New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1893-06-10
BPE1EFIST Table DUTIES.

One Of the most pcrpexing questions which
the Democratic party has settled is whether II
will put duties on tea, coffee and sugar IN
order to obtain the revenue which it Will sac
rificc by removing protective duties on MANI
featured product. The question has staggered
all the Democratic statesmen. IL has pushed
them SO far that part are prepared to adopt.
instead of the breakfast table dutics,' the re-
vival of the old and cver-odious income tax.
But it is plain enough that the Democratic
party at its National Convention did net pro
nouncc in favor of an income tax. but decide d
to appeal 20 the people in favor of tariff for
revenue only This being the fact it Is plain
enough that the duties on sugar, tea and coffee
mus, be imposed if the democratic party Is
faithful t, is pledges. made during the last
campaign. Thus "The Ncw-York SUM- gives
especial attention to a correspondent VINO pro-
pounds the following questions:
Do | understand you I, advocate duty on tea,
coffee and sugar! Is this the scheme by when W"
working people are - he benefited VIII you pcis'
inform me how much the average workman saves III
a year when the tariff Is taken OFF foreign manu-
featured goods and corresponding duty is placed on
tea. coffee and sugar
To this "The SUM- replies that a tariff for
revenue only must be enacted. i'll obedience 10
the dictate Of the National Con> cntion, and
that this involves Of necessity the tax upon
tea. coffee and sugar. IL goes on to say that
"while tho workingman may not be directly
benefited ly the abolition Of Protection, yet
his indirect benefit will far slirpasS every TEN
porary Inconvenience which he may he called
upon t. endure. or else the theory OF tariff re-
form and Of tariff for revenue only Is mis-
taken" One might be excused for su>pcciing
that there i, quaint but strong sarcasm hid
den under these words, Bat "Thc sun declines
10 enter into the mathematics OF the question.
enter into the mathematics of the question
and perhaps with wisdom, for almost every
worlingman. and certainly every working
mans wife. is able 10 answer the question
without much assistance We have been lv-
ing for good many years under high pro-
tcctive duties on manufactured products. II
has been said many times that such products
were much enhanced in cost by the protective
duties but ~ workineman or his vile has
been able to discover the fact.
On the other hand he ard his wife know
paticllarly well what the dTtics on sugar used
10 cost. and they also know that the pIlce OF
sugar which they purchase has been reduced
since the Mckinley bill passed about cents
Ter pound All the economical philosophers in
the country will fail if they try 10 dispute this
fact Of universal experience. And there are
other wOrkngmcn who remember III Ike
manner what the effect was Whon the old duties
on tea and cJifcc were abolished, a little more
than twenty years ago. All of them know
also that such imported products have on the
whole been rendered cheaper, although ri
times the control Of foreign markets has made
them more costly 10 the consumers III this
country The one thing obvious is that the
duties on sugar, which the Mckinney tariff
cleared away, took from the pockets OF the
people more than a dollar for every inhabitant,
more than - for every family in the United
States. 1t will puzzle any woikingman - dis
cover where he is t. get compensation, by any
reduction Of duties Oh manufactured products,
for the obvious increase in c. - Cf living which
a repeal of the Mckinley tariff would involve.