The Press., 1888-11-29
(For The Press.) IS THE DUTY ON IMPORTS 4 TAXI

Messrs. Editors: I was much interest ed in reading an article in your paper of the 22l inst, entitled "Tariff Not Tax. That interest led me to seek for the auth orship. It did not appear in the editorial column, neither had 1t any signature to indicate its author. Being a Yankee, I had right to guess, and so concluded it must have been Rip Van Wrinkle. It says that the claim that the duty is added to the cost of an imported article and paid by the consumers, ''is a simple, bold, inten- tional untruth." It further says that "the tariff duty is not added to the price of the domestic article. It is not paid by the consumer"
 I am tempted here to refer to little personal experience. In the course of a business life of ffty-two years, having transactions with various parts of the world, received an order from friend in the West Indies for a locomotive engine. some cars, and quantity of steel rails. The engine being ordered of e particular manufacture named, sent it with some cars, as ordered. Steel rails being very dear in this country, I ordered what the order called for, with some other articles required, from England, and shipped them in bond. The duty on steel rails at that time was eighten dollars per ton. MT. 4, at the same time wishing steel rails for road in this country, also ordered them from England, and paid the duty on them here. MT. B, also requiring steel rails for road bought them of the American manufacture, costing the same as those bought by MT. A, duty paid.
 Now 1 ask, who paid the duty, or tax {? It is evident that the consumer, A, paid it, and it is equally evident that the con sumer, B, paid the equivalent to the duty in the enhanced price. The government gained eighteen dollars per ton on As im- portation, and the manufacturer gained the same amount on those sold to B. My friend got his rails eighteen dollars per ton cheaper than the American consumer. I wish Rip Van Wrinkle to reconsider his statement Of "a simple, bold, intentional untruth.
 The old Rip Van Wrinkle, having aroused from his long slumber, then goes on to compare various prices formerly and now. have not time to criticise the compari- sons of prices he makes, nor do think it necessary ln this connection. He claims that those indifferences are all attributable to the protective tariff. I ask the old gen. tleman If he has really walked up, to make a few additional inquiries and compari- sona?
 What is the price of clocks, watches, pi- amos, sewing machines, blows, reapers, moving machines, and many other articles could mention, all made in this country, and unaffected by the protective tariff, compared with forty or fifty years ago?
 Has there been no improvement in ma chinery,a making the labor of one man equal to @ dozen or more in former years !?
 The prlce paid for weaving a yard of cloth with the old hand loom (yarn furnish edl will TOW buy several yards of the same quality, material included.
 How long would it take to print an edl- tion of the New York Herald, and what would be the cost, with the old-fashioned hand press?
 These questions might be extended in definitely, but it is not necessary, as every thinking man will see.
 Really, MT. Van Wrinkle, the world has made progress since you took your nap trust you will remain awake long enough to look around you and see the changed conditions existing since you dozed quiet ly in the Catskills, and find better reasons for cheaper prices than those given.
 And now, as I must say good bye for the present, you will excuse me for quot ing your favorite toast when friends filled your favorite glass, "May you live long and prosper you and all your family"