The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1890-07-28
NOT mUcH OFF A SNARE.

The Examiner has discovered a snare for
Mckinley in the provision of the bill which
admits duty free all material used in the
construction of ships for the foreign trade
and of ships built on foreign account. The
bill also provides that exporters of any kind
of manufactured products may recover 90
per cert of the duties paid on imported
materials employed in the manufacture of
such goods. Our contemporary sees under
this provision fleets of ships being built in
American yards both for foreign shippers
and for Americans, who wish to engage in
the ocean carrying trade. 1t also sees
American goods going to foreign countries
at prices much lower than these same goods
can he sold for in the American market
One Object.of these two provisions is to fur
nish a practical answer to the free-tTade
argument that with raw material we could
compete with cheap labor countries for the
commerce of the world. The bill practi-
eally gives free raw material to articles we
manufacture for export. 1t places our ex-
port trade as nearly as possible on the
ground ii would occupy under free-trade
dspensation. But the home market for
raw material for our industries to the ex-
tent to which they supply the home demand
for manufactured goods is preserved. Un-
der free raw material, for all purposes, the
labor engaged 10 the production of raw
material would be exposed to competition
on equal terms with the cheaper labor of
foreign countries. AS the labor engaged in
producing raw material has as much claim
to protection as the labor engaged In con-
verting such material into finished goods,
the advocates Of a protective policy cannot
consistently expose this raw material labor
TO competition with cheap labor while pro-
tecting the labor invested in manufactures
But the free-traders constantly asserted
that with free raw material they could
compete with foreign manufacturers.
The higher rates paid for Ameri-
can labor, they said, would not
prevent such competition. Under the Me
-kiney bill we shall see how much there is
IN these professions of ability to compete
with foreign manufacturers. Our manu-
faeturers viii have free raw material to the
extent to which they export their produc-
tons. The protective position is that the
higher cost American labor will prevent
our manufacturers from competing with
foreign manufacturers except in classes of
goods IN the production of which we pos
sess especial advantages. Protectionists
Claim, also. that with free raw material
there would have to he a general and mate
RAJ cheapening of labor in this country to
enable our manufactures to compete with
foreign manufactures for the home market.
We make an experiment in returning to
manufacturers all the money they pay out
il the form of duties on the raw material
on such goods as they export. For ex-
ample, the manufacturer of good quality
Of wooden cloth pays about So 80 in duties
on the wool used in the cloth for a suit of
clothes if he imports all his material II
he sells this cloth abroad he gets his 81 30
back. If be sells it at home he adds it to
the price of his product Now, as tie Nc
kinney Tariff Bin imposes duty Of 40 per
cent on foreign cloth of the same quality
in addition To a specific duty to cover the
amount paid for duties on raw material,