Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1842-09-20

better opinion in most countries certainly Is, that ~
ner cent or thereabou's. IS the best maximum u u
ror;cs Il l.tllr and goes below to heen above I"
,wontv FIVE it may Ut times make essential ditier-
cnce But this BILL while protesting to be formed Tor
purposes Of pure fiscal laxaiion not only goes above
twenty or twenty FIVE in numerous instances butt III
several above one hundred. Indeed, its hole duties
ON an average near Sc per cent and soe calculate
Them at quite 80 II therefore becomes important to
ascertain whether this large Of 10 or ~ PER cent
IN nm average for revenue alone, is not improper on
memorial principles well inednsslte Under some
leading circumstances connected with the peculiar po
sion of the General Government, as TO taxation aud
the comoromise If shall be successful IN show
ing this the bill should underg" material change IN
whole structure, and reduction be made IN It's rates
of duties 10 the proper standard Bu II not successful
or if these rates found to be imposed SO high lot
oroteciion and revenue, 1t will become necessary
TO INQUIRE whether the right exists in this Government
10 raise duties high for protection aone and 1t 1t does
whether they here assessed in such an amount ana
in such manner, IN respect 10 all tne great .efessS
Of society entitled TO equal protection, as alone can
Justify the passage Of the bill as measure OF equa
protection OF equal legislation and of equal taxation
on the whole people
One of the strongest proofs that duty equvaentto
nbou, 30 per cent is high enough for the purpose OF re-
venue is the practice Of most nations in not exceeding
such for the purpose. Thus, the tax on import
ed corn Athens limited TO one filth, or exactly
60 per cent and the early tariffs in England, Tor reve
nue. seldom If ever, exceeded twenty, and we're often
Ent re per cent. w men tItJ " eASSco ~ kdo
they have done in modern times, for the pur-
poses of retaliation protection, though before 1857,
no higher than twenty seven per cent even Tor those
puposes they have proved to be 80 dlsadvantageous
for revenue 10 lead often TO much lower duty,
when imposed for Alone as s the case on CO.
Ionial products Indeed the conviction has become so
strong there with all paes that for revenue alone ~
per is sufficiently high, that the plan proposed ny
the present ministry is to impose, on all materials 'or
manufactures, duty not over per cent, and, IN many
/ T,ea Nnxt ri A.
nufactured not ~ per cent and manufactures
themselves not 90 per centuin In cases Of I'M,
ports from their colonies, there IS to be dlerenuai
duty often moderate than THIS
Lord John Russell, Qhe organ of The preceding M
nistry0 entertained similar views and The most en-
Gvblened there seem now to concur with the Commit
tee on Imports that "t obvious that hle pfofcu'e
duties check importation, and consequently, are unpo
ductve TO the revenue and experience SHOWS 'hd 'e
profit to the trader the benefit 10 the consumer ana Inc
fiscal interests of the country nre all sacrificed, when
heavy import duties impede the interchange OIL co"-
modities with other nations.
| AS an indication Of the present feeling on TINS SUD-
iect, allow me TO read sentence, which came ny Tue
very last packet: cr.,. .
mThe inlelliqence from the Continent is oil little IN
terest if we except the publication OF royal otdi.
nance from France, imposing an ad vaiorehi au'y VI
90 per cent all linen yarn imported mo Inc h'ng
dom. As may be expected, such revolutionary mea'
sure has produced great stir with English man uiactu,
|
submit 10 amelioratIon
In truth the average duties IN France 10 ho', iof
time, appear TO have exceeded u or ic per ce
for revenue; which is ground OF the surprise Al ~
ner cent on linen warm and is another decisive evi.
dence that such rate is regarded there, as wen az
in Enrland sufficiently high for all fiscal purposes In
several of the other of Europe where duties
are higher il avowedIy for retaliation or protection
1t was long the boast and glory of Holland and swift
zerland that their duties only II and ID per cent
nd nb,hl rpvp instance now eS-
lists in the latter country OF their being as high as ~
per cent.
In Cuba that most prosperous island IN both com
merce and agriculture and whose exposis and imports
per head Of her population nearly four TIMES the
amount of ours and three times the amount In Eng
and-he duties are often less than 20 and seldom cx-
coed % per cent
But in our own records we have illustration, equally
convincing, thut such standard IS hisn enough 10,
all fiscal purposes. During the Revolution, and TIL
The new Constitution was adopted Hamilton says (in
No. 81 of the Federalis that per cent was the h'gh
rate. He did not propose, under the ne" uo'efh
ment to 90 beyond in ordinary cases. lie thought
spirits as luxury, might bear tax OF one shilling
per gallon, which about IL per cent; and II II d.
minshed the revenue, because 30 high, as was aPpre
hended the gain to the public morals by dlscourag-
ing the use of SO bad luxury, might prove an equ-
valent.
Accordingly, when the Constitution went into ope-
ration the first Tariff did not rise above ia per cent
except in single instance approaching nearly hfeen
1T is difficult after this lapse Of time, in cases IN
which the duties specific, TO reduce them with ex-
actness to true ad vaorem standard. But no compa
risons can be made which OF any utility either IN
our own country, different periods, or between our
and foreign nations, without being at the labor 10
do this in the most important articles
have, therefore, attemptedit myself in such cases,
generally, though adopting few from one oil The Com
mttee on Manufactures, in the other House ana nav
ing made the official values which the duties were
actually assessed the basis Of my computations rather
than newspaper price currents, merchants books,
will not he u matter Of surprise, II some difference
should exist But mine, beside being III this way most
conformnbe law, will, in any event. answer for The
ce neral purpose Of comparative examination
The first Tariff Of 1850, even if made higher, IN
some respects for protection (as some have contended
but which is very questionabe placed mott OF It's du
lies as low as five and ten per cent AS II was altered
from time to time till the war of 1912. scarce an in
stance be found where it ranged above 20 IL re-
manned, in mos! particulars, low as IN and 10 per
cent. and where, the case OF spirits and salt, u
had gone higher the whole duty on the last became re-
peued in 1907 and, on the former, the object was
rather to dscounlenance baneu luxury, than collect
greater revenue.
Here is table for comparison of the whole of those
tariffs. Passing by the doubling OF the duties during
the war; it is true that the next tariffs OF 1910, 1884,
and 1928 exceeded in many cases, the rate OF ~ per
cent but all of these did avowedy for protection,
rather than The chairman not only admits
this TO the two last but argues strongly TO prove H.
In the ardent pursuit oil that protection, tufgeo on Lon
gross almost exclusively by and Tor one class OF the
Community, the oppression became so great to some
other classes and sections and the benefits OF such hgh
duties became questionable, even for protection,
that in 1885, the whole system was abandoned and the
duties gradually reduced, as by law, where mol iree
10 range by the present year. higher than the very
revenue standard, for which ! am now contendlng.
This circumstance furnishes another striking argu-
meGt in support Of limitation to that rate 1t was
agreed deliberately by the highest representatives, of
all our great interests II moulded into form to
remain in that particular, perpetual unless in some
great exigency.
1t was to operate gradually, so as not, by sudden
changes, derange capital 1t was great
paccator OF sectional and fra,erna troubles and it
has ever since been called and eulogzed sacred
compromise of former difficulties. Mr. Clay pledged
himself originally TO abide by it, not only while above
20 per cent-as then most beneficial to his friends
but after had reached 90, and had begun to benefit
most of his opponents THIS pledge he renewed at Ha
Court house, late as lc40; and General HART
n, ln deliberately aVOwed.