Evening journal. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1888-1932, 1891-09-14
laNoRANcE .Ann lNIus1lce.


The Mckinley tariff imposes no duty
on pig tin, and the same sources Of sup
ply are open 20 our manufacturers as to
British nplate mon0polists. Odessa
Herald.
The Mckinley bill imposes duty Of 4
cents pound on pig tin. which was free
before. Perhaps the editor like many
another tin crank, never read the Nc
Kinley bill
Is it not astonishing that man can
gain his own consent TO write thus ad
vocating tax on the whole people, adj
vocating and defending a bill which his
own great man Blaine has dubbed an
infamous bill'' without having read the
bill? Not to mention the injustice OF
such ignorance it is astonishing that a
mans pride does not prevent him from
advocating measure Of which he can
not be otherwise than ignorant.
The Odessa Herald is not alone In this
I'M Justice TO people who pay an objection
able tax or in It's shameful lack Of infor-
nation; there are many other protection
lists who advocate the tax on articles the
commercial names even of which they
do not know
Take the first four articles With which
the Mckinley bill tempered two Of
which, aluminium and acid aulphurie
we're free. and affairs for churches, and
srtic shoes were increased; can the edi
tor OF the Odessa Herald give any valid
reason why those things should be taxed
ut all in the FIRST place; in the second
place, can he tell why they should be.
taxed respectively 10, and / cents per
pound and why the taxes
on affairs should be Increased to 40 per
cent. and arctic shoes to 49, cents per
pound aud 90 per cent. ad valorem2 We
know he is ignorant Of these facts be-
cause no man can know all Of the facts
necessary to impose taxes on the prin
ciple proposed by the protectionists
fairly to the people who pay them and
sufficient to insure wages and profits
TO the people who are engaged in such
Industries. This is only a sample Of
protectlonism ignorance.
Take aluminium Is the labor expended
on that equal TO is cents per pouudf
Arctic shoes; Is the labor expended IN
making them equal TO 49i cents per
pound and go per cent. ad vAloremf
II that Is not the case can the.Mc-
Kinley bin be said TO 'protect labor" In
those articles or to be simply perpetra-
ting a vulgar and shameless robbery on
the people In the name of labor7
The Mckinley bill has increased the
duties on 79i articles ia common use;
has the editor Of the Herald any concep-
ton Whist necessities we're alleged, not to
mention the Justice, for increasing the
rates on all Of those articles2 If the
editor Of the Herald does not know who
does know, why these articles were in
creased or why they were increased to
the rates specifed2
Now, there Is no patriotism" and
there should be no other sort OF foolish
ness in this matter. The proteclionists
propose to levy tax TO eauslize the DIFF
ference between labor in this country
and labor abroad Do they do that
honestly aud fairly or do they allow the
oenedcisries TO levy the taxes and fix the
rates TO suit themselvesi
That is actually what was done aud the
general Ignorance concerning the Nc
Kinley bill Of which the Herald has given
q sample, proves that even the most
ardent advocates Of It have not read the
bill