The true northerner. [volume] (Paw Paw, Mich.) 1855-1920, 1871-03-10

We give the following from valued cores
pondent: although we differ in some things
touching tho question under discussion, yet we
propose to give all, who may desire it, hear
ing: believing that the great body OF the peo-
nile will. after careful consideration OF this
matter, settle down upon that which, to them
appears to possess the most sourdness and
greatest good to the greatest number.
-. R-E.Nv7E gEFOgs.H."
Mr.. EDIroR:-In notice in the last number
of your paper the best attempt at definition
Of the measures proposed by those who call
themselves - somewhat obscurely Revenue
Reformers that have yet seen. 1t was con-
tanned in an article you reproduce from soma
unexplained source, and was glad to zee 1t,
for the first step III the settlement OF any
question is always the dissipation OF the ob-
securities and misapprehensions that are apt TO
gather round all subjects in any degree COM
plex. One statement III the article, however,
| cannot but think too sweeping-and that is.
that they favor ''constanr reduction Of taxa
ion" This policy would lead, ultimately, to
n final abolition OF taxes, and, as a consequence,
of a revenue I presume, however, that by
this is meant reduction Of taxation as rapid,
and to as great an extent as the necessities or
the Government will admit. The national
debt must be provided for and the Govern
men. must be supported. All agree to this
except repudiatlonsts, and all agree that this
involves taxation. Some believe 1t best 10
keep taxation up TO such point as VIII enable
IA to paw Off the national debt rapidly and thus
relieve the country Of the burden, and save
the vast sum we are all paying as interest,
while others think it preferable to pay the
principal more slowly and pay interest longer.
This point is, however, of minor Importance,
comparatively speaking, and the difference OF
opinion have Indicated would not Of itself
cause any great commotlon.
When we come, however, to details, find
some propositions which ] cannot reconcile
with each other, or facts. ! note:
1.-The Revenue Reformers propose tle
adoption OF policy aimed at the eDcouIaSe-
ment OF the utmost amount OF BUSINESS mat
can be done in The country. They Want
to sec duties raised, as Tar as possible, from
articles which are not produced IN this country,
for thereby the Government gets all that the
people lose through the enhanced price; while
in regard TO articles the like OF which are pro-
duced here, the usual effect Of high DUTY ls
to let the home manufactures promo by the ln-
erea. ed expense to the people
They would shift the genera, burden of taxa
ton from articles OF necessity and utility to
articles Of luxury like tobacco and spirits.
Protection" "a it is called, is "a policy
aimed at the announcement o. the utmost
amount of business that can be done in the
country" Levying duties who ly and princi- !
pally upon articles such az are not produced I'D
this country, is Free Trade, pure and simple |
that the two are compatible with each other,
requires more proof than | have as yet seen
adduced The effect Of such y policy upon all
Sorts of business except importing would GER
tany be anything but encouraging. The
only argument in favor OF such policy ID !
partially embodied in the second OF the fore
gong extracts, and is founded upon faiia-
oious assumption, namely that the price OF
duty-paylng a tcle is increased in our markets,
by Just the amount Of duty. When the article
is wholly Of foreign production this is prac-
tically true but when 1t Is produced here it Is
very far from the truth. Competition among
cur own producers will Ultimately, and under
q steady protective policy, very soon, bring
prices at as low point as manufacturers can
afford thus compelling The foreign producer
who seeks to take advantage Of our market, to
receive our prices, and take the duty out OF
them. Under Free Trade policy, however,
'oreign capitalists and manufa cturers can read
.ly combine, and have done 30 In past years to
crush one less wealthy and powerful manufac-
turers, and then put up prices to suit their
own views. Tic effect OF q protective duty
to give our home manufactures an advantage
,the home market and IL should never be
qpied except where our natural facilities are
good as those abroad. To admit all foreign
'oducts free Of duty, save articles which are
1t made here ut all. would be substantially, to
sld all our raw material abroad to be worked
! aud to reduce US to the position Of mere
'iucers OF raw material Michigan wool
I'D go to England and France (where wool
Tow cheaper than here) TO be made into
otbing and returned here to c!othe us. To
upport the operatives who manufactured it we
should have to send wheat, and we should
! we to compete in foreign markets with wool
ON Russia, South America, Australia and
frica, and with wheat from Hungary and
.assia. These two products would be what VIC
a Nichil, IN would have mostly to rely upon
and we should have to sell them as cheap Is
our foreign rivals can produce them, with the
added disadvantage Of sending them nearly
four thousand miles and bringing the goods
back in return for hem, all at our own ex-
pense. ] believe that bushel Of wheat or a
pound OF wool would bring US better returns
under the present system toan they would an
der one that would close nearly all the facto-
r,es and workshops IN the country. and thus
,stroy our homo market, not only for raw
.serials, but for many Of the products Of our
ms and mines that will not bear Transports
10 datsnt markets.
u, coffee, spic,s tropical products, etc.,
NAV rateriAls needed for manufacturing
d q, bat not produced here, would be
taxed, while the prsdsots Of such man
an would b> free Of duty. The only {