Salt Lake evening Democrat. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1885-1887, 1885-11-13
THE TARIFF.


ence in Chicago yesterday revives tn
interest in the tariff question. The tarif
and civil-service reform will be the chic
political questions in this country for tht
next decade The present tariff is wal
tariff and is as harmful now as it wa:
beneficial twenty years ago. A tariff fol
revenue is just and proper, but there
should be no tariff for protection. A pro-
tective tariff is to commerce what land
grants and bounties are to railroads and
private enterprises; it is government
guaranteeing private undertakings 1t is
claimed by the Protectionists that prim-
arily the 'laborer is benefited by high
tariff, and that the benefit to a protected
industry is only incidental. The very
reverse is the fact. A protected indus
try will look for labor in free market,
and will have the benefit of competition !;
and the laborer must submit to this COM
petition. Ii times are dull and the
labor market is overstocked, the
competition will be more active,
and the laborer be compelled to
take less wage. Ii the industry is to
be protected against foreign competition,
then the home laborer should be pro-
tected against the foreign workman, and
such workman should be excluded from
the country. Likewise foreign capital
should be excluded, for the profits upon
that capital will 60 to foreigners. Reduced
to logical consequence, protection is
boycotting.
A few years ago the German Govern
ment prohibited the importation of Amer
ican pork into Germany, and assigned as
a reason for such action the fear of tri-
china. The fact that American pork was
not allowed entrance into Germany
greatly incensed the pork-raisers and
pork merchants of this country, and they
assigned as the ground OF their COM
plant the fact that American pork
was excluded from German ports
on the ground Of its being unhealthy
when it was not unhealthy The reason
assigned for the exclusion of American
pork was in all probability false, but
this country had no right to demand of
Bismarck the true reason of such ex-
clusion, and the German Parliament had
perfect right to exclude our pork for a
good or bad reason, or for no reason at
all. The United States put prohibitive
tariff upon many foreign articles, and |
they do not consult the wishes of the
country producing or manufacturing such |
prohibited articles. We seem to see the |
injustice and bad policy of protection
only when the doctrine of protection is
adopted by some other nation and en-
forced against American products.
Nothing better illustrates the absurditv
of our tariff system than the duty upon
works of art. The duty on these works
is thirty per cent. ad caiorem. The pride
ofcountry will scarcely go SO far as to claim
that America has produced the greatest
artists the world has ever seen, nor will
that pride declare that American art gal
leries surpass those of Paris or Dresden,
Madrid or Munich, London or Rome
Yet, if some lover of art whose home is in
this country should have an opportunity
to purchase a masterpiece by Raphael,
Murlllo, Titians, Luini, Rubens, Or any
other of the great masters, he must paw
almost one-third of the price of the pic
ture for the privilege of bringing it into
free America. This thirty per cent.
may be tax upon despolsm, and /,
imposed for the purpose OF showing
Europe that American art is thirty per
cent better than her art This thirty per !;
cent is imposed for the benefit of Ameri-
can artists, yet the Ecole des Beaux Arts =
OF France gives American artists their !;
instruction for nothing; such is the case !,
with Munich. There is no place in Amer
lea where art students can get the same
instruction either in architecture. paint.
ing or sculpture as at either of these
places, and only two years ago the ques- =
ion was raised by the authorities of
France whether the privileges of the 2
Ecole des Beaux Arts should not be for
hidden to Americans on account of the
in the United States
against French works of art The same '
question was mooted in Italy. Exclude :
American artists from the art schools of :,
europe and what would become of Amer :,
can art?
The absurdity of protection is perhaps = !,
'etter shown by the tax on art than the :.
AK on ordinary articles, but it is quite as :,
4bsurd when the question of protecting a,
ship-builders comes up. 1t is =
he carrying trade that gives prestige and - :,
'roft, and produces race of sailors, and :.
% We are glad to see the Free Trade Con. ::
erence demand free ships. Free ships =.
would give Il much greater impetus to a,
American ship-building than protection a.. A.
yer will. 'i
THE STANFORD UNIVERSITY. li{