Mr. HENDERSON. Why is this? Ships could be built in Maine in 1860; they could be built in Connecticut. If it takes twice the amount to construct a ship in Maine that it does to construct a ship in NewBrunswick it must proceed from the high prices of labor. The high prices of labor result from the high rices of commodities which the laborer must ave. Does the Senator expect to build ships cheaper when the price of labor has been advanced 2Ihave shown that this bill will advance prices, while the Senator then attempts by drawback to resuscitate a drooping industry he gives his support to a measure which will certainly neutralize the advantage he seeks. Even if this were not so 20%. in the cost of a vessel will not be sufficient. If the Canadians can now build 100%. cheaper can they not build 80%. cheaper even after this bounty in the name of drawback shall be paid? Mr. President, as a western man, I would rather today that the Government of the U.S. would take in hand the tobacco and whisky interests of this country and deal it out as they do in France and England, and raise the entire revenue for ordinary expenses from those 2 articles of western growth and manufacture than to continue this evil system in which we are now engaged. I would positively rather that those 2 interests should be taken and subjected to the same operation to which they are subjected in England and France. I would rather that the Government would take in hand the whisky distilleries of the West and let the article be manufactured by the Government and sold by none except Government agents; I would rather adopt that system a great deal than to pursue this policy. It would be infinitely better; and I believe the people of the western States, at least my section of the country, would rather see it done. I see by the report of the ComrIntRev that the revenue collected on whisky in 1863–64, when the excise tax for a large portion of the time was 20 cents per gallon, was $28,000,000, and in the year 1865–66, with a tax of 2 dollars per gallon, the revenue collected was $29,000,000. I believe as much whisky was manufactured in the latter as in the former; surely the consumption of the article has not in the least diminished. I am satisfied that a revenue of 150 to 200 million dollars could be collected from this source alone without materially increasing the price to the consumer. Much of what has been said in regard to whisky is equally applicable to the article of tobacco. Frauds must be prevented or the honest manufacturer will be driven from business. The espionage necessary to prevent frauds requires Government control tantamount to ownership itself, and it is exceedingly questionable in my mind whether a radical change is not demanded in reference to these 2 articles. Then what is the remedy? Let us wait on the HoRep, get their bill, reduce the internalrevenue; and when we shall have reduced it I undertake to say it will give an impetus to trade and business in this country that we cannot realize by passing this measure. This is not going to help the manufacturers, and my friendfrom RhdIsland [Mr. SPRAGUE] had better vote with me to postpone this measure, because I am inclined to think that cotton manufactures will languish and die under its operation, especially if they have to pay 3 cents per pound on the raw material. Whether the woolen manufactures will fare any better or not I cannot say. But that is a significant fact stated by the Commissioner in his report that they were far more ros.perous under low but stable and fixed It seems that not only is our commerce dying, not only are our vessels driven out, not only is our registered tonnage dimin ishing, but our woolen manufactures are drooping, and it may be soon that the cotton manufactures will feel the blighting influences of this legislation.