The weekly democratic statesman. [volume] (Austin, Tex.) 1871-1883, 1882-01-26
What a Tariff for PrOtec ton Sig
nifieS.

A tariff framed i'll the interest OF
monopolies is in direct conflict with
the welfare OF the people. When a
law is so framed as to increase the
cost of living by unnecessarily tax
ing the consumer for the purpose of
increasing the gains of the producer,
it becomes fragrant wrong which
the people will not fail to condemn.
1t must be borne in mind that tariff
means tax; that just III proportion
as duties are imposed the cost of the
article is increased, and that the coll
sumner as certainly pays the tariff tax
as tLat he pays any other tax levied
by the authorities. 1t is this fact
that protectionists seek by every
species of false reasoning and false
statements to obscure. They are
forever striving to make it appear
that the tariff tax, unlike all other
taxation, is great national blessing,
and that the people by paying So or
$1.50 for an article of prime me-
cessity are better off than if they
paid 81 for it; and this great bless
ing Of increased cost of living. they
contend, is of special advantage to
the laboring people. The purpose
of having tariff laws is to obtain
revenue with which to defrav the
expenses of the government. To
regulate the tariff for that special
purpose is the demand. There is
no discussion in regard to the ne
cessity for such tariff. 1t secures
revenue, competition in trade, and
affords incidental protection. But
tariff framed for protecting cer-
tain descriptions of industries Sc
cures little or rs1I94ff, -sr'rvirnves'--rrro
0Usr v.- vI.S- rrfUfc and taxes the con-
sumner for the benefit of the favored
manufacturer, who, under the opera
tion of high protective duties, Sc
cures a monopoly of the business.
The duty on crockery, for example,
is equivalent to an annual tax on
the people of Indiana IN an amount
of not less than 100000. Pursuing
the same line of argument, we pro-
pose to show that the people of
Indiana are required to pay unnec-
essary high prices for other artl-
cles that must be had in every family
in the state. The tariff DUTY on cut
lery is fifty per cent, and still i'll the
article of table cutlery fully four
fifths of the sales are of American
manufacture. AS result of the
operation of the tariff, every set OF
knives and forks purchased by the
people of Indiana costs them fully
fifty per cent. more than would be
the case if the duties were removed
that is TO say, set of knives and
forks which now cost S1.50 could, il
relieved of the tariff tax, be pur-
chased for 81. 1t is fair 10 assume
| that the 2S5,000 families of Indiana
each purchase 81 worth of ta'
BILE cutlery annually, a sum to-
tai of $4,000. or this
amount at least 33 1-2 per cent. re,
suits from the imposition of tariff
tax on table cutlery, and since fully
four-fifths of this cutlery is OF
American manufacture, the conclu-
sion is that the cutlery factories o.
America are able to stand alone
and no longer need protection, by
which every labOring man in lndl
ana is required TO pay from 81 tC
$1.50 for a set of knives and forks
when but for the tariff they woulC
not be required to pay more thai
seventy-five cents or 81. The de
mand is not to abolish the tariff Ol
table cutlery, but to modify it il
the interest of the government ant
the people. AS the case now stand
the tariff on cutlery amounts almos
to prohibition. The importations o
the foreign article for the year 18o
amounted to only 81 ,123, ,529. and th
revenue derived wac 1851, ,764, equa
to one-half of the value of the i'm
portations. What is true of tabl
cutlery is equally true of pocke
knives, and every man in Indiana
required to pay 90 per cent. NOR
, for his pocket-knife on account @
, the tariff tax. That is to say,
pocket-knife that could be sold q
fifty cents, under the tariff cost
, seventy-five cents, and 100000 me
and boys of the state are require
under the operation of the tariff
pay fifty cent tax on their pocket
: knives, the sum total of whic
reaches an amount we'll calculate
: to arouse reflection. These ma
, ters may seem small to some peopl
3 and protectionIsts may pooh-pool
!, but they are not so small as to haV
5 escaped the attention of monop'
g lists, nor will they permit the tari
l on cutlery to be reduced if they ca
: prevent such wise legislation.