Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1892-08-28

tn neecssarios Of life had reached the
minimum, and az no time IN our history
wat II easier for the ware-earner 70 sup
por his family The farmer. the mechanic,
the tav-laaOrer alike realized the nenent
OF low taxation, A bepeht' whyF simply
for tie reason that " iessenso we coss OF
food. OF clothing, of every article that
conau,ed To his comfort. Our manufac-
tories i'd NOT lagguiah. The hres did not
90 ont ;, our farnnces. Tho wheels aud
snindlaa were not idle in orr great hives
~ indnslrv. Che demand for labor was
not leassnsd. aor was its value deprecated.
AL have stown. the average tariff tax
NJ the beginning Of the civil war IN 1861
Was but 10 W cent. To purchase NUM-
mons of war 20 arm and equip soldiers
and meet al OF the expenses incident 10
the great Struggle required large sums of
money. i1rif taxes were largely in
creased. Tie Morrill, tariff bill was passed.
Our government was in the throes of war,
struggling or its existence, and but little
heed was gwen by the people 20 the fact
that dutiel under the new tariff law wero
not only highly protective 70 the manu-
facturers, out burdeusome TO the people.
But this yas not all. BY subsequent in-
crease by successive Republican Con-
crosses th average rate OF duties reached
AZ per cert. This was the average rate OF
tariff taies when the Mckinley bill be-
came thclaw.
HTTRNAI-REvKNUE TAXES.
Lot u. refer for a moment TO other
sources q revenue provided In the early
DAYS Of the war A new system OF taxa
ton was devised by Congress known a. the
internal-evenue system. by which enor-
nous sumo flowed into the Treasury.
Under tlis system taxes were imposed
upon manufacturers, upon railroads. upon
express COMPANIES, upon banks and bank
circulation. A large part OF these taxes fell
heavily upon those who were best able 70
bear them. The strong arm OF the law
was. IN the hour of the governments need,
LAID heavily upon the great corporations,
upon the wealth of the country. In a
single year S72, 900 0G0 were collected from
income alone. In many instances this tax
was rad by those who had amassed large
fortunes out of the war. In single year
S127, 300, 900 were collected from manufac-
lures alone. This was the very essence
of iIstice, for the reason that the manu-
faciurers had in many instances grown
enormously rich because OF the high tarlH
winch protected them against competition.
In single year the aggregate of internal
revenue taxes paid into the treasury eX-
cesded $500 000.O0J
Who're are the statutes imposing these
iu.ernal-reyenue war taxes! with but few
exceptions swept from the statute-bOoks Ks.
while the nation was yet grooming under
the burden of enormous debt. One of tho
reasons given at that time for the high
protection 20 manufacturers was the per
'eCtage they were required TO paw out OF
heir earnings as war taxes, aggregating IN
D single wear the sum | have mentioned.
With the war closed. q Republican Con-
yress relieved the manufacturers from this
taxation and added TO their profits and TO
the burdens of the people by increased
duties ! grant the necessity OF repeating
these internal war taxes when the eXigsn-
clos of war no longer demand their con-
tinuance. But why did not the Republican
Congress repeal the war taXes-t1Tlr tdreS-
which bore so heavily upon the farmer,
upon the mechanic, upon tho laborer, upon
the great mass of our peOpIeI Why was
not the war tax reduced upon the ne
cessaries Of hfe2 Why wholly remove the
tax upon corporations and allow It TO re-
nam upon the tools Of the mechanic, the
implements of the farmer, upon the food
and clothing of the pOOrf why. remove
from the manufacturer the tax OF less than
8 per cent and leave him the power to tax
the customer Al, 60, 80 per cent. upon hats,
upon shoes, upon blankets, upon clothing!
THE M'KINLEY ACT.
But this is not oil. The protected classes
growing year 10y year stronger and more
powerful with the protection afforded
them demanded Of the FIfty-frst Congress
vet higher duties. As infant industries
they had been for the time content with
the moderate protection gwen by MIR.
CLAY. Later they had demanded the higher
duties imposed by the Morrill, tariff and
that of later congresses. In 1890. during
the first session of the Fiity-frst Congress,
. Ia. nd n n
mbItory tariff. The response TO this de-
maud was the passage by a Re-
publican Congress OF the Mchlnley
bill. The avowed object of this bill
was to check importation; its purpose
80 10 increase the rate Of duties,
rs in many instances to exclude
absolutely foreign goods from our mar
kets. and thus by cutting of competition
enable the home manufacturer. without
let or hlndrance, to TX the price OF his
wares. In O word, the Mckinley law, by
ITS prohibItOry features. gave ITS benehI
ciarles a practical monopoly and enabled
them in fact to levy an additional tax
upon the consumer 20 the extent that the
duty had been increased. Was this iegis-
lation demanded by the people, Was II
IN their INTEREST," Was 1t not class leglS--
latIon Of the most OdIOus character -such
legislation as enriches the few at the eX
pense OF the many? The American peo-
pie Enthusiastically set their seal OF con
demuation upon this bill. Slowly, but
surely, they have become convinced that
protection does not protect" them.
II is worse than idle to speak Of It's bene-
fits to the American farmer. What he de-
mands is both foreign and nome mar
ket for the products of his farm. 1t Is
mockcry 10 tell him heis protected against
the corn aud wheat products of the Old
Ia h.. a 10 gal
open markets of the world he should be al
lowed the poor privilege of buying what
his necessities require without paving nleh
tribute 10 the protected classes Of his own
country. 10 the mechanic and labor
or no less than 10 the farmer pro-
lection has proved deluson and a snare.
In no instance has it opened up to the
farmer additional market for pound
Of meat or bushel of grain" Has It IN a
single instance given 70 the mechanic or
laborer increased wagesy The present high
tariff adds largely TO the cost of articles
necessary to the comfort OF the wage
Garner How has he been benefited! Has
II increased his wages HAS 1t IN any
manner benefited his condition? Recent
events connected with the most highly
protected establishments OF this coun-
trv sadly attest Tho fact that high
protective tariff affords no protec-
lOu 10 those WHO earn lutI biCdu "
daily toll. 1t was never intended to
benefit them. Long enough has the wage
Garner been deluded by the cry that high
tariff means high wages. Tariffs have no
effect upon wages, except TO diminish
their purchasing power. The higher the
tariff the less the purchasing power of the
wages. Wages are governed by the great
law of supply aud demand. If the clam
of the proiecliouist Is well founded why
have not wages increased as tariffs have
increased? Why constant reduction OF
wages IN the most highly protected esta0-
lshments in the land
10 the tolr the Mckinley bill has
kept the word Of promise TO the ear, but
BROKEN u 20 the hope"
In his great speech against the high
tariff corn laws in the British Parliament
in lS43 the matchless orator, Daniel
OConnell, SAID But what Is the mean
ing OF protection? II means al additional
sixpence for each loaf that Is the Irish OF
it. If he had not the protection the Loaf
would sell for shilling; but it he mas
protection it will sell for one and sixpenoe.
Protection is the English for slxpence,
and. what Is more, it Is the English for an
extorted slxpence. The real meaning OF
protection, therefore, is robbery-robbery
Of the poor by the rich"
TIE VANISHED SURPLUS.