The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1876-03-01
HIGH AND LOW TARIFFS.


HIGH AND Low TARIFFS.
We referred, few days ago, to the large
reduction in the duty on marble proposed
by Mr.. Morrison's bill, but it is not alone
on marble that reduction is proposed.
Wool and the manufactures of wool, also,
come in for large reduction, as we'll as
several other articles in which, not only
Vermont, But the whole country is inter
es,ed The question of protection" aside,
the passage of such measure as Mr.. Nor
lisons can only be urged upon the ground
that it will increase the government reve-
nue., or that the reduced duty will lessen
the cost of the enumerated articles to the
consumer or purchaser. Free traders draw
many fine spun theories, to the effect that
a low tariff, or no tariff at all, will so in
crease competition-that is bring foreign
articles IN such large quantities into COM
petition with home products-that prices
must necessarily be lower that, with
low tariff, the imports will be, proportion
ately, SO much larger that the revenue
must be increased and that protective
and manufacturers, are injurious TO The
consumer.
The theory seems plausible enough, but
the facts do not sustain it. Statistics of
trade and commerce show, that with a high
tariff, prices are not materially increased,
that lmportations are not lessened, but that
the revenue derived from the article, so
protected" is largely enhanced, and that
home production Is greatly stimulated,
while the product is afforded at the same
price as under a low tariff, or no tariff at
all. We will not pretend to explain this.
1t is sufficient that the facts prove it. To
illustrate this, we need only refer to the
well remembered fact that the placing Of
tea and coffee on the free list did not lessen
the price to the consumer one mill, while
it deprived the country of some twenty
millions of dollars revenue annually.
The effect on Italian marble, in blocks,
has been precisely the same. Prior to
1854, the duty thereon was forty cents per
cubic foot, but the act of June, of that
year, Increased it to fifty cents. The
dealers in Italian marble claimed that this
increase was, in effect, prohibitory and that
under it, the importation Of Italian marble
would cease. The result proved different
let the figures speak. Under the tariff
of 1862, the revenue received from Italian
marble imported, for the year ending June
30, 1864, was S43, $40. 10; while for the
first eleven months after the tariff had
been raised twenty-five per cent, it was
STA, 079-an increase in eleven months
Of over seventy-one thousand dollars.
During the same eleven months, forty-fve
thousand five hundred and eighty more
cubic feet Of Italian marble were imported
than for the previous year under the tariff
of 1862.
The tariff Of 1864 omitted to make pro-
vision for sawed marble-marble in slabs
and it was entered at the same proportion
ate rate of duty as marble in blocks. The
laws of 1870 corrected this, and made the
duty on sawed marble twenty-five per cent.
higher than on blocks and again the
dealers in Italian marble claimed that this
increase was prohibition, not protection"
and that its effect "would be virtual ex-
A" clusion of Italian marble" What the
facts are, will be seen by circular issued
by Vermont marble manufacturers, before
Morrisons bill was introduced before the
question of change Of duties was agi-
They say that they have seen, in the past
ten years, "dstricts and states that for
" merly used their product almost exclu-
" sively, diverted from them, and now
d" using foreign marble to the exclusion Of
their product
A recent article in the RtpuJhc shows
that the tariffs of 1924 and 1S29-the high
est of high protective tariffs-had the
same effect. We quote from it an extract
from report made to the Pennsylvania
legislature, IN 1928, as showing the condi-
ton of the country prior to the passage of
the former act-and, in it, we recognize
almost perfect picture of the condition of
the country to day. 1t states that there
was going on ''ruinous sacrifices OF landed
property at sherff's sales, whereby lands
" and houses have been sold at less than
a." half their value--forced sales of merch-
=" andise, farming stock and utensils, at
"prices far below the cost of production,
by which numerous families have been
" deprived of the necessaries of life and
"the implements of their trade" To
meet this condition of affairs, congress
passed the tariff act, which Tatnall, rep.
resentative from Georgia, declared was an
" internal bill" which would "add to a