Macon beacon. [volume] (Macon, Miss.) 1859-1995, 1891-11-28
SHALL HIDES BE TAXEO2

Secretary Rusk Favors Duty on Hides to
"Get Even" With the Boot and Shoe
Manufacturers Real Animus of His Rec
concentrations.
When the news of the election in
Massachusetts reached Washington,
Secretary Rusk was the only man in
the gloomy group around the White
house who betrayed his conviction that
national issues were involved in the
Massachusetts, fight, and he did it BY a
silly threat According to the New
York Tribune the purport Of his re-
marks was as follows:
Secretary Rusk declares that the
elections went as he expected, and he
was not at all surprised. The only
comment he had to make was that he
would be in favor of restoring the tariff
on hides, as the Massachusetts, shoe
manufacturers for whose benefit hides
were put on the free list, had voted
with the democrats He believed it a
good idea to make them pay more for
their hides"
The secretary would punish the boot
and shoe manufacturers for voting in
their own interests by taxing hides. ="
The question arises would the boot
and shoe manufacturers be the worst
sufferers? Hardly. The tax would
have to be paid by the people who buy
boots and shoes. There is, however,
another view of the question. Accord
ing to the doctrines taught by McKin-'
ley, the foreigners who sell us hides,
not the boot and shoe manufacturers,
would have to pay the duty. Secretary
Rusk does not agree to this doctrine,
for II he did he would not recommend
tax on hides as the best way of get
ting even"
Secretary Rusk's plan has deeper
meaning. He never overlooks the in
terests of the big Four" of Chicago;
he never looses an opportunity to put
| i'm word for the benefit of this group
of millionaires, although he pretends
to be the farmers friend.
In 1890, during the debate on the Nc
Kinley bill. the New York Tribune
showed clearly how tariff on hides
would operate 1t said: at can hard
ly be believed that the home producer
will be benefited by the imposition OF
duty which would apparently help
nobody so much as the rich combina-
ton of beef packers in Chicago"
Col. Bayne, one of the high tariff
members of McKinley's ways and
means committee, showed more clearly
! still for whose interests duty on hides
was being advocated when he said dur
ing the debate: "As matter of fact,
the business of hides is largely in the
hands of such men as Phil Armour Zone
of the Big Four) who can consign to
tannery n hundred or several hun
dred hides ut once, and it is they who
will be benefited by this duty, rather
than the farmer, who has only one or
two hides to sell ut time"
What the real effect of tariff on
hides would be is shown by the follow
ing statement made by Thomas Z.
Proctor, Of the Proctor Leather Co., OF
Boston. Said Mr.. Proctor: "The only
effect II would have would be TO In
crease the price Of shoes and curtail
our foreign trade In leather. There Is
no surer way to make New England
solidly and reliably democratic than to
put tax on hides, as contemplated.
Let me show you how II would work.
The trade offered would be that with
the Argentine republic and Brazil. The
leather made from American hides ID
that used in the uppers OF the shoes
Very little, may say no sole leather
is made from American hides To pu'