The evening light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1881-1883, 1882-09-27
FINLAY ON TARIFF.

Geo. p Finlay has made nice mess OF the
tariff question.
In order to secure the favor of the border
counties in the nominating convention, MI.
Finlay gave it out that he was in favor OF pro-
t lotion and differed from his party upon this
question. So wide was his difference with his
party on this question that the Galveston News
bemoaned the fact that the democratic party
had surrendered its position upon the tariff
question in the nomination Of Finlay. But
Mr.. F. feeling himself secure in the saddle
now comes out in his opening speech at Gal
weston and kicks the ladder by which he
climbed to fall from under him and declares
himself in perfect harmony with the national
and state platforms of the democratic party on
the tariff question, which, if true, places him
in antagonism with the interests requiring pro-
lection in his district.
We quote from this portion Of Finlays
speech as given in the News:
"Unfortunately for me, have had papers
in places favorable to me to give expression to
my views on the tariff"
1t was not discovered by Mr.. Finlay until he
secured the nomination.
81 claim to stand on the platform of the
democratic party-state and national-oa this
question, side by side with its greatest states
men,"
He would have the people believe he is a
statesman too, because he stands on the dem
ocratic platform. Then he goes on to say:
81 do not believe protection per Sc warrant
ed by the constitution. Protection for protec-
tons sake consider an abomination.'
Well, what in the world is protection but
for projections sake especially in this district.
The duty could be relieved from wool and
sugar, and still the tariff would be within the
bounds of "for-revenue-only.
Free trade, if possible now, would, in order
to raise the $3o, 1000, 900 annually needed for
the support of the government, in addition to
the tax necessary for the state, raise the
amount of direct taxation to $3.50 on the
S1oo, which would amount to nothing more
than legal plundering.
But, according to your democratic logic the
people would be able to purchase goods from
foreign manufacturers so much cheaper than
they do now that they could afford to pay that
tax. Your argument is good for nothing Mr..
Finlay, it contradicts itself. He continues:
''No tariff can be levied without protection,
as it is al incident to every dollar of duties
levied.".
But there can be no protection without a
tariff and the more tariff the more protection,
and the less tariff the less protection. Your
party is for tree trade or they are compelled
to take the republican view of the matter, judi
cious protection Of American industries, ad-
iusted to produce the revenue needed for the
government. He goes on to make this
statement:
"All articles Of prime necessity should be
admitted free, as the constitution says taxes
should be levied for the payment of debt and
the general welfare of the people, &
And then takes exactly the opposite. posi-
ZION as follows:
"The articles 10 the south which are pre-
tected are wool, sugar and rice. l am in favor
of protecting the manufacturer from cheap
labor of foreign lands. Sugar is raised in four
counties in this district not one of which is
democratic. am in favor of protecting sugar,
because by so doing it is protecting the labor
of this country. If you should take off the
duty on sugar, every sugar house in Louisiana
and Texas would fall into decay, and there
would not even be a stick ofcane raised for
your children"
Now, the man don't know what he is talk
ing about or he takes the voters of the 9TH
district to be pack Of idiots.
He asserts: 81 have never said that was
an advocate of protection. In special tele-
gram from Laredo was made to say l was
now in favor, etc., when said was not in
favor Of protective tariff"
Now, we have heard of dodgers but Finlay
not only lodges but Aops from side to side
with recklessness that would argue that the
man is positively crazy.
This won't do; Mr.. Finlay, you have
juggled yourself into the nomination, but you
can't juggle yourself upon both sides of the
tariff question.