New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1880-08-31
GENERlL BETLER on THE TARIFF


General Butler, in his reference TO the tariff
question: is guilty of paltry pettifogging winch
will not help him or the party into which he
now rclapses. He kno rs full well the differ
ence between a tariff for revenue AMI talIii
framed 10 protect home Industries. NO man
knows better than General Butler that distlnc-
ton no man has taken more plins to apply
if in its bearing upon industries in which he
had personal interest; and no man Is more
widely understood to have been specially
benefited by the legislation which he
now pretends not to understand, and
tries to bcfog people about. BY way
of illustration, the llttle nickel business may
be taken. III 1869 at a duty Of only ID per
cent. imports of this article paid a duty Of
$2O,I49. That was a duty for revenue. Some
persons, who may not be wholly unknown to
General Batter, having discovered valuable
deposits which they hoped TO develop, the
duty was raised in 1871 to 80 per cent, and
in 1872 the revenue from imports OF this ar
tcle fell to $1Sl2. The precise object as
General Butler well knows, was to get less
revenue by preventing impOrtatlOns. so
thoroughly was that object attained
that in 1878 the entire revenue from
imports OF nickel fell to $7G7.
Here over $10O Of revenue WIS deliber-
ately sacrificed, and General Butler, with
every other intelligent man IN the country,
knows that it was done for the purpose Of
building up an Industry in this land which.
il was believed, would gain incidentally more
by that process than the Government Or the
people would lose ID revenue sacrificed.
Duties of this character become protective
only because they check or restrain foreign
competition. But this can be done only by
some sacrifice of revenue. When Democrat
insists upon a tariff for revenue, Therefore,
every intelligent voter knows that there is
meant tariff which shall not discriminate
with the object of building up any home in
dustry The Democratic notion Of tariff may
be learned from the one adopted by that
party when il was last in power, and kept in
force from 1916 until 1861 with little
change. 1t was Il level or horizontal tariff,
treating all sorts Of goods alike, whether i'm
portation worked harm to our own industries
or not--a duty of 81 per cent " for reve-
"nue only" whether the goods imported
were brought hither to underseIl the products
of some home manufacture, or were OF kind
not produced in this country. That was the
Democratic notion Of proper tariff, and for
that sort of tariff they now declare again, as
usual, in the demand. "a tariff for revenue"
Argument there may be as to the wisdom
of such tariff, but General Butler knows
that he cannot urge its wisdom without attack
inc his own Congressional record and conduct
for years. The fact that he cannot argue on
the Democratic side without Inconsistency
gives him no right to try to befog or deceive
people about it. The open Free-Trader. who
knows what he wants and is not ashamed to
ask for it, can be respected. But there is
little room to respect man who pretends
after sitting in Congress many years and
voting upon tariff bills that he does not
know the difference between tariff for reve-
nue. and the tariff which we now have.
Whether the people want tariff for revenue,
in the Democratic sense, they will decide
by their votes. One thing is certain we should
have "a change" with vengeance
if Democratic politicians could have the max
ing of our tariffs for year or two. 1t would
be q change, too, which there is probably not
a single intelligent advocate Of either opinion
as to that subject who would desire or ap-
prove For this is plainly not the time to up
have started into new life and prosperity.
For a long time the condition of the currency
had kept our industries in trouble, until re-
sumption was effected. Now we begin to realize
glorious prosperity, and in great part
because the tariff has been so framed as to
prevent an undue increase of imports until
our home industries can get on their feet
again. and adjust themselves to the new con-
ditiOns. Whatever they may think of it at
other times, even sensible Free Traders know,
and many of them say, that at this time the
tariff is doing great good. To tear it up now
when it meets the especial needs of the time,
and is working so grandly for our home in
dustrics, would be piece of folly which no
other party save the Democratic ever would
have proposed.
Mr.. Simon Greenspan, subscriber of The