Okolona messenger. (Okolona, Miss.) 1900-current, 1912-04-11
%-ternaIIy Present is the Most Effective, the
I and the FaireSt Way Of EquaIizing
he Burdens of Taxation
'ouId Have the Question Solved with the
alton to do the Right, Safe and
Reasonable Thing
New York Southern Society Dec, Is, 1911

political ..ue. mu., and will continually change with
5 OF our R,puhll, but there is one question that was
g and will BE- ln The end, and that IS the most effective,
OF equalizirg me burdens Of taxation that are levied by
INT. OF all the great powers that were yielded to the
the States when they adopted the Constitution Of our
)ensable to the administrator OF pubic affairs is tie
i taxes. Without tie exercise Of that power we could
md navy; VIC could not establish the courts Of the lanl;
fail to perform its function if the power to tax were
The power to tax carries with it the power to destroy
most dangerous governmental power as well as 4 most
ar and marked distinction between the position Of the
rties q America as to how power to tax should be
: Vi r~,O.l- :. The custom houses.
IS Lave Always Stood for Protection.
y has m7irtaircl TIC doctrine that taxes should not
purpose Ol fcst,ue, but also for the purpose OF protect
turer from foreign competition. OF necessity protection
Is with 1t a guarantee OF profits. In the last Republican
OF Tie party was distinctly recognized when they de-
not only in favor Of the protection OF the difference in
lad but also a Reasonable prolt to American Industries.
ic Party for Tariff for Revenue Only.
y favors the policy Of raising its taxes at the custom
is levied Tor revenue only, which clearly excludes the
manufacturers profits. In my opinion, the dividing
'ons Of the two great parties on this question is very
tanned in theory. Where the tariff rates balance the
Jme and abroad, including an allowance for tie differ
the tariff must be competitive, and from that point
St tariff that can be llyIeI it will continue to be COM
less extent. Where competition is not lnterfered with
love tile highest competitive point, the profits Of the
projected. On the other hand, when the duties levicl
quallzes the difference in cost at home and abroad and
y are high enough 10 allow the American manufacturer
e his competitor can enter the field, we have invaded
lection OF profits. Some men assert that the protection
> the home manufacturer should be commended instead
tut in my judgment, the protection of any profit must
.%tndcncy to destroy competition and create monopoly,
.ectlI IS reasonable or unreasonable.
Unfairness of Protection.
mind that to establish a business in a foreign country
both in time and capital. Should the foreign manu-
ItaDnsh himself in this country he must advertise his
agencies and points Of distribution before he can sue
us1ness. Alter he has done SO, if the home producer is
at not only equals the difference in cost at home and
is a reasonable or unreasonable profit, it is only neces-
his prices slightly below the point that the law has
foits and his competitor must retire from the country
because he would then have to sell his goods at a loss
continued to compete. The foreign competitor having
dcer could raise his prices to any level that home COM
i'm and it is not probable that the foreigner who had
ut OF the country would again return 10 matter how
g as the law remained on the Statute Books that would
y AGAIN put HIM out Of business.
uity of the Protection of Profits.
S ago when we had numbers of small manufacturers,
competition without an attempt being made TO restrict
1arket was more than able to consume the production
ries, the danger and the injury to the consumer OF the
reat or apparent as it is today when the control OF
has been concentrated in the hands of a few men or a
luse domestic competition was prohibited. When we
lion at home and the law prohibits competition from
rolts, there is no relief for the consumer except to cry
equation. To my mind, there is no more reason or
nent attempting to protect the profits OF the manufac-
t this country than there would be to protect the prohti
Z lawyer, the banker or the farmer, or the wages of the
oSt every line of industry in the United States we have
ces to develop as that Of any country in the world. Ii
{ our machinery and methods Of doing business are in
nations. By reason Of the efficient use of American
n labor, in most of the manufactures Of this country
t Of production is no greater here than abroad.
course, that the actual wage of the American laborer
can countries, but as to most articles we manufacture
country is not more than double the labor cost abroad
at the average ad valorem rate Of duty levied at the
ifacturec Of cotton goods is 500 Of the value Of the
total labor cost Of the production of cotton good:
2lf6 Of the factory value of the product, that the diff
t home and abroad IS only about as one is to two ant
cent Of the value Of the product levied at the custom
difference in the labor wage, it is apparent that ou
eed the point where they equalize the difference in cos
and we realize how far they have entered into tn
profits for the home manufacturer. This is not ont
ire Of cotton goods, but Of almost every schedule II
f necessity means to protect i~neficency. It does no
,nse a manufacturer standing behind a tariff wall tina
5 is not driven to develop his business along the line
nd greatest economy
Tool, Iron and Steel Industries.
trated in a comparison of the wool and the iron AM
mas had a specific duty that when worked out to al
ints to tax Of about 900 of the average value OF a
/ into the United States, and the duties imposed nav
1changed for forty years, During that time the woo
naratively little progress in cheapenlng the cost OF 1t
its business methods. On the other hand, in the iro
4if rate has been cut every time a tariff bill has bee
ago the tax on steel rails amounted to SH.5O a tor
ny. tOTty years ago lit ldh Oh PS Nao YA"SO
The same is true Of most of the other articles in tn
and " ,&e iron and steel industry has not la]4 lgu shed
ed and it has not gone to the wall. 1t IS the mos
force of all the industries of America today. 1t ha
productive capacity beyond the power of the America
output and is today facing out towards the markets c
+ a part of the trade of foreign lands where it mus
Or as is often the case, pay adverse tariff rates to ente
wts. competitor.
nment-Genuine Tariff Reduction to a Revenu
Producing Basis Only.
ae wiser for our government to take? The one th'
d Of profits, the continued policy Of %hot-house growt
The stagnation of development that follows where CON
the other hand, the gradual and insistent reduction c
isis where the American manufacturer must meet hone'
kmust develop his business along the best and mo.
Jhen he fights at home to control his market he
economic development of his business to extend HI
fhe world. In my judgment, the future growth {
tyond the seas. A just equalization of the burden
--"o'ition. in my Judgment are economic truth:
'ountry we must face towT
4 free ts
~