The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1888-02-09
A Strong Statement.

The following facts and arguments were
recently drawn out of Congressman Bur
rows, of Michigan, member OF the Com
mittee on Ways and Means. The argu-
ment covers almost every phase of the
tariff question, and is SO strongly stated
that 1t cannot but carry conviction to the
mind of every impartial reader. 1t is a
whole volume in nutshell. Read 1t, as
it is taken from the New York Tribune S
Washington correspondence:
~ belieye,' - said Mr. Burrows that a
protective tax is for the best interest OF
All the people, and | am unalterahly OPP
posed to free trade for this country: The
highest prosperity of the agrlculturlst
demands protective tax. What the
farmer wants is market for his surplus
nroducts. 1t is for his advantage to have
that market as near his farm as posslpie,
and such IA market is secured only by
building up diversified industries to con-
sumo the farmer surplus product. Ii we
we're purely an agricultural people we
would be the poorest country on theglODe.
a nrotectiye tariff builds up these diversl-
fed industries and to such an extent that
thh farmer to-day, leaving out cotton an
tobacco. sells 90 per cent OF his surplus
product to our OWN people. Any policy
which would disturb our manufactures
and thus drive the consumers to the farm
and make them producers would he IN
inrious to the agricultural interests.
Then to the farmer the home market is
steady one. on which he can rely from year
to wear. so that when he sows he knows
wien he may sell, while ii he relied Oh the
foreign market his surplus would be taken
one year and left on his hands the next.
1.-THE statement of the President In his
recent message that the duty on an I'M
ported article enhances Its cost by SO much
TO the consumer is never true except when
the article is one exclusively of foreign
nrOduction. If the article on which duty
is levied is also one of domestic production,
II ia ALWAYS true that lhe cost OF the artl-
Gle ia thereby reduced, for the simple
reason that the price OF an article is never
determined by the am0ut OF duty on II,
but by the great law of supply and demand
If duty imposed on an article results IN
increasing the production of the home az
ticle. the direct and inevitable tendency is
to bring down the price.
1.-The Free Trader cannot name single
article of domestic manufacture when is
the result of well established industry
which cannot be purchased to day cheaper
under the protective tariff than IN the
DAYS of free trade. And there is not an
article in the farmers home or on MS iarm
upon which duty is imposed that Is net
furnished to him cheaper than II would Ce
furnished under free trade.
s.Of course, favor putting on the Tree
list all articles purely Of foreign production
which are not, OF cannot be, produc' III
this co lntrv, bnt when an imported article
comes. in competition with an article
which is. or can be, produced III this coun
try. believe in imposing such restraint on
the imported article as will tend TO build
I'D the domestic industry, encourage III
vestment of our capital and give employ
ment to our labor.
LAS to wool am unaterably opposed to
putting it on the free list, OF reducing the
duty one penny On the contrary, L pc
lieye the best interests Of the people
demand that the duty should be raised to
what it was under the act OF 1867. IL is
humiliating to a nation of 10000 ,0O0,0O0
people to have to depend on anybody for
the clothing on the backs of its citizens.
The wool industry exists to day III every
county IN the United States. except thirty
seven. and, if it can be encouraged, there
is no reason under the sun why we cannot
produce all the wool necessary Tor our
home manufacture. If the polcy OF tie
President outlined in his message. were
carried out. have no question but that 1t
would drive our forty four millions OF
sheep to the slaughter house. and lima ly
result in an increased price of wool and lis
fabrics.
.sAs to lumber, salt. copper and iron.
those important industries in my State. l
shall not knowingly adopt any course
tending to cripple them or reduce us to
state Of dependence upon any foreign
country. There should be no question IS
to salt. which has grown in Michigan un-
der protection from a product of four
thousand barrels in go, to four million
barrels ln'S7 And it is complete refu
tation of the President s assumption that
the duty added to the cost. that the price
OF salt has gone down in that time from
81 80 per barrel to 60 cents per pound in
the Saginaw Valley. barrel and all.
1.-The barrel costs by wholesale % cents.
and that leaves the price of $50 pounds of
salt only 81 cents. But look at the mat
ter beyond its Michigan aspect with
broad view for what benefits the country
at large, benefits each State and indl-
vidual
There is no question but that at the
present rate of taxation. surplus Will
follow at the end of the year 80. There
ia no difference of opinion as to the neces-
sity of so moderating our tax laws as to
avoid such result, and | shall favor any
system which Will surely reduce the sur
plus to the needs of the Government.
honestly, wisely and pat iotically admin
istered. But shall not knowingly sup
port any measure which in my Judgment
will tend to cripple American industries or
pauperiZe American labor.