The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1884-01-22
The Logic Of Facts.

sons might think. an the prorrietors ana
emnloves Of manufacturing establishments
with whom we have ever conversed firmly
believe that "proicctiou y does " protect
80 s,so. as we have had occasion 10 say
the Louisiana sugar-planters favor pro-
tcc,ive tariff on sugar; the South Carolina
r,cc.yrowers, one on rice; the zinc-bed
owner~ O, Missouri, one on zinc; the
hemp-raisers Of Kentucky, one on heinp'
and the obacco-manufacturers ana pant
ers. and the sumac- gatherers OF Virginia
one on tobacco and sumac. TIE owner
Of mines and furnaces and ioundrIes, %c''
&C., everywhere demand protective dut'es
on iron, steel, glass, and whatever else 'n's
make or mine.
Orr friend the editor Of the Charleston
N,,ns and Courier. like oil the rest oil Tue
persons we have Just mentioned, yields 10
the logic Of facts, and demands protection
when he is able TO see that protection Is
needed. We would rs soon have expected
Mr.. WArrERsoN TO admit thai protective
duties arc ever Unsuitable. Indeed, we mao
no expectation that anything we could say
would cxtort from our Charleston contehi'
porary the two concessions that it has made
~ us- Bu, so IL Is. These two conces'
sions are
/. That protection does protect.
. Tha, n protective tariff Is sometimes
not simply iustifable. but necesSary-'na.
Is 70 say. indispensable to the prosperity OF
a community.
Vow. lest somebody should conclude too
soon that we have done injustice 10 our
Charleston contemporary, we must lei lhe
Ne,cs and Courier speak for itself. We
quote:
To helo itself out Of the difficulty the
DispatcA says that the NeicS and Courier
..holds IL 10 be great 'wrorg' to put
tariff az fifty cents per pound on tobacco
in order TO protect the Virginia manufac-
turer from Canadian or other foreign COM
netitiop.D We do not-so far as the Nlr-
s,inia manufacturers are affected by the ln-
ferpal-reyenue tax. No economist WIN
urain OF sense would dream Of admitting
foreign tobacco duty free as long as there
was an internal-reyenue tax on the dornes-
tic tobacco. The strictest tariti-reformer
would make the import duty equal to the
excise
Here is clear and candid admission, first,
that the tariff on tobacco does protect the
Virginia manufacturers and planters from
destructive foreign competition, and,
secondly, that they ought to be SO pro-
tected.
But why? Why ought these Virginia
manufacturers and planters not to be al
lowed 10 shift for themselves :-to sell Tor
whatever prices they can gety Why not
indeed! The Ne,cS and Courier gives the
answer: Because there is an internal-reve-
nue. tax on the domestic tobacco. fhus
does our contemporary give away" its
whole case; for if the United States Gov
eminent ought to protect Virginia's tobac-
co-manuiacturers and planters because
they have 10 pay a tax OF eight cents
per pound on tobacco, it would seem
TO follow that if for any reason an Ameri-
can manufacturer has 10 pay eight cents
per pound more for the labor of manu-
featuring. then ne ought to be protected in
like manner. And this is just what the
platform OF 1883 OF the Democratic party
of Virginia, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and New
jersey declared for-namely, that II, owing
TO higher wages in this country, or greater
prosperity, or higher State or Federal
taxes, II costs eight cents per pound more
to manufacture tobacco in Virginia than 1t
costs 10 manufacture it in Canada, then the
Government ought to step in and shield the
American workman from q destructive
competition. Let us quote from that plat
form once more:
1--WE favor tariff for revenue limited to
the necessities OF government economl-
cally administered, and so adjusted in its
application as to prevent unequal btrthens'
encourage productive industries at home.
and afford just compensation to LABOR, Dut
not 70 create OF foster monopolies."
That language teaches the doctrine which
or Charleston contemporary teaches
namely. that il in this country taxes cause
the prices Of any articles to rise above the
prices for which like articles OF foreign
manufacture can be sold. then the Govern
ment ought to levy a tariff high enough to
s.make the import duty equal to" the do
nestle tax. This domestic "taX" may
take the shape OF two dollars a day for
workman whose European counterpart
could be employed for dollars day. why
not nrotect for this reason rs well as for the
reason that the Government laid the tax!
On this point we will let the Hon. A. j
WARNER, distinguished Democratic con
cressman from Ohio, speak for the Demo
Gratis of his State, where the tariff resolu
ton we have quoted originated. Mr.
WARNER writes
III explicitly lays down The principle That i
the appication of the tariff II shall tic 30 adluste
to encosrsg ,s r foster monopoes is Their
any ground for double Interpretation hereT IN
difference between encouraging nome .hdh'Iie
and fostering monopOlieS Is very distinct.
iinstrate: suppose The actual difference In IN
cost OF producng steel rails IN this country ana J.
England u labor ana othsT hn a mpw Of 5s sio
ION by putting our own steel industries on a plan
OF equality III competing IN our market ar; wit, u
or st.ei rails at home. Twelve dollars ton wou'
be mole announcement and II can DE shown ina
an eos, OF production the importer, In order 10 q
inro our market. will cut dow his own profits, an
20 that extent he, and not The consumer, pays Oh
Row. If The tariff Ia not carried above or muc
above. the line that marks the difference in cost
production, there can be no monopoly. This.
think, Is evident enough 10 anybody. But IL ~
actual difference In cost oisprudncion Is but VI,
and the t.ifiE were ma ae $50 ton. then ~ woui
enable the Amagated steel Association 10 con
nine and put the price of steel rails TO point iu
under tie importing price. That womb nc creiuI
and fostering monopoly, or. IN other word
lending the aid of legislation 10 enable one cla
10 lew chsrgos upon another. II can be snow
too that nu TO the point have indicated, iao'
would derive the larger share oil the benefit afssif
from euch a tariff. But, above that point, capt.
alone would De benefited. -
!. Menns la Ire Ohio plalforn The difference