New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1869-01-26
nELAfAR IND WELLS.


---
DELMAR md WELLS.
We have enjoyed, during the past three
years, the luxuries of Bureau of Statistics,
conducted by Mr.. Alexander Delmar, and
Special Commission or Bureau, designed par
ticularly for the collation. of facts and sta
tistics relating to the revenue, conducted by
Mr.. David A. Wells. Yet, Notwithstanding the
two bureaus thus employed as adjuncts TO the
Treasury Department, we are officially tOlu'
on due application thereto, that 1t has no
information or returns which enable 1t TO
state so simple and primary fact as the
amount of customs revenue collected on any
particular article enumerated in the TarlH
act whether it be sugars, mOasses teas,
coffees, wines, hardware cutlery, or dry
goods. Mr. Wells has written report OF
40 pages in length, formidable to examine,
and which some persons estimating its econom-
ical weight apparently from its weight in au0W-
dupois, and the amount of wisdom conveyed
in its figures by the difficulty Of comprehendlng
them, have supposed to be an ineXhaustiDle
mine of craftsmanship. On closer examination
we find that the report is made up OF the con-
Iicting statements of large number OF inter-
ested committees, and representatives OF I'M
porting and manufacturing interests, who have
appeared before Mr.. Wells, had their say"
and been reported by him, aud that dlligent
use of short handn the scissors and the paste
pot, explains at once its imposing bulk and Its
ill-digested, though sometimes valuable, con-
tents.
But the keynote Of Mr.. Weiss "Omnium
"gatherum" is an attempted statement in de-
tail of the effects of our tariff. Selecting few
of the least important of all the articles on
which the tariff rests, such as lumber (ot which
we import only about S70OO,OOO and collect
only one and a half millions out OF our entire
$1GO00OOO0 of tariff reyenue), and salt, ana a
few other like products, he ventures the auda-
cous assumption that it is the high rate OF
tariffs on these petty articles which have Oc-
casiOned the rise in rates of living, OF wages,
and of commodities Now, nothing is palmer
than that the first step toward ascertalning
whether it is the protective portions oil
the tariff which increase our cost
of living and in what degree, is to
find out what share of our tariff
revenue is collected from articles like coffee,
tea, wines, solely of foreign production, and
cannot therefore protect, and what share is
collected on articles which we do produce and
can protect. A tariff on tea, silks, spices, and
coffee, is anti-protectiye. If our tariff were
levied in accordance with the protective prin-
cipe only, such articles would be admitted
free of duty. Our own estimate of the amount
of tariff levied on goods necessarily and cXclu-
sively of foreign production and therefore levied
on the free traders principle of "tarigJor reUeRae
only" is that they amount to Sl20,OO00OO, leav-
ing only about s 600 0OOleved on articles which
we do produce and can protect. Many OF the
latter may not be protective, but none Of the
former possibly eau be. If 50 of tariff are levied
in violation of the protective principle where
81 is levied in accordance with it, ought not
Mr. Wells, rs Special Commissioner of the
Revenue, to have at least inquired into the
factsH Should we have had for six years a
special bureau and a special commission Of the
revenue, and yet have nobody connected with
our Treasury Department who can tell how
much of our tariff Is collected from tea, coffee,
sugar or hardware Is this an evidence of
competency to instruct Congress in its legisla-
tive policy upon the tariff question: Is this
sort of neutrality-suspicious., and paste-pOt work,
defective in its details, a mere straddlc i'll its
aims and perverted in its cOnclusions-to be
Landed, inflated and pulled until it shall
claim to stand on level with thoughtful in
yestigation and statcsmanlike research