districts is a just illustration of the principle which pervades the whole plan: a principle which discriminates in favor of the strong and against the weak.

But all these objections to the policy of the measure aside, we hold that the plan cannot be carried into effect without conflicting with the rights of the States. The 6th clause of section 9, article 1, of the Constitution of the United States declares that "No preference shall be given by any regulation of commerce or revenue to the ports of one State over those of another: nor shall vessels bound to, or from, one State be obliged to enter, clear, or pay duties in another." Now it is possible that an astute legislator might contrive some way to evade this very plain clause of the constitution, but we are persuaded that it would be exceedingly difficult to devise an efficient plan that would be sustained by the courts. It is true, the States, by consent of Congress, may lay a duty of tonnage; nor does the third clause of the tenth section of the first article, in which this provision is found, limit this privilege to any particular class of vessels: indeed there would have been no propriety in doing so, for the limitation is contained in the sixth clause of section ten. Hence, it is most obvious that the power to lay a duty of tonnage by consent of Congress is limited to foreign vessels.

But more than this, the compact entered into between the State of Missouri and the United States, when the former was admitted into the Union, provides that the river Mississippi, and the navigable rivers and waters leading into the same, shall be common highways, and forever free, as well to the inhabitants of the said State as to other citizens of the United States, without any tax, duty, imposts, or toll, therefor imposed by the said State." This is something more than an act of Congress. It is a compact between two governments entered into and executed by the parties— it can neither be repealed nor modified by Congress. Similar provisions are contained in the acts authorizing the admission of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Iowa into the Union.

In view of these facts, we do not hesitate to affirm, even against the opinions of the President and Senator Douglas, that Congress possesses no power to authorize any State to lay and collect tonduties on boats or vessels navigating the river Mississippi or nage its tributaries, for the purpose of improving the navigation thereof, except in case of foreign vessels.

But should we be mistaken in respect to the power of Congress and of the States over the subject, we are persuaded that it would be as difficult to bring the States to act in concert, as it has been or as it will be in future, to obtain appropriations from the national legislature. Nor would there be much gained, we believe, in the economy of either time or money by transferring the work to the States; for in general they have not shown more efficiency or economy in such matters than the General Government.

But again, let it be admitted that there is no question in respect to the power of Congress over the subject; that the States will agree to act promptly, and that the work can be accomplished in a reasonable time and at the least possible expense; yet, we ask, would the people of the Western States accept of the poor privilege of taxing themselves to enable them to do what it is the duty of the nation to perform? Are they, as American citizens, willing to acknowledge before the world that their government is not only incapable of accomplishing a reasonable undertaking, but that it obstinately persists in refusing to do justice to its constituents? Are they willing that the commerce and general prosperity of the new States and Territories adjacent to the waters flowing into the Mississippi should be crippled and impeded for the want of navigation, until under all their difficulties and privations they grow rich enough to make their own improvements? Are they prepared toadopt a policy calculated to foster and add still more to the money power of the East by compelling our produce and imports to take the railroads to and from eastern markets instead of taking the natural channels by water?

We cannot believe that the people of the West would blindly stultify themselves by the adoption of such a system as that proposed by the President, and advocated by Senator Douglas, even if it were not in violation of the constitution and laws of the country. We trust they will persist in claiming justice at the hands of Congress without abatement of their rights. The difficulties and delays which have been encountered in obtaining appropriations for the improvement of rivers and harbors, in times past, arose in a great measure from a lack of cordial and earnest co-operation on the part of western men and western politicians. Have they not abandoned and sacrificed their interest to party discipline, divided their strength between northern and southern parties, lead on by fanatics on one hand, and political abstractionists on the

other? If so, let us not charge Congress with injustice, but ourselves with folly. The North, the East, and the South, have each a sectional policy and local interests to promote, and whatever be the politics of the people, their public policy is shaped with reference to their respective interests: the West has local interests, but her people have never agreed upon a western policy; hence she can exert but little power in the councils of the nation in favor of western measures. We deprecate sectional or local legislation; but from the nature of our institutions, it is philosophical and just that each important section of the Union should form their public Policy in reference to their own peculiar interests. And we are persuaded that until the social and moral condition of men shall attain to a higher standard, this is the only principle upon which justice can be obtained by all the various sections of the Union at the hands of the national legislature.

We charge no individual with neglect of western interest. The acts of our public men are matters of record; it is no part of our present design to examine them. But we must be allowed to express our regret that one of the champions of the West and of western interests has felt himself compelled to acknowledge, in effect, that it is folly to indulge the hope that Congress will ever do justice to the Western States in respect to the improvement of their rivers and harbors. And who can hope when the heart of Senator Douglas fails? We know he has labored long and valiantly in the cause, and though dismayed, we hope to see him return again to the charge. We trust, however, that his communication to the Governor and Legislature of Illinois will do good to the cause: it may be the means of awakening an inquiry into the true reasons. why justice to the West has been so difficult to obtain, and so long delayed, and induce them to resolve with one consent to make all party considerations subservient to their claims upon Congress for ample appropriations to improve their rivers and harbors. Let them do this, and be firm, and our word for it, we shall never again have a reasonable cause to charge Congress with injustice to the West in respect to the subject of river and harbor improve

ments.

ARTICLE II.

[From Hunt's Merchants' Magazine.]

The Cotton Trade.

BY C. F. MCCAY, PROFESSOR IN THE COLLEGE OF SOUTH CAROLINA.

In presenting to your readers the statistics of the cotton trade for the past year, I am compelled by unavoidable circumstances to omit any remarks or suggestions they might present to me. The figures, however, will not be dry or uninteresting, so numerous and varied are the interests connected with this branch of our agriculture and Commerce.

CONSUMPTION.-In England the demand for 1853 has been less than for the preceding year, but only a little less. In the first half of the year the amount worked up by the mills was really larger than in 1852; but the Turkish troubles, and the high price of corn, has reduced the consumption very considerably. The Liverpool deliveries to the trade, which constitute more than 95 per cent. of the whole purchases of the manufacturers, have been for the two years as follows:

11..... 1,578,150

1,718,700

35,100

38,200

66

18..... 1,609,500

1,731,100 35,000 37,600

For the whole year the consumption of Great Britain for 1852 was 1.861,200 bales, against 1,663,400 for 1851, and 1,514,500 for 1850, and 1,474,420 for the average of the five preceding years. The falling off for 1854 is not so great as would appear by the reported deliveries, since the stocks in the hands of the manufacturers were estimated to be 50,000 bales more than usual on the first of January last, and at the present time they are supposed to be uncommonly low.

The demand for the coming year must decline. The high price of food must seriously interfere with the domestic consumption of Great Britain. When the cost of the English quarter of wheat is now [according to the average of the 12th of November] 73s. 7d. against 40s. for 1852, the portion of their wages which the laborer and artisan can spare for clothing is much diminished. The scarcity of money, as indicated by an advance in the rate of interest from 2 to 5 per cent., must also discourage the wants of the home

trade.

The favorable circumstances, such as the high price of iron, the general advance in wages, the abundance of work for the laborer, the diminution in the number of paupers, will be alike operative for both years. The export trade will be seriously embarrassed by the war between Turkey and Russia. The calicoes sent to Turkey and the Levant, including the plain, printed, and dyed, approach 100,000,000 yards per annum, which is 10 or 12 per cent of the whole export. The cotton yarn is 7 or 8 per cent. The calicoes bought by Russia are few, but the yarn is nearly as much as that sent to Turkey. The demand from both these countries must be very much decreased by the war. From Austria and the other German States a decline must be expected from the same cause. The revolution in China will seriously interrupt the exports to that country. The cotton cloths sold by Great Britain alone to this populous empire are larger than what is taken by Russia and Turkey together. The possession of Nankin, and the control of the great canal by the rebels, the occupation of Amoy and Shanghai, two of the five open ports, by lawless usurpers and robbers in whom the merchants place no confidence, the famine at Pekin, and the alarm and distrust at Canton, will largely curtail the English exports to the Celestial Empire. From Australia and India, the United States and Canada, no falling off may be anticipated; but if we notice the very large business done with these important countries for the year 1853, no increase can be expected for 1854. The failure of the harvests in Lombardy, France, and Germany, and the high price of food in all parts of the continent of Europe, will lessen the demand for English cottons. Everywhere, both at home and abroad, the prospects of the English manufacturers are discouraging.

Under these circumstances, it may be expected that the increase in the consumption of 1852 and 1853 over previous years will be entirely lost, and that the wants of Great Britain for 1854 will not much exceed the average of 1849, 1850, and 1851, which was 1,589,400 bales. It may reach 1,700,000, but its probable limit is 1,600,000 bales.

In France the consumption for 1853 is nearly as large as for 1852, and both are decidedly above those of previous years. The deliveries at Havre up to the 16th of November were 349,045 bales, against 367,587 for 1852, and 275,764 for 1851. Our exports to France for 1852 and 1853 have been 421,375 and 426,728 bales; but the stocks on the 16th of November were 36,716 bales in excess of last year, and 37,200 bales over 1851. This would indicate a probable consumption of American cotton for the present year of 390,000 bales; but on account of the unfavorable circumstances at the close of the year, this amount will scarcely be attained. The very great deficiency of the French harvest will lessen the demand for 1854: but as past experience shows that the consumption in the French factories is much more regular than in