The Kimball graphic. (Kimball, Brule County, Dakota [S.D.]) 1883-1905, 1892-05-13
THE KlNIBALL GRAPHIC
cLATE ls. TgSAN.
Official Paper Of the CITY and COUNT
THE TARIFF Is Al TAX.

Alexandria Hefaid:-Soma one recent
ly asked Sir John A. Mcdonald If there
was any truth in the Democratic slogan
that "the tariff is a tax" and the Cana
dian premier replied: ut is Il tax and
I'll prove it to YOU. Suppose | have
1906 bushels of barley on this the
Canadiam side which desire to sell in
the United States. Under the present
law in America must pay Is cents per
bushel, or Sl5o in all on my l,CGO bushels
before am permitted TO cross the line
with my barley, and when | do cross the
line with 1t how much do | get for it?
Why. get the American price, tho same
that barley is selling for over there /
don't add to that price the 10 cents per
bushel that paid in at the customs
house. Therefore, tho iariff is a tax, but
unfortunately it is a tax upon our people
VINO ship their produce TO the United
States"
The fallacy of this argument has been
exposed time and time again, but the
high tariff organs keep reiterating it,
trusting, evidently, that by and by some
body will believe it.
Suppose that Sir John had LOCO pounds
of sugar on the Canadian side which he
desired to sell in the United States and
on which there was tariff of cents a
pound. Hepays the tariffof cents (S20)
upon landing ut Il United States custom
house and then sells his sugar at the
American price. He pays the tex and
not the consumer, eh? Will the Herald,
or some other g. 0. p. organ, please ex-
plain why, il the foreigner pays the tax,
sugar dropped over two cents pound
| the day the tariff was removed? When
the high tariff organs can demonstrate
chat the consumers OF sugar were not
taxed seven to eight pounds on every
dollars worth OF sugar during the years
there was tariff on it they can prove
the world fiat. Incidentally the removal
of the tariff on sugar and the correspond
ing reduction i'll price was a complete
yindieatio of tho Democrats claim
that the tariff is tax on the consumer
In the case of the barley example
quoted above the same rule hclds good
as to sugar. The price of grain of all
kinds is fixed, in the absence of tariff
upon the law of supply and demand. tft
variations in price in different localities
being governed by transportation charges
In event that Canada was large pro
ducer of barley and a tariff of Is cent:
was placed Gu the cereal. it would bl
done to protect tile American farmer
that is the object of the tariff, to protec
the home producer. And unless il
enabled him to obtain more for his pro
ductions it would not be protection
1t makes TO difference whether tlt
foreign exporter CT tile home importe
pays the tariff at the custom house In
price of the barley is advanced 10 the
amount OF the tariff aEtl he consume
must pay 1t III the end; but luckily for u.
consumer in this case and unfortunately
Tor the farmer, the United States is Il!
exporter Of grains, not an importer, :.nt
the tariff on wheat, barley, etc, is n,t,o
ly a bait to entice the farmers to swallow
the eastern manufacturers hook.
While it may be an open question tiG
high tariff is better for the Wjel,
country on general principles, and y
such is open toa fair and cal,;i:d tisrNs
sion, two claims by the negative sid
have been completely demonstrated;
1.-The tariff does not raise wages.
2.-The tariff is a tax.