University of Virginia Library

APRIL 21. DUTIES ON IMPORTS.

I am a friend to free commerce, and, at the same time, a
friend to such regulations as are calculated to promote our
own interest, and this on national principles. The great
principle of interest is a leading one with me, and yet my
combination of ideas on this head leads me to a very different
conclusion from that made by the gentleman from New York,
(Mr. Lawrence.) I wish we were under less necessity than
I find we are to shackle our commerce with duties, restrictions,
and preferences; but there are cases in which it is
impossible to avoid following the example of other nations in
the great diversity of our trade. Some reasons for this were
mentioned on a former occasion; they have been frequently
illustrated in the progress of this business, and the decision
of the committee has proved them to be necessary.

I beg leave to remark, in answer to a train of ideas which
the gentleman last up has brought into view, that although
interest will, in general, operate effectually to produce political
good, yet there are causes in which certain factitious circumstances
may divert it from its natural channel, or throw

or retain it in an artificial one. Have we not been exercised
on this topic for a long time past? Or why has it been necessary
to give encouragement to particular species of industry,
but to turn the stream in favor of an interest that would not
otherwise succeed? But laying aside the illustration of these
causes, so well known to all nations, where cities, companies,
or opulent individuals engross the business from others, by
having had an uninterrupted possession of it, or by the extent
of their capitals being able to destroy a competition,
let us proceed to examine what ought to be our conduct on
this principle, upon the present occasion. Suppose two commercial
cities, one possessed of enormous capitals and long
habits of business, whilst the other is possessed of superior
natural advantages, but without that course of business and
chain of connexions which the other has: is it possible, in
the nature of things, that the latter city should carry on a
successful competition with the former? Thus it is with
nations; and when we consider the vast quantities of our
produce sent to the different parts of Europe, and the great
importations from the same places; that almost all of this
commerce is transacted through the medium of British ships
and British merchants, I cannot help conceiving that, from
the force of habit and other conspiring causes, that nation is
in possession of a much greater proportion of our trade than
she is naturally entitled to. Trade, then, being restrained to
an artificial channel, is not so advantageous to America as
a direct intercourse would be; it becomes therefore the duty
of those to whose care the public interest and welfare are
committed, to turn the tide to a more favorable direction.

In the trade of South Carolina is employed annually about
56,977 tons of shipping. The proportion of French and
Dutch is about 2,100 tons, while that of Great Britain is about
19,000. In Massachusetts the quantity is about 85,551 tons;
it is stated, that there are belonging to the State, 76,857, the
remainder is foreign, and mostly British. In Virginia we
have 56,272 tons; 26,903 British, and only 2,664 of the

French and Dutch. I cannot, from this view of the subject,
be persuaded to believe that every part of our trade flows
in those channels which would be most natural and profitable
to us, or those which reason would dictate to us, if we were
unincumbered of old habits and other accidental circumstances
that hurry us along.

It has been asked by the gentleman from New York (Mr.
Lawrence) what evidence we had that the public sentiments
of America were in favor of discrimination? Perhaps it
would be improper on this occasion to adduce any other
proof of the fact than from the transactions of public bodies;
and here, I think, is abundant proof to be found. The State
of Virginia, if I am not mistaken, lays a double duty on tonnage;
French and Dutch vessels pay half a dollar per ton,
while the vessels of Great Britain are subjected to one dollar.
There are other distinctions in our revenue laws manifesting
the same principle; some of them establish a preference to
French wines and brandy. In Maryland, a similar policy has
prevailed. I believe the difference there is about one-third
in favor of our allies, (if I err, the gentlemen from that State
can set me right;) in Pennsylvania, there is a discrimination
of about a fourth. I do not certainly recollect, but I believe
the like policy exists in other States; but I have not had an
opportunity of searching their laws on this point, but what
I have enumerated are facts affording substantial proof that
the public sentiment does favor the discrimination.