It thus lies in the very nature of things, that the number ofthe advocates of the protective system must again increase, andthose of free trade again diminish.Hitherto, the prices ofagricultural produce have been maintained at an unusually highlevel, owing to the previous prosperity of the manufactories,through the carrying out of great public undertakings, through thedemand for necessaries of life arising from the great increase ofthe production of cotton, also partially through bad harvests.Onemay, however, foresee with certainty, that these prices in thecourse of the next few years will fall as much below the average asthey have hitherto ranged above it.The greater part of theincrease of American capital has since the passing of theCompromise Bill been devoted to agriculture, and is only nowbeginning to become productive.While thus agricultural productionhas unusually increased, on the other hand the demand for it mustunusually diminish.Firstly, because public works are no more beingundertaken to the same extent; secondly, because the manufacturingpopulation in consequence of foreign competition can no moreincrease to an important extent; and thirdly, because theproduction of cotton so greatly exceeds the consumption that thecotton planters will be compelled, owing to the low prices ofcotton, to produce for themselves those necessaries of life whichthey have hitherto procured from the Middle and Western States.Ifin addition rich harvests occur, then the Middle and Western Stateswill again suffer from an excess of produce, as they did before thetariff of 1828.But the same causes must again produce the sameresults; viz.the agriculturists of the Middle and Western Statesmust again arrive at the conviction, that the demand foragricultural produce can only be increased by the increase of themanufacturing population of the country, and that that increase canonly be brought about by an extension of the protective system.
While in this manner the partisans of protection will dailyincrease in number and influence, the opposite party will diminishin like proportion until the cotton planters under such alteredcircumstances must necessarily come to the conviction that theincrease of the manufacturing population of the country and theincrease of the demand for agricultural produce and raw materialsboth consist with their own interests if rightly understood.
Because, as we have shown, the cotton planters and theDemocrats in North America were striving most earnestly of theirown accord to play into the hands of the commercial interests ofEngland, no opportunity was offered at the moment on this side forMr Poulett Thompson to display his skill in commercial diplomacy.
Matters were quite in another position in France.There peoplestill steadily clung to the prohibitive system.There were indeedmany State officials who were disciples of theory, and alsodeputies who were in favour of an extension of commercial relationsbetween England and France, and the existing alliance with Englandhad also rendered this view to a certain extent popular.But how toattain that object, opinions were less agreed, and in no respectwere they quite clear.It seemed evident and also indisputable thatthe high duties on the foreign necessaries of life and rawmaterials, and the exclusion of English coal and pig-iron, operatedvery disadvantageously to French industry, and that an increase inthe exports of wines, brandy, and silk fabrics would be extremelyadvantageous to France.
In general, people confined themselves to universal declamationagainst the disadvantages of the prohibitive system.But to attackthis in special cases did not appear at the time to be at alladvisable.For the Government of July had their strongestsupporters among the rich bourgeoisie, who for the most part wereinterested in the great manufacturing undertakings.
Under these circumstances Mr Poulett Thompson formed a plan ofoperations which does all honour to his breadth of thought anddiplomatic adroitness.He sent to France a man thoroughly versed incommerce and industry and in the commercial policy of France, wellknown for his 'liberal sentiments' a learned man and a veryaccomplished writer, Dr Bowring, who travelled through the whole ofFrance, and subsequently through Switzerland also, to gather on thespot materials for arguments against the prohibitive system and infavour of free trade.Dr Bowring accomplished this task with hisaccustomed ability and adroitness.Especially he clearly indicatedthe before-mentioned advantages of a freer commercial intercoursebetween the two countries in respect of coal, pig-iron, wines, andbrandies.In the report which he published, he chiefly confined hisarguments to these articles; in reference to the other branches ofindustry he only gave statistics, without committing himself toproofs or propositions how these could be promoted by means of freetrade with England.
Dr Bowring acted in precise accordance with the instructionsgiven to him by Mr Poulett Thompson, which were framed withuncommon art and subtlety, and which appear at the head of hisreport.In these Mr Thompson makes use of the most liberalexpressions.He expresses himself, with much consideration for theFrench manufacturing interests, on the improbability that anyimportant result was to be expected from the contemplatednegotiations with France.This instruction was perfectly adaptedfor calming the apprehensions respecting the views of Englandentertained by the French woollen and cotton manufacturinginterests which had become so powerful.According to Mr Thompson,it would be folly to ask for important concessions respectingthese.
