The Manchester journal. [volume] (Manchester, Vt.) 1861-current, 1888-09-06

'on cav and 4 foreign article which the
,eople OF this country require and wnicn
Il necessity they must import, any duty,
however low, indeed the very minimum,
viii produce revenue; for mas much as |
here Is no home produced article TO con- |
end for any part Of the home market, I'M
,ortations will 60 on unchecked, ano tne
revenue derived therefrom Will % Only
limited by the extent OF the importatlons
By the necessities OF our pecPie
ADD their capacity TO buy. An liiusltauon,
lea and coffee. Neither Of these great
rtaple articles are produced In the United
states. The demands Of our people ior
fhese products, and they extend To every
home and fireHide In the land, are supplied
from abroad. Now, any tax thereon,
however slight and insignificant, would
produce very considerable revenue 20 the
and this illustrates what Is
understood as revenue
tariff II, however, the duty 10 levied
upon the foreign competing product, u Is
made 10 low, having revenue only I'D view
that the effect Is to destroy home compe-
tition and increase the revenue tnereironi
by Increasing importations.
Hon. ]. Randolph Tucker, OF Virginia,
an eminent lawyer and experienced states
man. In speech delivered In the House, OF
Representatives May is, 1878, denneo
revenue duty rs follows:
"Therefore, as no higher duty ought TO
be laid than is needed to raise the requis.
ita revenue on any particular article, u
follows that the true revenue duty 10 the
lowest duty which will bring the required
revenue"
and accept 1t. A revenue tarin ~, tnere-
fore, such one as Will produce the
LARGEST REVENUE FROM THE LOWEST
DUTY.
The lowest rate Of duty will encourage I'm.
portat ions, diminish home production, and
inevitably increase the revenue; It Will OF
necessity check competition at home and
send our merchants abroad to buy; Il
affords no protection, not even Incidental
for the very instant you discover that such
duty fsyors the home producer, that In
slant you discover that importatlons and
revenue are checked, and that our own
producers are able to control the nome
nmsrsef or part Of 1t. Then at once the
advocate OF a revenue tariff reduces the
duty. brings 1t down to the true revenue
standard for 1t must not be overlooked,
according to that free trade MAXIM
aWbere protection begins revenue ends,
and the question OF revenue iS always con-
Sailing A revenue tariff Is inconsistent
with protection; 1t il intended for wholly
different purpose 1t loses its force and
character rs genuine revenue tarlff wnen
il becomes to any extent protective. u mas
but one object 1t can have but one eiiect
that OF opening up our markets 10 tne
foreign ducer--impoyerlshing tne nome
producer and enriching his foreign rival.
England Is more nearly a free trace
country than any other, and her system Of
taxation furnishes an unmistakaele ex
ample OF the practice and principle OF
revenue tariff. Her import duties are I'M
posed. almost exclusively upon articles
which cannot be produced BY her OWE
people upon her own soil. Tobacco, snufl,
cigars, chicory, cocoa, currants, fga,
raisins, rum, brandy, wine, tea and coffee
these are the articles from which her
customs revenue Is derived articles, IN
the main, not produced 40 england, Dut
while, practically, all competing products
OF foreign make and production are ad.
mitted through her custom houses free Of
duty. A brief statement OF the dutiable
imports OF Great Britain will not be with
out interest.
il viii be observed that her duties are
more largely imposed upon peculiarly
American products than upon any others
The duty upon tobacco is, according 70
moisture, from 81 to % cents per pound
for the raw, or manufactured article,
and II manufactured 1t pays duty OF from
si04 to tl.l6 per pound. The manufac'
tured article Is made dutiable at ~ cents
per pound greater than the raw product,
which, with all OF England's boosted free
trade. is intended as protection to those
engaged in the manipulation OF tobacco.
1t Is almost prohibitiye to Americans who
would export manufactured tobacco. The
I'D valorem equivalent Of the duty ON to-
bacco Is nearly 1900 per cent. Cigars pay
A duty OF Al. 35 a pound, and from tobacco
and SNUFF over $43,0C0O00 Of duties are
collected annually. The duty on tea IL IL
cents. a pound.
HOW WOULD THE AMERICAN ENJOY
paying such duty upon this article Of
every day user The duty collected from
this source Is over ts.000.0O0 annually.
Coffee pays duty Of 8 cents pound, but
II ground, prepared, or in any. way manu-
featured, II must pay duty Of cents a
pound another example Of where Eng
land protects those engaged In manufac-
turs. Cocoa pays duty OF . cents . pound,
but II It is In any form subjected 10 manu-
facture It pays cents pound. the duty
on the manufactured article being double
that on the raw material Beside the arti-
cles have named. there are about 20 or
100 others. chiefly OF American production,
patented and other medicines, which are
dutiable at $3.50 per gallon. More than
S96. O0O, 600, or nearly oue-fourth OF the
British revenues. are raised from customs
duties. .
You will note. the character Of taxation
70 which the revenue ref0rmer invites the
people Of the United States. Both the
breakfast table and the sick room are
made TO bear large part Of the burden
under the British system Of taxation. IL
Il not without Significance that the nearer
Nc approach this System the more gener-
ous the bsst0wal Of British communication.
Every step we take In that direction. every
enlargement Of the free list u competing
foreign products, every reduction Of duty
upou such products In hailed ~ vindtca-
ton OF Golden and = beneficence to Brit