New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1890-09-01
An 1DTANCE; NOT A RETREAT.

Mr.. Raines speech at Waterville was admir-
ably adapted to remove misapprehensloh anu
correct Misrepresentation of the policy ne ao'
vocates. Since his suggestion was first mace
opponents of protection have lab0red mceS,
sanity 70 make it appear that he had opened
war upon the protective policy. Some uh'hi'K-
ing or ignorant supporters of that policy 1ail-
ing to see that removal Of purely revenue
duties would in no way affect the pr0tec'loh
Of home industries, have Numbered into the
notion that the protective policy would some
how be weakened or modified by removing
s,,ch duties in exchange for free admission OF
American products to foreign markets. IhE
TRIBUNE has already pointed out tha' oec'
rotary Blainc's idea is not anegoh'S'ic
TO the protective policy OF the Nation o"t
only an extension and broadening Oh 'ha'
policy. by making even the relaxation OF purely
revenue duties means of inSurine larger oe-
mand for American labor. Nhlle menoaeio"S
0pponcntS have persisted in representing INC
sort of reciprocity proposed as an abandonment.
Of protective principles. Republicans have not
hecn deceived In the Senate and In Kepuo-
lean conventions hearty support OF pro'cc,ioh
has been Joined with warm approval OF Mr.
Blaines suggestions.
Secretary Blaine completely entrapped MS
political opponents into public approval OF MS
suggestion before they discovered that IL was
in harmony with the Republican policy. some
NAV suspect that an apparently iil-c0nsldered
recital of arguments for admission OF coarse
wool free of duty was, in fact shrc"di! III
topdcd to draw the entire Democratic force into
unreserycd commitment to his plans before
the harmony of those plans with the protective
policy had been perceived. In his first Iapcr
on the subject, Secretary Blaine said nothing
himself in favor of the removal vi duties OH
South American wool. but qlotco 'ne ARK"
mcnt of Argentine delegates. In all S',hSe'
ouent papers and letters, he argues cXci''sNc.!
for retention of sugar duties because 'h's
duty is. and duties on coffee. tea. hdcs anu
ruhbcr were of 10 protective value. 'heir IT,
moyal can be made to strengthen the delence
of American industry. if in exchange iof 'ha'
rcmoval larger markets for American products
can be opcnc% A.
STILL loss can the broader protection Z"
which Minister Reid has referred in his "lllcial
papers. and which Congress Has embodied III
the Meat Inspection bill. be distorted INTO al!
want of attachment 10 or confidence III the pro-
tcctiye policy. Minister Reid was careful ~
state that the right of France to impose dn'i">
for The defence Of lis industry was III no WAY
questioned. But prohibition OF American proa-
ut.s ON the ground that they aic unwholcSoh"
night be fly met by American prohibition Oh
imports of French wines which statesmen ana
medical authorities of France declare adol-
teratcd in a manner injurious to hcal'h. 20
any other unjust discrimination against Amer-
can products. against cattle by Great britain or
no,l, nv Germany, can be most effectively an
swercd by prohibition Of such products from
those countries as the President may SEQ lit 10
exclude The people who have falsely caile"
pr,tc,tivc duties prohibitory in purpose are the
first to discover that a real prohibition oi some
foreign product would he at war with pro-
lection.
The common sense Of TIE whole matter IL
This: protection aims to build up American IN
dustrics and TO increase the demand for ATcT-
can labor. not necessarily BY charging the
home market only. but also BY opening foreign
markets where that is practicable. The re-
| moyal of purely revenue duties would not be i'll
| itself protection. but when granted in exchange
! for free admission OF American products IA
| foreign markets.. it becomes most ef"rtiNc
| form of protection. So an exclusion OF Frchrh
wines. or of the f"7 900. 900 worth OF woolcn
| goods which were imported last year IRON
| Great Britain, would become peculiarly pro-
tective if it shOnld open foreign markets f"I
American hog and cattle growers. 1t ought t.
cnliphtcn even Free Traders little to consider
that both of these important extensions OF the
protective policy have been suggested ny inc
same State Department.