-05-03

rrrr orrT0r n rraror.

N
The past and present policy Of france, IN
lregard 10 the admission Of The raw materials
Of manufacture inio tie country, is worthy
Of sgcetlai holf. afaGTdHE eridenrs 0nsthe
uuRaisn Protection ". Free Trade-so iopg
pending before the tribunal Of public opinion.
Eappezfs that Frsuce Hdshgr5slf IN lherps-
sfi0n that she must either abolish her high
protective system and anoptfncer principles Of
trade, or accept TIE Alternative % iosing all
prestige az a commercial couuty. The re-
Formed tariff that has atraetea 90 mech atten-
tl0n Il not The result ofsnere commsrcial the
orizing, bat Of 81 absolute necessity, ausine
from fheEeriurs conseqlences oi the chain
work 81 prohibitions and pr3iectiops With
(which thefrade CT France has bsen hitherto
feitsred. There have been but Few tarif
ehaneesin Frauee uPon raw cotton y .
law. ehacted Aprn Is. 1910, he daty on cot
ton was Fixed az fof per 100 klogrammes Tor
long siaple. ard 20E on saot Staple with
I more modefata charges on thorc of iIdia and
Egypt. Subsequently,, On i634,) the duty on
long staple cotton was reda ed 10 the same
level ss the shor. 2of-s-haiax on Tho stsplea
Of India and Egypt remaining Unchanged on
the 5th % January, 1858 however, tneduty on'
[ the latter descriptions was reduced FROM 100
70 81. per 100 kilOeranmss.
During ne whole period, from 1916 20 the
present date, the duty has averaged about ~
per cent. ad valorem. Let ue see how the I'M
post has operated upon the cotton maBufac-
lures % france. Il "a 70 81 taken into Bc-
count that, % TO fSt55 the adverse influence of
Z tie cotton tariff H. that coan.rF was largely
I eountsraclsf BY ths existence Of similar rsgu-
lstions in England tbalehisf eomPehior Of
France. For 2 number Of years previous %
1881 TIE Bdish government Imposed = dnty Of
6 per cent. "a vlorem on foreign cotton; but IN
order 70 eonpsnsate for ths los Of revenue
caused byth repeal OF fheaiuty on printed
~enttons, the tax yvas raised Ia that year to s..
iod. per ewt- The bearing Of such a duty on
heavy goods was soon found 10 Be so serious
that two wears afierward The AMOUNT was re-.
dnced 20 q. ia. per cwt. TIE govsrnusrt,
however, soon cam 70 the conclusion that he
imposition Of any duty on such az important
staple was inconsistent with the development
Of manufacture end Tie tax sFas. Therefore,
totally and finally abolished in 1915. From
4 th AZ period, France began to feel most serious
~ The consequenc-E Of Der cotton tariff.
In 1872, three years bafore the abolition Of
the duty on eotoB bV Great Brltain, France.
vas consuming 163.00.Go0 pounds Of cotton I;
n lS4S, three Yeas after the free admission Of
cotton inio Great Britain. France consumed
I oniy I2TOOO 600 poundsi whilst England had.
been frcdigionsly extending her manufacture
Of cotton fabrics,-incressing her consampa
tan- Of raw material from il663.400 balesih
1851. 70 2O31,400 bslesfn 1S5ls4and the Uni
ted States has been worthiy emuiating that
counlW@acreasingf the home e~aHsumption az
cotton fram 484 fOl bales % 1851, to zoe, l3S
bales in 1s57.EFranes has made but a miseI-
able propress, her increased- consumption of
rae material from 1851 to 1881, bsine onir
about 8 per cent. Her manHfaeturers have
been encouraged 10 export their products by
en- export bounty of2per cent, al. val. on cot
ton fabrics; but heir foreign shipments have
neFertheless been Light, AMI have bfen Induced
rather by the excellence Of the eolors IN their
printing, than by any recommendations Of
e~heapness o. Of texture. Tue commereisl ge-
nius or the Emperor and bis advisers has de-
tected this canker spot in The in3ustry Of the
eonitrF, and, as fortunately thev have BIZ
anon tie chief cause % 1.-THE hurdensome
tsrIf on raw eoHon,@this relic Of iH-iasged
tarifs-alonga wih fha-wom out protective
tariff on Wool,-is doomed to-, We tpi9t eternal
abolition. The f~oiioWingfs Mr.. RoIhers's pro-
posai 20 IRE Emnerar on BE a~brogation o. the
duty on eottons
"To-daF, sire, Il is proposed completely to
abolish- The duly On direct impnrtations b
French vessels. and 10 maintain, but IS node
rate as possible, a tunnsge dutY VARYING &C
eording % country and dag for the bensft Of
the maratime interest.
r seems 10 me that the Hl1nare dates can
be fixed at the same rate forWrol. AN things
considered, and in yiew Of the treaty Of june
24th, 1929. which assimilatcs TIE hag Of The
United States 70 ours, n q~usstioa is Of no
great importance for ON marine, American
ships bringing Hi1e-tenths Of the cotton which
feeds our manufactures.
Th4rsform 81 the tarifo on WOODS and eottons
Induces, as a consequence, the suppression Of
the bonnties- granted on the eXportation of
manufactures Of wool or coftonT
Let our prnteciiOHists ponter upon these
facts, and digest their NEAL. Protection lie
being driven out OF The GA world let rs see
20 it that it does not emigrate 10 the United
Statcs-U s. Economfgt.