Year: 1870

The Br0Oklm EGgLe-seeming to take ground
for Free Trade, as becomes Democratic or
gan-says:


The E0gie asl Democratic Freei Trade journal
would desire nothing much as this square appeal to
the people on the vital merits Of the question. This is
what we have always supposed THE TRIBUNE TO be try
ing TO dodge, with s ntermnabe essays petty de
tails OF the tariff. Protection is wholly wrong. Gov
ernmen has no right to specially protect class in it,
taxes because thereby It specially damages another
Dollars are definite II the tax is 80 levied that while
the Government makes dollar the seller Of the taxed
article makes another then the buyer Is taxed two dol
lars-One fairly for Government purposes the other
fraudulently, for the benefit of the seller.


"Absoute Free Trade naturalrght. so Is absolute
ownership Of a house has built ones land
The limit in each is the Governments claim for
necessary revenue. Government may levy much
money it needs, fairly upon all houses, fairly upon all
articles OF trade When go for Free Trade therefore,
we do not mean that the Government may not levy
tariff high provided it be levied only for reve
To be sure, believe it wiser not to tax trade at
all. II would pay the Government better and make the
country richer, to let trade and commerce 80 cntrey
free, TO abolish Cu-tOm-HOuses and tax nothing Dut
realized wealth. not property IN the ACT OF chahging
hands and Of changing form But that Is not the que
ton at present Whether all tariffs are not unwise Is as
yet speculative question This country - heavily IN
debt and until its debt Is lowered, VIII need some tarH


"The question OF to-day, therefore, ia rather Revenue
Reform against Protection than Free Trade



logically no tariff At all no tax but direct taxes, that
the people may how and how much they are pay ing
But the demand OF the Democracy and the Intelligent
Republicans now, under the cOuntrys present cfcum
stances of indebtedness IS for Revenue tarf instead OF
mOnOpost Protection tariff Let no money be PAID by
the people, but to the Government"


Comments by The Tribune.


The Eagle either does or does not see that
if its premises be sound as we say they are
not-any duty imposed for WhGterer purpose on
an IMPORTED article Which is largely rirdled in
this cOuntry is a mOnStrOuS traud and CrOng,
unless ike impOSt be leCied on ats HOMEMADE
riral. Say Pig Iron is the article, and the
Government assesses SO per tun on all that is
brought into the country and nothing on that
which is smetcd here from American ores.
We make Two Million tuns and import Half
Million. Does The Eagle see, or does it not,
that this impOst according to its premises,
not ours) makes our consumers Of Iron pay
five dollars, whereof but one goes into the
Treasury, while our IrOn-smelters gObble up
the other four2 Does The Eagle favor such
mode of raising Revenue? Yea or Nay!


If Duties on Imports may be leyiednaccOrd-
ance with Free Trade principles they must be
leried EXCLUSIVELY on Coffee, Spices dc, ,'rhich are
not produced or rrdled in this country. Or if
Iron, Wool. Fabrics, &C., are taxed when i'm
ported then a corresponding tax must be
levied on the home made rivals Of those for
cign products. Does The Eagle see and con-
cede this or nOtl