Rensselaer Union, Volume 9, Number 50, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 30 August 1877 — A Question of No Practical Importance [ARTICLE]

A Question of No Practical Importance

Mr. W. C. Howloy of this city is dosirous of having our opinion on the question whether a high or a low tariff is better for tlie country. Wo answer that it is a question of no practical importance. The until nul debt is so largo and the expenses es carrying on the government are so heavy, even if the greatest economy should be practiced, that a high tariff’of duties on Imports is indispensable. Thu very lowost rule of duties lliul it is possitdo to get along witli is an average of forty per cent, upon ail articles imported; nnd we think everybody, portoe l ion is t tor free trader, will agree that an average of forty per cent, forms what may strictly be termed a high tariff. We ad.t, too, that under the circumstances this is good for tlie country, since it is always good to pay your debts. Our correspondent will thus sco that so far as the sum of money to be raised by duties upon imports is concerned, it would make no difference whether the Secretary of tho Treasury and the majority in Congress were free traders or protectionists. In either case they must raise through the custom liouses acertain amount of revenue; and thus even the <Yee trailers must insist upon maintaining a high tariff. There is, however, an important difference in the views and policy advocated by the two classes of people. Tho .protectionists .Contend that, while there must bean average pf forty per cent, levied upon tlie whole aggregate of our imports, there should be a discrimination respecting different articles. Thus they think that teit and coffee should be let in free, because they arts consumed by all classes of the people, and to tax them would he to tax the poor ub much S 3 tho rich, or even mure. Besides, they say, tea and coffee cannot be grown in tliis country, And there is no competition between those who produce them nnd any class of American producers. Tbo free traders, on the other hand, contend that tea and coffee, being articles of universal necessity and consumption, may he relied upon as sure sources of income, and .it is fully to lot them in free and tax in their place other articles le?s extensively and less regularly consumed, and less manageable as sources of revnue. Here is the whole controversy between the two parties as it now exists in this country. Free traders insist upon levying duties for revenue only, nnd without regard to any other consideration. Protectionism insist on lovying them with discrimination in favor of American manufactures; and as they have had "(ho majority in Congress, while the Executive has been of their way of thinking, they have had thetr own way up to the present time. There is no doubt that the system of disci Inanition has iu many respects been injuriously and even corruptly appHed for the benefit of interests that ought not to he favored. Such übnrcs should be rigorously reformed; but, on the other hand, free trade being out of the question, we take uo vory ardent interest in the general subject.—New York Sun.