Republican news item. [volume] (Laport, Pa.) 1896-19??, 1905-12-14
TARIFF REDUCTION.
:4AS ALWAYS RESULTED IN LOSS
OF REVENUE.

III COllSluefIlls tut IutSlloi w. 'oiih"
altl revenues it does not require-in-
,.rd, it is not practical to defend pro
l."llon from the standpoint of needed
T., enues. The principles of protection
ave confirmed us sound regardless OF
ne actual results in the matter of rev
,..ups derived. But even considered
l...l the standpoint of revenues need
"a by the government, which is meet
ium the reYisionists and tariff smasherS
,.l their own ground, it is possible to
yu3.r from the results in past years
i.i.t what would follow tariff tinkerng
il lhe interests of additional revenues,
f9.. it can be shown from the results
pGi}ined in the past that reductions CT
lfr tariff have produced losses instead
: .ains in revenues from customs du-
"3. If that proposition can be aus-
ta ed, what becomes of the theories
o. ihe tariff smushers that Increased
!eygAues would follow reductions in
..sn triff rates?
'lh.,re was Il revision of the United
E.%i : tariff law in 1882. That was Il
ga.ublican and protection revision. 1t
what exists now in the country--a pop
Tar clamor for reduction of duties.
},n..n the high customs duties incident
4, lEe civil war had been materially
r. Ceed at different times from 1860
G";..! to 1880, there were still heard
/ J-3ug ghout the country strenuous de-
..n. that the customs duties be fur
IL" reduced. 1t will be remembered
e. the tariff commission of that year
faro. ID a reduction of duties Wei. in
! No." the Republican congress revised
Ire tariff 10 reduce duties. The sched-
I.v; Of the tariff We're Ovcrhau.ed
III IL .hout, substantial reductions be-
sa.s / lde in many cases, and, as Il
I&G:rl result Of a practical investiga-
ii0n Of conditions, in some instances
tGoHe were increases in customs rates.
Tie sGm total, however, was Il net re-
Cuet.Ca amounting to an average In the
customs rates on free and dutlable
goods Of about 9 per cent. Now, what
was the Influence of these tariff
changes upon Che customs revenues:
IL 1891. year before the tariff
changes. the net receipts of the gov
cruMant from customs duties were
$10BlJ9000. Without considering the
year OF the change, but passing to
year later. when the new law had
an opportunity to demonstrate its full
cricipncy untrammeled by the intu-
c1cas of the changes in importationS, it
Is f1nd that the revenues declined
rather than increased. In she fiscal
reI" ending June 80. 1891, the first full
fiscal year after the tariff changes. the
amc"c sate receipts from customs were
%l3rC6I, GOO or three millions less than
lcgJrr the changes and reductions in
Gu..eS. In the next fiscal year there
WaS further decline in receipts from
customs down to $1S1, Al 600.
Probably no change in the tariff laws
wou,i be u better type Illustrative Of
tiIe influences of reductions in customs
ratos than that of 1882. especially for
IL comparison with existing conditions
today. But there are other striking il
lCstrt;iOns.
In 1890 the Republican party again
made changes in the tariff law for the
avowel purpose of reducing revenues
rather than reducing customs duties.
That resulted in the Mckinley tariff.
The duties were increased rather than
diminished on the average line of duti-
able goods. But by the removal of the
duties entirely from raw sugar and
other changes the revenues from Gus
toms were reduced from sos, ,S32000
in 1859. the year before the changes, to
SIT7.152,O 600 in 1892, the first full fiscal
year after the changes.
Then came the season of Democratic
tariff tInkering for the express purpose
Of reducing duties, not revenues. That
was tie period of disaster. The Demo
cratic party reduced the duties of t.
Mckinley tariff from an average rate
on free and dutiable imports In 1893
Of 23 per cent to an average of 20 per
cont in 1896. Now. what was the eff
fect uDon the revenues of the govern
m"nt from customs duties? In 1898.
UniCr the Mckinley tariff, we collected
from customs $203 800 600; in 1896, the
FIRST full fiscal year under the opera
TONS OF the tariff reform act, we col
l2rtcd from customs duties S160,000,-
ihHi And the tlde OF reduction III Gus
TOMS revenues which then set in was
not stopped unth the Dingley protec-
tive tariff act nt 1897 had time TO get
4 debate between representatives. OF
he,gl!boring oranges Is often interest.
Ing.
Touching the Tariff.
Some stand patterS so 50 far us to
say that the tariff is like pile of
bricks and cannot be touched at all.
f-.is preposterous position involves a
shameful admission of impotence aud
coWlrdiee, and we do not believe the
Republican party or congress will make
such an admission. The tariff must be
touched" and the rates that spell
.F...lx