San Saba County news. [volume] (San Saba, Tex.) 1874-19??, 1893-12-08

The tendency of the Wilson
tariff bill in most instances is re-
euction of present duty on manu-
featured goods. and a proposed
change from specific duty to ad
valorem duty. But in all cases
where there is a proposed reduc-
ton on manufactured goods or
wares the raw material suffers a
corresponding loss. Hence the
manufacturers, virtually, have lost
none Of their protection. For IN
stance, the duty on wooden goods
is proposed to be reduced from so
per cent adj yalorem to 40 per cent,
bat wool is put on the free list.
Hence the manufacturer is not
hurt because he can buy his raw
material at free list" prices; ana
SO on, for the most part through
the list of productions. The pro
ducers of raw materials are the
ones upon whom the weight of the
reductions must ultimately fall.
1t is also noticed that there are
several other items, of which the
United States are exporters rath-
er than importers, that are on the
free list. To sum the whole thing
in a few words raw material and
such manufactured articles as do
not enter into competition are on
the free list, while all manufac-
tured articles that enter into COM
petition with foreign trade have
almost as much protection as ever.
True it is proposed to reduce
their protection, but at the same
time it is also proposed to give
them their raw material at foreign
competition prices, by putting
same on the free list
Even granting, however, that the
bill in the above respect is all
right, and we do not presume to
say but what it is, yet we must
confess that it had never occurred
to US that "tariff reform" necessa-
rily meant tariff reduction" We
see already tibet the proposed re-
duction which will amount to about
s50,0OO,000 per year must be made
up in some way, probably by in
creasing internal revenue. We
we're we'll aware of the fact that an
actual and clear tariff reduction
under present circumstances. was
impossible. But the tariff plank
in the democratic platform not on
ly declares for tariff for revenue
only" but also declare for reduc-
ton of government expenses to an
"honest and economical basis.
But in reading the proposed bill
we failed to notice a single in
instance where there Is a proposed
reduction in the government ex-
penses. If the government ex-
penses are already adjusted on an
honest and economical basis, why
were those words inserted in the
democratic tariff plank? If the
government expenses are not adj
justed on an honest and economi-
cal basis, why does this bill not
propose an honest and economical
basis? But no. 1t simply pro-
poses a reduction of revenue in
come of 100000 which must in
the end be met by the producers
of raw material. This same $780,
900, 600 must be replaced in some
way, probably by an increase of
internal revenue. As we have pre-
yiously stated in the News, the
tariff is reduced on some things but
is added to other things. And by
the tranposition of duty the man
ufacturers virtually lose none of
their protection, the government
expenses remaining the same, viz,
about s5OO,OOO.OOO per year. This
must be met by tariff duties
in one way and another, hence SO
long as the government expenses
remain as thev are no actual "tar-
If reduction" is possible. Tariff
reform" however is possible, but
not probable. While there are
many good features in the bill, yet
on the whole it is not what it might
have been. For the reasons con
tanned herein above sketched we
therefore recommend that the bill
do not pas.