Bolles,

II, Bk. III,
Ch. IV.

Taussig,

State Papers and Speeches on the Tariff, 252-385.

planters of Louisiana, who, handicapped by disadvantages
of soil and climate, could not compete with the sugar
growers of Cuba and Jamaica unless protected by a tariff
wall. In New England there was a conflict of interests.
Conservative men were attached to the established indus-
tries, each and all of them menaced by the protective
policy. The effect of high duties was to diminish the
volume of trade, increase the cost of shipbuilding, and
raise the price of raw materials for rum, cordage, and
other important manufactures. The textile interests, on
the other hand, favored high duties. By 1820 Rhode
Island and Connecticut had come over to the protec-
tionist camp.
Meantime, Southern statesmen had an-
nounced themselves squarely against protection. It had
become evident that, spite of great natural advantages, cot-
ton manufactures could not be prosecuted in the Southern
states because of the inefficiency of slave labor. Import
duties tended to enhance the price of all they bought and
lower the price of everything they had to sell. The price
of raw cotton had risen to 29 cents immediately after the
Peace, but was now falling because of the discriminating
duties levied by Parliament on American cotton. The
6 per cent ad valorem duty of 1820 was raised to $7.25
per bale in 1831. The price dropped from 32 cents per
pound in 1818 to 171 cents in 1820 and 91 cents in 1827.
Our import duty of 3 cents a pound levied in 1791 was
continued until 1846, but it had ceased to have any effect.
Since our normal crop was more than sufficient to supply
the domestic demand, the surplus must be exported to an
unfriendly market.

The Tariff Act of 1824 was carried by the votes of the Middle and Western states. The special advocate of protection was Henry Clay of Kentucky, "the father of the American system." The argument of Randolph in behalf of the consumer and that of Webster for the shipping interest could not avail against the influence brought to bear by the eastern manufacturers and the western farmers. Increased duties were imposed on wool and woolens, hemp

1752-1860.

and cotton bagging, pig iron and iron manufactures. It was intended that the duties on raw materials should in each case be offset by a compensating duty on the corresponding manufacture. The 25 per cent rate on imported cottons was not increased, but the minimum valuation was raised from 25 cents to 35 cents, thus excluding higher grades of cloth. Coarse cottons were now manufactured in New England as cheaply as in the old country. Under the combined influence of cheap raw material and improved machinery, the cost of production diminished until our cotton manufacturers were able to sell at English prices. The goods from the Waltham mill that had been sold for 30 cents a yard in 1816 brought but 21 cents in 1819, 13 cents in 1826, 8 cents in 1829, and 6 cents in Wages and 1843. Domestic competition served to reduce prices Prices, within the protected area exactly as Hamilton and Dallas had foreseen. The Tariff Act of 1828.. - In 1824 Parliament repealed Taussig, the import duties on wool, and the price of this important raw material dropped from Is. to 1d. a pound. The English cost of production was correspondingly reduced, and 68-108. American woolen manufacturers petitioned for more effective protection. Massachusetts, convinced at last that protection of manufactures was the settled policy of the country, led this agitation. A meeting of manufacturers Bolles, held in Boston voiced the demands of the woolen interest. II, 393–409. Their raw materials, not only wool but castile soap and olive oil, were fifty per cent dearer than English prices; compensating protection must be given their finished product. The General Court passed favorable resolutions, Webster and all but one of the Bay State congressmen advocated a minimum valuation clause in the woolen schedule. A national convention was assembled at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, which urged the protection of other industries.

A congressional committee on manufactures summoned. business men representing the different manufacturing interests to testify as to the nature and degree of protection required. Politics played so large a part in the

Tariff Hist.

of the U.S.,

37-45,

Taussig, State Papers and Speeches on the Tariff, 108-213.

Bolles,

II, Bk. III,
Ch. V.

tariff. legislation of 1828 that the result was satisfactory
to no section of the country except the Middle West.
Duties on pig iron, wool, and hemp were raised to prohibi-
tory rates. Flax was, for the first time, placed on the pro-
tected list. The compensating duties on iron manufactures,
woolens, and cordage were not high enough to offset the
increased cost of production.
The rum distillers were
outraged by the raising of the import duty on molasses.
to ten cents a gallon and the withholding of the draw-
back previously allowed. The shipbuilders were jeopard-
ized by heavy duties on chains and anchors, sail duck,
and cordage. The drawback on sail duck purchased for
the use of American vessels was now disallowed. These
duties involved the addition of $6.25 per ton to the
cost of every ship built in the United States. Serious as
were the burdens imposed on New England industries
by this "tariff of abominations," it bore even more
heavily upon the South. The prohibitory duties on the
coarse cottons and woolens with which the slaves were
clothed, on sugar, salt, and iron manufactures, gave the
planters no choice but to buy of domestic producers at
prices averaging forty per cent higher than in foreign mar-
kets. The cotton crop of 1831 was nearly treble that of
1815, but the price in the American market was one half,
in the English market one fourth, of that prevailing in the
year after the war. The tariff was formally protested as
sectional legislation and therefore unconstitutional by
Georgia, South Carolina, Alabama, Virginia, and North
Carolina in 1829, and an anti-protection convention was
held at Augusta, Georgia. In the same year a free-trade
convention was held at Philadelphia and a memorial
addressed to Congress, in which the views of the anti-tariff
men were ably rehearsed by Albert Gallatin.

In the Tariff Act of 1832, New England's interests were reconciled by reduction of the rates on low-grade wools, hemp, pig and bar iron, and molasses, and by a slight increase in duty on woolen cloth. Flax was restored to the free list, and the accustomed drawbacks on rum and