National Republican., 1888-05-16
TIE HOUSE.

Tie first speaker on the tariff yesterday
morning was Mr.. ButtcrwOrtli, of Ohio. He
said that in immediate results and far re ach
ing consequences the pending bill dwarfed
all other measures before the House. No
other measure reached to every hearth
stone IN the republic as did the Mills bill.
Every gentleman on the floor desired to
promote the good of the country to secure
that kind of prosperity that reached to
every home. The issue Joined between the
majority and minority was not whether the
tariff needed revision or not. Whether the
rate of duty imposed on this article or that
was too high was not the line on which
they divided. Whether lower rate of
duty 50 far as any special schedule was
concerned would yield sufficient revenue
and sufficient protection to American IN
dustry was not the point on which they were
in antagOnism. Tie line on which they
were divided was on the economic principle
itself. Gentlemen on the other side had as
serted time and again, and pcrsistcntly, that
10 levy tariff except for revenue
for purpose of conducting the affairs Of
the government, economically admins
tered, was unconstitutional unwise, un-
Just. and Il robbery Of the people. The two
parties divided, not rs to the wisdom of
revising the tariff. but as TO whether the re-
vision should be SO conducted as to destroy
upon the policy itself, and not upon the
manner Of application. 1t was a mere jug
cling to say that tariff for revenue would
afford sufficient protection.
That was not the question: but would the
tariff be arttnged with reference to the die
tatcs of the protection system?
lie greatly miSappreLcndcd the people Of
the country If they would he miSlcd into the
belief that the contest between the majority
am m A. p,.la al IN IN ,f ,,rt
sion only. The majority assaulted the sys
TEN, aud had sworn to destroy it, aud ii it
was not destroyed il would not be the fault
OF the majority, but the fault Of the patri-
Otic people of the country. The passage of
the Mile bill would be Il direct cOndemna-
tion of the protective policy. 1t indicated
10 the country that whether the tariff was
perfect or not, the Democratic party was
not III instrument To perfect il.
The mission of the protective tariff was
To place the people Of our own country on
an equality with the producers of the old
world. The protective tariff dealt with
conditions, and not with boundary lines
from those nations against which the Initcd
states held the coign Of vantage no odds
were asked, but when the Republicans found
conditions which would strike down our iR-
dllstrics and the rate Of wages Of or work
inSmcn, there they erected the wall of II
protective tariff. Applause.
Nh buttcrWorll then proceeded to give Il
history of the origin Of tue protective tariff,
which, lie said, had been adopted
by the fathers Of the republic,
when the young country lacked the
capital, plant, aud skilled workmen.
He showed that the same conditions existed
now Us then, and argued the necessity
for continuation of the protective system
IN order that the luhorcr he not called ON to
compete with the starvation wages which,
he said, ''ncycr would be here 50 long as
the Republican party wrote the law. of the
country Applause.
lie argued that tariff was Il trade regu-
lotion rather than u tax and then went on
to give q comparative statement Of wages
as paid in the various states, north and south,
showing that Ohio with u population of
10000 paid SG,OO0,OO0 more IN wages than
was paid in all the states of Delaware, West
Virginia, North and South Carolina, Georgia,
Florida, Alabama Mississippi, Louisiana,
Tennessee, Texas, Kentucky, and Virginia,
with population of lj,00O,O0O. The south
was 10 blame If It was not manufacturing
country. God had blessed it beyond com
pare, hut II had not consented to bless itself.
The highest evidence of great and pro-
grrssiye people was the output of the brain
the output Of inventive genius, lie again
called Ohio To the front, and declared that
she had given to the country more improve
mcnts in mechanics and the arts than lad all
the ,iNtocn states where free trade philOso-
ply held on. lie continued his comparison
between Ohio and the southern states