Democratic Sentinel, Volume 14, Number 26, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 18 July 1890 — HOW WE ARE TAXED. [ARTICLE]

HOW WE ARE TAXED.

[From the Chicago Herald.] The Buffalo Courier says that some time ago Senator James K. Jones asked C. R. P. Breckinridge, of the House Ways and Means Committee, to prepare for W. L. Terry, of Little Rock, a statement of the amount of tariff duties on a bill of goods bought by a representative farmer. In reply Mr. Breckinridge furnished an exhibit based on actual transactions between R. M. Knox, a merchant of Pine Bluff, Ark., and 1). W. Branch, a farmer who bought the goods. Mr. Breckinridge explains that “this is calculated upon the basis of copy from the books of Mr. Knox and upon the rate of taxes actually paid upon competing articles at the ports as provided by law." The bill as it appears in Mr. Knox’s books is subjoined: 1887. Articles. Cost. Tariff. Jan. 26—To cassimere suit clothesSlLOO SI.OO 2 pair brogans, $1.65 3.30 75 Feb. s—l bell collar 1.50 75 2 pair plow lines 70 16 1 pair boy’s brogans 1.25 29 17—1 box axle grease 10 2 21— 1 Avery plow 3.50 1.09 • 2 buck boards, EOc; 9 pounds nails at 6c,550.. 1.03 29 1 bushel salt, 75c; 1 pair misses’ shoes, $1.25.... 2.00 62 March B—l pair shoes, $1.75; 1 pair of hinges, 25c i 2.00 50 1 yard water-proof 75 30 26—1 pair brogans. 1.60 37 2 yprds calico, 10c 20 9 1 water bucket, 25c; 1 spool thread, 5c 30 9 April 9—ll pounds nails, 6c 66 14 22 hats, 65c; 1 yard lawn, 50c.... ».... 1.80 51 20 yards stripe, 12‘-ic 2.50 1.06 14 yards calico, 10c 1.40 60. 3 yards jeans, 50c 1.50 70 jt> dozen thread .40 13 12 yards ticking, 25c 3.00 1.25 1 set cups and saucers.. 75 29 May 3—l knife 75 25 June B—2 pair men’s shoes 4.00 47 1 pair suspenders 75 20 24—10 yards bleached domes-

tic, 114 c 1.25 54 July 25—2 suits clothes, §7.50,59... 16.50 5.79 2 yards oil cloth, 40c 80 12 10 yards gimham, 10c.... 1.00 35 1 currycomb and brush.. 16 5 Aug, 19—35 yards bagging, 9c 3.15 1.05 1 bundle ties, #1.50; 12 pounds nails, sc, 60c. .• Sept. &—l4 pounds nails, 5c 70 21 1 box A grease, 10 pounds * soda, 10c 20 6 16—35 yards bagging, 80.... 2 80 95 1 bundle-ties 1.50 39 10 yards Osnaburgs, 11c.. 1.10 34 Oct. 24—1 suit jean clothes .. 7.50 2.67 2 wool hats. $ Land $150.. 2.50 1.02 l W£* wool hat.. 75 32 10 yards worsted, 200 .... 2.00 87 13 yards worsted, 17c 2.20 95 1 set plates..... 65 24 1 set goblets..... 65 21 1 set knives and forks ... 2.75 91 2 dishes, 40c and 600 1.00 36 35 yards bagging, 8c 2,80 99 1 bundle ties 3.13 95 The Key West and other domestic manufacturers of cigars from Havana tobacco are very much awake to the ruiu of their business which would be worked by the McKinley tariff. The duty on their imported material it is proposed to increase from 35 cents to @2 per pound, which will amount Jto an increase of $30.60 on the quantity required for makings thousand cigars, or 4 cents on each cigar. Meantime, the customs duty on the imported cigars is to be increased only #6O par thousand, or 3 cents each. The in-

crease of duty will be therefore one-third more on the domestic, manufacture than on the imported. Bo much for the “home industry” under Mr. McKinley. The customer’s part will he to P»y 15 cents for a 10-cent cigar. In the fiscal year 1883 we sold Great Britian $380,0(X),0J0 worth of our - products, mostly agricultural. It is the object of the Englisn protectionists to destroy this export trade, or as much of it as possible. Should they succeed our farmers would be mainly confined to the home market for the sale of tneir surplus and would have to reduce their production accordingly. For we could not find a market at home to take the place cf the British market. Supposing that we stopped buying of Great Britain, a 3 well as selling to her, we should reduce our imports by only $178,000,0X1, while onr loss of patronage would amount to sßßo,ooo,o<Jb. Our net loss, therefore, according to the Louisville Courier-Journal, would exceed $200,000,000. This is the consummation toward which British protectionists are laboring. In view of the foregoing facts there does not seem to be a great deal of intelligence back of the encouragement which American protectionists occasionally give to their British brethren. Eoth are laboring 1o “check imports* into their respective countries, and the oonsequence of the BUCC3SB of bo h would be the destruction of commerce between the two nations. But as Great Britain is a better customer to us than' we are to her, the advantage of such a result would seem to be largely on her side—at least, if we admit the protectionist contention that the true policy of a country is to sell as much B,B _P oßa 'bl e abroad and buy altogether at home. The British protectionists are numerically so weak that it may be a long time before they will be able to secure the adoption of retaliatory duties against this country. But the idea is growling abroad, and has already taken shape in Mexico and France within the past few months. Other countries are discussing the propriety of a similar course upon the passage of the new tariff bill. It may as well be understood, at once that we can not pursue onr policy of “checking imports" without provoking retaliation and injuring our export trade.

The merchant tailors of the United States are up in arms ngaiust the Republican party on account of a clause In tho McKinley tariff bill which admits into United States ports free of duty SSOO worth of clothing. In St. Louis there is au organization of merchant tailors known as the Drapers and Tailors’ Exchange, of which B. F. Myers, of the MyersLubre Tailoring Company, is President. Mr. Myers was seen by a Republic reporter and asked for some information on the subject of the grievances against the Republican party among the members of the tailors' oxebange. He said that the merchant tailors all over the country had memorialized Congress not to pass that section of the McKinley bill, but that they had passed it in the House, notwithstanding the protest of the tailors. The law will be highly detrimental to the interests of merchant tailoring in tho United States, and in the tailors’ petition to Congress not to pass it attention is called to the fact that it virtually admits duty freo SSOO of value of wearing apparel by each person arriving within the United States, and further, that each such individual importation by adult male passengers would represent at least fifteen suits of foreign made clothes, representing a value in the United States of at least SI,OOO ; and further, that 25,000 adult male residents of the United States depart for and return from Europe annually; and further, that the average tourist’s trip abroad is once every third year, and that i ho $1 000 worth of clothing will supply such tourist with ample clothing during the Bald period of three years ; and further, that themmoy value limit in the McKinley bill would indues those residents of the United States visiting Europe who do not now purchase foreign-made clothing to do so.

“Europoan merchant tailors have already begun to send agents to this country to employ American cutters," said Mr. Myers. “There Is no tariff on the raw material there, and consequently they can make a suit of clothes and sell It, for 82 ) that cannot be made and sold for less than S4O here. They propose to come to this country and get cutters, and then employ men to travel hack and forth across the Atlantic bringing the goods they make up into our ports. The first, offeet of the law would be felt most keenly by the merchant tailors in the Eash m cities but it would not le long before it would sweep clear across the country. If there was no duty on the materials out of which clothing is made we could compete with the foreign tailors, but when the import duty ie left on raw materials and is taken off the madeup goods, as the Republican party proposes in tbe McKinley bill, it would not take long to ruin the merchant-tailoring business in this country and set our journeymen tailors out in the street to look for other employment.” Another gentleman who does business with the merchant tailors throughout tbe country said to the Republic representative: “I have talked with a great many tailors on the question of the stab at their business made by the Republican party through the McKinley bill, and I find that every one among them who was ' a Republican heretofore has made up his mind to vote the Democratic ticket in the future. They have had their pockets' pinched by the political party that makes laws for the benefit of the rich nabobs who can afford to go to Europe to buy their clothing. The passage of that clause of the McKinley tariff bill will cost the Republican party a good many thousand votes at the coming election, you can bet on that.”