Delaware gazette. [volume] (Delaware, Ohio) 1855-1886, 1870-09-30
THE TARIFF.
Extract from Senator shermnn's Del
aware Speech

I again. d great zeal IS SalO among al
parties about a protective tariff and rev
enue tariff. The last National Demo
cratic Convention, in 1868, declared 70
ga tariff for revenue upon foreign i'm
/ ports, and such equal taxation under tn
Internal Revenue laws as will afford in
cidental protection to domestic manufac
tures, and as will, without impairing thu
revenue, impose the least burden upor
and promote and encourage the grea
industrial interests of the country.
The substance of the recent Repub-
lican platform at Columbus is for a rev
enue tariff with incidental protection
The substance Of the recent Democratic
State platform is for a revenue tariff,
with all the necessaries of life free. Now
if all the necessaries Of life are free, the
revenue part of a tariff would not be
enough for a good Democratic treat. II
sugar, tea, coffee, brandy and gin are
necessaries, / don't see what the luxuries
are, unless they are the silks of the la
dies, and we have the duty now as high
on silks as the ladies will submit to. It
is not, fellow citizens, by such general
phrases YOU can deal with a practical
question like this. 1t has been the bone
of contention since the beginning of the
government. There are a few simple
propositions that we can agree upon,
and they settle nearly all the principles
upon which a tariff, in the present
condition of our finances, can be based.
The primary principle-which governs
all the others-is that we must raise rev.
enue enough by a tariff on imported
goods to pay the interest of our debt,
one per cent. annually of the principal,
ALa ,F inf
course.
This cannot be less than 100 millions
a year, until the Funding bill gradually
reduces it. We know that year in and
year out our importations of foreign
goods are about 400 millions of dollars,
exclusive of the flow of gold, which from
its use is not taxable. Now a uniform
rate of 40 per cent. on all articles would
produce 100 millions, which we must
raise. Everybody admits that we ought
not to levy the same rate of duty on all
articles imported, and here is the rub.
Political theories, sectional interests and
demagogism add to our difficulties in
making the distribution. Let US lay
.hese aside, and see if we can agree a
little further Let us divide our importa-
ions into classes according to their ma
.ure and uses, and fix the rate of duty
afterward. A great multitude of articles
are too trifing in amount to make it
worth while to tax them. Certain med
cines of tropical production are indis-
0ensable to health. Certain dyes are of
use, like logwood, where the |
,hief cost is the trouble of preparing
hem for use. Certain raw articles are |
he basis of domestic industry, but of /
title value in themselves-all these we |
an agree ought to pay no duty. This |
S class No. I. We can, perhaps, agree |
hat other articles, which we cannot pro-
luce in this country, are of such univer-
al use and necessity-such as sugar,
ca, coffee, spices-that the duty should /
,e as low as possible consistent with the 1
wants of the Government. But these
.rticles, from their being so universally /
lsed, are the most fruitful sources of
US last year 500, ,OOO,-
,oo-and if we take the taxes off of these
.rticles, we must make up in others
Flais- Is class NO. 2. Up to this point the
,nly question is one of revenue. We
.ome now to the great mass Of articles
# prime necessity, which are produced |
lot only in foreign countries, but in our /
,wn country. Now, any tax you put 4
lpon such an imported article is to the /
xtent of the tax a protection to the do
nestle article. It is not strange, but is
4 accordance with the universal law of
that every domestic pro-
ucer wants the duty as high as possible
n the foreign article that competes with
i'm, and as low on everything else. fl
ou put a lower rate of duty than the
verage of 40 per cent. on the foreign
roducer, you discriminate against the
ONE producer to his injury. If you
ut higher duty than 40 per cent. on a
oreign article, you discriminate in favor
f the home producer. This class in
Iudes the manufacturers of iron, steel
nd cotton, all the multiplied objects Of
lodern commerce, also coal, salt, and
uch natural gifts, whose chief value is
4 the labor of mining and transporta-
on. This is class No. 3, and with class
10. is the basis of our revenue. There
re also a number of articles of luxury,
ut as their use is confined to a few, the
evenue is not so great. This call class
To- a, and includes spirits. wines, cigars,
Iks, satins and the like. We will agree
lat these ought to be taxed at the rate
lat will produce the most revenue. I'm
some of them are of a char
cter to be easily smuggled-such as
.welry, diamonds, and the like, and too
Ugh a duty leads to the loss of revenue; |
hile upon others, like brandy and CT
ars, we levy the highest rates of duty.
low, fellow-citizens. the chief trouble
ith the present tariff is in the inequality
f class No. 2. Some of them are con-
.ssedly too high. and some too low. It
as upon this rock the general tariff bill I
roke in the House. 1t was a struggle
local interests, and not of party pol
les. What we wanted to do was to re-
uce taxes. What we did do finally was
enlarge the free list, or class No. I, to
.rgely reduce the taxes on class No. ?,
/, change some ad zJaI0Tem duties in
lass No. 3 to specific duties of about
le same amount, and to somewhat in
-ease the duties on wines. 1t was not all
-e might have done, but it was in the
ght direction.
Now, fellow-citizens, apply the Demo
ratio theory to this subject, and how
.ould It leave you Class No. /, the
oo list, they would enlarge. because
lev are all the necessaries of life. Class
10. they would make full, because
icy are all necessaries of life. There
oes sixty millions. Class No. A we
ave already got as high as it will bear.
low then can they raise the necessary |
,venue7 Only by increasing the duties
n class No. 8, or by reducing taxation
nd then raising again the ghost of re-
udiation. / believe before God the last
ould be the alternative of the Demo
ratio leaders.
Now if have anything to do with
aiming the next tariff bill, l would adopt
oeCiGf dufiec in every Dossible case /
quail in result to the average aa oalO-
sHz revenue duty demanded by the
ants Of the Government, and would
pply this rule 60 all the articles Of class
10. 3, and make exceptions only when
le nature of the article demanded a
igher or a lower duty. I would, take
e the duty from class No. 2, ana S
lrge-the free list only to the eNtent tLia' (
could swell the revenue above the az. az,
rage on class No. 4. ouGn n,,,5 I Sa,.a s'all
ANY s,,,leG rbSnce for stability. It might be
T,,lS ,,,,sred or raised by a uniform percent