Independent Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Miss.) 1842-1844, 1842-09-17

ty In this on tea and coffee. lie naZard
ed little in saying that, if the duties Tim
poses on the protected articles we're re.
duced two-thirds, they would yield thiro
more to the treasury; and that for every
dollar this bill puts into the public Golfers
it will put three at least into the pockets
J Of the manufacturers, unless (what would
be worse, and which, he believed, would
prove to be the CASEY it should annihlate
that amount and more of the productive
industry Of the country, TO the general
impoverishment of the community.
But our political friends who. are about
| Unfortunately, as he believed) to give this
bill their votes, endeavor to console us by
telling us it is mere provisional measure,
INTENDED. to meet present exigencies; and
that it will be repealed, or greatly modi-
fled, in short time after we get into pow
err. They doubtless think so; but will it
be the. case2 Can they, on reflection,
seriously believe that thesnecessity, which
they plead In excuse for their votes, will
be less then than it is now?
Do they really thiAk that the manufac-
turers will be better able to bear reduce
ton of those high duties about to be i'm.
posed, as it is alleged, to save them, than
they are now to do without them? If they
do, they will be wofllly mistaken. We
have had good deal Of experience on the
subject. The effect of high duties is not
to decrease the necessity Of continuing
them, but th6-reverse--to increase the me-
cessity of raising them still higher. This
bill itself furnishes some striking evidence
of the fact. Among the articles on which
it imposes the highest rates OF duty, is
that Of coarse cottons--rates not less-than
100 per cent. on some descriptions; and
they are the very articles SO highly favor
ed BY the tariff Of 1916, under the mini
mum duty, which the Senator from Ken
lucky [Mr. Crittenden] so kindly brought
to his recollection in the course Of hisere-
marks. We were then told Gas we now
are of this billy that it was a mere pro-
visional measure to protect an infant man
ufacture, which, in few years, would
protect itself by its own intrinsic energy,
and yet now, after more Than quafter Of
a century, the manufacturers Of the same
articles come and ask still higher duty,
in proportion, than what they then dido
AGala ass 1ssd T ff i, ar bsOtsci ws
against the foreign, duty Of $50 per ton
was laid on the imported; and npw, also,
its manufactures come again, after SO
great alapse of time, and ask duty Of
$25 per ton; which is an ad yaiorem duty
on the present cost greater than the rate
per cent. in lSl6--being not less than
100 per cent. He would add another
item--that Of cotton bagging and bale rope:
on which the rate per cent. is much high
err, as now proposed by this bill, than I'M
der the tariffs Of 1924 or 1928; although
we had the sdne assurance as to it, as we
have now as TO this Bill-that it was pro-
vlsional, and that the home market would
soon furnish a cheaper and better article.
In fact, the whole bill, taken In connexion |
with the declarations of its advocates
that the manufactures must 90 down un:
less these duties are imposed "a
volume of evidence that the whole effects
Of all passed protection, from 1915 to this /
day, have been but to require still higher
II is, indeed, in literature of the system,
as he had proved when the vetoed bill was
before the Senate. that every duty impos-
ed had but the effect of requiring a. still
higher. The cry ever has been more,
more, more The more. it has been sup
ported, the more il required to be sup
ported.
Those, then, of our political friends
who intend 70 vote for this bill, deceive
themselves, in supposing they are impos-
ng provisional or temporary burden.--,
1 is easy to put on the burden, but it will
,rove hard to fake it of--as we have had
ample experience. The exigency under
which they, unfortunately, suppose they'll
ire compelled to vote for it, will be as
yreat-nay, greater against repeating or !
educing the duties it Imposes, hereafter.
is 1t Is now to impose them. Instead of .
,eing less dependent, the operatives, who 8
i've by the bodpties it grants, will be i
more numerous, and more dependent; and, {
TO refuse to impose these duties nov I
you'd subject them to starvation, as we |
re told,--to repeal or reduce them here g
fter would more certainly be followed i
and that, to a greater exsept) by The same a
meet he would lse who were 8
bout to take ths fatal 81 that they we're s
bout tome Reg fould not be undone c
iio55 = death his ss1sieine Of the Con- 8
IsSsl 8 ae Ns,s ,b (which h, i Is 3
n empty treasoI 5nfiiet with mo. i
ection, or the -. <,r ;,,r,i. III