The state rights democrat. [volume] (Albany, Linn County, Oregon) 1865-1900, 1892-07-08
Che 9etturrat.
WHO PAYS TIE TARIFF rAxq

tits the foreigner who pays the tariff tax
says Mr. Mckinley. The treasury figures
tell a different story. Mr. Mckinley insists
that the foreigner deducts the American
duty from his price in order to procure the
pleasure of selling in American markets.
In other words, Mr. Mckinley asserts that
the foreigner takes off ofhis regular price
on pearl buttons Ia per cent, on shoe but
tons SO per cent, on tannic acid 247 per
cent, on sulphuric ether 800 per cent, just
for the pleasure of selling in this splendid
market. The cotton goods makers, accord
ing to this poet of mathematics, deduct 40
per cent, the makers of glass and glassware
56 PER cent, of iron and steel SO per cent, of
Of readv-made woolen clothing 20 per cent.
Under these circumstances the foreigner
must regard the splendid" American
market as more ornamental than profitable
OF course Mr. McRinley's assertion is alb
surd. Americans who buy in foreign
markets know that they pay for the goods
they purchase the price which is charged to
those who buy for domestic consumption,
and who do not intend to export to this
country. AS to the amount of the tax the
treasury figures tell the truth.
During the fiscal year 1891 the custom
h,use collected on foreign goods entering
this country for consumption the enormous
tax of S2I5, ,790,6S6. The total value of
these goods was s466, ,465, ,17S, so that the
rate of tax was more then 46 per cent.
There is no tin plate manufactured in
this country. Notwithstanding Mr. Nc
Kinley's assertion that there are today
twenty-eight tin plate industries in the
United States, he knows that American
tin plate is myth, and that all the tin
plate that goes to the making of the tin
goods for domestic and trade uses is i'm
ported. On this article in 1891 the custom
house collected a tax of $40, ,577, lis, and the
purchaser of dinner pals, kitchen pans,
roofing material and canned goods paid
t.lis tax, with the added profits ofimporter,
wholesaler and manufacturer. The tax was
paid In this country to our own custom
house by the American firms to which the
goods were consigned. 1t was added to the
original cost of the goods by the importer,
who reckoned his profit on the aggregate.
Each subsequent purchaser added his profit
to the total, and the last man to pay the
original cost of the article, the duty, the
duty the interest and the profits was the
man who put the tin plate to practical use.
A similar story could be told of glass, on
which the government collected tax of
81 $50, ,220 in 1891. The duty prohibited
the importationof the largest sizes of plate
glass, but the rate of tnx on the smaller size
was 81 per cent, on another 1858 per cent,
on common window glass from 4S to 10
per cent, on table glass 60 per cent Mr.
Mckinley would have us believe that the
foreigner gave US the glass and paid a
bonus of 81 and 10 per cent besides!
The government collected on cotton
wearing apparel tax of S4,49S,742, on
woolen wearing apparel 81, ,S25, 719, and on
wooden dress goods a tax of sI6, 6,616, ,9O2.
All these taxes were collected in this
country. They were paid by American i'm
porters, who brought them here to sell
them to American consumers. If the foreign
exporters paid cent af the tax the custom
house does not know it, the American i'm
porter does not know it and Mr. Mckinley
does not know it, while the consumer, if he
will take the trouble to think, knows that
he paid it ali, with interest and profits
added.
Is Mr. Mckinley solemn, ignorant hum
bug or a disingenuous monopoly defender? +?
New York World.