The Greenville times. [volume] (Greenville, Miss.) 1868-1917, 1888-05-26
HORACE WHITE.
Extract Of Address Before the Harvard Club
on Finance

NE IeOent HleSsdge, mas rendered the
greatest service to the country that has
been rendered by any President since
the close of the war unless President
Grants veto of the imitation bin may
be considered of equal value. But it
required more courage on Mr.. Cleye-
lands part to do what he did than for
General Grant to do what he did. The
latter had accumulated, by unparalleled
military service, a stupendous personal
prestige. 1t could cost him nothing
to differ from Congress ON the subject
of greenbacks and bank notes. More
over, the imitation mania was never
more than skin deep. Nobody was
particularly interested in it except
few politicians. Mr.. Cleveland had
no such personal prestige to fall back
upon. The interests that would be
sure to take alarm at any disturbance
of the tariff,-the same interests that
overbore and overwhelmed their own
chosen Tariff Commission of 1888
were vast and omnipresent, and as a
general rule uncompromising; power
less indeed If public opinion can be
reused and educated, but all-powerful
otherwise. There was a growing sur
plus in the treasury. 1t had to be
stopped. and Mr.. Cleveland was bound
to say how, in his opinion, 1t should
be stopped. There were but two HON
est ways, one by repeating the taxes
on liquor and tobacco the other by
repeating those on the necessaries of
life. Mr.. Cleveland recommended the
latter, and having so resolved he spoke
no dubious language. For one ! am
ready to follow him either to victory
or defeat. Whether defeated or victo-
rious this year, believe that he has
set ball rolling that will crush pro-
tection-that is, restriction-to pow
der. And when this is done msnufac-
turing will be more prosperous than
il ever was before in this country, and
worKingmen's wages will be higher
than they ever were before, because
workingmen will not then be burdened
with undue and disproportionate taxes
OH articles Of consumption.
Why should not this restrictive sys-
TEN be ground to powderg
Well we know that in the early days
of the Republic the plea for protection
was always flanked by the statemen
that restrictive duties would only b.
temporary, and that they were intend
cd merely to enable certain industries
to get themselves naturalized and es
tablished. suppose that Henry Cla!
will be accepted as an authority oil
this point; for If anybody is entitled
to be called the father Of the Ameri
can SYSTEM II is he. Ills first pub
lished speech-that Of April s, 1870
was a speech in favor of protecting
domestic manufactures and from tha
time on he was the very high priest o
protection in this country, to whom
all the neophytcs bowed and who's,
counsels they followed. In debate II
the Senate in the year 1888 Mr.. Cha,
used these words: "No one, Mr.. Pres
ident, in the commencement of th
protective policy ever supposed that |
was to be perpetual. We hoped AM
believed that temporary protection
extended to our infant manufacture
would bring them up and enable then
to withstand competition with thos
OF Europe. If the protective polio,
were entirely to cease in 1912, II woul'
have existed twenty-six years fron
1916, or eighteen from 1S24-quite a
long as at either of those periods IL
friends supposed might be necessary.
[Benton's Thirty Years View, vol.
page l13.
That was said fifty years ago. Blu
protection did not cease Ill 1912. d
the contrary. it was greatly augment
ed in that year; and although 1t ri
ceived some salutary notifications /
1916, lasting till 1861, it is within th
truth to say that it has now lasted
full century, lacking a year and fou
months, and is now, as Senator Shel
man said in his 1872 speech, at poin
"unexampled in our history | hav
examined his Home Market Clu
speech to see if it contained any sug
gestions that protection should not las
for ever. lie does not expressly sa
that it ought to last forever, but all hi
argument runs that way. His logi
would not be very much impaired b
any thought or hint that it should nc
last forever. Nor do | find, in an
protectionist arguments of the preser
day, anything resembling the doctrine
and beliefs of Henry Clay upon th
point.
Another transformation present
itself. Protection in the early da.
meant protection to industries not "
firmly established in the country, an,
of course, manufacturing industry;
could quote pages, in support of th
distinction, FROM Henry Clay and Ho
ace Greeley. Do we hear anything
that kind now?
The point is, that protection has BEE
turned end for end and topsy turv
| In the beginning and in the first hs
century, 1t was to be temporary, now
1T is TO BE ETERNAL.
| a.. 4. ...o. .,.olouatso ,nxu ~