The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1888-01-26

benefit of the farmer. the miner and the
furnace owner, as sell as of the maputac-
turer, and whenever that Iuie was departed
from the whole system would fail, and
properly so. The priGeiple of protection
demanded equality Of benefits
and OF burdens. TIE objecL
was protection to labor, not to capital. No
reason could be given why wool should be
made free and wooden goods should be pro-
tected. If there must be cheap wool there
must be cheap wooleus, aud if the labor OF
the farmer In producing the wool WAS not
protected against undue eompstition vita
Australia or Bucnos Ayres, then that of
the cloth maker should not be protected
against competition with the looms OF
Manchester and Lyons. Ii there were low
duties on iron ore there would have to be
low duties on iron and steel In all its forms.
The farmer performed as valuable labor as
the artisan and the rights of every producer
should have
EQUAL AND JUST CONSIDERATION,
without fear or favor. And yet the Presi-
dent had selected that class Of productions
under the name of 'sraw materials
for destruction, and had espe-
cially selected wool as an
article not to be protected. His whole ar
gument rested upon the sllegation that the
price of wool was increased to tie extent of
The duty, and that but tor the DUTY the
! merchant could buy his wool cheaper in
South America and Australia. This aJgu-
ment was fallacious, because the destruc-
tion of the wool industry in the United
States would at once advance the price
wool In foreign markets. But even IL the
argument were true, 1t would apply as well
10 all domestic productions and to all
manufactures. Wool was the completed
article of the farmer, just Sc cloth was Of
! the manufacturer aud IS the coat was of the
tailor: and the objection that the duty on
! wool raised the price to the consumer ap
piled as well Qf trus) to The duty on cloth
and on every article on the tariff Hat. The
all-suf1icieDt answer was that the duty en-
couraged the production of wool, the manu-
facture Of cloth, and of the isfnite variety
of articles produced by American labor,
competing with foreign lsber. This di-
versigy Of production Injured to the benefit
of all classes of the people alike, anG was
the secret Of the enormous growth, power,
and
WEALTH OF THE REPUBdo.
It bad always seemed to hfm that the
most rarrow and selfish notions do
vsnced ia respect to tariff laws (sna
to witch the President row lieut. his
nancy was that made on behalf Of aa-
vancsd industries, now supported by duties
gresser tAen those on raw HahteTlais-that
they must be allowed to purchase their raw
materials In the cheapest markets OF the
wofld-taat the mineral treasures Ia every
state and territory must be LETT undevelaped
in order that these advanced Industries
must have cheap raw materials. He re-
garded the home production of raw mRter-
t,Iz -f har aerJ-
features. There was bat 1ne rule, which
had 10 be applied to sill industries impair
TALLY, snd that was to give to all forms Of
American labor, which have to eem pete
with foreign labor, that fair and reasonable
advantage snd protection which would give
the American producer the home market
Tor home products.
TErping from raw materials to msnufac
lures, Mr.. Sherman said sass the imports
not or tho free lat and rot clsssea By hiEa
as luxuT,es or raw materials, amnusEss -
valHe TO $218,00o, 900, asd paid So, o0OsD00
IN DUTIES. These imporfsSiens earne iats
erect competition vita eos5estic nsaasfas-
lures, which had begp nasints built uo y
the encouragement OF tariff laws, Gcascsfs
aav Of them had existed In the Gnftes
States whea the constitution was frsfBed
Since then
THEY HAD FLoURIsHBD OR FoUNDERED
by the changing rates of the revenue laws.
A careful revision of rates had beaa nssde
by the tariff commission Of 1882 All
| branches OF domestic industry had become
adapted to shese rates. 1t wss tbis SYSTEM
which was denounced by the President az
''vieious. inequltsble, and Illogical" That
| eenBneistien was aimed at the prtscipis OF
protection. All the industrial classes OF
the population wsEe directly interestes tn
| hat principle. The farmers ana nae
| ohanics bad long since lesrBed TO look
beyeed the narrow view of their interests
taken by the President. They Looked at it
| ton permeated through the whole cGmH,u-
nifty, aod extended to the remesest parts of
the country, but were most apparent iH the
| immediate ne!ghborhood of manufacturing
| industries. The President assumed that the
duty on imported articles wss added to the
! price of similar articles of home production,
| but such was not a fact. In the absence
of domestic competition the importer fixed
bis own price, and added the duty and OK
penses to the eost, but at the first sign Of
American competition, the price was re-
| dueed; and cfteR, In a stsgnant market,
| goods were sold at far less than the original
cost and duty. AS rule, imported gsods,
competing with America goods, were solo
| in the American market cheaper than IN
| the European market duties sdded). In
the great body of articles formerly iRpertsd
| the American manufacture was well essab-
| lished, and, under domestic competition,
the price was reduced to figures approach
| ing European rates. In some articles
AMERICA COMPETED WITH EUROPE
in the markets OF the world. And this
process was now going on Home eompe-
| tition. wherever it get fosthold, reduced
| prices and lessened importatiens. A rossst
remark able example Of that was in the
production Of glassware, pottery, and
| chinaware, which had become established
industries in this country. He quoted Mr..
| Dudley, late consul general at Liverpool,
to the effect that there is not single
manufactured commodity that is not
cheaper to-day Ia the United States under
the protective system than it was is 1860
under free trade, and that nine-tenths of
| the manufactured commodities Used by
| American tanners Gncludlng clothing,
household goods, furniture, Implements of
husbanery, tools, Gel are as cheap Ia this
country as they are In England. and In some
| instances cheaper.
The fact that large importstions were
row made of manufactures of irea. steel,
cotton, wool, wood, leather, china, and glass
ware was evidence that the duty on certain
/
revenue standard. If the present system
wers maintained American home indus
triea could, and would, com pete with Eu-
topeAn productions in articles essentis1 to
hum7n life and comfort. AS to the Presi-
dents assertion that more than 1900 arti-
eles we're subject to tariff duties that (Mr.
sherman said) was
A GROSS BUT COMMON BxAaGERATIoN.
He would agree with the President, how
ever, in saying that if, on careful
sxamisatien, it should appear that any
duty on say article could be dispensed
with without detrimant to American indus
try, it should be done, and that, If any ar
| ticle now paying taxes could not be manu-
| featured here, 1t should he placed on the
free list.
The object of the tariff laws was to en-
courage home manufacturers in competi-
tion with foreign rivals, as well as TO So
cure revsHue; and, therefore, these laws
should be IS peraanent as possible, cos-
sistept with the needs Of the government,
| American citizens were encouraged to IN.
vest their money IN expensive machinery