The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1893-03-20

view il correct he il bound to overthrow
protection, which he denounces to be I'M
just and immoral. Whatever duty large
or small involves pro,ection-and any
duty upon a competitive product involves
protection-must be to Mr.. Cleveland UNI
just and immoral. The David b. Hill
method of escaping from the consequences
of the Chicago platform demand for tariff
for revenue only was to argue that the pro-
lection which grows out of levying duty
solely for revenue is not protection for
projections sake" that it is incidental"
not intrinsic" protection. The sophistical
nature of this plea for incidental" pro-
lection is exposed by the Philadelphia Press
when it says:
This is the favorits answer, and 1t might b
effective If It were necessary TO levy duties for
the purpose Of raising revenue which involve
Incidental protection. But IL il not The
necessary revenue can b raised by duties which
Involve no protection at all. There is no pro-
lection in duty on tea and coffee, because We
do not produce them. There is practically no
protection in a duty on sugar, because We pro-
duce So little rs to be of small account The
restoration OF the old duties these three ar.
ticies alone would raise more than Q hundred
millions OF revenue, and would leave the matter
OF providing the remainder . very simple prob
lem. Indeed, such sincsre and intelligent OPP
porena OF protection A. the Philadelphia Record
openly advocate this kind OF . tarin, which
raises the revenue from non-compesittvs I'm
ports; and the simple statement OF its possibil.
tiles disposes OF che evasion which undertakes
TO justify incidental protection while condemn.
Ing protection for projections sake"
The Democratic party are face to face
with the responsibility of doing something
in fultilment Of the pledges upon which
they asked to be entrusted with the ad-
ministration of the government. They
m ust do something: they cannot afford to
not only specifically assail and denounce
the Mckinley tariff, but the whole princi.
pie of protection as unconstitutional, and
then leave the Republican tariff legisla-
ton essentially unchanged. What will
the Democracy do7 Brother Springer, ofthe
Democratic ways and means committee,
evidently would like to merely juggle with
the tariff; he would scale down the pres.
emit rates without making q radical change
in the system and would favor free
raw materials to manufacturers, which
discrimination against the producer in IA
vor of the manufacturer. Watterson. Mills
& Co. would wipe out tho protective du.
ties and substitute revenue duties on SUI
gar, tea and coffee. One of these roads to
tariff reform" the Democracy must take.
and the cheerful prospect before the Re-
publican party is that when the Democ-
racy have taken one of these roads they are
likely to wish they had taken the other,
for either road will be found very wretched
and hard to travel.
The enactment OF a tariff for revenue
only and the extirpation of protection,
whether "incidental' or intrinsic"
would make both labor and capitol revolt;
it would 10 tariff reform" forcing capital
to close its doors or cut its wages to the
level of European labor. If. on tho other
hand, the Democracy continue protection
to the Eastern manufacturer and
double it by giving him free raw materials.
then the Western producers will revolt and
say to the Eastern Democracy: 1--WE will
join hands with the South and give You
full free trade" if you propose to discrim-
mate against the producer and in favor OF
the manufacturer. The South would
probably welcome tariff for revenue only,
as under it its sugar would get practical
protection by the imposition of duty
on sugar, non-competive product Its
cotton has been on the free list since 1916,
and the mountaineering South, whose
staples are cotton, sugar and rice. would
probably help the West to enact 'free
trade" to punish the Eastern manufact-
urers for enacting one-sided protection for
their own benefit. BY whichever road
the Democracy move on the tariff, they
are likely to suffer disaster.
The people have had protection for
thirty years and they know that it spe lis
prosperity; they know Democratic tariff
reform by promise only. and if its performs
ance does not spell prosperity the people
will be prompt to resume protection. The
mood of though tful Republicans viewing
the Democracy is cheerful, because they
see the Democracy must do something.
and yet whatever they do is likely to in.
vOlve them in disaster and defeat.