The Congressional Globe, Volume 14: Twenty-Eighth Congress, Second Session Page: 46
xv, 408, 421 p. ; 25 cm.View a full description of this legislative document.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
46
CONGRESSIONAL GLOBE.
ging the cormorant and avaricious- appetite of the
manufacturers of the country. It was a question
whether'the agricultural interest, which coula barely
make 4 per cent, on the capital invested in their
business, should be taxed for the protection of those
who make 35 per cent, on the capital which they
have invested.
But there was a cant about this thing; there was a
cant which he had long seen, and with which he had
long been disgusted. That cant was that this protective
system was for the protection of the industry of the
laboring man. "To protect the industry of the la-
boring man"—that was the form of expression; but
had gentlemen examined this bill with a direct
reference to that question? A gentleman from Penn-
sylvania (understood to be Mr. E. J. Morris) had
pretended to do so during the last summer to his
constituents; but that gentleman looked first, last,
and at all times, to the interests of associated wealth,
and not to the interests of the industrious classes.
Now, he (Mr. P.) would, for a moment, examine
that question, to see what protection this tariff bill
of 1842 afforded to the laboring man. He would
take, for example, the tailor; and he selected him
because it was most convenient to do so. The du-
ty imposed under the tariff act on ready-made
clothes was 50 per cent.; and no doubt the tailor
thought that this afforded him ample protection, and
that, but, for that he should be ruined by free trade.
But how many of that class had really looked at the
facts of the case? While the tailor, as he supposed,
was receiving the protection of a duty of 50 per
cent., he forgot that 40 per cent, of that duty
was laid on the cloth out of which the goods
were made;- not for the benefit of the tailor,
but of the manufacturer of the cloth. But let him
deduct the 40 per cent,, and only 10 per cent,
remained for the protection of the tailor. Now sup-
pose the tailor made clothing which was worth
$1,000 a year: the protection to him, at 10 per cent.,
was worth $ 100. But suppose, again, that he and his
family consumed of dutiable goods $1,000 worth:
the tax on this consumption, by the tariff act of
1842, was 40 per cent., which amounted to $400.
Deduct, then, the protection he receives from the
tax which he pays, and he would find, instead of
being benefited, that he was plundered by the ope-
ration of that act to the amount of $300. Apply
the same examination to the operation of the act on
the shoemaker, and they would find that he, too,
was plundered at the same rate. And where, he
would ask, was the protection for the blacksmith—
he who labored amidst the dust and smoke of his
workshop? Where was his protection? Could
any one point it out? The same was the case
with the mechanics generally. If, as was pretended,
that act'was intended to benefit the operatives, why
was not a clause introduced requiring the manufac-
turer to increase the wages of labor in proportion to
the increased duty for his protection? If that was
the object, why was it not permitted to appear in any
part of the bill? Why was not some one solitary sec-
tion allowed to record the fact? He (Mr. Payne) well
understood it. It was not the policy of the advocates
of protection to protect individual labor. There
was a certain Websterian doctrine prevailing in this
country some years ago, when that distinguished
man was in public life, to this effect: "Let the gov-
ernment take care of the rich, and the rich will take
care of the poor."
That was the doctrine of the manufacturer.
Give him ample protection, and he will protect the
laborer in his establishment. He (Mr- P.) was sick-
ened by such hypocrisy and fraud. The system
which the manufacturer proposed would not bene-
fit the laborer, as he had shown; it was, on the con-
trary, a system of plunder, of which the laborer was
the victim. But if it was still pretended that the inten-
tion was to protect the operative, he demanded
from the advocates of associated wealth why it
was that some clause was not introduced to protect
the operatives against the rapacity of their employ-
ers.
Having shown the effect of the system on the la-
boring interest of the country, let them turn to look
at its effect on the great manufacturing interest.
Take a manufacturer who manufactures to the amount
of $500,000; on this he received protection to the
amount of 40 per cent. The amount of $100,000 thus
would produce $40,000. But he is also a consumer;
and on the articles which he consumes, he conceives
that he pays a tax like every other person. Suppose
he consumes $5,000 worth: on this consumption at
40 per cent., he pays $2;000; then deduct the $2,000
^hich he pays from the $40,000 which he receiyes
by protection of the tariff act of 1842, and a net
profit is left of $38,000 per annum. And why is
this? Because he has the labor of 200 individuals
in his employment, and he receives the protection
which it was pretended was for them. Thus, then, the
mechanic was plundered'to the amount of $300 per
annum, whilst the rich manufacturer—whilst asso-
ciated wealth, with all its other privileges—was en-
abled to realize $38,000 per annum profit by this
bill, which its friends professed was for the protec-
tion of the labor of industry.
But here another question arose. Who paid the
duties? They were told that it was the producer;
but if that were- true, it was a paradox which he
could not understand. Look at its working; and he
would take, for example, a Virginia farmer. He
carried to England $1,000 worth of wheat, and
when he got there, Great Britain imposed upon it a
tax of $200, and thus it was reduced to $800. He
sells his wheat, and converts it into manufactures
as a home cargo; on arriving here, his $800 worth
of goods are taxed by this government (say) $200;
and thus his $1,000 worth of wheat is reduced to
$600. Such was the practical operation of the
system. He admitted that he lived in an age
of invention. They saw the wonderful inven-
tion of Professor. Morse, by whose discovery—
which was astonishing the scientific world—
they could converse with a friend-at a distance of
forty miles (and of fifty thousand miles, if the ap-
paratus was so far extended) almost as freely as he
could with his friends around him on this floor.
This discovery struck the world with admiration;
and the name-of Professor Morse would be as dura-
ble as the records of time. Then, again, there was
Professor Espy. What had he done in this age of
invention? Why, with mathematical accuracy, he
could calculate the progress of storms, define their
origin, and trace them through every part of the
process through which they passed. Here was a
philosophical discovery, too, which had placed the
name of Prof. Espy high amongst the scientific men
of this age of the world. Well, then, look at Colt's
submarine battery, another invention, and one which,
in all human probability, would change the whole
system of harbor defence throughout the world. They
had seen s gallant ship riding proudly on the waters
of the Potomac, her sails swelling with the breezes
of heaven, and in a twinkling they had seen her
heaved from the bosom of the deep, and scattered in
thousands of fragments high into mid air. But
great as were all these discoveries and these inven-
tions, they dwindled into comparative insignificance
with the discovery of a party here, that "high taxes
make low prices."
But he was not inclined thus to dispose of that
question. Gentlemen had thought proper to broach
and defend that absurd doctrine there; and he felt
justified in making one or two observations upon it.
Now, every article had a certain intrinsic value,
and that value consisted in the amount of the mate-
rial and the labor bestowed thereon; and it must
bring a price equal to the cost of the raw material
and the labor expended upon it, to be remunerative.
If, then, a duty was imposed upon such article, the
price to the consumer was enhanced to that amount,
or the price would not equal the cost of production.
If there were a perfect system of free trade—if
competition were free to all the world,—the price of
commodities would be kept down to a remunerating
one simply. He was willing to admit that there
might be a temporary increase of price, resulting
from a deficiency of supply, or a temporary de-
pression, resulting from an excess of supply; for
the price would be regulated by supply and demand.
But where competition was untrammelled the
equilibrium would soon be restored. Take, for il-
lustration, a hat. Suppose it manufactured in Eu-
rope, and brought here and sold for $3, that being
its intrinsic value: but if government imposed a
duly of $1, the price must be increased to $4, or its
intrinsic value would not be obtained; and thus it
was clear that the doctrine that high duties produce
low prices was an invention of modern days that
was irreconcilable with common sense. If, how-
ever, high duties do make low prices, as the gentle-
man from Pennsylvania asseited, why did not that
gentleman go at once for a modification of,
the existing duties, and a sweeping reduction
of them, so that Pennsylvania iron might
realize high prices? But such an argument as that
which the gentleman had made could not command
the respect of the American people. If he should
hereafter write out his views on this subject, he
should go into it farther than time would now per-
mit him to do, and he should then show, beyond
the possibility of contradiction, that while gentle-
men professed to regard the interests of industry,
the duties on articles consumed by the rich were
comparatively trifling, while those imposed on ar-
ticles consumed by the poorer classes were three-
fold greater. Such was the distinction made be-
tween the rich and the poor.
He would then take up statistical tables, and ex-
hibit, in such a light that the whole world could see,
the iniquity of this tariff as it now stood. And here
let him make a remark he had before made. He had
been charged by the public press with demagoguism.
In order to exonerate himself from any charge of
this kind, he wished it to be remarked that he advo-
cated no exemption for the poor from paying their
due proportion for the support of government. It
was the people's government; it protected the poor
as well as the rich; and the proud spirit of a man
would scorn exemption-from paying his due pro-
portion for its support. What he demanded was
equality of taxation—that the poor man should be
taxed no higher than his richer neighbor; that stern,
inflexible justice be meted out to him by the nation-
al legislature. On that account, he did oppose the
tariff act of 1842, and this bill also, unless it was mod-
ified so as to raise a revenue duty upon this article
of iron. It was against the whole system of unequal
andfraudulent duties, of plunder of one portion of the
people for the benefit of another portion, that he re-
monstrated. It was justice—justice that he demand-
ed; and-that he would demand until the American
people were aroused from the lethargy under which
they seemed now to rest, until they saw the fraud
perpetrated oh their interests; and when they did
see it they would vindicate their rights; and it was
not in the power of any man or set of men to conceal
forever these frauds upon their "interests. How
long was this system to be borne? Was it to be
perpetual? No; the American people had pronounc-
ed against it once, and had pronounced against it une-
quivocally in the election of James K. Polk; it might
be attempted to evade this question, but the Ameri-
can people had proclaimed at the ballot-boxes that
this iniquitous system, among others, should fall to
the dust; and fall it must. We look (said Mr. P.)
for relief to the returning sense of justice of the
American people. Whenever we have had a fair
"lick" at this question, it has been always condemn-
ed; and if this Congress chooses not to act at this
session, when that still silent voice ia heard again
from the ballot-boxes, it would speak in tones not
to fee misunderstood. The Senate was to be re-
formed; this House was to be reformed; and in the
next Congress all these questions were to be
settled on principles of right, of equality, and
of justice to all. He desired anything rather than
oppression of this character. He was prepared at
any time to meft any emergency that might arise,
rather than continue to endure the weight of this in-
justice and oppression. We hope (Mr. P. re-
peated) to have redress from the returning sense of
justice of the American people'. There were one
or two other remedies. State interposition was one;
submission was out of the question. He did not say
this in vain boast, with a vie w to create prejudice and
excitement; and he alone was responsible for it. But
he said submission was out of the question. There
were two other remedies, then. One was an actual
State veto of the laws of Congress; and another
was State legislation which could reach it, which,
in his opinion, was efficient; and which, if the State le-
gislatures were true to the interests of their con-
stituents, they would not fail to adopt. What was
it? I would (continued Mr. P.) attack the tariff bill
of 1842. I would attack it in detail, or in any way.
I would adopt any measure to get rid of it. I
would take the tariff bill of 1842, and lay a tax-
not an impost tax, but a tax on every article of do-
mestic manufacture in this country, precisely as
high as the tax was laid upon the foreign article.
I would take the Kentucky bagging, and would tax
it 5 or 6 cents per yard—which the State legislature
has a perfect right to do. I would tax Pennsylva-
nia iron—if she insists on the protection she now
has—and every other article, precisely as the tariff
bill of 1842 taxes the foreign article. I would go
farther—as far as to throw the consumption of the
entire South upon the foreign article, instead of the
domestic. I would rob—not rob, sir—but I would
vindicate my right, by being robbed no longpr. I
would give as a bounty that which we refuse to
have extorted from us by force. The very instant
the northern States lose the southern market, they
will go without it forever, or until they agree to a
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This document can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Legislative Document.
United States. Congress. The Congressional Globe, Volume 14: Twenty-Eighth Congress, Second Session, legislative document, 1845; Washington D.C.. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth2366/m1/62/: accessed April 19, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.