The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1888-08-25

deep anxiety 10 yindieate American rights
sc 54
The Hon. George Walker did not say in
terms that free lumber would benefit nobody
but the Canadians. But he did say that
SHOULD the Mills bill go into effect to-mor-
row the price Of lumber would not be affect
cd by it, Now if the removal of the duty
will not benefit the American producer or
consumer, and il 1t does not affect the price
It IS difieult to see how it can do either, If it
benefits anybody it must be the Canadian
producer or consumer. Mr.. Walker also in
his article in the Argus furnished this illus
tration Of the working OF free trade in lum-
Der; -.gr NJ, y.
When we first had free trade in lumber in 1884,
lumber dealers from Boston, Providence. New
York thr0nged eastern Maine with this threat
we want lumber for our customers cheap; they
VIII consume more; Ii you will MOI sell II at our
prices we win continue our journey TO the Prov
inces we have free trade now on lumber. Mean
time the Liverpool deal market caught the ALARM
and fearing that Province lumber might be divert
vented I sce apd he hranpp re
cheap lumber seekers after many days came back
like the sheep in the nursery story with their
tails behind them" and the price OF lumber con-
tinued to be enhanced.
1t win be seen that the American consumer
was not benefited. He had to pay as much for
lumber as before. But the Canadian pro-
Queer got more money for his product.
Therefore, while we admit that Mr. Walker
did not say so In SO many words (and had we
intended to attribute the language to him we
should have placed it in quotation marks
logical inference from what he did say
and from, the example of the workings of
free trade in lumber in 1884 which he fur
nished, was that the chief benefit from the re-
moyal of the lumber tariff would accrue to
the Canadians. But |. is matter Of small
consequence whether the removal Of the
duty on lumber benefits the Canadians or
not. The Important question is how it win
affect the American consumer. On this
point Mr.. Walker is ON record In black and
white. s'Should the Mills bill,' he says, Ego
into effect Tomorrow the price of lumber
would not be affected by it," That is to say,
the removal Of the duty on lumber would
not reduce the price to the consumer.
In his now famous message of last Decem-
Der, President Cleveland made the surplus
the main peg on which he hung his discourse
against our system Of protection. which he
declared to be In its present form. a "vicious
source OF unnecessary taxation" This was
Mr.. Cleveland S statement last December:
Our surplus revenues have continued to accu-
mulate, the excess for the present year amounting
and estimated'to reach the sum Of SI13, OG0, 900
on the Both OF June next, at which date it is ex-
pected that this sum, added to prior accumula.
IONS, VII swell The surplus in the Treasury to
sAfoiVvosevo. eict-.o9 1la 2T
=. Redundant revenues were undoubtedly the
principal cause of this surplus, but these
revenues had been made abnormally re-
d,ndant by the free trade Democrats Of the
House Of Representatives for the very pur-
pose Of creating large surplus which they
might use as fulcrum over which to pry
down the tariff system. Now the Republic
cans have held that the evils of the surplus
could be obviated without revolutionizing
the indu strial system of the country by pay
ing off the national debt, by taking off GER
tain Internal revenue taxes like that on
tobacco or spirits used in the arts, or by a
reduction of duties in such way as honest
ly to reform not deform and destroy the pro-
tectiye system. A striking and conclusive
substantiation of the Republican position is
found In the estimate of the Treasury De-
partment for the current year. The Treasury
Department figures out that with $40, 0O0,-
900 Of revenue the current year, there will
be only surplus, after paying the appro-
priations likely to be made by Congress, of
between 100000 and $27,000.00O. This is
certainly neither a large nor a dangerous
margin for a government that requires up
wards of half billion dollars year for its
running expenses. 1t is certainly not large
enough to warrant such serious step as the
putting the protective system on an entirely
new basis, when every purpose can be
better answered by taking off part of the
internal revenue taxes-taxes which are
truly emergency taxes, and can be easily
putof or on as the nation is blessed with
prosperous peace or costly wars or other
emergencies.