Morning journal and courier., 1883-07-21
Fres-Trade LO~ir

sGs
 From the Philadelphia North Americana
 The free-trade org fal1s have monopoly of statement. Prot lection deals in facts and ar- guments. oslII we can agree with some of the stP dement's found in free-trade organs. We Ian agree with statement found in one or these organs that modern history furnish
 es no parallel for the present condition of the
 finances of this country. That is true. The credit of the nation was never so high as it is now. The government could borrow a hundred millions to- m orrow at four per cent. Twenty three years ago 1t wanted to borrow six millions, and only had offers of about half that sum at @ heavy discount For eighteen years the nation has been paying of it's debt at the rate of about hundred mil lions year. During the term of the last Democratic free-trade President the national debt was doubled, and the Treasury was bankrupted. The Republicans took the reins from free-trade drivers, and with them large floating debt.
 We should say, then, that the freetrade organ is right in saying that there is no par allel in modern history for the present con dition of the national finances. But the fact 1 that we have the highest credit of any nation on the globe seems to business men demon | stration of the general wisdom of the policy of the Republican. party. As we had no credit under free trade, or revenue tariff, we should be obliged if some free-trader would explain why we have had high credit l and general prosperity under a protective tar 1 iF Certainly the country was not prosper ous at any time from 1857 to 1862, yet we had tariff flor revenue only" all that time If we had the revenue, what became of 1t | It was not devoted to paying either funded l or floating debts. We may know that be- | cause the funded debt increased from $28,- 1 699, ,831 on July 1, 1857, to upward of seven | ty millions on the 1st of March, 1861. Be- sides this there was 8 large floating debt, which, added to this volume, carried the total up to eighty millions. If revenue tariff | was the best for the country, why was the | public debt trebled in four years? There was no war save the Mormon war, and no ex- 1 traordinary expenses save the famous mule contracts which made the fortunes of so many Democrats, whose descendants now shout themselves hoarse for reform.
 These loose talking folk must have some
 figures to consider. The revenue from the low tariff in 1860 was in round numbers,
 $53, 900, ,O00- The expenditures were $6O,- 1 GOO, 900. This had been going on for several
 years. Under the tariff of 1863 the revenue
 was $7O OOO, 900. It increased annually until
 it exceeded $2O0, 900, 900. s'Ah but" say these free traders, t'this increase was robbed
 from the people of the United States" Was
 it If so, then the people must have been
 growing poorer every year. Is that the factT
 On the contrary, we find that the value of
 farm Lroperty had advanced from $6, 645.-
 O45, 0O7 in 1860 to $10, 197, ,096, 776 Tn 1850;
 the value of farm products had advanced
 from S274. .316, ,951 in 1860 to $2.213, ,402, 564
 in 1880; the value of farm implements in-
 creased from S246, 11s, Al in 1860 to $4O6,-
 52O, ,O55 in 1880; the value of manufactured products advanced from $1, S85, ,s61, ,676 in 1860 to $5, ,369, 579, 191 in 1880. If the peo- ple have been robbed at the rate of hundreds of millions year since 1863, how is it that they are three times as rich to-day as they 1 were prior 50 that time ? Where labor has J its profits, ss we see here demonstrated, who
 is robbed if anybody?