The Jasper weekly courier. [volume] (Jasper, Ind.) 1858-1922, 1897-08-13
THE HIGHEST TARIFF.



The new tariff law registers the high
water mark In tariff legislation. The
protection afforded by it 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. IL is not inn
probable hat the Dingley bill. IL itmay
be SO called after its thorough revision,
will go down in history rs worse than
the Mckinley law. There can be no
justification at this day for the exces-
sively high rates of duty which IL IN
poses. Ii Is n continuation OF war taxes
In time of peace for the benefit. not
OF the government, but OF private In
dividuals. The duties in many cases
being so high as to be p%rohibitive, 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 protectionists of this
country cannot approve such a tariff.
1t cannot be justified by reason and
OuclltoS etnet. ht bAbEAt ~,
the Mckinley tariff Of 1890, is based
on the Morrill, tariff Of the early COS.
confessedly a war measure, hastily
drawn and. not intended to serve as
the permanent model for q system OF
taxation. The duties under the Morrill,
.ariff were made high in part as a COM
p~cnsation for the internal revenue taxes
~ -~~ DIT xrhAn TIM snfQrn1l
revenue taxes were removed the rate
OF duty on imports was left unchanged,
20 that in reality the protection at
forded by these duties was greater than
In war times. This condition of things
was so obviously unjustifiable 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 to a
slight degree successful. Then came
Mckinley, who put in force the war
rates again. His act was called an act
20 reduce the revenue. and in order
TO accomplish this object rates were
made so high as to prove practically
prohibitive in many cases. The avowed
object of the Dingley bill is TO increase
the revenue and to encourage IL -fr stry
In the United, States. But the high pro
~tective duties are so nca-iy prohibitivt
of revenue 10 the government that il
was found necessary to resort to non
protective duties and 10 internal taxes
In order to raise sufficient revenue
The duty on hides furnishesoneillus
tration of the way the Ding,ey bill is
likely to encourage industry in the
United States" For many years there
has peer no duty on hides. There has
been growing up in this country a con
siderable export business in leather
The duty on hides will tend to prohibi'
the leather merchant of this country
from going into the foreign marke'
with his goods. The duty in question
was placed in the bill at the demand o
representatives of a very few cattle
growing states. the electoral votes o
which were for the most part cast 70
Bryan. Hides imported come mostl.
from South American countries. wit
which hitherto it has been the polio,
to encourage trade. but which will b
offended and repulsed by the duty OF
hides..Chicago Record Ind.).