Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1846-08-06

J
to be reUenue duty The precise point in the as
cendng scale Of duties at which it is asceraned
from experience that the revenue is greatest, is the
maximum rate of duty which can be laid for the
bona fide purpose Of collecting money for the sup
port of Government. TO raise the duties higher
than that point, and thereby diminishing the a
mount collected, is TO levy them for protection mere
~, aud not for revenue. AS long, then, as Congress
may gradually increase the rate of duty on given
article, and the revenuo is increased by such in
crease of duty, they are within the revenue stand
ard. When they go beyond that point, and as they
increase the duties the revenue is diminished or
destroyed the act ceases 10 have for its object the
raising OF money to support Govornmunt, but is for
! protection merely"
This is the same principle stated and more elab
Grated by the Secretary, and they both hold, that
any duty which exceeds what is thus defined as the
revenue standard, not only mpolitic, but actually
unconstitutional
As the President says it is important TO under-
stand distinctly what is meant by the revenue stan
ddrd, which must never be exceeded, and as can
not better define his meaning than he does himself,
| VIII now cndeaVor to present 1t in practical and
simple case We will suppose that all the shoes
worn in this country were made in Europe and inn
ported here, and Congress was to impose on them
duty of ten cents per pair, and suppose this were
to produce one million dollars revenue, this would
clearly De a reuenue duty. lfueeding more money,
Congress impose on them duty of fifteen cents
per pair, and as many were still imported it would
bring into the Treasury one million and half of
revenue. This is clearly within the revenue stand
ard because increasing the duty increased the rev.
enue. Let US now suppose, some one should sug-
gest, that this course held US entirely dependent
on foreign supply for shoes, and, if war took place,
we should be barelooted and besides, it WIS draw.
ing off the money which only taken for tie
Shoes and therefore proposed to lay duty of TWEEN
ty cents per pair on the Imported shoes, TO encour
age their manufacture here. Suppose that duty
laid, and thereupon our people began to make
shoes, and carried them into our markets, without
duty, and there meet the foreigner with his shoes,
on which he paid twenty cents, and undersell him
The foreigner then reduces his price, because he
would rather give up part Of the great profits he
had Uefore made than to lose the market; and So
I between the two, our people would buy shoes al
about fair price. Suppose that, under this law,
the American supplies half and the foreigner half
what is the effect on the revenue? Most obvious.
| y it is this: The revenue received is the same it
was under the duty OF ten cents per pair tor If
half as many are imported at twenty cents as there
were at ten cents, the whole amount received will
be the same. But it is also obvious that there is
not so much revenue realized as there was when
the duty fifteen cents, and therefore the treaty
cent duty above what is now called the reuenue
standard, for it diminished the revenue, and there
fore, as is now said, it was unconstitutional, and it
would be the immediate duty of Congress to re-
peal it, and thus put stop to the making shoes In
America.
This is a true and practical application of the
principe on which the bill is formed, and will ap-
ply, with the same force, to every American artisan
and every American production Nor Is it attemp-
ted to be disguised by the Secretary. It follows,
then, as clear coroary, that any thing which can,
by the poor and suffering population OF Europe, be
produced or made at less price than by
people, will and must supply our market, and drain
Off our money, until our people will live as poor
aud produce as cheap, and be reduced to the
degree of degradation, as the masses in Europe.
How the President in truth say, that when.
ever the rate 4 duty exceeds The uUenue standard,
noy detneI, that u.s. whenever tho rate of duty
is so high that thereby there is less revenue than
when at lower rate, then it becomes duty for
protection merely Such an expression makes the
impression that whenever protection begins, reve-
nue. This is not So as have already shown
and our present tariff, which is protective tariff
still raises Il reasonable amount of revenue How
then can it be in truth and candor said that such a
discrimination for protection destroys the tariff as
revenue measure, and makes it a law for protection
merely. That can only be, with truth and candor,
said of law laying duty so high as to amount to
entire prohibition. That would indeed be for pro-
lection merely.
The Secretary, in his report, frequently uses the
term "the forrest amount of duty which will pro.
duce the largest amount Of revenue" Now, it must
be perfectly obvious, on moments reflection, that
there cannot be but one point which can raise the
largest amount of revenue. 1t is that rate of duty
which is the highest that can be laid, and yet keep
, the whole supply to be imported This is the hipk-
est point IN the reuenue standard. If that rate is
, exceeded, it at once diminlshes the revenues be-
cause the American supplies some, the importation
Is diminished, and so the revenue is lessened--
E Therefore, the highest rate of duty which will raise
the largest amount of revenue, and the Lowest rate
of duty which will raise the largest amount of rev.
.Is fhao L.,
that point which will raise most Therefore, the
expression loUeSt rdte Of dttty which is often
peaed in the report, is mere political trick and
, catch-word
The next feature in the proposed course Of poll
cy on which the bill is founded and in strict ac-
cordance with its great object, is, that all duties
to be assessed by certain per cent the foreign
cost Of the article an ad uaorem duty; and all
specific duties, which have SO long been levied in
our own country and in all civilized nations, are TO
be entirely abolished. Ii is perfectly well known
that every nation has found that dd pdlorem duties
open the widest door to talsehood and fraud on the
f revenue, on the home PRODUCER and the fair
der, who honestly pays his duties; and such a
3 course has universally, and long since, been ack-
Dowedged to be the worst possible form Of duty
and 1t has been every where, as far as possible,
4 avoided, either by home valuation or by specific
duties Ii is difficult to see any object to be secur
: ed by this new and exclusive dd uuorem duty sys-
ten, unless II Is 10 express sort OF settled nallg-
nifty TO lome production. 1t Is certain that ad va
r iorem duties are utterly at war wnh any possible
proectioa for when the foreign price is high, and
# the home producer needs duty tor his protection
it is then only that the duty will be highs and when
Y the foreign price low as that the home produ-
Ger actually needs protection, 1t is then that tie du-
ty falls to almost nothing; aud when the importa-
n tlon Is largest, both the duties and revenue are
least
: On wool the present duty, on such wool as is
produced by our wool-growers, is 80 per cent, and
specific duty OF three cents per pound; but coarse
u wool, costing abroad not seven cents per TO-,
has on it no specific duty by The pound, but only an
y ad valorem duty of five per cent. Now 1t is much
r insisted that, by fraud, mech fine wool is introduced
n under this ad valorem duty OF five per cent Let
e the present law be fairly construed and fully exc.
s cuted, and The complaint would cease; and atho'
,, they make this complaint of the present tariff, yet