Cameron County press. [volume] (Emporium, Cameron County, Pa.) 1866-1922, 1907-01-24
SPEAKS FOR TARIFF
GAIL LAUGHLIN TAKES ISSUE
WITH IDA M. TARBELL.
Writing from Protectionist Standpoint
Miss Laughlin Discovers Many
Flaws in Miss TarbelPs Ar
gument.

There are two types of historians:
ID Those who ferret out and present
impartially all the facts and chen 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.
If Miss Ida Tarbell's history of the
tariff is to be classed as 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 installment
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 US that IF there was
any public question on which the
minds Of the people of the United
States were made up so years ago, 1t
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 it had accepted the idea that
a Christian nation should establish
as rapidly as possible reciprocal trade
relations with it's neighbors."
THE mind of the country"-that is,
the country had but one mind on the
subject-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-
oViiAdLlNVo WIZ littd SpohNh o0 "Sii S'N
voted against the bill in 1857, and
his speech at that time had been
very able. Indeed it made him the
acknowledged head of the active pro
tectionist sentiment left in the coun-
try"
There was protectionist senti-
ment then, even according to Miss
Tarbell; 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 dutes,' but was
strenuously in favor of protection.
Miss Tarbell let's drop another fact
which would indicate that the people
were hardly settled in favor of a
free trade policy as she intimates-
viz: the fact that a large majority of
the house of representatives which
met in 1859 were in favor of protec-
ton. The members taking their seats
in 1859 had been elected in 1858. Just
one year, therefore, after the time
when, according to Miss Tarbell, the
united mind of the country" had
DtSh odllSlIcd WIFI lower duties ana
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-
lieve
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
to protection when their toying with
free trade has brought the logical Re,
suit cf industrial panic. The period
of Il l6-1S57 was one of these times
So was 1S90-1S93 Each free trade
period was followed by panic. and
the Ianic by a return to protection
and prosperity.-Gail Laughlin.