progress of popular rights, increased general prosperity and an improved condition of the laboring many attended the abolition of every time-honored restriction, the scales fell from the eyes of the people, and they awoke to the wrongs they had suffered, under the name of "protection." It is scarcely one hundred years since the enactment of a law of Parliament, prohibiting the wearing of all printed calicoes whatsoever, either of foreign or domestic origin. When we read the Spectator, enjoying the didactic humor and trim morality of Addison, who did so much to advance the art of prose, we scarcely reflect that so low was the science of political economy in his day, that the above barbarous sumptuary law was enacted some years subsequently by sapient legislators, at the bidding of a London mob, for the reasons which were repeated a few weeks since in Congress. in favor of protection. The law, after ten years, was modified, when British calicoes were tolerated, provided the warp was linen, on the payment of 6d. sterling per yard. In France existed the same prejudice against printed cottons, the use of which was supposed to injure the consumption of French flax. When the government intimated a project for permitting the free manufacture of cotton, the Rouen Deputies declared to the government that "the intended measure would throw its inhabitants into despair, and make a desert of the surrounding country." Those of Lyons said, "the news had spread terror through all its workshops." Amiens said, "that the law would be the grave of the manufacturing industry of France." Paris declared that her merchants came forward to bathe the throne with their tears, upon that inauspicious occurrence." These phrases are now, in the mouths of politicians, applied to the new tariff of the United States. The protectionists appear to have borrowed, not only the cast-off theories, but even the phrases of European monarchists. The French government passed the law, and Rouen, Lyons, and Amiens, soon reaped unexampled manufacturing prosperity, not that the new law did them any good, but the old law ceased to do evil. The style of French calicoes, so great has been the progress of the art, cannot now be excelled, nor their designs equalled. In England, in 1773, the silk-weavers of Spitalfields were protected by a legalized list of prices, and high duties. They enjoyed a close monopoly of the home-market for half a century, yet the public ear was continually stunned with the story of their miseries. These protective laws were altogether repealed in 1822, and the silk trade thrown open; universal ruin and starvation were the least of the evils predicted as the consequence. The result has been an increase of 150 per cent. in the manufacture, and a fair degree of prosperity among the operatives. The same prosperity has uniformly attended every business from which "protection" has been withdrawn; and practical experience has demolished for ever the absurd theory of helping those who cannot help themselves. In the United States, where all other liberal principles have gained such vigorous growth, protective oppression has been clung to with greater tenacity than even in Great Britain. The reason is mostly because the benefits of unrestricted commerce have not been experienced. Free trade has not been tried; and the fear of evils greater than those we now possess often prevents a change for the better. Many curious instances of this presented themselves during the bank-suspension. At NewOrleans, in particular, there were 16 banks that failed in 1839; these institutions for three years continued to deluge that section with from 7 to 9 millions of depreciated paper, to circulate as money. The discount on this unredeemed and irredeemable paper was supposed to be indicative of adverse exchange, and a national bank was declared to be indispensable to the restoration of the currency. During all this time is was gravely urged by legislators, bankers, and merchants, that to compel the banks to resume, and withdraw that paper from circulation, would leave them without a currency. There is no doubt but this was seriously believed by otherwise sensible men. The bank paper men then, as the protectionists now, had no faith in the powers of trade to regulate its own wants. What the law did not do they supposed would not be done. The evil, however, ultimately became so intolerable, that redemption was forced upon six of the banks, and liquidation upon ten others. The result has been a superabundance of money at New-Orleans ever since. The banks have held some 5 to 7 millions of specie against 2 to 3 millions of issues. As soon as the banks were compelled to pay their debts, trade provided for its own wants, and the exchanges regulated themselves. It would be difficult now to persuade that community that bank suspension is necessary to the existence of a currency. Had a national bank been established in 1841, the restoration of affairs would have been ascribed solely to its influence, and the public would have labored under the delusion 50 years longer, as it is, the notion is "obsolete." The same idle superstition in relation to the necessity of high duties to manufacturing and national prosperity, are to be dispelled by the practical effects of low taxes upon imports. It has ever been experienced that tariff laws passed for the encouragement and protection of manufactures, have been followed by great distress among those manufacturers, and that that distress has caused renewed clamors for more efficient protection, to the want of which the difficulties, whether arising from ignorance, improvidence, or incapacity, are always attributed. Enhanced protection as uniformly increases the embarrassments. The reason is a very natural one. The enactment of a law avowedly to give persons who will manufacture a particular article the monopoly of the home market as a special reward or bounty for so doing, tempts many persons deficient in capital or the necessary information to undertake the business.They hope to get, through the operation of law, more than the fair profits of regular business; that, without being obliged to exercise their whole faculties, ingenuity and skill, they will be able to make more money than the most skilful and ingenious artisans already in the business. The experiment is not attended with success, and they then clamor for more protection. They alledge, and with some show of reason, that the government tempted them to leave a business comparatively successful; to withdraw their capital from pursuits in which it yielded a profit, and embark in new enterprises from patriotic motives; that they are suffering losses in co sequence, and ought to be remunerated; that more restrictive laws ought to be framed for their benefit. The waste of time and capital thus brought about is a great national calamity. Probably more labor and money has been wasted in this manner since the formation of the government, than all now engaged in manufactures. Up to the time when the colonies separated from the mother-country, the colonial and protective policy was almost undisputed. But a few years before that event, as we have seen, Parliament enacted laws prohibiting the use of certain materials for clothing not of native growth. Such barbarous tyranny was just beginning to be seen in its true light. The clear demonstrations of Smith were disturbing the theories, but not affecting the practice of commercial legislation. The colonial system was in most rigorous operation. The spirit of that system was, after having formed distant settlements, to profit by them by monopolising their trade. The colony was permitted to trade only with England. It was compelled to buy all its manufactures of the mother-country, at a price dictated by it, and to sell all its raw produce to it only. The prohibition of manufactures here, and the restrictions upon trade that now could not be tolerated for a moment, were then, in the low state of political economy, less complained of than really a lesser evil, the direct tax, which was the immediate cause of separation. The state of feeling which existed in the colonies at the approach of the revolution, was made evident in the resolves carried at the town meetings of the active citizens of Boston.* The independence of the colonies At a legal and full Meeting of the freeholders of the town of Boston, on the 28th of October, 1767, the following votes were passed unanimously: Whereas the excessive use of foreign superfluities is the chief cause of the present distres sed state of this town, as it is thereby drained of its money; which misfortune is likely to be increased by means of the late additional burthens and impositions on the trade of the Province, which threaten the country with poverty and ruin: being established, it was but natural that the idea of encouraging manufactures here should immediately present itself as a counter policy to the prohibitive system of the mother-country. There were, however, 13 sovereign and independent colonies, each of which possessed and exercised the power of imposing taxes on imports, and of protecting its own internal industry against the rivalry, not only of Great Britain, but of other states. The surrender of this right into the hands of the Federal Government was one of the greatest obstacles the framers of the Union had to encounter. The customs union was finally perfected, yielding to Congress the power, precisely as of later years the German states have formed the Zollverein. It was at first acquiesced in as the only possible means of providing for the public debt. Subsequently the power was embodied in the Constitution of the United States, and the first regular tariff under it was passed July 4, 1789. The preamble of this law set forth, that is was "necessary for the support of the government, for the discharge of the debts of the United States, and the encouragement and protection of manufactures, that duties be laid," &c. The moderation of this view is sufficiently striking, when we take into consideration the state of the public mind in Europe on the subject of political economy. There were no prohibitory Therefore, voted. That this town will take all prudent and legal measures to encourage the produce and manufactures of this Province, and to lessen the use of superfluities, and particularly the following enumerated articles imported from abroad, viz.: Loaf Sugar, Cordage, Anchors, Coaches, Chaises, and Carriages of all sorts, Horse Furniture, Men's and Women's Hats, Men's and Women's Apparel ready made, Household Furniture, Gloves, Men's and Women's Shoes, Sole Leather, Sheathing and Deck Nails, Gold and Silver and Thread Lace of all sorts, Gold and Silver Buttons, Wrought Plate of all sorts, Diamond, Stone and Paste Ware, Snuff, Mustard, Clocks and Watches, Silversmith's and Jeweller's Ware, Broad Cloths that cost above 10s. per yard, Muffs, Furs, and Tippets, and all sorts of Millinery Ware, Starch, Women's and Children's Stays, Fire Engines, China Ware, Silk and Cotton Velvets, Gauze, Pewterers, Hollow Ware, Linseed Oil, Glue, Lawns, Cambrics, Silks of all kinds for Garments, Malt Liquors and Cheese.-And that a subscription for this end be and hereby is recommended to the several inhabitants and householders of the town. And whereas it is the opinion of this town, that divers new manufactures may be set up in America, to its great advantage, and some others carried to a greater extent, particularly those of Glass and Paper. Therefore, voted, That this town will, by all prudent ways and means, encourage the use and consumption of Glass and Paper, made in any of the British American Colonies; and more especially in this Province. The form of the subscription voted unanimously by the town, is as follows: Whereas this Province labors under a heavy debt, incurred in the course of the late war; and the inhabitants by this means must be for a time subject to very burthensome taxes. And as our trade has for some years been on the decline, and is now particularly under great embarrassments, and burthened with heavy impositions, our medium very scarce, and the balance of trade greatly against this country: We, therefore, the subscribers, being sensible that it is absolutely necessary, in order to extricate us out of these embarrassed and distressed circumstances, to promote industry, economy, and manufactures among ourselves, and by this means prevent the unnecessary importation of European commodities, the excessive use of which threatens the country with poverty and ruin-Do promise and agree, to and with each other, that we will encourage the use and consumption of all articles manufactured in any of the British American Colonies, and more especially in this Province; and that we will not, from and after the 31st of December next ensuing, purchase any of the following articles, imported from abroad, viz., Loaf Sugar, and all the other articles enumerated above. And we further agree strictly to adhere to the late regulation respecting funerals, and will not use any Gloves but what are manufactured here, nor procure any new garments upon uch an occasion, but what shall be absolutely necessary. Three years later, when the revolution became more advanced, holders of imported goods were required to deliver them up into the hands of a committee. On the 23rd of January, 1770, a town meeting" was held, William Phillips, Esq., being "moderator." The following resolution, among others, was passed : WHEREAS, John Bernard, James and Patrick McMasters and Company, Anne and Elizabeth Cummins, and John Meir, most of whom being strangers in this country, have set them. selves in open defiance of the will of the people throughout this continent, and have been selling British goods, contrary to the known united sentiments of the merchants, freeholders, and inhabitants in every colony. Therefore voted, That they have in the most insolent manner too long affronted this people, and endeavored to undermine the liberties of this country, to which they owe their little importance; and that they deserve to be driven into that obscurity from which they originated, and to the hole of the pit from which they were digged. 1846.] The Tariff-Its History and Influence. views entertained in the act, but the idea of the incidental protection that the necessary duties would afford to the manufactures started into life during the war, was held out to counteract in some degree the popular prejudices against all taxation. The political prejudice against British goods which existed before the war was appealed to under the Union to make taxation palatable. The number of the population was then 3,500,000, and they owed 65 milThe tax levied by the lions dollars. new law, to provide for these wants, amounted to 5 per cent. only on manufactured goods, 12 per cent. on teas and China goods, with specific duties on British and West India goods. The plan of the tariff appears to have been very nearly the same as that just passed by Congress, except that the duties were far lower. There was no discrimination of duties with the view to protection. The taxes appear to have been laid solely with the view to the revenue they would yield, and protection was entirely incidental to those taxes, and advanced to make them palatable. Notwithstanding that the law, however, embraced this idea of protection, the principle was very far from being agreed in by all the great men of the time. The sound and clear mind of Benjamin Franklin was in advance of the age upon this subject, and his pen ably exposed the fallacies of the The public mind protective notion. was not, however, sufficiently ripe to discard the sophisms which were not only generally believed in, but acted upon by the governments of Europe; and the report of Mr. Hamilton, on manufactures, in 1791, reiterating the popular fallacies, retarded the spread of sound views. It is a little singular, however, that at the time Mr. Hamilton wrote, 54 years ago, the manufacturing industry of the country was in a high state of prosperity. He enumerates 17 kinds of manufactures, among which are iron, cotton, wool, flax, and hemp, and remarks, "besides manufacturing of these articles, which are carried on as regular trades, and have attained to a considerable degree of maturity, there is a vast scene of household manufacturing," &c. Iron works, he states, "have greatly increased in the United States." Cotton goods are manufactured, he states, with great success, in Massachusetts and Rhode 1790, went into operation Dec. 1st of and continued until July, 1804; under it the imports were $337,363,600, and the duties $69,959,912, or 21 per cent. The tariffs of March 26 and 27, 1804, the first for establishing a fund to protect seamen against the Barbary powers, and the latter altering the duties and increasing the number of free articles, were in force until July, 1812, though the embargo and difficulties with foreign powers, growing out of the decrees of Napoleon, and the orders in council of England. The imports during the eight years were $720,730,000, and the duties $141,379,824, being an annual average of 20 per cent. The act of July 1, 1812, doubled all duties during the continuance of the war, and in July, 1813, the duty on salt was raised to 20 cents per lb. The law of July 1, 1812, continued in force four years, until July, 1816. It simply provided that the duties imposed by the act of 1804, should be doubled. The effect of such a requirement, if the operations of trade were not changed by it, would be to double the revenues on the same amount of imports. This was, however, far from being the case. The imports during the four years of its action, were $295,114,274, and the duties $62,315,140, or 28 per cent. Had the law produced the anticipated amount of revenue, the duties would have been 113 millions, or 40 per cent. The higher taxes, as is usually the case when they were too onerous, were evaded or avoided. The commercial influence of a war, is the same as that of an ultra protective policy. The vigilance of an active enemy more effectually protects the home-manufacturer, than can any parchment-edicts in time of peace. It therefore comes to be true, that the enormous prices obtained for those goods usually imported, forces into life the manufacture of substitutes of all descriptions. These are usually poor in quality and extravagant in price. The hardship thus inflicted upon the consumers forms one of the greatest evils of a state of hostility. When, however, the peace returned, it found a large population, who had been driven or tempted into these pursuits by the state of affairs incident to the warfare, and their wares were now to be exposed to the competition of the large stocks of similar goods that had accumulated abroad. The latter offered to consumers a much better and cheaper supply. Those who during the war were deprived of accustomed comforts or luxuries, by the high price demanded for the domestic article, had them once more within their reach. The warfostered and unskilful products of domestic manufacture could not withstand the competition, and they demanded of the government to interpose and prolong by protective laws, the evils which had attended the war. They required that consumers should continue to pay exorbitant prices, to shield them from a wholesome competition. In the same manner the interests that were created in England by the war were ruined by the peace; a suspension of the Bank of England for 20 years, had filled the country with a depreciated paper currency, according to which, all property was valued and outstanding obligations measured. The persons so interested exerted themselves to prevent a resumption of specie-payments, and succeeded until 1821, when the bill, known as "Peel's Act," compelled a return to specie-payments, commencing that series of financial and commercial reform, which that able minister has, in 1846. brought to a successful issue. In the United States the demand of the war interests for protection was aided by a false patriotism, which supposed that having suffered wrongs from the English government, we could obtain redress by refusing to exchange benefits with the English people. The tariff of 1816 was the first framed to recognise protection as a principle, and not incidental to the taxing-power. Of the tariffs previously passed, none but that of 1787 had recognised protection, and that merely as incidental to a five per cent. duty. The protectionists introduced into the tariff of 1816 the minimum valuation, or a fixed value for certain goods, on which the duties are to be cast. This was a species of unworthy trickery, as by it the duty on cottons appeared in the tariff as 25 per cent. ad valorem, when in fact it was a specific duty, which has been equal to 100 per cent. ad valorem. This tariff continued in operation two years, and under it the imports were 221_mil |