Mr. HOOPER, of Massachusetts. It is not necessary, Mr. Speaker, for me to say that I am in favor of the polic of protecting domes tic manufactures and o encOuraging in every way the development of all the great productive resources of our country. Agriculture is the true foundation of national wealth and prosperity. That foundation is insignificant or grand according to the superstructure upon it. agriculture cannot flourish by itself; it must e aided by diversity of employment ampug the people, in order that these an in other pursuits may create a market that will furnish a ready sale for the products of aericulture. It is not alone the supply of foo to the workmen employed in manufacturing and minin" and commerce that creates such a mar ket. The development of mechanical skill that converts into articles of value the great staples of agricultural production, like wool, cotton, flax, hemp, and various other products, is of far greater importance. Many articles are thrown away as useless until manufacturing skill imparts value to them. The cultivation of those great sta lcs would yield no profit but for the meclianica skill and industry developed by manufacturing. Their bulk renders the transportation of most of such products to distaut foreign markets so expensive as often to consume the whole of their value, leaving no profit to the producer. This country possesses advantages over every other in the world, in its diversity of climate, in its mineral wealth, and in its abundance of fertile lands that require only labor to make them productivem But of what use is it to extend the cultivation of those fertile lands if there are none to consume the products? A few acres supply food to the cultivator; and there is no incentive to industry and energy unless there is a market for his products. The farmers of the West have in many instances within a few years consumed their corn for fuel, because there was no cheap mode of transportation to supply it to miners, who ladly would have furnished coal in exchange or that com. How much more must this be the case when the farmer depends on a foreign demand for a market, subjecting his products to the cost of 1000s of miles of transportation. The opponents of protection to home industry sa we should be content to find mar kets abroa for our agricultural products and depend on the foreign manufacturer to supply what we need; by which means the value of everything the farmer raises is diminished by the high charges for transportation by land and by sea, and the cost is enhanced of all he receives in return for his products, instead of placing the farmer, the miner, and the manufacturer side by side where each can aid and supply the wants of the other, and thereby save the immense cost of transportation hither and thither across the ocean. My theory of protection to American industry does not differ materially from the practice of the English theory of “free trade, as applied to the interest of British industry and commerce; which is to encourage free trade in all raw materials for manufacture which cannot be produced in GreatBritain, and in all articles which GreatBritain can produce cheaper than another country. This British idea of free tra c is identical with my idea of whatthe protection policy of this countryshould beas applied to theinterestof American industry and commerce, namely, to encourage free trade in all the materials for manufacture which we cannot produce, or which we can produce cheaper than any other country, and to impose duties for the protection of American labor against the competition of the cheaper labor of foreign countries on all articles which we can produce, and for revenue alone on those other articles which we cannot produce. The tendency of a purely agricultural community is aristocratic; the large landed proprietor and the laborers who till the soil composing mainly such a community. In Europe, whereever this condition of society exists, the laborers constitute what is termed “ the peasantry.” In the only portions of our own country where purely agricultural communities were preferred, that labor has been performed by slaves. Field labor under the supervision of the proprietor of the land, or his agents, requires but little skill or intelligence. In such communities skilled labor is not appreciated, and education and the improvement of the laboring class are discouraged as useless and tending to create discontent and insubordination. In a community where agriculture is combined with manufacturing, mining, and mechanical pursuits, intelligent skilled labor is absolutely essential, and to thayend the education and improvement of all classes of the people are demanded for the public interest. Igor this reason in a com; iniinity where the protection of industry encourages diversity of occupation, combining agricultural with manufacturing and mechan ical employments, there will be found school houses, churches, and lyceums, in every city, town, and village, and it will be rare to find a native born citizen who cannot read and write and converse intelligently on almost any topic of general concern. The effect of a free trade theory, favoring a, purely agricultural community dependent on foreign commerce for its supplies of manufactures, may have been seen in the condition of most of the slave States, in which the community generally consisted of some large landed proprietors, some cor whites, and a great many slaves, and where it was said to be exceptional to find a laboring man, black or white, who could read and write. I confess that I am proud of the condition of NewEngland, considered in this aspect; and I am so well satisfied with my own State, which enjoys the reputation of taking the lead in all the great moral and intellectual reforms to raise the standard of intelligence and cult ure, that I ani never offended by any of the sneers 0r denunciations of Massachusetts, by rebels n’nd rebel sympathizers, and which are sometimes even heard on the floor of this House. In regard to this tariff bill, I am not aware that NewEngland has asked for anything in it; the changes it prooses do not generally favor her interests. The manufacturers of NewEngland have been for several years so plied with coal, free of Qty, from the neigh boring British Provinces. I‘liis tariff bill imposes upon it a duty of $1 50 perton, which is equal to 5 dollars perton on every ton of iron produced in NewEngland more than 3 tons of coal being consumed in the manufacture of a ton of rolled or cast iron. The Gentfrom Philadel hia [Mr. KELLEY] says, however, that this Will benefit NewEng land manufacturers; but they cannot see it in that light. I shall ask for a special vote on it in the House, with the hope that the amendment made in the ComWhole House will be rejected, and thereby restore the section taxing coal as it was reported from the ComWays&Means with the approval of the distinguished Representative from the Pittsburg district of Pennsylvania, [Mr. MOORHEAD.] The duty on salt has been increased 75%., making the whole duty equal to about 350%. on the foreign cost. This article is largely used in NewEngland for reserving and packing fish. Our fishermen aniFpackers cannot understand how they are to be benefited by this increase of duty, though the Gentfrom Philadel phia says they will be benefited. The crushers of linseed along the eastern coast are simply “crushed out’ by this tariff; and we must hereafter im art the oil, as it will be a long time before the West can supply the requisite quantity to meet the consumption of the whole country. I think our distinguished chairman of Ways&Means will be unwilling to have this bill, if it “ becomes a law, known as the Morrill tariff.” It would be more justly des ignated as the “Pennsylvania and western tariff.” I shall vote for this bill, however, because other portions of the country than NewEng land say thatit is necessary for their protection, and because I believe in the theory of protecting the labor and of encouraging the development of the great material resources of this country. But I am opposed to such high rates of duty as this tarili‘imposes, except as a tem' porary measure to meet the exigencies of die present time, growing out of the expansive condition of the currency and the scarcity of labor, which are inevitable results of the war in whichthe nation has been engaged. I believe that when the injurious effects of the wai have passed away, and our currency, which measures the value of property, is restored to the standard of coin, lower rates and a ermanent scale of duties will better protect t ie substantial interests of industry and promote the prosperity of the whole country.