Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1897-08-05
ANOTHER HIGH TARIFF.
The New Tariff In Worse Than the
Mckinley Tax.


Mckinley Tax.
The new tariff law registers the high
water mark in .Ariff legislation. The
protection afforded by il is greater in
important instances than that of the
Mckinley law itself, which was con-
demned by the voters of this country
as an odious measure Ii is not i'm
proba that the DingIey bill, If il ma
be so called after its thorough revision.
will 60 down in history as worse than
the Mckinley law. There can be no
Justification at this day for the exces-
sively high rates of duty which ii i'm
poses II is q continuation of war taxes
in time of peace for the benefit, not
of the government. but of private in
dividua,s. The duties in many cases
being SO high as TO be prohibitive. there
will be no imports from which the gov
eminent can derive revenue. but the
taxes in such cases will go to private
individuals in the form of higher prices
for products and greater profits
The moderate protecticnists of this
country cannot approve such tariff
1t cannot be justified by reason and
business sense The Dinghy tariff. like
the Mckinley tariff of 1890. is based
On the Morrill, tariff of the early COS.
confessedIy a war measure. hastily
drawn and not intended TO serve as
the permanent model for system of
taxation The duties under the Morrill,
tariff were made high in part as COM
Pensation for the internal revenue taxes
then imposed. But when the internal
revenue taxes were removed the rate
of duty on imports was left unchanged.
so that in reality the protection af-
forded by these duties was greater than
In war times This condition of things
was so obviously unjustifia bic that for
a decade or so after the close of the war
little attempt was made to Justify il.
A reduction of duties was promised.
not at the demand of the free traders
alone. but to satisfy protectionists as
well Efforts TO reduce duties were 10 4
slight degree successful. Then came
Mckinley. who put in force the war
rates again. His act was called an act
to reduce the revenue. and in order
to accomplish this object rates were
made So high as to prove practically
pTohibitive in many cases The avOweG
object of the Dingley bill is TO increase
the revenue and TO encourage industry
in the United States. But the high pro-
tective duties are so nearly PrOhibitive
of revenue to the government that il
was found necessary to resort to non
protective duties and to internal taxes
In order to raise sufficient revenue.
The duty on hides furnishes one illus
tration of the way the Diugiey bill Is
likely to encourage industry in the
United States" For many years there
has been no duty on hides. There has
been growing up in this country con-
siderable export business in leather.
The duty on hides will tend to prohibit
the leather merchant of this country
from going into the foreign market
with his goods. The duty in question
was placed in the bill at the demand of
representatives of a very few cattle
growing states. the electoral votes of
which were for the most part cast for
Bryan. Hides imported come mostly
from South American countries. with
which hitherto il has been the policy
to encourage trade. but which will be
offended and repulsed by the duty on
hides.-Chicago Record Und.).