New-York tribune., 1872-01-29
TARIFF REVISION.
ADDRESS BY HORACE GREELEY


AT meeting of the New York Liberal Club, Friday
evening, at their rooms in the Plympton Buildings,
Tor the discussion of questions of Political Economy
Horace Greeley made the following address:
should say, Mr.. Chairman. Ladies and Gentle
men. with reference to the remark of our President.
That we are collecting the materials now gathering
together the elements ont Of which science of po-
litical economy will yet be constructed. appre-
hend that what has been done 80 far is nothing more
than this collection of materials; by and by per-
haps, we may proceed to erect the structure What
have to say tonight will be a very humble contri-
button toward the elements Of economic science.
Ladies and gentlemen, the only legitimate OBJ
ject of discussion is the ascertainment and general
recognition Of truth. Let us see, then, if we may
what there is in this question of tariff which we may
bring perhaps, somewhat within the reach of scen-
tfc investigations; and to begin with must define
the actual question by exclusion, by negation,
better reasoners doubtless have done before me. /
assert, then as foundation that the question of
having or not having tariff Is not practically in
dispute before the people OF this country that,
whatever question there may be, that question is
not practically in issue. Why do say sol This gov
eminent of ours is now between eighty and ninety
years old. Forty-two different Congresses have in
turn considered the elements Of national wealth, and
the whereby that wealth might be ncreased,or or
its accumulation promoted. Forty-two Congresses
have acted or declined to act the subject OF ras-
ing revenue by tariff or otherwise and no Federal
Congress since the first one has ever seriously
doubted the expediency propriety Of raising rev.
enue by tariff That is not half the strength of my
position. In no Congress has any man risen and
said seriously: Il propose we throw open
our ports, abolish tariffs, support and
maintain our Government by other instru-
mentalities-from the fruits of other taxes than
those on imports" Am wrong in assuming that
that is not question:; that, far as this American
people are concerned, it has never been seriously
proposed to them by any party or section, or even
cump Of individuals that there should be no longer
tariff or system of imposts goods imported into
the cOuntryi l might go still further. believe
there is nation which we should call civilized
that does not have custom-hOuses at its ports and
impose duties large or small. more or less, upon
merchandise brought sent from other NATIONS
to be sold and consumed by its people There is
not merely an agreement of our own people
throughout all our past national history to raise
the most. ard for a greater portion Of tho
time the whole of the revenue that sustains our
Federal Government and pays its debts by means of
duties on imports but every other civilized nation
think, with no exceptioD-does exactly the same
thing. think, then, the question, for any one VINO
chooses to raise the question: Of the propety OF ex
pediency Of imposing duties on products entering
the ports of country is not practical ODe It II
not one whereon there is any such division as to
render its discussion at all desirable or indeed pos
sible.
I take the next question in order. Never in any
time in our national history has 1t been even sei-
ously proposed to raise whatever we do raise
by duties on imports by uniform absolutely nor
izontal tariff Our fathers began in 1889 or 1870 with
a tariff wherein there various rates OF duties
imposed on various artices-capIicOus If please
to say so-but always with general consent
tha. there should bc higher duties imposed on this
article lower on that and none at all on another tor
GOOD and sufficient reasons; and from that day to
this there has Ebeen exception to that rule.
Even Mr. Calhoun only demanded that there
should be maximum; that, after DIS
policy had taken, effect there shouid ue
no duty higher than 20 per cent but he did
NOT exclude the idea of having lower duties and no
duties ON certain articles. Mr. Robert j. Walkers
tariff of 1896 called, suppose by comparison, free-
trade tariff the being avOwedly Free Trader, had
not only no duties at all on large list OF articles
but duties ranging from 10 per cent. at lowest up 10
100 per cent and at no time have there
enough in Congress to call the Yeas and Naysn eter
House. who have even proposed that there
should be one uniform, absolute, equal rate OF
duty on everything imported into the country. Ihe
first Congress- az you, doubtless are aware, declared
that the tariff was imposed for three Objects L. TO
support the Government. III. To pay the Debt. Ill
lso they said To protect Domestic Manufactures
Those purposes were avOwed. Whatever party
preyailed-Federal, Republican, Wing, Democratic
no party and no considerable section or segment OF
party has proposed either to raise revenue sufcient
for the Government without tamil, Or raising l6
with tariff to impose one uniform, absolute equal
rate on everything imported.
THE FREE-TRADERs' MEMORIAL
have before me the petition of taxpayers for
tariff reform. which / presume was issued from
the Free Trade League in this city, It declares IL is
absolutely hostile to everything like Protection 1t
SAWS that any tariff called Protective. by enhancing
the cost of living places us at q disadvantage IN
connetitou with other lands that the laborer bnds
the cost of living more than his wages, and 1t closes
in this way: And they especially pray thai the de-
termination of Congress TO abolish duties known to
be for Protection so called, and not for revenue,
NAV be shown by immediate repeal of the dntles on
Salt. Coal and Pig Iron." Repeal" you see not re-
ducton not graduation to a revenue standard; Dub
that these several articles shall be actually freed
from duty, as o proof as an earnest OF devotion 10
Free e'principles.
Now, ladies and gentlemen, il IS not at al neces-
sary that should argue before body Ike tins that
freeing certain articles from duty involves the ne
cessity of imposing higher duties on others Before
an assemblage so intelligent as this that pont proves
itself by being simply stated. If certain articles,
especially Pig Iron and such staple articles are to DO
freed from duty other articles must be subjected 10
n higher average rate, in order to raise the
| amount of revenue which you propose 10
collect by tariff. Now, will any one be