The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1897-08-07

the Mckinley law about 60 per cent. and
downward on about l20 articles, many Of
them of general use and consumption.
Among these is anthracite or hard coal,
the kind used for hOusehold fuel, upon
which duty of IS cents ton is levied.
This kind of coal was free in the Mckinley
law. as it was also in the Wilson law. and
has always been in Democratic laws. The
Democrats taxed only soft or bituminous
coal, which is used only in the furnaces Of
railroad locomotives and in the steam power
o! the factories of rich corporations. Other
articles in this list upon which the Mckin-
ley duties are increased are camphor, chalk,
chloride of lime, spirit varnishes, different
kinds of paint, opium, morphine, different
kinds of chemical acids, chlOrate of potash,
chlorate of soda, soda ash, and number
Of other chemicals of general use, pumice
stone, asphaltum, different kinds Of g lass
and glassware, freestone, granite, sand
stone. scissors and shears and blades Of the
same, finished or unfinished, watches,
watch cases and movements and watch
Jewels, clapboards, shingles, raw sugar and
molasSeS, oranges, lemons, lines, cocoa
nuts, pineapples, chocolate, mineral waters,
ginger ale, different manufactures of cotton,
hemp. different kinds of carpet, paper,
feathers for beds, hides of cattle, leather,
musical instruments, umbrellas parasols
and sunshadeS
THE AVERAGE OF DUTIES DELUSIVE.
When it is stated as a fact shown by
the Treasury experts that the average ad
valorem of the rates levied by the Nc
kinley law is 81 per cent startling view
of its oppressive burdens is undoubtedly
revealed, and one which would have
alarmed our antebellum ancestors, who
believed that eternal vigilance is the
price Of liberty into heroic resistance.
But the fact is these figures, astounding
as they are, do not adequately Y tell the tale,
as will appear by further inspection of
the table Of figures prepared by Treasury
Expert Evans, and presented by Senator
White, to which reference has already
been made There it is shown that upon
81 article, many Of them necessarily con
smed by the masses of the people. the
duties range from 100 to 22f per cent.
Among these are common window glass,
upon which the duty ranges, according t"
size, from l07 to l6S per cent; pen knives
or pocket knives of the cheaper qualities,
upon which the duty is III per cent;
wooden goods of the different descriptions.
upon which the duty ranges from l02 per
cent on the better qualities and ll9 per
cent on the cheaper qualities Of tannelS
up to III per cent on the cheaper quail
ties of wooden or worsted shawls; the cheap
er quality of blankets, upon which the
duty is l25 per cent; wool hats, upon
which the duty is III per cent on the
better qualities and 2O3 per cent on the
cheapest quality; felts, upon which the
duty is 104 per cent on the better quail
ties and 224 per cent on the cheapest
quality; pulp, paper and books, upon
which the duty is 200 per cent.
The same table shows that upon 81
other articles, also of general use, the duty
ranges from % to 100 per cent. In this
class are found wooden manufactures, such
as shawls, hannels, blankets, dress goods,
cloths and ready made clothing OF Il better
quality than those above enumerated IN
the class above 100 per cent; carpets OF
different descriptions, felts Of the higher
qualities, pocket knives Of better quality
than those enumerated in the class bearing
above 100 per cent duty, 9 lass and glass
ware of better quality than that ennm-
Grated in the higher duty class, starch,
currants, sugar castor oil, spirit varnish
and many other things that poor people
have to use.
There is still another large class Of more
than 200 articles upon which the duties
are shown to range from 80 to 70 per cent.
This class embraces all kinds of cotton
and fabrics, refined sugar,
upon which the duty is n per cent, um
brellas, parasols, etc, cutlery, chlnaware,
porcelain. and other earthenware, bread
soda, any many other useful articles.
Thus it is seen that within these three |
classes of articles, upon which the al va
lorem equivalent of the duties levied ranges |
from 80 to above 200 per cent, are IN
cluded the bulk of the articles consumed |
by our people, and especially the poorer |
classes, and in fact the greater portion OF
the article embraced in the entire tariff |
schedules. Lower and nominal duties |
placed upon Il number Of inconslderable |
articles of which in the nature Of things
here are few importatiOns, serve to bring |
lown the average of duties, which, as al
ready stated, is delusiye.
HEAVY BURDEN ON THE PEOPLE.
1t is impossible, of course, in news
paper article, to 90 into sufficient detail to
show the exact extent to which the bur
lens of the American people all Of whom
are compelled to consume the taxed arti-
lies, are increased by the large measure
If increased taxation carried by this vic
ous bill with its excessive application OF
he protection principle. 1t has been
demonstrated by Senators who have par
-icipated in the debate, that the increased
cost of carpeting room OF ordinary dl-
nensions will be $14 or upward, and it
mas been estimated that the cost Of living
lnder the new schedule of taxation will
be increased on an average of 80 to 40 per
cent. While the average difference be-
,ween the rates of duty levied by the VIII
son law and the Dingley lar are, as already
stated, as 80 to 81 per cent, yet the du-
les in the latter being levied upon diff
ferent and more onerous principle, its in
;rease of the burden of taxation is really
greater than is revealed by this disparity
n figures Perhaps the most concise and
summary of the oppressive
character of the Dingley law is found in
he statement that while it will probably
axe from $3.50, 900, 900 to $4OO, 600,
300 from the pockets of the people who
consume the articles it taxes, it will only
put about $175, 600, 600 of that amount