Springfield daily republic. [volume] (Springfield, O. [Ohio]) 1887-1888, 1888-07-14

CASUALTIES lncluent 70 ioio'SH market"
| Again, in speaking OF our manufactures, he
says: Their preservation, which depends
on due encouragement. Is connected with
the high interests OF the nation"
JacI-son, In his first message, declares:
THAT it is principally as mdnufdct,.res
and commerce tend to increase the value Of
agricultural productions, and to extend
| their application to the wants and comforts
of society, that they deserve the fostering
care of the government"
What shall we say of Jefferson, claimed
as the father Of the democratic party? Let
him speak for himself. In his letter writ
ten in 1915 to Benjamin Austin, lie says:
THAT to be independent for the comforts
of life. we must fabricate them for our
selves; we must now place the manu-
facturer by the side of the agriculturist.
| The former question is suppressed. or
| rather assumes a new form. The grand
| inquiry Is, now. shall we make our own
comforts, or go without them at the will of
another nation? He, therefore, who is now
| against domestic manufactures must be for
reducing us either to dependence on that
nation or be clothed In skins and live like
wild beasts In dens and eaverns. | am
proud to say am not of them. Experience
has taught me that manufactures are now
| as necessary to our independence as to our
comforts, and If those who quote me as of
a different opinion will keep pace with me
in purchasing nothing foreign, where an
equivalent domestic fabric can be obtained.
without regard to any difference Of price, it
| will not be our fault IL We do not have n
supply at home, equal TO our demand, and
wrest that weapon OF distress from the
hand that has so long violated it." Is not
this sufficient evidence that Jefferson
favored the protection Of our domestic man
ufactures?
We then have Washington, Jefferson.
Madison, Monroe and jackson fav0ring the
protection of home industries, and now d.
any OF you imagine that these men favored
| protection for the purpose of making farm
ing less profitable in order to reduce the
cost of labor to the factory? And yet, &C.
cording to the fifth and last conclusion of
my friend Thomas, this Is just what they
must have done. They were great factors
In the early history of the country. They
shaped all legislation and nodded public
opinion, but certainly were never before
charged with favorIng reduction of the
price of labor.
need not speak Of the other great names
that come after them, as they were as free
from the crime as those l have already
mentioned.
! l will not pursue this line of thought far
ther, but will examine into the truth or
fslsity Of the charge that protection Injuries
both the farmer and laborer. TO do this q
protective tariff must reduce the value of
what the farmer has TO sell and the wages of
the labcrer. / deny that 1t does, and l ap-
peal To the history and results Of our tariff
Legislation for the proof of my position.
make the statement that tariff for revenue
only has always left the government in
debt and our industries depressed. / now
make the further statement that every tariff
levied for revenue and protection has always
either freed the government from debt, or
reduced the debt and increased our farming
and manufacturing interests, and advanced
the wages of the workingman.
i Let us see If this is true. We will GO
back to 1859. Up to that year we had been
living under free trade, and any one who
will investigate the condition of affairs al
that time must admit that our country was
not prosperous.
That you may fully understand the con.
diiion of the country at that time. nd why
the people felt depressed, 1t Is only neces-
ssry TO say tina. the balance of trade was
against them; and to show you the effect
upon any country when the balance of trade
is against 1t, it is only necessary tina;
you see what effect the balance of trade has
had upon this country, from the time 1t be
came an independent nation up to 1861. TIC
do this / will give you a short history OF
the various tariffs passed by congress from
1859 to 1861. Up to the year 1889 we had
free trade in its most unlimited sense. The
result was that in 1859, during seven years
of free trade, the importation of foreign
goods amounted to eighty-five million dol
lars (ss5. .000. .000) and our exports to thirty
three million dollars 1888, ,0O0. .0O0), leaving
balance of trade against Us amounting te
fifty-two million dollars (S52, ,0e0. .000). Al
this day this might not be considered q
large amount, but at the time ii occurred.
considering the wealth of the country, Il
was excessive. The people petitioned con.
gress for relief, and Indicated very clearly
, the direction In which relief should come
They requested that congress should pro
tect the manufacturing interests by impos
ing duty on foreign impOrtations-on for
, eign goods that came in competition witt
home industries.
Hence, in 1859, congress passed the frs
bill imposing duties ON the products of for
eign countries. The duties levied wer,
| slight. In 1899 congress passed an act In
, creasing the duties on imported goods. IL
, 179l-9l-94 and in the year 1900 other bill,
were passed, each bill increasing tn,
Gutiel
/ these various bills brought about tn,
following results: In seven years, from 179'
to 1901, our importation OF foreign good,
amounted to one hundred and twelve mil
lion. thirty Thousand, eight hundred ant
twenty-fOur dollars ts112. .03O, S24) and ou
exports during the same time amounted Il
! two hundred and one million. four hundred
and five Thousand, one hundred and thirty
nine dollars tS201, ,405, 1:9). leaving a bal
ance of trade in our favor amounting t.
, eighty-nine million, three hundred and sew
enty-four thousand. three hundred and fif
teen dollars 1889. .374 Sl5).
/ This shows the difference in results be
, tween free trade and protection. In sever
years, under free trade, the balance o.
, trade against us amounted to fifty-two mil
lion dollars (S52 900, 000), while in sever
| years, under a protective tariff, the balanc'
of trade was not only not against us. bu
was eighty-nine million, three hundred an,
/ seventy-four thousand. three hundred ant
) fifteen dollars 1889, 374. S15) in our favor.
: This was u2questionably the result o
> protection given by the various tariff act
Z from 1889 to 1900
{ We began to export more than we inn
ported. We sold more goods than VI
bought, and this is one of the sources OF tn
wealth Of nations as well as of Individuals
T No nation can continue to import more thai
, she exports without becoming impover
q isbed. The result Is the same with Individ
, uals. He who buys more than he sells be
t comes poor, and he who sells more than h
: buys will eventually become Tich.
The next tariff bill passed by congres
was In 1904, again increasing the duties
: and the prosperity of the country con
Z tinued.
r Unhapplly. this state of prosperity wa
Y not permitted to continue. We had then
!? as now, free trade or ''revenue only
|. Marty and IN 1917 and arair In, 1Sns III