ny part of the United States, may order from any commercial
port or country any article desired and be able to receive it and
pay the prescribed duty, at any considerable port or city in the
United States that he may designate.
As to the objects of tariff taxation there is and always will be
an honest difference of opinion. The main purpose is to secure
the revenue from foreigners seeking our market to dispose of their
products. The United States has the right, exercised by every
nation, to determine upon what terms the productions of foreign
nations shall be admitted into its markets, and those terms will
be such as its interests may demand. Great Britain may admit nearly
all commodities free of duty, but even that country is guided by
her interests in all her commercial regulations. All other nations
classified as civilized seek, like the United States, by tariff
laws, not only to secure revenue, but to protect and foster domestic
industries. Japan has won its entrance among civilized nations by
securing treaties with European countries and the United States,
by which she has been relieved from restrictions as to her duties
on imports, and now has the right to regulate and fix her import
duties as her interest dictates.
The United States has from the beginning of its government declared
that one object of duties on imports is the encouragement of
manufactures in the United States, and, whatever may be the dogma
inserted in a political party platform, tariff legislation will
continue to have a double object, _revenue and protection_. This
was strikingly exemplified by the recent action of Congress in the
passage of the tariff law now in force.
The real difficulty in our tariff laws is to avoid unequal and
unjust discrimination in the objects of protection, made with a
view to favor the productions of one state or section at the cost
of another state or section. The dogma of some manufacturers, that
raw materials should be admitted free of duty, is far more dangerous
to the protective policy than the opposition of free traders. The
latter contend that no duties should be levied to protect domestic
industry, but for revenue only, while the former demand protection
for their industries, but refuse to give to the farmer and miner
the benefit of even revenue duties. A denial of protection on
coal, iron, wool and other so-called raw materials, will lead to
the denial of protection to machinery, to textiles, t
|