of its life and, at its termination after eight years, the people would be living under a free trade program! Clay felt that before the expiration of that time, the South would have been converted to protectionist principles. DEMOCRATIC TARIFFS PRIOR TO THE CIVIL WAR In 1840, after the severe financial crisis of 1837, there appeared to be an excellent opportunity for the Whigs to come into power.3 Clay was the genuine leader of that party but, owing to the political trick called the "Three-Sided Correspondence," the impression was soon gained that the chances of success with this strong protectionist as a leader were very slight. The Walker Tariff of 1846, a Democratic measure, remained in force during eleven years, and the rates were lowered at all points. The country seemed prosperous under free trade principles, although the effect of the free trade policies of England undoubtedly had, during that period, a marked influence upon this side of the water.9 PROTECTIONIST PRINCIPLES ADVANCE IN FAVOR AFTER THE CIVIL WAR With the Civil War arose the necessity for increasing the revenue and this, again, gave the opportunity to the protectionist theories See Act of 1840. By this time there was almost freedom of trade and, much encouraged, the advocates of that theory enthusiastically proposed that after 1842 there should be a further reduction of 1 per cent per annum until, at the end of twenty years, there would be no further need of customs houses. Act of 1842 (approved August 30, 1842, by John Tyler). A protective tariff and the rates were mostly ad valorem. See Act of 1846 (approved July 30, 1846, by James K. Polk). This This Walker Revenue Tariff was the beginning of a new order of things. democratic tariff remained in force during eleven years. It was an attempt to conciliate the South, which section often threatened to secede from the Union, and was a direct approach to free trade. Act of 1857 (approved March 3, 1857, by James Buchanan). Democrats again in power and tariff placated the free traders of the South. Act of 1861 (Morrill Tariff Act). Dealt chiefly with woolen and iron schedules, and, although protective, yet mainly for revenue purposes. 1861-1865. Internal Revenue Acts for war measures. to be heard by the passage of the Morrill Act of 1861. The Internal Revenue Acts which were later passed for war purposes were evidently arranged on the principle of which the Irishman spoke at Donnybrook Fair, "Whenever you see a head, hit it "; or, in other words, "Whenever you see a commodity, tax it." The country emerged from the Civil War imbued with strong protective principles. England had been very sympathetic with the South during that trying period and this attitude, as well as the general discrediting of the Southern States, evidently encouraged the tendency toward protective tariff policies. Horace Greeley had become a strong protectionist and wished the United States to continue a policy of aloofness and to disregard Europe entirely. Nevertheless, during the years that followed, a necessity for a reduction in the rates arose, with the result that in the Tariff of 1872 there is found a reduction of ten per cent.10 ORGANIZED LABOR FAVORS PROTECTIVE TARIFF AT ITS In the debates of the first meeting practically, of organized labor in 1881, Mr. P. G. Somers favored a protective tariff resolution because "it is protection that gives us work and wages and enables us to beautify our homes." The resolution was soon adopted and read: "That we recommend to the Congress of the United States the adoption of such laws as shall give to every American industry full protection from the cheap labor of foreign countries." 11 10 See Act of 1870 (approved July 14, 1870, by Ulysses S. Grant). Attempt to take away duties on food and to provide the manufacturers with raw materials. Act of 1872 (approved June 6, 1872, by Ulysses S. Grant). Provided 10 per cent reduction on the manufacture of cotton, wool, iron, metals, paper and glass. Act of 1875. Little change. Act of 1883 (approved March 3, 1883, by Chester A. Arthur). Some woolen duties were advanced, while others were lowered. 11 Report of Proceedings of 1st Session of Federation of Organized Trades and Labor Unions, 1881, p. 19. James G. Blaine, in discussing the relation of labor to the protective tariff, declares: "Every impartial investigation thus far has conclusively proven that labor is better paid, and the average condition of the laboring man more comfortable, in the United States than in any European country." 12 GROVER CLEVELAND ELECTED TO PRESIDENCY ON ANTI- In 1884 the duties were again raised by the strongly protective tariff act of that year. The revenues were, however, superabundant, and Grover Cleveland was elected to the Presidency largely upon the anti-Blaine platform. The Democrats, although not having the control in Congress, attempted to pass a tariff measure with a horizontal reduction of twenty per cent. The instigator of this plan, which failed of passage, has been dubbed ever since " 20% Morrison." The tariff again was the issue in the 1888 Presidential Campaign when Harrison defeated Cleveland because of his failure to carry New York. One of the features of this election was the campaign. cry of a "free breakfast table," because tea, sugar and coffee were to become free if Harrison were elected. PROTECTIONIST PRINCIPLES EMBODIED IN MCKINLEY TARIFF BILL The McKinley Tariff Bill exhibited the protective tendencies of the Civil War measures and strongly marked a further extension of the protective system. This manifestation was in marked accord with the 1883 Act, which showed a strong protective tendency but with gradual reductions in certain commodities.13 At a hearing of the Committee on the Revision of the Tariff in 1889, when McKinley was in the chair, Mr. John Moses of Trenton, New Jersey, appeared before that body and stated that Ger 12 Blaine, James G., "Twenty Years of Congress," 1893, Vol. I, Chap. IX, p. 212. 13 See Act of 1890 (approved October 1, 1890, by Benjamin Harrison). The McKinley Tariff Act. Provisions: Protection of agricultural implements and free admission of sugar. many's competition in food stuffs was having a serious effect upon the industrial situation in the United States, and some action must be taken.14 Hon. William D. Bynum of Indiana, speaking in the House of Representatives on Tuesday, May 13, 1890, in favor of the McKinley Tariff Bill, stated: "The prosperity of the people and the wealth of the country depend upon the greatest good to the greatest number, and we should legislate with that view." 15 The McKinley Act, among other things, contained the innovation in American tariff legislation of full protective duties upon agricultural products, and in addition placed sugar and molasses on the free list. Duty on woolens was increased, but the opposition was not so great as previously, and it seemed as though tin plates would soon displace wool from its former prominent position. Duty on tin plates was raised as their manufacture had been highly developed in the United States, and this naturally cut down tin plate exports from Wales. Sugar was admitted free, but a direct bounty of two cents a pound was to be paid out of the United States Treasury on all domestically produced sugar, primarily to benefit the State of Louisiana. The Acts of 1883 and 1890 had exhibited the protective principles to a marked degree, but in 1890 a revenue reduction became imperative. However, these reductions were accomplished to imperil the protective system as little as possible.16 14 See Tariff Hearings, House Document, 51st Cong., 1889-90, Vol. XV, p. 465. 15 Congressional Record, 51st Cong., Appendix, p. 163. 16 See Provisions of McKinley Tariff Act (October, 1890): Sec. 3 Reciprocity provision. Sec. 15-16 Free lumber for St. John and St. Croix Rivers. Sec. 18-19 Re-enacted Sec. 2497 of Acts of March, 1883; i.e., no imports from nations barring American vessels, except in American or foreign vessels entitled to reciprocity. Sec. 2599 per cent re-export drawback. December, 1890, Sec. 1- Rebate on tobacco in some instances. March, 1891 — McKinley Act not to impair Hawaiian Treaty. July, 1892 An act to enforce Canadian Treaty. August, 1892 - Retaliatory measure to enforce Canadian Treaty. TREATIES AND AGREEMENTS UNDER THE 1890 MCKINLEY Аст The United States has adopted a policy of “reciprocity" agreements in dealing with foreign countries as distinguished from the treaty bargaining practice of "favored nation " negotiations of European countries. The reciprocity agreements authorized under the McKinley Act were something of a misnomer. Their provisions contained a threat, for the President was granted the power to impose duties on imports if he considered that the countries from which they came were according unfair or discriminatory treatment to the United States. These reciprocity agreements entered into by the United States and other individual nations provide for mutual concessions in the reduction of the rates established by the general tariff. In accordance with Section 3 inserted by the Senate in the McKinley Tariff Act of 1890, the President was allowed to impose duties on hides, sugar, molasses, coffee, and tea (which were duty free)" or any such articles" coming from countries which imposed duties on products of the United States, to such an extent as he thought "reciprocally unequal and unreasonable." Owing to this clause, agreements were negotiated with Germany, Austro-Hungary and with a number of Central American States, but these were all virtually abrogated when the 1894 Wilson-Gorman Tariff Act came into operation.17 17 Agreements under Section 3 of the McKinley Tariff Act (from Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Vol. XXIX, p. 507, by G. G. Huebner): |