The Kimball graphic. (Kimball, Brule County, Dakota [S.D.]) 1883-1905, 1896-04-11

party has based its whole assault upon
Democratic politics, and its appeal to The
American people to reverse them. upon
the statement that Democratic changes
in our tariff laws are the sole cause OF
industrial depression. That is the only
issue upon which it asks 20 be restored
to power, and Mr.. Mckinley has become
Its logical candidate as representing it.
The voters have been told, from one end
of the country to the other, that the
carrying ont OF free trade ideas by the
tariff law now in effect, has sacrificed
the revenue and destroyed or crippled
industries beyond the power of anything
short Of general and large increase in
tariff duties to repair. How manyo the
plain people Of the country. we wonder
have looked into the figures and are
familiar with the actual proportions of
the tariff reduction accomplished under
the German act.
The New York Times presents some
figures which expose very neatly the es-
tonishlng humbug of The Republican
claim. The annual average of all duties
on foreign imports, outside OF the free
list, for the four years in which the Nc
kinley act was in force, was 1896 per
cent. The average rate on dutiable
goods actually imported under the pres
ent tariff is II 755. In the yelr 1891, in
which the Republican tariff was, one
which had just been readjustel carefully
by Republican administration. the
average rate of duty was 4l.6l per cent.
The Times agues very pertinently: IF
1886 per cent was protection, is 41.15
per cent free trade.?" We see from
these figures that the total decrease of
the average tariff rate accomplished BY
the tariff revision of the Fifty-third con
gress was less than per cent. In the
earlier days OF the Republic, when, il
ever, protection was most necessary to
the building up OF infant industries,
tariff ranging from 10 to 90 per cent
would have been considered excessive. 1t
WAS only the necessities OF raising reve-
nue for War purposes that made possible
the great advance in tariff duties at the
time of the War OF the Rebellion, and
since. The country was subjected to an
enormous burden for which there was
no longer any excuse, which served only
to roll up immense fortunes for its IA
vored beneticiaries, and from whose ex-
actions the people demanded relief.
The partial and altogether too limited
response Of the last congress was re-
duction, which, as we see, amounted to
only IL Of the highest rates imposed;
namely, those levied by the Mckinley
act. After that change had been made
there remained a protection OF more
than 10 per cent on the whole range of
imported goods. Not only is that true,
but the official report shows that this
percentage is calculated on d liberal
basis, since the value OF free imports was
less in 1895 than in any one ofssthe four
years lufifssaictsly preceding, 1t is
seldom that those who are arguing liUty /,
for and against the protective principle
condescend to come down to facts and |
figures. The people have been told that |
millions of dollars were lest, and hun
dreds of industries threatened with ex-
tinctiOn by the Democratic sl.shlng of
tariff rates. On the contrary, the mex
cusable error Of the present tariff act is
that it is thoroughly protective, and the
average of duties which it levies is prob
ably quite double the amount that would
cover the difference between cost OF pro-
duction here and abroad, including the
difference III the wages of labor.
Our panic and our business losses are
due exclusively to the extravagant ex-
penditures foisted upon the country by
prodigal Republican congress, and by its
financial policy, which has shaken the
foundations of commercial interests and
involved the nation in universal distrust.
Whenever a Republican speaker
or newspaper tells the people
that the country has suffered from
Democratic free trade" let the reply be
the simple question whether an average
change of less than per cent in exces-
siye duties is competent to produce such
effects: and whether an average tariff of
4I.7o is free trade, or even an approach
to it?-St. Paul Globe,