BoletiÌn mercantil de Puerto Rico. (San Juan, P.R.) 18??-1918, 1902-10-23
SAN JUAN, OCTOBER q
An Old Superstition.

The platform Of the Republicans OF
Massachusetts revives an old myth ap-.
pertaining to the tariff question, in the
terms following
Changes which the.world's progress
and the interests of the American peo-
pie may suggest should aud will be
made by the Repu oican party when
ever they are Of sufficient importance to
Justify the check to business which i'll
evitably attends any revision of the ta-
1iff".
The authorship of this plank in the
Ma ssachusetts platform is assigned to
Senator Lodge. 1t is really imma-
terial by whom it was prepared, and We
allude to the authorship merely to note
the fact that the Senator seems not to
apprehend any serious check to busl-
ness if either coal or beef from Canada
should be adni ted to the United STATES
free ot duty. This suggestion, made
by Mr.. Lodge in a recent speech, leads
the discriminating reader 10 ask what is
meant By a "check to business. Nobody
would anticipate a check to business
from the Importation OF Canadian coal,
but the Beef Trust might justly say that
the introduction Of Canadian beef would
be check to their business, A check
is a very vague term. 1t may mean
anything from financial panic like
that of 1893 to a mere slackening OF the
demand for single article OF domestic
production. It was evidently used i'll
the Massachusetts platform as a bogY
to affect the public imagination more or
less.
Nov it is not true that revisions Of
the tariff check business either inevitably
or generally, but if it were true, then the
blame for such checking during the last
forty years, with one single exception,
would be upon the Republican party
A glance at our tariff history will prove
this statement.
There we're three tariff revisions dur
ing the rebellion, those of 1861, 1862,
and 1864. All were made by the Re-
publican party, and were, or were sup
posed to be, necessary for procuring re-
venue for carrying on the war. Nobody
ever said at that time, and nobody ever
imagined since, that any check to bust
ness was produced by those revisions.
Yet I've are nov gravely reminded b.
the Massachusetts platform max rs that
such revisions inevitably check busi-
ness.
The next tariff revision was made in
1870. Mr.. Morrill,, the father OF the
Morrill, tariff Of the war period, tried
vainly to get those duties reduced which
had been raised during the war as a
compensation for the internal taxes on
manufactures, which We're now repeal
ed. Whatever percentage of duties,
he said, twas imposed on fo1eign goods
to cover internal ia alton on home ma
nufactures, should not now be caimsd
"as the lawful prize Of protection where
such taxes have been repealed. The
privateers thought other.vise. They pre-
vented Father Morrill, from carrying
oat his purpose, although Senator Sher-
man lent him a helping hand. The
tariff was, however. revised by lowering
some duties and raising others, bat
without any cheek 10 business.
Another tariff revision, anG one on a
much larger scale, was made in 1872
This was a Republican measure intro
duced by Mr. Dawes of Massachusetts,
then Chairman of the Committee OF
Ways and Means. 1t repealed entirelg
the duties on tea and coffe, and made
a horizontal reduction Of 10 pr cent.
on other goods. No check to business
was felt in consequence of this revision.
but in September of the following year
there was financial panic due to gi-
gantic speculation in railways and West
ern lauds. Nobody at the time fancied
that this crisis was caused BY the petty
reduction of the tariff on dutiable goods
or by the repeal of the duties on tea and
coffee, but whatever effect was prodacedI
was caused by the politics. his
10 per cent reduction was itself
repealed in 1875, the duties being re-
stored to the old scale.
The Republicans inflated and carried
through tie famous tariff rAvisionofI
sI883.&All all thatneed b. said SOW is that
il produced great political c5mmotion,
but did not give anY check to business.
In the folio wing year there was a Wall
Street 4 TRY that has since been kfloR n T
as the Grant & Ward panic. The fail
ure OF Grant & Ward did not cause this
trouble 1t was most probably due 10
the opera ion of the Bland Silver Act +
which had been pouring fiat money into
the channels Of business for SIX years at /,
the rate of $50 ,ooo, 900 per year
The next tariff revision was the Me-
Kinley Bill of 1890 This was accom-
panied by the Sherman Silver Bill, and
the TWO things toget er ID produce dis
as 1TOt1S results is 2n7 I,ffr NJ will tiaf he