H. OF R.] Tariff Bill. [MARCH 4, 1828. English or rolled iron cost in Bristol, the year past, about it to England or Germany? I confess, Mr. Chairman, I $38 60 per ton. Duty, exchange, and freight, will am minute. I mean to be such exertions have been amount to nearly 40, or above 100 per cent. The pro-made out of doors to enlist the prejudices of the farmer posed duty, in addition, is $4 44 on hammered, and $7 against the manufacturer, that a full explanation shall be on rolled. The protection afforded to the American given. Who, then, can give the American farmer a marmanufacturer, against the first, will be, in practical effect, ket? It is the domestic manufacturer, if there is any equal to about 67 per cent.; and, against the latter, 121-market at all. Under what circumstances do you expect should the bill become a law. This, it would seem, must he will buy? If he is reduced to bankruptcy and ruin, answer the purpose. The duty is specific. No evasions will you compel him to purchase? It would seem, that, can take place. No inducement exists to misrepresent if you only exclude foreign wool, the manufacturer is in its value. duty bound, even compelled, to buy of the farmer, at all events. If such is his condition, it is truly distressing. I am sure no farmer, who is entitled to the name, can be the dupe of such fallacy. On Pig Iron the committee propose to advance the present duty 25 per cent. In this they were almost unanimous. The vast quantities now produced-the unlimited capacity of the country to supply what is now required from abroad, induced the committee to advance the duty. The value imported is small, it is true. It averages, for the last three years, not much above $50,000, so effectual has been the operations of the existing and former tariffs. The proposed advance of duty will readily produce a domestic supply, as the foreign may be diminish Steel. The present duty is $1 per hundred weight: the proposed duty $1 50-an advance of fifty per cent. The Committee on Manufactures derived but little aid from the witnesses examined on this point. It was, how ever, considered that sound policy required more decided protection. That it can be produced in the United States to the greatest amount required for domestic use, the committee did not doubt. ed. I shall not occupy the time of the committee with any remarks on the proposed advance of duty on the smaller manufactures of iron and steel. Next in order of the bill, is the subject of wool and woollens. These are the great interests which most occupy attention. Upon them it has been my misfortune to differ #ost essentially from the Committee on Manufac tures. I shall endeavor to present the reasons by which I ar led to the conclusions which follow. Next, the manufacturers are to be considered. I am fully aware of the treatment they have received from abroad. I do not, however, refer to the views of a portion of the country, which has been steady and consistent in a decided opposition to the policy of protecting domestic manufactures. We have often heard them charged with becoming rich at the expense of the hard labor of the laboring classes of the community: that twenty or twenty-five millions of dollars are drawn from the con. sumers, under the operations of the existing tariff, and put in the pockets of 100,000 persons engaged in manufactures. It is said we annually produce in the United States, $72,000,000 of woollen fabrics. The duties alone, merchants' profits not included, amount to $23,000,000; and this amount is enjoyed by 100,000 employed in the manufacturing business. It is not true: but suppose this sum is the bounty, who enjoys it? Household fabrics exceed $40,000,000, as a proportion of the estimate of consumption, Is the farmer conscious-is it true, that he is thus rewarded for the productions of industry by his fireside? He does receive it, in proportion, as much as the manufacturer who conducts an extensive establishment. Does not the wool grower participate, when he receives double the amount for his wool that is received by the farmer of England, Spain, or Germany? And yet the 100,000 manufacturers are accused of enjoying the annual income of twenty or five-and twenty millions. This enormous perversion of truth is spread through the country, and many receive it as conclusive evidence of the grasping avarice of manufacturers. I shall not take up the time of the committee with exemarks on the deep interest which the farmer nufacturer have, in the question about to be decid. is a subject that has been fully examined by the themselves, and they fully understand its importance. A reference only will be made. Statements, made Mr. Chairman, I consider the manufacturers as a class on a former occasion, have been often examined, and found entitled to as much respect as the same number of any sufficiently accurate for argument, as well as legislation. | other—to no more. To their interests I would extend The number of sheep may be set down at 16,000,000. the paternal arm of Government, when required, as much The value dependent on manufacturing establishments is as to the same amount belonging to any other class, and not less than 20,000,000. The land required 20,000,- | 000 more. This great interest now stands suspended. Its fate depends on our decision. Its salvation or ruin depends on the determination of Congress. no more, But, on this great question, they are not to be considered as individuals independent of the rest of the community. I consider them as the agents and factors of the agricultural interest. Hence is derived my strongest argument for sustaining them. Their capital and indus. try are employed to give life and animation to millions around them. Their interests and those of the farmers are identified. They must exist, or perish together. Now, sir, let us consider what the farming interest de mands. The answer is at hand: a market, a market for what he produces. Who gives it? England? No. France? No. Germany No. I have already stated the experiments of sending wool to England. It produc I shall now, sir, ask your attention to the woollen maed 23 2 3 cents per pound, whilst the American manufac-nufacturer. It seemed to me that, on this point, we could turer gave 50 cents for the same quality. By the evidence have been satisfied, without resort to the examination of taken before the committee, it appears, that the foreign witnesses. That examination has put the question to rest, manufacturer obtains the raw material for a far less price as to their embarrassed condition, could any doubt have than the American has given. In Europe the price is existed. I shall refer to the evidence in mass. I believe daily dimishing. I have evidence in my possession, up- that every one, who will examine it, must inevitably come on which the most perfect reliance may be placed, of the to the conclusion, that their condition is even worse than recent purchase and sales of German wool. The pur- public representation ever made it. If 1 recollect, it was chase was made at Leipsic, and sold in the United States. said, the other day, by an honorable gentleman from New What cost 51 cents, sold for $1 1 York, [Mr. CAMBRELENG] that he was acquainted with woollen establishments which had divided, during the past year, from ten to twenty-five per centum on the capital. Do, 39 Do, 27 Do. 21 do. do. do. 814 66 57 Suppose you impose a duty of ten dollars a pound, or prohibit wool at once: What then? Will our farmers send [Mr. CAMBRELENG, in explanation, said the reporters had made him say something of that kind. What he did say, was, that, on balancing the books for the six months, ending April 1, 1825; and for the next six months, ending October 1, there was found to be in the latter a difference of ten per cent. in favor of the establishment. He however hoped that no honorable member might ever have any thing to do with such bankrupt concerns, except in his legislative character.] Sir, I had hoped, if such evidence existed, we should have had the benefit of it before the committee-I am confident we should. But the honorable gentleman was mistaken. I think I am not a stranger to the scource of his information. As I understand it, the company to which he refers, in making up their accounts, found they had, in their operations, lost only fifteen per cent. when they supposed they had lost twenty-five. So far, they may be said to have gained ten per cent. Even this was a gain that but few could boast of. Let gentlemen examine as many witnesses as they please, pry into the concerns of the manufacturers as deep as they please, they will find nothing but an empty, unprofitable, ruinous business. But one alone, for the last year, unless by aid of a Government contract, has said that he made a farthing of profit. Mr. Marland, engaged in the flannel business, thought he might have made a saving; but he explains the cause. As an experiment, in 1826, he, with his friends, suddenly put into the New York market, about 400 bales of flannels, or about 300,000 yards, and sold them, in a day, at auction. The effect of the immense sale was to check importations. In 1827, the domestic market was better, and he had a temporary advantage. He tells us, also, that he shall diminish his operations for the coming year. He dare not hazard the foreign com petition, under existing circumstances. Now, sir, I will briefly state some of the causes of the fatal embarrassments which surround the woollen manufacturer. One is, the low price of wool in Europe. This is, probably the most important. Should the American farmer supply the raw material as cheap as the Spaniard and German, far less protection would be required for the fabric. Sales at auction is another; credit for duties is another. This gives to the foreigner the use of an amount of revenue for eight, ten, and twelve months, equal to the duties charged on his merchandise. It becomes a capital, without interest, and gives him continual aid in all his operations. Our revenue system is defective, also, in the mode of imposing duties on woollens. It is evaded. It invites evasion, by the facility with which it can be done. No better evidence is wanted than that which has been given by the appraisers, in the city of New York. In a report made last session, by the Secretary of the Treasury, we have the rule by which they are governed, in fixing the value on which duties are paid. They say, that impositions, to a limited extent, not sufficiently gross to be met by the provisions or penalties of the law, may be occasionally practised on this and other custom-houses in the United States, &c. But that any considerable amount of importations has passed this custom-house, below possible prices, the examinations under our superintendence, authorize us confidently and unequivocally to deny." Possible prices-possible prices! This proves the character of the law, that now, it is pretended gives protection to the manufactures of the country. Possible prices! What is the possible price of a piece of broad cloth? This expression itself proves that there is no standard of valuation. The foreign manufacturer can put his own price to his fabrics, and will do so, to avoid the payment of duties. His interests require it. He is justified by the expounders of the laws themselves. They may be right. The original fault may be in the system. If so, it requires correction. Another great cause of the depression of the domestic manufactuers is, the irregularity of the market. The effects have been fully explained by the witnesses. They prove it [H. of R. to be one of the great causes of their past and present embarrassments. Is this important branch of national industry worth the aid of Government? Shall it be abandoned? Shall it be left to perish? I trust not. What is the remedy? What is required to rescue it from impending destruc tion Protection, sir, protection-real, efficient procection. Adopt a measure that will at once give confidence. At the termination of the late war, thousands were ruined. The tariff of 1816 revived hopes; but only for disappointment. The tariff of 1824 was delusive. Under its influence, the manufacturer has struggled on, in the expectation that he would be eventually sustained. He had better yield at once, than place reliance on a doubtful measure. While the manufacturer hesitates, the farmer is left in suspense. He knows not whether he should give up his flocks to the butcher, or meet the expense of sustaining them. By adopting a decided course, every spindle is put in motion. The raw material will instantly find a market. The supply of the fabric will be, in a short time, adequate to any demand. I shall now examine the proposed duty on wool. The bill provides for a duty of seven cents per pound on all kinds of wool; and, in addition, an ad valorem duty, increasing from forty to fifty per cent. On this subject, I could not concur with a majority of the committee. It seemed to me, clearly, that the proposed measure was not adapted to the existing state of things. I am opposed, at present, to an additional duty on wool, costing ever eight cents per pound. My reasons are, that such wool is not produced in this country. The manu facture of it is established. The fabric which we formerly imported from abroad, is now produced among ourselves. The advantages resulting from the manufacture, we now enjoy. The raw material we do not produce. The evidence before the committee clearly proves, that the lowest priced wool, of native growth, is worth from 20 to 25 cents per pound. I know that the farmer is appealed to. He is asked to believe that he will enjoy a great benefit from this apparent protection. Now, sir, I ven ture to say, that the State to which I belong, is as deep. ly interested in the policy now under consideration, as any portion of the Union. But I do not believe the farmers of my State would be much flattered with a recom mendation to grow wool, worth ten or twelve cents, when they can as well produce that which may be worth forty or fifty. Neither would they drive a manufacture out of the country, because they did not produce the raw material. Protection should, in my opinion, be extended to such interests as do exis', or may be promoted. A majority of the committee considered that the door would be open to frauds; that such wool as is imported into the United States, would take the place of the wool of this country. To me, this seems impossible. Wool, costing, abroad, eight cents, and under, would be worth, in our market, about twelve or thirteen cents at most. The price of the poorest American, as we have seen, is from twenty to twenty-five, in the market. If it is a little lower in the interior, the cause which depresses the price there, would also increase the price of the foreign article, when transported into the interior. The space, therefore, is so wide, between the price of foreign wool, costing 8 cents, and under, and the price of our own, worth 20 and 25, that it will perfectly secure our farmers from any danger. But, it is said, that foreign coarse wool comes to our market unwashed, and loses one-half or twothirds in preparing for use. The duty, then, operates, certainly, with greater effect. Again: the trade in wool is confined to the American merchant or importer. The foreign manufacturer is not engaged. The cost, abroad, is known. Responsibility to our own laws is felt. From this material the coarsest fabrics are produced. Negro cloths, inferior baizes, and flannels. They are 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. Again, sir: Relying on the provisions of the tariff of 1824, manufacturing establishments have been created for the express purpose of using this kind of raw material. An immense value of fabric is now produced. The foreigner is almost entirely excluded. Shall the American manufacturer be sacrified, as he must be, should the proposed duty be imposed? But this is intended for the American wool grower. Let us see the effect. The duty is to take effect instantly. Exclusion is inevitable. The manufacturer of coarse wool is compelled to stop at once. The farmer requires time to produce the raw material. What is the consequence? By the time the far mer grows wool worth 10 or 12 cents per pound, where is the manufacturer who can use it? He will have been long in the shades. I will examine this subject further; because I know, abroad, it has been used to create hos tility between the farmer and manufacturer. Let us see the operation of the tariff of 1824, on wool costing above ten cents per pound. In 1825, it amounted to 1826, 1827, $515,000 Not to exceed, in 1827, 600,000 pounds; and is produced in the county of Dutchess, in the New York, alone. 343,000 [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 spe. cific duty. Eighteen or twenty cents would be sufficient. Nine-tenths of the wool produced in the United States, has a market value between twenty and forty cents per pound. The sum I have named would be abundant protection. The bill proposes seven cents specific duty, and an increasing duty to fifty per cent. ad valorem, in addi. tion. This is for the purpose of taxing the finest wool imported, as well as the coarsest, which has been explained. The quantity of the finest wool grown in the United States, is yet small.__The manufacture requires great skill and experience. The wool grower must look to the manufacturer for a market. It is for the inte rest of the latter, that the former should be prosperous. It would be a folly to produce wool, while nobody could use it. To the twenty cents, an annual addition of two or three cents would augment the protection as the sup. ply increased. The manufacture can go on. The farmer 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 pro. pose 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 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. 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 proof 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.] Although 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. Again, sir: There is no doubt that the present capacity of the manufacturer is greater, to produce the fab-visons of the bill, which are intended for the protection ric, 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, flannels, 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 Smyrna, 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. 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 ef fect. 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, 10 173 50 per cent. ad val. (less 15 per cent. pre sent duty,) 51-15 134 {H. or R. economically supplied as now. Just as we are about to realize what the friends of the American policy have foretold, that American skill, industry, and enterprise, could accomplish, to make them subservient to some fancied benefit, we offer them up as a sacrifice to our ene. mies. Again, sir, by throwing the manufacture out of the country, the effects of domestic competition is lost. The duty imposed is, in reality, a tax on the consumer. The price must, of necessity, advance. What then becomes of the poor-the poor-who have recently become the objects of sympathetic regard? All this for the benefit of the farmer-the farmer-who loses the advantage of furnishing the manufacturer with the ordinary supplies for subsistence, and the anticipated market for-what he does not produce-the raw material for a fabric that will be created by foreign labor. In truth, this is beyond my comprehension. The next provision of the bill, to which I wish to call the attention of the committee, is the one dollar minimum. It is provided that cloths, whose cost shall exceed fifty 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, running yard. Wanted 1 lbs woul, 12 cents, Specific duty proposed, 10 60 per cent. (less 15) 44 be charged with a duty of forty cents on such square yard. This, in my mind, is the most objectionable feature in the whole measure. We must here consider the duty proposed on the raw material. We must bear in mind that the foreign manufacturer obtains what he uses free from such charge. The calculations I offer will best explain themselves : A yard of 6-4, invoice at 6s. 9d. equal to $1 50, at $1, square yard. This cloth sells for, and is equal to domestic at $2 25 and 2 50. 1 yd. 6-4 pays a duty of 55 cents. Proposed duty, 6-4, 60.-Gain to manufacturer, 5. This kind of cloth requires wool, in the United States, worth 50 cents per lb. sorted; in England, 30. 24 lbs. for a yd, 50 cents in United States, Carpets 23 Carpets now pay duty, 25 cents, By hill, 16, loss by duty, 23 lbs. 171 The effect is too apparent for any further illustration. The manufacturer of the coarse fabric is ruined at a blow. The farmer who chooses to grow wool, worth eight or twelve cents, instead of that quality that should command thirty-five or fifty, might as soon send it to Smyrna or Buenos Ayres, as to New York or Boston. I think, how ever, I am authorized to say, that a reduction of the duty on carpets was not intended by the Committee on Manu. factures. That article escaped observation when the bill was framed. To this, I understand, the honorable gentle. man from New York [Mr. WRIGHT] assents. Should any alteration be made in respect to carpets, a small part only of my objections will be removed. In referring to them an illustration of the effects to be produced on other Worse than tariff of 1824, per yard, fabrics was equally clear and strong. The manufacturer What consequences must inevitably follow? The qualiwill be ruined. What next? The foreigner will takety of wool used in cloths, worth, in our market, 32 00, the same wool we prohibit, and furnish the same fabric $2 25, and $2 50, is such as is now produced in this which the American must abandon. This for the benfit country, nearly sufficient to supply the demand. The of the farmer! If this is a correct policy, it is a mystery price given by the manufacturer has been, for a year or which I am unable to comprehend. It has been consider-two past, from 35 to 40 cents in the fleece. This is ed a maxim, that domestic competition would reduce any abundantly proved by the witnesses examined before the fabric which we were prepared to manufacture to the Committee on Manufactures. This quality also comprises lowest price. It is proved to be true, entirely true, in the great proportion which the American wool grower that now under consideration. Never were the coarser sends to market. It is the production of his flocks, which, fabrics so cheap never were the poor-the poor-so for years, he has sustained and improved. It is that which : 61 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 effectually 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. [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 each. 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 manufac turers 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 up. on 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 But, we are told that the duty is specific. This is $2 50; I will not pretend to disguise it. But, when considered a great improvement. It is not so. It is no the practical operations are seen, we need no longer better than ad valorem. The duty is imposed on the be alarmed. 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 consider ed 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 dis cussion 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 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 1 would carry as high as $2 50. An honorable member from New York, [Mr. CAMBRE LENG,] 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 pos sessed some real, substantial, merit; that it would fully answer the object I had in view; that it would be protec tion 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 8705,000. 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 na tive wool of this country is precisely the quality required. By introducing the manufacture of this article, ket 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 a mar |