Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1848-12-07
~ The following Article should have appeared If
proper season, but was mislaid and forgotten.
For the Green Honnain Freeman.
Taii and Eree Trade,


my opinion, his manner Of treating the question
of Tariff and Free Trade will not improve his Yep
nation as luminous and logical writer. ! confess
myself pleased with the respectful compliment which
he pays to mo as Il lover Of truth, but should have
been better pleased, if had not been compelled to
pay his compliment with complaints
| My complaints against him are these, In the first
pa E, complain that he neglecs to prove fundamen,
tai points in his argument secondly, complain Of in
accuracy and inconsistency III his statements; and
lastly that he clouds and pepexos the question by
habit of confounding things that are distinct
In replying to me he has written more than seven
columns Fully to sustain my complaints and expose
all his unsound reasoning would, perhaps, require as
many more, but shall hardly have patience to write
half 50 much.
Under my first complaint will state that A. II. B.
has represented Taliffa as plan OF extortion, or
"bargain" between government and rich men for then
mutual advantage. This view OF Tariffs, if correct is
enough to condemn them as odious things But is i
sustained by a single fact or argument? Not one
" left TO take it on trust. Government no doub
has power to support Itself either by tariff or dicc
tax, but do not know that las any preference OIL
its own recount for a Tariff.
A. Il. B. treats tariffs as dishonest concclns On the
part of rich men. How does he provet to be such
They are founded in the love Of gain and make rcl
uen richer. Well, admitting this to be true IS it tin
peculiar wrong of tariffs; Let US present the argl
ment in his own words; but if protection makes ric
men richer, as we both agree, it is evident that YER
much of what the rich gain in this way must be some
.body's loss Somebody must pay it to them; pay no,
for what they buy than what it cost the seller" A
II. b, regards the fact hat tariffs make rich menrch
er as he secret that les 1t the foundation OF tariffs
There may be weight in this argument, and perhap
ought not to complain that no proof is attempted o
this point. Bat may ask A. II. B. not to be res
pecter Of persons in his application of the argumen
ifh he condemns arfiS on such grounds, let him pre-
nounce the sentence against railroads, locomotives
and every thing involved in similar guilt. Let hin
give no quarter to anything, which makes rich me
richer. Let him kill every "goose which lays golt
en- egg" fear his sentence against tariffs, if impa
italy administered and rigidy executed, would max
desolating havoc among the improvements of the ag
which he 50 much admlres In short, his argumol
ruins itself by proving too much
To sustain my second complaint will now notice
few of A. II. BIS inaccurate statements
la the Freeman of March he says: "rhe who
object of protection is to benefit the rich at the G.
pense of the roor" Did A. II. B ascertain the co
rectncss of this assertion before he made it? If $
what becomes of his opinion that tariffs are a suhje
of bargain between government and rich men for Il
advantage of 10th? Besides, A. H. j. has shown iii
protection does answer other ends than beneftting Il
rich. In the Freeman OF July 49, he ascribes hon
manufactures and the growth of villages and cities
protection. lie has shown, too, that protection pr
duces an urgent demand for labor He has SEE
agents travcrsing the country Up and down to procu
hands to be employed IN manufacturing. One won
conclude from his statement of facts, that pGotect'
in one country produces an exception to his "gener
rule" that ''the rich regulate the price of labor"
Il is obvious that, in such state Of things us he has
e cribed to tariff the poor man has something bett
than the option to work for just what the rich pleas
or starve And how has A. II. B. arrived at the co
|. custon that some of these results, which he ascrb
to protection not among the objects OF protection
- Take another nacculacy. A. II. B. says in
at Freeman of April &: "lhG poor classes by their lat
re pay for all, and oally produce all the wealth OF
= country" Possibly A. Fl. 3. can reconcile this W
% his own assertion that "wealth produces wealth."
r. how can he reconcile it with justice TO many ri
ir men, who labor diligently as well as the poor?
"a Another. In the Freeman of July 6, replying
a. my statement that Free Trade begins in one coun
~ by grinding poor people, and ends in another by tn
lie ing them out of employ, A. H. b. declares his ign
es ance that Free trade "las ever had trial in the c
bo lied world" and treats it as phantom conjured ~
he "rghten children" In few lines after he astoni
lar es us by asserting that my suppo ed case of F
er trade is ga tue picture Of the state of things from
T., immemorin" He says: "Foreign articles must CO
ed cere, and compete with the home articles. They
IN come have come, and will come.-No nation or P
YER Pile will shut itself up refuse intercourse or CO
~ munon with the rest of mankind" Thus he disT
es of one of my arguments by denying that free II
an ever had trial. ami then OF another, by asserting
free trade always existed, There must be some ii