Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1882-10-16
THE TARIFF COMMISSION.
A Lively Debate at Philadelphia.

PHILADELPHIA, October 14.--At the ses-
sion OF the Tariff Commission to-day Prof.
Sumner, of Yale College, New Haven,
Conn, read paper on the relation of pro-
tective taxes to wages. He appeared as a
professional student of political economy,
and argued that protective taxes lowered
wages. Protective taxes did not aim to
produce good government, or to accom-
plish any civil purpose at all. Their aim
was industrial. They were planned to help
some people to get a living. Anything that
lessened the number Of persons competing
for wages, or that increased the amount of
capital, increased wages. It was impossible
to raise wages by opposing cheapness
and abundance. A protective system
lessened wealth and enhanced the cost of
all articles OF clothing, furniture, crockerY,
utensils, tools and machinery. He
denied the allegation that protection
brought capital into use which would
otherwise lie idle, and he asserted
due to economic forces at work. There was
only one thing that could reduce American
wages to European standards, and that was
protective taxes, applied long enough and
with sufficient weight. Mr. Sumner wanted
all protective taxes abolished, and said II
half the list of dutiable articles were put on
the free list, and the duty of the other half
reduced fifty per cent, the revenue would
be doubled, If more revenue was wanted.
Kenner-Then, understand that you do
not want to abolish custom duties? |
understood you to say just now that you
would abolish all taxes.
Mr.. Sumner-All protective taxes.
Mr. Kenner-Au import duties.
Mr.. Sumner-I did not say all import
AvrFfa hvrn L.. !.
on tea, coffee or pepper, they would
not be protective taxes. A tax on wines
might be protective. A tax on sugar is
largely a revenue tax, but It is also partially
a protective tax in behalf of Louisiana
sugar growers. have no objection to pay
tax to the United States Treasury, but do
object to pay tax to the Louisiana sugar
growers or to the Pennsylvania iron and
Ohio wool manufacturers, or anybody else
Arguments were also made by Samuel A.
Edgerly, of New. York, against an increase
of the duty on cotton ties; by II. P. Coll
quit, of Atlanta, In favor of increased duty
on Spanish piTrotes; by General A. Potts, of
New Jersey, asking, In the sorghum and
sugar interest, for the maintenance of exist
ing duties on sugar; by Stockton Bates, of
Philadelphia, and William A. Burke, of
Lowell, Mass, in favor of existing duties on
cotton and textile machinery.
Mr.. Kenner-Did not New England sup
port the first tariff bill signed by Washing
ton?
Mr.. Sumner-No; New England was for
free trade until after the tariff Of 1924.
Mr.. Kenner-The doctrine of free trade
is one that was ad Vocated in the South for
fifty years.
Mr.. SUMNER hope the South will stick
to it.
Mr.. Kenner-It will not stick to It.
Mr.. Sumner-They are going to begin
manufacturing there, to their very great
loss.
Mr.. Oliver-Do you mean to the great loss
of the South or of New Englsndg
Mr.. Sumner-New England can stand It.
do not think It would be any loss to the
country If there was no New England.
Mr.. Kenner-I agree with you In tnat last
remark.
Mr.. Sumner-And It would be no harm to
the'country If there was no Louisiana, either.
Mr.. Kenner-Yes, it would be. We tried
to leave the country, and you would not let
us go; and now you say that Louisiana
would be no loss. That is a non seqaEitlr
which do not understand.
Mr.. Sumner-We should all live here and
be happy, aud get our living, IL there was
not any New England or any Louisiana or
any Pennsylvania.
Mr.. Kenner-You mean, l suppose, if
there was no North and no South. We have
heard enough OF that.