Democratic Sentinel, Volume 15, Number 33, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 4 September 1891 — Hamilton vs. McKinley. [ARTICLE]

Hamilton vs. McKinley.

Alexander Hamilton, the sc-called “father of protection," did not delude himself with such sophistries as one hears from the McKinleyites of the present day. He rejected utterly the preposterous claim that a protective tariff adds nothing to the price of the domestic-made article, but he frankly admitted that the tariff gives a bounty to manufacturers. Here are his words: “Duties evidently amount to a virtual bounty on the domestic fabrics; since, by enhancing the charges on foreign articles they enable our manufacturers to undersell foreign competitors.” And again: “As a duty upon a foreign artie'e make -an addition to its price, it causes an extra expense to the community for the benefit of the domestic manufacturer; a bounty does no mure. ” Hamilton did not have the gift of selfdeception and blowing hot and cold.