Some commodities of domestic manufacture are, nevertheless, much better fitted for the operations of the legislator than others.A duty, for instance, on the inner textures of cottons and linens, might perhaps be so levied as to make it nearly altogether a tax on luxuries.The fineness of the thread in these fabrics, affords a pretty conspicuous mark, and by raising the impost gradually in proportion to it, the more delicate sorts might, perhaps, come to be esteemed as adequate marks of a capacity to expend largely and so be converted into especial luxuries.In this case part of the expenditure of individuals, which is now dissipated in changing fashions, would be made over to the legislator, and might suffice to sustain some part of the public burdens.
All such duties, however, require to be laid on very gradually, else the consumption of the commodities on which they are imposed may very probably be stopped.Men have generally a very high opinion of the reasonableness of their conduct, and the correctness of their taste.They are apt to fancy that there is a real and very great enjoyment in expenses, which, in truth, have scarce any thing to recommend them but the gratification they afford to vanity.In like manner, when any article rises suddenly and greatly in price, when in their power, they are prone to adopt some substitute and relinquish the use of it.In such cases the observation is forced on them, that the commodity is no better than it was before, and that, if then they sometimes used another for it, the best thing for them now to do is to confine themselves altogether to that other.Hence, were a high duty at once im posed on any particular wine, or any particular sort of cotton fabric, it might have the effect of diminishing the consumption very greatly, or stopping it entirely.Whereas, were the tax at first very slight, and then slowly augmented, the reasoning powers not being startled, vanity, instead of flying off to some other objects, would be apt to apply itself to them as affording a convenient means of gratification.
The chief practical objection to such imposts, as a source of revenue, is the expense of collection and the attempts generally made to evade them.
The former diminishes the amount yielded by them, the latter is injurious to the morals of the people.Both are greater in commodities of domestic, than of foreign manufacture.In articles produced within the country, it is necessary to watch the whole progress of manufacture, and to guard against imposition at every stage.Commodities, on the other hand, imported from abroad, have only to be watched at the time and place of importation.
There is a case in which duties imposed on foreign commodities, have particular advantages.It not unfrequently happens that in manufactures which it is the object of the legislator to introduce, and carry to perfection within the society, the chief, perhaps the only difference, between the enjoyment afforded by the foreign and by the domestic article lies in the gratification the former affords to vanity.This is very generally the case in all commodities affording materials for such articles of dress as are seen by many, these being always in a great degree luxuries.I very much question, for instance, whether the passage of the manufacture of calicoes from Britain to America, has occasioned the wearers of calicoes in the United States any sensible diminution in the comfort, or in the pleasure arising from the perception of beauty, afforded by such articles.
The standard is in such cases altogether relative, the pleasure given by any particular dress of this sort arising from its being as fashionable, and as becoming as the dresses of other persons, or more fashionable and more becoming than theirs, and the chief requisite for rendering any fabric fashionable, seeming to be that it be costly, and have novelty.The unrestrained introduction of British or other foreign calicoes would, therefore, in all probability, have been felt, merely as a change in fashion, not as an increase of pleasure or diminution of cost.
There are very many similar cases.As the great mass of commodities are in part utilities, in part luxuries, so, in transferring the manufacture of any of them from one country to another, it very frequently happens that, in as far as the article in question has real utility, the domestic soon equals the foreign variety.It is chiefly in a laborious finish, for the most part the result of the demands of vanity, that the former falls behind the latter.In such instances the operation of transferring the art from one country to another, by means of a protective duty, takes either very little, or nothing, from the revenue of individuals, and makes, it may be, a considerable addition to that of the legislator.Its general effects on the funds of the community, are directly, and indirectly, to advance the absolute capital of the society by the introduction of a new art, and, during the process, to give a considerable revenue to the legislator for the attainment of public objects, without encroaching at all, or but in a very slight degree, on the returns made by the industry or stocks of individuals.
CHAPTER III.OF OBJECTIONS TO THE INTERFERENCE OF THE LEGISLATOR IN THE CASESINDICATED IN THE TWO PRECEDING CHAPTERS.
It appears, therefore, that there are at least two modes by which the legislator can effectively advance the general stock.1st.By effecting the passage of the useful arts from foreign countries to his own: 2d.By applying to useful purposes a portion of those funds, which, in all societies, are otherwise dissipated in the production of mere luxuries.
To these positions several objections may be made, of which some are rounded on the nature of things, others arise almost entirely from the ambiguity of language.
