The Democratic press. [volume] (Ravenna, O. [Ohio]) 1868-1901, 1882-01-26
Tariff Ahsurdiltes.

Zee Hon. ADfam .. T1eWlIt, III q
recent interview with a reporter of the
New York Herald, furnishes some
| very sensible and incisive views in
regard to our present tariff system.
Mr.. Hewitt among other things said
am extensively engaged in getting
out iron ore. There is duty OF u
per cent. on iron ores, and l would
have that duty abolished, both upon
principle and for eXpediency. I'm
ported ores are useful for us in mixing
with our own, and the benefit would
be reciprocal. The duty acts as an OBJ.
stacle to the best interests of this in
dustry, yet if the proposal is made to
| abolish it, it will meet with an active
opposition from the mining furnaces
| Of Pennsylvania, Virginia and West
Virginia, because of the popular igno-
rance of the subject. My friend, Mr..
Randolph Tucker, as free trader,
would find his views in opposition to
those of his constituencies, and his
vote might afterward lead to his defeat
at the polls or in convention, whereas
with a full discussion of the matter the
facts of the case would be made plain.
Again, I have interests in the matter
of steel rails, upon which there is a duty
of S2S per ton. When it was imposed
English steel rails were quoted at $50
per ton, and the duty was, therefore,
about ninety per cent. The English
rails are now $32 per ton, and hence
the duty now amounts to about ninety
per cent. Last year the demand was
i'll excess of the supply. so that the
American manufacturers could de-
mand and receive about the entire pro-
tective duty of ninety per cent; but
xryith tho 10 i,ln domestic mai l.
ton the cost of the home article will
rapidly fall. until, as l am convinced,
after the lapse of twelve months the
increased price will be only Sl4 per
ton, or forty per cent. duty. / had in
tended offering bill reducing the du-
ty, as the duty was reduced on quinine
without reference to other features OF
the tariff, but frankly, as 1 told you,
the effect of domestic competition will
practically be to reduce the price on
rails within year to the point at
which my bill would bring it. 1 am,
however quite ready to advocate and
vote for a bill to reduce the duty on
steel rails to $l4 a ton. This reduc-
ton would not interfere in the slight
est degree with the growth of this man
ufacture. One mill for the manufac
ture of stell rails in this country, with
a capital of s., 600 600, made u profit
in one year of $5, ,UOO,O 900.
Utterly absurd and ridiculous is this
howl about "pretection." The labor
justice with equal rights and equal
opportunities and free from the en-
sIavement of monopoly and the tyran-
ny of capital, and our word for it the
laboring man will not suffer. The
protection" howl is but the scheme
of designing political tricksters who
seek monopoly and the opportunity
to plunder through iniquitous legisla-
ton.
The fact stated by Mr.. Hewitt, that
zone mill" engaged in the manufac-
ture of ''steel rails" protected by du-
ty of ninety per cent, with a capital
of two millions, made PROFIT, IN
ONE YEAR, OF FIVE MILLIONS OF DOL
LARS !" is conclusive evidence of the
fraud that marks the whole system.
Now, 1T is not probable that the la
borers' wages in this mill were increas-
ed by reason of these enormous profits.
The people of the country paid these
five millions and thus were robbed by
the act of the government in affording
to capital this unjust monopoly. AT
all events, the laboring men do not
usually come in for share of these
enormous gains. That is a horse OF
another color; but it shows that the
protection howl is not really to
benefit the laborer so much as to give
capitalist an unjust monopoly.-[Stark
10 dem