The PRESIDENT protempore. The morning hour having expired, it becomes the duty of the Chair to call up the unfinished business of yesterday, which is the bill (H.R.No. 718 to provide increased revenue from imports, an for other purposes, which is now before the Senate as in ComWhole, the pending question being on the amendment proposed by the Senator. Vermont [Mr.ed MUNDs] to the amendment of the committee, to insert in section 18, after line 30, the following: Books, maps, charts, and other printed matter specially imported in good faith for any public library 9r Society incorporated or philosophical, literary, or religious purposes, or agement for the encour of the fine arts, or for the use of any college, academy, school, or seminary of learning in the U.S. Mr. o: the man who opposes the passage of this bill must expect to bejThe “protectionists, ” i. choose to call themselves, have already opened the vials of their indignant wrath upon the heads Af those whose opposition they anticipated. Threats of utter political extinction are hurled against every man who, in the exercise of an independent judgment, is not prepared to impose upon his constituents the burdens which the various manufacturing combinations demand. That portion of the public press suborned to their interest is rife with charges that “the capital is thronged with freetraders, and that British gold is operating to secure American legislation for British interests.” Every man is condemned in advance who would inquire before he would vote. We know what all this means, and so far as I have the ability, I am resolved that the people shall know what it means. It means that 2 or 3 large manufacturing interests in the country, not satisfied with the enormous profits they have realized during the last 6 years, are determined at whatever hazard to put more money in their pockets; and to this end they have persuaded some and coerced other manufacturing interests to unite with them in a great combination demand for what they call protection to American labor, but what some others call robbery of the American laborer and agriculturist. It seems that the men specially interested in the passage of this bill are bent upon taking the legislation of the country into their own hands; that the are unwilling that there should be impartial, free inquiry into the subject; that conscious of the interested motives from which their own action spring they cannot conceive it possible that those who disagree with them can be in spired by any other than selfish considerations; that having bought and paid for the support o a portion of the public press they cannot imagine that there is any longer such a being in existence as an independent, manly, honest editor of a newspaper. Mr. President, this mad dog cry of “free trade and British gold”, passes by me like the idle wind. The men who utter it follow their vocation and earn their bread by it. disturb them. Nor am I alarmed at the scheme now being carried into execution of sending free of charge to every prominent man in Iowa and elsewhere in the Northwest a weekly copy of a NewYork journal of what is called the “protectionist” school for the double purpose of building up a sentiment there in favor of high duties and of politically destroying such members of congress as may not vote in favor of them. The men who pay for the papers can well afford the expenditure; and the results that will flow from this bill, which I doubt not is fated to pass, will be a sufficient refutation of all the arguments they contain. I have known nothing so alarming in the whole history of legislation in this country as the methods that have been adopted to secure the passage of this bill. The people have not asked for it; they, so far as we know, are sat isfied with the present tariff laws. The members of this Congress were not elected upon any issue of this kind. This enactment is solely demanded by the manufacturers of iron and a few wool agriculturists and speculators who call themselves the wool growers of the country. They have organized associations contributed large sums of money to p. mold sentiment through the press, and have ormed combinations with other interests to control the legislation of the country. The result of their labors is before us, and we are to determine whether we will permit these clubs and associations of interested parties to govern us in our action as the clubs and associations of revolutionary France governed the constituent assembly of that country. It is the fashion to denounce every man who does not favor a prohibitory tariff as a free trader. The charge is made that free trade agents are at work to influence Congress, and that our tables are encumbered with free trade documents. Who has seen these free trade agents? I have yet to see the 1st man who was in favor of free trade, nor have I seen any man who was opposed to a revenue tariff which should incidently protect such branches of American industry as needed the fosterin aid of the Government. It is on questions. detail that we differ. We disagree as to how much money shall be taken from the pocket of Peter to support and enrich his brother Paul. I would not We are told that for some centuriesEngland maintained a protective systemalmostamount. to prohibition, and grew rich and power ful under it; and that example is presented to us as worthy of imitation, as though the world had made no progress in arts and sciences, in productive, resources and machinery, no ad. vance in the science of political economy and the application of its principles to practical life. . forbid that we should go back to the early days of the British Empire, or even to her more modern days, for laws or policies. upon which to model our own systems, na,tional, social, or economic. Besides, it is undoubtedly the fact that the prosperity, the wealth, and the renown of England aredue ian far greater degree to her commercethan to her manufactures. It is commerce that is the great civilizer and elevator. It is commerce that has poured the wealth of the world into the lap of England. Yet the tendency of this measure will be to utterly destroy i. Commerce of this nation, already almost swept from the ocean by hostile legislation. And now what is the measure beforeus? It purports to be a bill “to provide increased revenue from imports, and for otherpurposes." If this bill when passed into a law would indeed “provide increased revenuefrom im: sorts' no man could support it morecheer ully than H would. That is preciselywhat my constituents desire, and which they believethe interests of the country demand. They would be glad to see that kind of legislationadopted which would secure such an “increasedrevenue from imports” as would be sufficient to pay the annual governmental expenses and theinterest on the public debt without resort to internal taxes. True relief is only to be found in the abolition of the manufacturers' tax. Butthe friends of this bill do not support it upon any such theory as that. They do not pretendthat it will “provide increased revenue from im: ports.” If they thought it would, theywould utterly and forever repudiate it. It is for procisely the reverse reason assumed in the title of the bill; it is because it will not “provide increased revenue from imports;" it is because they believe that under its provisions foreign products, coming in competition withAmerican products, will be so excluded from our ports that no duty at all can be collected on them that they require its passage. The title is? misnomer. “. it passes from our hands let it be amended so as to read: “An act to prevent the collection of duties from imports and defray the expenses of Government by direct taxation.” This bill is said to contain a P.for the benefit of the wool growers of the weso States, and on that account my aidisinvoked to secure its p. No one could be o; gratified to be able to render to that classo our people any legislative assistanco." power than I would be, provided I coulddo without detriment to the common inters." the whole country, and not otherwise, fo examine this subject of wool as exhibited in this bill. The existing tariff fixes a duty of 3 ” per pound specific on wools costing" cents per pound or less, and 6 conto. pound on wools costing more thano and less than 24 cents. The bill fore us dec lares other That merine , mestiza, mets, or metiswools, or wools of merine blood, immediate, or reno; P. clothing wools, and wools of likeoore of the preceding, including such as have! from tofore usually imported into theo; of uenosAyres, NewZealand, Australia,wheGroeo, d ope, Russia, GreatBritain, Canada, joalso including ribed, all woolsnotho. caonmd buipnognw Loeoilcsester, Cotswold, Lincolnsi. like Canada long wools, o combing woois, known of English blood, and o. of the by the terms herein used; and also. His: goat, and, the value other like. o.o.ro whereof, at the last port or placewhenceo po the U.S.,charges oi the duty shall be 32 cents of les, ot shall be ten centsper pound, and, in o:same a per: to: o?. class, unwashed, the Valuewho last port loi to the U.S. cluding chargesin such port, shall exceed32 cents per pound, the duty shall be 12 cents per pound, and, in addition thereto, ten%. advalorem. This is the demand of the Wool Growers' Association. Now, let it be borne in mind, that coupled with this demand and dependent upon it is the demand of the Wool Manufacturers' Association, another society in full sympathy and accord with the Wool Growers' Association, and jowith them to secure the adoption of this bill. They demand that for every cent of duty imposed on wool there shall be 4 cents per pound imposed on imported woolens, and then 35%.valorem added to that to cover the cost of chemicals, dye stuffs, transportation, &c. Mr. Wells, the special comrRev, in his very able report to the SecyTreasury, seems to think that this is in some measure a reasonable demand, for he says: “It must be evident, now, that, to the extent to which the cost of wool is increased to the American manufacturer through the increased duties on his raw materials, it will be necessary to impose an equivalent increase of duties on the importation of foreign woolcns, otherwise the increased price of wool, growing out of the duty, would act as a bounty in favor of the foreign manufacturer, and prove speedily disastrous both to the American wool grower and to the American woolen manufacturer. “To balance the duties proposed upon wool, the executive comWoolen manufacturers claim, and cndeavor to prove it to be essential to the preservation of their industry, that for every cent of duty imposed on wool, 4 cents per pound must be charged on all woolens imported. It is also clear that if the price is to be enhanced to the extent of the duty the advance must be estimated alike on goods madeof domesticas well as of foreign wool. Consequently, for every cent of duty imposed on wool, the American consumer will be taxed 4 cents per pound on his manufactured woolens; which tax on the present annual consumption of the country, namely, 150 million pounds, would amount to the sum of $6,000,000for each cent of“Adsustuymimingposed on wool. the existing rate of duty upon unwashed wool at 6 cents per pound, the present annual tax for the protection of this interest is, therefore, ($5,000,000 ×6cents=) $36,000,000b;ut at the proposed printe, assuming 11 and a half centsastheminimum, this tax will be further increased ($6, 500,000 × 5}=) $32, 250,000;or, in other woods, the proposed tariff on wool and woolens will tax the community (if it should have the effectsought by those who proposeit) to the extent of $71, 250,0opoer annum for the protection of an interest, the whole annual value of whoseproduct as we have already shown, cannot be considered in excess of $36,000,00goold valuation. Can any such amount of taxation on an absolute necessary of life in this equntry be justified under the plea of protection to American industry, and that industry one which cannot claim high protection on the plea that it is not yet well established? “‘Nothing less, ”, say the gomWool manufacturers in their report, “than a specific duty of 53 cents per pound on their manufactures will be sufficient to place the manufacturer in the same position, as if he had his raw material free of duty; a position which he must demand as an imperative necessityfor the preservation of his industry, and added to this specific duty there is in the bill an advalorem duty of 35%.” Now, it must occur to the most casual observer that with this relative increase in the duty on woolen fabrics the manufacturer can import wool to compete with domestic wool to precisely the same advantage that he can under the present tariff. Yea, with greater profit, for the proposed duty on the manufactured goods is relatively greater than on the raw material. What, then, will be the effect of this meas. ure? Granted, for the argument, that it will immediately increase the price of both domes tic and foreign wools to the temporary advan tage off the home producer. But at whose cost will this increase be made? Of course every man knows that the profits of both the wool rower and wool manufacturer must be derived from the consumer. Let me illustrate how this is: The average weight of the ordinary clothing of the male population in the U.S. is made from d. the average weight of ten to 11 ounces per yard of 3/4ths of a yard in width. If the average quantity for each person for a full suit be for a coat 4 yards, for a waistcoat 3/4ths of a yard, for trowsers 2 and one 4th yards, for an overcoat 4 yards, making for the suit 11 yards; which would cost in England 70 cents per yard, or $7 70 in gold. To this under this bill must be added $583 duty in gold, to which should be added the premium on gold, for it operates as a duty on the import, at 35 cents, amounting to $205, making a total of $790 duty, or 20 cents more than the material cost in England of which the suit was made. This is an example of the protection which the combination of wool growers and wool manufacturers demand that the common people of And this this country shall afford them is a fair illustration of the increase of prices given by this bill over all imported clothing and woolens. But is it true that this increase of F. duty will increase the price of wool? I had supposed it to be “an axiom in political economy that no amount of duty on any foreign product can permanently enhance, above the cost of production, the price of the domes tic product so long as it could be produced to an unlimited extent.” Does anyone imagine that the increased price will not stimulate the production of wool in Iowa, Missouri, Kansas, and especially in NewMexico and Texas, where it can be produced as cheaply as on the Pampas of South America? I venture the prediction that the effect of this law would ulti mately be, were it continued on the statute book which I do not predict, to entirely destroy the wool growing business east of the Mississippi river, in all of these States where wool growing is conducted upon lands costing 30 dollars per acre and upward. Iowa, so far as I have heard, with her 2 million sheep demands no protection. That demand comes from the wool growers of Ohio and the States east of them. I do not understand that we do not receive today a fair price for our wool as compared with the prices of other agricultural products. With the present price of sheep and labor we can as well afford to produce wool as we can corn, beef, and pork. during the war the producers received from 60 cents to one dollar a pound for wool. I." fully with the commissioner when he says that “The low prices of wool at legitimate arguments the present time are no in respect to this question, in: asmuch as they are abnormal in are due mainly their eharacter, and to a general depression of business, consequent upon an anticipated reduction of prices, and to an over importation of foreign wools in the spring and summer of 1866, stimulated by the pros pect of an advance in the tariff.” And I further agree with him in his opinion that “The trouble under which the wool grower at present labors is one and the same affecting every other branch, of industry in the country, namely: a most extraordinary advance in the cost of all the elements entering into production. To remedy this state of things the wool grower now proposes to the cost of production still higher; for make it cannot be supposed that he alone, of all the producers of the country, is to be allowed to advance the price of products his without submitting to an equivalent advance in the price of all others.” I wish it to be understood that I want to protect the wool growers. I want to protect them against an enormous advance upon the necessaries of life; against an increase of 25 or 30%. in the cost of all of their agricultural implements; against an increase in the clothing they wear, the food they eat, the books they read. I would not advise or stimulate ifIo people of my State, under the stimulus of a high duty, to rush into attempts to produce wool on a large scale which cannot be of advantage to the State, an must in the end be disastrous to them. From the time of the Shepherd Kings down to the present moment, no nation, people, or community that devoted their energies principally to the husbandry of flocks ever became rich or powerful. Providence has created certain regions on this continent, one would almost think, with a special reference to this kind of hus bandry, and planted there both the shepherds and the sheep. When the Pacific railroad shall be pushed a little further to the Southwest, the wool of Santa Fe will drive many large wool growers in this country from this avocation. I admit that the agriculturist who diversifies his labor and hisF.the farmer with his 15 horses, his 40 cattle, his 50 swine, and 100 head of sheep is a benefactor, and should be encouraged. }. us see how this bill encourages him. His 100 head of sheep will furnish him 250 pounds of wool, which will beincreased in value by the passage of this bill, if it does what its most ardent friends claim for it, 15 cents a pound or $42 50 on his clip. But in order to secure this, he must consent to be taxed 6 cents a bushel on the salt that he feeds to his sheep and with which he cures his meat and seasons his food; he must agree to an additional tax upon the plows, harrows, shovels, hoes, reapers, with which he cultivates his crops, and the engine that drags his products to market, upon his clothing, the household utensils used in preparing his food, and the table cutlery with which he eats it. I would be pleased to know where the net profit on the 100 head of sheep would be found in this transaction; and if that would be small, where would the equally deserving farmer who was not the owner of sheep find a compensation for the additional taxation put upon him by this bill. And let it be remembered that those who raise wool are only as one in 1000by the side of those who consume it. But the truth is, this bill will not cause any permanent and reliable advance in the price of wool. There may be a sort of spasmodic rise brought about for the benefit of the speculators holding large quantities of it, but it cannot last. This bill will only benefit the manufacturer by lacing the consumer completely in R. his power. was the innocent sheep more completely shorn than the wool growers have been in the nice little combination they entered into with the manufacturers to increase the price of wearing apparel and blankets on the consurnet. Why, Iask, is so high a duty placed upon the wool of Cotswold, Leicestershire, and other long wooled sheep which are not produced in this country to any appreciable extent? I believe we have at this time a capital amountin to between 5 and 8,000,000 dollars. in the worsted business. This wool is used' solely for that purpose. The effect of this bill will be to root up and destroy that entire worsted business to the advantage of nobody in this country so far as I can learn, but to the great detriment of everybody who uses worsted abrics by greatly increasing the price of them. But the iron makers insist that they are in distress and must be relieved. It was for their benefit in the 1st instance that this bill was proposed. I do not profess to be as well in formed upon the subject of iron manufacture as some others, or perhaps as I ought to be, but so far as my observation and inquiries have extended I am convinced that every iron establishment in the properly located and economically conducted, is yielding reasonable profits to its owners, and some of them yield enormous profits. y “reasonable profits.” I mean what is considered by men engaged in other legitimate business to be fair returns for their capital invested. The present duties on the leading descriptions of iron are: Per cwt. ig.: 52 rom, bar, oequivalent to. 68} Iron, small, round and square, equ 77 Iron, hoop, equivalent to Iron, band, equivalent to Iron, refined, equivalent to Iron, best Yorkshire, equivalent to. 36 to Iron, 40 best English boiler plates, equivalent to. 33 Iron, shect, Nos. 11 to 20 wire gauge, equivalent to. Steel, cytra cast, equivalent to. 41 Steel, blister, equivalent to. Steel, 3rd quality spring, equivalent to Steel tires for locomotives, equivalent to. To these rates freight, insurance, commissions, &c., must be added, thus to some extent increasing the duties above the rates here given. The average varieties of iron used by black smiths, machinists, and ship builders, now protected to the extent of 55%; is advanced by this bill 15%. Nail o plate, hoop iron, and small bar iron now protected by 60%, duty is directly advanced by the bill from 15 to 75%., and some of it over 100%. But the iron manufacturers are not sat isfied with the monstrous duties apparent upon the face of the bill. By adroitly changing the classification of iron it will be observed that several descriptions have been carried from lower to higher classes, thus making an additional increase on plate iron of 2 leading sizes of one 4th of a cent per pound, and on round and square iron of some sizes, namely, No. 9, wire gauge to less than 5 16ths of an inch an increase of 3/4ths of a cent per pound. This is not apparent on the face of the bill to a casual observer who does not compare the present tariff with the proposed one. In order that the Senate may have a complete understanding what the duties proposed upon the various descriptions of iron will amount to, I lay before it a table that has been prepared with a great deal of care and for the accuracy of which I think I can safely vouch. Table comparingthe cost per ton, on board, at the port of shipment, including 60 cents, per ton !"; charges, of iron imported into the U.S. with the duties to be charged on. same in tohebfilltre.portedby the Senate ComFinance, 1867 reducedto U.S. gold. Duties proposed P. by Senatobiii. 35to.o3.a. Poerftofn g?8;. ppounds. 5o o Gold. Gold. Gold Bars, round or square, 1} cent. $2800 $3811 Bars, round or square, 1}. Bars, round or square, 13 39 20 38 11 Bars, roun.13 Bars, round 1 “ 89 20 47 80 Bars, round. 1; Bars; round 1: “47 Band iron – thinner than No. 8, gauge, and not twhiirne ofI submit to the Senate a table carefully prepared showing facts important to be known: The rates of duty average somewhat over 100%. on the cost on board. Of the 28 specifications of duties, about 13 are under and 15 are over cost. Is it possible that we are prepared to place such a tax as this upon iron which is the raw material for all our industries, and which it has been the policy of all civilized nation t o afford to their people cheap? Can I justify myself to my constituents for voting to double the cost of iron by pleading that in their behalf we secured the blessed boon of compelling them to pay double for all the clothing they wear? Of the proposed duties on sheet iron it is unnecessary to speak. Upon some descriptions they are confessedly prohibitory. The steel manufacturers laid upon our desks yesterday a statement of their demands. They tell us that in 1859, under an advalorem duty of 12%., the manufacture of steel became an assured success; that the duty fixed by the act of 1861 was agreed on between the importers and manufacturers, and was well adapted to the then existing state of the manufacture in this country; and they now demand an increase of from 46 to 67%, on the existing tariff. On this point H tr; to:5 on to on to to Upon Bessemer steel rails is fixed a duty of 45 dollars per ton, doubtless intended to be, as it certainly will be, entirely prohibit ory, all for the }. of the rich monopolists who are the assigne&s of the patented process by which it is manufactured. Now, what is to be the effect of this great increase in the price of iron and steel? Need anyone be told that iron and steel are the bases of all production, and that the enhancement of their value will increase the cost of every variety of manufacture? Can anyone name a single fabric the cost of which will not be augmented by this increased duty 7. The railroad iron makers, content with the existing duty of 14 llars, insist that if the duty be raised on ordinary bar iron they must have an increased duty on their production to meet the increased cost of blooms and the increased wages of puddlers and other skilled laborers. The manufacturers of every variety of hard ware and cutlery asked with great justice that we should give to them an increased protection, because of the anticipated increase in the value of what is to them the raw material, iron and steel. There is not a single industry that does not demand and need greater protection, because of the increase you will give to these articles. The manufacturers of machinery require, they tell us, that the duty on machinery shall be raised from 35% to 65% advalorem, at least a rate corresponding with no other articles in the present bill except upon silks and other articles of luxury, saving and "excepting always iron and j They insist that a machome for cotton yarn costing in gold $10,000 shall have added to it a duty of $6, 500, and all other machinery employed in the manufacture of cotton, wool, &c., must be enhanced in a corresponding degree. Mills therefore already built will become monopolies. Do the advocates of this measure insist that this is the way to build up manufactures and make cheap goods? Is this the way to E. spread through the land and glad the earts of the poor? Is there anyone so blind as not to see that the effect of the bill will be to increase the colossal fortunes of iron and steel masters and of the owners of woolen and cotton mills at the expense of the consumers of their products? Is this the way to pay the interest on the public debt? Will an increase of the price of every necessary of life and of every consumable. enable the people to more easily pay their internal taxes or make them any more willing to do it? These are questions that it would do well for us to ponder. Yet we are expected to vote for all thi because we are permitted to have an: duty on wool. We were reminded the other day that the farmers' interests were to be specially protected under this bill, and so it contains a provision by which the duty on salt, an absolute necessity of life, is increased 160%. above its cost. We in the West prouce beef and pork ohich are packed and sent to foreign countries, where they come in competition with beef and pork packed elsewhere, with salt that pays no tribute at all, free salt. Yet the farmers' interests are protectedl Mr. President, another effect of this bill will be to completely destroy the commerce of this country. I hold that no nation can be great and powerful and o a prominent and respectable position in the family of nations j.commerce. When I said this to one of the gentlemen outside of the Senate who were advocating the p of this bill he denied my proposition, and referred me to Austria as a great nation without commerce priest ridden, bankrupt, despotic, disintegrat.ing Austria as an example to the country! Sir, you have already by your hostile '.lation nearly destroyed your commerce. You have destroyed your business with Mexico and with .America; your carrying trade is now to a great extent done in. if bottoms. I am told by those upon whom I rely that where ten years ago there were ten vessels of this country in the South American ports there is not one now. This change has not been wrought by the Alabamas and Floridas, but by us. You have a little commerce with Cal cutta and the East Indies; but before this bill passes, if I am not mistaken as to where the strength of the body lies on these questions, you will so amend it as to destroy that commerce also. This bill will effectually destroy your trade with the countries of northern Europe.