Athens weekly banner. (Athens, Ga.) 1889-1891, June 18, 1889, Image 5
Hr
'Tr§l
-TAX
The taxation of luxuries presents no feat
ures of hardship; but the necessaries of
life used and consumed by all the people,
the dutv upon which adds to the cost of
living in every home, should be greatly
cheapened.—President Cleveland.
SOME EXTRACTS FROM THE SPEECH
lower by reason of numerous labor-saving I product of 1880 would have been worth I the proportionate increase was 7 per cent.
inventions and increased use of the power $6,624,835,056, or $1,155,255,865 in excess
ajpou
of nature—steam, electricity, etc. This re- I of the actual value. Where do the benefits
duction in prices is falsely attributed by the of the high tariff appear?
monopolists (those dear friends of low
prices) to the very tariff which clogs ’and
hinders reduction, as if the brakes increased
the speed ofn train. The truer comparison
is not between then and now, but between
here and there—between prices in the
LABOR.
But the wage-earner has not fared even
so well as the manufacturer. The average
(r hand of employes in manu
facturing establishments in 186Q was $247.
nure ana mere—Detween prices m the T „ , , _ OQQ
United States end prices abroad, and be- *“/*** h T f SS*®
tWAAn rtrinnes -nrifV. lnnr *«*.:«* ’Uw-'U P® r CCIlt. Ill 1880 tllQ Wftff© W&S
HON. A. H. COLQUITT,
OF GEORGIA,
IN TEB SENATE OF THB
PKLIVERED
UNITED STATES, MONDAY, MARCH
12, 1888.
The President recommends that no sur
plus be raised by taxation. Some of our
public men differ with the President on
this subject. To the tax-payers they say:
■ • If you will just continue to raise the
we will contrive to spend it.” It
money we win conwive spenu u. x
must be admitted that the surplus is larger
by virtue of the economy of the Adminis
tration ; they argue that proper extrava
gance would have reduced it.
This is the Republican form of opposition
to the wise policy of the Administration.
Possibly they think a spirited foreign policy
might consume the surplus, and even ren
der higher taxes necessary. The opposi
tion of a small minority of the Democratic
party is of like character. Wonderful
enough is it that the Republican party
should take this ground of opposition, but
it passes wonder that any man calling him
self a Democrat should oppose this most
Democratic policy—oppose it even at the
risk of dividing the party on so plain an
issue. They go with the Republicans in
preferring, if taxes must be reduced, to take
them off from the unnecessaries of life
rather than the necessaries.
* * * *
tween prices with low tariff and high.
Quinine illustrates the latter difference con
spicuously. Everybody knows about that.
Steel rails have fallen et
have fallen even in America by
virtue of the Bessemer process and numer
ous improvements. The credit of this fall
is gi ven to the tariff. As well attribute the
in the price of cotton since the inven
tion of the cotton-gin to the policy of pro
tection. Compare the prices of steel rails
in the United States with those of England.
Last year the average price here was $37.13
I or ton; English rails could have been laid
own here at an average of $23.60 per ton.
Yet the monopolists say we ought to be
content; that prices are low, ana that the
liifle of $18.50 extra a ton is insignificant;
and so is it with a thousand ottibr articles.
THREE KINDS OF TARIFFS.
average wage
an increase of only 20 per cent, in
twenty years. Had there been a gain of
16.6 per cent, from 1860 to 1870 and from
1870 to 1880 under a high tariff, as there
was from 1850 to 1860 under a low tariff,
the average wage in 1880 would have been
$392 instead of $346. Wages continue to
increase, taking one decade with another,
under a low tariff or under a high tariff.
The improvements in machinery, con
stantly going on, enable the wage-earner
to get more money, while the employer
jys out less money for the same product
1850 the average individual product
was worth $1,064 and the employ^ received
$247, or 23.2 per cent. In 1860 the product
was valued at $1,438, and the worker re
ceived 20 per cent, of it, or $288. In 1870,
on a greenback valuation, which, however,
In discussing the effect of the tariff on does not interfere with the comparison, the
prices we observe that a tariff mav benuga- I product was worth $2,060 and the employe
tory, prohibitory, or operative. It is nuga- was P a 'd $328, or 18.4 per cent. In 1880
tory when the duties are laid on articles in I l*her was even cheaper, the 'average indi-
the production of which we surpass all other vidual yearly product beingvaluedat$l,962
countries—such as wheat and cotton. 8ueh I and the workingman receiving the average
yearly wage of $346, or only 17.7 per cent.
countries—such as wheat and cotton. Such
duties would yield neither revenue nor pro
tection. Nobody cares to have a nugatory
tariff.
It is prohibitory when the duties are so
high as to prevent importations and to com- I
pel all such commodities to be made at home,*
no matter at what disadvantage. When
the tariff is prohibitory Government gets | * or tae ”'gh tariff,
nothing, and all excess above fair profits
goes into tribute. This is the form the
monopolists prefer.
of the product, as against 18.4 per cent, in
J18T * '
1870,20 per cent, in 1860, and 23.2 per cent,
in 1850. Wages were higher in money in
1880 than in 1850, but they were, not so
high in the former year as they ought to
have been or would have been were it not
THE SURPLUS.
The President’s message shows that on
the close of the fiscal year, June 30, for
the years mentioned the surplus was ae
follows:
COMMERCE
Much has been said as to the increase in
Tf ;; . i our foreign commerce, and very little as to
nor manufactured in this country, andit L P an ^ tured $S,658,873^
wMA was Xdf per cent, of the total’ H
Vkdd P° rt - In 1870 exported $47,921,164
frttle tribute * h com P aratlvel y worth (in greenbacks) »f manufactured
111118 lnDute - goods, but they were only 10.63 per cent.
the tarif f causxs waste. of the total export. In 1880 the value of
The effect of the tariff in causing waste manufactured goods exported had risen to
readily shown by illustration. . Suppose | 879,510,447; but-they were only 9.65 per
1885 $17,859,735 84
1886 49,405,645 20
1887 65,567,849 64
1888 (estimated) — 66,182,214 72
Such is the surplus for separate years,
Mich its enormous annual growth—Pelion
upon Ossa, Ossa upon Pelion—so that, de
spite of a strain upon the powers of^Gov-
crnme.it to apply U, purchasing l»Wi jfl
enormous premiums, some at 24 per cent.,
the estimated aggregate at the close of the
present fiscal year was $140,000,000. Later
information places it at $155,000,000.
* * * * *
This mere surplus above what is needed
would build three State capitols in every
State in the Union as magnificent as that
now being constructed in my own State
and leave untouched a large surplus still.
It would support all the State and Territo
rial governments for two years, and still
leave a surplus. It is much more than
twice the entire cost of the Federal Gov
ernment for any year before the war.
lys
Great Britain can sell an article in-the
United States for $1, while our manufact
urers cannot sell it for less than $1.40. Now,
let Government put on a duty of 60 per
cent. Then the British manufacturer can
not sell here for less than $1.50. The
American may sell at $1.49 and control the
whole market. The American manufact
urer then makes 9 cents, while the Ameri
can consumer loses 49 cents. In this trans
action 9 cents of the increase goes to the
manufacturer and 40 to waste.
» * *
To understand the operation of the pres
ent tariff it is necessary to compare it with
forjner tariffs and the tariff of other*coun- I and cotton,
tries. Comparison is~Yhe"gr6ftt means of
knowledge and improvement,
age rate of duties on all im;
first twenty-one years ofthe
less than 20 per cent. During
1812 existing rates were doul
measure. "The tariff of abominations,”
which shook the Republic to its found*. crea sed to $1,603,693,404, a gain of 118.8
tinns. somewhat exceeded nnr nrnsant term I i j. r . j j .r . •<>
THE TARIFF.
The next proposition is that taxes should
be removed off the necessaries of life rather
than from its superfluities. This proposi
tion would seem to be too r lain, direct, and
honest to admit of successful contradiction.
It is indeed a truism which does not need
argument. The two terras, “tariff,” "in
ternal revenue,” sound at first equally
hanniess. Each is but a particular form
of tax; but the operation of the two taxes
is widely different. Of the various broad
distinctions between them one of the most
important is emphasized by the fact that
the tariff is a tax on necessaries—the inter
nal revenue a tax on superfluities. Both
taxes are indirect; so that by shaping ex
penditures they may to some extent be
avoided. But of all taxes the tariff is the
most unavoidable—the internal reve
most easily avoided.
tions, somewhat exceeded our present tariff.
The Walker tariff of 1846, the beginnii
of a great period of prosperity, averagi
23.20 per cent, duty on all imports and 26.22
on dutiable imports. The tariff of 1857
made the average duty 15.66 per cent, on 1 baff”bein'
all goods, on dutiable goods 20.12 per cent. 8 b e carri
There it will be seen that the tariff of Alex
ander Hamilton was only about one-third
of our present tariff. In 1795 it was 11.21
per cent, on all goods imported.
A FORTY-SEVEN PER CENT. TAX.
The i mports of this country for
the last fiscal year, ending
June 30,1887, were $692,000,000
Of which were free of duty.. 232,000,000
Leaving dutiable 460,000,000
Duties collected 218,000,000
Brag*
47 per cent. The tariff Is levied on thirteen
leading schedules, embracing more than
four thousand articles.
Of course a great system is necessary for
the collection of these duties, involving
custom-houses and custom-house officers
revenue-cutters, inspectors, searches ant
seizures, forfeitures, and the like. The
process of collection involves the right of
search of men and women, who are pre
sumed guilty, and
» pre
and required to prove tnei
innocence, not by oath, but by exposure of
their trunks, boxes, and their "very persons.
The system is highly complex and unintel
ligible, hard to understand, and difficult to
escape by shaping expenditure to avoid it.
* ' rrhl
The higher the rates of duty the more con
trary is it to sound principles of taxation
and political economy. It deviates more
and more from the true ends of taxation till
it becomes antagonistic to the chief objects
of government—the maintenance of justice
and equity.
WHO PAY TARIFF TAXES?
less during the twenty years than the ten
years.
In 1850 the value of farms was $3,271,-
575,426; in 1860 it was $6,645,045,0*07, a
gain of $3,873,469,681, or 103.11 per cent,
in ten years of low tariff. From 1860 to
1880, during twenty years of high tariff,
the value rose to $10,197,096,776, an in
crease of $3,552,051,769, a very little more
actually.in twenty years than in the pre-
m m■ ■ li if if
ceding ten years, and only about half as
much proportionately, the gain being 63.45
per cent, in the twenty years of high tariff
as against 103.11 per cent, in the ton years
of low tariff.
HIS GAIN UNDER LOW TARIFFS.
In 1850 the value of live-stock on farms
was $544,180,516; in 1860 it was $1,089,-
329,915, an increase of $545,149,399, or 100
per cent.; in 1880, after twenty years of
high tariff, it had risen to $1,600,464,609,
a gain of $411,134,694, which was $134,-
000,000 less increase in twenty years of high
tariff than ten years of low tariff, and only
87.74 per cent, of increase in twenty years,
after a gain of 100 per cent, in the preced-
g ten years.
The value of farming implements and
machinery in 1850 was $151,587,638, and
in 1860, at the end of the low-tariff period,
$246,118,141, an increase of $94,530,503, or
62.36 per cent. From 1860 to 1880 the in
crease was $160,401,914, or 66.17 per cent,
the total value being $406,520,055. In 1870
the specie value of implements and ma
chinery was $280,732,034. If the gain
from 1870 to 1880 had been 62.36 per cent.,
as it was from 1850 to 1860, the value in
1880 would have been nearly $50,000,000
greater, or, to be exact, $455,796,514.
In the ten years of low tariff ending
with 1860 the acreage in farms had in
creased 113,651,924 acres, and farm values
$3,373,469,681.
cent, of the total export. In 1870, after ten
years of high tariff, we exported less manu
factured goods, reducing values to specie,
than in 1860. After ton more years of high
tariff we exported less proportionately than
in 1860.
On the other hand, our exports of agri
cultural products were 81.14 per cent, of
our total export in 1860, fell to 79.34 per
C6nt. in 1870, while in 1880 we sent abroad
merchandise of this character worth the
enormous sum of $685,961,091, which was
83.25 per cent, of our total export. After
twenty years of high tariff, we exported, in
1880, over 2 per cent, more of agricultural
product? than in 1860, chiefly breadstufls
The~SV5r~
orts in the
ipublic
FARM MORTGAGES.
Most of the farmers had a clear title to
their land, a mortgage being a rare excep
tion. In the twenty years of high tariff
ending with 1880 farm acreage had in
creased 128,869,297 acres, and farm values
$3,552,051,796. A much greater number
of farmers on a much larger acreage made
a very little more gain in wealth in twenty
years than did a smaller number of farmers
on a less acreage in ten. years, and even
this comparatively small increase is only
apparent and not* real. A correspondent
of the New York Times, basing his calcu
lations upon Michigan records, estimates
that farms in that State, Ohio, Indiana,
Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Ne
braska, Kansas, and Missouri are mort-
;ed to the enormous extent of $3,422,-
,000. A very recent issue of the
Farmers’ Review, of Chicago, prints state
ments of correspondents from which it ap-
—ared that of counties reporting jn Ohio
per cent, of the farms are under mort-
;e; in Indiana, 26 percent.; in Illinois,
per cent.; in Iowa, 44 per cent.; in Ne
braska, 61 per cent.; in Wisconsin, 32 per
cent.; in Michigan, 50 per cent.; in Ken
tucky, 23 per cent., and in Dakota, 69 per
cent.
gencies which spring out of war. Does any I for the shivering men and women who
such emergency now exist? The exper.di- dwell in the land of the blizzard, they gra-
tures for the fiscal year on account of war ciously offer the comfort and protection
pensions and interest on the war debt are
estimated at $120,000,000. This would
seem to constitute a full-grown emergency.
The expenditures on account of pensions
and interest on the war debt are obligations
growing out of the war, and it would be
manifestly inappropriate to meet them by
tariff taxes on the necessaries of life, which
we are taught to believe are peace taxes,
pure and simple. *
The internal tax upon spirits in 1865 was
$2 per gallon. It has been reduced to 90
cents. When the war taxes upon the neces
saries of life have been reduced a propor
tionate amount it will be time enough to
commence the further reduction or repeal
of the whisky tax.
NOT UNDEMOCRATIC.
It is further alleged that the internal-
revenue taxes are undemocratic. A per
sistent and irrational effort is being made
to array the people of the South against
them on that ground. How is the claim
sustained? By assertion, naked, bold, reck
less—that, and nothing more. There are no
facts to sustain it. There are no fair infer
ences to justify it. These taxes have been
in force ever since the war. If. it be true
that they are in violation of Democratic
principle, it is surely possible to find some
authoritative utterance against their con
tinuance by some convention of the party
met to formulate its principles and to nomi
nate its candidates. No such utterance can
be found. No such declaration was made
in either of the conventions of ’68, or ’72,
or ’76, or ’80. No such declaration was
embodied in the platform of 1884, on which
the present Chief Magistrate was elected.
On the contraiy, these taxes and the pur
poses for which they are collected were dis
tinctly recognized, and the pledge was
given to the country that the proceeds from
them would be " sacredly devoted ” to the
relief of the people from the remaining
burdens of the war, and to be made a fund
for the payment of such pensions as Con
gress may from time to time grant. If
these taxes be undemocratic it is a little
remarkable that not one of the five National
Democratic Conventions that have assem
bled since the war has put upon record
any such declaration.
*****
that may be found in untnxed whisky. To
the Western farmer, who finds all the pro
ceeds of his toil eaten up by outrageous
taxes on all he buys, with no compensating
benefits by reason of protection in anything
which he sells, they oiler a deluge of cheap
whisky. To the entreaty of the Southern
farmer for cheap iron, cheap farm tools,
cheap bagging and ties, cheap salt, in
mockery of the hardships under which he
struggles, comes the ready offer, in bland
benevolence, of untaxed whisky for whites,
untaxed whisky for blacks.
FREE WHISKY FOR ALL.
To the struggling needle-women, who
demand cheap tnffeaa, cheap needles, cheap
buttons, cheap scissors, cheap thimbles; to
the toiling working-man who asks a cheap
ening of the few articles that are necessary
to the comfort of his humble home; to the
freedmen who ask cheap food, cheap cloth
ing, cheap books, cheap agencies in their
progress and elevation; to the manufact
urer, who demands cheap raw materials as
the sole condition to his successful compe
tition with the whole world; to the ship
ping interests, which plead for free ships
as a means of restoring the commerce of
the country to its pristine glory and great
ness—-to each of all these worthy repre
sentatives of outraged and failing interests
comes the cruel, the impious, the shameless
offer of free whisky. It is the sum of all
jood. It is the cure of e very ill. If is the
inspiration of despairing hope. « Let him
drink and forget nis poverty, and remem
ber his misery no more.” I need not re
peat that whatever is taken off the internal
taxes on whisky means so much unneces
sary tax laid upon the necessaries of life.
THE BLIGHT OF FREE WHISKY.
The total imports and exports of mer-
T chandise in 1860 were valued at $317,885,-
the warrf j 252, and in 1860 at $687,192,176, a gain of
116.17 per cent. In the twenty years of
high tariff succeeding, the total value in
per cent, during two decades of high tariff
as against a gain of 116.17 per cent, in one
decade of low tariff. #
Great Britain took 62.60 of our exports
in 1860 and 61.65 per cent, last year, over
ag products of agriculture, which
ed fro
_ . OUR TARIFF THE HIGHEST. .
From Mr. Switzler’s table it appears that I
the tariff of the United States, 81.64, is indebtedness to Cuba for sugar. She thus
more than double that of Russia, which is lights, profits, and commissions
15.45; it exceeds the combined tariff of I whlch we.ought to and would make with
m our ports to Liverpool in
her own ships and bought in open market
where all the world competes. Instead of
paying us directly, she loads her vessels
with her manufactured goods and pays sun
dry little bills which we owe here and there,
such as $45,000,000 balance due Brazil for
Russia and Italy, the sum of these being our °, wn “ g°°£? wer ®
less than 30 per cent.; it exceeds the com? P** 1 ®. ^ ° f ®
bined tariffs of England, France, Germany, I P resent burdensome tariff.
and Austria-Hungary, which together
amount to 30.42 per cent.
Says Mr. Spofford, in the American Al
manac, referring toJGerman statistics: “ In
1879 heavy additions were made to the
tariff on imported goods, and Germany has
returned to an extreme protective system.”
The extreme protection afforded by Ger
many is found in a tariff rate of 9.02 per
cent. Three times the German tariff, 27.06
WHO OWN THE VESSELS.
per cent., lacks 4.48 of the present tariff of lSfio’J! 1870 American 22647
the United States, is less than the tariff pro- I From 1860 1870 ’ Ame can ’ “ ,647 »
posed in the Mills bill, and would be de
nounced as " free trade ” by the monop
olists! What would they think of a return
to the extreme protection rate of Germany,
9.02 per cent. ?
Let us see who owns the vessels which
have transported the enormous quantities
of merehanduein the last thirty-seven years
exported from and imported into this coun
try. From 1850 tp 1860 the tonnage of ves
sels entered at seaports of the United States
from foreign countries was as follows:
American, 29,404,994 tons, or 67 per cent.;
foreign, 14,392,560 tons, or 33 per cent.
From 1860 to 1870, American, 22,647,333
tons, or 46 per cent.; foreign, 26,451,441
tons, or 54 per cent. From 1870 to 1880,
American, 28,518,537 tons, or 28 per cent.;
foreign, 74,465,573 tons, or72percent., anti
from 1880 to and including 1887 (seven
I am in favor of real, honest, bona fide
protection—protection against all wrong
and injustice—even against the injustice,
wrong, and gross partiality now practiced
And yet*the United States are the most I joawj^ericau, 19,^866 tons,or Si per in the sacred name of "protection. “
.. . 3 cent - foreign. 73.897.204 tons, or 79 tier
^HEIR DEPRESSING INFLUENCE.
The depressing influence of farm mort
gages is now felt in my o wn'St&ttf-ttS
never was before and I hope will never be
again. Complete records are not at hand,
but when ten States are reported to be
mortgaged in an amount almost as large as
the entire increase in farm values from
1860 to 1880, it is very safe to declare that
while the farmers’ gains in the ten low-
tariff years, from 1850 to 1860, went into
their own pockets, the increase in farm
values' during the twenty vears of high
tariff, from 1860 to 1880, did not begin to
be sufficient to satisfy the mortgages placed
on farms during the latter period. In other
words, the farmer worked for himself dur
ing the ten years of low tariff, and for the
money-lender during twenty years of high
tariff.
The present high tariff is a blight upon
the country and all its interests—upon
agriculture, upon commerce, upon manu
factures, upon population, upon wealth,
upon railroads which unite distant sections,
and upon the ships which ought to carry
our products of agriculture and manufact
ures to the uttermost parts of the globe.
The comparisons which I have made are
instructive, but the idea is not a new one.
Mr. Calhoun, in a speech in the Senate on
March 16,1842, contrasted with much more
force and clearness the years of high tariff,
from 1824 to 1882, inclusive, with the suc
ceeding years under the lower and compro
mise tariff, from 1832 to 1840, inclusive.
*****
In the light of the wise and sober utter
ances of the sage of Monticello, I declare
that no greater wrong could be perpetrated
on my section than to abolish the whisky
tax. It would flood our States with cheap
whisky, demoralize and brutalize our labor
ing class, and render worse than nugatory
the labors of a quarter of a centuty in the
interest of their advancement. It would
be an outrage on all our people, but against
the negro race it would rise to the propor
tions of a hideous and appalling crime.
A distillery upon every spring branch, a
peck of corn bartered for a quart of whisky,
a jug of the devil’s swill in every cabin
will convert every neighborhood into a
pandemonium, and expose to danger the
rarity of every Christian household. Faiu-
lies would fly into the town; aiid'cities and
abandoH-thfrUGURtry to the orgies of sen
sual, drunken, debauched wretches.
It is a universally recognized principle
in all civilized governments that luxuries
and articles promotive of vice are esi
dally fitting subjects of taxation. T1
principle is of wise and just application
n all governments, but peculiarly so in
those which depend for their glory, their
greatness, and their perpetuity on the virtue
and intelligence of their people.
It is impossible to deny honestly and
logically the justness of the principle or
the fairness and propriety of its application
to the taxes in question. Burdens upon
vice are incentives to virtue. It is right
to make vice and vicious tendencies pay
dear for the privilege of existence. I am
not for giving to whisky, so far as the per
mit of Government can give it, the unre
strained freedom of the country. Untaxed
whisky will be cheap whisky. Chea]
whisky will necessarily result in increase*
consumption. Increased consumption will
be followed by increase in lawlessness and
crime and degradation. »
CHARGES OF CRUELTY AND OPPRESSION,
FEDERAL METHODS NOT APPLICABLE.
Under the constitution of several of the
States—Georgia is among them—the levy
of taxes must be made ad valorem. You
could not transplant the Federal method
into that system. If it were possible to do
so by any scheme or device whatsoever, the
fact that the surrounding States might not
adoptasimilarpolicyorimposeacorrespond-
ing rateof taxation would render the scheme
an utter failure. With the tax in Tennes
see at 10 cents per gallon and with no tax
at all in Illinois and Kentucky, how could
the Georgia manufacturer compete in the
sale of his product taxed at 90 cents per
gallon? Laws could not be framed to
remedy the difficulty. Besides, to transfer
the system to the States would not relieve
the harshness and cruelty complained of;
the collection would be made then by offi
cers of the State, as they are made now by
Federal officials who are citizens of the
State, identified with the people and enjoy-
THE REAL PROTECTION.
There is a dim but false idea afloat in
some minds that somehow the importer, the
middle jonan, or the foreign manufacturer
pays the tax. By tracing the transaction
the mistake is revealed. The duty is, in
the first place,'paid to the custom-house
officer by the importer. The importer adds
the duty to the price with his profits on
both. He sells at the increased price, in
cluding the profit on prime cost and duty,
18 the retailer, and he sells to the consumer
at a price including his profit on the entire
cost. Out of the pockets of tho consumers
comes, at Iasi, the uttermost farthing.
, In the State tax the tax-collector pays
into the State treasury, but the citizen pays
him first. Tho money does not come out
of the collector’s pocket. In Federal taxa
tion the importer pays into the Treasury
and collects afterwards. All the taxes, at
last, are paid by the citizen, not by the
agents of Government. All these instru
mentalities are mere conduits between the
tax-payer and the Government. The tax
payers do not understand the operation. In
State taxes they understand it all—they see
. and pay the tax-gatherer and take a receipt.
In Federal taxation they do not know who
collects, how much he collects, when, how,
or for what purpose. They are as ignorant
as if they had no interest in the results, so
little do the people know of tho direct op
eration of the tariff.
favored" nation on earth in the abundance I, f*"
and variety of their natural resources. cen ^‘ 7n I860, under a low tariff, 67 per
They stand least in need of protection, and <? nt ' ? f ou " f ® re,gn tr ^? w “, ca " ied °® ‘. n
their tariff is more than double the highest American bottoms and but 83 per cent, in
„ __- ot foreign bottoms. In 1887, after twenty-six
^ g 710 I years of high tariff, foreign bottoms did on
an average 79 per cent, of our carrying
railroads. I trade abroad, while only 21 per cent, en-
There were 9,021 miles of railroad in the | gaged the attention of American bottoms,
United States in 1850. The mileage in 1860
was 30,635, an increase of 239.6 per'cent,
during the low-tariff period. In 1870 there The tonnage of sail and steam vessels
was a 'mileage of 62,914, a gain of 72.72 per built in the United States from 1850 to 1860
cent. These figures had increased to 93,349 amounted to 3,666,026 tons; from 1860 to
in 1880, a gain of 76.41 per cent. In the 1870, 8,008,881 tons; from 1870 to 1880,
twenty years of high tariff, from 1860 to I 2,538,004 tons, and from 1880 to 1887,
1880, there was a gain in mileage of 204.7 1,458,629 tons.
per cent, as against a gain of 239.6 per cent. The tonnage of sail and steam vessels of
in the ten years of low tariff from 1860 to the United States engaged in foreign trade
1860. How much the duty on iron and was 1,439,694 tons in 1860. After ten years
steel rails checked railroad building during of low tariff it rose in 1860 to 2,379,396
two decades of high tariff may not be cor- tons. In 1870 it declined to 1,448,846 tons;
rectly estimated, but it is easy of conjecture. I in 1880 to 1,814,402 tons, and in 1887 to
1 989,412 tons—the smallest amount of
, , , . American tonnage in foreign trade since
The capital employed in manufactunng lg46) when it was 943|8 07 tons. After
establishments in 1850 was $538,245,851. twenty-six years of high tariff the tonnage
.During ten years oflowteriff, up to I860, of American vessels in foreign trade was
it had increased to $l,009,8o5,715, a gain of onl 46 i 0 5 tons more than it had been
89.87 per cent. In 1880 this capital was for ^ y . one years before.
$2,790,272,606, an increase of 1/0.34 per In I860, out of a total import and export,
cent, in twenty years of high tariff, manu- coin and bul i ion j nc i H ded. valued at $762-
facturing, especially for army supplies, bav- 288.550, American vessels carried enough
ing been stimulated during and on account to amourvt in value t0 $507,247,757; in
of the war. Here the high tariff would 1887> w ;th a total export and import, coin
seem to hold its own; but appearances are and bullion included, valued at $1,504,-
often, as in this case, deceptive. In 18*0, 571452, American vessels carried only
five years after the close of the war, the $222,476,047. worth about 44 per cent, of
capital in manufactures was $2,118,208,769 the value carr ; ed j n 18GO, when the total
in greenbacks, or $1,765,173,974 in specie. va j ue G f exports and imports was about
The ratio of increase on this specie capital half t jj at of 18 g 7> Less than thirty years
in the ten high-tariff years from 1870 to of b i g li protection has almost cleared the
1880 was 58 per cent., against 89.37 per seas 0 f American vessels in foreign trade,
cent, in the ten low-tariff years from I80O p e f ore t b ey are entirely swept away the
to 1860. Had the percentage of increase American people are likely to see to it that
from 1870 to 1880 oeen as large as from I a ^ obstacles in the shape of tariff and nav-
1850 to 1860, the capital invested in manu- -
would protect all honest industry against
being plundered in the interest of a few
wire-workers. I would protect the great
hard-working mass of toiling people against
the deceptions and traps of the bosses and
managers. I would give the people an
honest platform of honest principles,
would take the devil’s hymn and make it
serve God—the false protection of monop
oly and make it the true protection of the
citizen.
faeturing in 1880 would have been $550,-
000,000 more than it was, or $3,342,692,837.
WHY PKICKS DECREASE.
It is true that prices in this age of pro
gress are low, and will constantly grow
PRODUCTS OK MANUFACTURES.
In the matter of products the same phe
nomena appear. In 1850 the total value
was $1,019,106,616. In 1860 it was $1,885,-
861,676, a gain of 85 per cent. In 1880,
after twenty years of high tariff, the prod
uct was valued at $5,369,679,191, a gain of
184.7 per cent, since 1860. The same causes
which enlarged manufacturing capital in
1861-’65 increased manufactured products;
but compare 1870 with 1880. The product
of 1870 was valued at $4,232,325,442 in
greenbacks, or $3,626,937,868 in specie. If
the gain from 1870 to 1880 had been 85 per
cent., as it was from 1850 to 1860, the
igation laws are done away with.
INTERNAL REVENUE TAXES.
THE FARMER.
But, after all, the farmer who sells his
surplus crop in the cheapest and buys what
he cannot do without in the dearest market
has the best right to complain. In 1850
there were 293,560,614 acres of improved
and unimproved land in farms; in 1860
there were 407,212,638 acres, an increase of
113,651,924, or 38.71 per cent.; in 1870
there were a very few more acres than in
Since the conclusive showing by the
President of the necessity for getting rid of
the immense and growing surplus, it has
been discovered that the internal revenue
taxes are intolerable burdens. It has also
been discovered by "some unknown species
of political clairvoyance that Mr. Jefferson
is exceedingly angry at their existence, and
that all the other fathers of the Republic
turn uneasily and unhappily in their graves.
It is announced with solemn and dra
matic affectation of sincerity that they are
undemocratic, and that they are odious.
Some thick and thin partisans of another
and far worse system of taxation have de
nounced them. They are charged with
being barbarous methods which in Russia
lead out to Siberia and to death in its frozen
wilds. . .
But what is there in all this ? Nothing
but a subtle and inexcusable purpose to
retard, if not altogether to prevent, a reduc
tion of the tariff taxes on the necessaries of
life. This is the purpose and the end, with
few exceptions, of all the wild assertion and
cunning pretense with which the taxes on
whisky and tobacco are arraigned before
the bar of public opinion.
Aroused by the dangers to which a re
duction of the surplus may expose monopo
lies and trusts, the partisans of high-tariff
spoliation have suddenly waked up to the
fact that the internal-revenue taxes are war
taxes, in a sense which does not apply to
contemporaneous tariff taxes on the neces
saries of life.
It is further charged that there is harsh
ness, cruelty, and oppression in the execu
tion of these laws. We are told of “Sibe
rian exile ” and " Russian despotism.
Frightful and pathetic pictures are drawn
of martyred men and citizens who have
been taken from the bosoms of their fcm
ilies, hurried through the forms of trial, and
mercilessly condemned to exile and impris
onment a thousand miles from their homes.
I was shocked and horrified at the thought
that numbers of my own fellow-citizens of
Georgia were pining away in the dungeons
at Albany, N. Y., without the solace and
sympathy of friends to-alleviate their ca
lamity. I sought for information ; the
record is before me. The imprisonments
in Northern prisons for the past five years
from the northern district of Georgia (there
are none from the southern) have been as
follows:
One for fraudulent accounts, one for
nsion frauds, two for perjury, one for
‘ ing into Government warehouse, nine
for counterfeiting, ten for conspiracy, thir
teen for violation of postal laws, and three
for violation of internal-revenue laws.
" RUSSIAN METHODS.
Mark it I Three victims of " Russian
methods ” from both the revenue districts
of Georgia for the past five years I One
$rould have thought from the passionate
denunciations of the internal-revenue sys
tern that its officers had put out drag-nets
and depopulated the mountain region of
my State, with a view to colonizing with
suffering martyrs the alleged Siberia of the
North.
Let us look, to the record again. Three
for violation of internal-revenue laws
Thirteen for violation of postal laws 1 Why
do we not hear of "Siberian exile” and
" Russian despotism ’’ in connection with
the postal laws ? Why are they not de
nounced as odious, and the cry raised,
“ They must go; they must go.” The an
swer is obvious. The retention of the
postal laws is no harrier to the schemes of
ing their confidence and sympathy. If it
be said that the States would pass laws re
lieving the system of its rigor, the reply is,
so may the General Government, and Dills
are in progress now to effect that result.
SMALL INTEREST IN INTERNAL RKYENV Wtfi"
^ The interest of the people of the United
States and of my own State in the repeal of
the internal revenue is astonishingly small.
The repeal will hurt one thousand where it
helps one. The reduction of the tariff will
help one thousand where it hurts one.
at appl
to that will be true aa to others. .Of the
800,000 colored people in Georgia not one
is benefited by the tariff, nor one hurt by
the internal revenue. Of the 900,000
whites, half are women, not one hurt by
the internal revenue; of the other half,
males, one half minors, not one hurt by
internal revenue. Of the fraction of the
population remaining, even the drinking
men do not think themselves helped and do
not regard cheap whisky as a boon to them.
THE TOBACCO TAXES.
With respect to the tax on tobacco, I
would retain the tax on cigars and cigar
ettes. They are by ho means necessaries—
they are the indulgencies of gentlemen and
des. As a measure of compromise to
dm
compr
effect a general reduction of the tariff, I
would consent to remove the tax on to
bacco in all other forms.
,y,
present tariff of. abominations, with the
tariff of different periods of our history,
showing that the tariff of 1790, prepared by '
Hamilton, the father of protection, com
pared with the present tariff of 1888, stands
as one to three to a people then of three
millions, now of sixty; for a people then
scattered and young compared with a coun
try now knit together by 120,000 miles of
railroad, with telegraphs, newspapers, etc.
And still we have “ infant industries ” a
hundred years old, growing yearly more
clamorous for the bottle. I have shown
relative prosperity during the low-tariff
period and the high—the former exceeding
the latter in the country and in every Stcte
in aggregate wealth and in every detail.
COMPARISON OF TARIFFS.
Finally, I have compared our tariff with
iff < * mf
the tariff of other great powers with the
astonishing result that it exceeds the com
bined tariffs of England, France, Germany,
and Austria-Hungary. I know no better
way of understanding the subject than by
such comparisons. If the protectionists
will show us a better way I will follow it.
Choose ye between economy and extrav
agance, necessaries and whisky, tax and
tribute. Thus the two simple, well-chosen
propositions.of the President stand con
firmed in the light of the closest investiga
tion: Opposition to them is only possible
by denying truisms; argument only by
obscuring them.
the monopolist—the repeal of the internal- .heralding “ peace on earth, good will to
or 31.64 per cent. The actual increase in
acreage in twenty years of high tariff was
only 15,000,009 acres in excess of the actual
increase during ton years of low tariff, and
TWO KINDS OF WAR TAXES.
At the bare mention of taxes on whisky
and’tobacco the cry of “war taxes” is raised,
and night end day are made hideous with
visions and howls of war, of bloodshed, of
barbarism, of vandalism. But when you
speak to them of other war taxes—of taxes
1860; in 1880 there were 536,081,836 acres, on salt, on sugar, on rice, on coal, on iron,
an increase of 128,869,279 acres since 1860, on clothing, on wool, on blankets, on farm
tools—they are a - ’ gentle as sucking doves
No respectable statesman of the country,
of any party whatsoever, denies the advisa
bility of excise taxes for meeting the emer-
revenue laws removes the chief obstacles to
the preservation of a high tariff.
If objection is made to the internal-reve
nue laws because they are searching and
inquisitorial, the same objection applies
with equal force for tho abolition of the
custom and postal laws, all of which are
enforced by similar methods and under
similar pains and penalties.
• MODIFY THE LAWS.
If the laws are too rigid in themselves ;
if the processes under them are too harsh,
let them he amended and modified. This
can he done, if necessary, without affect
ing their objects or efficiency. During
the present Congress numerous bills have
been introduced which will remedy all the
abuses which have been charged against
the internal-revenue laws; but no modifi
cation, no change, however beneficent, will
suit the high-tariff beneficiaries.
A NEW EMANCIPATION.
A new act of emancipation is needed,
freeing more whites than the Lincoln proc
lamation freed of blacks, and setting the
blacks—far more numerous now—wholly
free. Moreover, and best of all this will
be a bloodless victory of the ballot, not of
the bullet—a victory of peace, not of war,
which, when once inaugurated, will be per
manent—promotive of the harmony of the
sections and the brotherhood of classes, and
They are willing to relieve the distresses
of the suffering, monopoly-ridden miners
of Pennsylvania by furnishing them abun
dance of cheap whisky, but deny them
cheap food ana clothing. To the demand
for cheap coal, lumber, nails, and blankets
Could we' bring the country hack to the
sound doctrine that labor should not he
pauperized by charity, and that monopoly
was not to he fostered by tribute; could
we restore to capitalists and manufacturers
a manly sense of independence and self-
reliance ; could wo lift that noble army of
honest toilers, those untold millions who
never get protection, from the bondage
they are under to support special classes ;
could we place labor where in the nature
of things it might stand, giving and receiv
ing equal benefits; could we by the crush-
ing power of public reprobation drive out
of decent recognition that man or set of
men. who claim the right to levy tribute
upon another man’s industry to support
his own ; could we say to all parts of the
earth that we are one in the blood of a
common civilization, and all countries are
one in the common wealth of God, and that
we come to them upon the wings of our
noble ships bearing the endless and varied
bounty that God has given us to exchange
with them, then we might boast of a Re
public that asked nothing but peace—that
is the oppressor of none, but tue emanci
pator of all.
"a r '