The representative. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1893-1901, 1894-09-05
MONEY AND TARIFF.
The Unlimited Coinage of Silver n
Necessity.

To the Editor:
The principle upon which the money
question should rest is, that all minis
should be open for the coinage of all
bullion brought to it, the owner of the
bullion paying the expense of the coinage
and taking back the coin in the same
metal as he brought to the mint. This
is the principle found in Elliot's Debates
on the Constitution and the debates in
congress upon the first coinage act. The
constitutional provision that congress shall
have the power to coin money to regulate
the value thereof, was based upon this
principle, and the government has no right
or power to prevent the operation of this
principle, because the power to coin money
carries with it the power to coin that
money out of the metals used for that
coinage at the time this provision was
adopted, which were silver and gold, and
any limitation of the incident of this
power is an infringement Of the constitu-
ton and dishonest
The repeal of the Sherman law without
placing coinage law on this principle in
It's stead, was equally dishonest, because
the evil alleged against this law was that
the certificates issued upon the bullion sill
yer, being payable in gold silver, the
receiver or owner of the certificate always
took the gold, which resulted in depicting
the treasury Of it's gold reserve This be-
ing the disease. the remedy should have
been to make the certificates payable in
the coin upon which they were based and
against which they We're issued and not
to destroy the coinage of this metal The
evil came from the option to exchange the
certificates for gold, and the remedy should
have been to abrogate the option.
Besides the Sherman law was inherently
vicious and dishonest, because the govern
ment mas no right to purchase bullion; its
duty is limited by the constitution to coin
ing money.
The principle upon which a tariff should
rest is that there should be a tariff on
undeveloped industry or products and not
on developed industries and products, and
whether or not an industry or product is
developed or undeveloped is a fact, ascer-
tainable among other ways by the fact
whether or not the home industry can
compete with the foreign industry of the
same kind.
The principle that all governments should
levy upon imports the expense of such gov
erment instead of levying internal taxes, is
conceded by all parties and by all govern
ments, and in levying this expense upon
imports the rule above stated is the only
true one.
If the industry product is not devel-
oped, then in proportion as it is devel-
oped, in that proportion will the wealth of
the country and employment of the peo-
pie increase
If the industry product is developed
and can compete with the foreign industry
or products then any tariff or protection of
SuCIl liuuStTy OF pTOOuct is ROBBERY, be-
cause the compelling of a price beyond the
competing price in the home of the foreign
industry is robbery of that excess. For
instance. if the selling price without the
tariff of manufactured product is five
dollars and the tariff two dollars the SELL
ing price would be seven dollars. Now if
that article can be sold in England or in
the home of the foreign product for five
dollars or can be sold in this country as
cheap and as good the foreign article
from he
chaser two dollars without any considera-
tion which is stealing. To sell the article
In a foreign market cheaper than to our
own people cannot be justified and vet
this is the condition, not only before the
Mckinley bill, but under it and under the
Wilson BILL The persons who made or
cOncocted these tariff laws either did not
know the principle in tariff legislation or
acted dishonesty.
The only reason upon which a tariff or
protection can be justified is that imposts
"a tax on mports-is the best way of sup
porting a government and that by Ievying
such imposts on undeveloped industries
that is, upon products which would COM
pete with an undeveloped industry-such
taxation would increase the wealth of the
nation and the means of employment for its
people.
AS an abstract principle of right and JUS
tce, every individual has the right to buy
when and where he pleases, and in the
cheapest market and any limitation of this
right is only justifable on the ground of
public policy and the power to levy i'm
posts.
The doctrine of tariff for revenue on}v
is not true or honest, because it does not
discriminate between developed and unde
veloped industries but if it went further
and held that in the levying of tariff for
revenue only that tariff should be laid
upon products which would compete with
our undeveloped industries and this would
be- as to these, protective tariff ard
that upon all products with which we can
compete with the world no imposts should
be levied. The present Democratic doctrine
is wrong, and the writer tried to have it
properly framed in the platform of 1876.
when the party first announced this Ge-
parture from it's heretofore reliable doc
trines The Republican doctrine of protec-
ton is wrong for the same reasons. Moth
ing should be protected which does not
need protection, and article does not
need protection when it can compete with
the world. The trouble or the failure to get
the correct principles enacted into laws is
that the politicians are dishonest. In con-
gress there are two classes, to wit: No bod
les and politicians for revenue only, the
latter always running the job.
JNO. F. KELLY.
st. Paul, Aug. g.