No. 151] 319 



I am aware that Indian corn enters largely into the calculations 

 of some men; and it may be in some demand for a season, in con- 

 sequence of the partial destruction of the potato crop both in Europe 

 and America. Indian corn is not to be transported from Indiana, 

 Illinois, Ohio or Michigan, to Europe, without great risk of sustain- 

 ing injury; and this may account in part for the prejudice which is 

 entertained against it as an article of food. If I am correctly in- 

 formed, it is more liable to heat than other grain, imbibes a musty 

 flavor, and its sweetness is gone. If this be to a great extent, cattle 

 will not eat it, much less man. It may be doubted whether the pea- 

 santry of England, to any great extent, ever tasted Indian corn in 

 its purity; then, too, it requires costly additions to make it a favorite. 

 But suppose it be introduced as an article of general consumption; 

 a large portion of the continent is as capable of producing Indian 

 corn, as Indiana or Ohio. In four years, from 1837 to 1840 inclu- 

 sive, 5,537,896 bushels of Indian corn, the produce of the country, 

 was shipped from Galatz and Ibruila, two ports at the mouth of the 

 Danube, at an average cost of twenty-four cents per bushel free on 

 board. So says McGregor. It is folly in the extreme, to expect 

 that any important benefit will be realized by the grain producers of 

 the United States, in consequence of the repeal of the British corn 

 laws. Drive the mechanics and manufacturers, or any considerable 

 portion of them, into agriculture, and you will vastly increase the 

 quantity produced, whilst the marketable or money value of it will 

 be diminished. 



The American Institute has labored for years to bring into suc- 

 cessful operation a new branch of industry — the culture and manu- 

 facture of silk — for which our country is admirably adapted, pos- 

 sessing advantages over every other, in point of climate, for this 

 purpose. It is an admitted fact, that we can beat the world, in 

 strength of fibre and lustre. Under the tariff of 1842, we felt con- 

 fident that the time was not far distant, when the domestic produc- 

 tion of silk would arrest the annual expenditure of seven or eight 

 millions of dollars in foreign lands, which might be retained at 

 home, to reward the labor of the agriculturist and the" skill of the 

 artisan. But the tariff of 1846 strikes at the production of silk. A 

 large portion of the annual crop of the United States, in the form of 

 tram, organzine and floss, was used in the manufacture of cord, 

 gimp, fringes, &c., and the consumption rapidly increasing. By let- 

 ting in the foreign article at a low rate of duty, the American silk is 

 to be measureably abandoned. Thus our legislation, in regard to silk, 

 materially injures that branch of it which belongs -to agriculture. 



