The Ouachita telegraph. [volume] (Monroe, La.) 1865-1889, 1883-02-10
THETARIFF DECUssION.

at the last session employing all their ener-
gies to put back revision of the tariff, no.
tably in organizing the Tariff Commission,
they are now as zealously endeavoring to
fix new tariff rates before the present Con-
gresse expires. The sudden change oftac'
tics is explained in the fact that tariff for
Protection must be enacted before the Attn
of March, when the Republicans, who favor
that idea as against the Democrats who adj
vocate tariff for Revenue only, will pass
out of power. giving place to Democratic
majority in the House. The discussions III
both houses clearly demonstrate that the
issue, as just stated, is directing the debates
and fixing the position Of the two parties
in the next presidential campaign. Thus
while the Democrats are strenuously urg-
ing reductions for the benefit OF the agri-
cultural interests, the Republicans arc no
less fixed in their purpose to protect the in
tcrcsts of the manufactures. The course
pursued by tho Republicans was aptly
stated the other day in the Senate by Sena-
tor Jonas in the following pungent STYLE:
In the discussion of every schedule and
eyery amendment the interests of the man
ufacturers are advanced and the claims OF
American labor brought to our attention as
ifthis government was established alone
for the protection OF manniactnning i AMER
ers engaged in manufacturing were the on
Nv iaborers i'll America whose interests
were worthy of consideration.
Tho Tariff Commission went through the
country taking the testimony OF manu1ac-
turers. Occasionally they gave hearing to
an importer or dealer; but they paid no at.
the millions who follow the pillow and Gull
tivate the soil, and who produce by their
labor the enormous crops when constitute
the real wealth and exportso or TINS country;
Nh Inl nc M
as such not entitled TO protection, and to
but little consideration. Thanks to the
boundless fertility Of our soil they can com
pete successfully with the serf and pauper
labor Of Europe in cultivation of wheat and
corn, and with tho slave and cody labor OF
India and Egypt in the cultivation of cot
a surplus Of profit. This they are not per-
mtted to spend in the cheapest markets OF
tho world for tho articles which they re-
qnire, but they are compelled by our tariff
laws to make Il contribution OF it to tho
support of"American labor''-nOt the labor
of the field, but that of the furnace, loom,
and machino-shop.
Illustrating the point made by Senator
Jones, we copy the following colIoquy be-
tween Senator Vance, of North Carolina,
and Senator Aldrich, of Rhode Island. Tho
schedule Of cotton goods was pending, and
the Senator from Rhode Island, himself the
owner of large cotton factory, was urging
protection for the lower class of cotton
goods, although no admitted this class of
goods could be manufactured and sold as
cheap here as in England. Senator Vance
asked.
want u little further information. II
we can manufacture this lower class of cot.
ton goods as cheaply as England can, what
effect does that have upon keeping up
wages? How can VIC afford to pay more
wages than England if VIC manufacture
-lss,, ,1,N ,l,n .
Mr. ALDRIcH. Because OF our better ma
chinery, and because of The greater skill of
our operatives.
Mr. VANCE. We do not thcn need any
tariff duty to protect them.
Mr.. ALDRICH. And we have advantages
in our proximity to the cotton, thereby
saving transportation.
Mr.. VANCE. Then we do not need any
tariff duty.
Mr.. ALpHIcu. We certainly DO need ~
tarifdutv.
Mr.. VANCE. What for?
Mr.. ALpRICH. l have already explained.
We need it on the lower class of goods to
prevent the English manufacturers sending
over their surplus product to this coun try
and selling it at ruinouS prices, thus closing
up our manufactures. We need it on the
finer goods for protection as II compensn-
ton for the larger earnings OF our opera
tives and skilled mechanics and lnborers.
Mr.. VANCE. If wo can mako it rs cheap
as tho English can, how can tho English un-
dcrsell us g?
The question OF Senator, Venice put
opontedly, was not answered by Mr..
Aldrich, but evaded by asking Mr.. Vance
why he derived to retain the duty on rice?
This evasion and the effort to protect II class
of cotton goods mostly used by tho laborcr
and which may DO made and sold here
cheap as the imported article, gives II clear
demonstration OF the absurdity and injustice
ofa.tarriff for protection to American labor.
But III favor of this dogma tho Republicans
propose to do battle.
The discussion in Congress promises to
last throughout tho session, and to tormi-
nate without reaching any definite action
certainly none in favor of reform.