West Virginia argus. [volume] (Kingwood, W. Va.) 1877-1946, 1903-10-29


OF transporting goods. In these ways
the tarlff enters into the price OF nearly
all goods, including many on the free
list Even when you buy flour, meal,
meat or milk you pay your share OF the
tariff cost of steel rails, OF structural
material In bridges and buildings and
OF the paint, glass, tin plate, etc, used
In cars. depots, steamers, warehouses;,
stores, etc. About 10 per cent OF your
rent goes for the extra tariff cost OF
building your home and OF keeping it In
repair. The trusts which charge two
or three prices for glass. tin plate, lead.
pipes, nails, screws, etc, all present
their bills to you through your land
lord. You do not see these trusts or
realize how much tariff there Is I'm your
bill, but they get your money just the
same. Tho great steel trust collects
tariff taxes averaging SO per family.
Because you do not buy steel rails or
other steel goods you may imagine
that you do not pay your share OF the
tarin'profits (ST5,00000O OF this great
est of all trusts. You are mistaken.
The tariff trusts go over this protected
country with fine comb. They miss
nothing worth mentioning.
To show how carefully the tariff cost
OF each item has been estimated I'm the
saboye table we will 90 over the ex-
penditurcs for few articles.
The per capita consumption OF sugar
In 1902 was 72.S pounds. or about 32G
pounds per family. The average retail
price In New England was not less
than 5Ia cents per pound, or SIS per
family. The government collected n
tariff tax OF $53,033,511, or SO per
family, but it collected on only 3,031,-
ol0,SIo pounds, while we paid II on the
full 5,IJ0,0O0.o00 pounds consumed.
While tho duty on refined sugar is only
1.05 cents per pound nominally, yet,
because OF the countervailing duty lev
led to Offset the export bounty paid by
Germany and other countries, the actu-
al dwy is about 2.25 cents. Including
the profits OF the tariff tax, IL is GER
tain that we pay nearly cents per
pound more for sugar than we would
pay IL there were no tariff on 1t. In
fact before England put a duty on
sugar. two years ago, II was selling
there for about . cents and was so
cheap that II was fed TO stock to fatten
1t. At pa cents per pound the tariff
on sugar taxes each family over SO a
year, only SO OF which reaches our na-
tional treasury.
Sugar Is only one of hundreds of ar
ticles coming under the "groceries,
item. In similar way the tarlff cost
OF wooien clothing Is estimated mt $40
per family ana the tariff cost of other
clothing at $50 per family. The allow
ance for tariff cost OF liquors does not
include the increased cost because of
the internal revenue taxes. This
amounts TO $50 or $50 more per family.
Thus at fair estimate the tariff on
goods adds 500 10 the cost OF living Of
the average family OF the boot and
shoe workers. Only S13.75 OF this tax
reaches the government, which is less
than the average (S142G per family
collected last year. IT thus appears
that tho average family spends $3.50
for goods and for legitimate taxes and
gives $05.25 each year to the tariff
trusts. These trusts, then, Increase the
cost OF living more than 10 per cent.
AS the wages and expenditures Of the
average family OF the boot and shoe
workers are about 10 per cent greater
than those OF the average working
mans family In the manufacturing in
dustries OF this country we may CON
cludc that the average tnrim cost per
family for the whole country is about
500 and that the abolition OF tarin
duties would save this much per fam
Ny and reduce the cost Of living ut
least 10 per cent
Why do the voters vote 20 tax them
selves so heavily to fatten the trusts7
Why not vote TO keep the 500 which
you now give to the trusts and have
50 much extra 20 spend on your fam
lly2 Try itl BYRON w. HOLT.