Delaware gazette. [volume] (Delaware, Ohio) 1855-1886, 1870-02-18
THE TARIFF BILL.
tFrom she Cincinnati eauette,l

n
From the Cincinnati Gazette.l
The Tariff bill reported By th
0 House Committse Of Ways and Mean
2 appears to Us 3 bill to impair the rev
, suue without bringing any relief t
I the people. Its main features seem Il
/ be the abandonment Of revenue du
{ ties, and The maintenance Of pFOhibi
: tory duties A system which was ere
/ ated by the conditions of civil var
and which only the exceptional eOndi
tioDs of war could Justify, this bill
/ proposes to make permanent in peace
J The high rates of duties retained on
articles of the simplest manufacture
and Of low price show the despicable
opinion of American manufactures
Rhieh has been created By the always
growing demand for more projections.
The new arrangement Of the sugar
/ duties is an imposition upon the people
IL will sacrifice large revenue while
/ continuing the tax on the consumer.
Ii reduces the duty on raw sugars,
such rs retiners use, TO 2 cents; keeps
duty of cents on refined sugars,
and then makes a new aud arbitrary
classification, by which a class of raw
sugars, that by the Introduction OF
better machinery and more care are
good anough without refining for the
use Of the economical people, are
classified as clarified, aud taxed Scents
This - 30 force al TO use refined su-
gars. or pay the same price for the IN
refined while the Feiner, who gets
his sugars ak 2 cents, Is given a mon
Opoly Of the market By 3 duty Of A
! cents on refined sugars,
The enormous scale of duties on
Woolen goods is retained, and toe ar
Irangement by which on the ooarseF
and cheaper articles the duty is pro.
hibitoFy. This is one of the main
features Of q tariff which insults those
il Eobs By calling itself protection TO
the American labOrer the protec-
ton being by making poor family pay
$4 for the coarse blanket it should
have for g. And should it become
SO presumptious as to desire a coarse
| carpet, it Is protected by being made
to pay the prohibitory duty of 40
/ cents per yard, or from 80 to $3.50 per
cent, while the revenue gets nothing.
Will the producers of pig iron, who
say the increased production is speed
lily going to break down the price, in
form as how they are ever going to
make cheap iron while labor is taxed
by such q system as this Labor
must have its living, and every tax in
creases its cost Of living.
The bill retains the enormous duty
Of cents per yard on unbleached
cotton sheetings and shirtings, aud 10
per cent. dd UaLoreD besides on bleach.
ed. "A manufacturer OF unbleaehed
cotton shirtings would be hoOted at
who should say that he needed the
protection Of cents q yard. Such
features as these rates on coarse cot
tons and WooIens make the tariff odi-
ous without beneftiDg single indus
try. 70
The duty of one centa pound on
-four. and one. half cent q pound on
wheat, corn, rye and bnckWheat, is
to mock the farmer with the shadow
of protection on articles which he IL
selling cheaper than any other cOuDtry
can.
The reduction Of the duty on pig
iron is matter Of no moment. We
presume that no producer cares a fig
for this as Tar as the amount is con-
oerned, for it will not make a particle
of difference in the imports Of iron
nor in his control Of the market.
and enteFDFising country, where all
the materials of industry have great
est scope and demand, which in time
OF peace puts q tax on common
wrought iron Of ] cent q pound. and
on steel N bars Of 81 cents = pound,
Claasing Bessemer iron as steel aud on
steel railroad frogs and other railroad
appliances II cents pound, and on
steel springs of 6 cents a pound ?
These are taxes that dwarf indnstrisl
growth. Such duties show che ex-
tFeme tension to which we have been
wound up, hrst by the cry of war nee
essitY which Was used to make the |
tariff facilitatOF for a few monopo- |
lies. and, second, BY the success which |
these have had In covering up their |
impostions by the cry Of protection |
against British labor.
The new bill retains the odious tax
on salt. The tax on lumber Is chang
es from Q per eeat. 20 81 per Thousand
feet. This puts the same tax on the
boards for the farmers fence aud the
laboFeF's shanty and shop as on the
best lumber which sells for three or
four times as much. The tax on lum-
Der is tax close to the elements of
production. For climatic and other
reasons we do not desire TO stimulate
the destruction of our forests. The
duty is wholly unnecessary, and il in
Vidiously taxes the means Of shelter.
tits not a protection. bat aD imposi-
ton on American labor.
Generally the bill seems to abandon
revenue duties, and keeps up and in-
Greases prohibitory duties In this
way il will impair the revenue without
lessening the burdens of the people.
It makes no progress toward the sim
pliticatlOn of our complicated system.
We are opposed to sweeping changes
but we doubt If this bill is any i'm
PrOyement. The spirit with which
the tariff question is discussed ou the
side Of the prohibitiOnists, who. to
cover up their selfish ends, seek to
make IL fanaticism By which the
the most baFefaeed pluRder shall be
called protection, gives every Opportu-
nifty 70 Organized capital 20 fix the tar
if 20 suit itself This bill looks as If
few interests had manipulated Il. 1t
is an aggraVatiOn Of those features
which are making the name Of prOteo-
tion OdiOus.
IT we look TO the constitutional basis
ot tariff, and keep in view its legiti-
mate object, the rule of adjustment is
simple, and it will allow sufficient dis
orimination for true protection. With
us protection has run to prohibition.
The constitutional basis of taxation is
revenue. Prohibitory duties are ille-
climate No duty ought to be laid
which does not contemplate the posi-.
bility Of revenue, and which will not
allow relief By importation in case
scarcity or combination At home have
created high prices. A tariff arranged
upon this principle will give all due
protection without creating mOnOpolies
or prices which bring the system into
odium. A tariff may average very
high rates, and Jet may be so badly
adjusted as TO encourage importation,
as, ours does enormously. We do not
observe that the new bill ma kes any at
tempt TO reform the system which has
resulted in these excessive importa-
tions. In brief, & seems a disturbance