Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1888-01-22
SUNDAY............JANUARY %, 1888
ENCOURAGING Homo Industry.


"To encourage home industry and
home enterprise is the best way IN the
world to build up towns and cities and
render the country and people around us
prosperous. Why send our money
abroad for our wants when we can pur-
chase them at home on as good or better
terms? And why encourage manusactu-
ring establishments or other enterprises
at distance when We can build them in
our own city to the Advancement Of our
own mechanis and Encouragement?
We mentioned that the above para
graph was not taken from Protectionist
journal, but from one whose editor was
an nti-Protectionist. Whereupon the
-Advance comments as follows
"Our friend of the Dispatch is mis-
taken in saying that the AdvGnce is
opposed to protection. That Is pre-
cisely what We want, but We want it
even. We stand upon the solid Demo
cratic platform OF tariff with proper
incidental protection. la other words,
tariff for revenue properly levied will
give ample protection 10 ell Of our indus
tries and interests.
"The Dispatch also peryerts our
paragraph as 10 encouraging home in
dustry and home enterprise That has
nothing in the world to do with paying
revenue tribute to InOnopOlists IN the
shape OF high tariff on importations.
II we cant make and buy what We need
Is cheaply at home rs elsewhere, and
without any tax, then We believe in buy
ing somewhere else.
We fear that the Adr0ncGs liberality
would not be appreciated by men de
string TO establish new industries in Nir
ginia. To send money away fem home
because the goods can be purchased a
little more cheaply in lankeeland
would, il seems TO Us, be TO "encounge "
home industry Ivy Offering a premium
for the lowest OF prices, and conse-
quently for the lowest of wages in all
those cases where the labor constituted
the laTges; portion Of the cost of the
article.
Cuisines is business" " Buy where
you can buy cheapest, and sell where
you can sell highest" Pay the lowest
wages you can get your work done for,
and demand the highest price you can
get for your own work" These are say
ings that seem to nave a ring of "busi-
ness T." III them but there is, to say the
least, some reason for challenging their
soundness. We know that the editor of
the Adra1cc does not allow the
saying last above quoted to govern
his actions as an employer. May
not the other two be equally
personal Can it be that a man s duty
to encourage home industry" requires
him only to ctupon the sayings We have
quoted =? Why shouldn't our money be
sent "abroad If those sayings lay down
the true doctrine Why should We pre-
fer to build up "our own towns and
cities? Can it be any mans duty to
"encoursge home industries " and
"build up the towns and cities around
him." and yet night for him to go North
for any and every article that he can buy
there 10 or per cent. cheaper than he
can buy it here?
AS to incidental protection, let us say
that il it really be true, as the Adrance
we take it believes, that for every dollar
collected at the custom.house the con-
sumner pays five, or three. or even two,
10 the protected manufacturer, the
"bloated monopolist" &C., &c, &C.,
then the AdUance ought to favor direct
taxes and free trade. For as the articles
that yield the largest revenue must be
those that are most largely consumed by
the people, it follows that upon our
friends theory that one dollar to the
custom-house means two or perhaps five
to the consumer, a revenue tariff must |
be just the kind of tariff that does most
harm. If We thought that the people of
Virginia were under the tariff taxed fif-
teen millions of dollars ayear. whereas six
millions OF direct taxes would be her /
full contribution TO the support of the |
Federal Government, we should advo-
cate that system of taxation which would /
enable her to save nine millions of dollars |
every year-enough TO support the State
government, pay all the interest upon
the State debt, and leave six millions Of |
dollars in the pockets Of the taxpayers.
Oh, no, old friend, if your theory is
sound, you ought TO come out for
abolishing the cuStom.house.
Suppose the Government succeeds in
showing that we can make in this coun-
try all the sugar we need, and thus keep
at home thirty or forty millions OF dol
lars now sent annually 10 foreign coun-
tries, and also save some fifty millions Of
dollars annually paid in the form OF Gus
constitutes on sugar, would it not be
better for the Government to put pro-
hibitory duty on sugar than so 10 tax it
rs 10 produce the most revenue Pin
other words, than 30 to tax il as TO take
ucdiit uuluitu uuDOub Oi uOllhIb OUT
OF the pockets of the people every year
II II is right fos Congress to appropriate
money 10 be used in fostering and build
ing up the manufacture OF sugar from
sorghum and beets, how can it be wrong
TO fix the customs-duty on sugar so as TO
accomplish that object?
Now, friend GLASS, you must either
admit that Virginia does not pay fifteen
OF dollars year in the shape Of
and OF the increased
prices caused by tariff upon imported
goods sold in this State, or you must adj
nit that there is something in tariff
AK that not only dificrentistes II from
iirect tax and makes people like the for 4
nes better ihsn the latter, but is far bet 4