Funding for the digitization of this title was provided by R.J. Taylor, Jr. Foundation.
About News & planters' gazette. (Washington, Wilkes County [sic], Ga.) 1840-1844 | View Entire Issue (Sept. 14, 1843)
From tkc American EagJc. | TO COTTON PLANTERS. ./effect of a National Bank upon the J Value. an a Price of Cotton. i h : extreme low prices ofCotton during elm J>al five years, males it a matter of mi woo* interest and enquiry among the; Planters, t'< ascertain if possible, what has j produced these low prices, and what lias contributed to produce them. We have long maintained the ground that the miserable condition of the Currency, its contracted and dried up volume, and the almost total des traction of the Credit system, have been the main cause of the extreme low prices of cot ton during the past live years. That sup ply and demand uro the positive causes re gulating the prices of an article, is true — but the Currency and the Credit system re gulate in a great degree the demand. Des troy them, and you destroy the main spring to the demand. It is well known to our Merchants, and j to the Merchants in New Orleans—and this is a highly interesting and important fact which we wish impressed on the minds of the Cotton Planters throughout the coun- . try that the destruction of the Banking sys tem for the past year or two has thrown the control of our immense Cotton crop into the bands of the Foreign Merchants—who have regulated in a great degree both its price and demand. Heretofore, w hen onr Banks were in good standing and credit, they were enabled to afford the New Orleans Mer chants facilities and money to advance to the Planter for his Cotton, who would there by be enabled to hold it back from glutting the foreign market, and thus force the for eign purchaser to pay its value for it. But this, (luring the past season oftwo, the Mer chants have not had the power to do, in consequence of the destruction of the Banks I and tlie destruction of those facilities soes- ; -sential to do it. And the consequence has j been, that the British manufacturers and j speculators have come over to New Orleans ■ with their gold and silver, and set up their j offices, and bought the Planter’s cotton pret ty much at their own price, in consequence of the great scarcity of money amengst us, and the destruction of those Bank facilities which have heretofore enabled our Merch ants to resist and successfully compete with the foreign capitalists. It is tiie Banking and credit system alone that has enabled our Merchants ever to compete with the heavy and overgrown solid gold and stiver capital of foreigners. England, we doubt not, has one hundred times the amount of Gold and Silver that we have, besides the powerful credit and facilities of her great Bank of England, and other banking insti tutions. It can then be seen attlie slight est glance, that with the little gold and sil ver we can keepamongst us to compose our entire Currency with which to control, re present, direct and protect our immense trade, against the overgrown and overwhel ming capital and credit of England, our trade is bound to languish, our Cotton and Tobacco, and other products, are bound to decline in price. These are truths. And until a sound Banking credit system be res tored to us—until we have at least three times the amount of money we now have to constitute our Currency, we must expect things to remain as they arc. We throw out these remarks for the benefit of those who are desirous of obviating these difficul-. ties through the polls at the approaching election, by voting for these candidates who are in favor of RESTORING A SOUND CREDIT SYSTEM—of giving to the country an AMPLE AND ENLARGED CURRENCY, capable of representing, pro tecting and controlling our products and agricultural labor. This the Whigs are struggling to do, —and which the Democrats are striving to defeat. The History of the two Banks of the United States, as connected with the price of Cot ton. We refer our Cotton Plapters to the fol lowing tables of the prices of Cotton for every year, from 1789 to 1835. We com pile it from a report made by order of Con gress in 1836, to that body, by Hon. Levi Woodbury,Secretary of the Treasury— good Democratic authority. It will plain ly be seen that the influence of the United States Bank upon the price of Cotton was powerful—and also, that during the inte rims when there was no Bank, the price of Cotton fell and languished—and immedi ately rose again when tlie Bank was re chartered. Let every one read for him self: Years. Prices, i Years. Prices. 1789 ! 1813 12 1799 141 i 1814 15 1791 26 j 1815 21 1792 29 1816 294 1793 32 1817 ‘ 26| 1794 38 1818 34 1795 36£ j 1819 24 1796 36| j 1820 17 1797 34* j 1821 10 1798 39 1822 16£ 1799 44 1823 10&12 1800 29 1824 15 1801 44 1825 21 1802 19 1826 11 1803 19 1827 Oh 1804 20 1828 lot 1805 23 1829 10 1806 22 1830 10 1807 21 \ 1831 9$ 1808 It) 1832 10 1609 16 1833 11 1810 16 1834 13 1811 15£ 1835 164 1812 )0J * Ve. find from this authority, that the av ■s'i ,e price of Cotton for the 5 years, from 1812 to 1817, the period between the first and secoud Bank of the United States, when there was no Bank, was 18 cents ; and that the average price during the next five years the first 5 of the new or late Bank, was 231 cents—quite a difference, truly, in favor of the Bank. The first Bank of the United States was Chartered in 1791. The price of cotton, as the table shows, for the two years pro ceeding the charter of the Bank, was 14J cer.'.s. The next year the Bank was char. | tertd and went into operation, and cotton rose to 26 cents a pound—the next year to I 29 cents—and kept rising for a series of years. The average yearly price of cotton during the twenty years’ existence of this Bank, is shown to have been within a frac tion of 2.8 cents per pound—and in no year j lower i immediately prior lo the chartering of the Bank [we haxc have no data to run farther buck] it averaged as low as 14J cents ; nor did it fall as low until 1842 when we had no National Bank again, when down goes cotton to 10 1-2 cents, lower than it haclev er been. We now speak of the period from 1811 to 1817—during which we had no Nation al Bank. The averagr price of of cotton as the table shows, for the five years when we | had no Bank, from 1811 to 1817, was 18 cents. Hero the new, or late Bank was chartered—in 1816—and the average price of cotton runs up during the five first years ito 23 1-2 cents per pound. And the aver age yearly price, for the whole twenty years existence of the late Bank, was a fraction over 15 cents per pound. * Now we come to another no bank period again, and a gloomy one, truly. The late Bank expired in 1837. During the five years proceeding 1837 ; during the exist ence of the Bank, the average yearly price ofcotton was 14 1-2 cents. During the 5 years following, which we have no Bank a gain, the average price is down to 81-2 cents, and becoming still lower, with a still gloomier and more lowering aspect. Is there any argument in these facts and fig: ores ’? Is experience and history to be re lied on ? If so, we here have, in the history ofthe United States Banks, in connexion with tlie prices of cotton for Fifty years past a barometer which tells as correctly as any 1 ! tiling can he told, what effects have occur | red in the cotton market in conjunction with j operations and existence ofa National bank, [and also what effects have occurred during j the interims discontinuance. There j tlie facts exist, plainly before you, there is no dodging them, no denying them. The sun is not plainer than tlie results they de clare. MONEY. ’['he superabundance of money in the city of New York, is shown in an authen tic and striking form by tlie quarterly re turns, recently made by the Banks in that city. We learn from the American, that these returns are from twenty-three banks, with an aggregate capital.of $23,000,000. Oil the 7th inst. they held in specie twelve and a half millions, or more than ono half of the whole capital, while their aggregate circulation was about. five and a half mil lions—so that there was on hand about two dollars and a quarter in coin for every pa- j per dollar issued. Tlie aggregate dis counts of commercial paper were thirty one millions, aud about nine millions are lent out on United States and State stocks. The deposites arc near twenty four millions of 1 dollars—more than equal to the united cap itals of the 23 banks, and as those deposites draw no interest, their large amount shows the absence of any demands for money, and ! the difficulty of finding satisfactory invest ! meats for it. The intelligent editor adds to these facts, the following comment: “The Strength of the banks, as exhibited ! by these returns, is evidence of any thing 1 but active and beneficial commerce. 1 “Nevertheless, the ordinary trade of the country is active and healthy ; but without 1 any prospective or speculative demand.— Purchasers lay in no stock in advance, eon -1 tent to live from hand to mouth, and paying | very generally, cash for what they buy.” We may here take the occasion to re mark that the banks of tlie city, of Bahi- more exhibit the same relative degree of strength in the items of full vaults of specie, reduced circulation, limited discount lines, and redundant deposites. Trade here is al j. so narrowed down to the actual wants of the people, and speculative enterprises are unknown. The aggregate business of the 1 summer has been greater than usual, lining made up of numerous items of moderate transactions. The condition of the business j community, on the whole, is sound and healthful in an extraordinary degree; and the results which have been already real , ized from the completion and more perfect organization of the various lines of internal improvements which connect our city with the noble valley of the Susquehanna, with the interior empires watered by the Ohio and Mississippi, and with an extensive re gion stretching to the South West—afford assurances of the most pleasing and posi tive character, that henceforth the march of Baltimore is steadily onward.—Balti more American. SLAVERY. “I have been on plantations among slaves and seen their condition ; and truth com pels me to affirm, from my knowledge and personal observation, that the slaves are “better off',” as the phrase is, their condi tion is more prolific of real enjoyment, and possesses the elements of contentment, ease, and quietness, to a greater extent, than does that of free blacks, according to numbers. And I have no doubt that there are at least 20,000 inhabitants of the City of New York, whose condition is worse than the condition of the slaves in our Southern States. And that under the paternal government of cowi miserating England, there are in England and Ireland, at least three millions of peo ple, whose condition is more deplorable than that of our Slaves !” The above is impartial testimony from an able discriminating writer, a gentleman and cliristian.of high character, and a na tive of Massachusetts. Northerners, after residing in the South, become almost inva riably advocates of Southern institutions ! Are the “madmen,” who are by themselves, and by fanatics like themselves, styled “philanthropists,” in favor of free inquiry and candid investigation on the topic of their monomania? If so, let them study Hon. J K. Paulding’s writings on the sub ject, as well as the publication, of Presi dent Dew, and Elder Stringfellov. From the Augusta Chronicle fy Sentinel. I Messrs. Editors :—1 have been prevented by other engagements from giving earlier attention to the remarks of the Constitution alist of 29th ult. That press complains with some bitterness of the language with which I choose to clothe my thoughts.— That is a matter of taste, about w Inch there is no disputing. It is not likely that we should agree upon that point. I might con sider it more consistent with the character ofa “ true gentleman,” to speak plainly and truthfully even in “ Billingsgate” than to weave tho tangled web of deceit in the chaste, sparkling and brilliant language of tlie Constitutionalist. Duplicity and chi canery arc not apt to be pleased with any language with which they are detected and exposed—hence 1 shall continue to write truth in such language as choice or neces sity may dictate. Who lamis a matter of small consequence to tlie public, though I adopt this mode pf communicating my thoughts on public affairs rather in accord ance with custom than with any desire for concealment. Though promising to expose the “ mis statements” of the legislative Whig ad dress, the Constitutionalist in neithor of its two laborious articles has joined issue upon a single statement’ made in it. In its arti cle of the 22d ult. it attempted to cover the disgraces of its friends there portrayed, by preferring charges against the Whigs Those charges were met and answered by me. His reply abandons the points made in this first artfcle except as to which party had the majority in the Legislature of 1838, and rambles off into anew set of pretended delinquencies against tlie Whigs, equally unfounded with those which have already been exposed. These tactics may be very good for the purpose for which they arc in tended, for as its readers generally see but one side of the question, what is lost to truth by this mode of discussion may he gained by “the party.” I gave the Whigs one more majority in the Senate of 1838, bv mistake, than they actually had ; instead of a majority of six or seven, as the Consti tutionalist asserts, their actual majority was only two. Judge Dougherty received for ty-seven votes for President of the Senate, all Whigs except the Democratic Senator from Madison county. Gen. Echols receiv ed forty-two votes, all Democrats. The Democratic Senator from Bulloch, it was well understood at the time, voted for Col. Lamar, and as is usual on such occasions, neither of the candidates voted. I believe this to be the exact state of the case ; but it is needless to dispute this point—the politics of every member of the Senate of that year was well known to me, and I presume also to the editor of the Constitutionalist, in which latter opinion 1 am greatly confirm- I cd by the accuracy with which he designa ted their politics, w lien it suited his purpo ses on the question to lay Colonel King’s bill upon the table. He did not mistake a single man on the negative of that question. The history of the bill to continue the charter of the Central Bank until 1843, for the sole purpose of winding up its affairs,is correctly given by the Constitutionalist.— I well knew the history of that bill and took a deep interest in its success. It did pans a democratic House of Representatives (a few Democrats have uniformly opposed that institution,) after the failure of their scheme ‘ to amend the charter, so as to authorize the- Bank to borrow five millions of dollars to be squandered in loans. That amendment 1 was defeated by the union of a portion of the Democrats with the Whigs. After its • defeat the Democratic party abandoned the bill, and Mr. Toombs of Wilkes, did offer I the bill to which the Constitutionalist refers as a substitute therefor, which was accept ed and passed the House. This bill came up on its final passage in the Senate on the [’ 29th December, the last day of the session. , Absences of members had reduced the Sen , ate to under eighty, a large majority of those present were democrats and they en s grafted those provisions upon the bill of the • House-v.hich theCons'.itutionaiist now char es on the Whigs. They used their acci r dental majority, as they attempted to do subsequently upon a memorable occasion, ; to defeat the popular will and to carry out 1 their own destructive measures. By rea- I son of the afcsen ;e of members the demo . era’s had acquired a majority in the Sen . ate as early as the 27th December, and on i that day, as the journals will show, carried i their sub-treasury resolutions by a vote of forty-five to twenty.nine, only three mem i bers of the Whig party (the Senators front Burke, Striven, and Paulding,) voting* with I them. Every other Whig present voting against them. Then tlie only charge which the Constitutionalist can sustain against the Whig Senate of that year in respect of that bill is, that they were not present to prevent the Democratic party from passing so bad a measure. For this the absentees justly de serve the public censure, unless their ab sence was for providential cause, nothing else should ever excuse a Whig for trust ing the Democrats with power for a single day, when they can prevent it, for the coun try has never yet failed to suffer by their exercise of it. And the present attempts of the Constitutionalist to saddle them with democratic measures should be an addi tional warning to the Whigs never to aban don their posts even for a day without the most controlling necessity. The uniform inconsistency of errors is happily illustrated by the Constitutionalist in its speculations on the Central Bank.— Its positions are “crossly indented and whimsically dove tailed.” Its editorial of the 23d ult. taunts those whom it pleases to term “ Whig leaders,” with lending all their energies to the sole object of the des. truetion of tlie Bank. That institution it .affects to consider of small account. It (liitAsaid “ all the vaporings of the Whig . 7eatiers were against the Central sank; that institution was the bug-bear of all the calamities with which the people of the State had been afflicted, and nothing but the destruction of the institution could'repair our disasters, pay our State debt, complete our.internal improvements, and relieve our citizens from ail their distresses.” And in its editorial of the 29th ult... one short week | afterwards, when it became necessary to traduce the Whig Senato of 1838, it de clares that tho defeat of Mr. Toombs’ bill and the passage of the act of 1838, “ ex tending the charter,of the Bank to 1850, (was) a measure fraught with baleful con sequences and ?he root of all the evils we have since suffered in Georgia;” and a gain, in the same article, ho designates it as “ a monstrous measure, the origin of’all our subsequent embarrassments.” The first article intended to disparage the sagacity of the Whigs, charges them with a quixotic crusade against an institution, the destruc tion of which was not “ an efficient and practicable measure for the support of the credit of the State and the relief of the peo ple,” and within seven days afterwards de clares one of tho least inoffensive amend ments to the charter to be “ tlie root of all the evils we have suffered in Georgia, and the origin of all our subsequent embarrass ments.” The “ Democracy” must have capacious throats and strong stomachs to swallow and keep down such heterogenous and conflicting ingredients. I hope the next editorial will give us the third “sober thought” of the editor, for those of the faith ful who take the trouble to think at all must be in great doubt until they receive a “ new revelation.” But the act of 1838 was not “ the root of all of our evils.” It gave the Bank no power for evil that it did not posses by its original charter, .except that SC allowing it to buy, with its bills, exchange to pay the State debts. This, however, if properly used at that time, would have been produc tive of good rather than evil to the State.— It produced no evils under the administra tion of the Whig direction of the Bank in 1839. They used the power honestly sot the purpose for whic it was inteded ; the fraudulent use of the power to make accom modation loans, by the Democratic direc tors under McDonald, produced all the e vils growing out of it. But even when thus used, it was weak and impotent for evil, when compared with that great Democratic measure of 1839, which authorized the directors to issue as much paper us they pleased. This was much more “the root of all otlr evils;” charity would induce me to hope that the Constitutionalist had confounded the two measures, and in fact referred to the latter. This Was the wild, delusive and destructive measure which annihilated our credit, and overwhelmed our State with pecuniary dis grace. 1 flatter myself that I have satisfied the Constitutionalist of tlie wisdom and patri otism of the Whig policy in 1840, as it leaves that untouched and rambles off up on anew sin of the Senate of 1836- A pro fessed friend of Internal Improvements, which its party have have made unpopular by extravagance aud imbecility, that jour nal now seeks to make political capital out of that very unpopularity It is but another illustration of that uni versal Democratic priciple, to sacrifice ev ery social and physical improvement, State honor and State credit, public interests and public virtue, our dearest interest, our ho liest affections to the sole object of parly ; power; and, of course, to mislead honest but uninformed citizens, for the accomplish ment of that end. May God deliver this ! country from the domination of sucli a coni bination of reckless and desperate adventu i rets. A bill having precisely the same objects as the one referred to by the Constitutional ; ist, was passed by a Democratic House of ! Representatives in 1837. It was supported ■ bv both sides without regard to party, and i went into the Senate, (also Democratic) where it would have passed, but for an ob ■ noxious amendment sustained by the ene • mies of the bill and local interests. That Legislature was decidedly and unequivo cally Democratic, yet no voice of condem f nation is raised by this chaste “ gentleman ly” organ against it. It would not help the i party! But a false impression is attempt ed to be raised, touching the ‘.oto of certain Whig Senators upon an incidental motion i on a similar bill in 1838. The vote refer , red to, and attempted to be distorted, wasa . j gainst laying the bill upon the table ; that vote might have been given in strict accor dance with parlimentary usage, without a single individual giving it, being in fa vor of the bill, not only as it then stood, but in any other way. A bad bill may be the foundation of a very good one on the same subject, as the Constitutionalist has admit ted, was the case in substituting the bill Re winding up the Central Bank in 1838, for that outrageous Democratic measure for borrowing millions of money to squan : der in loans to political adventurers. But it is not made to appear by the Constitution . alisl, what were the provisions of the bill; , how far the rights of the State were protec ted by it; or under what conditions the thing was to be done ; for all that is disclo sed, tiie bill might have been a harmless if not a good one, whether it was or not, the simple vote against laying it on the table without further knowledge of the opinions of those who gave it, is insufficient to base a charge against any public man, except by those whose known rule of political warfare is the indiscriminate use of any and every means, however unworthy, which promises success. This may be a perfectly “gentle manly” rule, but I should prefer to act here, and be judged hereafter, by a different code. Yours, &c., A WHIG MEMBER OF THE LEGISLATURES OF ’3B AND ’4O. The Difference. —It is stated in the N. Y. Tribune, that SIOB,OOO in specie is now travelling to the west to pay off'lndian an nuities, under an escort of two special gov ernment agents, and otherwise transported at a heavy’ expense—probably not less than three or four per cent, on the whole amount. While a National Bank was in existence, this transfer would have been made by a draft through the mail, without costing the treasury a farthing, and with the certaiftty that it could not be lost by any casualty, or be purloined by special agents or sub treasurers—a security now altogether wanting. FREE TRADE REASONINGS. The New York Evening Post quotes the following passage from a letter recently written by Mr. Clay. “1 am so far a friend to free trade as to think that, within the limits of the Union, it should be entirely unfettered, and perfectly equal between all interests and all parts of our country. But to that free trade which would throw wide opbn our ports to foreign productions, without duties, theirs remain ing closed to us, or our admission allowed only upon the condition of high duties and severe restrictions, which would compel a resort to direct taxation, instead of a custom house, to supply the wants of the •Treasury and which would leave our domestic indus try unprotected, and exposed in an unequal contest with tho rival productions of foreign powers, I am utterly and irreconcilably op posed.” The Post wishes to know what reasons there are for a tariff between different na tions which do not apply with eqiml force to a tariff between our different Stages. Is there any consideration adduced it asks, “or that was ever adduced, in favor of higli protective duties between this country and Great Britain, which might not be made applicable to the differents parts of this country.” Inasmuch as the States of this Union are parts of one whole—members of one body politic; it may be naturally infered that tlie relations existing among them are different from those between the United States and a foreign country. In so far as that differ ence consists, to such extent the analogy of the New York paper fails. Great Britain has institutions different from ours :—Her condition is what it is by reason of those institutions and ‘he results oftheir operation. The state of !i r iabor ing population—the rates of --ug. --the relations between the employer ami the working man ; in fact the entire social and political condition of the kingdom could not but affect very powerfully our condition, both socially and politically, if unrestricted trade were allowed between that country and-our own. Ifitbeaduty of Govern ment to make no distinctions between its own and people ofother countries ; to show no preference for its own domestic concerns; to provide no safeguard for its own institu tions when they are liable to danger ; then indeed our view of the matter is wrong and protective duties are wrong ; all discrimi-. nations in favor of home industry are wrong. It is common with nations to incur annu ally very considerable.expenses to support navies and military armaments to a greater or less extent. The speculative philanthro pist might say', as some do say, that all this is improper ; that war is an unnatural state; that all the world ought to be at peace, and that these war-like preparations among the various governments are but provocations to hostility. Every arfstment which the speculative free-trader adduces in support of free trade, the speculative philanthropist might adduce in favor of peace; al! reason ings against a ta'iff, as calculated for the distinctive advantage ofa nation, might be urged against a navy and military arma ment for the individual protection of a na tion. The time may come when there will be perpetual peace in the world, and when navies and armies will no more be needed; and So the time may come when free trade may prevail among the nations of the earth precisely as though they were, as ou r States are, all members of one political body.— But until that time comes—until the diverse nations arc lo one another as the States are among themselves, the reason which makes free trade p*oper within the limits of this Union will not be applicable to sustain the argument in favor of unrestricted free trade with foreign countries. It is as much a proper matter of policy to regulate commercial intercourse with na tions differing from our own in spirit, gi-n ----ius. institutions, and ot.ndition our ir.teiests shall not suffer from such inter course, as it is to take care that foreign arms be not allowed to endanger our land. If unrestricted trade with a country where the laboring classes were serfs and paupers or little better, should have the ef fect to degrade our laboring men to a simi lar condition, then we would say let all the dogmas of all the free trade theories in tho world perish forever ; —we will have none of them. In view of such an alternative, we would adopt the wish of Jefferson that an ocean of fire might roll between us and such a country. The Post uses an argument to this effect: “If it be an advantage to the farmers of ll linois to exclude the manufactures of Old England, in order to build up manufactures within their own limits, would it not be an equal advantage to them to exclude the manufactures of New England, for the same purpose ?” IfNew England were a distinct nation from Illinois as Old England is ; if it were a country foreign in its institutions, feelings, habits; if it were an over-populated region crowded with millions of oppressed labor ers at the mercy of employers, and if a war might break out at some time and stop all intercourse between them—then we say that Illinois should not remain dependent on such a New England for her supplies of manufactures, and this the more especial ly because a New England similar to the Old England would allow no just rules of trade but would keep out the agricultural productions of Illinois by restrictive corn laws. So long as there is a possibility of war between countries it is not good policy that either should be dependent on the other for indispensable supplies. The last war with England found us without domestic manu factories ; we had been dependent on Great Britain, It is known that our country suf fered much on this account. When the war was over the policy of encouraging our domestic manufacturing industry was strongly advocated by Mr. Clay, Mr. Cal houn and others, as a policy essential to the National Independence. Upon that ground it stands ykl. — Balt. Anxr. BANK OR NO BANK? Is a National Bank useful and necessa ry to our prosperity as a people ? This question mav be answered in few words by facts. Then, It is a fact that the government never lost anything by a National Bank as fiscal agent. It is a fact that during the existence ofa National Bank, we had a sound currency, and a plenty of it—the working man got liberal wages for his labor, and the poor man could get money to buy bread and meat too for his family. It is a fact that when we have had no National Bank, our currency lias bean de ranged, depreciated, and so scarce as to produce pressure and distress among the people every where throughout the coun try- If a Bank be necessary, tllen will not the people have one ? They are the sovereigns and must decide. If they will the creation of one, let them go so the polls and give their votes for Whig candidates : if they will otherwise, then they may stay at home, or vote for the* self-styled democrats, just as their humor may dictate.— Raleigh Reg ister. PRICES UNDER THE TARIFF. The Tuscaloosa Monitor refers to the de cline in the price ofcotton bagging, an im portant article of consumption in the South, to show the beneficial effects of high duties upon prices, by bringing tlie domestic in competition with the foreign fabric. In 18- 40, the price of cotton bagging was quoted in the New Orleans papers, at 20 cents a yard. It is now selling from 12 to 13 cents —a decline of 100 per cent. The quanti ty of this fabric used in Alabama alone, is estimated at two million of yards, which under the Locofpco Van Buron system in 1840, would have cost the Planters the round sum of $520,000 While under the present Whig Tariff, th ■ same quantity on ly cost! 260,000 Saving under the whig tariff $260,000 And this the Locofocos complain of as, oppressing the people ! Here again is a fact against a theory. ANEDDOTE OF JOHN RANDOLPH. An Irishman in the New Mirror, relates tin following anecdote, illustrating the marvellous geographical knowledgeof John Randolph : “ My knowledge of Ireland,’ said he to me, ‘seems to astonish you as much as it did a servant of Mr. Canning’s at Washing ton, the other day. He brought me a note from his master—who, by the bye, is a ve ry superior man, sir—and the moment he spoke I at once detected the Munster man, for lie had a fine rich brogue ; so thinks, I, I’ll have some funr’ ‘6o, John, you’re from Munster, are you not?’ said I. • I am, plaise yonr honor,’ replied he, surprised at my question. ‘ From the county Clare, I presume?’— (This was a guess on my part as to the county.) ‘ Yes, sir,’ said lie, still more astounded,i ‘ What town did you live in ?’ continu ed I. ‘ The town of of Ennis, sir.’ ‘Oh,’ said I, laughing, ‘I know Ennis very well. Pray does Sir Edward O’Brien still live at Dromoland ?’ ‘ He does, indeed, sir.’ ‘ And Mr. Stackpoole at Edenvale?’ ‘ Yes, surely, sir.’ ‘ And the Knight ofGlin at Shannovale?’ ‘ Yes, sir ;’ and then, after a pause and a low bow, he added, ‘ might I make bould to ax, sir, how long your honor lived in Clare?’ ‘ I never was there at all,’ replied I, ‘ but hope to bo very soon.’ • Oil, sir ’ said he, don’t be afthcr fooling me. for yon m tst be a bit ot an Irishmen ; you i.uve tiie brogue, and you know as much of the tounthry as I do myself, and more too, I’m thinking!’ It was in vain that I assured him I bad never been in Ireland ; he went away still insisting that I had lived there; which fact he told to Mr. Canning, who was very much amused a-t the way in which I had puzzled poor John, as he told me himself next day.” A NEW WAY OF DETECTING A THIEF. The St. Louis New Era of the 3d inst., chronicles the discovery of a thief who had previously managed always to evade de tection, by tiie following contrivance: “ Thomas P. Bray, a man heretofore holding a respectable position in society, was yesterday arrested, and brought before Justice Wetmore, under the following cir cumstances. G. S. Chouteau, flour mer chant in front of the market, has occasion, ally lost inconsiderable sums of money, and set a trap to catch the pilferer. lie placed a pistol in the drawer containing the money usually received, and so contrived it that the opening of the drawer would discharge the. pistol. Yesterday an explosion took place, and Mr. Bray being left alone by some other person in the employ of Mr. Chouteau, was met by him, immediately af ter the discharge, descending the steps, his face perforated with powder, and his man ner much confused. He was shortly after wards arrested, taken before Justice Wet more, and held to bail in the sum of The accused w'as for MrT Chouteau.” _ Food of the Chinese. —Monven’s Voyage around tlie World, furnishes the paragraph : “ The Chinese eat almost everything that comes to hand. Upon the streets of the city, but particularly on the large square before the factories, a number of birds are daily exposed for. sale, which among us, have not yet gained much repute for fla vor ; among others, hawks, owls, eagles and storks. To a European, nothing can
