The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1881-11-03

II his cofnnu'
hdef, tells tho
|slatlon In con
interes. was sub
ont. under the ex-
h fined in'iS0l-2, and
ARTICLES Of commerce
brn(ous rates which II
wcfe necessary to meet
nc times. II appears fur
hg TO law the true rate fixed
don was only 50 per cent,
he meanwhile the former fig
IN -wrung from the pockets of
intores, or such rs produced
h. By suit brought and carried
the UidteHStates supreme court,
finally decided against the protec-
rs AM hDei manufacturers who
he'd this w por5d ties should be taxed
hoop iron on whics tue law imposed the
aid duty of7o per cen, The cotton grow
ing represe natives bad always contended
per contra hat cotton TVS being bands
| FL t,I ~ cd
and not used or known at lifetime the tariff
act was passed, being of subsequent inven-
ton, could hot have been specifically in
cluded in said tariff; and that therefore
they must come within the explosion Of
the "things not otherwise provided for"
Now obs rve the gross injustice done % the
farmers of the south under that iniqlNy
Resulting from that tax the cotton-groweys
had to pay ten cents per balN
extra ion their crops. Now the cot
ton production of last season was
somewhere above 100000 bales, which at
ten dents per bale drew directly from an
interest least able to afford the tax and one
at the foundation of all our prosperity, the
enormous sum of 100000. And prior to
the decision of the supreme court last
String reached, of course, nearly double
that sum under the 70 per cent rule, the
drop being in excess of 5, 100000 bales. Now
What was the amount by the government de-
Iriyed from duties on all sorts of imported
lhoop or band iron? Statistical tables re-
| Gently to hand from the beaureau of COM
merce and navigation, show it to have been
some $1,227. If this is not striking case
of spoliation and robbery of the farming IN
dustry of the south, if it is not a
case of inequitable, uniform, I'M
lust discriminating taxation against that
industry, then we are utterly unable to
conceive Of one. And particularly is it so
seen when we reflect that for
every 100000 persons engaged in
manufactures in this country there is al
most exactly 100000 employed in agricul-
ture. Again, our production Of cotton fab
RIGS last year was about $3.50, 100000 the
+ average import duty on such articles being
say 3S per cent, or tribute to the manu-
facturers of some $70,0O0,0 900. The cotton
tie case is only sample of what is being
done daily under the tariff laws. Let as
look at some of the other iron data.
The duty on pig iron, for instance,
is 81 a ton; the home production
of pig iron last year was 100000 tons,
: whereas the imports amounted to only
$4,000 tons. Now the tax paid to our rich
Pennsylvania friends was therefore some
$17 coo 600, while that paid to the United
States government was only $3.50, 900; or
for the. latter 81, for the manufacturer $50.
Now when we consider the fact that upon
iron, the great necessity OF the age, all
of us, and especially the farmers, are so de-
pendent in all manner of things from a
steam engine to kitchen kettle or cam
brio needle, we would conceive that
some consideration to secure its cheapness
would behad But what are the facts concern
ing this the problem of even, cheap trans
portation, the wish of producer and con-
sumner? Take one article, rails. Steel rails
last year cost in England $25 per ton, trans
portation expenses $500, natural price, for
American market, duty $28; protection
price, $56 Now here we had to pay just 100
ercepnt.-, or double, on this great cost of
railroading. The production was some 5OO,-
600 tons, or robbery at $2S per
ton of some $14,O00,0OOl And thus runs
the list all the way through these necessary
article of life while the ''luxuries of Spain"
and the Quantities of France are but feebly
taxed, as on diamonds the duty being only 10
per cent, while on laces it is only IS per cent.
If, in view of such data as these, the farmers,
when properly advised, do not rebel against
the iniquity, surely they must have a Sc
renity that is inconceivable to say the least
Particularly so when, too, we have regard
to the..other fact that of the relative amounts
of capital invested the farmers are shown by
the returns to have $4,000, 900 900, against
the manufacturers $1,000, 900 900; and that
other fact that in the distribution of the Ia
Dor load annually carried the farmer popu-
lation stands so per cent, other unprotect-
ed industries 30 per cent, protected indus
ries 20 per cent; the farmer carry
ing half the load and getting nothing
for IT,. Mr.. Wells is doing humanity good
service when he attacks the legislation on
cotton ties. Let his hands be sustained.
Such gross protection is iniquity. "Turn
upon it the light of full, earnest discussion
and it will die"
|
THEsOUTHERN BOOM.
IL would seem indeed that a new era Of
prosperity is about to burst upon this