Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1891-04-12
Free Trade and Governor Hill.

Governor Hill was announced fiat
footed for protection, but his letter puts
him fat-footed on the old Democratic
ground. That ground was and Is o tariff
for revenue to meet the expenses OF honest
and economical government, and nothing
more The prime object Is revenue ana
protection so far as o revenue tariff yields
protection.
There is no free-trade party now. For
free trade means direct taxation for Fede-
raj revenue. What might have been the
results. if at the organization of the Gov
eminent real free trade had been proclaim
ed and the Federal Treasury supplied by
direct taxation il would be hard to say.
Probably there would have been less job;
berry in the administration OF the Federai
finances. Possibly the Government would
have been less able to force tho seeding
States INTO submission. But such ques-
tons have no practical interest. The
American people are almost unit in favor
Of the tariff scheme of revenue. Hence,
there Il no real tree-trade party. :.
All parties claim to favor an honest and
economical government. But they differ
on the tariff. The real difference seems to
be as follows Every man who has studied
the subject. even slightly, knows that the
total tariff income from any article OF i'm
mort is a product of two factors. One fac
tor is the quantity Of the impost; the
other the rate of tax. A rate at zero will
nroduoe no income That Is free trade. A
rate so high q TO prevent importation will
make the quantity zero, and there will be
no income, That is perfect protection:
Between these extremes practical men will
readily fix a rate for any gwen article
which will yield the maximum income
from that article. BY carrying that princi-
nle through we get tariff yielding the
LARGEST income from the immense volume
of onr imports. Whether the rates on diff
ferent articles which would get the largest
;ncome from each would approach uni
formity II uncertain. Should they do so
the fact would vindicate the old "ad-vaio-
But the aggregate of these special maxi
NUNS would be perhaps two or three
ernment needs. And just here comes the
difference between protection and free
trade, Protection says reduce the in-
come TO what we really need, but do so ~
,ncreasinc rates. shortening quantity, en-
bancing price, and thus protect and
stimulate homo production" II higher
tariff rates do not increase cost to the con-
sumer they have no protective value. On
the other hand free trade--the only free
trade now in the country--says reduce
income by lowering rates and oheapeninS
L
rates do not lessen cost TO the consumer
| they have as much protective value As the
| higher rates
understand the matter, the Republi-
! can party holds TO one view-the protective
| yiew--ln the interests OF manufactures.
The Democratic party holds to the other
| view, In the interests Of the mass OF the
| people, and Governor Hilps letter puts
him fully on the Democratic platform.
For MIR. Cleveland have great respects
and that respect u not lessened by his sil-
yer lettsr. He may be right in his views,
II IL quite probable that DO knowsa good
deal moro about the matter than some
others But there IL in me . suspicion
that nobody knows much. The thing has
TO be tried. But II surprises me to SOC the
claim set up for MIR. Cleveland that he
mad" the issue on the tariff. read hte
message and II there u an idea In It which
had not many times before been just -
clearly announced - Democratic doctrine,
! failed 70 catch II. Indeed, doubt Il
there are many ideas on tho subject which
were not clearly stated years ago BY Ro-
bert J. Walker. then at the head OF The
Treasury Department. n.