The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1892-08-28


of the reasons given at that time for the
high protection to manufacturers was the
PERCENTAGE they were required to pay GU
Of their earnings as war taxes, aggregatlng
in single year the sum have mentioned.
With the war closed q Republican Congress
relieved the manufacturers from this tax
alton, and added to their profits and to the
burdens of the people by increased duties.
grant the necessity of repeating these in
ternal war taxes when the exigencies OF
war no longer demanded their con tinuance,
But why did not the Republican Congress
repeal the war taxes tariff tares-w hich
bore SO heavily upon the farmer, upon the
mechanic, upon the laborer, upon the great
mass of our people! Why was not
necessaries of llfeg Why wholly remove
the tax upon corporations and allow it to
remain upon the tools OF the mechanic, the
implements of the farmer. upon the pod
and clothing Of the poor? Why remove
from the manufacturer the tax Of less than
per cent. and leave him the power to tax
the consumer AZ, so, so per cent. upon hats,
upon shoes, upon blankets, upon clothing!
But this is not all. The protected classes
growing year by year stronger and more
powerful with the protection afforded
them, demanded of the Fitty-frst Con-
gress yet higher duties. AS "infant indus
tries" they had been for the time content
with the moderate protection given by Mr.
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 Fifty first Congress
their demand was In substance for the
prohlbitory tariff. The response to this
demand was the passage by a Republican
Congress of the Mckinley bill. Was this
legislation demanded by the people? Was
il in their interestl Was it not class legis-
alton of the most odious character-such
legislation as enriches the few at the ex-
pense of the many2 The American people
Enthusiastically set their seal of ccndemna-
tion upon this bill. Slowly but surely
they have become convinced that "protec-
ton doe not protect them.
It is verse than idle TO speak of its bene-
tits to the American farmer. What he de-
hands is both foreign and home market
for the products of his farm. 1t ia mockery
TO tell him he is protected against the corn
ana wheat products of the old world.
while he is compelled to sell in the open
markets Of the world. he should be allowed
the poor privilege of buying what his nee
essities require without paying high trib-
ute to the protected classes of his own
country. To the mechanic and laborer no
less than to the farmer protection has
proved delusion and snare. In no in
stance has it opened up to the farmer lad
ditional market for a pound OF meat
or a bushel of grain.'' Has it in a
single instance given to the mechanic or
laborer increased wagesa The present
high tariff ADDS largely to the cost of arti-
cles necessary to the comfort OF the wage
Garner. How has he been benefited! Has it
increased his wagesl Has it ii any man
ner benefited his conditions Recon t
events connected with the most highly
protected establishments of this coup-
try sadly attest the fact that a
high protective tariff affords no protec-
ton to those who earn their bread by daily
toll. 1t was never intended to benefit
them. Long nough has the wage-earner
been deluded by the cry that high tariff
upon wages except to diminish their pur-
chasing power. The higher the tariff the
lesa the purchasing power Of the wages.
Wages are governed by the great law OF
supply and demand. If the claim of the
protectionist is well founded. why have not
wages increased, as tariffs have increased
Why constant reduction of wages in the
most highly protected establishments in
the land.
l have shown that instead of surplus OF
little less than Sl00,000,000 left by the
Cleveland administration. the treasury is
now confronted by bankruptcy. This is
the result in part of the reckless extrava-
gance of q Republican Congress. 1t is in a
large measure the necessary result Of the
Mckinley tariff. By that bill the treas.
ury was deprived of $50, GOO, 600 of revenue
by repeating the sugar tax: but in order to
compensate the sugar grower for this loss
OF the production" afforded, $40, 100000 an
nuelly, for fifteen years, are to be paid him
out Of the treasury as bountys The con-
suner is TO be deluded into the belief that
he is the recipient of great benefits under
the free sugar clause Of this bill, while I'M
der another section Of the same bill $40,
100000 are TO be taken annually
from the pockets Of the taxpayers
and given TO the sugar growers.
In addition to this, whatever nene-
fit might come to the consumer by thefree
sugar clause of the bill is over balanced
many fold by the largely increased cost OF
wooden goods and of all other necessaries
OF life. The repeal of the sugar tax was
simply intended to reconcile the consumer
to the still greater taxes laid upon him.
Heretofore, the persistent claim of the pro-
tectionist has been that tariff taxes are not
paid by the consumer. This claim is now
abandoned. The advocates of the McKiu-
ley law concede the tax upon sugar to
have been paid By the consumer Else,
why take so much credit TO them
selves for removing itg Is there
not danger that the consumer may
inquire, 'if removing the tariff tax upon
sugar lessons its cost, why would not the
same blessed result follow reduction OF
ali tariff taxes upon all of the other neces-
saries Of lifesn
The Democratice House OF Repressn Ia
tives of the present Congress has passed q
bill removing the increased duty imposed
by the Mckinley bill upon tin plate and
| providing that within few years it shall
20 upon the free list. Ii has also passed
the free wool and cheap clothing Dill. by
which wool is admitted free of duty, aud a
large reduction sought to be effected In the
tarln upon wooden goods of all descriptions 8.
1t has also removed the tariff upon binding
Irvine. But for the hostility OF Repub-
lican Senate these measures, so just, &c
beneficial to the people, would now be
upon our statute books. Our present
tariff laws need careful revision. Their
glaring Inconsistencies should be cor
rected. 1t is to the interest of
manufacturer and consumer alike that
IL the main raw material be sd
mitted free of duty. Working the raw
material into the finished product would
give employment to our skilled workmen.
The reduction of tariff taxes to the milo
imum upon the necessaries of life is import.
ant to ali our people; it would prove OF In
eetimable value 10 the millions who earn
their bread by daily toll
My fellow citizens: The contest upon
which we have now entered Is of deep SIG
nifcance TO the American people. Shall
high tariff, continually increasing with the
demands of the projected classes, be the
settled policy of our government, or shall
there be relief to the people from the bur
dens Of unjust taxation!
THE FORCE BILL.
The Republican party, by its acts in the
Fifty first Congress. and ny its platform,
in it's late national convention, stands
pledged to the passapa of fha force hin