Morning journal and courier., 1884-09-15
Tariff Revision.

The great practical difficulty in tariff leg islation is that it must be the result of a ] scramble, in which the most adroit and ac- tive get the advantage. The theory of pro tection Is plain and simple enough. It is that the duties on imports should be ad
 justed as to put our domestic producers on an equality or give them a slight advantage, as compared with their foreign competitors
 in our markets. It is easy to state the theo-
 "; it is easy to state the theory; it is next to impossible to put it in practice, because it requires knowledge of the conditions of all
 produce industries, which cannot be attained
 except by a systematic inquiry beyond the
 power of individuals. As things now are, there is always demand from some quarter
 or another for changes in the tariff. Some one interested in a certain industry thinks it
 inadequately protected, or believes he can
 convince majority in Congress that it is.
 He gathers a mass of statistics bearing upon
 the subject and submits them to the Com
 mittee on Ways and Means, and, if he ob-
 tains favorable report, to the House. His
 facts are disputed, and an equally formidable
 array of statistics is produced on the other
 side The general subject of protection and
 free trade is debated at length. The discus
 sion is deprecated, and the desired change is
 opposed by members who are not unfriendly
 to it. because they fear that, when Congress
 begins to rneddle with the tariff, it will not know where to stop, and may be led to make changes which will seriously derange commerce and production. No schedule of
 duties would be entirely satisfactory to eve-l rybody and the special knowledge which would make it possible to determine whether
 objections to any proposed schedule are req
 sonable, or whether it is on the whole fair to
 all interests and well adapted to the prevail
 ing conditions, if anyone has it, is not access sible to members of Congress. Individual
 members are well instructed as to the inter
 ests of their constituents, but no one has that thorough knowledge of the whole sub
 ject which Is necessary in order to adjust
 equitably conflicting interests, nor is there any source accepted and trusted by all from which the facts needed as the basis of a sat
 isfactory tariff could be drawn.
 The need of such body of trustworthy statistics was forcibly set forth by MT. Car roll D. Wright, chief of the bureau of labor statistics, in his paper read before the Social Science association at Saratoga on Wednes- day. The title of his paper was Scientific Revision of the Tariff" He not only showed the need and the advantages of scientific method in work which has been done in a clumsy and unscientific way hitherto, but he gave in outline plan of the investigations necessary to provide scientific data for the work There should be, first, classification of all articles on which duties are now paid, showing the duties on each, whether intend ed for protection or for revenue only, which of these articles are produced in foreign countries and in what countries, what duties have been imposed under various tariffs, and 1 what may be considered natural industries of i each foreign country in competition with ! those of the United States Second, classi- ! fed data concerning the composition ot all leading articles which pay duty, showing the percentage of labor, raw material, etc., 1n l each; the cost, including all elements up to | the selling price in the country of produe- l tion, list of iobbing and retail prices in the 1 country of production, the cost of importa- | tion, the jobbing and retail prices of the i'm | ported articles in this country, and of like articles produced here, and the prices of such articles with and without duty charges, and | under various tariffs. Third, classified data | showing the amount of tax paid by consu- mers on account of the tariff, as shown by | budgets of annual expenses of families in va rious grades of life; showing also what per 1 capita tax property tax would be If our | national revenue were raised by either of 1 these methods of taxation, and a comparison l of the three methods of raising our public | revenue. This comparison would show which | method would bear most lightly on the peo- | pie, and which would be most justly distrib l uted, and also whether the poor or the rich | pay more in proportion to their ability of the l revenue raised by the general government. l These, says Colonel Wright, are the leading 1 features of plan for the foundation of an l equitable adjustment of the tariff. He il l illustrates his plan as follows:
 If a single illustration of the point would l attain with regard to each leading industry is 1 required it will be found in the supposition ! that if in woolen goods, after the collection l and analysis of the information have indi | eated and all other information relative there 1 to- it should be found that the American pro | ducer of broadcloth stands at 6 dlsadvan- l tage of one dollar per yard as compared with | the British producer of the same kind of | goods then @ tax of one dollar per yard l would simply place the foreign and American | producer equality; in other words, the | American manufacturer of broadcloths, if a 1 tax of one dollar per yard were laid on his l product, would have no inducement to abaII- l don his factory in America and set it up ir | England. If the tax of one dollar per yard | were not laid it would be for his interest to 1 abandon his factory in America and move to | England, or to Canada, or out of the country 1 somewhere where the same conditions which ] give the foreign producer the advantage of 1 one dollar per yard exist and there set up | his works. Having tax, exactly and math- 1 ematically determined, essential to place | the foreign and domestic manufacturers on | an equality, the consumer of broadcloth is | simply aiding in preserving that equality when he purchases broadcloth, and through | the duty which he pays he is not enabling l the manufacturer to ask any nore for his yard of broadcloth than he would if no duty were laid The revenue is preserved and no advantage given to the American producer, l nor is he placed at a disadvantage through | the location of his factories in this country | instead of in some other. If now Congress | wished to protect the American manufactur- | CT of broadcloth that is to say, put him in position where the foreign producer of the l same goods could not compete with him, | then any tax or rate of duty broadcloth | above one dollar per yard would be essential, and he could ask higher price for his goods | on that account, and the home consumer | could purchase the foreign article if he | choose, although it would be enhanced in | price on account of the duty beyond the one | dollar The distance beyond the one dollar | per yard of the duty laid upon broadcloth | would determine whether the duty was a | protective revenue duty only, and | the public would know exactly what kind of | duty it was paying.
 The result of this illustration, if it could l be applied to all leading articles, would soon define the lines of the parties in this coun- try, and would soon determine the question l of how far tariff shall become protective Do not misunderstood me in the use of the word protective I use it in its literal sense and the protective duty excludes foreign pro ducts The consumers, under the basis I | qave indicated, would clearly understand the question.
 A Cheerful Situation.
 From the New London Day.l
 At this stage of the canvass in Connecticut the Republicans have good ground for conf
 III