The Superior times. [volume] (Superior, Wis.) 1870-1912, 1892-04-02

mai IaIurc. w e Sudll take al Tduuon u
dozen of the free trade orators asser-
tons, and show their falsitv, and then
we shall drop Mr.. McMilin.
The speech began as follows:
/. Mr.. Chairman, the last Congress I'M
posed the highest tariff taxes ever levied
in this country.
From the last annual report of the
chief of the Bureau of Statistics we
learn that the average ad valorem rate
on dutable imports has exceeded 10!
per cent. during ten different years.
The average ad vaiorem rate on ali i'm
ports under the Mckinley law is now
about 2la per cent, less than it has been
for thirty years, less than it was during
ten years of the Walker tariff. less in
fact than it was under our frs, tariff of
a century ago. In 1866 the duty collect
ed per capita was S4.96. In 1882 it was
81 For the four years preceding
the passage of the Mckinley bill it ex
ceeded $500 During the first twelve
months of the new tariff it was less
than IS. In 1882 less than - per cent.
of our impOrtations came in free. Now
81 per cent. come in free.
IL. Mr.. McMiln says the tariff law has
now been III operation for Cne year and
five months.
Part ot it has, but part has not. The
most important changes in the blli add
ed sugar to the free list and increased
the duty on tin-plate. The former took
effect less than twelve months ago,
while the latter has been in operation
less than nine months.
III. | challenge any representative here
to point to a single line OF manufactures in
which the laborer'S wages has been HI
creased by that law.
How about plush, pearl buttons, lin
en-. cutlery and other industries estab-
lished or aided by the new tariff? Free
traders collect dozen instances of re-
duction in wages. They pass over every
reported instance of increased employ
ment and advanced wages directly
traceable to the tariff The last annual
report of the Bureau of Statistics of La
Dor of New York State shows that in
| ,94l cases wages were increased, while
IN HI cases wages were reduced. 1t
further shows that Il reduction in the
hours of labor took place in 2,0S5 in
stances, all of which should be counted
as increased pay. Could We present
the statistics from every state it would
be shown that the Mckinley bill Was
indeed laborers' bill. Mr.. McMllin
does not speak of the present condition
OF the laborers of free trade England.
". Tie laborcr has been forced to pay
more for the roof that shelters him for the
hat that covers his head. and the wOolenS
that cover his back. lie has had to pay
more for the linen he wears, the hammer
and hoe with which he works.
With one exception the price of ev-
erything Mr.. McMillIn names is lower
now than before the bill passed-in fact,
is cheaper than ever before IN our
history.
V. The act of 1883 imposed an average
rate OF 10 per cent. The two acts Of 1890,
which supplanted it. have imposed an
average OF nearly 90 per cent.
The last figures at hand bearing on
this statement are those ending Sep
tember 50. 1891. During the twelve
months ending on that day our i'm
ports were valued as follows:
Free OF ti9, i63 i@9
......~-... AIS, g0S loo
Total duties collected during these
twelve months. $685. .0i0,0D
If Mr.. McAliilin cares to get at the
truth he can divide Sl9j ,O40.U2O by S4l3,-
205, l6o, and he will find that instead of
our average rate being 80 per cent. it
was only IL, while on the total imports,
the honest way of reckoning, it was only
% per cent, and is still less for the
calendar year 1891.
VI. Il is true that fifty odd millions of
dollars was taken off the sugar tax. But
this was no trceWlll offering, for the same
measure provided for the payment of
twelve millions TO the producers of sugar
as b1unticS.
Government estimates are that the
amount of bounties for the current year
will amount to s., 793. 900, almost all of
which will 90 to Southern sugar growers.
The Mckinley law is not sectional
law" as every Democratic tariff has
been.
VII. Again while the fifty odd millions
of tax was taken OFF sugar. increase of du-
ties. amounting to about SIXty-hve millions,
was PUT on other things and generally on
tie necessaneS of life.
The amount of duties collected during
the fiscal year preceding the Mckinley
tariff act was S226. 30, ,03T. During the
first twelve months of the operation OF
the new tariff the duties collected
amounted to only Sla3, ,04O, ,020. l0-a de-
crease Of S33, ,500.0l7, ana this will be
much further reduced under IA whole
wear with free sugar. Whereis Mr.. Nc
Milin's increase Of $50, 600, 900?
Will When an American citizen buys
here an article manufactured abroad he
paws for not only the original cost abroad.
but the cost of TRANSPORTATION to this coun-
try and the duty collected at the port of
entry. and when he uses and consumes the
article he pays the tax I'M o0Sed by the gov
crnmtns.
Why then have the Chemnitz hosiery
makers, the Sheffield cutlery manu-
facturers. the tin plate barons Of Wales
reduced their prices TO meet the IN
creased duty on their wares? Why
does the Canadian sell his barley for
less than the New York farmer gets for
his? These people confess and COM
plain that they pay the duty.
IN. If the foreigner and not our citizen
pays the duty. why did we relieve him
from paying millions of tax for us on
sugar? Why not let him continue to pay
the fifty odd millions?
Protectionists never claim that the
tariff is not tax on imported articles
which we cannot produce in this cOun
trp. The tariff on tea or coffee now
taxed in free trade England), and
finally on sugar, was removed, and they
were made tree TO our people for this
reason.
X. \ rich man going abroad can bring
back thousands OF dollars worth of wear
ing apparel free from taxation.
This statement reveals an ignorance
/ W hich is inexcusable in a member of the
wavs ana means committee, or il is de-
| hberate talsehood, OF which we gladly
acquit the honorable member. Para
graph 30 of section of the Mckinley
/ law, which enumerates the articles that
/ when imported shall be free OF duty,
says:
49, Wearing apparel and other person
al effects not merchandise of persons ar
irving in the United States shall be free,
but this exemption shall not he held To in
clude articles not actually IN use and ne
ceSSarv for the use of such persons.
ri. They lthe manufacturers have
been forced to use shoddy as a substitute
Tor WOODEN goods. The rags that had al
ready fallen from the back of beggarS in
| other countries have been used aS a SubSti
! tute for wool
| The quality and value of imports OF
| shoddy, mungo. rags, tiocks and waste
| for $50 were 4,9S0,3527 pounds. valued
at 3. .052. .07s, while for the calendar year
! 1891 under the new tariff only 2l5. IA