The Portland daily press., 1884-09-08
Protecting American Labor.

From Senator Sherman's Speech at Ashland Ohio9
Another practical difference between the
two parties is the tariff question, and this
grows out of the fundamental difference as to
the powers of the National Government. The
Republican party believes that taxes on i'm
ported goods should be the chief source of Ma
tional revenue, and that in lsvying these taxes
called duties, they should be levied not only to
raise revenue, but to foster, protect and diver
sify American labor and productions. The
Democratic paper tavors duties for revenue
only, or exclusively-they are very touchy
about words and their leaders try all sorts of
OF phrases to conceal their meaning. This is-
sue is getting clearly defined, and is to-day the
chief immediate issue between the two parties.
1t is true that in Ohio, Pennsylvania, New
York and Connecticut we have protective
Democrats, as We used to have anti-slayery
Democrats, or Bank Democrats, or Temper
ance Democrats, but the position of the Demo.
cratic party is for tariff for revenue only and
free trade as SOON as possible. Upon this issue
Mr.. Carlisle was elected speaker of the House,
Mr.. Hurd was nominated in the Toledo Dis
trict, and Mr.. Converse was defeated in the
Mr. Cleveland forgot in his letter of acceptance
in favor of his moral issue. He prefers to posb
as moral reformer rather than as a free trad
er, but all the same he would approve any free
trade bill that would pass Congress. Who
does not know that if Blaine is elected he will
seek to maintain the protective policy which
for twenty-five years has been the policy of the
Republican party, and who does not know that
II Cleveland Is elected we will have immediate
and continual agitation for the reduction and
abolition of all protective duties?
What is the object of these duties. and how
do they affect the different classes of our mao
pie? These questions have been SO fully an
swered by recent speakers in Congress- and es.
pecially by General Robinson. Mr.. Taylor and
Major Mckinley and others, of Ohio, that /
will only state them in general terms. The OBJ.
ject of protective duties is to encourage home
production. AS the duty or tax is only levied
on foreign goods IL follows that, to the extent
OF the tax, It is discrimination in favor OF
similar goods made here. The domestic manu-.
facturer is encouraged to make them here. II
the cost to him here is no greater than the cost
of the foreign article with the tax added he
can make it here and thus supply the home
market with the home product. The advantage
to the country at large is that he becomes a
consumer OF other home products, such as food
clothing, ETC., instead of competitor. II he has
no such protection he must reduce the wages OF
his labor, or the cost of his materials or 90 to
farming or some other pursuit. The Republican
party believes that the protective duty, while
1t may in the first instance increase the cost OF
the article to the consumer, confers benefit
by the diversity of employment, by increasing
the price OF labor, and making O MARKET and
In the end, by domestic competition, lowers the
price OF the article to the consumer. When
this reasoning is applied to the vast amount of
production affected by the tariff laws, it be-
comes question of unusual Importance
touching every citizen of the United States,
Our domestic manufacturers employing mill
lions OF laboring men are the great consumers
OF our surplus farm products, and of the pro-
auctions of other mechanics. In this way any
advantage derived from protective duties is
generally distributed among all classes, wheth-
er farmers, Shoemakers, tailors or merchants
Under this system our production has extended
to all kinds of manufactures in all metals and
all textile fabrics, giving market for all raw
materials and all food and necessaries of life.
But the chief benefit of a protective duty is
that it secures to the laboring men and women
OF this country good, fair wages for honest Ia
Dor. confess that this is the main reason
why have uniformly supported protective
duties. 1t is not good policy in this country to
have men and women work for the bare nee
essaries of life without means to improve their
condition, to educate their children, and share
in the benefits of social life. The men who Ia
Dor must constitute the great mass of our peo-
pie, ana with them must rest all political pow
er. The object OF good government should be
always to protect and foster their interests and
to secure them good wages, full employment
and all the comforts and benefits of life con-
sistent with all the rights of property guaran-
teed by the Constitution. Any disturbance
of this protective policy creates doubt and stag
nation, deprives laboring men of honest en-
ployment. and causes panics, strikes, reduction
of wages and organizes riots. The threat of
the Morrison bill deprived thousands of men of
employment and made stagnant the great pro-
ductlve industries of the country. This fell
low citizens, is one strong reason why the
Democratic party ought not now to be trusted
with national power, for Democratic success
means reduction of protective duties, and a
gradual but sure overthrow of our manufac-
turing industries,