NORTHWESTERN
UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY
EVANSTON
ILLINOIS
THE"
:'ROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD,
AND
llemarb at tlje |abiaaaplis C^positioa.
BY JOHN L. HAYES.
FROM THE BULLETIN OF THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF
WOOL MANUFACTURERS.
CAAIBRIDGE :
I'RESS OF JOHN WILSON AND SON.
1870.
Annex
-T-
%
PROTECTIVE ABROAD.
It cannot be denied that a tendency to free-trade doctrine largely
prevails in our great cities, in fashionable circles, and among
literary and professional men, and, what is more than all to he
regretted, in our colleges. To the importing merchants and agents
of foreign houses, and-to the newspapers who depend upon them
for advertisements, free trade is merely a personal question of
livelihood. To people of fashion it recommends itself by a
meaner motive. When the tariff was under discussion in 1867,
the prince of American dry-goods importers, at a public recep¬
tion in Washington, gathered about him a circle of fashionable
women, and readily made them converts to his doctrine, by assert¬
ing that, if the pending tariff bill should pass, their silks would
cost a dollar a yard more. Many professional and literary
men, with scarcely a broader scan, see in the protective
system only the cause of the increased prices of labor, and hence
of their necessities. But the influence, of all others, which
sways the mind, or rather what assumes to be the mind, of
the country towards free trade, which warps the press, and is
irresistible in the college, is the idea so carefully inculcated by
the propagandists of free trade, that their doctrines are sanctioned
,by all the intellect of Europe. Free trade is thus accepted,
like the last Paris fashion, or is assumed as the young men
of the clubs assume certain manners, because "it is English,
you know."
But foreign cipinion, or the experience of other nations having
conditions of existence analogous to our own, cannot, any more
4
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
than the lessons of history, be lightly regarded by the philoso
pher or statesman. If it be true, as is arrogantly asserted, tha
"to relax commercial systems, and not to restrict them, is alon
in accordance with the spirit of the age," * and that " the leadinj
commercial nations, the United States alone excepted, hav
been i-elaxing of late years their commercial systems," a pub
lie opinion abroad, although no conclusive argumcit agains
the protective policy here, would be a reason for quesiioninj
it. The assertion, however, we believe to be wholly unsupportec
by examples, with the single exception of England. Of Russi
it is declared in the official reports of English Chambers of Com
merce, " that the importation of manufactured tissues is practi
cally prevented, by a scale of duties higher than any in thi
world." Some concession was made to Great Britain in 1869
but is admitted to be but a very slight measure of free trade
which " would not lead to an extension of legitimate trade, al
though it might make smuggling less profitable." The Austriai
tariff is characterized by the same English authority as " present
ing features of the most objectionable character, while the duties
are almost prohibitory." This was said in 1865. Recent changei
still leave the average duties on fabrics in Austria from 24 t(
67 per cent.f The Swedish taiiff is referred to as having "th(
* Professor Perry.
t Mr. Behrens, President of the Chamber of Commerce of Bradford, ii
a speech at the annual meeting of the Association of Chambers of Commerce
of the United Kingdom, February, 18(19, said: —
" As to Austria, we liad the same advantages as the most favored nations, bi
virtue of a treaty which had received the sanction of the Reichsrath ; but then
was a supplementary convention, negotiated by Sir L. Mallet, which, unfortu
nately, had not yet received that sanction. It was entered, in order to carry ou
the treaty, which provided that no specific duty should exceed twenty per cen
of the value of the imported goods ; and that after 1872 it should not exceee
fifteen per cent. Now, the protectionists in Austria were quite aghast at this
for, although they always used to say that the fixed duties agreed upon did no
amount to more than five or ten per cent, when pressed to allow a restriction t<
fifteen per cent, they said it would be ruin to them.
" On Sir L. Mallet visiting Bradford, he put patterns before him, and showec
that the duties had averaged from twenty-four to sixty-seven per cent. Ht
hoped the exertions made by our government, and well seconded by the Aus
trian government, would have some result; so that, even if we did not get oui
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
5
unfortunate distinction of disputing with Spain the debatable
honor of being the highest in the world, the Kussian only ex¬
cepted." The Peninsula is declared by British manufacturers to
" be shut out from the products of the looms and forges of
England by a most ridiculous tariff." The Anglo-French treaty
is pronounced by Count Gasparin to be scarcely less prohibitory
in fact than the Morrill tariff. This treaty, we admit, cannot
be fairly cited as indicating either an affirmative or negative
sentiment as to the protective question, on the part of the Im¬
perial Government which concluded it. It would seem that the
purpose of the Emperor was to conciliate England, by apparent
concessions to her free-trade policy, while practically yielding as
little as possible. Mr. Cobden and his friends claim the treaty
as a free-trade victory. The Bradford Chamber of Commerce
complains that the French.tariff is still "excessive," "unreason¬
able," and " onerous." Whether it indicates a free-trade prog¬
ress or not, the actual protective sentiment of France is shown
by the arguments made for and against the commercial treaties.
They are defended by the political supporters of the Govern-
full pound of flesh, we might obtain a good, practical treaty. As to Russia, the
new tariff announced by Mr. Mitchell would not lead, he thought, to an exten¬
sion of legitimate trade, at least as far as this country was concerned; but it
might make smuggling a little less profitable.
" In proof that it was not based on any intelligible principle, he might mention
that yarns and machinery were actually subject to higher duties than previously,
thus impeding the progress of Russian manufactures. It was sajd that the
sole reason for the change was the desire to have a round sum instead of a frac¬
tion. "While preaching free trade, however, to foreign nations, we must not
forget our colonies, against which we had just ground of complaint. As long as
they required the protection of the mother country, we might fairly demand
that the leading principles of our policy should be accepted as fundamental.
He presumed that no English colony would be allowed to introduce slavery, or
arbitrary imprisonment, or any thing contrary to our fundamental principles.
Now, surely free trade was one of those principles. What we asked foreign
countries to adopt, we had a perfect right to require from our colonies. In
newly peopled countries it might, perhaps, be right to enforce a duty on imports,
as the only way of raising revenue ; but it should be limited to the purposes of
revenue, and should not act as a protective duty. Some of the seaboard prov¬
inces of the Canadian Confederation used to have five, seven and one-h.alf, or ten
per cent duties; but one result of the Confederation had been to substitute a
uniform duty of fifteen per cent."
6
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
ment, for the very reason that they are sufficiently protective
of French industry; and are opposed by the practical men of
France, for the reason that they have been disastrous to her
industries. M. Pouyer Qartier, eminent both as a manufac¬
turer and statesman, in a speech before the Congress of the
learned societies of France during the present year, "com¬
plained of the treaties of commerce of 1860, which had been
in operation ten years, and demanded what developments the
treaties had procured for French industry, and if agriculture
had derived any advantage from it. lie separated himself from
the political economists (free traders), when they wished to apply
economical science to France. In England the strife was opened
by the manufacturers against the landed proprietors. In France
it was the men of doctrine who had taken the initiative. Hence
all our misfortunes. They had no experience, and hence they
could not fail to take the wrong roads." These remarks illus¬
trate the truth which will be apparent to any one who reads the
French journals, that free trade is generally repudiated by the
practical men of France. It is supported by extreme or specu¬
lative philosophers, and by sentimentalists of the liberal school,
like Jules Simon, who closes his late speech in the Corps Legis-
latif with the transcendental argument: " All the liberties are
sisters ; if we have liberty of trade, we shall have the others."
Mr. Carey has shown that the shattered fragments which five
and thirty years ago passed with the world as Germany, united
into a German Confederation by the Zollverein, and with its
industry protected by a scale of duties which effectually disarmed
English competition, then bearing down all the industry of Europe,
entered through the gates of the protective policy upon the career
which has had so brilliant a culmination. The new policy secured
a market on the land for nearly all its products, and, as a necessary
consequence, an agricultural population which grows daily both in
intelligence and power. Thirteen years ago Mr. Carey expressed
the opinion that Germany, " whose national sin for two centuries
has been poverty," already stood first in Europe in point of intel¬
lectual development, and was advancing in the physical and moral
condition of her people with a rapidity exceeding that of any
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
7
portion of the eastern hemisphere. The philosopher is the only
seer. How marvellously are these predictions confirmed by the
events which now startle the world ! To what, says Mr. Carey,
is the progress due? "To the great and simple operations of the
protective features of the system of the Zollverein, loiig regarded
by me as the most important measure of the century, and among
the most important ever adopted in Em-ope." We demand what
really truly protective feature of the Zollverein duties has been
modified in accordance with the spirit of the age ? It is vain to
say that the duties are low compared with our own, since they
are carefully adjusted to the admitted and actual necessities of
the manufactures which they are designed to protect. Low as
the apparent rate of duties in the Zollverein, they are stated by
Mr. Burn, of Manchester, in his recent pamphlet, to be "practi¬
cally prohibitory " of British manufactured goods. It does not
affect the question whether the duties are 50 or 5 per cent, if
the lower duty act equally for the advantage of the industry of
the country which seeks to exclude injurious competition from
abroad. A careful observation will show that all the boasted
concessions to free trade in the continental tariffs, such as the
admission of yarns, warps, and thrown-silk, which are of the
nature of raw material, are made as measures of " qualified pro¬
tection," of which we shall hereafter speak, and with the avowed
object of encouraging native industries.* If any doubt existed
* The protective character of the ZoUverein is confirmed by the following
extract from a recent article by Mr. Henry Carey Baird : —
" To this grand result (the Zollverein) the two men, not in oflScial position,
who contributed most, were Frederic List and Baron Cotta. The central and
controlling ideas of List, who was an eminent and popular political economist,
were a nationality for his native land and the building up of a diversified industry
by means of protection. These were the great ends he aimed at, and these
thoughts can be traced on nearly every page of liis ' National System of Political
Economy,' from the title itself to the concluding line of the book. As to whether
the tarifiT gave the protection required, as well as to the results of it, there can be
no more competent authority than he. Of the tariflf and its effects, writing in
I84I, he says : —
"' We hesitate not to say it afibrds a protection from twenty to sixty per cent
on manufactured goods;' and adds, ' Germany in the space of ten years has
advanced a century in prosperity, in self-respect, and power. How so 1 The
8
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
as to the protective sentiment in Germany, it is set at rest by
the fact, that the works of our great protective philosopher have
been translated into tiie German and Italian languages, passed
through numerous editions, and adopted and studied as text-books
in continental universities. If we add to these examples that of
India, whose finance minister, Mr. Wilson, long a free trader,
found that the adoption of measures tending towai'ds protection
was the only means of saving tiie remaining manufactures of
that magnificent country, impoverished by the opposite policy;
that of Australia, which has already entei'cd vigorously upon the
protective policy ; and that of Canada, which less vigorously, but
no less surely, is tending in the same direction, — what examples
remain to prove that the leading commercial nations are relaxing
their commercial systems? The example of England alone.
SIR EDWARD SULLIVAN AND ENGLAND.
Among the many recent indications that a change of opinion as
to the working of the free-trade system is going on now in Eng¬
land, the most important is the work recently published, entitled
"Protection to Native Industry," by Sir Edward Sullivan,
Baronet, author of " Ten Chapters on Social Reform ; " the re¬
publication of which, in tliis country, we owe to Mr. II. C. Baird,
of Philadelphia, and the Bureau Printing Company of Chicago.
Sir Edward occupies a respectable place in the magistracy
of his country, being a justice of the peace and deputy-lieutenant
of the County of Lancaster. His father was an admiral of the
Blue, and his family is traced hack to one of the kings of
Munster. The testimony of one occupying the social position of
this writer is particularly valuable, as it assures us that he has
no bias for the industrial class which he seeks to relieve, while
suppression of the barriers and custom-houses which separated the German
States has been an excellent measure; but it had borne bitter fruit if home
industry liad been exposed to foreign competition. The protection of the tariff
of the Customs Union (Zollverein) extended to manufactured products in general
use has accomplished this wonderful change.'" (See Pol. Econ., Am. ed., p. 459.)
THE PEOTECTIYB QUESTION ABROAD.
9
entirely independent of the commercial class, which derives the
principal advantages from free trade in England. The author
makes no pretension to philosophy or learning. He gives hardly
a quotation, except from General Grant's inaugural; does not
attempt to fortify himself with tables or statistics ; does not accu¬
mulate facts, and even repeats such as he has collected. But his
work is no less convincing, because it is the utterance of deep
convictions. He is not deeply read in the doctrines of protection,
and makes admissions which a closer reasoner would not do. But
the book is the plain talk of a man of good practical sense, who
utterly discards theory, and addresses himself to the facts before
him; not in book language, but just as one man of the world talks
with another; and with a freedom of expression which is not
often found without flippancy.
Sir Edward, above all, wins our admiration by his defiance of
the prejudice of his class, in boldly breaking a lance for the
cause of the crushed working-men of England. It is a chivalric
O O
deed, not less knightly than the legendary feats of Sir Launcelot
and the companions of the Round Table, when they went forth
to free the English soil from oppressors in the " true old times,"
" When every morning brought a noble chance,
And every chance brought out a noble knight."
Our object is not to review, criticise, or even to condense
this book, nor to make it a text for our commentaries. We
shall serve our purpose, and more interest our readers who have
not the work in their hands, by largely extracting such portions
as show the new and unexpected phase of opinion in England as
to a question upon which there has before been no divided sen¬
timent.
The author states the purpose of his work with admirable
simplicity and directness.
" Protection to native industry is not a question of sentiment or
theory, but of fact and common sense. There is no magic or mystery
about it; it is an ordinary calculation of cost, in which all the con¬
ditions and figures are perfectly well known. Wages in France,
Belgium, Prussia, Austria, and in Switzerland, are from thirty to
2
10
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
fifty per cent lower than in England : rent, clothing, food, beer, taxes,
and general charges, are all in the same proportion. The habits of the
people are economical in the extreme; the manufacturers have as
much capital, science, and enterprise, and their operatives as much
skill and intelligence, and technical education, and industry, as we
have; they get their raw materials very nearly at the same price
we do. The question is. Can our manufacturers, with higher wages,
higher rates and taxes, higher general charges, and our operatives,
with dearer food, dearer clothing, dearer house-rent, and extravagant
habits, produce as cheaply as they can ?
" The remedy for the present state of things is not to export our
workmen and import our manufacturers, but to keep our workmen
and manufacture for ourselves.
" England is the only country in the world that does not, in some
shape or other, protect native industry, and preserve a preferential
market for its own operatives. Theoretically, it may be very chival¬
rous : practically, it is very stupid, — c'est beau, mais c'est bete."
The author commences his treatise with a sensible chapter on
the " Growth of Trade." He shows tliat at the very time,
about twenty years since, when the gold of Australia and Cali¬
fornia, and the spread of steam communication by land and sea
over the whole face of the globe, increased to an inconceivable
extent the trade of the world, and equalized the trading condi¬
tions of tlie different nations, the Mancliester School of Political
Economists took out their patent, as it were, for free trade.
" They maintained their patent was so grand, and its advantages
so evident, that every nation must adopt it, and that those who did
so first would be the greatest gainers: so eager were they to begin,
that, like most other things done in a hurry, it was only half done.
To try the experiment at all, other nations must be found to join us ;
to know what the result of free trade actually was, there must be
reciprocity and free ports : but as no other nation joined us, we never
had either one or the other. As we advanced, they drew back ; conse¬
quently, the experiment has never been tried, and we know to-day as
little of free trade, strictly speaking, as we did twenty years ago. It
is amusing to hear people expatiating on the marvels of free trade,
and on the blessings it has conferred upon the human race in general,
and ourselves in particular, when we remember that as yet this policy
has never even been tried, that its miracles and blessings are still in
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
11
the womb of the future. Free traders renounce all logic and facts
when discussing their favorite dogma: they are, indeed, the most dis¬
ingenuous of arguers. I declare, that, as constantly as I have heard
the subject discussed, I never once heard a free trader have the
honesty to attribute the increased trade of the world in general, and
of England as part of it, to its true causes, viz., the vast increase in
the circulating medium and the general application of steam, but
always to what they choose to call free trade. To ignore these illimit¬
able agencies, and to ascribe all progress to the pigmy efforts of a
small school of political economists in England, is to reverse the old
proverb, and to imagine the mouse bringing forth the mountain.
" The increased foreign commerce of England, during the last
twenty years, is attributed to her free trade policy; and we are led,
by implication, to understand that she is the only nation that has
advanced in commercial activity during that period ; that whilst she
has been advancing, the rest of the world has stood still.
"Free traders point with triumph to our Board of Trade returns
of exports and imports, and exclaim, triumphantly. This is our doing ;
but they ignore the fact — it cannot be through ignorance — that the
Board of Trade returns in France, Switzerland, Prussia, Belgium,
and Austria, show results far more satisfactory, a proportionate
increase of trade far exceeding our own.
" It is not England alone that has increased her trade during the
last twenty years : the whole of Europe and America, with some
trifling exceptions, have increased theirs far more rapidly than we
have. Take France, for instance, as being our nearest neighbor, and
compare her wealth and commercial position now with what it was
twenty years ago, and it will at once be granted that, however great
may be the blessings of free trade, sound progress is not incompatible
with the strictest protection ; and the bullion in the Bank of France
is now, in 1869, forty-seven millions, — twenty-seven millions higher
than it was in 1841, and sixteen millions higher than in 1853 : the
bullion in the Bank of England is seventeen millions, — two millions
higher than in 1844, three millions less than in 1853 !
" In France, in 1868, the exports and imports balanced within
twenty millions. In England, the excess of imports was over sixty
millions ! and in 1869 it will, in all probability, reach one hundred
millions.
" The increased commerce of the world has been caused by the
increased circulation of gold and the increased facilities of communi¬
cation by land and sea: it never has been and never can be affected
12
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
by paltry legislation, either in one direction or the other. Local
legislation, like that which has made England a free port, may atfect
the trade of England, but to suppose it will materially influence the
commerce of the world would be preposterous ; it is only our national
bumptiousness that renders the idea possible. All the nations of the
world have increased their commerce, — they under the strictest
principle of protection, we alone under what we call free trade. To
attribute our progress to free trade is just as absurd as to attribute
theirs to protection. It might be more fairly said, we have all
progressed in spite of both. Neither system has had more than an
infinitesimal effect by the side of the great agencies that have brought
about this result."
Similar views, but more eondensely stated, had been before
expressed by Mr. Bigelow in his Tariff Question, which evi¬
dently had not been seen by Sir Edward Sullivan. It is
instructive to observe how these two writers corroborate each
other.
After giving tables exhibiting the increase of British exports,
Mr. Bigelow says : —
" The chief causes of this large increase of British exports are
undoubtedly to be found outside of the tariff laws. That they are
causes of general application, is shown by the fact, that Great Britain
was not alone in this experience of prosperity. The foreign trade of
France, under a tariff highly protective, increased, during the same
period, in a ratio greater than that of England; and the United
States, with a tariff moderately protective, had a commercial record
equally advantageous, — as may be seen by the following comparative
statement: —
Countries Compared.
Exports in
1853.
Exports in
1859.
Percentage of
Increase.
Great Britain
Branca
United States
Dollars.
4y4,G«8,'J05
18y,8G'J,162
Dollars.
652,057,055
371,028,000
278,392,080
Per cent.
31.82
46.04
40.02
" In accounting for this recent and great expansion of commerce,
two causes especially suggest themselves : —
" First, The influence of applied sciences in augmenting the
means of production ; an influence which is constantly becoming more
extensive and efficient.
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
13
" Secondly, The greatly increased supply of gold.
" This is pre-eminently an age of progress. Useful inventions in
the mechanic arts, and important discoveries in science, are of almost
daily occurrence. Countless improvements in existing machines, and
in the methods and processes of production, are continually enlarging
the ability to produce, — multiplying articles of consumption, and
thus, of necessity, swelling the great currents of trade.
" The annual produce of gold, which, prior to 1848, was $50,000,000,
has, since 1853, amounted to nearly $150,000,000. ' The effect of
this treble supply of gold,' says Mr. Tooke, ' has been to set in motion
and sustain a vast and increasing number of causes, all conducing to
augment the real wealth and resources of the world, by stimulating
trade, enterprise, discovery, and production.'
" While these are causes of general application, which operate
with more or less effect in all commercial countries, there can be no
doubt that they exert a peculiar power in England. This is an
advantage which she owes to her superior capital and skill, and to her
well-established system of production, and her widely extended busi¬
ness relations. These enable her to apply, readily and efficiently, to
her productive means, every new improvement, and to meet witl^
promptness every new demand ; while under the all-controlling laws
of commercial attraction, her position, as manufacturer for half the
globe, draws to her vaults the larger part of the gold."
These views are confirmed by McCuUoch, who says, in his
Dictionary, edition of 1859 : —
" It would be difficult to exaggerate the advance that has been
made in commerce, and in most sorts of industry, and the improve¬
ment in the condition of society that has taken place, during the last
seven years. A considerable portion of this advance is no doubt due
to the discovery of the Californian and Australian gold-fields."
The same causes had increased the manufactures and exports
of England during the most brilliant period of her older com¬
mercial history. In the sixth and seventh years of Elizabeth,
the woollen manufacture of England had so much increased,
that the export of woollen goods to Antwerp alone, according
to Camden, amounted to £750,000; and the whole value of
the exports, in 1564, was £1,200,000, — all fabricated from
English wool. The vigor of the woollen trade, the only textile
14
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
manufacture then established in England, is attributed by
Smith, a very high autliority, in his celebrated memoirs of wool,
to the abundance of gold and silver, in consequence of the recent
discovery of South America.
In the chapter on free trade and free ports. Sir Edward Sul¬
livan exposes the absurdity of the first canon of free trade, that
" each nation should supply to the world's market what it pro¬
duces best and cheapest, and should resign to other nations those
industries in which it is not so strong." He observes, that it
would not be difficult to prove, that as capital and science
become more general, and the natural resources of different
countries are more fully developed, there will be scarcely a
single article of manufacture that will not be produced as
cheap by some one nation or other, as in England. And
he pertinently inquires : " If this ever takes place, even par¬
tially, is England to sacrifice her existence to her theory, and
abandon all, or a portion of her industries, because she cannot
jwoduce quite so cheaply as her neighbors ? Is she to sink into
the position of a manufacturing country absolutely without
manufactures ? "
He proceeds to show what are the actual results to the work¬
people of England, with dear food, dear clothing, dear house-
rent, and a double rate of wages, of unrelieved competition,
with the work-people of other nations, whose superior advan¬
tages, more economical and thrifty habits, and a fostering
home support, enable them to undersell the English. The dis¬
tress of the English operatives, who have been pushed out of
their home market by foreign competition, is shown by the
increasing crime and pauperism of the country. " The pauper¬
ism and crime of the country," says Sir Edward, " are increasing
so rapidly, that we must look the difficulty in the face, and try
to mitigate it, or we must shut our eyes and ears, and let
destruction come upon us ; at the rate they are now increasing,
this need not be very long. In the year 1853, fifteen vears
ago, the amount expended in actual relief of the poor n-as
under five millions; in 1868 it was seven and a half millions,
an increase of fifty per cent in fifteen years. Nearly the whole
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
15
of this increase, and also the increase of crime, has been in the
manufacturing districts." He continues : —
" The manufacturing districts are depressed as they never have been
before; and any one who will visit them may see by evidence that
cannot lie, by smokeless chimneys, by closed shops, by crowded poor-
houses and glutted jails, by crowds of squalid idlers, that the distress
is real. Take the one single fact that the consumption of cotton goods
in England has fallen off 35 per cent in three years 1 Can any fact
afford stronger proof of the poverty and depression of our operative
classes ? Cotton constitutes the greater proportion of the clothing of the
lower orders; when, therefore, the consumption of cotton falls away,
it is proof positive that the working classes are taking less clothing.
" Those who wish to learn the present condition of affairs must not
consult the wealthy political leaders of the manufacturing districts, —
men who have realized their wealth, and to a great extent have con¬
verted their workshops into farms. They are land-owners, not manu¬
facturers, — consumers rather than producers, — and they can afford
to see trade leaving their districts without danger or alarm.
" No : they must go amongst the workers, the managers, and active
owners of manufactories, amongst men whose capital is still at stake,
amongst the operatives, the small shopkeepers and householders who
crowd the manufacturing districts. You do not hear so much of the
present manufacturing depression at Manchester, where an immense
proportion of the wealth is realized, invested in lands or in the 8 per
cents, and where the fortunate owners have abandoned the struffslinsr
' oo o
existence of trade for the more brilliant life of politics. It is amongst
smaller men and less fortunate districts that the real suffering and
distress is witnessed, — amongst the small and moderate capitalists still
struggling, striving, disappointed. Manchester represents the past,
not the present, condition of the manufacturing industries ; it is in
Bolton, Wigan, Stockport, Oldham, Preston, Coventry, Nottingham,
Macclesfield, not in Manchester, that the true tale of sorrow and ruin
is heard. You must read the never-ending and still-increasing lists of
failures and bankruptcies that decimate every trade and industry in
the country. Never in the history of England has that portion of the
commercial class, that depends on home consumption and home pros¬
perity, been so depressed, despondent, and ruined! Never has home
consumption been at such a low ebb in every article consumed by the
working classes. It is not cotton only that is depressed ; cotton is,
comparatively, flourishing : it is every trade and every industry that is
16
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
in the difficulties. Of this universal depression of industries I have
no doubt whatever ; it is only now, only within the last three years,
that the foreign producers have acepiired the skill and capital and
machinery that enables them really to press us out of our own markets.
The shadow has been coming over us for many years, but it is only
just now we are beginning to feel the substance ; their progress corre¬
sponds with our decline. A great manufacturing nation like England
does not suddenly collapse and give place to another ; her industries
are slowly, bit by bit, replaced by those of other countries ; the pro¬
cess is gradual, and we are undergoing it at present. The difference
between England and her young manufacturing rivals is simple, but
alarming. France, Austria, Prussia, Belgium, Switzerland, have in¬
creased their export trade and their home consumption. England has
increased her export trade ; but her home consumj)tion has fallen away,
in the matter of cotton alone, 35 per cent in three years. Value of
home consumption of cotton goods, for 1800, was nearly thirteen mil¬
lions; for 1808, nearly seven millions.
" In the present condition of manufacturing industries it is foolish to
tell the operative class to attribute the prosperity to free trade ; they
are not prosperous ; it is a mockery to tell them to thank God for a
full stomach, when they are empty ! They are not well off; never has
starvation, pauperism, crime, discontent, been so plentiful in the manu-
factnring districts; never since England has been a manufactnring
country has every industry, great or small, been so completely de¬
pressed; never has work been so impossible to find ; never have the
means and savings of the working classes been at so low an ebb.
" We have had periods when some two or three of the great in¬
dustries were depressed, but health still remained in a number of
small ones : now the depression is universal; the only industry in the
country that is really flourishing is that of machine makers, turning
out spinning and weaving machinery for foreign countries ! many of
these works are going night and day ! "
Of the cotton industry, in the interests of which Great Britain
threw open her ports to foreign manufactures, our author
says : —
" In 18G8, one-third of our total imports of raw cotton, amountin"-
to three hundred and twenty-two and one-half million of pounds, was
exported, because the merchant or importer could get more for it in
the foreign markets than in our own.
THE PEOTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
17
" The Board of Trade returns for December, 1869, show a falling
olf of nearly half a million, or two and one-half per cent, in declared
value of our exports, as compared with corresponding month of De¬
cember, 1868 ; the falling off is chiefly in cotton goods, which are over
£800,000 less than in December, 1868.
" It is not that the great cotton industry has dwindled, but that Eng¬
land no longer has a monopoly of it; whilst cotton mills are closed or
pulled down in England, others are being erected in considerable num¬
bers in France, Germany, Switzerland, Belgium, and America, and
the English manufacturers of cotton ruachinery are working early and
late to execute orders for these countries. It is rather a melancholy
consideration for us, but I believe it to be a fact, that the only flour¬
ishing industry in England at this moment is that of the machinists
producing cotton machinery of all kinds for foreign countries."
Sir Edward refers only incidentally to the decline in the silk
industry under free trade, for the reason, probably, that the facts
were so well known in England that it was unnecessary to en¬
large upon them ; while, on the other hand, free traders regard
the facts so damaging to the cause, that they seek to suppress
them. Some pertinent facts and admissions leak out in the re¬
ports and journals of commerce, which only serve to supply the
omissions in the work before us. A memorial to Lord Stanley,
from the working-men's association at Coventry, represents that
fifty-five firms in the ribbon trade at that town have succumbed
since I860, and twelve hundred houses are vacant. In seven
years before the Erench treaty, £8,000 were given by the
parish for out-door relief; in seven years succeeding the treaty,
£36,000 were given for parochial relief; for the simple reason
that the imp)Ortations of French ribbons, during corresponding
periods, had more than quadrupled in consequence of the treaty.
At a meeting of the Macclesfield Chamber of Commerce, in
June, 1868, Mr. Condron said : —
" In 1826, Mr. Iluskisson introduced his free-trade measures, and
immediately both silk and cotton manufactures began to decline.
Before the treaty came into operation, there was a great silk trade car¬
ried on in Macclesfield, and there were thousands of silk looms in
Manchester ; but immediately after the commencement of the treaty,
nine-tenths of the factories were closed, and machinery worth £50,000
3
18
THE PEOTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
had been sold for less than £5,000. . . . He (Mr. Condron)
contended that the silk trade throughout England had been entirely
annihilated by the French treaty, and the general trade of Manchester
had suffered by it. The silk that should be thrown in Manchester,
Macclesfield, and other places in England, was now going to France,
and other foreign looms."
The Association of Chambers of Commerce suppress, as we
have intimated, all reports embodying such facts as are given
above.
At the annual meeting of the Association in 1869, a commit¬
tee, appointed to consider foreign tariffs, presented a general re¬
port and a special report from the Chamber of Macclesfield.
The question arose on the adoption of the report. The difficulty
was to get rid of the Macclesfield report, which had exposed the
condition of the silk industry.
" Mr. Morris, of Halifax, said the different Chambers had, of
course, merely expressed their own opinions, and the meeting ought
not to sanction the complaints of the operation of free trade. Any
thing of that kind should be withdrawn from the report.
" Mr. AYright, of Macclesfield, said that what the manufacturers
wanted, was not a system of free trade, from which some painfully
suffered, but a system of fair trading between country and country ;
and then they would be able to compete with their foreign neighbors.
. . A manufacture was springing up in Macclesfield and else¬
where, called the mixed trade; including gentlemen's scarfs and
ladies' dresses, it being partly on account of the unparalleled price of
raw material. On these products France levied a duty of 10 or 20
per cent. Now, there ought to be some reciprocity in the way of
duties. ... If there was free trade all over the world, it would
be for the benefit, not only of individuals, but of the whole com¬
munity.
" Mr. Bracklehurst, M.P., remarked that Macclesfield Chamber had
drawn up their report to the best of their light. The shoe had cer¬
tainly pinched them very much ; but whether this had arisen from the
French treaty or not, he would not discuss. The trade of the town
had materially diminished. Before the treaty, the importation of silk
goods from France was about £750,000 value ; but in 1868 it was
nearly £3,000,000; and this showed how severe the competition was
in that department. . . . According to the census of 1861, the
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD,
19
silk trade employed 117,000 persons, and indirectly 300,000 were
probably dependent on it. Now he was afraid the next census would
show a material decrease." Pauperism was increasing enormously, and
it could only be arrested by occupation being found for the people.
" Mr. Field protested emphatically, not only against several sentences
in the report, but against remarks which had been made antagonistic
to the principles of free trade. . . . Now he protested against
the meeting being committed to doctrines of that kind. It had been
suggested that such sentences should be expunged, but he thought it
would be difficult to extract a virus which so extensively permeated
the reports. It would be more prudent to accompany them with a pro¬
test against all such sentiments. He would therefore propose a rider
to this effect, ' without expressing approval of any sentiments that
may be found in them at variance with the doctrines of free trade.'"
To get rid of the IMacclesfield report, several members recom¬
mended that none of the reports of the separate Chambers be
printed. Although one member feebly protested that the facts
contained in the report should go before the country, that it might
" consider how to meet so serious a diminution of exports." Mr.
Whitwell, M.P., pointed out that the difficulty would be met
by printing none of the Chambers' reports, " as his report con¬
tained nothing hostile to free trade." This course was adopted
by the meeting, and thus the Macclesfield report, which would
have enlightened England as to the fatal influence of free trade
o o
Upon one of the most important industries, was suppressed.
It is from this industry, so depressed that the free traders of
England dare not publish the facts, that an American writer of
Political Economy * derives an illustration of his" proposition that
" no branch of business grows into self-sustaining and vigorous
life without the stimulating breezes of competition."
" For more than a century (he says) the silk manufacture of Eng¬
land, fenced round and protected, as it was called, by these restrictive
and prohibitory duties, languished, pined, and at times almost expired,
for the simple reason that the manufacturers, instead of relying upon
their own inventive skill and energy, looked to the government for
support and an artificial monopoly ; and when at length, in 1826, this
* Professor Perry.
20
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
foolish system was abandoned, and the silk interest was told that it must
look out for itself, and the ports were thrown open to foreign silk, then
first the English silk culture began to thrive?. It has thriven from that
day to this ; until now we are told that in the plainer and firmer kinds
of silk the English surpass the French, and that there is a considerable
exportation of these English silks into France itself."
Sir Edward Sullivan admits that the whole English press, and
the wealthy manufacturers, deny that the manufacturing interests
of England are declining. We find, however, the views of Sir
Edward supported by an overwhelming authority from an unex¬
pected source.
At the annual dinner of the Chambers of Commerce of Eng¬
land, in March, 1868, as we find in their official reports, —
" Mr. Ripley, of Bradford, proposed the ' Textile Manufacturing
Company ;' with the toast, the names Mr. Bazley, M.F., Col. Akroyd,
M.P., and Mr. Mundilla, as representatives of three great industries.
. Mr. Akroyd had devoted to the interests of commerce
time, talents, and money, to an extent that few had done. His estab¬
lishment was held to be a model to manufacturers generally.
" Col. Akroyd, in responding in behalf of the woollen manufactur¬
ers, after a few preliminary remarks, said, ' He wished to utter a
word of caution to manufacturers. Looking to the past history of
the country they were apt to imagine it was impossible to lay
down too much machinery, and to build too many factories. There
was some limit to the products the world would take, and we are
bound to admit into competition the manufacturers of Germany and
France. We had other competitors in supplying the demands of the
world at large, and we could scarcely he Justijied in increasing our inills
and machinery at the rate we had done in the past.' "
IMildly as this singular admission is expressed by this high
commercial authority, it is full of meaning. It is a declaration
that the manufacturing prosperity of England has culminated
under the system of free trade. With the natural increase of her
population, one-fifth of which is dependent entirely upon the
textile manufacture, the arresting of the increase of mills and
machinery — which in former years, as from 1850 to 1850, had
neai-ly doubled the product of the cotton manufacture in less than
ten years — means inevitable decline, — a fatal decline to a nation
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
21
which, in fifty years, has derived a profit from^the manufacture
of cotton alone of one thousand millions pounds sterling.
Under the head of "special interests," the work before us
presents very lucidly the motive which induces the ruling class
in England — the whole press which is its voice, and members of
Parliament who are its organs — to adhere so pertinaciously to
free trade. We have been led to believe that this policy is kept
up, as it was established, by the great manufacturing interest.
Sir Edward Sullivan shows that it is sustained by the selfish in¬
terests of the high and easy classes, the only consumers of foreign
manufactures, who find great convenience and economy in the
free admission of foreign manufactures in the British markets.
He shows that this class oppose protection as a sj'stem of legisla¬
tion for special interests; those of the operative class, because
their own special interests are better secured by free trade. But,
says he, —
" The special interests of some classes are, however, more urgent
than those of others ; for instance, the fever patient has a special in¬
terest in quinine, the gourmet has a special interest in truffles. But
these special interests cannot be considered of equal importance ; the
gourmet can live without truffles, but the fever patient may die without
quinine.
" It is the same with our own industries. The upper and middle-
class consumers have a special interest in getting their luxuries cheap,
as cheap as they possibly can, irrespective of the interest of the pro¬
ducer. The producers have a special interest in having a remunerative
market for their produce ; but you cannot compare the magnitude of
those two interests. It is a matter of convenience and luxury to the
former, of actual existence to the latter.
" In considering the effect of making England a free port, it is most
important to examine and to weigh well how it affects the special in¬
terests of the different orders and classes of the community. It has
been by no means general in its effect. To some classes it has been
a great convenience, to others a source of great wealth, to others
again a source of danger and prospective ruin.
" The admission of foreign manufactures into our markets has
been a great convenience and economy to the upper and middle classes,
to the rich, and to those who enjoy fixed or professional incomes, or
incomes from lands. To all of them it is a decided gain ; they get
22
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
more for their money, their luxuries are all cheapened, and they have
greater facilities for indulging in foreign tastes and fashions. The
upper class, and those with fixed or professional incomes, profit by it
considerably; but the class that profits by it most of all is the commer¬
cial class, — the great bankers, merchants, and brokers of the coun¬
try ; to them it has been the source of immense wealth. England has
become a vast emporium for foreign goods and manufactures of all
sorts of kinds and deseriptious ; English merchants are, in fact, the
bankers and brokers of the goods of the whole world. Countless
millions of produce and manufactures pass through their hands ; and,
as every item leaves some trifle behind, their business is most lucrative.
An English merchant gets an order for silks, or cottons, or clocks, or
watches, or the finer description of cottons and linens, for the East
Indies or China, or North or South America, or Turkey, or any part
of the world : it is perfectly immaterial to him whether the article he
supplies has been manufactured in Manchester or Rouen, Coventry or
Lyons ; it does not signify the least to him whether it is British or
foreign manufacture, so long as he gets his percentage.
" So long as merchants can buy foreign articles in England cheaper
than Britisli, they are quite indifferent as to the means by which this
result is attained, whether by fair competition or by crafty and unjust
manipulation of markets ; they have nothing to do with the stoppage
of mills and the ruin of manufacturers and operatives : their business
is simply to buy and sell; to buy as cheap and sell as dear as they
can."
It is asserted tliat while the operatives, tlie small tradesmen
and householders, and the vast jtopiihition that crowds the manu¬
facturing districts, spend all their money on home-made articles,
and none of it on foreign luxuries, the wealthy class, noblemen,
bankers, manufixcturers who increase their expenditure, spend
their surplus wealth on wine, pictures, clocks, silks, satins, and
articles of foreign luxury ; and that, to speak roughly, nearly
every manufacturing industry in England might shut up, cease
to exist, and the rich and middle-class consumers, those with
fixed incomes in fact, xvould still be supplied with eveiy thine
they require from abroad, with very little additional cost.
The author gives a remarkable illustration of the manner in
which the interests of the luxurious classes are favored, in Ene-
lish diplomacy, in the provisions of the Anglo-French treaty.
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
23
He shows tliat every single one of the thirty-three or thirty-four
articles, admitted duty free from France, ai-e articles of luxury
or convenience, whose use is entirely confined to the wealthier
and more luxurious classes in the English community, while not
a single one is directly or indirectly, or in any degree whatever,
of any service to the working classes.
With such facts before the working-people, who can doubt
that the masses of England will, at no brief day in the future,
repudiate the calculations of the free-trade philosophy, from
which their class has been excluded as a factor? As the author
says, in concluding his chapter on Reciprocity, —
" The working classes have been enfranchised ; they have been
urged to think and speak for themselves: and it is very probable the
first use they will make of this liberty will be to protect themselves,
and to tear to threads ' the puerile doctrines and illusions of their
teachers, and return to the fine old national sense.'
" Even now, I believe that the most ordinary speaker, who would
condescend to stump any manufacturing borough or county on the cry
of ' Protection to Native Industry,' would carry it against Mr. Bright
himself. Trade unions have hitherto had for their object the protec¬
tion of workmen from each other, and from their employers ; soon they
will seek to protect themselves and their employers against unfair
foreign competition."
The writer under review regards the abolition of the corn laws
as a decided legislative and social success ; but he denies, although
his reasoning upon the subject is somewhat obscure, that the
logical corollary of returning to protection to native industries is
to return to protection of corn. The true reason why no such
deduction can be made, although the author fails to state it, is
that, in the then existing condition of England, the abolition of the
corn laws was a measure of protection to the manufacturing class.
It was a measiu'e of qualified protection, a distinction first made
by Mr. Bigelow ; " qualified protection," as he defines it, being
" either tlie abrogation or adjustment of custom duties, with
a view to cheapen production, and thereby aid the home
producer against foreign rivalry. In the first case, raw ma¬
terials are admitted free; in the other case, duties on articles
24
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
of general consumption are increased or diminished, according
to the bearing on the cost of living, and conserpjently on
the rate of wages." " I freely grant," says Mr. Gladstone,
" that the relief of raw materials from taxation is a different
thing from annihilating protection." The abolition of the corn
laws was equivalent to an increase of wages to the operatives,
who threatened revolution in their clamor for relief. The bread
tax for the year 1800, with the sliding scale, and with corn at the
prices which ruled for three years before its repeal, would have
amounted to over $31,000,000. As "qualified protection" has
in view the peculiar circumstances of the nation in which it is
applied, its successful operation in England, as in the admission
of all raw materials free, is no argument for its adoption in a na¬
tion placed in altogether different circumstances. For instance,
England admitted wool free of duty. This was a boon to manu¬
facturers, but no injury to agriculture. England raises only
mutton sheep. Her climate prevents the culture of merinos.
With the command of the best long-woolled sheep in the world,
she had no fear of competition with her wool from foreign nations.
Iler lands were already occupied by all the flocks which they
could nourish. The production of avooI could not, therefore, be
stimulated by any duty. Besides, sheep are grown in England
primarily for mutton, the wool being only the incident. Animals,
unlike wool, are, in an insular countiy, almost completely pro¬
tected by expense of transportation. The repeal of the corn laws,
and the enlarged purchasing power of one-fifth of the whole popu¬
lation dependent on manufactures, increasing the consumption of
animal food, made the improved market for mutton an ample com¬
pensation for the repeal of the duty on wool. It is needless to
observe that the conditions of sheep husbandry in this country find
no parallel with those enumerated as peculiar to England. To
demand, upon the authority of English example, the repeal of the
wool duties here, which are essential to keep up the supply of
four-fifths of the consumption of our mills, is as unreasonable as
it is preposterous to bope to accomplisb it while the agricultural
class, being the most numerous, have a just claim for the reirard
to their rights and interests, and also have the political power
to enforce them.
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
25
We have already remarked that it is the object of Sir Edward
Sullivan less to prove his case by an array of facts and sta¬
tistics than to utter his earnest convictions.
The fundamental truths upon which his argument reposes —
viz., that the former advance of England in manufacturing pros¬
perity was in spite of free trade, and that the present decline is
due to it — require but very simple statements or illustrations.
Still, we may gather some incidental facts which are instructive,
and which we present without any attempt at systematic arrange¬
ment, leaving to the reader to apply them.
The facts given as the operation of the Anglo-French treaty
are peculiarly interesting, in view of the reference which is so
often made to this treaty as an illustration of the progress of free
economical philosophy. An American writer upon political
economy,* speaking of this treaty, observes : " A large part of
the manufactures of either country are admitted into the other
with perfect freedom, and the duties on most of the rest very
materially reduced; and the French manufacturers have found,
as the American at no distant day will find, that there is nothing
which stimulates manufactures so much as a broad market, —
not merely a home market, but a world market. The French
sent to England, in 1863, 1,176,000,000 francs' worth of goods,
and received back within a trifle as much in return, which was
almost a quarter of what they sent and received to and from the
rest of the world."
Upon consulting the French treaty and the pages of Sir Ed¬
ward Sullivan, we find a very different story. France admitted
free not a single article of textile manufactures except thrown
silk, which was wanted as a raw material, and a few articles of
miscellaneous manufacture, such as tiles, bricks, and gas retorts,
also wanted to supply her manufacturers, and artificial flowers
and modes, which was admitting coals to Newcastle ; but she did
admit brandies, silk, glass, mirrors, chin a, carriages, cabinet-ware,
and thirty or more other articles which are actually produced
more cheaply in France than in England, at an ad valorem duty
* Professor Perry.
4
26
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
of 15 per cent. In 1865, according to our author, the total ex¬
ports from England to France amounted to twenty-five and one-
half millions sterling. The exports from France to England
amounted to fifty-three millions, of which over forty millions were
French products and manufactures. Our author continues : —
" The relative value of this international trade is shown more by
its natui'e than by its amount. It was nearly as follows : seventy-two
per cent of our exports to France were raw materials (seven-eighths of
which were foreign and colonial produce, merely passing through the
country, and one-eighth coal and iron). Sixteen per cent were half raw
materials, chiefly yarns of different descriptions, on which most of the
labor remained to be done in France. Twelve per cent only were fully
manufactured articles ; a very large proportion of which consisted in
the machinery of all kinds required to manufacture the raw and half
raw materials we supplied them with.
" Our manufactured goods paid duties from 21^ per cent on glass
and potteries, to 20 per cent on cutlery, 13 per cent on cotton, to
7^ on metal work.
" Of our imports from France, 16 per cent were raw materials ; all
home produce, consisting chiefly of brandy, wines, oil, corn, &c.,
true produce of the soil, annual and inexhaustible, and on which a
vast amount of labor had been employed.
" Thirty-one per cent were half raw materials, and per cent
were fully manufactured articles, on which all the labor was em¬
ployed in France, and all of which were admitted duty free in
England.
" It is tlwis a fact, that 88 per cent of the articles exported from
England to France, in 1865, consisted of foreign and colonial raw
produce, on which no labor had been expended in this country, and
of half raw materials, on which comparatively little had been em¬
ployed, and of the coal and iron necessary to manufacture them;
whilst of the remaining 12 per cent, a very considerable proportion
consisted of spinning and weaving, and other machinery necessary to
extend the manufacturing industries of the country.
" Tliis was in 1865. Take a later date. In the debate in the
French Chambers, Jan. 18, 1870, Monsieur Johnstone said : ' Our
exports to England are four times as large as our importations from
that country; we have exported goods to the value of four hundred
millions of francs more than we have imported.' And still, in the face
of statements and facts such as these, we find free-trade orators and
THE PEOTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
27
free-trade penny-a-liners calling on the producing class to be thankful
for the blessings they derive from free trade.
" According to this statement of the exchange of the manufactured
products of the two countries in 1865, the French exported to us
seven times the value of manufactured goods we exported to them;
to do this, they must have expended seven times as much in wages,
and found occupation for seven times as many hands."
The wilful misrepresentations in respect to this treaty, made
to the people by free-trade advocates, is thus exposed : —
" Public men have stated, in addressing the working classes, that
our exports of cotton to France alone exceeded thirteen millions per
annum; and they have asked them what they would have done but
for this market for such a large portion of their produce. But they
knew perfectly well that nine-tenths of this cotton exported to France
was either in the raw state, merely passing through the country, or
cotton in a half manufactured state. Misrepresentations of the com¬
parative competing powers of ourselves and foreigners are cruel
deceits to practise on the ignorance of the operative class, and they
have a perfect right to, and in all probability will some day, resent
them."
The figures as to the balance of trade, in which the author
says he is not ashamed to believe, considering it a matter of
very serious import that every year the balance of trade against
England should increase, are thus stated : —
" In 1854 the balance against us was
1855 ,, ,, ,,
1856
1S57
1858
1859
1860
1861
1862
1863
1864
1865
1866
1867
1868
37, millions.
27 „
33 „
41 „
25 „
14 „
45 „
58 „
59 „
52 „
62 „
53 „
57 „
50 „
68 „
28
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
" In 1869, it is stated, it will be over one hundred millions. In
1854, our imports exceeded our exports by thirty-seven millions; in
1847, by forty-one millions ; in 1808, by sixty-eight millions ; so that,
in fourteen years, the annual balance against us, in our export and
import trade, has advanced from thirty-seven to sixty-eight millions,
and the total against us amounts to nearly seven hundred millions.
Remember, this is a quantitative comparison ; the meaning of it is,
that, in 1868, we buy more and sell less, in comparison to our whole
trade, to the extent of thirty-one millions, than we did in 1854.
" As I have before remarked, the fact that, during the last twelve
or fourteen years, the excess of imports over exports amounts to over
seven hundred millions sterling, is a proof of the immense wealth
of the country, but no proof at all that the wealth is increasing; on
the contrary, the accumulated wealth of the country must have
diminished."
While the author maintains that the tide of wealth now ebb¬
ing from England would flow back, if free trade were adopted
by the other principal nations, he has no hope of such a con¬
summation. He says : —
" Protection is as firmly drawn around all the native industries of
Europe and America as it was twenty years ago, and generations will
elapse before there is any sensible move in the opposite direction. If
the English operative class are to wait till universal free trade over¬
spreads the world, England must be turned into a Sleepy Hollow, to
be awakened every hundred years, to see how foreigners are learning
their duty to their neighbors as well as to themselves.
" We are told free-trade principles are spreading ; why, in Prussia,
Austria, Belgium, Switzerland, the idea even of opening their ports
and markets, and inviting competition with their o^^^l industrial
population, has never yet been mooted : whilst in America, the oper¬
ative's paradise, the duties on many British manufactures have been
doubled during the last few years ; and France, the Promised Land
of free trade, is already trying to withdraw the nominal facilities
doled out to us in the commercial treaty. The only man in France
who is at heart a free trader, is the emperor himself."
Th'e reactionists in England against free trade, as it exists
there, do not yet acknowledge themselves to be protectionists.
They limit themselves to demanding reciprocity. They say:
" Give us reciprocity. Get other nations to take all their duties
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
29
off, and we shall be content; let us close our ports to nations who
will not reciprocate, and we shall have real free trade in one."
Such a party has already rallied in Coventry, and resolutions in
favor of reciprocity were passed at a public meeting. By what¬
ever name the reactionary party is called, it no less represents
protective sentiments. Several pamphlets which have recently
appeared, give earnest utterance to the extensive dissatisfaction
prevailing among the manufacturers, in relation to the working
of the free-trade policy. One before us, printed in 1869,
is entitled " The Present and Long-continued Stagnation of
Trade ; its Causes, Effects, and Cure : by a Manchester Man."
The writer is Mr. R. Burn. Another tract is entitled "Free
Trade, a Gigantic Mistake: by James Roberts." As the argu¬
ments and facts are of the same tenor as those already given in
the lengthy quotations from Sir Edward Sullivan, we shall con¬
tent ourselves with a single extract from each pamphlet, bearing
upon the fundamental fact, the decline of manufacturing pros¬
perity in England. Mr. Burn, of Manchester, says : —
" The trade of this country has fallen into such a deplorable po¬
sition, that there is scarcely a single branch of it which does not leave
a very heavy loss to the producers, and consequently little inducement
for the investment of capital and the employment of labor; indeed,
the amount of distress that at present pervades the industrial interests
of this kingdom is tridy deplorable, and the future appears still more
clouded than the present.
• " The cause of such a state of things, I feel very sure, arises al¬
most exclusively from foreign competition, which has increased to such
an extent that, a few years since, would have been thought fabulous,
and no doubt was not anticipated by the most acute politicians a quarter
of a century ago. It was then thought, that as manufacturers we
reigned supreme, and could defy all competition. However, experi¬
ence has proved the reverse ; and we now find that, unless we can ob¬
tain foreign reciprocity, even by begging that which we could once
have commanded, we must descend to a position lower than that which
we at present hold."
Mr. Roberts states thus in detail the industries which are suf¬
fering : —
" In order to explain and account for the injuries to British manu-
30
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
facturing trades, it is necessary that we should show how foreign com¬
petition, and the admission of foreign manufactures duty free, are
affecting the British workman; and we will now cite cases, by way of
illustration, which have come under our notice in a variety of ways,
and are very varied in their character.
" We find that Mill wall, Deptford, Woolwich, and most ship-building
ports, are comparatively idle; no sailing vessels building: foreign
vessels do away with the necessity for British. Trade falls off in the
towns of Nottingham, Macclesfield, Stockport, Bolton, Wigan, Old¬
ham, Coventry, Leek, Preston, Manchester, Derby, Congleton, Sand-
bach, Leighton, Buzzard, Luton, Newport, Pagnell, Tring, Exeter,
Crediton, and London, and many other places. Ship-building involves
thirty other trades ; watch-making, sixty trades : they are gradually
passing from us. The iron trade is losing ground ; tools, chairs, pans,
spades, hoes, axes, nails, lamps, tin-ware, locks, curry-combs, traps,
hinges, brass foundry, needles, hooks, guns, swords, buttons, jewelry,
steel pens, trinkets, pins, wire, tubing, scales, cutlery, bronze articles,
japanned articles, &c., &c., now come from America, France, and
Germany. We have doors, window-sashes, and all kinds of wood¬
work, from the Baltic. Foreign agricultural implements, furniture,
artificial flowers, baby-linen, dresses, baskets, beads, beds, Berlin work,
blankets, bonnets, boots, braids, brushes, candles, canes, common car¬
pets, cardboards, caps, china, glass of every kind, clocks, cloths, dam¬
asks, delaine, electrotype paper, pencils, fringe, muslin, lace, gilded
goods, gold and silver articles, hosiery, leather, linen, looking-glasses,
lucifers, shoes, silk, ribbons, soap, stationery, stays, steam-engines,—
in fact every thing, small and great; and all are admitted duty free
into England, and on equal terms into our colonies.
" Is it, then, any matter of surprise that the British workmen and
British manufacturers have no employment ? If all these articles were
made here, there would be no lack of work for the British workman;
and the whole of England would once more be set in motion."
M. Emile de Laveleye, an eminent French political economist,
but not of the protective school, has recently furnished to the
" Revue des Deux Mondes " a very instructive article upon the
"land question" in England. After showing that the accumu¬
lation of capital in the little island of Great Britain is so vast, that
the vaunted treasures of Carthage, Tyre, and Babylon are noth¬
ing by its side, he adduces many facts which confirm the state¬
ments of the English authorities ^Iready quoted, as to the present
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
31
unparalleled distress of the working classes in England. He
shows that pauperism, which had before slightly diminished, had
increased since 1866. The number of persons relieved, which
in January, 1866, was 920,344, rose in January, 1869, to
1,039,549, in a total population of 21,760,000 ; that is, in Eng¬
land, exclusive of Scotland and Ireland. Although in the last
year 167,000 emigrants had left room for those who remained,
the number of paupers had increased in that year 74,000. He
quotes the observation of Lord Hamilton in Parliament, that
" it is impossible to consult the sad statements which indicate a
constant increase of misery for the three years past, without be¬
ing vividly alarmed for the future." M. Laveleye remarks that
this increase of wealth on the one hand, and of misery on the
other, overturns all the old calculations of the science of political
economy. " The economists say that if a considerable part of
mankind is still poorly provided with the necessaries of life, it is
because labor does not produce enough. This would seem true.
Then the genius of invention accomplishes wonders. It constructs
machines so admirable, that a single individual can do the work
which once required a thousand. According to Mr. Fairbairn,
an English engineer, the total number of horse-powers employed
on the steam engines of England, in 1865, was 3,650,000, equiv¬
alent to the labor of seventy-six millions workmen. There are
in that country about five millions families. Each family, then,
has at its service fifteen slaves, whose muscles of steel, put in
motion by coal, are never tired. Among those peoples who have
not yet learned how to borrow from nature these indefatigable
servants, — in Russia, for example,—the labor of the head
of a family, using the most simple tools, is sufficient to provide
comfortably for all his dependants. How is it that every Eng¬
lishman, having at his command fifteen slaves, is not able to live
in the greatest comfort? M. F. Passy, in his \vork on Machines,
repeats a calculation which proves that England, in 1860, ex¬
ported 2,673,960 kilograms in weight of cotton cloth, or sixty-
four times the circumference of the eai-th. How is it that she
can send abroad the vestment for our planet, when she cannot
clothe her own poor ? "
32
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
Tlie writer seeks, with English economists, — Mill, Leslie,
Fawcet, and Bright,—to explain the exceptional situation in
which England finds herself, by the land monopoly, which excludes
the whole working population from any interest in the soil. Poten-
tial as this cause unquestionably is, M. Laveleye almost uncon¬
sciously admits, in the following passage, the influence of a more
efficient cause ; viz., unrestricted foreign com])etition with English
industry. Comparing the present con<lition of industry with that
under the old regime, he says : "Now, on the ccmtrary, in the
economic world all is agitation, uncertainty, strife, incessant al¬
ternatives of progress and crises. This is the result of the division
of labor, wliich makes all the industi'ies dependent on each other;
of the employment of mechanical forces, which group an increasing
number of workmen, with increasing wages, in the same establish¬
ment ; and of the facility of international exchanges, which
places each one in competition with unknown rivals scattered
throughout the whole world. The great industry does not
work for the clientage of the neighborhood which it can under¬
stand, but for the market of the world, whose necessities it is
impossible to foresee. The dearness of food or raw material, a
revolution, a war, a change of tastes, a crowd of other circum¬
stances, may close the outlets of production, and bring on ruin.
The workmen share the chances of their employers; a new
engine, a displaced industry, may force them to change their
occupation or residence. No one, neither patron nor workman,
is sure of the morrow. Such is tlie situation which we see every¬
where around us. It gives rise to the complaints which we
hear from time to time, on the part of masters as well as work¬
men ; but without re-establishing the regime of the Middle Ages,
or finding a wholly new organization, whose elements we can¬
not yet resolve, it is difficult to escape from a situation which
is the result of economic liberty, free competition {la concur¬
rence), and the condition of industrial progress. To this gen¬
eral uncertainty of conditions, we must now add another source
of complaints and troubles. It is the strife between labor and
capital. It is a general hostility, a veritable social war, of
which the arms of combat are coalitions and strikes. It is not
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
33
for political rights that they are undertaken; it is, what is much
more agonizing, for the means of existence. It is the ' struggle
for life,' of which naturalists speak, transported from the animal
world to the economical world. The manufacturing employer,
pushed by free competition, is obliged to demand the utmost
possible work for the least possible wages. The workman, on
his side, is driven to obtain the most wanes from the least work.
' O
The conflict, far from subsiding, becomes more genei'al, and no¬
where has taken more alarming proportions than in England."
What can be more graphic than this sketch of the results of free
trade, drawn by one wbo is compelled, by theory, to accept a
system whose lamentable consequences he deplores !
It is the vaunted economic liberty, the unrestrained compe¬
tition from abroad, the contempt for home demand, the ambition
to supply the world, the system of production at the cheapest
possible rate for the utmost possible production, wbicb have
cast the people of England into the " struggle for life," upon
which the upper classes look down, from the amphitheatre of
exalted position, as the Romans looked upon the struggles of
the arena. We have to thank M. Laveleye for the illustration
which he has drawn from the animal world, and we will venture
to complete it.
Mr. Darwin, to whom we owe the phrase above quoted, and
the flrst elucidation of a great principle of natjure which it ex¬
presses, has shown that, in the free strife for existence to which
nature has left the feral races of the animal world, it is the
strongest, and not the best merely, which have swept race after race
from the earth ; for many of the extinct forms are grander than
those which survive. He shows, too, that it is through an unre¬
stricted range over the continents, unprotected by barriers of moun¬
tain ranjres or intervening oeeans, that the domain of the surviving
o o ' o
races has been extended. The barriers of mountains, oceans,
rivers, and climates, have alone preserved the characteristic
features of those regions which retain their peculiar types of
animal or vegetable existence. These natural obstructions have
given vaidety to the productions of the earth, and break up that
drear monotony which would have followed from the unimpeded
sway of the strongest races.
34
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
So it is in the industrial world. In the economical compe¬
tition of nations, it is not the best and fittest industries which
survive; it is those of the strongest people. Unobstructed in
their admission to India and Turkey, British cottons have sup¬
planted the magnificent muslins of Ilindostan; and the cheap
dress goods of Bradford have extinguished the precious mohair
fabrics of Angora, just as the white-weed and Canada thistle
take possession of the blue-grass pastures of the ^Vest. They
supplant, but they by no means replace. Protective barriers
are to industrial nations what natural obstructions are to the
animal and vegetable world. They secure to each country its
native industries, and permit others to take root, which, in time,
acquire a national character, impressed by the peculiar genius of
each people. The arts and products of each country overflow
its borders, and spread into surrounding nations. The whole
world is benefited by the variety, excellence, and cheapness,
which follow from the competition of many industrial countries,
deriving their very power to compete from partial exemption
from competition; and is relieved from the monotony, medi¬
ocrity, and dearness of production, which are the inevitable
results of a monopoly of industries by the strongest and wealth¬
iest nation.
LOUIS ADOLPIIE THIERS AND FRANCE.
Amidst the crash which announces to us, as we write, the fall
of the proudest nation of Euro2)e, and the displacement of the
political axis of a continent, it seems almost mistimed to turn
to France for any other lessons than the vanity of human am¬
bition, and the instability of a national glory which has no other
defence than imperial will. As a military nation, France is, to
all appearance, annihilated. But she lives, and will continue
to live, in her science and art, in her taste which rules the em¬
pire of fashion ; and, above all, in the supremacy of her industry,
which the genius of her workmen and the perfection of their
productions have made the best, if not the most powerful, amono-
all the industries of modern nations. The example and lessons
of such a country will be still studied by all nations who desire to
THE P'ROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD. 35
attain material prosperity. The country wliich, in Colbert, gave
to the world the great apostle of the protective philosophy, has
in the most cherished of her living historians and statesmen the
best expounder of bis doctrines. We propose, in further illus¬
tration of our general theme, "The Protective Sentiment
Abroad," to present the substance of a recent discourse by this
eminent man, after submitting some brief biographical notes,
to enforce the weight of authority with which he speaks upon
economical questions.
Louis Adolphe Thiers was born at Marseilles, in France,
April 16th, 1797. The son of a poor workman, an origin in
which he has always gloried, he was, through the patronage of
influential maternal relations, enabled to receive a classical edu¬
cation. After distinguishing himself at college, he studied law,
and, entering upon his profession, made some eflbrts which gave
promise of a brilliant career. He was, however, early led
away by the higher attractions of history and philosophy. Com¬
pleting ten volumes of the " History of the French Revolution,"
a work commenced by another author, lie at once attained celeb¬
rity as a historian. He became equally well known as a shrewd
political writer and literary critic, through his contributions to
the journals, and a volume on the fine arts, and one of travels.
In 1830 he established, with Mignet and Armand Carrel, a
new political journal, the "National," which, more than any
other, contributed to bring about the Revolution of that year.
After rising to distinction in the Chamber of Deputies, to
which he had been elected through the political influence
acquired as a journalist, he became, in 1832, Minister of the
Interior, and shortly afterwards ilinister of Commerce. His
administration was signalized by the new impulse given to inter¬
nal improvements, and the fostering care afforded to industry.
In 1836 he rose to the Premiership of France. Being unable
to persuade the King, Louis Philippe, to adopt a more liberal
policy at home and more energy in his transactions abroad, he
resigned, but was reinstated in 1840. lYhile Premier, he set
himself at work, with extraordinary vigor, to prepare the country
for war; which he deemed necessary to raise France to her
36 THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
proper standing, outwitted as she had been by the dijdoinaey of
Kussia, Austria, and England, in respect to the Eastern ques¬
tion. He prepared for this emergency, by reinforcing the
regular army, reorganizing the hiational Guards ; and by con¬
structing the fortifications of Paris, which he has lived to see
the last refuge of the Capital. Unable, however, to make the
King partake of his war views, he resigned the Premiership,
and has not again been called to the administrative control of
public affairs.
From 1845 to 1848 he figured as one of the opposition
leaders to the Guizot cabinet, and was prominent in denoun¬
cing the growing influence of the Jesuits. His speeches were
eagerly read and commented upon; and his articles in the
" Constitutionel," in the ownership of which he had a share,
contributed to the spread of the reform agitation. In 1846 he
denounced the cabinet for declaring itself against the annexation
of Texas to the United States, under the poor pretence of
preserving an Ameincan eqiiUihrium, which was in reality only
an English equilibrium; and thus, as he expressed it, ''alien¬
ating France from the great American nation, which is destined
to effect the enfranchisement of our political system."
Although M. Thiers voted for the Presidency of Louis
Napoleon, he pronounced, only fifteen days before the coup
d'etat, while demanding the independence of the Assembly, as
it were the funeral oration of the Eepublic, by predicting that
it was perhaps the last Assembly which should really represent
France. The political seer, who had penetrated the designs of
the imperial usurper, could not fail to fall under his ban. Thiers
was imprisoned, and afterwards teuq)urarily banished. He was
shortly after permitted to return, when he abandoned politics,
and entered upon the completion of his great work, the "His¬
tory of the Consulate and the Empire," — a work published in
20 volumes, which has been translated into every lan<;uage in
Europe ; and, in 1863, won for its author, from the Institute
of France, the extraordinary prize of 20,000 francs. As we
have more to do with M. Thiers as a practical statesman than
as a historian, we will pass by this work, with the single quo-
THE PEOTECTITE QUESTION ABROAD.
37
tation of its concluding sentence, — a passage which reveals the
liberal, and at the same time conservative, tone which chai'acter-
izes the political opinions of a statesman writing history which
he has helped to make ; —
"The life of this great man, so instructive for soldiers, rulers, and
politicians, contains a lesson also to citizens. It teaches them that
they ought never to abandon their country to the power of one man,
no matter who he may be, no matter under what circumstances ! This
is the cry which springs from my heart, the sincere wish I utter as I
conclude this long history of our triumphs and our successes, and
which I hope will penetrate the heart of every Frenchman, and per¬
suade him never to sacrifice his liberty, nor run the risk of doing so,
by abusing it."
In 1803, M. Thiers reappeared upon the political stage as
a member of the Corjjs Legislatif, being one of nine deputies,
of liberal politics, returned by the city of Paris. He at once
took the first place in the opposition, as the defender of the
public liberties; and his discourses, always carefully prepared
for the press, were eagerly read by the country, if not reli¬
giously listened to by the Assembly. In the recent events M.
Thiers has been eonspicuous for the sagaeity with which he pro¬
nounced upon the want of preparation, on the part of France,
for the terrible struggle into which the Emperor had so rashly
rushed; and for the patriotic forbearance which withheld him
from discouraging the army by an expression of his views.
The Assembly evinced its confidence in his wisdom and vast
military sagacity, by electing him, against his own remonstrance,
without a dissenting voice, a member of the Committee of De¬
fence. His own country, as well as Europe, has listened to
every word which has fallen from his lips, with an eagerness
which has sufficiently recognized him as the first of the states¬
men of France.
It is said by his biographers, in pronouncing upon his forensic
powers, that it is not the style of his discourses,—though
declared at times to have attained the most austere beauties
of eloquence, — nor his stature or voice, which make M. Thiers
a great orator, but it is " the intelligence and good sense
38
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
which he exhibits in an incomparable degree." Of liis char¬
acter as a statesman, it is said, "that among the men who
served Louis Philippe, that which distinguished M. Thiers
in a remarkable degree is his vivid sentiment of national
dignity, and a sort of practical genius, which enabled him
to govern otherwise than by pure formulas of political theory.
Enamoured with the wonders of art and the grandeurs of indus¬
try, he has always ap})lied his thoughts to the first necessities
of a nation." Again it is said : " One of the most remarkable
characteristics of the talent of M. Thiers is a powerful faculty of
assimilation in the presence of things the most unlike, the rela¬
tions of which he is able to seize at once, and Avhich he is able
to unite into a system full of lucidity and practical utility. The
different consulative committees of commerce, manufactures, and
agriculture, which he frequently called together, under his pres¬
idency as Minister of Public Works, and whose apparently oppo¬
site interests he sought to reconcile, brought out particularly
this eminent quality."
If the views of a statesman so eminently practical, upon the
most practical of all public questions, outweigh all the theories
of schoolmen and closet essayists, the passages which follow,
and which we have translated from "L'Opinion Nationale," are
the truest expression of the protective sentiment of France.
The question of an inquiry into the operation of the commer¬
cial treaties being before the Corps Legislatif, M. Thiers, on the
22(1 of January, 1870, after calling attention to the gravity of
the question before the Assembly, addressed it as follows : —
"Every nation has three great affairs, which should be the object of
its ardent and constant solicitude: liberty first, its greatness next,
and finally its material prosperity. Liberty, which consists not merely
in the right of the nation to criticise its government, but in the right
of governing itself by its own hands, and conformably to its own
ideas ; greatness, which does not consist in subjecting its neighbors
by brute force, but in exercising over them so much influence
that no question shall be resolved in the world against its interests
and security; prosperity, finally, which consists in drawing from its
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
39
own soil, and from the genius of its inhabitants, the greatest possible
amount of well-being.
" And do not think that this anxiety for the prosperity of the country
has any thing in common with that passion for material interests which
the highest minds despise. There is no work of higher morality than
to diminish the sum of the evils which weigh upon man, even in the
most civilized societies. To make man less unhappy, — that is, to make
him better, — it is to make him more just towards his government,
to his fellow-beings, towards Providence itself.
"We have before us a noble task: we shall succeed, I hope, in ac¬
complishing it. It is to give to the country liberty, without disturbance,
without violence, without revolution. The work of establishing pros¬
perity where it is wanting is not less grand or less worthy of your
thoughts.
" The Government has thought, for a time, that it could arrogate,
for itself alone, the right of deciding upon the economical system
of the country. I do not wish to recriminate as to the past: this is
not the time. "We must, on the contrary, forget the past, or remem¬
ber the past only to derive from it instruction. Our task is to
fecundate the present and the future.
" It was nevertheless a strange pretension, that of thinking that the
Government could, of itself alone, decide upon the economical system
of the country. I can understand that the Government — when it is
composed of the most enlightened men of the country — might believe
that it could be a better diplomat, a better warrior, than the mass of
the nation; but a better merchant, a better manufacturer, a better agri¬
culturist, when the nation is composed of merchants, manufacturers,
and agriculturists, is an unsustainable pretension."
After appealing to the Assembly to listen to details, however
dry, without which they would have in mind only vague gener¬
alities, without practical utility, M. Thiers continues : —
" I have exhausted myself in this study, to which I have brought the
greatest material disinterestedness, and that moral disinterestedness,
which results from the absence of bias for any system. I shall pro¬
ceed directly to the end which we have in view. In these debates
some call themselves protectionists, others free traders, and we have
even heard the tei-m compensationists. I accept whatever term you
will. It is the thing only which I have in view.
" It is asked. Shall we place around France a sort of Chinese wall ?
40
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
No : our object is the national labor, which we wish to preserve in the
country; to give birtli to it where it does not exist; but, above all,
to preserve it where it does exist. Do we demand, for this, prohibitive
duties ? No. Duties sufficiently protective ? Not even that."
After briefly showing that the duties in France are not suffi¬
cient to preserve such national industry as is already established,
he resumes : —
" I can understand that we might hesitate before undertaking to de¬
velop certain industries in a country ; but what I cannot understand is,
that, when they are already developed, we should leave them to perish.
" We are told that we would have a hot-house industry. What, then,
are the nations which liave sought to develop among themselves a na¬
tional labor ? They are the nations which are intelligent and free. When
the foreigner brings them a product, after they have found it service¬
able, they desire to imitate it. The nations which do not have this
desire are the indolent nations of the East; intelligent and free nations
seek to appropriate for themselves the products brought to them by
foreign nations.
" We are constantly referred to England. Here is an example
which this great and intelligent nation has given us. In the four¬
teenth, fifteenth, and sixteenth centuries, the people of the Low coun¬
tries had become enriched by the beautiful products of their woollen
manufactures ; England, who had received these products, as soon as
she commenced to wake up to her position, said to herself, ' It is out of
my wools th.at these tissues are fabricated. I have the hands, the in¬
telligence, the raw material; and shall the labor of foreigners provide
me with my necessities ?' She kept her wools : she put herself to
work ; and then commenced the great prosperity of England. Was
there any barbarism in that ? I am asked. Did not England soon
after renounce this system ? I answer by the question. Did not
England, only a few years ago, in order to procure for herself the
beautiful industry of flax and linens, cover herself with protective
tariffs, forbid the exportation of machines, and even give premiums to
the peasants of Ireland to encourage the production of flax ?
" I wish it were in my power to conduct you through the history of
civilization. I could show you that there has been no intelligent na¬
tion, which has not held it, not only for its profit, but for its honor, to
create for itself the productions of other nations, whenever nature
did not oppose it.
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
41
" I need not recall Colbert, creating our marine, our woollen indus¬
try, our silk industry, our lace manufactures, our glass industry, and
for this purpose giving, according to the language of the times, the
money of the king, the lands of the king, and even nobility itself,
which was at the king's disposal.
" This is old-time history, you say. I will lead you to the youngest
and freest nations. You shall see that the procedures of two cen¬
turies ago are still their procedures. An English member of Parlia¬
ment, Sir Wentworth Dilke, who has travelled over all the English
possessions, has recently published a remarkable book, in which you
will tind a curious picture of the vast Britannic Empire. I would
have those who think themselves at the head of the science of politi¬
cal economy, and who scoff at the protective system, read this book.
They would see that it is not America alone which covers herself with
protective tariffs to develop her own labor : the English Colonies,
Canada, and Australia, have recourse to the most energetic tariffs
against their own metropolis, to establish industries upon their own
soil. India herself, which has a colony of 500,000 English established
upon her territory, makes tariffs, that its cotton may be manufactured
by herself. And Sir Wentworth Dilke repeats the words spiritedly
uttered by America of the West; ' An agricultural people should
become a manufacturing people. We want something besides the
seaboard capitals. New York and Boston. We want to sustain the
brilliant cities of the interior, such as Cincinnati and Chicago; and
to do this, we must exclude, by means of protection, the productions
of foreign nations.'
" And nevertheless Sir Wentworth Dilke is a free trader in England ;
but he comprehends that what suits one country does not suit all, and
that free trade is not the law of the world.
" But I lay aside theory, to return to it again, and proceed to the
facts which touch us so nearly."
M. Thiers then proeeeds to point out the eireumstances whieh
characterize the state of the leading industries of Prance, under
the operation of the treaties of Commerce, with the free-trade
tendency impressed upon them by the arbitrary act of the gov¬
ernment which concluded them. The order whieh he proposes in
this discussion is instructive : —
" Since all the industries have man for their object and instrument,
I shall take as my guiding thread in this debate the order of the neces-
6
42
THE PKOTECTITE QUESTION ABROAD.
sities of mau. It is necessary tliat man should clothe himself ; that he
should procure for himscdf a covering ; that he should feed himself; and,
finally, put himself in communication with the world. I shall ex¬
amine these according to their logical order,—the textile industries,
those of construction and iron, agriculture, and the merchant marine.
It would be beyond our purpose to follow the orator in details
whicli have special relation to the interests of France : we shall
limit ourselves to extracts which are instructive to our own in¬
dustry, or throw light upon the general question of protection.
It is sometimes said that the American cotton manufacture can
contend, without tlie aid of tariffs, against the cotton manufac¬
ture of Great Britain. Let those who assert this be instructed
by what M. Thiei's says of the incapacity of France for such a
contest: —
" Cotton is the grand textile of modern times. It was not unknown
to the ancients. Egypt shows us cotton stutfs dating four or five thou¬
sand years ago. What is the importance of the industry of cotton
among us ? We work up GOO,DUO or 700,ODD bales, which represent in
weight 90,000,000 of kilograms, and in value .'500,000,000 of francs.
When the cotton has been spun, woven, converted into plain cloths,
printed cloths, haberdashery, and hoisery, these 300,000,000 of francs
represent 11,000,000 or 12,000,000 of francs. Xo industr}' has supe¬
rior or ecjual importance. What is its peril ? It is exposed to a double
rivalry, that of the English and of the Swiss.
" The English find the material, in part upon their own possessions
and part abroad. They have created among themselves an immense
market, and it is not possible that we can seriously speak of making
Havre the etjuivalent of Enghiud. The English have over us im¬
mense advantages : great capital, raw material, an enormous com¬
merce, machines in the greatest numher, coal at the cheapest price,
and finally, wliich is a capital point, have the cheapness which results
from an immense production. AVhilst we move G,000,000 of spindles,
they move 34,000,000 ; wo work up 000,000 or 700,000 bales of cotton,
they work up 3.000,000. Hence the cheapness which creates the grand
production by lowering the general expenses. ... It is very ditficult to
establish the true prices of production, I know : but, for myself, I am
sure that the difference in the cost of production between England and
France is not less than 15 or 20 per cent."
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD,
43
The advantage of the Swiss cotton manufacturers over the
French is estimated by M. Thiers at 25 per cent.
After reviewing the state of the flax manufacture, and coming to
the woollen industry, M. Thiers regards the industry of merinos,
like that of silks, so dominant that it fears no competitor. The
mixed stuffs of wool and cotton, he says, are with diflSculty sus¬
tained in competition with those of England. The flne clothing
industry has nothing to fear; but with the inferior stuffs, made
of waste material, the English, says M. Thiers, overwhelm
France. "The most hideous and tainted rags are disinfected,
carded, transformed into a kind of oakum, then into yarn with¬
out solidity, and made into tissues, which, instead of 10 or 12
francs, costs 4 francs the yard. "Whilst we formerly made for
the people excellent cloths, entirely of wool, and which could
not be worn out, we give them at present these detestable stuffs ;
and this for the 2iroflt of foreigners." We need not say that our
wool and woollen tariff has delivered the United States from an
inundation of these "detestable stuffs," of which the English
blankets, costing 18 or 20 cents per lb., are a type, and whose
exclusion, by a duty of 200 or 300 per cent, is the gravest charge
which the free traders can make against our tariff.
Proceeding to a discussion of the existing state of agriculture
in France, M. Thiers calls attention to the hundreds of letters
which he has received, complaining of its decline, especially in
the wool-growing districts, and to a petition signed by more
than a thousand agriculturists of Campiegne, who say that the
price of wools has decreased 40 per cent, and that mutton is sold
with difficulty since it meets in the markets of Paris the English
and German competition.
He asks. Is it true that wools which we have seen at 1 franc
50 centimes bring now only 71 centimes ? A voice in the Cham¬
bers answers that it is unquestionable. M. Thiers proceeds : —
" In certain countries where they have pasturage analogous to that
of England, and the culture of the large-sized animals has succeeded,
the culture of the English sheep, which produce much mutton and
wool, has also succeeded ; but upon four-fifths of the territory, where
the soil is stony, and only the fine grasses abound, fhe fine sheep alone
44
THE PEOTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
can convert tliis grass into flesh and manure. But it is threatened
that this French sheep must disappear from the soil. (Cries from the
Chamber, ' It is true.') The wools of Australia do not posse.ss all the
qualities of the French wool. They are not so silky, so fine, so supple,
and, above all, so tenacious ; but they are very excellent, and they are
able to make a very formidable competition, because the pastures in
Australia are immense, the internal duties are small, and because
the facility of transportation permits these wools to be landed upon
our shores at very low prices.
" Our ovine population has gone down from 40,000,000 to 30,000,-
000. Our production of wool is 05,000,000 kilograms, and we
import 00,000,000. Australia already gives 105,000,000, and she
will give 300,000,000 if they are wanted. La Plata can produce
as much more.
" In this situation how can the French resist the foreign competition ?
The agricultural industry of France cannot dispense with sheep. The
facts which I have given ought to inspire you with the most serious
concern."
In the replication which M. Thiers made to the arguments
of the free traders, on the 26th of January, he refers again to
the question of wools : —
" A young and very intelligent traveller, M. de Beaumont, has given
some curious details about Australia. The wool-growers who com¬
menced with 150,000 francs make as much as 500,000 francs in a
year. The reason is that the land costs nothing ; there are no taxes ;
and a man on horseback can take care of 1000 sheep. Australia will
soon export 200,000,000 or 300,000,000 of kilograms. La Plata
and the Cape of Good Hope will soon reach the same number.
" I do not wish to prevent your resorting to these countries. Protec¬
tion as well as free trade follows the progress of science. But with an
indigenous production of 05,000,000 of kilograms, in presence of a
foreign exportation which may reach 600,000,000, can you be tranquil ?
"We are told. Make mutton. Have you ever seen sheep producing
mutton and no wool ? You say to agriculture. Grow sheep which
produce the most mutton and the most wool. This unhappy agricul¬
ture, which you accuse of being all routine, has tried the English
sheep in the north of France. It does not think much of it. Is the
essay practicable everywhere ? Ask our agriculturists ? They
will tell you that in the centre, the east, the south, the rustic sheep.
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
45
tlie old French sheep, is the only one possible. There are no districts
having pastures which will grow the mutton sheep, and for four-fifths
of the territory the production of 65,000,000 of kilograms remains,
in the face of a foreign production which can reach up to 600,000,000
of kilograms.
" If this situation does not impress you, it is because you are opti¬
mists ; and this no one has a right to be except for his own affairs.
When it concerns the fortune of the community, optimism is nothing
but blind improvidence."
We have reproduced these passages at length, because we
regard them as worthy of profound attention. They completely
disprove the statement of the late special Commissioner of the
Revenue, already denied by the Executive Committee of our Wool
Manufacturers' Association, that the experience in France has
been " high duty, low wool at home ; moderate duty or free wool,
prices good at home." They establish the important proposition
that the agriculture of a nation cannot dispense with sheep;
they show that the unrestricted competition of the wools of the
southern hemisphere, which is extinguishing the fine-woolled
flocks of France, is a subject of serious concern to her statesmen ;
and they lead us to sincere congratulation that this delicate and
difficult question of the just protection of sheep husbandry and
the woollen industry has been so wisely resolved by American
legislation.
The friends of the commercial treaties had pointed to the
actual figures, which showed a large numerical increase in the
exports of France. M. Thiers, in reply to this, points out
that there is a very important distinction between an increase of
numbers and an augmentation of ascending force. The ascend¬
ing force of the numbers representing French commerce, which
before 1860 was 115 per cent, had fallen, since the treaties, to
65 per cent.
" But it is asked (says M. Thiers) how it is possible that French
industry, which had shown such prodigies at the Exposition, could not
compete with all the world ? It is true that the French industry has
a superiority ; but in what ? In articles of luxury. Yes : our work¬
men are very skilful; if they have not the patience of the English
workmen, they are no less the most intelligent in Europe. Our silk
46
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
products are superior to all; and also our printed cottons and stufTs.
The English, the kSwiss, and the Germans borrow our models, and
thus make a considerable saving. Our designs are above all com¬
parison ; our machines are superior to the English machines; our
irons, at least before the ruin of the cliarcoal iron forges, were ex¬
cellent ; our grains are, at least, as good as those of Arragon and
Naples. But in one thing we are wanting, — cheapness ot production :
we have perfection, but we do not have cheapness. Moreover, we
do not have the immense outlets of England ; we have not India and
Australia; we have not been able to take in all the markets of the
world, the ascendency given by cheapness carried to such a point as
to discourage all rivals. We produce 1,000,0(10 tons of iron; Eng¬
land produces 10,000,000 tons; how can we produce at the same
price ?
" To desire us to enter into rivalry with England in cheapness, is to
mistake the genius of Frauce and the truth of our situation. And
now shall France complain that slie cannot supply so many nations
as England? No. She must understand that all nations cannot be
great in the same way. England is the nation of cheap production,
and she must seek after cheap production. This is her career. France
must seek after perfection, and the elevation of her products. How
has she made her fortune in the world, and reached this ascending
force, of which I have so often spoken ? Is it by entering into com¬
petition with England in the low price of products? No, gentlemen.
It is by selling her silks and printed goods, which have no rivals in
the world. It is by her merinos, it is by her wines, — not the com¬
mon wines, but the delicate wines, so superior that we made our for¬
tune out of them before the treaties.
Since the new system, the quality of products of all industries
has been lowered in France. Have our workmen become less skil¬
ful ? No. But we have sought to rival our neighbors in cheapness.
This is the secret of the situation.
" But this situation is enviable, compared with that of the great and
admirable nation which we call England. God forbid that I should
utter one injurious word against a nation which has been an inviolable
asylum for the proscribed of all revolutions ! — against that nation
which has given us the most beautiful model of human liberty, and
where the government, kept at an equal distance from the passions of
the low and the passions of the high, is to my eyes the ideal of govern¬
ments. But I may be allowed to say that it has in its industrial
greatness that which is not so solid as the situation of France.
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
47
" France has her consumers within itself. Its market does not de¬
pend upon a cannon-shot fired in Europe. And for exportation she
has her beautiful products. England, on the contrary, has an artifi¬
cial existence. She depends upon the doings of the United States;
upon the doings of her colonies, which already oppose her with hos¬
tile tariffs. May not the day come when its immense production
will find no purchasers ? She produces ten times as much as her con¬
sumption ! This little island, in tlie words of Fox, embraces the
world. True ; hut when she embraces the world, she is vulnerable
everywhere.
" Such was the situation of Holland in the seventeenth century, which
had realized a prodigy almost as marvellous. What was needed to
make Holland, which gave laws to France, to descend from this lofty
place ? It needed only fifty years. It needed only a Navigation Act
in England ; it needed only a Colbert in France.
'• God forbid that I should predict for England such a destiny ; but, I
repeat it, her existence, which depends upon consumers, which she
seeks everywhere without herself, is less solid than that of France,
which has her consumers in her own bosom.
" I ardently desire that England should continue her career ; but I
do not envy that career for our own country. That our country shonld
have her career as brilliant, depends upon your wisdom. It is for
you to choose between doctrines puerile and full of illusions, and the
doctrines of your old national good sense."
On tlie 26th of January M. Thiers resumed the discussion
of the Economical question before the Assembly, repeating
and reinforcing his positions, and replying to objections.
We shall limit ourselves to two extracts of general application
from the second discourse. The objection so often made by
free traders here, that the old industries, which cannot sustain
themselves without defensive duties, deserve no protection, is
thus vigorously answered : —
"You say that no protection is due to an industry which demands
an exaggerated protection, and an eternal protection. That is your
principle ; that is the principle of free trade. Let us apply it to
France, and come to the bottom of the doctrine.
" Cotton has been protected ever since it came into Europe. It has
been protected by prohibition. I repeat that I condemn prohibition ;
but I observe that cotton has been protected since the commencement
48
THE PEOTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
of the eighteenth century, a protection of a hundred years. But you
have declared that you would not have an eternal protection. You
must then cease to protect cotton, or your maxim is false.
" Wool has been protected since the time of Colbert, and it still de¬
mands to be protected. Must we, then, abandon our woollens to the
competition of Germans, Belgians, and English ? The linen industry
has been protected since all time. It ought then, since it has need of
permanent protection, to be given up like the others. Iron has been
protected since a very ancient period, and still cannot get along with¬
out protection. It deserves it no longer, since you admit only tempo¬
rary protection.
" Our agriculture has been always protected. It still cannot produce
grain at the same price as the Crimea, and the plains of Western
America. It deserves to be no longer protected. What, then, shall
France do ? If you dare maintain that she can make cotton cloth at
the price of England, woollens at the price of Germany and Belgium,
if our metallurgy can contend with that of England, and our agricul¬
ture afford grain as cheap as the Crimea and America, then I will
acknowledge that there is no longer need of protection ; and thus, all
the world being ruined, there will result universal prosperity. I ask
again. Can our agriculture produce at the price of the Crimea ? (A
member, Yes.)
" My adversary proves that he has studied the question more in books
than in practice. You can never prove to me that France, with the
imposts which weigh upon her agriculture, can produce grain as
cheaply as the Crimea.
"What, then, shall we do ? Shall we renounce all our industries, and
make only wine ? Recall the lessons of history ? If there is a country
which could content itself with its wines, it is Portural. What has
^ O
she become ? If France should renounce her industries, her cottons,
her woollens, her irons, would not the world say that she had sunk
into idiocy ? "
Let those who assert that protective duties are oppressive
taxes, imposed upon the mass of the community for the benefit
of a monopolist, see how firmly this great practical philosopher
plants himself upon the doctrine that protection is a boon to
the consumer: —
" It is urged that all the protections accorded to industry constitute
monopolies, and that, to enrich a few monopolists, we burden the
THE PROTECTIYE QUESTION XKEiattR i-t 49
•whole country. It is true there is a monopoly; but it is not in France,
it is abroad. I desire to say that this little monopoly, -which you
accord to French industry, destroys the monopoly of foreign industry.
" When England and France alone worked up cotton, as you know,
what was the price of a kilogram of cotton yarn which is now
worth three francs ? It was worth twenty-seven francs. It is true
that this was at the period of our wars, and when the raw material
bore a high price; but after the peace the price was still as high as
fourteen francs.
" It has gone down now to three francs. And here is the reason
why. In proportion as the French production was developed, there
was, in spite of prohibition, a sort of penetration between the two
markets. We created a competition with England, and thus the cot¬
ton fell to three francs.
" What purpose, then, has the monopoly served? It has compelled
the foreigner to lower his prices. Every time that you give a protec¬
tion to a national product, you cause the price of the foreign product
to be lowered, and you prevent monopoly.
" Another example more recent. When the linen industry was de¬
stroyed in France by the English production by power, a kilogram
of thread was worth seven francs. We protected the linen industry in
France. This protection permitted competition ; and the French pro¬
duct compelled the English manufacturers to lower their prices to
three francs fifty centimes.
" If, then, there is any thing evident, it is that this pretended mo¬
nopoly, this sacrifice of a few centimes, produces a general lowering of
price, which is for the benefit of the whole country ... If you are not
willing that the French manufacturers should fabricate, because you
have to pay twenty per cent more than in England, it will end in the
English making you pay a hundred per cent more.
" If England were the only country to produce certain objects, could
you have them at the same price ? Certainly not. It is competition,
sustained by- a just protection, which destroys foreign monopoly.
Those who speak of universal, unrestricted competition, do not com¬
prehend it. Do you know what true competition is ? It is that no
nation should ever suffer itself to make any surrender of its native
industries. It is that no one should say that it will no longer manufac¬
ture cotton, because it cannot produce as cheaply as another; that no
one shall say that it will no longer fiibricate cloths, because it cannot
fabricate at so good an account as its neighbor; that no one should
say that it will not raise grain, under the pretext that grain is pro-
7
50
THE PEOTECTIVE QUESTION ABEOAD.
duced more dearly than in other countries. The nation which should
reason thus would exhibit the reasoning of an idiot. Do you know
what is the true competition of nation with nation, the universal com¬
petition? It is a noble ambition on the part of each people, the
noble emulation of 'producing every thing, and even that which it pro¬
duces with less advantage than other people. This competition has, as
its result, the reduction of prices to the lowest attainable standard,
throughout the entire world."
SIE WENTWOETII DILKE AND THE BRITISH COLONIES.
Our readers cannot fail to be interested by the full extract
which we give below, from tiie English author to whom M.
Thiers refers. The work of Sir Wentworth Dilke, "Greater
Britain," has attracted much attention in England. The author
is a baronet, a member of Parliament, a graduate of Cambridge,
a barrister, and a radical in his political opinions. His senti¬
ment for this country is sufficiently shown by the remark that
the United States, in the late war, " struck the noblest blow for
freedom that the world has ever seen." This article completes
the circuit in our review of " The Protective Question Abroad."
" PROTECTION.
" The greatest of all democratic stumbling-blocks is said to be pro¬
tection.
" ' Encourage native industry !' the colonial shop-keeper writes up ;
' Show your patriotism, and buy colonial goods 1' is painted in huge
letters on a shop-front at Castlemaine.
" In England some unscrupulous traders, we are told, write ' From
Paris ' over their English goods; but such dishonesty in Victoria takes
another shape. There we have ' warranted colonial made' placed over
imported wares; for many will pay a higher price for a colonial product,
confessedly not more than equal to the foreign, such is the rage for na¬
tive industry, and the hatred of the ' Antipodean doctrine of Free
Trade.'
" Many former colonists who lived at home persuaded themselves,
and unfortunately persuaded also the public in England, that the pro¬
tectionists are weak in the colonies. So far is this from bein"- the
case in either Victoria or New South Wales, that in the former colony
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
61
I found that, in the Lower House, the Free Traders formed but three-
elevenths of the Assembly ; and in New South Wales the pastoral
tenants of the Crown may be said to stand alone in their support of
free trade. Some of the squatters go so far as to declare that none
of the public men of the colonies really believe in the advantages of
protection ; but that they dishonestly accept the principle, and under¬
take to act upon it when in office, in order to secure the votes of an
ignorant majority of laborers, who are themselves convinced that pro¬
tection means high wages.
" It would seem as though we free traders had become nearly as
bigoted in favor of free trade as our former opponents were in favor
of protection. Just as they used to say. We are right: why argue
the question ? so now, in face of the support of protection by all the
greatest minds in America, all the first statesmen of the Australians,
we tell the New England and the Australian politicians that we will
not discuss protection with them, because there can be no two minds
about it among men of intelligence and education. We will hear no
defence of ' national lunacy,' we say.
" If, putting aside our prejudices, we consent to argue with an Aus¬
tralian or American protectionist, we find ourselves in difficulties.
All the ordinary arguments, against the compelling people by Act of
Parliament to consume a dearer or inferior article, are admitted as
soon as they are urged.
" If you attempt to prove that protection is bolstered up by those
whose private interests it subserves, you are shown the shrewd Aus¬
tralian diggers, and the calculating Western farmers in America, — men
whose pocket interests are wholly opposed to protection, and who yet,
almost to a man, support it. A digger at Ballarat defended protec¬
tion to me in this way : he said he knew that under a protective tariff
he had to pay dearer than would otherwise be the case for his jacket
and his moleskin trousers, but that he jireferred to do this, as, by so
doing, he aided in building up in the colony such trades as the making
up of clothes, in which his brother, and other men, physically too weak
to be diggers, could gain an honest living. In short, the self-denying
protection of the Australian diggers is of the character of that which
would be accorded to the glaziers of a town by the citizens, if they
broke their windows to find their fellow-townsmen work. ' We know
we lose, but men must live,' they say. At the same time, they deny
that the loss will be enduring. The digger tells you that he should
not mind a continuing pocket loss, but that, as a matter of fact, this,
which in an old country would be pocket loss, in a new country such
52
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
as his only comes to this,—that it forms a check on immigration. Wages
being five shillings a clay in Victoria and three shillings a day in Eng¬
land, workmen wonld naturally flock into Victoria from England, until
wages in Melbourne fell to three shillings sixpence, or four shillings.
Here comes in prohibition, and by increasing the cost of living in
Victoria, and cutting into the Australian handicraftsman's margin of
luxuries, diminishes the temptation to immigration, and consequently
the influx itself.
" The Western farmers in America, I have heard, defended protec¬
tion upon far wider grounds : they admit that free trade would con¬
duce to the most rapid possible peopling of their country with foreign
immigrants ; but this, they say, is an eminently undesirable conclusion.
They prefer to pay a heavy tax in the increased price of every thing
they consume, and in the greater cost of labor, rather than see their
country demoralized by a ru.sh of Irish or Germans, or their political
institutions endangered by a still further increase in the size and power
of New York. One old fellow said to me : ' I don't want the Ameri¬
cans in 1900 to be two hundred millions, but I vfant them to be
happy.'
" The American protectionists point to the danger that their coun¬
trymen would run, unless town kept pace with country population.
" Settlers would pour off to the West, and drain the juices of the
fertile land by cropping it year after year, without fallow, without
manure; and then, as the land became in a few years exhausted,
would have nowhere whither to turn to find the fertilizers which the soil
would need. Were they to depend upon agriculture alone, they wonld
sweep in a wave across the land, leaving behind them a worn-out,
depopulated, jungle-covered soil, open to future settlement when its
lands should have recovered their fertility by some other and more provi¬
dent race. The coast lands of the most ancient countries are exhausted,
densely bushed, and uninhabited. In this fact lies the power of our
sailor race : crossing the seas, we occupy the coasts, and step by step
work our way into the upper country, where we should not have at¬
tempted to show ourselves had the ancient population resisted us upon
the shores. In India, in Ceylon, we met the hardy race of the high¬
lands and interior, only after we had already fixed ourselves upon
the coast, with a safe basis for our supply. The fate that these coun¬
tries have met is that which colonists expect to be their own, unless
the protective system be carried out in its entirety. In like manner
the Americans point to the ruin of Virginia, and, if you urge ' slavery,
answer, ' Slavery is but agriculture.'
THE PEOTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
63
" Those who speak of the selfishness of the protectionists as a
whole, can never have taken the trouble to examine into the argu¬
ments by which protection is supported in Australia and America. In
these countries, protection is no mere national delusion : it is a system
deliberately adopted with open eyes as one conducive to the country's
welfare, in spite of objections known to all, in spite of pocket losses
that come home to all. If it be, as we in England believe, a folly, it
is at all events a sublime one, full of self-sacrifice, illustrative of a
certain nobility in the national heart. The Australian diggers, and
Western farmers in America, are setting a grand example to the world
of self-sacrifice for a national object; hundreds and thousands of
rough men are content to live — they and their families — upon less
than they might otherwise enjoy, in order that the condition of the
mass of their countrymen may continue raised above that of their
brother toilers in Old England.
" Their manufactures are beginning now to stand alone ; but hith¬
erto, without protection, the Americans would have had no cities but
seaports. By picturing to ourselves England dependent upon the
city of London, upon Liverpool, and Hull, and Bristol, we shall see
the necessity the Western men are now under of setting off Pittsburg
against New York and Philadelphia. In short, the tendency, accord¬
ing to the Western farmers, of free trade, in the early stages of a
country's existence, is to promote universal centralization, to destroy
local centres and the commerce they create, to so tax the farmer with
the cost of transport to distant markets, that he must grow wheat
and corn continuously, and cannot but exhaust his soil. With mar¬
kets so distant, the richest forest lands are not worth clearing; and
settlements sweep over the country, occupying the poorer lands, and
then abandoning them once more.
" Protection in the colonies and America is, to a great degree, a re¬
volt against steam. Steam is making the world all one ; steam 'cor¬
rects ' differences in the price of labor. When steam brings all
races into competition with each other, the cheaper races will extinguish
the dearer, till at last some one people will inhabit the whole earth.
" Coal remains the only power, as it will probably always be
cheaper to carry the manufactured goods than to carry the coal.
" Time after time, I have heard the Western farmers draw imagi¬
nary pictures of the state of America, if free trade should gain the
day, and ask of what avail it is to say that free trade and free cir¬
culation of people are profitable to the pocket, if they destroy the
national existence of America; what good to point out the gain of
64
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
weight to their purses, in the face of the destruction of their religion,
their language, and their Saxon institutions?
" One of the greatest of the thinkers of America defended protec¬
tion to me on the following grounds: Tliat, without protection,
America could, at present, have but few and limited manufac¬
tures ; —that a nation cannot properly be said to exist as such, unless
she has manufactures of many kinds ; for men are born, some with a
turn to agriculture, some with a turn to mechanics ; and if you force
the mechanic by nature to become a farmer, he will make a bad farm¬
er, and the nation will lose the advantage of his power and invention ; —
that the whole of the possible employments of the human race are,
in a measure, necessary employments ; necessary to the making up of
a nation : — that every concession to free trade cuts out of all chance
of action some of the faculties of the American national mind, and, in
so doing, weakens and debases it; — that each and every class of
workers is of such importance to the country, that we must make
any sacrifice necessary to maintain them in full work: ' The
national mind is manifold,' he said ; ' and if you do not keep up
every branch of employment, in every district, you waste the national
force.'
" If we were to remain a purely agricultural people, land would
fall into fewer and fewer hands, and our people become more and
more brutalized as the years rolled on.
" It must not be supposed that protection is entirely defended upon
these strange new grounds. ' Save us from the pauper-labor of
Europe,' is the most recent, as well as the oldest, of protectionist
cries. The Australians and Americans say, that bv working wo¬
men at one shilling a day in the mines in Wales, and by generally
degrading all laborers under the rank of highly skilled artisans, the
British keep wages so low, that, in spite of the cost of carriage, they
can almost invariably undersell the colonists and Americans in
American and Australian markets. This state of degradation and
poverty nothing can force them to introduce into their own countries;
and, on the other hand, they consider manufactures necessary for the
national purpose alluded to before. The alternative is protection.
The most unavoidable of all these dithculties of protection — namely,
that no human government can ever be trusted to adjust protective
taxation without corruption — is no objection to the prohibition which
the Western protectionists demand. The New-Englanders say, 'Let
us meet the English on fair terms ;' the Western men say that they
will not meet them at all. Some of the New York protectionists
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
55
declare that their object is merely the fostering of American manu¬
factures until they are able to stand alone, the United States not
having at present reached the point which has been attained by other
nations when they threw protection to the winds. Such halting
protectionists as these manufacturers find no sympathy in Australia
or the West; although the highest of all protectionists look forward to
the distant time when, local centres being everywhere established,
customs will be abolished on all sides, and mankind form one family.
It is a common doctrine in the colonies of England, that a nation can¬
not be called ' independent' if it has to cry out to another for sup¬
plies of necessaries ; that true national existence is first attained when
the country becomes capable of supplying to its own citizens those
goods without which they cannot exist in the state of comfort which
they have already reached. Political is apt to follow upon commer¬
cial dependency, they say.
" The question of protection is bound up with the wider one of
whether we are to love our fellow-subjects, our race, or the world at
large ; whether we are to pursue our country's good at the expense of
other nations. There is a growing belief in England that the noblest
philosophy is to deny the existence of the moral right to benefit our¬
selves by harming others ; that love of mankind must, in time, re¬
place love of race, as that has, in part, replaced narrow patriotism
and love of self. It would seem that our free-trade system lends
itself better to these wide modern sympathies, than does protection.
On the other hand, it may be argued that, if every state consults the
good of its own citizens, we shall, by the action of all nations,
obtain the desired happiness of the whole world, and this with
rapidity.
" The chief thing to be borne in mind in discussing protection with
an Au>tralian or an American is, that he never thinks of denying that,
under protection, he pays a higher price for his goods than he would
if he bought them from us ; and that he admits at once that he tem¬
porarily pays a tax of fifteen or twenty per cent upon every thing he
buys, in order to help set his country on the road to national unity
and ultimate wealth. "Without protection, the American tells you,
there will be commercial New York, sugar-growing Louisiana, the
corn-growing North-west, but no America: protection alone can
give him a tinited country. When we talk about things being to the
advantage or disadvantage of a country, the American protectionist
asks what you mean. Admitting that all you say against protection
may be true, he says that he had sooner see America supporting a
56
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
hundred millions independent of the remainder of the world, than two
hundred millions dependent for clothes upon the British, '^ou, on
the other hand,' he says, ' would prefer our custom.' How can we
discuss this question ? The difference between us is radical, and we
have no base on which to build, from the reason that every country
understands its own interests better than it does those of its neighbor.
As a rule, the colonists hold that they should not protect themselves
against the sister colonies, but only against the outer world ; and
while I was in IMelbourne, an arrangement was made with respect
to the broader customs between Victoria and New South Wales ; but
this is at present the only step that has been taken towards inter¬
colonial free trade.
" It is passing strange that Victoria should he noted for the eager¬
ness with which her people seek protection. Possessed of little coal,
they appear to be attempting artificially to create an industry which,
owing to this sad lack of fuel, must languish from the moment that it is
let alone. Sydney coal sells in Melbourne at thirty .shillings a ton;
at the pit's mouth, at Newcastle, New South Wales, it fetches only
seven or eight shillings. With regard, however, to the making-up of
native produce, the question in the case of Victoria is merely this : Is
it cheaper to carry the wool to the coal, and then the woollen goods
back again, than to carry the coal to the wool ? And as long as
Victoria can continue to export wheat, so that the coal ships may not
want freight, wool manufacturers may prosper in Victoria.
" The Victorians naturally deny that the cost of coal has much to
do with the question. The French manufactures, they point out,
with dearer coal, but with cheaper labor, have in many branches of
trade beaten the English out of common markets ; but, then, under
protection, there is no chance of cheap labor in Victoria.
" Writing for the Englishmen of Old England, it is not necessary
for me to defend free trade by any arguments. As far as we in our
island are concerned, it is so manifestly to the pocket interest of
almost all of us, and at the same time, on account of the minuteness
of our territory, so little dangerous politically, that for Britain there
can be no danger of a deliberate relapse into protection ; althouo'h we
have but little right to talk about free trade, so long as we continue
our enormous subsidies to the Cunard liners.
" The American argument in favor of prohibition is, in the main,
it will be seen, political; the economical objections being admitted,
but outweighed. Our action in the matter of our po.^tal contracts,
and in the case of the Factory Acts, at all events shows that we are
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD,
57
not ourselves invariably averse to distinguish between the political
and the economical aspect of certain questions.
" My duty has been to cbronicle what is said and thought upon the
matter in our various plantations. One thing,.at least, is clear, that
even if the opinions I have recorded be as ridiculous when applied to
Australia or America as they would be when applied to England, they
are not supported by a selfish clique, but rest upon the generosity and
self-sacrifice of a majority of the population."
REMARKS AT THE INDIANAPOLIS EXPOSITION, AUG. 2, 1870,
BY JOHN L. HAYES.*
Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen, — I intend to conflne my remarks
entirely to the subject of the woollen manufacture, and topics connected with it.
The protective system which was established by our fathers, — for the protective
system was established by the first Act which was passed by Congress after
the inauguration of our government, — and which has been continued with more
or less efficiency during the whole period of our national history, had placed our
woollen industry, at the time of our great war, in a position to do its part in pro¬
viding the industrial resources and the means necessary for carrying on the war.
That war was one in which victory was won by the North, not by its skOl, not
by its courage, not by its military genius, not by its patriotism ; but it was really
won through the industrial resources of the North. It was won because the
North had power — industrial power; because it had strength — material
strength, growing out of its diversified industry.
I say the woollen industry of this country, at the period of the war, was in a
position to perform its part; it did perform a very important part throughout
the war. Our mills, our looms, and our sewing machines used up no less than
two hundred millions pounds of wool during the war, for the benefit of the army
and navy. In one single year of the war we furnished thirty-five millions of
garments to our soldiers. Our army was better clothed than any other army
ever was in the history of the world. They were clothed in wool — in sound
cloths; and the Quarter-Master-General of the Army has officially reported that
there is no army upon earth so well clothed as that of the United States, or as
it was clothed during the war.
But the clothing of our army and navy, and the furnishing of the industrial
resources necessary to the nation, in its time of difficulty, is not the only good
result of our woollen industry. Some persons are disposed to speak slightingly,
and even sneeringly, of the clothing interest; for the growing of wool, the mak¬
ing of woollens, and the conversion of them into garments constitutes but one
* These remarks, made wholly without notes, were originally reported in the " Indianapolis
Joumai." The editor, in reproducing them, follows substantially the original report, supplying
omissions of quotations, and correcting some statements and figures imperfectly understood by the
reporter.
8
58
THE PEOTECTIVB QUESTION ABROAD.
great interest. The great British author, Thomas Carlyle, has ■written a work
which lie calls Sartor Resartus, or " The Tailor Sewed Over." This work he
characterizes as the " philosophy of clothes," and takes this subject as the vehicle
of his satire upon the subject of mere externals. He says that in turning a cor¬
ner in the Scottish town'of Edinburgh he came upon a sign on which was written
So-and-so, " Breeches-maker to His Majesty;" and then followed the words sic
itur ad astra, —" so we ascend to the stars." This was intended as satire; but
there was a great deal more truth in it than the philosopher conceived of. The
prime necessities of the whole world of mankind consists of a very few things, —
food, clothing, and the means of shelter. Clothing is one of the first great
essentials of man. Take, if you please, your household expenses, and see what
they indicate as to the importance of this class of commodities. You will find,
that, in the necessary expenses of the family, clothing has the second place,
always next to the article of food; and in fashionable families, very often the
first place of all. What, therefore, can conduce so much to the absolute comfort
of the homes and households of the country, as to increase and improve the
means of obtaining cheap, good, and substantial clothing 1 If we are enabled to
use double the amount, in value, of clothing, or to get it at one-half the money;
or, in other words, if we are enabled for the least possible expenditure of labor to
get the largest possible amount of clothing, how much is thereby added to the
comfort of the people 1 That is the grand object of the wool industry of this
country.
What is the present position of our woollen manufacture I We consume, in
this country, two hundred and forty millions of dollars' worth of woollen manu¬
factures, or of manufactures of which wool is the chief component, per annum.
Of that amount we import thirty-two millions of dollars' worth. Of this thirty-
two millions about six millions are in cloths; about fifteen millions in dress
goods; about two millions in carpets of certain classes. But when we say we
import thirty-two millions, bear in mind that that is the declared value, — the
amount on which the duty is paid; we have got to add to that the cost of the
duties and the charges or profits of the importer, which will double it; so that
we may put the total value of our imports at sixty-four millions of dollars. Es¬
timates, very carefully made, show that we produced, in the year 1868, one
hundred and seventy-five millions dollars' worth of woollen manufactures; adding
to what we produced ourselves what we imported, we consume, in round num¬
bers, two Inmdred and forty millions. And we may safely say, that we produce
here, of our own manufacture, nearly three-fourths of all the woollen goods used
in this country.
But when we come to look at it practically, we find that for the goods con¬
sumed by the great masses of the people, we are very largely independent of
all foreign countries. A few years ago all the materials used for our great coats,
such as beaver and Esquimaux cloths, were made abroad; but, within the last
five years, we have succeeded in making tliose goods of an excellent quality at
home; and, practically, we now make all the cloths that we use for our great coats.
We make all our under-goods, stockings, hosiery, and goods for under-clothing,
amounting to some forty millions of dollars. Three or four years ago we made
no goods of the class that are made fitted to the form; but within two or three
years past we have succeeded in making these also, not by hand, but by machin¬
ery, and surpassing in quality any goods of tlie kind that are made abroad. And
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
69
the result of this has been, that American competition has actually reduced the
prices of the foreign articles at least six dollars on the dozen.
Then we have introduced, within the last five or six years, a very large class
of dress goods. During the war there was an association of patriotic ladies
formed, who pledged themselves that they would not wear any thing but
American goods. But when these patriotic ladies went into the shops to make
their purchases, they found, to their great mortification, that there was a sad
deficiency in the better classes of dress goods of American manufacture. But it
is not so now. Now the ladies can be dressed, and most elegantly dressed, in
American goods entirely. The silk goods that were shown in the Exposition
at New York compared favorably with any that are made abroad. Our silks,
our lustres, our serges, and a great variety of cotton stuffs, of a class not made
in this country at all, until within the last five years, challenge comparison with
any similar articles made abroad. And in the article of carpets, I say, without
hesitation, that we surpass the manufacturers of any other country on the globe.
We can make, at this very time, all the ingrain, two-ply, and three-ply carpets
that are used in this country. We have nearly twice the number of looms en¬
gaged in that branch of manufacture that are to be found in England; and our
carpets are so far superior to those of English manufacture, that there are now,
comparatively, none at aU of that class of carpets imported into this country.
The materials of which the English carpets of that class are made are so poor
and weak that they cannot be woven by power looms, but have to be made by
hand looms; while ours are made in the power loom, are of better and stronger
materials, and superior in every respect.
Of the Brussels and other rich and expensive carpets, nearly one-half are made
in this country. Witliin the last two years we have succeeded in manufactming
what is known as the Axminster carpet. That is a carpet wliich is laid down in
palaces,—a carpet that costs eight dollars a yard. These carpets are made in
Europe by hand; but we have been able to make them by the power loom, supe¬
rior in strength to the French, and in beauty and finish so exact a copy of the orig¬
inals that, if you lay the two side by side, you cannot tell them apart. And these
we make at so low a cost, that we have compelled the manufactmer of the foreign
article to reduce his price a dollar or two a yard, although the American Axmin-
sters are frequently put upon the market and sold for the imported article.
Your own Exposition shows how much you have done ; but the great fact to be
looked at is, that we have not only done all this, but that we have been enabled
to make these goods cheaper through the competition that grows out of our pro¬
tective system. Our import duties are the great barrier that prevents the influx
of the great tide of foreign importation that would otherwise sweep over us. If
you will take the pains to compare the prices of goods at the present time with
the prices that prevailed in 1860, just before the war, and before the present tariff
was levied, you will see what has been the result of the protective system. Now
you cannot ordinarily arrive at a satisfactory comparison of prices of cloths at
periods so far apart, for the reason that there will be some difference in style, fin¬
ish, coloring, or in some other respect, between any two pieces manufactured ten
years apart. You must have an uniform standard; and the only such standard
you can have is the article of flannel; and every piece of cloth at one stage of its
manufacture is a piece of flannel. That, therefore, we take as a standard in a
comparison of the prices of 1860 and those of the present year. We have careful
60
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
and accurate reports from two of the first flannel commercial houses in the United
States, engaged in the selling of flannels, houses which represent the sales of
twenty different establishments, and the products of at least one hundred different
sets of machinery. That report shows, in one house, tliat the prices in gold at
which their flannels sell at the present time are twenty-one per cent less than they
were in 1860, and in the other establishment sixteen per cent less. The fact is
there demonstrated by the prices of flannels, which are au uniform standard ;
it is settled beyond contradiction how much the country has gained by this pro¬
tective system, and the competition which grows out of it.
I say, therefore, as a result of the tariff and the protective system, that prices
are much lower to the consumer. I will go further, and say that for the wool-grower,
who sells his product to the factory alongside of him, the prices of woollen cloth¬
ing at the present time are at least fifty per cent lower than before the war; and
before the woollen mills were established in your midst, through the protection
afforded by the Morrill tariff' and the tariff of 1867.
Now, what is the one great power by which we are enabled to clothe the masses
of our people with a hundred and seventy-five millions dollars' worth of goods of
home manufacture ? I answer. It is the possession, mainly, of an animal which
some persons are accustomed to regard with contempt, and which John Randolph,
of Roanoke, once said he would always go out of his way to kick, — and that is
the sheep; and more than all is it owing to the fact that this country has the
possession of the merino sheep. Here we have an illustration of the connection
and mutual relation of agriculture and manufactures; and the historical facts,
which I shall now briefly review, will show how absolutely the manufecturing
interests of this as well as every other country are dependent upon its agriculture.
The Romans wore nothing but woollen goods.. They had no cotton ; they had
a little linen which was worn as a material of luxury; they had no silk. They
cultivated the sheep with great care, and some of their richest possessions were
in sheep. Rut there was one breed of sheep which they cultivated with extra¬
ordinary care, and by that system of selection which Darwin speaks of as the
source of the perfected forms of our domestic annuals. It was ciilled the Taren-
tine sheep, from Tarentum, a city of Greek origin, situated at the head of the
Tarentine gulf. The fleece of this sheep was of exceeding fineness; it was of
great delicacy, and the prices of its fleeces were enormous. The sheep were
clothed in cold weather to keep them warm; and the result was that they were
very tender and their wool was very fine. They were a product of Greek
civilization transmitted down to the Romans. Columella, the great Roman
agriculturist, says that his uncle, residing in Spain, crossed some of the fine
Tarentine sheep with some rams that had been imported from Africa; and the
consequence was, that these animals had the wliiteness of the father with the
fineness of the fleece of the mother, and that that race was perpetuated.
Here we see an improvement of the stock, — an increase of strength and produc¬
tiveness given to the fine-wool sheep of Spain. At that time the sheep of Spain
were of immense value; for Strabo says that sheep from Spain, in the time of
Tiberius, were carried to Rome, and sold for the price of a talent, one thousand
dollars a head. In the time of our Saviour a thousand dollars was given in Rome
for a Spanish sheep. When the barbarians inundated Italy, these fine-wool sheep
were all swept away, but they remained in Spain ; they were cultivated by the
Moors in the mountains of Spain, wliich were almost inaccessible, and were not
THE PEOTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
61
reached by the hordes of Huns, and other Northern barbarians, which had laid waste
the greater portion of the Roman possessions. They continued to be nourished
there by the Moors, who were very much advanced in arts; and further on were
found there as the Spanish merino. So that the Spanish merino which we now
have, if not the only, is at all events by far the most important relic that we have
to-day which has come down to us from Greek and Roman material civilization.
We have here a direct inheritance from the material wealth of the Old World
civilization.
What was the result of the possession of this race of animals to the countries
which could command their fleeces I The Moors, before their expulsion from
Spain, had 16,000 looms employed in making the fine cloths then known. The
States of Italy, in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, established commerce on
the ancient routes of navigation to the East. They made the Spanish wool, which
they secured by their commerce, into fine cloths; and we find that Florence, Genoa,
Pisa, and Venice acquired their wealth and splendor, and the material of their com¬
merce, from the woollen manufacture. The arts flourished as wealth increased;
and we find the colossal statue of David, one of the grandest works of the great
Michel Angelo, purchased by the Wool-Workers' Guild.
The arts declined in Italy. They then went over to the low countries, — the
Netherlands. The Netherlands were in possession of this Spanish fleece, from
the fact that the two monarchies had been combined under King Charles the Fifth.
Their precious cloths were carried all over the East, and all over the world which
was then known. From the Netherlands the wool manufacture was carried to
England, to Germany, and to France. Such was the early result of the possession
of this animal, and of the wool manufacture which this animal supplied.
It was scarcely one centvuy ago that Western Europe determined to get pos¬
sesion of this merino race. The King of Saxony sent out to Spain to get it in
1776. At that time, of such importance was the culture of this animal held to be,
that the mode of cultivating them was directed to be read before the service in
the churches on Sunday. What is the result of that importation ? We have now
the Saxony sheep with fleeces vastly finer than the old Spanish stock. The
King of Prussia, Frederick the Second, introduced about three hundred of these
sheep into his kingdom, and persevered in their culture until they were estab¬
lished in Prussia. What is the result of that? Eighteen per cent of all
Prussian exports now are fine woollen goods from the merino sheep. The
great Maria Theresa, in 1776, introduced the merino sheep into Hungary,
and established them there. At this time the finest manufacture of Hungary
is her cloth, and the most valuable of all her possessions are her flocks. Louis
the Sixteenth, in 1786, introduced the merino sheep into France. The great
Colbert, a century before that, had endeavored to establish it there, and failed.
But Daubenton, the great naturalist, and the associate of Buffbn, had made the
sheep a subject of study, and with his assistance the merino race was established
in that country. The result is, that France to-day has the finest manufactures in
the world, only a century after the introduction of the Spanish sheep into that
country. The stock of sheep of Rambouillet still exists. Said Nap.oleon ; " Spain
has twenty-five millions of merinos ; France shall have one hundred millions;"
and he established three htmdred sheep-folds all over France. One of the most
interesting and most touching incidents, as showing the interest which the great
people of the world have in the culture of this animal, is this: The sheep-fold of
62
THE PEOTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
Rarahouillet was about to be destroyed. The Empress Eugenie, the wife of the
pre.sent Emperor, learned that such was the fact, and she at once declared that it
should not be done, — that the Rambouillet sheep-fold was identified with the in¬
dustrial prosperity of France ; and she took the fiock of Rambouillet under her
special protection, declaring that it should be regarded as her personal charge.
Thus we find all the continent of Europe provided with this race of sheep
less than a century ago. A little later, about the commencement of the present
century, the merinos were introduced into this country. The best family of our
merinos came from an importation which we owe, indirectly, to George "Wash¬
ington. For Colonel Humphreys — who had been an aid of "Washington, and
who had been stimulated by Washington with that love of agriculture which
was so strong a feature in his character — having been appointed minister to Spain,
brought home with him, in 1802, the most important of the early importations of
the merino sheep, which had been selected from the best Spanish families. From
this Humphreys's sheep have come our American merinos, a peculiar breed, and
one of tbe finest in the world.*
I may say in regard to the improvement which has been made in this country
in the culture of sheep, that our American merinos, our best improved American
sheep, produced more washed wool in 1846 than they did of unwashed wool
when first introduced ; and that they now produce twice the amount of scoured
wool that the original Spanish sheep did. It is one of the most productive
sheep in the world. I may say that the possession of the merino fleece, which
composes now a great proportion of the fleece of this country, is to fabrics pre¬
cisely what wheat and flour are to grain. We may eat com bread and lye
bread occasionally, for a change; but we all, in tbe long-mn, have to come back
to wheat. So it is with merino wool; it is the great foundation of all febrics.
Its fibre is finer than any other. The greater the number of strands there are
in a wire cable, the stronger it is ; and just so, the greater the number of fibres
that are contained in a yarn of a given diameter, the greater will be its strength.
Merino wool constitutes the greatest portion of tlie cloths of the^world; it is the
wool of which there is the highest necessity.
I am coming now to my point (and I fear you may think I am a long time
in coming to it). My point is this : Our merino wool culture was at one time
on the point of being destroyed by the immense increase of the wool product of
South American countries, — La Plata and Buenos Ayres. The increase within
seven years was, in La Plata alone, from sixteen millions to fifty-nine millions of
pounds per annum. Tbe wool-growers and the wool manufacturers came to¬
gether. There was at that time no division or classification of the grades of
wool with respect to the tariflf duty, except upon the basis of the price; and there
was always an opportunity to bring in the wool a little dirtier, and in that man¬
ner avoid the proper duty. Instead of six cents per pound, the proper duty,
the importers of wool and manufacturers paid practically but three cents. The
wool-growers demanded an increase on the duties on wool; the wool manufactur¬
ers assented. The wool duty upon the great bulk of imported wools was increased
from an average of about three cents up to ten cents specific, and eleven cents
* In the speech, as delivered and reported, it was inacenrately stated that the Humphreys's
merinos were the first ever brought to America which actuaily survived. This error which is
now corrected, was kindly pointed out, in a private letter, by Dr. Kandall.
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
63
ad valorem; and the result was simply the salvation of the growth of wool in this
country. The fine wool husbandry in the Southern Hemisphere had grown so
rapidly, from the failure of the cotton crops of this country, that when the war
closed, if it had not been for this wool tariff, there would have been such an
importation from the Southern Hemisphere as would have wiped out the merino
flocks of this country, — one of the most important of our material resources.
The wool tariff saved it. Before the tariff was applied, the importation of wool
from Buenos Ayres and the Cape of Good Hope was thirty-six thousand bales ;
in the next year, after the woollen tariff went into operation, the importations
were only about seven thousand bales; so that there was actually a relief to the
wool-growers of this country, from the ruinous competition, of thirty thousand
hales of foreign wool. Of course I need not tell you that tliis measure was
the salvation of the wool-growing interests of this country.
Nevertheless the manufacturers were much troubled about this tariff. They
accepted it at first as a necessity, but yet the demands of the wool-growers for
this increased duty proved to be really the salvation of the wool manufacturer.
The fair demand of the manufacturer was, that he should be placed in the same
position as if he had his wool still free from duty ; and accordingly a neutralizing
duty was placed upon cloth —fifty cents per pound — to offset the duty of about
twelve cents per pound on wool; it taking about four pounds of wool, upon the
average, to make a yard of cloth. As the tariff went into operation the wool man¬
ufacturer felt its operation first. This fifty cents per pound on cloth was a barrier
which was raised against the importation of foreign cloths ; and, but for the de¬
mands of the wool-grower for protection to his interests, the manufacturer would
not have had the benefit of it. The result has been to shut out European goods,
and to build up our home manufactures as nothing ever did before. To the
demands of the wool-growers we owe the best protection that has ever been
given to our manufacturers. Said an intelligent manufacturer to me the other
day, " I have been manufacturing wool for thirty years, and this is the first
time the plug has ever been in."
Now, if our government has given this encouragement to the woollen manu¬
facture, the next question is. Has the manufacturer responded I Has he done
his duty ? in other words, has it paid to encourage the manufacturer 1
Let us make a comparison between the position of the woollen manufacturer
in this country and the industry abroad. And I cannot express my ideas upon
this point in a better way than by reading an extract from a report upon wool¬
lens, at the Paris Exposition, prepared conjointly by one of the most eminent
of our practical manufacturers and myself: —
" A more important point of comparison between American and foreign fabrics is the
relative cost of production of such manufactures as we have most successfully achieved
here, measured by the only correct standard, the relative expenditure of human labor
required for such production. The solution of this question will determine whether we
have such natural or acquired advantages as will justify the encouragement of this man¬
ufacture as a national industry. In pursuing this inquiry, we can fix upon no single
repre.sentative article of uniform quality and value; such as a ton of pig iron, the
relative cost of which would determine the comparative advantages of the American or
foreigner in the manufacture of iron. The infinite variety of cloths forbids the selec¬
tion of any one as the standard of comparison, even if it were possible to obtain data
from the books of foreign manufacturers. This question must be solved for the pro¬
ducts of the card-wool industry, generallj', by comparing the eflSciency of our system.
64
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
processes, and machinery of fabrication. The many practical manufacturers ■who have
recently visited Europe, for the express purpose of studying its industries, concur in
declaring that, in these respects, ■we arc on an equality with the most advanced nations.
Laying aside the supposed advantages which we have, in the possession of water-
power, upon which far too much stress is laid in popular estimates, we apply every¬
where, in our fabrication of wooilens, the factory system, and make the utmost use of
mechanical power, while handicraft processes are still largely used abroad, especially in
weaving. For the preparation of card-wool, no machinery at the Exposition equalled
in efficiency the American burring machinery exhibited there, such as is in general use
here. In the carding of wool no improvements were seen at Verviers, one of the chief
centres of the card-wool industry in Europe, which we do not have in use. About the
same number of hands were employed at the cards as here. Spinning, in large estab¬
lishments abroad, is usually performed by mules; while jack spinning is more generally
adopted in New England, as better suited to the different qualities and quantities of
j'arns demanded by the variety of fabrics usually produced in our mills. The mules
used here are of equal efficiency with those in the best mills in Europe. With respect
to weaving, it was remarked that looms were being constructed at the machine shops at
Verviers, such as we would not put into our mills to-day. It was also remarked, that
no European looms for weaving fancy goods were shown at the Exposition, which would
bear comparison ■with the Crompton loom, and even upon that admirable machine great
improvements are known to he in progress. The other processes of manufacture, such
as dyeing, are the same as in Europe. When we take into consideration the greater
energy and intelligence of our better fed and better educated workmen; the necessary
use of every labor-saving process, on account of the higher cost of labor here; and the
admitted superiority in construction of American machinery, — it may be safely asserted
that a yard of cloth is made in this country with less hours of human labor than one
of equal quality and the same degree of fini.sh abroad. In other words, a week's labor
will produce more j'ards of cloth in an American than in an European mill. But it is
said that a yard of cloth costs less in Europe than in the United States. Even this
statement requires qualification, for the American laborer can purchase here more yards
of cloth, by the produce of a day's work, than the European laborer, the ratio of the
price of cloth in this country, to-day, not being in proportion to the ratio of the rate of
wages of ordinaiy labor. It is still true, that the money cost of producing cloths is
greater in thi.s country than in Europe. From what has been said, it is apparent that
the greater money cost of fabricating cloths is not due to any want of natural advan¬
tages, or any deficiency in skill and efl'ective labor on the part of tlie American manu¬
facturer. It is not true of this industry, as is often asserted by theorists, that it has a
sickly and hot-bed growth, sustained only by artificial stimulus; and rendering its pro¬
ductions as unnatural, to use Adam Smith's often-quoted comparison,' as that of wine
produced from grapes grown in the hot-houses of Scotland.' The higher cost of produc¬
tion in that country is due, solely, to national causes inherent to the condition of a new
country and a progressive people, or the higher rates of interest on capital required to
initiate and sustain industrial enterprise, and the higher rates of labor demanded by the
greater social and educational requirements of our industrial population."
So we see that the free-trade argument, that unrestricted competition with
other nations would lead us to the exercise of higher skill, amoimts to nothing
at all. We have already in the woollen manufacture more skill than foreign
nations ; for a week's labor in the American mills produces more than a week's
labor in the mills abroad. If we had unrestricted foreign competition ■with our
home products, how should we be able to pay our high prices for labor ? How
could we keep up the rates of labor to that standard which is essential to the
prosperity of our workmen ? We protectionists declare, as the foundation of
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
65
our whole argument, that the wages of labor should be brought up, and kept
up ; while, on the other side, they invariably acknowledge, if they are fair and
intelligent men, tliat the results of free trade will be to reduce the price of
labor; and that we cannot continue to manufacture and compete with foreigners
except by reducing the price of labor to the foreign standard. A certain class
of philosophers and benevolent men in this country, and among them a good
many of those who have been advocates of free soil doctrines, — such men as
William Lloyd Garrison and Wendell Phillips, — carried away by the sentiment
of universal philanthropy, have been inclined to the side of free trade, and to
overlook entirely the particular interests of tliis country. But I find, in a very
recent letter of Mr. Phillips, some remarks embodying an argument which
covers the whole ground upon which we found protection. The blessings of
protection and the malign results of free trade were never more eloquently por¬
trayed than in the vivid words which I will read to you ; —
" Putting aside all theories, every lover of progress must see with profound
regret the introduction here of any element which will lessen wages. The main¬
spring of our progress is high wages, — wages at such a level that the working-
man can spare his wife to preside over a ' home,' can command leisure, go to
lectures, take a newspaper, and lift himself from the deadening level of mere toil.
That dollar left after all the bills are paid on Saturday night means education, in¬
dependence, self-respect, manliood : it increases the value of every acre near by,
fills the to vn with dwellings, opens public libraries and crowds them ; dots the
continent with cities, and cobwebs it with railways. That one remaining dollar
insures progress, and guarantees millions to its owner better than a score of stat¬
utes." It is worth more than a thousand colleges, and makes armies and police
superfluous."
I have not talked about the improvement of the woollen manufacture abroad,
but here at home, — as applied to this country, — because I conceive that that is
what we have to do with. Providence has so arranged it that the instinct of self-
preservation shall be the strongest instinct of our nature. In a man of little cul¬
ture, where that instinct is strong, it leads to selfishness; give him more culture,
and it leads to a kind of selfishness, — to self-interest; next, he looks not
only at his own personal interests, but at those of his family; and with a still
greater degree of enlightenment and culture he begins to look after his coun¬
try. When a man goes outside of his country to work, he generally works
with very little effect. With the old Greeks and Romans, patriotism was the first
of all the virtues ; and during our war we thought patriotism was a very great
virtue ; we partook a great deal of the Greek and Roman sentiment on that sub¬
ject, and our young men were so inspired by that sentiment that they could pour
out their life-blood with a smile of peace and triumph. We now hear the tocsin
of war resounding through Europe, and we are about to witness there one of those
great conflicts which, in the end, are always sure to advance the cause of human
liberty. Meanwhile, in this country, we find the Germans, almost as one man,
crying out for Fatherland; and upon the other hand, the French, with one voice,
shouting for their country, forgetful of every wrong, forgetful of exile, forgetful of
every feeling of animosity toward the Emperor. To them France is still Ma mere
bien aimec, " My mother well beloved." One of Parailol's last expressions was, " If
war breaks out in France, there will be but one party, — the party of the Govern¬
ment."
9
6G
THE PROTECTIVE QUESTION ABROAD.
Tlie most sublime example, illustratin;? this love of country, is that of the
great Author of our religion : " O Jerusalem ! Jerusalem ! llow often would I have
gathered thy children together as a hen gathereth her brood under her wings.
"What depth of love for his country was there ! I onee heard Parodi -sing those
words to the music of one of the great Masters, and as she proloneed the vords,
" Jerusalem ! .Jerusalem!" it brought most vividly before my mind the tliought of
the agony of love which,Jesus had for the country of his fathers. I felt that the
doctrine that the love of country must be subordinate to that universal pbilanthroi)/
whieli is declared and preaclied for by free-trade tbeori.sts, and men of that class,
is the idlest clamor in the world. The human heart and the sentiments of reli¬
gion declare this. All these things teach us that it is through the development of
our own country that we are to carry out the great work which we are called upon
to do for the good of mankind. In Expositions like this we are no less truly
fighting for our countrj' than if we were fighting for her upon tlie field of b.attle.
We are doing our part to carry out the eountr) 's in lustrial in lepeudenee, —the
only sure foundation of the prosperity of every nation. And when I hear men
preaching free-trade theories, and see Americans accepting and repeating the les¬
sons taught them by England, for the purely selfisli purpose of putting down and
keeinng down our industrial independence, I cannot restrain my in lignation. I
feel as .Jefferson felt towards the Americans of hi.s iinie uho were tiir a-similating
us to tlie rotten as well as sound parts of the British model, when be described
the apostates who had gone over to these heresies as " men who were Samsons in
the field and Solomons in the council, but who have had their heads shorn by the
harlot England."
Let me say in conclu.sion, gentlemen, that tl e intelligent manufacturers of
New England rejoice in the progress of manuiaetures at the We-t. The}" know
very veil that the undeniable elieet of ei'inietition is to diinini-h the consump¬
tion of Eastern goods. But they know th.it this competition, which reluees the
prices to eonsumers, is the stronge.-t argument lor the protective policy, without
which neither the manutiieturers of the Ea.-t or the West could li^e for a mo¬
ment. The true work of the East is the higher brand es of manufacture, de-
maniling the investment of more eajiital and the employment of the most skilled
labor. Such a field exists in the worsted uianulaeture, or that ol dress goods.
Our largest clothing mill has already taken off fifty sets from the imnufactrue of
cloths, and is employing its capital in the jiroJuetion of dress goods.
The onl}' obstacle to that motement is the want of eonfidenee in the continu¬
ance ot our protective .system. It would cost a million or two millions of dollars
to build a worsted mill which could fairly c iinpete with the best mills of Brad¬
ford or Boub.aix. So long as British influence can m.ake it doubtful whether our
protective system will continue, Ainerie.an e.ipital will fail to 11 iw into the new
invcstin *nts in the woollen manufacture. The British manufacturers eau well
affhrd, therefore, to agitate free trade in this country. They do not expect to
rept d our tariff laws, but they deter capital from new manufacturing investments.
It is le.dly British intluenee which is now retarding our national progress, just
as It did in the early perioil of our nation.al existence. It is this intluenee, which,
unconsciously it may be, makes men, who are otherwise honest and patriotic,
advocate, ot the baletiil system of British free trade; and which makes the re¬
mark ot Jlr. Jefferson, in his letter to Mr. Mazzei, as true now as it was tlieu.
^ p DI KJ ^
Alliance of British Cotton Spinners and Slave-
holding Cotton Lords to build up "Free
Trade."—The West and North to be Victims,
and raise cheap food for slaves, but be de¬
prived of a Home Market for their products.
Not by any assertion of ours, but by the testimony of high
witnesses, shall this base plot be proven :—" Out of their own
mouths sball they be condemned." It is an old but true saying
that " murder will out," and the facts we give but verify the
old adage anew, while they show how shallow is the pretence of
philanthropy and humanity claimed for free trade.
Years ago a book was published in the South, made up of
contributions from able and distinguished advocates of the
supremacy of slavery, with the significant title, '' Cotton is
King." Such men as Hammond, Harper, Christy, Stringfellow,
Hodge, Bledsoe and Cartwright furnished the articles that made
up its 600 pages, each and all advocating in various ways the
power, wealth and perpetuity of the slave system, and the
editor, E. N. Elliott, LL.D., President of Planters' College, in
Mississippi, furnishing an essay on " Slavery in the light of In¬
ternational Law." This remarkable book was published in
Augusta, Ga., and sold only by subscription, being kept care¬
fully out of the general market, that it might not reach the
North, but as carefully put in the way of those it was intended
for—the Southern slave holders. It is an able statement of their
plans, theories and aims, and, before the rebellion, was in the
libraries of planters, found its way over the Atlantic to English
manufacturers, but was rarely seen north of Mason and Dixon's
line in this country. From a worn and well-read copy, brought
from the house of some slaveholding rebel by a soldier, we ex¬
tract what is needed to prove the statements at the head of this
article. The essay that serves our purpose is on " The Economi¬
cal Relations of Slavery," by David Christy, of Cincinnati, Ohio,
who seems to have been blindly serving cotton at the expense of
the corn of his own State. He says, pp. 57, etc., "The econom¬
ical value of cotton as an agency for supporting and extending
slavery has long been understood by statesmen. The discovery
of the power of steam, and the inventions in machinery for pre-
2
paring and manufacturing cotton, revealed the important fact
that a single island, having the monopoly secured to itself,
could supply the whole world with clotliing. Great Britain
attempted to gain the mono})oly and to prevent other countries
from rivaling her. She long prohibited all emigration ot^ skill¬
ful mechanics from the kingdom, as well as the exportation of
machinery. As country after country was opened to her com¬
merce, the markets for her manufactures extended, and the
demand for the raw material increased. * * *
principal articles demanded by this growing commerce have
been cotton, coffee and sugar, in the production of which slave
labor largely predominated. England could only be a great
commercial nation through the agency of her manufactures.
She was the best supplied of all the nations with the necessarj-
capital, skill, labor and fuel to extend her commerce by this
means, but for the raw material (cotton) she was dependent on
other countries."
Thus much for the British policy of monopoly—the same as
in the days of 1/76, when Lord Chatham said he would not let
the American colonists make their own hobnails. But let us
follow Mr. Chi'isty, and see how the unholy alliance giew up
between these foreign monopolists and the cotton growers of the
South, the base offspring of which they tnisnunied free trade.
He continues: "The planters of the L'^nited States were the
most favorably situated for the cultivation of cotton, and while
Great Britain was aiming at monopolizing its manufacture, thej
attempted to monopolize the markets for that staple. This led
to the fusion of interests between them and the British manufact¬
urers, and to the adoption of principles of political economy
which, if rendered effective, would j/romote the interests of this
coalition. ^Vith the advantages British manufacturers pos¬
sessed, free trade would make all other nations subservient to
their interests, and the demand for American cotton would grow
with the increase of their operations. * * * To the
cotton-planter, the co partnership has been eminently advanta¬
geous. * * * Cotton and tobacco only are largely
exported ; our sugar production does not equal our consumption,
but of the other two staples we e.xport more than ttco-thirds the
amount produced, while of other agricultural products (wheat,
corn, etc.), less than a forty-sixth part is exported." Yet this
cottono-politico economist argued that since Northern fanners
can supply planters with food, the more cotton, and the more
slavery, the better for them, even while admitting that the
Southern policy was to keep prices of grain low for their own
benefit, and get rich at the cost of these same farmers.
Let us follow him still further. After stating that cotton
was only profitable in the slave labor States, he savs: "The
attempt of the agricultural States (meaning the North) to
establish the ' protectrve policy' was a struggle to ci-eate such a
division of labor as would afford a home-inarket for their pro-
3
ducts no longer in demand abroad * * The opposition
to the protective taritf in the South arose from two causes;, the
one, to secure a foreign market for cotton, the other, to get a
bountiful supply of provisions at cheap rates. Cotton was ad¬
mitted free into foreign ports, and Southern statesmen feared its
exclusion, if our government increased the duty on foreign
fabrics. * * Cheap cotton was essential to the schemes of
English manufacturers of supplying the world with cloths. The
close proximity of the cotton and provision-growing districts of
the United States gave its planters advantage over all others in
the world ; but they could not monopolize the market, unless they
could obtain a cheap supply of food and clothing for their negioes,
and thus undersell all rivals in cotton. A manufacturing and
mechanical population in the midst of Northern provision-grow¬
ers, such as the protective policy contemplated, it was thought
would increase the price of their products in the home-markets,
thus furnished, and if the manufacturing could be prevented and
a system of free trade adopted, the South would be the principal
provision market of the country, and the rich lands of the North
furnish cheap food for their slaves. If they could establish free
trade, it would insure the American market to foreign manufact-
ttrers, secure the foreign market for their cotton, repress home
manufactures, force a large number of Northern men into
agriculture, multijjly the growth and diminish the price of pro¬
visions, feed and clothe their slaves at lower rates, produce their
cotton at a third or fourth or former prices, and monopolize the
trade of Europe in that staple.
But, enough. Here is the plot, fair and frank, as such men—
able, selfish, tyrannical, regardless of the rights of free labor,
or of the common prosperity of our countr}-, would state it to
each other ; for all this, and much more in this remarkable book,
was not written for the North, or for the colored man, but lor
the Southern lords of the lash, and such British manufacturers
as choose, for gain in trade, to be their allies. " The economical
value of cotton as an agency for supporting and extending
slavery," with free trade to help the evil work. Lovers of liberty,
does this command your respect ?
How does it suit you, freemen of the North and West ? Was
it not patriotic and chivalrous to insure the American market
to foreign manufacturers ?" Iligli and generous motives, indeed,
prompted the partners in this base alliance to "/brce a'large
')iumber of Northern men into agriculture., multiply the growth
and diminish the price of provisions., to feed and clothe their
slaves at lower rates /"
For this have the pioneer farmers of the great West toiled
while they should have built up manufactures in their own
midst, created a home mai'ket and gained higher prices for the.
fruits of their labor. Thus tlid the planter hope for wealth,
from the toil of the slaves and at the expense of the farmer of
the North, who sold him cheap food for his human chattels.
4
From the plots of these Southern planters and their British
helpers came the crafty efforts to stir up bad blood against New
England, crying out against "Eastern monopolists" whenever
it was proposed to do anything fairly to protect our home indus¬
try, and concealing the fact that whatever policy helped manu¬
factures iti one section helped them in another. East or West
alike. Of course the cotton lords wished to prosper at the
expense of both the East and the West, breaking down the
manufactures of the one, and cheapening the grain of the olher;
and English manufacturers wanted the monopoly of our market,
and cheap grain from the prairies where supplies nearer home
were short.
Thus it was that Jefferson Davis and others, who plotted and
led the late rebellion, were free trailers. Let none be blinded by
the plausible but shallow sophisms of free trade. Slavery i's
gone, and the interest of labor is one, all over our free land.
The mines, and forests, and cotton fields, and waterfalls of the
South ; the coal and iron beds and rich soil of the West and the
Middle States, the skill and experience and mechanism of the
East, offer ample scope for the growth of a richly varied indus¬
try, giving good employ and fair wages to labor, each part of
which siiall help all, and all help each, and the skill and power
of American workers be ample for the work of America, and
for furnishing due share of the wide and varied commerce of the
world. G. B. S.
Detroit, Mich., January, 1871.
HEAD AND CIRCULATE!
bsTERN FAMS & FACTORIES
^ jN eiglibors and Allies.
a'
"PROTECTION OF OUR INDUSTRY.
DEVELOPAIEXT OF QUE RESOUEOES.
:eion and home markets for the
farmer.
•- ?e °:reatly oven ate the importance of the
tlish and other foreiarn irraiii markets.
' r hen the British corn laws were repealed,
inducement was held out by the Enirlish,
. the hope enteriained by our grain growers,
" c a large market would open there for our
ducts.
ut, in twelve y^ars afUr the repeal of the
' i laws, from 18dS to IddO, our evoorts of
1 .idstuffr> to England had decreased, in pro-
-.tion to our population, almost thirty per
., even by English estimate twenty-seven
a half per cent.
1 uring the same years the British imports
irain from this country were ordy one fifth
r imports from other countries.
tUwaukee and (thicaoo often send off in ten
s more grain and fiour than England has
■n from us each year, on the average, for
ity years past.
he eleven Northwestern States, in 18B0,
duced $900,000,000 worth of grain and pro-
ons for consumption and export, of which
y $25,000,000 worth went to foreign coun-
3, a.id less than half of that to Great Brit-
wh.le our Eastern States and the South
c $190,348,655 worth, or more than .seven
a half times as much as all foreign coun-
3. New England is a larger market for us
1 Olii England. The annual average of our
orts to Great Britain from 1846 to 1800 in-
dve, is com|>uted at only $6,048,645.
aetories in New England are far better for
country than in England; and a large
•ease of mills and factories in the West
lid be a still greater beneflt.
y the Reports of Hon. Horace Capron, D.
Commissioner of Agriculture, our total
■at exports, for forty-three years past, were
OOO.OtlO bushels — with flour reduced to
lilt—eq)ial only to the product of the three
•s, 1866- 7-'8. Of this. Great Britain took
per cent, of our exports to Europe; yet
n 1857 to 1868 we furnished but a quarter
icr imports, Europe ending the rest from
nearer m-irkets, and wiih her cheaper farm
ir. There is no prospect of this meagre
lit improving, for railroad- are buihling to
great grain tii'lds of Hungary and the
ck Sea, to cheapen and facilitate their
isportiou of grain.
President Grant thoughtfully suggested, in
his Annual Message to Congress, that "The
extension of railroads in Europe and the East,
IS bringing into competition with our fann
products like products of other countiifts,"
and that, therefore, " self-interest, if not seif-
prescrvation, dictates caution in disturbing
any industrial interest of the country."
Distance, and the higher wages our civiliza¬
tion demands, put the Western farmer at such
disadvantage against the grain grower in
Europe that competition is hopeless, except
in seasons of great scarcity abroad.
The plain remedy is to increase our home
consumers by increasing our home manufac¬
tures, and to vary our crops to meet these
larger home markets. It is not alone his grain
and piovisions, which will keep and bear
transportation, by which the farmer lives and
gains, but his perishable fruits and vegetables,
which must find market soon and near home,
are, or should be, of great value. Put the
factory and farm together, and these find larger
market, the farmer is saved from dependence
on one crop alone; his laud is kept in better
heart by this variety of products. Mildew,
and blight and rust, which come from exhaus¬
tion of the soil, the result of the constant ex¬
port of grain, and the want of change in pro¬
ducts, ynll cease, and good farming become
possible and profitable, and the father be able
to hand over his farm to his sons, not impov¬
erished, but enriched and full of promise of a
more fruitful future.
No CODNTRT, exci-nsivelt AQRICtJIiTCTtAL,
EVER BECAME PEKMANENTLT rich. To take
from t le earth and not wear it out, the farmer
mu-t give back. Let this be done, and crops
increase with the growth of populat on ; neg¬
lect this, and when decay shall come to the
best land is but a question of time, t ome it
WILL INEVITABLY.
In New England, with a poor soil, crops in¬
crease ; in the West, with a rich soil, they
decrease in the aveiage. In New England,
factory and farm are near eaeh other, making
a home market for the farmer's produce, ana
enabling him to get manure to enrich his soil.
In the We.-t, our oroduce being carried off,
the soil loses thousands of tons of its most
preciou- constituents for crops every year, and
receives no equivalent. A distinguished agri-
tulturist said, in ISfiet " It yvqulij be im-
proper to estimate tlie annual waste to the
country at less than an amount equal to the
mineral constituents of 1,500,000,000 bush¬
els of com " Put the factory beside the farm,
and this drain is stopped.
Wu CANNOT HAVE THE BEST PAEMING,
UNTIL WE HAVE THE BEST MANUPAOTUKINO
IN VAHIED POEMS AND MATEEIAI.S, BACH
AN INDISPENSABLE HELP TO THE GROWTH
AND PERPECTNESS OP THE OTHER We must
remember, too. tnat it is not the quantity
hut the vaiw of our grain exported that we
are to consider, and we find that when
the foreign demand is large, the price paid is
low, and onr farmers gain little of course : in
the year 1800, when exports were so trifling
in quantity, our wheat was at $1.75 per bushel
lu England. In 1868, when the much larger
ger centage of our products was taken in
urope, the price was down to $1.35, leaving
to the Western farmer about $1.(16 in the year
of the smaller demand, and only 66 cents when
the larger quantity was taken. The rule being,
that when rates are anything like remuner¬
ative, Europe buys but little of our farm
products, say three-eighths of the total ex¬
ports; when the rates are rainous to the
cultivator, they rise to something approach¬
ing three-fifths.
PREB TRADE ASSERTIONS VS. PACTS. ARE
TARIPFS ADDED AS TAXES TO THE PRICE
OP GOODS?
Were we free from debt, and with a surplus
revenue, there might be some seeming reason
for free trade talk. Even then it would be a dis¬
astrous policy; but with our imperative need
for a large revenue, free trade is shameful repu¬
diation and national bankruptcy, and yet this
time is chosen to agitate in its favor all over
the land, under the auspices of the "Ameri¬
can Free Trade League," with its headquarters
and support among New York importers, and
men closely linked wiih foreign manufac¬
turers !
What class or party of men dare propose to
raise over $300,000,000 yearly by direct inter¬
nal taxation? None are rash enough to dig
their own political graves by such proposal or
suggestion. Even the free traders are com¬
pelled to admit the need and justice of a
tariff for revenue, and by that admission over¬
throw their own shailow sophisms, and are
not fairly free traders, but rather pretenders to
belief in an impracticable theory.
Our importations should not go beyond
$400,000,000 yearlv, and ought to be less, and
we must raise $150,000,000 from tariffs on
these imports.
This admits of but a small reduction in the
amount to be raised in this manner, and a
little common sense and patriotism should be
enough to settle the whole matter for years to
comc.
This new outburst of free trade zeal at such
a time is suspicious. Political demagogues, un¬
der guise of impartiality, can use it to ride
into power on complications they thus fer
ment, but more especially is it a struggle for
the control of our market by British manufact¬
urers.
Great Britain has cheap labor, great capital
at low interest, large experience in trade and '
mauufacturcs, and narrow territorv. We have [
labor better paid, cotton, wool, poal, iron, en¬
ergy and skill, and amiile room for farm and
factory to be neighbors and allies.
Th-' English preach free trade to us, because
low tariffs here will give them advantage in tiie
trade with us, which thev greatly need, for, if
England loses the United States as her largest
and best customer, her industrial and financial
supremacy is gone, A few millions spent to
demoralize us is but dust in the balance.
Even il our tariff is not changed, the keeping
up a feeling whieh would prevent our capital
ffom investments in new industries would pay
them well.
So we have a pretended "revenue reform,"
into which some well-meaning men are drawn,
which would levy a stiff tariff on tea, coffee and
other articles we do not and cannot produce,
and reduce the duties as far as possible on the
article we can and do produce, and in which,
with fair protection, we can compete with the
foreigner.
Its object is to cut down the duties on articles
which the British, and others abroad, make
and would sell us, and of course, they arc
willing our tea, su^r, coffee, etc., should pay
our revenue.
To build up this absurd "reform" and to
make protection to home industry seem a
base wrong; we hear the loud assertious of
free traders and self styled "revenue reform¬
ers," that a tariff is a tax, andadds its amount
not oniv to the imported article on which it
is levied, hut to the price of the same article
made here; and that this added price goes to
the manufacturing "monopolists," who thus
adroitly rob the people. ()iic of the League
lecturers said, " On pig, bar and railroad iron,
the people last year paid a tax, in the in¬
creased price and the duty, of over $45.(XX),-
006, of which Government got but $5,000,0.10,
and $40,000,000 went into the pockets of
the iron men." The " Free Trader," parades
the " Tax on a man in his clothes," and the
"Tax on a farmer's bedroom" in the same
style.
Like assertions are made touching " tax" on
lumber, woolens, etc. The aim of all this is
plainly to urge the British sy.stem of levying
tariffs on articles we do not and canuot pro¬
duce, and reducing or abolishing the duties
on articles we can manufjcture here. This
scheme is of British origin, and parent and
child are alike.
An Euglish writer well says of the effect of
the system there on the peojile, " It hits
them doubly, and they suffer both ways; the
value of their wages is lessened by the duties
charged on these necessaries of food they con¬
sume, and their wages are reduced by the free
admission of foreign manufactures competing
with those they produce." Shall we adopt
this miserable system — this mongrel cailed
" free trade, with tariff for revenue ?''
Before entering on the interesting process of
confronting assertions with facts, let me re¬
mark that even if these assertions are true, a
vital aspect of thgjp.ise is ignored, and it is but
half stated, such ■half-statements being often
worse and more deceptive than falsAoods.
No allowance is made for difference in wages,
taxes or interest, or for the benefits and necessi¬
ty of a hirge home market. Give our iron makers
workmen at British wages (less than one dollar
there and more than two dollars a day in our
mills), and they could defy England the world
9ver. The horrid $40,000,1 lOO," if thev get il,
goes largely to their worhmen, and the work¬
men pay three-fourths of it to the farmer for
food. Suppose we approach this so-called
Iree trade in our legislation, and our m.iuufac-
tures decrease largely, as they would.
A miiliou of men, nowartizms and cou-
snmars, turn to the farm and crowd into the
army of produeer.s, raisin^' grain and other
food. The home market the\ now give the
farmer, better far than thit of England, is
gone, our larger surplus would glut thedistant
markets, prices would fall, hundreds of mil¬
lions of dollars kept in circulation among us
by home-manufactures would stagnate or go
abroad, times woul.l grow hard, tabor would
go begging (as it alw,ivs has in our free trade
period-), and, even if goods were cheaper,
which is doubtful, we snould (ind them of
little use to idle people with empty po-kets,
or to farmers with fat granaries and lean
purses.
But let us return to these assertions, about
the tarift being a tax levied on the consum"r,
for thehenefltof the "monopolist," so-callo ,.
ALEX.VNDBR HvMiLyos is supposed to have
had some statesmanship and sagaeitv (proba¬
bly not so much as these learned free trade
agents sent out by the New Y ork importers to
enlighten us in the West), and in his famed
Report of 1791, as U. S. Secretary of the
Treasury, he said;
^ "But though it were true that the immedi¬
ate and certain effect of a tariff was an increa-e
of price, it is u.iiversally true that the con¬
trary is the ultim.ite etlect with every success
ful manufacture. When a domestic nmnufac-
ture has attained to p Tleetio.i, and has en¬
gaged in the pro-ecution oi it a oaraiietent
number of persons, it can be a Horded, and
accordingly seldom or never fails to be sold
cheaper, in process of time, than the foreign
article for which it is a substitute. The inter¬
nal comp 'tition, which takes place, soon does
away with everything like mouopolv, and by
degrees reduces the price of the article to tlie
minimum of a reasonable prolit ou the capital
emploved Tnis accords with the reason of
the thing and with experience."
Howhas our experience agreed with Hamil¬
ton's views'f Cottons, imported at 511 cents a
yard,have been exported of better qu ditv, under
a high tariff, at G vents. Cotton ho.-iery from
18G0 to 18GS was reduced near.y lialf in price.
Delaines, imported a; aSc. to .5Uc. w-re made
here in ISGS, of equal quality, at 20c Tue
present prices of woolen cloths, of general
consumption, are less than thirty years ago,
and woolens are lower, in gold to day, than in
18G0, under a lower tariti; carpets are cheaper
and better.
Nails, axes, saws, tools, pins, etc., are lower
under protection than formerly. Cast steel
was reduced from 18c to 13c. in 18G1, and
sold in the war for 32c., while the English,
no better, was held at 45c., saving oiir Gov¬
ernment some money as well as dependence
on an unfriendly foreign power.
England raised the tariff on Iran seventeen
times, beginning with $2.50, or ten shillings
sterling, in 1679, and going up to $35 a ton
in 1819. Did the price rise, as it should have
done by the assertions of these wise men?
Not at all; pigs an.i Lars are stupid, and
would go dowi ! In liiii Ejgland con d un¬
dersell the world, and oflered her iron aUess
3
tliaa $.50 a ton, took off the tariff, and cried
" Uurrth for iree trade in iron !"
So of her woolens, through four hundred
years of high tariffs they fell in price, as
capital, skill and competition at home in¬
crease I, and through protection she reached
fre trade in woolens; but her sufferiug work¬
men beg her to turn back to-day.
Let us follow our imports and prices of iron
a little as tue simplest mode of details, and as
covering the like ground on other articles.
I'rorii 1839 to 1842, inclusive, the duty on im¬
ported pig iron was from $5.31 to $8,59 per
ton, and the price from $25 to $37. From
1843 to 1847 the duty was raised to $9; but
the price ranged lower, or from $25 to $30.
In 1850 it fell to $20.85, while the cost in
England was $19.65, and the tariff 30 per cent,
and English bar iron was sold here at $41.87,
our British cousins being engaged in selling at
CO t or less to close up our mills, having paid
large sums, iu 1846, to spread free trade no¬
tions 111 this country, lower our tariff, and get
u-i in their power. When this was uone they
pushed up prices, and, in 18.54, sold us 160,000
tons of pig iron at $37.16, costing in England
but $17, and with the tariff only 30 per
cent., and 45,000 tons of bars at over $70,
and railroad iron at heavy prices and prolits,
all with a low tariff, an 1," in 1857, we had a
"crash," and labor went begging, and farmers
had tneir share of trouble.
With the tariff at $9, for four years, from
1843 to 1840, pig iron ranged from $2< to $29,
averaging $27,70.
With the tariff reduced to 30 per cent, for
four years, from 1853 to 1856, the range was
fro II $27 to $37, and the average was $32, or
over $1 higher than under a lower tariff.
'•^'These ttgurcs we take from official reports
of Government Reveiiue Commissioners, and
And great ttnctuations in prices, ruinous to
us if not gu irded against by a tariff; the
E.ighsh producers paying the tariff at times,
and ae-ain the buyer h -re, just a.s markets
ranged, and, most noteworthi/ of all, we see the
English pushing down onr tariff, selliug us
iron low to break down our mills, and then
pushing up the price, and reaping immense
prolits while o.ir tariff was low.
We find the prices gradually coming down,
both of foreign and domestic articles, as
competition, skill, exnerience, fit machinery
and eapilai become invested in growing
indu-tries, starting und r a protective policy.
Let us put till.-, absurdity of a tariff being
necessarily so mueh addition to the price
in another light.
Free traders apply it only to snch manufact¬
urers as they wish to reduce the tariff on,
and those are such as the British would con¬
trol in our markets, if possible. Mr. Horace
ivi atnard, of Tenne- see, aptly said, in a speech
in Congress in March,;
"If this doctrine is true of these articles, it is
true of all others; for examjile of butter,
cbeese, potatoe.-, and wheat. The duty on
butter and cbeese is 4 cents per pound, on po¬
tatoes 25 cents per husnel, "and on wheat 20
cents per bushel. Now, will any man be bold
enough or reckless enough to assert that the
duty of four cents per pound upon butter en¬
hances to the consumers by so much the price
not o;ilv of the 6,0.50,(K)0 pounds imported
from Ciiiada, but also of the entire produce of
our own dairies; pr tljat the like daty pf 4
[ts per pound on cheese adds 4 cents per
•md to the consumption prices ol American
ese as well as of tl)e 1,500,000 pounds im-
' ted from Canada, the 1,175,000 pounds from
r,nce, and the 250,000 pounds from England ;
ithat the duty of 20 cents per hushel on wheat
Is that sum or any sum to the price cither
American wheat, or of the 1,500,000 bushels
Dorted from Canada; or lastly that the duty
ii5 cents per bushel on potatoes is an addi-
n of 25 cents a bushel to the market price
our whole potato crop, as well as of the
1,000 bushels imported from Nova Scotia?
e folly of such an assertion would be so ap-
l^ent as to impose upon nobody; it would be
ubject of universal ridicule."
n the light of the facts of our experience,
■Milton's views are true and sagacious;
4 surely these facts do not sustain the bare
4 absurd assertions of the free traders and
iir friends.
f we follow their advice we carry our gnst
British mills and pay heavy tolls, and road
•s both ways. Better take our grist to Amer-
n mills and keep tolls and fees at heme,
•in if we build our mills in the start,
bet us look at a plan of tariil reform quite
like that we have been examining. That
.y well be called a scheme to benefit foreign
.uufacturers and New York importers at the
it and peril of our enterprise and industry,
is is a plan to help the best interests of a
mer, worker, manufacturer and importer
ke, and to develop the resources of our
intrv.
For brevity's sake we put It in shape of
loives.
'1st. Besolved. That while approving tariff
brm, simplifying, increasing the free list,
knging rates where needed and just, revis-
< the bonded warehouse system, and espe-
dly, changing ad valorem to specific duties, to
ivent fraud—we would keep in view, not
iv the immediate wants of our revenue,
t that protection of our industry and that
velopment of our resources by which' the
osperity of the people may make the solv-
cy of our Government perfect, and its
venue lasting.
"2d. Resolved^ That as a decrease of revenue
im duties on imports is feasible, we favor
ver duty, or the free admission, of tea,
ffee, spices, dye-stuffs, etc., not produced
us, and in universal use, that the people
ly thereby gam; and would retain duties for
otection and revenue on articles we can and
I produce, and the home product of which
a benefit to the people.
" 3d. Resolved, That while wages are higher
d workmen better off with us than in Eng-
id, and while English workingmen, impelled
the force of hunger, are denouncing free
ide, and alleging that it is reducing them to
•unerism, leaving them defenceless against
II cheaper labor in Europe, and driving
eir skilled artizans to protective countries,
would be injustice and injury to American
tizans and workmen to adopt or aporoach
system which is denounced by workingmen
England as lowering their wages and de¬
eding their condition.
"4th. Re-solved. That while British workmen
id mauufacturcrs are complaining of hunger
nougwoikmen and peril to capital, caused
/ their free trade and revenue tarill system—
bich admits free ol 4hty articles made in
England, while ten, eoffbe, sugur, tobacco, eto.,
pay heavy duties—and are alarmed at their
vastly growing balance of imports—greater
than the exports in 1868 by 8580,00(1,OOO—and
while our foreign debt is 81,.500,000,000, growing
constantly from excess of imports, and taking
away our specie to partly pay the interest, any
approach toward free tradewould not only put
far away the return to specie paimcnis, but
would increase our debt abroad more rapidly
and make the calamity of a terrible financial
crisis swift and sure."
The idea of these resolves was partly realized
in the changes made last winter in the tariff,
reducing duties f'24,0000,000, and no doubt the
country will benefit thereby.
Is it not plain that this free trade agitation is
ill-timed, false in its pretences, and bad in its
plans ?
"The Extension of ock Eaileoad Ststem
within the last few protective \ curs has been
most extraordinary, and yet the lines now pro¬
jected promise still more rapid extension in the
future. Let them be made aud let our farmers
fail to provide for corresponding increase in
the home demand for their products, and the
result must inevitably exhibit it elf in the
form of a depression of the agricultural inter¬
ests as great as, if not even gi eater than, has
heen ever known. Let them, on the contrary,
determine that all our cloths and all our iron
shall be made at home, and the road making now
in progress will be followed by inereased prosperity
to all, the old farmers and the 7ieu'.'"—H. C.
Caret.
The Chicago Tribune, in 1861, gave the
clear and ioreible views and facis below. It is
well to read them in contrast with its free
trade talk m later days : " Exclusive of cotton,
rice, cane sugar and molasses, which are not
American products, the United States exported
in the year ending .June 30, 1S60, to all foreign
countries, $61,891,042. E.xcliLsive of the same
products, the Western States produced 40 per
cent, of the whole agricultural oroductof the
Union. Assuming that the "West exports in
the same ratio that it produces, and we have a
foreign market for $24800,000 of the value of
all agricultual articles produced in the West-
cm States.
" As the total agricultural production of the
Western States is about $1,159,000,000, of
which sav $1259,000,000 mav be deducted for the
value of farming impliments, animals held lor
use, impmvcment. wear and tear, etc., there
remain^ $900,000,0000 for consumption in the
producing States, and for market in other
States and foreign countries. It thcreiore ap¬
pears that the proportion of the market fur¬
nished by the United States for our produce,
compared with that furnished by all foreimi
countries, is as $37 .50 to $1 00. If we inquire
where this market is found, we discover that
the same year the manufacturers of pig-iron
produced $67,828,231 worth of that material.
I'he cotton manufacturers produced over $115 -
000,000, woolen about $60,000,000, leather
$93,000,000, boots and other products of leather
$70,000,000, agricultural impliments 818 000 •
OOO, steam engines $47,000,000, flour ^^lOOO'
000, and lumber $93 000,000, making an~a^rgr4
gate of $664,000,000.
" A very large portion of the value of these
V
manufactured i)roducts Goiisists iu the western
food, whieh entered into them, and for whieh
they paid. But besides the manufacturinff
classes, the number ensasred in commerciar
financial and professional pursuits are included
among: tbe food consumers. But the p culi-
arity of the manufacturing; class is, that tliey
are not only competinsrin the market to make
the farmers' produce dearer, but to make the
farmers' clothing and other articles of pur¬
chases and enjoyment cheaper.
" Nothing;, therefore, can be plainer than the
entire unity and harmony of interest between
the manufacturimj and farming classes, and
their absolute dependence on each other for a
market. Those who suppose, therefore, that
the manufacturing; interests of the country
can he broken down without breaking down
the farming interests by thesame blow, or that
the former can be built up without building
up equally the latter, are wholly in error.'1
M. Chevahbb, a distinguished French
statesman, who negotiated with t'obdeu the
An.^lo-Freneh treaty of 1800, (claimed as a free
trade treaty, but which was not, yet of which
the French are growing tired, and asking its
repeal), said In 18.53 :
"It is not an abuse of power on the part of
the government; on the contrary, it is the ac¬
complishment of a positive duty, so to act at
each epoch in the progress of a nation as to
favor taking possession of all the branches of
industry, whose acquisition is authorized by
the nature of things. Governments are, in
cfTect, the personification ot nations, and it is
required that they should exeicise their influ¬
ence in the direction indicated by the general
interest, properly studied, and fully appreci¬
ated. I regard as excellent the desire of some
of the eminent men of the principal nations of
Europe to establish around them the vtirious
branches of manufactures, although I may not
praise without distinction, all the measures by
them adopted for the accomplishment of their
object."
In "the nature of things " we should "take
possession" ol the manufacture ot woolens,
cotton, iron, steel, etc., as our natural re¬
sources point that way.
John Stuart Mill, of England, free trader
as he professes to be, in his " Political Econ¬
omy," says:
" The superiority of one country over an¬
other iu a branch of production olten arises
from having began it sooner. There may be
no inherent advantage or disadvantage on
cither dde, but only a present superiority
of skill and experience. A county which has
this skill and experience to acquire, may, in
other respects, be better adapted to the pro¬
duction than those earlier in the field; and
beside, it is a just remark, that nothing has a
greater tendency to produce improvement iu
any branch of nroduction than its trial under
a new set of conditions. But it cannot be ex¬
pected that individuals, at their own cost, should
introduce a new manufacture and bear the
burthens of carrving it on until the producers
have been educated up to the line of those
with wliom the processes have become tradi¬
tional. A Frotbotivb Duty, continued a
reasonable tirae, will sometimes be tlie least
inconvenient mode in which a country can
itself for the support of an experiment." j
This grants the argument for protection at
principle. i
Senator Morrill, of Vermont, in E
speech of May 9, on the tariff, made the §
lowing very just remarks on the advantagesJP
buying American instead of foreign manuB'
tures ; ffi
He said: " When the farmer of llliiB
sends wheat to England iu exchange for Sti
field cutlery, London watches, or Nottingi™
laces, he can form no just e-limate of i
actual value of what he receives, and does I
know whether he is cheated or not; but ifg
can exchange bis wheat for such commoditf
made in his own neighborhood, he will kiiB
all about it. When he buys an Illinois phi
or ail Illinois wagon, or Illinois watch, InJ
ways gets a prime article at a fair price. 'S
knack of machinery and the profits of trS
are no secret at home. The profits on forea
articles are unknown, exeept that they |
known to be generally much greater tFj
upon those of domestic origin. Hence, d'S
ers have an interest m handling foreign to P
exclusion of American goods; and the grerj
profits thus derived enable them to liber:-
patronize the press, as well as to subsic*
peripatetic philosopiiers of free trade. A ;;
ticular style of foreign goods is more eaqj
monopolized than those made at our oJ
doors, and, it found suitable, cannot at o|
and so easily be duplicated by neighboi;
competitors. A domestic aitlc e, howevcr<i
found saleable, will at once be multiplied, aj
can be ordered by any number of dealenj*-
such quantities as to cause a reduction j
prices by competition. American articles
staple kind, produced in large quantities. It
cut nails, prints, delaines, cotton cloth, wh'
lead, shoes and boots, are usually sold at a b'
commission, and often without any profii',
all, whether at wholesale or retail. Ma
dealers in imported goods keep and sell liji
of staple American goods at cost as baitsf
catch customers for the trade in more prcK
able commodities. Purchasers have a fashii'
able partiality for goods of foreign make I
style, and have not yet fqund out that Ami
can iron, cotton, and wohlens, are tougt#
stronger, and more d arable than such asi
usually imported. It is true that the relay
merits of American manufactures, as cffl
pared with some others, appear to be beg
understood in some places abroad, and Brir
manufacturers have been lately detected in J
ing the stamp and brand of American mat
facturers, iu order to fradulently dispo^
tiieir own good in far oil markets. Vj! '
likely, our manufacturers have undervalv
the artistic training and culture of their wq
men; but it is a vital point which canj ^
longer be safely neglected. It is not the
of America to follow, but to lead."
the industrial question. '
The consumption in the United Statei
iron, steel, copper, lead, zinc, woolen goc .
cotton goods, leither and glass, is not less t
to the value of a thousand millions of doll:
of which we import to the value of ove
hundred millions. To imnort our full sup!
of these articles from the cheapest marietc '
Europe or of the world would, take all llic
gold in the countiT, all our cottx)!!, and all the
comrnoditiet. uf-uaiiy exporttd, and leave Ub in
debt for half the amount. It would compel
the whole manufacturinsi' population to eiicaac
in aitriculture ; it would put wheat to 40 cents
per bushel, and every other product in pro])or-
tion; it would reduce monthly wages again to
$10 or $15, and virtually place "the whole coun¬
try in Ihe condition of an apiicndage of the
manufacturing countrieb of Europe.
The purchasing power of a people who have
duly mingled manufacturing industri with
agricultural productions is tenfold that of a
purely agricultural coinmunitv. The individ¬
uals of a country with such a lilendcd in¬
dustry purchase from each other, and the ordy
limit to the power is the power of production.
TTie internal rade of the United Stales is of
tenfold greater value than oui .entire loreiun
• trade.
The strength and wealth of a county should
be measured by the quantity and value ol its
productions which it consumes, and not liy
what it sends to olhcr countries. Ko e.i\ ilizi d
nation obtains Irom other countries a tenth of
its consumption.
The indispensable national policy is to up¬
hold and cherish that inoustry to which wc
are compelled to look for neariy all that meets
the wants of civilized life.
REMAKKABLE REACTION IN BNGI.AKD AGAINST
FRtE TRADE.
We find the workingmen of England im¬
pelled by "the force of hunger," beginning to
ask with heartfelt earnestness that free trade
may be abandoned and a protective policy take
Its place to save them Irom growing jiauper-
ism, pinching hunger, and hopeless want.
An infiuentiai London paper lately said:
"There is no blinking the lact that the great
principles of international trade and public
wealth which the Manchester school did so
much to establish, are regarded by large
classes of people with unbelief or abomina¬
tion."
A force is at work, far greater than that of
Tory arguments—Ihe foice of hunger. Mr.
Bright cannot show, us he once could, that the
workmen's sutTcrings are the inevitahle con¬
sequence of the national comincrce being con¬
trolled by Tory princiiiles. Free trade is
established and Toryioin is powerle.ss. 8tiil
the working classes are crying for bread.
They find themselves competing with the rest
of the world at a disadvantage. And so they
form themselves into associations, and are
known as the " Revivers of English Indus¬
try." They allege that free trade has reduced
one in every twenty of the population to pau¬
perism, and is driving thousands of skilled
artisans out of the country.
Few persons in this country, who have not
cio.sely watched the progri-ss of the move¬
ment, can have an adequate conception of the
extent to which dissatisfaction with, and oppo¬
sition to the further triai of the "free trade"
experiment in England has jirogressed. The
literature of the subject is becoming quite
voluminous, and the discussion of the ques¬
tion is conducted with great spirit and consid¬
erable ability — especiallv upon the side of
protection. The protectio.iLts—or, rather, as
tbey prefer to style tbems^ves, 'revivalists"
of British indv.itrv—are Ihorcuglly organized
for the work, at Manchester and have enlcied
ujK.r the collie.'-t «ith en evident detciiiiina-
tionfowiri. ... • f „
"The Manchester Reciprocity Association'
asks aid, to give h cturcs, print tracts, etc.,
and says: , . ,
"Tliere is nothing in which the people are
so intensely iulerested. or which niore deeply
concerns their material prosperity, than the
protection, by the Imficrial Farliainent, of
British industry against a grasping and unsym-
pathizing foreign comiictition, which takes all
and yields nothing." Thcvhave upublislied
"Sophisms ot Free Trade examined," written
in 1849, by Hon. J. B. Bvlcs, Judge of Com¬
mon F erns; "The Decline ot Biithh Industiy,
bv a Manchester man," is just published in
London and Manchester; and ' Froleetion to
Native Industrv," bv Sir E. Sullivrn, which is
reprinted by "the ""Bureau Company," 101
Wabash Avenue, Chic.igo, and is a very able
work
T he author says this niovenicnt started with
the werkiiig meii. The whole case is summed
up by him ill these few lines :
"Is it not absurd, and stupid, and irritaficg
to the working classes to admit duty free all
they produce, to tax all they consume; to
admit, duty free clocks, watches, silk, paper,
gloves, glass, ribbon-, hats, i oots, shoes, mil¬
liner*, the finer kind of cotton goods, and
linen, and scores of other industries and to
eontinne a heavy tax on cocoa, coffee, sugar,
tea and tobacco ?
" The operative class are the largest con-
sumeis of cocoa, ti a, coffee, sugar and
tobacco ; and thcv are the actual prouucers of
all the articles of foreign manufacture that are
adniiitcd duty free into our m.irkets.
"The present stite of affairs hits them doubly
hard, they suffer both ways; the value of their
wages is dimini-hed by the amount of the
Customs duty charged on the necessary arti¬
cles of food they consume; and the amount of
their wage.s i.s reduced by the free admission of
foreign article.- of manufacture to compete
with those they produce "
" At present emigration is confined to the
operative class; but there is another emi ra¬
tion that is ihrcalened t at will be far more
ruinou- in its iff, ct-, viz. : an eroigratiou of
c piial and manufaciurcrs; what can the
British op,rativedo it his employer and capital
disappear together ?"
Alluding to the sophism that "the theory of
free trade is right, even though the pracTce is
fatal," he says:
" There is nothing like dying by a fine
sword ; if we are to perish, let us perish in a
noble cause, in laying down our manufactur¬
ing life, for our neighbors 1 Such conduct may
be very sublime, but it is wonderfully stupid,
c'est beau, mats c'est bete.
The author of the "Decline of British In¬
dustry" says:
" There cannot exist the least doubt that
our manufacturing po.-ition is on the wane. In
reference to the coiton trade, the United
States and foreign Europe have more than
overbalanced us. We do not fear competition,
if placed on an equal footing; but to attempt
to compete against the hostile tariffs and
cheaper labor of the world with free imports,
is the very height of insanitv.
» • » » - , *
li
"What amount of labor would not these
articles have found for our half-starving; nopu-
latiou ? The inci-eaxe in the number of paupers
iuEusrland since 18U0 is 183,8l)d persona, beim;
about equal to the pojiulatiou of Slockport,
Boltou and Blackburn.
***** ^
" Since the reduction of our tariff by Mr.
Gladstone in 1853, upwards of three millions
of our people have emigrated from the United
Kingdom, and principally to the extreme pro¬
tective countries, in which their labor has
found a more remunerative reward for them¬
selves ; but at the same time it has served to
increase the foreign competition against Eng¬
land."
The excess of all imports over British ex¬
ports was in 18.54, £o5,'i04,8'17, in 186ll,4!74,63Q-,
64<j, and in 1868, £116,047,923, or $580,000,000
in one year!
The amount distributed in relief to the poor,
and raised mainly by taxes has risen from
£4,939,064 in 1853, to £7,500.000 in 1868, one
in eighteen of England's whole population
being paupers.
The London Farmer, an influential farmer's
journal, favors protection, and the Manches¬
ter Gaardian, in the vi^ry heart of the free
trade region, has a corre.spondent a free trader,
who frankly sky.s " There ii unquestionably a
reactionary feeling against free trade."
There is a mournful pathos in a late address
of a meeting of iron-wcrkers in South Staf¬
fordshire to their employers. They say:
" We ask you, gentlemen, can you expect
that we will continue, ' like dumb, driven cat¬
tle,' to accept with indifference the present
state of things as if we had become ' living
dead men T The low price of labor and the
high nrice of living has driven and is driving
your best workmen from the country, to com¬
pete with us in t .e labor markets of the
world."
Another English wriier tells how this vast
excess of imports over exports is taking away
their bullion from the Bank of England, and
adding $140,000,090 to the gold of France
since 1853.
If England's free trade and revenue tariff,
with all her wealth, draws her specie to the
continent, how shall we, under a similar plan,
ever reach specie payment "f That plan would
be peril to capital, paralysis to industry, and
the swift and sure harbinger of a terrible
financial " crisis."
This cup, of which England has drunk until
her people are sick unto death, is offered us
by the "American Free Trade League," and
pressed to our lips by its agents." Let us
beware of the deadly draught.
England is learning the truth of Napoleon's
aphorism, " Though an empire were made of
adamant, free trade would grind it to dust,"
and we may take timely warning.
HOW WORKMEN LIVE IN ENGLANT).
The London correspondent ol the New York
Times gives a most deplorable picture of the
poor ol the large cities of England. Millions
of people live almost entirely upon baker's
bread. Here, for example, is the way of
of life of a sober, haigi-working Englishman,
who earns 18e. a week (6a.y $4.50 gold stan
dard), and has a wife and six children. He
neither drinks nor smokes, and hands over his
whole wiujes to his wife. This is a oommou
practice in well-ordered families. She pays 43
a week for rent; Is for coals; candles, soap,
etc., 9d.; a penny a week each for the six
children to a burial club, 6d.; on a doctor's
bill due. Is. Here are 7s. 3d. of the ISs. gone,
and nothing to eat Now the bill of fare for
those eight persons. One pound of bread a
day for each—the children scarcely taste any¬
thing else—comes to 7s. a week ; 30 pounds of
Eotatoes. 8d.; one pound of butcher's meat on
unday, and two pouuos of salt pork for week
days, 2s.; one pound of sugar, half pound of
butter, one ounce tea, lad., make up the
week's account. No milk, no iruft, no cloth¬
ing. The only way they can have that is for
the children to got work or die ; then some¬
thing would come in from the burial club.
Thousands and thousands of men work harl
for two-thirds of these wages, or less.
The New York World tells of a host of em¬
igrant mechanics lauding at Castle Garden,
who could not live in the Old World, and ot
English masons and carpenters among them,
telling of getting but $4 50 to $7 50 per week
in gold, and paying $3 for miserable board,
while laborers get from $3 to $5. Who ever
heard ot ship loads of American mechanics
landing in Liverpool, to escape starvation and
get better pay? A Mr. Hodgkius, of New
York, an Englishman and a free-trader, said
lately in an essay at Brooklyn, that the ore
and coal and limestone, for making Iron, were
as cheap and as abundant in Pennsylvania as
in England, or more so, but the labor was
cheaper in England, giving them the advan¬
tage. I go for protecting labor In this coun¬
try, and not for pushing it down to the pauper
level of England with her free-trade theories.
A correspondent of the New York Evening
Fbst gives tlie wa^es ot five edge tool makers
in that city as $55 33 a week in gold, and $35
in London, and the Post tries to make out that
English workmen can live as well as ours, and
says that their wages will buy more yards of
carpet and poplin, more silk stockings and
spool thread! All well, if men and women
could eat carpets and use spool thread for
sauce, but a good share of a workman's ex¬
penses are for food easier to masiicate and
digest, and cheaper with us, certainly used
with far more varied abundance.
Savings banks hold mainly the deposits
saved by working people. In 1860 these banks
in Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts,
Rhode Island, Philadelphia and Newark, held
$66,569,307, and the next year $1,338,304 less.
In 1868 the same banks (with only one dime
savings bank added) held $153,833,667, an in¬
crease of $35,064,038 over 1867. Similar of¬
ficial reports from other regions show a like
result.
EXTRACT FROM THE SPEECH OF THE HON. ACS-
TIN BLAIR, M. C. OF MICHIGAN—WASHING¬
TON, MARCH 35TH, 1870.
And here it is proper to remember that the
protection of our industries is the protection
of labor. Great care is taken to conceal this
obvious truth from the people. It is the fashion
with the importers, who are themselves the
most wealthy and aristocratic class in the
country, to denounce the manufacturers as s
8
body of rich mouopoUsts who are amaasing
wealth out of the taxation of the people, while
they aflcct to pity the impoverished operatives.
But it needs no argument to prove to an intel¬
ligent man that in this country the success of
the employers means increased wages to the
employed. The operatives are now so intelli¬
gent and well-organized that they are enabled
to know both the amount of wages which they
are entitled fairly to demand and the most
effectual methods for enforcing that demand.
Every day's experience is proving that the
time has passed when the capitalist will be
able to deprive the laborer of his fair share in
the prohts of the business.
Wages in this country are necessarily high.
The^sparseness of population and the great
abundance with cheapness of .'and makes it so.
The iiiteliigent laborer need not be a sujipliant
for employment; he can, as a last resort, quit
the workshop and take a homestead out of the
public lands which are always ojien to him. It
is impossible, therefore, to place him upon the
European rate of wages. Free trade, however,
requires just this, and that is just what pro
tection intends to prevent and does prevent.
Can anything be clearer than this, that free
tnide means low wages ?
The Free-Trade League is controlled bv very
cunning and unscrupulous men. They think
the time has nearly rrrived when the coun¬
try will enter upon a period of serious
embarrassment, and they intend to take advan¬
tage of the discontent arising out of It to aid
their schemes. They mean to lay everything
to the tarifi, believing that the unthinking
multitude will not be able to detect the cheat.
I am not afraid of them. The country under¬
stands them, and the good sense of the people
will be an overmatch for all their subtlety.
Great calculations have been made heretofore,
predicated upon the presumed discontent of
the people under necessary taxation, but they
have ail failed. The repudiators set on foot "a
plan of great ingenuity to deceive the pi ople,
but it did not deceive them ; nor will the free-
trade leagues have any better success.
To the old catchword, why not buy always
where you can buy cheapest? I reply that he
cannot buy at all who does not scU. He is a
very stupid economist who clamors for a cheap
market to purchase in while he makes no pre¬
paration for acquiring the means to purchase
m any market whatever. As in cooking a rab¬
bit it is necessary first to catch the rabbit So
in buying it is necessary first to acquire the
means to pay.
SCABCB SIXPENCES.
An Irish emigrant was telling how cheap
goods were at home and in England, and how
much a sixpence would buy. Some one said,
" Why did you leave home, then'f" Hts quick
wit flashed out in the ready reply, "And sure,
where was the sixpence to be got ?" He came
here after it, as do many each y ear.
PROM ADPRESS TO WISCONSIN STATE AORICPI.-
TUHAL SOCIETY, MADISON, OCTOBER, 1868, AT
STATE FAIR, BY E. B. WARD, OP DETROIT
MICHIOAN.
We are a working people, and when we see
that labor has done so much in making the
wilderness blossom and the waste places gted I
with civilized life, we should ajiprecialt li,
privilege and duty of uselul work.
Each and all should do something fortl.:
own and for the common good We k.;
small lOom for drones, or dignified, gm
XT » 4 U T
For my own part, I want to be budjt
some decent and useful way, and wlien t.^
time comes I can work no longer with hati
or brain, I pray that my life on earth »j
Capital likes good investments and quick
turns, yet it can live, and wait, and take li
vantage of poverty. Labor wants coiistii!
and dcccutlv paid occupation. Diversified j-
dustry is desirable to the capitalist, but Ij
more so, and more necessary to the workma
If I had a million dollars it wonid need m
areat wit to go into a region where cash »a
scarce, becau.-M' the people were far from niii.
ket. loan money to farmers, and swallow ip
their farms, according to law, if not acconlii;
to Gospel, bv relentle-8 foreclosure of meri-
gages. But suppose I invested the millioDdor
lars in woolen, or cotton, or Iron mills, boncli
the products ol those farms for the workmei
and employed the surplus laborers; thereBtri
be no mortgages, but the lands would rise In
or ten fold in value.
I should not be acting as a philanthropH
but simply as a business man, helping oliiai
to prosper that I might share in that piospni
ty. A factory witli a capital of 1500,OIXI will
spend about that sum yearlv for materials aed
labor, and the larger part circulates among tin
people.
Let the blood stagnate or move too slow ii
the veins and a man is sick—the strong aid
ready pulsation is health. So with basines-;
It is rapid and easy circulation of money, quiet
returns, nearness of producer and coDSumti,
demand for labor of all kirds, and sale and a
tcrcliange of its products that makes healtl
and brings wealth.
An able French journal weU says;
" That which, above all, agriculture claim,
is the niultiidieation of markets, its greatei
need being that of a non-agricultural popuk-
tion. What is it that presents itself tori"
in onr poorest pi-ovince«'! A people thUi
Bca .tcred and almost eiitireh rural; not work
lug within reacii of a market; cou.-uiDlng
tiie spot their own local piroductioos; «illi
few or no towns, no liidiistry, and no com-
nieree bevond that which is strictly necessarf
for satisfying the limited wants of their iuinW'
taiits. There the poor proprietor diridfe
produce with miserable tenants, the inevitaWt
result of agriculture without a market. Ou
manufacturing departments, on theotberband.
are by far the best cultivated, and for tbat io
son the most productive. 'There onr agricul¬
ture has proved its ability to realize, by o''"
means, but in an equal degree, the wondtn
of Eagli.-h husb.indry Wherei'er a lovi
ter of consumption is formed, the neU/Niont!
farmers are the first to profit by it. This ton"
infallible, and aUows of no exertion."
PROM SPEECH OF HON. HORACE MAYNiB®,
M C., OP TENNESSEE.
Washington, March 30, 18W-
1: is true lhaf New England has cagagol
lBTg«ly and b-necessftiliy m muinrtictures-. B®
ii
' i no disparagement to New England to affirm
.|,t she IS not the only or the principal seat of
I'mifactures in the country. However it
y have been 40 years a™, or 35 years ago,
' s not so now. Philadelphia, PitLshurgh,
^ i Cincinnati are literally vast workshops, in
ich are produced almost every conceivable
uisite for health and sickness, business,
" asure, and comfort, peace and war; while
' ttered over the middle States, the West,
1 the South are a multitude of estalilish-
nts, some large, others small, employing
Husands of people, and all busy in fashion-
■raw materials into forms adapted to the
Sply of human wants.
U the woolen exhibition of 1868 in Chicago
. ire were represented nearly 30 diilerent mills
-"Illinois alone. The surrounding States of
- liana, Iowa, Michigan, and othei-s were not
. rapresenled. During the last summer tiiere
, 's held in Cincinnati an exhibition of textile
rics for the West and South, at which were
. placed fabrics in great variety from, I be
ve, every western State, including Caiifor
." and the Territory of Utah, from Kentucky,
■ unessee Alabama, Georgia, and South Caro-
a, in the South. This list of successlul manu
ture might he extended to the watches of
{in and Waltham, better, I am reliably in-
med, than any foreign time-keepers of simi-
'• construction and price; and in fact indeti-
- eiy,and into almost every branch of industry.
liCt it not be supposed, however, that these
■ . .ults have been reached without great ellort
, 1 sacrifice. Tlie history ol American manu-
"tures is a dreary narrative of bold, unaided
leavers by men who had little else than skill
1 a purpose; of costly but useless experi-
■ mt; of discouragement, disappointment,
' ture repeated and disastrous; of penury,
nt, and suflering. And when success crowned
-3 work, the community at large were bene-
-3d rather than they whose genius and patient
■^■Ihad accompiished it. A popular clamor
ittempted against the men engaged in this
id of production. They are represented as
-■ mopolists with overgrown fortunes, aequir-
; fabulous wealth at the expense of those
'-10 purchase and use their products.
•"Vlr. Chairman, it happened about two years
- 0 that I went to the State of New Ilamp-
re, and I came back instructed.
. I saw their children on the way to school,
_ ecntly clad, with satchel and shining inorn-
'-g face, and school-house that might well pass
• a temple or a palace. I saw the people at
■ ureh; 1 saw them at political meeting's—
^ ople of the highest self-respect, and not de-
' ient in intelligence and cultivation, raised by
■ nest labor far above the hard conditions of
•^'verty, the hardest of which, according to
■';e satirist, is the ridiculous shifts necessary to
^'ike the two ends meet. These were the
■•onopolists of the country, the people who
■-'e by manufactures and work bv machinery !
lere were other monopolists. I remember a
• ung man, not 30 vears of age, receiving a
lary greater than is paid to us as members
M Congress. He was at the head of a large
iico printing establishment, which by
-js genius he was able to organize and
ep in operation. This was' one of
id's monopolists, endowed by his Maker
'■'th a cunning brain to understand thir._^
J 'yond the reach of other men. His talents
a
here found employment, profitable tohimsoli
and useful to the world.
While the Committee of Wajrs and Means
were conducting their exaniiiiatiou in Boston
the last season, some pains was taken to ascer¬
tain the profits upon capital employed in manu¬
factures there in the neighboring region, where
the received opinion is that such capital has
enjoyed the largest returas. For this purpose
a number of witnesses were examined, men of
f'cat expeiienee and high social position.
heir testimony was, that taking a series of
years together, the aggregate of capital invest¬
ed in manufacturing enterprises of the different
kinds had not yielded a return exceeding the
lawful rale of interest; while upon manufac¬
turing carried on upon borrowed money there
had been no profit. Now compare this with
the profits of banking, with the ecoimous
mercantile incomes annnaliy reported for tax¬
ation, reaching in some in.-itances to millions,
and we see how unfounded is the invidious
eiamor raised in the name of free trade and in
the interest of those who have grown opulent
by dealing in foreign exchange and imported
merchandise.
But it is especially as the representative of
a Southern constitucncv that 1 advocate the
policy of protecting and fostering our manu¬
factures. The opposite doctrine had prevailed
for a whole generation prior to the war; and
during the wiir we experienced the bitter con¬
sequences Isolated from the rest of the
world, seaward by tiie blockade and landward
by the military lints, we endured privations
altogether incredible and difiicuit to appreci¬
ate. With 8,000 miles of sea-coast, and naval
stores and material in abundance, we had
neither ships nor seamen. With an unlimited
supply of cotton, and wool, and hides, and oak
bark, and fulling waters, we had neithiT shirts,
nor coats, nor blankets, nor shoes. But for
the household industiy prevalent in the South
beyond otherparts of the land, not a few would
have been reduced to stark nakedness. Many
ladies spun and wove the material for their
own dresses and for the clothing of their fami¬
lies ; professional gentlemen madeand mended
shoes for their own and their neighbors'
children.
This lesson is not likely to be unheeded by
the South. Already the effects of pro¬
tection are felt upon all her industries.
Old works have been revived and re¬
paired, and many new ones have sprung up.
The fabrication of cotton and woolen goods
has been greatly stimulated ; also the produc¬
tion of coal, salt, iron, copper, zinc, lumber,
and naval stores. Some of our spindles and
looms have distanced competition from foreign
or Northern rivals.
The influence of a diversiflcd industry has
been benign upon our great staples of cotton,
tobacco, rice and sugar. Less labor has hecn
engaged than formerly in their cultivation, less
capital employed, tint more profitably; a
larger return for smaller crops. Three miliiou
bales of cotton in lb69, at 25 cents, for
instance, realize 50 per cent, more than 5,000,-
000 in i860, at 10 cents; while the work of
growing and handling is 50 per cent, less.
It is further shown by the statistics ol manu¬
facture, that in 1869, there were spun in the
United States 434,293,883 pounds, equal to
1,085,734 bales of 400 pounds each ; so that at
present we export somctbing lees than 2,000,
10
000 bales, and consume something more than
1,000,000. Assuming as correct the figures
giv n the otlicr eveuiiig by the g<'ntleman from
AIal)ama, (Mr. Buckley,) the cotton spun in
the United States, in 1800, amounted in value,
after coming from the spindle, to .KiiO.STti.S'JO.
The value of the cotton crop for 1809 may be
stated then, as follows ;
Pounds. Value.
Exported 7^2,615,5)19 4187,762,474,
Spun 435,2:«,88:l 260,576,32!)
Total 1,156,912,812 $148,336,806
1 am indehted to the same gentleman for the
fact that 35,800,700 pounds were spun in 101
Southeru mills, and 39S,-133,133 pounds in 093
Northern miUs,
review op d. a. wells' report.
This report, which has been widely circu¬
lated by the Free Trade League, and has had
some influence irom'its author's po.sitiou as a
Government official, has lately been reviewed
by the Committee on Manufactures of the
House of Representatives at M'asbington, and
their work is a keen and searching expose of
errors in facts and figures, of om'ssions making
half-truths more dangerous than frauk false¬
hoods, and of singular misstatements.
They say that petitions for its review were
"very numerous, and from all parts of the
country, and signed by thousands of persons
interested in almost every department of in¬
dustry," Without examining all parts of it,
they sum up as follows their conclusions
touching some of its leading features ;
"It opens by declaring our material progress
to be 'wonderful,' and 'in a great degree in¬
dependent of legislation,' and then devotes
large space and effort to show tliat this ' won¬
derful ' progress has treen, and is, ohstructed
by legislation,
"It misstates prices, and costs, and aggre¬
gate values of manufactures iu important par¬
ticulars.
" It makes pitiful complaint of some ' taxes'
or tariffs, and then proposes otiiers much
heavier; for instance, its complaint of an al¬
leged 'tax' of $3,999,000 onsalt, audits pro¬
posal of a ' tax ' or taritl of $60,009,000 on su¬
gar, coffee, and tea.
"It umlerrates manufactures and overrates
agriculture, while both branches of industry
are best served liy the impartial truth.
"It make.s unfair and unreliable statements
toueiiiiig the condition of tlie farmer, as af¬
fected by the currencv and the tariff
" lUs assertion of the costs of freights, and
their inlluence as protection to the manufac¬
turers in the interior, is a gross mistake or
misstatement.
"It greatly underrates the number of per¬
sons employed iu manufactures.
" It unfairly, and uiitrutiifuliy, depreciates
the condition of our artizaus aud laborci-s.
" It proposes to raise the revenue needed by
the Government by such import duties as will
euhancc the cost of foreign food, etc., consumed
by our laborers,while denying to them adequate
orotection against the invasion of foreign la¬
bor-products competing with their own.
" It seeks to array class against class, and
section against section, sowing the seeds of
hate, strife, and disunion, which, scattered
long ago for like purposes, sprang up aud bore
fruit, the taste of which is still bitter.n
lips ; and it doea this with preternltn
icucc toward those whom it woule/
en, lave, and destrov.
"Such are some of its purpn-cs,rj
tion.s, and errors, and \our cooi'uiltt
that they fully confirm the opinionoi _
tioners, that its recommendatiOM "j.
most dangerous guide to legislation."
Sixty pages are crowded with fads,
proved, on the Farmer Question, on Ifj
Woolens, Cotton, Iron, Freights, li
etc., etc.
Two of tiie committee, inclininr
trade, of course did not sign this rstis
seven members sign it.
Tire review is strong and makes
weak and contradictory.
^'Toible exhibiting some of the leading ajm
productions subject to duty when
the United States, together with the nte
on :
Rye and barley 15 cts. peri
Corn and oats 10 cts. ptri
Wheat 20 rts. ptrfe
Flax seed 16 cts. per a
Beef and pork 1 ct. per
Bacon and lard 2 cts. per ii
Butter and cheese 4 cts. per[i
Wool 12 cts. per f
Apples, dried and green.. 10 per cent
Cider 30 per cent
Live stock 20 per cent
Flax $1 per ton.
Hetnp $40 per ton,
'■ Now, without taking into the aceoti
but the most simple and common p
of the farm, it wiii be found that
000,000 currency value of agricultunipt
tions were imported into the Uniteds
during the fiscal year ending June39,
which duties amounting to more thattlti ^
000 were paid; and If farmers need
tection they have only to ask it. Bntlto
under no such necessity; their waiti&i"
totally different direction. To be pntpa
and hapipy the farmer needs a steady aad'.
munerating home market; and howtl
get it't Certainly not by espousing frc
measure.^, as demanded by and intiieiais
of British capitaiiists. New Yorkimporlffi
jobbers, as well a.s Eastern railroad
olists, the effect of which, if carried oat,"
be to bring him in direct competition nil)
pauper labor of Europe. If the famti
this country shaU allow themselves l
carried away by the specious and deiu-ri
of free-trade moiiopioiies, whether at be
abroad, can they expect a better fate Hal
which has fallen to the farmers of fori;"
or Turkey, wiio.se women are oompell.
work in tiie fields for the pittance of foari ,
per day, and whose men work for 1®
one fourth the sum paid to the maielabos ,,
America?"—Hon, J. T. WmsoK, Jit
Ohio.
WHY IS PROrECriON NECESSiM,
That a country possessing so mnehitl'
vigor as our own should need protectionf.'I
the competition of any other peoniebi H
denied. That such necessity existe.bos
is proven by tiie fact that every "trvtn
period in our history has ended inal
11
kniptcy of the people, with bank-
■ortionitionp, and State and jfcucral
.te ; and tiiat the only way in which
covered from these mitfortunes has
e aaoption of the protective poiicy.
on money is nearly double here
in England; wases nearly double,
" local taxes for National, ^late and
fairs, foreisners pay nothing; and
mufaeturers pay less at home than
: Taxes for our free schools count
'0,000,000 yearly, and are cheerfully
our manufacturers and workers,
a dollar is paid, save in a few cx-
- cases, to educate the children of
)r workmen by British or other
lauufactuiers, as they have no free
tern.
Hewitt, Commissiouer to the Paris
u in 1807, savs, that in the manufac-
stricts of Enalaud there are more
in the poor-housts than in the
apiial, taxes and labor as low as in
and with their experience, we are
lals, and on the erouud of this in-
aaainst us, prutectioii is just and
, in the development of our great
, the varied employment of labor and
enlargement of our home market,
ncrease of our productive power, the
ur wealth.
ture of the competition on the part
. Britain, against which our home
ins and home labor have to contend,
ly stated iii the following extract
" Report of the Commissioner ap-
■inder the Provi.-ioiis of the 'Act 5
t. e. 99,' to inquire into the opera-
lat act, and into the state of the popu-
the Mining Districts, 1854 Prc-
0 both Houses of Parliament by
-1 of Her Majesty," p. 20.
ieve that the laboring classes gencr-
'Ihe manufacturing districts ot this
• and cspeciallv in the iron and coal
are very little aware of the extent to
ey are oiten indebted for their being
.1 at all, to the immense losses which
iloyers voluntarily incur in had times
to dcstrov foreign competition, and
id keep possession of foreign markets,
e instauces are well known of em-
aving in such times carried on their
. a loss amounting in the aggregate to
four hundred thousand pounds in the
■ mauy years. If the. efforts of those
lourage the combinations to restrict
mt of labor, and to produce strikes,
ae successlul for any length of time,
t accmiiulalion of capital could no
le made, which enable a few of the
•ealthy eapitidists to overwhelm all
• mmpetition in limes of great deprcs-
,1 tlma to clear the way for the whole
step in when prices revive, and to
a great business before foreign cap-
again accumulate to such an extent as
le to establish a competition in prices
ii' chance of success. 'The large capi-
lis coLiufry are the great instruments
■re (if the exprcssicn may be allowed)
he competing capital of foreign coun-
■ d arc the mod essential instruments
laining, by which our manufacturing
cy can be maintained; the other ele-
t
ments—cheap labor, abundance of raw mate¬
rials. means of communication, and skilled
labor—being rapidiy in piocets of being equal¬
ized."
We are told how tariffs raise prices, but
not how dependence on foreign markets low¬
ers them to the farmer. Every bushel of our
gi-ain, every pound of our provisions, sent to
Bntish markets, tends to lower prices, and
Liverpool governs New Yorkand Chicago, and
will so long as our home manufaciures and
home demands are kept down. Ho that the loss
comes on the whole crop.
Suppo.-e our supply reduces British prices
six pence or twelve cents a bushel; on a thou¬
sand million bushels tliis would be $120,000,
000 a year, lost on our- farmer's grain,,aud this
is a low estimate.
Ireland and India are fair examples of the
effect which it has upon the agriciilturists of a
country to allow its manufactures to be broken
down by competition with a foreign and
stronger rival. 1 hree-quarters of a century
ago the general manufactures of Ireland rival¬
led in prosperity thoso of England. The Irish
linens were. Indeed, superior to all others, and
the woolens stood nearly as high. As a con¬
sequence, the large portion of her peopls en¬
gaged in manufactures, consumed all the
products of her farmers, while her fanners
could consume but a small portion of her
manufactures. These she exported, and so
maintained an extensive importation of trop¬
ical products. Could Ireland then have con¬
trolled her own legislation and protected her
manufactures from being broken down by
competition with those of England, she would
still have been a prosperous nation, though
she could not, for want of iron and coal, have
carried her manulactures to so high periec-
lion as those of England. But instead of this,
the union with En -land, by admitting English
goods free of tariffs, broke down Irish manu¬
factures, turned her whole people into fanners,
while giving them no market for their produce,
gave rise to an exhausting and wasteful mode
of farming, bv compel dug the raising of one
crop year after year on the same soil, without
rotation, and so brought on the potato rot,
and other causes of famine, which reduced
her population in a few years, from eight mil¬
lions to tive millions, and is still reducing
them by emigration.
A century ago India had never known a
famine. Her people were so divided between
manufactures and agriculture that each class
produced what the other needed to consume.
Not only did her native hand-looms weave the
finest cottons, and woolens or cashmeres, but
the richest silks, such a.s for centuries had
been carried from India acroas the deserts of
Central Asia on camels to Europe But free
trade was carried into India at the point of
Eugland's bayonets, and with it came the de¬
struction of Indian manufactures, and the
turning out of employment of miUious of
laborers. Theoretically they were free to buy
in the cheapest market and sell in the dearest,
but, in fact, they could sell nothing and buy
nothing, farmers could not .ell their crops
because there was nobody producing anything
but crops. Weavers could not sell" their
cloths because the English undersold them.
Those who made tbeii' cloths in England did
12
not buy their (irops, because they could buy
them cheaper ueircr home. Uence the poor
Hindoos had uo reeourso but to starve and
die by milliona, by tlie roadsides, and in tlie
lield . Famines prevailed periodically, as inanv
as two inillious of persons dyiuij in a single
year, and this repeatedly. Now the Coolies are
beiuf; exported from India like the Irish from
Ireland in search of bread. Of what avail to
them the privileRC of buying cheap and selling
dear when they have nothing to sell and noth¬
ing with which to buy. tukker, Spain and
PouTCreAL, under free trade, present a like
picture of poycrty and dependence. — The
SurcatL.
Illinoi.s, Indiana, Michigan, Missouri,
Iowa and Wisconsin have in each an average
of 2.5,000 women and children, who are willing
to work, but who now earn comparatively
noihina', and are practically a dead weight
on the industry of the remainder of the pro¬
ducers. If you had cotton, woolen, iron and
other inanutactunng establishments scattered
over these and other Western and Southern
States, all these persons could get employment
at from three to live dollars per week. Let us
see what this number of persons would earn at
an average of four dollars per week, in ten
years. In one week they would earn $(500,000;
in one month, $2,400,001); in one year, $14,400,-
000; in 10 years, $144,000,000. Tou can easily
see that if these Slates could utilize all this
unproductive labor, in 10 years after your
works were in full operation, you could have
$100,000,000 ill your Savings Banks just as well
as the working people of the States and
countries now enjoying the benefits of manu¬
factures as well as of agriculture.
No small item this, in these days when
women are asking, and rightly too, for means
of self-support.
Luropean and American wages for six
days (a week) work, in eighty dillercnt trades,
aggregate $1,224 50 in this country, and $2211
in Euroiie, according to a careful examination
by M W. Field, of Detroit.
To make the West (and South as welll
peruianenlly iiroeiierous, with a steady and
cou^taut market at home, with ability to keep
our lauds rich, and with power to be financial¬
ly independeut, bring the manufacturers into
our neighborhood, carry our wool and other
products direct to them, make our own ex¬
changes, and set up our sons and daughters in
home-manufactures as well as trade and farm¬
ing. Follow thus tenor tw nty years and the
surjilus wealth of the East and of Europe will
be drawn liere, machinery, s.iill, and labor will
come with it, our westom cities will be great
centers of exchange, and bankers in Chicago,
St. Louis and Cincinnati will not be compelled
to sneeze every time the B.iring'S in London,
or the brokers in New York take snuff.
Give us the varied industrt of farm and
mechanism and factory, and the blending of
these varied experiences and vocations, the
meeting and mingling of these many lile-cur-
rents, tinged and shaped by such wide mastery
of man over Nature's forc.s and materials, is
full 01 benefiL It is civilization, culture, wealth
of soul as well as of purse. To the farmer it is
increase of the produce of his aeres, economy
of exchange, work of hand or brain, for what¬
ever gift of power or charatl-
inay posse.ss, instant and Oig
variety of labor, and all the *
inventive genius pulsing Ikt.,
quiet of his life in the fields,,,
narrowness or stagnation, ti.
more enjoy Nature's beautj,
make her forces serve him.
imports and farm kg
The value of the commodit
ing the year ending June 30,H
02<1,,54L" Tlie value of tea, coji
imported daring the same pnii
593,618, and as these articles ar
in the United States, we *il
amount leaving the total valip
commodities imported JKiUi
value.) The commodities cu!
manufaetures of wool, cotton,-d
lead, leather, chemicals, flax aal
ture), all of which we can *ill
produce in the United States, iil
estimated that at least M
women and children are noi
England and other foreign cna
work of mauufacturicg fhr r
mentioned for the people of iter
The hands require food, and tin
consumed will greatly exceed lie
of all the breadstufis and prori,
exported to foreign countries dni
year. We exported ae follows
Breadetufts
Provisions
Total,
It has been estimated ttatiif
ingmen, taking the average, eis-i
food of various kinds $120 percr)
estimate the laborers now emplo)
work in other countries woaldt)
to the value of $120,000,000 sasjil
they were employed wilhrntkefi
making the sane articles thetmii
ing for our use in Europe. Stra
elans estimate that, taking lilt*
manufaeturing Jndustries, Sptti
whole value of the prodnit rtji
food opusumed by the laborfis ii
tion of the woik. I think SOpti
considered a fair estimate in tbl-
it is well known tliat yon can li
" with board" for at least or
wages than you can where the It
himself.
At this estimate, if we areto-dif
1,000,000 of laborers to do onrw
counfrics, and if the value of 'ii
ties produced by that labor lei
the v,aluc of the food consumed I
number of laborei-s in the Uuiteai
be .5120,129,876 being $45,630,391
the total value of food exporledti
States during the year 1369.
It appears then that uotirilU '
boast of the free traders as to of
exporters of breadstuBs," wr
porting more food than any oMc'
world.
We pay for the food consunnjl
British and European workeii,
the goods they make, wheuweot J
them here.
13
, therefore, au importont ques-
tners to consider. Would it
^"5, and for our interests, to
ket at home for the vast
„ our European laborers re-
■'' uld wt not lavor such leeisla-
urage the immigration of the
' and" laborers, us well as the
- country oi the capital and
in operation, and kept in
"'.rope to supply the American
• ods, wares and merchandise?
s principle of political ecosomy
cer and consumer are most
'tin placed side by side, and
lizes the substantial benctit of
> actory located near the farm,
.ind, how exhaustine and suici-
rof raising grain for shipment
rad paying the expense of
■ to feed the laborers in Eu-
are foolish enough to employ
work. Can we prosper, grow
■_ap our resources, diversify
tnd employ owr labor profitably
_ viy, by adopting the fnendly
iv^s in Europe, which would
"the workshop of the world,"
other work tit only for barba-
—the raising of raw products
- unfavorable markets; or, in
.-selling the whole skins for six-
i"ig the tails back for a shilling
' ■h. M. W. Eiblu.
Michigan, Wisconsin, or Iowa,
ses wool. A watevfail is heard
ir the put! of a steam engine,
..from the adjacent forest; but
n to the seaboard, and the cloth
- .ie tools he uses, brought from
" in a foreign land, thousands of
is wheat, corn and cattle, go to
, 'or to Europe to be sold, al-
'.ice goterned by a foreigx
. 2 gets that price, less the cost
ation and commission, and
HipwRECE.. Spend half these
, ig the water-wheel in place,
"-earn might be his servant; or
vaste power of the steam engine
wield trip-hammers, and his
; and his tools made. Naturallv,
with its great extent of rich
"-1 surplus to send away, while
with its water-power, capital,
^■•population, will manufacture
we should manufacture also,
room for both, and no jealousy
The Northwest, with raw
• with food cheap and abundant,
-ufacture with less expense than
lerior, in Illinois, Indiana, Wis-
souri, in Ohio and Kentucky,
mineral wealth—coal and iron,
't. We w.Tut such conditions as
lasting success of our mining
"acturer that grow therefrom,
not the West make its own iron
•1 send abroad fine qualities for
But now English iron comes to
inuati and St. Louis, sent bv
Capitalists," who, as they them-
- suffer losses for a while, " to
break down competition," and "step In for
the whole trade, when prices revive,"—mak¬
ing us, in the end of course, pay both their
losses and profits. What folly in usl
There was such an increase in the wool
product, not only in our country, but in South
America, Austria and Africa, that the price of
wool in London fell eleven eentsa pound, before
our wool tariff of 18tt7 was passed.
D. A. TVclls, in his report, tries to show
that the tariff made wool lower, yet he argues
consistently that tariffs make other articles
higher. Consistency isa jewel!
England protected her indmstries for 300
years before she left them to free-trade, so-
called, which they have worked undcrfor forty
years past. She is now no nearer free-trade
than the United States, since she collects the
whole interest on her national debt in duties
on imports. But her tariff is levied for reve¬
nue only, as well it may be, since her manufac-
tu*es stand in the same relation to those of
other countries, as the lion among the beasts,
needing no protection. The stronger never
seek protection against the weaker. Yet even
in England the protectionist party is increas¬
ing, and her silk, worsted, and other fine goods
manufacturers' are demanding protection from
the labor-degrading competition witn France.
The increase of produce, merchandise,
etc., carried over our railroads within 11) years,
has been, in quantity, more than double, or
two and a-halftimes the amount in 1360, In
value we carry now ?14 w orth to every SI
worth carried then. This is the wav tariffs are
" ruining the country "!
Mechi says that, in 1852, England imported
$90,000,000 worth of cotton, manufactured it,
supplied the wants of her own people, and had
$150,000,000 in cotton goods to export.
In 1858 and '59 the yearly profit on the cot¬
ton manufactures of Great Britain was $188,-
000,000, while the total value of our cotton crop
was but $184,000,000. Why not keep this
profit at home ? Straw is of very little value
m its raw state, but imported from Italy in
fine work is woith $10,000 per ton. 'Why not
add the value here ?
Shoddy is used in England at the rate of
65,000,000 pounds a year, and $30,000,000
worth of cloths arc made from it. In the
great Expositions of over 2,000 samples of
woolens made in the Northwest, shown at
Chicago, Cincinnati and Indianapolis, no shod¬
dy was in any of the goods. Which is best, to
pay $5 per pound for Euglish shoddy cloths,
or buy honest cloths, at fair prices, made at
home?
The London Mining Journal (England)
says of the " American Free Trade League ; "
"If the League succeed we may expect a very
large trade with the United States." With
that " very large trade " we shall have a very
large debt to pay, with decreased ability to
pay it.
We export axes, shovels, hoes and agricul¬
tural implements, competiug with England,
yet it is said the tarifl makes farm tools enor¬
mously high. How is it?
The tobacco which England imports al¬
most wholly from us, pay? a tariff of over $32;-
14
00i>,0f)0 a year, and yet tliey want free trade on
the articles they send us!
ip i'ueke bb mon"opor-t of trade and money
power anywhere, it is that of tlie New York
importers, who brim; into the eountry over
$;jt)0,l)00,')01) of foreis;n f;oo;ls veariy, and, with
the bankers, control a ba- inesa far greater than
that sum. W'e do not brand these men as
"bloated monopolists," lea vim; the bandyin;;
of Bueh ei)ithots to free traders, but no such
enormous business and power, in few hands,
can oe found la our country among our manu¬
facturers.
We want large manufactures, united with
our internal commerce, to build up interior
cities in the West and South, and prevent
New York from overshadowing our business
and linanees.
Three importiutr firms in New York sell
§150,000,000 .yearly, and employ in their busi¬
ness about 3,000 person.s. Manufacturers
turnins; out an equal value of domestic goods
would employ at least 75,000 workers. Give
the people varied employ, aud build up interior
cities and towns.
Thus the great seaboard cities will grow and
thrive, but not control and overshadow.
A nandt sum for lioys (or men) to figure up
is the rise in value of farms and the increased
market prices, not onlv of grain, but ofiieri.sha-
ble fruits and vegetables, created by putting
mills and factories near the farms, For exam¬
ple : suppose a wcolen factory or iron mill cost¬
ing §50(3.000 erected and in operation, what
per-centage will it add to value of crops and
price of farms for 10 miles around? To help a
little,it can be stated, that the iron mills at and
near Youiigstown, Ohio, use up the farm pro¬
ducts of the Mahoning Valley, and send to To¬
ledo, Chicago, etc., for §1,000,000 worth of
food a year. Cypher it out, boys !
what british free trade lieaks.
In a speech m the House of Lords, Lord
Goderich said: " Other nations knew, a.s well
as the noble lord opposite, and those who act¬
ed with him, that what we (the English) meant
by free trade, was nothing more nor less than
by means of the great advantages we enjoyed,
to get the monopoly of all their markets for our
manufactures, and to prevent them, one and
all,from ever becoming manufacturing nations."
" The policy that France acted on was that
of encouraging its native manufactures, and it
was a wise policy; because, if it were freely to
admit our manufactures, it would speedily be
reduced to an agriculturalnation, and therefore
a poor nation, as all must be that depend ex¬
clusively upon agriculture."
So we learn from this precious revelation,
that " British free trade' really meaxs the
monopoly op all markets, and the break¬
ing down op all manupactcres, except
THEIR ow^N. This English nobleman has at
least the merit of frankness
Lord Brougham, in the House of Commons,
made the benevolent statement that " England
could atlord to bear some loss on the e.xport of
her goo.ls,/or tTie purpose of destroying foreign
manufactures in their cradle.''''
who pays ?
It is no part of my intent or wisl i'
wholesale charges against believer! e
trade; hut who lead and furnish the j
of war" forthi.s movement? Let a.#
§4d,0i)0 rai.sed in May, ISO'J, for tbeFr
League in New York, as given by tbu;.
we find contributors as follows: A. B,
& Co., drug importers, relatives ofliiej
bankers Baring Brothers, §0,3.57; B
shall. Treasurer of the League, agent if
Ball line of Liverpool packets, foreign j
§5,51)0; Grinnell, Mintnrn & Co., Jli
brother-in-law to Baring, §3.800; Mei.-n
Liverpool and London Globe Insnraa;
§843; Naylor <fc Co., English steelhoa-c.
Mall & Co., importers, Mall, Belgian (i
§500; George Ward, banker, ageni 1
Brothers, .§500, and so on througli, t
paid by men closely linked with loreign
ests. These men are simply taking j
care of themselves and their kin, thatt
It this can be done consistently m
country's good, all well; but it is a lit
gular that these gentlemen, of foreign o
tions are so much more solicitous for At
interests than men of wealth not tliiti
with British movements and ideas. IP
don ilinircg Journal says; "If this L
Bueeeeds in the United States wemajk/f,
very large trade with that country."
It recalls the days of 1840, when b
Glasgow and Manciiester subscribal SB
to lower our tarifi, and some of tlien
foolish enough afterward to say theymue
got their money back by breaking don
factories, and then selling us goods ill
own prices.
opinions of distinguished hb
Our forefathers felt that they mnst
commerciai and industrial indcpenJeji-,
wa.vs denied them by England, ortlieira
leai indeiiendence would be but an eij
name. The neces■^ily of a PEOTECTiniM
for the States, was a mam snbjttf
deliberation at the first convention, in l)
of delegates at Annapolis met to w.j
the formation of a Constitution, and ni
the Convention of. 1787, hi which th"
stitutiou was framed. '
Washington, as President, met theJM'
gress, clad in a suit of domestic minnhd
and the second Act passed by ihaltoii.i
had the following preamble:
" Whereas, It is necessary for the sB'i
of Government, for the discharge of the '
of the United States, and for the
AGEMENT and protection of mandticlo
that duties be laid on goods, wares
chandise imported. Be it enacted," elt-
ihis bill being passed, was signed bvr
ington, Julv 4, 1789, marking thus IM-
truth no doubt deeply felt by him, and»;
august body, that the birth of po''f"
dom should be followed by that of ind'-'
independence, that a great nation nikliri
its high destiny—free and independenia-
Jefferson said to Benjamin Austin »'
"You tell ine I am quoted bytb?"
wish to continue our dependence on E'-
for manufactures. There was a time "
might have been so quote.i withsom-'b'
* * * We have sines expent
15
lid not then believe—that theio
. 5rofligaey and power enoueh to ex-
from the held of intcrchantce with
ons ; that to be independent for the
af life we mu«t faliricate them onr-
Ve must now place the manufacturer
e of the auriculturiBt."
gacioub Dr. Franklin, writing from
. 3 Uuniphret Marshall, in 1771, said:
f nianafncturer encouraged in our
..lakes part of a market for provisions
, rselves, and saves so much money to
■ .ry as must otherwise be exported to
> lanufactures and supplies. Here, in
it is well known and undersood that
_ a manufacture is established, employ-
_iberof hands, it raises the value of
^ibout; partly by the greater demand
"aand, and partly from the plenty of
-awn there by the business.
.ems, therefore, the interest of
farmers and owners of land, to
ge ocr manufactures in prefer-
foreign ones." Wise words, and
as then.
. .vate letter, in 1824, Andrew Jack-
" Take trom our agnculture 600,u00
,nen and children, to be employed in
ures. and you will at once give a home
■. or more breadstufifs than all Europe
i us. We have beeu too long subject
lic.v of British merchants. It is time
d become a little more American-
, when Abraham Lincoln, our mur-
■ lef Magistrate, was nominated to the
_re, he made a speech, in which he
- in favor of the internal improvement
. lid a hiqh protective tariff."
held the same views all his life.
-C Carey, of Philadelphia, says:
" ticn. as eatab ' British free trade as
L 813,1828. 1812. established in 1817. 1834,
. hat of '861 is 1816 and 1857. bequeathed
.•ive, to its free to its successor: Laiior
. lessor : Great everywhere seeking to be
■ It labor. Wages employed. Wages low
money cheap, and money high. Public
1 private reve- and private revenues
.. and immiOTa- small and steadily de-
" t and steadily creasing. Immigration
Public and declining. Public and
iperty great be- private bankruptcy near-
orevioiis piece-ly universal. Growing
•iw ing National'national dependence.
.. nee. I
. is the history of the past. Let our
- tudy It, and "they w ill, as 1 think, un-
- the causes of the prosperity of tlie
That done, let them determine for
- es whether to go forward in the direc-
. idivldual and National independeuce,
: t of growing dependence, both Na-
■1 individual."
, weli-known philanthropist, Peter
of New York, gives his views as fol-
, e read your statement and the recom-
. ns of your Association for the promo-
...protection of American Industry, ana
. .pprove of everv word and seniiment
"tpressed. Believing firmly that ihe
^ ible. source of National wealth will
.' found in a well directed industry of
The Hon. J. W. MoClurg, of Missouri,
"We must become manufacturers, as well as
producers Irom the soi', and build up cities
and towns of manufacturersandopcratives who
will purchase our meat and our bread, without
the deduction of high transportation, and sell
to us shoes and clothing and, if needs be,
wines and cigars, witbout tlie addition of
traiisportion and the profits of importers and
one or more middle merchants. Thus we will
keep our coin at home and be independent of
other nations. Otherwise we must necessarily
become, as a people, what an improvident
farmer becomes, who sells his grain at low
prices to pay, at hij'h prices, for the comforts
and luxuries of life?'
James M. Cooper, of Pittsburgh, writes
that:
" No proposition can be more clearly proven
than that tiie protection of American indus¬
try in all its branches is so closely interwoven
with the general welfare that the neglect
of any one of them is an attack upon the
whole.
"The farmer, miner, mechanic, laborer and
manufacturer are aU wedded to the same des¬
tiny, and the interests of all must flourish or
languish together, as tlie wisdom of our law¬
givers shall or shall not afford adequate pro¬
tection to American industry."
5Ien of America, choose between the words
of these great Americaus and the British cry
of free trade.
Farmers, mechanics, mauufacturers, there
is no conttict of interest between you. " Each
for all, all for each," is the divine law, in poli¬
tical economy, as well as in ethics or religion.
The permanent success of one branch of in¬
dustry is only secured by the prosperity of all.
immigration.
We are told of the bad effects of protective
legislation on the people, how " the rich are
growing richer, and the poor poorer;" how
the farmers sutter from high prices of goods,
etc. But how is it that emigrants come to us
more rafiidly than ever ?
From 1820 to 1860 we had 5,4.59,421 arrivals,
in forty ye,ars, mostly working peopie, hut
from 1800"to 1868, in only eight years, 1,934,712
persons came to us from Great Britain and
Europe, almost wholly.
In three months, ending June 30, 1870, 5,523
emigrants from Canada came to Port Huron,
Michigan, a town on the St. (ilalr River, near
Lake Huron. We are told how cheap clothes
and other goods are in free trade Canada, hut,
strangely "enough, the living tide sets to us
/roin "that paradise of cheapness, and many
come while lew return 1
From the proceedings in Congress, on April
14th, an amendment being up for reducing ihe
tariff on hemp, we extract the following:
"In the cousc of the discussion, Mr. Butler
declared that he did not wish to see the day
when manufactures would flourish in the West,
tor where manufactures flourish agriculture
goes down."
Hon. B. F. Butler would do well to take a
few les.-oub from some of our Western farmers,
and surelv should be shrewd enough mean¬
while to keep still and not expogq bis igug-
rauce on this matter again,
16
In twbntt-eiant (Jountibs in Ireland the
waives of farm l.il)orer3 per mek, in gold, range
from six shillings sterling, to tea shillings, and
average about eight shUlings, or 1.78 cents,
wit/tout board.
In five counties the range for six months,
without board, is from $80 to $00. See U.S.
Agricultural Report, .July, 1870.
There is some nonsense in our American
heads on one matter. An Englishman is proud
of wearing English cloths and using English
articles of all kinds, and will always have them,
if possible or reasonable. So with a French¬
man ; but an average American is almost as¬
hamed of wearing or using articles made at
home. The men must have French or Eng¬
lish or German cloths, and be shod in
"French calf;" the women must be "dear
creatures" in one sense at least, clan in stufls
"farfetched and dear-bought" from Europe
and "farthest Ind." So trong is this absurd
notion that Jersey hats are marked "Parisien"
(as Jersey cider" is branded champagne, the
drinker none the wiser); beautiful American
sewing silk, equal to any in the world, is
labeled Italian, and even our woolens some¬
times have foreign labels What absurdity to
prefer the stranger to him who works in your
midst. An Englishman's dream U, that the
" rest of mankind," and especially we Ameri¬
cans in the West, are to raise raw materials
and food, to be sold cheap, and expenses of
transit to their markets paid, and to be con¬
sumed by them and manufactured in their
mills, to be sent abroad again and sold at .good
profits to an obedient and docile world ! This
is our "manifest destiny"—all Englishmen
from John Stuart Mill down to Laird of Ala¬
bama memory being witness. It is chronic
with them, and hereditary. But that d'-eam
must never be realized.
We are Americans, and must have an
American policy, shaped in view of the
wages of intelligent labor as compared with
the pauper labor of the Old World, the benefit
of a larger home market for our farmers, the
rates of interest, the needs and obligations of
our Government, and a recognition of the fair
c aim of American artisans to do the work
which we need and which they can perform;
and such policv, benefiting all sections, should
have the hearty support of our people.
The .-olid and lasting prosperity ot the honor¬
able and sagacious importing merchant, is best
helped by a policy which develops oaroti
resources, builds up a great internal commeR-
and adds to our wealth, so that we. can»fj
pay for such imports as will always be wanW
The problem for each nation is, how bestti
develop its resources, employ its labor, m
encourage skill and genius.
Manufactures must be built up, mine;
opened, farms improved, and Governineiilei.
penses paid, and tariffs are established forjiro-
lection and revenue. Without such pi'ottcSoii.
foreign labor at lower wages, capital more
abundant and cheaper, and skill longer traink
in some older country, would prevent the
growth of this varied iiidastry, and keepmle
labor half employed in but few ways; hut wlH
it there is larger and better employ for labor
.and sklU, and articles made at home poi
more perfect and cheaper. When any orticif
needs no such protection, the tariff can be re¬
duced or abolished, and thus real free tradefe
reached through protection.
Inventive skill must be encouraged, patenli
are issued—each patent a prohibitory tan!-
nnd thus useful devices increased. Aba-s
may exist, but the common good is helped.
Genius must be called out in literature, aol
copyrights are given—each copyright a "pro¬
tection "—and the people gain in food for
mind and soul.
Thus a nation builds up solid wealth forifc
share in the world's commerce, while the life
and culture of its people grow broad and rid
Speculative theorists, and learned professon,
who knew more of the dead past than the lit-
log present, niore of the thought and life ol
Greece or Rome, or Hindostan, than of the
work of hand and brain in Wisconsin ortlaro-
lina, or New England, may talk of "the phil-
anthrophv of free trade," and imagine protec¬
tion to home industry a selfish policy, rnakios
the few rich; but for workingmen and womei
the choice is between "free trade" with ihe
pauper pay and hopeless life of British wort-
shops, and fair "protection" with the hetler
wages of Americans, and hope for ahkbcr
futui-e for labor.
For Western farmers, the choice is between
"free trade" with distant markets, low
prices, and soil growing jioor, and protection
to home industry, with factories at his door,
and in the East, home markets and soil growing
richer.
G. B. STEBBKS.
Detroit, Mich., Sept., 1870.
" The American Association op Home Industries." Chicago, 111., headquar¬
ters. Officers in different States. George S. Bowen, Pres.
A. B. Meeker, Treas.
F. B. Norton, Sac'y.
" The Bure.au," 101 Wabash Avenue, Chicago, 111. Monthly. 50 large png®®-
$3.00 per year. Commerce, Manufactures, and General Industries. Large and wid'
circulation, excellent advertising journal, gives valuable facts and able arguments in
favor of Home Industry.
Prolsclioi of oir Iniistry-DeTeloiiBieil of oirEesoirces
LA.BOII.
Wages and Living in Europe and America—
75 cts. vs. $4.00 per day.
RICE AND POTATOES "AVERAGE LUXURIES."
HOW WORKMEN LITE IN ENGLANT).
The London correspondent of the New York
"imes gives a most deplorable picture of the
^, oor ol the large cities of England. Millions
. f people in England live almost entirely npon
aker's bread. Here, for example, is the way
f life of a sober, hard-working Englishman,
■'ho earns 18s. a week (say $4 50 gold stun
'anl), and has a wife and six children. He
' either drinks nor smokes, and hands over his
" hole w.iges to his wife. This is a common
■ ractice in well-ordered families. She pays 4s
- week fbr rent; Is for coals; candles, soap,
■-.c., 9d.; a penny a week each for the six
lildren to a liurial clnb, 6d.; on a doctor's
li Ul due. Is. Here are 7s. 3d. of the ISs. gone,
Liid nothing to eat Nov the bill of fare for
■. lose eight persons. One pound of bread a
r..jy for each—the children scarcely taste any-
Ming else—comes to 7s. a week ; 30 pounds of
; otitoes. 8d.; one pound of butcher's meat on
-.indav, and two poum s of salt pork for week
. lys, ^3.; one pound of sugar, half pound of
itter, one ounce tea, 13d., make up the
eek's account. No milk, no fruit, no cloth-
, ig. The only way they can have that is for
le children to get work or die; then some-
.ling would come in from the burial club.
'. housands and thousands of men work hard
" rtwo thirds of these wages, or less.
, r'l'he New York World tells of a host of em-
rant mechanics landing at Castle Garden,
ho could not live in the Old World, and of
nglish masons and carpenters among them,
. lling of getting but $4 50 to $7 50 per week
-.gold, and paying $3 for miserable board,
jr hile laborers get from $3 to 85. Who ever
- sard of ship loads of American meehanics
' nding in Liverpool, to escape starvation and
ill ;t better pay? A Mr. Hodgkitis, of New
ork, an Enghshman and a ree-trader, said
tely in an essay at Brooklyn, that the ore
i -id coal and limestone, for maidng iron, were
ij» cheap and as abundant in Pcnusylvania as
England, or more so, but the labor was
i''-ieaperin Engimd, giving them tne advan
ge. 1 go for protecting labor in this conn
y, and not for pushing it down to the pauper
level of England with her free-trade theories.
A correspondent of the New York Evening
Past gives the wages of five edge tool makers
in that city as 855 33 a week in gold, and 835
in London, and the Post tries to make out that
Engli.^h workmen e m dve as well as ours, and
says that their wi^es will buy more yards of
carpet and popiin, more silk stockings and
spool thread! All well, if men and women
eould eat carpets and use spool thread for
sauee, but three-fourths of a workman's ex¬
penses are for fuel, &c , and for food easier
to masiieate and digest, and cheaper with
us, certainly used with far more varied abun¬
dance.
Savings banks hold mainly the deposits
saved by working people. In 18G0 these banks
in M.tine, New Hanpshire, Massachusetts,
Rhode Island, Philadelphia and Newark, held
856,569,307, and the next year 81,338,304 less.
In 1868 the same banks (witb only one dime
savings bank added) held 8153,833,667, an in¬
crease of $35,064,0:18 over 1867. Similar of-
fieial reports from other regions show a like
result.
EXTRACT EROM THE SPEECH OP THE HON. AUS¬
TIN BLAIR, M. C. OP MICHIGAN—WASHING¬
TON, MARCH 35TH, 1870.
And here it is proper to remember that the
protection of our industries is the protection
of labor Great care is taken to conceal this
obvious truth from the people. It is the fashion
with the importers, who are themselves the
most wealthy and aristocratic class in the
country, to denounce tiie manufacturers as a
body of rich monopolists who are amassing
wealth out of tlie taxation of the people, while
they aflect to pity the impoverished operatives.
But it needs no argument to prove to an intel¬
ligent man that in this country the success of
the employers means increased wages to the
employed. The operatives are now so intelli¬
gent and well-organized that they are enabled
to know boih the amount of wages which they
are e.ititled fainy to demand and the most
effectual methods for enforcing that demand.
Every day's experience is pro,ing that the
y
lime Lfls vn^sed l> whin t)ie cr] lli.liit will he
nble 1o deprive the luborer of bib liiir d.iue iii
Ibe prolilb of Ibe busiueit-.
Wages ill tliis 00011117 ere ncccBiarily high.
The sparscness of po] ulalioii end tiic great
jliundaiicc with cheai'nesK of,'and niiibee. it so.
The intelligent laboier nerd not be 11 siipplient
for einploMiienl ; he ran, 11s a last resort, quit
the workshoj) and take a honiesteiid out of the
public lands which are always o|ien to hini. It
1= inipoBsil.le, therefore, to place hini ui on the
Eurojiean rate of wages. Free trade, however,
requires just this, ard that is just what pio
teetion intends to prevent and does prevent.
Can anytlnrig be clearer than this, tliat free
trade means low wugeo ?
Sir, all this clamor ag.ainst the tariff is d"lu-
*ive. It has had its origin with a very few per-
ions. Among the people there are ten com¬
plaining of the internal revenue taxation where
one complains cf the tarilf. But these latter
are not organized with ahundanee of ineau.s at
their disposal to hire, leeturois and subsidize
nrinting-prcsses. The free-tradeleairue is eon-
trolled by very ciiuningund untcruiiulou.s raiu.
Tbey tliiiik tlie time lias neaily arrived when
the eouiitry will inter upon a period of tcrions
embarrassment, and they intend to take advan¬
tage of the discontent arising out of it to aid
their seliimes. They mean to lay everything
to the tarifl, believing that the uutiiliiking
multitude will not be able to detect the cheal.
I am not afraid of tlieiii. Tire country imdir-
stiinds them, and the good sense of the jieople
will be an overmateh for all their subtkly.
Great calculatious have been made heretofore,
predieated upon the presumed diseoutent of
the people under necessary taxatiou, but tliey
have all failed. The repudialors set on foot a
plan of great ingenuity to deeeiv e the pi ople,
but it did not diceive them ; nor will the free-
trade leagues have any better suecess. The
distresses of the importers on account of the
sufieriugs of the pieople upon the protective
taritl are very intense, no doubt; but they are
always groaning at such a rate that we never
know just when the tears ought to be shed,
f.isteniiig to them one would 'ni)po.-.e thai this
was the poorest, most oppressed eorlntrv 'inil
people in the world. Mr. Wells tells us plainly
that the laborers of this country are notliing
nigh so well paid as they are in the despotic
comitnes of Europe. How strange that under
these cireniiibrunees those well-paid, liappy
European laborers should be flockiug to tins
tax-ridden, tariff impoverished country by hun¬
dreds of tliousaiids every year! How still
more strange and wonderful that a naii )n thus
oppressed from the beginning of its existence
until this time by protective legislation sbould
iievertbiTess have presented to the world the
most remarkable example of prosperitv and
growth which history records! A nation thai
has never for a single year even let down tlie
due measure of protection for its own domes¬
tic industries that it did not hasten to restore
its time-honored policy at the earliest oppor¬
tunity, It has never lacked advice from the
disinterested importers or the equally disinter¬
ested manufacturers of Britain, and "yet it has
steadily preferred to buy its goods of Ameri¬
can manufacturers instead of our loving and
devoted cousins over the water.
To the old catchword, why not buy always
where yon can buy cheaxvest ? T reply that he.
cannot buy at all who dois not et 11. lie li
very stupid eeiini.mist whoeli mort fir a clfj]
miiiket to jnii'ihate in V\bile he ii.akis no fit
I'liration for iiciiniriiig the means to ] urchaH
ill any m.vikit whatever. As in cooking aiiti
hit ii is iiccessaiy first to lalih tlieiabbit. (i
in buying it is necessary first to acquire Iti
means to pay.
SCARCE SrXl'ERCES.
An Irish eniigraut was teilicg how clioij
goods were at home ard in Engh nd. andlioj
niiieli a sixiicnee would buy. borne one taid,
'■ Why did voir leave hoTuc, tlieny" IIis quick
wit llatlreil out in the ready reply, "And sure,
where was the sixpi nee to be got 5" He cam
here after it, as do many tach year.
TROM AuntESS TO WisCOKSIN STATE AOEICn.-
Tl HAL BCCIETT, MADIfcljR, OCTOBER, IStK.il
STATE FAIR, BY E. B. WARD, OF DElBOlt,
MICUICAR.
We are a working people, and when we see
that labor has done so much in raakirig Ike
wildiiries.s blossom end' ilie warte places plid
Willi eiv illzecl lite, we shi uld axqircclate Its
privilege afiO dnty of useinl work.
Each and all tiionld do something forllicit
own and for the common good. We have
small loom for dioiies, or dignified, ginteil
iiiicrs.
For my own part, I want to be busy in
some decint and m-cliil way, and wliiu llie
time comes I can work no longer with baud
or brain, I pray that niy life on earth may
cease.
*********
Capital likes good investments and quickre-
tnrtis, yet it fan live, and wall, and fiikc ad¬
vantage of iioverty. Labor wants coiataut
and deecutlv paid oceuiiation. Divcraiiicd in-
dustry is desirable to the capitalist, but fai
more so, and more necessary to the workiuau.
If I had a million dollars it would nceil M
great wit to go into a region where cush wis
scarce, bieuusc the people wore far from mar-
kiT, loan money to fanners, and swaliovr up
their farms, according to law, if not accordim'
to Gospcl, bv rcleiitle.-B foreclosure of morl-
piges. But supjiose I invested the in 11.iuu dol¬
lars in woolen, or cotton, or iron niiils, bouskl
the products ol tho: e farms for the workmet,
and employed the suitiIhs laborers ; therenied
lie 110 mortgages, but The hinds would rise five
or tin fold tn value.
I should not be acting as a phiiantiiropist
bill simply as a business man, helping otiiciv
to prosper that I iiiignt share in that prosperi¬
ty. A laclory with a capital of #jbO,t)00 vrili
spend about that sum yearly for materials and
labor, and the larger part elrciilatis among the
pieople.
Let the blood stagnate or move too slow in
tlic veins and a man is sick—rne strong aud
ready piulsation is health. So with business;
it is rapid and easy circulation of money, quick
returns, neaniess of jirotlueer and consumer,
demand for lalior of all kirds, and saleaudiU'
tercbange of its pvroiiucts that makes bealtli
and brings wealth.
All able French journal well says;
'■ That which, above all, agriculture claimf,
is the multiplication of manii-ts, its greaUst
need being that of a non-agricultui-al populi-
tion. What is it tlmt present? itself to viw
3
fn our poorest.provinces? A people thinly
I cottercJ an I aliujit entirely rural; not work-
ai within reaca ot a iniricet; consuming oo
ha spot their own local proJuetioui; with
l aw or no towm, no industry, anl no coiu-
' ncrce beyond that which is strictly necessary
. or satisfyinj; the limited wants of their iiihabi-
ants. There the poor proprietor divides the
irodnce with miserable tenants, the inevitable
esult of agriculture without a market. Our
. aanufacturinsi;departments, on theolherhand,
'.'re by far the bast cnitivated. and for that rea-
on the most productive. There our a-jricul-
. ure has proved its ability to realize, by other
. naans, but in au equal deetree, the wonders
if En.^l'^'t huibiudry. Viheremr alarge cen-
fr of consumption is formed^ the neighboring
drm'.rs are the .first to profit bg it. This law is
^.nfallible, and allows of no exception."
OPINIONS OF DISn.saOlSHED MEN.
Our forelathers felt that they must have com-
aercial independcnc 3, always denied them by
■ '-Sanilaad, or their political independence would
-ie but an empty name. The necessity of a
- 'KOTEOTIVB SrSTEM fob THE STATES, Was a
niin subject of deliberation at the first Con-
ention, m 17S6, of delecrates at Annapolis,
t-aet to condder the formitioa of a Con^titu-
■iou, and also at the Convention of 1787, in
-:-fhich the Constitution was framed.
Wa.shm.tton, as President, met the first Con-
:ress, clad in a suit ot domestic manufacture,
■ : nd the second Act passed by that Congress,
■ lad the following preamble:
- - " Whereas, It is necessary for the support
■f Government, for the dischare:e of the debts
' if the United States, and fob the encoh-
oiagemeni and protection of manofac-
_-'ube3, that duties be laid on ijoods, wares and
' aerchimdise imported. Be it enacted," etc.,
■.: tc. Tiiis bill being passed, was signed by
. Vashiugton, July 4, 1789, m irking thus, the
■ .;reat truth no doubt deeply felt by him, and
7)y that august body, that the birth of politi-
• - al freedom should be followed by that of in-
• lustrial independence, that a great nation
^ night fnlfiil its high destiny—free and inde-
- leudent indeed. And Jefferson, made Presi-
.lent by a rival party, w.is too broad in his
. _ iews to differ from Washington on this great
. [uestion. In his second message, he said:
, 'To cultivate peace, and maintain commerce
nd navigation in ail their iawfnl enterprises,
' o foster our fisheries, as nurseries of naviga-
" ion and for the nurture of man, and to pro-
ECT THE MANtfF.VCTDRES ADAPTED TO OHB
iRotXMsiANCEs—tliesp, are the landmarks by
rhieh we are to guide ourselves."
Jefferson said to Benjamin Austin in 1816 :
: "You tell me I am quoted by those who
^rish to continue our dependence on England
or manufactures. There was a time when I
. aigbt have been so quoted with more candor.
^ * We have since experienced
■' what we did not then believe—that there ex-
its both profiigaey and power enough to ex-
. lude us from the field of interchange with
tber nations; that to be independent for the
'\oniforts of life we must fabricate them our-
efves. We mast now place the manufacturer
■ y the side of the agriculturist."
The sagacious Dr. Frankain, writing from
^ London to Humphrey Marshall in 1771, said :
"''"Every manutactui'erenoouruged in our coun¬
try makes part of a market for provisions
within onrselves, and saves so much money to
theeoantry as must otherwise he exported to
ry lor maunfaetares and supplies. Here in
igl-ind it is well known and understood that
whe.iever a mm ifactnre is established, em¬
ploying a nnm'ier of hands, it raises the value
of lands all about; pirtly by the greater de¬
mand near at hand, and partly frotn the plenty
of money drawn there by the business.
"It seems, therefore, the interest of
all odb farmers, and owners of land, to
bncopbaoe our manufactures in prefer-
e.nce to foreign ones." Wise wol'ds, and
true now as then.
In a letter to J. C. Cahall, in 1.818, James
Madison said, "The theory of 'let us alone,'
suppo.ses that all nations concur in a perfect
freedom of commercial intercourse. ■* * *
No nation can safely do so until at least a reci¬
procity be insured to it. A nation leaving its
foreign trade to regulate itself in all cases,
might soon find it regulated by other nations
into a subserviency to foreign interests."
In a private letter, in 18.11. Andrew Jack¬
son said, " fake from our agriculture 600,000
men, women and children, u he employed iu
manufactures, and you will at once give a
ho.iie market for more breadstuffs than all
Europe now gives us. We have been too long
subject to the policy of British merchants. It
is time we should become a little more Aineri-
cauized."
In 1883, when Abraham Lincoln, our mur-
d ered Chief Magistrate, was nominated to the
Legislature, he made a speech in which he
said :
" I am in favor of the interna! improvement
svstem, and a high protective tariff."
And he held tliesame views ail his life.
Henry C. Carey, of Philadelphia says :
"Protection, as estab- British free trade as
liah,;d In 1813, 1818, '8j2, established In 1817, 1834,
gave, as that of 1861 is 1816 and 1857, bequeathed
ready to give, to its free to its successor: Labor
trade successor: Greatbverywhere seeking to bo
demand for labor. Wagesjemployed. Wages low
high and money cheap, and money high. Public
Public and private reve- |and private revenues
naes large, and immigra- small and steadily de-
tion great and steadily creasing. Immigration
increasing. Pa lie and declining. Public and
private property great be-pri ate bankruptcy near-
yond all previous prece- ty universal. Growing
dent. Growing National National dependence,
independence. |
" Such is the history of the past. Let our
farmers study it, and they will, as I think, un¬
derstand tlie causes oi the prosperity of the
present. That done, let them determine for
themselves whether to go forward in the direc¬
tion of individual and National independence,
or in that of growing dependence, both Na¬
tional and individual."
The well-known philanthropist, Peter
Cooper, of New York, gives his views as fol¬
lows :
"I have read your statement and the
recommendations of your Association for the
promotion and protection of American Indus¬
try, and heartiiv approve of every word and
sentiment therein expressed. Believing firmly
that the most reliable source of National wealth
will always be found in a well directed indus¬
try of the people."
The Hon. J. W. McClurg, of Missouri,
says:
4
" We must become inanufflcturcrs, as wellaa
l)|-oducerB Irom llie sob, imu build up cities
imd towns of inunufacturcrs and operatives who
will purchase our meat and our bread, without
the dedtiction of hifjh transportation, and tell
to ua shoes and clothimj and, if needs be,
wines and clears, withoiU the addition of
transportion and the protits of importers and
one of more middle merchants. Thus we will
keep our coin at home aud be independent of
other nations. Otlicrwise we must nceestarily
become, as a people, what an improvident
farmer liecomes, who fclls his p;rain at low
prices to pay, at higii prices, for the comforts
and luxuries of life."
Jamks M. Cooper, of Pittsburgh, writes
that:
" No proposition can be more clearly proven
than that the protection of American indus¬
try in all its branches is so closely interwoven
witli the general welfare that the neglect
of any one of them is an attack upon the
whole.
" The farmer, miner, mechanic, laborer and
manufacturer are all wedded to the same des¬
tiny, and the interests of all niust flourish or
languisli together, as the wisdo.u of our law¬
givers sliall" or shall not afford adequate pro¬
tection to American industry."
Men of America, choose between the words
of these great Americans and the British cry
of free trade.
Farmers, mechanics, manufacturers, there
is uo contliet of interest between you. " Each
for all, all for each," is the divine law, in poii-
tical economy, as well as in ethics or religion.
The permane.it sueeess of one branch of in¬
dustry is only secured by the prosperity of ail.
RBaOLUTrOKS of national LABOR C0S0BE.s3.
Mr. Hewitt, Commissiouer to the Paris Ex
position, sent by our Government to examine
iron and steel matters, says tlic dilierenee in
cost of iron making here and in Engiuiid is the
wages, which are more than double here ; and
in other manuf.retures wo iind from best au¬
thority, the difference is from L'5 to 75 per cent.
But the assertion is made, that, considcnug
cost of living in our country, the Eng.i-h aud
European workmen are us well off as here.
When we find as many ctiildren in our poor-
houses as in our schools, when the tide of im¬
migration, made up of working people com¬
ing here to better their condition, ceases, when
one ill twenty of our people are paupers, these
assertions may be correct. Now, the working
people of our coautry know they are not, as is
seen bv their resolve passed in Philadelpiiiaby
the National Labor Congress, representing
5(lO,OfKJ workers, in August last:
" V<here4XSy The price of American labor is
above the wages paid for labor in other coun¬
tries; aud
" Whcrcan, The products of the cheaper la¬
bor of foreign countries, when imported into
the United States, compete with the produc-
tiOD.s of American labor in o«r home markets,
to the manifest injury of our workingmcn,
tliereby decreasing enterprise, industrial inde¬
pendence aud diversity of employments, and
tending to degrade our labor and force down
the wages of American workingmcn to the
level 01 ill-paid millions of Europe; there¬
fore, be it
"iieaofwtfff. That we demand such ac^ustment
of the duties on all commodities produced by
the labor of foreign countries as will adequately
protect Anicricah labor, and restrain the ei-
ecbsive imiiorlation of iiiaiiufaetures from
abroad, while we liave tlie raw material, tbe
skill and the ability to produce Ibe same com.
modities in our own country."
what british free trade mbaes.
In a speceli m the House of Lords, Lord
Goderioh said; "Other nations knew,as well
as the noble lord opiiOsite, and those who ait
ed with liim, that what we (theEnglish) nieaat
by free trade, was nothing more nor icss thaa
by means of the great advantages we enjoyed,
to get the monopoly of all their markets lurour
manufactures, aud to prevent them, one and
all,from everbecoiriingmanufacturingnatiODS."
"The policy that France aetid on was thai
of encouraging its native manufactures, and it
was a wise policy ; because, if it were freely to
admit our •mamitacturcs. It would speedily be
reduced to an agricultural nation, and therefore
a poor nation, as all roust be that depend ei-
elusively upon agriculture."
So we learn from this precious revelation,
that " Briti.-h free trade " really means tm
monopoly of all markets, and the break¬
ing down op all manl'pactures, except
their own. Thi.s English nobleman has at
least the merit of frankue.-s
Lord Brougham, in the House of Connnons,
made the benevolent statement that " Engbiid
could ailord to bear some ioss on the e.xportof
her goods,/(«• tilt /Airpose of destroying fanvp
mflriufactures in their cradle.'^
who pays?
It is no part of iiiy intent or wish to maie
wholesale charges against believers in free
trade; but who lead and furnish the "sineifA
of war" for t(iis movement ? Let Us see. Oftbe
$43,000 raised in May, ISOO, for the Free Trade
League in New York, as given by themselvei,
we liud coutributoi"s as folJows: A. B. Sanda
<55 Co., drag importers, relatives of the London
bankers—Baring Brothers, $6,257; H. .\lar-
shall, Treasurer of the League, agent of Black
Ball line of Liverpool packets, foreign banker,
$.5,500; Griunell, Miiiturn & Co., .Minturn
brother-in-iaw to Baring, $3,800; Messrs. Pell,
Liverpool and Loudon Globe insurance Co.,
$■<42; Naylor <5: Co., Englishsteel lioose, $5011;
M til <55 Co.. importers. Mall, Belgian Coasnb
$500; George Ward, banker, agent Barinj
Brothers, $500, and so on tlirough, $oll,0(W
paid by men closely linked with loreign later-
ests. These men are simply taking shrewd
care of themselves aud their kin, that is all.
Il this can be done con.sistently with iia'
country's good, all well; but it is a little ain-
gular that these gentlemen, of foreign connec¬
tions are so much more solicitous for Auiencan
interests than men of wealth not thus linked
with British movements and ideas. The Itfi-
clou Mining Journal savs: "if this Lcajne
succeeds in the United States we may hope fori
very large trade with that country."
It recalls the days of 1S40, when
Glasgow and Manchester subscribed $100,000
to tower our tariff, and some of thcni were
foolish enough afterward to say tlicy more than
got their money back by breaking down oar
factories, and then selling us goods at th'if
owu prices.
EXTRACTS FROM SPEECH
•O F-
Hon. HORACE MAYSARD,
OF TENIsTFSSEE.
WASHINGTON, D. C., MARCH 30, 1870.
Mr. Chairman : The opposition to this bill
has, quite largely, assumed the form of com¬
plaints against the burden of taxes. Now, sir,
taxes, ill whatever way imposed, are the sub¬
ject of frequent complaint by those who have
to pay them. They often fail to comprehend
how they receive an equivalent, or that this is
the price of stable government and the protec-
tioii of law; less in a lifetime aggregate than
the ravages of a single passing army, friend or
foe. Complaints are heard, many and loud.
■It is our duty candidly and patiently to con-
■ sider them, and if well founded to relieve; if
not, to submit to them resignedly as we sub¬
mit to complaints of the weather and to much
-other unreasonable grumbling.
THE SOURCE OF THE COMPLAINTS.
It may be well to inquire before we proceed
in what quarter these complaints originate;
how far they come from the people, tiie con¬
sumers of imported articles and the represen¬
tatives of consumption; how far from the for¬
eign producer and tho-e in this country who
live by the sale of foreign productions, iuclud-
'ing not only the importer, the jobber, and the
-retail dealer, but the agent, the stipendiary
-lecturer, the suborned otiicial, and the subsi¬
dized press as well. To state the question is
-to answer it. They invariably begin abroad in
-the ioterest of some production seeking a
market in this country. English journalism is
islanding protest against oiir "illiberal and
"unenlightened" financial policy. TheRu-ssiaii
Minister protests against the duty on hemp.
The wines of Portugal and even the currants
. if Greece cry out Indeed, it would seem
hat a principal office of European diplomacy
lear this Government is to protect its respec-
iive home industry from the burden of our
- urifif. This is xierfectty legitimate.
In our country the objections to the tariff
iome from the great commercial centers,
. whereof the city of New York, the emporium
, if foreign trade, is the chief. Of course I
leave out of the account all merely partisan
jolitical clamor, and all pro-rebel clamor in
the South. That- is but the reverberation of
the principal cry. It will be borne in mina
that the complaint is raised against the duty
upon those articles which are rao«t largely
produced in this country in competition with
tne foreign, especially the British. The influ¬
ence of England in the legislation of this coun¬
try is but inadequately understood. Her
agents aud paid thinkers and writers are every¬
where in the land; in thecities of the .sea-hoard
and on the remote frontier; in the universities
and schools; in the popular lecture-rooms,
and in the lobbies of Congress. Whatever
money can do or procure to be done in the
way of shaping oui laws we may be sure will
be done. This is not difficult to account for.
During the fiscal year ISflS—the latest whose
returns arc now aecessible —our entire impor¬
tation amounted to #371,6d4,808. Of this sum
61(7,323,763 represinied the importation from
Great Britain and her depcndeniues, less bv
only 63,483,612 than one half the total amount,
Tiiis is an immense and to ter a most profita¬
ble trade.* |
The articles about which wfehear the loudest
noise are coal, salt, iron, and wool. These are
all imported very largely from Great Britain
and her colonies. There is a heavy duty on
tin, spices, flax, and silk, all of which are im¬
ported more largely from the same quarter
than from any other; but we hear no com¬
plaint of the duty upon the latter articles.
I ask the House to consider why these strict-
*The following table shows the importations
during 1368 from the principal countries except
Great Britain:
Cnha $50,750,7271
Spain and her other depen- f $63,942,465
deucies 13,191,738j
France and her dependencies 27,428,451
Brazil 23,682,885
Bremen 13,3i6.33K
China 11,385,024
Hamburg 8,61>,930
Mexico 6,115,9-22
Argentine Eepuhlic 4,807, 74
Italy and Sicily 4,509,- R3
6
nres are eonflned to coal and enlt and iron and
■wool ratliir tlnin to till;, !-i-iccB, flax, and tin.
Tin iB used in evert habitation of the land.
It is the poor man's plate; it is to be found on
every hreakfast table and in every kitchen ana
dairy, and in the band of every child. W e
hear no complaint of the duty upon that. Silk
in some form enters iuto thediess of every
woman, and flax forms part of the dress of al¬
most everybody, and yet we hear no complaint
of the duty on either silk or flax. The pepper
which stands on our tables side by side with
the salt is taxed, without complaint, at 288 per
cent., and other important spices even hitther.
Now, why have we heard no whisper against
the duty on those articles '! I atk ffcntlemen
to ponder that question and to take time to
answer it. I will give my answer, and gentle¬
men can consider whether it is the true one or
not. The reason of the difference I think is
found in the fact that we proi ucc in this coun¬
try coal, salt, iron, and wool so as to establish
a market price to which the imported article
must conform; while of tin, spices, flax, and
silk we either produce nothing or our produc¬
tion is not such as to establish the price or to
compete with the iniporte.d articles. Hence,
upon the former articles the duty falls on the
importer; upon the latter, on the consumer.
The one paid by the British producer makes
him grumble, the other paid by ourselves he
regards with indifference.
THE REAL POIHT AT ISSUE
Is the possession of the American market,
and the struggle is between the domestic and
the foreign producer. The latter annually
watches with jealousy all legislation tending to
foster a competing hoo e industry. When
there is no such competing home industry he
looks upon our tariff as a burden imposed upon
ourselves, in which he has no share. Hence,
he seeks to persuade us that coal and iron and
salt and wool should be admitted to our mar¬
ket in free competition with the same articles
of our own production ; and is quite content
to let us tax his tin and sniccs and flax and
silk, with which we are urableto compete.
He has the market for these articles and can tlx
his own price upon them.
IS THE TARIFF A TAX?
A tariff is a sum of money exacted from the
Importation of foreign merchandise. It is a
duty, not a tax, a burden in rem and not in.
personam, enforced when necessary by a pro¬
ceeding against the property itself. " Taxes,
duties, imposts, and excises," is the language
of the Constitution, never tautological.' But
it is assumed that tlie importer, in turn, exacts
it from the citizen to whom he sells; or, to
state the proposition differently, that the tariff
invariably and necessarily forms a part of the
price and is paid by the consumer. And it is
insisted that the price of all like artieles
of domestic production is equally enhanced as
a necessary etlect of the tariff; that the duty
of SI 25 per ton on bituminous coal, for in¬
stance, increases the price just so much to
the eoiisumers not only of the 100,000 tons im-
Sorted from England and the ^0,000 from
ova Scotia, but of the 4,000,000 tons from
the mines of the United States; and it is fm-
ther argued that while the Government re¬
ceives but .?412,500 duty on the coal imported,
the .American minci's receive on iheir produc¬
tion $5,000,000, and fhat it all comes fromtta
hard-uocd, over taxed coiibumers. This Lu
liecn asserted so often, with respect cspceisllv
to coal, salt, iron and wool, that a belief hai
resulted from the continued reiteration. It
would follow, then, as a corollai-y, that m
duly should tie imposed upon these article!,
or indeed upon any others that compete iritl
the growth or production of our own countrv.
if this doctrine is true of these articles, itij
true of all others; for example of butter
cheese, potatoes, and wheat. The duty on
butter and cheese is 4 cents per pound, on po¬
tatoes 25 cents per tiusbel, and on wheat 20
cents jier bushel. Now, will any man be bold
enough or nckless enough to assert fhat the
duty of four cents per pound upon butter en¬
hances to the consumers by so much the price
not only of the (j,fi-50,(X)d pounds imported
from Canada, but also of the entire produceof
our own dairies; or that the like dutyofd
cents per pound on cheese adds 4 cents per
pounu to the consumption prices ot Amencan
clieese as well as of tl e l,5()(l,(!t'0 poands Im¬
ported from Canada, the 1,17.5,0110 ponndsfrom
France, and the 2.50,000 pounds frciu Englapd;
or that the duty of 20 cents per bushel on wheat
adds that sum or auy sum to the price either
of American wheat, or of the 1,500,000 bueheli
imported from Canada; or lastly that the duty
of 25cects jier bushel on potatoes is an addi¬
tion of 25 cents a bushel to the market price
of our whole potato crop, as well as of the
170,000 bushels imported from Nova Scotia!
The lolly of such an assertion would be so ap¬
parent as to impose upon nobody; it would he
a subject of universal ridicule.
the tariff not sectional or partial lit its
operations.
A few days ago a gentleman from niinois
(.Mr. Marshall), my associate on thet'om-
niitti-e of W-ays and Means, introduced ihlo
the House a resolution demmciatory, auioig
other things, of a tariff "levied to foster ana
enrich one section of onr country at theei-
pcnsc of others, or to foster and enrich oM
class of citizens at the expense of ofhera"
While it is not asserted that the presentfarill
is of this character, yet if that was not the im¬
port of the resolutions they have no meanins;
they are idle abstractions. The tarifl was so
long and so persistently represented by a cer¬
tain school of politicians as an ingeaions de¬
vice to enrich New England, especially Mas.si-
chusetts, at the expense of the rest of the
countrv, and particularly of the Sonfh, thai
a great many people believed it. Mauy still
beUeve it. To their minds it is simply a lil-
lainous Yankee contrivance to tax the whole
country, especially the Southern people.
The constant reiteration of this idea for
many years, and in every form, accustomed the
people of that region to consider them.-elTei
greatly oppressed" and to look upon secession
and disunion as the only means of relief. This
kind of agitation had been used iu 1863, and
before to unsettle South Carolina and involw
her in nullltication. It had much to do iu fo¬
menting the late rebellion. Aud I admotlsli
those gentlemen here aud elsewhere, who a«
scattering the same fire-brands over the IVest,
whether for partisan or personal ends, to bt-
ware lest they kindle a tire as destmetive to
themselves and their region as that which te
so recently dcsohted the South.
7
■ I, It is tru3 thst New England hss fn^'^el
iTery lar^jiy aucl suc•c^^sfully in nmuufacturoi.
ta somi braiic'.ies she is unrivalled. Her voc-
| X)a ui luufjcliire has attuhitd to sueli excel-
i^.Oiiee tli-iS tae Lnidoii liiw-s refers to the "sti-
, perioriay of Amiricia m iiiufactures " us
^tunouic the obstacles to the prosperity of En^-
,j...ish cotton-loo:n i; and for years ourfabiios
,have enjoyed such pre eminence in India that
.both Hreat Britain and Gernian.y have resorted
~to conuterroiuii^ our tr.idc-niarks to pun ad-
f missio.i into that m irket. But it is no dispar-
a'jjeinent to New E.i.ciaud to allirm that she i,-
not the 03 y or the prineipal seat of mi iufac-
^;tures in the eountrv. llow.-ver it may
'have bee.i d'J years a^'o, or :i5 years a^ro,
' it Is not so now. Philadclpuia, Pittsburgh,
and Cincinnati are literally vast workshops, in
which are'produced almost everv conceivable
"requisite for health and sickness, business,
pleasure, and comfort, peace and war; while
-scattered over the middle States, the West,
■and the South area multitude of establish¬
ments, some larze, others sua ill, employing:
thousands of people, and all busy in fashion-
iui; raw materials into forms adapted to the
"supply of human wants.
" At the woolen e.vhibition of 1S53 in Chioapo
. there were represented nearlyflOditierent mills
in Iliinois alone. Tim- suiTOuudine; States of
^Indiana, Iowa, .Michiq-an. and others were not
'.nurepresented. Dnri itf the last summer tliere
-was held in Cincinnati an exhibition ol te.xtile
' fabrics for the. West and Sonih, at wnich were
displayed fabrics in ifreat yariety from, d be-
lieye, eyery WBsteni State, including' Califor
■ nia and the Territory of Utah, from Kentucky,
Tennessee. Alabama, Georijia, an.i South Caro-
, iiiia, in the. South. It is now full .W years siueo
the Edinbnra-h Rmew propounded the famous
, question, " Who sieeps iii American hlauk-
"ets?" Now comparatively few in this eonu-
_ try sleep in any but American; and the biank-
- ets of the Paciiic coast and tlie cotton blank¬
ets 01 Georgia are unrivaled iii commerce.
..Flannels of superior texture, and qnaliiy are
" sold in the bazaars of this city woven in the
■- miUs of centr.il Iowa, and the dress silks of
New Jersey compete in excellence with the
' silks of Lyons. This list of snccesslnl manu
' facture miifht be extended to the watches of
Elgin and Waltham, better, I am reliably In¬
formed, tiian any foreign time-keepers of sinii-
a lar construction and price; and in fact indcli-
- nitely, and into almost every branch of indus¬
try.
Let it not he supposed, however, th-at these
. results have been reached without great ctiort
and sacriliee. The history oi Aineriean manu-
■ faetures is a dreary narrative of bold, unaided
• endeavors by men who had little else than skill
: and a purpose; of costly but useless experi-
■ nient; of discouragement, disappointment,
..failure repcateu and disastrous; of penury,
want, and sutfering. And wben success crowned
; the work, the community at large were hone-
fited rather than they whose genius and patient
toll had aecompli^hi'd it. A popular vlaraor
, is attempted against the men engaged in this
kind of producLion. They are repres'.-nted as
monopolists with overgrown fortunes, aequir-
, ing fabulous wealth at the expense of those
wiio purchase and use their proilnets.
Mr. Chairman, it happened about two years
^ «go that I went on a speeiid missiou to the
State of Now Ilampshlre, for the purpose of in¬
structing, or rather of disinstructing her peo¬
ple concerning certain heresies which our
friends on the other side had been atteiup'.iug
induitrionsly to inenlcate. I saw the people
in their various avocations, and I came back
instructed. I made the acqnaiutanee of these
monopolHts, of whom we have heard so ranch.
I saw them at work in the manufacture of
wool and cotton ani iron; ia building the
famous Concord wagons, found in ail p.irts of
the con liry, even in th ; ernons of the Rocky
monntaiar; in dragging the mount lin birches
from the clitL and crumbling iiicm into shoe-
pegs, mj^u-nred by the bii-hel and .sol.l by tne
hirrel. 1 saw women e.ignged i.i tiro tin.-r auil
uieer process of mmufaeture, whiie m?.i were
emplo.yed in the heavier and eoarscr; 1 saw
the.n at tlieir work cheerful and in lustrions ; I
saw the.n as they went, and I saw them on their
return; aad always the same cheerful and
buoyant spirit.
I saw tiieir children on the way to school,
deerntly clad, with satchel and shining morn¬
ing f.iee, and school-lionse that might well pass
for a temple or a pilace. I saw them at
church; I saw them at political meetings—
people of the highest self-respect, and not de-
ticient in intelllgeiicB and cultivation, raised by
honest labor far above the lurd cnndilioas of
povert.v, the lui-de.st oi wliich, according to
the satiri.st, is the ridicn'ous shifts iicces-ary to
mike th-; tivo ends meet. These were "tlio
monopolists of the country, the people who
live by m innfactnres and work by macbinery !
There were other monopolists. I remember a
young man, not JO years of age, receiving a
salary gre.iter th-an is paid to us as members
of Congress. He wa.s at the head of a large
calico printing establishment, whic i by
his genius he was able to organize and
keep in oporaliou. Tuis vvas' oue of
God's monopolists, endowed by his Maker
with a cuiming brain to understand thing.s
beyond the reach of other men. His tJlent.s
here fo-nnd employment, protitabie to himself
and Useful to the world.
While the Committee of Ways and Means
were conducting tlieir examination in Boston
the l-ast season.'some pains was taken to ascer¬
tain the profits upon capital employed in manu¬
factures' there iu the neignuoring region, where
the received opinion is that such capital has
ciijo.yed the largc.st retunis. For this purpose
k number of witnesses were, examined, men ni'
great experience and higli social position.
Their testimony was, that taking a series of
years together, the aggregate of capital invest¬
ed in manufacturing enterprises of tlie dilierent
kinds had not yielded a return exceeding tiie
lawful rate of interest; while upon m.inufae-
luriug carried on ui>oii borrowed money there
had been no prolit. Now compare this with
the profits of banking, with the enormous
mercantile incomes annually reported for tax¬
ation, reachiug in some instances to millions,
and we see how unfounded is the invidious
clamor raised in the name of free trade and iu
the interest of those very bankers aud mer¬
chants who have grown opulent by dealing ill
foreign exchange and imported merchandise.
THE EFFECT OF THE PROTECTIVE POLIC'l" IX
THE SOUTH.
But it is especially as the representative of
a Sonthern constituency that 1 advocate the
8
polirv of protecting and fostering onr mnnn-
fiictures. 'ihe opi)osite doctrine had prevailed
for a whole gem ration prior to the war; and
during the war we expericui ( d the bitttr fon-
sequeuces leolated froin the rett of the
world, seaward by the blockade and landward
by the military lime, ne endured privalione
altogether inereiiible and ditlicult to appreci¬
ate. With 8,000 niilee of sea-eoast, and naval
stores and material in abundance, we hud
neither ships nor seamen. With an un imiled
supply of cotton, and wool, and hides, and oak
haik, and falling waters, we hod n ilhcr shirts,
nor coats, nor lilaukets, nor shoes. But tor
the household industry prevalent in the South
beyond otherpaits of the land, not a lew would
have been reduced to stark nakedness. Many
ladies spun ,and wove the material for tlieir
own dresses and (or the c.otbing of their fami¬
lies ; professional gentlemen n.aieand memied
shoes for their own and their neighbors'
children.
This lesson is not likely to be unheeded by
the South. Alnady the cfleets of pro¬
tection aie felt upon all her industries.
Old works have teen revived and re¬
paired, and many new ones have sprung up.
The fabrication of cotton and woolen goods
has been greatly stimulated ; also the produc¬
tion of coal, salt, iron, copper, zinc, lumber,
and naval stores. Some of onr s) indies and
looms have distanced lompctition from lorei^n
or Northern rivals. And but a few y ears will
elapse, witli the same em ouiagcment and pro¬
tection we now enjoy, before the Sonib wi'l
export largely both 01 her te\lile fabrics and
of the products of ber mines, advinccd to a
condition for immediate use—articles whicb
hitherto she has been aceustomed to receive
either from foreign eoniitrics or from the
mantifacturing districts of onr own country.
The infinenee of a diversified industry bg
been benign upon onr great staples of cotlci,
total CO, ri< e and sugar. Less labor has beti
engaged lorn erly in their cultivation, its
capital tmployed, lut more ircfitably;i
larger return lor smaller crops. 1 hree niillim
hales of cotton • in ItvGb, at 25 cents, (or
liistanee, realize 50 per cirt. more than 5,00),
0(0 in ibOO, at 10 cents; while the woit of
growing and handlii g is 50 percent, lees. Ik
state of the eoiton trade will appear iroreei-
actlyliom tl.e following table, compilwl Ircm
the Cuetom-house retuius ;
COTTON EXPORTTTD.
Pmi ds. Bale^. Valve.
18 8 7£6,C00.t76 1,966.502 $19.5,962,191
1860 7i2,o)8,929 1,106,547 187,W.til
It is further shown by the statistics ol maiio-
fiicture, that in 1809, there were spun in the
United States 434,293,883 pounds, eqnal to
1,085,734 bales of 400 pounds each; so tliolat
present we export something less than 21X)0,-
000 hales, and < onsnme something more to
1,000,000. Assnuiing as correct the figures
giv n the other evcoing by the gentleman froia
Alabama, (Mr. Buckley.) the cotton span in
the United States, in 1809, amounted in valae,
after coming from the spindle, to 8260,576,329,
The value of the cotton crop for 1869 may ha
stated then, as follows ;
P,vndt V hie.
Exported 722.61-.929 $-87,762,m
Spnn 44.5,293,883 260,57s.S9
Total 1,156,912,8 2 $448,338,6(16
1 am indebted to the same gentleman for the
fact that 35,800,750 pounds were spun in 131
Southern mills, and 398,433,133 ponndsinSSf
liorlhern mills.
FACTS AJSTD OPTIONS.
"REVElVtJE RkFOEM."
Great Britain has cheap labor, great capital
at low interest, large e.vperiei ce iu trade aud
mannfuetures, and n irrow terri.ory. We have
labor better paid, cotton, wool, coal, iron, en¬
ergy and skill, and ample room for farm and
factory to be neighbors and allies.
The United States is England's best ous
tomer, and the English preacii free trade to us,
because low taritls Here will give the.u advan
tage in the trade with us, which they qreatly
need.
We must raise $150,000,000 a year from du¬
ties on impor.s, and, of course, free trade is a
delusiot. and an absurdity.
Nobody objects to t-irifl reform, and the
new Tariff bill before Congress last winter
aimed to simplify, to add largely to the free
list, and to make ad valorem rates specihc, to
prevent fraud; but it met with captious oppo-
Bitou from men eiamiing to be " Keveuue Ke-
formern," while English newspapers praise
tlicir so-call'.'d "refonn,"
FEOM SPEECH OF HON, J. T. WILSOS, M. 0.
OF OHIO, W.VSHINGTON, M.VKCH, 1870.
Table erh{bi( ng rome of the eading agri ultan!
I r du Uone eubjcct to duty w' en importfdMithe
U'ited . tales, iogether with the r tes hereon:
Bye and barley 15 cis. perbashd
Com aud cats '0 cts. perboshA
Wheat 20 cte. per bushel.
Flax seed 16 eta. per bushel.
Beef and pork. 1 ct. p r pouuA
Bacon and .ard 2 eta. per pount
Butter and cheese 4 eta. per pouui
Wool.. 12 eta. perpouud.
Apples, dried and green 10 per cent.
Ciuer • 20 per cent.
Live stock 20 per cent.
llides and pelta 10 per cent
Flax $1 per ton.
Hemp $40 per ton.
Now, without taking Into the account mf
hut the most simple aud common production!
of the farm, it will tie found that near $50,-
000,000 currency value of agricultural prodnf-
tions were imported into the United States
during: the liseal year ending June 30,18ti8 »
y
I,'®ch dutira amontitinE to more that $10,000,-
were paid; audit larmers need more pro-
'J iou they have only to ask it. But they are
er no such necessity; their wants lie in a
iMly-ditferent direction. To be prosperous
.''happy the farmer needs a steady and re-
" leraliiig home market; and how is he to
"it? Certainly not by espousing free-trade
® sures, as demanded by and in the interests
' ■ritish capitalists, New York importers and
_')ers, as well as Eastern railroad monop-
'■is, the effect of which, if carried out, would
0 bring him in direct competition with the
per labor of Europe. It the farmers of
country shall allow themselves to be
I' led away by the specious and delusive cry
(, rce trade monopolies, whether at home or
,^bad, can they expect a better fate than that
i.[_eh has fallen to the farmers of Portugal
!f:Turkey, whose women are compelled to
1 "k in the fields for the pittance of four cents
■" day, and whose men work for less than
^ fourth the sum paid to the male laborers of
! eriea ?
' rABIFF EEFOKM FOR HOMB INTEBESTS.
-ae resolves below were unanimously adopted
-i public meeting, in the Detroit City Hall,
:. 1S69, and embody views not new, yet, it
L-.elieved, true, and give an idea of tarifl re-
n dittereut, and many would think tar
ter, than that of the "American Free Trade
""gue" and the "Revenue Reformers."
® iir idea may well be called a scheme to
' eflt foreign manufaeturers and New York
~ lOiters at the co.5t and peril of our enter¬
ic and industry. This is a plan to help the
'-t interest o 1 farmer, worker, manufacturer
" importer alike, and to develop the re-
• rces of our country:
1st. Sesolved, That while approving torili
irm, simplifying, increasing the free list,
nging rates where needed and just, revising
bonded warehouse system, and especially,
nging ad valorem to specific duties, to pre-
t fraud—we would keep in view, not only
c immediate wants of our revenue, but that
S tection of our industry and that develop-
"•'at of our resources by whieh the prosperity
the peoijle may make the solvency of our
rerument perlcct and its revenue lasting.
2d. Jteeolved, That as a decrease of revenue
ji duties on imports is feasible, we favor
■ free admission of tea, cofi'ee, spices, dye
'■fi's, etc., not produced by us, and in univer-
* use, that the people may thereby gain;
would retain duties for protection and
enue on artic es we can and do produce,
•1 the home product ot vrhich is a benefit to
I people,
h'3d. Sesolved, That while wages are higher
1 workmen better off with us than in Eng-
■^d, and while English workingmen, impelled
f' the force of huiigei, are denouncing free
■Jc, and alleging that it is reducing them to
I iperism, le.ivihg them defenseless against
i>l cheaper labor in Europe, and driving
ir skilled artisans to protective countries,
Vould be miustice and injury to Amerii an
' isans and workmen to adopt or approach a
'teni which is denounced by workingmen in
; gland, as lowering their wages and degra-
- g tlieir condition.
" 4th. Sesolved, That while British manufac-
.ers are complaining of hunger among work¬
men and peril to capital caused by their fl'ee
trade and revenue tariff system—whieh admits
free of duty articles made in England, while
tea, coffee, sugar, etc., pay heavy duties—and
are alarmed at the vastly growing balance of
imports—greater than the exports in ISdS by
$580,000,0t)0—and while our foreign debt is
$1,500,000,000, growing constantly from ex¬
cess of imports, and taking away our specie
to partly pay the interest, any approach to¬
ward free trade or revenue tariff would not
only put far away the return to specie pay¬
ments, but woultl increase our debt abroad
more rapidly and make the calamity of a terri¬
ble financial crisis swift and sure."
BEVIEW OF D. A. WELLS' REPOBT.
This report, which has been widely circu¬
lated by the Free Trade League, and has bad
some influence Irom its author's position as a
Government official, has lately been reviewed
by the Committee on Manufactures of the
House of Representatives at M ashington, and
their work is a keen and searching expose of
errors in facts and figures, of omissions making
half-truths more dangerous than frank false¬
hoods, and of singular misstatements.
They say that petitions for its review were
"very numerous, and from all parts of the
country, and signed by thousands of persons
interested in almost every department of in¬
dustry." Without examining all parts of it,
they sum up as follows their conclusions
touching some of its lead.ng features :
"It opens by declaring our material progress
to be 'wonderful,' and 'in a great degree in¬
dependent of legislation,' and then devotes
large space and effort to show that this ' won¬
derful ' progress has been, and is, obstructed
by legislation.
■'It misstates prices, and costs, and aggre¬
gate values of manufactures in important par¬
ticulars.
" It makes pitiful complaint of some ' taxes'
or tariffs, and then proposes others much
heavier; for instance, its complaint of an al¬
leged ' tax' of $3,900,000 (u salt, and its pro¬
posal of a ' tax' or tariff of $60,000,000 on su¬
gar, coffee, and tea.
"It underrates manufactures and overrates
agriculture, while both branches of industry
are best served by the impartial truth.
"It makes unfair and unreliab.e statements
touching the condition of the larmer, as af¬
fected by the curreney and the tariff.
" Its assertion of the costs of freights, and
their influence as protection to the manufac¬
turers m the interior, is a gross mistake or
misstatement.
"It greatly underrates the number of per¬
sons employed in manufactures.
" It Unfairly, and untruthfully, depreciates
the condition of our artisans auu laborers.
" It proposes to raise the revenue needed by
the Goveniinent by such import duties as will
enhance the cost of foreign food, etc., consumed
bj- our laborers,while denying to them adequate
protection against the invasion of foreign la¬
bor-products competing with their own.
" It seeks to array class against class, and
section against section, sowing the seeds of
hate, strife, and disunion, which, scattered
long ago for like purposes, sprang up and bore
fruit, the taste of which is still bitter upon our
lips ; and it does this with pretended beuevo-
10
Icnco toward thosp whom Ifwonld de^^ade,
enslave, and destrov.
"SiicLi arc some of its purposes, con I radio-
tions, and errors, and your committee believe
that they fully eoutirm the o linion of the peti¬
tioners, that its roeommendutioiis " will be a
most danijerous guide to legislation."
Sixty pages are crowded with fact®, all fully
proved, on the Farmer tjuestion, on Wool and
Woolens, Cotton, Iron, Freights, Kevenue,
ete., etc., of whieb a few specimens must snf-
liee. For instance, In the cbapKron Cotton
M.iuuf.ieturc, tbey®ay:
" On page 4S the Commiseioner proposes to
ehow that the ' agricaltural interests of the
country' are not gre.vtly 'dependent U[)on
certain special industries ior a market for their
products." He sets forth that the direct con¬
sumption ol agricultural products by cotton
manufacture is only jlS),500,000 per annum.
Now, so far as regards tlie fanner or planter,
it matters not what use is made of his product,
whether it be eaten or manufactured into mer¬
chandise, so it he bought and paid for. When
bought and paid for, it is for liim con.-^umed.
Premising this, attention is invited to tiie
Btatementon page 17, that cotton manufactures
coiisuiued, in IhOO, 4.5vl,000,000 pounds of agri¬
cultural product m the form of cotton alouc,
valued at .$11^,500,000.
The statement, accordingly, of the direct
consumption of agricultural products by cot¬
ton m luufacluro, as made ill different parts of
the report, stands thus ;
Commissioner's state¬
ment.
Page 17.
(of cotton only,)
$112,500,000.
Commissioner's state¬
ment.
Page 4S.
(grand total,)
$19,500,000.
Special commissioners of the revenne,
who, on one page attempt to show the trilling
amportance of the market afforded to agricul¬
ture by a great branch of mt-ntifacture, should
not forget what they have written on a former
pa^e.
When to the cotton consumed, the food of
the operatives, the starch ntade horn pota¬
toes, corn, and wheat, the leather, the oil, the
grease, and other articles of agricultural
derivation, consuracd hi cotton maimfactuic,
are added, the aggregate of direct consump¬
tion alone will uiiquestiouably rise to $150,-
000,000.
Commissioner's figures.
$19,500,000.
Correct figures.
$150,000,000."
Examining the wool question, they find :
"The same inexplicable carelessness of a.sser-
tion in the Commissioner's surprising state¬
ment that one of the results of the wool tariff
has been " a decrease in the number of sheep
estimated by the Commissioner of Agriculture
at four millions for 1808, while other authorities
place the total decrease as high as 25 per cent,
since the passage of the wool tariff."
The truth is that by the reports of tlie De¬
partment of Agriculture lor 1807 and 1808, we
find the number of sheep for February 1, 1808,
(see page 93,) stated at 38,991,913, and for Feb¬
ruary 1, 1809, (see page 40,) at 37,72i,'.J99, a de¬
crease of 1,267,033. Even this decline is al¬
ready more than checked, for we learn from
the statistician of that department that "The re¬
port of 1809 will show, including recent and
more complete data from the more Western
States and the Pacific slope, not far from j
030.000sheep on F.ibrnary 1,18i0. Thn.-ii,
is )t«( 4,000,000 decrease for IsOl, or "atj
decrease of 25 per cent.," but an actmlj
crease.
To take t ic nurab"r of sheep hiitcherfPi
their peJrs and tallow, and not allo.r fjr,
crease of lambs; or to take the decrewj
some State.s, ami not the transfer and iiionj(
of more Western regions, might po-siblymi
an apparimt decrease of 4,Oil0,0'K). anii it|
prohahlv in so'iie such mamier tiiat tlis Cij
missiouer. in this case, as in so many nit,
obtains the figures with which he seem,
prove hi® foregone conclusions.
Commissioner Wells asserts that freighti,
"protection" of .51_ 50 per ton for s
hundred miles, and this m ikes "thetr'asp]
tation of a single pound of pig iron to t,
considerable distance in the interior a mirj
of ordinary commercial impossibility;"
the committee show that the actual frelirht j
pig iron to Chicago is $2 70, iustead of tilj
per ton, as Mr. Wells' assertion would miii'
it, and to other inland points the diserepiii']
is as great, and foreign pig iron is coasuo;i
sold at tho®c places, notwithstandins u
"commercial imposcibUity."
Two of the committee, inclining to ti
trade, of course did not sign this rensit.h
seven member-, sign it.
The review is strong and makes the repr
weak and contradictory.
EFFKCTS OF FREE TRADE.
Let lis look at the condiiion of oonplrii
that have come under this so-called ''ha
trade" policy.
Portugal, in 1703, signed the " Mcthua
Treaty" with England, bv which, in retoroM
favors given her wines, she cut off alrao-iill
protection from her wool, food, etc. Hernnif
iaciures were mined ; British goo.lspourtdiiu
her ports; she became a purely agriculliiil
country, poor, with population decreasiaj.bil
roads, and mails carried on horseback, ssa
is the condition of a country uatnrally litS,
but made poor by her miserable policy.
Turkey has produced wool, silk, corn id
cotton in large quantities; coal, iron and»?■
per abound. Two hundred years ago hertu-f
with Europe was large, and her mercbms
rich. But in an e\ it hour the govcmineBt m"
a treaty with England and France, agrefinsl"
charge no more than three per cod. liutl i"
their imports, and to exempt tlieirvesselsfn®
port charges. Great Britain forbaiie ti»'■
portation of her machinery to Turkev,asm
as of her meclianics who might have gM'
there to make it. . ,
Of course, Turkish manufactures were nat"!
In Scutari there were 6tX) looms io 18k;
40 remained in 1S21; and of 2.006
shops io Touruova in 1S12 hut 200 were Idi'
1830. As in most purely agricultural couoWa
the cultivators are in debt. Recently theMJJ
exports of Turkey were but $33,000,000, vH
those of England to that country were W
Jll.OOO.tKX) yearly. , ,
Thus grasping selfishness defeats itself,®
Turkey, unjustly treated, is too poor to »"
good customer.
Two years ago Australia enacted aprotee®
tariff to encourage her native woolen iBSBib
turers agaiu-st the imported woolens ol »'
11
jer country. The Dotninion of Canada has
'" 'cars maintained a protective tariff aerainst
'dibh importations, and has lightened the
len of taxes on her own people by colleet-
1 part of them from English manufacturers
" sng the ttast season the protective features
her tunff have been increased, both from
'■'ives of revenue and to extend protection
er salt, liim her, coal, and other interests.
' now, aceording to the London Times, the
- fng statesmen ol India are coming to per-
• e that the one thing needed for the revival
' -le ancient prosperity and weaith of India is
- restoration of her ancient manufaetures.
i'tthis they ask such legislation as will enable
■ Hindoos again to spin and weave their own
t Is and cottons, instead of receiving their
,j1v from England. So in spite of the efforts
oingland to propagate free trade, her own
"'p leading colonies repudiate the theory,
.and, too, if she enjoyed the advantages of
_cal poriiamcnt, would he the first to call
■ a revival of her manufactures and protec-
to Irish spinners and weavers.
- eukopean and amebican wages.
t a debate on " Protection vs. Free Trade"
"St. Andrews Hall, Detroit, Mich., the list of
' iparative prices, which follows, was given.
. Ir. Moses \V. Field said:
The English, to monopolize the American
rket, had reduced the cost of their surplus
" ductions to the mere holding together of
: a and bone of their down-trodden pauper
" arcrs. Mr. Field said the cost of a com-
dity was in proportion to the cost of labor,
had obtained from authoritative sources a
of 83 trades, the relative wages of which
a week of six days, to one man in each,
Tuld be $1,238 50 in the United States, and
.11 62 in Europe. There was no more certain
y of securing general prosperity than by pre-
, ing the people with employment. The occu-
.ioiis referrea to by Mr. Field, and the wages
. d the laborers of the respective continents
as follows;
Europe. America.
MerCs Wages. Men's Wages.
■:ordeon Makers $2 52 $18 00
dflcial-flower makers.. 2 62 6 00
icrs 2 88
cbers.i 1 44 15 00
sket-makers 2 IB 9 00
rrel-makers 3 60 10 50
^r-brewera 3 24 16 00
It-makers, workers in
-ironze 4 32 16 00
lachers 2 88 15 00
okbinders 2 88 15 00
188-founders 4 56 21 00
asbmakers 72 15 00
-Ickla3'ers 2 88 24 00
ickmakera 3 00 12 00
. .tcbera.... 2 88 1-3 50
Ft/rope.
America.
3fen*s Waffes.
HcrCB Wages
Bntton-Tnalcers
2 F8
13 50
Caid (playing) makers...
2 88
12 00
Card (carriibg) makers...
2 88
12 00
rabinpt-makeiB
2 16
10 50
Carpenters
3 24
15 00
Cartoon-makers
3 24
12 00
Cigar-makers
2 40
15 00
Chalr-tramera
2 88
32 00
Cliemical manufacturers.
2 40
21 Oil
Chimney sweeps....
72
9 00
Cloth-finishers
3 24
12 00
Cloth-wcaTers
3 60
12 10
Cloth-sheares
2 88
20 00
Cloth-printers
3 60
12 00
Comh-makers
1 44
18 50
Confi ctioners
1 80
15 00
Coopers
3 60
10 50
Cotton-spinners
3 60
15 GO
Crockeryware artists
5 '4
18 00
Day laborers
2 84
9 to
Distillers
1 44
18 00
D3'eiS of silk ana wool...
2 88
15 00
Engravers
3 60
File-cutters
2 8S
35 00
Fringe-makers
2 40
12 00
Gardeners
3 6)
12 00
Glaziers
2 8S
18 00
Glass-workers
2 S6
20 00
Glove-sowers
1 44
12 Ol)
Goldsmiths
8 24
18 10
Gunsmiths
1 68
18 no
Hatters
2 5 -2
IS 00
Harness-makers
1 08
15 01
Iron-founders
J3 32
1 4 32
15 18
Machine-builders...
3 24
18 00
Locksmiths
4 32
IS 00
Cutlers
2 40
18 00
Nailinakers
2 40
15 GO
Blacksmiths
1 OR
12 00
Screw-makers
4 32
15 00
Lithographers
4 32
80 00
Loom-builders
2 P2
Millers
1 92
15 00
Needle-makers
96
9 00
Oil-cloth makers....
2 40
32 00
Potters
2 40
18 00
Printers:
Compositors....
8 60
20 GO
Boys
96
t) GO
Rope-makers
96
12 00
Saddlers
96
15 00
Saw-mill laborers...
2 88
12 CO
Slaters
1 92
24 00
Shoemakers
1 68
16 50
Shoemakers' tools..
2 SB
15 00
Soap-makers
2 SB
12 GO
Stocking-weavers
(ma-
chine)
5 04
10 50
Stonemasons
3 60
24 00
Stcnecuiters
7 20
15 00
Stone quarrymen...
2 16
13 50
Tailors
2
18 00
Tanners
1 44
21 CO
Turners
1 08
15 00
Tapestry-makers
2 40
12 00
Watchmakers
2 88
IH 00
Wheelwrights
2 38
24 00
Worsted work
1 68
12 00
Wire-cloth makers..
2 16
35 GO
Weavers (silk)
2 10
15 00
Wool combers
2 88
15 00
£231 U
£1,238 50
EXTRACTS FROM SPEECH
o F
Hon. W. D. KELLES
OF FElSr^J-SYLVANIA.
WASHINGTON, D. C., MARCH 20th. 1870.
Many of the laboring people are immigrants,
and know how small are the wages of work¬
men on the otlicr side of the Atlantic, and
how humble the fare on which they live. They
know that free trade means low wages. Buy
labor where you cah buy it cheapest is the
cardinal maxim of tlie free trader. More than
85 per cent, of the cost ol every ton of
salt and pig Iron is in the wages of labor, and
when the gentleman shall have stricken the
duties off these articles, the l,50d,0U0 people
who are now earning good wages in their pro¬
duction must compete with the cheap labor of
Turk's Island, England, Wales and Germany.
Thrown out of remunerative employment in
the trades to which they tiave devoted their
lives, as they will be, they must compete with
workmen in other pursuits, even though tiiey
glut the market and bring down the general
rate of wages throughout the land. He who
advocates productive duties pleads the cause
of the American laborer. It will not amplify
this proposition. I regard it as a truism, and
beg leave to illustrate it by inviting the atten¬
tion of my colleague (Mr. Allison) from Iowa,
and the gentleman Irom Ohio, to a statement
of the wages and subsistence of families of
laborers in Europe, on page 179 of the monthlv
report of the Deputy Special Commissioner of
the Revenue, No. 4 of the series 1869-70. It
refers specially to Germany, and was translated
and complied from Nos. 10-1.2 of the publlea-
tions ol tlie royal Prussian statistical bureau,
Berlin, 1868.
Its facts are almost signiOcant.
The wheat-growers of Iowa and thfe West
are suilcrliig for the want of a market for their
grain. Too large a proportion of our people
are raising wheat. We want more miners,
railroad men, and mechanics, and our p resent
rates of wages are inducing them to come to
us. Half a million people tempted by these
wages will come this year. Our working people
are ree consumers of wheat, beef, pork and
mutton. But could they be, under free trade
and reduced duties ? These articles are luxu¬
ries rarely enjoyed by the working people of
Eng.aad and the eontiuent, with whom anti-
protectionists would compel them to compete.
The official paper to which 1 refer tells us that
" rye and potatoes form the chief food of the
laboring classes ; that the wives and daughters
of brick-makers, coal and iron miners, a i
furnace and rolling-mill men aid them intli
rouah employ raents ; that the reguiarinjM
workingmen average in summer aod will
from 16 8-lOth to 24 cents per day, and tk
of females from 8>^ to 14)^ cents per day; h
miners at tunneling are sometimes piiJi
much as 72 cents (one thaler) per day, aniltli
a brick-maker, aided by his wife, aVerasei
cents per day ; tliat wages for female labors
more uniform, and that 18 cents per day a
be earned by a skillful hand; that juveni
laborers in factories begin with 48 cents [(
week for 10 hours daily, and rise to K etui
per week; that the general average of iH
wages is as foUows : males, for 12 honrs'ra
per day in the country, 19)^ cents; in clti«
24 cents; and that the wages of master-wort
men, overseers, etc., are at least lliipa
year."
DETAILED STATEMENTS OF THE WAGBS tH
COST OF LIVING IN DIFFERENT aiSTBICn
OF LOWER SILESLA.
1. Di-itrict of BoXkerih/An.
The annual expenses of a family of ib'il
Ave persons, (three children), belonging tott<
working class, were as follows:
Provisions (per day, 0.14J to 0.163) per year..fS) •
Rent (8 thalers) Jjl
Fuel '
Clothing, linen, etc
Furniture, tools, etc '
Taxes: state, 0.72; church, 12; com-
mune. 36 tl w
School for two children ' jj
Total
The expenses of a laborer's family being ^
to 26.4 cents per day, the earnings nlio™]*
28 to 80.8 cents per day, which the headol*
family cannot earn. While his earnings I*
from 17 to 19 cents, the wife earns from »!'
10 cents, and the children must W
as soon as old enough. Miners in this distns
have 24 to 29 cents daily wages; factory ^
from 19 to 29 cents; mechanics receive 48»
54 cents per weeks, besides board: mile''*''
servants $17 to §30, and lemale §12per8Bnn»
exclusive of board and lodging.
13
2. Disidct of Lcndshut.
enses of a family:
J n the Ccvntry. In a I ity.
er annum $ 5 76 5 10 72
lions (per week, 90c)
pniuim 46 SO ' 56 10
ad ligUt per annum... 14 40 16 42
etc., per annum 3 60 4 32
og, etc.. per annum.. . 8 56 10 OO
expenses per annum.. 7 20 8 57
ital $86 32 $106 13
tincome of laborers' (weavers') families
encrallj not reach these amounts. Many
rmitted to gather their wood from the
forests, and spend little for clotuing,
I they beg from charitable neighbors. A
:r earns here from 48 to 72 cents, $1 and
per week; most weavers have two
i fn operation, and, together with their
, earn from $1 50 to $2 16 per week The
ge earnings of weavers are given at 96
per week, or about $50 per annum,
nilar statements in regard to other dis-
are omitted.]
eollcague (Mr. Townseud) hands me a
1 containing a statement of American
i.i in some of the same branehes of labor.
. gentlemen may contrast them with the
gs of Germany, as set forth by the statisti-
ireau of Prussia, I will hand the letter to
iporters :
PiKENixviLLE, Pa.. March 21, 1870.
-4bSir: Your favor of the 16th is before
ow I give you the prices paid per day to
■rineipai workmen, as foiicws:
g LoMng-miV, on ra Is and beams.
r Per day. Per day.
."ra $4 50 Bar mi I.
■ ra 1 70 Hcatera $3 87
^ helpers 1 60 Helpers 1 70
liiigrollerman. 6 75 Rollers 2 12
-. lingrollerman. 2 70 Catchers 1 55
r ers 2 25 Hooks 1 60
s 1 SO
'tridghteners... 2 50 Heavy mrrehant iron.
itraighteners.. 3 60 Heaters 4 37
ers 2 3.> Helpers 1 70
1 50 Finishing roller 5 00
jT^ers 1 50 Rougheis 2 35
leers 2 10 Catchers 1 50
Straightener 1 50
■Uerchant i'on. Mauler 1 50
rs 4 37 Engineer 1 90
rs 1 70j
- helpers 1 60 i Puddling.
. aing roller... . 4 05 Pnddler 3 OD
' hing roller 2 12 Puddler's helpers... 2 03
ers 1 601
ling catcher... 1 30 Labor.
(hteuer 1 90 Common labor 1 4D
leers 2 80]
m unable to give the wages paid for the
■ -e classes of work eitoer in England,
ce, or Belgium, but I am satisSed from
rices, as we have had them from time to
from these, that their present pay is not
an average of 40 per cent, of aliove.
Respectfully, JOHN GRIFFIN,
Oe eral iuperintendent
4'J. Washixoton Townbenu.
. • PROTECTIVE DUTIES MOT A TAX.
; Chairman. I apprehend that no enlight-
student of political economy regards a
etive duty as a tax. Even the gentleman
Iowa [Mr. Allison] admitted that in most
it is not; yet influenced, as I think, bv
t ler story which the chairman of our com-
'•je, who is somewhat of a wag, telis, ha
does not think the principle applies to pig
iron. I hope our chairman, who I see does
me the honor to listen, will pardon me for re¬
ferring to the anecdote. It runs thus : Some
years ago, during the days of the Whig party,
when the chairman of the committee [Mr.
ScHEMCKj was here as a Representative of
that party and a friend of protection, he met as
a member of this House a worthy old Ger¬
man from Reading, Pennsylvania, a staunch
Democrat, but strongly in iavor of protection
on iron. The geutieman from Ohio, who is
fond of a joke, said to him one day, " Mr.
K.. I think 1 shall go with tae free-traders on
the iron seetions of the Tariff bill, espeeially on
pig iron." " Why will you do thatwas the
response. "Well, my people want cheap
plows, nails, horseshoes, etc." " But," re¬
plied the old German. " we make iron in Penn¬
sylvania; and if you want to keep up the
supply and keep tiie price down you ought to
encourage the manufacture." '• But you
know," said our chairman, "that a protec¬
tive duty is a tax, and adds just that much
to the cost of the article?" "Yes, I sup¬
pose it does generally increase the cost of
the thing just so much as the duty is;
all the leaders of our party say so,
and we say so in our convention platforms
and our public meeting resolutions ; but, Mr.
Sehenck, somehow or other I think it don't
work just that way mit pig iron." [Laugh¬
ter.]
The gentleman while admitting that protec¬
tive duties do not always or even generally in¬
crease the price of the manufactured article,
thinks " that somehow or other it don't work
that way mit pig iron." blow, I think that
iron in all its forms is subject to every general
law. and that the duty of $9 per tou "on pig
iron has reduced the price measured in wneati
wool, and other agricultural commodities and
increased the supply to such an extent as to
prove that the duty has been a boon and not a
tax. On nothing else produced in this coun¬
try has the influence of protection been so
broadly and benelicently felt by the people of
the ccuntry at large.
On the 11th of January I submitted to the
House some remarks iu the nature of a review
of the last report of Commissioner D. A.
Wells, and showed that after the production of
American pig iron had been without increase
for a decade, under the stimulus of this duty
we more than doubled it in six years. The
authentic figures I exhibited were as follows:
Product on of pig iron i ■ England and the Pnited
States from 1854 to i»62 inchuive.
Uni^d
B gland. Bate-.
1851 3,069.338 716,675
18.56 3.586.377 874 42a
1858 3.456,064 705.094
1860 3.826.752 91.3.774
1862 3,943,469 767,662
The Morrill tariff, which raised the duty to
$6, went into effect in 1861. In 1864 the duty
was raised to $9. The results have been as fol¬
lows;
United
ingland. Sate'.
1863 4,.".10.040 947.604
186>4 4,767.951 1,135.497
1865 4.819,2.54 931,582
1866 15 3.197 l,3iU.943
1867 4,761,028 1.461.626
1863 1,603.600
1869.. 1J)00,000
In coiinectiou with tliese fl^nres 1 then in
vitcd the attention ot the House to the fact
that we built last year 65 furnaces in 15 States
of the Union, and 5S more had been bea'un.
A few years more of such wonderful progress
and we will produce from our own coal and
iron our entire supply of iron and steal, and
compete with England in supplyiULC the de¬
mands of the world. The vast demand created
hy the extension of our railroad system, and
those of Kussia and India, are excccdiui; tlie
capacity of Eosland. She cannot larttely in¬
crease her production without Urfjely incrcas-
ina; its co.st. The gentleman from Iowa was
constrained to admit yesterday tliat tlie price
of English iron has gone up steadily during
the last year, because the demand is in ex¬
cess of tier capacity to produce ; yet the price
of American pig iron has fallen at least ?6
per ton on all grades within the last 10
months. What is the cause of this reduc¬
tion ? Not British competition—and that is
the only possible competition—for the price of
British iron has risen. No, sir; the price of
American iron has gone down under domestic
competition and the general depreciation of
prices.
the effect of protection on picices again.
The gentleman from Iowa said that pig iron
sells at $4t) a ton and yields at least $15 prodt.
I have the IronAne, a paper of the higlieot au¬
thority among dealers in iron and hardw.ire,
and I do not find it puts it at the price named
by ttie gentleman. March 1:1 it quotes prices
at Philadelphia of American pig iron. No. 1,
for foundry use, as $3d 50 to $01:; No. 2,
foundry, $31 50 to $31; gray forge, $30 to $81;
white ami mottled, $38 50 to $30. There is
Bome difference between these prices and $40 :
and if the gentleman was so far out of the way
in the proiits of iron-makers as in the cost of
iron he has shown clearly enough that there is
no nrollt in making pig iron at tihi.s time.
The English people know what would be the
effect of the reduction of our duty. I hold in
my hand the annual circular of a leading iron
linn in London advising the English Iron-
makers of the state of the trade and the pros¬
pect for tills year. Let me read from this cir¬
cular, wliich 1 may say was evidently uot in¬
tended for American consumption :
" No. 5s Old Bboad Street, I
London, iiocember 31, 18o9. (
'■ Sib : This has been a prosperous year for the
iron-masters. Our monthly advice ot exports will
have revealed the cause. Three countries alone—
linssia, India, and the United States—have pur¬
chased lr4<l,()0U tons of British raiis. Under the.se
unprecedented exports the price has ruled flriu,
and good Erie rails are now worth i!. 15s, net.
'Wet with the present out-turn a material reduction
of the American duty, or something equally signifi¬
cant, is necessary to advance the price above £7."
Yes, -Mr. Cliairmaii, a material reduction of
the American duty, or sometliing equally sig-
niiicaut, is iieccBsary to enable the British iron¬
master to advance his price beyond £7; and
tlie day the telegraph announces that we. have
reduced our duty on pig and railroad iron will
be the day on which the price of British iron
will go up. I pray you he admonished by this
circular.
I have also an article from the .Manchester
Examiner and Times of January 3, 1870, rela¬
ting to cotton, as cotiipared with tiie year pre¬
ceding; and from what I shall read it will be
seen that iron is not the ouly English interest
which will he Improved by the rednctioji
our duties. Thi organ of the cottou-ipimij
of M uieh -'ster s.iyi:
".As co.npjred with the years precelinn
Am::ricaa war, this country has roccivel fa
the past few yeirs £7,0X),il.H to £8,l>aj,'X)l]a,:i
aiina 11 for the cost of iniaafactaring coiloi. t|
there cm be no question that in comparhojru
the cost of cotton this couatry has marteeJu
cheapest cloth ever made; and if cotton auDD:,^
turers on the coatinent of Europe h id notbiei;.',
tooted by high tariffs they would nave been !i:j
from the flelJ."
Yes, repeal the protective duties on cottn
which arc so abhorrent to the gentleiiiiii fraj
Iowa, says the Examiner and Tunes of Ma
cliester, and the free-trade league and the«
ton iiianufactnres of the coniitry will betftj
from the field.
the tariffs of engi/and and fbasoe db
criminate against a.merlcan farxess.
Tlie gentleman from New Yort iMi.
Brooks) held up the English tariff to onrritt
(jeutlcmen may liave been surprised to hoi
me say that I was very anxious to ItiSM
the day when the tax on distilled spmj
slionld be repealed. Gentlemen from tn
agi-ieultural districts of France and Eg
land discriminate specially agaimt hi
and your constituents in tlieir tad
England derives nearly half her customs Itw
inordinate duties on the proJnclioDi of ua
American farmer, or from agricuitural pr>
ducts with which this country could snppl;
her. Let us look at the facts. Tuc gebtliM
f"om New York held up the tariff of Eiurisiii;
said it yields £11,6(13,414 sterling, or
UOO; bat he did not invite your atteutioo it
the fact that she raises over $.51,(WlJ,lk«,«i
more than one-half, by duties thatdLcrimnull
against our farmers. Yet such is the cast.
She raises from tobacco and snuff, one of oil
leading agricultural staples and its immeiliiii
product, £6,.543,460, or $33,713,31)0. lb
friends of free trade say we do uot import
enough English iron ; "we do not impoit
enough English cotton goods; we do not in-
port enough English woolen goods, coibiiler-
ing how elieip we can buy them ail l(»i
are to redu'-e our duties and import more!
beg the Representatives of the fanniug SWs
of the W est to demand sonietbing like r<ri*|
proeity on behalf of their constituents. Iff
whose grain there is no market. Every arl
of cottou and woolen goods and every ton of
iron represent the grain and meatconsumtilh
the fainiUes of the meu who produced it; uJ
while our grain goes to waste for the want il
purchasers, tlie Iriends of protection profal
against importing that grown in other com-
tries, even when converted into cloth orir*
The cloth and iron would he as good it mill
whore well-paid laborers eat freely of Anieri-
can wheat, butter and meat; and to thosevto
cannot sell their crop at any price a nciglito-
ing fiiriiaee, factory or rolliug-uiill would bti
blessing, even tiiough they could notbuycMl
or iron at English prices. But 1 must pr'oceol
I have sliowii that of the $108,(WO,000 Eg-
land raises by her tariff she gets $33,712.7"
bv duties on one of our agrieultural stajls
Iter duties on tobacco are taxes, for Eoi'kJ
has 110 tohaceo-fields to develop. Tbeyui
therefore, not protective duties. Lite oi
duties on tea, coffee, pepper and spier, to
are taxes purelv. But let us go a little farW
into this matter. England raises $31,661,S
15
It
.tints. This in an absolute dibcrinunation
St our Kiain. Were that uutv rfmovt.d
farmer and distiller would he working
her, and in.stcad of exporting wheat and
' at prices that will not cover the cost of
action and transportation, their produce
,"d he manufactured into alcohol, pork and
oil; and while our own laboring people
d have cheaper proiisions the farmer
' d greatly reduce the cost of transportation,
lavc an ample market for his grain manu¬
red into alcohol, pork and oil. Yet
■iemen representing agricultural districts
I with us to admit British goods at lower
■, while she gathers i?.54,,5U'J,8do in a single
by imposing such duties ou tobacco as
;ly diminish its consumption, and such on
ts as preclude the importation of our grain
,c only forms in which it can be profitably
erted.
".AUD X HIDEOUS MONOPODT—PIIEB TEXDE
SUPPOUTS IT.
BROOKS, of New York. Let me state
our great agricultural products—cotton,
" h IB an immen.-ie product, and wheat, corn,
T-are admitted duty free,
r. KELLEY. To that I reply that they
our cotton because they cannot live with-
it, and our wheat and corn when they can-
buy cereals cheaper elsewhere. France
li duty oil wheat and flour even when im-
'ed in French vessels. We are too far from
ieaboard, and the cost of transportation
out- grain fields is too great for us to send
yi gniin in bulk at present prices. The
pest way of transporting corn ib in the
1 of alcohol. In this form' we could send
■ otitably were their duties not prohibitory,
land will take raw materials from coun-
- from which she can buy cheapest. But
■much-lauded free trade does not ofi'er any
-Ullage to the American. Gentlemen talk
It monopolists, and aver that protection
ers monopolies. Sir, the world has never
■ BO heartless, so unrelenting, and so gi-
■".ic a monopoly as the British Government
-the manufacturing power that sustains it.
a inouopoly which has desolated Ireland
. swept her factories from the face of the
-h. Ireland, less than a century ago, before
anion, the home of a contented people, and
-seat of a busy and prosperous industry, is
■ a land whose people are born only to be
-ohed and hunted as felons, or cxi ej from
land they love so well. The m-anuficturing
landed monopoly of England but a few
■s ago huddled into their graves the decay-
hodies of more tlian 1,000,000 of the people
Ireland, who died of starvation in a single
. is a monopoly which has inflicted on Brit-
. India wrongs even greater than these,
ee years ago the air of the whole wide
rict of Orissa was fetid with the stench
ig from the decaying bodies of more than
10,000 people who had starved in one of the
lest agricultural regions in the world, ho¬
se, under England's enlightened free trade,
■V were not permitted to deversify their in-
drics. and when their single crop failed they
e permitted to starve, as the Irish were
in the rot assailed their only crop—the po-
i. This English monopoly is so absolute
' selfish that'll will not allow provinces and
,,)nles to diversify their industry. It binds
them to the culture of one prodnet—India, cot¬
ton, and Ireland, men for exportation, thall
she also hold the people of the Northwest as
her commercial suh^cets and doom them to
raise wheat and wheat alone V VYe can break
its power and overthrow ^this monstrous mo¬
nopoly. Yes, by peaceful arts, without the
clash of arms, we can emancipate the hundreds
of millions of pi opie England now oppresses.
The source of her power is her commeicial and
inanulacturing supremacy, and Ihis we can and
should uudcrmiue, as we arc its chief sup-
piort. With our cotton-fields, our wide-spread
and inexhaustible deposits of all the metals,
and our immense sheep-walks, we should sup¬
ply all our warns. When we do this our com¬
merce will revive, for populous nations that
supply their own markets always produce a
surplus which they can export at low piioes.
But now England piroiierlv regards us as a de¬
pendency more profitable than '* all the Eng¬
lish-speaking dependencies of the empire." Ou
this point the Loudon Times of February
when discussing the bill now under considera¬
tion, says:
" The fiscal policy of the United States is lor ns a
sabject of no remote or transient Interest, Al¬
though statistics may be adduced to prove that in
proportion to population the colonies are our best
customers, yet iu the mass our rade with republi¬
can America is by lar the largest item in the bal-
auce-sheot of our exports to foreign countricB, and
is nearly equal to ttiat with all the English-speak¬
ing dependencies of the empire."
the pullpose of the free list.
The committee in proposing the extended
free li.st embraced in the second section of the
hill hoped lo accomplish two important ob¬
jects, one of which was to promote direct com-
m roc between us and those nou-manufac-tur-
ing countries which require the productions
of our shops and mills, and whose raw ma¬
terials we require ; and the other was to give
our manulacturors and mechanics, free of duty,
those essentials which France, England, and
Belgium admit free. A maioi ity of the coin-
iiiittee believe that the adoption of this will
do much to revive our commerce, and not only
quicken established industries, but lead to the
introduction of new ones, and thus moreaso
the market for the productions of the farm and
reduce the cost and price of a large range of
manufactured goods. W^e think it is sound
])Oliev to let in free raw materials that we can¬
not produce, and collect our revenue from
articles in the production of which labor ha.s
been expended. This is the theory of the bill
we reported. It ha-s the sanction of the sagaci¬
ty and experience of France and England, and
was framed regardless of the teachings ol mere
theorists and school-men.
the alleq.ttioh that we protect our
manufaciuhbs bt duties averaqisg forty
per cent. is not true.
Mr. Chairman. I desire to call attention to
the unfairness, iminteutioual, of course, of the
statement of the gentleman from New York
(Mr. Brooks) th-at the existing tariff gives pro¬
tection equal to an average of 41.2'pcr cent.
This is the percentage of duties on the ag¬
gregate of oar imports, and he will hardly
claim that the duty of over 833 per cent, on
chalk is protective of any of our industries
Again, we coll<-ct a duty of 300 per cent, on
• pepper. Why should black pepper pay 300
per cent, f Do we grow it anywhere in this
•16
country y Is this duty protcctiye of any of
our industries? You piy 5 cents a pound for
p epper and the tarilf imposes a duty of 15
cents, gold, equal to 30d per cent., and the
geutlerain includes this in his average of pro¬
tective duties. Do we grow cloves or clove-
stems in any part of the country ? Is the duty
on them protective? It is on cloves 35.5 per
cent, and on clove-stems 336 per cent., and yet
the gentleman also Includes these with his pro¬
tective duties. 1 think gentlemen perceive by
this time whati meant whenlsaid that many of
the provisions of the present tarill are incon¬
gruous. While many of them are high enough
for protection they are countervailed by higher
duties on raw materials that we cannot pro¬
duce, and which rival nations admit free or un
der very low duties
I shall not attempt to bring all such incon¬
gruities to the attention of the committee, but
beg leave to allude to a few more. On cayenne
pepper, the duty is 303 per cent.; on allspice,
376J^ per cent.; on nutmegs, 1331^ per cent.;
on crude earaphor, 113 per cent.; on saltpeter,
ll/i P^i" cent.; on varnish gums, none of which
are produced in this country, 30 per cent.; on
tea, the laborer'.s refreshing drink, 73)^ per
cent; on coffee, 47)^ per cent. I could large¬
ly extend this list ol duties, each of which is a
tax on some article of common consumption
not produced in the country, and to that ex¬
tent a hoiius to our competitors. I am in fa¬
vor of making all su7h articles free; and the
committee has reduced the duties oii tlicm or
put them on the free list. When this shall he
doue the gentleman from New York can cal¬
culate the percentage and lind that our duties
will compare favorably with those imposed by
England and France. [Since this speech was
made many of these articles have been put in
the free list.]
duties which need readjustment.
Another serious fault of the existing law is
thai so many ol its duties are ad valorem. Dis¬
honest men take advantage of this and have
goods invoiced below the proper value, and
thus not only defraud the Govcrumont, hut do
wrong to both the home manufacturer and the
honest importer. This isystciu of duties has
much to do with the decline of American com¬
merce. The large temptation to defraud the
Government by undervaluitiou has cause 1
great houses abroad to est ildlsh agencies here
and to refuse to sell directly to an American
purchaser. This is so with all the Sheffield
steel-makers and most of the continental silk
houses. In this way the frauds of the steel¬
makers and silk manufacturers have been enor¬
mous, amounting to many millions of dollars.
The new bill substitutes specitie duties wher¬
ever it is practicable.
Many of the existing duties are so high as to
defeat all their legitimate objects and deprive
the Government of all revenue. This is espe¬
cially true of spices. It was in evidence from
miny sources that these are imnorted intoNew
Y'ork and San Francisco and immediately ship-
■'American Industrial League," Detroit, Mich
ped in bond to the British provinces, irleM
they are smuggled hick. The bill of tbicij.
iiiittee proposes such reduction of the Jii'd
as will probably give tue Governmeat a In j.
some revenue while cheipening themtil)
consumer. The value to the country ol l.i
changes proposed cannot fail to be yervtrui
the present law should be rbvised, Sit
overthrown.
Would that I could impress upon the!
my estimate of the value to the coaotryil
these changes. I am discussing the billlnii
spirit of partisanship. In urging itsawe:
ance I am pleadinij the cause of the farmenil
laborer, as I conscientiously believe thatitih^
if adopted, increase the purcha.-ing poifpr.tli
exchangeable value of every hoshel of^iii
grown and hour of labor performed ia mi
country. I have no general rondemaatjoii(«
the existing law. It needs revhioa, liii
should not be overthrown. As a revetm
measure it has e.xeeeded the antieipatioosd
its friends and the most earnest frieodsoftie
Government. It yielded for the year talii;
June 30,1367, $176,417,810; for the year
ing June 30, 1863, $164,464,599 56; and Ik
the year ending June 30, 1369, $130,034,4568;
and no preceding tariff produced resultscoi-
parable to these.
Ami, sir, notwithstanding thesetaalts illiii
been of great value as a protective meisr.
By its protective influence it has added miitii
to the power of the country and the proipenti
of the people. Under it our prodactiMiolpi;
iron has been more than doubled, asIhaR
already shown, and its produclioa has beffl
extended into new and large fields ia State
where it w;is previously unknown. Thus lui
iucreased value been given to all the tad is
those Slates ; the increase being equal to tie
addition of the value of the mineral lani< li
thai of the agricultural surface; and more tun
that, it has provided a market in the ueglibiii-
hood of each furnace, in which articles can le
sold which would not hear transportatioa to
distant points or foreign lands. The faimeii
of Iowa and Minnesota now nrod ace for salt
little of aiivthing else than wheat and wool hi
exportation to the sea-hoard States or ete
where. When roannfaetorics are built ormiats
opened, villages spring up and create a martd
for roots, as potatoes and turnips, the produc¬
tions of the garden and the orchard, and i»i
hay, by which the Western farmer will be re¬
lieved from the necessity of growingsnccessiit
crops of wheat to the exhaustion of tbesoii
These villages also afford a market forlamk,
veal, eggs, and all the thousand things tbil
come in as subsidiary sources of iocouieevd
to those who farm on a great scale. Tbii
have many fanners felt the protective luJaeiiM
of the e.visting tariff, as well as in the stimoiib
it has given to immigration, and the addilioi
of the mineral to the agricultural value of im¬
mense bodies of land" in almost every State;
and while endeavoring to improve illrenei
my protest against its repeal or overthrow.
,, June 1810.
THE ELJEE-k^ XJ."
Monthly. 50 Large Pages. S3 Per Year.
OOMMEEOE, MANUFAOTUSES AND GENEKAL INDUSTEIES.
Large and wida clrcuiation. Excellent adverfieing onrnai and full of valuable facta and
able argumeuta In favor of home Industry. (I'l Wabash Avenue, Chicago, Ui.)
WESTERN CAMPAIGN OF THE AGENTS
OF THE
AMERICAN FREE TRADE LEAGUE."
leir Plan of Free Trale aiJ Tariff for EoTome tie Britlsl Plaii.
- It Works Badly There and Will Here.
TAGES.-REAL TARIFF REFORM.
Within th past two months meetings
■vebeen ho id in leading cities in the West
- sundry agents of the " American Free
ide League," sent out from its headquar-
. 8 in New York, and their coming plan-
1 by correspondence and personal visits
months. Magnified reports of their au-
• nces and the enthusiasm are telegraphed
m each place. For instance, a company
-'•about three hundred or less in the old
y Hall here, invited to attend a " Tariff
orm Meeting," and made up of more
n half protectionists, became a " large
T enthusiastic free trade meeting" in
■ ly journals in New York and elsewhere !
'rof. A. L. Perry, of Williams College,
.s3., Gen. Brinkerhoff, of Ohio, Mahlon
-ids, of Now York, and Rev. H. Blan-
;-.rd, of Indianapolis,- have been the speak-
Reports, in journals claimed as favor-
their views, of their speeches in this
Chicago, Milwaukee and St. Louis, are
ore me.
their "revenue tariff " scheme.
'heir present plans and aims may be sift-
down to the following, from Prof. Perry'.
'l I would throw off at a stroke ninety per
t. ol all the artielea taxed in our present
it
tariff. I would also remit the duties on the
part remaining, to that point at which, I sup¬
pose, the most revenue would come in, with
the least interference with the industries of
the people. But you say such a procedure
would take away the revenues of the Govern¬
ment. Not at all. In 1^7 three-fourths of
all the revenue th,at was raised from customs
was raised on thirteen articles, and it is just
as certain as anything can be that revenue du¬
ties levied uuder the principle which I have
just enunciated—namely, the highest degree
of revenue with the least interference with
the industries of the people—on from fifteen
to twenty articles, will realize one hundred
and fifty millions of dollars a year without
any vexation, without any popular complaints
against the duties, and with very little or no
interference with the industries of the people.
Why, last year we realized on tea and coffee,
sugar and molasses, wines and spirits, tobac¬
co and snuff—four classified articles—the sum
of $ti3,.595,000. Spices and camphor, which
will bear a high rate of duty; opium, still a
better source of revenue; embroideries of ail
kinds, &c., &c., &c."
This plan of a preteatied "-iseyenpe tariff "
is really a fine deyiee to tahe the iaje from
the prodwts of British and, other foreign
manufacturers,, and levy it. on the.comforts
and neeessiii^ of, the Ameri^je farrner and
2
tcoTn-.^man, and to redvM our rates of wa¬
ges. It is a premium or discrimination in
favor o f foreign manu facturers and foreign
pauper wages, and against our own capitalists
andbetterpaid workmen.
There is, of course, no home competition
to lessen the price of tea, coffee, etc., and
therefore the tariff tends to permar^enfly in¬
crease their price.
To reduce, or even abolish, the duties on
these articles, would lessen the price of the
necessities and comforts of the people, and
impose no new burthen on them.
Interest on money^is nearly double here
what it is in England ; wages, as we will
show, nearly double, and of our local taxes
for National, State and district affairs, for¬
eigners pay nothing ; and foreign manufac¬
turers pay less at home than ours here.
Taxes for our free schools count up to $100,-
000,000 yearly, being $120,000 in this city
alone, and are cheerfully shared by our
manufacturers and workers, while not a dol¬
lar is paid, save in a few exceptional cases,
to educate the children of their poor work¬
men by British or other foreign manufac¬
turers, as th^ have no free school system.
Mr. S. C. Hewitt, U. S. Commissioner to
the Paris Exposition in 1867, says, that in
the manufacturing districts of England
there are more children in the poor houses
than in the schools.
Hon. D. A. Wells, U. S. Special Bevenue
Commissioner, well says:
■'In this country every man is a citizen,
and nearly every citizen a voter. As the pos¬
sessors ot power we cannot afford to have any
class of the people ignorant or socially degra¬
ded. To insure a safe standard of education
and of domestic comfort there must be a cer¬
tain scale of wages, and these must be rela¬
tively higher than are paid to the competing
laborer of Europe, to whom power is not en¬
trusted and education denied. These de¬
graded laborers constitute the ' dangerous
classes ' there, but no dangerous classes ought
to exist in America. Whatever discrimina¬
tion, therefore, may be necessary to keep up
the wages, the social status, and the self-re¬
spect of the American voter, is a tax imposed
by our political system, and it is a tax which
the enjoyment of that system amply repays."
Tet, making no allowance for all this, we
are offered a scheme to have absolute free
trade on the products of our industry, and
revenue raised on foreign products which
we do not produce here—except sugar.
This is Political Economy 1
With capital taxes and labor as low as
in Europe, and with their experience, we
are their equals, and on the ground of this
inequality against us, protection is just and
beneficial in the development of our great
resources, the varied employment of labor
and skill, the enlargement of our hom
market, and the increase of our produetivf
power, the basis of wealth.
an "axiom" examined.
But Gen. Brinkerhoff has a"6ettle(iji
iom " and the whole company maintain i;
that, " as a rule, a duty imposed on an in
ported article enhances not only the pti#
of the imports but of the home prodnn
to the same extent," and they dwell on tlii
" axiom " to convey the idea that thepw
people are robbed of ten times the amoaii
of the tariff to enrich the " monopolieta 'or
home manufacturers.
Alexander Hamilton is supposed to hni
had a little knowledge and sagacity—pos
bly equal to these gentlemen—and in his
famed Keport, in 1791, as Secretary of tin
Treasury, he said :
"But though it were true that the immed:
ate and certain effect of a fcinfl was an h
crease of price, it is universally true that tif
contrary is the ultimate effect with every am
cesstul manufacture. When a domestic man
ufacture has attained to perfection, and lia
engagea in the prosecution of it a competeil
number of persons, it can be afforded, mi
accordingly seldom or never fails to be snli
cheaper, in process of time, than the forein
article for which it is a substitute. Ibeinttr
nal competition which takes place soon dw
away with everything like monopoly, and to
degrees reduces the price of the article totli
minimum of a reasonable profit on the capiul
employed. This accords with the reason of
the thing and with experience."
How has experience agreed with Hami!
ton's views ? Cottons, imported at SOcenii
a yard, have been exported, of better qoaS-
ty, under a high tariff, at 6 cents. Coitoo
hosiery from 1860 to 1868 was reducednw
ly half in price. Delaines, impwrted atlit
to 50c., were made here in 1868, of eqoil
quality, at 20c. The present prices o' wouin
cloths of general consumption are less thai
thirty years ago, and woolens are lower.h
gold, to-day, than in 1860, under a low
tariff.
Nails, ax'es, saws, tools, pins, etc.,
lower under protection than formerly.
steel was reduced from 18c. to 13c. in
and sold in the war for 32c., while theEij
lish, no better, was held at 45c, saviigoto
government some money, as well as depei''
ence on an unfriendly foreign power. %
land raised her tariffon iron seventeenth"
in a hundred and fifty years, and it ptj
cheaper until in 1826, she could undots-'
the world, and lowered the duty and criof
" Hurrah for free trade in iron!"
Facts and the " axiom" hardly agree.'"'
free trade theorists have a delightful
lessness of facts in dealing with a piactia*
3
, 3gtlon where they are of highest impor-
ice.
^ sample of a curious mode of statement,
Jjring results curiously absurd and erro-
')U8, may be taken from Gen. Brlnkerhofif,
, i the rest agree in this mode. He says :
m pig, bar and railroad iron, the people
-t year paid a tax, in the increased price
■.i the duty, of over $45,000,000, of which
-) government got but $.5,000,000, and
er $40,000,000 went into the poekets of
s iron men."
A word on this may cover reply to like
;tements on lumber, &c. Many
irers in our city were led to suppose that
-f manufacturers swindled the govern-
ijint of these great sums, but as only im-
.•ters have to do with Custom Houses,
, honest men among them are the only
•sons who can cheat there, and false ad
orem invoices, under our bad system, ar®
^)d by such men to keep back millions
^ ly ought to pay.
.t is for the interest of manufacturers that
duties be fully paid, and they say, as all
. nest men do: " Obey the laws, and
inge them if best."
I If he meant that the increased price added
much to the profits of the employers,
'It, too, is groundless.
' The figures are quite wild, but pass that
■, and all other errors of fact or argument,
i let us see where the money goes.
'The entire difference in the cost of
iking iron here or in England is in the
■ges—[see report of S. C. Hewitt, H. S.
mmissioner], which are 87c. to 100c.
lay there and 200 cents here, and our
■n workers must ask more to be able to
y more wages, or push wages down to
'npete with pauper pay abroad. Thus we
d that the $40,000,000 goes largely to the
-irkman ; and we may well bear in mind
■ it severireighths of the wages [see estimate
' U. S. Revenue Commissioner] goes to buy
id—of our farmers of course. For in-
-ince, the mills and shops in the Mahoning
-dley, in Southeastern Ohio, use up at
9t prices the produce near them, and send
out $1,000,000 yearly to Toledo and Chi-
go tor piovisions.
So this terrible $40,000,000 does not go into
'■B pockets of these " monopolists "—" any
■•ly you can fix it," but gets into the pock-
'i of artizans and farmers, helping our
■ "alth at home, instead of adding to our
' bt abroad.
"In a pitiful effort to awaken some local
?judice the growth of Western manufac.
res, and their importance to this region,
• kept quite in the distance. Yjst Chicago
^'lims $'25,000,000 of yearly manufactures,
^veland $40,000,000, and Cincinnati $104,-
000,000 in 1868, an increase ftom 1860 of
over $50,000,000—even under the baleful
sway of that " iniquitous tariff!"
Of the benefits of a home market, of the
draining the Western soil of its wealth by
constant export of grain, these gentlemen
say nothing. Let me again quote from
Hamilton's report:
" There are natural causes tending to ren¬
der the external demand for 4he surplus of
agricultural nations a precarious reliance.
The differences of seasons in the countries
which are the consumers, make immense dif¬
ferences in the produce of their own soils in
dift'erent years, and consequently in thede-,
grees of their necessity for foreign supply.
Plentiful harvests with them, especially if
similar ones occur at the same time in the
countries which are the furnishers, occasion
of course a glut in the markets of the latter."
Fluctuation in our exports of grain from
3,000,000 up to 40,000,000 bushels a year,
and down again, show his sagacity. And
in 1859, while England and Europe took but
$18,000,000 worth of the farm products of
the Northwest, our customers in the United
States took $190,000,000, and with facto¬
ries built up in the West, we had saved trans¬
portation on this and kept our lands rich
beside. Home manufactures and home mar¬
kets grow together. Pennsylvania last year
bought more Western produce than Eng¬
land, and New England more still.
PERRY vs. MILL, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, ETC
With great pertinacity and constant
repetition. Professor Perry rings the
changes as follows : " It has been dinned
into our ears that a tariff" is a necessary pro¬
tection to the industrial interest of a nation,
but look at the facts." And then he seeks
to prove tariffs to be taxes with no returns
of benefit.
John Stuart Mill, of England, free trader
as he is, has too much breadth of view and
candor of spirit to take such ground. In
his " Political Economy," he says :
"The superiority of one country over an¬
other in a branch of production often arises
from having begun it sooner. There may be
no inherent advantage or disadvantage on
either side, but only a present superiority of
skill and experience. A country which has
this skill and experience yet to acquire, may,
in other respects, be better adapted to the
production than those earlier in the field; and
beside, it is a just remark, that nothing has a
greater tendency to produce improvement
in any branch of production than its
trial under a new set of conditions. But it
cannot be expected that individuals, at their own
cost, should introduce a new manufacture and
bear the burthens of carrying it on until tha
producers have been educated up to the line of
those with whom the processes have become
4
traditional. A protectivk dutt, continued
a reasonable time, will sometimes b'e the least
ineonvenieut mode in wbieii a country can
tax itseli for the support of an experiment."
M. Chevalier, a distinguished Frencli
statesman, ■vvho negotiated witli Cobden, tlie
Anglo-French treaty of 1860 (claimed as a
free trade treaty, but which was not, yet of
which the French are growing tired, and
asking its repeal), said in 1852 :
" It is not an abuse of power on the part of
the government; on the contrary, it is the ac¬
complishment of a positive duty, so to act at
each epocli in the progress of a nation as to
-favor taking possession of ail the branches of
industry whose acquisition is authorized by
the nature of things. Governtnents are, in
etfect, the personitication of nations, and it is
required that tliey should exercise tlieir in¬
fluence in the direction indicated by the gen¬
eral interest, properly studied, and fully ap¬
preciated. I regard as excellent the desire of
some of the eminent men of the principal
nations ot Europe to establish around them
the various branches of manufactures,
althougli I may not praise without distinction
all the measures by them adopted for the ac¬
complishment of their object."
We might quote from the powerful and
earnest speeches of Abraham Lincoln in Il¬
linois, years ago, appeals of a nobly honest
man, in favor of protection, and add more
from Jackson, Jefferson and others, but
possibly the views of Mill, Chevalier and
Hamilton may weigh as much as those of
this agent of the " Free Trade League."
If there be " robbery" anywhere in this
matter, I fear it would be in the inevitable
effects of a free trade system, with its tariff
for revenue (the British and also the Perry
plan)—robbing the workman of his wages
by their reduction to the British level.
Frank confessions wiU sometimes be made,
such as that of a free trade writer in a New
York journal, who said : " A commercial
revolution would follow ; laborers would be
out of employ, and the price of labor toould
come down, dxmn, until it reached ths Euro¬
pean standard, and then success is insured."
In this connection I give a letter Irom a
late Hartford Post, the writer of which
heard Prof. Perry in Chicago:
" I propose to show, as briefly as possible,
the working of our present 'iniquitous and
accursed tariff,'—as Prof. Perry caiied it—its
effect upon the revenue, upon the home man¬
ufacturers of spool-cotton, and upon the price
of iabor, and the relative price of foreign and
American thread to tiie consumers.
" Tlie average importation of spool-cotton
into New York, for three eoiiseeulive years,
ending June BO, 1801, was 0,08.5,200 dozen per
annum, and under a duty of 24 per cent, ad
valorem, yieided a revenue to the government
of iB0o,0tiB.04 per annum.
" The importation of spooi-cotton lntoSe»
York in 18(i8 was 3,519,573 dozen; duties si
the same, $822,276.'J8.
" We iiave no data to show the importatiin,
of this article into other ports in the couDln
but will suppose it to be .500,000, or the wliulh
importation ot the year to be 4,000,000dozei;
amount of Atnerican six-cord thread maDoIt
tured in 1808, 3,000,000 dozen ; amonDt o(
American enameled thread manufactnrei(
8,000,000 dozen.
"It appears that not less than 14,000,OS)
dozen spool-cotton will be consumed in tto
country the present year, more than tw«.
thirds of which is of American manufactnn.
" During the war, and up to a late period,
the foreign manufacturers controlicdtbeprict
of tiiread in our market; at present th
American manufacturers control the price.
" For two or three years after the decline li
the price of gold to about its present val®,
the price of foreign thread remained eteadi
at $1. to to $1.15 per dozen; it is now eelliii!
at 80 to i»0 cents per dozen—a decline In pritt
of 30 cents per dozen in two years, whichwill
be a saving to the consumers of foreignthnad
of $1,200,000 the present year, while theds
eline in the price of American spool-cotki
owing to strong competition, has been is
dueedmore than .50 percent., which will slioi
a still further saving of $2,000,000, The fol¬
lowing is a summary of the results of a liifd
duty of spooi-cotton, as appears hy the loit-
going exhibit: The revenue to the gora
ment has been more than doubled; the Amwi-
can manufacture of thread has heen larjeK
increased, while the price of labor in tli«
thread mills is still as high as dmringthe nt,
and the consumers of thread are savinjJS,-
000,000 per annum, through the strong cob-
petition wiiieh has sprung up between tli(
American and foreign manulacturers undei
the influence of a high tariff.
"Mr. Sands, Secretary of the Free Tridt
League, made a speech at the same tiuieii
Chicago, drawing a pitiful picture of a poor
sewing girl iu her garret in New York. H«
said ; ' The woman's thread is taxed S
per cent, in order that 'Willimantic factor)
owners in Connecticut may make big profits.'
" The allusion heretotheWiliimanticThread
Company is unfortunate for the gcntlemaii,
for this company, with a capital ot $1,000,000,
have not enlarged their works or made bnt»
single dividend of 10 per cent, for three yeaix
and arenoxv running their machinery otsboij
time, while other manufacturers of thrcu
with less means, have already failed. Ofl"
establisiiments of about the same nwga'""''
have not made a dividend since startiiigi'
period in some instances of six years"
TlfE BRITISH PLAN AND THE PERRV
PARENT AND CHILD—IT WORKS B.U>t!
THERE AND WILL HERE.
Professor Perry's "Revenue Tariff"P">
ject is the British plan, and child and
are quite alilie. Common sense woulddB
tate that every country should hst®
s
n policy in view of its debt, rate of inter-
trade, taxes and wages; but common
ase and " political economy," after bis
Ba, may not agree.
England, a few years ago, thought she
'aid undersell the world in iron, cottons,
•"iKtlen, eta., and made her rates of duty
minal on these staples, and levied her
Tiff on tea, coffee, spirits, tobacco, etc.,
rich she does not produce, and cried loud
-d long for free trade. But she protects
T beer-makers by a duty of 63 cents per
shel on malt and $5 a barrel on beer,
it us see now this Biitish free trade sys-
n with its tariff for revenue, after which
e Perry plan is modeled, works there.
• A remarkable reaction is going on in
igland. The force of hunger is powerful,
d the working classes are forming asso-
Htions against free trade, known as " Re¬
fers of British Industry." A free trade
rrespondent of the Manchester ffttarrfiun,
■ the very seat and centre of those views,
fs; " There is unquestionably a reaetion
■' ainst free trade." And other journals
ght be quoted to the same end, but I give
irt of a letter in the Sheffield" Telegraph,
.'im a manufacturer—Mr. Wood—as fol-
■ vs:
'It is no wonder people are complaining
bad times, when we stand In the position
now are in. To what extent foreign eom-
"tition has extended may be best gathered
■m the following figures : In 18.54 the fotal
cess of imports over British exports was re-
, Bsented by ±5.5,204,337. In 1860 tbis ex-
' is had reached £'.14,639,646, and in 1868 the
p ;al excess of imports over exports had
y-'iounted to the enormous and ruinous sum
- £116,043,932, an amount more by £13,081,-
■) than the whole of our textile manufac-
i: res exported to the whole world, giving a
. lanee against us in our foreign trade for
; 3 year 1868 of £116,000,000 sterliijg.
• « * * #
What must be the effects of free admis-
V m into this country of 363,523 clocks and
, .tches, of 7,757,930 yards of cotton manufac-
•e; of 404,544 cwts of glass; of 468,340
' Irs ot shoes; of 10,714,188 pairs of kid and
aor gloves; of 3,866,136 fibs, of silk manufac-
res; of 2,361,192 lbs. of woolen and worsted
rn ? What amount of labor would not
-* ;se articles have found for our half-starving
■- pulation ?
; ■' Whilst certain articles, such as tea, cof-
- J, sugar, etc., which we cannot produce our-
' ves, are admitted at heamj duties, other
-^.ieles which we can produce, and our
®,'lf-starTed countrymen are literally dying to
"•J Jduce, are admitted free, such, as silks,
& lolens, watches and clocks, cottons, hats,.
, )ves, &c., itc. The foreign masters can
"mufacture at 30 per cent, less than we can,
'" 'd yet they tan import their goods free.
It ■''.ere was bullion in the Bank of England, in
• ill-
January}, 1S53, £20,537,000; and in April, 1869,
only £W,225,000, showing a decrease of £3,-
303,000. In the Bank of Frrnee there was bul¬
lion, January 13, 1853, £20,017,948; in April,
1869, £47,102,112, or an increase of £27,084,-
164. These figures are facts, and plainly show
who is making the money. It commends
itself to the notice of every right-minded man
who loves his country and its welfare.
* « » » *
" At the present moment about one in
every 18 persons of England.and Wales is in
receipt of parochial relief. There was paid, in
1853, £4,939,064 for pauperism, but in 1868
£7,500,000 was paid. In London alone the
amount expended in relief was, in 1859, £117,-
935, while in 1868 it was £279,898. Since 1853,
upward of 3,000,000 of our people have emi¬
grated, and principally to eetrerne protective
countries, where their labor has found a better
reward, but at the same time it has been the
means of greater foreign productiveness. We
have tried free trade so long in the face ol
other protective producing countries, that it is
almost time we protected ourselves."
They compete at ruinous disadvantage
with lower labor on the continent, and we
are asked to fling away all barriers and
thus let our wages go down to pauper level !
They are alarmed at this growth of pau¬
perism, this want of work, this vast excess
of |.580,000,000 a year in imports over ex¬
ports, and this draining of gold to fill French
and German bank vaults.
We might well remember our debt
abroad of $1,500,000,000 in bonds, stocks and
trade debts, and its yearly interest of
$90,000,000 in specie or its equivalent, and
our excess of imports counting some $100,-
000,000 or so yearly. These imports for
the fiscal year 1869 being $437,000,000
in gold value. If England's free trade
and revenue tariff, with all her wealth,
draws her specie to the continent, how shall
we, under a similar plan, ever reach specie
payment? That plan would be peril to
capital, paralysis to industry, and tlie swiit
and sure harbinger of a terrible financial
" crisis."
This cup, of which England has drank
until her people are sick unto death, is of¬
fered us by the " American Free Trade
League," and pressed to our lips by these,
its agents. Let us beware of the deadly
draught.
It is no part of my intent or wish to make
wholesale charges against believers in free
trade; but who lead and furnisji the " sinews
of war "for this movement? Let us see.
Of the $42,000 raised last May for the
League, in New York, as given by them¬
selves, we find contributors as follows : A.
B. Sands & Co., drug importers, relatives of
the London bankers—Baring Brothers, $6,-
257 ; H. Marshall, Treasurer of the League,
6
agent Black Ball ]>ine of Liverpool packets,
foreign banker, $5,500 ; Grinnell, Minturn
& Co., Minturn brother-in-law to Baring,
$3,800 ; Messrs. Pell, Liverpool and London
Globe Insurance Co., $842 ; Naylor & Co.,
English steel house, $500 ; Mall & Co., im¬
porters, Mall, Belgian Consul, $500 ; George
Ward, banker, agent Baring Brothers, $500,
and so on through, $30,000 paid by men
closely linked with foreign interests.
These men are simply taking shrewd care
of themselves aftd their kin. that is all.
If this can be done coBsistently with our
country's good, all well; but it i> a little
singular that these gentlemen, of foreign
connections, are so much more solicitous tor
American interests than men of Wealth not
thus linked with British movements and
ideas. The London Mining Jountal says ;
" If this League succeeds in the United
States we may hope for a very large trade
with that country."
It recalls the days of 1840, when men in
Glasgow and Manchester subscribed $100,-
000 to lower our tariS', and some of them
were foolish enough afterward to say they
more than got their money back by break¬
ing down our factories and then selling us
goods at their own prices.
In his speech here. Prof. Perry extolled
the " good time coming," when the people
could have cheaii iron, &c., &c., but possi¬
bly we may have a second experience like
that of 1852 to 1857, when British iron
makers, having sent over and sold railroad
bars at $40 a ton (under our low tariff,
which they had helped to make, but at
cost or less), closed our mills and then run
up the price to $30 a ton, selling us 1,000,-
000 tons or so, and thus helping on the
crash ot 1857. These men fail to see that
the best possible security against " monopo¬
lists," at home and abroad, is such protec¬
tion of our home industry as will give scope
for successful competition.
MANNERS AND INACCURACIES.
The meeting in this city was the opening
of the Western series. An invitation to
Prof. Perry and others to speak on " tariff
reform " was courteously signed by gentle¬
men some of whom were protection¬
ists.
He indulged in a little humor on Tarifa,
a Moorish town on the Mediterranean,
where Christian traders paid tribute under
the gentle suasion of heathen batteries, as
giving name tg tariff, and said of those
Moors ; ■' The transaction was robbery,
without the hypocrisy of pretence of giving
it back in an increase of prosperity to those
who paid it, as do those who advocate a
tariff' for protection."
This fling at the gentlemen on the llslol
his invitors is hardly fine manners in tin
region, and if it be a sample of the Prols
sor's courtesy, our Western people nai
form a poor estimate ot the manners inNt»
England colleges. Without claiming m
monopoly of virtue by the maaufactureri
of our country, it might be fair to beg lit
agents of the League not to overwlieh
tnem with hard names, or brand them tw
much as " monopolists." However, as i;
is easier to use hard names than solid facis
and arguments—when one's case is poor-
perhaps allowance must be made in tk
direction.
In the same speech he said; " We.doiu
East, at least, would like to have foreigner!
assault us in the way of trade ; we would
like to see some of their goods. Haven't ve
had shoddy enough 1 Havn't we lid
fabrics enough of home manufacture at fib
ulous prices and of such texture a coicl
and four could be driven through withoii
making a rent?"
It will be seen that woolens were in Lis
mind. As we imported some $.35,000,01))
worth, at gold invoice cost, he could "set
some of their goods" with no great trouble.
As for shoddy, we use none in our weslera
mills, some in New England, but the
English manufacturers use 65,000,00#
pounds a year. So he must look then for
shoddy when his words would imply it wis
not. The honest excellence of our Americu
woolens will probably outlast this little
mi.stake of the learned professor on the
shoddy question.
Mr. Blanchard complacently stated the
cost of pig iron at Chicago at $48 per toi,
while it was selling at $36 to $45.
Prof. Perry said at Indianapolis thii
pig iron, which could be made in St.
Louis foir$23 a ton, " owing tothetanf'
was sold at $40. It was not selling at $10,
and I should dispute its being made lot
$23. But, granting him right so far, ho*
would a tariff' of $9, gold, or $12, currency
raise the price $17 a ton? He says the
Missouri ore is 95 per cent, iron, andthe
Scotch ore but 25 per cent., and yet *e
want protection. There is no ore in the
world yielding 95 per cent, of iron.
Sixty-five per cent, for Missouri and Lahe
Superior ore is nearly exact, and the Scotch ,
ore averages 38 to 40 per cent., and is vet; ,
easy to smelt, and our wages are doiihli
those in Scotch iron furnaees. Space forbiii
to give details on other matters,—Ihi ;
"Onondaga Salt Monopoly," for instince, .
under cover of which all salt makers ite 4
assailed. The producers of millions d t
bushels of salt in our State report no such
enormous profits as Prof. Perry telle of, ani »
7
Uink over half could be taken from his
ures. Let all remember that the tariff
the salt used by an average family of five
^uld be the terrible sum of about seven
■its a year, acd on a barrel of salt pork the
*01611 But enough ; I only give samples
"loose statements ■which show these agents
' the League not to be reliable authority ;
d that they will prove " blind leaders of
blind " to such as may follow th(^.
»
i WAGES.
*Only a word on wages. Mr. Hewitt,
"•mmissioner to the Paris Exposition, sent
our government to examine iron and
;el matters, says the difference in cost of
"')n making here and in England is
' e wages, which are more than double
■ ire; and in other manufactures we find
'hm best authority, the difference is
-rm 25 to 75 per cent. But the assertion
made, that, considering cost of living
-'ire, the English and European workmen
e as well off as here,
i When we find as many children in our
'-•oi^houses as in our schools, when the
-ie of immigration, made up of working
• ■^ople, coming here to better their con-
-tion, ceases, when one in twenty of our
-■-lople are paupers, these assertions may
B) correct. Now, the working people ot
f ir country know they are not, as is seen
■jr their resolve passed in Philadelphia by
,e National Labor Congress, representing
ti)0,000 workers, in August last;
'"Wliereas, The price of American labor is
lOve the wages paid for labor in other coun-
ij-ies; and
The products of the cheaper
fbor of foreign countries, when imported
. to the United States, compete with the
-Reductions of American labor in our home
■' -arkets, to the manifest injury of our work-
1, gmen, thereby decreasing enterprise, in-
iioslrlal independence and diversity of
,,nploymcnts, and lending to degrade our
.. bor and force down the wages of American
"|Orkingmen to the level of the ill-paid
ilhons of Europe; therefore, be it
^ "Sesolved, That we demand such adjust-
' ent of the duties on all commodities pro-
' teed hy the labor' of foreign countries as
i-11 adequately protect American labor, and
: strain the excessive importation of manu
ctures from abroad, while we have the raw
'' aterial, the skill and the ability to produce
f'^e same commodities in our own country."
^ The great debt, the derangement of cur-
".ncy, the increase of taxation inevitable
'' ,ter our great war, are burthens that must
'' 'lar upon all. The labor of the country
? 18 borne nobly its share of these burthens,
Rid yet we find, despite the assertions that
i hr tariff system helps to crush labor, that
"'vings bank deposits—the earnings largely
of workingmen and women—have increased
in Maine, New Hampshire, Massachusetts,
Rhode Island, Philadelphia and Newark,
amidst our factories, from $66,560,000 in
1800, to $153,825,000 (or $130,000,000 in
gold walue), in 1868. This increase being
under an increased tariff.
Mahlon Sands, Secretary of the League,
has gone home to New York, and asks for
more money to "• enlighten" the people. In
his pitiful way he tries to make New York
worse than London, that he may get a free
trade argument, and says that " while there
are from sixteen to twenty thousand people
living in cellars " in his own city, " in Lon¬
don the poorest can get decent lodgings."
How strange that London paid in 1868 to
relieve people able to " get decent lodgings "
some $1,500,000, or twice as much as nine
years before ! Mr. Sands may never have
heard that the shameful reason was urged
against a law in England " requiring
children to attend schools, that if they
left off work they would starve—the labor
of father, mother and tender children being
necessary to keep alive."
Woolens, cottons, iron, etc., are delight¬
fully cheap in England, we are told, yet
120.000 people left this land of cheap things
for our country, taxed and hurthened by
" iniquitous tariffs " last year. It reminds
one of the Irishman telling his friend in this
country how much a sixpence would buy at
home. Being asked why he left, his quick
reply was, " And shure, how was the six¬
pence to be got."
We are told how tariffs raise prices, but
not how dependence on foreign markets
lowers them to the farmer. Every bushel of
our grain, every pound of our provisions,
sent to British markets, tends to lower
prices, and Liverpool governs New York
and Chicago, and will so long as our home
manufactures and home demands are kept
down. So that loss comes on the whole crop.
Suppose our supply reduces British prices
six pence or twelve cents a bushel ; on a
thousand millionj bushels this would be
$120,000,000 a year, lost on our farmers'
grain, and this is a low estimate.
Let us remember, too, that under our
"iniquitous tariff" mortgages have been
paid on lands, farmers have grown inde¬
pendent, labor has thriven, and manufact¬
ures grown.
Let us change, simplify, and improve that
tariff, that it may be more just and effica¬
cious, but let us keep in view the principle
of protection to home industry, which will
bring us prosperity and freedom " in the
future as in the past."
TAKIFP nSFORM FOR HOME INTEREISTS.
It would seem that reform of our tariff
was never thought of, save by Prof. Perry
and other agents of the " Free Trade
League," judging by theirnoise on the mat¬
ter. but for years others have hoped for
needed changes. The resolves which close
this article were unanimously adopted at a
public meeting, in our City Hall, the week
after the League agents had spoken there,
and embody views not new, yet, it is be¬
lieved, true, and give an idea of tariff re¬
form different, and many would think
far better, than that of Prof. Perry and his
friends. Their idea may well be called a
scheme to benefit foreign manufacturers
and New York importers at the cost and
peril of our enterprise and industry. This
is a plan to help the best interest of farmer,
worker, manufacturer and importer alike,
and to develop the resources of our country;
" 1st. Jtexolved. That while approving tarifl
reform, simplifying, increasing the free list,
changing rates where needed and just, revis¬
ing the bonded warehouse system, and
esj)ecially, changing ad valorem to specific
duties, to prevent fraud—we would keep in
view, not only the immediate wants of our
revenue, hut that protection of our industry
and that development of our resources by
which the prosperity of the people may make
the solvency of our government perfect and
its revenue lasting.
" 2d. Reaolved, That as a decrease of revenne
from duties on imports is feasible, we favor
the free admission of tea, coffee, spices, dye
stuffs, &c., not produced by us, and in univer¬
sal use, that the people may thereby pin,
and would retain duties for protection iji
revenue on articles we can and do prodnoi,
and the home product of which is a beaetttv
the people.
"3d. Jtesolved, That while wages krehljht!
and workmen better off with us than in £dj
land, and while English workingmen, impeW
by the force of hunger, are denouncing btt
trade, and alleging that it is reducing them to
pauperism, leaving them defenceless against
still cheaper labor in Europe, and driviiiE
their skilled artizans to protective counfrieo^
it would be injustice and injury to Ameriao
artizans and workmen to adopt or approacli
a system which Is denounced by workingmen
in England as lowering their wages and de¬
grading their condition.
" 4th. Mesolvtd, That while British mannfse
turers are complaining of hunger amongworl-
men and peril to capital caused by their free
trade and revenue tariff system—which admit
free of duty articles made in England, while
tea, coffee, sngar, etc., pay heavy duties—and
are alarmed at the vastly growing balance of
imports—greater than the exports in ISfid hf
$.580,000,000—and while our foreign debt If
il,.500,000,(X)0, growing constantly from ei-
cess of imports, and taking away our specie
t» partly pay the interest, any approach to¬
ward free trade or revenue tariff wonld not
only put far away the return to specie psj-
ments, but would increase our debt abroiid
more rapidly and make the calamity of • ter¬
rible financial crisis swift and sure."
G. B. STEBBINS,
Sec'y "American Industrial League."
Detroit, Mich., Dec. 12th, 18C9.
READ, AND LEND TO YOUR NEIOnBOR. /
British^Free Trade,"'a Delusion.
J. I-, t- > .
TOITHEIFARMERS, .MECHANICS, LABORERS,
' fAND ALL VOTERS OF THE
UlsriTED STA,TES.
We have jnst passed through the terrible strue
a great rebellion. Vast sums of money have
")n expended; great loss of precious lives has
^n our lot. The blind rage and insane folly of
Itois, rising up against the rights and inter-
-8 of free labor and self-government, have
fmght this upon us. But in the trial of battle,
A right has triumphed. The interest of our
uad land is one:—the dignity, prosperity,
^ity and lasting success of Freb Labor. Wo
>e shown, in our great contest, the inherent
t'mgth of a free government. If yie can wisely
lor affairs, so that agriculture, inventive skill,
'.nufactures and commerce shall thrive, we
►4,11 crown our triumph with the signal blessing
• peaceful prosperity, provide the means where-
a finer culture can be gained, and show the
:.rld the glory of a true Republic.
must adapt ourselves to the great changes
our national condition and necessities, put
isde the prejudices of the past, and work earn-
ly for a better future.
V^ise care of the industry of a nation is a
mifest and important duty of Government.
Hentnries ago, when Governments were all, and
pular industry and manufacturing skill nothing,
re as servants to aristocratic or kingly wants,
marchs held monopolies of trade in wool, salt,
., Ac., and granted thorn to favorites who would
y well therefor. Now such monopolies and
^hibitions are passing away, and among civil-
id nations the protecting and fostering of
iustry and skill, not only as a means of
renue, but to increase wealth and civilization,
the prevalent policy
We hear much said about free trade.'' To
)se who loek slightly or partially at this sub-
Jt, there is magic in the words; they are
lociated with ideas of reform and popular good,
oseness in the use of terms on this mutter
ikes great mischief. Absolute free trade, the
(noval of all custom duties, as the world is,
luld pauperize the richest nation in half a
neration. Too^much leaning that way is
lastrous. QuaiyUd Free Trade, the impo¬
sition of duties for revenue on articles not pro¬
duced at home, or that do not compete with home
products, and the free admission of such articles
as are specially needed. Qiiali/ied Froteotion
to such branches of industry as need it; the
adjustment of duties to protect homo industry
as well as for revenue.
Such is the present policy of the most prosper¬
ous nations. With wars banished, and free trade
reciprocal all the world over, the question might
assume a different aspect.
A large revenue is now a necessity to us.
Home taxes and tariff are in operation.
Is it not plain that duties should be so fixied as
to protect home industry?
This loose talk about free trade, delusive and
dangerous as used, has its origin, as we shall see,
from foreign self-interest.
It is largely a crrj raised by British capital¬
ists and manufacturers, to unsettle our policy,
and that of the ttorld, that they may reap the
benefit, by making England the toorkskop for
the world, and her ships and traders the carriers
of raw material and finished products to and
from, her workshops—a cry of those who would
monopolize, but not reciprocate.
During our civil war just closed, all will
remember how the majority of the trading and
manufacturing classes in England, and tlie tory
aristocracy, sympathized with rebellion here.
The falsehoods of the London Times, the sneers
of lesser journals, the fitting out of Alabamas,
escaping from their docks through the feeble
meshes of "British neutrality," to «prey upon
our commerce, are all fresh in every mind.
Without casting any reflection on the conduct
or feeling of the English people, the conduct of
these classes is palpable enough.
And now efforts are being made by these men
to induce us to adopt what they call the ^free
trade sysiem.^^
The following extract from a letter from onr
American Consul in Liverpool, England, received
In Washington May 18th, is a timely and needed
warning: _
4
1
"Great efforts will now bo ma<lo by English
capitalists and maaufOcturers to induce us to
reduce our tariff, .*ind pernnt tbera to do all our
snanufacturing ; they are beginning to stir this
matter already. Our warm persoual friends will
be put forward to movo the matter, such men as
John Bright, Ooldwin Smith, aud others, who
have stood by us through this war. I have seen
decisive evidence of this purpose bore. Person¬
ally we owe them very much, but wo may fi ight-
fnlly abominate their free trade principles. "
" They will struggle hard to break down our
tari0.*'
"There will be a terrible pressure put on the
Goveroment."
While urging free trade upon the world, Eng-
Itmd has always jealously protected her manu¬
factures and does to this day.
In a speech in the House of Lords, Lord
Goderich said : " OthcrnatioDS knew, as well
as the noble lord opposite, and those who acted
with him, that what wo (the English) meant by
free trade, was nothing more nor less than, by
means of the great advantages we enjoyed, to
get the monopoly of all their markets for our
manufactures, and to prevent them, one and all,
fVom ever becoming manufacturing nations."
"The policy that France acted on was that of
encouraging its native manufactures, and it was
a wise policy; because, if it were freely to admit
our manufactures, it would speedily bo reduced
to an agricultural nation, and therefore a poor
nation, as all must be that depend exclusively on
agriculture."
So we learn from this precious revelation, that
"British free trade" really means • the
monopoly op all markets, and the breaking
down op all manufactures, •' except their
own., 'This English nobleman has at least the
merit of frankness.
Within a few years, having made some modi-
ffcations of her tiiriff, she proclaims herself the
triumphant examplar and disinterested champion
of free trade.
Only in 1840 commenced any change of note in
British policy'on this question, A Committee
was then chosen, with Joseph Hume as chairman,
" to inquire into tho several duties levied on
imports." How likely he would be to inaugurate
free trade, may be judged from his wish, ex¬
pressed in ParliamcHt years before, that "the
manufactures of tho Continent might be strangled
in their cradle." This committee's report said,
that " the tariff presents neither' congruity nor
unity of purpose; no general principles seem to
have been applied."
In 1842 tho ftimed tariff of Sir -Rabcrt^ Peel
was enacted. Was it free trade? Let Mr,
Qladstone, Chancellor of the English Exchequer,
answer: " It was an attempt to majco a general
approach to the following rules : Firsts • the
removal of prohibitions; stcondhj^ the reduction
of duties on manufactured articles and protective
duties generally, to an average of twenty per
contend xalorcTn\ thirdli/y on partially manu¬
factured articles to rates not exceeding ten per
cent; fourthly^ on raw materials to rates not over
livo per cent."
2
Simply a reducing to order of a chaos
centuries of patchwork acts, a reduetion of fot,
duties in view of the well known fact, tJ!iat,ini
sactLTcducilon^ tluir wdl tutablishcd
iurtrs uould slill undersell Uft cnrfj
seim magnanimous, and low^ duties on
uiateriftb', and articles partly manafacturrj
whkli, of course, uould help h(jmemanuf(uim
But Peel himself said, in bis W'ecch ciosingtiu
debate on the bill: "I do not abolish allprotft;
ive duties; on the contrary, the amended tirl*
maintains many duties that are purely protectirt
a.s distinguished from revenue duties."
Tho tariffs of 1845 and 1846 were simihtk
their general tenor, but of less consequeDit:
carefully protective, uhere necessary, reiluc^j
where no homo interest was hurt thereby, a-
duced indeed sometimes to benefit home iDtereai
by giving raw material cheaper to Iheinaoo
facturor.
In 1849 came, after long and warm debitf
tho virtual repeal of the corn laws, placing iL
duty on grain at a shilling a quarter, or llut<
cents a bushel, whcro it still remains.
Tho opposllLon to com law repeal oaoie fron
the land owners; but the manufacturers gainoi
the day for it was an imperative neeev^UTK
them. England cannot feed her ovn
the factory workers must have bread, or li*
mills must close ; stop those mills, and domigft:
the vast fabric of British power.
So the people had breadstuffs cheaper—a blesj-
ing to them, yet a protection to the mannfii;
turcr, called free trade, S
No tariff changes of moment have since b«i
made, and these are a slight foundation on wbid
to hose the boasted free trade claim. Taliir
twenty-two years, from 1638 to 1S59, and thetoui
annual custom receipts on sixteen leadingarlScIe:
some ninety-four per cent, of all the duties, wiei
less than seven million dollars. This takes ii
five years before any change and six years tjlcr
Gladstone's tariff. Indeed, the duties (Athene
articles yearly, from 1S33 to 1841, before oj
change of tariffs was made, were ll.lSlDOOk
than from 1854 to IS59.
When the British com laws were repealed,the
inducement was held out by the English, and the
hope cntortained by our grain growers, tbits
large market would open there for our product,
But, in twelve years after the repeal of
"corn lairs, from 1848 to 1860, our exporo o'
breadstuffs to England had decreased, kp-
portion to our population, almost thirty per oeol
even by English estimate 273^ per cent.
During the same years the British imports w
grain from this country were ouly one-fiflh
imports from other countries.
Take our exports of provisions and breadstnf
to Great Britain, and to all the Western IIuoi-'
pbcre, from 1846 to 1860, and we fiad oi'
yearly exports to Great Britain the least, and th-
demand this side the Atlantic much largertiiJ
last part of the time.
The average of three years' exports ef P
visions, closing with ISGO, was, to Great Cnh'-
$3,792,268, and on this side the ocean
Our exports of breadstuffs to Great BntAi-''
3
each of these same throe years, averaged
>42,991 bushels; but to ports of our Wosteru
jmisphere 16,034,586 bushels.
Wkicago aJontofltn sends off in ten days more
^•iain and ffour than England has taken from
k each year, on the average, for twenty years
and the grain export from that city in a
ngU duyy often exceeds what England has
flight of tw for a whole year.
■:Inl8GQ, tho total products of our soil were
II-,860,000,000 in value; our total exports of
j ose products $272,282,873, or but one-
hventh. Taking out the cotton exports, and
i j.T home market and consumption was twenty
.znes as great as our exports to all foreign
. nds. . ♦
; Would it not be well to think more of this
£,'eat home market 1
- At a late meeting in Boston Oi guests of tho
i'oard of Trade, J. W. Brooks, President of the
^..iobigan Central Kailroad, in a speech, said:
" And now I may mention a subject which has
ten given me, as a Western railroad manager,
i^iuse for anxiety. It is the want of a more
eady and reliable market for the produce of the
mat food-producing region. Its power of pro¬
duction has hardly begun to be developed, but
BjVen now it is often without a market for its
, roduots. The natural buyers of surplus food
^re the manufacturers, and the great body of
lese live too far away from us. England docs
ot import food from this country until she has
' xhausted those nearer home, which usually
Tipply nearly all she requires. Sometimes a
aortcrop will bring her here for a considerable
'mount, and run up prices so high as to stimulate
n over production and render the surplus thore-
fter more unwieldy than ever. Estimating tho
.rowers portion of tho price received, at an
"verage of 25 cents per bushel for com, an<J SO
ents for wheat, the exports of breadstuSs for
he last 18 years, have yielded to the growers an
' veiage of about thirteen millions of dollars per
'DDum, rising as high as $34,800,000 and falling
kS low as $360,000 per annum, some years more
'^hau forty times as great as others, yielding to
- he nation a maximum of but a little over a
lollar per head, and sometimes falling below
- hree cents. This outlet is too insignificant at
)est, and too unreliable at all times, for so im-
'^>ortant an interest in our national economy. It
■las not prevented the price of com to the
'armer of Illinois from falling to eight cents per
mshel, when it is sometimes over eighty cents.
Et is not a wise arrangement of the world's
economy for those who raise a surplus of food
• xnd those who have a deficiency to be separated
oy a thousand miles of land carriage and three
thousand miles of ocean. Thus situated, it is no
Wonder that the agriculturist and the manufac¬
turer, who should be natural allies, meet so
i.'ldom and to such small purpose. Who pays
.or this anomalous condLtiou of things, for the
transportation of raw material and food from this
.country to the European manufacturer and a
.portion of* the product back againl The west-
.era producer makes a largo contribution in the
lower price and reduced amount of his produce,
and the foreign operative a very largo contribu¬
tion ik wages ; and shame to the nations 1 long
hours of childhood's labor, bringing iguoranca
and degradation, misery and want into hundreds
of thousands of what ought to be cheerful and
happy homes. It is claimed in England that her
cheaper labor will always make it for our Interest
to employ her people to do our manufacturing.
Without questioning tho unselfishness of this
advice, its soundness may well be doubted. A
hundred thousand educated, thinking operatives
will invent, in a short time, more simplifying
processes to cheapen the product, than will equal
the difference in wages, and though cheap labor
will avail of these inventions, the great result,
cheaper product, is due to the educated, higher
paid labor. Among all tbe favors of which
nations boast, may we be delivered from that of
cheap labor; it would be fatal to the institutions
of a self-govoming people. It is tbe province of
Boards of Trade—those most useful organiza¬
tions—to aid in scouring to our land the means
of most fully developing its resources. It is the
duty of every well-wisher of his kind to place
the hungry where they can got food, to educate
the ignorant, and to restore men of all oolors
from slavery to freedom.
" Whenever the statesmen of the West shall
feel it their duty, iu the National Council, to
promote home manufactures, they wiU know
where to find Now England, and when wo are
all oonvinced, and act upou tho principle, that
agriculture, manufactures, and commerce are
natural allies, this people, who have had, of
late, so much of common sorrow and of commcm
joy, will not need to toll the story of our common,
glory,- for that will toll its own to tho nations
of the whole earth."
We may safely estimate, to-day, the New
England market as worth, to the western grain
grower, more than that of England.
We import goods from Europe, tho making ot
which keeps busy a miirion workers. Could wa
build up our home manufactures, we might draw
a large portion of them to this country, and feed
them here, greatly to mutual benefit.
Great Britain is poor in resources of soil; her
territory is narrow, her population crowded.
Even taking into account the products of her
mines, and manufactures of raw muterlal pro¬
duced on her soil, and the yearly balance against
her is over $390,000,000. This vast sum she
must make up in some way. After making
allowance for her profit from shipping and ex¬
changes, she mitst, to maintain her position and
power, find yearly market for her manufactures
to the amount of $650,000,000 iu foreign lands.
To do this she is compehted to gather, so far as
possible, the raw materials of the world, and
aeud them out agam manufactured, from her
workshops, using her vast capital and great slcili
TO BREAK BOWiT FOREIGN COMPETITION, AND
KEEP THESE DISTANT MARKETS, WITHOUT
WUICH HER RUIN COMES, SWIFT AND SURE.
A Parliament commission, in 1854, iu a report
on the mining population, .^poke of " imioense
losses which employers incur in bad times, in
order to destroy foreign competition, and to
4
gainandkeep posstasionoffoTeignmarkcts^" and
of works being carried on for this purpose, " at an
aggregate loss of three or four hundred thou¬
sand pounds sterling and of the ability of a
ibw wealthy capitalists "to overwholm, all
foreign competition" and thus "sttjp for
thfj whole trade when mices p.nvive.''
As an illustration of this process—very costly
to us and equally profitable to these Briti.-h
capitalists—let us look at the trade in railroad
iron from 1840 to 1851, First th^^se men Lad
Rpcnt money hero lar^'^ely to break doV\'n our
tariff of 1842, and got instead the lower tariff of
1846 with its ad valorem (or invoice value)
duties, under which system frauds in tlio import¬
er's invoioo could push his duties down to a low
rate. Then in 1849 and 1850 more than 300,000
tons of rail road iron waspu.'hod into the country
at S40 per ton, and our mills at homo closed up
and their business ruiri'^J. This was the plot to
"gain and keep the market," and the harvest
was at hand. From 1950 to 1854 the British,
controling tho market, and running up the price,
sold us 1,000,000 tons of rail road iron at $80
per ton.
"With an adequate protection, our own mills
could have furnished the ii'oa at $50 per ton, but
for want of it they were stopped, and thus
$30,000,000 went into the hamls of British
capitalists, and soon came, inevitably^ the terrible
distress of the crisis of 1S57.
"Why did.Engli^h capitalists spend $1,250,000
in Washington to break down our tariff of 1812?
It was the inevitable result op their
pitiful position, compelling them, ip
possible, to rule or ruin the world's
hanufactures. a much larger sum they will
spend again, if necessary, to make us tributary
to them, holding out the promise of larger mar¬
kets in their ports for our grain and provisions,
a promise, as we have seen, never redeemed in
the past, nor like to be, as the currents of trade
set, in the future. All the while is tho free trade
cry kept up by these needy monopolists, the
British manufacturers, because it helps greatly
to unsettle the minds qrour and other countries
and prevents the adoption of a stable policy of
fair protection to home industry.
With our broad extent of fertile soil, and our
vast wealth of mines, we are under no necessity
of seeking to crush industry the world over, to
save ourselves. We wish no such wrong to other
nations, but simply desire to protect our home
interests, and leave them fair scope to do the
same.
All tho world's experience and the present
condition of nations show the protective policy ;
to be tho only safe and wise means for national
growth and the highest culture; that i.s, where it
is carried to the extent of simply fostering home*
industry, ami stops short of efforts to mouopolizo
ami crush down all industry elsewhere. This
latter conrsa, as we have seen, is that to which
FREE TRADrt ENGLAND is driven by the narrow-
ness of her territory, and the poverty of her
resources, aside from capital and skill in manu¬
factures and trade. Her policy has made mil¬
lions of her people paupers, has wrought ruin
and starvation in her Irish and Indian posesBioni
and has well nigh ruined whatever nation W
been induced to follow it.
In her colonies, England has full sway. Ijth«
philanthropic free trade policy, so kindly con-
mended to other nations, carried out there] K,
Tho constant aim has been to discourage and pa-
vent maniifiicturing among them; tobringtheif
raw materials to England to be wrought intoifiner
forms there, and sent back again. Fearful,io.
deed, has been the ruin wrought in this way.
In Bengal, sixty years ago, looms for makipj
cottons were in well-nigh every household. Tie
fine muslins of India had a world-wide celebritj.
Calicoes and coarser stuffs were made, not odIj
for home use, but a hundred million pouadjof
cloth were exported yearly.
Macaulay, who would not overstate the ei£e
'against his own countrymen, said:
"The misgovcrnment of the English was car¬
ried to a point such as seemed hardly compatible
with tho existence of society. They forctd&i
nat ires to buy dea r and sell cheap. They insulted
with impunity, tho tribunals, the police, and tie
fiscal authorities of the country.
" Enormous fortunes were rapidly madein C&1>
cutta, while 30,000,000 of human beings vere
reduced to the extremity of wretchedness. Tbej
bod been accustomed to be under tyranny, bot
never under such as this, * * * ♦
" Under their old masters they had, at least,one
resource; when the evil grew insnpportable,tbe
people rose and pulled down the goTemmnt.
Bat the British government was not to be obakeo
off. Oppressive as the most oppressive form of
barbarian despotism, it was strong with alltbe
strength of civilization."
. The importation of machinery into Hindortao
was forbidden, and down went the vastmanufk-
lures of cotton, for hand labor could not compeia
with power-looms, and wide tracts of the best
cotton lands in India ran to waste and wild jun¬
gles.
England gained thereby, for a time, but m-
tions make no lasting gains by injustice, and His-
dostan, made poor by British monopoly, is a fn
less valuable customer than she might have been
with fair treatment.
These horrid evils are partially remedied, but
too late to save death, and haggard want, and
pitifni suffering of millions of poor Hindoos.
The Sepoy rebellion, but a few years ago. in
which babies were tossed down tho mountain
gorges of Hindostan from the bayonets of Britidi
soldiers, was one of the latest tragedies in that
unhappy country.
It may bethought, too, that the late "opin®
war" with the Chinese—fought to push that bale¬
ful drug down the throats of the natives at tie
bayonet's point, for the sake of the trader's gain
—is not the best illustration either of phkanthw*
py or free trade.
Look at England's course toward Ireland-
Irish wool manufactures, once flourishing, dh-
couraged and broken down; Irish shipping col
off from equal privileges, Ireland must send hej
raw materials to England in English ships, W''
take back fabrics wrought in English shopa. Her
5
' poor, her famished people were kept at
st labor, and, while want ruled there, oru-
f the surface^ including the richest
I the Kingdom^ were lying waste, Ire-
•ffering is largely owing to this grasping
' England.
trade indeed T Tiie colonial policy of
is pTohibition of that association of man
^fellows, in varied labors, which leads to
'.al growth and culture and wealth. Her
•)ward the West Indies has been marked
Hme features, mitigated somewhat of late
^ utter ruin. Canada has been. better
M look at the condition of other countries
- e come under this so-called^ free trade"
"'jal, in' 1703, * signed "the Methuen
with England, by "which, in return for
Tiven her wines, she cut off almost all
• n from her wool, food, <fec. ■ Her manu-
- were ruined j British goods poured into
-s; she became a purely agricultural
" poor, with population decreasing, bad
id mails carried on horseback. Such is
'lition of a country, naturally rich, but
'or by her miserable policy.
'•y has produced wool, silk, com, and cot-
iarge quantities; coal, iron and copper
Two hundred years ago her trade with
..was l&i'go, and her merchants rich.
SI an evil hour, the government made a
.^ith England and Eranoe, agreeing to
0 more than three per cent, duty on their
pand to exempt their vessels from port
« Great Britain forbade the exportation
nachinery to Turkey, as well as of her
,.cs who might have gone there to make it.
^'rse, Turkish manufactures were ruined.
1 itarl, there were six hundred looms in
.'ut forty remained in 1821; and of two
, L weaving shops in Tournova in 1812, hut
' Ired were left in 1830. As in most purely
iral countries, the cultivators are in debt.
'.Vthe total exports of Turkey were but
fOOO, while those of England to that coun-
but $11,000,000 yearly.
^ grasping selfishness defeats itself, and
unjustly treated, is too poor to be a good
look at the condition of countries that
• otected their industry, deaf to the siren
British free trade." At the close of
I'q's wars, great quantities of British goods
into Germany, to the injury of their
industry. In 1818, Prussia enacted a
1 self defense, on which occasion Lord
'^ <m, in the House of Commons, at London,
benevolent statement that " England
f'^ford to bear some loss on the export of
2 9, for the purpose of destroying foreign
ziures in their cradle.^^
^lerman States soon united to form their
i'ein, a Custom-Union, for duties abroad
intercourse among themselves, and since
^/e gained in wealth and indopendeuce.
"835, Germany exported to England
•:'00 pounds of wool; in 1851 the imports
were 25,000,000 pounds, adding some 50,000,000
to the quantity made into cloth at home.
So in other departments, and we see proof of
German wealth in the fact that some $200,000,000
or more of our National Bonds are held there.
In 1625, Russia, before almost wholly agricul'
tural, encouraged manufactures by a more pro"
toctivo policy, and has gained largely in wealth.
Tho abolition of sorfdom has come, too, helped
largely by the moral eflfectof that growth of per¬
sonal power and character, which comes with
varied industry.
Other features and conditions of national life
havo their effect to help or hinder growth, but we
can see plainly enough the good results in wealth
of purse and character..of wise protection, fos¬
tering varied industry
The policy of France has been to comoine a
small amount of foreign raw material, with a
- larger quantity produced at home, and thus ena¬
ble her farmers to keep up commerce with distant
lands.» Her skill and taste make most of the
value of her exports. ** With vast military ex¬
penses, she yet gains in Wealth, for her industry
thrives and is cared for
Much noise has been made about the so-called
"free trade treaty" between France and England
in 1860, concluded mainly under the care of Rich¬
ard Cobden, but that title is a strange misnomer.
The present French tariff, then decided on,
though modified in many particulars, and re¬
duced to a clearer system, more adapted to mod¬
ern wants and customs, is yet carefully protect'
ive, and averages quite as high as eur own. 9
Earl Gray said of it, in the House of Lords, and'
none refuted his words, "The advance France has
made on the road to commercial freedom, is most
inconsiderable. She retained her whole system
of navigation laws, and bound herself to no duties
on her marpufactured goods, lower than thirty per
cent, and twenty-five per cent afterward."
Mr. Horsman, in the House of Commons, de¬
clared the uity of thirty per cent, "prohibitory,
as toward England." The Leeds Chamber of
Commerce bad the same opinion, and the Journal
des Debats—the Emperor's organ—deemed it pro¬
hibitory, and held the English outwitted.
So far as the influence of race and religion go,
France, Portugal and Ireland are of Ceiti® origin,
and of Catholic faith. The first protects its in¬
dustry and grows in wealth, the two last are in
the clutches of " British free trade." groanini^
under the yoke.
The solicitude of England touching our manu¬
factures, was manifest in our colonial days, am|
still continues.
In 1710, the House of Commons declared, that
the erecting of manufactures in the colcmies tend¬
ed to decrease their dependence on Great Britain.
At a later period the exportation from England
of artisans or tools for making wool, silk, cotton
or iron, was prohibited
Lord Chatham said he would not let the col-
enista make even a hobnail for themselves.
We have no wish to create or increase any un¬
just prejudice against the English people. Sure¬
ly we would not depreciate the noble words
in our behalf, of the little band of our faithful
0
friends there, through our joars of trial j ust past.
Any fair measures for mutual good, betireen
our governments, will be met, let ua hope, in the
future as in the past, in a friendly spirit. But
tboro seems a strange blindness, even among
Englishmen who have been our intelligent friends
in other respects, as to our right and duty to pro¬
tect our home industry from the deadly grasp of
their great monopolists.
The gross amount of revenue from
CHPtomH j early, from lf50 to 1859, in
Great IJrltain was $120,486,165
and in the United States 67,082,014
During the same time the average
rate of duty, on dutiable imports in
(Krcnt Britain was 32.41 per ct.
and in the United States.. ..- 22,54 " "
With a revenue from customs more than double
ourSy and duties on such articles as she chooses
to protect, ten-per cent, highery it is quite mani¬
fest the golden ago of real free trade will not
dawn on England this generation.
Of course it is notfair tochargo all fluctuations
in trade to varying tarifis; yet the fact is signiji-
canty ihit eroery great paoiic and commercial
revulsion we have had in this country was when
tariffs were reducedy under the influence of the
free trade cry, while our periotls c4" prosperity in
all our industrial interests have been under a
more protective system.
It may be asked, " why are so many of our im¬
porting merchants, especially in New York, in
favor of free trade 1 "
The cost of foreign goods being less accurately
known than that of domestics, gives more chance
for profits.
Nearly sixty-five per cent, of all imports, and
more than eighty per cent, of our imported dry
goods, are brought into New York.
The dry goods importing is largely in the
hands of foreigners or of those connected with
foreigners. Swayed by interest as men are, the
partiality of many, not all, importers for low duties
is no marvel.
Our forefathers felt that they most hare com¬
mercial independence, always denied them by
England, or their political independence would
be but an empty name. The necessity of a pro-
TECTIYE SYSTEM for THE StATES, WAS a main
subject of deliberatioc at the first Convention, in
1786, of delegates at Annapolis, met to consider
the formation of a Constitution, .and also at the
Convention of 1787, in which the Constitution was
framed.
Washington, as President, met the first Con¬
gress, clad in a suit of domestic manufacture, and
the second Act passed by that Congress, had the
Allowing preamble :
" Whereas, it is necessary for the support of
Government, for the discharge of the debts of the
United States, and for the encocragment and
protection of manufactures, that duties be
laid on goods, wares and merchandise imported.
Be it enacted,'* etc., etc. This bill being passed,
was signed by Washington, July 4,1789, marking
thus, the great truth no doubt deeply felt by him,
and by that august body, that the birth of politi¬
cal freedom should be followed by that of indus-
trifll independence, that a great nation might
^ n
fulfill its high destiny—froo and indr
indeed. And Jefl^orsoDi made Preside^i
rival party, was too broad in his viewjii
from Washington on this great question,
second message, he said t *' To culUrate
and maintain commerce and navigatioj
their lawful enterprises, to foster oor fch-
nurseries of navigation and for the nor
man, and to protect the manupactitbesi
et to our circumstances—theseareiti.
marks by which wo are to guide ourselTe
The sagacious Br. Franklin, writing
don to Humphrey Marshall, in 1771, iiij
ery manufacturer encouraged la our g
makes part of a market for provhiow i
ourselves, and saves so much money to thi
try as must otherwise be export toj^
manufactures and suppl iee. Here in £o^
is well known and understood, thai irbeu
manufacture is established, empIoyiagSDi
of bands, it raises the value of lands all
partly by the greater demand Dearathat^
partly from the plenty of money dnwntiq
the business. ^
" It seems, therf/FORe, the intebestot
OUR FARMERS, AND OWNERS OF LAND, TO EH
AGE OUR BIANUTACTURES, IN PBEPBRZy|
FOREEGN ONES." Wise words, and true
them
1
In a letter to J. C. Caball, in 1P18,J
Madison said, The theory of' let as aliiw.
poses that all nations concur in a perfect
of oommeroial intercourse. * * • Nen
can safely do so until at least a redpmi
insured to it. A nation leaving itsfertip
to regulate itself in all cases, might sooira
regulated by other nations i5t0a
viencv to foreign interests."
Andrew Jackson, in his Presideniiil Ka
of 1330, said, in favor of the consiitntiaiiii
to 80 adjust tariffs as to encourage domesD
dustry :
"In this conclusion I am confirmed.
the opinion of Washington, Jefferson, JW
and Monroe, wbo.hare repeatedly reconuts
the exercise of the right under tbe>CoDStitl
as by the unifoam practice of Congress, tbl
tinual acquiescence of the States. aDddies(i|
understanding of the people." J
In a private letter, in 1824, he
from our agriculture 600,000 men, woDfi
children, to be employed in mannfadure-
you will, at once, give a home market fw
breadstufls than all Europe now gives la
hate been too long subject to thl ww'
British merchants. It is time we rhoel.
come a little more AMKRiCANirEB,"
Men of America, choose between it? vw
these great Americans, and the Brithh ery
trade.
Farmers, mechanics, manufacturers, tl^
no conflict of interest between you.
all, all for each." is the divine law. in pf-
economy, as well as in ethics or religion-
The permanent success of one bronchw^
try is only secured by the prosperity
No country in the world is so well
that assoclatioQ and diversity of labor, j
ij
Kth, &nd help mcrcase civilization and
as ours, Kich in abundant and varied
rivers and lakes, natural highways far
'Vater power in every State, steam and
^ to use it, everywhere,—all combine to
>oducer and consumer side by side,
is would come naturally with a true policy
lament, to put obstacles aside. That poU
Help or hinder greatly ; bringing thereby
I'ty or ruin.
mer, in Michigan or Wisconsin, for in-
^raises wool. A waterfall is heard from
or the puff of a steam engine, cutting
from the adjacent forest; but his wool is
^ the Eeabcard, and the elotb he wears, and
^ ho useSj brought from some workshop
)igQ land, thousands of miles away. His
'orn and cattle, goto Kew England or to
^to bo sold, alwavs at a price governed
reigk uarkf.t, and he gets that price,
-ie cost op transportation and com-
akd the risk of shipwreck. Spend
"ise costs in putting the water-wheel in
'hereby the stream might be his servant;
iking the waste power of the steam engine
jies and wield trip-hammers, and his wool
n and his tools made. Naturally, the
.jst, with its great extent of rich soil, will
mrplus to sendaway, whl'lo New England,
J water-power, capital, skill, and dense
i cd, will manufacture largely. There is
,pom for both, and no jealousy between
.'The Northwest, with raw materials here,
r.d cheap and abundant, can really manu-
,with less expense than the East,
jiake Superior, in Illinois, Wisconsin and
in Ohio and Kentucky, we have vast
wealth—copper, lead and iron, Wewant
iditioDs as shall help the lasting success of
• ing and the manufactures that grow there-
I should not the West make its own iron
'd, and send abroad fine qualities for special
. But now English iron comes to Chica-
'Cincinnati, sent by those great capital-
ho, as they themselves admit, suffer losses
bile, " to break down competition," and
in for the whole trade, when prices re-
'-making us, in the end of course, pay both
'sses and profits. What folly in us!
Northwest should manufacture, too, the
'now exports so largely,
■country, exclusively agricultural,
-!rew permanently rich, To take from
^h and not wear it out, the farmer must
•ck. Let this be done, and crops increase
e growth of population ; neglect this, and
decay shall come to the best land is but
'ion of time, comb it will, inevitably,
?w England, with a poor soil, crops increase;
West, with a rich soil, tbcy decrease in the
6. Ih New England, factory and farm are
ich other, making a home market for the
's produce, and enabling him to get manure
eh his soil.
ee West, our produce being carried off, the
ses thonsajads of tons of its most precious
uents for crops every year, and receives no
equivalent. A distinguiahed agriculturalist said,
in 1856: " It would be improper to estimate the
annual waste to the country at less than an
amount equal to the mineral constituents of
1,500,000,000 bushels of corn." Put the factory
beside the farm, and this drain is stopped. »
We cannot have the best farming, until
we have the best manufacturing, in varied
forms and materials, each an indis¬
pensable help to the growth and perfect-
ness op the other,
Give US both, and the blending of these varied
experiences and vocations, the meeting and
mingling of these many life-currents, tinged
and shaped by such wide mastery of man over
Nature's fbrces and materials, is full of benefit.
It is civilization, culture, wealth of soul as well
as of purse. To the farmer it Is increase of the
product of his acres, economy of exchange, work
of hand or brain, for whatever gift of power or
character his children may possess, instant and
constant call for a variety of labor, and all the
while, the thrill of inventive genius pulsing
through the serene quiet of his life in the fields,
saving it from all narrowness or stagnation, that
ho may the more enjoy Nature's beauty, and the
better make her forces serve him.
Our country has a great national debt. Tarifi^
and taxes wo must have. It is important so to
shape the policy op government, as to pro¬
tect home industry, whts-e raising the rev¬
enue, ^
There has been a grave mistake in the action
of Congress in this matter. Important domestic
manufactures are less protected than formerly.
Take forinstance, railroad bar iron, andpigiron,
woolens, etc.; all can be shown to suffer more or
less in the same way. The tariff on foreign rail¬
road bars is S14 00 per ton, and there is no other
special addition to the cost of its manufacture.
The revenue tax upon the domestic article is
$3 60 per ton; but this is but a small part op
the added cost to the maker.
Big iron is taxed $2 40 per ton, and coal,
machinery, freight, salaries, etc., etc., all pay
taxes, which go to increase the €0st of the
finished article. Thus a ton of American
railroad bars really pays a tax of at least $10 00.
The tariff is paid in gold, the tax in currency;
this at present rates, makes the tariff equal in
currency to $19 60 per ton. But, before any rev¬
enue tax was imposed, the tariff on foreign bars
was fixed at $12 00 per ton, so that with the
gold premium, the real protection is but $9 bO,
Reduce gold to par and it would be but $4 00, or
eight dollars per ton less than in 1861,
So long as a great war-demahd for manufac¬
tures existed, this was not felt, but, as that ceases,
it is beginning to tell with great severity. Un¬
less this mistake bo soon corrected, manufactures
are crippled, inventive skill discouraged, the
Northwest made tributary to England, and all
fluctuations of foreign trade severely felt.
There is a danger, too, rapid in its approach,
swift and terrible. CoBtinue our present large
importations, and we increase our great foreign
debt, our specie and bonds flow to Enrope, (some
$400,000,000 of National Bonds, and $500,000,lXH)
8
of State aud railroad securities are there now, in
all $900,000,000,) and, in two years or
less, w© shall have to pay $80,000,000 in specie,
yearly, for our foreign interest money, and for
goods wo can far better mal^e at home. This will
be paralysis of business, failure of capitalists,
want to the poor, such as wo have never bad in
the panics " of the past.
Just at this critical juncture, as we are warned
by our Consul at Liverpool, the trading classes
and aristocracy of England arc plotting to re¬
duce even our present inadeq^uate tariff.
Should they succeed in uoiog so, or even in
holding it whore it is. and preventing protection,
just and indispensable in our present emergency,
they would rejoice at our calamity, knowing that,
by crafty management, they had dealt a blow at
us, and at the sacred cause of free government,
more terrible than the clash of iron-eiad ships,
or the smiting of heaviest cannoa shot, could in¬
flict.
All this is needless. " Forewarned, forearmed,"
is a good motto. The manufacturers do not com¬
plain of their tuxes, but can pay even more, read¬
ily, only lot home-skill and labor havo a fair
chance for our great home market.
Let it be borne in mind how large a part of
our natloniil income is from this internal revenue,
and that this income must bo had to presorve
our national honor.
In the fiscal year, just closed, while the in¬
come from internal revenue was l^-^OOjOOOjOOD,
the tariff on foreign goods, with large impor¬
tations, was but $76,000,000, The next year
will show a dechease in the manufactures at
home, and in the tux they pay, of course. Thus
it is plain that adequate protection to home indus¬
try is the ready means of paying our national ex¬
penses, as well as helping that common and last-
ing prosperity we so much need.
The cattle and corn of Europe, in their raw
shape, cannot como to Wisconsin, but they do
I commend this valuable pamphlet t
toe people.
Detroit, July 1st, 1865.
como worked up into cloth, tools, etc,
is no selfish measure, for the benefit of t[i»
mill-owner, but simply the preservatioDasi
oreaso of certain branches of industry furia.j
efit of all.
Lot us remember that our fathers, in 'itrj
that tried men's souls," favored proiei'^
HOME INDUSTRT OS tho meuDs of REALina»a
encej that Washington and Jefferson a, |
the people's industry and skill must be nii
tained above the reach of foreign craft or
Remember that one great grievance (
days of colonial dependence on England, it;i
persistent resolve to crush our manufsctom
thus keep us dependent and poor, and (ii
the present hour of trial, the same spiritofii
monopoly would break down our industrj, i
us again dependent and poor, andcraftOjIa
to pour our gold into British coffers, alrewTl
with the ill-gotten gains of "neutral"pirsfT
rebel blockade running.
We must avoid foreign debt, deereanf kji
tiom^ protect hane indusiry hyaimjx
shall ihoroeughly guard its interests; ari
shall have no panic or bankruptcy, bit k:!i
business, work and fair wages for oU, i
National Independence, andEevekps^^
out Ruin. »
G. B. STEBBQ
Detroi'^ Mich., July let, 1865.
Note.—In so brief a pamphlet only a gej
acknowledgment can be made. From a
and able work of E. B. Bigelow, of Bostc:
" The Tariff Question, considered in reprj
the policy of England, and the interests (f-
United States," from the well-known sat! i
writings of Henry Carey, and fromvarioocl
sonrces, facts and arguments of great valaeii
been gathered for this work.
the careful aud thoughtful readia,'
E. B. WARD.
Valuable Books.—" Manual of Social Science,' condensed from H. C. Carey'a WoAs
Kato McKean, 1 vol., $2.50; H, C. Baird, Philadelphia, publisher.
"The Tariff Quostion, considered in regard to tho policy of England, and the iateresbofi
United States." late and excellent, by B. B. Bigelow. Price $5, Uttlo, Brown A Co., B«1
publishers.
li
WAGES OF AMERICAN & ENGUSH WORKMEN.
RESOLUTION
OP THE
'NATIONAL LABOR CONGRESS"
For Protection to Home Industry.
Frequent statements have been made by
ree Trade authors and orators that Ameri-
Hn workingmen, all things considered, are
-0 better paid than those in England and
'urope.
~ As a prominent instance, some comment
a wliich may serve as a reply to others,
leNew York Eeening Post of Aug. 25th
"lys in relation to a resolution of the Na-
i onal Labor Congress in Philadelphia, fa-
oring protection to American labor ; " On
uesday Mr. Moses W. Field, of Michigan,
utroduced a series of resolutions, in which
was asserted as a matter of fact, on which
!n important part of the resolutions was
ased, that the price of American labor is
bove the wages paid for labor in other
runtries. Now it is clear that the resolu-
ons founded on this statement ought not
■> be adopted by the Convention, because
fte statement is not true. It is not true
rat workingmen in this country are bet-
)r paid than their brethren in England and
;her countries of Europe."
Such reckless assertion from such a jour-
al is surprising, when the fact is plain to
rery intelligent person interested in
merican industry, that the price of labor
ere, taking all trades and occupations,
rerages about one hundred per cent, above
irrent wages in Europe.
It will be an easy task, I think, to show
le correctness of this statement by incon-
•overtible testimony.
The average price paid for the labor to
roduce 1,000 tons of iron in this country,
icluding quarrying, smelting, puddling,
jlling, etc., etc., will not fall short of $2
1 gold for each day's faithful labor ; whiio
the United States Commissioner to the Paris
Universal Exposition, in 1867, gives the
statistics of the wages of labor employed in
iron making in Europe, showing that in
England its average cost ranges from three
shillings and six pence to four shillings, or,
in our money, 87^ cents to $1, gold, per day;
in France at about 70 cents, and in Belgium
at less than 60 cents per day. On this point
we have the further authority of Mr. Abram
S. Hewitt, United States Commissioner,
Paris Universal Exposition, 1867, who says :
"We have seen that the cost of making
iron in England, France and Belgium at the
present time varies from £6 10s. to £8 per
ton, and £1 additional suffices to pay its
cost of transportation to the seaboard of the
United States, making the total cost at our
seaport cities at about $40, gold, per ton ;
while at the same ports American iron can-
nofpossibly be delivered at a less cost than
$60, gold, per ton, and the entire difierence
consists in the higher wages, and not in any
larger quantity of labor required for its pro¬
duction in the United States, where the
physical, moral, and pohtical condition of
the working classes occupies a totally differ¬
ent standard from their European confreres,
and where the wages cannot be reduced
without violating our sense of the just de¬
mands of human nature."
WAGES IK GAS-W0BK8.
A regular correspondent of the Phening
Post, signed "No Monopoly," has repeated¬
ly demonstrated in its columns that work¬
ingmen of every trade and occupation in the
United States receive higher wages than
are paid for similar labor in Eurape, and I
have now before me a statement published
by the Post^ and endorsed by it as follows:
The average wages of persons employed
in the gas-works in New York and London,
respectively, are:
New York,
Currency.
Firemen, per week $17 25
Second men,
Yardmen,
Purifyers,
Engineers,
Carpenters,
Masons,
Blacksmiths,
Pipe-Layers,
Gas-Fitters,
Lamp-Lighters,
Laborers,
Farmers,
$195 22 $85 G3
This statement shows the result of one
week's work, as follows :
American wages in gas-works, 1 week
(greenbacks), $195 22, which at 33 per
cent, premium for gold $146 80
English wages in gas-works, 1 week (gold).. 85 63
do
do.
do.
do.
do.
do.
do.
do.
do.
do.
do.
do.
16 11
9 GO
11 90
18 06
18 60
22 36
16 75
13 13
13 20
9 70
10 05
19 61
London,
Gold.
$6 75
5 50
4 75
6 25
10 00
7 25
8 25
7 50
7 50
6 25
4 00
4 50
8 13
Difft FceinfavorofAm'can wages (gold) . $61 17
WOBKERS ON EDGED TOOLS.
Again, in another number of the EMning
Post, I find the following statements:
Wages, in 1867, of five hands in the Uni¬
ted States, in currency, for six days :
Forger
Grinder.w.....
4-1J
Heri
per.
Wages, in 1867, of five hands in England,
in gold, per week, for six days labor :
Forger $8 30
Grinder; B 50
Machinist 1 50
Engineer 7 50
Helper 5 00
$35 00
Reduced to gold at 33 per cent, premium,
$55 33. Difference in favor of American
wages for six days' work, $30 33, gold.
Referring to the wages of saw-makers, the
Eoening Post says;
The following eight classes of saw-makers
earn, per week, in the United States and
Sheffield, respectively :
T7. S.,
In currency.
Saw-makers, per week $25 00
Grinders,
Polishers,
Turners,
Tilers.
Laborers,
Helpers,
Boys,
do 20 39
do 16 50
do 24 00
do 10 00
do 9 42
do 11 52
do 5 50
Sheffield,
In gold.
$11 25
12 50
7 CO
8 50
8 25
4 60
5 00
2 60
$122 33
In gold 91 18
$57 60
According to this statement the Ameri
can saw-makers get for six days' wmk
$34 48 in gold more wages than the Sljtl.
field workmen receive.
STATEMENTS OF COMMISSIONER WELU,
The Special Commissioner of the ULited
States Revenue, Mr. David A. Wells, in liii
last report (1868), furnishes the following
information touching the compensation of
labor in certain leading branch's of indus¬
try in the United States and Europe, fls
says :
" In the manufacture of cotton the aver
age excess of wages paid in the United
States in 1867, over those paid for the w
responding labor in Great Britain, gold be¬
ing taken as the standard in both cases, the
Commissioner ascertained to be 35^ per
cent.
" In Belgium, from an examination of less
complete data, the average depression in
wages, as compared with the United States,
appears to be about 48 per cent. The fol¬
lowing are specific illustrations of the speci¬
alties of labor in the cotton manufacture in
the United States, Great Britain and Bel¬
gium :
" Wor'kers in cotton mills—Average week¬
ly wages or earnings (in gold):
$17 25
,
12 16
18 18
o
16 50
9 50
a.
9
$73 59
C4
o
Drawing frame
tenders
Roving trame
tenders
Male spinners..
Weavers
a-2 B
««.— 5
o c L
wP o I
I'-i
B-3
Sa:.
'la
$3 41
3 54
7 24
6 06
$2 75
3 38
5 36
4 54
$2 10
3 00
5 00
3 60
25 p. c.
35 p. c.
35 p. c.
33 p. c.
6ip.c
18D.e
«i-10
ttoi-lO
" In France the average weekly earniuBS
of persons employed in manufactories of
cotton are as follows :
Men $4"
Women Dt
Bovs ^
Gills , iW
" Taking the 467 men and 1,446 women
employed in that branch in Paris, the aver¬
age weekly wages of adults (men and
women) are 14.9^f., or $1 98, and inclnd
ing the children, the average is 13.82., or
$3 76.
" Manufacturer of Wool—The average
excess of wages paid in woolen mills of the
United States in 1867 and 1868, over th(W
paid for similar labor in Great Britain
would appear to be about 35 per cent. (2152
per cent.), and in carpet and other
mills 58 per cent.
3
" The following are Bpeoifio illustrations
■ the average weekly wages paid in the
oolen mills of the three countries above
iferred to:
In United In Eng- In Bel-
Occupations. States (gold), land. glum.
irders $4 .17 $3 85 $3 I'O
linners (men) 8 33 6 05 3 00
linners (women) 3 91 3 73 3 00
.rawors 5 80 4 13 3 40
eavers 5 73 4 67 3 SO
: " Fire-arms—The average weekly wages
■ all employes in the manufactories of fire-
-ms in the United States, Great Britain
id France, in the year 1867, were as fol-
■ws:
. ttie United States (gold) $13 22
"i England 7 79
1 France 5 94
" In this branch, therefore, the rates of
ages m the United States are 56 per cent,
nore than in England, and 106 pe^ cent,
tore than in France.
^ " Iron Founding and Machine Building—
rverage excess in wages paid in iron found-
;es and machine shops in the United States
j 1867 and 1868, over those paid for simi-
"".r labor in England 58 per cent. Tiie fol-
■wing are specific illustrations of the avert
■re weekly wages paid to the following
lumerated employes in this branch of in-
Tistry in the countries above referred to ;
In the United In Eng- In Bel-
Occupations. States (gold), lend. glum.
; oulders $11 63 $8 00 $5 40
1 achinlsts 11 54 7 00 3 60
1 oiler-makers 12 64 7 50 4 20
- lacksmitlis 12 32 7 12 4 12
; Qgineers 14 40 7 50
iborers 7 03 3 40 1 80
_ " Iron Manufacture—The average price
' puddling irttn per tttn :
■ I the United States (gold) $4 37X
1 England 2 373^
'i Belgium 1 20
" The average weekly earnings of pud-
slers in the leading iron producing coun-
n'ies are as follows ;
[juited States (gold) $16 54
□gland 8 75
ranco 8 10
elgium 6 00
ussia, 1 93
" In this department of industry we se¬
ct the price paid for puddling as an indica-
'^;pn of the entire average of wages in this
'^ranch of industry in the different coun-
■- ies, although the work performed under
''lis head is not always the same in every
'^'stablishment.
• " Unskilled Ldbnr—The following are the
' verage rates of weekly wages paid for tin-
' tilled labor in the manufacturing estab-
shments in the countries below enumera-
. )d;
^ ,i the United States, general average (gold). $6 81
1 Great Britain, general average 4 50
(Sheffield) $5 25
(Hull) 4 50
(Wlgan) 4 35
(Bradford) 4 00
(CJlasgow) 3 75
In France 3 60
In Belgium—
(Leige) $2 40
(Ghent) 2 50
(Mayence) 2 40
—General average 2 44
In Saxony (Dresden) 2 35
In Prussia (Berlin) 2 10
In Russia 1 33
Other proofs might be adduced, but the
foregoing being the highest official evidence
available at this moment, I think will be
sufficient to establish the fact, as asserted in
the resolution, to-wit; That the wages of
workingmen in the United States are
higher than in any other country :
I think the difference in wages between
us and Europe greater somewhat than the
estimate of (Commissioner Wells.
BEARING OF WAGES ON THE (JUESTION OF
PROTECTION.
The following is a correct copy of the
preamble and resolution referred to by the
Eoening Post:
" Whereas, The price of American labor
is above the wages paid for labor in other
countries; and
" Whereas, The products of the cheaper
labor of foreign countries, when imported
into the United States, compete with the
prodiictions of American labor in our home
markets, to the manifest injury of our
workingmen, thereby decreasing enter¬
prise, industrial independence and diversity
of employments, and tending to degrade
our labor and force down the wages of
American workmen to the level of the ill-
paid millions of Europe ; therefore, be it
" Resolved, That we demand such adjust¬
ment of the duties on all commodities pro¬
duced by the labor of foreign countries as
will adqeuately protect American labor, and
restrain the excessive importation of manu¬
factures from abroad, while we have the
raw material, and skill and ability to pro¬
duce the same commodities in our own
cjuntry."
The proposition was happily endorsed by
the National Labor Congress, and the car¬
dinal principle of protection to American
labor was embraced in the platform and
adopted by the representatives ol the work¬
ingmen of the nation. On the proofs
wiiich have been adduced I think the cor¬
rectness of the statement as to wages will
be admitted; furthermore, I feel well as¬
sured that the resolution receives the cor¬
dial endorsement of the workingmen very
generally throughout tbp land. The arti-
zan favors it, for it is to his interest that
the work should be done at home and good
4
wages maintained. The farmer favors It,
for if the artizans are employed here, and at
good wages, he finds a ready market for all
his productions near the farm, instead of
shipping his grain to Europe, losing six
bushels in every seven to pay the cost of
transportation. All our people, embracing
every class, particularly the workingmen
in every field of labor, in agriculture, in
manufactures, and in the mechanic arts,com-
prising over three-fourths of the voting
population of the country, are interested
alike in the question, and it becomes to
them a question of vital importance.
The workingmen of America begin to
see that protection to American labor by
the imposition of heavy duties on the pro¬
ducts of the cheaper labor of foreign coun¬
tries, is, in reality, protection to American
wages ; and they begin to see that this is
the only practicable political measure for
securing with certainty for American work¬
ingmen greater demand for our labor, diver¬
sified employments, and a higher standard
of wages, and for maintaining our wages
above the mean compensation which labor
receives in the monarchical and despotic
countries of Europe.
I take the ground that American labor
must be protected against the unequal and
unfair competition of the pauper labor of
Europe, or our higher wages cannot be per¬
manently maintained. The proposition is
so clear and self-evident that I think it
must be patent to the comprehension of the
meanest understanding. The National La¬
bor Congress, therefore, in my judgment,
have acted wisely in declaring in the most
emphatic manner for protection to Ameri¬
can labor. It is a matter of vital concern
to workingmen, and manifestly for the ben¬
efit of all classes, for who does not know
that when our labor is well employed and
well rewarded, the whole country is pros¬
perous, all classes sharing in the general
prosperity.
OTHER CONSIDERATIONS.
There are other considerations connected
with this question of wages that demand
our earnest attention.
It is not only the true policy of the work¬
ingmen of the nation, but sound public
policy, that will secure for the United
States real industrial independence. On
this point the Special Commissioner of tie
Revenue in his last report has presented
reasons which I cordially endorse. He
says:
" In this country every man is a citizen,
and nearly every citizen a V9ter. As the
possessors of power we cannot afford to have
any class of the people ignorant or socially
degraded. To insure a safe standard of
education and of domestic comfort tli«re
must be a certain scale of wages, and thefe
must be relatively higher than are paid to
the competing laborer of Europe, to whom
power is not entrusted and education da
nied. These degraded laborers constitute
the 'dangerous classes' there, but no danger
ous classes ought to be suffered to exist in
America. Whatever discrimination, there¬
fore, may be necessary to keep up the
wages, the social status, and the self-respect
of the American voter, is a tax imposed by
our political system, and it is a tax which
the enjoyment of that system amply re¬
pays."
The Evening Post claims that no protec¬
tion is required for American workingmen
as they are not injured by the importation
of commodities produced by the pauper
labor of other countries.
This proposition is so absurd on its face
that I deem it unnecessary to point out itn
fallacy. Who does not know that supply¬
ing our markets with the productions of
foreign labor, cheaper than our own,_forces
down our labor to the same level ?
Labor is subject to the great law of "sup
ply and demand," and if American labor
should ever be subjected to the free and
ruinous competition of the cheaper labor of
Europe, I hazard nothing in the prediction
that employments here will then speedily
fail and the supply of idle men and women,
with equal certainty, rapidly increase.
This proposition may be illustrated tbns:
In the United States, ten puddlers, for six
days' work, receive (gold) $165 40; at these
wages the actual cost of the iron is ascer¬
tained to be $60 per ton. In England, ten
puddlers, for six days' work, receive $87 50.
At this rate of wages the cost of the iron is
ascertained to be $38 per ton, and the cost
of transportation to the United States not
exceeding $3, making the total cost per ton
$40.
If the iron workers of England are al¬
lowed to bring their iron to this country
free of duty, how long will American pud¬
dlers find employment at rates of wages89
per cent, abtjve the prices paid for similar
work in England ?
THE EFFECT OF HTPORTATIONS.
But let us examine the question a little
further with the view to ascertain whethei
our labor is at the present time compelled
to suffer some of the evils growing out of
the excessive importations of commodities
produced by foreign labor at pauper wages,
noiwithstanding the duties imposed thereon
by the existing tariff. I submit the follow¬
ing statement showing the value of certain
comiuodities produced by foreign labor, and
5
nported into the United States during the
2 months ending June 30, 1869.
Commodities. Value in Gold,
ooks, pamphlets, maps and engrav-
. lugs $1,202,211
iuttons of all kinds 1,400,805
'oal (bituminous) 1,280,824
iocoa 643,402
lopper ore and manv/ac(uref of coidxr. 51.3,551
1'otion and manufactures of cotton.. .. 17,443,466
Jhemicais 4,575,542
iarthen and stoneware 4,007,213
"ancy goods, invoiced by dozens or
; gross 2.845,152
'ish, fresh and cu;ed 1,685.-591
'lax and manufactures of flax 21,078,597
iJlass, window and other descriptions.. 3,040,778
[cmp 3,905,544
con and steel, and manufactures of iron
' and steel 23.4f>4,655
head and manufactures of lead 2,930,274
■ eather 5,726,255
. aints, colors, white and red lead 1,028,526
-apcr 1,175,198
erfumery 365,373
•alt 1,-303,087
ilks, all kinds 17,977,991
ordage, ropes and twines, of all kinds. 124,616
Chloride of lime or bleaching powder... 64,3,641
■■lothing (not including silk stulfs) 1,277,805
ada ash and carbonates 3,807,6-30
■,'ood and manufactures of wood, in-
s eluding furniture 7,511,709
fool and woolen manufactures 36,249,540
ther manufactures not classified 23,449,852
e, ]
Total $190,619,527
Jt This vast sum of money we are required
-D pay for the productions of the labor of
-ireign countries, where, as I have shown,
■tdss wages are paid, and the commodities
hove specified—all of which we liave the
; bility to produce in our own country—are
utrced upon our home markets and compete
iP irectly with tlhe products of our better paid
tcorkingmen. It is true that a demand ex-
:its here for the commodities named, but it
St equally true that as soon as we secure
( igislation calculated to restrain their im¬
portation from abroad, the work required to
produce these commodities will be done at
uome. Be good enough to look over the
hove statement of commodities imported,
^nd find, if you can, any article enumerated
^lerein that cannot be produced in the
jjJnited States 1 And if this large increase
f production was secured for our own
juntry would not enterprise be stimulated
nd projects started on our soil calculated
) increase the demands for labor and fur-
-.ish for all our people diversity of employ-
tents? Would it not tend to increase our
Population and wealth ; to quicken labor
!tnd secure in the highest degree the de¬
li elopment of the country, and general pros-
■ferity ?
To illustrate, take window glass, of which
•"i appears we imported during the year, in
i'old value, $3,040,778. By starting 40
'lass houses on the Detroit Kiver we could
*roduce that ttmount of glass, and the 40
glass houses would furnish employment for
at least 15,000 men at wages averaging at
least $3 per day ; and the 15,000 men thus
employed would consume the surplus pro¬
ducts of every garden and farm in the
townships of Springwells, Ecorse, Taylor
and Brownstown,
I think the farmers of those townships
would be glad to see 40 glass factories in
operation on the banks of our beautiful
river.
We consume, it appears, per annum, over
$3,000,000 worth of window [glass^in ad¬
dition to the production of all our glass
factories; and this shows that we have a
home market for that much more of win¬
dow glass. Why is it thatjthe 40jfactories
are not established at once? I will answer.
At the Detroit Glass Works it has been as¬
certained that to produce 100 boxes of win¬
dow glass of the best quality the following
outlay is required :
For material. Including pots, fire brick.
iron, nails, lumber, tools, coal, wo d,
• sand, alkalies, lime, salt, etc $350 00
For labor (American wages) 450 00
$800 00
In England, to produce the same quantity of
glass, the cost of the material would be.. .$350 00
Labor (pauper wages) 225 00
Transportation to United States, 100 boxes
SOleeteach 10 00
Duty 100 00
$685 00
The Englishman lays down the 100 boxes
of window glass in the United States at a
cost of $115 under the cost of the Detroit
Glass-Works, because the jiauper wages at
which the glass-vs-orkers in England are
obliged to labor, give him the advantage
above shown. This brief statement illus¬
trates the whole question of protection, and
the American laboring man cannot fail to
see that it is solely a question of wages.
Either the duty on the glass made by
foreigners at lower wages must be adequate
to overcome the difference in the price of
labor or American wages " will be forced
down to the level of the ill-paid millions of
Europe."
HOW AMERICAN WORKMEN EXPEND THEIR
WAGES.
•
Having demonstrated, I think, that wages
are higher here than in other countries, and
having also presented good reasons why
wages here should always continue above
the standard maintained in other countries,
not only for the direct interest and advant¬
age of our workingmen, but on the broad
ground of sound policy for the government
of this free Republic, I will go on to ex¬
amine other statements of tho Etening Post,
particularly the averment that Americans
6
get the poorest wages because they are
compelled by the iniquitous tariff to pay a
a high'price for every foreigp commodity
they are required to buy, and the Evening
Post illustrates the argument as follows:
" A week's wages of nine workingmen, in
a manufactory of fire arms in Connecticut
will buy 113f yards of Axminister carpet in
New York ; a week's wages of nine men,
similarly employed in Birmingham, wilj
buy 1335 yards of the same quality of car¬
pet.
" Ninety-six days' labor in a saw manu¬
factory in this country will buy CSJ yards
of broadcloth in this country ; ninety-six
days' labor of just the same workmen in a
manufactory in Sheffield will buy 794^ yards
of the same, or even better cloth there.
" Ninety-six days' labor in an American
saw factory will buy here 136 dozen silk
stockings ; ninety-six days' labor of precise¬
ly the same class of workmen in an English
saw factory will buy there 153ii dozen.
" Thirty days' labor by five factory
women in Massachusetts—one week each—
will buy here 93 yards of poplin or 35/8
dozen of Clark's spool thread ; the same
labor of the same class of hands in England
will buy them 134f yards of the same pop¬
lin, or 50 dozen of the same spool thread."
The question arises, do American farmers
and other workingmen expend all their
earnings and wages in buying Axminister
carpets, fine broadcloths and silk stockings?
And do our American women expend all
their wages for poplins and Clark's spool
thread ? It cannot be possible that these
statements are put forth in candor, for the
editor of the Evening Post knows, as well
as every other well informed man in the
country knows, that the annual disburse¬
ment of a workingman or workingwoman,
for the articles specified is a very small and
insignificant item. It is the least item in
our list of wants, and one requiring the
least expenditure of money.
On this point 1 submit the report of Mr.
D. A. Wells, Special Commissioner of the
Revenue, the following table showing the
average weekly expenditure of laboring
men in the various manufacturing estab¬
lishments of the United States in 1867 and
1868 ;
Articles. Amouat.
Flour and bread $1 40
Meat of all kinds. 1 60
Butter... 45
Suzar and molasses 60
Tea : 37
CotTue 10
Soap, sisrch, etc 2-3
Lard 18
Milk 32
Egijs '. 20
SMt and spices.I 05
Potatoes and other vegetables K
Fruits, fresh and dried if
Coal, wood, etc H
Oil or other light it
Other artices of food , f;
House rent 16
$8M
Add clothing, house-keeping goods, etc 1 (t
Total average weekly expense J951
The foregoing exhibit shows that of tbe
entire cost of living, on the average overM
per cent, of the whole is expended for food.
This statement of the Commissioner was
founded on the most reliable data, takioj
the average actual expeiience of a large
number of mechanics and laboring men Id
different sections of the country as the basis
of the investigation, and 1 think it will be
considered a sufficient illustration of tbe
question.
It is a fact within the knowledge andei-
perience of every man that the Cost of food
requires the largest disbursement of money,
^ and as food of every description in tbe
United States is as cheap as, if not cheaper,
than in any other country, and as our
wages are double the wages of other coun¬
tries, I think we can afford to huy a few
dozen spools of thread every year or two,
and as many yards of poplin as our wira
require, even at higher prices that the pau¬
pers of England pay for the same articles.
Observation and extended inquiry with
the view to ascertain tbe average annual
expense of laboring men in the United
States, embracing single men and men with
families having diversified Anployments,
convince me that, taking the annual costol
living, the average of 86 per cent, of the
whole is expended on subsistence alona
In view of this fact how weak and frivoloin
the illustrations and arguments of tbe
Evening Post appear touching the cost ol
poplins, stockings, and Clark's spool thread.
In another way we can see an improve¬
ment in tbe condition of our people. Sav¬
ings banks are largely julaces of deposit for
the surplus savings of working people, k
1860 the total deposits in Maine, New
Hampshire, Massachusetts, and Rhode Isl¬
and, and in Philadelphia and Newark, N.
J., embracing large manufacturing dis¬
tricts, were $66,569,307. In 1861 the total
was $65,330,003 ; but in 1868 the deposiis
in the same States and cities (with one new
bank added), reached $153,833,667, and the
number of depositors largely increased. _
This does not quite agree with the idea
that " the rich are growing richer, and tbe
poor poorer," but in view of these tacts, and
of partial reports from other parts of the
country giving like good results, this idea
must be erroneous.
7
In addition to all this weight of testlmo-
ly at home, showing the superior condition
f our working pex)ple, and the benefit to
hem of protection to home industry, we
ind the workingmen of England impelled
ly " the force of hunger," beginning to ask
;rith heartfelt earnestness that free trade
uay be abandoned and a protective policy
ake its place to save them from growing
■jauperism, pinching hunger, and hopeless
"vant.
An influential Lotodon paper lately said ;
There is no blinking the fact that the great
''rinciples of international trade and public
realth which the Manchester school did so
-uuch to establish, are regarded by large
' lasses of people with unbelief or abomina-
-ion."
" The New York Times says: "The re-
ipse has been caused by the great and gen-
' -ral distress which exists in English manu-
- icturing districts—a distress which is felt
-very hour in the home of the workman,
- nd for which Mr. Bright himself is unable
"3 suggest a remedy. A force is at work
' ^ir greater than that of Tory arguments—
: he force of hunger. Mr. Bright cannot
. how, as he once could, that the workmen's
"Tufferings are the inevitable consequence of
.;the national commerce being controlled by
i^'ory principles. Free trade is established
tnd Toryism is powerless. Still the work-
, ig classes are crying for bread. They find
phemselves competing with the rest of the
, 'orld at a disadvantage. And so they
,'|.)rm themselves into associations, and are
'(.nown as the ' Revivers of English Indus-
\ They allege that free trade has re-
'.^"^uced one in every twenty of the popula-
, .on to pauperism, and is driving thousands
^j,,f skilled artisans out of the country."
Mr. Wood, of Sheffield, England, a lead-
"^ig manufacturer, in a letter to the Daily
'^,1 elegraph of that city, says:
"At the present moment about one in
"" Very 18 persons of England and Wales is
- 1 receipt of parochial relief. There was
aid in 1853 £4,929,064 for pauperism, but
1868 £7,500,000 was paid. In London
^ 'lone the amount expended in relief was,
■' i 1859, £117,925, while in 1868 it was
-■;'279,898. Since 1853 upward of 3,000,000
f our people have emigrated, and principal¬
is to extreme protective countries, where
l^'-lieir labor has found a better reward, but
JS bt the same time it has been the means of
rcater foreign productiveness. We have
Kn'ried free trade so long in the face of other
t' rotective producing countries, that it is al-
'.ti lost time we protected ourselves."
lib After telling how the imports of England
lei Exceeded her exports $580,000,000 in 1868,
jjifc e says ;
" Whilst certain articles, such as tea, cof¬
fee, sugar, etc., which we cannot produce
ourselves, are admitted at heavy duties,
other articles which we can produce, and
our half-starved countrymen are literally
dying to produce, are admitted free, such as
silks, woolens, watches and clocks, cottons,
hats, gloves, etc., etc. The foreign masters
can manufacture at 30 per cent, less than
we can, and yet they can import their goods
free. There was bullion in the Bank of
England in January, 1852, £20,527,000 ; and
in April, 1869, only £17,225,000, showing a
decrease of £3,302,000. In the Bank of
France there was bullion, January 13, 1853,
£20,017,948 ; in April, 1869, £47,102,112, or
an increase of £27,084,164. These figures
are facts, and plainly show who is making
the money. It commends itself to the
notice of every right minded man who loves
his country and its welfare."
The Pall Mali Oazette, in London an or¬
gan of the upper class—" the aristocracy"—
Says:
" On Wednesday, Mr. Aryton and Mr.
Samuda attended a public meeting at Lime-
house to consider certain proposals with
reference to emigration. Mr. Wilkins, a
workingman, moved an amendment to one
of the resolutions, referring to the poverty
and distress which prevailed in the country
to the importation of foreign manufactures
duty free. There is a society in existence
for the revival of protection, and some day
we may see it with bands, banners, and new
and favorite orators at its head, on the way
to Hyde Park."
The London Farmer, an influential farm¬
ers' journal, favors protection, and the
Manchester Ouardian,, in the very heart of
the free trade region, has a correspondent, a
free trader, who frankly says: " There is
unquestionably a reactionary feeling against
free trade."
There is a mournful pathos in a late ad¬
dress of a meeting of iron-workers in South
Stafibrdshire to their employers. They
say :
"We ask you, gentlemen, can you expect
that we will continue, ' like dumb driven
cattle,' to accept with indifference the
present state of things as if we had become
' living dead men ?' The low price of labor
and the high price of living has driven and
is driving your best workmen from the
country to compete with us in the labor
markets of the world."
now WOKKMEN LITB IN ENGLAND.
The London correspondent of the New
York Times gives a most deplorable picture
of the poor of the large cities of England.
Millions of people in England live almost
8
entirely tipon baker's bread. Here, for ex¬
ample, is the way of life of a sober, hard¬
working Englishman, who earns 18s. a
week (say $4 50 gold standard), and has a
wife and six children. He neither drinks
nor smokes, and hands over his whole
wages to his wife. This is a common prac¬
tice in well ordered families. She pays 48.
a week for rent; Is. for coals ; candies, soap,
etc., 9d.; a penny a week each for the six
children to a burial club, 6d.; on a doctor's
bill due. Is. Here are 7s. 3d. of the IBs.
gone, and notiiing to eat. Now the bill of
fare for those eight persons. One pound of
bread a day for each—the children scarcely
taste anything else—comes to 7s. a week ;
twenty pounds of potatoes, 8d.; one pound
of butcher's meat on Sunday, and two
pounds of salt pork for week days, 2s.; one
pound of sugar, half pound of butter, one
ounce tea, 13d., make up the week's ac¬
count. No milk, no fruit, no clothing.
The only way th-^y can have that is for the
children to get work or die ; then something
would come in from the burial club. Thou¬
sands and thousands of men work hard for
two-thirds of these wages, or less. Plenty,
even In large towns, work for 12s. a
Thousands cannot taste even the Sunday
meat dinner. Great numbers never taste but
ter; they get a little drippings as a substltata.
In a London shop on a Saturday night, you
will see great heaps of penny and half,
penny packets of tea, and pennyworths of
brown sugar, ready done up for " people of
moderate incomes." I once had the curiosl.
ty to buy a halfpenny packet of tea-a
cent's worth. It resembled musty clove!
hay, and a decoction tasted as you might
fancy drippings from a heap of dead leaves
to taste at the end of a hard winter.
After the testimony of this " cloud of wit
nesses," on both sides of the Atlantic, what
ground is left for the assertion that the
American artizan and workman is no better
paid than his suffering brethren in England
or Europe ?
How clear, too, is the proof that fair pro¬
tection to home industry benefits the work¬
man, and therefore the resolution adopted
by the National Labor Congress is both
true and timely.
MOSES W. FIELD.
Detroit, Michigan, Oct. 20, 1869.
READ, AND LEND TO YOUR NEIGHBOR!
Pretectio!) vs, PreeTrade, National leai vs, National PoKortf.
TO THE
Farmers, Mechanics, Laborers, and all Voters of the United States.
; (j-. *
I
This little pamphlet is directed to yon
because you and your children are deeply
interested in the prosperity, credit and
character of the people of the North-west¬
ern States, as well as of the whole Union.
All who ai'c acquainted with the natural
resources of the great Western States,
know that they are equal to those of any
otlier part of the world, possessing a tine
climate, and inhabited by an active, intel¬
ligent, honest, and patriotic people. You
raise enormous quantities of grain, wool,
wheat, corn, pork and beef, for sale. You
work very hard, but when you close up
each year, and pay your store and oilier
bills, together with your taxes, you find
you have but little money left to put at
interest, or as an accumulated fund. You
wonder why it is that farmers in Massa¬
chusetts, Connecticut, and Old England
can pay §200 an acre for poor land, and at
the end of each year put in the Savings
Bank a handsome deposit. The mechanic
or laborer living in the West, raising a
large family, is at a loss to know why he
cannot clothe, educate and support his
growing family, and lay up money, just as
well as his friend in New England who
gets no better pay per day than himself.
The Irishman, in Ireland, cannot see
why the English landowner gets rich,
while he is so poor that he must subsist
on the coarsest food from year to year,
while his family grows up without educa¬
tion, and with little but rags to wear. The
Spaniard, Turk, and Portuguese exist with
scarcely a motive to prompt them to ex¬
ertion ; they cannot see why France and
England monopolize a large share of the
active capital of the world, whilst they
possess as fine a country and climate as
either.
The answer to all these queries is sim¬
ply as follows: Where there is diversity
of employment, and people make their
own goods, as well as raise their own ag-
•icultiu-al products, they and the country
irosper. But where the people are cou-
Inedto but one employment, like agricul-
ure, they never prosper. England de-
irived Ireland of her manufactures by
irohibition. Ireland is purely agricultural.
£ngland has
agriculturs, jaaaufesitiiaisr-i-uisurance
commerce. She is the richest nation in
the world. Before the revolution, France
was very poor. She depended on England
for her manufactures. After the revolu-
lution her system was changed, and she,
too, has now large manufactories, whilst
her restrictions on American ships pro¬
hibit our vessels from trading much with
her. In 1821, European ships transported
less than ten per cent, of the commodities
between Europe and America; in 1850,
33 per cent., and in 1863, 45 per cent, of
our trade was in foreign ships. (See For¬
eign Relations, 1864, p. 7) We buy enor¬
mous quantities of French silks, laces,
wines, brandies, and other luxuries, and
she takes from $20,000,000 to $30,000,000
of our g)ld coin each year to pay the bal¬
ance. England also takes a large amount
of our coin; but who ever heard of our
gold and silver going to Ireland, a purely
agricultural country ? Who ever heard of
an exclusively agricultural country getting
rich? No one. It never can be. The
mechanic or farmer in New England or
Old England, who has a large family grow¬
ing up, can have one, two, or three of his
children in some kind of a factory, earning
from three to five dollars per week, each.
This gives him double, and sometimes
three times as much income as his own
unaided labor will produce. He is then
able to feed, clothe, and educate his fami¬
ly better thau he could from his own sin¬
gle labor, and at the end of the year he
often has one, two, or three hundred dol¬
lars in the Savings Bank besides. Massa¬
chusetts has $60,000,000 In her Savings
Banks alone. The whole North-western
States, with eight times as large a popula¬
tion, have not $3,000,000 in all their Sav¬
ings Banks. There are two principal
reasons why the Western man cannot
prosper as well as the one who lives in or
near a manufacturing town. One is, that
the farmer in the West sells his produce
to the merchant, who pays its transporta¬
tion either to New England or Old Eng¬
land, or France, and then buys the cloth,
shoes, silks, and the thousand other arti¬
cles that are used in the West. He then
transports them back to the West to be
sold, with all the charges of freight and
added.
2
By this process you are obliged to sell
your products for half, aud in many
instances, for less than half the price you
oughtito get, and you pay more for your
goods than you would if they were made
near your own home, where you could
exchange your eggs, cabbage, oats, corn,
pork, beef, miik, etc., without any extra
transportation. Whereas, by the present
process you sell your corn at 10, 15, or 20
cents per bushel, pay 00 or 80 cents per
bushel transportation to a distant market,
and then buy it back with all the incident¬
al charges, commissions and profits added,
in the shape of silks, linen, cloths, iron,
and other merchandise.
Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Missouri,
Iowa and Wisconsin have in each an aver¬
age of 05,000 women and children, who
are willing to work, but who now earn
comparatively nothing, and are practically
a dead weight on the industry of the re¬
mainder of the producers. If you had
cotton, woolen, iron and other manufact¬
uring establishments scattered over these
and other Western and Southern States,
all these persons could get employment
at from three to live dollars per week.
Let us see what this number of persons
would earn at an average of four dollars
per week, in ten years. In one week they
would earn $140,000; in one month, $500,-
000; in one year, $0,720,000, in 10 years,
$07,200,000. You can easily see that if
any one of your States could utilize all
this unproductive labor, that such State
would, in 10 years after your works were
iu full operation, have $50,000,000 in your
Savings Banks just as well as the working
people of the States and countries now
enjoying the benefits of manufactures as
well as of agriculture.
There are now at work in Europe at
least 1,250,000 people, whose products are
brought to this country for sale These
people you support by sending them your
grain, at an enormous expense for freight,
and buying their handiwork. If the 4,000
factories now employed in Europe on
American fabrics and commodities, were
transported to the Western States, with
half the operatives to work them (you
could easily furnish the other half), it
would have the immediate ell'ect to in¬
crease the value of your farms four or five
fold. Every factory in the country imme¬
diately adds to the value of all the lands
within many miles of its location, and iu
the aggregate more than its whole cost,
and the operatives immediately com¬
mence consuming every species of far¬
mers' products, at good prices for cash.
Suppose, on the other hand, that all the
people of the North-west, with all the
new emigrants, continue to confine them¬
selves to the production of agricultural
staples, and that everybody who works at
all is driven into that employment, what
will be the certain result'! Over produc¬
tion, low prices, poor, idle, and as an in¬
evitable result in the end, uneducated and
vicious people. Turn again to Ireland,
Spain, Portugal, Turkey, and contrast
them with England, France, New Eng¬
land, Pittsburgh, Philadelpnia, and other
manufacturing cities and countries. Eng¬
land and France are aiming at the entire
monopoly of the commerce, manufactures
and money-lending country, and
our laws are so framed as to favor their
policy, to their hearts' content. One of
t^he leading causes of our Revolution wm
the oppressive laws of England prohibit¬
ing the establishment of manufactures in
the American colonies.
England's corn laws, of which snob
great boasts are made by our Iree-traders,
were enacted for the sole purpose of en¬
abling England to feed her manufacturers
at home, so that they would not be obliged
to come to America to get food; or in
other words, it was an act of protection
to her manufactories. England never
buys our food when she can buy from the
coutinent cheaper; and the cost of trans¬
port from the Far West is so great that
during the past few years she has bought
more than two-thirds of her Imported
grain from the continent of Europe. The
entire value of all the breadstuffs and pro¬
visions exported from the United States,
is just about sullicient to pay for the silks,
satins, laces and embroidery we annually
import.
The false assertion is often made, that
England and France are practically free
trade countries, while the United States
Government is inclined to prohibitory
tariffs. To prove the utter fallacy of this
assertion, the custom returns of England
show that for 10 years previous to the re¬
bellion, England collected over $100,000,-
000 per annum for customs duties. And
France collected a still larger sum, if we
include tobacco and alcohol, both of
which the Govemraeiit monopolizes.
During the same period, the customs
duties of the United States averaged a fit-
tie over $52,000,000 per annum. Where is
the American who has the hardihood to
reiterate this base perversion of truth, in
the face of such facts'!
The coarse, bulky products of agricul¬
ture, shipped to a market distant 4,560
miles, after deducting all the charges of
freight, commission, and profits of the
middle men or merchants, leaves so small
a margin for the producer, that when the
product is returned in the shape of cloths,
silks, iron and cotton goods, there is not
enough to supply the reasonable wants of
the producer, and as a necessary result,
he parts with his specie, while he has any,
to pay the balance due the distributing
merchant for his goods. Hence specie
flows from the agricultural to the manu¬
facturing States and countries.
All the facts presented by the history of
the United States may be adduced in
proof of this assertion: That a country
which maintains a policy tending to pro¬
mote the export of raw materials, must
have against it a balance of trade, requir¬
ing the export of the precious metals, and
must dispense with their services as meas¬
ures of value. Protection ceased in 1818,
and commenced again in 1824. The im¬
mortal Henry Clay gives the following
portrait of the United States during the
continuance of the free trade period:—
" In casting our eyes aronnd us, the moat
prominent circumstance which fixes our atten¬
tion and challenges pur deepest regret is the
cnarul ,..71,.oK „ wholS
3
coantry. It is ferced npon a5 by nnraerons
facte of the most incontestable character. It
ie indicated by the depressed state of our for¬
eign navigation; by our diminished commerce;
by the alarming diminution of the circulating
medium; by the numerous bankruptcies, not
limited to the trading classes, but extending
to all classes of society; by the universal com¬
plaint of the want of employment; by the low
and depressed state of the value of almost ev¬
ery description of the whole mass of property
of the nation, which has on an average sunk
not less than fifty per cent, within a few years.
This distress pervades every part of the tTnion,
every class of society—all feel it. It is like the
atmosphere that surrounds us, all must inhale
it, and none can escape. It is most painful for
me to attempt to sketch or dwell on the gloom
of this picture. But I exaggerate nothing.
Perfect fidelity to the original would have au¬
thorized me to have thrown on deeper and
darker hues.
"What, I would ask. is the cause of the un¬
happy condition of our country, which I have
described ? It is to be found in the fact that
during the whole existence of this Govern¬
ment, we have shaped our industry, our navi¬
gation, and our commerce, in reference to for¬
eign markets; in the fact that we have depend¬
ed too much upon foreign sources of supply ;
in the fact that, while we have cultivated with
assiduous care our foreign resources, we have
suffered those at home to wither in a state of
neglect and abandonment. The policy of all
Europe refuses to receive from us anything but
those raw materials of smaller value essential
to their manufactures, to which they can give
a higher value. In adopting this policy, the
States of Europe do not inmiire what is best
for us, but what suits thems^ves respectively.
They do not take jurisdiction of our interests,
but "limit the the object of their legislation
to that of the conservation of their own pecu¬
liar interests. They do not guide themselves
by that romantic philanthropy which we see
displayed here, and which invokes us to con¬
tinue to purchase the products of foreign in-
* dnstry, without regard to the strtc of prosper¬
ity of our own.
"Both the inability and the policy of foreign
powers, then, forbid us to rely upon the foreign
market as being an adequate vent for the sur¬
plus produce of American labor. The object
of wise governments should be, by sound legis¬
lation so to protect the industry ot their o'wn
citizens against the policy of foreign powers,
as to give to it the most expansive force in the
production of wealth. Great Britain has ever
acted, and still acts on this policy. She has
pushed her protection of British interests fur¬
ther than any other nation has fostered its in¬
dustry. The result is greater ability to bear
their public burdens.
"The measure of the wealth of a nation is
indicated by the measure of its protection of
its industry, and the measure of the poverty of
a nation is marked by that of the degree in
which it neglects and abandons the care of its
own industry, leaving it exposed to ihe action
of loreign powers. Great Britain protects most
her industry, and the wealth of Great Britain
is consequently the greatest. France is next
in the degree of protection, and France is next
in order of wealth. Spain most neglects the
duty of protecting the industry of her subjects,
and Spam is one of the poorest of European
nations. Unfortunate Ireland, disinherited or
rendered in her industry subservient to Eng¬
land, is exactly in the same state of poverty
with Spain, measured by the rule of taxation."
The remedy proposed by Mr. Clay for
the evils existing in this country was a
high tariff on foreign imports, which is
the only means that the wisdom of na¬
tions bus yet discovered to be effectual.
The sole object of a tariff is to tax the
view of promoting .American industry.
The tax is exclusively leveled at foreign
industry. That is the avowed and direct
purpose of the tariff.
Extracts from a Speech of Henry Clay. July
11, 1833.
" Spain, by an utter neglect of her domestic
resources, confided altogether to those which
she derived from her colonies, and presents an
instance of the greatest adversity.
" Strong in the convictions and deeply seated
in the affections of a large majority of the peo¬
ple of the United States, the tariff stands self-
vindicated in the general prosperity, in the rich
fruits which it has scattered over the land, in
the experience of all prosperous and powerful
nations, present and past, and now in that of
our own.
" By various acts, and more especially by the
tariflf of IS'il—the abused tariff" of 1824—the
public coffers were amply replenished, and we
have been enabled to reach our present proud
eminence of financial prosperity.
"Encoura.ge fabrication at home, and there
will iriiiautly arise animation and healthful
circulation throughout all parts of the repub¬
lic.
"We must speedily adopt a genuine Ameri¬
can policy. Still cherishing the foreign market,
lot us create also a home market, to give fur¬
ther scope to the consumption of The produce of
American industry. Let us counteract the pol¬
icy of forei.irners, and withdraw the support
which we now give to their industry, and stim¬
ulate that of our own country. It should be a
prominent object with wise legislators to mul¬
tiply the vocations and extend the business of
society, as far as it can be done, by the protec¬
tion of our interests at home, against the inju¬
rious effects of foreign legislation.
" The creation of a home market is not only
necessary to produce for our agriculture a just
reward for its labors, but it is indispen«5able to
obtain a supply of our accessary wants. But
this home market, highly derirable as it is, can
only be created and cherished by the PROTEC¬
TION of our legislation against the inevitable
prostration of our industry, which must ensue
from the action of FOREIGN policy and legis¬
lation."
Mr. Clay, referring to the balance of
trade being against this country, says:—
"In the mean time there will he an export of
the precious metals, to the deep injury of inter¬
nal trade, an export of public securities, a re¬
sort to credit, debt, mortgages. All of these
conditions are believed now to be indicated by
our countiy in its commercial relations. What
have we received for the bonds sent to Eng¬
land? Goods. But these bonds must be paid.^'
The oft-repeated fallacy that commerce
will regulate itself is thus disposed of by
Mr. Clay:—
"Yes, and the extravagance of the spendthrift
heir, who squanders the rich palrirnony which
has descended to him, will regulate itself ulti
mately. But it "will be a regulation which will
exhibit him in the end, safely confined within
the walls of a jail. Commerce will regulate it¬
self—but is it not the duty of wise governments
to watch its course, and beforehand to provide
against even the distant evils by prudent legis¬
lation, stimulating the industry of their own
people, and checking the policy of foreign pow¬
ers as it operates on (hem?"
After a two years' trial of free trade, the
Emperor of Russia says:—
"The country which adopts, while others re¬
ject, free trade, must condemn its own industry
and commerce to pay a ruinous tribute to those
of other countries.
" It is with the most lively feelings of regret
that we acknowledge it is our own proper ex¬
perience which enables us to trace this picture.
The evils which it details have been reauzed in
Russia and Poland since the conclusion of the
act of the 7th and 19th of December, 1818. Agri¬
culture without a market, industry without
protection, lan^juish and decline. Specie is ex¬
ported, and the most solid houses are shaken.
Events have proved that our a^?ricultu^e and
our commerce, as well as our manufacturing
industry, are not only paralyzed, but brought
to the brink of ruin."
Eight years after the tariff of 1824 had
been enacted, and its beneficent elFects
were fully developed, the Sonth, under the
leadership of John C. Calhoun, attacked
the law as an excuse for nullification.
Read from Clay's speech of January 24,
1832:—
" Eight years ago it was my painful duty to
present to the other house of Congress an uu-
exaggerated picture of the general distress
pervading the whole land. In short, if I were
to select any term of seven years since the
adoption of the pres<'nt Constitution, which
exhibited a scene of the most wide-spread dis¬
may and desolation, it would be exactly that
term of seven years which immediately pre¬
ceded the establishment of the tariff of 1,S24.
I have now to perform the more pleasing task
of exhibiting an imperfect sketch of the exist¬
ing state of the unparalleled prosperity of tho
country. On a general survey, we behold cul¬
tivation extended, the arts flourishing, the face
of the country improved, our people fully and
profitably employed, and the publfc counte¬
nance exhibiting tranquility, contentment, and
happiness. Our cities expanded; whole vil¬
lages springing up ; our tonnage, foreign and
coastwise, swelling and fully occupied; the
currency sound and abundant: the public debt
of two hundred millions was nearly redeemed;
and to crown all, the public treasury overflow¬
ing—embarrassing Congress, not to find ob¬
jects, but to select the objects which shall be
liberated from impost- If the term of seven
years were to be selected of the greatest pros¬
perity which this people have enjoyed since
the establishment ot their present Constitution,
it would be exactly that period of seven years
which immediately followed the p i!->-age of the
taritf of 1824.
" This transformation of the condition of the
country, from gloom and distress to brightness
and prosperity, has been mainly the work of
American legislation fostering American indus¬
try, instead of allowing it to be controlled by
foreign legislation cherishing foreign industry.
While we thus behold the entire failure of all
that was foretold against the American system,
it is a subject of just felicitation to its friends,
that all their anticipations of its benefits have
been fulfilled."
Democrats, read the following patriotic
testimony from the great leader of your
party. What was true in 1824 is true now.
Extract of a Letter from Andrew Jarkson. 1824,
to Dr. L. H. Coleman., C.
"Heaven smiled upon us and gave us liberty
and Independence. That same Providence has
blessed us with the means of nationai independ¬
ence. ♦ * He has tilled our mountains and
plains with minerals—with lead, iron and cop¬
per—and ^ven us a climate and soil for tue
growing of hemp and wool. These being the
great materials of our national defense, they
ought to have extended to them adequate and
fair protection, that our manufacturers and la¬
borers may be placed in a fair competition with
those of Europe. ♦ # i will ask, what is the
real situation of the agriculturist ? Where has
the American farmer a market for his surplus
produce? Except for cotton, he has neither a :
foreiOT nor a home market. Does not this
clearly prove, when there is no market at home
or abroad, that there is too much labor employ¬
ed in agriculture, and that the channels for la¬
bor should be multiplied ? Common sense at
once points out the remedy. Draw from agri¬
culture this superabundant labor; employ it In
mechanism and manufactures, thereby creatinj
a home market for yoiirbreadstuffs-distributing
labor to the most profitable account; and beno-
fits to the coun'ry will result. Take from agri¬
culture, in the United States, 600,(KJO men, wo¬
men and children, and you will atoncegivea
market for more breadstuffs than all Europfi
now furnishes us with. In short, sir, we have
been too long subject to the policy of Britiwh
merchants. It is time we should become a lit¬
tle more u47/ierMyj'n2?e/'/, and instead of feeding
paupers and laborers of England, feed our owu;
or else in a short time, by continuing our pres¬
ent policy, we shall be paupers ourselves. » *
The experience of the late war ought to teach
us a lesson, and one never to be forgotten. If
our liberty and republican form of government,
procured for us by our Revolutionary fathers,
arc worth the blood and treasure by which they
were obtained, it is surely our duty to protect
and defend them. It is, therefore, my opinion,
that a careful and judicious tariff is much want¬
ed/o pay our national and afford us the
means of that defense within ourselves on
which the safety of our country and liberty de-
ponds ; and last, though not least, give a proper
(Ihtribution to our lahor. which must prove ben¬
eficial to the happiness, independence, and
wealth of the community."
The tariff act of 1828 was highly protec¬
tive. The country flourished under it,
and paid off its national debt. The com¬
promise tariff ol 1.S33 reduced the duties
from year to year for ten years, until no
duty was over 20 per cent. Long before
this ruinous act had reached the full force
of its mischief, the country was import¬
ing far more than it could pay for in agri¬
cultural products, including cotton.
When, in 1837, our specie had nearly all
left for Europe, a wide-spread crash came,
involving counties, towns. States, and in¬
dividuals in almost univer&al baukruptcy
and ruin. Great distress brought the peo¬
ple to their senses, and another protective
tariff act was passed in 1842. The coun¬
try soon recovered from its misery, under
the beneficent operation of tiiat act.
Specie flowed back to the United States,
and our banks in most of the States soon
resumed specie payment. In 1840, specie
commenced arriving from California, and
in the same year the tariff of 1843 was
again reduced to a revenue of semi-free
trade standard. The receipts of gold
from Calilornia supplied this country
with exchange for many years; but the
monomania for buying and using foreign
manufactures more than kept pace with
our exports of domestic produce, and in
1857 we had another season of bankruptcy
and ruined fortunes. Each of these finan¬
cial revulsions was preceded by large ex¬
ports of specie, ana the startling fact ap¬
peared, that, in a time of profound peace,
when our exports of produce were enor¬
mously great, together with large sales ef
our railroad bonds and stocks abroad,
they were not in all sufficient to pay for
our huge imports of silks, laces, cloths,
wines, brandies, iron, sugar, tea and coffee,
but that our coin must be drained to make
up the balance, aud when that was ex¬
hausted, we must break.
The country is now drifting towards an¬
other terrible revulsion. Our imports in
1864 were $328,000,000, in specie value,
while our exports, exclusive of specie,
['■'■:??»»OvOUO of currency
value, which, reduced to specie, is $135,-
000,000, leaving a deficit of $203,000,000
to be made up in specie and national
bonds. $40,000,000 of the specie export¬
ed has been used to pay interest and divi¬
dends on stocks and bonds held abroad
before the war, leaving the enormous bal¬
ance of $163,u00,000 to be paid in national
bonds at about fifty cents on the dollar,
requiring $293,000,000 of bonds.
With the same policy now pursued, by
the end of 1806 Europe will hold at least
$1,500,000,000 of our railroad bonds and
national stocks and bonds, involving the
export of at least $90,000,000 of cash per
annum, to pay the interest alone. This
vast export of specie to Europe, to pay
interest, together with our improvident
purchases of European luxuries and man¬
ufactures, will as surely bring financial
rum and national bankruptcy, as that
death will follow the continued flow of
blood from the human body.
Money is as much the tools of trade as
the plow, the harrow and hoe are the tools
of agriculture; tride thern offfor cloth and
silk, and crops will soon fail. When our
money is all gone, trade must nearly end.
The exports of specie from the United
States since the discovery of gold in Cali¬
fornia, in excess of imports, has been
$603,646,000. In 1863 the excess of ex¬
ports was $73,000,000. In 1864, $91,970,-
000. Coin held by the banks of the three
chief cities ot the United States was as
follows:
Nov. 15,1862. I cb'y I860.
New York, $31),318,947 $20,072,378
Philadelphia 5 511,0.14 1 4H8.ii44
Boston, 7,970,000 1,932,769
$52,830,001 $23,503,791
Loss in 2 yrs. 3 men. ,$29,326,210
It is also clearly shown by statistics that
the specie has been gleaned from all parts
of the country to make up the failing sup¬
plies in the commercial cities. Where
has it gone ? To Europe, Cuba, China ?
The Bank of France has gained $30,000,-
000 in 1804, while England has received
her tiill share of the coveted treasure.
The finances of no nation ever did, and
never can, remain sound under such a sys-
iem as is now pursued hy this Govern¬
ment,
Look at the facts, and draw your own
conclusions.
Your first natural inquiryis, what remedy
can be applied to avert the prospective
disasters towards which we arc tending?
There is but one remedy, and that is the
adoption of a rate of duties on imports so
high as to lessen the importation of for¬
eign goods below the value of the pro¬
ducts we can easily export, and keep the
principal part of our coin at home.
By pursuing this policy for five years,
we would accumulate $350,000,000 of eoiu
in this country—more than we now have
—and with this addition as a basis of re¬
sumption, we could glide into specie pay¬
ments without any great finaueial disturb¬
ances occurring.
The opponents to this remedy, and the
enemies to Ameriean manufactures, as
well as the enemies to ||i 1Jl. 1 imi'L»a,n,
First. The free trade theorists, who are
so very benevolent as to desire America
to abandon all her interests for the
benefit of Europeans, who always did, and
always will, legislate for their own exclu¬
sive interests.
Secondly. The British, French, and
other European manufacturers, who al¬
ways have agents in tliis country, and es¬
pecially in and about Washington during
the sessions of Congress, They are al¬
ways anxious to promote the interests of
the people of the United States by ofter-
ing what they call cheap goods, aud, when
the ordinary modes of persuasion fail, they
bring large sums of money to bear, in
order to aid in convincing Congress of its
duty! These legislative parasites are the
most pestilential curses to American inter¬
ests that our lenient government and peo¬
ple tolerate within their capitol. What
other nation p)ermits the interested, paid
vampires of legislative corruption to
iniest its seat of government, hut
America? After the free traders had
succeeded in breaking down the tariff
of 1843, it came out in the testimony
of one of the investigating com¬
mittees, that the European-manufacturers
had sent $1,2.50,000 to this country to be
used in satisfying the governing classes of
the United States that low duties for
America, and high duties aud commercial
restrictions for Europe, were for the in¬
terest of all mankind.
Thirdly. The merchants and business
men of the great seaport cities like New
York and Boston.
Just so long as vast imports and exporto
continue, and the transfers are made there,
the people of those cities are enriched by
the operation. Every cargo of produce
that is shipped through NewY'ork, and
every package of goods that arrives there
and goes West, leaves a profit to the
New York merchant. This trade, both
ways, amounts to seven or eight hundred
millions per annum, and the importers
and exporters get about ten per cent, of
profit out of it. Tliis gives them eighty
or ninety millions of dollars per annum of
profit, \Vhenever the people build a wool¬
en or cotton, or an iron mill, in the West,
and consume their own wool and food,
and sell their products to Western con¬
sumers, tlie New Yorkers would get no
profit out of it, but the whole profit re¬
mains with the people who manufacture
and the farmer who raises the tood.
Fourthly, The carriers of the products of
the farm (nearly half European), embrac¬
ing all the ship-owners on the ocean, and
part of the ships and steamers on the
lakes.
Many of the owners of our Eastern and
Western trunk line railways suppose their
interests to be in favor of free trade, as
considerable of the iron, steel and other
articles used in railways is imported from
Europe. But if they could fully appreci¬
ate the fact that the great profit of their
road is the internal taritf along their
lines, that through freight and passengers
-are the least profitable, and that when
> ■ ..<•
0
are depressed, their stock and diridends
are sadly eontracted, as was the case in
1857, they would see that their prosperity
is so closely allied to the<;eneral prosperi¬
ty of the nation, that whatever injures the
one injures the other, they must in the
end afrree with the friends of protection,
that all real American interests are, in
fact, harmonious.
Many of the newspaper publishers have
become partially committed ai^alnst us,
believing their "own interests would be
promoted by a reduction of duties on
paper. Time, and a little sober reflection,
it Is hoped, will redeem them from an
error so fatal in the long run to the inter¬
ests of their best customers, as well as
their own.
With this powerful array of wealth, in¬
tellect and interest opposed to the estab¬
lishment of Western manufactories, it is
no wonder that the Western farmers,
laborers and mechanics, whose intere.sts
are immediately involved In this question,
should have shrunk from a contest that
seemed so unequal and hopeless.
But the history of this war has proved that
your courage and perseverance are equal
to any emergency, and you, the voters of
the North-west, should make a united,
determined,persistent demand upon every
candidate for Congress, of whatever party,
that, if elected, he will use his best en¬
deavors to free your country and your
people from the terrible incubus attempt¬
ed to be forced upon you by European
legislation and Congressional folly, and
you should tell thein that you will not
permit the great garden of America to
become the Ireland of the world, thrmigh
the folly of free trade theorists, and that
American farmers, American manufact¬
urers, and an American policy through¬
out shall receive the consideration of the
law-makers of this country.
Do this, and you will save yourselves
from poverty, and the nation from bank¬
ruptcy.
If you make the attempt, you will surely
succeed; and when you have succeeded
in establishing an American policy let
your young men commence at once, with
all the aid you can give them, and build
factories in every part of the country
where localities favor their construction.
Begin small, if necessary, and as fast as
capital is accumulated, reiuvest in ex¬
tending your works, until the whole
North-west becomes freed from their pres¬
ent thriftless system of being the "hew¬
ers of wood and drawers of water" for
European manufacturers. Make your own
woolen cloths, cottons, shoes, boots,
agricultural implements, iron, steel, and
every other article you or your neighbors
wish to use. If this system was fairly in
operation at the present time, America
might complacently comp.are her power,
wealth and credit with those ot any other
nation on earth. Twenty years would
make her the moneyed centre of the
world and the manufacturer for at least
one-fourth of its civilized inhabitants ;
whilst, with our present policy, Heaven
can only save us from deep aiid lasting
humiliation.
In support of the views I have eiprfss
cd above, I ask the reader to peruse n,
following extracts from Clay, Webster,
Napoleon I, the Emperor Alexander, Gen
M. Dallas, President Jackson's Secret,irj
of the Treasury, and Abraham Lincoln,
our martyred president, Jefferson, Ham'
iltou, Henry C. Can y, the best author*
and ablest statesmen tlm world has ever
produced. If I have failed^ to convince
you that protection of American intere-l-
against tlie tixed policy of Europe, and
tiiat tlie importation of untold millions of
luxuries and manufactures from foreign
countries, accompanied by the export of
our precious metals and our national
bonds, is detrimental to the interests of all
the industrious peoiile of the tJulM
Stato.s, and especially of those of th
North-west, who live so far from a foreitn
market, I cannot believe but that hit
ojiinlons of these great and practical men
will carry conviction to your minds.
The United States have tried the protec¬
tive policy four times, and it always bad
the effect to keep our coin in America;
hut every time the tariff has been so ad¬
justed as to admit of large importations,
we always get poor in money, and revul¬
sion ensues.
The question for you to decide is, Shall
Americans do their work, and become
rich and independent, or shall they hire
Europe to do it, while thousands of our
wortliy people live in idle poverty and
servile dcpenlerce 1
I hope yon will not tall to Impress this
vital trutii upon your minds, that our
national debt, with the interest, must be
paid by and through the industry of the
jieople" of the United States. There isno
other possible element adequate to meet
that vast deht, and any attempt to obtain
the money fi>r its liquidation by large im¬
portations, for the sake of revenue, must
fail, as every im]>oi-tatloQ that gives the
government thirty dollars sends one hun¬
dred dollars to Europe to pay for the com¬
modity imported, and thereby lessens the
ability of the people to pay home taxes to
just the value of their foreign purchases.
If this nation drifts ashore, it will be on
the financial rocks that are partially hid
in the deceptive bay of Free Trade, and if
we have any state-men in or out of Con¬
gress, it is high time their foresight was
brought to hear on the impending dangers
towards which the storms of war and the
weakness of politicians are fast driving ns.
"Experience has taught me that manufacture-
are now as necessary to our Independence as to
our comfort."—T, Jefftrson.
" This source of national wealth and lode
pendence (manufactures) I anxiously recom¬
mend to the prompt and constant guardian¬
ship of Congress."—llailisorCs Message, IS"-
Las Casas reports Napoleon to have said
that duties, which were so severely con¬
demned by political economists, should
not be an object to the treasury; thev
should be the guaranty and protectionoi
the nation,and stionld correspond witbtbc
nature and objects of its trade. France,
which Is rich in every sort of production
and manufaetnres, should iucessantly
guard against the imporlatlons of a rival,
' ' ' -l|tt«f»*i*yitinue to be superiorto
7
,er^ and also ajjainst the cupidity, ego¬
ism, and indifference of mere brokers.
1 have not fallen into the error of
aodern sympathizers," said the Emperor,
' who imagine that all wisdom of nations
5 centered in themselves. Experience is
lie true wisdom of nations." He classi¬
cs the national interests as follows :—
. "First, Agriculture; the soul, the first basis of
.he empire. Secona, Indnsiry; the comfort
nd happiness of the population. Third,
i'oreign Trade; the superabundance, the pro-
ler application of the surplus of agriculture
nd industry.
"Inaustry, or manfacturcsand intemal trade,
aade immense progress during my reign. The
pplication of chemistry to manulactures caus-
d them to advance with great strides. I gave
• hem an impulse, the effects of which extended
hroughout Europe. When I come to the head
)f the Government, the Ajnerican ships, which
vere permitted to enter our ports, brought us
aw materials, and they had the impudence to
ail from France without freight, for the pur-
)Ose of taking in cargoes of English goods in
jondon. They, moreover, had the insolence to
nake their payments, when they had any to
nake, by giving bills on persons in London,
ience the vast profits reaped by the English
nauufacturers and brokers, entirely to our pre-
udice.
"I made a law that no American should im-
)ort goods to any amount withoutjiramediately
;xporting their exact equivalent. ' A loud out-
ay was raised against this; it was said I
lad ruined trade. But what was the conse-
lUence? Notwithstanding the English ruled
-he seas, the Americans returned and submitted
.0 my regulations."
Our trade with France is at the present
Ime as humiliating and more injurious to
.he interests of the United States than it
-ffas then.
The following sentiment from a speech
_3f Lord Goderich, in the House of Lords,
n England, is most significant of the
Dolicy of Great Britain :—
- " Other nations knew, as well as the noble
ord opposite, and those who acted with him,
;• hat what we (the English) meant by free trade,
vas nothing more nor lees than, by means of
he great advantages we enjoyed, to get a mon-
ipoly of all their markets for our manufactures,
vnd to prevent them, one and all, from ever be-
: :oming manufacturing nations.
" The policy that France acted on was that of
. iDcouraging its native muniifuctures, and it was
; I wise policy: because, if it were freely to ad-
nit our manufactures, it would speedily be re-
luced to the rank of an agricultural nation, and
t herefore a poor nation, as all must be that de-
oend exclusively on agriculture.
„ " When a domestic'manfactuje has attained
■ o perfection, and has engaged in the prosecu-
P' ion of it a competent number of persons, it In-
• 'ariably becomes cheaper. Being free from the
.leavy charges which attend the importation of
- breign commodities, it can be alibrded cheaper,
. ind accordingly seldom or never fails to be sold
cheaper, in process of time, than was the for-
rtdgu article for which it is a substitute. The
^nternal competition which takes place soon
^loes away with everyting like monopoly, and
|)y degrees reduces the price of the article to
' he minimum of a reasonable profit on the cap-
>11 tal employed." This accorded, as he thought,
' with the reason of the thing, and with exper-
KUeiice,"—Alexander Hameltan.
\St In July, 1840, Mr. Webster said,—
If " The Northwestern States are destined to
rf)e munnfacturiug States. They have iron and
jj^aial. They have a people of laborious habits.
.They have already capital enough to begin
, vorks such as belong to new States and new
I '.ommunitite#; and when the time comes,—
and it cannot but come soon,—they will see
their true interest to be, to feed the Northern
and Eastern manufacturers, as far as they may
require it, and in the meantime begin to vary
their own occupations, by having classes of
men among them who are not of the now
universal agricultural population. The sooner
they begin this work the better; and begin it
they will, because they are an intelligent and
active people, and cannot fail to see in what
direction their true interest lies.
"Employment feeds, and clothes,and instructs.
Employment gives health, sobriety and morals.
Constant employment and well paid labor pro¬
duce, in a country like ours, general prosper¬
ity, content and cheerfulness.
"Mr. President: If intelligent men of patri¬
otic purposes, good intentions, and great re¬
spectability in many walks of life, private and
public, ever were seized with a monomaniaism,
that disease has taken a strong hold of those
who come to us with such statements and sen¬
timents as these. How else can we account for
such a zeal for over-importation, a zeal which
looks for a paradise upon earth, if we can only
be surrounded with British manufactures with¬
out stint and without count ? The love of im¬
portation has become a sort of passion with
those at the head of affairs—an unthinking,
headlong passion.
From early times the English Government
has discouraged in Ireland every sort of manu¬
facture, except the linen manufacture in the
North. It has, on the other hand, encouraged
agriculature. It has given bounties on wheat
exported. The conseqencehas come to bo this,
that the surface of Ireland is cut up into so
many tenements and holdings, that every man's
labor is confined to such a small quaniity of
land, that there is not half employment for
labor, and the lands are cultivated miserably
aller all,"
Were it known in Europe that protection
was the fixed and unalterable policy of
this nation, the present year would see
the transfer of population to the extent of
half a million of persons, and of capital
in the form of machiney to an incalculable
extent; and once here, here they would
stay, increasing at once, and immensely,
the market for food, clothing and iron.
Mr. Jefferson desired that the manufact¬
urer should take his place by the side of
the agriculturist—that the loom and the
anvil should be in close proximity to the
plow and the harrow. Mr. Jefferson
looked and thought for himself.
One of the ablest statesmen now in the
councils of the Government writes to a
friend on the 5th of March, 1865, as fol¬
lows :
" It seems impossible to teach the American
people to understand their own interests, and I
fear that nothing but the saddest experience
will teach them wisdom. There is no use re¬
lying longer upon argument, and unless the
great leading interests of the country can com¬
bine so as to force the nation into the only
policy that can save it, we shall have to give up,
and permit this great nation, with'all its capa¬
bilities, to become an uninfluential, poverty-
stricken, dependent set of agriculturists and
herdsmen."
In 1832, when Abraham Lincoln, our
murdered Chief Magistrate, was nomina¬
ted to the Legislature, he made a speech
in which he says,—
" I am in favor of a National Bank. I am in
favor of the internal improvement system, and
a high protective tariff.""
Iq the admirable works of H. C. Carey,
we find the following pertinent sen¬
tences :—
8
" The object of protection is that oi dimin¬
ishing the distance and waste between the pro¬
ducer and consumer, thereby enabling the pro¬
ducer to grow rich, and become a large
consumer ol cloth, iron, etc. Ireland, the type
of this free trade system, has miiiions of her
ricliest lands yet untouched, that would alone,
if drained, yield food in abundance for the
whole population.
"The land owner of India has been ruined.
The immense body of village prosperity, that
but half a century since existed in that countiy,
lielping and governing themselves, has disap¬
peared.
" The land owner of Portugal, the continen¬
tal colony of Great Britain, has been ruined,
and with diminished value of land there has
been steady deterioration of civilization, until
the name of Portugal has become almost syn¬
onymous with weakness and barbarism,"
An able French journal well says:
"Whereever a large centre of consumption is
found the neighboring farmers are the first to
profit by it. This law is inl'aUible, and allows of
no exception,"
"What do you think of the policy of buy¬
ing an annual average of $35,000,000 worth
of silks, laces, and other tinery from a
nation that takes very little but coin in
payment; or of buying $35,000,000 worth
of woolen goods, to be paid for in corn at
15 cents per bushel, paying 80 cents per
bushel to get it to the seller of the fine
cloths and silks, or the policy of buying
from $30,000,000 to $30,000,000 worth of
iron and steel to lay down over the great
coal fields and vast iron mines of the
United States':'
The people of this country are now act¬
ing upon the principle of the old gentle¬
man who had a family of grown up sons
and daughters, whom he was unable to
satisfy with his ordinary income; he
mortgaged his farm to the storekeeper for
its value, and in three or four years traded
out its value in silks, laces, fine cloths,
brandy, wine and cigars. When his mort¬
gage was traded out, he and his worthy
representatives were obliged to leave the
farm, bankrupt and ruined. Then noth¬
ing but hard work and long snffering would
make amends for their previous folly.
By carefully fostering our resources, we
can easily pay the interest and principal
of our great National and State debts,
carry on all onr national improvements,
and soon become the first power on
earth. While by a wasteful, or free trade
policy, we shall lose all the advantages of
our gold product; mortgage our lands to
pay lor silks, laces, cloth and iron; rob
our farms of their fertility, by cropping
them continuously for the benefit of Eu¬
rope and European farms; build up and in¬
crease the vast individual and national
wealth of England and France, who are onr
enemies and competitors,whilst we impov¬
erish ourselves. If you are prepared for
this, go in lor free trade. Ifyouwantto be
alternately prosperous and then bankrupt,
continue the vaeillatingj policy that has
characterized the legislation of the United
States since its existence as a nation, and
you will have it. Bnt it you wish to be
permanently prosperous, with an unfail¬
ing andsteadymarket.bringthe manufact¬
urers into your Western States, near your
own homes; carry your own wool and
other products directly to the'manufact-
urer, and make your own exchanges.
Set up your sons, or neighbors sons, in
the business of producing manufactures
for your own use. Follow this policy
and in a few years you will have the sur¬
plus wealth ol England and France trans¬
ferred to America. Adopt free trade and
your late will be similar to other free
trade countries—Poverty, Bankruptcy.
In the preceding pages I have endeav¬
ored to show, by the best possible human
evidence, that the experience of this and
all other nations is, that when a nation
fosters and protects its own resources and
interests through its national laws, the
nation prospers. If the laws are so fram¬
ed as to give other nations the advantage,
either through their superior skill, cheap
labor, or cheap and abundant capital, it
suffers. That when a nation separates by
great distances the producers ol raw ma¬
terials from the consumers, the producer
practically pay the transportation, and
become poor, while a few forwarders,
traders, and carriers become rich at the ex¬
pense of the producer and consumer.
That wnen a nation diversifies its meaus
for the employment and utilization of all
it laborers, prosperity and wealth ensues,
while the nation and people who confine
themselves prineipally to one employment
become poor and dependent. That the
prompt payment of the interest and prin-
eipal of our national debt depends upon
the general prosperity of our country,
and any system that tends to its impover¬
ishment endangers that great and honor¬
able obligation of the people of the
United States. That the experience of
nations has taught us that the vast export
of the precious metals and State and Na¬
tional bonds to foreign countries to pay
interests and balances of trade against us,
if fraught with the most serious danger
to our future financial condition, and
that there is no possible remedy for the
misehief likely to ensue but high protec¬
tive duties ou foreign commodities. That
the heavy cumulative taxes and excise on
nearly all kinds of American manufac¬
tures, leave too small a margin between
internal taxation and the custom duties
on imports for adequate protection, and
that foreign imports will flood the coun¬
try, while home manufacturers must nec¬
essarily curtail their products, thereby
lessening the national revenue.
Had the Republican party but fairly ful¬
filled the solemn pledge of American pro¬
tection made at the Chicago Convention
in ISliO, our country would now be in a
condition to meet any financial emergency
that could arise; and if in the mighty
changes that are foreshadowed, deep
financial humiliation should be our fate,
Congress will be held responsible for onr
connition.
Our plain duty is to stand by the Gov¬
ernment and its obligations with firm and
fixed faith. But we have a right to de¬
mand that our Government shall sustain
the rights, the interests and the happiness
of its own people, whenever their inter¬
ests conflict with those of any other na¬
tion under the sun, E. B, WARD.
Detroit, May, 1865.
THE FARMEIl AND THE MANDFACTDRER.
TO THE
isfonsiu ^grirultural ^orut|),
BY
E. E.
OF DETROIT, MICHIGAN.
I^adison, "Wis., October 1, ISGS.
DETROIT .
DAILY POST BOOK AND JOB PRINTING ESTABLISHMENT.
1808.
Gentlehen of .the State Ageicultueal Society, and Men
and viomen of isconsin :
This State Fair is the result of the hard labor of the
pioneers, who leveled the forests, and grubbed the stumps, and
broke up the prairies, and washed and baked, working hard,
early and late, out of doors and in, living simply, amidst rude
surroundings. These products of the farm and the mill, so
abundant and wonderful, could not be here unless they had
struck the first blows, and gone through these heavy toils.
Let us give them due honor.
Amidst better conditions you are following in their steps,
and, indeed, many of you have been of their number and
shared their privations, and are already seeing this young and
vigorous State pass by the pioneer stage.
We are a working people, and when we see that labor has
done so much in making the wilderness blossom and the waste
places glad with civilized life, Ave should appreciate the
privilege and duty of useful Avork.
Each and all should do .something for their oAvn and for
the common good. We haA'e small room for drones, or dig¬
nified genteel idlers.
For my OAvn part, I want to be busy in some decent and
useful Avay, and when the time comes I can Avork no longer
Avith hand or brain, I pray that my life on earth may cease.
As this is a festival of Avorkers, it is fit to see hoAv labor can
be best employed, and skill wisely guided, to effect highest
results. The pioneer's first effort Avas to struggle for bread,
his first occupation tilling the soil, which gave rich returns.
Next he sold a little surplus to any market, far or near, and
that surplus has now groAvn great, and its transportation to
markets far aAvay costs a large part of its price. England
takes little of your wheat, but she governs the price, and it
4
takes two men to carry to Liver))Ool the corn one man can raise
in Wisconsin. Cheaper modes ot transit can and should he
had, in time, which will remedy this in some small degree,
hut the more thorough remedy I will speak oi soon. As the
surplus grows large capital accumulates, and means are at
hand to undertake new enterprises, hut the peoj)le make the
mistake of supposing that farming and the e.xporting of pro¬
duce, inevitahly the great work of the pioneer, can he st.ll
pursued almost e.xclusivel}', with las'ing iirofit and henetit.
This is a grave mistake indeed, and it is folly and hlindness
for us to listen to the flattei'y of our British cousins over the
ocean, ahout our heiug "the granary of the world." Of
coui'se, with this hreadth of rich soil, farming will always he
important, hut we must have h'ime-manufactures, and a great
home-market, if we would make farming pay, and have a
surplus also to send abroad.
Agriculture alone never made a country rich or
civilized. Ireland has a rich soil, hut England has cruelly
crushed her manufactures, and she is poor. Portugal and
Spain, deluded by England into "free trade," and, of course
with limited manufactures, are poor. France, with the same
Celtic race, a more protective ]>()licy, and larger manufactures,
has more wealth and far better farms. So it is the woidd over.
It is folly for one class to tiy to stand alone, or to look
upon others with jealousy. We dej)end on each other. Farms
or factories only thrice best when they are near each other,
so that they can helj) each other easier. They are natural
allies. Diversified industry is the "manifest destiny" of the
Northwest, and thus the farmeis will partake of the common
prosperity. England has no room for farming, as we have,
and while her manufacturing puts great wealth in a few
hands, her landless people are poor. Here there is room for
homes and farms for an indepemlent jaeople. Here are metals,
fuel, food, and raw materials tor te.vtile fabrics in abundance.
Here are skill and energy, capital increasing, and labor acces¬
sible. No country in the world has such natural capacity for
great and varied manufacturing and farming as the Northwest.
5
There are now at work in Europe at least 1,250,000
people, whose products are brought to this country for sale.
These people you support by sending them your gi-ain, at an
enormous expense for freiglit, and buying their handiwork.
If the 4,000 factories now employed in Europe on American
fabrics and commodities were transported to the Western
States, with one half the oj)eratives to work them (j'ou could
easily fu'nish the other half), it would have the immediate
effect to increase the value of your farms four or five fold.
Suppose on the other hand tluit all the people of the
Northwest, with all the new emigrants, continue to confine
themselves to the pi-oductions of agricultural staples, and that
everybody who works at all is driven into that employment,
what will be the certain result? Over production, low
prices, ])oor, idle, and as an inevitable result in the end,
uneducated and vicious people.
Your land is rich to-day but will be poor to-morrow if this
expoi'ting process goes on. Its exhaustion is only a (pieslion
of time. The best farming is where the best manufacturing
stimulates skill. The soil of En<>'land is thinner than yours,
but her average wheat crop is twenty-eight bushels per acre,
and that average gains, while in this country we have
reduced our yield more than half, to an average of only
twelve bushels an acre.
In England you find roots and other crojjs in rotation,
covering half the arable soil, and the small wheat fields
kept rich by this skillful management, yield heavily. With
us no such variety of crops, and less wheat on two acres than
on one over the ocean. In New England we hnd excellent
farming, and poor land growing richer, because the market is
near and excellent.
J. H. Klippaet, Sec-retary of the Ohio State Board of
Agriculture, said in 1800:—"Several years ago I became
aware of the fact that wheat—the staple of Ohio—was annu¬
ally diminishing its yield; that in less than fifty years the
average product was reduced from thirty to less than fifteen
bushels per acre. I also learned that in Great Britain the
6
yield, in the same time, had increased from sixteen to thirty-
six bushels per acse. Portions of New York that formerly
produced thirty bushels, now seldom averajj;e over eight; and
Ohio, Avith her virgin soil, is reduced to thirteen. Unless our
farmers soon turn their attention to renovation, even Ohio
Avill vill soo/i. be amoiKj the non-prodi(riii(j icheat htixis."
Wisconsin will follow the same dismal path, unless there
be a change, and only the building up of manufactures can
avert this calamity.
]\Ir. Kliitakt says of the former wheat lands of New
York, Maryland, Yirginia and Delaware:—"ExpAUSTioN is
written all over them in language too i)lain to be misunder¬
stood."
Facts might be given in regard to the yield of cotton, corn
and tobacco, all with the same jjitiful result. The reason is
simple enough.
Constant exportation of wheat, or any product, e.xhausts
the soil of the constituents necessary for the growth of that
j)roduct, with no device by which they are returned to the
soil. In a paper read before the Geographical Society of New
York, by Mr. WARiX(i, he says :—
" In my o|)inion it Avould be imj)roper to estimate the total
annual wastes of the country at less than ecjual to the mineral
constituents oi p'ft<tn hiiiidreiJ Dilllion bxshtbt of ror/i. To
suppose this can continue, and Ave can remain prosperous, is
simply ridiculous. As yet Ave have much A'irgin soil, and it
Avill be long ere we reap the full fruits of our improvidence,
but it is merely a question of time. With our earth-butchery
and prodigality Ave are each year losing the intrinsic essence
of our vitality."
These are grave truths, and "■ forewarned, forearmed" is
a good motto for us, before our yet neAA' soil is exhausted.
You may truly say that better fiirming Avould lessen this
Avaste, but you look in Auiin for this better farming, save
Avhere the factory and the farm are neighbors. DiA'ersified
industry is the remedy. Much attention has been paid to
cheaper transportation to the seaboard, and I ha\'e read with
7
interest the proceeding of farmers' meetings for that object
in Illinois and this State. All proper and important, and
worthy of just success, but I have greatly wished that the
increasing of the home market had claimed equally intelligent
thought and discussion, for the one hut alleviates a chronic
complaint, the other cures the disorder.
Wisconsin has a special interest in this matter. You raise
wheat largely, hut the great corn crops and cattle herds of
Illinois you hardly rival. The exportation of a single leading
staple is exhausting and hazardous, and should lead to the
development of other resources.
Your wool crop is large, it is true, hut what folly to send
away a pound of it. The lumber from your pine forests will
he exhausted, the large export of wheat, with small home
consumption, will impoverish your soil, your farming will not
improve if you keep up the old habits; hut turn to the ex-
haustless stores of iron and coal and peat, so easily accessible
in and near your borders, hind the swift streams to your ser¬
vice to turn your water-wheels, build factories and shops and
iron mills, weave your own cloths, shape your own tools,
make your own iron and steel, feed the workmen from your
farms, and thus diversify their products, and the day of your
redemption is at hand. In the great exj)osition of wool and
woolens at Chicago in August, I shared the pleasure and sur¬
prise of all there, at the quantity and quality of the products
of Western skill exhibited. I saw woolens from your State,
not only servicahle hut beautiful—good enough for any man
to wear anywhere. You have already some eighty woolen
mills, making excellent and honest cloths, with no shoddy in
them. But you sell wool to go eastward, pay freights, com¬
missions and protits, both ways, and get back imported
woolens nicely finished, but shoddy-mixed—and shoddy and
shabby are the same after a little wear. You have iron ores
of the finest quality, and send to England to buy rails, so
poor that no other market in the world will take them, and
lay them down over the very mines where lies your own iron
waiting to be wrought by the hands of decently paid and
hopeful American workmen.
8
Capital likes good investments and quick returns, yet it
ean live, and wait, and take advantage of poverty. Labor
wants constant and decently paid occupation. Diversified
industry is desirable to the caj)italist, but far more so, and
more necessary to the woi'kman. If I had a million dollars it
would need no great wit to go into a region where cash was
scarce, because the people were far from market, loan money
to farmers, and swallow up their farms, according to law, if
not according to gospel, by relentless foreclosure of mort¬
gages. But suppose I invested the million in woolen, or
cotton, or iron mills, bouglit the products of those farms for
the workmen, and employed the surplus laborers ; there need
be no mortgages, but the lands would rise fiv'e or ten fold in
value.
I should not be acting as a philanthro])ist, but simjdyasa
business man, helping others to prosper that I might slinie
in that prosperity. A factory with a ca2)ital of 8jOn,0(tO will
spend about that sum yeaidy for materials and labor, and the
larger part circulates among the people.
Let the blood stagnate or move too slow in the veins and
a man is sick^—the strong and ready pulsation is health. So
with business; it is ra])id and easy circulation of money, quick
returns, neaimess of pr-oducer and consumer, demand for labor
of all kinds, and sale and interchange of its j)roducts, that
makes health and brings wealth.
An able Fi-ench journal well says:
"That which, above all, agriculture claims, is the multipli¬
cation of markets, its greatest need being that of a non-agri-
cultural population. What is it that presents itself to view in
our poorest provinces ? A peo]>le thinly scattered and almost
entirely rural; not working within reach of a market; con¬
suming on the spot their own local productions; with few or
no towns, no industry, and no commerce beyond that which
is strictly necessary for satisfying the limited wants of their
inhabitants. There, the poor proprietor divides the produce
with miserable tenants, the inevitable result of agriculture
without a market. Our manufacturing departments, on the
9
other hanl, are by fir the best cultivated, and for that reason
the most productive. Tiiere, our agriculture lias jiroved her
ability to realize by other means, but in an equal degree, the
wonders of English husbandry. Wliartcer a lur<je centre of
of consunrjjtion i.t formed^ the neighboring fanners are the first
to profit hg it. This laio is infallible., a)id allows of no
exception.''''
At the Fair of the New England Agricultural Society, in
Brattleboro, Vt., in It-'GG, Hon. John A. Andrew eloquently
said :
" I desire to attract the observation of this body of intelli¬
gent agriculturists to the subject of the diversification of
industry, in its relation to the prosperity of the American
farmer. I can do little more than remind you that while popu¬
lation has grown beyond a precedent, wealth has advanced
beyond ]>opulation; that in proportion as our industry has
bicoine diversified, our capacity to purchase and enjoy the
fruits of the earth has been much more than correspondingly
enlarged ; and that the union of the people in a common pur¬
pose to develop all their powers, by whatever means, whether
intellectual or mechanical, is the secret of their own growth,
and the amelioration of the estate of man.
" Better fed, with more fullness and variety; better clad,
in more garments, an 1 those more pleasing to the sense of
beauty; better sheltered, by houses more commodious, and in
styles of more taste'ul architecture, and more enduring qual¬
ity; with more books and newspapers, and larger ])ublic
libraries; enjoying incomparably more avenues and better
means for traveling, and for transportation of goods; with
ampler crops and better prices than ever before—this very
Co.union wealth docs, in its own cun-ent history, afford the
proof of the advantages of our American aim at the largest
conquest over all the domains of industry."
Words well worthy the heart and the head of a noble and
lamented son of Xew England, who once illustrated the
genuineness of his Democracy by saying to a large audience,
" Whatever other sins may be laiil to my charge, and doubtless
2
10
there are many, I thank God I was never mean enough to des¬
pise a man because he was poor, or ignorant, or black." Let
it be our effort to hasten the day when what lie says of tliese
aspects of Xew England life, wliich are the results of her
diversihed industry, may be as true of Wisconsin as of the
"Old Bay State."
With a variety of occupations, all find something to do;
with few kinds of labor much power is wasted in idleness.
In Wisconsin there are some 40,000 women and cliildren of
suitable age for light labor, willing and able to work. In New
England they would all find employment. Sujipose they
could earn, with you, 50 cents each a day in manufacturing
establishments; that would be $3 a week, each, or 8120,000
for all, and 80,240,000 a tear, or 802,400,000 in ten years, in
addition to the {iresent wealth of your State. Savings banks
are mostly i)laces of deposit for the surj)lus earnings of
working people. In I'-OO, notwithstanding the fact that large
sums were invested by the same class in government bonds,
there was deposited in the savings banks of Massachusetts
867,000,000.
Statistics of the avealth and yearly income of England,
carefully prepared by Mr. McQueex, sum up this conclusion:
" Capital usefully employed in manufactures by an agricul¬
tural nation in time increases the value of the soil ten fold."
The special advantage of the Northwest is that we have
ample room for farming as well as manufacturing, and thus
the conditions which not only create wealth but distribute it
among the intelligent land owners and artizans.
It would be of great interest to enlarge on what must be
passed by with a simj)le statement—varied industry helps to
civilization and wealth of soul and life, as well as of purse.
While it enlarges the capacity to enjoy the fruits of labor, and
multiplies and distributes their enjoyment, it stimulates art,
science, and all higher moral and mental powers.
Some of your new towns which have sprung up and
driven so rapidly have reached their growth, and others will
soon do so. Nobody with us enjoys living in a town "all
11
finisherl, painted and fenced in," as the saying is. Let such
towns huild up manufactures, and thus help themselves to a
now life, and add to the value and enjoyment of the country
around.
Not the least benefit of diversified industry is to huild up
many thriving towns, instead of the few great centres of trade,
which absorb all around them iu an agricultural community,
taking much and giving back little.
The West has made rapid advances in manufacturing, for
we find by the census returns of 1800 that the value of manu¬
factures of all kinds for that year in the eleven Western
States was $390,411,042, giving employ to 222,325 persons,
but the twelve New England and Middlh States turned out
§1,29S,'j07,05s' worth, and cnqiloyed 1,025,000 persons. Your
own State, being new, hardly did its proportion in this work
with Oliio and Indiana, but we fiinl that the woolen mills of
AVisconsin had increased from fifteen, with a yearly product
of $115,000, in 1800, to sixty or eighty, yielding $562,500
worth of cloths, in 1806, while the 560 mills of the seven
States of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Alichigan, AVisconsin, Iowa
and Alinnesota turned out about $4,200,000 worth. A good
beginning, but we must keep on and overtake Massachusetts
with her great mills turning out $40,000,000 worth yearly,
and the wool growers of AA'isconsin, learning the kinds of
wool, long or short, for combing or carding, that your manu¬
facturers want, should take care that their home-market is
fully supplied, even if it takes millions of sheep to do it.
Let me put it fairly to you, farmers of AA'isconsin. Do
you want to banish these woolen manufacturers? AA'ould
you think it a benefit to be compelled to sell all your wool in
the distance and buy a half million dollars worth of shoddy-
cloths from over the ocean in place of the honest goods they
make for you ? AA'ould you not be glad to have scores of
woolen mills to each one now running?
Iron ore is valueless in the ground, and labor gives it
value. It costs about eighty dollars, paid to workmen, to
make a ton of iron.
12
Wliicli is l)cst for you—to send your wlioat to Liverpool
and take it back in poor English ii-on, with heavy ii'eiglit and
cotnmissions deducted, and your rich lan.l made })oor hy the
export of its crops; or to teed the ii on-makei s at your doors,
save ex))enses, get better iron, <|uiek returns, better piiees,
and keep your land in good heart?
The West produced, in 1807, 500,000 tons of pig iron
and 200,000 tons of bars, and plates, and I'ails, and our total
product of iron and steel was worth over $45,000,000.
Would you send that sum to England to swell her yearly
iron and steel exports of $75,000,000, and increase you debt?
or would you increase this business, which is labor creating
value from coarse* raw material, and reach to the j)oint Of
exporting the product of your mines, the richest in the
world? Iron ships, built on the Clyde, navigate the ocean.
Tou may remember iron blockaile runnei'S—aimed to scourge
our commerce also—coming from the same locality, and built
to order for certain Britons of the baser sort. (Thank Heaven,
the Brights, and Thompsons, and the cotton sjiiuners in
English mills, poor in purse but rich in soul and in loyalty to
free labor the world over, had no fellowship in such greedy
meanness). Iron ships built at our own yards, by our own
workmen, from our own iron, should navigate our lake®, and
rivers, and the ocean.
Shall the hum of the sjiindle, the roar of the waterfall, the
puff of the engine, and the clang of the triphammer cease in
your borders, that England may find market for her wares,
while you keep on being " the world's granary" until your
land is too poor to raise wheat ?
You will answer these questions for yourselves and your
children. Fail to diversify your industry and your path leads
down to decay of purse, and soil, and soul; give your
labor and skill many ways to act, and that path leads up to
wealth of soil and of soul.
Agriculture and Manufactures are the creators of useful
materials and finished pniducts. Commerce only transports
and exchanges what they bring into being. Neither can
13
thrive without the other, and neitlier can gain hy overreaching
the other.
Lessen our manufactures, and, for a time, a few importing
traders might gain, but the ])ower of the country to buy
from abroad would soon decrease, and the liome trade would
languish. Let our manufactures thrive, and our agriculture
with them, and our power to buy abroad such articles as can
best be produced in other lands increases, our importations
are healthy, and our internal trade—far greater and more im¬
portant than the foreign—keeps active and strong.
Protection to home industry is the business of a good
government, and its advocacy the duty of the intelligent and
enlightened citizen. Not monopoly for the benefit of any one
class, but j)rotection to that degree needed to encourage
manufactures and benefit farmers, and keep our balance of
trade healthy. You do not need tariff on wheat to prevent
its iinj)ort from Europe, for the freight is a tariff, but a roll
of English or Gerirmn cloth is a car-load of cheap foreign
corn, packed in small com[)ass, and if you buy it you help to
keep down the ]irice of your grain to its level. Better make
it here, and have your home market govern a price that shall
rule higher than in Liverpool or Hamburg.
How can a farmer raise wool and pay his laboi-er decent
wages for a civilized man, and compete with half-naked herds¬
men in Australia or South America? Is it easy even for a
cotton-grower, paying his laborer $20 a month, to compete
with Egypt and India at $5, or even $3 a month wages? In
1861, by the accurate Report of the Revenue Commission, it
api)ears the wages of an English iron puddler were $1.80 per
ton, or 90 cents per day, those of an American $0.54 jter ton,
or $3.27 per day—much more here than there, allowing for
higher cost of living. Can we so shape affairs that American
workers, in the field and null, shall be decently jtaid for
doing our own work? Or must we come to the pauper wages
of the old world ?
The elevation of labor is called "the sentiment which
created civilization." Sometimes we find a frank statement
of the eflfcct of "free trade," as in a late New York journal.
14
"I am for unqualified free trade. I would sell out the
custom houses, diseliaruje the leeches there, and allow people
to sell and buy wherever they chose. This will bring us to a
true and normal relation.
"Commercial disturbance would result. We shoxild be on
a new foundation. The first effect would be to stop manufac¬
turing: here and fill the country with foreign goods, many of
which Europe would never see her money for. A commercial
revolution would follow, laborers would be out of employment,
and the price o f labor icouhl come doioi, <loi''/i^ nntd it reached
the European s^tandard, and then naccess is secured.
Success, possibly, for the few, but hard work at pauper
pay for the many !
If a farmer half tills his land, and buys silks, {>• *wi!:au-s,
cloth, etc., more than he jiays for, year by year, no nialter
how large or rich his farm, he comes to trouble at last. So
with a nation. Our trouble is the great and growing tendency
to idleness and extravagance. Our boys comj)lain of work,
and want to be clerks or government officials. Our girls
waste their time on frivolity and di-ess, and mechanics and
laborers want large pay for little work, and we see as the result
Jiigh prices for all the products of industry, large importations
of foreign commodities- to sujeply the deficencies caused by
our iilleness, a steadily increasing foreign debt, and gold at a
high and increua-iing premium.
A great number of healthy men are seeking or holding
public offices as a means of easy support, while the number
and cost of such offices ought to be largely reduced. Young
men, if you would have your manhood dwindle and fade
away, and be a genteel and subservient pauper, be a seeker
for Government office. If you would be manly aud independ¬
ent, keep to your farms or trades.
People talk about specie payments, and bonds, and debt.
Overtrading with Euro2)e, and underwork at home, and want
of develo2unent of our great resources, cause these financial
troubles. Pcmove these causes, and we can resume specie
23ayments in two years without distress or revulsion.
15
At the close of a groat war, when we ought to have been
prudent, if ever, our reckless iinjiortatious reached S4:i7,<l00,000,
or, deducting $9,000,000 specie imported, $42^,000,000. But
the Secretary of the Treasury says that the undervaluations
at the Custom Houses are some 20 per cent., which is a low
estimate, and we must add that amount, or $85,720,000, and
piake a total of $514,220,000, for a single year's imjiorts in
1807. Of this vast sum there was
Cotton manufactures $20,844..291
Iron and Steel, 24 000.000
Wool and its manufactures,. . .s G(i,?00.000
$121,044,391
All this the Xorthwest alone should have produced
or manufactured, but we have gone on and allowed our
imports to lar exceed our exports or ability to pay, until our
debt in Europe, mostly in England and Germany, is some
$1,500,000,000, including National, State, railroad, and munici¬
pal bonds, and stocks; and our Xational obligations in the
shape of bonds are tossed about by foreign bankers at a
shameful and ruinous discount. The yearly interest of this
great debt is $90,000,000, in gold, or more than all our mines
produce.
From January 1st to August 1st, seven months, the exports
of specie to Europe were $00,000,000, while our recei2)ts from
California were but $25,000,000, and at last the "AFu' Yorh
Shijqjing and Commercial List,'''' uttering the views of great
bankers and imjtorters, says on the 8th of August; "Various
theories have been adduced (in regard to the rise of gold),
but it would not be difficult to show that the real cause is
mainly^ the result of an uneven foreign trade movement, that
is, the undue prejionderance of im2)orts over exports, thus
leaving a large balance against the country, Avhich is neces¬
sarily draining us of a vast amount of treasure, since bonds
are no longer available, in ade<2uate quantities, for that
j)urpose." I am glad to see in such a journal such clear state¬
ment of our danger and its main cause. Kcjieatedly, for
years back, I have made the same statement, which was passed
16
by almost unheerlcrl, but is at last seen in all its dangerons
magnituile. IMore work and less extravag;inee, more prodiu-
tio 1 an 1 less im[) :)rt itioii, m )re develoj) n mt of onr natural
resources, more diversified industry to make our labor pay
better, and the debt decreases, sjjecie ])ayment results, and
the vexed (juestion of greenbacks and bonds gets settled.
For this increased production we must have more manu
factures, for mingled agriculture and manufacturers, such as
you can have here, are the great sources of wealth and
pros])erity.
That well-known philanthropist, Peter Cooper, of Xew
York, has carefully prej)ared a table, from the Treasury
Rejiorts of 1850 and '57, showing the production, for ea''h
man, woman and child, white or black, in the States, which
shows the great advantage of the manufacturing States. I
give a part of it to illustrate:
Massachusetts $106 CO
Wisconsin 06 41
Rhode Island, 164 01
Iii'liana 90 13
Connecticut 150 05
Caliloinia gold included), 149 90
Move on in "Wisconsin and you can overtop Massachusetts,
but you must move in that path. Reing "the world's
granary" and importing your goods from Europe never will
carry you there. You see the " wooden nutmegs" of Coimef-
ticut are worth more than the gold nuggets of California, and
may learn that the ii'on mines and fleeces in your midst can be
made of moi'e value than richest gold beds.
I have nothing to say about motives or intentions, but, in
fact, the man who adtocates and supjiorts what is called
"free trade" is an enemy to our country's good, and es]iecially
to the good of the Xorthwest. The free trade cry conies from
England, a country that now levies duties on imjiorts to the
amount of about $1C0,()0(),0()0 yearly, and puts a tariff of 300
per cent on the tobacco we send them. In 1859 the duty on
American tobacco imposed by the British government was
$18,7 ■24,4 20.
17
A witty Frenchman, Baron Drpix, well said in 1852 :
" When the British Parliament applaud the enfranchisement
of the world's commerce, they clap their hands, and those
hands are covered bj' English gloves, protected against foreign
gloves by a duty of 25 per cent."
England has always taken care of her manufactures until
they could stand strong, no matter how long it took. In the
fourteenth century Edward III. forbade the exportation of
rams, and levied heavy taxes on imported woolens, calling a
Parliament almost wholly to legislate on the matter. In 1772
there were 311 laws on wool and woolens, aiming at the
building up of this great industry. In the days of Queen
Elizabeth, Lord Bacox said to her Ministers, " Let us turn
the wools of our land into cloths of our own growth. It
would set many thousands at work, and multiply the materials
five, ten or twenty times in value." Thus, for over four
hundred years, England constantly took care of her woolen
interest.
In 1610 the protective duty on foreign bar iron was $12.50
per ton; in 1782, $14; in 1803, $21 ; in 1806, $27; in 1819,
$32.50; in 1836 it was reduced to $7.50. Why? Because
throiujh an unwavering policy of protection for a century and
a half her iron had obtained the mastery over all competition.
Then it was time to cry "Hurrah for free trade in woolens
and iron the world over!"
As has been well said by Hon. D. J. Morrell, of Penn¬
sylvania : " During the last century an institution was
founded in England, under the style of ' The Society for
Propagating the Gospel in Foreign Parts,' whose munificent
and practical benevolence is attested by many churches still
standing in this country, erected by funds winch it supplied.
The great missionary enterprise to which England of to-day is
devoted is the propagation in 'foreign parts' of the doctrines
of a political religion—the gospel of free trade. Its tracts are
the essays of British economists, its colporteurs, her commer¬
cial traders, its foreign missionaries, the representatives of the
press of our leading commercial city, and its churches, our
8
18
bonded 'wharebouses. Xo influence wbich can contribute to
the spread of this religion is despised; no accessible organ
■\vliicb can aflect opinion abroad remains unsubsidized.
The solicitude of the English for our adoj)tion of their
"free trade '''' ^professions as owv 2Pra dice can hardly arise from
philanthropy, as they are not vastly better or worse than
other people.
In 1840, when our tariff was reduced, firms in Manchester
and Glasgow paid some §00,000 to that end, and over $1,000,000
of British money was spent in Washington. Samples of
foreign goods were shown in a basement room of the Capitol,
used for that purpose, and to-day there is no lack of money
from interested foreign parties to propagate the same "political
gospel."
But even John Stuart IVIili,, an able advocate of free
trade, says in bis Political Economy: "The superiority of
one country over another in a branch of production often arises
only from having begun it sooner. There may be no inherent
advantage on one part, or disadvantage on the other, but only
a present superiority of skill and experience. A country
which has this skill and exj)erience yet to acquire may in
other respects be better adaj)ted to the production than those
which were earlier in the field; and, beside, it is a just remark,
that nothing has a greater tendency to produce inq^rovement
in any branch of production than its trial under a new set of
conditions. Hut it cunnot be cs'peeted that individuals should,
at their own cost, introduce a new manufiicture, and bear the
burdens of carrying it on until the producers have been
educated up to the line of those with whom the processes have
become traditional. A protective duty, continued for a
reasonable time, will sometimes be the least inconvenient
mode in which a country can tax itself for the support of such
an experiment."
This covers the whole ground of protection as a pyrinciple,
and his only error is in considering as a tax that which is a
help and benefit.
In 182.5 heavy cottons were sold in Xew England for 23f
19
cents per yard, in 1840 for 12 cents, in 1855 for 9^ cents.
Cotton hosiery went down from 25 cents in 1860, to 12^- cents
a pair to-day. Lawns were imported from England in 1846
at 28 to 30 cents, then we undersold them. Delaines, of which
we consume two yards to each of our population, were im¬
ported at 28 to 30 cents; a better home-made article now sells
at 20 cents. Carpets have been reduced 25 per cent, by
economies and processes introduced here. Our shoe industry
excels the world in quality and beauty, and only needs a
tariff to guard against fluctuations abroad. Ten years ago
our cast steel was imported from England at a duty of but 12
per cent., and its average price was 18 cents per pound. In
1860 its manufacture commenced in Pittsburgh, and in 1861
.the duty was doubled, but the foreign article went down to
13 cents, and ours a trifle lower. Gold premium and war
prices carried English steel up to 45 cents, but ours was sold,
of equal quality, at 32 cents, and our Government and people
thus saved millions in the war, and were saved from pitiful
dependence on a foreign power not especially friendly to us in
the days of our peril.
These reduced prices, all under protection, are no great
tax, surely.
John Quincy Adams, in a Report from the Committee on
Manufactures to Congress, in 1832, said: "The first act of
the first Congress was an act levying duties on importations,
and this act, by an exception to the general rule, was preceded
by a preamble as follows:
'WUEEEAS, it is necessary, for the support of the Govern¬
ment, for the discharge of the debt of the United States, and
the encouragment and protection of manufactures, that duties
be levied on goods, wares and merchandise imported.'"
And that able patriot argued that this was a part of their
duty "to provide for the common defence," saying, "This
common defence must be provided for as much against com¬
mercial rivalry as warlike invasion, for the spirit of traffic
armed with power, as the experience of mankind has proved
20
is more insatiate and grasping that all the Alexanders and
Ca.'siirs that ambition lias inflicted on men."
The sagacious Fbanklix, writing frym London in 1'771 to
Iluiii'iiiiisy Marshall, said :
" Every manufacture encouraged in our country makes
part of a market for provisions within ourselves, and saves so
much money to the country as must otherwise he exported to
pay for the manufiictui-es he sup])lies. Here in England it is
well known and understood that wherever a manufacture is
established which employs a number of hands it raises the
value of land in the neighboring country all around it. It
seems, therefore, tlie interest of our farmers and owners of
land to encourage our young manufactures in preference to
foreign ones."
Thomas Jeffersox said to Bex.tamin Austix, in 1S16:
"You tell me I am quoted by those who wish to continue
our dependence on England for manufactures. Tiiere was a
time when I might have been so quoted with more candor.
* * * have since experienced what we did not then
believe—that there exists both profligacy and power enough
to exclude us from the field of interchange with other nations;
that to be independent for the comforts of life we must fabri¬
cate them ourselves. We must now place the manufacturer
by the side of the agriculturist." ,
Andrew Jackson, in 1826, wrote to Dr. Coleman:
" In short, sir, we have been too long subject to the policy
of British merchants. It is time that we should become a
little more Americanized^ and instead of feeding the paupers
and laborers of England, feed our own, or else in a short time,
by continuing our present policy, we shall be rendered paupers
ourselves."
Henry Clay, speaking of the balance of trade against this
country, uttered words worthy of heed to-day:
" In the mean time there will be an export of the precious
metals, to the deep injury of internal trade, an e.xport of public
securities, a resort to credit, debt, mortgages. All of these
conditions are believed now to be indicated by our country in
21
its commercial relation. What have we receiverl for the
bonds sent to England? Goods. But these bonds must be
paid
In 1R46, Daniei. Webster, looking into the future of this
Northwest, sagaciously said:
"The Northwestern States are designed to be manufacturing
States. They have iron and coal. They have a people of
laborious habits. They have already capital enough to begin
works such as belong to new States and new communities;
and when the time comes—and it cannot but come soon—-they
will see their true interest to be to feed the Northern and
Eastern manufacturers, as far as they may require it, and in
the mean time begin to vary their own occupations, by having
classes of men among them who are not of the now universal
agricultural population. The sooner they begin this work
the better; and begin it they will, because they are an intelli¬
gent and active people, and cannot fail to see in what direction
their true interest lies."
Tliese are the opinions of great Americans. Similar
opinions of great Europeans might be given.
Our distinguished Political Economist, Hexey C. Caret,
well known in both Continents, and whose masterly wi-itings
should be in every home-library and in every scho >1, well says :
" Steadiness and regularity in the returns to agricultural
labor grow with increase in the variety of commodities pro¬
duced in the land. Disease tends to disappear as population
increases and a near market is created. The poor Irishman
sees his potatoes perish of rot, consequent on the increasing
exhaustion of soil; the Portuguese witnesses his hopes de¬
stroyed by the vine disease; the American farmer is visited by
blight, residting from taking from the soil the material for the
ever-recurring wheat crop. The man who has a market at his
door finds blight and insects vanish, and is able to make his
crops more certain."
This plot of keeping back diversified industry in the
Northwest is of Southern origin, and you have been kept
raising cheap food by the craft of the same class of men who
22
rebelled against our free institutions, and slaughtered your
sons in the struggle.
A book was published at Augusta, Ga., sold only by sub¬
scription, and thus kept away from the Xorth, while it was a
sort of political gospel on the tables of leading slaveholders.
A copy was brought away from some rebel's library by one of
the " boys in blue," from which I make extracts.
The title of this large volume is "Cotton is King, and
Pro-Slavery Arguments, comprising the writings ofllAiiMoxD,
Harper, Christie, Strinofellow, Hodoe, Bledsoe and
Cartwrigiit on this important subject; by E. K. Elliott,
D. D., President of Planter's College, IMississippi; with an
Essay on Slavery in the light of International Law, by the
Editor."
It is the plots and plans of the slave power, got up for their
own study and use, and apart of the base scheme was to form
an alliance with British cotton spinners, raise the delusive cry
of " free trade," to give them a market for their cotton goods,
and to keep down manufacturing in the Korth and West,
that you might raise cheap food for their negroes !
A writer on the " Economic Relations of ISlavery" thus
states the ease:
" But they could not monopolize the market for cotton
unless they could obtain a cheap sujijily of food and clothing
for their negroes, and raise their cotton cheaper than their
rivals. A mnntifucUiring poimlntion, with its ineclianical
comJjutors amidst the provision growers, on a scale such as the
protective policy proposed, would create a permanent market (at
home) for their products, and enhance the price, whereas, if
this manufacturing coidd be prevented, and a system of free
trade adopted, the South could he the chief provision market
and the fertile land JVorth supply the cheap food for our
slaves. * * *
" If they could establish free trade it would insure the
American market to foreign manufacturers, secure the foreign
market for their cotton, repress home manufactures, force a
large number of northern men into agriculture, multiply the
23
growth and diminish the price of provisions, and feed and
clothe their slaves at lower rates."
The writer goes on to show how the West "had its atten¬
tion turned South for a market," and fully reveals their scheme
fo)- making you pioneers of the West work cheap, and keep
factories away, for their benefit, under a " free trade" delu¬
sion, to strengthen Avhich " the southern planter and the En¬
glish manufacturer became united." Comment is needless.
Farmers of Wisconsin, how do you like the j)lot ?
I present these facts because no class of men in this coun¬
try should have more interest in, or would reap equal benefit
from, the building up of varied industry in this region than
the farmers, and it is important they should have clear views
of the best means and wisest policy to that end.
We greatly overrate the importance of the English grain
market.
When the British corn laws were repealed, the inducement
was held out by the English, and the hope entertained by our
grain growers, that a large market would open there for our
products.
But, in twelve years after the repeal of the corn laics, from
1848 to I860, our exports of breadstuffs to England had de¬
creased, in proportion to our population, almost thirty per
cent., even by English estimate twenty-seven and a half per
cent.
During the same yeai's the British imports of grain from
this country were only one-ffth their imports from other
countries.
2Iihcauhee and Chicayo often send off in ten days more
grain and four than England has taken from us each year,
on the average, for tn-enty years jiust.
The eleven Northwestern States, in 1860, produced $900,-
000,000 worth of grain and provisions for consumption and
export, of which only $2.5,000,000 worth went to foreign
countries, and less than half of that to Great Britain, while
our Eastern States and the South took $190,248,655 worth, or
more than seven and a half times as much as all foreign
24
countries. New England is a larger market for us than Old
England. The annual average of our exports to Great Britain
from 1840 to 1860 inclusive, is computed at only $6,048,645.
Your farming needs great improvement. With change of
crops, root culture, deej) ploughing, under-draining, plaster
and manure, I doubt not your products per acre will vastly
increase, and that fruits and other products you now find it
hard to raise will yield abundantly. You need to plant
orchards and to have groves of trees growing to shield ex¬
posed lands on the prairies from the blasts of the winter wind.
All the labor and money spent in this way will be repaid
a hundred told; and it would be timely wisdom if township
and county Agricultural iSoeieties would combine some broad
plans for the planting of trees, and perhaps laws might be
passed for that purpose. But all these improvements, so
greatly needed, I have little expectation of seeing until you
diversify your industry and increase your home market.
Let me warn you of another great change that is coming.
The South will not only raise their own grain, but compete
with you on the seaboard and in Europe. That region has so
long been looked at as fit only to produce cotton, and rice,
and sugar, that we forget its capacity for grain growing.
From Virginia through to Alabama and Louisiana are great
tracts of the finest wheat regions, capable of producing that
grain of the choicest cpiality, and putting it in market iu New
York or Boston a mouth or more earlier than you can, and at
no more cost. This is beginning already, and it is sure to
come, and it is well for you to foresee and prepare for it.
Its approach should stimulate you anew in your good work
of putting farm and factory side by side, and should lead you
also to look about, and find, if possilde, some new product,
fitted for your soil and climate, that may help to keep all
right.
Such a product is in your reach in the sugar beet, the cul¬
ture ot which, and the manufacture of sugar, should grow up
in the Northwest, in ten years time, to an extent sufficient to
stop importations, and keep at home $40,000,000 we send
abroad yearly for sugar.
25
In Prance, this great industry, starting into new life under
the eiforts of the great Napoleon—who resolved to counteract
the British blockade, which had raised the price of sugar to a
dollar a pound, and offered premiums and imposed heavy
tariffs on imported sugar—had no marked or rapid progress
until 1818, but now can compete with cane-sugar, and instead
of wanting a tariff pays a large sum in government taxes.
From a report of the active and able Commissioner of
Agriculture in Washington, Hon. Hokace Cai'ron, who is
gaining much valuable information on this important subject,
I learn that: "At the first of January, 1808, 3,1V3 refineries
ol beet root sugar were reported as in operation in Europe.
"27te toUdproduct in 1828 is stated to have been 7,000 to7is;
in 1851, 180,000 tons; and in 1867 the enormous quantity of
663,000 tons, or 1,485,120,000 pounds, worth 1100,000,000, or
about seven cents per pound.
"Sixteen yeai-s ago, France was able to manufacture half of
her total consumption of sugar, or 60,000 tons; and Belgium,
•consuming 14,000 tons, imported, in 1851, but 4,000 tons,
Germany, at the same date, produced 48,000 tons; Austria
15,000, and Russia 35,000 tons; the latter country also im¬
porting, at that time, 50,000 tons of sugar in addition to tlie
home product. The total manufacture of Europ>e, as stated
above, has been altnost quadrupled since that date, and cane
^iga/r in sevvral of those /States is now scarcely known.
" The product of beets per acre is from fourteen to fifteen
tons in France and Belgium. Enormous crops have occasion¬
ally been reported, 110 tons per acre in one instance.
" A ton of beets yields about 100 pounds of raw sugar. At
first the proportion of sugar obtained was but three per cent;
it was increased to six, and even to seven and a half per cent.
" The beet cake for feeding purposes, the molasses, alcohol
and other products obtained, greatly increase the aggregate
which makes the total value of this branch of industry. Beet
sugar districts become so enriched that far greater amounts
4
26
of the cereals and other products of agriculture are obtained
than before beet factories were known.
"The growing of the beet re<jnires rotation, as well as
thorough culture and careful weeding. It would therefore be
a boon of untold value to our wheat-producing districts of the
West, which are decreasing year by year in returns for labor
expended from these causes, and the additional neglect of
stock growing.
"A promising beginning in beet sugar making has been
commenced in Chatsworth, Illinois, and fine samjiles of its
sugar may be seen in the museum of this department. A
history of this enterprise will hereafter be given.
"Another feature of the business is worthy of attention.
The ])roduction of the sugar beet by farmers, for sale in a
dried state to manufacturers of sugar, may be made to yield
an immense revenue to rural industiy. The beets are cut in
small pieces after washing, and dried by artificial heat, by
which process from eighty to eighy-four per cent, of their
weiglit is expelled, leaving a residue containing fifty-five per
cent, or more of sugar, whieh is extracted by infusion, often
after months of delay and transportation to distant factories.
A sj)ecimen of this dried beet can be seen in this department,
made by Thomas (tea^nei{t, of Chatsworth, 111., who claims
about 80 per cent, of sugar in it. As an illustration of the
extent of such a business, a record may be cited of an estab¬
lishment for obtaining sugar by infusion of dried beet, at
Waghiiusel, near Carlsruhe, in the Grand Duchy of Baden, in
which .3,000 people were employed, a capital of eighty millions
of fiancs (or sixteen million dollars) used, and twelve acres
of land covered with buildings."
in Germany, the beet sugar paid last year $12,678,000 in
a tax to the government, and could defy competition ; and in
France 120,000 tons were made in three months, in 1867.
What they have clone we can do surely. Let that crop be
a means of imj)rovement and wealth among you, and, if it be
necessary, the Xational Governmeut should take measures for
the encouragement of this important industry.
27
It is a privilege to meet the working men and women of
Wisconsin on an occasion like this.
I have offered these views and presented these facts not as
new or original with me, but because I feel they are of vital
importance with us, and to that Future we would make great
and truly noble.
I have dwelt on the importance of building up diversified
industry because it is of great importance to farmers, and to
all. In the fit words of another:
"We canxot have the best farming until we have
THE BEST JI \NUPACrUlltNG, IX VARIED FORMS AND MATERIALS,
EACH AX IXDISPEXSABLE HELP TO THE GROWTH AXD perfect-
XESS OF THE OTHER.
"Give us both, and the blending of these varied experi- ■
ences and vocations, the meeting and mingling of these many
life-currents, tinged and shaped by such mastery of man over
Xature's forces and materials, is full of benefit. It is civiliza¬
tion, culture, wealth of soul as well as of purse. To the far¬
mer it is increase of the product of liis acres, economy of
exchange, work of hand or brain, for whatever gift of power
or character his children may possess, instant and constant
call for a variety of labor, and all the while the thrill of in¬
ventive genius pulsing through the serene quiet of his life in
the fields, saving it from all narrowness or stagnation, that he
may the more enjoy Nature's beauty, and the better make her
forces serve him."
I do not feel like a stranger among you. Coming to this
Western country forty years ago, in my boyhood and youth
I shared the toils and privations of our pioneer life. I have
rolled and burnt logs, and ploughed and planted, and hoed
and harvested, amidst stumps and girdled trees, with the for¬
ests all around the little clearings.
I have sailed along the wild shores of your then new ter¬
ritory, landing at Milwaukee, when a few rude cabins tvere
the pitiful beginnings of what is now a large and beautiful
city. I landed flour in a small boat, lying of the mouth of
Chicago river, when there was only a few houses, a ruinous
28
warehouse, an old fort, and a miserable so-called hotel, on the
open prairie where now rises another great city, and have
always been glad of these my toils and trials, since they
earned me the privilege of somewhat appreciating the
laborious life of the pioneer.
My efforts have been, with yours, in this broad western
field. Much has been done, and more is yet to be done
Let us go on with faith, courage and unyielding effort, to
build up, in your own State, and for our common country, a
future in which labor shall be free and honored, genius and
skill find ample scope in widely varied occupations, and
farmer and manufacturer work out, in fraternal spirit and
with a common purpose, the great problem of industrial
independence.
REVIEW OF THE LAST REPORT OF COMMISSIONER WELLS.
^ REPORT
SUBMm-ED TO
THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
MAY 19, 1870,
BY MB. MORBELL, OF PENNSYLYANIA,
FROM THE MAJORITY OF THE
COMMITTEE ON MANUFACTURES,
CONSISTING OF
DANIEL J. MOEIiELL Peimsylvania "WORTHINGTON C. SMITH
OAKES AAIES Massachusetts ! STEPHEN SANFORD
PHTLETirS SAM^YER TVisconsin ' WILLIAM H. UPSON
SAMUEL P. MORRILL Maine
..Yermout
New York
Ohio
WASHIIfGTON,
GOVERNMENT PRINTING
1870,
OPFIOE.
41sT Congress, ) HOUSE OF EEPEESEXTATIVES. ( Eepoet
2d Session, f ( No. 72.
EXAMINATION OF STATEMENTS IN THE EEPOET OF SPE¬
CIAL COMMISSIONEE OF EEVENUE.
May 19, 1870.—Laid on the table and ordered to be printed.
Mr. Morrell, from the Committee ou Manufactures, made the following
EEPOET.
The Committee on Manufactures, to ichom tcere referred a number of peti¬
tions, ashing for an inquiry to be made into certain statements contained
in the last report of the Special Commissioner of the Revenue, respect¬
fully submit the following report ;
These petitions are very numerous, and from all parts of the
country, and are signed by many thousands of persons interested in al¬
most every department of industry. The following may be taken as a
specimen of their general tenor, to wit:
In the last report of Hon. D. A. Wells, Special Commissioner of Revenue, be alleges
that protective duties are a burden upon industry, taking from the laborer a i)ortion of
bis hire and giving bim no return ;* that tbey have been enacted and are sustained
by the unproductives, who are the chief makers of lavs and institutions for the protec¬
tion of labor and ingenuity, and shape their devices so cunningly, and vork them so
cleverly, that tbey continue to grow rich faster than the producers ;t that, oving in
part to the tariff, the laborer is less worthy of bis hire than heretofore, and has lost
interest in bis work ;t that domestic competition, excited by tariff lavs, causes man¬
ufacturers to adopt the usual resort of turning out articles or products of inferior
quality, but vitb an external good appearance—slate being substituted in place of coal,
cinder in place of iron, shoddy in place of vool, starch and sizing in place of cotton,
pasteboard in the manufacture of boots and shoes in place of leather, and clay and
plaster in paper manufacture in place of liber ;§ and the Commissioner recommends »
to Congress sveeping reductions or a total abolition of duty upon the staple products
of American mines and manufactures—his tariff scheme proposing to raise sixty mil¬
lions of revenue from tea, coffee, sugar, and molasses, vhich are the food of the work¬
ing people, and but fifty-three millions from all metallic and textile wares and fabrics, ||
thus raising the cost of the articles which our workers consume, while reducing the
market value of the products of their labor.
Your memorialists respectfully express their belief that the pretended statistics of
the Commissioner will be found erroneous; that his conclusions are a libel upon Amer¬
ican manufacturers and workingmen, and that his recommendations will be a most
dangerous guide to legislation. And your memorialists respectfully ask that a special
and searching examination be made of the above stated and other allegations of said
report, and of the data on which they are based, that the truth may be made public,
and error, however strongly indorsed, may be effectually confuted. And they will ever
pray, &c.
* See Report of 1869, page 33. t Page 40. t Page 33. § Page 106. H Page 129.
2
EXAMINATION OF STATEMENTS IN REPORT OF
The committee have not made a thorough examination of all the
features of tlie Commissioner's report to which exception is taken by the
petitioners, but have limited their inquiries to such portions thereof as
assumed the existence of certain facts. They have chosen to examine
into tlie correctness of the figures and assumed facts presented, rather
than combat what to them seem false theories, since, if the facts faU,
the theories erected thereon must also fail. They do not conceive the
promulgation of siiecial theories to have been any part of the duty im-
jjosed upon the Commissioner by the act of July 13, 18GG, creating his
office, which act declares that" it shall be the duty of the Special Com¬
missioner of the Eeveime to inquire into all the sources of national
revenue, and the best methods of collecting the revenue; the relations
of foreigu trade to domestic industry; the mutual adjustment of the
systems of taxation by customs and excise, tcith the view of insuring the
requisite revenue toith the least disturbance or inconvenience to the prog¬
ress of industry and the development of the resources of the country f &c., &c.
By the true intent and meaning of this act, the Commissioner is
clrarged with the compilation and arrangement of such data as might
aid Congress to legislate understandingly upon all questions relating to
the industries and revenues of the nation. Your committee think he
errs in supposing that the promulgation of any system of political
ecouomj was within the limits of his duty or his authority, since Con¬
gress may reasonably be supposed competent to draw its own conclu¬
sions.
The committee have failed, after a careful examination of the report,
to find any evidence of an intention on the part of the Commissioner to
perform the first portion of the duty mqrosed" by the act above cited.
Leading sources of revenue are barely alluded to, while the rule pre¬
scribed for his guidance in his inquiries into the " mutual adjust¬
ment" of customs and excise duties, namely, that the requisite rev¬
enue may be insured "with the least disturbance or inconvenience
to the progress of industry and the development of the resources of the
country," is palpably ignored. And they cannot help believing that,
if his suggestions concerning leading industries of the country should
be adopted by Congress, they would be attended by great "disturb¬
ance" and "inconvenience "to those industries, while other suggestions,
if adopted, would as surely retard the "development of the resources
of the country." His best energies, and the labor of his many assistants,
as embodied and presented to the country in the report, have been mainly
bestowed upon the condition of the currency, a subject not mentioned
in the act creating his office, and upon the duty prescribed in the clause
referring to " the relations of foreign trade to domestic industry," and
in the performance of this duty he manifests little of the just pride an
American might well feel in the efforts of his countrymen to attain in¬
dustrial independence, but much solicitude to meet the views and
SPECIAL COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE.
3
■wishes of the trading and importing interest, especially where closely
allied to European manufactures.
These remarks are not made without full knowledge of the fact that the
Commissioner opens his report with a glowing description of our material
condition and progress as a nation during 1869, as was proper and una¬
voidable ; but nowhere does he mention, among the many evidences of
this progress which he cites, the wonderful strides made during the past
year by our people in the building up of the manufacturing interests of
the country. He could find room to repeat the cheap boast that "peace
reigns in all our borders," but not to state that new mines have been
opened and new factories built. This omission would not be worthy of
mention if there were not manifest throughout the entire report an
apparently studied effort to ignore the large number of furnaces and
mills and workshops erected and put in operation during 1869. A
foreigner upon reading the report would suppose that our manufactures
had stood still or retrograded during the past year, for he states no facts,
he gives no statistics, to prove the contrary, although every well-in-
formed American knows that in 1869 the progress of our mauufacturing
enterprises, especially in the West and South, was a source of national
pride and exultation. Contrast with this flagrant omission of the Com¬
missioner, whose duty it was to care for every industrial interest of
the country, the following noble and statesmanlike utterance from
the first annual message of the President of the United States, General
Grant:
Oui manufactures are increasing ■with wonderful rapidity under the encouragement
which they now receive. With the improvements in machinery already effected, and
still increasing, causing machinery to take the place of skilled lahor to a large extent,
our imports of many articles must faU off largely within a very few years. Fortunately,
too, manufactures are not confined to a few localities, as formerly, and it is to be hoped
wiU become more and more diffused, making the interest in them equal in all sections.
They give employment and support to hundreds of thousands of people at home, and
retain with us the means which otherwise would be shipped abroad. The extension of
railroads in Europe and the East is bringing into competition with our agricultural
products like products of other countries. Self-interest, if not self-preservation, there¬
fore, dictates caution against disturbing any industrial interest of the country'.
Referring to our progress as a nation in 1869, the Commissioner tells
how the " receipts of the national exchequer have been largely in excess
of national expenditures;" "the tide of labor-seeking, wealth-producing
immigration continues to flow with increased volume;" the crops have
' been " in excess of any recent average;" " millions of acres " are now
opened that " a year ago were uncultivated wilderness;" more miles of
railroads have been built than in any previous year; " and from the At¬
lantic to the Pacific, from the St. John's to the Rio Grande, there are few
who, except for physical ailment, need hunger for food or be idle for want
of remunerative employment;" and he closes this pleasant and hopeful
story by saying: " In short, the experience of another year reaffirms the
4
EXAMINATION OF STATEMENTS IN REPORT OF
])rinciple before announced^ that the progress and growth of the country,
through its elements of vitality, viz., great national resources and an
inherent spirit of energy and enterprise in the people, is, in a great de¬
gree, independent of legislation, and of the impoverishment and disorder
which the occurrence of a long war has necessarily occasioned." Some
Images of evidence follow, " in support of these generalizations " and in
liroof of " the principle before announced," yet, with conspicuous lack
of consistency, a large part of the remainder of the report is devoted
to efforts to show that not only the distribution but the accumulation
of wealth has been largely affected by legislation, of which, he announced
in the opening, "our growth and progress" are "iw a great degree inde¬
pendent!'''' Criticism of the legislation of Congress relative to duties on
importations of foreign fabrics and productions forms the pith and
marrow of the report. He states distinctly two hostile and irreconcil¬
able propositions, in each of which he avows the profoundest faith, and
then ijroceeds deliberately and with the utmost gravity to prove that
his first proposition—the rose-colored one—is utterly unworthy of behef!
At the very outset the Commissioner thus violently shakes the reader's
confidence in his fitness for the work he has undertaken, and this impres¬
sion must be confirmed by the following examination of the most con¬
spicuous errors and misstatments which have attracted the attention of
the committee.
THE FARMERS.
In his report for 1868 the Commissioner sought to prove that the con¬
dition of mechanics, laborers, and other consumers is being made worse
by the high prices of food, and said that the " average increase in
the price of a barrel of wheat flour throughout the manufacturing States
has been, from 1800 to July 1, 1808, in excess of 90 per cent., while the
increase in the wages of laborers and operatives, skilled and unskilled,
dui'iiig the same period, has averaged about 58 per cent. Measured,
therefore, by the flour standard, the workman is not as well off as in
1800, by at least 20 per cent., or, to state the case differently, the wages
which in 1800 purchased one and a half barrels of flour now pay for
about one and a quarter barrels."
The increase in the price of butter, meats, potatoes, &c., was asserted
to be about the same. Granting these statements to be correct, the
farmer was prosperous in a corresponding degree, getting rich indeed at
the cost of the poor artisan and laborer.
One short year has passed, and now the Commissioner suddenly dis¬
covers that it is the farmer who suffers " under a system of currency
which unsettles values," and "under a tariff which, without offering him
sufflcieut compensation, unnecessarily increases the cost of his tools, his
fuel, his fences, and his shelter."
The same currency system and the same tariff were in operation in
1808 as in 1809, but then it suited the Commissioner to prove that the
SPECIAL COmilSSIONEE OF REVENUE.
5
artisan and laborer suffered, and the farmer had large prices; now, how¬
ever, he finds it convenient to prove that the poor farmer is taxed for
the benefit of these late sufferers and their employers.
In 1868, tariff and currency, by his argument, brought about one
result; in 1869 they produce another and quite contrary result.
The farmer is told of his disadvantages in competing with Europe, as
follows: "hTor does it cheer the wheat-grower to reflect that, while he
suffers from a depreciated currency and competes with the stable condi¬
tions, metallic values, cheap materials, and cheaper labor of other
countries, contributing at the same time his share to the public revenue,
he also makes much heavier contributions on his clothing, iron, lumber,
salt, coal, &c., not for revenue, but for the profit of industries more
favored than his own."
The tariff is now considered as a tax, a small part only for revenue,
but chiefly "for the profit of industries more favored" than that of the
farmer.
• This is the argument of 1869, but in 1867 the same Commissioner, in sub¬
mitting a high tariff on steel, which " was protested against by not
a few American consumers of steel," said it was necessary to the " de¬
velopment of a most important and desirable branch of domestic in¬
dustry," and pleaded in justification that it was "represented to the Com¬
missioner that since the introduction of the manufacture of these grades
(fine steel) into the United States, or since 1859, the price of foreign
steel of similar qualities has been very considerably reduced through the
effect of the American competition, and the whole country has gained in
this way more than sufficient to counterbalance the tax levied as a pro¬
tection to the manufacturer." The farmer shared in this gain, of course,
hut the Commissioner is now apparently blind to a reduction in price
which he could see very clearly in 1867. In fact it suits the preseut pur¬
pose of the Commissioner to ignore the past unfavorable seasons and the
demands of war, which carried the price of farm products to a high rate
for a few years, and the recent heavy crops and cessation of those
demands, which reduced some products to the low prices of former years.
Nor is this the only instance of evident unfairness, for the Commis¬
sioner virtually assumes that wheat-growing is the farmer's only source
s of profit. He has apparently forgotten, or has chosen to suppress the
• fact, that the important articles of beef and pork have fully maintained
; the prices current during the war, and the further fact that the large
body of farmers situated in the vicinity of manufactuiing communities
have had most profitable markets for perishable vegetables and fruits—
markets which the extension of our industries is daily carrying to the
,, doors of the agriculturists of frontier sections of the country.
He takes wheat as an article of comparison in his prices, the lowest ju^t
noiD on the list of farm products. Suppose that he had taken the im-
,j,- portant articles of pork, beef, and butter, or taken all these with wheat,
J. he would have come nearer'j^o getting a fair average of the farmer's con-
6
EXAMINATION OF STATEMENTS IN REPORT OF
ditiou, as the following price-lists, compiled from the Kew York Journal
of Commerce, will show :
Articles.
Gold. Fiscal
year 1809.
Currency.
Fiscal year 1869.
1869, in Gold
at 81.30.
Pork, mess, barrel
S17 00
§25 00
819 25
Pork, prime, barrel
13 00
28 00
21 50
Beef, plain western, barrel
9 50
22 00
16 90
Beef, prime mess, tierce
9 00
28 00
21 50
Larrl, pound
Hi
171
13
Butter, western, pound
18
40
31
Butter, prime State, pound
20
48
361
The prices given by the Journal are those of January 1, 1859 and
18C9.
It is not a true aiid fair mode of showing the farmer's condition as a
consumer to take the product lowest in price as a basis of comparison;
yet this is the method adopted by the Commissioner. A specimen of
this elaborate style of false reasoning may be seen in the Commissioner's
table, (page 51,) professing to show the purchasing power of one htm-
dred bushels of wheat in New York, in 1859 and 1869, with a large de¬
crease to the farmer's disadvantage ; from which it is argued that the
tariff and the currency, especially the tariff, have wrought the farmer
great injury. If the Commissioner had taken pork and beef as his basis,
the result would have been entirely contrary to that which he has pre¬
sented, yet perhaps not any nearer the truth; or, if he had taken wheat
at the prices of 1868, with the same tariff, the then higher price of
wheat woidd have changed his result, yet the conclusions would hare
been equally valueless as indicating the influence of the tariflt and cur¬
rency.
An honest way of showing the relative prices received by the farmers
in different years would be to take the total products of agriculture,
balancing those which rose against those which fell in the market. This
may be partially illnsti'ated by a brief analysis of exports in the years
1868 ami 1869, which degrades wheat to a second place, even in the
trade which is sui)posed to make it of chief impiortance.
The exports of wheat and flour in 1868 amounted to 811,693,641
The exports of bacon and hams, beef, butter, cheese, lard,
tallow, and leaf tobacco, in same year, amounted to 42, 636,060
To this add corn and corn meal 4^ 827,196
Total
SPECIAL COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE.
7
Pursuing the subject further we find :
Exports of articles above mentioned, except wheat and
fiour, in the year 1869 $54, 430, 441
To this add corn and corn meal 13, 349,191
Total 67, 779, 632
Exports of wheat and flour in same year 67, 832, 721
It appears that in 1868 the provisions and tobacco exported to foreign
countries amounted to more'than the wheat and flour, and in 1869 to
but a trifle less. Summing up the two years, the results are as follows:
In 1868-'69, i)rovisions and leaf tobacco exported $115, 242, 890
In 1868-'69, wheat and flour exported 109, 526, 368
It may be said that all these provisions and tobacco had risen in price
or ruled proportionally higher than the products of other industries, and
that the agricultural interest generally was finding an improved market
and doing a profitable business. This is necessarily a partial and unfa¬
vorable view of the subject, for the range of home prices and the amount
of home consumption should also be considered—an investigation so
large that your committee cannot now enter upon it. It would disclose
the extent and value of the home market for farm products created by
the development of other industries, and their influence in diversifying
agriculture,'equaliziug prices, and insuring plenty.
The Commissioner seems to be incapable of considering the farming
interest in all its operations and relations. He prefers to sustain the
theory of which he is the advocate by taking a single agricultural prod¬
uct, subject to extraordinary fluctuatious, because of its special depen¬
dence upon a limited foreign market, and blaming its fluctuations upon
the tariff and the currency. The one important lesson not taught by
the Commissioner is, to beware of dependence on any one crop, or on
distant and uncertain markets.
From the reports for 1867 and 1868 of Hon. Horace Capron, United
States Commissioner of Agriculture, we find that our total wheat exports
iov forty-three years past have been, reducing flour to wheat, 670,000,000
bushels, equivalent ouly to the product of the three years, 1866, 1867,
and 1868. Great Britain takes about ninety-Jive per cent, of our exports
of grain to Europe, yet for twelve years, from 1857 to 186S, we for¬
warded to her but twenty-six per cent, of her imports, Europe furnishing
the rest. Nor is this meagve result likely to be bettered in the future;
for, as President Grant says in his message: " The extension of rail¬
roads in Europe and the East is bringing into competition with our
agricultural products like products of other countries."
Distance and the high wages demanded by our civilization put the
western farmer at such increasing disadvantage against the grain-grower
in Europe that he cannot compete with the latter for the foreign mar-
8
EXAMINATION OP STATEMENTS IN REPORT OP
ket, save in seasons of poor liarvests abroad. The plain remedy is to
increase onr home consnmers by increasing our home manufactures; but
the Commissioner, ever seeking to make out a case against our tariff
and currency, ignores the teachings alike of common sense and experi¬
ence.
The depreciation of our currency is a part of the " exceeding great
price" paid for the nation's life in a terrible war; yet the industry of
the country is gradually restoring to it the value and stability which all
desire. Our taxes, too, are a part of that great price which all must
share, and the farmer's ability to pay his. portion must depend on the
variety of his resources, that variety only increasing with the nearness
and extent of his home market, which again can only be rendered per¬
manent by the stability and variety of home manufactures.
WOOL AND WOOLENS.
On these important interests, or rather these two branches of one
great interest, we find valuable facts in a pamiihlet entitled " Eemarks
on that portion of the Report of the Special Commissioner of Revenue
for 18G9, relating to Wool and Woolens, addressed to the Chairman of
the Committee of W^ays and Means of the House of Representatives."
It is prepared with evident care and accuracy, and signed by the execu¬
tive committee and the able secretary of the Kational Association of Wool
Manufacturers. Lest it might be thought a one-sided statement, the
opinion of the president of the National Wool-Groicers' Association,
Henry S. Randall, of Cortland, Kew Tork, has been asked, and he re¬
plies, under date of February 14, 1870: " I approve of the pamphlet,
and am having it republished in the Rural Hew Yorker." Mr. Randall
is a practical and leading icool-groicer, and thns we have concurrent
and ai)proving testimony of eminent representatives of both branches of
a great home industry. We extract from their comments on some of
the statements of the Commissioner, as follows:
" The undersigned are compelled to characterize the portion of the report
above named relating to wool and manufactures of wool as abounding
in grave errors and inconsistencies.
##»## ####
" In introducing his remarks the Commissioner assumes to give a his¬
tory of the movement which, leading to the arrangements between the
wool-growers and wool-manufacturers, resulted in the existing tariff.
This movement, he declares, was commenced by gentlemen claiming
to be wool-growers of the United States, but more especially interested
in the breeding of sheep than in the growing of wool. So far from this
being true, the delegates at the convention at Syracuse, where the
movement first took a definite form, were the otficers of the respective
wool-growers' associations of Hew York, Vermont, Ohio, Illinois, Wiscon¬
sin, and Hew England. The executive committee, whom the manufac¬
turers met, and who signed with them the joint report recommending
SPECIAL COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE.
9
legislation, were aijpointed by the National Wool-Growers' Association
formed at Syracuse, and of that committee (consisting of five) one only
was especially interested in the breeding of sheep.
"The Commissioner thus disparagingly characterizes the work under¬
taken by the rei^resentatives of the wool-growing and wool-manufacturing
interests: ' What was this work? Not to increase the revenues of the
national treasury; not to promote the interests of the great mass of the
people, to whom woolen fabrics are almost as much a necessity as food
and shelter; nor to increase the wages or comforts of the laborers who
grow the wool or manufacture the cloth, but simply and exclusively to
influence legislation for the promotion of their respective gains and
interests.'
" Contrast this statement with that which we find in ' Special Eei^ort
No. 13 of the IJnited States Revenue Commission on Wool and Manu¬
factures of Wool,' made in May, 186C. The present Special Commis¬
sioner of the Revenue was a member, and, in fact, chairman of that
commission. Although the report was written by another member, Mr.
ColweU, no dissent is found on the part of the present SiJecial Commis¬
sioner to the views of his associate.
" ' The attention of the writer,' says the report last cited, ' as one of
the revenue commission, has been turned to this important branch of
industry (wool and woolens) since the commencement of his duties.
Believing that the amount of internal revenue demanded by the state of
our finances could not be realized without the vigorous and proper action
of the leading classes, and that such continuous movement could not be
maintained unless all the sources of domestic employment were opened
and duly supported, the classes directly interested were invited to a full
exchange of views.'' #######
"'As nothing can be more certain than that the industrial interests of
these two classes in the United States are substantially identical, it was
a principal object to have the fullest possible interchange of oinnion
between them. Upon the first intimation of the icishes of the commission^
the necessary conferences commenced, and continued for more than six
months, without much imuse, by conventions and separate and joint
committees, in which the various interests of each class and the united
interests of both were subjected to a scrutiny so patient, so intelligent,
and so discriminating, that the utmost deference is due, and should be
awarded, to conclusions so carefull;^ prepared.'
*####***#
"The Commissioner asserts,in the late report of 18G9, that the experi-
- ence of two years has demonstrated the following consequences as the
direct residts of this tariff:
1st. Wool to the agriculturist at a lower price than has almost ever before been ex-
perienced.
2d. A decrease in the number of sheep in the United States, estimated at four mil
, lions for the single year.
10
EXAMINATION OF STATEMENTS IN REPORT OF
"In considering the jiresent low price of wool and the destruction of
sheep, we remark some omissions, which are quite extraordinary in
view of the responsible position which the Commissioner occupies.
"IIow comes it that he ignores or suppresses the great controlling facts
of the glutting of all the markets of the world, except that of this coun¬
try, with the over-production of the fine wool of the southern hemisphere,
and of such a destruction of sheep in .Australia and the country of the
La Plata as has no parallel here ?
"In Australia the progress has been from 32,000,000 pounds in 1859
to 60,000,000 pounds in 1866, an increase in seven years of 108 per cent.*
In the Cape of Good Hope, from 11,500,000 pounds to 21,000,000 pounds,
an increase of 87 per cent. In La Plata, from 16,000,000 to 59,000,000
pounds, an increase of 208 per cent. ' The lowering of the price of La
Plata (mestiza) wools,' says M. Aubde, Gn the French reports of the
Paris Exposition, within four years, may be set down, without exagge¬
ration, at 40 per cent.'
" In 1866, under the low duty on wool, practically three cents per
pound, the imports into the United States from the two great competing
countries in fine wool production were 22,693 bales from Buenos Ayres,
and 14,067 bales from the Cape of Good Hope. In 1868, after the vool
tariff went into operation, the imports were reduced to 4,604 bales from
Buenos Ayres, and 1,986 bales from the Cape of Good Hope.t Is it con¬
ceivable that a diminution of imioortation to the extent of 30,176 bales
brought down the prices of our domestic wools, and this while the miUs
were still in full activity ? It is needless to multiply arguments in proof
of the saving influences of the present tariff upon our sheep husbandry,
or to cite authorities from the united voices of the agricultural press,
of the Commissioner of Agriculture, and of the wool-growing associa¬
tions throughout the United States.
" AYe find this extraordinary statement by the Commissioner:
The wools of the TTnited States are mainly merino clothing wools, which can be pro¬
duced in any quantity, and at prices which defy foreign competition. Wool has been
raised in Texas, during the last year, in large quantities, at an estimated cost of seren
cents, gold, per pound; and it has readily commanded twenty-five cents per pound.
"Manufacturers and wool-growers will learn with surprise that good
merino clothing wools are produced in Texas for seven cents a pound,
and that any clothing vAols are produced there in available quantities,
which will serve as substitutes for the wools of Ohio and Michigan;
and with more surjirise, that merino clothing wools can be produced in
this country at iirices which defy the foreign competition of wools enter¬
ing here without duty. If this be true, wool has the exceptional priff-
lege of being exempt in its production from the influences of high cost
of labor, of interest of capital, of charges of internal taxation. State
and national, and of the high demands of American civilization. In other
* Mr. Moll's report ou wools at Paris Exposition.
tMr. Lynch's statistics, Bulletiu of National Association of WqoI Manufacturers, p. 84-
SPECIAL COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE.
11
■words, the American farmer can freely compete with the half savage
shepherd of the pampas. If this he true, why is not American wool
produced for exportation? But it is well known that our exportations
of wool to all the manufacturing nations of the globe, in a single year,
have not been equal to our importations of playing-cards. That Texas
and the nnoccuined lands of the South and Southwest open the pros¬
pect of profitable fields for sheep husbandry is admitted, and this con¬
sideration was urged as reason for applying the stimulus of protective
duties for the development of these fields. But the most sanguine
friends of the tariff were not aware that the hoped-for effects had been
realized in two years.
"Another statement, that 'wools which the existing tariff excludes are
mainly wools which are either not grown, or grown in very limited quanti¬
ties here,' is far from correct. The main object of the wool-growers in their
demands for increased duties on wool was to check the ruinous compe¬
tition of the foreign wools, which were being used as substitutes for the
ordinary American wools. The American wools now take the place of
the medium mestiza wools, formerly imported so largely. The great
bulk of the wools excluded by the tariff is of this class. The substitution
of the American wools has proved, moreover, highly advantageous.
We fiud the published statement of a well-known maniifactiurer as fol¬
lows: 'In 18G5 and 1866 we had a large amount of goods made of
mestiza and other foreign wools, and were continually having claims
made against us for imperfect goods. We abaudoned the idea of making
any more goods of mestiza, and from that time to this have never had a
clahn made upon us for a iiiece of feeble goods.' Pro'vision was made
for the admission, at a mere revenue duty, of wools which it was admitted
could not he profitably grown here. The protective duties were made to
apply to the superfine wools and combing wools, as well as to the ordi¬
nary competing merino wools; to the superfine wools, because they had
been grown here with profit and of unrivaled excellence, and to the
combing wools, because upon imblic groimds there is no branch of sheep
husbandry more desirable to nationalize.
#»#####*#
"The Commissioner, in a tone of hostility toward onr industry which is
hardly disguised, calls upon ' the great mass of the American people,
especially the working men and working women toiling to elevate
themselves, with the multitude of clerks, accountants, professional men,
pensioners, and others who deny themselves, and economize their slender
incomes to make the year's receipts balance the year's expenditures,
' to so direct public opinion and suffrage as to compel the abandonment
of the existing policy,' that they may be enabled to purchase cheap
clothing.
"If the increase of the price of cloth is less than the increase of the
wages of labor, the laboring consumer cannot complain of the existing
policy. A just comparison of the cost of most finished woolen fabrics
12
EXAMINATION OF STATEMENTS IN REPORT OF
cannot be made between those of different periods on account of the
almost invariable differenees of style, finish, and raw material. The
only article forming a proper standard of comparison is flannel, which is
the basis of all card-wool cloths. Eehable returns from the two leading
agencies of flannel mills in the country, representing Tuore than twenty
different establishments, show that the selling prices in September, 18G9,
were in one house twenty-one per cent, and in another sixteen per cent,
less in gold than in 1800. On the other hand, the books of a mill pro¬
ducing cloths more extensively and of greater variety than any other
establishment in the country, and employing two thousand five hun¬
dred operatives, show an advance in wages in gold, from 1860 to Sep¬
tember, 1809, of thirty-seven per cent, for female operatives, and fifty
per cent, for male operatives. These facts show conclusively that the
protection to the woolen industry, if to no other, has been a boon to
laborers and consumers."
The following statement of the comparative prices of standard flan¬
nels, furnished by leading manufacturers to Mr. Greeley, and published
in his " Essays on Political Economy," is referred to as being unques¬
tionably correet;
Fabric.
Flannels per yard:
A. and T. wbite
H. A. F. scarlet
J. R. F. twilled scarlet
B. twilled scarlet
Double weight scarlet, twilled
F. &C
Talbot R. f plain scarlet
G. M. & Co., twilled scarlet...
E. S
N. A. M
Ballardvale 4-4 wbite. No. 1...
Ballardvale 4-4 wbite. No. 2 ..
Ballardvale 4-4 wbite. No. 3 ..
Ballardvale 4-4 wbite. No. 4 ..
Ballardvale 4-4 wbite. No. 5 ..
Price in
Price in
Currency.
1869.
1869.*
Price in
(Gold.)
(Gold.)
1869.
$0 18
$0 16
80 21
26
23
30
30
29
S?i
26
25
321
27i
30i
40
36
34i
441
26
25
23
20f
27
25
23
30
25
23
30
75
65i
85
60
53J
70
45
40i
521
40
34i
45
35
32i
421
* Equivalent in gold, (gold at 130,) October average.
We give another table, comprising a list of aZZ the woolen fabrics
dealt in by a great commission house, and the two will show that, even
with labor paid higher wages, with capital dearer, taxes much higher.
SPECIAL COMMISSIOXER OF REVENUE.
13
and wool protected, woolens are actually cheaper to-day than ten years
ago. This table was furnished at the request of the New York Tribune
by Mr. S. W. Pay, of Perry, Wendell, Pay & Co., commission mer¬
chants in New York, Boston, and Philadelphia :
Standard woolens.
Prices in gold.
1860.
In currency.
1870.
Ravine mixed, all wool doeskins, 12 to 13 ounces....
80
to
85c.
80 to 85c.
Munson satinets, (standard article)
50
to
55
50
to
55
Staffordville satinets
60
to
65
60
to
65
Printed satinets
25
to
621
25
to
621
10-4 HoUand blankets, 4J pounds
S3
25
S5
00
11-4 HoUand blankets, 4i pounds
4
75
6
75
" Talbot" It. scarlet flannel, f, (standard)
26
30
"F. & C." twiU scarlet flannel, f, (standard)
34
45
Ricbmond Kentucky jeans, (standard)
26
321
Wasbington Kentucky jeans, (standard)
27
34
Palestro Kentucky jeans
14
141
St. Lawrence plaids
21
to
22
231
Leicester tweeds, (standard)
621
65
Waterloo blanket shawls
8
00
7
50
Belvidere 9-4 printed table covers
871
921
Mixed and plain cashmerettes
50
to
55
521
to
60
Boys' aU wool checks
55
to
60
57
to
62
Shaw diagonal aU wool cassimeres, 10 to 11 ounces..
80
to
85
75
to
80
Evans double and twist, 8 ounces, aU wool
75
80
Middlesex sackings
1
10
1
25
Middlesex doeskins
1
05
1
15
Middlesex shawls
7
00
7
00
Washington sackings
1
05
1
15
Glenham sackings
1
05
1
10
Glenham repeUents
1
15
1
20
It is thus evident that the " great mass of the American people," the
toiling clerks and working women whom the Commissioner calls upon
: to protest against the wool tariff, have, as consumers, no reason to com¬
plain of the existing prices for woolen goods. If, then, the producers
: proclaim that they are equally well satisfied with the operation of the
tariff, it is difficult for your committee to see any reasonable cause for
disturbing it.
The same inexplicable carelessness of assertion is found in the Commis¬
sioner's surprising statement that one of the results of the wool tariff has
. been " a decrease in the number of sheep, estimated by the Commissioner
jjij of Agriculture at four mUlions for 18G8, while other authorities idace the
14
EXAMINATION OF STATEMENTS IN REPORT OF
total decrease as high as twenty-five per cent, since tlie passage of the
wool tariff."
Tiie truth is that, by the reports of the Department of Agriculture for
1867 and 1868, we find the number of sheep for February 1,1868, (see
page 93,) stated at 38,991,912, and for February 1, 1869, (see page 46,)
at 37,724,279, a decrease of 1,267,633. Even this inconsiderable declme
is already more than checked, for we learn from the statistician of that
department that "The report for 1869 will show, including recent and
more complete data from the more western States and the Pacific slope,
not far from 40,000,000 sheep on February 1, 1870." Thus there is not
4,000,000 decrease for 1868, or " a total decrease of 25 per cent.," but
an actual increase.
To take the number of sheep butchered for their pelts and tallow, and
not allow for increase of lambs; or to take the decrease in some States,
and not the transfer and increase of more western regions, might pos¬
sibly make an apparent decrease of 4,000,000, and it is probably in some
such manner that the Commissioner, in this case, as in so many others
obtains the figures with which he seems to prove his foregone couclu-
sious.
The Commissioner expresses great self-satisfaction in referring to his
report of 1867, and in irroclaiming that, in accordance with its prognosti¬
cations," wool, from the passage of the wool tariff in 1867, has continually
fallen in price." He neglects, however, to indicate the causes of this
decline; preferring to refer to the tariff everything that he thinks may
render it unpopular, he assumes the reduction in price to be the result
of increased duties, though everywhere else he treats the tariff as a " tax"
which inevitably enhances prices. The truth is, that, as the "Wool Man¬
ufacturers' Association has shown, the decline in price is the direct and
inevitable result of au increased production of fine wools the world
over, which has outrun the consumption of the world. This increase,
the committee are informed, had reduced the price of fine wools, in
London, more than eleven cents in gold below the averages of previous
years, and this reduction occurred before the passage of the wool tariff.
In view of this fact it needed no prophetic endowments to predict low
prices for wool in the United States.
The experience of Great Britain and France is referred to by the Com¬
missioner as establishing the policy of having free wools here, but with
customary lack of impartiality he fails to show that there is no parallel
in the circumstances of this and these other countries. The chief pro¬
duction of England is combing wool, of which she has the monopoly
more truly than we have of cotton. Of course, free merino wool,
which she does not produce, is a boon to her manufacturers and no
iujui'y to her agriculture. On the other hand France does grow merino
wool, and that of great excellence, and, notwithstanding the quoted
report of M. Budrillard, the testimony from other sources is conclusive
that the free admission of foreign wools is extinguishing the merino-
SPECIAL COMMISSIONEE OF EEVENUE.
15
wool husbandry of France. The wool-growers of Cote d'Or, the finest
merino-wool district of the empire, in a petition addressed during the
present year to the Emperor, say: " In the presence of an invasion
which tends to substitute foreign wools for the French, the sale of the
latter has become impossible." M. Moll, in his report on wools at the
Paris Exposition, declares that the culture of the Eambouillet merinos,
the pride of France, must be abandoned in all the northern half of the
empire, and gives as a principal reason, that " in consequence of the
extreme facility with which wool is transported, we find ourselves in
our own markets in competition with the most favored countries of the
globe in the production of this article."
It is thus evident that in this, as in so many other cases, the Commis¬
sioner has selected and distorted facts, with the purpose of supporting
preconceived theories; and legislation based upon his partial and one¬
sided statements would be manifestly unsuited to the wants of the
country.
At the late annual meeting of the Northwestern Wool Manufacturers'
Association, at Chicago, February 17, were many men of practical experi¬
ence, as well as eminent character and ability, amoag them A. M. Gar¬
land, president of the Illinois Wool Growers' Association. After thor¬
ough discussion, the following resolution was passed, with but one dis¬
senting vote:
Whereas eiforts are being made by the advocates of free trade to influence Congres¬
sional legislation, and secure the repeal, or serious modification, of our protective tarift
lavs; and believing that the present depression in our manufacturing interest does
not, as is alleged in the arguments of the opposition, arise from or is the result of our
protective tariff, but that it is entirely dependent upon other influences, mainly aris¬
ing from the var: Therefore,
Resolved, That this association earnestly protest against any change in our present
tariff laws, and that we urge upon our members of Congress the duty, and our earnest
desire, that they leave the present duties on wools and woolens in full force.
At the annual meeting of the New York State Sheei) Breeders and
Wool Growers' Association, held at Syracnse, March 2, 1870, the fol¬
lowing resolutions were, after a full discussion, unanimously adopted:
Resolved, That this association retains its full confidence in the wool and woolen tariff
as the best legislation which can now be devised to benefit equally the ultimate and
• permanent interests of the wool grower, the manufacturer, and the consumer.
Resolved, That we are opposed to any amendments in such act, excepting those which
axe necessary for the better carrying out of its original intent and objects.
Resolved, That we repel with indignation the imputations cast by the United States
Special Commissioner of Eevenne, David A. Wells, on the motives of the represen-
1 tatives of the wool producing and manufacturing interests who framed the present
, wool and woolen tariff; that such imputations are as uncalled for as untrue.
HENEY S. EAIYDALL,
' President.
H. D. L. SWEET,
> Secretary.
16
EXAMINATION OF STATEMENTS IN REPORT OF
COTTON MANUFACTURE.
A letter dated from tlie "Office of the Natioual Associatiou of Cotton
Manufacturers and Planters," Boston, Massachusetts, March 28, 1870,
addressed to the Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee of this
House, and signed by officers of that association, is before your com¬
mittee, and they avail themselves of the privilege of giving its clear
and weighty comments on the Commissioner's report, so far as it refers
to the cotton manufacture, as follows:
"The Special Commissioner of Eevenue, on page 17 of his late report,
gives wliat purport to be the statistics of the manufacture of cotton
in the United States for the year 1869. These 'statistics' consist in
part of facts furnished by others, and in jiart of estimates made by the
Commissioner himself. To the class of facts belong the ' number of
spindles,' viz, 6,930,346; the 'average number of yarn,' namely, 28;
and the ' capacity of cotton,' to wit, 450,000,000 pounds. These items,
furnished by the labors of the Cotton Manufacturers and Planters' As¬
sociation, are, beyond doubt, substantially correct.
" Upon the basis of these facts the Commissioner frames sundry esti¬
mates to exhibit the relative importance of cotton manufacture among
the various industries of the country. ' Capital represented' is made
upon an assumed unit of $20 per spindle, in currency.
" If the cotton manufacture of the country were confined to plain goods,
if it required no worlcing capital in addition to that invested in the plant,
if its outlays in bleacheries, dye-houses, repair-shops, and boarding-
houses Avere an inconsiderable item, the figure assumed would not he so
much in error. It is in error to the amount of one hundred per cent.
"We do not hesitate to hazard onr professional judgment and credit upon
the declaration that the capital represented in cotton manufacture in
the United States for the year 1869, ineluding the floating and that
iuAmsted in the various forms just recited, was not less than $40 per
spindle. The aggregate capiital, accordingly, as represented by the Com¬
missioner on the one hand, and as required by the truth on the other,
woidd stand thus:
Commissioner's estimate. Correct estimate.
$138,606,920. $277,213,840.
" The publications of the Manufacturers and Planters' Association, from
which the Commissioner's facts were chiefly drawn, contain an estimate,
imblished in 1868, made by the president of the association, Hon. Amos
A. Lawrence, of the capital represented in cotton manufacture, the figure
assigned being $240,000,000. The estimate is based on an assumed num¬
ber of 6,400,000 spindles, and, when applied to the real number, vh,
6,930,346, gives an aggregate of $260,000,000.
" It appears, however, that it did not suit the purposes of the Commis¬
sioner to give further publicity to figures so just, and so favorable to
the credit of cotton manufacture, as those of Mr. Lawrence, though
SPECIAL COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE.
17
ready to his hand and sanctioned by an authority so weighty. Such tig-
ures did not, of course, well comport with the theory elsewhere advanced
and repeatedly dwelt upon in his report, that the manufactures of the
country are of comparatively small consequence.
"[2.] The Commissioner next proceeds to estimate the 'value of the
product^ for 18G9. The aggregate flgiire at which he arrives is
$184,000,000.
" In lieu and in correction of this figure, we beg to submit the following
estimate, which we vouch for as substantially correct. The estijnate is
based upon returns at the mill.
"Of the total product of cotton manufacture, in imunds, we estimate
that one-third, or 125,000,000 pounds, were in prints; one-sixth, or
62,500,000 pounds, were in brown cottons; one-fourth, or 93,750,000
pounds, were in bleached cottons; one fourth, or 93,750,000 pounds, were
in colored cottons.
"The value of these manufactures was not less than as follows:
125,000,000 imituds, at 80 cents per pound, $100,000,000
62,500,000 pounds, at 48 cents per pound, 30,000,000
93,750,000 pounds, at 60 cents per pound, 56,250,000
93,750,000 pounds, at 65 cents per pound, 60,937,500
375,000,000 247,187,500
"In round numbers, $247,000,000.
" Or, stated in the form adopted by the Commissioner:
"Cotton, at 27* cents $121,500, 000
" Interest, at 6^ per cent 17,500,000
" Labor 72, 000, 000
" Supplies and repairs 36,000,000
247,000,000
"Accordingly, the product as represented by the Commissioner on the
one hand, and as required by the facts on the other, stands thus:
Commissioner's estimate. Correct e.stimate.
$184,000,000. $247,000,000.
"The true estimate is thnty-four per cent, in excess of the Commis¬
sioner's.
»»##»**
■ " [3.J But cotton manufacturers regard themselves justified in still
louder complaint at the use made of figures on page 20 of the report.
The value there placed to the credit of agriculture will be seen, upon
, referring to pages 15 and 16, to be gross value. That there may be no
. doubt upon this point, attention is invited to the last two lines of the
first paragrapli of page 48, in which the sum total referred to is expressly
declared to be the gross value of the product of agriculture. It is really
* The Commissioner assumes that cotton at the mill cost 25 cents. It did cost at least
, 27 cents. Its cost at the Kliini.iiw n»rt.e-wes 25 cents.
18
EXAMINATION OF STATEMENTS IN EEPOKT OF
more than this, for a large amount of transportation value is added in
to produce the aggregate. Com was not worth 50 cents the bushel on
the farm in the average of the country, nor cotton worth 25 cents the
pound on the plantation, but at the distributing centers and the ship-
ping ports, and so on of the other products.
"When now the Commissioner compares the i)roduct of cotton manu¬
facture with the product of agriculture, instead of putting them down
together, gross against gross, he first deducts all the raw material of the
manufacture, all the transportation, both of the cotton to the mill, and
of the goods to the distributing points, and having thus cut the.product
down to $71,500,000, i)laces it in comjiarison with the total i/ross product
of agriculture, increased by considerable transportation value!
*»»*#*»
" When, in contrast with this extraordinary mode of computation, to
the real ^'alue of the product of cotton mariufacture at the mill, a proper
sum is added for transportation to the distributing centers, the resultant
amount, which should have been i)ut in comparison with agriculture by
the Commissioner, instead of being $71,500,000, would be largely in
excess of $247,000,000.
" [4.] The Coin mission er fixes the number of hands employed in cotton
manufacture at 125,000. A careful estimate, based upron both the num¬
ber of spindles and the consumption of cotton, shows that those employed
within and about the mills, also in bleacheries, dye-houses, repair-shops,
and in handling the goods in and between the various processes, num¬
ber not less than 208,000 jiersons.
Commissioner's estimate. Correct estimate.
125,000 persons. 208,000 persons.
" In other words, the actual number employed is G6 per cent, above the
Commissioner's estimate.
" [5.] On page 48 the Commissioner proposes to show that the 'agricul¬
tural interests of the conutry^' are not greatly ' dependent upon certain
spiecial industries for a market for their products.' lie sets forth that
the direct consumption of agricultural products by cotton manufacture
is only $19,500,000 per annum. ihTow, so far as regards the farmer or
planter, it matters not what use is made of his product, whether it be
eaten or manufactured into merchandise, so it be bought and paid
for. When bought and jiaid for, it is for him consumed. Premising
this, attention is invited to the statement on page 17, that cotton manu¬
facture consumed, in 18G9, 450,000,000 pounds of agricultural product iu
the form of cotton alone, valued at $112,500,000.
" Ihe statement, accordingly, of the direct consnmprtion of agricultm'al
j)rodncts by cotton maiiutactnre, as made in different jrarts of his report,
.stands thns:
CommiaRionpr a .statement. Commissioner's statement.
Page 17. Page 48.
(of cotton only,) (grand total,)
$112,500,000. $19,500,000.
SPECIAL COMMISSIONEE OF REVENUE.
" Special coimnissioners of the revenue, vho, on one page attempt to
show the ti'iliiug imiiortance of the market afforded to agriculture by a
great branch of manufacture, should not forget what they have written
on a former page.
"^Mieii to the cotton consumed, the food of the operatives, the starch
made from potatoes, corn, and wheat, the leather, the oil, the grease,
and other articles of agricultural derivation, consumed in cotton manu¬
facture, are added, the aggregate of direct consumption alone will un¬
questionably rise to $150,000,000.
Coiniaissioner's fi;:fures. Correct fi^nres.
$10,500,000. $150,000,000.
" It is worthy of attention, in passing, that the three branches of manu¬
facture, cotton, wool, and iron, are shown by the figures given on pages
15 and IS of the Commissioner's report to have consumed, in 18G9, over
$321,000,000 of agricnltnral products, an amount exceeding the total
export of those products for the fiscal year 18C0. In other words, the
market made by these three branches of manufacture really exceeded in
importance to the fanner the entire foreign market. Yet on page •48 the
Commissioner attempts to demonstrate the comparatively trivial conse¬
quence to the farmer of the market made by these manufactures.
"[().] On page 37 of liis report the Commissioner takes occasion, by
quotation, to announce to the world that the American cotton o])erative
receives birt little more than a ' sufficiency for his bare subsistence, owing
to the high prices exacted from him for food, fuel, clothing, and rent.
There is a great difference between bare subsistence a?id a good living.
The American operative supports his household, as to food, clothing,
schooling, &c., without help, in a style of positive luxury as compared
with the European. If without a family, he lays up money, being able,
as the Commissioner himself has publicly declared, to visit the sea-side
and take other expensive recreation. Already this portion of the rei^ort
is being set before the emigrating jiopulations of the old countries as a
warning against their projected removal, and is being dwelt upon in
public addresses beyond sea, and in the public prints, as honest testi¬
mony as to the ill condition of xAmericau labor. Of what avail is it that
the South and "West aie incurring large expense for immigrant agencies,
publications, and advertising, with the view of drawing in laborers from
beyond the ocean, if an official representative of the nation is to be
allowed in such a manner to discredit the condition of American labor?
It is to be observed, too, that the Commissioner, in ffirtual contradic¬
tion of his own statement, declares on page 54 that within a few years
the wages of workers 'have generally been greatly advanced,' as is
certainly the case with cotton operatives. He further declares that
workers are doing far less labor than ever before, ' two-thirds as much;
twenty-five per cent, discount; three men do the work of two; one-fourth
to one-third less,' &c. It further appears, on pages 51 and 52, that
the staples of food could be bought at a lower price in 1809 than in 1807,
20
EXAMINATION OF STATEMENTS IN REPORT OF
and in some ros])e(;ts cheaper than before the war; tliis fact being'made
the occasion by the Commissioner of prolonged lamentation over the
hardships and snifcrings of the farmers of the country. Thus, in almost
the same breath, the Commissioner condoles with the operative because
agi'icidtnral products are too high, and Avith the farmer because they
are too low, the natural ettect of which would be to excite the discoiiteut
and disalfection of both.
"We do not deem it necessary to make further exposure of the errors
and selfcontradictions of the Commissioner in all that pertains to cotton
manufacture or the laborer, i'ior shall we take it upon ourselves to
show, Avhat can easily be shown, that his deliverances in foimier reports
are entirely inconsistent Avith those of the present. Much less shall we
enter upon the far Avider field of his treatment of other branches of
manufacture, though assured that his mistakes haA'e been finite as ex¬
traordinary in connection with them as in relation to our oavu. It suf¬
fices our present piu'iiose to enter a general i-emonstrauce against his
report, as in all that relates to our own industry, grossly unreliable and
unjifst. Muthout attempting to sit in judgment uimn the motiA-es or in¬
tent of the Commissioner, we do not hesitate to affirm that the real effect
of his report is to belittle the importance of cotton manufacture among
the great industries of the country, by certainly one-half its real amount.
As large employers of both labor ami capital, Ave find it impos-sible not
to share in the common moiTification and resentment of the manufac¬
turers of the country, when in an elaborate public document, treating
at length of lalifir, Avages, and industry, there can be found hardly
a single remark upon the relations of employers and employed but
makes suggestion of tyranny and aA'arice on the part of the one, of pri¬
vation and hardslii[)s on the part of the other. ' The encroachments and
oppressions of capital;''the subordination of labor to capital;' 'highly
orgaiuzed and aggressiAC associations of capitalists,' tlictating when
taxes shall be reduced or remoAmd; 'the discontent of the real pro¬
ducing classes.' The laborer no longer able to Ih-e in his own house,
but croAA'ded into tenements; going in ' one collection districf into the
l)oor-house in uiiAvontcd nnmbers; unable to hold good the measure of
accumulations in the 'savings banks of XcAA-York and Massachusetts;'
the ' rich gTOAA'ing richer and the poor groAving poor'or"—such are the sug¬
gestions aa'ith aa'hich this official publication is replete, suggestions eal
culated to exasperate the jealousy of labor against capital, and to hi-
tiame against the rich the hostilities and hatred of the poor. From the
reading of the report one Avould certainly never derive the impression
that manufactures are desirable branches of national occupation, or a
blessing rather than a bane to the farmer, the laborer, or the country.
^ ^ #
"What conclusions the Commissioner, as an individual, may reach re¬
specting our OAvn iiidustry or any other, or Avhat promulgations he may
see fit to put forth respecting it, the dcA-elopments hereinbefore made
SPECIAL COMMISSIOXER OF REVEXUE.
21
slio^v, as we tliiiik, to be of no eonse(inence whatever. Bat his official
position, and the transcendent interest of the (piestiuns submitted to his
judgment, give an importance to his utterances altogether dispropor-
tioued to their intrinsic Aveight or value. This alone has led us to enter
this protest against his report. * * * #
" We ask that cotton manufacture be not exposed another year to the
liability of such misrepresentation as it has suffered in tlie last. If it
cannot be more fairly represented than in the Commissioners report, we
pray that it be not represented at all."
GtrXNY CLOTH AXD GUNXY BAGS.
The statements and reeommendations of the Commissioner touching
these articles are giA^en to shoAv their inaccuracy.
The present tluty on gunny cloth and gunny hags is three cents per pound, or near
one hundred per cent, of their market A'alue, a rate so excessive that the import from
Calcutta has almost entirely ceased. The,import of gunny cloth, Avhieh rvas retimied
at 75,U00 hales in 18G0, was reduced to 14,000 bales in 1868, and has not exceeded 5,000
bales in 1869. » * * xhe result is manifestly detrimental to the reA'euue. * » *
A redvrction of the price of gunny cloth would result to the adA'autage of the agricul¬
turists of the country, affording a ehe.aper material for the inclosure and transporta¬
tion of cotton, corn, and similar products. A duty of one cent a pound, as tlie maxi¬
mum, is, therefore, recommended on gunny cloth and gunny bags.
Guniiy cloth is called a material for the iiiclosure of "corn and similar
products," as well as cotton, but it is so coarse as to be useless for grains,
and is used only for cotton. Gunny bags are of liner and closer stuff and
are used for corn, but the increase of grain eleAmtors is rapidly diminish¬
ing the use of bags for corn. Stati.stics obtained from dealers in the
article show that the actual import of guuuy cloth in 1809 was 10,007
bales, instead of " not exceeding 5,000 bales," as stated by the Commis¬
sioner, and the stock on hand January 1, 1809, AA'as 28,903 bales.
There aa'ere 27,000 bales of imported gunny cloth delivered to con¬
sumers for use on the cotton crop of 1809-'70—enough to coA'er 1,620,000
bales of cotton, or more than half the crop, yet the Commissioner says
" the importation from Calcutta has almost entirely ceased."
There is another reason, too, for the decrease of gunny-cloth imports,
wliich is not giA'en in the report. Half the bagging made in this coun¬
try is made of jute and jute butts, imported from Calcutta, of which
only 14:,963 bales Avere brought to our ports in 1800; but 91,478 bales
were imported in 18G9.
The loAV grades of hemp, flax and tow grown by our western farmers
are used for about half the bagging Ave make, and their market would
be injured or destroyed if the low tariff should depress the making of
American bagging; yet the Commissioner's argument is that keeping up
our imports aauU giA'e us reA'enue, and he promises to our agricultiuml
interest a cheaper material for the inclosure of " corn and similar
products'' by a " reduction of the price of gunny cloth" under his lower
22
EXAMINATION OF STATEMENTS IN REPORT OF
tariff, wlieii gunny cloth is not and cannot be used for grain bags of
any kind!
As for the revenue aspect of the case, tlie Cominissioner is equally
astray. The 27,000 bales (20,035,000 pounds) of imported gunny clotli
used for covering cotton this season i)aid the government $019,050, at
a duty of three cents a pound. Had the whole crop, say 2,020,000 bales,
been covered by iinported gunny cloth, paying a duty of one cent a
pound as the Commissioner recommends, the 33,4:05,000 pounds required
would have paid a revenue of but $334,050. Thus not only is the rev¬
enue increased, but the growth of hemp and flax, together with tbehome
manufacture of bagging, is stimulated by the policy which the Commis¬
sioner deprecates.
SAET.
On page 49 the Commissioner says: " The farmer finds he can pnr-
chase salt in Liverpool or Cadiz and lay it down in the tlnited States at
fntm 15 cents to 20 cents per bushel; but the government, through its
currency and tariff, has imposed such a tax on it as to make it better for
him to pay from 40 to 45 cents for xAmerican salt.''
Even the extravagance of this statement does not satisfy the prone-
uess of the Commissioner to exaggerate whatever he thinks may prove his
theory. On page 51 he returns to the subject, and asserts that Liver¬
pool salt has risen in price from 90 cents per bag in 1859 to $2 60 per
bag in 1SG9. Again, page 53, ho recurs once more to the salt question,
a!id gives us a third statement to the effect that the price of salt has
been enhanced from 20 and 23 cents in 1800 to 40 and 50 cents in 1869.
These contradictory assertions are equally unfounded, and the truth of
the matter will appear from the following table, which demonstrates two
things, viz: that the figures of the Commissioner are wholly unreliahle,
and that the advance in the i)rice of salt has not been caused by the
tariff, but is due simply to the premium on gold. In fact, measmed by
a gold standard, salt is cheaper to-day than it was in 1800.
ConqMraiive prices of foreign and domestic salt (cost of pacMges inchuM)
on measured bushels.
Places.
ForeigTi.
18G0.
Domestic.
1860.
Foreigu.
1869.
Domestic.
1869.
Bo.-,ton
SO 25
40
41
40
42
Gohl.
Currency
80 28
34
34
33
34
C'levelaml
$0 32
334
m
32p
Detroit
Toledo
Cliicago
SPECIAL COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE.
23
The average price of Onondaga salt in bulk in Xew-York, in 18GG,
18G7, and 18G8 was 25 cents gold, or 35 cents currency; and in 18G9
hardly 32 cents in currency, by the reports of commercial agents of the
Onondaga Salt Company. The competition between Onondaga, Sagi¬
naw, and West Virginia keeps the interior prices as above, and it ap¬
pears that the tariff, far from enhancing the cost to the consumer, has,
by stimulating domestic production, actually reduced it.
Following up his crusade against the salt manufacturers, the Commis¬
sioner endeavors to show, from our exports of that article, that protec¬
tion is wholly gratuitous. To accomplish this, he states, page 8G, that
our yearly exports to the British possessions are "ux)wardof 500,000
bushels," and that " we are able to maintain such an export year after
year in defiance of all competition." The truth is, that as long as no
salt was made in Canada our exports were about 500,000 bushels per
annum, but since salt springs have been worked at Goderich they have
fallen to 290,000 bushels in 18G9, and are still decreasing.
Throughout his whole treatment of this salt question the Commis¬
sioner seeks to convey the impression that the salt manufacturers of
the United States are either extortioners or incompetents, who deserve
to be driven from their business, and he does not hesitate to go all the
way to Spain—a country which has been impoverished by free trade
legislation—for a missile to hurl at them. He shows great facilitjy too,
in concealing facts that favor the claims to protection of the domestic
manufacturers of salt, and equal readiness in giving imrtial statements
that do them injustice. On page 88 he introduces a letter from Hun-
can Stewart, "j)resident of the Saginaw Salt Association," asserting
that the present tariff' on salt is an outrage on the country, and
that, one-half of the duty is all that the Saginaw interests desire.
The title aiqmnded to Mr. Stewart's name is calculated to make the
country believe that he spehks by authority for the salt manufactur¬
ers of Michigan. To show how erroneous this is, and how the real rep¬
resentatives of the Saginaw salt interest have been ignored, we extract
from a letter from H. M. Fitzhugh, of Bay City, Michigan, imesident of
the Saginaw and Bay Salt Comjiany, a large concern made up by the
consolidation of several conq>anies, with its sixteen- directors in Saginaw
and its neighbor. Bay City, and representing the manufacturers of nine-
tenths of the salt macTe in the Saginaw Valley. Mr. Fitzhugh dates from
the cornxtany's office. Bay City, January 29, 1870, and writes as
follows:
Mr. Duncan Stewart represents no one but himself. There could be no objection to
Mr. Wells puWishiii}!; his opiniou, if he were not represented a.s president of the Saginaw
Association of Salt Manufacturers, whereas he is president and principal owner of the
Saginaw Valley Salt Company, a small concern, which made in the last year only
9,.^78 barrels of salt.
*###***
Saginaw does not want th.eylutj:_on salt disturbed, so far as I know. *
24
EXAMINATION OF STATEMENTS IN REPORT OF
Tgavp tho Bureau of Statistics my opinion in full on this question, in response to the
circular from that oiiice. Mr. Wells does not allude to it, hut prefers to quote Mr.
Stewart, calling him president of our association, which is incorrect. You can make
any use of this letter you choose.
Very respectfully, yours,
H. M. FITZHUGH,
President Saginaw and Bay Salt Crniqiany.
The writer of this letter is well and widely known, and represents
the makers of 3,000,000 bushels of salt, while the no-called " President
of the Saginaw Association of Salt Manufacturers " represents no one
but himself.
The-Commissioner says, m speaking of the iron interest, that but few
iron-makers answered his circular of questions. Surely they and others
could effect little by doing so if this is a sam^de of his mode of using
such answers.
The Commissioner's anxiety in regard to the heavy tax which he says
the salt tariff imposes on the people is ludicrous in its contrast with his
total indifference to far heavier burdens. He estimates the added cost
of the 39,000,000 bushels of salt used each year at .$3,900,000, or ten
cents iier bushel, owing to the tariff; bnt this is too high, as the average
consnmx)tion is some forty iionnds per head, which would show an an¬
nual amount of not over i'0,000,000 bushels. On this the tariff is but 8
cents, and if the i)rice were eidianced to this extent, which we have
shown not ,to be the ease, the total increased exyienditure by the peo-
I)le wonld only be about $2,000,000—little over one-half of what the
Commissioner has estimated it. Granting, however, that the Commis¬
sioner is correct in his statement, his in'ox)osition to raise $00,000,000
yearly from duties on tea, coffee, sugar, and molasses, the one-half of
this to be paid by a tariff on sugar alone, would impo.se a far heavier
burden on the peoi)le than the small revenue derived from foreign salt.
COAX,.
On page 89 of the report the Commissioner again renews his recom¬
mendation for " the entire removal of all duties imxrosed upon the im¬
portation of coal," alleging as one argument in favor of the recommend¬
ation, that "coal is a necessity of life—next in imimrtance to food;
indeed, as both are in our climate absolutely indhspensable, it cannot he
said that either is more or less needful than the other, for life cannot he
sustained without both. The universally recognized jirinciple of taxa¬
tion—that a tax should be taken from what can be spared—forbids the
laying of a tax upon that which is indispensable to rich and poor alike."
On page 129 of the report the Commissioner himself discredits and
ignores this same argument concerning the neces.sities of life and the
things that are " indispensable to rich and poor alike," for he there pro-
jioses the schedule of a tariff which would heavily tax the coffee and
sugar of the laboring man and the tea of the poor widow and under-
SPECIAL COMMISSIONEK OF REVENUE.
25
paid seamstress. Coffee, sugar and tea are, according to iVIr. Wells'
own philosophy, greater necessities of life than coal, for they are
"/oofZ"—sugar especially is food; yet the Commissioner, in contempt of
his own teachings, would tax food, the prime necessity, and admit for¬
eign coal, a minor necessity, free. Coffee, sugar, and tea are neces¬
sities of the masses of general consumption, which must be almost
wholly supplied by foreign countries, while the owners of foreign coal,
for whose benefit the Commissioner pleads so earnestly, could not sup¬
ply with their product oue-tenth of the demands of the country, no mat¬
ter how favorable the facilities might be for its introduction. Has not
the Commissioner thus placed himself in the position of an advocate of
a special interest which affects comparatively few consumers, while ignor¬
ing the claims of the whole country to untaxed food?
But the Commissioner does not here rest his argument. He adds :
" Coal, moreover, is not only a necessary of life, but the source of
motive i)ower. To tax coal, therefore, is to tax power ; to tax the force
of the steam-engine, to starve the laborer on whose strength we depend
for work. To do this as a jiart of a plan of promoting domestic industry
seems the reverse of wisdom." Farther on he states: " The protection
of coal means, then, the enhancement of its price by a duty, so that the
consumer may be obliged to buy coal raised m the United States rather
than that procured abroad." These are grave statements, which chal¬
lenge investigation. Are they true? Has the experience of the past
shown that the duty on foreign coal starves the steam-engine, and does
it result in the " enhancement of its price ?"
The committee find that the duty on coal has not had the effect of
increasing the cost of either foreign or domestic coal to the American
consumer, and in svipport of this view submit statistics obtained from
sources entitled to the highest credit. About two-thirds of the coal im¬
ported into the United States coiues from Nova Scotia. For twelve years,
from June, 1854, to March, 186G, the reciprocity treaty between this
country and the British provinces permitted Nova Scotia coal to be ad¬
mitted into our ports free of duty. Since 18GG a duty of $1 25 (gold) a
ton has been imjmsed. A comparison of the prices obtained for Nova
Scotia coal and for American bituminous and anthracite coal, for a series
of years, say trom the first year of the war to the x^resent time, will estab¬
lish the inaccuracy of the Commissioner's statement that the duty has
operated to enhance the price. A table showing this comparison is
subjoined. The price given is the average for the years named and for
the mouth of Ainll, 1870.
Table shoioing the average ^jrices obtained for Nova Scotia coal and for American bituminous and anthracite coal, from l^Gl to 1870, together with the effect of the
duty on foreign coal on these pricce from 18()G to 1870. ^
No. 1.
§4 C7
862
5
GO
863
7
40
864
10
40
865
9
60
866
8
54
8 10
8 16
7 78
6 00
fcJD
o
fcO
<
No. 2.
Par.
13 +
45
102 +
57
40 -
38
40
36
15
*n
A
ci tM
o
a
No. 3.
$4 67
5 29
6 77
9 45
7 33
6 52
6 44
6 51
6 35
5 37
o
g
t
0
1
0
Q
No. 4.
Free.
Free.
Free.
Freo.
Free.
$1 75
1 72
1 75
1 70
1 44
1
hi
No. 5.
$4 67
5 29
6 77
9 45
7 33
8 27
8 16
8 26
8 05
G 81
3 13
No. G.
$3 44
4 23
5 57
6 84
7 57
5 94
4 97
4 71
4 97
4 GO
o 2
«
4; ^
r .2
ft ^
O
No. 7.
$3 44
3 73
3 H4
3 38
4 82
4 25
3 59
3 36
3 05
4 00
No. 8.
83 39
4 14
6 06
8 39
7 86
5 HO
4 37
3 86
5 31
4 50
No. 9.
#3 39
3 65
4 18
4 12
5 GO
4 15
3 16
2 75
3 90
3 91
ft
ft
a
No. 10.
204, 457
192, 612
2H2, 774
317,504
465, 194
404, 254
338, 492
251, 949
287, 745
a
^ •
0 .
0
c
H
No. II.
890. 588
1,291,
1, 656,
1,711,
1, 989,
2, 482,
2, 788,
3,308,
4,233,
103
655
980
>- O
.a
C CJ
Z o
5-i
1 -a
®
ft
c
C CO
— -X)
^ a: ^
Ph
No. 12.
Profit
$0 31
63
95
2 27
27
No. 13.
$1 75
1 72
1 75
1 70
1* 44
Reraarks.
Be/jinnin;? with the averajjo prices of 1861 for
Nova Scotia coal, viz: 84 67, we may assume
that there was then a profit.
Consumer paid premium and 31 cents more.
Consumer paid premium and 63 cents more.
Consumer paid premium and 95 cents more,
Oonsiuner paid premium and §2 27 more.
Duty paid by producer out of his profits. The
consumer gets coal $1 06 cheaper per ton. The
price covers premium, duty, and 27 cents more.
The ju'odiicer is reduced to his profit of 1861, and
6 cents less which he pays as duty.
The producer is r(>diioed to his profit of 1861, and
10 cents loss which he pays as duty.
The producer is reduced to his profit of 1861, and
27 cents less winch lie pays as duty.
The pioducer is paying inoro than half the duty.
hH
H
O
iz:
a>
H
t=3
H
CO
tz:
w
t=j
o
SPECIAL COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE,
27
The foregoing table shows that Xova Scotia coal rose steadily from
1801 to 1864, receding but slightly in 1805, and that the consumer not
only paid the premium but also a regularly increasing jirofit to the
owners above the prices of 1801. The average prices of this coal
in 1802, 1803, and 1804 disclose its constantly increasing power in our
markets, enabling the producers to increase their profits by more than
thirty cents per ton each year, and they were so strong in 1805 that the
very great decline in gold dirring that year was of slight benefit to the
consumers, the profit realized upon it by the i)roducers amounting to the
sum of $2 27 per ton above what they made in 1801, and exceeding by
fifty-two cents the currency duty imposed the next year.
Tlie year 1800, in which the duty took effect, was the turning point,
and the profits in foreign coal have as steadily declined since then as
they had steadily risen previous to that time. The downward tendency
of prices since the duty was payable has been more rapid than
the decline of the gold iiremium, which fact is sufficient evidence that
the tariff has not increased the cost to the consumer, and that he does
not pay the duty in the sense in which it is alleged by Mr. Wells.
The shipments of American bituminous coal to the Atlantic seaboard
in 1800 exceeded the shipments of 1805 almost 500,000 tons, being
nearly one-fifth greater than that 3'ear's entire import of Kova Scotia
coal, and almost three times the sea-board consumi>tion of domestic coal
in 1801. Owing to this remarkable increase in the home production of
bituminous coal, under the stimulus of the duty, the foreign article ex¬
perienced a wholesome check, and its producers were obliged to divide
their enormous profits with the treasury of the United States.
That the consumer paid the duty when it was first imposed cannot
be questioned, but that his coal was therefore enhanced in price we have
reason to denj". He paid it into the treasury of the United States, in¬
stead of giving it to the owners of foreign coal, who have manifested the
determination to get the highest i)ossible price for their product, and
would have been able in 1800 and 1807, had coal been free, to pocket
a sum equal to the dutj', or to use it to break down the market at
pleasure, and harass and ruin the producers of American coal. Since
then the foreign operator has lost his undisputed control of the market,
and has been obliged to pay a constantlj' increasing portion of the duty
out of his anti-war profits. He will soon be comxjelled to pay the whole
of the dutj' out of these x)rofits, and can well aft'ord to do it.
It is natural that the wards of the Commissioner should be exceed-
inglj' desirous of controlling, at will, the American market, and they
doubtless remember, with much regret, their immense gains prior to
the imposition of the dutj-, especially in the year 1805, yet thej' are now
reai)ing such x)rofits as should content them. It is somewhat singular
that Mr. Wells, who has manifested surprising zeal in hunting out and
holding up to public reprobation anj' American industrj^ which he
imagines to have heeir^luably-prosperous and i)rofitable, should have
28
EXAMINATION OF STATE;\IENTS IN EEPORT OF
made no iiiqiiiiy into tlie {^aiiis of the Nova Scotia coal companies,
whose cause he advocates with such earnestness. IJis I'cport gives no
light upon this subject; but from reliable statements of mining opera¬
tions your committee Inave learned tliat the cost of mining and trans¬
porting Pictou coal to the vessel, and all charges and expenses accruing
oil and about the same, cannot be computed at more than eighty cents
per 2,240 jiounds. The royalty payable to the jirovince is ten cents,
making the total cost to the owners ninety cents per ton, or, allowing a
margin of ten cents, it would cost one dollar a ton. Taking the average
price at Boston during the year 1800, which was S7 78 per ton, and
deducting therefrom the duty, and freights estimated at $3 per ton,
there would be a net jirolit of about $1 80 per ton, or more profit than
the average selling price of American bituminous coal at the pit's
mouth. Evidence of the grasping spirit of the.se operators in foreign
coal is disclosed by the fact, that in the winter of 18C4:-'05, ichen tlim
was no duty on coal, they actually put up the inice of their coal in Boston
harbor, by the cargo, to $15 50 a ton.
Surely, men who do not hesitate to reap snch exorbitant profits as
these from the pockets of American consumers may well be asked to
pay a part of the taxes from which our own citizens are not exempt.
Especially are they not entitled to have an elaborate plea for their ben¬
efit inserted in an official document emanating from an officer of our
government, whose first duty it is to " inquire into all the sources of
national revenue, and the best methods of eolleeting the revenue"—not
the best methods of abolishing it for the advantage of foreign pro¬
ducers, as the Commi.ssioner suggests.
The foregoing currency table has stated the facts and argument in
one form, as we think fairly, but to refute most clearly the assertion of
the Commissioner that " protection to coal means the enhancement of
its price bj' a duty," the following brief statement of gold prices of
Nova Scotia coal is here inserted :
Tear.
Average prices of
Nova Scotia coal
in Boston,in gold.
Gold duty.
Increase of gold
price year by
year when froe.
Fall in gold price
year by year un¬
der the duty.
b -3
a §
— u
cc
a .
S i -5
1 ^
•S 2
S t 1
1 g.2
H
1001
4. 67
4. 95
5.10
5.15
6.12
6. It
5. 87
5. 83
5. 72
5.22
Free.
Free.
Free.
Free.
Free.
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.25
1.25
.28
. 15
.05
.97
1063
1064
1. 45
.01
.24
.04
. 11
.50
.90
8PECIA1, COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE.
29
The great benefit of the coal duty is seen in its infiueuce upon the
production and prices of American bituminous coal. This averaged by
the cargo, at Baltimore, $1 63 a ton less in the duty year of 1866 than
in the free year of 1865, and dropped almost a dollar more in 1867, since
■which time it has been remarkably steady at the average currency price,
for three years, of $4 88 per ton. It is with this coal (the Cumberland)
that Nova Scotia coal comes most directly in comijetition ; and, according
to the theories of the Commissioner, its price should have been increased
by the whole amount of the duty ; but the very contrary of this is the
case. Gold fell, it is true, but coal fell faster and farther, and it con¬
tinued to fall when gold took a turn and went up again. Its average
cost, as above stated, during three years jmst, reduced to gold, has
been $3 52 per ton, being 8 cents higher than the price in 1861, and 19
cents per ton less than the average of five years preceding the war.
Anthracite coal is not directly affected by foreign competition, yet it
has ruled lower since the duty took effect, and quite low enough—its
average price, delivered in Philadelphia, during three years past, having
been $3 26 in gold, or 13 cents per ton cheaper than it was in 1861, and
21 cents cheaper than the average of five years before the war.
The allegations of the Commissioner, that the coal duty has caused a
loss of force, and has starved the steam laborer on whom we depend for
work, are refuted by a comparison of our total coal imports from all
countries i)rior to and during the duty years with the amount of Ameri¬
can bituminous coal used upon the sea-board alone since the tariff took
effect:
Tears.
Increase in coal
imports from
all sources.
Decrease in coal
imports from
all sources.
Increased ship¬
ments of Ame¬
rican bitumi-
nous coal to
sea-board.
Total increased
receipts at sea¬
board, foreign
and domestic.
1866
Tons.
11,913
Tons.
Tons.
493, 685
305,171
520, 552
925, 325
Tons.
505, 598
305,171
520,55
952, 763
1867
174, 788
125,177
1868
18C9 ..
27, 438
299, 965
2, 284, 034
1, 9e4,119
Briefly, it appears that since the imposition of the dutj*, year by year,
the losses of foreign coal amount to 299,965 tons; the gains of foreign
and domestic bituminous at the sea-board amount, year by year, to
2,284:,084 tons, the net increase being much greater than the total import
of coal from all sources during three years prior to the imposition of the
duty, and gxeater than the total imports of the five years prior to the
war. AVe might show that the absolute gain is much greater if the
30 ' EXAMINATION OF STATEMENTS IN REPORT OF
largest coiisuiDptioii of any year prior to 186G is taken as a standard of
comparison, for tlie yearly gains would tlius be fairly compounded and
vastly increase the total; but it is enough for our purposes to ask tbe
Commissioner how the increased consumption of two million tons of
coal on the sea-board has resulted iu loss of power or starved the
laborer on wliom we depend for work? In this, as iu other matters,
Mr. "Wells shows great fondness for a fine jihrase, and little precision of
statement or accuracy of learning.
LtnviBER.
On page 88 of the report under consideration the Commissioner makes
the following statement conceruing one of the leading industries of the
Eastern and Northwestern States:
Luniber.—The following table shows the advance which has taken place in the
price per thousand feet of mixed lumber, by the cargo, in Chicago, from 18G1 to
1868, inclusive:
Mean of daily averages.
Year ended December 31, 1861 - 86 of per M feet
March 31,1866 14 80 per M feet.
March 31, 1867 17 70 per M feet.
March 31, 1868 15 10 per M feet.
On the following page this table is referred to, to " illustrate the
effect of the imposition of the tariff on prices," as follows:
" Thus the existing duty of twenty per eent. on lumber heeame operative on Imnber
imported from the British Possessions (our only foreign source of supply) by the expi¬
ration of the reciprocity treaty in the spring of 1866. The subsequent advance in
prices iu Chicago was from 814 80 per thousand feet in 1865-'66, to 817 70 in 1866-'6r.
* * * As tlie prices paid for lumber, furthermore, have been as a rule higher
in Canada since tlie expiration of the reciprocity treaty and the imposition of the
twenty per cent, duty, while the sales have been larger, it is evident that the dnty
falls u-lioUy upon the American connuiiur.''
As the Commissioner does not give the names of practical lumbermen
as authority for his figures above cited, your committee have submitted
them to the examination of the highest authority in Chicago in tlie
lumber trade, W. D. Iloughteliiig, esq.. President of the Lumbermen's
Exchange of that city, ami from him have received the following de¬
tailed statement:
Jlcceiptu of lumber, lath, aetcl shinglen manufactured in the Vnitcd States arid received at
port of Chicago during the last seven years.
Year.
Lumber.
Lath.
1863
384, 932, 000
40,747, 000
152,344,000
1H64
467, 594,000
60, 385, 000
133, 360.000
186.5
' 636. 425, 000
63, 375, 000
297,159,000
1866
712, 741, 000
122,167, 000
391,858,000
1867
837, 868, 000
145, 4-3, 000
481,356,000
1868
977, 968. 000
145, 346, 000
537,876,000
1869
985, 931, 000
119. 329, 000
673,166,000
—•
SPECIAL COMMISSIOXER OF REVENUE.
31
Becexpts of lunxber, lath, and shingle manufactured in Canada and received at the Fort of
Chicago, for the last seven years.
Tear.
Lumber.
Lath.
Shingles.
1863
4. 068, 000
853,000
71.000
1864
6,286, 000
1, 715, 000
None.
18G5 •
10, 895, 000
910, 000
None.
1866
8,3G4, 000
526.000
214, 000
1867
9. 7G6, 000
119, 000
99.000
1868
8, 478, 000
41, 000
None.
1869
5, 903,000
2!roue.
None.
Total amount of lumber received, and the average price obtained per 1,000/eef, at Chicago, for
the last seven years.
Year.
Total feet.
Average price.
1663
l-'Bl
1P6d
16GG
1667
1HG8
1669
389, 000, 000
473, 880, 000
647, 320,1100
7iU. 105, 000
847, C34, 000
986, 446, 000
991, 834, 000
§12 75 per 1,000 feet.
17 30 " " "
13 85 " " "
16 80 " " •'
14 15 " " •'
13 60 " " "
11 30 " " '•
The :ibove receipts are taken from the custom-house hooks, and the average price is obtained by
averaging the dailj' sales afloat as reported daily for the last seven years.
W. D. HOrGHTELIXG.
Chicago, April 13, 1870. President of LuinhermciCs Exchange.
Accomi)anying the foregoing statement was the following letter,
addressed to a member of the committee:
Chicago, April 13, 1870.
De.vr Sir : Your favor of 7tli instant came duly to hand. Inclosed I hand you a
statement shoving the total amount of luraher received at tliis port for seven years,
aud the average i)rice at which it has been sold afloat each year.
You will observe that after the close of the war in 1865, it dropped .$3 45 x>er JI from
the price of 1^64. The year 1866 was oue of high prices in all commodities and jiro-
ducts. Tlie soldiers had been paid off; had got home; were using their money and
again becoming producers, which infused new life aud activity into everything. This
year lumber, like everything else, advanced. But since 1866 there has been a yearly fall¬
ing off, and a strong one—the whole decline from 1866 to 1869 being, as you will
notice, $5 50 per M feet. This season xirices will be less. The few cargoes that have
thus far aiTived have sold at from §1 to .82 less than the ox)euing x>rice of last year.
I do not think lumber will average over ,810 this season. Several millions have been
contracted at 810 for future delivery. To throw lumber into our markets free, manu¬
factured where labor is, from the condition of things, cheap, must xirove ruinous to the
men who have millions invested in this business.
Yours, resi)ectfully,
W. D. IIOUGHTELINO,
Premlent of LumiermerC^ Exchange.
Hon. PiiiLETUs Sai^wer, Washington, D. C.
The striking fact is preseutetl in Mr. Ilonghteling's letter and accom¬
panying statistics that the price of lumber has rapidly decUiwd in
32
EXAMINATION OF STATEMENTS IN REPORT OF
Cliicag'o since 1800, notwithstanding the imposition of a duty of twenty
per cent, on Canadian Ininber. The Commissioner endeavors to create
a contrary impression by referring to the quotations in 180G-'G7. He
even ignores his own previously quoted price of mixed lumber at
Chicago in Alarch, 1808, Avhen, according to his own figures, it had
fallen 82 00 per thousand since 1800-07. But why did the Commis¬
sioner end his table of prices with the quotations for March, 18G8?
His report is dated December 17, 180!), twenty-one months later,
and it certainly Avas possible for him to procure the Chicago lumber
quotations nj) to IMarcli, 1809, one year later than those given in his
table. Had be done this, the truth would have been found to be even
more damaging to his comments than his own quotations for March,
1808, for it Avould have .shown a decline in i)rice to a point as low as in
1805, when lumber was admitted free of duty. Mr. Houghteling brings
the (piotations down to the present year, and they show that lumber is
noAv selling in Chicago, after making due allowance for the premium on
gold, at prices as Ioav as prevailed in 1803, 1804, and 1805—all fm
years. With such facts as tho.se we have given, either before him or
within his reach, your committee deem the Commissioners deduction,
that "the duty falls wholly upon the American consumer," at once
illogical and unjustifiable. In this conclusion tiiey are sustained
by the additional fact, derived from 3Ir. Houghteling's statistics, that
our annual imports of lumber from Canada into Chicago, either under
the terms of the reciprocity treaty or under the duty of twenty per
cent., have been the merest trifle Avlieii compared with the home product.
To repeal the duty noAv imposed on foreign lumber would benefit
no one but the foreign producer, while the Government woidd have to
look elsewhere for the revenue now derived from that source.
In the foregoing remarks the committee have had under consideration
only so much of the Commissioner's statements as relates to the prices of
lumber in Chicago, his argument being mainly deduced therefrom. But
the Committee are not without other evidence of the fallacy of the Com¬
missioner's reasoning and the utter lack of qandor in his dealing with
simple facts. For example, in the table he gives of the cost of lumber
at Albany, he entirely omits the rates prevailing in that market in 1869,
thus repeating the offensive and always hazardous experiment of sup¬
pressing the truth, as was done in the table of Chicago prices.
The committee feel justified in quoting the following i)reamble and
resolution adopted at a large meeting of the citizens of Oshkosh,
A\ iscousin, on the 12th of April last, at which Judge Washburn pre¬
sided and of which llev. F. B. hTorton was secretary.
VVlioreas, Coiiiniissioner Wells has asserted that the manufacturers of lumber have
raised the price far hej'oud the average increase in the price of labor and other com¬
modities, that the tariff of twenty per cent, has been a direct tax upon the consumer
to that amount, and that its repeal would cheapen lumber to the amount of |16,000,000j
therefore,
liesohed. That so far as this market is concerned, his statements are false in every
SPECIAL COamiSSIONER OF REVEKUE.
33
point, and tend to bring into disrepute a large class of manufacturers who claim equal
honesty rvith the officers of the government, and who have been selling a large portion
of their products for the past year helow the cost of production.
THE COST OF IRON.
On page 81 of tlie report tlie Commissioner makes tlie following state¬
ments concerning one of the leading industries of the whole country:
The average expenditure requisite to produce a ton of pig iron in the United States
at the present time, including a liberal interest upon the capital invested and a fair
allowance for repairs and incidentals, may be fairly estimated at from $24 to $26, cur¬
rency ; and as confirmatory of this estimate, the Commissioner submits the following
evidence: In a letter under date of September 2,1869, Mr. George T. Lewis, of Clarksville,
Tennessee, who is indorsed as one of the most intelligent and experienced iron manu¬
facturers of the Southwest, says: On the line of the Nashville and Chattanooga rail¬
road, pig iron can be made and delivered in Nashville at a cost of $19 per ton, currency.
In the city of Nashville itself Mr. Lewis states the present cost, including interest on
capital and incidentals, at $22 60, currency, per ton. At Carondelet, Missouri, Mr. S.
Waterhouse, of St. Louis, in a letter under date of February 20, 1869, states the cost
of making pig iron, including an allowance of $1 50 per ton for interest, taxes, and in¬
surance, at $25, currency, per ton; and adds, this " is not an estimate, but an exhibit
copied from the books of the company." The distance of Carondelet from St. Louis, a
central market, is six and a quarter miles. An estimate furnished by one of the larg¬
est iron-works at Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, gives $27 98 as the cost per ton when ore of
.sixty-.six per cent, is used, and an allowance made of eighty cents per ton for interest
and twenty-five cents per ton for repairs and incidentals. In the valley of the Cum¬
berland, and in the anthracite districts of Pennsylvania, and at Scranton, the Commis¬
sioner is informed by those conversant with the business that the.average cost of man¬
ufacture in the case of furnaces favorably situated, under good management, and with
coal at ordinary prices, is not in excess of from $24 to $26 per ton, and in some in¬
stances is much less than this figure. These estimates, furthermore, it should be ob-
. served, include a liberal interest on the capital invested, which is turned on an aver¬
age from two to three times per annum. *
After submitting these statements, the Commissioner adds the foUow-
, ing comments:
The average price of all the varieties of pig iron in the principal markets of the
. United States for the past j-ear is estimated by the secretary of the American Iron and
Steel Association at $35 25 per net ton. Other recognized authorities report a higher
average to the Commissioner, viz : from $36 to $36 50 and $37 50 as a fair average in
. - New York City. The average value at the furnaces of the Lehigh Valley during the
past year has been about $36 for No. 1, $36 for No. 2, and $34 for No. 3. It is therefore
obvious that, adopting the minimum market price, and allo^ving for the cost of one
hundred miles of railroad transportation, the price of pig iron to the American con-
- ' sumers has been unnecessarily enhanced during the past year to an average of from
ir fdijht to ten dollars per ion.
The committee find that here, as iu other parts of the report, the
Commissioner is grievously in error, and that, too, without the shadow
^ of excuse. He accepts as established facts statements not proved to be
true, and not entitled, from the character of the sources whence they
- emanate, to be seriously considered without verification. It was a duty
If the Commissioner owed to himself and the country, that he should
not present conclusions based upon e^ddence that did not emanate
from sources entitled to the highest credit; yet he is constantly
H. Eep. —
34
EXAMIXATIOX OF STATEMENTS IN KEPORT OF
doing tliis, "wlien it was entirely within his power to obtain com-
X)lete and authentic information npon every sxibject referred to in Ids
report. In Ids exhibit of the cost of inanufacturiTig i)ig iron, he is
singularly unfortunate, as your committee will proceed to show from
abundant material in their possession.
" From $24 to $20, currency,' is stated by the Commissioner to be the
^'■average expenditure requisite to produce a ton of pig iron in the
United States." This means that some pig iron can be and is produced
at less rates than those here quoted, which may be true of a few favored
localities, or of a few iron districts remote from market, like one in
"Western North Carolina of which your committee has heard, where
negro labor, through lack of other emixloyment, and from other well-
known causes, can be obtained for from forty to sixty cents a day—
starvation wages. Iron can there be produced at a cost of $18 a ton,
but the cost of transporting it to market is almost as much more. Ex¬
ceptions, however, never prove a rule, the old maxim to the contrary
notwithstanding; and the Commissioner, instead of seeking for instances
of exceptional cheapness, slnrald have directed his inquiries to those
localities where most of the iron of the country is made, and where the
labor bestowed upon its manufacture is paid a fair price.
He should also, in giving the assumed cost of producing a ton of
pig iron at different localities, have stated what land of iron he referred
to in each instance, since iron differs in quality as much as many other
articles of manufacture; but this he does not do. An otiicer of the
British revenue service would not have the hardihood to omit a
classiflcation so necessary and one that everybody would certainly
expect, nor would he be allowed to do so if ever so recklessly inclined,
The committee now i)roceed to an examination of the authorities
and figures cited by the Commissioner. lie quotes Mr. George T.
Lewis as authority for the statement that "pig iron can be made and
delivered in Nashvilleat a cost of $19 jxer ton," and says he "is indorsed
as one of the most intelligent and experienced iron manufacturers of
the Southwest." The committee lind, upon investigation, that neither
the figures nor the reputation as an iron manufacturer of Mr. Lewis are
entitled to the consideration the Commissioner has accorded to them.
Mr. Lewis has had expericjice as an iron manufacturer, but not even his
warmest eulogist will assert that he has been a successful manutacturer.
The committee find that he has been the very reverse of successful.
Next, they find that, when Mr. Lewis made the estimate which the Com¬
missioner quotes so prominently, he had purchased, or was about to pur¬
chase, some iron and coal lands on or near the Nashville and Chattanooga
railroad, and greatly desired to secure the co-operation of capitalistsin
their development. Of course he made asfivorable an estimate as pos¬
sible, and advertised it in the newspapers. Even then, however, it is
manifest that he referred to stone-coal iron, and your committee would
not do him the injustice to sup2)ose that he meant to create the impres-
SPECIAL COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE.
35
sion that charcoal iron can be produced on the line of the Kashville and
Chattanooga railroad at $19 a ton. Kor do they believe that he conceived
it possible to make even stone-coal iron in any other locality than the
one he was specially interested in commending to the attention of capi¬
talists as cheaply as $19 a ton, including freight to INasliville.
But are his estimates—for they are nothing else—reliable? Can pig
iron of any quality whatever be madeinTenne.ssee uiifZ delivered at Nash¬
ville for $19 a ton ? On this point, the testimony of successful manufac¬
turers of pig iron in that State is the only evidence that should be
received, esjiecially when it is opposed only by that of a gentleman not
engaged in iron manufacture. Messrs. Hillman, Brother «& Sons, iron
manufacturers of long experience in Tennessee, and gentlemen of high
standing for integrity and business capacity, under date of Nashville,
January 7, 1870, write as follows. They speak of charcoal iron.
We Lave been running but one fumace since tbe war, and, as vre bave always done,
bave been careful to know wbat it bas cost us to make pig iron. Tbis furnace bas tbe
ore almost at its moutb, and a railroad to tbe river, two and a balf miles. Our pig iron
on tbe bank of tbe Cumberland River costs us no one year less tban from $33 to $35.
Tbis is reliable, and we do not believe tbere is any establishment in this whole section
that is making pig iron for less, or that bas any more favorable location.
This statement is supported bj' the testimony of another iron firm of
high standing in Nashville. Their letter is of so imiiortant a character
that your committee give it entire :
Nashville, January 26, 1870.
Dear Sir : We are in receipt of your favor of late date req^uesting a statement of tbe
actual cost of production per ton of cold blast charcoal pig metal in this section.
After careful examination of tbe accounts kept at tbe furnace of the various expenses
connected with tbe manufacture of pig metal, and transportation to tbe shipping point
on tbe river-bank, four miles from tbe furnace, we estimate "the cost per ton at $35 65.
This does not include interest on capital invested, wear and tear, &c. Our statement
is based upon actual operations, while that of Mr. Lewis, as it appears in Commissioner
Wells' report, is on estimates, and those, too, made up for a field in which be bas no
experience.
Mr. Lewis's practical knowledge of tbe iron business was all acquired at our Cum¬
berland Iron Works, and a furnace near by. In tbe year 1860 Mr. Lewis was manager
of the Cumberland Iron Works, and in that year it cost us about $30 per ton to place
a ton of metal on tbe river. We were running two furnaces, a forge, and rolling-mill,
with an annual production of $300,000 value. Our business was well organized on a
basis that bad tbe advantage of over thirty years' experience ; we owned four hundred
and twenty-five negroes, many of fbem skilled mechanics; supplies were lower, and
labor cheaper, and vastly more efficient tban at present, while tbe coalings and ore
banks, and tbe coal and ore teams were worked seven days in tbe week, thus lessening
in a still greater degree every item of consumption and management. With all these
advantages, and on a larger production tban we bave been able to achieve since tbe
w.ar, tbe cost was about thirty dollars per ton of metal under Mr. Lewis's management
Since then, Mr. Lewis bas been engaged in railroading and mining for coal, but bas
bad, we think, no connection with the iron business. We protest that his estimates
should not receive currency, much less be adopted as authorities in a report of such
importance as that of Commissioner Wells, to tbe injury of one of tbe greatest pro¬
ducing interests of tbe country.
Very respectfully,
WOODS, YEATJIAN & CO.
36
EXAMINATION OF STATEMENTS IN REPORT OF
The president of the La Grange Iron Works, Stewart County, Ten¬
nessee, which works embrace three furnaces, writes as follows:
La Guaxge Furnace, January 8, 1870.
Dear Sir : In answer to yonrs as to the cost of pig iron in Tennessee, I will saytLat
I think we have as many advantages as are in Tennessee, and probably the best im¬
proved fnrnaoes, and it costs ns to make charcoal iron, delivered at onr landing on the
Tennessee River, $29 93 jier ton, and this does not include anything for interest on cap¬
ital, nor the depreciation of propiorty, and at each furnace wo use at least three
hundred acres of timber per year.
I am yours, respectfully,
STEPHEN S. GLIDDEN,
I'remdent La Granye Iron Worh.
The committee come next to the testimony of INIr. Waterhouse, of St.
Louis, Missouri, as produced by the Commissioner. Not crediting Ms
statements any more than those of Mr. Lewis, they inquired, first, into
the legitimacy of his claim to be considered an authority in iron
matters; and, secondly, into the correctness of the statements furnislied
by him to the Commissioner. Eelative to these subjects of inquiry,
Jules Valle, esq., vice-president of the Iron Mountain Company, writes
as follows. He speaks of stone-coal iron:
Office Iron Mountain Cojipant,
JVb. 003 Xortli Second street, St. Louis, December 30,1869.
Dear Sir : I am this morning iu receipt of yours of the 27 th instant, which is carefully
noted. Professor "Waterhouse, who, I believe, is employed in some of our city colleges,
is only a theoretical iron man, never having had, I believe, any practical knowledge
of the business. Ho possibly obtained his data from some of the owners of the Ca-
rondelet furnace, and, basing these on a week's run when everything was mriTiing
smoothly, they may have been correct. This much, however, I will say in regard to
the Kingsland furnaces at same point, in which we are deeply interested, and whicli
have now b(>en in blast some six months, and managed with the greatest care and
economy—that is, that the cost of the pig iron made there comes up fully to $23 75 a
tou: and, takiug a whole blast through, I doubt very much if it can be produced for a
cent less. The ore costs $5 50 per ton of 2,240 pounds; the coal .$4 35 per ton of 2,000
pounds, delivered in barges at the fiimace lauding; to which must be added the cost of
unloading, hauling, and waste, which is fully twenty-five per cent.; lime rock seventy
cents per ton; labor, &c., is fully $5 per ton; and to which interest on capital, insurance,
taxes, &c., must be added. These figures will apply as well to the Carondelet furnace,
as they pay the same prices for ore, coal, coke, &c., and have no advantages that I can
see over the Kingsland company, excepting possildy in the item of "interest."
Indeed, taking in the rislc attending sales, moving of the iron from the furnace to tic
city, weighing, repairing, &c., and $30 per ton is as low as any one, I think, conld
figure it down, and even at that price it is only a matter of time how soon those now
engaged in it will be driven to some other business to make an honest living. We
ourselves will certainly have to do so if our free trade friends and such men as Com¬
missioner Wells carry the day and force their visionary views on the country.
Yours, truly,
JULES VALLE.
Under date of January 12, 1870, B. W. Lewis, jr., esq., president of
the Carondelet Iron Works, forwards to the committee the foUo'ffing
statement, for the accuracy of which he vouches:
St. Louis, December 31,18®^-
Editors Missouri Democrat: In readingj.he report of Mr. David A. Wells, Special
SPECIAL COMMISSIOJIER OF REVENUE. 37
Commissioner of Internal Revenue, we find he refers to the statement of Professor
Waterhouse, regarding the cost of making pig iron at the Carondelet Iron Works, and
as the information npon which Professor Waterhouse based his statement was furnished
by us, we have since ascertained that we were led into a number of errors, which we
desire to correct, so that the public may not continue to entertain erroneous opinions
upon a subject—the actual cost of making pig iron—of so much importance to our
city and State.
When we gave the above-mentioned statement to Professor Waterhouse, asking him
not to use our name specially in connection with it, (because it was for the most part
biised on estimates,) our furnace had been in blast but a short period, and we based the
statement upon the data furnished in our weekly reports, which showed the quantity
of iron produced each week, with our estimate of the cost of ore, fuel, labor, expense,
&e. Subsequently, when the furnace had made what is regarded as a successful run
of ten months, and a correct statement was made from our books, we find the actual
cost of making a ton of pig iron to be largely in excess of §25, the figures given Pro¬
fessor W., as will be seen by the statement appended below of the run of the furnace
from September 1, 1868, to July 1, 1869, duiing which period forty-four hundred tons
of metal were made, at a cost of §32 05 i)er ton. This dift'erence between the weekly
reports, which contain several estimated items, and the statement of ten months' busi¬
ness, is caused by the large loss in the coal by tre(xueut handlings and constant expo¬
sure, as well as by losses in weight and failure on the part of the ore always to yield
the full proportion of metal given Professor W., and numerous other causes developed
by the results of ten months' work, viz:
Cash paid for fuel used §55,520
Cash paid for ore used 35,640
Cash paid for wages i 29,972
Cash paid for repairs and expenses 19,894
141,026
Total product for ten months, 4,400 tons; cost §32 05 per ton.
CHAS. A. McNAIR,
Secretary Carondelet Iron Iforls.
The committee submit tlie foregoing statements as conclusive answers
to those of Mr. Geoi'ge T. Lewis and Mr. S. Waterhouse. The
evidence quoted fully establishes these conclusions: first, that the Com¬
missioner was not justified in quoting these gentlemen as authorities in
iron manufacture; and, second, that their testimony is not reliable.
The Commissioner quotes next the cost of pig iron at Pittsburg at
$27 98, and then passes to the anthracite districts of Pennsylvania,
where, he says, at " furnaces favorably situated, under good manage¬
ment," the cost of making iron is from $24 to $2G per ton, and in some
instances is much less than this figure." The committee, again dis¬
crediting the Commissioner's figures, which are not substantiated by
any authority whatever, sought for correct information from those ac¬
tually engaged in the manufacture of iron in the districts of Pennsyl¬
vania referred to, and found it in the following memorial to Congress,
presented in the month of January last:
Your memorialists, representing tbirty-seven furnaces in the Lehigb, Schuylkill and
Susquehanna regions, producing annually in the aggregate over two hundred and
seventy thousand tons of x'ig iron, resiiectfully express their belief, based upon jicr-
38 EXAMINATION OF STATEMENTS IN REPORT OF
soual kiiowlialf^o, that the ahovo statement of the Commissioner will he found upon a
critical examination erroneous, and if accepted by Congress a most dangerous guide
to legislation. Upon the authority of our peraonal knowledge we heg leave to state
that tlie average cost per ton at tlie furnaces we represent, exdnnive of any intmxt oii
capital and lite expenses of moving product from the furnaces, in the year 1868, was .$29IGJ,
and in the first six montlis of 1861), .$29 63, while we believe the cost for the last six
months will not materially vary therefrom. These prices being the average cost of
the product, embracing the three qualities of iron, viz: Nos. 1,2, and 3. We re¬
spectfully express the conviction that the foregoing average cost of the product of the
furnaces we represent is below the average cost of the product of American furnaces
collectively; it being our belief that we rejiresent interests having important eco¬
nomic advantages.
LEHIGH CRANE IRON COMPANY,
Catasagna, Lehigh County, Petinsylrank.
ALLENTOtVN IRON COiMPANY,
AUentoivn, Ix'high County, Pemtsyhaim.
SAUCON IRON COMPANY,
Iletlertoivn, I^ehigh County, Pennsylvania.
ANDOVER IRON COMPANY,
Phillipshitrg, Xeip Jersey.
MONTGOilERY IRON COMPANY,
Montgomery County, Pennsylvmia.
J. B. MOORHEAD & CO.,
Montgomery County, Pennsylvania.
ROBERTS IRON COMPANY,
AUentoivn, Lehigh County, PeHiisylrania.
REPPLIER, LANIGAN & CO.,
Montgomery County, Pennsylvania.
CHESTNUT HILL IRON ORE COMPANY,
Columhia, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania.
E. HALDEM^UM & CO.,
Chiekies Station, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania.
C. B. GRUBB & SON,
Columhia, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania.
C. S. KAUFFJIAN,
Columhia, Lancaster County, Pennsylvania.
ATKINS BROTHERS,
Pottsrille, Montgomery County, Pennsylvania.
CARBON IRON COMPANY,
Parryville, Carbon County, Pennsylvania.
HENRY S. ECKERT,
Heading, Pennsylvania.
G. DAWSON COLEMAN,
Lebanon, Pennsglvania.
The men who nuite in this st:iteinent are of niiimiieaohahle character,
and the establishments they represent fnltill the very conditions laid down
by the Commissioner. They are "favorably sitnatetFand "under good
management." Most of their furnaces are large and of the most improved
construction; ore and coal are abundant in their neighborhood; and tliey
have created the means of bringing them cheaply together by means of
railroads, tramways, iron bridges across deep, wide valleys, «S:c. If an¬
thracite iron is or can be made cheap in this country, they can and do
so make it. Yet they testify that C3, or, from to
SPECIAL COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE.
39
86 more than the Commissioner states. The committee are further in¬
formed that furnaces less favorably situated in the same section of Penn¬
sylvania produce iron at a cost greatly exceeding that at which it is pro¬
duced in the more favored localities named.
The committee have been furnished with a mass of corroborative tes¬
timony relating to the cost of manufacturing pig iron in sections of
the country other than those referred to by the Commissioner. They
give an abstract of some of this testimony as follows :
Wm. Watson, secretary of the Western Iron Co. at Harmony, Indiana,
writes that in 1809 their product of pig iron cost $29 a ton, and adds :
" I am certain that there are no furnaces around here that are making
it at a less cost." Messrs. Garlick & Collins, of Indianapolis, Indiana,
say that the iron maimfactured by them in 1809 cost $29 83 a ton, and
remark that to this sum " one dollar a ton ought to be added for repairs
and incidentals." Proprietors of other furnaces in Indiana report the
cost of making pig iron at a slight advance upon the above flgui'es. In
Ohio the cost is greater than in Indiana. In the Hanging Rock district
the average cost is stated by Ex-Congressman H. S. Bundy, and other
practical iron manufacturers, at $34. A. B. Concell, treasurer of the
Himrod Furnace Co., in the Mahoning Valley, says it costs the comiiany
$30 53. In the Shenango Valley iron district of Pennsylvania, where
every facility exists for the manufacture of pig iron, the average cost
is stated at $28 58. All these cost prices, it must be remembered, do
not include interest on capital, freight to a market, commission on
sales, &:c., which add considerably to the market value of pig iron, as
will clearly appear by the following detailed statement of the cost in
January last of manufacturing and marketing one ton of it in the great
smelting region of the Mahoning Valley, Ohio:
3 tons coal delivered at furnace, including fuel for boilers, bot-blast, drying-
furnace, "blowing in" screenings, &c., at $3 25 §9 75
14 tons Lake Superior ore, delivered, |10 18 per ton 15 27
4 ton limestone, at $1 30 per ton 65
Labor, including salaries 3 47
Repair and expense account 1 39
Total....................... .... — .......... ..... 30 53
Freight to Pittsburg §2 00
Weighing and unloading, per ton 17
Commission on selling, 24 per cent, on $33 24 91
Interest, four months on $36 24, this being the four months' price 1 09
Internal revenue tax on sales, $2 upon $1,000 07
4 24
Total expense when sold 34 77
Average Pittsburg price for three weeks past, as reported in tile Pittsburg
papers, actual sales 36 24
Amount left to pay interest on capital, risk and contingencies 1 47
To the foregoiujg the wmmittee deem it not improper to apiiend the
40
EXAMINATION OF STATEMENTS IN REPORT OF
following letter just received from an eminent iron manufacturer, whose
office is at Rome, Georgia. It has reference to an official communica¬
tion, published recently by Commissioner Wells, in the public prints,
in reference to the cost of making pig iron, and is therefore iJertinent to
this incpriry.
Cornwall Iron Works Company,
t Rome, Georgia, April 11, 1870.
Dear Sir : I notice in Commissioner Wells' reply to several gentlemen of Pennsyl¬
vania, on the cost of the manufacture of pig iron, a statement from Major L. Thomas-
ton, former superintendent of our works, of three weeks' production, and the cost of it
in October, 1869. According to his statements he makes it cost about twenty doUars
per ton. Unfortunately, he has estimated the eost of the ore at too low a figure, and
underestimated the consumption of charcoal per ton, and made no allowance for wear
of furnace, machinery, putting in new hearths and linings, and many other expenses.
Besides, he gives the result of the three weeks' operations, which were the most pro¬
ductive and economical in his admhiistration. We find that we produced from fifteen
hundred to sixteen hundred tons pig iron in 1869, which cost us at the works, on an
average, forty dollars per ton. I give you this statement, as it may be of use to you
should you wish to correct Mr. Wells.
It is true some furnaces can produce iron much cheaper than others, as they have
more advantages in location, cheap) iron ore and coal, and a very successful blast; but
it is very unfair to presume that, because three or four furnaces can produce iron
cheaply, all can do so.
Very respectfully,
SAAI'L NOBLE,
Secretary and Treasurer Cornwall Iron Company.
Hon. D. J. Morrell,
Wasldngton, D. C.
The committee feel constrainetl to add the expression of the opinion
that the Commissioner has not, in his investigation of the cost of manu¬
facturing pig iron, consnlted the authorities which he should have con¬
sulted, while he has manifested an undue willingness to accept as evi¬
dence the mere estimates of men who have either wild Tennessee lands
to sell, or who have never been initiated into the practical workings of
the iron business. He appears to have used only such testimony as
would have had least weight in a court of justice, and rejected all evi¬
dence which would have been accepted as important and conclusive.
"What is yet more remarkable is the fact that the testimony to which
he gives the most prominence was derived by him, not through the
medium of direct communications with the parties furnishing it, hut
from rose-colored advertisements, written to subserve jiersonal and local
interests. Mr. Lewis's statements were given to the world in a letter
to a newspaper, while those of Mr. "Waterhouse first saw the hghtin
the Images of a pamphlet published for the purpose of attracting immi¬
gration and capital to St. Louis and Missouri. Tour committee are at
a loss to comprehend how the Commissioner can reconcile such trifling
with the confidence, and such contempt for the intelligence of the
country, with the responsible trusts committed to him by his high office.
SPECIAL COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE.
41
FREIGHTS ON PIG IRON—DO INLAND FREIGHTS ON IMPORTED GOODS
AFFORD INCIDENTAL PROTECTION TO THE H03IE MANUFACTURER?
In fnrtlier illustration of the unreliability of the Commissioner's state¬
ments concerning pig iron, your committee call attention to the follow¬
ing passage to be found on page 83 of the report:
It is also to be noted that, if tlie duty on pig iron were entirely removed, the
American producer in the interior ■svould still enjoy a protection in the cost of trans¬
portation to erfenf 0/of leaai $1 bd per ton for every one hundred miles that intervene
between the place of production and a port of entry, which circumstance renders the
transport of a single pound of foreign pig iron to any considerable distance into the
interior a matter of ordinary commercial impossibility.
The committee, doubting the correctness of these statements, sought
information concerning them from practical men, whose high stand¬
ing as gentlemen and business men in their respective communities is a
sufficient guaranty of the entire reliability of the statements they make.
In response to the committee's inquiries they write as follows:
From the Lewis Iron Company, St. Louis.
St. Louis, Alarch 11, 1870.
Deae Sie : In answer to your note of the 8th, the information which you wish is as
follows: During the past six months pig iron has been shipped from New Orleans
and delivered at St. Louis at $3 per ton. The rate is now |4. It fluctuates between
these points. We are informed that large quantities of pig iron are brought to New
Orleans as ballast. The rate from the Cumberland River here by water is .§4 to ^5 per
ton; from northern Alabama it is $12 40 iier ton; from Cincinnati it is $4 by rail, and
from New York by rail would be $7 50 to $8.
Very respectfully,
B. W. LEWIS, Je.
Hon. D. J. Moeeell,
Chairman Committee on Manufactures, Washington, 1). C.
From A. B. Meeher of Chicago.
Chicago, March 14, 1870.
Deae Sie : In reply to your letter of the 8th last, the freights on pig iron from sea¬
board ports to Chicago are as follows: Montreal to Chicago, via lakes and river, $2 25
to $2 50, gold, per ton of 2,240 pounds; New York to Chicago, via river, canal, and
lakes, $4 to $5, currency, per ton of 2,240 pounds; New Orleans to St. Louis, via Missis¬
sippi River, $4, currency, per ton of 2,240 pounds. The decline in gold will let foreign
iron in on us very cheap when navigation opens, and we cannot stand a reduction in
duty. Scotch pigs are being offered to arrive in May at $22, gold, per ton, delivered
here in bond.
I am, yours, truly, A. B. MEEIfER.
Hon. D. J. Moeeell,
Chairman Committee on Manufactures, Washington, D. C.
From the Western Transportation Company, New Torh.
New Yoek, March 19, 1870«
Deae Sie : In reply to your inquiry, in reference to freight on pig iron during the
year 1869,1 have to savrthat-tho-nrrcragcfsate from New York to enumerated ports.
42
EXAMINATION OP STATEMENTS IN KEPORT OF
via water route, was as follows: Toledo, Cleveland, and Detroit |5 per gross ton;
Cliicago and Milwaukee |5 50 and |6. The railway competition, by the trunk lines,
from the seaboard to the interior, was so sharp during the season of navigation of 1809
that pig iron was shipped at less than the above rates by all-rail routes, consequently
the water route lost largely of tonnage.
Yours truly,
HUGH ALLEN.
Hon. D. J. Morrell,
Chahman Committee on Manufactures, Washington, D. C.
JMost of the foreign pig iron imported into tliis country comes by way
of Montreal, New York, and New Orleans, all' ports of entry. The
shortest distances from these ports to leading points of consumption in
the interior have been ascertained from official sources, and are given
below, together with a correct calculation of the cost of transporting pig
iron to these points, based upon Mr. Wells' statement of "$1 oO pertqn
for every one hundred miles," which is p)laced in a parallel column with
the true cost of transpiortation, as given in the letters above.
Places.
Distances.
Wells' false
rates.
True rates.
Miles.
Per ton.
Per ton.
Montreal to Cbicago —
760
§11 40
§2 60 to §3 00
New York to Cleveland
572
8 58
5 00
New York to Detroit
750
11 25
5 00
New York to Toledo
684
10 26
5 00
New York to Cbicago
890
13 35
5 00 to 6 00
New York to Milwaukee
984
14 76
5 00 to 6 00
New York to St. Louis
1,068
16 02
7 50 to 8 00
New Orleans to St. Louis
728
10 92
3 00 to 4 00
These figures are most damaging to Mr. Wells, but their fidl force
will best be seen by comparing them with the figures in Mr. Lewis's let¬
ter relative to the cost of transporting pig iron from the furnaces in Ten¬
nessee and Alabama to St. Louis, which he states at from $4 to 65 a ton
from the Cumberland Eiver, and $12 40 a ton from Alabama; in the
first instance slightly exceeding the cost of transporting foreign iron
from New Orleans to St. Louis, and in the second exceeding by almost
one hundred per cent, the cost of transporting it from New York—in both
instances fully covering the average cost of transportation from Europe
to St. Louis. Instead, therefore, of the freight charges on piig iron from
the principal ports of entry in this country and Canada to commercial
centers in the interior being, as Mr. Wells alleges, a source of "protec¬
tion" to the home manufacturer, it is clear that they afford no impediment
whatever to the importation of the foreign-made article when it is brought
into competition with the imoducts of our owm furnaces. And the same
is true of freights on other articlespjL&ttffigifcnjiilMamestic manufacture.
SPECIAL COMMISSIO>'ER OF REVENUE.
43
The most Yaluable classes of imported goods are generally not subject
to heavy freight charges, for they are of light weight; while heavy goods,
such as railroad iron and pig iron, are carried long distances inlaTid from
ports of entry much cheaper than the same classes of freight are carried
short distances between " the place of production " and a market. Every
business man knows that the through-freight schedules are much lower
proportionally than those for local freight. Iron, for instance, can be
shipped more cheaply from INew York to St. Louis and Chicago than
from the interior of Pennsylvania, and the letter of Mr. Lewis shows
that it costs more to carry pig iron from the Cumberland Elver to St.
Louis than from Hew Orleans, and from Horthern Alabama fully fifty
per cent, more than from Hew York.
Mr. Wells' yet more sweeping statement, that these freight charges
render "the transport of a single pound of foreign pig iron to any con¬
siderable distance into the interior a matter of ordinaiy commercial
impossihility,'" is refuted by the statement in the letter of Mr. Meeker, of
Chicago, above quoted, that " Scotch pigs are being offered to arrive in
May at $22 gold per ton [about $25 currency] delivered here [at Chicago]
in bond." It is also refuted by such advertisements as the following,
which we clip from a St. Louis journal of recent date:
Garrett, McDowell & Co., commission mercliaiits and dealers in Scotch and American
pig iron, No. 707 North Second street, St. Louis, Missouri.
In the foregoing table the committee have given the shortest traveled
distances between the points named, except that from Montreal to Chi¬
cago, which is an air line. These distances are all therefore in Mr.
Wells' favor, and are not wholly just to the large number of our fellow-
citizens whose interests are assailed by his false statements. A second
letter from Mr. Meeker, dated March 21,1870, exhibits the Commissioner
in a light that is at once more just to the industries he has injured and
more damaging to him as a public officer. Mr. Meeker, whose office is
at 45 Dearborn street, Chicago, says:
It is 1,350 miles by water from Montreal to Chicago, which, on his [Mr. AVells'] basis
of figuring, would make the freight $20 25 per ton. The actual freight is §2 25 gold,
or $2 .50 currency; insurance, f per cent., 20 cents; total, $2 70. Difference against
Wells, $17 55 per ton.
From New Orleans to St. Louis is 1,251 miles, which, on his same basis, would be
$18 76 per ton. The actual freight is $4; insurance, 20 cents; total, $4 20. Difference
against Wells, $14 50.
This whole question of freights, your committee feel compelled to add,
is one which Mr. Wells treats most unfairly throughout his entire report,
and, as has been shown, with conspicuous disregard of facts easily pro¬
curable. In his advocacy of foreign in iireference to home markets for
the surplus products of American farms, he studiously ignores the fact
that the freight on one bushel of ivheat sent from one of our western
States to a European market is never much less than the price of
another bushel, and often exceeds it, thus requiring the farmer to sac¬
rifice one bushel fcreiga market for the other. But when he
44
EXAMINATION OF STATEMENTS IN REPORT OF
comes to speak of shipments the other way—shipments of foreign goods
from American "ports of entry" to points in the " interior," heboid with
whiit imiiressive pomp the "cost of transx>ortatiou" is xiaradecl, and how
graciously the information is extended that this cost is an efficient ally
of " protection!" "When freights tell against the theory which favors
the building uj) of European workshoirs at the expense of American
farmers and manufacturers, they are carefully hidden away out of sight;
but when, by means such as have just been explained, they can be pre¬
sented in a shape calculated to weaken the claims to public acceptance
of the protective policy, they are brought forward with the utmost
celerity.
STEEL.
In the Commissioner's rejiort, for the year 18G7, he gave his views on
steel as follows:
Ou steel much higher rates of duty than those recommended upon iron are submitted.
Although these rates seem much higher, and are prote.sted against hy not a few Amer¬
ican consumers of steel, yet the evidence presented to the Commissioner tends to estab¬
lish the fact that if any less are granted, the development of a most important and
desirable branch of domestic industry will, owing to the present currency derangement
and the high price and scarcity of skilled labor, be arrested, if not entirely prostrated.
This is claimed to be more especially true in regard to steel of the higher grades or
qualities. It is also represented to the Commissioner, that since the introduction of the
manufacture of these grades of steel in the United States, or since 1859, the price of
foreign steel of similar qualities has been very considerably reduced through the effect
of the American competition, and that the whole countrj' in this way has gained more
than sufficient to counterbalance the tax levied as a piroteetion for the American steel
manufacture, which has grown up under its influence.
It will be seen that he then held that the price of steel had been
reduced by the conipetitioii of American and foreign manufacturers,
and that this comxretition should be maintained by the xirotection of a
tariff, but having meantime changed his.views, he now xiroxioses a loicer
duty, although, owing to the decline in gold, the position of American
steel-makers is now much less favorable than it was in 1867.
We shall not here enlarge uxwn this point, but in order to show how
widely the Commissioner's x)resent wish for lower duties upon steel differs
from that of xiractical men, we insert the following memorial lately sent
to the Finance Committee of the"Senate, and to the Ways and Means
Committee of the House, and signed by more than ninety officers and
managers of leading railroads, in all parts of the country, from Boston
to Charleston, Milwaukee, and St. Louis. These roads are large con¬
sumers of steel rails, yet they ask a duty of two cents xyer pound or
SI! 80 xmr ton, on the imxmrted rail, and say:
Immediately before the construction of the first steel-rail manufactory in this eoim-
try, foreign makers charged $150 per ton (equal then to $225 currency) for steel rails.
As American works were built, foreign skilled labor introduced, home labor instructed,
and domestic irons, clays, ganister, and spiegel (after many and expensive trials) foiuid
to produce excellent rails, the price of the foreign article was gradually lowered, until
it now stands at less than $79 per ton in vohX, or $90 fi,Trendy, Xow that several
SPECIAL COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE.
45
miUioDS of dollars have Leen expended in macliinery, furnaces, and experiments in per¬
fecting the process of manufacture in this country, and numbers of our own citizens
are dependent upon it for support, the husiuess is threatened with annihilation hy the
pressure of English and Prussian makers. We, as users of steel rails and transporters
of the food and material for American manufacturers and their numerous employes and
skilled laborers, do not desire to be dependent exclusively upon the foreign supxdy, and
therefore join in asking that, instead of the i)resent ad valorem duty, a siiecific duty of
two cents per pound be placed upon this article, being the rate fixed by a bill which
passed the Senate January 31, 1867, and of a bill which was reported to the House by
the Committee of Ways and Means during the same year.
These eminent railroad managers, representing, as we are informed,
about half the total length of all the railroad tracks in the country, ask,
in substance, in their memorial;
Impose this tariif, to save us from high prices of foreign steel rails, which are kept
down by American competition, and in justice to American workmen and manufac¬
turers.
^Vhen was the Commissioner right ? In 18C7, when he submitted with
favoring statements an increased tariif on steel, which was " protested
against by not a few American consumersor in 18G9, when he said
" the interests of the country and the revenue demand that the existing
duties should be reduced," in the face of the assertion of the consumers
that an increased duty would result in maintaining a reduction of prices ?
To understand the power and benefit of our home competition it must
be remembered that, up to 1859, when steel-making was first successful
in Pittsburg, the English prices had varied little for twenty years, and
were 10 cents, 12J cents, and 16 cents for different kinds, but were re¬
duced to 9 cents, lOJ cents, and 13 cents in 1860, and the quality sold
for twenty years at from 16 cents upward is now, with a tariff much
higher, offered 'at 13.J cents, gold. Thus the prices of cast-steel have
been reduced, though the tariff has been raised meantime from 15 to
about 10 xxer cent., and labor, materials, taxes, and all expenses have
risen greatly. American competition effected this reduction. Our im¬
ports of steel in 1869 (Bessemer and wire not inchrded) were little over
15,000 tons, while about 30,000 tons were made in this country, and ex¬
perience shows that, when so large a share of any article consumed is
made at home, home comjietition regulates the prices, the foreigner being
compelled to meet them, and the foreign maker, not the American con-
smuer, paying the duty.
Upon page 125 of his report the Commissioner urges the adoption of
a new schedule of import duties upon the various grades of steel. In
the great steel-making city of Sheffield, England, which exports the
largest part of its products to this country, another schedule was pre¬
pared, suggesting the duties which our government should impose upon
foreign steel, a copy of which schedule was sent by our consul in Shef¬
field to the Secretary of the Treasury, and is now before this committee.
We think it worth while to place these two schedules side by side in
order that the remarkable correspondence may be observed between the
46
EXAMINATION OF STATEMENTS IN EEPOKT OF
one prepared by foreign steel makers as best suited to their interests,
and the other, prepared (quite independently, of course,) by a sworn
officer of our government, as best suited to our interests.
THE COlIMiaSIONEK'S SCHEDULE. SHEFFIELD SCHEDULE.
On scrap steel, J cent per pound. On scrap steel, J cent per pound.
On blister steel, in bars broken up for On blister steel, in bars broken up for
melting, IJ cents per pound. melting, li cents per pound.
On German steel in bars, 2 cents per On German steel in bars, 2 cents per
pound. pound.
On shear steel in bars, 2^ cents per On shear steel in bars, cents per
pound. pound.
On cast-steel ingots, and on all rough and On cast-steel ingots, 1 cent per pound,
unfinished castings in steel, 1 cent per
pound.
On castings in steel, drilled, bored, or On castings in steel, with holes drilled
hammered cold, IJ cents per pound. or hored, hammered or turned or planed in
parts, but in no case hammered or worked
hot, li cents per pound.
On cast-steel in bars, 2^ cents per pound. On cast-steel in bars, 2^ cents per pound.
On cast or German steel in plates, to IC On cast or German steel, in sheets or
wire gauge, inclusive, 2 cents per pound; plates, to No. 23 wire gauge, 2^ cents per
from 17 to 24, 2J cents per pound; above pound.
24, 3 cents per pound.
On cast or German steel in form of wire On cast or German steel in form of wire
and sheets which are drawn or rolled cold or strips which are drawn or rolled cold to
to 16 wire gauge, 3 cents per pound. 16 wire gauge, 3 cents per pound.
Thinner than 16 wire gauge, 3^ cents per When drawn or rolled smaller than 16
pound. wire gauge, 34 cents per pound.
On cast-steel tires for rolling-stock for On cast-steel tires for rolling-stock for
railroads, 2 cents per pound. railroads, 2 cents per pound.
On cast-steel straight axles, shafts, pis- On cast-steel straight axles, piston, eon-
ton rods, and general forgiugs to pattern, necting and coupling rods, crank-pins,
1 cent per pound. slide-bars, and general forgiugs to pattern,
only 1J cents per pound.
Do., do., rough turned, LJ cents per If forged to shape and rough turned or
pound. planed, 1^ cents per pound.
Do., do., finished ready for use, 2 cents If finished ready for use, 2 cents per
per pound. poimd.
On cast-steel crank axles, forged to shape. On east-steel crank shafts, if forged to
only 11^ cents per pound. shape, only 1J cents per pound.
On cast-steel crank axles, forged to On cast-steel crank shafts, if forged to
shape, rough turned, planed, and slotted, .shape, rough turned, planed, and slotted,
li cents pier pound. 14 cents pier pound.
Do., do., finished ready for use, 2 cents On cast-steel crank shafts, if forged to
per pound. shape, finished ready for use, 2^ cents per
pound.
On east-steel raDs, 14 cents per pound. On east-steel rails, 1 cent pier pound.
On steel not otherwise provided for, 2 On steel, or manufactures of steel, not
cents per pound. otherwise provided for, 2^ cents per pound.
How curious and bow toucbiiig is this new proof of the stale assertion
that the interests of both parties to every bargain are really identical!
It is surely remarkab e that the representatives of the two sides of a
SPECIAL COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE.
47
great international negotiation liave each been imbued by so clear and
definite an inspiration that, though separated from each other by a dis¬
tance of 3,000 miles, even the peculiar technical expressions which each
employs are for the most part identical.
lu ruder times the most inconvenient consequences might have resulted
to a councillor whose propositions to the government he had sworn to
serve showed so singular a resemblance to those urged by his adversary.
UNDERVALUATIONS OF STEEL.
The report alludes to the fact that the agents and officers of the
government charge the importers of steel with systematic under¬
valuations, and quotes, without naming them, American manufac¬
turers, who use steel as raw material, as saying that it is an " unnecessary
interference" for our government to decide against the importers.
The Commissioner's indorsement of the high "reputation for integ¬
rity of tlie English importers and their commissioned agents in the
United States," is, however, most unfortunate, for, since the publication
of his report the efforts of our Treasury Department have fully disclosed
systematic undervaluations, and the Sheffield steel-makers, finding their
entire trade with this country suspended, were at last constrained to
yield, and to invoice their exports of steel to America more nearly ac¬
cording to its real value.
In further xiroof that the charge of undervaluation on the English or
Sheffield invoices is true, we submit a statement obtained from the Bu¬
reau of Statistics for the years 18G7, 18G8, and 18G9, showing the exact
number of x)ouuds of imxiorted steel of all kinds {except Bessemer and
steel wire) entered for consumxition in each year; the invoice value and
the amount of duty collected; the average cost and the rate of duty xiaid.
It will be seen that the percentage of duty upon invoice is 39J to 41J
per cent., a lower ad valorem than on manufactures of steel of all kinds,
the present duty on which is IS per cent.
It will also appear that Go x)er cent, of the steel imported is ingeniously
crowded into the lowest rate; 30 to 32J x'er cent, into the middle class-;
and but 2J to 5 per cent, xnit into the highest class- We could name a
single consumer of English tool (highest class) steel, who uses as much
of this description as the whole importation shows. An ax)XU*oximatelj'
borrect x)roportion of the several descriptions, from the best information
we can obtain, would have been 25 per cent, of the lowest and highest
classes respectively, and 50 per cent, of the medium grade.
Report of Bureau of Statistics.
ImiMtrts.
Invoice value.
Duty paid.
Pf'Vnds.
42, Or)4, 449
30, 077, 025
39,399,358
$2, 779, 915
1, 91)1, 824
2, 596,013
$1,093,050, or 39^ per cent., or 2. 59 cents per pound.
775,216, or 394 per cent., or 2. 57 cents per pound.
1, 079, 927, or 41^ per cent., or 2. 74 cents per pound.
ItOd
lt'G9
48
EXAMINATION OF STATEMENTS IN KEPOKT OF
Of the three classes of steel which jjay differeut duties, the proportions
iuvoiced were as follows:
18G7. At cents duty, Co per cent.
At 3 cents duty, 30 per cent.
At 3J cents and 10 per cent, duty, 5 per cent.
1808. At 2^ cents duty, 05 per cent.
At 3 cents diity, 32 per cent.
At 3J cents and 10 i)er cent, duty, 3 per cent.
1809. At 2J cents duty, 05 percent.
At 3 cents duty, 32^ j)er cent.
At 3^ cents and 10 per cent, duty, 2J per cent.
This table tells its own story of fraud.
ELASTIC WEBBING.
The Commissioner's zeal in behalf of certain special interests—some¬
times foreign, sometimes domestic—is one of the prominent features of
his report, and it occasionally leads him into the most glaring and sug¬
gestive inconsistencies. A forcible example is foimd in his treatment of
the elastic webbing question. On page 75 of the report he begins an
elaborate argument in favor of a repeal of all duties on leather and
manufactures of leather, quoting largely in support of his Auews from
"exiierts," and from "leading representatives" of the boot and shoe
interest. On page 77 he says that the aggregate cost of the boots and
shoes manufactm'ed in the United States in 1808 was enhanced about
percent., or over $10,000,000, "by reason of the tariff," which enhance¬
ment he styles an " unnecessary burden." Of the whole number of
shoes manufactured for women, misses, and children, he estimates that
" at least 15,000,000 pairs are composed in part of two fabrics of wool,
technically known as 'lasting' and 'serge.'" On page 78 he adds:
" Nearly one-half of the lasting and serge goods are fitted with elastic
gores, made of rubber webbing inserted in the sides. This material is
nearly all imported, and pays from 35 to 00 per cent, duties ad valorem.
These duties, it is represented to the Commissioner by the trade, are
equivalent to a tax of five cents per jiair on all the goods using webbiug
as a constituent of their composition." This is the Commissioner's owu
statement. Now, " nearly one-half" of the 15,000,000 pairs of lasting and
serge shoes would be about 7,000,000, which, at five cents a pair, would
make $350,000 as the sum which consumers of these goods were required
to pay in 1808 " by reason of the tariff" on elastic webbhig; and if this
much in 1808, certainly not less in 1809, and in each subsequent year
during Avhich the same duty would continue.
The drift of Mr. A^^ells' whole argument under this head is a plea for
a repeal of duties on leather and all articles which enter into the manu¬
factures thereof, including lasting and serge and rubber webbing,
which duties he styles an " unnecessary burden." On turning to page
122 we find how he proposes to lighten the burden of the consumers of
SPECIAL COMMISSIOXER OF REVENUE.
49
shoes made in part of rubber webbing. He does it in a way that has the
merit at least of originality. He says:
The duty at present levied on cotton and India-ruhber webbing is 35 per cent, ad
valorem, and on silk and India-rubber webbing 50 per cent, ad valorem. AVith these
duties it is the opinion of the ax)praisers that undervaluations are most extensive and
difficult of detection. A change, therefore, is most desirable, and the following specific
rates prepared for the Commissioner by experts in this business are herewith sub¬
mitted :
Form of Law.—On webbing, or fabrics of India-rubber and other materials com¬
bined, except silk,* * * over four inches wide, and not over five inches and one-eighth
wide, eighteen cents per lineal yard; over five and one-eighth inches wide, and not over
seven inches wide, twenty-five cents per lineal yard. On webbing or fabrics of India-
rubber and silk,* * * over four inches wide, and not over five inches wide, forty cents per
lineal yard; over five inches wide, for every additional inch in width, eight cents per
lineal yard.
To understand fully bow Mr. Wells' specific duties, as recommended
above, would relieve the wearers of shoes manufactured in itart of elastic
webbing of the " unnecessary burden" now imposed " by reason of the
tariff," your committee herewith submit a table, showing the comparative
cost to the American consumer of the various descriittious of goods
mentioned in the above extract when imiiorted under the present ad
valorem tariff, and if imported under that proposed by Mr. AYeUs.
The data for this table were obtained, under date of March 1,1870, from
Messrs. Faxon, Elms & Co., of Boston, a respectable firm largely
engaged in the importation of elastic webbing, and its correctness may
be relied upon.
From these figures, which will be foirnd on the following page, we
learn that, by Mr. Wells' proposed tariff, the" unnecessary burden " on
the above-named goods, which enter into these classes of women's and
misses' shoes, would be increased an average of 180 per cent. This in¬
crease would be equivalent to an enhancement of nine cents in the cost
of each pair of shoes, which, added to the five cents so jiatheticaUy
referred to by Mr. Wells, would make the " minecessary burden" on
each pair amount to fourteen cents. AYhat now becomes of his plea for
lower duties ? What of his " true principle of tariff reform," so ostenta¬
tiously and oracularly set forth on page 72 of the report, to wit: " That
the maintenance of an average o/forty-sevenper cent., «s under the
existing tariff upon all dutiahle imports, is excessive and unnecessary P
AVhat, under the above plain showing, becomes of his reputation for
consistency and reliability as an expounder of political economy and a
collector of important information for the people ?
The committee refrain from attempting to find any explanation for this
remarkable recommendation of the Commissioner. A\ hat explanation,
indeed, can be found 1
H. Eep. 72 i
EsUmate of present and proposed duty on cotton elastic tvchsj quality No. 90.
Cn
o
sterling cost.
9(1., 20 per cent, discount
10(1., 20 per cent, discount...
lid., 20 per cent, discount...
Dutiable valao; al.so
cost of elastic webs
in England, 10 per
cont.exch'go added
14^ cents per yard...
IGJ cents per yard...
17| cents per yard...
Present duty of 35
per cent.
5 cents per yard..
5| cents per yard.
Ci cents per yard.
Y.alue x>eryard in
gold, duties hav¬
ing been paid,
ad valorem.
19^ cents
22 cents.
24 cents.
"Wells' propo.sed
8i)ecific duty.
18 cents per yard.
18 cents per yard.
25 cents per yard.
Value per yard
in gold, duties
having been
paid, specific.
32^ cents
34^ cents
42J cents
Increased cost
per y'd under
Wells' pro¬
posed duty.
13 cents.
12J cents
182 cents
Percentage
ofincrease
of duty per
yard.
260
220
300
Estimate of present and proposed duty on cotton elastic wehsy quality No. 300.
Sterling cost.
13d., 20 per cent, discount...
It.Jd., 20 per cent, discount..
10(1., 20 per cent, discount...
Dutiable value; also
cost of elastic webs
in England, 10 per
cent, exch'go added.
21 cents per yard...
23i ccmts per yaid...
25i cents per yard...
Present duty of 35
per cent.
C(3ut8 per yard..
cents per yard..
9 cents per yard..
Value per yard in
gold, duties hav¬
ing been paid,
ad valorem.
2HJ cents
315 cents.
34^ cents
Wells' proposed
specific duty.
18 cents per yard.
18 cents per yard.
25 cents per yard
Valuo per yard
in gold, duties
haWng been
paid, specific.
39 cents.
41J cent-s
50i cents
Increased cost
per y'd under
Wells' pro¬
posed duty.
10§ cents
9J cents
16 cents
Percentage
ofincreaso
of duty per
yard.
145
121
177
Estimate of present and proposed duty on silJc-faced clastic wehsj quality No. C2.
Sterling cost.
%
Dutiable value; also
cost of clastic webs
ill England, 10 p(^r
cent, cxeh'ge added.
Present duty of 50
per ceut.
Value p(w yard in
gold,duties hav¬
ing heeu paid,
ad valorem.
Is. 8d., 20 per cent, discount
Is. lOd., 20 percent, discount.
28. O^d., 20 per cent, discount.
321 cents per yard...
3.51 cents per yard...
.aoi conts per yard...
16^ cents per yard.
173 cents per yard,
log cents per yard.
4Hg cents
531 cents
58J cents
Wells' proposed
specific duty.
40 cents per yard,
40 ceuts per 3'ard.
44 ooiits per j'^ard.
Value per yard
in guld, duties
having been
paid, specific.
724 cents
75J cents
cents
Increased cost
per y'd luider
Wells' pro¬
posed duty.
235 cents.
22i cents.
24^ cents.
Percentage
of increase
ofduty per
yard.
148
125
125
SPECIAL COMMISSIOXEE OF REVENUE.
51
REVENUE FROM IMPORTS.
On page 83 of the report, the Commissioner, speaking of pig iron, as¬
serts that " all the facts show that a reduction or entire repeal of the
duty would in no degree affect the manufacture, but only reduce its profits
to a par with those realized in other branches of domestic industry; and,
furthermore, that under an abatement or repeal of the duty no more pig
iron would be imported than at present, for the American manufacturer
would simply reduce his prices, and thus retain, as now, full command
of the domestic market." The first proposition here stated is pointedly
contradicted by the experience of the country in every period of free
trade or anti-protective legislation with which it has been afflicted.
The fact can be conclusively established that, during the "hard
times" following every reduction of the tariff, the production of
American ifig-iron was greatly reduced by the stoppage of Amer¬
ican furnaces and the consequent surrender of our markets to the for¬
eign manufacturer. It is not necessary at this late day to recall the
past in detail to prove how widely at variance with the teachings of our
low-tariff experience is the Commissioner's most positive statement. The
whole country knows these chapters of our history only too well.
Your committee desire more particularly, however, to indicate here
another of those incongruities of statement and inconsistencies of argu¬
ment for which the report under consideration is so marked, as illustra¬
ted by the second of the propositions above quoted. The Commissioner
says, on page 83, that " under an abatement or repeal of the duty no
more pig-iron would be imported than at present," and, on page 108,
admits that "no material increase of imports being probable, the loss to
the revenue would, therefore, be approximately $750,000" annually
from pig-iron alone. On page 129, in the " Schedule of a Tariff" which
is there submitted as a revenue measure, the Commissioner i)roposes
to raise from " metals " as follows:
lion, steel, lead, tin and manufactures of same, at such specific rates as
shall amount to 25 per cent $15,000,000
Of course, the Commissioner's assumptions and admissions above con¬
cerning pig-iron will also apply to all kinds of " iron," and to " steel,"
and their manufactures, the two leading articles in the above classifica¬
tion. The iifquiry naturally suggested itself to your committee whether
with reduced duties and no increase in importations, the proposed revenue
of $15,000,000 could be obtained from the sources named, and a note was
addressed to the head of the Bureau of Statistics, asking for a statement
showing what amount of revenue was derived therefrom during the past
, few years. The following official statistics were promptly furnished:
52 EXAMINATION OF STATEMENTS IN REPORT OF
From home conaumj)Uon statements for the years 18G7, 1808, and 1809.
1867.
1808.
1869.
Value.
Duty.
Value.
Duty.
Value.
Duty.
Iron and m'f'a of..
Steel andmTsof.
Lead andm'fsof.
Tin and niTs of..
Total
81-1, 979, 9C5 31
10, OK), 22H 50
2, 8H1, 077 29
7, 526. 426 15
87, 304, 2H2 12
4,139, 001 P2
1, 332, 584 01
1, 763,105 41
814,470,201 73
8, 053, 990 40
2,184,573 07
8, 384, 770 70
1
87, 334, 781 97^819, 500, 895 22
3,39H, 121 00 9,212, 474 36
1, 308, 401 4l| 3, 810, 904 84
1,905, 978 04 10, 307, 757 98
$10,993,439 98
4,008,908 92
1,817,122 37
2, 408,302 67
35. 404, 207 25
14, 539, 633 30
33, 699, 542 50
14. 007, 2t2 42 42, 922, 002 40
1
19,227,773 94
From this table it appears tliat in 18G7 and 18G8, with the present du¬
ties npon the four classes of imported goods named, the total annual
revenue was less than $15,000,000, while the imports were, in round
numbers, respectively $35,000,000 and $33,000,000. In 18G9 the total
revenue was $19,227,773 94; imports, $42,922,092 40. The Commis¬
sioner recommends a reduction of the duties on these articles to " such
specific rates as shall amount to 25 per cent." ad valorem, which would
require an annual importation of $00,000,000 to yield the revenue of
$15,000,000 which he considers a necessary feature of his plan of "tariff
reform." How the Commissioner proposes to increase our importa¬
tions from $43,000,000 to $00,000,000, and yet not increase them, is a
problem in simple arithmetic which your committee leave to him
to solve at his leisure. The country at large will, most probably,
no matter how the Commissioner solves the problem, refuse to
approve his policy of increasing our foreign purchases of metals
almost forty per cent., with a net loss to the Government of four mil¬
lions of dollars annually in revenue. Such a policy of " tariff reform," if
applied to all articles of importation, would increa.se our present annual
imports from $450,000,000 to $000,000,000, and seriously decrease t\ri
revenue of the Government. It would also add largely to om- foreign
indebtedness, for, if the exports of onr labor products do not note equal
our imports, the balance of trade against us would certainly be gveater
if the proposed encouragement to foreign manufacturers of metals
should be extended to foreign manufacturers generally. And this bal¬
ance of trade could only be met by still fiuTher depleting the country of
its gold and silver, or by sending abroad the bonds of the government
which should be held at home.
PROGRESS OF HOJIE JIANUFACTtTRES AND GROWTH OF NEW INDUSXKIES.
The Commissioner passes over the gTowth of onr home manufactures
with such quiet omission as to leave the readers of his report uninformed
on important facts which it was a part of his duty to give, and wbicli
shordd be known as guides to correct conclusions.
That this singular omission may be, in part at least, supplied, your
special commissioner of revenue.
53
cominittee have obtained, from a highly reliable and intelligent source,
the following list of manufactures recently established or enlarged, which
could be largely extended and made to embrace many classes as well as
many single establishments not given.
Since the enactment of the tariff bill of June 30, 1864, great and con¬
stant progTess has been made in developing establishments already
existing, and in erecting new establishments for the manufacture of
almost every class of merchandise embraced in that act.
A general summary of these results may be first given under the sec¬
tions of that act as follows:
Sugar.—Beet-root sugar has been made in Illinois and in Wisconsin,
while machinery has been imported and preparations made for its man¬
ufacture in California and in Kew Jersey.
Spirits.—Brandy has been successfully and largely made in California;
wine is made in even larger proportion, not only in California, but in all
the central States, including Hew York and Michigan. Cordials and
liqueurs are also largely made from domestic rectified wme and other
spirits. Malt liquors are almost exclusively made in the IJnited States
for consumption here.
Cigars.—The domestic manufacture of cigars has risen from the pro¬
portion of half, or less than half, of the consumption, to the proportion of
seven or eight times the quantity imi)orted. In the fiscal year ending
June 30,1864, the importation was 1,150,000 pounds. In the fiscal year
ending June 30,1868, it was 250,000 pounds. Yet the consumption was
greater in 1868 than in 1864, by probably more than 250,000 pounds.
Bar and Eolled Iron.—The increase in the manufacture of all forms
of bar and rolled iron is large, though probably the forms are not much
changed.
Eailroad Bars.—In iron and steel railroad bars the increase is
large, and new forms have been introduced; first, of iron and steel
rolled together; and second, of all-steel rails.
Iron Manufactures.—The following descriptions of iron and man¬
ufactures of iron are now almost wholly supplied from'domestic produc¬
tion: Boiler, and other plate iron, iron wire, (covered,) spiral springs of
wme, locomotive tires, mill irons and wrought irons for ships or engines,
anchors, malleable iron castings, cut nails and spikes, horseshoe nails,
cut tacks, brads, &c., screws for wood, cast butts and hinges, hollow-
ware of all kinds, andirons, sad-irons, hammers and sledges, axles, rail¬
road chairs, nuts and washers, spikes, rivets, and bolts, stoves and stove
plates, with many other unenumerated manufactures of iron.
Of the following descrii)tions of iron manufactured, the proportion now
imported is much smaller than in 1864, while the consumption rapidly
increases:
Sheet iron, (both common and iiolished,) slit rods, wire rods, anvils,
wrought steam, gas, and water tubes and flues, cast-iron pipe, galvanized
iron in all forms.
54
EXAMINATION OF STATEMENTS IN REPORT OF
Of steel and steel uiauufactiires the eliaiige since 18G4 has been very
great. Of the manufactures of steel, almost wholly of domestic pro¬
duction, there are: Steel wire of all sizes, cross-cut saws, mill, pit, and
drag saws, hand-saws, back-saws, skates, side-arms, circular saws and
saw plates, machine needles.
The following are very largely increased: Cutlery, of all classes, files
and file rasps; cutting instruments and machinery.
Hardware and cutlery of every description are now made in the
United States to an extent relatively twice as great as in 18C-i. Cutlery
at many establishments in Connecticut, Massachusetts, &c., and at Pitts¬
burg and Beaver, Pennsylvania; by the Meriden Cutlery' Company,
Meriden, Connecticut; Beaver Cutlery Company, Beaver, Pennsylvania;
J. Kussell & Co., Green Kiver Works, New York; New York Knife
Company, Wallkill Eiver Works, New Y"ork; Booth Brothers, Sussex
Factory, Newark, New Jersey, and at least twenty other large establish¬
ments.
The following are the leading cast steel manufactories in the United
States, most of them very recently established, or extended beyond their
irroduction in former years:
Cast steel.—The William Butcher Steel Works, Philadelphia; Phila¬
delphia Steel Works, Baldwin & Co., Philadelphia; Disston & Son,
Keystone Saw and Tool Works, Philadelphia; William & Harvey Eow-
land, spring, blister, plow, and shovel steel, Philadelphia; Black Dia¬
mond Steel Works, Park, Brother & Co., Pittsburg; Sheffield Steel
Works, Singer, Nimmick & Co., Pittsburg; Hussey, Wells & Co.,Oast
Steel Works, Pittsburg; Creseent Steel Works, Miller, Barr & Parkin,
Pittsburg; Pittsburg Steel Works, Anderson & Woods, Pittsburg.
Steel saws.—St. Louis Saw Works, St. Louis, Missoim; American Saw
Company, Trenton, New Jersey; Wheeler, Madden & Clemson, Middle-
town, New York; H. W. Peace, Brooklyn, New York; Park, Brother
& Co., Pittsburg; Henry Disston & Sons, Philadelphia; Singer, Kim-
niick & Co., Pittsburg; Ohlen & Lauman, Columbus, Ohio; DirigoSaw
Works, Bangor, Maine.
Steel files.—Black Diamond File Works, G. & H. Barnett, Philadel¬
phia; S. G. Howe & Co., Sing Sing, New York; Anbrnm File Works,
Aubuiui, New York; Nicholson File Company, Providence, Ehode Isl¬
and; Granite File Works, Manchester, New Hampshire; New York
File Company, Kearney &, Birdsall, New York; Lancaster File Com¬
pany, Lancaster, Pennsylvania; J. Collett, Bangor, Maine.
Bessemer steel worJcs.—John A. Griswold & Co., Troy, New York; Penn¬
sylvania Steel Company, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania; Cleveland EoUing
MiU Company; Freedom Iron and Steel Company, Lewistown, Penn¬
sylvania; Cambria Iron Company, Johnstown, Pennsylvania; E. B.
Ward, Wyandott, Michigan.
Other conspicuous new iron and steel manufacturers may be cited, as
the Iron and Steel Wire Eopeworks, John A. Eoebling & Sons, Trenton,
SPECIAL COMMISSIONEK OF REVENUE.
55
Xew Jersey; cotton and woolen machinery manufacture, by the Brides-
burg Machine Company, Philadelphia; steel-headed railway bars, by
Trenton Iron Works, Cooper, Hewitt & Co.; and the works at Danyille,
Pennsylvania, of Waterman, Beaver & Co.
The detail of establishments engaged in making edge tools, axes,
steel and iron squares, and hardware generally, is too great to be given.
Of new factories of this class since 18G4, the number is several hundred,
and they supply more than nine-tenths of the demand, both for consump¬
tion and export. Steel forks and steel tools of various kinds are even
exported to the British Islands, and very largely to British and other
colonial possessions in tropical climates.
Shovels, siiades, axes, forks, chisels, hammers, nails, and particularly
tools requiring peculiar excellence of form as well as superior quality,
have completely occupied the domestic, and largely the foreign field.
In manufactures of metals, other than iron and steel, there is an
equally great change, and the number of new works on brass and white
metal goods, plated wares, saddlery, decorated articles, &c., &c., amounts
to hundreds. The increase in these has been greater between 18G4
and the close of 18G9; the first check to their progress being under the
practical decline of the tariff, when the recent fall in gold took i)lace.
Woolen Manufactokies.—Since the acts of 18G2, 18G4:, and 18G7
the woolen manufacture has been greatly extended. There is no branch
of it, except that of fine broadcloths, in which entire success has not
been attained, and the immense supply required in the country is almost
whplly provided at home. Of the "cloths and cassimeres" imported,
reaching about $G,000,000 in value yearly, nearly all is broadcloth. Im¬
ported " shawls " reach less than $2,000,000 in value; " carpets" about
$1,000,000, and "dress goods," chiefly of worsted, and worsted with
cotton or silk, go to the large sum of $15,000,000 in value.
On cloths and cassimeres of wool there are now more than three hun¬
dred factories engaged, the new dei)artments being the cloakings,
beavers, coatings, and fine "Prench" cassimeres, &c.; the other branches
being longer established. Throughout the West a more rapid increase
in the number of mills of this class is observed than in Xew England.
On shawls there are about twenty-five factories engaged; the pro¬
duction is comparatively new, and completely supplies the market.
On flannels there are fully thirty factories engaged, supplying four-
fifths of the demand.
On blankets there are about forty-five mills engaged, and the mar-
liet is almost wholly supi>lied by them.
On hosiery and knit goods there are about a hundred and fiftj" iuills
engaged, almost wholly supplying the market. Some departments of
this manufacture are new suice 18G7, and a large share since 18Gf.
On carpets there are nearly one hundred mills and other establish¬
ments engaged—nearly one-half being yet woven by hand-looms. The
production is full upon ingvains and the lower gvades, comj)letely sup-
56
examination of statements in report of
plying the market, but of Brussels anil tlie finer carpets four-fifths are
imported. The new manufacture is of these finer kinds, and also of felts
and druggets, a number of large establishments having recently been
■ devoted to making the last named goods.
On balmorals, kerseys, and various mixed manufactures, the recent
increase has been very rapid, balmorals being nevdy and wholly made
in the United States—tweutj* or thirty large mills being engaged upon
them.
Worsted manufactures have especially attained rapid development
under the present tariff; first, worsted yams, on which ten or twelve
mills are engaged; second, worsted reps, terry and like goods, on which
five or six mills have started with great success; third, worsted di'css
goods, as mohairs, mohair lustres, mohair poplins, &c., on which one
very large mill at Philadelphia, with two or three at other places, have
begun within a year past. The great Xew England mills at Lawrence,
Lowell, and Manchester have been making worsted dress goods since
18GL
SinvrviARY OP the Growth of Woolen Manhfacture.—The ex¬
tent of the present possession of the market for fine woolens of every
other description than what are distinctively known as dress broad¬
cloths is best illustrated by a list of nearly three hundred factories,
which but for its length we woidd give in full, represented in the Xew
York market alone, all engaged on cassimeres, coatings, beavers,
tweeds, repellants, ladies' cloakings, and other like fine goods, all wool
or cotton warp, and which were, until recently, nearly all impoittd.
The distinctively fine goods are almost all the growth under the tarifls
since 1861, and the market of the United States, now gTown to three
times the measure of 1860, is held by this domestic iiroduction so
nearly exclusively that the proportion of foreign goods entermg into it
is scarcely distinguishable.
The three hundred mills so reported are, of course, not all; at least
fifty more would be represented exclusively in other markets of sale
than New York, but taking, for three hundred ordy, an average yearly
product of $200,000 in value of goods, the totalis $60,000,000; and of this
one-half, or $30,000,000, is the growth since 1861, with a continued gain,
although under adverse conditions of the general markets, since the act
of March 2, 1867.
In the line of finer manufactures of wool and worsted the progress is
more recent and not yet so complete; but there is evidence abundant
that two or three years more will develop this branch equally with the
heavier woolens. The hold of the ten or twelve great establishments on
the trade in mohairs, worsted stuffs, and other light goods, usually de¬
scribed as dress^goods, is strong already. As an evidence of the fact,
the United States consul at Bradford, England, the seat of the manufac-
time of this class of goods in England for the American market, reports
SPECIAL COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE.
57
tlie decline in exporting sucli goods for two months of 18G9 and 1870 as
follows:
February, 18G9
February, 1870
Decrease
£251,093 March, 18G9,
192,958 March, 1870.
£G1,135 Decrease.
£233, 723
181,815
£18, 908
For the first time in the history of the trade the market is really
supplied with a domestic production of mohairs, alpacas, Italian cloths,
&c.; delaines having been abundant for some years previously.
We assume, therefore, that the tariff on woolens is effective and val¬
uable, as i^ was designed to be, in developing at home the enormous in¬
dustry that must be engaged in the manufacture of woolens to supply
our markets.
Further examination in almost every other class of woolens would
show the same progress. Knit goods almost completely supply the field
at home; and the growth since 18G2 is to about three times the value
then produced.
Shawls of all sorts, other than mohair or camel's hair, are no longer
imported in any considerable degree.
Blankets, both of the finer white sorts, including carriage and travel¬
ing blankets, as well as all coarse Indian blankets, are also not imported
to any amount, while the domestic production has reached large aggve-
gates. Bearing in mind the enormous importation of all classes of
blankets formerly existing, the value of the protection which secures
this industry will be felt.
In Kew England, as we have shown, and we repeat the statement
because of the attempts now made to convey the impression that it is hos¬
tile to the tariff on woolens, the development of this manufacture has been
very great within five years, and especially since 18G7. Ten or twelve of
the largest mills of the country manufacture delaines, alpacas, mohairs,
ItaUan cloths, poplins, reps, chenes, armures, &c., including everything
known in dress goods of worsted, mohair, »&c. Among the number of
miUs the chief are the Pacific Mills; the Atlantic Delaine Company;
the Lowell Mills; the Manchester Mills; the Hamilton Mills, &c. The
production of domestic miUs is rapidly supplying the market, and with
the continuance of the protection of 18G8 and 18G9 would, in two years
more, cover two-thirds of the consumption in the United States.
Manufactures op Silk, or Silk and Wool.—The growth of the
silk manufacture in the United States may be shown by comparing the
- importation of raw silk in 18G4 with the like importation in 18G9. For
. the fiscal year ending June 30,1891, this importation was 371,973 pounds;
while in the calendar year 18G9, it was 735,000 pounds, nearly or almost
• exactly twice as great. And of silk organzine, and of twisted and spun
J silk, used only in further manufacture, the quantity was also doubled, in-
. creasing from about 50,000 pounds to 100,000 pounds. Taking, say.
58
examination of statements in report of
450,000 pouuds of raw silk as tlie material of the new manufactures of silk
since 18G4, the value of finished goods cannot be less than 812,000,000, or
more than $20,000,000 for the entire manufacture of silk in the United
States.
As much of this silk is mixed with other materials, the sejiarate value
of goods all silk would not reach so large a sum—probably two-thirds or
three-fourths of this sum only. Examining these by the best attainable
information in detail, we find the follo^\iug: On dress goods and satins
of silk, about ten mills or factories are employed; on silk ribbons, seven
or eight mills or factories; on silk trimmings, fringes, &c., about one
hundred establishments; on silk thread, about twenty establishments; on
silk-mixed goods, of the classes not usually reckoned with woolens, cot¬
tons, &c., about forty establishments. The existence of nearly or quite
one-half of these depends upon the acts of 18G4 and later, fixing the
existing rates of duty on manufactures of silk.
Some of the leading manufactories of silk, of recent estabhshment,
deserve to be cited in detail, in order to silence the cavil raised against
general statements, and to do justice to those who take risks in indus¬
trial enterprises at critical periods like the present; we therefore name
the following:
Silk Dress Goods, Ribbons, &c,—Black silks; colored and gray;
green and other dress silks; silk poplins, stripes, linings; ribbons, belt¬
ings, &c,—Cheney Brothers, Hartford, Connecticut,
Black, colored, green, and gray dress silks; cashmere silks, &c.—
P, G, Givernaud, "West Hoboken, Rew Jersey,
Black and other dress silks; satins; serges; neck-tie sUks, &c,—J. S.
Shapter, Paterson, Rew Jersey,
Silk poplins, of every class and color—Fred'k Baare, Schoharie, New
York,
Silk serges, scarfs, linings, &c,—Dale Manufacturing Company, Pater¬
son, Yew Jersey,
Silk ribbons, belts, &c,—"Werner, Itschner & Co,, Philadelphia,
Silk ribbons, scarfs, sashes, &c,—William H, Horstman & Sons, Phila¬
delphia,
Of silk trimmings, laces, gimps, fringes, &c,, the number of establish¬
ments is fully a hundred; but this department is not so largely new
as the preceding. There are several new establishments making orgau-
zine and spun silk, and otherwise preparing raw silk for further manu¬
facture.
Cotton Manufactures,—The manufiicture of all the finer classes
of cotton goods has advanced rapidly since 18G4, the gain being chiefly
in the finer prints, cambrics, and what are generally known as white
goods, percales, jaconets, and jacquard-woven goods of various kinds.
In regard to many of these finer classes the change is great, and their
importation has fallen off to small proportions.
The total importation of cotton yarn goods in the fiscal year ISOI-'CS
SPECIAL COMMISSIOJTEE OF REVENUE.
59
was less than 40,000,000 square yards; the re-exports of the same were
500,000 square yards, and the export of domestic cottons was 13,750,000
square yards. The consumption cannot have been less than live times
the importation, excluding the unbleached domestic grades, which
formed the chief share of the domestic export. The production of fine
bleached and printed cottons is enormous, this class being at least
doubled in amount since 18G4.
Cotton Spool-thread is another new department, dating since
18G4 almost entirely. There are now ten or twelve large establishments
engaged exclusively in this production, among the largest being Clark's,
recently transferred from Scotland to Patersou, New Jersey. The num¬
ber of American mills on spool thread is now as great as the number of
Scotch and English sending to this market; and although the larger
share of the supjdy may yet be received from abroad, it cannot be long
before the production here will meet most of the demand for consump¬
tion.
Statistics of the various manufactures of Cincinnati, Cleveland, De¬
troit, Chicago, Milwaukee, MinneapoUs, St. Louis, Indianapolis, and
many interior towns in the West, and from the South also, would show
a large increase; but this list will give some idea of the growth of our
manufactures, and thus partly supply the omission of the Commissioner
NUMBER OF PERSONS EMPLOYED IN MANUFACTURES.
Not being satisfied with the Commissioner's estimates of the number
of persons employed in manufactures, your committee addressed a letter
of inquiry to the secretary of the American Iron and Steel Association,
and this was done with the more confidence as the Commissioner him¬
self quotes Mr. McAllister as reliable authority. His reply is as follows:
Office of the American Irok and Steel Association,
522 Walnut Street, Philadelphia, March 30, 1870.
Dear Sir : I beg leave to submit answers to tbe interrogatories made in your favor
of the 10th instant:
1st. What number and proportion of our total population is engaged in the different
branches of manufactures ?—Answer. Number of persons employed in manufacturing
establishments, 1,900,000. Number directly supported, 10,000,000.
2d. What number and proportion in the manufacture of iron and steel and manufac¬
tures thereof, and iu mining ore .and coal for same ?—Answer. Number of persons actu¬
ally employed, 640,000. Number of persons directly supported, 3,200,000.
3d. What amount of capital is at present invested in the manufacture of iron and
steel and manufactures thereof ?—Answer. Estimated at $420,000,000.
4th. How many persons are directly and how many indirectly supported by manu¬
factures, and especially by iron and steel?—Answer. The above question is answered
pretty nearly iu the answers to the first and second interrogatories. Perhaps one-
half of .the whole population of the country is indirectly supported by the many branches
of manufacturing industry.
In regard to the number of hands employed in the manufacture of iron and steel, and
manufactures thereof, in Pennsylvania, I would say perhaps something less than tiro-
60
examination of statements in eeport of
fiffha of tlio whole number in the country, or about 250,000 persons employed, and
1,200,000 supported.
I am, sir, very respectfully, , , ^ „
henry McAllister, semtanj.
Hon. D.cniei. J. Moruell,
Washington, D. C.
This differs widely from the Commissioner's mode of imtting his case,
lie estimates tlie number of jiersons employed in cotton, woolen, and
leather manufacture, and in iron making, railway service, and fisheries,
at 535,000. Leather and the manufactures thereof are included, and
pig and bar iron, but not the manufactures thereof. Had they been,
not only the number of persons employed in manufactures, but the
value created, would have been largely increased. Such increase,
however, would not have been in harmony with the spirit of the Com¬
missioner's report.
THE CHEAPENING OF COJDrODITIES.
The committee feel bound to protest most earnestly against the gen¬
eral drift and tenor of the report, in that it virtually holds up the cheap¬
ening of commodities to be the chief, if not the sole object of our indus¬
trial legislation.
Doubtless the governing classes of England have acted upon this prin¬
ciple for many years. The numerous non-producing consumers of that
country, who, by their connection with, or dependence upon its legisla¬
tors and rulers, cause their wishes to be strongly reflected in its laws,
have naturally no other interest in the matter than to see such general
cheapness iirevail as will give them for their fixed incomes the largest
possible portion of the laborers' products. The great factory owners
of England, finding their domination of the world's markets endan¬
gered by the growing arts and protective legislation of other countries,
endeavor to maintain their supremacy by ottering their products at con¬
stantly lower prices, a policy requiring the smallest possible outlay for
wages and for the laborer's necessaries of life, our breadstuff's included.
General cheapening of commodities means everywhere general oppres¬
sion and degradation of the producers for the benefit of non-producing
consumers.
This cruel and unnatural system, so utterly at variance with all our
habits and needs, is now strenuously resisted in England itself since tlie
laboring population has acquired a greater repiresentation in Parliament,
and will probably soon be so modified there as to conform more to tlie
interest of the producers and less to that of the mere consumers. It is
a source of astonishment and mortification to your committee that the
Commissioner should have been so pliant to the influences which the up-
pier classes of England know so well how to wield, as to suggest for the
guidance of our industrial legislation English notions which are so per¬
fectly unsuitable to the temper of our iieople and to our condition, and
which, if it were possible to bring them juto practice Jiere, would simjily
SPECIAL COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE.
61
reduce our working men and women to the degradation, poverty, and
ignorance of European laborers, thus endangering our government,
which rests upon the intelligence and contentment of the people, and
preventing that immigration of skilled laborers attracted here by the
higher wages and improved civilization which contribute so greatly to
our prosperity.
THE INDUSTRIAL STRUGGLE.
Tour committee have remarked with pain the Commissioner's apathy
to the tremendous fact that his own nation, though ostensibly at peace
with all the world, is really engaged in unrelenting warfare with several
other nations, and particularly with Great Britain. That this warfare
is waged, not with armies and navies, but with the complex enginery
of industry and trade, does not palliate the Commissioner's negligence,
since his duty has been to study exactly those agencies which in our
times are no less potent for the aggrandizement or the subjugation of
the contending parties than were the armed conflicts which they have
in great measure superseded.
The trained legions of England are flghting us from her mines and
workshops, under guidance more subtle and more ruthless than that of
military rule, and from those secure fortifications they launch the mis-
. siles which are to subjugate and impoverish us. Her mines and facto¬
ries are iiitted against our mines and factories in a struggle wherein
our independence is at stake, and every industrial establishment upon
our side which is forced to succumb in the struggle is one of oirr bat¬
teries silenced, with its soldiers cast into the hospital.
This struggle is one which we cannot avoid, and in which defeat must
be fatal. The continent is ours to" subdue and to possess, ready to yield
all its treasures to us and to our posterity, but only upon the condition
of our being able to develop all its capacities and to maintain ourselves
against all comers. Any dreams of a merely agricultural wealth and
civilization are utterly illusory, for no merely agricultural people have
ever long maintained their independence except when both they and
their country were tdo poor to excite cupidity.
Our own vast and teeming agricultural regions, embracing the whole
broad and bountiful basin of the Mississippi, can form no exception to
this rule. Inconceivably vast as are the resources of that favored ex¬
panse, its population, if restricted to agriculture, debarred from manu¬
factures themselves, and undefended by conterminous manufacturing
communities belonging to the same great nation, would merely fall a
prey to the trade plunder and rapine of Europe, and would vainly ex¬
haust the riches of their soil for the benefit of the cotton lords of Man¬
chester.
The importance of the functions performed by the manufacturers in
the social economy of this nation can hardly be overstated. Not only
do they make a market for the crude products of the field and the mine,
62
EXAMINATION OF STATEMENTS IN REPORT OF
increasing twice or twenty fold tlie value of those products; not only
do they protect the industrial and financial independence of the nation,
by supplying without any detraction from the nation's treasure the nu¬
merous and costly articles which our people will consume; not only do
they furnish within our own borders the appliances demanded in modern
war, but they are a principal means of advancing the civilization of the
country, and of diffusing the useful arts into ever-widening districts.
That manufactures were originally first planted along the Atlantic slope
was inevitable, since there was the first seat of population; that
the same region is constantly improving its manufactures and under¬
taking new and more difiicult branches is also inevitable, since its
position facing Europe causes its industries to be the first assailed, and
constantly stimidates its energies to fresh efforts and to new inventions.
It is while making these advances that the Atlantic seaboard acts as
teacher to the sister communities lying further westward, who draw
freely from it those arts and indirstries and skilled laborers which it has
acquired,
A perfect harmony of interests exists in this re.spect between the
East and the West, as also is the case between the North and the South,
and between the American farmer and the American manufacturer.
That the Commissioner, instead of exhibiting this community of inter¬
est and thus reinforcing the tie of nationality, should appear wilhng to
depreciate the manufacturing class and to excite against it the jeal¬
ousy and animosity of the farming class, is to your committee the source
of surprise and regxet.
CONCLUSIONS,
Other parts of the report are open to animadversion, but further crit¬
icism is needless. Enough has been done to show that the statements
and teachings of the Commissioner gave the petitioners just cause of
alarm. Some of the contradictions and errors of the report, so far as
examined, may be stated as follows:
It opens by declaring our material progress to be " wonderful," and "in
a great degree independent of legislation," and then devotes large space
and effort to show that this "wonderful" progress has been, and is, ob¬
structed by legislation.
It alleges that the farmer is now oppressed by the operations of the
present tariff and currency, while in the report of the same Commissioner
for 18G8 an attempt was made to show that the farmer had reaped undue
profits for many years under the opierations of the same tariff and the
same currency.
It makes unfair and untruthfid statements touching the condition of
the farmer as compared with that of other American producers, when
the author must have known that the only effect of such statements
would be to excite jealousy and hostility between those whose interests,
rightly understood, are in perfect harmony.
SPECIAL COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE.
63
It makes pitiful complaint of some "taxes" or tariffs, and then pro¬
poses others much more grievous, as, for instance, its comidaiut of an
alleged " tax " of $3,900,000 on salt, and its proposal of a " tax" or tariff
of $60,000,000 on sugar, molasses, coffee, and tea.
It underrates the products of manufactures and overrates the products
of agriculture, while both branches of industry are best served by the
impartial truth.
It greatly underrates the number of persons employed in manufac¬
tures, especially in those industries which are most essential to the well-
being of the country, and the inestimable value of which was so com¬
pletely demonstrated during our late struggle for national existence.
It misstates the prices, the costs, and the aggregate values of manu¬
factures in important particulars, as follows:
It alleges that the cost of American salt in our markets is from 40 to
45 cents a bushel, when correct quotations in commercial centers show
that in 1869 it ranged from 28 to 34 cents.
It alleges that the importation of gmnny cloth in 1869 did not exceed
five thousand bales, when the actual import exceeded ten thousand
bales.
It alleges that since the enactment of the wool tariff there has been
a large decrease in the number of sheep in this country, when the sta¬
tistician of the Agricultural Department reports a considerable increase.
It conveys the impression that the decrease in the price of wool is the
result of the wool and woolen tariff of 1867, and omits the important
fact that a rapid increase of sheep and an over-production of wool in
other countries had decreased prices in foreign markets, thus tending
to a decrease in our own.
It urges working men and women to so act as to compel the abandon¬
ment of the present tariff on wool and woolens, that they may obtain
cheaper clothing, but suppresses the fact that cloths, blankets, and
other woolen manufactures are as cheap now as in 1860, notwithstand¬
ing an increase in the price of labor.
It greatly under-estimates the amount of capital engaged in cotton
manufacture, the value of the product of that manufacture in 1869, the
number of persons supported by it, and the value of agricultural pro¬
ducts it consumes.
It alleges a cost of production of pig iron which is shown to be falla¬
cious and unreliable by every authority within reach of your committee,
now connected in any manner with its manufacture.
It alleges that no material increase of the imports of iron is probable,
and yet recommends a schedule of a tariff on this and other metals
which would render a large increase of these imports necessary in order
to raise the revenue it estimates to be required from these sources.
Its assertion of the cost of freights, and their influence as protection
to the manufacturers in the interior, is a gross mistake or misstatement.
64
EXAMINATION OF STATEMENTS IN EEPORT OF
It suppresses the fact that tlie price of lumber rapidly fell iu 1808 and,
180!), aud argues that tlie present duty tlioreoii teuds to an increase of
the price, wheu the market quotations show that it is as low now as
during the last three years iirior to the imposition of the dutj'.
It alleges that the duty on coal enhances the price of all the coal of
the United States to the consumer, a statement contradicted by the
statistics of the coal trade for the last ten years, No importation of
the coal most largely iiroduced aud most generally used, the anthrar
cite, is possible, aud the revenue collected upon bituminous coal is paid
by the producers abroad, by so much reducing their own exorbitant
l)rofits.
It alleges that the present duty on elastic webbing, used in the manu¬
facture of shoes, is equivalent to "an unnecessary tax" of five cents on
each pair, and yet recommends a change in the duty, which would make
this "unnecessary tax" amount to fourteen cents on each pair.
It unfairly, and untruthfully, depreciates the condition of our artisans
and laborers, endeavoring to create the impression that, through the
operations of the present tariff and the present currency system, labor
does not command the same reward it did ten years ago, when the fact
is patent to all, that the general prosperity of the people during the past
ten j'cars, notwithstanding the drain of a great war, has been most
marvelous and wholly rrnprecedented.
It alleges that domestic competition, excited by tariff laws, " is ac¬
companied by the usual resort of turning out articles or products of in¬
ferior (piality, but with an external good appearance," thus ruthlessly
condemning the American manufacturer, and inferentially praising his
European rival, when the truth, fairly stated, would have bestowed
praise aud condemnation in reverse order, and shown that the competi¬
tion engendered by a protective tariff has uniformly resulted in greater
mechanical skill, improved machinery, and finer and more durable work¬
manship.
It entirely omits any detailed exhibition of the growth of our manu¬
factures under the existing tariff system, and of the advantages to the
country derived from that growth.
It endeavors to cast suspicion and odium uiion American manufac¬
turers whose gains and strength belong to their country, and who are
the defenders of American independence in the trade battles of the
world; and invites this country to trust in and pay tribute to foreign
manufacturers, whose gains and strength give increase of riches and
power to our rivals and enemies.
It slanders the American inventors and manufacturers, whose labors
in the useful arts, under the encommgenient of existing laws, have given
a multitude of new and improved products to the American people, who
draw from home manufactures a great variety of articles of common use
unknown to the mass of workers in other lands, and better in form, tex
SPECIAL COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE. 65
ture, and quality, tliaii such similar goods as may be furiiislied by foreign
commerce.
It uupatriotically seeks to establish the principle that dei)endence upon
foreign manufactures is our natural condition, in defiance of the policy
of all enlightened nations, whose civilization has been built up and
whose people have prospered as a consequence of legislation fin'oring a
diversification of their industry.
It recommends large reductions, or a total abolition of duties upon
such importations as come in competition with the staple products of
American mines, forests, and manufactories, and tliat the loss of reve¬
nue thus caused should be compensated by increased duties ujmn
necessaries of life not produced in our country, thirs displaying undue
regard for the interests of foreign manufacturers and traders, and a dis¬
position to impose needless burdens upon his own countrymen.
It aims to subvert the protective policy of our own country, estab¬
lished since the formation of the government, under which our people
have always prospered, and every departure from which has resulted
in enforced idleness of the laboring classes, individual suffering and
bankruptcy, and loss of national credit and revenue.
It proposes to raise the revenue needed by the government from such
import duties as will enhance the cost of foreign necessaries of life con¬
sumed by our laborers, while denying to them adequate protection against
the invasion of foreign labor products competing with their own.
The natural effect of the Commissioner's recommendations, if heeded,
would be to array class against class, and section against section, sowing
anew the seeds of hate, strife, and disunion, which, scattered long ago
for like purposes, sprang up and bore fruit, the taste of which is still
bitter upon our lips; nor is this effect concealed by jiretended benevo¬
lence toward those whom it would degrade, enslave, and destroy.
In short, the report seems to have been written in the interest of for¬
eign producers and manufacturers, and its suggestions and recommenda¬
tions, if followed by consequent legislation, would be hostile to the best
interests of the people of the country, and tend to make us dei^endents
on foreign nations, when we have the means and ability to be indepen¬
dent of the world.
Such are some of the propositions, contradictions, and errors of the
report, and your committee believe that they fully confirm the opinion
of the petitioners, that its recommendations would be " a most danger¬
ous guide to legislation."
DANIEL J. MOEEELL, Chairman.
OAKEg AAIES.
PHILETUS SAWYEE.
WOETHINGTOX C. SMITH.
STEPHEN SANFOED.
AYILLIAIM H. UPSON.
S?l:MUEL P. IMGEEILL.
H. Een. 72 .■") C
The Bureau :
{^PAMPHLETS FOR THE PEOPLE)
DEVOTED TO THE
(^OMMERCE, M ANUFACTURES, & G ENERAL JNDUSTRIES
OF THE UNITED STATES.
PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY
The Bureau Printing Company,
loi AND 103 Wabash Ave.,
Incorporated under the General La-a'x of the State of Illinois.
No. I.
CONTENTS:
Why Irishmen should Vote for Protection 2
Manufacture of Silk Velvet 4
Brown and Jones—A .friendly Talk about the
Tariff 5
American Shipping- ir
Causes of the Power of Prussia 12
Leather 15
Adam Smith 16
Extract from the Republican National Platform adopted at the Wigvjam^ Chicago^
in i860:
" While prodding revenue for the support of the General Government by duties on imports, sound
policy requires such an adjustment of these imposts as to encourage the development of the industrial
interests of tiie whole country; and we commend that policy of national exchanges which leaves
to the workingmen, liberal wages, to agriculture, remunerating prices; to mechanics and manufacturers,
an adequate reward for their skill, labor and enterprise; and to the nation, commercial prosperity and
independence.^
Extract from the Democratic National Platform adopted in Tammany Half New
Tork^ in yuly, 1868:
" The Democratic Party, in National Convention assembled, reposing its trust i^ the intelligence, pat.
riotism and discriminating justice of the people, * * * do, with the return of Peace, demand * * ♦
such a tariff for revenue upon foreign imports, and equal taxation under the internal revenue laws, as will
afford incidental protection to domestic manufactures, and will, without impairing the revenue, impose
he least burden upon and best promote and encourage the great industrial interests of the country."
2
WHY IRISHMEN SHOULD VOTE
FOR PROTECTION.
Of all the anomalies of American pol¬
itics the most strange is the blank stu¬
pidity with which nine tenths of all Irish
voters in America vote for the party of
British free trade. If here is any man
on earth, the lessons of whose national
history ought to make him a Protection¬
ist, it is the Irishman He has been ex¬
ported to this country a pauper—a thing
it was the interest of his own couhtry to
get rid of, because the manufacturers of
Ireland had been ruined by British free
trade. This fact is all there is of Irish
suffering and English oppression. This
is the cause. All the rest is consequence.
And yet, nine Irishmen in ten have here¬
tofore voted for that policy of subser¬
viency to England which has been stead¬
ily advocated and practiced by the Dem¬
ocratic party, and which would bring the
same ruin on this country as it has
brought upon Ireland.
British free trade, relative to Ireland,
means—as it does relative to all other
countries—Englishmen's frofits. It is
not a principle of political economy, out
a subterfuge of a nation of plunderers.
Sometimes it assumes the form of pro¬
hibiting trade between Ireland and
the colonies; sometimes of prohibiting
associations from forming among Irish¬
men for manufacturing purposes; some¬
times of removing Irish duties on
manufactures so as to let in English man¬
ufactures free ; and sometimes of remov¬
ing the tariff on breadstuffs, so as, after
turning Ireland over to agriculture, to
destroy its agriculture. But in all cases
there is one object, viz., to sell English
goods in Irish markets, regardless of the
effect it may have to destroy, first Irish
manufactures, and ultimately Irish agri¬
culture.
As early as 1688, the government of
William and Mary, in reply to a petition
of London merchants, pledged itself to
"discountenance" the woolen manufac¬
tures of Ireland, which were then rapidly
advancing, so as to compel Irish wool
growers to send the raw wool to England
and buy back their cloths. The export of
wool to foreign countries being prohib¬
ited, the Irish wool grower was required
to sell his wool to English cloth makers.
Irish ships were excluded from all benefit
of the navigation laws, and excluded from
the fisheries. English ships and English
fishermen had free trade and special pre¬
rogatives, But while England took the
turkey, she gave Irishmen the crow, every
time. Sugar could be imported only
through England; and as no drawback
was allowed on its exportation to Ireland,
the latter was taxed for the support of the
English government while maintainrng;
jjg ^kil trade with the colonies
must be done by English ships and
through English ports, thus prohibiting
Ireland from building up either internal
manufactures, ports of entry, oracoip-
mercial marine. To induce them to con*
fine themselves to raising wool, hemp
and flax, for English looms, these were
admitted into England free of duty.
During the American revolution. Irish¬
men asserted the rights of their country
to legislative independence, and the em¬
barrassments of England were such that
she complied for the time with their de¬
mand. In 1783, duties were imposed on
articles of foreign manufacture, with the
avowed purpose of employing the sur¬
plus labor of the Irish people in convert¬
ing their corn, wool and pork into cloth.
Commerce made rapid strides. The linen,
silk and book manufactures flourished;
more books being published in Dublin
by a single house than are now used by
the whole population of Ireland. With
1801, however, the English copyright
laws were extended to Ireland, and with
free trade in English books, Ireland began
to cease to either make, buy, or read
books. Under the act of Union the al¬
most prohibitory duties on English cali¬
coes and muslins were to continue until
1808; those on Englisti woolens were to
last until 1821; those on cotton yarn
until 1810; and by an extension of the
English patent laws over Ireland, a pro¬
hibition on the erection of new forms of
machinery was imposed, unless tribute
were paid to their English inventors; thus
accompanying free trade in commodities
by an embargo on the ideas and inven¬
tions which would promote their produc¬
tion. As a sample of the results, Dublin,
which in 1800, had ninety-one woolen
manufactories, in 1840, when, according
to the natural law of increase, it ought to
have two hundred and fifty, only had
twelve. The hands employed, instead of
increasi.ig from four thousand nine hun¬
dred and eighteen, in i8oo, to ten thou¬
sand, or twice as many, in the forty years,
were reduced to six hundred and two.
The wool combers and carpet manufac¬
turers had nearly disappeared The
same results had ensued in Cork, Kil¬
kenny and Wicklow. Branches of man¬
ufactures, in which the employes were
counted by thousands, numbered only a
few scores.
At first, the whole population being
dr ven into agriculture, land became the
only means of living, and rose to rents of
six, eight and ten pounds per acre.
" Enormous rents, low wages, farms of
enormous extent, let by rapacious and in¬
dolent proprietors to monopolizing land
jobbers, to be re-let by intermediate op-
3
pressors for five times their value, among
the wretched' starvers on potatoes and wa¬
ter." This led to insurrections, coercion
acts, and speedily to famine and the expor¬
tation of the people as a surplus commod¬
ity. Manufactures did not fail in Ireland
for want of coal, for that was abundant,
both anthracite and bituminous; nor for
want of capital,for capital was being depre¬
ciated and wasted every year equal to that
then invested in all the cotton and woolen
machinery in England; nor for want of
industry, for with proper returns for his
labor the Irish laborer is as vigorous and
industrious as any in the world, and has
more power than the English, French, or
Belgian. It was not for want of iron, for
Iceland had all the materials for making
it in the greatest profusion. It was not
from excess of population, for the popu¬
lation was far less dense than in Belgium,
and so far from crowding the land, mil¬
lions of acres of the best land in Ireland
were,and still are, unreclaimed and uncul¬
tivated. County Mayo has an area of
1,364,000 acres of which 800,000 are waste,
470,000 acres of which are declared to be
reclaimable. Counties Galway, Kerry,
and others have a like proportion of un¬
filled land. Had manufacturing towns
been developed near these lands, so that
the tillers of the soil could find a market
for all they would produce, they could
have been reclaimed at an immediate
profit. But the poor are compelled to
work for immediate profits, however
small, and to forego remote profits, how¬
ever great. Under the injudicious system
of agriculture which Irish farmers were
obliged to pursue when all their markets
were across the channel, the soil declined
rapidly in fertility. Had the markets
been near, the Irish farmers, having their
choice among a hundred crops—roots,
grains, grasses, fruits, berries, live stock,
poultry, eggs, butter, cheese, etc.—could
have practised rotation of crops, and of
manure, and so cropped their lands twice
a year without exhausting their soils at
all, but, on the contrary, improving them
constantly. With distant markets, how¬
ever, they were limited to a few crops,
which would not pay for manuring, and
did exhaust the soil. The potato espe¬
cially is one of those crops which, when
planted without rotation on the sarqe soil,
extracts from the soil speedily every parti¬
cle of capacity it contains for growing
the potato. The weakness of the plant,
caused by continuous cropping, showed
itself in the potato rot, and this resulted
in the Great Famine. The famine of '46,
'47, '48, and '49, is thus clearly traceable
to the removal of the tariff barriers, erect¬
ed for the defence of the Irish industry
against English encroachment, which re¬
moval began in 1808, was consummated
in 1821, and made still worse by the re¬
moval of all tariff on foreign corn and
food in 1846. In the decade in which
British free trade developed its full results,
the people of Ireland perished of hunger
by thousands, and the population in 1850
was one million six hundred and fifty-
nine thousand less than in 1840. In Gal¬
way Union alone four thousand families,
and twenty thousand human beings, were
upon the road, houseless and homeless,
within two years. A writer in the Irish
Journal, says:
" Some parts of the country appeared like an
enormous grave-yard; the numerous gables of the
unroofed dwellings seemed to be gigantic tomb¬
stones. They were indeed records of decay and
death, far more melancholy than the grave can
show. Looking on them, the doubt arose in my
mind. Am I in a civilized country ? Have we really
a free constitution ? Can such scenes be paralleled
in Siberia or Caffraria ?"
For a time the Irish were allowed to
flow into the cities, and over into England.
But at length the wretchedness they every¬
where carried with them, and their ten¬
dency to reduce the wages of Englishmen
below the living point, caused a cry to go
up from the cities, and from all parts of
England, for a poor law, to compel the
Irish counties to maintain their own pau¬
pers. Such a law was passed, to thrust
back the starving Irish on the heartless
agents of their absent landlords. For,
however the laissez faire school of
politicians may advocate letting industry
alone (as if any such thing as letting in¬
dustry alone, and at the same time taxing
it, were possible), yet, when the failure of
a government to protect its industry reduces
its people to paupers, they can then no
longer apply the "let atone" doctrine.
But if a government is bound to prevent
starvation, is it not bound to do so in the
cheapest and best way, by protecting in¬
dustry before it totters to its fall, while
the arm of the worker is strong, his eye
undimmed by hunger, and his natural
force unabated? "A stich in time saves
nine," and a little effective wisdom while
industries are in operation, is worth more
to prevent the suffering of the working
classes than millions spent after a nation's
industries are destroyed. The sole func¬
tion of government is to protect—what?
Life, liberty, property. " But, " said Na¬
poleon, " formerly they had a property
called land. Now we have a new kind of
property—industry." Shylocksays, "You
take my life when you do take the means
whereby I live." So government protects
life, liberty and property, all in one, most
effectually, when it protects industry.
Though the excessive rents of agricul¬
tural lands followed the turning of the
manufacturing population of Ireland over
to agriculture, yet, as a whole, it can not
be said that the high price of land in Ire-
4
lant was a cause of its depopulation. On
the contrary, the same causes which de¬
populated the island reduced the value of
the land to a level with that in the coun¬
ties which are newest and most distant
from markets.
In a paper read before the British Asso¬
ciation,it was shown that the Irish estates
owned by English capital, embracing403,-
065 acres, had been purchased at an ave¬
rage value of £2 15s, or $13.20 per acre,
being about the price paid for unbroken
prairie in Illinois, Iowa, and Minnesota.
Captain Head, in a work on Ireland, tells
us of an estate of ten thousand acres pur¬
chased at five cents an acre.
Between 1841 and 1851, the houses of
the fourth class decreased from 491,278 to
135,389. showing that in ten years over
350,000 humble houses had been razed to
the ground, and converted into deer parks,
pastures, and waste. Notwithstanding
the flood of emigration to America, the
total number of paupers who came upon
the government for support was, in 1848,
2,043505; in 1849., 2,142,766; in 1850, i,-
17 1,267 ;4n iS.Si' 755-,H7; S19-775;
in 1853,409.668; in 1854,519.616; in 1S55,
305,226; in 1857, 190,851, and in 1S58, 183,-
056. Again we say, this abomination of
desolation did not result from over-crowd¬
ing the land, for in the barony of Ennis,
for instance, there were 230,000 acres of
land to only 5,000 paupers, or 230 acres to
every head of a family. Why, then, could
they not live? Simply because free for¬
eign importations had destroyed their
manufactures, while furnishing them no
market for their crops. For this miser¬
able policy of misgovernment the people
lay on their backs by the hundred thou¬
sand, without food or work, " for the hun¬
ger," because they had discovered that a
starving man could live longer lying down
than standing up.
And yet nine-tenths of the very Irish¬
men who escaped from these sufierings to
become free and sovereign voters of the
United States, would march to the polls in
solid phalanx and vote for free trade, with
all its tendencies to bring America into
the same condition as Ireland then was.
Who talks of the wisdom of the collective
people? Nothing is so densely ignorant
as the ignorance that moves in masses and
sustains itself by numbers 1
We talk frankly to the Irish people, be¬
cause we despise all demagogury, and
because they, in the past, have been spe¬
cially subject to it. When we see an Irish¬
man talk, write, or vote for British free
trade, we feel an innate tendency to collar
him, and shove him back under its influ¬
ence, saying ; " There, if you like British
free trade so well, stay in Ireland, where
you can keep your hungry belly full of it
—as of the east wind."
We call upon 'he Irishmen of America
to redeem themseli-es fiom the foul dis¬
grace of voting as the tools of their Eng¬
lish oppressors in America. Every vote
for the protection to American indus¬
try is a vote for the redemption of Ireland.
As England's manufacturing supremacy
wanes, and is superseded by that of the
United States, her hold upon Ireland will
be released, until at last Ireland, like Aus¬
tralia and Canada, will be permitted to
legislate for herself in a Dublin parlia¬
ment. When she is so permitted, she will,
like Canada and Australia, legislate for
the protection of her industries, manufac¬
tures, farms, fisheries and ships. The
value of her land and labor will rise, and
that of her food and clothing will fall,
until her cry will no longer be ;
" Oh God I that bread should he so dear,
And ricsh and blood so clieap!"
Let Irishmen, then, no longer basely
and blindly vote in America for a policy
that has ruined Ireland. Rather let them
vote for one that will develop both, raise
the value of MAN in both, and in so doing
render both more FREE, because more
self-sustaining and wealth-producing.
The Mississippi I'alley Rei'ieTV informs
us that the first velvet manufactory in the
United States has just been started by a
colony from France, located at Franklin,
in Kansas, eighteen miles southwest from
Ottawa. The colony commenced opera¬
tions last summer, upon the co-operative
community plan, under the superintend¬
ence of Valeton de Boissiere, and have
already, besides their velvet manufactory,
comfortable dwellings, several farms under
operation, with a co-operative store, shops,
etc. Mr. Boissiere brought to St. Louis last
month a box of samples of beautiful silk
velvet, equal to the best French imported
article. They were of various shades of
color, and in width from No. 9 to No. 14,
inclusive, very neatly packed in pieces,
with handsome gilt bands and. labels,
marked : " Extra French Velvet—Ameri¬
can —Manufactured in Kansas. 11 yards."
Mr. Boissiere states that he has nowone
loom in operation, with which one person
makes about 2S0 yards per day, carrying
through the loom fifty-six pieces at a time,
of various widths, each piece about five
yards in length. He says, so far as he hp
been able to learn, this is the first loom in
operation in the United States. He con¬
templates adding other looms, not only to
increase the manufacture of ribbons, bnt
also to add machinery for manufacturing
sewing-silk, tassels, trimmings, etc. Thus
tar, he has used raw materials which he
procured from France, but he contera.
plates securing his supplies of silk from
5
Japan, until it can be furnished from his
own native industry. This is another evi¬
dence which, in connection with our newlj-
started manufactories of sewinsand other
silks at Patterson, N. J., and other eastern
points, shows that the silk manufacture
can easily be widely introduced in this
country ; for where one silk manufactory
will pay, a thousand will pay still better.
Nor will it be long before the silk culture,
as well, will be a demonstrated success in
California, Utah, and upon the plains of
Kansas. At Salt Lake there is a cocoon¬
ery with 800.000 worms, consuming thirty
bushels of mulberry leaves a day. No
difficulty is found in feeding or multiplying
them. We now import about $25,000,000
worth of silk manufactures per year; and
the introduction of Chinese and French
labor to an extent sufficient to grow the
silk and manufacture it here, will add to
our yearly production an amount equal to
one-fifth the annual interest on the na¬
tional debt. The silk manufacture was
introduced into France by the great Pro¬
tectionist statesman, Colbert, at consider¬
able trouble and expense at first; but how
immeasurably has the ultimate profit to
that country exceeded the co-t of the ex¬
periment We hope to see it firmly intro¬
duced during our present epoch of pro¬
tection with equally beneficent results.
BROWN AND JONES.
A FRIENDLY T-ALK .ABOUT THE TARfpF.
Mr. Brown.—Neighbor Jones, they tell
me you are a protectionist, and as I can
not see why a shrewd farmer like you
should want to tax yourself to help others
to do some kind of work that can't be
made to pay its own way, I have come
over hero to see about it.
yonc.s.—Glad to see you, Mr. Brown ;
but you must learn my views before you
can tru'y state them. I hold that where
a tax must raise prices, as it generally
must by the amount of the tax, and
where the thing taxed is made or raised
by both Americarrs and foreigners, the tax
should be laid on the imported article,
so as to make the foreigner pay as much
of it as we can.
Brown.—That sounds very well; but
are you sure he does not add the tax to
his former price, and charge us the whole
thing f
yones.—Often he cannot. He can only
raise the price to the point where our
American producers could afford to make
crraise all we need of it. Take pig-iron.
We make nine-tenths of all we use,
whether the tariff is high or low. If it is
high, we import about one ton in thirty;
and if it is low, about one in twenty-five.
But in either case we produce nearly all we
use, and the price therefore, like the price
of butter, lumber, coal, leather, boots and
shoes, and other things which we produce
mainly at home, is mainly fixed by our
own supply and demand. If it were pos¬
sible to make us wholly dependent on
importation, the increased demand on
foreign pig-iron makers would enable
them to double on their prices, as they
did in 1836, when free-trade had stopped
many of our furnaces, and the price of
the imported article went from $27.00, its
average price under protection to $52.50.
Of course, an article so extensively used
that we ordinarily import only a tenth of
our supply would rise if we were compelled
to import even half of it, to two, or three
times, the ordinary price.
Brown.—Very likely a removal of the
tariff would often baise the importer's
prices ; but I do not quite see why he can
not add the duty to his selling price, and
make the consumer pay it.
yones.—He can do so in one case only,
viz ; where the foreign supply of the arti¬
cle is unlimited, and there is no domestic
production to compete with the foreign,
and to reduce the price. Hence the only
terms on which the American consumer
can get it is to pay the foreign price with
duty added. However long such taxes
are imposed they remain a dead tax, paid
wholly by our consumers; never stimulat¬
ing any domestic production of the arti¬
cle, and therefore never setting any
causes in motion, which would r< duce the
price. The.se are called free-trade tariffs;
f.c., tariffs for revenue only, since they
have no other effect than to proauce reve¬
nue.
Brotvn.—But have they not at least the
effect of leaving industry undisturbed, so
that all the tax paid by the con.-umer
goes to the government ^
yone^.—By no means, Eng'and for
instance, collects the whole ir.'.rc-t on
her national debt in tar'ffs of this kind,
resting on teas, coffee, cocoa, tobacco,
liquors and wines. Vhat is the effect .?
She cannot avoid raising her aggregate
cost of production by this amount,
say about $120000,000 a year. For, all
these productions are consumed by her
laborers, and add to the cost of her labor
just as truly as if the same amount were
collected on the watches and manufac¬
tured goods she imports from France. But
while the tax thus imposed raises the cost
of her products, it does not rai.se their sell¬
ing price, for this, under free trade in man¬
ufactures, is fixed mainly by the importing
price. Hence this mode of ta.xation,
while it leaves foreign trade no freer than
under the protective .system, (for England
taxes her aggregate imports as heavily as
we do), yet leaves domestic industry to
be enslaved by unfair competition.
6
Brown.—I see a point there. But as
England and France live mainlv bv sell¬
ing their products in foreign markets, if
England cannot compete with France in
her own market, she certainly cannot
abroad,
Jones.—A fatal blunder in fact and
theory. No nation lives mainly by for¬
eign commerce. Even to England, hrr
home market is her most important one
in all of her industries. France, under
so-called free trade, undersells her in this
way. As English watches are shut out
of France by a protective tariff, while
French are admitted into England free,
the French watchmakers have exclusive
monopoly of their own market and equal
command in the English market. Sup¬
pose the cost of making watches to be the
same in both countries, and that $5 profit
on a watch is the average profit needed
to pay cost of capital, etc. The French
manufacturer having the monopoly of his
own market, by putting the profit on his
French sales up to $7 can afford to re¬
duce the profit on his English sales to an
average of $3, and still maintain the full
average on his entire trade. The English
manufacturer, however, must put his
profits down to $3 on all his sales, and
even at this rate, which is $2 less than
will pay for his capital invested, he must
lose half his sales. Perceiving this, he
closes his shop in England, and moves
across to France, where he can have the
full benefit of the French market, and an
equal field in the English market. Large
numbers of manufacturers have under
these influences, crossed from England
into France within five years.
Brown.—But even on that showing the
French farmer pays for his watch $4
more in profits to the manufacturer than
the Englsh farmer pays. As a consumer,
he has lost money.
Jones.—He has lost a penny to gain a
pound. Suppose, for instance, the watch
to be worth $50, ana to sell for $52 in
France, and $48 in England. In either
case three-fourths of the value of the
watch consists of the products which the
workman consumed in making it. The
English farmer has saved $2 in the price of
his watch, and has lost a purchaser of
$37.50 worth of English non-exportable
products, such as real estate, provisions
and clothing. The Frenchman has im¬
ported a consumer who will sell him only
one watch in a lifetime, and will buy of
him several tons of the produce of the
soil every year, besides making watches
so plenty in France as to insure, in the
long run, cheaper watches to French¬
men than to Englishmen. For, in the
end, the cheapness of all products is ob¬
tained by an abundant home production.
A man who always draws his water from
the well on his neighbor's farm, a mile
away, can never have so cheap water as
one who first goes to the expense of dig¬
ging the well at his own door.
Brown.-You believe then, thatEngland's
" free trade" mode of collecting her reve¬
nue on articles which she does not pro¬
duce, so increases the cost of her produc¬
tion, without increasing the price of her
products, as to became a bounty in favor
of her French and English competitors in
industrv.
Jones.—Certainly; England's free trade
scale of tariffs protects foreigners trading
in her markets against the competiton of
her own people, and sends very much
more than the amount of the tax collected
into the pockets of her rivals in manufac¬
turing industry.
Brown.—But you claim that there are
some cases in which the price to the con¬
sumer is not raised by the tariff at all, and
other's in which it is not raised by the
amount of the tariff. What are these?
Jones.—The price in all cases is fixed by
the proportion of the whole supply to the
whole demand. Where the available for¬
eign production is adequate to supply only
a twentieth, fortieth, or one hundredth
part of the American demand, in such
cases it only influences by a correspond¬
ing fraction the American prices. The
importer finds his price fixed by the
American supply and demand. If he
sells, he sells at our price, and if he pays
a duty, he deducts it from that same price.
This is the case with the coal, of which
we import one-fortieth of our supply;
with lumber, of which we import one-
twenty-fifth; with butter, of which we im¬
port one-hundredth part, and with pota¬
toes and grain, of which we import one
two-hundredth part of our consumption.
In the cases of both coal and lumber the
levying of a tariff, in i866, of $1.25 per
ton on coal, and of twenty per cent on
lumber did not raise the prices of those
products by a hair in the United States,
but lowered them in Canada by just the
amount of the tariff, because they would
only sell in Canada at the States' price
with duty off. When the time came for
them to decline in the United States, they
declined, notwithstanding the duty that
had been imposed on them, so that
they sold for less in gold in 1868-9 and'7O1
though paying $2,000,000 yearly in duties,
than they "did in 1863-4 ancl '65 when pay¬
ing no duty. Of course, there is no doubt.
in these cases, that these entire $2,000,000
of duties are paid by coal and lumber pro¬
ducers in Canada toward the support of
our government, and do not raise the
price of lumber or coal to the consumer
by a hair. To suppose the tariffincreases
the home price in such cases is to suppose
that all the butter produced in the United
7
States is raised in price 4 cts. per lb. by
the duty on butter, that all the grain pro¬
duced in our country is raised in price 20
per cent, by the tariff on grain, and that
all our potatoes sell for twenty-five cents a
bushel more than they would were there
no tariff on the few potatoes we import
from the Bermudas and the Canadas.
Brown.—That may happen in cases
where the foreign supply is trifling com¬
pared with the domestic production and
demand; but in the case of Bessemer
steel rails, for instance, the foreign supply
is ample; the American production is
small, and, apparently, the price is in¬
creased by the amount of the tax.
Jones.—For a time the tariff on steel
rails does sustain the price up to the point
at which American manufacturers can
produce about two-thirds of our actual
consumption. But thirty-six railroad
presidents unite in petitioning congress to
maintain the tariff at the protective point,
as the best means of developing that
degree of American competition with the
foreign which will insure us a permanent
supply of cheap rails.
Brown.—But our free-trade papers say
that all these railroad presidents are more
interested in the manufacture of steel rails
than in the success of their railroads; and,
besides that, this Bessemer steel patent is
a monopoly owned by only three persons,
who will get the whole benefit of the tax
paid by the companies on their rails.
Jones.—I fail to see how a thing can be
a monopoly owned by three persons, and
yet thirty-six presidents of as many inde¬
pendent railroads be more deeply interest¬
ed in its manufacture than they are
in their own business. In Europe the
patent is owned by Bessemer himself and
his grantees solely, but whether in this
country it is owned by three or thirty-
three, its owners have the same interest in
making as many rails as possible, and
selling them as cheaply as costof produc¬
tion will permit, as they have in Europe,
All railroads need these rails, and most of
them have the capital to make them as
cheaply as they can be made here. If
1 American competition does not bring
f hem down to cost of production and a
fair profit, let the railroad companies go
to making them themselves, as they do
their cars, depots and engines. Several
of them are already doing so. We need
in all 1,000,000 tons of rails a year, and
Europe only makes 560,000 tons of Besse¬
mer, of which nine-tenths are demanded
for consumption in Europe. After all,
therefore, our dependence for an adequate
supply must be on ourselves. Railroad
iron is far too bulky to be permanently
importable at a profit. If, therefore, we
break down our own rail makers and
fall back on importation for our whole
supply, we should soon raise the foreign
price much higher than it now is with
duty added. Besiaes, the production of
1,000,000 tons of rails in the United States
creates a market for 40,000,000 of Ameri¬
can agricultural products, while their pro¬
duction in Europe would not cause a de¬
mand on us for $3,000,000 of products of
any kind. The profits on the increased
demands for agricultural products, caused
by the manufacture of all our rails in this
country, would offset the higher price
paid for the rails, even if we suppose that
prices would continue to be higher after
we had come to be able to manufacture all
our rails than if we were compelled to
import them. But any man with half an
eye could see that if America manufac¬
tures $1,000,000 tons of rails annually,
they must be cheaper here, even though
the tariff were ten thousand dollars per
ton, i. e., prohibitory, than they possibly
could be under free trade, and the neces¬
sity of importing our whole supply from
Europe. The road to cheapness lies in
abundant production of the article we
would have cheap, not in prohibiting its
production entirely.
Brown.—Do you admit, then, that in
the case of imported manufactured goods
generally, the price is raised by the
amount of the tariff.'
Jones.—No, by no means. Wherever
the competition becomes close between
foreign and home producers, not only
does the home production constantly
contribute more and more to lower the
price, but the foreign producers pay a
large share of the duty out of what would
otherwise be their profits, as long as by
so doing they can possibly hold our mar¬
kets. Our late commissioner of the reve¬
nue, Mr. Wells, and our congressional
committees, have not inquired, as they
ought to have done, into the operation
of our tariff law in this respect; but I
think you will see it just as clearly if I
state a case:
A manufacturer in Sheffield, England,
makes cutlery, and has usually shipped
to America knives which cost him $4 a
a dozen, to be sold at $6 a dozen, whereby
he controls the market, as the American
manufacturer cannot make them for less
than $7. A duty of $3 a dozen is laid on
them, and he says : '"Now, I cannot sell
these knives for more than $7 50 a dozen,
for at that price the American shops can
make the same knives at a profit, and if
I sell at $8, they will cut me out of the
trade altogether : I will therefore pay the
duty of $3 a dozen myself, sell them at
$7.50, and have 50 cents profit, instead of-
selling them at $6, with $2 profit, as I did
before the American tariff was passed."
The effects, therefore, are :
I. The price of the knives to the Ameri-
8
can consumer is not raised b}" the amount
of the tariff, $3, as Free Traders assert,
but hy only $1.50.
2. The amount of the tariff is not
charged over by the importer on the con¬
sumer," as the Free Traders assume, and
paid by the American purchaser of knives,
but is paid by the British manufacturer,
two-thirds thereof out of his previous
profits, and one-third thereof out of the
rise in price, so that only the latter—one-
third of the tariff—is paid by the Ameri¬
can consumer.
3. Though the price of the article is
raised by $1.50, yet had the tax been
levied in any other manner whatever, the
price of whatever it was levied upon must
have been raised $3. American consum¬
ers, therefore, have not only got rid of
$2 of tax, by collecting it out of their
British cousins, but have avoided $i.50of
the rise in price, which would have re¬
sulted somewhere else and on something
else, if. they had levied the tax where
Americans would have to pay the whole
of it.
4. American manufacturers, who had
previously been undersold by $i a dozen
on knives, now find they can make them
at a cost of $7 a dozen, to start with, and
make a profit of 50 cents a dozen. But as
they go on, and their skill, organization
and capital increase, they constantly tend
to produce them more cheaply, until, at
last, they can produce them at $6, $5, or
$4 a dozen, and the foreign manufacturer
is finally and forever undersold, and
driven out of the field.
This is the process of making foreign¬
ers, at the same time, pay our taxes, and
support our industry. I am now collect¬
ing the materials for a demonstration by
which I expect to show that fully twenty-
five millions of dollars of our revenue are
paid by foreign producers of our imports.
Brov:n.—I see you have ciphered that
sum down pretty clos e. But if tariffs on
imports are a means of collecting our taxes
outof the people ofothernations, why is it
that none of our great free trade writers
see the advantage of them?
Jones.—The wisest of them do. Mr.
John Stuart Mill, the ablest of living ad¬
vocates of free trade, say.s, in vol. 2,
page 457, of his Principles of Political
Economy: "Those are, therefore, in the
right, who maintain that taxes on imports
are partly-paid by foreigners."
Brovjn.—Why is he, then, a Free Tra¬
der?
Jones.—He is a Free Trader in the
•English sense; because the manufactures
of England have outgrown the need of
jiiotection. The stronger, like the lion
among the beasts, never seek protection
againsi the weaker. But Mr. Mill, like
Adam Smith, the so-called father of free
trade, is only a qualified Free Trader.
Both admit the propriety of protecting
industries under certain circumstances:
as, where they are ess ntial to the na¬
tional defence in war; where they are
adapted to the natural resources of a
country, and only need encouragement
to make them profitable ; where they are
already in existence, and the removal of
the tariff would throw their workmen out
of emploi ment, etc. All these reasons
apply to the protected American indus¬
tries; and of coijrse, when you grant
the wisdom of the principle of protection
to particular industries by tariffs, you
must also grant that each nation will
judge best for itself what industries it
should protect.
Bro-o.'n.— How, then, can such men be
called Free Traders?
Jones.—They are Free Traders of the
English sort. English free trade means
that breadstuff's shall come in free, be¬
cause England has so little farming Ian d
that she cannot possibly raise all her own
grain. In everything but breadstuffs, she
thought she could undersell all foreigners
before she declared for free trade.
Brown.—Free trade in England and
protection in America, are, alike, policies
of encouragement to manufactures—the
one by securing them a home market for
their goods—and the other by securing
them cheap food for their operatives.
Jones.—Certainly. The repeal of the
protective duty on corn was the only tri¬
umph ever won by free trade in Eng¬
land. For three hundred years before
that, and until her manufactures could
compete with the wr»rld, she protected
them by heavy tariffs. She abandoned
protection because she supposed she had
nothing capable of needing it. But the
event is proving otherwise, since already
h.-r manufactures are breaking down and
her industry is being turned into pauper¬
ism and exile.
Brozi n.—I think you are right in claim¬
ing that foreigners pay a considerable
share of the duties on articles in which
they compete with us as producers. But
is not this profit off-et by the fact that
Americans p.ay in increased prices under
protection, a cons derable amount of tax
which does not go into the treasury?
Jones.—No. It is impossible that a
net profit which we make out of foreign
countries can be offset by any loss or
profit we make out of each other. If out
of our $180,000,000 of tariff duties, we
suppose that $20,000,000 are paid by for¬
eigners, our people, as a whole, are re¬
lieved from $2o,cxx),ooo of direct taxation.
It is as if^ the interest on our national
debt were reduced from six per cent, to
five.
Brown.—True, but nevertheless, so far
as protective tariffs raise the price of a I
product, only the increase in price on the
portion imported goes to the government,
while the increase in the price of the por¬
tion produced in this country goes to the
manufacturer, miner, or farmer producing
it. It is, in fact, a tax paid by the con¬
sumers of that product to the producers,
and I am opposed to taxing one set of
men for the benefit of another.
Jones.—So am I, where it can be avoid¬
ed. But abstract equality of taxation is
an Utopian dream. It is a logical im¬
possibility to impose a tax on any thing, .
foreign or domestic, land or goods, with¬
out changing values in such a way as to
make one man's property worth more,
and another's less. In levying the inter¬
nal revenue on whisky, it was seen that to
tax the process of manufacture would en¬
rich the owner of a stock already manu¬
factured, since he would add the amount
of the tax to his selling price. To tax the
whisky already in the vaults of whole¬
salers would raise the price of the liquors
owned by the retailers, who would add the
amount of the tax to their selling price,
though they had not paid it. Yet the re¬
tailers were so numerous, and their stocks
separately so small, that to prevent their
making this profit was impossible. If we
failed to tax the imported high wines, the
tax on the American whiskies would raise
the importer's price, and so act as a boun¬
ty to the foreign against the home pro¬
ducer. If we taxed real estate, it lessened
its profit to the owner relatively to other
kinds of property, and so amounted to a
bounty to those whose property was per¬
sonal. If we taxed incomes, it was a
bounty to the man who would swear down
his income return, as compared with one
who made an honest return. If we levied
an aggregate of $400,000,000 of taxes on
American industries in any manner, and
levied none on products of foreign indus¬
try coming into the country, this was a
tax on Americans and a bounty to foreign¬
ers, which would enable them to undersell
us in our markets by at least forty per
cent. It oeing absolutely impossible to
lay any tax so that the whole amount col¬
lected from the peop e shall go into the
treasury, i. e., so that it shall not change
the value of various kinds of property to
the benefit of some and the injury of oth¬
ers, it is no fair objection to a protective
tariff that it has this effect in common
with all other modes of taxation: It dis¬
turbs values and changes prices. So do
all taxes. To the extent that a tax raises
the price of an article on which no tax
has been paid, it taxes the community to
enrich an individual. Protectionists
merely recognize this effect of a tax, to
change prices and endeavor to so adju.st
the'tax, that the price raised shall be that
of an American product, while the thing
that pays the tax shall be the imported
product.
.5;-£)tv»..^But why not tax both equally.'
Jones.—^This is not possible, because
we can never compute with certainty the
actual tax on the domestic article, and
because, with every change in. the cost of
producing it, here or abroad, the equality
of the tax would cease.
Brown.—'Why can't we compute with
certainty the actual tax on the domestic
article ?
Jones.—To compute the amount of tax
which rests on a product, we must knq(4
how much tax enters into the cost of its
production. This includes the increase
in the wages of the workmen who make
it, by reason of the tax they pay on the
tea, coffee and sugar, beer and liquors
they consume, on the clothes they wear,
and the implements they use, on the prop¬
erty they own, and the income they earn ;
and the increase in the cost of their food
by reason of the taxes paid by the farmers
on what they consume, and which, in the
end, goes to raise the price of farming
products to those who have to buy them.
If, therefore, a duty of $7 per ton is laid
on imported pig iron, it is obviously im¬
possible to tell what portion of this tax is
ofl'set by the increased cost of domestic
production, until the tariff has developed
its results. If it has checked the impor¬
tation and increased the domestic produc¬
tion, then we know it has afforded protec¬
tion. If it has raised the price of the pro¬
duct $3, while other taxes have raised
the cost of producing it only $2, we know
it has afforded $i protection. When, for
instance, in Wisconsin the product of pig
iron rises from 2,000 tons in iSho, to So,-
000 tons in 1870, we may assume that the
tariff has been protective; the tax on the
foreign article being more than the rise
in the domestic cost of production. But
no mathematician cou d compute with
exactness all the items of tax -vyhich cause
the rise in domestic cost of production.
We estimate that our national taxation
equals one-tenth of the total earnings of
our industry, and the State and local taxes
generally amount to another tenth. Hence
in the grand total, one-fifth of all we pro¬
duce is received by the national and St.ate
governments in taxes. On this basis we
may roughly estimate that a tariff of tweri-
ty per cent, on all foreign products is nec¬
essary to offset our home taxes merely.
But in addition to this, our cost of labor
is increased by the better mode and means
of living demanded by the laborer. If
American laborers are to eat white bread,
and meat twice a day, with tea, coffee,
and 'oeer if they like, while British and
French eat black bread, and meat once a
week; if Americans are to wear oeiter
I
o
i
clothing, live in better houses, have better
furniture, support their own churches, and
educate their children, their share of the
product of labor must be greater ttian that
of the paupers of Europe. At least twen¬
ty per cent, more of tax on the product of
foreign labor is demanded to protect
American labor in its better style of liv-
, ing, and prevent American workingmen
from being pauperized. Under these cir¬
cumstances, and until our national debt
is paid, an average tariff of forty per cent.
I at least, is needed.
Brown.—But a protective tariff must
lesfen the revenue, since it is only by ex¬
cluding imports that it affords protection,
and by excluding imports it diminishes
the amount of duties paid on them.
yones. — Nonsense. Every protective
tariff excludes part, and admits part. It
gives, generally, an increased revenue on
the part it admits, and protection to our
producers against the competition of such
parts as it shuts out. In 1861, under a
revenue tariff, we collected only $39,000,-
000 of revenue. Then we passed the Mor¬
rill Tariff, which we have since raised
every year. Mark the result. In 1862 we
collected $59,000,000 in 1863, 69,000,000,
in 1864, $102,000,000, in 1865, 85.000,000,
in 1866, $157,000,000. in 1867, $176,000,-
000, in 1^8, $164,000, and in 1869, $177,-
000,000. The amount of our revenue is
four and a half times greater under our
present tariff than under that of 1800.
Had it not been, repudiation would have
been inevitable. Then we collected $i of
revenue to $8.50 of imports. In 1868 we
collected $1.00 of revenue to $2.11 of im¬
ports. Of course that is the best tariff for
revenue which from a given amount of
imports, collects the largest amount of
revenue. So it has been in every change
from a revenue tariff to a protective one.
Brown.—But if this is so plain, why
don't all our statesmen see it
yones.—All our statesmen do. Wash¬
ington, Hamilton, Gallatan, Franklin,
Jefferson, the Adamses, Madison, Andrew
Jackson, Martin'Van Buren, Calhoun—in
his earlier and wiser days, before he be¬
came a sectionalist and secessionist—
Henry Clay, Daniel Webster, Silas
Wright, Abraham Lincoln, all were pro¬
tectionists, though six of them were Demo¬
crats. When these are taken out of the
roll of our deceased statesmen, who are
left ?
Brown.—These are great names, and
I perhaps I can see how they, as statesmen,
should wish to build up manufacturers in
, America, in order to be independent of
^ Europe. But I do not see why I, as a
; wearer of cloth, should pay $20 for a coat
made here, when I could import the same
; coat for $15 were there no duty on it.
yones.—Suppose you had to pay the $5
tax in some form or other, would you not
sooner pay it in a way that would^ help
me to start a woolen factory adjoining
your farm, where I would buy your wool
to make the cloth, than to pay the same
$5 in a direct tax on land or income, and
buy an imported coat, made of English
wool and English labor I
Brown.—Yes, I would. I would like to
see manufactures of every kind springing
up around among the farmers. They give
employment to such boys and girls as
don't take to rough farming work, and
they make goods cheaper, and raise the
value of land. They are a great help to a
country. But I doubt whether a protective
tariff really helps manufaptures much. It '
is liable to be repealed, you know.
yones.—That is the fault of you Free
Traders, who repeal it: not of the Protec¬
tionists, who pass it. But, for that matter,
free trade is just as liable to be repealed as
protection is. And when it is repealed,
and a country turns from free trade to
protection, domestic industries and com¬
merce become so much more profitable
than foreign, that navigation and ship¬
ping interests decline as surely as manu¬
factures do when there is a change from
protection to free trade. Moreover, suffer¬
ing arises in the foreign countries, whose
goods and crops we had consumed, by
reason of the withdrawal in part of our
trade from them. But, better have protec¬
tion when we can than never have it at all.
France, Prussia and Russia have grown
great and mighty by means of the wealth
they acquired under protective policies,
steadily pursued. Spain, Ireland, Turkey
and India^ on the contrary, have been
pauperized by the destruction of their
manufactures.
Brown.—'VVell, neighbor Jones, you
have told me some things I hadn't thought
of. I shall weigh them carefully, and
make up my mind before I vote again for
a member of Congress. By the way, do
you know of any short, pithy arguments
on the question.' I would like something
to turn to, if any new point should occur
to me, which has not come up in our con¬
versation.
yones.—Yes, send to Chicago and get
The Bureau pamphlets. They are to the
point, brief and full of facts. Take the
New York Weekly Tribune, too. You can
club for it, so as to reduce the price to a
dollar a year, which makes it the cheapest
newspaper ever issued. Then, if you
have time to read anything more exten¬
sive, send for Henry C. Carey's "Slave
Trade: Domestic and Foreign," which
shows how the liberty of man grows in
all countries which protects and diversifies
their industries, and how the enslavement
of men, in some form, is always on the
increase in countries which allow their
I
I
laboring class to be made paupers by
unrestricted competition with the entire
pauper labor of the globe. By the way,
let me hand you a brief catechism, which
I cut from The Bureau, defining free
trade and protection. It sums up the
subject in the fewest words possible :
^ues. What is free trade.' A»s. It is
the exemption of foreigners from all taxes
on the business they do in our country in
competition with our own people, ^ues.
How much is it worth to the foreigner?
Ans. It is a bounty to him equal to our
average rate of taxation, which is twenty
per cent, of our total earnings of our
national industry, besides our higher cost
of labor, which is at least twenty per cent,
more. Free trade is, therefore, a bounty
of forty per cent, to foreigners competing
in our markets, ^ues. What is protec¬
tion? Ans. It is the sole object of all
government. Everything else we manu¬
facture for ourselves, but protection is the
only thing for which we must look to
government, ^ues. What is protection
to American industry? .,4»5. It is levying
such a tax on foreigners trading in our
markets as makes them pay a consider¬
able share of the cost of supporting our
government, at the same time that it
prevents American producers from being
slaughtered by foreign competition, .^ues.
What is the effect of free trade? Ans. It
keeps every American workingman under
perpetual competition with all the lowest
paid workingmen on the globe. If he
attempts to weave cloth, he is not per¬
mitted to do so at a profit so long as the
poorest Manchester weaver can do it for
less, and undersell him. If he tries to
raise wool, he is broken, provided a Buenos
Ayrean or Australian grower can under¬
sell him. Whateve*" he does he must do
cheaper than the whole world besides;
and, of all theworld's paupers he must be
the poorest, or else the national industry
must fail in the fierce competition, ^ues.
What is the effect of protection? Ans. It
is to guarantee to the workingman the
highest rates of wages anywhere paid ; to
his children, the best clothes and schools:
to his wife, the greatest freedom and vir¬
tue ; and to society, the most perfect local
and national independence, in peace and
in war.
AMERICAN SHIPPING.
The free trade theorists are making a
dismal howl about what they call the decay
of American shipping. We also regret the
decline in our sea-going tonnage, but we
do not perceive that free trade in ships and
shipping materials si the panacea for the
evil. The free trade theory levels all man¬
kind. The people of every nation are by
this theory entitled to benefit by the trade
with every other people on equal terms.
No national land marks, no nationality is
respected. This may be well enough in
England, since she has controlled the com¬
merce of the world. It was well enough
for the Dutch when they had that control.
But v^e, as defenders of national greatness
and national progress, prefer to take a more
practical view, and by consulting the his¬
tory of the past, endeavor to arrive at the
proper means for re-establishing our com¬
mercial marine.
It is a well-known fact tnat previous to
the Common-wealth, the Dutch held the com¬
mercial supremacy of the seas; England
was the greatest market, as the United
States is now, and Dutch ships traded to
all parts of the then known world, bringing
the products of foreign climes to England,
or to Holland and thence to England. The
great Cromwell, with his clear-sighted states¬
manship, saw this, and determined to cor¬
rect it in the interests of England, the
greatest consumer. Hence the celebrated
" Navigation Laws," enacted during his
" Protectorate," and which continued to be
a law of England till a recent date. Now,
what were these famous " Navigation
Laws," which had the effect of almost
sweeping Dutch commerce from the seas,
and making England the greatest of mari¬
time nations. They provided that no goods
or products of any country should enter
England, except imported in ships of the
particular country producing them, or in
English shifs.
Here was .protection with a vengeance.
Dutch ships could no longer bring the pro¬
ducts ef India, Africa or America, to Eng¬
land, neither could they bring those pro¬
ducts from Holland.
The effect was instantaneous aYid perma¬
nent. All England resounded with ship¬
building, and her merchants, so suitably
protected, opened up a vast trade with all
the world, importing the products of Amer¬
ica and the far east; and as a consequence
creating a demand for English wares in
those countries, which stimulated the home
industry of the nation to a large degree.
And not till England had outgrown the
necessity for those laws, not till her manu¬
factures had risen to such a height that she
needed all the outlets she could obtain for
them, were those stringent laws repealed-
And how was our great China trade built
up? By enacting that teas coming in our
own ships from China should come in free
of duty, while all other tea should pay such
duty. The consequence of this state of the
law was the building up of an extensive
market for our cotton manufactures in
China, of which we exported fifteen mil¬
lions of dollars worth annually before the
war. And yet with these facts before them,
with these lights of history shining upon
I
2
them, our Free Trade friends would throw
down the small barriers still left for the as¬
sistance and encouragement of our ship¬
masters. We say rather enact Cromwell's
expedient, and by one bold, determined
stroke, re-establish in a national manner, a
great and prosperous American commerce.
If the Free Traders are correct, it ^s all
one to us if English ships carry all our
traffic. Let English hulls do our com¬
merce, English Iroms spin our yarns, Eng¬
lish furnaces make our iron; we can grow
the grain, raise the cotton, ship them the
ore to smelt in their vessels, and generally
we can be the " hewers of wood and draw¬
ers of water" for them. This is the gene¬
ral tendency of the free trade doctrines, and
it would be 'well if their scope and tend¬
ency were well understood.
Our views are different. We believe in
building up a great nation in all its parts.
Both on land and at sea we wish to see our
country, as a country prosper and progress.
We desire that every branch of industry
should have not only a fair chance with
foreign competitors, but have the helping
hand held out to it, to aid it in firmly es¬
tablishing itself. We believe with the great
Daniel Webster, that to give all the people
employment is the true way to national
greatness. " Give the people emploj-ment
and they will get bread," were the words of
the immortal statesman, and it is in furnish¬
ing this employment in all branches of trade
and manufactures, and commerce, that our
principles of due protection to the producer
hold their high pre-eminence.
CAUSES OF THE POWER OF
. PRUSSIA.
The power of Genuany, which is now,
attracting Ihe attention and admiration of
the civilized world, has grown up in the
■ hrief space of forty years, as the result of
two intimately related policies, viz.: the
general diffusion of literary and industrial
education, and the protection of German
manufactntes, agriculture and mining,
against foleign competition, through the
Zollverein. Americans have special reason
to be proud of German progress, since the
efficient agent in favoring the Zollverein
iwas Frederick List, author of a work enti-
I tied "The National System of Political
1 Economy," and who, though German bv
' birth, became imbued with the principles
of protection, during his residence in Penn-
jsylvania. Prof. List was invited by Lafay-
^ette to accompany him in his tour of this
[country, and came only as a visitor and ob-
; server. He had previously edited an edi-
i tion of J. B. Says' treatise on Political Econ-
Jomy, and his leanings were toward free
1 trade. During his stay in this country he
[became familiar with its economical his-
itory, and reversed his opinions as to the
eflfects of unrestricted foreign trade on do¬
mestic manufactures. He learned that our
Federal Union grew out of an attempt to
form a customs or commercial union, with
free,trade between the various States, and
protection against foriegn competition, as
its guiding principle. He became familiar
with the unitizing effects of such a union,
and with the gratifying results to our man¬
ufactures and general industry, during the
years from' i8o6 to i8ty, in which com¬
merce with England was interrupted or
nearly destroyed, and the disastrous effects
of the free "trade treaty of i8i6, which
flooded American markets with English
goods, swamped our manufactures, and in
three years brought every branch of in¬
dustry to the lowest stage of suffering and
ruin. Thoroughly indoctrinated in the
Pennsylvania school of political economy,
of which Matthew Carey was then a lead¬
ing expounder. Prof. List returned to Ger¬
many filled with the purpose of agitating
for thd adoption of the principle of protec¬
tion to German industry, through a Zoll¬
verein, of which Prussia had, since i8i8,
been the proposer and exponent, while
Hanover and other German States, mainly
controlled by England, had formed an op¬
posing combination in favor of free trade.
The dream of List was of a united Ger¬
many, bound together by a net-work of
railroads centering in Berlin and Frankfort,
collecting its whole revenues in an exterior
line of custom-houses, under laws so framed
as to secure the freest possible intercourse
within the bund., and permanent protection
to every needed industry against foreign en¬
croachment. He had ■written a -work in
favor of these views while in America, and
his ability in advocating them in the public
journals of Gennany caused him to be se¬
lected as the executive agent in negotiating
suclji a union.
Prussia since iSi8 had been vainly en¬
deavoring to dra'w the other German States
into a Zollverein. In 1819, Saxe Weimer
and Mecklenburg had entered it, and in
1827 Wurtemburg and Bavaria made a treaty
of commerce with it ^ut, would not join it.
Hanover, Saxony and Hesse stoutly op¬
posed it, and favored an anti-Prussian free
trade coalition. During this period the
trade between Germany and Great Britain
consisted in the export of raw -wool from Ger¬
many and the import of woolen cloths from
England; an export of rags and an import
of paper; an import of cotton goods and
export of food. Under these in dustries,
Germany was the granary of Europe, and
her people so poor that they were sold by
their princes into foreign service as mer¬
cenary soldiers; and so weak, that it was
but sport for France, which had pursued
protective policies for two centuries, to
march her armies through Germany and
make it the battle-ground of Europe.
13
In 1831, however, Ilesse abandoned the
free trade coalition and joined Prussia, the
results of whose steady maintenance of the
protective policy were beginning to impress
the other German powers. Several of the
smaller states followed in quick succession.
In 1833, Bavaria, Wurtemburg, ana Saxony,
did the same. In December of that year,
the union counted 14,800,000 people.. In
1S34 they had increased to 23,500,000. In
1S35, Baden, Nassau, and Frankfort, joined
their number. In the next year the inde¬
fatigable List—through whose labors Ger¬
many was thus laying the foundation of its
present prosperi y—was ruined pecuniarily
by the decline in the value of his extensive
mining investment in Pennsylvania, in con¬
sequence of the adoption of a free trade
tariff by fne United States in 1833. This
spur did not retard his labors. In 1839, the ^
federation extended over 20,000 square
miles and a population of 27.000,000 of
people. In 1852 it had reached -32,600,000,
and now it includes 4D4XX),ooo of people,
and from a mere customs union, is rapidly
welding the discordant principalities of
Germany, into the United States of Ger¬
many, under a national union as perfect as
our own. It is often claimed by the Fi;ee
Traders that the rates of the ZoUverein are
low. They are indeed, lower than the
French, English, Russian and American
tariffs, for the reasons: ist. The debt of
Prussia is very small, compared with the
other powers. Mr. Gladstone, in 1866, in
his speech on the Budget, stated the debt
of Prussia at £43,000,000 sterling, or $208,-
000,000, a sum not quite twice the amount
of the revenue for one year. The debt of
Prussia bears the proportion of 43 to 279
for that'of Russia Holland, 85; Austria,
316; France, 400; Italy, 152; Spain, 145;
Turkey, 581; and America, 516. Mr. Glad¬
stone then remarked that " the finances of
Prussia are a model of administration."
Since that date, Prussia conquered the
.\ustrian armies and virtually annexed king¬
doms and duchies containing ten millions
of people, without borrowing a dollar or
contracting a debt, compelling the enemy
.-he defeated and the provinces she annex¬
ed, to pay nearly the whole cost of the war,
and disbursing the remainder herself out of
her revenue for the year. Now she is put¬
ting forth a marvelous display of military
strategy and financial power in a war with
France, which bids fair to prove as brilliant
a sucpess as her onslaught Spon Austria.
This economy of administration, and ab¬
sence <rf debt, render a lower rate of fron¬
tier duties more protective to Prussian in¬
dustries than a much higher one would be
in countries like England, France, and the
United States, where the effect of the cus¬
toms duty if designed to be protective, is
offset by high rates of internal and local
taxation, rendered necessary by huge debts
and heavy expenses of national and local
governments.
Again: Prussia has an abundant supply
of capital and of economical laborers. Her
rates and her money rates of wages are
low, and she does not need, therefore, in
her customs duties, to protect herself
against the underselling power of cheaper
foreign capital and labor. She needed only
to tax foreigners toward paying the ex¬
penses of her government, whenever they
attempted to sell in German markets any
commodity which Germans could and
ought to produce by their own labor. To
this principle, which is the gist of protec¬
tion, the Prussian-German tariff is faithful.
It utterly ignores all notion of taxation for
revenue, though under it the aggregate
revenues are largely increased, because
with every increase in their powers of pro¬
duction the ability of a people to consume
and pay for foreign goods is increased.
The Zollverein tariff has scarcely an ad
valorem duty in its schedule. Its cares
nothing for the values of commodities, in
its assessments bn their imports, but only
for their kind. It throws every quality of
I goods of the same general description into
a single class, without regard to their dif¬
ference of cost, and levies one rate of duty
upon the Prussian hundred-weight, whether
the fabric be muslin or canvas. It throws
together, under a common tariff of $36.40
per centner (iioj^ lbs.), such diverse ob¬
jects as hardware, perfumery, sewing-
needles, wigs, clocks and umbrellas, and
all admixtures of them. Such a tariff"
among us would raise a howl of ojiposition,
as burdening the coarse goods of the poor,
and exempting the fine goods Of the rich,
etc. But when these rates were first ad¬
justed, in i820-30l"'German manufactures
were in their inftfhcy, and the Germans
saw that the coarser the manufactures the
more certainly the Germans ought to be
able to produce them themselves. The
revolution in the character of German
commerce is seen in the fact that forty
years ago the German exports were double
the weight of the imports; though of less
value. In 1825 the commerce down the
Elbe was 110,600 tons, while that going up¬
wards was only 66,000 tons, Germany being
constantly in debt to the'money-lending
powers. ' Now, the exports are but half the
weight of the imports, though exceeding
them in value. In 1850 the transportation
of raw products up the Elbe was 315,000
tons, while the return of finished commod¬
ities down the Elbe weighed only 174,000
tons: Yet so greatly do her exports of
commodities exceed her imports in value
that the difference is constantly being ad¬
justed by ari importation of bonds or liens
on the industry of other nations, the United
States of America being a borrower of
nearly one ttiousand' millions of dollars of
I
4
German surplus capital. Then they were
selling raw products and cheap labor to the
outside world, in exchange for cloths, silks,
machinery and finished wares. Now they
are selling finished commodities and skilled
labor at high prices, in exchange for the
raw products of unskilled and agricultural
toilers.
For instance, in 1825 Germany exported
to England 28,000,000 pounds of raw wool,
receiving her pay in English cloth, thus
showing that wool was cheaper in Germany
than in England while cloth was dearer.
But in 1851, after twenty years of the Zoll-
verein, Germany imported 25,000,000 pounds
more wool than she exported, and exported
12,000,000 pounds of woolen cloths — prov¬
ing that woolen cloths had become cheaper,
and the raw wool dearer, in Germany than
in other countries; the price of the raw ma¬
terial and the finished article approaching
each other in consequence of the extensive
development of German manufactures. Can
It be contended that the Prussian farmers,
as growers of wool and wearers of cloth,
were not enriched by the higher prices they
received for their wool, and the reduced
prices they paid for their cloth ? Or that
as tax-payers the Germans were not profited
by the fact that while their manufacturers
were struggling into equality with those of
England and France, the latter m large
measure paid the German tariff out of their
own pockets for the privilege of selling
their goods in German markets, thus re¬
lieving the German tax-payer of so much
of his burden ? That the Germans as con¬
sumers were enriched is shown by the fact
that they consume more woolen goods, by
50,000,000 pounds annually than they did
under free trade, and when they imported
their cloths from England.
Again, in 1825 Prussia imported only
5,000 cwts. of cotton and cotton yarn, and
in the twelve years ending in 1836 the
amount had increased only to 8,000 cwts.,
or 6,000,000 pounds, which was about one
pound per capita per year for the whole
Prussian population. Since that period the
importation into the States of the Zollver-
ein of cotton and cotton twist has been as
follows: In 1836, 397,233 cwts.; in 1845,
1,018,150cwts.; and in 1851, 1,362,796 cwts.
In the last year the export amounted to
159,241 cwts.—leaving .for domestic con¬
sumption more than 1,200,000 cwts., or
130,000,000 of pounds, or not less than four
pounds per capita, for the whole population.
Says Mr. Carey, in his chapter on Prussia,
in "The Principles of Social Science," from
which many of these facta are drawn:
"The weight of cotton goods exported was
less than an eighth of that of the wool and
yarn imported; and yet the value of that
small quantity was 20,000,000 of thalers—
$14,000,000—being almost enough to pay
for tb'" whole import. At least three-
fourths of this large sum consisted of labor
representing German food, thus^readily en¬
abled to go to distant countries." In 1826,
"Germany supplied the world with rags,
and imported paper of which her consump¬
tion was then but small. In 1851, all had
changed, the net import of the first having
been 37,000,000 of pounds—the net export
of the last having risen to 3,500,000. In
the first period rags were cheaper than in
other countries, while paper was dearer.
In the second, rags were dearer, while
paper was cheaper. The prices ot the two
had greatly approximated, and, therefore,
had the consumption of paper so much in¬
creased as to absorb not only the whole
quantity (of rags) produced at home, bnt
in addition thereto more than 30,000,000
pounds produced abroad. From 1830 to
1854 the quantity of coal mined—a sure
test of the growth of modern manufectures
—increased from 7,000,000 tonnes (of 391
lbs. each) to 46,000,000 tonnes. In 1834
Germany produced 76,000 tons of bar iron;
in 1850, 200,000 tons of bar and 600,000
tons of pig-iron. The value of cotton and
woolen goods exported rose in 1851 to $25,-
000,000, the chief part of which consisted
of the food that had been combined with
the wool in the process of converting it
into cloth. As a consequence, the neces¬
sity for going abroad to find a market for
food had so greatly decreased, that the net
export from the country that in 1825 was
the granery of Europe was but 10,000,000
bushels." Simultaneously with this de-
velopement of manufactures, and especially
'of cheap iron, Prussia became able to build
railroads, until she had one mile of road
for every five miles of her land, besides
loaning hundreds of millions of capital to
other countries to build roads with, or--
which is the same thing—buying their
stocks when built. Travel became so com¬
mon that but few of the people of Prussia
failed to visit their chief cities, and thus a
higher standard of taste in art, architecture
and music was dilfused over all Germany.
As the price of the farmer's products in¬
creased, and local markets near at hand
sprang up at thousands of local centres, the
farmers advanced from the early three-field
system of agriculture, first to improving
their land by rotation of crops, so as to
keep it all in cultivation at once, and then
to a rotation of manures, the highest de-
velopement of skill in the preservation and
improvement of the fertility of the soil
So great has the necessity become for a per¬
fect system of tillage to meet the demands
of the German consumers that the proprie-'
tors of land feel that they cannot afford to
hold and cultivate it in large quantities, and
hence the division of land among a con¬
stantly increasing number of proprietors is
going on in Germany under protection,
from a law of profit, as natural as that
15
which causes the increasing concentration
of the land in England into the hands of a
few under free trade. In Germany the
land is a means of producing wealth in ac¬
cordance with the principles of the highest
of all arts, that of agriculture. In England
it is a means chiefly of the laborious display
of the spirit of monopoly which character¬
izes trade as the spirit of reciprocity char¬
acterizes production.
By means of this minute division of land,
great diversification of employments, steady
increase in wealth by production rather
than by trade, a competency is brought
within the reach of every German. The
government has wisely cared for the edu¬
cation of the people as well as their pro¬
ductive industries. As a consequence,
there is a strong, active, intelligent love of
fatherland; an intelligence in the Prussian
armies which fulfills the adage that " bay¬
onets think," and a capacity On the part of
the people during war or peace to do any¬
thing that man can do, and do it well.
Prussian literature and art are rapidly taking
the lead in the world of ideas as Prussian
arms and diplomacy are in that of politics
and nations. In theology, history, poetry,
science, art, in universities and galleries, in
books and paintings, in the stage and
the church, Germany has achieved her
greatest strides within the last half century.
And it does not even yet appear what she
shall be. Nearly all of this prosperity she
owes immediately to the adoption in 1820
to 1834 of a protective policy. Without this
she might have been industrious, but she
would have been disorganized, poor, and a
borrower. With it she has become united,
powerful, and rich; indeed the strongest
power in Europe to-day, except—it Tnay be,
Russia—who is only stronger as eighty mil¬
lions of people are inevitably stronger, in
certain respects, than forty.
LEATHER.
Few, even among dealers in the article,
are aware of the vast extent of the Leather
trade, and industries growing out of its
use. Next to agriculture, it employs more
capital and labor than any other interest of
the country. Whatever, therefore, advan¬
ces or retards its healthy condition and
growth, is worthy of careful study and at¬
tention.
During the rebellion, this industry, like
many another, was greatly stimulated, being
taxed to its utmost capacity, to furnish sup¬
plies for the armies in the field. When the
exceptional demand from this source was
cut ofiF with the close of the war, it was
found that the foreign demand, upon which
it had been accustomed to rely for the sale
of its surplus products, had gone oflf to
other markets, driven thereto by the inability
of our dealers to supply its wants during
those dark days of our history.. The con¬
sequence was, that the flow of trade was
checked, and over-production and stagna¬
tion supervened.
Some relief from legislation should un¬
doubtedly be given to this branch of indus¬
try in order that it may be enabled to re¬
gain a portion at least of its foreign trade,
that with South America having been es¬
pecially valuable. Our leather dealers were
accustomed to receive from that portion of
the continent, in exchange for their manu¬
factured products, an article of hides, sole
leather from which forms 90 per cent, of
the stock consumed in the country. These
hides now pass into the hands of other
parties abroad, who have supplanted our
dealers in this profitable market.
With such a modification of the duties
upon the raw material as will restore the
exchange of products with Buenos Ayres,
the leather interest may reasonably look
for a restoration of prosperity far exceeding
all former experience. The South has again
become a valuable customer, and her de¬
mand is now for the better grade of goods,
whereas, before the war, she only called
for the inferior qualities. The astonishing
recuperation of that section of the coun¬
try has made itself felt in this branch of
manufacturing industry, in a growing and
healthy trade. Under these circumstances
it is not unreasonable to expect, in the
course of five years, that instead of $225,-
000,000 as the total value of the leather
manufactures of the United States, double
that amount will be within bounds. The
advantage that this country holds in respect
to labor-saving machinery, upon which im¬
provements are constantly being made, and
the vast amount of capital that is only
awaiting favorable conditions to be invested
in this direction, indicate that in a few
years American facilities will be such as
that they can obtain and hold the markets
of the wo'ld in Leather Manufacture.
This is one of those branches of industry
which we want to see more extensively in¬
troduced into he West; and the farming
community, by giving their attention to it,
can turn their winter leisure to profitable
account, as their brethren in New England
have done for half a century.
The largest product of pig iron in the United
States, up to 1861, was 932,583 tons—having grown
from only 50,000 tons in 1810. But, under the recent
large production, the product has increased within
the last nine years to an estimated amount 1,950,000
tons, or a greater increase than in the previous hair
century I Can it be doubted thaj this immense
addition to the stock of iron has kept tlie price the
world over far below what it might otherwise have
been? The recent discovery of a mode of dispens¬
ing with the process of puddling will, if it proves a
success, turn out malleable iron at a cost but little-
above that of crude metal.
i6
Adam Smith, book iv.,chap. i-i, p. 203,
of the " Wealth of Natioiib,'' bays :
Though there seems, however, to be two cases in
which it wilJ generally be advantageous to lay some
burdens up<)n foreign, for the encouragement ol
domestic industry— •
The first is when some particular sort of industry
is necessary for the defence of the country;
The second case is witen some tax is imposed at
home upon the produce ol domestic industry—
Se there are two others in which it may sometimes
be matter of deliberation :
1. When some foreign nation restrains by high
dutie'4 or prohibitions the im4)ortulion of some of our
manufactures into their country.
2. \\'hen particular manufactures, by means of
high duties or prohibitions upon all foreign goods
which Ciin come into competition with tliem, have
been so Air extended as to employ a great number of
hands. Were those high duties and prohibitions
taken away all at once, ciieaper foreign goods of the
s :me kind might be poured so fast into tlie home
market as to deprive ail at once many thousands of
our people c»f tlieir ordinary employmcut and means
of subsistence.
Applvinsf these remarks of the father of
Political Ecoiiomv to our own industries,
we observe ;
First—That tlie manufacture of iron
and steel ^oods and wares ot all kinds,
from the ritie to tiie needle that sews the
soldiers' clothing, and also of cottons,
woolens, and machinery for making them,
are essential to tlie defence of the country
from the enemy, during war, and, far
more, from our competitors in industry,
during peace.
Secondly—As we are imposing taxes at
home upon tiie produce of our domestic
industry (national, state, county and city
taxes included) to an aggregate not less
tlian $500,000,000 a year, it fails quite
within Adam Smith's requirement tiiat
we should impose some burden upon
foreign for tiie benelit of doipestic in¬
dustry."
Tiiirdiy—England lays a tax of Ihree
hundred per cent, on the tobacco which
we'■ manufacture " out of our soil, sun¬
light and muscle, and export to her. If
we siiouid send witli every ship load of
tobacco enough more tobacco to pay the
duty, it would require three ships to carry
the duty to the IJritish government for
one that carries tobacco to the people. A
large share of this tax is really borne by
American producers, for the price of a
luxury depends as largely on what the
consumer is willing to pay, as on its cost.
The consumer would pay more to the
American producer, if the government
did not withdraw three-fourths of what he
is willing to pay in tax. Moreover, the
tax diminishes the ability of the consumer
to buy tobacco, and so checks the power
of the producer to sell it. This, some
may argue, is a benefit to tiie world.
That is a matter of humanitarianism with
which we iiave nothing to do. In fact,
however, the effect of a tax upon tobacco,
liquors, and like articles on which very
iiigh taxes are usually laid, on grounds
of morality, is not .so much to lessen the
apparent quantity consumed, as to deteri¬
orate the quality, by leading to the use of
fraudulent substitutes. The best tobacco,
as raised, is American; and hence the
English taxes wiiich rest on American
tobacco tend to encourage the use of the
inferior substitutes produced elsewhere,
thus lessening the importation from
America into England.
Finally, we have a vast manufacturing
industry, wiiich now employs 2,200.000
men and women directly, or about one-
tiiird as mans as our agriculture employs.
io.Ojo.ooo of persons are dependent on
these manufactures for their support.
These 10.000.000 are tiie consumers of
thirty-five thirty-sixths of ail the surplus
agricultural products of the country not
consumed by the farmers and planters
tiiemseives. So that either as consumers
of agricultural products, or as producers
of manufactures, the interests of the
manufacturing class is inseparable from
the interests of the agricultural. As ail
tiie.se industries would be brought to a
sudden and disastrous .collapse by one
year of free trade, like that which over¬
whelmed tiie country in 1S16 to '23, in
i833-'4I, and in i857-'6o, we find Adam
Smith's specifications of the circumstances
in which protection to "domestic in¬
dustry" should be applied, to cover the
whole case of the American Protectionists;
THE BUREAU;
A MONTHLV MAGAZINE,
DEVOTED TO THE
COMMERCE, MANUFACTURES, AND GENERAL INDUSTRIES
OF THE UNITED STATES.
Three Dollars per Annum. Sin£'ie copies^ 25 cents.
Office, lo and 103 VVab.vsh Avenue. Chicago, III.
The Bureau;
{PAMPHLETS FOR THE PEOPLE,)
DEVOTED TO THE
^ ^ >r
^OMMERCE, jy^A-NUFACTURES, AND ^^ENER!AL JNDUSTRIES
V OF THE UNITED STATES.
PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY
_'HE Bureau Printing Company,
H
loi AND 103 Wabash Ave.,
Incorporated iittder the General Laws of the State of Illinois*
Nq. 2.
CO N T E N T S :
cellaneous 2, 8, n, 13
V a Tariff may Protect Industry 5
:lish FreeTrade 6
■ e Your Enemies ^ 6
- 'ariff for Revenue. 7
The on Carpets S
Pig- Iron Protection 9
Mr. WeJls on Wool and Woolens lo
The Law of Advance and Decline in the. Fer¬
tility of Soils
The United States and^Russia 14
' ^ract from the Republican National Platform adopted at the Wigvjam^ CkicagOy
in i860:
■,/'While providing revenue for the support of the General Government by duties on imports, sound
■' ^y requires such an adjustment of these imposts as to encourage the development of the industrial
"ests of the whole country; and we commend that policy of national exchanges which leaves to the
dngmen, liberal wages; to agriculture, remunerating prices; to mechanics and manufacturers,
idequate reward for their -skilh labor, and enterprise; and to the nation, commercial prosperity and
pendence.''
'ract from the Democratic National Platform adopted in Tammany Hall^ New Torh^
in July^ 1868:
"The Democratic Party, in National Convention assembled, reposing its trust in the intelligence,
lotism, and discriminating justice of the people, * *-* do, with the return of Peace, demand * * *
^ a tariff for revenue upon foreign imports, and equal taxation under the internal revenue laws, as will
J^'"d incidental protection to domestic manufactures, and will, without impairing the revenue, impose the
: burden upon and best promote and encourage the great industrial interests of the country."
2
Washington, as President, met the first
Congress clad in a suit of domestic cloth,
and the second act passed by that Congress
had a preamble as follows:
"Whereas, It is necessary for the sup¬
port of Government, for the discharge of
our debts, and for the. encouragement and
protection of manufactures, that duties be
laid on goods imported," etc.
In i860, the eleven Northwestern States
had $900,000,000 of farm products to con¬
sume and sell. IIow much did manufac¬
turing Europe, England and the Continent
take of us.? Only .some $13,000,000 worth.
How much did 20,000,000 of our customers.
East and South, in the Union, buy.' Some
$190,000,000, or sixty-fold as much per head.
But these foreign countries sent us $200,-
000,000 worth of their manufactures. Great
Britain sent to the West $45,000,000 of her
wares—buying little and selling us much.
The Tribune (Chicago) says:
" The tariff on foreign wools prohibits the Ameri¬
can woolen manufacturer making any but the coarser
goods ; for this he has an overstocked market of
cheap wools, and alt competiticm from abroad is cut
off; he, therefore. purch.ases his principal material at
25 per cent, less than be did before the soar, and sells
his blankets back to the wool-^ower at an advance of
70 to 100 per cent."
The only competition from abroad that is
cut off, is that of the sellers of wool. Our
market is as open to all buyers as if we had
no tariff at all, for there is none on exports.
The only competition that could come to
the American wool-growers, is that of the
foreign wool-grower! And this being cut
off, we are told that the manufacturer
"therefore" buys his wool for one-fourth
less than before the war I Let us see. The
census of i860 says the total number of lbs.
of wool carded in the United States in that
year, were 5,230,651, and that the cost of
the raw material used, was $1,756,125, being
31 cents a pound in gold. The average
prices to-day range from 30 to 53 cents per
pound in currency, or from 25 to 45 cents in
gold, the mean being 35 cents in gold,
which is 2 cents a pound higher, in¬
stead of 25 per cent, lower than before the
war.
There are some who claim to be econo¬
mists, who hold that tariff duties should
never be levied on any articles save those
which we cannot produce ourselves. This
is Mr. J. S. Mill's theory. On this theory
we are evidently raising four times as much
revenue as we ought, since our mode of
raising three-fourths of it is an entire mis¬
take, and yet it is confessedly the only pos¬
sible mode of raising any such sum. But
this is not all. We have only to suppose
that our country, by new modes of cultiva¬
tion, or by the acquisition of new territorr,
becomes a producer of those things which
now we do not produce, such as coffee, tea,
etc., when lo! those duties also become pro.
tective, and should, according to Mr, Mill,
no longer be levied. This may perhaps ex¬
plain why Mexico, which has varieties of
soil and climate adapted to produce eveij
known product of the globe, can have no
re-enue whatever, and consequently must
let her bonds sell at six cents on the dollar!
If she would levy any import duties on
anything, such duties would naturally tend
to stimulate the production of that article,
which, say the British ecxinomists, would be
all wTOng. Therefore she must do without
all revenue, since she could impose none,
but would stimulate some branch of Men-
can industry! How unfortunate must that
country be which must dispense with all
revenue, because God has endowed it with
the resources for producing all products.
It is singular, that while Mr. Mill in
general opposes protection, though he also
in a special way indorses it, he concedes its
strongest point, viz.: that the tariffs on im¬
ported goods are to a great extent paid b;
the foreigner. In vol. 2, page 457, of hi
Principles of Polit. Econ. he says: "Those
are therefore in the right who maintain that
taxes on imports are partly paid by foreign¬
ers." And again, on page 458, he says con¬
cerning " duties not sufficiently high to
counter-balance the difference of expense
between the production of the article at
home and its importation. Of the monev
which is brought into the treasury of an;
country by taxes of this last description,!
part only is paid by people of that countn,
the remainder by the foreign consumers of
their goods." And again he says, (same
page), "a non-protecting duty would in
most cases be a source of gain to the coun¬
try imposing it, in so far as throwing part
of the weight of its taxes upon other people
is a gain." And again, "the only mode in
which a country can save itself from being
a loser by the revenue duties imposed h;
other countries on its commodities, is to im¬
pose corresponding revenue duties 00
theirs."
It is plain that, according to Mr. Mill's
definition, the entire $ 123,cxx5,ooo of dudes
which we have classed as " protective" art
revenue duties, i. e., they have not been»
high as to " counter-balance the difference
of expense between the production of the
article at home and its importation," for it
they had, the articles on which the duty has
been actually collected could not have been
imported, and ergo, no duties would have
been collected upon them. Hence, accord¬
ing to Mr. Mill, a portion of the $123,000,-
coo of revenue thus derived has been paid
i by foreign manufacturers and merchants
3
vTiainly English and French, toward the sup-
(X)rt of our government. We have explain-
in another article exactly how and why,
! ind out of what portion of his capital, the
j breign manufacturer pays the tariff. What-
.:ver objections Mr. Mill and the foreign
',nanufacturers have to our mode of levying
j'.i tariff, so as to make them pay a large "por-
ion of it, we confess that we like it In
, iew of the part the latter took in our late
' lar, if we were quite sure they were pay-
ng half, two-thirds, or even the whole of
"he interest on our national debt, we should
bide under the conviction still more com-
'"jrtably.
We do not see what ground there is to
"iment specially that European capitalists
'yave come into possession of our ships,
"Sore than to grieve over the fact that they
'"wn nearly all our railroads, and two-thirds
i-f our national debt. The decline in our
""lipping began five years before the rebel-
■^'on. Mr Carey, in a work then published,
'^edicted, on purely economical principles,
lat the nation which exports its bulky
"-roducts, on which the freights are large,
-bd receives in exchange therefor finished
■ Products, on which the freights are small,
-; datively to the values, must pay the freights
""oth ways. The mere saving to the manu-
' scturing nation from this source alone
. ould soon buy all the means of trans-
cjrtation required to carry on the com¬
ic; lerce, whether they were ships, steam-
1 ■ "s, cars or canals. When manufactur-
c "s and miners stop, and their work¬
men are turned out of employment, the
,.ree Traders say, "Let them stop! It is
ecause their work can be more profitably
r;Tiployed in other kinds of business." When
- .merican manufactures are so built up that
;^:Jr need of ocean transportation diminishes,
T-* when British cruisers compel American
f isssels to sell out to British owners, or when
,-ir any reason we stop building ships, why
innot the Free Traders say with the same
j,^inchalance, " Let them stop; it is because
[-•ir capital and labor pay better in other
jj-iings." Certainly there never have been
,,^;n years of our history in which the aver¬
se condition of our working and producing
^ asses, apart from the sufferings of the
"'ar, have been so good as during the past
m. In i860, after fourteen years of peace
id free trade, the city government of Phil-
'■Telphia advertised for a hundred men to
^^iit stone on the highway at sixty cents a
'^ay, and six thousand offered—most of them
; nemploj-ed mechanics and skilled artisans.
' a 1857, soup-houses were donating bones
nd watered grease to the unemployed work-
"igmen of all our large cities, arid Illinois
^ irmers were burning their corn for fuel,
ecause it would not bring 10 cents per
'•■.'ushel on the prairies or twenty-five in
Chicago, while light cattle were selling in
Chicago at two to two and a half cents a
pound. While such was the condition of
Northern labor, Mr. Pollard describe^ the
mass of Southern slave laborers as unfit to
appear to the presence of women because
of their nakedness. Instead of this, we nov»
have Northern workingmen receiving, sava
a recent free trade article in the North
Atnerican Revteiv, "salaries that profes»
sional men could not command before the
war," mechanics demanding, not public
soup, but a reduction of their hours of
labor, the late slave husband sending his
children to school and sustaining his wife
at home, and an advertisement for 100 men
to cut stone on the Philadelphia highways at
twice sixty cents that would not attract a
man.
The following table, prepared by the De¬
partment of Agriculture, shows the average
production of com per acre, and its cash
value per acre, and average price per bushel
at the place where grown, in eighteen North¬
ern States, for 1865:
State.
Bushel per
acre.
Cash value
per bu.
Value per
acre.
New Jersey
42M
fi 1514
$4S 8n
Connecticut
3"J4
I 22 V4
38 28
Rho4e Island ...
3'^
I 22^'^
38 58
Massachusetts..
33
I 101/2
36 83
\ ermont
4324
' 'S14
50 42
Maine
34
1 21
41 14
New Hampshire
33
1 2114
40 10
New York
24
05
22 80
Pennsylvania ...
40
TO
32 00
Ohio
4'H
44 3-7
'8 43
Michigan
38H
60 1-9
23 14
Indiana
402-S
38 1-10
63
Illinois
35 !4
2914
10 32
Wisconsin
4'14
46
19 00
Iowa
4214
30
12 78
Minnesota
38
S'!4
*9 57
Nebraska
4654
59
^ 43
Kansas
41 1-6
53
21 82
Illinois is a com State, dependent largely
on consumers east of the Alleghanies for
the disposal of her surplus. From the value
of her com, therefore, is deducted the cost
of shipping from 800 to 1,200 miles, so
much of it as is consumed in this country,
while from the portion consumed in Europe
there must be deducted the cost of trans¬
porting it 3,000 miles. Hence her product
in 1865 of 1x7,095,852 bushels averaged but
29^4 cents per bushel. Had her consumers
been in the Northwest, she would have re¬
ceived the average pric* paid for New Eng¬
land corn — $1.20 per bushel. Her tax for
transportation, therefore, was 90^ cents per
bushel—amounting on her entire crop to
$105,473,856.06. This is the price agricul¬
tural States pay for the privilege of having
their manufactures and their markets in
distant States. And yet no State in the
Union, and no country in the world, has so
great undeveloped manufacturing power as
4
Illinois. Two-lhii-cis of the wliole State is
lAicieriaid \\ith co.al; three tiers deep, afford-
ipg power enough, if used, to run all the
spindles and furnaces in the world for twd
cenfu+i'es. The ores of Missouri and Supe¬
rior ,*Wid the cottons of the South, and an
imlimiced supply of wool can be brought to
Illinois by water catriage. Yet Illinois', to-
chiy, is just where England was three cen¬
turies ago, when she sold her pelts to the
Dutch for srepence and bought back the
tails for a shilling. And the leading journal,
and some of the leading demagogues of the
Northwest, are clamoring for cheaper trans¬
portation, so as to sell more pelts and buy
more tails!'
»
Irei-and and India are fair examples of
the effect which it has upon the agricul¬
turists of a country to allow its manufac¬
tures to be broken down by competition
with a foreign and stronger rival. Tliree-
quarters of a century ago the general man¬
ufactures of Ireland rivaled in prosperity
tliose of England. The Irish linens were,
indeed, superior to all others, and the
woolens stood nearly as high. As a conse¬
quence, the large portion of her people en¬
gaged in manufactures consumed all the
products of her farmers, while her farmers
could consume but a small portion of her
manufactures. These she exported, and so
maintained an extensive importation of
tropical products. Could Ireland then have
controlled her own legislation and protect¬
ed her manufactures from being broken
down by competition with those of Eng¬
land, she would still have been a prosper¬
ous nation, though she could not, for want
of iron and coal, have carried her manufac¬
tures to so high perfection as those of Eng¬
land. But instead of this, the union with
England, by admitting English goods free
of tariffs, broke down Irish manufactures,
turned her whole people into farmers,
while giving them no market for their pro¬
duce; gave rise to an exhausting and waste¬
ful mode of farming, by compelling the
raising of one crop year after' year on the
same soil, without rotation, and so brought
on the potato rot, and other causes of
iamine, which reduced her population in a
few years, from eight millions to fi\ e mil¬
lions, and is still reducing them by emigra¬
tion.
A century ago India had never known a
famine. ller people were so divided be¬
tween manufactures and agriculture that
each class produced ivhat the other needed
to consume. Not only did her native hand-
looms weave the finest cottons, and woolens
or cashmeres, but the richest silks, such as
for centuries had been carried from India
across the deserts of Central Asia on camels
fo Europe. But free trade was carried into
India at the point of English bayonets, and
with it came the destiuction of Indian
manufactures, and the turniiig Out of em-
jdoyment of millions of laborers. The¬
oretically they were free to buy in the
cheapest market and sell in the dearest,
but, in fact, they could sell nothing and buj
nothing. Farmers could not sell their crops,
hccause there was nobody producing anv-
thing but crops. Weavers could not sell
their cloths, because the English undersold
them. Thbite w^ho made their cloths in
England ditf not buy their crops, because
thev could buy them cheaper nearer home.
Hence the poor Hindoos had no recourse
but to starve and die by millions, by the
roadsides, and in the fields. Famines, un¬
known under the previous exclusive policy,
and still unknown in Japan and China
where that pMicy is still resolutely and
wisely maintained, prevailed periodically,
as many as two millions of persons dying in
a single year, and this repeatedly. On
some occasions the Governor-General in
moving through the country was com¬
pelled to send out bodies of " sappers and
miners" in advance, to bury or remove
enough Of the dead to enable the Governor's
cavalcade to advance. Now the Coolies
are being exported from India, like the
Irish from Ireland, in search of bread. Of
what avail to them is the privilege of buy¬
ing cheap and selling dear when they have
nothing to sell and nothing with which to
buy?
What is Free Trade?
Ans. It is the exemption of Foreigners
from all taxes on the business they do in
our country in competition with our own
people.
Jjjwcs. How much is it worth to the for¬
eigner?
Ans. It is a bounty to him equal to our
average rate of taxationl which is twenty
per cent, of the total earnings of our
national industry, besides our higher cost
of labor, which is at least twenty per cent
more. Free trade v-, therefore, a tounty
of 40 per cent, to foreigners competing u
our markets.
^uns. What is protection.'
Ans. It is the sole object of all govern¬
ment. Everything else we manufacture
-for ourselves, but protection is the only
thing for which we must look to govern¬
ment.
What is protection to AmericM
Industry?
At/''. It is levying such a tax on foreign¬
ers trading in our markets as makes them
pay a considerable share of the cost of sup¬
porting our Government, at the same time
that it prevents American producers from
being slaughtered by foreign competition-
\
5
^ues. What is the eifect of freeitra^f.?
Ans. It keejis every American workuig-
man vjinder perpetual competition, with all
the lowest paid workingmen on the globe.
If he attempts to weave cloth, he is not
permitted to do so at a profit so long as tlie
poorest Manchester weaver can do it for
less and undersell him. If he tries to raise
wool, he is broken, provided a single Bue-
mob Ayrean or Australian grower can un-
■ dersell him. Whatever he does he must
do cheaper than the whole world beside,
and, of course, of all the world's paupers,
' he must be the poorest, or else the national
.industry must fail in the fierce cpmpeti-
rdon.
^ ^es. What is the effect of protection ?
A?is. It is to guarantee to the working-
^Tian the highest rates of labor anywhere
„raid; to his children, the best clothes and
^ychools; to his wife,, the greatest freedom
;^ind virtue; and to society, the most perfect
^ ocal and national independence, in peace
md in war.
Now analyze the tariff, and see how
nuch of it aims to afford any protection
- vhatever to American industry. The fol-
-owing for the year ending June 30th, 1868,
- hows amounts collected on articles not prO-
...iuced in this country, and the tariff upon
~ rhich had no protective purpose in view:
loffee $10,637,859.18
Hamonds ro6,i^69.05
"ruits, (chiefly non-producible here)... 3,593,657.81
'urs , 500,066.44
linger 74,822.70
.rums 622.844.18
~ futs 4^,603,61
3." ilk and manufactures of 10,560,384.13
pices 1,750.455.00
9,414,664.29
Duties wholly non-protective .§36,^,025.69
^" Besides these, the duty on sugar can not
'' rictly be regarded as having proteiction in
t '-'iew, though we produce in Louisiana
K -bout one-tenth of the sugar we consume in;
le entire country. The duty would not
"robably be reduced if we produced none
Louisiana. It yielded, in 1868, $34,858,-
56.19, being our largest item of revenue,
lere we have a total of $71,664,091.88
vied for revenue only, and at rates aver-
,4 |ing about 80 per cent., being much higher
lan the average rates of the protective
J.- ..riffs, which are about 35 to 40 per cent.
here has been no neglect to cover with
.jjr- Jt every article which we do not produce,
id do import. If therefore the foreign
. lanufacturers were given free importation
■ , ir their goods, we would either have to col-
ct from the above list three times as high
V. I'iffs as we now do, about doubling the
.'-■eseni prices of tea, coffee, sugar, silks,
" '-)ices, etc., or collect the present " protec-
ve" duties, by internal revenue taxes or
:pudiate.
HOW A TARIFF MAY PROTECT
INDUSTRY.
Free Trade is the policy of exempting
the goods imported by foreign manufactur¬
ers, miners, and fanners, fronj (4^ taxation,
and consequently, (when not coupled with
open repudiation of collecting all our taxes,
from the profits on the exchanges we make
among ourselves.
■Protection, as opposed to free trade, is
the policy of collecting upon foreign goods,
before they can he sold in this country,
such a tax as will make their manufacturers
and importers pay as much (or more) to¬
ward the support of our Government as
they would have paid if they had manu¬
factured the same goods.in this country.
A Revenue tariff, so called, is one which
aims to collect the whole needed revenue
from our own people in such a way as not
to interfere with the foreign manufacturer's
access to our markets.
A Protective tariff, as opposed to the
above, is one which collects such-a propor¬
tion of tax on imports as causes the for¬
eign producer to pay as much of it as he
can be made to, and the importer to pay
enough more, so that the t'wo together shall
not undersell the Amercan producer of
similar goods or crops, without paying a
part of his taxes for the privilege. That
the foreign manufacturers pay a consider¬
able share of our revenue, and stand the
loss in order to compete for control of our
markets, is abundantly proved by their own
confessions, and by the intense anxiety they
feel to lower the protective duties in our
tariff list. They would not care ■whether
outr'duties were high or low if, as Ihe Free,
Traders nfesertj they had only to add the
tariff to the price of the goods, and sell to
the consumer for so.much more.
The practical working of a protective
tariff is this i A manufacturer, in Sheffield,-
England, makes cutlery,- and has usually
shipped to America, knives which cost hirn
$4 a dozen, to be sold at $6 a dozen, where¬
by he controls the market, as the American
manufacturer cannot make them less than
$7. A duty of $3 a dozen is laid on them,
and he says " Now, I cannot sell these
knives for more than $7 50 a dozen, for at
that price the American shops can make
the same knives at a profit, and if I sell at
$8, they will cut me out of the trade al¬
together. I will therefore pay the duty of
$3 a dozen myself, sell them at $7.50, and
have 50 cents profit, instead of selling them
at $6, with $2 profit, as I did before the in¬
fernal American tariff was passed." The
effect, therefore, is:
I. "The price of the knives to the Ameri¬
can consumer is not raised by the amount
of the tariff, $3, as any Free Trader would
tell you, but by only $1.50.
6
2. The amount of the tariff is not charged
over by the importer on the consumer, as
the Free Traders assume, and paid by the
American purchaser of knives, but is paid
by the British manufacturer, two-thirds
thereof out of his previous profits, and one-
third thereof out of the rise in price, so
that only the latter—one third of the tariff
—is paid by the American consumer.
3. Though the price of the article is
raised by $1.50, yet had the tax been levied
in any other manner whatever, the price of
■whatever it was levied upon must have
been raised $3.00. American consumers,
therefore, have not only got rid of $2 of
tax, by collecting it out of their British
cousins, but have avoided $1.50 of the rise
in price, which would have resulted some¬
where else, and on something else, if they
had levied the tax where Americans would
have to pay the whole of it.
4. American manufacturers, -who had
previously been undersold by a dozen
on knives, now find they can make them
at a cost of $7 a dozen, to start with, and
make a profit of 50 cents a dozen. But as
they go on, and their skill, organization
and capital increase, they constantly tend
to produce them more cheaply, until, at
last, they can produce them at $6, $5, or
a dozen, and the foreign manufacturer
is finally and forever undersold, and driven
out of the field.
This is the process of making foreigners
pay our taxes, and support our industry,
which the Free Traders tell us is Robbery!
Robbery of whom ? Certainly not of
American tax-payers or workingmen.
ENGLISH FREE TRADE, A MANU¬
FACTURER'S POLICY.
The ascendancy of England, France,
Prussia, and Russia, in Europe, has been
obtained by a steady policy of protecting
their industries by tariffs from foreign com¬
petition. At one time England imported
all her manufactured goods from Flanders
and Holland. The standing joke was that
England sold her pelts to the Flemings and
Dutch at a sixpence apiece, and bought
back the tails at a shilling. Now, the ma¬
chine power of England is computed to
equal the hand-labor of 1,000,000,000 of
men, or the whole population of the globe.
Now, English capitalists derive from their
loans of surplus capital to foreign nations
and corporations, an annual income of
$140,000,000 per year, or more than the
whole interest of our national debt. True
she has iron and coal; but so have Poland
and Hungary, which have been wiped out
from among the nations. But they allowed
their people to form their alliances with
foreigners and fight among themselves.
England compelled hers to depend on each
other, to produce by their industry all that
Englishmen needed to consume. In the
course of three centuries her manufactur¬
ing industries, one by one, reached the
point where they could defy competition;
and when she repealed her duties on silks,
the last of her tariffs on manufactures, her
own silk manufactures so fully supplied her
markets that the entire duties collected on
imported silks did not equal her dog-tax.
England never subjected her manufactures
to competition while anything capable of
underselling her existed outside. When
her manufacturing and commercial popula¬
tion had become so large that the soil of
Great Britain was inadequate to feed them
her farmers still, in the name of the prin¬
ciple of protection, which had worked so
admirably in developing manufactures, de¬
manded that tariffs should be imposed on
the importation of corn (breadstuff's), suffi¬
cient to give them control of the market
The free trade agitation in England, there¬
fore, was not, as it is here, an effort by im¬
porters and foreign manufacturers to sell
their manufactured goods in England in
competition with English manufactures.
Englishmen would have scorned to listen to
such a claim. But it was the demand of
the manufacturers themselves for cheap
food, founded on the well-known fact, that
while manufactures are capable of indefinite
expansion in a small area, agriculture can
only expand, in any corresponding degree,
by spreading over more land. In England,
the richer the country grew, the more of it
was taken up by gentlemen's forests and
parks, and the less was left for agricultural
uses. The same reason that existed for pro¬
tecting manufactures, viz.: their capacityof
infinite increase in productiveness, could
not be alleged in behalf of agriculture
where it had no room to increase the area
of tilled land. Hence the cry tor free trade
in England was just, and the American
Protectionist indorses the repeal of the com
laws there for the same reason that he
would advocate a protective tariff here,
viz.: to promote the prosperity of manu¬
factures.
"LOVE YOUR ENEMIES."
Never was any class of business men #
anxious for the success of its rivals in trade
as the importing Free Traders of New York
city, if we may judge from the professions
of their organs, the Evening Post, Drt
Goods Reporter, Commercial AdvertiserxA
Commercial Bulletin, are for the success ol
those very American manufactures witli
which they are competing. These papeis
are too wise to mention their true clients,
the importers. They are disinterested prac¬
titioners of the gospel '• love your enemies."
Hence they are in perpetual "agonyoverthe
7
;vils which the tariff is inflicting upon their
ntagonists and competitors. The import-
rs of British, French and Russian woolen
oods, and of Cape, Buenos Ayres and Aus-
ralian wools, are alarmed lest American
.col-growers and manufacturers have been
.urt, or will be, by the tariff of their own
.aming! The Commercial Bulletin attrib-
tes the failures of ten "prominent firms
nd corporations within as many days," of
jhich "one was a woolen commission
ause and five were manufacturers," to the
iriff of 1S67. The says:
(- " The truth, hoiyever, is, tliat the high duties, while
jey have had no direct tendency to benejit the interest,
'we induced an nndne expansion of mannfacturing,
lid the market has consequently been over-supplied
. ith goods, which have been Held at heavy losses.
, he commission agents of manufacturers thus sit-
-ited h.ave been dmwn into heavy advances to the
llill-owners. and they too suffer in the common iii-
,jry. Really, therefore, the means employed for prd-
^ cBng the manufacturers have been a source ot in-
Vrj' and failure.
i.u'The failures in other branches of trade appear to
ive been due mainlv to the fall in prices consequent
"'ton the recent decline in gold, for which the agita-
thn of financial schemes at Washington, concur-
^-.ntly with Wall street speculations, are largely re-
. lonsible."
£ ■- If woolens were high, the free trade story
■Tiould be, that the manufacturers were ab-
c'-irbing all the profits without extending
LOieir manufactures. As woolens are low,
■u ,ey tell us that without getting any higher
fofits, the manufacturers extended their
ijorks. Had the wool tariff of 1867 never
rcrjen passed, hundreds of failures, if not
r. ousands, would have occurred in 1867
-fi'.id 1868. As it is, the following results
££ ive ensued:
r'l. The revenue on wools and woolens
5;ts been raised to $24,000,000, being, next
; sugar, the highest revenue received on
.J My one article in the tariff list. As a
^ venue, therefore, the protective wool du-
T-es are a success.
.^-2. Our production of wools, and im-
'jv ovement in the qualities of woolen goods,
^.jj.ve been unexampled in the history of"the
rt^nh-y.
,,3. Already this enhanced production of
'l^nerican farms and looms is giving Amer-
. m wearers of woolens—cheap goods.
4. Everybody is satisfied with the tariff,
cept the organs of the importers of wool
[3; d woolens. They only are of the opinion,
..at American wool-growers would be ben-
''. ted by heavy importations of foreign
'''X)ls, and that our manufacturers would
. protected and'benefited, if a market al-
■f^^idy overstocked with the product of
I' nerican looms, and depressed by the
:ady decline of gold and cotton, could be
"Own open to a deluge of untaxed British,
1 i®-'ench and Russian woolen goods, that
Cm mid increase ten-fold the over-supply,
iff'd a hundred-fold the failures and dis-
iit'":ers.
aeS-"
A TARIFF FOR REVENUE.
The recent meeting in behalf of free
trade in the city of New York resolved
that " taxes should be imposed only for the
support of the government, and to provide
for the national debt, and that the tariff
should be adjusted solely with reference to
revenue." A tariff adjusted solely with
reference to revenue would certainly be,
that which will raise the largest revenue
possible in proportion to the amount of
goods imported. The revenue of 1861 is a.i
fair sample of the workings of a tariff for
revenue only, so called. Under it we im¬
ported for the year 1861 goods worth $334,-
350,453, and collected thereon a revenue of
$39,582,125.64, or $r of revenue to $8.50
worth of goods imported.
Under our present tariff, we collected in
1869 a revenue amounting to $177,151,126
on a total importation of $415,569,872, be¬
ing $i of revenue on every $2.37 worth of
goods imported. Purely as a tariff for reve¬
nue, the present is three and a half times
more effective than that in force in 1869,
than any that had previously been in force.
To collect our present revenue from the
tariff of i860, we would have to import
more than twelve hundred million dollars
worth of goods per annum; a quantity of
imports which the surplus products of our
industry would, of course, be wholly inade¬
quate to pay for. Or if we return to the
free trade tariff of i860, without increasing
our importations, and make up for the re¬
duction in duties on imports by an increase
of our internal taxes, we would either have
to repudiate the whole interest on the nation¬
al debt, or else add $138,000,000 in gold to
our present internal taxes, which, with gold
at 120, would amount to $166,000,000 in
currency. This added to our present inter¬
nal revenue taxes, would swell them to
$350,000,000, or about twice their present
figure. "The following table shows the in¬
crease in the efficiency of our tariff as a
means of supporting the government, and
providing for the national debt, during nine
years of Republican administration:
Year.
Value of
Merchandise
Imported.
Revenue.
Ratio of
Rev'nue to
Imports.
1861
1862
1863
1864
1865
I8ot
1869
/05.Si9,S23
252,187,587
328,514,659
437,638,966
389,92^,977
357«436.flo
415,569,873
$39,582,125.64
491O56.308.00
^,059,042.00
102,316,153.00
84,928,260.00
160,000,000.00
176,417,810.88
104,^4,500.00
177,151,126.00
$L to $8.50
I to 4.or
1 to 3.65
1 to 3.21
1 to 2.76
I to 2.73
I to 2.43
1 to 2.II
I to 2.34
We venture to say, that never in the his¬
tory of the revenue legislation of any coun¬
try has there been so steady and rapid an
increase in revenue from any given source.
Ip every year from 1861 to 18^, inclusive.
8
the revenue increases with a regulaHtv that
is convincing. During the four years of
the war we imported less than in iS6o, as,
in fact, only the importations into the
Northern States could count; but we im¬
ported as much as we could afiord to pay
for. In the four years since the war ended
we have resumed and increased upon our
former importations in a ratio larger than our
increaseof population, thus showing beyond
dispute that the tariffs of the' past nine
years have been from twice to four times
more effective than the free trade tariff of
i860, and yet that they have not lessened
"the ability or disposition of our people to
i consume the needed products of foreign
countries. Could we have any more effect¬
ive tariff for revenue ?
The Grand Trunk' Railway, a British
corporation, a portion of whose line runs
through the United States, recently took
pains to advertise the fact that they had laid
a part of their line on the Canada side with
steel rails, but would wait, before laying that
on Hie American side in the same manner,
until the tariff was reduced. Very proper.
The road being owned by British steel rail-
makers, they would like the privilege of
laying and selling their rails in the United
States without paying the taxes which
American steel raii-makers have to pay in
increased cost of wages, of living, and of
production. But our e.xperience on this
point will not lead to the exemption of
British steel rails from taxes nght off. Be¬
fore any American steel rails were manu¬
factured the British monopolists sold us steel
rails at $150 per ton in gold. When a tariff
was laid on, and we began to produce them
ourselves, the price fell under American and
British competition to .^179 per ton in gold,
or about one-half within three years.
Thereupon the officers of thirty-three of the
leading railroads of the United Stated unit¬
ed in a petition to the Senate for the con¬
tinuance of such a protective tariff as would
insure the continued prosperity of the
American manufacturers of steel rails.
More recently Jay Gould, President of the
Erie Railway, was applied to by some New
York Free Traders to sign a memorial asking
for British free trade in steel rails, so that
England might again monopolize the mar¬
ket. He replied as follows:
" It seems to me that our policy should he to foster
and encourage home products, rather than open our
markets to such a formidable competition as would
inevitiihlv result from the reduction of duty so strongdy
urged in the memorial. By establishing e.xtensively
the manufacture of steel rails on our ou-n soil, and
protecting their production by a tariff which would
effectually prevent the importlltion of European mils
to any great extent, we rvould, in mv opinion, he
largely the gainers in the long run ; for the capital in¬
vested would all be kept in the country, our operatives
would find constant and lucrative employment, .and
the general effect upon our f ustness could not fail to
be beneficial. I am at a loss to perceive why
should contrihute so large ah amount amitally t
build up the tr.ide and manuf.ictures of foreian rooji.
tries, while our own iiitercsLs are sacrificed just sn
much. Entertaining these vies.s^ 1 do not fed a
liberty to attach my signature to the memorial."'
Not only the Erie road, but all the prin¬
cipal American roads, have supplied them¬
selves largely with steel rails for those por¬
tions of the track where the wear is exces¬
sive and the speed great." As all the.dmeri-
can New England roads have done so the
Grand Trunk will probably do so when it
finds the free trade dpdge won't work.
THE TAX ON CARPETS.
The free trade organs plume themselves
upon one argument, which runs somewhat
as follows:
1. "Where an article is produced bothhere
and abroad, the price at which itwillbesold
is determined by the cost of importation,
with tariff added.
2. In the case of any article partly pro¬
duced abroad, and partly in our own coun¬
try, the consumer pays a tax to the manu¬
facturer on th part produced here equal
per quantity or per cent, to what he pays to
the Government on the part produced
abroad.
For instance, one-ninth in quantity Of the
carpets used in the country are imported.
On these the custom duties paid to 'he
Government are $2,383,814. Now, argue
the Free Traders, the other eight-ninths
would sell if there were no duties at the in¬
voice price of the part imported. Hence,
their price is enhanced" by the same amount,
per yard, as that of the imported goods.
Hence, the tax paid to the manulacturerson
the carpets manufactured here is nine times
that paid the Government, or $21,300,000,
Let us sift this sophistry as to carpets.
The tariff is seldom so evenly balanced as
to admit of the same grade and kind of an
article being produced here and also im¬
ported at a profit. If it can be imported at
a profit it is because it cannot be produced
here at a profit. Where products nominally
the same are both produced and imported,
continuously and steadily, through all ordi¬
nary fluctuations of prices, it is pretty good
proof that the two articles are of different
grades and values, and are applied to differ¬
ent purposes, and do not therefore compete.
This is true of carjiets, of which the im¬
ported styles are those wnich are not manu¬
factured in this country at all. The duties
on carpets are reported, by the Bureau of
Statistics, as follows:
DCIItS.
Carpets, Auhusson and Axminster, and
those woven whole for rooms..., $144,681
Saxony, Wil'iur and Tournay Velvets,
wrought hv the Jacquard Machines 7o6.?»
Patent Velvet, and Tapestry Velvet J7:'V°6
Tapestry Brussels mco.j37
$1,353.84
9
I>)mpare these carpets, whicK cost, "with
iff added, from $2 to $6 per yard, with
)se made in the United States, which, by
; census of i860, are stated to amount to
285,921 yards, valued kt $7,857,336^ ah
'2rage value of fifty-nirre cents per yard,
is plain that these twO classes of carpets
more compete with each other than bilt-
.8 with diamonds; lior does*the cost of
; foreign control or affect the cost of that
iduced here. The latter is determihed
^\y by the cosf 'Of production, and their
-k is so great, in proportion to their
.:ue, that, like houses, shoes, agricultural
"dements, lumber, and pig-iron, we must
-'.essarily produce them for ourselves or
■ without. The pretense that we pay the
nufacturer of our ihgrains,, three-plies,
"■estries, etc., $21,000,000 of tax (which,
- the way, is more than fwice the whole
> t of our domestic product), is one of
se stunning errors which show that the
'-ters Who''commit them do not reflect,
"-i have barely knowledge enough of their
:ject to mislead them.
PIG-IRON PROTECTION.
[From the New York Herald^ March 26.]
~-g«iron must be free. This is not a very aristo-*
1-ic \4^r-cry, for all that. Iron is about'the moSt
..jrtant of aJl the raw materials on Which Ameri-
industry is engaged. From those .who make
-lorsto tbose who make needles,—the state of pig-
- takes in all het^veert—an interest of the aggre-
value of sonife $.^50,000,000 : and when, restless
price of $32 per ton, this interest sees that Scotch
*"r:ould be sola in this city at but a trifle over half
' amount—$16.60, to be entirely accurate—no won-
.. .it lifts up its voice to the war-cry of Pig-iron
the free.'
' lis i§ the way it is not free:
^ iron, per ton, in Glasgow. $i3»3t
a:htto New York... . 4.00
* 'ping charge? 0.69
. r '.perton., 9.00—$27,00
limn on ^d, at 1121/4i 3'37H
•"-it.. 1.62V4
, itected" foreigri pig in» New York ' $32.60
, - )w knock off the protection, and this is the way
fee: '
go%v pig. per toui S13.31
^ht to New York. 4.00
pingchargep 0.69—iS.OO
' lium on gold, 12^4 2.25
t f 1.62V4
; pig-iron ^ $2i.b7V^
. • ere are some people who would like to save this
2|4 difference between free and protected pig-
which at present goes into some t^vo hundred
' - isylvania pockets, 1
' - will be seen that the Herald demands
trade in pig-iron, in the name of pro-
ion to the'American tnanufacturers of
, and steel wares "from needles to an-
rs." We answer: '
- 'irst. The pretense is dishonest. The
erican manufacturers of iron and steel
' ' es understand their own interests per-
ly, and have never given the Herald or
any other free trade orgag, authority t<f
speak in their name. The Herald really
speaks for a dozen or so New York iron and
steel importers. The American manufac¬
turers of iron and steel are united in the
'Iron and Steel Association, for whom the
Herald has as much affection as Satan has
for holy wateK
Second. The Herald says the manufac¬
tures of iron and steel now amount to $350,-
cwo,ooo in value. In i860, the product of
iron and steel amounted by the census only
to $95,925,292,or but little m6re than a fourth
of the present product, according to the
Herecl4. Whence arises this rapid increase 1
From protection. While'the American pro¬
duct has increased at this marvelous rate,
see how trifling a decline in the importation
suffices to produce this increase! Observe,
too, how impossible it would he for so small
an importation to expand so as to supply so
large, a market, Without -vastly increa^ng
the price of the-foreign product.
Ygg,, Consumptioa of foreign
Iron and Steel.
tS6o (5old valiilis, ^21,246,409.
.'...a ** 17,500,000
iSo?. r,* ^667,927
iS6j , '. '' 12,708,414
1864 " 19.609,698
1865 v........ " 13,802,946
lS66 .f., " 19,425,110
1S57 "
1S6S ., " 23,1(^.410
1869 J.J i...i..j. ' " 30,446,336
The present price of the 'imP^rted pig-
iyoh is according to the Herald's statement
equal, with gold at a premlulh of 1?, to $28
per tori. Arid the fact that only about 3 per
cen,tl'Df our pig-iron is irtiported, proves
that this price is generally undersold by
thh American product, which therefore may
be set dofvn at $26 to $28 In gold. ISlow
compare fhis with the prices during free
trade pefiods. Anthracite pig stood at f 38
per ton in 1834, wffience it ranged down to
$l8®g in 1S61, the medium price for the
seven years being $27, or squarely at the
present gold prite, though the cost of pro¬
duction is increased by taxation from one to
two-ftflhs since that period. From 1846 to
1853, it ranged at frorri $36, down to $2ol.£
—^the medium being still as nearly $27 as
could be stated. The imprirtatlon was never
adequate to supply ten per cent, of the de¬
mand, but was just enough by its fluctua¬
tion tabreak down the market; just as tep
men out of employment may underbid one
after another lo,0(X) men, reducing all their
wages, and still remain out of employment
themselves. "So a small foreign importation
may reduce the price of a thousand tim'es
its own value of the domestic product he-
low the cost of profitable production, and
vet when thq domestic supply is cut off, the
import is so inadequate to meet the demand,
that the price becomes excessive as soon as
the importer obtains control of the market.
lO
For instance, in the protective period from
1842-46, pig-irSn ranged at from $24 to $36,
•while in the free trade period which begun
in 1832-3, and culminated in the disastrous
crash of 1836-7, though pig-iron was " free,"
its price ranged at from $42 per ton, to
$52.50, the highest figures it had reach¬
ed since the war prices of 1815, .when it
touched for a while $55 per ton!
Knock off .the protection then, and in¬
stead of the price falling below $27, the
effect of expanding our demand for the
foreign product, would be to carry up its
price to the figures of 1837—from $40 to
per ton. Before the Herald speaks
again on the iron question, it would do well
to drop the pretense of speaking on behalf
of the manufacturers of iron and steel wares.
Its clients are the impdrters and the foreign
manufacturers.
MR. WELLS ON WOOL AND
WOOLENS.
Seldom has a government officer put for¬
ward an argument so apparently disingen¬
uous and inteutionafly misleading as the
statements of Commissioner Wells, in his
last report, relative to the effect of the tar¬
iff, framed by the wool-growers and woolen
manufacturers, and passed by Congress in
1867. The thorough practical business men
who framed this tariff had been engaged,
a part of jfcem, in manufacturing woolens,
and the ottiers in growing sheep, when Mr.
Wells was editing text books for school
"boys. They were familiar by personal ex¬
perience as well as careful study, wifh the
-effects of tariff legislation upon wool indus¬
try for the past fifty years. It would be
strange, indeed, if they could not frame a
tariff that would promote their own busi¬
ness. To argue this is to assume that one
who has no practical knowledge of a busi¬
ness whatever, comprehends its interests
better than those ■svho know most about it
For, mark! the claim of Mr. Wells is, not
that the wool-growers and woolen spinners
have combined to oppress the people, that
they have made high wools and dear wool¬
ens; that they have "lessened the weight
of the covering over the shivering babe,
and stripped of its decent veil the rigid
corpse," as free trade rhetoricians would
express the fact if wool w^ere high. Mr.
Wells does not appear in this case as volun¬
teer counsel for the consumers. Those he
tacitly admits are doing " as well as can be
expected," since manufactftred woolen
goods, not-withstanding our high rates of
interest, of taxes, and of labor, are nearly
all as low, and many of them lower than in
i860. Flannels that sold for 18 cents per
yard in i860, sold in 1869 and still sell for
f 16 cents in gold. Twilled scarlets that then
sold for 30 cents now sell for 29, Ballardville
4-4 white. No. i, then selling for 75 ce®
now brings 65!^ cents, and other grade»ij
proportion.
While the consumers of salt, lumber
coal, iron, and other articles on which the
Uriff was framed by Congress at large,
have, according to Mr. Wells, fallen a prej
to the producers of those articles, the coo.
sumers of wools and woolens, the tariff 01
which was passed exactly as framed bj the
wool-growers and wcxilen spinners, have
had the quantity of wools and woolens that
- can be bought for a day's work by the con¬
sumer in any part of the land nearij
doubled, and both wools and woolens re¬
duced to so low prices that the factoriei
are obliged to close on an overstocked mar¬
ket, and the wool-growers to kill theirsheep
for their pelts and tallow.
If this be so, then in the name of the
consumers, and of cheap goods, let all
tariffs hereafter be framed solely by the
domestic producers of the article on which
they are laid! Since the producers of wodi
and woolens have rushed so fiercely to their
ruin, to give the wearers of woolen goodi,
abundant supplies at low prices, in the
name of cheap, iron, let the pig-iron makeis
alone frame the iron tariff! In the name
of cheap salt, cheap glass, and cheap coal,
let the American producers of those article>
have a carte blanche on which to write oat.
their own rates, and we shall all have even-,
thing for nothing, -with the' grateful thina
of those w^ho are competing for our customli
To achieve this argument, Mr. 'Wells cart-i
fully avoids the one overwhelming influence
whose effect on the wcxilen trade through¬
out the w^orld, no tariff could wholly coun¬
teract, viz.: the supply of cotton. The
withdrawal of the Southern cotton supply
during the rebellion, increased the demand
for wool throughout the world- In Austra¬
lia the clip rose from 2,2,00afco lbs- in 18^
to 66,(xx>,cxx) lbs. in 1866; an increa^m
seven years of 108 per cent In the Cape
of Good Hope, from 11,500,000 lbs-to
2i,ooo,cxx) lbs; an increase of 87 per cent
In La Platta, from i6,txx),ot»lbs. toffpiW'
cxxj lbs.; an increase of 268 percent ho
doubt this increased production was at nral
stimulated by. increased prices abroM «
well as at home. Yet it is a singular illus¬
tration of the tendency of foreign shippers
to reduce their prices, in order to f
sate for our increase in the tanflf and hot
our markets, that -while in 1859, iSfl? en
1861 Cape wool -was shipped to us freea
18 to 19.4 cents a pound; in 1863, a du
of three cents per pound and five percen
ad valorem being imposed, the foreign pnc
fell to 16-2 cents; in 1864, the d"!."
been increased to six cents per pound, B
price fell to 14.8 cents; in 1867,
opened at 15.1 cents; but in the nP""?
this year, the dutv being increased to
11
-s psi" pound, and 11 per cent, ad valo-
for the last six months of the year,
t irice fell still further to 13.4. In 1868
jiOreign price still further declined to 10.9,
-showing that on our actual importation
^breign producer paid the chief share of
..ariff without seriously diminishing its
ftity.
jie nominal rise from 35@48 cents per
. id in April, 1861, to 90©$!.17 cents
[^pound in August, 1864, is in reality a
^p.ne since the intermediate rise in gold
. ,80, would have required that wool
^"Id rise to from 90 cents to $1,341^,
it never actually did. The nominal
i."in wool, though not more than adequate
..aintain its former gold price, at least
I' lgmostof the time, was much more
,^1 than the rise of mutton, wages, land,
" "1 of interest or any of the other expenses
producing wool and woolen goods, and
for a while gave a large profit and
"4 growth to both industries. In the
years from 1850 to i860 inclusive,
mported in the aggregate, wools and
" ens to the value of about $30,000,000 a
I $3301382,330; estimated production
-he same time was only about $26,000,-
-I year, or $264,880,000; importing more
-=^-1 we produced bv $73,402,232.
it under the stimulus caused by the
■"^drawal of the cotton supply, our an-
product of woolen fabrics rose from a
:-eof $68,865,963 in i860, to $175,000,-
k: n 1869, while our product of raw wool
2 tripled.
ir. Wisconsin alone, an average State, the
ii' rth in ten years was as follows:
' No. of Shtep. No. of Factories.
r 33.000 15
^ 1,235,000 69
XJ Iowa the growth was greater, and in
- J nearly as great. Here we have simul-
ously an enormous increase in both the
■;n esticand foreign production, attended
tji very moderate rise in the domestic
J 2. Of course, had we been dependent
ly degree upon the foreign supply, as
^ t the rebels of the South, it would have
-I inadequate, and our soldiers during
„(;war would have been as naked and
^.-;ed as those of the rebellion. It is not
much to say that our ability to clothe
armies in the fleeces of our home flocks,
',-e up in our home mills, was one of the
.'.nt influences in securing our success.
'i'. chief rebel officers have repeatedly de-
'^id that our superiority in iron and wool-
aanufactures more than offset their ad-
"^.age in fighting op defensive lines. In
'''lequence of the rise in the foreign gold
e, we had, during the war, but little im-
ation of wool. Our manufacturers and
lers held the market under the moder-
-_'-iriff of 1861, and the high premium on
1. But in 1865 and 1866 there was a
cei-tainty that with the decline of gold, and
return of Southern cotton to the market,
there would be a heavy decline in wool, and
imminent danger that the production de¬
veloped by the war would be found exces¬
sive, not only here btlf in South America,
Australia and the Cape of Good Hope.
The question for American farmers, there¬
fore, was simply "will our interests be pro¬
moted by opening our ports to the wools of
a declining market, and surplus production
throughout the world, or shall we take care
of our wools, and let the outside world take
care of theirsA decline in wools and
slaughter of sheep were inevitable every¬
where, for wool can not permanently com¬
pete with cotton. But by passing the tariff
of 1867, the tide of foreign wools was
turned aside, our markets declined gradually
and a heavy importation, and sudden pros¬
tration of our woolen industries, were
averted. That this tariff has not increased
the foreign importations is clearly shown
by the returns of i860, and of the year
after its enactment; *
i860. ' 1868.
Value of wool imixirted $+.833,153 $3,915,263
Value of woolens imported. 37,957.190 32,+09,749
"Decrease in wools $926,890
Decrease in woolens 5.537.431
Here stand combined all the advantageous
effects that can possibly ensue from a tariff,
to-wit;
1. Though the amount of the importation
has declined, the revenue is enhanced.
2. The supply for consumers is more
abundant and cheaper than under free-trade.
3. The domestic production has been
tripled within ten years, and is not now so
depressed as the wool and woolen business
in other parts of the world; especially,
have woolen manufactures in France and
wool-growing in Australia been more de¬
pressed than here.
4. We have advanced to the manufacture
of fabrics of improved quality and finish,
especially shawls, cassimeres and beaver
cloths. While our American purchasers
have a silly and stupid preference for foreign
fabrics, +yhich it is hard to o+ercome be¬
cause for half a century of almost uninter¬
rupted free-trade, they have been educated
into the belief that the best woolen fabrics
must of necessity be the imported ones, yet
they are gradually learning that if they
would make sure of first-class goods free
from shoddy, they are safer in buying the
products of our American mills.
Foreign capitalists and manufacturers
are becoming alarmed at the marvelous
rapidity with which American manufac¬
tures are superseding the foreign, and
promising not only to oust them from
American markets but to compete with
1 them abroad. In England, the government
1
and leading men are devising emigration
schemes to avoid the expense of feeding
their unemployed pauper workmen, whom
we, under the rapid extension of our indus¬
tries, are taking otf jt^er hands at the rate,
of 400.000 a year, and converting from
paupers into self-supporting competentmen
and capitiUists. llo,w could it be otherwise
when within ten years our product of iron
and iron-wares has doubled! Our shipping
interests have fallen otf, but so have those
of England and Scotland who are not build¬
ing one-fifth as many ships as they were in
1S65. But while our general industries are
flourishing the manufacturing pre-eminence
of England is waning. The London Times
of September 18, 1869, discourses upon this
change as follows, viz:
" Why, for example, should the Americans, who
used to ne well ple;i.sed that we should spin cotton
while they jrrew tt, resolve now to be spinners and
powers too? Why. again should we be told, as a
correspondent did tell us plainly, that we had better
let the Hindoos resume then- old tnvde of cotton r.iis-
ing and work up-thc produce of their own fields?
Howls it that b ranee finds it for her advantage to
take up this manufacture which was our monopou so
short a time ago? ♦ * * * • New cotton fields
have opened, but new cotton factories have beeu
opened too, some under tlie shelter of protection,
some perhaps in .a more natural atmosphere. There
is a more extensive demand for the raw material,
whichirises in price accordingly, and that rise in price
deprives us of a condition essential to tlie superiority
we once maintained.
THE LAW OF ADVANCE AND DE¬
CLINE IN THE FERTILITY OF
SOILS,
An attempt has been made to belittle the
law of the increase and decline of soils in
fertility, as discovered and explained bv
Henry C. C.arey, by representing Mr.
Carey's doctrine to be that farming lands at
great distance from the consumers of their
products decline in fertility only because the
nutritive properties of the crops exported
from them are conveyed to distant parts of
the world and are not returned to the soils
on which they were raised. Were this all,
or the chief part of Mr. Carey's statement,
there would be abundant evidence of the
importance and truth embodied even in this
partial and imperfect presentation of it.
Prof. Henry, the eminent Secretary of the
Smithsonian Institute, has estimated "that
there was more wealth invested in our soil
in fertilizing matter at the moment this
continent was discovered by Columbus, than
there is at present above the surface in im¬
provements and all other investments. The
fertility which ages had accumulated upon
its surface has been the capital upon which
the fanner has been drawing witli reckless
prodigality from the first settlement of the
country."
All are familiar with the wastet'ulness of
the chief part of Southern agriculture.
Deserted houses standing in the midst)
exhausted plantations, which were ono
fertile, tell the story too plainly for contn
diction. But it has been qustpmar}' to at
tribute this to Slavery. Instead of tl,.|
both it and Slavery itself should have btn
attributed to the fact that the only indu,iii
practised was the report of the soil, in tiij
form, of cotton, molasses, and tolnccii
This, by keeping the country conitanilj
burdened by an increasing poverty anddea
compelled the enslavement of the labora
since the work was too hard, and the m
returns too small to enable the planter!
pay wages. He was generally eightee
months in debt for the means to feed u
clothe nis family and servants, the slave
often not having rags enough to makt the!
nakedness decent, and the planters liiiii|
with hardly more purchased luxuries Iha
many mechanics at the North earning thret
dollars a day.
But it is but little known that the South
em system of agriculture was onlv moe
wasteful of the soil than the Northern,!
the degree that it was further removed irai
its markets. Wheat near Albany, No
York, declined from an average yield!
from 20 to 40 bushels per acre in 1775,11
16 to 20 bushels in 17S5, to 12 to 15 bushel
in 1815, while, by the State census of iS^J
Albany county gave bushels peraot
Dutchess 5, Columbia 6, and Westchestaj
Wheat declined in Ohio in the yo yea/spre
ceding i860, from 30 to 15 bushels peracit
and 5 years later, to an average of 13. I»
dian com, in the same State, in the 5 year
from 1850 to 1S54 both inclusive, aveiagd
3S.S1 bushels to the acre, while in the ntil
5 it fell to 32.93 bushels, and in iS6al
2S.96 bushels.
That these are no necessary results!
cultivation, are shown by the facts ihah
Massachusetts, whose soil was originalh a
poor as that of any State, .has so advance
in average fertility, that it appears in Ih
census of 1S60 as producing the laigC'
average crop of wheat to the acre-u
bushels — while Georgia produced tM
smallest average irrop—5 bushejs. L!''"
necticut, originally a poor sandy StatCi M
full of manufactures, must have gtcnfl
improved her soil to appear in the
census as producing the largest aveijij
crop of CQim per acre—40
South Carolina produced the smallest. |
Ohio Agricultural Report of 1S62,
to the decline in the wheat product in d '1
and its advance in other countries,
"The lowest average bf wheat in any counq
in England is 34!^, and from that yP
bushels per acre. . If is a histoncal
that, within the past two hundred y^i
best soils in England did not produce ^
exceed six bushels of wheat
like improvement is going on in the sous
1
3
ice, Belgium, Holland, Prussia, and
.thern Germany, China and Japan; a
;fe and decay In the soils of Mexico,
of the West India Islands, Brazil,
"a, since its possession by the English,
Ind, Portugal, and Turkey. All of these'
ngaged in exporting the" raw product of
- soils fbr foreign consumption, while
lountries in which soils are at^ancing
rtility,' are those which export nothing
it is furnished readj- for the consumer.
. ife sahie improvement is occurring, for
; ame reason, in the horses, sheep, cattle,
~ , poultry, and other domestic animals in
ynanufacturing States, and the same de-
"'^atibn in the breeds in'the States purely
' -ultural.
• ;, in Illinois, go to England for improv-
• -eeds of cattle, horses, and hogs, and
- our Durhams, Devons, and BeAshires
leir blood, while we pass heavy penal
'-tes, and make it a crime to even drive
- across the State from Texas. The
' spreads contagion and death in his
'^"led path; the former imparts beauty,
~ th, Weight and health to all the flocks
- which his blood may mingle, until at
- fades out among the " bastard breeds
-prairies.
~; ese facts abundantly prove that the
^ ■■ of agriculture rises in proportion to its
• ess to its market of consumption, and
.uies as it is removed therefrom; and
r that soils increase in fertility as the
:.. Uet arid consumer take their place side
le, and decline as they are distant from
• tther. But the reason of this is_not so
the withdrawal of the nutritive mat-
^•.ontained in the crop exported, as the
■ hat the farmer, who is far removed
his market, cannot sell all the crops
. he ought to raise in order to practise
"air rotation of crops, which would
,j-,ate, manure, and enrich the soil,
plants grow principally from the at-
, lere, and these enrich and restore soils.
_ ..^s draw from the soil peculiar elements,
^ r eat drains it of silica and potassium.
' TV <lsrire may find this subject ably
sed in the American Encyclopedia,
the head, "Agricultural Chemistiw."
• '_jj:herefore, the preservation of the fer-
■■" of soils depends on the rotation of
and if a farmer distant from a market
,nd sale for only a few of the crops
<^•'1 in practicing such rotation, here is
^ ce of decline in fertility analagous to,
S'^"it entirely identical with, the deporta-
■y- f the constituent elements of his soil
crops he exports; For, if he sent his
'but ten miles, their elements might
i c ■ - return directly to his lands. But at a
r-'i' :e of ten miles from an adequate
..,.y t of consumption, he could raise clover
»■ ds exhausted by wheat, and sell his
JO"' nbaled, for more than he could have
ix;
sold the product of the same land in wheat.
But the farmer fifty miles from his consum¬
er of hay, must bale it before he can send it,
and if loo miles distant, he can only send it
by water, baled, while if 250 miles distant,
he cannot send it at all, the freights con-,
suming the whole value. The grasses
which ripen slowly through long periods,
are the best rfenovators. But if no return
can be got for them, they are merely pastur¬
ed, i. e,, trodden underfoot and wasted.
Besides these, a farmer whose market is
near, may raise root crops—the beet, turnip,
and carrot, which derivef nearly their whole
growth from the air, apd hence, restore ten¬
fold more to the soil in their tops than they
extract from it for their tubers. By the fact
that he can utilize his entire land, and need
let none lie fallow, or waste, such a farmer
economizes his manures, and makes it a part
of his system to restore to the soil in his
manures every part of its produce which is
not'sent to market in the form of butter,
cheese, poultyy, pork, and the like. The
farmer of New Jersey, with Philadelphia on
his right, and New "York on his left, takes
his choice of a thousand crops. The herder
of the South American pampas cannot sell
any grain, corn or potatoes, and rarely even
the flesh of his herds. He kills them; there¬
fore, for their pelts and tallow, and leaves
the meat for carrion. Of the price of his
pelts and tallow in Liverpool, five thousand
miles away, he pays nine-tenths, as a trans¬
portation tax, and the other tenth supplies
him with a plug of tobacco and a few
pounds of sailor's hard tack each year, these
being the luxuries he enjoys, under the
privilege ot " buying in the cheapest market
and selling in the dearest," and participat¬
ing in his humble degree in promoting the
foreign commerce of his country.
Said Senator Morrill, of Vermont, in his
recent speech on the tariff; "Our annual
importations of dutiable foreign merchan¬
dise cannot be expected to go much beyond
$400,000,000. Last year, stimulated by a
large amount of bonds, they were $416,-
718,994; and the amount of revenue indis¬
pensable from the tariff is $15.0,600,000 to
$1(10,000,000. It is thus apparent that the
average rate of duties must not be less than
37!^ to 40 per ce.iti in order to secure even
the lowest amount 1 f revenue required.
This opens a field wide enough for protec¬
tion, and discloses the grave of free trade.
The present average rate of duty upon im¬
portations is less than 42 per cent. This
presents a narrow field of battle for the
conflict of opinions. Duties removed in
one place must be added in some other.
The common sense of our people will only
demand that we adjust the tariff wisely;
yielding nothing to mere class selfishness,
but everything to the general welfare."
H
THE UNITED STATES AND RUSSIA.
In 1816, the United States and Russia
both emerged from the Napoleonic wars, in
which Russia had taken part with England,
and the United States ag.ainst her. During
our war of 1812-15, suspension of com¬
merce with England had built up numerous
manufactures, and the conditi6n of the coun¬
try, apart from the trials of war, was pros¬
perous. The commerce of Russia had been
open with England during the same period,
and her domestic industries had suffered
more severely tharr ours. With the peace,
British manufactures swept freely into both
countries for eight years, prostrating the
previously growing manufactures of the
United States, in a manner that, in 1819,
was thus described by General Andrew
Jackson:
" What is the situation of the agriculturist ? Where
has the American farmer a market for his surplus pro¬
ducts? Except for cotton, he has neither a foreign
nor a home market. Does not this clearly prove, when
there is no market either at home or abroad, that there
is too much Labor employed in agriculture.^ and that
the channels of labor should be multiplied ? Common
stfLse points out at once the remedy., Vraw from agri¬
culture the superabundant labor^ employ it in mechan¬
ism and manufactures^ thereby creating a home mar¬
ket for your breadstuffSy and distributing labor to a
more profitable account, and benefits to the country
will result. Take from agriculture in the United
States ^00,000 men, women, and children, and at
once give a home market for more breadstu ffs than all
Europe now furnishes. We have been too long sub¬
ject to the policy of British merchants. It is time we
should become a little more Americanized, and. in¬
stead of feeding the pauj>ers and laborers of Europe,
feed our own, or else, in a short time, by continuing
our present policy, we shall be paupers ourselves.
"It is therefore my opinion that a careful tariff is
much wanted to pay our national debt, and afford us
the means of that defense within ourselves on which
the safety and liberty of oxir country depend, and last,
though not least, give a proper distribution to our
labor, which must prove beneficbiJ to the happiness,
independence, and wealth of the community.
On this platform, in part, John Qitincv
Adams was elected in 1S25, and a protec¬
tive tariff was en.acted, which was increased
on the election of Jackson himself, in 1828;
at the same time Russia abandoned sharply
her free trade policy, and adopted a rigidlV
protective one, to which she has adhered
ever since. At that time the prospects of
the United States for rapid advancement,
peace, unity, and industrial independence,
far surpassed those of Russia. We had
slavery, and Russia had serfdon. While but
one-eighth of our population were slaves, |
three-fourths of those of Russia were serts. j
Both had wide expanses of territory for ag- 1
riculture. In the United States, except \
among the slaves, education was universally \
diffused. In Russia it w,a, much less com- 1
mon. We had general suffrage, and repub- 1
lic.in freedom for, the white race. Russia 1
h.ad been characterized as a despotism tern- '
pered by ass.assination. Surely any prophet
would have said, if both these nations are |
to emerge from klavery to freedom within
fifty years, in the United States the chana
will be effected prudently without war,itiii,
out debt, and without an agonizing devaii,
lion of fire and sword. For here free d»
cussipn, general education and rapid imuii
gration will most rapidly promote that in
crease in the producing power of maii,aii(
that capacity on his part to pay for tin
voluntal^' services of his fellow-man, whki
tend to substitute wages for the lash, ag
freedom for slavery, and to make eitr
workingman the owner of the soilorotln
implements with which he carries on li|
industry. ^
But exactly the reverse of this propod
lion has been true. We have emancipate
4,000,000 of slaves, by the loss of a milli
of lives and five thousand millions of monej
while Russia has emancipated five timest
many serfs without the cost of a dollar a
the shedding of a drop of blood. Whytlia
contrast.' It was not because Russia'*ati
despotism and the United States adenm
racy. For no despotism could have aw-
ished slavery directly here, nor could ai
mere vote of the people, unaccompam
by profounder industrial causes, have nW -
the abolition of serfdom peaceful in Russia.
The whole difference grew out of theW ^
that Russia, by a steady policy of protW
ing her industries of all kinds, sought!
secure the highest wages to her laboiiil ^
classes, and succeeding in this, it becami .
more profitable for the owner of Russiai .
serfs to allow them to work where thevchosp.
at home,or abroad, in their own tovnia
another, as agriculturalists, clerks, artisan!
book-keepers, merchants, sailors, architect! ,
and even lawyers, physicians, and priest! .
than to hold them in personal seifdcm m .
work them as slaves. In Russia, inaiiuW(.
tures were built up until, in i860, sii tiin^
as large a proportion of the Russian as el
the American people took part in thenJ
This diverified Russian industry gave th( .
Russian farmers better markets at honi!
and enabled Russian manufacturers to cob ,
pete with the British in the markets of .la
for the sale of hempen, linen, iron, cottoi
woolen and leather goods, wooden »iu<!
and fumiture. Only two years ago, eiub#
sies from the British National Chamber 0
ConuTierce made a pilgrimage through Ro'
sia, and endeavored to induce the Rus^
to adopt a pxilicy of free trade toward EpS'
land, by the argument that their roanuttC'
rures were now so far advanced that evf
under free trade the English could not ®
dersell them. "If so," remarked the
sian manufacturers in reply, ^
would do you no good." Thus, .
plea of the Free Traders here is that
trade uould benefit our people
British r«« undersell us, in Russia the ,
Traders sing the opposite tune, and 1
for free trade because the Russian
15
t;Urers, they say, can now defy all com-
i^tion.
f,ut while Russia, by a consistent policy
(jirotection to her industry, was diversify-
,her employments, distributing a larger
\^x)rtion of her people to manufactures,
j, .ing the serf so valuable as an earner of
,.es that his master's ownership in him
,"ime nearly nominal (the right of per-
d chastisement on tire part of the mas-
j. or even of controlling the slave's^ resi-
. :e or occupation gradually disappearing,
nothing remaining of his waning serf-
. . except the necessity of paying an an-
, stipend to his mastej- for his time), in
erica, under the policy of British free
e, begun in 1833, and continued with-
^jintermission (except for the fpiir years
1842 to 1846) until the great pro-
" ery rebellion of i860, precisely the op-
' te results were developing. In the pro-
'.\ve period from 182410 i832,there seemed
-ospect that manufactures would be built
~ hroughout the South as well as in the
~ -th, and slave-owners were already con-
'®-'ing whether their slaves would not
s^-it them more as free laborers for wages
T as field hands. The system of " hiring
time" was more largely practiced at
•'A' South than ever afterwards. Proposi-
to abolish slavery were introduced in
s "k egislatures of Virginia, Kentucky,North
sc. ilina, and Tennessee, and discussed by
i^^holders with but little of the bitterness
characterized the subsequent discus-
t:;> of the slavery question.
is usual to attribute the rapid growth
arrogance of the slave power during
■,;-iree trade period from 1832 to i860 to
.^T.nvention of the cotton gin and the con-
j,, ; ent profitableness of raising cotton, and
- - iti-slavery agitation. But these are su-
^ cial reasons for accounting for a fact
:h had its origin in the economical
py of the country. Tke best froiected
jg ^iries the country ever conducted ever con-
-yrf were the breeding of slaves and the
■■'ing of cotton and sugar. One clause in
:onstitution prohibited tbe importation
aves after 1808, and this gave the slave-
ders of Virginia, North Carolina, Ten-
^'. (.ee, Kentucky, and Missouri, an exclu-
' , monopoly of the business of supplying
" -ers for the cotton fields. Another clause
^";Te constitution prohibited a tax on ex-
' i, and practically exempted the South
any serious taxation, since she had
* f ing but cotton to tax, and this was not
When we add that under all ad-
1^* strations, however given to free trade
re* verything else, a high protective tariflf
13^^ laid on sugar and molasses, we see that
(I' ystem of taxes was adapted to give the
C ■- 3st possible protection to slave-breed-
-■i- cotton exporting and sugar planting,
e the cry of -'free trade" was used to
prevent any corresponding protection to
manufactures of cotton, iron and steel, wool¬
ens or other fabrics, essential to a really
diversified industry. In":a word, we pro¬
tected slave labor by prohibition where it
was wanted, by high tariflfs and by exemp¬
tion from taxes, and left free labor to be
undersold at every point. Hence slavery
grew and freedom declined. Instead of ex¬
porting our cotton in its manufactured forms,
we exported it raw, and received but fron*
one-fourth to one-tenth the price we should
have received for it if we had imposed such-
a tax on its export raw, and such tariffs on
its import manufactured, as would have
caused it to be manufactured in this coun¬
try instead of in England. The South was
kept so poor by the swift exhaustion of its
soils, and the wasteful system which always
accompanies the export of raw materials
instead of the finished product, that, meanly
as her laborers were fed, indecently as
they were clothed, and "shiftlessly" as the
planters themselves lived, the whole South
was constantly from a year to eighteen
months in debt to the capital of New York
importers and English manufacturers, for
the means of subsistence. No system of
industry ever lyas more rapid in its growth
and extension, because none was ever more
thoroughly protected by legislation. Yet
'none was ever more wasteful and impover¬
ishing to the soil, or more brutalizing to
those engaged in itS; cultivation, because
the protection stopped at the point of the
production of the raw cotton, and was utterly
withdrawn from the manufacturers of that
cotton into cloths. Hence the bale of cot¬
ton was sold to England for $200, and the
same cotton was bought back in a manu¬
factured form at from five to fifty times that
rate, thus repeating the early experience oC
England toward the Flemings, of selling
them her pelts for sixpence and buying
back the tails for a shilling.
The North was kept poor in the effort to
find a market in England for her bread-
stuffs, in competition with the nearer grain-
raising countries of Europe; North and
South both furnished the raw matsrials,
food and cotton, for the English cotton fac¬
tories; American capital was convulsed with
panics every seven years by the uncertain¬
ties, speculations and losses that arose from)
the distance of her markets, the range of
her competition, and the impossibility of
foreseeing the fluctuations of demand and
.supply in industries, which were subjected
to competition with all the world, and in
which most of the facts necessary to arrive
at a sound judgment were unknown. Had
our markets been at home, the shortness of
a crop would have increased its price, and
the producers would not have suffered. But
our markets being abroad, the supply in
Europe might be most abundant when ours
i6
was least so, and thus poor crops would
combine with low prices to ruiivthe farm¬
ers. NortJr and South were each knit to
England by the ties-of trade, but no ties of
mu^al commerce bound them to each
otlier, or neutralized the rapid tendencies
to disunion which arose from their differ'-
ent modes of industry. Planters sneered
in Congress at the poverty of the Northern
muflsills and -greasy mechanics. Philan¬
thropists, who were not economists, de¬
nounced the wastefulness and cntelties of
slavery, and yet many of them ignorantly
opposed, and still, like Garrison, Phillips,
Beecher, and other abolitionists, now op¬
pose all measures designed to insure a
higher and freer national industry. All
our railroads pointed and still point to Liv¬
erpool, instead of as in France to Paris, in
Prussia to Berlin, and in Russia to St. Pe¬
tersburg and Moscow. All our alliances
■were abroad, all our strifes and bickerings
at home. We gloated over a ship as some¬
thing glorious, and denounced a-furnace or
factory as something contemptible. Every
acre of soil. North and South, was growing
poorer every year, except in Massachu¬
setts, Connecticut, New Jersey and Penn¬
sylvania, where the most adverse and ma¬
levolent legislation could not wholly pre¬
vent mills and furnaces from springing up,
and where, consequently, the nearness of
the farmer's market enabled him to prac¬
tice rotation of crops and'so to manure and
improve his soils. It was wholly o-« ing to
these industrial misgovemments, and ex¬
hausting and impoverishing systems of in¬
dustry, that the diflerent sections of our
country were prevented from having profit¬
able commerce and community of interest
with each other. There -was but little
travel 'between North and South. The
■less they understood, the more they hated
each other; and Northeast and Northwest
Southeast and Southwest!, and again the
Pacific States, had so'little in common that
Vallandigham, in 1860^ proposed a division
into five confederacies, instead of intobvo.
Our dissevered afid discordant, condition
was like that of the petty German States
before the establishment of the 2ollverein.
These- disorganizing influences culminated
in i860 in secession, rebellion, civil war, the
loss of a million of lives, and five thousand
milliorts of treasure, and at last the re-sol-
dering of the Union and the establishment
of one undivided nation, through a resort
to that protective policy whose abandon¬
ment by the North had dissolved the Unioa
That policy has increased our revenue five-'
fold in nine years, and but for that we
should have stranded on repudiation long
since. Who supposes that with a free trade
tariff, raising only the f 40,000,000 of reve¬
nue that sufficed for the expenses of the
government before the war, we could have
avoided another break-down in our finances
and a permanens dissolution of the Union!
Compare these illustrations of the tendencj
of the protective policy toward emancipa¬
tion and peace in Russia, and of the com¬
petitive policy to-ward slavery and war in
the United States. Ponder them well
And then let the American people vofetn
restore the source of their calamities, if
indeed "judgirient has fled to brutish
beasts."
The Bureau:
,0mmcircc4
A MONTHLY 3SIAGAZINE,
DEVOTED TO THE
OF THE UNITED STATES.
Tltree Dollars fcr Annum.
Single copies, 2j cents.
Office, ioi and 103 Wabash Av-finue, Chicago, III.
The Bureau; ;
B
^PAMPHLETS FOR THE PEOPLE^)
DMVOTKn 10 TlUt
^OMMERCE, ^/JANUFACTURES, AND ^^ENERAL JNDUSTRIES
I '
OF THE UNITED STATES.
PKZNTSS AND rUBLISHBD BY
HE Bureau Printing Company.
101 axd 103 Wabash Ave.,
Imcorporxtud under lAe Gtiurai Xmws of tJu State of lUinoit,
No. 3.
CONTENTS:
I
rellaneons >(3«4i5t6t7« *6
|1 England Boast or Blush? 8
>t and Blankets S
Free Trade no Issoe 9
".Nibbled to Death by Pismires" *0
Manufacture of Glass it
The Interest of the South in ProtectioOf ».l 14
>
ract from the Republican National Platform adopted at the Wig-warn, Chicago,
in i860:
II* While providing revenue for the support of the General Government by duties on imports, sound
requires such an adjustment of these imposts as to encourage tlie development of the industrial
7 ests of the whole country ; and we commend tliat policy of national exchanges which leaves to the
anginen, liberal wages; to agriculture, remunerating prices; to mechanics and manufacturers,
dequate reward for their skill, labor, and enterprise ; and to the nation, commercial prosperity and
)endence."
ract from ike Democratic National Platform adopted in Tammany Hally Ne-w Torky
in Julfy 1868:
• ^*The Democratic Part>', in National Convention assembled, reposing its trust in the intelligence,
otism, and disyiminating justice of the people, ♦ ♦ * do, with tlie return of Peace, demand * * *
a tariff for revenue upon foreign imports, and equal taxation under the internal revenue laws, as will
d incidental protection to domestic manufactures, and will, without impairing the revenue, impose the
4 burden upon and best promote and encourage the great industrial interests of the country."
2
Thk republican party declared for a pro¬
tective tariff in i860, and when it came into
power, enacted a tariff pwhich has tripled
our revenue from imports, and saved the
country from repudiation. So successful
had protection proved In practice that in
1868 the democratic party in its national
convention at New York, adopted a plat¬
form demanding such an adjustment of the
tariff to internal taxation as would afford in¬
cidental protection to such American in¬
dustries as have to compete with the for¬
eign.
' England protected her industries for jcx>
years before she left them to free trade, so-
called, which they have worked under for
forty years past. She is now no nearer free
trade than the United States, since she col¬
lects the whole interest on her national debt
in duties on imports. But her tariff is
levied for revenue only, as well it may be,
since her manufactures stand in the same
relation to those of other countries, as the
Jion amrfn^ the beasts, hieeding no protec¬
tion. The stronger never seek protection
against the weaker. Yet even in England
the protectionist party is increasing, and
her silk, worsted and other fine-goods
manufacturers are demanding protection
from the labor-degrading competition with
France.
Suppose our farmers are receiving some¬
what less for their crops and paying some¬
what more for their manufactured goods,
than they were in i860, though by no means
with so great a difference as some would
make it appear, how can $400,000,000 a
year be subtracted from the annual earn¬
ings of a people, and leave everybody just
(Sm pjuch as he would have had if such sub¬
traction h.ad not been necessary? But
would the case of the farmers be helped if
several millions of people, now supported
by manufactures, should be thrown out of
employment and obliged to compete with
the farmers in raising crops? Thirty-five
thirty-sixths of all American agricultural
products are consumed in America. Can
we afford to sacrifice the home market,
which buys $35 of our produce, to the for¬
eign market which buys $i ?
At the time the copper-tariff bill was
pa.ssed a prodigious hue apd cry was raised,
under which speculators ran copper up to
28 cents a pound, as a means of defeating
the bill. But the price has subsided, under
the influence of American competition, to
31 cents, and will continue to fall as new
mines are opened, and improved processes
are applied here, where we have the very
best mines in the world. But by the tariff,
American copper producers were assured of
control of the American market, and uiHier
this stimulus they have prijduced at L^t
Superior, 20,000,000 pounds; in Tennesw,
3,tx»,ooo; at Baltimore, 4,000/xxi, and r
Bergen Point and Trenton, 2,000^00; total,
28,000,000 pounds, which, with a.stockova
from last year of 12,000,000 pounds, gives lu
a total supply of 40,000,000 pounds. Eng¬
land consumes annually about 62/xio/xi)
pounds. The effect, of our supplying out
own market, is that England has put he
copper down from £125 per ton to £75,11
the effort still to compete with us in out
market. Of course, whatever copper she
imrports, by so reducing her price asto jiaj
the tariff out of h«r former profits, enables
us to collect so much of our taxes out d
the English manufacturer.
" What difference does it make," saythe
Free Traders, " whether our iron and doth
are made in this country or in England,
since, if we buy our iron and cloth abroad,
though we send abroad the price of these
articles the country loses nothing? It gffl
the worth of its money in the iron and ddh
imported."
The Protectionists reply that "underpro¬
tection, the country keeps both the ironand
cloth and the prices paid for them, and jtt .
the purchaser of the iron and cloth gets the
worth of his money just as fully when he .
buys at home as when he buys abroad."
" But," says the Free Trader, " whvnotlet -
every man buy where he can buy cheapest .
and sell where he can sell dearest?"
Says the Protectionist, " We do, in the .
long run. But we take care to see that be ,
sh.iil htive at home a dearer market to sell .,
in and a che.aper market to buy in than he
-can possibly find abroad."
Two years ago, Australia enacted a protee- -
ti\-e tariff to encourage her native woden
manufactures against the imported wMleni 1
of the mother country. The Dominion of ''
Canada has for many years maintained a
protective tariff against English impotf"! f
tions, and has lightened the burden of Urtji
on her own people by collecting a ^''1*
them from English manufacturers. '
the past session, the protective featurW®'
her tariff have been increased, both fro® "•
motives of revenue and to e.xtend prdee- r
tion to her s,alt, lumber, coal, and ofhff"' "1
terests. And now, according to 1''®^ ^
don Times, the leading statesmen of In
are coming to perceive that the onethmS -i-
needed for the revival of the ancient p"*"
parity and wealth of Jndia is
tion of her ancient m.'uiufacturcs. '1'^ •
they ask such legi.slaiion as will enable _■*
Hindoos again to spin andVeave the""
wools and cottons,, instead of receiving ^ _
supply from England. So, in spite
3
it-
J, fforts of England to ,propagate free trade,
'er own ,three leading colonies repudiate
theory. Ireland, too, if she enjoyed
le advantages of a local parliament, would
e the first to call for a revival of her manu-
."ctures and protection to Irish spinners
J weavers.
. That the motto, "Buy in the cheapest
;; larket, and sell in the dearest," is not the
V hole science of political economy, is evi-
trint from the fact that it has no reference
^ .1 the most important means of wealth,
a-z: production, A spendthrift may buy
^ s liquors, horses, women, gaming etc.,
;ry cheap, and may sell what little service
■. : renders to the world very dear, y et if he
constantly engaged in selling what he
ight to keep as a means of carrying on
tsiness, and in buying what he has no
'■ isiness with, every cheap purchase and
~ :ar sale he makes will bring him one step
"-jarer to the poor-house. It is the peculi-
ity of those who are most successful in
'o'lsmess, that they are enabled, often, to
■k lower prices for what they sell, and pay
gher for what they buy, than others, and
"■ ill make more profit, because they pro-
it ice more, or give miore aid to production
■- f others.
, The effort of the Free Traders is to
cribe the whole burden of our taxation to
- ■ e Protectionists. One would suppose
r Mn their reiterated assertions of the re-
onsibility of Protectionists for the high
• ist of production and of living, that we
j Cive only to stop collecting revenue from
is'ports, and the Government would run
ielf; nobody would be taxed at all, and
ices, would return to those of i860, and
^;t expenses and interest would be prompt-
paid. The truth is, however, that we
.ci- ust raise $400,000,000 a year of national
a. xes, or repudiate. This is $10 per capita
■, , r every man, woman and child in the
- -untry. It is one-eighth of the whole
. ' mings of our industry, according to the
_• nsus of i860. Besides this we have State
j;.;: id local taxes, which in many places,
, j. nount to as much more. One-fifth of the
inual earnings of our industry therefore is
- tually received by our National, State and
2 -.ty governments in taxes. It is the amount
^ these taxes which forms the great bur-
; ^ !n, and no mode of raising them will avoid
. - e rise in prices, deamess of living, and
xes upon industry, which they represent.
e '■
I -' The Free Traders are beginning to repu-
ji l'ate Mr. David A. Wells's figures, as they
Vive heretofore done those of their previous
i^l, Mr. Alex. Delmar. The New York
;j£ '«//chn, a free trade organ of the import-
confesses, as the result of the tilt be¬
tween the cotton manufacturers and Mr,
Wells, that their letter to Mr. Schenck
"may well induce caution in the acceptance
of the CommissioneFs future figures, vihkh
are his -weak point" " Mr. Wells," contin¬
ues the Bulletin, "not unfrequently errs in
attempting to square matters by arithmetical
rule, where data, the first essential to cor¬
rect calculations, are obtained only by guess¬
ing. More principle and feiver figures -Mould
greatly improve the Commissioner's annual
documents^
At first the Free Traders vaunted Mr,
Wells as a man whose specialty was facts.
The truth is, Mr. Wells is a mere reporter
andipompiler. The material lor his reports
was all pumped into him, piecemeal, by the
various committees and parties who'waited
upon him with information. His opportu¬
nity, therefore, was vast. So long as he
confined himself to condensing and arrang¬
ing the facts thus brought to his notice, he
did well. The moment he attempted to
generalize on these facts, being a mere re¬
porter or compiler, and not in any sense an
economist or statesman, his work became
biased, superficial, superfluous, and at last
malicious.
The Bulletin agrees with the Cotton Man¬
ufacturers' As.sociation, that the amount of
capital invested in the manufacture is not
merely $138,606,920, as estimated by him,
but about $277,213,840, or double the Com-
missioneris figures; that the value of the
annual product, which Mr. Wells estimates
at $184,000,000, is $247,187,500; that the
number of hands employed is 208,000 per¬
sons, instead of 125,000, and that the agri¬
cultural product consumed, including the
raw cotton, by these mills is upwards of
$150,000,000, instead of the mere $32,430,-
000 stated by Mr. Wells, who left wholly
out of his count the raw cotton, which was
the leading item of the account.
Since Mr. Wells made the discovery, in
his report for 1868, that while the average
expenses of a workingman and wife in¬
crease with the birth of four children from
$12 to $18 per week, but that the birth of
the fifth and sixth child reduces their ex¬
penses down to $14, or very nearly to the
figure at which they were without any chil¬
dren, while the unlucky birth of the seventh
child hoists them suddenly up to alxiut $19
per week, and that an exactly correspond¬
ing metamorphosis is effected in their in¬
come as well as in their expenses, and that
this statistical monstrosity occurred in i860
as well as in 1868, and occurs always and
everywhere, we have felt no capacity for
surprise at any new development of Mr,
Wells's " profound and diversified misinfor¬
mation." We have felt with the Bulletin,
that "more principles and fewer figures"
would serve the country better in his public
documents.
4
■ Thosr who contend that fot'eign manu¬
facturers artd shippers do not pay a large
share of our tarift" on their goods, out of tlie
profits they would receive but the tariff,
will be greatly puzzled to account for the
tecent action of the steel manufacturelrs of
Bheflield, England. Their principal market
has been in the United States; without this
market they would be compelled to run on
Vialf-time; and, if permanently cut off from
it, one-half of them Could better afford to
remove their business, machinery, workmen
and all, to the United States, than to con¬
tinue it in Sheffield. IJy an ingenious sys¬
tem of undervaluation, they attempted re¬
cently to reduce the American duty, which
would be about £21 per ton on the ordinary
manufacturer's prices, to £14 per ton. This
they could readily do by sending their
goods to their confidential agents here, to
whom an invoice could as easily be made
out at one price as another, since it was not
based on any actual sale. Against this
system of smuggling the government put
its foot down. The Sheffield men stopped
importing and combined to fight it out.
They actually run on half time, and still
kept an ovei'-supply on hand. The Ameri¬
can manufacturers, stimulated by this with¬
drawal, increased their production, and were
making such headway that the Sheffield
men concluded to "come down" and pay
the tariff, rather than lose the market.
S^uery.—Would they have fought this
battle over the payment of this £7 per ton,
if it had not come out of their own pockets
The New York Worid denounces the
demand of the Protectionists for a free
breakfast table" as a " protectionist trick,"
and says:
" There is something very seductive in the demand
for a free brerikfiLst-tahie. It fhrnislies abundant
material for plausible apptuils to tlus people, whocan
have little acquaintance wkb tlie pr.tctical working
of so complex a s} stem as Uiat of a protective tirifb
The demagogue can be as epigrammabc and plausible ;
the economLst mu.st be conipar.itively tedious, and
'Btricttv aritumentative. Messrs. Cox, Kerr, Marshall
and fleck succeeded admirabtv, however, in exposing
"tlie I ilse pretenses of those who, while calling tlieinl
sellrelirmers, nevertheless advocate measures
.ii^hh b would render reform impossible. The dairuc*
iion of revenue from ten and coffee -would necessitate
the retention 0} the present iniquitous duties on -woolens,
iron^ salt avd Inmber,. This would enable the
jnonopoiists to continue tlieir extortions/*
■ Though the FreeTrader^ pretend to be the
champions of reduction of taxation, vet, as
will be seen from the above, the moment it
is proposed to abolish taxes which rest
wholly on American consumers, and which
•do not help the foreign producer to under-
"sell the American, they cry out against it as
a protectionist trick. Is it a protectionist
trick to reduce sugar from 16 cents a pound
tob cents.' Or tea from a pound 1075
cents? If these are tricks, the people
would greatly like to see them played. If
the tariff on pig-iron were taken off in a
degree sufficient to impair, for six monthi,
our home production, the price, instead of
staying down, would be very likely to
rise, as it did in 1836, u'nder free trade iil
pig-iron, from $27 to $52.50 per ton. But
if the tariff be taken off from tea and coffee,
we know that the price would come down
by more than the reduction in the dut;,
and stay down.
The Chicago Evening Post, formerly a
rabid Free Trader, is modifying its tone
very greatly. For some time past it hai
objected to the term " free trade" as not in
any way expressive of the kind of revenue
reform it has been seeking. And still later,
it advocates a tariff for revenue, with such
incidental protection to domestic 'industries
as is consistent with the collection of the
Largest public revenue. This is a sound and
wise platform. Now we put the question
to the editors of the Evening Post, whether
upon the following brief exhibit of the tariff
legislation of this country, it is not more
likely to attain its present object by alliance
with Protectionists than with Free Traders;
Table showing average imparts and average atitem,
Revenue uiuier Free Trade ascendency, and the snu
during periods when Protectionists were in pova,
~r~—y ■! ., I, , ~
Years.
Amount
imports pbr
Average
revenue f'm
customs.
Radoof
revenaclD
itnpoits.
1S21-3.I3 vrs. $
Inc.. F. T. SO'T-lS-ora-SS
loyii.
Inc.. I Prfn, 66,515,935.30
lR3t-p S -STS.I
1 ac.. I F. T. 1103,407.276.00
1S42-46 5 vrs.|
Inc..
Ptr'n 91,126,91^40
IRS7-6I 150*1-5.'
Inc.. I F.T. 239,167.557.00
■6.557-543"7
23,066,272.30
I7,IS3.74"'6O
21,331,22903
47.605,5.3045]
[Rer. In
$lloM
I to lis
itB ^
Ito fll
ito 5»
Or, a-arying the mode of expression, wt
find that from 1S21 to 1S23, a "tariff fa
revenue " collected only $3.j6 of revenue •
on every $ lo worth of imports, while under
the next ten years, over most of
protective tariff extended, we collected
imder a protective tariff $3.47 of revenue
on every $10 worth of goods, increasing our
average importation by $16,000,000 p®
yeat, our average revenue by
per year, and the ratio of revenue to goo®
imported. From 1S34 to.,i84i, inclusive,#
yciu-s of free trade, and of disaster cau^
by excessive importations, our average nn-
portations nearly doubled, while our tori
for revenue fell off nearly $0,000,000 p®
annum, and we collected only $146 of rev
enue On $ 10 of imports. In the five protect'
ive years from 1S42 to 1846, inclusive,
importations were less by $i6,cxX),ooo,^
the duties collected more by $3,CXX),00^
tioof duties rising to $2.34 per $ioof im-
)its. Now turn to another article in
.e April number of The Bureau, and
otice that from 1S61 to 1S70, under proteo¬
se tariffs the revenue has advanped from
.;9,000,000 to 180,000,000, each increase
protection being attended by a steady
'ie in the ratio of the revenue collected to
" e goods imported. In 1S61 we collected
.18 cents of revenue per $10 of imports,
1870 it is $5.00 of revenue per $10 of
■ iports. Is it any wonder that a protective
•iff should produce the most revenue,
;ien, as Mr,, John A. Stuart Mill admits,
-ery tariff laid on articles which compete
. th our own products is paid in great part
foreigners, and not alone by American
^nsumers ? Of course more taxes can be
-.sed by taxing many nations besides our-
. Ives than by taxing ourselves only.
The pretended theory of the Free Traders
.Jaissez faire, let everything alone, and let
- tax be levied in a manner to promote in-
, 5try. But in practice they apply this only
the productive industries, to the manu-
.turers, miners and farmers. They have
,.4:0red grants of land and loans of money
irx ships, canals and railroads, anything in
nart that helps us to export our raw pro-
ye to England, and buy from thence our
^.-nufactured goods. This is because the
sney that moves the free trade party is
- tof the importers and the foreign man-
cturers. They seldom say laissez faire
r.en means of transportation to Liverpool
to be bountied, though the foreign mar-
; has never, under the freest trade, de-
„ nded more than one thirty-fifth part of
• crops, or furnished more than seven per
- -•it. of our iron. Yet the only use of rail-
ds, canals and ships is to take our pro-
ie to the factory, and the objects, a sup-
^ . of manufactured goods, and market for
, d and raw materials, which are far more
^ pctively attained by an expenditure of
! million dollars in manufactures than by
• vaste of twenty millions on b-anspoi-ta-
If the State of New York had said,
!Oi,'hen it will pay to build the Erie canal,
vate enterprise will build it," that canal
,uld never have beeh built; Philadelphia
'^.,tead of New York would still have been
first city in the Union, Virginia would
'e been the Empire State, and Chicago
uld have been a village. We have not
7^ ited for private enterprise to build our
' ans of transportation, but have bountied
.m, taxed the people for them, and sus-
led them at every cost. To withdra^v
d from the common land market, and
' ; e it to a railroad or tax the people to
'|.ld a canal, is to take money out of the
t'-^ids of the people to put it into those of
o®* lividuals, in order to foster into life an
enterprise tliat.without sijch fostering would
not pay, and, would not be started. More¬
over, increased means of transportation are
increased ties of dependence on Europe.
God has interposed mountains, ocegns,
deserts, and distances between various com¬
munities in order to build up distinct pu-
tibnal systems of industry, diverse but de¬
pendent. Bounties to transportation are an
attempt, by artificial and costly means,, to
overcome these national barriers so that
there may be but one manufacturing and
capitalist nation in the world, and all others
tributary to it. If it were possible to reduce
opr cost of transportation low enough, Eng¬
land would send us our houses and bams, fur¬
niture, boots and shoes, as well as our beer,
ale, and porter. On the contrary, had it
remained at natural rates without being
cheapened by bounties and foreign capital,
American manufactures would have de¬
veloped at even speed with American agri¬
culture. Our bounties to transportation
are, therefore, obstructive to manufactures,
which, as we have seen, are, in the long
run, the cheaper mode pf obtaininganarkets
for produce. The only bounties ever given
to manufactures have been those in which
enterprising villages like Elgin, 111., to se¬
cure the location of a manufactory in their
midst, have given them grants of land as
England gave the Flemish weavers three
centuries ago, and both have found it pay.
If a protective tariff is class legislation
for the benefit of manufactures, then it will
stimulate manufactures, causing manufac¬
turers to employ more men, pay higher
wages, consume more agricultural products,
and while creating a better demand for the
farmers' crops, will lessen relatively the
number of farmers who compete with each
other in raising tbem. But as more em¬
ployment and higher wages are just what
all Working men want, and fewer farmers
and higher prices for crops, are what all
fanners want, the Free Traders are obliged
to den V that a protective tariff will in fact aid
manufactures. If so, in whose favor is the
class legislation
When such statesmen as Washington,
Hamilton, all the early Adamses, Jefferson,
Franklin, Madison, Andrew Jackson Clay,
Webster, even Calhoun, in his earlier and
better days, and Abraham Lincoln, in this
country, and those who have moulded the
legislation of Europe for three centuries,
from William of Orange to Napoleon Bona¬
parte, from Peter the Great of Russia and
i Frederick of Prussia to Bismarck, have all
' seen wisdom and national profit in protect¬
ing such of the industries of their countries
as were subject to competition with those
of other countries, is it probable tiiat any
6
profounder revelations have been made to
little Sunset Cox, whom Thad. Stevens
called the Congregational FICa, to Brick'
I'Omero^, Thomos Ho^ ne and Emory A.
Storrsf The mere fact that our present
protective tariff produces tour and a half
times the revenue ever collected under a
free trade tariff, is a Rufficient proof that
protection will always be the policy of the
party upon whom it rests to sustain the
honor of the government by the collection
of a large revenue.
"The Chicago Tnbmw of February 28th
says that woolen blankets " can be made
and sold at a large profit in the t'nited
States, for ao cents a jxiund;" and alleges I
that the only rea$on thcv sell for from fxi 1
cents to a pound, is the tariff of 20 cents
per lb. and 35 per cent, ad valorrm on im¬
ported blankets. Yet the same issue in
which this statement is made quotes un¬
washed fleece wool, (coarse, the lowest
grade of wools), at 28 to 30 cents a pound;
and the highest new Wool, (tub extra clean),
at 50 to 53 cents. How with these prices
for new wool, can blankets be manufactur¬
ed, the wool washed, dyed, sjiun and wove,
for less than the cost of the poorest raw-
wool in the fleece?
The Tribune then says:
"*'Tlie tlrift opcr.ites a.s ;i prohitiition ; not a pound
of blankets of that kind is imported, and the trovern-
meiit gets not a dollar of reienue."
This is not strictly true. ,The reports of
the Bureau of Statistics, show an import,
though not large, of woolen blankets pay¬
ing revenue, being abtiut from $10,000 to
$i5,txx> per _tc:u', w hich are probably of the
finer qualities, and do not compete practi¬
cally with the tlomestic article. But so far
as they are not imported, it shows that they
are produced and sold more cheaply at home
than they can be imported, /. c., for le^s than
the invoiced price of the portion imported
and the tariff. How much less depends on
the cost of production and home competi¬
tion. It is sheer foyy to speak of the tariff
affecting in .any degree the price of an
article that is not imported. If a tariff of
$10.00 a ton were levied on hay, would it
raise the price of hay from $10 a ton to
$io.ao? It would not naise it a mill. So
with boots and shoes, or blankets, or any
substantially non-imported article. Never-
tlieless the Tribune sa^ s:
*' tlut the people who purchase the lo.ooo.ixxt pounds
of blankets of tliat tirade ikis the ta . in the iticrea.sed
price of the hlanket.s. Kstiinatinii tltis tax .it oniv 20
cents per pound, tlu-y pav ^t'.ono.ono tax annuallv to
the blanket niaimf.icturers.*'
This argtiment is queer. It fixes the price
of American blankets according to the for¬
eign with tariff added, tbongh it affirms
that not a single foreign blanket is import¬
ed, because all the blankets sold and used
' in the country, are sold helovi the price of
the foreign! According to this argument,
if the tariff were made $10.00 a pound, the
price of blankets would ri.se to $10.00 a
pound! If a tariff were laid on potatoes of
$20.00 per bushel, the price would rise b)
that amount! Since it is evident that on an
article wholly supplied by domestic labor,
the prioy is wholly determined by domesb'c
competition, it follows that if American
latxtr could afford to make woolen blankets
at 30 Cents a pound, they Would be sold for
that. The fact that the new wool costj
about twice that, sufficiently proves that the
whole statement is an error. ' '
The New York Times, arguing for free
trade, says the larmer receives 24 percent
less for his flour than he did 10 years ago;
14 per cent, less for his wheat, 7 percent
less for his rye, less for com and less for
potatoes. 'Vet David A. Wells, arguing
likewise for free trade, says that the con¬
sumers of provisions of all kinds pay 80 pa
cent, more for cost of living. Now the
farmers prices are, with cost of transporta¬
tion and middlemens' profits added, sub¬
stantially the same as cost of Kving. Tbeie
middlemens" profits rcre not very different
now from what they were in i860. Hows
it then that the sellers of provision and food
get from 7 to 35 per cent, less, while the
buyers pay 80 per cent, more?
The figures are all felse. Wheat, in 1859,
according to the published market reports,
varied from $i.ar>J to ^hile in
1S69, it ranged from $1.60 to $183?!, indi¬
cating an advance of from 17 to 20 percent
in gold price over that of 10 years before.
So of other farm products. On the other
hand, if w e ex<amine the following list ol
selling prices of cloths in gold in i860, and
in currency in 1869, furnished by A t
Stewart to the revenue department, and
published in the Tree Trader for January,
we will see that many of the most "pro¬
tected " woolen fabrics for common wear
are lower in gold prices now than then, not¬
withstanding the higher rates of wagespaid
for producing them:
i860, i860.
Cadet cloths. Govern- Inciry- /ae'W'
meiit sLmtLird 75 $3 w»'
Ilarrisr-assiinCs, i4or:Si
Cot. warp cloths, 14 o/. I 00 ®
All-wool cloths, 14 ox
Middlesex sackings.,
Middle.sex doeskins ..
Middlesex stiawls
Middlesex beavers ... -
I Middlesex op'ratlaii'ls
Bro.idhrook casslm'rs 1
ISroadbrook beaiers.. s 13
j Spring cassimeres 8 2. —
I too ox I.XbxfjJI
Glenham repellants.. i lO @
i Glenham sackings ...
j Swift River faibcies, ii
to 12 oz
KoyaJston cassimeres average®
I Fitrhburff cassimeres **
1 25
I 50
1 10
1 05
7 00
3 75,.
47 »
tS
I 05
1 87
I 75
» 75
1 25
I 15
7 00
4 25
50
1 75
JO®
1 y
t 30
I '5
•10
/
Ore of the ingenuous devices resorted to
) break dowh protection, is to ask free trade
I some particular article, under pretense of
, ficouraging and protecting the industry in
, hich this article is used. As if all articles
,?import were not the raw material of some-
^,iing else. Even the food and clothing of
,ie laborer are part of the raw materials of
/is labor, and go to make up the cost of its
noduct. The logic which would justily
trade in any thing, would justify the
,.temption of all imports f rom taxation, thus
.^aving the government without a revenue
,yd industry without protection. The latest
'these pleas is the demand of Mr. C. W.
uckley, of Alabama, for free trade in |he
~ngiish style- Of machinery for spinning
•'itton yams, so that our cotton crop may be
■ tported and spun, instead of in the bale.
- dmirable plan for the diversification of in-
"■-jstry and the building of manufactures at
"'le South! Under it England would send
•'-erher second-hand cotton spinning ma-
■> lines, sell them off at the cost of new and
- itter ones, and the planters would find
' at the same reasons which have prevent-
: I them from using the American machines
•: a profit, apply also to the British. Says
r- e Wiiladelphia North American:
ri"This insidious attempt to break down
1' e protective system by endeavoring to en-
; - ge the manufacturers themselves in it has
■ ' culiarly marked the present free trade
—'Usade. We are asked to allow the free
J, liportation of wool to encourage the
,-:Oolen fkctorles; the free importation of
^ iron to encourage manufactures of
j. in goods; the free importation of rails
^ benefit railroads; the free importation
steel to benefit manufacturers of cut-
and hardware; the free importation
hides and sumac to benefit leather man-
_ , Icturers and shoemakers; the free im-
'./ rtation of soda ash to benefit the manu-
'^^'.iturers of glass, soda and paper; the free
' ...portation of nickel to benefit the manu-
iturers of Gennan silver; the free impor-
ion of copper to benefit the manidac-
'ers of brass and bronze works; the free
.portation of dyestuffs to benefit the print
^ irks; the free importation of books to aid
,1 cause of literature; the free importation
paper to aid the publishers; the free imr;
Irtation of coal to aid the New England
'-J tories; in fact, we can scarcely day a
.«' ger upon any industrial interest in Amer-
• but is threatened by this process.
'Every one of these demands is made in
J interest of capital wholly and solely,
it one of them can in any degree benefit
5 operatives engaged in manufacturing
rsuits while the enormous influx of for-
;n goods that would follow so sweeping
If": increase of the free list would crush
lusands of American industrial establish-
ints, and throw tens of thousands of opera-
I I
tives out of employment. This is undoubt¬
edly the aim of the English Free Traders at
the present time, as they see that untess
they can by some means arrest the rapid
progress of an industry their own interests
must suffer heavily."
It is important that the advocates of pro¬
tection should never give away one of their
strongest points, by conceding that any
other tariff can be more efficient than a
protective tariff, in the collection of a large
revenue. We have always, without one
exception; derived larger revenues from
protective tariffs than from non-protective
ones. A tariff so laid as to produce the
maximum of revenue on every articlfe,
would neces-sarily be one that would be pro¬
tective on ,^every article. When we had
what we cafied a " revenue tariff" on woof
and woolens, they produced only one or
two millions of revenue. Now under a
protective tariff, they produce $24,000,000
of revenue (in 1868), being the highest
article next to sugar* on the list.
We deprecate therefore the language of
the New York' Tribune, in commenting on
Marshall's resolution in Congress, in favor
of " such duties on every article as w ill give
the maximum of revenue oh that article.'**
Upon this the Tribune'sayai '
The doctrine of tliat resolve, embodied in a tariff,
would turn many thousands of dem(x:ratic artisans
out of employment and reduce the tvages of many
otliers. It would reduce the impost on ready-made
clothing- composed of wool, etc., from 50 cents per
pound afui 40 per cent, ad valorem to less than half
these rates, and flood our city with the sweepings of
the great slop-shops of Europe. It would reduce the
impost on cigars from $3 per pound and 50 per cent,
ad valorem to 50 per cent, vjithout the per pound,
and thus deprive of employment tvvo-thiras of those
now working in cigar factories and almost unani¬
mously voting the democratic ticket. These are but
two out of a hundred pursuits of our citizens which
such a tariff as the Free Traders demand would
damage and all but destriw. Either those pursuits
would be transferred to foreign countries, or the
wages of those employed in them must be reduced
nearly one-half; for it is simply impossible that em¬
ployers should persist in paying $10,000 here for labor
that they could hire for $5,000 or less in Europe, if the
tariff were recast with a view to revenue alone.
Undoubtedly a low tariff would produce
the effects Mr. Greeley describes, but his
error consists in conceding that the " tariff
which will produce the maximum of rev¬
enue on each article," would be a low tariff.
Such an admission gives away one-half of
the strength of the Protectionist argument,
and is besides grossly untrue. We get
three times as much revenue now from the
most protective portions of our tariff, as we
got in i860 from our entire tariffs. Protec¬
tion has given us four and a half times
higher revenue than free trade, and we
can not afford to let a leading Protec¬
tionist journal admit away this all impor-3
tant fact.
8
SHALL ENGLAND BOAST OR
' BLUSH?
The Ottawa Times, a Canadian authority,
hoasting that the advantages of Great Brit¬
ain for manufacturing, are superior to those
of the United States, says:
"Without some protection the United States could
not manufacture for themselves at all. England
would sunply them with everytliinp they want—ships,
houses, planes, saws, and even door knobs—in iron
and it adds, what is also true, tliat " tlic internal tax¬
ation of the United States is counter-balancing' even
the high protective duties, making the cost of produc¬
tion in England, in spite of the present discriminating
tariff, less than in the United States."
The writer's statement is even truer than
he conceived, for he evidently writes under
the mistaken impression possessed by many
Americans, that all custom duties are neces¬
sarily protective. On the contrary, duties
levied on articles which we do not produce,
and which do not compete with our own
industry, counteract the protective effect of
the others. Ope-third of our tariff revenue
is rpised from tea, coffee, sugar and molas¬
ses, spices, foreign oils and wines, silks,
etc., which are wholly unproteetive in their
character, except that we produce in Louis¬
iana, about one-nineteendi g(" all the cane
sugars and molasses we consume. More
than a third, probably one-half our tariff
therefore is laid on articles from which the
Protectionists would gladly remove it if
their wishes alone were consulted, and its
removal would increase their protection, by
lessening the cost of production. One-
third of the tariff itself therefore must be
added to the internal revenue tax, to arrive
at the total burden of our internal taxation,
which is tending to raise the cost of produc¬
tion here. In other words, a tariff which
■would rise one-third our present revenue,
but raise it all from articles which compete
with our own products, would be more
really protective than the present. And
yet the free trade policy is to take off all
the duties from products which compete
with our Industry, and to double and tnple
the tax we pay on teas, coffees, sjigars, etc.,
in order that foreign manufactures may
come in free, and hundreds of thousands
of American workmen be thrown out of
employment on the one hand, and have
the price of their tea, coffee, and sugar,
tripled on the other!
And the Times concludes its boasting
over the advantages it fancies England will
retain, by saying:
"Rri^nnia, in every sense, now rules the waves,"
and British is more omnipotent to-dav, in war
iuid peace and commerce and arts and science and
literature, than at any previous period of the world's
history,"
And yet, notwithstanding British gold
seems so omnipotent on this side of the
■water, read how disastrously the free trade
system of England reduces the wages of
the British laborer below the living poim
Is it any wonder, when his labor is com.
pelled to compete unprotected against the
whole unemployed and surplus labor of the
world ? Since there musi always be some
point, where labor relatively to cost of living
must be lower than anywhere else, ho*
natural that that point should be where it It
subjected to the greatest compeb'tion.
The Mark Lane Exj>resso( February jth,
says:
We arc, indeed* reaching a crisis of contnsU.
Bread goes a begging, whiJe many go begging for
bread ; and while some propose emigration as
great source of relief to the country, no bolder
corn believes that a diminished consumption will».
crease the demand. A strange phenomenon is this:
Prfwidence has made the earth to teem with plenty-
tliaf plenty instrumentaliy caused by the hand of mM
—yet the laboring man is destitute in the midst
abundance."
WOOL AND BLANKETS.
The Evening Post, of Chicago, makes s
labored effort to show that American
farmers ought to wear the wools grown bj
foreign farmers. For this purpose it cj'phen
out a curious sum to show that the fanner
only gets for ten pounds of wool to-dajfive
pairs of blankets, while in i860 he would
get thirteen pairs. In other words, argues
the Post, the American woolen manufactur¬
er makes a profit of eight pairs of blankets
on every thirteen pairs, in excess of the
profit he made in i860.
Before showing that every figure involv¬
ed in this sum is false, let us suppose fnra
moment it were true. What would be the
effect ? Evidently that woolen manufactur¬
ing would be very profitable, and that 1
sufficiently large number would soon go
into it to reduce the profits to a medium,
and to bring down the price. The Bvenag
Post surely cannot suppose that intrio-
sic,ally it involves less labor for the Ameri¬
can farmer to send hiS wool to England to
be manufactured, p.aying 6,000 miles of
tmnsportation and the services of twentj
handlings, than to have it manufactured in
an adjoining village. On the contrary,
every western farmer knows that the oA
way to have western wools manufactured
at all is to h.Tve them manufactured here.
TTie coat or blanket we import from Eng¬
land contains no western wool. If all our
coats and blankets were imported, thei^
fore, nine-tenths of western wcxil would mi
Every man -who buys an imported coat«
blanket takes the bread out of the rooutn
of a western wool grower.
But let us look at the Posf s figures, every
one of which is a falsehood. It states that
the price of pulled Merino wool ten years
ago was fifty cents per pound. There
so much less market for wool in i860 tb^,
now, that its price was not then 1"° .jl"
any of the Chicago daily pataers- But the
nsus of l86oshows that the average-ralue
' the wool carded, which would include
actly the qualities made in blankets, was
the whole Union 321^2 cents a pound; to
't, in New England 39.6 cents a pound, in
5 Middle States 43.1 cents, in the South-
■^1 States 33 cents, in the Western States
"4 cents, and in the I'acific States 39.8
'its per pound. The lair price for blanket
'ols in the Western States in i860 was not
cents, therefore, as the Post asserts, but
'Jcents.
^rhe Post next asserts that pulled Merino
^1 is to-day worth only 45 cents. On the
'-J the Post published the statement it
;"■? quoted in the Chicago dailies at from
a'to 53 cents, or ranging exactly 50 cents,
b43 cents in gold. It is safe to say that
al of the same quality averages ten cents
—her to the farmer than in i860, instead
cents lower as reported by the Post.
Vith regard to the price of blankets it is
" ^cient to say the average prices of woolen
■ jds generally are lower in gold now than
-l86o. Commissioner Wells admits this
." "leral fact, but denies that all Woolen
ids are cheaper now than then, and at-
■- ipts to neutralize the effect of his state-
L^iQt by,showing that woolen goods gene-
-y are not as much lower here than they
. - "6 in i860 as they are in Europe. Blan-
are one of the plainest and coarsest of
manufactured woolens, and when
it woolens are selling lower than then,
safe to say that blankets are not selling
j^. he average throughout the country,»more
■ ft five per cent, higher. As we have al-
j- ly seen, the wool itself is selling ten per
higher, so that the power of wool tn
_^ chase woolens is at least five per cent.
7..iUer to-day than in i860. In other words,
pounds of wool would buy to-day 5 per
t. more in woolen blankets, and twenty
hirty per cent, more in other kinds of
' liens than in i860.
FREE TRADE NO ISSUE.
Lt- 'k great many papers are talking about a new po-
'J (iast of parties wherein the question of Free
'V-te versus Protective Tariff shall be the main
- ^ i. It is not easy» and will not be for some years
-1 - line, to draw party lines across an> such question
A .sRort time ago we took occasion to show
the term free trade is a misnomer, that there is
-■ »arty and na very considerable number of people
,<•/-lis country who advocat«" absolute free trade. It
needed on all hands that a con.sideralde portion
revenue must be derived from duties on im-
rf's for many years; at least till the body of the
.C'icdebt is very greatly reduced. It is a form of
• j^;a.«;ier collected and Jess severely felt than almost
other; besides the virtue., that can not be over-
by anv n fterih'e person., of gathering at least a
rFTr;;«<r from Jordan capital
, ^ 'h has the advantage ofy an4 derives its projits
't, our markets.
The utmost controversy that can be made, ap-
- j;; ching to a part)' difference, on the tariff question,
r ® details of tariff laws rather than to the
* There is not a free trade journal in
Te land, that wc liave seen, wliich even advocates
a plain tariff for revenue and for no other purposer-
Wnerever they complain of any particular rate of
duties, thev use tlie same plea tliat tariff Protection¬
ists do—ill fact, protection, if they advocated tariff
changes that should he most effective for revenue
only, thev must advocate cither placing the duties on
such articles as can not be produced in our own
country, or an *' iron-clad" scale upon all imports
alike, with no discrimination whatever. But they ad¬
vocate neither of these. Neither do any two of the
free trade journals, that we have seen, agree precisely
as to the terms of the tariff that they want. The
only thing that they agree about, and about which
the Protectionists afso agree, is that a large number
of articles should be admitted free of duty—some be¬
cause they are articles of great and common neces¬
sity, others because the revenue derived therefrom
would not pay for the extra trouble of collection, and
others still for their g^eat utility in home productive
arts and industries. Hammering away at a difference
of three or five dollars a ton in the tiiriff on pig iron
will never raise it to the white heat of a party ques¬
tion. Modifications may be sought for on a varie^
of articles, and the test of experience must after aU
determine how far they should be made. Even now
Congress is engaged in that very work. And so long
as there are any discriminations in tariff duties., we
care not upon what pretext they are made., the principle
involved IS protection. All tariff advocates are there¬
fore Protectionists, however they niay talk. The
real difference betiveen the so-called Free Traders
and Protectionists is in regard to who shall be pro¬
tected.
The protective tariff advocates go in Jor American
protection., for protection to all home industries^ for
encouraging them in their competition with foreign in^
terests. 7ne Free Tradersy while claiming to favor
protection to consumers as against producers^ are really
working to protect foreign manufactartng industrtee
in their rivalry with our own. bor there it comes at
last. By throwing off tlie duties upon goods that
compete'with domestic manufactures, we should not
only throw awav the amount of revenue derived
therefrom, but that very fart of the revenue which,,
under the tariffs the foreigner is compelled^ in Part at
least, to pay. Protectionists claim that by protecting
and thereby promoting domestic manufactures, they
increase the home market for productions of the so^
and tliat thus all parties .are benefited.
** But there is no question broad enough in this
tariff issue to constitute a substantial plank in a party
platform. Fhr many years past no party has dared
unequivocally to put free triule in its platform, and no^
party will dare to do so for many years to come.'"'
We call attention to the above sound and
most intelligent staternent of the tariflT
question from the Grand R.api4s( Daily
Eagle, of Michigan. The assumption that
the general sentiment of the press of the-
Northwes^ is for free trade, is a most calum¬
nious and erroneous one. Until within two
years, not one Republican journal in tw enty
of the press in the Northwest was for free
trade, and we still doubt if one in four of
them is so. We admit the backsliding of
the Cincinnati Gazette, St. Louis Democrat
and Chicago Tribune, are formidable facts
for the champions of American industry.
But their arguments are, in the main,
frothy carpings at trifling details, such as
the determined critic C4n always find in all
works, human or divine. But they can not
deny that a protective tariff has more than
quadrupled our revenue; that the protective
portion of our present tariff now yields
three-fourths of our custom duties; that the
general prosperity of industry in the United
States during the past ten years has been
more uniform and vigorous than for any
lO
preceding ten, and all th's nMwiihftandiHg
fiw of tliesi- years have het-H years oj the most
expenshv -warfare ever earned on by a siii^de
nation. The sober sen-'e of the Amerii an
people can not fail to see that these are in¬
controvertible proofs, that protection t</ our
industry Jias been the sheet-anchor of our
safety-.
"NTHBLED TO DEATH BY PIS-'
MIRES."
It is seldom that the longest speeches are
the most elVective. Of all the utterances
in Congress or from the Cabinet during the
present session, the thunder-bolt that went
farthest, killed the greatest number, and
will be the longest remembered, was hurled
when Gen. Schenck declared that, should
the tarift" bill be defeated, the verdict over
its corp.se would be, "Nibbled to death bj-
pismires." Not a single denial has been
made m Congress that the protective char¬
acter of the tariff has quadrupled our reve¬
nue. It has not been denied that the effect
of a protective tariff has been to develop
and foster all the industries in which we
compete with Europe, except that of pro¬
ducing breadstuffs. In the matter of bread-
stuffs, we have gone far toward supplying
our farmers with that home market which
is always so much more valuable than the
foreign, and which, if protection to manu¬
factures were continued, would .soon de¬
velop them to a point which would con¬
sume all our breadstuffs at home, at
higher prices than could be obtained
abroad.
Not a single square assault upon the prin¬
ciple of protection has been made from
any quarter, by attempting to show that it
had failed to develop and extend the indus¬
tries it had aimed to develop; that it had
lessened our revenue; that it brought on
commercial distress; or that it had turned
any class of men into the streets, as did
free trade in 1816-20, in 1836, and in 1857.
All efforts to change the tariff are made
under the plea of reducing the revenue, on
the ground that we are collecting more
revenue than we need, and are paying off
the debt more rapidly than we ought. It
is not contended that our avcuking classes
are suffering or that ready employment
at full wages is not everywhere to be
had for all who are willing to work. It
18 not denied that in England industry is
very straightened, and that a recent com¬
mission, appointed by Parliament to inves¬
tigate the condition of the working classes,
reports that it is better in America than any¬
where else. The editor of the Missouri
Democrat, now traveling in Europe, writes
to his paper that it is in vain for American
farmers to attempt to compete with the
cheap serf labor Of the Russian, Austrian
and Ceiman peafeintry, in the attempt to
raise breadstuffs for the English miiet
While we are paying from $i5 to $J0 ptt
month, and board, for green farm haiidi,
who are mostly fresh imported European
peasants, hands of the same d.ass in Eu¬
rope, i,5'X) miles nearer to the Englid
markets, are working for less money airf
Ixi.arding themselves. .'\s a s,ample of tht
difference in manufacturing wage.s, tak;
the following average weekly earnings of
puildlers in the iron furnaces here aii
there:
United Stsitei |i6 54 goii
En^htnd 87$ "
Kr^nrc 800 "
Hclg^ium and Rhtfrnsh Prtist»ia 600
Rusbia (Vicksa ironworks) * 95 "
In spite of the arguments of the Fret
Traders, that we ought to be suffering,
while the artisans of England ought to bi
happy, under free trade, we find the mem¬
bers of their nobility presiding at vast meet¬
ings for the promotion of the emigration rf
laborers from England, and Canadian jni
Australian papers abusing the home au¬
thorities because they report in favor of
emigration to the dearly-taxed United States,
rather than to the cheaply-taxed colonies-
About 400,000 people came here last year,
and we look for a still larger number Ihii
year. And still, in spite of these great facts,
the army of pismires are mustering their
hosts to the work of nibbling down aid
undermining the defenses of American m-
dustries.
Pismire the first proceeds by understating
the value of our manufactures, the numbei
of hands they employ, of souls they sup
port, and the extent to which they supply
the wants of our people, and consume out
agricultural products. Thus, one writer, h
an article before us, states the whole value
of our annual product of iron and steel
manufactures at only ^119,950,000, where*
the true value, as computed by the Ameri¬
can Iron and Steel Association, which is is
receipt of regular reports from the membeis
of their production, is seven hundred sod
fifty millions of dollars a year.
Pismire the serond says that Only 3301100
persons are employed in the great protected
industries of iron, woolens and cottons, whet
those of iron alone employ fully 650,00)
persons, and support directly 3,200,000 per¬
sons.
Pismire the third ("Oath," the Washing¬
ton correspiondent of the Chicago Trim,
in his letter published May 17) says;
" The whole number of manufacturing laboms,
direct and incidental, in every department of whit is
called industry, amounts to only 1,385,000."
This was the number returned by the
census, as male and female operatives in
manufactories, in i860, ten years aga As
each of these supported at the average (w
1
ions, they \»ouId have suetamed 5,540,-
! persons, or one-sixth of our whole popu-
">n at that time. But if, in addition, we
ude the persons collaterally employed in
fangins; and transporting their prc^ucts,
ould have shown not less than 8,oOB,rxx),
I fourth of our population sustained by
lufactures. But "Gath" wholly omits
ate that within ten years our iron product
- doubled, and our other manufactures
,e increased by from 60 to 80 per cent,
increase of 60 per cent, would make tbc
icnt number of persons employed in
lufact\ires'alone (exclusive of tho-e nun-
farmers and planters who are employed
amishing their raw materials) at 2,308,-
, We are safe in stating their entire
'sberat 2,5oo,ixx>, and the number of per-
3 they support at 10,000,000, or one-fourth
;.)ur whole people.
i^ismire the fourth (and there are at least
rcoof this class, all misled by David A. •
lis) represents that we have, during the
- two years, placed such taxes on the'
; erials used in ship-building as to close'
-ry ship-yard in the country; whereas, in
owing to an over-production of ships
J England during our war, the decline in
rebuilding has been as sudden and dis-
.sing to ship-builders there as it has been
,B. The building of sailing vessels in
..;at Britain rose from 32 vessels of 13(584 '
-i aggregate in i860 to 142 vessels and
^ ,074 tons in 1863, and 154 vessels of
,716 tons in 1864, from whence it rapidly
to 99 vessels of 39,103 tons in 1867, or
^ibout one-third its standard during our
■j', The building of steam vessels in Great
^tam rose in like manner from 149 vessels
^,'1,115 tonnage in i860 to 342 steamers of
: ,g8i tons in 1864, and 344 steamers of
_ ,382 tons in 1865, from w hich high rate
" production it fell to 188 vessels of 75,1x19
' s in x868, and has since declined still fur-
r. Besides this, the reports of our Sec-
''iries of the Navy show a heavy sale of
'^vemment vessels of all kinds sufficient
' hemselves to glut our market with cheap
»■ ps, and stop further demand for ship-
•Iding. Nevertheless, when the writer,
1 years ago, made personal inquiry into
- rates of wages paid in the New York
"p-yards, he found sufficient building and
' airing going on to enable the principfil
ds to run with nearly as large a force as
i860, and to pay consider,ably higher
- ges in gold.
°ismire the fifth, echoing some assertion
ich he supposes he has heard soine-
ere, says that we are building no
ire^ iron vessels, while the following
ures, taken from Mr. Nimmo's rejioid
, the number and tonnage of Ameri-
1 steam and sailing vessels recently
,iU of American iron, shows that we
ve Ciuriy embarked in the business of
iron ship-building, and are making good
progress therein: '•
Class. Number. Tonssage. *
Barks I 680
I 359
Barges i 244
I.ake Steamers 1 2 2,325
iKiver Steamers 64 22,810
lOeeau Steaioers .... * 49 41,884,
Total 118 68,299^
It is not uncommon to read the statement
in tlie free trade papers that the American
flag no longer waves over a single ocean
steamer except upon the Panama and Pa¬
cific lines, whereas here we have 49 iron
steamers afloat^ besides the wooden ones.
Or if they have been sold to foreigners, it
proves equally well that they found it ad¬
visable to have their ships built here rather
than ^^broad. So far no \ essel has been,
built in the United States of imjxirted iron,
the rkmerican irpn being a superior article.
Official tests, made at the Watertown arse¬
nal, give the average tensile strength at
41.505 lbs. for the English specimens, and
45.272 lbs. for the American, per square
inch.
So we might pursue the ai-my of infinites¬
imal liars into their jungle of infinitesimal
lies. But what is the use of firing the
artillery of statistics at such a marsh full of
mosquitoes. The only way is to light a
smudge that will protect us from the worst
of them. This Gen. Schenck did when hCj
named them. Every Free Trader in the^
country felt the force and truth of his epi¬
thet. It stung only because it was true.
While they denoiince4 it, they could neither
deny nor answer it.
1
THE MANUFACTURE OF GLASS, r.
Glass is the most useful, and one of the
most ancient of all the metallic substances
invented or discovered by man. Specimens
of glass ornaments are found buried with
Egyptian'mummies, and inscribed with the
name of a monarch who reigned 1.500 years
before Christ. The Egyptian use of glaaS'
ante-dates the story that Phenician sailors
discovered it accidentally among the ashes
i of a fire they had kindled on the sand, and
into which some soda had fallen, which,
fusing with tlie sand, produced the crys¬
tal. The latter is doubless apocryphal.
.Among the ancients, however, glass was an
article of jewelry and ornament, a substitute
I for pearls and precious stones. A few high--
ly wrought vessels and plates -were formed
j of it, some of which have co.ne down to us
' in tombs, and in the ruins of Pomfeii. In
modem Europe, the manufacture was begun
at Muraiio, near Venice, and can ied to such
a success that glass mirrors, began to take
the place of the mirrors of polished metal.
Colbert, the father of the protective policy
in France, brought the manufacture from
12
Venice to Ffanocj contemporaneously with
those of Sevres china, Flemish carpets, and
Gobelin tapestry, in the splendid reiyn of
Louis XiV. In 1614, the first French
window glass was made, though it had been
made in England In 1557, and in Scotland
in 1610, but to an extent that only admitted
of glazing a part of the windows of the
Royal palaces. Not until 1630 did the use
of glass for windows reach the common
people. Owing to the fabulous value of
glass beads in trade with the Indians, arti-
zans were sent to Virginia to make glass,
as early as 1609, eleven years before Ply¬
mouth Rock received the Pilgrims. In
Salem, Massachusetts, in 1639, the first
glass factory was encouraged by a grant of
several acres of land. Three years after,
the General Court authorized the town to
loan the proprietors thirty pounds, to be re¬
paid " if the work succeeded, when they
were able." In Scotland, fen years after,
the first glass house was erected, and the
importation of foreign glass was prohibited.
Scattered enterprises were undertaken in
New York, New Jersey, and Maryland;
but as late as 1783, very little glass was
made in America, except an inferior window
glass and bottles. In 1795-97, General
James O'Hara, Isaac Craig, and Stephen
Bayard began the first glass works at Pitts¬
burgh, the town having been laid out in
1784. Among General O'Hara's papers, at
his death, was found, a memorandum, as
follows: "To-day we make the first bottle
at a cost of thirty thousand dollars." Some
Free Trader should have been at hand to
assure him that it woutd have been cheaper
to import that bottle from England!
Prior to Alexander Hamilton's celebrated
report to the first Congress, in 1790, on man¬
ufactures and the duty of protection to
American industry, the tariflf on glass was
two and a half per cent. He reported that
the materials for its manufacture are every¬
where found throughout the United States;
that tlie sands and stones called iarso,
which include flinty and crystalline sub¬
stances generally^ and the salts of various,
kinds, particularly of the sea-weed Kali or
Kelp, are the essential ingredients; that
fuel was abundant, and that the manufac¬
ture only needed large capital, and afforded
employment for much manual labor. He
recommended a bounty on window glass
and bottles, and, in 1794, the tariff on win¬
dow glass was raised to fifteen per cent,
and on certain elaborate glassware still
higher.*
*. interesting to note that in tli^ same year in
which this tariff act was passed, its gyeat autlior,
Alex. Hamilton, formed an incorporated ** Society
for the establishment of useful manufactures,^' with
certain privileges, includinga city charter, over a dis-
trict six miles square, at the Falls of the Passaic, N. J.,
which they named Patterson. It is now one of the
Jargest manufacturing cities in the country. Three
In i8o3. General O'Hara, of Pittsburgh,
sent to England for more workmen, en.
larged his works, and began the manufac.
ture of white and flint glass. The fact that
his flrbt bottle cost $30,000 had not die
couraged him. In 18^, Congress, in re¬
sentment of British outrages on American
commerce, prohibited the introduction of
most kinds of British manufactures, includ-
ing glass; though Congress soon after sus.
pended the operations of the ac^ yet the
issue of the Berlin decrees, prohibitingall
commerce with the British islands, whileit
seriously impaired our transporting and
shipping interests and lessened our foreign
trade, gave so great a stimulus to domestic
manufactures as to increase with unet
ampled rapidity our domestic commerce,f
In 1807, O'Hara's white glass worbat
Pittsburgh were reported as producing
$i8,(xx> per annum, and a green glass fac¬
tory had been erected across the Monooga-
hela. In 180S the first flint glass facton
was established in Pittsburgh by Baltewelis
& Co., who met with the greatest difficulfj
in procuring trained workmen and the pro¬
per materials, but, at length, establish^ a
profitable business.
In 1810, Secretary Gallatin reported ten
glass manufactories in the country, em¬
ployed 140 glass-blowers, and making 27,-
(XX) boxes of window glass 100 square feel
each; that of Boston made crown gU»
equal to any imported; all the others,green
or German glass, worth fifteen per cent
less; that of Pittsburgh used coal, all the
others, wood for fueL The importations of
window glass were also 27,000 boxes, the
extension of the domestic manufactnrq
which supplied precisely one-half the con¬
sumption, being retarded by wantol wort
men.
In i8ro, three glass works in Pittsburgh
produced flint glass to the value of $30)<**h
years afterward the " Hamilton Mannfeehinnf Sir
cicty " was incorporated and became proprietor wW
extensive g-lass works, ten miles west of AJ
which its rnembers had nine years before set loop^
tion. The change of name was a tribute to Bie
father of American protection, to whose
relative to the supremacy and coercive powers oiW
National Government, as well as relative tc
cal questions, the country has been forced to retofc
witlnn the pa^ decade*
t Undertheprotectivetarifr.framedbyHamJlW''
1794, we were, at this period, colJectin|" so ,
revenue that, afterpa> ing oiTupw ards of
the narionjilfundea debt in four and ^^balfyears.n^
ident Jefferson reports to Congress that per®
a sulcus, unless the rate of payment is
lie inquired whether it would do to remitthe
Sfilt, which the salt importers were clamonng ^
then as now. Said he, " Shall we suppress
post and give that advantage to foreign
tic manufactures?" Ife expressed the belief^
" On most articles the patriotism of the people
prefer its (the tariff^s) continuance and appbcatieP
the great purposes of public -education, roads,
can^s, and such other objects of publicimprovw^
as it may be tliought proper to add to the consow
tional enumeration of &e federal powers.
id bottle and window glass worth $40,000.
the same year a German, named Eich-
um, "formerly glass cutter to Louis
yi, late King of France," established
i siness in Pittsburgh, and cut the first six-
ht chandelier, with prisms of his cutting
,er cut in the United States. It was sus-
* nded as a triumph of art in the house of
ri'Kerr, inkeeper, for public admiration.
i8i2, large flint glass works were built
lultaneously in Pittsburgh and in Boston;
.."1814, a glass factory was built in Keene,
^ H., where it is still a principal business.
^.'1815, two were projected at Cincinnati.
1818, the New England Glass Company
^ablished, at Cambridge, one of the most
pensive flint glass manufacturies in the
■^"mtiy. With two flint furnaces, and
~ :nty-four glass cutting mills, operated by
""am, and a red lead furnace, they pro-
"^":ed the finest .work, Grecian lamps,
'-'indeliers for churches, vases, antique
" I transparent lamps, and began to ex-
^■-•t, in competition with England, to the
^~;st Indies and South America. Capital,
^■■),ooo; annual product, $65,000. The
'^railton tariff was thus developing its
-C-its, substituting an export for an import
le.
; -n the next year, however, a series of in-
t" "winces which had been accumulating ever
- '.-.e the peace of 1B15, suddenly broke
...in the country, with a power that could
-xarealized only by those who experienced
L, Tl.
srji 1810, under the joint influences of the
jjji.nilton tariff, and the Jefferson non-inter-
ji': rse policy against England, our manu-
,L? ures had rapidly increased, and our agri-
^jc'Ure and internal commerce were pros-
.ous. With a population of 7,239,903,
census of that year returned our manu-
ures at $127,694,602, and trustworthy
.^,,jiiates increased the total to $172,762,676,
^ about $21 fer capita. This was only
^^^it one-third our present ratio per capita,
it had nearly all been the growth of
j^y^n years of encouragement.*
. --otwithstanding the urgent recommend-
of >ir. Madison, on the return 'Saf
:e, that Congress should not permit tlie
oration of commerce with England, to
'.f'kdown "the manufactures which have
«=!''ng into existence, and attained an un-
' glided maturity throughout the United
—-
^ .'resident Madison in the.saike year, in his rnes-
- congratulated the country upon tiie e.Mcu^ion
- .^^eful manufactures and tile substitution of domcs-
forei'Mi .suppfi ,i :d s.iiti, "in a national view
i-ange is justly rcenrdcd as of itself more tlian a
y^ -nnense for our privations and losses, resulting
.- cT r foreign^ injustice, which furnished the general
Ise required for its accomplislirnent. ITow far it
fyl^t he exjiedient to guard the infancy of tliis im-
H' , iment in the distrinution of labor by regulation
e. commercial tariff, was a subject which could
: rc-r ail to suggest itself to the patriotic reflections of
'!rir'','neaa,"
States, during the period of the European
wars," a commercial treaty was adopted on
the third of July, at London, by which
duties on tonnage and imports were equalized
so that the produce or manufactures of the
one country could be imported into the
other, in the ships of either, upon equal
terms." This inaugurated, in principle,
perfect free trade between a country whose
manufactures were 20 years old, and an¬
other whose industries had been steadily
protected for 300 years. The result was in¬
evitable, and the disaster complete, and
almost unparalleled in the misery it, pro¬
duced. The imports suddenly swelled
to $1.55,2.50,000 in 1816, and the country
was for the hour flattered by their enor¬
mous quantity—the duties, despite the low-
ness of the tariff, rising to thirty-si.x mil¬
lions. English manufacturers competed
with each other in piling heavy consign¬
ments of goods into the American market
to be sold at a loss, uniler a policy which
Mr. Brougham at the time justified in par¬
liament in the following terms: " It is even
worth while to incur a loss upon the first
exportations, in order by the glut, to stifle
in the cradle these rising manufactures in
the United States, which the war had forced
into existence contrary to' the natural cause
of things." The iriiporters and auctioneers
made heavy profits for a year or two.' In
i8i6'-T7-'i8, the manufacturers of the
country were discharging tjieir men one
after anotlier; 60,000 operatives were dis¬
charged, and 240,000 persons dependent on
them were reduced to distress. In 1819,
after three years of free trade, the depres¬
sion extended to all branches of industry,
the country reaching that unfortunate con¬
dition, in which Gen. Jackson wrote that
unless protection from competition with the
cheap capital and pauper labor of Europe
were restored, " we should soon be paupers
ourselves."
In 1824, protection was restored, and in
1831, the committee on glass and inaniifaqr
ture of clay, in Congress, (for instead of
one general committee on manufactures as
now, each leading industry then had its
committee,) reported twenty-one flint-glass
furnaces in the United States, of which six
were in and near Boston, and twenty-three
manufactories of c; linder window glass, of
which four were at Fittsburgli, four at
Burnsville, Pa., and two at "Wheeling, Va.
The New England Crown Glass Company,
and one of the kind near New York,
were all in that line. The total annual
product was $3,000,000, employing 2,140
persons, subsisting to,800, paying in wages
$720,000.
In 1844, the manufacture of pressed glass,
by means of metallic moulds, in imitation
of cut glass, an American invention, was
introduced into England, a proof among
14
-man^ that even ffir England, I>ord Brough-
' am's policy of breaking down American
manufactures was' short-'-ighted. Within
two years pressed glass had become.a very
prominent branch of the manufacture in ail
manufacturing nations, F'roin this period
until i8(>o, the growth of the glass manu¬
facture was steady, and, owing to the skill
required in the manufacture, the abundance
of our raw materials, the partial protection
atTofded by its friability, and the consequent
losses by breakage sustained in shipping it
across the ocean, it has been less affected
than most industries, by hostile or fluctuat¬
ing legislative measures. In iSho, the cen¬
sus returned ii2 manufactories of glass¬
ware of all kinds, employing $6,133,^//)
of capital,* consuming $2,914,303 worth
of raw materials, employing 9/J16 hands
of whom 251 were females, paying $2,-
903,832 in annual wages, and producing
$3,775,155 worth of glasswares, annually.
Our imports for the same year amounted to
only $2,104,493. Cnr'imports of glass are
now about three millions per year, and our
production probably five times that value.
The manufacture is one of the most artistic
and beautiful in which the human energies
can be employed. The conversion of the
rude sand, asues, and salts into a transpar¬
ent crystal, the processes of fusing, mould¬
ing, priissing, cutting, blowing, chasing,
silvering, embossing, engraving, and le-Iter-
ing are all attractive to the mind, and edu¬
cative of the hand, the eye, the nerve, and
the head, and through the refining power
of intelligent industry over the moral nature
of man, we may add that these artistic
• The etatisticR above given of "capital invested,"
and " hands employed," were not collected with the
svstem and care necessary to make them trustworthy.
"NVTiether "capital invested" means the value of the
original investment on which the business was started
Tk*ithout regard to losses or addicioiiS, or whether it
tneans the actual cii.sh value of the whole property
cmplo>'ed at the time the census was taken, or the
ca.sh value thereof, less incumbranct-s and debts, or
the pofninal par of the stock of companies engaged,
or the selling value of their aggrepite stockj was not
determined by the Law and each marsh>il, in taking
the census, and, perhap.*;, c:ich manufacturer in mak¬
ing his statement was left free to take either basis.
A manufacture might have been started with only
$10,000 actual capital, which, being p:ud out b>r $50,-
000 of property, would make the capital employed
$10,000 or $50,000 as one choosts to pnt it. If, then,
\n ten years the business incre;ises in profits so as to
pay 10 per cent, on $100,000, and tne company is
stocked on $100,000 capitd, and its stock sells at par,
k may be said to hnve $»oo,ooo of "capital em¬
ployed.^' Yet one-hiilf of this on analysis is not cap¬
ital but good will. In this respect, therefbre, the
census figures form a very imperfect guiile to capital
invested. So of hands employtjd. u a gla.ss factory
Incidentally employs upon wages the men who mine
hs co;il, or collect its fuel, its tinners, p.ickers, sales¬
men, etc., its list of persons emiiloyed may appear at
ajo. But, if, instcaii of hiring tf/em on wages, it lets
the same work to laj of them on contract, it only ap¬
pears as employing 150. Vet, in both in«t.ar>ces alike,
the glass factory is the real employer of the whole
sxunber, and ail would be u&eioployed xf it should
stop woriu
an<J .beautiful mochanic-'d procee«ieE tea!,
like .ill the bncr manufactures, to ekvitt
thotandard of morals, religion and lift,a
veil ^ of wealth and culture, in thecnrr-
munitjes in which they are carried on.
earnestly desire to see such manufacruw
as are now the pride of tioston, Brookli:
I^hiladelphia and Pittsburgh founded ore
the (;:oal mines of Illinois, and amon^ilii
mountains of Kentucky and Tdnnejket
God the day.
THE INTEREST OF THE bObXHiJ
PRfTTECTIO-N'.
The New York World a^ks, forrxvihi
appreheusivel V, '*Can the proltction^
proselyte the South * and endeavoRtoptf
suade its readers that they cannot It
argument and assumptions are alloftial
sectional kind in which the FreeTradersa
love to indulge; as if no Southern UJna
^Vestem nian could see anything bcjoa
his own immediate crop. In dajswha
protection had not been so fully vindinij^
either as a source of revenue orasastirau
lus to production, as it has been withinthi
past ten years, such Southern men '
ington, Jefferson, Madi.son, Aadrewjacbo^
Henry Clay and John C. Calhoun verefin
tectionists, and only the last-named w
swerved from the faith. The South bi
always had protection on its sugar. Inth
old slave epoch, the law prohibiting the la
troduction of slaves operated as a prohibil
cry tariff to protect and encourage (lirt
breeding as a leading branch of indwaj
On the raising of raw cotton the Southneedei
no protection, because she had practiciil]
no competition. On two out of her urt
chief industries, therefore, she had cai
tinned protection prior to i860, and on tii
third she needed none. How is it do*
The IVorldy in mo-^t respects, very fairl
states the political aspects of the qu«w
thus:
" ^^"hen the division of parties is made bTftisii
the frt'e trade ho.«t will be marshaled bv tlie IW
cratii, and the protectionist forces by the Repubu'Vi
TJie South wili turn the political scale; audits,
ble action is an irvquiry of deep interest.
'* The question where the negroes willchss Ui
selves in our politics is merged and •
this. The South can be carried for prote<tiiT«i
all) only by t.h< ir vote-s. If the Souik go*f ftrv
tru<U^ (t nuikis liitlc di^ertncc ivhcthcr \t *
or in spiie oj the offositicn^ of *he ru^mtUnai. *
triumpA of free trade in the Scmth n'tU be
of the Democratic J^rty ; and the negroes aKf*
likely to be foumT Oil our side than onthetut ■
Their pecuniajy interest is identifiod with the pro*
ity of their secdon. The annu.il inconeol theS*'
be diridcd bet^'een labor .and capital. Efliptf;*
can pay higher w ages in proportion as ihev ;
greater profits. If free trace is for the interestdli
planlt rs, it is aiso for the interest of their hands;*
wti*T» this becomes tlie predominant questcoli
freeti:*K,-n and kiTKi-Ownus wili be fouod vcWC*
the same Side."
We beheve the negroes are oot ^
'5
elj to be found on tbie Deiuocratic tide of
s question than on the Republican., '
\mong the reasons why we so believe,
irt from the national preference of the
.cks for the party which gave them frcc-
n and the ballot, are these:
The blacks' ardently desire a change
m the old system of industry which
so closely associated in their minds
h slavery. They well know that so
g as the South has nothing but col-
-raising to do the negro will be noth-
- but a "field-hahd." He cannot, as
agricultural laborer, acquire cdpi-
buy land, build a house, support his
lily oh a comfortable footing, or make
■headway in the world. It is because
'negroes know this that they flock to the
•ns, seeking diversity of employments,
the town there is room for everv faculty,
the country thg range of employments,
ecially at the South, is very limited.
I blacks, above all things, desire and
d that diversity of employment which
lufactures brings. Now, it will not be
Icult to show them that if the $200,000,-
of raw cotton which the South exports
ually, were first spun into yarn, and then
orted, it would be worth $400,000,000.
1 yet this extra work could, should and
ild be done by that portion of the South-
. people who are now and have always
- n idle, trying in the hardest way to eke
a living without work, because the kind
vork to which they were adapted could
''be had. Men and women have a natqra!
" ;rsity of gifts; some are mechanical,
-'e religious, some miiscular, some elo-
-nt, some prudent, some enterprising,
< le inventive, .some organizing. jMI are
■■"rstrious if the kind of industry they
• ■ is made possible to them. All are
and improvident if it is not. Having
bled the value of their cotton crop by
■'ining it into yarn'before exporting it,
S!-\ blacks'and whites of the South would
e to quadruple it, by weaving the yarn
.J, muslins, cloths, and calicoes. Already
, v South has loi mills going, or one-sixth
fnany as the North. A very fair begin-
i«S J I
Ion. Horace Maynard. of Tennesse, thus
rested, in Congress, the views of the
' , thert protectionists. He said that:
Is a Southern man, he was for fostering domestic
uficturcs, and pointed to the milortunate experi-
'* \ of the rebels (luring tlie war as a proof that no
•'"'le could afiord to limit its energy tp growing the
-"•'material. With bark and hides, they were.then
^►''lessj with cotton and'water falls, they were shirt-
\ and, with a good supply of wool, could not
' themselves in blankets. They had coal and
hut could act casta cannon, nor forge their own
-..-"(is or shovels; they had salines, but were dis-
"icd for salt. The lesson was so direct that now
I y Stite is rivaling every other in an effort to
'6 die most cotton and woolen goods ; to produce
. copper, rinc, lumber, salt, and coal, as well as
stores. So much has been actually achieved
that the hirtest entertained, fpr the future,
and a belief is-eX'pressed that foreign countries will
draw a much snwuier per cent, of Southern wealth to
subsi.st rival industry, X..a.st year pounds
of the 1,11^6,912,812 pounds of cotton grown, were
spun in thus country, and the South spun 3^,860,750
of this, in 101 mills, leaving 308,453,133 pounds to 693
Northern mills. The .'ahie of tlie export was $187,-
702,477, and of the materia' spun, 576,329."
Senator Revels, of Mississippi, and Rep¬
resentative Buqkley, of Alabama, with
others in whom the Republicans of the
South, black and white, have confldence,.
w ill labor to impress these facts indelibly On
the Southern mind. Even the World admits
that: ■ -1
'-If the South cont*;mpl}ited anothinr rebellion, Mr,
Maynard's chief argument would be persuasive. In
aiiN other view, 'the unfortunate e.xperiences of the
rel>cls during the war" is no reason wiiv il.ev should
guard themselves against being reduced to .suOh
straits ag-.iin."'
On the contrary, .if the South contem¬
plated another rebvlUon, the quickest way
to.bring it about would be to restore British,
free trade, for that unites the commercial
interests of the South with England, and
of the North with England, but leaves
the South and North no commercial
dealings with each other. The less de-
pendept the two sections are on each other,^
tlie more frail will bo the tie that unites
them. The more intimately both are de¬
pendent on England, the more liable they
are to go to war with each other, in the
hope of her alliance.
The World, having argued that the South
ought not to have any manufactures, next
proceeds to argue that protection will not
help her to them. It says:
** A man is no rea-soner, but an an idiot, who thinks
that domestic protection can benefit a product which
must necessarily be sold abroad, where it must com¬
pete with the English yarns on perfectly equal terms.
The sole object of protection i.s to increase the price of
tlie protected article by adding the duty to the cost of
its foreign competitors. But duties can be levied
only on goods introduced within our frontiers. Out¬
side of our national limits, the market is reflated by
free competition. Therty our tariff is utterly inopera¬
tive. To ask for protection as a means of enabling
tlie South to sell cotton yarns in foreign markets,
against the competition of England, is .stark stupid¬
ity. Protection ceases at the water's edge. It is only
on the principle of free trade that the South can ever
sell its cotton abroad in tlie form of manufactured
goods."
lingland protected her manufactures for
three hundred years. Have the power and
pre-eminence to which they attained stopped
at her wateEs edge? Is it "idiocy" or
" stark stupidity" to say that the protection
from foreign competition, which first gave
them tlie home market, imparted a prosper¬
ity and growth to their manufactures which
ultimately so cheapened their processes as to
give them the control of the foreign market of
all free trade countries as well ? We demand
the same policy here, and will guarantee
the same result. The South was able to
run 101 cotton mills last year, though we im¬
ported enormous quantities of cotton goods,
i6
'wliich should have been produced in this
country. Shut out these foreign made cot¬
ton goods and in a few years the number of
cotton mills at the South will double and
quadruple. Then the value of the cotton
in the field, and of the labor that raises
it, will rise at the s.ame time that the
value of the manufactured product will fall.
As unerring as gravitation is the law that
as the farmer and manufacturer come to¬
gether, the price of the raw material rises,
and that of the manufactured goods falls.
All this the South can see, and we do not
believe theh-esult will show that either the
whites or the blacks of the South are blind.
The principle of protection confers the
same advantage on the nation adopting it,
as a trades union confers on those who fol¬
low a particular trade. The object of a
trades union is to prevent the few men un¬
employed, of whom there will always be
some, from competing with and reducing
the wages of. those employed. Without
such unions ten men unemployed, and offer¬
ing to work at half wages, could pass from
shop to shop, and place to place, com¬
pelling every employed' man to come down
in his mte of wages, or be turned out, until
they had reduced the wages of 10,000 men,
and there would still be ten men unemploy¬
ed, just as when they began. It is against
this tendency of excessive competition to
reduce wages, that trades unions are formed.
Merchants and owners of property form
similar combinations, to maintain the prices
of what they have to sell, as working men
form to maintain the prices of labor. For
a very few goods forced upon the market
and sold below their value may bringdown
the price of a hundred times their value,
of similar goods. So a small importation
may temporarily so underbid and reduce
the price of a very large domestic product,
that the producers of that product eouW
better afford to buy the whole importation
and throw it into the sea, than to stand the
loss resulting from the temporary reduction
of price. Nor is this temporary reduction
any boon or benefit to the consumer,fork
can only occur, in any important d^ree,
when the importation is very small, and the
domestic production very large. But, n
such a case, any check to the domestc pro¬
duction enables the importer promptly to
raise his prices higher than they were
before.
Prof. Perry and Rev. Heiuy Blanchard
are in the habit of inquiring, in their fiee
trade speeches, " Why, if protection be (o
wise a governmental policy, was it not
known to the ancients ? Why did not the
Caesars collect the revenues of Rome hj
protective tariffs ?"
Answers: J^trs/—Because the Caesars,
especially Augustus, eldom or never wore
any garments save those which were spun,
woven and made by the women of their
family. There was no foreign competition.
Secondly—Because the Caesars practiced free
trade and direct taxation. They got what
they wanted in the cheapest market, paying
for it only in blows; and they sold their
labor in the dearest market, for they held it
far above any price. All barbarism is free
trade.
T he Bureau:
A MONTHLY MAGAZINE,
UEVOTKD TO THK
mmttct, and
OF THE UNITED STATES.
Three Dollars per A tmum.
Single copies^ 25
Okkick, 101 and 103 Wabash Avenue, Chicago, III.
The Bureau:
(PAMPHLETS FOR THE PEOPLED)
DEVOTED TO TIIE
^OMMERCE, ^/JANUFACTURES, AND (^ENERAL JNDUSTRIES
OF THE UNITED STATES.
PRItfTED AND PVBLISUBD BY
he Bureau Printing Company,
loi AND 103 Wabash Ave.,
Incorporutid under the General Ixrrtfs of the State of lUittoie,
No. 4.
CONTENTS :
'JIaneous a, 4,
; 3
Some and Foreign Market. 3
)ivision of Labor 4
England^s Great Kconomist 5
The Action of Congress 10
Cheap Salt 13
American Association of Home Industries 14
American Bessemer Rails 16
:y
'ftct from ike Republican National Platform adopted at the iVigvjam, Chicago^
in i860:
While providing revenue for the support of the General Government by duties on imports, sound
f requires such an adjustment of these imposts as to encourage the development of the industrial
sts of the whole country ; and we commend tliat policy of national exchanges which leaves to the
ngtnen, liberal wages; to agriculture, remunerating prices; to mechanics and manufacturers,
lequate reward for their skill, labor, and enterprise; and to the nation, commercial prosperity and
3ndence."
act from the Democratic National Platform adopted in Tammany Hally New Torh^
in Jiily^ 1868:
. Democratic Party, in National Convention assembled, reposing its trust in the intelligence,
^ and discriminating justice of the people, * * ♦ do, with the return of Peace, demand » * ♦
\ tanflf for revenue upon foreign imports, and equal taxation under the internal revenue laws, as will
incidental protection to domestic manufactures, and will, without impairing the revenue, impose the
. upon and best promote and encourage the great industrial interests of the country/'
!i(«'
2
"If an empire were made of adamant,
free trade would grind it todiivt."—Xafolcon
Bonaparte.
Irondate, Ohio, is situated on the Cleve¬
land and Pittsburgh R iilroail, twelve miles
south of Alliance, and ojj-es its existence to
the establishment of tlie Pioneer Rolling
Mill and Blast Purnace, employing three
hundred men.
English dispatches say the prospect of
the reduction of the American turitf on iron
is occasioning great activity in the ^\'el-h
mines. Is it a healthy sign, when Amer'-
can legislation stimulates the miners of
Wales, and discourages those of Wiscon¬
sin, Michigan, Missouri .and Ponns\ 1 vaiiia ?
Wh.at would Welsh miners care whether
our tariff were low or high, if thev had onlv
to add it to their price and charge it to our
consumers.''
In iSio, President Jefferson, who, like
his Secretary, Gallatin, and his rival, Ham¬
ilton, was fully devoted to protection to
American manufactures, wrote to Thomas
Leiper, of Philadelphia, as follows:
"I hive litelv i-irulc.itcd the en ouraTrernent of
m.\rmf ictare-* to tlie extent of our own coiisu Tipfif>n.
at le.ist of iill irticles of which we raise ti r r
in iteri.il. On this the Fe<lcrLl piper's aiul iullUi l'-
have amnded the darn of C lint a* r destruiti<i i
of coninerce, etc.. ♦ # * Hut 1 truest the yocid
sense of our muitrvwill see th if its irreitest pro^-
per t, fleperuls () 1 i due balance h en ij^iiMlture.
inanufictur* s .» id coiiiim'n , . d L in t ib pr< fii-
ber.int u iviir h " u Ins ^ is i ln»t \ itfr
Iro n tin < > iiiie ice lu nt ol o ir »* )V eriii it lit, ai I is
no ( nj; I diii: 111 a w r."'
To (jovt'rnor Ja\, a little l iter, he wrote:
" \l e 1 ill' 111 I < )f .1. II ii t in.. 1 1 ' 1 I s I nl
com I ri ^ i-. < t I li \ < unn ' - -t i i i ii> < i r i 1« -
pendt. Ml M uiu I t I I . s th I I I tor ( r i • ii im-
suinptiini, »)f w li tf A e r j. tl i i ' ii <'i il i dim
more. Co ui n r» e, siill r u it t > ( 'i r tl « s i pi !•« [ i-
duct of .12 ic/i.tnre, liesimd our o i t^oi mii.j ii lo , t< i
a mar e I i m Ii i iliiu; il f r i I ,<.s < i i i i t i.u <
—.ihd lo iimre. These .ire tht ti n Ii nif-of m i l -
tures .nvi <Nnnirier» e. To yo he iid ti em, is to 1 -
cre.isM (,ur depeadeiice on lurcinn uatwju.s, ,uid o ir
liahilic. to w-ir."
According to President Jcfferson.therefore,
we ought to manufacture all the iron, steel,
woolen and cotton goods, tor which we pro¬
duce the raw tn.aterials, the iron, steel, coal,
wool, cotton, breadstulfs and provisions.
And the fact that we export a large portion
of our cotton unmanufactured, and import
much of our dry goods, iron and steel wares,
etc., '• increases our dependence on foreign
nations, and our liiibility to war,"
Sen.xtor mftrrill, of Vermont, in his
speech of m.iy 9, on the tariff, made the
following very just remarks on the advan¬
tages of buying American instead of foreign
m.anufactures; showing that the American
are usually, all things considered, the
cheaper of the two, even where the nomi¬
nal pric's are the same, lie said: "When
the fanner of Illinois sends wheat to Eng¬
land in exchange for Shefheld cutlcn,
London watches, or Nottingham laces lie
can tonn no jusf estimate of the aclJil
v.ilue of what he receives, and doe. not
know whether lie is clie.ated or not; but ii'
he c.xn exchange ills wheat for such com¬
modities, made in his own neighborhood,
he will know all about it. When he buv-
!in Illinois pl'hv, or an Illinois wagon, or
Illinois w'.-.i.'h, he alwais gets a prime
article at a fair price. The knack of mi-
chinery and tlie pr -fits of trade are no
secret at home. The profits on forei.n
.articles are unknown, exceiit that they are
known to be generally much greater than
upon those of doine-tic origin. Henie,
dealers have an interc-t in handling t'orei^
to the exclusion of AiiTrrican good.; ard
the greater protit- thus derived enable them
lo lilier.allv patronize the press, as well 1-
to subsidize peripatetic philosophers of free
trade. A particular -tyle of foreign go d<
is more ea-iiy monopolized than tho.enuJe
at our oivn dcor-. and. if found salable, can¬
not It once and -o e.i-lly be duplicated br
neighboring competito-s. A dome.tic arti¬
cle, howevsr, if t'ound salable, wall at once
be multipli-'d. and can be ordered bv anv
number of dealers in such quantities a< m
cause a reduction of piice- bva de.tnici'e
competition. American nticdesof a-tafli
kind, produ "e i in large qu intitie., iKecit
nails, prints, delaines, c itton cloth, \,lli■^
Ic ic, sh ICS, md hoots, are u.ually s.ilJ j j
bare c 'mmis.ion, and olten without .rt
p-olat at all, wheth T at w holesale or ret 1
Mam c'e.ilers m imnorted 'goods keep ,I'd ,
sell I'nes of st.iple Ameiac; n gocds at c -t
,1s li-ut.s to c, tela customers for the trade in
na ire pr iftable conimod ties. Purchasi'-
ha\ e a fi-hi m.ahle p.artiality for good-of
loici'gn make and style, and have not let
i'ound cut that American iron, cotton,ad
woolens, are tougher, stronger, and mce
durahlc- than such as are tisually imponei
This prejudice and ignorance haste becrni-
ciliated by a reduction of price; and 1
superior American article is often scld for
less til.in an inferior foreign article of the
same sort readily commands. It i. miethit
the relative merits of American manufac¬
tures, as compared with some others .ly
penr to be better understood in some places
abroad, and British manufacturers have beat
Litelv often detected in using the stamp aid
brand of American manufacturers, in order
to t'r.audulentlv dispose of their onn gnols
in tar-off markets. Very .ikely, ourmjJ: ■
facturers have undenalued the mi-fc
training and culture of their workmen; bat ■
it is a vital point which cannot longer t«
safelv neglected. It is not the rok td
America to follow, biit to lead."
3
ITISH GOLD AND FREE TRADE
VIRTUE.
. !"he New York Free Trade League pub-
1, with an ostentatious blare of trumpets,
ir letter to the leading British Free
, de Association, declining to accept the
ney which the latter had expressed a de-
to contribute in aid of the promotion of
■jsh free trade in America. Their decli-
ion is based solely on motives of policy,
they so say. They know, and have
n compelled to publish the fact, that
■ out of every $20 contributed to pro-
X the principles of British free trade in
erica have come from importing houses
New York and agents of the foreign
lufacturers. This has been charged
n them, pressed home, and finally estab-
ed by publication of the subscription
I. Some of the free trade organs are so
jse as to not see that, if a Birmingham
vlanchester manufacturer establishes an
ncy in New York, calls it an importing
se, and through that " importing house "
tributes ^5,000 to pay agents of the Free
de League for croaking down the tariff,
charge of "British gold" is just as well
'ed as if the money that pays for Prof,
■y's lectures were subscribed by the
mber of Commerce of London. An im-
er, whether using his own capital or
of British manufacturers, is, so far as
attitude toward American industries is
;erned, the agent of the foreign manu-
arer. The money which the -mporter
ributes to propagate British free trade
British gold;" and the importer him-
so far as he labors to break down
;rican industries, manufacturing and
cultural, is an alien enemy, and, in
y industrial sense, a traitor to his
itry.
be leader of these importers enjoys an
me of six millions a y ear, and has ac-
, ulated a fortune of sixty to seventy mill-
—a fortune larger than was ever before
imulated in a single lifetime! Does this
■ :ate that the importation of the foreign
. ics which compete with our own is
- Jr any di-.tresHing shackles? Where is
manufacturer who has an income one-
that of this huge agent of foreign trade
. T. Stewart?
f course there will be no lack of funds
ty tor free trade logic, on the stump or
le press, which such powerful monopo-
- • ol the import trade, backed by tlie cap-
- ' its of Great Britain, are all willing to
any price for legislative votes, glib
. ' :ues, and printer's ink. If the British
; Traders cannot, from motives of policy,
'r/y subscribe ±1x0,000 to sustain their
trade strikers and blowers in America,
have only to send their offering to their
I York importing agents, who will lay
^ '• >on the same altar, amidst the grateful
incense and thank-offerings of the New
York Free Tr.ade League. The British
Free Traders are spurned with the same
indignation as the roue who should propose
to a woman of the demi monde to commit
adultery in public. The indignation is not
directed at the act, but its publii-ity. A pri¬
vate proposition of the same kind will be
found to be an ordinary question of terms
and prices.
THE HOME AND FOREIGN
MARKET.
The most discourging fact in connection
with political journalism is the monstrous
system of dealing in " false facts " and false
figures, which especially characterizes the
the discussion by Free Tr.aders, of the policy
of protection. As a sample: the Missouri
Rcfubiicau, in one of its issues, shows itself
stung by the force of the statement that
thirty-five thirty-sixths of all our agricul¬
tural products find their market in this
country, and that the i-emaining one-thirty-
sixth part of them can only sell in Europe
by underselling a supply twenty times
larger than we can furnish, coming from all
the agricultural countries of Europe, South
Amei'ica, Africa, and elsewhere. The Re¬
publican, therefore, audaciously attempts to
show that:
"The idea that these manufnctnring' interests,
which are the beneficiaries of protvution, afiord a
home market-for American brcati'>tu1i''=. or for even a
considerable portion of them, is one*of the absurdest
of all the delusions burn of protection lo^ic."
Well, we have the census and agricul¬
tural reports of the total pioduction of our
farms, and we have the custt in-house re¬
turns and commercial report?, -Jlowing that
only one-tliirty-sixth part of the whole goes
abroad. What becomes of the remainder.^
The Republican says that the number of
persons engaged in the marufactures of
cotton, wool, and iron is " estimated at only
215,000," and on this basis proceeds to show
that they would consume onh four and one-
half per cent of our farm products. Observe
the contrast between this and a fair state¬
ment of the truth. The total number of
hands employed in manufactures, in iSoo,
was 1,311,246, as against a tot.il of 3,219,574
farmers and farm laborers emjdoyed in agri¬
culture. Supposing each hand employed
in both to have supported four persons, -v^e
ha\e 5,244,984 supported directly by manu¬
factures, and 12,878,296 pei>ons supported
directlv by agriculture. About one-third as
many persons were then sup]iorted directly
by manufactures as by agriculi are. Then add
that of those supported by tiaiisportation,
commerce, and mechanical trades, notniore
than one-hundredth part arc supported by
foreign commerce, and ^^e have a fair state¬
ment of the rel^ti^ c imj oraaive of the home
trade to the foreign. Tliis is the reason
4
why, Ibrtunateh, only one*thirty-sixth part
of our a^riculiural products are compelled
to a market abroad. If protection
shall be continued for live years more, none
of our ra\v j)roducts, except cotton, ■N\ill
go abroad. We shall export manufactures
only, and our home price for wheat will
ah^a^^ be so much higher than the foreign
that we shall never covet the foreign mar¬
ket for it.
Tiie liofublican says:
" Th<' truth i<, Kuropc ou^ht to be the market for
our surplus ^rain, and the swurnnng^ millions of tliat
country oui^ltt to be the consumers of it. But wc
C I uiot hope to ulTord to send a large amount of i
to l£ur«)pe, because we cannot sefi :is cheaply as tlie
Canadian.s and Kus.sians ; and we caimot sell as
c.'icajily as thevj because our farmers are burdened
■n ith protective tariffs tliat the Canadians and llus-
si.ins arc free from."
Do our farmers make money by selling
cheap, or by selling dear.^ And does not
the St. Douis Rcpubhcan know that the
Canadians have a tariff which, relatively
to their rates of internal taxation, is as pro¬
tective as ours; and that Russia'has never
swerved from a protective tariff since 1824?
The Free Traders have greatly misinter¬
preted General Garfield's remarks, on the
floor of the House, relative to the tariff.
He is leported as saying;
"If you draw a line by the west side of Ohio, by
the nortli side of Arkiinsas, you will find nine Stiites,
every one of them Republican, some of tliem over-
whehninijlv RejlubJican ; yet if I have correctly taken
the census of tlie States in the House, out of the fifty-
seven votes which these SLUes cast on this floor, there
are fiftv-one who will probably vote for a reduction of
the tariff in some shape ; and if they be not gratified
by some subst.inti.il reduction, thev are liloly to <^0 a
good dc.il further toward our Democratic friends than
ley might otherwise."
Upon this, tlie Evening Post (N. Y.) sajs:
"We advise the Republicans to take notice of tJils
warning from one of tlieir own members, who, as his
speech showed, is very far iiuleed from being a Free
Trader ; so far that he would not advocate even a
Small reduction on the present monstrous dutv on pig-
iron. The Republican party must ' move on '—or it
will be run over."
General Garfieia aid not advise that tlie
tariff should be made less protective. He
simplj represented the Western members
as demanding a reduction of taxation. All
protectionists, unless thev believe the Gov¬
ernment needs its present enonnous rev¬
enue, and cannot afford to part with any
portion of it, would be glad to see a reduc¬
tion in the tariff' on teas, cotfee, sugar,
spices, tropical fruits, woods, and other pro¬
ducts, silks, especially raw silk, and such
other foreign products as in no way com¬
pete with our own industries. The advan¬
tage of reducing the tariff on these articles,
in preference to those which compete with
our own industries, is two-fold: Fiist, the
tax paid on thc-e coitics wholly out of the
American consumer, while the tax paid on
products that compete with our own is
largely borne by foreigners. Secondly, it:
one fosters the home production of tkt
article on which the tax is laid, while tl.
other is an unproductive drain of ourspt-
to foreign countries.
THE DIVISION OF LABOR.
We print below one of the most audv
cious samples of the malice, the dens
blindness, and the apt genius for misreprt-
sentation, which characterize the free tniii
writers. It is from the pen of Geora
Alfred Townsend, the Washington corre¬
spondent ot the Chicago Tribune, nh
writes better for free trade than any other
living Bohemian, because, knowing leJ
than any other about political econonv.hl
sticks at nothing:
" idiots of division of labor.
Some of these rtianufacturing operatives ofPwti-
sylv.inia do nothing all day but strike nails on
head. Some make holes all the year rouodand Dot>
ing more. Otliers fasluon the heads of bolts. Othd
sets sh.irpen the same bolts. Division of labor per¬
meates the whole area of modern manufactures, ad
the inventive, and intelJectuai qtiaiiCies of incasn
suppressed in the Pennsylvania miiis. Themanw.a
is At present before* Congress, at the sug^eslinL t
his unprincipled employer, to point to his hands diil
ask protection—or alms, for it was the same tJurf-i
does, perhaps, nothing at all, but with dull,
in«>notonous manual energy, strikes one spothw
after hour. Unlike the farmer, the sjulor,th€piniiHi,
or the miner, this man sees nothing of natiir«,aii
venture, tlie lessons of stars, the nature of drau^
animals, and such other observations as makciM^
pendence and give self-resources. He has becow
fax separated from the capitalist who possesses him j
and, at last, with all his industry, he is capaMeol
coming to Congress to ask that he be supportedbi
special sum of money hiken from a brotheroperaliK
in another field. If tfiereis to beanvencouragenitiiK
let it go to tlie homestead farmer, who, toberidoft
irom-nuuiter's domination, has become the ut^hlnr.
of the l*ieg.ins and the Apaches, and who is it did
mcrcv of more rapacious transit corporations, whidf
stc,il half his whciit."
This beardless Bohemian ventures to
attack what is conceded by free trade ecow
omists, as well as by protectionists-bf
Adam Smith, John Stuai't Mill, and Herbert
Spencer, as well as by Henry C.Carey-to
be the very first condition of rapid produc
tion, and of growth in wealth and cbilu*
tion, viz.: division of labor. Mr.Spencfl
resolves all the phenomena of human pio
gressinto the ** differentiation of functions,!
which is only another term for thedmslM
of labor. Adam Smith opens his grei
treaties by showing how the division e
labor enables one man to make as ma®
pins as one thousand or ten thousand vitli
out it. Yet this Townsend, Bohemian, bi
discovered that, instead of promoting pf®
duction, it promots idiocy! Suppose ft
the moment this were ti'ue, would it
in any way the economy of producing
iron, cotton, and woolen wares at
instead of importing them.^ Doesnottl
importation of them involve, in the estil
lishrnents of the importers and the fijrd?
5
lufacturers, as much division of labor as
production of them at home? It in-
7es more: for it duplicates abroad all the
vision of labor" required to produce
iC wares at home; and, in addition, it
.cts upon us a new race of " idiots " (ac-
ling to Mr. Townsend's philosophy) by
division of labor which is required in
■- business of importing.
"ou enter, for instance, the importing
ice of A. T. Stewart. The first man you
- it does nothing but open and shut the
r. There are twenty men of this kind.
.1 second does nothing but bow to you, if
appear to know what you want; if not,
-bows and points you the way to go.
cre are perhaps twenty of these. The
i does nothing but take down packages.
- fourth puts them up. The fifth opens
-ti and shows the goods; he must not
. 1 talk about them, except to answer
'- itions. The sixth folds and wraps them.
"■ seventh carries them, with a mem.
the money, to the change counter,
—re the eighth makes the change. IIo\^
division of labor be carried out more
pleftely than where it requires eight per-
to sell and deliver a yard of tape, after
IS upon the importer's shelf? Is it more
lectual to measure tape than to manu-
ire it? Is it more manly to open and
a door for a living than to make ore
jiron ? Is it nobler to wrap up packages
) to build steam engines! Does it de-
,j a hardier intellect to unroll carpets
- to run the complicated machine that
■es them ?
ery process in production, w hether of
- ultural or manufactured goods, is crea-
and likens man to God, the first and
' est manufacturer and planter. Too
J of the processes of trade consist in
bing a profit for which no value is
irred; and to this extent they liken men
i devil, the primeval thief.
' 4.. T. Stewart should send a delegation
• 5 clerks to Washington, to ask that he
- irmitted to sell foreign goods in Amer-
'markets "free" from American taxa-
J'Mr. Townsend would see in that only
' mancipation of trade. But when the
""'ing-men's associations in Pennsyl-
■ , who are now getting exactly twice the
I's in gold which ai-e paid for the same
; :es in England, and who deserve all
t get, and need it all in order to live
:'5rtably, and not be mere wages-slaves
r en they demand that their wages shall
,> e lowered by free trade, this Bohemian
.. n it a clear case of asking alms. Had
^'ved m 1819, when 70,000 workmen
-r turned out of employment by free
f) . or in 1836, when still greater suflfer-
. oreyailed, he could easily appreciate
, notive of the working-men in Pitts-
0f,i. They may, indeed, be of the class
who do nothing but strike nails on the head.
They certainly could not " strike the nail
on the head" more effectually than when
they demand that Congress shall not turn
them out of employment to benefit British
iron-makers.
There is, however, no part of the world
where machinery is substituted for manual
labor more extensively than in Pennsyl¬
vania; and Mr. Townsend cannot find the
spot in the whole State where " steady,
dull, monotonous manual energy strikes one
spot hour after hour." All this work is
done by machine labor, where machinery
has been invented for it, and the drift and
intent of the statement, viz: that the same
processes which are elsewhere performed
by machinery, in Pennsylvania are per¬
formed by hand, is a wTetched and mali¬
cious slander, unworthy of any man portend¬
ing to truth or honor.
The last sentence of the above screed
shows a density of idiocy that is almost in¬
conceivable. Because half the farmePs
wheat is now required to pay for transport¬
ing it one thousand miles to market, Mr.
Townsend would set all the men who are
now in manufactures to raising wheat,
thereby doubling the already destructive
competition between the growers of wheat,
destroying the home demand, increasing
the already excessive supply, and compel¬
ling the faimers to send all their wheat
three thousand miles instead of one thou¬
sand, a result that would swamp every
wheat-raiser west of Pittsburgh, and give
Ai.L HIS grain for the freight instead of
half!
ENGLAND'S GREAT ECONOMIST.
In the December number of the J^ree
Trader a writer began a review of John
Stuart AUll's Political Economy, in a tren¬
chant and scholarly manner, which in the
columns of the organ of the Free Trade
League, surprised us. We are not surprised,
however, that the promise that this was " to
be continued" has never been fulfilled.
Nor will our readers wonder that the writer
was summarily suppressed by his employ¬
ers after perusing the following estimate of
Mr. Mill b^' this free trade reviewer:
" To the earnest seeker after truth who judges
scientific productions hy the laws of science. Mill's
great reputation must at first sight be a profound
mystery. It is not alone his theory of Rent, which
is "forced and wrenched to suit emergencies with _a
pertinacity almost unscrupulous; it is not alone his
failure to'fatlioin the great prohlems of currency, his
almost total disregard of the still more profound
question of credit; nor the fundamental error, per¬
vading his whole system, of considering things, not
men ; it is not any of these, new all of these, that make
us wonder at his reputation, but it is the most startling
absence of the logical faculty, the indefiniteness of
definition, the shambling loseness of style, that make
each explanation need to be explained, that convert
each answer into a dozen fresh questions, and that
6
seem to throw light across a path only to illumine
confu-^ion and disorder.
••'I'hcrc are two American writers who are char-
acteri/.e<l by tiie possession of tliese same (juaJilies in
an eminent degree, and a reference to thern, wliile it
mav enforce our meaning, will also help to furnish a
key to the problem of Mill's great name. Not tiiat
tliese ^v^•jters are otherwise to be compared to Mill,
favorably or unfavorahl;,, for thev both are men of
mark w ithin their difl'erent spheres, hut that, like Mill,
tliey possess abibtv of tiic very highest order, com¬
bined witli that very absence of the logical facult),
that indefinitencss of defnntlon. that shambling loose¬
ness of stvle, which no one can fail to recognize as
tlieir most striking literary ciiaracteristics.''
After refen-ing to Horace Greeley and
Mr. John W. Draper, author of " Intellec¬
tual Development of Kuiope," and '"Civil
Policy in America," as the two writers who,
in their illogical force resemble Mr. Mill,
he says:
"The influence of these three men, ne\t to their
real contributicms to the sum t>f homan knowledge, is
mainly, nav, almost e\clusj\ elv , due to the bv\itili/.mg
dijficulty of meeting an uloi^ital argi:m€nt. A i eiror,
a downrigh fa.senood, logiialls argued, is easily
met, and capable ofhut little mi"-cbief. But an error,
intentional o honest, ably argued by an iHoCirrl
thinker is the most mischievous, perverse, and in¬
eradicable of ail errors. It is this illogical faculty, if
we muv' so call it, this power of unintentionally
stating ftlsehood in an almost un.inswerabJe manner,
tliat is tiie foundation of the inlluen<"e of the three
men ti.lined. In Draper, coupled yvith mudi solid
work, and much yvild, dreamlike suggestiveness. it is
yet compelled to surrender to critici.sm of no extreme
severity. In Greeley, supporteil bv i» <^ourage and
pertinacity that fill us w-tli admiration, it is gradual]
yielding to the irresistible logic of events. In ISlilf,
haloed i\v a father\s reputation, upheld h' a wonder¬
ful facility of application, by real Jearniug, and active,
wide-spread sympatliies, this illogical faculty reaches
a perfection yvhich no longer .illo ^ s us to worder
how. yvith all his great and tatol errors, he still stands
on his high pre-eminence."
For the reference to Mr. Greeley and Mr.
Di aper we care nothins;, except as it serves
to illustrate the writer's estimate of Mr.
Mill. We presume Mr. Greeley believes
■with Emerson and Wendell Phillips that
more^truth is perceived than can be proven,
and, therefore, that a writer who aavpeals to
men's perceptions of truth, forcibly by his
mere statement of a fact, unsupported by
argument, as justlv and more easily carries
their convictions than if he argues elabor¬
ately. A "Tian mav often weave an iiresis-
tahle sophistry in fa\or of a false conclu¬
sion, when the simple statement of the point
would reveal its error. While we would
not class Greeley. Draper, Phillips, or Emer¬
son among logical or argumentative writers,
since they appeal to our perceptions and
sense of the truth rather th.an to reason, it
does not folio iv that their views are more
liable to error than those of logic.al writers.
For while a logical writer must be judged
by the consistenc\ of his arpument, a per¬
ceptive writer will go true or false, accord¬
ing to the truth oR his jierceptions, which
may he most unerring when he gi\"es the
worst reason for them.
But while a man's perceptions founded on
observation of facts may he only parti.ally
true, his imaginative deductions from sup¬
posed logical principles thrust forward in
the place of facts, are usually false. We can
not conceive, for instance, that any man
who trusted to his perceptions, or, as wt
commonly say, "'used his common sersp,"
could fal' into so monstrous a blunder as the
following from Mr. Mill's chapter on Rent
(Vol. I., p 52S, " Pnnciples of Political
Economy."):
[f ivc c'luld imagiiM; that the railways and canal,
of the United States, instead of only cheapening con-
niuiiiration, did their business so eflectively as lii
a,iiiiliilate cost ot carrU,ee altO|tctiiei", a.id eiu'tLU
produce of IMichigau to re irh New York as i|uic!Jv
an'l clicMpIv as tile produre of Lonff Island, thewhile
value of ail the land cd the United States fexceptsuciij
as lies coiivenieiit for Imiidiuff) would be aanihiiital;|
or, ratller, the i-est would o.ily StQ for the egieaacd'
clearing and the •governi.ieiit tax of a doll-irajidi
quarter per acre; sioec land in .Michifi^^ egualto
ttie be-t m the United State.- may be liau la uoikiitoi
almndance by that amount of outJay."
Think of it! The aggregate value of the
real estate of the United States is fifteei'
hunored millions of dollars. All this (fc-i
pends for its value on means of transporla-i
tion and travel on railroads, canals, rivers,i
roads, vesseK, and carts. 'Were alPthtsci
me:tns of transit abolished in an hour, conn
men sense teaches us that nearly the whole
value of our lands would be destroyed. Bill
Mr. Mill would have us believe thatwitil
every increase in the cheapness of communi¬
cation the aggregate value of the realestitt
would decline, until if communicatioii be¬
came so cheap that a ton of wheat coiilii
he brought from Oregon to New York fa
one cent, the value of all the real esatehu
the country would he as effectually annihi¬
lated as if not a bushel of grain could bei
moved a foot for any price. This isasample
of the wisdom which the youth in our col¬
leges are taught to reverence, as one of the
deductions of science!
Now, if we trace the process by which
Mr. Mill arrived "at this strange conclusion,
we find it was strictly one of closest l'!"-
As the oriental recluses strove to become
seers by concentrating their mediation oe
some imaginary point in their own bowels
so Mr. Mill endeavored to discover thelaiii
of rent by a process of scholastic radocina-
tion, without looking abroad for fiicts. Had
he gone to a comer grocer and asked him
why he paid a fourth or fifth more rentfa
the comer than was asked for the lot ned
adjoining, he would have been told thaf"!
brought to his store the passengers oa tml
streets instead of on one;" that obaining»
this manner more competitors for the p®
chase of his goods, he could do more bua"
ness, and hence afforded to pay a hisha
rent. The very first element in thevaluei
his rent was the means of easy communia
tion between his store and the houses ol'tu
customers. Because of that ease of com
munication, however, the butcher, bakd
7
-"lothier, and twenty others, all competecj
■ 'ilh him for the store, and the price he paid
.'.6 the lowest he could obtain beeau-e of
leir competition. Thus the competition
~ " many customers for the purchase of his
■jods determines what he can atlbrd to pay,
hiie the competition of many 'other mer-
lants for the location determines, in the
- ind of the landlord, what rent he can
ford to ask. The price actu.ally paid js the
eJium between these two. Had he turned
en to agricultural lands he would have
en that land neai" London used for garden-
g purposes was worth £200 per acre, while
ud equally good a hundred miles away
. uld be had for a fourth or a tenth that
. ice, its value depending on its access to
irkets, becquse, in lands near to markets
" e cultivator could raise the Bulkiest cropSj
.rile in those most distant he had his choice
only a few. Deducing his Law of Rent
_ this manner, from observation he would
ye announced that the rent of land is the
tasure of the number of uses to which
.. may be profitably applied, i. c., it is the
tan between the value the tenant can earn
the use of tt^ depending on the number
uses he can apply it to, and the value the
idlord can earn by renting it to others,
pending on the number who compete for
use. The highest value of land and rent
where it is used in the service of hU|man
'lociation, intercourse, and exchange,
lether of goods, of ideas or of affections,
tet in London, for the use of which the
nk of Engla'nd earnestly competes, very
ely to be the most valuable in the world,
:ause the uses to which that bank would
t it reach vitally a larger number than
• Y other private institutioni From this
' : value of all rents decline in proportion
the profit that pertains to the possible
:s of the land, until, in portions of Ireland,
! smallest rent becomes oppressive, and
' dlords prefer to tear down the cabins and
hort the tenants to another country.
- But Mr. Mill, wholly unconscious of the
. .• hly increased value given to land and
; buildings thereon by the degree in
ich they subserve the gre.1t uses of hu-
n association and exchange, lays down
^ uv of rert which finds, apparently, no
J er reason for rent than the superior fer-
,.-ly of the soil; an item which, even in
^ erence to farming lands, seldom rises to
;-tenth the importance, as an element of
it which belongs to location and means
^ communication. The logic of Mr. Mill,
■-i refore, on rent, is that the reason why
. ndon is a great city, is that, at the first
. dement of Brit.iin, the amazing fertility
L the soil at that point caused men to
nopolize the land there; while, in less
tile districts, the land was held in com-
n. The desire to embrace the adven¬
es of this wonderful fertility of the Lon¬
don soil, caused men to " pile in " so thick
that some began to sell the products that
others raised, to spin, weave, manufacture,
import, export, and so on. By whatever
degree the London soil yieldedj'bv cifltiva-
tion, larger crops than that of the rest of
the kingdom, that excess the landlord could
charge as rent.
Mr. Mill (page 520, Vol. I., Political
Economy) defines rent as follows;
Any land yields just as much more than the or-
Ginary profits of stork, as it yields more than what is
returned i>y tlie worst land In cultivation. The sur¬
plus is what tiie fanner can aiford „pay as •^jntto
tfie landlord ; and since, if he did d '• so pav^it, he
would receive more than the ordinarie'ite of profit,
the coinpetition whicli equalizes tlie pncpts of differ-
mit capitals will enable tiie landlord to iropriale it.
The rent, therefore, wluch any land wilt yield is tlie
excess of its produce bevond ^vhat would be returned
to the same capital if employed on tlie worst land in
cultivation,"
The crude oversight which renders this
labored reasoning false, is tbat Mr. Mill
mistake.s the amount of crops which land
will raise for the amount of the return
which the farmer will receive, and sup¬
poses that the fertility of the soil is the only
limit to the value of the crops it Will pro¬
duce. Mow, in fact, the true limit of proi
duction of a soil is not what it will produce,
but how much of what it produces can be
marketed for consumption, and how much
of the value it has at the place of consump¬
tion will it cost to get it there. An acre of
land ten miles from a market may be no
more fertile than one two thousand miles
away; but upon the latter nothing can bq
produced at a profit, and upon the former
everything. Compared with location and
means of communication, therefore—which
are but conditions of the great.end sought,
viz., the foTuer of exchange of values and of
ideas, or of human association—the mere
fertility of the .soil. Which Mr. Mill makes
to be the sole cause of the value of land,
forms not a millionth part of its value.
Having begun with the primal blunder of
attributing the whole value of land to the
power to monopolize its natural powers of
production, and wholly ignoring its power
to subserve human association and com¬
merce, it was natural that he should carry
out the blunder to its logical result, and con¬
tend that, were the means of communica¬
tion cheapened so as to be as perfect be¬
tween the most (jistant parts of our country
as between opposite sides of the same
street, the total value of ail the real estate
in the country would cease, because, for¬
sooth, there would no longer be a monopoly
of the more fertile soils!
To annihilate this "fertility" theory and
show how all values and utilities of prop¬
erty, real and personal, as well as the value
and freedom of man, depend upon and grow
out of Human Association, intercourse
and exchange, has been one of the services
8
of Henry C. Carey to the cause of Eco¬
nomic Science.
Now, let us analyze Mr. Mill as a guide
in practical questions of taxation as applied
to ouf own countrt. We have two sources
only of revenue, viz.: duties on imports,
and an internal tax which must be mainly
on incomes, liquors and tobacco. Our
duties on imports must be levied either on
products which we are capable of produc¬
ing at home, such .as wool and woolens, iron
and iron ware, and steel wares, cotton and
silk manufact res, etc., or on products which
we I -an not roduce, such as tea, cofiee,
sugar, etc. Wow follow Mr. Mill. In vol.
XI., page j, he says:
•* Tea, c« e, sngTir, tobacco, fermented drinXs can
hardly be s.) taxed that the poor shall not bear more
than their due share of the burthen. Something
might be done hy making the duty on the superior
qualities, which are useo by the richer consumers,
much higher in proportion to tlie value, (instead of
much lower as is almost universally the practice un¬
der tlie present English svstem), but in some cases
the difficult}' of at afi adjusting the duties to the value,
so as to prevent evasion, is said, with what truth I
know not, to be insuperable ; so that it is thought
necessary to lay the same fixed duty on all the quali¬
ties alike ; a flagrant injustice (o the poorer class
of contributors, unless compensated by the existence
of other taxes from which, as from the present in¬
come tax, they are altogether exempt,^*
Having thus disallowed, as contrary to
the science of political economy, our whole
Internal Revenue, except the income tax,
and at the same blow struck down our tariff
system as to tea, coffee, sugar, (and in the
same category must come molasses, spices
and all other products of which a poor man
consumes as much as a rich one),—having
annihilated with a stroke of his pen $175,-
000,000 of our revenue, one would suppose
he would perceive the necessity of leaving
the duties on imported products that com¬
pete with our own industries, since they are
the only remaining source from which the
government can be supported. Especially
should he do so if he concedes that the
duties on this class of imports are largely-
paid by foreigners, and that such duties
may often be necessary and expedient for
the protection of our own industries. Yet
Mr. Mill, after conceding all these doc¬
trines, which give to the principle of pro¬
tection an impregnable fortress, wheels
around on the very economists whose doc¬
trines he justifies, and thinks to extinguish
them by a few paltry epithets unsupported
by argument, and in the light of his own
admissions utterly illogical and unjust.
Witness first, his admission of the strong
point that protective duties are paid in a
greater or less degree hy foreigners:
In vol. II., page 457, of his Principles of
Political Economy, he s.ays: "Those are
therefore in the right who maintain that
taxes on imports are p.artly paid by foreign¬
ers." And again, on page 458, he s.ays con¬
cerning "duties not sufficiently high to
counter-balance the difference of eiipense
between the production of the artide al
home and its importation. Of the moner
w hich is brought into the treasury of anj
country by taxes of this last description, a
part only is paid by people of that coun¬
try, the remainder by the foreign con¬
sumers of their gcxids." And again he sayj,
(same page), "a non-protecting duty would
in most cases he a source of gain to the
country imposing it, in so far a.s throwing
part of the weight of its taxes upon othe
people is again." And again, "theonlv
mode in which a country can save itseif
from being loser by the revenue duties im¬
posed hy other countries on its com:iiodities,
is to impose corresponding revenue duties
on theirs."
Under Mr. Mill's definition, the entiiie
$123,000,000 of duties which we ordinarilj
regard as " protective," are revenue duties,
so far as the amount actually imported un¬
der them is concerned, 1. e., they have not
been -so high as to " counter-balance the
difference of expense between the produc¬
tion of the article at home and its importj-
tion," for if they had, the articles on which
the duty has been actually collected, could
not have been imported, and er,gonodudo
would have been collected upon them.
Hence, according to Mr. Mill, a portion o(
the $i23,otx),ooo of revenue thus derived,
has been paid hy foreign manufacturers and
merchants, mainly English and French,
toward the support of our government
It is doubtless impossible, without a sjs-
tematic inquiry into the matter by a com¬
mittee of experts, to ascertain w hat propor¬
tion of this $123,000,000 of duties is paid
hy foreigners; but if we suppose it to be
only one-fourth, Mr. Mill has shown thai
protection causes foreign merchants to pa;
$30,000,000 of our revenue, relieving the
whole industry of the country of taxation
to that extent-
Mr. Mill also concedes fully the wisdom
of protection in those cases in which Eng¬
land still applies it, as, for instance, in live
navigation laws, and only recommends that
this kind of protection he dispensed witn
when it is no longer needed. He says;
" When the Eng^iish navigation laws were eiwru4
the Dutch, from their maritime skill and their
of profit at home, were able to carrj-for other naUo^
England included, a/ cheaper rates than
could carry for themselves^ which placvd an oa
countries at a great disadvantage in o'v'tmnitig '
perienced seamen for their ships of war. ,
gation laws, by which this deficiency vyas reyvee
and at the same time a blow struck ngainst the y
time power of a nation with which England wa)
frequently engaged in hostilities, were proja h
though economically disadvantageous, pn"'' ' j,
pedient. But English ships and sailors can
navigate as cheaply as those of any other cooniU^
m.aintaining at least an eqnal competition
other maritime nations, even in their own trade
cuds -which may once have justijied
require them no longer, and aftbrd no reason
9
intaining this invidious exception to the general
5 of free trade." I
■W^ho fails to see, under the free trade cant
the above, a rigid adherence b_v Mr.
.11 to the Protectionist principle.? When
; Dutch could carry freight cheaper than
English, if there were any economy in
ie trade, then was the time to avail them-
ves of it, by getting their freights carried
whomsoever would cairy them the
japest. No, .says Mr. Mill, we needed a
'rsery of seamen for the national defense.
!i't looking at the whole tield as an English-
, n merely, and not as a philosophical
, momist, w hose works might be safe
, des in other lands, he says: " Now that
" can caiTy freights cheaper than all
^ lers, let there be free trade in ships and
~ights." Not so! If it was wise for Eng-
d to protect her carrying business against
^ Hand, it is wise for America to protect,
Drily her carrying trade, but all her
er hades and occupations, against Eng-
d. Mr. Mill's sneers are the sneers of a
Trader, but his logic is the logic of
^■'tection. It remains only to quote the
-■ract wherein Mr. Mill, in a few words,
tifies, in all their length and breadth, the
-^'.trine of the American, Canadian, and
~ stralian Protectionists. He says (vol.
P- 538):
"Tlie only case in which, on mere principles of po-
"'il economy, protecting duties can be defensible,
h.hen vhey are imposed temporarily (especially in a
. .Jig and rising nation) in hope.s of naturalizing a
■'"ign industry, in itself perfectly suitable to tlie cir-
V" stances of tlie country. The superiority of one
;^-.itry over another in a branch of production, often
..is only from having begun it sooner. There may
i-^"io inherent advantage on one part, or disadvan-
i_l on the other, but only a present superiority of
tired skill and experience. A country which has
'. skill and experience yet to acquire, may In other
- ects be better adapted'to the production than those
J.-' :h were earlier in the field; and besides, it is a
..remark of Mr. Rae, that nothing has a greater
.ency to promote improvements, in any branch of
uction, than its trial under a new set of condi-
t But it cannot be expected that individuals
... lid, at their own risk, or ratlier, to their certain
introduce a new manufacture and bear the bur-
.s.. of carrying it on, until the producers have been
- ated up to the level of those with whom the pro-
.. .es are traditional. A protecting duty continued
f ' r^onable time, will sometimes be the least in-
^ " enient mode in which a n.ition can tax itself for
, li>'Opport of such an experiment. But the protec
^ should be confined to cases in which there is
I ground of assurance tliat the industry which it
5^ rs will after a time be able to dispense with it;
^ yhould the domestic producers ever be allowed to
.a.'ct that it will be continued to them beyond the
necessary for a fair trial of what they are capable
^i-lcomplishing."
^-.pply these principles to the United
'-.es. Our chief protected industries are
, J " manufactures of iron and steel, cottons,
>;''.CDS, the growing of wool, and the
^-.ting of salt, sugar, and molasses. For
;£r'these pursuits, our natural advantages
- ■ not only equal to, but greater than those
other country. We have more un-
^,'j'eloped coal and water power than all
f.t-'
other enlightened nations combined. We
raise all the cotton which supplies the looms
of other nations, and we lose three-fourths
of its value by e.vporting it unwoven and
unspun. As to iron and steel, Mr. Hewett,
our commissioner on iron to the European
exposition, reported facts, showing that the
same number of workmen will make as
much iron in Pennsylvania, or Missouri, in
one day, as they will make in England and
Belgium in two days, or in France in near¬
ly three days. And why should we import
wool when we have every variety of climate
on the globe in which to grow all grades of
wool.? Whenever we have protected these
industries, protection has expanded their
production, and ultimately reduced their
price.
Yet we find Mr. Mill, after having in¬
dorsed the principle of protection in all its
highest claims, still speaking of it as " the
most notable of false theories;" as a policy
in which " all is sheer loss to the country,
as well as to the consumer;" as "a sj'stem
derived from fallacies, and specious pleas of
employing our own countrymen and our
national industry, instead of feeding and
supporting the industry of foreigners;" as
" defeated as a general theory, and finding
support in particular cases from considera¬
tions of national subsistence and national
defense," and as a " system declining, but
not yet wholly given up in the United
States."
Why should a system be " given up " by
the United States, which he has just re-,
commended as a sound policy for a " young
and rising nation.?" How can any policy
that is essential, " in particular cases," to
" the subsistence and defense of a nation,"
ever be defeated as a general theory?
These contradictions are stultifying. Al¬
though he has explicitly recommended pro¬
tective dutie.s, as a means of encouraging
manufactures, he, in the same connection,
says:
" In the case of manufactured articles, the doctrine
involves a palpable ini onsistency. The object of the
duty, as a means of revenue, is inconsistent with its
affording", even incidentally, any protection. It can
only operate as protection, in so far as it prevents im¬
portation ; and to vvh.atever degree it prevents impor¬
tation, it ^ords no revenue."
This argument is on a par with the
demonstration of the Greek sophists, that
all motion is impossible. For, said they,
motion can only occur through space; now-
there are, as to any body, but two spaces,
viz.: the space where it is, and the space
where it is not. It cannot move so long as
it remains in the space where it is. But
until it moves it cannot reach the space
where it is not; therefore it cannot move at
all. A protective duty usually admits part
and excludes part of the foreign article. It
gives revenue on the part it admits, and
protection from the part'it excludes. For
lO
instance, wool and woolens, under the pro-
tecti\e tarifl' of 1S67, yielded over $J3,fxX),-
000 of revenue in 1S68, and yet it excluded
enough of the foreign wools to keep a lair
market for our fanners, and prc\ ent the
dis.astrous decline which would otherwise
ha\'e ensued here in all textile fahrics and
staples, from the return of Southern cotton
to the markets of the world. While Mr.
Mill denies that a protective tariff can pro¬
duce revenue, we see tl at $120,000,000 of
our taritf revenue is from duties strictly
protective.
We have seen that Mr. Mill would
abolish, as " a flagrant outrage on the poor,"
our taxes on articles of consumption, such
as teas, coft'ee, spices, liquors and beer,
whether under the tariff or internal excise
system; and that he would abolish, as "in¬
capable of producing a revenue," all our
custom duties on articles that compete wath
our own industry. This would leave us
only the income tax as a means of support¬
ing the Government. Turning to his view
of the income tax, we should naturally look
for some means of expanding, very greatly,
its productiveness, if a tax which now sus¬
tains only a tenth of our expenditures, is to
be made to bear the whole of them. But,
instead, we find that not only are the in¬
comes of all the poor to be exempted, but
from the incomes of the rich, all sat^htgs
above hving expenses are exempted. It is
not really, therefore, a tax on income w hich
Mr. Mill would levy, but on expenditure
for purposes of consumption only, exclusive
of all investments and savings. Here,
again, he defeats his own logic, for a poor
man expends for his own consumption
nearly ,as much as a rich one; and the ag¬
gregate tax would be paid by the poor.
While Mr. Mill in one breath extols the in¬
come tax as the only one that rests on the
rich, and a valuable offset to the taxes on
consumption, in the next he so prunes it
that it rests no heavier on the rich than on
the poor, and becomes itself a tax on con¬
sumption. Were all his speculations ap¬
plied in pnactice, it would reduce the rev¬
enue of our Got eminent to about $5,000,000.
What can such a jai-gon of mutual throat-
cutting contradictions be called.' Certain¬
ly not political economy. We have not
alluded to the great ignorance Mr. Mill has
shown of the modern experiences of na¬
tions and communities relative to the credit
system, banking .and finance. His mode
of investigation—that of deriving his facts
from his theories—would not admit of his
venturing in these greater depths. In the
pages of Mr. Mill you find a hundred
hypotheses and supposed cases where vou
meet with one tact. " Let us suppose," " if,"
" unless." '• provided," " this being assum¬
ed," " we may imagine "—such are the
steps by which the student of Mill is
led through a maze of ratiocination, a* j
the " scholastic" period of early moiiti
science the pedagogues dogmatized with J
experiment or observation. While A.J
Smith, J. R. McCulloch, and in a farhi;,le
degree t-han both, Henry C. Carey, d i
upon all nations and periods for their fa.i
and illustrations, one seldom finds in Ih
Mill any facts which are not the cprami
property of all men of common readir,j
He writes with a degree of metaphvsci
acumen, and with a lofty self-confidencei
his own dogmatizing, which carryacerti
force until the reader has learned todctci
superficiality, and to expose his freqwi
errors. But, in spite of these and otlij
merits, Mr. John Stuart Mill k of il
Europeans, the most overrated in Aineiia
For this fact we are chiefly indebted totit
sympathy of the Republican press within
advanced notions rekitive to the rkht i
suffrage, and of the Democratic pren wi
his Anglicisms—they cannot be calfe
arguments—in favor of free trade. Anothi
article w ill enable the reader more fulM
compare him with the American economiil
Henry C. Carey, the only American, sino
Benjamin Franklin, whose peculiar fortm
it has been to enjoy a wider fame in th
Universities of Europe than among th
people for whom he has specially labord
THE ACTION OF CONGRESS.
We rejoice that Congress hasaffectdi
reduction of taxation to the extent ofeijlilj .
millions of dollars per year. We wouldnol
have had it less, and we could not reaont-
bly ask that it should be greater. Thissill ,
still leave a surplus of revenue, allowinjlii
the increase of productiveness in the lass .
that remain, sufficient to p.ay off the debtii
thirty years. A more rapid rate of panneit ,
is not consistent with the welfare of on
producing interests. Acccording to tit
census of i860, our tax-payers are annuJt
earning, by the use of tire aggregate capial
of the country, twenty-seven per centon
that capital. Though this is more tliffl "
three times the current rates of intere-tot
oapital that is seeking loans, it is naluri '
that the earnings of capital, when used it
connection with labor, should be three lilIl^ ■
as great as the current rates of intercil a -
capital alone. In other words, we belies
the capital that is being used by ta-x-paver
in the work of production, is earning, at Ike
average, three or four times as high an ir-
terest in conjunction with the labor it <et-
in motion, as the interest on the nabonJ
debt. As a mere question of n.itional econ¬
omy, therefore, we do not believe m depriv¬
ing the tax-payers of money which isunri ',
to them, at the average, 27 per cent, pft
annum for purposes of production, inordv
to pay off for them a debt w hich is ninnin.'
11
6 per cent. Wliere we stop six millions
interest we stop twentv-seven millions of
■nings, nettinij a loss to the tax-pavers of
1,000,000 over all interest saved. We
jnld onlv pay oft' the national debt as fast
we can pay it out of the savings of our
lustrv, but not by running in debt to
rope in other forms, to borrow the means
pay it, and still less by collecting in tax-
on the capital that is needed, as one of
e implements of industry. Since 1865 we
ve reduced the national debt, funded and
iting, by about $900,000,000, for it then
lounted, all told, to about $3,300.o(«3,txx>,
d it is now down to $2,400,ooo,rx3o. Uut
■ have not paid the difference out of our
'ing or surplus earnings. At the close of
: war, not $200,000,000 of our national
nds were held abroad; now over ,$1,200,-
'2,000 of them are so held. They have
en exported in exchange for the foreign
ods we have been consuming. As a
-tion, therefore, we have, by exporting our
' nds, been running in debt to Europe to
- amount about equal to the sum we have
"id off, on account of the national debt,
-ere is no real economy, no actual erqer-
nce from debt in this process; it is merely
nnging the form of the debt, not paying
itf. Had we not levied so heavy taxes for
e years past, we would not have exported
_ many bonds. Consequently, by the
.cunt our annual interest to the govern-
■nt is lessened, our annual interest to
rope is increased. We are like a farmer
ving twelve adult sons in his family, all
. ,ng business in partnership. To contest
awsuit, he has run in debt to his sons,
.-d given his notes to them for $200 each.
• le suit being decided in his favor, he says,
- 'few, my sons, you must all help me to
y off these notes which I owe to you,
ving I50 a year each. They make the
empt, but soon find it obliges them to
her curtail their expenses by $50 each,
.. else to run in debt to their clothiers,
peers, and millers that amount. They pre-
■ the latter course. But these creditors
1 the sons that the the title to the farm is
. the old man's name, and if they will bring
5 notes they can buy all they want, bo,
■ the end of the first year the paternal
■mer makes a triumphant announcement
. at $600 of his debt is paid, forgetting that
5 sons have sold $f)00 of his notes to
■ "eign creditors to keep up their tables and
- irdrobe's. In two vears he rejoices in the
itement that t'ne debt is half paid, though
e other half of the debt is now all held
road. Now, at last comes the pinch,
le old man still proposes to collect from
em $50 a year, and they reply, " We can¬
't; we have not paid these previ oussums
■t of our earnings, but have obtained the
- eans by selling the notes of yours, which
' 2 held within our own familv when the
lawsuit ended. But these are now all gone,
and the merchants Mill not trust us indi¬
vidually I" bo there would be nothing left
but to come down to the actual surplus
earnings of the annual industry of the twelve
boys, and pay oft" the rest of the debt only
as fast as they could pay it from that source.
To pay it faster would be to strip the farm
of working tools and teams, and stop the
raising of crops.
Believing that this has been just our case
in a national point of view, and that the sal-
2-ation of our industrie.s, and especially of
those manufactures which most directly
compete with the foreign industries, depend
upon a reduction of the aggregate taxes
levied on the country, and that too immedi¬
ately, as the exportable portion of our bonds
is rapidly being exhausted, v.-e earnestly
labored for a reduction of taxation. Had we
believed with Mr. Grreeley that the amount
paid on account of our debt had been saved or
earned, we should have favored the con¬
tinuance of former i-ates of taxation. But
perceiving clearly that it had only been bor-
roM'ed, and that excessive taxation only
transferred, but did not lessen the actual
indebtedness of our forty millions of people
as a wholes, we did not u-egard the policy,
of high taxation as a sound one, or one'that
could much longer be continued uithout
bringing all our manufactures, and soon
after our transporting and agricultural inter¬
ests to a dead stand.
Nor are we more thorougly delighted at
this reduction of taxation than at the mode
in which it has been accomplished,- which
has been throughout in literal accordance'
-with the views we have steadily advocated.
The main idea has been that of enlarging
the free list as to all articles of exclusively
foreign production, and reducing the rates
on those articles of general comfort and
necessity, such as tea, coffee, tropical spices
and fruits, sugar and molasses, -which do
not compete at all, or only in very incon¬
siderable degree, with our home products.
The following is a general statement of the
more important changes:
New Tariff. Old Rate.
Tea 15 cts per lb. 25 cts per lb.
Coifee 3 " " S "
Substitutes for do— 5 "
Molasses 5 per pal. 8 "pergal.
Supir i^^to4Cts.perlh. 3toscperlb,
(being a reduction
of.ii but 25 perct.)
Pip iron $7 per ton. §9 per ton.
Cast scrap iron o *'
M roupht do 9
Bessemer steel ct per lb.
Railroad bars, part
steel I "
Nickel 3^ fts
Nickel allo\ 20 "• "
(rerman silver and
other mi.xed metals.45 per ct. ad val.
Live stock 20 " "
The following items, some of which are
not included in the present tariff, we give
1
2
■without comparison: Corsets, two dollars
per dozen or less, and 35 per cent, ad valo¬
rem, when valued at over six dollars; straw
flax, five dollars per ton; undressed flax,
twenty dollars; dressed flax, forty dollars;
hemp, twenty-five dollars; jute, fifteen dol¬
lars; jute buts, six dollars; cotton bagging,
two cents per pound; hair cloth for seating,
40 cents per square yard when 18 inches
wide, 30 cents when less than that width;
crinoline cloth, 30 per cent, ad valorem-,
hair pins, 50 per cent, ad valorem; silk but¬
tons or dress ornaments, 50 per cent, ad
valorem ; oranges and lemons, 20 per cent.;
pine apples, etc., 10 percent.; neat's-foot oil
and all animal, whale, seal, and fish oils, 20
per cent.; linseed, 20cents per bushel; lin¬
seed oil, 30 cents per gallon; rape seed oil,
cent per pound; raw opium, per
pound; smoking opium, $6 per pound;
morphia, its salts, |«i per ounce; cot¬
ton thread, yam, warps, or warp yarn,
not wound upon spools, whether single or
advanced beyond the condition of single by
twisting two or more single yams together,
whether on beams or in bundles, skeins or
caps, or in any other form, valued at not
exceeding 40 cents per pound, 10 cents per
pound; valued at over 40 cents per pound,
and not exceeding 60 cents per pound, 20
cents per pound; valued at over 60 cents
per pound, and not exceeding 80 cents per
pound, 30 cents per pound; vahted at over
80 cents per pound, 40 cents per pound;
and in addition to said rates of duty, 20 per
cent, ad valorem.
There is an increase of duty on some
kinds of spices, and a new classification of
foreign wines and cordials, with increased
rates. Steam-plow machinery comes in free
for two years. Tonnage duties on vessels
owned by our own citizens are abolished, as
are also duties on boats, barges and flats.
By reducing the duties of articles of uni¬
versal consumption, such as tea, coffee, and
sugar, which enter into nearly every mouth¬
ful of our three meals per day, and which
we cannot produce at all, or not in quantities
adequate for our consumption. Congress
has secured important objects, viz.: the re¬
mission of the tax will benefit directly and
immediately the whole people, and especi¬
ally the poor, and the price of the article
from which the tax is removed will of neces¬
sity fall by the amount of the tax taken off.
On the contrary, had the tax been removed,
as Mr. Wells desired, from lumber and coal,
the price of those articles, as we showed in
the last number of The Bureau, would not
be reduced by the fraction of a cent. We
should lose $2,000,000 of taxes which the
Canadians are now paying toward support¬
ing our government for the privilege of sell¬
ing those products in our market; we should
raise the price of lumber in Canada and coal
in Nova Scotia by the amount of the tax
I remitted, and we should then fall back on
our own people for $2,ooo,0(X) of taxes in
place of those now collected from the Cans-
dians and Nova Scotians.
Again, if we should remove the tax from
pig iron, an article whose price depends
mainly on our American supply, there ■would
be a certain degree of fall in the American
product, and a considerable rise in the for¬
eign product until they should meet and
bear the same price. If the fall in the
American product should be one-half the
amount of the late tariff, it would stop the
opening of new mines and furnaces in Wis¬
consin, Indiana, Missouri, Virginia, Ohio,
Alabama, and Tennessee, and would leave
us dependent on Pennsylvania and England
for our supply. This diminution of the
sources of supply would soon advance the
price of pig iron in something like the de¬
gree it did in 1836, when it rose to $52.p
per ton, under the stoppage of the Amer¬
ican production causeid by four years of
free trade, though in the eight years of
protection, from 1824 to 1832, pig iron
had ranged at from $27.00 to $35.00 per
ton. The entire removal of the duty on
pig iron, it may safely be assumed, would
instantly raise the price of the foreign article
mwre than it would lower the price of the
American, and, in a few months, say two
years at farthest, it would carry the price of
imported pig iron much higher than it hai
ever been, or ever would be, under a pro¬
tective taritf, though that tariff should be
$io,cxxj per ton. We ought to be as much
ashamed to import pig iron, of qualities
which we have the ores to produce, as to
import our fences or dwellings. We might
extend those comparisons to other articles,
but the same general principles apply. The
Free Traders sought to wear the lion's skin
of " Reduction of Taxation." But they
really w.anted that only these taxes shoitid
be remitted which are paid mainly by for¬
eigners. When it xs as propiosed to take off
those which rest upon ourselves exclusively,
and whose removal would benetit tlie largest
number of consumers in the greatest de¬
gree, then the Free Traders brayed, wagged
their ears, and app>eai-ed as the champiow
of exemption for British trade, and ta.\ation
on Americans only. The Whole action of
Congress in reducing taxation will be wel¬
come to the people wherev er it is really uO"
derstood. Nor do we believe the utmost
zeal of demagogy and ignorance can pr^
vent it being understcxid and indorsed by
the American people as a whole.
A SITE has been selected, and a company
organized, to construct a car wheel toundry
and box car factory at C'natlanooga. 1®
erection will be commenced some timethia
summer. Capital stock $300,000.
13
The freedom of the working classes may
,be secured by the ballot and laws, but it is
^created by and is proportionate to wages.
Every working man knows that low prices
"or the products of labor mean low prices
-br labor itself, for no employer can pay
ligh wages to his workmen and sell the
rroducts of their work at as low a price as
me who pays half wages. Now compare
he following rates of wages paid per week
o manufacturing hands in the United
, itates, and in two of the nations with whom
. lur manufacturers principally compete:
Great United
Branch of Industry. Prussia. Britain States
"^ottop mills $2.88 $3-87 $5-25
; Voolen mills 2.52 5.20 T.bo
. Vorsted mills 2.40 5.14 7.13
" ugar refineries 5-^S 9-^5
■^on rolling' mills 4.02 liSa 8.70
,rteel works 3.60 8.30
lachine shops 3.90 5.46 9.SS
lardware, man 3.60 0.30 9.4a
- ' Idge tools, man 3.62 ^.oo 11.10
igriculturcil implements, man. 5.24 6.75 13-76
irearms, man 4.38 8.17 12.63
aw, man 3.60 7.8c 12.00
- ,as works 6.80
• eather, man 3.35 6.50 9.83
. lass-works, man 2.74 7.62 JO-37
• ilk hat, man 6.60 13.40
. aper mills 2.50 a.8a 9.00
y 7ood shipbuilding o.io 11.70
"On shipbuilding .... 6.70 10.00
, American manufactures now sustain, di-
. .jctly and indirectly, one-third of the
. ..merican people, and their consumption of
~*|ricultural products affords a market in
■ ^ lis country for thirty-live thirty-sixths of
~ .le agricultural products of the other two-
'Jiirds. Vast as are the importations of
\[ew York city the manufactures of that
_2ry city sustain more of her population than
^ er importations. Now, is it not plain, if
• '^le products of all these manufactures must
^ )me down to a level with the lowest price
hich the lowest paid labor of any corner
; * the world will produce them for, then
ages in America must fall to their level in
' ngland and Prussia, and our artizans will
"^nk into paupers.? Instead of discussing
u" hether we shall work eight hours or ten
T a sufficient support, the question will be
- hether we can sustain a meagre life at all,
' '^en by working sixteen hours a day.
'J way with the enslaving horrors of free
... ade! Let every American working man
)te for free labor, which means freeman's
r 'ages.
■ The Mobile Register, edited by John
" orsythe, an ultra Democratic sheet, irrec-
^ icifabl^ Southern, and lately Confederate,
is the following cheering article on the
■I'- 'Ogress of the South towards that diversi-
'' :ation of its industry, on which, more than
1 laws or constitutions, the growth of its
. asses in real freedom depends:
■ ■■'."The Real Good Time Coming.—One of the
'•i' yns of an awakening sense of the people of the
LOuth to their own best interests is seen in the exten-
, , re factories tliat are spiingiog up in different por¬
>1'
tions of this section. In South Carofina, Georgia,
Tennessee, Mississippi, and even in remote Texas,
the econoni V of home manufacture, having presented
as a mere theory such an invaluable aggregation of
results, is resolving itself into a thing of practice.
There is no divine right in Lowell or Manchester to
tlie exclusive manufacture of fabrics from the fibre
we produce. If water-power is essential to compete
with Ivowell, there is an abundance of it in Nortliem
Alabama, speaking for tliis State alone, and steam
will accomplish just as much in Mobile as in Man¬
chester. bhiill tlie injin who raises the corn be abso¬
lutely dependent on his neighbor for bread ? Shall
we, with all the elements of physical strength around
us, give to far-off States the tine tiour, and be content
to subsist on the husks oivselves ?
"Every manufacturing institution established m
the Soutli is a rock in the wall of her defense. Every
dollar spent in developing and expanding home enter¬
prises is a seed sown tliat will have its fruitiou'in tlie
full ear. It seems that there was this one good effect
resulting to the South from the war. It has taught
us tliat a people cannot make themselves invulnerable
by agriculture alone; that contingencies may arise
when foreign industries can avail us notliing, or but
little, and it has, as a consequence, turned the
Southern mind toward a full development of its in¬
herent strength, and tlie building up of a phy sical
constitution that will make it, as far as may be desira¬
ble, independent of external supports."
Is it not marvelous that a sheet which can
recognize the importance of manufactures
as an end should be blind to the wisdom of
protection as a means, when the history of
the world shows that no nation has ever
become a manufacturing nation except by
protection, and that none which has sys¬
tematically pursued that policy has ever
failed to impart the highest prosperity, be¬
cause of the greatest diversity and activity
to all her industries. The sections which
specially need protection now are the South
and West. If protection to American in¬
dustry generally is broken down, the ii-on
industries of Pensylvania will survive, but
no new furnaces will open in Georgia,
Tennessee, or Wisconsin. The cotton mills
of Massachusetts and Rhode Island will not
be crushed, but the plans for dotting every
Southern stream with cotton mills, and
every Western village with woolen mills,
which are now in contemplation or in action,
will be dashed, and therewith the hope of
the future peace and harmony of the Union
itself will be reduced one-half. For the
very stability of our government depends
on "enla-ging the commerce of all sections
of our Union with each other, and contract¬
ing the dependence of each on foreign
markets. The road to the highest freedom
of labor and the greatest stability of our
Union lies only tlirough a thorougliJy Amer-
can policy.
CHEAP SALT.
It is amusing to note occasionally the
marvelous cyphering powers of the St
Louis Democrat, i. e., its power to reduce
the most important facts to cypher, and to
expand cyphers into facts, ^ir. McCarthy,
of New York, stated in Congress that the
production of domestic salt had increased
from 12,000,000 to 2opoo,ooo bushels and
H
had fallen in price by reason of domestic
competition to "a lower point than it was in
i860 in most of the leading markets of the
country." The Drmncrut replies that tlie
average price of Turk's Island salt in i860
was iSl.^ cents per bushel, and Liverpool
sack sal: was 19I2 cents. If the Dnnocrat
will consult its tiles instead of the finance
report of the Secretary of the Treasury, it
will find the price in St. Louis in i860, did
not vary essentially from the price then
quoted in the Chicago daily papers which
was $1.50 per brl., or 50c. per bushel for
Syracuse fine and coar.-,e salt, $1 per bag for
Liverpool and 30 cents per bushel for
St. Uhes coarse.
But,'suppo.-c it to be true that the average
selling price was then as the Democrat
claims 1^1^ cents, and is now .pg cents,
while the duty is is the Democrat also savs,
"from 10 to 14 cents a bushel," how would
a duty of, say twelve cents added to a price
of iSij cents bring it up to 44 cents. It
could not raise it above 32 cents. The
Z>'v« vraf says that the dutv on salt is from
100 to 17, per cent, on its cost price at
Turk's Island. Cili/c and Liverpool. So is
the duty on tea, colfce and tropie-il spices
and fruits, from 100 to 175 pi r cent., and
these are used in values a hundred times as
great as salt. B it when it is proposed to
remove the duty from these, the Democrat
and its free trade allies raise a terrible shout
of "No. no, we need those for recenue."
The only difference being that the tariff on
teas, colTees and foreign spices, however
high, never would cause them to be pfro-
duced in this country, and hence never
would c'liiso a ri'd.i :tion in the price while
the t.arifT on salt d luhlcs its Ami'riean pro¬
duction in ten years, and soon cei-es to be
a t.iv at all, for the incre.i-ed iiro.iuction
lowers the price and adds to the reicnucsor
the go\ eminent in another form. bit. Louis
does not want .always to send 21 xo mile - for
her salt, when the v.ast salt springs of Ken-
tuckv and Arkansas are capable of supply¬
ing the continent, if the capiLil can only be
invited thither, and sustained until competi¬
tion develops cheapness. If Missouri al-
w.ays relics on Turk's Island and Cadiz for
salt, the transportation tax will aluavs con¬
tinue to add 100 per cent, to its foreign
price. But if the salt springs of Kentucky
and Arkansas are worked, St. Lo. is will m
a year or two get her salt ivith a t.ix of only
one or two per cent, tor transportation.
Salt manufacture should be no Syracuse or
Saginaw monopoly. Tlie same facilities for
making salt exist in Virginia, Kentucky,
and Ark.ansas, as in New York and Michi¬
gan, and if the manufacturens are making
money in the latter places, let the Southern
States go to manutacturing it. Thev have
enough who need money, enough who need
work, and many millions who need salt.
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF
HOME INDUSTRIES.
Do we need such an organization.' We
have long needed it, and this necessity i,
felt at the present moment as, perhaps,
never before in our history. The tierce
assault of Free Trade upon the great in.
dustries of the nation has found us scarcely
better prepared for self-defence than was
the Union at the opening of the rebel¬
lion.
Fortun-ately a few of our leading indus¬
tries, such as iron and wool, had efficient
organizations, and, but for them, we should
have been defeated in the first attai k. But
it is neither right nor safe to look to anp
one industry ""o fight single-handed the bat¬
tles of jmitection to American labor. The
cause of productive industry is national,
not local, and above all others demand'a
national i iterest and supervision. The
wealth, the independence and very life of
tlie nation, rest primarily on the productive
power of human skill and labor.
It should be the first duty of the General
Government, who-e necessary taxes make
It a p.irtner in tlie proceeds of all our in¬
dustries, t'lough it furnishes none of the
ctipit.il or labor and su.,tains no part of the
risks incidental thereto, to see th.it the
share it extracts from the proceed'of-Amer¬
ican industries does not lead to their over¬
throw bv their foreign competitors, and
that the burden of taxation be so adiii'ted
as to leave to everv citizen the means of
g.aining an hone-t living. But the Govern¬
ment can onlv sust.ain the industries on
whose pro'peritv its own revenue depends
in so far .as it is itself sustained by the in¬
telligent \ oire and votes of the misses. It
has done imicii and nobly. Its past pol'cy
of protection his, within ten years, quad-
rnpl'd onr customs revenue, saved the
Government from repudiation .ind conduct¬
ed us in safetv through the greatest titno-
ci.tl undei'taking ivhirh any government on
e.arth was ever compelled to pertonn. It
has .iLo doubled the product of ourramu-
facturing Industrie--, and the home mrfet
for agricultural products, making our ten
years of protection, despite all the enihar-
rassments of war, more evenly prosneroo-
among all classes than any ten years d
merely -evenue tariffs and peace,
years of the persi-,tent, clamorous and sk'j"
fill agitation of British free trade, render 1
vit.ll to tlie very existence of all
Home Industries that the masse' shou
come up to the help of the Governiuen
and of our true statesmen in tliis striKJd
There is needed, beyond our poh"'
parties and specific associations,
general organization which shall emboe
the whole circle of productive industnK.
which shall give aid and unity W
15
- sociatioiTs, and cause all their labors to
nverge to the general good.
- What is the work for such an organiza-
m to accomplish ?
First < To refute the slanders and meet
e sophistries of Free Trade. True, when
.e set are destroyed there will always be I
other to take their place. Plausible as-
rtions, specious statistics, the " lie well |
jck to," the low appeal to ignorance and
eiudice; these seem to be a dishonorable
irfare to meet. But it must be met with
patient reiteration of the truth thiough
e press, on the stump, and in every man-
r, belore the people. Secondly: we
ust gather the facts pertaining to .Vmeri-
n industry and popularize them till they
' all become household words; we must
peal to people, naturally intelligent and
triotic, but whose time has been too
uch engrossed in private pursuits to admit
eachtind all of them being deepl y versed
questions of national economy. We
jst infuse a spirit of national pride which
11 spurn dependence on other nations for
it which we have all the resources to
iduce in greater abundance than they,
e must correct false impressions.
We asked a professor in a Western col-
;e, who belieyed the tariff on iron to be a
nus to the monopolist, what he would
nsider a fair share for the manufacturer
railway bars to retain, when they sold
, eighty dollars per ton. He replied, " ten
r cent," or eight dollars. A free trade
acher, when asked the same question,
, mght from eight to twehe dollars would
fair; and a working man answered that
supposed the manufacturer received one-
rd, or more than twenty-six dollars per
I. The President of a Western rolling
II, assures us he would be glad to con-
ct to run his mill indefinitely for a profit
three dollars a ton. When Commission-
Wells estim.ated the whole value of our
uial product of iron and steel manufac-
es at less than one hundred and twenty
lions, there were multitudes ready to
■ept it as a true statement; but the Sec-
try of the Iron and Steel Association
tNv that he en'ed by more than .six
tdred and thirty millions. Gen. Brinker-
f as-erts that we pay a bonus of thirty
lions in gold to our lumber manufactur-
, every yeai', because of the Canadian
irt, when, in fact, the price of lumber is
■ er than when the tariff' was imposed,
1 Canadians themselves confess and know
t they, and not we, pay the duty .on the
iiher they export.
t is constantly asserted by Free Tradm-s,
1 scarcely disputed, that staple American
)ds are by the tariff higher than mder
e trade. Indeed, this is the foundation
Mr. Well's lofty structures, and the
rden of all their wailing and denunciation,
when,- if you take quality into the account,
the very articles they attack most fiercely
are cheaper in gold to-day than for the four¬
teen years that preceded the Morrill tariff.
Such gigantic blunders or falsehoods have
only to be industriously, laboriously ex¬
posed, to recoil on those who utter them.
The facts pertaining to productive industry
are difficult to obtain, but they are worth all
they cost. The exceeding value of the
statistics gathered by the Iron and Steel
As.sociation shows how oui- cause would be
aided if .we possessed similar facts pertain¬
ing to all the productive industries of the
l.iiid. *
'I'he .Vmerican Association will encourage
the organization of all the leading industries
into one special association for each, and
vne Xiit'omil Association for all. It can do
much to promote the collection of such sta¬
tistics as are most valuable in writing our
industrial history, and in defeating the plans
of our enemies. We have had a lamentable
illustration of money and labor misapplied,
in the voluminous incoherent reports of
Commissioner Wells, which, like great
sponges, contract to pitiable small dimen¬
sions when grasped by logic and com¬
mon sense. He has been following out,
with tedious detail, the relative condition of
wages and cost of living, hoping, as an
attorney of the foreign Free Trader, to array
the American people against each other,
when the simple story of one rolling mill,
following the iron from the mine to the rail¬
way, picturing the operatives, first in their
British and then in their Americ.an homes,
would have been worth more than all his
well manipulated figures.
There has been but little effort vet put
forth to gather the facts and place them be¬
fore the people in attractive torm. Xo
accurate or full statements of the re-ources
and development of a single Western State
has yet been given. The history of mining
and manufactures, especially in the West
and South, is an unwritten volume. Our
first vork will be to place these and similar
facts before the people at large. The organs
of the separate branches of industry seknmi
carry information betond their otsn limits,
where it is perhaps le 1st needed for eri'ect
on popular opinion and gocernmental jioli-
cies.
Protection to home industry is preemi-
ne'ntly the people's question, for it aff ects
all interests equally. It decides whether
there shall be general prosperity or univer¬
sal distress. It is the question of freedom
to the masses, who live by labOr, or to the
few, who live by trade. .Vnd as it is the
supreme question for the people; it is til¬
ting that the organization which defends
their rights and maintains their freedom be
as broad in its scope and its labors as the
industries it would save from overthrow.
1
6
AMERICAN BESSEMER RAILS.
There is a great outcry made by the Free
Traders in the matter of Bessemer steel
rails. The Chicago Tribune declaims
against the "outrage" of fostering a trium¬
virate of steel rail makers in this country.
The truth is, the right to make Bessemer
rails is still covered by Bessemer's patent,
both here and in Europe, and will, and
ought to, continue to be so covered until
that patent expires. If the right were con¬
fined to a triumvirate here (which is not
true) it is confined to one man in Europe,
and to those there, as well as here, who ob¬
tain the right from him or his grantees. If
Europe can have free competition in Besse¬
mer rail manufacture when one person
owns the patent, can not America have it
when several own it? Would the Tribune
have America wait sixteen years for the
patent to expire before beginning the man¬
ufacture ?
It is contended that Europe can manufac¬
ture 550,000 tons of steel rails, while we can
manufacture only 60.000 tons; while our
demand for rails last year was <100,0x3 tons,
ant! this year will be more. But let it be
remembered that the European demand for
rails absorbs a large portion of their pro¬
duction, and competition on this side the
water is as necessary as in Europe to any
permanent supply of cheap rails. Under
free trade Europe took the fiye best qualities
of her rails for her own use, America being
too poor to buy them. The sixth quality
rail, " rejected from use in Europe, was
called the " American rail," because we
alone would buy it. Were we again de¬
pendent on Europe for rails, or for any
large portion of our supply, we would again '
be buying " Sixth quality American rails'
instead of first quality Bessemer. Qui
steel rail business is rapidly extending, and
the time is fast arriying when we -will pro.
duce our own steel, and begin to compete,
eyen in the exportation, with our foreipi
riyals. P'our large steel works haye alreadj
been established, two more are nearly coni.
jrleted, and se\ eral additional are projected.
Preyious to the burning of the Bessemer
Works of John A. Griswold & Co., of Troy,
they had made 2000 tons of rails, of which
none have broken, and all are officially re.
commended as fully equal to the best for¬
eign rail. With the completion of the nev
works, this firm can produce 20,000 tons
steel rails per year. The Pennsylvania
Steel Works, at Ilarrisburgh, produce some
13,000 tons per annum, principally for the
Pennsylvania Railway Company, the official
report pronouncing them equal to foreign
rails. "The Cleveland Rolling Mill produces
steel rails at the rate of 8,000 tons per year,
with a proposed capacity of 20,000 tons pet
annum. "The Cambria Iron Company hasa
Bessemer Steel Rail Works nearly complet¬
ed, with a proposed capacity of 20,000 tons,
These works alone indicate a capacityof
production of So,ooo tons annually of Amer¬
ican steel rails. The Hope Rolling Mill,at
Allentown, is producing for the Lehigh
Steel Company, puddled steel of a superior
quality, under the new patent known as the
Excelsior process. This company is receiv¬
ing orders from all parts of the country for
its products, and has run out a hundred
heats of puddled steel since the commence¬
ment without a single failure. The puddled
steel stood a test of sixty-four tons to the
' square inch at Whitney's Car Wheel Works.
All of the for*-s^oinsr apt*enrt\i as E'li'oruil Artirlet in
THE B UREAU:
A MONTHLY MAGAZINE,
DEVOTED TO THE
|^0mmerce, autl |j|eueral
OF THE UNITED STATES.
Three Dollars per A nnum, .... . Single copies, 25 a"*
Office, ioi and 103 Wabash Avenue, Chicago, III.
The Bureau;
(PAMPHLETS FOR THE PEOPLE,)
DEVOTED TO THE
JOMMERCE, jy^ANUFACTURES, AND ^^ENERAL JNDUSTRIES
OF THE UNITED STATES.
PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY
he Bureau Printing Company,
loi AND 103 Wabash Ave.,
Incorpoi^ated under the General Lews of the State of Illinois,
No. 5.
• CONTENTS:
jllaneous 2, 16
Pays the Duty on Lumber ? 2
^ Lion in the Ass' Skin 3
Lromweilian Settlement of Ireland 5
Show Us Both Sides, Mr. Wells 8
Decline of Industry in England 9
Free Trade Working Ruin in England 11
Free Trade Falsehoods About Taxation 14
raci from the Republican National Platfonn adopted at the Wigvjam^ Chicago,^
in 1S60:
'While providing revenue for the support of the General Government by duties on imports, sound
!y requires sucli an adjustment of these imposts as to encourage the development of the industrial
^ests of the whole country ; and we commend that policy of national exchanges which leaves to the
k'ingmen, liberal wages; to agriculture, remunerating prices; to mechanics and manufacturers,
dequate reward for their skill, labor, and enterprise; and to the nation, commercial prosperity and
)endencc."
ract from the Deirwcratic National Platform adopted ?« Tammany Hall^ New Torhy
in July, 1868:
'The Democratic Party, in National Convention assembled, reposing its trust in the intelligence,
l^.otism, and discriminating justice of the people, * * ♦ do, with the return of Peace, demand * ♦ *
a tariff for revenue upon foreign imports, and equal taxation under the internal revenue laws, as will
4 incidental protection to domestic manufactures, and will, without impairing tlie revenue, impose the
burden upon and best promote and encourage the great industrial interests of the country."
2
The Chicago Tribune says that railroad
iron costs $72 per ton, and will last only ten
years, whereas Bessemer steel rail costs
$91 .25 per ton and only needs to be renew-
^ every fifty years. Steel rail has also the
advantage of greater strength and conse¬
quent safety as well as durability. And yet
the Tribune, instead of fostering and pro¬
tecting the infant manufacture of so desira¬
ble an article, would be glad to see all the
steel rail mills in the United States bougiit
up and destroyed. We doubt not the steel
makers of Europe would be glad, and even
willing, to pay handsomely to see the
Tribune's desires consummated. This pro¬
cess of destruction once begun, where will
it end ? What branch of American indus¬
try would be next demolished ?
Will any of our readers, who are in
possession of the facts, send- us a list, and
as complete a statement as they are able to
make, of the European manufacturing enter¬
prises which, within ten years past, have,
to their knowledge, removed their works,
including capital and laborers, from any
part of Europe to the United States.'' Cer¬
tain prominent instances of total or partial
removal, like those of the great rival Scotch
firms, of J. & P. Coates and of Geo. A.
Clark & C5o., thread manufacturers, that of
the American Lead Pencil Company, and
of several watch companies and silk manu¬
facturers, have been mentioned to us. We
hesitate to publish these partial statements,
lest any statements short of the whole truth
may be assumed to be the whole truth. We
are s<atisfied that the number of foreign
manufacturing houses which have removed
their entire factories to this country is verv
large. Though this is one of the most im¬
portant effects of our protectiie tariff, it is
one upon which the Bureau of Revenue at
Washington throws no light wh.atever. We
design The Burevu of Chicago to super¬
sede the defunct Bureau of Mr. Wells, in
the dissemination of sound statistical infor¬
mation upon revenue questions. If everv
one who has the knowledge of these facts
at command, and into whose hands The
Bureau may fall, will communicate them
to us, we will publish at an early date one
of the most interesting exhibits yet given of
the effects of protection to industry.
Our business men and merchants spend
hundreds of millions of dollars every year
for insurance against fire. And yet fire is a
small calamity compared witja free trade.
The business man whose store, or factory,
or dwelling, burns down in prosperous times
has no difficulty in raising the means to buy
or build another. But the business man
whose investments are ruined by free trade
finds that all his neighbors are cast down
and prostrated by the same general cafe
trophe. He wishes his whole properti
might burn as his only means of gettinj i
half or a third of its value. Is this met
speculation? Read how the blunder of frtt
trade inaugurated in this country in ibt.
caused 60,000 workmen to be turned out of
employment in 1817, and by 1819 our agri.
culture was as prostrate as our manulac.
tures, so that Gdn. Jackson declared tha
unless the country turned back prompt)?
from free trade to protection, its working
classes would soon be reduced to a levd
with the paupers of Europe. What it
plainer than that if we compete with pau¬
pers oti even terms, we must take paupers'
■wages.' Free trade proposes simply "epiial
competition of all American producers witli
all foreign paupers." Turn to the historr
of the crisis of 1S36-41, brought on bvfonr
years of the untaxed importation of cheapfor-
eign goods. See the same result produced
in 1857 tariff of 1S47. In the
la.st instance the crash would have come in
'30 to '51, had it not been postponed five
years by the great influx of gold from Cali¬
fornia. Study carefully these three periods.
See whether they increased the govern-.
ment revenue or impaired it; -whetherther
lowered permanently the cost of foreign
goods or raised it; whether they inaeased
the aggregate of American production, or
brought our people by tens of thousands to
bankruptcy, charity, and the soup-housef
WHO PAYS THE DUTY ON
LUMBER?
The tariff on lumber operates in much
the same way on prices as the tariff on cori.
elsewhere explained—the main conditions
being the same. i. e., the price of the lor-
eign article is controlled by the American
market, and if the article is imported, the
duty on the quantity imported is paid h
the importer out of what would othendve
be his profits. To illustrate: In iS(i6. t),
"68. and "(19 ue received from yoo,5oo-(W
555.500.'x*) feet of imported lumber at all
port--. The three States of Michig.m Ih--
consin and Minnesota alone give an annud ,
product of 3.200.CXX1.CXX) feet, while the
marketed prod-act in all the States h it'--
000,000.000 of feet, or twenty-lour times tlie
amount of the importation. Now there ait
those who think that if a pumpkin isbrousit
across the Canada line at East]»rt.in Maiu-
its price regulates the price of pumpkins»
California. Thev will have no exception
to the rule that t'ne home price is regular
by the foreign. But practical menv™s'®
that if the Canadian lumbering divtrids at
only adequate to supplv one twentv-fonr.a
of our demand, thev onlv contribute"'
twenty-fourth of the influences which or
termine the price. The price depends»
3
le ratio of the whole supply to the wliole
,emand, not on an insignificant fraction of
ae whole supply. From 1862 to 1866
imber was imported under reciprocity
ithout duty. Since that time it has paid
iwards our revenue $1,500,000 a year.
; he question arises, "Who paid this sum,
le Canadian producers or the American
jnsumers"
The following is a statement of prices in
le Chicago market, the largest lumber
larket in the country or the world, made
:.p of monthly sales into an annual average,
■y the President of the Chicago Lumber-
- lan's Exchange:
btal feet
sold.
.19,000,000
. ■.1,880,000
-.7,j#),ooo
_!T,105,000
■,7,631,000
C 16,4^,000
-11,^34,000
Tear.
Price in
1863
currency.
$12.75
1864
17.30
iS6c
1866
16.80
1867
14-J5
186S
13.60
1869
11.30
Price in
gold.
I9U3
8.49
It will he observed that the quantity sold
■ 1 this markfet has annually increased from
89,000,000 feet in 1863, to 991,834,000
let in 1869, and increasing during the years
amed of reciprocity 251,493,000 feet and
lose since its abrogation 349,506,000 feet,
'he average price in currency for the three
ears ending with reciprocity was $14.63.
■ince then, under existing tariff, it has been
13.96, a decrease of sixty-seven cents per
. lousand. The price in 1865, the last year
_f free duty, was $13.85, while in 1869, with
- uty, it was $11.30, a decline of $2.55 per
housand since the duty was imposed. The
xtreme years given of 1863 and 1869, the
inner under reciprocity and the latter
■nder the tariff, stated in gold, were respec-
ively $9.31 and $8.49, a decline of eighty-
wo cents per thousand.
Nor is this all. While the fact that there
s no increase but a steady diminution in
'rice here under the duty shows that the
. iuty is not paid by our consumers, a rise in
vrrage Canadian prices under the duty shows
hat the tax is paid there, for the average
Canadian price is fixed by the American
irice with dutv added. A memorial to
fongress for the removal of duties on im-
lorted lumber, signed by M. Davis for the
letitioners, su\s:
*'_At the expiration of the reciprocity treaty, in the
■prinit of iSo/i, a duty of ro per cent, ad valorem was
mposed on luinher. Contrary to the general expec-
ation that prices in Caiiaiia would depreciate, the fol-
owiug figu-es w iii siinw tile advance in the chief
. iescriptions of in nher imported from Ottawa. This
aide was prepared from tne hooks of one of the
argest importing houses in tiie United btates.
AdvaTKe cost in Canada.
1S65. 1869.
Stock and sidings (boards and pianks)..'8in,5o $12.50
Strips of all thickness S.tx) lo.oo
Third quality of deal plank 6,50 7.25
Cominou liox or shipping lumber 8.00 9.00
" The above are gold prices.
"Freight from Ottai-.a to Burlington, Vermont.
$3.25 per thousand ; to WhiteliaJi, $3.50 per thousand
in gold. These rates continue unchanged.^'
This exhibits.the average price for uppers
and common in 1865, under freedom from
dutv, $9.25, and in 1869, under the duty, an
average of $ 10.75 i" i being an increase
of $1.50 per thousand the last year with
the tariff over the last year of " free
duty," in Canada, against a decrease of
$2.55 per thousand, as already stated, for
like years in the States.
The free trade organs are fond of assert¬
ing that where any part, however small, of
a given product, pig iron for instance, or
blankets, or lumber is imported, the entire
internal product of the country is sold
higher bx' the amount of the tax on the im¬
ported article, so that in the case of lumber
where $i of tax is collected by the govern¬
ment, $24 of tax is paid to the manufac¬
turers of lumber, and in the case of pig iron
where $1 of tax is paid to the government
$40 is paid to the makers of American pig
iron. To illustrate the absurdity of this
doctrine in all cases, let us apply it to agri¬
cultural products. We import from Canada
wheat, corn, oats and barley as well as lum¬
ber and coal, all paying duties. If the price
of all the lumber, coal, salt and pig iron
produced in this country is raised by the
amount of the tariff then the price of all the
wheat, corn, oats, barley and potatoes must
be raised by the same invariable law. If so,
then the farmers of Illinois get $21,063,200
tariff on their wheat, corn, oats and barley,
those of Iowa are increased in like manner by
$12,617,250^ those of Missouri by $7,861,000,
and those of Michigan by $9,713,000! ' But
if the price of wheat, barley, oats, corn and po¬
tatoes is not regulated by that of the quantity
imported, and if, on the contrary, the insig¬
nificant quantity imported is regulated in
price by the vastly greater quantity we pro¬
duce here, the same rule applies to pig iron,
lumber, coal and salt, of all of which we pro¬
duce from ten to fifty times as much as we
import.
THE LION IN TIIE ASS' SKIN.
The old fable of the ass in the lion's skin
has recently been eclipsed by a new and
original version in the Chicago Exvninsf
Post. It has been furnishing its readers
for some weeks past with a series of arti¬
cles entitled "The Farmers and the Mo¬
nopolists." As long as the writer adheres
to abstract terms and gener.al abuse of
American manufacturers, be seems quite
at home, but the few attempts at illustrative
statistics have been among the most laugh¬
able of all the curiosities ot free trade liter¬
ature. The writer has shown conclusively,
in his statements on wools and woolens,
that he kijows less on the question than a
young dry goods clerk ; but he was evi-
4
Ldentiy -saving- himself for a grand climax,
which dul\ ajipeared in his article on " lions
f cloth." Tiie customary prelude Informs us
that " the abomination of our present tarift"
system ; its utter inequality and tendency
■ fto oppress the hard-working and, truly in¬
dustrious class, who wear clothes for com¬
fort and use, and not for mere show, make
' up one of the worst characteristics of the
• monopoly curse." He then proceeds to
picture the British lion, indignant that we
- will no longer purchase his shoddy woolens,
■ as using his ingenuity and application to
• find some fitting substitute with which to
clothe the foolish Yankees.
The device is soon found, and, -with one
stroke of this versatile pen, we have the
British lion arrayed in heavy fabric known
. as " lions cloth," and made " of the hair of
dogs, calves, cows, the softer hair from the
hides of horses and we may add, still
better, from that of the historic ass, as be¬
ing at once longer and stronger than that
of its occidental rivals. It only remains to
fimi some means of smuggling this heroic
cloth into the United States. The lion's
. eye, alwa^■s alert to find tlaws in the rev¬
enue laws of all nations but its own, dis¬
covers a small hole in our tariff on wooleps
and similai" goods. The law provides that
goods made from wool of sheep, alpaca
goat, or other hke animals, shall pay a cer¬
tain duty. •' Surel>," reasons the lion,
" the barking dog, the neighing horse, and
the braying ass, can, by no fair legal inter¬
pretation be called //Ac the sheep and goat;"
and, therefore, exclaims the delighted Post,
fortunately it escapes^ as by a miracle, the
heavy double duty. And hence farmers,
and other industrious families, can have a
rather cheap, warm aarticle of clothing for
winter. " It is very cheap. A yard costs
in England seventy-two cents, and weighs
two pounds." Unfortunately, the writer,
having told us what the cloth costs in Eng¬
land, by a common infirmity of Free Traders,
forgets to tell us just what it sells for m the
West, and how it compai-es in quality and
price with the tariff-enhanced woolens for
which it is such a providential substitute.
He turns from the only point of any in¬
terest or importance to us, to pounce upon
>Ir. Hooper, of Boston, who " actually in¬
cluded this poor lions cloth in a duty of fifty
cents per pound, or thirty-five per cent, ad
valorem" by simply leaving out the word
" like," in the bill reported by the Commit¬
tee of Ways and Means. Had this bill
passed, he fears it would effectually have
stopped the hole through which the lordly
monarch now creeps, and have proved pro¬
hibitory, because, as he figures, it would
have subjected this cloth to a tariff of
$1.2514 per yard.
Now, here is a case worth observing—
one 01 the Free Trader's own chos-sing.
We have an article made doubly cheap by
using material far less valuable than wonj,
and ^bv robbing the laborers of hone-
wages," It miraculously escapes in Uk Ui\
"abominable, unjust, iniquitous, and a■
cursed tariff," which, as Professor Perr,
Commis.sioner W^ells, and all the Briti-
attorneys, have so loudly told us, isthc
great cause of the " artificial and exorbi-
tantly high prices" of staple goods. It lie,
on the merchant's counter, side by side
with the competing western-made woolens,
enhanced in cost by higher raw- materia!,
and threefold higher wages, and a tarif
which the Post estimates at "somethinj
like 285 percent." Fortunately, we had an
opportunity to test this Where farmers trade,
the very class to whom the/"eii/directs its
shallow, unpatriotic sophisms. |
We visited a flourishing store in one of
our largest inland cities, which can secure
goods as cheaply as Chicago. The merchant
knew just what we meant by lions cloth.
He explained how it was of two kinds, sin¬
gle and double-fqced, and that the latter
wan decidedly heavier and better than the
other. On weighing a piece of the better
quality we found it weighed, as stated, two
pounds to the yard, double width. But the
questions of durability and cheapness are
of more importance than mere weight
" Do the fanners and workingmen buy this
cloth, and how do they like it?" "We
have sold it to them for cloaks and over-
ccxits mainly, but they don't like it. After
a little, it cracks open and falls to pieces
There is no wear in it. We were deceived,
for it looked like warm, substantial goods"
On inquiring the price, we found that this
better quality retailed last winter for $38
yard, the wholesale mei-chant in New fort
charging $2.25 for it, although he pur¬
chased it for somewhat less in the auction
room. But the question for us is, w hat did
the farmer pay ? Any Free Trader in ar¬
gument would assume that goods cost us
in the West, duty free, no more thaain
England, with fair profits and freights ,
added. Thus, the Chicago Tnbum san
that woolen blankets are made in SngW
for 25 cents a pound, and could
under free trade, at 30 cents in the United
States. Here is a good test of theii theory;
Cloth, w-hich retails at a profit in England
of 73 cents, gold, w-as sold last w-inter to
our farmers, nearly duty free, for $223
gold. On examining the cloth, w-e found
it was made by w eaving coarse hair filing
into a cheap cotton warp. It i-s we.it,
rotten, worthless—just such cheap goods a-
Engl.ind is famous for making, with wh.c
to undersell honest manufacturers, instead
of being adapted to " the hard-working,
industrious class, w-ho w-ear clothes luj
com tort and use, and not tor mere sA'-*-
It is a crime and an iiisult to so"
5
ds to a workingman at any price. Wliile i
as some claim to "mere show." it has
.:her ■ comfort nor use in its makemp.
lile in this store) a worthy Baptist cler-
nan came in, from his home, in a pros-
ous farming community, a few miles
He had purchased an overcoat from
, very piece, last winter, and hence was
lore competent witness than the theo-
cal editor of the Evening Post. He
1 he bought it in January last. After a
e the nap peeled otf, it pulled off, it
led apart wherever any wear came upon
ind ^as the meanest piece of shoddy he
r saw. Side by side, with this rotten
:ish goods, lie the strong and genuine
■ics of our Western looms, which will
ir for years without a rent, selling for
one penny higher than this trash sold
Two dollars will buy a larger surface,
1 tenfold more wear, in Western woolens,
n three dollars purchased of " this poor
IS cloth" last winter.
Ve have taken up this case, partly be-
se it was chosen by a Free Trader to
ocate his cause, and partly because it
ws some simple facts of value to the
ners which Free Traders always ignore,
te these points:
. What goods can be made for in Eng-
d is no criterion of what they luould be
'i for in this country under "free trade:
IS cloth 73 cents in England, and $2.23,
d, to the Western farmer.
. Note the falsehood of the constant as-
tion, that the taritf enhances the price of
pie woolen goods. Western goods of
■e wool are sold cheaper to Western
ners than British shoddy under free
ie.
Observi the farmer's account in the
I cases. When he pays $2.25 a yard for
IS cloth, he buys so much labor, food and
' material of a nation that wants none of
wool' and little of his labor or food;
ile $1.32 in gold is paid as a useless tax
jseless middle-men. 'When he wants a
:stem overcoat, he finds that fifteen
inds of wool in his lumber wagon will
,hange for as much cloth, of vastly supe-
1 quality, as thirty pounds bought of
tish shoddy under free trade. He has
useless taxes to pay to middle-men, and
■ a factory village to feed in the bargain.
, If this lions cloth had paid the alleged
y of $1.25 per yard, and 72 cents to the
nufacturer, it would have left sufficient
ifits for the middle-men at the prices it
> brought in the West.
•Ve sincerely hope Mr. Hooper's amend-
nt may succeed, and that it may prove
>hibitory to this sham cloth, which be¬
gs, with shoddy, in the land that invent-
^Iter laboring to perpetuate this swindle
Western farmers, ^nd abuse of houest
i Western manufacturers, the Post piously
concludes by saying; " The salvation of the
fublic month, as well as tlpe interests of the
public at large, and the cause ot' commer¬
cial justice, unite in demanding a reform of
the tariff system, by which a people are first
cheated and then oppressed."
THE CROMWELLIAN SETTLE¬
MENT OF IRELAND.*
This book, of which we are glad to wel¬
come a second and enlarged edition, tells
one of the strangest stories in all history,
and, when we say that it accounts for the
present condition of Ireland with a clear¬
ness displayed by no other work, it is the
same as saying that it throws light on one
of the darkest and most serious problems of
modem society, for the condition of Ireland'
is actually putting in peril at this moment'
the dearest interests of both England and
America. The " Curse of Cromwell," in
short, has lighted on and followed over the'
earth not only the Celts, whom he sought to'
extirpate, but the A,nglo-Saxons, whom he'
sought to serve.
Mr. Prendergast was five years ago ap-'
pointed, with Dr. Russell, the President of
Maynooth College, on a commission to ex¬
amine the great body of historical papers
known as the Carte Collection, and deposit-^
ed in the Bodleian Library, Oxford. The
Carte Collection contains the Ormonde'
Papers, or letters and documents, public
and private, connected with the government '
of Ireland during the Duke of Ormonde's
connection with it, from 1641 down to his
death in 1688, with the exception of ten-
years, from 1650 to 1660, passed in exile
with the king. From the Restoration until
his death, Ormonde was in effect Lord-
Lieutenant of Ireland, and was the recip-'
ient of all the petitions, plaints, and remon-'
strances presented by those whom the wars,
confiscations, and settlements of the Com->
monwealth had ■wronged. 'With the aid of
this collection, and of various family papers
never before examined, Mr. Prendergast
has been able to set before us, with curious
and instructive minuteness, the real nature
and results of the great social and political
revolution'known as the Cromwellian settle¬
ment of Ireland.
The war in Ireland, begun by Cromwell
in 1649, was ended in 1653. The Irish were
p>it down much as the Indians on the
Western plainsare nowput down, by whole¬
sale massacre and by the destruction of
tneir crops and cattle. During the last two
years, their resistance consisted simply of
guerrilla warfare, in which, owing to the
nature of the country, they were very sue-
*"The Cromwellian Settlement of Ire¬
land. By John Prendererast, Barrister at Law."'*
Second edition, ciilarjjcd. London; LoLj^inans. 1S70,
5
cessful, and to put an end to it the parlia-
mehtary army under Ireton laid everything
■waste. In Jiis march of 150 miles from
Limerick t6 Waterford, he passed through
fertile districts of thirty miles together in
which not a house or living creature was to
be seen. When "peace" came in 1657,
special licenses were issued by government
to kill and dress sheep and lambs. There is
one on record which pei-mits the Widow
Buikeley, in consideration of her " ould
age and weakneijspf bodv, to kill and dress
as niuch lamb as shoulci, be necessary for
her own use and eating, not exceeding three
lambs for a whole vear," The last otgan-
ized force of the Irish had surrendered the
previous year, and now came the plan of
pacification. The pay of the English arrpy
was heavily in arrears, and it was resolved
to satisfy thcelaims of both othcers and
men by grants of rland to be taken from the
Irish. The ofiiceri) wery , very eager for
this arrangement!, • as they wished, to found
families—the men less so, but it was the best
they could do ; so they accepted.
The first thing to be done was to get rid
of as many of tire Irish as possible. Ac¬
cordingly, the men were|^ encouraged in
every way to enter the service of Continent¬
al powers, and in the years 1651-54 ;54,ooo
embarked for Poland, France, and bpain,
few or none of whom ever returned. Large
numbers of the genti-y at the same time
emigrated voluntarily, whose descendants
are still found in the O'Donnells and
O'Reillys, and others, of Spain and Aus¬
tria ; and the MacMahons, Dillons, Reilles,
Niels, and Cavaignacs (Kavanagh) of
France. Orders were then issued by the
Commissioners of Ireland to governors of
garrisons, and keepers of jails, and masters
of workhouses, and all other persons in au¬
thority, to deliver to agents of Bristol sugar
merchants all able-bodied men in their
charge, " marriageable women and not past
breeding," and all persons without visible
means of livelihood—in the then state of
the country an enomious multitude—for
transportation to the West Indies, to be
employed in forced labor on the plantations.
Many found their way, under similar con¬
tracts, to New England. Mr. Prendergast
gives the names of the agents, and mer¬
chants, and dates of some of the largest
contracts. Under this system, in the course
of four years, 64,000 Irish men," women,
boys, and girls were sent into slavery, and
many of the women belonged to families
of the better class whom the war had left
destitute. In March, 1655, the order was
revoked, and the trade ceasecj, In 1655,
however, Jamaica having been conquered,
and colonists and a garrison being wanted
tor it, Cromwell engaged 1,500 men of the
English troops in Ireland to go there to set¬
tle, and ordered "1,000 Irish wenches" to
be sent with them. Henry Cromwell, then
commanding the forces in Ireland, an¬
swered that he would have to take the
" wenches" by force, and suggested that
from 1,500 to 2,000 boys, frpm twelve In
fourteen years of age, should be sent out
also. Orie thousand of each were accord¬
ingly sent, with the pious hope thatthei
would be made " Christians " of in Jamaiui.
In the meantime, the process of dividing
the lands was going on actively. There
was due to the " Society of Adventurers,"
or persons who had lent money to the gov¬
ernment for the expenses of the ver in
Ireland, a sum of' £3604x10, This was paid
oft" by liberal grants of land, drawn by lot
at a public lottery heldratjthe Grocers' Hall,
in London, in July, 1653, 1®" counties.
The ivhole of the rest of Ireland—exceptlhe
province of Connaught—was set apart for
the payment of £1,550,000, due as arrears
to the officers and soldiers, and of £1,750.-
oao of floating debt, incurred by the gov¬
ernment for supplies furnished during the
war. On the 26th of September, 1653, all
ancient estates and farms of the people of
Ireland were declared to belong to the Ad¬
venturers and : Army of England, and all
Irish were ordered to " transplant" to Con-
naught—a howling wHoerness of bog and
rock—with their families, before the first of
May follo'wing, on pain of death it" found
east of the Shannon after that date, the
trial to be by military commission. ,
The exceptions to this rule were the Irish
wives of English Protestants embracing
their husbands' faith ; boys and girls, un¬
der fourteen, in the service of Protestants,
and Irish Catholics who could ofifer satislac-
tory proof of having shown "Constant
Good Affection" - to the Parliament as
against the king during the previous ten
years. The decree was an awful one, and
It struck the unhappy people just as they
were gathering in their harvest, and this
the first tolerable harvest they had had
since the war began. "Constant Good
Affection " was almost impossible to prove,
for mere passiveness would not support the
plea. Moreover, the order covered not
only the " Irish enemy," but the descend¬
ants of the English settlers of the Eliea-
bethan period-—men English in blood and
speech and manners, the Comynses, Stack-
poles, Morrises, Hamiltons, Fitzgeralds,
Butlers, Plunkets, Cheevers, Bamewalls,
Talbots, Archers, and Atkinsons, justa«
much as the Tooles, Donohoes, Motes,
Kavanaghs, and Keoghs. It was just
hard for the one as the other to prov'
" Constant Good Affection," and their land
was just as valuable. Among these unlor-
tunates was William Spenser, the grandson
of the author of the "Faerie Queene.
Edmund, who was " the first settler," wh®
he took his confiscated land, was as bard on
7
^he mere Irish " as any of the Elizabethan
opers. And now tlie grandson was or-
red to quit his pleasant home and his
ids in the county of Cork in midwinter,
move into Connaught as an " Irish
■ pist." He appealed to Cromwell, who
ote to the Commissioners begging tliat
might be spared, but in vain. Mr.
"jndergast reproduces the Protector's let-
, and it is worth quoting ;
Protector to Commissioners for Af-
'~''airs in Ireland.
«i "Whitehall, March 27, 1657.
' light Trusty and Well Beloved :
A petition hath been exhibited unto us
William Spenser, setting forth that, be-
but seaven years old att the beginning
the rebellion in Ireland, bee repaired,
' -.h his mother, to the Citty of Corke, and
Ving the rebellion continued in the Eng-
quarters ; that he never bore arms or
"■■ed against ye Commopwealth of Eng-
^'-d ; that his grandfather, Edmund Spen-
isn and his father were both Protestants,
r-TO whom an estate in lands in the barony
ff-Fermoy and county of Corke descended
- him, which during the rebellion yielded
ttbing towards his reliefe; that ye estate
Ah been lately given to the souldiers in
xdsfaction of their arrears, upon accompt
■jchis professing the Popish religion, which
.;i«e his coming to years of discretion hee
ri;h, as hee professes, utterly renounced;
c'.this grandfather was that Edmund Spen-
att who by his writings touching the reduc-
a,r. 1 of ye Irish to civility brought on him
odium of that nation, and for those works
J-1 his other good services Queen Elizabeth
,j.,;iferred on him yt estate which the said
^ ^lliam Spenser now claims. Wee have
.f jO been informed that ye gentleman is of
ivil conversation, and that the extremi-
f.i his wants have brought him unto have
prevailed over him to put him upon in-
^ :reet or evil practices for a livelihood,
'..d if upon enquiry you shall find his case
_Jbe such, wee judge it just and reason-
__" e, and do therefore desire and authorise
"^1 yt hee bee forthwith restored to his
ite, and that reprisal lands bee given to
souldiers elsewhere. In ye doing whereof
'* . satisfaction will be the greater by the
' ptinuation of that estate to ye issue of his
■ f" ndfather, for whose eminent deserts and
I ''■vices to ye Commonwealth yt estate was
given to him.
A "We rest, your loving friend,
df " Oliver, P."
a; The work before them was so horrible—
l^': prayers and entreaties of the aged and
e3^ derly bred women, many of them wear-
I! of ancient titles, of war-worn men, young
ftci Idren, of the sick and infirm, that they
i i-'ght not be cast out of their homes in mid-
;Salter to perish miserably in the waste,
lie re so piercing—that the Commissioners
-ttcf
■wrote a circular letter to the commanding
officers, calling for a general fast and a gen¬
eral " lifting up of prayers, with stiong crying
and tears to Him to whom nothing istoo hard,
that his servants, whom he had called forth
in this day to act in these great transactions,
might be made faithful, and carried on by his
own outstretched arm against alj opposition
and difficulty to do what was pleasing in his
sight." So the Lord strengthened them,
and they pushed on the work. Mr. Pren-
dergast cites a great many of the certificates
given to the poor victims on their fjeparture.
They all contain personal descriptions of the
holders and the members of their families,
and one can hardly read them, even through
the mists of two centuries, without feeling
some of the pang of those dreadful days.
After a year's trial, it was found impossi¬
ble to make all the Irish go. So in 1654 ®
dispensation was' issued in favor of " the
sick, aged, laine, and impotent," those who
had aided or sheltered English soldiers, and
who should manifest a desire to turn Protest¬
ants. But the work went on very slowly
still; the Commissioners were loth to hang
the recusants—although they did it in some,
cases—and an immense force would have
been required to carry it out by means of
arrest and transportation; so they tarried and
granted indulgence; the troops all the while
clamoring for their lands and reproaching
the Commissioners with their slothfulness
in the execution of the Lord's will. At last,
however, the work was accomplished satis¬
factorily. The bulk of the Irish from all
districts, the land which was needed,
were caged up in Connaught. The old
homes of the landed proprietors were taken
possession of by the English officers; the
privates settled down under them as tenants,
somewhat discontentedly, for Ireland con¬
tained neither -beer nor cheese, horses nor
plows, nor Englishwomen. This last want
was the worst of all, for love-making to Irish
women, whom the troops found very at¬
tractive, was strictly prohibited by " the
third article of warre," and offenders, as the
records of courts-martial still extant show,
were severely flogged for it. Other heavy
penalties were inflicted on soldiers marrying
Irishwomen. Ireton, by a general order,
forbade any officer or soldier marrying an
Irishwoman, whether calling herself a Papist
or not, " until it had been ascertained by an
examination (by fitt persons, such as shall
be appointed for that end) whether the
change of religion flowed from a reall ■worke
of God upon their hearts," or " from cor¬
rupt and carnal ends."
The intermarrying, ho^wever, went on to
a greater or less extent, human nature being
stronger than general orders. Some of the
transplanted crept back and died within
sight of their old seats; others came back
and rented farms from their conquerors;
8
others ended their days in Connaught;
others again of the younger men stole
home and " bvishwhacked" the English¬
men, thus beginning the practice of assassi¬
nation about land which " Rogues and Rap-
parees," "Whiteboys," "Captain Rocks,"
and " Molly Maguires " have kept up down
to our own day. Thousands in the next gen¬
eration flew to arms jovfully thirty years
later, under James. During the century
following the Boyne, 400,000 Irishmen died
in foreign service, and the rest remained at
home to hate and curse their conquerors.
In short, if we judge this settlement, on
which the Lord's blessing was invoked so
often, by its consequences, work so devilish
by Christian people was never done.
SHOW US BOTH SIDES, MR. WELLS.
The evils of Mr. Wells' management of
the Statistical Bureau and Special Com¬
mission of the Revenue, were, first, that he
ignored utterly the facts and statistics show¬
ing our rapid expansion erf industries, and
the growth of our internal commerce. He
does not tell us how much our products of
wool and woolens, of iron and steel and
their manufactures, and of cotton goods,
have expanded in quantity. We could
never find out from him that Wisconsin is
now producing forty times as much pig iron
as in i86r; that the product of iron in the
whole country had doubled; that woolen
manufactures had doubled; or any other
fact indicating an increase in our powers of
production. All Protectionists concede
that the effect of moJt tariffs or taxes of
any kind is temporarily to raise the price
of the thing on which it is levied, whatever
that may be. The only difference in prin¬
ciple between the tariff on tea, coffee and
tropical spices which the Free Traders ap¬
prove and the tariff on iron, is that the
former might continue a thousand years
without •Stimulating the production of tea,
coffee and spices in this country, and, con¬
sequently, without ever reducing their
price. But on iron, cotton and woolen
goods; every ounce of protection stimulates
a pound of production, and this production
not only affords a market for agricultural
products, but tends to reduce the price.
For instance, on the article of pig iron
alone, our production has increased within
ten years by 1,000,000 tons, which, at
average prices, have sold for $32,000,000 in
gold. Of this value, careful estimates have
shown that 42 per cent, consists of the pro¬
ducts of the farm consumed by the laborers
employed in their manufactiu"ed state, to
wit: meats, poultry, eggs, butter, cheese,
lard, flour, corn, fruits, vegetables, feathers
for beds, and if to this we add the farm pro¬
ducts in a manufactured state, such as the
boots and shoes made from the farmers'
hides, the clothing, flannels and hats made
from the farmers' wool, the beer, ale, cidet
and vinegar made from his fruits and grains,
and the shirts made from the planter's cot¬
ton, and the sugar and molasses from hi,
canes, and the rice from his plantations it
is safe to say that 70 per cent, of the sellin;
price of American pig iron consists of tke
products of the farm and plantation. Then;
is no value in pig iron save that of the labor
and capital invested in it, and of the costof
this labor 70 per cent, represents the con-
sumption of the products we have named
by the laborers employed in making it and
by their families. Upon this calculation
we find that the increase merely in the pro¬
duct of pig iron has increased an additional
demand for $23,ioo,cxx) worth in gold of
farmers' and planters' products, for which
there would have been no American de¬
mand but for protection. Thus the mere
increase, not the entire product, of the
manufacture of pig iron, calls for agricul¬
tural products of more value than onr
entire export of wheat flour for the year
ending in June, 1869, viz., $18,813,865.
Turning to cotton manufactures, we find
our annual product in i860, by the cendus,
amounted in value to $117,581,231 in gold.
In 1869 it is officially reported by the As¬
sociation of Cotton Manufacturers at $287,-
147,000 in currency, which, with an average
premium of 30 per cent., would be $23^,-
289,167 in gold values. The increase ia
production is $121,707,926, or 103 percent
in nine years, or at the rate of 125 percent
in ten years, and this notwithstanding the
enormous price of raw cotton during the
war. Under the previous ten years of
peace, the increase was only 86 per cent
If we suppose the difference only between
the rate of increase under protection and
the rate under a low tariff, viz., 39 per cent
to be due to the tariff, and make no allow¬
ance for the adverse influences of the war,
higher cost of labor and generally increased
cost of production, we find that in this
increase of our cotton manufactures $47,-
466,091.14 must be credited to protection
^one. In point of fact, every man of com¬
mon sense knows that, 'without any protec¬
tion, under the tremendous taxes and pnces
of the war, the .cotton manufactures, in¬
stead of increasing 103 per cent., would
have fallen far below their product in times
of peace. But even on the above basis
supposing in like manner 70 per cent of
the cotton manufactures to represent pi^
ducts of the farm and plantation consuinM
in their production, and we find that the
portion of the increase in our cotton manu¬
factures under protection, in excess of what
our increase would have been under W
trade and no war, has increased the demand
for agricultural products to the amount ol
more than $33,226,263.77, or more than
9
0,000,000 more than our entire export of I
;ieat. i
It is the business of an officer of-the
Vermtient employment to discuss the
; ects of taxation to ^ive in full the credit
; ^^rell as the debit side of every tax or
•iff he discusses. In addition to giving in
half of the Free Traders an argument
■Swing that some goods might be had tem-
rarily cheaper if the fdreign article could
^ sold in this country ftee of all tax, a fact
Sich no Protectionist •would think it worth
fiile to deny, the Cdmmis-sioner is bound to
'Sw whether this is the whole effect of the
iff. For^ust here, where the free trade
-'[ument ends, the Protectionist begins.
'-Ve admit," says'the Protectionist, "that
' "ariff, if it operates to protect the Ameri-
Th market at all, does so by keeping the
- ce temporarily higher than it would be if
- taxed foreign products were let in free,
-"t does it not rapidly develop production
~ -the point where the competition between
-nerican producers lowers the price below
- ■- at it would be if we were dependent on
"I; foreign supply alone?" To follow this
aneof argument, Mr. Wells should'inquire
: « far the tariff has increased the produc-
!' a, and how far the increase in production
"i lowered the price, of the particular pro-
™t and has raiSed the'\vortlr »f all other
-:iducts. NumerouS manufactories have
n :n transferred in bulk, managers, capital-
foremen, workrhen, families, machinery
:_• 1 all, from Germany and England to
; rerica in consequence of the.tariff. The
■ rierican Lead Pencii Company, of Hobo-
iT'i, N, J,, is a transfer of this kind. We
/e heard of scores of others, but of not
through Mr. Wells. Transfers of for-
-j.-j n industry to this cou,htry escape his
^.;ice. He aims to bring their products
•e free of tax. Protection'aims to induce
: industries themselves ,to pome here,
.;.ere their workmqn will increase our
_ rkets and consume our products.
^j.'.n no instance is this one-sicfedhess of
Wells .better exemplified than in the
ent report of the Democratic minority of
: committfee on manufactures, drawn up
. him. ' ^
le argues that if the tariff were reduced
■steel rails, we should get the whole 9O0,-
tons of rails now needed of steel, and at
_,J a ton. As they cannot be produced in
' s country at that price, he, of course, as-
nes that they will be imported, and says
s^rit it would be economy to buy up and
"J^ itroy all the manufactories of steel rails
- this country, rather than not have the
'eign product free. He figures up the
of the importing policy thus:
T the i,ooo,ocx) tons of rails which are this year to
fC'i •aid down, either on new roads or in repair of old
, s, could all he steel instead of iron, the cost of re-
•'.fdna: them would he reduced from 10 per cent, to
er cent., and probably less, per annum ; a differ¬
ence which, on the rails of this year alone, would
make a difference of $4,200,000, to he saved as a pro-
portioniU annuity, deducted from the cost of tran^or-
tition chiirg'ed upon tlie wealth of tlie country. Mul¬
tiply this hy yearly additions until the whole 55.000
miles of railroad track in this country is laid with a
permanent steel track, as it certainly will he, with its
5,500,000 tons of rails, and the aimual economy be
the difference between 10 per cent, and 3 per cent, on
that amount,, or 550,000 against 165 tonSy at $60 /<w»,
$23,100,000.
Now let us look at the economy of maiw-
taining such a tariff on these rails as will
cause them all to be made here. The
1,000,000 tons of rails per annum, at $60 per
ton, if manufactured here, would require-
the consumption of $40,000,000 of Ameri¬
can farm produce in their manufacture. If
manufactured in England, they would re¬
quire the same amount, but only one-tenth
of it would come from the United States.
$36,000,000 of American farm products is'
the difference between the demand which
would be made by the policy of making our
iron rails here, and that of makiifg them
abroad, even if we admit that Americans
never could manufacture them as cheaply
as the English. But should we reduce our
cost of manufacture as low as that of Eng-
land,-our demand for farm products would
be equally great, while Mr. 'Wells's vaunted
economy in destroying American industries
to patronize foreign, would wholly disap¬
pear. We .should then save his $23,100,000-
a year by the substitution of steel for iron
rails, arid, in addition, we should save $36,-
000,006 a year by putting American farm
products into our rails, instead of the for--
eign. . - ■ r
DECLINE OF INDUSTRY IN ENG¬
LAND.
Before us lies an able English pamphlet,,
entitled, "The present and long-continued
stagnation of trade; its causes, effects and
cure, being a sequel to an inquiry into thd
comtaercial position of Great Britain, etc.,
by a, Manchester man," just published at
Manchester and London, and running into
several edition^. It is one of the first sharp •
thunder-claps in a coming storm, the mut-
terings of which have for some time been
rolling around the horizon, of, Albion. It
opens as follows: ^
The trade of this country has fallen intq such a de-'
ploralde position that there is scarcely a sini^le branch
of it which does not leave a very heavy l^s to thd
producers, and, consequently, little inducement for
the investment of capital and the emplpymeqtcff labor ;
indeed, the amount of distress that at present per¬
vades the industrial interests of this kingdom is truly
deplorable, and the future appears still more clouded
tlian the present.
The cause of such a state of things, I feel very
sure, arises almost exclusively from foreign competi¬
tion, which has increased to siich an extent that, a few
ye-.irs since, would h-ave been thought fabulous, and
no doubt was not anticipated by the most acute poli¬
ticians, a quarter of a century ago. It whs then
thought that, as manufacturers we reigne'd supreme
and could defy all competition. However, experi¬
ence has proved the reverse, and we now find that
lO
unless we can obtain reciprocity, even by begging-
tliat which we could once nave commandea, we must
descend to a position lower than tliat wliich we at
present hold.
Fortunately we have one chance left of redeeming
ourselves, to a certain extent, viz.: in the case of the
French treaty, which expires early in the coming
year; and, as we have suffered so severely from our
•unequal competition with that country, 1 shall en¬
deavor to show the consequences to this kingdom of
our present policy, and its ruinous effects upon our
manufacturing interests, as well as the disastrous re¬
sults of the hostile tariffs of foreign competitor^
The writer then proceeds to show the
condition of foreign trade in 1854, the first
year in which the government published
the real value of imports, in i860, being the
jear previous to the commercial tariff, and
in i8(^. In 1854 the excess of imports
over an exports was £36,576,961; in i860 it
was £46,009,522, and in 1868 it is £71,174,-
757. But of these exports, a portion are
colonial and foreign. The excess of all im¬
ports over British exports was, in 1854,
£55,204,^^7, in i860, £74,639,646, and in
i8f^, £116,047,922. The following is the
exhibit:
TOTAL IMPORTS A4>JD EXPORTS OP GREAT BRITAIN.
Total Importt:, I Total Extorts.
18^4. £ i
laiports 152,398,053 British 97,18^726
Exports 115,821,092 Foreign aud col 10,630,366
Excess imp'ts. 36.576.961' Total exports.. n 5,821,093
Excess of imports over British exports 55,204,341
i860. £ I ' £
Imports 310,530,8731 British .•.135.891.337
Exports 164,521,3511 Foreign and col 20,630,124
Excess imp'ts. 46,009.522;Total exports.. 164,531,351
Excess of imports over British exports.... 74,6^,646
Imports 395,511,566 British 179,463,644
Exports 334,336,809 Foreign and col 44,073,105
Excess imp'ts. 7i,i74,757iTotal exports,.324,336,809
Excess of imports over British exports.... x 16,047,933
While the total imports harte more than
doubled, the total exports, and especially of
British exports, has much less than doubfed.
How does Great Britain pay for this Ex¬
cess of imports ? Mainly by exports of cap¬
ital, /. e., by loans of money to be invested
in the industrial enterprises of other coun¬
tries. This is an export of capital corre¬
sponding in value to her export of labor.
For so long as fiplicies are pursued which
deny remuneration alike to capital and la¬
bor, botl)„ being governed by the same law,
will seek employment elsewhere. The por¬
tion of English capital thus held abroad is
now about $2,500,000,000, or about equal
to our entire national debt, and, though this
emigration of Engligh capital calls nomi¬
nally for a reflow in the form of interest, yet
the condition of exchanges shows that grad¬
ually this interest is itself being invested
abroad, and the lenders are themselves fol¬
lowing the'ir capital across the ocean.
Though capital is unremunerative, and is
migrating to other lands, there to be madt
available to the laborer, the laborer is even
worse paid than the capitalist, and is flee¬
ing from his country to some one where he
can earn the bread which is denied him at
home. The writer then asks: " Why have
we so much distress in England.'" If ith
over-production, why.is k that the produc-
ing classes cannot procure enough of what
they produce for their own consumption?
Before arguing that famine and nakednei.
can result from excessive production of
food and clothing, he asks whether they
are not better explained by the fact that the
French are making many articles for Eng¬
lish consumption, which unemployed Eng¬
lish laborers ought to make for themselves,
I instead of doing nothing, and being sustain-
i ed by charity.
for instance, must be the effect of the free
admission of 302.523 clocks and watches; of 77,145^
920 yards of cotton manufactures; of40v^cwts.
of gla-ss ; of 337,003 lbs. of straw hats ana bonnets;
of 468,240 pairs of boots and shoes ; of 10.714,188 pain
of kid, etc., ffloves ; of 370.606 cwt. of paper; of 3x6,-
574 lbs. of wrown silk ; 3,806,136 lbs. of silk manu¬
factures ; of 2,261,193 lbs. of woolen and worsted
manufactures, and of 9.337.247 lbs. of woolen and
worstedvam? Whatamonntoflaborwouldnotthese
articles have found for our half-starving populatios?
The ificrease in the number of paupers m England
since i?6o is 183,803 persons, being anout equal to the
population of Stockport, Bolton and Blackburn. Con-
tmst tlie char^ter of these duty fru imports will
those upon which we charge a duty. In fact ow
tariff is a perfect anomaly ; we admit the import d
tea, coffee and sugar—articles which we cannot pro¬
duce—only at heaw duties ; and yet we admit tbe
silks, the gold watches, the hats, the gloves, and the
better class of woolens and printed cottonp,alld
which are luxuries;, duty free.
The writer shows that England imported
from Russia, Sweden, Norway, Denmark,
Prussia, Belgium, France, Spain, and the
United States, an aggregate of £128,551,946,
and only exported to them £47,555i5'9
British products, thereby subjecting her to
a drain of other resources than the product!
of her annual industry, to the amount of
£80,996,427. In part this balance is paid
by a drain of gold, the Bank of England
having less gold in her vaults now than
when the vast discoveries of gold in Cali¬
fornia and Australia were made.
Under the Cobden-Chevalier treaty with
Fraence, entered into in 1854, England gave
absolute free trade to France, while Fiance
reserved a very considerable measure of
protection in her tariffs against Enghs6
manufactures. As a result, England's im¬
ports from France have grown from £9,146'"
418, in 1855, to £34,584,343 in 1868, an in¬
crease of nearly four hundred per cent-,
but the exports of British products to France
have grown only from £6,012,658, in iSjj,
to £10,633,721, or only sixty per cent, the
French having advanced in the sales ol
their products in competition with those ol
English workmen, six times as fast as Eng'
lancl has advanced in the sale of her pro-
.ts to the French. England imports
n France products, nearly all of which
ipete with her own industry, to the value
.t;23,Q50,623 more than France imported
11 Bridsh products combined. But, while
^nce takes care that her tariff shuts out
.ft of those products which compete with
; industries, England admits all compet-
• products free, and, in order to do so,
es her whole burden of taxes on articles
-food which she cannot produce, and
, 3se increased cost becomes a tax on her
1 labor, and raises her rate of wa^es,
-lOut advantage to her working classes.
.'nee, for instance,' by the protection to
Tt sugar, begun by the first Napoleon,
i steadily continued, now supplies herself
1 beet sugar of her own production so
fitably that it can afford to pay a heavy
- rnal tax. But England taxes her working
i."ises £30,000,000 a year on their sugar
[: molasses, though the tax does not en-
t rage the production of any article of
' ir own industry, and, on the contrary, is
IX on all British products into which
• )r enters. France is growing rapidly in
- ability to undersell England in all for-
'^1 markets. She now exports £39,517,611
s' th of her manufactures of silk, millinery,
:^n, woolen, worsted, and linen, which
" eeds by £10,000,000 the ^ aggr^ate
,'j3len, worsted, and silk exports of Eng-
ied. Obviously France is advancing to-
a-d ascendancy over England in cotton
3;! linen manufactures, as well as in those
'vhich she now reigns supreme.
. 'rom 1866 to 1868 the export of manufac-
cottons, linens and worsteds from
■^{land fell off from 92,087,53.3 yards to
"194,735 yards, while the export of yarns
Preased from 8,801,732 lbs. to 13,920,809
2', showing that France, in her relations
-Jngland, is narrowing down her eom-
-me to an exportation of manufactured
'■ ds, and an importation of the raw ma-
3 als, such as yarn, wools, fuel and labor,
is is already importing the yarn, and re-
laing to England the cloth. She will
{ .n, if her progress continues, import the
j-.ce, the coal, and the workmen, and re-
to England troops for her protection,
;.l viceroys for her government. While,
lifrance, the excess of imports over ex-
^r.ts was only £19,671,600, in England it
■,.i £116,047,612. The French excess is
too large to represent her share of the
- fits of foreign exchange and ocean
ghts and expenses. The English excess
. yesents a continual drain of capital, ill¬
ative, with the corresponding drain of
lulation, of her steady decline oP in-
jSTRY. The bulliondn the Bank of Eng-
^ d has increased, from 1844 to 1869,'"by
j ,016,000, and from '53 to '69 it decreased
P £31302,000, while the bullion in the Bank
France has increased from £10,885,000,
1
in 1S44, to £47,102,112 in 1869, a total in¬
crease of £36,217,112. Says the writer:
Tliere cannot exist the least doubt that our manu-
farturing^ position is on tlie wane. In reference to
the cotton trade, the United States and foreign Eu¬
rope have alr»^y more than overbalanced us. The
number of s])mdles employed in cotton spinning in
this country is estimated at thirty-thre6 millions, \i^ile
those of America and foreign Europe are about thirty-
hve and a half millions ; and instead of these coun¬
tries being, as formerly, to a great extent dependent
ujion us, are actually sending the same description of
goods here. We do not fear competition, if placed on
an equ li footing ; but to attempt tO' compete against
tiie hostile tarilTs and cheaper labor of the world with
free imports, is the very height of insanity.
The amount distributed in relief to the
poor, and raised as we have seen, mainly by
taxes upon the poor, has risen from £4,939,-
064 in 1853, £7,500,000 in 1868, one in
eighteen of England's whole population
being paupers.
Since the reduction of our tariff by Mr. Gladstone
in 185,1, upwards of three millions of our people have
emigrated from the United Kingdom, and pnncipallv
to the extreme protective countries, in which their
labor has found a more remunerative reward for them¬
selves ; hut at tlie same time it has served to increase
the foreign competition against Kngland.
This pamphlet comes from an English¬
man, and no doubt embodies facts on which,
within five years, a great revolution of sen¬
timent, and a considerable modification of
policies will result in Great Britaifi. All
these facts had been previously set forth in
the review of the Cobden-Chevalier treaty
by Mr. Carey. But now that the thinking
men, and especially the manufacturers, of
England, are getting their eyes opened, we
may look out for the uprising of many Sauls,
suddenly struck by a great light out of hea¬
ven, and inquiring to whom they shall go to
be cured of their blindness.
FREE TRADE WORKING RUIN IN
ENGLAND.
The new appeal to the British people for
protection to their manufactures, by Sir
Edward Sullivan, Bart.,* is a fresh indica¬
tion of the vigor which the Protectionist
cause has gained in England, from a com¬
paratively few years' trial of the experiment
of free trade. Like Hercules, thrown to the
earth, the truth gathers new strength from
the bosom of the great mother. Defeat
and almost suppression in England have
thrown the Protectionists of that country so
far in the shade that they have been almost
forgotten. But the very removal of all re¬
straint from the champions of free trade,
has enabled them to try their policy, so far
as any one nation can do so, without reci¬
procity on the part of others, to the fullest
* Protection to Native Industry. By Sir
Edward SuUivan, Bart., author of *'Ten Chapters on
Social Kefomi." London: Edward Stanford, 6 and 7
Charing Cross ; Chicago : Bureau Printing Company.
117 pp. .Svo. Price Ji.50.
1
2
extent, and the result is as disastrous as any '
Protectionist could have feared or wished.
Says Sir Edward Sullivan:
"There are many who argue that our
manufacturers would at once give up man¬
ufacturing if it did not pay; and no doubt
it is a very natural assumption, that if a
manufacturer continues his business, it is a
proof he is making money by it; but it is
very often the case that he continues to
manufacture only because he cannot afford
to stop. They little know how many man¬
ufacturers continue to struggle on in busi¬
ness merely because they do not know how
to get out of it. A man with twenty, thirty,
fifty, or a hundred thousand pounds sunk in
works and machinery, cannot give up busi¬
ness without ruin. The causes that dimin¬
ish the demand for his produce diminish
also the value of his plant; his capital and
interest are imperiled at tVie same time and
by the same cause. It is not expected, it is
not in the nature of Englishmen, that he
should at once throw up the sponge, and
declare himself beat; he will continue to
tread the mill, though he gets nothing for it;
he will struggle on for years, losing steadily
perhaps, but yet hopeful of a change. Mill¬
ions of manufacturing capital are in that •
conditiop in England at present. Capital¬
ists continue to employ their capital in
manufacturing industries because it is al¬
ready invested in them; but in many cases
it fe earning no profit, and in others dimin¬
ishing year by year.
" It takes Bonje time to scatter the wealth
of England. The growth of half a century
of industrial success is not kicked over in a
day. Moreover, it is only now, onl^ within
the last three years, that the foreign pro¬
ducers have acquired the skill and capital
and machinery that enables them really to '
press us out of our own markets. The
shadow has been coming over us for many
years, but it is only just now we are begin¬
ning to feel the substance; their progress
corresponds with our decline. A great man¬
ufacturing nation, like England, does not
suddenly collapse and give place to another;
her industries are slowlv, bit by bit, replac¬
ed by those of other countries; the progress
is gradual, and we are undergoing it at pres¬
ent. The difference between England and
hfer young manufacturing rivals is simple,
but alarming. France, Austria, Prussia,
Belgium, Switzerland, have increased their
export trade and their home consumption;
England has increased her export trade, but
her home consumption has fallen away, in
the matter of cotton alone, 35 per cent, in
three years!"
Again he says:
"Free trade in goods was understood by
its promoters to mean not only the free ad¬
mission of foreign manufactured goods into
' this country, but also the free admission of
English manufactured goods into the mar¬
kets of the world. Now this latter and
most important part of the arrangement has
never been carried out. We admit foreign
goods duty free into English ports, but in
no single case are English goods admitted
duty free in foreign ports. Now this nas
the only part of the arrangement that could
possibly be to the benefit of the British pro.
ducer. No man in his senses ever expect¬
ed that the British manufacturer and opera¬
tive would be enriched by admitting into
his market foreign apd cheaper manufac¬
tures. This could not in any possible war
benefit him; but many looked forward with
the, most brilliant anticipations to the result
of opening all jthe ports of the world to our
manufactures. 1
" In so recklessly throwing open our ports
to foreign manufactures without any reci¬
procity from other nations, we have what is
vulgarly called taken hold of the dirty end
of the stick; we paidj as it were, our money
in anticipation of the delivery of the goods,
and the goods have never been delivered-
the transaction has resulted in an immense
entry on the debit, without any correspond¬
ing entry on the credit side of the account"
The whole - case is summed up in these
few lines:
" Is it not absurd, and stupid, and irriln^
ing to the working classes to admit
free all they produce, to tax all they cobi
sume; to admit duty free, clocks, watches,
silk, paper, gloves, glass, ribbons, hats,
boots, shoes, millinery, the finer kind of
cotton goods, and linen, and scores of other
industries, and to continue a heavy tax on
cocoa, coffee, sugar, tea and tobacco.'
" The operative class are the largest con¬
sumers of cocoa, tea, coffee, sugar and to¬
bacco; and they are the actual producersof
all the articles of foreign manufacture that
are admitted duty free into our markets.
" The present state of affairs hits thoin
doubly hard-; they suffer both ways: the
value of their wages is diminished by the
amount of the customs duty charged on
the necessary articles of food they consnni^
and the amount of their wages is reducw
by the free admission of foreign articletof
manufacture to compete with those they
produce."
And again:
" Those unacquainted with manufacturing
industries can have no idea of the strengu
and number of the temptations that .already
exist to induce the English manufacturer to
remove his capital and.enterpriseto Prussia,
Austria, France or Belgium. Some have
already done so, and if,|the present condi¬
tion ot affairs continues, many more wi"®'
so; it will become a necessity of their ex¬
istence; they will then have twomarketsto
13
lanipulate—the English, where they are
dmitted duty free, and their own foreign
larket, where they are protected.
■ "At present emigration is confined to the
Operative class; but there is another emi-
ration that is threatened that will be far
■lore ruinous in its effects; vi^., an emigia-
on of capital and manufacturers; what
'm the British operative do if his employer
•id capital disappear together?"
" The following is a forcible illustration of
" 16 practical effects of. the attempt, as Dis-
...eli expresses it, to " fight protective
Countries with free trade ":
^ "The position of the foreign manufacturer
■^ith his own market closely protected, and
-e English market entirely free, gives him
1 opportunity of carrying out this prin-
^-ple to the danger and disadvantage of the
-"-•itish manufacturer that he takes good
-- re to push to the utmost. Suppose
- dtish and foreign manufacturers both pro-
' 'ice an article that must be sold for an
- erage price of 2d per pound or 2d per
'■ rd to yield fair profit; the English market
ing open to all, the foreigner has his own
~-.d the British market to work in; whilst
e British manufacturer, being prohibited
heavily taxed in all foreign markets, is
nfined to his own. The foreigner extends
_ _) production to the utmost, and, being
stected at home, he easily arranges with
" t brother manufacturers to maintain a
ice that will give him 2i^d a foot or pound
his own market; but" 2d is a paying
V erage, and therefore if he can manage to
1 half his make for cj^d at home, he can
s-'ord to sell the other half at ij^a in Bng-
C-id, and still maintain an average of 2d
.■J"er his whole make. Now the English
usf inufacturer being excluded from the for-
1 '"pi market where the price is maintained"
■3"' 2i^d, and having only his own market
vjr'en to him, is obliged to sell the whole of
f. • produce at tj^d, the cost at which arti-
i3 lal legislation enables the foreigner to dis-
r ie of a portion of his make in this
-^.rintry.
yS' ' Now this applies to almost everv article
.s'' foreign manufacture that is sold in tliis
i3C intry; there is scarcely one that is not
"y frequently sold at a lower price in Eng-
C# d than in the country where it is manu-
tured; when their home demand is good
y naturally sell more in their own dear
,J"ket than in our cheap one, and we sell
1 of their goods; but the moment their
' n djir. mil slackens, their surplus goods
turned into our market, to be sold at
:i~ y price they will fetch."
jiC that our American markets
^ re always been treated in the same man-
They have been the Botany Bay to
'ch Europe sent its " sixth quality" or
" American " rails, its shoddy woolens, and
all its rejected and unsalable goods, to¬
gether with its surplus production, and in
this manner, during free trade periods, sold
at a loss in this country, whenever it was
necessary to do so to break down American
competition. Lord Brougham, in Partia-
ment in i8i6, commended this policy of the
British manufacturers toward the Ameri¬
cans as "wise," and we are glad that the
same chalice has been presented to the lips
of British producers. We have space but
for one more citation, which should be care¬
fully studied by all who think we would, as
a nation, increase in wealth more rapidly by
importing than by producing any article
which we have all the natural resources for
making in greater abundance than any other
people; as,for instance, steel and Bessemer
rails. Sir Edward Sullivan says:
" In the debate in the French Chambers,
January i8, 1870, Monsieur Johnstone said:
'Our exports to England are foTir times.as
large as our importations from that country:
we have exported goods to the value of 400
millions of francs more than we have im¬
ported.' And still in the face of state¬
ments and facts such as these, we find free
trade orators and free trade penny-a-liners
calling on the producing class to be thank¬
ful for the blessings they derive firom free
trade. According to this statement of the
exchange of the manufactured products
of the two countries, in 1865 the French
exported to us seven times the value of
manufactured goods we exported to them;
to do this thev must have expended seven
times as much in wages, and found occupa¬
tion for seven times as many hands.
" If it is the case that the proportion of
wages expended on manufactured articles
is 50 per cent, of the cost, this twenty-one
millions sterling of manufactured goods im¬
ported from France represents ten and one-
half millions of wages that have been paid
to French workpeople in producing them:
to the extent that, these twenty-one millions
worth of French manufactured goods have
replaced British manufactured goods of a
similar description, to that extent have our
operative class lost wages that would, if a
protective duty had existed, have come to
them. It is easy to see how unequally this
affects the two clas-e-, consumers and pro¬
ducers; the average Uilieieuce in cost be¬
tween English manufactured goods and
similar kinds of foreign goods that compete
with them in the English market is from •;
to I2l^ per cent., say 7 per cent.; the pro¬
portion of wages spent on them is in both
cases much the same, say 50 per cent, or
one-half. Suppose manufactured goods
from France, Germany, or Belgium, to tlie
value of twenty millions, replace similar
goods of English manufacture of equal
value to our home trade, our manufacturers
14
lose their manufacturing profit on twenty
millions, which may fairly be put at lo per
cent, or two millions; our operative class
lose their wages, which would have
amounted to 50 per cent, or ten millions;
whereas the consumers would save, say,
7 per cent, on twenty millions, or about
one and a half millions sterling! so that
on the admission of 'every twenty mill¬
ions' worth of manufactured goods, there is
a loss to the manufacturing and operative
community of twelve millions, as against a
saving to the consumer of one and a half
millions! But if home articles of manufac¬
ture had been consumed instead of foreign,
all of the twelve millions would have re¬
mained in the country, fructifying, creating
industries, spreading enterprise and energy,
etc., taking its share of the burthens and
taxes of the country, and, moreover, vast
amounts of raw material of home produc- 'j
tion, coal and iron, would have been em¬
ployed, ^ving erhployment to thousands of
workmen, and stimulating the endless
number of trades and occupations that are
indirectly protected by active manufactur¬
ing operations. The loss to the community
of allowing our capital, to be diverted from
home to foreign industries is complete and,
if carried far enough, would become fatal to
the actual existence of the whole country;
but, indeed, as a rule, the consumer does not
really benefit to the extent of 7 per cent, on
the value of foreign manufactures, or any¬
thing like it; one or two per cent, or less will
always divert orders in any article of con¬
sumption."
We have given much space to these cita¬
tions, because we feel convinced that noth¬
ing we could say of Sir Edward Sullivan's
work would commend it so intelligently to
our readers as these extracts; and, secondly, _
because it is all-important th.it Americans
should h.ive clearly mirrored before them
their own future, should they fall into the
snare from which England is tr^■ing to get
out. With all her m.inufacturing ascend¬
ancy, she was wholly unequal to the task of
levying all her taxes on her own workers,
and allowing the products of foieign workers
to come in untaxed and undersell them.
Says Sir Edward, in alluding to the sophism
that "the theory of free trade is right even
though the practice is fatal":
"There is nothing like dying bv a fine
sword; if we are to perish, let us perish in a
noble cause, in laying down our manufac¬
turing life for our neighbors! Such conduct
may be sublime, but it is wonderfully stupid,
c'csf beau mais c'est bete."
England thought her manufacturers were
the Gibralt.ar of the world. But she is
learning the truth of N.apoleon's aphorism,
"Though an empire were made of adamant,
free trade would grind it to dust."
FREE TRADE FALSEHOODS ABOUT
TAXATION,
We find in The Free-Trader (or]»\\
following pithy mass of concentrated decep.
tion and falsehood, extracted from a speeck
of Hon. S. S. Marshall, of Illinois, 'delivered
March 29th, 1870. Read it item by item,
and then compare it with the facts as t»
each item:
" The farmer starting to his work has a shoe pi '
on his horse with natts taxed 67 jrer cent., dma
bv a hammer taxed 54 per cent.; cuts a stick wift,
knife taxed 50 per cent.; hitches his horse loi fla
taxed 50 per cent, with chains taxed 67 per cent. Hi
returns to his home at night and lavs his whtb
limbs on a sheet taxed 58 per cent., and covershiinsd i"
with a blanket that has p;ud 250 per cent. He rWi
the morning, puts on his humble yiarrrrr/shirt tlra
So per cent., his coat taxed 50 per cent., j/xKstaied: ^
per cent., and hat taxed 70 per cent; opens farj '
worship by a chapter from his Bible taxed 25 p ■:
' cent., and kneels to his God on a humble cnr/dtaia -
150 percent. He sits down to his humble meailioei '
plate taxed 40 per cent., with knife and fori^^
cent.; drinks his cup of coffee taxed 47 per cento :
tea 78 per cent., with sugar 70 per cent.: seawnsH ..
food wnth salt taxed 100 per cent., pepper xfae "
cent., or spice per cent. He looks around Bjui
his wife and children all ta.xed in the same way :taie c
a chew of tobacco taxed roopercent., orli^hteadji .
taxed 120 per cent., and then thanks his stars tbatfa "■
lives in the freest and best government under harm
If on the Fourth of July he wants to have thesBr
spangled banner on real hunting, he must partb .
American Bunting Company of Massachusetts lO "
per cent, for this ^orious privnlege. Nowonder.iii ~
th.at the Western farmer is struggling with porertj
and conscious of a wrong somewhere, althooti a .-
knows not whence the blow comes, that is cliaim
him to a life of endless toil, and reducing his wife a "i
children to beggary."
There is no such tax on any of thea -
ajicles as the speaker alleges. His nala -
sStement as made is, of course, false. Bit _.
the speaker thinks himself justified in say ..
ing that each of these articles, as used bj .
the farmer, is taxed as stated, because,ifil ..
were to be imported, it would have topi
th.at tax. In brief, Mr. Marshall falselyo .
ignorantly assumes that whenever a tariff i .
laid on any article, its selling price israisa
bv that amount, whether it is actually®
pbrted or not. Whv. if this were Lnie,llil
farmers would lose nothing. For therein
tariff ot^ from twenty to forty per cent m
the importation of farming animals, jraini
potatoes, butter, dairy products, and, i ;
short, of every thing they sell as uell >
everything thev buy. Now, if it be W ,
that a tariff on the importation of anartiJi ^
raises the price of all of that article p®
duced and sold in the country, then.a'® _
farmer sells fiftv times as much v^ue i
crops as he bnvs in the articles designate
by Mr. Marshall, he must make fifty®" ,
as much, as lie loses out of the tariff.
And if tlie price of articles on wb''''
tariff is laid is not nece.ss.nrily raised by'• ,
amount of the tarifl". then Mr. Marsbin ..
assumption, that the farmer is taxed m t" ;
15
.mount he states, becomes a naked false- i
ood. I
. Now let us see what the facts are.
lorse nails, knives, forks, plows and chains
■ re articles which American manufacturers
re actually exporting. We sell them in
ompetition with England in the markets of
-le world. We can only do so by being
ble to undersell England in countries
•here our goods and hers compete on equal
-irms. Hence these articles are in the
t ime category as wheat, butter, potatoes,
; ops, and grain. A tariff of one thousand
" er cent. would"be no tax whatever on
- lem, so far as they are made in this
juntry, and would h6t raise their price.
1 The British Parliament's select'committee
~ 1 scientific instruction reported to the
louse of Commons, in July, 1858, that our
" • merican manufactures had largely super-
- ;ded theirs in the corhmon markets of the
■orld, including the English colonies, in
' Izes, axes, broad-axes, cut nails, gimlets,
Jts and bolts, plows, shoemakers' tools,
- igers, horse nails, penknives, scissors,
ble-ware and many other articles of hard-
are, cutlery and machinery. Of course, if
, .e can export these and sell them in Eng-
nd, or her colonies, cheaper than she can,
-~e sell them at home cheaper than we can
1 iport them, and consequently by two
,.-:ean freights, than shd'could sell them
^';re were there no tariff.
Of the articles of hardware mentioned by
"Tr. Marshall, none, except the knife,'
ould, by any chance, be imported, and if
■; mericans will insist upon buying a Shef-
-ild or imported knife, after our American
lives have superseded the English in Eng-
ih markets, and are sold a third cheaper
.., ere, he deserves to be taxed for his blind
id senseless preference for foreign over
merican goods of equal merit.
. Sheets, blankets, flannels, shoes, hats and
. ain carpets, are also articles of which,
bstantially, r^ne are imported, because
ir American manufactures have long since
perseded the foreign. They are ail as
w or lower in gold now than they were
iring the ten years from 1850 to i860, not-
_ thstanding the higher rates of wages paid
r producing them as fully appears by the
- llowiiig list of selling prices of cloths in
' ■ lid in i860, and in currency in 1869, fur-
shed by A. T. Stewart to the revenue
" ' partment, and published in The Free
- rader for January;
det clotlis, Govern-
ment standard
irris casbiinr's,!-! oz$i 371^
't. w;irp cloths, 14 oz I 00
1-wool cloths, 14 oz
-iddlesex sarldn^s,.
iddlcsex doeskins,.
ddlescx shawls
iddlesex beavers.. ,
-iddlescx op'fa Hands
T866.
t86g.
1860,
IncrCcy. In.gold.-
Broadbrook cassim'rs
1 63Vi@
» 75
I 75
1 46
Broadbrook beavers..
2 75
3 00
2 50
Spring cassimeres, 8
to o oz
Gleoham repcllants..
I 1314®
1 10 ^
I 25
» 15
I 31
1 20
1 14
I 00
Glenham sackings...
I OS
I 15
98
Swift River fancies, ii
to 13 oz
90
' 05
92
Rojalston cassimeres
average
I 071/,
I 25
I DO
Fitchburg cassimeres
I 07^
I 2S
I CO
i8d6. 1869. 1869.
IncrCcy. In gold.
$2 71
I
1 40
2 29
1 00
5^
3 54
42
$4 75
$3 45
H ■ 50
I 87
@ I 25
I 75
''50
4 75
1 10
I 45
I OS
I >5
7 00
7 CO
3 75
4 4S
50
The tariff has no more effect on their
prices than a tariff of .$io,OQO per ton on
the importation of sand or ice or water
would have on their price.
With regard to the tax of 47 per cent, on
coffee, 78 per cent, on tea and 70 per cent,
on sugar, Mr. Marshall was one of those
who voted last winter against reducing either
of these taxes when the Protectionists pro¬
posed to put them on the free list or greatly
reduce them. They are not protective
duties and Protectionists generally oppose
them. The Free Traders, on the contrary,
would have us repeal the protective portions
of the tariff, which now raise $120,000,000
of our tariff revenue, and saddle this whole
tariff on teas, coffees, sugar and spices,
which no'W yield $5o,ooo,(fco of revenue, so
as to collect the entire needed revenue of
the government from those non-protective
portions of the tariff. If this were done,
then "free trade" would accomplish its per¬
fect work by raising the tariff on teas, cof¬
fees, spices and sugar to three or four hun¬
dred per cent. And even then, without re¬
taining some of the protective portions of
the tariff, our revenue must sink to the
point where we would be compelled to re¬
pudiate.
We leave the tariff on salt, pepper, spice
and bunting to be discussed by pismires. It
is sufficient for us to know that our protec¬
tive tariff gives us four and a half times as
much revenue as the free trade tariff of
i860, that large portions of it are borne by
foreigners, that its effect upon the industries
of the.country has been good.
What the Western farmers suffer from is
the want of a more diversified industry and
a larger home market. There are 1,200,000
of them competing with each other in rais¬
ing the same crops. At least 400,000 of
them ought to be spinning cotton and mak¬
ing iron. One million tuo hundred thou¬
sand fanners competing with each other in
raising the .same crops have the same effect
to reduce each other's profits to the starving
point as would 10,000 clothing merchants
selling the same kind of goods in the same
street. It is the competition between farm¬
ers that is their oppression. This and the
transportation tax, which charges five bush¬
els of corn for carrying one to market.
Compared with this, what is the tax on cin¬
namon, which Mr. Marshall is'so troubled
about? '
The free trade papers are fond of quoting
Mr. Wells' statement, that we could better
afford to destroy the steel rail manufacture
in this country than to aid it by protective
tariffs. This is only a frank statement of
the ' inherent vindictiveness of the Free
Traders toward one branch of industry.
But as the same arguments exactly, which
apply to-steel rails apply as well to iron rails,'
and to cotton and woolen manufactures, and
to all other articles in whose industries the
two countries. Great Britain and the United
States, compete, it follows, "as the night
the day," that in a Eyee "Trader's mind it
would be better to. destroy them all than to
protect them by tariffs. Moreover, their
complete destruction involves the equally
complete destruction of Aipericap agricul¬
ture, whose prosperity depend^ upon its
ability to get higher prices in America fhan
it can get abroad for its crops. Jt is idle to
suppose American farmers can be driven to
compete with Russian serfs in raising wheat
for European markets, unless they are
willing to accept as small a compensation as
the serfs require for their support. So, in
the long run, the logic of free trade is, that
it is better to break down all American in¬
dustries, agricultural, mining, mechanical,
manufacturing and professional, than to
sustain them by protection.
The tariff of England yields ^21,602,414
sterling, or f 108,000,000. Of this .sum, over
$54,000,000, or more than one-half, is raised
from the tariff on tobacco and spirits, viz.:
$32,712,300 on tpbacco and snuff, and $21,-
667,565 on spirits. Both these taxes discrim¬
inate heavily against American producers
16
of tobacco and grain, the latter being the
raw material of spirits. Were the revenue
which England now raises on spirits and
tobacco rai.sed on" French and Prussian
manufactures instead, much American com,
rye and potatoes that are now excluded from
English markets in their raw form by their
bulk, and in their manufactured form by
' the duty, would enter them at a profit to the
American farmer. Tobacco is almost ex¬
clusively an American product, and spirits
are the natural export and first manufacture
of an agricultural country. In the main,
therefore, the $54,000,000 of revenue raised
by England from these two staples is a dis¬
criminating tax on American productions.
Our tobacco producers take a price for their
tobacco which is largely diminished by the
duty, and our grain raisers and distillers are
shut out of the English market, so far as
the trade in the grain for distilling is con¬
cerned. This is the way England gives us
free trade on our e.xports. The remainder
of the English tariff is levied on tea, coffee,
cocoa, sugar, molasses and chicory, all
tropical or oriental products. The dis¬
crimination of the English tariff is mainly
against American agricultural products.
For these English taxes increase the price in
England of the American articles on which
they rest by the amount of the tax, and,
as Dr. Wayland in his Political Ecomwt,
page 137, says: "As the price of the article
is increased, the demand for the article is
diminished, there will, therefore, be less of
the article produced, because less of it is
wanted. By all this diminution is the de¬
mand for labor diminished, the price of
labor must tlierefore fall, and the stimulus
to labor, by so much, diminished."
Alt of the > foregoing appeared as Editorial Articles in
The Bureau-
A MONTHLY MAGAZINE,
DEVOTED TO THE
OF THE UNITED STATES.
Three Dollars per Annum^ ------ Single copie^i 2$
Office, ioi and 103 Wabash Avenue, Chicago, III.
The Bureau:
{PAMPHLETS FOR THE PEOPLE,)
DIVOTED TO THE
(^OMMERCE, jyjANUFACTURES, AND G ENERAL JNDUSTRIES
OF THE UNITED STATES.
PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY
The Bureau Printing Company,
loi AND 103 Wabash Ave.,
Incorporated under tke General Lews of the State of Illiftois,
No. 6.
CONTENTS:
Miscellaneous a, 7, 14, 15, 16
Western Opinion on Protection 3
Illinois on the Tariff 3
Who Pays the Tariff on Coal ? 5
The Butter^ Potato, and Grain Monopolists.... 6
BastiaUs ''Sophisms of Protection" ?
Cotton Manufactures in the South 11
The "Importing and Smuggling" School of
Economists u
Our Magnificent Exports 13
Extract from the Republican National Platform adopted at the Wigvjam^ Chicago,\
in i860: '
"While providing revenue for the support of the General Government by duties on, imports, sound
policy requires such an adjustment of these imposts as to encourage the development of ,the industrial]
interests of the whole country; and we commend that policy of national exchanges which leaves to the*
workingmen, liberal wages; to agriculture, remunerating prices; to mechanics and manilfacturers,)
an adequate reward for their skill, labor, and enterprise; and to the nation, commercial prosperity and|
independence."
Extract from the Democratic National Platform adopted in Tammany Hall, New Tork,^
in ^tly, 1868:
"The Democratic Party, in National Convention assembled, reposing its trust in the intelligence,
patnotisni, and discriminating justice of the people, * ♦ ♦ do, with the return of Peace, demand ♦ » *
such a tariff for revenue upon foreign imports, and equal taxation under the internal revenue laws, as will
afford incidental protection to domestic manufactures, and will, without impairing the revenue, irqpose the'
least burden upon and best promote and encourage the great industrial interests of the country."
As an evidence of the rapid progress
made by our domestic industry under the
existing protective tariff policy we may men¬
tion that a recent work, the Nevi England
Railway and Statistical Gazetteer, by Webb
Brothers, Providence, R. I., gives a list in
detail of four thousand one hundred facto¬
ries in New England alone, as existing in
1869, of which the average production is
one hundred and fifty thousand dollars a
year, and one-ltalf of which date since 1863—
one-fourth dating since i8fi6. Three hun¬
dred of these are on fine woolen cloths, cassi-
meres and like goods, all of" which were im¬
ported fifteen years ago, and one-half of
which were imported up to 1864. The pro¬
duct of these three hundred factories aggre¬
gates forty-five millions of dollars; and of
the whole four thousand one hundred facto¬
ries embraced in the list, about six hundred
and fifteen millions of dollars, and this is
only for New England!
o
In Iowa, two life-long Protectionists have
recently been elected to the United States
Senate, and Minnesota stands on a protec¬
tive tariff platform. The three great States
west of the Mississippi are for protection.
So also are the three great States of Illinois,
Indiana, and Wisconsin. The newspapers
in the great cities make it appear otherwise
to distant people, but it is nevertheless true.
It must from the very nature of things, be
true. The Western people are just begin¬
ning to build up their industry. They want
fair play and no foreign competition. They
do not use foreign goods, as the people of
the East do, but wear bome-made clothing,
and are not only satisfied with it but are
proud of it. We intend as soon as possible,
to make all we want in every department
of life.
Woolen factories are going up all over
this country, and soon we shall go into cot¬
ton manufactures. Iron works are multi¬
plying on every side, and now we are going
into the manufacture of iron and steel
rails, and shall soon be able to supply all
the Western railroads. Protection to home
industry is, therefore, to be hereafter the
great economical doctrine of the West.
Even to-day, the Western people are more
in favor of a- protective tariff than the East-
em. There is good reason for it; our indus¬
try is still in its infancy; that of the East¬
ern people well established. They can
endure foreign competition; we cannot, nor
will our people permit it, as the next elec¬
tions of Congressmen will show. The next
Congress will be at least as protective as
the last, and the American people will
beconle a great, rich and powerful nation.
Vice-President Colfax, in a recent
speech at South Bend, Ind., remarked: "Is
there anything unjust to any one, when
adjusting the duties by which our impera¬
tively needed revenue is raised, in so dis¬
criminating, within a revenue limit, as 'to
secure home producers fair competition with
foreign capital and labor,' especially In
regard to the great iron, cotton, and woolen
manufacturing interests of the country!
These manufactures are quite indispensa¬
ble to real national independence. With¬
out them, we should be almost as depen¬
dent, if foreign war burst upon us, as if we
had to import cannon, rifles and gunpowder
from abroad. Our home production of pig
iron rose from the average of 800,000 tons
during Buchanan's term to the average of
1,600,(xx) tons per year during the past four
years, and the last year, to nearly 2,(x)o,ooo.
Suppose we had imported these 2,(xx),ooo
tons of pig iron from abroad. Three-fourths
of all the 50,000,000 we paid for it would
have been for foreign labor, foreign bread-
stuffs, foreign meat, vegetables, clothing,
etc., used by the laborer while producing it,
and we should have paid for it in gold.
Would this have been better than paying it
in labor wages here, and for the breadstutls,
meat, vegetables, etc., purchased of our
farmers, and consumed by our laborers
here ?"
o
Two interests demand equally to be
consulted in legislating relative to the com¬
petition between American producers and
those of Europe; viz., the interests of con¬
sumers and the interests of producers.
Con.sumers can only get any article cheap
by promoting a large production thereof at
such points as will enable it to reach the
consumer with the least cost of transpor¬
tation. Free trade is under all circumstan¬
ces the policv of the non-producers. Eng¬
land, being governed by the non-producers,
adopts free trade in their interests. But let
her whole people vote, and she will adopt
protection against importations, and if she
enacts free trade anywhere, it will be free
trade in land. At present, with an igno¬
rance of all sound statesmanship that could
only result from allowing one-fifth of the
people to do all the noting, she locks up the
trade in land so as to consecrate two-thirds
of it to hunting, fishing, and sterility—the
uses of barbarism; and having thus short¬
ened by one-half, her supply of food, she
lets in all foreign wares untaxed, in order
still further to cripple the powers of her
own people to pro(iuce them. This is the
temporary interest of those who have
fixed incomes, and want to make thern
go as far in the purchase of commc^i-
ties as possible. This is the condition
of England's ruling class. But to those
whose incomes depend on productive
industry it is suicidal and disastrous,
as the steady decline in the industry and
exportation of the population of the United
Kingdom testify.
3
WESTERN OPINION ON PROTEC¬
TION.
Recent manifestations of public opinion
in the Western States, and among the
■workingmen's Unions throughout the coun¬
try—where, if anywhere, it is supposed that
free trade might have made progress—show
a manifest strengthening of the hold which
the American industrial polidy has on the
American people. Vice-President Colfax
ably vindicates the action of the Republi¬
can party in Congress, on the tariff, as the
permanent policy of the party, and insep¬
arable from its devotion to libei tv. For the
real freedom of the whole people grows
with every increase in the diversity of our
industry and every rise in the intrinsic value
of labor. Cheap labor means the enslave¬
ment of the masses. Dear labor is identi¬
cal with the freedom of the working class.
The true way to obtain cheap labor is so to
stimulate a diversified industry as to cause
a large use of machinery in labor—not to
grind down the working classes in their
earnings.
The recent Republican conventions in
Ohio, Iowa and Michigan, have adopted
resolutions so nearly alike that their utter¬
ance may be accepted as that of the Re¬
publican party of the whole country.
Ohio says;
"Tliat a tariff of revenue is indispensable, iind
should be so adjusted as to be the least prejudicial
to the industrial and producinpf interests of any
class or section, while securing; the home producer
a fair competition against the loreign producer.
Iowa says:
"That a tariff for r venue is indispensable, and
should be so adjusted as not to become prtjudici 1
to the industrial interests of any cUuss or section of
the country, vehiie securing to our home producers
fair competition with foreign c..pital and labor.''
Michigan says;
" Now, since the war has made larger revenues
necessary, duties should be so ndju.stcd as to be
least prejudicial to the industrial and producing
interests of ever}' class and section, securing to the
horne producer a fair copipetition against foreign
capital and labor."
The National Labor Congress, a.ssembled
at Cincinnati in August, and representing
the views of the working classes, as di.^-
tingiiished from the capitalist class, adopted
the strongest possible resolutions in favor of
protection. We have not these resolutions
at hand, but they agree in tfmor with those
of the National Labor Congress which
met at Philadelphia the previous year,
which were as follows:
Resolved, That we demand such adjust¬
ment of the duties on all commodities pro- ■
duced by the labor of foreign countries as
will adequately protect American labor, and
restrain the excessive importation of manu¬
factures from abroad, while we have the
raw material, the skill, and the ability to
produce the same commodities in our own
country.
Meanwhile, Wi.sconsin is stanch in the
faith, Missouri is not retrograding, and the
Protectionists of Minnesota, though they
need organization and work, are numerous
enough to control the State as often as the
issue of protection is fairly raised.
o
ILLINOIS ON THE TARIFF.
The revenue refoi-mersof Illinois consists
of Mr. Horace White,, of the Chicago Tri¬
bune, and those who are afraid of him.
After four years of unlimited contiol of the
four leading Republican dailies of the
Northwest, the Cincinnati Comnierrial, Cin¬
cinnati (Jazette, St. Louis Demo rat, and
Chicago working in unison with the
entire Democratic press of the country, it
has been loudly proclaimed that in the
nominating conventions of this campaign,
the great West would speak in thunder
tones for free trade. Has it done so.' It is
claimed that the Stafe convention of Illinois
has passed a free trade resolution. If they
designed it as .such, they have indeed shown
that on occasion, they can " roar you gently
as a sucking dove." Here is the resolu¬
tion :
Resolved, That, as taxation is a pecuniary-
burden imposed by public authority on the
property of the people for the maintenance
of .government, the payment of its debts
and the promcrtion of the general welfare
(a), Congress ought not to tax the substance
or the earnings of the citizen for any other
purpose than those above indicated (i), and
that it is wrongful and oppressive to enact
revenue law.s for the special advantage of
one branch of business at the expense of
another (r), and we hold that the best sys¬
tem of protection to industry is that which
imposes the lightest burdens and the fewest
restrictions on the property and business of
the people (d).
Amen, say we as Protectionists, to nearly
the wliole of the above resolution, when
fairly and literqlly interpreted, whatever its
authors maji' have meant by it. Its proposi¬
tions are four in number; viz., '
(«). Taxation is a pecuniary burden im¬
posed by public authority on the property
of the people, for the maintenance of gov¬
ernment, the payment of its debts, and the
fromutiuu of the general velfare.
The w ords, " promotion of the general
welfare," include the building of forts for
the protection of our coasts from attack, of
a navy and lighthouses for protecting our
commerce, of harbors for protecting our
shipping, of canals and railroads for giving
our farmers cheap access to markets, and
so protecting them from being undersold
by competing farmers, of prisons for pro¬
tection from crime, of schools for protection
from ignorance, of asylums for protection
of the helpless, of hospitals and quarantines
4
for protection from disease, and (<«■ thd
maintenance of armies and navies for pro¬
tection from foreign force, and of ambas¬
sadors for protection from foreign diplomatic
overreaching and state-craft. In sliort, all
ta.\es, national and state, are expended in
securing protection of some kind for some
class of the people, since protection in some
form is the sole object of all government.
Our state governments protect us from the
irregularities and crimes of our own people,
leaving to our national revenue no other
function or use than to protect the Amei-i-
can people, as a whole, against foreign
aggression. This is meant by taxing the
people, "for promoting the general welfare."
But all these means of promoting the gen¬
eral welfare, are open to cavil as being
designed to confer a local and individual
benefit. A light house on Cape Cod, benefits
Boston, but not San Francisco. A canal at
Sault Ste. Marie, benefits the people living
on Lake Superior, but not the Georgians.
A fort at Charleston does not directly pro¬
tect Chicago, though Chicago is taxed to
pay for it.
Now the protection to all other interests,
after life and libert v, is of less consequence
than the protection to our industries,
wherever foreign aggression may overcome
them. If a squad of hostile soldiers should
take possession of a single Florida reef, the
nation would be called to arms to expel the
aggres.sor, and yet a foieign force might
overrun the whole of Florida and hold it
for a century, without inflicting as much
injury or real disgrace upon our American
people as would be done them if either of
our leading branches of manufacture were
broken down, and a few hundred thousand
working men were turned out of employ¬
ment.
All taxation is for protection, and no
object is more immediately in the line of
the promotion of the general welfare than
the protection of industiy wherever it is
exposed. Kentucky and Arkansas may
say; You build forts on the Atlantic coast,
but where are ours.?" So they mav de¬
mand : " Where are the tariffs that protect
us.'"' How apparent is it that if the outer
defence.s are past, interior forts would be of
no avail. Kentucky is really defended on
the Atlantic coast. So our wheat-raisers
are protected in the protection of iron, wool
and cloth-making, for four-fifths of the
value of iron, wool and cloth is the food
that enters into them. Protection cannot be
limited in its eftect, but diffuses itself" for
the general welfare."
(b). Congress ought to tax the sub¬
stance or earnings of the people for anv
other purpose than those above indicated.
Of course not. hy did not -the Spring¬
field revenue reformers dare to charge that
Congress had done so, and to specif)- in
what particulars? What tax or tariff has
been imposed that has not in fact operated
for the general welfare ?
(<•);, It is wrongful and oppressive to
enact revenue laws for the special advan¬
tage of one branch of business at the expense
of another. This means that it is wrong to
enact revenue laws for the advantage of
importers and foreign manufacturers at the
expense of American manufacturers and
workingmen, as a free trade tariff would do.
It equally implies that it is wrong to enact
laws for the advantage of the consumers of
a given product at the expense of its pro¬
ducers, but that the interests of both should
equally be consulted.
(d). " And we hold that the best system
of protection to industry," etc. Here we
read the acknowledgment of the revenue
reformers that protection to industry, after
all the sneering and calumny which have
been directed at it, is a legitimate object of
the efforts of a political party, and that
they themselves claim to offer the " pure
and unadulterated article—none genuine
unless stamped in the bottle and counter¬
signed by the Free Trade League." After
all, then, it is a question of means, and not
of ends. The Free Traders desire the end,
bht have perhaps a different way of arriv¬
ing at it. They say it is—
(e). That which imposes the lightest
burdens and the fewest restrictions on the
property and business of the people.
And yet, when it was proposed in Con¬
gress by the Protectionists to give every
American a free breakfast table—to relieve
the property and business of the people of
the taxes on tea, coffee, foreign spices, and
other articles of exclusively foreign produc¬
tion—the Free Traders voted solid, to a
man, for high tariffs on these articles.
The only point in the resolution with
which we differ is its statement that taxa¬
tion is in all cases a pecuniary "burden
imposed on the property of the people."
i. e., of the people of our own country. We
have frequetly shown, in previous numbers
of The BuRE.kO, that tariffs very often are
taxes not on the substance and earnings ot
the nation imposing them, but are paid
and borne by the people of other nations
trading with them.
We collect $2,000,000 of annual revenue
from the Canadians, on coal and lumber,
our people paving no share of the tariff on
those articles. We also, collect some por¬
tion of our tariff on iron, steel, cutlery,
cloths and all articles in which our own
industries compete with foreign, from the
foreign producers of the imported articte.
This proportion is largest in those cases in
which our own production is nearly ade¬
quate to our consumption. It dow not
at all strengthen our conviction, that a
large portion of our tariff revenues are
5
collected from foreigners, that John Stuart
Mill, happens to agree with us. For by
the mode in which he treats this question,
we perceive that he has given it only a
very -superficial study. He has got far
enough, however, to perceive that tariffs
on articles in which the industries of two
nations compete, are largely borne by for¬
eigners and not wholly by our oy'ij people.
In that light we commend his views to the
careful consideration of the Springfield
revenue reformers.
^^
WHO PAYS THE TARIFF ON COAL.?
The case of coal illustrates the complete
fallacy of assuming that a removal of the
tariff on an imported article would reduce
its price by the amount of the tariff
removed. The last Report of the Pictou
Mining Company of Nova Scotia, says:
" At any port in tbie United States north of
Cape Hatteras, which admits vessels of
seven feet draft, this coal can now be deliv¬
ered (nptwifhstanding the temporary exorbi¬
tant duty of gold per ton) at a price
cheaper for the consumer than the best hard
wood at $5 a cord." The same report ex¬
plains how this profit arises, by stating that
" the co.st of mining and transporting coal to
the vessel, and all chai-ges and expenses ac¬
cruing in and about the same, cannot be
computed at more than eighty cents per
2,2.10 pounds; the royalty payable to the
Province is ten cents—making the total
cost to the company ninety cents per ton,
but a margin of ten cents may be allowed,
bringing the cost up to one dollar per ton,"
or with gold at 30 per cent premium $1.30
per ton.
The same report (page 15) says: " Pictou
coal of like character, for steam and gas,
as ours, has been sold the past year at the
vessel's side, in Pictou Upper Harbor, for
two dollars and twenty-five cents per ton,
leaving far foojit one dollar sixty-jive cents fer
ton. United Slates currency. We will
count for this e.stimate only upon sales at
two dollars per ton, thus leaving us one
dollar profit at least upon each ton mined
and delivered. The production of the
comparatively insignificant quantity of
43,000 tons only, which would be but the
work of three or four months, will pay at
one dollar per ton, six per cent, in gold upon
the ten dollars per share par value of the
whole stock of $750,000," which really rep¬
resented a cash outlay of only $85,000, so
that the actual profit paid upon the capital
invested is'about fifty per cent, per annum.
While "the coal could be got out and
shipped at this rate, the following table
shows its average yearly selling price, in
currency, at Boston, compared with the
Cumberland coals of Pennsylvania; by
which it will be seen that the price of the
Pictou was regulated not by the cost of its
production, but by the prevailing price of
other coals in its selling market :
Pk'tou,
Per Ton,
Currency.
Cum-^r-
Gold
Gold
land, Per
Prices.
Profit.
Ton,in
Currency.
i36i, Free of Duty
1862,
.S63, "
$4 67
$4
$5 ort
5 60
4 48
3 48
& 57
7 40
4 94
3 94
8 04
1864,
10 40
9 00
5 20
4 ao
10 88
1865, "
6 8s
5 6S
10 32
1S66, Duty paid.
$1.25 per Ton
8 54
6 00
3 75
9 47
1867, " ....
8 10
s 07
2 82
7'07
1868, "
S 16
5 V-
2 85
7 79
]86q, " "
7 88
S 8^
2 80
7 42
The Nova Scotian supply being small m
quantity compared with the vast supply
and demand of the United States, the
owners of the Nova Scotian mines, looking
wholly to profit and not to the philanthropy
of forcing down thfeir own price to mere
cost of production, asked for their coal the
full price it Would have commanded had it
been mined in the United States. The
difference was their profit, viz: in i86r, in
gold, $3.67 per ton; in 1862 (average pre¬
mium 25), $3.48, gold; in 1863 (average
premium 50), $3.04, gold; in 1864 (average
premium 100), $4.20, gold; in 1865 (average
premium 40), $5.85, in gold; in 1866, after
paying duty of $1.25 per ton (average pre^
mium 40); $3.75, in gold; in 1867, $2.82, in-
in gold; in 1868, $2.85, in gold; and in
1869 (average premiutn on gold 33), a pi-ofit
of $2.86, in gold. Here it is clear that the
small Nova Scotia supply has its own price
fixed by the vast U. S. markets in tvhich
it is sold, just as a stray basket of peaches
from the BennudaS coming into the New
York market would find its price fixed by the
vast supplies which would meet it from
Delaware, New Jersey, and all the adjacent
States. The standing fallacy of free trade
is, that foreign supply fixes the price. It
does so only in the proportion that it
supplies the demand. On an article like
coal,or lumber, in which the foreign supply
is insignificant in quantity compared with
the domestic, it avails itself of the prices
which it finds current and prevailing in our
markets, and if they range much higher
than the cost of producing the foreign
article, the importer pockets the difference
in profits. There can be no doubt, there¬
fore, that the tariff on Nova Scotia coal has
been wholly paid out of the importer's
profits, and that it has not raised the cost of
coal to the American consumer by a frac¬
tion of one per cent. The whole revenue
derived from coal amounting to $400,000 a
year was collected from the coal producers
of Nova Scotia, and not from the coal
consumers of the United States.
But it may be said that though importers
of coal W'ould seize the benefit of our high
prices at first, their lower cost of production
6
would Goon enable them to supply our
markets altogether, and necessarily reduce
the price by competition. To this we
answer, that their tendency to reduce our
prices will depend wholly on their ability
to supplj our markets. If they are a mere
drop in the bucket of .supply, they will
contribute but a drop toward the regulation
of the price. The coal area of Nova Scotia
is 7;5,5o square miles, as against 639,266
square miles of coal area in the United
States. Its product is 600,000 tons, as
against a United States product of 2<S,ooo,-
000 tons, or about one forty-fifth of our
own. Hut of this product only a limited
portion can be drawn oft" for the supply of
the United States, the rest being needed
elsewhere.
Under the impression that our sea-board
could be supplied with cheap fuel from that
source, coal was admitted free of duty
under the Reciprocity Treaty, with this
result. During the six years preceeding
1854 (the date of the Treaty), we imported
from Nova Scotia an average of 115,570
tons per annum, while the succeeding six
years, in which that coal was admitted free
the average import was only 125,960 tons
per annum: and there was no perceptible
advantage to our home consumers in the
supply of coal, until the general start of
trade during the war, or 1S63, and our aver¬
age import for the closing five years of the
treaty rose to 292,308 tons; and during the
two years succeeding the expiration of the
treaty, and in which the duty of $1.25 per
ton was collected, the imports from Nova
Scotia have averaged 283,312 tons pr. annum.
These facts show conclusively that, how¬
ever free the importation of coal is made, the
amount imported cannot materially in¬
crease; that the maintenance of the tariff
on coal does not add a farthing to its selling
price in this country, and, consequently, that
while as consumers of coal we have no
interest whatever in removing the tariff on
that article, as tax-payers we collect by its
means half a million of dollars from' the
Province of Nova Scotia. Indeed, if we
should m.ake the tariff $2.00 per ton instead
of $1.25, we should effect a laige increase
in the revenue from this source, without
increasing the cost of coal. For at present
prices the Pictou mines bring an average
profit of $2.85 per ton, over and above the
duty, which an increase of the duty to $2.00
would reduce only to $2.io—still leaving
these mines at least forty per cent, of profit
on their capital invested. In other words,
their net profit, after paving a duty larger
than they now pay, would still be more
than the average selling price of American
bituminous coal at the pit's mouth. It is
plain, that instead of removing the dutv on
Nova Scotia coal, it should be increased' to a
point which would double or triple our pres¬
ent revenue from that source, and still leave
the Nova Scotia capitalists a fair interest,
say twenty per cent, on their capital. This
would not raise the price of their coal in
our markets by a dime. The same facts and
reasonings apply to the Canadian lumber
trade, to the pig iron trade, to the salt trade,
and indeed to every other in which the
amount of the importation is trifling as a
source of supply compared with that of the
domestic product.
o
THE BUTTER, POTATO, & GRAIN
MONOPOLISTS.
The Chicago Tribune says:
" But Congress stiil maintaii>s taxes, direct and
indirect, to the amount of not less than $3oo,oCO,-
000. Ot this enormous tax, less than one-half is
received by the g-overnment. The remainder is
distributed to private individuals and classes who
control legislation/'
This statement, so frequently reiterated
by tbe free traders, depends for its truth
on the theory that wherever we import any
part of our supply of an article, the price
of all we produce, as well as of all we im¬
port, is raised by the amount of the duty.
Now if this be true, the estimate of $400,-
000,000 of taxes paid to private parties is
entirely too small. Indeed, the amount of
taxes paid to private parties on this basis
would exceed the whole annual production
of all our industries.
For instance, we last year imported 6,685,-
093 lbs. of butter, under a tariff duty of 4
cents a lb., which pays the revenue $267,-
403.75. This, on the free trade theory, adds
four cents a pound to the price of all the
butter consumed in the United States,
because the home price is fixed by the for¬
eign. In i860 we produced 460,509,854
lbs. of butter; and supposing our production
to have increased by 60 per cent., which is
our average increase in other products, we
are now producing 736.256,897 lbs. Now,
although this is one hundred times as much
as we import, yet, as our production of coal
is forty times as much as we import, and of
lumber twenty-four times, and of pig-iron
twenty-four times, it will be seen that the
same principle applies to all; viz., that the
importation is insignificant as a means of
supply, compared with the domestic pro¬
duction. But, says the Chicago Tribune,
tlrat makes no difference. The greater the
amount of the domestic supplv, the more
certainly its producers have their price in¬
creased by the amount of the duty. As¬
suming this to be true, butter pays four
cents extra per lb. to the buttermakers on
account of the tariff, being a t.ax on the
consumers of butter, amounting to $29,454,-
275.S8 annually.
Again, we imported 190,000 bushels of
potatoes, which paid a duty of 25 cents per
bushel, or $46,458.81. Now, according to
the Tribune, the " potato monopolists" had
the price of their whole domestic product
enhanced by 25 cenis a bushel. Our do-
7
mestic product in i860 was 152,000,000
bushels, or in 1870 say 243,200,000 bushels,
the consumers of which must have paid for
them $60,800,000 more than they would
have been compelled to pay but for the
tariff. For there can be no deviation from
the rule that the foreign price, with duty
added, fixes the price of the home product.
Again, we imported grains, flour and
meal under an average duty of 15 cents per
bushel, upon which we collected a total
revenue of $954,616.46. Our domestic pro¬
duction of those articles amounted in 1870
to about 2,289,270,850 bushels, which, if
increased by the average rate of duty on
the amount imported, would have levied a
tax on the consumers in favor of the " grain
monopolists" of $343,290,627.50, or about
equal to our whole national taxation. On
these three articles, butter, potatoes and
grains, the consumers would be paidng the
producers a tax, over and above the cost of
production, amounting to $433,544,902.
So the Tribune is too modest by half. It
might with the same ease assume and state
that the people are taxed by all the grind¬
ing monopolies combined at least five thou¬
sand millions of dollars, leaving them abso¬
lutely not a crust nor a bone for their own
consumption.
Did it never gleam on the understanding
of the Chicago Tribune^ that there might
be some defect or error in a theory which,
when applied, results in such startling con¬
clusions.' It never tires of applying its soli¬
tary rule of statesmanship to pig iron, wool,
salt, coal and lumber. But it never remem¬
bers to apply it to grain, potatoes and butter.
Now, if it be false in regard to one, it
must as to the other. It does not do to say
that grain, potatoes and butter are articles
of exportation as well as of imporL So are
pig iron, wool, salt and lumber. Will the
Tribune accept the doctrine that our farm¬
ers are collecting $433,000,000 of " private
tax" on their grain, butter and potatoes,
over and above the sum paid the govern¬
ment on the' portion imported of these
articles.' And if not, will it back down
from the position that the American manu¬
facturers of pig iron, salt, lumber and coal
collect a tax on their whole product equal
to the amount of the duty per ton.' It
must do one or the other, to show faith in
its own principle!
On the contrary, if our law of prices is
the true one; viz., that the price of any
article depends on the ratio of the whole
supply to the whole demand, and that the
foreign price only contributes to regulate
the domestic price in the proportion that
the foreign supply bears to the domestic
supply, then at wh.at conclusion do we
arrive? Our importation of coal, being
adequate to supply only one-fortieth part of
our demand, contributes one part in forty
towards fixing the price. If there is a fall
or rise of 40 cents a ton in coal, one cent,
per ton of the fall or rise may be credited
to Nova Scotia. So as we produce twenty-
four times as much pig iron and lumber as
we can import, our importation of either
only affects by one twenty-fourth the actual
changes in price, and so on.
But if this be so, then the fraction oF
influence exercised by the foreign supply
over the domestic price is so insignificant
as to make it substantially true in the cases
of lumber, coal, pig iron, grains, butter,
potatoes, flour, and in a scarcely less degree,
of rice and salt, that our domestic supply
determines not only our own price but the
foreign price of those countries who sell
their products in ours; for butter-makers in
Canada, and coal miners in Nova Scotia will
not sell their butter and coal to Canadians
and Nova Scotians except at the price they
can get for it in the States. Now, in con¬
sidering the price they get for their article
in the States, they know first that they can
get the average price of the States, and
secondly, that out of this price they must
pay the duty. If they can afford to import
at the price here prevailing, and fay tlieduty
out of tuhat -would else be ilteir f rafts, they
import; if not, they stop importing. So
that in all these cases where the ratio of
the amount imported to the domestic pro¬
duction is small; viz., butter, pig iron,
grain, lumber, coal, potatoes, salt and wool,
it is the invariable rule that the foreigner
pays the tariff. So far from its being a
moribund burden upon American con¬
sumers, it does not, as a rule, raise their
prices by a hair. On the contrary, it col¬
lects from ten to twenty millions of our taxes
out of those foreign froducers whose indus¬
tries compete with ours, and to whom free
trade means freedom to profit by our high
prices without paying any share of the
taxes which go to make bur prices high.
This is not the only of the principal mode
in which protective tariffs collect our taxes
out of foreigners; but it covers about
$15,000,000 of taxes so paid. We sh^
advert hereafter to the other instances in
which we are now making competing for¬
eign industry pay tribute to our treasury.
Says Wendell Phillips:
" Puttinp; aside all theories, every lover of prog¬
ress must see, with profound regret, tlie introduc¬
tion here of any element which will lessen wages.
The mainspring of our progress is high wages—
wages at such a level that tlie workingman can
spare his wife to preside over a 'home,' can com¬
mand leisure, go to lectures, take a newspaper, and
lift himself from the deadening level of mere toih
That dollar left after all the hills are paid on Saturday
night means education, independence, self-respect,
manhood ; it increases the value of every acre near
hy. fills the town with dwellings, opens public
linraries, and crowds them ; dots the continent with
cities, and cobwebs it with railways. That one re¬
maining dollar insures progress, and guarantees
millions to its owner better than a score of statutes.
It is worth more than a thousand colleges, and
makes armies and police superfluous.
lO
cause; that, for instance, as labor is the
cause of production. Protectionists think
that mode of production the best which re¬
quires most labor. Neither we nor IJastiat
ever met a Protectionist who had an^ such
notion. In this chapter he italicizes the
assertion, that labor is never vjithout employ¬
ment, wliich is simply a bald falsehood,
which no man conversant with the history
of labor in Ireland, India, England or the
United States, in free-trade periods, could
utter. It is a bald, naked, irretrievable
falsehood, which sacrifices all claim of the
writer to candor or sense. There have
been periods in Ireland, alone, when two
millions of people offered to work sixteen
hours in the day for bread, and could not
get work there, nor could they get to where
work was to be had; and yet Bastiat dares
to say that labor is never without employ¬
ment! Had the labor of Babylon and Nin¬
eveh never b.een without employment,
would those cities have been given over to
be waste deserts.' Both labor and capital
may fail of employment for long periods,
and the world is a history of the migrations
of both to new fields of employment, and
of their adventures and sufferings by the
way.
In his third chapter Bastiat argues that
progress consists in the increase in the pro¬
portion of the result to the effort, and
charges Protectionists with aiming to bring
about that system of industry in which the
effort is greatest and the result least. Let
us see: Mr. Abram S. I lewett, our commis¬
sioner on Iron to the Paris Exposition,
whose testimony is the more certainly im¬
partial, as he is himself a free-Trader, re¬
ports facts showing that one day's work in
Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, or Missouri, will
make as much iron as two days' work in
England or Belgium, or about two and a
quarter in France. On Bastiat's basis, the
proportion of the effort to the result, the
men now engaged in making iron in Eng¬
land, Belgium and France should be in¬
duced to remove as fast as possible to the
United States, because here the result in
iron would be from two to two and a half
times as great for the effort in labor. The
protectionist policy encourages the transfer
of iron production from there here, and so
incre;ises the proportion of the result to the
effort put forth, in accordance with Bastiat's
desideratum. His error arises in supposing
that the money price of labor is a measure
of the effort put forth. It is only a measure
of the competition between laborers. Black¬
smiths put forth as much effort in one
country as another, and attain about the
same result, so far as the amount of work
done is concerned. But in the U. S. thev
receive $13.10 per week, in gold; in Great
Britain, $6.33; in Prussia, from $2.52 to
$4.32; in Saxony, from $2.52 to $3.60, and
in Switzerland, $5.40; according to an offi-I
cial report of our Bureau of Statistics at
Washington. Iron puddlers receive $16.54
per week in the United States; $8.75 lu Great
Britain; $3.60 to $4.32 in Prussia; $3.12 to
$4.32 in Saxony; and $1.92 to $4.20 in Bel¬
gium. Now, if no greater effort were re¬
quired to make the same amount of iron in
these countries than here. Great Britain
could sell iron for half what we could make
it for; Prussia and Saxony for one-fourth;
and Belgium for one-fifth. But they cannot.
Removing all duties, they would, at first,
sell iron to us for a fourth less, until they
had stopped our manufacture, and then the
magnitude of our demand would compel
them to ask more under free trade than
their present price with tariff added. But
the fact that Prussia can only produce iron
at three-fourths of our price when she pays
one-fourth of our wages, shows that her
iron costs three times as much effort in
days' work as ours, and hence that the
world would be the gainer by 66 per cent.,
in the proportion of the result to the effort,
if we should forbid the importation of a
ton of Prussian iron, and compel German
laborers, if they proposed to make iron for
our markets, to make it in this country.
American Protectionists generally would
be satisfied if our tariff laws secured the
production of those articles in this country
which we can produce with a larger pro¬
portion of result to effort than the people of
any other country.
4. M. Bastiat's third "Sophism of the
Protectionists," is that they aim to equal¬
ize the facilities of all countries for produc¬
tion, and that it is from the differences
between various countries in their facilities
for production that trade arises, each coun¬
try being able to export only that which it
can produce more cheaply than other
countries; consequently the adoption of the
protectionist policy would destroy trade.
We answer, that the international trade
is always of far less importance than the
domestic commerce of every country. Pro¬
tection, by increasing the domestic produc¬
tion, increases the extent to which a people
can exchange with each other at home,
and diminishes the neces,sity only forgoing
abroad. It lessens not the number of ex¬
changes made, but only the distance to
traveled, and the transportation to be paid
for in making them. The ability of a
people to make exchanges depends, ulh-
mately, wholly on the amount of their
production, which, in turn, depends chiefly
on the diversification of their indusby-
There are 1,200,000 farmers in the Mis¬
sissippi Valley, none of whom can make any
exchanges with each other because their
products are the same. There are a similar
number of spinners and weavers in Eng-
land who can make no exchanges with
each other, because they are all producing
I
the same thing. Bastlat thinks the contin¬
uance of this state of things increases the
amount of commerce between these two
classes of producers. We say it diminishes
the amount of the commerce between the
farmers and the spinners to the lowest
point; that if one half the spinners were in
the Mississippi Valley it would quadruple
the value of the present products of that
region and of its land. Is there any doubt
that in this respect we are looking at the
aggregate of commerce, domestic as well
as foreign, while Bastlat is looking only to
• the commerce that crosses the ocean or
some strait or channel of it. So long as
the whole people of the Mississippi Valley
are farmers, while their weavers and cutlers
are in Lowell and Sheffield, is not the com¬
merce of the people of Illinois with each
other paralyzed by the fact that their indus¬
tries are homogeneous? But if of the
people of Illinois 3,000,000 were farmers,
and 2,000,600 were mechanics and manu¬
facturers, would not the exchanges of prod¬
ucts among each other be infinitely greater
than the exchange could be so long as the
two classes of industries are separated by
thousands of miles? Commerce grows, not
out of the unequal powers of various people
to produce the same things, but out of their
equal power to produce diflferent things.
It is not inequality but diversity of produc¬
tion that promotes exchange. If a farmer
in England raises sixty bushels of wheat to
the acre, and another in France raises ten
bushels, their inequality of production forms
no inducement to them to trade with each
other. But the farmer trades with the spin¬
ner, weaver, cutler, blacksmith and carpen¬
ter, without regard to their equality or
inequality of productive power. His trade
is as profitable if they earn $5.00 a day and
he earns $3.00, as it is if he earns $5.00 a
day and they $3.00. Yet Protectionists do
not desire to create equality of production
in competing branches, except as prefer¬
able to inferiority of production on our own
part. They prefer equality to inferiority, supe-
rioritj- to equality and supremacy to superiori¬
ty. If we can do no better in penknives than
to compete with Sheffield on equal terms, let
us do that. If we can expand and cheapen
our production so as to undersell Sheffield
in her own market, let us do that, if British
legihlators never learn the wisdom to put up
bars against us. We seek the utmost di-
^■er^ity of industry, and the highest excel¬
lence in each branch. If we can attain to
nothing higher than equality in those in¬
dustries in which we compete with other
nations, we must be content with that.
But we deny B.astiat's " Sophism " that our
inferiority to England in any branch of
production helps us to trade with her. It
must be our superiority in the production
of the article we sell her.
I
COTTON MANUFACTURES IN THE
SOUTH.
The Southern Guardian comes to us from
Columbia, South Carolina, the capital of
the State, with an able report on cotton
manufactures, presented to an Agricultural
and Immigration Convention in that city,
in May, through Col. J. B. Palmer, of Col¬
umbia, and signed by him and by James
Hope, Augusta, Georgia, and Julius C.
Smith, Greenville, S. C.
We take pleasure in giving some extracts
from this report, as it is a new proof that
some of the best men in the South see the
need and benefits of building up manu¬
factures amidst their rich farms and plan¬
tations, and thus gaining that varied indus¬
try so essential to wealth and a high civili¬
zation. In such laudable efforts there is
ample room for us all, and we believe the
best men of the North and West will give
cordial and fraternal welcome to their co¬
workers in the South.
After stating the advantages of cotton
manufacture amidst the plantations—the
saving of freight and waste, mildness of
climate, the abundance of lumber and
water-power; the operatives "remarkably
frugal, industrious, easily taught and con¬
trolled," etc., the report says:
" The North and Europe will contribute largely
in operatives, whenever there is a demand for
them, and thus manufacturing will advance immi¬
gration.
*'The English, in manufacturing, mix India and
other inferior cottons with the American, while we
use the best staple the world produces. The con¬
sequence is, that where our goods have been intro¬
duced abroad, they are preferred to the English.
The foreign manufacturer has been known to
brand his goods—drills, for instance—as American.
Your committee have had before them carefully
compiled statements, showing tlie cost of manu¬
facturing cotton North and Soutli. They are fully
satisiied that yarns can be manufactured here,
transported to the North, pay a commission of five
per cent, for selling, be sold at the cost of Northern
production^ and yet yield a net profit of five cents
per pound. And that certain classes of colored
goods can be produced here and sold in the North,
at cost of production of similar goods there, and
yet yield a profit of over ten cents per pound.
English manufacturers have admitted, after
inspecting the boohs of some of our southern fac¬
tories, that we produced yarns more clieuply than
they did. To test this admission, tlie t afnda fac¬
tory, of this State, sent in April, lS6i'. tlirough the
house of W, C. Courtney & Co., of Ci.arleston,
some packa-tes of tlieir No. 30 yarn to Manchester,
England, These yarns sold at i6d., ivhich, at the
then rate of gold and exchange, w as equal to 43-^
cents currcncv here. The total cost of the yarns,
including fre.ght, insurance, commission on s.iies,
etc., was 39Hv-> leaving a net profit of ^yc. per
pound.
*Tn support of the positions assumed, your com¬
mittee direct ttcntion to t .e greet success of the
Augusta, Graniteville, and oth< r factories in manu¬
facturing plain goods ; of t' e Columbus, Alamance
and other factories, in making colored goods ; and
the Saluda, Roswell, and other factories, in
spinning and warping fine yams, y, ith profit, at _a
time when manufacturing at the North and in
Europe has been languishing and frequently un¬
profitable, In further confirmation, the^ following
extracts from a letter, written by a prominent man¬
ufacturer at the North, are submitted :
12
" *WhUe I have only met expenses at the North in
mnninff twenty frames—3,000 spmdles—the returns
I have from sixteen frames of the same machinery
in Georg:ia, fbr the last six months^ have been
1^15,000 clear profit. Our company have determined
to sell out their machinery.' * '* * 'The South
enjoys the advantage of not less than twenty per
cent, over the North in manufacturing".'
''The writer of this letter has since moved
South, and his cotton mill at the North is perma¬
nently closed.
" It cannot be long before machinery for working
long staple will be introduced, and Savannah,
Charleston, and Wilmington, with their facilities
for procuring" cheap coal, will vie with each other
in the manulacture of our sea island, cotton ; and
soon the busy hum of the spindle will be heard on
every water-course from Virginia to Texas,
It is the belief of your committee that the
planters may, with profit to themselves, aid in pro¬
ducing this result, by combining together in joint
stock a.csociations, and erecting cotton mills ot suf¬
ficient capacity to work up their cotton crops.
These miUs should be managed, pot by the plan¬
ters themselves, but by experienced and capable
business men, who will give them their undivided
attention, with experts in charge of the mechanical
departments. Manufacturing comprises so many
details, that its successful prosecution requires the
most careful and systematic man;igement. With
ail our advantages, inattention to details and care¬
less management cannot but produce loss.
"From $250,000,000 to $300,000,000 would be
added to the value of our cotton crop if we were
to manufacture it into yarns and woven goods.
Of this a large amount would be paid out for
wages, and that to a class that is now not only
unemploved in adding to the wealth of the coun¬
try, but for the most part a burthen upon their
parents or the public." •
" The merchant, the mechanic, the agriculturist,
the banker, the real estate owner, and, in fact,
every citiren of our country, would be incidentally
benefited. Business generally would he stimulate<f,
and property of all kinds enhanced in value."
"We cannot alTord to stand idly by, while foreign
capital and energy, attracted as it will be—indeed,
as it is—by the wonderful advantages we possess,
gradually occupy the field to our exclusion.
Then, indeed, would the sceptre have departed
from Isreal. But rather let us, while heartily wel¬
coming the northern business man and capitalist, '
join in generous rivalry in the great work of I
developing our resources. |
" A new era is upon us. The policies attending
the institutions of Repast no longer control our
actions. The industrial pursuits to which we were ;
wont to devote our energies no longer claim our 1
undivided attention. No country exclusively i
agricultural ever grew permanently rich. I
Let there be no idlers in our streets. Let honest, ■
manly labor be clothed with its proper dignity.
Let agriculture, manufacturing, mining, and corh-
merre" alike command our efforts. Let energy,
method, and careful, close management attend us ]
in our various pursuits. !
The manly dignity of these words is
worthy high respect: and the statements
we give from the appendix to the report ^
are worthy attention : '
appendix.
Cost of manufacturing No. 20 vams in South
Carolina, taken from the books of Saluda factory :
Labor—Superintendent, 37 ; carding, 50; spin- !
ning, 76, reeling, 75 $2 44 I
Repair—Labor and material (machinery nearly I
new) .J 22 I
Packing, bundling, etc.,—labor and materials, 58
General expenses—watch, 13; hatdingf, J1;
findings, 20; oil, 15; salaries, 64; miscel-
ianeous, 56 2 00
Total per pound $5 24
Add loss by waste (450 lbs. cotton, costing $90),
making but 400 lbs. of yarn 3 50
10 per cent for wear and tear of machinery.
• charged to production, per pound 2 a6
Total cost of manufacturing cotton worth
26 cent per pound 1... 9 00
Freights to New York or pmladeiphia, 65;
insurance, 15 So
Cost cotton per pound-.-.. ^—ao 00
Total cost per pound of Southern yara,
(No. 20) delivered in New York 29 80
The very loxvest estimates of the cost of manu¬
facturing at the North place cost of labor,
repair, packing, and general expenses at,
per pound ..10 24
Loss by waste (cotton at 20 cents in Columbia
would be 2214 cents in New York J 45olbs<
cotton would cost $101.25} would
make 400lbs. yarn)-—— 281
10 per cent, for wear and tear of machinery., i 26
Total cost of manufacturing in the North.-14 31
Add cost of cotton 22 50
Cost No. 20 vams hianufactureddn the North,36 81
Showing a difference in favor of the South of,
per pound - ... "j 01
Both using the same quality of cotton.
Deduct commissions, cartage, etc 2 01
Showing a net profit per pound to the South¬
ern manufacturer, provided he sells at the
cost of Northern productions 5 00
THE "IMPORTING AND SMUG¬
GLING" SCHOOL OF ECONO¬
MISTS.
In the columns of The Bureau we have
always endeavored to meet the Free Trader
on his own premises. If he demands a
tariff for revenue, we have replied by show¬
ing that our present tariff produces four and
a half times as much revenue as the free
trade tariff of lS6o did, and three times
more than any non-protective tariff could
possibly yield. Is he solicitous about the
welfare of consumers—we show that a por¬
tion of our tariffs do not rest on the con¬
sumers or increase the prices to them at all,
although they put money into the national
treasury—the tax being paid by the foreign
producers. This is true of coal and lumber.
In other instances, we show that while the
removal of the tariff would cause a tempo-
rai-y reduction in the price, yet that very
reduction would, as in the case of iron or
steel and their manufactures, so effectually
check our home production as soon to ren¬
der us dependent on the foreign supply,
and thereby result in a rise in prices far
beyond their present figure.
Is it in the interest of manufacturers, suf¬
fering for want of an abundant supply of
the raw materials of their manufacture, that
these Free Traders profess to be concerned
—we point to the fact that ten yeare of pro¬
tection, notwithstanding the costs and fluc¬
tuations incident to the most expensive war
13
ever fought out \vithin a single nation, have
given a more rapid expansion and a more
general prosperity to manufactures than any
period whatever of free trade. We remind
them, too, that not a single organ or associ¬
ation authorized to speak for manufacturers
asks any other than a protective policy.
At least nineteen manufacturers in twenty
would regard the advent of free ti-ade as
the signal for closing their factories, dis¬
charging their workmen, and " lying on
their oars" to wait until reason and common
sense should again resume their sway.
They justly regard as mere charlatans and
demagogues all who demand that the un¬
taxed products of foreign workmen shall
come freely into our markets to undersell
products, one-fifth of whose average cost has
alreadv been received by our governments,
state, national and municipal, in some fonn
of taxation. ■>
But it is as advocates of the interests of
farmers that Free Traders are most persist¬
ent and ingenious in their sophistries. The
hand of the importer and foreign manufac¬
turer is kept concealed. You would never
learn front any free trade organ that a
single importer had an interest of three- or
four millions a year in evading the payment
of as much customs revenue as he could
escape from, and that the whole importing
class are an organized fraternity of revenue-
evaders, all willing to contribute any re¬
quired sum to pay for propagating the doc¬
trine that the revenues of the Government
could better and more cheaply be raised
from any other class than from them.
Though these importers and their foreign
manufacturers pay the fiddler for the whole
free trade dance; though they stand ready
at all times to loan the money which will
control the daily journals which will prove
that the revenues of the Government ought
to be collected from direct taxation or from
internal revenue, or ought not to be col¬
lected at all, but that at all e\'ents importa¬
tions of foreign-made goods ought to ccrme
in and be sold untaxed, especially where
they compete with any domestic production ;
yet in all these c.ases the hand that moves
the free ti ade Punch and Judy and makes
them dance so nimbly—the hand of the
importer—is kept skillfully concealed. But
we tell the farmers and plantei-s and agri¬
culturists generally, the dairymen and stock-
raisers, the cheese and butter makers, and
all who till the soil, that the free trade agi¬
tation which has been going on for four
years past has been paid for by the import¬
ers whom it serves. It has not been carried
on because it paid its own rVay, because
fi-om first to last it has been distasteful to
the mass of those among whom the free
trade ai-guments hare been distributed, and
in all cases it has been seriously detrimental
to the journals which printed them, so far
as they looked for support to their adverti¬
sers and readers. It has all been paid for,
and that too by those importers whose pros¬
perity is exactly commensurate with the
extent to which American industries are
invaded, prostrated, subdued and trodden
under foot by the foreign. The importers
of wool and of woolens find a mouthpiece
in the United States Econmnist and Drt Goods
Reporter, of New York, as the whole im¬
porting interests do in the Daily Bulletin
and Financial Chronicle, the New York
World, in which the importers advertise
their auction sales, the Exvniny^ Post, Com¬
mercial Advertiser and Journal of Commerce,
in which importers are almost alone inter¬
ested as advertisers, patrons, or e\ en read-
ere. This kind of responsiveness on the
pai-t of a journal to the immediate interests
of its patrons is doubtless legitimate; and
yet every reader, in reading the views of
this class of journals, should remember that,
however deliberate the tone in which they
are expressed, they are not the unpaid
utterance of a public journalist, but that he
by virtue of his position is the mere mouth¬
piece through whom ten or twenty thousand
importers are seeking to escape the pay¬
ment of the revenue. There are various
modes of effecting this escape. One is by-
sending a lighter outside of Sandy Hook,
taking off a portion of the cargo at night,
and running into some cove or inlet with it,
without paying any duties wnatever. This
is called smuggling, and is publicly discoun¬
tenanced by the "honest trader" — not
because it evades the revenue, for that they
ail aim to do, but because it undersells him;
though every real Free Trader—i. e., every
man who believes foreign goods ought to
come into the country free—must secretly
regard a smuggler as a practical philanthro¬
pist. The second plan for evading the
revenue on a large scale is to infiuence the
appointment of customs officers so as to
have confidential agents of the importers
in the positions which enable them to esti¬
mate the quantity of duties to be paid.
This power is worth millions eveiy year to
the few who are strong enough as importers
to wield it. The inmates of a custom-house
generally have good reason to know who
among them are the recognized agents of
the chief importers, and equally good rea¬
son to say nothing about it, or treat it as a
matter of course. If an importer sells ten
millions of dollars worth of goods in a year,
four millions of the selling price should be
duties paid to the United States. In the
assessment of those duties, a variation of
one-eighth could easily be effected by the
aid of two or three confidential agents or
"personal friends" in the appraiser's and
collector's departments. This would amount
to a profit of half a million dollars a year,
out of which a very comfortable " plum "
can be sent to the customs officer, not as a
bribe or fee, but merely as a present. So
prevalent did this become that a general
rule now requires all officers, in the custom
houses before drawing their pay, to make
oath that they have received no "present,"
but such oaths even are easily evaded.
A third mode of evading the revenue is
to send a free trade lobby to Congress every
winter to see that the Representatives sent
there by farmers, mechanics and manufac¬
turers of America, and who are supposed to
serve their district and their country for
$^,otx5 a year, are furnished with proper
arguments to show that the welfare of
farmers urgently demands that importers
shall pay no revenue. The importers never
or seldom say to the committees in person:
"We want you to reduce this tax on steel
rails, because we are importing them and
have an interest of five or ten millions in
this reduction;" though they open their
fashionable mansions in Washington every
winter, and might say it, if they desired.
They always speak in the name of the dis¬
tressed farmer. But they are careful to
vindicate the distressed farmer's rights by
the advance of their own money.
A fourth manner in which the importers
promote free trade is by keeping close
watch of all cases wherein deserving young
men who aspire to be founders or controllers
of public journals, and who need only a
few thousand or hundred thousand dollars
to succeed in their laudable object, are fur¬
nished the money with the most generous
disregard of the value of the security, but
with an ample benevolence which from
thencetbrth causes the journal in question
to believe in its heart and to utter with its
lips no other doctrine than that all custom¬
houses ought to be straightway abolished,
and that all men who propose in Congress
or elsewhere to collect a taritf from import¬
ers are robbers and plunderers.
In all these ways, as well as by the Free
Trade Le.igue, the free trade agitation can
be conducted — that of the Free Trade
League being tfie least effectual of all,
because it shows its hand, whereby we
trace the power to its source.
Behind the whole question of protection
to American industry against untaxed for¬
eign importations there is the previous
question. How came the advocate of free
importations to stand on that side of the
question.'', If an importer's money has
directly or indirectly helped him to his
conclusions, don't argue with him. Until
you can argue the superscription off from a
dollar, you cannot convince him.
" Do not American manufacturers, farm¬
ers and merchants raise funds for the pro¬
motion of American industries," you ask,
and " why, then, may they not raise them
for the promotion of foreign industries as
well.^' Perhaps they may. If the advo¬
cates of British free trade choose to discuss
the question on that ground, we shall con¬
tinue to meet them on their own premises.
o
The Free Trade League declares, (ist)
"That every man has a natural right to
dispose of the product of his labor, wher¬
ever he can obtain in exchange for it the
most of what he desires. (2d.) That he
should be free to seek his own welfare in
his own way, so long as he does not infringe
on the rights of others." Now, for what
purpose does the League parade these
irrelevant truisms.' Why give them forth
as a political platform.' We can see only
one use for it. In a popular farce, a cun¬
ning servant manages his simple-minded
master in every argument, by setting out
with "you can't deny, master, that young
ducks turn up their eyes when it thunders."
"No." "Nor, that too much is plenty."
" No." " Nor, that the best way is as
good as any." "No." "Well then, hav¬
ing admitted my premises, and felt that my
reasoning is sound, my conclusions must
follow; and the dispute being over, I have
nothing to do but to state the case.' The
case, to be sure, has nothing to do with the
preliminary philosophizing, but everything
is gained by the impression made upon the
master's small understanding, and the art¬
ful dodger carries his point in the shadow
cast by the dazzling brilliancy of his general
principles.
o
In 1869, British and Irish exports to the
United States advanced to $123,121,555, a
value far above that of any previous year,
except 1866, which was one of unusual
speculation. This is an increase of 12 per
cent, over 1S60, before the commencement
of the civil war, and of nearly 15 per cent,
over iS68. This increase is in spite of an
average rate of American duties on imports
,amounting to 37 per cent, ad valorem. In
1869, as compared with 1S6S, in British
exports to the United State.-, there was an
increase in cotton piece goods to the declared
value of $2,851.22c; in linen ditto, $2,063,-
075; tin plates, $1,336,900; railway iron,
$1,314,520; wool (sheep and lamb), $951,-
545; pig iron, $719,410; hardware and cut¬
lery, $511,460; earthenware and porcelain,
$504,470; woolen cloths and coatings,
$478,475; woolen carpets and druggets,
$1,613,630; w bile there are only two articles
in the whole li.-tof British and Irish exports
to America on which the falling off' amounts
to so large a sum as $250,000—viz: worsted-
stuffs and soda. The total value of all
exports from the United Kingdom in 1869
(whether British and Irish or foreign and
colonial), is $1,185,531,625, an increase of 4
per cent, over 1868; the total has been
once exceeded—viz: in 1S66. It is double
that of 14 years ago.
15
OUR MAGNIFICENT EXPORTS!
The British customs report for 1869 shows
that the British islands imported last year
the unprecedented amount of 79,914,055
cwts. of wheat, each of 112 pounds, of
which the United States exported 13,181,507
cwts., and Russia only 9,158,331 cwts. We
have in these Western States 1,200,000
farmers competing with each other and
with the Russian serfs in raising wheat for
the lowest possible return of compensation
to the grower. It is only by raising it for a
less return than the Russian serfs would be
willing to that we are able to sell this
wheat cheaper and more of it in England
than they. True, we have somewhat bet¬
ter machinery than they, but, even with
those aids, is the competition a promising
one? The writer hereof is one of these
farmers, and knows whereof he affirms
when he declares that not one-third
of the wheat so exported paid for the
cost of raising it. It is a losing busi¬
ness in the nature of things for the Illinois,
Iowa or Minnesota farmer to raise wheat
to send twelve hundred miles to a seaport
and fifteen hundred by sea, and several
hundred more by land on the other side of
the ocean, there to be sold in competition
with the crops of Russian and Hungarian
serfs, whose rates of labor and of living arc
about one-sixth as expensive as those of an
American farmer must be, in order to live
decently. This whole export is a waste of
land, of labor, and of resources. It is some¬
thing of which we should be ashamed.
The remedy for its unprofitableness does
not consist in cheapening our means of
transit for wheat to Liverpool. That will
only more fii-mly rivet our bondage. Tb.e
remedy lies in bringing the raw cotton of
the Southern States up the Mississippi to
Chicago, Elgin, LaSalle, Freeport, Rock-
ford, Decatur, Burlington, and a hundred
other points, and here manufacturing it
into yarns, cloths, threads, and fabrics of
every kind. This would quadruple the
value we now get for our cotton crop; it
would employ the youth of both sexes, and
the weaker and lazier adults, who are not
strong or hardy enough for farm drudgery,
and who now flock into the cities to swin¬
dle or steal; it would employ the capital
which is now occupied in speculating in
values already created, when it ought to be
employed in creating new values; it would
increase the aggregate national earnings by
an amount greater than our whole imports
and exports combined; it would double the
flow of immigration into the country, and
convert it from an influx of unskilled pau¬
pers to one of skilled artisans and manufac¬
turers; and, finally, it would enable the
farmer of Illinois to sell his wheat On the
stalk for twenty per cent, more than it now
brings in Liverpool, instead of for sixty per
cent less. It would create so large a do¬
mestic market for our farm products that
we would scorn the thought of raising
wheat for Manchester in competition with
naked Cossack.s. And yet, in.stead of pro-
I moting a policy which would tend to build
up cotton manufactures in Illinois, two-
thirds of her representatives in Congrcvs-
will vote next winter to break them down.
Nothing could more fully verify Carlyle'>
I statement that "America contains forty mil¬
lions of people, mostly"—statesmen and
economists 1
o
The lesson which the friends of American-
industry have to learn from the defeat of
General Schenck, of D.J. Morrell, and of
Mr. McCarthy in the Syracuse district, is
that when the Free Traders have a certain,
job to do they have .a formidable and effect¬
ive way of going about it. They levelled
their guns and issued their proclamations a
year ago at these three membeis, and an¬
nounced their determination that, come
w^hat might elsewhere, these were to be
defeated. And they have done it. Yet
every Protectionist knows that the use of
sufficient energy on our part would have
prevented it. Schenck is defeated by a
trifling vote by Lewis D. Campbell, who
was a Protectionist and Plenry Clay Whig
when he sat in Congress fourteen years ago.
What he is now, after ti'aveling the dubiou.s.
path he has trod for the intervening peno i,
we need not say. He has been Kno.v-
Nothing, pro-Rebel, Unionist, Johnsonite,
and now will help rake the free trade
chestnuts out of the fire. Mr. Morrell is
probably defeated, though whether his seat
has been lost by a legal vote or a fraudulent
one is not yet certain. Both these candi¬
dates were elected by a narrow majority .u
the previous election, and the districts are
close. General Schenck would not perhaps
have been elected before but for the un¬
popularity of his adversary—Vallandighain.
And it still remains to be seen whether the
illegal exclusion of the votes at the Soldiers'
Home will not result in entitling him to his
seat. We regret to lose his vigorous right
arm in Congress, for it always struck from
the shoulder. But it only remains for Pro¬
tectionists to put their shoulders to the
wheel and carry these districts next time.
It can be done.
o
KANSAS.^In i86o the population of Kan¬
sas was 107,204; the census just completed
shows a population for 1870 of 359,349; an
increase of 252,145 in ten years.
i6
The British Parliament's Select Commit¬
tee on Scientific Instruction reported to the
House of Commons, on Jul v 15th, 1868, that
the manufactures of the United States have
wholl^• or largely superseded those of Bir¬
mingham, England, in the common mar¬
kets of the world, including the English
colonies, in the manufacture of
Adze's,
Axes—best article.
Brass ware (sUiinpcd),
Clothes-pegs,
Carpenters broad-axes,
Cultivators,
Cut-nails,
Cotton gins,
Door-catches,
(riinleLs,
lloes—for cotton.
Kibbling machines,
flowing machines.
Nuts and bolts,
Plows,
Plumbers' br.uss foundry,
Revoh ers.
Sausage machines.
Shoemakers' tools,
Traps—rat, beaver and fox,
Washing machines.
Augers,
Breech-loading muskets,
Buckets,
Clocks,
Coopers* tools,
Currv-comb.s,
Coffee-mills.
Corn-crushers,
Cjas-fittings,
Hay-rakes,
Horse-nails,
X,ocks—door, chest, cup¬
board and drawer.
Petroleum lamps.
Pumps,
Pen-knives.
Rice-hullers,
Sewing machines,
Scissors,
Table ware,
Watches—machine made.
Weighing machines.
Compare this state of our manufactures,
especially as to cutlery, with that which
prevailed in 1842, when Dr. Francis Way-
land, in writing a free trade text-book on
political economy, said:
We pay a heavy duty on cutlery in this country,
while not a thousandth' part of the cutlery used is
made here. It would be vastly cheaper to pay a
bounty sufficient to raise ali the cutlery made in this
country to its present prices, and it would be, for
aujcht 1 see, just as ^od for the cutler."—H'aylaruTj
Political Economy, Edition of 1842,140.
If the American people had listened to the
voice of this free trade philosopher in 184:,
they would not have the cheap and abun-
ant supply of hardware and cutlery that
they enjoy at this time, owing to the duty
which has been im^sed upon similar good",
of English manufacture. Forty years ago
American hardware was almost unknown in
the trade, yet five-sixths of the consump¬
tion is now supplied by home industrv.
American axes, shovels, spades, and hoes
have wholly taken the place of foreign
tools, and in cutlery of all kinds, table and
pocket, the medium American qualities
which are most suitable for popular con¬
sumption, are cheaper and better than those
imported from abroad. English journals
admit the loss of this trade, and lament it as
a calamity. England would prefer to have
the American people still tributary to her
work-shops in Sheffield for knives, saws,
chisels and similar articles of common use.
In 1842 Wayland thought it ridiculous to
protect the American manufacturers of
these goods, but the " high duty" produced
results which he could not foresee, and
which his disciples declare to be impossible.
The effect of a protective tariff in cheapen¬
ing commodities has never been more clear¬
ly illustrated than in the matter of cutlen .-
All of the foregoing appeared as Editorial Articles in
The Bureau:
A MONTHLY MAGAZINE,
DEVOTED TO THE
and general Jjndudries
OF THE UNITED STATES,
Three Dollars per A nnum, Single copies, J5
Office, ioi and 103 Wabash Avenue, Chicago, III.
TEE SOLIDARITY OF THE INDUSTRIES
AS ILLUSTRATED BY THE RELATIONS OF TEE. WOOLLEN
MANUFACTURE.
AN ADDRESS
DELIVEEED AT THE FAIR OF THE AMERICAN
INSTITUTE, NEW-YORK CITY,
October 13, 1870.
BY JOHN L. HAYES,
SECRETARY OP THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF WOOL MANUFACTURERS.
CAMBRIDGE :
PEESS OF JOHN WELSON AND SON.
1870.
THE SOLIDARITY OF THE INDUSTRIES
AS ILLUSTRATED BY THE RELATIONS OE THE WOOLLEN
MANUFACTURE.
An Address delivered at the Fair of the American Institute, New York City,
Oct. 13, 1870. Bt John L. Hates.
In presence of hese magnificent products of a diversified
native industry, at the same time evidences of national progress
and inspirations for higher achievements, it would be a waste of
words to dwell upon the importance of sustaining upon our soil
the general industry which has placed before our eyes these bril¬
liant results. The duty of developing a national industry is not
a question for argument; it is a sentiment like patriotism or
filial love, and here, at least, we could find few who will not agree
with the greatest of living geologists, Elie de Beaumont, that
"of all the tendencies which occupy different civilized nations,
the most marked is that of fixing upon their own territory all
those branches of industrial activity which suit its soil, climate,
and commercial position; and that government will most pi-eserve
the respect of neighboring nations, and show itself worthy of the
respect of its people, which shall use all its means of action to
favor with discernment this tendency." And few would refuse
to partake of the "noble emulation of producing every thing,"
which the venerable Thiers says is possessed by all intelligent
and free nations.
"What, then," says he, "are the nations which have sought
to develop among themselves a national labor ? "
" They are the nations which are intelligent and free. When
the foreigner brings them a product, after they have found it ser¬
viceable, they desire to undertake it. The nations which do not
have this desire are the indolent nations of the East; intelligent
4
THE SOLIDARITY OP THE INDUSTRIES.
and free nations seek to appropriate for themselves the products
brought to them by foreign nations."
While the proposition of the importance of a diversified native
industry, in the abstract, is generally accepted, the favors which
special industries demand from national legislation are frequently
the subject of condemnation. We have seen quite recently the
copper, the iron, the steel, the woollen, the salt industries, each
reproached for the special consideration which they have invoked
in legislation. Appearing before you as the representative of a
special industry, I offer the apology for my position, and find
the guiding thread for my remarks, in the subject to which I now
beg your attention,— The Solidarity of the Industries, as Illus¬
trated by the Helations of the Woollen Manufacture, An emi¬
nent liberal statesman, who now occupies a place in the new
government of France, Jules Simon, closes a recent free-trade
speech in the Legislative Assembly by the transcendental remark,
"All the liberties are sisters : if we have liberty of trade, we shall
have all the others." This remark is only sentimental nonsense,
for there is no necessary relation, except in words, between free
trade and free government; but, slightly changed, it expresses
what I mean by the solidarity of industries. All the industries
are sisters: if we have one, we shall have all the others.
Let me at the outset exclude the inference that the woollen
manufacture is not of itself, and independently of its relations
to other interests, of the highest national importance. A manu¬
facture whose direct annual product in the United States is, by
the most careful estimates, of the value of one hundred and
seventy-five million dollars, making necessary an importation of
only sixty-five millions, thus supplying nearly three-quarters of
the whole consumption of woollen and worsted goods in the
country; which employs directly at least one hundred and
twenty thousand operatives, and supports twice as many more;
which consumes the fleeces of thirty-five million sheep; which
supplies with cheap and sound clothing the great mass of the
people, furnishing nearly all the cassimeres, tricots, and cheviots,
for business suits; the beavers, moscows, and cloakings, for
outer garments ; the knit goods for under-clothing, and the flan-
THE SOLIDARITY OP THE INDUSTRIES.
5
nels and blankets for bed-coverings; ■which furnishes all the
ingrain carpets consumed here, produced from twice the number
of looms that are in England, making the American working-
man's parlor and bedroom the most cheerful and attractive that
labor ever found for repose; a manufacture which supplies all
our delaines, the most largely consumed of the cheaper fabrics
for woman's wear; which is daily producing new fabrics for
female attire, such as worsted poplins, serges, cloakings, printed
cashmeres, alpaca and mohair lustres ; a manufacture which fur¬
nishes lastings for our shoes, enough for thirty thousand a week
in a single establishment, reducing the price of the foreign arti¬
cle in two years from $1.10 to 66 cents a yard; which supplies
for our furniture all-wool and union damasks, silk cotelines and
reps of tasteful designs and beautiful colors ; an industry which
has torn down the British bunting, which has so long disgraced
O' o o
our national ships, and has run up a real American flag made of
our own wools and in our own mills, — a flag which means not
merely political, but industrial independence; a manufacture
which in the last five years has made more progress than in any
twenty years before, and more than any other branch of textile
industry has done, and which by its own grand exhibition in this
hall last year won the reluctant admiration of your shrewd im¬
porters, and the generous admiration of a diplomatic representa¬
tive of Great Britain, — an industry like this, I say, has claims
of itself alone for grateful appreciation by the American people,
and for vigorous defence by American legislators.
But I must hasten to a consideration of the indirect and less
obvious influences of the woollen industry. And I must be
permitted to go beyond our own country and the present time
for my illustrations. Let me first show the relations of the
wool manufacture to agriculture.
The woollen manufacture works up a fibre which was in prim¬
itive times, and is again becoming in quite recent times, the
material of the first necessity for the clothing of man. This
fibre outranks all others,—first, because it is made more per¬
fect than any other, through the chemical elaborations of an
animal of high organization, thus surpassing silk, which is de-
6
THE SOLIDARITY OF THE INDUSTRIES.
rived from an animal of a lower organic structure. Again, its
specific gravity being the least-of all fibrous substances, its
tissues are the lightest, warmest, and most healthful. And,
finally, this material, provided in some varieties with a struct¬
ure which enables the fibres to be laced and intermingled, by the
process of fulling, into fabrics distinguished for their warmth
and softness, in other varieties has a lustre which assimilates its
tissues to those of silk; and, like silk, and unlike cotton and
flax, it receives and permanently retains every tincture and every
tone and hue which the art of the dyer can produce. The
industrial application in primitive times of this marvellous mate¬
rial to clothing for man, in lieu of the skins of wild beasts,
demanded the substitution of the pastoral system for that of the
chase, and marked the first step of mankind in agriculture, and
consequently in the way of civilization. The whole direct
benefit to agriculture from the consumption of wool in manu¬
factured products is measured by the annual value of the wool
of the world, which is estimated by M. Moll, chairman of the
jury on wools at the Paris Exposition, at three thousand mil¬
lion francs, or $600,000,000. The estimates of Mr. Lynch,
approved by Mr. Bond, both high authorities, place the total
wool clip of the United States, in 1868, at one hundred and
seventy-seven million pounds. At fort}"^ cents per pound, the
direct value of the American wool manufacture to American
agriculture is nearly $71,000,000.
The direct is very far from the only or even chief benefit
accruing to agriculture from the woollen industry. The Sheep,
cultivated in primitive times, and at present in merely pastoral
countries for only one of its aptitudes, that of producing wool,
is found to have a more important aptitude, that of converting,
in the shortest possible time, vegetable matter into the most
healthful and nutritious flesh : and in countries most advanced
in agriculture it has become the most important source of animal
food. Again, wool, unlike tobacco, the cereals, the oleaginous
seeds, and the vegetable textiles, including cotton, can, so far
as is known, be produced and exported indefinitely without
creating exhaustion of the soil; and even more than that, sheep.
THE SOLIDARITY OF THE INDUSTRIES.
7
through the peculiar nutritiousness of their manure, and the
facility with which it is distributed, are found to be the most
economical and certain means of solving the highest problem in
agriculture, —that of constantly renewing the productiveness of
the land. Their manure is more valuable tban that of cattle,
because they digest better; they cut their food finer and chew
it better. They void less vegetable fibre, and their excrements
are more converted into soluble matter. " One thousand sheep,
folded on an acre of ground one day, would manure it sufficiently
to feed one thousand and one sheep. So that by tbis process, land
which, the first year, can feed only one thousand sheep, may, the
next year, as a result of their own droppings, feed thirteen hun¬
dred and sixty-five."
So said Anderson, more than forty years ago ; and Sprengel
allows that the manure of fourteen hundred sheep, for one day,
is equal to manuring highly one acre of land, which is about
four sheep per year. Mr. Mechi, a still more recent authority,
estimates that fifteen hundred sheep folded on an acre of land
for twenty-four hours, or one hundred sheep for fifteen days,
would manure the land sufficiently to carry it through four
years' rotation.
Permit me now to present in more detail some illustrations
of the relations of the woollen industry to agriculture. I need
not say that these relations are reciprocal. Action and reaction
are equal in the moral as well as in the physical world. I have
elsewhere shown the dependence of the manufacturers of each
nation upon the wool-growers of their own country, and that
the characteristic features of the manufactures of different na¬
tions have been impressed by the peculiar condition of their
agriculture. I present the same picture, only with the point of
view reversed. Manufactures instead of agriculture now occupy
the foreground; and the latter, being in distant perspective, are
made to appear subordinate to the latter.
The country where the woollen industry has had the longest
standing, and the most complete development, naturally presents
the most complete example of the interdependence upon which I
insist. England, from a very early period, has produced sheep
8
THE SOLIDARITY OP THE INDUSTRIES.
of two distinctly marked classes. The one class, thriving upon
the dry uplands, produced a short, comparatively fine wool,
adapted solely for making fulled cloths. Of this class the
original Southdown was a type. This wool supplied the cloth
manufactory established at "Winehester in the time of the Eo-
mans. The other class of sheep, of greater size, flourishing
upon the rich, moist plains, produced wool characterized by
greater length, strength, and lustre, and its moderate felting
properties. This wool, fitted for making serges and other stuff
fabrics, adapted especially for female wear, was called combing
wool, from the instrument used to make the fibres straight and
parallel, preparatory to spinning. Until about the time of Eliz¬
abeth, England herself, worked up, the greater portion of her
short wools into cloths; but exported nearly all her combing
wools, far the most valuable of her agricultural products, which
were made up into says and serges, by the workmen of the Low
Countries. In the time of Elizabeth, the persecutions of the
Duke of Alva drove the say weavers, skilled in working up the
combing wools, fi-om tbe Netherlands into England. The
worsted manufacture, or that of the eombing wools, was thus
engrafted upon the industry of England, and prepared the way
for the consumption of all her wools upon her OAvn soil. The
domestic consumption of all her wools was made a national
necessity by stringent laws prohibiting the exportation of wool,
which were in force from 1(160 to 1825. The prohibition of
exportation was especially^ efficacious in developing the worsted
industry, as it compelled the manufacture at home of the comb¬
ing wools formerly exported. The number of sheep during this
period was nearly trebled, and tbe production of wool in each
animal was doubled. As the worsted industry became devel¬
oped, and agriculture became more prosperous, from the home
markets opened for its products, the woollen industry and agri¬
culture continued to react upon each other ; the wool manufac¬
ture making increased demands for combing wool, or that
produced by the heaviest sheep, and agriculture taking a direc¬
tion to supply this demand.
In the mean time, the artificial or turnip husbandry was intro-
THE SOLIDAEITT OF THE INDUSTRIES.
9
duced by Willifim of Orange, and the means were provided for
trebling the number of sheep which an acre of land could sup¬
port. The results at the present time to the English woollen
manufacture arc, that the worsted manufacture far surpasses
the clothing-wool manufacture, the two together supporting a
population of over a million; and the towns which have been
the centres of the worsted manufacture have made a more rapid
progress than any in Great Britain, Bradford having increased
her population 90,000 in fifty years. The result of this recip¬
rocal action to the agriculture of England is a genuine trans¬
formation, of external character at least, in the English races
of sheep. The production of combing wool, the kind in greatest
demand, was secured by breeding sheep which would attain the
utmost possible weight of mutton, which could be fed to their
utmost capacity, and would produce the utmost amount of
manure. The merino sheep, although introduced into England
at about the same time as into Germany and France, which
they have so greatly enriched; and although their culture was
encouraged by the King and the first noblemen of the realm,
were finally wholly discarded. The mutton sheep is at this
moment not only the chief animal product of England, but it is
what it was declared to be long ago, "the sheet-anchor of Eng¬
lish agriculture." It is the chief animal product of Great
Britain. The statistics of domestic animals, published by the
Royal Agricultural Society, show that Great Britain had, in
1868, 30,711,396 sheep, 5,423,981 cattle, and 2,308,539 pigs.
The sheep is literally the basis of English husbandry. The
agriculture of England, as a whole, is very simple. Four
crops, in regular rotation and mainly in the same order, consti¬
tute her great staples. Turnips, barley, grass, and wheat, are
said to be the four maarical words at which the earth unlocks
O
her treasures to the British farmer. The four field, or four shift
system, which pervades the greater part of the kingdom, consists
of this succession. The profit is in the barley and wheat alone;
the turnips and grass serve mainly to feed the sheep, which
furnish mutton and wool to support them in their most impor¬
tant function, that of mannring the turnip field upon which they
2
10
THE SOLIDARITY OP THE INDUSTRIES.
are folded, for the four years' rotation. It is this function which
I wish to bring into special prominence. Recent agricultural
writers in England affirm this to be the main object of English
sheep husbandry. Professor Coleman, of the Agricultural Col¬
lege of Cirencester, in a paper recently read before the Royal
Agricultural Society, on the breeding and feeding of sheep,
says : " It is not difficult to show that sheep alone, apart from
their influence on the corn crops, will not pay a living profit, after
all the expenses of growing the crops are considered." Other
practical writers for the same journal declare that there is no
profit in growing sheep in England simply for their mutton and
wool, but that the culture of sheep is still an indispensable ne¬
cessity, as there is no other means of keeping up the land.
Passing away from England, I observe that the highest author¬
ities in France inculcate the same lesson. The most eminent
of French practical statesmen, M. Thiers, in his great discourse
on the protective question, delivered in the Legislative Assembly
in January last, demands protective duties upon the wool of
France; as it is threatened that the fine sheep, unprotected
through duties on wool, must disappear from the soil of France,
in consequence of competition from the southern hemisphere.
He says : " Upon four-fifths of the territory, where the soil is
stony, and only fine grasses abound, the fine sheep alone can
convert this grass into flesh and manure." After giving the
facts as to the decline of the ovine population of France, and
its enormous increase in Australia and La Plata, he continues:
" In this situation, how can the French resist the foreign com¬
petition ? The agricultural industry of France cannot dispense
with sheep. The facts which I have given you ought to inspire
you with the most serious concern." The same lesson is taught
by the best practical agriculturists of the United States. Mr.
Stilson, president of the Wisconsin Wool-Growers' Associa¬
tion, has shown that his flock of fifteen hundred sheep has
enabled him to produce eight or ten more bushels of wheat to
the acre than is grown on the average lands of Wisconsin,
where sheep husbandry is not an auxiliary to wheat farming.
The president of the Ohio Wool-Growers' Association, Mr.
THE SOLIDARITY OP THE INDUSTRIES.
11
Stevens, whom I had the pleasure of meeting this summer, at
the Indianapolis Exposition, assured me that he eould see no
means of reclaiming the rapidly deteriorating lands of Ohio
except by the restorative influence of sheep husbandry. "We
have seen lands in certain portions of the West producing wheat
so abundantly as to compel the opening of railroad lines for
the single purpose of transporting their teeming harvests ; and
have also seen, in our own time, these very lands so rapidly
exhausted, that the rails have been torn up for want of traffic.
Such facts apprise us that there is no security for continued
fruitfulness, even in our most fertile States, but in a more prov¬
ident agriculture. What is taken from the land must be restored.
Science gives us but little encouragement in the promise of
cheap imported or artificial manures. The guano beds are
being rapidly exhausted. The experiments of Messrs. Lawes
and Gilbert, at Eothamsted, show that the application to
the land of sewage from the cities, from which so much was
expected, is a failure. The brilliant experiments of Vila, in
France, made to exhitnt the applicability of artificial manures
in place of animal manures, in countries like France, where
the land is so much divided as not to permit the profitable cult¬
ure of animals, lead to no practical results, because no econom¬
ical sources of artificial nitrates, phosphates, or potash, have
been or are likely to be discovered. We see, but as through
grated windows, exhaustless but practically inaccessible stores
of potash in the granite rocks ; of phosphates in beds of apatite;
and of nitrogen in the atmosphere, or in the far-off rainless
plains of Chili. Has not Providence locked up these treasures,
or removed them from our reach, to compel man, for his highest
physical good, to cultivate the animal which best supplies the
primal necessities, — food, clothing, and the continued enrich¬
ment of the earth? The blessing, in the olden time, was given
to him who " brought of the firstlings of his flock," for " the
Lord had respect unto Abel and to his offering."
There are other relations of the woollen industry to agriculture,
much less broad in their scope, but so interesting and illustrative
that I cannot pass them by. The first which I aUude to, because
12
THE SOLIDARITY OP THE INDUSTRIES.
connected with the topic which we have just considered, is the
achievement which chemical science has recently effected in sav¬
ing the potash contained in the yolk of fleeces in such a form
that it may he returned to the soil or used in the arts. It is
well known that sheep draw from the land upon which they
graze a considerable quantity of potash, which, after circulating
in the blood, is excreted from the skin with the sweat, in combi¬
nation with which it is deposited in the wool. The French
chemists MM. Maumon^ and Rogelet have established quite re¬
cently at the great seats of the woollen manufacture in France,
as at Rheims and Elbeuf, factories for putting the new industry
which they have created into practical operation. They induce
the woollen manufacturers to preserve and sell to them the solutions
of yolk obtained by the washing of the raw fleeces in cold water,
and pay such a price as encourages the manufacturers to wash
their wool methodically, so as to enrich the same water with the
yolk of a number of fleeces. These scourings the chemists carry
to their factory, and then boil them down to a dry, carbonaceous
residuum. The alkaline salts remain in- the charred residuum,
and are extracted by lixiviation with water. The most impor¬
tant of the alkalies obtained is potash, which is recovered in a
state of great purity. It is computed that if the fleeces of all the
sheep of France, estimated at forty-seven millions, were subjected
to the new treatment, France would derive from this source
alone all the potash she requires in the arts, enough to make
about twelve thousand tons of commercial carbonate of potash,
convertible into seventeen thousand five hundred tons of salt¬
petre, which would charge eighteen hundred and seventy million
cartridges. So that the inoffensive sheep, the emblem of peace,
can be made to supply the chief muniment of war. The obvious
lesson from these facts, to the sheep farmer, is to wash his fleeces
at home, in such a manner that the wash water, so rich in pot¬
ash, may be distributed upon the land as liquid manure.
I have already adverted to the influence of the wool manufact¬
ure of England in developing the breeds of long-woolled sheep in
that country. Facts illustrative of the influence of manufacture
upon sheep husbandry are furnished by all manufacturing nations.
THE SOLIDARITY OP THE INDUSTRIES.
13
In the indolent nations of the East, manufacturers adapt them¬
selves to the raw material which has been furnished for ages.
The beautiful Turkish carpets of Asia Minor are produced now,
as they doubtless were in the time of the Crusades, from coarse
wool grown upon the Barbarous broad-tailed sheep, which is
still precisely the same as those which formed the flocks watched
by the shepherds of the Bible, and to which belonged the Paschal
lamb. Nations of higher civilization are constantly varying
their fabric and their sheep husbandry.
The Spanish merino, which I conceive to be a relie of Greek
and Roman civilization preserved in tbe mountains of Andalusia
from the barbarians wbo swept over most of the Roman posses¬
sions, was introduced about a century ago into all the manufact¬
uring nations of Europe. When introduced into France, at
the sheep-folds of Rambouillet, it produced a short clothing wool.
Let me, before describing the important change which subse¬
quently took place, advert for a moment to a zoological prin¬
ciple.
A beautiful law of nature has been brought into view by the
studies of modern zoology, that, while the primary and specific
characters, determined by the forms of the skeleton, are abso¬
lutely fixed, and transmit themselves infallibly by generation, the
secondary or accessory forms of animals, such as the fleshy cov¬
ering, hair, and fleece, the only characters which man has in view
in cultivating the domestic animals, can be modified indefinitely by
culture. For example, the sheep in a state of nature is provided
with two kinds of covering. The outer or principal covering is
a coarse hair. Beneath this hair, and concealed by it, is a short,
fine down. It is this down, which, by the culture of sheep in a
state of domestication, has become the woolly fleece, and which
is again susceptible of being modified by the climate in which
it is developed, or the care of which it is the object. This
modification of the secondary characters of animals is sometimes
the result of high agricultural skill, or, to use the more accurate
modern term, zootechnic skill, directed to a specific object, as in
the labors of Bakewell and Elman, in England, and of Ham¬
mond, in Vermont. But the modification generally takes place
insensibly.
14
THE SOLIDARITY OP THE INDUSTRIES.
One of the most important of these insensible influences is
that which the wool manufacture exerts in its demand for the
material for its fabrics. The merino, as I have observed, when
introduced into France was a small, short-woolled sheep. The
higher feeding naturally given to the precious animals necessarily
tended to increase the size, and at the same time to lengthen the
fibre, it being the fixed law that woolly fibre is increased in
length but not in diameter by increased nourishment. French
industry, with that creative genius which is its highest attribute,
saw in the newly acquired fibre a means for creating new, soft
fabrics for female wear, in place of the coarse and stiff serges
which were the characteristic stuffs of the former country. Here
was a fresh raw material for the novelties in dress which the
world of fashion is perpetually calling upon France to supply.
Remember that before the present century no female stuffs were
made of fine wool. In 1801, Dauphinot Pallotan invented the
most beautiful of all woollen tissues, the French merino, at pres¬
ent, or recently, the chief product of Rheims and its fifty thou¬
sand workmen, and the sole product of a single establishment at
Cateau, with ten thousand workmen. In 1826, M. Jourdain in¬
vented all-wool moitsselines de laines for printing, the material
being long merino fleece. In 1838, he created challis, a fabric
with a warp of silk organzine and a weft of merino wool. Since
then the dress fabrics of which merino wool forms the chief com¬
ponent material have been infinitely varied to meet the insatiable
demands of fashion for change. The Exposition of 1867 demon¬
strated that of all the fabrics which the art of man has produced,
there are none which bear comparison in tastefulness, variety,
and perfection of workmanship, with the French dress tissues of
merino wool.
The demands of the wool industry of France gradually and
insensibly converted the fibre of her merinos into a combing wool.
The wool could not be made to acquire the length required for
combing without increasing the size of the animal. The merinos
of France are the largest animals of tbeir race in the world.
They are said to be, as compared with the American merino,
bred for a different purpose, " what the great, pampered short-
THE SOLIDARITY OP THE INDUSTRIES.
15
horn of England is to the little, hardy, black cattle of the Scotch
Highlands." The influence of French manufacturers has ex¬
tended even to the sheep husbandry of the southern hemisphere.
As the fine combing-wool industry of France was extended, her
own wools became insuflScient to supply her looms. Regenera¬
tors of the Rambouillet stock were largely introduced into Aus¬
tralia, originally producing only clothing wools. The wools of
Australia have becomelengthened in their fibre, and the exports
of Australia, according to jNI. Moll, are now princijially destined
for the combing-wool industry.
The peculiar necessities of the French woollen industry have
led to one of the most remarkable zootechnic achievements —
and one which could not have been eflFected without the auspices
of the manufacturer,—the creation of a new race of sheep and
of an absolutely new fibre. The enormous prices of Cashmere
shawls stimulated the French manufacturers in the early part of
this century to emulate the Indian tissues. They succeeded per¬
fectly in the fabrication. They induced, also, the importation
of a large number of Cashmere goats, the animals furnishing
down from which the Indian shawls are fabricated. It was
found, however, that the goats could not be cultivated with
profit, as each animal produced only three or four ounces of
down. In 1828, there was accidentally produced at the farm of
Mauchamp, cultivated by M. Graux, a ram of the merino race,
which besides other peculiarities or monstrosities was provided
with a wool remarkable for its softness, and above all for its
lustre, which resembled that of silk. By a system of careful
breeding, M. Graux succeeded in obtaining a small flock of ani¬
mals from this stock whose wool was perfectly silky. He at
first met with but little encouragement. The ordinary manu¬
facturers, to whom he offered his wool, complained that it was so
pliant and slippery that nothing could be done with it. Fortu¬
nately the silky wool attracted the attention of M. Davin, a wool
manufacturer familiar with the fabrication of the Cashmere fibre,
and distinguished for his zeal and skill in introducing new mate¬
rial into the textile arts. Taking the silky wool in hand, he
succeeded in making magnificent stuffs which won the admiration
O O
16
THE SOLIDARITY OF THE INDUSTRIES.
of connoisseurs. Merinos, mousselines, satins of China, and
shawls, made of this material, equalled, if they did not surpass,
analogous products made of the finest Cashmere yarns. " The
silky wool," says a report of the Imperial Society of Acclima¬
tion, "is destined to replace completely in our industry the
Cashmere wool which comes from Thibet. It is fully as brilliant
as Cashmere and as soft, while it costs less as a raw material, and
requires less manipulation to be transformed to yam."
The IMauchamp or silk-woolled race of sheep is now definitely
established. I need not say that this beautiful creation could
not have been effected in a country where the arts were not
already developed to apply it.
The merino sheep, introduced into Germany abbut the same
time as into France, received an improvement in an opposite
direction. This direction was mainly given by the demands of
the German wool manufacture, though partially due to a dry
climate and unfruitful soil. Germany was already provided
with sheep producing coarse clothing wool. They continued to
suffice for the clothing of the great mass of the people, who were
not elevated and wealthy as they have since become through the
influence of the protective Zollverein, nor educated, as they have
since been in Prussia, through the wise counsels of the immortal
Humboldt. The early woollen manufacture of Germany was
directed to the supply of cloths for the more wealthy classes.
The combing-wool industry had been scarcely attempted. The
first demand of the manufacture, therefore, was for fine clothing
wools. The German flock-masters, being generally wealthy
landholders, possessed the ability and intelligence to respond to
this demand. The ideal in sheep husbandry became the pro¬
duction of the finest possible fibre. The ideal has been com¬
pletely attained. The characteristic wools of Germany, those
of the Electoral race, are much finer than those produced from
the original Spanish stock ; and the animals are much smaller in
size, while the fleeces are correspondingly small. The extremely
fine fibre, designated in Germany as noble wool, is marked by
the distinctness and great number of its curves or wrinkles.
The wools are distinguished not only for their fineness, but the
THE SOLIDARITY OP THE INDDSTRIES.
17
extreme shortness of their staple, which give the felting qualities
essential for the fine broadcloths and doeskins, for which German
manufactures are so celebrated. These wools bear the highest
price of any known, although the profitableness of their culture
exclusively is questioned even in Germany. Still they form a
leading soui'ce of German wealth. Eighteen per cent, of all
the exports of wealthy Prussia consists of woollen manufactures,
and those principally fine cloths. Thus we have a manufactur¬
ing industry acting directly upon agriculture; this reacting in
its turn upon manufactures, until a distinct physiognomy is im¬
pressed upon the German national fabric, and the chief agricul¬
tural distinction of Germany has become that of possessing the
most perfect fine-wool husbandry of the world.
Results quite different, but no less distinctive, have been
effected by the infiuence of the woollen manufacture in the
United States. Sheep husbandry in this country has been
hitherto pursued exclusively with a view to the production of
wool, mutton being a mere incident, and manure hardly a
matter of consideration. The character of our sheep husbandry
has, therefore, been wholly determined by the demand of manu¬
facture. The American manufacturers have found it more
profitable to run their mills upon the classes of goods in demand
by the mass of our people. The masses of American consumers,
although not demanding superfine cloths, require goods of a
better and finer class than would content the masses of European
population. Sound and sightly cloths, but of medium fine¬
ness, are in the greatest demand. Medium wools, produced by
merino grades, of considerable length of fibre, are well suited
to the production of flannels and fancy cassirneres, our principal
products in the clothing-wool manufacture. It is true that the
fine broadcloth manufacture was attempted under the fostering
influence of the protective tariffs of 1824 and 1828, and was fur¬
ther extended under the tariff of 1842 ; and the culture of Saxony
or superfine woolled sheep was pursued with enthusiasm. The
horizontal tariff of 1846 destroyed the broadcloth manufacture,
and at the same time swept away our Saxony sheep or merged
them into coarser flocks. The demand for broadcloth wools
8
18
THE SOLIDARITY OP THE INDUSTRIES.
having ceased, the American breeders of merinos, adapting
themselves to the wants of manufactures, sought to produce a
coarser and longer staple than had been in request at an earlier
period. They have produced, through these influences, a race of
sheep designated as the American merino and now recognized
as a distinctive variety, like the Saxon merino or French merino.
The most complete account of the American merino is the elabo¬
rate paper furnished to the report " On "Wool and Manufactures
of AVool," at the Paris Exposition, by Dr. Eandall, the highest
American authority on sheep husbandry, and no less favorably
known as author of the Life of Jefferson. The remarkable
improvement in productions of wool, effected by American hus¬
bandry upon the original Spanish stock, is the most interesting
fact brought out in this excellent paper. From facts and ex¬
periments in scouring which he details. Dr. Randall says: "It
appears, first, that prime American merinos produced more
washed wool, in 1844-46, than was produced of unwashed wool
by the original stock in Spain, at their palmiest period; second,
that prime American merinos produce about as much scoured
wool now as they did of washed wool in 1844-46, and nearly
twice as much as the picked merino flock of the King of Great
Britain from 1798 to 1802. They undoubtedly produce twice
as much scoured wool as the average of the prime Spanish flocks
of that period." By breeding to produce heavy fleeces, the wool
of the American merino has become elongated so as to make it
a true combing wool. No use of this quality has been made
until very recently, except in delaines, a comparatively low
fabric. The American Commissioner at the Par-is Exposition, in
the department of woollens, who, though lai-gely interested in
manufactures, had at that time but little practical experience in
fabricating, was fascinated by the magnificent French merino
fabrics at the Exposition. Upon his return to this country his
attention was drawn to a fleece of American merino wool, which
had been sent from Ohio to the office of the Association which I
serve, to illustrate the combing qualities of the American staple.
He instantly resolved to emulate in the mill of which he had the
direction, with our merino combing wools, the French fabrics
THE SOLIDARITY OP THE INDUSTRIES.
19
whlcli he had admired abroad. "Within less than two years the
resolution has been crowned with complete success ; his establish¬
ment has achieved several entirely new dress fabrics, made wholly
of native fibre, such as had never been attempted in England,
and at least three thousand pounds of American merino clothing
wool are consumed per week in this new fabrication. This
achievement I regard as the event in this year's history of the
woollen industry of the United States. Perhaps I may be excused
for recalling in this connection an intimation which I made in a
published address five years ago : " The true value of the fleece
of the American merino is for combing purposes, for which it
has a remarkable analogy with that of France. This country will
never know the inestimable treasure which it has in its fleeces
until American manufacturers appropriate them to fabricate the
soft tissues of merinos, thibets, and cashmeres, to which France
owes the splendor of the industries of combing wool at Paris,
Eheims, and Roubaix."
The relations of our industry with agriculture are so fascinating
that they have too long detained me from the most important
branch of my subject, — the relations of the wool manufacture to
the higher arts and the other mechanical industries. As the
oldest of textile arts, the woollen industry has filled the pages
of history with illustrations of its civilizing influences. Passing by
the voyage of the Argonauts for the golden fleece, and the fruits
of that expedition, the birth of the arts of navigation and the
origin of Phoenician letters, — a fable, indeed, but one teaching
the same lesson which I would inculcate ; passing by Tyre, en¬
riched by the commerce of its murex-dyed tissues and fleeces;
the Italian States, Florence, Venice, Pisa, and Genoa, which
were the first in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries to appropriate
the arts which the Crusaders brought back from Asia, and who
found in the woollen manufacture the source of the wealth whose
fruits survive in the "stones of Venice," and the wonders of
Florentine art, for IMichel Angelo's great statue of David was
paid for by the wool-weavers' guild; passing by Flanders,
where the growth of the wool manufacture and of Flemish art
were contemporaneous, and which subsequently became the cen-
20
THE SOLIDAUITY OP THE INDUSTRIES.
tre from which the art of fabricating woollens spread into Eng¬
land, France, and Germany,— turning aside from these brilliant
examples, I would point you to a homely and familiar illustration
at our own doors of the indirect influence of the woollen indus¬
try upon the sister arts.
Mr. Benton has pointed out with singular felicity the succes¬
sive events which mark out the routes of the great railroad lines
across the continent; first the path of the buflido, then the In¬
dian's, then the trapper's trail, then the emigrant's wagon and
dawning civilization, and finally the railroad train, and civiliza¬
tion accomplished. Manufacturing industry has been established
by a similar succession.
Settlements are made in the beginning upon our water courses.
Water power is first applied to the saw-mill; then comes the
grist-mill; then follows the woollen-mill: in old times it was
the fulling-mill. The fulling-mill was, and the woollen-mill now
is, to a matured industry, what the emigrant's wagon is to the
great interior, the dawn of manufacturing enterprise, as that is
of permanent settlement. The cotton, the machinery, the iron,
the silk, the paper manufactures follow and build up our Lowells,
Patersons, and Manchesters. This is no fancy sketch. I remem¬
ber the time when the Salmon Falls River, watering a district
which was occupied by one of the earliest and most impor¬
tant settlements in New England, dating back to 1632, had no
other manufacturing establishments than a saw-mill, a grist-mill,
and a fulling-mill. The latter disappeared, and was succeeded
in 1828 by a well-appointed woollen factory. Afterwards came
the cotton-mills of Great Falls; and the Salmon Falls River
moves now one hundred and thirty-two thousand cotton spindles
and fourteen sets of woollen machinery. This is but a type of
the march of manufactures everywhere in this country. The
first textile manufacturing establishment in Massachusetts was a
fulling-mill, built at Rowley, near Ipswich, in 1643. This waS
the pioneer of a textile industry in Massachusetts, which, ac¬
cording to the Commonwealth returns in 1865, amounted to
$144,730,679. The woollen-mills in the North-west, California,
and Oregon, are in their turn the pioneers of a diversified in-
THE SOLIDARITY OF THE INDUSTRIES.
21
dustry In the newly settled States. The erection of a woollen
mill of two or four sets seems to us at the East hut a trifling
affair, but to the new States it is an epoch, the dawn of manu¬
factures, which all experience tells us will expand into a largely
diversified industry and its attendant results, a superior civiliza¬
tion. The historian, Thiers, chronicles a more insignificant
event than the building of a four-set mill, as an epoch in history.
The introduction of a little manufacture of cloths, at Abbeville
in France, by Colbert, is recorded as a more important conquest
than that of his master, Louis XIV., who struck down the
Spanish power. I have mentioned the fulling-mill as really the
pioneer of the textile industry in this country. Few have a
conception of the very brief period within which the woollen
industry has attained its present development. A hundred
years ago in England, and fifty years ago in this country, the
woollen manufacture, as it now is, had hardly an existence. The
spinning and weaving of wool was simply a domestic industry,
power being used only in the fulling-mills. Dyer, despised by
Dr. Johnson as poet, because his subject, the Fleece, partook
of "the meanness naturally adhering to trade and manufac¬
tures," but now regarded as a better poet than the great critic,
and also as the best annalist of the industry of his time, de¬
scribes the manner in which the products of the woollen industry
were collected, a century or more ago, for British commerce : —
" From little tenements by wood or croft.
Through many a slender path, how sedulous.
As rills to river broad, they speed their way
To public roads.
And thence explore.
Through every navigable wate, the sea,
That leaps the green earth 'round."
Some of our leading living wool manufacturers were apprenticed
in their youth to clothiers, or the workers of the old fulling-mill;
and one so apprenticed, from whom I recently sought reminis¬
cences of the early manufacture, well remembers the farmers of
Connecticut trudging miles through the woods with rolls of cloth
22
THE SOLIDARITY OP THE INDUSTRIES.
upon their shoulders, to be felted and dressed in the fulling-mill.
We sometimes regret the Arcadian days, when
" Maids at tlie wheel, the weaver at the loom,
Sat blithe and happy."
But considering the matter more practically, how vast an im¬
provement upon this toilful and unproductive industry is that of
the present time, when a single establishment, such as the Wash¬
ington Mills, of Lawrence, Massachusetts, with its hundred sets,
was capable, according to the statement of its late lamented
treasurer, Mr. Stetson, by working day and night, to produce
all the woollen clothing for an army of a million men.
Let me give the relations of the woollen manufacture to partic¬
ular textile arts, and first to the cotton manufacture. The cotton
manufacture of Great Britain, the most stupendous phenomenon
of modern industry, was the natural offshoot of the woollen
manufacture. Through the woollen trade, mainly, England had
become a nation of spinners and weavers, or of artisans sub¬
sidiary to them. A national taste and skill had been developed
in the textile arts by the manipulation of wool, which was
readily applicable to a kindred fibre. Many of the inventions
upon which the cotton manufacture is dependent, such as the in¬
vention of the fly-shuttle, which doubled the power of the weaver
and made necessary the subsequent inventions which increased
the spinning power, were contributed directly from the seats of
the woollen manufacture. What was scarcely less important, the
commercial connections established by the woollen trade gave
to the cotton manufacture, Avhen completely inaugurated by the
inventions of Hargreaves, Arkwright, and Compton, a command
of foreign markets for unlimited exports of the new British tex¬
tile. The British cotton manufacture is as truly the offspring
of the woollen industry as New England is of Old England.
This may be called the most important incident of the woollen
industry; for in giving birth to that of cotton, it secured to
England, from the fabrication of that textile, a profit in fifty
years of one thousand million 'pounds sterling. Pursue these
THE SOLIDARITY OP THE INDUSTRIES.
23
consequences still further, and we have the cotton gin in Amer¬
ica, the growth of the slave power, its aggressions, the war of
the rebellion, and emancipation !
The cotton manufacture, reaching maturity, discharged its
filial debt by giving an unexpected and singular development
to the woollen industry.
Between 1830 and 1840, cotton became an important auxiliary
to wool, through its use in warps for woollen or worsted filling
in the fabrication of tissues for female wear. Many varieties
of these union fabrics are classed under the generic name of
cotton delaines. This fabric was first introduced into France in
1833, and into England in 1834. It is practically the same as
a woollen fabric, the warps being so covered with wool that the
presence of cotton can be observed only by the closest inspection.
Its cheapness, durability, and sightliness, when printed, make
its introduction an invaluable boon to women of moderate means.
Not less than sixty thousand yards are annually manufactured in
this country, and the cheapness and excellence of the American
fabric practically excludes its foreign rivals. The cotton warps
are now used as vehicles to extend the surface of wool and
worsted mohair and alpaca in a countless variety of dress fabrics.
The wool of a single sheep may be extended by the cotton warp
so as to fabricate 672 yards of so-called alpaca fabrics, enough
for fifty-six dresses. All the cheaper fabrics are made by this
wholly modern alliance of wool and cotton, and the great manu¬
facturing cities of Bradford, in England, and Roubaix, in Fi-ance,
are chiefly occupied in the fabrication of these cheap tissues,
whose undoubted fragility is rendered less objectionable by the
fickleness of female fashion.
An establishment producing fabrics of this class will give us
the best illustration of the manifold and important relations of
the woollen industry of the present period. I select the estab¬
lishment known as the Pacific Mills, located at Lawrence, Mas¬
sachusetts, because it is the oldest and largest of its class. This
establishment turns out an annual product of printed delaines
and calicoes, principally the former, valued at not less than
$7,500,000. In the production of its union fabrics the mill works
24
THE SOLIDARITY OP THE INDUSTRIES.
up each year thirty-five hundred thousand pounds of fleece wool
or the fleeces of ten thousand slieep each week. For washing
this wool it makes and consumes annually two hundred and fifty
thousand pounds of soap, composed by the domestic products,
lard and caustic soda. It combines with this wool, in the form
of cotton warps, thirty-five hundred thousand pounds of cotton.
In tlie processes of spinning and weaving it expends twelve thou¬
sand gallons of lubricating oils and ten thousand gallons of olive
oil. The raw materials for dyeing and printing, such as soda
ash, sulphur, prussiates of potash, the various preparations of
tin, the dyewoods, indigo, cochineal, yellow berries, and aniline
colors, &c., require an annual expenditure of $400,000. The
consumption of potato starch is five hundred tons a year, or the
product of one hundred and twenty-five thousand bushels of
potatoes. $30,000 a year is expended in lumber and nails for
packing boxes, an expenditure which, in twenty years, would
build up a considerable town. As much more is expended an¬
nually in iron, steel, lumber, and paints for repairs; fourteen
thousand tons of coal are consumed yearly, although the motive
power of the mill is water. To this may be added the food and
clothing of thirty-six hundred operatives aud of their dependants,
at least twice as many more, and the items of transporta¬
tion of raw material and manufactured products. Consider¬
ing these multiform relations, how vast is the wave of pro¬
duction set in motion by the wheels of a single mill, and how
broadly extended are its ever-enlarging circles; for the mate¬
rials of consumption above enumerated show that the pro¬
ductive stimulus of this industrial centre moves labor, not only
in fields of the South and the pastures of the "West, but in the
plains of India, the forests of Brazil, and the islands of the
equator.
The wool manufacture makes itself auxiliary to other textile
arts, as to those of linen and silk. The flax or linen manu¬
facture is particularly allied to that of wool in the produc¬
tion of Brussels and tapestry carpets. A single Brussels carpet
factory, producing five hundred and fifty thousand yards of car¬
peting, consumes annually a quantity of linen warps of the value
THE SOLIDARITY OF THE INDUSTRIES.
25
of $150,000. Another establishment, making principally tapes¬
try, Brussels, and velvet carpets, to the extent of eight hundred
and eighteen thousand yards, besides thirty thousand yards of
Brussels, consumed for the filling and backs 793,8G6 pounds of
linen yarn and jute, costing $1G7,000, besides two hundred and
two thousand pounds of cotton yarn for warps, costing $90,000.
The silk manufacture is an important contributor to the wool¬
len industry. One form of the alliance of silk and wool is the
silk poplin, the warp being of long combing wool and the weft
of silk. This tasteful, though useful fabric, is now largely pro¬
duced in Connecticut and New Jersey, and the American produc¬
tion [compares favorably with the celebrated poplins of Ireland.
Another form of this alliance is the silk-warped flannel, now
produced in our mills in connection with the manufacture of the
beautiful opera flannels, formerly brought exclusively from
France.
The most important form is the silk-mixed Cassimere, the
alliance of silk with merino wool, through the infinite combina¬
tions made by our Crompton mule-producing fabrics, distin¬
guished for their subdued lustre, and the softness of their
neutral tints. A single manufacturing house of your city,
whose silk and wool mixtures are admitted to vie with those of
Elbceuf, and which, as I shrewdly suspect, the dealers, not the
manufacturers, usually sell as such, consumes annually $150,000
worth of American silk organzine. The whole amount of silk
consumed by our mills is estimated by good authority at not less
in value than a million dollars.
I can barely refer to two other very important industries, one
of which is directly in one department, and tlie other mainly
founded upon our wool manufacture,—the manufacture of hats
and that of ready-made clotliing. The former, in one of its
branches,—that of wool hats, and in the first part of its processes,
the preparation of raw material,—is really a branch of the wool
manufacture. It is too important a branch not to be referred to,
as the annual production of wool hats in the United States ex¬
ceeds in value ten million dollars. The industry of ready-made
clothinor, datina: back no further than 1824, and now the most
O' o
4
26
THE SOLIDARITY OP THE INDUSTRIES.
imj^iortant single one of our city industries, obtains its supply
of material substantially from the American wool manu¬
facture. The official statistics of Massachusetts for 1865 show
that this industry in the city of Boston alone yielded a produc¬
tion of $15,186,833, and employed fourteen hundred and sev¬
enty-nine males and nineteen thousand, two hundred and five
females. If the production in the other cities is in the.same pro¬
portion, the part which the offspring plays in supporting Ameri¬
can labor is scarcely less important than that of the parent
industry.
I have not time to trace the relations of the woollen manufacture
to the chemical arts, nor to follow in any detail the progress of
discovery from the period of the great impulse given by Colbert,
who, in introducing the woollen manufacture into France, made
improvement in the art of dyeing the object of special care,
considering, as he happily says, " dyeing as the soul of tissues,
without which the body could hardly exist." The discovery of
Prussian blue in 1704, of cbromium in the latter part of the
century, the fixing of color by means of steam in 1810, the ap¬
plication to union fabrics in 1857, the discovery of alizarine m
1826, of murexidc, the reproduction of the Tyrian dye in 1856,
of aniline dyes from coal tar in the same year, and finally the most
brilliant chemical discovery of the last two years, that of pro¬
ducing from coal tar the coloring principle of madder, alizarine,
— a discovery of such practical value that the product of the
coal fields is already replacing the product of the madder fields
among the Scotch dyers. Most of these discoveries have had
their impulse, as the great industries which supply the materials
for dyeing have their support, in the textile arts, and principally
in the woollen industry, which makes the largest application of
color.
I must hasten to my final illustration; the relations of the
woollen manufacture to the industries producing machinery. In
this view I do not regard of chief importance the many spe¬
cial industries directly and exclusively employed in constructing
machinery and supplies for our mills, although the capital and
labor which they employ make them worthy of more than a pass¬
ing notice. A few establishments construct all the classes of
THE SOLIDARITY OF THE INDUSTRIES.
27
machinery made use of in our mills. But generally the worK is
divided. Some build only pickers, others carding machines,
others jacks, others looms, others shears. Others make supplies
for both woollen and cotton mills, as card clothing, reeds, har¬
nesses, shuttles, bobbins, spools, and belting. The bare enumera¬
tion shows how important is this direct relation of the woollen
manufacture. But I desire in closing to call your attention to a
broader view, and therefore will not separate the woollen manu¬
facture from the other textile arts of which it was the pioneer.
The textile industries of the wool and cotton made, in England
during the last century, the first extended application of the new
motor power, steam, which, for some time after its appearance,
had been condemned to a sort of obscurity by being applied only
to the drainage of mines. The power of steam was first made
conspicuous by the woollen and cotton mills. The factory system
and the movement of textile machinery by power demanded the
construction of great numbers of pieces of machinery of the same
dimensions, and also the construction of works of nice mechan¬
ism, which the mere hand-craftsmen, the whitesmiths of a former
age, could not su2)ply in sufficient number, nor with the requisite
precision of construction. Machine shops were, therefore,
erected upon a. large scale, to be moved by power. It is well
known that the great machine shops of this country arose con¬
temporaneously with the factories in Providence, Lowell, and
Philadelphia. The necessities of the textile manufactures, then,
and for the first time, called into existence the automatic mechani¬
cal contrivances called machine tools and engines ; the planers and
lathes and steam hammers which substitute the firm, iron arm.
for the weak and uncertain human hand, — contrivances which
have caused the disappearance, in the manufacturing world at
least, of the file, the plane, the chisel, the auger, the drill, in
the hand of man, except for the most trivial and unimportant
purposes. The power and accuracy of constructive art were
thus marvellously extended. Masses of iron of thirty or forty
tons' weight are wrought and transformed with more facility and
in less time than a bar of a few hundreds' weight could have
been fifty years ago. The precision of construction attained is
so perfect, according to President Barnard, the chief ornament
28
THE SOLIDARITY OP THE INDUSTRIES.
of* the science of your city, who has suggested much which I have
just said, that the dimensions of a required piece of work may be
gauged to the one-millionth part of an inch. The machine tools,
created by and for the textile manufactures, were now ready for
new applications. Kiver aSll lake steamboats, locomotives,
ocean steamers, monitors, appeared in succession, the methods
of interior transportation are revolutionized, and the entire
naval marine, and almost entire commercial marine of the world
are completely transformed. In all the manufacturing nations,
and particularly in our own, a passion for invention has been
developed with the new facilities for putting in practice the con¬
ceptions of inventive power. The arts succeed each other by a
true generation. Idea begets idea, and the invention of to-day
gives birth to the invention of to-morrow. In the genial atmos¬
phere of invention new industries take root in the old, like
epiphytes in the humid forests of the tropics. Watchmaking
by machinery was established at Waltham, the cradle of the cotton
manufacture in Massachusetts; and a still more luxurious art,
the working of silver plate by machinery, was founded at Provi¬
dence, the birthplace of the cotton manufacture of Rhode Island.
For a long time the mechanical arts reacted chiefly upon each
other. The inventive and constructive power invoked by manu¬
factures reached tardily, but at length, the fields of husbandry.
The labor-saving machinery of the farm, the harvesters, reapers,
mowers, and planters of the last two decades, came into exist¬
ence. Agriculture, now doubled in its productive capacity, not
by improvements properly its own, but through the auxihary
forces of the mechanical arts, presents the final and triumphant
demonstration of the solidarity of the industries. This is the
idea which called into existence your noble Institute, which in¬
spires the grand expositions that distinguish the present age, and
which you have made so obvious to our senses by placing the
dahlia, the grape cluster, and the wheat sheaf by the side of the
organ, the engine, and the loom, and by gathering all these fair
products of labor under the self-supporting carpentry of this
vast dome, which is thus an emblem of the unity of national
industry.
PROTECTION A BOON TO CONSUMERS:
AN ADDRESS
DELIVERBD BEFORE THE
NATIOISTAL ASSOCIATIOI^ OF KNIT
GOODS MANUFACTUEEES,
AT THE
SECOND ANNUAL MEETING IN NEW-YORK CITY,
May 1, 1867.
By JOHN L. HAYES.
BOSTON:
PRESS OF JOHN WILSON AND SON.
1867.
ADDRESS.
Gentlemen of the " National Association of Knit-Goods
Mandfactukees:"
The occupation of my time during the brief period of my
connection with your Association, in attention to important
general interests affecting your welfare, has prevented me from
obtaining that minute statistical information which would
justify me in attempting, as I would have preferred, the
discussion of questions specially relating to your interests;
iphile, at the same time, my recent occupation has convinced
me of the necessity of continually re-enforcing our own minds,
by seeking fi-esh, or recalling dimly remembered, illustrations
of the great principles upon which the prosperity of American
industry is based. With the absorption of the public mind in
questions affecting the national existence; with the pervading
influence of the literature of England, tinged as it is by its
own political philosopby ; with the increased favor accorded to
such expounders of that philosophy as Bright and Mill, on
account of their sympathy with the cause of American free¬
dom ; with the power of a great municipal press, with a single
brilliant exception in one of its representatives, allied to the
interests of a foreign commercial policy; with a new genera¬
tion of men uninstructed in those doctrines which their fathers
4
accepted as axioms, — there is urgent need even at the East,
enriched as it has been by diversified industry, of reviving the
faith in the principles of political economy, which, twenty years
ago, were accepted as firmly as religious truth. I have, there¬
fore, no hesitation in inviting your attention to one of the
many considerations by which the American system of political
economy is commended to public favor. I propose to main¬
tain the proposition, that protection of domestic industries is
a boon to American consumers. Waiving all attempts to
fortify my position by deductions from assumed general prin¬
ciples, the favorite method of free-trade economists, I propose
to consider this proposition inductively; and to sliow, not from
what Lord Bacon calls " mere rumors or whispers of experi¬
ence," but from well-establislied facts and phenomena exhibited
in the progress of various industries, that the benefits accru¬
ing to consumers from their establishment through protection,
whether by tariffs or patents, have counterbalanced the tem¬
porary inconveniences experienced from duties or restrictions.
Many may admit the soundness of this proposition, and yet,
by the variety of illustration, may gain in the impression of its
truth. For this reason. Dr. Paley defends the use of variq^
illustrations of natural theology. As he says, " It is by a fre¬
quent or continued, meditation upon a subject, by placing a
subject in different points of view, by induction of particulars,
by variety of examples, by applying principles to the solution
of phenomena, by dwelling upon proofs and consequences,
that mental exercise is drawn into any particular channel."*
To a large class, something more than impression of the truth
of this proposition is necessary, — namely, conviction: and while
it is a party cry that protection by tariffs is a tax at the ex¬
pense of the many for the benefit of a few; and when persons
speaking with authority on questions of revenue could be
* Paley's Natural Theology. School Library edition. Vol. ii. p. 206.
5
found to argue, that the recently proposed tariff on wool and
woollens, if it should have the effect sought by those who
proposed it, would tax the community to the extent of over
seventy millions per annum, for the protection of an interest
tlie whole value of whose product cannot be considered in
excess of thirty-six millions, — it cannot be unnecessary to
multiply examples of the fallacies of such reasoning.
I shall draw my illustrations irrespectively from the effects
of protective duties and of patents. And here I would observe,
that the strongest advocates of free trade have admitted the
fallacy of what has been called their most comprehensive and
most noted maxim, — the laissez-faire, or let-alone principle,
— the doctrine of non-interference by government with the
economical interests of society, by recognizing the reasonable¬
ness of granting patents and copyrights. " The condemnation
of monopolies," says Mr. J. S. Mill, the ablest of the British
economists, " ought not to extend to patents by which the
originator of an improved process is permitted to enjoy, for
a limited period, the exclusive privilege of using his own im¬
provement. This is not making the commodity dear for his
benefit, but merely postponing a part of the increased cheap¬
ness which the public owe to the inventor, in order to com¬
pensate and i-eward him for the service." * How marvellous
has been the admitted effect of the patent-protective policy
upon the wealth and comfort of the people of Great Britain!
Mr. Woodcroft, the Superintefadent of the British Patent Office,
attributes the growth of the cotton manufacture in Great
Britain from 1766, when the entire value of cotton goods
manufactured was X200,000 a year, to 1862, when 451,000
* It appears from the report of the testimony taken by a Select Committee of the
House of Lords, in 1852, appointed to consider a bill proposing to amend the then ex¬
isting law of patents, that many Englishmen, — among them the celebrated engineer,
Mr. Brunei, and Mr. J. L. Ricardo, a Member of the House of Commons,— are so con¬
sistent in their free-trade doctrines as to recommend the total abolition of patent laws.
6
workpeople were employed in 2,887 factories, containing over
thirty million spindles, to ten inventions, — those of Kay, Paul,
Ark Wright, Hargreaves, Radcliffe, Cartwright, Jacquard, Rob¬
erts, and Heilman.* It has been said, " Every one of these ten
inventions which have produced these marvellous results was
protected by patents. Each inventor was stimulated by the
reward which this protection opened to his hope, if not his
fruition, and, without the prospect of appropriating to himself
wealth and power, would have shrunk from the labors of
creating and introducing his invention. Granting, as is quite
probable, that the individual importance of these men, in rela¬
tion to the cotton manufacture, is somewhat exaggerated; and
that the credit given to them should be shared with the eight
hundred men wiio have taken out patents for improvements
in this manufacture, — it is no less true, that the whole system
of the manufacture of cotton in Great Britain is founded upon
patents." And, it may be added, it thus presents the most
marvellous example of the beneficent effects of a protective
policy, — an exception which utterly confounds the doctrine
of non-interfercnce by government with the economical inter¬
ests of society. In no other country have the economical
interests of society been so dependent upon the governmental
protection of patents as in our own. The cheapness of securing
patent privileges here, our admirable system of examination,
and the fidelity of official administration, have rendered our pat¬
ent system a complete security and reward for the inventive
genius of our people. We have thus one great, conservative
system of protection, in which there has been no instability.
For over thirty years it has remained the same in all its essen¬
tial features, amidst the fluctuations which have disturbed
other portions of our industrial system. The inventions which
* Brief Biographies of Inventors of Slachines for the Manufacture of the Textile
Fahrics. By Bennett Woodcroft, F.R.S. Page 9.
7
it has stimulated have cheered our homes, given efficiency to
our workshops, doubled our mechanical power by the substi¬
tution of machinery, cheapened all our agricultural products,
and have given a national character to our arts. We may
safely point to the Patent Office as the one institution which,
above all others, exemplifies the beneficent influence of tbe
Federal Government upon the wealth and comfort of our peo¬
ple.
Upon the threshold of our inquiry as to the beneficent
effects upon consumbrs of protection by tariffs, we are met by
the objection, tbat the very demand for a duty implies an in¬
crease of the price «of the imported commodity, and that the
protective duty raises the price, not only of the goods imported
paying the duty, but of the domestic article competing with it.
Indeed, the popular argument of the opponents of our policy
is, that the prices to consumers are increased by the whole
amount of the duty imported. No such effect has ever been
sought by the advocates of protection, nor has it ever been
attained. The rates of duties are fixed, not to guard against
tlie average prices, but the lowest prices, of foreign commodi¬
ties. The practical benefits of protective duties are found,
not so much in relieving from regular importations made by
our own merchants, with a full knowledge of the wants of the
country, but to secure our ports of entry from being flooded
with surpluses forced upon us by foreigners to relieve tbeir
own markets, and sustain their home prices, or to overwhelm
our industry at any temporary sacrifice, that they may com¬
mand our markets. Of the great bulk of tbe products of our
manufactures and arts, it is undoubtedly true, as I hope to
show by examples, that — while they need to be defended by
duties against injurious fluctuations of price, so characteristic
of foreign trade, and against the surplus productions of foreign
nations, which, thrown upon a well-stocked home market,
would lower, to the price of the imported commodity, our
8
whole domestic product, though tenfold in amount — they are
dependent for prices upon domestic competition, and are
therefore in the main unaffected by duties.
Protection is a boon to the consumer; because, by relieving
domestic industry from foreign fluctuations and excesses, it
preserves the industry which is the chief source of supply for
the necessities and comforts of our people. One of our most
revered living teachers,* under the quaint name of Jonathan B.
Wise (Jonathan, be wise'), some twenty years ago illustrated,
in a simple pamphlet, which should be written in letters of
gold, " our actual dependence upon home production, and the
consequent wisdom of defending our own*industry from every
danger." He demonstrated that any people who would be well
clad, well fed, and well supplied with the comforts of civilized
life, must produce themselves nine-tenths of their consump¬
tion,— that being the amount of our own production, — and
that it is only upon this condition that they can pay for liberal
supplies. He showed that the foreign trade of the whole com¬
mercial world is but ten per cent of the value of its industry,
and that the greatest commercial nations derive but a very small
part of their supplies from foreign commerce. He demonstrated
that the attempt to substitute any considerable portion of the
product of our domestic industry, by importing the cheaper for¬
eign articles, would inevitably cause such goods to advance so
as to cost more than the prices of the home market, and that
we cannot pay for more than one-tenth of our consumption, by
increasing our exports; because no foreign market will bear
any considerable addition to our products without a heavy fall
in prices: as in 1847, when our export of breadstufis, in the
face of one of the severest famines on record, broke down the
British market, and ruined scores of merchants abroad and at
home. These considerations alone establish the paramount
importance of sustaining our domestic industry, and render it
* Stephen Colwell, of Philadelphia.
9
necessary for me simply to exemplify the benefits which this
industry has derived from the protective policy.
I seek the first illustration of my subject from your peculiar
manufacture. Although single knitting frames have been
operated by isolated workmen, particularly at Germantown
and Philadelphia, the hosiery business did not exist in this
country, as a branch of manufacture, properly so called, be¬
fore 1832. The germs of the manufacture were sown in two
localities, from which have sprung the two characteristic
manufactures of New York and New England. The knitting
frame, the same machine substantially as the original inven¬
tion of William Lee in 1585, was first adapted to power by
Timothy Bailey, at Albany, in 1831, at the suggestion of
Mr. Egbert Egberts, the son of an officer of the army of the
Revolution, and first operated by power in Cohoes, in 1832.
The credit of the introduction of the power knitting frame
clearly belongs to Mr. Egberts, as Bailey was employed and
paid by him for the special purpose of adapting the frame to
power, after two other workmen had failed. Mr. Egberts liad
great difiiculty in introducing his fabrics; and it is said, in the
early days of the manufacture, vainly wandered through the
streets of New York, urging merchants to permit him to leave
samples of his goods for sale. From his enterprise has sprung
the important and distinctly marked knit-goods manufacture
of New York, which is now represented so ably by a nephew
"of the original manufacturer. The business was not firmly
established until after the Tariff of 1842, when, through its
influence, the originator of this manufacture was happily
rewarded for his enterprise.
The commencement of the manufacture of knit goods in
New England was at Portsmouth, in New Hampshire, in 1834.
It is*liardly necessary to say, that the enterprises, both in New
York and New England, were undertaken under the assurance
of profits given by the highly protective tariffs of 1828 and
10
1832. The first stocking made in Portsmouth was woven, in
1834, by Daniel Pepper, the father of one of the most important
American inventors in this branch of manufacture. The fac¬
tory operations at Portsmouth were confined to spinning the
yarn, which was woven in the mill upon knitting frames, oper¬
ated by the workmen, without power. The work was continued
upon knitting frames, operated by hand, until 1844, although
an important step was taken in concentrating the workmen in
the factory. Up to this time, in Great Britain, all the machine
hosiery was made upon single knitting frames, there being at
that time, viz., 1844, 48,482 stocking frames in tiie three king¬
doms, employing abbut 100,000 persons, — one at each, and
another winding, seaming, Ac., and the rest taking in work.*
Sliglit as was the apparent progress in rivalling the vast English
trade, important improvements were yearly made in the manu¬
facture at Portsmouth; such as adapting the frames for working
ribbed goods, and in applying power with success. Portions
of frames, consisting of the inside work, were imported from
England; certain parts were dispensed with; and simpler and
more efficient machines were constructed, adapted to power.
Some of these are still in operation. Such skill was attained
in making goods, especially women's ribbed hose, that tlie name
of " Portsmouth hose " is still given to that style of goods,
without regard to the locality wher-e they are made. Previous
to 1850, there were only three sets of machinery in operation
upon these goods; and a product of 3,000 dozen per year was
considered so enormous, that the managers of the mill doubted
if a demand could be sustained for this trifling supply. In
making the ribbed hose, one machine made the leg and another
the foot. The price paid for knitting the legs was $1.20 per
dozen, and for knitting the foot 75 cents per dozen. The cost at
the present time is two cents a piece for knitting the legs,^nd
* Reports of Juries. International Exhibition, 1862. Section C, Hosiery, &c. By
William Felkin.
11
five cents for the feet. Where three thousand dozen of these
goods were, made, there are five hundred thousand dozen made
to-day. For knitting ribbed shirts, the prices paid in the early
stage of the manufacture were $4.00 per dozen for the bodies,
and $1.25 for the sleeves. The price now paid for knitting a
single shirt body and sleeves is 12 cents. This great reduction of
the cost of manufacture was the result, both of the firm estab¬
lishment o£ our industry by tariff protection, and of its develop¬
ment througli patent privileges. It has been mainly effected
through the adoption of the circular knitting machine, invented
by Mr. John Pepper in 1851, and by the subsequent introduc¬
tion of tlie circular machine for the same purpose, invented by
the Messrs. Aiken, father and son. One of these machines run
by power, containing 92 horizontal needles, may make from 100
to 200 revolutions per minute, producing the same number of
stitches per minute, thus amounting to from 9,200 to 18,400 per
minute. These two machines have made the ribbed work, so
well fitted by its elasticity to supply the defect of narrowing
in circular knitting, a marked feature of American, and
especially of New England, hosiery, and have enabled us
to supply our own market wholly with these admirable goods,
none being imported. One curious development of the Ameri¬
can idea of the ribbed hosiery, and of the inventions which
have made it cheap and practical, is the Shaker stocking.
This article, consisting of a ribbed, machine-knit leg and foot,
with a hand-knit heel and toe, derives its name from the cir¬
cumstance, that the Society of Shakers at Enfield, in New
Hampshire, having purchased some circular knitting machines,
first combined the hand-knit heel and toe with the machine-
knit leg and foot. The durability given to the stocking by
making the parts where there is the greatest wear of a texture
which can be perfectly shaped by hand, while hard yarn un¬
fitted for machine work can be used, has brought this stocking
into great demand. More than twenty sets of cards are employed
12
in preparing materials for these goods. Pieces of cylindrical
ribbed hosiery, knit in the mill by power, for the legs and feet,
are sent to the women at their homes in the rural districts of
New Hampshire, Maine, and Vermont, to be supplied with the
heels and toes, constituting not an eiglith part of the finished
article. In certain districts, the whole female population is
employed, at spare moments, in this work. It may be safely
asserted, that there is more hand knitting done in New Hamp-
sliire at the present time than sixty years ago, when all the
stockings worn were knit at home. What a commentary is this
singular fact upon the short-sighted wisdom of Queen Eliza¬
beth, who, when William Lee, the founder, by his great in¬
vention, of the knitting manufacture, applied, through Lord
Herndon, for a patent for his knitting frame, rephed in these
words: " My Lord, I have too much love for my poor people
who obtain their bread by the employment of knitting, to give
my money to forward an invention which will tend to their
r^in and make them beggars. Had Mr. Lee made a machine
that would have made silk stockings, I should, I think, have been
somewhat justified in granting him a patent which would have
affected only a small portion of my subjects; but to enjoy the
exclusive privilege of making stockings for the whole of my
subjects, is too important a grant to any individual." * The
American invention may revive hand-knitting among Queen
Victoria's "poor people;" for a factory has been recently
started near Dublin, Ireland, expressly for the manufacture of
Shaker stockings for the London market, by American ma¬
chinery, wliich has been exported from this country.
During the period preceding 1860, although the manufac¬
ture was still inconsiderable, the knitting industry had attained
skill and machinery for an unexpected demand which was
made upon its resources. At the opening of the war, the
* William Felkin, supra cit.
13
Government found this industry fully prepared to furnish the
class of clothing the most indispensable for the health and
comfort of our soldiers. No greater boon could have been
given to the most important of our consumers, the national
defenders, than the woollen underclothing which this protected
industry furnished, and which could have been supplied from
no foreign source. The Government became the largest pur¬
chaser of the heavier and staple classes of hosiery goods, such
as woollen shirts, drawers, blouses, and stockings. Not the
least among the circumstances which made the hygienic con¬
dition of our armies so excellent, and has induced a change of
habit in the whole country, was the general substitution of wool
for cotton underclothing, effected by this and the other branches
of the woollen industry; so that, while no army was ever better
clothed than ours, its commander-in-chief might have said,
with respect to cotton and linen, of our million Union soldiers,
in the words of Falstaff, " There's but a shirt and a half in all
my company." The demand was so great through this source,
and the complete protection afforded by the high prices of gold
and exchange, that the production of the finer classes of ho¬
siery were undertaken which liad never before been attempted.
Looms and maciiinery adapted for^ these goods, with skilled
operatives, were brought from abroad, and the knitting manu¬
facture expanded to national importance.
There is no more striking instance of the rapid development
of a manufacture, than the successful establishment of the
manufacture of cotton hosiery, which was called into existence
by the protective influences of the period of the war. Al¬
though this branch of the hosiery business has not, thus far,
been a pecuniary successj the difficulties of production which
usually attend infant industries have been completely over¬
come. A merchant and manufacturer, whose name is among
the most honored of the patrons and pioneers of American
industry, says, that, before the war, the manufacture of cotton
14
•
hosiery was considered as one of the impossible things.* In
1860, with prices of cotton then prevailing, ordinary cotton
stockings were sold for not less than $3.00 per dozen. They
rose during the war to $5.00 per dozen; parties who under¬
took the manufacture estimated that this class of stockings
could be made for $3.00 per dozen. I am informed that
parties would now undertake the manufacture at $1.60 per
dozen, and that the productive power of present machinery is
not less than 3,000 dozen per day. It is said, that, with cotton
at 14 cents, a substantial domestic article for general consump¬
tion, equal to that which before the war cost 25 cents, could
be furnished to the consumer for 12^ cents. This is a reduc¬
tion of one-half the cost to the consumer, achieved in less than
five years, by efficient protection given during the war.f
If we regard the economy and comfort, to American con¬
sumers, as affected by the present position of the knit-goods
industry, we find it supplying the great mass of the people
with all that they require of underclothing, of a firm and sub¬
stantial quality, made of the best American wool, and of styles
adapted expressly to the wants of consumers. Twenty years
ago, the only article of woollen underclothing worn by the
laboring classes was an occasional Guernsey shirt, of a coarse-,
ness reminding one of the goat's-hair garments which Yirgil
speaks of as worn by the miserable sailors, — miseris velamina
nautis-X Through our manufacture, the use of soft and strong
wool under-garments has become extended among most of our
laboring men, and even women and children. No sumptuary
law could have conduced so much to the health of the commu¬
nity as this influence of our single industry. This manufac-
* Mr. A. A. Lawrence.
t Since the close of the war, the protection aiforded to cotton hosiery by the ad
valorem dutj' is insufficient. Nothing more, however, is asked than an additional spe-
cifio duty of twenty cents per pound, which was recommended by the Committee of
Ways and Means, and by the special Commissioner of the Revenue, at the last session
of Congress.
t Georgics, Lib. III. line 313.
15
ture — although, like all other industries, it will for a long time
to come require to be guarded against foreign fluctuations and
surpluses—may be said to be fully established; and this has
been accomplished in thirty years. It is demonstrated, that all
the goods made by power abroad, can be made equally well
here. Estimates, the correctness of which have never been de¬
nied, state the value of consumption required of limited classes
of knit goods at over $10,000,000.* It can hardly be doubted,
that, within a few years, there will be a demand in this country
for $60,000,000 in value, of all varieties of this manufacture.
With this growing demand, there is no reason why the
knit-goods industry in this country should not soon compete
in importance with that of Great Britain, which employed in
1862, directly and indirectly, 120,000 persons, producing goods
valued at £6,480,000. Great Britain has the start of us only
in the skilled, but miserably paid, labor of the hand-knitting
frame; and it is admitted there, that the old frames must soon be
banished by the circulars and votaries and analogous machines
moved by power: for already twenty-five per cent of the hand
frames have been thrown out of use. Power machinery was
not introduced in England before 1851, the date of its most ef¬
fective application here. With the command of our own mar¬
ket, we shall have equal advantages, except in the price of labor,
which must be overcome by superior inventive activity, to be
called into play by the encouragement it meets here. The
time cannot be distant, when American consumers of the pro¬
ducts of this manufacture will have the same benefits from
protection as they now have in the fully matured manufactures
of hardware, and coarse cottons. ^ *
Although the success of the manufacture last mentioned —
that of coarse cottons — has often been referred to in illustra¬
tion of the general position which I maintain, a few definite
* Letter exhibiting the condition and necessities of the knit goods manufacture,
addressed to Hon. Justin S. Morrill, p. 6.
16
examples of the effect of this industry, as benefiting consum¬
ers, less familiar perhaps than the general statements com¬
monly adduced, may be instructive.
The first important impulse to the manufacture of cotton
in New England vras given by the embarrassments of foreign
commerce and the restrictions upon the importations of goods,
whidli prevailed about 1807 and 1808. In 1812 there were in
Riiode Island and Massachusetts about seventy cotton mills,
with 48,000 spindles. The protective influences of the war,
which had raised the prices of the poor articles of cotton pre¬
viously imported from England from seventeen or twenty cents
to seventy-five cents, so stimulated the manufacture, that, in
1815, the cotton mills in New England had reached the number
of 165, with 119,000 spindles. It was during this period that
Mr. Francis 0. Lowell introduced the power loom at Waltham,
and for the first time arranged all the processes for the con¬
version of cotton into cloth within the same building. At the
close of the war, the rush of importations was so excessive,
, that it was apparent that the American manufacturer must sink
before foreign competition. The war had nourished patriotic
sentiment; and manufacturers were regarded with favor for
the aid which they had afforded during the period when foreign
supplies were cut off. The Tariff Act of 1816 was therefore
passed, which imposed a duty of twenty-five per cent on all
cotton fabrics; requiring also, at the suggestion of Mr. Lowell,
that they should be taken at a minimum valuation of twenty-
five cents a square yard, being in effect a specific duty of 6^
cents.* By the Acts of 1824 and 1828, this minimum valua-
tit)n was advanced, first to thirty, and then to thirty-five cents
1
* " In 1816, a new tarilf was to be made. .. . Mr. Lowell was in Washington a con¬
siderable time during the session of Congress, . . . and he finally brought Mr. Lowndes
and Mr. Calhoun to support the minimum of 6^ cents per square yard, which was car¬
ried."— Introduction of the Power Loom, by Nathan Appleton, p. 13.
"In 1818, Mr. Calhoun visited the establishment at Waltham, with the apparent sat¬
isfaction of having himself contributed to its success. It is lamentable to think, that, in
n
the square yard, and so continued with little modification until
1834. The effect of this protection in the reduction of the
cost of goods, is shown in the prices of this article first made
at Waltham, which was precisely that of which a large por¬
tion of the manufacture of the country has continued to
consist, namely, a heavy sheeting made from good cotton and
without starch-or dressing, the idea having been to imitate
the yard wide goods of India. The changes in the price of
this article, produced by improvements in machinery and pro¬
cesses, are stated by Mr. Appleton as follows: —
The success of the Waltham company suggested that the
manufacture and printing of calicoes might be profitably intro¬
duced in this country. With this view the articles of associa¬
tion of the Merrimack Manufacturing Company were drawn up
in December, 1821. The bringing of the business of printing
to any degree of perfeetion, proved a work of difficulty and
time. Many of the auxiliary arts, such as that of engraving
the printing cylinders being then kept profoundly secret in Eng¬
land', while all exportation of machinery from that country was
prohibited. Even under the stimulus afforded by the protec¬
tive duties, the manufacture of prints was hardly successful
before 1825. The highest success was finally attained, with
gradually reduced prices to consumers for many succeeding
years, the prices having been diminished, according to Mr.
Appleton, as follows; —
1832, under the alluring vision of a separate Southern Confederacy, he should have
become the active enemy of the manufacture which was doing so much for the interest
of the planters, and that the influence of his name has continued to keep them in that
error." —Introduction of the Power Loom, p. 32.
1816
1819
1826
1829
1843
30 cents per yard.
n « n
n » »
3
18
The average price per yard in 1825 was 23.07
1830 „ 16.36
1835 „ 16.04
35 S3 33 33
33 33 33 33
33 33 33 33
33 33 33 33
33 33 33 53
33 33 33 53
1840 „ 12.09
1845 „ 10.90
1850 „ 9.24
1855 „ 9.15
It was during the protective period, extending from 1824
to 1834, that the most material changes in the texture of
American cotton fabrics were made, — changes so marked as
to have become of national importance. The Hamilton brown
drillings, of a twilled texture, were first made at Lowell in
1827. Before this fabric and that of jeans was first made
here by power, no cotton cloths, except of a perfectly plain
texture, were made by power in England, although similar
fabrics had been made upon hand looms. When the drillings
were first introduced at the New-England auction sales, the
question was generally asked, " What can be done with them?"
According to memoranda wliich I have examined, made by
Mr. Samuel Batchelder, the oldest and most eminent of
surviving New-England manufacturers,* the brown drillings
were sold by package, in 1828, for 15| cents a yard. This
fabric being stronger, tliicker, more serviceable, and at the same
time cheaper, than any thing which could be imported, supplied
a universal want of consumers of cotton. The popular
demand set other mills at work. Not less than fifty of the
largest mills are now employed upon this fabric, which has
become one of the great staples of the American manufacture.
The drillings have not varied a thread since they were first
* "This company (the Hamilton Manufacturing Company) secured the services of
of Mr. Samuel Batchelder, of New Ipswich, who had shown much skill in manufactur- ^
ing industry. Under his management the power loom was applied to the weaving of
twilled and fancy goods with great success. The article of cotton drills, since become
so important a commodity in our foreign trade, was first made in this establishment."
—'Introduction of the Power Loonx^ hy Nathan Appleton, p. 29.
See Letter of Mr. Batchelder, p. 61,
19
manufactured. They have the same width, the same number
of threads to the warp, the same for the filliug, yarn of the
same number, and the same average weight, — 2.75 yards to
the pound. They therefore furnish a precise standard for com¬
parison of cost of production at different periods. Through
multiplication of establishments, and consequent improvements
in machinery and processes, the cost has been greatly reduced.
This article sold, when first introduced, at 15J cents, with
cotton at about 12 cents per pound. In 1860, according to
Mr. Wells's Report, the prices of drillings in gold were
to 9 cents. This article has been sold for exportation, within
a few months, with gold at 1.30 and cotton about 80 cents,
for 20 cents a yard. Here is a case where a domestic pro¬
tected industry has not only given the consumer a new article
of prime necessity, but has reduced its cost to the lowest point
at which it can be obtained from any source. The article
called "jeans," a lighter twilled fabric than the drillings,
though of similar texture, was made here before the latter.
When .it was first introduced by our own mills, no article like
it could be purchased in the stores for less than 30 to 35 cents.
A better article from our own than any which could be im¬
ported was sold when first put upon the market for 23 cents.
The prices of this article in 1860 were 6|- to 9 cents. Previously
to 1828, the British shirtings had a weight of only five or six
yards to the pound, — of course, a thin and unserviceable fabric.
Upon the starting of the Appleton Mills in 1828, Mr. Patrick
Jackson suggested the making of an article of^ore substan¬
tial fabric, and better suited for the necessities of the masses.
Shirtings were therefore made, of a weight of about 2.80 yards
to the pound. This article, so well adapted to the wants of con¬
sumers, and which had never been imported, became another
great staple of the American manufacture. About this time Mr.
Batchelder conceived the idea of making a striped blue-white
shirting, of stout and substantial twilled texture, expressly
20
adapted for American whalers and sailors, and which should
take the place of the inferior checked shirt then nniversallj
worn by seafaring men. The striped shirtings were eagerly
bought. They were carried by sailors and whalers to every port
in the Pacific and South America, and thus became in demand
for exportation. The manufacture of the heavy cottons, which
make up a very large proportion of the consumption in this
country, had become established beyond competition at home,
and thus could be exported with profit. Of these heavy goods
there were exported in 1850, 15,000,000 yards; in 1852,
25,000,000; and in 1860, 83,000,000 yards. Thus, so far
as the manufacture of cotton is concerned, the introduction
of the business in this country has resulted in supplying not
only for the population of this country, but also for many other
parts of the world, a better and cheaper article for clothing,
than could before be procured, either from the looms of India
or Great Britain.
It is readily admitted, that fine articles, or those which
require experience and skill, and in the production of which
machinery cannot be substituted for hand labor, can be
produced cheaper abroad than in this country. This is of less
moment to general consumers, as such articles are matters
of luxury, rather than of necessity. But the effect of the
introduction of such finer cotton fabrics as we have attempted,
has been invariably the reduction of the price of the imported
article. Such was the effect of tiie introduction of Mr.
Bigelow's remarkable machinery, which led to the manufac¬
ture of the figured cotton counterpanes known as Lancaster
quilts; the foreign article being lowered in price one-half by
the domestic production, which has driven the foreign article
from our markets. Such was the effect of the introduction
of the manufacture of fine lawns, first established in Ports¬
mouth under the stimulus of the Tariff of 1812. These
lawns, of a fineness of No. 1400, and particularly adapted to
21
the Southern market, were first put on sale in the spring of
1817. Similar goods, imported from England in 1846, were
sold at from 28 to 30 cents. Both foreign and American were
sold in the spring of 1847 at from 12 to 15 cents. The lawns
continued to be offered at half the cost of the imported
article, until th» foreign article of the same denomination was
driven from the market, and the American lawns were sold as
low as 9 cents per yard.
Our attainments in this manufacture show how confidently
the country may rely upon a well-protected industry to supply
all the essential wants of its consumers. Tlie number of
spindles in New England in 1850 has been estimated, upon
reliable authority, at 2,751,078; according to the census, the
population of New England in 1850 was 2,728,106: making
an average of 1,008 spindles to every thousand of its inhabi¬
tants. The population of Great Britain in 1850 was 20,798,552,
and the number of spindles was 20,857,062: equal to 1,008
spindles to a thousand inhabitants. Thus, in less than fifty
years, the productive power of the people of New England
in this manufacture had become fully equal to that of the
greatest manufacturing nation on earth. The number of
spindles in the whole country in 1860 was 5,085,798. In
Great Britain in 1862 the number was 80,887,457.* Our
whole product, therefore, was at least one-sixth of the British
product. To form some idea of the value of this domestic
industry to consumers, we might, were not such suppositions
always preposterous, conceive this domestic industry to be
entirely annihilated. To call upon Great Britain for one-sixth
of her product, would make cotton cloth as dear as silk. All
experience shows, that deficiency of domestic production limits
the use. As we could import but one-sixth of our consump-
* Introduction and Early Process of the Cotton Manufacture in the United States,
by Samuel Batchelder, p. 76.
22
tion, cotton cloth would cease to be consumed. It is true, a
substitute would be found in some other fabric ; but, like the
substitution of a crutch for a limb, it would always remind us
of tlie extent of our loss..
Allied to the manufacture of cotton is that of the mixed
fabrics of wool and cotton, which have grow* up during the
present century. I refer to those fabrics with a warp of cotton
and a filling of wool or worsted, which first appeared in
France in 1833 and in England in 1834, and which are classed
under the generic name of " mousselines delaine." This fab¬
ric, as I have elsewhere said, " whose products are counted by
millions of pieces, has proved an inestimable blessing. It
enables the most humble female to clothe herself more com¬
fortably and becomingly, and as cheaply, with wool, as she
could thirty years ago with cotton." * This fabric, being
actually stronger than if made wholly of wool, is practically
the same as a woollen texture; the warp being so fully
covered, that the presence of cotton can be seen only on the
closest inspection. These fabrics are never washed. They may
be worn in travelling, or in ordinary housework, without being
changed. They are not tumbled, and are free from danger
from fire. No fabric could be better fitted for the ordinary
wear of females and children. Everywhere in this country,
north of Tennessee, they have taken the place of the printed
muslins or lawns, which have greatly gone out of use. In
consequence of the establishment of the domestic manufacture
of this fabric, the importation of printed delaines has almost
wholly ceased. The American fabrics are made expressly to
suit our consumers. In printing them, all the French novel¬
ties of style are introduced. The American article is softer,
owing mainly to the qualities of domestic wool, and takes
better color than the imported fabrics; while the latter is
* The Fleece and the Loom, p. 34.
23
wiry, and less pliable. The only competing fabric is one im¬
ported from Germany, woven from colored yarns, of a lighter
texture, and inferior in wear. So great is the perfection to
which the art of printing has attained here, that the woven
cannot be distinguished by inspection from the printed goods
A celebrated importer in New York, who, when called as a
witness at a recent trial, had asserted his infallibility in detect¬
ing the differences in fabrics, was dismayed at discovering
that he had sworn to the identity of the foreign woven and
printed American goods. Fortunjitely his mistake had the
happy effect of preventing a contemplated fraud upon the
revenue and the domestic manufacturer. We manufacture at
present not less than sixty million yards a year of these goods,
which are all consumed here,—nearly two yards to each in¬
dividual of our population. Through the large scale upon
which manufacturing establishments are organized, to the
extent even of employing in one mill nearly four thousand
operatives, the producers have been able to obtain perfection
and cheapness, by very small profits upon large quantities of
goods, never seeking ^r more than one or two cents a yard.
By the establishment of this domestic industry, the prices
have been lowered to consumers — as I learn from disinterested
parties, from 30 or 40 cents, the price of the English article
when first introduced—not less than ten cents per yard, while
a better article is supplied; the prices now ruling at about
20 cents. Here is a direct gain of at least six million dollars
annually to consumers, from protection afforded to a single
fabric. The prices at which these goods are afforded, show
how erroneous are the conclusions which many derive from
simple studying of tariffs. These goods, under the present
tariff, are apparently protected by a duty of six cents per square
yard, while, as I have shown, the manufacturer is satisfied
with a profit of one or two cents per running yard; and in
ordinary times, the prices being regulated by home competi-
24
tion, no directly competing goods being imported, are mainly
independent of duties.*
The products of the woollen manufacture are so various,
that I should fail in attempting any thing like a systematic
illustration of my subject from this industry. When we
consider the vast extent to which this manufacture has at¬
tained,—its annual products being valued, from returns made
in 1864, when it was most prosperous, at $121,000,000,we
perceive that this is an important proportion of the product
of the whole manufacturing world. It cannot be doubted,
that the existence of this manufacture has an important effect
upon the general prices of woollen fabrics in the commerce of
tlie world, and that it would be utterly impossible to clothe our¬
selves with comfort and decency without our domestic manu¬
facture. This manufacture contributed its part during the
war, having supplied cloths for the army and- navy in three
years, which consumed 200,000,000 pounds of wool. It was
mainly through this manufacture that our army was Tetter
clothed than any large army ever brought into the field; and
its cloths are officially stated to have bej^i stronger than those
in use in the armies of Europe. This manufacture felt more
sensibly perhaps than any other the stimulus given by freedom
from foreign competition during the period of the war. Con¬
sequently it has suffered more than any other by the flood of
importations which overleaped the too feeble barriers of pro¬
tection left at the restoration of peace. While all branches
of the woollen industry were extended during this period.
* The tariff provisions intended to apply to this class of goods, are rarely carried
into full effect. Year after year, poor substitutes for the American dress goods, and
therefore indirectly competing with them, which cannot be imported by any regular
merchant wlio pays his duties without a heavy loss, are consigned from Germany to this
country, and sold at the auction rooms, in the city of New York, where agents of the
foreign manufacturers are located. Such sales could not be systematically made if it
were not true, as stated by the United States Revenue Commission, that "foreign com¬
mercial parasites co-operate, in New York, to debauch and mislead our officei'S, and
nullify the laws pertaining to our commerce and industry."
25
others were called into existence by the protection afforded by
the war and the increased duties under the Morrill Tariff;
among which may be specified the manufacture of braids,
which are woven upon small machines, from worsted yarn.
Insignificant as this article appears, it is one of important
consumption, for bindings for men's clothing and for orna¬
menting ladies' dresses. Before 1861, our whole consumption
was supplied by imported articles. The prices were from 62|-
cents to 75 cents per dozen. They rose during the war to
$1.60 to $1.65. From 2,500,000 to 3,000,000 dozen a year
are now manufactured, single establishments turning out
from 10,000 to 20,000 dozen a week. The foreign article is
now wholly supplanted by the domestic, of a better quality
and at a price of about 75 cents currency against the former
price of 75 cents gold. It is a singular circumstance, that, on
the very day that the recent tariff, which largely increased the
duty on braids, was published, the assurance of freedom from
foreign competition and frauds gave such encouragement to
the domestic manufacturers that they might safely enlarge
their production, that the prices fell five cents per dozen, and'
have remained at that reduced rate.
The last-cited branch of industry may be said to contribute
only to the fancy of the community. There are other longer-
established branches, essential to the necessities, and literally
to the comfort, of consumers. Such are the manufactures of
blankets and flannels. The manufacture of blaiikets was
brought into successful operation by the highly protective tariff
of 1842, we having failed of any good results before that
time. Under the stimulus of this measure, our manufacturers
attained such skill, that samples of American blankets from
year to year were sent for from England, to be imitated in
style and finish. Nothing can surpass the best domestic
fabrics; and nothing is made here so poor as the cheaper im¬
ported blankets. The prince of dry-goods dealers in New York
4
26
has repeatedly asserted, that he could not atford to keep stocks
of American blankets, because purchasers would not buy
foreign blankets, if offered by the side of American goods.
No comparison of prices can be made with articles formerly
made or with imported articles, on account of the improve¬
ments in the styles of goods. It is sufficient for my purpose,
to show that this prime article of necessity is furnished by our
own industry, and at prices effected by domestic competition,
very few blankets being imported. How stringent this compe¬
tition is, is shown by the fact, that blankets, which cost during
the war $12, are now sold for $5.50, a pair. A great economy
in production, of which consumers receive the benefit, has been
effected in this, as in other brandies of the woollen manufac¬
ture, by the saving of stock. Wool has such indestructibleness
and durability, that every sound fibre, however it may have
been mixed with foreign substances, can be, and now is, con¬
verted to use. Thirty years ago, in the infancy of our
manufactures, this was not appreciated. Piles of waste and
dirty wool, or of short staple and bits of yarn, all containing
sound fibre, such as is now usefully appropriated, were allowed
to accumulate, to be sold at best for manure, or to be thrown
into the adjacent river which moved the mill. The saving from
utilizing such material is said to be equal at least to the profits
from improved machinery.
The manufacture of flannels is another branch of our wool¬
len industry, in which we have practically secured independ¬
ence. Cards of opera flannels, made of tlie finest American
fleece, from the pan-handle of Virginia or the Silesian wool
of New York, may be seen, upon which specimens of eighty-six
distinct colors or-tOnes and hues are displayed. Tlie old notion
that Americans cannot dye good or fast colors is exploded.
The French opera cloths sold in New York are mostly of
American production. Our markets are supplied, not only
with these finer fabrics, but with colored and checked flannels
27
of coarser texture, now largely used for men's use ; these flan¬
nels having largely taken the place of the cotton or linen shirt,
while the old flannel under-shirt is replaced by a knit gar¬
ment.
One of the most distinctly marked of our indigenous manu¬
factures in this branch of industry, is that of Dommet flannels,
which originated with Mr. James Johnson in 1835, the idea hav¬
ing been suggested by the necessity of using up a quantity of
cotton warps provided for a mill making satinets, which had
proved unprosperous. This fabric is composed of a cotton
warp, with a filling of wool, and is uncolored. Its principal
merit is, that it shrinks but little in washing. It came into use
at first as a substitute for the linsey-woolsey stuffs origin¬
ally of household manufacture, worn by working-women for
under-petticoats. So extensively has this serviceable article
come into use, particularly in New England, where the greater
proportion of the goods are consumed, being admirably, fitted
for under-garments in the variable climate of the East, that a
single house manufactures 800,000 yards a year. This article,
being made now by the representatives of the original manu¬
facturer, without any change in quality or texture, presents a
proper subject for comparison of prices. It originally sold for
20 cents, in 1855 for 14 cents, and at present for 37 cents,
but with cotton and labor at double price. In this article
there is no foreign competition. It is referred to as illustrative
of the advantage of the existence of a domestic manufacture,
in supplying a fabric exactly suited to the wants of con¬
sumers.
No feature of American domestic life has been more
noticed by foreigners than the universal use, in this country,
of carpets, even in the humblest homes. It is a significant
■feature, for a cheerful home is the most refining of all social
influences. The higher civilization of the masses of our peo¬
ple, and the capacity of our domestic industry, have reciprocally
28
acted to produce tliis American peculiarity. The existence of
the carpet manufacture among us, and its capacity to contribute
to that sense of comfort which we have inherited in our Eng¬
lish blood, is eminently due to protection. This will be obvious
when we reflect that in this, more perhaps than in any other,
branch of the woollen industry, the manufacture, to be carried
on advantageously, must be conducted in very large and costly
establishments. The largest woollen establishment iii the
world is the carpet factory of the Messrs. Crossley, in England.
It is said that not less than three years' time is required to
complete the appointments of a well-conducted establishment.
So great are the difficulties in instituting such an establish¬
ment, that for fifteen years no new one of importance has been
put in operation in this country. It is clear that capital could
not be found to embark in such enterprises without the assu¬
rance given by a protective tariff". But in no other branch has
the protected industry paid more rapidly the debts due for its
education. This.industry has not only acquired such skill as
has made the products of its looms, even in the fabrics of
luxury, vie with any in Europe: it has cheapened the products
of European looms, as well by competition as by the contribu¬
tion of its inventions. The best English carpets are actually
woven upon power looms invented by American genius. This
contribution by America to England of the carpet loom re¬
ceived from France, with its beneficent substitution of power
for painful hand labor, still further completes that circuit of
the arts described by the poet of " The Fleece," in his apos¬
trophe to the loom: —
" The loom, that long renowned, wide envy'd gift
Of wealthy Tlandria, who the loom received
Trom fair Venetia ; she from Grecian nymphs;
They from Phenic^, who obtained the dole
Prom old Egyptus. Thus around the globe
The golden-footed sciences their path
Mark, like the sun enkindling life and joy." *
Dyer. Book iii.
29
It is stated confidently by eminent carpet manufacturers, that,
since the establishment of the carpet manufacture in this coun¬
try, the cost of the goods to the public has been reduced more
than twenty-five per cent through the economies introduced
here upon the processes in use abroad, and the gain is believed
to be equal to from thirty to forty per cent. Fortunately we are
able to obtain from official data more precise statements as to
the reduction in price effected by the establishment of this
industry. The facts which follow came to my knowledge
oflScially, in a judicial investigation at the United-States
Patent Office. Before 1842, all three-ply and ingrain carpets
were woven on hand looms, the motive power being furnished
by the weaver. Numerous and costly experiments to weave
ingrain carpets by power looms had been made in England, but
had proved unsuccessful. Mr. E. B. Bigelow, in 1842, — the
period, it will be observed, of the inauguration of the most im¬
portant protective measures in behalf of all branches of the
woollen industry, — conceived a series of devices for making
the carpet loom automatic, so that the costly labor of men
might be dispensed with, and the whole process of weaving
might be conducted by girls or boys. After laying his plans
before many manufacturers, he succeeded in engaging the
attention of the treasurer of a manufacturing company in
Lowell, who had the intelligence to perceive the importance of
the undertaking, and to understand the grounds of its probable
success. Through him Tie made an engagement with the
Lowell company, by which the exclusive right to use the in¬
ventions then existing, or afterwards to be made by the
inventor, respecting the weaving of ingrain carpets, was con¬
veyed to the company. The construction of an establishment
with the newly invented machinery was undertaken at the cost
of many hundred thousand dollars, the fixed capital of the
company in the carpet works being nearly a million of dollars.
This vast outlay was made upon the double protection given
30
by the existing tariff, and the exclusive right under the
patents. The enterprise having accomplished more than was
expected from it, the Hartford company acquired from the
Lowell company the right to use the invention.
While the receipts of the invention from his royalty were
insignificant, the benefits to the public from these inventions
and these protected enterprises are the production of superior
goods; the texture of the power-loom carpeting being more
uniform, the selvage more even, and the matching of figures
more perfect, besides a Tnaterial reduction of cost. The actual
saving to consumers has been thus calculated: Prior to the in¬
troduction of the power loom, the Lowell Manufacturing Com¬
pany paid as wages for weaving, by hand loom, the description
of carpeting known as two-ply, 11| cents per yard, and for
three-ply 25 cents per yard; whereas, with Bigelow's power
loom, they only pay for weaving the former article 2^®^
cents per yard, and for the latter cents per yard; thus
showing a saving by the power loom in wages paid for weaving
of cents per yard for two-ply, and 22cents per
yard for three-ply, being an average of 15 tVc- cents per
yard. But the saving in wages is partly neutralized by
the more costly repairs of the power-loom machinery, and
interest on the larger investment of capital required therefor,
so that the average net saving by the power loom is estimated
at ten cents per yard. Accurate returns from the mills of the
Lowell and Hartford companies, up fo April, 1863, show that
the number of yards of carpeting woven upon looms was
25,964,185 yards. Thus the saving to the public by this in¬
vention has been two million five hundred dollars. That the
saving in the price of the manufacture of carpets has accrued
to the consumers is evident from the fact, that, at the time Mr.
Bigelow's invention was introduced, the wholesale price of the
best quality of two-ply carpeting was from 85 to 90 cents per
yard, and of three-ply from $1.30 to $1.33 cents per yard;
31
whereas in 1860 the former description of goods, power-loom
wrought, of a better quality than the hand-loom wrought, sold
for from 70 to cents per yard, and the latter fi'om 95 to
97^ cents per yard, making an average reduction of over
twenty per cent. It is worthy of observation, that the ingrain
carpets are used not so much by the wealthy as the middle
classes; and thus the increased cheapness, so manifestly due to
protection, has been a direct.boon to the great body of con¬
sumers.
In regard to the most important branch of the woollen
manufacture, that of cloth, it is difficult to make comparisons,
on account of the great changes in the fabric commonly worn,
and changes in the prices of wool. An essential change in
the styles of cloths was made by the introduction, in 1834, by
M. Bonjean, of Sedan, in Prance, of fancy cassimeres, a style
in which there may be an infinite variety in tints and figures.
Before this period, the colors of nearly all fulled cloths were
uniform, and the cloths were highly finished on the face. The
production of fancy cassimeres now gives employment to the
greater number of our mills, the plain-face goods bging com¬
paratively little in demand, though made of great perfection in
some of our mills. In the production of fancy cassimeres for
general consumption, we are in no respect behind foreign man.
ufacturers in machinery or skill. We have produced a machine
for weaving these fabrics, — the Crompton loom, capable of
weaving 24^ets of harnesses, thus having an almost infinite
, capacity for varying the fabric, — which is declared by experts
to be "the best in the world for this purpose. Our machinery is
capable of fully supplying our whole population; and hence
domestic competition is so active, that the prices to consumers
must always be close to the cost of production. A careful in¬
quiry among the most experienced and oldest dealers justifies
the assertion, that cloths, as a whole, have never been so cheap
in this country as at the present time. It is the opinion of
32
many of the oldest dealers whom I have consulted, that, in cer¬
tain styles where comparison can be made, such as black broad¬
cloths and cassimeres, the prices of American cloths are much
less than foreign cloths of the same quality forty years ago.
The present great reduction of prices may be temporary ,• as
many goods are doubtless offered below the cost of production,
and the want of protection to other branches of industry doubt¬
less diminishes the demand. In any view of the case, there can
be no question that the cost of cloth to the great class of Ameri¬
can consumers has been materially diminished by the domestic
manufacture. Assuming that the consumer pays the whole of
the duty given under the present tariff, the amount which he
pays to support a system, the effect of which is continually
to reduce the cost of material for clothing wiiile at the same
time it supports tlie government, is comparatively insignificant.
It is shown by data, wliich, subjected to most rigorous scrutiny
in Congress and elsewhere, have never been impeached, that
the whole amount of duty given to protect the manufac¬
turer, on the cloth for a full suit of clothes, at an average cost
of fifty dollars for the suit, is only one dollar, sixty-three cents
and four mills, or a little over three per cent of the cost of the
whole suit.* The assertions here made may be doubted by
young men who pay such enormous prices to the fashionable
tailors. But they have only to make the experiment, and they
will find that the cost of the cloth furnished will be only from
one-third to one-half of the sum which will be char^-ed for mak-
* The published statement of the Executive Committee of the " National Associa¬
tion of Wool Manufacturers," relative to the proposed duties on wool and woollens,
addressed to the United-States Revenue Commission, May, 1866, contains a table, pre¬
pared from authentic data, showing the operation of the then existing and proposed
tariffs, as affecting the consumer. The table shows, that, under the proposed tariff on
wool and woollens, which has since become a law, the whole duty on the cloth required
for a full suit of clothes, made of fancy cassimeres, costing, at prices then prevailing,
fifty dollars, would be the duty on the wool would be the
duty on dyestuffs, and other materials, ; the charges on account of duties,
$0.21-3^Y; the Internal Revenue tax, at six per cent, $0.81,^''^, and the duty for
the protection of the manufacturer, ; or $3.26 per cent of the whole cost of
the suit of clothes.
33
ing and trimmings. I make no complaint against the tailors,
who are' doubtless largely controlled by the trades' unions of
their journeymen. Neither do I complain that the woi'kmen
should get all they can for their labor: I simply wish to show
that the grievance of dear clothing should not be charged to
the manufacturer and the tariff.
It is not unfrequently urged, that our domestic textile in¬
dustry does not supply the varieties and styles demanded by
fashion and luxury. A certain class of consumers would never
be satisfied with home products. See how, a hundred years
ago," The British Spectator " denounced the passion of his fair
countrywomen for French frivolities. An English poet of his
period thus compares the foreign and home products of the
loom: —
" Nor do tlieir toils and products furnish more
Than gauds and dresses of fantastic web
To the luxurious; hut our kinder toils
Give clothing to necessity."*
It is really no objection to a system which enables domestic
manufacturers to supply the great mass of consumers with
necessities more cheaply than they can obtain them abroad,
that it increases the cost of novelties and luxuries not pro¬
duced here. This is precisely what the exclusive desire who
select goods for the adornment of their persons or houses, be¬
cause they cannot be bought by the masses. If our fair friends
are willing to pay for a Turkish rug three times the price of an
American Wilton, actually superior in real beauty and in intrin¬
sic value, simply because it is costly and rare, why should not
the Government obtain a revenue from siich tastes as well as
from the grosser appetites of men ? Laces and diamonds are
really no more necessary than cigars and whiskey. " Obvious¬
ly," says Professor Bowen, "in respect to all articles which
* Dyer's Fleece, book ill.
5
32
many of the oldest dealers whom I have consulted, that, in cer¬
tain styles wliere comparison can be made, such as black broad¬
cloths and cassimeres, the prices of American cloths are much
less than foreign clotlis of the same quality forty years ago.
The present great reduction of prices may be temporary ,* as
many goods are doubtless offered below the cost of production,
and the want of protection to other branches of industry doubt¬
less diminishes the demand. In any view of the case, there can
be no question that the cost of cloth to the great class of Ameri¬
can consumers has been materially diminished by the domestic
manufacture. Assuming that the consumer pays the whole of
the duty given under tlie present tariff, the amount which he
pays to support a system, the effect of which is continually
to reduce the cost of material for clothing while at the same
time it supports the government, is comparatively insignificant.
It is shown by data, which, subjected to most rigorous scrutiny
in Congress and elsewhere, have never been impeached, that
the whole amount of duty given to protect the manufac¬
turer, on the cloth for a full suit of clothes, at an average cost
of fifty dollars for the suit, is only one dollar, sixty-three cents
and four mills, or a little over three per cent of the cost of the
whole suit.* The assertions here made may be doubted by
young men who pay such enormous prices to the fashionable
tailors. But they have only to make the experiment, and they
will find that the cost of the cloth furnished will be only from
one-third to one-half of the sum which will be charged for mak-
* The published statement of the Executive Committee of the " National Associa¬
tion of Wool Manufacturers," relative to the proposed duties on wool and woollens,
addressed to the United-States Revenue Commission, May, 1866, contains a table, pre¬
pared from authentic data, showing the operation of the then existing and proposed
tariffs, as affecting the consumer. The table shows, that, under the proposed tariff on
wool and woollens, which has since become a law, the whole duty on the cloth required
for a full suit of clothes, made of fancy cassimeres, costing, at prices then prevailing,
fifty dollars, would be $4;.77^'^; the duty on the wool would be the
duty on dyestuffs, and other materials, ; the charges on account of duties,
the Internal Revenue tax, at six per cent, $0.81^°^, and the duty for
the protection of the manufacturer, $1.63^°^; or $3.26 per cent of the whole cost of
the suit of clothes.
33
ing and trimmings. I make no complaint against the tailors,
who are doubtless largely controlled by the trades' unions of
their journeymen. Neither do I complain that the workmen
should get all they can for their labor: I simply wish to show
that the grievance of dear clothing should not be charged to
the manufacturer and the tariff.
It is not unfrequently urged, that our domestic textile in¬
dustry does not supply the varieties and styles demanded by
fashion and luxury. A certain class of consumers would never
be satisfied with home products. See how, a hundred years
ago," The British Spectator " denounced the passion of his fair
countrywomen for French frivolities. An English poet of his
period thus compares the foreign and home products of the
loom: —
" Nor do their toils and products furnish more
Than gauds and dresses of fantastic web
To the luxurious; but our kinder toils
Give clothing to necessity."*
It is really no objection to a system which enables domestic
manufacturers to supply the great mass of consumers with
necessities more cheaply tlian they can obtain them abroad,
that it increases the cost of novelties and luxuries not pro¬
duced here. This is precisely what the exclusive desire who
select goods for the adornment of their persons or houses, be¬
cause they cannot be bought by the masses. If our fair friends
are willing to pay for a Turkish rug three times the price of an
American Wilton, actually superior in real beauty and in intrin¬
sic value, simply because it is costly and rare, why should not
the Government obtain a revenue from siich tastes as well as
from the grosser appetites of men ? Laces and diamonds are
really no more necessary than cigars and whiskey. " Obvious¬
ly," says Professor Bowen, " in respect to all articles which
* Dyer's Fleece, book iii.
5
34
are used only for purposes of ostentation and display, the only
strong argument against a protective tariff, that it operates as
a tax upon consumers by slightly increasing the prices of the
commodities on which a duty is imposed, ceases to have any
weight whatever. If the duty were removed, consumers would
save nothing; for they would abandon the use of the cheapened
commodity, and seek out one of higher cost, not because of its
superior quality or convenience, but because its high price
renders the possession of it a token of wealth."*
A well-developed cotton and woollen manufacture nourishes
many auxiliary arts, not the least of which is the manufacture
of chemicals, in which branch of manufacture, particularly in
Philadelphia, we have made commendable progress. I do not
propose to enlarge upon this manufacture, and refer to it mere¬
ly to show, by one example drawn from this industry, the
public loss which may be sustained by the abandonment of
the protective policy. The art of making soda ash, as now
practised, was due, like the first impulse given to so many
other industries in this country, to a condition of war which
shut out the ordinary supply. For years France had depended
for the supply of soda upon importations of borilla or crude
carbonate of soda from Spain. When the commerce between
Spain and France had been suppressed by the war of the
Revolution, the committee of public safety appealed to the
French chemists to point out a means of supplying this article
from domestic sources.f At this time, a student of medicine
named Leblanc, while attending the chemical lectures of Dar-
cet, at the College of France, was deeply impressed with the
remark of the savant, that any one who would invent a
method of obtaining soda from sea water or common salt, of
which soda forms the base, would be a benefactor to France,
* The Principles of Political Economy applied to the Conditions, the Resources, and
the Institutions of the American People, by Francis Bowen, p. 477.
t Dumas's Chemie appliqu^e aux Arts, t. ii. p. 470.
35
and make his own fortune. Leblanc at once abandoned
his medical studies, and devoted himself to experiments to
obtain soda-ash for the arts, from the chloride of sodium.
Being generously allowed to pursue his researches in the
laboratory of the great chemist, he was successful in solving
the problem. He established the manufacture at Marseilles,
and put his products upon the market. The manufacturers of
soda-ash from borilla, imported from India, which heretofore
had been used, combined in denouncing his product, calling it
" factitious soda."* Finding no sale for his product, and fore¬
seeing certain ruin unless he obtained assistance, he applied
for aid to the French Government, showing the vast benefits
which would accrue to the manufactures of France from his
discovery. Vainly waiting from day to day for a reply to his
petition, he sunk at length in despair, and blew out his brains.
A few hours after, a courier arrived at Marseilles, but alas! too
late, to announce that the Government had provided for the
despairing inventor a competence for life and a pension for his
family.f It has been well said," Many a heart has been broken
upon the wheel whose revolutions have made the fortune of
thousands." This invention saved many millions to France,
and many more to England, where the manufacture of soda-
ash by this process was afterward carried on upon a vast scale.
The first effort to manufactui-e soda-ash in this country was
made in Pittsburgh, — a favorable locality, from the abundance
of coal, and facility of obtaining salt from saline springs,—
about 1850 or 1851, when the duty on this article was ten per
cent ad valorem. Although the duty was hardly high enough to
protect the American against the foreign manufacturer, it suf¬
ficed to induce capital to embark in the business. The manu-
* The term saude faclique, originally given in derision, is now the commercial name
of soda ash, in France.
t My authority for this statement is Dr. Charles T. Jackson, of Boston, who ob¬
tained the information at Leblanc's works at Marseilles.
86
facturers here were able, even under this duty, to compete with
the English, who, to use their own words, as written to their
agents in this country, were determined to " put out the fires
of the American works." * To accomplish this, they authorized
their agents to lower the price from ten cents to six cents a
pound. Still the American manufacturers were able to com¬
pete, and struggled along, though with but little profit, until
1857. At this time the Eastern manufacturers of textile
fabrics, suffering under the horizontal tariff of 1846, and des¬
pairing of a return of the public mind to the protective ideas
of 1842, were compelled to make some compromise of their old
principles, and adopted the theory of free trade in raw ma¬
terials ; a theory which, sound enough as applied to materials
which could not be produced in this country, was unsound
when applied to those which could be produced here,—
such as wool and many chemicals, which, though raw ma¬
terial to the woollen manufacturer, are ullimate manufac¬
tures to the chemist and farmer, requiring the raw materials
of coal, hay, and grain. This theory prevailed in the tariff of
18 67, which lowered the rate of duty upon soda-ash to 4 per
cent. The manufacturers of this article still struggled along,
and kept down, by their competition, the price of the British
product to 4-|- cents. By the tariff of 1861, soda-ash was made
free. The effect was to completely crush out the American
manufacture, and to raise the price of the British article in
this country to from 12 to 15 cents. A great inconvenience,
resulting from the withdrawal of the American product, is the
iiTegularity and sometimes almost total deficiency of the foreign-
supply, a usual consequence of dependence upon foreign trade.
When we consider that we consume at least forty thousand
tons a year of this chemical; f that it is the most important of
all chemical products for our manufactures, except sulphuric
* Letter of Mr. James Park, jun., of Pittsburgh.
t We imported, in 1860, 70,853,312 flis, of a declared value of $1,411,015.
37
acid; that it is indispensable in bleaching, soap-making, paper-
making, and in many other arts, — we must admit that the
restoration through protection, of a manufacture which fur¬
nishes at home a regular and abundant supply to all these arts,
would be no little boon to manufacturers and consumers.
In the vicissitudes of language, the term manufactures is
held by modern writers to signify the reverse of its etymologi¬
cal meaning, and to apply, not to the products of handicraft
occupations, but to denote the extensive products of art which
are made by machinery with little or no aid from the human
hand ; so that that is regarded as the most perfect manufacture
which most dispenses with manual labor. The shoe industry
has risen in this country from the position of a mere handi¬
craft employment to that of a manufacture ; and, in the sense
expressed above, is more perfect than the shoe manufacture of
any other nation, because it makes more use of machinery.*
The shoe industry was commenced in Lynn, Mass., on a
small scale before the Eevolution, the art of making ladies'
shoes having been introduced as early as 1750 by a Welsh
shoemaker. During the Revolution, while foreign articles
were excluded, the industry had made sufficient progress to
become a characteristic business of the town, and it performed
important service in supplying shoes to the army. After the
war, the business was so totally prostrated by foreign importa¬
tions, that able and skilled men offered to bind themselves out
for a year's constant labor simply for their board. By the
first Tariff Act passed after the adoption of the Constitution,
July 4th, 1789, the preamble of which declares one of its
objects to be " the encouragement and protection of manufac¬
tures," provision was made for boots and shoes, by a duty
* The facts and views which I have presented in relation to this industry have been
mainly derived from a gentleman of Lynn, who, having risen from the shoemaker's
bench, has signally demonstrated, by his eminent achievements in public life, the fal¬
lacy of the maxim, familiar since the time of Horace, " Let the shoemaker stick to his
last."
38
on the former of 50 cents a pair, and on the latter of 7 cents
a pair. While these duties had much effect in checking im¬
portations, they were not regarded as sufficient. About the
period of 1793, a young man named Ebenezer Breed, who
had moved from Lynn to Philadelphia, which city had become
the seat of the national government, being familiar with the
necessities of the shoe business in his native town, suggested
to a Quaker gentleman named Zaccheus Collins, also a former
citizen of Lynn, who had attained wealth and respectability in
Philadelphia, that the business of their native town would be
greatly benefited by the increase of the duties on foreign boots
and shoes. Collins assented to these views, and promised his
co-operation upon the condition that Breed should obtain,
through influences brought from Lynn, a resolution of the
General Court of Massachusetts, recommending the further-
protection of this industry. This resolution having been
obtained, Collins proposed to bring to bear a kind of influence
which is still supposed to have no little effect upon Congres¬
sional action. He invited to a formal party-dinner a number
of the leading men in Congress: among them Mr. Madison,
Breed being also invited to present the demands of the Lynn
shoemakers. The result of this social influence was the incoi'-
poration into the Tarifi" Act of 1794 of a provision adding to
the duty already existing on boots 25 cents per pair, and to
that upon shoes, 5 cents per pair; these being the only manu¬
factures for which an increased duty was provided by that
act. This duty was effective, because specific. The conse¬
quence of these two Acts was the firm establishment of the
boot and shoe industry of Massachusetts, one of the earliest
and most valuable fruits of our recently acquired independ¬
ence. This industry, though gradually enlarging, languished
from time to time, as during the depression which preceded
the tariff of 1812. But, like all other industries, it received
a new impulse from that great revivifying measure. But it
39
was through the protective influences of the late war, aided
by the labor-saving inventions of American origin which had
come into use, that this industry became fully developed into
a true manufacture, thoroughly independent, and capable
of responding to all the requirements of the country. The
shoemakers' shops are now largely replaced by extensive fac¬
tories worked by steam-power, with machines for cutting and
rolling the leather and shaping the soles, and with machines
for pegging and sewing so efficient, that it is declared that
one sewing machine, expressly adapted for this work, will
sew 200 pairs of shoes in a day. It is asserted by persons
competent to pronounce an opinion, that we furnish boots and
shoes more cheaply than they could be obtained without duties
from abroad in any considerable quantity. The styles are,
particularly of ladies' shoes, unsurpassed in graceful appear¬
ance and excellent workmanship by any made in Europe.
Parties from this country have even opened factories in Eng¬
land to manufacture shoes upon the American plan, and with
our machinery. The American leather, tlie manufacture of
which was protected by the early tariffs, is said to be superior
to that which enters into ordinary consumption in Europe.
Before the war, American leather was largely exported to
England, the prejudice which retarded its introduction having
been finally overcome. Although the continuance of duties
is desirable to protect against the surpluses and fluctuations
of foreign trade, the present tariff has actually no effect upon
prices, which are regulated wholly by home competition, no
ladies' shoes being imported, and only a very few French
boots, to gratify caprice or fashion. This industry has grown,
mainly through the protective influence of the early tariffs,
from a mere handicraft to a national manufacture; from a
product, measured by its exportation to Southern markets, of
300,000 pairs of shoes in 1795, to a product in 1860 of over
30,000,000 pairs of shoes and over 11,000,000 pairs of boots.
40
of a value of over $37,000,000 in the State of Massachusetts
alone. With the slow processes of tanning abroad, the absence
of hemlock bark, the necessity of relying almost exclusively
upon chemicals to supply tannin, and with the want of
mechanical appliances, all Europe could not supply us with
leather and shoes at quadruple the price we pay at home.
There is another industry upon which all these arts which
minister to the comfort of man depend. While gold is but
the measure of wealth, the instrument with which wealth is
created is iron. It is the sword, the axe, the ploughshare,
the anchor, the loom, the rail track, the steam engine. It is
the basis of the world's material prosperity, and the propor¬
tion of its produetion and consumption tlie measure of the
civilization of nations. The state of every mechanical art is
determined by the perfection and the use of the tools which it
furnishes. When iron is in demand, all labor is astir; when
its consumption declines, the arts languish. Hence those
who have studied the antiquity of man, and have traced his
existence through the infinity of ages which modern researches
have assigned for his being, —following him from caves to lake
habitations, and thence to his present abode in tilled fields
and cities, from the age of stone through that of bronze,—
style the period when the race culminated into civilization
the " age of iron," as iron is both the means and the standard
of hurnan improvement.
Thirty years ago, our whole production of iron was but
50,000 tons, and our largest furnace was not capable of
producing more than 1,500 tons a year. We manufacture
now 1,500,000 tons; and have single furnaces which produce
15,000 tons a year, and single rolling-mills producing 1,800
tons of railroad bars per week. The development of our iron
manufacture to its present colossal proportions is one of the
most striking proofs which our whole industry furnishes of
the indomitable energy of our people. That this industry
41
should exist at all, is a wonder. No other has been subjected
to such vicissitudes or such temporizing legislation. No other
has had so formidable a competitor. It has had to contend
against a combination of British capital, so vast, so patient,
and so far-seeing in its purpose of aggrandizement, that it
could throw its products upon the markets of the world, for
year after year, without any profit, and wait until full indem¬
nity might be secured for present sacrifices by the monopoly
of markets of other nations, whose industry had been broken
down by cheap imports. Our iron manufacture has had,
besides, to contend with a people who have wasted the raw
material of their mines with a prodigality whose consequences
the wiser men of England even now look upon with dismay ;
and also with fluctuations of prices in England, varying from
below the cost of production to one hundred and fifty per cent
upon the actual cost. The iron industry has been able to
obtain a foothold in this country only through the brief res¬
pites which our legislation has afforded from this competition.
That it owes its existence to the brief periods of prosperity
due to protective legislation, is capable of demonstration. Its
production was doubled during the protective period from
1828 to 1832, having reached in the latter year the quantity
of 210,000 tons, although our population had increased only
twenty per cent. For eight years later, under a free-trade
policy, till 1842^although our numbers were increasing at the
rate of thirty per cent, our production made no progress,
having at the end of this period reached only 282,000 tons.
From 1842 to 1848, under protection, with a growth of pop¬
ulation of only 20 per cent, it trebled, having reached tire
amount of 800,000 tons in 1848. Abandoned, during the
twelve succeeding years, to the tender mercies of British iron¬
masters, who had full sway under the tariff of 1846, the pro¬
duction fell, in 1852, to less than 500,000 tons.
The protection having been greater under the ad valorem
6
42
system, as prices rose in England by the very destruction of
our works, our production gradually" rose, our whole produc¬
tion and consuini)tion in 18G0 being about 1,000,000 tons; a
very moderate increase, compared with the growth of our popu¬
lation, which had increased 40 per cent. What remained of
protection had been sufficient to keep in a state of preparation
the skill and machinery of this industry for the imperative de¬
mands imposed upon it by the war of the rebellion. In five
years, under the influence of the Morrill tariff of 1861, and
the exclusion of foreign iron during the war, the production
attained the amount of a million and a half of tons.
To come to the application of the facts connected with this
industry to the solution of tlie question under discussion,—
tiie benefits of protection to the consumer. It is assumed that
the material progress of a nation is in proportion to its con¬
sumption of iron. The whole body of consumers constituting
the nation has derived incalculable advantages fi'om the estab¬
lishment of this home industry through protection, because we
use iron abundantly only^when it is produced at home.* We
* In illustration of the incidental benefits of this industry, I venture to reproduce
n passage from a paper published by me in 1P50, in which I presented the results of my
personal observations at the Katahdin Iron Work«, in Maine.
The influence of the imlustry of iron upon the prosperity of an agricultural people,
will be better seen by taking a closer view of the actual operations of an iron establish¬
ment. We will take the case of a charcoal furnace and forge at the North. The loca¬
tion of the establishment, for obvious geological reasons, is in an interior position,
remote from the great markets, and in a country whose mouiftainous surface offers a
scanty return to the labors of the husbandman. The erection of iron works is deter¬
mined upon. An idle stream is dammed up, and forced to the aid of human industry.
A sawmill is erected. Timber, which would not bear transport to a distant market,
becomes suddenly valuable. The worthless clay and sand are converted into bricks.
Building stone is quarried and hauled. The neighboring farmers find constant employ¬
ment for themselves and teams, during the intervals of their farming labors, in the
coarser mechanical work, or in the transportation of materials. The store and board¬
ing-house are built. The workmen abstracted from farming pursuits must be fed. A
market is found for the surplus products of the farm, — for milk, potatoes, hay, and all
vegetables which could not be carried to a distant market. Tiie regular work of the
furnace ami forge commences. The young men, who must earn the money to buy
their fdrm.s, find constant employment at the fire or hammer. But the greater portion
of the labor must still be performed by the farmer. The winter, which he had before
43
do so because we can exchange for the iron produced here our
agricultural products and the products of domestic manufac¬
tures, which cannot be exported to pay for iron abroad. A
careful comparison of statistical and commercial returns will
show that the deficiencies of the home production of iron have
never been made up by importations.
Our home production of iron benefits consumers, not only by
enabling them to consume more iron by the exchange of their
own products, but it keeps down the prices of foreign iron.
After the fires of our furnaces and rolling-mills had been ex¬
tinguished by the tariff of 184G, and our increasing wealth and
population, through the influx of gold from California, had
created a demand for the extension of our railroads, the de¬
mand for foreign iron revived; and for four years, from 1851 to
1851 inclusive, "we imported a million tons, British iron,,
which had been sold here in 1819 for 40 dollars a ton, while
American iron, worth twice as much, was offered at 50 dollars,
rose to the enormous price of $80 a ton. The sliding-scale
spent in comparative idleness, doing little more than feeding his stock and getting in
his firewood, becomes the busiest season. This is the best time to transport ore and
wood to the furnace, and iron to market. Three or four cords of wood must be sup¬
plied for every ton of iron made. He cuts and hauls this wood, and thus receives
wages for clearing new land for his crops, whereas, before, the trees were felled and
burned up upon the land at a great expense. From these various employments he soon
derives means to improve his instruments of labor. He gets a better team, puts iron
tires and axles to his carts, has new chains, bars, picks, and ploughs, to use on his
farm, and stoves for diminishing the labor of his household. For these he has only to
exchange his labor, without payment of a tax or profit td the merchant and carrier.
Constant occupation of his time doubles the products of his hands, and the market at
his door quadruples the value of his land.
The increase of the material prosperity of the country is not thQ only result
achieved by well-emploved and rewarded labor. Newspapers, hooks, schools, churches,
are the investments of the surplus products of the laborer. With the prosperity
effected by the production of wealth, spring up the desire and effort to extend its bless¬
ings among the unfortunate. We can point to a small iron manufacturer in Connecti¬
cut, who has devoted all the profits of a small furnace and.farra, in and upon which he
labors every day with his own hands, to feeding, clothing, and educating, at his own
house, ten or twelve orphan children, whom he has rescued from poverty and crime,
and is training to be Christian teachers and missionaries." — of Iron Manu-
ftcfurfirs of New Englauii, p. 29.
44
of duties, which the American iron-masters asked without ob¬
taining, would have preserved the price of American iron at
60 dollars per ton. Our railroads paid, in consequence of the
destruction of American competition for want of adequate pro¬
tection in those four years, not less than thirty millions of dol¬
lars. Such facts seem to place it beyond doubt, that the
aggregate cost of iron to American consumers, during the eight
years preceding 1854.was greater than if the reduction of duties
through the tariff of 1846 had never taken place.* The cheap
imports offered to us by England have proved but snares and
illusions. In the race of nations, cheap imports are like the
golden apples in the fabled race of Hippomenes and Atalanta.
They serve only to lure us from the course, and to secure for
our rivals the riclier prize.
Attempts to make cast-steel in this country have been con¬
tinued for more than thirty years; but witli so little success,
that, until within the last five or six years, it was believed that
we should be always compelled to depend upon foreign mines
and labor for this indispensable material for tools and machin¬
ery. It was said that our ores were wanting in the steely pro¬
pensity found in the Swedish irons, of which England had the
monopoly; and we were warned against attempting to nourish
tliis manufacture through protective duties, by reference to
Prance, which was said to have failed, even by the highest pre¬
miums and prohibitory duties, to attain any excellence in this
manufacture.! Hence, until 1861, the duties on steel were
kept even below the revenue standard. Within the last five or
six years, it has been demonstrated, that the steel-producing
qualities exist in American iron; and many of the best edge-
tool manufacturers and machinists in the country testify that
* This is the conclusion of one of our most eminent political economists, and a dis¬
interested observer, Prof. Bowen. Principles of Political Economy, &c., p. 213.
t See M<^moire sur la Fabrication et le Commerce des Fers a Acier, par M. F. Leplay,
Annales des Mines, quat. ser. i. 9.
45
steel, both cast and rolled, made from American iron in Pitts¬
burgh,.is equal in quality to the best of English make.
The capacity of the works in and around Pittsburgh alone,
some of them employing a capital of over half a million of dol¬
lars, is estimated at seventy-five tons a day. The acquisition
of this industry to our national resources may therefore be
said to be an accomplished fact. Brief as has been its history, *
it has already demonstrated its efficacy in controlling foreign
prices.
For many years before the introduction of American cast-
steel, while the duty was only 12 per cent ad valorem, the
price of the best English steel averaged 16 cents per pound.
As soon as it was found that the manufacture in this country
was likely to be a success, and that the American "steel was
offered a little below the English rates, the prices of English
steel were reduced until the best imported cast-steel was sold
at 13 cents a pound. A memorial addressed to the Senate,
signed by the officers of several important railroad companies,
states that, previous to the present extensive preparations in
this country for producing Bessemer-steel rails and forgings,
foreign agents charged $150 per ton in gold for the same rails
that they reduced to $110 per ton in gold, when they became
aware that such preparations were being made.* Mr. Cattell,
* Six different establishments for making Bessemer steel, each capable of producing
daily from thirty to forty tons, are now in operation, or in the course of construction, in
this country. The leading iron manufacturers of the country, in whose company I re¬
cently witnessed the operations at the works of Messrs. Win&low and Griswold, at
Troy, N.Y., declare that all the difficulties of this manufacture are overcome, and that
the making df steel by the pneumatic process, — the greatest improvement in metal¬
lurgy which has been made since Cort's process of puddling, — with judicious protec¬
tion, will be definitely established in this country. The benefits which consumers will
derive from the establishment of this manufacture are incalculable. A steel railway
bar, costing not twice as much, will last thirty times as long as one made of puddled
iron; and it is said by those best informed, that, so soon as the facilities for manufac¬
turing the Bessemer metal shall be adequate to meet the demand, this metal will come
in use for making all the axles and wheel tires of our carriages and wagons; the shoes
of our horses, oxen, and mules; the ploughs and harrows, spades, hoes, and rakes of
our. farmers; the bars and mattocks, the hammers, sledges, and picks of our miners;
46
in an admirable speech upon the tariff question delivered in
the Senate last winter, makes the following statement: "A
number of original invoices now in my possession from promi¬
nent English steel-manufacturing agents on this side, dated in
the years 1850, 1852,1853, 1855, and 1857, show that during
tiiese years, when- the duties on steel were far below the pres¬
ent rates, being as low in the year 1857 as twelve cents ad
valorem, equal to about one and a quarter of a cent per pound,
as shown by the Custom-house valuation, the best cast-steel
averaged fifteen cents, and the maximum sixteen and a half
cents. Invoices and offers made by the same manufacturers'
agents during the present month (January, 1867), the exist¬
ing tariff upon the same grade being three cents per pound,
shows an average decline of one and a quarter of a cent per
pound. This comparatively new branch of manufacture, and
the figures I have given (says Mr. Cattell), shows that, work¬
ing under a protective duty of three cents per pound, the
energy and enterprise of our own people have forced the
English manufacturer to reduce his rate one and a quarter of
a cent per pound; saving to the American consumer twenty-
five dollars on every ton used." At the time of the Trent
affair, when we were upon the verge of a war with England,
the steel manufacture iiad not been developed, and we were
mainly dependent upon that country for the raw material of
our bayonets and sabres, and what was more vital, for the tools
for boring and fashioning our guns and cannon. A conflict
with England would have severely taught us the lesson that
no country is safe which does not rely upon its own industry
and resources for every muniment of war.
There is no reason why, with adequate protection, the
industries of steel and iron should not obtain that absolute
nails and screws for buildings, bolts and nuts for machinery, &c., all of which will be
made better, and, in proportion to their quality, cheaper than they are now produced,
— See Paper on the Pneumatic Process, by T. S. Durfee.
47
independence which the American manufactures of iron and
steel, denominated hardware goods, now enjoy. I liave taken
some pains to ascertain the position of the hardware manufac¬
ture in this country, and its capacity for supplying the wants
of consumers. Forty years ago, as I have been informed by
the oldest of the extensive dealers of hardware in New Eng¬
land, American goods were an exception in the hardware
stores. At the present time, in taking an account of stock, five-
sixths of the hardware, including heavy goods, is of American
manufacture. We now manufacture all the styles required
for our consumption; and there is no English article imported
for which there is any demand which is not furnished by our
own manufacture. The American axes, shovels, spades, and
hoes have wholly taken the place of tlie foreign tools. Noth¬
ing like them in shape or finish is made abroad, and they are
largely exported. A single axe factory has made 1,500 axes
per day for 300 days in one year. Tiie original manufacturer
of the most popular shovels congratulated himself when he
could make ten dozen per week. His sons now make regularly
2,000 dozen per week. In nearly all carpenters' tools we excel.
The American socket or framing chisels take the place of the
English, although English furmer chisels and plane irons, for
hard wood and ship-carpenters' use, are preferred. We import
no long saws or circulars; of other saws, the consumption is
about divided between the American and English. The twist
gimlet is of American design, and principally of home make.
The screw auger is also an American design and lias replaced
the English pod auger. It is the same with all bits of that
family, though English pod-bits for countersinks are still
imported. In the class of locks of all kinds, American articles
are cheaper, simpler, and of better workmanship. Foreign
locks are imported only for the variety in the patterns of the
keys and wards. American butts and hinges of all kinds are
clieaper and better, and exclude the foreign. Wood screws, in
48
shape and design, are A.merican, none being imported except
such as are made under foreign patents of American inven¬
tions. In cutlery of all kinds, table and pocket, the medium
American qualities are cheaper and better than those of foreign
importation, which are confined to the very low, or very higli
or fancy articles. It is said by those who have watched the
hardware business for many years, that the introduction of
every American article to replace the foreign has had the effect
to lower the price of the latter until it has generally been driven
from the market. Every year adds to the list of the small prod¬
ucts of this class of manufacture. These manufactures have
grown up without any advantages of cheap, raw material, either
of coal, iron, or steel. Tiiey have been clearly the products of
protection.*
In presenting the thread of argument upon which I have
strung these illustrations of our own dependence upon home
industry, which could be continued indefinitely, I have not
hesitated to repeat the term protection, to which, I am aware.
* Our progress in many industries which are sometimes referred to as having de¬
rived very little benefit from protection, is to be attributed to the skill nourished by the
protected manufactures. Our machine shops originated with our mills, and the power
of applying machinery, so characteristic of our people, has been developed by our man
ufacturing system: it is therefore one of the incidents of protection that we make the
best watches in the world by machinery. The Walthara watch factory lies alongside
of the first power-loom cotton mill. It is this power of applying machinery which has
enabled us to excel in the manufacture of those musical instruments which can be
principally made by machinery, — such as guitars, flutes, and pianofortes. Violins
must be made wholly by hand, and in the manufacture of these instruments we have
attained no success. Heavy machinery was first applied to the manufacture of silver
plate, formerly made with jeweller's tools, at Providence, R.I., one of the earliest seats
of the cotton manufacture. I visited one establishment, in 1864, when two-and-a-half
tons of silver were in the process of manufacture. Wherever possible, machinery was
substituted for manipulation. Silver was rolled into sheets between rollers weighing
fifteen tons, and pressed by heavier dies than those in use for striking coin. The ware,
made from designs furnished by highly-paid artists, was unsurpassed in perfection of
finish. If we ask how the wealth is produced to bring these luxuries into demand
even in a time of war, we have only to look around the little State where this manu¬
facture flourishes, and see its diversified industry, aided by the large use of machinery,
enabling its population to pay a taxation, per capita, of $22.58, while the agricultural
State of Tennessee pays a tax of only $1.36 for each person of its population.
49
some who sympathize with me in opinion object. No better
term, I think, has ever been suggested to express the precise
idea which the word " protection" implies. It is the word used
by the early statesmen in the preamble of the first American
tariff, to denote their object in aiding our home industry by
legislative action. It expresses the precise object of such
legislation, — that of defending against the assaults of other
nations the labor of our own, so tbat our industry may be as
well protected and as free as our soil, and tbat the country
may have a real free trade of its own, and not one imposed
upon it by the selfishness of other nations. Its object is, that
our people may enjoy in full measure the happy privileges of
a country to which, as the greaj; statesman of Russia has said,
" God has given such conditions of existence, that its grand
internal life is enough for it."
It is obvious that my argument, that protection is a boon to
the consumer, is a hypothetical one, so far as it implies that
there is a class worthy of consideration who are consumers
only. In this country we are all producers as well as con¬
sumers. The man of science who discovers the laws of
mechanics, the scholar who teaches them, the inventor who
applies them to the labor-saving machine, the official who pre¬
pares the patent titles, the lawyer who defends them, the
clergyman and physician who preserve the physical and moral
health which make invention possible, are equally producers
with the mechanic who makes the machine, the capitalist who
employs it, the merchant who distributes its products, or the
farmer who feeds them all. Each contributes some useful
product, the labor of his mind or body, in exchange for the
product of the other, who in his turn becomes a consumer.
Production and consumption re-act upon each other, and, when
pushed to the utmost, effect that diversity of industry which
employs all the powers, intellectual and sesthetic as well.as
mechanical, of the community. The more varied the indi-
7
50
vidual efforts, the more complete the concert of all, twining
together like the tones of many instruments in some great
sympliony. Society thus becomes a harmonious whole, con¬
cordant with the origin of creation and the purpose of man's
being, so grandly sung in Dryden's stately measures: —
•
" From harmony, from heavenly harmony,
This universal frame began;
Through the whole chorus of the notes it rang.
The diapason closing full in man."
LETTER
OF
MR. SAMUEL BATCHELDER.
Mr. Hates : Dear Sir, — I understand your inquiry relates to
the effect of the introduction of manufactures in this country, in sup¬
plying manufactured articles cheaper, and also to the production of
such as are better suited to our climate and the wants of the population,
than had before been imported.
Within my recollection, which extends back to the last years of the
last century, most of the clothing for summer wear,— including shirting,
sheeting, &c., — with the exception of a few articles of household
manufacture, consisted of India cotton, a very light and unserviceable
fabric, and made from cotton very inferior to that produced in this
country. After the introduction of spinning machinery in England,
cotton yarn was made suitable to be used for warps (which until that
time were made only of linen), thus facilitating to a great degree tlie
household manufacture of cotton cloths. After the introduction of pow¬
er-loom weaving in England, —which was about the time of the coin-
menceinent of the war of 1812, — the manufacture of cotton cloths was
increased in England to such a degree, that, immediately after the close
of the war, large quantities of British shirting were imported annually.
These goods, though a considerable improvement upon the India cot¬
tons, were by no means suitable for common use; and it was not until
the introduction of power-loom weaving in this country, that an article
was produced that was of such a substantial fabric as to meet the wants
of the people. The Waltham sheetings, a stout fabric, made from good
cotton, sold without any starch or dressing, proved to be so serviceable
52
and romfortable an article, that many mills were soon employed in sup¬
plying the wants of the country. And these goods not only proved to
be better adapted for use in this country, but soon became an article of
export to South America, India, China, and other parts of the world,
where the people substituted American cottons in place of such as they
had formerly imported from England. This was so much the case,
that English manufacturers were driven to imitate the American
fabrics; and English sheetings and shirtings, made of inferior cotton,
were soon found in many foreign markets, bearing the stamps of Wal-
thani and other American marks.
Mr. Nathan Appleton, in advocating the encouragement of Ameri¬
can manufactures in Congress against the opposition of the South,
very properly took the ground that manufacturing in this country
would be the means of increasing the demand for Southern cotton, by
substituting goods made from such cotton in foreign countries, instead
of those manufactured from the inferior cotton of India. These
American cottons not only proved to be better suited to the wants of
this country, and to wear better than such as had formerly been im¬
ported, but were afforded at a much lower price.
In 1826, I commenced the manufacture at the Hamilton Mills,
Ijowell, of a twilled article known now very extensively as Jean,
Until this time, the power loom had been principally confined to what was
called plain goods, such as the sheetings and shirtings before mentioned.
Tlic Merrimack Mills were just commencing the manufacture of a
finer article for printed calicoes. Very few articles of twilled cottons
were imported, — such as were fini.shed for particular articles of dress,
and sold at a high price. So far as I could learn, these twilled goods
were woven only on the hand loom in England, where the power loom
had only been emjdoyed in weaving plain cloths. The production of
those goods upon the power loom at as low a price, according to weight,
as plain cloth, at once opened a market for them for various purposes for
which they were better adapted than those woven plain. And, being
sold at little more than half the price of any similar imported article,
the demand for them was considerably increased in this country, and
some were exported ; and, among the first that were sent to Calcutta, I
was told a j)ortion of them was sold for clothing the British troops in
India, who, on account of the climate, being clotlied in white, required
something a little more substantial than llie thin manufacture of the
country.
53 -
In 1827, I commenced the manufacture at the same place of an
article similar to the Jeans before mentioned, but of a stouter fab¬
ric, since well known as Drilling; on which thousands of looms have
since been employed, making goods of precisely the same description,
with the same number of threads both in the warp and filling, of the
same average weight, with yarn of the same fineness, and without
the least variation in any particular. These Drillings have gone into
extensive use in this country, and have become generally known abroad,
having constituted a large article of export. «
I have a memorandum of the exports of Domestics to China alone,
consisting principally of the above articles, as follows, in round
numbers: —
In 1850 15,000,000 yards.
„ 1852 25,000,000 „
,, 1853 24,000,000 „
„ 1854 15,000,000 „
„ 1855 7,700,000 „
„ 1856 16,590,000 „
„ 1857 5,500,000 „
„ 1858 28,000,000 „
„ 1859 31,000,000 „
„ 1860 32,900,000 „
as you see, continuing to increase, until interrupted by the rebellion.
Within the recollection of the present generation, sailors generally
wore a blue and white check for shirting, which was mostly imported
from England. In 1827 or 1828, I commenced the manufacture, at
the Hamilton Mills, Lowell, of a twilled article, blue and white, since
well known as shirting stripe. The sale of this article was moderate
at first, and was not manufactured to any great extent, but was soon
found to be more serviceable and suitable for the hard service of
sailors than the thinner and lighter article they had been accustomed
to wear; and coming into use by sailors on long voyages to India,
and by the whalers in the Pacific, soon became so generally known,
that there was a great demand for export to the Western coast of
A.merica, and is now so generally adopted for sailois shirts, that it
would require a considerable search to find a sailor w^eaiing the blue
and white check, formerly so common.
' 54
The foregoing facts within my own knowledge, and most of them
connected with my own operations, afford a conclusive answer to your
inquiry, — that, so far as the manufacture of cotton is concerned, the
introduction of the business in this country has resulted in supplying
a better and cheaper article for clothing—not only for the population
of this country, but also for many other parts of the world — than could
before be procured, either from the looms of India or Great Britain.
It may also deserve notice, that the manufacture of printed lawns
for ladies' dresses was commenced about 1846, at Portsmouth, N.H.
The cost of importing the article, at that time, was twenty-seven cents
per yard. The manufacture of goods so much finer than any thing
that had before been attempted in this country was at first unsuccess¬
ful, but, by perseverance, at length succeeded so far, that, while I was
connected with the business, the article was made and sold at a moder¬
ate profit, until the price was reduced below twelve cents, and after¬
wards declined to nine or ten cents; affording another instance of the
great reduction in price by the establishment of manufactures in this
country.
So far as my observation goes, the establishment of almost every
branch of manufactures in this country has resulted in improving the
quality, as well as reducing the price, of such articles as we had pre¬
viously imported; and very few branches of manufacture have been
established otherwise than by protection in the commencement of the
business, from the severe competition of importers and foreign manufac¬
turers. This has been the result even in the manufacture of various
articles of hardware, where the English had much greater advantages
over this country from their abundant supply of iron and coal, which
for a long time induced us to consider any competition with them as
altogether hopeless. But the manufacture of locks, hinges, screws,
firearms, and many other articles, has proved that American skill has
succeeded in producing articles not only cheaper and better than could
be supplied from abroad, but has induced the manufacturers in other
countries to adopt our improvements in order to supply themselves.
Notwithstanding all the discussion that has taken place in regard to
a taritr of duties for the protection of American interests, it seems to
have been considered a new policy; and to have ^escaped notice, that
protection has been the policy of the country from the organization of
the Government. One of the earliest acts of the First Congress im¬
poses a duty of six cents per ton on American-built vessels, and fifty
55
cents per ton on foreign vessels. This tonnage duty, and what have
been called the navigation laws, have not only been a protection to that
branch of business, but an absolute prohibition to Foreign vessels to
interfere in certain branches of our domestic trade; and even up to the
present time, not only foreign-built ships, but those built in America,
which have been sold to foreigners, on being repurchased by Americans
have been refused a register as American vessels; yet those interested
in navigation and commerce have at times being the strongest opponents
of protection to American manufactures.
I ought to apologize for having been so prolix; but it is difficult to
enumerate all the benefits that have resulted from protection to the
wealth of the country, and to the comfort and prosperity of the
population.
Very sincerely yours,
SAMUEL BATCHELDEK.
Cambridge, June 18, 1867.
THE FLEECE AND THE LOOM:
AU
ADDRESS
BEFORE THE
Rational at ^iVol panufadut^visi,
AT
THE FIRST AKNUAL MEETING IN PHILADELPHIA,
SEPT. 6, 1865.
By JOHN L. HAYES,
SECRETART.
WITH SECRETARY'S REPORT AND TABLES.
BOSTON;
PRESS OF JOHN WILSON AND SON.
18Gf).
ADDRESS.
The occasion of the first annual meeting of the " National
Association of Wool Manufacturers " would seem to demand
from your Secretary something more than a meagre statement
of transactions of tlie Association necessarily limited by the
brief period since its organization, and has suggested, as
the most suitable subject for an address which shall have a
wider scope than a mere official report, the consideration of
the national importance of the wool manufacture and the
means of developing it.
The principal articles of the wealth of a nation are the
yearly products of those industries which supply food and
clothing, and the instruments by which they are produced
and diffused. The distribution of these products constitutes
the commerce of the world. Of the four branches of textile
industry which clothe mankind, the one to which we are
devoted is the most ancient, the most important to the inhabi¬
tants of the temperate regions, and, therefore, to the most
civilized portions of mankind, and at present the second in
commercial importance. We cannot fail to benefit ourselves
by impressing upon our own minds even familiar facts and
considerations which tend to exalt our industry, and stimulate
us to advance and ennoble it; and it is the highest duty to
our cause to enlighten the public mind as to the influence
which this industry has had and may have in its future possi¬
ble development, in promoting the wealth of the country and
4
comfort of the people, in identifying tlie interests of distant
States, in sustaining the public credit, and securing a real
national independence.
Among the well-ordered adaptations of nature for the well-
being of tlie human race, one of tlie most beneficent is that
which has supplied the temperate regions with an animal
fitted to produce at the same time food and the most essential
clothing of its inhabitants, and one whose culture is a most
valuable accessory to general agriculture. So early did man
avail himself of this gift, that we find sheep mentioned in the
most ancient writings, in the first chapters of Genesis, in
the Persian Zend Avesta, in the Indian Vedas, and in the
Chinese Chou-king, and represented on the monuments of
Egypt. According to Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire, the highest au¬
thority on the origin of species, the specific source of our
domestic sheep is rinknown. All that is certain is, that the
present races originated in the East; the primitive names,
Bock and Bouc, found in the most ancient Asiatic languages,
being preserved in our term Buck*
This species is endowed with a plasticity, so to speak, so
remarkable, that it is more susceptible of modification than
any other animal, except the dog,f so that " the breeder," as
Lord Somerville says, " may chalk out upon a wall a form
perfect in itself, and tiien give it existence." ^ Hence peculi¬
arities are developed in the coverings of ditferent races pro¬
duced by man, wbich make tbat distinctness and variety of
fabric wbich characterize the wool manufacture; and thus we
have the coarse Cordova and Donskoi wools for our carpets;
the noble electoral wools of Saxony and Silesia for our broad-
cloths; the strong middle wools of the Southdown and our
* Bulletin de la Socidt^ Iinperiale Zoologique d'Acclimatation, t. 6, p, 502.
t Cuvier. Animal Kingdom, translated by II. JIcMurtrie. New York, 1831. Vol. i.
p. 199.
J BischofT on Wool, Woollens, and Sheep. London, 1842. p. 380.
5
native sheep for blankets; the soft, long, and finer merino
wools of France, Vermont, and Michigan, for thibets, delaines,
and shawls; the longer and coarser combing wools of the
Cotswold and Leicester races for worsteds in their thousand
applications; the very long and bright-haired lustre wools of
Lincolnshire for alpaca fabrics; and, lastly, the precious silky
Maucbamp wool, the recent triumph of French agronomic
skill, rivalling even the Cashmere, for shawls, and the Angora,
for Utrecht velvets.*
The fibre of wool, rendered more perfect than any other by
the more complete chemical elaborations and assimilations of
the animal economy, has the most highly developed organic
structure. While the specific gravity of cotton is 1*47, of
linen 1*50, and of silk 1*30, the specific gravity of wool is but
1-26.1 It is, therefore, of all fibrous substances the best non¬
conductor, and its tissues the lightest and warmest and most
healthful. The perfection of the fibre is shown in its inde-
structibleness and durability. Cotton and flax may be ulti¬
mately reduced to mere woody fibre. Wool is almost incapable
of mechanical destruction. The existence of " shoddy," the
term of reproach to the woollen manufacturers, is the strongest
proof of the excellence and indestructibility of its original
fibre. Unlike silk, the product of an inferior animal organiza¬
tion, which is straight and entirely structureless, the fibre of
wool is crisped or spirally curled, and is made up of cells
of different kinds, —the interior forming the pith, and the ex¬
terior consisting of serrated rings imbricated over each other,
having under the microscope the appearance of a scries of
thimbles with uneven edges inserted into each other; these ser-
ratures, as well as the spiral curls, being more or less distinct
according to the fineness of the fibre. J We have here tiie
* See note on p. 55.
t Urc's I'lulosopliy of Monufnctures, p. 81, ei seq.
t Youatt on Sheep, p. 94. Argument by George Harding in Snpreme Court of
United State.s. Uurr rs. Uuryce el aU. " Hat Body Case," p. 113. Report of Flax and
Hemp Commission p. 68.
6
cause of the invaluable quality of felting, to which we owe
our hats and broadcloths. Flax and cotton composed of
mere woody fibre are opaque and dull in aspect; woolly fibre,
when freed from the peculiar soapy oil or yolk which nour-
islies and protects its growth, has a natural polish which
protects it from soiling, and in some varieties gives a positively
lustrous beauty to its fabrics; the vegetable fibres receive
with difficulty permanent dyes, and sometimes curiously exhibit
their refractory nature in contrast with wool. The fibres, acci¬
dentally detached from cotton or hempen strings, with which
fleeces are sometimes bound, when incorporated with the wool¬
len fabric, refuse the dye, and often ruin whole products of the
loom. On the other hand, all animal fibres have ready affini¬
ties with the chemical agents of the dyer. Wool especially,
from its beautiful whiteness, itself the result of the ameliora¬
tion of the original black sheep, is unrivalled in its facility for
receiving, and power of permanently retaining, color, as in
the famous woollen Gobelin tapestries,* where over a thousand
distinctly defined tones and hues are given to fabrics destined
to be indestructible as works of art.
Such are the qualities of fibre which have led every indus¬
trious nation to the culture of flocks as the first necessity of
its people ; whieli have caused, in every manufacturing nation,
tlie demand to constantly exceed the supply ; which have trans¬
planted colonies from the Cape of Good Hope to Australia,
and liave carried tlie shepherd-emigrant to the steppes of Rus¬
sia and the plains of La Plata;! which have brought the
present production to such enormous figures as are given by
recent German estimates,! giving to Great Britain an annual
production of 260,000,000 pounds of wool; to Germany,
* Chevreiul on Colors. Translated from the French by John Spanton. London,
1858. p. 113.
t See Southey on Colonial Wools,/lossim.
t United-States Economist of June 10, 1865, which quotes from a writer in the
Year-book of German Cattle Breeders
7
200,000,000; Fi-ance, 123,000,000; Spain, Italy, and Portugal,
119,000,000; European Eussia, 125,000,000; making, in all
Europe, 827,000,000 ; in Australia, South America, and South
Africa, 157,000,000 ; the United States, 95,000,000 ; the Brit¬
ish North-American Provinces, 12,000,000; Asia, at a very
general estimate, 470,000,000 ; Northern Africa, 49,000,000 :
the aggregate production of wool in the whole globe amount¬
ing, by these estimates, to 1,610,000,000, or a pound and a
quarter to each inhabitant, reckoned at twelve hundred and
eighty-five million people.*
In tracing the history of the woollen manufacture, we find
that it had already attained considerable perfection with the
Romans, who employed this material in almost all their gar¬
ments,! and with whom sheep were so abundant that a single
patrician bequeathed, by will, two hundred thousand to Augus-
tus.J The prices of the finer fabrics, however, were enormous.
* Bulletin of American Geographical Society, 1865, p. 153. Hon. Fred. A.
Conlding, in a paper on the Production and Consumption of Cotton, furnishes a table,
prepared by Prof. A. J. Schem, in which the populations of all the countries on the
globe using cotton exclusively are set do^vn at 695,596,483. The populations which
use cotton only partially (and, consequently, use more or less wool) are set down at
519,656,253.
t "All the garments of both sexes were for many centuries made of wool exclu¬
sively; and, although silk and flax were introduced under the empire, they were never
adopted by any large portion of the community." — Ramsay's Elementary Manual of
Roman Antiquities. London, 1860. p. 238.
X Statistique des Peuples de Antiquity, par M. Moreau de Jonnes, t. ii. p. 464.
The invaluable race of merino sheep is probably an inheritance of Roman civilization.
The race most prized by the Romans was called the Tarrentine, from Tarrentum, a town
settled by a Greek colony. They were also called Greek sheep. Their wool was of ex¬
ceeding fineness; and they were protected by coverings of skins, and were also carefully
housed, and often combed, and bathed with oil and wine. Hence they were very deli¬
cate. Columella, the most eminent agricultural writer of the Romans, who lived in the
century before the Christian era, relates {De Re Rustica^ lib. vii. chap. 2) that his
paternal uncle, M. Columella, "a man of keen genius and an illustrious agiiculturalist,"
transported from Cadiz to his farm-lands, which were in Boetica, comprehending a part
of the present province of Estramadura, some wild rams of admirable whiteness brought
from Africa, and crossed them with the covered or Tarrentine ewes. Their offspring,
which had the paternal whiteness, being put to TaiTentine ewes, produced rams with a finer
fleece. The progeny of these again retained the softness of the dam and the whiteness
of the sire and grandsire (maternam molUtiem, paternum et avitum colot-em). Other agri¬
culturalists undoubtedly imitated Columella, and a stronger constitution was thus imparted
'8
The Roman purple worn by the senators was made from wools
of Italy, which, according to Pliny, were worth four dollars
per pound of twelve ounces,* and which, of the same weight,
were worth one hundred and sixty dollars, when colored
with the Tyrian dye.f It is not strange, then, that Horace
should boast of a gift to his mistress of fleeces twice dyed with
the Tyrian murex.J The world has regretted, for many cen¬
turies, the loss of this imperial dye; but within the last ten
years, or no later than 185G, chemistry has produced from
aniline, a product of worthless coal tar, a purple tint, resist¬
ing light, alkalis, and acids, § and rivalling, upon tiie light
worsted zephyrs of our simple maidens, the hue of the patrician
mantle.
The woollen industry disappeared with tlie incursions of the
barbarians and the fall of tlie Roman Empire, or languished
to the fine-fleeced but delicate sheep of ancient Italy. That this improvement was com¬
menced in ancient Spain is further established by the testimony of Strabo, who says, in
his account of the geography of that country (lib. iii. chap. 2), that in his time, that of
the Emperor Tiberius, wool of great fineness and beauty was exported from Truditania,
a part of Boetica; and that rams were sold in that province for improvdng the breed for a
talent each, or about one thousand dollars. When the Roman Empire was overrun by
the barbarians, the Tarrentine stock of Italy, being very tender, became extinct; but the
improved stock of Bcctica, living in the mountains, survived and perpetuated by the
Moors, who, skilled in the textile arts, could appreciate its value, still exists as the
merinos of Spain. If this view is correct, the merino race is the most important sur¬
viving relic of the material civilization of the Greeks and Romans. I shall be excused
for these remarks, which may be of little practical benefit, by those who appreciate the
sentiment of Niebuhr, the great historian of Rome, that he who calls what has vanished
back into being, enjoys a bliss like that of creating.*'
* riiny's Natural History (lib. viii. chap. 73); Centennos nummos^ or a hun¬
dred sesterces, a sesterce of the value of four cents. — Allen's Classical Hand-book,
p. 110.
t Pliny's Natural History (lib. ix. chap. 63): Dennriis milky or a thousand
denarii, a denanns of the value of sixteen cents. — Allen's Classical Hand-book,
p. 110.
J Muricibus Tyriis iteratae vellera lanae, epod, 12-21.
§ " It is no exaggeration to say that the introduction of this one color (the aniline
purple) has been a greater boon to the dyer than all the other inventions of the last ten
years put together. Not only is the hue yielded by the coal tar (purple) of a diff"erent
and better kind than any before known; it is likewise so fast, that it may, with indigo
blue and a few other colors, be considered as permanent."— International Exhibition of
1862. Reports of Juries, Class 21.
9
only in domestic manufacture, or in the abbeys where the
monks of the dark ages still pursued tlie arts necessary for
their own comfort. This decline in the arts continued until
the time of the Crusades, which eifected a complete revolution
in industry and commerce. The Crusaders* found in Asia the
scattered fragments of the sciences and arts, and among others,
the processes for making those rich fabrics which had formed
the most luxurious vestments and furniture of the Romans.f
The States of Italy were the first which availed themselves of
these discoveries, making the mechanical arts auxiliary to the
commerce which they had revived on the ancient course of
navigation to tlie East. In the twelftii and thirteenth cen¬
turies, Florence, Venice, Pisa, and Genoa, had arrived at great
perfection in manufactures. In those States we have the first
brilliant illustration of the influence of the industrial arts
upon the prosperity of the State. Florence owed her splendor
to the woollen manufacture with wliicii she supplied the world.:j:
Machiavelli alludes to the sound of the moving siiuttle which
resounded in all lier streets, and he mournfully contrasts the
former cheerful hum of a busy industry with the stillness pi'e-
vailing, after the loss of this manufacture, through the plague
and change of ti"affic.§ It is no little boast for our indus¬
try that it was the source of the commerce and wealth whose
magnificent fruits still survive in the wonders of Florentine
art.
* Mill's History of the Crusades, vol. ii. p. 346,
t Metellus Sciplo, in the accusation which he brought against Cato, stated that
even in his time Babylonian (Asiatic) coverings for couches were selling for 800,000
sesterces, or $128,000. In the time of Nero, they had risen to four million sesterces,
$640,000. — Pliny's Natural History, lib. viii. chap. 73.
Some of the most ancient Asiatic forms survive unchanged in modern woollen
fabrics, such us the palm patterns of shawls. Specimens of Cashmere shawls, of the
kind called E/:pouline in France, collected, in the year 835, by Iheodoiphus, Bishop of
Orleans, are preserved in the archives of the Bishopric du Puy de Veiny. — Pastoral
Life and Manufactures of the Ancients. New York, 1845. p. 94.
t Millar's Historical Views of the English Government, vol. ii. p. 370. James's His¬
tory of the Worsted Manufacture, p. 20.
§ Quarterly Review, January, 1821, p. 296.
2
10
The Netherlands, already advanced, as early as the tenth
century, in the manufacture of linen, which their soil produced
of admirable quality, readily appropriated from tiie Italians
the arts of manufacturing wool. Favored by their internal
water-carriage, which gave them supplies of material, and by
the middle station of their ports in the foreign navigation of
the maritime nations, tliey liad outlets for their commodities
in all parts of Europe. They supplied themselves with wool
from England, to the vast amount of forty-five million pounds
in some years, and were aided, at one period, in obtaining wool
from Spain by the union of the sovereignties of Spain and the
Netherlands under Charles V. Flanders continued for a long
period to supply Europe with all the woollen cloths and stuffs
demanded by luxury or taste, and was the veritable centre
from which the arts of fabricating woollens spread in time to
all the other industrious nations of Christendom.* Flemish
wealth, derived mainly from this industry, was the envy of all
Europe. Letters and the fine arts were encouraged and flour¬
ished, and the works of the Flemish, no less than the Floren¬
tine painters, survive to illustrate the great truth that the true
source of the highest culture of a nation, and of its only
immortal monuments, is its industrial prosperity.
This sketch of the industry of Rome, Italy, and Flanders, is
but introductory to that of the great nation from which we
derive our language, institutions, and arts, and which, com¬
manding a foreign trade of not less than twenty-one hundred
millions of dollars, and exporting annually her manufactures to
the amount of six hundred and fifty millions of dollars,! must
be first looked to for instruction and example by all nations
who seek their own industrial development. We find that our
own industry has played no mean part in securing England's
commercial prosperity.
* Hume's History of England, vol. ii. p. 398. Motley's Rise and Fall of the Dutch
Republic, p. 36. Jnihir, supr. cU.
t The Tariff Question, by Erastus B. Bigelow, p. 3^
11
The climate of England is wonderfully fitted for raising cer¬
tain breeds of sheep, and it is probable that our British ances¬
tors were .employed in the domestic production of woollen
goods from the earliest period that they liad emerged into civi¬
lization. Names derived from textile occupations must have
been early incorporated among English sirnames. The name
rendered so familiar by its quaint calligraphy upon our Trea¬
sury notes, and that of New-England's great orator, are inherit¬
ed from the ancient spinners and websters, or weavers of Eng¬
land. Nevertheless, the English produced only common stufis,
and exported, in the eleventh century, more than half their
wools to the Netherlands. In the early part of the fourteenth
century, the English are spoken of as " only shepherds and
wool merchants," and as " depending on the Netherlands, who
were the only wool-weavers in Europe.* In the latter part of
the fourteenth century, the manufacture of wool received its
first impulse in England, and became firmly transplanted upon
her soil by the protecting influence of Edward III., who thus
added to his title of hero of Cressy, the prouder name of
father of English commerce. The eyes of this enlightened
sovereign were opened to one of those simple facts which Eng¬
land now expects to be invisible to all other nations. He saw,
in the quaint words of the author of the " Golden Fleece,"
— "that the subjects of the Duke of Burgundy, receiving the
English wool at sixpence a pound, returned it, through the man¬
ufacture of that industrious people, in cloths at ten shillings,
to the great enriching of that State, both in revenue to their
sovereign and employment to their subjects. He at once
proposed how to enrich his people, and to people his new con¬
quered dominions; and both these he designed to effect by
means of his English commodity, wool." f The first great step
* The Pensionary De Witt, quoted by Youatt. Sheep, their Breeds, &c., by Wil-
liam Youatt, p. 205.
t Smith's Memoirs of Wool, vol. i. p. 139. Youatt, p. 205.
12
of Edward was to attract to England a large number of Flem¬
ish families initiated in the arts of fabricating woollen goods;
and it is said that" he not only royally performed his promises
to them, but he likewise invested them with privileges and
immunities beyond those of his native subjects." Seventy
families were brouglit over in the first year. England became
speedily enriched by " this treasury of foreigners," as Fuller
styles them in his Church History. " Happy," says he,* " the
yeoman's house into which one of these Dutchmen did enter,
bringing industry and wealth along with him. Such who
came in as strangers within doors, soon after went out bride¬
grooms and returned sons-in-laws, having married the daiigli-
ters of their landlords who first entertained them; yea, those
yeomen in whose houses they harbored, soon proceeded gentle¬
men, gaining them estates to themselves, arms and worship to
their estates." During his great military preparations, Edward
summoned a parliament, whose principal business it was to
make laws for the encouragement of the woollen manufacture
in Englaud.f The exportation of rams was prohibited, and it
was decreed that no foreign cloth manufactures should be re¬
ceived, and that no one even should wear cloth made beyond
the sea. Through these measures the manufacture became so
well established that the first export of English cloth dates from
this reign. A tax upon importations was substituted for the
prohibition, and in the twenty-eighth year of this reign
the exports of cloths were triple the imports."|
* Fuller's Church History. London, 1842. Vol. i. p. 419.
t Bischoff on Wool, &c,, vol. i. p. 55.
X In the sixth and seventh years of Elizabeth, the woollen manufacture had so
much increased that the export of woollen goods to Antwerp alone, according to Cam¬
den, amounted to 750,0001.; and the whole value of the exports in 1564 was 1,200,000^.
(Smith, vol. i. p. 72), all fabricated of English wool. The vigor of the woollen trade at
this period is attributed by Smith to the abundance of gold and silver, in consequence
of the recent discovery of South America. Mr. Bigelow has shown that the chief
causes of the large increase of British exports since 1853, usually attributed to the free-
trade acts, are found outside of the tariflf laws, and principally in the greatly increased
13.
For five centuries the system of protection to the wool-
manufacturers, inaugurated by Edward III., was continued by
the succeeding sovereigns and parliaments of England. The
abstract of laws relating to the growers of wool and the manu¬
facture thereof, made in 1772, enumerates three hundred and
eleven laws,* all tending to one object, — the encourage¬
ment of the manufacture. With this object the exportation of
wool, after being several times suspended, was definitely
prohibited in 1660, and so eontinued until the year 1825.i
The exportation of fuller's earth was forbidden. The expor
tation of sheep was prohibited under the severest penalties; J
and even sheep-shearing could not be carried on within five
miles of the sea without the presence of a revenue ofifieer.§
To secure the manufacturers against a monopoly of wool, the
number of sheep to be kept by one person was limited to two
thousand. II One statute required that all black cloth and
mourning stuff worn at funerals should be made of British
wool alone ; another, which was carried into full effect for one
hundred and thirty years, or nearly to the present century,
ordained that every person should be buried in a shroud com¬
posed of woollen cloth alone.*^ The export of woollen cloth from
England to any foreign ports was permitted without a duty.**
The export of woollen goods from Ireland, or any of the English
Plantations in America, was prohibited.ff Upon the application
of the London and Canterbury woollen weavers, the wearing pf
supply of gold, the annual produce of which has tripled since 1848. The correspond¬
ence between the periods of Elizabeth and Victoria is quite remarkable. —The Tariff
Question, p. 17.
* Bischoff, vol. i. p. 6. See Bigelow's TariflF Question, p. 17
t Porter's Progress of the Nation. London, 1861. p. 168.
t Youatt, p. 216.
§ Bischoff, vol. i. p. 244.
II Youatt, p. 216.
If Youatt, p. 224.
** First William and Mary. Bischoff, vol. i. p. 85.
tt Tenth and Eleventh William III., chap. 10. Bischoff, voh i. p. 80.
14
Indian calicoes was forbidden, and afterwards,* when it was
apprehended that tlie rising cotton manufacture migiit inter¬
fere with the great national industry of woollens, the use of
British printed calicoes was restricted to those only of a blue
color.f Even the great commercial companies of England lent
tlieir protecting influence. The powerful East-India Company,
possessing tlie power to open an almost boundless market for
woollen goods, made it an invariable rule that in the cloth
which it exported, both the material and manufacture should
be British. This rule was inflexible till 1828.| The arts of
diplomacy were not wanting on the part of England in aid
of her favorite interest. At the close of the seventeenth cen¬
tury, Portugal, by interdicting the entry of foreign fabrics, had
succeeded in supplying her own population and Brazil with
woollen goods of her own manufacture.§ In 1703, England,
having in view principally the interests of the woollen manu¬
facture, made the famous Treaty of Methuen, by which, in
consideration of certain favors to Portuguese wines, she
secured the free admission to Portugal of her woollen goods.||
The English historian might well say, " this treaty hath
proved very advantageous to England, in the woollen trade
particularly." ^ But this treaty was a mortal blow to Portugal.
Her manufacturing industry disappeared. While all Europe
progresses, Portugal remains stationary. The few of her pro¬
ducts shown at the great Exhibition in 1862, were noticed only
for the melancholy representation which they gave of her
industry.
The measures of protection which were most significant of
* Bischoff, vol. i. p. 90.
t Bischoff, vol. i. p. 97.
t Report of Committee of House of Lords, 1828. Examination of Mr. Ireland.
§ Smith's Memoirs, vol. 1. p. 394. " I appeal to every person," says Smith,
that lived in Portugal from the year 1683 to 1703, during the time of the prohibition
whether Portugal did not make cloth enough for herself and Brazil."
II Smith, vol. i. p. 394.
^ Sec Smollett's History of England, vol. i. p. 568.
15
the devotion of England to lier manufacturing interests, were
the prohibition, for nearly a century and a half, of tiie exporta¬
tion of British wool,* and the admission of foreign wool at a
merely nominal, or very modei-ate duty, in spite of the violent
reclamations of the landed aristocracy. In a struggle of over
a hundred years with the manufacturers, the landed proprietors
had but one brief success, where they secured, for four years
only—viz., from 1819 to 1824—a tax upon foreign wool of six¬
pence per pound.t It had become a deep-rooted sentiment of
British statesmen of every party, that their highest duty to the
State was the encouragement of their own manufactures, and,
first of all, those of wool, for so many years their chief export,
and peculiarly national staple, — " eminently the foundation,"
as it was called, "of English riches,"| and "the flower and
strength, the revenue and blood of England." § The " wool
sack," upon which the Lord Chancellor of England has sat for
ages as the President of the House of Lords, is a symbolical tra¬
dition of the importance which the nation has always attached to
the woollen industry. || It was declared by statute that " wool
and woollen manufactures, cloth, serge, baize, kerseys, and
other stuffs, made or mixed with wool, are the greatest and
* " The one sole reason why England obtained the mastery of the ocean, and com¬
mand of the world's business, is that she exported no raw material; and the reason why
the Southern States went into ruin by the route of rebellion is because they exported
nothing else." — The Western States; their Pursuits and Policy, by Dr. William Elder,
p. 20.
t In 1802, a duty of 5s. 3d. sterling per cwt. was laid upon foreign wool. This was
gradually raised till it reached 6s. Sd. per cwt. In 1819, the ministers wanted to raise
1,4001. by a tax on malt; and the landed aristocracy refused their assent unless a tax was
laid on wool, and the tax of sixpence a pound was imposed, the bill having been hurried
through Parliament before the manufacturers could be heard. Bischoff, vol. i. p. 452.
t Sir .losiah Childs. Smith's Memoirs, vol. i. p. 157.
§ Golden Fleece. 1656. Smith's Memoirs, vol. i p. 139.
II "The antiquitie of wool within this kingdom hath been beyond the memorie of
man, so highly respected for those many Benefits therein that a customable use has
always been observed to make it the seat of our wise learned judges In the sight of our
noble Peers (in the Parliament House) to imprint the memorie of this worthy Coin-
moditie within the minds of those firm supporters and chief rulers of the land." —John
Hay, 1613. Smith's Memoirs, vol. i. p. 91.
16
most profitable commodities of the kingdom.*' * One of tlie
greatest English lawyers, Mr. Lawes, afterwards Lord Ellen-
borough, speaking of tiiis interest before tbe House of Lords,
said,! " to state to your Lordships the extent of the manufac¬
ture, would be to state tbat it is at least a tbird in point of
export, that it is a fourth of the national income, as derived
from all its various sources. Its magnitude is so important, its
connections with the vital interests of the country so close and
intimate, that it has been the principal object of attention in
the framing of the statutes upon your rolls from the earliest
period of any ascertained act of legislation of this country."
The encouragement of this industry had received the sanction
of tlie greatest of English names, even that of the founder of
experimental philosophy. Lord Bacon, addressing the future
ministers of his sovereign, patriotically exclaims,! "Let us
advanee the native commodities of our own kingdom, and ♦
employ our oivn countrymen before strangers. Let us turn the
wools of the land into clotiis and stuffs of our own growth. It
would set many thousands to work; and thereby one of the
materials would, by industry, be multiplied to five, ten,
and many times to twenty-five times more in value, being
wrougbt." It was by such lessons and traditions as these that
British legislators had become imbued with devotion to the
woollen trade, as with loyalty to the throne. In the whole
history of the world there is no such example of persistent
national care, continued alike through all administrations, in
peace and in war, under commonwealth and monarchy; and
thus " fondled, favored, and cherished," to use the words of
Mr. Iluskisson, § the woollen manufacture in England has
advanced, with constantly increasing prosperity, only, in mod-
* Tenth and Eleventh William III., chap. 10.
t Bischoff, vol. i. p. 323.
} Bischoff, vol. i. p. 321. From Mr. Lawes' speech. I do not find the passage in
Lord Bacon's Works.
§ Bischoff, vol. i. p. 5.
17
ern times, overshadowed by its own offspring, the cotton man¬
ufacture, and still surpasses that of all other nations in tl'e
quantity and value of its fabrics.
" The rapid growth and prodigious magnitude of the cotton
manufacture of Great Britain," for a century has not elapsed
since its infancy, have been called " the most remarkable phe¬
nomena in the history of industry."* But it should be
remembered tbat tliis industry was the natural offshoot from
the woollen manufacture. Through the protection of four
centuries afforded to the woollen trade mainly, and in a less
degree, only because they were less important, to the linen
and silk trades, England had become a nation of spinners and
weavers, or of artisans subsidiary to them. The textile crafts
had become, by hereditary transmission, as fixed as in the castes
of India. Tiie skill and taste for textile industry was already
developed for application to a kindred fibre. Some of the first
and most important inventions wiiich have produced the won¬
derful results of the cotton manufacture, sprang directly from
that of woollens. To instance one only; John Kay, residing in
Colchester, wliere the woollen manufacture was then carried
on, devised the fly-shuttle, by which double tiic quantity of
cloth, and of a better quality, could be produced by each work¬
man, and with less labor. Tiie Yorksliire clothiers were the
first to adopt his improvements, which form a part of every
power-loom of the millions of silk, cotton, linen, and woollen-
looms in all parts of the world.f The commerce and capital
which supplied the raw material fi'om abroad for tbe rising
manufacture had grown up from tlic woollen trade principally ;
but it had exerted a more important influence in making capi¬
talists familiar with the direct and incidental profits of manu¬
facturing industry, and in assuring them that the favor of
government, which had been extended for centuries to one.
* McCuUoch's Commercial Dictionary, article Cotton,
t Brief BiograpUies of Inventors of Machines, by Bennett Woodcroft, p. 3.
3
18
would never be wanting for a kindred interest. Hence capital
flowed by a natural transition into the new channel, and inven¬
tion found a fresh field for its creative skill under the patent
system which England had inaugurated as a part of her pro¬
tective policy. The subject which I have proposed for this
address, — the national influence of our own peculiar manu¬
facture, — finds its most brilliant example in the history of
English industry, which no less illustrates the more important
truth, that any industry, thoroughly incorporated in the nation¬
al existence, will have new offshoots and unexpected develop¬
ments, and may enrich a nation even more than by its own
fruits, in opening fresh sources of productive power.
Towards the close of the last century the woollen manufac¬
ture received in its turn the inventions first applied to cotton-
spinning. They were, first of all, the great discovery of Watt,
whicli furnished a motive-power everywhere applicable; the
roller-spinning of Paul, adopted by Arkwright, whicli furnished
an automatic mechanism, instead of muscular force, which
drew and twisted the fibre in a continuous thread; the jenny
of Hargreaves, whicli drew at once from ten to sixty or seventy
threads; the mule of Crompton, which increased tiie power of
the spinner a hundred fold ; and the power-loom of Cartwright,
which quadrupled the power of the weaver.* All these inven¬
tions, and what was equally important, the factory system of
Arkwriglit, were applied, upon a large scale, to the woollen
manufacture, first by Mr. Gott, who added the gig-mill for rais¬
ing the wool on the cloth, and shearing-frames worked also by
power. These improvements gave a vast extension to the
manufacture. The use of woollen tissues increased with the
low price of production, which continued to advance with
accelerated progress. At the end of the eighteenth century
Great Britain already consumed in her fabrics ninety-four mil¬
lions of pounds of her own wool, and eight millions imported.
* Woodcroft, p. 3, ei iey.
19
In 1828, the number of slieep in Great Britain had increased
one-fifth, and the average weight of the fleeces in equal pro¬
portion.* Mr. Bernoville, in his admirable work on the " In-
dustr)''of Combed Wools," published in the report made to the
French government on the labors of the French Commission,
at the Universal E.vposition of 1851, estimates the number
of pounds of wool in Great Britain in 1851 at two hundred
and eight million pounds, so that the production doubled in
fifty years. This increase of production was caused partly by
tlie increase of the number of sheep, but principally by the
increase in the weight of fleeces. Within that period a genu¬
ine transformation has taken place in the English races. To
attain the utmost possible weight of mutton, sheep are fed to
their utmost capacity, and the increase of flesh is accompanied
by a corresponding increase of wool, which, losing in fineness,
has gained in strength, length, and brilliancy. While the
domestic production has made such extraordinary progress,
the importation has increased with equal rapidity. Tiie eight
million pounds in 1801 have risen successively from sixteen
million pounds in 1821 to fifty-six millions in 1841, to eighty-
three millions in 1851, having inci'cased tenfold in fifty years.
In 1859, the importation had reached one hundred and thirty-
three millions.!
There are no official statements of the amount or value of
the whole production of British manufactures, or of the popu¬
lation employed in them; we must, therefore, rely upon the
very general estimates of the best authorities, which, however,
differ so widely that we can merely approximate the totals of
production in the woollen manufacture. Mr. Bernoville, in tlie
work above quoted, estimating the mean value of the domestic
production of wool in Great Britain at one franc twenty cen-
* Porter's Progress of the Nation. London, 1851. p. 168. Industrie des Laines
peigndes, par M. Bernoville, p. 11. Travaux de la Commission Fran^aise, vol. iv.
t Bigelow's Tariff Question, Appendix, p. 108.
20
times the pound, and tlie imported wool at one franc seventy
centimes, places the wiiolo value of wool employed by British
industry at 370,000,000 francs, or $74,000,000. lie estimates
that the value of thi/ wool is increased once and a half times
'by the manufacture, and that the annual production of woollen
fabrics in 1851 was 925,000,000 francs, or $185,000,000, and
the domestic consumption 079,000,000 francs, or $185,000,000.
Mr. Redgrave, one of her Majesty's Inspectors of Factories,
estimates tlie value of the British woollen and worsted manu¬
factures in 1850 at $183,492,725, and tiie domestic consump¬
tion in Great Britain, $111,300,100, for each person of its
population at $4.25.* Mr. Simmonds, the editor of Urc's
" History of the Cotton Manufacture," estimates the total pro¬
duction of woollen goods in 1800 at $100,000,000, and the
domestic consum|)tion at one-half that amount. Tiiis estimate
appears too small, and that of Mr. Redgrave seems most reli¬
able. Judging from the progress of exports, sixty millions of
dollars in 1850, and eighty millions in 1800, the value of the
woollen manufactures in the United Kingdom cannot be short
of $200,000,000. The number of persons employed in the
woollen industry, in all its ramifications, was estimated in 1841
at 245,000 persons. This number must have vastly increased
in twenty years. Mr. Bcrnovillc estimates them at 400,000
in 1851. Statistics have been procured, from time to time,
by the inspectors of factories in reference to establishments
under their supervision. Tiicy give the number employed
in tiie wool manufacture in 1850, at 79,091; and in the
worsted manufacture at 87,794 ; a total of 100,885. The num¬
ber employed in 1835 is stated at only 71,274. The number
had more than doubled in twenty years, although the progres¬
sive employment of mechanical means has had a tendency to
diminish the number of hands. Precise data are given only in
* Bigelow's Tariff Question. Appendix, p. 199.
21
relation to establisliments subject to the provisions of tlie Fac¬
tory Acts, wliicli make the whole number employed in all the
textile manulactures only 682,497. Mr. Redgrave estimates
that there are 887,369 persons employed in textile fabrics, not
subject to the provisions of the Factory Acts, which two classes
have dependent upon them at least 3,000,000 unemployed
persons, representing a total of 4,568,082 persons. Those
emploj'ed in the woollen and worsted manufactures constitute
very nearly a quarter of the whole number enumerated under
the provisions of the Factory Acts, which would give to the
woollen manufactures a population, depending upon them, of
over one million. Tiiis immense progress in the manufacture
of wool has been due principally to the advance in the manu¬
facture of combing wools or worsted, which now employ directly
a larger number than fabrics of carded wool. This progress
is best illustrated by the rapid increase of population around
the manufacturing centres of the worsted trade. In the West
Riding, where there was only a population of 593,000 inhabi¬
tants in 1801, it had risen, in 1841, to 1,154,000 ; it had
increased at Halifax from 63,000 to 130,000; at Iluddersfield
from 14,000 to 38,000; at Leeds from 53,000 to 152,000. It
is still more remarkable at Bradford, the great centre of the
worsted trade. At the commencement of this century, when
this town had a population of only 13,000 souls, all the wool
was spun and woven in private houses of the workmen. In
1821, Bradford had doubled the number of its inhabitants,
whieh were 26,000. By the introduction of power-looms in
1834, and afterwards the use of cotton warps in woollen fab¬
rics, and the employment of alpaca and Angora goat's wool, the
manufacturing industry was so developed that it sustained in
1851 a population of 103,000, an increase of ninety thousand
in half a century.* Such an increase in this country would
* Bernoville's Industrie des Laines peigtides, p. 22. James's History of Worsted
Manufacture, p. Cll, et. seq.
22
appear by no means remarkable; but in England, where the
question lias been for centuries, bow to employ tlie present
population of each year, tlie increase is truly marvellous.
One of the most interesting questions in the study of the
philosophy of manufactures is their influence upon the com¬
fort of mankind in diminishing the cost of production. The
amounts and values of British exports are instructive upon
this question.
One of the largest exportations of woollen tissues from Eng¬
land occurred in the year 1815, after relations had been estab¬
lished with this country, which had been interrupted by the
war. It amounted to X9,381,000 in value, and 1,482,000
pieces, and twelve millions of yards. In 1851, it amounted to
2,637,000 pieces, and sixty-nine million yards. The number of
pieces, comprising cloths, damasks, and stuffs in general, had
almost doubled; and the number of yards, consisting princi¬
pally of articles of wool and cotton, had more than quintupled.
Yet the total value in 1851 was only <£9,856,000, exceeding
the exportation of 1815 about half a million. The increase of
cheapness consisted principally in fabrics of wool combined
with cotton.*
This progress in the cheapness of production has continued
since 1851. It is estimated in the report of the International
Exhibition of 1862,f from well authenticated data, that al¬
though there was a clear and established advance of twenty-
five to twenty-eight per cent in the cost of wool between the
prices of 1851 and 1862, the manufacturers had cheapened
the prices of goods between the two periods from seven and a
half to ten per cent, the quality and weight being tbe same.
It is, perhaps, unnecessary to say that this increased cheapness
of production is no peculiarity of English manufactures. The
facts hero mentioned illustrate a result which is sure to follow
* Bcrnoville, p. 18.
t IiiteriiaBonal ICxhibition of 1862. Eepoi't of Juries, Class 21.
23
from any well established manufacturing industry. An in¬
creased cheapness of production in England has been effected
by two other causes, one of wliich certainly will be regarded
by consumers with less favor. The first is, the use of cotton
warps, which are used as a vehicle to extend the surface of
wool to such a degree that millions of jiounds of cotton are, as
it were, plated with this material. Vast establishments in
Lancashire are employed solely in making cotton warps, to be
woven with wool into wliat are called union fabrics.* The
second is, the combination of shoddy with wool. Twenty-five
years ago, woollen rags were wortii about £4 per ton, and
were used only for manure. They are now wortli, in England,
£40 per ton, to be converted again into cloth. It is estimated
that, in the neighborhood of Leeds, 7,000,000 to 8,000,000
yards of cloth, of the value of 115,000,000, are annually manu¬
factured from this material; and, that if the supply of shoddy
were stopped, it would close one-third of the woollen mills in
tiie United Kingdom, and bring distress upon the AVest Rid¬
ing, ill Yorkshire, as great as that lately suffered in Lanca¬
shire from the want of cotton. It is disclosed in the report
on the London Exhibition of 1862, that sixty-five million
pounds of shoddy are annually consumed in England, a
greater quantity than the whole wool product in the United
States, estimated at 60,264,913 pounds by the census of 1860 ! f
It is one of the advantages of depending upon foreign impor¬
tation for our goods, that we are in blissful ignorance of their
* Mr. Anderson, a gf-ntlcman of much experience in English wool, stated before an
agricultural club in England, that a single hogget fleece weighing twenty pounds, with
a length of staple of about seventeen inches, *' when used in manufacture to its utmost
extent, as an admixture with cotton to fabricate the finest alpaca fabrics, would suffice
to make upwards of twelve pieces, each forty-two yards in length, and very possibly
might be extended to sixteen pieces, or six hundred and seveuty-two yards."—Ohio
Agricultural Report, 1863, p. 224.
I would, in this connection, invite attention to the most valuable and admirable
papers and'communications on sheep, husbandry and wool, furnished for these reports
by Mr. Klippart, Secretary of the Ohio State Board of Agriculture,
t Eighth Census of the United States, vol. Agriculture, p. 86.
24
origin, and are not shocked with the consciousness of being
clad in the cast-off habiliments of a Polish Jew or an Italian
beggar.
I will close this sketch by some general remarks upon the
character of the Britisii industry in woollens. The whole
energies of British manufacturers are directed to supply the
masses with goods of tiie utmost cheapness. They do not seek
so much excellence in the fabrics as marketable products. It
was remarked by continental observers, at the two great expo¬
sitions, that although fabrics of wonderful perfection were exhi¬
bited, tliey were not specimens of the ordinary work of their
spindles and looms. The colors of their goods are excellent,
much better than their designs ; but, above all, they surpass in
the art of dressing tlieir fabrics so as to conceal tiieir defects
and make them attractive to purchasers. Their inventive
capacity is shown, particularly in the application to new uses
of the vast variety of raw materials which their extensive com¬
merce supplies, but, more than all, in meciianical improve¬
ments for substituting the iron frame for the human hand.
The breaking up of existing machinery and tiie replacing of
new is the marked feature in the present era of British manu¬
factures. The abundance and cheapness of capital, cheap food
under the change in the corn laws, tlie free admission of raw
materials, a well founded confidence in friendly legislation,
and the establishment of mercantile houses in all parts of the
world, sustain England in tiie war which she is waging unceas¬
ingly against the manufacturing industry of all other nations;
and would render a strife against her utterly iiopeless, without
the barriers of countervailing duties which the instinct of selF-
preservation has placed around all other industrious nations.
The history of the woollen industry of France, the second in
tiro amount of its productions, and the first in the general
excellence of its products, exhibits the important part which
this industry performs in developing the national prosperity.
25
and how it may flourish or decay under the favorable or
adverse policies of governments.
This industry received its first impulse in France, near the
close of the sixteenth century, from the celebrated edict of
Nantes, which restored to that country the Protestants, who
had become the most enlightened merchants and skilful work¬
men in Europe. Tliey brought from Germany, and tiie Low
Countries where tliey had wandered, the arts of spinning,
weaving, and dyeing woollens, and founded the first establish¬
ments for making woollen cloths. The infant manufactures,
slightly advanced by the agricultural improvements of Sully,
who introduced some important breeds of sheep, and, languish¬
ing under the inauspicious administration of Richelieu, were
finally planted in their present flourishing seats by Colbert, the
illustrious minister of Louis XIV. Under his administration,
the manufactures of new products created by the arts of Italy,
Holland, and Germany, were attracted to the French soil by
seductive offers made to foreign artisans. The woollen manu¬
facture received his special attention. He obtained, from
Louis XIV., tbe disposal of fifty thousand livres to be distributed
in encouraging this industry. At this period, Holland alone
had attained any perfection in the manufacture of fine cloths.
Colbert attracted Gosse Van Robais from Holland, by enor¬
mous concessions, to fabricate — as his patent, signed by the
King, declared — fine cloths, after the fashion of Spain and
Holland. Of this act Thiers says, —" When Louis XIV.
struck down the Spanish power, Colbert, at his side, executed
conquests more important, by introducing the manufacture of
cloths into France." * Not content with naturalizing foreign
skill, he imposed heavy duties upon foreign manufactures, and
attempted the amelioration of flocks by imported breeds; and
it is admitted that France owes to his wise acts and counsels
* Industrie des Laines fouleds, par M. J. liandoing, p, 38,
4
26
the most important developments of lier industry.* It is with
great justice, then, that our own great political economist,
whose works, translated into five languages, have been adopted
as text-books in the universities of the continent of Europe,
'has selected the name of the French financier to designate that
school of statesmanship which aims to develop, by protection
and encouragement, tlie industrial wealth of a nation.f
The woollen interest became again depressed under Louis
XV., in wliose reign those arts alone flourislied which adminis¬
tered to [deasure and luxury. The manufacture revived under
Louis XVL, in whose reign merino sheep were naturalized in
France, to be again struck down by a fatal error of adminis¬
tration. In 178G, a treaty was concluded between France and
England, which admitted into the latter country French pro¬
ductions of luxury and taste, in exchange for an analogous
concession for the admission to France of English goods of
apparently small price, but which, suiting all classes, are the
essential bases of the industry of a people. This treaty was
the most fatal blow that the textile manufactures had ever re¬
ceived. England, favored as we have seen by continued pro¬
tection, had already made great progress in the capacity of
manufacturing at comparatively low prices. Before the lapse
of the second year from this treaty, France was so flooded by
English importations of cloth that she ceased to attempt even
to supply her own consumption. Although the policy of 1786
was speedily retraced, and protection restored, the French
manufactures had not recovered from the shock when the
revolution completed the prostration of all industrj'.t
* See the Works of Mr. II. C. Carey, passim.
t Smith, in his Memoirs', speaks thus instructively of this great state.sman: "Mon¬
sieur Colliert, erecting manufactures of wool in all parts of France, and prohibitiisg all
the English woollen manufactures to be imported among them, in a few years set the
poor to work throughout that kingdom; . . . the first consequence of which was,
that the King of France saw all his subjects clothed, however indifferently, with the
manufactures of their own country, who, but a few years before, bought all their
clothes from Englaml. — Vol. ii. p. 290.
j Randoing, Industrie des Laines fouleds, p. 21. Manual of Social Science, by H-
C. Carey, p. 209.
27
No sooner had the first Consul, Bonaparte, grasped, with a
firm hand, tlie reins of State, than he resolved to develop upon
the French soil all the elements of wealth concealed within its
bosom. lie wished to appropriate for France all sciences, arts,
and industries. l\Iade a member of the Institute, he uttered
this noble sentiment: — "The true power of the French Repub¬
lic should consist, above all, in its not allowing a single new
idea to exist which it does not make its own." * To learn the
necessities and resources of the nation, he called upon savans,
painters, and artisans, to adorn with their productions the vast
hall of the ancient Louvre. From this epoch a new career was
opened to the industry of France, which found its most magnifi¬
cent protector in the chief of the State. Napoleon said: —
" Spain has twenty-five millions of merinos; I wish France to
have a hundred millions."f To effect this, among other admin¬
istrative aids, he established sixty additional sheepfolds to those
of Rambouillet, where agriculturalists could obtain the use of
Spanish rams without expense. By the continental blockade,
he closed France and the greater part of Europe against Eng¬
lish importations; and the manufacturers of France were
pushed to their utmost to supply, not only their domestic, but
European consumption. T'licy had to replace, by imitating
them, the English commodities to which the people had been
so long accustomed. The old routines of manufacturing were
abandoned, and tlie reign of the Emperor became, in all the
industrial arts, one long series of discoveries and progress.
Napoleon saw that the conquest of tlic industry of England was
no less important than the destruction of its fleets and armies.
He appealed to patriotism, as well as science and the arts,
to aid him in his strife with the modern Carthage. Visiting
tlie establishment for printing calicoes of the celebrated Ober-
hampf. Napoleon said to him, as he saw the perfection of
* Bulletin de la Socidtd Imperlale Zoologique d'Acclimatation, 2d Serie, t. i. p. 665.
t Bernoville, p. 133.
28
the fabrics, — Nous faisons tovs deux la guerre d VAngle-
terre, rtiais je crois que le vieilleure est encore la voire —
" We are both of us carrying on a war with England; but I
think that yours, after all, is the best." " These words," says
M. Randoing, " so flattering and so just, were repeated from
one end of France to the other; they so inflamed the imagina¬
tions of the people, that the meanest artisan, believing himself
called upon to be tiie auxiliary of the great man, had but one
thought, the ruin of England." *
Tlie fabrications of cloths attained such high perfection dur¬
ing this period, that since then the only progress has been the
modification of details. During this period the chemical aids
of dyeing attained the excellence so characteristic of French
colors; and, during this period, the mechanical genius of Ja-
quard, aided by the practical skill of Dcpouilly, produced the
loom which lias been justly regarded as the greatest invention
in the art of weaving of tiie present century, and has only been
eclipsed by the great achievement of our own inventor, who
made the Jaquard loom automatic.f The profits acquired by
successful manufacturers, during this period of prosperity,
were immediately applied to the erection of vast factories, and
Mulhouse, St. Quentin, Tarare, and Roubaix, at present re¬
nowned seats of the woollen manufacture, received the ele¬
ments of progress and wealth which they have not since ceased
to develop. Of all the conquests of Napoleon, the greatest by
far, the industrial Independence of France, is still secure.| And
the assaults of British free trade are still unavailing against
* Randoing, p. 11.
t For an account of Mr. Bigelow's great invention, see Preliminary Report of Com¬
missioner of Patents, 1863. The report says, " It now presents a machine which is ad¬
mitted to he unsurpassed by any "thing which the mechanical genius of man has ever
devised." p. 11.
t " Protection, the industrial creation of Napoleon, the most precious and principal
cause of his conquests." Industrie des cotons, par M. Mimirel, President du Council
General des Manufactures de France, etc. p. 5.
29
the bulwarks of protection established through his maxims and
example.*
Thanks to the immortal founder of the industrial glory of
France, she has never been lioodwinked by the specious phi¬
losophy of British free trade. She saw, when Mr. Huskisson
suppressed the prohibitory duty upon French silk, that it wus
only because he could not suppress the contraband trade, and
because the duty of twenty-five per cent was a more efficient
protection of British silks. " When the Britisli Parliament
applaud the absolute enfranchisement of commerce," says
Baron Dupin, in 1852, " they clap their hands, and these liands
are covered with English gloves, whose inferiority is protected
against foreign gloves by a duty of twenty-five per cent."
Whenever a new manufacture, not provided for in the tariff
regulations, has been attempted, the French have seen it
crushed by British capitalists, who had been instructed by Mr.
Brougliam, that "England could afford to incur some loss on
the export of Englisli goods, for the purpose of destroying for¬
eign manufactures in their cradle." f " Three times," says
Dr. Sacc, " since the commencement of the present century,
have attempts been made in France to spin the wool of tiie
Angora goat. Each attempt has failed ; for, as soon as the
products appeared in the market, the English spinners lowered
the prices from twenty to twenty-five per cent, and rendered
competition impossible." J Tlie Anglo-French Treaty of 1860,
althougli often referred to as evincing a cliange in the protec¬
tive policy of France, still carefully guarded her manufactures.
The Leeds Chamber of Commerce, the highest authority in
relation to woollens, regarded the duties under that treaty as
prohibitory. Lord Grey asserted, without contradiction, in the
* Tableau Statlstique des Industries, Franqaises du coton, de laine et de la sole,
par Baron Charles Dupin, p. 9. Travaux de la Commission Franqaise, t. iv.
t Report of the Commissioner of Patents for the year 1861. Agriculture, p. 17.
t Bulletin de la Soci^t^ Imperiale Zoologique, &c., t. v. p. 579.
30
ITouse of Lords, that "Franco retained Iicr whole system of
navioation laws. Siie bound herself to jio duties on her manu-
O
factured goods lower than thirty per cent in the first instance,
and twenty-five per cent afterwards. The only articles, on
which she made any reduction, were coal and iron, which she
wanted in order to stimulate her manufactures." *
The condition of the woollen manufacture, under this system,
must be regarded with no little interest. The number of sheep
in France in 1851, according to Mr. Bernoville, who is my prin¬
cipal authority in the following statements, f was 40,000,000.
Each fleece, upon an average, comprising the lambs, weighing,
washed upon tiie back, about kilogramme, the 40,000,-
000 of sheep give the number of 72,000,0f)0 kilogrammes,
158,832,000 lbs., as the whole weight of domestic wool, worth, at
a minimum of 3 francs 50 centimes per kilogramme, the average
of the qualities, 252,000,000 francs. The mean of importation
duty paid for these years was of the value of 55,000,000 francs,
making the total value of wool employed 307,000,000 francs.
The value of the raw wool, wliich enters into tiie average French
tissues, is estimated at one-third of the price of the tissues when
they enter into the hands of the consumer. The value of the
raw wool, tripled, is 921,000,000 francs, or $184,200,000. The
mean of exportation for three years before, including 1851, was
116,000,"000 francs, or $23,200,000. There remained 805,000,-
000 francs, or $161,000,000, as the value of the domestic con¬
sumption in France in 1851.
The average of French exportation of woollens from 1827 to
1836, was 38,000,000 francs. The exportation of the same
fabrics in 1851 was 122,500,000 francs. Thus there was an
increase of exportations in twenty years of 220 per cent.
The exportations of woollens from England were, in 1830,118,-
000,000 francs, or $23,600,000; in 1851, 246,000,000 francs.
• Bigelow's Tariff Question, p. 38,
t Industrie des Laines peigndes, p. 135, et «cj.
31
or $49,200,000. The increase in twenty years was 110 per
cent. While England had doubled her exportations, France
had tripled hers, besides supplying her domestic consumption.
Thus the acknowledged protective system of France had ac¬
complished more for her foreign commerce than the so-called
free trade of England had done for British exterior con¬
sumption. Assured by the increased prosperity of her man¬
ufactures, of the domestic consumption of all her native wools,
France, while continuing the duties on her manufactures, has
diminished the duty on raw materials. In 1861, her exporta¬
tions of woollens amounted to 188,000,000 francs ; in 1862,
221,000,000 francs; and, in 1863, to 288,000,000 francs, or
$56,000,000.
I have been able to obtain estimates of the number of per¬
sons employed in only one branch of the French woollen
manufacture, that of combing wool. Mr. Bcrnoville* estimates
that France, in 1851, employed constantly 800,000 spindles in
the fabrication of combing wool; that each spindle produced
twelve kilogrammes of yarn, representing nineteen kilo¬
grammes of washed wool, worth at least 5 francs 25 centimes
per kilogramme. At that, the 800,000 spindles consumed 15,-
200,000 kilogrammes (38,481,200 lbs.), worth, in round num¬
bers, 80,000,000 francs. He estimates that the various ma¬
nipulations wdiich the wool undergoes in fabrication, including
the selling, adds two and one half times to the original value
of the wool, making the total cost of wool, and fabrication of
combing wool, 280,000,000 francs. The 800,000 spindles pro¬
duce 9,600,000 kilogrammes of yarn, representing 8,400,000
fleeces, of which 5,800,000 are produced by French sheep. It
is ascertained, from the statistics of M. Billiet, that this wool,
from the shepherd to the spinner inclusive, employs 51,000
workmen, who receive a total salary of 26,182,976 francs. It
is calculated that two looms occupy five persons, and each wea-
* Industrie des Laines peigiides, p. 139.
32
ver uses about eighty kilogrammes of spun wool. The 9,G00,-
000 kilogrammes give employment to 120,000 looms, which
gives the number of 300,000 workmen em[)loyed in weaving.
It is estimated that in dyeing, hleacliing, printing, and selling,
20,000 more persons are employed. Estimating the average
pay of each of the 320,000 workmen, exclusive of the spinners,
at 1 franc 25 centimes a day for tliree hundred days' work,
and adding the salary included in the spinning, Mr. Bernoville
arrives at the sum of 140,000,000 francs distributed among
371,000 men, women, and children, which would allow
393 francs 55 centimes, or $78.70 to each person. Tiiese
estimates furnish data by which we may arrive at a general
estimate of the number employed in all the branches of the
woollen manufacture. The value of the fabrication of comb¬
ing wool was 280,000,000 only of her 921,000,000, the esti¬
mated value of the wliole fabrication; leaving a value of
641,000,000 in other brandies. These branches, by the rates
established in the estimates above given, would employ 849,000
persons, making nearly a million and a quarter as the number
of persons directly employed in the woollen manufactures of
France.
In studying the characteristics of the French manufacturers,
and the part they have taken in advancing the general pro¬
gress of the woollen industry, and in adding to the means of
consumption, we observe that they have not attained that
economy of production which so eminently distinguishes the
British manufacturers. Supplied with abundant labor, sup¬
ported by cheap sustenance, the French manufacturers have
been content to remain far behind the British and Americans
in the substitution of machinery for human labor. But the
tendency of machinery, as they think, is to give mediocrity to
manufactured products; and the French aim at the utmost
excellence in their works. The individual skill or handicraft
of the workman is developed to the utmost extent. All ma-
33
cliinery is rejected which will not surpass the manipulations of
the hand. Spinning, the foundation of good textures, is car¬
ried by them to the utmost perfection. Yarns, spun from
combed or carded wool by the rival nations, exhibited at the
great London exposition, were carried ten, twenty, and even
thirty numbers higher by French spinners with the same
wool.* They excel equally in ameliorating raw materials, in
making them softer and more flexible. The French, in the
textile arts, are creators; while the English are exploileurs.
Tiie one nation invents new fabrics, new combinations of old
materials, new styles and patterns, or what, in a word, are
called French novelties. The other works up these ideas,
copies, transforms, dilutes, and, above all, cheapens. Most
other nations follow the English example, and our own is as
yet no exception. To specify the contributions of inventive or
creative genius of France to the woollen industry, we must
class, first among the machines, the Jaquard, already referred
to, whose wonderful products are seen in all figured textures;
and next, the machinery for combing wool and also cotton, of
Heilman, of Mulhouse, an invention which possesses interest,
not only on account of its vast importance, but the circum¬
stances of its origin. The most novel and valuable part of
this machine, as stated by the inventor, which he had long
unsuccessfully endeavored to obtain, was ultimately accom¬
plished by carrying into mechanical o{)eratioii a suggestion
which occurred to liim whilst watching his daughters combing
their hair. He was at that time meditating on the hard fate
of inventors generally, and the misfortunes which befell their
families. This circumstance, says Mr. Woodcroft, being com¬
municated to Mr. Elmore, of the Royal Academy, was embod¬
ied by him in a picture which was exhibited, and greatly
admired, at the Royal Academy in 1862.f We all practise or
• Bernoville.
t Brief Biographies of Inventors, &c., p. 45.
5
34
use French creations without suspecting their origin. Before
1834 the colors of all fulled cloths were uniform. At that
time Mr. Bonjean, of Sedan, conceived tiie idea, to give beauty
to the productions of his looms, of uniting in the same stuff
different tints and figures. His thought was that the domain
of production would be as illimitable as that of fantasy, which
was the name given to his goods. He was the originator of the
product and name of fancy cassimeres, by far the most im¬
portant branch of our own cloth manufacture.* The Frencli,
already skilled in making light gauzes of silk, first made
bareges in 1818; f a fabric with a weft of wool and warp of
silk. The English imitated the fabric by substituting cotton
for silk in the warp. In 1826, Mr. Jourdain first produced, at
the establishment of Troixvilles, that invaluable fabric, mouss-
eline de laine, made of fine wool, for printing. | In 1831, the
manufacture and printing of this tissue was fully developed.
In 1838, he also created challis, made of a warp of silk orgau-
zin and a weft of fine wool. § In 1833, first appeared at Paris,
simultaneously introduced by three French houses, that fabric
so appropriate for the consumption of the masses, the mousseline
de laine, with cotton warps. The English adopted the manu¬
facture in 1834-5, and it prevails in every manufacturing
nation. This fabric, which is unquestionably a French idea,||
has been an inestimable blessing. Its products arc counted by
millions of pieces, and it enables the most humble female to
clothe herself more comfortably and becomingly, and as cheap¬
ly, with wool, as she could thirty years ago with cotton. In
1858, plain bareges were introduced, for printing. These had
before been made of colored threads; at the same time, balso-
rine, having the effect of alternate fabrics of cloth and gauze,
v/as created in wool in imitation of a flaxen fabric. The
* Randoing. Industrie des Laines tbuldes, p. 23.
t Bemoville, p. 179. J BemoTille, p. 186.
§ Bernovllle, p. 186. || Bernoville, p. 187.
T Bernoville, p. 188.
35
foulards, with a warp of silk and weft of English combing, were
introdncod about this time at St. Denis.* The fabric, how¬
ever, most appreciated by female taste, and the most unrivalled
of modern woollen textures, and the only one not degraded by
imitation, is that beautiful material which derives its name fi'om
the fleece of which it is made, the French merino. This tissue
was first made at Rheims, in 1801, by a workman named
Dauphinot Pallotan.f The invention, for which a patent was
asked, whether successfully or not is not known, consisted sole¬
ly in the adaptation of a peculiar type of wool, and not in the
fabric. I shall refer to this fabric in another connection, to show
that the intelligent skill of the agriculturalist is no less import¬
ant than the genius of the artisan in developing the manufac¬
turing prosperity of a nation.
The creative genius of the French is more conspicuous
in their arts of design and color, as applied to all textile
products. There is an unlimited application of these arts
and a boundless field for novelties, in the modern use of
printed woollen goods. All the manufacturers of France,
in producing new styles of fabric or figure, nourish their
tastes by Parisian ideas, the inheritance of the ancient splen¬
dors of Yersailles. Says Mr. Bernoville : "At Paris, each con¬
sumer is a judge, and becomes a guide to the merchant
and manufacturer. Tiie Parisians appreciate only what is
good, and consecrate only what is beautiful. The grisette as
well as the grande dame, the artisan as well as the" dandy, has
received, and practises, without knowing it, the traditions of
art." J Although important commercial houses are now estab-
^ lished for the sale of designs elaborated in this school, there is
no manufacturer in Europe who scruples to copy French pat¬
terns. We have even so framed our patent laws that, while
protecting all other foreign works of invention, we might appro-
• Bernoville, p. 185. t Bernoville, p. 195. J Bernoville, p. 175.
36
priate with impunity the productions of the Parisian pencil
and pallet.
Thus, by importation as well as imitation, all over the world,
the true lovers of the beautiful, as well as " the sophists, econo¬
mists, and calculators," whose advent, upon the fall of Maria
Antoinette, is so pathetically lamented by Burke,* acknowledge
France, so gracefully symbolized by Eugenie, the empress of
taste and fashion.
I shall not attempt to review the woollen industries of the
other manufacturing countries of Europe, and will confine
myself to a brief notice of four other nations, the most dis¬
tinguished for their resistance to the commercial policy of
England. In the reports of the Bradford Chamber of Com¬
merce for 186-4-5, kindly sent me by our consul at Sheffield,
Mr. Abbott, wbo has charge also of the vice-consulates of Brad¬
ford, Leeds, and Huddersfield, I find bitter complaints of the
tariff regulations of Austria, Sweden, Spain, and Russia, as
affecting, most injuriously, the woollen trade of Bradford. The
Austrian tariff is spoken of as presenting "features of the
most objectionable character," while " the duties are almost
prohibitory, and unjust to England." The Swedish tariff is
referred to as having " the unfortunate distinction of disputing
with Spain the debatable honor of being the highest in the
world, the Russian alone excepted." Of Russia, it is said,
"the importation of manufactured tissues is practically pre¬
vented by a-scale of duties higher than any in the world;"
and that the value of only £46,258 of British woollens and
worsteds were exported to that country in 1862. It is a mat¬
ter of no little interest to us to know the manufacturing con¬
dition of the nations which have made such declarations of
independence.
* "But the age of chivalry is gone; that of sophisters, economists, and calculators
have succeeded, and the glory of Europe is extinguished forever." —Reflections on the
Revolution in France. London, 1791, p. 60.
37
Austria consumes about 70,000,000 pounds of wool per year,
and its annual production of woollen fabrics amounts to about
$50,000,000 per year. It supplies its own population, and
exports to the Levant, Asia, the United States, and even Ciiina.
Its manufactures of woollens were stimulated, first, by almost
absolute prohibition, and have been since encouraged by duties
highly prohibitory. What is tlie condition of the manufacture
thus aided by tlie national favor ? Let the disinterested testi¬
mony of an English expert answer. Tlie reporter on tlie class
of woollens,in the London Exhibition of 1862, says: " There is
no inland country in Europe which has made so much pro¬
gress in woollen manufactures during the last ten or twelve
years as Austria. It has not only maintained and improved
its reputation for fine plain woollens, doeskins, heavy coatings,
&c., but has made wonderful advances in fancy trouserings.
They are no longer imitations of French, English, or other
designs, but display an originality highly creditable to the
manufacturer. Their woollen dyeing is the best in the whole
exposition. The whites, scarlets, oranges, and other shades,
possess a clearness, richness, and fulness of color, not attained
by any other country."
Sweden, although enjoying few advantages of soil, climate,
and position, owes to the policy which the Bradford merchant
calls " a debatable honor," her present honorable place in the
community of nations. Her population has steadily advanced.
Her importation of foreign luxuries of food has greatly in¬
creased. Her agriculture has been developed. In the ten
years ending in 1787, her importation of grain had been 196,-
000,000 pounds. In the decade ending in 1853, it was but
34,000,000, while the population had almost doubled. Lands
have increased in value, property is divided, a taste for litera¬
ture is extending, and the people have secured political repre¬
sentation. In the short space of thirteen years the iron manu¬
facture had nearly doubled.* The manufacture of woollens in
* Carey, Manual of Social Science, p. 24G.
38
the large establisliments has been so successful tliat it is said
that " the worsted and mixed fabrics are such exact imitations
of Bradford goods that tiie most acute judges can scarcely dis¬
tinguish the difference." The manufacture of woollen cloth
is found everywhere throughout the country in the houses of
the people. Compare the condition of the people of Sweden,
under their system of industrial independence, with that of
the population of Ireland, or of Turkey, where men, com¬
pelled to abandon weaving and spinning and gathering mul¬
berry leaves and feeding silk worms, can earn but five cents a
day,* to which condition the policy of the Bradford merchant
would reduce them. " The people of Sweden," says a travel¬
ler quoted by Mr. Carey, " seem to unite, on a small scale, all
the advantages of a manufacturing and agricultural population
more fully than in any district I have ever seen. The men do
the farm business, while the women drive a not less profitable
branch of industry. There is full employment, at the loom or
in spinning, for the old and young of the female sex. Ser¬
vants are no burden. About the houses there is all the neat¬
ness of a thriving manufacturing, and the abundance of an
agricultural population. Tiie table-linen, laid down even for
your glass of milk and piece of bread, is always clean; the
beds and sheets are always nice and white. Everybody is well
clad, for their manufacturing, like their farming, is for their
own use first, and the surplus only as a secondary object, for
sale ; and from the number of little nick-nacks in their house¬
holds, the good tables and chairs, window-curtains and blinds
(wbich no hut is without), clocks, fine bedding, papered rooms,
and a few books, it is evident that they lay out their winnings
on their own comfort, and that these are not on a low scale of
social well-being."
Spain, wbich also enjoys " the unfortunate distinction" of pro-
* Keport of the Commissioner of Patents for 1861: Agriculture, p. 12.
39
tecting her industry, was driven to this policy by seeing, under
her colonial system, her home industry abandoned, her artisans
and farmers dying out, her towns and cities decaying, and her
lands monopolized by the nobles and tbe church. Fortunately
She lost her colonies, and was compelled to look at home. Her
agriculture, manufactures, and commerce, have doubled in the
last twenty-five years. Provided with that wonderful breed of
sheep which has been the great ameliorator of most of the
flocks in the world, and which, according to the statement of
Her Catholic Majesty's Secretary of State in 1854, still sur¬
vives in its original perfection,* Spain has made remarkable
progress in her woollen manufactures, and will not be likely to
abandon tbe system which sustains them when even English
judges say of them as follows; "Upon the whole, it is evident
that Spain now possesses manufacturers of great enterprise,
artisans of first-rate skill, and machinery of the best and most
approved kinds. The progress made by tbe Spanish woollen
manufacturers since 1851, is of a most striking character, dis¬
playing results which bring their productions almost on a par
with the most advanced manufacturers of any country. The
printing of their dyes, and clearness and beauty of their
blended colors, are equal to those of France, Austria, and the
United Kingdom.f
Russia, which wears the crown of"debatable honor" in Eng¬
lish eyes, was, fifty years ago, merely an agricultural nation.
Manufactures began to spring up under the continental sys¬
tem, but were crushed by tlie policy of Alexander, wbo, at tbe
close of tbe war, gave free admission to tbe goods of his late
ally. In 1824, Count Nesselrode established the system which
achieved the industrial independence of Russia. That empire
has now 45,000,000 sheep, of which 18,000,000 are merinos.
In 1849, the woollen industry employed 495,000 workmen,
* Ohio Agricultural Report, 1862, p. 498.
t International Exhibition of 1862. Reports of Juries, Class 21.
40
distributed in 9,172 establishments; besides employing a vast
number in making carpets and common stuffs in the cottages
of the peasantry. It supplies almost entirely the domestic
consumption, including clothing for her vast army, none of
which was made in the empire before 1824. In cloths alone
the production is more than $20,000,000. Eussia exports even
more woollen goods than she imports. In 1850, she imported
woollen goods of the value of $1,000,000, and exported to the
amount of over $2,500,000, principally to China and Central
Asia.* The people of Eussia, employed by this and kindred
manufactures, consume at home the enormous products of
their agriculture. Of the 1,600,000,000 bushels of corn, which
is tiie product of their soil, they export only 15,000,000, less
than one per cent of the total cereal product. The question
arises, Can manufactures, so completely exempted from foreign
competition, attain that excellence which is necessary for true
industrial progress ? Let the English judges again answer.
They say, in 1861, " Those who remember the woollen goods
exhibited from Eussia, in 1851, and compare them with the
goods exhibited now, cannot fail to be struck with the remark¬
able progress made in every branch of manufacture, cloths,
beavers, fancy cassimeres, mixed fabrics, and shawls, Ac.; all
bear evidence of the improvement, and show a degree of excel¬
lence, which, as regards make and finish, place the production
of Eussia on a par with some of the oldest manufacturing
countries." f
The present manufacturing prosperity of these, as well as
other industrial States of contitiental Europe, naturally sug¬
gests this inquiry, What would have been the future indus¬
trial condition of continental Europe, if, at the time when
peace restored the nations to labor, the textile manufactures
had been left to their own free course, and no legislation had
* Bernovillc, Industrie des Laines peigndes. p. 90, tt seq,
t luteniational Exhibition of 1602. Reports of Juries, Class 21.
41
iutei'vcned to regulate tlieir progress? Can there be any
doubt that tliey would have become the exclusive occupation
of England? Alone in the possession of steam power and
machinery; alone provided with ships and means of transport;
alone endowed, through her stable legislation, with capital to
vivify her natural wealth, she had absolute command of the
markets of the continent. The question was presented to
the continental nations, whether they should accept the cheap
tissues of England, or, at some sacrifices, repel them, to appro¬
priate to themselves the labor and profit of their production.
The latter course was successively adopted, with some modifi¬
cations, by each of the continental nations; and with what
results to their own wealth, and the industrial progress and
comfort of the world! Instead of a single workshop, Europe
has the workshops of Fiance, Russia, Austria, Prussia,* Bel¬
gium, Sweden, Denmark, Spain, each clothing its own people
with substantial fabrics; each developing its own creative
genius and peculiar resources; each contributing to substitute
the excellence of competition for the mediocrity of monopoly ;
each adding to the progress of the arts and the wealth and
comfort of mankind.
It remains for me now to illustrate the national importance
of the wool manufacture by the industry of our own country.
I shall not attempt to describe the successive steps of the pro¬
gress by which this manufacture has attained its present posi¬
tion. I can add nothing which is not already familiar to the
members of this Association, or which may not be found in easily
accessible sources of information. The most striking feature in
the brief history of our manufacture is its instability. As in
* The trade of Germany at the beginning of tiie century was hides, tallow, flax, and
wool, exported for cloth and cutlery in return. Since 1815, Gennany has made its own
clotlus and cutlery. The balance in favor of exportations of woollen goods from the
Zollverein, from 1846 to 1848, was 3,310,000/;; and tlie total production in 1840 was
40.1,7.10,000 trancs. Such were the consequences of the adoption of a common system of
pruldclion.
6
42
the continental states of Europe manufactures were called into
being by tlieir respective governments, the very existence of the
Avoollcn industry in tliis country depended upon the national
legislation, or such a state of national affairs as would restrain
tlie competition of the older and well-establisbed foreign manu¬
factures. By tlie war of 1812, wbicli accomplished for tiiis
country what tlie continental blockade did for France, the wool¬
len manufacture was l)rougbt up from a product of only
4,000,000 in 1810 to 19,000,000 in 1815; only to be over¬
whelmed by the enormous importation, at the close of the war,
of 70,000,000 ill woollens and cottons at an ad valorem duty
of 5 per cent.* Reviving in 181G, by the aid of a duty of 25 per
cent, and tlie free admission of raw material, the interest was
depressed again in 1820, by the fall of the duty to 20 per cent.
The manufacturers were stimulated to new enterprises by the
increased duty of 331 per cent established after June, 1825, and
by the still increased rates of the tariff of-1827; but the ex¬
pected benefits were neutralized by the high duties placed
upon the raw material. Tlie characteristic instability was
continued under the biennial reductions of the compromise
policy of 1832. The stimulus of the favorable tariff of 1842
was followed by the crushing influence of the ad valorem
tariff of 184G, which, placing an equal duty upon wool and its
manufactures, and in some cases a higher duty upon the
former, gave no protection, or discriminated against American
fabrics. The effect of this measure was the destruction of
American broadclotlis, and, at the same time, the extinguish¬
ment of our Saxony sheep. The tariff of 1857 was productive
of some benefit by enlarging the free list. Finally, the so-called
Morill tariff of 18G1, since modified by the law of 18G4,
gave, not by increasing the duty, but by establisliing just rela¬
tions between the duties on manufactures and raw material, the
* At this time, full-hloodt'd merino.s sold for one dollar apiece. Bucks had been sold
during the war for a thousand dollai's apiece. liandall's Practical Shepherd, p. 24.
43
first encouragement that our industry miglit be established
upon a permanent basis, and become here what it is elsewhere,
a pillar of national prosperity. Notwithstanding the legisla¬
tion, often unfriendly and always uncertain, the woollen manu¬
facture bad become established in 1860 as a great industrial
power, and, by the amount, variety, and excellence of its pro¬
ducts, bad proved itself eminently worthy of national favor.
I am indebted to Mr. Kennedy, the late admirable Superin¬
tendent of the Census of 1860, for proof-sheets of the chapters
on " woollen" and " worsted goods" of the forthcoming
volume of the Census upon "Manufactures;" a work which
while passing through the press, has been most cruelly taken
from the hands of the one who conceived and executed it.
The total values of the several manufactures of wool in 1860
were as follows: —
Carpets $7,857,636
Hosiery 7,280,606
Wool-carding 2,403,512
Worsted Goods 3,701,378
Woollen Goods (including yarns, blankets,
and shawls) 61,895,217
Total $83,138,349
"On the first of June, 1860, the number of establishments
employed on woollen goods, exclusive of worsted dress goods,
was 1,260. They represented a capital of $30,862,654, and
consumed 83,608,468 pounds of wool, and 15,200,061 pounds
of cotton, costing, witli all other materials, $36,586,887. They
worked 3,209 sets of machinery. They gave employment to
24,841 male and 16,519 female hands, or 41,360 persons, whose
annual wages cost $9,808,254. The aggregate value of the
product amounted to $61,895,217."
" With a decrease of 557 in the number of establishments, as
compared with the census of 1850, doubtless in part oceasioned
by a more complete exclusion from the recent tables of such
44
accessory and kindred brandies as wool-carding and worsted
mills, tiio aggregates show an increase of $4,791,112, or 18-3
per cent in capital invested ; $11,074,432, or 4G'8 per cent in
the expenditure for raw materials; 6,405, or 18-5 per cent
in the number of iiands; and 12,640,354, or 36'8 per cent in
the annual cost of wages, while tiie aggregate value of the
manufactured product appreciated $18,352,929, or 42-14 per
cent upon the returns of 1850. The gross proceeds of the
manufacture, after deducting the cost of materials and labor,
was $15,527,367, or upwards of fifty per cent upon the capital
employed, to cover the interest on capital, tlie wear and tear of
machinery, and various incidental expenses."
"The consumption of wool amounted to an average of 2-61
pounds per capita for the entire population of the Union. It
was in tlie proportion of five and one-half pounds to every
pound of cotton used in the business. The quantity of cloth
manufactured exceeded the amount returned in 1850 by 42,-
691,210 yards, or fifty-two per cent, and the weight of yarn was
2,106,870 pounds, or nearly fifty per cent greater than in that
year. The product in cloth was equivalent to nearly four
yards to each inhabitant of the Union, and in value averaged
nearly two dollars ($1.97) per capita. The average annual
wages of each operative was $237, or $32 greater than in 1850."
(Compare this with the annual wages of the French workman,
$78.70!)
According to the same report, the worsted manufacturers had
in 1860 an invested capital of $3,460,000. " They employed 110
sets of cards, and 1,101 male and 1,277 female hands, whose
aggregate yearly wages amounted to $488,736. The raw ma¬
terials were 3,000,000 pounds of wool, worth $1,554,000;
1,653,000 pounds of cotton, costing $196,640, besides madder,
and other dye-stuffs, coal, oil, &c., costing altogether $2,767,-
700. The cost of wool was 51 cents, and of cotton 11-8 cents
a pound. The aggregate product was 22,500,000 yards, valued
at $3,201,378."
45
Keeping in mind tlie total value of our manufactures of
wool in 1800, according to the census returns, we have some
means of forming an estimate of tiie progress of our manufac¬
tures since that period, from the reports of the Internal
Revenue for 1864. From the amount of internal revenue paid
upon those classes of manufactures of wool enumerated at
three per cent, I have calculated the total value upon which
that revenue was paid in each State. The aggregate is $121,-
808,250.33. It will scarcely be suspected that the value has
been exaggerated. The value in each State is as follows: —
Massachusetts $40,603,651.00
Pennsylvania 16,599,713.33
Connecticut 15,866,641.00
Isew York 13,977,775.00
Rhode Island 10,892,700.33
New Hampshire 9,079,677.00
Vermont 3,708,721.67
New Jersey 2,778,084.00
Maine 2,476,483.67
Ohio 1,400,877.67
Indiana 558,615.33
Delaware 548,134.67
California 538,956.00
Maryland 451,912.00
Kentucky 359,905.00
Illinois 359,084.33
Michigan 151,848.33
Oregon 128,620.67
Iowa 118,30o.33
Missouri 75,344.00
Minnesota 9,14b.UU
Nebraska Territory 45.65
A great progress is indicated by the returns made to tlie
office in answer to about 1,700 circulars sent out. The total
Wisconsin .
West Virginia
Kansas .
105,317.67
63,753.00
14,947.67
9,146.00
46
number of sets in 18G0, according to tlie census, was 3,319;
931 returns received at tlie office of the Association on the first
of September,* 18G5, reported 4,073 sets of cards, consuming
2,275,855 pounds weekly of scoured wool, of which 1,G3G,82I
is domestic, and G39,0C4 is foreign ; the weekly average per
set being 559 pounds. The census returns of 18G0 were com¬
plete. According to our list G08 mills remain to he heard
from. Returns are coming in daily, and it is believed the
number of sets will not fall short of five thousand.
Another indication of progress is the greatly increased con¬
sumption of wool. The total amount of wool produced in the
United States in 18G0, according to the census, was 60,2G4,913
pounds, all of which was consumed in our manufactures. The
amount imported in that year, according, to the report of
Messrs. Bond and Livermore, was 32,371,719 pounds,! making
the total amount consumed 92,G3G,632 pounds. The home
product of 18G4 is estimated, by the Department of Agricul¬
ture, at not less than 80,000,000 pounds. J The amount im¬
ported was 72,371,503 pounds.§ Total, 152,371,503 pounds,
an increase of 59,734,871 pounds, or sixty-one per cent.
Not the least interesting result, which is at the same time
the cause and effect of the increase of our woollen manufac¬
ture, is one eminently national; viz., that we have been able to
clothe our vast army with our own fabrics, and by only the
national expansion of our industry. By our looms and sew¬
ing-machines we furnished, in one year, not less than 35,174,-
608 garments. II Mr. Bond, chairman of our " Committee on
Raw Materials," estimates, from official reports received from
the Quartermaster-General of the United States of the quan-
* The Table in the Appendix contains the aggregate results up to Oct 25th, 1865.
t Wool Report to the Boston Board of Trade for 1804, by George William Bond and
George Livermore, p. 8.
X Monthly Report of the Agricultural Department for Januar}', 1865, p. 22.
§ Report of Me-^srs. Bond and Livermore for 1864, p. 8.
II Report of Messrs. Bond and Livermore for 1864, p. 7.
47
tity of woollen goods purchased for the army in 18G2 and 18G3,
tiiat the quantity of wool consumed in our mills for army use
was, in —
18C2 51,400,000 lbs.
1803 61,300,000 „
1864, no returns, say 61,300,000 „
To this must be added the consumption for the navy, and
for cartridges, and the total cannot vary much from 200,000,-
000.
Compare tliis with the condition of tlie country at the com¬
mencement of the war of 1812, when the Secretary of War
was compelled to ask Congress for permission to import 5,000
blankets for the supply of the Indians.*
This is but one.of the many illustrations which the war has
furnislied of the great truth of political economy, that a nation
is powerful and independent, just in proportion as it cultivates
a variety of industry in its people.
" The war and its incidents," says Dr. Elder,f " shed a flood
of light upon the effect of a wcll-secured home consumption
for agricultural products of every kind, of which the wool-
growing interest is an example. In the ten years-before the
rebellion, the sheep of Pennsylvania had decreased 12 per
cent in number. In May, 18G4, the Agricultural Bureau
reports an increase of 7G per cent in four years. Iii
Illinois, they had fallen off in the last census decade 14
per cent. In the first two years of the war, according to the
report of the county assessors, they had increased from 7G9,-
135 to 1,20G,6D5, and the editor of the Chicago " Tribune "
estimates the number at 3,000,000 at the close of the year
18G4, an increase of two liundrcd and ninety per cent in four
years. This immense advance is owing simply to a protective
* Pamphlet entitled Free Trade in Haw Materials considered in its Effect upon all
Classes of the People. New York, 1S5.), p. 14.
t The Western States, their Pursuits and Policy, p. 22.
48
tariff, aided by tlie liigb rate of foreign exchange and absolute
possession of the iiome market."
I sliall not enlarge furtiier upon ti e American woollen
industry. It may appear that I have not done it justice. It
would have afforded me satisfaction to give, from original
sources, special details of our manufacture; to enumerate the
fabrics in which we excel; to specify the inventions which we
have contributed ; to do honor to the great men whose genius
and enterprise have built up the pillars of our industry; to
exhibit its peculiar social and economic relations in this coun¬
try ; in a word, to tontribute facts from our manufacture to
serve to illustrate the general progress of the arts.' But the
experience and observation of many years, instead of a few
months, are necessary for such a work. It can be done,
indeed, by no one man. Each one of you, gentlemen, must
spare time and thought to contribute materials for such a work
as shall be a worthy record and monument of your labors.
In this way you will subserve the highest object of our Associ¬
ation.
But the time has not yet come for the woollen manufacture
to vaunt of its achievements. Its career has but commenced.
Its aim is nothing less than to clothe the American people with
indigenous fabrics. In twenty years preceding 1802, we im-
j)orted foreign woollen manufactures of the value of §429,422,-
951, — an average of upwards of 19,000,000 a year. To
displace the foreign manufacture, and supply a population of
35,000,000, to be doubled in thirty more years, — consuming
more woollen goods than the same number of any people
in the world, — a field for gigantic enterprise is opened to the
American manufacturer. This consideration leads to the
second branch of my subject: — The means of developing the
woollen manufactui'e.
The requisite above all others necessary for the development
of our manufacture, is a sufficient and diversified supply of the
49
raw material, — wool. For this our main dependence must
always be upon our own agriculture. An instinctive senti¬
ment of patriotism leads every consumer to prefer a home
product, if it will suit his purpose equally well with a foreign
product. It is for tiie interest of the consumer to buy at
home; he saves commissions, exchanges, transportation. He
can select exactly what he wants, and he can sell his own pro¬
ducts where he buys. The statistics collected by tlie Associa¬
tion show that the vast majority of the manufacturers of the
country use only domestic wool. Of 4073 sets, 2171 are em¬
ployed wholly upon domestic wool. Of 931 mills, 7G7 use
domestic wool; while only 46 mills in the whole country use
foreign wool alone.
So absolute is the dependence of the manufacturer of each
nation upon the wool-growers of his own country, that the
characteristic features of the manufactures of different nations
have been impressed by the peculiar conditions of their agri¬
culture. I will cite some examples, which will serve at the
same time to show the direction towards which it is desirable
our own agriculture should tend.
The sheep of England at an early period were divided into
two distinctly marked classes. The one class, thriving upon
the dry uplands, produced a short wool, adapted solely for
making felted cloths, called clothing wool. Of this class, the
original Southdown was a type. The other class, of greater
size, flourishing upon the rich moist plains, produced wool
characterized by great length, strength, transparency, and tiio
little degree in which it possessed the felting property. Tiiis
wool, fitted for making serges and stuff-goods, was called comb-
ino- wool from tlie instrument used to make tiie fibres straight
and parallel preparatory to spinning. The type of tliis class
was the Leicester sheep. In raising sheep of both kinds, tlie
primary object anciently was, the product of wool; tlie mutton
b6ing iiiGrely acc6ssoiy.
50
Under tlie old s}'stem of pasturage, it was found that but a
given numl)er of slieep could be kept on a certain space of
ground ; and, throughout a portion of the year, they were defi¬
cient in nourisliment. Towards the end of the seventeentii
century, the culture of turnips was introduced from Holland
to England, with the financial and political institutions brought
over by William III. Under the new system of agriculture,
the artificial or turnip husbandry, a regular supply of food was
j)r()vided for each season of the year, and double or treble the
numi)er of sheep could be kept upon the same land. The agri¬
culturalists of England then began to perceive that the meat
of the sheep was a more important source of profit than the
wool, and that the wool must be the accessory. The revolu¬
tion, which established the superiority of meat over wool, was
principally due to Bakewell, of Dishley, to whom England
owes hardly less than to Watt and Arkwright. Before his day,
the English sheep were not fit for the butcher till about four
or five years old. lie conceived that if it were possible to
bring sheep to their full development before that age, — to
make them fit for being killed at two years old, for example,—
the j)foduce of the flocks by this means would be doubled. To
accomplish this, he applied to the old Leicester sheep of his
neighborhood what is now the well known jn-inciple of selec¬
tion in breeding', but which may be said to have originated in
his brilliant experiments. So complete was his success, that
the breed obtained by him, called the '• New Leicester," is un¬
rivalled in the woild for precocity, produces animals which
may be fattened as early as one year old, and, in every case, have
reached their full growth before the end of the second year.
To this invaluable quality is added a perfection of shape which
renders them more fleshy and heavier for their size than any
known breed. Bakewell himself was not wanting in remunera¬
tion for his labors. So great was the appreciation of his new
flocks, that he let his rams for one season for the enormous
51
sum of six thousand guineas. The " New Leicester," in time,
came to be the most numerous and widely extended breed
in all England. In many districts, they displaced the short-
wool breeds ; in others modified tliem. The extension of this
breed gave preponderance to tbe production of the long wool
with which it was clothed. The great value of Bakewell's labors
consisted, not only in contributing a new race realizing the
maximum of precocity and return, when placed on suitable
lands, but in pointing out the means by which other indige¬
nous races might be improved. The ancient race of the Downs,
adapted for the highlands where the " New Leicester" did
not thrive, originally producing short clothing-wool, was for¬
merly of small size, and yielded but little meat, and would
seldom fatten until four years old. By a careful selection of
breeders, and the good winter regimen which the turnip hus¬
bandry gives, the English breeders caused tbe Southdown to
become the rival of the "New Leicester" in early development
and perfection of shape. They fatten generally when about
two years old, and are sold after the second clip. But a change
was also effected in the character of the fleece, which the far¬
mers at first refused to believe. It lost the character of a
clothing-wool. It became longer and coarser. As Mr. Youatt
says, — "That which was once a carding, had become a comb-
ing-wool; and useful and valuable for a different purpose. It
had not deteriorated, but it had changed." * The same change,
from the same cause, has been effected in the Cheviot wool of
Scotland.
The result of this direction of the agriculture of England, to
seek profit rather from the meat tlian the wool in the culture
of their flocks, is truly astonishing when a comparison is made
with France, — which pursues a different system, — making
the meat accessory to the wool, as it is with us. Each country
* Youatt on Sheep, p. 227.
52
has an equal number of sheep. But England feeds one sheep
per acre, while France feeds only one-third of a head. The
produce of the English sheep is double that of the French ; and
the average return of an English sheep-farm is six times greater
than a French one.*
The effect of this system upon manufactures is no less
remarkable. The wool of England, without the knowledge or
purpose of her farmers, has become a combing-wool; and the
worsted manufacture, through the rinconscious influence of
English agriculture, has become developed to such an extent,
that the towns of Yorkshire have grown up as marvellously as
those of our great West.
The uses of the wool have changed. It was anciently em¬
ployed prineipally for making says and serges, — grave stuffs
for monks or mourners. It is now principally used for making
light fancy fabrics for female apparel. Spencer describes envy
as clad in a garment of this wool:—
" All in a kirtle of discolored say,
He clothfed was y painted fnll of eies." t
The female of modern times, arrayed in the bright-colored
textures of Bradford, may be likened to the Fidessa of Spencer
in her outward aspect:—
" A goodly lady clad in scarlet red,
Pui'flod with gold and pearls." J
I need not make the application of the lesson contained in these
facts to ofir own country. We imported in 18G0 $15,000,000 of
worsteds, principally from England. We made only $3,000,000.
To replace the English worsteds we have absolutely no raw
material, and depend wholly upon the Leicester and Cotswold
wools of Canada.§ Why should not the American, as well
* Rural Economy of England, Scotland, and Ireland, by Leonce Do Lavergne,
translated from the French. Edinburgh and London, 1855, p. 27.
t The Faerie Queene, Book i. Canto iv.
t The Faerie Queene, Book i. Canto ii.
§ The wool known in our markets as Canada wool consists wholly of fleeces from
the long-wooled Leicester, Cotswold sheep, and crosses of these breeds with the South-
53
as tlic English farmer, seek a profit in mutton and wool as
well as in wool alone, and tluis supply the greatest necessity
of American manufacture.?*
, Anotlier example of this dependence of manufactures upon
agriculture is found in Fi-ance. The attempts of Colbert to
naturalize the merino had so utterly failed, that it was believed
impossible to raise or multiply tliis invaluable animal under
tlie climate of France. A century after Colbert had made his
attempts, Trudaine, the Minister of Finances under Louis XV.,
liad direction of the department of commerce. Although at
tliat time the happy effects of the administration of the Min¬
ister of Louis XIV. were evident, in the progress of French
industry, the indigenous wools were all of moderate quality, and
the manufacturers obtained all their choice wools from abroad.
Spain threatened to organize manufactures of her own, and it
was feared that France would be no longer able to obtain her
choice wools. To remedy this evil, Trudaine conceived the
happy tliought of applying to Daubenton, already distinguislied
down, recently introduced from England. Mr. Stone, of Guelph, Canada West, has
taken the lead in the introduction of these sheep. The flocks in Canada are small,
averaging from 20 to 50 head. It has been estimated that 6,000,000 pounds of long
wool will be grown this year. Large numbers of Canadian sheep have been carried
to the West during the present season. The consumption in the United States of
Canada wool for the present year, is estimated by Mr. Cameron, an intelligent worsted
manufacturer, whose data, showing the consumption of each mill, are now before me, at
5,500,000 lbs. The success of the Lowell Manufacturing Company, in fabricating
alpaca goods from Canada lustre wools, has demonstrated that the wool does not
deteriorate. The Canada wool has been found equal to the best English lustre wool,
imported expressly for compariBon. The free wool of Canada has been an inestimable
boon to our worsted manufacturers. It does not compete with the production of our
own farmers, as we grow hardly more than 200,000 lbs. of long wool, while Canada con¬
sumes 300,000 lbs. annually of our clothing wool. It is not possible that our own pro¬
duction of long wool will keep up with the demand.
Long-wooled Flemish sheep have been recently imported from Friesland by Mr.
ChenerA', of Belmont. They are said, by Youatt {p. 176), to be more prolific tliaii any
En<^lish breed. Their milk is valuable, and is used by the Dutch in the manufacture of
a coiiBiderable quantity of cheese of a good quality.
* See an excellent article, on the Condition and Prospects of Sheep Husbandry in
the United States, in the Report of the Commissioner of Agriculture for the year 1862,
p 242 in which the raising of long-wooled sheep is forcibly recommended.
54
for his profound investigations in zoology and comparative
anatomy at the Museum of the Jardin des Plantes, where he
was associated with tlic illustrious Buffon. Daubenton, who
had studied the question of domestic animals with Buffon, did
not hesitate to accept the mission of ameliorating the domestic
sheep of his own country. The government furnished him the
means of establishing a sheep-fold for experiments at Montbard,
his native country,- and, in the space of ten years, viz., from
17G6 to 1776, he had solved the problem which, for a century,
had been thought impossible. He produced superfine wool
from the coarse native sheep of France. " I allied," he says in
his instructions for shepherds, " rams whose wool was the
finest with ewes having as much hair as wool, to judge by ex¬
tremes the effect of the wool of the ram upon that of the ewe.
I was surprised to see issue from this cross a ram with super¬
fine wool. Tiiis great amelioration gave me the more hope for
the success of my enterprise, as it was produced by a Roussclon
ram.* I had at that time had no Spanish rams." " By these
experiments, continued with the greatest precautions," he
continues, " I brought all the races of my sheepfold to the
degree of fineness of Spanish wool without using any Spanish
stock." He caused his wools to be made into fabrics at the
Gobelin manufactory, and the stuffs were pronounced to have
all the fineness of those made with Spanish wools with more
nerve and strength. Convinced by this success, Louis XYI.
obtained from the King of Spain, in 1786, a flock of merinos,
which he placed at Rambouillet, under the direction of Dau¬
benton. Enlightened by his previous labors upon the domestic
sheep, the practical naturalist found no difficulty in accli¬
mating and ameliorating the Spanish race. The flock at
Rambouillet was multiplied. It furnished an example and sup¬
plied reproducers, which were spread everywhere throughout
France. A school of shepherds was organized ; other national
* The finest of French native breeds. Noveau traitd sur laine, p. 67.
55
sheepfolds were founded, and tlie merinos were established in
France.* Daubenton continued to publish treatises upon their
management. Even fifty-three years after his first labors,
when 84 years old, he addressed the Institute in relation to
experiments upon sheep which he was tiien carrying on.
* One of the most interesting results of the acelimatation of the merinos in France is
the creation of a now and perfectly lixed race, remarkable for its silky wool, called the
Mauchamp race. In lS2Sj there was accidt-ntally produced at the farm of ilaiichamp,
cultivated by M. Graux, a ram, badly and even monstrfuisly formed, having a head of
unusual size and a tail of great length, but having a wool remarkable for its softness,
and above all for its lustre, which resembled that of silk. This was the second animal of
the kind which had been born in the Hock of meriiujs at Mauchamp; the tirst had been
kdled by the mother. Mr. Graux separated it from the flock, and raised it apart, to pre¬
vent any accident, and used it for reproduction; obtaining some animals similar to the
sire, and others to the dam. Taking afterwards the animals similar to the sire, and crofjB-
iiig them among themselves or with the sire, which served as a type, he succeeded in
forming, little by little, a small flock of animals whose wool was perfectly silky. AVhen
he had arrived at this result, he occupied himself in modifying the forms, which he easily
accomplished; and flmilly in modiiying the size, originally quite small, but which is now
the same as that of ordinary French merinos, — rams of three years old weighing as much
as 80 kilogrammes, and a flock of six hundred head producing on an average two kilo¬
grammes of wool wa.-hed on tlie back. As with all innovators, M. Graux met on all
sides detractors of his discover\\ The "farmers pretended that the silky type could not
he preserved when transported from Mauchamp; and the manufacturers asserted that the
wool was so pliant and slipper^' that nothing could be done with it. They even com¬
plained of the very qualities which distinguish it. It is prf)bal)le that the discoverer
would have renounced the development of this magnilicent race, if he had not been en¬
couraged by an annual subvention from the government, obtained by M. Yvart, the
Inspector-general of the imperial sheepfolds. In 1853, Davin, a manufacturer dis¬
tinguished for his zeal and skill in Introducing new material to the textile arts, experi¬
mented upon the material rejected by others. Ho succeeded in making magniiicent
stuffs which excited the admiration of all connoisseurs. They exhibited, in the tender
colors especially, reflections of light which had never been before observed, and a s(»ftness
which had never been found in any material of wool of any degree of tineness. The
silky lustre was so marked, that, in a chcllis made with a silken warp and weft of !Mau-
champ wool, although the stuff contained only one-eighth of silk and seven-eighths of
silky wool, it was as brilliant as if made entirely of silk. jNIerinos, mousselines, satins of
China, and shawls, made of this material, equalled, if they did not surpass, analogous pro¬
ducts made of the linest Cashmere yarns. The commission of savans, who reported up(m
the qualities of this new race to the Imperial Society of Acelimatation, say: *' The silky
wool is destined to replace completely in our industi'^'' the Cashmere which comes from
Thibet. It is fully as brilliant as Cashmere, fully as soft; and, while it costs less as a raw
material, it rec^uires less manipulation to be transformed into yarn, since it does not con¬
tain the hair {Jarre), which must be removed from the Cashmere." In 1857, a medal of
the first class was decreed to Davin for his industrial application of this material; and
the society above reteiTod to has proposed a prize of 2,000 francs for a flock of erne hun¬
dred animals of the silky tj-pe. Bulletin de la Societd Imperiale Zoologique d'Acclima-
tatiou, t. V. p. 113, also t. vi. p. 502.
56
Althougli it was scarcely before the establishment of the em¬
pire tliat the advantages of the new race began to he under¬
stood, one-fourth of the sheep of France consist at present of
merinos from this stock. The merino of France has become,
through the culture of her agriculturalists, one of the most dis¬
tinct of the merino races. In size and weight of washed wool
it surpasses all other merinos, and their French savans say of
them, " We are at present the first in the entire world for the
fineness and quality of our wools, and the beauty and good
conformation of the merinos which produce them." Within
even the present year the Imperial Zoological Society of
Acclimatation, at the instance of its President,— the illustrious
Drouyn de L'huys, the Premier of Napoleon III., — has dedi¬
cated a statue to the great naturalist who endowed France
with this magnificent legacy, to prove, in the language of its
A^ice-president, " that no true glory passes unperceived, that
every serious servitor of his country and humanity receives
sooner or later his just recompense." *
What has been the effect of this agricultural achievement of
France upon the character of her fabrics ? The high culture
of the French sheep for the purpose of obtaining great size and
weight of fleece, has done for the merino in France what it did
for Southdown in England; it has added length to the fibre,
and made it a genuine comhing-wool.f Its value for this pur-
* M. Richard, Vice-president of the Imperial Society of Acclimatation. See Bulle¬
tin de la Soci<5t^ Imperiale Zoologique d'Acclimatation, 2 Sevie, t. i. November, 1864,
p. 647, et seq.
t Although the prevailing character of the French fleeces is as above described, a
breed of sheep has been cultivated to a limited extent in France which rival in fineness
of wool the most reputed flocks of Saxony. They are called the sheep of Naz, and
have been cultivated by an agricultural association of that name for over sixty years.
The original nucleus of the flock was derived from the most ancient of the Royal
Cabana®, and the flock has been increased without any admixture of foreign blood.
The flock in 1840 had been reduced to about 500 head, but the wool still preserved its
reputation for fineness, softness, force, and elasticity. The price at that time was about
five francs the kilogramme for wool in the yolk, which was double the price of the
wools of Rambouillet. The average weight of the fleeces is a little le®? than two kilo¬
grammes, or about 4 lbs. Gen Lafayette raised sheep of this race at La Grange; and
57
pose is thus pronounced by one of the most eminent of the
practical manufacturers of Prance :—
" There are two facts we ought to proclaim abroad.
" The first is, that without the introduction of the Spanish
race into our flocks, and without all the skill of our agricul¬
turists, we should still vegetate in dependence upon neighbor¬
ing nations, and should be reduced to clothe ourselves with
their stuffs. It is to the admirable revolution in the raising of
ovine animals that we owe the beautiful industry of spinning
the merino combing-wools. It is to this that we owe the splen¬
dor of the industries of weaving combing-wool at Paris, at
Rheims, at Roubais, at Amiens, and St. Quentin.
" The second fact is, that the aspect, the quality, the char¬
acter of our modern tissues, in a word, all that makes them
deserve, for forty or fifty years, the name of new inventions, is
due principally to the particular nature of the combing-wool
obtained by tlie Spanish cross. There are few, very few inven¬
tions, in the contexture of the stuffs, or in their mounting upon
the looms, which are still the same as in the 18th century. It is
because it has been favored by the wool of merinos tliat the 19th
century has changed the physiognomy of the tissues of preced¬
ing ages." *
Before inquiring what profit our manufacturers can derive
from these facts, I wish to cite an American example of the
influence of agriculture upon our manufactures, and pay hom¬
age to an American name less widely known but hardly less
deserving of honor than those of Bakewell and Daubenton.
Col. Humphreys, who had been a member of Washington's
family at his home on the Potomac, and had been imbued with
a taste for agriculture by the immortal farmer of Mt. Vernon,
having been afterwards Minister to Spain, made the first im-
in a letter to Mr. Skinner, in 1828, recommends their introduction into the United
Strifes. New EngUind Farmer, vol. vii. p. 92. See Bulletin de la Socidtd d'Acclima-
tation, vol. vii. p. 479.
* Bernovillc, p. 165.
8
58
poi'tant importation of pure merino slieep from the Spanish
cabanas. In 1813, Stephen Atwood, of Woodbury, Connecti¬
cut, bought a ewe of Col. Ilumplircys. He bred this ewe and
lier descendants with rams in iiis neighborhood, which lie knew
'to be of the pure Humphreys's blood, until about 1830, after
which he uniformly used rams from his own flock. This flock
gaining much public favor, although full of what would be
now regarded deficiencies, attracted the attention of Edwin
Hammond, a farmer of Middlebury, Vermont, who made con¬
siderable purchases of Mr. Atwood's sheep in 184-4 and 1846.
A distinguished member of this Association, whose invaluable
contributions to American-sheep husbandry place him by the
side of the illustrious Von Thaer in Germany, thus describes
the physiological achievements of Mr. Hammond: "By a per¬
fect understanding and exquisite management of his materials,
this great breeder has effected quite as marked an improve¬
ment in the American merino as Mr. Bakewell effected among
the long-wooled sheep of England. He has converted the thin,
light-boned, smallish, and imperfectly-covered sheep above
described, into large, round, low, strong-boned sheep, models
of compactness, and not a few of tliem models of beauty, for
fine-wooled sheep.* I examined the flock nearly a week in
February, 1863. They were in very fine condition, though the
ewes were fed only with hay. Two of them weighed about
140 lbs. each. One of the two largest ewes had yielded a
fleece of 17^- lbs., and the other, 14|- lbs., of unwashed wool.
The whole flock, usually about 200 in number, — with a due
proportion of young and old, including say two per cent of old
rams, and no wethers, — yields an average of about 10 lbs.
* It was stated at a public discussion at the Yeraiont State Fair, in September, 1865,
that Mr. Hammond was offered $10,0U0 for his celebrated ram Gold-drop, but the owner
refused to sell him. He alone possessed the characteristics he had been striving for for
years. The President of the Society stated that Mr. Hammond was present when the
lamb, which became so valuable, was dropped. He turned it over, and examined it with
the warmest adinkation, and exclaimed, " Welcome! I have been looking for you fifteen
years and more, and now I have got you." — Boston Evening Courier, Sept 16th, 1865.
59
of unwashed wool per head. The great weight is not made
up by the extra amount of yolk" (although it must be ad¬
mitted that this is not the prevailing opinion of manufac¬
turers), " but by the extra length and thickness of every
part of the fleece. It is of a liigh medium quality, and very
even. In every respect this eminent breeder has directed his
whole attention to solid value, and has never sacrificed a par¬
ticle of it to attain either points of no value or less value." *
The genius of the American breeder received its crowning
honor at the International Exhibition at Hamburg, in 1863.
Sheep bred from Mr. Hammond's stock, exhibited by Mr.
Campbell, — " among 350 competing sheep from Austria, Prus¬
sia, Germany, and France, — received a first prize for the best
ram, a second prize for the second best ram, and a first
prize for the best ewes." f The fleeces of the Vermont breeds
may be regarded as types of the American merino fleece, and
the character of this wool has exerted a marked influence upon
American manufactures. It is not a clothing-wool, for the
American merino wool exceeds all other merino wool in length.
The wool exhibited at Hamburg was from 2|- inches to 3|-
inches long; and, according to German authorities on wool, 1|-
inches is the extreme limit for the length of clothing-wool for
the filling. J Hence we have comparatively no manufactures of
broadcloth.§ American merino wool is fitted for fancy cassi-
* The Practical Shepherd, hy Henry S. Randall, LL.D., p. 29.
t See extract from the ctHcial record of awards, published in the Rural New Yorker,
September 9, 1865. The class of merinos in which Mr. Campbell's were shown was
stocks which have been bred with especial reference to quantity of wool.
J "A length of li inches may be regarded as the extreme limit for card (clothing)
wool. It is true a longer wool may be used, but then it is only for the warp of the tis¬
sues, and the wool re(iuired for this purpose is only two-fifths of the quantity employed."
Traits des BStes Ovines par Aug de Weckherlin. Intendant de Prince de Hohen Zol-
lem, p. 90.
§ Since the above statement was made, I have learned that it requires a material
qualification, and I am happy to say, that a name identified with the establishment of
the cotton manufacture in the United States is to be associated with the revival of the
60
meres, in wliicli we excel; for fine sliawls, in wliicli we have
attained' great perfection; for monsselines de laine, which
we have of great excellence, and which we owe to our Ameri¬
can fleeces. The true value of the fleece of the American
merino is for combing purposes, for which it has remarkable
analogy with that of France. This country will never know
the inestimable treasure which it has in its fleeces, until
American manufacturers appropriate them to fabricate the
soft tissues of merinos, thibets, and cashmeres, to which
Prance owes " the splendor of the industries of combing-wool at
Paris, Rheims, and Roubaix." Although our main dependence
for raw material must always be upon our agriculture, it sup¬
plies but little more than three-fourths of our wants, and it is
probable will never supply it wholly. Our farmers will pro¬
bably never attempt to supply the cheap coarse wools which
Egypt and South America furnish, nor will they soon abandon
the lusty merinos for the small and delicate Saxons.* For our
very coarse, and, for some time to come, for our very fine, and
for our long wools, we must depend upon the foreign market.
Our manufactures certainly cannot be extended unless we can
be on some terms of equality with foreigners who have no
restriction in the supply of raw materials ; for all the principal
broadcloth manufacture in this country. During the present year the TVebster'Woollen
Manufactiuring Company, under the auspices of Jlr. H. Nelson Slater, has established, on
a very large scale, the manufacture of broadcloths, -which rival the best German fabrics.
* I refer to the wool growers of the north and west. With the auspicious advent of
free labor, an inviting field for fine-wool husbandry is opened on the Appalachian slopes
of the Southern States, and the prairies of Texas. I have the authority of Mr. Gilbert,
of "Ware, whose opera cloths, made of the finest Saxony and Silesian wools, have re¬
placed the best French goods in the New-York market, for saying that most admirable
fine wools have been grown in the " Panhandle," Virginia. Judge Baldwin, the late
eminent examiner in the class of " Fibres and Textiles " at the U. S. Patent Office, and
formerly a practical flockmaster in Tennessee, assures me that the culttrre of fine-wooled
sheep can be pursued to the utmost advantage in the Southern States. Cotton may not
be king even in its own vaunted domain.
For the best history extant, in our language, of the fine-wool husbandry of Germany,
the reader is referred to the article of Mr. Fleischman in the U. S. Patent Office Report
for 1817.
61
manufacturing nations of Europe have practically thrown open
their markets to the raw material of manufacture.* I will
refer to but one instance of tiie impolicy of even the present
comparatively moderate restrictions upon raw material. We
have already constructed, in this country, machinery adapted
for the manufacture of bunting, webbing, braids, and bindings,
sufficient to make all required in the United States. The long
combing-wools required for these manufactures cost in England
35 cents, and pay a duty of 12 cents and 10 per cent, averaging
about 45 per cent. Two pounds of wool are required to make
a pound of worsted, and the revenue tax on the manufactured
goods, therefore, equals 12 per cent on the raw material.
Without any duty on the imported worsted, the foreign manu¬
facturer would have an advantage of 57 per cent. The duty
on bunting, made wholly of worsted yarn, is 50 per cent. The
foreign manufacturer has therefore an advantage at present
of 7 per cent in the manufacture of bunting. A large por¬
tion of the worsted yariis now made, enter into the fabrica¬
tion of those beautiful goods called fancy hosiery goods,—
zephyrs, nubas, &c., — for which the manufacturers of Pliila-
delphia are so celebrated. The only protection which the
* Rates of duty on wool imported into the principal manufacturing nations of Europe,
according to the Customs Tariffs of all nations, up to the year 1855:—
Great Britain
Free.
France (TaritF of 1860)
1)
Belgium
»
Zollverein, including Prussia, Saxony, i _ ,
and 21 otlier States ) * ' '
Netherlands
»
[ 20 copeks per pood or
about 2 cents per
[ pound.
[2d. per centner (or
123^ lbs. avoirdu-
1 pois.)
[ Common 35s. 5d. per
100 lbs.; Saxon,
[ 23s. 9d. per 100 lbs.
62
manufacturer has, is his superior taste and knowledge of the
styles wliicli will suit the American fancy. The English manu¬
facturers are not quick enough to learn our styles ; although
it is said they had given large orders for Philadelphia hosiery
to imitate our fashions. One mortifying result of this absolute
discrimination in favor of the English worsted manufacture is,
tiiat we actually make no bunting. To our shame be it spoken,
all our flags are grown, spun, woven, and dyed in England;
and on the last 4th of July, the proud American ensigns which
floated over every national ship, post, and fort, and every
patriotic home, flaunted forth upon the breeze the industrial
dependence of America upon England ! *
I do not propose to discjiss the question of the free admis¬
sion of raw materials, or the relative duty on wool and woollen
fabrics. Most of us, as manufacturers, believe that so long as
the home product of wool is inadequate to the supply of our
machinery, the only protection which can avail the wool-grower
must include protection to the manufacturer; and that any
policy which deprives the manufacturer of the home market
for goods, tends to deprive tlie grower of the home market for
wool, and to oblige him to compete in the general markets of
the world with other wool-growers; and that the only reliable
protection of the wool-grower is in the ability of the manufac¬
turers to convert his clip into goods which will command the
home market. We believe that the mutuality of the depend¬
ence of the two industries has been demonstrated by the
experience tiiat the wool-growers have always been prosperous
when the prosperity of the manufacturing interest secured them
a home market, and that the seasons of depression have been
only when the depression of manufacturing has diminished
the home demand.f But it is not enough for us to believe, or
* Jly principal authority for these statements is Mr. Allen Cameron, of the Abhott
Worsted Company, Westford, Mass.
t See argument of Mr. Rowland G. Hazard in behalf of the Rhode Island woollen
manufacturers before the Committee of W^ays and Means, May 11, 1864. These views
63
even prove all this. There can be no reliance upon a perma¬
nent friendly legislation for both interests unless the wool-
growers are satisfied. Our object is not to reach Congress, but
to convince the farmers of the West, who will inevitably con¬
trol the legislation of this country, of the absolute identity of
our interests. The most important means of extending our
manufacture, therefore, is to establish friendly relations with
the wool-growers. How shall this be accomplished ? Let
them understand that, while, individually, the manufacturers
will follow their commercial instincts in buying at the cheapest
market, they utterly repudiate all associations or combina¬
tions to lower the market price. Let manufacturers be more
careful in the selection of their agents for purchasing wool, or
let them go themselves into the agricultural districts and be¬
come acquainted with the farmers and tiieir flocks. If there
is any rule of the trade which operates inequitably towards the
wool-grower, let it be abolished. Tiie complaint has been
made by the wool-growers, that the rule that all wools shall be
are not confined to manufacturers. I find the following in the New-England Farmer,
April, 1828, vol. vi., p. 298: — "Mr. Mallarj-, of Vermont (a wool growing State), in his
speech on the tariff bill, reported b}- the Committee on Manufactures, opposed the pro¬
posed additional dutv on wool costing eight cents per pound and under. lie said such
wool was not and would not be produced in this country. The farmers of Yeimont
would not grow wool worth ten or twelve cents, when they could as well produce that
which may be worth forty or fifty cents. This coarse, imported wool is made into negro
cloths and inferior baizes and flannels. The manufacture of it is established, and ought
not to be driven from the country and given to foreigners. The proposed duty would
amount to more than 100 per cent, and would ruin the manufacturer of coarse fabrics at
a blow, without benefiting the farmer. If the latter should raise wool worth eight or
twelve cents, he could not find a mai'ket for it. He was also opposed to the other provis¬
ions of the bill respecting wool and woollens. The charge on wool was too high, or that
on woollens was not high enough; and this disproportion would inevitably ruin the man¬
ufacturer and with him the wool grower. If the farmer could not purchase the wool of the
latter, it would be in vain to purchase it. The markets of Europe are full of wool, and
prices are very low. The English wool-growers are petitioning Parliament for a duty on
foreign wool, but their petitions will not be granted. The English woollen manufacturers
will receive every encouragement, and will be able to sell their goods at the lowest rate
possible so long as there is a prospect that they can break dotvn the American manufac¬
turers. Should they succeed in accomplishing that object, they will then raise their
prices, and we must p.ay them."—Hampshire Gazette.
64
washed, or subjected to a deduction of one-third, to put them
upon a par with brook-washed wools, operates unequally and
inequitably. I am happy to say that this subject has been
entrusted to a committee of this Association, and will, doubt¬
less, receive the action of this body. Let our manufacturers
interest themselves directly in the production of desirable
varieties of wmol. Wiiat could be a more becoming or prac¬
tical contribution from our manufacturers to agriculture, than
the offer of a really munificent prize for the best tiock of fifty
English long-wooled sheep, born and raised in this country, or
the best flock of Angora goats?* A practicable mode of ex¬
tending amicable relations between the two industries is
suggested by what has been done in Germany. In 1823, the
illustrious Von Tbaer, the great sheep-breeder of Germany,
invited all the flock-masters and wool-manufacturers of Ger¬
many to meet at Leipsic, and visit the exposition of wools
which has since become so important. He urged them to
enlighten each other mutually in respect to their reciprocal
interests, and to receive precise indications of the demands of
manufacturers. This congress convened, and was continued
from year to year, and contributed essentially to preserve the
reputation of German wools and cloths. An important result
of this congress was the adoption, in 1848, of a fixed termin¬
ology for the raising of sheep and knowledge of wools.f It is
* The Angora goat, wholly unknown to the ancients, and first described by Belon in
the sixth century, is diffused around the mountains of Thibet, and beyond the central
plains of Asia from Armenia to Chinese Tartary. The district of Angora, where it most
abounds, is described as a country" with a dry atmosphere, and verj' hot summers, and
very cold winters, — the mercury descending to 20 degrees centigrade. The number of
head in the district of Angora is estimated at from 400,000 to 500,OuO, and the product of
wool at 2,000,000 pounds. Formerly the wools of Angora were spun and woven in the
place, and were exported in the form of yarns and camlets, of which the city of Angora
sold, in 1844, 35,000 pieces to Europe. The exportation of the wool called t'lftik in
Turkey, and muhair in England, was prohibited, and tlie native spinners and weavers
we.'e protected against the machinery of Europe. Some 1200 looms were employed.
The natives displayed great skill in making gloves and hosiery'", and summer robes of
great Ij.'auty for the Turkish grandees. The town flourished, and the whole population
t V>'ccher]in, Traitc' dos betes ovines, p. 25.
65
believed that a convention of delegates from the respective
associations of wool-growers and manufacturers in this country
would have the liappiest effect upon the harmony of both in¬
terests, and might accomplish important practical results, not
the least of which would be the adoption of a fixed terminology
for the description and knowledge of wools in our own.markets
and farms.
The surest means of developing our industry rests witli the
manufacturer alone. It is for him perpetually to aspire to the
utmost excellence in his products. I need not say that the
manufacturer who suffers his goods to run down will inevitably
bring down with them his credit and his fortune. I need not
say that the trade-marks on your goods should he like the
tower mark on old silver, the stamp of the true metal, or the
marks on Swedish iron, recognized all over the world as infal-
ivas employed and happy in the pursuit of their beautiful industrj'. Tlie Turkish Gov¬
ernment was tempted, by British influence, to admit, free of duty, tlie products of European
moeluneiy, and to permit the export of the raw tiftik. This fatal step was the deatli-
blow to the town of Angora. Instead of 1200, not more than fifty looms were employed;
the retail merchants, weavers, hand-spinners, and dyers, were ruined, and the city, having
at its command all the raw matenal for a most important and characteristic manufacture,
offers, in its sad decline, another monument of the desolating influence of that system
which would make the raw material of every country tributary to the one great workshop
of the world. Nearly all the produet of Angora wool is now exported to England, a,nd is
spun into yarns which are largely exported to France. They are used for the manufac¬
ture of Utrecht velvets, lace, braid, fine shawls, S^c. Vigorous attempts have recently
heen made on the continent of Europe, especially in France, to acclimate this species; but
nowhere have they succeeded as in the United States. The first importations of seven
head were made about seventeen years ago by Dr. Davis, of South Carolina. About three
hundred have been imported since. Their progeny, with crosses, is said by Mr. Diehl
to number several thousand, scattered in flocks of from 12 to 300 hundred head, princi¬
pally in the south-western States. A flock imported this season by Jlr. Chenery, of Bel¬
mont, JIass., which I have examined, is in excellent condition. This flock numbered ten
when it started, and fourteen upon arrival at Boston. They were driven 800 miles to
Constantinople, and were seven months upon the voyage, but arrived in good health.
The value of the wool in the market is now about $1.25 per pound (not $G to $8, as
stated in the Agi-icultural lieports). The agent of the Abbott Worsted Manufactur¬
ing Co., Westford, Mass., informs me that ho has similar machinery for spinning this
wool to that nsed in the celebrated establishment of Titus Salt, of Bradford. — See
article bv Israel S. Diehl, U. S. Agricultural Beport, 1863, p. 216. Southey on Colonial
Wools, p. 322, a SC'J. Bulletin de la Societe d'Acclimatation, t. v. p. 569.
9
66
lible seals of uniform excellence. Tlie credit of your mills and
tlie honor of your houses will be the most certain fortunes for
yourselves and the best legacies to your sons. But it is not
enough that you should be content to keep up tiie old standard
of your goods. The highest attribute of iiumanity is the pas¬
sion for perfection, the aspiration for some unattained ideal.
The noblest men stamp these aspirations upon all their earnest
works; they are tiien no longer workmen, traders; they be¬
come artists. Art is not found alone in painting and sculp¬
ture. It is the domain of Minerva, who gave the distaff, as
well as of the Muses. The lover of art sees it in " the Stones of
Venice," the iron scroll-work and armor of the middle ages, and
in the old tapestries of Versailles, — in every work of man's
liands which bears the impress of his soul. The sturdy honesty
of the English clothiers of former times, and their workmanlike
fidelity to the canons of their ancient guild, made the old-
fashioned cloth of England as sound and solid as English oak.
A higher sentiment, a passion, as it were, for an ideal fineness
and nobility of fibre, incited the German flock-masters to create
the unparalleled cloth wools which have given Silesia the
crown of the " golden fleece." A passion for an ideal perfec¬
tion of tissues inspires the master weavers and spinners of
France in their perpetual strife to conquer new fields for her
industrial glory. It impels them to add, each year, to the fine¬
ness and softness of their threads, and the perfection of their
tissues, till their fabrics have become models which the spindles
and looms of all other nations are content to simulate, but fail
to imitate. All American industry needs to be vivified by such
aspirations. Every earnest worker with such a purpose is a
blessing to his country and race. As Mr. Ruskin said, in his
art lecture to the manufacturers of Bradford, " If you resolve
from the first, that, as far as you can ascertain what is best, you
will produce what is best, on an intelligent consideration of
the probable tendencies and possible tastes of the people whom
(iT
you supply, you may literally become more influential for all
kinds of good than many lecturers on art, or many treatise-
writers on morality." I will add: By such noble work you
rise above the sphere of common labor; you become more than
woi'kmen, — more than artists, — you become creators, imi¬
tators, though humble, still worthy, of the great Worker, the
infinite Maker. Indulge me a moment longer while I give you,
in the eloquent words of a great teacher now passed away,
the supreme example which is set for your labors.* " A
thoughtful man for the first time goes to some carpet-mill in
Lowell. He looks out of the window and sees dirty bales of
wool lying confusedly about as tiiey were dropped from the
carts that brought them there. Close at hand is the Merrimac
Kiver, one end of it pressed against the New-Hampshire moun¬
tains and the sky far off, while the other crowds upon the mill-
dam, and is going through its narrow gate. Under the factory
it drives the huge wheel, whose turning keeps the whole town
ajar all day. Above is the great bell which rings the ri\er to
its work. Before him are pullies and shafts. The floor is
thick set with looms. There are rolls of various colored woollen
yarns; bits of card, pierced witii holes, hang before the weaver,
who now pulls a handle, and the shuttles fly, wedding the woof
to the expectant warp, and tlie handsome fabric is slowly
woven up and rolled away. The thoughtful man wonders at
the contrivance by which the Merrimac River is made to weave
such coarse materials into such beauty of form and finish.
What a marvel of machinery it is! None of the weavers quite
understand it,—our visitor less. He goes off, wondering what a
head it must be which made the mill a tool by which tiie Mer¬
rimac transfigures wool and dye-stuffs into handsome carpets,
serviceable for ehamber, parlor, staircase, or meeting-house."
" But, all day long, you and I, . . . and all the people in the
* Lessons from the "World of Matter and the World of Man, hy Theodore Parker
Boston. 1805. p- 51*
68
world, are in a carpet-factory far more wonderful. What vast
forces therein spin and weave continually ! What is the Merri-
mac River, which only reaches from the New-Hampsliire moun¬
tains to the sea, compared to that river of God, on whose breast
the earth, the sun, the solar system, yea, the astral system, are
but bubbles whicli gleam, many-colored, for a moment, or but
dimple that stream, and wliich swiftly it wliirls away ? What
is the fabric of a Lowell mill to that carpet which God lays on
the floor of the earth from tlie Arctic Circle to the Antarctic,
or yet also spreads on tiie bottom of the monstrous sea? It is
trod under foot by all mankind. The elephant walks on it, and
tlie royal tiger. What multitudes of sheep, swine, and horned
cattle, lie down tliere and take their rest! What tribes of
beasts, insects, reptiles, birds, fishes, make a home there, or
feed thereon! Moths do not eat away this floor-cloth of the
land and sea. The snow lies on it. The sun lurks there in
summer, the rain wets it all the year: yet it never wears out;
it is dyed in fast colors. Now and then the feet of armies in
their battles wear a little hole in this green carpet; but next
year a handsome piece of botanic rug-work covers up the wear
and tear of Sebastopol and Delhi, as of old it repaired the waste
of Marathon and Trasimenus. Look ! and you see no weaver,
no loom visible; but the web is always there on the ground and
under tlie sea. The same Clothier likewise keeps the live
world tidy, and in good trim. How all the fishes are dressed
out,—those glittering in plate-armor, these only arrayed in their
vari-colored jerkins, such as no Moorish artist could paint!
How well-clad are the insects. With what suits of mail are
beetle and bee and ant furnished. The coat of the buffalo
never pinches under the arm, never puckers at the shoulder; it
is always the same, yet never old fashioned, or out of date. . . .
The pigeon and humming-bird wear their court-dress every
day, and yet it never looks dusty nor threadbare. In this
grand clothiery of the world, every thing is clad in more beauty
69
than many-coloredJoseph or imperial Solomon ever put on, yet
nobody sees the wheel, the loom, or the sewing machine of
this great Dorcas institution, which carpets the earth and
upholsters the heavens and clothes the people of the world with
more glory than the Queen of Sheba ever saw in her dream of
dress and love."
APPENDIX.
Swrfturn's ©fficrixl Report.
The By-laws of the " National Association of Wool Manufacturers"
make it the duty of the Secretary to prepare, under the direction of
the government, an annual report of the transactions and condition
of the Association. The following is submitted in conformity with
this requirement: —
The want of some organization, capable of united and systematic
action, having long been felt among those engaged in the woollen
manufacture, a circular was addressed, on the tenth day of August,
18G4, to those most directly interested in the matter. In response to
this call, a large number of the leading wool manufacturers of the
country, from Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, Mary¬
land, Delaware, and from each of the six New-England States,
assembled in convention at Springfield, Mass., on the twelfth day of
October, 180-4. The Convention at that time resolved that it should
proceed to the formation of a " National Association of Wool Manu¬
facturers." To carry this resolution into effect, a committee was
appointed to prepare a plan of organization, and report at an ad¬
journed meeting of tlie Convention, to be held on the 30th of Novem¬
ber following. The Convention having met on that day, and having
been dissolved, the Association was organized by adopting Articles
and By-laws which had been presented by the Committee, and by
choosing officers as therein described. Meetings of the government,
provided for in the By-laws, were successively held at Boston,
Mass., on the twenty-first day of December, 1864; at New York,
on the liftcculh day of March, 1805 ; at New York, on the seven¬
teenth day of May, 1805 ; at Newport, R.I., on the twenty-sixth
day of Jtdy, 1805; and at Philadelphia, on the 0th of Septem¬
ber. These /nccliugs were all numerously attended. At all of them
interesting discussions took place upon questions relating to the inter-
71
ests of tlie Association. Committees were also appointed, having in
charge the more important matters to be acted upon by the govern¬
ment. By the direction of the government, a statement was prepared
by the President of the " Objects and Plan" of the Association.
Ibis has been printed and extensively circulated. It'was regarded
by the government, that the first and most important duty of the
Association was to obtain information of the actual condition of
the woollen manufacture throughout the United States. With great
labor, a list of all persons known or believed to be engaged in the
woollen manufacture was prepared. Circulars containing such inter¬
rogatories as would draw forth the desired information were sent to
all persons on this list, about 1,700 in all; 931 returns have been
received, representing 4,073 sets of machinery, and returns are com¬
ing in daily. It is believed that by this means the Association will
be in possession of complete and accurate statistics of the woollen
machinery in operation in this country, the amount and description of
wool consumed, and the quantity and character of goods manufac¬
tured,— information indispensable for wise and just legislation in
matters aflecting our interests. It is believed that no inquiries at
present pursued by the national Government will furnish a basis for
such legislation. It is the object of the government to place the
Association upon such a basis that it shall have weight in our national
councils, and that the interests of all the woollen manufacturers of
the country shall be fully represented and cared for. The govern¬
ment believe that they have accomplished all that could have been
expected in the few months of the existence of the Association, in
completing its organization and arranging its machinery. They have
not deemed it wise to attempt too much, or to make a display of their
operations. The value of such an organization exists most in its
silent and hardly appreciable influence ; and time and patience are
necessary to secure that which is really useful and permanent. The
Association consists, at present, of 201 members; a number which,
it is hoped, may be greatly increased when our " Objects and Plans "
are more fully known.
Resnectfully submitted,
JOIUSr L. HAYES,
Secretary,
72
TABLE,
Showing the Value of Woollen Goods manufactured in the United States, for the Year
ending June 30, 1864. Calculated from Official Eeport of United-States Commis¬
sioner of Internal Revenue.
Manafacturers of
Cloths, and all
Textile, Knitted or
Felted Fabrics of
WOOL,
before dyed, printed,
or prepared in any
other manner.
Manufacturers of
STATES.
WOOL
not othcrwiso pro¬
vided for.
WORSTED
not otherwise pro¬
vided for.
TOTAL.
Dollars.
Dollars.
Dollars.
Dollars.
Maine
3,238,098.67
238,385.00
....
3,476,483.67
New Hampshire ....
9,044,762.00
34,915.00
9,079,677.00
Vermont
3,145,933.67
562,788.00
....
3,708,721.67
Massachusetts ....
38,905,399.00
800,531.33
897,720.67
40,603,651.00
Rhode Island
2,963,154.33
7,668,531.67
261,014.33
10,892,700.33
Connecticut
11,873,763.67
3,913,905.00
78,912.33
15,866,641.00
New York
10,850,180.00
2,214,802.67
912,792.33
13,977,775.00
New Jersey
2,752,652.00
25,361.67
70.33
2,778,084.00
Pennsylvania
13,022,447.33
3,502,190.00
75,076.00
16,599,713.33
Delaware
648,134.67
548,134.67
Maryland
450,385.33
1,526.67
451,912.00
West Virginia ....
68,486.00
6,267.00
63,753.00
Kentucky
117,534.33
242,370.67
359,905.00
Missouri
72,980.00
2,364.00
75,344.00
Ohio
1,315,243.00
85,634.67
1,400,877.67
Indiana
545,128.33
11,794.33
1,692.67
558,615.33
Illinois
341,907.00
11,384.00
5,793.33
359,084.33
Michigan
118,094.00
33j754.33
151,848.33
Wisconsin
104,457.67
860.00
105,317.67
Iowa
102,815.67
15,489.67
118,305.33
Minnesota
8,696.00
450.00
9,146.00
Kansas
14,947.67
14,947.67
California
538,956.00
538,956.00
Oregon
128,620.67
128,620.67
Nebraska Territory . .
45.67
45.67
121,868,250.33
73
STATEMENT OF AGGREGATE RESULTS,
Obtained dp to Octobek 25, 1865.
In Reply to Circulars of Feb. 24, 1865, and May 30, 1865, addressed to Wool Manufacturers.
STATES.
Returns
Re¬
ceived.
Sets
Re¬
ported.
Weekly
Cou.umptlon
of
Scoured Wool,
iu Pounds.
"iVeekly
Conbumption
of
Domestic Wool,
iu Founds.
Weekly
Cousumption
of
Foreiim Wool,
in Founds.
Per-
ceutage
of
Foreifrn
Wool.
Averape
Weekly
per Set.
Mills
to be
heard
from.
Maine
40
177
93,835
74,120
19,715
19|
530
11
New Hampshike ....
69
361
217,110
174,841
42,269
19J
601
28
Vermont
39
112
50,217
32,652
17,565
35
448
19
Massachusetts ....
186
1,467
857,496
560,396
297,100
34i
585
74
Ehode Island
61
340
188,775
152,967
35,808
19
555
15
Connecticut
88
452
252,880
125,486
127,394
50J
559
43
New York
154
576
236,510
174,536
61,974
261
411
124
New Jersey
11
64
33,660
25,238
8,422
25
526
7
Pennsylvania :
Philadelphia
24
68
88,200
68,650 .
19,550
22J
1,297
98
Remainder of the State .
57
90
39,054
39,054
....
434
69
Delaware
6
15
14,050
13,050
1,000
n
937
4
Maryland
1
8
5,400
2,700
2,700
50
675
2
West Virginia ....
1
Ohio
44
83
32,615
32,615
392
34
Indiana
47
103
51,200
51,200
....
497
41
Illinois
22
47
23,355
23,355
497
13
Michigan
20
26
9,660
9,660
372
12
Wisconsin
13
25
10,800
10,800
....
432
6
Minnesota
1
,2
1,200
1,200
....
600
2
Iowa
15
43
17,658
17,658
411
6
Missouri
10
21
16,650
16,650
....
793
4
Kentucky
7
14
6,600
6,600
400
7
Kansas
1
3
1,620
1,620
540
2
California
1
Oregon
1
4
4,000
4,000
1,000
1
Nebraska Territory . .
Total, Oct. 25, 1865 . .
917
4,100
2,252,545
1,619,038
633,497
550
624
10
OFFICERS.
^PrcstUcnt.
E. B. BIGELOW Boston, JUss.
T. S. FAXTON Utica, N.Y.
THEODORE POMEROY Pittsfield, Mass.
SAMUEL BANCROFT Media, Pa.
Crtastirer,
WALTER HASTINGS Boston, Mass.
Secrctarj.
JOHN L. HAYES Boston, Mass.
Ot'tECtarS.
Maine.
R. W. Robinson, Dexter.
J. H. Burleigh, South Berwick.
Thomas S. Lang, N. Vassalboro'.
New Ilampsliire.
D. H. Buffum, Great Falls.
Daniel Holden, Concord.
Vermord.
S. Woodward, Woodstock.
Seth B. Hunt, Bennington.
Massachusetts.
Jesse Eddy, Fall River.
S. Blackington, North Adams.
Joshua Stetson, Boston.
A. C. Russell, Great Barrington.
G. H. Gilbert, Ware.
C. W. Holmes, Monson.
Connecticut.
Homer Blanchard, Hartford.
J. Converse, Stafford Springs.
B. Sexton, Warehouse Point.
George Kellogg, Rockville.
George Roberts, Hartford.
Rhode Island.
S. T. Olnet, Providence.
Rowse Babcock, Westerly.
New York.
A. J. Williams, Utica.
Charles Stott, Hudson.
Edward A. Green, New York.
New Jersey.
Jonas Livermore, Blackwoodtown.
David Oakes, Bloomfield.
Pennsylvania.
S. W. Cattell, Philadelphia.
Emanuel Hey, „
John Covode, Lockport Station.
Charles Spencer, Germantown.
Delaware.
William Dean, Newark.
Maryland.
Charles Wethered, Baltimore.
Ohio.
Alton Pope, Cleveland.
A. P. Stone, Columbus.
Stanlitntj
Finance.
J. W. Edmands, Boston, Mass.
Edward Harris, Woonsocket, R.I.
S. D. W. Harris, Rockville, Ct.
J. W. Stitt, New York, N.Y.
Benjamin Bullock, Philadelphia, Pa.
Statistics.
R. G. Hazard, Peacedale, R.I.
James Roy, West Troy, N.Y.
Archibald Campbell,Manayunk,Pa.
N. Kingsbury, Hartford, Ct.
J. V Barker, Pittsfield, Mass.
Raw Material.
George W. Bond, Boston, Mass.
H. D. Tellkampf, New York, N.Y.
S. B. Stitt, Philadelphia, Pa.
T. S. Faxton, Utica, N.Y.
J. J. Robinson, Rockville, Ct.
Machinery.
Richard Garsed, Frankford, Pa.
J. K. Kilbourn, Pittsfield, Mass.
C. H. Adams, Cohoes, N.Y.
Esms Lamb, Blackstone, Mass.
Robert Middleton, Utica, N.Y
LIST OF MEMBERS.
MAINE.
Galen C. Moses Bath.
Newichawanock Co., J. E. Burleigh, Ag't So. Berwick.
Dexter Mills, E. TF. Eobinson, Ag't Dexter.
S. 0. Brown Dover.
Anson P. Morrill Readfield.
Thomas S. Lang No. Vassalboro'.
NEW HAMPSHIRE.
J. M. Babcock & Co., Barnstead.
B. F. & D. Holden West Concord.
Almon Harris Fisherville.
Great-Falls Woollen Co., E. H. Buffum, Ag't . . . Great Falls.
D. Henshaw Ward, Ag't Ashuelot Manufacturing Co. . Keene.
Moses Sargent, Jr Lake Village.
Milton Mills, E. R. Mudge, Sawyer & Co., Ag'ts . . Milton.
VERMONT.
Seth B. Hunt Bennington.
Holmes, Whittemore, & Co Springfield.
Burlington Woollen Co., J. Stetson, Treas Winooski.
Solomon Woodward Woodstock.
MASSACHUSETTS.
S. Blackinton No. Adams.
S. W. Bratton & Co „
Dean & La Monte So. „
George L. Davis No. Andover.
N. Stevens & Sons „
Assabet Manuf'g Co., T. Quincy Browne, Treas. . . . Assabet.
Miller's-Biver Manuf'g Co., Geo. T. Johnson, Ag't . . Athol. ;
C. P. Talbot & Co Billerica.
Estus Lamb Blackstone.
E. M. Bailey Boston.
Erastus B. Bigelow
76
George William Bond Boston.
Gardner Brewer & Co »
Gardner Colby
J. C. Converse, Blagden, & Co „
Reuben S. Denney „
J. Wiley Edmands
George L. IIarwood „
Walter Hastings „
James L. Little „
Ajiory Maynard
Adolriius Merriam „
Charles Merriam „
Perry & M'endell
George W. Ryley „
M. H. Simpson
John II. Stephenson „
Austin Sumnep., Treas. Mcn-h. Woollen Co., Dedham, Mass. „
Henry V. Ward, Treas. Lawrence Mamifacluring Co. . „
C. L. Harding Cambridge,
French & Ward Canton.
Hamon, Smith, & Co Concord.
Thomas Barrows Hedham.
Highton Woollen Co., William C. Whitridge, Pres. . Highton.
Jesse Eddy, & Son Fall River.
F. B. Ray Franklin.
Allan Cameron Graniteville.
Berkshire Woollen Co., A. C. Russell, Ag't . . . . Gt. Barrington.
F. W. Hinsdale & Brother Hinsdale.
Plunkett AVoollen Co., C. J. Kittredge, Pres
August Steusberg Holyoke.
D. H. Crombie Lawrence.
George A. Fuller „
Pacific Mills, IF. C. Chapin, Ag't „
■Washington Mills, Joshua Stetson, Treas
Elizur Smith Lee.
Baldwin Co., P. Anderson, Ag't and Treas Lowell.
Isaac Farrington
Star Mills, George Brayton, Treas >Iiddleboro'.
S. U. Church & Brother Middlefield.
Crane & AVaters Millbury.
M. & S. Lapham „
Nelson AValling ,,
Hampden Cotton Manuf'g Co., C. IF. Holmes, Ag't . Monson.
Loam Snow, Pres. Star Mills, Middleboro', Mass. . . . New Bedford.
Burrough & Bartlett No. Oxford.
77
W. K. Parks Palmer.
John V. Barker & Brother Pittsfield.
Peck & Kilbourn Pittsfield.
Pittsfield Woollen Co „
L. Pomeroy's Sons
S. N. & C. Russell „
U. & H. Stearns
Taconic Mills, Qeorge Y. Learned, Treas
Salisbury Mills, John Gardner, Treas., Boston . . . Salisbury.
C. Alden Springfield.
John L. King „
C. E. Parsons „
J. Z. & C. Goodrich & Co Stockbridge.
S. W. Scott Uxbridge.
George II. Gilbert & Co Ware.
Charles A. Stevens
S. H. Sibley Warren.
[j. M. Capron & Sons Webster.
Ravine Manufacturing Co So. Wilbraharo.
Scantic Manufacturing Co., L. E. Sage, Ag't . . . „ „
Adriatic Mill, Granville M. Clark, Treas Worcester.
n. II. Chamberlain & Co „
Curtis & Murdoch „
RHODE ISLAND.
H. Satles & Son Pascoag.
R. G. Hazard Peacedale.
Atlantic Delaine Co., George W. Chapin, Treas. . . Providence.
William G. Budlong „
Chapin & Downes „
Taft, Weeden, & Co „
Wainskuck Co., S. T. Olney, Treas „
Rowse Babcock Westerly.
Brown & Clark „
Edward Harris Woonsocket.
CONNECTICUT.
Thomas Crossley Bridgeport.
Broad-Brook Co., B. E. Hooker, Treas Broad Brook.
A. C. Dunham Hartford.
Hartford Carpet Co., George Roberts, Treas „
Home Woollen Co., H. Blanchard, Treas „
N. Kingsbury & Co „
78
Thames Woollen Co., R. O. Hooper, Ag't Montville.
Thomas Lewis Naugatuck.
New-Bkitain Knitting Co., John B. Talcott, Sec. . . New Britain.
Union Manufacturing Co Norwalk.
William Elting, Ag't Elting Woollen Co Norwich.
Yantic Mills, by E. Winslow Williams „
American Mill, J. J. Robinson, Ag't Rockville.
Florence Mills, Oeorge Kellogg, jr., Ag't „
S. I). W. Harris
Hockanum Co., Oeorge Maxwell, Ag't „
New-England Co., Allen Hammond, Ag't „
Rock Manufacturing Co., George Kellogg, Ag't... „
Joseph Selden „
E. H. Hyde Stafford.
Mineral-Springs Manuf'g Co., J. Converse, Treas. . . Stafford Springs.
Mill-River Woollen Manuf'g Co., Thos. S. Hall, Pres. Stamford.
Terry Manuf'g Co., by Henry K. Terry Thomaston.
East-Windsor Woollen Co., B. Sexlon, Pres Warehouse Pt.
Glenville Mills, A. D. Le Feore Waterbury.
Waterbury Mills, John W. Whittal „
Haleville Mills, Ed. H. Robinson, Pres Willington.
Sequassen Woollen Co., William W. Billings, Ag't . Windsor.
P. C. Allen Windsorville.
Lounsbury, Bissell, & Co Winnepauk.
Norwalk Mills, by Charles C. Beits „
Daniel Curtis & Co Woodbury.
NEW YORK.
Steam Woollen Co., S. Harris, Ag't Catskill.
C. H. Adams Cohoes.
Alden, Frink, & Weston „
Joseph H. Parsons „
A. E. Stimson, Treas „
Levi Yanney Ephratah.
Glenham Co., William M. Dart, Ag't Glenham.
Charles Stott Hudson.
Saxony Woollen Co Little Falls.
A. Van Sickler Madrid.
Chester Moses & Co Marcellus.
P. S. Haines Newburg.
J. Harrison „
Edward A. Green New York.
Elias S. Higgins „
Samuel Lawrence „
Little & Dana
79
L. J. Stiastnt New York.
J. W. Stitt „
H. Staesburg „
H. D. Tellkampf „
Allen & Gibson Otto.
A. L. Clark & Co Philmont.
S. W. Gregory Plattsburg.
Plias Titus & Sons Poughkeepsie.
H. "Waterbury Renssalaerville.
Schaghticoke Woollen Mills, Amos Briggs, Pres. . Sohaghticoke.
Isaac R. Blanvelt Spring Valley.
P. W. Hart Stamford.
Troy Manufacturing Co., by Azro B. Morgan . . . Troy.
Troy Woollen Co., by James S. Knowlton
James Roy & Co West Troy.
Peter Cloger, Ag't Utica Steam Woollen Co Utica.
Empire Woollen Co., A. J. Williams
T. S. Faxton „
Globe Woollen Co., Robert Middleton, Ag't .... „
Lester Stone Westfield.
NEW JERSEY.
Jonas Livermore Blockwoodtown.
David Cakes & Son Bloomfield.
Camden Woollen Co., S. B. Stitt, Treas., Philadelphia . Camden.
S. & R. Duncan Newark.
Norfolk & New Brunswick Hosiery Co New Brunswick.
PENNSYLVANIA.
Waldo & Son Arcade.
James Irving Chester.
Fremont Woollen Co., by B. Garsed Frankford.
Samuel Riddle Glen Riddle.
John Covode Lockport Stat'n.
A. Campbell & Co Manayunk.
Edward Holt »
H. S. Huidekoper Meadville.
Samuel Bancroft Media.
Edward H. Amidon Philadelphia.
Benjamin Bullock's Sons „
H. N. Bruner »
S. W. Cattell, Lincoln Mills „
Campbell & Pollock, Continental Woollen Mill ... „
William Divine „
Thomas Dolan »
80
Samuel Eccles, Jr. Philadelphia.
George P. Evans „
Emanuel Hey „
B. H. Jenks „
Charles Spencer „
DELAWARE.
"William Dean Newark.
MARYLAND.
Wethered, Brothers, & Nephews Baltimore.
OHIO.
Glaser & Brothers Cincinnati.
Alton Pope & Sons Cleveland.
Columbus Woollen Manuf'g Co., A. P. Stone, Pres. . Columbus.
INDIANA.
Schaeffee, Rimroth, & .Co Evansville.
MICHIGAN.
William Wallace Battle Creek.
P. S. Ly.man Corunna.
H. R. Gardner Jonesville.
John Nicol St. Clair.
HONORARY MEMBERS.
Hon. Henry S. Randall Cortland "Vilh, N.Y.
Hon. Justin S. Morrill Vermont.
Hon. Isaac Newton, Commissioner of AgricvXture . Washington, D.C.
337.3 142
3 5556 003 248 879
MLO
U3