Democratic Sentinel, Volume 8, Number 16, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 16 May 1884 — EXTRACT FROM THE TARIFF SPEECH OF HON. T. J. WOOD, OF IND. [ARTICLE]

EXTRACT FROM THE TARIFF SPEECH OF HON. T. J. WOOD, OF IND.

[Continued from Just week.]

SCHEDULE J. In this schedule all cotton thread, yarn, or warp yarn, in skeins or bundlesiorlother form if worth 25 cents per pound, the tariff is 10cents pei pound; if worth over 25 cents and less than 40 cents, the tariff is 15 cents per pound; and so on through the list. The goods described in this schedule pay a dutj nearly one-half of their market value. If the farmer paid this rate of tax upon his property he would be driven into bankruptcy. Ten per cent, interest is a high rate for money loaned, yet the farmer and the workingman pay 40 to 50 per cent, upon all this class of goods he buys. But the end is not here. From the cotton yan , warp, and thread, which pay this enormous duty, is manufactured cotton cloth and othgoods, which are loaded down also with duties ranging from 50, ,to 148 per cent, aa valorem. So duty upon duty is added when one class of goods is used to manufacture another kind. WOOLEN SCHEDULE. I now £ o to the wool and woolen schedule of this famous reform law and I find wool, the raw material, paying a duty of 33£ to 40 per cent, per pound, according to value. — From wool is manufactured cloth, shawls, flannels, blankets, wool hats, knit goods, and many other articles, all loaded down with anfadditional duty of 85 to 88i cents per pound. Women’s and children’s dress goods made wholly or in part from the dutiable wool pay specific duties equal to an ad valorem duty of 05 -to 75 per cent, ner square yard! Count the yards necessary to dress the average family and you will have some idea of the shameful tribute paid by the consumer. You must not stop here in calculating tariff prices Count the tariff rate upon the cotton warp and again upon the warp when woven into cloth. SCHEDULE C. I call attention of the House to Schedule C, metals, <fcc., and see what duties iron and steel pay. Begin with iron ore. Iron ore is charged with a duty of 75 cents per ton. From the ore is made pig-iron, which is charfed with a duty of $6 per ton. ig-iron is run into bar-iron, &c., and that pays a duty of 820 per ton. Bar-iron, round iron, and flat iron is made into spikes, nails,and other articles, which pay a duty,of 825 per ton, while horseshoe-nails, hobnails, wire nails, wrought iron and steel nails pay a duty of £BO per ton; chains pay £35 to ! * 50 per ton, and fence-wire 812 per ton. These rates apply substantially to iron and steel j blooms. The blooms are made into iron and steel goods of every description, such as saws, files, nuts, rods, screws, and edge tools of everv kind, and all are charged with other high duties. I ask the Clerk to read a statement made in the discussion of steel duties. Allow me to call attention to the profits of the iron and steel industries. In 1880 there were 1,005 establishments with a capital of over 1 230,971,874. ! The iron and steel products : were valued at *296,557,685; ! value of material £191,201050; wages paid, £55,476,785. The profit is 849,809,750, or 21.56 per cent, on the capital invested. The average wages paid was 81.31 per day. In 1880 there were 36 establishments engaged in the manufacture of steel, with S2O 975,990 capital. Their manufactured product amounted to 855,805,210: value of materials, £36, 826,928 ravages paid $4,930,349. The profit was “14,-

047,933, or67percent, upon the capital. Average wages paid ■T.oO per day. Here is astoun-d-ing profits and low wages.— is protection for you in We beg to call your attention to the duties on steel as mentioned in Schedule O, in the act of March 3, 1883 wheioin, after providing certain rates on all kinds aud qualities of steel an additional duty of 1 cent per pound is levied on steel circulur auw olates. This discrimination makes the* duty on these amount to 4* cents per pound. Previous to the enactment of this law the duty on circular-saw plates up to 46 iuohes In diameter was only 8 esnts per pound, and above 46 inches in diameter it was 3i cents per pound and 10 per cent, ad valorem. The present rate of duty is equnl, on an average, *® ab »ut 35 per cent, of the foreign value of the article. We use these plates largely in our business, and consider the present duty excessive anci unjust, ami respectfully hope that your bill will remove t is discriminating paragruph and have steel circular-saw pi at ss taxed no more than -ther grades of steel of t e sumo value. TnE STEEL DUTIES. [Copy of a letter addressed to the Iron Age, ui:d published by that paper in its issue of March 13, 1884. To the Editor of the Iron Age: 8m: Your article entitled “Consolidation of rnawufuctures," iu your issue dated February 28, se ms to be against the cousuroeror steel and his efforts and wish fur » reduction of the tariff' on that necessary commodity. Your sympathies are more strongly expressed in favsr of the manufacturer of steel and his success in keeping up the high duties which some consumers have felt to ;e oppressive. You are right In saying “there is uo' reason why a steel works should not also make axes. saws, shovels, &e," and no sane consumer of steel will attempt to dispute the StatementMany oonsumeis of st.’e : , however, who have succeeded in establishing industries have reason to complain about a tariff that Id giving the steels makers snob a profit that they are rich enough to invest capital in the mauufrotura or axes, saws, shovels, Ac., and put them in the market at priee j tout are ruinous to thuser'who have been their customers, arfcl out of whom they have made thelr f riches. At the same time tnese consumers have not reulizei profit enough from their business to allow them to ens gag- ill making steel. Many who have tieretolore voted for and advocaied a turiff ror protection now be. lieve that the popular cry for protectiou bus Leeu used iu some places not merely for the purpose of scouring protection but to secure tne ore» ation of monopolies. Can any one Sho that duties or $44 8n per ton on lo w grades und $35 20 per ton on the high grades of crucible steel are needed for protection only? These high duties have been the means of keeping up high prices and unequal profits. They are duties that are so highly favorable to the producer of raw material that he is enabled to manufacture goods out of It at a price which while it affords him a profit will be ruinous to those who do not make their own raw material. These rates seem too high to one who has advocaieil protection from the davs of Henry Clay to the present time and a consumer of steel who believes that they operate iu favor of monopoly and against the principles of protection. An Old PHOTBcxroNrsT Huiran genius could not devise more jobbery covered by the forms of law than is contained in the metal schedule of this reform act.

SCHEDULE U. I call attention to Schedule Mos this odious law. It contains paper of all kinds. lam asked, “Why do you desire to reduce the tariff on paper, when it is only 15 to 20 per cent?” Let us see. The raw material, wood pulp, is chargediwith 10 per cent, ad valorem. The raw material out of which paper is made is loaded down with high duties, and when it is manufactured into paper for blank-books, bound or unbound, then another duty of 20 Per cent, ad valorem is added. W hen printing-paper, sized or unsized, used for books or newspapers is made, then 15 per cent, more is added. This kind of dodging to hide a high protective tariff is called reform. GLASS SCHEDULE. -W* The people pay for window glass $3,000,000 per year as class exaction. How? The amount imported last year was about $1,427,079, The duty paid the Government was $979,738, or about 67 per cent. The home manufacture last year was valued at five millions. It s:fid

or the same price as the imorted article, and the domesic manufacturer received the lenefit of the 67 per cent, duty non this sum, which makes "3,350,000 paid by the people, ot one cent of which went ino the public Treasury. It is lie talk that the home prouct did not sell for the same rice as the imported article, f the domestic manufacturer ndersold the importer, then he import of glass would cease iut the importer did sell in the American market near one lillion and a half dollars of window-glass, and the home 'roduct did not undersell it o as to drive the imported aricle out of the markets. No party can stand before he consumers of this country nd sustain a tariff like this. >ut this is what my Republian friends on the other side f this House call reform. Is obbery of the consumer more omplete, No other civilized ountrv imposes such burdens ipon the many to support the ew under the guise of nation--1 benefit. Every laboring man n this country, whether in the actories or out of them, pays n enormous tax when he lothes himself andj’family. There are about $9,000,000 of aboring men in the United dates independent of the faraing class. You can almost ount the millions taken from heir daily wages annually by his cruel and exacting law. — There are about 8,000,000 farmts who bear the sam 3 burden. This tariff law takes from the lockets of the people over -500,000,000 annually. No (tht people could stand this unust drain of annual profits oi any considerable f ime, and >ur own people, < -wning in fee -plendid farms of incomparaile soil, aided by the improvenents of farm machinery, are able to produce enormous (uantities of the cereals and ill farm products for home and oreign markets; but withal hey are only able to stand the iressure for a few years,"when financial distress comes and nvolves a vast number of them DIVERSIFIED INDUSTRY. The present tariff, unequal n in its protection, is ruinous vo diversified interests. Capital is selfish. It seeks the investment that brings the heavest returns. The tariff on 1 totton and woolen goods, iron, tnd steel is so protective that t stimulated unnatural prices, vhich invited an overbalance ff capital for investment in hese industries, and the result is overproduction. I ask he. Clerk to read the report of <lr. Swank for the American t.ron and Steel Association, lade May 1,1883: At :he beginningof June nearly all be milis referred to (rolling-mills of Pittsburgh and the Wesr) were closed y a general str'ke which continued QVil the last of September, when ork was resumed upon the scale of ages which had previousl, prevail I. During the strike of four months le prices of rolled iron did not ad ance, notwithstanding the stoppage £ so many mills, a fact wnich clearly emonstratcd that the capacity to roduce this form of iron had again, .i in the panic years, exceeded the -.mand. * * * At the same time - must be frankly admitted that our -lling-mill capacity has for 6ome me been in advance of the con imptire wants of the country, and iat the check to the overproduction ‘ rolled iron which was afforded by to strike of 1882 was in no sensa a damily to the manufacturers. Many unprotected industies languish all over this counry because of the unequal inestment of capital in the i gih 1 y protected industries nd labor is poorly paid or wholly unemployed. The class ivoritism of this Government as caused depression in all inds of business. The equaimity of trade, the only basis f true prosperity, is disturbed y the overproduction of the tandard, goods, and the milions of money invested in aem is now inactive and help3ss, and a sympathetic deression pervades all other inustries. This is the history f protection. injustice to farmers. Protection compels the farmrs, numerically the greatest ’ass of consumers, to pay high rices for all they buy, while ley are compelled to sell the >roaucts of the farm at fr«erade prices. The protective iriff establishes the price of . manufactured articles at home J

but fails to establish a price for wheat and beef, -shat is fixed in the free-trade markets o f the world. Farmers buy under protection and sell under free-trade. High protection makes high prices for imported goods. If the domestic manufacturer sold his goods cheaper than the imported ar tide they would exclude the latter from our markets. <he home manufacturer will not compete with the importer, because it is against liis interest to do so. He wants enough of the imported article to come into our markets to pay the high duties and establish prices. That is the index for the home product. 1 he prices of domestic manufactured goods will not be fixed by home competition under high protection. We can have competition among domestic manufacturers only by enacting a prohibitory tariff to exclude imports altogether or have no tariff at al 1. The manufacturers do not want a prohibitory tariff nor free-trade. They want a high protective tariff that admits foreign goods to our market on payment of high duties, and they take the price of the importer, after duties paid, for their price. Here is an example: — The Government received about thirty millions of revenue from tlie import of mamufactured woolens last year. — I he home product amounted to four times the imported article, or about two hundred millions. The average duty on woolens is about 65 per cent, ad valorem. The importer paid the Government thirty millions in duties, charged it to the selling price of his goods, our people purchased them and paid the duties; but when the people purchased the two hundred millions of the home-manufac-tured article they paid no less price for it than they did for the imported article. If the people could buy the home product cheaper would they buy the imported article? — Certainly not. Hi. eis no difference in the pric-s of the imported and domes! article, ihe farmers and othe ;onsumers pay 65 per ceni 011 two hundred millions oi lie (domestic product, which goes to the benefit of the manufacturer. This tribute given and none returned brings periodical distress to the farmer, and he is met with the sneering query, “If you have anything to sell, can not you get a good )rice for it?” He has sold his products to the minimum and has saved little or nothing from the prices received, for the reason the tariff has robbed him, silently robbed him,at the end of a series of years. He has sold at Liverpool prices instead of the promised high S rices of the home market. — o class of men work harder and save less than the average farmer. We are told that the farmers have prosoered under protection. They have prospered in one way, and that is in the increased value of their farm lands, which came by crowded settlements and shipping facilities. Value their lands at SSO per acre, count cost of labor, fencing, farming implements burdened with pr Section prices in all their parts,keeping work-horses,and he can not raise wheat at less than 80 cents per bushel and corn for less than 20 cents. I agree that Western farms show evidence of prosperity; but how many years of patient toil do they represent?— You must go back forty to fifty years for a beginning on these farms. If protection has made good farms, it has been slow indeed. A man works forty years from daylight to dark upon his farm, makes himself a bard taskmaster, and if he is economical in his living belore he dies he can build a barn worth SBOO and a house worth #1,500 or #2,000. Yes, farms look prosperous by a lifetime of toil and close economy. Tell me this is the fruit of a protective tariff. No; that yields him exceeding bitter fruit. All the farmer wears and uses in his business from his pocket-knife to a tin pan is forced up to double its value by tariff law, while he sells his farm products at home and abroad for prices fixed by competition in Europe. Talk to the farmers about pauper la-!

bor! 1 hey are forced to sell their wheat at Liverpool, if they seH at all, and there they come in direct competition with the pauper labor of the Baltic, where only #lB per year is paid for farm labor, and a worse competition with the labor of Egypt. Why the anxiety to protect manufacturing industries, many of them ever fifty years old and worth millions of dollars, from the pauper labor of Europe, while you see the large body of agriculturists, on whom the prosperity of the country depends, selling the products of their labor in competition with the poorest of all pauper labor, the unskilled labor of Egypt* HOME MARKET FOR THE FARMERS. The promise of protection is a home market for farm products. Thai is a humbug. The American people can not and never will consume the products of the American farm. — To do that you must import 20,000,(XX) people and put them in the factories and workshops Then a worse result would folon the other side —overproduction of manufactured articles. In 1880 the American people only consumed 64 per cent, of the farm products. I heard a Western farmer say, “ vVhy, see for yourself. 'J ake the surplus of six great farm States, then count the number of people piotected and their employes, and each one of them would have to eat six barrels of flour per day, a ton of beef, l,ooc pounds of bacon, chew a hogshead of tobacco, and drink twenty gallons of Kentucky whisky.” It’s nonsense. hey advise less farmers. hat would not increase consumption and would not lessen production materially, as improved farm machinery takes the place of men on tlie farm. The home market for farm products goes farther away every year. In 1860 the farmers raised $170,000,000 in wheat, and exported $4,070,764, or 2£ per cent, of the product. 1111870, high protective tariff year, they produced ?550,000, < >oo in wheat, and exported #47,171,229, or 14 per cent, of the product. In 1880, same tariff, they produced $425, 000,000 in wheat, and exported $190,546,305, or 36 per cent, of the total prodn ct. The export of pork will average $70,000.000 annually since 1870, excepting the time of French and German interdiction. The export of beef and beef cattle exceed this during the same years. There was also a large export of com and provisions. Farm products overstock the home markets more and more every year, though protection has been on trial for nearly thirty years to fulfill the great promise of a home market for the products of the farm. It is a failure.