New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-01-04
Total rev. from textiles IN 'sf6s.7S+77Si 4lS59o4s
Thus ron win See that che changes I prof.

Thus You will see that the changes | proposed
only amounted to a reduction of S7,92o,22S on the
revenue from all textiles, which amounted IN 1881
to $50. 1874 773. In other words, proposed re-
duction of lees than IA per cent average on
gross revenue of $50, 7S4,773. Can this be termed
free trade or can DO termed a rabid free-trader
On pig-iron / proposed o reduction OF 81 ton,
from 81 to So. On steel rails proposed duty OF
$40 % ton On raw sugar L proposed
duty of 40 per cent al vsiorem.
On all chemicals and dyestufs / pro-
posed a duty of 20 per cent ad valorem.
and If you peruse my tariff revision further you
must admit that my proposals for reduction Of
duties are moderate; nay, very moderate. Inc
reason for this moderation is simply because my
economic knowledge is not derived from books or
theories bnt is the result of old practical ner-
chants acquaintance with the commerce Oh the
world believe in q gradual reduction OF duties,
and above all, In a simplihcation Of the pres
emit complicated tariff, 1t is true proposed free
wool and free raw materials, such as hemp,
flax iute all kinds Of and many other articles
of the kind which would sweep away Sl3,773,OOO
revenue if computed on the Importation OF 1851.
But this proposal is in reality in favor OF the manu-
faoturers And right here. allow me to assure you
that my wishes for the prosperity OF the manufac-
turine industry of the country are as strong and
renuine a. any ones IN the land. And am practi-
cal enough to know that without free raw material
there can be no genuine manufacturing prosperity.
Seooud-If not free-trader, what do / am
att Well, / aim at simplihcation aim at ex-
posing and. If possible. rectifying those shameful
tariff tricks which great and nnuentlal Journal
"a The tribune would indeed be the hr5t TO con.
denim IhIs very morning TIE TRIBUNE informed
its readers that the Committee OF Ways ana Means
has passed the Tariff psUPTssd tr dIIy com On
tanned therein. The CLASSIFICATION IN wnat rs eele1
combing OF clothing wool has not been changed.
The changes made by the Tarln Commission are az
follows aud for the convenience OF the readers oI
TUE TRIBUNE | will place the present reading
and the changes side by side
Present TdrG on Wool Proposed TarlD on Wool
wool OF the first GLASS Wool Of the nrst class the
the value whereof at the value whereof at the last
s"norpted to the United ported TO the United states
ssses % be- 81 sEs Be T6ry
or less PER pound 10 less per pound 10
per pound and III per cent cents per pounu.
40 yalorem
vroo,a ~ thu same class Wool OF the same class
Oh" ya,o whereof at the the value whereof at the
last port place whence as port OF pit t iS
aarss excluding charges n states excluding charges In
sacS port shalt exceed 80 such port shall exceed
psr 5opad and 10 per cent IL cents per pound
nd vaorem.
Nv, th.p tina compound duties are abolished.
which is all very well, but the trick Is, hrst Ia
lowering the valuation IRON 81 cents per poundto
here to the most tricky OF all assessments,
In ordering that speeino duty OF ~ ~
foreign valuation OF 80 cents a pound or less Ii
the an praser In the United States has TO determine
the value of raw wool and have that almost occult
science of determining the value Oh Wool between
80 cents pound and S0h cents, the latter pfice
would of course throw the duty INTO the 10 cens
per pound category instead OF 10 cents per pound:
Why IN tue world should there not DC simple az
yalorem ratef If, the other hand, IL Is feared
that differentiation would be praetised why give
the temptation to importers who, by the unoer-
valuation of l cent, nay. Il OF cent would save
cents pound Oh the duty ,.., -,
appeal to the most persistent, influential, hhu
one Of the odesI journals that advocates pre- tection
whether this proposal to revise the tarin ON "ooi
@ simpliiication. II. a. rot
critclse the rate Of duty In fact, can ~,
nit ot nothing less than free wool But, ~ pride
myself on being practical man. 4 pnlIosopnicaly
admit that my economic watch Is ahead Oh lme
We may have free wool In o year-lWo OF tnee
years. But if there Is to be duiy on raw woJ ,
ma ask does the commission reduce tine oid Vaiua-
ton of 32 cents pound To so cents poendt is ~
not clear that that cents lower Valuation, Mnion
entails additional duty OF cents pou rnso ~
millions of pounds of wool coming TO TINS maIket
Why all this eonfusionf Why al. TINS shumlns ~
2 cents on the valuation of WOOL n nohes Wciis
meaning simplihcation was ~ Sa Of tns tariff
the Commissioners, such pToposaI OF ,no 'ai'"
changes ON raw wool would be InadmlSsiple.
In criticising the Tariff Commissioners: report 4
strictly adhere TO the principle OF tarin hmpiinVa
ton. and most sincerely anu most empnasicays
tbe tariff report wanting III TINS u 81 Oh
aII damands for which IHE TRIBUNE, as wen an
tariff reformers has Loudly called. IL renahs uus
10 he ADDED that this revision OF the raw Woo
- only an example OF the many simila- tariH COM
niicafons 10 DO found Ia the report, which eopeis
me TO denounce and expose what Is moaht w P"''
for tart REFORM .o.s,,,