Reporter and farmer. [volume] (Webster, Day County, Dakota [S.D.]) 188?-1946, 1894-03-29
The Reporter . Farmer
THURSDAY, MARCH 2s. 1894.
FRED. w. HARkIs. Editor
vsuhg d Tie sss!,, nn::s ;s.s Press asss:;:as
Protective Act of isa4.

Protective Act of 1894.
No relief came until the protective act of
1924 Among those -ha voted for that
much needed measure were such well
known Democrats as Andrew Jackson,
senator from. Tennessee: Thomas II. Ben
ton, senator from Missouri; Martin Van
Buren,, senator from New York; James
Buchanan. a representative from Penn
~sylvania; Richard NJ. johnson, senator
from Kentucky; Louis McLain, a represen-
tative from Maryland; General Sam Hous-
ton, q representative from Tennessee n
afterward senator from Texas. 1t will be
observed that in this group are three Dem
ocratic statesmen who subsequently be-
came president of the United States, as
well rs one that became vice president,
Richard NJ. johnson of Kentucky. All
gave their ardent support 70 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 ii. The names of no fewer than FIVE
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 K. Polk against it.
Compromise of s33
But the change of position of Mr.. Cal
houn and his followers eventually found
expression in the compromise tariff of 1888.
~ 4hfn rnxts.t.A1 -. E~.1 e. L~..~ IN
and while it Gained the excitement In the
South occasioned by the qualification cpl
sode OF 1882, it at length produced the
great financial crisis of 1871, a period of
distress almost equal TO that which pre-
coded the enactment of the tariff of 1924
Many of our older citizens recall with a
shudder the hardships and privations
which were endured throughout the coun-
try from 1887 TO 1912. They Justly attri-
buted the prevailing distress to the tariff
OF 1888, and, when opportunity came, as it
did in 1910, they overthrow and drove from
power nal branches of the government
the party responsible for it.
The Tar n OF 1912
As a result of his great revolution on
August 81, 1912, 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 10, by the narrow margin of four
votes-yeas l16, nay liz. 1t 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. 1t passed the
senate by the bare majority of but a single
Nnnn Oh nayn 10
active supporters were such men as
Richard II. Bayard, James Buchanan,
Rufus Choate, John j.. Crittenden.
William L. Dayton and Silas Wright.
This law rails d the country from the
depths of financial deprivation and dis
tress to a 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.
Tariff Of 1857.
Mr.. Mckinley then went on to give the
history of the repeal of this tariff in 1916
and the appeal to the country in lSfS,
when it was repudiated by the people in
the election of General Taylor 10 the presi-
dency. He then continued:
Still the Wing victory was not suff-
GENTLY decisive to secure a change in the
tariff N other questions crowded to the
front and imperatively claimed public at
tention. So it tran pired that there was
no further legislation on the subject until
the enactment known as the tariff of 1857.
BY this law the duties were reduced to a
lower point than they had been at any
time since the war of 1912. The direct re-
suit of its passage was the disastrous fin
ancial panic which soon after swept over
the country and Frustrated every depart
ment OF business, involving alike all our
agricultural, commercial and m~anufactur-
ing interests.
This was the last tariff legislation pre-
ceding the secession of the Southern
states and brings this review to a period
within the recollection Of many Of my
hearers. 1t will be seen that in the early
days of the country the tariff was not
only not . sectional question, but mad
among its firmest supporters the leading
statesmen of the South. Then this ques-
ton was as broad as our country and as
national as our flag. May we not conf
IDENTIFY hope that it will be again so held in
the near future!
Is history worth nothingp Are expert
ence and its lessons to be forgotten? Are
the teachings of the past to count for
naught? Is the national distress, business
depression and the universal poverty of
the people, which lave relentlessly fol-
lowed the enactment Of every revenue tar
III measure in all our history, to be lost
upon us in the calm consideration of this
economic subjecti Are all these to be- dis
earded in the making up OF our verdict9 /
implore you to study them withou. bias,
for they will steady your Judgment in
reaching a righteous conclusion.
THE wILSON BILL.