If all things
But things

reflection that the consumer is not obliged, in the great majority of cases, to buy, while the manufacturer, to keep up his business, is obliged to sell. He must sell, and make the smaller profit. So the loss would, at least, be shared. remained as they were, the tax would, no doubt, fall on the consumer. do not remain the same. The very object of the tariff is that they shall not. Immediately our own manufactories are at work, and capital gets fairly invested in them, they must go on; others, however, have also sprung up; competition takes place, and with competition, its invariable accompaniment, a reduction in price, until, in a space of time scarcely credible, the article is manufactured in this country at rates fully as low as prevailed before the tariff; frequently lower. The history of the various tariff laws and their operation proves this beyond cavil or denial; and the very result is thus effected which seems so surprising. The matter may at once be illustrated by an example near home. Suppose but one steamboat running between this city and New Orleans, and that there was no other medium of travel or transportation; suppose, to use the favorite word, this boat had a "monopoly of the trade, and charged enormous prices for freight and travel. Now suppose one of your citizens were to say, "I will build a boat in opposition to this monopolist,' if you will give me at first higher prices to justify my investment of the capital. I will enter into the trade, compete with the present boat, and force her to reduce her fare; and then, when my capital is once fairly invested in the boat, and the business begins to prosper, I can and will reduce my charges until we both fall to reasonable rates, or are forced to do so by other boats still coming into the trade." Would not this reasoning be just, and is it not daily exemplified and acted on by sensible men around you? And yet such is the simple and natural effect of the tariff, when it gets into full, and fair, and permanent operation.

But there is another objection against the tariff, though found generally only in the mouth of the partisan demagogue; it is, that the manufacturers are making money by it. That some of them have realized twenty per cent. on their investments; that it is "a monopoly " in their hands; and that, therefore, the legislation of the country operates partially for them. Before I combat the truth of this objection, I must express my deep contempt for the source from which it generally emanates. It is one of those low and miserable attempts to array the poorer classes against the rich, which I never see without sentiments of abhorrence. It is the emanation of a base envy which denominates every man, who by industry, and skill, and talent, has accumulated a little reputation and property, an aristocrat; which looks upon wealth legitimately engaged in commerce or other employment, as a "monopoly," and, appealing to the vilest passions of men, would array society against itself, to the utter destruction both of society and of government. Society must consist of all the varied relations and interests of life. All its members are vitally related to each other, and to the whole body. Every one is bound to contribute his modicum of intelligence, morals, industry, and enterprise to the general stock. The minutest particles of the twig which I hold in my hand, are held closely together by an inevitable law of cohesion. Every particle of matter in the universe, by a similar law pervading nature, is attracted to this twig, and it in turn to them; and when I thus let it fall, true to its instincts, it seeks the body which, being largest, attracts it most powerfully. So ought society to be framed. There should be no jarring elements nor discordant parts. There need be none. Government should be one beautiful and harmonious whole, where each might pursue, unmolested of the other, his own interests. In this, our free and broad land, there are no distinc

tions in society except what men may make for themselves. Stephen Girard, a poor French boy, landed in Philadelphia, without friends and without means, and yet, in a few years, had accumulated an immense fortune. John Jacob Astor, with his millions of dollars, now tottering upon the verge of the grave, commenced life a penniless adventurer. In a few years where will be his immense fortune? Scattered into a hundred hands, distributed in fertilizing rills throughout the whole country; perhaps not accomplishing a single wish of its accumulator, yet fulfilling its inevitable destiny of enriching and benefiting the entire body. The rich man of to-day is the poor man of to-morrow, and the reverse. Wealth in its continuance is uncertain, and held by the frailest tenure. He, then, fellow-citizens, is your bitterest enemy who would incite you against the rich man; he is himself a victim of the worst of passions. There are, there can be, no permanent monopolies in this country. Wealth here, like water, will seek its level. Wherever capital finds a safe and lucrative investment, it will be made. That this is so, is shown in the fact that Maryland is largely engaged in manufactures. Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Kentucky, and Missouri, are all turning their attention in that direction. It has been stated that slave-labor is best fitted for manufactures; the slaves are more docile, more under control, more uniform, will work longer, and are less expensive. Should these calculations and expectations prove true, we will no longer hear the cry of monopoly or against protection. But the South, as it is now, have no right to say one word on that subject; labor, in proportion to capital invested, yields a far handsomer revenue in the South than in any other part of the Union. From statistical tables now before me, contained in Hunt's Merchant's Magazine, it is shown, that while the average return from labor in the New England States is about S4, in Mississippi it is 1.69, twice as much as the average of New England, and greater than in any State of the Union except Louisiana, whose commercial facilities through New Orleans bring it slightly above the estimate for Mississippi. We, then, are the real monopolists, if monopoly exist anywhere. We produce a staple that Nature has said shall not grow north of our latitude, and it yields us double what our manufacturing brethren obtain. We should be for ever silenced on that subject, then.

But, it is said, the effect of a protective tariff is to ruin our commerce; I have incidentally shown already it will have a contrary effect. At the worst, it would change the character, not the extent, of our commerce. Perhaps we might not

send so many ships abroad, our intercourse with foreign nations, when we become independent of them in our productions, might not be so great. There would be no need of it. We will have all the heart can wish, all the patriot could desire, of our own production, the growth or manufacture of our own land. But, as I have already remarked, let our internal resources be developed, and with some 4,000 miles of coast, with half a dozen Mediterraneans as large as that which divides Europe from Africa, with our mighty rivers, that at once fertilize and open channels of intercourse and access through the whole land, we have ample verge and scope enough for all our vessels. We might turn one-half of our forests into ships, onehalf our population into sailors, whiten our coasts, lakes, and seas with sails, and yet not give entire development to our commercial resources. But I cannot now press this subject further.

He who could succeed in establishing free trade as the policy of this country, or in overthrowing the tariff system, and destroying our American manufactures, would be entitled to receive from the English Government the highest pension in

their gift. If their constitution and laws permitted it, there is no dukedom-or earlship to which Sir Robert Peel might not justly elevate him. Yes, fellow-citizens, if the orators of the Democratic party could persuade us, by their plausible sophistries, that free trade is the true policy of this country, England would rejoice to her very core. I bid you, then, Democrats and Whigs, beware of their arguments and of their arts. Think not because the liquid in the cup seems fair and pure that it is wholesome drink. Even if they tell you it is the red and bubbling wine, dash it down; there is poison in it, and all the more deadly from the tempting guise it

wears.

And here, before I close, let me touch upon another view of this great question, in which the South is most deeply interested. Those among us who are opposed to the protection of American manufactures, know that the result is decidedly beneficial to England, to Germany, and to France-but more especially to England, who is by far the largest consumer of our cotton. And yet who more awake than these Southern anti-tariff politicians to the interference of England on the subject of the Annexation of Texas? It is strange they are not equally alive to danger here. Do they think that England, who at an enormous sacrifice abolished her own system of servitude, who has passed prohibitory laws against the introduction into her territory of slave-made sugar, and who has, through her ministers and parliament, almost taken oath that she will not rest from her labors till slavery ceases to existdo they think that England, so determined, so powerful, and with such resources, will take of you your slave-grown cotton any longer than she is obliged to do so? She cannot now do without it: but do you not know that she has nearly turned the world upside down in her efforts to raise cotton by a system of free labor? And when you reflect how broad a belt of land encircles the earth in which cotton will grow and thrive, and that but a few years ago hardly a bale was grown in the United States, is there such entire certainty that she may not ultimately succeed? Shall we, then, be dependent upon England for our market, or upon ourselves? Shall we, in the matter of slavery, find her, or the North, our best friend? For myself, I would rather look at home than abroad. Our Northern brethren, however opposed they are to slavery-fanatics though some of them may be on the subjecthave yet sworn, both Whigs and Democrats, to maintain faithfully the Constitution of the country, by which slavery is protected-that Constitution which is at once our surety and our shield. I would rather trust our Northern brethren, whose forefathers and ours fought the battles of the Revolution side by side, while their mothers and our own together wrung their hands over the desolations of the country, or bound up the wounds of the injured, or administered consolation to the dying-I would rather trust the sons of our conjoint sires, from whose wisdom we have derived our noble constitution of Government, and in which they feel a pride equal to our own. In the North, too, many of us have mothers, sisters, and brothers, who love us and regard us as part of themselves; I would rather trust them.

*

*

*

*

There is one more subject upon which I had designed to say a few words. I refer to the Annexation of Texas; but time forbids-(eries of "Go on," "Go on.") The evening is now far advanced, and most of you, especially the ladies, are, doubtless, weary. On some future occasion, I will discuss the subject referred to before either of the associations in the city. I returned you my thanks for the patient and considerate attention you have paid me, during my long address, and I only regret you have not been more fully compensated.

CHAPTER XXIII.

Decision of the Supreme Court of the U. S. involving his Title to the Vicksburg Commons-Letters-Removal to New Orleans-Public Dinners tendered him on leaving Mississippi-His Settlement in New Orleans-Withdrawal from Parties and Devotion to his Profession-- His Legal Career-Anecdotes-Trial of Phelps, the Robber-His Character and Attainments as a Lawyer and Advocate.

46

ET. 36. 1845.

THE year 1845 was a very eventful one to Mr. Prentiss. In January a suit involving his title to the Vicksburg Commons," and which had been several years pending in the Supreme Court of the United States, was decided against him. Thus, at a single blow, the pecuniary rewards of his professional life were snatched from him, and he was left worse than penniless. All the rest of his days he was heavily embarrassed by old debts-"floundering," to use his own expression, "like, a fish in a net." He had built extensively on his Commons property, expending in a block of stores, a large hotel, and other improvements, according to the estimate of Mr. Smedes, not less than one hundred and fifty thousand dollars; all this passed out of his possession by the above decision. In communicating to him this judg ment, under date of Washington City, July 19th, his friend, Mr. Crittenden, writes:

I was really so cast down and overwhelmed by the decision of the Supreme Court, on the day before yesterday, in your Vicksburg case, that I had no heart to inform you of the result. And but for the necessity of the case, I would not now say a word on

DECISION OF THE U. S. SUPREME COURT AGAINST HIM. 355

the subject. The Court (the Chief Justice and McKinley dissenting) has decided that the daughters of the testator, Vick, have an equal interest with the sons in the two acre tract of land reserved, or designated, in the will, as the site of the town. The decree below is reversed, the demurrer overruled, and the cause remanded for further proceedings.

Such a thing, I believe, has never been granted, but my determination now is to apply for a re-hearing. You may expect soon to hear from me again. I am in no mood to write more at present.*

He thus refers to this decision in a letter to his elder brother:

I sympathize with you most sincerely in your difficulties, and would gladly aid you in any manner in my power. I fear, however, that my name would be of little service; for I do not now consider myself as solvent. In fact, I am entirely used up, and do not expect my property to liquidate my debts. There has been, recently, a decision in the Supreme Court of the United States, which has thrown the whole town of Vicksburg (all my property included) into litigation. I do not fear the final result; but it will take a long time to bring the suit to a conclusion, and in the meanwhile no one will buy, or take in payment, property so situated. The consequence has been, that the largest portion of my property, including the hotel, has been sacrificed, under execution, for comparatively nothing. I hope still to be able to work out even, if I can realize some debts due me. In deed, I shall be very well satisfied to begin the world anew, provided I can begin free from my old debts. I suppose you are aware I am going to remove to New Orleans in the autumn. I have made all my arrangements for that purpose, and have the utmost confidence in my professional success.

A few extracts from his correspondence, will show that

*The decision will be found in Howard's Rep. of Sup. Court of U. S., vol. iii., p. 464. It was ruled by four judges; Mr. Justice Story being absent, and Judge Nelson not having yet taken his seat on the bench.-ED.