Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

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^