The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1866-12-08
Mccuiioch on "Monopoiies."

McCuIIoch on ''NIonOpoIies.'
From the Tribune.
The Hon, Hugh McCuloch was formerly
Whig and is accustomed still to assure his Old
friends that he is a moderate protectionist. He
has an unuuestionable right TO be free trader
If his convictions lead him to be; yet there is
moral Obligation to maintain a reasonable con
sistency between word and act, professed creed,
and. casual inculcation, which we regret to see
disregarded nay, defed by our countrys
Minister of Finance. From the beginning to the
end of his recent elaborate report, Mr.. McCulloch
talks as though he had never been protectionis'
and never knew how to be. Take, for example,
the second of his general principles of taxa
ton, of which he asserts that "the correctness
has been proved by other nations" so that they
"may be safely adopted as gHide to the legs
latiOn that IS now requ1red:"-
49, That the duties upon imported commodities
should correspond and harmonIze with the taxes
upon home productions and that these duties should
not be SO high as TO be prohlbltory, to butd up
home TnOnop0teS nor to prevent that free exchange
of commodities which is the life of commerce J.
seriously impair the revenues, nor-to subject the
home manufacturers, burdened with heavy in!ernal
taxes, 10 a competition with cneap labor and larger
capital which they may be unable to sustain. )"
What is a ''monopoly" Is it not an exclu-
sive privilege, by law conferred on a designated
person or persons, o produce or supply an
article which others desired Mr. McCulIocb,
Tor example, is our only Secretary of the Trea-
sury, and while he retains his place, enjoys
monopoly of the privilege of utterng nonsense
and sop6istry iii he WHY, from the highest
and most authorita i've financial position. But
in what allowable, what conceivable sense, can
a, nigh duty imposed on. a foreign product
build up home monopoles," while every
person living in this country is at perfect liberty
oproduce just such (or better) articles, and
sell them SO cheap as he may?
Do let us have this matter made so clear that
human suffice
further perversion or mystifcation.
Let us suppose that there is one and but one
mine of zinc, or plumbago, or nickel in our
country, and that this mine belongs to an indi-
vldual or company; 1t might be fairly urged that
a high duty on imported zinc, plumbago, or
nickel (as the case may be), would create a
gaintul monopoly for the beneht of that person
or company. In other words, it would enable
the owner or owners of that mine to sell their
product (within certain limits) at their own
price.
Now let us suppose Congress should impose
prohIbitory duty-say 500 and upward per
ton-on all imported iron, for instance, would
any any such s,t T. result be produced? What would
thenceforth regulate and govern the cost of
iron to our consumers? ? At first, for very
short time, there would be deficient supply OF
iron, and a consequent enhancement of its
price. But would not this fact inevitably, in
stantly stimulate and insure an increased home
production of iron? Here are blown-out fur
naces all over the land, standing idle because
they cannot be run at a prott-would not an
increase of even So per ton put many Of these at
once into blast again? And if the price were en-
hanced $40, $15, or $50 per ton, who does not
know that more and still more, of them would
be set to work, and that new works would be
erected whenever ore, coal, and lime could be
conveniently brought together giving employ
ment to tens of thousands OF blasters, choppers,
masons, quarrymen, turnacemen, etc. ETC.
Who that ever read page or thought an hour
on the subject does not know that this process
of erecting new iron-works and reviving those
now disused would go on so long as more iron
could be made at profit, or until the profit of
this pursuit had been reduced to the average
profit of business in general?
Is there any possible demur to this statement? ?
Ale not the elements of iron production abun-
dant, widely ditfused, and practically mex
houstible? Let us suppose all protectionlsts so
stolid or so ignorant that they would persist in
using their capital where 1t would yield them
little or nothing, when they might make twenty
five to fifty per cent. by employing 1t in iron
making, would not free traders evince more
common sense? If they now decline to invest
in iron-making, is it not for the precise reason
that they can do better-that is, make more
in some other vocation? And will they not
rush into iron-making whenever they shall find
this more profitable than their present pursuits
Nay, would not the very Brtons who are now
making iron Tor our market in the fast
anchored isle," come (or send) over and make
it here, if they could thus secure larger profit
tLan by making it where they now do?
Is there any answer to this statement of the
case! II so, what is it? And # not, what
reason or seLse is there in Mr.. McCulloch's bug
bear of building up home monopollesW
what he says is the sheer, bald, palpable fallacS
it seems to us, is it not discredItable to oul
country that its highest financial officer should
presume TO utter it?
That 'free exchange of commodities" i
''the life OF commerce." we have been hearln!
from free traders these forty years. during
which every protective tariff has been con
fronted by the EUeninq Post and its echoe
with predictions that our commerce would b
ruined and our revenue dried up by its enact
ment. We have heretofore printed those pre-
phesies, and contrasted them with the actua
returns of both commerce and revenue accru
ing under those very tariffs OF 1924, 1928, 1912
and 1861, which the Post DC Go. asserted wou
destroy both commerce and revenue. Their
are many countries which have systematical
ignored or rejected protection Portugal, Tur
key, Italy, Brazil, for instance-aud we invit
comparison between their commerce an
ours, especially in those years when protector
was here in the ascendant. Mr.. McCulloch'
assertions cannot outweigh the statistics of al
nations treasury departments, our own in
cluded. We dare the Secretary to compile au
present a tabular expose of our commerce an
revenue under protection and free trade respe
lively. Such table, fairly made up, would /
more instructive and more valuable than
volume Of naked and oft-reiuted assertion
HORACE GREELEY.
The Majority In COMgress-HOw The
Should Use Their Power.
From The Times