The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-09-17

cheap Canary wines, made Of almost entirely by
the poorer classes, pay l55 per cent The Tribune
must not blame any one for this but Mr.. Clay and
his friends. II they bundered into wrong in
drawing up their bungng bill Of denominations, they
must not blame George M. Bib, the late Secretary
Of the Treasury (who came from Mr. Gays own
Sate) for correcting their blunders. lfa duty Of 60
cents per galion-equal 10 40 per cent charged
upon Madeira and other wines Of Portugal why
were the costly champaign wines OF France admitted
with nominal duty Of only 10 per cent, while the
cheap Sicily wines were charged SO per cent? Mr..
Bib did just exactly what Mr.. Greedy himself
would have done had he been Secretary Of the Treas
ury-that is, made the tariff law correspond with
existing treaties. o.. .... ..
BY the third article fthe treaty between Portugal
and the United States, concluded on the 26Ih OF
August, 1910, il is expressly stipulated that mo
higher other duties shall be imposed the impor-
tations into the United States of any article the
growth, produce, or manufacture Of the kingdom
and possessions Of Portugal, than such as are or
shall be payable the like articles being the
growth, produce or manufacture Of any other foreign
country"
This is clear enough and easily understood, hut
notwithstanding this treaty, wires Of France, Aus
rla, &c, were admitted at "A cents per gallon, and
Mr.. Bibb had no discretion in the matter He was
obliged TO admit the wines Of Portugal at the same
rates Was he not, Mr.. Tribune' II so, call not
our statement "atrocious." But while you attempt
ed TO explain about the low duties costly Madei-
ra wines, what have you TO say about the low do.
Ties on expensive champagne wines paying under
Mr. Gays tariff but ID per cent. What about the
still more expensive Burgundy, paying but 81 per
cent Or the yet more costly Port, but 10 per cent,
while the cheap claret and sweet VINE. which poor
pebeians drink, pay 50, 10, and 100 per cent, and
some even mere. Is this also owing to "locofo
co Secretary ofthe Treasury" No, no, there stands
the fact staring full in the face, and Mr.. Greedy
must make the most Of il.
That there may be no cayilling about the facts
we will give the actual quantity Of two classes OF
wines, and will give all II necessary. In the year
l845, there imported and consumed in this
country, OF champagne, 80 ,422 valued at s297 202
duty ~ rents per gallon. Amount Of duty $780,
1853 30, or just 1871 per cent.
There were imported during the same year cheap
claret wines, in bottles, 80 TAO gallons-cos, S30-
65li duty, IS cents per gallon; amount Of duty;
sl3,9O9, or just 40 per cent, and the still lower
Canary wines actually paid duty Of l58 per cent !
IL is such tariff, Mr. Tribune, not our statement,
which must receive your speculation Of "atro-
cious"
All these wines, under Mr.. Walkers new bill, pay
40 per cent; so If the poor desires cheap but
respectable class OF wine, costing 81 the gallon, he
knows that he pays duty OF 40 cents; while If the
gormandizer and luxurious liver desires TO swallow
his rich Madeira, champagne, and Burgundy, cost
50 40 The Injustice of Mr.. CIay's old tariff, and
the justice OF Mr.. Walkers new bill, thus
at a glance.
This parallel, let it be understood, does not hold
good in reference TO wines only, but upon almost
cry article consumed the same vide difference ex-
ls's-Mr Clay taxing articles of luxury but little,
and articles Of necessity "atrociously," while by
Mr.. Walkers bill everything is taxed according to
It's actual value. lfit costs but little IL pays but
small amount Of duty; If costing high, and used al
most exclusively by the wealthy, the amount OF
duty is large. Which is the just tariff