Lynchburg Virginian. [volume] (Lynchburg [Va.]) 1829-185?, 1845-09-29
Thr zpMrhDurn Cir0imiau.
MONDAY. SEPTEMBER 90, Is45.
TIE TARIFF


Of all the lanciul arguments Of the opponents Of
protective tariff, there not perhaps Mr.. McDuf
fees ridiculous aud long since exploded lory bale The
ory," OF which even lis author is nav ashamed not
excepted, which is untenable, aud which is more
decissey reuled by facts Than that of comparatively
modern invention, which assumes many WORDS that
when duties high. the prices Of tobacco, cotton
-four ard other products of .he soil are low, and pee
uer,a, when duties low that the prices are high
II this assumption were true, nothing would DO more
easy than to demonstrate ii. Being false, it is no,
more difficult l., show its allacy. 1t may happen, in,
deed II has heretofore done, that high duties and low
prices may be colemporaneous events-bul does
therefore follow that the is The consequence Of the
other any Than that any o,her concdent things
which have connection with each other because they
happen at the same instant stand each other the
relation Of parent and offspring II. indeed, this were
the fact, the results would be uniform and unva ing
IN all other Of and effect. Il is only neces
sary therefore, 10 show that both prices aud duties have
been high al The time, and low at the same time
nay that prices have been highest when duties were
highest, and lowest when they were lowest TO satisfy
all unpreJndced minds that this theory, like every other
which the anti tarii party have times relied
upon 10 misead The public judgment, is unsubsanta
as the "baseoss fabric of vision" In doing this, we
need not fatigue the readers attention with very eabo
rate statements. We shall content ourselye. with
few facts all Of ,ehich obtain from the rery highest
Locotoco authority the very weapon with which
they have furnished crack their ow n sconces.'
few days ago referred 10 the prices Of flour a.
several different periods; aud should again do 50
now but that We wish to them in connection with
the prices of tobacco and cotton. We hope therefore,
to be excused for the repetition.
In 1921, when the duties were low the price
Of flour was $,O6
In 1914, when they were high, tine price was 4,67
In 1899, when the duties were at the highest
NOTCH il was 69l
In 1911 when they were at the lowest point, $40
II 1887, when they were higher than in 1871, $50
So much for flour. Now let us look at the prices of
the grea, staple Of Virgnia--lobacco.
In 1921, low duties the average price per hid
was $S4
In 1923. without any change in the duties it
was so
Why this sudden fall while the duties remained
the same. II the larfl controls the value But
thai II does nol do so, is still mora cuncusive.
y shown by The fact, 'ha, in 1896, alter the
duties had been considerably raised by the ia.
IN OF 1874, which Is said by have
been the FIRST protective tariff, tobacco rose in
despite of that increase Of duties to Sc
Agaln-ln 1928, belore the celebrated tariff of
that year passed. and the duties therefore re-
NAMED as they were IN 1926, tobacco fell TO 81
Is not this satisfactory ? II not, let us come
down later period.
/" 1889 tobacco went up TO The high price per
hid. OF 10
But IN 1910, when the duties were still l.wer
IL Tell To ~
And IN 1872 when they were at the lowest
point, it tell still farther to CT
How happens II, II prices are high duties are low
that We thus see prices and duties coming down oge,h
err II low duties beget high prices for produce the
elect would have been increase in the price of tobac
co In 1910 and ls42 but instead Of that we behold
elimination IN value, amounting in 1910 to 500, aud in
lo42 to $5i per hid or in the latter year nearly one
hundred per ceu There must he some cause for this
hucua'ion. however, aud We think it is very apparen,
upon the surface what that is. The value of 10.
bacco IN 1867, when lose 10 the extraordinary price OF
viz per hid was produced by the short crop Of 1888
the expor, OF that article falling lrom an average Of
Voo hhd' The three preceding years. only 10000 ex
h'oisng deficiency Of II 900 hhds in the usual suppv
'"r oTcgn consumption but in 1910, the amour, Ok.
ported ran up to ll94S4 hhds and in 50 to the enor.
nous quantity OF l5S,7lO hhds. glul,ng the European
markets, and causing rapid decline, as necessary
consequence in those years. and afterwards Another
cause, which has contributed materially to the decline
III The value OF the tobacco exported ous not to be los,
sght oil. We refer to the well known fact that for a
lew years past. the home manufacture of this article
mas greatly increased, AMI that the highest priced to-
oaccos, Instead OIL as formerly. being bought up for
'fe'sh supply, are now worked up in own factories
furnishing home market vastly beneficial to the
planter than any he has ever found abroad
Let us nov glance at the prices, at several periods
o' Tie great Southern staple, cotton the cuvalurs oi
which are naturally opposed to the tariff Than the
producers OF wheat aud tobacco,-snce they find ready
access TO ioreen markets. when breadstus are aoge,b
er excluded, and when tobacco finds itself burthened
with the most exnbi,ant duty imposed by one ma.
} ton upon the products OF another.
In 1871, when the duties were llw under what
Is said by The anti-tari les 10 have been "a re-,
venue laT'H, HE pfice Of cotton per To- was l6 els
IN to<o' on ne osher hand, the year after the
j"sl protective lariii. according to the same
authority, was Imposed, II rose, as II IN def.
a ""a o' nus wonderful theory, to 90 cts.
IN 1917 The duties remaining unchanged il most
s'unse'y ,e'i 10 only 10 cts.
wondered al is II, that, whereas, m 1885. ,os
, pf'ce oil cotton was Is cts.
IL tell again in 1910, when the duties were m,ch
lower one hundred per cent, or To 8 c,s.
We appeal to the judgment o. the country TO saw if
'hs ne" tangled theory is thus cut up root ana
ofahoh Who, after this exhibition of facts, which
as we before remarked. have cued from document
mat, strange 10 say, intended to establish il beyond
all con'roversy-who. we say. will bring his
~ into question, by insisting upon dogma so abs urd
and PeposerNus-a dogma thus Contradict by nume-
! rom aniin v,r,,i,t, 9.