The times., 1897-06-03
SOME PERTINENT QUESTIONS
To the Editor of The Times:


Willie our Congressman and their con
stituents are vigorously discussing the
tariff question, to enlighten the general
public thereon, will not some one have
the Kindness To briefly, consistently and
logically answer the following important
questions:
/. Can tariff on an article cheaper 1t.
yet simultaneously raise its producer
wages? II SO, how?
2. Would shrewd protectionists tlike
HavcIneyer, desire tariff ifit cheapened
what they -goods-and made dearer
what they buy-iabor?
3. Can we protect laborers by making
dear Through tariffs, what they buy =
goods and admitting free Through unre-
strictedimmigration) what they seii-labof:
4. If tariff on products cheapens them.
ought it be put on tand cheapen) wheat
and other farm products. which form the
bulk Of our exports? Why cheaper for
foreigners that with which we principally
pay them
5. But. if the proposed tariff increases
prices. Will It not thereby necessitate
larger volume OF money to handle the same
products, thus correspondingly increasing
the financial stringency?
6. Ii tariff on articles cheapens them,
ought 1t not be put ightest on the finished
products and heaviest on the raw material
Ito cheaper itl and thus widen our manu-
facturers' margin of profit Why does the
proposed tariff invert this order?
z. If the tariff is no tax, why re-
fund to exporting manufacturers os per
cent or the duty. on their imported raw
material? Why do so, If the foreigner
pays it? DO tariffs enable US TO tax
foreigners and them to tax Us, thereby
perpetuating taxation without repre-
sentation,' against which our patriotic fore
fathers rebelied? Can We tax ourselves
into prosperity?
8. Unless IA protective tariff enhances
domestic prices, why did the Mckinley
tariff give sugar producers bounty in
lieu OF the removed sugar tariff?
8. Why more laboriously produce the
desired thing itself instead or its cheaper
exchangeable equivalent? II toll Itself
is more desirable than its fruits-labor
products-why not prohibit all labor
saving tools and machinery?
10. A side from gifts or plunder. can
anything but production. or trading lesser
labor products for greater ones, enrich
either an individual. community, or
nation?
L. AS trade is mutually beneficial,
why, by tariffs, debar men from nau-
tually increasing wealth and happiness
by trade?
IL. AS foreigners exact pay invoiv-
ing American labor cost, can impuyts dis
place Americas labor? If they win ac-
cept pay involving no labor cost to Us,
ppIt n of h.s
expensive, deiusye ''nothingness' as we
can for their substantial. valuable goods?
13 If a protective tariff is good, would
not a prohibitive tariff be much better stan?
IA If internationa trade is fmpoverish-
ing, is not interstate trade equally hurt
full?
10. Can foreign trade be injurious, yet
shipping subsidies ito foster it, desirable?
16 Why, with gunboats, blockade our
enemies ports to iniure them, yet with
teriffs blockade our own to benefit our-
selves?
II Can trusts be injurious, yet the
tariff fostering them beneficent2
Is Why are free trade EnSland's S aver
age wages higher than those OF protected
Germany, Italy, Russia and all other pro-
tected European nations? Where age OF
country, form Of government, density Of
population, standing armies, exhausted
public domain, and all else, save taIifr.
are similar. does not free trade give the
most faetories, trade. wages and general
prosperity. and protection the least?
10 As labor alnne created all wealth,
can tariff laws, that create nothing, en-
rich one class without taking it from an
other class2
20 Why not decrease the taxes ON
labor and its products. to encourage them,
and proportionateIy increase taxes on mo-
nop9Iy and other evils that they may he
discouraged?
D. WEBSTER GROH.