Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1842-02-07
1916. 1925. 1899. 1892
Description Of Articles.

No.. -, ,....... 1916 1926 1888. 1892
fIIEITIEE
Hammer: s;; s..:s: bits i 81 81 81 E
s ss;a, r s:' E,' ''''" 8s8 g
"S dozen, Gust 'a'''' per 30 aa5 aa5 Is
''"''dS dozen, '''' j. pei 90 rs . IS 10 Q5
Curry Combs, per DOZEN 10 2o2 Isl 425l 1925
Here is list of articles in the iron manufacture,
which shows most ccnclusvely that the duty, by
producing domestic competition, has reduced the
price more than one half ] have taken these
prices from documents furnished from the Treas
ury Department. and have placed the duty and
the prices in conncxion so as TO show what each
article sold for under each duty. l have selected
the year 1916, TO show the cost of the article be-
fore the tariff Of that year, and the years 1925 and
1929, TO show The effects of the tariffs of the two
preceding years, and 1882, ms the last year con.
aincd in the documents referred TO. This table
shows, most conclusiyely, the wisdom of the pro.
ective policy.
Nor is this principle illustrated by manufactures
of iron alone. Other articles which have enjoyed
protection have fallen in price. The same A
cotton shcetngs which, in 1916, sold at Is 3D.
sterling, could be bought in 1882 for l-2 Il. Ster
ling per yard. Printed goods costing in 1916,
36s per piece, could be bought in 1881 for from
lSs to 22s per piece. Common blue and white
calico, costing in 1916, 32s per piece, could be
had in 1882 for Us or l5s per piece. Broadcloths
costing in 1917. 20s could be had in 1882 for Is
l0d. These facts are all taken from official doc
uments, aud their correctness is vouched for by
the names of David llenshaw of Boston, and
James y. Barker Of Baltimore, collectors OF those
DOrts. and MIR, Secretary McInne
And while | am upon this subject, have one
fact more, for the special consolation of my friend
from South Carolina, who has uttered such dole
tul lamentations over the oppression OF the poor
man, who was SO heavily taxed by the mannlac
turcis, "on every nail he drove into his cabin"
In 1916 cut nails were selling at wholesale for III
cents per pound. duty Of cents per pound
was imposed by the tariff of that year. and tho
| very next year they went down 10 cents per
pound. The duty was subsequently raised 10 5
cents per pound, and the price of nails has been
reduced to 8, z, 6, s. and believe to IL cents
| per pound; that is less than the protecting duy
This is the hardship of the poor man, whose cab
in nails excite so much sympathy. j am asked,
| Mr.. Speaker, by n gentleman near me- whether
the nails which sold in / 10 for II cents were not
wrought nails, and the nails which have since
/ been sold Tor the low prices mentioned, were not
cut nails. will answer The gentleman they were
all cut nails, and nails of the same kind--all A.
penny nas-and this on the authority of Mr.. Da
vld lienshaw. He places wrought nails and cut
nails in separate columns. Wrought nails have
not been manufactured to any considerable extent
IN this country, and hence the price ofthat article
has not been materially reduced.
| But ii may he said that these reductions in pri-
Gee nre owing not to protective tariff, but 10 the
great Improvements hich have been introduced
into machinery. ] have no disposition TO deny
that improvements in machinery have done much
TO reduce prices. But what has caused this i'm
provement? What has given rise TO labor saving
machnes? The very competition which protec
lion has produced, has been the efficient produ-
cling cause Of these improvements. That inv en-
tive power which has been eXered in perlecng
machinery would have slumhered for ages to
come, as it has for ages past had not manufactures
been prosecuted, and necessity, which is the mo
Their OF invention, demanded the employment of
Iabor-snving machines II is 10 protection that we
owe competition, aud to competition that we owe
those inventions which have aided in the reduction
OF prices. SO that after all, this reduction is main
to he ascribed to protection and 10 the industry
which il stimulates and to the genius which it ex-
cites.
| regret that this whole subject has been treat
ed as il it were local question, and if New
England was the only portion Of the Union which
was interested i'll the subject This is not Mas
sachlsetls question no. nor "a New England ques-
| lion. The Manufactures of Massachusetts could
stand with less protection than most others. In
some of our establishments a large capital is in.
| vested, and rich capitalists ore engaged. They
can ride out almost any gae-ihey can stand any
ordinary storm. In fact, such establishments us
those at Lowell could perhaps do better with n
lower rate of duy; because, in such an event, the
small competitors would fall the amount of man
ufaciured goods would diminish and, having the
market 10 themselves, they could command high
er price for their cotons. Pennsylvania aud Vr-
ginia need protection more than Massachusetts,
Look at their iron and coal there were imported
into the city of Boston uone, in 1871, lS36,SlS
bushels of foreign coal, 10 the injury Of the conl
interest of those States, And the same is true of
all the middle States, where manufacturing is
ricd on. Nay all the grain growing States have
nm interest IN this question, ms vital as Nlassachu
sets herself. Indeed, il we're TO select Snte
which above others would be benefited by the
protective policy, il would he Virginia. Nature
has been most ample in her gllls to the Old Do
mini0n. Her beautiful bay and her navagible riv-
ers nre admirably adapted 10 commerce. Her low
lands produce the "yelow corn" which is Il great
iavoriIe of the gentleman before me, (Mr. " Use
Aud while her low lands furnish food for the sup
port of manufactures further up the country, she
has water power ample TO drive machinery sufli-
cient TO manufacture for a continent. Her noun
tains are stored with precious minerals salt and
on, in abundance. Let her try manufactures,
aud she would soon find that the interest OF her
whole people would he promoted. She would
find that the protective policy no abstraction,
bu, the most practical hing in the world and her
whole people would he in favor OF those discrm-
mating duties which nre directly recommended in
the Presidents message.
| Here the hour having arrived, Mr.. H. gave
way for an adjournment On Tuesday, when the
subject came up for consideration, he resumed the
subject and concluded his speech
Mr.. Speaker: the kind indulgence extended to
me by the House yesterday, IN listening to my
marks, udmonishes me not TO abuse that induig.
ence by lrespassing too much upon their patience
this morning. When gave way for an adourn-
mcnt yesterday, had been endeayoring to show
that protecting duties, when judicously laid, tend
ed to reduce prices, and generally produced that
effect. This is not invariably the case. IL the
duty be imposed upon articles which do not come
in competition with our own industry, this