Waterbury evening Democrat., 1888-05-12
Mr. Scott Talks Tariff. if
He Gives His Ideas of How
 Taxes Should be Placed.

He Gives His Ideas of How
 Taxes Should be Placed.
 HIS OPINION OF THE MILLS BILL. The Opposition Measure Would. He
 Thinks, Benefit Nobody-He Says Pro-
 lection Does Not Protect the Farmer.
 The Woolen Schedule.
 WASHINGTON, May 12 The feature of yes- terday's session of the house was the tariff speech made by Representative Scott, of Pennsylvania. In the course of his speech he said that he had carefully watched the pro- ceedings of the committee who reported the bill, and no step had been taken which had not been care ully considered and found to be necessary for the good of the country.
 He continued:
 1T hold: First-That we have no p over to lay tax which, by excluding the article taxed, defeats the object of taxation, namely, revenue for the economical support of gov ernment.
 sSecond-That we have no power to lay tax which carries nothing to the treasury, but which draws money from one mans pockets to put it in the pockets of another. A tax with this avowed object is as manifestly unconstitutional as would be a law taking the life of one man because his existence was in convenient to another man.
 'sThird-That we have no power out of moneys actually collected and in the treas ury to grant largesses, or to make gifts to any man or class of men, and still less can we by the use of the taxing power constitu- tionally transfer the earnings of the many to the few. These are cardinal principles of the Democratic party. A bill has been ln- troduced by member of this house and re- ferred to the committee which provides a large reduction of internal taxes and deals very curiously indeed with customs duties" Mir. Scott then said that for every dollar of reduction in the iron schedule there were $26 added to the burden of the public. He said the bill he had just referred to was misbe- gotten, nlshaped, portentous, unjustifable monster, which benefited nobody, and which had no purpose in life but to obstruct the Democratic party and delay the justice for | which the country was clamoring.
 After reviewing the history of tariff legis- lation Mr. Scott said that the committee, in constructing the Mills bill, sought first to re- lieve the manufacturing interests of the country, in which, during the last twenty five years, enormous sums of money had been invested, by placing on the free list, as far as possible, such articles are essentially neces- sary to them to enable them to compete not only in their home markets, but in the mar kets of the world. Secondly, in the revision and readjustment of the vari- ous schedules under the existing tariff to leave ample duties on all merchan- disc that could possibly be imported 1 from abroad in competition with the home 1 products, and to protect our home manufac- 1 turers and the labor employed by them; and, as the best evidence of our efforts in this l direction. he said he could only compare the 1 average rates of duties under the existing l tariff with what they would be under this 1 bill if it should become law, namely, the average ad valorem duties on dutiable goods under the existing tariff of AIT per cent ad valorena, and under the proposed bill of 40 l cent. ad valorem, This, he said, showed a reduction under the present bill equal to 7.7 | per cent. ad valorem.
 Cautioning, Mir. Scott said:
 ''Of the $53, ,720, 47.22 reduction of duties on imports under the proposed bill, should it become law, $22, ,189, ,505. 48 are derived from articles placed upon the free list, leaving the sum of $31, ,52O, ,941.74 as the gross reduction made or proposed by the committee applica-
 ble to all our varied industries, and yet, sir, the majority of this house and of the com mittee are charged with being free traderslr
 He said it was not in the power of the gov. ernment to adopt a policy which would pro
 tect the farmer in what he raises and has te sell, but it could adopt one which would i'm
 poversh him by imposing high duties upor
 what imported articles he consumes, and by
 putting prohibitory tariff upon article.
 which are made in this country as we'll a.
 abroad, and which are necessary to his com fort, placing it in the power of the home
 manufacturer, by monopolies and trusts, te control the production and make the price ; what he pleases. The argument made by tn, protectionist, that protection insures hom.
 market for his productions was a fallacy ant fraud.
 MT. Scott then submitted statemen based upon the absolute amount of none,
 paid to employees in accordance with con
 tract of the schedule of wages awarded by
 the board of arbitration selected by tn , Knights of Labor and the Edgar Thomso, , steel works, fixing the wages of the employe
 in the steel mill department for 1887. Tn , cost of manufacturing ton of steel rail upon the terms of this contract was $26.79 4 profit of $5 ought to satisfy the mos | avaricious manufacturer. This would brin
 the selling price up to S31.7 .79, about the aver
 age price paid to-day in the United States
 Five dollars per ton profit on the output c , steeel rails for 1857 would be about SIG, PAS ? 190 to be divided among ten or twelve estat { lishments. But the average price at whic . steel rails sold in 1887 was $37. 1211 per tor f or S533 more than the price of to-day, or a additional profit on the output of 1884 of $1O
 924, ,570. 54, or an aggregate profit of $21, I'll 760 to be divided among ten or dozen ste,
 firms in the United States.
 : He then referred to coal mining, and il z dustry in his state, which, he said, protectio : : did not protect, and compared the wage . . paid in the Edgar Thomson steel works wit the wages of the skilled miner.
 :, He said that from a practical experiene he could state that the coal miner receive
 from 70 per cent. to 85 per cent. of the sel
 ing price of coal at the mines, as against u
 per cent. that labor received at the Edge y Thomson steel works on the selling price of ton of steel beams The tariff did not pr '' tect the coal miner, but robbed him just
 so far as it increased the cost of what he CO
 spmed by duties the government did not nee ' to meet its requirements.