New-York tribune., 1870-04-21
BLANKETS IND IIRIFF,S.

THE EreRiRg Post is displeased that the House
in Committee of the Whole has refused to re-
duce the duty now levied on Blankets---a duty
which, we cannot doubt, has reduced the aver
age cost of Blankets throughout our country,
and is destined to reduce it still further.
The opposition to reduction was led by Mr..
Axtell Democrat) of California, who complete
" unhOrsed Mr.. James Brooks in discussing
the matter. The Post says:
"Our readers will remember that in the wholesale
trade and manufacturers from five to ten per cent is
ordinarily large and satisfactory profit, and duty Of
ten per cent increasing the price of the article to that
extent is sufficient actually double the profits Of the
manufacture of most articles in common use unless COM
petition brings dorm The price again.
"They will remember that the tariff of the German
Zo Verein which TIE TRIBUNE has repeatedly
model of Protective legislation, has ten per cent for
its maximum duty.
Yet the monopolists in blankets and in the clothing
OF the poor not satisfied with adding ten per cent TO
their natural profits with twenty-five per cent,
Mr. Wells proposes, with thirty1ye per cent Mr..
Cox suggests, with fifty per cent. Mr.. Hol-
man moved; nor, finally will they consent to
accept one hundred per cent the whole Of
the natural cost Of these necessarics Of life TO
our people, the surplus profit the law is to secure
them. They not content to make the laborng mans
wages buy only half as much flannel cloth or blankeng,
as the laws OF trade would have them but must have
their fifty cents per pound; and In addition thereto
thirty-hve per cent. ad valOrem.'
"And If they succeed every poor mans bed in the
country will Winter be the less comfortable for it,
Comments Jy The Tribune.
/. What might be the effect of a Protective
duty "unless competition brings down the
price" we cannot say. AS competition does
reduce, has reduced. and inevitably must re-
"a. 4.
siderable profit is made, the question has no
practical bearing. The "being's end and aim "
of Protection to Blankets is to draw more
capital and more labor into the business of
Misunderstanding until the profit in this busi-
ness shall be reduced to an average with that
realized in other pursuits.
H. THE TRIBUNE does not happen to re-
member that ten per cent is the highest duty
levied by the German Zoll Verein, and it will
thank The Post to show that such is the fact.
Let it quote the duties actually levied on
Iron, Steel, Hardware, WOolens, COttOns, &C.,
and show that they in no case exceed ten per
cent.
What The TRIBUNE does like in the Zoll
Veren tariff is its charging duties on almost
everything by freight, with small regard to its
fneness or other quality. Yet this is exactly
what The Post denOunces in oar Tariff as high
duties on the goods required by the poor, with
comparatively low duties on those consumed
by the rich.
III. Whether "the laboring mans wages"
will now "buy only half as much flannel, cloth,
cor blanketing as the laws of trade would
"give him." is question of fact, on which we
take issue with The Post and ask the buying
public to decide between us. Messrs. con-
sumers! the duties now levied on the importa-
ton of Flannels and Blankets are high-far
higher than they were prior to 1SG1-on that
point, there is perfect agreement. Hare the
prices Of these important fabrics been correspond
! ingly adrdnced! 1t is assumed by The
Post that they have; it is insisted by
THE TRIBUNE that they have not. We
call you in as umpires in the con-
troversy. You bought Blankets and Tlannels
under the low Tariff of ls57-CO; you are buy
ing the like now under the high rates Of duty
fixed in 1867. We ask you to consult your
bills. your merchants, and see if you are
charged twice or thrice as much now as you
were in 16j9-C0 If you are, you are buying at
The viong shop and getting swindled; for our
American manufacturers are making adui-
rab!e Blankets and Flannols and selling them
at about the average (sold) prices Of 1850. If