Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1882-02-12

by committee Of the Cotton Exchange to
be submitted TO Congress.
To the Honorable senate and House OF Represent
atives in Congress assembled
Your petitioners respectfully state that
they are members of the Cotton Exchange Of
the city OF Memphis, and, as dealers, are
largely interested in cotton and all subjects
relating to the same. But the object Of this
petition il TO ask at your hands protection for
the cotton producer, most numerous and
deserving class. We notice with regret the
efforts being made by parties in and through
your honorable body to have that indispensa-
able and useful article of iron ties for cotton
reclassed aud the former enormous rate of
import tax re-established. We cannot be-
lieve at this time, when the iron interest OF
the country Is 90 prosperous and the public
treasury full to overlooking, that such a step,
80 oppressive to the large section OF country
covered by the cotton States.will be taken
without some full and sufficient reason. Our
purpose here is not so much TO enter pro-
test against an increase of the present high
rate OF duty on imported ties to ask for
an entire abolition OF the duty now 10 force.
Make them absolutely free, and open up their
manufacture to honorable competition. When
iron ties were first imported into this country
their class seems not to have been well under
stood, and adj Jdtorem tax OF eighty per
cent. wss put upon them, the rate then pre-
when il was shown that they were not hoop
iron, and should not be so classed; that with
buckle rivets, buttons and other appliances,
they were much manufactured article
for specific other =, they
we're put on the list of things not otherwise
provided for" aud the tax reduced to the
present rate of tbirty-fve per cent.-au
under the plea of revenue with incidental
protection" There are only two parties
directly interested in this question; both are
home producers, and az far as this subject
gees, their interests are antagonistic. For
the last twenty years the iron manufacturer
has been protected and his business fostered
by a tax upon ties, varying from thirty-five
to eighty per cent, and all this at the ex-
pense OF the cotton producer. 1t is well
known that much the larger part Of the cot
ton crop is exported, and that it is the Gus
tom in European markets to deduct six per
cent for basging and ties when the cotton is
sold, and in this way the bales are reduced
to net weight. And IN those markets we
have the additional disadvantage Of coming
in competition with cotton from Egypt,
Brazil and India, put up with ties not sub
iect to tax. The custom Of deducting a Ger
tain per cent. for bagging and lies does not
prevail with cotton bought for consumption
in our own country, but the spinner, in max
ing his purchase, takes the tare into his esti-
mate as much so as freight any other
necessary cost, so that in either case the tare
made up of bagging and ties is a total loss to
the producer. The iron tie among imported
articles stands alone in this respect, that 1t
is bought by the producer not for the pur-
pose of selling again for profit, but as
necessary expense in putting up his |
cotton bales, and with the GER
tain knowledge that the cost OF
making the tie, with a good profit
and thirty-fv per cent. added, for all !
which ha will clear loss fO
him. This loss on account OF tare or ties |
could be avoided if the laborer producer |
could cover it by adding it to the price OF his !
cotton, but it is well known that, for want of |
organization, which is impossible, and indie
pendence, that he does not control the price, |
and it is beyond his power to do so. We
hold:
l. That our government, in its present
prosperous condition, does not need the rev. |
enue derived from iron ties, and should |
abolish the law providing for its collection. |
=. That common fairness and justice are |
opposed to revenue tax on any article that |
can neither be sold again nor consumed, as |
in this Case, but is bought only as an accepted |
loss
3. That, in its practical operation, this |
is a direct tax upon farm labor, and, IA |
such, is unconstitutional and oppressive.
4. That as there are only two parties |
whose interests are involved in this question, |
to tax one for the support and benefit of the |
other is to legislate Tor one class and against |
another, and that the present revenue law |
governing ties is so vicious we cannot con- |
ceive OF any re ason that can justify its con-
tinuance in making cotton pay tribute TO |
iron.
D. That cotton, as one of the great staples |
of the country and one OF its chief sources |
of wealth, should have all the protection by |
the government given to corn, wheat and |
other useful articles, the product Of farm
labor.
In conclusion we cannot too severely con- |
denim this direct tax upon cotton, or too |
earnestly pray for the abrogation of the law |
which imposes it. We think that ties should |
be free, and to that end We commit this i'm
portant matter to the wisdom of your honor
able body, begging and hoping for that IA
vorable action and relief at your hands, !
which we so much need, and 10 which we |
feel so justly entitled.
II. NJ Nicely, Chairman.
G. 7. HI VT,
J. X GOODWIN,
JOHN 8. TOOF,
W. F. TAYLOR.