The North-Carolina standard., 1843-07-26
THE TARIFF.

we puDtlSn TINS week an aDStrdCI ol the arm
Law passed by the late Whig Congress We
have before u.s. also, the Tariff of duties underthe
Acts of July IA, 1882, and March End, 1888;
and we propose to institute brief comparison be-
tween the tariffs of 1928, 1888, and the tariff of
1912, which was, in every respect, Wing
But in the first place. although politicians un-
derstand the subject and have all the facts involved
in it at their fingers ends, yet it is highly impor-
tant that the people should clearly understand
what a tariff is, in order that they may consider
and determine for themselves Truth is always
sacred and to be received even at second hand but
it is decidedly preferable to obtain it for ones self
bv patient study and investigation. What, then,
is atariff law? 1t is law passed by Congress,
requiring foreign goods landed in our ports to pay
a tax, and this tax is called duty. These goods,
when landed, pass through our Government Gus
tom Houses, where they examined by Govern
ment Officers who receive, from the importer,
that is, the person who brings in the goods, the
amount of the tax. By the first article of the
eighth section of the Constitution of the U. States
Congress has the power to lay taxes and imposts,
and it is under this article that tariff law is en-
acted and justified. A tariff law may be passed
for three purposes. A tariff strictly for revenue,
is such an one as looks solely to the collection of
enough revenue to pay the expenses ofthe Govern
ment A tariff for revenue, with what is called
accidental protection, is tariff which imposes as
high duty upon certain articles as may be con-
sistent with the principles of revenue; and if the
articles thus taxed, yield sufficient revenue, to-
gether with other articles, which not taxed so
high, and this tax at the same time keeps off a
certain portion of the article thus taxed it amounts
to accidental protection, for the reason that our
manufacturers sell whatever quantity there is de-
manded bv the consumer, and which-is not sup
piled by foreign importation. A tariff for protec-
ton is such a tariff as prohibits importation in
some cases, and in others bears SO heavily upon
the articles imported as to induce the consumer
either to purchase but few of them or to purchase
exclusively whatever he may want from the manu-
facturers of our country. Now, which of these
tariffs is to be preferred2 The only sound reason
why any tariff whatever is laid, would seem to be
the necessity which exists for raising for
the support of Government. We want no more
revenue than is necessary for this purpose; and
taxation in itself being an evil, every cent which
is demanded beyond what is accessory, may be
regarded as unustly demanded and if persisted in,
amounts, not to taxation but to robbery. Is not
this principle correct2 But, say the advocates Of
projections the tariffs which are passed for protect
i've purposes, only tax the people indirectly-and
they are not compelled to buy the articles which
bear the highest duty. This, it is true, is a very
plausible saying. We admit that an Indirect tax
may not, in the abstract be considered as resting
upon any man particularly; but 1t IS @ t0r, and
he can purchase certain articles in no other way
than by paying this tax upon them Salt for ex-
ample, is taxed eight dollars on the hundred bush
els, under the present Whig tariff. This is an
indirect tax. But is not salt an article which the
poor man mast hare? Here, then in one single
article of prime necessity he pays to Government
eight dollars for every hundred bushels he pur-
chases; and in addition to this, he pays the profits
of the Northern wholesale merchant, the costs Of
transportation, and the profits made by the small
merchant who retails the article. In England,
the most atrocious despotism earth salt goes in
free Of duty Why, then, is it taxed here? To
make the poor man and the laboring classes con-
tribute more than they ought to the support of
Government and to build up at the same time,
the manufacturers of the article in this country.
Look at the article of brown sugar. That is tax
ed, under the present tariff, four cents per pound
Does the poor man use no brown sugar? Under
the tariff law of 1888, this article was taxed two
and half cents per pound. Why this differ
ence? Wherefore this duty Of four cents now?
1t was laid to enrich the sugar makers cf Lou
isiana; and its tendency is to make US buy their
the duty of four cents upon the ordinary price Of
foreign sugar. How these Federal Wings lore
the poor man! Again: we suppose our citizens
wnt boots and shoes-such articles are sometimes
worn-and they desire to get them as cheap as
possible, no matter where they are made. Well,
under the present tariff law mems coarse boots,
worth two dollars and fifty cents per pair, are
taxed one dollar and twenty-five cents per pair.
And what does the rich man pay for his pumps
Only thirty cents per pair on an article worth two
coarse bootees, for himself or wife? On such an
article, worth one dollar and half per pair, he
pays fifty centsl
Under the act of the 2nd March, 1888, provi-
sion was made for biennial reduction of duties
until the 3Oth June, 1912, when they were brought
down to twenty per cent upon the value of the
articles This was the rate of duties at the time
the present tariff law was passed, and the expert
of pracpdinr wears had demonstrated that at