Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1870-07-28

We give below az extract from SEN
ator Morton's speech delivered in Terre
Haute-on the 18th inst. His remarks
on this subject are well worth reading
by all voters:
THE TARIFF QUESTION.
Now, my friends, passing from.that, 1
come TO another question. come to
the question of tariff. There is great
| deal said by the Democratic politicians
about the tariff. What is tariff? A
duty levied upon foreign goods that are
| imported into the United States. We
have always had tariff in this country
ever since the Government was formed.
1t began with the administration of
| George Washington, and before the
Union was formed the several States
had their respective tariffs. We have
always raised revenue by a tariff, and
we always shall. 1t has been done
under every administration. Now,
when the war came on we could not
raise sufficient revenue by the tariff.
We had to raise it by direct taxation i'll
part. We have recently abolished near
| ly all of those internal taxes, but we
| still have to raise at least Sl55, ,OOO, 600 or
$3.50, 600, 900 by the tariff. You have got
to have the revenue to carry on the
| Government. Now if you abolish the
tariff how are you geing to get 1t?
Why, you must raise it by direct taxa
tion.- Is the Democratic party of lndl-
ana in favor of direct taxation to False
this money? Nobody is in favor of it.
Tnen we have got to have tariff for
the purpose of having revenue, and it is
all idle to talk about repeating the tariff:
You can not repeal it without you find
| NV xr1h oh n
on the Government without money.
| Mr.. VOORHEES, has discovered how he
can pay the national debt without cost
ing any body anything. If he could nov
devise some plan by which the Govern
ment could be carried on in other -Ee-
spects without money, then the work OF
| financial reform would be complete.
We have got to have the money. and
we have got to raise at least l55 or l60
millions by tariff. Then, my friends,
free trade is out of the question. When
man talks to you about free trade, lie
talks about a thing that is impossible.
1 do not care how you lay that tariff,
| how you adjust it, it will afford some
protection TO our manufactures. There
| fore, free trade is out of the question as
long as we have to levy tariff for rev.
enue.
Well. there are several kinds of taiiG.
There is what is called prohibitory
tariff That may be regarded as an oh
solete idea. I know of nobody that is
| in favor of that in this country. Then
there is tariff merely for protection.
Well that is very little different from
prohibitory teriff in principle. That is
not the kind of tariff we want. But
as we have to have tariff for revenue,
we propose that the protection tnat re-
suits from the adjustment of that tariff,
shall result in favor of our home pro-
ducers instead of in favor of the foreign
producers. Now, there are two or three
ways of levying tariff. First, there is
the way advocated by Mr.. Kerr, a Dem
ocratic Congressman from Indiana. He
says he wants it put highest upon arti-
cles that we do not produce at all, for
example, tea and coffee. We don't prot
duce them, therefore put the tariff
highest upon such articles. OF course
then it must come lowest upon articles
that we do not produce in competition
with foreign countries. Put the high
est upon articles that we don't produce,
or where we have nothing to encourage
or build up, and put the lowest upon
things that we do produce in competi-
ton with foreign countries, so as to af-
ford them the least possible protection
and encouragement.
Well, there is another plan that is call
ed the horizontal" tariff, 10 levy an
equal per cent. upon all articles without
regard to whether they are necessities
or luxuTies. 1t has been sometimes said
that that tariff was one Of strict neutral
ity between the home producer and the
foreign producer. Now, if you think
that our Government ought to maintain
position of strict neutrality between
the home producers and the foreign pro-
ducers, just as we shall maintain posi-
ton of strict neutrality between France
and Prussia in this great war that is be-
ginning, then you will be in favor of
that tariff. But there are very few peo- |
pie in any party that are in favor of
that; first, because We ought to put the
tax higher on luXuries than on the ne
cessities of life, and then if there is an
incidental and legitimate protection to
result from the tariff, let that he given |
for our own home producers instead of
going for the foreign producers.
Then there is another way of levying |
a tariff, and that is to put it lower upon |
articles that we don't produce, where |
we have nothing to encourage or build |
up-for example, tea and coffee; and |
then put it higher upon articles that We
do produce in competition with foreign |
countries, so that there shall be a fair |
and equal and honorable competition
between the home producer and the for
eign producer. If you make a prohib-
itory tariff then you get no revenue. If
you put it below the point of competi-
ton, then you get revenue only, and
you cut Off your home producer, and
give the market over entirely to foreign |
nrnnlIpprS Now yyn lnn)t wa nf
hibitory tariff. We don't want to make
a monopoly here. We don't want to
exclude the foreign producers, so that
mean men may produce and sell them
to us at their own price. But, as you
have to have a tariff, how are you to put
it? Put it at point that will afford a
fair competition between the home pro-
ducer and the foreign producer. That
brings you revenue, because there is q
competition, and competition implies
that there is foreign importation. That
gives you revenue, and at the same time
encourages and builds up your own
home producers, your home manufac-
turers and your home labor. l am for
protecting the home labor so far as it
can be done legitimately. don't want
to see the laboring men of Indiana
working for the same price as the labor
ing men of Great Britain, France and
Germany command. Labor is higher
in this country than it is in those conn
tries. 1 expect to see it maintained, and
hope that it will be. And when it
comes in our power, and we can legiti-
mately protect and encourage our own
labor, I am in favor of doing it. But
don't want any body to go away and
say because 1 say this that 1 am in
favor of a prohibitory tariff protective
tariff, in the offensive sense in which
this is sometimes used. What / mean
to say is that we have got to have
tnr;fs NNn haua rrnt To hnua IL ,ulathor |