lection of most of our readers. Then, for the first time, was heard in the streets of our cities,

The cry of sober, industrious, orderly men: "Give me work! only give me work; MAKE YOUR OWN TERMS - MYSELF AND FAMILY HAVE NOTHING TO EAT!"'

Thousands and tens of thousands of such cases then occurred, and by those who can now recall to mind the state of affairs that then existed, it will not be deemed extraordinary that we should state our belief that the cost to the people of the Free States of one such year as 1841-42, was more than the value of the trade with the Slave States, for which we are dependent on the Union, in half a century. This state of things had brought with it, however, a remedy in the change of public opinion that had been produced. Mr. Van Buren, the "Northern man with Southern principles " the advocate of the policy which looks to the extension of Slavery had been defeated, and the people called for a change of measures. Then, however, for the first time was the slave-labor policy advocated as a party measure, and in the division that then was had in Congress, the votes of both North and South were less unanimous than they previously had been, as is here shown:

The tariff of 1842 went into operation, and its effect was almost electric. Credit was reestablished — mills and furnaces were built, and the people were once more enabled to purchase and pay for foreign merchandise. Public and private revenue increased, and within four years from the date of this triumph of the sellers of labor over those who desired to buy slave laborers, the prosperity of the country had attained a higher point than had ever before been known.

This, however, did not suit the advocates of the slave-labor policy. Then, as now, they desired that the free laborer should be cheap, and a crusade was gotten up against protection, among the most active promoters of which were the people of Virginia, whose chief manufacture is that of negroes for exportation, and who are protected in this department of trade by an absolute prohibition of all competition from abroad. This prohibition they have always regarded as constitutional, because it enables them to sell Negroes at a thousand dollars that might be imported from the coast of Africa for a hundred, and yet they deny to the free laborer of the North any right to protection to further extent than can be obtained by aid of duties imposed exclusively with a view to the raising of revenue. To carry their views into effect, it was deemed necessary to extend the area of Slavery by incorporating Texas within the Union—a measure that was carried out by aid of "Northern men with Southern principles," so well described by the Charleston Mercury, as "hucksters in politics," always ready to sell themselves and their constituents when the advocates of cheap labor are seen to need assistance, Texas in the Union furnished two senatorial

votes, and by aid of those votes, added to the Senate in defiance of the Constitution, the tariff of '42 was repealed, and that of '46 substituted in its place. The advocates of Slavery were thus triumphant, but the consequences to the free laborer of the North were speedily seen in a diminished demand for labor. Mills and furnaces were every where closed, and their owners were ruined; but the object of the South, the cheapening of free labor, was thereby accomplished.

In another paper we shall give some of the details of the working of this Southern system; but, in the mean time, will ask our readers to reflect upon the fact that, for more than fifteen out of the last twenty years, the inen who buy laborers have had the control of the policy of the government, to the entire exclusion of the men who wish to sell their own labor. "Southern interests" have had, during that time, as the Charleston Patriot most truly observes, "the mastery in Congress," and "the government, although hostile in its incipiency, to Slavery, and starting into political being with a strong bent towards Abolition, yet afterwards”—that is, since 1833" so changed its policy that its action has fostered the slave-holding interest, and swelled it," by aid of war or purchase, "from six to fifteen States, and from a feeble and sparse population to one of ten millions."

How has this been accomplished? By aid of taxes paid by the North for the purchase of land in the South, and for the maintenance of the fleets and armies required for the protection of Southern men and interests connected with the occupation of the lands so purchased. The people of the North have paid at least one dollar per head, per annum, more than would have been required had they stood alone, and this they have done that Florida might be purchased and cleared, and that Texas might be converted from free Mexican territory into one or more Slave States; and they are now required to agree to the payment of a hundred and twenty millions for the conversion of the Mesilla Valley into slave territory, and for the prevention of the Africanization of Cuba. The more land they buy the greater will be the power of the South, and yet no Northern politician dares propose to increase the power of the free laborers of the North by the acceptance, in free gift, of Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and the Canadas, with their two and a half millions of hard-working, instructed, and economical population. The South may buy land to be filled with slaves whose votes, through their masters, shall govern the North; but the latter may not accept land covered with men, because those men will then vote for themselves.

We see, then, that the Union is maintained at the cost of taxation to the North twice greater than would be required for the North alone. It is maintained at the cost of relinquishing all right to self-government in this important matter of protection to free laborers. What is its value has been shown. We ask our readers to compare the forty cents per head gained by the Union with the many dollars per head that it costs, and determine for themselves the justice of the assertion of the South, that the continuance of the connection is of "such inestimable worth" to the North that, however disagreeable may be the purchase of Cuba or the repeal

of the Missouri Compromise, the bitter pills must yet be swallowed. And let them also determine what regard is to be paid to, and what terror is to be felt at, the menace of dissolution.

THE SOUTH AND NORTHERN INTERESTS.

The vast majority of the people north of Mason and Dixon's line had always believed with Franklin, Washington, and Jefferson, that protection tended to increase the value of labor and land, and to enrich both laborer and land owner. Whether right or wrong in this, the votes of their representatives have, on all occasions, proved that the belief existed; and it does, certainly, exist to so great an extent that were a vote to be now taken on the question whether protection should be maintained or abandoned, apart from all other issues, an overwhelming majority would be found favorable to its maintenance. Such being their belief, it would seem to be right and proper that they should be enabled to act in accordance with it; and yet, although almost thrice as numerous as the whites of the Slave States, they have rarely been allowed to exercise the slightest influence upon the action of government in reference to this most important subject. Why they have been so is, that in the Slave States every white person votes for his property as well as for himself; while in the Free ones men vote for themselves alone. In the House of Representatives, five millions of Southern whites counterbalance seven millions of Northern ones, and in the Senate, the taxes paid by the North for the purchase and protection of Louisiana, Florida, Arkansas, Texas, and Missouri, are represented by ten senatorial votes, and thus it is that Southern property and Northern contributions for its purchase are made to work for the enslavement of Northern men.

At the date of the passage of the tariff of 1828, Southern men like Madison and Jackson were still of the belief that protection was in a high degree advantageous to the country. The latter had then but recently given to the world, in the letter to Dr. Coleman, his opinion that the country had been "too long dependent on British merchants," and that all that was required for assuring its independence walk that we should adopt a policy tending to enable a few hundred thousand more persons to become consumers of agricultural products, thereby diminishing to the same extent the number dependent exclusively upon agriculture for subsistence. No one, however bigoted an advocate of British free trade, can, as we think, now read that letter without being strongly impressed with the correctness of the views of its distinguished author, Southern as he was.* Neither can any one compare the condition of the country in 1833 with that which had existed but half a dozen years before, without arriving at the conclusion that a continuance of what was then deemed the democratic policy would long before this time have placed the cotton, woollen, and iron

Jackson was a good general and an able President, but his opinions on political economy were entitled to no respect. No one knows this fact better than the writer of this article. It is unworthy of a serious argument to introduce the clap-trap of a great name when it does not represent a great authority on the subject under disJ. R.

cussion.

manufactures in a condition no longer to need protection. The democracy of that time had, however, never heard of the idea that the existence of a servile class, whose members were liable to be bought and sold, was essential to the maintenance of republican government. It has been since discovered by those South Carolina philosophers, at whose command the tariff of 1828 was repealed. That change was followed by speculation and bankruptcy, and by ruin to an extent rarely exceeded in any country — the consequence of Southern policy. Once again, in 1842, did the Northern policy of protection to the free laborer prevail, but years were then required to repair the damage that had been produced, and during those years the free cultivators had to suffer from the loss resulting from large supplies of food and wool, small markets, and consequent low prices of all they had to sell. Furnaces and mills were built, but time was required to build them, and when built, years were necessary for giving to those who worked in them the instruction needed for the advantageous performance of their duties. The skilled laborers of 1833 had been dispersed by Southern policy, and thus had been sacrificed an amount of Northern capital ten times greater than could be replaced in a similar time by the profits of Southern trade. We beg our readers to look back and compare for themselves the high position occupied in 1833 with the degraded one in which the country stood in 1842, and then to determine if the losses of that period were not greater than would be compensated by even half a century of connection with a people who, being buyers of laborers, believe in the advantage resulting from the enslavement of the laborer.

In the five years that followed the passage of the act of 1842, the production of iron grew, as was stated by Mr. Walker, to more than 800,000 tons, or nearly four times the quantity produced in 1842. The consumption of cotton grew from 200,000 bales to half a million, and manufactures of all other kinds grew with vast rapidity. A demand was thus made for labor to be applied to the building of mills and furnaces, the opening of mines, the construction of machinery, and to the making of cloth, iron, and other commodities, far exceeding a hundred millions of dollars a year; and the necessary result of this was, that there was no longer heard, as in 1841-42, the cry of "Give me work! Only give me work! Make your own terms, my wife and family have nothing to eat." On the contrary, the demand for labor of every kind, skilled and unskilled, increased so much more rapidly than the supply that wages rose greatly, and with every step in this progress, there was an enlarged power on the part of each member of this army of laborers to purchase the fruits of the farm, to the great advantage of the farmer. Never was a resuscitation so rapid and so complete; and it was a direct consequence of the exercise by the free people of the Union, of the right of the majority to direct the policy of the country. Free labor had this time triumphed over Slave labor and its owners; but this did not suit the gentlemen who are now so anxious to insure the stability and permanence of Slavery by giving a hundred millions

* What has that idea to do with the argument?

J. R.

of dollars for the purchase of Cuba, or making war to acquire it at still heavier cost.

The then existing policy tended to strengthen the free laborers, and therefore was it seen that it must be broken down; but this object could not be accomplished without an enlargement of the Slave territory. Texas must be brought into the Union, as she would give two more Senators, representing a State in which men were held as property. That done, the Secretary of the Treasury found little difficulty in furnishing abundant arguments favorable to the Slave-labor policy. Addressing himself to the farmers, he assured them that their revenues were largely decreased by the enormous advance on manufactured goods consequent upon protection; * but when he spoke of the public revenue, he assured them that prices were falling, and there was danger that importations would fall off, and that a direct tax might be required for the maintenance of the government. It was the fable of the wolf and the lamb over again. The Free-labor policy was to be reversed, and if one reason would not answer, another could be made that would. The advocates of Slavery had obtained power by aid of two votes dragged into the Senate in defiance of the Constitution, and for the purpose of depriving the people of the North of all control over their own actions in reference to the important question whether laborers should be Slaves or Freemen.

Four years later the production of iron had fallen below half a million of tons, when it should have reached twelve hundred thousand, if not a million and a half, and the domestic consumption of cotton had fallen off a hundred and fifty thousand bales, when it should have increased two hundred and fifty thousand, and would have so increased but for the determination of the slave power to direct the whole movement of the government. Before this day, the production of iron would have reached two millions of tons, and the consumption of cotton a million of bales, while the woollen and other manufactures would have attained a corresponding development, and we should now be independent of all the world for hundreds, if not thousands, of the commodities for which we have been giving bonds to the amount of hundreds of millions of dollars, until our credit has been so far affected that they can now with difficulty be sold, and only at prices so low as to secure the payment of enormous interest.

What, however, it will be asked, should we be doing with all this enor mous mass of iron, cloth, and other commodities? In answer, we say that we should be consuming it. Had the manufacture of iron been permitted to grow as it was growing in 1845, the farmers and planters of the country would now be supplied at fifty dollars a ton instead of having to pay seventy or eighty, and they would be making two miles of railroad where now they are making one, and buying two dollars' worth of agricultural machinery for every one they now can purchase. Increased facilities for going to market, and the presence of markets among the mines, furnaces, and factories that would now be found among all the States from Maine to

There is no doubt about that; else why have protection at all? J. R.