Year: 1872

laws and our OuLlco projecting Llelr


industries. Coal is the finished pro-


duct of the miner, as much as cloth is


of the manufacturer. How can you


convince the miner that he should


not have the benefiton the coal when


YOU demand it on the cloth Z? So with


salt. Salt is largely produced in


this country. 1t is chiefly the pro-


duct of the interior sections, where


the manufacturing industry does not


exist. The chief source OF supply is
at Syracuse, New York, at Saginaw,


Michigan, and at Pomeroy, Ohio.


1t employs 1900 persons and $50,


OOO, 600 capital. 1t is an absolute ne
cessity of life. This industy must be
maintained in war, for our foreign
supply will be imperiled by hos
tile power. The domestic supply ia
ample and the PRODUCTS cheap. 1t is
furnished at the domestic market at


less than one cent per pound. Our
producers who must compete with


foreigners have their salt, in effect,
duty free, for they are paid a draw


back of the duty on all they use. 1t
is a western product, and is a produc-
ton of transportation, and its use
represents labor. Every part of it is
labor. The raw brine costs nothing,
but there is labor in purifying. 1t is
labor in the form Of salt. If labor is
to be protected, why should labor
producing salt be excepted There is
now a duty on salt of Is cents per 100
pounds, or less than one-fifth of one
cent per pound. II all textile and all
metallic fabrics must be protected,
why not salt? IfyOu look for revenue,
it yields over one million, with little
cost and absolute certainty. If you
look to protection to labor, what duty
gives protection to more property than
the duty on salt q? The duty on salt
does add to the cost of the article on
the sea coast, but does not affect the
price in the West; but if duties are
to be levied only on these articles and
the manufacture Of each, how long
will they stand it? The revision Of
the tariff must be treated as a whole.
Free coal and free salt mean free iron
and free woolens. Whether we re-
gard the duty on coal and salt as
revenue duty or a protective duty,
they ought not to be entirely repeal
ed, and therefore the House bills
ought not to pass. AS to the duties
on tea and coffee, their repeal is sim
ply question of revenue. The re-
peal of either of the duties will in
some degree cheaper the daily meals
of nearly every family. The House
of Representatives has shown its de
sire to made tea and coffee free by
twice passing bills for that purpose,
bnt it is manifest that if this is done,
we must postpone for the present all
other reductions of duty.


L now come briefly to consider the
measure proposed by the Committee
on Finance. Instead of repeating en-
tirely the duties on coal, salt, tea and
coffee we propose large reduction on
them. We reduce the duties on lum-
Der, rice, lead and other articles, the
raw products of industry, on which
the present duties are excessive, and
propose a reduction of ten per cent. of
the duties on most textile and metallic
frabrics. The reduction proposed is
50. .507, ,353, but we fairly anticipate a
lessening of expenditures and such
an increase of importation as will re-
duee the loss to the revenue to S2l,-
OOO, 900.


Mr.. Sherman discussed the general
principles of protection and free trade,
claiming that the former should be
as the essential founda-
tion of our national prosperity, and
closed by stating that the Committee
on Finance was of the opinion that
now, when so many taxes are repeal
ed, there ought to be general reduc-
tiOn of the duties on textile and me-
tallie fabrics, and that this reduction
should be at the rate of ten per cent.
which is about the rate of the aggregate
reduction of tariff duties. We expect
to encounter the opposition of those
who favor The maintenance of the
highest duties on foreign competing
fabrics and those who would abruptly
disturb our industry by a sudden and
radicsl reduction of duties, to what
they term free trade standard, and
perhaps both classes Ofopposition will
unite in repeating the purely revenue
duty on tea and coffee If this Is
done we can repeal other taxes with
safety to the public service, and he
would then vote for striking out the
ratable reduction on textile and me-
tallic fabrics, and then called for the
yeas and nays on his amendment to
place tea and coffee on the free list.