Herald of the times. [volume] (Newport, R.I.) 1830-1846, 1832-02-23

pid.
The gentleman from Ncw-York had
selected hannels as paying the highest
tax, and paid,he says, by the poor! Now
for facts, in opposition to theory and as
SUM ption, in 1923, the high duties Of 100
per cent complained of, were levied on
flanncls-havc they increased the price?
No: they have reduced it in two years
and half more than thirty per cent and
already we supply the whole American
market. When the tariff was passed in
1923 the price Of hannels was 46 certs
per yard; IN 1929 it was reduced to 3G
cents; in 1880 to - cents, and although
wool, in this year, raised in consequence
of the great demand, seventy five per ct.
still hanncls are furnished at 80 cents a
yard. Thus we are taxed by the Ame-
rican monopollst, who gives our farmers
better ilannels for 80 cents, in exchange
for wool and brcadstuils, than they for
merly got from the British for 46 cents
IN cash; and This is the dreadful taxation
and oppression which constitutes the bur
den of every speech we hear upon this
subject. According to the gentleman's
logic, the tax is always in an inverse pro-
portion to the price--when the price is
lowest, the tax is highest. Ifcoarsc cot
tons, for instance, rose to 35 cents the
square yard then the tax, according to
this theory, would be only rs per cent;
but if the price is reduced by American
competition and skill to cents per yard, 3,
why then the gentleman figures prove
clear y that the tax rises to 100 per cent; !;
that is, 3 cents more than the whole cost
of the article!! And such are the db-
surdlties upon which all this clamor a.
ganst the protective policy is founded
As to iron, another article mentioned by
the gentleman from New York, IA similar
reduction of price had been experienced
in 1928, the duty was increased S4 40
on hammered, and 81 per ton on rolled
iron. In that year, the price was Sll8
per ton, in 1929 it fell to STA, and in
1880 to $50 per ton; vet We are told the
duty is added to the price, and is, there
fore, tax upon the consumer!
MIR. Stewart laid it down as general
and sound proposition that duties levied
on Articles not produced in our own coun-
try operated alone as taxes on consump-
ton; all these he was ready to repeal at
once. On the other hand, that the du-
ties levied on iorci gn articles similar to
those produced here, were takes levied
upon X paid into our treasury by foreign
ers, and ought therefore to be increased
rather .aan diminished.
The effect of The American competi-
ton was to establish an american price.
At this price all foreign goods must be
If, for instance, the Ameri-
can price for iron is established at 500
per ton, and of cloth at 81 per yard
suppose then we Increase the duty of $40
per ton on iron and 20 cents per yard on
cloth, still the foreigner must sell at the
established American price, 500 per ton
and s per yard.who then pays the du-
ly? the foreigner Undoubtedly. We get
The article at the established American
price, the foreigner paying the duty
This must be so or the foreign rival fab
-ic would be excluded altogether. The
pays the same; the duty adds
nothing to the price; if it did it would be
in its effect The plan pro-
IoSed, therefore, is to repeal the taxes
,ad by American citizens on unprotcct-
I'd articles, and collect our revenue from
oreigners by lcvying it on articles COM
ng in competition with American indus
ry. So much for taxation.
Here Mr.. Stewards remarks were in
errupted by the lapse of time allowed
or resolutions.
The next morning Mr.. Stewart rcsum-
le by saying that he concurred in the
opinion that this discussion was prcma-
ure; he would therefore dctain the
House with but few additional remarks, I
n which he would introduce no new top
c, but limit himself to reply. The
gentleman from Ncw-Y ork, (Mr. Cam
,rcleng) has said that the prote citing pol
cv had not only imposed taxes and bur
lens upon the country, but also had built
Up and cherished monopohes and gam
ling at the expense OF the agricultural
interests of the nation. So far from this
icing the fact, Mr.. S. contended that
'reclsely the reverse was its effect; in
teud of encouraging, it destroye ed mono
'o'y-instead of injuring, it benefited
griculture. BY affordng adequate pro-
ection you invite an enlarged invest
ncnt of capital-you increase the num-
,er of manufacturing establishments, in.
'rease the quantity of manufactured
FOODS, and thereby necessarily diminish
heir price; while on the other hand, you
Increase the market and the demand for
very thing produced by the farmer
WOOL, cotton, provisions of all kinds; and
~ increasing the demand, you as neces-
arily increase their price. This was an
Established law of trade inYariahle and