The Jasper weekly courier. [volume] (Jasper, Ind.) 1858-1922, 1893-01-20

a Question That Answers ltseu w he1
Property stated - The Manufacture
Pockets the lar. the Consumer Pays IL
Let rs see.
Manufacturers SAYS the projections
ist cannot live in this country without
the tariff. We DO not believe IL Blu
4 is. nevertheless, the prOtectsonists
position Manufacturers cannot live
without the tariff. That Is 20 say. they
IRE naturally improbable in this coun'
ny. I'VE could not sell our goods in
the competition Of m open market
But put a duty on foreign importation
20 hat we can raise our prices and we
shall flourish Bat the duty paid on
imports goes 10 the government. and
hence does not help the manufacturer
directly. His protection" consists in
the shape Of an increase of price on
goods. which are not imported But
whcnce comes the bonuse
This Is n very simple question:; but
the protectionist Is 50 dextrous in elud-
ing the point that we may venture to
be entirely explicit There are but
three conceivable sources from whence
the protection bonus can be drawn:
l. Tho>e who pay duties > The pro
tected industries 5. The unprotected
industries
Now. does the bonus come from those
who pay duties? No: the duties col
lected from them are turned over To the
government
Does it come from the protected man
ufac,urerse No. they get it
Then il must come from the unpro-
tected industries The unprotected.
naturally profitable agricultural in
dustries are taxed to sustain the pro-
tected industries-compclled TO make
up their losses and paw besides what
the protected manufacturers are pleased
to call their profits
The protectionist dissentS Two peas
and two peas make -four peas. theoretic-
ally. But IL you rattle them up in a
box. and have your box big enough 20
let them rattle a long way around. YOU
will presently find five peas and maybe
a few beans As thus: IL is ali very
who paws the deficit Ii won't do for
plain. practical business men Why.
don't we manufacturers pay our pro
portion with the rests The halter pays
his twenty-five per cent to the shoe
maker. the shoemaker pays his twenty
1--WE per cent 20 the halter. and out of
the increased prices we are able 10 pay
the farmer more; everybody gets higher
profits and il IS a good thing all
around
Again let US be explicit Suppose we
- -
manufacturers. mine and farm
ers The farmers hoe their own row.
asking odds of nobody: but the glass
manufacturers and mine owners lie
mand a bonus Of so a year each. How.
on the protection plan. will they get its
Ii would he too barefaced a steal To
levy a tax on the farmer alone. They
will not do that They will avoid the
appearance of unjust discrimination by
and coal; they viii make all purchasers
of glass and coal contribute alike-slO0
each-to the protection fund
Very fair this looks. Every man is
taxed 800. $50 To foster the glass trade
and $50 to foster the coal trade. But
mark the singular result
The mine owners pay 800: the glass
manufacturer pays 500: the farmer
pays si00 Every man taxed alike.
Total revenue. $500
But nov for the division The mine
owner receives $3.50. the glass manu-
~facturer receives $3.50. the farmer
nothing.
Marvellous financicring. All are taxed
alike Yet the glass manufacturer and
the mine owner are ahead $50 each.
while the farmer-his industry is not
fostcred.
Again. il is plain that the effective
protection received by the mine owner
IS the so that he takes out more than
he puts in; and that the glass manu-
facturer'> protection Is the $50 that he
has taken out more than he put in: also
that the farmers loss Is the 800 that
he put in but did not get out; that is
ieven il we leave out Of calculation the
cost Of collection of duties aud the ex-
ira profits Of middle men which are cal
culated on the prices as increased by
the tariff. the protection" received by
the protected industries is paid by the
unprotected .ones-lIon John Dew 1T
Warner.