NEW YORK
Within two days after Duane's dispatch appeared in the Aurora,
it was reprinted in at least three New York newspapers.[15] The
following week, the New York
editors printed the formal reports of the Philadelphia meeting
[16] and the
Daily Advertiser
printed a short comment on the proposed duty. It called attention to the long article in
the
Philadelphia Gazette, and repeated the
Gazette's mistake in thinking that the duty was an
additional twenty per cent.
[17] By this time the trade, ready to go into action, requested the
printers and booksellers to meet at the Old Coffee House at seven o'clock, Saturday
evening, February twenty-seventh.
[18] According to the official report, Samuel Campbell was chosen chairman
and George F. Hopkins, secretary. After the circular letter from Philadelphia was read,
it was unanimously resolved to cooperate with the brethren of Philadelphia, and the
Union. A petition to the House of Representatives was drafted, adopted, and ordered
engrossed.
[19] The
unofficial report, however, told a much more interesting story. Cheetham and Denniston's
American Citizen published it in the course of an article which
defended the increase and which stated that Binny and Ronaldson opposed it because it
would create competitors. According to the
Citizen:
The
meeting consisted of
sixteen printers, booksellers, and
type importers. It was with some difficulty that a chairman was
obtained. Mr. Samuel Campbell was at length prevailed upon to take it, and Mr. George
F. Hopkins was appointed Secretary. Mr. James Swords opened the business of the
meeting by reading a letter which he had received from the chairman and secretary of
the meeting of the printers of Philadelphia. This letter merely stated what they had
done, and invited their co-operation; it entered not into the merits of the proposed
additional duty. Mr. Swords then stated that he had mentioned his reception of the
letter
privately to Mr.
Pintard, (now
editor of the Daily Advertiser) who had prepared a suitable remonstrance against the
proposed increase of duty. Mr. Denniston asked for specific information of the nature
of the meeting—what the additional duty proposed by the committee of commerce
and manufacture against which they intended to petition? Mr. Lang, alias Lawyer Lang,
then rose, and moved that Mr. Denniston should give to himself the information which
he himself required, and instantly
dropt upon his chair.
Finding that no information could be given him, Mr. Denniston produced the report of
the committee of commerce and manufactures in which they propose an additional duty on
types. This was read by the secretary. The meeting were
astonished.
Because Mr. Duane stated that a duty of 20 per cent. would be laid on types, it had
been conceived by the typo's present, that this meant 20 per cent.
additional duty, which added to the 12½ now paid, makes 32½ per
cent. Whereas the report proposes an
additional duty of
7½ per cent. only, which, if added to the 12½ now paid, would make the
whole duty on types amount to 20 per cent. On this misconception the meeting was
called. It is probable the Philadelphia meeting laboured under the same error. Mr.
Denniston examined the subject, and stated two grounds for enquiry. 1st. Whether the
establishment of foundaries would not benefit the country? 2d. If so, what means ought
to be adopted to give them efficacy? He was decidedly in favor of the legislature
affording such aid as would enable us to cast our own types, and concluded that this
aid ought to consist of an adequately increased duty on the importation of foreign
types. Mr. James Swords acknowledged the correctness of Mr. Denniston's remarks, but
was of opinion, that to establish foundaries sufficient to supply our wants was
impracticable. After a few words in reply from Mr. Denniston, the Chairman very
gravely, if not very
sagely, informed the meeting that they did
not come there to
discuss the subject, but to
co-operate without discussion with their brethren of Philadelphia. Mr.
Campbell and Mr. Swords are both importers of types, and, of course, interested in the
non-increase of duty. Many of the Philadelphia meeting are also importers. This is
sufficient to account for
their opposition. Discussion being
thus closed, Mr. Pintard's memorial was read and passed in the affirmative with the
exception of Mr. Denniston's vote. The memorial, however, underwent some alteration.
It was written under the impression that the proposed increase of duty was 20 per
cent; and as this was viewed as tantamount to a prohibition of the importation of
foreign types, the memorial was couched in correspondent terms. The error being at
length discovered it underwent a suitable alteration. The public are left to draw
their own conclusions from this statement of
true facts.
[20]
Two days later, the
American Citizen reprinted Duane's long
Aurora article
[21] and
on the same day the
Evening Post defended the attack on the duty,
declaring that the only persons who oppose them are Duane and Cheetham, "two
foreigners." It concluded with a jeer at Thomas Jefferson as well as at his "protege,"
Duane:
Blest era of philosophism and philanthropy, which knows no distinction between
natives and foreigners, citizens and aliens, other than forever to give an
indiscriminate preference to the latter over the former!
[22]
And so on March 8, 1802, this petition was read in the House of Representatives:
To the Honorable the House of Representatives of the United States;
The Memorial of the Printers and Booksellers of the City of New York, respectfully
sheweth,
That, thro' the medium of the public papers and private correspondence, your
memorialists have been informed that a proposition is now before your Honorable House
for imposing a duty of Twenty per cent. on imported printing Types.
Conceiving this measure to be highly impolitic in itself, as directly calculated to
do extensive injury to all persons concerned in printing, and indirectly to tax every
reader in the United States for the emolument of the few persons who are concerned
in[23] the business of
Type-founding, they trust your Hon. House will not give its sanction to a measure
which, according to the practical knowledge, and the most diligent inquiry of your
memorialists, they believe to be founded in error and fraught with extensive
mischief.
They beg leave to submit to your Honourable House, that at present there exists but
one Type-Foundery[24]—in the United States—that they presume it is wholly out of
the power of this concern to supply a twentieth part of the demand from printers in
America: That there are many species of letters not made at this foundery which are
essentially necessary in order properly to conduct the printing business—That
the existing duty of 12 1/2 per cent. on printing types appears to be amply sufficient
as a protecting duty to this manufacture, as the Foundery at
present established in Philadelphia can afford to make and supply Types at a rate
quite as reasonable as those imported from Europe.
On these grounds your memorialists respectfully trust that your Honourable House,
taking the premises into consideration, will not impose a further duty on Printing
Types, which would almost amount to a prohibition; a result which your memorialists,
from their professional knowledge and pursuits, are persuaded would operate as a
public evil, and would materially and injuriously affect the whole business of
Printing and Bookselling throughout the United States.
All which is humbly submitted.
Signed in behalf of the associate meeting of the
Printers and Booksellers of the City of New York, by
Samuel Campbell, Chairman. George F. Hopkins, Secretary. New York, 27th Febry. 1802.
Ebenezr. Belden for himself & in behalf of the proprietor
of the Commercial Advertiser. John Lang. John Turner. Wm. A
Davis. Evert Duyckinck. Arthr. B. Tucker. Robert Falconer.
Thomas Fenwick. Thos. S. Arden. John Crookes, for himself, and
in behalf of the Proprietor of the Mercantile Advertiser. Wm.
Falconer. Louis Jones. Mich1 Burnham for himself and in behalf
of the proprietor of the New York Evening Post. Phinehas Heard. John Black. Ezra
Sargeant. Ming & Young. G. & R. Waite. Charles Smith.
John
Tiebout. Geo Jansen. Cornelius Davis. W
m Durell. Will Barlas. S.
W. Andrews. Thomas Swords. James Oram. Eglinton M. Boyle. John Reid. John Brown. Abrm
Ogier Stansbury. Hugh Gaine. Matthew L. Davis. Ph Arnold. Peter A Mesier. Edw
d. Mitchell. Naphtali Judah. Isaac Collins. Thomas Collins. Robert
Wilson. John Pintard in behalf of the proprietors of the Daily Advertiser. Amos
Butler. Jon
a Seymour. Stephen Stephens. Thomas B Jansen. J.
Harrisson. Thomas Kirk. James Swords. Lewis Nichols & C°. M. M
cFarlane. Nath
1 Bell. Paul R. Johnson.
The leading members of the book trade were not the only New Yorkers who protested. The
Franklin Typographical Association, one of the earliest and least known of the
typographical societies, forwarded this memorial, read in the House of Representatives
on March 15, 1802:
To the Hon. the House of Representatives of the United States.
The Memorial of the undersigned members of the Franklin Typographical Association of
the City of New York respectfully sheweth . . .
That your memorialists have been informed, through the medium of the Public Prints,
that there is a proposition before your Honourable House, to impose a duty of twenty
per cent. on imported Printing Types.
Under a full conviction, that every measure entered into by your Honorable House is
intended to benefit the Union, your memorialists beg leave to suggest the impropriety
of the proposed duty, and hope to be able to show, that, so far from being a
beneficial act, it would be highly injurious, not only to your memorialists, but to
all persons whose occupations are connected with the Printing Business, either as
Printers, Book-binders or Paper-makers . . .
First---Your memorialists beg leave to state, that the
addition of 7½ per cent. would almost prohibit the importation of Types; and as
the business of Type-founding is yet but in its infancy in the United States, (the
present foundery in Philadelphia not being able to furnish a twentieth part of the
Type in general use, and being totally destitute of the Oriental, and of almost all
the ornamental characters) resort must be had to the measure of importing Books; a
measure which the master-printers and Booksellers of New York, by forming themselves
into an association, have been patriotically endeavoring to suppress, and which would,
almost immediately, deprive two thirds of the Journeymen Printers in the United
States, of their means of subsistence, not to mention the great number of Boys, who
are at present learning the Printing business, on which they must hereafter depend for
a livelihood.
Second---The business of Printing being very expensive to
establish, from the high price of materials, very few of those, who are obliged to
resort to journey-work when they become free, ever have it in their power to realize a
capital sufficient to commence business on their own account; and the contemplated
additional duty, by enlarging the barrier, would still diminish their
number, to the very great injury of the whole.
Third---As the characters for Printing Books in the dead
Languages cannot be had in the United States, nor is it reasonable to expect that they
will be furnished for forty years to come; and as there are a number of other works
which cannot be done without European materials, all such characters and materials, at
least, must, of necessity, be imported from Europe. . . . The consequence would be,
that the printing of such Books must either be relinquished, or they must be done at
such an expense, as would render them dearer to purchasers, than those of the same
kind imported. This would be a severe blow to printing in this country, rising, as it
now is, rapidly, to excellence:—and, indeed, in a short time, almost every
description of Books must be had from Europe; which would not only distress your
memorialists, in a very severe degree, but destroy, in a great measure, the business
of Book-binding, and Paper-making, and give a heavy check to the dissemination of
learning and useful knowledge.
Your memorialists beg leave, also, respectfully to state, that as no art is more
conducive to the promotion of learning, liberty and happiness, than that of Printing,
so it would seem the policy of the government of our country, to leave unshackled
every article appertaining to it; and as the taking off the duty on Regulus of
Antimony will be a very considerable encouragement to any foundery that may be
established in the United States; and as the present Philadelphia foundery has been,
and must still continue to be liberally encouraged; and, in fact, as Types may be here
considered as a raw material to manufacture
books; in order to promote the manufacture within ourselves, and thereby to
prevent the importation of foreign Editions, we humbly submit to your Honourable House
the propriety of taking off, altogether, the duty on Printing Types, or at least of
reducing it, so that it may not, in any degree, impede the importation of them; and of
laying an additional one, even more than equivalent, on imported Books, for the
encouragement of the printing business. . . . If such encouragement be given, no doubt
can be entertained of its being fully adequate, in a very few years, to the supply of
not only the ordinary works of instruction, and amusement, but of the higher order of
classics. But if shackled in the way which has been proposed in your Honourable House,
your memorialists foresee an end of enterprize in Printing, and will probably have to
seek some other means of obtaining subsistence.—To take off the duty on Types,
and to lay an additional one on Books, your memorialists deem not only a wise, but a
necessary measure, as the number of people now employed in the printing business, is
very large, and is daily increasing.
Your memorialists beg leave further to remark, that all those who have arrived at any
degree of eminence in the business of Type-founding in Europe, have so great a share
of encouragement at home, as to render it highly improbable that any of them would
emigrate to this country: Therefore we must expect,
at best, if the
duty takes place, to have those only (if any should come) who have been but newly
established, or who might make their first commencement after their arrival here:
consequently, we should still labor under the heavy disadvantage of having but
imperfect founderies, and be obliged still to pay the heavy duty; or, which is more
probable, import the Books which we should be unable to print. And your memorialists
would add, for the information of those of your Honorable House who may not be
acquainted with the nature of the Type founding business, or may not have had leisure
to make sufficient inquiry, that it is such as to require, at, least, from fifteen to
twenty years, before a foundery can be made in any manner perfect: And the truth of
this assertion will appear manifest, when it is considered, that the foundery of
Mesrs. Binney & Ronaldson, in Philadelphia, had been established in Europe for
several years previous to its removal to this country, which took place at least six
years ago, and they cannot now furnish a single perfect fount of common Type, owing to
the labor and time indispensably necessary to cut the matrixes, &c.
&c.—
Independent of these considerations, it must be obvious to all; that if the
additional duty is laid on, the domestic founders will greatly enhance the price of
their Types, which must, of course, occasion a rise on all kinds of Printing Work, and
operate as a tax on every reader; from the student in college, to the peruser of the
daily newspapers, throughout the United States.—
All which is humbly submitted.
John Clough, President
Walter W. Hyer, Vice
President
John Hardcastle. S. W. Andrews. Robert Crumbie. John M. Williams. Harris Sage. Elisha
Hosford. A. Menzies. John Hamill. Henry Wm Peckwell. John
Moffat. Wm W. Vermilye. Joseph Pudney. E. B D Murphy. William T.
Stockton. Charles Wiley. T. White. E. Hammond. Daniel Dodge. George Bruce. Robert
Wilson. Henry C. Southwick. Richard Crooker. Thomas ONeill. Alexander McCarthy. E. Bowles. James Waterman. John Minor. Peter Jackson.
John H. Sherman. Thomas Ringwood. Robert Hinchman. Joseph Newton. James H. Looker.
Joseph Whartnaby. John Thorburn. James Thomson. Richard Smith. Samuel Marks. J. W.
Tillman. Koertenes Schenck. Gineva [?] Salmon [?] William Lucy. Henry Gird, Junr. T. M. Tillman. Thos. Campbell. Monteith
McFarlane. John Hogg. John Freeman. Elliot Hopkins. Wm.
Pelsue. Godfrey Bowman. Alex Wilson. P. B. Gleeson. R. Saunders. James Holmes.
