New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1876-07-09
RUINOUH TARIFF.

swallowing The whole batch Of resolutions
adopted at 81. Louis, have taken in some
very homogeneous materials. There d
one which we should suppose will not
agree with the popular stomach of Louis
lana. The meeting indorses the Demo
cratic s'denunciation of an odious pro.
tective tariff imperiling many industries
to subsidize few"
Here is proportion upon which both
the opinions and the interests Of the OPP
position are bound to disagree: can
odious protection tariff" Is, then, that
protective duty on foreign iron which the
Democratic Mr.. Randall advocates
"odious" to the Democracy of Louisiana?
Is the duty on foreign sugars and rice,
which the Democratic Representatives of
Louisiana are now striving to preserve
against free trade, ''odious?" We are
compelled to say that the Democracy who
have had control of the tariff for the past
six months, and who are about to ad-
iourn without having as yet touched one
of its protective features, are little dila-
tory in proceeding against this odious in
stitution. Thus fan their only step in
this direction has been to admit Hawaiian
sugar and rice duty free by majority of
Democratic votes on the bill for that pur-
pose.
The newspapers have been censured for
not calling public attention to the Hawai-
ian treaty in time. We shall in this case,
as in that, sound the alarm promptly. It
will become the interest of the Kenners,
Johnsons and Bringiers, who plant pro-
tected sugar and rice, the factors and
bankers who furnish the means of pro-
duction, the Socolas, Thomsons, Tai
mage and others, who conduct the manu-
facture of these staples, to demand some
explanation Of Democratic intentions.
The nominees for Congress in the sugar
and rice parishes are to be chosen. Let it
be known whether the protection of sugar
and rice is ''odious" to these candidates.
We have said that there is radical diff
ference between the free trader and the
protectionist We may assume the Demo-
Graf as champion of free trade. The
Bulletin certainly is friend Of protection.
We read few days since one of the most
ingenious arguments in favor of protec-
ton in the latter journal. In an edi-
torial essay to show the value of protect
ing domestic enterprise BY prohibiting
the introduction of any competing article,
this proposition is laid down:
Every enterprise calculated to divert the
flow of money toward New Orleans is de-
serving of encouragement.
Then follows the further axiom:
With the influx of capital comes directly
An indirectly increased prosperity.
The industry to which the protective
system of excluding competition is ap-
piled is the Louisiana State Lottery. OF
this We are told that it has already ''suc-
ceeded in diverting from Havana and
other places abroad an outflow of money
of no uncomfortable proportions" IF
money will be spent in lotteries, as we
know it is spent, it is certainly both wise
and patriotic to keep it at home" 1t is
no 'less wise and patriotic to bring it to
community which has suffered more by
financial depression than any other city
in the Union" A little pardonable pride
"may therefore be felt in the brilliant sue
cess of the golden drawing SERIES
Suppose we apply this language to
protected sugar, silk or champagne.
People will use these articles. Large
sums Of money will be expended for their
introduction. A protective duty which
will exclude or heavily burden the foreign
article must employ our own industry
and keep at home the values which other
wise 90 abroad to enrich or delight the
rival industry of foreign people.
Now, however, we might differ in the
enterprises proper for protection, we must
concede that the protection afforded our
sugar, rice and cigars is essential to the
maintenance of these industries.
How, then, can either the Bulletin or
ourselves, though differing in the policy
of protecting this or that article, consent
that protection is ''odious." 1t will be
obviously impossible that the Democratic
and Conservative wings of the opposition
can harmonic in the destruction of the
protective principle. The declaration that
protection is "odious," that it burdens
many interests to promote few, would
annihilate rice, cigars and sugar, golden
syrup and golden drawings. There is an
antagonism between free trade and pro-
lection which can not be compromised in
any platform. We warn such of our
Democratic friends as have an interest in
articles protected by the tariff to be on
hand at the nominating convention and
demand from candidates to say whether
the protection on sugar, rice, cigars OF
tobacco is "odious," and should be re-
pealed.
NOT MUCH OF A PURITAN.
General Alcibiades De Blanc is some.
what mistaken in his American records.
He says in an Grafton at Iberia:
Conspicuous among the signers Of the
declaratiOn Of in,}ependonCe were the two