Democratic Sentinel, Volume 14, Number 45, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 5 December 1890 — M’KINLEYISM INFRINGE [ARTICLE]

M’KINLEYISM INFRINGE

THE FRENCH ARE ENGAGED IN HIGH TARIFF MAKING. A Committee in Paris Building a McKinley W all—No Tom Rood Hurry About It —Maximum Duties for America—Effects of tbe Democratic Tidal Wave In Europe. France is at present engaged in reforming her tariff upward, after the McKinley fashion. But there is a difference. France goes about the job in a very leisurely way, allowing an abundance of time for discussion. The Paris correspondent of the London Economist, writiug under date of Oct. 30, says that the Customs Committee of the Chamber of Deputies had just held a meeting and outlined a plan to be adopted in the revision. At this meeting it was pointed out by M. Meline that, as the new tariff must be applied on Feb. 1, 1892, it will be absolutely necessary to vote on the measure by Nov. 1, 1891. The committee must, therefore, finish its labors by next February, he said, as the Chamber would, probably, occupy three months And the Senate two months in discussing the measure. Beginning next February, and allowing for the ordinary summer vacation, this would delay the final passage of the bill till the first of November. This deliberation is a great contrast with the way in which our McKinleyites rushed the tariff bill through the House last May in less than two weeks, and when only a small portion of the bill had been discussed. Our Senate took up about six weeks in discussing the McKinley bill, and the Republican organs were extremely impatient of the delay and were clamoring for greater hurry, their catch-word being, “Pass the bill In haste.” On the other hand, the French committee plans in advance that their • Senate will discuss the tariff measure two months. The French do not seem to take kinkly to suppression of debate, such as we have just seen, and in France there is apparently no demand for a patent double-back-action “tomreed.” The point of chief interest to us in the new French tariff is the fact that it is to be a piece of high McKinleyism, many of our own products coming in for high or even prohibitory duties of the McKinley type. One of the motives for those higher duties, as the French Minister of Commerco says, is “derived from the examples set by other nations. ” The chief of these other nations is just now the United States, our McKinley tariff having awakened feelings of strong opposition in France, which demanded a general scheme of retaliation against us. It is still fresh in the public mind that M. .Ribot, the French Minister, approached the other principal European cabinets with proposals for united action in retaliating upon us. The plan came to nothing, but the same retaliation sentiment which caused the French to amend their grain duties last summer by imposing a tax of 33 cents a bushel on our grain as against 15 cents on that from other countries will find expression in the new measure. Under the present French tariff live beeves pay $7.25 per head; under the proposed law the duty will be equivalent to about $11.50. The present duty on salted beef is about four-tenths of 1 cent per pound; under the new law it will be raised to slightly less than 2 cents per pound. Lard has been free, but it is to be taxed nearly 2 cents per pound. The new rates here given, however, are the minimum rates. A peculiarity of the new law will be that it will impose two distinct rates on each article—a minimum aud a maximum, and leave the Government to apply the lower or higher rate to the goods of each nation according to the'reciprocal trade advantages that each offers to France. The maximum will average about one-fourth higher than the minimum. It goes without saying that our products will be ruthlessly taxed at maximum rates from the start. Suc-.i is the tariff outlook in France now. The baneful example of McKinleyism wiil apparently be followed to thh letter, and our own farmers will be the greatest sulferers through the consequent narrowing of their markets. There is, however, one ray of hope. The McKinley example is one thingp the, tariff action foreshadowed by the’ late elections will be quite a different example. As the raising of the McKinley wall here raises a high tariff wall in Europe, so tho downfall here may cause a like downfall there. The London Statist, a very able commercial and economic journal, discusses the effects in Europe of our election, and says: “Everybody knows that American example has, all through the present century, had groat weight in European opinion. It is hardly too much to say, indeed, that tho American predilection for protection outweighed the English adhesion to free trade, and very considerably contributed to bring protection into favor upon the continent. But now that it has become highly probable that America will get rid of protection, American influence will be transferred from the protectionist to the free trade side all over Europe. Further, the McKinley act excited great resentment all over the continent, and there have been many threats of retaliation. It is possible that retaliation would have been resorted to if the McKinley act were likely to •continue upon the American statute book; but, now that its repeal is much more probable, the demand for retaliation will die away. For that reason also the protectionist party on the continent will be weakened. Whether the change of prospects in the United States will have such an effect upon French opinion as to modify in a liberal sense the tariff bill just introduced remains to be seen. But it is at least probable that outside France tho revulsion of American feeling will have a great and a lasting influence.” If the Statist is correct in its forecast, the recent Democratic victory will prove a great blessing to our own people in a two-fold way. When our tariff has been cut down to reasonable rates, not only shall we have the advantage of cheaper manufactured commodities at Home, but perhaps what is more important, we shall have freer entrance into European markets with our farm products, and manufactures, and this freer entrance will vastly enlarge the European demand for American products. Tho day for the widest possible reciprocity has come. James G. Blaine said in his speech at Waterville, Me., Aug. 29: “I wish to declare the opinion that the United States has reached a point where one of its highest duties is to enlarge the area of

its foreign trade. ” Removing tariff duties will do the business with a rush.