The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1852-12-16

that permanent system is impossible take the posi-
ton that permanent system is inconsistent with the OBJ
ject OF The systemwhich is the raising OF revenue we
are not acting under the power TO regulate commerce.
We are acting under The power IN The constitution Tor
raising and collecting duties excuses and mposs Tbs
purely money powedeclared SO by all your Jnfsts-
Judge Marshall among the rest.
mean to say that permanent tariff is impossible, Goa
sisenty With the nature OF the trusts eposed IN US Oar
duty is 10 raise By the imposition OF duties aud
imposts Well sir, what constitutes the capacity or the
measure OF the capacity, OF country TO Taise revenue by
| lnposts' 1t is the absence OF wealth IN particular
| forms Ii is because you can buy abroad what you
| do not make at home; can buy cheaper abroad
than you can at home. II Is the difference between
the cost of domestic and foreign production which
enables you to impose duty, aud without this dill
ference you could impose no duty al all. why, sir IN
1916 you could have imported hat such as that before
me, under duty of 50 possibly 200 per cent Now, sir
aduy OF thirty or forty per cent would be prohlbtory.
| Whyi Because the country has greatly enhanced is
own manufacture OF hats Ii is because the growth Of
the wealth OF the country in hats has diminished the diff
ference between the value OF the domestic and foreign
article Il is this that has disabled you 10 impose heavy
duue~. | could take thousand other articles. twill
take cotton cloths, all the manufactures OF leather, as
very prominent articles for illustrating this principle In
1916 most of the suggested articles could have borne
duly OF 100 per cent Now many of them are incapable
of any duty. Cotton goods which would have borne a
duty OF 100 per cent twenty years ago are now export
ed. II you to levy duty of three per cent upon
them il would be prohibitory The same might be pre-
dcaed of thousands OF articles very long list OF mer
chandse has become incapable OF duty and every single
article OF manufactures has become capable oil less and
duty, successvey and continually; not year, not
month revolves but article OF foreign trade becomes
incapable OF duty.
Take the article of sugar, prominent article in
the protective system, Twenty years ago sugar would
have borne duty OF $50, and probably 200 per cent
will stand corrected if in error. II did in TACT bear
a heavy duty. How is il now What would be called
a revenue duty in the view OF high tarf man, would
now be proh upon sugar, and is not difficult 10
oresee that in ten years from this hourand ten years
is but an hour in The lifetime Of naiioa-sugar will be
q N fha ad Stata And III
interest should make any proposition relative to II ten
years hence, is most likely they will insist upon
come IN cheap to the manufacturer for they teach
US that whatever they want to buy is made cheaper by
a low duty, and whatever they want 10 sell IS made
| dearer by low duty.
Now SIR this country has TO determine al once whether
it is TO raise its revenue by imports or by direct taxes
There two modes of reducing revenue-one by re-
ducng the duties all articles; another by reducing
the amount OF foreign commerce that is made liable to
dutyin other words, you may reduce the revenue by
prohiblory duties, as well as by repeating duties. a
duty that is prohbllory makes you no more revenue
than no duty at all and that is the practical propo-
sition now before the country. The surplus in the
treasury has forced the question upon us The coun-
try sees that there ought to be reduction OF the
tariff. There is no question how the government
can raise sufficient revenue. That was the question
which the free-lrade party had TO meet in s46 Many
OF the friends of low tariff driven from the sup
port OF the tariff of 1916 because they persuaded
that the government would be bankTuped by H. II was
not that they TO low duties not that they
were in favor OF protecon but that they afraid that
they would mpoverish The government That argument
or ground of apprehension, is now gone There As a
surplus in the treasury OF from seven 10 fourteen mil.
lions OF dollars, and the question is Whether you Will
continue that surplus and II not, how you are 10 get rid
of IT, II it is determined that you To decide whether
you will reduce the by reducing the duties or by
enacng prohibitory duties, MAINTAIN that this ques
ton could not go before the country in form more Ia
vorabe 10 free trade, or at lime more proptious than
the present In 1916 there deficient revenue, and
the friends OF moderate tariff found II dllhcu 10 per-
suade the community that high duties made low revenue
The proposition was tle complex. But, SIR, now that
there surplus, the gentlemen who may propose TO re-
duce the revenue by high duties must themselves evolve
and expound that complex proposition IL does not rest
upon our shoulders 10 do it, They propose 10 re-
duce the now, and they must show The coun-
try that raising duties will reduce The revenue. or else
unite with n the opposite idea They must maintain
our former proposition.
Having S4 900 900 surplus the naked question is how
to get rid OF IL and my word for it the people OF the Uni
ted States will demand reduction OF dues when thai
proposition is submitted TO them.
The tariff OF lsi6 is rapidly becoming prohibltory
tariff Why Because the cost Of production IN the Uni
TED States is continually diminishing the difer-
ence IN the cost of manufacturing in the United States
and foreign countries is becoming less and less Amer
lean SIX i'll is advancing. American profits are lowering
American economy Is improving Machinery, which
makes everything now-the hands Of man do but little
skilfu in the United States IN England, There
are very few things cannot make almost as cheap as
they made abroad But just in proportion as our ca
pacity to nanufaclue cheapy advances so must duties
ia prog essyey. The principle OF low duties must be
as prog gressye American skull and American machine
ry, or else your taTlH VIII become prOnlbIofy.
Now. sir, lay IL down undenIable proposition
and am willing in the course oil this discussion, which
hope will 20 on 10 be met upon the proposton-ihat
the tariff OF ls46 is al this time pohibofy than The
tariff OF 1912 at that time and maintain that II The
tariff OF 1912 the tarf OF the country, your
revenue would be less than $3j 900 O00 and the iaf
OF lS2s were now the tariff of the United States, your
would exceed S25 900 000 because, with the
advancing skill OF American artists foreign competition
could not pay the duties imposed al that me and come
into competition with US.
As to agricultural articles, look at the extent OF this
country. We the producers OF almost everything
Il duced or capable Of being produced, in the United
States Tell me what articles Of manufacture abroad,
or what OF the agricultural products OF foreign cmes,
aso produced in the United States likely soon
10 be Coffee tea, and some few tropical frus, not,
believe. found in the United States, but almost every
other production is The Uned States Is great Loll-
YeTein extending from the highest northern TO the low
est southern latitude Should Cuba become portion OF
them, there will be almost nothing Produced Throughout
osy IN he United States ica ,at in the deserts
Of California they aciasny find the gum acacia commod-
IVY hough .dgenous only in the sand seas OF Africa.
! In our day, almost verytbing is manufactured BY
means OF machinery. railroad locomotive, OF i've
operation, and requiring to be iinkered every trip OF
fifty or one hundred miles, fifteen years ago, 10 my
knowledge, cost $4,000. You get engine OF
six times that power, three times the speed and reli-
able for s operation the rising OF the and moon,
for $4,000 or $1,000 Who will pretend that perma-
neni duties appropriate for that article II strict
Innate be made II will be found that railroad locomotives
have been cheapened ninety per cent, and that Is the
reason why railroad stock, which sold few years
Luot b.,nI