The Pleasantville press. (Pleasantville, N.J.) 1912-1929, 1920-08-21
REPUBLICAN TICKET.
TARIFFS AND REVENUES.

The record of Republican and Dem
ocratic tariff laws as revenue produc-
ers compiled from official figures is
set forth by the Republican Publicity
Association, through its President,
Hon. Jonathan Bourne, Jr., as follows:
Seven years of our import trade
under the Democratic tariff law, 1914
20, inclusive, brought goods into this
country ~aggregating nearly 100000
O00. 900 in value, and brought customs
duties into the Federal Treasury in
the sum of 1851, 900, 900. During the
last seven years under the Republican
protective policy, 1907-13, inclusive,
our imports aggregated $4,000, 000, 900
in value, but they boosted the Federal
revenues by $2,2 200, 000, 900. This is a
statistical commentary which lands
right on the point of the jaw of the
Democratic contention that low rates
of duty provide larger customs reye-
nues, to which policy the San Francis
co platform gives reafirmance.
Comparing the two seyen-year Pc
riods: While imports under Democrat
ic law increased nearly 100 per cent,
customs duties fell off about 26 per
cent, or 1856, 900, 900. The average an
nual income from port under
Republican law was 1914, 900, 900, I'M
der Democratic law, $233, 900, 900; the
average annual importation under the
former was less than 81, 500, 000, 900,
under the latter, over $780, 600, 900.
During the last two years under
Republican law, the total imports
came to 1896, 900 600; under Demo-
cratic law, 1884, 000, 600. The Repub-
lican years gave us $780, 600 900 of rev.
enue: the Democratic years, $507, 000.-
900. The average rate of duty On all
imports under Republican law was
about % per cent; under Democratic
law il has sunk to 6 per cent.
Had the Republican rate of duty
been applied to the colossal imports
under the Democratic law during the
past seven years, our Treasury would
have realized nearly 81, 000,0 O0, 900,
instead of the $1,000, 000, 900 actually
received. In order that the Democrat
ic tariff policy might produce customs
revenues equal to the sums produced
annually under the Republican policy,
this country would be obliged to con-
tinue importations at a rate in excess
of five billions of dollars a year, and
in this connection it is noteworthy
that our imports for the fiscal year
ended June Both, last, valued at S.
239, 600, produced 1929, 000,0 900 of
customs revenues, or just about the
sum realized in the last Republican
year on $1,813,0 00, 900 worth of i'm
ports.
Having learned that in order to
equal Republican tariff laws as reye
nue. producers, the Democratic policy
must provide for an import value OF
. goods nearly three times our pre-war
average, another phase of the situation
remains to be discussed, namely, How
dong can this country continue to i'm
port between five and six billions of
dollars worth of goods annually and
still remain industrially prosperous,
keep up a wage standard twice as
great as before the war, and pay enor-
nous income taxes? Nor should it be
argued that high prices are mainly
responsible for the large aggregate in
money value of our imports today.
Quite the reverse is true. AS an able
economic writer recently stated, in
commenting on our 1920 import trade:
Yet wen this figure is subject to seri-
Gus modification because of the influ-
ence of foreign exchange. With the
French franc worth less than half its
normal value, the Italian Ira less than
third, and the German mark selling
under one-eighth of its parity, it is
necessary for us to import a much
larger quantity of goods from coun-
tries of those low %currencies to offset
in value an equivalent tonnage of our
goods exported to them at high prices
when Senator Harding asserted
that we would be calling for the saw
ing Americanism' of the protective
tariff policy again he stated what ey-
cry student of the subject knows to be
the truth. Assuming a 400 increase
over pre-war imports as practically
assimilable today we should count on
100000, 900 in port revenues annu-
ally"