Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1884-01-22
prize fight, to which they pave the way for
the unprofessional looker.on.
THE RIGHT TO TRADE FREELY.

"There is no certainty" say the dis.
patches, "that the Mexican reciprocity
treaty has been finally defeated. An ex-
tension of time has been secured, and we
have until July 20.h in which to debate
the matter" 1t is added that there was
but one vote lacking to confirm the con-
ventioU, the opponents Of the treaty mus.
tering just ore more than one-third of the
Senate. The free traders of the South
defeated the measure, and thus contra
dicted their own doctrines and stultiied
their position as to the tariff. Pure sell
tishness worked the defeat. Thus it is
stated by the correspondents that " Louis
lana wants free trade for everything but
sugar, North Carolina on everything but
rice, Virginia and a few other States on
everything but tobacco, Ohio on every
thing but wool, and the States further
west on everything but hogs, concerning
which they are just now crying for retail
many for excluding their products. The
high protectionists in the Senate voted
against the treaty because it tends toward
free trade, and the free traders because it
was aimed at raw material produced in
their special localities" This is very
humiliating showing, for it is equiva-
lent to statement that the
best good of the whole people
was not the actuating principle. The ex-
treme protectionists, we think, "overshot
the mark, for in seeking to protect a few
they really, by opposing Mexican re-
ciprocity, lay on an export duty, for the
treaty proposed is but means to an end,
and that end is TO stimulate and encourage
our exports. When, therefore, the pro-
tectionists declare that reciprocity Injuries
home industries, they literally say there
shall not be free export, in order that pro-
tacted Industries may tax the people. For,
if we secure free export by admitting the
country with which we hold q convention
to like privilege, we foster the scheme of
the Constitution. That instrument for
bids the levy of taxes on articles of export,
and non-reciprocity in fact compels us to
lose on our exports amounting to an export
tax. Says Perry, in his recent admirable
work on political economy The Conatitu-
ton limits the power of Congress to tax
the people to the sole purpose of getting
money by which we are to understand
that it is to get money for the whole
United States, not lay taxes to enable
a few to get money from the many or the
many from the few. So the conclusion is
reached logically that q tax on foreign
goods which prevents as from getting
money by reason OF a high rate, raises the
price Of the domestic product, and being
thus direct act Of taxation, is unjust and
unconstitutional. Webster, in his cele-
bTated speech against Hayne, it will be re-
declared that "tho authority
of Congress to exercise revenue power with
direct reference to the protection of manu-
features, is a questionable authority"
With vast surplus revenue, it is all the !
more questionable whether tax can be
levied on one class to protect another, be-
cause the getting Of the money is not for
-he end contemplated by the scheme of our
TO wit, the support of the
Government. The imposition of heavy
luties on Mexican imports prac- (
-icany lays an export duty on our
Trade with that country. What then shall |
we say to those VINO oppose reciprocity |
Simply that you are levying indirectly
upon the people an export tax, since, as we
have said, our trade, except through reel. /
orocity, cannot have free export, as con-
.emplated by the Constitution. To the
infection of non-reciprocity and the bar to
;rade, the country will not long submit
md the present defeat will not be final