Mr. MORRILL. I prefer not to be interrupted now. If we do not allow this draw back, then the result will be that we shall not manufacture the amount of cotton we have hitherto done, or shall not manufacture any increased amount to send abroad. Now, would it not be to the advantage of this country if we were to admit raw silk, and the means of manufacturing it, and laborers to manufacture it, to come here and manufactures large amountof silk goods such as we now import from abroad, even if we allowed them to be exported and reimported to this country? Would not so much added to the industry of the country be a public benefit? Would it not be a blessingto the State of Wisconsin and the State of Illinois to have 100,000 more laborers employed than they now have consuming their products? Certainly that would be a esirable result. As to this drawback making our products here any higher for our people, I say, with all respect, that that proposition is an absurdity; for the only duty that is levied upon our goods is levied upon the raw cotton and upon the manufactured cotton. Does it make any difference in regard to the rices of what we consume, whether there sha I be one million more bales of cotton manufactured in this country or not? Certainly not. But by the introduction of imroved machinery and the employment of a arger force of laborers in manufacturing cotton we should inevitably in a short l time reduce the cost of even what we consume at home. As I stated in my remarks of yesterday, we allow the same principle to apply to any other article of manu acture. For one, I would be very glad to nppl it to everything in the way of manufhct ures t. at it is passible to make provision for, so that we may accurately ascertain the amount of duty that has been paid upon the raw material. Suppose, for instance, we could provide some means by which we could ascertain the duties paid upon the raw materials used in the article of shovels, manufactured by the distinguished Gentfrom Massachusetts, [Mr.Auns] alarge sale of which he has hitherto enjoed in Australia on account of the superior quaity of the article he made. He is now perhaps in some danger of competition from manufacturers abroad, so that that trade may become extinct. Would it not be a proper course of legislation if we could reachthe matter precisely and ascertain the amount of duties pai by him upon the iron and steel he uses, to allow him a drawback upon the shovels he may manufacture and send to Australia? and the same remark applies to boots and shoes, to agricultural implements and to steam engines in which our artisans particularly excel. That is all we propose to do in relation to this article of cotton. Even if the amount manufactured should be no more than was manufactured before the war, I want to set in motion all those factories thathave been stopped since the war of the rebellion began even in the South. Take the 185 cotton manufactories in a single State, the most of which are now idle; pass this bill, and we at once set them in motion again. Does an gentleman object? I cannot see for myself 0w any gentleman will object. If we succeed in manufacturing the whole cotton l crop I would gladly give it up, because instead of a revenue of 44 we would have added to the wealth of the country more than 100 million.