Cincinnati daily press. [volume] (Cincinnati [Ohio]) 1860-1862, 1861-02-22

Z ODseINe ny inc OOnBT6SSlOnhl report
of Wednesday, that Senator Wilson, Of
Massachusetts,, made an earnest speech
against an amendment to the Morrell Tariff
bill, which levied duty of fifteen per cent.
on all wool invoiced eighteen cents q pound,
because, he said, it was injurious to manu-
iacturers and no benefit to wool growers.
This is queer. We supposed that protection
was to benefit all classes The glorious
Chicago Platform says so or at least it goes
for that revenue policy that will equally
bereft all classes; and if protection will not,
it must mean some other policy.
Wool is certainly avery important interest
in the Northern States; quite as important
as iron. 1t is much more exposed to compe-
tition with cheap foreign production than
iron. But here we are told by one Of the
leading protectionists that the wooden pro-
duction can not be protected, because it will
iniuro the manufacturer. Mr.. Wilson is
light, but this single feature shows that the
whole theory of protection is fallacy. The
manufacturer, whose materials are subject
to a duty, can not compete with the same
article made of free materials.
So he is driven from the markets Of the
rest of the world. Is he any better off here?
If the duty is the same on the materials as
the manufactured article, one protection neu.
tralizes the other, and he is only put on an
equality here with the foreign manufacturer,
aud excluded by him from the markets of
the rest of the world. OF course the foreign
manufacturer, having the world for his
market, and having our manufacturer con-
fined to this market, and without any ad-
vantage even here, can crush him, by ship
ping his surplus stock here, when the foreign
markets are glutted.
Thus we see, by the admission of protec-
tiouists themselves, that tariff on materials
is fatal TO manufacturing industry. So long
as such policy prevails, our manufactures
must continue in their state of "infancy,"
and the growth of labor must be dwarfed.
So far the protectionists are with us. We
propose to take them a little further. Does
not protection on iron equally dwarf the
growth of all the manufactures of iron. ex-
cept the simple smelling Nobody will deny
this.
What branch Of industry is so we'll suited
to the ingenuity and genius of the American
people, as the manufacture of iron into its
thousands of articles of use? What branch
Of labor is capable of such indefinite expan-
sion. We boast of the superiority of our
| iron machinery, from the most ponderous
steam. engines to the smallest tools. The
| whole American continent demands our iron
machinery and implements; and they find
a market in every quarter of the globe
But we propose to restrict all this infinite
field Of American labor to the narrow limit
of smelling Pennsylvania ore, by putting g
duty Of Sc tun on pig iron, $l5 a tun OF
bar-iron, and $l2 tun on rairoad-iron
Certainly the burning down of neighbor'
barn to roast ones potatoe is the only fl
comparison for this narrow policy.
We speak Of Pennsylvania, because
although there are some other iron inter
ests, it is her interest that governs this pro.
lection, and her political position solely
that enforces it.
We have before said that our objection tc
duties on imports is radical, going to the
very bottom of the matter. A tariff purely
for revenue is still more indefensible; fol
that is simply a grossly unequal system o.
taxation, without any excuse for its ine-
! quality. Protection restricts American la
Dor, while protesting to advance it. The
protectionists concede this by their strenu-
| freq fraIa IN, h.
their own speciality. 1t entails perpetual
Infancy" on American industry. 1t takes
more than ten per cent. of the revenue for
cost of collection, when one per cent. pays
for the collection of direct taxes.
Insensible taxation is at the bottom of all
our Governmental extravaganza. A tariff
takes the burden of the support of the Gov
eminent from property, and puts it on per-
soDs. Millionaires pay no more taxes for it
than men Of moderate means. Thus, the
system which pretends to be founded on the
protection of American labors, is nothing
but load upon labor.
Yet newspapers talk about free-trade as a
theory of fancy. A theory of fancy When
the most sturdy free-traders are the man.
ufacturers themselves, in every article they
| use.
Protection, as a theory--as a principle
has not a shadow of an existence. Every
protectiOnist repudiates the principle, but he
goes for sharp practice. The great author Of
the American System"-as be proudly
called it--slaughtered it with his own hand,
by the Compromise of 1888. After spending
half his life in building it up, and deluding
manufacturers by what they supposed was a
settled policy, he put his own hand TO its
throat, in the wretched hope of profting by
compromising with rebellion which his
great rival, General Jackson, had already
crushed.
Like every thing else of any prominenc'
which he ever advocated, he lived to see I
crushed chiefly by his own hand. And il
the place of the great American System, h
left the system of compromising with rebel
lion, which has been cropping out ever since
and now has borne its full fruit.
Striking Homo mOEeneity.
When the japanese ambassadors left tn
Niagara on her arrival al Jeddo, they car
ried of all the plate, spoons, forks, and, Il
fact, every portable thing they could la
their hands on. Nothing further is neede