Communication of Wm. Harper and Thomas R. Dew

4 [ Doc. No. S2. ] manufactures for us? It is thus certain that if all the cotton goods consumed in the United States had been made of American cotton, the market for cotton goods would, most undoubtedly, have been lessened by the establishment of domestic manufactures. Cotton goods, cheap as they now are, would have been cheaper still if furnished us from abroad, and, consequently, a larger quantity would have been consumed, making the market for the raw material more extensive than now. So far as cotton fabrics can be manufactured and sold more cheaply in the United States, independently of protecting duties, we do not deny that those manufactures afford an additional and better market for the cotton. But it is of the effect of the protecting system that we now inquire. If all the cotton manufactured in the United States coul 1 be manufactured more cheaply abroad, and sold more cheaply here, after paying the costs of transportation and duties for revenue, then it is certain that the market for cotton is injured in consequence of forcing manufactures by means of protecting duties. Certainly all persons whose incomes are independent of manufactures and protecting duties, would be able, in consequence of obtaining them more cheaply, to purchase a greater quantity of cotton fabrics than they now can. If there be a class of persons in the manufacturing districts, or connected with manufactures, who are enabled to purchase cotton fabrics which they would not otherwise be able to purchase, there would be a precisely similar class of persons connected with the European manufacturer® which our increased demand would call into existence. Though the aggregate of cotton fabrics consumed in the United States should be diminished by a reduction of duty, the consumption of American cotton would be increased. Certainly there would be an increased demand for American cotton proportioned to the increased American demand for foreign manufactures. A e speak not now of the policy or patriotism of affording employment, and the means of consuming, to foreign labor, rather than to American. The inquiry is as to the market for American cotton, and it seems to us that the protecting system affords no new or additional market, but only substitutes a more limited and inferior, for a more extensive and better one. If the amount of imports subject to duty should, within a few years, increase to eighty millions, as may very reasonably be expected, then an average duty of twenty per cent, ad valorem, as suggested by the memorial, would produce a revenue of sixteen millions, which, added to the incidental revenue from other sources, would make an income of at least nineteen millions. If imports should increase to one hundred millions, there would be a revenue of at least twenty-three millions. So great a surplus of revenue would seem to be attended with the most serious and alarming evils. Should the Government undertake to expend so large a sum, then what a scramble will we witness among the several sections of our community for their respective portions! What scenes of confusion, intrigue, and dishonesty, will we every year witness at the seat of Government! What total annihilation of State power and influence, and what entire dependence on the General Government! And can we expect, from a Government constituted like ours, a fair and equal disbursement of the revenue? Certainly not. The great principles of human nature must be entirely eradicated, and the character of man undergo a total change, before we can calculate on a result so completely at war with fact and experience. If large surplus revenues must be spent, let the States raise and disburse them; for their governments understand local interests infinitely better than

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM4ODY=