South Carolina Exposition and Protest

Front matter

EXPOSITION

AND PROTEST,

REPORTED

Exposition

Exposition.

The Committee have bestowed on the subject referred to them, the deliberate attention which its importance merits; and the result, on full investigation is, an unanimous opinion, that the Act of Congress of the last session, with the whole system of legislation imposing duties on imports, not for revenue, but for the protection of one branch of industry, at the expense of others, is unconstitutional, unequal and oppressive; calculated to corrupt the public morals, and to destroy the liberty of the country. These propositions they propose to consider in the order stated, and then to conclude their report, with the consideration of the important question of the remedy.

The Committee do not propose to enter into an elaborate, or refined argument on the question of the constitutionality of the Tariff system.

The general government is one of specific powers, and it can rightfully exercise only the powers expressly granted, and those that may be “necessary and proper” to carry them into effect; all others being reserved expressly to the states, or to the people. It results necessarily, that those who claim to exercise a power under the constitution, are bound to shew, that it is expressly granted, or that it is necessary and proper, as a means to some of the granted powers. The advocates of the Tariff have offered no such proof. It is true, that the third section of the first article of the constitution of the United States authorizes Congress to lay and collect an impost duty, but it is granted as a tax power, for the sole purpose of revenue; a power in its nature essentially different from that of imposing protective or prohibitory duties. The two are incompatable; for the prohibitory system must end in destroying the revenue from impost. It has been said that the system is a violation of the spirit and not the letter of the constitution. The distinction is not material. The constitution may be as grossly violated by acting against its meaning as against its letter; but it may be pro- per to dwell a moment on the point, in order to understand more fully the real character of the acts, under which the interest of this, and other states similarly situated, has been sacrificed. The facts are few and simple. The constitution grants to Congress the power of imposing a duty on imports for revenue; which power is abused by being converted into an instrument for rearing up the industry of one section of the country on the ruins of another. The violation then consists in using a power, granted for one object, to advance another, and that by the sacrifice of the original object. It is, in a word, a violation of perversion, the most dangerous of all, because the most insidious, and difficult to resist. Others cannot be perpetrated without the aid of the judiciary; this may be, by the executive and legislative alone. The courts by their own decisions cannot look into the motives of legislators—they are obliged to take acts by their titles and professed objects, and if they be constitutional they cannot interpose their power, however grossly the acts may violate the constitution. The proceedings of the last session sufficiently prove, that the House of Representatives are aware of the distinction, and determined to avail themselves of the advantage.

In the absence of arguments drawn from the constitution itself, the advocates of the power have attempted to call in the aid of precedent. The committee will not waste their time in examining the instances quoted. If they were strictly in point they would be entitled to little weight. Ours is not a government of precedents, nor can they be admitted, except to a very limited extent, and with great caution, in the interpretation of the constitution, without changing in time the entire character of the instrument. The only safe rule is the constitution itself, or, if that be doubtful, the history of the times. In this case, if doubts existed, the journals of the convention would remove them. It was moved in that body to confer on Congress, the very power in question; to encourage manufactures, but it was deliberately withheld, except to the extent of granting patent rights for new and useful inventions. Instead of granting the power to Congress, permission was given to the states to impose duties, with consent of that body, to encourage their own manufactures; and thus in the true spirit of justice, imposing the burden on those, who were to be benefited. But giving to precedents, whatever weight may be claimed, the committee feel confident, that in this case there are none in point, previous to the adoption of the present Tariff system. Every instance which has been cited, may fairly be referred to the legitimate power of Congress to impose duties on imports for revenue. It is a necessary incident of such duties to act as an encourage- ment to manufactures, whenever imposed on articles, which may be manufactured in our own country. In this incidental manner Congress has the power of encouraging manufactures; and the committee readily concede, that in the passage of an impost bill, that body may, in modifying the details, so arrange the provisions of the bill, as far as it may be done consistently with its proper object, as to aid manufactures. To this extent Congress may constitutionally go, and has gone from the commencement of the government, which will fully explain the precedents cited from the early stages of its operation. Beyond this, they never advanced until the commencement of the present system, the inequality and oppression of which, your committee will next proceed to consider.

The committee feel, on entering upon this branch of the subject, the painful character of the duty they must perform. They would desire never to speak of our country, as far as the action of the general government is concerned, but as one great whole, having a common interest, which all its parts ought zealously to promote. Previously to the adoption of the Tariff system, such was the unanimous feeling of this state; but in speaking of its operation it will be impossible to avoid the discussion of sectional interest, and the use of sectional language. On its authors however, and not on us, who are compelled to adopt this course in self-defence by the injustice and oppression of their measures—be the censure. So partial are the effects of the system, that its burdens are exclusively on one side and its benefits on the other. It imposes on the agricultural interest of the South, including the South West, and that portion of our commerce and navigation engaged in foreign trade, the burden, not only of sustaining the system itself, but that also of sustaining government. In stating the ease thus strongly, it is not the intention of the committee to exaggerate. If exaggeration were not unworthy of the gravity of the subject, the reality is such as to render it unnecessary.

That the manufacturing states, even in their own opinions bear no share of the burden of the Tariff in reality—we may infer with the greatest certainty from their own conduct. The fact, that they incessantly demand an increase of duties, and consider every addition as a blessing, and a failure to obtain one, a curse, is the strongest confession, that whatever burden it imposes, in reality falls, not on them, but on others. Men ask not for burdens, but for benefits. The tax paid by the duty on imports by which, with the exception of the receipts from the sale of the public lands, the government is wholly supported, and which, in its gross amount, is annually equal to about $23,000,000, is then in truth no tax on them. Whatever por- tion of it they advance, as consumers of the articles, on which it is imposed, returns to them from the labour of others, with usurious interest, through an artfully contrived system. That such are the facts, the committee will proceed to demonstrate, by other arguments, than the confession of the party by its acts, conclusive as that ought to be considered.

If the duty were imposed upon exports, instead of imports, no one would doubt its partial operation. It would clearly fall on those engaged in rearing products for foreign markets, and as Rice, Tobacco and Cotton, constitute the great mass of our exports, such a duty would, of necessity, mainly fall on the Southern States, where they are exclusively cultivated; and to prove that the burthen of the Tariff also falls on them almost exclusively, it is only necessary to shew, that, as far as their interest is concerned, there is little or no difference between an export and an import duty. We export to import. The object is, an exchange of the fruits of our labour, for those of other countries. We have, from soil and climate, a facility in rearing certain great agricultural staples, while other and older countries, with a dense population, and capital greatly accumulated, have equal facility in manufacturing various articles suited to our use; and thus a foundation is laid for an exchange of the products of labour, mutually advantageous. A duty, whether it be laid on imports or exports, must fall upon this exchange, and on which ever laid in our country, must in reality be paid by the American producer of the articles exchanged. Such must be the operation of all taxes on sales or exchanges. The owner in reality pays it, whether laid on the vender or purchaser. It matters not in the sale of a tract of land, or any other article, if a tax be imposed on the sale, whether it be paid by him who sells or him who buys, the amount must, in both cases, be deducted from the price. Nor can it alter, in this particular, the operation of such a tax, if imposed on the exchanges of communities instead of individuals. Such exchanges are but the aggregate of sales of the individuals of the respective countries, and must, if taxed, be governed by the same rules. Nor is it material whether the exchange be barter or sale, direct or circuitous; in every case it must fall on the producer. To the growers of Rice, Cotton and Tobacco, it is the same whether the government takes one third of what they raise, for the liberty of sending the other two thirds abroad; or one third of the Salt, Sugar, Iron, Coffee, Cloth, and other articles they may need in exchange, for the liberty of bringing them home; in both cases he gets a third less than he ought, a third of his labour is taken, yet the one is an import and the other an export duty. It is true, that a tax on the imports, by raising the price of the articles imported, may, in time, produce the supply at home, and thus give a new direction to the exchanges of a country, but it is also true, that a tax on the exports, by diminishing at home the price of the raw material, may have the same effect, and with no greater burden to the grower. Whether the situation of the South will be materially benefitted by this new direction to its exchanges, will be considered hereafter; but whatever portion of our foreign exchanges may in fact remain in any stage of this process of changing her market, must be governed by the rule laid down. Whatever duty may be imposed to bring it about, must fall on the foreign trade which remains, and be paid by the South almost exclusively; as much so as an equal amount of duty on their exports.

Let us now trace the operation of the system in some of its prominent details, in order to understand with greater precision, the extent of the burden it imposes on us, and the benefits which it confers, at our expense, on the manufacturing states.

The committee in the discussion of this point will not aim at minute accuracy. They have neither the means nor the time requisite for that purpose, nor do they deem it necessary, if they had, to estimate the fractions of gain or loss on either side, in transactions of such great magnitude. The exports of domestic produce in round numbers, may be estimated at averaging $53,000,000, annually, of which, the States growing Cotton, Rice and Tobacco, produce about $35,000,000. The average value of the exports of Cotton Tobacco and Rice, for the last four years, exceed $35,500,000, to which if we add Flour, Lumber, Corn, and various other articles, exported from the same States, but which cannot be distinguished on the Custom House books from exports of the same description from the other States, the amount must be equal to that stated. Taking it at that sum, the exports of the Southern or staple States, and of the other States, will then stand as $37,000,000 to $16,000,000, considerably exceeding the proportion of two to one, while their population, estimated in federal numbers, is the reverse, the former sending to the House of Representatives 76 members, and the latter 137. It follows that one third of the Union exports near two thirds of the domestic products. Such then is the amount of labour which our country annually exchanges with the rest of the world, and such our proportion. The government is supported almost entirely by a tax on this exchange, in the shape of an import duty, the gross amount of which is annually about $23,000,000 as has been already stated. Previous to the passing of the act of the last session, this tax averaged about 37½ per cent. on the value of the imports. What addition that has made, it is difficult with the present data to establish with precision; but it is certainly short of the truth to state it to be an average increase of 7½ per cent. Thus making the present duty to average at least 45 per cent. which on $37,000,000 the amount of our share of the exports will give the sum of 16,650,000 as our share of the general contributions to the Treasury.

Let us take another and perhaps more simple and striking view of this important point. Exports and imports must be equal in a series of years. This is a principle universally conceded. Let it then be supposed for the purpose of illustration, that the United States were organized. into two separate and distinct Custom House establishments; one for the staple states, and the other for the rest of the Union; and that all commercial intercourse between the two sections were taxed, in the same manner and to the same extent with that now imposed on the commerce with the rest of the world. The foreign commerce under the circumstances supposed, would be carried on from each section, direct with the rest of the world; and the imports of the Southern Custom House establishment, on the principle, that imports and exports must be equal, would amount annually to $37,000,000, which at 45 per cent. the average amount of the impost duty would give an annual revenue of $16,650,000, without increasing the burden on the people of these states one cent. This would be the amount of the revenue on the exchange of that portion of their products, which go abroad; but if we take into the estimate the duty which would accrue on the exchange of the products with the manufacturing states, which now in reality is paid by the southern states in the shape of increased prices, as a bounty to the manufactories, but which on the supposition would be paid, as a part of their revenue at the Custom House, many millions more would have to be added.

But it is contended that the consumers really pay the impost, and, as the manufacturing states consume a full share, in proportion to their population, of the articles imported, they must also contribute their full share to the Treasury of the Union. The committee will not deny that the consumers pay the duties, and will take it for granted that the consumption of imported articles is in proportion to population. The manufacturing states however, indemnify themselves, and more than indemnify themselves for the increased price, they pay on the articles they consume, as has already been proved, by their confession, in a form which cannot deceive, by their own acts. Nor is it difficult to trace the operation by which it is effected. The very acts of Congress imposing burdens on them, as consumers, give them the means, through the monopoly which it affords the manufacturers in the home market, not only of indemnifying themselves for the increased price on the imported articles, which they consume, but in a great measure of commanding the industry of the rest of the Union. The argument urged by them for the adoption of the system, and with much success is, that the price of property and products in the manufacturing states must be thereby increased, which clearly proves the beneficial operation of the system on them. It is by this very increase of price, which must be paid by their fellow citizens of the South, that the indemnity to the manufacturers, is effected; and by means of this the fruits of our toil and labour, which on every principle of justice, ought to belong to ourselves, are transferred from us to them. The maxim that the consumers pay, strictly applies to us. We are mere consumers, and destitute of all means of transferring the burden from ourselves to others. We may be assured, that the large amount paid into the Treasury, under the duties on imports, is really derived from the labor of some portion of our citizens. The government has no mines. Some one must bear the burden of its support. This unequal lot is ours. We are the serffs of the system, out of whose labor is raised, not only the money that is paid into the Treasury, but the funds out of which are drawn the rich reward of the manufacturer and his associates in interest. Their encouragement is our discouragement. The duty on imports which is mainly paid out of our labour gives them the means of selling to us at a higher price, while we cannot, to compensate the loss, dispose of our products at the least advance. It is then not a subject of wonder, when properly understood, that one section of country though blessed by a kind Providence with a genial sun and prolific soil, from which spring the richest products, should languish in poverty and sink into decay; while the rest of the Union though less fortunate in natural advantages is flourishing in prosperity beyond example.

The assertion, that the encouragement of the industry of the manufacturing states, is in fact discouragement to ours, was not made without due deliberation. It is susceptible of the clearest proof.

We cultivate certain great staples for the supply of the general market of the world; and they manufacture almost exclusively for the home market. Their object in the Tariff is to keep down foreign competition, in order to obtain a monopoly of the domestic market. The effect on us is to compel us to purchase at a higher price, both what we purchase from them and from others, without receiving a corresponding increase of price for what we sell. The price, at which we can afford to cultivate, must depend on the price at which we receive our supplies. The lower the latter, the lower we may dispose of our products with profit; and in the same degree our capacity of meeting competition is increased; on the contrary, the higher the price of our supplies, the less the profit at the same price, and the less consequently the capacity for meeting competition. If, for instance, Cotton can be cultivated at ten cents a pound, under an increase of 45 per cent. for what is purchased in return, it is clear, we could cultivate it as profitably at 5½ cents, if the 45 per cent. were not added, and our capacity of meeting the competition of foreigners in the general market of the world would be increased in the same proportion. If we can now, with the increased prices under the Tariff, retain our commerce, we would be able with a reduction of 45 per cent. in the prices of our supplies, to drive out all competition, and thus add annually to the consumption of our cotton at least 300,000 bales, with a corresponding increase of our annual income. The case then, fairly stated between us and the manufacturing states, is, that the Tariff gives them a prohibition against foreign competition in our own market, in the sale of their goods, and deprives us of the benefit of a competition of purchasers for our raw material. They who say, that they cannot compete with foreigners at their own doors without an advantage of nearly fifty per cent, expect us to meet them abroad, under a disadvantage equal to their encouragement. But the oppression, great as it is to us, will not stop at this point. The trade between us and Europe, has heretofore been a mutual exchange of products. Under the existing duties, the consumption of European fabrics must in a great measure cease in our country, and the trade must become, on their part a cash transaction. But he must be ignorant of the principles of commerce, and the policy of Europe, particularly England, who does not see, that it is impossible to carry on a trade of such vast extent on any other basis but that of mutual exchange of products; and if it were not impossible, such a trade would not long be tolerated. We already see indications of the commencement of a commercial warfare, the termination of which cannot be conjectured, though our fate may easily be. The last remains of our great and once flourishing agriculture, must be annihilated in the conflict. In the first instance we will be thrown on the home market, which cannot consume a fourth of our products; and instead of supplying the world, as we should with a free trade, we shall be compelled to abandon the cultivation of three fourths of what we now raise, and receive for the residue, whatever the manufacturers, (who will then have their policy consummated, by the entire possession of their market, both exports and imports,) may choose to give. Forced with an immense sacrifice of capital to abandon our ancient and favorite pursuit, to which our soil, climate, habits and peculiar labor are adapted, we should be compelled without experience or skill, and with a population untried in such pursuits, to attempt to become the rivals instead of the customers of the manufacturing states. The result is not doubtful. If they, by superior capital and skill, should keep down successful competition on our part, we should be doomed to toil at our unprofitable agriculture, selling at the prices, which a single and limited market might give. But on the other hand, if our necessity should triumph over their capital and skill, if, instead of raw cotton, we should ship to the manufacturing states, cotton yarn, and cotton goods, the thoughtful must see, that it would immediately bring about a state of things, which could not long continue. Those who now make war on our gains would then make it on our labour. They would not tolerate, that those, who now cultivate our plantations and furnish them with the material and the market for the products of their arts, should, by becoming their rivals, take bread out of the mouths of their wives and children. The committee will not pursue this painful subject, but as they clearly see, that the system if not arrested, must bring the country to this hazardous extremity, neither prudence nor patriotism would permit them to pass it by, without giving warning of an event so full of danger.

It has been admitted in the argument that the consumption of the manufacturing states, in proportion to population, was as great as ours. How they with their limited means of payment, if estimated by the exports of their own products, could consume as much as we, with our ample exports, has been partially explained, but it demands a fuller consideration: Their population in round numbers may be estimated at 8,000,000 and ours at 4,000,000, while the value of their products exported compared to ours is as sixteen o thirty seven millions of dollars. If to the aggregate of these sums, be added the profits of our foreign trade and navigation, it will give the amount of the fund out of which is annually paid the price of foreign articles consumed in this country. This profit at least so far as it constitutes a portion of the fund out of which the price of foreign articles is paid, is represented by the difference between the value of the exports and imports, both estimated at our own ports, and, taking the average of the last five years, amount to about $4,000,000. The foreign trade of the country being principally in the hands of the manufacturing states, we will add this sum to their means of consumption, which will raise theirs to $20,000,000, and will place the relative means of consumption of the two sections, as twenty, to 37,000,000 of dollars; while on the supposition of equal consumption according to population estimated in federal numbers, their consumption would amount to thirty eight and ours to nineteen millions of dollars. Their consumption would thus exceed their capacity to consume, if judged by the value of their exports, and the profits of their foreign commerce, by eighteen millions; while ours judged the same way would fall short by the same sum. The inquiry which naturally presents itself on this statement is, how is this great change in the relative condition of the parties, to our disadvantage, effected. The committee will proceed to explain this. It obviously grows out of their connection with us. If they were entirely separate, without political or commercial connection, it is manifest, that the consumption of the manufacturing states of foreign articles could not exceed twenty millions, the sum at which the value of their exports, of domestic products, and the profit of their foreign trade is estimated. It would in fact be much less as the profits of foreign navigation and commerce which have been added to their means, depend almost exclusively on the great staples of the south, and would be deducted from their means if no connection existed. On the contrary it is equally manifest, that the means of the south to consume the products of other countries, would not be materially effected, in the state supposed. Let us then inquire, what are the causes growing out of this connexion, by which so great a change is made. They may be comprehended under three, the custom house, the appropriations, and the monopoly of the manufacturers, under the Tariff system, all which are so intimately blended, as to constitute one system, which its advocates, by a perversion of all that is associated with the name, call the American System. The Tariff is the soul of the system. It has already been proved that our contribution through the Custom House to the Treasury of the Union, amounts annually to $16,650,000. which leads to the inquiry, what becomes of the amount of the products of our labour, placed, by the operation of the system at the disposal of Congress. One point is certain, a very small share returns to us, out of whose labor it is extracted. It would require much investigation to state with precision, the proportion of the public revenue disbursed annually in the southern and other states respectively; but the committee feel a thorough conviction on an examination of the annual appropriation acts, that a sum much less than two millions of dollars falls to our share of the disbursements, and that it would be a moderate estimate to place our contribution, above what we receive back, through all the appropriations at fifteen millions; constituting to that great amount an annual, continued and uncompensated draft on the industry of the southern states, through the Custom House alone. This sum deducted from the $37,000,000, the amount of our products annually exported and added to the 20,000,000, the amount of the exports of the other states, with the profit of foreign trade and navigation, would reduce our means of consumption to $22,000,000 and raise theirs to $35,000,000, still leaving $3,000,000 to be accounted for; this may be readily explained, by the operation of the remaining branch of the system, the monopoly, afforded to the manufacturers in our own market, which empowers them to force their goods on us at a price equal to the foreign article of the game description, with the addition of the duty, thus receiving in exchange, our products to be shipped on their account, and thereby increasing their means and diminishing ours in the same proportion. But this constitutes but a small part of our loss under this branch. In addition to the $37,000,000 of our products, which are shipped to foreign markets, a very large amount is annually sent to the other states for their own use and consumption. The article of cotton alone is estimated at 150,000 bales, which valued at $30 per bale, would amount to $4,500,000 and constites part of this forced exchange.

Such is the process with the amount in part of the transfer of our property annually to other sections of the country, estimated on the supposition, that each section consumes of imported articles an amount in proportion to its population; but the committee are aware that they have rated our share of the consumption far higher, than the advocates of the system have placed it. Some of them rate it as low as $5,000,000 annually, not perceiving by thus reducing ours and adding to that of the manufacturing states, in the same proportion, they demonstrably prove how oppressive the system is to us and gainful to them, instead of showing, as they suppose, how little we are affected by its operation. Our very complaint is, that we are not permitted to consume the fruits of our labour; but that through an artful and complex system, in violation of every principle of justice they are transferred from us to others. It is indeed wonderful, that those who profit by our loss, (blinded as they are by self-interest,) never thought to enquire, when reducing our consumption as low as they have, what became of the immense amount of the product of our industry, which was annually sent out in exchange with the rest of the world; and if we did not consume its proceeds, who did, and by what means. If, in the ardent pursuit of gain, such a thought had occurred it would seem impossible, that all the sophistry of self-interest, delusive as it is, could disguise from their view our deep oppression, under the operation of the system. Your committee do not intend to represent, that the commercial connexion between us and the manufacturing states is wholly sustained by the Tariff system. A great, natural, and profitable commercial communication would exist between us without the aid of monopoly on their part, which with mutual advantage, would transfer a large amount of their products to us, and an equal amount of ours to them, as the means of carrying on their commercial operations with other countries. But even this legitimate commerce, is made unequal and burthensome by the Tariff system, which by raising the price of capital and labour in the manufacturing states, raises in a corresponding degree the price of all articles in the same quarter, as well those protected as those not protected. That such would be the effect, we know has been much urged, in argument to reconcile all classes in those states to the system, and with such success, as to leave us no room to doubt its correctness; and yet, such is the strange contradictions in which the advocates of an unjust cause must ever involve themselves, when they attempt to sustain it by reason, that, the very persons who urge the adoption of the system in one quarter by holding out the temptation of high prices for all they make, turn round and gravely inform us that its tendency is to depress and not to advance prices. The capitalist, the farmer, the wool grower, the mechanic and labourer in the manufacturing states are all to receive higher rates, while we who consume, are to pay less for the products of their labour and capital. The obvious absurdity of these arguments leaves no room to doubt that those who advance them, are conscious that the proof of the partial and oppressive operation of the system, is unanswerable, if it be conceded that we pay in consequence of it higher prices for what we consume. If it were possible to meet that conclusion on other grounds, it could not be, that men of sense would venture to encounter such palpable contradictions; for so long as the wages of labour and the rate of interest, constitute the principal elements of price as they ever must, the one or the other argument, that addressed to us or that to the manufacturing states must be false. But in order to have a clear conception of this important point, the committee propose to consider more fully the assertion, that it is the tendency of high duties, by affording protection to reduce instead of increasing prices; and if they are not greatly mistaken, it will prove, on examination, to be utterly erroneous. Before entering into the discussion, and in order to avoid misapprehension, the committee will admit that it is perhaps possible for a country to find itself in such a situation in regard to its manufacturing capacities, that the interposition of the Legislature, by encouraging their development, may effect a perma- nent reduction of prices—but a comparison of the elements which constitute price here and, in England, will demonstrate, that such a result cannot take place in this country.