Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1882-01-19
TENDENCY orrnE rARIrF pEn.rr.

The subject Of the tariff Is being dis
eussed with far more breadth and COM
prehensiveness than ever before I'm this
country, although il has occupied the
attention and enlisted the talents of
the first statesmen In every period ofour
history.
The two great parties now occupying
the field are determined TO make rec
ord on the subject and take q definite
position. The tariff plank OF the plat.
forms are being Formulated for the cam.
paign OF 1854, and the leading men in
Congress are taking positions.
But the most curious phase OF the tar
III discussion Is the diversity of opinion
which exists among the leading men of
both parties. II may be more noticeable
among leading Democrats than Repub-
heans, but there are scarcely two prom
inent men ofeitherparty who are recog-
nized as being in entire harmony upon
this subject.
The diversity Of opinion shows how
complex the question of tariff and from
how many different standpoints plau-
sible argument can be framed.
For instance Senator GARLAND in
trOduced his revenue commission bill
with the novel groundwork of argu-
ment, that the constitution does not
contemplate laws for the protection OF
industry; that anything beyond the
mere collection of revenue is outside the
letter and intent of the constitution.
The difference between Senator's
BECK and BAYARD is founded chiefly
upon the methods proposed for revising
the tariff. Mr.. BAYARD favOrS Il COM
mission to investigate the subject and
report n bill for Encouragement of
duties. He holds that the paramount
purpose in tariff taxation should be to
provide for the expenses Of the govern
ment, and an incidental result Of this in
fostering our industry ought to be con-
sidered.
Mr.. BECK does not greatly differ from
this position, but he opposes the APP
pOintment of y commission, because q
commission appointed by Republican
President and a Republican Congress
would certainly report n bill ola one
sided, partisan character. He wants
Congress TO act on the matter at once
without waiting for commission.
1t must be conceded that Mr.. BECK
has made the strongest argument in ia
yor of his views of the tariff that has
vet been presented. He is strong in
any position he takes. He holds that
no one in this country wants free trade
that it is impossible so long as it is nee
eSsary to provide the larger portion of
the public revenue by taxing imports.
Nor does he want to deprive home in
dustries of the protection which fair
and proper revenue tariff affords; but he
holds that the tariff ought to be framed
for revenue and not protection, which
cOmpels farmers who furnish nine
tenths of the exports, to pay 45 per cent.
more for goods in the markets where
these exports are sold than the sellers Of
these goods ask.
The positions OF the two Indiana
statesmen, Senators Voorhees, and Me-
Donald, are at antipOdes, although they
are of the same party. That of Senator
Voorhees, was recently given wide pub
LEGATION in his Atlanta speech. Senator
Mcdonald has lately put himself on
record i'm this connection - follows:
''I4et me call your attention to the e.
fGCtS of the tariff upon the farmer and
producer as compared to the benetitsde-
rived from it by the manufacturer. Of
the SSS3, G0O,0OO of domestic merchan-
disc exported during the last fiscal year
eighty per cent. were products of the
soil and farm, the chief of which were
cotton, breadStutfS, provisions and to-
bacco and live stock. The prices for
this vast amount of farm and agricul-
tural products were fixed in Liverpool
and London. The price of wheat goes
up or down in the Board of
Trade at Chicago rs it fluctu-
ates in London or Liverpool, SO that the
foreign price determines the home price.
Our imports for the year npOn which
duty was paid, as you have seen, was
over SIG, 900, 900: of this amount ninety
per cent were of articles of manufac-
ture. The price of these were fixed i'll
Lowell and other manufacturing cen
tres in this country, and not at the port
at which they were shipped. There
might be difference Of anywhere from
thirty to one hundred per cent. in the
price there and here, the price might be
that much less in foreign market than
in this country, but the consumer could
have no benefit from that, for the tariff
would absorb it all. SO that while the
farmer and the producer had to sell to
the manufacturer theirproducts at for
eign prices, and they were compelled to
buy both foreign and domestic goods at
home prices enhanced by a protective
tariff the manufactures purchases ali
farm products at the lowest prices and
sells his manufactured articles at the
highest prices"
We give this summary of the differ
ent positions taken upon the subject by
some of the leading men, to show the
of the discussion upon the sub
ect that is fast becoming the leading