Washington sentinel., 1855-01-06
REDUCTION OF THE REvENUE.

We mentioned, yesterday, that the free list
recommended by the Secretary of the Treasury,
would, in its practical operation, give to the
monopolist manufacturing interest the benefit
of Free-trade, whilstit would burden the Free
trade agricultural interests by the imposition
of protective duties. This would seem strange
to the initiated, and it is passing strange in
the eyes Of those who understand the opera
tons of government.
The men Of associated capitalize manu-
facturers- would be consistent in advocating
their protective policy, if they were willing to ap-
ply their restrictions to every interest In the
last resort, they are willing to do that; but,
STILL they pay their tribute, an involuntary tri-
butte, to Free-trade principles, whenever they
come before the country begging in purple and
fine linen for protection from ruin.
Without pretending to speak with exact GER
tainty, we would be willing to venture the as
sertion, that that there is not manufacturer
in the United States who does not desire Free
trade in each and every article, except that
particular article which he produces-every-
thing else he wishes to admit duty free. He
will, whilst softly bedded, luxuriously fed, and
carefully waited on, complain of ruin and Of
suffering, and demand restrictive regulations
as absolutely necessary to preserve the country.
But press him close-question him-ascertain
what his real views are, and our life upon it,
he will demand Free-trade as to everything
which he has to purchase.
Before the people the advocates Of monopoly
will demand high duty on eueay thing; but
before Congress they have demanded high du-
ties only on their own products. These capi-
talists give the lie to their own assertions; for
they say that high duties make low prices, yet
they would abrogate all duties on schat they
acish to bug. They say that protection is good
for the country, yet they demand Free-trade in
nsaking their purchases. Can there be any
real convictions amongst such men? Can
there be any consistency in their creed? Can
there be any honesty in their purposes? There
may be; but our dim vision cannot perceive
how men can demand for themselves what they
will not give to their .tellows, and yet pretend
to be far and impartial only for the
public good.
In our country the manufacturing States de-
mand high duties, and affirm that high duties
benefit the whole country, whilst the agricul
turing and exporting States-those who pro.
duce raw materials-demand Free-trade, and
insist that freedom Of commercial intercourse
benefits the whole country. Under such Gil.
cumstances, it is surely strange, that Demo
cratic Secretary of the Treasury should recon-
mend that Free-trade be given to the manufac-
turers who denounce it, and that Restrictive du-
ties should be forced upon those who demand
terry in all this; if SO, we cannot penetrate and
reveal it. We are accustomed to consider
things in straight forward manner--never
dealing in duplicity, nor practising a tortous
policy. To our unenlightened mind, it appears,
therefore, that if the strict principles of Free
trade are to be abandoned on the recommen-
dation of the Secretary of the Treasury, it
would be right and proper to give the practical
benefits of Free-trade to those who advocate
Free-trade principles, and to permit the bur
thens of restriction to fall on the advocates OF
class legislation. The plan of the Secretary
of the Treasury ought to be reversed-turned
upside down---for his Free list would give Free
trade to the manufacturers and fetter and op.
press the Free-traders by. Protective system.