Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1888-08-24
Sugar and Wool.


A correspondent writes from Ottum-
Wa, Iowa: a high protective tariff
man wants me to ask you what de-
fense the Democratic party has for
putting wool on the free list and not
sugar?"
Another writes from Colorado
What reasons do Democrats advance
for maintaining high tariff on rice,
sugar and Tennessee marble?"
Every tariff measure is in the nature
Of compromise. The Democrats are
pledged to a gradual reduction of the
existing tariff. The Mills bill is not a
perfect measure by any means; the
argument in its behalf. il that il .xe-
moves some of the absurdities of the
existing tariff and rectifies some of its
inequalities. 1t is protective, because
the existing tariff is protective; it re-
tains duties at an absurd altitude, but
it does not reduce the rate on dutiable
goods little, and it does enlarge the
free list.
As to Tennessee marble being pro-
tected, it is exactly the position of
Colorado marble or any other marble.
In the original bill it was Oh the free
list, but some members from various
sections of the Union objected, and as
poor men do not use marble in build
ing houses or in furnishing them, the
Democrats thought it just as we'll to
yield the point, especially as the total
revenue from the item was only $l3,
513.Sl.
Now let lis come to the tax on wool
and the tax on sugar.
The tax on sugar is for revenue
The statement from the Treasury Bu-
reau of statistics is that we produce in
this country only one-tenth of the
sugar we consume.
The tax on the domestic consump-
ton goes to the producers; the tax on
imports goes to the public treasury.
In 1887 the duties OH sugar amount
ed to $56.5O4,l79; the protection"
amounted to one-ninth, sc, ,25O,OOO.
Here, then is a tax-yielding revenue
Of 50 to 81 for protection.
Turn now to wool. 1t is raw ma
terial essential to cheap production of
clothing, hannels, blankets, carpets,
etc. The revenue from wool amounts
only to $5,S99,s16.
With cheap wool American manu-
facturers could produce at lower prices,
and supply to u greater extent our
home markets without reducing wages.
1t is to he noted that while free
wool reduces the revenue only Sc, ,0OO,-
600, and the reduced revenue on wool
en- goods is about the came, or $12,-
600, 600 in all, the sugar duties have
been reduced from 78 to 62 per cent,
and the Government thus loses rev.
enue of $ll. .759 ,S99 on sugar and $l2,-
1877 ,902 on wool.
So we see that, as between sugar
and wool, the honors are about even.
But the benefits to the consumer
are far greater from free wool than
they can possibly be from free sugar.
Cheap wool means cheap clothes
and better clothes; it means more
mills and wider markets for American
products.
While the sugar tax is mainly tax
for revenue. the wool tax is tax for
protection. In order to reduce the
tax on clothing, ON bedding, ON car
pets, on cloaks, ETC., it WAS necessary
to put wool on the free list.
Free wool gives us cheaper clothing,
more abundant supplies at lower
, prices of the necessaries of life without
affecting wages.
Free sugar would have prevented
for the time, at least, any further re-
duction of tariff taxes.
Free wool meant u reduction of rev.
enue to the extent only of five or six
millions.
Free sugar meant sacrifice Of rev.
enue to the extent of $56, 1894 ITO.
Free wool made it possible to reduce
the tariff on other articles; free sugar
would make further reduction impos-
sible.
The Republicans favor free sugar
and free whisky, because that will pre-
vent any further reduction of the tariff
on the necessaries of life.
Free sugar means the same as free
whisky, in this, that they postpone in
definitely any further reduction OF tax
alton.
The Democrats reduce the tax on
sugar twelve millions; they reduce the
tax on wool and wOOlens twelve mil
lions.
They thus kept upa certain equili-
brium; they take off here little and
there a little and thus equalize the bur
dens Of taxation.
They reduce the tax on sugar to re-
duce revenues; they abolish the tax
on wool because it IL a raw material
essential to the cheaper production Of
the comforts of life.
We trust We have made plain the
purpose of the Democrats. There is
nothing sectional in the case. Free
wool takes its place by the side of free
cotton. Free wool secures cheap and
abundant winter clothing to the peo-
pie of tie North. The Southern peo-
pie can wear cotton clothing nearly
all the year; hundreds perish in the
North every year for want of proper
clothing. Keep in mind that free
sugar meant surrender of 80 revenue
to 81 of protection; free wool meant a
surrender Of 81 of revenue and 81 or
S. of protection; but more than this,
it means cheap clothing"
| The Democrats retain the sugar tax
for the revenue it yields makes pos
sible q reduction OF the tax on cloth
ing, ON lumber. ON salt, on tin plates