Democratic Northwest. [volume] (Napoleon, Ohio) 1869-1894, 1886-01-14
The Present Republican Tariff tax
Robbery.

lhC 1ifi1uftouS lucqutiltf III btlc BTtb-
ent Republican tariff tax schedule is in
no respect better illustrated than In the
following questions propounded to the
Chicago Herald and the answers thereto
by the editor of that paper. A full
knowledge of this iniquity is enough to
disgust an honest American with the
robbing policy of the 'protectionists,"
who want assistance for their s'infant
industries some of the infants being
more than q hundred years old and
owned and controlled by men made
millionaires several times over by that
which is no better than downright rob-
berry. The following is from the Herald:
"W. B." propounds to the Herald the
following questions:
1. Is sugar on the tariff list for the
Atlantic ports and not for the Pacific
ports?
2. If il is free for one section of the
country and not for another. how could
such legislation be procured-honestly
or fraudulently?
8. 1t is q fact or romance that the
sugar king, Claus Spreckels, has con-
tract with the Pacific railroads by which
he pays them certain large amount for
not transporting sugar except at an ex-
orbitant rate from East to West?
A. Is sugar cheaper in California,
where it pays no duty, than it is in New
York?
These questions cover almost an en-
tire field occupied by the Hawaiian re-
ciprocity treaty, and may be answered
briefly as follows: Sugar is admitted
free only when it comes from the
Hawaiian Islands, and duty would
therefore be collected upon that article
coming from any other country, no mat
ter on which coast it was landed. The
adoption of the Hawaiian reciprocity
treaty need not necessarily have been
dishonest legislation. 1t was supported
by powerful lobby, but there has never
been any evidence that money was
used. 1t has been freely charged for
years that Spreckles had contract
with the Pacific railroads by which, for
q certain large sum by him paid, they
purposely made freight rates SO high on
Eastern sugar that competition with
him on the part of Atlantic coast refin-
ers was out of the question. He has
denied this, but the facts are against
him. Sugar has been higher in Cali
fornia than it has been in~the East for
the reason that Spreckels had mono-
poly. Bringing in his Hawaiian sugar
| free, he has had no competition from
the East because the overland roads
kept freight at q point at which ship
ments were Improbable. In this way
| free trade has been established in one
article in one section of the country for
the benefit of one man, who, by reason
of his relations with the Pacific roads,
applies the principle of protection to
himself when he appears in the market
to sell his product. Spreckels' mono
poly is more Objectionable, If anything,
than the protected monopolies of the
East, because itg gives him, Individually,
advantages which should be free to all.
| The principle involved in the legisla-
tion carrying the Hawaiian treaty into
effect is, however, vicious. 1t is part
and parcel of the protective scheme. 1t
arises from the theory that three hun
dred politicians at Washington under
stand what the business interests of the
country and the people themselves
want better than they do themselves,
and that trade can be made by some ar
tificial process more lucrative than sa-
gacious merchants could ever hope to
render it. In turning over the sugar
trade of the coast to Claus Spreckels the
principle Of commercial freedom was
not considered. Itwas a monopoly de-
vice, as all legislation which considers
the good of the few rather than that Of
the many must be. With absolute free
trade in all sugar Spreckels could moi
have maintained his monopoly for .
moment.