The Labor enquirer., 1883-10-13
The Non-PoliticaI Tariff Talker.

1
The Non-PoliticaI Tariff Talker.
The Post and. Tribune, of the 25th,
gives us somewhat lengthy extract from
the address of one Benjamin Franklin
to an assemblage of the Berrien county
grangers. This extract makes Mr.. Frank
lin say: "A just tariff enables the govern
ment to raise revenues sufficient to pay
running expenses. I'VE would in all
candor ask Mr.. Franklin or the Post and
Tribune, either or both to tell us what a
lust tariff is. We are not blessed with
such a tariff in this country. We are
struggling under tariff SO high that the
cost of living is increased by one-third
or one-half above the normal cost of the
articles. that make up the staples of con-
sumption under system of free trade
The laborer who earns 1915 per annum
(the average wages of the iron and steel
manufacturing industries), under our
present system of tariff lays down to the
benefit of the tariff, because of the in
creased cost of his living expenses, $125
year, a tax of 95 per cent on his all.
And what is the per cent on the all of
the rich? You will find it compare
lively small, Mr. Franklin, if you COM
pute it. About in the proportion of one
to fifty. Call you that just? The sta
tistics of London, England, show that
an advance in the price of wheat of 3
pence per bushel, causes an advance IN
the death rate of three per cent. What
say you, Mr.. Franklin, to the probable
influence on the death rate'in this coun-
try by the 35 or so per cent increase in
the general living expenses which is
produced by our tariff system an in
crease as inevitable as the rising of the
sun. Does any man in his sober senses
dare to call our tariff system just? To
say that it is monstrous, is to speak
mildly.
A tariff is a sneaking, cowardly, in
sidious, thieving way to raise revenue.
Like thief it takes you unawares. 1t is
devoid of even one manly principle or
characteristic No tariff can possibly be
50 adjusted as to bear equally on all
classes and cannot, therefore, be just.
The tariff means to the poor one less
meal per day, third less clothing and
one-third less comfortable shelter and
home surroundings. Call you this just
system of raising revenue? A direct
and manly tax on the surplus wealth of
the country would not effect the comforts
or conveniences, not shorten by one
mouthful the bread of anyone, and
would be a great incentive to economy
in the expenses of government, and GER
tainly would be no greater draft on the
country than the tariff. 1t would di-
minish no ones living. At the very
hardest it would only diminish the &C
cumuations thai are laid up to tempt
the thief and the burglar. We would
recommend our good brother, Mr..
Frenklin, to read the political economy
of Professor Perry, of Professor Wayland
and progress and Poverty" by Henry
George, and we will wager that here
after his speeches will be for free trade.
Mr.. Franklin laments that sugar is not
sufficiently protected. 1t carries tariff
of 68 per cent. If we cannot compete
under that weight, I would suggest that
we engage in some paying business, re-
move the tariff from sugar altogether
and exchange our surplus of some pay
ing industry for our sugar, at the lowest
rate that some foreign country will fur
nish it, and both of us save money.
The philosophy of getting rich by q
tariff is like attempting to lift ones sci
by the boot-straps. The tariff may be
fun for certain capitalists but is death tc
labor every time.-C. H. Haynes in Mich
igan Labor Journal.