The gold leaf. [volume] (Henderson, N.C.) 1881-1911, 1888-08-30


oost.uctions IN the interest Of individuals
and moEopolists. lApplausc.l
Bu: let Us examine the schedule Of this bill
and see if wo can find any FREQ trade con-
cealed il them. We have not touched the
liquor schedule, nor tho silk schedule, be-
cause we thought that those who used the
articles embraced in these could afford to
pay the duties levied theta by existing
law The tobacco schedule has been stricken
from the bill in the committee of the wholc
We have tried to reduce the duties upon
the necessaries of life, because the great body
OF the people are compelled to have them.
The first schedule is that of drugs and
chemicals. The average rate OF duty by e1-
isting law is B.. 81 per cent. We reduce it to
28 II, or reduction of 81. 20 in the hundred.
They say that viii destroy the domestic
manufacture. Whys Because labor is SO
much cheaper in foreign countries But the
whole labor cost is only 1919 per cent. If the
| labor cost here was 100 per cent. higher than
! il foreign countries, which it is not, then 8
per cent. would fully cover the difference,
but we leave 90 II, more than twice the en-
! tire labor cost. Is there any danger to
chemical industry in n reduction of Al per
cent? The demand of the government for
revenue will more than double the entire Ia
Dor cost, SO that tho labor is not endangered
! But it seems a little strange that as the tariff
is levied to protect American labor aud the
protection is 32.S7, that the laborer only gets
1919. There seems TO be a leak somewhere
The next is earthen and glass ware. The
duty under the existing law is $3.50 on
every 500; by this bill it is S52.17. And
this is from trade, too.
Mr.. Speaker, if S52.17 taxation On 500
worth of property imported into the United
States from foreign countries is free trade,
il Gods name will some one tell me what is
meant by the term protection! Applause
Well, these manufacturers are alarmed
about cheap foreign labor, too, and they
want protection enough, they say, to cover
the difference between wages in Europe and
here. One of our consuls il England tells Us
that the average labor cost of earthen ware in
the United States in 1882 was 4615 per cent,
, and in Statrordshire, England, Az per cent.
; Il this b9 true, our labor is cheaper than the
foreign But if the foreign labor cost moth
ing tIlrA we have left per cent. enough to
, pay the whole labor cost Of our m2nufact-
Ures. The labor cost of earthon and glass
we're, as SHOWN by the census Of 1880, was IL
8 rcr cent, and VIC havo left 80 II per cent
Why is il that all OF that 800 per cent. did
] not get to the laborer, only II per cent. hay
: ing foundit5 way to his pocket2
= The next schedule is metals. We have re-
: Guccd the duties from an average of 30 I
8 per cent under the present tariff to IS. II
y Ger the pending bill. This is q reduction Of
Il $3.50 on 500 worth OF imported metals.
+ There is nothing revolutionary i'll that. moth
/ ing to excite alarm, and it IS long way yet
3 to free trade \ reduction on pig iron from
d $500 to 80. so per cent. still leaves it with Il
: heavy duty, and the tax Of Sc per ton which,
o we propose is the war tariff rate OF 1868 The
= reduction of the duty steel rails from S4.3s
e per cent to 54 81 leaves duty higher than
S. it was from 1865 to 1870. 1t was then 45 pei
cent In 1870 the duty wes changed to a spc
r. cfic rate of $:18 per ton The equivalent ac
1t valorcm was then about % per cent L
d seemed 4 reduction. Doubtless it was dOnt
n under the pretcnse Of preventing undervalu
to alton and fraud-that is tho false preteus
p under which specific duties masquerade-bGI
rt when English rails came down to $500 pc
Mt ton in 1879 the duty steel rails, though re
le manning the same per ton, amounted to 1O
a per cent WHY should the present cxhorbit
ant duty be retained? Steel rails can b
rt made as chcaply in this country as in Eng
We land or elsewhere.
i'll received letter few days ago from
liz gentlemen engae Cd in steel manufacture VIII
in said lie could make the best cutlery steel i
of Alabama ut total cost of S16 per ton, 2n
+a at a labor cost of 50 per ton The avcrag
DElcC Ol inc St6Gl IillS Ssl We
$50 16 per ton. From 1870 to 1878 inclUSiT'
bv steel rails wcrc cheaper in the United State
cd than in England, and cheaper here beccus
Int they could be produced at a lower cost hel
in than in Europe And if they could be mao
to cheaper here for four years why not all ii
we time! From 1873 to 1878 the iLIportatic
ed fell from f., 600 tons to 2 tors. The avcraG
re- English price last year was 500. 10; tho ave
on age American price tor the same time vi
ow s337. 13; difference in price sl697 tariff dut
his S17I Now, if the Steel Rail associate
,re could make rails as cheap in the Unit
States in 1873 rs they could be made in En-
de- land, they could do it in 1887, and the SIS.
led difference in price was pat in the pockets
701 the manufacturer. It is claimed to be i'll t
10 interest of the laborcr, bat he only gets fro
on s. to So per ton; the balance goes to t
od- manufacturer to make lnllionaires of E1
s a that they may build castles in Scotland Il:
ako go coaching through her mountains. Ia
! q plausc OF tic Democratic sidc,l
on. We have reduced the duty on steel rails
est SI1 per ton. 1t is equivalent to more tt
ado double the entire labor cost of the rails.
ac- wood and woodenware we found the presc
% rates averaging IS per cent, and we reduc
bio them to 17.+0 per cent. That is too small
me- require further notice.
of On sugar VIC reduced tho rate from 1S
the per cent to G2,Gl per cent. This IS t
fer largest reduction made on any schedule {
,ses ceDt tho wooden. The reduction of tho re'
nue on sugar proposed by the bill is ST, -
.ax 100, ard, excepting the woolen schedule
tate nearly twice as E!uch Gs all the others CO
few bired That is a heavy cut, but nobo
: as seems to be distressed about IL.
MIN The complaint about sugar is that we
ner not reduce enough. We have dealt M
harshlY with sugar than with any article
, of have left on the dutiable list. Yet gent
f,,a, men on the other side tell Us we have bt
,g1eo sec: .onal; that we have protected sugar :
-cn rict, and aimed at the destruction
-nfIe northern industries. The charge Is absCI
,icn We have not looked ct the section where {
on article is produced in order to detcr..l
I'll, vha: we would do. We have tried 70
er1l fairly with al, and in doing 1t we find I
cc, we have cut il far heavier than iron. or 8:
n Of or eartheawarc or woolens, or cottoas
port hemp, or jute, or fax In short, the cut
.tion sugar is nearly twice rs much cs all
others put together. IAlpiarsc-l
roy As Democrats, We believe that tax
was tribute from ito private property Of {
Tho zen exacted by law fer the support Of c
and errrent We believe, with the CONNIE,
n il tors and economists, that 1t Is burden,
body that l. ought TO bc 81 laid as 10 lie 2s llt'
tie .rss~!blc - TIE taxn2yeE.