Delaware gazette. [volume] (Delaware, Ohio) 1855-1886, 1860-06-15

Showing an improvement IN the hner kinds
especially For 1857, the price in August is
given as there were no sales in October.
Thus ii will be seen that these woods, rang
ing from IS to As ceEts per pound, which in
clude three-fourths in quantity Of all the wool
raised in the United States, have run down
from Al cents, in 1857, to 35 cents, in 959,
notwithstanding the increased demand for no
other reason in the world that l can imagine,
sxcept that their place is supplied by foreign
wool fraudulently imported, duty free, as being
worth 20 cents per pound.
1t was said in debate that this bill is more
/ favorable to agriculture than any tariff that
has heretofore been passed. Let US see how
! this is. Let nobody be humbugged by duty
on hay and pumpkins, that are protected by
their weight and bulk, and the consequent ex-
pense of transportation. Let US take the two
articles about which the controversy has been
had in this bil-wool and fax seed.
By the tariff of 1924, the tariff on wool
was 30 per cent.
Tariff of 1928, 40 per cent. ad valorem, and
4 cents per pound specific.
| Tariff of 1882, all under cents, free all
over cents, 40 per cent. ad valorem, and 4
cents specific.
| Tariff of 1912, all under cents per pound,
5 per cent; all over cents, 40 per cent, ad
valorem and a cents specific.
! Act of 1876, 80 per cent. ad valorem.
/ Act of 1857, all under 20 cents per pound,
| free all over a cents, "a per cent. advalo-
rem.
| House bill of 1860, all under 1S cents, freei
from Is to 20 cents, 8 cents per pound, and
over "a cents; 9 cents per pound.
The first duty imposed on fax seed was in
the tariff of 1876. when it was charged with q
duty of 20 per cent.
This was intended, it is said, to be continued
by the tariff of 1857, but by the construction
put upon that act at the 1'teasury Department,
it now comes in free. The House bill impo-
ses duty of 10 cents per bushel, which is
equivalent to about IL per cent. ad valorertl.
| Now; let us look at few other leading ag-
ricultural staples. BY the Tariff of 1924,
-four was charged with duty of so cents per
ewt, wheat 25 cents per bushel, oats 10 cents
per bushel and potatoes 10 cents per bushel.
The same rates we're continued Gu all these
articles in the Tariff of 1928, 1882, and 1912
In the Tariff of 1916, these articles were
all charged with duty of 20 per cent.
But, in 1850, the duties upon these articles
we're practically nulli6ed by the reciprocity
treaty with Great Britain. which authorized
the importation of these and other agricultu-
raj products free of duty. AS there was no
other country from which they could be i'm
ported this amounted in practice to an abo-
liton of all duties upon these commodities.
Upon this review of our tariff legislation
| IL hat 70
can it be said that the present bill affords
greater protection to agriculture than former
tariffs 1t is perfectly apparent that the
manufacturers of the country have recently
adopted the theory Of obtaining incidental
protection to manufactures, by cheapening
the productions of agricultgre. 1t is mani
fest that the cheaper they can buy their WOO
and other raw materials, as well the pro
visions which are consumed by their opera
tives, the cheaper they can manufacture theil
fabrics. Now, the only thing that can for G
moment justify protection to manufactures il
their tendency to increase the price Of agri
cultural products, by creating home market
and thereby saving the expense Of distap
} transportation.
They say to us, "Gentlemen, we want yoI
to buy our fabrics, though you may tempora
rily have to pay us a little more for them thai
you would have to pay for foreign fabrics o
the same kind, and in return we will buy you
products, and pay you more for them thai
f you can get by sefdng abroad"
, We agree to this; and then you turn rou,'
and say to us, "We want to go to the Britisl
9 Provinces for our bread and meat, and butte
and eggs and to South America. the Gap