Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1884-05-18
THE TARIFF.
speech Of Hon. olln wcloorn of Texas
Tn The House Of Representatives, April a.
1884.

,nuae IN the state of the Union, anu i"., y,
,,nder consideration the blu u. ~ ,Noi W
reduce import uuties "n"
Mr.. Welborn said:
Mn. CHAIRMAN: The bill unner con.
s,daration IL not an effort to readJust
The inconrruous details of our present
tariff schedule but rs understanu IL
10 aubstantially the first step in policy
which looks to the ultimate reduction
NJ duties to a strictly revenue standard.
shall not, therefore. undertake 10
point out the particular inequalities
and excrescences of existing laws, but
what is more pertinent to the occasion,
sneak to the principles and methods oil
protection.
The bill in its logical sequences puts
protectiOn as a system squarely on
trail. and even If the bill did not 1t
would be idle to talk of evading or post.
poniny the issue The uDexampled
burdens of our customs duties have
onickeped the masses uf TIE people ON
whom these burdens fall into search
ing. determined, remedial investiga-
tions and the agitation thus begun Is
destined never to cease until the fede-
raj mower of taxation is forever brought
to its rightftil function Of raising rev.
enue for the support of the govern
ment.
Protection Is domed and the chron-
icle of its fate will he read at no dis
tapt day i'm the legislation OF demo-
craric congress Nv purpose is to show
the desirableness of this consumina-
ton: and | shall troceed,t TO assign.some
of the reasons why ID ought to be ac-
complished. These reasons, such of
them as / shall pre- sent, may be CON
yeniently and 1t seems to me logically
grouped under two general tn, ses.
First. Protection lays destructive
hindrances on all the agencies of com
merce. and is monopoly in its worst
form.
Second. Protection is an illegitl-
mate and pernicious use of the right
of taxation.
To these arraignments | shall speak
in the order of their statement; and at
once to the first.
Under pretense of providing revenue
protection not only raises and grants
boun ties, not only EFFORTS from many
to give to few, but accomplshes
its objects at the expense of
widespread and disastrous interfer-
ence with the natural operations of
trade. II is but the repetition of long
acknowledged aXioms to say that ra-
tional selfinterest is the universal mo-
tive; and buy where you can buy
cheapest and sell where you can sell
dearest, the fundamental law OF eX-
change.
The propriety of the application of
this law to domestic trade none dis
pute.
a1x ~ ~ nj intn
course undisturbed by Fictitious restric
tons have been strikingly illustrated
in the domestic policies of our own
people. Under these policies marvel
Gus growths have been developed.
Within few generations a continent
has been reclaimed from barbarous
habitudes to the highest walks and
conditions of civilization; wildernesses
have been subdued and their primitive
solitudes broken by the teeming and
prosperous homes of millions of people.
Who will deny that these realizations
dom of reciprocal trade between citi
Zens of the different states, and tina
further progress and development In
any state would be retarded by the i'm
position of duties by that state upor
If freedom of exchange is the natura
order of things and beneficial wheI
applied to domestic trade, how does 1
suddenly cease to be advantageous be
tween citizens and commodities of dit
ferent nations?
Does the mutual advantage of par
ties to an exchange depend upon tn
accident of birth or the condition q
citizenship? The statement of tn
question is Its refutation. NatiOnalit,
has nothing to do with the economi
fruits of given trade. Competition
left to its own decisions will determin
the question as unerringly as acts til
physical law in obedience to whic
the needle, while it may move quive
ingly, still turns to the pole.
No congress, however powerful {
familiar with the forces of polite,
economy, has either the right or ii
wisdom to determine for individual
from whom they shall buy or to whol
they shall sell. These matters are on
side the legitimate province of COVER
ment, and ought not to be subjected
legislative interference further tina
the needs OF revenue require.
Avarice and selfishness, howeve
unrestrained BY considerations of soci
duty, are always in conspiracy TO raj
up factitious enemies to the benefice
principle of competition. At tim
they instigate capital to obtai
through engrossment, the whole su
ply OF "a desirable article and thus |,
outrageous extortions on all who
wants constrain them to become %,
chasers. AT other times they succe.
ful besiege congress, under the captiy
ting plea of protecting our own ci
zens, to lay such duties on foreign pl
ducts as will enable the home man
facturer to place upon his goods VIII,
soever prices he will.
Each of these contrivances Is
enemy to competition; both are II
nopolies and OF the two the last Is /
worst. These examples of monopo
the one being protection as it exis
the other selected for purposes of CO
parison, differ widely In important D
ticulars. In the one the wrong
injustice are the products solely of
dividual effort; In the other (whi
makes them incomparably worseN Ii
are wrought out through the agenc,
government. The one is local d
transit0ry; the tendency of the oil
Is to continuous expansion; and exp
sion. by multiplying the protected
dustries, serves to enlarge and PER-
uate the system. Protection feeds i
grows and strengthens ON its o
vices.
Sturtevant, in his Economics, 70
bly, pictures the gradual processes
the development of u protective y
tenn; and ask the careful attention
the committee to one paragraph.