The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1882-08-17
afnArl,n com b ON rnn 4Anirr.


via That the duty nDon all wool shall moi
exceed % per cent. I'd yalorem, and the du
ties upon all manufactures Of wool, or o.
which wool shall be the component materi
al OF chief value, shall not exceed 80 pei
cent. ad yalorem, and all laws and parts o
laws inconsistent herewith ore hereby re-
pea,ed. ] do not propose TO inAict speech
upon the senate. / have listened with in
terest tothe honorable senator from, Con.
necticut, Mr., Platt. 1 have failed to hear
anything from him which, in my Judgment
justites the taking of knit goods the
subject.matter OF this bill, out Of the same
category III which hundreds OF
articles on the tariff list are
found as much needing modification and
cording to the argument, this bill provides
for touching knit goods. | do not believe,
sir, that the change desired by the friends
OF this bill should be made, unless ut the
same time other changes equally necessa-
ry and equally desirable are also made
There are many articles on the tariff list
which are as INDUSTRIOUS and as enormous
in the excessiveness of the duties i'm pus-
cd as the honorable senator contends This
bill will remedy with reference to the dli-
tics imposed ON knit goods. | do NOT he
lieve that a bill professedly to decrease
taxation should have been laid ASIDE Tor
the purpose OF increasing taxation upon
the articles em braced in this bill. 1 thlnA
it would have been much better that tn sc
articles should have shared the fate OF the
rest OF the articles on the tariff
list, and whenever the tariff is revised that
they should have been revised with The re-
malIluer.
rose Mr.. President, however, to make
all observation upon one particular point
with reference to the am endment offered
by the honorable senator from Delaware.
The senator from Connecticut says ii the
amendment OF the senator from Delaware
with reference to the reduction of The tariff
on WOODEN goods prevails it will throw a
vast amount OF labor out of employment in
the manufacturing districts. l have to say,
in reply to that remaEk that Mr.. Burcha ard,
the director OF the mint, a few years ago a
distinguished member of congress, in q
very aoie speech made by him in the house
OF representatives, in which the tariff gues-
ton was discussed, stated have the ex-
tract from his speech on my desk-that 171
the money paid for labor in
the manufacture of wooden goods.
The amendment of the honorable senator
from Delaware allows 90 per cent. ad valo.
rem. Now, take 25 per cent, which repre-
cents the duty on the raw material, from
that and it leaves % per cent. So that the
is paid back every dollar he
expends for labor in the manufacture OF
wooden goods, and has y per cent. of pro-
lection for his capital besides. If labor
goes out Of employment by reason of the
reduction, if this amendment is adopted, it
will be simply because the manufacturer
refuses to pay to the laborer that which the
las places in his possession ostensibly for
the protection of American labor. When
LIZ per cent. ad valorem will pay for all the
labor, what excuse, what apology is there
for saying that at so per cent. ad valorem
duty Is an insufficient protection?
Sir, am one of those who believe that
under this government no class, no indus
try, no advocation is entitled to call on the
government to tax all others for its protec-
ton. | belle We that every industry should
stand on its own merit, that there should
be free competition, and that the impost
duties should be laid exclusively for reye-
nlh. | do not believe that il Is a part OF
the duty OF this government to lay impos.
duties, eXccpt TO raise money 10 support
the government. the protection OF private
interests by enormous burdens upon The pub
iic IS nO5 within The constitutional power OF
congress. Bat take the theory of the ge :
iieman Who favor aud who say thar they
should have protection, with the amendment
OF the h)nJrd0le senator from Del
extent vi % per cent. These gectlemen say
II is Tor the protection Of American lobOr,
when the facts show CHAT III per cent. will
pay for every doliar'5 worth of labor en-
p,Oycd ia the production OF weOien goods,
when tie figures further show TINT . per
ceHt wall pay the entire alleged difference
cia,nad 20 exist between labor in Europe
and America.
Sir, the whole theory upon which the
I'll % Ia
mu't be protected against the pauper labor
OF Europe. What otuer PROTECTION is thcr-?
IAree thousand miles Of ocean ace % Je
by the European product before
70 can LeJ 10 our markets- 10
compete WIKI our home pro-
duct. What other protection have
WEI We haYe in a prUfgS.on which exists
nowhere else IN the world, OF raw material
ready 20 hand; we have the che lpast, TIE
beet, ana the most abundant foot for our
operatives, white England, tho great con-
petltor most feared by orr Manufacturers,
sends her ships hers for our wheat and
corn and beef and pork ana canned goods,
70 iced her operatives, a5 the same time
procuring her raw material from all quar-
tiers OF the globe. Surely under these cir
% per cent ad vglorem ought
TO be sufficient protection for American
woulen products in American markets.
Our present tariff averages from % to 10
per cent. / believe that a tarffoi Is per
cent, such Is We had ia 1857. would bring
more revenue thdn Jue present ta1Ii Dungs,
and would give more protect on than IS
needed by any branch Of American in1us-
try. IL was estimated that the tariff vi lS&G
would produca $23,O0O.O0O. 1t actually
produced S64 900 900. Multiply sixty-fonr
millions by three and it will he vne aun,
dred and ninety two millions. The product
0f our present tariff in 1881 wes S193 ,000,-
90 in round numbers. Multiply tue pio-
uuct Of the low tariff OF 1916 by three aud {
produces exactly the product OF our tariff
in ISL, yet the volume Of trade aud OF com
merce and of business resulting from the
growth and development OF the country Is
ave times, as the figures show, as great now
as in 1876. IL a tariff Of Is per cent. wou d
produce S64 .O00, 900 Ia 1916, a tariff, of Is D,
cent. would certainly produce 800 .0O0,O0
now.
There can be no question about this.
Any gentleman who will take the tariff list
and see how many articles there are which
produce absolutely no revenue, because the
duties are prohibitory, will see at glance
that we have only 10 lower the duties, re-
duce the tariff, and let foreign goods come
in and pay the duties in order to On our
treasury. IL We viii reduce our tariff We
can greatly modify, If we deem it wise TO do
So our internal revenue system.
Mr.. President, lshall support the amend
ment OF the honorable senator from Della
ware. IL is not unobjectiOnable TO me.
The duty on wooden goods at 80 per
cent. is too high; but 4 will vote for il
as the best we can do now. / con-
Tend now, and shall always contend,
for reduction Of duties until we get down
10 an average not exceeding % per cent.
will take this amendment, though. as a step
in the right direction, and will vote for ID.
IL viii give 70 the producers Of the raw
wool p per cent. II will give 10 the manu-
iacturers Of wooden goods 50 per cent, when
hem back Tor all their labor. leaving in the
balance clear margin Tor an immense
profit. Twill not vote 70 reduce the duty
Dn raw wool unless OF the same time the
1ufT on wooden goods, Is j. done in this
is reduced.