Jeffersonian Republican. [volume] (Stroudsburg, Pa.) 1840-1853, 1846-07-16

duties 10 an average rate OF 20 per cent, and IN
support of this Recommendation he had accom-
panied his report with table, at page 956
showing the revenue under different tariffs for
The last twenty five years, viz, four years i'm
mediately before the tariff of 1924. four years
under the tariff Of ls24, four years under the
tariff of II e2S, Ten years under the compromise
BILL and three years under the tariff Of 1912
And what was the result?
For the four years preceding the tariff ol
l62i the average gross revenue was $22,753, :
600. Under the tariff of s24, which its oppo-
nents al The time predicted would ruin the rev.
enue and compel resort 10 direct taxation, the
Average for the four years of its duration was
| S2S, ,929 600. Next came the bill OF abomi-
nations" the !" black tariff of 1925" which il
was said would bankrupt the treasury beyond
all question, and what was the result? The
average revenue during The four years of its op-
Grafton increased TO $50, 0,5il 900 Then came
the compromise bill of 1888 which brought the
tariff down by biennial reductions 10 horizon
tai duty OF 20 per cent. and what was It's effect
upon the revenue9 The revenue declined pQri
paSu with the tariff, yielding for ten years an
average of S2l 10000, and the last year of
its operation under the 20 per cent duy only
600, while our expenditures were more than
double that amount. Then came the present
tariff which yielded more than $50, 900
eross-27 100000 net revenue. Now what
does our profound Secretary of the Treasury
propose TO do 10 improve the revenue Mark
IL! He proposes to reduce the tariff TO an az
erage Of about 20 per cent, which experience
proves" he says, will give the highest rsUenue,
and YET this very report shows the fact that a
20 per cent. tariff in 1912 yielded only Sl2,-
100000. while The present tariff last year yield
ed S27, ,52s,000. Thus, according to The Sec
relary, twelue IS more than twenty, Seren A
new discovery in arithmetic. The new free
trade" system Of finance says reduce the du-
ties 10 increase the revenue" a doctrine not
only urged upon Congress by the Secretary and
/" The Union" his organ, but by all the advo-
Gates Of this new tariff on this floor. Reduce
the duties TO increase the revenuer' Can any
thing be more absurd-ureed in the face of the
fact, proved by every official report on The f.
nances from The foundation Of The Government,
tha, he revenue has always gone up and gone
down as the tariff has gone up or gone down!
Yet Wc are told, "reduce The duties to increase
The revenue" Are no. du,ies the source Of
revenue, and would j. not be just as sensible
10 say reduce the revenue 10 increase The rev.
enue :" Duties and reveDue are convertible
terms You want twenty-five millions from
The ,arla--ibat sum mus, be raised, no matter
how you impose the duies; and why not SO
arrange them as TO protect and sustain your
own national industry, thus making taxation it.
self prolific Of benefits and blessings 10 the
people
On the subject Of The revenue. he would ven
lure TO predict that if The system of measures
recOmme nded by The SecreIary-the reduction
Of the tariff, the change from specific 10 ad valo
rem dnlles, the Sublreasury, and The warehous-
ing system were adopred-the revenue next
year would not be half the amount 1t will be
this year. Mark the prediction, not 5d.f"
Who could deny The fact that with The rails
ing of The tariff the revenue increased, and with
It's dmnuiion The revenue fell off, I'LL at last
under 90 per cent, which the Secretary con-
sidercd the very beau tdedI-be very perfection
Of a revenue systematic nett revenue sank
down to less than thirteen millionsl There
was his iheory--and there, alongside of it,
stood his proof; and his proof utterly subver,ed
his Ihcory. Did il prove that reducing duties
to 20 per cent. raised the revenue 10 It's highest
point just the reverse. 1t reduced il TO the
very lowest point OF depression. While his
lheoty said that 20 per cent would give the
" highest" his proof showed that 1t gave The
lowest"
And was MOI this pretty time 10 select for
the reduction of duties Now, when we had
just entered into a war, whose duration no man
could predict or calculate! When we went to
war in 1912 we doubled the duties now it was
proposed TO cut them down one half. What
consummaie proof of political wisdom and f.
nanca ability was here exhibited!
There was another thing of which the tariff
was an index, and lha, was the public prosperi-
~. When The people were poor they could
no, afford 10 consume Injuries imports fell of,
and down went the revenue. But when duties
were high and domestic competition was ex-
cited, agriculture having abundant markets, aud
labor full and profitable employment, the peo-
pie became prosperous they lived in comfort
they could afford TO pay for fine goods and lux
uries-aDd up went the revenue. Reduce The
tariff, break up American industry, aud you
clothed the people in rags, and your treasury
became bankrupt. The national rerenue and
he national prosperity wen. up and down TO-
gehef, aud were always coIncident with ma
uoual protection.
Mr, S >, sysrcm was his Select he articles