The intelligencer. [volume] (Lexington, Mo.) 1887-1891, 1889-06-01
PROF. II. C. ADAMS OPPOSES THE AMER
ICAN SYSTEM.

ICAN SYSTEM.
HE sTRENUoUsLY ADVOCATES THE
CLEvELAND-MILLs DOCTRINE ON
THE TARIFF QUESTION.
During the campaign last year we
adverted 70 the fact that the Chicago
platform had no defenders ia ,ours
colleges, and that the repubiicar
party, in tying itself 10 Sd x
as I' the rspfsssaistiss ss q s i{ Is,
tellectuaf HE 81 ufiIe ntt38H . m Bi1t ws
said wasEtrikin&ly y syefif1ed a few davs
before the close of the campaign, when
Prof. Bowen, of Harvard, was invited
to write letter for republican meet
ing at Cambridge, and replied, in hot
| indignation, that he intended to vote
for Cleveland and Thurman. Prof.
Bowen said that he had not changed
his views on the subject OF protection,
but that the present tariff was tyranny
and not protection. at is crushing
| onr native industries" he said. at is
taxing nearly all the necessaries OF life.
and thereby driving our native work
men into numerous aud rioutous At
lempts to raise the rate OF wages upon
which they can no longer subsist 1t
taxes the artisan and common faborer
IN his necessary condiments, his daily
food, in his clothing, tools, and mate
rlals, and this taxation must be kept
up, at James e. Blaine's bidding, by
the whole republican party, in order
to add a further surplus of about $780,
OCC 900 year 10 the many tons OF gold
and silver which are already lying idle
in the national treasury" This tcs.i-
mony from the author of the we'll
known textbook entitled American
Political Economy was one of the Sc
verest blows that the republican party
received in the campaign, but it came
too late to be effective.
The Offense of Prot. II. Adams is akin
to Prof. BoweD's in this, that he con-
'iders the question of present impor-
tance to be mot whether a restrictive
Or liberal commercial policy is cor
| rect in theory, but whether this coun-
try has reached a point in its industrial
development where it can advantage
ously drop the restrictions which il has
chosen thus far to retain" In series
of lectures to the students of Michigan
University, he answers this question in
the affirmative, giving n variety of rea-
sons for his opinion. For example, he
| asks what classes of people are now
benefited by the maintenance of pro-
tective tariff, answering his own ques-
lion in this way, according to the De-
troit Tribune:
(a) 1t is neither the laborer nor
the holder of uninvested capital. The
proof of this assertion is found in an
analysis on industrial occupations in the
United States.
co. Protection benefits the owners
OF real estate who, either by situation
or peculiarity of product, can. through
the medium of the tariff, maintain a
monopoly of the home market. The
rental upon mines, pine forests, and
The like. is increased by protective du-
| ties.
(c) Protection benefits those who,
granted monopoly OF the home market
by the tariff, are secured against COM
petition at home by patents or secure
themselves against competition by
means of trade combinations.
The mass of the American people lie
outside these classes.
| II suitable measure OF tariff reform
1
OF ali raw materials of manufacture
tree ct duty, he holds that the pur-
chasing power of wages, salaries, in
comes from fixed Investments, and
selt- t-supportiug industries would be
greatly increased, and that the United
states would take her proper place
among the nations OF the world as a
great commercial nation. These doc
| ,.,s,, Nil
were ''repudiated by the voters" last
tall, and therefore ought not to be
taught at the University of Michigan,
or al all events that "a fair presenta-
lion should be made of the economic
theories adopted by the majority OF ~
people and that text books in harrs sout
with those theories should be ibusi-
hands of the students" -s~auinauds:
"We have to deaf>m-
Mr.. Lowell in his Earvaneral assem-
address, ''when the belief see,ass Ows:
spreading that truth not only can, but
should be, settled by show of hands
rather than by count OF heads"
! The idea that nothing should be
taught that is not approved by ma
iority OF the people presupposes that
the majority are as wise as the profess
sors in universities, whereas if this
were the case, there would be no iced
OF universities. Everybody being able
to decide scientific questions, the high
er institutions of learning might be
shut up, and great saving OF expense
effected. Moreover, we must remind
our Detroit contemporary that there
are no textbooks in existence which
teach the contrary OF what Prof.
Adams teaches. There are some that
tell us that protection Is good thing
tor new country, by way of starting
up aud diyersifyiug industries. Prof.
4 Bowen tells us these things in his
American Political Economy; Fred
erick List tells US the same-and we
observe that Prof. Adams was partic-
ular to cite List as an authority on that
side. Prof. Robert Ellis Thompson
tells us the same. But none of them
say that protection is good perma-
nent policy for nation, for they all
, know that that would be sheer spoliS
ton of the many for the benefit of the
few. Nor do any of them advocate
duties on the raw materials of manu-
facture. They all know that such du.
ties are in violation of their own the
Ory. But ii is one of the grounds of
bitter complaint against Prof. Adams
that he teaches that duties on wool,
lumber, minerals, and dye-s,uffs arc
opposed equally to the theories of pro-
lection and free trade.
1t would seem TO be necessary, there
| fore, for the editor of the Detroit Trib-
+ nne TO prepare text book of the kind
that he wants, in order to get the right
doctrines before the students OF Mich
igan university, for we assure him that
there are none in the Eng lish or IN any
modern European tongue. such a
book would embrace two leading
; theses: (D that protection OF copper,
for example, Is a good permanent pol
icy Tor a nation, whether copper eau be
e produced here more cheaply than
5 abroad or not; (2) that duties on raw
e materials should DC maintained, whel IL
7 er they tend to cripple manufactures
3 or not. We should like to see such Il
q textbook. We wonder that some far
. seeing philanthropist like Mr.. Joseph
+ Wharton does not offer prize tor one.
I MISSOURI, KANSAS & TEXAS
. RAILWAY.