Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1885-01-20
TUEsDAY.......JANUARY 20, 1885.
Hph Tariffs and Large Revenues.


We last week quoted Mr.. TUCKER
against Mr.. WArrERsoN because we
supposed the latter had the highest re-
spcct Cor that distinguished virginian as
en- authority on all such questions as
those TO which reference is had in the fol-
lowing paragraph. But il appears that
we reckoncd without our host. Here is
whatth Cosrie-Jonraal says for itself;
Our esteemed contemporary of the
Richmond (ya.) Dispatch says:
i" Mr.. Watterson advances the UNI
tenable proposition that the higher the
tariff the greater the revenue. We need
only to cite against Mr.. Watterson the
authority Of Mr.. Tucker, of this State.
- Mr.. Watterson says that to
repeal the internal taxes hereinbefore
mentioned would be to provide for an
increase Of the present exorbitant inn
port duties in order to meet the ex-
penses Of the Government. Mr.. Tucker
holds, on the contrary, that to repeal
those taxes would be to provide for
tariff that will produce more revenue,
At the Same time that it will give full
encouragement to the industries Of the
country"
We have only to say that the expe-
rience and statistics Of the last ten or
a dozen years fatty contradict Mr..
Tucker.
In other words, Mr.. WATTERsoN
contends that the highest tariff is not
only protective tariff, but the best
tariff for revenue. We do not see how
he can deny that such is the logical
conclusion resulting from his teachings
on the subject. If Mr.. WATTERsoN's
contention were that Congress would
have to lay tax upon more Of the ar
ticies coming into this country as
consequence Of the abolition Of all
internal taxes, we could see the
force of the statement. But to
state it as general proposition, without
any qualification whatever, that to re-
peal all internal taxes would be to pro-
vide for AN increase of the present ex-
orbitant import duties in order to meet
the expenses OF the Government" is to
affirm in other words that all the Gov
eminent has to do at any time in order
to increase its revenues is to increase
the import duties Now, we are sure
that Mr.. WATTERsoN does not really
hold any such doctrine to be true. 1t
is to us incredible that he should do so.
What docs he mean when he talks of
prohibitory tariff? lie means customs
duties SO high that the articles upon
which they operate are kept out of the
country altogether. Now, inasmuch as
il would be necessary to increase the
"present exorbitant import duties " on
all articles that pay revenue to the
Government in order to keep those ar
ticles out Of the country, it is very GER
tain that an increase of that sort would
not add to the revenues. In "a word,
prohibitory duties bring in no revenue
whatever. Consequently, there must
be point where higher duties will be-
gin to reduce rather than increase the
revenues; and consequently, again,
there must be point where the lower
ing Of duties will increase the revenues.
Take the tariff on Sumatra tobacco.
1t is, let us say, seventy-fve cents per
pound. Make the duty two dollars a
pound, and none will come in. Make
il City cents per pound and twice as
much revenue will result as from max
ing it seventy-fve cents per pound.
So with cigars. Double the existing
duties, and it may be that none would
be imported, and no revenue be OBJ
tanned from them. Reduce the existing
duties, and the revenues will be in
creased.
II follows that discriminating tariff
is the one that yields the largest reve-
nue.. The existing tariff is not a dis
eliminating one, but among the worst
ever framed. We hold, therefore, with
Mr.. TUCKER, that to abolish all inter-
nal taxes would be TO compel the
framing Of a better tarif--,hat is, one
to produce large revenue. We ad-
vocate the abolition Of all internal taxes
because we believe that the Govern
ment can obtain revenue enough from
customs duties for all its reasonable
! wants.
We eonccde that to increase the du-
tics upon some articles would be to in
crease the revenue derived from them.
And Mr.. WArTEnsoS must, in like
manner. concede that TO lower the du-
ties upon some articles would be to in
crease the revenue. When he comedies
this, as concede il be must, he comedies
al that either the Dispatch or Mr..
TUcKEa has contcndedfor in this matter.
For the moment he has made this con-
cession, he has admitted that to abolish
the internal taxes would mot be to pro-
ride Cor an increase Of the present ex-
orbitant import duties. The result
would necessarily be lowering Of du-
tiss upon some articles, and an increase
Of duties upon other articles.
------s--:--- -
Its Champions.