Obrazy na stronie

back and neglected in the prevailing mania of this Congress to get rid of the old Constitution.

If we will take up the necessary business, sink the partisan in the patriot, and leave President making to the people, to whom it properly belongs, we still have time and opportunity to render invaluable services to the country. I am not unmindful that you have sacrifices to make and prejudices to overcome in rising above party to the higher plans of statesmanship. I will not claim exemption from its influence; perhaps we have all been more or less subject to its bonds. From boyhood I have been identified with the Democratic party; it may have committed some errors-no finite organization is perfect-still I have an abiding faith in the correctness of its principles and the purity of its motives, and would sooner confide the safety and destiny of our country to its keeping than any party that ever existed in the tide of time; and yet I have ever held in contempt a mere partisan for the sake of party. Our paramount duties and obligations to the country rise infinitely above all such paltry ties and considerations.

Against the judgment and clear convictions of those with whom it has been my pride to act, the people by decisive majorities have sustained the party in power; that expression of opinion, though not according with our judg. ment, is at least entitled to our respect; consequently, upon entering upon the duties of this Congress I accepted the situation, without any disposition to interpose factious opposition to such measures as the people had indorsed; with an anxious desire to cooperate in the adoption of such measures as would secure enduring peace, prosperity, and unity to the whole country. It, however, soon became apparent that a breach between the President and the radical portion of the party was inev itable, tha new political affiliations were forming, old issues becoming obsolete, new ones coming up, and in these mutations strange bed-fellows and old antagonism thrown together.

tionary disunionists or treasonable malplot-
ters? When he communicates his views to
the Senate, founded upon information derived
from the Lieutenant General and others, in rela-
tion to the condition of affairs in the southern
States, as he was bound to do by his duty and
oath of office, he is charged by a leading radi-
cal Senator with making a 16
report," intending to convey the impression
that he had perjured himself by furnishing a
false report. When he intimates to a Senator
his opinion in regard to amending the Consti-
tution, the chairman of the committee of fif-
teen [Mr. STEVENS] tells the House that kings
have lost their heads for slighter offense, and
brands him as a "usurper.


These are grave charges to be made against the President of their own choosing. Of what heinous crime has Andrew Johnson been guilty, that he should be thus abused by these Robespierres and Dantons? Is it because he is the friend of the people and the people's Government, and opposed to traitors and treason North and South? Has he not breasted the storm, stood firm and unmoved as an admantine rock, while the surging waves of disunion and trea son dashed wildly and madly around him? Has he not always been the fearless and incorruptible champion of the rights and liberties of the people? Ah, there is the rub; they know he is too firm to be forced and too pure to be bought. Southern traitors unsuccessfully tried both. He denounced and fought them until they acknowledged themselves whipped, laid down their arms, and sued for pardon. Then his gen-act erous nature revolted at the meanness of wreaking vengeance upon a subdued and fallen foe. Criticisms have been indulged in, that in 1861 treason was not nipped in the bud, but then, as now, he scented the danger in the tainted air, and was among the first to raise his warning voice and denounce the treasonable conspiracies against the integrity of the Union.

If these maligners are for the Union, the President is not in their way; but if against it, they will find they have a hard road to travel; but when they show penitence, and retract their disunion sentiments, executive clemency will wipe out all their guilty stains. He is generous and humane, but when they attempt to drive him they will find him firm and unmoved, except by the right.

Viewing the situation merely from a party stand-point, the Opposition would have affiliated with the disaffected faction and opposed the Administration. Such was not our course. Being in favor of the Union and a restoration of fraternal relations between the different States, we gave these measures our support, although inaugurated by an Administration which we had opposed. I am neither an opposer or follower of President Johnson, but will sustain him when right and oppose him when wrong. He has said and done many things, and probably will again, in which I cannot concur. Nevertheless, Mr. Speaker, candor and justice require me to say I am deeply impressed with the conviction that President Johnson, considering the new and embarrassing circumstances by which he is sur rounded, is doing the best he can for the restoration of the Union and the interest of the whole country, and thus believing, I would be unworthy the high trust confided to me, and of the constituency I have the honor to represent, if I failed to sustain him. I see no reason to impugn his motives, doubt his honesty, or question his capacity. He has served the country long and faithfully in important official positions. His early political training and antecedents are such as to give hope to the friends of the Union and constitutional liberty.

This is no time for captious or factious legislation. The Union of the States and the erties of the people are imperiled; their true friends must stand unitedly together battling against secession and disunion wherever, North or South, they may show their hydra head or cloven foot. On these issues the President is right, and we must sustain him and hold up his hands. Now, I submit to all candid and fair-minded men whether the ribaldry and vituperation daily heaped upon the President by this radical faction is just and fair. Is he a dog to be muzzled, or a slave that dare not speak? Is an American President to crouch like a whipped spaniel at the feet of revolu

the incorruptible Johnson to protect and defend the Constitution and preserve and maintain the rights and liberties of the people. His marked character renders him peculiarly adapted to the present crisis.

Springing from the people in the humble walks of life, his sympathies and associations have been with the laboring masses. He refers with pride and pleasure to the log cabin and the reminiscences of western frontier life where he spent his boyhood days. Starting out in life in the humble avocation of a tailor, with out the advantages of an early education or rich and influential friends, he has by strength of intellect, application to business, untiring energy, and laudable ambition made his mark in the world, occupying alternately nearly every honorable position from justice of the peace to President. What a proud commentary is here presented for the contemplation of the friends of our free institutions. It is quite natural that Mr. Johnson should cherish a warm attachment and profound reverence for such a Government. He was devoted to and confided in the people, and they never forsook him. It is said he is a "usurper;" a grave charge; but the public mind will feel at rest when advised that it emanates from the commit tee of fifteen, which was organized to convict. His "usurpation" consisted in the exercise of a constitutional prerogative of expressing his opinions on public affairs.

Again he is charged with being a "usurper" for vetoing the Freedmen's Bureau. Sir, that

is the crowning virtue in his life, and the brightest chaplet in his crown. A "usurper" would have accepted the proffered power and patronage, greater and more unlimited than was ever conferred on any President. If a usurper or tyrant, why did he decline it? Would the "directory" have rejected such immense patronage? Never. A measure which, if controlled by a "usurper," would have converted the Government into a military despotism. It provides for dividing the country into districts, with sub-districts of counties, parishes, &c., with hordes of officers, not elected by or amenable to the people on whom they are quartered, with summary power to try, convict, and punish without judicial process, trial by jury, writ of error, or appeal. These officers and agents may be white or black, and a negro may be sent from some other State to Illinois to sit in judgment on our civil officers and others and punish them "by fine not exceeding $1,000, or imprisonment not exceeding one year, or both," and they need not wait the slow process of execution, but ample provision is made for enforcing the judgment by the military, which may also consist of negroes.

It further provides for furnishing at Government expense, in each district, "the freedmen, their wives, and children, with provis ions, clothing, fuel, and other supplies, medical stores, medical aid, transportation," &c. Nor is this all. The freedmen were to be educated and have school houses erected at the public expense. Why should this odious distinction be made in this law against the whites on account of color? A person so fortunate as to have a black skin (a circumstance not under their control) can have "provisions," "clothing," "fuel," "and other supplies," "medical stores," "medical aid," "transportation" with school-houses and education at the Gov ernment expense, while the proscribed whites on account of prejudice against their color by this Congress may be hungry and naked and cold, without medical aid or medical supplies, or school-houses, or education, or free passes, and not a dollar can they get from the national coffers. The widows and orphans of our brave white soldiers, who gave their lives that the Union might live, are deprived by reason of their unfortunate color, though many of them are quite needy, from participating in this gov ernmental charity bestowed upon colored persons with such munificence by this Congress.

A short time since a bill was forced through this House by a party vote, and under the pressure of the gag law, appropriating some

Mr. Speaker, the country has cause of gratitude that in this national crisis, in this day of extreme peril, the right man is in the right place. All is not lost that is in danger. The President stands as a wall of fire between the people and the revolutionary disunionists who would undermine the foundations of the Government that they might perpetuate their power, revel in peculation and public plunder.

Southern treason is among the things of the past. Northern disunionists must also be put down. The friends of the Union must stand firm and united, encouraging the heart and strengthening the hands of their great champion. As Aaron and Hur stayed up the hands of Moses that Israel might prevail against Amalek, so may our Aarons and Hurs stay up the hands of our Moses, that they may be steady, and before the going down of the sun on the November election our Joshuas will discomfit and utterly overthrow and put out of remembrance these disunion Amaleks. Mr. Speaker, I have an abiding faith that an overruling Providence shapes and directs the destinies of men and nations; that the same prolib-tecting hand that lead forth the children of Israel and gave them victory over their enemies; that watched over our feeble colonies in their infancy; gave us Washington to organize and lead our raw recruits and undisciplined militia against the mercenary hirelings and trained veterans of despotism; that gave us such men as Madison, Jefferson, Hamilton, and their compeers to found and establish the best Government the world ever saw; that gave us Jackson to nip treason in the bud, and by the wise and fearless exercise of the veto power throttled the United States Bank, has in these latter days vouchsafed to the nation

$10,000,000 for the Freedmen's Bureau. And it the vetoed bill had become a law, the expense of this bureau would have been doubled or trebled. Except for the President's veto this vast burden would have been permanently entailed upon the labor and industry of the country, and coerced by the tax-gatherer from an overburdened people. I am unwilling to vote a tax on my constituents to support in idleness any class of people, white or black. I see no reason why a black man should not earn his support by the sweat of his brow as well as white men. And yet it is known that the galleries of this Hall have for the last five months been crowded with colored persons, who are housed, fed, and clothed at the public


indignant people, and the surging waves of fanaticism are stayed. "The man at the other end of the avenue" has spoken; the faction is paralyzed; the country breathes freer. Their cheeks blanch with terror as they hear the rumbling of the "earthquake.' The volcano in its convulsive eruptions has ejected from its crater a solid column of pure Tennessee marble, so firm and immovable that the angry billows of disunion and the howling tempest of treason may dash around its lofty summit, spend their fury in vain, and fall harmless at its adamantine base, and "the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." The majority in Congress may, for the temporary respite left them, scold and snarl at their inevitable destiny; they may denounce the Administration, retard but not prevent the restoration of the Union. The President will stand firm; the people, irrespective of party, will rally to his standard when the integrity of the Union is menaced by open enemies or pretended friends. It is no time for the true friends of the country to fall out by the way; personal considerations and party schemes should remain in abeyance until the Union is restored.


Mr. Speaker, I have no unkind feeling toward the unfortunate colored people; they are free; be it so. I hope it may prove to them a blessing, and am opposed to any law discriminating against them in the security and protection of life, liberty, person, property, and the proceeds of their labor. These civil rights all should enjoy. Beyond this I am not prepared to go, and those pretended friends who urge political and social equality, and confer ring special privileges like those in the vetoed bill, are, in my judgment, the worst enemies of the colored race.

But it is objected that on the 22d of February the President made a speech at the White House to the people, in which he indulged in some strictures upon prominent persons as to their loyalty. When a Senator he was bold and fearless in his denunciations of conspirators and traitors against the integrity of the Union, and I know of no reason why he should be less so when representing the whole people as President of the United States. Indeed I have faith that the national inquest by a decisive majority will indorse the sentiments enunciated in that able and patriotic speech.


Again, his traducers charge that he actually suffered unterrified Democrats to stand around him listening to his speech; and that, too, without invoking the aid of provost marshals to hunt them down and incarcerate them in the military bastile on Capitol Hill. Sir, this is a charge of so grave a character Í will not presume to interpose a justification. The speech is before the country, and approved by the people. It is well it was made. He is bound by the Constitution and his oath of office to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States," and "take care that the laws be faithfully executed." He is the representative of and directly amenable to the people, and when there is a revolutionary conspiracy plotted by a secret "directory" to disrupt the Union, subvert the Constitution, and filch from the people their liberties, it is meet and proper, as well as his solemn duty, to appeal to the people, expose the perfidious treachery, and denounce the traitors. He had before he made that speech evinced extraordinary forbearance. A majority in Congress had excluded Representatives from eleven States, and virtually decided that the Union was destroyed. His motives and policy of restoration had been bitterly assailed and malignantly misrepresented by the star-chamber conclave and their abettors. They had besmeared him with their choicest Billingsgate, such as usurper,' "whitewasher," tyrant,' "traitor," 66 copperhead," " ," "rebel," &c. Disparaging comparisons were drawn between him and certain negroes-Fred. Douglass and others. If he had kept silent under such provocations his meekness and humility would have obscured, if not totally eclipsed, that of Moses, the Israelitish lawgiver. He appealed to the patriotism and intelligence of the people, the true source of all power, in vindication of himself and his policy against the assaults of his enemies.




The occasion on which those fitly spoken words and golden sentiments were enunciated will form a memorable epoch in our history. From that day the power for evil was broken. Bad men are held up to the withering rebuke and contemptuous scorn of an outraged and

The country has at no time within the last five years been in more imminent peril than at present; the radical majority in Congress are inaugurating measures of the most revolutionary character, which, if carried out, will inevitably involve the country in another fratricidal civil war. Calling themselves a Union party, these gentlemen oppose all measures for the restoration of the Union. Pretending to be a constitutional party, they endeavor to break down its safeguards and destroy it. Assuming to be an administration party, they denounce and oppose the Administration, its policy and friends. One Senator and three members of the House who were legally elected and justly entitled to their seats were voted out that they might increase their majority so as to pass their unconstitutional measures over the veto of the President. No member's seat is secure who opposes their schemes as long as they require votes to carry their measures. Obstacles are brushed out of their way like cobwebs; they stoop to conquer, and hold that the end sanctifies the means. They hope to perpetuate their power and political ascendancy by excluding from Congress and the ballot-box all who oppose their revolutionary schemes.



Mr. Speaker, I cannot flatter myself that I shall be able to present any arguments or considerations to this House which will induce gentlemen to pause and consider. I wish I could. The only hope left is in an appeal to the people, the patriotic masses, who love country more than party. Our patriotic fathers laid broad and deep the solid foundations upon which the magnificent superstructure of civil and religious liberty were reared; for near eighty years, in peace and war, it has answered all the purposes of a most perfect government. It may have faults; what form of human government has not? It has furnished protection and security to all classes of our citizens wherever our flag floats, at home and abroad, on the land and the sea. Our national progress and prosperity, in power, wealth, and civilization, has been a marvel to ourselves and eclipsed the nations of the world. Why experiment with so rich and precious a boon? If we are blessed with a better Government than is to be found elsewhere had we not better bear with it until we know that amendments will insure improvements? It has cost a vast amount of blood and treasure, and is worthy of preservation. It is the only true model for free representative government. It is the asylum of the oppressed, and a secure refuge from the crumbling despotisms of the Old World. We receive with open arms and greet with a hearty welcome the drowntrodden people as they come flocking to our shores.

our utter failure, and that faction and party are the rock upon which we will strike and crumble into fragments. In the meanwhile the friends of free government in the Old World look wistfully on with emotions alternating between hope and fear. This munificent inheritance of free government, bequeathed to us by our cherished and revered ancestry, founded upon the corner-stone of the right of the people to govern, is all our most cherished hopes or loftiest ambition could desire.

A great and responsible charge has been committed to our keeping. As our mental vision looks at the vista before us, seeking to pierce the veil which hides from us the obscure future, we are solemnly impressed with the conviction that the imperiled destiny for weal or woe of this generation, as well as of unborn millions, hang tremblingly in the balance. It is my ardent desire, my sincere hope, that we may severally so discharge our respective duties, under the vast responsibilities that devolve upon us, as to redound to the true interest, highest honor, and perpetual glory of our common country. That when we leave these representative halls for the last time, to be occupied by those who succeed us, when we sever our public relations and retire from this congressional forum, around which cluster many fond and endearing remembrances, to the sanctity of the domestic circle and the quiet shades of private life, we may feel the proud satisfaction of having conscientiously acted our part in this momentous national crisis, in this convulsive struggle for the Constitution of our country and the liberties of the people. I have no higher ambition, no loftier aspiration.


Mr. NEWELL. Mr. Speaker, during all the years of the history of the country the subject of a tariff for revenue and protection purposes has agitated the public mind. With some the question of the revenue has been its primary and that of protection its secondary object; while with others protection has been looked upon as its primary and revenue its secondary consideration. By all parties, and nearly all writers, however, the necessity of a tariff for revenue, which of course would incidentally protect native industry, has been acknowledged and advocated. Nor is the United States an exception to all other civilized and even partially civilized nations as respects the use and necessity of a tariff for the purpose of revenue. The student of history can scarcely point to a country noted for the industry and prosperity of its people which does not owe a great portion of such industry and prosperity to the operation of a judicious system of revenue raised from imports. Even in the cases of countries which at the present day stand forward as the special champions of free trade, their principal revenue is derived from tariffs heavily discriminating against the products of other communities and nations. In no single instance, indeed, do we find absolute free trade to be the rule in any one nation. On the contrary it is not even the exception to the prevailing policy of civilization at the present day, which seeks to build up native industry as the parent seeks to prepare the child, by a course of discipline, instruction, and practical application of these for the varied duties of everyday life. As well might the parent send forth his child ignorant and unskilled in the means of procuring a livelihood as for a young nation to strive to contend with an old one in those peculiar branches of industry which require a large measure of skill and a vast accumulation of capital for their successful and profitable production in competition with the combined talent, industry, and wealth of old and settled communities.

The advocates of free trade forget that national art requires the protecting hand of the central Government as individual art does the The eyes of the world are upon us. The fostering hand of the parent. . In fact, in leavgreat experiment of the capacity of man for self-ing the confines of the mere savage condition government is being tested. The despotisms of society, every step toward a higher and betand monarchies of the Old World prophesy ter civilization is made under the protecting

ground heretofore so often occupied by abler parties. I will say, however, in passing, that the superior markets for agricultural products created by home manufactures must always largely counterbalance the enhanced prices of manufactures, while the tendency of protection to foster such manufactures must ever be to cheapen their products. Capital and labor are always attracted to the most profitable sources of investment, thereby facilitating the tendency to greater cheapness of production. This is the recognized and universal law which governs supply and demand, and is uniform under all conditions of human society. But admitting, for the sake of argument, that in order to foster and encourage manufactures in a merely agricultural condition of society, it is necessary to tax the general public in the outset, on account of certain conditions of labor or capital in older communities, I contend that such tax is a necessary condition of that stage of civilization which calls for its imposition. Nations, like individuals, have their periods of childhood, youth, and manhood. It is necessary that the child should be instructed in the duties of the life upon which he is to enter, and that instruction must be at the expense of individuals or the State at large. Modern civilization recognizes the positive duty and necessity of State education. Now, a merely agricultural people are in a condition of imperfect development. They are in the childhood of national existence. Let them remain in such condition and they will never attain to that acme of prosperity or of civil or military distinction which falls to the lot of their more progressive neighbors. Indeed, in time they become the prey of their more powerful and prosperous rivals. If the State finds it absolutely necessary to tax itself for the education of its children in the theoretical duties of life, why should it not find it still more necessary to tax itself for the purposes of the practical application of those duties?

ægis of government and law, while, as one phase after another of industrial progress is reached, the people are compelled to legislate to protect the rights of every particular class and every special industrial development; in other words, to provide that the weak are not overpowered by the strong, but that every individual capacity in man has a chance to bring forth fruits meet for the sustentation and preservation of the whole society. Thus the history of civilization has been simply the history of a series of progressive steps by which man has subdued nature to the various uses of society by the organization of labor under the protection of the central authority. In the feudal ages, the free cities were originally communities, under the lead of elected chiefs, organized for mutual protection against the free traders, the robbers, and banditti of those periods. In time their chiefs ceased to protect, and, indeed, became the oppressors of their people. Then the people appealed for protection to the central governments, the emperors. Thus feudalism was protection from those who preferred plunder to honest toil; and modern society, under the lead of national unity, is simply the protection of the whole people, their art and industry, from the adverse competition of communities, in which, under exceptional conditions of civilization, the largest amount of labor consistent with continued existence is extracted from the impoverished and famishing many by the wealthy and pampered few. It is as necessary, in modern times, that society should protect itself from the competition of those who grew rich by op pressing the poor, as in ancient times it was necessary to protect itself from those outside robbers and barbarians who preyed directly upon its weaker members.

The so-called democratic idea, that neither from oppression of the rich or powerful at home nor from the competition of the same classes in our intercourse with foreign nations should society protect itself, would end in anarchy and civil war, and finally in a return to the savage state in which the law of brute force and the condition of native stupidity would have their most perfect development. Free traders contend that is the best Government which governs the least." But how, then, is it that as civilization gives place to barbarism, Governments become more complex, more varied in their duties, and more extended in the spheres of their action? Either our boasted civilization is a failure and barbarism preferable thereto, or the facts of history give the lie to the theories of free-trade philosophers. Thus, although free trade and simple Governments, with limited central powers, may be the normal conditions of a barbaric people, protection and complex Governments, with extended central powers, are the normal conditions of civilized nations. Barbaric nations, composed of tribes acknowledging but a limited allegiance to a central authority, are weak, both as regards internal order and external defense; while on the other hand, civilized nations, composed of communities acknowledging an extended allegiance to a central authority, are strong both for purposes of internal order and external defense. In considering the question of a tariff for revenue or protection, then, we should, at once dismiss from our minds the fallacy that because it tends to the centralization of power it is consequently opposed to the liberties of the people. This is merely the clap-trap of the political demagogue, and, like the cry of State rights, so successfully used to lead the ignorant and unwary into rebellion against the central authority, should have no weight with the more intelligent and better educated citizen.

Another free-trade fallacy is, that the protection extended by a tariff on imports to the manufacturing portion of the community is at the expense of the agricultural classes, who, in return for their outlay in increased prices for manufactured articles, receive no compensating benefits whatever. I will not go into a lengthy disquisition upon this branch of the subject. To do so would be but to travel over

ilization which was the rule as respects every leading nation in christendom; while Mr. Hamilton and his followers saw that, even if we would not, the circumstances of our geographical po sition compelled us to follow in the wake of older countries or to relapse into mere barbarism. Mr. Jefferson would fain have preserved the United States in a mere agricultural condition of existence. He looked upon large cities as sores on the body-politic, and his followers regarded banks and manufacturing corporations as soulless monsters which were continually devouring the substance of the people. Mr. Hamilton, on the other hand, accepted the con ditions of modern civilization as the normal state of society, and desired to prepare the people for participation in their blessings and for the mitigation of their evils. Thus we find the Democracy taking for its mission the attempt to preserve society in its merely agricultural condition, in that period of happy childhood, to advance out of which, in the view of that party, was but to encounter nothing but disappointment, distress, and finally universal decay and death. The mission of the Whigand Republican parties, on the other hand, is to prepare the nation for that higher condition and more varied walks of industry which are essential to advanced civilization. The extreme conservatism of the Democratic party was illustrated in its attempt to preserve even slavery itself, the most simple and child-like form of human industry, and one only suited to the most primitive_condition of merely agricultural existence. It is not to be wondered at, then, that a party so conservative of a condition of society, which rendered manufacturing industry in its modern form totally impossible, would oppose all measures for the protection of such industry itself. It was not thus so much the principle of protec tion itself which the older Democratic lights opposed as the attempt to elevate manufactures in the United States to that position and standing in the community which would give them a controlling voice in the councils of the nation and a social status of the most towering proportions. No doubt the leaders of the Democracy instinctively felt that as manufacturing industry prospered, a system founded on an entirely opposite principle must decay; that the wealth and progress of New England would be a standing reproach to the poverty and stationary character of southern civilization. To this day your fanatical secessionist denounces the thrift of New England, and your provident New Englander the shiftlessness of the South. They represent the extremes of our national civilization.

I have said that a merely agricultural country is but in its adolescence, and lacks the bone and sinew of manhood. To be sure it may give raw recruits in abundance to a wealthier and more powerful neighbor on which it is dependent. In this way did Scotland in early times, and does Ireland to this day, supply England with men to fight its battles. In this way does India supply Great Britain with the raw material by which its outlying dependencies are kept in subjection. In this way does Russia draw from her vast steppes those agricultural laborers who fill the ranks of her monster battalions. But it is the manufacturing and commercial elements of those countries, and the aristocratic families in alliance with them, which direct all this brute force for good or evil. Even the sinews of war are directly contributed by manufactures and commerce. What could we have done in the late war for national existence if it had not been that the manufacturing and commercial interests of the country were on our side? A agricultural country cannot stand the taxation necessary to an expensive and long-continued war. Southern finances broke down at the very outset of the rebellion, while northern gathered strength with its progress. Because we were then an agricultural country, we could not sustain the vast accumulation of the old continental money, And on the other hand, the manufacturing interest of Great Britain enabled her to wage a war of a quarter of a century with Napoleon

It will be noticed that the time and expense incurred in preparing an individual for the duties of life are apparently out of all proportion to the benefits derived from those duties. So the expense of preparing a new people, a young and growing nation, for the actual strife of existence appears out of all proportion to the results. But such an expense must be cheerfully borne, or the nation will never take its proper rank among its sister States. As regards modern civilization, what strength has a merely agricultural community? It has the strength of brute force, as compared to modern science and skill, with all their improvements in arts and arms. The southern States of our Republic gloried in this strength; boasted of their agricultural wealth, declared cotton to be king, and defied the intelligence, skill, and science of the North. We all know the result. And such result must always follow a contest between a purely agricultural people and a country in which agriculture, manufactures, and commerce are blended in one harmonious whole, each dependent on all, and all combining to protect and preserve each. But as a child must force itself or be forced by its preceptors or parents to prepare itself for the duties of life, so must a merely agricultural people force themselves or be forced to prepare themselves for a more advanced condition of civilization, in which employments are more varied, and the resources of the nation more perfectly developed. Protection, then, like education, though possibly an abnormal condition of national manhood, is the normal condition of national adolescence.

Since the formation of this Government the opposing ideas of two great men have been struggling for the mastery, and that struggle, apparently, culminated in the late rebellion. For a time it was doubtful whether the followers of Thomas Jefferson or of Alexander Hamilton would control the Government, but the struggle at length, apparently, terminated in favor of the former.


Now, Mr. Jefferson and his followers had horror of progress in the direction of that civ.

and to subsidize all Europe against him. Had she been a merely agricultural country he might have portioned out Europe as he pleased among the members of his family.

at least, in periods of normal trade and commerce, but a tithe of the home consumption. It serves, however, to give the foreign manufacturer a lever by which he can operate injuBut let me illustrate the wealth and power riously on our home market; at one time lowwhich manufactures give to a nation in mod-ering prices to a point entirely unremunerative ern times by reference to the sources of our to the native manufacturer, and then, when own internal revenue. These sources will show that manufacturer is compelled to succumb to at once the superiority of a manufacturing, as the pressure, raising them to figures far higher regards the sinews of war, over a merely agri- than those from which they had fallen. In this cultural people. In round numbers, the receipts way the foreign manufacturer and capitalist of internal revenue for the fiscal year 1865 were extracts the loss he had been at in the effort to $211,000,000. Of this amount the New Eng- break down the home manufacturer and capiland States, together with the sea-board States talist from the pocket of the home consumer. of New York, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey, In a few months in this manner he may decontributed nearly $150,000,000, while all the stroy the labors of years, throw thousands out western States and Territories, including those of employment, and cause a depression of our on the Pacific slope, contributed but about home industry which will take years to recover $49,000,000. And in the western States and from, a destruction of capital which it will take Territories those portions devoted to manufac- a decade to recreate, and a disorganization of tures and commerce contributed the great bulk labor which may never be restored. of the revenue. Thus one district in Illinois contributed more than all the others. And so of other States. Here is food for earnest reflection. If manufactures can contribute such immense sums for purposes of the highest public good-the preservation of the life of the nation-how much can they not contribute for purposes of private use and benefit? Besides contributing thus largely to the public necessity, manufacturing districts also absorb a much larger proportional amount of the national circulation, thus not only saving interest to the Government, but also, by increasing the avenues of industry, furnishing employment to thousands of people. To illustrate, let me take the boot and shoe trade of Massachusetts. The capital invested in this trade last year was $10,067,474; the gross value of stock used $25,040,544; the value of boots and shoes manufactured $52,915,245; the number of male persons employed in manufacture 42,626; of females 12,534; total 55,160. These persons manufactured during the year 7,249,921 pairs of boots and 24,620,660 pairs of shoes.

But this boot and shoe trade is but one of those important branches of manufacture in New England which have contributed so much to the wealth, prosperity, and happiness of her people. Some twenty-six of the leading cities and towns of New England produce products valued at from one to thirty-six million dollars each, and give employment to a large number of persons, male and female. It is calculated that the consumption in the United States of iron, steel, copper, lead, zinc, woolen and cotton goods, leather, and glass is not less than $1,000,000,000 in value. In a few years this consumption will be increased one half. Now, suppose we were compelled to purchase all this vast amount of production from abroad, it is evident that it would exceed all the gold, cotton, and all other commodities annually exported, besides leaving us in debt for over one half the amount. But we should also be compelled to pay greatly enhanced prices for the articles imported, as the demand would be materially increased, while Great Britain and France would obtain complete control of our markets. Fortunately for us, however, the foreign imports for 1864-65 did not much exceed $100,000,000 in value. For 1865-66 I regret these imports will probably exceed double this amount; but should our manufacturing establishments be broken up, the effect upon the country would be fearful to contemplate. In some parts of the West agricultural products could not be given away; wheat would decline to twenty-five cents per bushel; wages would fall in proportion; the fate of Ireland, Turkey, and Spain, which are reduced to mere dependencies of the wealthy manufacturers of Great Britain, would be ours. The public generally are not aware that nearly ninety per cent. of the manufactured goods consumed in this country are the product of the United States. If they were, the freetrader's cry, that protection is obtained at the expense of the consumer, would be robbed of half its terrors. The truth is the foreign import, like our foreign export of agricultural products into Great Britain, is,

It is the internal trade, created by our manufactures, that builds up the country and unites every distant portion of it as with hooks of steel. Behold our vast network of railroads; see the amount of business performed by these roads; the immense number of persons to whom they give employment, from the artificer who builds the complicated engines and magnificent passenger cars to the laborer who constructs the track and keeps it in repair. Then glance at our river and lake steamboats, our canal-barges, our coastwise steamers and ships of all kinds. What is our foreign trade, extensive as it is, and attracting as it does the admiration of the world, to all this traffic, involving an outlay of thousands of millions and giving employment to hundreds of thousands of industrious and enterprising people? But nearly all this great travel and traffic is supported by our home manufactures. It is well known that a vast amount of the immense agricultural products which center in Chicago, Milwaukee, Detroit, Buffalo, and other inland cities never reaches the sea board, but is manufactured or consumed at various points on the route. Thus New England and Pennsylvania, and even New York, are better markets for the West than Great Britain or France. In the case of these latter countries other nations enter into competition with our products shipped to them, which compels shippers to regulate their prices accordingly. On the other hand, the West has no competitor in our home markets save Canada, and I trust the repeal of the late reciprocity treaty will do away with the injurious effects of that also. But even the expense of shipment from the West to the East eats up the profits of the agriculturist. During the past year corn has been consumed for fuel in portions of Illinois and Iowa. Does not such a fact prove the absolute necessity of a home market for agricultural products and its great benefit in increasing the purchasing power of a community? How immensely is the purchasing power of Pennsylvania increased by her manufacture of iron and her production of coal? How much poorer would she not be were she compelled to import all these vast amounts of the prime necessities of modern civilization? Would not her furnaces die out, her railroads become useless, her great cities decay, and the entire community tend toward barbarism? But what would take place in Pennsylvania in the event of the cessation of her iron and coal trade would only be a sample of what might be seen all over the United States were our manufacturing industry prostrated at the feet of foreign competition and foreign capital. We must preserve this great internal trade and industry, built up at the cost of so much blood and treasure, from the competition of the cheap labor of Europe.

Free trade presents to the American people but two eventualities. Either we must, under its influence, see our manufactures destroyed, or we must reduce the wages of labor to the European standard. In the first event we would place not only ourselves, but the foreign laborers, at the mercy of the capitalists of Europe. In the second, we would introduce into Amer

ican social life that degradation of labor which is little better than slavery itself. America would then cease to be the refuge of the oppressed of every clime, while the gulf, at all times, unfortunately even in the most favored countries, separating the rich from the poor, would be so widened that mutual hate and distrust would inflame men's minds and create materials which the political demagogue would be constantly fanning into the flame of revolution. In a country and political community in which universal suffrage is the acknowledged inherent right of the people, a state of things in which the interests of labor and capital would be at variance precisely in the ratio that the numbers on one side and the amount on the other increased, and in which the masses had the means of destroying the existing order in their own hands, the political condition would be fearful to contemplate. On the other hand, the only hope for the continuance of republican institutions lies in such an adjustment of the rewards of industry that the laborer shall not only be properly compensated, but be left free to select that employment which is in consonance with the bent of his genius. Every man is born with an aptitude for some particular pursuit in life. It is this diversity which tends to that variety, as necessary in the economy of artificial or industrial life as it is in the economy of nature itself. All men cannot be farmers or physicians or lawyers. On the other hand, the more we are able to vary the industry of a country the greater the number of avenues to employment which we provide. In old, agricultural communities manufactures must be created for the employment of the surplus population or that population must vegetate in idleness, degenerate into vicious habits, or emigrate to other countries. This is but the history of the social life of every people. Now, the factory would not only keep the young men at home, but also create a market for the products of the old. Thus the community would progress toward the goal of social existence, which is when the three great industrial interests of life-agriculture, manufactures, and commerce-are so blended and harmonized as to act and react upon one another, and thus become so mutually dependent that an injury done to one would be felt as an injury to the whole.

But by this comparison between a merely agricultural country and one in which manufac tures have been so developed as to add immensely to its wealth and prosperity, I do not mean to be understood as at all disparaging the relative importance of agriculture itself. On the contrary, I regard agriculture as the parent and basis of all other industries and arts, which repose upon it as the child upon the bosom of its mother, and draw their sustenance therefrom. The hardy tillers of the soil also not only sustain but help to save the country. No other branch of industry, in any nation, can send so many or such stalwart men to the field of battle, while from the ranks of the farming classes the cities and towns are constantly recruited with fresh material to replace the wornout toilers in all professions and trades, in the arts as well as the sciences, in law as well as medicine. It is only that form of society I deplore which rests content in an undeveloped national condition, entirely constituted of persons devoted to but one branch of industry, and that but very imperfectly organized. For be it noted how the inventions of the mechanic and the information of the merchant tend to develop the resources by which the agriculturist adds to the wealth of a country. How far ahead is the farmer of the present day, in all that regards the application of science to his peculiar branch of industry, of the farmer of a half or even quarter of a century ago. During the intervening period some of the most important agricultural implements have been invented and put to practical use. The reaping, threshing, and other machines now add the labor of hundreds of thousands of men to the producing power of the country, while improved machinery of all kinds helps to lessen the toil and increase the

productive forces of the husbandman. And are not these inventions and new mechanical applicances the products of the manufacturing industry of the country? And do they not add a thousand fold to the power and importance of agriculture; to its power as a great national interest; to its importance as shedding luster upon those engaged in it, and adding millions to the wealth of the people? Agriculture acts upon all other industrial interests; but these latter, in order to the perfection of national industry, should in turn react upon it. Agriculture is the sun around which manufactures and commerce revolve. But the sun must have its planets and satellites, or its genial influences, and all the blessings of its light and heat must be dissipated in the vacuum of an irresponsive space. In a true industrial system, however, agriculture gives sustenance to manufactures and commerce, while the latter in turn consume her products and increase her powers of production indefinitely. It will thus be seen that the interests of agriculture, manufactures, and commerce are so mutually blended as to be utterly inseparable, and that he who disparages one at the same time disparages all.

I have thus, in this imperfect manner, endeavored to set forth some of the benefits of manufactures to the people and the nation. Among other advantages, I find that manufactures create a home market, diversify the products of industry, increase the avenues of labor, develop internal and external trade and commerce, add to the amount of revenue, and form a basis for the absorption of a large volume of national circulation, thus internally and externally strengthening the national body, enabling it to preserve order and promote industry at home, and to make itself feared as well as respected abroad. To foster and protect an interest fraught with such blessings to the people should be the aim of every patriot. And fortunately the late war, so costly in blood and treasure to the country, has put it in the power of the national Government, without injury to other interests, to place the manufactures of the country on a basis of enduring prosperity. This can be done by so apportioning taxation that its principal burdens shall be made to fall upon the foreign manufacturer and on the realized wealth of the country. Thus of the immense revenue raised in Great Britain, a country most clamorous for free trade as respects other nations, the proportions are as follows:




Land and assessed taxes.

Income and property.

Post office.


gether nullified by the internal tax on articles the manufacture of the country. To such a height has this grievance risen that there is scarcely a manufacturing interest in the country which has not its representatives at your doors praying for the reduction or removal of the burdens under which it labors. To such an extent have these burdens reached that I very much fear the result will be to totally crush out a great many branches of manufactures now in their infancy and struggling for existence. Give such branches relief and they will in a few years be placed on a footing of prosperity and permanance which will bear a taxation that would now sweep them out of the field of their operations. In this connection I beg to read the following letter from a prominent iron manufacturing firm in my district. It is only a sample of hundreds of the same description from manufacturers all over the country:

Per cent. ..32







The revenue commission laid down this principle when it urged

"The abolition or speedy reduction of all taxes which tend to check development, and the retention of all those which, like the income tax, fall chiefly on realized wealth."

Previous to the war our tariffs were of course imposed without reference to an internal taxation, which did not then exist. Since the war this system has been continued, notwithstanding that the principal burden of taxation now falls upon the manufacturing industry of the country. Thus the internal revenue raised during the fiscal year of 1865 was $211,129,529; while the revenue derived from imports was but $84,928,260. For the present fiscal year the estimate of internal revenue amounts to the large sum of $272,000,000. Now, it is evident that to expect the import duties to increase in like proportion at present tariff rates would be to expect that our home manufactures would be overwhelmed with foreign importations. For be it remembered, (and I desire to draw particular attention to this point,) while the internal tax, principally borne by our manufacturers, as I have shown, has been added to the burdens of the manufacturer, the tariff on imports has not been proportionally increased. By this means the benefit derived from the tariff to the manufacturer is alto

TRENTON, NEW JERSEY, February 21, 1866. DEAR SIR: Facts in regard to the state of business are worth a thousand theories, when you legislate in regard to the tariff and the internal revenue system. You know how long we have been engaged in the manufacture of iron at Trenton, and that we have both capital and experience. During the last six months of 1865, the price of gold was nearly uniform, so that no profit or loss occurred from the fluctuations in the cost of importing foreign iron.

The result of our six months' operations at Trenton was a loss of $33,702 14, without charging any interest on capital, or any allowance for our personal services. In other words there was an actual loss of capital to the amount of $33,702 14.

During the six months we paid on the work turned out at Trenton internal taxes to the amount of $27,177 53. Therefore it is plain that all the internal revenue derived from our business was taken out of capital, and was in effect actually destructive of our means to carry on business. If no internal taxes had been levied there would still have been a loss of nearly seven thousand dollars.

It is obvious, therefore, that we must shut up our works unless either the tariff on foreign iron is increased, or the internal revenue duties repealed, or both modified so that it is possible to conduct business without loss.

But some will say "if we cannot compete with Great Britain we ought not to manufac ture." We could compete with her if we could bring our mechanics to work for the starvation wages paid in that country. But surely no man will have the hardihood to say that it is the interest of our Government to crush our people down to the level of those classes. The principle that wherever an article could be produced the cheapest, there it should be manufactured, and the world thence draw its supply, has its advocates; but such a principle tends to the centralization of capital in the hands of a few, who would not only have the power to compel their mechanics to work at their own prices, but, also, the world at large to pay such prices for their wares as they chose to set upon them. Many and many a time have we, as well as other countries, been compelled to pay enormous prices to the manufacturers of Great Britain on account of our own short-sightedness. Taking the arti cle of steel again, if we do not produce it, the foreign manufacturers combine and charge us a high price for it. They are restrained from doing so now by the desire to break up the trade here. It is well known that the competition among ourselves brings down the price of manufactured staple articles to the lowest paying point. The fear is sometimes expressed that the moment a protective tariff is levied on steel, so as to shut out the foreign, the price would go up. So it would, for the moment. But even in that case the Government would only be passing funds from one citizen to another, and there would be no national loss of capi tal. So soon as the home manufacture became thoroughly established, the competition would bring down prices to the lowest paying point, so that the consumer would soon get his supply as low as it could be profitably afforded.

And I am glad to see that many of the English manufacturers are recognizing the policy of the Government in this matter as the true one for the interests of the country, and are bringing their capital to this country in order to carry on their business here, instead of trying any longer to draw out our capital in exchange for their products. This policy brings not only capital but skilled labor into the country, which is what we so much need. At Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, the celebrated Sheffield (England) cutlers, Westenholm Co., are building an immense factory for the manufacture of various articles into which steel enters largely. It will give employment to a very large number of hands, for whom suit able homes are also being erected. One of the large thread manufacturers of England is also about to supply our market, by manufac turing the article here, employing his own capital with which to carry on his operations. Is not this much better than that we should send the cotton to England, at a large expense and risk, perhaps in foreign bottoms, and import the manufactured article in the same manner? There is now being erected in Essex county, in my State, a large establishment for the manufacture of watches. A village is also being

The loss on our product amounted to about six dollars per ton, which will be a fair guide in adjusting the new duties. Either the foreign duty must be raised six dollars per ton, or the internal revenue duties reduced six dollars per ton, or the two systems so adjusted that the difference between the foreign duty and the internal duty shall be six dollars per ton greater than it now is, or we must stop business. You are at liberty to use this letter in any desirable way, and we ask that the facts may be laid before the Committee of Ways and Means in order that the exact truth from a responsible source may be known. With great respect, we have the honor to be, very truly, your obedient servants,

operations which produced the steel. It is wholly lost to the country. On the other hand, if the steel is produced here it gives employ ment to five hundred men, directly or indi rectly. It secures steady work and good wages to miners of iron and coal, machinists, firebrick makers, builders, farmers, merchants. and in fact every branch of industry in the country, including law, medicine, and divinity. The whole $1,000,000 that the steel thus costs is spread about, circulated broadcast, to sup port our own people instead of being sent abroad to sustain a rival country. And this article of steel is one of the items which needs protection; for this reason I name it. But you cannot name an industry that is not benefited by the introduction of the manufacture of steel into the United States. Yet foreign steel is now able to compete successfully with the home article, and our steel works are all, or nearly all, either losing money or idle for fear of loss.

COOPER, HEWITT & CO. Hon. W. A. NEWELL, M. C., Washington city, D. C. In view of the statements in the above letter, for the truth of which I can vouch on the words of honorable men and respected citizens of my State, it is evident that if the Government fails to place the great manufacturing interests of the nation in such a position that they can move on and be self-sustaining, attracting the capital and skill of the country and the world to them, it will fail to protect its own interests; it will fail to provide the means to meet the interest on the national debt and for the final redemption of that debt; it will fail, in fact, to preserve its own existence; while, on the other hand, it will enable the foreign manufacturer to draw out of the country the very capital needed at home for the organization of manufacturing industry, and for the realization of such a scale of profits on that industry as shall be the future dependence of the Government in the levying of the taxes for its support.

Take the single article of steel, for instance, the manufacture of which had been greatly increased under the tariff previous to the war, and during the war by the high rates of exchange operating as a protection from foreign competition. If an ad valorem duty of twenty per cent. is levied upon steel the Treasury will receive $200,000 from the importation of every $1,000,000 in value. The advocate of a revenue tariff would claim that this would be the easiest way to collect a revenue; and it would at first sight seem so, but that importation takes out of the country the whole $1,000,000 of capital never to return it. We can derive no future benefit from it, as we derived none from the

« PoprzedniaDalej »