The Hickman courier. [volume] (Hickman, Ky.) 1859-current, 1892-03-18
TARIFF TALK.
Debate on tho Mckinley Law In
Congress.


second congress was begun In the
house of representatives, on Wednes-
day, March o, by Mr. McMillin. OF
Tennessee. who defended the justice
OF the Springer wool bill and reviewed
in mastery manner the Mckinley
law and its damaging effects upon
commerce, the industries and the
wageworkers of the country. He
spoke as follows:
The last congress imposed the highest tariff
taxes over levied in this country II also made
che most extravagant appropriatons.ever made
Hcro In time Of peace. This congress WAS sent
here to correct both evils The expenditures in
| the two years for which the last congress ap-
propratcd, besides the Deficiencies, aggregated
| N,eo,0o 600, $40 per family annually. or more
than s5c0, 900 900 eachoa bear, about onethird Of
| all the money in existence in the United
| States. Can there be permanent prosperity
| while one-half or even one-third Of all the
money has TO go through the hands OF federal
taxgatherer every Year, There is remedy.
| Impose less taxes and spend less money That
Il what this congress means TO do.
The tariff law has now been in operation tor
| one year and Ave months. Where are the bene-
| fetal effects that we're 10 follow from IT. Where
Is the magnificent price the farmer and wool
grower was to realize from IT. Where are the
| increased wages the laboring man was to getf /
sec before me many d man who voted for that
monstrous measure. II the facts were with
| them they would proclaim them to the world l
defy contradiction when say the farmer has
realized from two 10 three cents less on the
pound from his wool than he did before And
| challenge any representative here to point TO
single line OF manufactures in which the labor
ers wages have been increased by that law.
The labOrer has been forced 10 pay more for
the roof that shelters him for the hat that Gov
ers his head, and the woolens that cover mis-
| back. He has had to pay more for the linen he
| wears, the hammer and hoe with which he
works. yet his wages have not gone up one
| cent What benefit is increased protection,
| then, to him? II was passed under pretense Of
/ desire TO benefit him. yet while his wages
| stand still, or go down, what he, his wife and
children consume has been increased in price
| internationally.
ask any Of the republicans on the committee
| Of ways aud means TO point 10 a single laborer
| whose wages have been increased by that law.
| II IL diminishes the revenue received by the
| government, II IL does not increase the value OF
the raw material to the farmer, IL 1t docs not In
crease the wages OF labor II IL fosters trusts, II
u makes pooling profitable, in heavens name
let us not further iegalize the robbery, but try
| some better method.
I Hearings were had by the WAYS and means
| committee on the Mex nley bill. Some farmers
| and representatives Of agricultural associations
! came before the committee. Without single
| he'd that the value Of farms had gone down
within the last six years all the way from Is TO
| ~ per cent. Among those who came urging re-
| lief for the people were the many who sought 70
| still further exact tribute from the people for
| their own enrichment II il had been less seri-
Gus IL would have been ludicrous TO behold.
With solemnity and seeming sincerity they
| asked congress, while the treasury was over
flowing with surplus, 20 levy higher import du-
ties upon the things the people must consume in
order that their capital might declare greater
dividend. And their demand was needed
The duty on wool was in 1851 placed at eleven
cents pound on unwashed wool Ii was claimed
that this would foster the sheep industries and
increase the value OF wool to the farmer. What
were the resultsf In 1865 the year after the
enactment OF the law raising the duty on wool
there were 81 6SA 900 sheep in the states east OF
the Missouri and Mississippi rivers In 1891
there were only $4,000 sheep in the same
territory. a reduction Of more than onehalf in
the twenty-four years when high tariff on wool
had been in force This In face OF the fact that
the population in these states has vastly In
| creased. II the increase OF sheep had kept pace
with the increase Of population there would
have been probably 75,OoO,0oo
| Great things were promised 10 the state OF
Ohio in the way of increase Of the sheep hus-
! handry by increased tax on wool That state
| had in lsts 6,730OO sheep; In 1870 il had only
| 9as 90; in 1880 40s0,0oO in 1883 $1,000 in
lsqO IL had but $4,000, though in 1891 1t had
| 4 1911 ,Ol0-a falling on Of more than onethird in
the state OF Ohio during the twenty-one years Of
protective tariff on wool and In that time the
| population had increased more than 100000
The results are no. more encouraging in the
state OF Illinois which had IN 1888 2736 600 sheep
and in 1891 only 77l,cO0 SO l might go on
| through the eastern states. thorough inves-
| uration Of the question shows that the increase
| Ia the sheep husbandry has been In the west,
! where the grazing was limitless and cheap
The price Of wool at this time is about half
| what IL was at the time OF the passage OF the
act Of March 2, 1867 The whole matter may be
summed up ia ih5 fact shat after twenty-five
| years OF experiment with high rates of duty on
| wool the result has been a reduction OF half
in the number OF sheep in states east Of the Mis-
sissppi and Missouri rivers and a reduction Of
about oue-han in the price of wool.
Nor have the results been encouraging to
wool manufacturers. They have been restricted
as 10 the quality Of wool they could afford 10
buy In the grease by reason OF the tariff They
have been restricted in markets substantially 10
their own country. They have been forced 10
use shoddy as a substitute for wooden goods.
The rags that have already fallen from the
backs OF bcggars in other countries have been
lsod as a substitute for wool.
| This high tax on wool has forced the use Of
| vast quantities Of substitutes for wool-shoddy,
mungo and other adulterants used In the manu-
facture OF wooden goods. According TO the re-
u a.
| taken tho place Of the heecCs Of % 10000 sheep,
Or about two-thrds as many as there are N me
| whole United States.
| The first quarter OF a century OF the history
Of the government there was no duty imposed
90 wool The first duties that were imposed
we're insignificant as compared with those now
IN existence The pretense that a high duty
would increase the number OF sheep In the older
| states has not yet been verified The value OF
wool q similar quality has varied very little In
She markets Of Boston and London since that
duty was imposed occasionally a little higher
abroad, sometimes little higher in this coun-
try, but the average advantage In favor of one
! country or the other has not been one-iifth OF
he duty imposed by our government, which
| proves cpnclusiyely thai, while the cost 10 TIT
! consumer has been increased by the duty and
| tlc possibilities OF the manufacturers have
been restricted both In market and quantity
he sheep husbandmen have derived no sub
/ stuutial benefit
The tariH rates levied at the close of the reyo
uuonary war, when, II ever, we were In i'm
alncut danger OF having our infant ndustrie,
oyprw hemed by England and other old coun
tries were not one-sixth Of those imposed b,
she present law Those levied TO carry on tn,
war with Great Britain in 1872, when this capt
ial city mad its baptism Of fire, were not one
third So great They are about two and one
half times greater than the rates imposed q
carry ON the Mexican war and " per cent
] hiF NV AAteu AiiN iat'S AhlOoSd W NAii9 oh ph
recent civil war.
When the Morrill, tariff was imposed to carr!
on our great civil war and maintain more thai
2OOO O0O men In the field II was said by tn
author Of the bill and those who favored IL tina
the high rates were only temporary and woul'
be reduced with the return Of peace. Abou
onc-third Of "a century has now elapsed, NOR
ihan Wo-thirds Of the expenses incurred hav
been paid, every legitimate excuse for the In
reuse OF rates has disappeared, and yet no
only has there been no reduction in tarir rates
but they have been vastly increased. The &c
Of lss2 imposed an average rate OF % per cent
The two acts Of 1892 which supplanted IL hay
imposed an average Of nearly o. per cent Thi
Is not the worst The rates OF duty were places
lower by that act on luNuries than ON the neces
sIrios Of life There was less increase on tn
liner goods than on the coarscr, There va
less iucr~ssc on silks than ON wooden goods
, less ON irwelry than ON cutlery, less on Ala
muuds than on table-kuiVes, less on champaign
than on linens,
There was a tax on incomes, corporations, ct,
II Melted In the last two years Of existeuo
about Ni0WoWO hut IL was repealed. Thereh
the parties most able TO pay taxes were r,
1 ucytd fhis was collected on those who had
| respectable or large cash income. II was 60
! lcctcd on lcfatoCs and deyisees who inherite
property without working for IT, and coul
| therefore reasonably afford 10 contribute a mos