Waterbury evening Democrat., 1888-09-06

Walker tariff of 1S46, which averaged 23.20 per cent duty on all imports and 26.2 on dutiable imports, brought disaster to the nation. The fact is just the contrary; it was the beginning of great period of prosperity. So great, in fact, that in 1857, when the tariff was again reduced to 1856 per cent on all goods and 20. 12 per cent on dutiable goods, every member of congress from New England who voted on the ques, ton gave his vote for the reduction. And the house which made this tariff reduction of 1857 was republican house of which | General Nathaniel P. Banks of Massachu- setts was speaker.
 The prosperity of the country during the low tariff period from 1S46 to 1861, when the tariff was increased by the Morrill, bill, was very great. If we take the census returns of 1850 and 1860, period of low | tariff, and compare them with the returns of 1870 and 1880, when the tariff was high, ! we find that the prosperity and growth of the country was greatest during the low tariff period. From 1850 to 1860 our population increased 35.57 per cent; from 1860 to 1870 the gain was but 22.62 per cent, and from 1870 to 1880 it was but 30 07 per cent. From 1850 to 1860 there was a gain of railroad mileage of 239.6 per cent, while during the following twenty years of high tariff the increase was but 204.7 per cent There was an augmentation of TO- 59 per cent in real and personal property during the low tariff period, while in twenty years of high tariff the gain was but 41.5 per cent. Right here in Connecticut real and per sonal property showed an increase per cap ita of 13O per cent during the existence of the low tariff, while from 1870 to 1880 the gain was but 19 per cent. During ten years of low tariff manufac- turing capital shows an increase of S9.3 per cent, while during ten years from 1870 to 1880 it increased only 5S per cent. Let Us look in passing at how labor fared during the two periods. From 1850 to 1850 the average wages of employees in man. ufacturing establishments showed gain of 16.6 per cent, while during the follow ing twenty years the wages showed a gain only of 20 per cent, which was relatively smaller than during the low tariff era. This fact shows that the tariff has nothing to do with wages, which increase under low as we'll as a high tariff That wages have actually gone up in free trade Eng land, quite as much proportionately as in the United States during the same period, as is shown by Robert Giffens statistics. is further proof of this. The figures of the census show similar results in favor of the low tariff period in regard to the growth of manufacturing products, commerce, merchandise and farming.
 It will be seen from these figures that Judge Wheeler is rather presumptuous in concluding that the small reduction pro posed by the Mills bill is going to work ruin to our industries. The experience of the past proves the contrary. The re- duction made by the Walker tariff was advantageous, and the fact that the re- duction of 1857 gained the approval of the New England congressman proved its benefcence to this part of the country. Had not the war brought about the neces sity of increasing the tariff in 1861, We would not now be staggering un der the present excessive taxation.
 Judge Wheeler's prophecy of ruin from the Mills bill and the democratic policy of | tariff reform will not hold water. We prefer the prediction of Speaker Carlisle, who in his speech on the bill said: If this bill shall pass and become law, predict that within less than eleven years from this time the gentlemen who now represent New England on this floor and oppose this bill will be here voting for a further reduc- tion, or the people will send somebody here ! who will so vote"