hither they are shipped and consigned, with orders to be sold by private negotiation or by auction. Sold they must be and will be, at whatever price they will bring, generally at a sacrifice on the cost of production in Europe. A house in New York received a large consignment of goods in this way, in 1846, and sold them at an average of less than 50 per cent. of the original cost of production. This business, as is known to the merchants of New York, is done on a large scale. It is forcing off the goods. Nor is this mode of sale limited, either as to quantity or time, but unlimited. It is a regular, uninterrupted, systematic trade, carried on for more than twenty years, to dispose of surpluses on hand in Europe. As the sources are inexhaustible, embracing all kinds of manufactures, without the application of a legislative remedy, the flood is destined apparently to increase, and to overwhelm the labor and manufacturing interests of the country, together with American importing merchants. It will naturally be vastly augmented by the low duties of the tariff of 1846. Nor can any remedy be found, short of a union of state and federal legislation. So long as the laws of the state of New York impose but 1 per cent. duties on foreign goods sold at auction, the practice can never be arrested. In this way, all the regular manufacturing and importing business of the country is endangered, and American labor is doomed to fall with it, necessarily and unavoidably; for, in such a case, American labor has to compete, not with the low-priced labor of Europe at par, but at a discount, sometimes of 50 per cent. ; that is, with the pauper labor of Europe at half price, the average of which is about one sixth, or 17 per cent. of the average price of American labor. American merchants and manufacturers are first injured; but it all ends in depriving American labor of its rights.

It may perhaps be said that this is all for the benefit of consumers. But it does not operate so. It is the sole benefit, first, of those holders of these surpluses in Europe, who can not otherwise dispose of them; next, of the jobbers, who make the first purchase, and thirdly, of the retailers. Before they get into the hands of consumers, the prices are up to the ordinary level. The whole tendency of the operation is to injure the regular trade and the labor of the country.

A few words are due on the discriminations of the tariff of 1846 against labor, manufactures, and the arts. It has been pretended that England and the United States are marching, with equal strides, toward the goal of Free Trade. It is elsewhere shown in this work,

that the recent alterations of the British tariff, alleged to be of this character, have been made on the principle of Protection, generally or specifically. When the Manchester and other British manufacturers ask for what is there called Free Trade, they ask it to fortify their own position in relation to the rest of the world, hoping their example will be followed by other nations, and believing themselves strong enough, for the most part, to defy and break down competition on this pretended basis of free ports. It is remarkable, however, that they do not ask for the remission of the differential duties in their favor, in supplying the wants of British dependencies. Mr. Edwin Williams, than whom a more reliable authority in such matters could not be cited, in an article in Fisher's National Magazine for September, 1846, has clearly shown, that the late abatements of duty in the British tariff, vaunted so loudly as FreeTrade reductions, if so nominally, are quite the other way in their practical operation. He has proved, in the first place, that the revenue sacrificed is trivial, and that they gain on that score more than they lose. But secondly, the most important point established is, that these numerous changes, except that of the abolition of the corn laws, have been made directly-abolition of corn laws indirectly for the protection of British manufactures and arts, by the abolition of duties on raw materials, and partially manufactured articles imported for their perfection by British skill and labor. Whereas, the American tariff of 1846 has imposed duties in these very quarters where the British tariff has taken them off, not only withdrawing protection from American skill and labor, but taxing them, as the following comparative table, prepared by Mr. Williams, and representing, in these particulars, the tariffs of 1846 and 1842, with the British tariff for the same, will show. It will be found in the note below.*

The effects of the famine in Ireland, and of the scarcity of breadstuffs in Europe, in 1846 and 1847, making a market for American bread-stuffs to an unprecedented amount, have been held up by the advocates of Free Trade in this quarter as the fruit of the tariff of 1846. What, then, has produced the cessation of that demand, under the same tariff? Such a reason would rather make the tariff

"We might extend this list," says Mr. Williams, "but enough is given to show the comparative legislation of the American and British governments, with regard to raw materials and other articles essential for the use of manufactures and in the arts. While the British parliament are removing all duties on articles required for the use of their manufacturers, our American Congress have increased the burdens of our manufacturers, by additional duties on the raw materials imported for their use; at the same time that they have reduced the protective duties. Was there ever a parallel case of injustice in the history of legislation in any country? "Several classes of articles used in manufactures, which pay small specific rates of duties by the tariff of 1842, have been changed by the new tariff [of 1846], and on most of them the ad-valorem rates will be higher than the specific rates now paid. The following will serve as specimens, taking the duties actually paid on the last importations, by the report of the secretary of the treasury:—

"On all the previously-named articles, it will be observed, the duties are increased, except rags, on which there is a small apparent reduction on those of the quality imported last year.

"The importance in amount of raw materials and other articles imported for our manufactures, is shown by the following statement of the value of part of those articles imported, for the year ending June 30, 1845-(the last returns). Let it be borne in mind, that while our government withdraws a large proportion of the protection to our manufactures, by reducing the rates of duties on articles imported coming in direct competition with them, it taxes them with additional duties on the

of 1842 the cause, as the prices of American bread-stuffs were higher in the winter of 1845-'6, under that tariff, than in the winter of 1846-'7, under the latter tariff. The great demand arose, and the prices mounted to the highest pitch, under the former, and both have fallen off under the latter, and are tending rapidly to the old level, and peradventure will yet be less than ever. What is raw materials used; as if intentionally to deprive them of the ability of competing with the British manufacturer, who obtains the like raw materials free of duty. "Value of Articles imported, principally for the Use of Manufactures, in the year ending June 30, 1845.

"It is within bounds to say, that the additional taxes imposed on the manufacturer by the new tariff, on raw materials alone, will amount to at least 10 per cent., or over one million of dollars, unless we suppose that the operation of this tariff should reduce or destroy, as it probably may, some branches of manufactures, and thus diminish the tax imposed on them. Compare this effect with the new British tariff, which releases the more favored manufactures of Great Britain from taxes on raw materials formerly paid, amounting to more than five millions of dollars.

"The great leading interests of national industry which will be most affected by our new tariff, are the manufactures of iron, cottons, woollens, leather, paper, machinery, lead in its various branches, glass, ready-made clothing, and cordage. Many other branches of manufactures might be mentioned, which will be affected directly or indirectly. Indeed, we apprehend all classes, who depend on their daily labor for subsistence, will suffer by this blow at our protective system; for while the great manufacturing interests we have mentioned are prostrated, the country

the cause of this? To ascribe these results to legislation, either of Great Britain or of the United States, or of both, is proving too can not be prosperous; and if the condition of the people will not sustain the present or recent demand for articles of consumption, how can those classes of mechanics, manufacturers, and others, who seem to be protected by the new tariff, flourish, with a diminished and constantly-decreasing market for their fabrics?

"We might also notice those branches of industry which have recently sprung into existence, or have exhibited signs of life and excited hopes for the future; but which infantile manufactures must be checked or destroyed, under the operation of the new tariff. Among these, the important interest of silk should be named as the most prominent. The tariff of 1842 wisely fixed specific and other protective rates of duty on manufactures of silk, which were considered absolutely necessary to sustain this new branch of industry, and under those auspices it has been fast growing into importance, exciting the most lively interest in many parts of the Union. The new tariff repeals the specific duties on silk, and fixes a low rate of ad-valorem duties, leaving the enterprising and industrious citizens who have engaged in its cultivation and manufacture, at the mercy of foreign competition.

"Thus, then, we see that the present approaches to what is erroneously called 'Free Trade,' is in England one thing, and in the United States another. In England, it is to lay the heaviest duties on the great articles of tobacco, tea, coffee, distilled spirits, sugars, and wines, not one of which is produced in the realm, but which are largely imported, and which pay two thirds of the whole customs revenue, and to remove the duty from every species of material that enters into manufactures of any kind, thus sustaining the industry of her working classes. While in the United States, what is called Free Trade,' or an approach to it, is to reduce the duty on all manufactured goods, and to increase it to the destruction of the working classes, on many raw materials, as we have already shown.

"Does not this establish, beyond all dispute or cavil, that no such thing as 'Free Trade' now exists, or can exist ? and that while England, our great rival, is doing everything she can to foster and sustain her superiority in manufacturing, our present rulers are playing most completely into her hands, and rendering us more and more tributary to her, while lessening our ability to pay for every foreign production imported into this country?

"The plain truth is, and it is folly to attempt to conceal it, that the worst evil, the skill, capital, and labor of this country have to contend with, is its own present government, who, not content with demanding specie in all payments made to them by the people, have, by the enactment of the tariff of 1846, legislated against America, and in favor of England."

Though not, perhaps, directly in place, yet having been left out where it more properly belonged, it is worthy of remark, that the anti-corn law league of England originated with British manufacturers, with a view ultimately to reduce the wages of labor. The same men, manufacturers (see first annual report of poor law commissioners), who were engaged in 1834 in dragging paupers, against their will, from the south of England, 10,000 in a single group, to immure them in the manufactories of the north, professedly, as appears from their letters to the commissioners, to counteract the trades-unions and keep down the strikes-in other words, to keep down wages - were afterward enrolled among the most influential leaders of the league for the abolition of the corn laws; and Sir Robert Peel, naturally sympathizing with that system, which had been to him "the goose that laid the golden egg" (his immense fortune was made in manufacturing), and not less as a great statesman, put the finishing stroke to that great measure for the conservation and protection of the British manufacturing system. The first step was forcing the