The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1891-10-06
Tariffs and Prices.

few days ago the Argus presented to its
readers the statement that on imported arti-
Giles the amount of the duty was added to
the import price of the articles, thus COM
polling the consumer to pay the duty. We
showed that such general rule could be
true only of those articles which we cannot
produce in this country, such as sugar, and
that 1t was not the policy of the trainers of
our tariff law to put any duties on such arti-
cles. The duty on sugar was taken off ex-
pressly because the consumer paid it. But
for articles which we can produce suceess-
fully in this country, the general rule laid
down by the Argus has no truth whatever,
as we showed by reference to conspicuous
Industries, like the paper and wire nall man.
ufactories, which are protected by the tariff
as they have been for years. but sell goods,
In one case as low as anywhere else on earth,
and In the other case at price that is almost
precisely the same as the duty. The Argus
made no defence of its general rule, but yes
terday printed the following from a free
trade paper that is sometimes Republican
and sometimes Mugwump:
,squsrlng the circle and perpetual motion. says
the Republican Boston Transcript are simple
problems compared with the complex scheme OF
!evy1ng duties on foreign articles In order that
the consumer may get them at cheaper rate than
the duties were not imposed,
The inference sought to be conveyed is
that 1t is an impossibility to reduce prices
by applying protective duties. Can the
Argus point to any considerable number of
Instances where the application of protec-
tive duty has not resulted In constant
diminution of price? The paper Industry of
Maine is conspicuous illustration of this
fact, which the Argus and Boston Transcript
would have US believe impossible. The
slate industry of Maine is another proof, the
wire nall Industry another, the print cloth
industry another. And SO it would be posi-
BILE to go on through nearly the entire list of
protected articles. The Boston Herald took
occasion, upon rumor that wages had been
reduced In the print cloth mills at Fall River
to say:
Protection is not protecting at Fall River. With
the Mckinley Bill in full operation they have an
nounced the Intention to cut down wages there.
This f1lppant fling brought out the fact
that the Mckinley bill reduced the duty on
print cloths from four and half to four
cents per square yard; so thai II there was
any argument In the rumor it was the re-
verse Of what the Herald wished to insinu-
ate. But more to the point of the present
argument, was the further facts brought out
in reference to print cloths. For more than
thirty years there has been upon them,
under all tariffs, a very high protective duty.
Yet, under these high duties, the price OF
print cloths has steadily fallen from 25 cents
a yard In 1880 to eight cents In 1860 and about
three cents at the present time. 1t will be
observed that this price is actually less than
the duty, which is now four cents. And in
addition to this it is fact that the wages
paid labor in print mills is double what 1t
was In 1880.
Squaring the circle and perpetual motion
are simple problems compared with the
Argus's Herculean task Of trying to batter
down facts with theories and assumptions.