Norwalk Gazette, Tuesday, May 4, 1824 · page 4

 

r_..r

MR. CLAY’S SPEECH
In support of an idmericcn systent for the
V protection of flmerican Inditslry ; defivcred
' in the House of Representatives on the 30th,
and Stat of March, 1894.
The gentleman fromVirginia(Mr.Barboitr)
has embraced the occasion produced by the
proposition of the gentleman from Tennessee,
to strike out the minimum price, in the bill,
on cotton fabrics, to express his sentiments at
large on the policy of the pending measure :
and it is scarcely necessary for me to say,that
he has evinced his usual good temper, ability,
and decorum. The parts of the bill are so
intermingled and interwoven together, that
there can be no doubt ofthe fitness ofthis oc-
casion to exhibit its merits or its defects. It
is my intention, _with the permission of the
committee, to avail myselfalso ofthis oppor-
tunity, to present to its consideration those
general views, as they appear to me, pf the
true policy ofthis country, which imperiously
demand the passage of this bill. I am deeply
sensible, Mr. Chairman, of the high responsi-
bility of my present situation. But that res-
ponsibility inspires me with no other appre-
hension than tbatI shall be unable to fulfil
my duty ; with no other solicitiide than that_I
may, at least, in'soine small degree, contri-
little to recal my country from the pursuit ofa
fatal policy,wliich appears to me inevitably to
lead to its impoverishment and ruin. Ido
feel most awfully this responsibility ; and, ifit
were allowable for us, at the present day, to
imitate ancient examples, I would invoke the
aid of the Moss‘ HIGH. Iwonld anxiously
and fervently implore His divine assistance;
that He would be graciously pleased to show-
er on my country His richest blessings ; and
that He would sustain, on this interesting oc-
casion, the hitiiible individual who stands be-
fore Him, and lend him the power, moral and
physical, to perform the solemn duties which
now belong to his public station.

Two classes of politicians divide the people

ofthe U. States. According to the system of
one, the produce of foreign industry should be
subjected to no other impost than such as may
be necessary to provide a public revenue ; and
the produce of American industry should be
left to sustain itself, if it can, with no other
than that incidental protection, in its compe-
tition, at home as well as abroad, with rival.
foreign articles. According to the system of
the other class, whilst they agree that the im-
posts should be mainly, and may, under any
modification, be safely relied on as a fit and
convenient source of public revenue, they
would so adjust and arrange the duties on lor-
cign fabrics as to afford a gradual but adequate
protection to American industry, and lessen
our dependence on foreign nations, by secur-
ing a certain, and, ultimately, a.cheaper and
better supply of our own wants from our own
abundant resoui ccs. Both classes are equally
sincere in their respective opinions, equally
honest, equally patrioiic, and desirous of ad-
vancing the prosperity ofthe country. In the
discusrion and consideration ofthese opposite
opinions, for the purpose ofascertainiiig wlncli
has the support of truth and reason,wc should,
therefore, exercise every indulgence, and the
greatest spirit of mutual moderation and for-
bearance, And, in our deliberations on tlns
great question, we should look fearlessly and
truly at the actual condition of the country,
retrace the causes which have brought us into
it, and snatch, if possible, a view of the future.
VVe should, above all,consult expcrience—thc
experience ofotlier nations as well asour own,
as our truest and most unerring guide.

In casting our eyes around us, the most
prominent circumstance which fixes our atten-
tion, and challenges our deepest regret, is, the
general distress which pervades the whole
country. It is forced upon us by numerous
facts of the most incontestiblc cliaracter, It
is indicated by the diminished exports of na-
tive produce ; by the depressed and reduced
state of our foreign navigation ; by our dimin-
ished commerce ; by successive unthresbed
crops of grain, perishing in our barns and
barnyards for the want ofa market; by the a-
larming diminution of the circulating medi-
tim ; by the numerous bankruptcies, not limit-
ed to the trading classes, but extending to all
orders ofsociety ; by an universal complaintol
the want of employment, and aconsequeut
reduction ofthe wages of labor; by the rave-
nous purstiitafter public situations, not for the
sake of their honors, and the perfoi'nrzinpe of
their public duties, but as a means of private
subsistence ; by the reluctant resort to the per-
ilous use of paper money ; by the intervention
oflegislation in the delicate relation between
debtor and creditor; and, above all, by the
low and depressed state of the value of almost
every description of the whole mass Of the
property of the nation, which has,‘ on an ave-
rage, sunk not less than about fifty per cent.
within a few years. This distress pervades
every part of the Union, every class of socie-
ty. VVe have not, thank God, siitfered, in a-
ny great degree, for food. But distress, re-
sulting from the absence of a supply of the
more physical -wants of our nature, is not the
only, nor, perhaps, the keenest distress, to
which we may be exposed. Moral and pecun-
iary suffering is, if possible, more poignant.
It plunges its victim into hopeless despair. It
poisons, it paralyzes, the spring and source of
all useful exertion. Its unsparing action is
collateral as well as direct. It falls with ‘u-
exorable force, at the same time, upon he
wretched family of embarrassment and insol-
vency, and upon its head. W'hat is the cause
ofthis wide spreading distress, ofthis deep de-
pression,which we behold stamped on the pub-
lic countenance? ‘We are the same people.
We have the same country. We cannot ar-
raign the bounty of Providence. The show-
ers still fall in the same grateful abundance.
The sun still casts his genial and vivifying in-
fluence upon the land ; and the land, fertile

and diversified in its soils as ever, yields to
the industrious cultivator, in boundless profit-
.sion,its accustomed fruits, its richest treasures.
Our vigor is unimpaired. Our industry has
not rela-xed. Ifever the accusation of waste-
ful extravagance could he made against our
people, it cannot now be justly preferred.-
Tliey, on the contrary, for the few last years
at least, -have been practising the most rigid
economy. The causes, then, of our present
affliction, whatever they may be, are human
causes, and human causes not chargeable up-

.i..

on the people, in their private and individu-

al relations.

What, again I would ask, is the cause of
the unhappy condition of our country, tvltloll
I have family depicted E’ It is to be found. in
the fact that, during almost the whole exist-

industry, our navigation, and our commerce,
in reference to an extraordinary war in Eu-
rope, and to foreign markets, which no longer
exist; in the fact that we have depended too
much upon foreign sources of supply, and ex-
cited too little" the native; in the fact that,
whilst 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 consequence of the ter-
mination of the war of Europe, has been the
resumption of European commerce,European
navigation, and the extension of European
agriculture and European ' industry, in all its
branches. Europe, therefore, has no longer
occasion to any thing like the same extent as
that which she had during her wars, fbr A-
merican commerce, American navigation,the
produce of American industry. Europe in
commotion, and convulsed throughout all her
members, is to America no longer the same
Europe as she is now, tranquil, and watching
with the most vigilant attention all her own
peculiar interests, without regard to the ope-
ration of her policy upon us. The effect of
this altered state of Europe upon us, has been
to circumscribe the employment of our nia-
rine, and greatly to reduce the value of the
produce of our territorial labor. The further
effect ofthis twofold reduction has been to de-
crease the value of all property, whether on
the land or on the ocean, and whichl suppose
to be about fifty per cent. And the still fur-
ther effect has been to diminish the amount of
our circulating medium, in a proportion not
less byits transmission abroad,or its withdraw-
al by the banlting institutions, from a necessi-
ty which they could not control. The quan-
tity of money, in whatever form it may be,
which a nation wants, is in proportion to the
total mass ofits wealth, and to the activity of
that- wealth. A nation that has but little
wealth, has but a limited want ofmoney. In
stating the fact,therefore, that the total wealth
of the country has diiiiitiislied, within a few
years, in a ratio of about fifty per cent.we shall
at once fully comprehend the inevitable re-
duction, which must have ensued, in the total
quantity of the circulating medium of the
country. A nation is most prosperous when
there is a gradual and unteinptiiig addition to
the aggregate ofits circulating medium. It is
in a condition the most adverse, when there
is a rapid diminution in the quantity of the
circulating medium, and a consequent depres-
sion in the value ofproperty. In the former
case, the wealth of individuals insensibly iii-
creases, and income keeps ahead of expendi-
ture. But, in the latter instance, debts have
been contracted, engagements made, and liab-
its of expense established, in reference to the
existing state ofwealth and of its representa-
tive. \\'lien these came to be greatly reduc-
ed, individuals find their debts still existing,
their engagements unexecuted, and their hab-
its inveterate. They see themselves in the
possession of the same property, on which, in
good faith, they had botiiid themselves. But
that propei'ty,witliout their fault, possesses no
longer the same value ;aud hence,discontent,
impoverislnnent, and ruin arise. Let us stip-
pose, Mr. Chairman, that Europe was again
the theatre of sticli a general war as recently
raged throughout all her doininions—such a
state of the war as existed in her greatest ex-
ertions and in our greatest prosperity: instant-
ly there would arise a greedy demand for the
surplus produce of our industry, for our coin-
merce,foi' our navigation. The langour which
now prevails in our cities, and in our seaports,
would give way to an animated activity. Our
roads and rivers would be crowded with the
produce of the interior. Every where we
should witness excited industry. The pre-
cious metals would re-flow from abroad upon
us. Banks,wliich have maintained their cred-
it,would revive their business, and new banks
would be est:iblished,to take the place ofthose
which have sunk beneath thegeneriil pressure:
for, it is a mistake to suppose that they have
produced our present adversity ; they may
have somewhat aggravated it, but they were
the effect and the evidence of our prosperity.
Prices would again get up; the former value
ofproperty would be restored; and those em-
barrassed persons who have not been already
overwhelmed by the times, would suddenly
find, in the augmented value of their property,
and the renewal oftheir business, ample means
to extricate themselves from all their difficul-
ties. The greatest want of civilized society
is a market for the sale and exchange of the
surplus of the produce of the labor ofits mem-
bers. This market may exist at home or a-
broad, or both, but it tnust exist somewhere,
if society prospers ; and wherever it does ex-
ist, it should be competent to the absorption
ofthe entire surplus of production. It is most
desirable that there should be both ahome
and a foreign market. But, with respect to
their relative superiority, I cannot entertain a
doubt. The home market is first in order,
and paramount in importance. The object
of the bill under consideration, is to create
this home market, and to lay the foundations
ofa genuine American policy. It is opposed;
and it is incumbent upon the partisans ofthe
foreign policy (terms which Isliall use without
any iiividioiis intent) to demonstrate ‘that the
foreign market is an adequate vent for the sur-
plus produce of our labor. But is it so?
1. Foreign nations cannot, if they would,
take otir surplus produce. If the source of
supply, no matter ofwliat,inci'eases in agreat-
er ratio than the demand for that supply, a
glut of the market is inevitable, even if we
suppose both to reinaiu perfectly tuiobstructed.
The duplication ofour population takes place
in terms of about 35 years. Theterm will be
more and more extended as our numbers mul-
tiply. But it will be a sufficient approxima-
tion to assnine this ratio for the present. We
increase, therefore, in population, at the rate
ofabout fourper cent. per annum. Supposing
the increase of our production to be in the
same ratio, we should, every succeeding year,
have of surplus produce, four per cent. more
than that ofthe preceding year, without tak-
ing into the account the difference of seasons
which neutralize each other. If, therefore, we
are to rely upon the foreign market exclusive-
ly, foreign consumption ought to be shown to
be increasing in the same ratio of 4 per cent.
per aniiuin, ifit be an adequate vent for our
surplus produce. But, as Ihave supposed the
measure of our increasing prodnctioii to be
lurnislied bytliat ofour increasing population;
so the measure oftheir power of consumption
must be determined by that of the increase of
their population. Now the total foreign pop
ulation, who consume our surplus produce up-
on an average, do not double their aggregate
number in a shorter term than that of about

ence of this government, we have shaped on r

I00 years. Our powers of production increase
then in a ratio 4 times greater than their pow-
ers of consumption. And hence their utterin-
ability to receive from us our surplus produce.
But Qdly,‘ .lfthey could, they will not. The
policy of all Europe is adverse _to the recep-
tion of our agricultural produce, so far as it
comes into collision with its own ; and under
that limitation we are absolutely forbid to en-
ter their ports, except under circumstances
which deprive them of all value as a steady
market. The policy ofall Europe rejects those
great staples of our country, which consist of
objects of human subsistence. The policy of
all Europe refuses to receive from usanything
but those raw materials of smaller value, es-
sential to their manufactures, to which they
can givea higher value, with the exception of
tobacco and rice, whichlthey cannot produce.
Even Great Britain, to which we are the best
customers, and from which we receive nearly
one half in value of our whole imports, will
not take from us articles of subsistence produ-
ced in our country cheaper than can be produ-
ced in Great Britain. In adopting this exclu-
sive policy,the,states of Europe do not inquire
what is best for us, but what suits themselves
respectively‘; they do not takejurisdiction of
the question of our interests, but limit the ob-
ject oftlieir legislation to that ofthe conserva-
tion oftheir own peculiar interests, leaving us
free to prosecute ours as we please. They do
not guide themselves by that romantic philan-
throphy, which we see displayed here, and
which invokes us to continue to purchase the
produce of foreign industry, without regard to
the state or prosperity ofour own,that foreign-
ers may be pleased to purchase the few re-
maining articles of ours which their restricted
policy has not yet absolutely excluded from
their consumption. What. sort of a figure
would a tneinber of the British Parliaiiient
have made; what sort ofa reception would his
opposition have obtained, if he had reinon-
strated against the passage of the Corn Law,
by which British consumption is limited to the
bread-stuffs of British production, to the eti-
tire exclusion of American, and stated that
America could not, and would not buy Brit-
ish muniifactures, if Britain did not buy A-
merican flour ? ,
Both the inability and the policy of foreign
powers, tbeii, forbid us to rely upon the for-
eign market as being an adequate vent for
the surplus produce of American labor. Now
let us see ifthis general reasoning is not for-
tified and confirmed by the actual experience
of this country. If the foreign tnarket may
be safely relied upon, as furnisliing an ade-
quate demand for our surplus produce, then
the official documents will show a progressive
increase, from year to year, in the exports of
our native produce, in a proportion equal to
that which I have suggested. If, on the con-
trary, we shall find from them that for a long
term of past years some of our most valuable
staples have retrograded, some remained sta-
tionary, aiid others advanced but little, if any
in amount, with the exception ofcotton, the
deductions ofreason and lessons ofexperience
will alike command us to withdraw our confi-
dence in the competency of the foreign mar-
ket. The total amount of all our exports of
domestic produce for the year, begiuing in
1794, and ending on the 30th Sept. 1796, was
$40,764,097. Estimating the increase accor-
ding to the ratio of the increase of our popu-
lation, that is, at four per cent. per annuni,the
amount of the exports of the same produce in
the year ending on the 80th Sept. last ought
to have been 885,420,461. It was in fact on-
ly $47,155,403. Taking the average of five
years from 1803 to 1807, iiiclusive,thc amount
of native produce exported was $43,902,751
for each of those years. Estimating what it
ought to have been, during the last year, ap-
plying the principle suggested to that amount
there should have been exported $77,766,751
instead of 347,155,408. lftnese comparative
amounts of the aggregate actual exports and
what they ought to have been, be discourag-
ing, wc shall find, on descending into partic-
ulars, still less cause ofsatisfaction. The ex-
port of tobacco in 1791 was 112,428 hogs-
beads. That was the year of the largest ex-
portation ofthat article; but it is the only in-
stance in which I have selected the maximum
of exportation. The amount of what we ought
to have exported last year, estimated accord-
ing to the scale ofincrease which I have used,
is 266,432 hogsheads. The acttial export was
99,003 hogshcads, ‘Vt: exported in 1803 the
quantity of l,.°lll,85.“3 barrels of flour; and
ought to have exported last year 2,361,333
barrels. VVe, in fact, exported only 755,702
barrels. Of that quantity we sent to South
America 150,000 barrels,according to a state-
ment furnished me by the diligence of a friend
near me (Mr.Poinsett) to whose valuable mass
of accurate information, in regard to that in-
tercstiug quarter of the world, I have had oc-
casion frequently to apply. But that demand
is ten-iporary,growing otit of the existing state
of war. Whenever peace is restored to it,and
I now hope that the day is not distant when its
independence will be generally acknowledged,
there cannot be a doubt that it will supply its
own consumption. In all parts of it the soil,
either from climate or from elevation, is well
adapted to the culture of wheat ; and no where
can better wheat be produced than in some
portions of Mexico and Chili. Still the mar-
ket is one which, on other accounts, deserves
the greatest consideration.
\Ve exported in 1802, Indian corn to the a-
mount of 91,074,608 bushels. The quantity
should have been, in 1823, 3,734,288 bushels.
The actual quantity exported was 749,034
bushels, or about one fifth of what it should
have been, and a little more than one third of
what it was more than twenty years ago. We
ought not then to be surprized at the extreme
depression of the price of that article,of which
I have heard my honorable friend(Mr.Bassett)
complain, nor of the distress ofthe corn grow-
ing districts adjacent to Chesapeake Bay. W’e
exported 77,934 barrels of beef in 1803, and
last year but 61,418, instead of140,£11/L bar-
rels. In the same year, (1803,) we exported
96,609. barrels of pork, and last; year 55,529,
instead of 173,889. barrels. Rice has not ad-
vanced, by any means,in the proportion which
it ought to have done. All the small articles,
such as cheese, butter, candles,&r.c. too minute
to detail, but important in their aggregate,
have also materially ditninislied. Cotton a-
lone has advanced. But whilst the quantity
of it is augmented, its actual value is consid-
erably diminished. The total quantity last
year exceeded that of the preceding year by
near thirty millions of pounds. And yet the
total value of the year of smaller exportation,
exceeded that of the last year by upwards of
three and a half millions of dollars. If this

article, the capacity of our country to produce
which was scarcely kn_own in 1790, were sub-
tracted from the mass of our exports, the val-
no of the residue would only be a little up-
wards of $97,000,000, during the last year.-
Tbe, distribution of the articles of our exports
throughout the U.States, cannot fail to fix the
attention ofthe Committee. Ofthe 847,155,-
408, to which they amounted last year, three
articles alone, (cotton, rice, and tobacco,) coin-
posed together $28,549,177. Now these arti-
ticles are chiefly produced at the South. And
if we estimate that portion of our population
who are actually engaged in their culture, it
would probably not exceed two millions.—
Thus, then, less than one-fifth of the whole
population ofthe U. States produced upwards
of one half, nearly two thirds of the entire val-
ue ofthe exports of the last year.

Is this foreign market, so incompetent at
present, and which, limited as its demands are,
operates so unequally tipon the productive la-
bor ofour country,likely to improve in future?
IfI am correct in the views which I have pre-
sented to the connnittee, it must become worse
and worse. What can improve it? Europe
will not abandon her own agriculture to fos-
ter ours. We may even anticipate that she
will more and more enter into competition
with us in the supply ofthe West India mar-
ket.‘ That of South America, for articles of
subsistence, will probably soon vanish. The
value of our exports, for the future, may re-
main at about what it was last year. But, if
we do not create some new market; if we
persevere in the existing pursuits of agricul-
ture, the inevitable consequence must be, to
augment greatly the quantity of our produce,
and to lessen its value in the foreign market.
Can there be a doubt on this point? Take the
article of cotton, for example, which is almost
the only article that now remunerates labor
and capital. A certain description oflahor is
powerfully attracted towards the cotton grow-
ing country. The cultivation will be greatly
extended,the aggregate amount,annnally pro-
duced, will be vastly augmented. The price
will fall. The more unfavorable soils will
then be gradually abandoned. And I have no
doubt that, in a few years, it will cease to be
profitably produced, any where North ofthe
84th degree of latitude. But, in the mean
time, large numbers ofthe cotton growers will
suffer the greatest distress. And whilst this
distress is brought upon our own country,for-
eign industry will be stimulated by the very
cause which occasions our distress. For, by
surcharging the markets abroad, the price of
the raw material being reduced,the manufac-
turer will be able to supply cotton fabrics
cheaper, and the consumption in his own
country, and in foreign nations, other than
ours, (where the value ofthe import must be
limited to the value of the export, whichl
have supposed to remain the same,) being
proportionally extended, there will be conse-
quently an increased demand for the produce
of his industry.

Our agricultural is our greatest interest. It
ought ever to be predoininant. All others
should bend to it. And in considering what
is for its advantage, we should contemplate it
in all its varieties, of planting, farming, and
grazing. Can we do nothing to invigorate it;
nothing to correct the errors of the past, and
to brighten‘ the still more unproinising pros-
pects which lie before us? We have seen,that
an excltisive dependence upon the foreign mar-
ket must lead to still sevcrer distress,to impov-
erisliinent, to ruin. We must then change
somewhat our course. VVe must give a new
direction to S0l'Ile portion ofotir iudiistry. We
must speedily adopt a geutiine American pol-
icy. Still cherishiug the foreign market, let
us create also a home market, to give further
scope to the consumption of the produce of
American industry. Let us counteract the
policy of foreigners, and withdraw the support

-which we now give to their industry and stim-

ulatetliat ofour own country. It should be a
proinineut object with wise legislators, to mul-
iiply the vocations and extend the business of
society, as far as it can be done, by the pro-
tection of our interests at home, against the
injurious effects of foreign legislation. Sup-
pose we were a nation of lishermen,or ofskip-
pets, to the exclusion of every other occupa-
tion, and the legislature had the power to in-
irodnce the pursuits of agriculture and manu-
lactnies, would not our happiness be promo-
ted by an exertion of its authority? All the
existing employments ofsoc-iety—the learned
professions—cominerce--agriculture, are now
overflowing. \Ve stand in each otlier’s way.
Hence the eager pursuit after public stations,
wliichl have before glanced at. I have been
again and again shocked, during this session
by instances of solicitation for places, before
the vacancies existed. The pulse of incum-
bents, who happen to be taken ill,is not mark-
ed with more anxiety by the attending physi-
cians, than by those who desire to succeed
them,though with very opposite feelings. Our
old friend, the faithful sentinel,who has Stood

so long at our door,and the gallantry of whose

patriotism deserves to be noticed, because it
was displayed when that virtue was 111051 fare

and most wanted,on a memorable occasion in

this unfortunate city, became iiidisposed some

weeks ago. The firstintelligence which Iliad

of his dangerous illness,was by an application

for his unvacanted place. 1 liasteued to as-

sure myself of the extent of his danger, and

was happy to find that the eagerness ofsucces-
sion outstripped the progress of disease. By

creating a new and extensive business, then,
we should not only give employment to those
who want it, and augment the sum of national

wealth, by all that this new business would

create, but we should ineliorate the condition
ofthose who are now engaged in existing cin-
ployments. In Europe, particularly in Great
Britain, their large standing armies, large na-
vies, their established church, afford to their
population employments,which in tliatrespect,
the happier constitution of our govcriiinent

does not tolerate but in a limited degree. The,
peace establishments of our army and navy,
are extremely small, and I hope ever will be.

We have no established church, and I trust
never shall have. In proportion as the en-
terprise ofour citizens in public eniployments
is circuinscribed,should we excite and invig-
orate it in private pursuits.

The creation ofa home market is not only
necessary to procure for our agriculture ajust
reward of its labors, but it is indispensable to
obtain a supply of our necessary wants. If
we cannot sell, we cannot buy. That portion
ofour population (and we have seen that it is
not less than four-fifths,) which makes coin-
paratively nothing that foreigners will buy,
has nothing to make purchases with from for-

eigners. It is in vain that we are told of the_

amount of our exports, siipplieti by the plarit-_
ing interest. They may enable the planting
interest to supply all its wants: but they bring’
no ability to the interests not planting, unless.
which cannot be pretended, the planting in-
terest was an adequate vent for the surplus
produce of the labor of all other interests. It
is in vain to tantalize us witli the greater
cheapnessof foreign fabrics. There must be
an ability to purchase, ifan article he obtain-
ed, whatever may be the price‘, high or low,at
which it was sold. And a cheap article is as
much beyond the grasp of him who has no
means to buy, as a high one. Even ifit were
trite that the American manufactnrer.woul_d
supply consumption at dearer rates, itis better
to have his fabrics than the unattainable for-
eign fabrics; for it is better to be ill supplied
than not supplied at all. A coarse coat,which
will communicate warmth and cover naked-'
ness, is better than no coat. The superiority
of the home market results,lst. from its stead-
iness and comparative certainty atall times‘;
92d, from the creation of reciprocal interests ;
3d, from its greater securit ' ;aud, lastly, from‘
an ultimate and not distant augmentation of
consumption, and, consequently, of comfort;
from increased quantity and reduced prices.
But this home market, highly desirable as it is,
can only be created and cherished by thepro-
tcclion ofour own legislation against the ine-
vitable prostratioii ol' our industry,which must
ensue from the action offoreign policy and
legislation. The effect and the value of this
domestic care ofour own interests will be ob-
vious froni a few facts and considerations.-—-
Let us suppose that halfa million of persons
are now employed abroad in fabricating for
our consumption, those articles, of which by
the operation of this bill a supply is intended
to be provided within ourselves. That halfa
million of persons are, in effect, siibsisted by
us ; but their actual means of subsistence are
drawn from foreign agriculture. If we could
transport them to this country, and incorpor-
ate them in the mass of our own population,
there would instantly arise a demand for an
amount of provisions equal to that which
would be requisite for their subsistence thin’-
out the whole year. That demand, in the ar-
ticle of flour alone, would not be less than the
quantity of about 900,000 barrels, besides a.
proportionate quantity of beef, and pork, and
other articles of subsistence. But nine hun-
dred thousand barrels of flour exceeded the
entire quantity exported last year, by nearly
one hundred and fifty thousand barrels. Vlfhat
activity would not this give, what cheerfnlness
would it not communicate, to our now dispir-

ited farming interest ! But if, instead ofthese A

500,000 artisans emigrating from abroad, we
give by this bill employment to an equal num- '
ber of our own citizens now engaged in un-
profitable agriculture, or idle, from the want
of business, the beneficial effect upon the pro-
ductions of our farming labor would be near-
ly doubled. '

The great desideratiim in political economy -

is the same as in private pursuits ; that is,
What is the best application of aggregate in-
dustry ofa nation, that can be made honestly
to produce the largest sum of national wealth?
Labor is the source of all wealth ; but it is '
not natural labor only. In formertimes,when
but little coinparative use was made of nia-
cliinery, manual labor and the price of wages
were circumstances of the greatest considera-
tion. But it is far otherwise in these later
times. Such are the improvements in nia-
chinery, that, in analyzing the compound
value of many fabrics, the element of natural
labor is so inconsiderable as almost to escape
detection. Formerly, Asia, in consequence
ofthe density of her population, and the coii-
sequent lowness of wages, laid Europe under
tribute for many of her fabrics. Now Eu-
rope reacts upon Asia, by ineaiis of machine-
ry. Late estimates of the artificial labor of
England make it equal to the labor of two
hundred m'illions of able bodied men. The
population ofthe three kingdoms is'l1,500,000
——In the production of wealth she operates,
therefore, by a power of 221,500,000, or, by a
power 11 times greater than the total of her
natural power. If we suppose the machine
labour of the U. States to be equal to that of
l0,000,000 of able bodied men, the U. States
will operate, in the creation of wealth, by a
power (including all their population) ofonly
':20,000,000—-making a difference in favor of
England ofll to 1.
imaginary, will be, I think, evinced, by con-
trasting the wealth, the revenue, the power, of
the two countries. Upon what other hypoth-
esis can we explain those almost incredible
exertions which Britain made ditring tbelate
wars of Europe? Look at her immense sub-
sidies ? Behold her, standing iiuaidcd and a-
lone, breasting the storm of Napoleon’s colos-
sal power, when all continental Europe own- '
ed and yielded to its irresistible sway ; and,
finally, contemplate’her vigorous prosecution
ofthe war, with and without allies,to its splen-.
did termination, on the field of Waterloo !

[Mia Clay here went on to state that during
the war the revenue of G. Britain amounted
annually to £70 millions. In 1829. it was
eleven times greater than that ofthe U.States
for that year. The revenue of G. B. allows
her to constitute a Sinking fund greater than
the entire revenue ofthe U. S. Mi-.Clay also_
shewed that since 1789 the exports of G. B.
had been tripled. The amount of cotton fab-
rics cxported had increased within two years
more than 5 millions sterling. The amount_
of cotton wool imported into G. is five mil-
lions sterling: after supplying their own coun-
try they export cottoii fabrics to the amount
of2l,639,000, making a clear profit of up-
wards of 16,500,060 pounds sterling! I]

The amount of England’s wealth (coiitin-
ues Mr.C.) annually produced, is 850 million
sterling. The agricultural portion of it is
said by the gentleman from Virginia ‘to be _
greater than that created by any other branch
of her industry. Bttt that flows mainly from
a policy similar to that proposed by this bill.
One-third only of her population is engaged
in agriculture; the other two-tliirds furnish-
ing a market for the produce of that third.
Withdraw this market, and what becomes of,
her agriculture? (To be Continued.) '

On the passage of the Tariff bill on the
16 inst.wlieii the house had adjourned and the
speaker was stepping down from his seat, a
gentleman, who had voted with the majority, '
said to him-—-‘we have done prettywell.to-day.’
‘ Yes,’ returned Mr. Clay, ‘ we made a. good
stand, considering we lost both our Feet.’ Al-
lnding to Mr. Foot, of Conn. and Mr. Foote,
of N. Y. who both voted against the bill, tho’

it was thought, some time ago, that the‘, ‘

would support it.—-.N'i'les Reg.

That these views are not i

 

\

-\\.

 

V.

,5-

\