The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1876-06-17

and would be Il tax on each OF PIG cents TO
the person. Fory'three cents tax 10 the per
= son upon these articles would yield S2ooOl,'
900 revenue Where can we obtain 50 much
revenue from customs ut so little cost: NOT
from duty upon manufactures, for these are
protected at u rate exceeding 40 per cent. 10
obtain twenty millions in duties from manu-
features we protect, at the cost OF the consumer,
the home product of five times greater value
f which yields no revenue.
) By laying duties all of which 60 into the
treasury on tea and coffee, articles not pro.
duced here, we can remove duties on manu-
features which cost us from Sc TO So 10 put
one in the treasury. Somebody, well, do
not know whether il was somebody or no
, body, said you would tax "the tea and collee
of the poor Why, Mr.. Chairman, all tarlt
, taxes are paid by the multitude, not by the
few who own the property. This Is the
wrong and Injustice OF the system. And
shall the multitude pay on the tea aud coffee
twenty millions directly into the treasury, or
a hundred millions on their hats, blankets,
shoes axes, hoes, medicines, qunine, spool
thread and needles, to but twenty millions
, into the treasury and eighty millions into the
pockets of the manufacturers? We are now
, paying nearly three cents per pound duty IN
sugar, or a tax of 70 cents to the person, and
, while doing this we are protecting and IN
, creasing the prices of sugar made, putting
, money into the pockets of the planters as
, well as the treasury.
The same year, In June, 1872, the (h0rizon-
f taD reduction of 10 per cent on manufactures
was enacted. This reduction was injurious
to the revenue and illogical in effect il re-
duced the duty on bunting from liz to los
per cent, on spoolthread from rs TO 60 per
cent, with other like absurd reductions; il
was repealed year ago, but not without
adding little more protection for nanutac-
turers of silk and cotton mixed goods. This
, Is in brief our tariff history for thirty years
last past.
SHOULD OUR TARIFF BE MODIFIED?
The industry, trade ana commerce of the
country should not be disturbed wantOnly or
upon any trivial pretext; the proposed modi-
fication cSn affect them benefcially only,
and is a necessity demanded alike by the
needs of the treasury and consumer. This
necessity is best expressed by facts and figures
of existing rates Of duty taken from official
sources. They are reduced to rates on the
basis of value, though often laid in specific
or double form. On printed calico we pay
) a duty of Tic, on blankets an average of ,Sc,
on spool-,hread, 74c, on wooden cloth CSC, and
on very many articles of chief use among
the industrial and producing classes from 0O
To 100 per cent. and this brief statement
illustrates the eXactions of the present tariff
Now, should such tariff exist! How liulei
IS really known Of the meaning of 60 20 or
100 per cent. duties. Take for example, the
common print on which we levy II per cent
duty; if the government levied It's duties as
once the church did, IN the form of tithes, |
and instead of making consumers pay In
money for duties the treasury would buy
goods, what would be the result? The good
wife going into "a store to buy fifteen yards OF
calico tor dress would have to buy $3.50
yards, and the division would be Is yards for
her own dress and 1866 yards for the treasury.
This is the meaning of II per cent duty.
i Suppose q man required 200 feet Of marble,
he would buy AIS feet, out of which he might
retain 200 ieet and the treasury get 2lS feet.
This is the meaning of 100 per cent duty.
Suppose our patriotism at this Centennial
shall rise to the intensity OF requiring for
every home a flag made Of ten yards OF bunt
ing; we must bay each PIT yards of bunting;
1T yards of which we must render in tax to
this good government OF equal laws as an
earnest of patriotism displayed by the other
ten yards Haunting in the breeze,
Take for further illustration the article Of
blankets. In 1870 we produced 1000, 439 pair,
having an average weight of five pounds per
pair, in all 10000, 1875 pounds. Certainly We
did not produce less than that quantity in
1875. Now turn to the imports Of blankets. |
eign value was SlOS,5 so; the duty collected
thereon was $S,45l % or an average of rs per
cent Then we have protected over lO,OOO,OOO
pounds home made blankets at an average
rate of rs per cent and imported 1892 pounds
and got an incidental revenue of SS,45l. |
What does this protection OF 100000
pounds of blankets cost the people? Every
pound of blanket is, at its very lowest calcu-
lation, made dearer in average fifty cents.
/ I. IL, =
ly on their blankets, and the treasury gets an
| incidental revenue of $S,451. | shall no
doubt hear that blankets are now as cheap as
they were before the war, and If the duty
was off would be dearer than with the duty
on. The real fact is that pound of blankets
costing IN England itty.three cents gold can
not be bought for less than 81 10 TO 81 % in
! New York
! 1t is true that we protect the blanket inter
est Of this country. But suppose a PROPOSE
ton was made in this house to substitute the
blanket manufacturers and give them $1,000
! 600 annually, how would such a proposition
be rcceivcds The result and operation of our
tariff amount to the same thing, only that the
subsidy is covered up in the shade of duties.
The people are taxed all the same and have
| to pay It, These illustrations but show that
our tariff has for IFS object protection ofthc
socaled home industries; any revenue de.
rived from the mighty taxed foreign con.mod-
tiles Is incidental only. If members will
but consider the
ENORMOUS COST OF THIS SYSTEM OF PROTEC.
! TION,
the result OF their consideration will be
appalling. An examination as to qualities of
cotton and wooden goods, iron, steel and lead,
and their manufactures, which we consume,
and the average rate of duties on these arti-
Giles will show that we consume about $780,
100000 in value of them, and, estimating in.
creased price resulting from protection, if IN
creased TO the full extent of the rate of duty
would find it about S377, 100000, of which |
the government gets S41,0O0000, while $780,
100000 go in bouniies to the protected. In |
this connection, too, let it be remembered |
that our manufactures, all of which are high.