Page images
PDF
EPUB

H. OF R.]

The Tariff Bill.

[APRIL, 1824.

foreign countries. Government should not, by | volved in war, we had a large portion of the legislation, divert capital from other branches into ship-building and navigation. Whenever it shall be for the interest of individuals to employ it in this manner, it will be so employed; and then, and not till then, will it be the interest of the nation.

carrying trade of the world. The general pacification terminated this profitable branch of commerce, and left our navigating interests dependent upon its own resources, and those of the country. It will be found, however, upon examination, that, notwithstanding the disadvan tages against which it had to contend, the Government and the people of the United States sustained it in this crisis. It has always been the favorite of our legislation.

The true answer to all the suggestions of this nature, which might have been urged against our discriminating duties, and have been used against the present bill, is, that a wise nation, like a wise individual, should be willing to suffer a trifling temporary inconvenience in the beginning, that it may attain a great permanent good in the end. Should you plant and nourish those domestic manufactures only, which are congenial to your country, and of which you possess the raw material in abundance; if, in their infancy, you shield them, by protecting duties, against destruction from foreign competition and foreign capital; although, for a short time, the price may be enhanced to the consumer, yet, before long, it will be reduced belownage which paid duties. It will at once be perthat of the foreign article. Our experience with respect to coarse cotton goods completely justifies this remark.

But, upon the present occasion, we should be governed by higher considerations than these. I would vote for this bill upon the same principle that I would for the erection of a necessary fortification or the building of a navy. Are not the woollen and the cotton manufactures necessary to our independence? Is a nation perfectly independent, without clothing for its people, without iron, and without hemp? Is it either patriotic or wise to rely for the means of defence upon foreign nations, when we possess them in abundance within ourselves?

In the days of peace, whilst those nations are all desirous of pouring their manufactures upon us, and of exhausting our wealth for their aggrandizement, we shall experience no difficulty in obtaining supplies. But, let the clouds of war lower over our heads, let the nation be deprived of its foreign supplies, and cast upon its own energies for its defence, and what will then be our condition? The events of the late war, within the recollection of every gentleman on this floor, afford the best answer to this question. If there ever was a nation which should have been taught wisdom on this subject, by the lessons of experience, it is our own.

But, Mr. Speaker, I have been wandering from that portion of the subject to which I promised I would confine myself, into the general principles of the bill. The best apology which I can make for this digression is to return to it immediately.

The American tonnage, employed in foreign trade, which entered the ports of the United States, during the year ending the last day of September, 1823, was 775,271 tons. This is greater than it has been in any year ending on the last day of December, since 1811, except the years 1816, 1817, 1819, and 1820. It is nearly 5,000 tons less than in 1817; but it is above 20,000 tons more than in 1818, and upwards of 5,000 tons more than in 1821. The House will understand that I am now speaking of the ton

ceived, that this is greater than our actual foreign tonnage, inasmuch as the same vessel may, and often does, pay duty more than once in a year. If, however, we look at the actual registered tonnage of the United States, engaged in foreign trade, the prospect is equally cheering. It has been gradually increasing for several years. I hold a statement of it in my hand, from 1816 up till 1822, both inclusive; from which it appears that, in 1822, it amounted to 628,150 tons. In 1818, it had been 606,088. Between these two periods, its increase was 22,062 tons. Although, from this statement, it appears that, in 1816, it was 800,759 tons, in 1817, 809,724 tons, and that, in 1818, it was suddenly reduced to 606,088 tons, yet this is not a true state of the case. The Register of the Treasury has certified that this sudden decrease arose "principally from the registered tonnage having been corrected in 1818, by striking off all the vessels, the registers of which were granted prior to the year 1815, and which were supposed by the collectors to have been lost at sea, captured," &c.

Whilst the present state of our foreign tonnage presents nothing calculated to produce despondence, the condition of that employed in our coasting trade is flourishing beyond example. It has been increasing gradually and rapidly ever since the adoption of the Federal Constitution. In 1816 it amounted to 522,164 tons. In 1822 it was 624,188 tons. Thus, it appears that, in the short space of six years, it increased more than 100,000 tons. The same quantity of tonnage, in this trade, affords employment to a much greater number of sailors than in the foreign trade; and the actual tonnage engaged in each is now about equal.

I admit, said Mr. B., that the navigating interest, in common with the other great interests of the country, suffered considerable depression in consequence of the general peace in Europe. This branch of our commerce must grow with I deny, however, that this depression was at all our growth, and strengthen with our strength. in proportion with that experienced either by Human foresight cannot calculate its future exagriculture or manufactures. During the long tent or advantages, should it be directed by a period in which the nations of Europe were in-wise system of policy. The territory of this

APRIL, 1824.]

The Tariff Bill.

[H. or P

nation is so vast, and its capacities for the pro- | were carried to the West Indies in an English duction and manufacture of almost every article or an American vessel. In either case, they of necessity or luxury are so extensive, that could be exchanged for the same quantity of rum, nearly all our mutual wants will, at no very sugar, or molasses. It was the navigating interdistant day, be supplied by a free and unre- est alone, which was directly injured by this stricted commerce with each other. Besides, regulation. No other class of society had any this trade will be a powerful means of perpetu- concern in the question, except that general one, ating our Union. Providence, by rendering the which every good citizen ought to feel in prodifferent portions of our country dependent upon tecting the useful establishments of his country. each other, has laid the foundations of that in- Our navigating interest petitioned Congress for tercourse which will bind us together by the relief. What was the consequence? For their adamantine bonds of mutual interest and affec- benefit, we conceived the bold design of comtion. pelling Great Britain to abandon her colonial system, and to break those fetters in which she had for ages bound this portion of her trade. On the 18th April, 1818, the Congress of the United States passed a law, declaring that "the ports of the United States shall be and remain

Sir, said Mr. B., it must strike every person with astonishment, who examines this subject, that our foreign tonnage has not been greatly diminished since the general pacification of Europe. How has this interest been able to support itself at its present amount, notwith-closed against every vessel owned wholly or in standing the loss of the foreign carrying trade? I answer, by the aid of Governmental protection; and, although this allegation may be at variance with that of the gentleman from Massachusetts, (Mr. WEBSTER,) I had myself bound to prove it.

In the year 1815 the United States, believing her marine to have acquired sufficient strength and vigor to sustain a competition upon equal terms against the world, proposed to all nations a fair reciprocity of trade. By the act of the 3d of March of that year, we declared that we would admit into our ports the vessels of every nation, carrying articles the produce or manufacture of such nation, without levying any other tonnage or impost duty than was levied on American vessels; provided such nation would admit into their ports American vessels, laden with American produce or manufactures, without imposing any impost or tonnage duty beyond that which was paid by their own vessels. On the 3d July, 1815, the United States concluded a commercial convention with Great Britain, founded upon these principles, so far as respected our trade with her territories in Europe; but her possessions in the West Indies, and on the continent of North America, were expressly excluded from its operation.

The British Government, after the general peace in Europe, determined to adhere rigidly to their colonial system, so far as their own navigation was concerned. Although they were willing that there should be a direct trade between the United States and their West Indian and North American colonies, yet they insisted that it should be carried on by their own vessels. The ports of these colonies were therefore closed against American vessels, and they were entirely excluded from any participation in the trade.

part by a subject or subjects of His Britannic Majesty, coming or arriving from any port or place in a colony or territory of His Britannic Majesty, that is or shall be, by the ordinary laws of navigation and trade, closed against vessels owned by citizens of the United States." The provisions of this act were considerably extended by those of the supplementary act of the 15th May, 1820.

What, then, were the weapons with which we commenced this great undertaking? For its accomplishment, we depended altogether upon the patience and patriotism of our people. The contest was, whether our citizens interested in the trade with the British colonies, or those colonies, could the longest, and with the most fortitude, endure its destruction. How much those citizens suffered, for the benefit of the navigation of the country, will appear from the very able memorial from Norfolk, which was presented during the first session of the last Congress. The memorialists urged the repeal of these acts. They stated their conviction, that the attempt to compel Great Britain to abandon her colonial system was altogether hopeless; as she had "often and openly avowed her determination not to abandon it but with her existence." They declared that, under the operation of the existing laws, their farmers, their merchants, their dealers in timber and lumber, in fact all classes of their citizens were deprived, in a great measure, of their former resources, and were, many of them, burdened with debts which they were unable to pay. This picture, drawn by the inhabitants of Norfolk, of their sufferings for the benefit of our navigation, is applicable to every other part of the Union interested in the trade with the British West Indies.

The spirit of the country, however, nobly sustained its navigation in this contest. The great agricultural interest stood unmoved. They were willing to suffer for the benefit of the ship-owners. Congress refused to repeal these acts.

What portion of our citizens was injured by the exclusion of American tonnage from these ports? It was not the farmer, who had corn and flour, nor the planter, who had tobacco, nor the merchant, who had lumber, to be transported to market. To them it was a mat- Our bold policy finally triumphed, and, on the ter of no importance, whether these articles | 24th June, 1822, an act of the British Parlia

H. OF R.]

The Tariff Bill.

[APRIL, 1824.

ment repealed their colonial system in favor of | sacrificed to promote the interests of our navithe United States, and opened their ports in gation. The House will readily perceive to the West Indies and North America to vessels what degree that portion of the citizens of the belonging to our citizens. And yet, notwith- United States, who had commodities to be carried standing, the navigating interest complain that to market in France, must have suffered under they have been left unprotected by the Govern- the operation of this system. They, however, ment to struggle against the world. suffered without murmuring; because they knew that their misfortunes were intended to benefit that class of their fellow-citizens concerned in navigation.

Here, said Mr. B., I will take leave to remark, that I was astonished to hear it alleged by the gentleman from Massachusetts, (Mr. WEBSTER,) that this concession, made by the British Government in favor of our navigation, was an evidence that they were departing from their restrictive system. No, sir; if it proves any thing, it is the efficiency of this system. This concession was extorted from them by the adoption of our countervailing restrictions, and is strong testimony in favor of the power of that policy, when properly exercised, to obtain justice from foreign nations. However much English statesmen may talk about the new doctrine of the freedom of trade, they take care to act, in every case of importance, upon their old principles. It is, therefore, not improbable, that the scraps of speeches made by my Lord Liverpool, and others, which the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. WEBSTER) has collected and read to this House, have found their way to the very market for which they were intended. Should this bill be defeated at the present session, as I trust it will not, I have no doubt but that we shall have a fresh supply of the same articles imported before the next session of Congress. In Great Britain they dread nothing more than the adoption by our country of that system, which the Speaker has aptly styled the American policy. Rest assured, sir, they will leave no means untried to defeat it.

I will mention one other example to show with what care, and at what expense to the other interests of the country, this Government has fostered, and I admit wisely, its navigation. France, immediately after she had extricated | herself from the long wars in which she had been involved, devoted herself to the cultivation of the arts of peace. Among other things, she immediately directed her attention towards her marine. She was anxious to obtain the exclusive privilege of carrying those of our productions which she used in her manufactures. For this purpose she established discriminating duties in favor of cotton, tobacco, and potashes, imported in her own vessels, which are equivalent to a tonnage duty of from $18 to $21 per

ton.

The navigating interest of the United States took the alarm, and memorialized Congress upon the subject. To that interest Congress never lent a deaf ear. On the 15th of May, 1820, an act passed, which imposed a countervailing duty of $18 per ton, upon all French vessels entering the ports of the United States. The consequence of this measure was the suspension, in a great degree, of the direct trade between this country and France. That profitable branch of our commerce was at once

Our countervailing duties on French tonnage produced the desired effect. On the 24th June, 1822, the very day on which the British Parliament opened their colonial ports to our vessels, the convention with France was concluded, which placed our carrying trade with that country upon a fair and reciprocal basis.

From this brief history, we have learned that the patience and patriotism of the people of this country have obtained for their foreign navigation a signal triumph over both England and France; and have opened new and profitable avenues for its enterprise. And yet the Repre sentatives of that interest upon this floor, complain loudly that it has been left unprotected. They make this complaint in the face of a system of legislation in its favor, which is unparalleled in the annals of the country in regard to any other object. The Government watched over its infancy with parental care, and afforded it protection against foreign rivals, whilst such protection was necessary. When it had attained sufficient vigor to fear no rival-when a fair competition with all nations was that which it most desired, the Government obtained for it this important advantage. Now, when it is in a prosperous situation, having got every thing which it asked, it is the first to cry out against affording a comparatively trifling protection to other branches of American industry. Is this gratitude? Is it even-handed justice? Is it doing unto others as you would they should do unto you?

I shall now proceed to prove, that the navigation of the country is perfectly able to bear the additional duty upon hemp and iron proposed in the bill, as reported by the Committee on Manufactures. In order to establish this position, it will not be necessary to add much to what I have already said. For the sake of the argument, I shall suppose, with the gentleman from Massachusetts, (Mr. WEBSTER,) that the small additional duties upon these articles will be permanent additional burdens to that amount imposed upon our navigation. Even under this view of the subject, that interest is able to bear them; and considering what has been done for it by the country, ought to bear them for the common good, without a murmur.

The House, I feel certain, will understand, I do not admit that these additional duties will continue to be additional burdens upon the navigating interest. On the contrary, I firmly believe that the domestic competition which must necessarily spring up under this protec

[blocks in formation]

tion, will, in a few years, reduce the price both of hemp and of iron.

[H. OF R.

of copper bolts, 4 tons cordage, and 20 bolts of duck to the 100 tons."

In answer to another question, the same Society state, that "foreign vessels would not have a preference, in our ports, over American built vessels, unless at a reduction in freight of 25 per cent., or advantages equivalent, at the port of destination."

These additional duties cannot injure the tonnage employed in our coasting trade. This portion of our navigation, which, in 1822, was nearly equal to that engaged in foreign trade, and which must increase rapidly, has no competition to dread. It enjoys a monopoly. It will, therefore, sustain no loss in consequence of the additional duties, because, in proportion as you enhance the price of the vessel, you will increase the freight. The case might be different, if foreign competition were not altogether excluded. Would it not, then, be just, that this portion of our tonnage should be compelled to use the hemp and iron of our own production, even at an advanced price? We have estab-navigation? Is it possible we can, in the slightlished a prohibitory system in its favor-should not, then, the same rule be adopted in favor of our farmers and manufacturers, at least so far as respects the hemp and iron necessary in the construction and repair of the vessels which it employs? The bill before the House, however, instead of proceeding thus far, only imposes a small additional duty upon these articles, and yet it has been denounced, as though it would prostrate the navigation of the country.

I admit, said Mr. B., that our foreign tonnage must enter into competition with the world, and, therefore, it stands upon a different basis from that employed in our coasting trade. Under these circumstances, can it endure the proposed additional duties? I answer boldly in the affirmative. The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. WEBSTER) has stated, that all the materials of ship-building, except the timber, are cheaper in England than in this country.

Thus, it appears that the additional duty of $7 50 per ton, proposed upon iron by the bill, as reported, on a ship of 300 tons burden, would amount only to $90, and that upon hemp would be equal to about $200. How, then, sir, can this additional duty of $290 upon a ship of 300 tons, seriously injure, much less destroy, our est degree, be alarmed by such a clamor, when we consider that a vessel of this description now costs, in England, our great rival in navigation, $6,000 more than it does in our country?

It has been urged, by the gentleman from Massachusetts, (Mr. WEBSTER,) against the proposed additional duties on hemp and iron, that if a sufficient quantity of these articles to supply the domestic demand, were produced in this country, that our navigating interest would lose their freight from Russia and Sweden. Sir, said Mr. B., has it come to this? Shall we be compelled to purchase articles in foreign countries for no other reason but to increase the employment for our navigation? Are all the other interests of the country to be sacrificed, that the welfare of this one may be promoted? I trust not. It appears to me that the bare statement of this argument is its best refutation. We are asked to buy hemp and iron from foreigners-we are called upon to transport our wealth to distant countries to pay for these Not that we articles and for what reason? cannot produce them in abundance for ourselves; not that we need them; but simply be

This may be, and no doubt is the case. But is not timber the chief, and by far the most expensive material in the construction of a ship? In England they are compelled to purchase this article in foreign countries, and to pay the heavy expense of its transportation; whilst we cause the favored class of our citizens concernpossess it in abundance at home. The conseed in navigation want to enjoy the advantages quence is, that a ship of the same tonnage may resulting from their carriage. You must, sir, be built much cheaper in this country than in purchase the merchandise, that they may reEngland. We have the testimony of the Mer-ceive the freight. I am glad the gentleman has cantile Society of New York to this effect. The Committee of Manufactures, before they reported their bill to this House in January, 1821, addressed certain questions to the Society, two of which, with their answers, I will take leave to read to the House:

[blocks in formation]

come out boldly and avowed this position.

After what I have already said, it will be necessary I should add a few words only, concerning the Navy; because it is manifest that it cannot be injured by the additional duties upon hemp and iron, if I have taken a correct view of their operation upon our ship-building and our navigation. I feel myself constrained, however, to make one or two observations on this subject.

I am a sincere friend to the Navy. One of the earliest political maxims impressed upon my mind was, that it would be our most safe and natural bulwark against foreign invasion. This opinion has been confirmed by the victories which it achieved during the late war-victories which have equally covered both itself and the nation with glory. I would, therefore,

H. OF R.]

The Tariff Bill-Frying Pans.

[APRIL, 1824.

warn its true friends to have a care how they | instant; and the same being modified, was
introduce it into every debate upon the subject agreed to, as follows:
of this tariff. Like all the other institutions
of this country, it must depend, for its support,
upon public opinion. Withdraw that from it,
and it must and will sink. Are those gentle-
men, then, its genuine friends who wield it as
the chief weapon of opposition against the
present bill?

Resolved, That the President of the United States be requested to cause to be submitted to this House a statement of the several purchases of real estate in behalf of the United States, within the territorial limits of any State, since the 4th day of July, 1776, for public purposes, in pursuance of any act of Congress, or by any department or officer of the General Government, denoting in each case the particular authority under which each purchase was made; its date, and the end or use for which it was and the person or persons by whom and to whom effected; the nature of the estate thereby acquired; such estate was conveyed; together with the fact whether such purchase was or was not accompanied with the express consent of the State of whose territory such real estate constituted a part; and in the former case whether any, and if any, what special jurisdiction accompanied the cession or conveyance.

The Tarif Bill.

The unfinished business of yesterday, being the further consideration of the amendments agreed to in Committee of the Whole, to the bill "to amend the several acts for imposing duties on imports," was again taken up.

If, whenever any measure calculated to promote the domestic industry of the country, and to benefit its landed interest, shall be introduced into Congress, the cry is resounded, that it cannot be adopted, because thereby you may injure the Navy; the people will at last begin to believe that there is something incompatible between their prosperity and its existence. If they shall at any time be impressed with this conviction, which I trust in God they never may, but to which the course of argument that has been pursued by the enemies of this bill directly leads, its swift destruction will be the inevitable consequence. The people will not continue to sustain an institution which they have been taught to believe stands as a perpetual barrier against the adoption of any system, calculated to encourage the agriculture and manufactures of the country, and for the promotion The question being put on concurring in the of whose glory their own welfare must be the insertion of the following clause: "On all other sacrifice. The Navy has nothing to fear except fire arms, and on side arms, 30 per cent. ad valofrom such friends and from itself. Recent rem." Mr. RANDOLPH said he could not conevents have alarmed its true friends with seri-sent that the people should be taxed, even if it ous apprehensions that it has become intoxicated with prosperity, and has been relaxing in discipline. If, at this moment, when such impressions are abroad throughout the land, it shall be made the instrument by which this bill shall be defeated, and you should pass the one now on your table creating a magnificent establishment of vice admirals and rear admirals, the consequence may be justly dreaded. Should these measures not shake its standing in the opinion of the people, I confess for one I shall be disappointed. Thanking the House for their attention, I shall not trouble them longer upon the subject, having already said much more than I intended when I rose.

When Mr. BUCHANAN had taken his seatMr. STEWART, of Pennsylvania, rose, and spoke at large in favor of the bill, and in reply to Messrs. WEBSTER, MCDUFFIE, and HAMILTON; and when he concluded, the question was taken by yeas and nays, at a quarter before four o'clock, when the House agreed to the reduction -yeas 120, nays 85.

A motion to adjourn was then made, and carried-ayes 102, noes 90.

So the House adjourned.

SATURDAY, April 10.

United States Purchases of Land for Federal
Purposes within the States.

The House proceeded to consider the resolution submitted by Mr. WARFIELD on the 6th

were but a penny or two a pound upon tea,
without knowing who taxed them; he, there-
fore, called for the yeas and nays upon the
question. The yeas and nays were accordingly
taken-yeas 123, nays 59.

So the amendment was concurred in.

Several other amendments, to reduce the proposed duty on scythes, to strike out the duty on fowling-pieces, drawing-knives, &c., were agreed to.

Frying Pans.

On the amendment which proposes to strike
out the duty of 25 cents each on frying pans,
and insert four cents per pound, as the duty,
Mr. RANDOLPH said this also was a tax on the

people, and he must call for the yeas and nays
upon it. A short discussion took place upon
the propriety of this amendment, between Messrs.
MCDUFFIE, TOD, CAMBRELENG, and SHARPE.
The question was then taken, and decided by
yeas 168, nays 25.

So this amendment, also, was concurred in.

The several amendments, proposing to strike out the duty on griddles and gridirons, on indigo, and on Prussian blue, and to increase the duty on Epsom salts from three to four cents per lb., and to insert a duty on rape seed oil, were severally agreed to.

The question being put on concurring in the insertion of the clause, "On molasses ten cents per gallon," was decided by yeas 65, nays 132. So this amendment was rejected.

[ocr errors]
« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »