The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1883-07-26
VOL. XII.
A NEW CRUCIFIXION.


The annual imports of silk goods
amounts to S36.QU0,OOO, and the duty
being 90 per cent, it may be seen that
S21.6O0,000 is thus imposed as bonus
for manufacturers. Silk that costs
the consumer 81 per yard would sell
without the tariff, at about S1.25 per
yard, or that sold at So would be about
S3. Thus it may be seen how the
housewife who keeps one or more
silk dresses is taxed for the benefit of
the few silk manufacturers of this
country. But suppose the tax on silk
were II per cent instead of so; then
five times as many people would use
silk, and the government would col
lect the same amount of revenue us
now. But silk is very necessary
article of apparel, conducive espe-
cially to health, and its use would be-
come very general, and the revenue
would really be greater than it now
is The very high tariff on
silks is almost prohibitory, and
were it not for the demands OF
fashion in the use of foreign silks,
none would be imported. The silk
manufactures of this country, III 1880,
made goods valued at $4l,O0O,OOO,
which, sold at the market value OF
such good outside of our protection
ridden country, would have produced
25,G25,O 600, the difference of $15,375.-
600 being the profit derived from pro-
lection bounty. 1t may be safely as
sumed, therefore. that the profit to
foreign manufacturers made on $25,-
625,0OO worth of silks, added to the
$15 5,375,OC0 protection bounty, would
show profit to the American manu-
facturers of over $2O,0Q0O0O, or 100
per cent profit on their manufactures.
1t cannot be said that any Of the
profit of manufacture goes to opera
tives. They receive, it is proba-
ble, not even the full value Of
their labor. Taking the returns made
by the manufacturers themselves. in
which, it may be supposed, the most
favorable showing was attempted for
the laborerS, the census shows there
was paid out for labor in the manu-
facture of silk goods, in 1880, 50. l46,-
7Oo, making an average for 81 ,33l
hands ON DIOra1 Df o0uI nor ,-a,r
surely poor support. The tax put
upon the country to foster this silk
industry, no part of which went into
the treasury, would have paid every
hand engaged in it 1896 each year.
The raw material used in the manu-
facture of this silk production did not
cost one-fourth Of the Snm derived
from the sale of manufactured goods:
SO that it appears the estimate of 100
per cent profit on silk manufacture
is really within the margin. The
case in point is presented simply as
additional proof Of the oppression
Dracticed by the government in fur
therance of the accumulation of
wealth IN the iron vaults of monopo-
lists. The masses derive no benefit
from the vast sums thus accumu-
lated, but on the ether hand
they are made poorer The wealth
that llows into the Golfers Of monopo-
lists necessarily empties the pockets
of the struggling toilers of the land.
The debts of the multitude become
the credits of the few, and thus wealth
fl ws alone in one direction. What is
true as touching silk goods is equally
true as to almost all the necessities
of life. Reform is the demand of
the hour. Retrenchment for the tax
oppressed masses will be demanded
of political parties, and those who re-
fuse to extend it will meet with cru
cifixion at the hands of a justly out
ragged people.