Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1888-08-28
WHO PAYS THE TAX, THEM

WHO PAYS THE TAX, THENs
The esteemed InteHigeaeer makes Lilli-
putian attempt st reply to Judge THUR
MANS speech by quoting an extract from
one of Mr.. RANDALL's, in which that able
gentleman attempted to prove that the tariff
was not q tax on the consumer. We hold
Mr.. RANDALL's opinion in the highest re-
spect, but at the time of this speech, which
seems, By the way, to be the THte'ligeneer's
whole tariff stock.in-trsde, Mr.. RANDALL
was antagonizing the MILLS bill in favor
ofone of his own and allowed his zeal for
his own legislative child to run away with
his usually excellent judgment.
The Iatetigeneer, by the way, quotes, by
mistake, we suppose, merely the introduce
tory remarks on this subject in THUR
MANS speech, which are entirely corrobo-
rated by the first sentence, quoted below,
from Mr.. RANDALL. The Judge began
ny showing how the tariff on the import
ed article was paid by the consumer and
then went on to show how the tariff in re-
gard to the same article made in this conn
try WAS also paid by the consumer in the
same way. But the IatelligeRcer did not quote
the second part-the very subject that
Mr.. RANDALL deals Without quoted
only the first part, relating TO the tax on
imports being paid by the consumer,
which is acknowledged by Mr.. RANDALL
to be fact. So, as the assinine hteIi-
genev article stands, it is a complete
refutation of itself
Probably the HteHigeneer feared to quote
the portion of Judge THURMAN's speech
referring to the same phase Of the subject
that Mr.. RANDALL speaks of.
Bat we shall pass over the htelhgeaeer's
break and deal with Mr.. RANDALL him
self rs quoted in the Rtehfgeacer. He
says:
On articles not produced in this country this
that the tariff is tax on the consumer is
| doubtless true, as q general rule, aud measure
bly, true on articles in part produced In this
| country but not sufficiently To supply the entire
demand. But on all those commodities pro
dueed in sufficient abundance to supply, or
| messurably supply the home market, different
principles control In that case competition,
where IL is free to operate determines the prices
of the various products and the foreign producer
comes to this rs market where prices are fixed,
ami the dutieSare What he pays for the privilege
of entering our market.
This is the sum and substance OF Mr..
RANDALI's argument. And it will be seen
that he bases it all upon the assumption
that we have free competition under the
tariff in this country. We know this to be
wholly untrue from steel rail making all
the way down the high protected line 10
needle making. We're IL true there rOuld be
no call for a high tariff. We see that this
is so in our own principal home indus
try, nail making, which, under free COM
petition, can and does undersell England
| without the tariff, too. In that industry
there is no call for high tariff. 1t can
beat Euglaud at her own game.
But let us resort to the LntelHgcncer's
rather lazy tactics. We shall quote Judge
THURMAN a. follows:
Now, there are men who say the con-
SINNER don't pay the tax. have said that
that is q most audscious assertion, and
have tried to show you that he must peces-
sarily pay the tax. Bat if they want au-
shority upon that subject let me refer to
some men who have spoken upon it and
whose words will hardly be gsinssid. First,
I will go back to John Quincy Adams, and
dsresay there are plenty of Republicans
and some Abolitionists in this crowd who
have great veneration for that mans mem
DRY. knew him well; l served in the
House of Representatives with him. and |
know how intelligent he was, and | know
how frank and outspoken he was. In the
wear 1892 he WAS Chairman of the House
Committee on Manufacture, and he said in
a report made by him in that year:
"The doctrine that duties of import seem
to cheaper the price of the article on
which they are levied seems to conflict
with the first dictates Of common sense.
II L COuSRiNutco Psat Va ShV PAASSt
the whole mass Of the article in the mar
ket. 1t is substantially paid upon the ar
ticle Of domestic manufacture, as well as
upon that of foreign production. Upon
one il is bounty, upon the other burden,
and the repeal of the tax must operate as
an equivalent reduction OF the price of the
article, whether foreign or domestic. We
say so long a. the importation continues,
the duty must be paid by the purchaser of
the article The general aud permanent
effect must be to increase the price Of the
article to the extent of additional duty,
and it is then paid by the consumer. nit
were not 80, If the general effect Of adding
to the duty was to reduce the price Of the
article upon which il is levied, the converse
ST the proposition would also be true, and
the operation for increasing the price of the
domestic article would be to repeal the
duty on the same article imported, an ex
pertinent which the friends Of our internal
industry will not be DESTROYS of making
We cannot subscribe, therefore, to the
doctrine that the duties of imports, pro-
tective of our own manufacturers, are
paid by the foreign merchant or manu-
faefurar ~