Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1882-02-03
THE TARIFF COMMISSION.
Device to Secure Delay-Attack
the Tariff In Detail All Labor
Should be Protected alike.
NetU York Times (Rep.).

Mr.. Beck Is entirely justified in calling
the plan for commission q device of the
monopOlsts to secure delay, and to prevent
legislation at the present session Of Con-
gress. 1t is not that solely, for neither Mr.
Morrill, on the Republican side nor Mr.. Bay
ard on the Democratic side can fairly be &C
cused OF supporting the measure from anV
such motives. But the fact remains that the
commission scheme would produce delay,
and would prevent action for at least two
years, and is, therefore, inadmissible. Mr.
Bayard appears to have been BETRAYED into
his mistaken course by the notion that the
only choice lies between a revision by a
commission and revision by a general bill.
This is not the case There is still open a
third course, which is to attack the absurdi-
ties of the tariff in detail, or In accordance
with some simple principle, in separate bills,
which stand some chance of being forced
through in spite of the mouopolists' control
OF the Ways and Means Committee of the
House. The reduction of the duty on cotton
machinery, the repeal of the tax on cotton
ties, the reduction of the duty on steel
rails, on all agricultural implements,
on machinery generally, on the coarser
forms of woolen and cotton goods, on all
woods, with abolition of the duty on woods
not raised here, the reduction of the duty
on the cheaper kinds of silk and on drugs
and chemicals-these are measures for
which strong support could be had in both
branches OF Congress. They might not suc-
ceed. Probably not more than two or three
of them would succeed, if any, but they
would be less solidlY opposed than a gen
eral revision, which would unite the inter-
ests affected by each reduction in common
opposition to all. Some of the bills might
be carried by general consent as a necessary
concession to a growing sentiment in the
community.
In any case, we should get some adequate
discussion in Congress, and that would be a
point gained of considerable importance;
and what is aleo worthy of attention, we
should have practical and definite discus
sion. We should not be confined to that
very general, vague and deceptive style of
argument of which the advocates of high
duties are so fond. The question of tariff
reform, as we have pointed out very often,
is not question of theory. Concede every
thing that the protectionists advance In
the way of theory, and the actual tariff
is monstrous. Grant that infant indus
tries require moderate protection, man
ufacturers which have been in prosperous
existence q whole generation are no longer
infants, and an average duty of 43 per cent
is not moderate but eXorbitant protection.
Grant that American labor should not be
paid as low as English labor, duty which
covers the difference in the cost of labor
could not be more than one-third that now
imposed on most articles. Grant that
industries which have been built up by
protection should not have that support
wholly and suddenly withdrawn, that is no
reason why they should not be gradually
left TO take care of themselves. But apart
from all these, protection to American labor
should protect all labor alike, and the pres
ent tariff, which actually prohibits many
kinds OF labor, and taxes many other kinds
to protect the more favored, is in no just
sense protective, but oppressive. Guided
by such facts as these, it is quite practica-
bic for Congress to act on specific measures
in way which public opinion will support,
and It is much better to make the attempt
than it is to embark on any such prefer
tious and unpromising enterprise as revision
by commission.