The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1866-12-15

. L, +"
B. F. BRADFORD, WATERFORD, S. 6.
n. L. DARF, Sumter, 8. c.
THAD: {: andrews orangeburg s: C:
J. NJ BROWN, southerner office = Darlington, s. G.
NJ. NJ. QUINN & BRO, Augusta
J. Z. sHECUT, Agent at Atlanta Ga.
WA1. HENDERSON, Agent at Benne.lssvile, SC.
The Cotton Tax and the industries OF the
North. @ 'S&-f
We have seen of late many arguments against
the constitutionality Of the Cotton Tax Law, but
we do not remember to have seen any observations
respecting tie effect OF this law upon the indus
tries Of the North. We presume our readers are
quite well aware of the fact as we are that the
Northern people care good deal more for their
pockets than they do for the Constitution and that
whenever the former is touched by legislation
great noise comes spontaneously from the voI
populs, and something must be done. The follow
ing very sensible editorial on the subject we take
from the New York Commercial and Financial
Chronicle: NJ,
We are persuaded that the effect Of the cotton
tax on Northern interests has been sufficiently
considered 1t is customary to look at this mpost
as one merely Of revenue, shutting out from view
argument sustaining it has always been based on
the idea that the tax was not paid by the North,
nor even by the South but that it was collected in
great, part out Of the European consumer. There
rently lost sight Of, why tie North should question
the e1Psdeney Of this and demand at the
mediate and earnest consideration Of Congress-
It must be clear we think, by this time that the
pay the tax. Before the war we had monopoly :
our cotton drove out all competition. No country
couldproduce the staple IN sufficient quantities. as
goOd or as cheap as could. tax Of three
cents then would have been easily collected. The
planter could have added it to his price without
materially affecting the production in other coun-
"a far hos
worked decided change. Now instead Of monop-
9lizing the trade We have many competitors
incurably defective, has been improved, and Enc.
dsh machinery has been far better adapted for
Working it, the var having developed methods Of
there are several countries, as is well known
sendlng supplies to market which command as
nigh, and some Of them higher, prices than our
The effect Of this is seen in the present state of
the Liverpool market. With crop in the United
estimate it much below that fgure), the Liverpool
price is about Id, with q downward tendency In
e. tact 5 many good judges believe that it Will decline
passed, so nearly independent Of Us have foreign
markets become. Many countries which are, from
Gauses furnishing decreased supplies
present tax Offering premium on production
9 Is easilyse
Assuming ag, the planter to pnt the tax upon the
tion for American cotton at Liverpool Is in
creased Il per pound That advance necessi-
tates substitution Of the staple of other coun-
tr1es for American, which again puts up The
price Of these descriptions and directly stimu
lates the production Of cotton in such countries.
noting permanent extension Of the foreign cFon f,1
The consequent increase Of supply from those
sources reacts upon the value of our own crop and
planter Of the ability to collect his tax rom frz
eign buyers. Tn result, therefore, is to place the
American grower at disadvantage Of three cents
!,
countries This, f long continued viii be sniff.
% eent to foster production elsewhere-such an ex-
tent ea as to force re down prices to about their Old
level when the planter, being no longer able TO
grow cotton at profit, will abandon that for soma
1ther bcaa:n Of agriculture. It would thus appear
that We nave no power to compel foreigners to pay
this tax. The result Of it must be to transfer enr
cottol trade 70 other countries and to place Great
~ Ian = tat position Of independence Of the
ttalnc! ald which, for political reasons. she has
long sought. 80 60 80
T j. 6a:y nscossaEy tor . to say that the
lure prosperity Of the United States The Sonth
Is Dy no mcans the only interested party-nor, as
E' tala II ~ is she chiefly interested The prosper
cupo1on Of the whole Industry Of Tie .ne eoa9- rg
celved from the two and a half nii9on ha1aa
brought to market since the war closed. Do We
not all know that it bridged difficulties which to
Of cotton during the year ending September . : =
1866 were 1552, ,457 bales and we received IN goid
for these exports over $50 million Of dollars ro
now great an extent are we in the North indahte1
20 Inese @ very exports for the decided prosperity
en1oyed and our own quick recnperation since the
war closed? Is it not, then, a Question that We
should seriously consider, whether it is Wise ~
cripple an industry like this? = 80 - - q
.Ihe cotton tax, moreover, has q directly inin
I1ous bearing upon our cotton manufactured W?th
them cheap supply Of the raw material - ~ ~
vital Importance to enable them to 7comneta vith n
other countries. Either reducing the prodnct;o H
or increasing the relative price Of the A1ner;can
staple by taxation, must check the growth Of The
man%9factur1ng % interest In fact practically We
are, shut up to the consumption Of The American an
cotton. Our machinery is not adapted for the 11se
OF the short staple Of other countries: and ;f 3
we're there would be the necessity of addne to.
he Pace paid at Liverpool the cost Of Transporting
tne INDIA staple here Our manufacturers ara fI1ns
paced p At disadvantage as compared with those hose
OF Lancashire, who have variety OF gfanlaa II
nnlcn tAey can resort rather than Day the tax:
~ imi11ng q certain proportion Of Eastern cotton
Wa1n Amer1can they can set off the extra price
OF our cotton arising out Of the tax; and vet IN
many heavy goods; and on dyed. goods pe;ally
Pfoquce an article as marketable as thoueh made
Wnony fom Southern cotton. Thus the fendencv
1I tne tax Is to divert cotton from
new England to Lancashire and TO give Enoi;st o
COTTON goods the ascendancy over American. not
only IN foreign countries but in our own noariat
.,o+ts Is Hae the revenue law allows upon domestic
~t~r~