Under this fostering system, the tonnage of the United States made as rapid progress as ever was made by that of any nation in the world. The contrast between the magnanimous spirit that presided over those laws-and the miserable and blighting spirit that dictated the twenty-seven and a half per cent. on cottons and woollens-twenty-two per cent. on potterysixteen and a half per cent. on linens and silks, &c. &c in order to enable us to "buy goods where they could be had cheapest" is as astonishing as it is lamentable. On the one side we see a dignified policy, honourable to the nationand on the other a policy unworthy of a rising empire, which has produced the most disastrous consequences. A few lines more on the subject of the protection of commerce. The navy of the United States, which has been created chiefly for that purpose, has cost in 20 years above 56,000,000 of dollars.† The last war with Great Britain, which arose wholly from the duty of protecting commerce, cost, exclusive of the naval department, $52,000,000.‡ The expense of foreign intercourse, that is, for ambassadors, charges des affaires, consuls, agents, bearers of despatches, &c. &c. for twenty-four years, have been 10,872,494 dollars, or above 450,000 dollars per annum, (Seybert, 713.); and for the Barbary powers, in twenty years, 2,457,278 dollars, or above 120,000 dollars per annum. (Ibid.) Thus, in these two items, there is a positive disbursement, for the protection of commerce, of above half a million of dollars annually: whereas, the government has never paid one dollar, as bounty or premium, to foster, protect, or promote the productive industry employed in manufactures; and has never laid a dollar of duty, beyond what was called for by the exigencies of the treasury. *Seybert's Statistics, p. 317. † Weekly Register, and Seybert's Statistics, p. 706. Idem, p. 716. It is painful to state, but candour calls on us to state, that a portion of the merchants, who have thus enjoyed such a high degree of care and protection, bestowed at such enormous expense, have too generally been averse to affording adequate protection to their fellow citizens, engaged in manufactures; for which they suffer now in common with the manufacturers, by the consequent universal calamity of the times and impoverishment of the country. Let us now turn from the fostering care bestowed on commerce-the various statutes enacted in its favour-the expense incurred for that purpose-the complete protection it has experienced, to the situation of the manufacturer. Has he had bis equal share of the care and attention of government? No. The paternal care of their own manufacturers, generally exercised by other governments, shuts him out of nearly all the foreign markets of the world. And the impolicy of our system leaves him at home at the mercy of rivals from every quarter of the globe, who, availing themselves of the advantage of superior capital, and their own governmental protection, vanquish him in his own market, and reduce him to bankruptcy. That the manufacturers, particularly those of cotton and woollen fabrics, have not been protected from foreign rivalship-that they have been victims of an inadequate tariff, is palpable from the immense quantities of rival foreign artieles with which our markets have been inundated; from the ruin of so many respectable citizens who invested large capitals in manufacturing establishments; and from the great proportion of those establishments that are wholly suspended in their operations; many of which have been sold for 20, 30, or 40 per cent. of the first cost. Of these facts the proofs are within the knowledge of the great mass of our citizens. They admit neither doubt nor denial. Thus, while the manufacturer appears to enjoy the advantages of a free government, he is, we repeat, incontestibly in a worse situation, so far as respects the acquisition of property, and protection of industry, two principal objects of good government, than the subjects of the monarchs of Europe, whose situation he must regard with envy. The English, the French, the Russian, the Austrian, and the Danish manufacturers are generally secured in the home market. There is but one way to account for the care bestowed on the commercial, and the neglect of the manufacturing interest. The former has been at all times well represented in congress, and the latter never. It is, as we have observed on a former occasion, nearly as much unrepresented in that body as this country in its colonial state was in the British parliament. The Agriculturist. With hardly an exception, secured in the home market. Nearly all the foreign markets in the world open to him. A CONTRAST. The Manufacturer. Shut out of nearly all the foreign markets in the world, and beaten out of his own for want of adequate protection. The Merchant. The coasting trade secured to him by absolute and unqualified prohibition. Every possible advantage that the government can give, afforded to his shipping in the foreign trade. We appeal, fellow citizens, to your candour, to your justice, whether there can be a reason why the farmer should be protected by duties, which, in most cases,* are nearly equal to prohibitions--and the merchant have the coasting and China trade secured to him, the former by absolute prohibition, and the latter by duties equivalent to prohibition; while there is no one manufactured article whatever prohibited, and while the cotton and woollen manufacturers (to pass over others) are sacrificed to foreign rivals, by the utterly inadequate duty of twenty-seven and a half per cent? This is a vital point-and demands the most serious reflection. The whole question at issue may be said to turn on it. We put it to the understanding of our fellow citizens throughout the union-and to the consciences of the members of congress. If any adequate reason can be assigned for this very unequal distribution of protection, let it be proclaimed, in order to silence complaint. That several extensive establishments have survived the general wreck-that they are still in profitable operationis no disproof of our allegations. Their proprietors have generally had some peculiar advantages in point of capital *Hemp, as already stated, pays about 26 per cent.-cheese 70-cotton 30-and all other agricultural productions 16 1-2 It is obvious that those duties are far more effectual than 70 per cent. would be on pottery, glass bottles, or linen the two first of which are subject to 22, and the last to 16 1-2 per cent. We might go on with the enumeration and comparison to a great extent, but deem it unnecessary. or long establishment, that saved them from the fate of the others. But supposing that the prohibition of the coasting trade had not been enacted—that it had generally fallen into the hands of foreigners; but that twenty or thirty of our merchants were able to support themselves by that portion of it which foreign rivalship left them, would that be admitted for a moment to disprove the ruin of the hundreds of others that had fallen sacrifices? We are persuaded that very few of our citizens attach an adequate degree of importance to the industry of the manufacturing class of the community, and that it is prodigiously underated. To form a correct estimate of it, requires to enter into minute calculations, which have rarely been made. It never could have been supposed, without such calculations, that the cotton fabrics, produced by 100,000 manufacturers in 1815, amounted to more than one half of the whole value of the domestic exports, of every description, of that year; which is nevertheless the fact, as will appear in the course of this address. In order to aid you, fellow citizens, in comparing the products of manufacturing and agricultural industry, we submit a table of the exports of the United States for the. year 1815, extracted from the returns of the Secretary of the Treasury. We have annexed in the second column, a statement of the population of the several states according to the census of 1810; and in the third column, an estimate of what was the probable population in 1815, assuming, according to Dr. Seybert, an annual increase of 3 per cent. or 15 per cent. for the whole period. |