The Madison daily leader. [volume] (Madison, S.D.) 1890-current, 1894-03-29

the circulating medium: By the universal
complaint OF the want of employment and
the consequent reduction of the wages Of
labor, and above all, by the low and De
pressed state OF the value Of almost every
description Of property In the nation
which has, on an average, u not less
than so per cent within q few years. II Is
most painful for me to dwell on the gloom
OF this picture, but I have exaggerated
nothing. Perfect fidelity to the original
would have authorized me to throw on
deeper and darker hues.n
Colonel Thomas III. Benton's description
of the same period Is well worthy to be
noted:
f.No price for property or produce; no
sales but those Of the sheriff aud the mar
shall; no purchasers at execution sales but
the creditor or some hoarder OF money; no
employment for industry; no demand for
labor; no sale for the products of the farm;
no sound of the hammer but that of the
auctioneer knocking down property. Stop
laws, property laws, replevin laws, stay
laws, loan Office lawsuits was the bust
ness OF the legislatures in three-fOurths OF
the states OF the Union. Distress the
universal cry of the people; relief the uni
versal demand thundered at the doors of
all legislatures. state and federal
Protective Act 90 1894.
No relief came until the protective act of
1894 Among those who voted Cor that
much needed measure were such well
known Democrats as Andrew jackson,
senator from Tennessee; Thomas H. BEN
ton, senator from Missouri; Martin Van
Buren,, senator from New York; James
Buchanan. q representative from Penn
~sylvania; Richard M. johnson, senator
from Kentucky; Louis McLain, q represen-
tative from Maryland; General Sam Hous-
ton, q representative from Tennessee and
afterward senator from Texas. It will be
observed that In this group are three Dem
ocratic statesmen who subsequently be-
came president Of the United States, rs
well as one that became vice president,
Richard M. johnson of Kentucky. All
gave their ardent supportto this protective
tariff measure, and there was as yet no
sectionalism manifest in our industrial
legislation.
In 1928 the tariff was still further In
creased. Again most of these same dis
tinguished Democrats, including Silas
Wright OF New York, one Of the ablest
leaders of that party in the country, voted
for 1t. The names of no fewer than Ave
gentlemen who subsequently became
president are recorded In the yeas and
nays on the passage of this bill. Martin
Van Buren,, William Henry Harrison and
James Buchanan voted for it. and John
Tyler and James *. Polk against IL.
Compromise of 1883.
But the change Of position of Mr.. Cal
houn and his followers eventually found
expression in the compromise tariff of 1888.
This continued i'm force for about 10 years,
and while it GAINED the excitement I'm the
South occasioned by the notification cpl
sode of 1892, 1t ut length produced the
great financial crisis of 1881, a period OF
distress almost equal to that which pre-
coded the enactment OF the tariff or 1894
Many or our older citizens recall with a
shudder the hardships and privations
which were endured throughout the ccun-
try from 1881 to 1912. They justly attri-
buted the prevailing distress to- the tariff
of 1885, and, when opportunity came, as it
did i'm 1910, they overthrow and drove from
power I'm all branches of the government
the party responsible for it.
The Tarix oK 1sAa.
As q result OF this great revolutions on
August SO, 1Sk2, President Tyler reluct-
antly gave his assent TO another great pro-
tective Law, known as the tariff Of 1912. 1t
passed the house Of Representatives On
July 16, by the narrow margin OF four
yotes-yeas 116, y 112. Ii included
among its supporters such able leaders as
Garrett Davis of Kentuc y, Willard Fill.
more of New York, Thomas Morris and
Nathaniel Pendelton of Ohio, and Richard
w. Thompson of Indiana. JIG passed the
$500 49, a. 49, n~ssA- "a 49, - s--lu
vote-yeas "a, nays %. Among its most
Richard III. Bayard, James Buchanan,
Rufus Choate, John j. Crittenden,
William 4. Dayton and Silas Wright.
This law raised the country from the
depths of financial deprivation and dis.
tress to q condition of confidence and
prosperity such as it had not known since
the repeal of the tariff of 1928. So well
recognized was this fact, and so widely
popular was the new law, that in the pres
idential election of 1874, the Democrats In
the close Northern states were as earnest
and outspoken advocates Of a protective
tariff as the supporters of Mr.. Clay.
Tarin M 1857.
Mr.. Mckinley then went on to give The
history OF the repeal of this tariff In 184f
and the appeal to the country In lSA8
when 1t was ~repudiated by the people In
the election Of General Taylor to the presi
dencv. He then continued:
Still the Wing victory was not suffi
GENTLY decisive to secure d change I'm ths
tariff and other questions crowded to thu
front and imperatively claimed public at
tention. So it tran -pired that there wa.
NO further legislation on the subject unit
the enactment known as the tariff of 1867
BY this law the duties were reduced to /
lower point than they had been ct an,
time since the war of 1912. The direct re
suit Of it's passage was the disastrous fin
ancial panic which soon after swept over
the country and Frustrated every depart
ment of business, involving alike all on
agricultural, commercial and manufactur
} ing interests.
This was the last tariff Legislation pre-
ceding the secession of the Southern
states and brings this review TO q periot
within the recollection of many of m,
hearers. It win be seen that In the earl,
? days of the country the tariff was no
only not a sectional question, but ha.
among It's firmest supporters the leading
{ statesmen OF the South. Then this ques
ton was as broad rs our country and d
national as our flag. May we not conf