Portage sentinel. [volume] (Ravenna, Ohio) 1845-1854, 1846-11-18
From the Washington UniOpy
Our Tariff POlicy---Its Two Eras.


In favor of the protective system, to the ex-
ample bequeathed by the frawers of our con.
s.itution. His argument, reSerting to an
cient precedent as the rule for future legis.
lation, took boldly and tnreservedly the
yery broadest ground Of conservatism. His
ran thus: "Erom 1850 to 1914
our country has greatlyprospered. During
that time protection hgs been the settled pol.
lev of our government. Let us cling, then,
to the wisdom Of the fathers, and stand by
that established policy Of protection which
has brought in is hands national prosperi- {
ty!" The argument, even admitting the
facts which it assumes, manifestly forgets
that since 1889 the whole social and indus
trial world has become new. Granting
what Mr.. Webster most enormously took
for granted, that the trainers Of the consti- ,
tuition were ultra protectionists still OF course
the question arises, ~"would they, on their
own principles, be protectionists nowp-E
Does not a new state of fthings-a new world
demand a pew politics2 I I
But the constant appeal Of the protection
lists to the past, admits and demands quite
another answer. At the bar Of our early
constitutional usage, protection, as the term
is now understood, stands irrevocably con-
demned. Of the thirty tariff laws, general
and special, which Exclusive Of the tariff
Of ls46) comprise the financial policy Of
our government since the adoption of the
constitution, fifteen were enacted prior to
the 9th Of April, lsl6-the day when the
modern protective system began. The
first fifteen tariffs, extending, in their ope-
ration, through little more than quarter
Of a century, from the first or constitution
alsero, Of our revenue legislation. These
laws were enacted under the advice and
guidance of the men Of the revolution,
were contemporary legislative expositions
Of the federal government. They oil a
rose out of one creed of constitutional prin
ciples, (for on these laws federalists and re-
publicans agreed, and save in so far as two
Of them, enacted respectively in 1904 and
1912, were modified for war purposes-the
one looking to our hostilities with the Bar
baiy powers, and the other to our war with
England-they ell exhibit strict unity o.
character, and strong family likeness.
The first remarkable fact about them is
"A fact in our day, almost Incredible
hhot they wsre tariffs .0hieh satisfied M'
sohole country! They were not partizar
tariffs. No considerable effort was made
to ovsrturn the principles or the system o.
any one Of them during the whole period
embraced in their operation. They gave
to the country, therefore, the vast boon ol
stability in the principles and the purposes
of its commercial legislation. They rescu-
ed industry from the conclusions Of the bal.
lot box!
But they exhibited-the whole series Of
them-other very striking features. They
were what they purported to be, when the
power to initiate them was given exclusive
" to the House of Representatives, that is,
Iavs for revenue. Protection was their IN
cideni, not their purpose. In very few
cases only was it adopted in their preambles:
and in those cases, probably, it was so nam
ed, in order to conciliate the favor of peo.
pie Jealous Of taxation. They were all
based on real, not fictitious values. Gene
rally they preferred the ad yalorem system,
and the few specific duties they adopted,
were laid for the most part upon those arti-
cles which, from their uniformity of value,
render the specific duty less onerous than it
would otherwise be to the poor man. Their
specific duties very rarely, ifever, exceeded
80 percent of the value, and were general
ly much less. Of mintmums, these early
tariffs knew nothing. That cheat had not
been invented. All these laws taxed lux
uries higher than the necessaries Of life;
and all their incidental determinations,
made with view to protection, were below
--most Of them very far below-the lo.Dest
rsyenue limit. We will endeavor, hereaf.
ter, to present, somewhat in detail-and
perhaps in tabular statements the various
items Of taxation in those tariffs, which full
ly prove our assertion.
Since the 9th Of April, 1916, when the
operation Of the last in this first series of
tariffs expired, we have had exclusive Of
that of lS46) fifteen other tariff laws. All
these, with the single exception of the COM
promise act Of 1888, Ia special Legislation,
intended to meet a special emergency have,
like their predecessors, exhibited unity of
character and purpose. They form the new
system-the system of modern protection.
They are strictly party tariffs. They have
convulsed the politics Of the country every
two or three years. They have made in
vestments of capital in many branches of
industry to be little more than species OF
political gambling. These are the tariffs
that bristle with minimums and specifics, and
look with dread on ad valorems. They do
not adopt either quantity or value as their
basis Of taxation. Their efect--if not their
purpose--is to array one section of the
country against another. They entirely
abandon the principle that would restrict
the protective tax within the revenue limit
and in their general system Of operation,
they make no discrimination against the
luxuries, and in favor Of the necessaries OF
life- In many cases they adopt IN oppo-
site discrimination. We will give hereaf
ter, if possible, sorne detailed tabular state