The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1884-02-06

/
Several days ago you quo,eu .ne Charies
ain order thai they (the people Of Vir
ginia) shall make their mlI'iona ON Oh dollars
by the stroke OF pen, my n.,''on people
must continue to pay exor9'sans prices ioI
articles OF personal use an" eouiiort which
cannot be dispensed with;
This statement Is applied 10 the relief
afforded TO Virginia by the reduction oil
her oppressive internal taxation. had
thought that inequality OF taxation was
what was TO be reformed In the present
laws. The drift OF the argument above
quoted Is that. AZ 81 fly million people "
are burthened by import duties, the small
er number, who bear the larger burthen OF
internal taxation. should patriotically pay
the taxes. which will otherwise fail upon
the whole BODY OF the people. The most
odious feature OF the present system OF In
ternal taxes IL what most commends 1t to
those who do not share its expressions!
Cotton goods, wool and woollens, iron
and steel, and sugar and molasses have
been paving the larger part OF the tariff
duties, or about one hundred and eight mil
lions dollars. Cotton goods have furnished
eleven millions. iron and steel twenty-one
millions. wool and woollens twenty-eiglit
millions, sugar and molasses iorty-eight
millions.
Tobacco paid at the same time forty
three millions, liquors eighty-one millions,
or 1924, 900, 900 from these two sources oil
internal taxation.
Dark Virginia tobacco Is worth say &C.,
western Burley 12c. per pound. IN ordina-
ry years. The tax at 81. Is on Virginia
dark tobacco 1873 per cent. whilst on west
ern ii is less than 81 cents. During the
past fifteen years the tobacco tax has large
iy diminished the growth OF Virginia dark
tobacco. / have long believed that its con-
| tinuance will finally destroy its growth
entirely. Richmond and LyDchburS are
| the largest two markets for this tobacco.
| In Richmond we find that the decline IN
receipts owing to short production has
been marked. whilst III Lynchburg, the
| Viwinian OF the nth utimO says that
although its population since 1868 has
doubled, and It's general business has been
most fourishing, its "tobacco trade has
not kept pace with the growth and deyel-
opment OF other business" Cincinnati
reported for lust year the largest Dusl-
ness IN the history Of her leaf-tObacco mar
ket. whilst the transactions in the market
OF Louisville in 1888 were "of unprece-
denied proportions"
The cheap dark tobacco OF Virginia cam
not bear a tax as great rs the hieh-priced
tobacco of the West. l. 1t strange that the
West Is more than satisfied with the con-
tinuance of tax which work,Such odors
discrimination against the cheaper Nlr-
ginia product!
Some days since stated in reference to
the question OF taxation, that inasmuch Is
all parties agree in reducing the taxes TO
the point where they will be no larger than
the expenses OF the Government, 1t Is the
business Of Congress to ascertain where II
should curtaiI the revenues. This reduces
the question OF taxation TO a consideration
OF the comparative merits OF the systems OF
internal and tariff taxation.
1t is demonstrable that principle and
precedent both combine to require the coll
lection OF Government needs entirely from
u tariff.
Protection does protect. show me an
argument which denies the principle, and
will prove by an ANALYSIS OF the argu-
ment itself its own falsity. FOraIl articles
made both in this and foreign countries, it
can be shown that all internal taxes tend
to protect foreign manufactures, whilst all
import duties tend to protect American
20 DDS.
The Nelcs and Courier. for example.
when told that the tobacco and whiskey
tax. coupled with free trade with foreign
countries, would drive their manufacture
say to Canada, replied that OF course tariff
equal to the internal tax would be levied
to prevent this result. The object. then,
of the tariff duty would be what? Not for
IL fam
professedly protective to an American in
dustrv, which could not exist without it.
Notice Mr.. Hewitt's adroit letter on the
t riG. most carefully prepared. In the
latter portion Of his letter he states,
ties cannot. and do not, fayorably affect the |
general rate Of W, ges." Yet he states his !
belief in these propositions: First. Free !
ing raw materials from all duties -; and |
secondly. Gin imposing rates OF duty on |
products not more than SUI
ticient to make good the difference in
amount paid for labor in the production OF
any given article in this country, a. COM
pared with the amount paid for the same
labor in other countries with which we |
Southern pig-irOn is to be |
made to compete with that pro luced by |
cheaper foreign labor, but the duty on |
products from it is levied for
what purpose! Does Mr.. Hewitt mean TO |
say that the manufacturers, Of which he j. |
one, would get it, or will he confess that |
his object is to protect the American IL |
borer in his establishment! Undoubtedly |
he intends to say the latter. II so, protec-
ton does protect. The design OF his pro- |
position, it seem. to me. is to enable class |
like himself at the North by the introduce |
ton there OF cheaper foreign free ores than |
are produced in the South to drive OF what !
in time may prove dangerously fOrmida- |
bic competition here.
On the other hand, give Us free trade !
aud continue the tObacco-taX. for example, |
and that industry will 80 out OF the United |
States-Say, to Canada. Ii so. does not |
the internal tax tend to protect the foreign |
Can you not drive any |
industry out OF America by internal taxa
ton, unless ut the same time YOU levy a
protective duty on the same article made
abroad! The laying OF the duty itself
proclams the principle that the foreign Ia
bOrer is benefited by the internal tax.
Then import duties do protect American
labor, and internal taxes do protect foreign
labor.
Having shown that internal taxes are
opposed to the proper principles OF govern
nent. will prove that they are also against
precedent.
Thomas Il. Dew, the compeer at William
and Mary fifty years ago OF Judge Beverly
Tucker, the half-brother OF John RAN
dolph, was the exponent OF Virginia Demo-
cratic faith at that time.
He says in his Restrictive SYSTEM:
" Import duties are collected without the
odious visits Of excise officers; il is a spe-
cies OF indirect taxation which is cheer
fully borne by the community.