Arizona weekly citizen., 1885-01-10

THE tariff B many sided question, as viewed by members of the Democratic party. Free-traders, as a matter of course, want tax for revenue only, but everybody knows that Randall Is ID fa- vor of a protective tariff Yet read how he whipped the devil around the stump in bis Louisville speech. He says: "I have never been able to find in the con- stitution of the United States any war runi, and I have never made an utter ance, either in public or private life, at variance with what I am now going L. say. l do not believe there IS in the constitution of the United States aa authority to levy impost duties for protection for protection's sake. In other words I can find nothing which gives authority to the Congress of the United States to raise taxes on impos. duties for protection purposes"
 Now that is broad enough for any free-trader to stand upon. But the great leader of the high tariff wing of the Democratic party swallows his con- shtGtional scruples to levying impost duties for protection in less than three minutes after uttering the above, in the following unique fashion: "You may talk to me about free trade. There can not be any free trade between the United States and any country successfully where the business rate of interest in ore is different from tine business rate in the other, and where wages for light work Is different IF one from the other. The country winch has the lower rate of interest and pays the lower rate of wages vill exhaust the other. We had six years-from l7S2 to l7S9-ot what I may term free trade, and 1t was that which induced the first tariff act intro duced by Mr. Madison, the father Q; the constitution. and in it was developed the principle which am tonight con- tending for. If two countries with diff feront interests and different wages are Ag NbhAAAAAAN AAAN NA Nhh ANSAAAC AAAaA ANA- low: Either cur country must be brought down to the lower rate of interest in the foreign country and our wages come down io the lower rate of wages in the foreign country. bringing with it disas- ter and hardship. or else the other plan mus. be adopted, so as to exactly fill the cost of the foreign article and make 1t equal to the product Of the United States. I prefer the latter"
 He says he "does not believe there is in the constitution of the United States authority to levy impost daties for pro- tection," and in the next breath says that where 1.-two countries with different interests and different wages eIist,r the country with the higher rate must be brought down to the lower rate, or the other plan must be adopted so as to e1- actly ill the cost of foreign articles and make it equal to the product of the United States" and be prefers the lat ter.
 That Is certainly very clever express ion after having declared his belief that there twas DO power in the constitution to levy impost duties for protection" {" He assumes that there exists a natural equilibrium or adiuster between powers which can lower or raise the product of foreign country to correspond with the product of our own; or m other words if jack knife can be made in England for thirty cents and costs fifty cents to produce a similar knife Tn this country, the English manufacturer must pay twenty cents to the United States before he can sell hIs knife to 0 Yankee. Yet that Is not an impost duty for protection according to Mir. Ran dsll's ideas. Mir. Randall IS un- doubtedly an able man, but such labor