The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1904-11-06

of the sixties. the nnanclal Legislation u
the government at this time happened
Enlso TO he in the hands OF men with
strong professional views. such as Nor
irilI5 and stevens, and nearly every pro-
ducer. who laid his claims before Com
gress. got all the protection he dared 20
ask. a.,
Moreover, internal duties were imposed
on many articles. and I'm order to Onset
these and equalize competition from
abroad equal tariffs were collected on
like Imports. The universal rule seemed
10 be to tax every article indiscriminately.
and rs high as possible Duties were
placed that palpably levied taxes OF C0,
so and 100 per cent.
These burdensOme laws were war meas
III cs, and were to be removed, 1t was
generally supposed, as soon as peace
should be restored. such has not peeh
the case, however,; on the contrary, the
tariffs have multiplied and increased. It
was as late as 1872, before any special
effort was made ntireform, and the slight
reduction Of 10 per cent, effected then
was restored three years later. the plea
at this time being .the panic OF 1873.
The explanation Of the continuance OF
these war tariffs is not far to seek. Time
havins once been given for various IN
dustries to grow rich on government ~
yors there began fight for protection
rs a permanent benefit. Tho system. sup
ported by wealth and able leadership,
vas Inserted as strong plank IN the
platform, Of the political party In power.
and 1t was shown that the high tariff
policy would fill the United States treus-s
.ury, pay Pensions, punish rebels and
strengthen the foundations Of the Union.
internal taxes were removed, While the
custom duties, at first imposed only in
order to offset the internal taxes, were
sustained in interest OF domestic pro-
ducers "Ad valorem rates" were subatl-,
tuted for "specIfic' In some cases for tho
direct purpose Of hiding the amount OF
protection given, and In the Introduction
OF the "con>I cnsatory duty''-n tax placed
OH tho manufactured article to cover one
already laid on the raw material OF
which the article Is made-good opportu-
nifty for. OK ccssivc tariffs was also afford-
cd. '"rhe history OF our existing tariff
writes II. w, Taussig, In his Tariff HIS
tory of the United States" ian authority
on this questoD.. Is simply a history OF
tho way III which the war duties were
retained. Increased and syAtemnttzed, ana
of the half-henrted and unsuccessful at
tempts at reduction and reform which have
been made from time to time"
Under Cleyeland's administration con-
tinued an earnest effort ut reform. sue
ceeded in removing some Of the most op-
the Wilson orman bill OF 1894 was by no
means a free trade measure, nor at a u
satisfactory to the advocates OF a reve-
nue. tariff High duties were retained on
metals, many chemicals and the leadinp
articles OF textile manufacture The two
fundamental and characteristic principles
OF the Wilson bill, viz; That OF relieving
law material of manufactures from du-
Ties, and that OF substituting simple az.
ties, according to value, for those levlea
by the pound or square yard, were both
repudlated III the DIngley bill, which
practically put our tariff system back on
Its old basis
Just before McI<inley's second election,
General Charles II. Grosvenor, member Of
Congress from Ohio, while visiting IN
London and discussing the approaching:
PRESIDENTIAL campaign, stated his view OF
the position OF the Republican party on
the tariff question as follows: a
| "Republcans will enter the congression-
al and presidential campaigns standing
steadfastly for protection They cheer
fully father the Dingley bill re-enaet the
Mckinley law Of 1880 and expect that the
country in 1909 and 1904 Will rally over
mhelmingly to the idea Of hncoln2ronis
ing projections"
president Roosevelt, however, shortly
after his accession 70 the chlef MaS's'