National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1880-10-25
"TdRITF FoR REVENUE oNLY."
False Reasoning of The rroo-rrade Il

"TdRTFF ron REYENUE ONLY"
False Reasoning of the Froo-Trade Doctors.
General Hancock has officially declared the tariff
Is merely local issue. Since the result of the
i0cGiisuc In Ohio and Indiana the national demo.
cratic committee have called upon two wcl!-known
rrcctradcrs to arise and explain to the people Of
this country what they -Mcssrs. d. A. Wells and
$. Moore-thlnk tariff for revenue only" means
They explain by is,uinga manifesto, giving Gs OK
amples two articles OF wooden manufacture, where
the duty Is supposed to DO excessive; also tabular
statement OF n proposed tariff bill upon exng-
gorated imporlatious. Any great reduction as they
PROPOSE of twenty to ffy per cent Is intended to
cripple, IL not to completely destroy, our marufac
lures and products; rs, for example they pro-
pose TO admit FREQ OF duty all bra0dstuiT' raw wool
and potatoes. being a strike at our ugrlculturists;
coal, copper and lead, a strike at our miners;
chemicals drugs, dyes and salt at our manulac.
turing interests. wthoutgolng into detail as to the
inchlculablo injury thus proposed the following
example will fully and practically illustrate what
Is tho benefit Of tariff for revenue only:
Quininc aud It's salts were subject to duty of
10 per cent mp to 1873 aud from then to 1879 at 20
per cent: then by democratic congress lat the
urgent and personal solicitation and efforts of one
Of tho above experts who IL reports then current
were true would not have been so sollcitous II the
manufacturers of qunine had acqulesced In his
demands) made free OF duty.
The article ofalcohol that enters 50 largely in the
expense of manufacturing quinnc, being subject
to tho informal revenue tax, Is another item In
favor the foreign producer. There was demanded
refund Of tax paid OH alcohol souscd. 1t was de-
med. Lo and behold now In the closing paragraph
OF the manifesto they propose giving alcohol FREQ
OF tax to our manufacturing chemists" Is this not
class legislation. which they rofess SO strongly to
Condemn
There were imported during tho thirteen years,
from 1867 1879 inclusive S6S ounces fqulnine,
worth sl6i3,57j, yielding duty of Sll5,o7o.
The rate of duty from 1857 to 1872 IS per cent
ad valorem. During that period there was i'm
ported 800 253 ounces worth s3i6255, at an average
cost per ounce of Sl.C5. From 1873 to 1879, when
the rate of duty was reduced from 45 to 20 per
cent. there was imported 539G37 ounces, valued
at S2O ut an average cost OF S. 40 per ounce
Mark as the duty was reduced tho prico advanced;
and tho year ended Juno 30, 1880, when quinnc
was admitted under tariff for revenue only-i. e..
| free of duty-wo imported 4l6,09s ounces. valued
at 81 Ill 25l ut average cost of $3.50 rer ounce
having imported nearly as much in value in one
year under democratic legislation as we did in
thirteen years previous under q tariff yielding a
| revenue of Sil5879.
| The above illustrates "tariff for revenue only
From 1867 to 1879 wo had duty OF 10 per cent The
duty added to the cost Of sl05 gives the net cost
for that period ofsl.j2 per ounce. by the reduction
of duty In 1872 TO 20 per cent, we find from then to
| 1879 the average prlco has advanced to g.
per ounce adding tho duty to that the net cost is
s2ss per ounce. and by placing this expensive
chemical upon tho free lists, whereby tho price
should bc so much the less, We find II advanced to
S2G6 per ounce.
What have We gained? The difference between
So IS and S2.G6 is % cents. There was imported IN
1889 il6,O9s ounces, which would glvc SOL 1896
while IL tho duty had remained at % per cent
there would have come into the treasury the sum
of s221 2jO,S0, or if wo had imported none, only
consumed our own production and supported ow
manufacturers, we would have retained IN this
country to distribute among our own people tho
magnificent sum of 81 ,lll,2j4 that was sent to q
foreign country to purchase the importation Of
$780,
This Is fur example of what will be accom-
pshed by tariff for revenue only" The quos-
ton will be asked, Who has been benefited by #?
Certainly not those who arc SO unfortunate as Ia
require the use of quinine. Does your druggist
charge any less for 1t in your prescriptions2 No
not faIthng. How many families ever purchase
1t by the ounce? / may say none; the only per
sons who are benefited are the importer and the
wholesale and rotail dispensers of tho article.
You cannot impose upon tho intelligence Of the
people by this cry Of tariff for revenue only That
It Is false IN theory and practice, prcsuming 10 i'm
pose upon the credulity of tho masses, who have
not heretofore given the question Of tariff It's proper
consideration Is shown plainly in Ohio and In
diana, and further discussion with letters ex
planatory oft will only enlighten the people and
show what we do need is ample protection against
foreign cheGplAbor We have the soil to produce
the genius to invent, tho power TO compete. and
the people TO indorse what is inten ded to make u'
o happy free, industrious and Independent nation
We have plenty Of the neces'arles OF life, Nbun
dance of work, pay better wages, have peace, plenty
and change In our pockets. but want no change in
our national affairs, no tariff for revenue only"