Democratic Sentinel, Volume 17, Number 27, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 28 July 1893 — RECIPROCITY FRAUD. [ARTICLE]

RECIPROCITY FRAUD.

LOSS TO COMMERCE UNDER REPUBLICAN RULE. Our Protective Tariff I» a Proclamation to All Nations that the American Manufacturers Cannot Compete on Equal Terms with the Manufacturers of Europe. Delusion and Snare. In August, 1890, Mr. Blaine, recognizing that there was a growing demand for larger markets, suggested “reciprocity” as a palliative of the evils of protection. In a speech delivered at Waterville, Me., August 29, 1890, Mr. Blaine said: “I am here to speak of an expansion of our foreign trade.” Comparing the returns for 1889, he declared that with the countries to the south of us we had by commerce “lost” $142,000,000 in one year. With Cuba we “lost,” according to Mr. Blaine, $41,000,000, as we imported $52,000,000 and exported only $11,000,000. With Brazil we “lost” $01,000,000, importing $60,000,000 and exporting $9,000,000. With Mexico we “lost” $10,000,000, buying $21,000,000 and selling $11,000,000. That was Mr. Blaine’s idea of commerce; that was his plea for ‘.‘reciprocity.” Turning now to the record of 1892, under reciprocity we find an alarming condition infinitely worse, according to Mr. Blaine’s philosophy, than in 1889. In 1892 we “lost” with Cuba $60,000,000, as against $40,000,000 in 1889, importing $78,000,000 and exporting only $18,000,000. With Brazil our “losses” in 1892 were $104,341,731, as against $51,052,723 in the “dark year” of 1890. In 1892 we imported $118,633,604 and exported only $41,240,009. With Mexico our “losses” in 1892 were $13,813,526, against $9,766,705 in 1889, our imports being $28,107,525, our exports only $13,696,531. Throughout the record is the same. The discrepancy between imports and exports is growing at an enormous rate, and if this discrepancy represents a “loss," as Mr. Blaine contends, then we are rushing headlong to ruin. That there should be some increase in our exports was inevitable. Every obstruction, natural or artificial, lessens commerce: every removal of an obstruction increases the volume of commerce. The relaxing of the protective principle led to an increase .in exchanges, but absolute free trade' would have led to a fair exchange and to larger exports. Of course this discrepany between imports and exports is in no sense a “loss,” but it has its ‘lesson. Brazil, Cuba and Mexico offer us their products at prices we are willing to pay, and so they sell to us in great quantities. We offer to Mexico, Brazil and Cuba products of our mills at prices greater than those named by Germany, France and England, our neighbors send their orders across the water. Commerce will continue to run in these channels until we revise our tariff for our own benefit; until we relieve our own people, manufacturers and consumers of outrageous burdens and enter competitive markets on equal terms with other nations. What we need is not reciprocity, but free trade. We must be able to show all nations that our manufacturers do not need “protection;” that they are able to hold their home markets against all comers and are ready to undersell Europe in any American market.. Our protective tariff is a proclamation to all nations that the American manufacturers cannot compete on equal terms with the manufacturers of Europe. What would be thought of a city merchant who advertised that he could not sell goods at prices named by his competitors;' That is what America does with its protective tariff and its alleged treaties of reciprocity. For these reasons we should abandon the hypocritical .pretense of reciprocity and substitute for it the offer of Jefferson’s “free commerce with all nations.” —Louisville Courier-Journal.

Why We Need Protection. According to the catalogue of the German Section of the Chicago Exhibition nine-tenths of all the articles of coloring matter of the world are now produced in Germany. In 1891 German exports of aniline colors amounted to nearly $15,000,000, a largo proportion being sent to the East Indies to displace coloring matter of native origin. These facts indicate the close alliance between German manufacturers and men of science. A recent article in Nature gives an account of the research laboratory attached to a manufactory of dye-stuffs in Elberfeld. In it no less than twenty-six skilled chemists are constantly in the service of the company, while as many more are employed in other departments. An even larger number is employed at the works in Baden, seventyeight chemists, of whom fifty-six have the Ph. D. decree, being there engaged in investigations in the services of a •Jingle firm. Here we get a glimpse of the real “pauper labor” of Europe against which our manufacturers cannot compete. Instead of encouraging the yoking of science and industry, the discovery of new methods and machinery, and perfection in technical education, the true American policy is to tax foreign products out of the country, and enable manufacturers who are behind the times to make a living. —N. Y. Evening Post.

Custom House Comic Opera. If anybody has doubted the necessity of a radical reform in the Appraiser’s office a reading of the last two days’ testimony before the Fairchild Commission must have convinced him. Assistant Appraiser Goode, for example, testified that his only qualification for appraising cotton, linen and rubber goods and laces was drawn from his experience as a plasterer. He admitted that he has not yet learned or tried to learn anything about the market value of the goods he appraises or about the distinctions between different goods of the same class. In brief, he swears that he brings only ignorance and guesswork to a task which requires expert knowledge and skilled judgment for its performance. Then came J. Stanley Isaacs, who testified yesterday that he knows very little about the market price of goods in his own division and that he is accustomed to sign invoices for other assistants, not only without knowing anything about their correctness, but without troubling himself even to look at them and find out what they contain. The whole thing would be as amusing as comic opera were it not that all this is done to the commerce of the country and the revenues of the nation—not only the ignorant guessing, but the abominable frauds to which, it gives free license. — New York World. McKinleyism. ‘•Whom the gods would destroy they first make mad" applies with full force to the Republican party. In 1890 it went into the campaign for the election of Congressmen with the McKinley bill as its chief war cry. It learned nothing by its defeat of that year, but again declared for McKinleyism in the Presidential campaign of last year and again went down to defeat. Unable to find an} - thing else around which to gather its scattered and defeated following, it

again opens up the campaign in Ohio with McKinley as its standard bearer and high protection as its war cry. It is well. When the old Whig party turned its back on the masses of the people and made high protection its sole issue it went down to an inglorious defeat, never to be heard From again. History repeats itself, and the Republican party is following the same road to ruin. It reached its high tide with the election of Harrison and has lost steadily in every election since. New issue and new measures are crowding to the front and demanding recognition. Free trade no longer scares the farmer and the laboring man laughs to scorn the threadbare argument that protection makes high wages. The country has moved away from the Republican party. It has performed its mission and over its tombstone can be written the epitaph, died of too much protection.—Kansas Democrat.

Our Exports to Australia. The Iron Age of June 22 says: “Statistics of imports into New South Wales for 1891 show that in agricultural implements the United States shipped to that colony $33,467 worth. She also supplied hardware to the extent of $502,747. Other American goods furnished in quantities were gas fittings, furniture, wearing apparel, canned goods, kerosene and oils, and lamps, of which the large bulk Of the imports in that line were furnished by the United States. Most of the light buggies used in New South Wales are of American manufacture.” Such being the case why are our manufacturers of these articles protected from competition at home by high tariff duties? There is but one answer—to enable them to charge higher prices to home consumers. And this is exactly What we see done. In some cases this is just what our laws expect. The manufacturers are compelled to pay a duty on their raw materials, with the understanding that the duty will be refunded if the materials are" exported in the form of finished products. This is done to allow our manufacturers to compete abroad, and is an admission that protective duties enhance prices and tax the consumer. The Government, however, being inclined to favor foreign rather than our own consumers, passes a,“drawback” law which exempts foreigners from all burdens due to our protection laws. Certainly the foreigner Ought not to swear at this generous treatment. But there are other cases, and they are far more numerous and comprise practically all of the articles exported to New South Wales, where the raw materials are not imported and where manufacturers who sell abroad at lower prices than at home—as they often do in the cases of agricultural implements', hardware, etc.—need a duty, and use it, as the New York Tribune says, ’only as an “instrument of extortion.’' To do this they must combine into unlawful monopolies, which prevent that natural competition that would give our consumers the benefits of low prices. The tariff system is the supporter of trusts and of high prices—at home. Abolish protection and home-made goods will be sold as cheaply to us as to foreigners. And would this.be asking too much of our manufacturers? The people have answered “No,” and now expect Congress to pass a tariff bill which shall not put Americans at a disadvantage in their own markets. ■ Custom House Exists l'or Manufacturers. Is it really indecent for the manufacturers to assume that the custom house is run for their own private benefit, when the law evidently endeavors to put duties above the importing point in order to surround the work of importation with such vexations, hardships and uncertainties as greatly to hamper business, and when every possible doubt in regard to the rate of duty on any manufactured article is always settled against the importer, even though the chances are strong that money is being illegally collected which will have to be refunded afterwards? What other inference should a manufacturer draw? As a gentleman connected with a highly protected interest said to an Economist man, in talking over the inconvenience of the numerous refunds of illegally collected duties, the necessity for which is now bothering our depleted National Treasury: “Well, we don’t care much about that; the collection of the higher duty served its purpose in keeping prices up higher; and the goods having now. been all sold we don’t care what duties are refunded.” Is it not a fair assumption that the custom house is largely run for the private benefit of our manufacturers, and is it not so boldly claimed and acknowledged by the putative father of our present customs legislation?—Dry Goods Economist.

Insulting Popular Intelligence. Was there ever anything like the contempt for the intelligence of the American people shown by such thick and thin partisan organs of the Republican party as the New York Press? Says the Press: “The platform on which Grover Cleveland was elected was a protest against progress and a declaration of war 'upon prosperity. The return of the Democratic party to complete control of the Government, unless the solemn declaration of principles put forth by the Chicago convention was a tissue of deliberate falsehoods, meant ruin for American industries and debasement for American currency.” Leaving the “solid South” entirely out of the account, Cleveland received pluralities in the States of Connecticut, New York, New Jersev, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin and Caliiornia. In other words, a plurality of the voters in these great Northern States indorsed “a protest against progress and a declaration of war upon prosperity,” and voted in favor of “rum for American industries and debasement for American currency.” A more contemptuous estimate of popular intelligence in this republic could not be imagined.—New York Evening Post. Depends Upon Their Politics. Whatever may be the uncertainty as regards changes in the tariff, it does not seem to be so great as to prevent the starting of factories here by firms who up to the present have imported all their gloves. One large importing firm has already started making gloves in this country, with the intention of enlarging later. On the other hand, a domestic manufacturer of gloves which compete with the imported goods has stopped production until the tariff question shall have been decided. — Dry-Goods Economist. No part of the speech of the Hon. Wm. J. Bryan last night was so much applauded as that in which he advoeated an income tax. The demand for this tax is growing. The press is taking it up, and all sections of the people are talking the matter over. The average citizen cannot understand why incomes should not be taxed when so many of the necessaries of life are sul> ject to tribute. An income tax of the right sort and properly graded would be the easiest of all taxes and as just as any that could be laid. The income tax idea is marching on.—Atlanta Journal. Soft hands indicate a character lacking energy and force.