The citizen. [volume] (Berea, Ky.) 1899-1958, 1907-01-24
SPEAKS FOR TARIFF
GAIL LAUGHLiH TAKES lSSuE
WITH IDA M. TAR8ELl.
Writing from Proteetionist Standpoint
Miss Lsughlin Discovers Many
Flaws In Miss Tarbell's Ar.
qument.

There are two types Of historians:
1) Those who ferret out and present
lmpartiaily all the facts and then draw
their conclusions from the facts: and
(2), those who start with a theory
and who select and use facts calcu-
lated TO support that theory, omit
ting or slurring over such facts as
would tend to discredit their precon-
ceived theory.
II Miss Ida Tarbells history OF the
tariff is to be classed as a history at
all, rather than an argument In sup
port of A theory. then Miss Tarbell
must be regarded as belonging to the
latter OF the two types of historians.
at least so far as the first installmeht
of her history Is concerned. Here is
no impartial marshalling OF facts.
Such facts as are presented are used
as evidence for theory advanced
rather than as a basis upon which TO
found a theory.
At the beginning OF her article Miss
Tarbell informs MS that If there was
any public question on which the
minds of the people of the United
States we're made up 80 years ago. IL
was that of the tariff" and then, after
referring to the lowering of duties In
1857. she says:
Not only was the mind Of the
country satisfied with lower duties
and an increasing list of free goods,
but 1t had accepted the idea that
a Christian nation should establish
as rapidly as possible reciprocal trade
relations with its neighbors.'
The mind OF the country is.
the country had but one mind on the
subiect-every one was agreed; there
was no dissenting voice. This is what
Miss Tarbell plainly indicates.
Yet. on the very next page, she IN
forms us that
"Mr. Merrill was one OF the wings
who had not been satisfied to see
duties lowered in 1857, and who
strenuously objected to letting in raw
products free OF duty. He wanted
Vermont marble protected. He was
one OF the few New England repre-
sentatiyes who had spoken as well as
voted against the bill in 1851, and
his speech at that time had been
very able. Indeed, II made him the
acknowledged head of the active pro
gectionist sentiment left In the coun-
try"
There was q protectionist senti-
ment, then. even according TO Miss.
rarbell: a sentiment voiced by able
and patriotic leaders. Obviously the
country had two minds instead of one.
and one of these minds was not sat
isfied with lower duties" but was
strenuously In favor OF protection.
Miss Tarbell lets drop another fact
which would indicate that the people
were hardly settled in favor of a
Tree trade policy as she intimates-
viz: the fact that a large majority OF
the house of representatives which
met In 1859 we're in favor of protec-
ton. The members taking their seats
In 1859 had been elected in 1858. Just
when. according to Miss Tarbell the
united mind OF the country" had
been satisfied with lower duties" and
ready to embrace free trade at the
earliest possible moment. that same
country voted. by a large majority.
for representatives in congress who
stood for protection. Apparently
that mind was not SO firmly made
up as Miss Tarbell would have us be
iieve.
There have been two or three times
In our history when the people have
temporarily broken away from their
historic policy Of protection, and have
wandered after the strange gods of
free trade. only to turn sharply back
10 protection when their toying with
free trade has brought the logical re-
suit Of industrial panic. The period
Of 1S46-1S57 was one of these times
SO was 1S90-1s93. Each free trade
period was followed by a panic, and
the panic by return TO protection
and prosperity. -Gail Laughlin.