Arizona silver belt., 1888-07-14
aN lsgsE . e,.n As rnr eosFaSMnyr.


 AN ISSUE As oLD As TEE GOVERNMENT. Ths tariff issue, like the poor, we ! have always had withps It followed a' became cotemporary with tho
 sguestion, and the latter had saelittie te.ao~ msAlng the issue sectional one, and in lending the Advocates and opponents of tariff system, who were at the beginning confined te no party or section, re. spcctiyely to coalesee. When the Constitution was adopted, We had no inannfactares to speak of, Our wants
 .pplied hy England, and eur
 important industry was eur nmsree with European countries, That was monopoIized by Massachu, sstts and .ssacr coast States, and, therefore VIC find those States adyo- eating ipse trade, while the South and
 lpheld the advantage of proteo-
 Thus we find Webster, repre- Ating Massachusetts, warmly espous- ins free trade, while Calhoun and Clay were his chief opponents in the debate. ihsir arguments, pro and con, have probably never since been surpassed. Indeed, the very same arguments for against the tariff that are hsard day, were advanced then, and more Jquently urged The infant indus iss the need of the fostering of the government for the pro. sn of theme industry the ad- .lagss to be derived from "diyersi- lsd pursuits tue competition of "cheap labor from Europe, were sub jeCts commonly discussed. The first tariff bill devised by Alexander Ham, ilton and submitted to Congress in l1S9, began by declaring that it is necessary for the support of govern Inent, for the discharge of debts of the United States, and for the encourage msnt and protection of manufactures, that duties be laid on imported goods, wares, and merchandise.
 H is somewhat singular that the champions of protection and free trade should have 50 soon swappsd , f4rses. Ar. Webster who opposed the tariff bill of 1924 as tending to psrpstuata tho obsolete and exploded notion of protection, Feur years later is found tearing dawn the temple which hs had erected to free trade And what is equally surprising Is that Calhoun, who had been the doughtisst champion of protection, after his slec, tisp as Vlos-Prosidsnt in 1928. aspoussd fr.e trade, and subsequently,, became the leader of the Notification contest in Ssuth Carolina, The true reason, fer the change of " sbster and Calhoun on the tariff, are found in the altered conditions of A;s.5 Enpland and the South. Under the stimulating ensct of the tariff manufactures rapidl, grew in New England, and the con vgctiOn finally was fsreed upon Mr Webster that New England's futur, prosperity depended largely upon hel manufacturing industry which gov srnment protection had bulldsd. Mir Calhoun, on the other hand, who haC labored under the mistaken idea tba manufactures would develop in hi section, equal with New England. now recognized that agriculture must con ;inue to be the chief support of tht South, with her slave labor, and tha under the conditions prevailing, high tariff must work detriment in stead of benefit to that section.
 Tho discussion was than as now de terminsd by sectional and persona advantage Pennsylvania wanted he, iron and steel industry protected bu opposed B duty on coal Maryland demanded and secursd a duty on glass I. Madison opposed tax on cordage and questioned the propriety of rais ing the price of any article that en tered materially into the structure O yessols." 4 significant point is tha the early advocates of a reduction o the tarfg claimed that imports would thereby be largely increased, and tht revenues augmented in consequence Now the tariff reformers claim then object is a reduction of the revenues.
 sa2z-.1-.ss.z......zgns
 he proposition to submit to tht Stata5 a constitutional amendment tt