The weekly register. [volume] (Point Pleasant, Va. [W. Va.]) 1862-1909, 1903-01-28
Free Coal and Beef.
BY Samuel w. Mendum, in Pomeroy
Democrat.

NAcO- phCoA0Oab VI tu6 OlliLonb
Meeting held in Faneuil Hall un-
der the auspices of the American
Free Trade League to demand of
Congress the removal of duties on
coal and beef, declined in these
words: Il believe in abolishing
all duties on articles of necessity.
l do not believe in mixing up a
great popular cause with the tenn
porary politics of the time" He
is right when he designates this as
a great popular cause" but he is
wholly wrong when he intimates
that the motives for calling the
meeting were partisan or political.
This was gathering of people
called together to demand that
Congress, irrespective of party con-
siderations. follow the advice of our
president given in these words in
his recent message
I'm my Judgemnt, the tariff on
anthracite coal should be removed
When President Roosevelt wrote
that advice to Congress. was he
advocating popular cause" or
was he mixing up the temporary
politics of the time?"
Was Secretary Moody partisan
or was he himself sharing the pop
lar indignation when he denounced
this coal duty as having been sneak
ed into the Dingley law?
And must we charge Secretary
Shaw with mere political motives
when, before election, he, an adj
ministratiye officer, went even to
the length of overriding this OBJ
jectionable coal duty-a law on the
statute book-by instructing GUS
tom collectors not to enforce too
rigidly the carbon requirement?
The duty of 81 cents a ton on
all foreign ooal-for it is admitted
that practically no foreign coal is
free-is an unnecessary tax and by
that token IN extortion.
The duties upon meats are main
tanned by and for the moneyed oil
garchy which controls the Ameri-
can meat market. In other words
this is not question of free trade
or protection, but a question of
right or robbery.
From 1861 when the Morrill, tar
itf went into effect-a protective
mind you-until 1890 the duty on
beef and pork was l cent pound
Between those years the export of
beef and pork jumped from ST.
100000 in 1861 to S35,0OO,OOO in
1890. One would think that was
more than enough protection to
the American meat producer. But
for the benefit of that poverty
stricken, unprotected infant, the
beef trust, the duty was doubled in
1890 and still remains 2 cents a
pound on beef and pork. Whom
does it protect? The New Eng.
land cattle raiserp Western beef
and pork long since made the
slaughtering of New England cat
tie ancient history. Do our great
beef packers need protective du.
ty when they sent abroad last year
S44DOOO,OO0 worth of beef and SI3,-
OOO,OOO worth of pork? On the
other hand do not the people need
free beef and pork when domestic
beef and pork are scarce and high +?
An instance; a cargo of foreign
meat arrived at New York this last
fall paid duty of 2 cents a pound
and sold at a profit. Now the u
) government did not need this
money, and every unnecessary tax
collected of the people is extortion,
When you buy bacon and ham
do you realize that the duty on
these meats is cents a pound? A
medium ham weighs about four.
teen pounds. The duty then on a
fourteen pound ham is 70 cents.
Assuming that the wholesale price
of a fourteen-pound foreign ham
entered at Boston for consumption
were II cents, this would be a du-
ty of 70 cents on a valuation of
Sl.6S or over Az per cent.
Now from 1861 to 1890 the duty
on bacon and hams was only two
cents pound. This then is the
history of the bacon and ham du-
ty; 2 cents a pound, 1880; 5
cents a pound, Mckinley Law.
lS9O-94; the 20 per cent or about
2 cents pound under the Wilson
Law; then 3 cents pound, or over
Az per cent under the Dingley