IRLF
SB Sfl MD2
H F
1755
K62
1883
MAIN
THE TARIFF:
^PROTECTION ^H
TRADE
By ABBOT KINNEY.
*'' -ice 35 Cents.
LO
KT
OJ
LO
LIBRARY
OF THK
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA.
I FT OF
Received
Accession No.
Class A/o,
4 pi
I
THE TARIFF.
Protection vs. Free Trade,
JLIBIBOT
The details of the tax known as the Protective Tariff have
been much worked with, but the principles of taxation and of
government to which these details must be referred to be un-
derstood, receive but scant attention.
The details of administration in all things must be in
accord with the fundamental principles and general truths
upon which the matter rests, otherwise any theory based upon
such erroneous details is as though based on shifting sands. It
must fall; the higher and grander the structure thus founded,
the more certain is its downfall.
There are now in this country two opposing policies in
regard to Custom House taxation. One of these is the policy
of a tariff or tax for revenue only. The money thus raised is
used by the government for the maintenance of order, defend-
ing the commonwealth and the usual legitimate needs of
administrating the laws. Incidentally this tax like all others
works harder on some persons than on others, but this it tries
to avoid. It never intends private persons to derive a revenue
from public taxes. The tariff or tax for revenue only is laid
exclusively for the benefit of the government and to derive the
greatest amount of return with the least burden on trade. The
other policy is called a tariff or tax for protection. This is
mainly laid for the benefit of private enterprises in the hands
of private persons who operate them solely for their own
advantage. Without these contributions forced from the
people by this system of taxing and without the revenue the
The Tariff.
favored ones thus receive, it is contended that their enterprises
would languish. The incidental part of the protective tax is
that the government receives a revenue. This revenue going
to the government, however, is but a small part of the tax paid
by the people. It is impossible to determine what this propor-
tion is, but it is probably less than ten per cent of the tax paid
and may not be one per cent; that is 90 per cent, or perhaps
99 per cent, of this public tax for protection goes to private
persons, and from one to ten per cent, goes to public uses.
The culmination of the protective tax is that private persons
should receive all and the government none, either by making
the tax so high as to be prohibitive on foreign importations, or
by actually prohibiting them.
It is now forbidden to Americans to purchase ships except
when made in American yards. Thus a few ship builders are
enabled to lay a tax .on shipping satisfactory to themselves
and at the same time furnish such goods as they like. Ship
building thus receives the greatest amount of protection, but it
languishes. What good has the country obtained by the total
prohibition of the importation of ships? This is the logical
extreme of protection. We have the sad spectacle before us of
a, once powerful merchant marine proudly holding its own
against the world and carrying our bright flag into the corners
of the earth ruined, a beggar, whining for bounties at the feet of
Congress. The tariff has placed the industries it has been sup-
posed to favor for thirty years either in the position of trusts
and gigantic monopolies grinding both their laborers and the
people at large as much as they can, or else in the position of
beggars seeking for bounties and charity from the public upon
whom they have so long preyed. Who pays this tax? It can
not be the producer or foreigner; it must be the consumer; the
consumers are the people of the United States who pay the
tax in the price of nearly everything that they use. The
support of the protected industries is not by any foreigners
but by taxes laid on the American people themselves.
By the protective system, though the tax is levied by the
government, the collection of the greater portion of it is dele-
gated to the manufacturers or other individuals interested.
These demand such proportion as they like, which is in prac-
tice all that the people will pay.
Protection vs. Free Trade
In considering this question it should not be forgotten that
all tariffs or taxes collected from the people by government
authority or connivance are taxes for the levying and using of
which the government is responsible.
Taxes are unpleasant but they are necessary. Man's
experience shows that law and order can not be maintained
without organized government. The existence of governments
depends on their power to maintain themselves. To maintain
government there must be contribution. Voluntary contribu-
tions would distribute the burden unequally. Some would
pay and some would not. It has been found necessary in
justice to all, to assess taxes for maintaining government
equally according to the interests at stake and to make the
contribution a forced one, so that no one can throw his just
share unfairly upon his neighbors.
The justification of such forced tax is that it is exclusively
for the public good. A tax then should be always for the pub-
lic good, plainly and directly for the public good and only for
the public good.
"No taxation without representation" should have as com-
panion mottoes these: "The public needs are the sole excuse
for a public tax;" "No tax for a private use is just."
The question at once arises when the protective theory is
looked at in this light, does the taxing of the whole people for
less than ten per cent, of their number, harmonize with the
fundamental principles of taxation in a free government.
It is said that the distribution of the protective tax to the
capitalists thus favored enables them to carry on industries
which, owing to the high price of labor in this country, they
would otherwise be unable to do, and that though these capital-
ists are first helped and benefited by the tax, the people in
general are also benefited by the market this favored class
make for the goods of the common herd. A plain statement
of the position is this. The whole people are taxed for a few.
The few keep the tax except such part as they pay at home
for the gratification of their private appetites and desires.
With their families often in Europe and their own tours to the
old world, even this return of the tax is small. The tax which
the government enables these few to collect from our people is
thus often spent among what these schemers are fond of call-
The Tariff.
ing the pauper labor of Europe. But at the best it is only
robbing Peter to pay Paul.
The Supreme Court of the United States has not passed
on the legality of a protective tariff that I am aware of, but it
has passed on local laws, measures and taxes had and im-
posed for the benefit of individuals or corporations to increase
the private fortunes of these under color of advancing the
public good. The protective system in internal taxation, to
favor certain classes of business at the expense of others, has
received from this court its death blow.
One of the clear cases on this subject is that of the Cleve-
land Loan Association against the City of Topeka. This was
a case where the City of Topeka granted its bonds to an iron
bridge building company on condition that this company
would locate in Topeka, and the question arose on the validity
of the bonds. I quote some sentences from the syllabus and
from Justice Miller's opinion.
Loan Association vs. Topeka, 20 Wallace. "There is no
such thing in our government, State and National, as unlim-
ited power in any of their branches."
"There are limitations of such powers which arise out of
the essential nature of all free governments; implied reserva-
tions of individual rights, without which the social compact
could not exist, and which are respected by all governments
entitled to the name."
"Among these is the limitation of the right of taxation
that it can only be used in aid of a public object."
"It cannot therefore be exercised in aid of enterprises
strictly private for the benefit of individuals, though in a re-
mote or collateral way the local public may be benefited
thereby."
"A statute which authorizes a town to issue its bonds in
aid of the manufacturing enterprise of individuals is void, be-
cause the taxes necessary to pay the bonds would if collected
be a transfer of the property of individuals to aid in the pro-
jects of gain and profit of others, and not for a public use in
the proper sense of that term."
Justice Miller says in delivering the opinion of the
Supreme Court: "To lay with one hand the power of govern-
ernment on the property of the citizen, and with the other to
Protection vs. Free Trade.
bestow it upon favored individuals to aid private enterprises
and build up private fortunes is none the less a robbery be-
cause it is done under the forms of law and is called taxation."
Coulter J. in "Northern Liberties vs. St. John's Church"
cited in the same case says very forcibly, "I think the common
mind has everywhere taken in the understanding that taxes
are a public imposition levied by authority of the government,
for the purpose of carrying on the government in all its
machinery and operations that they are imposed for a public
purpose."
The peculiar and indirect operation of the protective tax
makes it difficult to recognize. It is levied at the frontier or at
the protected persons' factory . The people pay it in the in-
creased price of their purchases. They do not see that every-
thing they use is thus taxed by the protective system. Every
plow, harrow, nail, horse shoe, piece of iron, hat, coat, blanket
or bit of cloth now pays tax to a few favored persons, to the
owners of the protected factories. These form less than one
per cent, of the total population. It may be thought that the
laborers in these industries who compose about 7 per cent, of
the population receive some proportionate tax also, but the
owners pay no more than the market price of labor, on the
contrary taking the skill required, etc.. the laborers in the pro-
tected industries receive less annual pay than those in the free
ones, such as carpenters, bricklayers, locomotive engineers,
etc., and are often altogether out of work or on one-half time.
The laborers employed by these fa\ r ored persons cannot then
be said to be gamers by the system.
In the scheme of protection, the laboring man's commo-
dity, that is to say labor is entirely unprotected; immigration
and competition in laborers is entirely unfettered. By immi-
gration and the importation of contract labor by manufactur-
ers, and also perhaps on account of the narrow and inelastic
protected market, prices of labor in some protected occupations
are less to-day according to some authorities than in England.
The standard of living being more costly here than there,
these workmen are doubly injured.
The protectionists' positions should be carefully examined
to discover where they have been misled.
They say: The price of labor is higher in the United
The Tariff.
States than elsewhere. American industries of certain kinds,
therefore, to compete with foreign industries, must have a
bounty; or a tax must be levied on the people of their own
country, the larger part of which they, the manufacturers, are
to collect. Special bounties are also asked and given to ex-
porters of goods made here. Thus Americans are taxed in
this last case and pay out money so that foreigners can buy
goods made in America cheaper than they can be bought for
in America by the tax payers. In this way we pay taxes that
are given to exporters of American guns to enable them to
sell American guns cheaper to foreigners than t they can be
bought for at home, so in case of war our enemies could sup-
ply themselves with our improved weapons by our own taxes,
at less rates than we ourselves have to pay for them. So it is
with sugar and a number of other things. What sense is
there in such taxing to give bounties and drawbacks to our
large manufacturers so that American products are made
cheaper to foreigners than to ourselves?
This high labor complained of by the protectionists is a
state of affairs that it cannot interest the laborer to change.
A laboring man ought certainly not to complain that wages
are higher in his own residence than elsewhere.
High wages not only indicate a good condition for labor-
ers but also for capital. High wages cannot be paid unless
enterprise and capital are also well paid. High wages mean
good returns to the employer, else he could not pay them.
Therefore all capital not employed in industries to be pro-
tected and all labor can find nothing to change in a condition
where labor is high.
From five to seven per cent, of the population are engaged
in enterprises that are protected. The laborers in them, ac-
cording to the opening statement of the protectionist, that
because labor is high protection is needed, are not interested
in protection. It is only the few owners of certain industries
that are to be benefited. It is doubtful whether in the long
run even this small portion of our people are really benefited.
Such men among them as John D. Wise, the largest wool
handler in California, Abraham S. Hewitt, one of the largest
iron manufacturers in the country, and the late Edward
Harris, the largest manufacturer of cassimeresin New England,
Protection vs. Free Trade.
had some time since come to believe that the fetters of protec-
tion diminished in the end the home market and almost
entirely cut off the foreign one. $75,000,000 of the custom
duties collected by England were on the following goods:
Tobacco $42,948,405.
Tea 20,848,165.
Wine 7,348,550.
Dried Fruit 2,546,170.
Coffee 2,060,010.
Chicory 333,695.
Chocolate and Cocoa 223,355.
$75,306,350.
None of these articles are produced in England. How is
it then, if protection is really beneficial to manufacturers, that
the unprotected manufacturers of England paying more wages
than nearly, if not every country with which they trade,
can undersell and control the markets of the world?
The protectionists having obtained their wishes now say,
in a somewhat inconsistent way, that if the tariff is reduced in
the least then labor will diminish in price. This position was
first taken by the employers in the protected districts and has
been much insisted on. These gentlemen were formerly con-
cerned about the highness of labor. They have always sought
their labor at the lowest figures, even importing large numbers
of persons under contract to work for them at extremely low
figures, from countries in a distressed condition, as Italy and
Hungary. These things oblige one to doubt the sincerity of
the protectionist employers, either when talking of high or low
wages. With all possible charity we are forced to the con-
clusion that it is in no sense the laborers' interest, but that it
is their own private gain that induces them to interest them-
selves in politics, to secure representatives and to pay lobbyists
for purposes in the interest of which no delegation of working-
men has ever been seen in Washington. By immigration and
this importation of contract labor, as has been said, the work-
ing man is subjected to unrestricted competition and is paid
the lowest price the risks and cost of importing labor will
allow, while at the same time those things he consumes he
must pay a double and treble price for, to satisfy the tax of
the protectionist. The proportion of foreign operatives to
The Tariff.
American operatives employed in the protected industries is
increasing. It is difficult to obtain the exact figures for many
places, but the admirable statistics of Massachusetts obviates
the difficulty in that state. Here are the facts for three of her
manufacturing towns:
Native Labor Foreign Labor
Employed. Employed.
Fall River 3,137 <),334
Lowell 4,883 5,175
Lawrence . 3,415 5,724
By our protection system a few employers are protected,
the laborers never.
The price of labor is mainly regulated by the ratio of
laborers to the work to be done. No considerable employment
of labor can be long carried on in a country at a different price
from that paid in other industries in the same locality, because
labor will be drawn from the less paying ones to the higher un-
til the prices are equalized. It is therefore clear that the
prices paid one large industry, say farming, in which in this
country more than half the population are engaged, must
regulate the prices paid in all others, everything else being
equal; that is, the capacity required, the cost of apprentice-
ship, the dangers, the sanitary condition, etc., being con-
sidered, the wages with these compensations must be the
same. Laborers will leave the ill-paid occupations for the bet-
ter paid until any inequality is corrected. Taking farming in
this country, we may ask what have been the causes of the
high wages that have been the nominal reason and excuse for
protection. There are three clear ones:
1. The immense cheap capital of land in the Public Do-
main which has always been demanding labor and on the
most favorable terms.
2. The free institutions and security of property that have
assured every workingman that his earnings were safe, and
3. The freedom of trade that gives everyone full liberty
within our bounds to exchange his products or labor with
whom he pleases and for what he likes.
Every man, town, county and State in this great Union is
as free as air to do with its own what it pleases. Here in
America is an example of the advantage of untramelled trade.
No where else is so great a trade carried on without restric-
tions. No where else do interests more diverse, do climates
Protection r*. Fre* Trade. 9
wider apart, and labor conditions more unequal, freely ex-
change with each other.
Why should not the Lake Superior miner need as much
protection from the copper mines of Arizona as from those of
Sonora, or vice versa. If the protectionist position is correct
it can make but little difference to the workman, say of Lake
Superior, whether the competition be from Arizona or Sonora,
on one side or another of an imaginary line dividing us from
Mexico, that prevents him from selling his American copper
in America at four cents a pound more than he sells the same
American copper for in London, as has been the case. Our
experience of protection is full of such instances. This coun-
try has long produced more copper than it used. A protection
tax, however, was put on copper. This enabled, until recently,
the copper miners to combine and fix the price at which they
would sell American copper to Americans.
The surplus was exported and sold in London in competi-
tion with the world. The result was that for a series of years
American copper sold in London at an average of four cents a
pound less than without the ocean voyage it sold for in New
York. No government can be justified in doing acts of this
kind. Arizona has in a measure broken up this business.
Lake Superior should ask protection as much against Arizona
as elsewhere. Would the natural commercial conditions of
Arizona or California be changed by their being under the
Mexican or an independent flag? Would such a change make
it advisable for us to put on a protective tariff against the
Eastern States?
By a logical sequence we 'see ourselves forced, if we accept
vhe protective theory, to give sections of this country, having
different rates of labor, etc., protection against others more
favorably situated; States against States, counties against
counties, towns against towns, individuals against individuals.
Thus logically followed it leads us to absurdity. Any theory
that logically followed leads to absurdity cannot be correct.
If any protection argument is correct, California should
be protected against Massachusetts for her manufactures, for
labor in Massachusetts is lower than here; against Texas for
her wool, because land is cheaper in Texas; against Nevada
and Arizona for minerals; against Oregon for lumber, and so
10 The Tariff.
on through the whole list of our productions. Admitting that
the protective doctrines are correct there are unanswerable
reasons against the continuance of the American Union. The
protective system calls for secession of states from our grand
Union wherever and whenever a difference in wages exists
amongst them. Mr. Elaine has seen this point and in a speech
at Pittsburg called the attention of the iron workers there to
the natural advantage of Alabama for iron manufacture on ac-
count of the proximity of natural beds of iron and coal. Mr.
Elaine's principal statement was that the great danger to Pitts-
burg lay in the low wages paid the negro workmen in Alabama.
His remedy was a political interference in the affairs of Ala-
bama to stop shot-gun politics to which he attributed the al-
leged low wages. Whether shot-gun politics or low wages
prevail in Birmingham, Alabama, I do not know, but Mr.
Elaine's arguments, failing in securing his remedy would inev-
itably lead to secession on the part of Pennsylvania from the
Union to obtain a protective tariff against Alabama.
Protectionists often say that they wished everything used
in the United States, was produced here and that nothing was
brought in. In other words, the legitimate object of protection
being to prevent the incoming of foreign products, that end
can be best achieved by totally prohibiting their importation,
as is now done as regards ships. This is the extreme
of protection. It is the Chinese wall. This suggests
that the experience of China, the country most consistent in
protection in the world, and only allowing foreign goods to be
brought in at the cannons' mouth to certain treaty ports where
local taxes are at once placed on all goods going to the coun-
try, has not been to increase wages very much, labor costing
from 3 to 12 cents a day in that country. From this instance
it is plain that protection does not always increase the price of
labor.
If the price of labor in farming regulates and is regulated
by other home industries as it must be, we may well look at
some other matters that must have a regulative influence on
that industry. The farm laborer is paid not only with refer-
ence to the supply of labor but also with reference to the re-
turns derived from the farm. One of the principal of these is
wheat. The surplus of wheat is sent to Liverpool, and the
Protection vs. Free Trade. 11
price there governs that of the wheat in all countries, having a
surplus of it. The American wheat has to be sold in competi-
tion with the free trade wheat of the English farmer, the price
of whose labor is regulated by the price of labor in other Eng-
lish industries. Thus we see that the American iron workers'
wages are influenced by the American farm hand, and he
again by the English farm hand and he by the English iron-
worker, so as long as any trade exists between any two coun-
tries, where the conditions and institutions are similar, wages
must tend to approximate.
If this position is correct the only influence protection can
have had is to have diminished the rapidity of the occupation
of the public domain by legitimate settlers, as farmers, and
to have turned these persons into industries that, without
protection, would have been less renumerative ; or plainly, the
whole people have been and are taxed to enable a few to go into
what these claim to be losing business ventures. By this
means the productive power of the country, as far as it is
influenced, is turned into unproductive channels, and the whole
wealth of the country must be diminished and the wage paying
capacity lessened. As a matter of fact, as soon as the great
disturbance of labor values caused by the late civil war wag
overcome, the price of labor fell and doubtless would have
continued to fall, as have the returns on capital, except perhaps
those of a few favored monopolists, had not the West been a
spur to labor prices.
Under protection labor has often diminished in value and
no where is it more noticeable than in the protected industries.
Distress among the laboring classes, and consequent disorders,
always in recent years have commenced in the iron, coal, cot-
ton and other protected manufactures and fortunately, in many
cases, have not extended beyond them. As far as the laborers
in these industries are concerned, trie pampering which protec-
tion has given and the bonuses which the people at large have
been forced to give the owners of these industries, has not proved
favorable. The labor disorders amongst the protected fac-
tories and the continual laying off at half time of their la-
borers makes the price of all labor more or less uncertain.
The specialization of faculties or indoor life, one or the other
of which unfits for ready change of occupation, probably pre-
12 The Tariff.
vents the effect of the irregularities in labor pay amongst man-
ufacturers from being more rapidly felt amongst the people at
large and makes the price paid, so-called protected labor,
often the lowest paid in the country. General labor usually
in the protected districts is lower than for the same occupa-
tions elsewhere in the country. It must be remembered that
the articles most heavily taxed are either the crude materials
of manufacture or the necessaries of life. Of these latter the
laborer must use, per capita, nearly as much as the millionaire.
Consequently it is really the poor who pay most distressfully
for our tariff.
Capitalists engaged in the protected manufactories are
doubtless in the long run unfavorably affected by this system.
We hear every day of combinations of these persons who agree to
limit production, running on one-quarter or on one-half time.
Now it is iron which is made in quantities less than the plant
devoted to its production warrants, then yarn, etc. The last
industry agreeing by its representatives to diminish the out-
put and keep up the price is the nail industry. Thus the cap-
ital invested when the works are run on half time only brings
in half returns to what it might and ought were the industry in
a healthy condition. When we think of the large amounts of
capital thus lying idle an error of policy must be suspected. I
must here call attention to my experience in regard to the con-
dition of the. laborers engaged in the protected industries in the
Middle and New England States.
In 1877, I spent the summer driving in a wagon over por-
tions of these States. The farming communities were the
healthy, happy and moral ones. In the manufacturing ones,
even in villages, the laborers lived to a greater or less extent in
tenements. They looked as a rule pale and delicate. The
death rate was higher in every instance where I could obtain
it. The children were wan and sickly and the moral tone of
the laborers, especially of the young girls, was deplorable.
My experience was that the filth, unhappiness disease, igno-
rance, over-crowding and immorality in these States was so
monopolized by the manufacturing centers that they were un-
noticed elsewhere.
The political and moral vigor of the people was distinctly
lower in these centers than in the country. We may recognize
Frotedtion vs. Free Trade. 13
the advantages of manufacturing industries as compared to food
producing ones, but this seems to me clear: the food produc-
ing nation must be the most independent, for everyone must
have foed and the condition of its laborers must be the health-
iest.
In California for some years the number of sheep hav-
ing declined, the wool output is less. The government landg
which the sheep-men have so long used free of any charge for
their pasturage are being rapidly taken up by settlers, miners
and lumbermen. This is more injurious to the wool industry
than the removal of the whole tariff could possibly be. But
whether the people of the State, and especially the irrigators,
will regret the absence of the sheep-men from the forests is a
question. The shepherds have for years been willfully setting
fires in the forests and burning and destroying riot only valu-
able timber worth ten times more than all the sheep that ever
went into the mountains, but also destroying the water holding
power of the water-sheds and the reproductive capacity of the
forests themselves. Vast desolate sheep walks and burning
forests are against the best interests of the land owners of
California and still more against the interests of the people
generally.
Much of the ranch land formerly used as sheep-walks is
now in farms and orchards and towns. The lands of the wool
men have in consequence of this change in use increased
greatly in value, nevertheless these persons wish to arrest the
process. Their plan is to put on more duties or tariff on wool,
and they are bitter against a reduction of any sort or kind in
the wool duties.
There is one of two results that must be aimed at in this
agitation. The one is that no more land shall be divided into
farms, orchards, etc., and that the sheep industry shall be
maintained in its present condition as to number of animals,
wool output and lands occupied. The other is that the old
time prosperity of the industry shall be re-established and
that all former sheep-walks shall become sheep-walks again,
which would necessitate the suppression of the farms, orchards,
colonies and towns established on what may be termed the
ruins of the wool industry.
Tariffs or bonuses to establish the last result would be too
14 The Tariff.
onerous to be borne. Tariffs to be given the sheep-men to pro-
duce the first would be a tax on the American people including
those of this State to arrest the progress of California. The
wool men themselves do not really want the results their de-
mands would bring about, much less does any one else.
A plain statement of the wool tariff or no wool tariff is
this:
Wool Tariff, sheep-walks, desolate dusty plains, coyotes,
vultures, a scanty population of bachelor shepherds, half
crazed with loneliness, and two or three weeks of labor for a
band of Indian shearers, a few wealthy owners of vast landed
estates and burning forests.
No Tariff, farms, orchards, colonies and towns, remunera-
tive labor for families and small land holdings, smiling val-
leys, schools and improvement.
Choose.
This wool tariff is said to be for the benefit of labor. It is
an industry which probably gives less chance for labor than
any other of which this country is capable. Besides the
condition of those engaged in it, is to the last extent misera-
ble. A herder gets small pay and must find himself. Often
for months he does not see a human being, his supplies being
left by a> ranch team at his night corral, where the herder
never is during the day.
The lonely life of the shepherds makes them cranky, and
it is said that this class furnishes a larger proportion of insane
than any other in the State. I have not investigated this
statement, but from personal experience I can say that sheep
herders as a rule are queer and peculiar to such an extent as
to lead me to think them likely to furnish a considerable num-
ber of insane to our asylums. Marriage with them is practi-
cally imposible. Labor can have nothing to gain to be driven
by taxation into such occupations. Nor can the citizen be
benefited by allowing the great landed wool-growers to tax him
to prevent improvement, and still less is such a scheme of bene-
fit to the larger land owner. With other and better occupa-
tions the population will increase, the value of land must rise
and the citizen must become richer. The tariff on wool has
another effect; it kills any chance for a foreign market, not only
for wool but for every thing made from it as well, and thus the
Protection vs. Free Trade 15
strength of the manufacturers who buy wool is weakened and
its only market becomes uncertain.
The wool industry cannot continue as it is and the coun-
try progress as well. The wool industry must change and the
raising of sheep become intensified just as farming is coming
to be done on a smaller scale and in a better way.
We all of us rejoice at increased rapidity of travel by land
and sea and agitate for lower freight, being delighted when
competition compels it. We fire -cannon and hurrah when a
railroad takes the place of mule trains or wagons whereby
time is saved and freight and risk diminished. We thus re-
joice at the removal of natural tariffs and at the lowering of
insurance, interest and freight. A new railroad to Mexico, or
steamship line to foreign lands is hailed with acclamation, al-
though the natural tariff between foreign countries and our
own is thus lowered. Is it not strange that some should re-
joice at the imposition of artificial tariffs which neutralize the
benefits of freight rates, etc., lowered by steamers and rail-
roads over which they have already shouted?
There are duties upon several other imported articles pro-
duced in California, such as lumber, raisins, etc. Let us con-
sider some of these. The duty on lumber encourages the
rapid destruction of our forest. Is it not to the true interest of
the people to manage the forests more conservatively, to so cut
our timber as to insure a renewed growth for future supply, to
prevent fires and above all things, to preserve the integrity of our
water sheds so that our springs and streams will not dry up,
and torrents form to cover the valleys with debris? We know
from history that many lands once well watered from
wooded hills and containing fertile valleys and plains, are
now largely desert and desolate, owing to the removal of the
forests, and consequent disappearance of permanent water.
Such lands exist in parts of Asia and along the shores of the
Mediterranean. Once well watered from wooded hills, these
places are now alternately desolated by raging torrents from
the bared slopes incapable of holding water, or parched with a
drouth which vegetation cannot endure. Mountains well timbered
will hold water and give it out slowly in springs and streams.
Mountains bare will not hold water, but shed it off like the
roof of a house. Thus a watershed receiving ten billion gal-
16 The Tariff.
Ions of water, if wooded, may deliver it over a period of a
year, while a bare mountain watershed may deliver their supply
in a day. In one case you have beauty and fertility, and in
the other desolation and danger. The lumber tariff also en-
courages a lumber pool, or trust, that though in command of
the finest forests in the whole world, charges the people of Cal-
ifornia the most exorbitant prices for lumber. The price of
rough lumber is now $30 per M. in Los Angeles. What does
the State gain by such an absurd policy? It is true a few
lumbermen are becoming millionaires, but how about the house
builders, box makers, wagon-makers, ship builders, etc.? The
lumber tariff makes us pay through the nose for a prime neces-
sity, while encouraging a wasteful and senseless destruction of
the forests and of their reproductive power which will destroy
all future lumber supply and through the impairment of water
sheds, will everlastingly make a desert of our beautiful and
now fertile state.
The raisin industry is now only in its infancy in California.
The interior valleys of this State are better suited to the pro-
duction of raisins both in soil, climate, and water supply than
any other part of the world. This State is capable of sup-
porting fifty millions of people. Raisin growing will be one of
the best industries in which an increasing population can en-
gage. But we now produce with our few scattered raisin dis-
tricts nearly as many boxes as were imported before any
raisins were grown here. The importation is now less than
five hundred thousand boxes. We can, and with a healthy
and unhandicapped industry, will supply the world with
raisins in a few years more. What then is all this codling
about? It can only weaken the industry as codling does every-
thing. Let the industry grow in a healthy, natural and sound
way, and do not tax and injure the whole people only to injure
in the long run the raisin growers also. With a heavy tax on
all his agricultural implements, on all iron as horseshoes, etc.,
on sugar, except from Haiwaii, on boxes, on nails, on the lum-
ber in his houses, barns and fences, on his labels, on his pack-
ing paper, on fuel, in fact, on everything he uses, the raisin
man is handicapped in his own home market, and fatally so in
foreign markets. We find to-day all our large industries handi-
capped in the same way. The result has been to force them
Protection vs. Free Trade. 1
into combinations or trusts which protect them against home
competition, but which fleece unmercifully the people. Agri-
culture, including raisin growing, is, in my opinion, incapable
of this means of self-protection against the Upas influence of
the unsound tariff. In the first place, the natural instinct of
countrymen is against combination to take unfair advantage of
the people, and in the second place you can not pay a man to
stop producing from his orchard or vineyard, or only to pro-
duce a limited quantity from it, because he can not neglect
such property without its deteriorating in value and if he keeps
his orchards up. nature, and not he, will govern the product.
The farmer is in an entirely different position from the manu-
facturer, and he probably never can combine against his fellow
men as these do and as the tariff forces them to do.
All our fruit interests are handicapped and injured by the
tariff on the articles the producers use. Any temporary benefit.
even a special tariff may appear to give,will and must,in the long
run, injure them. AVe are already commencing to export fruit,
green, dried and canned, from California, and were our boxes,
nails, tin, sugar, etc., untariffed this export would doubtless
take a great development and encourage the increased planting
of orchards, etc. If California becomes the great horticultural
State her soil and climate make possible, she must have the
world for a market and this she cannot have with a vexatious
and destructive tariff such as now exists.
A few years ago the price of raisins was very low, while
this was the case part of the tariff on imported raisins was tak-
en off. I was in Fresno at the time and recollect very well the
outcry raised that every raisin vineyard in California would
have to be rooted up and burned for fire wood. Since the re-
moval of the duty the price of raisins has recovered while at the
same time a large increase of production has taken place. The
Spaniards and Italians already recognize that they can not
hope to hold the American market in fruits, tariff or no tariff,
against California, and official reports have been made to these
governments to this effect. This illustrates the difficulty of un-
derstanding cause and effect in political economy and the dan-
ger of violating well recognized economic orinciples for appar-
-pecial gain.
I am a farmer, fruit grower, and raisin grower and I be-
18 The Tariff.
lieve that I would be better off without the tariffs on fruit even
though other tariffs admitted to be detrimental to my class
were retained. There can be no question that a general revis-
ion of the tariff would prove of benefit to us and to the state.
The heaviest protected industries are those of lumber, coal, tin
and iron. Merchantable coal, tin or iron are not produced in
this state. The freight tariff' on the railroad forces us to import
these articles by sea from other countries . Thus all manu-
ring industries in this state are injured with no coal or iron
monopoly to benefit. How can California profit by this?
The fruit protectionist of California is in an amusingly awk-
ward position. In Congress he says that the removal of the
small duty on oranges or the -J cent a pound on raisins will
ruin completely his industry. To the Eastern man who comes
to buy his orchard or vineyard he says: From this vineyard of
raisin grapes I have netted from $200 to $600 an acre per year,
from this orange orchard I net from $400 to $1,000 a year per
acre. To use an informal expression, "There is a nigger in the
wood-pile" here.
Something should be said about labor, for one of the pos-
itions of the protectionists is that a high labor country cannot
compete in its products with a low labor country. Nothing
could be more contrary to experience. Countries with high
priced labor, unless artificial restrictions prevent, have always
been able to undersell countries with low priced labor. Of
course products depending on climatic conditions are exceptions.
The reason for this is that high paid laborers are as a rule more
efficient than low paid ones and enough more so to make their
product cheaper. Immigrants accustomed to low wages in
their own country become more efficient here under our higher
wages, and according to the statements of some of them to me,
and to my observation of others, the difference in their work ac-
complished, amounts to more than the difference in their pay.
Thus the labor account in high wage countries is often less in
the price of production of articles than it is in low ones. Thos.
Brassey, who was a contractor, and who built railroads in India,
Russia, England etc., has stated that the cost of moving a yard
of earth was highest in the cheap labor countries, and cheapest
in the dear labor ones. In our own country, we now know that
cotton is produced cheaper under free labor with wages, than
Protection vs. Free Trade 19
it was under slave labor, where a mere subsistence was given,
and no wages were paid at all.
I do not think that slave or pauper labor can ever compete
with free labor in a fair contest. If the food is poor and ambi-
tion is lacking, the laborer will fall off in efficiency. In my
own business experience in Turkey, I have found four and five
men necessary to do what one man did in New York, and
though the individual laborer was paid less in Turkey than in
New York, the labor account was highest in Turkey. There
are doubtless times and places where this is not true, but as a
rule it is true. Here in this country, I think that every em-
ployer of labor will agree with me that within certain reason-
able limits, well paid labor is cheaper in producing than is poor
paid labor.
The welfare of our laborers should, indeed, engage the at-
tention of statesmen. On them depends the integrity and
maintenance of our free institutions. Labor alone can save us.
In my opinion the hours of labor should be reasonably regulat-
ed. The employment of women and children should be care-
fully looked after to secure them from moral and physical in-
jury. The unsanitary condition of trades and manufactories
should be made less destructive to health and life, than most
of them now are. Any one, noting the heavy death-rates and
short length of life in many employments, will appreciate the
necessity of some action of this kind in the interest of labor
and of the people. For instance, one set of statistics I have,
shows the average age at death of farmers to be 65 years, while
that of women operatives in cotton mills in the same district is
placed at only 22 years. Here is a vast difference. The women
operatives must be considered before the employer, but the em-
ployer is also interested in putting an end to such a state of
affairs, even should he leave humanitarian feeling out, for death
always means previous sickness and inefficiency in the opera-
tive and also means sickness and inefficiency in from five to
ten other operatives. One death means this amount of sick-
ness in others. We can not give too much attention to the
welfare both moral and physical of our laborers, and everything
consistent with their manhood and the maintainance of their
self-respect and self-reliance should be done for them. I never
wish to see the price of labor lower in this country than it is to-
20 The Tariff.
day, and I do not believe that the lowering of laboi* pay would
in the long run cheapen production. The history of industries
shows the contrary, for while the wages of labor in the civiliz-
ed world has increased, the cost of production has diminished.
We must see to it that our laborers are kept independent, in
telligent and able to raise families. They must not be driven
to the ragged edge of misery and hopelessness.
What protection does for labor it is indeed difficult to see.
It certainly curtails the exchange value of the laborer's wages
and causes him to pay more for what he uses than would oth-
erwise be the case. The tendency of wages in the Eastern
states has been downward, and it is only the active develop-
ment of the new west that prevents this fact from becoming
apparent. In the middle west the farmers have been unable
to pay the tariff taxes and by mortgages and otherwise they
are fast becoming a tenant class. The condition of the farmers
in the Central Western states should command the attention of
every patriotic person. We can not afford to see our farmers
lose their independence and prosperity, as they must do should
they become a tenant class like the agriculturists of Ireland.
This is now the tendency in large districts of our country and
has been complained of by many farmers' organizations, not-
ably by that of Nebraska.
With our farmers becoming tenants, and the moral and
material condition of so many classes of operatives in this
country opposed to the reproduction of an improved race, we
have arrived at a point where we ought to stop all injustice
and legislation of a class character, or of showing favoritism
to persons, and we should direct our thoughts and energies to
correcting the present conditions which have brought this state
of affairs about.
We must not force our farmers into hopeless bankruptcy,
we must not force our laborers into hopeless poverty. Poor
girls driven to prostitution will not make mothers of a sound,
strong people. Fathers on the verge of starvation cannot be
fathers to improved children. Such men will form the nucleus
of anarchy and disorder already showing its horrid head in our
free land.
The misery of the poor in our manufacturing centers,
the increasing lateness of marriage, the diminishing ratio of
Protection rs. Free Trade. 21
births to deaths, the increase of prostitution among young wo-
men, the increase of insane greater in proportion
than the increase of our population, the condition of our farm-
ers, all these things show us that something ia wrong that needs
prompt correction. Whatever part the tariff plays in this
tragedy of error it has been coincident with its growth in our
country's history.
There is one other point of the many that might be
brought up to which I will allude and that is our Export
Trade. The protectionist favors exportation and often is will-
ing to give bounties to secure it, while opposing Importation.
It does seem strange that sensible men cannot see that expor-
tation, is impossible without importation. Shall the farmer
give away his products? Shall we fruit men who soon expect to
be exporters of dried and canned fruits give our products away?
We cannot do it. How then shall we export? We must take
from the foreigner what we most want with which he is willing
to part. We must exchange with him and the more we get the
better off we are. Money is a mere tool of exchange or com-
merce and can never be continuously exported too or from a
country exclusively, unless it be as a mining commodity. If
money were continuously imported to a country the value of
money would fall, the price of goods would consequently rise
until a point was reached where the export of goods would be
impossible. The price of the exported goods, they being a
surplus, would of course rise last and not until there was
no surplus. Those producing these would suffer first, through
the increased price of what they used, and second, through the
diminished foreign price of what they produced. For the ex-
portation of money from the foreign country would increase the
price of money and consequently diminish the price of goods
in the country exporting money. A point would soon be reached
where trade between countries dealing in this way, with no
roundabout returns through other countries, would cease. It is
therefore clear that if we are to export we must import, and
that trammels and tariffs on imports, are fully to an equal ex-
tent trammels on exports.
Henry George has shown up one protectionist article of
faith so cleverly that I cannot refrain from quoting him:
"Here, in substance, is the argument which has been ad-
22 The Tariff.
dresssed to the people of the United States from the time when
we became a nation to the present day: Manufacturing coun-
tries are always rich countries. Countries that produce only
raw materials are always poor. Therefore, if we would be
rich, we must have manufactures; we must encourage them.
"To many, this argument seems plausible, especially as
the taxes for the 'encouragement' of the protected industries are
levied in such a way that their payment is not realized. But
I could make as good an argument to the people of the little
town of Jamaica, near which I am now living, in support of a
.subsidy to a theatre. I could say to them :
"All large cities have theatres, and the more theatres it has,
the larger the city. Look at New York, New York has more
theatres than any other city in America, and is consequently
the greatest city in America. Philadelphia ranks next to New
York in the number and size of its theatres, and therefore
<comes next to New York in population arid wealth. So,
^throughout the country, whenever you find large, well appoint-
ed, theatres, you will find large and prosperous towns, while
where there are no theatres the towns are small. Is it any
wonder that Jamaica is so small and grows so slowly when it
lias no theatres at all? People do not like to settle in a place
where they cannot occasionally go to the theatre. If you want
Jamaica to thrive you must take steps to build a fine theatre,
which will attract a large population. Look at Brooklyn : Brooklyn
was only a small river-side village before its people had the en-
terprise to start a theatre, and sec now, since they began to
build theatres, how large a city Brooklyn has become.'
"Modeling my argument on that addressed to American
voters by the Presidential candidate of the Republican party in
1884, I might then drop into 'statistics,' and point to the fact
that when theatrical representations first began in this country,
its population did not amount to a million; that it was totally
destitute of railroads, and without a single mile of telegraph
wire. Such has been our progress since theatres were intro-
duced that the census of 1880 showed that we had 50,155,783
people, 97,907 miles of railroad, and 291,212 9-10 miles of tele-
graph wires. Or I might go into greater detail, as the protec-
tionist statisticians are accustomed to do. I might take the
date of the building of each of the New York theatres, give the
Protection vs. Free Trade. 23
wealth and population of the city at that time, and then by rep-
resenting the statistics of population and wealth a few years
later, show that the building of each theatre had been followed
by a marked increase in population and wealth.
ll l might point out that San Francisco had not a theatre
until the Americans came there, and was consequently but a
struggling village, that the new-comers immediately set up
theatres and maintained them more generously than any other
similar population in the world, and that the consequence was
the marvellous growth of San Francisco. I might show that
Chicago and Denver and Kansas City, all remarkably good
theatre towns, have also been remarkable for their rapid growth?
and, as in the case of New York, prove statistically that thfc
building of each theatre these cities contain has been followed
by an increase of population and wealth.
"Then, stretching out after protectionist fashion into the
historical argument, I might refer to the fact that Nineveh and
Babylon had no theatres that we know. of, and so went to utter
ruin; dilate upon the fondness of the ancient Greeks for theat-
rical entertainments conducted at public expense, and their
consequent greatness in arts and aims; point out how the Ro-
mans went even further than the Greeks in the encouragement
of the theatre, and built at public cost, the largest theatre in
the world, and how Rome became the mistress of the nations.
And to embellish and give point to the argument I might, per-
haps, drop into poetry, recalling Byron's lines,
'When falls the Coliseum, Rome shall fall ;
And when Koine falls the world.'
Recovering from this, I might cite the fact that in every prov-
ince they conquered, the Romans established theatres, as ex-
plaining the remarkable facility with which they extended their
civilization and made the conquered provinces integral parts of
their great empire; point out that the decline of these theatres
and the decay of Roman power and civilization went on togeth-
er; and that the extinction of the theatre brought on the night
of the Dark Ages. Dwelling then a moment upon the rudeness
-and ignorance of that time when there were no theatres, I
might triumphantly point to the beginning of modern civiliza-
tion as contemporaneous with the revival of theatrical enter-
tainments in miracle-plays and court masques. And showing
24 The Tariff.
how these plays and masques were always supported by monas-
teries, municipalities, and princes, and how places where they
began became sites of great cities, I could laud the wisdom of
'encouraging infant theatricals.' Then in the fact that English
actors, until recently, styled themselves her Majesty's servants,
and that the Lord Chamberlain still has authority over the
English boards, and must license plays before they can be acted,
I could trace to a national system of subsidizing infant theat-
ricals the foundation of England's greatness. Coming back to
our own times, I could call attention to the fact that Paris,
where theatres are still subsidized and actors still draw their
salaries from the public treasury, is the world's metropolis of
fashion and art, steadily growing in population and wealth,
though other parts of the same country which do not enjoy sub-
sidized theatres are either at a stand-still or declining. And
finally I could point to the astuteness of the Mormon leaders,
who early in the settlement of Salt Lake built a spacious-
theatre, and whose little village in the sage-brush, then
hardly as large as Jamaica, has since the building of this
theatre grown to be a populous and beautiful city, and indig-
nantly ask whether the virtuous people of Jamaica should al-
low themselves to be out done by wicked polygamists.
"If such an argument would not induce the Jamaicans to
tax themselves to 'encourage' a theatre, would it not at least be
as logical as arguments that have induced the American people
to tax themselves to encourage manufactures?"
As Mr. Watterson expresses it this is a complete and
felicitous exposure of one protection argument.
One curious comment on the protective doctrine is that to-
day in California in the face of free sugar from Hawaii large
enterprise are about to be started to manufacture sugar from
beets and this too in the face of the general handicap the pro-
tective tariff places on all outside industries.
If one hundred years of free land, free institutions and free
education have not been capable of making the American people
competent to compete in a fair industrial fight with slaves and
paupers then these institutions are not the best for us to have
and they must be condemned as a failure.
One of the arguments offered by those who would convince
the laboring man that it is to his interest as well as to that of
Protection vs. Free Trcn'c. 25
the monopolist to have protection, is that labor is higher in this
country than in Free trade England. Protection being in force
here is the cause of the higher wages paid in America. While
Free Trade being the rule in England is the cause of the lower
wages said to be paid there.
This argument is of doubtful value. In the first place the
condition of the population, the number to the square mile
the different land and social systems etc. makes a comparison cf
America with England, to ascertain the comparative value of eco-
nomic methods, unreliable. In England the land system is a
monopolist system, transfers are cumberscm and costly while in
this country transfers and subdivisions of real property are
quick and easy, and we still have a considerable amount of
free land within the reach of the people. In one country a
vast army and navy is supported, not found necessary in the
other. In many other matters equal diversity exists between
the two countries. England is an old country with a dense
population, while America is a new one only commencing to
fill its splendid empire. To a reasonable person a comparison
to ascertain the affects of free trade or protection would be more
correct if instituted between countries in as nearly as possible
the same conditions. The conditions prevailing in countries
on the continent of Europe are much more nearly like those in
England than are our conditions in America.
The wages in protected France, Germany, Italy and Aus-
tria are considerably lower than the wages in Free Trade
England. How can we reconcile these facts with the theory
that protection keeps up wages? At the very least it is clear
that other things enter into the price of labor.
Here is another question. If it be true that a country
paying high wages cannot con] pete with a country paying
low wages, how is it that England trades with all the world
and of necessity competes with all the world, although all the
world except one country pays lower wages than England?
There is a notable source of error in the prevailing protec-
tion methods of estimating wages. The custom of the protec-
tionist has been to state the wages of America and England at
certain figures for certain occupations. But, as has already
been said, wages in different sections of this country vary ex,
ceeclingly, for instance the wages of prime farm hands were a, few
26 The Tariff.
years ago, and doubtless are still, from two hundred (200)
to three hundred (300) per cent, higher in California than
they were in Southern Misssissippi. The wages paid in
California are, I am informed by woolen goods makers 30 per
cent, higher than those paid in Massachusetts, and in California
more continuous .work is given, owing partly to the climate?
which makes the difference still greater in favor of the Califor-
nia worker. The same difference in wages doubtless holds
good in nearly every business in California. Even in Califor-
nia, wages vary in different parts of the state, the highest being
paid in Southern California where a wonderful development is
going on. How can the protectionist reconcile the prosperity
of California, a high wage state, while dealing in unrestricted
freedom with the low wage states of the South and East?
The wages in this state are higher than the mere state-
ment of the amounts paid to the worker would indicate. The
climate here makes housing or shelter and clothing less expen-
sive, while offering opportunity for more work.
The wages in different parts of England also vary, but to a
less extent. Another source of error has been that the price
of a day's work has been taken without any corresponding in-
vestigation as to how many days in a year the laborer has
work.
The methods of combinations, trusts and monopolies, such
as running mills and works on half time or shutting down for
considerable periods etc. etc., makes such a supplemental in-
quiry of absolute necessity if we would learn the true earning
capacity of laborers.
As a matter of truth it is doubtful whether the wages in
the Eastern and Central states are higher to-day than they are
in England. Sir. Richard Temple, an authority on economic
subjects states, as quoted by Wells, the earning capacity, per
capita, in different countries as follows :
1st. Australia 41 .4s.
2d. England 35.4s.
3d. United States ; 27.4s.
4th. Canada 26.18s.
5th. Continent of Europe average 18. Is.
Australia comes according to this authority first in the
list. It is an island divided in its government between several
semi-independent powers, some of which as Victoria, where
Protection rs. Free Trade. '1~
Melbourne is, have a protective system, and others like New
South Wales where Sydney is, have a free trade system or one
approximating to it. Thus we see the difficulty of attributing
to any one cause some favorable or unfavorable condition we
may notice.
When we examine the condition of the English people
since the introduction of free trade to that country we find,
taking one year with another, a" great increase in general pros-
perity and an increase of population through indigenous means
of 30 per cent, in an already densely peopled country.
The curious thing about it is that the manual labor classes
have profited the most by their countries prosperity, and the only
classes who have suffered have been the monopolist land hold-
ers, heriditary nobles and their tenants etc. Even these have
only suffered recemly and doubtless the tenants troubles will
deliver them from the present land system and give them a
chance for an independence and prosperity they have never
yet enjoyed.
Mr. David A. Wells gives some figures on the compara-
tive condition of the English people in 184o and in 188G etc.
Free trade was adopted in 1848. His statements are as fol-
lows:
Crime and pauperism have diminished in England.
The income of the capitalist class increased from
$950,000,000 to 2,000,000,000 or 100 per cent. But at the same
time the number of the capitalist class increased so rapidly
that the increase of capital to each individual of the class was
^nly 15 per cent. The income of the upper and middle classes
from working increased from $770,000,000 to $1,600,000,000
or about 100 per cent. The increase of the manual labor classes
income has increased from $855,000,000 to $2,750,000,000 or over
200 per cent. ''Between 1877 and 1886 the number of assess-
ments for incomes between $750 and $5,000 increased 19.26 per
cent, while the number of assessments for incomes of $5,000
-and upward decreased 2.4 per cent."
"In 1840 one person in every 500 in the British Islands
was a, convict; in 1885 the proportion was as one to every 4,100-
These figures, as far as they are correct, show a great ad-
vance in the material welfare of the laboring classes in Eng-
land since the adoption of free trade.
28 The Tariff.
The wages of working men in America have also increased
during this period, taking it as a whole, to a great extent, in
fact the wages of labor have increased in every part of the
world.
The conditions in America and in England are different, but
admitting them to bo equal, we find the wages of the two coun-
tries, say from 1850, to have risen in about the same proportion j
but the purchasing power of these wages has not risen in the
same proportion. It has risen in America but risen still more
in England. The last result is clearly to be attributed to free
trade, and the increase generally of the purchasing power of
wages is largely to be attributed to the cheapening and quick-
ening of transportation whereby onerous natural tariffs have
been removed. On the other hand the rise in wages in this
country cannot be attributed to protection for the wages of
labor in a free trade country, under less favorable circumstances
have also increased, and for that matter wages increased very
rapidly in the Tariff-for-Revenue period between 1846 and
1860 in this country, and increased more rapidly than they
have for any similar period since the close of the civil war.
The Protectionists say that protection increases the price
of foreign goods so that these cannot be sold here so well in com-
petition with the home-made article. If this be true, then in
justice, everyone ought to.be protected to the same extent and
equally. This is not the case, some are protected 100 per cent,
some 80 per cent, some 50 per cent, some 35 per cent, some 10
per cent. and most of the people, that is to say 90 per cent, of
them, are not protected at all. The cost of a system of taxa-
tion, which has for its purpose the giving of public money to pri-
vate persons for the support of their private business, must fall
on the masses. Such protective taxes are for the few at the ex-
pense of the many. But we see that the tax is grossly unjust and
inequitable in its working as among the supposed beneficiaries
themselves. Some obtain 100 times more protection than
others and some have to pay more of the protective tax to
members of the protected class than do others. For instance
the wool manufacturer has to pay a high tax on his machinery,
dyes, boxes, and on his material, wool, while the cotton manu-
facturer escapes taxation to a greatextent on his material, cotton.
So the iron manufacturer has to pay the tax for his iron and for
Protection rs. Free Trade. 29
his fuel from 35 per cent, upward, while the jewelry manufac-
turer pays but 10 per cent, on his diamonds, etc. The amount
of protection given by our tariff varies from the ten per cent,
received by the prune grower to the three hundred and twenty
three per cent given the spiritous liquor maker. If it be true
that protection governs the price of goods protected to the ex.
tent of the tax or protection given, then is this tax tariff, as it
now stands, an injustice to most of those protected as well as to
the masses who pay for the larger part of the cost.
But the protectionist says also, that protection does not in-
crease the price of goods in proportion to the protection given
and points, as a proof that prices are not increased, to the fact
that prices are tending downward in this country and that all
products are becoming, generally speaking, cheaper. If this be
true then the protected industries are deceived, as the first pro-
position cannot be true and the second also.
Prices of products all over the world have been going
dawn while the price of labor has been going up, but the world
is too large a place for a protectionist to Idok at. His proposi-
tion is to tax dollars out of his fellow citizens and to put them
in his own pocket under the pleasant plea that his enrichment
is for the public good.
It does riot require a very broad mental horizon to take in
this idea. On the other hand the fact that in the long-run the
prosperity of the individual depends on the prosperity of his
neighbors, and the prosperity of each community depends on
the prosperity of the communities forming the nation, demands
a larger capacity to understand. Nations are political individ-
uals and their prosperity as individuals depends on the prosper-
ity of all nations. The conception of humanity and its welfare,
as a part of the welfare of the individual needs a heart as wel]
as a brain.
We cannot in a large sense nor for long periods of time,
profit by the miseries and misfortunes of others. It is a ghoul-
ish and demon profit even when it occurs and must be at the
expense of the wellfare of mankind, while sound trade is a
benefit to all concerned and can only be carried on voluntarily
as the traders se their profits. America would not benefit by
a general massacre or famine or plague throughout the world. nor
in any portion of it either. It is the mistake 'of the narrow
30 The Tariff.
view that a misfortune in one country, raising temporarily the
price of some particular product in another, is a benefit. The
advantage to any special class through the misfortunes of others
is usually more than counterbalanced by the effects
of the disaster in a general way. A failure of crop in one country
immediately diminishes the general consuming power of that
country. What it took in trade for its product it can no longer
take. Thus, any country that traded with it ^before, loses in
this general way,though some branch of trade may benefit. This
by diminishing its own consuming power, affects nations
trading with it, even though these never traded at all with the
original sufferer. It is seen then that an injury to one nation
is really, in the end, an injury to all nations.
According to protection, the advantage of one country is
the injury of another, and the injury, let us say of the trade of
one country by a tariff, is an advantage to the other.
To rejoice over misfortune, failure and bankruptcy is in-
human, but this is the logical outcome of the protective doc-
trine.
We should aim to encourage the enterprise and self-reli-
ance of our laborers and not to impair or destroy these qualities.
This last result cannot be achieved by diminishing the ex-
change value of the laborers wages on the plea that such gov-
ernment interference enhances their direct pay. It must be
done by improving the condition of the laborer, by giving him
time for thought and study and by a more practical education
in youth, to make him more capable of scientific and econom-
ical application of his powers to his employment, and doubtless
by many other means that 'will occurr to us when our minds
realize that this is the true direction by which to end the pres-
ent misery of the many and to give them a clear road to con-
tinued improvement.
In the old Political Economy of Wayland there is an illus-
tration that is simple and plain enough to be understood by the
most casual reader.
Let us take three supposed individuals A B and C
A has a taste for agriculture and has selected a home
where soil and climate are most favorable to the production of
wheat. These conditions together with his natural abilities
and taste for agriculture enable him to produce in a year three
hundred bushels of the best wheat that can be grown.
B has a taste for making shoes and has selected a home
especially favorable for this industry and by devoting his entire
time to the business can make three hundred pairs of the best
shoes that can be made.
C has a taste for making coats and following his bent, hag
Protection vs. Free Trade 31
located where his supplies are good and cheap and where he
has the best conditions for his work. By devoting his time to
coat-making he can produce three hundred of the best coats in
the world.
Now give these three liberty and freedom and what is
likely to be the result.
A goes to B and exchanges 100 bushels of wheat for 100
pairs of shoes and then to C and exchanges 100 bushels of
wheat for 100 coats.
He has then 100 bushels of the best wheat possible left and
a hundred pairs of the best shoes and a hundred of the best
coats. B has the same and C the same. One is as well off as
the other.
Now comes the protectionist with his chaing-gang of tariffs
and says to A. You are a fool. Make your own shoes and
coats and don't support these outsiders by trading for their
products. You cannot continue this without being ruined.
A tariff is put on. Barriers are set up. The freedom of
exchange is ended.
A then must make his own coats and shoes. This re-
quires time. He therefore- can devote but a third of his time to
growing wheat, which we will say, produces still 100 bushels of
the best wheat or one third of his former crop, but even if he
had more he would no longer have a market for it. One third
of his time goes to shoes and one third to coats but neither his
talents nor his situation being so favorable to these productions
as those of B and C he can neither make so many in the same
time nor make them so well as B and C. Let us estimate that
he will make fifty inferior pairs of shoes and fifty inferior coats
in the time available.
At the end of the year he has 100 bushels of the best
wheat and fifty inferior pairs of shoes and fifty inferior coats,
where before he had 100 pairs of the best shoes and 100 of the
best coats together with 100 bushels of the best wheat. He
had also those inestimable boons of man, liberty and freedom
from all constraint not necessary for the preservation of *mo-
rality and order.
It makes no difference whether A made his exchanges di-
rect or by means of money, the tool of commerce, through mid-
dle men, for the price he would pay them for their services
would be more than compensated for by the saving of his time
in making the exchanges.
Protection to the extent of the barriers it sets up against
the natural benefits of free exchange must operate in the line
of this illustration.
It is perhaps well here to allude to a matter of our own
actual exchanges. We take coffee from Brazil in large quan-
tities but send almost nothing in return. England sends goods
32 The Tariff.
to Brazil and pays for their coffee and we pay England for do-
ing so in our wheat and other exports to that country in excess
of what is required to obtain the goods we take direct from
England. Thus our bills of exchange on Brazil all pass
through London. Under a sensible system of Custom House
taxation I have no doubt but that we could make our ex-
changes with Brazil direct and send them our products for
theirs.
Heyl's "United States Import Duties" is the book in which
can be found the only official compilation of our tariff outside
of the revised statutes. A study of it will, I think, surprise
any one. Our tariff is a complicated affair. Taking the dif-
ferent articles under each head it covers about two thousand
products and taxes them in all sorts of different ways, some
with specific duties, some with advalorem duties and some with
both. "Many of the articles, such as tin, are not produced
here at all, and others, such as copper, are produced in such
quantities as to require exportation of the surplus, the only ef-
fect of the tariff being to make, as has been said, American
copper higher in America than it is in foreign lands and thus to
foster trusts, monopolies and combinations inimical to the
American consumer.
As a monument of stupidity and injustice there is probably
nothing extant that equals our Protective tariff. Its cost to
the American people no one will ever know. We have expos-
ure after exposure to show that its administration is honey-
combed with abuse and it requires but examination to show the
inequalities, injustice and complexity of its taxes, drawbacks
and bounties.
The statesmen of both the great parties long ago com-
mitted themselves to the necessity of a reform.
Most appropriate is the derivation of the word tariff. It
comes from Tariffa a castle and port formerly existing on the
Mediterranean from which piratical ships sallied to levy
toll 6n honest commerce.
The taxation of the people at large to advance the interests
of a few favored ones is a violation of the rights of the citizen
in a free country. No citizen should be forced to pay for the
augmentation of a private fortune. The violation of so plain a
principle of government and the doing of so gross an injustice
cannot but do harm.
He who sows the wind will reap the whirlwind. The
mother of riot and anarchy is injustice. To do wrong cannot
be right, to do right cannot be wrong. It is said that free trade
is theoretically right but practically wrong. Nothing can be
theoretically right and practically wrong.
A public tax for private uses is robbery under the forms of
law.
Protection v. Free Trade. 33
DRAWBACK RATES, 1883.
Enabling foreigners to buy certain American manufactures at
less than Americans themselves can buy them. It may be no-
ticed that bayonets, fire-arms, bullets and gunpowder figure
prominently in this table.
The government gives certain firms special advantages
over all others in this bounty system. Of these, Hubbart,
Blake & Co., makers of scythes. *The Colt's, Peabody, Win-
chester and E. Remington & Son, fire-arm manufacturers, are
the most prominent. Why such favoritism should be shown,
protectionists, perhaps, can explain.
AXES, made from iron and steel by the process of splitting the steel and
inserting the iron, 1 3-10 cents per pound. AXES alid HATCHETS,
made by the process of splitting the iron and inserting the steel,
same as duty paid. Allow for a quantity of iron equal to the net-
weight of the exported articles, and a quantity of steel equal to 166-
1000 of such net weight.
BAGS, from jute and burlap cloth, same as duty paid, 40 per cent. Ex-
ported quantity determined by measurement.
BAND and BAR IRON, (see IRON.)
BAYONETS, made for Colt's patent fire-arm, 7 cents each; made for the
Winchester fire-arm, 1 37-100 cents each ; made by E. Remington &
Sons, from steel made from imported iron paying ad valorem duty,
2 cents each ; and from iron paying a duty of one cent per pound,
1 77-100 cents each.
BLACKING Boxes, from tin plates, same as duty paid, 45 per cent. The
exported quantity determined by adding to the outside measure-
ment of the box one-fourth of such product.
BOLTS, NUTS, and PIVOTS, from iron, same as duty paid.
BULLETS, leaden, and SHOT, same as duty paid, 2 cents per pound.
CANS, from tin plates, same as duty paid. The exported quantity deter-
mined by measuring the " blanks" before soldering, or by 'adding
one-twentieth to the product of the outside measurement of* the com-
pleted cans, excepting one-pound cans, for which add 40 per cent, to
the outside measurement. CANS, from tin plates, completed, with
the exception of soldering (blanks), same as duty paid. The ex-
ported quantity determined by a United States weigher.
CARTRIDGES, same as on bullets and gunpowder exported separately.
CASTOR OIL, product of castor seed, 25 cents per gallon.
(' AsioR POMAC-I:, product of castor seed, 11 cents per 100 pounds.
CHAINS, from bar iron, same as duty paid. Add 4 per cent, to exported
quantity to cover wastage in manufacture.
COPPER, from ore, same as duty paid. COPPER, from block or blister
copper, same as duty paid, 4 cents per pound.
COPE TUBES, from tin plates, same as duty paid. The exported quantity
determined by allowing for each tube a square equal in length to
the height of the tube, and in width, to its largest circumference .
34 The Tariff.
CORDAGE, from Manilla hemp, \}^ cents per pound; from jute hemp, %
cent per pound ; of Sisal grass, % cent per pound ; from New Zea-
land flax, 8-9 cent per pound ; tarred Russia, 15-16 cent per pound.
DRESSED SKINS, from raw, same as duty paid.
FISH PLATES, from iron, same as duty paid. Add 12 per cent, to export-
ed weight to cover wastage in manufacture.
FLOUR, from wheat which paid a duty of 20 cents per bushel, 75 cents
per barrel.
GLAZIERS' POINTS, product of sheet zinc, same as duty paid.
GUNPOWDER, from saltpetre which paid a duty of 2 cents per pound :
American Sporting 1 08-100 cents per pound ; U. S. Government, 1
60-100 cents per pound; Shipping and Mining, 1 4-10 cents per
pound.
GUNPOWDER, from saltpetre which paid a duty of 1'cent per pound : Ameri-
can Sporting, 8 r 10 cent per pound ; II. S. Government, 8-10 cent per
pound; Shipping and Mining, 7-10 cent per pound.
GUNS, Gatling, 42 calibre and 10 barrels, $7.03 each gun ; 42 calibre and
6 barrels, $5.00 each gun. 65-75 calibre and 10 barrels, $9.00 each
gun; 1 inch calibre and 10 barrels, $11.73 each gun.
GUN-SYSTEMS, made for Colt's patent fire-arms 14 42-100 cents each.
GUN-SYSTEMS, inade byE. Remington & Sons, from iron and steel: For
the iron, 5 4-100 cents each ; for the steel, when imported as such,
3% cents each ; for the steel, made from imported iron, 1 31-100 cents
each.
GUN-SYSTEMS, made for the Peabody fire-arm, 7 29-100 cents each.
GUN TRIMMINGS, made for Colt's patent fire-arm, 6 6-10 cents each arm.
GUN TRIMMINGS, made by E. Remington & Sons : For the iron, 1 54-100
cents each gun ; for the steel, when imported as such, % cent each
gun ; for the steel, made from imported iron, ^ cent each gun.
GUN TRIMMINGS, made for the Peabody fire-arm, 1 74-100 cents each arm.
GUN TRIMMINGS and SYSTEMS, for the Winchester fire-arm, 8}t> cents each
arm.
GUN TRIMMINGS and SYSTEMS, made for the Martini Henry rifle, same as
duty paid. The quantity of material used in the manufacture shall
be determined by allowing for each receiver, 3 66-100 pounds steel ;
for each block, 1 'pound iron ; for each guard, 1 pound iron ; for each
lever, 8-10 pound iron ; for each set of bands, 45-100 pound iron ; for
each light base, % pound iron ; for each butt plate, % pound iron ;
for each bayonet, 1 84-100 pounds iron.
HANDLES and NOZZLES, made from sheet zinc and attached to tin cans
(when tagger's tin is also used in making such nozzles), 27 cents per
100 cans ; when tagger's tin is not used, 25 cents per 100 cans.
HANDLES, made from sheet zinc, and attached to tin cans, without above-
described nozzles, 16 cents per 100 cans.
HATCHETS, (see AXES and HATCHETS.)
HOOP IRON and HORSESHOE IRON, (see IRON. )
HUNGARIAN NAILS, same as tacks.
IRON, band, bar, horseshoe, hoop, railroad, rod, scroll. Wholly from
imported scrap iron, same as duty paid. To cover wastage in manu-
facture, add 25 per cent, to exported weight when exclusively old
scrap iron w r as used, and 12 per cent, only if part of the material was
new scrap iron.
LANTERNS, from tin plates, same as duty paid. Quantity determined by
the measurement of the pieces composing such lanterns before they
are put together.
Protection, vs. Free Trade. 35
LEAD PIPE, same as duty paid.
LEATHER, sole, from hides, same as duty paid.
LINSEED OIL, <i l 4 cents per gallon.
LOCOMOTIVE TIES, from imported steel, same as duty paid. Add 2 per
cent, to exported weight to cover wastage in manufacture.
NAILS, cut, from sheet and plate iron, 1% cents per pound ; horseshoe,
from slit iron rods, same as duty paid; Hungarian, same as tacks;
cut, from scrap iron, same as duty paid. To cover wastage in manu-
facture, add 25 per cent, to exported weight when exclusively old
scrap iron was used, and 12 per cent, only if part of the material was
new scrap iron.
NAIL RODS, rolled from iron, same as duty paid. Add 9 per cent, to the
exported weight to cover wastage in manufacture ; slit, from iron,
same as duty paid. Add 3 per cent, to exported weight to cover
wastage.
NEW ENGLAND RUM, (see RUM.)
NO/ZLES, made from tin plates, same as duty paid ; flat screw tops, from
sheet zinc, attached to tin cans, 9 cents per 100 cans.
OIL, (see LINSEED and CASTOR.)
PACKING, from jute yarn, same as duty paid.
PLATES, tack, same as duty paid.
PLATES, fish and robe, (see FISH PLATES, and ROBE PLATES.)
PIPE, lead, (see LEAD.)
PISTOLS, Colt's navy or belt, 11 64-100 cents each.
PIVOTS, (see BOLTS.)
POMACE, (see CASTOR.)
RAILROAD IRON, (see IRON . )
RICE, cleaned from paddy rice, 1 2-5 cents per pound ; cleaned from rough
rice, 2 1-5 cents per pound.
RIFLES, (see GUN SYSTEMS and TRIMMINGS.)
RIFLE BARRELS, from bar steel and from barrel moulds, same as duty
paid.
ROBE PLATES, from goat skins, same as duty paid. The number of skins
used determined by inspection of the exported plates.-
ROD IRON, (see IRON.)
RUM, New England, 6 5-16 cents per gallon.
SALT, fine, 8 cents per 100 pounds.
SALTPETRE, refined from crude, 95-100 cent per pound.
SCREWS, wood, (see WOOD SCREWS.)
SCROLL IRON, (see IRON.)
SCYTHES, manufactured by Hubbart, Blake & Co., of West Waterville,
Maine: Light grass, 45 cents per dozen; heavy St. John, 65% cents
per dozen ; grain 83% cents per dozen.
SHANKS, from steel, same as duty paid.
SHEET LEAD, from pig lead, same as duty paid.
SHOCKS, from staves, same as duty paid.
SHOT, (see BULLETS.)
SHOVELS and SPADES, chiefly of steel, 80 cts. per doz. ; chiefly of iron 50
cts. per doz.
SKINS, dressed, (see DRESSED SKINS.)
SOLDER, used in making tin cans, 16 cents per 100 cans of 5 gallons ca-
pacity, and in proportion for cans of less capacity.
SOLE LEATHER, (see LEATHER.)
36 The Tariff.
SUGAR, refined from raw sugar : Loaf , cut-loaf, crushed, granulated, and
powdered, dried, 3 18-100 cents per pound ; white coffee sugar, undried,
and above No. 20, Dutch standard in color, 2 58-1 00 cents per pound;
all grades of coffee sugar, No. 20, Dutch standard, and below in col-
or, 2 8-100 cents per pound.
SUGAR, refined from melado, on which a duty was paid of 1% cents per
pound, and 25 per cent, in addition thereto, same as sugar refined
from raw sugar; refined from molasses, 1J cents per pound.
SYRUP, from sugar, 6% cents per gallon ; from melado, on which a duty
was paid of 1}^ cents per pound, and 25 per cent, in addition there-
to, 5^8 cents per gallon ; from molasses, 5 cents per gallon .
TACKS, from bar iron, same as duty paid. Add 14 per cent, to exported
quantity to cover wastage in manufacture.
TIN CANS, (see CANS.)
WIRE, telegraph, from iron rods, same as duty paid ; from steel for bridg-
es, same as duty paid.
WIRK, finer than telegraph wire, from iron bars and rods, same as duty
paid.
WIRE, manufactured by the American Screw Company of Providence,
R. I., same as duty paid.
WOOD SCREWS, from iron, same as duty paid. Add 50 per cent, to ex-
ported weight to cover wastage in manufacture.
In those cases where a discriminating duty has been paid under the
provisions of Section 2501 of the Revised Statutes, the drawback allow-
ed shall bear the same relation to that duty as the usual allowance bears
to the ordinary duty. All of the foregoing, except the drawback on re-
fined sugars, shall be subject to the -usual 10 per cent, retention.
The drawback on refined sugars shall be subject to a retention of 1
per cent., as required by Section 3, of the Act of March 3, 1875.
On the exportation of syrup resulting from the refining of imported
molasses, upon which the duty of four cents per gallon, prescribed by
the tariff of March 3, 1883, has been paid, a drawback will be allowed
at the rate of three and two-tenths (3 2-10) cents per gallon, less the le-
gal retention of ten per centum. (S. S., 5750.)
Such of the rates of drawback prescribed under the old tariff' as are
specific, and relate to articles manufactured from materials upon which
the duty is changed by the new tariff, are hereby revoked. Exporta-
tions of articles which were subject to rates of the above description will,
therefore, be reported to the Department in accordance with the provis-
ions of Article 828 of the General Regulations for the establishment of
new rates. (Treasury Circular, July 7> 1883.)
DUTIES COLLECTED IN 1883.
All articles paying a duty aggregating less than $100,000 are omitted.
It must be remembered that 'the table only give the duties collected by
the Government.
The enormous aggregate -of duties collected by private protected
persons or by corporations is unknown and cannot be tabulated.
Table showing Quantities, Values, Total Duties, Rate of Duty and average Duty
ad valorem, on all Imported Commodities paying $100,000 or upwards into
the Treasury in the year ending June 30, 1883.
^[Compiled from the official report on Commerce and Navigation of the U.S. for 1883.
DTTIAKLE ARTICLES.
Quantities
Values R jf t f
Duties.
Duty
Ad-
val.
! Dollars.
Dollars.
^ ct.
Animals, living
4.030,822 20 per ct
TS06.164
Beer. Ale, Porter, in bottles galls.
901,215 801,906 35c. % gal.
315,425
39 33
" otherwise. galls. 979,787
344,891 20c . "f. gal .
195,957
56 . S J
Hooks, Engravings and printed matter
2,982,221; 25 per ct.
745,556
25
Braids. Plaits, Laces, Trimmings, etc
2.2'J7.'.!62 30 per ct.
689,389
;-;Q
Brass, Manufactures of
570,666 35 per ct.
182.664
35
BRKADSTI-FF.-: etc.
Baric v
9,944,066
7,573,443 I5c %>. hush
1.191.61(1 19 70
Barley. Malt
1.355,112
1,124,331 20 per ct.
224, S66 20
Peas, 'Beans, etc bush. 700,876
1,112,638 10 per ct.
111,264 10
Rice, cleaned. . Ibs.
63,909,474
1,391,742 2Kc. ^ ft.
1.597.737 114.86
Bristles Ibs. 983,907
1,193,707 15c. "ft ft.
147,586
12.36
Brushes i
434,706 1 40 per ct.
173,882 40
Buttons '
3,771,331 30 per ct.
1,131,399 30
Cement, Roman bbls^ 456,418
802,294 20 per ct.
160,459
20
CHEMICALS, Dunis. Etc.
Aniline Dves .. Ibn 1,004,701
1,195,837 <50c. ^ ft
920,874 77.01
r;ivi-crinc... ..;H 6.780,217 1,017,772 30 per ct.
305,332 30
Opium 229,011 747,794 $1 per ft.
2'J.t.Oll 30.62
Medicinal preparations, not otherwise
provided for 284,356 10 per ct.
113,74:; tn
npium prepared for smoking 298,153 2.*>84,589 $6 per ft.
1.7SS.917 66 64
Nitrate of Saltpetre, crude Jbs 10,534,081 382,589 Ic. "
105.341 27.5;;
Soda, Caustic Ibs -Vj.172.49d 1,134,265 ll-^c. "
782,5X7 69
Sod a A sh Ibs 323.726,726 4,006,638 ' . t c. "
809,317 20
Total Chemicals, etc
16,134,204
ii.053.574 37 52
clay, Fuller's Earth, etc. tons
204,742 $5 per ton.
107,310 52.41
Clocks and ]4arts of
443,953:35 per ct.
155,384
35
Wntches
2,347,311 25
5S6.X53 25
Coal, Bituminous tons
Corsets and Corset Cloths.
645,924
2,013,555 [75c. per ton
589,473 35 per ct.
484,443
206,315
24.05
35
COTTON, MANUFACTURES OF
Cotton, bleached yds.
9,776,320
1, 101,509 5Mc. per yd
537,698
48.81
Cotton, colored yds.
3,778,286
1,041,576, \ly z c. "
58,882
53.48
\ & 20 *j$ Ct.
Cotton, Jeans, Denims, etc., colored
<6l^c.^yd
under 200 threads to the sqr in. .yds.
Cotton Goods not in foregoing sch'le.
4,629,056
4,841,664
734,939 j*15^ct.
1,016,199 7^c.^yd
411,129
355,670
55.94
35
U 15$ct.
Cotton Hosiery
8,5o5,769 35 per ct.
2.994,519
35
Cotton Laces, Braids, etc.
6.392,258 35 "
2,237.290
35
cotton Ready-Made clothing
Cotton Thread, Yarn, etc., 40 to 60
<20c. f. 11)
cts, per pound . . . . Ibs
257,655 (1 ,t 20$ ct.
p.5.900 60 18
cation Thread, Yarn, etc. 60 to 80 cts.
C3IV. -|^- p,
per pound Ibs
308,716
224,302 /* -JO -f c t.
137,475 61.20
Cotton Thread. Yarn. etc.. over 80
\ (Of "t^, |}|
els per pound His
856,600
1.014,705 4k20' ct.
5)5.5X1 : '3 77
Cotton Velvet, Velveteens, etc. .... 1.799.761 35 per ct.
629,916 35
Lotion. Manufactures of, not other-
wise provided for. 9.029,782 35 per ct.
3,160,424 35
Total Cotton Manufactures j 32,359,344
12. 2:. 1.371 -.7 -1
Diamonds, Gems, etc.
7,598,175,10 per ct.
759,818: 10
Earrhenware, plain and white
368,943 45 per ct.
166,023
45
Earthenware, decorated
2.587.545 50 per ct.
1,293,772
50
Earthenware. other.uot otherwise prov 5,685.700 40 per ct.
2,274,283
40
Total Earthenware and Chins
8,693,273
3,746.489 43 10
Embroideries. ''otton. Linen JBilk, etc
4 ,929,445 35 per ct.
1,725,30'
FA N c Y A RTI r LE s
c .
V / ,
Beads and Bead Ornaments 730.649 50 per ct.
"":;65.:'.-M. 50
Dolls
794,269 35 per ct,
277,9'"
Fans
381,09835 per ct. '
133,384 3o
DUTIABLE ARTICLES.
Quantities.
Values.
Rate of
Duty.
Duties.
Duty
Ad
val.
Feathers, Ornamental, Ostrich, etc.,
crude
Feathers, dressed colored, etc.
Feathers and Flowers, artificial
Perfumery, Cologne galls.
Perfumery, other, not otherwise pro-
vided for
Pipes, not otherwise prov. for, .gross
Toys, wooden and other
Total Fancy Articles
Fire Crackers boxes
Sardines boxes
FISH, Total
FLAX AND MANUFACTURES OF
Brown Linen, under 30c. yard
Brown Linen, above 30c. sqr. yard. .
Handkerchiefs under 30c, yd
Handkerchiefs, above 80c. sqr. yard.
Burlaps, etc
Thread Lace and Insertings
10,226
12,li4
264,606
6,250,832
Dollars.
3,286,162
299,434
813,695
212,416
230,133
136,575
554,019
25 per ct.
50 "
50 "
$?3 '# gal
I A 50 '$ ct.
50 per ct.
1 11.50 r # KB
U75^ct.
50 per ct.
fi per box.
4c.
35 per ct.
40
35 "
10 "
30 "
30
40 "
40 per ct.
10 per ct
Ic. per Ib
2J* "
20 per ct
20 "
20 "
6c. per Ib
lOc per Ib
3c. "
1C. "
Ic. "
2^C. "
20 to 35 pr c
40 per ct
(25c. per
j sqr foot
50c. sqr ft
lOc. "
l^c. per Ib
2c. "
2^C. "
3C.
10 per ct
25a40per ct
I0a40 "
10
$20 per ton
$15 "
$6
*15
40 per ct
25
8c. per Ib
l^c. "
35 per ct
l^c. per Ib
Ic. per Ib
20 per ct
$7 per ton
70c. per 100
Dollars.
821,540
14!), 717
406,849
136,887
115,067
120,002
277,009
~#ct.
25
50
50
64.44
50
88.30
50
3H 43
126.07
35.20
21.27
35
40
35
40
80
30
40
40
32-. 85
10.
24.99
27.32
20.
20.
20.
5fi. 91
56.66
44.98
35:
10.50
36.82
25.35
21.99
7,908,102
209,894
710,311
1,474,954
10,924,648
2,280,129
488,309
585,67-2
4,391,675
1,012,759
723,654
814,614
22^088^891
1,331,998
1,247,504
489,10?
531,462
2,555,787
3,010,662
381,632
220,291
527,851
555,388
2,763,067
3,495,591
3,U39,082
264,606
250,033
357,979
3,823,627
912,052
170,908
234,269
1,317,502
3015,828
298,461
325,846
7,584,343
133,200
311,712
138,683
106,280
511.157
602,132
217.480
124,815
237,454
194,386
511,107
1,287,185
Thread and Twine
Other FJax Manufactures, not other-
wise provided for
Total Flax and Manufactures of.
FRUITS AND NUTS
Bananas
Currants... ...Ibe
Figs Ibg
Grapes and Grape Juice
Lemons
Oranges
Almonds, not shelled Ibs
Almonds, shelled Ibe
Filberts and Walnuts Ibs
Sweetmeats, etc., not otherwise prov.
Prunes Ibs
31,171,171
5,345,324
S',624',6es
1,248,150
7,915,135
51,110^
51,487,389
Raisins Ibs
Total Fruits and Nnts.
18,157,687
5,142,022
' 1,017^628
339,171
600,032
737,874
312,63?
882.34f
407, 805
479,691
1,927,53?
4,603,455
1,130,575
287,323
* 407,471
213,1 =>2
738,688
220,937
182,128
268,786
326,246
360,512
771,016
Furs and Manufactures of.
GJ,ASS AND MANUFACTURES
9,577,437
Porcelain, Bohemian cut, etc
Plate Glass, 24x30 to 60 inches, not
silvered sq. feet
Plate Glass, above 24x^0 in ... sq. feet
Plate Glass from 16x24 to 24x30 inches
silvered sq. feet
Window Glass, under 10x15 in Ibg
Window Glass,from 10x15 to 16x24 Ibs
Window Glass, from 16x24 to 24x30 Ibs
Window Glass above 24x30 Ibs
Manufactures of Glass,not otherwise
provided for
Total Glass and Manufactures of
Gold and Silver, Manufactures of
Hair and Manufactures of
Hats and Bonnets, straw
HEMP, JUTE AND FIBRE
Manilla, not otherwise prov. for-tone
Jute and Sunn tons
Jute Butts tons
Sisal Grass, <fec tons
Bags and Baggingnot otherwise prov.
Jute Yarn pounds
Total Hemp and Manufactures of
Hops Ibs
IKON AND MANUFACTURES OF
Band,hoop andscroll,under%in thick
Cotton ties Ibs
Bar, rolled or hammered, smaller
sizes. . Ibs
40.
ti'2 M
123.11
29.94
58.26
70.30
80.
77.0:;
-10.
55.05
:-;:-;. 4 s
21.26
40.
14.17
24 **
18.71
14.15
40.
25.
2C.34
10.62
88.04
00.
57.72
50.26
20.
44.
51.92
852,607
1,477,37'
2,209,371
12,141,85*-
13,439,10?
13 049,85 f /
12,317,077
7,597,897
339,671
1,021,323
750,027
4,656,840
577,831
2,092,186
1,978,804
1,786,036
698,836
4,182,616
113,708
217,140
300,011
660,018
143,787
391,349
279,949
714,414
171,709
26,401
9,58(
65,22
18,66?
12,230,98C
1,977,715
9,903,51?
49,746,80f
8,120,088
88,724,974
609,322
432,3*3
37,076,985
12,615,a
1,490,026
168,726
822,773
210,979
1,765,355
1,587,597
7,789,840
472,601
lV<v>,5C6
158,217
148,553
287,971
121,801
887,250
317,519
3,026,470
259,539
Bar, rolled or hammered, larger
sizes Ibs
Ore tons
Pig Iron tons
Railroad Bars Ibs
DUTIABLE ARTICLES,
Quantities.
Values.
Rate of
Duty.
Duties.
Duty
Ad
Val.
Rolled or hammered, not otherwise
provided for Ibs
Strap, wrought tone
Sheet 1 roil, over No.20,wire guage,lbs
Manufactures of Iron, not otherwise
provided for
Total Iron and Manufacture of.. .
STEEL AND MANUFACTURES OF
Blooms Ibs
39,664,719
76,126
10,742,365
147,679,483
15,101^992
8,838,148
154,982,363
412,225,655
154,322,347
Dollars.
927,738
1,399,806
241,895
3,393,827
l}4c. per Ib
$8 per ton
l^c. per Ib
35 per ct
45 per ct
50 "
35
2J4c. per Ib
ic.
35 per ct
25 "
P>%c. per Ib
30 per ct
' "
i per ct
1 5 per ct
25 per ct
50
10
20 "
35
jSOciciibft
( & 50 pr ct
20a45 per ct
10a40 per ct
30
$1 per gal
10 per ct
10a35 per ct
35
15c. per bus
12c. per 100
Sc. per 100
20c.perbus
20 per ct
60 "
80 "
60 "
60 "
60 "
60 "
50 "
60
50 "
60
jie.prlb*
/ 25a30 pr c
lOc. per Ib
20c. "
5c.
$2 per gal
|2 per gal
$2 per gal
$2 per gal
$3 per doz
$6 per doz
40c. per gal
$1.60 pr doz
(5c. pr gal
( <t 25 pr c
4c. per gal
Dollars.
495,809
609,011
134,279
1,187,839
FcF.
53.44
43.51
55.51
35.
40.37
4.").
:>o .
35.
48.21
30.58
;;.->.
25.
82. S5
30.
30.
4f>.
40.87
25
58.86
25.
50,
10.
20.
;;.-, .
29 80
<;;; :>i
29.72
28.46
30.
fiG . 1:1
10.
32.88
:j4 t;;?
I!;") .
32.38
36.60
73; 25
18.49
20.
60.
60.
60.
60.
60-
GO.
50.
60.
50.
60.
59 01
44 99
118.94
36.94
4S ',.[
51.05
83.25
127.04
302.39
322.94
47.ir>
48.98
63.
28.69
69.45
24.01
17. SI
20,305,844
1,687,080
1,245,853
860,954
704,814
867,685
1,336,32'!
421,204
2,335,615
7,691,52*
1,416,850
1,261,608
8,198,389
7">9,1SP,
622,92(,
:i,:m
839,793
265,144
467,714
105,301
1,937,279
425,05;-,
2,292,4^9
5(17,721
Cutlery, knives
Cutlery, all other
Ingots, bars, &c.,under7c per Ib. .Ibs
luirots, 7 to lie per Ib Ibs
Fire-arms
Needles, not otherwise prov. for
Railway bars, steel. Ibs
SU-el wire rods Ibs
Steel, not otherwise provided for.. Ibs
Manufactures of, " " "
Total steel and Manufactures of
Jewelry, not otherwise provided for..
Lead, and Manufactures of
LEATHER AND MANUFACTURES OF
Calfskins, tanned
Cloves and Mitts
Morocco skins
Upper leather and skins, u. o. p. for
Manufactures of, not otherwise p. for
Total leather and Manufactures of
Marble
Mats and Matting
Metals, not otherwise pi*ovided for. . . .
Musical Instruments and strings . .
Olive oil gall
Paintings and Statuary
20,531,532
692,97?.
170,198
2,150,732
4,040,095
2,019,850
3,518,438
756,472
8,392,115
148,244
100,172
537,688
2,020,047
201,98.-]
709,687
264,765
218,708
12,653,72V
607,631
702,275
1,480,445
1,486,251
889,653
3,078,867
l,284,20t
1,864,548
369,9ic
1,091,99C
1,035,946
451,001
824,944
537,946
222,335
16,395,182
825,681
3,348,967
469,561
1,708,800
619,042
4,888,602
2,155,685
2,196,111
3,770,547
385,877
208,795
423,917
445,893
218,708
807,887
422,244
645,691
129,472
353,545
375,493
330,351
152,n2r>
107,589
133,401
9,837,109
495,409
2,009,380
281,737
1,025,280
3J9,521
2,933,165
1,077,845
1,317,687
Paints and colors
Paper and Manufactures of
Pickles, Capers and Sauces, n.o. p. for
Potatoes. bush
Salt in bags, sacks, &c Ibs
Salt in bulk Ibs
Seeds, Flaxseed or Linseed bush
Seeds, Garden
2,356^965
312,911,360
412,988,686
762,627
SILKS AND MANUFACTURES OF
Braids, Fringes and Galloons
Dress and piece goods
Hosiery.
Laces
Ready-made Clothing
Ribbons
Ribbons, cotton edge
Mauuf act's wholly or mainlv of silk
Manufactures, mixed with 25 per ct.
or over of cotton, wool, &c . . .
Velvets
Total Silk and Manufactures of
Soap Ibs
SPICES
Cassia and Cassiavera Ibs
Nutmegs Ibs
Pepper, not ground Ibs
Total Spices
SPIRITS AND WINES
Brandy gall
Cordials, &c gall
Spirits, other, from grain gall
Spirits, from other materials . . .gall
Champagne, pint and under doz
quarts doz
Still Wines, in casks gall
in bottles gall
Total Spirits and Wines
SUGAR AND MOLASSES
Molasses . . .gall
1,664,647
661,132
6,973,645
588,702
141,292
659,824
271,892
316,147
208,841
6.901,551
221,600
- 19,848,814
8.210.199
83,307,112
304,119
139,95*
361,842
718,40C
15,654,941.
136,811
166,465
132,226
348,642
1,682,168
1,414,338
222,442
436,411
168,888
2,011,542
2,558,536
4,379 951
1,235,864
873,886
1,177,408
282,588
1,319,648
54:1,784
948,443
1,243,046
2,760,620
354,561
12,586,869
5,165,82*
1,894.019
8,741,958
1,240,551
328,409
do not above 56 . , . ... gall
i .*:.^
Dm
DUTIABLE ARTICLES. Quantities.
Values. j)utv
Duties.
Ad
1
Val
Dollars.; Dollars, ,1ft c
Syrup, Meiada,ttc.,notaboveyO...lbs
214,818,140
9,026,804 2c per Jb 4,2%,3t;:i
47 b
Syrup, &Q., not above 96. Ibs
14,491,875
689,306 2. 24C. pr Ib 324. 61 b
47
Sugar, No. 7, or under Ibs
797,011.161
31,910,89:: \l-'. l c. "
I A 25 pr ct
17,434,619
54. b
do No. 7 to 10 Ibs
850,185,097
40,389,5if \2c. peril.
U25percl 21,254,627
52.6
do No. 10 to 13 Ibs
23,548,433
1,103,181
j^c.pflb
(A 25 per c
662.300
GO. 4
Total Sugar and Molasses
91,406,718
46,172,379
50 5
Tin, plates or sheets Ibs
453,724,126
16,688,277
IMOc.prlb
4,990,965
29.9
Total Tin and Manufactures of
16,797,322
5,075,052
30.2
TOBACCO AND MANUFACTURES OF
i
Leaf, iiuinanufactured Ibs
13,811,140! 7,414,104
35c. pr Ib 4,833,899
65 2
Cigars, Cigarettes, &c Ibs
787,393 3,055,124 }$2.50prlb 2,732,264 i 89 4
|A 25prct
Total Tobacco and Manufactures
10.515.8U6; 7,b6l,638
72. fc
Varnish, value $1.50 or less gall| 152,860 ! '161,973 SOcgl A20pc 108,82'!
67.1
Varnibb, over $1.50 ....gall 113,598j 274,239 50c gl *25pc 125,359
Vegetables, preserved, not provided for j 346,416|85 per ct 121,245
45 7
35
WOOD AND MANUFACTURES OF
1 !
Lumber, unplaned M feet
486,410 ! 6,649.643 $2 per M 972,821
14 6
Wood, manufactures, notprov. for.
Total wood and manufactures. . .
865,559 35 per ct
"9^530, 364
302,946
1,703,096
35
17.8
WOOL AND MANUFACTURES
Raw Wools, Class 1, under 82c Ibs
11,466,637
2,526,477
HOc. prlb
1,424,576
56 :
< A 11 pr ct
Combing, Class 2, 32c., or under. .Ibs
1,306,751
314,491
JlOc. pr Ib
165,258 52 f
/A 11 pr ct
Carpet,&c., Class 3,12c.'$ Ib orless, Ibs
28,477,593
3,43S,77
3c. per Ib
S5-I ,:J2s
24.81
do value over 12C per Ib Ibs
11,652,510
2,143,750
6c. "
699,151
32 b
Carpets, Axminster, &c sqr. yds
do Brussels, Jacquard. .sqr. yds
269,174
136,505
474,575
165,636
50 per ct
44c y A35 p c
237,288
118,035
50
71 2
Mats, Rugs, &c
296,898
45 per ct
133,604
45
Cloth ,lbs
10,806,324
|&0c. pr Ib
7,892,226
73.0
1 A 35 per c
Rags, Shoddy,&c Ibs
8,220,025 423,120
12c per Ib
116,509
27.5
Other manufactures of wool, not
(afrperlb
otherwise provided for
971,406
1,398,389
1 A 35 per c
952,479
68 1
.Clothing and wearing apparel Ibs
712,364
1,427,457 U40pr. c 927,165
64. P
Hosiery, value over SOc per Ib Ibs
302,089
I IfiOcperll)
677,418! |A 35 per cj 388,141
57.3
Shirts, drawers, <&c., value above
Wcperlb
8Uc per Ib Ibs
94,502
224,966
I A :55 per <
125,989
56
Shawle, woolen Ibs
238,764
509,421
\50cper Ib
297,67y
;'i8 . 4
\ A 35 per c
Shawls, worsted Ibs
282,016
686,267
SOcper Ib
415,515
60.5
Dress goods, not over 20c per sqr.
| A 40 per c
yard yds
44,581,580
7,830,094
i6c per yd
5.415.42S
69.1
I A 35 per c
Dress goods above 20c sqr. yd yds
42,532,940
11,959,029
J8c per yd
8,186,247
68.4
Dress goods weighing 4 ozs.
( A 40 per c
and over sqr. yd yds
1,914,088
2,829,983
50c per Ib
1,947,538
68.8
( A 35 per c
Flannels, above SOc per Ib IDS
132,086
171,931
J50cperlb
126,219
73.4
Worsted and wool manufactures,
( A 35 per c
below SOc per Ib Ibs
374,543 272,959
40cpei Ib
245,353
89.8
Worsted and wool manufactures,
( A 35 per c- !
above SOc per Ib Ibs
438,7761 608,803
^50cper Ib 432,469
71
'l A :'.-"> per c
Webbings, beltings, &c Ibs
228,560 : fiP.9,523
<50cperlb 434, 04 -J
67 8
j
A 50 per (
Yarns, value above SOc per Ib. ; . . .Ibs
326,468, 366,975 J50c peril)
291,676 79.4
1 / A 35 per c
Total Wool and Manufactures of
51 044 444
7T; -j>(j syy (*! '*,
Zinc or Spelter, in pigs Ibs
17,067,211 '655,501
IJoC per Ib
'25fi.008
39
Total Dutiable and Average Duty
493,916384
209 659 69^
42.4
Total Free of Duty
206,913289
Total Imports Entered for Con-
sumption'and Average Duty
700,829673
209659699
29.9
U.C.BERKELEY LIBRARIES