Los Angeles daily herald., 1888-09-30

tariffs showing the average rate, in this
Government from 1889 until 1888.
Average
Date Name OF Tariff Rate of Duty.
1889 49,. Hamilton Tariff . $50 per ct.
1916. go. Calhoun Tariff .......... rs
1894 Clay Tarif...:.. 37
1873 Tariff of Abominattons 43 ''
1883 ompromise Tariff. ..... l32
1912 Whig Tariff ..,....... 35
1916 E. Walker Tariff .... ......l23
1927 e. lem, Rep Tariff ....... iS :, :.
1861. Morrill, Tariff ........... 40
1883. Republican Tariff. ..... AZ 10 "
1888 PropoSed Mills Tariff AZ 40 "
1t will be seen that the high tariffs in
this country were all war tariffs, except
ing the tariff of 1928, called the "Tariff
OF Abominations" which produced a re-
bellion in the Government, and was
quickly repealed under the demands of
all political parties. The Morrill, tariff OF
1861 was strictly war tariff adopted
under great emergency and with the
promise then made that it should be re-
duced as soon as peace was restored.
The reduction and revision of this war
tariff which caused dutiable list OF
import has been changed from
time to time; but to-day the average is
$47.10 on every 500 Of imports. The
leading statesmen of the Republican
party and its platform have steadily
pledged themselves and the party for
the past twenty years to reduce
this war tax, revise the lists,
and give relief to the people
of this country. The Democratic party
and its leaders have promised to
do the same thing, if entrusted with
power. Since the Democratic party has
had control of two departments OF the
government, it has struggled in good
faith to redeem it's pledges made to the
country. In 1885 it presented the Nor
rison bill, which was bitterly opposed
by the Republican party. In 1888 it
presents the Mills bill, and that
measure is to-day in the hands
OF the Senators of the United States, who
seem to be afraid to adopt or reject it..
The logic of events is drawing them
slowly but surely to the last ditch. For
statesmen worthy yofleadership, they hold
to-day the most extraordinary position
ever occupied by great political party.
Stripped of all apologies and explanations
made by their candidates and leaders
we behold them posing before the coun-
try, begging the people to allow them to
control the government. This platform
proposes, on the question of revenue, to
do two distinct things: One is to main
tain the protective system and raise the
rates so as to check imports, in order to
give protection to home industries.
The obvious effect Of this is to prevent
the government from getting revenue
from this source. The second object de-
clared is to get rid of the increasing sur
plus revenue by repeating the tax on to-
bacco, spirits used in the arts, and lastly
on whisky. AS to the $l40, 900, 900 of sur.
plus already in the Treasury, some of
the leaders of that party on
the Pacific coast propose to "Blow it in ~
Now, put the question, "From what
source will they get revenue to operate
the Government?" 1t is plain they pro-
pose to repeal the internal revenue on
luxuries in order to preserve intact
''our protective SYSTEM" which must
be maintained, and then they propose
| to increase the war rate of tariff
by raising the rate until imports are
checked or prohibited, thereby giving
the protected domestic manufacturer all
the benefits of the high rate, and at the
same time defeating the Government of
its revenue and forcing the consumer to
buy in the home market created
for the benefit of the domestic
manufacturer. Let the voter contrast
this remarkable policy and statesman
ship, with the practical and business
problems of revision and reform of the
tariff, as exhibited in the Mills bill, and
answer in the forum of conscience and
l,,txy xxrhinh rfx ohor11 ho 4
with this government for the next four
years. Passing from the charges made
by Republicans, which we have
endeavored to answer, 1 will now
consider some other reasons for
approving the reduction and revision
proposed. Republicans affirm that pro-
lection is necessary to enable our domes-
tic manufacturers to compete with their
foreign rivals; that it guarantees to those
engaged in that business certain
and high wages; that it secures
to the home producer profit
against his foreign rival, without
increasing the cost of his produce to the
domestic consumer; that it diversifies
the industries of the country, and secures
steady work and good wages to all labor,
whether in protected industries or not,
by giving them home market for their
products, and securing to them cheaper
domestic products by checking imports
and competition of foreign rivals.
If these claims are we'll founded, and
protection could secure these ends, the
Republican party ought to change names
with the Anti-poverty party and propose
the doctrine as the panacea for all
political ills. In answering these claims
II ask Of the tariff tax OF
$47 on the 500 has secured any of these
marvellous results? All the world knows
that it has signally failed. No country on
the earth has had more labor troubles
and more severe financial panics and
greater industrial stagnation than this
in the last twenty years. To verify this,
you have but to inquire how many labor
unions, labor organizations, alliances,
Knights of Labor and other organizations
have lately united for the purpose of de-
manding relief and resisting oppyes-
sions. By authentic statistics it has
been shown there were 995 labor strikes
in this country from 1881 to 1886, largely
csnfned to the protected industries.
1t is obious, also, that the laboring
classes are in condition Of
have sufficient work nor adequate price
for their labor. 1t is useless to array
labor statistics to demonstrate such facts,
because every laborer knows we'll that
the wretehed plight of labor in this coun-
try is the direct cause of all the organiza-
tiOns of labor to improve their condition.