St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1890-02-07
THE REAL QUESTION.

Among the many notable contribu-
lions to current tariff literature there is
none more valuable or that deserves to
command more respect than HUGH Nc
CULLocH's review of the BLAINE and
GLADSTONE articles which appeared
in the January number of the North
American Review. Mr.. Nc CULLoCH's
article is not only model in form and
temper, but tbs written in that easy
style of one who is thoroughly &C
Qualnted with his subject and who is
simply actuated by desire to reach
a just conclusion. There is nothing of
the partisan about it, nor is there any
effort at display of gIittering general
tiles. Mr.. MCCULLocH is no theorist in
relation to questions of finance and tax
alton. He is an eminently practical
man whose long and varied experience
as successful banker and man of
affairs, as well as minister of finance
and statesman, entitle his opinions on
the tariff to the utmost respect.
In his review of the BLAINE and
GLADSTONE articles, Mr.. MCCULLoCH
starts out with the proposition that the
question before the American people
is not free trade or protection, nor
will itbe within the lifetime of any liv
ing American. Therefore the argu-
ments of Mr.. BLAINE and Mr.. GLAD
STONE count for nothing so far as this
generation is concerned. He takes the
position that we must always collect a
considerable part of the money for the
uses, or abuses, of the federal govern
ment from duties on imports, and
though these duties may be levied prin-
cipally with reference to revenue, they
must always be an obstruction to CON-
merce. Inasmuch as they will tend to
check foreign competition with the do
nestle producers of the articles taxed,
they will be in effect protec-
ton. Then he proceeds to show
that while we cannot have free trade,
we are equally unable to have conf
plete and fair system of protection, be-
cause our industries are SO great, so
varied and so complex that duties
which restrict competition in some in
dustTies will increase the cost of pro-
duction in others, and in some cases
destroy the profits. In protecting one
industry another will be oppressed. He
quotes the Chicago platform of 1888 to
show that even Mr.. BLAINE's party
friends conceded the inequalities of the
existing tariff schedule.
Mr.. MCCULLoCH holds, therefore,
that the real question is between an op-
pressiye tariff and tariff reform, not a
question of theories. but simply one of
practical policy. He thinks that Mr..
GLADSTONE is more excusabe for his
failure to master the facts that have
made the industrial and fiscal system
of this country different from that of
England than is Mr.. BLAINE for his
failure to understand, or at any rate to
recognize, even the mostimportant facts
that determine whether the protection
policy is now the wisest and best. He
then reviews the historical part of Mr..
BLAINE'S article and points out its in
accuracies. He shows that the periods
of prostration to which Mr.. BIZ AINE re-
terred were due to other causes than
tariff legislation. In the fourth period
alluded to by Mr.. BLAINE, in 1873, the
policy which he affects to believe must
bring prosperity and safety to the nation
was in full blast, and in the three other
periods. 1877, 1887 and 1857, the cause
imagined by Mr.. BLAINE was not in
operation to any considerable extent
Despite the uniform courtesy of his Ian
guage Mr.. MCCULLoCH is well-righ pit
iless in his dissection of Mr.. BLAINE
article, for he cuts it into shreds and
exposes the fallacy of the whole argu-
ment. 1t is safe to say that Mr.. BLAINE
will not attempt reply to Mr.. McCUI.-
LoCH's article.