Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1890-01-08
LEAF-TOBACC0 TALK
FOR AND AGAINST THE ABOLITION
OF THE TAX.
Some Favor the wiping Out OF the Entire
InternaI-Revenuc system-Ways
and Means Committee.
IBy telegraph TO the Dispstch.I

lBy telegraph 10 the Dispstch.l
WASHINGTON. January There were but
four members of the Committee on Ways
and Means present this morning when Mr..
+. A. Schroeder. OF New York, began TO
address the committee on the subject OF
tobacco. lie advocated uniform rate OF
duty on leaf tobacco Of 3j cents per
pound exactly what IL was prior To
1888 when two specific rates of duty were
adopted. He opposed the proposition TO
increase the duty on wrapper and filler
tobacco. II the duty on wrapper-leaf were
increased the American manufactures
would reduce the quality and cost Of the
tiller. and the wages of the cigar-makers
would be reduced. The average cost Of
the production of tobacco IN the United
States was about ~ cents per pound.
When the farmer was protected 10 this eX-
tent everything that could be done had
been done. BY higher rate Of duty the
product might be slightly increased. butnOt
10 such an extentastO make any appreciable
difference. The cost of cotton, corn. and
potatoes would regulate the cost OF to-
Dacco. If the importation OF Sumatra to-
bacco had been prohibited when il was
first brought TO this county the production
Of the American leaf might have been IN
creased but now smokers would not ac-
cept the American leaf for the Sumatra
wrapper. The farmers raising tobacco
were doing better than they had former
~ done, and the American smoker
was using better cigar. The
farmer himself enjoyed the SumatrG
tobacco for wrappers and rejected
his own product. He cited statistics 10
prove that the importation of Sumatra to-
bacco had not injured the home product.
Mr.. Schroeder maintained that an increase
of duty on Sumatra wrappers would not
increase the price realized for the domestic
wrapper. TO increase the duty OnSunatra
from 80 cents to 81 pound might increase
the acreage Of the domestic leaf, but not
the price. The American people would
have to be educated 10 use theDatiye wrap
per, and mean while would be apt TO take
to cigarettes, or pipes, II deprived or the
wrapper they wanted
Dir. j. S. Vanduseer, Of Elmira, n. T.,
eaid that the only reason for the preference
the people and the trade had for Sumatra
tobacco was that the American people
were disposed TO believe that an imported
article was better than q domestic. There
WAS no sound reason for IT.
Mr.. james Ertheiles, representing the
New York Leaf Tobacco Board OF Trade,
said that tho board wanted the internal
revenue tax repealed The system should
be completely wiped out. Clgar-makers
were also in favor OF repeal. a uniform
duty of thrty-fye cents per pound was
wanted on all imported tobacco Inc
board meeting yesterday was IN favor ot
free tObacco: but as there was "A desire not
tn ask for anything that would injure the
farmer, II was decided toask FOR Uniform
duty of 80 per cent. If that rate would
not protect the farmer no rate OF duty
would. SumatTa wrappers would be I'M
ported regardless Of tho duty. Three dol
lars per pound would not be prohibitory.
some manufacturers would import II and
others would he forced to do so. smokers
looked for import stamps on cigars, and II
that was not there they would not buy tho
best American cigars. while the biggest
trash made in Cuba would be eagerly
bought if il only had a stamp affixed.
Mr. Frank Il. Diffendcrter, secretary OF
the PENNSYLVANIA fobacco-Growers' Asso-
ciatiou, wanted prohibitOry duty on for
eien wrappers.
Mr.. L. Ii. Neudocker, of the Baltimore
Board of Trade. SAID those he represented
wanted the internal-revenuel laws repealed.
They did not want the tax reduced. What
they desired was the abolition of the ma
chinery for the collection of the duty. That
machinery was harsh, and could not be
otherwise if the duty was to be collected
Mr. George NJ. Trader, Of Atlanta. Ca
and Danvllle. Va. also urged the wiplng
wanted il done quickly.
Nh Walter l.. Barnett, of New York, n
manufacturer of fine Havana cigars, want
ed tine law repealed requiring imported
cigars to bear an import stamp; ms
stamp was what many smokers looked 10
to determine the quality of cigars under 1t
and they would buy any kind of trash that
came in box bearing the import stamp.
Better CIGARS, he said, were made here than
IN Havana.
Mr.. Morris s. Wise, counsel and mana
ger Of the Cigar Manufacters' Association
Of New York city, opposed the repeal OF
the internal-revcnue system so TAR az 1t
related TO tobacco. They did not care
whether the tax was increased or reduced,
but they desired very much that restrlc-
tions and regulations necessary to collect
the tax should not bo done away with.
The manufacturers claim that the moment
the safeguards and governmental restrlc-
tiOns against thcrcfllngo empty packages
are repealed that that moment there viii
be n food Of piracy, and tho rChlllng or
empty packages of well-knOwn and sue
cessful brands throughout the United
States. The manufacturers ask that the
law be continued for their protection III the
first place, and in the second place Tor the
protection Of the consumer. The trade
mark law would not give projection. Ihere
was now q vast amount OF rehilng, ana
this would be increased thOusandtold by
the repeal of the system.
Air. Moses Crone, a manufacturer Of Gin
cinnati, agreed with Mr.. Wise that the sys-
tenn should be retained.
Mr. Hopkins, representing the manuiac-
turcrs of Detroit also wanted the system
retained.
Mir. Robert Stewart. secretary OF the Bal
timore Tobacco Board of Trade, urged the
totalabolition of the system. Manufacturers
must be pretty hard up if they could not
protect their brands. There were copy
rights. trademarks, and labels for the pro-
lection Of the manufacturers. The people
demanded q total repeal of the tax. The
should be discontinued.