Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

as I have been told by its proprietors, is only awaiting transportation facilities to follow the example. At least two of those in Ohio procure their ores from the same source. Every dollar's worth of ore raised from the mines of Michigan, Missouri, or Tennessee, is a dollar CREATED, and eighty or ninety per cent. of every dollar thus created is distributed to those who delve in the mines, or work in the mills, and through them to the farmers who feed them, and the mechanics or laborers in a hundred other branches of industry who contribute to their necessities or comforts. Every dollar so created, and its multiples resulting from the labor of perfecting the raw material, is an addition to the wealth of the nation. Buy your iron from abroad, and you not only lose that profit which would otherwise have been produced, but every dollar you pay, save only the small percentage of tariff and the agent's commission, is carried off to be expended in a foreign

land.

What has been said of railroad iron applies with equal force to all kinds of iron manufacture, whether cast, rolled, or hammered; and especially to those finer kinds upon which the greatest amount of labor is expended, and which, by reason of the comparative cheapness of European labor, the foreign maker has, at all times and under all rates of duties, been able to send to American markets. And the principle which I wish to enforce is not confined to iron, but to American manufactures in all their branches, every one of which is entitled to as much care from the Government as is required for its safe, steady, and successful development.

BENEFITS OF PROTECTION.

The benefits which flow from protection are not confined to Pennsylvania, and will be as wide-spread as our boundaries. Iron and coal are found in great abundance in many of the western States, and, already a large quantity of iron is manufactured in West Virginia, Ohio, Tennessee, Kentucky, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and other States; and the day is not distant when the fertile Northwest, so productive of the cereals, will become the great manufacturing center of the Union. The earlier settlement of Pennsylvania, and the local advantages she enjoyed, have given her a start which, I hope, will enable her to maintain a healthy competition there many years for the trade of the West and South; but as population increases and the wants of the country are developed capital will seek promising locations and find new mines of ore and coal in the search for the minimum cost of production. Michigan ore will then be turned into bars, rods, and nails on Michigan soil, and the prairies of the West will be dotted with the chimney stacks of furnaces and forges, and ring with the cheerful sound of many-handed labor. The same causes will secure for the West a division of the manufacture of textile fabrics, which are now nearly monopolized by the eastern States, and the blessings of diversified production will thus be gradually extended over every portion of the country, until, with enlarged capital economically employed, improved machinery, diminished risks and costs of transportation, the minimum cost of production will be reached, and the nation be secure in its commercial supremacy.

This is within our grasp, and it is for the legislators of this day to say whether we shall reach this position and enjoy the advantages to be reaped from it, or whether we are to continue to play a part subordinate to a people to whom there is no reason why we should pay tribute; who are the enemies of our institutions and the scoffers at our principles; who were our enemies in the day of our weakness, and are our inferiors in every element of greatness except in the aggregation of capital which has enabled them to crush feebler nations, which has enabled them at times to corrupt the legis lation of stronger, and before whom I insist it is our duty to maintain a determined and inflexible front,

THE STEEL QUESTION.

The history of the manufacture of steel in this country is of itself an argument. It is but a few years since it was commenced here. In 1864 there were thirty-seven establishments, of which fourteen were in Pennsylvania, nine in New York, five in Massachusetts, five in New Jersey, two in Connecticut, one in Michigan, and one in Illinois. The manufacture is one of great value, as its products cover the whole range of mechanics' tools and agricultural implements, as well as the implements of war. Its manufacture requires the highest class of skilled labor, and the pioneers in the experiment were obliged to pay large wages and even bounties to tempt skilled European workmen to incur the expense of coming here, and to pay them during the time thus occupied, each of which items was an addition to the disadvantages under which the attempt was made, although experience has proved that we have in this country, and especially in Essex county, New York, ore from which steel is manufactured of a quality equal to the best foreignmade article.

The tariff duties have been less favorable than was required. Prior to the passage of the Morrill tariff of 1861, the duty was only twelve per cent., less than half the amount then charged on iron. In that act it has been about doubled, but it is graded according to appraised value. That valued at seven cents per pound or less pays two and a quarter cents per pound; valued at seven and not over eleven cents per pound, three cents per pound; valued at over eleven cents per pound, three and a half cents per pound and ten per cent. ad valorem.

During the year 1864, of the importations of steel at the port of Philadelphia, 2,071,060 pounds were valued at less than seven cents; 1,093,507 pounds were valued at over seven and less than eleven cents; and 22,084 pounds were valued at over eleven cents.

During the year ending June 30, 1864, at New York, 14,308,828 pounds were imported valued at less than seven cents; 11,057,947 pounds valued at over seven and less than eleven cents; and 2,698,093 pounds over eleven cents.

During the same period the internal revenue assessor of the twenty-second district, Pennsylvania, which I represent, collected this excise tax from manufactures of steel:

On steel valued at 7 cents or less.......

On steel valued at over7 and not overllcents, 618,147 pounds.....

$3.693 22 On steel valued at over 11 cents, 10,614,313.... 70,903 80

$74,597 02

These figures show:

1. That the American manufacturer pays excise tax upon the full market value.

2. The foreign manufacturer pays on a foreign valuation, imports to his own agent on invoices which are not sale prices, and as a matter of fact manages to get one half of the entire importation of steel through the customhouse at the lowest rate of duty, and the result is, the amount of excise tax paid by the home manufacturer is about equal to the entire duty paid on the imported article, as appears from this detailed statement of the steel manufactu

rers:

[merged small][ocr errors]

Tax.

none.

[ocr errors]

on cost of crucibles consumed

66

10 tons coal........

64

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

cast iron molds, castings for repairs, fire brick, oil, &c., used in making one ton of steel is.. The cost of stamps on letters, checks, bills lading, &c.

The indirect tax on labor on same basis as that estimated by D. J. Morrell, Esq., at the Cambria Iron-Works, on average value of cast steel, six per cent., inclusive of income tax..

60

60

23 00 $50 00

every pound of cast steel produced by him, amounts to two and a half cents.

"From which it appears that the direct and indirect tax paid by the American manufacturer upon

"Now, for the sake of comparison, take the official returns of steel imported into New York, Philadel phia, and Baltimore, giving the quantity under each of the several classifications, and it will be seen that the whole quantity of imported steel amounted to 31,296,043 pounds, which at the present rate of duty will amount to $870,030 38, or two and seventy-eight hundredths cents per pound duty, being about one fourth of a cent per pound more duty than the American manufacturer pays in the shape of excise on his production."

As a consequence the steel trade of America is in great peril, and unless aided by friendly legislation it must perish under the double competition of powerful British corporations or combined capital employing low-priced labor, and of fraudulent evasions of our custom-house duties. The Committee of Ways and Means propose to exempt this manufacture from all direct internal tax; the indirect tax will of course remain. This is a step in the right direction, and will to a considerable extent afford relief; but this important branch will require an increase of duty upon the foreign article to enable it to withstand the effort now being made to crush it out, and to recover the entire trade to the foreign manufacturer.

It is certain that this new and important manufacture is entitled by sympathy, by interest, and in justice, to positive and sufficient protection.

[blocks in formation]

Cost in 1865.

..289,277 lbs, 12 cts.....$34,713 24 .214.930 lbs, 12 cts..... 25.791 60 33,514 tbs, 15 cts..... 5,027 10 ..144,000 bu., 12 cts..... 17.280 00 ..342,263 ft., $25.....

Total.............

8.556 58 67,422 14 ..$158,790 66 This is exclusive of the internal revenue tax, which nearly equals the tariff on the imported article. These figures show the circumstances under which existing competition is maintained.

table, it may be well to state that it was exten Respecting soda ash, included in the above sively manufactured in 1852, 1853, and 1854 in this country, and was sold as low as $2 60 per hundred pounds. It supplied in a great measure the American market, and drove out the foreign article. The foreign makers then combined, put down the price in this market to so low a figure as to break down the American manufacture, and at this moment none is made in this country. The price has been raised to four and a half to five cents per pound in gold in England, and it costs the American manufacturer, in many instances, twelve cents per pound in currency delivered at the factory. The result of the failure properly to protect it is, that the American maker has been broken down and the cost of the article has been more than doubled to the glass manufacturer who requires it in his business, thereby necessarily increasing the cost of glass to all consumers.

During the war, the premium on gold acted as an increase of duty, but as the premium has declined, of course that temporary advantage has declined with it, and will shortly pass away entirely.

As a consequence it is not surprising that the imports are rapidly increasing. For some weeks past they have averaged about eight million dollars per week, and last week they exceeded twelve millions. The exports are This is a state of about half the former sum.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

facts well calculated to alarm and startle us. The surplus productions of foreign manufacturers are thrown into our ports at low prices, disturbing our values and ruining our manufacturers.

truth. As a policy it has always been an enriching one to the whole people. The country has never been as prosperous as when the Government acted upon it. And the periods of weakness and collapse have always been those in which misrule exposed us to the miseries of free-trade fallacies, which afflicted alike the producer, the manufacturer, the trader, and the Government.

I say the Government has never been rich except under the policy of protection. It has never been strong internally except when it recognized as its first duty that it owes to its Take for proof this table:

I recently proposed a temporary increase of duties of fifty per cent. until the tariff bill can be prepared and passed, for the purpose of checking this excess of importation, but the House appeared to prefer awaiting the new bill for which the country is languishing.

Some persons object to an increase of duties because a return to specie payments will effect a reduction in the rates of labor and the value of materials. This expectation can be realized only measurably. I hope it will not to the extent desired by many. I should be unwilling to see labor reduced to its former minimum. Under our system it is not the policy of the Government to repress the laborer as in Europe; and we must legislate in the consciousness that the laborers of the country are a power in it. Their interests must be respected; and they are entitled to such legislation as will tend to keep open to them the avenues to thrift, wealth, and power.

They who expect to build up a system which is aimed at the dignity and prosperity of the laborers of the nation, and which necessarily involves their depression to the level of the European standard, should know, what they will soon be taught, that the inspiration of their system is from abroad, is not congenial to our institutions, and should find no lodgment on the statute-books of the great Republic.

THE WOOL INTEREST.

There is another interest of great importance to which I have not alluded, and which deserves candid and just consideration. It is the wool interest, in which eastern, middle, and western States are like concerned. As a branch of industry it is among the most valuable to the nation, both as to its agricultural and its manufacturing capabilities. The product is an absolute necessary of life, for which there can be no adequate substitute. It is capable of the largest variety of domestic and personal || uses. Its production and its manufacture employ ⚫large numbers of persons, and the profits growing out of it are distributed among different classes and pursuits. Its agency in increasing personal and national wealth is direct and valuable, and in every aspect it deserves to be fostered and protected by the Government.

During the ten years ending in 1860 the aggregate value of the imports of woolen goods into the country was $282,682,830. During the same time, we imported $30,428,157 worth of wool, being an increase of nearly two hundred per cent. over the imports between 1840 and 1850. Our climate and soil enable us to produce wool of every description equal to any country in the world; and it is for the Congress of the nation to say whether, by wise legislation, we shall encourage so profitable and important a production, and whether we shall claim for ourselves the blessings and benefits which will result from the increased manufacture of flannels, cassimeres, shawls, delaines, and the like from American wool. As for myself, I prefer the interest of the American farmer, the American wool-grower, the American manufacturer, the American dealer to the like classes elsewhere; and I am anxious to add to our already numerous sources of wealth that which, in a peculiar manner, appeals to the generous pride and the honorable ambition of every true-hearted American citizen. Petitions by thousands of signers are before Congress beseeching us to be fair to this most meritorious class and thus just to all; and I trust we will not rise until we help to put their business upon such a foundation as will give them hope of ultimate triumph in their effort to expand the sweep and deepen the current of American industry and production.

POLICY OF PROTECTION.

Sir, I know the strength of the prejudices which have been created against the policy of protection; but they will not bear the light of

[ocr errors]

own.

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]

EXPERIENCE OF ENGLAND.

What is our experience in this respect is the experience of other Governments, and especially of that of England, whose remarkable record on this question is worthy of study. In 1846 England formally abandoned the policy of protection, and insisted that if under its previous legislation they prospered it was not owing to protection, but in spite of it. Let us see what has resulted from the change.

In 1820 England's exports of cotton piece goods amounted to 248,370,630 yards; in 1840 to 790,631,997 yards, being an increase in twenty years of 542,261,367 yards, equal to two hundred and thirty-four per cent. In 1860 her exports of cotton piece goods amounted to 2,765,337,818 yards, being an increase in twenty years of 1,974,705,821 yards, equal to two hundred and forty-nine per cent.

The increase of the free-trade period over the severely protective one in the exports of cotton was only fifteen per cent.; but if the respective capabilities of expansion are justly considered, it ought to have been a hundred per cent. at least. The increase of American manufactures from 1840 to 1850 was three hun

dred and thirty per cent.; and from 1850 to 1860 eighty per cent.

But the greatest and most important of all her products show more than this. Her production of pig iron in 1823 was 452,066 tons; in 1840, 1,396,400 tons-an increase under the|| protective system of two hundred and nine per cent. In 1857 the production was 3,657,447 tons-an increase of only one hundred and sixty-two per cent. The duty upon pig iron for the first three years of the first of these periods was 17s. 6d. per ton, and ten shillings for the first six years of the last, and free of duty for eleven years, or from 1846 to 1857. The latter period had the supposed advantage, and yet fell forty-seven per cent. short of equaling the protected period in ratio of progress.

Again: the exports of silk manufactures of the twenty years, from 1820 to 1840, increased one hundred and thirteen per cent. in value, while their increase from 1840 to 1860 reached no more than one hundred per cent.

The exports of flax manufactures fared worse; they rose in quantity of yards one hundred and forty-four per cent. from 1820 to 1840, and only reach fifty-five per cent. in 1860 above their amount in 1848.

In woolens, so long encouraged by sumptuary laws, and protected by fines, forfeitures, and even imprisonment, and after these were mitigated to a general average of fifty per cent. duty on all imports, England has lost her supremacy, not indeed by any change in her commercial policy, but by the superiority of the fabrics of the Continent. In 1815 she ex

ported 889,338 pieces of cloth; in 1860 but 570,671. Her home-grown wool has for a long period deteriorated in quality, and she is now to a great extent dependent upon foreign wool and foreign looms for the finer fabrics required for home consumption, as is shown by the constantly declining proportion of the foreign wools imported. Between the years 1820 and 1840 the increase of her imports of wool was one hundred and ninety-seven per cent.; in the next period the increase fell off to one hundred and thirty-seven per cent.

Her exports of worsteds increased in the former period sixty-nine per cent, in the latter but fifty-two per cent. In those of mixed stuffs and flannels there has been some compensation in an increased value amounting to one hundred and forty per cent. as against thirtythree per cent.

In her cutlery, also, she is retrograding, a fact which is by her own authors attributed to the demoralization in her manufacture of those articles. In her endeavor to command the markets of all the savage and semi-civilized regions of the globe, her manufacturers find their account in making goods rather for sale than use; especially in those tools and implements of which every workman is a competent judge. German and American articles are at a premium even in her home market.

The purpose of this detailed array of the results of the respective periods of England's manufacturing history for the twenty years next preceding and next following the date of her change from protection to free trade is to show that the boasted triumph of the latter policy is as false in fact as it is in theory. The advocates of the modern theory appeal to facts and figures, which have a plausible appearance, but the meaning and value of those facts and figures flatly contradict the inferences so confidently drawn from them. The rate of progress in British industry and foreign trade in the years which have gone by since the policy of protection was abandoned has not exceeded, but has actually fallen behind, the rate of progress of any equal period of years previous to the change. The simple truth is, that for more than five centuries British policy defended her productive enterprises, as well as her commerce, against all competition by whatever severity of import duties and discriminative rates which seemed necessary, and having by this means fought her way into such perfection and power as she is capable of, and having nothing more to gain by the policy which made her what she is, she abandons it and decries its policy, utility, and necessity, and uses every agency which she can command to dissuade the nations whom she would hold in industrial vassalage from adopting in their own defense the very system that has made her fortunes. Her business is manufacturing; her progress depends upon it; she must extend it, and her manufactures for foreign use include opinions as well as commodities; she must have foreign markets, and these she cannot have if foreign nations will do their own work and defend their domestic industry as determinedly as they defend their territory against foreign invasion.

Six hundred years ago, in 1331, England commenced her system of protection in the form of absolute protection of the export of her own wool, then the best and most abundant in Europe, and of the import of cloth, of which till then Flanders had the monopoly in European commerce; and she continued the system, under many modifications adapted to the exigencies of her manufacturing history, at every change increasing the efficiency of her tariff, until it culminated in 1819 in an average protection of fifty per cent. on all articles competing with her staple products except manufactures of leather, printed cottons, and earthenware, which carried seventy-five per cent.; bar iron, fifty-seven and three quarters per cent.; plain white cottons, sixty-seven per cent.; and silk manufactures, embroidery, and leather gloves, in which France had the mastery

and old iron, from $4 89 to $6 35, but on iron manufactures, as follows: railroad $13 68; sheet iron, $25 41 to $31 46; heavy wrought manufactures, $17 58; small ware, $29 32; anchors, chains, cables, $19 54; and wrought tubes, large, $25 40; small, $48 85, per ton; while clocks and watches are let in at five per cent., and clock movements at nine cents per pound, just because they cannot come in at that rate or at any rate.

Now for the results.

||

so decidedly that they were met by total prohibition. This policy of centuries was never relaxed, though the atrocious severity of its penalties was gradually abated, until all its objects were fully accomplished; and only after the edifice of her industrial system was finished from foundation to cap-stone she took down the scaffolding on which it was built and called it lumber and rubbish. In 1824 cottons woven in Asia, Persia, China, and the East Indies were still prohibited. In 1730, when the cotton manufacture was commenced in England, the oriental fabrics could be afforded for one third the price of the British product. In 1769 Arkwright invented his spinning machinery, soon afterward improved so that one hand in England could do the work of three thousand in Asia, yet no relaxation was indulged until the price of cotton yarn was reduced from thirty-eight shillings in 1786 to three shillings in 1832 per pound. Silk goods were charged with twenty-five to forty per cent. by their tar iff of 1834, and woolens from fifteen to twenty. From 1819 to 1826 the duty upon foreign bar iron was £6 10s., or $32 50 per ton; but it was in that year reduced to £1 10s., or $7 50. Why? Simply because protection had done its work. Iron was produced at Cardiff the year before at £10 per ton, while in Sweden and Russia it cost £13 13s., in Belgium £16 14s., and in France £24 10s. For ten years before this reduction in the rate of duty England imported of foreign iron an amount equal to ten and a half per cent. of her exports; in the succeeding ten years ten and a quarter per cent., so that her tariff was a dead letter long before its repeal. Her policy in all its stages and apparent changes is a copy of her procedure in relation to iron; never abated, never varied, but to accomplish its object the better, and finally abandoned only when it had fully achieved its utmost possible service in a complete success. The history of French commercial policy is but the fellow of the British in the earlier stages of industrial development, but something wiser and better in its latest phase. The protective system, introduced by Colbert in 1660, maintained the finances of the kingdom and the progress of her manufactures against the vast expenditure of the fifty-five latter years of the reign of Louis XIV, (1643 to 1715-seventytwo years.) And of a much later period we have the history in the words of J. B. Say. He says:

"For thirty years (1804 to 1834) nearly every law

passed on custom-house matters has been intended

either to establish or to consolidate the system of protection and prohibition."

The result, as stated by the same author, was that France in 1826 contained the most beautiful manufactures of silk and woolen goods in the world, and he distinctly attributes this success, notwithstanding his free-trade principles, to the policy of Colbert. But after the example of England, France also could afford to remit duties when prohibition and protection had accomplished all their uses. In the treaty of commerce made in 1860, commonly called the Cobden treaty, and proclaimed as a triumph of the free-trade policy by all its advocates in England and among ourselves, silk was made free in the ports of France; and the finer kinds of glass, porcelain, embroideries, and other fabrics in which she excels all other nations, were also exposed to a competition in her home markets, as iron and the coarser cottons are in England; because no successful rivalry in price or product can possibly be ef fected. Just as free, and for the same reason, as ice at Boston, ivory in Africa, and seal skins among the Esquimaux.

But let the declaration be remarked, and challenged, too, by whomsoever will venture the question, in all things and every item of those commodities wherein her domestic industry could be endangered by Great Britain, the duties agreed upon are as highly protective, as in our Morrill tariff. For instance, on the coarser cottons of England, that treaty imposes two cents per square yard, and on the finest, but one fourth of one cent; on pig, broken ||

The treaty went into operation in 1861. In that year the total exports to France were £17,427,413, and the imports from France £17,826,646-nearly equal. In 1864 the exports were £23,825,392, and the imports had risen to £25,640,733. Here there is no gain even in gross amount to the free-trade operators as against the protective party in the business. But when we come to look at the kind of exports which England sends to France we find that £11,839,517 worth of raw silk, raw cotton, and raw wool made up quite the half of these exports in 1864; how much more of her colonial produce entered into the total may be inferred from the fact that only £8,200,700 of British produce was embraced in the total, leaving full fifteen and a half millions or within a trifle of two thirds of the whole, of which England was only the carrier, and received only the profits or wages of commerce, and nothing of those of manufacturing industry; carrying, among other raw materials, raw silk to the value of £3,545,919, and taking back in exchange £5,980,814 worth of silk manufactures.

Verily this much-trumpeted triumph of Eng; land over the protective system of France, and the glorification of Mr. Cobden therefor, looks now as if England was only deceived, and her champion and agent had been outwitted by Louis Napoleon. But other noteworthy results have followed and are still to come. The Liverpool European Times, of the 23d of December last, speaking of the manifold benefits of the Cobden treaty to France, says:

"Some time since the English locomotive was a sort of ideal; whereas at the present day French locomotives are brought to such a degree of perfection as to be ordered from France for English railroads. In like manner the English machinery for extracting coal from mines was justly regarded as the best in the world. Yet not long ago a machine was ordered from a French house in the department of the Nord for an English mine."

Here we see that French protection, equal in amount but threefold equal in effect to that of the Morrill tariff bill, has had the effect to cheapen in price and improve in character the very iron and machinery in which England thought herself safe from all rivalry.

OUR OWN EXPERIENCE.

In our country the periods of protection have been those of prosperity. In 1842 the country beneficent act of that year. This continued was suffering in every part until revived by the until the act of 1846 checked our growth, while that of 1857 would have absolutely destroyed us but for the rapid increase of our population and the indomitable energy of the people. The calamities of the war forced us to the enactment of the tariff of 1861, which was the wisest and best we have ever had, not excepting that of 1842. The Morrill tariff will be known in history as the great agency by which the country was enabled to pass successfully through the war, and to grow in material prosperity. The high price of gold made its duties almost prohibitory, and we were thrown upon our own resources, which expanded incredibly at the call, and nerved the trade of the country to bear with ease the unequaled strain upon it.

THE MORRILL TARIFF.

I may be asked whether we are not now under the Morrill tariff. I answer, we are in theory, but not in fact. All that the manufacturing interests of the country ask, and I speak confidently for my own constituents, is to be placed where that tariff placed them in 1861. But it should not be forgotten that since that time the cost of foreign manufacture has not materially changed, but the cost of domestic manufacture has doubled, and in some cases

triplicated. The excise tax reaches almost everything which enters into manufacture. To place the two competitors where they were in 1861, our tariff duties should be increased so as to equal the increased cost of labor and the excise tax. This done, the condition of the country will improve in every part, and no one will feel the blow except the foreigner who hates us and his agent here who is undermining us.

RETURN TO SPECIE PAYMENTS.

The opinion prevails that a return to specie payments will remove all these evils. But it will not relieve the country of its taxes. It can only modify the cost of some raw materials, and probably of labor. Hence its effect can be but partial. I desire the return to specie payments, and would greet it with my whole heart, but in my opinion the true line of policy is in the direction I have indicated. By increasing the rate of duties to the point suggested our excessive importation will be restrained, the balance of trade will be thrown in our favor, our coin will be kept at home to fill the channels of business and become once more the

circulating medium among the people. With present legislation this is hopeless. During the last four years our exports of coin have exceeded the imports $177,778,163, as follows:

Imported. Exported. Excess. $16,415,068 $36,887,640 $20,472,552 9,584,105 63,392,036 53,807,931 13,115,612 69,390,485 56,274,873 7,225,377 54,448,184 47,222,807 With this tendency to enormous importation of goods and the increasing necessity of gold exportations to pay for them checked, it is not unreasonable to hope that the product of our gold mines retained in the country a few years will enable us to glide into specie pay ments naturally and without shock to any of the great business interests of the country. It will be much easier to resume specie payments on the $740,000,000 of paper money now afloat, on this plan, than to contract the currency to half its present volume and allow the present rate of foreign importation ($12,000,000 per week) to continue.

All experience demonstrates the necessity of self-protection among nations. The Ameri can legislator who is blind to this truth must be ignorant of the business history of his own country as well as that of the civilized world. No nation can prosper without regarding its special capabilities, without developing them, without using the advantages which God has given it. With us this is a peculiarly imperative duty, because our labor is not only our financial need, but it is our political sovereign. Our Government rests upon its laborers; our strength comes from them; our hope is in them. As they sink the nation sinks; as they rise the nation rises in all the components of greatness and power. Let us be just to these willing giants who support the fabric of freedom, and the jewel of liberty will remain forever, blessing our children's children.

RESTORATION.

1862... 1863. 1864.. 1865........

[ocr errors]

Mr. FINCK. Mr. Speaker, had debate been allowed on the civil rights bill after it was objections of the President, I would not have returned by the Senate to this House with the troubled the House with any remarks on this occasion; but the principles involved in that bill and of other kindred measures which have been introduced into the present Congress, are of such an extraordinary character as may well challenge the profound attention and close examination of Congress and of the country. Their consideration demands an inquiry into the nature and powers of the Federal Government, and I propose very briefly to examine some of the questions which seem to me appropriate to this discussion.

Our system of government, Federal and State, is a complex one, and the boundaries which separate and fix the powers of each, engaged the most anxious and thoughtful consideration of the great men who framed the Constitution of the United States. No question was presented and discussed in the Convention of so

[ocr errors]

much interest and importance as this. It was upon this great question that the Convention was principally divided; and if any one thing was settled in that Convention, and by the conventions of the several States, which afterwards ratified the Constitution, it was, that the Federal Government was to be one of limited and delegated powers, which were clearly defined in the instrument, and that it could exercise no powers not thus expressly granted, except such as were necessary to carry out express grants.

The powers conferred upon Congress, high and important as they are, are comparatively few in number, and are defined in section eight article one of the Constitution. I know that some gentlemen claim that a great deal may be done under the last clause of the section to which I have referred, which provides that Congress shall have power

impairing the obligation of contracts. Justice Story, speaking of this Government, says:

"They have made it a limited Government. They have defined its authority. They have restrained it to the exercise of certain powers, and reserved all others to the States or to the people."

[ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

The Constitution was formed by a people who had been in the possession and enjoyment of State governments of long standing. These States had entered into a Government under Articles of Confederation, which, after the pressure of the war of independence had been removed, proved inadequate for the purposes of a General Government; and the States, sovereign and independent as they were, having all the machinery and attributes of governments in themselves, so far as the same had not by the Articles of Confederation been "expressly delegated to the United States," undertook to form a more perfect Union; and to that end sent delegates to a Convention; and the result of their labors, the Constitution which they framed, was submitted, not to the people of the United States, for ratification, but was submitted to the several States, to be ratified by the people of each State acting through their own conventions, and was to be binding only on such of the States as should thus ratify, thus making it a Federal Government. The extent and ebaracter of the powers conferred upon the Government thus formed, were delegated powers, defined and limited, and all power not granted was from the very nature of the grant reserved the granting power, namely, to the States and the people.

Mr. Madison, in the Federalist, says:

"The powers delegated by the proposed Constitution to the Federal Government, are few and defined. Those which are to remain with the State govern ments are numerous and indefinite. The former will be exercised principally on external objects, as war, peace, negotiation, and foreign commerce, with which power for most part be "The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which in the ordinary course of affairs concern the lives, liberties, and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement, and prosperity of the State."

connected.

But this House, by a majority of more than two thirds, has solemnly decided that Congress can do precisely what Marshall believed the Federal Government had no power to do.

Justice Story, in his Commentaries, speaking the Federalist, discussing the character of the Mr. Madison, in the twenty-ninth number of on the same subject, says:

then proposed Constitution, and to prove that it created a Federal, and not a national Government, says:

Now, was any power delegated by this Constitution to Congress to regulate the internal affairs of the States, or control contracts, prescribe who should be witnesses or parties in suits, who should inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real and personal property in the several States? None whatever, except that it is prohibited to the States to pass laws

[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

"The idea of a national government involves in it not only an authority over the individual citizens, but an indefinite supremacy over all persons and things, so far as they are objects of lawful government.

Among a people consolidated into one nation, this supremacy is completely vested in the national Legislature. Among communities united for particular purposes, it is vested partly in the general and partly in the municipal Legislatures. In the former case, all local authorities are subordinate to the supreme, and may be controlled, directed, or abolished by it at pleasure. In the latter the local or municipal authorities form distinct and independent portions of the supremacy, no more subject within their respective spheres to the general authority than the general authority is subject to them within its own sphere.

In this relation, then, the proposed government cannot be deemed a national one, since itsjurisdiction extends to certain enumerated objects only and leaves to the several States a residuary and inviolable sovereignty over other objects."

And still further, in discussing the same question, speaking of the adoption of the Constitution, Mr. Madison says:

"Were the people regarded in this transaction as forming one, the will of the majority of the whole people of the United States would bind the minority in the same manner as the majority in each State must bind the minority; and the will of the majority must be determined by a comparison of the individual votes, or by considering the will of the majority of the States, as evidence of the majority of the people of the United States. Neither of these rules has been adopted. Each State in ratifying the Constitution is considered as a sovereign body, independent of all others, and only to be bound by its own voluntary act. In this relation, then, the new Constitution will, if established, be a Federal, and not a national Constitution."

But each of the States in ratifying the Constitution gave expression to the strong and unmistakable sentiment of the people, that the Government formed thereby should be one of limited and delegated powers only.

The State of Massachusetts, in her convention of delegates, made the following formal declaration:

New Hampshire, Virginia, North and South Carolina, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, all evinced the same anxiety to have it distinctly understood, that the General Government could exercise no power not delegated, and that all powers not so delegated were reserved; and so strong and universal was this sentiment, that it soon found itself embodied in that amendment to the Constitution which declares:

"And as it is the opinion of this convention that certain amendments and alterations in the said Constitution would remove the fears and quiet the appréhensions of many of the good people of the Commonwealth, and more effectually guard against an undue administration of the General Government, the convention do therefore recommend that the following alterations and provisions be introduced into said Constitution: first, that it be explicitly declared that all powers not expressly delegated by the aforesaid Constitution are reserved to the several States to be by them exercised." luviti nood wing will

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively or to the people.'

Again, Mr. Madison, in speaking on the subject of express powers, lays down this rule:

"Whenever, therefore, a question arises concerning the constitutionality of a particular power, the first question is, whether the power be expressed in the Constitution. If it be, the question is decided. If it be not expressed, the next inquiry must be whether it is properly an incident to an express power, and necessary to its execution. If it be, it may be exercised by Congress. If it be not, Congress cannot exercise it." consider foundation of the Constitution as laid on this ground, that all powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, as reserved to the States or the people. To take a single step beyond the boundary thus specially drawn around the powers of Congress, is to take possession of a boundless field of power, no longer susceptible of any definition."

It is unnecessary that I should multiply authorities on this point.

Neither is there in this plain and undeniable doctrine as to the powers of the Federal Government, any warrant whatever for the heresies of secession and nullification; heresies which I have always opposed. The Federal Government is supreme in all its constitutional powers; so are the States supreme in the same way; and there is not necessarily to be any conflict. There cannot; it is true, be two supremes over the same subject-matter, but the Federal Government, and the States, are each supreme in their respective constitutional spheres.

But, sir, the danger to-day is not in secession, or any threatened or apprehended encroachment by the States, on the just and constitutional powers of the General Government. It meets us in the other direction-in the strong and well-organized attempt to destroy the just and constitutional rights of the States, and establish on their ruins a great and powerful centralized system.

As a part of this attempted revolution, bloodless it is true, but nevertheless a revolution of the most dangerous character, we have schemes and propositions pressed upon Congress which should arouse the fears of every true patriot, and stimulate him to the most determined exertions, to preserve our admirable system of government. Not only have eleven of the States of this Union during this session of Congress, in the very face of the plainest provisions of the Constitution, been denied all representation, but members duly elected to both branches of Congress, have been ousted from their seats, by the action of a domineering majority, and in some cases others admitted, who no intelligent man will pretend, represent the views of the majorities in their districts.

But, sir, this majority, not content with thus depriving nearly one third of the States of this Union of representation, have seized upon this opportunity to force through, and to continue to press, upon this Congress, measures which no one could expect would be adopted by the representatives of the people of all the States, if their voice could be heard in these Halls.

[blocks in formation]

of fourteen years. Here would be a clear discrimination on account of color, and however much the policy of such a law might be questioned or discussed, yet it seems to me that no one can seriously question the right of the States to adopt such legislation. But, sir, not only the members of the Legislature who should vote for the passage of such a law, but the judges who under their convictions of duty and oath of office, should administer it, would be liable to arrest, trial, and conviction in the courts of the United States, and exposed to suffer imprisonment for one year, and to pay a fine of $1,000. An exceedingly "civil" act, indeed. A State may in its discretion believe it necessary for the best interests of its people, in relation to certain crimes committed by a colored man, to impose upon him a "different" punishment from that imposed upon a white citizen; but here also this law steps in and rudely thrusts aside the laws of the State, and subjects both those who enacted, as well as those who enforce the State law, to the penalties already described.

Other examples of the interference of this law with the local legislation of the States, could be cited to show how it invades the reserved rights of the States, and centralizes power in the Federal Government, but it is unnecessary, as they will readily suggest themselves to the mind of every man who will cousider this question. And the cases arising under this act are to be tried in the courts of the United States. Thus the State courts are to be deprived of hearing and determining controversies, growing out of that vast field of questions embraced in the class of rights described in this act, between the inhabitants of the same State, or, it may be, of the same county. And to enforce these extraordinary provisions the President is required to have always at hand a reserved military force.

The ninth section provides:

And to have

"Full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of person and property as is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishment, pains, and penalties, and to none other, any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to the contrary notwithstanding.

The second section provides:

"That any person who, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, shall subject, or cause to be subjected, any inhabitant of any State or Territory to the deprivation of any right secured or protected by this act, or to different punishment, pains, or penalties on account of such person having at any time been held in a condition of slavery or involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, or by reason of his color or race, than is prescribed for the punishment of white persons, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and, on conviction, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $1,000, or imprisonment not exceeding one year, or both, in the discretion of the court."

It is thus sought to establish an equality between the white and colored races by Congress, in all of the States of this Union, in the enumerated rights and immunities defined in the sections already quoted, and to prohibit the States from making any discrimination in any of the particulars named between the races. Sir, this measure invades the local legislation of the States, and controls it. It lays prostrate at the feet of Federal power the right of each State to regulate and control its own domestic concerns.

But not satisfied with subverting the legislative powers of the States, it strikes down the independence of the judiciary of the States, and subjects the judges of their courts to the arrest of some petty mercenary agent of the organized band of detectives which this act creates ; thus overriding and completely subverting the free exercise of the local powers of all the States, by placing their officers under the control and surveillance of the Federal authorities. Sir, if there is anything which the people of this Union will never abandon, without a struggle worthy of all the great defenders of free government, it is the great right revered and cherished by a free people, of each State to regulate and control its own domestic affairs, unchallenged and uncontrolled by any other power or authority whatever, except the Constitution of the United States.

Where, allow me to inquire, do you get the power to declare that "all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign Power, excluding Indians not taxed, are citizens of the United States?" No such power is conferred by the Constitution. Congress, it is true, has the authority to establish a uniform rule of naturalization," but the effect of nat uralization is only to remove the disabilities existing on account of alienage. But this power does not authorize Congress to confer citizenship on a person born within the United States.

**

Mr. Justice Curtis, in his dissenting opinion in the Dred Scott case, (19 Howard R.,) has very ably examined and considered this question, and he says:

[blocks in formation]

"That whenever the President of the United States shall have reason to believe that offenses have been, or are likely to be committed against the provisions of this act within any judicial district, it shall be lawful for him, in his discretion, to direct the judge, marshal, and district attorney of such district to attend at such place within the district and for such time as he may designate, for the purpose of the more speedy arrest and trial of persons charged with a violation of this act."

So we are to have a traveling court, going around from one neighborhood to another, to look after such persons as are likely to commit offenses against the provisions of this wonderful act; and as if to stimulate the swarms of deputies who are authorized by this law to be created to make arrests, they are to be paid by the United States the sum of five dollars for cach arrest they may make, with such other fees as may be deemed reasonable by the commissioner for additional services.

And for whom are all these strange and extraordinary powers to be exerted? Not for the white men and women of this country. No, sir; the rights of the States are to be thus in vaded, the legislative and judicial departments of the States are to be stricken down at the feet of Federal power, because the people of the States may not, in the civil rights and immunities enumerated in this act, be willing to place the negro race on a perfect equality with themselves.

Well may the President say, as he has said in that most able and unanswerable document containing his objections to this measure, that "In all our history, in all our experience as a people living under Federal and State law, no such system as that contemplated by the details of this bill has ever before been proposed or adopted. They establish for the colored race safeguards which go infinitely beyond any that the General Government has ever provided for the white race. In fact, the discrimination of race and color is by the bill made to operate in favor of the colored and against the white race.'

And now, let me inquire under what power delegated in the Constitution you may do all this. Certainly not under the clause which declares that "the citizens of each State shall be entitled to all privileges and immunities of citizens in the several States." This clause has never before been invoked to sanction such startling

legislation as this, and it seems to me no sound lawyer would risk his reputation by seriously asserting that this clause would warrant this But I believe the power has been claimed under the second clause of the recent amendment abolishing slavery.

measure.

Now, what is the power contained in that provision? It confers upon Congress the power to enforce the amendment which abolishes slavery. It was not the purpose, nor does it in the least affect, the questions relating to contracts, parties who may sue or be witnesses, or inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real and personal property, for these are subjects which have always been regulated and controlled by all the States, both North and South. The power evidently was intended to enable the Federal Government to prevent any State, or the people in any State, from continuing or reestablishing the institution of slavery; and if any of the States, or the people of any of the States, should attempt to enslave any person, this clause was intended to give to Congress the power to prevent such oppression, and to that end appropriate legislation is authorized. But, sir, to my mind, it seems perfectly absurd to claim under this clause, the right to control the local legislation of the States which regulate the questions as to who "shall make and enforce contracts, sue, be parties and give evidence, inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold, and convey real and personal property." The States have always exercised exclusive jurisdiction over these questions, unchallenged and unquestioned, and the power to interfere in these matters has never been granted by the States to the Federal Government. To enslave a man is one thing, but for a State by its legislation to refuse to place the negro upon a perfect equality with its white men and women, in relation to the rights enumerated in this act, is quite another and a different thing, and one which must be left to the sound discretion of the States. This Congress has no more constitutional right to interfere with the local legislation of the States on the subjects embraced in this act than it has to regulate an eclipse of the sun.

Sir, I am not the enemy of the colored race. Heaven knows that I have not the least unkind or ill feeling toward them; and while I shall, as a citizen of Ohio, steadily oppose conferring upon the negro the right of suffrage, I shall always encourage, and be gratified to witness, a wise and liberal policy practiced toward them by the several States.

I have no doubt but that the generous and patriotic sentiments expressed by Alexander last, not only express the views of the people H. Stephens in his speech of the 22d February of his State, but of a majority of the people of all the States, in which this population is found. In that speech, speaking of the colored race,

he said:

"In legislation, therefore, under the new system, you should look to the best interests of all classes their protection, security, advancement, and improvement, physically, intellectually, and morally. All obstacles, if there should be any, should be removed, which can possibly binder or retard the improvement of the blacks to the extent of their capacity. All proper aid should be given to their own efforts. Channels of education should be opened up to them. Schools and the usual means of moral and intellectual training should be encouraged among them. This is the dictate, not only of what is right and proper and just in itself, but it is also the promptings of the highest considerations of interest. It is difficult to conceive a greater evil or curse that could befall our country, stricken and distressed as it now is, than for so large a portion of its population as this class will quite probably constitute among us hereafter, to be reared in ignorance, depravity, and vice."

But, sir, if the Federal Government may thus invade and control the legislation of the States, in regard to their laws regulating the civil rights enumerated in this act, what is to restrain it from regulating all other legislation of the States? You have just as much power to regulate and control the laws of the States relating to marriage, divorce, dower, alimony, common schools, the assessment and collection of taxes, as you have to regulate the laws relating to the several matters contained in this law. Nay, more than this, by the exercise of

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »