The Dalles times-mountaineer. [volume] (The Dalles, Or.) 1882-1904, 1899-09-09
order to keep up the price of the

order to keep up the price of the
article
"The duty was levied by the govern
ment under the act of 1897, and the
Macdutf experienced no delay in dis
charging her cargo for the simple
reason that the farmer paid the duty
just as he paid the freight, the insur
| ance charges, and every other item o.
expense in connection with the cargo
of grain bags, from the time it left the
Calcutta exporters hands until il
reached the local railroad station
nearest his farm. In the case of the
Macduff. the S5l, 900 duty which was
paid was advanced by three firms in
Portland that had previously added
the sum to the price of the bags.
This case illustrates the iniquity
or injustice of a system which is add.
ing much to the burdens of the pro-
ducer of the Pacific coasti Previous
to 1897 there was but little change
from year to year in the price of bags
on the Pacific coast. Calcutta prac.
tically supplies the world with bags,
and accordingly the price Is establish
ed in that port. With no duty to pay
and nothing but the freight and in
surance to add to the Calcutta price,
the Pacific coast impor ter felt reason
ably safe in ordering enough bags in
excess OF those actually needed to
guard against anything like such
shortage as would have existed this
season, had the Macduff failed to ar
rive. Not caring to have several
thousand dollars tied up in duties, i'm
porters bought sparingly, and nothing
bus the arrival of the Macduff pre-
vented bags advancing to or 9 cents,
and perhaps higher.
''The duty on Calcutta grain bags at
the present time is of a cent per
pound and 15 cents ad valorem,
amounting to l-5 cents per sack. On
burlap it is ! of cent per pound and
Is per cent ad valorem. Hopcloth
pays 45 per cent ad valorem, the
valuation in each case being on the
Calcutta price. Portland importers
fOrestalled the effect of the Dingley
bill in 1897 by getting in enough bags
before it went into effect to supply all
demands for that year. Ordinarily it
might be expected that they would
take advantage of their bargain and
add the tariff to the price, but !
strong business rivalry among the
1rms that imported the bags enabled !
,he farmer to secure his stock at the I
'ame prices as prevailed in 1896. Last
7ear the total failure of the California
.rain crop left surplus of over 1000,
700 bags on the markets of Portland
md San Francisco. In the anxiety
o get rid of the surplus stocks, prices
Vere cut right and left. and the aver
ge for the season was little, if any,
bove that of the year previous, when
callers had secured the du ty
rec.
"Under these circumstances, it is |
zen that this is the fret year when
ne effect of the bag duty can be
iewed in its proper lights Un.
tariff legislation has hamper
our trade with the Orient, and
riven much of the business away form |
IT shores. This loss was heavy hut t
fficult to particularize. The $751;. :
u which the farmers of Oregon and /
Tashington lost on the Macduff's r
'rgo is so plainly apparent that ef- 6
rts should be made to secure
vision of the tariff which will place
g Pacific coast wheat grower on the h
ual footing with his Australian and D
rgentine competitors" I,
Here is an illustration of the work
gs of protective tariff fully demon
'ated and it comes from a source II
lich the protectionists cannot ques- .,
N, for it is one of their own organs.
ID if the consumer pays the duty on
ain bags, is it not true that he pays 4,
3 tax on every dutiable article he -
1sumes, and also tax to the home ~ ~
,ducer of protected articles equal TO - -
, tariff imposed on like foreign i'm ~ ~
'ts? And it is not false that the "
eigner pays The tax?