St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1884-04-28
THE TARIFF QUESTION.
Address of the Anti-Protectiye-Tariff
League Of Minnesota.
To THE PEOPLE OF MINYEsoTA:

To HI PEOPLE OF MINNESOTA:
Under the existing tariff laws of the United
States the average rate of taxation upon
dutiable imports is not less than 42I pei
cent. of their value. This tax is levied upon
about fifteen hundred articles. 1t varies
from ten per cent. upon diamonds to seven
ty-fve per cent. upon iron, and eighty to one
hundred and fifteen per cent. upon wooden
goods. 1t is heaviest upon those things that
are most in general use, and many of which
are necessaries of life. 1t embraces nearly
everything which is essential to the comfort,
business, prosperity and existence of oul
people. There is scarcely any article which
they wear, use or consume, from the cradle
to the grave, Except farm products), which
is not burdened by an increased cost OF
about one-half its value by this method of in
direct taxation.
Originally imposed as a war measure fol-
the purpose of raising a revenue for war pur-
poses, it has been maintained during the
nineteen years which have elapsed since the
war, without any material reduction in its
rates, and long after the revenues it pro-
duced began to form an accommodating sur
plus in the national treasury.
1t is no longer a tariff for the support OF
the government, but it is, as its advocates
assert, a tariff for the ''protection of our in
FAINT manufactures" The revenue it pro-
duces is merely an incident to the 'protec-
ton" it affords. It rests upon the theory
that our strong and self-developed industries
should create and support those which are
incapable of supporting themselves-that
capital should be diverted from remunerative
enterprises and employed in those which are
naturally unremunerative-that a well estab-
lished system of pauper industries subsidized
and sustained by the enforced charity of
their prosperous n~efghbors is conducive to
the public welfare-that taxation is a source
of profit to those who are taxed.
The object of such a tariff is to stimulate
capitalists to invest their means in manu-
featuring by the promise of an abnormal
profit. This stimulant it supplies by taxing
imported goods so heavily that they cannot
compete with goods manufactured here. It
artificially increases the selling price of the
commodity upon which it is imposed. This
iiNASooS IL AoOl1 PNyH N.Y. " bhN SO'
eminent, but to the home manufacturer, to
him who makes and sells the article here as
cheap as it can be made abroad and imported
into this country under the existing tariff. 1t
is essentially a tax upon all consumers for
the benefit of the mill-owDing capitalist
alone. It increases his dividends. But it
adds nothing to the wages of his employees.
They work and are forced to work for what
ever their labor is worth in open market.
No tariff shields them from the competition
of foreign labor-no legislation protects them
from labor-saving machinery. If the price
of labor, by reason Of a ''strike, " or its scar
city, rises 80 high that the manufacturer can
import foreign laborers at q profit, he does
so. If in the progress of invention he can
be supplied with improved machinery by
which one laborer can do the work formerly
done by two, he puts it in and turns out the
extra laborer. 1t is for his interest to reduce
the wages of labor, to cheaper production.
ployees. The subsidy which the tariff tax
gives to manufacturing is given to the mill
owners; not one dime reaches the mill
workers.
This system uninterruptedly main
tanned for the past quarter century has
borne its legitimate fruits. Those who first
engaged in manufacturing under protection
realized enormous profits. This invited and
created competition. Old factories were en-
larged, new ones sprang into existence.
Over-production was the result. Manufac-
tured products increased in quantity until
the market was gluted; the factories could
only run at a loss; they produced more than
they could sell.
The tax which excluded foreign competi-
ton from our markets prevented us from
competing in foreign markets. 1t taxed
both manufactured products and the raw
materials out of which they were manufac-
tured. If we were able to make an article as
cheaply as it could be made abroad, we could
not sell it as cheap, because the material out
of which it was made cost here SO per cent.
more than it cost there. Moreover, all
traffic consists in the exchange Of produc-
tons. If we do not buy of a nation it can
not buy of us, because it has nothing but its
plOuuCtlOuo W ouy Will. ~ WHCh OfCi PiV
ductioI came upon us we could not barter
our surplus stocks for the surplus stocks of
other nations, because our custom house
stood in the way, and taxed the goods we
purchased. The tariff Upon imports differed
only in name from a tariff upon exports.
Protection not only walled others out, but it
walled US in. 1t confined US to a home mar
ket, and then overstocked the market. Then
the manufacturers ''pooled" and combined,
wages were "cut'' and shops ''shut down"
until the surplus stock could be worked off.
Strikes followed. Workmen began to re-
alize that high wages left no surplus fortunes
of de~pression-that the costs of the weeks
living consumed the price of the weeks
labor. Struggling against low wages they
found themselves without work, without
means of support, without hope. Misery,
violence and crime issued out of the ''pro-
tected" industries. The Molly Maguires
commenced their work, and the tramp began
his wanderings.
Then came the "survival of the fttest."
The small manufacturers went to the wall,
and were captured by the large ones. Mono
poly triumphed over competition. To-day
our leading industries are in the hands of a