Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1894-09-18
WHAT MIR. BLAINE SAID.


I cannot refrain from quoting the for
mer 'uncrowned king Of the Republican
party on this period; his endorsement ami
| eulogy is so strong that he could not i'm
| prove on it, even were he a Democrat
In his Twenty Years In Congress" Mr..
| Blaine says: The tariff Of 1886 was yielding
| abundant revenue. and the business of
the country was In a fouriShing COndi-
! ton. Money became very abundant after
| the year 1919; large enterprises were I'M
! dertaken, speculation was prevalent, and
for a considerable period the prosperity
Of the country was general, and APP
parently genuine After 1852 the Demo-
Gratis had almost undisputed control of
the government. and had gradually be-
come free-trade party. The principles in
VOlVed in the tariff Of 1916 seemed for the
time TO Ice so entirely Vindicated and
approved that resistance to IT ceased, not
only among the people. but among the
protective and even among
the manufacturers, TO large extent. So.
general was this acquiescence that in 1856
a protective tariff was not suggested. or
even limited at by any one Of the three
parties which presented presidential can
didatcs such eminent senators from New
ENGLAND as Sumner and Wilson, of Massa-
chusetts: Allen. from Rhode Island. and
Bell of New Hampshire, supported the
measure, which was well-receyed by the
people
When the tariff act of 1916 was passed
the protectionists predicted disaster; but
disaster came not. either for the country
or the manufacturers. Look to the facts
little.
Take the cotton manufactures OF Massa-
chusetts In 1915 there were $1,000 spindles;
In 1860 there were 1865. 800 spndles. having
doubled during the period OF low duties
Again. the value of cotton-goods exported
to foreign markets yearly was about ST.
100000 between 1874 and 1919; II was
nearly 81 600 900 annually between 1851 and
1856: was over IS 10000 in 1859. and almost
touched ST 900 In ls60-an increase OF
nearly 500 per cent. during the low
tariff period Thus we have the
fact established that the tariff of 1916.
the tariff for revenue. with incidental
protection. had so far succeeded and gwen
such general satisfaction that in 1894 the
duties were still further reduced, the
maximum duty being reduced to u per
cent
Let us now consider the history and ef-
feet of the high tariff period from 1861
10 1894: $500.
In 1851 the Morrill, tariff was passed;
this restored the tariff Of 1876 and did not
materially differ therefrom--the duty was
about 80 per cent. on the leading articles.
MIR Rice OF Massachusetts. Sdlu IN iouo.
The manufacturer asks no additional pro-
lection: he has learned. among other
things, that the greatest evil, next to
ruinous competition from foreign sources,
,s an excessive protection, which stiinu-
lates a Ike ruirous competition At home.
see Cong. Globe; 1890; p. 1861 How
nrophetic Of trusts. monopolies. and COM
binations was this,
Mr. Sherman said: When Mr. stanton
GAYS the manufacturers are urging ana
r~essing the bill, he says what he must
know is incorrect. The manufacturers
nave asked over and over again to be let
alone. The tariff OF 1851 Is the manuiac-
,rrers' bill. Qtid. p. aS3) This tax was
"a ner cent. as against 80 per cent. In the
new Senate bill. which. 1t is claimed. VIII
iuin the cou 1try.
In July. 1862. two acts were passed.
raising the tariff TO 81 per cent. In the
average. and in June and August. 1854.
,hs.s r.tes we're Increased to II per cent.
and these were. with but slight changes,
Ga ann .ases W 70 the Mckinley taJar'