The Kinsley graphic. [volume] (Kinsley, Kan.) 1890-1940, 1890-05-30
veLvETEEN. roo.
Another Direction in which the LonS-SuI
fering Public Is to BE Bled.

Another Direction in which the Lons-Suf-
fering Public Is to he Bled.
mr. Mckinley, in his process Of
simplifying" the process, proposes to
change the present ad yalorem duty of
40 per cent on velveteen to a compound
duty of 10 cents square yard and 20
per cent ad valorem. The effect of
this would be to make the duty lower
on the higher grades of velveteen,
which are bought by the rich, and to
make it enormously higher on the
cheaper grades, which are bought by
| the poor
One of the most prominent of the
dozen importers of velveteens in New
York says: with respect to the lower
grades of velveteens the result would
be an increase in the duty of nearly
100 per cent Take yard of velveteen,
haif-a-yard wide, which costs US 10
| cents The present 10 per cent ad
valorem duty is cents, making the
total cost to US Il cents If the pro-
posed duties were in force the 90 per
cent. ad va1orem duty would be cents
and the specific duty would be cents,
making the total duty cents, as against
the present duty of cents, and the
total cost Il cents, as against the pres
emit cost of II cents.''
But the duty on the higher grades
would be made less. A piece of costly
velveteen would pay neaI three cents
yard less than at present. But the
cheaper grades are three-fourths of all
| the velveteen raised, and the people
least able to bear the increase would
feel the burden of the higher duty,
while those who are able to bear an in
crease would actually pay less.
That is called simplifying the tariff"
Some call it, too, removing the in
CAPABILITIES of our present tariff system"
1t is a plain specimen of what some pro-
tectionist newspapers have been calling
for under the name of tariff revision,
not tariff reform"
But even in the interests of protection
there can be no excuse for raising the
duties on velveteen, nor for any duty at
all on it; for the article is not manu-
featured in this country. Some attempts
have been made to manufacture it,
but they have failed, owing to a
lack of knowledge and skill
in dying it. Our supply comes from Man
chester, England, and from Germany.
The raw material of velveteen is cotton.
This we send across the ocean and when
the manufactured velveteen comes back
it pays a duty of 40 per cent. of its value.
Even under these favorable circum-
stances the manufacture has not taken
root here. 1t is another one of those
protected industries which do not yet
exist.
Major Kinley went to the helm a few
months ago with the avowed purpose of
reducing the revenues, and he has re-
Gently boosted that his bill would cut
off some S45, 600, 900 of surplus collections.
The total revenues collected on velvet
Gems last year were about $1,000, COO.
Instead of reducing this Ma or McKin-
ley now proposes to increase it largely.
Is he getting ready to meet the heavy
drafts on the treasury from the extrav-
agant appropriations of the present Con-
gress?
The consumers of velveteen will be
interested to know how the importers
feel in view of the increased duty. Those
who use yelveteen have, along with all
other consumers, been treated often to
| the queer doctrine that the foreigner
pays the duty. If this were true, it
would not be necessary among honest
people to call attention to this cheap
and dishonest method of getting our
taxes by other people. But what do the
importers say? ITO us importers higher
duties signify nothing, because not a
yard of velveteen is made in the United
States; and as long as that is the case,
we can with impunity count the duty in
with the cost and charge whatever is
necessary to give us a fair profit. But
higher duties do signify immensely to
! people who buy velveteens, for it is out
Of their pockets that the duty is paid :"