Mr. BANKS. Mr. Speaker, I support the tax on cotton proposed y the committee, not in the belief that it will materially affect the quantity produced or its market value, but because I believe it to be one of the legitimate objects of taxation from which we can, without detriment to the producer, the manufacturer, or the merchant, obtain a large portion of the revenue necessary to defray the expenses of the Government and meet the obligations incurred during the war. If this tax were in any essential degree to affect the quantity produced and its value in the markets of the world, or tended to stimulate its cultivation in other countries, or deprive us of the monopoly which we have had, and in my opinion will still have, of this article which enters so largely into the textile manufactures of the world, I should hesitate, eVen in view of the financial necessities of the country. But in my opinion it will not have this effect. It stands upon different grounds. It can be sustained without injury to anyone of the great interests of the country, and perhaps with benefitto all. It is in this view that 1 present the question. Mr. Speaker, before the cotton crop of this country can be largely increasedity is indispen sable that the General Government should do many things to protect and aid those who are or may be engaged in its culture. They are at present unable to control permanently anyone of the many elements of power necessary to insure successful results in this branch of industry. The advantages to be derived from stable andjust government, capital, credit, continuous labor, the security of property, and the maintenance of just laws, all of which are essential and indispensable to successful industry, can be enjoyed only through the assistance of the Federal administration. In no one of the cotton States are these indispensable prerequisites to the profitable culture of cotton within the control of the people themselves. In the lower valley of the Mississippi, for example, it will be necessary that the Ge Government should assume the management of the Mississippi river. A large portion of the best cotton lands of the country are now submerged or in danger of overflow. Every car will increase the destruction of lands that have been reduced to cultivation, and prevent the reclamation of extensive tracts that might be, and doubtless will be, devoted to this great interest. But it is now unproductive and use less to the people, and altogether beyond their power of reclamation. Nothing less than the powerfuland sustained aid of the General government. can render this part of the country accessible or secure to the cultivators of cot ton, sugar, or any other important agricultural product. Without this aid it can do little more than provide subsistence for the people, ifin deed this were not beyond their power. The restoration of the levees of the Mississippi, the Red river, and other less important bayous and rivers, will cost 20 or 30 million dollars. It is a work altogether beyond the power of the peOple, whose substance has been destroyed and whose country has been laid waste in the late terrible war; and the maintenance of the work, if completed, is equally beyond their present means. In other parts of the country it will be necessary for the Government to assist the people in securing continuous and contented labor to relieve them fora time at least from the heav burdens consequent upon the war; to exten to them its credit and secure to them that permanent peace without which comensating industry is impossible. For everyting that belongs to good government and successful industr, the cop e of the South will be more Or less ependent upon the Federal administration; and with this aid we shall be able, without difficulty, in my opinion, to equal the lar gest crops of past years, or to double and treble them in quantity. Instead of the 5 million bales produced before the war, it is not impossible that we may gather, at a day not far distant, ten and 15 and even 20 million bales. Cotton has been produced only in 5 or 6 States or arts of'States. It is capable of successful on tivation, with greater or less profit. in 20 States of the nion. It is by no means certain that the present prices will be maintained indefinitely; still less is it probable that its value will be so far enhanced as to give other nations an advantage overAmerican cotton in the foreign markets of the world. I do not know what time may be required to re establish, upon a permanent basis, the industry of the South. I entertain no doubt, however, that it can be or that it will be done; and when it is accomplished we shall find that we are able to produce cotton in such quantities and at such prices as to make it impossible for other countries to compete with us, whatever aid and encouragement they may receive from their respective Governments. If we are capable of good government we are destined more than ever to secure and maintain the monopoly of this great staple, the substantial basis of the world’s industry. In years past, I believe, cotton has been grown in favorable seasons for 5 cents a ound or less. I have no doubt whatever that it may be and will be produced at 50%. less cost than it.ever has been raise in this country; if at 5 cents before, then at 2 and a half cents per)ound. I speak of course of the cost of prouction alone at the same standard of values, a standard of gold, not of paper, to which I he 0 we may come at some time or other, and Without subjection to the heavy burdens imposed upon our industry in consequence of the war. If under the most wasteful and extravagant system of industry that the world ever saw cotton could be grown and sold without loss at 5 cents a pound, what extravagance is there in assuming that with the most economical system of labor, like that applied to the manufacture of cotton, with all the advantages of mechanical ingenuity, the energy imparted by compensated industry, and tie constantly increasing intelligence of labor that results in many ways from sharing in the profits of the work; what extravagance is there, I ask, in assuming that the same results can be obtained at 1/2 the cost of former crops, or even less than half the cost of product under the old system? A far greater advantage has been obtained every where and in everything by free, intelligent, and interested labor over that of serfs and slaves. I listened with respectful attention to the statements of the Gentfrom Iowa [Mr. Kassos] as to the different conditions of labor now as compared with that of the vold system. But in his estimate of this difference, the gentleman omits one most important consideration. He says very justly that formerly plantation labor cost the planters but a couple of suits of Kentucky jeans each year, and a scanty fare of cornbread and poor bacon and that now the laborer requires, after the style of northern labor, I suppose, good food, comfortable dwellings, education or his children, and broad cloth instead of jeans for clothing. That is very true. But we must remember also that under the old system the plantation laborer was entitled to a bare subsistence as the reward of his toil, amounting to perhaps 3 or 5%. of the profits of the crop. The planter and his factor received 50 or 75%., which was expended in extravagant systems of cultivation, costly machinery, heavy interests, or wasted in other extravant expenditures in the country where he live, or in other countries where he s eat a large portion if not all of his time. The laborer was a slave. He received nothing that was not necessary to his existence. Beyond that everything went to the capitalist, the master, his factors, and his creditors. At the end of the year the master and the slave were poor alike. 0w the laborer will get not only a subsistence, the means of existence but. a share of the profits. It is from this that he obtains his better living improved dwelling, better raiment, and education for his children. If his share were ten or 20 times that which he received when a slave, it would not affect the quantity nor the value of the crop. It is a new rule of division between labor and capital employed and the employer. it is a change with mutual advantages. The market rice or cost of the cotton will depend upon different cohsiderations, of which the compensation of labor is but an immaterial, and the rule for division and profits between labor and capital the material and controlling point. Looking upon a cotton or sugar plantation in the South, you cannot fail to see from the character of its organization that the greater portion of the profits were applied to other and less profitable things than the improvement of the plantation, the economy of time, product, or labor. Large estates, numerous idle hands unrestricted waste, universal indolence, and extravagant and thriftless customs of labor and life consumed the product of the soil and left the cultivator a bankrupt, without hope of improvement in his condition except by an increase of the evils that crushed him, and an attempt to overthrow the Government that protected him. From this came the poverty, trea son, rebellion, and defeat of the South. Under the new system of cultivation large estates will be broken up. Usurious interests upon hands that never worked, and old debts that could never be paid will be stopped. Laboring men will plant for themselves, as lessees or owners of the soil. They will turn over their crops of one.acre or more to those who can manage the markets to the best advantage. All the intelligent laborers are likely to cultivate the land for themselves, whether as les sees or owners. A new class of factors will arise, men who no longer manage old debts, or receive pledges of future crops, but who will buy at fair prices and sell at small profits whatever cm s are offered, whether large or small, from the acre of the cmancipated slave or the plantation of the disinthraled master. such changes as these are not impossible. between the In time they will be certain. They are certain to reproduce from the cultivated fields of the South as much and all that they have ever produced. They will recuperate oldand reclaim new lauds. They will enrich the country by a more equitable division of profits among the people. By increasing the quantity of the crop and reducing the price of the product they help us to maintain the monopoly of cotton without losing altogether the control of our senses. I do not expect to see these results produced by the same agents that have led the South to destruction heretofore. New men are necessary to the success of new measures. The people of the South must apply to the cultivation of the soil the apostolic injunction. They must try all things that are new and hold fast all that are good. Ifgovernments can be provided for the cotton growing States that will strengthen the Union while they romote the prosperity of their people, in which 1 power shall)be exercised by friends and not by enemies, I know not what limit can be fixed to the ener osity or clemency of the loyal States. that ever is in my power I shall cheerfully give. Without this there is little of good, I fear, for us or for them. Now, Mr. Speaker, if we can assist the South in securing such political organizations governments in harmony with the institutions of the country and with the spirit of the age; governments that are in all respects in accord with the general administration of the country, without which they can never successfully cultivate the soil they can well afford to pay a tax of 5 cents a pound on their cotton. Assessed upon a product which is almost exclusively the growth of American soil, it cannot impair our control of foreign markets. Coupled with an exemption from this duty, in the form of a drawback, when manufactured in this country, it cannot increase the cost of the supplies of the manufactured article. The burden of the tax is borne by foreign purchasers, and not by our people. It will aid us to reduce taxes upon many necessaries of life. It will extend the markets for American manufactures. It will reconcile the people to liberal appropriations for the benefit of the South for compensation for losses, and to a temporary relief from the excessive burdens of taxation. It isa measurethat will benefit the whole country, without bearing unjustly upon any part; and as it may be reduced or removed as the financial exigen' cics of the Government diminish, it ought not to be regarded as unjust or oppressive. The report of the ComWays&Means upon all those amendments on which separate votes had not been demanded was their agreed to. The question recurred upon agreeing to the 3rd amendment of the Senate on which a separate vote had been demanded, to wit: in line 13 (in the paragraph in reference to the tax on cotton,) strike out the word “ 5" and insert “ two, ” so as to make the tax 2 cents perpound. The ComWays&Means recommended a non-concurrence.