The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1867-11-29

we understand the Committee or Ways and
Means have unanimously resolved to recon-
mend the repeal Of the cotton tax and from
present indications it is likely Congress will
repeal it. Such action would not only be Just
toward the Southern people Of both races, but
would be good policy as well, for it would
show that the government is relaxing its
severity over those absolutely in is power.
A people unrepresented in the body that
makes laws for them are generally oppressed.
IL has been So through the history of all coun-
tries it cannot be otherwise, for Legislators or
even statesmen see only their own interests or
the interests OF their Immediate constituents.
We have striking example Of this in Great
Britain taxing the American colonies, which
led to our war for independence. We have
another more striking still in the cotton tax
imposed upon the South. This tax, too, has
something vindictive in it A large party in
Congress voted for it for the purpose of pun
ishing the South. But, as we intimated, repre-
sentatves in any legislative body are always
disposed to favor tae States or people they
represent directly, and TO lay as much Of the
burden of taxation as possible on the unrepre-
scented.
There are numerous examples in our history
of different branches Of industry being pro-
tected, and even Of direct bounties being
given by government to them. The manufac-
turers of New England and the iron interests
of Pennsylvania have been and are fostered
by protective tariff. The New England fish
cries received for long time direct bounties.
Agriculture and other industrial interests-the
people generally-have paid all along in
creased prices for what they wore and con-
sumed to protect, Or rather, to enrich manu-
facturers. But never before, as far as we re-
member, was an important branch Of domestic
industry burdened with direct taxation. II is
doubtful if this cotton tax be constitutional;
but if even it can be made out to be'so by
strained construction Of the constitution, it is
nevertheless partial, invidious, oppressive and
Ubiquitous. II is said the foreigner must take
the cotton, and, therefore, he has to pay the
tax. This is fallacious argument Cotton
viii go down in proportion to the supply, and
if the price be high the production will be
stimulated elsewhere. The present tax falls
on the cultivator. But this is not
all. The cotton agents Of the government are
not only heavy cost to the Treasury, but they
have every opportunity to feece the planters
"a well as negro laborers, who arc mostly paid
for their labor by q percentage OF the crop in
the arbitrary control Of the cotton trade and
In nothing is the hypocrisy Of the pretended
radical negro philanlhropists seen more than
in this cotton tax. They cry out continually
/" the poor negro" and they pretend to be his
best friend, yet they tax his labor. Ignorant
as the negroes are they understand this, and
hence, in the Alabama Convention and else
where throughout the cotton States where
they have voice, they proclaim loudly against
The iniquily. Not the planters alone, but the
negro laborers protest against the tax. The
New York Chamber q Commerce, too, seeing
the unjust character and ruinous effect Of this
tax, has protested against it The South needs
all the encouragement possible to recover from
the ruinous consequences OF the war, not for
the sake Of the Southern whites alone, but for
the general welfare, for the revenue, for the
negroes, for commerce and to save magnia-
cent country from permanent desolation yet
weak and radical Congress taxes heavily the
productive power Of that section. If the
radicals have no regard for principle, for the
general welfare OF tho South or for the white
people there surely they will listen to The voice
Of their negro friends an1 repeal this iniqui-
tous cotton tax.