Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1857-01-10
Revision Of the Tariff.
From the MeD York Daily Tribune.

changes demanded. That the 1arllt oil 1897
is to produce a smaller revenue than that oil
1876 is the only point on which all parties are
united. Yet whoever inellgenty and closely
scans the rival projects presented by Messrs'
L. d. Campbell and fletcher, from the MAORI
tv and minority respectively of the House Com
mittee of Ways and Means, will perceive that,
under the garb of diversity, there is substan-
tial agreement-ihat no party is inclined to
press extreme vews--thai while Mr.. Campbell.
an avowed Protectionisi, proposes to reduce
duties and even to remove them from some
articles hitherto requiring Protection. Mr.
Letcher does not urge horizontal or purely
Revenue Tariff Each of them emhodles i'm
.provemenis ON the existing law; and, though
we decidedly prefer Mr.. CampbelPs, and be-
leve this might be improved by making it less
like Mr. Letcher's, we are not sure that even
the latter is not preferable to that now existing.
Mr.. Campbell's has the manifest advantage
over Mr.. Letchcr's of greater simplicity and
economy ia the collection of the revenue. In
adding very large to The list of articles admit
ted free of duty. Mr.. G.. liehtens the labors
of the Custom-House and greatly dimiuishes
the cost of keeping It's accounts. Of the two
hundred ard odd articles transferred by Mr. &.
from various duty.paying schedules to the free
list, at least one.half cost the Treasury quite
all the revenue they yield. OF the Six Mil
lions of Dollars or Whereabouts annually paid
into the treasury for duties on the articles thus
proposed to he made free, Wool, Tin, Salt,
hides, Raw Silk, Lead, Hemp. Inda-Rubber,
Furs Gums, Flaxseed Indigo, Cream of Tar
tar, and Copper, yield over -Four Millions.
An incaculable diminution Of the cost Of meas
iuring, weighing, appraising, ascertaining cost,
&C., would be effected by this sweeping addi-
ton TO the Free-List.
We will note the influence of these two Tar
ifs respectively, on the most important articles
now subject 10 duty. viz:
Iron.-Mr. Canpbell's bill leaves iron sub
ject to 80 per cent duty. Mr.. Lelcher's re-
duces this to 81 per cent.
Wooi.--The duty on all raw wool imported
is now 80 per cent, but this same wool, when
manufactured into Fannels, Baizes, &c., is ad.
Matted at 25 per cent, and if made into Blankets
at 90 per cent Mr.. Letcher proposes reduc.
tion Of the duty on raw wool TO per cent,
while Mr.. Campbell would admit all wool cost
ling under Is or over so cents per pound free
and leave the residue subject, as now, to a du.
ty Of 80 per cent. We consider either of these
substitutes preferable 10 the present impost, but
neither of them quite the thing. If we are to
try the experiment of Free Wool, let us try il
thoroughly. 1t is confidently asserted that the
experience, successfully of England and o.
France, proves this the best policy for all class
es-that The free importation of foreign wool
by stimulating, extending and insuring prosper
ity to the wooden manufacture, not only en-
larges and steadies the market for home grown
wool, but enhances lis price. We are inclined
10 test shis assumption practically and, should
il prove false, we can back out. During the
Gast three fiscal years, we have imported nearly
Ninety Millions Of Dollars worth, Custom
House valuation) of Wooden Fabrics, and onl,
Six and Half Millions worth of wool. o.
importation Of wool has steadily diminished
while that of wooens firmly holds its own
Let US try, then, the experiment Of admitting
raw wool free, and see il we cannot Diminish
our importations of woolens. In the hope tina
Free Wool, by reviving our now silent Wooler
Mills, would ncite larger and quicker HON,
demand for WOOL we hope this Congress viii
make wool completely free.
Sugar.-Mr. Campbell proposes that III,
Sugar duty shall remain 80 per cent. Mr.
fletcher would reduce it to 81 per cent. We
hope it may be left undisiurbed. Earnestly
believing that the way to cheap sugar lie
through its extensive production at home, w
believe the interest of all classes and sections
requires continuance of the present duy
SaA-The present duty on Salt Is -U
cent. Both Mr.. Letchor and Mr. Clmpl
would remove this altogether.
Six. The duty on raw Silk is now
cent. Mr. Letcher would reduce this i0
cent. Mr.. Campbell would abolish il entirely
Willow.-We regret To see tina, Mr.. Camp
bell proposes 10 include Osier, or Willow il
his free.list. This is purely agriculture
product, which can nowhere be produced NOR
cheaply than in this country, and in almost ev
cry part of it. We have hitherto mainly i'm
ported it, from sheer want of consideration am
of knowledge on the part of our farmers. w,
are at last beginning to grow it our consump
atom is rapidly increasing; the duty is but 81
per cent, and if Congress will just let i; alone
we are confident that we shall very soon, no
only grow all we need, but both produce ant
(by Yankee machinery manufacture il cheape
ahan any other country. Will not Congress
be so good as to let Willow alone
On the whole, we hail the appearance o
these two rival Tariff bills, as giving promise
of substantial accord in the future on the sub
ject thus treated. 1t is too much to hope tina
this Congress will give us Specific instead o
iAd Vaorem Duties yet, if the present dutie
were Specific, we feel sure that it would no
change them TO AID Valorem. We trust tina
this Congress will not adjourn without acting
decisively on the subject, and we exhort thos,
who agree with MS in believing the diffusion
und prosperity of Home Manufactures essentia
10 National wcll-being, to meet every overture
which looks to practical accord on an HONORABLE
middle ground, with frankness aud liberality