The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1891-09-23

Inc cute Auuuhtfy.
We hardly expected that our article
on Monday on free iute would admit
OF a counter argument from our neigh
Dor the Every Evening as the facts
were so plain and evident for free iute
as to carry conviction ut sight, that
jute should be on the free list. TO get
a better run of the gist of our neigh
boris argument we copy the following
at length from last evenings issue:
1.-THE DAILY REPUBLICAN has just
learned that the Mckinley act put jute
on the free list, and thereupon preach
es the benefit of free raw material to
the Wilmington Jute Mills. II does
not ser that Its own article is as valid
an argument for free wool or free lux;
but some OF its more intelligent read
ers will. The REPUBLICAN probably
does not know that in putting unman-
ufactured jute upon the free list the
MckinleylteS were simply borrowing
from the wicked Mills bill which pro-
posed to do precisely the same thing.
But the Mills bill did not follow this
up, as does the Mckinley act, by rails
Ing the tariff on manufactured iute
from IS TO 40 cents nd valorem. 1t Is
very pleasant for the manufacturers
no doubt to be given their raw mater
ial free simultaneously with an added
protection on their manufactured pro-
duct Yet the REPUBLICAN affects to
see here a taking principle erroneous
ly called tax on consumers"
We must confess that we cannot see
that our argument In favor of free
jute would be ''as valid for free WOO
or free flax" The difference is just
here. Jute is not raised in this coun
try in paying quantities, in fact it.
nature is not us indigenous to Ameri-
can soil and air as to the same in In
dia, but flax. hemp and wool are, and
hence the distinction. We believe the
Mills bill did provide for free jute as
did the Mckinley bill, but does oui
neighbor know that during the last
session OF congress MIR. Carlisle, thai
eminent free-trader from Kentucky
wanted tariff placed upon jute sim
ply because his State raised 1t In small
quantities, and raised fax aud hemI
In large quantities II required con
siderable OF an effort on the part O
manufacturers of articles from iut,
TO keep Mr.. Carlisle from having iut,
made dutiable. These southern free
traders have most remarkable con
sisteney to speak sarcastieally any
how, when it was proposed to decrease
duty on anything produced in tina
section. They fought free sugar, FIRE
flax, free hemp, free iute free cottoI
free cotton bands and free rice. The
only wanted everything in the NORTH
ern States to be free. But this Is get
ting away from the question at issue
In making the distinction between tn
Mills and the Mckinley bill our neigh
= Dor says the first did not follow up tn
jute manufacture industry as the III,
Kinley act did by raising the tart
on manufactured jute from IS to 4
cents ad yalorem.'
That is true, and that is just wher
the protection part of the MeKinlr
bill comes in at, 1t admits the ia
material of jute free. but 1t claps
dnty on manufactured articles irol
jute OF 35 or 10 per cent. ud yalorel
simply to protect the we'll paid LIB,
In jute mills in this country from u
cheap Sepoy labor OF Burmuh al fro
6to 0 cents per day. That is what Il
al valorem duty does Tor labor
home. We are rather surprised til
our neighbor would 20 so far in III
matter rs to suggest an abrogation
the duty on iute that our iute raj
may b. hushed into silence and Il
country be supplied with iute artlcl
manufactured abroad by Sopoys W!
are glad to work for 8 to Q cents
day We do not believe the people
this country want that kind Of FIRE
trade.