The state rights democrat. [volume] (Albany, Linn County, Oregon) 1865-1900, 1883-03-02
rnousnr. on raorncrl,E rAn.rr..

man who Is worth but $1,000. II
order to be a just, aud an equal
taxation, the rich should buy dutia-
BILE articles In proportion to the
amount of their wealth, and not In
proportion 10 their wants. To
illustrate II man who Is worth
$500 buys a Wade l. Butcher knife
in tho market for $3.50, he pays as
much duty or tax as the man does,
who Is werth si5, 900. Mach man
pays seventy Ave cents tax. Now
where is the justice In taxing $500
as much as you tax $40, 200.
All taxes imposed directly by tho
States are levied upon property In
accordance with its value. All i'm
pert taxes or duties should be lev led
In such a way as to bear upon the
property OF the country and not upon
individuals. Why should this DO so.
Because the revenue collected by
levyIng a duty upon imported arti-
cles Is used to maintain the govern
ment In return for the protection
which government gives to life, liber.
ty, and property.
/ We are told that free trade will
ruin any country that adopts Il. Has
1t beggared Great Britain ? II 1910
the tonnage of Great Britain was
| 6, 490, 900 tons. In 1880 It was As,-
400, 900 tons. In 1879 the sea.going
trade OF the British Empire was
| So ZOO, ,000, 900, while the combined
sea-going trade of the United States
and the German Empire, both under
protection, was but equal to that Of
the British Empire. The English at
the present time have flfty-two per
cent Of the carrying trade of the
World. 1t were a great blessing TO
our people to be thus beggared.
theoretically all customs duties,
are wrong. Practically, with the
great business interests of the country
as they are adjusted at present, 1t
would be improbable to resort to
free trade, but the tariff rates, as at
present arranged, should be readjust-
ed and made TO conform to the
requirements of the government.
The cry set up Dy monopoly manu-
facturers that protective tariff Is the
means Of furnishing the farmer and
producer with home markets for his
produce is a sham put out to deceive.
The truth Is that beef, pork, wheat,
corn, and all s!aPie-articles raised by
The farmer, has to be sold upon Tie
bases Of the Liverpool and london
markets. OF course there are now
aud then, local exceptions to this
rule. That compels oqr farmers and
laboring men TO compete with the
laeor OF the old world, and pay
freight besides, while they, at the
same time, buy all their good.
at protective tariff rates. But IL tax.
Ing farmer and producer helps the
manufacturer, why not tax the man.
ufacturer TO help The farmer and
laboring man ?
Has not the farmer and laboring man
as much right to ask to be "helped'
under our system of government as the
manufacturer Suppose now we change
this tariff program awhile. Suppose
. we levy tax of sl,00 per hundred
, pounds on all flour consumed TO be paid
by the consumer. Would not this
protect, encourage, and "help" the
! "infant industry" known as wheat pro-
duction But we are grayely told by
these manufacturers that farmers and
mechanics do not need protection.
J What manifestation Of selfshness
These protected "pets" of Republican
rule decide that they do need protection,
aud, actuated by the same spirit of self
interest, they decide that the farmer
and labering man do not need protect
len. If this tax of 81 per hundred
pounds were placed upon -four, these
manufacturers would say at once that
this would raise the price of -four. But
bless your ignorant" Iunsophisticated
souls, would not this tax upon flour
lever the price By thus protecting it r.
Would it not enable the farmer to pay
higher wages for labor on the farm. and
TINS protect American laborl Besides
this would create hume market for all
the manufacturer has to sell.
But we are told that our "infant in
dustries" must be protected" until
they have 50 firmly established them
selves as to be able to live without
protection" Well, we have s'protect-
ed' many Of them for eighty to ninety
years, and now we want to know when
these ''infants" will arrive at years Of
discretion. But away with such folly.
Che only reasonable excuse for tariff
duty is to raise revenue, and when the
demand for revenue ceases, then should
the duty be removed.