Of Porto Rico in 1830, 30,000 kilogrammes; 1831, 10,000 kilogrammes; 1832, none; 1833, 5,000 kilo grammes; 1834, 20,000 kilogrammes; 1835, 1836, and 1837, none; making a total of kilogrammes 65,000 Theannual average of 4 years' exportations into Germany would be 16,250 kilogrammes, equal to centners Making the total annual average exportations into German from centners 325 24,925 AMSTERDAM. From Amsterdam there were exported into Germany of American leaftobacco and of stems as follows: 14,007 hogsheads in eight years, making an annual average exportation into Germany of 1,751 hhds., which, at 12 centners each 21,012 And of 640 bales stems, which, at 2 centners each 1,280 'Mak'g an annual average from Amsterdam into Germany of centners 22,292 BELGIUM. From Belgium into Germany there were exported from 1831 to 1835, inclusive - kilogrammes 5,979,657 From which the amount sent to the Hanse Towns by sea during the same period is to be deducted as it is allowed for in the importations into the said towns Kilogrammes 608,294 5,371,363 Making an annual average of 1,074,272 kilos., equal to centners 21,485 PRUSSIAN BALTIC PORTS. Not having been enabled to obtain correct information of the amount imported into those ports, I will estimate it at (as the annual average importation) centners 1,049 RECAPITULATION. Imports into Bremen Imports into Hamburg, not including the quantities probably brought from Bremen into that city 98,029 Importation into Germany from Rotterdam 24,925 Importation into Germany from Amsterdam of American leaf Annual average amount of foreign leaf-tobacco imported, centners 483,780 The aforegoing statement shows an importation into Germany of an annual average of From which should be deducted the following: 1. The probable purchases of Austria in the Hanse Towns and Holland, which I will estimate at 40,000 centners annually, although I am convinced they do not amount to that quantity - centners 483,780 - centners 40,000 2. The probable quantity exported from the Hanse Towns to Denmark, Sweden, etc., which I will estimate at 3. The exportation of foreign tobacco from the zollverein, as estimated by Dr. Diederici, say 42,381 centners, but as he has probably included native tobacco, I will estimate the re-exportation of foreign at one half of that quantity, say 24,000 21,190 85,190 398,590 - centners Total annual average consumption of Germany, not including Total annual average consumption of foreign leaf tobacco in the zoll-verein - centners Which at the reduced duty that we proposed in our memorial Centners 21,190 178,810 70,457 328,133 984,399 Which, at the actual duty of 5 thalers per centner, makes the revenue derived by the zoll-verein from that article to be Consequently, at 3 thalers per centner, the zoll-verein would gain 983,455 - thalers 11,944 The difference between the quantity of foreign leaf-tobacco consumed in the zoll-verein, as estimated by Doctor Diederici, and that which I think I have satisfactorily shown, by the aforegoing statement, to be the real quantity consumed, is centners 149,323. In arriving at this result, I have made a liberal allowance for the purchases of Austria, the exportations to Denmark, Sweden, &c., from the Hanse Towns; and, also, a very liberal allowance for the consumption of those countries of Germany not belonging to the zoll-verein; and have not taken into consideration the importations into Germany of Hungarian tobacco from Austria, nor the Cuba from Amsterdam. Consequently, I feel convinced that the consumption in the zoll-verein of foreign leaf-tobacco is far greater than that mentioned by Doctor Diederici, and fully equal to the quantity which I have stated it to be in the aforego. ing calculations. This excess is unquestionably smuggled into the zoll-verein, the high duty as now levied serving as a premium of encouragement to the smuggler, and which would not happen if the duty should be diminished to three thalers per centner. The aforegoing statement shows that the zoll verein would gain by the proposed diminution in the duties on leaf-tobacco; but, for the sake of argument, let us suppose that my calculations are erroneous respecting the quantity of foreign leaf tobacco consumed in the zoll verein, and that no smuggling exists; and further, that there would be no increase in the consumption of that article (which last supposition is, however, contrary to the experience of all nations which have gone from a high to a low tariff), in case the duties are diminished as we propose, what then would be the difference to the revenues of the zoll verein? According to Doctor Diederici the importations are 200,000 centners. 21,190 178,810 178,810 centners at 5 thalers per centner, is thalers 178,810 centners, at 3 thalers per centner, would be 983,455 536,430 Making a diminution in the revenues of the zollverein, to be divided among 22 states, of 447,025 thalers. But this question ought not to be considered in an isolated point of view, of more or less revenue; the zoll-verein ought to examine its general effect upon the rising industry of Germany. A great market is opened to it, and the use of German manufactures can be increased in proportion to the rapid increase of the population in the United States; but our countrymen cannot purchase unless they have the means to pay for the products of Germany. Our means are our cotton, our tobacco, and our rice; and if Germany wishes that the consumption of her manufactures in the United States should keep pace with the unparalleled increase of our population, every thing ought to be done by the zoll-verein to encourage an increased consumption of the produce of our soil; and I have no doubt that it would be for the general interest of the zoll-verein to admit our leaf-tobacco and our rice even free of duty, as, in that case, our means for purchasing German manufactures would be greatly increased, to the inmense advantage of German industry, adding thereby to the general riches and prosperity of the countries composing the great commercial union of the customs. That the high rate of duty as now levied in the zoll-verien has not increased the cultivation of tobacco within its territories, can be shown by the example of Baden and Hesse-Darmstadt. While I was in those countries I endeavored to obtain the most correct information on that subject; and I was informed by persons well acquainted, that the cultivation had not increased since they joined the zoll verein and adopted the high duties of the Prussan tariff. I am fully convinced that a diminution in the duty on American leaf-tobacco cannot injure the cultivation of that article in the zoll-verein; for, if we add to the first cost in the United States of such tobacco as is usually wanted for the German market, the merchants' commissions, the freight from the United States, insurance, charges of shipping, landing, warehousing, and the wagon-hire from the port of entry to the manufactory in the interior of Germany, it will be found that all those charges and expenses, and a duty of three thalers per centner, will so much increase its price to the manufacturer, that certainly it will be sufficient protection to the German cultivator. Having thus shown the great importance of the markets of the United States to German industry; having contrasted the liberal tariff of our country with the high duties of the zoll verein, and that the manufactures of Germany are in fact more favored by the operation of our tariff than those of Great Britain; that the balance of trade is more against us than with France or England; that it could not have been the original intention of Prussia to levy 67 per cent. duty on our leaf-tobacco; and that, by diminishing the duty to the amount demanded by us, no loss would accrue to the revenues of the zoll-verein, I now arrive at my seventh and last proposition, viz: The disastrous consequences to the rising industry of Germany, in case the actual high duty on our leaf-tobacco is persisted in by the zollverein. This is a delicate question to touch; for, however cautious and sincerely desirous I may be to avoid any thing which has the slightest appearance of a threat, yet the very nature of the subject is such that it demands the utmost candor to prevent being misunderstood; my intention is candidly to show that if the zoll-verein persists in its high duty on our leaf-tobacco, they will force the United States to take such steps (a judicious revision of its tariff) as will be found necessary by the wisdom of Congress to protect a great agricultural interest of our country. The United States would gladly avoid, if possible, the being obliged to recur to such measures; but the adopting them would be a natural consequence of the zoll-verein's persisting in the actual heavy duty; self-preservation is the first law of nature, and it is as applicable to nations as to individuals; and, consequently, should negotiation fail to accomplish that which we demand, the United States have no other alternative than to retaliate through its tariff. I have heard it remarked in Germany, that, should the United States apply retaliatory duties on the manufactures of this country, the zollverien might possibly, in that case, put a duty on our raw cotton. I do not feel the slightest apprehension of their so doing; for Prussia, Bavaria, Baden, and Saxony, in which countries the manufactures of cotton, and, in the last-named, of hosiery, exist in most perfection, know too well their own interests ever to put a duty on our raw cotton; and from my personal knowledge of the industry of Germany, I know that such a measure would be destructive to their spinneries, and to their cotton-cloth and hosiery manufactures, and any one conversant with the subject must know that such a measure would fail of its intended effect (injury to our cotton planters) for it would not prevent one single pound less of our raw cotton from being exported to, and manufactured in, Europe. The injury it would do would be solely to German industry, to the great benefit of England: the injury would be to the Rhinish provinces, to Bavaria, to Baden, to Saxony; for one of these two things would be the consequence, either the German manufactures of cotton-cloth and hosiery would, from the enhanced price of the raw material in this country, be driven from foreign markets, or they would have to obtain their twist and yarn from England; thus destroying the German spinneries and enriching the English spinner. I again repeat, the zoll-verein will never lay a duty on our raw cotton, for it would be solely to their own injury, and to the benefit of England, and it would not prevent the consumption of one single pound less of our raw cotton in Europe, for the same quantity of cotton-cloths and hosiery would be sent to foreign markets, and the only difference would be, that the English weaver and hosiery manufacturer would have an increased demand for the supply of those markets. I have frequently heard it said in Germany, and even by its statesmen, that the duties in the United States on German manufactures were very high. This certainly cannot be said of their silk-stuffs, their linens, their silk-velvets, their worsted stuffs, and silk and worsted goods, their lowpriced wools, and many other important articles, for they are free of duties; and as the duties on all the other articles of German produce or manufacture will, in June, 1842, be, at the highest rate, 20 per cent., it really appears to me that the very cry they raise respecting high duties in the United States, is one of the strongest arguments in favor of granting to us our demand. for it shows that in Germany they consider even 20 per cent. as a high duty to be complained of when they have to pay it themselves; therefore, acting on the good old principle of doing unto others as they would have others do to them, they cannot defend the enormous duties of 67 per cent. on our leaf tobacco, and of 157 per cent. on the tobacco.stems. A slight diminution in the duty on our leaf-tobacco would not effect the object we have in view. To be effectual, and of mutual benefit to both parties, it ought to be diminished to such a rate as will encourage an increased consumption, and at the same time prevent smuggling. The American tobacco-planters never will desist from demanding a diminution in the duties on that article until they have succeeded. They have the means of success in their own hands, by a judicious revision of our tariff, so as to retaliate on those countries which persist in their high duties; which can be made in such a manner as not to affect our standing policy of raising no more revenue than is sufficient for an economical system of Government. This powerful weapon is in the hands of our tobacco |