Year: 1867




The Hon James W. Grimes a. s. Senator
from Iowa. has written o letter touching the
| Tariff question, which we printed On Tuesday.
| He SAYS truly that "the Republican party
" has never taken any position on the subject
I" of a Tariff That is not quito correct, as he
will see by consulting the Chicago Platform of
1861. But we quite agree with him on the main
noipt that the Republican party was founded
| On other issnes and contemplates other ends
than those of Protection or Free i:ssho. And
| we will unite with him in maintaining the
right of every Republican to be Protection
| ;st or Free Trader, as he shall see fit No man
| ia the less a Republican for any opinion he
NAV cherish on questions of Political Economy
But MFR. Grimes seems to us uncandid in his
treatment of the Tariff question. He may Or
nav not be right in his assertion that four
ffths of the Republicans of Iowa think as he
does on this question if he IS right, ne has
the less excuse for treating the matter un-
fairly. And when he asserts that the end
"avOwedly sought by the advocates of the
"Tariff bill Of last Winter" was to destroy the
"revenue from imports" he says what is not
true We regret the necessity of saying thisi
but Justice must take precedence OF courtesy.
We do not doubt that the Senator can cite
some isolated expression that seems 10 couhVe-
nance his assertion but we appeal to the gen
cral tenor of the Tariff speeches in Congress
as officially reported in The Globe, as demon
strating the inaccuracy Of the Senator's asser-
ton.


More than forty years ago, when boy in
Vermont, we heard the chief landowner OF


40 hat fha nOiIcy
were adopted it would destroy the revenue
from imports and compel the imposition of
Federal land-tax: then, he said, he should sell
out his real estate and return to Boston to
spend the remainder of his days. He read the
Boston papers-then all for Free Trade-and
he really believed that a Protective Tariff
would have the effect he asserted. The Erening
Post reiterated the like wild assertions in 1923,
and again in 1S42, as we have repeatedly
quoted Then "the Black Tariff" was to de-
stroy our foreign commerce and dry up our
revenue from imports. Experience proved these
doleful prophecies utterly mistaken. Our reve-
nue. from imports was increased by Protection,
lust as it has been large beyond precedent for
the last three years, under q Tariff which MIR.
Grimes pronounces "the highest ever known in
"a civilized country"


That the present Tariff is high on many arti-
cles is true but Mr.. Grimes keeps out of sight
the facts that we have an excise on raw Cotton
and another on every.description of homemade
Textile Fabrics and thus tax after tax is piled
upon our Home Manufactures, while our in
fated Circulating Medium increases the cost OF
Home production in every particular, and taxes
on property, production, and income, hunt the
American producer through every stage OF his
effort. Gov. Grimes, we submit, deals unfairly
with the matter in suppressng these vital facts.


We quite agree with the Senator that the
business first in order and in Importance Is
Reconstruction. We trust that is to be taken
in hand with firm resolve to complete it this
Winter if Johnson and his hackers do not pre-
vent. But it is not possible to repress either
discussion or action on the Tariff question: and
Gov. Grimes seeing that he differs with the
great majority of Republicans in Consroas and
out of it, ought to treat that majority and their
views with fairness if not with respect. He
has changed, they have not, since the good old
days when we stood together for Harry Clay
and Protection TO Home Industry; and de-
cent regard for the principles which he main
tanned through the better part of his life
should have prevented his writing his late
letter