The weekly tribune. [volume] (Great Falls, Mont.) 1891-1894, 1891-10-24
THE TARIFF A TAX.

which appeared in these columns a few
mornings ago. The Courier confesses il
the ouset that it "can seldom spar
either the time or the patience to wad,
, through, carefully dissect and logical,
~refute" n of the many articles on tn,
tariff which finds its way upon it's desk
an admission quite unnecessary in view
of the exhibition of ignorance it display.
in the editorial referred to. The TRIB
UNE does not proprose to reiterate what
it said in the article to which the Cour
Ter takes exception, but it will empha
size by proof as strong as holy writ the
points it made in that "Yard of Cloth
The points made we're these:
First: The tariff Is a tax.
Second: That the government or home
manufacturers receive the benefit of the
tax.
Third: That the consumer pays the
tax.
If we rightly understand the Courier
it denies these three propositions. To
prove that the tariff is a tax we will
bring Mr.. Mckinley on the stand. In
his Cleveland fOhio) speech he says:
"Yes, we did increase the tar on tin
plate from l cent to 90 cents per pound
or from S7,5O0,OOO to S15,OOO,OOO. The
result is we are making tinplate in
America and this glory is worth all it
cost"
Tn italics ara o,,ro tbo word 4, M
McKinley's. He acknowledges the tariff
is a tax. He says it increases prices, and
that tinplate can be made in America at
a profit. Now everyone knows that the
mere imposition of a duty would not
create an industry. The increase of
duty increases the price, and the increase
in price leads to the manufacture of
taxed goods in America-a tax which
the consumer must pay.
Mr.. Mckinley also admitted that the
tax on cotton ties had been increased
from 80 per cent to 1O3 per cent. He
justities the increase on the ground that
it gave employment to 300 men in Ohio.
1t did not concern him that cotton
planters were forced to buy their ties at
OHIO prices whether they liked those
prices or not. They must pay the tax if
they use the ties. Here is a second ad-
mission that the tariff is a tax and that
the consumer pays it.
Again Mr.. Mckinley points with pride
to the fact that the repeal of the duty
on sugar reduced it's price; that is it
costs the consumer less. The tax is
taken off. Here is the third admission
that the tariff is a tax. Now we will re-
tire Mr.. Mckinley and bring his tariff
on the stand and hear what it has to say.
The duty on pearl buttons, such as near
every farmers wife and daughter
wears, is a trihe over 200 per cent. A
Chicago firm recently received S1,4OO
worth of these buttons from Austria the
iuty upon which was just $1,000. Does
The Avant Courier believe the foreign
manufacturer paid the United States
$1,000 for the privilege of sending $1,4OO
worth of buttons to us. 1t cannot. That
5000 tax was added to the first cost
of the buttons and the pur-
or paid it when they
ook the buttons from the merchants
COUNTER. Any sensible man knows that.
Again we will take plate glass. This
s something farmers do not use to any
.reat extent, but for the purpose of
that the tariff is a tax and the
pays it it is mentioned. The
luty is about 40 per cent. Last year
We imported 100000 worth of plate
lass as the value appeared upon the
looks of the importer. The duty on this
lass was S223,OOO or $4,000 more than
he cost of the glass in England. Now
'ho paid that tax of S223,OOO, for it was
direct tax upon the glass. Did the
manufacturer give us the glass
nd $4,000 besides? Not much. The
ak was added to the cost and the con-
paid it. No n else paid it. Even
he Avant Courier will not maintain that
he consumer did not pay it. Now if
he tariff is not a tax, what is it? And
the consumer does not pay the tax
Tho does?
The second proposition is who gets the
enetit of the duty or tax levied upon I
imported articles. OF course the gov )
must get a certain portion or it I
ould not maintain itself. According to l
1r. McKinley's statements in on. of his
'hio speeches it costs S l,OOO,O0O a day or I
a year to run this govern :
lent. All this money must be raised by |
or taxes levied upon imports.
tut the government does not receive all -
ne benefits of protection. The McKin- :,
y tariff was not enacted TO protect the !,
overnment, but to reduce the revenues \
nd to protect home manufacturers. 1t :,
as more than exceeded Mr.. McKinley's l.
lost %saDruine cXpecti tiOne. In fact tbo :