Iowa County democrat. [volume] (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1877-1938, 1895-07-04
REVENUE PRODUCER.
WILSON BILL SUPERIOR TO THE
M'KlNLEY TARIFF LAW.

Tariff Reform indicated by Comparison
Countrys Welfare Revival of Business
and Increased Wages.
che comments i'll the public press by
the saemies of tariff reform upon the
recent decision Of the supreme court of
the United States that the schedules of
the Wilson tariff act became operative,
not on Aug. l, 1894, as stated in the
not itself, but on Aug. 20, 1894, when
it went into effect by operation Of law,
show either an entire ignorance of the
real state of affairs or else a desire to
mislead the reading public, says the
Philadelphia Record. During the month
Of August, 1894, prior to the 2Sth inst,
the only tariff act that was in effect
upon the statute books was the McKin
ley act, and therefore, as a consequence,
duties were necessarily assessed upon all
imports brought into the country during
that period in accordance with the rates
set forth in the schedules Of that act.
When, however, the Wilson act be-
came law on Aug. %, 1894, those i'm
porters upon whose particular importa
tions the schedules of the new tariff had
lowered the rate of duties saw an oppor-
tunity to save money in case a favorable
decision should be rendered by the courts
upon the question as to which date the
new act went into operation, and hence
their protests were filed against the
classification of their merchandise under
the Mckinley act, and the cases were
taken into court, with the result, as
above stated, of decision against their
contention.
Those importers, however, who would
have had to pay higher duties under
the schedules of the new act-notably
tho Sugar trust of this country, which,
instead of getting the raw sugar for its
refineries free as under the Mckinley
act, had, under the terms of the Wilson
act, to pay duty of 40 per cent upon
the value of its raw sugar-of course
filed no protests and did not carry the
question to the higher tribunals.
No matter how the courts might have
decided the question as to the date on
which the new act went into effect it
would have made no substantial differ !
ence in the receipts Of tho government
from customs for the % days of last Au
gust, as tho revenue that would have
been lost upon the merchandise upon
which duties were reduced by the new
act would have been made up by the
new duty imposed upon the one article
of raw sugar, and this would have much
more than made up the difference had
not the Sugar trust for several months
prior to Aug. /, 1894, accumulated
large stock of raw sugar in this country
III anticipation of the passage of the new
act, and hence did not import very large
ly during the % days of August, 1894,
The allegation, however, that the Gus
toms revenue would have been larger
since Aug. %, 1894 if the Mckinley
act had continued in force instead Of the
Wilson act is utterly without any foun
dation in fact. On the contrary, the sta
tistics show that the receipts under the
Wilson act rs compared month by month
with those received last year under the
Mckinley net largely exceed those de-
rived from the latter act, while tho
treasury deficit has been correspondingly
less Thus for the month of May, 1895,
the deficit was So, 2S6, 1885, while for the
month of May, 1894, it was SO, 632, 146,
and while the deficit for the | | months
of the present fiscal year up to June /,
1895, during nine months of which time
the Wilson act has been i'll force, was
somewhat less than $47 900, 900, the
deficit for the same ii months of the
preceding fiscal year, during the whole
of which period the Mckinley act was
in effect, was over $40, 100000
Those unfair partisan critics who COM
ment upon the treasury deficit incurred
since the Democratic administration
came into Office carefully neglect to state
that about three-fourths of the whole
deficit since that time has been caused
by the failure of the Mckinley act to
produce sufficient revenue to meet the
expenses of the government. The Wilson
tariff act has already, in the short space
of nine months since its passage. dem
onstrated its superiority rs a revenue
producer over the Mckinley act, and
with the unprecedented revival of all
our home industries, together with the
increase of the wages Of the workingmen
of the country under its beneticent pro-
visions, the friends of tariff reform can
have no better vindication Of their &C.
ton than by comparing in every possible
view the effects Of the two acts upon the
welfare OF the country
Activity In the Iron Trade.
1t is rare thing to find the iron mar