P - TWO DOLLARS PER ANNUM. 7 HALF-YEARLY" IN ADVANCE. 5 AUD FAfffllS' AMD MECHANICS' REGISTER. f IF NOT PAID WITHIN THE YEAR, I $2 50 WILL BE CHARGED. PRINTED AND PUBLISHED WEEKLY BY JONATHAN RO W, SOMERSET, SOMERSET COUNTY, PA. New Series. TUESDAY, AFXRXi 28, 1846, Vol. 4. No. 24. Hour. Love may be increased by fears, . May be fanned with sighs: Nursed by fancies, fed by doubts But without Hope it dies! As ill the far Indian isles Dies the young cocoa-tree, Unless within the pleasant shade Of the parent plant it be; , So love may spring up at first, Lighted at Beauty's eyes But Beauty is not all its life, For without Hope it dies. Con &rr00f onal. SPELXII OF THE HON. A. STEWART, Of Pennsylvania. On Internal Improvements and the Tariff, Delivered In tlie II. or Kenresenlalives or the Unl - ted State, March 14, 1846. CONCLUPED FROM LAST WEEK,' THE TARIFF AND FARMERS. I had not intended, said Mr. S., to say one word about the Tariff; but I am strongly templed to state a (act or two in reply to the gentleman from Virginia. That gentleman dealt entirely on the benefits of foreign trade. He went alto gether in favor of importing foreign goods. and creating a market lor the beneht ot foreigners. Would our own agriculture be benefitted by a process like this? Nothing could more eflectually divert the benefit from our own people and pour it in a constant stream upon foreign labor. No American interest was so much bene fitted for a protective system as that of ..Sericulture. The foreign market was nothing, the home market was everything to them; it was as one hundred to one.- The Tariff gaveus thegreathome market, while the gentleman's scheme was to se cure us, at best, but the chance ot a mar ket abroad, while it effectually destroyed our secure and invaluable market at home. The gentleman says he is very anxious to compete with the pauper labor of Eu Topc. I will tell him one fact: With all the protection we can enjoy, Great Bri tain sends into this country eight dollars' worth of her agricultural productions to one dollars' worth of all our agricultural productions (save cotton and tobacco) that she takes from us. Mr. Bayly. Does the gentleman assert that? Mr. Stewart. I do and will prove it. Mr. Bayly. Then you will prove the return false which are made by our own Government. No, sir; I will prove it by the returns furnished by Mr. Walker himself in sup port of the bill which he has laid before the committee of Ways and Means. Now I assert, and can prove, that more than half the value of the British goods im ported into this country consist of agri cultural products, changed in torm, con verted and manufactured into goods. And I invite a thorough analysis of the facts. I challenge the gentleman of the scrutiny. Take down all the articles in a store, one after another estimate the val ue of the raw material, the bread and meat, and other agricultural products which have entered into their fabrication, and it will be found that one-half and more of their value consists of the pro duction of the soil agricultural produce in its strictest sense. Now, by reference to Mr. Walker's re port, it will be seen that, for twelve years back, we have imported from Great Bri tain and her dependencies annually 52 millions of dollars worth of goods, but call it 50 millions, while she took of all our agricultural products, save cotton and tobacco, less than two and a half millions of dollars worth. Thus, then, assuming one half the value of her goods to c ag ricultural, it gives us 25 millions of her agricultural produce to 2 millions of ours ?L-.n l.v- hrr. which is iust ten to one; to avoid cavil, I put it at eight to one. To test the truth of his position, he was pre pared, if time permitted, to refer to nu merous facts. But for the information of the gendeman from Virginia , who is so great a friend to the' poor and oppressed farmers, I will tell him that we have im ported yearly, for twenty-six years, (so says Mr.' Walker's report, more than ten millions of dollars worth of woolen zoods. Last year we imported $10,6GG,176 00 worth. Now, one-halt and more of the value of this cloth was made up of wool, the subsistence of labor, and other agri cultural productions. The general esti mate is, that the wool alone is half. The universal custom among farmers, ''when they had their wool manufactured on the shares, was to give the manufactu rer half the cloth. Thus we import, and our farmers have to pay for five millions of dollars worth of , foreign wool every vear in the form of cloth, mostly the pro duction of sheep feeding on the grass and grain of Great Britain, wliiie our own n wool in worthless for want of a market; nd this it the policy of the gentleman re commends to American farmer. "Ye, tir; and tht gentleman is not satis ficd with five millions, but wishes to increase it to ten millions a year for foreign wool. Will the gentleman deny this? He dare not. He has declared for Mr. Walker's bill, reduced the duty on woollens nearly one half, with a view to increask the revenue; of course, the imports must be doubled, making the import of cloth twenty mil lions instead of ten, and of wool ten in stead of five millions of dollars per an num. . This was the gentleman's plan to favor the farmers, British farmers, by giving them the American market. His plan ; was to buy every thing, sell nothing, and tret rich. (A laugh. V What was true as to cloth was equally true as to everything j else. Take a hat, a pair of shoes, a yard of silk or lace, analyze it, resolve it into' its constituent elements, and you will find that the raw material, and the substance of labor, and other agricultural products, constituted more than one half its entire value. The pauper labor of Europe em ployed in manufacturing silk and lace got what it eat, no mote, and this is what you pay for when you purchase their goods. Break up your home manufactures and home" markets, import everything you eat and drink and wear, for the benefit of the farmers. Oh, what friends these gentle men are to the farmers and mechanics and laborers of this country no sir, I am wrong of Great Britain. Now, I ask whether wool is not, in the strictest sense, an agricultural production? And if we import ten millions in cloth, is not five millions of that sum paid for the wool alone a product of British farmers? As a still stronger illustaation of his argu ment, Mr. S. referred to the -article of iron. Last year, according to Mr. Walk- er s KeporL we imported y,U4,j'Jb ft A worth of foreign iron, and its manufac tures, mostly from Great Britain, four-fifths of the value of which, as every practical man knew, consisted of agricultural pro duce nothing else. Iron is made of ore and coal; and what is the ore and coal bu ried in your mountains worth? Nothing nothing at all, unused. What gives it value? The labor of horses, oxcn,mules, and men. And what sustained this labor but corn and oats, hay and straw for the one, and bread and meat and vegetables of every kind for theother? These ag ricultural products were purchased and consumed, and this made up nearly the whole price of the iron which the manu facturer received and paid over to the far mers again and again, as often as the pro cess was repeated. Well, is not iron made in England of the same materials that it is made here? Certainly: then is not four-fifths of the value of British iron made up of British agricultural pro duce? and if we purchase nine millions of dollars worth of British iron a year, do we not pay six or seven millions of this sum for the produce of British farmers gram, hay, grass, bread, meat, and other provisions lor man and beast sent here for sale in the form of iron? He put it to the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Bayly) to say if this was not true to the letter. He challenged him to deny it, or disprove it if he could. The gentleman's plan was to break down these great and growing markets for our own farmers, and give our markets to the British; and yet he professed to be a friend to American far mers!! "From such friends good Lord deliver them!" One remark more on this topic; Secretary Walker informs us that the present duty on iron is 75 per cent, winch he proposes to reduce to 30 per cent., to increase the revenue. To do this, must he not then double the imports of iron? Clearly he must. Then we must add tenor twelve .millions per year to our present imports of iron, and of course destroy that amount of our domes tic, supply to make room for it. Thus at a blow, in the single article of iron, this bid is intended to destroy the American markets for at least eight millions of dol lars worth of domestic agricultural pro duce to be suplicd from abroad; and this is the American no! the British sys tem of policy which is now attempted to be imposed upon this country by this Jiri-lish-heling 'Jdminislratio Let them doit, and in less than two years there will not be a specie paying bank in the country. The people and the Treasury will be again bankrupt, and the scenes and suffering of 1840 will return; and with it, as a necessary consequence, the political revolutions of that period. The home market, Mr. S. contended, was every thing to the " farmer, and the foreign market comparatively nothing. Massachusetts alone purchased and con sumed fourteen times as much of the grain, flour, and meat of the other States as the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, from whom we took fifty millions of dollars worth of manufactures yearly. Massachusetts took 35 millions worth, (exclusive of cotton and tobacco,) while Great Britain took but two and a half!! Yet, according to the gentleman from Virginia, the foreign market was vastly the most important! ! Mr. Leake, here put this question to Mr. S.: Whether cotton and tobacco were not agricultural products? Mr. S. Certainly; but they, are not our only agricultural products. There were other interests m this country worth looking after and preserving besides cot ton and tobacco. But, no doubt, the gen tleman concurs with Mr. Secretary Walk er, who tell us, in his free trade report, which has so delighted England, and no wonder it has, for he there says we must take more British goods, because, if we do not,"England must pay for our 'bread stuff' m specie and ''not having it to tpure, she will bring down to even a greater extent the price of our cotton."- Yes, four cotton" there is the rub. The North, and West must quit work.sell 'nothing, and bring every thing from Eng- an( aJ,j semuhein our specie as long as it lasts, so that England may have "specie to spare" for Southern cotton that's the plan this openly and boldly proclai med by the Secretary and his followers We of the North and West, must send our last dollar to England to buy bread and meat, and grass, in the form of iron and cloth, to increase the price of "our cotton." We must be "hewers of wood and drawers of water" for Great Britain paupers, slaves, and beggars, that Eng land may have "specie to spare"for South ern cotton. This is the undisguised pol icy and purpose' of the Treasury Report. But Mr. S. would say to these Southern gentlemen: don't be afraid. You will have your cotton market still. England must have your cotton she can't do without it at present. But beware; the time may come when England would not want "our cotton," and the South, in turn, would cry out for protection. But the gentleman congratulates the West with the prospect of an early repeal of the corn laws. But, in his opinion, if the corn laws were repealed, the people of the West would scarcely get a bushel of their grain into England on any terms. Mr, Bayly. Do you mean what you say, that not one bushels-ill go therc?J Mr. Stewart. I will answer the gen tleman, by giving him Lord Ashburton's speech in the House of Lords a few days ago. He states that nine-tenths of the grain now imported in Great Britain is supplied from the north of Europe, al though they pay. a tax of fifteen shillings the quarter; while that from Canada and the United States, passing throrgh Cana da, pays but four shillings. Repeal the duty of fifteen shillings, and will they not supply the whole? Most clearly they will. The fact is notorious, that most of our grains and flour now goes to England through her colonial ports, and at colonial duties, thus evading the operation of the corn laws, while the grain and flour from the north of Europe must always pay the highest duties imposed by the corn laws. Hence Lord Ashburton very justly argues that we must be overwhelmed if the corn laws are repealed; and this great advan tage, now enjoyed by Canada and the U nited States, of importing flour and grain at abont one-fourth of the duty paid by the importers from the . Baltic and Black sea. Repeal the corn laws put them on an equal footing with us, and . is not the question settled, and the market lost to our grain and flour in all time to come? Nothing can be clearer. And yet gen tlemen exult in the prospect of the repeal of the corn laws, and are ready to sacri fice the whole of our manufacturers and home markets to bring it about. Such will be the operation of the repeal of the corn laws on American Agriculture, and such is the statement of Lord Ashburton, who, perhaps knows as much about the matter as even the learned gentleman from Virginia. But this is not all. This opinion of Lord Ashburton is sustained by the most intelligent merchants in Great Britain. Such is the uniform tenor of the testimony recently taken before a select committee of the House of Commons on this subject: Henry Cleaver Chap man, one of the witnesses, and one of the most intelligent men in the kingdom.says: "Repeal the corn laws, and the growing trade with Canada and the Western States of America will be crushed by the cheaper productions of the Baltic and the Black sea, consequently," he adds, "America, Canada, and British shipping, wonld receive a severe and decisive blow" by the repeal of the corn laws. Bnt still the gentleman from Virginia exults in the prospect of the repeal of -the corn laws, and boasts of the market it will open to our Western farwers, to whom, however, he will not give one dollar for their rivers and improvements not a cent but is anxious to seduce them into this British free trade trap; but he would say to the West, "limeo danaos," trust your friends, and beware of your enemies. Look at the boasted foreign market, what is it? Comparatively nothing. Look at facts. The agricultural productions of the United States, exclusive of cotton and to bacco. is estimated at one 1 thousand mil lions per year. Our exports to all the world amounted last year to $11,195,515. Of this, Great Britain took about two and a half. All thft rest was consumed at home. So the foreign markets of the world amounted to 11 millions, and the home market to 089 millions. Yet the gentle man had iust pronounced the foreign markets every thing to' the farmers, the home markets comparatively nothing. But another fact. Our exports of manu factures last year, including those o wood, amounted to $13,429,166. As turning, as in the case of British manu factures, that one half their value is made up of American agricultural produce,then we export nearly seven millions ofdol lars worth of agricultural produce in the form of manufactures, which does notglut or injure the foreign markets, for our flour and grain, in its original form. To use a familiar illustration; Western farmers send their corn, hay, and oats, thousands of dollars worth, every vear to the Eas- ' tern market, not in its rude and original ; form, but in the form of hogs and horses; ; theygiTe their hay-stacks life and legs, and make them trot to market with the farmer on their back. (A laugh.) So the British converted their produce, not into hogs or horses, but into cloth and iron, and send it here for sale. And, viewing the subject in this light, he could demonstrate that there was not a State in the Union that did not now consume five dollars worth of B ritish agricultural produce to one dollar's worth she con sumes of theirs. Time would not per mit him to go into details; but he would furnish the elements from which any one could make the calculation. Assuming that consumption and exhortation are in proportion to population, then we import 50 millions of British goods, and 25 millionsone-half is agricultural produce. We export to England agricultural pro duce (including cotton and tobacco) 21 millions. Divide these sums, 25 and 2. millions, by 223, the number of Repre sentatives, and it gives $112,108 as the amount of British agricultural produce consumed in the form of goods , in each Congressional district; and 611,210 as. their export to Great Britain of agricultu ral produce. This gives the proportion often to one. Yet gentlemen are-not satisfied, and wish still further to increase the import of British goods, and still fur ther psostrate and destroy the American farmer and mechanic and laboring man to favor foreigners. To shew the effect upon currency, as well as agriculture, the gentlemen from Virginia(Mr. Bayly) wants a new coat; he goes to a British importer and pays him 20 dollars, hard money, and hard to get. England takes none oi your rag money. j laugn. Away it goes, in quick time. We see no more of it. as far as circulation is conJ ccrned, the gentleman might as well have thrown it into the fire. 1 want a coat. 1 go to the American manufacturer and buy $20 worth of American broadcloth. (He wears no other, and he would compare coats with the gentleman on the spot.) (A laugh.) Well the manufacturer, the next day, gave it to the farmer for wool; he gave it to the shoemaker, the hatter, the blacksmith: they gave it back to the former for meat and bread; and here it went from one to another. You might perhaps sec his busy and bustling $20 note five or six times in the course of a day. This made money plenty. But where was the gcntlemans hsru money I anished; gone to reward and enrich the the wool-growers and farmers, shoema kers, hatters, and blacksmiths of England. Now, I go for supporting the American farmers and mechanics, and the gentle man goes for British that's the differ ence. Can the gentleman deny it? There are but two sides in this matter, the British and the American side; and the simple question is, which side shall we take? The great stuggle is between the British and American farmers and chanics for the American market, me- and we must decide which shall have it. Mr. S. would here . take occasion to state a fact that would starde the American people. The British Manufacturers have; at this moment, possession of this capital. Yes, sir, I tell vou and the country one of the principal committee rooms in this house is now, and has been for weeks past, occupied by a gentleman formerly residing in Manchester, England, who has a vast number, perhaps hundreds of specimens of goods sent from Manchester (priced to suit the occasion) to be exhibi tion to members of Congress to enlighten their judgments, and in the language of' his letter of instruction from Manchester j of the 3d Jauuary, 46, accompanying these specimens, to enable them "to rive at iust conclusions in regard to the proposed alterations in the present tarin. Yes. sir. ao-cnts sDecimens. and letters r w ft ttriMm ;n,tniftino- us how to make a tariff to suit the British. Mr. S. here expressed the hope that the people of the North would send on specimens of ft, W ft ft t U. - m-T ft ft HW - m- American manufactures to be also exhibit- ed in the Capitol, not only to show their ; scale of duties at which it is ascertained perfection and extent, but to correct on ' from experience that the revenue is great the spot the false representations made by j est, is the maximum rate of duty which these Manchester men and their agents j can be laid for the bona fide purpose of in regard to the character and prices of , collecting money for the support of Gov British and American goods. Speaking J eminent. To raise the duties higher of the President's message, this Manches- than tnat point, and thereby diminish the ter letter writer exclaims "a sec- amount collected, is to levy them for pro- ond Daniel come to judgment, a second Richard Cobden;" and so delighted were they in England with Mr. Walker s cele brated free trade report that it was or dered to be printed by the House of Lords. Alter all this, having our Presi dent and Secretary oa their side, they ought to have been content, without send ing thei r letters of instructions here to direct us what kind of a tarin' ihey wish us to pais. ; But if their chancellor had sent us a revenue bill, he could not have furnished one to suit Great Britain better than the one furnished by the Secretary oi tne l reasury. rarnament would pass it by acclamation. Sir Robert Peel un derstands his business; he proposes to take the duties off breadstuffs and raw materials of all kinds used by their man ufacturers, and remove every burden so as to enable them to meet us and beat us in our own markets of the world, where Yankee competition is beginning to give them great uneasiness. Last year, we exported hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of cotton goods into the British East Indies, and beat the British in their own markets, after laying discriminating duties imposed to keep us out, first 8, then 10, finally 15 per cent. In this great struggle, Sir Robert Peel comes to the rescue; he repeals the dnty on cotton and wool, 2nd bread and meat and every thing used by British manufacturers to enable them to go ahead in this struggle with the Americans; and what does Mr. Walker do ? Just the reverse. He pro poses to take off all protective duties, and imposes heavy hurdens on the raw ma terials, dve-slufls, &c. used by our t manufacturers, so as effectually to pros trate and break them down. Sir Robert Peel takes burdens off his steed, while Sir Robert Wralker piles bags of sand on his then crack their whips clear the road a fair race! (A laugh.) Such is the difference between British and A merican policy. Sir Robert Peel's pres ent system furnishes powerful arguments for adhering to our protective system his object is not to favor, hut to beat us; and our course is not to defeat, but to fa vor his purpose. This will not only be the effect of the tariff proposed by our Secretary, but it is its open and avowed purpose and design; is it not proclaimed purpose of the message and report to in crease the importation of British goods, snd of course, to that extent, destroy A mcrican supply ? Does not the Secreta ry propose to reduce the protective du ties more than one-half for the purpose of increasing revenue; and if the revenue is increased by reducing duties one-half, must not the imports be more than doub led? This is self-evident, and if you a 1 double your imports 01 lorcign goods, must you not destroy to fnat extent A merican supply ? Most certainly, unless the Secretary can, in his wisdom, devise a plan to make people est, drink, wear double as much as they now do. But where will we find money to pay for them ? There's the rub. But Startling and extraordinary as it may appear, our Secretary, for the first time in the history of the world, has boldly and openly a vowed it as the object of Government to break down and destroy its own manufac tures for the purpose of making way for those of lbreigners. In the very first paragraph of his argumentative report .he sets out with stating that the revenue of the 1st quarter of this year is two millions less than the 1st quarter of the last, and that this has been occasioned by the sub stitution of highly protected American manufactures for foreign imports; and this evil, this terrible evil, thi3 American Secretary proposes to remedy by redu cing the protective duties, and thus break ing up this abominable business of ''sub stituting domestic products" made by American labor, out of American produce for British goods, made by British labor, out of British produce. Oh! but he hates the British. Now, Sir, this is not only the doctrine of his text, but it runs through his whole sermon of 957 pages. No wonder it was printed by the House of Lords: and let our Secretary carry through this bill, and Queen Victo ria would gladly transfer the seals from Sir Robert Peel to Sir Robert Wralker, for he will have rendered her a greater service than any other man, dead or liv- ing. But this is not the only doctrine of Treasury report, bat of the message elf. The revenue stand ard laid down the message aims a death blow at all merican industry. It suggests a kind the its- in A- of "sliding scale" so that whenever any branch of American industry begins to ' I LmaI C r. rcn mf CM.rT.?r t Vi m n r r ot ! and thereby diminish imports and reve nue, this is evidence that the duty is too ; nign ana ougnt to . - be reduced, so as to m n . m let in the loreign rival productions; but let the president speak for himself here is the revenue standard in his own words: "The precise point in the ascending ; tection merely, and not for revenue. As long, then, as Congress may gradually m crease the rate of duty on a given article and the revenue is increased by such in crease of duty, they were within the rev enue standard. When they go beyond that point, and as they increase the duties the revenue is diminished or destroyed, the act ceases to have for its object the raising of money to support Government but is for protection merely." . What is this but a rule to fi?or foreign- ers, and break down Americans ? Ths moment the American by his superior industry and skill begins to succeed, then the duty must come so as to increase for eign imports and revenue. This is ths plain and inevitable operation of the rule, and who would go into manufacturing un der such an anti-American rul as this, making in death by the law certain and inevitable. As an illustration, take iron for instance. Owing to the rapid increasa of iron works in the United States, th import of iron has been greatly reduced; men tnc executive ruic applies uowii with tne duties, so as to increase import and revenue. Accordingly, Mr. Walker proposes to reduce the duty, which he says, is now 75 per cent., to 30 per cent., . so as to increase the revenue. Well, to do this, he must more than double the im ports, now amounting to more than eight millions a year, and thus he must import. 16 millions of dollars worth of iron in stead of eight destroy eight millions of American manufacture to make way for. fhe foreign, and thus import 12 millions of dollars worth of .foreign (mostly En glish) grain and other produce used in, the mrnufacture of this iron; for the fact is incontestable, that more than three- fourths of the value of iron is made up of the product of the soil. And this is the policy to favor American farmers and A mericans laborers ! Throw the plough out of the furrow, and turn labor out to starve to make away for British goods, increase revenue. Mr. S. said he had not time aUpresent, but he would avail himself of the first pro per occasion, to shew, as he thought he ' could most clearly, that all theories of I the Secretary and his followers in favor ot their free trade policy were not only false and unfounded, but that exactly tho re verse of those theories was true. Ho referred to the theories that "protection was for the benefit of manufacturers at the expense of the farmers and labor ers of the country;" that "protection in creased the price of manufactured goods, and reduced the price of labor and pro duce;" that it "favored monopoly and wealth at the expense of the poor;" that "reducing duties would increase revenue,' &c. He could scarcely speak of such gross absurdities in respectful terms. What? Favor invested capital by build ing up competition, 5 increasing the sup ply of the articles they had to sell ? In jure the farmers by doubling the demand for their produce, raw materials and breadstuffs of every kind ? Oppress and rob the consumer by giving him goods at one-fourth of their former price ? Re duce wages by doubling the demand for labor of men, women and children ? Yes sir, increase the price of goods by doub ling tht supply, and reduce the price of Agricultural produce by doubling the de mand? Favor monopolies by building; up competition, the only thing to destroy it? Such are the absurd theories of frea trade. But gentlemen must first rcversa all the laws of trade the great and uni versal law that "demand and supply regu late prices;" a law as universal and in variable in its operation, as the law that governs the solar system, must not only be repealed, but reversed in its operation before gentlemen could sustain any of these absurdities. The clock admonished him that hit time was out he would avail himself of the moment left to warn gantlemen if they would allow him to prophecy, ha would say gentlemen, pass this Treasu ry bill, approved, as he understood, by the cabinet bring back the scenes 1840 restore your twenty per cent, tarifl bankrupt your treasury paraliza your national industry break down your farmers, manufacturers, and mechan ics, by importing goods und exporting rnonei, pass this bill, and in eighteen months you will scarcely hare a spcci paying bank, or a specie dollar left in th country. Pass this bill, and you will not only bring back the scenes, but I re peat, you will bring with them the po litical revolutions of 1840. Again will b heard throughout the land the cry of "change! change! any change must be for the better." Political revolu tions are the fruits of pnpular suffering and discontent; in prosperity the cry i "let well enough alone. (A voica.) Then as a ouht to go for the new tariff. Whig you Yes, said Mr. S., if I was like soma gentlemen on this floor if X loved my 0 .1 . T tvfvilrl? party more man my wuu;, , but as I love my country more than my nartv. I will not. If it were not for th uv. n,l drill ot party aiscip;ine, mi " British Bdl" would find few advocates on this floor. It was the banting of party the illegitimate offspring of the Balti more Convention, that Pandora's box. whence originated most of the troublij that now alllict this country. But he again warned gentlemen pass this bill and in a strong language of a democratic, Senator on a late occasion, it will u "the party so low that the arm of rcsur- rectioa could never reach it -0 low that (here the hour having brpirwd, th chairman haisrr-r fe.siid Mr. t?. re turned his r?at) ir fi
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers