The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1897-07-24
Mr.. Dingley's Own AnaIy sis.

Mr.. Dingley's Own Analysis.
The parent and sponsor of the new
tariff bill, Hon. Nelson Dingley. jr,
contributes to the Philadelphia Press
an extended review of the revenue fea-
lures of that measure together with
a forecast of the probable results of
it's operation which greatly illumines
and clarifies the subject for those who
do not profess to be tariff experts.
AS to the amount of money which 1t
will raise directly from customs duties,
his idea is that the annual sum after
the effect of anticipatory importations
shall have ceased to be noticed, will
amount approximately to $225,0Oo,0OO,
as against about $3.50, 100000 under the
Wilson law. For the first year he pre-
diets a return of only about $1S5,000,00O,
inasmuch as $4O,OOO,OOO has already
been lost through the rush of imports
in anticipation of the new tariffs en-
actment. From internal and other
sources exclusive of the postal receipts
he expects a revenue for this year of
s1S5,O0O,O00, making $370,00000O alto
gether, or about $5,000,OO0 more than
the governments annual average ex-
penses. Under normal conditions the
bill ought therefore to yield a surplus
OF $45,000,000, which can be applied to
the eXtinguishment of the public debt.
OF the $75,OOO,0O0 of revenue which
the Dingley bill is expected to raise
above the amount now raised by the
Wilson bill, $35, 1000, 900 to $40, ,O00, 900 is to
come from luxuries which in the Will
son bill ESCAPED -untaxed. The re-
mainder of the additional revenue will
come mainly from sugar. According to
Mr.. Dingley it is this increase which
raises the average equivalent ad val
orem rate of his bill apparently above
that of the Mckinley BILL which ad-
mitted sugar free. He adds: THE aver
age equivalent ad valorem, estimat-
ed on the basis. of the values of 1898,
is about so per cent including the duty
on sugar. Excluding sugar. the aver
age does not exceed As per cent,
against 491a per cent. under the tar
iff of 1890 and 40 per cent. under the
tariff of 1894. But the difference be-
tween the 40 per cent. of the present
tariff and the As per cent. Excluding
sugar. proposed, properly distributed
or protective lines, is the difference
between life and death. We have
heard much reckless denunciation of
the proposed tariff as the highest ever
known but, as a matter of fact, the
average ad valorem of the tariff of
1924 was 501a per cent, and 61A per
cent in 1880, 4S1a per cent. in 1867,
and this, too, before undervaluation
became a science
In correction of a delusion which the
Mugwump coterie of free traders re-
volving around Grover Cleveland has
insidiously fostered, Mr.. Dingley re-
marks:
An impression exists in some minds that
a tariff constructed on protective lines IS
antagonistic to revenue. 1t would be a
sufficient answer to such a contention to
point to the fact that all our revenue tar
ifs since 1861 have been greater revenue
producers than any tariff for revenue only
ever put into law in this country. The
tariff of 1890, knowing it surrendered from
$50,O00,0O0 to $50, 900 of revenue by plac-
ing sugar on the free list, yielded nearly
SIT, ,500,0 900 revenue from customs in the
fiscal year beginning July 1, 1892, and would
have undoubtedly yielded s220,000,0OO reve-
nue. in the fiscal year beginning July l,
1898, If ii had not been for the result of the
November elections of 1892, which pro-
claimed the overthrow of our protective
policy and disarranged our industries
and impaired the consuming power of our
people, and thus cut down revenue, while
the present tariff, heralded as a revenue
tariff, with 40 per cent. duty on sugar
yielded only S152, 900, 900 in the fiscal year
ending June 80, 1895, and would not have
yielded in the fiscal year just ended over
$4,000 900 II 1t had not been for anticipat-
ing importations to avoid the new duties.
1t is very easy to predict misfortune
and that kind of work comes natural
to the men now in control of the Demo.
cratic party. But Mr.. Dingleys gues:
as to the popular effect of the operation
of the bill with whose drafting he hat
so much to do is certainly entitled tC
as much faith, pending the actual test
as are the direful prophecies of his an
tagonists. II believe" says he "tha
this proposed tariff framed so as Il
secure adequate revenue for carryins
on the government and at the sam,
time with duties so adjusted as to oper
up new opportunities for our own labor
will be the beginning of that prosper
ity which was dispelled in 1892, afte
thirty years continuance" The coun
try will soon have an opportunity t
perceive which kind of forecast is tn
correct one. ".