Alpena weekly argus. [volume] (Alpena, Mich.) 1871-1893, 1891-12-02

for tariff reform and reduction has
ever since been burning and grow
ing one in the country, the protected
industries have exacted and received
from each Republican Congress elect
ed since 1874 an increase of the tariff,
occasionally permitting the repeal or
lessening of a tax that went into the
Treasury in order to keep away from
or to increase the taxes levied for
their benefit. And such will always
be the case. Protection left to its
natural momentum never stops short
of prohibition, and prohibitory walls
are always needing to be built high
er or to be patched and strengthen
ed. A protective tariff never has Civ
en- and, from its own nature, never can
give stability aud contentment to the
very interests which it assumes to pro.
tect. Even if its victims are too weak
or spiritless to agitate for its decrease,
its benefcaries are sure to agitate for
its increase.
Now, let us see where stability and
contentment can be found. Every
representative of New England, ex-
cept one who did not vote, voted
against the Walker tariff of 1916,
and prophesied disastrous consequent
ces to New England manufacturers
from its passage. That tariff was
about % per cent. on the average of
dutiable goods, as against quite 60
per cent. under the Mckinley bill.
In eleven years every New England
representative voted for a 20 per cent.
reduction of the tariff of 1S46, and
two-thirds Of these representatives
voted for the tariff of 1857, which
made reduction of % per cent,
bringing down the average rates to
less than 10 per cent, and so we'll
contented were the manufacturers of
that section with those rates that
when the Morrill, bill of 1857, took
the first step toward protection their
representatives declared that they ask
ed no increase of protection. Hon.
Alexander Rice of Massachusetts
said in the House "The manufac-
turer asks no additional protection. /"
John Sherman, protesting to urge the
bill in the interest of the farmer, ad-
mitted "the manufacturers have ask
ed over and over again to be let
alone" Mr.. Morrill, himself has since
said that the tariff of 1861 twas not
asked for and was but coldly welcom-
ed by manufactures. Senator r. M
T. Hunter of Virginia, patron of the
bill of 1857, said: "Have any Of the
manufacturers come here to complain
or to ask for new duties Is it not
notorious that if we were to leave the
manufacturers to themselves, to the
manufacturers of hardware, textile
fabrics, etc, there would be large
majority against any change? Do we
know that the wooden manufacture
dates its revival from the tariff of
1857, which altered the duties on
wool ?"
But the tariff of 1861 was passed
by politicians who were seeking by its
passage to make sure of the vote of
Pennsylvania for the Republican
party. War tariffs followed, and the
old road has been travelled over
again. The manufacturers, who in
1916 we're prospecting by their own
efforts and asked nothing from the
Government, having once received
pTOIcCIiOu DcCdIuc 81 CldIuOTOuS lOT
higher and still higher tariffs that
they embroiled the country and allie.
mated the people. So, likewise, the
manufacturers who were contented
and prospecting under the low revenue,
or, as they now call it, the free-trade
tariff of 1857, and asked nothing of
the Government, having been pro-
tected against their will, soon lost
their self. reliance, and have vexed
our ears with almost frantic cries for
higher tariffs. And just as the Tariff
of denominations" so angered and out
ragged the people that they gave what
would have been death blow to the
protective system had not the war in