The Ottawa free trader. [volume] (Ottawa, Ill.) 1843-1916, 1888-03-10
TARIFF REFORM.

|
TARIFF REFORM.
A new stage has been reached in the
tariff discussion evoked by Pres!den
Cleveand's annual message. The howl o
&" free trade " against the President and hi
endorsers is no longer pertinent, for thu
Democratic majority of the ways Snt
means committee of congress, having com
pleted their first draft Of tariff bill, have
given II to the public, and II shows clearly
enough, both TO the surprise and chagrir
of the republican howlers, that II is no.
free trade, but genuine and earnest tariff
reform, and nothing else, that the demo
Gratis as represented by their leading com
mittee of the house, are aiming at.
Instead of blow at the great manufsc
tural Industries of the country, the bill Is
admitted 10 be In their favor. While,
indeed, on cottons, wOolens, linens, and
o'her manufactures of that class, there is q
reduction In the interest of consumers
(Which means the great body of the peo
ple) the loss is more than duplicated 10 the
manufacturers by the entire removal of the
tax, which has heretofore borne them
down so heavily upon raw materials
chemicals, dye.stuffs, &c.
Aside from this important feature of the
bill, the leading changes 1t proposes in our
present tariff system are:
I. Entire removal of the duty on lum.
Der.
2. Entire removal of the duty on salt
3. Entire removal of the duty on wool
hemp and jute.
4. A reduction on the duty Of steel rails
/ from 81 to $l1 per tom but as an Offset &c
this the duty on pig iron is reduced, the
manufacture of steel rails requiring the
importation of large quantity of pig iron
that this country does not produce.
5. A reduction to the extent of one. fifth
OF the duty On sugar But while this, "a
that extent, will be against the interest OF
the Louisiana planters, the effect Of the
changes Ia the sugar tariff will be to head
off the great sugar trust In one Of lis
strongest holds. Under this law as IL now
stands, sugars between No, 10 and No. Id
Dutch standard cannot be imported, though
they are goou, clean sugars, and go 10 Eng.
land, where they are sold at low prices and
t,t. aln,n.t % antt,n IN, nj IN
The liberal importation of these sugars
will so affect the demand for the refined
SUGARS of this trust" as to 20 far towards
breaking down their monopoly.
The removal OF the tariff on wool, instead
of niuring, II is believed will be to the
benefit of the wool growers, for the reason
that all the better class of wooden goods
require mixture of foreign and dom este
woods, but while the foreign wool Is kept
out these goods cannot be made here and
there Is not the demand for the domestic
woods that the manufacture of these goods
would create. But the free admission of
foreign woods will give our wooden manu-
facturers such n boom that IL will i'm
menseIy increase the demand FOR the home
product Such was the case from lSii 10
1850, when foreign woods came In free aud
the protection on wooden goods averaged
but 10 per cent; yet our manufacturers
held the marke, and exported largely.
Without attempting, however 10 go Into
details, il must be said generally Of this
democratic tariff bill, that while 1t in no
case initiates against protection its aims
from beginning 10 end are in the interest
of the honest, hart- voIking poor-those
whose hard. earned dollars mean cheap
light, fire, food and clothing.
The bill, however, which affects over
300 articles on the present tariff list, cutting
most of them entirely off and reducing the
tax on others. ag!tates and irritates just
| that many of the four thousand tentacles OF
the great tariff Octopus, and that enrages
! the whole animal, which of course will
urge againts the present or any other con
ceiyable tariff reform measure, a war &c
the death. The animal which showed
itself SO irresistible In 1882, has lost none
of It's venom or power for mischief since
then, and before the present, or any bill
with Its reforming and amelioratiug pur-
pose, can get through congress, II will have
to encounter a struggle to which that Of
the great reform bill in the English parlia
ment sixty years ago, or the present strug-
gle Ia the same body for justice TO Ireland
are alone comparable.
Indeed, we have no idea that the so