Indiana Palladium, Volume 3, Number 31, Lawrenceburg, Dearborn County, 11 August 1827 — Page 2

WOOLLENS BILL. Remarks of Mr. Buchanan, of Pa before a County meeting at Lancaster, on the

Woollens Bill.

Jlr. Chairman: 1 never rose with

more pleasure to address an assembly,

than upon the present occasion. This meeting presents a spectacle which is the

trongest illustration of the freedom and excellence of our institutions. You have called upon me, as your representative,

to render you an account of my conduct,

m regard to the Woollen Bill. To the people of this congressional district I hold myself responsible, and to them I shall therefore cheerfully answer. As your representative, I have no doubt often erred in judgment; but that 1 have ever intentionally abandoned the rights or the interests of my constituents, no person, 1 trust, within the sound of my voice, will for one moment believe. Such an abandonment of duty would, upon my part, be the basest ingratitude as well as the blackest guilt. I am bound to you by

every tie which can bind man to his feM manufactures; but it would nave impos-

a duty of 55 cents; but if the estimate!

of its value could have been reduced to 50 cents, the duty would only be 14 2-3 cents. It may be called unfair in me, to put

extreme cases under this Bill. What then would have been its operation upon the three intermediate prices, between the four minimums? They are 95 cents. ,$2, and $3 25. A square yard costing

95 cents, would pay a duty of 58 per cent ;

if it cost 2, the duty would be 46 per cent, and if 3 25; it would be 45. From

3 25, the duty would have gradually

sunk, as the value of the cloth increased,

until it nrived at 4, at which point it

reached the old duty, and would have

been tree from the operation of the bill.

Waving thus endeavored to explain he nature of the Woollen Bill, I shall

now proceed to state to you, some of the

reasons which compelled me to vote against it. And, in the first place, had it become a law, it would have been a grievous tax

upon the poor, for the benefit of domestic

vested in the woollen manufacture:

this country. But a small portion of this capital comparatively speaking exists out of New England. Even there, the great

er part of it is confined within a narrow

01 gainer uriu-iittu uy uie Muisiun ui m

third. I he second section established a minimum of 40 cents per pound for foreign wool, and finally would have

raised the ad valorem duty from 30 to

space. Much of the immense capital of 40 per cent. The third section, howev

er, permitted the importation of wool

upon the skin, without establishing any minimum. I will not say that this pro-

Boston and Salem, has been diverted

from commerce to the woollen manufacture. This branch of business 19 not conducted in New England as it is in

Pennsylvania, by individuals; but large'defeating the protection which the se

masses of wealth are concentrated, and applied to that purpose, by incorporated companies. In this state of the manu

facture, prohibit, at once, the importation

Jow men.

Friendly to the tariff" policy as you know I am and ever have been, still reflection has only served more firmly to

convince me of the propriety of my vote!

ed little, or no additional burden upon the

rich. Whilst the poor man would have been compelled to pay a tax of 100 per cent upon the coarse cloth which he purchased to corer his nakedness and shield

against the Woollen Bill. Before I pro-jhim from the wintry blast; the wealthy cmA M !,itP thr reasons whirh inHnred (individual, who clothed himself Witt)

me thus to vote, it will be proper to explain to the meeting the nature of its pro

visions.

costly raiment, would have paid no more than the existing duty. Such a law would have been imeoual and uoiust. It

Immediately after the organization of, would have violated the spirit of our re-

the federal government, congress, in the publican institutions. I do not wish to

preamble to the act of 1739, recognized ! play the dem gogue upon this, or upon

the policy of protecting domestic manu

factures. Under that act, the duty upon the importation of woollen goods was fixed at five per cent. This duty has been increased, from time to time, until at length, by the tariff of 1824, it was raised from 25 to 33 1-3 per cent. This is the present nominal duty. The actual duty is greater, because in estimating it, you must ad 1 ten per cent to the cost of the article at the place from which it is imported, and calculate the duty upon the aggregate. Thus, if a yard of woollen cloth cost one dollar at Liverpool, you add to this ten per cent, which makes $1 10. Thirty-three and one third per cent, upon that sum gives you the actual rate of duty, which is equal to 3G 2-3 per cent. Every man in this country, j

who purchases a coat of imported cloth, pays a tax of 36 2-3 per cent, upon its original cost, for the benefit of domestic ma ufaclures and of the public revenue. Thus stands the law at present. At an early period of 4the last session of congress, many petitions were presented from New England, alleging that the tariff of 1324, had been evaded at our eustorn houses, and that the protection which it meant to extend to our woollen manufacturers, was not aff"ded. For

any other occaisou. The poor man has no right to exclusive advantages, on account of his poverty. He ought to bear his share of the public burdens. He ought to be taxed, as he now is, in proportion to what he purchases. In this

rep(ct, he now stands on the same footing with the wealthy. All are now taxed by this equitable rule. J was willing to inciease.this burden for the benefit of the Woollen manufacturers, provided the bill had continued to tax all our citizens, in proportion to what they purchased. It is necessar), that the duty upon the importation of foreign Woollens should be increased, in order that the protection may be afforded, which was intended by the Tanffof 1 824. Since the passage of that law, the British Government have reduced the duty upon the importa

tion of foreign wool, from 6d. to Id. sterling per pound. The decrease of duty upon the raw material, considerably diminishes the cost of the manufactured article. To that extent it enables the English manufacturer to enter into competition with the American manufacturer, in our market, upon terms more favourable than he could have done, immediately after the passage of the Tariff of 1824. The re-

of a very large proportion of foreign woollens, as the Woollen Bill would

have done, and what would be the inev

itable consequence? In the East, they

are already in possession of the capital.

I hey already have large incorporated

companies in operation. They could,

at once have extended their machinery

to meet the increased demand arising from prohibition: and in this manner

they could, and they would have swal

lowed up most of the woollen manufactures throughout the rest of the Union. We are not yet prepared to contend against them. Our woollen manufactures could not sustain such a competition. The skill and the cnnital of inrli-

I - viduals,inthe middle states if this bill had become a law, must and would have been overwhelmed by the superior skill and

the superior capital of the Eastern manufacturing companies. Is it not much better, then, to pursue our former policy, by gradually increasing the duties upon importation, for the purpose of protecting our manufactures, as they gradually arise, than to be hurried into a prohibitory system for which we are not prepared; a system, too, so unequal in its operation, that whilst it would have

levied an oppressive tax from the pockets

of the poor, would have left the law as it now is in regard to the rich. If the woollen Bill had been confined to a protection merely, which would have operated equally upon all classes of society, I should-have voted for it, even if I had believed that protection to be somewhat too great. No slight difference of opinion should have separated me from the friends of this bill. Under a system of protection, the woollen manufacture of Pennsylvania, yet, compara

tively speaking, in its mlancv, would

the Woollen i3ill should "be rccOrr.mil' ted to the committee on manufactures with instruction so to amend the same, as to make the duties on the importation of foreign woollen goods and foreign wool, commence at the fame time; and to make the duties the same on foreign wool, whether imported upon the skin

or not: also to increr.se uit uuijr u.i mc

pints

not less

vision was introduced for the nurnose of!imnortation of foreign

r r - n:

than ten cents per gallon, aisu iu in-

cond section afforded; and thus deluding'crease the duty on the importation ot

the wool growers. That it would have foreign hemp not less than $o per (on. had this effect, however is almost certain. No question was ever taken upon this It is true that the people of Europejmotion. A member from New Ilnmpwould not kill their sheep for the pur-jshire rose and moved the previous qut spose of sending wool upon the skin tojtion, which was sustained by the house our markets; yet we know that immense land put an end to all amendment and to

numbers of them are annually slaughter-jail debate. The vote was 102 to 98. ed for other purposes. These fieecesEvery representative from New England would all seek our market, where they lexcrpt one, voted for the previous queswould find a most strange discriminatii.gtion. Only eight of the representatives duty in their favor. In this manner a'from Pennsylvania toted in favor of i!, sufficient quantity of foreign wool might jthe remaining uighteen voting against it. have been imported at the small addi-j The friends of the Woollen Bill have tional duty of 10 per cent, to enter into:often said, let us now protect wool and competition with the domestic material, iwoollens, and afterwards we will pro- & to keep down its price. In this manner'tect other articles. 1 ask have we any the hopes of the wool grower; from the'reason to hope, that after we shall have Woollen Bill, would have been blasted, (afforded them the protection which they There was another view of this sub-!demand, they will assist us in obtaining

ject which made a strong impression (additional duties tor tne nenent or t::e upon my mind; because it immediately grain and hemp, and manufactures of

interested my own constituents. The;Penns lvania. If they will not now vote friends of the Woollen Bill uniformly for an'additional dutv upon any of these resisted every attempt to nffird addition-articles, when they have so much at

al protections any otherartkh, except stake, will they generously and volunta-

wool nnd woollens. Our hi mer lanlts i ih give it to us, witnoui any equn aient, rested upon broad national foundations. latter they have obtained all they desire?

They embrace even article which re-! All our experience is at war with such

quired protection. I he olessmgs andia supposition.

the burdens of the system were thus dif

fused over the Union. These examples

I shall state but another reason, in

justification of mv conduct, and that is

however, made no impression upon thejthe frauds of the revenue to wrich the friends of tilt: Woollen Bill. In v ain did i Woollen Bill must have given birth, sve inform them, that the agricultural in-jOnr frontier, both upon the ocean and terest of the grain growing states, wnshipoe. the lakes, is so extensive, that there

in a suffering condition, and was as much depresed'as the woollen manufacture? of New England. In vain did we inform them, that for several years, the

price of grain had been so low, as scarre-

1) to afford the farmer a bare subsist-1 f xtravagant duties imposed on particu

is great danger ot smuggin g. e should present as Ihtle temptation for the commission of this crime, as consists with a proper regard for our domestic manufactures. The unnecessary and

have gradually grown into importance, at this result.

ence. 1 tie) were dent to all our complaints. Upon a proposition to impose an additional du'y upon the importation of foreign spirits, not one representative from New England voted in the affirma

tive. I eonfoss I was utterly astonished

manufacturers is the same, as though

' -

there had been a reduction ofour duties. '

this evil, the petitioners askc -1 a remedy jjlative position of the parties has thus

and I never heard a merftber of congress' beer, changed, and the effect upon our

express an opinion adverse to tneir petition. The language of one arid all was. let the act of 1824, be fairly executed: if frauds against its provisions have been committed, let them be prevented & punished. The committee of domestic mantlfactuies, instead of reporting a bill for this purpose, reported the Woollen Bill, which does not contain a solitary provision against the frauds upon the revenue

of which the manufacturers complained.

In its present condition, nrohihitirm

7 . . . - - . would have destro)ed it, whilst it enriched our great Eastern capitalist.-, who

Although every good man must de

plore the excessive use of ardent spirits in this country, yet it is the clearest die-

own the stock of the manufacturing com- bite of policy, if the article must be used panies. that of dome-tic origin ought to be preUpon the present occasion, I shall not ferred. In proportion as you substitute speak of the effect which prohibition! the of whiskey for foreign spirits, in might have had upon the public revenue,' the same proportion do ycu increase the though this is a view of the subject not j demand and the juice for the grain of to be disregarded, as our national govern-; the fanner. M.st persons in this assemment is supported by the duties colleet-Jbly will be astonished to hear, that we

ed upon the importation of foreign mer-' import annu dl between 5 and 0,000,000 chandise. of gallons of foreign spirits, which cost I shall now proceed to give a third between two millions and two millions

reason whv I voted against the Woollen and :l half of dollars. The total value

lar classes of w oollen goods, by the Wool

len Bill, would probably have given rise to a system of smuggling- In this manner our revenue might have suffered,

and the morals ofour people might have been corrupted. Frauds of another description must have sprung from this hill. A square yard of cloth costing 40 cents would have paid a duty of only 14 cents and 2-3 whilst if it had ccst 41 cents it would have paid a duty of 55 cents. So a square yard which cost 1 50, would have paid only 55 cents, whilst if it had cost '1 51, it would have paid a duty of 91 cents and 2-3. One cent of difference in value at the minimums would have made an enormous increase of duty.

jThe temptation to commit fraud upon

tbe revenue, by perjury, would thus have been very great. No man ever would,

if he could avoid it, have imported woo!

Mr. Cook, of Illinois, made a mntinn ' Rill. TT n it :kfTnlH oan:il nmtprtimi of t'.K1 llour which we exported from thisilpn rrnnd.; intn thi rnnntrv i-hirV hnnM

winch was intended to increase Uic pre- to the growers as well as manufacturers countr , even before we lost the BriiUhjbe valued at a price a little above anv of sent rale of duty upon all imported wool- of woof, I should have felt much less ho- West India trade, did not exceed double' the minimums. Every effort which selflens, to an extent sufficient to counteract tile to its passage. Any measure intend-' the value of the spirits imported, li'thelinterest could command, would have.

this late Biitia legislation upon the sub- ed for the benefit of Agriculture, i shall! use of whiskey were substituted through-Sheen used to reduce their value t the

imum price, or below it. A differ-

ject. This motion I advocated with a!l;alwavs view

the ability iu m power. Tiiejriends of the Woollen Bill, however, would not

sutler its form to be changed.

MM i Ins mo-

This bill, nominally, did not increase) tion was defeated, and I was compelled by

the existing, rate of duty. It was intend-!" sense ofdu;, to vote against a Bill ed to produce its effect in a different man-' which would have extorted from povercer. Instead of continuing to estimate jty its hard earnings, whilst it suffered

woollen goods imported into (ids country,! wealth to escape, w ithout imposing on it

any additional nurden. It has been said that a precedent ex-

the duty under it, whenever the actual ! its in our legislation, for the unequal and

value of a square yard of woollen cloth, unjust provisions of the woollen bill, in

u'elit of Agriculture, i shall! use of whiskey were substituted througJi-Sbeen us w jth a friendly ve, ft is out the U. States for that of foreign spir-:minimur

Ih

e price

might

At tlieir real value, it established four

arbitrary standards. Thus, in assessing

place whence imported, did not jthe mode by which the domestic manu40 cents, it was valued at 40 cts. ; facture of coarse cottons was protected.

at tne

exceed 40 cents, it was valued at 40 cts. : , tacture of coarse cottons was protected.

When it exceeded 40 cent", and did not j Even if that were the case, a dangerous!

excet'd ,i au, u was valued at l 5U;.anu unjust precedent should not be folwiieii it exceded 1 50, and did not ex- towed. But there is no foundation for ceed 2 50, it was valued at 2 50; and! this assertion. In 181G, a single mini-

wueii ii r.trnn'u ami uiu mu t; a-: -m icius me snuaic varfl wn

established in favor of domestic cottons. 1 L . '

into sheep walks; but it is equally certain, that in the western pait of our state many of the farmers have emlxii Iced largely in the growing of wool. They must, and ought to be protected. We are all members of the same political family, and should never forget tbe interest and happiness of each other.

j Did the Woollen Bill sufficiently protect

true, that but few of the small and valu-jHs, it would open a market for the grain ence of ore rent ir

able plantations of Lancaster, ChesterJ of our farmers, better than any foreign make a difference of 40 cents in the dui A rV . I r ... -. .... t. ii! .-... ,.!-,, : .. il . ii " ... mm i r i . i

""u ktnuiiiir, t.wi eci ue eonvui ion j - m me "ouu iv. 1 uus perjury ai.-u irauo must nave

The tariff of 1 824, which afforded ad-; hern the natural growth of the Woollen ditional protection to almost every other j Bill. If there had been but one miniinterest in the country, contained no pro-Imam, as is the ca?e with respect to cotvision in favor of the growers of grain. tons, no Mith temptation could ever exIt did not increase the duty upon foreign ist. The minimum of thirty cents is the SMirifs. T'l.'lt diHv nnw rpmninc :ic i t 'cf ni.rt :i n T i-;lii f.r K.i .n-:i- --wl

I ------ - 1 .......... v iui iiil rijumu i i u ft

ceed .$4. 00, it was valued at 4 00. The tariff of 1824, remained unchanged in regard to all cloth which cost ,$4 00, or more, the square yard. These arbitra-

which was increased by the Tariff of 1824, to 30 cents. But one minimum

exists with respect to cottons the wool-

ry standards of 40 cents, 1 50, 2 50, and j ton bill proposed to establish four in re

400, were called minimums. gard to woollens. When the one cotton The nature of the Woollen Bill, will minimum was established, we had a sufbe best explained by a few examples,! licient supply of the raw material not shewing the manner in which it would'only for ourselves, but for the world; at have operated. jtbis time, when every effort is used to What would have been the rate of; establish four woollen minimums, our duty to be paid under it, upon a squarejeountry does not produce any thing like yard of cloth, worth 50cents,at the phceja supply of wool for the manufactures from which it was imported? In estima- already in existence. If the friends of

ting the duty, you must assume the fact, jthe woollen bill had been contented with

the growers of wool? 1 answer confident

ly that it did net. In regard to them, it was a mere delusion. Indeed the manufacturers, at first, did not intend that any additional duty should be imposed upon the importation of foreign wool. To the ability and perseverance of a representative of this state, (Mr. Stevenson of Pittsburgh,) are we in

debted, that any provision was made in

was established by the tariff of 181G.

all cotton

goods

which co?t less than

The friends of the Woollen Bill, op-fthat price; when you get above it the posed with equal success any increase'duty rises gradually in proportion to the of the duty upon foreign hemp. It is value of the article. You do not at once most strange, but it is not less true, thatjlcap to a second, to a third, and to a.

i the American navv our bulwark mid fourth minimum.

our defence, is exclusively supplied w ith Such my fellow citizens, was the bill, hemp from Russia. We are the most against which 1 voted. So novel, so uneagricultural people upon earth, and et;qual, so undigested are its predion?, we depend upon a foreign nation forthe'that I never heaid a member of congress supply of an agricultural product, with- express entire satisfaction with its deout which ournav) could not exist. Fori tails. Indeed many doubted whether m.'inv ears it wa believed, tb.t hfi;iftT (ho -rH rl" vrnfc !f miM

have been of much benefit to the v oollen

the bill in favor of the growers of wool. hemp of Russia was superior in nua!it

TM !. 1. it I. .i..-. . . '

i no aaauionai amy upon wooitensj o tn.it ot the United States. This de-

that it was worth 1 50 instead of 50 cts.

Add 10 per cent to. 1 50 and the aggregate is 1 65. 33 1-3 per cent upon this sum, is equal to 55 cents. Thus it appears, that such a yard of cloth worth

50 cents, under this bill, had it become a law, would have paid a duty of 55 cents or 1 10 per cent. Under the law, as it now stands , it ould pay a duty of 1 8 2-3 cents. Under the Woollen Bill, a square yard of cloth, worth but 41 cents-at the place whence imported, would have paid the same duty as though it had been worth 1 50. The principle of the bill was, the higher the price, between any two of the minimums, the lower the duty. A yard of cloth worth 41 cents, would have paid

the single minimum of 40 cents upon woollens, there might have been some

resemblance between it and the cotton minimum; but even then the likeness would have been faint. As the Woollen Bill stood at the 1 tst session, no parallel can be drawn between them. 1 shall now state a second reason for my opposition to this bill. Had it he-

come a law, its tendency would have been to give the woollen manufacturers of the Eastern States a monopoly of the market of the whole Union. Pennsylvania would then have needed a Tariff against New England, as much as the United States now need a Tariff against Old England. It was said, in Congress that 40,000,000 of capital had been iu-1

would have taken effect on the 1st Au

gust, 1327; whilst that upon the wool was not to commence until 1st June,

1828, nor to r.ttain its maximum until 1st June, 1 829. Although the growth of w ool is in a state of equal depression with its manufacture, yet the wool grower was to suffer for nearly two years, after the manufacturer had been relieved.

What w ould have been the effect of this provision? The manufacturers would

have bad sufficient time between the passage of the law and the commencement of the additional duty on foreign wool, to lay up a store of that article, sufficient to last them for years. That they intended to adopt this course, no

man acquainted with the springs of hu-

manufacturers themselves. Manv be-

lusion has vanished. It has been asccr-; lieved that the English manufacturers tained that the difference between the! would soon have accommodated their two articles is occasioned entireh by the cloth to the minimums w hich is sdifferent methods, in w hich they are pre- tablished, and thus have evaded the pared for market. The Russia hemp is additional protection w hich it inter-

waiei retted, the American hemp ls.ded to afford. Upon tbe whole, so

new retted. 1 here is no country upon earth in w hich greater facilities are af

forded for water retting hemp, than in

far from regretting that I did not vote for this bill, 1 feel sincerely sorry, that

circumstances prevented me frcmoppos-

.ancaster county. If its cultivation jing it in such a manner as 1 believed the

I owed to my constituents.

I was in the chair, whilst

were encouraged by the government, duty which the home demand would veiy soon beidemanded.

supplied with the domestic article; and thus the half million of dollars w hich is

annually sent to Russia, would

go into?

the pockets ofour fanners.

We had a right to expect, that if our farmers should agree to pay a heavy ad

man action, and the selfish feelings of ditional dutv upon all the woollen goods

our nature, can doubt for a moment, w hich they purchased, for the benefit of 'PL.. i.. ........ .. r 1

i ne lenei, men winch this bill intended manufacturers, the manufacturers would to afford to the growers of wool would not object to a small additional dutv up-

. ....

have been long deferred. Many of them might have been ruined, before they could have been protected. But the relief which the second section of the bill purported to extend to

them, would probably have been alto-j

on foreign hemp, for the benefit of agiiculture. We thought this was no more than a just reciprocity; but we found

that the representatives of the easten manufacturers were of a different opinion.

the bill was in committer- of the whole, and by tbe rules of the house, could not then cither move to amend it, or partici

pate in the debate. Without meaning, in the slightest degree to reflect upon others, whose opinion? were no doubt, equally honest with m own, I can declare in the most sch mi. manner before this mt-eiit g, that had I voted for the bill I should have done ai: act at war w ith mv most solemn conviction of dutv and with what 1 lirmlv believe to be the host interests of my constituents, and of my native state. Siill it is possible 1 may have been mistaken j and to your candid

Amotion was mnde by myself, thatJjud&cnt I ihill now leave this subiect