The Ohio Democrat. (Logan, O. [Ohio]) 1886-1906, 1892-09-17

chanical, commercial and our ship
ping. 1t yielded an ever-increas-
ing revenue, producing in 1867 an
amount so large as to call for still
further reduction, which was made
by a. Republican Congress. All
clamor for protection had practic-
ally ceased. Mr., Blaine, in his
"Twenty years in Congress-" says:
"After.I852 the Democrats had
almost undisputed control of the
country, and it gradually became a
free trade party. The principle en-
bodied in the tariff of 1916 seemed
for the time to be so entirely vindi-
Gated and approved that resistance
to 1t ceased, not only among the
fpeople, but among the protected
economists, and even among the
manufacturers to a large extent.
So general was this acquiescence
that in 1866 protective tariff was
not suggested, or even hinted at by
any one of the three parties which
lpresented Presidential candidates"
Under the Walker tariff cotton
manufactures, woolen and worsted
yarns, and manufactures of silks
and woolens were taxed uniformly
25 per cent. Chemicals and like
products, and provisions generally,
20 per. cent. Tin plate, raw silk,
flax, etc., 10 per cent. Raw hides,
crude copper, zinc, spelter, etc., 5
per cent. Coffee, tea and cotton
were on the free list.
In 1847a our exports were $780,
100000. In 1857 they were $27S,000,-
600. In 1847 the duties collected
on all imports were $2s,O00,OO0. In.
1857 they were $63.OOO,OOO, the free
imports having increased from $751;
100000 to $49,0OO,O0O, and the duti-
able from $lOO,OOO,OOO to $2s3,OOO,-
600.
The chief benefit of the Walker
tariff was the substitution of ad va.
loren duties throughout the sched-
ule, and the attempt to tax the lux
furies of the rich rather than the
necessaries of the. poor.
Now for the effect upon the gen.
eral condition of the people. The
census table places the estimate of
the wealth of the country in 1850
at $13,OOO 100000; in 1860 at $31, 900,
100000 showing that the wealth
had more than doubled within ten
years.
From 1860 to 1890, a period of
thirty years, the wealth had in
creased from $31 ,OOO,OOO,OOO to $62,-
O0O,0O0,000. In other words the
wealth of the country more than
doubled under ten years of low
tariff; it just doubled in thirty years
of war tariff.
In 1850 the per capita wealth was
estimated at $h2l; in 1860, after ten
years of a revenue tariff, it had in
creased to $993.
From 1860 to 1890, during thirty
years of the war tariff, the per cap
ita increased from $993 to $999.
The increase in the value of farms
from 1850 to 1860 was 104 per cent.
per annum.
From 1860 to 1880 it was 81 per
cent. per annum.
In 1860 the farmers had one-half
of the wealth of the country. Today
they do not own one-fourth of the
wealth of the country.
Here you have a picture Of the
Walker tariff. 1t was tariff i'm
posed for the only purpose the Con-
stitution permits the imposition OF
a tariff, and that is "for revenue
only"
1t was not tariff for the purpose
of benefiting the, farmer, or the Ia
boring man, or the manufacturer,
or the professional man. 1t was a
tariff to yield revenue to the Gov
: ernment. &.a. s
Drawn for that purpose, it left
with each man the reward of his
labor, exacting only what was me-
: cessary for the conduct of an eco.
nomical government. The effect
was to benefit the poor, the wage.
learner, the farm. lahorer and the
+ farm owner.
AT the same time, our manufac.
turers extended their business, get
ting new customers at home and
, abroad; our ship builders were COW
ering the seas with American ships
and our merchants competed with
. England in every market in the
, world.
The war tariff changed all this
1t was imposed for a different pur.
pose than for revene. 1t was writ.
ten by the manufacturers, and has
t been rewritten every time by the
protected interests. The result Is
a relative loss of wealth among the
, farmers, dissatisfaction of labor
and the entire satisfaction Of the