Belmont chronicle. [volume] (St. Clairsville, Ohio) 1855-1973, 1888-01-12

! upon domestic industry. Therefore. ar
| t;cles Of voluntary use. o. luxury, cIna-
meat or appetite, not in comnicn use
among the people, and which are pur-
chased a,most exclusively by tle wealthy,
should bear a higher rate cf taxation-
/ the higheS. rate cailecja5lG without eX-
Guiding them OF inducing smuggling.
This was founded upon the admitted
maxim Of political economy, that taxes
should be assessed upon these best able
to pay. This applied to wires, liquors
and cigars supposed To be superior in
flavor 20 the domestic articles}, and to
silks, satins, broadclothS, iEnumerable
articles of dress ornament, TO porcelain,
statuary. painting, glassware and the
| like As 10 all these articles the price
was a matter of Indifference to the con-
sumer, and the rate of duty was very
much like the price fixed by the manu-
! facturer-that is. as much as could be
got. This was the policy of the present
tariff. and it had operated even better
than had been hoped. The value of
such articles imported was not less than
| Sl20.000,000, and the duties collected on
them not less than S60,000,0a0 nearly
One-third OF the whole amount collected.
It certainly could not be said of these
duties that they Imposed burden upon
those who consumed domestic products,
as well as upon those who consumed
imported articles" (using the Presidents
language). On the contrary. these du-
! ties had imposed the chief burdens of
taxation upon articles of voluntary lux
ury. and had still melted American art
lists and mechanics to compete in these
branches of industry with the skilled
artisans of Europe and Asia. IN this
way remarkable progress had been made
in those expensive productions: and por-
celain, tableware ornaments, clothing,
decorated and enameled furniture, and
a multitude of other articles of taste
and luxury (the work of American me-
chanicS), had been brought within the
means OF great masses of the American
people. To reduce the duty on these
foreign luxuries would be to transmit
the burden of taxation from those who
now bore It willingly to the shoulders of
the people Another class of duties
was On articles of food ard On animals.
Of these the value imported last fiscal
year was S112, 100000, and the duty paid
on them sos, ,000.c00. Of this sum the
sugar, rice and fruit imported were val
ued at S9l, 100000. and paid duty of
$50, 100000, or more than nine-teGths of
all the taxes levied on food and animals.
These were articles that entered into the
consumption of every family in the
United States. If the object were to re-
duce surplus revenue, what better mode,
he asked, could be suggested than to
repeal one-half of the duty on sugar, and
thus directly relieve the people from
S2S,250.000 Of taxes On an article in
most general use and now bearing tax
of 81 per cent? No such suggestion
was made by the President or the Sec
retary Of the Treasury, and he Mr.
Sherman did not care 20 explore the
reasons for their silence. He believed
in protecting all home industries, with
out respect to section or to the place or
manner of production, whether on the
farm or in the workshop: but if protec-
ton was not the object of the law, and
if surplus revenue was the great evil to
be dealt with, why not give relief to the
people by a reduction Of the tax on
sugar? The effort to produce sugar in
the United States in quantities at all
approaching the demand had failed,
though projected by the highest tariff
rates. Still, in view of the hopeful pros
poets Of producing sugar from beets and
sorghum cane, as well as from sugar
cane, he would not cripple that industry
by reducing protective duties, except by
giving the producers of domestic sugar
a bounty equal to the reduction Of duty
on the imported article.
But it was not of the duties on food
that the President complained as '.vic-
ious, inequitable and inogic source of
taxation" The duties of which he COM
planned were those for the benefit of
manufacturers; and he urged especially
"a radical reduction of the duties i'm
posed upon raw materials, used in man.
ufactures, or their free importation"
The great body of crude articles import
ed which entered into the processes of
domestic industry, to the value of $780, |
100000, were now free of duty. Every
imported article of that class was SO un-
less it competed directly with the devel-
Opement OF American resources. Duties |
averaging - per cent. were now levied
upon such imported articles, valued at
fifty-nine and half millions, and which |
yielded revenue of nineteen and half |
millions. The chief Of them were agri- |
cultural products fax, hemp and |
other textile grasses; hops, bristles and |
SeedS-valued at S35,OUU,000, and Weld !
ing a revenue of Sl0,000,000, or less than
30 per cent. The remainder was chiefly |
metals, in ore or pigs, coal and marble, |
OF the value of 81, ,500,0 900, and Welding
$9,250,000. These imports came into
direct competition with the productions
of nearly two million American farmers, |
and of hundreds of thousands of labor
ing men. This moderate protection,
given to the labor and capital employed |
in mining and agricultural industries, |
was the favorite point of assault bv the
President and all free traders. upon the
protective policy 1t was the citadel of
the system. The whole depended upon
the principle that it was wise to give bv
tariff laws, to all forms of American |
labor, the degree of protection or advan-
tage which the imposition of duties on
similar foreign productions, necessarily
gave. That had been the rule since the
beginning of the Government, and had
been recommended by every President
from Washington to Polk. The same
rule had been applied for the benefit of
the farmer, the miner and the furnace
owner, as well as the manufacturer; and
whenever that rule was departed from
the whole system would fail, and pro-
perly SO. The principle of protection de-
manded equality of benefits and of bur-
dens. The object was protection to Ia
Dor, not to capital. No reason could be
given why wool should be made free
and woOlen goods should be protected
If there must be cheap wool there must
be cheap wOoiens: and if the labor of |
tha farmer in r,r,.tuciDr tha rrooI y1-o