The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1886-11-13
1niquities of Protection.
.tw...ssn for The the Democratic Advocated

rich manufacturers This pronosition. we
think, has been abundantly demonstrated in
our previous articles on this subject. II does
not benefit the laborer, for it does not in.
crease the price of labor in proportion to the
increase of the price of living which it pro-
duces. It does not benefit the farmer or
planter, for, while it increases the cost OF
everything that he is compelled to buy, 1t IN
a large measure ruins the market for the pro-
ducts which he has to sell. II the farmer has
any doubt of this, let him compare the price
of wheat now with the prices which he was
accustomed to obtain in ante protection times.
The effect of the protective tariff has simply
been to enrich few at the expense of the
many. And that is an iniQuity. which the
American people may be slow to find out,
but which they are sure to find out and punish
some day.
But we hold that it would be unjust and
oppressive even if it accomplished all it claim
ed for it by the most Jealous advocates.
These advocates seldom have the temerity to
show themselves in agricultural regions, in
which there exists any considerable degree of
intelligence; for the case is so plain, that the
interests of agriculture receive detriment and
not benefit from the policy of protection, that
only those who are toiLfulty blind could posi-
bly, be deceived. But it is claimed that man
country possessing facilities for manufactur-
ing operations, are greatly benefited. The
mining and manufacturing regions of Penn
sylvania at least, it is claimed, are benefited,
even if Maryland and Virginia are not; and
the laborers in the mine and workshop have
an advantage, even if those on the farm and
plantation have not.
Now as far as the laborers are concerned
we hold, and think we have demonstrated,
that this claim is false. But even if 1t were
all true, we still hold that the policy of pro-
lection would be unjust, unfair and iniquitous.
What right has the government OF the United
States to prefer one section OF country, or
one class oflaborers to another? Why should
the interests of Pennsylvania be protected,
and not those of Maryland or of South Caro-
lima? Why should the value of a ton of iron
be increased by legislative enactment, and
not the value of bushel of wheat? True,
indeed, the price of wheat could not be in
creased, unless it were done by paying
bonus to the farmer directly out of the Treas
ury. But that very fact is a reason why other
interests ought to be made to stand on their
own bottom, as well as agriculture. Why
should the people of Maryland and Delaware,
for instance. be compelled to pay bonus to
the citizens of Pennsylvania for producing
iron, or to those of Massachusetts for weaving
cotton, or to those of Rhode Island for max
ing shoes, or to those of: Ohio for manufac-
turing reapers? ity
It's not new discovery, but an old truth,
that has long been known and recognized,
that protective tariff must necessarily be
unjust because unequally discriminating in
regard to different sections of country. The
conditions of climate, soil and natural re-
sources in different sections of the United
States are so different and diverse, that any
policy of protection in favor-of one section
must necessarily be prejudicial to some other
section. That which is intended to favor a
mining or manufacturing region, must neces-
sarily work injury and injustice to a purely
agricultural region. This, we say, is an old
truth 1t has, however, in consequence of
partisan passion and sectional jealousy and
hatred, long been ignored by the General
Government and forgotten by large body of
the people. But this cannot always continue.
If the Union is to be permanent, the General
Government must treat all sections, east and
west, north and south, with fair and equal
Justice, and must, moreover, conhne itself to
the legitimate objects of its existence, leaving
the industry of the people to be governed by
those natural laws which the Creator Himself
has ordained.
And then also will the General Government
again recover its original integrity and purity.
What has been the effect of the Governments
dealing with these questions of protection ?
It has been anything but happy for the moral !
ity of the Government itself. This tariff bust
ness has for twenty years debauched the pol
tiles of the United States, corrupted legisla-
ton, and turned the halls of the national
Congress into den of thieves. There has
not been an election held for twenty years
that was not more or less controlled by the
money and influence of the capitalists who
have grown rich under the system of protec-
ton. These ''infant industries" which can
not stand the free competition of similar in
dustries FIVE thousand miles of, and which
make such frantic appeals for protection, can
raise millions of dollars in order to help carry
Presidential and Congressional elections.
this is not the only way in which they
make their influence felt; for that extends
even to the direct control of the votes of the
operatives in these protective industries.
These operatives are politically as much sub
ect to the will of their masters as the negro |
slave ever was in times past
But the corrupting influence of the policy of
does not stop here. 1t penetrates
into the Hobbies and halls of the national leg
islature itself These weak and languishing
like the iron business of Pennsyl.
yania, can afford to come to Washington and |
Gil the pockets of Congressman with gold, in
order to secure their votes. Whatever they
spend in this way comes back to them five-fold
under the operation of the law of protection;
and the masses of the 'dear people" for
whose interests the politicians are SO much
are mulcted for the benefit of the
generous manufacturers who are so kind to
The politicians. And lest these nice jobs
should be ventilated and made odious by the
newspaper press of the country, the manufac-
turers are rich enough also to purchase con-
siderable portion of that, and make it subser-
Went to their views. Thus all the advocates
of protection are well paid for their interest
The facts here given explain what to some
people seems to be a mystery, namely, ho1o
some politicians come to be rich. 1t is we'll
known fact that men may go to Congress with
empty purses, spend annually two or three
times as much as their salary amounts to, and
vet in ten or fifteen years be millionaires. The
last twenty five years of our national history
have been rich in examples of this kind
In earlier times it was not so. Webster,
CLAY and Calhoun, we believe, never came
to be millionaires. They had not the
OPPORTUNITIES to enrich themselves, even II
they had had the inclination. But Blaine,
Sherman, and other like illustrious states
men of more recent times, are said to be mil
lionaires. What an interesting revelation 1t
would have been to the miners of Pennsyl-
vania, if Mr.. Blaine had explained to them
the mystery of Congressman growing INTO
millionaire; what light that would have thrown
upon his notifies for going about the country
and talking of the necessity OF protecting
American indqstriesl The time may not be