H. OF R.] The Tariff. [JUNE 25, 1832. in the last period a recovery and return to that exact rate. I wish to contrast the growth of the Eastern and Middle It appears, then, that, for the last ten years, when the with that of the Southern and Southwestern States; of the country had been under the full effects of the tariff, it planting and non-planting States. Every thing exists to has advanced more than two per centum more rapidly facilitate the comparison, and make it fair. The populathan it did from 1810 to 1820, and has a little exceeded tion of the two sections at the start is about equal. The what Mr. Malthus lays down as the rate of the unchecked census of 1790 gives to the Eastern and Middle States and most prosperous increase. This fact alone is most in- 1,968,455, and to the South, 1,941,372; nut 30,000 dif structive. The better to appreciate it, let us inquire at ference. In each was the nucleus of one of the old setwhat rate the population of the two most prosperous tlements of the country; in one was the great developcountries of Europe, viz. France and England, increased. ment of commerce, and in the other, of staple agriculture. From the best returns I can find, France has increased The census presents the following results, which I apprefrom. 30,500,000, in 1821, to 32,750,000, in 1831, being at hend, to those who have listened to the vehement comthe rate of seven and one-third per cent. plaints of the decline of one part of the country and the Of the population of England, we have accurate re-growth of the other, at the expense of their injured turns for the period from 1821 to 1831, giving the follow- Brethren, will be thought to contain matter worthy of sober ing results: meditation: It will recur to the mind that there are parts of Great Britain where the increase is not healthy; but granting it to be all a sound increase, it is not one-half that of the United States. 29 * 5,681,132 (in 1830.) Thus, in every period, the Southern and Southwestern, the planting States, have grown faster than the Eastern and Middle; and in the last period, in which the revenue system of the country is supposed to have operated as a bounty to the Eastern and Middle States, and as a curse to the planting States, the latter have gained on the former more rapidly than at any preceding period. I also observe, that, under the full pressure of the tariff, the planting States have grown more rapidly by two and a half per cent. than in the preceding period, and within three per cent. as rapidly as in the golden period from 1800 to 1810! This is a test on the largest scale, covering a ground too broad for local exceptions; and, as it seems to me, decisive of the point, that the comparative prosperity of the planting States has not been impaired by the tariff. From 1820 to 1370. But there might be in several States a great decline, overbalanced by the growth of others. I observe, there fore, in the next place, that every one of the Southern But the United States embrace communities very States, with a single exception, which I deplore as much differently situated, as to the growth of the population. as any one of her citizens, has increased more rapidly in All other things being equal, it increases most rapidly the last than in the preceding ten years; that is, not one of where there is the greatest abundance of vacant lands. them is on the decline; not one is stationary; every plantWe accordingly find that, in the West, it has been alto- ing State is increasing, and but one that did not increase gether unparalleled. To present the subject in a clear more rapidly in the last than the preceding ten years. light, and to correct some most pernicious errors in reference to the comparative influence of the revenue system on the different sections of the country, I have considered it in three divisions, viz. the Eastern and Middle States, as far south as Pennsylvania, inclusive; the Southern and Southwestern; and the Northwestern; in which last class I have included Missouri, as being under the influence of the same effect of an indefinite quantity of the new land. The growth of this last section has been unexampled. It stands at the following rates: 1800 to 1810, four hundred and eighty-nine per cent.: 1810 to 1820, one hundred and ninety-eight per cent.: 1820 to 1830, ninety-seven and a half per cent.. 13 2-3-1-413 16 -- 1 512 15 6-10 512-5-17 1-5 From 1810 to 1820. Virginia, 9 1-3 North Carolina, 15 South Carolina, 21 1-10 Georgia, 34 1-5 If Georgia and South Carolina be taken together, as from locality and community of soil and productions they should be, in an economical view, their growth from 1810 to 1820 would be at the rate of twenty-six and one-third; and from 1820 to 1830, thirty and one-tenth per centum. If this view of Georgia and South Carolina be admitted, the Southern Atlantic States, from Virginia to Georgia, (being all on the increase,) have increased more rapidly the last ten years than the preceding ten. The first overflow, after the pacification of the treaty of Greenville, presents a more rapid rate of increase on If South Carolina be taken alone, her increase has beer, the small capital of population, existing in the West, than is exhibited at any subsequent period. And in the largest it is true, five and a half per cent. less rapid than it was State of the West, Ohio, it has of course settled down to from 1810 to 1820; but still it has been more rapid than something like an ordinary rate of progress. It was, how-that of Virginia and North Carolina, from which the tore ever, sixty-one per cent. in Ohio, the last ten years. But of remonstrance against this system is much less urgent this section I lay aside, as not bearing directly on the pre-than from South Carolina. sent inquiry. Again, the six New England States have increased more JUNE 25, 1832.] The Tariff. [H. OF R. slowly, most of them much more slowly, than those South-South. But, in discharging my duty as a member of this ern and Northern States whose growth has been least ra- House, and called upon to modify the revenue system of pid. I will state the growth of the former, contrasted the country, in consequence of its alleged effects upon the with the latter, placing them in the order of comparative planting States generally, and South Carolina in particular, I shall surely be pardoned for analyzing the facts of the case. increase: Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Georgia, per cent. do. do. do. 8 · 10 1-2 17 - 19 33 13 do. do. do. do. I have stated that South Carolina alone, of all the planting States, has increased less rapidly during the last period of ten years, than during the preceding. In this State the number of slaves is considerably greater than that of the whites, and their proportion to the whites greater than in any other State of the Union. The increase of the slaves has almost always been more rapid than that of the whites in South Carolina. The great wealth of South Carolina is the labor of her slaves applied to the cultivation of her staples. Their support is so small, compared with the produce of their labor; and the demand for slaves, at an But it is alleged that the burden of the revenue system, enhanced price, in the neighboring States, is so certain though borne by all the planting States, falls peculiarly and so constant, that the increase of the slaves in the State upon the article of cotton. The gentleman from South is a much fairer test of the growth and prosperity of the Carolina stated that South Carolina was placed in her State, than the average annual increase of whites and present attitude, because it was with her that the system blacks together. I have, accordingly, inquired what has began to operate with unmitigated force. With South been the increase of the two portions of the population Carolina, the cotton region, strictly speaking, begins. from 1790, in South Carolina: The culture of rice I understand to be a profitable and prosperous pursuit; and inasmuch as this must share with the other staple the burdens of the protecting system, and yet is prosperous, it seems obviously to suggest that there must be other causes for the decline of those other staples, if they have declined. And what is there in which they so obviously differ, as the circumstance that the culture of rice is limited by the narrow extent of country. yielding it, while that of cotton is as boundless as the vast Southwestern portion of the Union? But leaving this point aside, I will observe that the increase in population of the cotton-planting region has been, in the last ten years, (with the exception of that part of South Carolina which produces it,) at the following rates: In Louisiana, 40 per cent.; in Georgia, 51; in Tennessee, 62; in Mississippi, 80; in Alabama, 140; that is, the cotton region, on which the burden of the tariff falls without mitigation, has increased in every part of it (except South Carolina) at these unexampled rates. Now, sir, we are told that this system is oppressive beyond example, and are challenged to produce a parallel in the history of the world. I have searched the history of the world, from its earliest records to the present day, in vain, for the account of a region whose growth has been so rapid, whose prosperity has been so signal. Such oppression! Show me an instance of such a growth. I have seen within a week or two a commentary on the subject, proceeding from Alabama; and its writer, to illustrate the desolating influence of the tariff upon that State, compares it with the supposed condition of some parts of England in the middle of the last century, and cites the pathetic exclamation of Goldsmith in the Deserted Village: "Il fares the land to hastening ills a prey, Where wealth accumulates and men deoay." The population of Alabama, in the last ten years, has fallen off from 127,901 to 309,206! and, if it continues to decay at the same rate, will, in 1840, amount to about 760,000! From this statement it follows, 1st. That the white population of South Carolina has, within less than one per cent. increased as rapidly the last ten years, as it did from 1800 to 1810. 2d. That, from 1810 to 1820, the period of commercial restrictions and war, the white population of the State actually increased nearly two per cent. more rapidly than it did from 1800 to 1810. As the slaves in the same period fell off three per cent. in the rate of increase, (viz. from 34 3-10 to 31 3-5,) it is evident that the check on the planting interest was favorable to the growth of the white population. 3d. The slave population of South Carolina, in the last ten years, has increased more than twenty-two per cent., being a good deal more rapidly than any part of New England, except Maine, and more rapidly than the population of New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, or North Carolina; more rapidly than the slave population, or the aggregate population of Virginia and North Carolina. In other words, the growth of that part of the population of South Carolina in which her wealth resides, has been fifty per cent. more rapid for the last ten years than that of Great Britain, and considerably more rapid than that of any State in New England, except Maine. Considering the increase of the slave population to be a test of the prosperity of a planting State, wherever there is an active neighboring market for slaves, (I speak, of course, only in an economical point of view,) I will further state that the increase of that population generally I come now to speak a little more particularly of the in the Southern country presents a view in confirmation State of South Carolina. A remark made by the gentle- of that which I have already deduced from the aggregate man from South Carolina leads me to say, what I hope, population. The slaves in the Southern States have, in however, is superfluous, that I am utterly incapable of the last ten years, increased at the following rates: Vir"taunting" her with any thing in her situation, less favor-ginia, 10 2-5 per cent.; North Carolina, 20 1-5; South able than that of her sister States. Had I the power, by Carolina, 22; Kentucky, 30; Georgia, 45; Louisiana, 58; stretching out my hand towards my own New England or Tennessee, 77; Mississippi, 100; Alabama, 180! South Carolina, to convert one or the other of them, at Let us pursue the analysis a little further. Among the my pleasure, into one wide garden of fertility and plenty, bounties of Providence to Southern regions is this, that, in Heaven knows that, in the present state of the public the same latitude, a difference of elevation above the sea, feeling in South Carolina, I would turn my hand to the and other geographical causes, will give you every variety H. of R.] The Tariff. [JUNE 25, 1832. of productions. Thus, you may travel in the tropics upon Before I state what I deem the causes of the depression of the same parallel, from the regions of the bread-fruit and the planting interest in South Carolina, I will briefly state I think the tariff is not the spices, to those of Indian corn--from eternal summer to what I think is not the cause. eternal snow. This rich variety of products is found, in cause. I might avouch for this opinion the authority of a considerable degree, in the Southern States of this some of the most respectable names in South Carolina; Union. The lowlands of the seacoast are favorable to the but, as I know the eminent men of South Carolina are di culture of the great staples of cotton, rice, and tobacco, vided in opinion on this point, I will not urge it. But, It is well known while the elevated interior invites to farming and the me- leaving authorities, let me state facts. chanic arts. I presume that the increase of the slave po- that the minimum duty on woollens is deemed the most pulation may be considered as a sufficient test of the oppressive feature of the tariff, or as oppressive as any. growth of the planting interest; but I have endeavored to It is stated that this essential article of Southern consump ascertain the comparative growth of the upper and lower tion comes enhanced by an enormous duty, at the lowest, country in the State of South Carolina. If we divide the of forty-five per cent; and when the article costs a little more population of the State into two parts, the upper and than one of the minimums, the duty is nearly doubled, and lower, the former containing 270,000, and the latter sometimes more than doubled, by estimating the price at 360,000 inhabitants, I find that the entire lower region the next highest minimum. Thus, a cloth costing fifty has increased 13 1-3 per cent. in the last ten years; being cents, pays at the rate of forty-five per cent. duty; and, more rapidly than Connecticut or New Hampshire. The costing fifty-one cents, pays that rate of duty on the assessentire upper region has increased 24 7-10 per cent.--an ed price of one dollar, amounting to eighty-eight per cent. exceedingly prosperous rate of increase. If we look at on the value of the article; and, at this heavy rate, the the comparative rate of increase of whites and slaves in burdens laid by the tariff on the South are estimated. the two sections, we find that, in the lower country, it Now, the question of fact is, does the tariff produce this has been about equal-whites, 12 4-5; slaves, 13 7-10. effect? And this is a question of fact, and, by way of anThe case is very different in the upper country. The swering it, I quote a fact which seems to bring it to a most white population in that region, in the last ten years, has unexceptionable test. In the course of the last year an increased but five per cent, and slaves sixty. This distribu- importation was made into Charleston, South Carolina, of tion, I confess, I am unable to explain on any theory of coarse woollens, for the purpose of trying the constituthe operation of the tariff; but it shows that one species tionality of the tariff in the courts of the United States. of the labor of the upper country has increased with great I will not say that the cloth imported was designedly so rapidity; and the aggregate increase of that country is, ordered, as to price, as to show, in the most exaggerated as I have remarked, at a highly prosperous rate, being form, the possible operation of the minimum system, alnearly twenty-five per cent. though such a design would have been perfectly fair. But How then stands the fact? In the planting region of South I say the cloths were so ordered as actually to make the Carolina, one great staple, rice, is admitted to be pros-duty as high as possible, under the dollar minimum. The perous. And for the depression of the cotton, other and cloths cost 28. 2d. sterling per yard, which, at $4 44 the satisfactory causes can be assigned. The upper country pound, is between fifty-one and fifty-two cents. The quanhas increased at a very prosperous rate, and its pursuits tity ordered was one bale of blue Yorkshire plains, conare such as are to be favored by the operation of the taining 570 yards, 29 inches wide, and amounting, at £61 16s. 1d. tariff. I find the following account of them in Drayton's 28. 2d. to view of South Carolina: "As transportation is more difficult from the middle and upper country, so necessity has, in a proportionate degree, compelled the inhabitants to provide for their respective wants. And thus a domestic spirit of manufacturing has arisen, which much prevails in those parts of the State. The traveller there soon becomes accustomed to the humming music of the spinning wheel, and the industry of the loom often meets the eye. Cottons are thus male, both striped, figured, and plain, of ingenious fabrication, as well for clothes and the table, as for house use. Woollens, also, of strong nature and decent appearance, are woven, and dressed by suitable falling mills; coarse linens, blanketing, woollen bed-covers, and cotton rugs, are also manufactured. With the exception of salt and sugar, the people in the upper parts of the State may be considered independent of foreign support, as their country and their industry supplies them with all the other necessaries of life required by those whose wants are not yet excited by refinements of luxury. Carpenters, smiths, masons, tanners, boot and harness makers, saddlers, batters, millwrights, and all other tradesmen, necessary for rural concerns, are conveniently situated throughout the country." Charges, commission, porterage, 3 5 2 £65 1 3 $289 16 14.46 4 34 307 96 Exchange on England five per cent., Cost in Charleston, exclusive of duty, Total cost, (equal to about ninety cents 206 78 $514 74 Cost, per running yard, exclusive of duty, fifty-four cents. The duty per running yard, thirty-six cents: equal to sixty-seven per cent. on the cost, including all charges, and seventy-one per cent at the port of exportation. Now, sir, for the dénouement. The foregoing was sold in Charleston at its market value, at sixty-eight cents per running yard. A portion of the planting industry of South Carolina is unquestionably in a state of comparative depression. I say In making up the account of charges, exchange, incomparative, because still equal to that of portions of New terest, and freight are charged at less than half their England admitted to be highly prosperous; but, compar-actual amount in a business transaction, and nothing is ed with other portions of the Southern States, it is depress- charged for commissions on remittance and sales. These ed. And why? This surely is an all-important question. items amount, at a low calculation, to six cents a yard, As we answer it one way or the other, the entire mecha-raising the actual cost and charges on this article, exclunical, manufacturing, and agricultural industry of one-half sive of duty, to sixty cents per yard. Allow but ten per of the Union is to be exposed, to say the least, to a very hazardous experiment, or the Union is to be dissolved. See note at the end, JUNE 25, 1832.] The Tariff. [H. OF R. Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi must have hastened still more the depreciation of the inferior qualities of soil. Indeed, on the principles which govern the exchangeable value of every thing else, I should, as a citizen of South Carolina and Georgia, have regarded the very rapid acquisitions of land that have been made in that quarter as absolutely ruinous to the agricultural interests of the portion of the State already under cultivation. cent. profit on the whole transaction, and you bring it up modern economists is, that where lands of different deto sixty-six cents yer yard. This is the price the cloth grees of fertility are in cultivation, the least fertile land would sell at if there had been no duty at all. Had a pays no rent. Not only so, but it is not taken into cultiduty of twelve and a half per cent. been levied, it could vation till the better lands are all taken up; or if, while not have been sold, allowing ten per cent. profit, under second rate lands are under cultivation, first rate lands seventy-two and three-fourths. In other words, with a are made accessible in sufficient quantities to supply the duty of twelve and a half per cent. only, there would market, the second rate lands, as a matter of course, have been a loss to the undertaker of $27 88. cease to be cultivated altogether. It is the standing comIt appears, then, that the actual cost of these cloths in plaint against the corn laws, that, by prohibiting the imAmerica, as imported, would be sixty cents per yard. A portation of the produce of better soils, they keep inferior business profit and the gentleman's duty of twelve and a soils in cultivation; and the great argument against the half per cent. would raise them to seventy-two and three-repeal of the corn laws is, that, on the admission of cheaper fourths cents per yard; but their market value was sixty-corn from abroad, the inferior lands of England will eight cents per yard. Now, what is market value? It is cease to be tilled, to the ruin of their proprietors. the price at which goods of that quality were to be bought Now in the Southern States there is a great body of ferand sold in Charleston at that time. The duty, which was tile land as yet untilled, and within a year we have added nominally thirty-six cents a yard, added but two cents per vastly to it by the Choctaw and Creek purchases. The yard to the price; and a duty of twelve and a half per great and original cause of the depression of South Carocent. would have been just as prohibitory as the minimum lina was the Louisiana purchase, as has been truly stated by levied by the law. I admit that, on the importation in a distinguished citizen of South Carolina (Judge Huger) question, the duty was prohibitory; but I have proved in a speech in the Legislature of South Carolina. The that twelve and a half per cent. would have been just as purchase of Florida has contributed to the same effect, prohibitory. This is but one example; but it is an exam- and the rapid acquisition of lands from the Indians in ple constructed by the opponents of the tariff, and one showing the extreme of its operation. On the strength of this example I lay down this proposition--that when the market price of woollens is sixty-eight cents per yard for cloths which could not be sold under seventy-two and three-fourths, if imported from England under a duty of twelve and a half per cent., the tariff on that article is not oppressive. I believe that facts of this kind might be collected, in reference to all the great branches, on which, The gentleman said that the labor of the slave in South as regards the consumption of the South, the tariff is Carolina was worth but twelve and a half cents per day. supposed to have an oppressive operation. It cannot, But whether this is cheap or dear, depends on the cost of therefore, be the cause of the depression which exists in the slave. I endeavored to show, two years ago, in reply the cotton region in South Carolina. What is that cause? to this same argument, that, even at that low rate, the The gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. McDUFFIE] profits of slave labor were greater than that of any manuhas himself given us the cause, and one totally distinct facturing stock in New England. But let it be rememfrom the tariff; one which would continue to exist in un-bered that this applies only to South Carolina. I find it mitigated force if every duty were repealed to-morrow. stated by 'a distinguished Senator [Mr. GRUNDY] from Such are the soil and climate of South Carolina, that three Tennessee, that labor is fifty cents per diem. That genbales to the hand are a good crop, and half that quantity tleman observes, "our nation is young; our land is feris regarded as the average yield. In other portions of tile; with us a laborer can earn his fifty cents a day." the cotton-planting region, five or six bales is the average Even in South Carolina itself, labor in most parts of the to a hand. The gentleman from South Carolina stated State is represented by Mr. Mill, in his statistical work, that it cost two or three cents per pound more in South as being worth much more than twelve and a half cents Carolina to make cotton, than in other portions of the cot- per day.* ton-planting region. Now, sir, does it need any tariff to account for the depression of the State under these circumstances? The wonder is, not that it is depressed, but that a single pound can be sent to market. This inferiority amounts to from twenty-five to thirty-seven and a half per cent. against South Carolina; and what does the gentleman tell us in his report, in another connexion? "No branch of human industry can permanently maintain the year." itelf in a competition with a rival branch, under à discrimi- Chester. "Good laboring hands are hired at eighty nating tax of twenty, much less of forty per centum." dollars a year and found, or by the day fifty cents. CotWith such a rival branch at her very door, South Carolina, ton eleven cents per pound, average of five years. by admission, is contending; and why then resort to any Chesterfield. Price of labor eight to ten dollars per other cause to account for the existing depression? Sup-month. Cotton ten-twelve and a half cents. pose the factories in New Hampshire and Rhode Island Colleton. The price of labor, fields hands, from eighty could manufacture coarse cottons, of precisely the same to one hundred and twenty dollars per annum and found. description, from twenty-five to thirty-seven and a half per cent. cheaper than they could be manufactured in Massachusetts. Would it not be utterly impossible for the latter to subsist? And would it be thought necessary that any other cause should be sought for their ruin? In the state of things admitted to exist in South Carolina, the law of competition, which is as sure in its effects as the law of gravitation, must reduce the returns of cotton planting to the lowest possible rate. In fact, I cannot understand how, under the circumstances assumed, it can be continued at all. The almost unanimous voice of the The following statements of the price of labor are taken from Mr. Mill's large work, (in 1826:) Charleston District. "As every planter employs his own hands, it is not easy to ascertain the price of labor. Active young fellows have been hired out from one hundred and ten to one hundred and twenty-eight dollars for Darlington. Eighty to one hundred dollars per annum. Per annum and found. Fairfield. Field hands hire at the rate of $80 to $100 Lancaster. 80 to 100 80 to 100 Do. Do. Do. Do. 80 to 100 80 $759 H. OF R.] The Tariff. With these facts and statements before me, I can come to no other conclusion than that the general state of the Southern country is eminently prosperous, and that, where it is otherwise, the cause is to be sought not in the tariff, but in the superior fertility of some portions over others. [JUNE 25, 1832. But, however this may be under doubt the existence of any effect which it is necessary to ascribe to that cause. the tariff, with its repeal the legerdemain would cease. How then should we trade with the South? All trade is How can we trade in a market an exchange of labor through its fruits. A day's labor is worth with us fifty cents. That the repeal of the tariff, and the admission of fo- where that quantity of labor is worth but twelve and a reign goods, even duty free, would have no effect in re-half cents, and to which we can bring nothing which may not be imported from some foreign market, where labor lieving this distress, is most apparent from its causes. Would this repeal raise lands of inferior qualities to the is equally as cheap as in South Carolina? No part, then, first quality? If the tariff occasions, as is alleged, a di- of this increased importation could be made on our acAre there any lands minished profit of forty per cent., would not its repeal count. Would it help South Carolina? instantly cause a fall of prices to that amount? What would be the effect of the repeal of the corn laws in Eng- there to compete with the millions of acres you have been land? Would it give a profit on lands of the inferior acquiring in Georgia, Alabama, and Mississippi? Or is it It would instantly throw them not rather more probable that the immediate effect would quality? Certainly not. out of cultivation. And if the repeal of the tariff would be to draw off a portion of the slaves from South Caroenable the planter in Mississippi and Louisiana to make lina to these new and more fertile lands? his cotton two or three cents cheaper than he now makes it, the planter in South Carolina would have to lower his price to that extent. The gentleman from South Carolina has set forth in his report (and he repeated the same ground in his speech) the beneficial consequences which would accrue to South Carolina in particular, and the Southern States in general, from a repeal of the tariff. He observes: "Let us suppose that the repeal of the protecting duties would cause an increased annual importation of foreign manufactures, to the amount of ten millions of dollars, of which four millions would be of cotton manufactures. For the whole of this increased importation cotton would be received, creating an increased foreign demand for But the domore than three hundred thousand bales. mestic demand for cotton would be diminished only by the substitution of the four millions of imported for the same amount of domestic manufactures." And this leads me to make a remark on the character of the labor of the South, which I trust I shall be per mitted to do without giving offence. The gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. BELL] commented freely upon the influence of manufacturing industry, creating a mixed popula I will not say that the tion of monopolists and paupers; a compound highly uncongenial with our institutions. slavery of the South is uncongenial with our ipstitutions; it is not only admitted to be altogether anomalous and foreign to them, but is deplored as an evil, of which they ought most to complain who are oppressed with it. On this subject I have nothing to urge; it is one I would never ap proach, but in the language of tenderness and conciliation. But in reference to the prosperity of the Southern States, and as a purely economical question, I am firmly persuaded that the evils which are ascribed to the tariff, are, in a great degree, the effects of slavery. This cheap labor costs our Southern friends more than all the tariff's ever enacted, ten times multiplied, would cost them. The gentleman from South Carolina, in his report from the Committee of Ways and Mean3, tells us that about one-fifth of the whites in the planting States are planters. Suppose another fifth to be professional men, merchants, &c., there are left three-fifths of the entire white population who must live by their labor. How can they live? Their labor must be estimated on the scale of twelve and a half cents per diem, for where that is the value of the great mass of labor, it must set the price of the whole article. Nothing that a slave can do will be done by a white man, unless he will work as cheap as the slave; but you cannot work as cheap as a slave, unless you live as cheap. If But we have neither cotton, your pay is on that scale, so must be your clothing, food, Our lodging, education, and your general share of the com rice, nor tobacco; and how are we to get them? Did it stop here, this cheap labor would be Southern brethren are not to give them to us; and, if forts of life. every thing we make (according to the argument) may be found dear enough; it costs the community, annually, a brought cheaper from Europe than we can make it, what great part of the value of the labor of three-fifths of its white population. shall we have to give in exchange? I will not It seems to me this view is utterly fallacious. dwell on the fact that South Carolina could derive, as a State, no benefit from this increased demand for cotton, for the reasons I have stated. My colleague [Mr. DAVIS] has well asked the question, how these importations are to be paid for. The gentleman says, "pay in cotton;" but the goods are to be imported for, and consumed by, the entire population of the Union, three-fourths of whom have no cotton. But, it will be said, we can buy cotton But how shall we pay for it? of the Southern States. The gentleman urged that we could not, from our own production, trade with Great Britain; that, but for the cotton, rice, and tobacco, we could carry on absolutely no commerce with her. It is not for me to read a lecture to gentlemen on the I understood the gentleman to argue that we of the touch the topic only as connected I do so because I Believe that Northern States could not trade with Europe, because our evils of slavery; labor is too dear; that it is only the cheap Southern labor with this question. by which that trade can be carried on; and, I presume, it is the great cause of the sufferings ascribed to the his intimation was, that the tariff, by some process difficult tariff. Am I alone in this opinion? What other inference to define, (and which has been frequently called the le- is deducible from the debates at Richmond? Let me gerdemain of trade,) enables the Northern region to pos-quote an extract from the speech of Mr. Marshall, in the sess itself of the fruits of this Southern labor, and with Assembly of that State-a representative of a county in Now, as there is Eastern Virginia: them carry on the foreign commerce. "Wherefore object to slavery? Because it is ruinous really no legerdemain in trade, I am strongly inclined to Per ann. and found. to the whites; retards improvement; roots out an indusFrom 10 to $15 per month, $120 to $180 trious population; banishes the yeomanry of the country; 80 to 100 deprives the spinner, the weaver, the smith, the shoe80 to 120 maker, the carpenter, of employment and support. This 96 to 120 evil admits of no remedy; it is increasing, and will con96 to 120 tinue to increase until the whole country will be inundat 50 to 60 ed with one black wave covering its whole extent, with a 96 to 120 few white faces here and there floating on the surface. Newberry. Pendleton. Spartanburg. Williamsburgh. 8 to $10 per month, York. (Cotton 10.) 8 to $10 per month, |