The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1888-01-14
LETTERS FROM THE PEOPLE.
The Tariff Discussion.

To the Editor of the Indianapolis Journal:
In the multifarious discussions concerning the
tariff, there are two extremes, towit: absolute
free trade on the one hand, and high protective
tariff on the other, which are wide asunder
as the poles. or the antipodes intermediate
between these extremes. are found approximate
grades OF tariff propositions, amongst which a
low protective tariff, and tariff for revenue
only may be mentioned as the most prominent,
the latter of which is sometimes denominated
tariff for revenue only, with incidental pro-
tection," which is merely play upon words.
political jugglery of phraseology, designed for
the especial purpose OF catching votes; inasmuch
all tariffs are in their very nature protective
in moro or less degree. For. deprive any tariff,
however low. of its protective features, and alb
solute free trade is the direct result
There is no poetry sentimentalitT about
the tariff whatever; its regulation and adjust
ment is purely q business proposition. dependent
upon facts and figures rather than theories.
distractions and coDjectural speculations.
There metaphysical vagaries about the
imposition of tariff duties, for it is only by the
careful exercise of cool, clear-headed, dlspas-
sionate business analysis of the varied wants
and exigencies of American commerce and home
manufactures, as well as the interests of con-
sumers, that we can arrive at just olscrlmlna-
ton of the multiplicity of subjects involved In
the tariff, which even now embraces about A. 900
items in its schedule, covering as it does, the
dailylife demands of the greatest and most en-
terprising nation on the face of the globe, now
closely approxlmating the magnificent number
of 60, 600, 900 people. There is not in this coun-
try any party. any manufacturing or agrlcult-
ural interest, sufficiently strong to dictate the
basis of a tariff. Any tariff arrived at must be
accomplished by the compromise of diverse and
conflicting interests. 1t must be subjected to
the crucible of common sense and adjusted by
the careful MANIPULATION of level-headed bust
ness men. 1t should be taken from the domain
of politics, and relegated to committee of bust
ness experts, distinguished for economical
gacity of mind and incorruptible integrity of
character who would be independent enough to
consider it in all it's bearings. and do justice to
f al conflicting Interests though the heavens
A tariff revision so accomplished should be &C
quiesced in by common consent, as fnallty or
settlement of a vexed question. not to be again
disturbed by any light or trivial matter what
ever and not to be aeitated upon imaginary
grounds, whilst the Republic stands.
l have just been reading article in Har-
pers Magazine for January, by the noted Henry
Watterson, which he closes up by attempting to
run parallel between the agitation of the tariff
question and the agitation of African slavery,
and its final destruction by bloody civil war.
which oe all wars is the most uncivil. And he
goes so far as to intimate that something similar
may yet be required to reduce the tariff. if it be
not accomplished by legislation in Congress.
Now il strikes that such comparison is not
opposite, it is too farfetched and NAL apropos to
fit the case; for African slavery was sectional
it existed only in the South whereas the oper-
atoms of the tariff are not sectional, not
fined to any portion of the Union, nor to any
class of citizens, but its benefits and detri-
ments. its merits and dement's affect the entire
dominion of the United States; and there is not
nor cannot be any such clash of interests be-
tween manufacturers and operatives, between
employers and employees. between agriculture
aud the mechanical arts and their diversified APP
plications would lead to irrepressible con-
fiict of ideas, eventually ultimating in civil war;
or anything more serious than every presidential
campaign produces. At least, nothing more
serious than Mr.. Watterson proposed in 1876,
when he promulgated his pronunciamento in
favor of marching to the city OF Washington at
the head of 100, 900 unarmed Kentuckians, for
the purpose of installing Tilden and Hendricks
by main strength and awkwardness, instead of
vi ct armis. WIN. r. NORRIS.
SHELBYVILLE, Ind.