The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1894-08-11
FREE TRADE OR TARIFF REFORM

A Republican paper which cannot
pride itself on its consistency, because
its character for both astonishing and
comical inconsistency is fully estab-
lished, has this to say about some re-
marks of The Herald:
When a paper prides itself on its
entire consistency and in one column
says that 1.-The Democrats did not adj
yocate free trade when they came be-
fore the country in the campaign of
1872. and then in the next column de-.
clares that protection Democrats are
not exactly the kind OF Democrats the
people want" it is calculated to mud
die the ordinary reader"
The last phrase is mistake. The
two expressions quoted were not zeal
culated" for any such purpose. Neither
will they actually muddle the "ordi-
nary reader. People possessed of or
binary sense can understand them
both, and no one but sophist would
pretend there is anything inconsistent
in them. Is it not fact that the Dem
ocratic rallying cry in 1892 was "a
tariff for revenue only" and its motto
was Tariff Reform?'' Free trade was
not contended for. Present free trade
is not the doctrine of the Democracy.
A protection Democrat is not a tariff
for revenue Democrat, therefore he is
mot exactly the kind of Democrat the
people want" judging from the pop
ular votes in 1890, 1891 and 1892
The attempt of our contemporary to
ma la o M Of tIxy
consistent and harmonious propositions
is failure. like nearly all it's essays at
argument. 1t is unable to perceive the
logical conclusions of ordinary reason
ing. 1t is only able to void billingsgate
and manufacture obituaries.
In this instance its whole endeavor
turns on the meaning which it endea-
vors to attach to the term free trade
England has a tariff for revenue and
its policy is sometimes called free
trade. So far that is correct. AS a
matter of fact England is not under
free trade. because it derives revenue
from duties on imports Where a tar
if is imposed, free trade is an impos-
sibility.
But are not great many articles
admitted into England free of duty 90
Certainly. well. is not that free
trader" For answer we point to the
Mckinley law, the most extravagant
protectionist measure ever enacted It
contains a free list Does that make
1t a free trade law? There will be
some more articles on the free list
when the tariff reform bill is passed
But that will not constitute it a free
trade measure.
There have been some eminent Dem
ocrats who contended for protection to
certain industries, on the Republican
theory. Why? Because they represen-
ted in Congress districts in which du-
ties were desired to foster industries
established therein. The Congress-
men were Democrats in all else but
the one issue. And they voiced on that
question the sentiments of the people
who sent them to Congress. There are
some Democrats who appear to be
pulled by similar strings today
The Herald takes the position that
true Democratic doctrine and policy
require the statesmen of the land to
legislate for the whole country. They
should study the greatest good TO the
greatest number When each local in
terest is fought for regardless of the
effects upon the rest of the nation, the
result is bound to be contention and
finally advantages to some sections
at the expense of others.
The terms protection and free trade
might be used in a controversy be-
tween the great political parties, if
both were employed in the sense inten-
ded to be conveyed in the original ar
gument. But free trade" as assailed
by Republican deceivers, is not the
doctrine of the Democracy. What the
party in power is endeavoring to es-
| tablish is a reform of the tariff, not
It's abolition. It is a reduction of du-
ties on many articles and an addition
to the Republican free list 1t is not
tariff smashing" nor free trade" as
pretended by those Republicans who
have no regard for truth or fairness OIL
anything but party advantages.
The tariff for revenue, which the
Democratic party considers for the
benefit and prosperity of the entire
people Of the United States, and which
4 that party was placed in power by the
people to inaugurate, is not only not
free trade" but is not to be compared
with the English revenue tariff, as our
confessedly muddled neighbor pre-.
tends. 1t is moderate measure OF
tariff reform. altogether different from
what that inconsistent sheet predicted
would be devised. As some eminent
Republicans have stated, 1T is not
protection, it is not free trade" The
Democratic party promised neither
and have attempted neither
AS to the facts about the effects Of
free trade on the prices of WOO
lead and other commodities. our ad,
der-like neighbor may hiss and wrig,
gle as much as it pleases, the fact re
mains that under the highest protec.
tive tariff ever pass ed, the prices Of
those articles have rapidly declined
until today, when McKinleyism gov
> l. Il