II. OF R.]

:

Tariff Bill.

used by the poorer classes of society. The poor-the poor, sir, have been subjects of great commisseration of late much sympathy has been felt for them. I hope I am not destitute of humanity, also. I am fully confident, should we impose the proposed duty, we should drive the manufacturer out of the country. The consequence will be, an unnecessary burthen on those whose suffer ings all seem desirous to alleviate.

[MARCH 4, 1828.

If there is any error, the estimate is much too low. But it is sufficiently accurate for the illustration I wish to make. The wool-grower will be occupied for years in produc ing a supply of a superior quality, and the importation of the coarsest will not prove injurious. It will be recollect. ed, that my proposition is to reduce the cost abroad from ten cents to eight, which will produce a considerable effect. On wool costing over eight cents, I prefer a speAgain, sir Relying on the provisions of the tariff of cific duty. Eighteen or twenty cents would be sufficient. 1824, manufacturing establishments have been created Nine-tenths of the wool produced in the United States, for the express purpose of using this kind of raw materi- has a market value between twenty and forty cents per al. An immense value of fabric is now produced. The pound. The sum I have named would be abundant protecforeigner is almost entirely excluded. Shall the Ameri- tion. The bill proposes seven cents specific duty, and can manufacturer be sacrified, as he must be, should the an increasing duty to fifty per cent. al valorem, in addiproposed duty be imposed? But this is intended for the tion. This is for the purpose of taxing the finest wool American wool grower. Let us see the effect. The du- imported, as well as the coarsest, which has been exty is to take effect instantly. Exclusion is inevitable. plained. The quantity of the finest wool grown in the The manufacturer of coarse wool is compelled to stop at United States, is yet small. The manufacture requires once. The farmer requires time to produce the raw ma- great skill and experience. The wool grower must look terial. What is the consequence? By the time the far to the manufacturer for a market. It is for the intemer grows wool worth 10 or 12 cents per pound, where rest of the latter, that the former should be prosperous. is the manufacturer who can use it? He will have been It would be a folly to produce wool, while nobody could long in the shades. I will examine this subject further; use it. To the twenty cents, an annual addition of two or because I know, abroad, it has been used to create hos- three cents would augment the protection as the sup tility between the farmer and manufacturer. Let us seeply increased. The manufacture can go on. The farthe operation of the tariff of 1824, on wool costing above ten cents per pound.

In 1825, it amounted to

1826,

1827,

$515,000
343,000
234,000
less than
State of

Not to exceed, in 1827, 600,000 pounds; and is produced in the county of Dutchess, in the New York, alone.

mer has a certainty of a purchaser. The grower of the common and better quality of wool cannot complain. He will be fully protected at all events. The plan i propose has met the approbation of the owners of the best and choicest flocks in the United States, who have expended an immense amount of money to obtain them, and who are equally desirous to make them profitable. And, sir, it is worthy of remark, that those who have taken the most pains to improve their flocks, and who

The coarse wool, under ten cents per pound, imported, have expended the most money to introduce them into

in 1825, cost

1826,

1827,

$53,000
106,000
174,000

The quantity for 1827, must have been above two millions of pounds of this latter quality. The fabric produced from it must have been imported, had the raw material been excluded.

Again, sir: There is no doubt that the present ca. pacity of the manufacturer is greater, to produce the fabric, than the farmer, to produce the raw material. I have taken much pains to ascertain the quantity of wool that the imported cloths, cassimeres, blankets, baizes, flan. nels, and carpets, would require. It cannot be less than 10,000,000 lbs. To this, add 15 per cent. for increasing consumption in the country, together with the wool imported, and the quantity will not be much, if any, less than 14,000,000 lbs. To produce this, would require 5,000,000 of sheep, in addition to the present number. The coarsest wools now produced, would, for years, be required for cloths of a better grade than is made from the Smyr.a, Adrianople, and Buenos Ayrean wool. The native wool of the United States is fitted for blankets, flannels, and other fabrics, far superior in value to such as is made of the other. To exclude the coarse wool, would, therefore, ruin the manufacturer, and would, of Coarse, not benefit the farmer a farthing.

this country, are the most decidely in favor of an ample protection to the manufacturer, the least anxious for a heavy prohibitory duty on the raw material which they produce. They are sensible, in the present state of things, an exorbitant duty, on the finest wool, would drive the manufacturer out of the country, and prove a sacrifice of their own best interests.

Now, sir, I will proceed to examine some of the provisons of the bill, which are intended for the protection of the manufacturer. On these, it is again my misfortune to differ, widely, from a majority of the committee. With one exception, however, all considered that some legislation was necessary. That exception was the honorable member from South Carolina [Mr. MARTIN.] Al though steadily opposed, in principle and practice, to the system of protection, to no one is the committee more indebted for efficient and liberal aid, during the whole of their laborious investigations, than to that gentleman.

The first point to which I call your attention, is the proposed minimum of fifty cents. The bill provides, that all woollen goods, the actual cost of which, at the place whence imported, shall not exceed fifty cents the. square yard shall be charged with a duty of sixteen cents. It is my intention to show what will be the practical effect. I am, however, sensible that the subject can be much better examined in the closet, than in a public as. To place this in a fuller point of view, the following esti-sembly. But I cannot avoid the examination. I invite the mate is submitted, of the quantity of wool that would be required, if the foreign fabric should be excluded. We import cloths and cassimeres, worth

$5,000,000, requires wool 6,500,000 lbs. Flannels & Baizes, 500,000, do do 1,000,000 do Carpeting, 500,000, do do 1,000,000 do Blankets, 600,000, do do 1,500,000 do Add fine and coarse wool, now imported, 2,450,000 do Add 15 per ct. for increasing consumption, 1,400,000 do 13,850,000 lbs.

most rigid scrutiny. If I am an error, the sooner it is discovered, the better. I wish to know it. No doubt now exists in my mind, that this provision of the bill is decidedly more injurious to the manufacturer, than the tariff of 1824. By that act, the duty is thirty three and a third per cent. ad valorem. By other acts, 10 per cent, on cost and charges except insurance, is taken into ac count. The duty on fifty cents would be nearly equal to nineteen cents. The bill proposes sixteen cents. If there was no further duty imposed on the raw material, this amount might operate as a protection on some of the

most inferior fabrics. To see its practical operation, we must consider also the intended duty on wool. I have full confidence in the accuracy of the statements I offer. Should they prove erroneous, I shall cheerfully make an acknowledgment.

One yard, 3 4 wide, invoiced at thirty seven and a half cents, is equal to fifty cents the square yard. This now pays a duty of thirteen and three-fourths cents. By the proposed bill the duty will be 12: loss, 14

Requires 14 lb. wool, at 10 cents per lb. proposed duty, 7 cents,

This is at the rate of 40 cents the square yard. Take a cloth, costing 32 cents the square yard, or 24 cents cents, and shall not exceed one dollar the square yard,

Worse than tariff of 1824, per yard, ty of wool used in cloths, worth, in our market, 12 00, What consequences must inevitably follow? The quali $2 25, and $2 50, is such as is now produced in this country, nearly sufficient to supply the demand. The price given by the manufacturer has been, for a year or two past, from 35 to 40 cents in the fleece. This is abundantly proved by the witnesses examined before the Committee on Manufactures. This quality also comprises the great proportion which the American wool grower sends to market. It is the production of his flocks, which, for years, he has sustained and improved. It is that which

the manufacturer is prepared to use to the fullest extent. We now propose to aid the farmer twenty-eight centsthe manufacturer is allowed five. It must operate as a delusion to one, and a sacrifice of the other. Five cents on a fabric worth from two dollars to two and a half! Even on a cloth worth only seventy-five cents abroad, the proposed duty is less real protection than the fatal tariff of 1824. I know it is said, that near the minimum of 50 cents, the duty will be effectual protection. Let us see its real practical operation. The foreign manufacturer will not be deceived. He will adapt his fabrics to the minimum points. The difference between fifty cents and one dollar, is, of itself small, almost imperceptible, in the great operations of trade. But again: the foreign manufacturer will fill the markets at those points, and the effect is felt each way. Vast quantities of cloths entered at the custom-house, will affect the value of such as are above and below. Cloths imported at fifty cents the square yard, and goods at one dollar, would effectu. ally meet.

The great objection, therefore, is, that the minimum points are so near each other-only fifty cents between. The proposed duty at one point, is less than is given by the tariff of 1824, and, at the other, only five cents in addition. This, with a disproportionate charge on wool, must inevitably seal the fate of the domestic manufacturer, and, with him, the wool-grower.

But, we are told that the duty is specific. This is considered a great improvement. It is not so. It is no better than ad valorem. The duty is imposed on the same basis-the pretended valuation abroad. There is no more security in applying sixteen or forty cents on any assumed amount, than in the computation of thirty or fifty per cent.

The third minimum-Manufactures of wool, the value of which shall exceed one dollar, and not exceed two Collars and fifty cents the square yard, shall be considered as having cost two dollars and fifty cents, and charged with a duty of one dollar. The present duty is about ninety-five cents; the advance of duty on the minimum price, five cents. The protection may be beneficial on fabrics valued at $1 25, or $1 30, on one side, and $2 on the other. As I before explained, the market will be filled by the foreigner, at the minimum points, and the effect will be felt in each direction. But the amount of the fabric thus protected is small, compared with that which the American manufacturer now produces from American wool. The fabric requires a raw material, worth, in our market, from 60 to 80 cents per pound, as assorted for use, and the supply is yet deficient. The duty on the foreign will be from thirty to forty cents per pound, and this will diminish the apparent benefits which the domestic manufacturer might seem to derive.

The other minimums contained in the bill are of secondary importance. I shall not occupy time in the discussion of them.

I am confident, Mr. Chairman, that the best and surest way to accomplish the desired object, is a measure framed on the plan which I recently gave notice I should, at a proper time, move as an amendment. I am satisfied that the first minimum should be at least fifty cents, as proposed in the bill. But the duty proposed is clearly too low. We should begin at forty per cent. for the year to come. An addition of five per cent. per annum, until the duty reaches fifty per cent. would give a full and efficient protection for all the coarser fabrics. A progressive duty I prefer. There will be no sudden shock to trade. The manufacturer looks forward, and prepares to furnish a supply. The farmer uses his exertion to furnish the raw material; which requires time to produce. There is then no sudden change in the employments of the people.

The second minimum I would carry as high as $2 50.

[MARCH 4, 1828.

The space between that and fifty cents, I admit is wide, but it need not excite alarm. At the minimum points, I have before stated, the foreign manufacturer would have access to our markets. The effect would be sensible above and below cach. A large intermediate space would be secured to the American manufacturer. It is a space he is amply competent to fill with his own fabric. The American wool grower is now prepared to furnish the raw material in abundance. The kind of cloths that would be furnished, are precisely such as are made of the wool this country now produces. Should my plan be adopted, and take effect on the first of June, a vast amount from abroad would reach our market. It is expected. The effect would be to keep prices diminished. While the stock was exhausting, the American manufacturers would be engaged. Hence a security against any exorbitant increase of value; any oppression of the consumer.

I know, sir, that, theoretically, to call a fabric worth $2 50, which cost only 51 cents, and to charge a duty upon it as having cost $2 50, appears, at first, unreasonable. But when the condition of the country for producing the raw material is considered-the capacity of the manufac turer to furnish the fabric; the necessity for taking a decided stand to sustain all the great interests concerned, no alarm need be felt. I admit that the nominal amount of duty is great, as we descend from the minimum of $2 50; I will not pretend to disguise it. But, when the practical operations are seen, we need no longer be alarmed.

An honorable member from New York, [Mr. CAMBRELENG,] Soon after I gave notice of my intended motion for amendment, presented a formidable statement of calculations as to the effect. It seems that it never occurred to him, that it was necessary to give us calculations about the bill reported by the committee. [Mr. CAMBRELENG said he should like to explain the reasons why he had not.] Sir, the honorable gentleman will soon have time to do so. As he is generally on the alert when a tariff is concerned, I was a little surprised that the bill seemed to have escaped his calculations. As soon as my propo sition was made, we were soon advised that it had attracted his attention. This afforded me much satisfaction, I assure you, sir. It was evidence, to my mind, that it possessed some real, substantial, merit; that it would fully answer the object I had in view; that it would be protection to the great interests to which it related. I could not have had better evidence. I think more favorably of it than ever. Such a plan as I have suggested, has the sanction of a numerous delegation from the farmers and manufacturers from extensive sections of the country. It is sustained by thousands, from different States, whose me. morials are on our table. It has been examined for months, and is sustained by public opinion.

The next provision in the bill, to which I will call the attention of the committee, is for the protection of the manufacture of blankets. This received the approbation of a decided majority of the Committee on Manufactures. It appeared evident, from the testimony of Mr. Marland, that the manufacture could be readily introduced. The amount imported in 1827, was $705,000. This fabric would require above 2,000,000 pounds of wool, on the annual product of at least 700,000 sheep. Even now, Mr. Marland states, that he can afford to manufacture wool into blankets, for six cents per pound. The common native wool of this country is precisely the quality required. By introducing the manufacture of this article, a market would be afforded for all the surplus common wool in the country. I should be even willing to give a progressive duty beyond that which has been proposed by the committee. I am confident it would be good policy, and promote the farming interest. During the last war we had no supply. We suffered the humiliation to ob

dians.

As to the smaller articles of hosiery, &c. the committee recommend an advance of duty. I shall not consume time by any remarks as to them.

[H. OF R.

of sailors. The chief articles of exchange are the products of the forest and fisheries. The great market for

tion. Those who are now able to purchase the one, would be unable to purchase the other.

these is in the West Indies. One of the most valuable articles received in payment is molasses. Cut up this trade, you cripple the operations of all concerned, and drive a multitude from their accustomed employinents by sea and The committee recommend an additional duty on land. For what? To make the people drink whiskey. hemp. Ten dollars to take effect on the passage of the Suppose you destroy the trade, stop the distillation of act, and five dollars per annum, until the whole, includ-rum, you cannot extend the market for whiskey in proporing present duty, shall amount to sixty dollars. It was considered, by the committee, sound national policy, to introduce the culture of an article so essential to the civil Again The advantages imagined to flow from this and military marine of the country, as well as to the agri- provision, to the grain growing States, will not be perceivcultural interests. The average value imported for the ed-while the most disastrous consequences are sure to last seven years, is about $600,000. The capacity of the be felt by others. Why sacrifice a portion-a great and country to produce it is undoubted, The quality is infe- important portion of the industry of the Nation-to conrior to none in the world. Water-rotting, instead of dew-fer a doubtful benefit on the other? This is not my docrotting, is necessary to make it suitable for the most im-trine. portant purposes. When the grower will adopt the former mode of preparing it, the country will have, within itself, an abundant supply. It seems from the testimony, that Russia water-rotted hemp is usually worth about $225 per ton; the Kentucky, or American dew-rotted, is worth about $117; making a difference of $108. At pre- Our annual exports to the West Indies amount to sixsent, Russia hemp is worth $270-American $125; a dif- teen or eighteen millions of dollars. The trade, I consiference of $145. This certainly presents a great induce- der, is the only fair and reciprocal trade, of great import. ment to change, in this country, the mode of preparation. ance, we have with the world. In the West Indies we At present it appears,from the evidence,but little of the first sell. There we find a great market for the agricultural quality is produced, and the additional duty was believ- staples of the United States, which European Nations reed, by the committee, to be required. I should have fuse. We sell-we can buy. The great agricultural inpreferred a smaller advance than the committee recom-terests the grain growing States-are also deeply conmended. Fifty dollars, instead of sixty, would have an- cerned in the preservation of one of its most important swered as well, and been less burthensome on the great branches. interests of navigation and commerce. All that is wanted, is to turn the attention of the agriculturist to the best preparation of this important article.

By the testimony of Mr. Johnson-by authentic information, besides, in my possession-the duty and incidental charges are from two to three or four hundred per cent. on the cost of the article in the West India market. One would suppose that this should satisfy taxation.

The duty will have a double operation. By excluding the poorer qualities, (fit only for distillation) you will advance the price in the West India market for the better. Additional duties are also recommended on flax and sail Lots, as they are called, are generally composed of differ duck. It is to be feared that these are not properly ad- ent qualities. They are sold together. The purchaser justed. The duty on flax will materially injure the man- would be compelled to give an advance of price on the ufacture, not only of canvass, but of smaller articles, best alone, so that the seller might, in some degree, be which are at present entirely dependent on the foreign indemnified for a loss of the poorest. The consumer of material. This country at present produces little or none molasses would be certainly required to pay six or eight prepared in a suitable manner for the uses required. cents more per gallon, while the farmer could not, possiWhen we reach this part of the bill, a proper adjustment bly, have a correspondent advance on his grain. Consi. can be made. I feel confident that the manufacture dering the value of the West India market, for the grain should have a decisive protection, and all necessary in-growing States-the value of the trade to our shipping ducement afforded to the farming interest, to furnish a interests-the unnecessary tax on the consumer-the supply of the raw material. doubtful benefits that will be enjoyed by any-induce me to oppose the proposed duty. shall make no further remarks. The subject is in better hands.

A majority of the committee were in favor of an additional duty of five cents per gallon on molasses. The quantity imported in 1827 was 13,370,000 gallons, which is a near average for several years past. The value for the same year was $2,819,000. The principal, perhaps the only reason of the committee for imposing this duty, was that a considerable portion is distilled, and the spirits came into competition with such as are produced from the grain of this country; that, by imposing the duty, molasses, used for distillation, would be excluded, and a wider market would be opened to the farming interest for its own productions. To any further charge on this article I am decidedly opposed. I cannot reconcile it to any tariff principles I possess and all must admit that they are liberal. It is an article of general use, of the first necessity, for the comfort and convenience of every class of people, especially of those in poor or moderate circumstances. This country does not, and cannot, produce a supply. It is stated, by the committee, that the trade is principally confined to one section of the country. This makes the objection to the duty still more palpable. If the trade was confined to the whole sea-board, the burden would be more equally divided. The trade is most extensively carried on in the East, by the State of Maine. It employs 100,000 tons of navigation, and a vast number VOL. IV-110

:

I shall vote for the proposed duty on foreign spirits. They are not necessaries of life. A substitute can be furnished in the United States. If the price is increased and the quantity consumed diminished, I have no doubt the benefits to the country will surpass any injury that will follow. It seems to me, however that a better mode might be adopted. The proposed duty is ten cents per gallon: it operates alike on the lowest and highest proof. The existing law makes a necessary discrimination. To have the intended effect, the same principle should now be observed. I think that an addition of twenty five per cent., on the present duties, would operate more equally and beneficially. The present duty is from 38 cents to 75 cents per gallon, on the differents kinds of spirits, according to the proof they bear.

By existing law, a drawback of four cents per gallon is allowed on the exportation of spirits distilled from molasses. This is the return of a greater portion of duty paid on the importation. The committee propose to abolish it. The design of the Committee on Manufactures was to promote the distillation of spirits from domestic materials, and introduce them into the foreign market, in the place of the former. It really appears to me that a majority of the