Clarksville weekly chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1873-1890, 1883-02-24
The Tariff.

The Avalanche is neither a free
| trader nor protectionist. Abso.
| lutte free trade is utopian and pro-
lection is robbery. The tariff can
not be abolished as the free trade
cranks wish and should not be
adjusted for the purposes of protec-
ton in the sense that Pig Iron
Kelley and his gang of robbers by
tariff would have it. When ,whis-
ky and tobacco have furnished
their share of the revenue the bal
ance must be raised from importa-
tions and on precisely the same
principle, SO far as applicable, as
that which taxes whisky and to-
bacco. The luxuries and things not
necessary for sustaining daily. life
should be first taxed and SO on
down with reference to the burden
imposed by the taxation on the
consumption of the article, the in
terest of the manufacturer of it
being of secondary importance only,
SO that as much as possible, consist
ent with sufficient revenue, of the
necessaries of daily life should go
on the free list. The necessity of
discriminating against nations that
discriminate against us in their tar
ifs is an essential element but the
interest of the manufacturer should
come in only when the interest of
the consumer has been as fully as
possible cared for by the tariff ad-
justment. For example, if it be
determined that of two articles, one
manufactured in this country and
the other not, the consumption of
each should contribute to the reVe-
nue., it would not be always wise to
put a light duty on the foreign
manufactured article and light
duty On the home manufactured
article nor as the protectionists
demand heavy duty on the article
manufactured at home and let the
other go free or come in with a
light duty. But considering the
effect on the revenue as the chef
element the foreign article should
pay its fair share and the other its
fair share giving the home manu-
facturer the benefit of such duty as
may be imposed. This is the only
kind of protection that is admissi-
ble. But, in making a new tariff it
would be folly to wreck all the bu-
SineSs interests that have grown up
under the old tariff by radical
changes without regard to these
business interests. We have had a
high protective tariff twenty years
and we cannot abandon the system
of protection all at once without a
panic and financial ruin. We must
return to a better system gradually
and be careful not to bring on sud-
den and unnecessary ruin by our
tinkering. We need a policy of re-
form that looks towards Il reduction
of taxation by as easy and harmless
methods of change as possible and
not by "A reckless and radical revul-
sion of policy that would sweep the
country like tornado. Any
change results in injury, no doubt,
but the least possible injury should
be sought for by all revenue reform
ers. 1t is only the thoughtless and
very fresh extremists who do not
know as much as they think they
know who fail to comprehend the
Avalanche. Democratic policy in
1882 and since has been to guard
ical changes in the revenue laws.
To jump all at once from high
protective policy to one for revenue
only or to the free trade policy
would be destructive and the Ava !
lanche is content with a steady but
sensible reform. 1t is a revenue
reformer and neither free trader
nor protectionist. 1t finds daily |
of the seltishness and |
of both political parties in
dealing with the subject. Senator
Lamar says protection and reduc-
tion of taxation are incompatible
and SO they are on the Pig Iron
Kelley theories. but large nation
al debt, extravagant pensions and
lavish expenditures for government
in every "deestrick" are
incompatible with free trade.