The Fairfield herald. [volume] (Winnsboro, S.C.) 1849-1876, 1869-06-30
CFrom the Reform League. !
To Impede Imports is to Impede Exports

CFrom the Reform Lcague.1
To Impede Imports is to Impede Exports,
BY impeding imports we raise tho
cost of home productions, and by i'm.
peding exports We diminish the power
of consumers to purchase home pro.
ducts.
Whenever there is an excess of any
givon crop, say of wheat, the value of
the whole crop is regulated by the
price which can be obtained for the
portion exported, as there cannot be
two prices for tho same article at the
same time and in the same place.
Therefore although tho quantity
exported may be very small, it is Of
the utmost consequence to the produ,
Ger that its export should be unim-
pcded, since upon the price obtainablc
for this portion may depend the profit
or loss of his whole years work.
| 1t is alleged that We have
not impeded exports from the United
States; but the allegation is not true,
for thcrcasoa that an import duty may,
and often does, have tho same effect
as. an export duty.
There can be no export unless there
is an import, and in some cases the
import must be commodity produced
in tho same country tc which the ex-
port is made, if the exporter is to get
the full value of the article which he
ships.
In illustration Of this, let us take
the trade with South Africa. Before
the passage of the tariff upon tho
wool we used to ship q considerable
quantity of wheat flour shipped to the
Cape of Good Hope, to be exchanged
for Cape wool. To the extent Of this
shipment the home market was re-
licved of surplus wheat, and the value
Of the whole crop was enhanced there.
BY.
We have impeded, or practically
prohibited the import of Cape wool,
by high duty (from which the Gov
ernment fails to obtain revenue), and
therefore we cannot sell the wheat.
But, it may be said, why cannot the
Cape wool be sold elsewhere, and the
proceeds paid to us for our wheat?
True, this can be done, but under
what conditionss
Other nations being wiser than we
are, welcome the supply of Cape wool
because it is cheap, and as we by our
policy of exclusion diminish the de-
mand, we thereby increase their sup
ply, and reduce the price to those na-
tions which will buy it.
We have forced all the Cape wool
into the markets of London and Ant"
werp, where the producers receive but
one half or two-thirds as much as
they might got if we would continue
to trade with them; thoy must pay
exchange and bankers commissions,
and can therefore buy of us, for gold,
less than .one-half or two-thirds as
much wheat as they could if we would
take their wool directly from them.
Having thus reduced the price of
wheat, our farmer is compelled to do
something else, and he undertakes to
raise tho wool, but this he must sell at
a very low price. Why2 Because by
excluding the Cape wool, and reduo-
ing the price abroad, we have enabled
the foreign manufacturers to make
cheap cloth in other words we have
protected him, and the home manu-
faoturor must buy his home. grown
wool at correspondingly low price,
also, or stop his mill.
In some cases we absolutely prohi-
bit home manufacturing, and must
take foreign goods whether we want or
mot, when by preventing the import Of
foreign wool we deprive the manufao-
turer Of certain kinds which we must
have; take broadcloth, as en- instance,
| for the manufacture of which we have
not succeeded in raising suitable
wool in the United States, or goods
made from what are called lustred
wool.
1t may again be said why not raise
the duty on woollen goods still higher
than it is? But the smuggler and frau
dulent importer impose a limit to the
rate of duty, and this limit has alrea-
Idy been reached.
| The effect Of the protective duty
upon wool has, therefore, been as fol
lows: