The gold leaf. [volume] (Henderson, N.C.) 1881-1911, 1888-08-30

duty on SUGAR and mclasSes about S5S. Co.,
Geo per annuu. According to the estimate
OF TIE gentleman on the other side who
offered the amendment providing for FREQ
sugar and bounty to the sugar grower, the
present rate Of duty affords protection to the
domestic suGar grower equal to sc, ,OO0, ,OO0, 50
that tie whole cost to the people is SG4 ,000,
coo. In order to get Sc, ESQ 600 Of revenue
from manufactures OF iron and steel, and
wooden and cotton goods, the people have TO
pav $500, ,CC0, 900 to S6C0,000, ,0O0 We pro-
duced in 1880 SG70, COS, COO Of all manufactures
Of iron and steel. It IS certainly over $780,,
Cox, eco now. We produced about s275. 5.oo0, !
coo eaca OF cottou.ard r-oolen goods. These
figures have from the bureau of statistics.
Now, if protection protects, and that is
what it is for, it increases the price Of the
domestic product nearly Gs much IS the
price OF the imported product plus the duty.
This il admitted by the gentlemen who
offered the proposition FOR tho sugar bounty
and by those who supported him. This il
admitted by the constant arguments made
by the other side, that if we reduce cottons
and woolcns and iron and steel tc 40 per
cent they will be ruined. This argument
admits they are getting more than that now.
OF these three branches Of manufactures we
are producing today fully 81 ,40O,OO0,OO0
worth. Ii they are projected 10 per cent. 1t
costs the people $560. 600, Geo to get SG0O O00,-
900.
Now, which is the better tax to keep, the
one that brings S5S coo, 900 with $G0OO,OJ0 of
bounty, or that which brings $50, 100000 OF
revenue with $500, 100000 of bounty! Be-
lieving that a tax is burden, and that 1t
ought to be as light as possible to the tax
PAYERS | would keep 4 high duty on sugar
and lower the duties on cotton goods, woole1S
and manufactures of iron and steel. III the
rate of 10 per cent. on these three articles
only raised the price of the domestic produce
80 per cert. it would increase their cost to
the people over $4G0,C C00,01O. Why then
should we repeal the duty on sugar and keep
the high duties on the others? The duties on
the others ought to be lowered and the duty
on sugar ought to be put at the revenue
standard and kept there.
The duty on provisions by existing law is
2t33 per cent and we leav- it at $3.50 Inc
reduction is 81 cents il 500 This is a very
moderate reduction. We might have gone
further without injury to any interest
The average rate Of duty on manufactures
Of cotton by existing law is 5000. We leave
it bv the pending bill at 39C7. a difference
of o. cents in Sl00 will hardly drive the
cotton manufacturing industry of this con-
tinent The whole labor cost in cotton nl2n-
UractuI'c3 averages ZIG per cent. and there
is IyI5 lit..e difference between this country
and ENGLAND in the labor cost OF cotton
goods. But if England paid nothing for her
labor, we have lcf5 duty enough to nearly
double tn. labor cost here. The present reve
uucs from cotton Goods is nearly Sl2, 600
We reduce it $277. 600. Where does the free
trade skeleton hide in this schedule?
Hemp jutc and fax goods VIC found q
SOS. u in the existing law. and we leave thcH
at So1.G4. There is a reduction OF something
over s6 il the hundred, but that occurs ~
Dl1t.ing 9 largo number of items Of hemp
FAX, i:lte, MANILA and sun aud sisal grass OF
the free list. Still the reduction Is ver.
, small.
Vow wo como to wools and woolcrs. "
found the duty on thai schedule under IL
existing law averaging $5S.0l, and we hav
left is at :;:}}S 90: reduction Of 500 on ever
,, , <,1O0 worth. This reduction seems large, bu
it was caused by eliminating wool from tn
calculation and putting it on the free lis
The reduction on dutiable wooden good
: amounts to &12, 0C0, Geo. But the woolea MAJ
. ufacturer is not injured: he is benefited, Ii
wrolen manufacturer by the existing 10
., GETS compensation for the taxation on wo'
aud 81 per cent. protection for the manula
t!7rcd product By our bill We give him trt
wool AID 10 por cent protection on his maj
). rfactured goods. Instead Of be ns lnJure
. hn is positively benefited to the amount OF
- in the hundred more than he is by the eXls
:, inr law | want to read at this point wh
! the WOODEN manufacturers said TO congress
- number of years ago. In lSCo they 2ddfes> 4
20 p communication to the United States rev
mo co,nnissi orcr to be submitted to co
- .-ress. in which they said:
~ Tho committee do not hesitate to affirm th;
. i3dcpcndertly of considerations OF general pt
lie policy demanding duty on WOOL the Wooi
10 manufacturers of this country would prefer. prefer
lc total abolition OF the specific duties PROVO
70 thcy could have all their material DUTY II
70 and an cctual net protection OF - per cent. l.
r nla,lse on the Democratic sde.I
as This is signed by the executive commits
=. IF +bo National Association of Wool Mar
N facturers and by John L. Hayes, their sec
oI tary.
G7 upor, the domestic production the manut
of turers came and said to congress: Now
he want compensation for this, too" 1hey Z
m compensation for the tax on wool, and n
ba +bav wanted compensation for the tax OF
on ner cent. imposed by the internal reVei
nd laws. The duty was raised to 80 per Ger
y but they are fine diplonatists, and sh
time after that they came before congr
to md cot the internal revenue tax on WOO
an Goods repealed. But the % per cent still
In rnains. although they had said that .
pt cent. protection was all they want
al Now yye give them free wool and 40 per &C
to nro1ection, and still they say to US, ~
hills a free trade measure" daughter
Is the Democratic side-l
he On the schedule embracing books, pap
- etc the dutv under existing law is az
90 and We left il ct 500 O6, reduction of
d.. than 10 cents on q hundred dollars
is Now, Mr.. Speaker, l have gone thro'
m with the schedules Of the bill and | com
DIV the free list. We have placed upon the
list articles amounting il round number
lid 5000. .O00 The largest item IS wool
ore Ok, 600 Why have we put wool on the
we LIST? They say that this is full free tsf
tie They say TO Us. when You strike WOOL
zen of the taxable list you have shot ont the 7
nd die link IL the cham, and tne et
Of Is rsr1cd.n Is that r-uel Why,
I'd. somebody put cotton on the
nv LIST n few years ago. They shot
iro middle link out and parted the chain Il
eal There werc millions Of our fellow citL
hat who were affected BY that missing Inl
is. the chain Of protection, but tie chain
or parted, and parted by gentlemen on the O
on side of the house. who have been so lol
tho cr--inr free trade ar Is. It IS our grca
exporting pro3nct; il gives employment
Is a millions of Iabo7ers Il had a duty
It'll cents pound. but they removed it and
-oy- cct.oa On the free list, and they did n
nt.- There could be no justification for its ta-
and there can be r.oao for a tax On wool
/. Is In lS-2 hides were put on the free list,
tv the salre Trcrtv thaJ bcasts itself the 81 50