The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1880-10-05
,..anI,,. peIIaIre precii- Gene'al Gar
,d.id and tho Tarin.

Sneaker Randall was quoted Of belIa're
saturday night as having said in hisspeech
The night before at that place that General
Garfield had never said a word in Con-
oress in favor of protective tariff. 1t
soo,ns IA II there must be some mistake
ohout what Mr., Randall said or meant to
ny. Al least, fol bisown reputation, there
onobt 10 be some misunderstanding as to
his language or meaning Wehave never
heard that his memory was defective, and
vet It would seem as II IL must have failed
him utterly at Bellaire. Mr. Randall wss
a member OF Congress on the 4ih day oil
Jupe 1878, and as Speaker Of the House
his duty required him to be In the chair.
Where were his ears then, and whereas
his memory now, that he should not know
that on that day General Garfield deliver.
ed an elaborate speech on the tariff, and
against the bill brought in by Fernando
Wood. 1t is an interesting, able and in
structive speech, and opens with 81
quotation from James Madison to
show that protective tariff is constitu'
tiopal. After adducing several quotations
from Madisonin retulation Of the position
taken by Randolph Tucker, OF Virginia.
free trade member OF the Committee Of
Wavs and Mesns,--General Garfield said:
~ saw that more than q hundred pages
NJ Madison's works arc devoted 70 DIS
cnssipg and exploding what was, In 1873
this new notion OF Constitutional con
structiou. In one OF these papers heIcasls
n mind the fact that sixteen OF the men
WI n formed The Constitution sat In the
frst Congress and helped TO form tariff
ey1r,ssIy for Tie protection Of domeStic indus
trIsa: and Il u fair 10 presume that ut'se men
und.rsiOod he meaning Of The Contribution"
How does this quotation tally with Mr..
Randalls alleged remark at Bellaire?
Does II not sound like an expression in
favor Of protective tariff
Continuing his comments on the ques'
ton OF Constitutional construction, Gen.
Garfield remarked further:
onr fathers had been disciplined in the
saoe.eschool OF experience during the long
neriod OF colonial dependence. The heavy
hand OF British repression was laid upon
alItheir ATTEMPTS TO become q sell'support-
Inc people. Thenavigation laws and com
metcial regulations Of the mother Country
we're based upon the theory that the colo:
MES we're founded for the sole purpose OF
raising mn customers for her trade. They
were allowed TO purchase in British mar
kets alone any manufactured article when
England had 10 sell. In short, they were
compelled to trade with England on her
own terms; and whether buying or sell
ING. the product must be CARED In British
bottoms at the carriers own price. In az
diiion to this, revenue tax oil o per cent;
was imposed on all colonial exports ana
imports.
yitudeof furnishing, by the simplest forms
raw materials for the mother country,
who srrOgated 10 herself the sole right 10
supply her colonies with The finished pro-
duct. To our fathers, independence was
emancipation from this servitude., Ihey
knew that civilization advanced from
the hunting to the pastoral STATE, ron
the pastoral to the agricultural, whlch
gentleman from Virginia, (Mr. Tuckerl.
But they also knew that no merely agrl-
cnltnTai people had ever been able to rise
N a hivh civilization and TO seli.support-
ing Independence. They determined,
therefore, TO make their emancipation
complete by adding TO agriculture the me-
Q, chanic arts, which in their turn would carry
agriculture and all other industries TO
etill higher development and place our
people in the front rank OF civilized ana
self.supporting nations. This idea In
spired the legislation Of all the earlier Con-
crosses. It found expression in the htst
tariff Pct Of 1880; in the higher rates OF the
act of 1890; and In the still larger schedule
and increased rates OF the acts OF 1877 and
1900.
1t strikes US that there Is good deal oil
"protectiye" sentiment in the foregoing
remarks. What logic or point have they
outside OF the idea OF protectionH We
think that Mr.. Randall would have selt
himself very much embarrassed and non.
plussed had they been read in his pres
ence at Bellaire.
Further along in the same speech from
which We are quoting We find that Cen
eral Garfield arrays himself all the time
on the side OF protection. He did not
then, does not now, and we dare say never
will, advocate what is known as a prohib-
itory tariff. What be advocated then, and
what his candidacy represents now, 10 a
tariff that will yield iudicious amount Of
revenue to The Government and at the
same time protect American industry.
Upon that point we quote him as follows:
/ freely admit that revenue Is the
primary object OF taxation. That object is
attained by existing law. But 1t is an in
cidenlal aud vitality important object OF the
law to keep In healthy growth those in
dustiies which are necessary to the well
being OF the whole country. II gentlemen
can show me that this To-, as they allege,
class legislation which benefits the few at
the expense OF the many, will abandon
1t and Join them in opposing 1t. This is
the Legislature Of the Nation; and itshould
make laws which will bless the whole
Nation. do not affirm that all the pro
visions oil the existing tariff law are wise
and just In many respects they are
badly adjusted aud need amendment.
But l insist that in their main features
they are national, not partial; that they
promote the general welfare, and not the
welfare OF the few at the expense oil the
many.
which, under the provisions Of the exist,
ing law, are enabled to maintain them
selves in the shaIpstruggle Of competition
whh other countries, / will name them
in Ave groups. In the first l place the
textile fabrics, manufactures OF cotton,
wool, fax, hemp, jute and silk. From
these We received during the last fiscal
wear f5O 100000, which Is more than one
third OF all our customs revenue.
Il Is said that tax should not be levied
upon the clothing OF the people. This
,rnnlh hn n valid nhinniinn MeIh Il not for