The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1892-07-13
PROTECTION vINDTCATEs ITSELF.


PROJECTION vISOICATEs ITSELF.
The tariff act OF 1890 is protective tariff
In distinction from a tariff for revenue
only. demanded today by the Democratic
national platform. tariff for revenue
only IS tax, and is paid by the consumer,
While protective tariff is not tax, and
may be paid wholly by another than the
consumer. To illustrate: Since the Nc
kinley bill passed with its tariff On pearl
buttons. such buttons as sold for $125 a
gross have been reduced so cents a gross
Who pays the tax?
The tariff was tax, of course. when we
protected sugar, a non-competing product,
and made the American consumer paw
Soo,Uo0,0 600 annually for the benefit of a
little corner of the country, like Louisiana,
butunder tariff whose protection of COM
petitive industries forces down the price,
as IN the case of steel rails, and other iron
products. linseed oil, salt, cotton ties and
other industries that have multiplied un-
der protection, competition results in a
fall of prices. The tin plate tariff went
into effect the 1st of July last year: but
the price in July. the first month after
the new duty was levied, showed no adj
vance from the month before, despite the
advance Of S1.29 box in the tariff. Who
paid the tax?
The foreigner whose price was forced
down after the increased duty was levied
paid it. Last December he was selling for
$3.22 box of plates upon which the DUTY
was $2.37, whereas in April he had sold
similar plates, upon which the duty was
SL08, for 81 81 a box. In other words.
when the duty was raised $129 a box his
price dropped $l.i0-a way foreigners have
of paving our tariffs.
In other words, the foreign price of tin
plate was lowered by foreigners at the cost
OF their labor in anticipation OF the loss of
the American market and competition
with American producers. Great Britain
answered our tin plate tariff by dropping
the price of the foreign product; the null
tipiication of the home industry will re-
duce the price of the home product.
Under free trade, Great Britain, our
competitor, would do as she always has
done, drop prices aud drive us out of
business, but under protective tariff she
cannot do this. Under protection COM
petition cuts down prices. Under protec-
ton our iron product has been multiplied
by twelve, while our population has been
multinlied by two. Taper hand-saw files
in 1865 cost 81. 81 a dozen, in 1891 the price
was Al cents a dozen. In 1865 the files
cost Is cents apiece, in 1891 3k cents
The
the file of three-quarters of it's price The
material of which these files were made
in 1866 cost IT'S cents pound, while today
the cost is under AZ cents pound.
The protected raw material has been
robbed Of its price. too. The old tariff on
the cotton ties made of iron was 35 per
cent, which was equivalent to Sill to Sl2
per ton. Previous to the taking effect of
the new tariff the lowest price at which
these ties had ever oeen sold was ~ cents
per pound. The Mckinley tariff increased
the duty TO 1886 per ton, and today cot
ton ties made of steel and far superior to
any iron tie ever imported, are being sold
by American manufacturers at cents per
pound, or 20 per cent. lower than the iron
ties had ever sold previous to the passage
of the Mckinley tariff.
The result of increasing the duty nearly
goo per cent. on cotton ties made of iron is
that cotton ties made Of steel are selling at
% per cent. lower values within eigh Teen
months after the passage of the Mckinley
tariff The South is now making and SELL
ing cotton ties cheaper than they have
ever been sold in the United States, and
they are aiding iii building mp their home
markets by the employment of American
labor to make the ties and produce the
raw materials from and by which the ties
are made.
These familiar illustrations answer the
question who pays the taxi" The Nc
kinley tariff law aims 10 give us free of
tax all those articles necessary to our COM
fort that we either do not or cannot sue
cessfuiIy produce at home. 1t gives us a
free list unprecedented in tariff leg station.
because il lifted the tax from all non-com-
petitiye foreign articles upou which duties
were imposed for revenue only. Tie
Democratic revenue tariff Of 1916 gave US
but u per cent. of our inportations free.
The tariff of 1897 gave US but Is per cent.
OF our linEpTkaLsbfis Tree. lie present
law gives Us nearly one-hali OF all we inn
port free of tax.
The duty paid on sugar, of which we
raised but a tenth of our consumption,
was revenue duty and Il tax affecting
TIA nyice of both the foreign and domestic
product. so the Republican party placed
Sur2r on the free list rs nou-competing
industry, thus .iiitins $50 ooO,O0o annual
tax from the American consumer. while
tho Democracy ali cry for taxed sugar. tea
and coffee IN the same breath that they all
yell FOR free wool. free lumber. free coal,
free iron and free hops. The Democracy
under Grover Cleve.and's leadership al
v0cate A tariff for revenue only. which, IS
We have shown. means serious loss 10 the
miner. the sheep grower. the logger. the
lumber man and the farmer. Against the
clear consequences of a tariff for revenue
only the workings of the Nc kinley tariff
furnishes the American protective policy
with 4 com n.ete vindicstlon.