Los Angeles daily herald., 1888-08-27

for duty alone much more than the
specific duty on the goods. The laws of
trade, working under the tariff, govern
the shape in which the material is i'm.
ported, and these favor the use of shoddy
in our home manufactures. In other
words there is a prelc ium of thirty-five
cents per pound offered by the tariff for
the use of shoddy and other substitutes
that we can buy at or below the prices
they cost in foreign countries, and there
is tax, more or less heavy, according
to the quality, upon the pure wool that
must be imported if the goods are to be
made in this country, over and above the
so-called compensating duty on the for
eign goods. These are plain, naked facts
that any one can substantiate by going
to the proper sources for information. it
is unfortunate that this is not more read
lily available, and that those who are
called upon to vote on these questions
do not have the time and disposition to
learn the exact truth"
The farmers Of the West are supplying
5000, ,O00,O0 of cereals and provisions
annually to the people across the water,
and yet are compelled to walk about in
brand-new suits manufactured out OF the
cast-off woolen clothing of European
paupers!"
In areply by guild OF wool manufac-
turers to an inquiry of Secretary Man
ming in 1885, they said: "The duty on
wool does not help the wool-grower. The
effect is to cause the importation of
fabrics; whereas, if imported in the raw
state, much domestic wool would be
used mixed with the foreign, and our
home-growers would furnish at least hall
the wool for the goods now made wholly
of foreign wools. Free wool
would also make our idle
mills to start up, and we could, after
short time, export some of our goods,
thus creating market for our home
grown wools. 1t would give
the grower what he most needs, Gus
toners and competition for his wool.
The homegrown would be used, so far
as suitable, before the imported"
Mr.. VIM. Singerly, Of Philadelphia, in
very lucid paper upon the tariff ques-
ton, says: "ro my mind the first and
all-important step, to make change in
the tariff should be the repeal of duties
on the raw materials of manufacture.
This country needs free wool, coal, ores,
jute, hemp, lumber, salt and dye-stuffs.
Taxes on raw materials are inconsistent,
even with the theory Of protection. The
element of cost by reason of the tax on
raw material, kills US. The taxes on the
articles named are distinctly disad-
vantageous to the people Of Philadelphia,
Eastern Pennsylvania and adjacent
States. The taxes on iron ore and coal
operate as means of perpetrating dis
ordinations against this city [Phila-
delphial in the freight charges
by the railroads. The govern
ment gets from these but
small revenue, but the exactions of the
railroad companies amount to millions a
year."
We have seen that in the matter of
woods, not only the American growers
would be benefited by the free importa-
ton of foreign woods to be used in con-
nection with their product, but that the
people would be enabled to purchase
clothing at low price that would be
fit to wear and not fall to pieces
upon the slightest provocation. The
mills would be enabled to extend their
trade and run all the year round, and
their profits would be more reliable than
they possibly can be under the present
system. But the arguments in favor Of
free wool are applicable to almost every
other branch of manufacture in this
country. The hat industry, for instance,
is hampered by an average tax OF 35 per
cent. upon it's raw material, very
little of which is made in the
United States. The manufacturers
Of all kinds of copperware are
compelled to pay tax of four
cents per pound to the wealthy copper
mine owners, while these same owners
sell the same articles in England for
three cents per pound less. The manu-
facturers of lead pipes and other articles
of lead, pay to the lead mine operator
the enormous tribute of two cents on
every pound used. Nickel is loaded
down with the outrageous duty of thirty
cents per pound for the benefit of one
mine in Pennsylvania, from which almost
the entire production of nickel in this
country is taken. This prohibitive
duty has compelled the Meriden Britain
MIA Ware Company, one of the largest
consumers of nickel in the United
States, to establish factory in Canada
in order to compete for the foreign
market. What sense is there in heavy
tax on jute, when none is produced in
this country, and yet California alone re-
quires for her grain crops an average of
80, 900 sacks every year? The tax
on jute is SIS per ton and 20 per cent on
its value. The farmers of California
have paid in duties for jute sacks in the
last three years over seven millions of
dollars
The tax on the raw materials entering
into our manufactures is a two-edged
sword which cuts both in buying and
in selling, with the additional injury OF
shortening the time of the laborer and
crippling the industries of the country to
such an extent that neither the manu-
facturers nor the operatives receive the