CONTENTS OF NO. VI., VOL. XXIV. II. THE MERCHANT: OR, THE INFLUENCE OF COMMERCE.-PART II. By GEORGE R. RUSSELL, LL. D., Merchant, of Massachusetts..... ART. ARTICLES. PAGE. I. THE UNION, PAST AND FUTURE: A Rejoinder to the Article of the Hon. R. M; H. Garnett, of Virginia, published in the Merchants' Magazine, for April, 1851. By E. H. DERBY, Esq., of Massachusetts..... 659 681 .......... III. THE PORT OF SAN JUAN DE NICARAGUA: Its Position, Commerce, and Resources. 690 697 V. THE STUDY OF POLITICAL ECONOMY: In Reply to an Article by " A Farmer," in the April number of this Magazine. By k. S., of New York..... 700 VI. CURRENCY-INTEREST-PRODUCTION.-No. VI.-The Suffolk Bank System, etc. By J. S. R., Merchant, of Massachusetts....... 707 VII. MAURY'S ASTRONOMICAL OBSERVATIONS.. 712 JOURNAL OF MERCANTILE LAW. Are owners of Vessels, transporting goods for the public, on foreign voyages, liable as common carriers, etc.?... Homestead Exemption Law of New Jersey.. Action in S. J. Court of Massachusetts on a Promissory Note.. Law of Pennsylvania in relation to Selling Goods by Samples.. The Mode in which Protest against the Payment of Duties should be made... Liability on a Forged Chock.-Action on a Policy of Insurance against Fire.. 718 719 720 Policy of Insurance on a Flat Boat and Cargo of Produce.-Action for Salvage Service. Decision of S. C. of California on Summary Process by Attachment for Collecting demands against vessels, etc... COMMERCIAL CHRONICLE AND REVIEW: EMBRACING A FINANCIAL AND COMMERCIAL REVIEW OF THE UNITED STATES, ETC., ILLUSTRATED WITH TABLES, ETC., AS FOLLOWS: Review of the Spring Trade-Present Financial Condition of the Country compared with the antecedents of the last Commercial Revulsion-Prospects for the next Season's Trade-Imports of Dry Goods at New York for April-Imports for four months, with particulars of Increase-Exports at New York for April-Comparison of Shipments in Leading Articles of domestic produce-Movements of Specie, including a Statement of Exports at New York and Boston, and total receipts from California-Condition of Money Markets-Sales of Railroad and other Bonds-Dividends of Phila delphia Banks-Condition of Pennsylvania Banks-Condition of Banks of Virginia and Branches Amount of Specie on Deposit in New York-Condition of the New York State Banks-Coinage for April at the Philadelphia and New Orleans Mints, etc............ VOL. XXIV.-NO. VI. 42 721-727 JOURNAL OF BANKING, CURRENCY, AND FINANCE. Incomes of the Middle and Upper Classes in Great Britain.... Pennsylvania Currency in 1723.. Statement of the Condition of the Banks of Pennsylvania for the month of November, 1850. Payment of Claims against Mexico.. Receipts and Expenditures of the United States to 31st March, 1851. Condition of the Bank of Georgia.... United States Treasury Statement, April, 1851.. Receipts and Expenses of France from 1814 to 1848.. Books on Finance and Banking.. Finance, Taxation, and Incorporations in Ohio.. United States Branch Mint at Dahlonega.. The Crown Jewels of England....... Revenue and Expenditures of Mexico.... .... Statistics of Bankruptcy in England... Semi-Annual Dividends of Banks in Boston.-Issue of a new Coin in California.. 732 733 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 742 743 COMMERCIAL STATISTICS. Vessels Built in the United States from 1815 to 1850...... 744 Vessels Built in the United States in 1849-50.-Imports and Exports of Canada in 1850.. 745 746 Trade and Commerce of Philadelphia.... 747 Commerce of the Sandwich Islands in 1850 748 Export of Tea from Shanghae to United States and Great Britain. Inspection of Breadstuffs at Baltimore in 1850-Importation of Cotton into Liverpool. COMMERCIAL REGULATIONS. Of Information in Relation to Foreign Imports... Of Fees for weighing, Measuring, etc., Merchandise.. Of Passengers Arriving at Ports of Entry in New York.. Of the Direction and Distribution of Letters-Instructions to Post-masters. The New Life Insurance Law of New York...... 748 750 750 751 752 753 754 755 New York and Philadelphia Line, via the Camden and Amboy Railroad and Steamboat.. Receipts of the Rochester and Syracuse Railroad.-Shortest Passages of Ocean Steamers.. JOURNAL OF MINING AND MANUFACTURES. Improvement in the Manufacture of Steel.. Of the Discovery of California Gold.-Wickersham's Weaving Wire.. The Flax vs. the Cotton Question The British Patent Law Amendment Bill.. The cost of making Cotton Cloth at Graniteville, S. C.. Improvements in Cooperage The New Almaden Quicksilver Mining Company. S.enton's New and Ingenious Clock.. 764 765 766 706 Cultivation of Flax in the South of Ireland. The Profit of California Gold Mining.. The Mines of California.-Quicksilver Mines of California.. NAUTICAL INTELLIGENCE. 767 768 769 769 770 770 771 771 771 772 779 Important Notice to Whalemen, in relation to Whaling Grounds, etc..... Quickest Trip between New York and San Francisco.-The French Cotton Trade.. THE BOOK TRADE. Notices of new Books, or new Editions 773 779 780 781 782 783 783 784 784 785-793 MERCHANTS' MAGAZINE AND COMMERCIAL REVIEW. JUNE, 18 5 1. Art. I. THE UNION, PAST AND FUTURE. M. R. H. GARNETT, ESQ., the author of an essay entitled "The Union Past and Future," has seen fit to reply in the April number of the Merchants' Magazine to my brief review of his pamphlet. I came forward as a champion of the Union, and learn with surprise from his reply, that he claims to be a stronger Unionist than myself. This may reassure a part of the public, misled by the warmth of his style and the brilliancy of his coloring; but I still desire to place both the North and myself "rectos in Curia" before the southern readers of the Magazine. The eloquence of Mr. Garnett may have converted them without convincing himself. The positions originally taken by Mr. Garnett which seemed to me most pernicious, were, 1st, that the history of the Union had been a history of aggressions on the part of the North, and constant concessions on the part of the South. To sustain this leading proposition he advanced the following series: That the North had violated the compact under which Virginia ceded her claims to the Northwest Territory, because a part of this region north of the 45th parallel of latitude, and west of Lake Superior, had been annexed to the territory of Minesota. That the Northern States would neither pass nor enforce a law for the surrender of southern slaves, as required by the Constitution. That the North, in forming the Constitution, had required a reduced representation for the slave population. That duties had been levied on imports which imposed unequal burthens on the South, because she furnished the principal exports, which were entitled to the imports, and paid the duty thereon. That the principal disbursements under the Union, for public improvements, light-houses, public debt and pensions, had been made in the Northern States, and the amount paid for such purposes, at the South, was not proportioned to the area of the South. That the North had not done justice to the South in fixing the line of future slavery at thirty-six thirty. That during the Revolutionary contest, the North had not furnished either men or money in proportion to the South, but "had left the South to be scoured by the enemy." That the North had by her legislation stripped the South of her trade, and acquired the gratuitous use of her capital to the extent of one hundred and forty millions of dollars. That if such aggressions were continued, and the South were not placed on a footing of equality, she would be justified in seceding from the Union. That upon such secession, the South would at once become a great and flourishing Republic, increase her territory, reduce her duties to ten per cent, regain her trade, and lighten her burthens. That the North was tending towards radicalism and pauperism. That labor was increasing faster than capital. That the white slaves in northern factories were not in as good condition, moral or physical, as the negroes of the slave States. That if the South seceded, the North would have no surplus of breadstuffs, and virtually no exports, would be compelled to resort for revenue to direct taxes, and thus break down the manufactories, and involve herself in ruin. And in his reply he arrived at the conclusion that the most dangerous enemics of the Union were those who spoke of slavery as an evil, or expressed a hope for its amelioration and eventual extinction. In reviewing these propositions of Mr. Garnett here succinctly stated, but diffused in the originals over a wide surface, I satisfied myself the first and main proposition was not sustained by those that followed, and that part of the latter were alike erroneous and pernicious. Hence, my brief review. In refuting charges against the North, I have acted merely on the defensive. I have advocated no prohibitory duties, I have ascribed no benefits to secession, as Mr. Garnett intimates. My effort was to exhibit the fallacy of his estimates, the innate vigor and resources of the North, to prove that after all her losses she would still excel the South in Commerce and revenue, that she would not succumb to misfortune, although her progress should be arrested. But for the North or the South to remain stationary while the world is advancing, or to present two nations each shorn of part of its power, two fragments of a planet, each liable to clash with the other, is to my eyes no picture of well being. In a progressive age the nation that recedes falls behind others in the race, and the nation that is stationary is receding. Mr. Garnett, to prove the aggressions of the North, and concessions of the South, cites first the cession, by Virginia, of her claims to the Northwest. Is he not signally unfortunate in his proof? What are the facts as to this cession? Virginia, in 1787, ceded in fee all her claims to the Northwest Territory. Other States ceded their claims to the West, and the Union assumed their revolutionary debts. Virginia, so far from making a reservation in favor of the slave States, made it obligatory that the new States to be carved out of this territory, should not exceed one hundred and fifty miles square. Virtually insisting that this territory should be divided into ten or twelve new States. All these States would have been dedicated to freedom, by the ordinance of 1787, but Congress-the aggressive Congress of the Union-subsequently volunteered to reduce the number to five, to diminish the free States at least five, and Virginia, without any new consideration, sanctioned the change. This voluntary diminution of the free States, this abandonment of five or seven, comes strangely in as proof of northern aggression. But Mr. Garnett, notwithstanding this, says the compact of cession has been violated. How not by the creation of more than five States from this territory. Five only have been formed, viz: Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin; but there is a small selvage re maining, a fraction less than one-third of Wisconsin, lying north of 45°, in the parallel of Quebec, between the icy shores of Lake Superior and the Red River of the North, a barren and inhospitable region, scarcely fit for human habitation. Non constat that it may not still be annexed to Wisconsin, non constat that it will ever be a State, or even part of a State, for who will people it, and until this is accomplished, no aggression has been committed. Surely this evidence, if it prove anything, proves not only that no aggressive spirit has been shown, but on the contrary, that a great and unrequited concession has been made by the North. Were it necessary for the argument, I might well ask what shadow of title did Virginia ever have to the land west of Lake Superior, or to Michigan, or to Wisconsin, or to the northern part of Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio? Her original charter gives no definite title beyond 38°, and not a shadow beyond 41°. Between 38° and 41°, the mother country did not hesitate to plant Delaware, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania, and evidently considered the land west of them at her disposal. It might well be argued, the Middle States, or the Union, succeeded to all her rights, while the Indian title was not acquired until the sanguinary conflicts of Wayne and St. Clair. But this argument is entirely unnecessary; the frozen region of Lake Superior is not yet a State. But there have been other concessions to the South in place of aggressions? The acquisitions of Florida, Louisiana and Texas, were southern measures, and out of those have been formed five entire slave States, and but one free State, the solitary State of Iowa. But it is urged the North would not consent that another slave State should be established in the unsettled region north of 36° 30'. But this region is not yet occupied, and is not even this reluctance protective to the South rather than aggressive. Does not the strongest apology for slavery rest on the fact, that the white man cannot labor in southern latitudes? And is it not the policy of the South to confine servitude within its more appropriate limits? Is not the tendency of slavery still from the lands north of that line, to southern climates? However this may be, in disproving aggressions, it is sufficient for my argument to show the South was eminently favored in carving out States from these newly acquired and fertile regions. But Mr. Garnett, in this connection, urges that the South has contributed more than its share to the public expenses, through the public lands. He puts this upon the inchoate title of Virginia to the Northwest Territory, a title little if any better than her title to Maryland, Delaware and Pennsylvania, and in some respects even more defective, as most of it was north of her most shadowy pretensions; but let these claims be what they may, and far be it from me to disparage Virginia, my answer was most irrefutable, viz: that the proceeds of all the public lands had not yet sufficed to pay the original cost, charges and interest, the last of which is the most formidable item, and for this I refer to the archieves of our land office, and the report of a committee of Congress. The answer of Mr. Garnett, on this point, is a little amusing; he denies the truth of my proposition, not by reference to the report or other documents, but by omitting the most material element of the proposition-the interest on the cost. His reasoning is somewhat like loading a cannon and leaving out the powder, or es |