The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1872-04-30
The Tariff Question.


80 anc, seemed to appreciate the fact that
bic e,ooncncc was worse than wasted Inc
Gentlemen appealed TO may not have hkea
Tho Dcmocratic party, but they loathcd that
n which Mr.. PorHAM belonged. The Stdfe
Journal. In trying to interest our people
upon the subject of a tariff, initiates Mr.. TOT
HAM, and forgets that whatever may oe 'nol
opinion rs to the desirableness of protectioh 70
domestic industry, the people OF virginia eau,
not for a moment weigh that question against
tho evils that would follow Republican ascch-
dancy. TusoDoRE T1LToS says the 1kAN1
men. who talk so much about "tre'son'
urehe,,ion." &C., are like the dog that banks
at \ hole long after the game that went int"
il is cone. The State Journal. on the con-
trary- is barking too soon. 1t is not yet.time
:, ask yircinians to consider the tariff qleS-
ton seriously. They are all, we take it, like
ourselves. We would vote for HORACE
GREELEY, The most distinguished pro-
tectionist in the country, or for CARL
ScurRz or any other enemy Of protection,
rather than for GRANT. Such unimportant
questions scarcely enter into our thoughts.
How TO put down carpet-bagscrs, sc:'lawaSs,
and the enemies Of the peace OF the State
those who keep the poor negroes banded
together against the white>-is m object so
desirable, so necessary to our material pros
perity. that we cannot be induced to endca-
yor to attain minor ones. Neither free trade
nor protection would avail to save It's from
ruin if we were to turn over our State TO
the tender merccs of such plunderers us
have brought South Carolina, Texas, AT
kansas, Mississippi, and Louisiana, to
their present condition. Fill our streets
with negro policemen, and business
would fec the city. We do not consider
the editor of the Journal as one of
these bad men; yet he ought to know, if he
does not, that too many of his party asSocl-
ates are men utterly devoid Of principle,
whilst the rank and file, the negroes. who
constitute nine-tenths Of his party, are too
ignorant and prejudiced to makeit worth any
mans while to address an argument to them.
The Journals arguments, therefore, arc adj
dressed to the Conservatives; and If there Is
ANYTHING which the editor of that paper Tin
derstands, it is. in his opinion. the taris.
Being, rs we have explained, in Il frame OF
mind which enables us to judge imrartially
any argument that may he adduccd for or
against tariff for protection, we propose to
ask the Journal for IL little information on
the subject.
The Journal knows that truths are truths |
everywhere. 1t is as true in England As ii
is here Tor in Mr.. HALE's book that "ten |
times one is ten," and that the square of the
hypothcnuse is equal to the sum of the
squares of the other two sides of right
anglcd triangle. There are as many right
angles in circle in France us in the United |
States. We change our ekicS not our aXiomS,
by crossing the Atlantic. We wish the
Journal to tell us why the politco-economi-
cal doctrines which it teaches are not |
sound everywhere. 1t believes in the
protection of domestic industry. 1t holds
that our mechanics ought to he pre-
tected. But how fur does our domestic |
industry extend, and who are our mechanics
Is the Journal willing to protect southern
mechanics from competition with the "arl-
per labor" of the North: Would it de- |
nounce our Legislature if that body were to |
pass sample-mcchanic law, or Il law to levy |
tariff or tax upon wooden buckets, |
brooms, bedsteads, cloths, and what not, |
made at the North and brought hither? I'll
not, why not! Does the Constitution for
bid! If SO, does the Constitution do lis Il
wrong in this respect? In the absence Of d
constitutional prohibition, would the Jour-
nal advocate tax upon the products Of
northern industry? Or is the territory of
the United States SO exactly "sized" that a
protective tariff is suited to just that much
territory and no more? If Canada were an
neXed, would the people of the United States
lose because they could no longer levy tariff
upon Canadian productions LIST protective
tariff wise measure for France, Great Britain,
Russia, Prussia, Spain, and Italy, or for only
some Of those countries? Does one protec-
tive tariff benefit England in keeping our
productions out of that country, at the same
time that another protective tariff benefits us
by keeping the productions of England out
of this country! If the United States were
on, In twain could each half benefit itself by
Lowing a tariff for protection? If not,
wbx not, Many other similar questions
win suggest th.N mselreS to the Journal.
They all have 70" their end the as
certaining over how great territory pro-
tective tariff would operate beneheially.
Some philosophers think that the processes
Of dissolution and indignation will go on
until all the world shall be ruled by one Gov
eminent What, then, will become OF pro-
tective tariffs
Then there is that Tough question raised
by Beast BUTLER and repeated by WENDELL
PHILLIPS: II we protect the manufactures
shall we protect the manufacturer! small we
levy a high tariff upon the "pa1'pef i'Dor
of Europe, and none upon the " .pauper Ill
borers" of Europe who may CONF 10 TINS
country to underworld our mechanics! lhe
Journal processes to he the poor maus Il leho.
Is it desirable to tax his competitors VINO NIL
CRATE hither from abroad? Would that ia
per agree to gee the Tredegar hands turned ,
out Of employment by thousand hands as
good brought from the old country?
When the Journal shall have answered
these questions, we shall understand upon
what sort Of foundations rest those theories
of protection which it is so fond of airing.
IT