The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1888-10-05

American manufacturers, and they have raised
the United States to first rank among the wool
producing countries of the world. Those who
have. by their patient labor and intelligent eff
forts. built up this great industry. relying for
security upon the protection of present revenue
arrangements. are certainly entitled to fair
treatment aud reasonable consideration. They
are refused either by this proposal. In select
ing these branches of industry for the radical
changes which free-trade theories enforce. the
President and his party have made il perfectly
understood IL this country and abroad, that their
acceptance OF these theories is complete, and that
they intend 10 put the ak TO the root Of the pro-
tective system. IL will be noticed that in 1850,
after fourteen years of revenue tariff. the total
production OF domestic wool was 6O,264,9l3
pounds, or IL pounds per capita. while in 1884,
after twenty four years of protection. the total
production had increased to sos, 900. 900 pounds,
or "a pounds per capita This increase justites
the policy of afordine this important aericultu-
raj product adequate protection. The develop
ment Of WOODEN manufactures In the United
States has been arrested by the in sdequate du-
ties thatswere imposed upon manufactures OF
wool by the act OF March 3. 1888. which, taken
together with tbs erroneous classiflcation OF
manufactures of worsted. have led 20 greatly
increased Importations from England, Germany,
France and Belg um. It is only by the main
tenance of the American system that the opera
tives IN American woolen-mills can hope to re-
tain the immense advantages in respect OF
wages which they have over the workingmen OF
England, Germany aud France. The protection
OF the allied industries OF wool and woolens has
not, however. been benehcia alone to the per-
sons employed in wooden mills. ltshas, at the
same time, helped to increase the wages and re-
wards OF farm hands; 1t has enabled as to raise
and sell 300. OO0, 900 pounds OF wool where
60, 00O, 900 pounds were raised, and TO employ OBJ
eratives in working up 400. 600, 600 pounds where
but sc, 0OO,0 900 pounds were manufactured.
10 wages and enlarged employment,
there has been q great reduction
on the cost OF WOODEN goods to American con-
sumera Free trade in wool and bare revenue
duty for woolens would compel farmers to raise
other crops. of which the supply Is already great
er than the demand, and it would close factories
IN which many millions of capital are invested.
rob an army Of operatives OF employment, and
force down the wages of all other labor. All this
sacrifice and suffering, this arrest of harmonious
progress, and this disorganiZafiou OF labor, We
are asked to face IN the hope that, with one
sixth of the worlds supply of wool cut of. we
may thereby get cheaper wool and woolens. II
this hope were rational, the loss would far ont
weigh the gain. 1t 10 better to maintain the
wages of the workers and TO develop our own re-
sources than to abandon our fields, stop our
mills and to look to Europe for the supply of our
manufactured products"
The majority terms the Mills bill ga sectional
bill. and Gays its provisions point to an at
tempt TO in favor OF the planters
of the cotton-growing States, an attempt made
with the vain hope that it may be found pos
sibls to achieve the permanent prosperity OF
one section at the expense or another. This
discrimination is not less marked In favor OF the
people of Canada and against the farmers and
lumbermen living along our northern border,
from Maine 10 Oregon.H
The majority treats at length upou the ad-
Ivantsges OF q home market for farm products,
arguing that It is for the highest interest OF the
American farmer that the number of our food
consumers. rather than Of food producers,
should be increased, and that the general pros-
perity OF all should be secured. 1t is true. it
says, that the decline IN prices OF agricultural
products has been very great, but the value or
these, when measured by the value OF clothing.
farm utensils or other necessities OF . farmers
life, - much greater now than In any Of the
yesrs preceding 1860. The report says:
"After months spent in violent attacks upon
the protective system, and when, fortunately,
the people Of the country have become thorough
ly aroused 60 impending danger, the friends or
she House bill suddenly discover that II IS not .
fTeetrade measure and that 10 would not injuri-
ously affect the vital interests of any of the
large number of persons employed IN American
industries. In proof OF this, 1t is said that the
bill proposes an average reduction OF only S4.32
on every 500 Of dutiable merchandise i'm ported.
IL Is assumed that the retention of an AVERAGE
ad valorem rate of 42.16 per cent on duitsble
merchandise is conclusive evidence that the bill
has no free-trade tendencies"
The report euumerates a number of articles
which paid an average ad valorem rate IN 1857,
under the present law. of IL 6 per cent, and
would have paid under the provisions Of the
House bill, 2.51 per cent ard says:
Instead, then, of retaining an average ad
vaIorem rate upon al articles enumerated in the
bill of ~ 70 per cent, it would actually retain
but % 81 per cent. The alleged cons ervative
character Of the bill disappears under this exam
~ination, and we find that the average reductions
&c would produce are more than twice as great
ss any which have heretofore been proposed by
the most courageous revenue reformsr. If all
the articles in our tariff schedules upon which
protective duties are levied should be placed up
Gu the free list, and sl our protected industries
destroyed. and duties should be maintained
at present rates upon tobacco. silk. wines, and
liquors and sugar, the average I'D valorem rate
imposed upon dutiable importations would DO
7l.92 per cent. instead Of 40, and by this
wonderful mathematical process of ascertaining
the extent of protection by the ad valorem rate,
We should fnd that the nearer we approached TO
free trade the greater would be the degree Of
protection afforded onr industries
The majority defines a free-trade country as
one which does not impose protective duties
upon importstions. and says:
"A careful comparison OF the provisions OF
the House bill now under consideration, with
the detailed suggestions contained 10 the resolu
tons, will show with what fidelity the pro-
eramme Of the free-trsde conference held in
Chicsgo IN 1855 has beef followed in every es-
sential particular. The controversy, however,
between the opponents and the friends Of the
bill under consideration is not one over names
or phrases; it 10 q contest between those who
support and those who oppose the American
system of defensive duties; and this conflict
is as irrepressible as that which was
waged between the respective friends
Of freedom and slavery" The majority deny
the charge that a war tariff is being maintained
in time Of profound peace, and express the
opinion that the sections OF the House bill in
tended TO modify existing laws relating to the
tax on distilled spirits are certain to open wide
the door TO fraud "a the collection Of taxes on
distilled spirits.
In conclusion. the report says: '"rhe excessive
duty of from 2 to 81 cents per pound now i'm
posed upon sugar adds a considerable sun TO the
daily cost of living of every family in the United
States, where. IN most cases, the cost of sugar is
greater than the cost of bread. The high rates of
duty which nave been levied upon this
important article Of food have not sue
cessfully developed the suear-producing in
dustry Of the United States. The great
natural advantages which the producers of cane
sugars in the tropical islands have over those of
the United States preclude domestic competition
upon equal terms. If it were not for the fact
that parties interested In the production of
sugar from 500 or beets are confident of
the rapid development of those industries in the
q still greater reduction in the rate of duty upon
sugar, as the advantages of this production
would be felt throughout a larger circle than any
other which could be made in our tariff SEIZED
ules.
your committee have considered numerous
suggestions for the repeal of all In Internal reve-
nue. taxes and the abolition of the entire inter
pai-revenus system; but they deem the adoption