Newspaper Page Text
i iji owner of
li " " r ' r>i'nr.-vl' mll: ' ln *
"fe urn wit'. n'mH.n.na-
-‘H U I rwoicmtion, on
,erts» (Imtf• : „| lt f rt inhibit
cv in Hi" ww^'[y, ;iS offl -,,i ^k ?
>':frm^‘i»i
nothing n '<l- _ A, hu'V<‘ v,r i
havr-AUhr. 1 nAmcn t (tors niucl
tii.> sErnUetrwn » m* 1nn of Conirr^ upon
t'l.-r thin oven lri ‘ iu- tlii* net, l"' r ‘
■uteri) lie reties l,: '* m Louisiana tuijdit
isllril to . i. .t l»v tiii>
^sors
that
nitach fcir-
tMt, hy ill'
farther mtro-
( nns win* wished tos
c” rv with them thw '•
gentleman * am™'in ^j ssnlir i io hr irre-
.1 i.'lion of sta'is 11 . , ;f a n owner ol
voeahlyprotu | »' u :‘ , i ” /, Missouri, he roulil
Slavoi wre to m* . 0 i property,
riot enrrV with h" n . 1 r j v( , an v |>"Mt»vi
Without atteniP V ' f v |,; llk lt 1M .» im-
Opinion upon the ■ h.ul ever l"'"ii
pUiblethit.!««*»'>’• *'*
property bro’isht , | vl . |„.,. n (l«*rl.-ir-
pro!iiliitorv | ‘ , ’*' linl J 'Vjjj consequently void.
<■-! miroUBtitutlonal. ao o , h( , w lt;:lt
nisBullleiontfoi; n ^..Irreil Ihej
fir- CoBSress t,, ‘' f it1 relation to tins iii-
became apprised
Ji-h't'00- • A «trh they had filllcii, mid
or t ! m error- in !*, mrlumt y of correct-
iE!lX«tr*s2 "
of rhe terriluTJ 1 , in ,he ,
have,, )
:.rrluded from 1,11
for the government
’(/Orleans, it i» enacted. Unit
' i tin- ordinance
s ,) shall not
■ f n,l to Imtisexehided from all operation
°u rt Po "tTri»rv of Oilcan*. And the
" llh " 1 tiirW were then in force in the snnl
territo'ry, eit‘ inconsistent withthw act, were
^inThewmewir. (»*«,) C«n*r«* *1*"
. 10r for the government of the tin -
1,0
inl TV?rrhS^VlHc*nf. Wy the ..aim: .of
Emitted inte the Untoji
.rith<M - in
1,n
i !1( \im5flent state..
strirtioi^ui^re.Jiyi^,
ir of the
pdffi, .(.wry. i'l*'! 1 "''- aiir.-n-nt nos
’ ;; r .I think persons w-t.o pnr-
l yjSso-.il i might well have cal
Vany future period, it would
■hecoBet cut lor them to settle those lands,
arid wmivate them with slaves. I might ha
■permitted to ask, sir. would not it"' imposi
tion of the restriction now, even admitting
(’ i lercss had the power to impose it, he ma
nifestly unjust. The. state *>( Louisiana, a
part of the same territory, acquired at the
same time, is in the fuH enjoyment of the
rights of property in slaves. By what prio
ri! of eqna),justice will von deny to Mis
' the same privilege. Mr. President, it
-Id be the pride of congress to mete out to
habitants of the various sections of thin
'.lie, equal anlllimpartml justice.—
section have'just cause of pnm-
.. differenre sought to be made
-n the inhabitants, of even the same
jrv. is roo apparent not to hi |ierceiv-
it win t'»n*r f«. rememhen il, i tear, by
«f •' ,iw, ’rravcir"
CpS'f’.filtCtuitJx. im'-vuetfr
Hut, Mr. president, the words oi the troa-
Jy i. S elf are sufficiently compri-iu usise .or
{lie luiiuoses of this argument, i hey
broad and latitinliuary in their extent.—
Toe inhabitants of the ceded territory are
to her admitted to all (he rights, advantages
and-'immunities of citize.ns *1 the Lmird
Sr -tcs. They are not to he restrained; hut
l, e to he left free to choose, for thetnseive.s
.h ,at portionof these privileges they will eu-
j.. v . Restrain them, then, in the enjoyment
of any one essential right, and you violate
the provisions of this treaty. If an ujhahi-
\lint of Missouri can point to an inhabitant
of another state, and with propriety say,
that such individual is in the enjoyment ot
fights which Congress have denied to him,
I<c mry well complain that the treaty has
li >n Violated. To illustrate this position:
Li the inhabitants of Missouri should turn
their eves to the slave holding states, and
flee the ; .habitants of those states exer
cising an -<>f ownership over a description
n: prop--tv which the-Congress of the U.
States !/•:.; nied to them the privilege of
o ruing, vv. n ight those of Missouri ctmi-
p| .in of ’it of good f.iitb. ami of an
infiingen those rights which iierc
gu «rantei • :!:-m hy the treaty of cession.
iiut.ad nog.sir, that we possessed the
tight to im, as-, the restriction now sought to
b impost 11 .Missouri, would it corn-
pert with -agnanirv.ity of Congress
",impose it: And is not tin policy of do-
ieg... at lea • .-.ionable? I would aife
s’r, t... * hem fded by it? The free
p-qpje of Missouri. They tell you tliuf you
ni ikt- their tr;tv interest, if you suppose
\ i are doing then a service by tin .leans
Is it fur the benefit >f til a free pop-.datjf,’
of the slave hold; .i '.ilc s They .-v-^py
not to he coi ■ ■ their accn,V)| n) . ccs .
do not 04) . ictifip their hap-
s.K-y, not .; , .in y pete j'sUch a measure,
pint" will be pionv!'.,ose condition is to
J is t ie slaves, th , imposition of speh re-
l>8 uni-liorator’. spies of humanity and
{deletion. 1 to promoted bv tin-
iie.i-ve’ \ wieoi-rtain of this ? Will the
ln,: of the slaves within rircum-
■ 1 . narrow limits have a tendency to
•' ‘ their comforts and promote their
h ness ? Is not the experiment a doubt-
lin a: I aomewliat a dangerous oil*-? May
v. " not deteriorate the condition of thr
?. 1 ' le * 1:1 a gv-ati-r ih-gree thau we shall nnte-
Hontle tliat of the bLicks ? I presume, sir.
the greatest pnitantli.-opist among us would,
:-l hewt, doilht tipn-i the suhi«ct. A qui-sli-
"1, then, of such doubtful policy ought toln-
si lU'iii- d. I ain at a loss even to conjecture
{' k.I d i If,: re nee it ran make on the score of
humanity and benevolence, wiu-tliei- the
.e person is held to serve in fieorgia or
J I. inn. dt is not contemplated by those
tvho oppose the am.mdmi'iit oin-our titbit* to
1: "Tea so the number nr slaves. It is not con
template,! t,j rivet the chains of slavery
«uoand the rteck ofasiagl*. individual who
IS now free, nr to bring anv si .v.-s into thi-
country trnm foreign state's T|.,.v *
however, that, the states should be''let. free
to ri gulate th«-intercourse among themselves
I Ihii'k every principle of po'-
•mnng them
1- v ‘iirhids tbe interfereiice on (he part'
"ogress^ w ith tin- internal police of the
’A .‘ h the states and
federal govern,nont might he productive
' te m„,t unhappy consequences-sneh as
J' l ,atn,,t " 1,6 """ling to see, and w hi, !,,
1 »m sure, the honorable gentleman who ail-
v ateil the proposes amendment wouldd-
" "-it.-B-t .r-.chas any other mimb.r of
tin aiSomhlj.
w - d.u'.., ' f.-. President, honorable gentTe-
have received erroneous inip-csslons in
uion to the. treatment of slaves in those
i ts of the country in which slavery is to
lerated. These people, sir. an- far from he-
tliat italc of intolcrulde vassalage
w hirli gentlemen seem to believe. Persons
it a distance cannot possibly judge correctly
of their condition. They h*-ai- the b-rn>
slave, »nd Ihvit- imaginations accompany il
with nakedness, hunger, with the lash, the
chain, and a destitution of every comfort.—
Nothing enn he mure foreign I rum the true
condition of the slaves. As far ns my knotv-
li-dge extends, they .are well clothed, well
fed, ant! treated with kiudnes. and humani
ty. They are cheerful and apparently hap-
py. .
lint, sir, we nrc tint Irgi-kUmg upon tlu-
question whether slavery is to he tolerated
or not If we were, perhaps there would
not he such a diversity of opinion. The pe
riod has long sim-e passed hy'v\ lien that
i|il, stion was in order. The ftvil, if it hi
one, already exists. It has taken d.-eq' root
in our soil, and 1 know of no meant! of ex
tirpating it As the poison eminot be en
tirely destroyed, tlien, tin- political physici
an would recommend that it should he srat-
tnred and disseminated through the, system
af to lose its effert. The nforo widely
then, thisevii is diffused, (paradoxical ns il
m,iv seem,) the less fatal will he il" effects
If tnis description of people should ever do
us harm, it will he by their dense population
when they can net ill concert at short notice
Cut, Mr. President, this is a topic, too deli
cate to touch; it is imeuponwlikih I forbear
to enlarge.
Honorable gentlemen, arguing tins as .an
original question upon the subject of slavery
t i'll us, very emphatically, that slavery is too,
great an evil to be tolerated. Soppo-c we
should entertain tin: opinion that siirli is the
fact, anil the people of Mis-'orri slioui-I think
differently, shall we take upon ourselves t"
judge for them vvli.at is most for their advan
tage? Shall vve deny thetu the right of opi
nion ? Is this compatible with the genius
nod spirit of our free constitution ? Are
these the sentiments of gi-utb-men who ab
hor slavery ? I had thought, Mr. President,
that the pride of opinion was the American s
boast. I hud fondly hoped, -that the old
doctrine of saving the people froiii their
worst enemy, themselves, had been long
since exploded. And (.hat one much more
congenial with the principles of our govern
ment, had been substituted. 1 had thought,
that, as the .people were the. source of all
pOiver, they might be permitted to judge
for themselves in all original ami important
questions in which their welfare was materi
ally involved, I must contend then, sir, that
whether slavery is reaiiy an evil or no', is a
matter for the people of Missouri to deter
mine for themselves, and not Congress lea
thern. If it is an evil and they choose to hug
it to their bosoms, and to enfold it in their
fond embrace, does it pertain to Congress to
deny them the, privilege? Shall vve lake
from them the right of themselves upon a
subject so intimately connected with their.
welfare 7 IVill those who inveigh so bitterly
against the slavery of the blacks, make slav es
of the white people of Missouri, and rivet
chains about their necks? Shall an American
Congress,basking in the sunshine oi’the only-
free Constitution upon earth, unmindful ot
Ahftt’fr 1 ( > Vib-zV(tftV-d^h‘wr 1 trtthrSciii.
and to restrain them in the exercise of
rights enjoyed by others? Such a course-of
conduct might do well for a despot of l-'.u-
ropc. Such a procedure might have been
expected from a Bonaparte, in the meridi
an of his splendid career of conquest. But,
for the meek-eyed sons of a. republic, to
ittempt such a thing, I must confess, Mr.
President, has excited my astonishment
and regret.
These people are either capable of sell
government, or they are irol. If the for
mer, permit them to-frame a-Constitution
for themselves, restrained wily hy the ob
ligation imposed by the Federal Constitu
tion—that it shall have a iv-publican form.
Let us grant to them the iioon of scil-gov-
ernment, without alloy. Unfit they should
he-deuincd incapable ol’self government, It t
Congress,in tender commiseration for their
unfortunate condition, continuer to make
all needful rules and rcgulatims” which
may be essential for their comfott and pro
tection! But can it h- i xpectcd'i that the
peoplo of Missouri, the hardy sAis of tile
west, will tamely submit to smii ildegrad-
ation. to such a palpable iufringciWut of
their rights? IVHi tiny submit j" \<- told
that they are, incapable of thinking and
nciing for tlirnisclvi-s: tliattney are ip-gpa-
hle of appreciating the advantages vr of
^voiding the ev ils of slavery? \
Such Biilimission and humiliation, sir,
might be expected from the slaves of tin
eastern despot, whose souls, enfettered and
enchained by arbitrary power, had In-coin,
so fallen, to degraded and debased, th/
thev V v . ,l,ca i'“bl | - "f the exereise c-f
ma"- ; * Pl! lings. But to «vpecl Mu:h sfb-
.‘-lon from tile tree-born sons ol'Aiin-sea,
upon whose birth the genius of lilerty
smiled, wlio have been nursed in (lie bp of
independence, and grown to madiood,
wanm d and animated by the geniil iuflu-
enec of our happy Constitution, is .'n expect
that which reason and nature f.rbid? ’Tis
to expect from freemen the .onduct of
slaves.
Mr. President, unless these rn-n are com
posed of different materials from what I
presume they are, 1 fear, much do I fear,
that (he imposition of restrictions,'or the
refusal to admit them unconditionally into
the Union, will excite a tempest whose fu
ry will not be easily allayed. It is pefbaiis
wrong to predict or.anticipate evil, but lie
must lie badly acquainted with the signs of
the times, who does not perceive a storm
portending; and callous to all the finer feel
ings of nature must he he, who does not
dread the bursting ofthat storm.
31r. President, I cannot but imagine 'o
ray Mil f intestine feuds, civil wars,and all iln-
black catalogue of evils consequent upon
such a state of things. 1 behold the fatber
armed against the son, and the sou against
the father—I perceive a brother’s sword
crimsoned -w ith a brother's blood. I per
ceive our houses w rapt in flames, and our
wives and infant children driven from their
homes, forced to submit to the pelting of
the pitiless storm, with no other sheiter
but the catiupy of heaven: with nothing to
sustain them but theeold charity of an un
feeling world. 1 trust in God, that this crea
ture of t!u imagination may never he re
alized. But if Congress persist in the de
termination to impose the restriction con
templated, 1 fear there is too much cause
to apprehend, that consequences fatal to
the, peace and harmony of this Union w ill
be tile inevitable result.
[Dilate to be continued],
•'nail bo paid by fnMtilttJC-friF. J ii'M pnv-j forcnoc In omrt
ment, Nov. runh 1C 20 aft ho second, day asking sucli an
1st IC.’l, and the last, November 30tb
1021.
Annapolis, (Md.) Fob. 12.
'I he Law to stay exactions has just pas
sed both houses by large majorities.—
Its provisions arc, that judgment debts
rno?t Tin: rvti-mr.R.
At a meeting of the Agricultural Society
of Virginia, liohlen on the 1 Jinvust. tin-
following M i Monivt. was uiiHiiinioUsly
mlopted, and ordered to Ixv sent to tin
Representative in Congress tor tlii-
lhetrict.
THE MEMOllIAli
fy the “ J irginiti Sociity fur pronwlinu
fejrirulliircy te tiio t on^xc > .</ ih< f
Statct, iu npjiofiti'in. to the scvsrul ,\fc-
niontih impi I'd ific'iw praying for e.iltli-
tiimt’l tfatic* vpan Forigh In.ports—llc-
- fpret fully state* :
Tliut although Un- right of the riti-
7rpns oft he rmldil'.S'l'nns \o address
tlieir Kepn-seiitatlves, be a first prin-
ciple 'in -otir go vend dent, your mc-
lnoriulisls arc no acl\"ocatesifl>r t ho ex
orcise of it—except upon'occasions.,
which do, or may indterially ali'ect,
either individual or Patioibil interests.
Such vve consider tilt- one which 1ms
been the cause of our present meeting.
And however well inclined we may
generally feel, tacitly to repose full
confidence, both in your inclinations
and ability -to promote the general
good, yet we should deem ourselves
guilty of an inexcusable dereliction of
duty, were we now to remain silent,
when a question so deeply interesting
to the whole agricultural people of our
country, has been forced upon your
attention hy the urgent importunitk*
of our domestic manufacturers and
their friends, to impose additional tax
es upon foreign imports. Wo aim
not to arraign their motives, but the
purposerfor which you are thus assail
ed, seems to us not less impolitic and
unjust, than their arguments and
picas appear unsound and fallacious
Tims, upon the assumption that ag
riculture, manufactures and commerce
ire naturally friends and allies, and
equally entitled to the protection of
government—to ail of which we rea
dily agree; they confidently Ask you
to make that protection unequal t by
imposing additional burdens and res
trictions upon two of these allies and
friends to benefit the third! That any
farther tax upon foreign commodities
must necessarily operate in this way,
is most manifest, notwithstanding the
protestation, that u the- 1 good of the
w hole,” is the motive for-asking it.—
1 «U. ■ p.i»£ jwntocCwvn
right, w e diner, from them most essen
tially : for the only kind, that in our
view, government ciyi justly bestow,
either on commerce,, manufactures, or
agriculture, is to guard their respec
tive rights from violation. The mo
ment she attempts to interfere with the
investment *f tlieir c'apitul, or the re
gulation of profits, shdrtuTards the con
version of this natural friendship and
alliance into enmity and contention.—
Iler constitutional right to regulate
the one, can never, without au utter
perversion of language, be construed
to mean, the power of checking or des
troying either of these three great
sources af national wealth : because
every pow cr >A' our government at leant,
was given to benefit, not to injure the
people-governed, ft is not enough,
therefore, to say of any measure, that
it is designed to promote the general
welfare; it must actually do it, or mani-
fi sth/ hare that tend envy, not to violate
the spirit of the constitution.
Again, because they,-the manufactur
ers, have sitfl’crcd enormous losses and
privation since the p»ace, it is stroiig-
iv insinuated, that your honorahk*
body are sorely to blame for it; inas
much as you have failed, when engag
ed in imposing taxes, exclusively al
most for their advantage, to make
them sufficiently high to destroy fo
reign competition. A reference to
their prosperity duringMhc war, when
they had the benefit of monopoly
prices, (as we have all sufficiently felt)
and their claiming a resuscitation of
this prosperity from your hands, ap
pears to us equivalent to an assertion,
that tlie-natioim! legislature is, in peace,
to guarantee every speculation into
which the lust of gain, or the impro-
\ ideneg of -visionary theory during
tear, may betray men of avaricious
or sanguine dispositions. If any man,
or set of men, either in peace or war,
voluntarily engage in a business, which
turns ouf. a losing pirn, can there lie
■my justice in taxing the whole na
tion to make good his, or their losses,
be flic pretcxUi’or the undertaking,
what it may? T)o they complain oT
sufferings and losses ? U’iiat class is
there who have not participated in
them? Hare the agriculturalists been
exempt? If not, bow would our man
ufacturers.like a petition from the cul
tivators of the soil, to prevent them
from buying any, but the native pro
ductions of our own country? Or w hat
would they say to a request from any
one state in the union, on the plea of
having suffered most, to compel the
manufacturers to purchase bread stuffs,
cotton ami tobacco exclusively from
that one ? The glaring injustice of
such a proposition would be denounc
ed, and very properly too, by every
manufacturing 'establishment in the
United States. Yet where is the ciit-
between one state's
Advantage over the
i.-st, and one class—a minor one too,
praying for a similar privilege over
the other classes,({by seeking to com*
-I them to buy whiit they want, only
of them! Neither the investment nor
direction oif individual capital, nor die
idjustmerit of iIiorc losses and gains
suiting either from its good or bad
management, have ever appeared to
to be matters with which govern
ment could legitimately concern, l!
his position be true, and to us it seems
cmonstrable, the following inter
nee must.be most obvious; that the
lahu of our manufacturers to Con-
gre.*si«nal interference in their behalf,
by a tax—no part of which they are
to pa\., cannot be sustained upon any
principles, cither of equity or consti
tutional law. If they have chosen to
(conjecture that they were to he kept
up by tbe nation, cost what it might;
that they alone, were with impunity to
red palaces, instead of simple mauu-
aduring buildings, and to spend in
the structure and equipment of these
such enormous sums, .is to leave little
else, besides the delusive hopes of ex
orbitant profits to carry on their busi-
tion, i,-. diminished or destroyed.—
“ How ridiculous then, to attempt to
increase this industry, by having re
course to prohibitory enactments! Jl
we will not buy of foreigners, foreign
ers cannot buy of u«. The restric
tive system, if carried to its full
extent, would shut us out of every mar
ket. It would not merely diminish,
but totally annihilate the commerce ol
tho world.” Now although the false
policy of some of thr foreign govern
ments with whom we have commer
cial relations, has diminished the mar
kets for our products—can this be a
sufficient reason on our part, for a
policy which will decrease these mar
kets still more ? Can any rnan be
lieve, that a total prohibition of foreign
imports could create a number of do
mestic maiuifucturrrs adequate to the
consumption of all the surplus produc
tions of our agriculture? If not—how
is a partial prohibition to have that
effect;—us it can only substitute a
small domestic market with reduced
prices for our labour, and enhanced
ones for theirs, in lien of all that por
tion of the foreign market which sucli
partial prohibition would extinguish:
numbered too, by the additional du
s; that agriculture w as to be taxed, j ties to be transferred from our pockets
ad libitum, either through foreign im
ports, or in some other way, to com
pensate them for every failure; the
■. hole error in these unreasonable cal-
ulatious, being their own, so should
be their total loss. No speculation
originally bad, from violating the true
principles of national policy, can ever
be made good, merely by govern
ment’s undertaking to reimburse the
losers. Tiiis only transfers the loss
from those who ought to bear it, being
their own contrivance, to those w ho
are innocent of all part icipation in tiie
blunder. Should these sentiments
subject us to tbo imputation of disre
garding tbe misfortunes of our fellow
citizens, we may safely urge in our de
fence, that had we been originally de
ficient in our due share of humani
ty, which we by no means admit, the
pressure of the times has borne suffi
ciently hard upon u» also, to inspire
abundant sympathy for all their sul-
ferings. lint individual and volun
tary bcnificcnce, we contend, is the
source alone, from whence tliese should
be relieved, when beyond die exer
tions of the sufferers themselves; not
from the coffers of the government
a >■>/! .atill bv the imposition of par-
life L miy’Tfrfft if (W W> HV. M... JL‘ 1
ral, there are certain diseases so (-Du
plicated raid inscrutable, that it is saf
est to leave' them to work tlieir own
cure. The vis medicatrix untune,
is the beet physician in all such.emer
gencies; for if the government under
takes to play the doctor., the patients
are much oftener killed than cured by
the prescriptions.
There is another ground on which
you are importuned to grunt the pm ver
of the petitioner?., that we cannot omit
to notice. You are confidently told,
that such a measure will “ promote na
tional industry;” and upon this plau
sible pretext you are asked to impose
a tax to be paid by ngri rulturc for the
benefit of her friend and ally—inanu-
(aotures. This, it-is true, has not been
said.in so many words by the peti
tioners; but we confess our incapaci
ty to see their object in any other light
to those of the domestic manufac
turers ; and reducing the revenue,
at the same time, in such a man
ner, as to require farther taxes on
agriculture, the paymaster general,
to support the government itself?
Compel the Cultivator of the soil
to pay more for what he w ants, by
excluding or raising the price of fo
reign commodities; taketiway, or di
minish simultaneously, his chance for
selling w hat lie makes, at the best pri
ces lie can; and we shall, by forcing
igricultural capital to seek other chan
nels, not only, very soon reduce the
{uantity of agricultural products with
in such limits, as no longer to excite
tlie sympathies of our manufacturers
for our difficulties in getting rid of the
excess; but bring about a sftatc of
tilings, after the lapse of a few years,
when our surpluses of all sorts will lie
converted into deficits, and we may
all have the consolation, if it be any, of
starving together.
Itis by the productive labor alone,
of any country, that capital is aug
mented ; any thing therefore which
sets this labor in motion, and conti
nues its activity, necessarily increases
national capital. But the most pow-
»• i i v I’ll* f l' " *
..mUTTe more extensive it be
comes, the greater w ill be the quantity
of producth e labor employed, and tin
more rapid the augmentation of per
inanent wealth, “ Commerce being
nothing more than an exchange of e-
quivalentsthere can he no greater
absurdity, than to suppose, that the
importation of foreign commodities
has a tendency to impoverish a coun
try. “For whatever we purchase,
w ust be obtained with the produce, ei
ther of our land, capital, or labor ; the
commodities bought, are of course e-
quivaletrts for such portions of the
product cither of (he labor, the capi
tal, or the land of the country, as have
been employed in obtaining them. If
those to w hom we sell, should happen
to make a greater profit from their in
dustry, than we do from ours, this cir
cumstance does uot affect the truth of
tbo general principle ; for so long as
That the temporary interests of our the sellers in both cases, find a ready
market for w hat they make, so long
must national industry be promoted
in both ; and so long will national ca
pital, which depends upon the con
stant exertion of this industry, conti
nue to be augmented. The ratio of
increase may be greater in one coun
try thau in the other; but still, it is
gain in each ; nor can we perceive c-
ven the shadow of plausibility in the
sophism, that would make it any thing
else. “To whatever extent we may
purchase of oilier nations, they must
inevitably be compelled, directly or
indirectly, to purchase a correspond
ing quantity from us; and vice versa,
die less we buy of them, the less they
can buy of us. But if the permanent
prosperity of all countries, so far as it
results from wealth, depends upon the
continual increase of productions, atul
the ready sale of the surplus, can we
rationally expect the mere exchange
of a foreign, fora domestic market,
sucli as ours, that is, a market in ex
pectancy, to produce this effect ? Sup
pose the substitution made, ami ima
gine that to gratify our manufactur
ers, the strong arm of power shall
check or annihilate our foreign mar-
munufacturers would, for a time, be
promoted by such a tax, we have no
doubt whatever; but we have yet to
learn that they constitute the nation.
If they do not—if they compose but a
small part of it—if a very large ma
jority of the whole people have any
superior claim to be called “the na
tion”—and if this majority in our
country lie the agriculturalists—then
are wo prepared to show, that nation
al industry, so far from being promot
ed by it, will be most injuriously
checked—if not in a great measure
destroyed. At this advanced stage of
political knowledge, we hail hoped,
that there never could bean occasion,
in our country, at least, for the reca
pitulation of certain first principles in
political economy, which from the uni
versality of their adoption by all the
ablest writers on this science, may al
most be pronounced axioms. Yet this
seems to be rendered necessary in self-
defence, b} : the recent justification of
a departure from the so long acknow
ledged maxim, “ that the many should
not be taxed for the benefit of tbe few;”
and by the attempt to shew the impol
icy' of “ purchasing where we can pur
chase cheapest;” both of which we
perceive in some of the late addresses
ou behalf of our manufacturers. Na
tional industry can only lie promoted
by finding ready and extensive mar
kets for that which it produces; and
the continued exertion of this industry
depends upon the extent and constan
cy of these marts, where nationul su-
perlluitics may be exchanged for each
other on the best attainable terms.—
Every limitation therefore, of these
markets, whether created by our owtl
or by a foreign government, must in-
evitubly have the effect of discourag
ing in a proportionate degree, the na
tion: 1 ’ indnstrv : because the stimulus
ket to the extent tit
;y w ish, and leave
us to take our chance for one at home;
will the same arm, at the same time,
legally compel tliese manufacturers to
buy all our produce at fair prices, since
ive shall be virtually compelled to pur
chase theirs, at w hat prices they please?
It not, what is to become of that salu
tary principle of competition, w liicli is
our only security against exactions on
the one hand, aiul fur fair profit on
the other? But say they, it is high
time to turn our eyes homeward j'or
markets, w hen w e can see nothing for
our produce abroad, but losing pri
ces, or total exclusion ; \et the whole
basis of their application to vottr ho
which imparted and continued its mo- not able body K'lhy
T ,
m. that
foreign commodities abound so much
in our cotnlry, as to prevent tlicin
from living by the manufacture of do
mestic ones. I low these goods get
hero, without some equivalent beinp;
taken in exchange for them, and of
course some market, a pretty exten
sive one too, being open for its recep
tion, is a mystery w hich we shall leave
to them to explain. Certain it is, that
hotli parts of tlieir dilemma cannot he
true. If wc have a vent abroad for
our products, to complain of wanting
one, contradicts a plain matter of fact.,
On the contrary, if we have little of
no foreign market we can receive but
few, or no foreign commodities, and
of course tbo tnnoufactiirm need not
fear a competition wljichdoes not ex-,
ist. But we do not deny that our fo
reign markets have, decreased; and we
w ill add, from causey beyond our,con-
troitl: yet, surely, this can furnish no
reason for decreasing them still more
by our own acts. It would be the
old project in a new form, of cutting
off men’s feet to save shoes. “ The
end of all commerce is certainly to in
crease production, and though parti
al loss may possibly accrue from tlris
increase, yet the general happiness
must be augmented. As well might
we endeavor to arrest all improve
ments in agriculture &c manufactures,
and all inventions of machinery ; for
though tliese contribute to general a—
bundance, and therefore to the gene
ral happiness, they never fail at the
moment of tlieir introduction, to dete
riorate or annihilate a part of the ex
isting capital of farmers and manufac
turers.” Tliese are nearly the words
of one of the ablest political econo
mists of the present age, as quoted in
a late public' journal of established
reputation ; and in our judgment a-
mount to a demonstration of the im
policy and injustice of any legal ex
clusion of foreign competition from
our markets. It would indeed be an
act of sore oppression, thus to create^
at our expense, a virtual monopoly in
favor of our domestic manufacturers,,
who, unless they differed from all the*
men, that ever have been placed rn si
milar circumstances, w ould not fail to
make us pay, in the price of their com
modities, the whole difference occa
sioned by the excluding duty. AN c
are far from asserting that they w ould
do wrong to avail themselves of such
an advantage ; we believe all classes
would do the same; but we can not
tuatiJfiVNBV.Ulii
ed to the double loss of enhanced pri
ces lbr w hat we bought, and reduced
ones for all that wc sold.
Il' there be any truth in the forego
ing arguments, *it must be manifest,
that production and consumption, mu
tually increase each other; that by
this increase and by this alone, nation
al industry is promoted, national ca
pital augmented, and national happi
ness, bo far as it depends on wealth,
ensured ; let us then, no farther pur
sue the policy of controuling them by
legislative enactments, the obvious and
inevitable tendency of which is, to
counteract all tliese beneficial results.
Allhoug the general reasoning here
in contained, he opposed to the whrNe
system of duties upon imports, we on
ly desire for the present, to prevent
the slightest extension of it. We have
no wish to he understood, as aiming
at the abolition of all taxes whatever
upon foreign commodities. To a cer
tain extent wc believe such taxes as
eligible perhaps, as any others; but
wc take this occasion to say, that ma
ny of them have appeared to us, al •
ready too high; and the nearer wq
can possibly approach to free trade
with all tiie world,and equal taxation
among ourselves, the better. Every
departure from tliese great principles
is calculated to work injustice by
drawing money unequally from the
members of the community; because
it must necessarily press chiefly cn the
consumers, who are principally agri
culturalists ; and by diminishing con
sumption from rendering it more cost
ly, must check in a proportionate de
gree the national industry among that
class where it is most productive. If
all classes are in reality, not in profes
sion alone, equally entitled to the pro
tection of government; there is surely
a Corresponding obligation on all, to
contribute equally towards the support
thereof. Nor does it appear to us,
that tbo circumstance of other nations
adopting this pernicious principle ol
checking, or altogether prohibiting hv
excessive duties, the introduction Ll1
our commodities, can furnish any va
lid reason for us to retaliate in the
same w ay, under the delusive notion,
that it is a countervailing policy. Stu
diously to avoid receiving a benefit,,
from a belief that we shall thereby in
jure those who attempt to injure us. ifc
a mode of counteraction w hich inevi
tably inflicts ns much miqcliiel upon
ourselves, us it can possibly occasion
to others. It may truly be called, (to
borrow the language of Mr. Jefferson)
“ the unprofitable contest of trying
which can do each other tbe mo?t
harm.” Docs not the true counter
vailing policy, rather consist in doing
every thing we can to render all arti
cles qf homy consumption derive^