Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-02-21

SPEECH OF HON. WIN. w. BoYcE,
OF SOUTH CAROLINA,

OF SOUTH CAROLINA,
In the House Of Representatives., Feb. l6, 1854,
The House being in Committee of the Whole
on the state of the Union, Mr.. 0LDs in tie
chair the CHAIRMAN stated that the business
before the committee was the consideration Of
House bill No. 81 ito encourage agricul-
ture, commerce, manufactures, and all other
branches of industry, by granting to every man
who is the head of a family, and citizen OF
the United States, homestead Of one hun.
bred and sixty acres of land out Of the public
domain upon condition Of occupancy and cul
tivation of the same for the period herein spc-
ci6ed;H and that the gentleman from South
Carolina Mr.. BoYcE, was entitled to the
floor.
Mr.. B0YCE said: Mr.. Chairman, desire 10
make some remarks on the subject of the tariff.
1t appears, from the report of the Secretary Of
the Treasury, that the surplus balance on hand
September 30, 1853, was $2S,2l7,sS7 rs.
Moved by such vast and increasing surplus
the Secretary very properly recommends a
modification of the tariff. His proposed modi
fcation may be summed up in three ideas:
Duties of one hundred per cent. on brandies
and cordials, greater extension of the free list
and uniform duty of twenty-five per cent. on
all remaining imports. Though have the very
highest respect for the Secretary of the Treas
ury, am compelled to differ from him on this
subject As regards the one hundred per cent
duties, they are utterly indefensble as n fnan-
cial measure; they are FIVE times higher than
the revenue standard, and must diminish the
revenue and injuriously affect our commercial
relations with France. lean see no possible
reason for such exorbitant duties but a desire
TO legislate indirectly on . great social qnes-
ton with which / conceive we have nothing 10
do. Passing by these one hundred per cent
duties, which are in no harmony with the Sec.
retarys general tariff policy, | approach the
two leading principles urged BY hinl--the free
list, and uniform duty Of twenty-five per cent
1t is important to observe what the free list
does not contain and what it does contain. 1t
does not contain articles of foreign manufic-
ture, which may come in competition with home
manufactures. 1t does. contain the raw ma
terial of our domestic manufactures, and GER
tain exports for which our manufactures
are exchanged, as tea and coffee for instance.
: 1t is also important to consider what articles
will pay the duty OF twenty-five per cent, con
iessedly high duty, above the revenue stand
ard-hve per cent. higher than the maximum
duties under the British revised tariff of 1912.
1t will be found that among these articles are
all foreign products which may come in eompe-
facts the object of the Secretary's tariff becomes
luminous. 1t is evidently designed to give do
mestic manufactures the utmost practical pro-
lection, and it accompishes this purpose most
thoroughly; for the effect of admitting the raw
material duty free, and taxing the manuiac-
tured article twenty-five per cent, is to extend
protection in some instances to the extent OF
forty and forty-fve per cent. This free list is
great invention for while it confers an exclu.
sive privilege on the manufacturers-tha OF
importing the commodities they need free OF
duty-it creates an apparent necessity, and Of.
fords the pretext for high duties on their rival
imports. What system! Those commod-
ties which the manufacturers need pay no duty
those which the people need pay duty amount
ing practically to about one-third Of their value.
As regards the uniform duty of twenty-five
per cent, it rests on the radical error that all
imports can pay the same rate Of duty; where,
as the fact is exactly the.reverse Some com
modites cannot pay more than FIVE per cent,
and others more than ten per cent; and hence
every tariff we have ever had has proceeded
on a graduation of duties. To apply uniform
rate of twenty-five per cent. is to prohibit many
articles, and diminish the revenue. There is
one article to which the Secretary proposes to
extend even more than an ordinary share Of
projection. That is irou-of all imaginable
things that which the universal industry Of the
country, in every form and section, is most in
terested to obtain cheap. Yet under the eu-
phonious term specific duties this article is to
receive the lions share of protection. l en-
tirely dissent from the Secretary's recommcn.
dations. | object to every one of them-his
one hundred per cent. duties his free list
his horizontal tariff Of twenty per cent, his
specific duties on iron. This projected tariff
is protection and monopoly in their worst be-
cause their most covert forms. / will not
dwell longer on this report, satisfied to call at.
tention to its protective features. / pass on
to the general consideration of the subject.
The history Of the revenue system in our
own country is instructive. Previous to 1916,
the duties on imports were extremely low. BY
the first tariff act that of l7sg with the ex-
ception Of duty on carriages of fifteen per
cent, and on East India goods of twelve and
half per cent, the highest rate of duty was
Only ten per cent. ad raiorem: on iron it was
seven and half per cent. on cotton and
wooIlen fabrics it was FIVE per cent. Interven-
ing tariffs, mp to 1916, Increased these rates but
very little In 1916. the protective policy was
adopted. And here | may remark, that in It's
inception, it was advocated as temporary ex-
pedent Government was urged to extend aid
TO infant manufactures struggling into exist
ence. 1t was not contemplated that such aid
would be permanently necessary.
In 1924, 1928, and 1882, however. the coun.
try advanced still further in the protective
course of policy. In 1893, to avoid convul-
sion, it was agreed 10 be graduSaiy abandoned.
In the act Of 1888 was incorporated the great
principle that duties shall ba laid for the pur-
pose Of raising such revenue as glay be ne.
1essarg to an economical administration of
government and providing that after the
30th Of June, 1912. no duties should be over
twenty per cent, which was considered the
highest point Of revenue duties. In 1912, pro-
fitting by the financial difficulties in which the
government was placed and other circum-
stances, the protective policy was revived, in
violation of the compromise Of 1889. In 1876
the country reeeded from this policy 10 some
extent. Il appears from this rapid summary
that under the ADMINISTRATION OF Washington, the
first Adams, and Jefferson, the tariff was used
merely as a revenue instrument; that the pro-
lection they favored was that universal protec.
ton which the entire country experienced from
b Ia 80 \. q.