New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1869-12-21
MR HELLS,S RHDGET.


------------
MR.. WELLS'S BUDGET
Mr.. d. A. Wells, Especial Commissioner OF
the Revenue" has put forth his annual Dud-
get, in opposition to that of the President and
the Secretary of the Treasury who-we THINK
wisely-are intent on paying of principal Oh our
great National Debt in order that we may
fund the bulk of what remains at q lower
rate of interest than we are now pay
ing and they think we should NAM
tain our Revenue unimpaired until TINS
can be effected. Mr.. Wells, on the other
hand, urges Congress to cut and SLASH the
Revenue right and left, leaving the reduction
of the Debt, whether principal or interest, 10
get on as it may. Why not abolish the oilces
of President and Secretary OF the Treasury,
and let the Especial Commissioner" run the
Government
Mr.. Wells has hitherto appeared IN the some
what homogeneous characters Of PrOtectioniSt
and Free Trader; he now assumes third
character-that of an opponent OF both or
either. lie says
The experience OF the last years has been equva
lent TO demonstration that any attempt 10 reconstruct
he TariG whoie any bdss of prinee IS proeeay
impossible the diverse interests OF the different sections
OF industries being sufficiently powerful under almost
any circumstances to engrat upon D,i Gnng tSs y ~
age such notifications would cnectaly DEPRIVE ~ vi
any pretensIons To consistency or harmony. lhsIs
would therefore To be but one available methou oI
tariff reform; which IA 10 adopt the same course
that has been taken in respect TO the REFORMS heretofore
made In the internal revenue anu WnGn u
finds u precedent In all the experience oil treat bIan ~
legislang upon these subjects VIZ: 70 MAKE sueh %
fcaons or removals OF dutes, yea, ~ Sv iincate as
prcl ole aud desirable; and thus 10y pruning tatnet
degree OF simplicity aud effectiveness with the least pos
slbo burden upon industry aud tho people
We beg leave to assure Mr.. Wells that he
forms a party by himself. Some of the Amer
lean People are Protectonsts, others for Free
Trade; there are some who have not yet fully
considered the question and made up their
minds as to its proper solution; but the num-
Der who have 10 principle on the subject, and
wish it acted on without reference to any, Is
small indeed
In fact, there is no standing ground where
he affects to plant himself. Every page of his
Report assumes the fundamental position of
the Free -Traders-that Protection enhances
prices to the detriment of consumers. Every
argument for Protection, from those of Hamll-
ton and Madison to those of Carey and Nor
ril, is quietly pooh-poohed by this Special"
doctor in Finance as sOphstical and
absurd. If Henry Clay and Hezekiah
Niles knew anything of the effect of duties on
prices, then Mr.. Wells has yet to learn the
alphabet of Political Economy. If duty be
raised from 20 up to 80 per cent, q true econ
omist does not assume that the price Is thereby
enhanced so per cent: he cOnsults the Prices
Current not of one year only, but of several, and
conforms his theory to the facts, instead OF
assuming that the facts must be such as his
theory would have them. And herein he would
place himself in direct antagonism to Commits
sioner Wells.
Mr.. Wells, in his Report of 1867, proposed
that the existing duty of nine dollars
on Pig Iron per tun be retained and
his bill, Herewith submitted, retained
the existing duty on Salt also. lie
now proposes reduction of the duty on Pig
Iron TO three dollars per tun and of the duties
on Salt by one-half And this is but n sample
of his ground and lofty tumbling."
Mr. Wells serves his employers too we'll when
he stoops to rnsstate the arguments he chooses
not TO face. He says:
But the usual almost the only arguments offered
in reply to such that above given u.s. that
continuance OF present duties imposed Pig Iron 10
necessary to insure employment TO American labor"
No, Mr.. Wells this is not the case and
YOU know it. You cannot have so utterly mis-
taken the drift of the arguments you do not
choose to meet We, who stand for Protection
to our Iron industry, commend that Protection
as calculated to expedite the opening of Amer
lean mines, the construction of American fur
naces, the connection of those mines with those
furnaces by railroads, &C., until the American
need of Iron shall be satisfied from American
sources. Time and again have we said to the
Free Traders "YOu tell us that Iron can be
"made and should be afforded much cheaper
ethan it is now sOd Then trhy not make III
"You own many mines and can buy millions of
"acres more at very low prices; you have
some furnaces, and others arc selling each
"week for less than cost; you can build more
every readily; you can hire wOrkmen rs
"cheaply as Protectionists can; you are your
"seves purchasers of Millions worth of Iron
leach year; so you cannot fear lack OF de-
"mand: Why mont you make Iron? Who asks
"you to buy it of Protectonists for 80 or Sl5
"per tun more than 1t Is worth, when you can
"make it rs cheaply as Others cant The
ITarif gives none monopoly; the business
" is as free to you as to any: and you well
"know that you can get as good prices for it
"as others Then ,chy don't you make LOnp
-"What answer" What is there in the
nature of Iron-PiG or Bar-that impels those
who will chase a dollar across the equator and
around Cape Horn, to refuse so stubbornly,
persistently, to make Iron9
Suppose the duty were $4,000 per tun instead
of 80, what would be the price, and what
would regulate that price'
We oppose the change commended by Mr..
| -
this country, but that it would arrest her in
l. -, a