When Charles
Adams published his book For Good and Evil, a world history of taxation,
the most controversial chapter by far was the one on whether or not tariffs
caused the American War between the States. That chapter generated so much
discussion and debate that Adams's publisher urged him to turn it into an entire
book, which he did, in the form of When
in the Course of Human Events: Arguing the Case for Southern Secession.
Many
of the reviewers of this second book, so confident were they that slavery was
the one and only possible reason for both Abraham Lincoln’s election to the
presidency and the war itself, excoriated Adams for his analysis that the
tariff issue was a major cause of the war. (Adams recently told me in an
email that after one presentation to a New York City audience, he felt lucky
that "no one brought a rope.")
My
book, The Real Lincoln, has received much the same
response with regard to the tariff issue. But there is overwhelming
evidence that: 1) Lincoln, a failed one-term congressman, would never have been
elected had it not been for his career-long devotion to protectionism; and 2)
the 1861 Morrill tariff, which Lincoln was expected to enforce, was the event
that triggered Lincoln’s invasion, which resulted in the death of hundreds of
thousands of Americans.
A
very important article that documents in great detail the role of protectionism
in Lincoln’s ascendancy to the presidency is Columbia University historian
Reinhard H. Luthin's "Abraham Lincoln and the Tariff," published
in the July 1944 issue of The
American Historical Review. As I document in The Real Lincoln, the
sixteenth president was one of the most ardent protectionists in American
politics during the first half of the nineteenth century and had established a
long record of supporting protectionism and protectionist candidates in the
Whig Party.
In
1860, Pennsylvania was the acknowledged key to success in the presidential
election. It had the second highest number of electoral votes, and
Pennsylvania Republicans let it be known that any candidate who wanted the
state’s electoral votes must sign on to a high protectionist tariff to benefit
the state’s steel and other manufacturing industries. As Luthin writes,
the Morrill tariff bill itself "was sponsored by the Republicans in order
to attract votes in Pennsylvania and New Jersey."
The
most influential newspaper in Illinois at the time was the Chicago Press and Tribune under
the editorship of Joseph Medill, who immediately recognized that favorite son
Lincoln had just the protectionist credentials that the Pennsylvanians
wanted. He editorialized that Lincoln "was an old Clay Whig, is right
on the tariff and he is exactly right on all other issues. Is there any
man who could suit Pennsylvania better?"
At
the same time, a relative of Lincoln’s by marriage, a Dr. Edward Wallace of
Pennsylvania, sounded Lincoln out on the tariff by communicating to Lincoln
through his brother, William Wallace. On October 11, 1859, Lincoln wrote
Dr. Edward Wallace: "My dear Sir: [Y]our brother, Dr.
William S. Wallace, showed me a letter of yours, in which you kindly mention my
name, inquire for my tariff view, and suggest the propriety of my writing a
letter upon the subject. I was an old Henry Clay-Tariff Whig. In old
times I made more
speeches on that subject than any other. I have not since changed my
views" (emphasis added). Lincoln was
establishing his bona fides as an ardent protectionist.
At
the Republican National Convention in Chicago, the protectionist tariff was a
key plank. As Luthin writes, when the protectionist tariff plank was voted
in, "The Pennsylvania and New Jersey delegations were terrific in their
applause over the tariff resolution, and their hilarity was contagious, finally
pervading the whole vast auditorium." Lincoln received "the
support of almost the entire Pennsylvania delegation" writes Luthin,
"partly through the efforts of doctrinaire protectionists such as Morton
McMichael . . . publisher of Philadelphia’s bible of protectionism, the North American newspaper."
Returning
victorious to his home of Springfield, Illinois, Lincoln attended a Republican
Party rally that included "an immense wagon" bearing a gigantic sign
reading "Protection for Home Industry." Lincoln’s (and the
Republican Party’s) economic guru, Pennsylvania steel industry
publicist/lobbyist Henry C. Carey, declared that without a high protectionist
tariff, "Mr. Lincoln’s administration will be dead before the day of
inauguration."
The
U.S. House of Representatives had passed the Morrill tariff in the 1859-1860
session, and the Senate passed it on March 2, 1861, two days before Lincoln’s
inauguration. President James Buchanan, a Pennsylvanian who owed much of
his own political success to Pennsylvania protectionists, signed it into
law. The bill immediately raised the average tariff rate from about 15
percent (according to Frank Taussig in Tariff
History of the United States) to 37.5 percent, but with a
greatly expanded list of covered items. The tax burden would about
triple. Soon thereafter, a second tariff increase would increase the
average rate to 47.06 percent, Taussig writes.
So,
Lincoln owed everything--his nomination and election--to Northern
protectionists, especially the ones in Pennsylvania and New Jersey. He was
expected to be the enforcer of the Morrill tariff. Understanding all too
well that the South Carolina tariff nullifiers had foiled the last
attempt to impose a draconian protectionist tariff on the nation by voting in
political convention not to collect the 1828 "Tariff of
Abominations," Lincoln literally promised in his first inaugural address a
military invasion if the new, tripled tariff rate was not collected.
At
the time, Taussig says, the import-dependent South was paying as much as 80
percent of the tariff, while complaining bitterly that most of the revenues
were being spent in the North. The South was being plundered by the tax
system and wanted no more of it. Then along comes Lincoln and the
Republicans, tripling (!)
the rate of tariff taxation (before
the war was an issue). Lincoln then threw down the gauntlet in
his first inaugural: "The power confided in me," he said,
"will be used to hold, occupy, and possess the property, and places
belonging to the government, and
to collect the duties and imposts; but beyond what may be necessary for these
objects, there will be no invasion--no using force against, or among the people
anywhere" (emphasis added).
"We
are going to make tax slaves out of you," Lincoln was effectively saying,
"and if you resist, there will be an invasion." That was on
March 4. Five weeks later, on April 12, Fort Sumter, a tariff collection
point in Charleston Harbor, was bombarded by the Confederates. No one was
hurt or killed, and Lincoln later revealed that he manipulated the Confederates
into firing the first shot, which helped generate war fever in the North.
With
slavery, Lincoln was conciliatory. In his first inaugural address, he said
he had no intention of disturbing slavery, and he appealed to all his past
speeches to any who may have doubted him. Even if he did, he said, it
would be unconstitutional to do so.
But
with the tariff it was different. He was not about to back down to the
South Carolina tariff nullifiers, as Andrew Jackson had done, and was willing
to launch an invasion that would ultimately cost the lives of 620,000 Americans
to prove his point. Lincoln’s economic guru, Henry C. Carey, was quite
prescient when he wrote to Congressman Justin S. Morrill in mid-1860 that
"Nothing less than a dictator is required for making a really good
tariff" (p. 614, "Abraham Lincoln and the Tariff").
Thomas
DiLorenzo is a professor of economics in the Sellinger School of Business and
Management at Loyola College in Baltimore, and is senior fellow of the Mises
Institute.
No comments:
Post a Comment