Richmond palladium. [volume] (Richmond, IA [i.e. Ind.]) 1839-1854, 1848-02-16

1912 were withheld till the duties came
down. They were piledup in warehouses
or kept in bond till the tariff OF, 1916 and
low duties took effect; besides. goods
which had paid heavy duties were re-ex-
ported. and the duties Withdrawn from the
treasury. During this period. Of course.
little revenue, in comparison. was coming
in. though the country was still nomnaliy
under the tariff of 1912. Now these are
the months which this very fair and candid
Secretary takes for his estimate OF the pro-
duce of the tariff of 1912. As soon as
the reduced tariff of 1886 went INTO oper-
alton. all these goods. which had been
held back waiting for the reduced duties.
were at once poured in. and in pours .eT-
enue by millions. The goods AMI duucs
Withdrawn from the tariff of lS4o new re-
turn under the tariff Of 1916: and these
are the months which this tru'h-seeking
Secretary takes. as showing the compara-
tive produc: of this model tariff contrasted
with five months of the tariff of 1912. Civ
ing a little over seven millions. when. for
two years before, the revenue had exceed
ed an average of twentv-seven millions!
And this is put forth as fair COMPARISON
This is no deception. Oh. no; this IS
fair This is the way to bring truth TO the
people! He might as we'll compare the
strength of giant and that Of child, by
putting down what the giant could hit
when on his sick bed and in his last hours
and what the child could lift in the viyor of
health and under sudden and violent eN-
element Would this be a very satlsfac-
tory way of proving that the child was
stronger than the giant9
The next thing the learned Secretary
attempts to prove is. that under low duties
more revenue is always obtained than un-
der high duties. To show this, he selects
ten years income under high tariff and
ten years under low one. lie selects
ten wears from 1882 to 1842. under the
compromise bill, for his fO,r tariff. and ten
wears. from 1924 TO 1882. eight years un-
der the high tariff Of 1924 and 1928, with
two years under the tariff of 184o. as the
high tariff period. Now. assert that, in
the very years on which he relies, and
which he has selected for the comparison,
his own figures prove. not that he got less
revenue under the high than the low paid,
but il proves that he got cighty-tro millions
more under the high tariff than he did un-
der the low. For the proof, refer gentle
men and the Secretary to his own official
report on the finances in 1645, page $50.
Here you have his own report. Take IT
down gentlemen; | desire you to take a
minute Of what state; for what | say
can prove. | hope the chancellor of the
exchcquer that was Mr.. Mckay will pay
special attention to these statements. |
say, on Mr. Walkers own showing, that
under the ten years of low tariff the re-
ceipts were $214,G85,858, and that under
the high tariff years the receipts were 1927,
G42.215. The difference in favor of the
high tariff is $82,95G. 456-S3, 30 1855
per year, and yet the Secretary and the
President say that all experience proves
that low tariffs give the most revenue!
Whether such statements proceeded from
ignorance or design he would not say. but
it was one or the other. | refer (said Mr..
s. to day, to date. book. and page. Let
them look at it. want MIR. " alker HIM
self to look at it. suppose when he sent
US his book. with all these confident state
ments. supported by figures 100. he thought
it would answer its purpose. lie owes 1t
to his character for truth and candor to
come out and admit or deny this state
ment, or authorize some friend to do it for
him on this floor. VIII it be done! We
will see.
And now for his positions on the sub
ject Of exports. The Secretary atlirms
that the balance of trade is a.sSaysi in our
favor under low tariff; that our exports
exceed our imports, and that the exports
of breadstufls and provisions are especial
ly increased Now say that, deducting
the imports during the ten years Of high
tariffs, selected by the Secretary for COM
parison. from the imports during the ten
years of low tariffs. and it would appear
that the balance against the country under
the low tariff was S4O1 $40 .O76-equal to
$40, 1877 ,6O7 year. and, deducting du-
ring each period the goods re-exported,
the balance against the country would be
increased to the sum of S423 49, 1874.
And how had it been paid. By two hum
dred millions of State bonds, sent to Eu-
rope to pay for goods; mercantile debt
Of nearly an equal amount, resulting at
he end of the low duty period in 1910,
Al. and 40, in reputation and bankrupt
", State, National and individual through
put the land. Yet we are told by the
President and Secretary that low duties
produce prosperity, national and individ-
u dls diiu cSpCSIoiiN tiiC prosperity VI thC
farmers and laborers of the "toiling mil
Ions
But this is not ALL Take the exports
from the imports during these ten years Of
ON duties, and it will be found that the
lebt saa;nst the people Of the United
States in favor Of foreigners is S176.166,-
242. What sum Of national prosperity
S here exhibited!
Such is the evidence in favor Of Mr..
" alker's position that low tariffs always
urn the balance Of trade in our favor.
Such are the happy effects Of his policy Of
rec trade. Low tariffs always have been
and always will be the ruin Of the country.
LIE. any man look at the scenes Of gener-
al distress which always have followed this
insane policy; the ruin Of fourishing es-
the multiplication Of bank
-uptcies, the advertisements of sherifs'
sales, the destruction of credit and conf