Arizona silver belt., 1888-07-14
AN ISSUE IS OLD As TEE GOVERNMENT.

AN ISSUE As OLD As TEE GOVERNMENT
 The tariff issue, like the poor, we have always had with us. It followed ard became cotemporary with the slavery question, and the latter had net little to do in making the issue sectional one, and in leading the advocates and opponents of a tariff system, who were at the beginning confined to no party or section, re- Epectively to coalesce. When the Constitution was adopted, we had no manufactures to speak of. Our wants were supplied by England, and our most important industry was eur commerce with European countries. That was monopollzed by Massachu- sstts and other coast States, and, therefore, we find those States adyo- eating free trade, while the South and West upheld the advantage of protec- ten. Thus we find Webster, repre- senting Massachusetts, warmly espous- ing free trade, while Calhoun and Clay were mischief opponents in the debate Thsir arguments, pro and con, have probably never s1nco been surpassed. Indeed, the very same arguments for and against the tariff that are heard to-day, were advanced then, and more eloquently urged. The "infautind dustries, the need of the fostering care of the government" for the pro- motion of theme industry" the ad- vantages to be derived from "diversi- fed pursuits, the competition of ''chaap labor from Europe" were sub jects commonly discussed. The first tariff bill, devised by Alexander Ham, iiton and submitted to Congress in 1789, began by declaring that it is necessary for the support of govern ment, for the discharge of debts of the United States, and for the encourage ment and protection of manufactures, that duties be laid on imported goods, wares, and merchandise.
 It is somewhat singular that the champions of protection and free trade should have so soon swapped horses. Mr. Webster, who opposed the tariff bill of 1924 as tending to perpetuate the obsolete and exploded notion of protection" four. years later Is found tearing down the temple which he had erected to free trade. And what is equally surprising IS that Calhoun, who had been the doughtiest champion of protection, after his cleo ten as Ylce-Presidenti in 1928, espoused free trads, and subsequently,, became the leader of the Notification contest in South Carolina. The true reasons for the change of Webster and Calhoun on the tariff, are found in the altered conditions of New England and the South. Under the stimulating effect of the tariff manufactures rapidly grew in New England, and the con- vlction finally was ferced upon MT. Webster that New England's future prosperity depended largely upon her manufacturing industry which gov ernment protection had bullded. Mr. Calhoun, On the other hand, who had labored under the mistaken idea that manufactures would develop in his section, equal with New England, now recognized that agriculture must con- tinue to be the chief support of the South, with her slave laber, and that under the conditions prevailing, a high tariff must work detriment in- stead of benefit to that section.
 The discussion was then as now de- termined by sectional and personal advantage. Pennsylvania wanted her iron and steel industry protected, but opposed a duty on coal. Maryland demanded and secured a duty on glass. N. Madison opposed a tax on cordage, and questioned the propriety of rais- ing the price of any article that en- tered materially into the structure of vessels" A significant point is that the early advocates of reduction of the tariff claimed that imports would thereby be largely increased, and the revenues augmented in consequence. New the tariff reformers claim the1r object is reduction of the revenues.
 -
 The proposition to submit to the States 9 constitutional amendment to