Los Angeles daily herald., 1888-08-24

;he constitutional power of government.
It is robbery of one class to enrich an
other, and nothing less. Surely if the
protected industries could stand the
Republican reduction Of 10 per cent. in
1872, they have grown strong enough in
thirteen years of the restored high tariff
to bear the reduction OF per cent.
now proposed by the Democratic party.
OF course it makes all the difference in
the world to partisans, what party's
label is pasted upon reform measures.
If Blair and Dawes had fathered the
Mills bill it would be worthy of all praise.
Prof. Sumner, of Yale, recognized
authority in matters OF political econo-
1.-THE period, from 1S46 to 1860, was
our period of comparative free trade.
For an industrial history OF the United
States no period presents greater inter.
est than this. 1t was period of very
great and very solid prosperity. The
tariff taxes were low and their effect linn
tied. 1t was called revenue tariff with
incidental protection. The manufactures,
which, it had been said would per-
ish, did not perish, and did not gain
sudden and exorbitant profits. They
made steady and genuine progress"
"I will add" says Mr.. Sumner, ''that
the period from the Mexican to the Civil
War is our golden era, if we have any,"
Blaine in his Twenty Years in Con-
gress," corroborates this when he says,
"the tariff of 1916 was yielding abundant
revenue and the business OF the country
was in fourishing condition"
Secretary Manning, in his report ol
1885, says: "The highest endurable rates
of duty which were adopted in 1924 tc
offset internal taxes upon almost every
taxable article, have, in most cases, now
been retained from seventeen to twenty
three years after every such intern al taz
has been removed. They have been re
tanned while purely revenue duties upor
articles not competing with anything pro
duced in the thirty-eight States have
been discarded. They have been retain
ed upon articles used as materials for oul
own manufactures lin 1874 adding $50,
900, 900 to their cost which, if erportet
would compete IN other countries agains
similar manufactures from untared ma
terials."
Let us look closely into the effect of the
way in which the tax on raw materials
handicaps our possible expansion of trade
abroad.
In 1860, under the tariff for revenue
we exported manufactured cotton goods
to the value of $10,934, 796. In 1870
after ten years of high tariff, these ex.
ports had dwindled to $3,7S7,2s2 and
only amounted to $9,9S1, ,41S in 1880, or a
falling off of 81 900, 900 in the value of oul
foreign sales Of cotton goods after twenty
years of high tariff.
Tobacco exports fell off 81 900, 900 ir
1880, after twenty years of high protec.
ton, and the exports of metal and theil
manufactures, exclusive Of iron and steel
fell off in 1880, after twenty years of high
tariff, 5000, 900.
All the manufactures which we could
produce and sell at our very doors if the
raw material were untaxed, are sold by
our British competitors who get their
raw material free. The trade of Mexico,
which should be ours, is almost entirely
in the hands of English and other Euro
pean merchants. In the census report
of 1880 we find that the exports of
British goods to Mexico in that year
we're in value 81, ,406, 900, against 1892, 200
from the United States. And when we
examine the exports to all the Spanish
American part of the continent, which
should be commercially ours, we find
that, inclusive of Mexico, those Republics
bought in 1880, $51, 1886 10000 worth Of
goods from England and only $500, 400
from the United States.
Il is thus that a monstrous and suicidal
tariff destroys our commerce and places
8 Chinese wall around our manufacturers.
a R0nrtsh Aaeamlt.