The Irish standard. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn. ;) 1886-1920, 1892-10-29

pled organ or RapuDlcaiESM GIyou WIG
recall of Mr.. Egan, and despite that fact
this subservient official goes to Ophir
Farm as the bonored guest Of Woitelaw
Reid to advocate his election for vice
president Uf the United States
REVENUE TARIFF VS.. FREE TRADE.
While our eloquent friend, John r.
Finerty, IS away talking for Harrison aud
high tariff, the editor protein of the Git
izen is trying to enlighten or hefog the
minds of his readers on the tariff ques-
ton. Finerty's sapient substitute in the
eanctum oracularly exclaims: "As has
been shown more than once in this jour
nal (The Citlzen), tariff for revenue only
means free trade, pure and simple"
THE IRISH STANDARD respectfully but
emphatically denies that The Citizen
has shown that tariff for revenue only
means free trade, and furthermore, 1t
confidently asserts that with all his
yaunted wisdom the editor protein is
unable to show anything of the kind to a
man of ordinary intelligence. Henry
George is considered a higher authority
on economic questions than the anony-
nous sub-editor of The Citizen, and he
does not say that tariff for revenue only
is equivalent to free trade. In his
speech at the exposition building in this
city last Saturday evening, and from the
same platform where VIM. Mckinley Jr.,
proclaimed that the foreigner pays the
tax, Mr.. George said; Il am not III "a
yor of tariff for revenue only. am
free trader. don't want any tariff at
all" The Citizen must be aware that the
Mckinley tariff is strange compound
Of protective tariff, revenue tariff, tree
trade and reciprocity. The two latter
mean substantially the same thing, the
difference being no more than between
tveedledum and tweedledee. AS the
editor of The Citizen is evidently "at
sea" on this abstruse subject we will try
to simplify the question for him. II
every article now being imported into the
United Suites be admit ed free OF duty
we would have "free trade, pure and
simple" what Henry George wants when
he says II don't want any tariff at ALL
Then there would be no necessity Tor
custom houses and merchandise from
foreign countries could be shipped into
America in the same way that goods are
shipped from Illinois into Minnesota,
and vice versa. The Democratic party
wants nothing of that kind. It favors
tariff for revenue, and for revenue alone,
and only enough, in addition to the IN
ternal revenue, to run this government
economically as during Cleveland's ad-
ADMINISTRATION. Who ever heard OF sur
plus in the United States treasury till
Cleveland announced the fact in his
message to Congress and recommended
a reduction of the tariff to relieve the
burdens of the people? The large rev.
enue required for governmental expenses,
however. is so much that it will afford
ample protection to American industries,
but the manufacturers must get along
with less profit and reduce the price OF
their commodities to the bulk OF our
population. The Citizen naively says:
eff the tariff were made so low that it
would not afford any protection at all to
American Industries, the amount OF
money arising from it would be as great,
or perhaps greater than the amount aris-
ing from 1t at present. Every decrease
lot duty on an imported article leads to
heavier importations of that article. II
the duty on certain article is reduced
so per cent, and it the importations Of it
are consequently increased 50 per cent
Lis not the amount of money received
from the lowest tariff on it the same as
from the original tariff, and is not the
protection Of the American manufactured
article, to large degree, nullifed?"
That kind OF argument does not hold
water. How much must the tariff be re-
duced to afford no protection at all? II
4 is not fact that every decrease OF duty
leads to heavier importations or that 9
reduction Of 80 per cent duty on an arti.
Gle will increase the importation of it 81
per cent. Take sugar, for instance. The
duty on that article in the raw state
was not only decreased 50 per cent but
was entirely wiped out. Does the Cit.
zen mean to say that since it was put on
the free list the Importation has been
doubled? The people may consume
moro sugar now than before the tariff on
it was removed, but it does not follow
either logically or in fact that twice the
quantity is being imported. The people
Of the United States require SO much
sugar annually, and such men as the ed.
tor OF The Citizen eats no more sugar
,,rxr, ~, an .1,ny, ~ xuac doarnr md n r1aT.