Virginia Free Press & Farmers' Repository

THE TARIFF.
From Niles' Register.

POLITICS FOR FARMERS.
[Concluded]

Such is the connection between agriculture and manufactures. We shall now notice the folly, or falsehood, of those who insist that the laws for the protection of domestic manufactures are 'taxes' on consumers—these laws have had one invariable tendency to reduce the prices of articles protected, without at all diminishing the foreign demand for the product of our soil. In 1823, the year before the abominable tariff of 1824, we exported 173 millions of pounds of cotton,* and 756 thousand barrels of flour, together worth $25,400,000; and in 1826, 204 millions of pounds of cotton and 857 thousand bbls. flour, together worth $29,150,000: the quantity and the value being both increased, in defiance of all the awful predictions to the contrary.†

Taxes, of some kind, must be paid. A revenue duty must be collected: but whether a protecting duty superadded, is, or is not a tax, depends on particular considerations. For example—the duty on a square yard of coarse cotton goods is 8 cts.—but we may buy a square yard of such goods, home-made, for 8 cents, or three-fourths of a cent less than the duty. It is impossible then, that the duty is a tax. The duty on shot is four cents per lb. but we can obtain any quantity of shot at five cents per lb.—if the duty is a tax, the shot is worth only one cent per lb. and so on. The duty on wheat is 15 per cent—or '15 cents on every dollar of its cost,' as the 'free trade' folks say; but is any farmer foolish enough to believe that a tax of the United States is collected on the wheat that he grows and consumes? It is a popular cry, that duties are taxes:' so was the halloo, 'Great is the Diana of the Ephesians.' A falsehood, or an idol, placed in opposition to truth, and the ETERNAL PRINCIPLES OF TRUTH! There is a duty of 3 cents per lb. on cotton—is cotton advanced in that amount, because of that duty? Pshaw! We cannot dwell any longer on such subjects—and must proceed.

MANUFACTURES OF IRON.
This is the leading interest in the United States, and a great supporter of the home market, as every farmer in the neighborhood of iron works knows. The following shows that decreased prices have invariably followed increased duties. As to iron manufactures, no patriot will contend that we should be dependent on any foreign nation for them—they are essential to the independence of our own—and are without substitutes.
The first encouragement was given to rolling iron by the tariff of 1816, when the duty was fixed at $30 per ton, and so it remained until 1828, when it was raised to $37 per ton.—In consequence of the act of 1816, fifteen new rolling mills were immediately erected, without including the new establishments west of the mountains—and Sheet iron and boiler plates, (better than the English.) which sold for £130 the ton, 8 or 9 years ago, may now be had for 130 or $140 the ton. We speak always of wholesale prices.—Rolled round iron has had the same reduction in value.
Small hoop iron, (a new manufacture.) protected by a duty of 5 cents per lb. by the tariff of 1828, and which sold for $150 a ton a few years ago, is now selling for $120 a ton.
Braziers' rods which had never been made in this country until protected by the tariff of 1828, with a duty of 3½ cents per lb. and were sold at $150 a ton, or six and two-third cents a pound, now sell for $135 a ton, or six cents per lb. though 'taxed' 3 cents per lb.
Cut nails were 8 cents per lb. in 1821, and had an average value of 7 cents until 1828, now sell for 5½ cents per lb. The duty on nails is 5 cents per lb. If the duty is a tax, the value of the nails is only half a cent per lb.
These, and such as these, are the articles of iron best protected and they show a general decline of about 25 per cent. or one fourth in price, as compared with their value previous to such protection. On hammered bar iron, the duty was 45 cents the cwt. in 1816, raised to 90 in 1824, at which it remains. It was worth (the superior qualities) $100 the ton, a few years since, and now sells for only $85—a reduction of 15 per cent. because of the domestic competition excited by the tariff:

MANUFACTURES OF WOOL.
The duties laid upon foreign wool, for the protection of American farmers, (and which we heartily approve of, except as to the coarsest and finest qualities, because we do not produce any of the former, and very little of the latter.) has prevented a large general decline, in the price of woollen goods, except in what may be called the medium qualities, which were about 25 per cent. less last year than previous to the increased duties upon them.—The price of wool has advanced, and so have such cloths; but they are still cheaper, of American manufacture, than ever they were, of English product, under a mere revenue duty. The very fine cloths retain pretty nearly their old prices, though rather less.—All mixtures of cotton and wool are much cheaper. The 'Welsh plains,' which averaged at least 65 cents a yard, previous to the tariff of 1824, fell to 60 cents, on the increased duty, as soon as certain of our factories were put in operation. And the article known as 'Canton cloths,' a much more valuable one than the 'Welsh plains,' sold last year at 56 to 60 cents. Their price has since advanced, because that the stock of foreign coarse wool is exhausted, and there is no domestic supply. Negro cloths, such as in 1825, 6, 7 and 8, sold for 27 cents—and, because a glut, last year, for 22 cents—now sell for 42 cents—for the reason assigned. The south imposed the duty on coarse wool, and will pay it!
It is difficult to fix a determinately descriptive quality of cloths, and not so easy to make out a clear comparison of prices; but it is manifest, that their cost has generally declined with the increase of duties on them. The fact is that the manufacture of a yard of cloth in the United States, now costs less than in England, because of new and improved machinery, not used in the latter country, and which, perhaps, cannot be used, because of the great number of persons that it would throw out of employment. The difference in the cost of a yard of cloth made in the United States and in England, if any there is, is in the difference of the cost of the wool and dye-stuffs used—for the protection of farmers and planters. As before observed, we heartily approve of these duties, so far as they affect articles produced by us in reasonable quantities; but the duties on very coarse and very fine wools and indigo, have a direct tendency to tax consumers of the cloths made out of, or dyed, with these materials. The farmers have had a large advance in the price of their wool, and we are glad of it—we as much wish an advance in the value of cotton.
A great rise in the price of flannels was predicted but, with two tariffs heaped upon them to increase the price, such as sold for 23 cents in 1825, will hardly bring that sum even now. Last year these goods were seventeen cts. only. This shows that the tariff has no effect on their price. Wool was cheap in 1828-9, and is now more valuable, and so are flannels. Such wool as sold for 18 cts. last year is worth thirty.

MANUFACTURES OF COTTON.
These may be said to have fallen fifty per cent. in price since the protection of the domestic manufacture of them—that is, fifty cents will purchase as much cotton cloths—shirtings, sheetings, calicoes, plaids, stripes, and all the common articles for men and women's wear—as one hundred cts. would do, before our tariff laws were enacted to encourage the domestic industry and consume the domestic material. Whole ship-loads of East India cotton goods were imported into the United States—we now export American cotton goods to the East Indies! It is readily admitted, (though our opponents will 'admit nothing') that a large part of this reduced price is caused by improved machinery—but the fact is no less true, that coarse cotton goods are cheaper at Providence, in Rhode Island, than Manchester, in England. We speak understandingly—and the proof is at hand, that in England they have counterfeited our marks to sell their goods for ours, in South America. We have seen so specimens of this trick. The poor cotton of Surat was worked to imitate the strong upland cotton of South Carolina, &c. thus to injure both our planters and manufacturers; but such frauds have generally been discovered, in the superior quality of our goods. Mr. Raguet has spoken of the tax on these goods. We will assure him the payment of $100,000 a year, bonus, if he shall obtain us the liberty to export them, free of duty, to England, for 5 years—half a million of dollars, by way of purchasing his free trade!' We have friends who are ready for this 'speculation'—as things are at present.
The duty on such goods is 8½ cents a square yard—the cotton in them costs 2½ cents, together 11½; we buy them at 8 cents the square yard; then, if the duty be a tax, the manufacturer not only gives his labor for nothing, but pays a premium of 3½ cents on every yard that the people are kind enough to purchase of him! Such is the reasoning of the free trade philosophers!'
The price of cotton goods is too low, by the domestic competition; but that must regulate itself. The following little statement may show the power of protection to produce competition, and decline prices, as well as a volume of facts. In 1826 and '27, a sort of goods, well known as the 'Warren calicoes,' were worth 17 cents a yard—the tariff of 1828 raised the duty, and they fell to 16—they were 15 in 1829, and now are only 14. What an 'oppression' is here!
Such is the case in respect to all and every description of goods, the manufacture of which we have fairly 'taken hold of.' We speak without the fear of contradiction. A reduced cost to consumers has universally followed increased protection to manufactures.

CHEMICAL PREPARATIONS.
All these have been reduced at least 50 per cent. in price, because of the domestic manufacture of them. We shall notice only a few leading articles.
The old steady price of alum was from five to six cents—a duty of 25 cents per cwt. was laid upon it by the tariff of 1824, and the present selling price is 3 to 3½ cents per lb.
Glauber salts had a regular demand at four cents per lb.—2 cents per lb. duty was levied by the tariff of 1824, and the present price is 2 cents per lb. the exact amount of the duty.
Epsom salts had a steady price at 8 cents per lb.; a duty of 5 cents was laid upon them, and any quantity may now be had for 4 cents per lb.
Refined saltpetre was from 12 to 14 cents per lb. before the tariff of 1824, when a duty of 3 cents per lb. was put upon it—it fell to 9 cents, and may now be had for 8 cents.
There is a duty on copperas of 2 cts. per lb. the present selling price 2½ cts. per lb.

GLASS AND GLASS-WARES.
Such window glass as sold for $15 the 100 sq. feet in 1816, may now be had for 7 dollars and 50 cents, or one half the old price. Glass and glass wares generally are more than one half less than the price they were before protection was extended to them, and we are thankful that they were really protected. We buy as many tumblers for fifty cents as used to cost us one dollar.

CABINET WARES, &c.
We are told that on all sorts of cabinet wares, the people are taxed thirty dollars on every hundred of the cost, or $3 on every cradle or table that costs $10.' So says Mr. Raguet of the 'Banner of the Constitution!' He also informs us, that chairs, hats, leather, and all its manufactures, such as boots, shoes, saddles, &c. with indeed almost all the products of mechanics, pay the same 'tax.' Now, what rogues must these mechanics be, seeing that from Baltimore, only, they have exported to foreign places, not less than $500,000 worth of these articles in one year to meet all the competition of the world, while they EXTORTED $3 on every $10, of the value of their products, sold at home! A leathern medal, with a suitable motto stamped on saw dust, stiffened with glue, is worthy of the man who thus exposes the swindlings of the mechanics!

MISCELLANEOUS.
We have already extended this essay much beyond the limits that we wish to assign for it—but the facts are so numerous and the subject so copious, it was impracticable to condense them more than we have done—we shall therefore conclude with a few more specifications, as to the happy effects of the "American System," in reducing the price of commodities—adding some general remarks.
Lead and all its manufactures, have been reduced much in value—the duty on pig lead is 2 cents per lb.—its price 3½ cents; the duty on shot is 4 cents, the price 5. It was 9 to 10 cents before the duty was laid.
Gun powder was 45 cents per lb. and is now 22 cents and less. The common as low as ten or twelve cents.
Spirits of turpentine was fifty cents gallon in 1824—now thirty cents,
"Cyphering slates," were 'taxed' with a duty of 3½ cents and one third per cent.—and they are now cheaper by 3½ and one third per cent. than before that duty was levied, and of very superior quality.
Paper is a great and valuable manufacture—the various business which old rags furnish is of a greater annual value than the cotton crop of South Carolina. The price of the article has declined about 20 per cent. though the duty upon it was much increased, and the quality has greatly improved by the domestic competition. The long list of taxes' on books of different sorts, is a string of nonsense.
Castor oil had an average price of more than three dollars a gallon previous to 1824, when it was 'taxed with a duty of forty cents per gallon. A large cultivation of the bean immediately followed, and the price fell to about one dollar and fifty cents, except in 1828, when, because of a great demand for our oil in England, it rose to $2 75 cents per gallon, by which our farmers profitted.
Fire brick, in imitation of the English Stourbridge, and fully as good, are selling for thirty dollars a thousand.—Before we made them ourselves, the British charged 70 dollars for them, and are now kindly willing to take 30 dollars. But our own are preferred to prevent future impositions.
Cotton bagging, before the tariff of 1824, averaged about forty cents per yard—it is now hardly worth twenty, and has been sold at 18.
The manufactures of hides and skins are worth at least thirty millions a year, or three and a half millions more than the export of cotton last year from all the United States.
There are fifty minor articles that we might add, as fast as we might write them down. But it is enough.
In what is the consumer taxed for the benefit of the manufacturer? Take the fire brick as an example. John Bull demanded as received of us seventy dollars, for what he is willing to accept thirty, since we began to make them for ourselves; foreign nations made us pay 3 dollars a gallon for castor oil, until we grew the bean on our own farms, and now it is worth only about one dollar and fifty cents. What more is needed?

GENERAL REMARKS.
An important commentary on the facts stated, naturally presents itself—for matters of most serious interest to a large majority of the people of the United States are involved in them; but we must hasten to conclude.
Revenue, in some way raised, must be had. Public opinion, or, at least, the public practice, is in favor of supplying government by duties on importations. We shall not now contest the correctness of this opinion or practice. It is sufficient to our present purpose to show that the protection of manufactures, which insures a home market to our farmers has not affected the amount of that revenue, or enhanced the price of articles on which it acts.
We have demonstrated, and in a manner that cannot be disputed, that the price of protected commodities has universally declined, and that those most highly-protected have declined at the greatest rate There is no wonder in this—it is the natural result of competition—no matter whether among ourselves, or of the working people of the United States against those of Great Britain. Take the strong case of fire-brick, not affected by any newly discovered machinery, but only by the application of American labor, to bring into value what had been valueless—American earths. While England had the monopoly, the price of each brick was seven cents; but when the persevering Messrs. Berry, of Baltimore, under the encouragement of the "Maryland Institute," offered a quite equal if not superior article at three cents, the English makers were content to receive the same price for theirs. Generous men!—but such is the inevitable effect of a brisk and well-managed competition, and in all things. Monopolies cannot long exist among ourselves. The Messrs. Berry already have successful rivals in the meritorious manufacture in Baltimore.—This is unavoidable necessity, or what the ancients called "Fate"—and is applicable to every domestic manufacture.
The list of taxed articles that lately was published, and there are to many of its clans: such as bonnet wire, 'brace or gallows' chafing dishes'—'cologne waters,' 'currants for mince pies,' dolls for children,' 'haversacks,' mittens.' 'otto of roses'—'pack thread,' twice mentioned—'tooth powder,' 'spermaceti candles,' 'sweet meats,' 'frier pot down—'toys' 'tubs,' 'traps for rats and mice,' 'vinegar,' wafers,' 'walking sticks,' 'tooth brushes' and 'wigs,' and hundreds of other contemptible things—a mere bugaboo to frighten the vulgar, and disgraceful. Why were not horn spoons, tooth picks, tweezers, nail brushes, corn-cutters, whisker patterns, shoe strings—gilt sand, lime, and cord wood? Nay, the very granite rock on which, the Baltimore and Ohio road is laid, would be taxed—if only if imported, according to the honorable statement before us.
* Much the largest amount that we ever had as—ported, in one year. The average of 1819 to 1822, inclusive, was less than 10 millions of pounds a year.
+ But in the last year we exported 25 millions of pounds of cotton, valued at $26,875,000. Have the demand and value been reduced by the tariff?
It is difficult to resolve what is meant by the "oppressions of the south," and what it has to complain of, because of the progress of manufactures.
A duty of nearly ten millions is levied in England on so much of our tobacco as costs about one million.
The more we reflect with which the planters of Virginia emit to this has since excited our co—rlnde
Cure unless too insignificant to excite attention.

We shall show in a note below that protecting tariff, never had but little, if any, effect on the revenue as derived from the customs (unless to increase its amount) though the ruin of that revenue was mournfully predicted. Those who made such predictions knew not even themselves—much less were they acquainted with the laws which regulate society.

Desire always presses upon means. The man who earns one dollar a day, generally saves as much money at the end of the year, as another who earns a dollar and a half—for the reason that the latter indulges himself in what he calls comforts, while the other is bound down to the purchase of necessaries, only. These things are within every man's experience.—We ask our readers to look round among their neighbors, and see if these are not so. And, strange as it may appear, a manufacturing village of 500 persons, though the greater part are children, consume more duty-paying articles than an agricultural population (of the same class) of 2000 persons.

The regular receipt of money by the former, enables, or tempts, them to gratify themselves in 'comforts.'—Such is human nature, and we shall not find fault with it. There are more silk gowns and yards of ribband, at a factory using five hundred bales of cotton a year, than among the persons engaged in growing 10,000—and much more tea, coffee and sugar is used.—Cyrus, after his overthrow of the Babylonian empire, was told how great a sum he might have possessed, had he retained, instead of distributed, the fruits of his victories among his friends and followers. To shew the folly of such a calculation, he gave it out that he needed a larger sum of money—and it was immediately tendered to him by those to whom he had given the means of advancing it. So with us—if labor be rendered profitable, there is no fear of a lack of revenue. The product of the excise on beer, is a sure indication of the condition of the laboring classes in England. We refer to England because the 'free trade philosophers' make all their comparisons with a country in which the poor's rates, alone, are larger in amount than the whole of our revenue, reducing the public debt at the rate of 10 millions a year!—whose church rates, (collected at the point of the sword,) would pay off all our national debt in about a year and a half!

Advance duties are, or are not, taxes, 'according to circumstances.' Now, if a person is compelled to use 20 lbs. of tea per annum, an increased duty would be a tax; but if at liberty to refuse the use of it, a diminished consumption might reduce the tax he had paid. We do not grow any tea. But there is a tax of 15 per cent. or… 15 dollars on every hundred of the cost, as Mr. Raguet has it, on wheat and Indian corn—acorns and hickory nuts—but the price of these is not affected by the 'tax' on them.

It is then manifest, that the farmers pay less money for the articles needed by them, because of the manufacture at home, than they did before such manufacture was established. We defy the shewing of a single case to the contrary, even in 'cradles' or 'artificial flowers!' But this is not all.—The divided labor of the people gives to the land holders larger and more safe markets for their various commodities in grain and other vegetables, meats, drinks, fuel, timber, lumber, and all other products and profits, in one year, than all the world has given since the revolution: excepting the cultivators of cotton, &c. whose product, for great export, is of small comparative value, with the requisitions of the home market. This may appear an extravagant expression to those who have not reflected on the subject—but the points that we have previously made and sustained, are to us 'confirmation strong as proofs of holy writ.' that this assertion is much within the range of holy truth.'

We add a table of the receipts, according to the nett amounts given by Seybert until 1815, and since derived from the documents.

The average from 1791 to 1810 was more than $10,000,000
1810 to 1812 (or the war) 12,000,000
In 1816 and 1817, because of the charmed attack on foreign goods of all sorts during the war, the average was $31,317,000
1818 17,000,000
1819 20,000,000
1820 15,000,000
1821 13,000,000
1822 17,300,000
1823 19,000,000
1824 17,000,000
1825 18,000,000
1826 19,000,000
1827 149 (about)
1828 estimated

These figures simply shew that the various tariffs have had no necessary effect on the revenue, unless probably to increase it. In 1820, and '21 and '22, the productive labor of our country was at its lowest ebb, and the revenue, in three years, was only 45,500,000—or the same sum as in the five years of 1828 and '29.

The great benefit to the farmers from the division of labor, has been conclusively demonstrated—but what must become of at least two millions of free persons, who are subsisted by domestic manufactures and internal improvements—these being abandoned? This is, indeed, a solemn question. Are the tanners, curriers, boot and shoe makers, saddlers, and all the rest of the mechanics, to be cast out of employment—all the workers in iron, lead, copper—in wool and cotton, flax and hemp, to be driven from their homes, to seek new means of livelihood, and simply because these freemen 'increase and multiply' faster than some of the southern holders of slaves wish that they should do? Here is the foundation of the opposition to the protecting tariff: It is not worth while to mince the matter. As we stand before God, we believe that the more rapid increase of citizens in the north, middle and west, is the leading cause of the furious opposition to the tariff that is now going on, though unknown to the multitude of our opponents, for the accursed thing may not be openly proclaimed. We believe it is the ground on which the leading politicians of S. Carolina have placed themselves. Let the laboring people think of it—and when working men toil for their children, let them reflect upon the desolation which these persons would cause, to hold political power—'rather to rule in hell than serve in heaven.'