The Globe-republican., 1891-04-08
FARMERS. TOOLS NOT TAXED

Cut on the Wholesale Prtce-Amefic2n
Plows and All Other Implements Much
Better Than Foreign Make.
OF all dishonest charges made by the
foes of protection, that which says farm
ers are taxed As per cent on their agri-
cultural implements is, perhaps. the
most groundless. A simple illustration
will make this clear.
The farmer buys plow of the local
agent for, say. Sl2. The ''reformer,"
desperately bent on weaving farmers
from their allegiance to protection,
comes along and tells him that the tax
on that plow is 45 per cent The good
man takes out his pencil, multiplies the
price he paid by the rate per cent, and
finds that, if the ''reformer" tells the
truth, the tax is $40. The re
former" knows that the farmer will ar
rive at this result. and he also knows
how absurd it is. but he takes good care
not to correct the figures.
Now. even if the farmer did pay
the whole of the - per cent. tariff,
the amount of the tax is nothing like
this sum. The duty is not compu-
ted on the retail price. Sla, but on
the wholesale price. which. at most. is
not more than half of this amount.
pose, then. that the wholesale price
the American plow is S6. Any
| honest free-trader will admit that
the IS per cent. tariff is not paid by the
consumer unless equally good foreign
plows can be imported, and. with duty
added. be placed in the American
market at s. apiece. But the IS per
cent must not be computed on the So
which the plow brings in this country,
but upon the price at the English or
German manufactory, which price, with
the IS per cent. duty added, must
equal SIS. That is, instead of multiply
ing 81 by ,45, which would give 81. 20
as the tariff. 81 must be divided BY
l.45 to obtain the true base, the price
in the foreign market. This price
would be S4.14, and IS per cent.
Of this would be Sls6, the true duty.
which. added to the price, gives just S..
the price at which it must sell here, in
order to compete with the American
plow The tax" then even according
to the ''reformer's" own theory. would
be only s1s6, instead of s.. 10. as he de-
signedly tried to lead the farmer to sup
pose.
Even these figures do not do jus tice
to the ''reformer'sr daring in perverting
truth. The calculation is based, as has
been said. upon the assumption that a
foreign made plow, equal in all respects
to the American plOw. could be placed
upon the market at IS, the price at
which the latter sells. Now. the fact
is that such conditions do not exist In
no country in the world can the equal
of the American plow be found. The
best agricultural implements in foreign
countries are only clumsy limitations OF
antiquated American models.
Consul Ii. 7. Dunlap attended the an
nual exhibition of agricultural machin.
cry at Breslau. Germany. for the special
purpose of comparing the machinery
from many countries which was there
displayed. The plows," he reported,
to the state department, resemble the
double Michigan plow so popular in the
United States twenty and more years
ago. but now about obsolete. / am
perfectly safe in saying that no Ameri-
can former would take a single one OF
the plows on exhibition as gift: he
would be ashamed to be seen in its
company. 1t looks very much as though
it was the work of country black
smith of forty years ago.
Competition by foreign agricultural
implements in our own markets would
be out of the question. even if they were
admitted frce-nay. even ii we paid q
bounty of 80 per cent, foreign imple-
ments could not compete. for the simple
reason that no American farmer would
take the heavy ungainly things at any
price. Since, as we have said before,
the tariff can be tax only when the
| American consumer would Just as soon
have the foreign article, with duty
added, as the American article at the
domestic price. the absurdity Of the as
sumption that the farmer pays even
Sl.s6 tariff tax" must be plain to any
one whose intellect is not clouded by
| frec-trade mania.
| Tin Plate Mills and the New York Times. -
One of the most thorough and cf-
| fectual refutations of the absolute false
hoods of the free trade press is now go
ing on in the progress already made in
this country in the establishment of tin
plate manufactures under the protec-
tion of the Mckinley bill.
The New York Times especially was
one of the most violent opponents of a
tariff on tin and ridiculed the idea of
establishing a tin-plate industry in this
country In a remarkable article on
this subject November 10, the Times
stated that the American tin-plate liar"
was dead. The article also states:
There never was anything whatever
in those Pittsburgh stories of tin-plate
factories. Nobody ecsr thought Of inresting
a dollar in a tin-p,ats factory any'ehsre IN
this country. The Times has repeatedly
stated this fact" etc.
Now it would appear from present're-
suits that the Times was in error re-
L -