The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1894-01-20

weight for wooden cloth double width.
indeed, much lighter than most of it,
there is 80 cents per yard duty to be-
gin with, and then added to that, fifty
per cent. of the value of the CLOTH
What is this duty imposed for? To
protect the American manufacturer, is
it not? Is not that the theory of the
Republican high tariffites? What pro-
lection is there, in this big tariff, if it
is not to enable the American manu-
facturer to charge for his goods an
amount equivalent to the foreign price
with the duty added? And does not
that have the effect to make the Amer
lean purchaser pay that high price
for his cloth, Independent of the differ
ence in wages for making the suit?
How, then, can any sane and honest
person say Cloth is cheaper here than
lit is across the sea?"
But suppose there was any approach
to truth in that assertion and it was
a fact that cloth or clothing can be
bought anywhere near as cheaply here
as in Europe, why make such fuss
about the contemplated reduction in the
tariff? If the claim about American
cheapness is true, what is the use of
keeping on the exorbitant tariff? How
can the manufacturers be ruined and
why should there be a reduction in
wages, because of a mere lowering of
duties, if the articles are now made
and sold as cheap as they are abroad?
The Tribune asserted that tariff re-
form papers claimed there was to be
no reduction of the duty on woolens
but only on WOOL" There was no ex-
cuse for such an assertion, because
the Wilson bill proposes to do both.
Now the Tribune has this:
Tuesday The Herald said:
I'VE showed that it is not proposed
to put woolens on the free list but
only to reduce the tariff on the manu-
featured article, and make the raw
material free.
What response is offered to this cor
rection of the Tribune's misstatement?
Here it is:
'That is bungling, confused SEN
tence."
Is it? Well, never mind. We be-
lieve plain people in their right minds
can understand it. And when there
is a reduction of the duty on manufac-
tured woolens, and the raw material
is admitted free Of duty, will not that
have the effect of cheapening the price
of wooden cloth and clothing in this
country? If 20, the proposition to
bring this about is not an excuse
and it is not "falsehood." But if the
high tariff does not keep up the prices
of those articles it is of no use and
ought to be cut down, and if 1T does
maintain them it ought to be reduced
for the benefit of the consumers, who
include the whole population of the
country. The falsehood is in the de-
NAL of this plain proposition.
It must be clear to every reasonable
mind alse that if the manufacturers
obtain free of duty all classes of for
eign wool needed to mix with our home
article, they can afford to make wooden
goods cheaper. Therefore the PROPOSE
ton to reduce the duty on the manu-
featured article, while causing them to
compete with foreign markets, will
bring wooden goods to a lower figure
in this country without injuring the
manufacturer or requiring a, reduction
of wages. because the difference in both
cases is more than covered by the tar
iff remaining, coupled with the benefits
of free wool"
If that is not perceptible to our in
consistent contemporary. it must be
through confusion of mind and not be-
cause of any error in the plan and
purposes of tariff reform.