New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1871-02-20
pUELyC COOD-PRIVATE GAIN

That there are heads incapable OF holding at
opco two ideas. il a melancholy truth but are
their unfortunate posscssors capable or IN
strncting mankind in Political Economy
For years. the opponents of Protection to
Home Industry have been yehemehtiy assert
ing that our present Tariff secures inordinate
profits to the makers of Iron and Wares, Fab
RIGS and Implements, in this country.
To which we respond primarily " II such DE
1.-The fact, those industries are as free to you
Gas to any, If there be 50 per tun proht on
"smeling Iron, why under the sun dont you
"smelt il? What hindersP You have capital;
"yon own millions of acres of Ore, Coal, and
| Cline: why not smelt them into Pig Iron
GAS the Yankee inquired respecting Niagara
1" What, = TO henderpn Can any one conjure
M n reason why our ree-Tradcrs don't make
Iron, Cloth, and Wares, if there be more proht
in these pursuits than in Othersf
Here, for example, are Messrs. Z. vanderbilt
and A. Il. Stewart-men OF vast business ca
pacity and ample wealth Let either of them
say. 81 want to embark in onmaking: /
will put ia S1O,OOO,OOO, and solicit subscrp-
" tons of s5OOOO,OOO from others, so that the
"work may be done on the largest scale and
"with the greatest possible economy" VINO
does not know that the sum would be eagerly
put up, on the'strength of the public confidence
in the prOpOsers sagacity and abllityT
WIN they choose to invest their means In
other undertakings is none OF our business
but every one knows that we speak truth when
we say that they so invest their money because
they believe it will pay them better than IRON
making And they know.
Now we want TO induce men to make lron'
Cloth, and Wares,'in this country, to the extent
of the home demand for them. To this end,
we stand by Protection, as afording induce
ments to such investment which would not
exist under Free Trade
-"Then your object is to enrich those who
embark in these pursuits ~
No, Sir not at all Our object is totally
different-to develop all the resources and
capacities of our cOuntry-to diversity employ
mcnts and call forth abilities and energies
which would otherwise lie dormant. We desire
more skill more invention, more production.
But, though others may expect Messrs YAM
derbilt Stewart, and their class, to invest Mil
lions in Iron making with no hope OF profit,
but under the influence of patriotic impulses
solely, we are not sure that such motives would
prove controlling. Hence, we endeayor to rem
der it probable that they could make money by
such investment. That is no part of our object
it may very reasonably and properly be theirs.
We insist, therefore, that Washington, Ham
iltOn, Jefferson Madison, and their cOmpeers,
who laid the foundations of our Protective
policy, were impelcd by the highest and purest
motives They sought "the greatest good of
the greatest number" and they believed the
way to that end lay through Protection. That
they were emphatically right, we have not a
shadow of doubt others think differently, and
have a perfect right to their opinion. But
he who charges that it was their intention to
enrich by Protection the few at the expense of
the many, is a wanton libeler He cannot
know that their purpose was thus sOrdid and
despicable, and all who revere their memory
know that it was not-could not have been.
You might as well charge that Washington
hung Andre under the influence of jealousy
and envy of the Majors military fame.