The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1882-01-13
LEGAL Subsidies and the Protective Prin.
elple.


WHEELING, W. VA, JANUARY Is. 1852.
LosaI subsidies and The Protective Prin.
baltimore sun.
The Wheeling 1STELLIOEScER Is taking
Baltimore 10 task for advocating measures
calculated to encourage industries among
US Its fear In that such measures will OPP
crate against Cumberland, Wheeling and
other localities, and tgntlitously assumes
that the SuH is iree.trlicr, and therefore
Is nat consistent when the question oil pro-
noting manufacturing industries COMES
Home TO Il us local matter. What the
Sun has urged is nothing more than is be-
ing done In every active and iar-seeing
business community. u Wheeling adopts
similar course we will take pleasure In
recording hef public spirit and congratula-
ting her on her success. II Cumberland,
4, with all the advantages that the coal fields
give her, can offer 10 manufacturers in
ducoments superior 10 what can be offered
by Baltimore, We hope she will do so, and
shall take just pride in her prosperity,
We arc not pr0teCtioniSls in any Just sense
when at our own cost, and without appeal
ing TO external aid, we seek TO remove OBJ.
Btacles 10 the establishment OF Industries
Z in Baltimore, aud arc willing TO tax our
selves, II need be, TO that end, well know
ing that II we remit taxes in one way we
greatly enlarge the basis Of taxation in an
other. In point OF fact, in 80 doing We are
simply putting out our money at compound
interest
The Sun usually gives, we think, lat least
we hope SOL fairor statementot the posi-
ton Of critics or opponents than is con-
tanned in the above comments on recent
editorial in the INrELLloEScRR in regard to
the matter Of local protection 10 manuiac-
lures. In the first place we did not "take
Baltimore to task" On the contrary we
commended her example. 1t was the Sun
We took to task, as far as We took any body,
forthe seeming inconsistency OF its position.
That paper says that wo gratnitously u.s.
sumo it to be in favor Of free trade. II the
Sun will refer to our article it will observe
that we were quite guarded on this point.
Werather referred to it as being opposed
to what is known as protection as a policy
for the country. We do not understand
the Sun to deny this. We have published
It's reply in full and we find no denial in it.
We therefore ask that paper now whether
We have misrepresented its general posi-
ton. The Sun can say yes or no on this
point,
The Sun says it is not protectionist at
the expense OF other people when il pro-
poses to subsidize manufacturers in BALI.
more. Well, suppose we admit this. Is
not this same reply made by the protec-
tionists Of the country at large? Do they
admit that they are protected at the ex-
pense OF the country at large? Not by a
good deal They use the Baltimore argu-
ment, They claim that protection for
manufactures is protection for all-protec-
ton for the farmer as well as the manuiac.
turer. They claim to protect the capital
and labor Of the Countrywide labor OF all,
both those directly engaged in the shops
and factories Of the country and the la
borcrs who till the soil. They claim, in
other words, that the benefits Of protection
find their level like water, distributing
themselves throughout the country.
We suspect that the suns position on
this whole subject is at least somewhat
illustrated by the position of tho Hon. sam
Randall, NJ. G., as we find it set forth in
recent issue Of the Richmond Dispatch.
For the benefit OF the Sun We will quote it
US follows:
Mn. RANDALL OK THE TAMFF.-I met Mr..
Randall yesterday. | spoke to him freely
and frankly Of the tariff. He will favor re-
vision, no matter what the Pennsylvanians
may think abo 1t. 81 am free-trader
per se, said Mr.. Randall, "but we must
deal with the tariff question as one OF prac-
teal statesmanship. h-NsW York Letter in
0yaaha Herald.
Sensible and practical. Most irce-tra.
ders are OF the same sort Those from
Louisiana are practical enough to vote for
taritf on sugar; those from South Caro-
lima for tariff on rice; those from Vir-
ginia for tariff on tobacco, sumac, pea
nuts and possibly iron; those from other
States for u tariff on whatever their con-
stituents desire TO have protected. Yes,
there are great many free-traders in
theory who are sensible enough to be pro-
tectionists in practiOe.-RiehmOnd Dispatch.
This is pungent and pointed comment
on Mr.. Sam Randall, whether it hits the
Sun Or not, We might all afford to be
free traders per Sc, ii there was nothing for
US in protection Us parts and parcels OF the
country, or, in other words, as local partic-
ipants in the general benefits OF protection.
Noone otus, however, can expect to havean
exception made ofourspecialities. We must
combine them all under general average
policy OF protection. In this way we make
a market for all the labor OF the country,
and for all the products Of the country.
Sometimes some particular interest gets
more than its share, but this does not affect
thegenenl principle Of protection, but only
the proper application Of it. The INrELLI.
GRScRR is not now, and never was, IN
apologist for the excuses Of the tariff. It
advocates only discriminating duties. 1t
belongs, perhaps, to what might be called
the "low church" wing OF protectionists,
and would be glad to see the tariff so re-
yised MS to take away all cases Of hardship
and all cause Of complaint from any section
or any interest Of the country.
Our point Nith4he Baltimore Sun, how
eyer,afects the general principle Of protec.
ton, viz: Temporary subsidy or protection
for special Interests for ultimnte penernl