Clarksville weekly chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1873-1890, 1884-03-29
DIFFERENCES ON THE TARIFF.

We have repeatedly endeavOred
to explain our tariff position and to
show wherein we differed from the
extreme attitude of the Republicans
on the one hand and that of the
free traders on the other. We be-
lieve that we have succeeded in this
endeavor and feel that we are very
generally understood on the SUBJ
ject. But while the tariff question
is so prominently before the coun-
try, and is absorbing so large a
share of all political discussion, it
will not be out of place for us to
iterate what we have formerly
written in this regard. In order to
do so clearly and unequivocally we
can do nothing better than to copy
and endorse the following from an
eminent Democratic source, The
American Register:
"The main object of the tariff of
the Republican party is protec-
ton, making reUenue TO support the
Government a merely incidental or
subordinate matter, hence the col
lection from the people Of hundreds
of millions of dollars more than is
needed for the expenditures of the
Government. On the other hand,
the object of the Democratic tariff is
TeUenue to support the Government,
and the protection it affords is sim
ply incidental to the raising of the
revenue. The one is a tariff for
protection, the other is tariff for
revenue. The former makes revenue
to support the Government simply
incidental to protection, where the
latter makes revenue its object and
protection where needed and proper
a mere Incident. This is precisely
the difference between the two par
ties on this subject.
The amount of the expenditures
of the Government being large, all
the protection needed can be afford
ed by protection simply incidental
to revenue.
The Constitution gives no power
to Congress to levy tariff for pro-
lection as its object. But the Consti-
tuition does give power to raise rev.
enue to support the Government.
And as Congress has to select the
articles on which the impost is laid,
and is bound in the exercise of the
powers granted to promote the gen.
eraI l0elfdre,' it is most clearly the
duty Of Congress, in selecting the
articles for the tariff, to discriminate
with view TO promote the general
lDelfdre, by affording protection and
encouragement to home productive
industry and labor when needed,
and in a proper manner. This has
been the Democratic doctrine since
the days of Jefferson, Madison and
Jackson.
Our country is country of indus
try and labor. The Democratic
party has been the great friend OF
the laboring classes, and of the equal
and just rights of all. To foster and
encourage the home productive in
dustries of the country against the
lOw-priced labor of Europe has al
ways been an object of Democracy.
The new-fangled idea of free trade,
or a tariff for revenue, that excludes
and precludes all protection and
encouragement to home production
and labor, is in the interest of the
Republican party. 1t is not Demo
cratic doctrine. There can be no
such thing as free trade while for
eign nations levy heavy duties on
our exports, which are taken to
their markets. Free trade requires
reciprocity between nations. 1t
would be absurd to remove our tar
iff on imports from England while
that country heavily taxes our ex-
ports there. The Golden Free Trade
Club is not in the interest of the
people of the United States. And
the phrase "a tariff for revenue only
is a device in favor of, and in the
interest of the present Republican
party. 1t manifestly defeated the
Democracy in 1880, and the ques-
ton is now presented, whether it
shall be allowed to do so again."