Staunton spectator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1849-1896, 1888-04-25
Mr.. Mills for reform.
HE SHOWS THE FALLACY OF THE ARGUMENT
THAT PROTECTION PROTECTS THE La



THAT PROTECTION PROTECTS THE La
BoRER.
WASHINGTON, April II, 1SSS.-During
the late war, said Mr.. Mills as he took the
floor to open the debate, the expenditures
required by the enormous military establish
ment dema nded that the burdens of taxa
ton should be laid heavily in all directions
authorized by the constitution. The inter-
nal revenue tax and the direct tax had been
called into requisition to supplement the
revenues arising from customs to aid the
Treasury to respond to the heavy demands
daily made upon it. The duties on imports
had been raised from an average of IS "a
per cent. in 1851 TO an average of 1929 per
cent during the five years from 1869 to 1866
inclusive. This had been recognized at the
time as an exceptionally heavy burden. 1t
had been stated by the distinguished gen.
tleman who presented the tariff measure at
that time that this sis intended as a war
measure. a temporary measure, and we
must as such give it our support"
More than twenty years had elapsed since
the war ended. A generation had passed
ard new generation had appeared on the
stage since peace had returned to bless our
common country, but these war taxes still
remained and they were heavier to-day
than they were on the average during
the five years of the existence of HOSTILE
ties. The average rate of duty during the
last five years amounted to 44,5t per cent,
and during the last year the average was
47.1O
WHOSE TAXES HAVE BEEN LEssENED.
After this large increase had been made
by Congress, Congress had imposed slight
direct or internal revenue tax upon domestic
manufactures and that tax had brought into
the Treasury in 1868 $127, 100000 That
was but 1.-THE of the heavy burdens that
we're laid upon imports. 1t amounted to
about three per cent on the whole manufac-
tured products of the country in 1866. 1t
was thought to be a reasonable tax to i'm
pose on manufacturers who were receiving
large bounties from the government in the
enhancement of the prices of their products
to pay three per cent when they had in
creased their bounties up to twenty-five
| per cent.
But that tax was gone.
| 1t could not live.
| 1t was tax on wealth.
1t was tax that came out of the pockets
of the manufacturers. 1t was tax that
came from those into whose pocket the
government had brought large bounties.
! Congress had imposed tax on income to
help carry on the war and there were $780,
ITO people IN the United States in 1866 that
had $707, zoo, 900 of net income upon which
they were assessed duty WHICH brought in
to the Treasury in 1886 $22, 900, 900.
But that tax had gone.
| 1t was tax on wealth.
1t was said to be an enormous tax. 1t was
said to be inquistorial in its nature. 1t
was said to be oppressive. 1t was thought
to be just by those whe had charge of the
administration of the government to take
off the burdens and place them on the
shoulders of those whom the official report
| showed had nothing bat living. And a
tax of three per cent on net income ag-
gregating $707, 600, 900 was swept away,
but the war tax on clothing, upon food, up
on employment of labor still remained.
Every effort that had been made to bring
the exactions of the government down to a
peace establishment had been resisted step
by step, and every effort had been defeated.
| There had been tax on railroads, but it
was gone. 1t had not lived long after the
war.
1t had been tax On wealth.
1t was said to be oppressive TO tax the
wealthy.
There had been tax on insurance com.
panies. 1t was gone.
There had been tax on express COM
panies. 1t was gone.
| There had been tax on bank deposits
and bank capital. 1t was gone.
| Three hundred millions that had been
paid by the wealth of the country had been
swept away, and the burden of taxation
had been made heavier as it had been load.
ed upon the shoulders of those who had to
support themselves and the government
Was tax of three per cent to be paid out
of the pockets of the manufacturers OF
blankets weight more enormous than the
tax of Seventy-nine per cent paid by the con-
sumner on imported and domestic products
Was the tax of three per cent on incomes
more oppressive than the tax of 100 per cent
on women's and children's dress goods
Yet all these taxes on wealth had gone, and
the gentlemen Of the minority boosted that
they had reduced taxes to the amount OF
$3.50, 900, COO, while the democratic party
had reduced it only a bagatelle. That was
the splendid column those gentlemen had
erected.
LABOR BEARS THE BURDEN.
The tax on consumption was paid by
hard daily toll. Suppose a laborer with 81
day buy woollen suit of clothes for $40.
1t required ten day. labor to purchase it,
But when the tariff puta duty one of hundred
per cent the suit would cost $50 Then it
required twenty days labor for the man to
secure what he could otherwise have secur
ed for ten days. labor. Had not ten days OF
labor been annihilated Either it had been
annihilated or the proceeds of ten days
labor has been transferred from the laborer
to some one else. But the greatest evil in
f1icted upon the people by the excessive
taxation on the consumers of the country
was ia the destruction of the values Of eX-
ports. The great body of the exports we're
agricultural products. From seventy five
to eighty per cent of the exports were such
products. War duties limited importation
and that limited expectation. The surplus
productions were, therefore, thrown upon
the home market. II became over supplied
and the prices went down. So it was with
the people of Europe. Their products were
thrown upon their home markets and their
prices went down.
HOW TO PROMOTE PROSPERITY.
In 1880, after the long depression from
1878 to 1880, prices suddenly rose in Europe,
and the result was that as prices rose the
tariff went down aud importations incress-
ed about two hundred million in one year.
Inc exports also Increased enormously.
But it was insisted that if duties were low.
er and foreign goods were imported ouI
people would be turned out of employment
and the rates of wages would be reduced.
Nothing of the sort would happen. We
would import the things which we could
not produce-the things that could be pro.
duced cheaper in other countries than at
home. We would import more tea and
coffee and more of everything that the peo,
pie required. The manufacturers would
go on with increased rapidty; their wheels
would fly faster and their people would re-
ceive higher wages. We could now pro
} duce at least ninety per cent of all manu-.
, features consumed in this country cheaper
at home than they could be produced any.
where else ia the world aud transported
here. In 1850 the United States consumed
. 88 80 of domestic products and 1161 OF
imported In 1860 it consumed S7.57 Of
domestic aud 1913 of imported. Ia 1870 il
consumed SO. IA of domestic and 6 SO of i'm.
ported; in 1880 it consumed 90 So of domes
tic and 7 AZ of imported.
If we had no tariff, if all the Custom
Houses were torn down and the govern
ment supported by direct taxes there would
not be exceeding ten per cent of imported
, manufactured products consumed by the
| - l.. -. IL