Sean Francis Lemass Quotes

Nothing has ever been made plainer at a general election than that the controlling principle in the raising of revenue from duties on imports is zealous care for American interests and American labor. The people have declared that such legislation should be had as will give ample protection and encouragement to the industries and the development of our country.

Petitions poured in upon Congress urging the imposition of discriminating duties that should encourage the production of needed things at home.

… the time is come when a removal of the restrictions upon the importation of food cannot be successfully resisted. Should this be Sir Robert's own opinion, the Queen very much hopes that none of his colleagues will prevent him from doing what it is right to do.

Unemployment is due to the large import of goods from Britain and other countries. The Government haven't used the powers which they have for the benefit of the country.

The first thing that any President must do to lead effectively on economic issues is to persuade the country that trade matters.

Thank God I am not a free-trader. In this country pernicious indulgence in the doctrine of free trade seems inevitably to produce fatty degeneration of the moral fibre.

I never was a free-trader. I never felt that we could ... do away with all protective devices, because we would have been flooded with imports which would have hurt our economy.

Whence comes this demand for tariff tinkering. Aren't all our fellows happy?

Protecting the automobile industry has always been a very difficult and very necessary task that I have had to undertake.

From Abraham Lincoln in 1860 to Alf Landon in 1936, every Republican Presidential candidate ran on a platform endorsing high protective tariffs.

Immediate restrictions must be introduced to drastically reduce imports. We waste millions of dollars on provocative imported commodities, like dog food, nuts, and ice cream.

There has always been a temptation, at times of economic difficulty, to turn inward and put up the shutters. That is when we need free trade most.

Tariff policy is no longer a question of raising revenue or protecting domestic manufacturing. It is the executive's instrument of foreign policy.

A protective tariff would be collected only from those whose pride, whose abundance of means, prompts them to spurn manufacturers of our own country ...

Protection to American Industry

Protect and foster American industries … Democrats are willing to risk our manufacturing interests in the face of the starving hordes of pauper labor in other countries.

To protect our own great industries ... it is necessary to make some sacrifices.

At this moment came the direful struggle between the great parties in Congress founded upon the claim which the majority ... from the north of the Potomac made to the right to lay any tax upon the importations into the United States which was intended to act as a protection to northern manufacturers by excluding foreign fabrics of the same kind. Hence all the states to the south of the Potomac became dependent upon the Northern States for a supply of whatever thing they might want, and in this way the South was compelled to sell its products low and buy from the North all articles it needed from twenty-five to one hundred and twenty-five per cent higher than from France to England. .

We must now place the manufacturer beside the agriculturalist... The grand inquiry now is, shall we manufacture our own comforts, or go without them at the will of a foreign nation. He, therefore, who is now against domestic manufacturers must be for reducing us to dependence on that nation, or to be clothed in skins and live like wild beasts in dens and caverns. I am proud to say I am not one of these.

Free tariff or no tariff would close up our manufactories by the scores.

After so many historical illustrations of the evil effects of abandoning the policy of protection for that of a revenue tariff, we are again confronted by the suggestion that the principle of protection shall be eliminated from our tariff legislation. Have we not had enough of such experiments?

There is nothing inconsistent between standing up for free trade and standing up for American workers.

The United States should adopt a protective tariff of such a character as will help the struggling industries of Europe to get on their feet.

Will the shutting out of foreign goods increase the total amount of wealth in this country? Can foreign nations grow rich at our expense by selling us goods under cost price? Can a people tax themselves into prosperity? Can a man stand in a bucket and lift himself up by the handle?

It cannot be denied that a state of great national prosperity is quite consistent and compatible with legislation in favor of the protection of native industry. That proposition, years ago, was denied; but with the experience we have had of France and the United States of America—the two most flourishing communities probably in existence—it is now incontestable.