Mr. BOUTWELL. I move to amend the amendment by strikin out “ 3 ” and inserting in lieu thereo “two and a half.H I do it for the purpose of saying that I cannot concur with the ComWays&Means in the policy of putting the duty at 5 cents perpound, and chiefly upon general reasons. So far as I can be supposed to have an interest in the manufacturing industry of the country, I do not know that the manufacturers are particularly concerned in the amount of the tax on the raw material, provided that the drawback on goods exporte corresponds with the tax laid on the raw material. at I concur with the Gentfrom Iowa [Mr. Kassox] that if the tax b. but at 5 cents, and there be not a drawbaclir, it will destroy the manufacturing interests of the country. BntIobject to it chiefly upon general grounds. It is pretty well known that in reference to all political matters concerning the South, and the restoration of that section of the country to its former relations to the General Government, I am, in some degree, uncompromising. But upon all questions alIectin their material pros perity upon everything reating to the restoration ofcommerce and social order, I am in favor of the most liberal policy on the part of the General Government. Now, air, if this tax be put at 5 cents, and the Representatives of the South return here, as they must do at some time, I cannot anticipate anything but well founded opposition, and some degree of bitterness on their part, in ref erence to this matter. We should consider that this must be, to some extent, a tax upon the cotton producing interest of the country, for, while a portion of this increase in price may be charged over to the manufacturers of this and other countries, it cannot be reason ably aiitincipatd, when you impose the duty equal to E y or 75%. of the cost of producing the material in ordinary times, that such a tax will be paid by the consumers entirely. Previous to the opening of the war, in 1861, American cotton sold in the market of England, for about 5pence and 3 10ths, or something like 12 cents perpound. If you add 5 cents, or twopence hapenny person nd, it must tend to increase the cotton pronction of other countries. Previous to the war the importation of East India cotton into GreatBritain was between 500,000 and a million bales a year. During the war the importation of American cotton into GreatBritain went down from one million 841,000 bales to 281050 bales last year; showing a loss of more than a million and a half of bales on the importations of American cottou. Now, the importations into GreatBritain of all kinds of cotton have diminished only 328,000 bales, comparing the year 1861 with 1865, showing an immense increase in the cottonowing interests of other arts of the {arid during the prostration of the business ere. Now, if you impose a duty of 50%. on the cost of producing the raw material in this country it must inevitably result in an increased production of cotton in other countries. I should much prefer that we should put the duty at something like 3 cents perpound, which corresponds with our general system so far as we can compare the duties on raw materials with the duties on manufactured articles which is observed in the revenue system of the country, and which is preserved in the bill now under consideration. Here the hammer fell.]