The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1904-10-23

Of duty. The protected interests, which
had previously given their consent and
support to the commission, now suddenly
changed front. They went to Washington,
killed the commission bill and caused
Congress to pass another In its place. 1t
was framed in conference committee,
that Ia, in secret. 1t was never considered
In detail in either house Of Congress. 1t
was passed in one lump. Instead of re-
ducing duties 20 or 80 per cent, as the com
mission had recommended. this bill in
creased the average rate on dutiable goods
from Al .35 per cent. to 1886 per cent. This
was the tariff of 1888. Notwithstanding the
betrayal Of public interests which it in
volved. and the clandestine manner OF its
enactment this tariff was more moderate
than the subsequent Mckinley tariff of
1890, or the Dingley tariff now in force.
The average rate of the former as shown
by the importations OF 1892 was 4s.7l per
cent. on dutiable goods. The dutiable i'm
June 80, 1904, were $3.50, 94O59o, and the
duties collected were $230,90 ll9, which
Is an average rate Of SO per cent.
THE CONDITION THAT coNFnoNTs US.
To this condition we have come at last.
Beginning with a tariff Of So per cent. in
1850, when many Of our industries were
really infants, We have by successive steps
reached a scale Of over so per cent, while
the industries themselves have become
steel industry was already in fourishing
condition in his time: He was willing,
nevertheless, to give IA per cent. OF pro-
lection to steel. 1t now has S7.a per cent.
on steel rails and the steel pool sells them
to t.. Canadians at SO per ton. but exaets
abled by the tariff to do this, for without
the tariff it would be obliged to sell rails
at home for the price at which they
could be imported. American railways
are thus compelled to pay s7s4 per ton more
price at which somebody else would supply
them. Why do the railways, submit to
such extortion? Why do they remain
quiet3 Why do they not establish rolling
mills and make their own rails? Surely
is a sufficient inducement to do so.
! cannot answer this question but il the
leaders Of the steel rail industry are also
the controllers of the railways which are
strong epough to defend themselves against
s1tS S the mystery Is explained In
OF the controllers Of the railways in their
capacity Of steel producers, while the other
shareholders Of the railways and the general
public pay the difference. The tariff lends
Itself to this sort OF, grab game, and if the
avail themselves Of their opportunity they
are not so ehrewd as they are generally
supposed to be.
/ cherish no grudgee against men be-
cause they are rich, nor do greatly blame
them for taking the profits which unjust
laws throw in their way, but Iprotest againt
the unjust laws. / protest against the men
who make them, and who stand pat when
ever anybody proposes to repeal or modify
them.
THE HOME MARKET ARGUMENT.
The pauper labor argument for the tariff
has for the most part dropped out Of sight.
Industries that compete with foreigners in
foreign markets no longer have the au-
dacity to say that the difference Of wages
prevents them from competing on equal
terms In the American market.
In place Of the pauper labor argument and
other arguments heretofore noted, the
home market argument has been substi-
tuted and is now relied on SO far as any
arguments are used. This assumes that
without the tariff, and indeed without the
IS per cent. Dingley tariff. we should have
no home market for the farIners' prod
ucts or for any other products. This is a
it. In view OF what Hamilton told US of the
hourishing condition Of large branches of
manufacturing industry more than a GEN.
tury ago, and Of all that has TRANSFERRED
since, that no answer to 1t is required. The
bare statement OF such an argument carries
its own refutation.
What happened under the low tar IFS
OF 1S46 and 1882 Was there any lack OF
q home market them On the contrary,
Senator Morrill, Of Vermont, the father
of the Morril, tariffs OF tho war period
said in public debate that the year ISc0,
which fell within this period wns one of
the most prosperous in our history. This
Ia also the testimony Of Prof Taussig In
his tarh history OF the United States, not