126 Political Economy, 
numbers required for the potteries. Men afipear as they are want- 
ed. And all the potter’s needs must eat, and be lodged, and cloth- 
ed. 
Besides potters, what a large number of other people — carriers, 
packers, dray-men, brokers, merchants, underwriters, shipbuilders 
— what a host of artists, and tradesmen, concerned in furnishing the 
materials for ships, and in equipping them — all would more or less, 
derive support and affluence from the clay.* For, if our pottery, 
in the supposed case, were exported in our own vessels, the fo- 
reign consumer, besides the labour of the potters, and the value of 
the materials, would have to pay the merchant’s commission, the 
merchant’s profit, small charges, insurance, and freight — which 
items are included in the price the exported article must bring a- 
broad. If it did not bring this price, the exportation would dis- 
continue. 
Further— -in consequence of all this industry which the clay 
puts in motion — what a mass of additional livers, to consume, and 
give value, to the produce of the farmer. 
We have no such clay in Pennsylvania. But, does the same 
reasoning not apply to every article which we are in the habit of 
exporting ; to our flour, to our pork, to our flax seed ? Do they 
not all bring abroad their cost, and the enumerated charges ! 
Does it not strictly apply to the cottons, the tobacco, the tar and 
turpentine of the south ? to the fish, and the potash of the north ;f 
* All this is very true ; but is tliere no method of employing the same num- 
ber of people and the same quantity of capital in the home trade ? The case 
put, of a Potter, is a very unfortunate one ; for so far from wanting an export 
trade for our pottery, v/e do not suppiy the 1000th part of our own consump- 
tion in pottery, except of the very coarsest and least valuable kind. When 
the time shall arrive, if it ever do, that no employment for our people or our 
capital remains at home, then it may be wortli discussion whether vve may not 
as well encourage employment from abroad by direct means, and at any ha- 
zard. At that period of time, and not sooner, will the argument in favour of 
the direct encouragement of foreign commerce really become a subject of im- 
portant discussion. T. C. 
j- 1 see no difficulty in manufacturing a great part of our flax seed into li- 
i^en— of our cotton into cloathing, and carpets, and sail cloth, and bagging — > 
our potash into soap and glass, and employ it in bleaching and dying. If we 
did so, our flour and our pork would not spoil upon our hands. But in this, 
as in all other particulars, the question is, can you manufacture it, or export 
it, to the greatest advantage ? If you can export it to more advantage, do so ; 
but do not tax us, the consumers, with the expence and inconvenience of a war 
tQ defend your gains in the export trade, when no such expence or inconveniv 
