Gambar halaman
PDF
ePub

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE.

A message was received from the Senate, by Mr. SYMPSON, one of its clerks, notifying the House that that body had passed a concurrent resolution providing that four thousand additional copies of the reconnoissance of Arizona and Nevada be printed in quarto form and bound; of which one thousand copies shall be for the use of the Senate, and twenty-seven hundred and fifty for the use of the House of Representatives, and two hundred and fifty for distribution by the chief of engineers of the United States Army; in which the concurrence of the House was requested.

The message further announced that the Senate had passed an act (H. R. No. 1191) making appropriations for the naval service for the year ending June 30, 1873, and for other purposes, with amendments, in which the concurrence of the House was requested.

ORDER OF BUSINESS.

Mr. TOWNSEND, of New York. I desire unanimous consent to report from the Committee on Commerce a bill for present consid

eration.

Mr. SARGENT. I object.

Mr. DAWES. I move that the House take a recess until half past seven o'clock this evening.

Mr. ELDREDGE. And I move that the House do now adjourn.

Mr. SARGENT. I withdraw my objection to the request of the gentleman from New York, [Mr. ToWNSEND.]

Mr. ELDREDGE. I insist on my motion to adjourn.

The question being taken on the motion to adjourn, there were-ayes 31, noes 67.

So the House refused to adjourn. The question was on the motion of Mr. DAWES, that the House take a recess until half past seven o'clock.

Mr. DAWES. I desire to include in the motion that the session of this evening be for the purpose of general debate on the tariff only, as in Committee of the Whole.

Mr. SARGENT. I object to that. I ask simply ten or fifteen minutes to pass one of the most important appropriation bills that have been before the House this session.

The SPEAKER. The majority can take a recess, but the order of business can only be determined by unanimous consent.

Mr. DAWES. So far as I am concerned, I will not object to the House sitting long enough to dispose of the business of which the gentleman from California [Mr. SARGENT] has charge.

Mr. BROOKS, of New York. I object.
SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE.

The SPEAKER. By unanimous consent, the Chair was authorized to appoint a Speaker pro tempore for to-morrow and next day, and in pursuance of the authority thus given the Chair names as Speaker pro tempore for the sessions of the House on those days Mr. HENRY L. DAWES, Representative, of Massachusetts.

The question being taken on the motion that the House take a recess, it was agreed to. The House accordingly (at five o'clock and five minutes p. m.) took a recess until half past seven o'clock p. m.

EVENING SESSION.

The recess having expired, the House resumed its session at half past seven o'clock p. m., Mr. DAWES in the chair as Speaker pro tempore.

ORDER OF BUSINESS.

Mr. CONGER. I move that the House resolve itself into Committee of the Whole for the consideration of the tariff bill.

Mr. SHOEMAKER. I ask unanimous consent to report a bill from the Committee on the Territories, in order to have it printed and recommitted.

Mr. RANDALL. There is no quorum pres

ent, and I object to any business being transacted. But if the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. SHOEMAKER] will agree that the bill shall not be brought back by a motion to reconsider, I will not object.

Mr. SHOEMAKER. I agree to that. Mr. SARGENT. I desire to make a single remark. I understand that quite a number of gentlemen desire to speak on the tariff bill, and I am aware that general debate on that bill is to close at three o'clock to-morrow. In consideration of that fact, I will not press the Indian appropriation bill now, but I give notice that I will endeavor to call it up at the first opportunity.

UTAH, IDAHO, AND MONTANA RAILROAD.

Mr. SHOEMAKER, by unanimous consent, from the Committee on the Territories, reported back the bill (H. R. No. 2473) granting the right of way through the public lands for the construction of a railroad and telegraph line for the Utah, Idaho, and Montana Railroad Company, with a substitute; which was ordered to be printed and recommitted to the same committee.

Mr. SHOEMAKER moved to reconsider the vote by which the bill and substitute were recommitted; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the table. The latter motion was agreed to.

BUTLER, MILLER AND COMPANY. Mr. VAN TRUMP, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R. No. 2638) for the relief of Butler, Miller Co., and Hawkes, Miller Co.; which was read a first and second time, referred to the Committee on Military Affairs, and ordered to be printed.

JOHN GIBBS.

Mr. VAN TRUMP also, by unanimous consent, introduced a bill (H. R. No. 2639) granting a pension to John Gibbs; which was read a first and second time, referred to the Committee on Invalid Pensions, and ordered to be printed.

INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL.

Mr. RANDALL. I beg to state to the gentleman from California [Mr. SARGENT] that I do not wish to impede the progress of the ap propriation bill of which he has charge. I therefore suggest to him that he make a motion to assign Tuesday next, immediately after the reading of the Journal, for the consideration of the Indian appropriation bili.

Mr. SARGENT. I make that motion, and ask that the bill be considered in the House as in Committee of the Whole under the fiveminutes rule.

There was no objection; and it was so ordered.

TARIFF.

Mr. TAFFE. I desire to have a bill read, with a view to its being put upon its passage. Mr. RANDALL. I object.

Mr. TAFFE. Will the gentleman not hear it read?

Mr. RANDALL. I do not object to its being read.

The Clerk read the title of the bill, as follows: A bill in relation to the creation of new land districts.

Mr. RANDALL. I have no objection to hearing the bill read, but I give notice that I shall object to any action upon it at this time. Mr. TAFFE. It is a short bill.

Mr. RANDALL. No matter; I shall object to its consideration now.

Mr. CONGER. Then I insist upon my motion to go into Committee of the Whole on the tariff bill.

The motion was agreed to; and the House accordingly resolved itself into Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, (Mr. ScoFIELD in the chair,) and resumed the consideration of the bill (H. R. No. 2322) to reduce duties on imports, and to reduce internal taxes, and for other purposes.

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. HAZELTON] is entitled to the floor.

Mr. HAZELTON, of New Jersey, and Mr. HIBBARD addressed the committee. [Their remarks will be published in the Appendix.]

Mr. WILSON, of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, it is a most gratifying fact, and speaks volumes for the energy of the people and the resources of the country, that since the close of the war and prior to the organization of the present Congress we have been able to reduce taxes to the extent in round numbers of $252,000,000. The present Congress, by act of May 1, 1872, has made a further reduction of $17,000,000 by placing tea and coffee on the free list, making the total reduction to date $269,000,000, and now we are engaged in modifying the revenue laws with a view to a still further reduction of at least $33,000,000, which if consummated will make $50,000,000 for this session, and a total since the war of $302,000,000, which, together with the further fact that notwithstanding these immense reductions of taxes the public debt since March 1, 1869, has been reduced $328,000,000, is a result alike creditable to the Administration and satisfactory to the people.

But I am aware that in reducing taxes the question will arise as to where and from what articles reductions shall be made, and this question is one of vital interest to both producers and consumers. The preconceived opinions and opposing views of gentlemen on the tariff question will doubtless have much to do in shaping their course and controlling their votes on the various modifications and reductions which may be proposed, but all, I apprehend, are agreed and will engage with avidity in the pleasing duty of reducing taxes. Still the question arises and must be met, shall we make the entire reduction from the internal list, or shall we divide it between internal and import duties?

INTERNAL REVENUE.

The internal revenue system in this country, as all very well know, grew out of the neces sities of the war, and was regarded as a purely war measure to be abandoned as soon as the necessities of the Government should justify it. The taxes under this system were laid on lightly at first, amounting in 1863 to $41,000,000, but reaching in 1866 nearly $311,000,000, and falling in 1871 to $144.000,000, showing an aggregate in eight years of $1,626,572,882 22, an astounding sum, and one which approximates our entire national indebtedness. This tax is a blight apon prosperity, a clog to enterprise, and a burden upon the country which nothing but dire necessity can justify. It is my belief that there is no one grievance that the people so much desire to get rid of as this system of direct taxation, together with its army of revenue officers, and it does seem to me that the time has come when we can set free from this species of taxation every article of domestic production except spirits, tobacco, and malt liquors, and I trust the day is not far distant when we shall be able to exempt these also.

The income tax, which by limitation of law ceased with the year 1871, was, in my judgment, less offensive to the people than the stamp tax which still exists. Our fathers, in 1776, regarded a similar tax imposed by the mother country as one of the prominent and justifiable reasons for revolt; but because of the necessities of the Government the people have borne it patiently since 1863. The actual expense in the rural districts is less complained of than the trouble and inconvenience to which the people in the more sparsely settled portions of the country are subjected, being compelled in many instances to travel from fifteen to thirty miles to procure a stamp before a contract or obligation can be made legal. The Treasury can now dispense with the revenue arising from this source without serious inconvenience.

Hence this tax, yielding about sixteen million dollars, as well as the tax on gas and lucifer matches, yielding each about twenty-five hundred thousand dollars, should be wiped out at once, never again to return in time of peace. The Secretary of the Treasury, in his last annual report, uses the following language:

"In the suggestions I have the honor to make in reference to the reduction of taxes I keep in view two important facts: first, that the ability of the nation to pay at least fifty millions annually of the principal of the public debt shall not be impaired; and, secondly, that in the change of the revenue system no violence shall be done to the business interests of the country. While I do not undertake to state precisely the causes which have contributed to the public prosperity, there is no substantial reason for questioning the truth of the statement that the last few years have been the most prosperous in the history of the country; years without example in our own affairs, and without parallel in the affairs of any other Government.'

These are sound financial views and worthy of the statesman who uttered them. Let us then see to it that in changing our revenue laws "no violence shall be done to the business interests of the country." Let reductions be made from such articles as we cannot or do not produce, and not from such articles as come directly in competition with those produced by the labor of our own people.

WAR UPON DOMESTIC INDUSTRIES.

Mr. Chairman, it cannot be doubted that a war of great virulence is being waged against the domestic industries and interests of the people of the United States. This war has been carried on for more than fifty years, with more or less success, victory perching now upon the banners of the enemy and then upon those of the Republic-a war against labor, capital, commerce, manufactures, agriculture, and every enterprise which tends to develop the resources of the country, strengthen the independence of the nation, and enhance the interests of the people.

the precious metals to pay the balances of trade; our manufactories were closed; proprietors were ruined; laborers thrown out of employment, and bankruptcy and ruin pervaded the land, all in a single year, which must be regarded as the legitimate results of erroneous legislation, to be guarded against if possible in all future time. There are yet men living who have a vivid recollection of the commercial distress which pervaded the country from 1815 to 1820, and who would shrink with horror from such legislation as would bring about a similar state of affairs. But in 1820 the average rate of duties was again increased to twenty-nine per cent., and vibrated between twenty-nine and forty per cent. up to 1837, during which period the country was again prosperous. But the reduction which commenced in 1832, reaching an average duty of fifteen per cent. in 1834, and culminating in bankruptcy in 1837, when the reduction had reached an average duty of twelve per cent., will never be forgotten by the American people. A general increase of duties in 1842 again brought relief and prosperity to the country, which continued until the revenue tariff of 1846 was enacted, under which the energies of the country where again paralyzed. But by the act of March 3, 1857, the average rate of duties, was cut down to seventeen per cent., which increased importations in that year to the enormous sum of $361,000,000, an amount unequaled in any former year, and the energies of the country were taxed beyond endurance to pay this immense sum; hence the general distress and bankruptcy of that year. I hazard nothing in the assertion that with the exception of secession, the doctrine of free trade or revenue reform, which, as I understand it, means about the same thing, has caused this country greater distress and greater financial loss than any other political heresy that has ever been promulgated.

NECESSITIES OF THE WAR.

During the first half of the last decade, the country was harassed by a war of unparalleled virulence; men and money were indispensible, and both were furnished without stint.

Dur

Perhaps no people in the world are harder to drive, and certainly none are more easily coaxed and led, than those of the United States. England, aided and abetted by her American free-trade friends and allies-the very worst enemies of the laboring man and of every industrial pursuit-has for long years been preparing for the battle now being fought. She has been strengthening and extending hering the last half the necessities of the Governfortifications, advancing her picket lines, and mustering into her service every American reeruit found willing to sacrifice the industrial enterprises of his own country for the benefit of foreigners.

EFFECT OF PROTECTION.

ment have been such as to require increased amounts of revenue, and the people have responded to the demands of the tax-gatherer as no people ever did before. The credit and perpetuity of the Republic have been assured, because the people had the will and the means to do it; and yet during the whole of those ten years of unparalleled taxation the country has been prosperous beyond a precedent, and it must be conceded that our revenue laws, affording reasonable protection to and stimulating our industries, have been the great financial lever underlying and contributing quite as much to our prosperity as the energy of the people.

It may safely be said that the manufacturing industries of the United States have within the last five years attained a vitality and importance far in advance of our highest expectations. Indeed, every productive industry of sifying its operations to an extent which, withthe country seems to be enlarging and diverout careful study and close observation, is difficult to understand.

No one who has taken the trouble to examine the history of the country has failed to see that those periods in which industry and enterprise have been most amply rewarded, and the country most prosperous, are precisely those periods when the productions of the farm, the mill, and the mine, have had the fostering care and protecting efficacy of national law. During the war of 1812 we had an average rate of duty ranging from fortyseven to sixty per cent. The result was that in the older and more populous States, especially those of New England, where labor and capital were more abundant, manufacturing establishments went up as by magic, labor was in demand at good prices, agricultural productions were taken at remunerative rates, all branches of busines and all classes of the people were prosperous beyond a precedent The question of utilizing the labor and matein our former history, and we began to feel rial of the country is of such paramount imfor the first time that we could live independ-portance that it can hardly be too much disently of the outside world. But in 1816, just after the war, our revenue laws were revised, and at one swoop the average rate of duty was reduced from fifty-five to twentyfive per cent., and subsequently to fourteen per cent.

The results were as they ever must be under such reductions-our ports were filled to overflowing with foreign goods, importations increasing from thirteen millions in 1815 to one hundred and forty-seven millious in 1816. The country was drained of 42D CONG. 2D SESS.--No. 189.

LABOR AND MATERIAL.

cussed in order to a correct understanding. It is well known that the chief element of wealth in New England is her manufactures without which she would be as poor as the most impoverished States of the South; and how well the shrewd Yankees know how to encourage and protect this interest by State law in addition to any and all protection af forded by tariff enactments is shown by an act of the Legislature of Maine, in 1864, declaring that all manufactures thereafter commenced

shall be exempt from taxation for ten years, provided the towns in which they are located shall consent to the same. Vermont by statute of 1867 has enacted the same provisions for five years. If such laws have been wise and beneficial to the people of Maine and Ver. mont, why would they not be equally so to the people of the weatern and southern States?

It is a well known fact that in any district or State where manufacturing and agricultural interests are in harmony, are combined properly, dividing labor between the two, wages are higher, and the intelligence and prosperity of the people promoted far in advance of localities where either industry prevails to the partial exclusion of the other. This statement is verified by labor statistics, and any gentleman who will take the trouble to examine the table will find that farm labor is forty per cent. higher in Massachusetts than it is in Maryland, and one hundred per cent. higher in Pennsylvania than it is in Virginia, and this difference can only be accounted for on the ground that Pennsylvania and Massachusetts are largely engaged in manufacturing, while the other two States named are not.

During the last decade the workingmen have advanced to the front ranks of respectability. Labor has been made to take a higher position, and to-day commands higher respect than ever before, and in the same proportion facilities for clothing, feeding, and educating the children of the laboring classes have been enhanced. The amount of capital employed and the number of manufacturing establishments in every branch of industry have been increased to correspond in some degree with the wants and capabilities of the rapidly-increasing population of the country. Our enormous debt, entailed upon us as one of the results of the war, is being paid at a rate not even approximated by any other nation, and all classes and conditions of the people are prosperous beyond any period in our history. I submit, then, in view of these facts, whether it is a time to give heed to the unceasing cry of revenue reformers for a reduction on such imported articles of foreign manufacture as come in direct competition with those of American production. If the time shall ever come when the capitalists of this country will loan money as cheaply, and the laboring men work for the same wages as those of Europe, then, and not till then, we may adopt a freetrade policy.

not.

A SUPPOSITION.

Suppose the domain lying south of the Po tomac river belonged to a separate and independent Government-a supposition which at one period in our history many feared would be an accomplished fact; and suppose on either side of that river there stands a manufacturing establishment, whether of wool, cotton, iron, leather, or anything else, it matters They are of the same capacity, each requiring the same amount of capital and labor to turn out an equal amount of goods, but the proprietor of the establishment on the north side is obliged to pay double the rate of interest on capital, double the wages of labor employed, and double the amount of taxes paid by his competitor on the south side. Now, if the latter be allowed to cross the river with his goods free of duty, or with a duty at such rates as would fall largely below the difference in the rates of interest, labor, and taxes referred to, and to put them upon the market in competition with those of his rival on the north side, does any one fail to see that the latter would be compelled to close his establishment, dismiss his laborers, and probably go into bankruptcy? Now, if we substitute the Atlantic ocean for the Potomac river, I think the case is illustrated.

Any argument against protection to American productions is, in my judgment, equally an argument against American labor, manu factures, and agriculture; also against the development of the resources of this grand

country, the payment of the public debt, and against American independence. Protection is enabling us to pay our national debt at a rate satisfactory to the people and creditable to the Government, and under the healthy influence of existing laws the material resources of national wealth are being developed at a rate and to an extent hitherto unknown. Laborers, manufacturers, and producers everywhere are asking to be let alone, while importers, traders, and gentlemen of leisure, who are mere consumers, who produce nothing, and add nothing to aggregated wealth, but are mere traffickers in the products of other men's labor, are clamoring for low duties that they may continue to fatten and grow rich at the expense and degradation of honest toil.

The strength and glory of a nation, as well as the intelligence and prosperity of its people, depends very largely upon the diversification of its productions. While we have the natural capacity for agricultural productions in quantity and variety to an unlimited extent, our manufacturing resources are equally unlimited. These two industries have been very properly termed twin sisters; an injury to one is equally an injury to the other, and from their joint productions the trade and commerce of the world is carried on.

PROTECTION TO FARMERS.

Free-trade economists are unceasing in their declarations of sympathy for the farmer, declaring that he is oppressed and robbed by tariff laws for the benefit of manufacturing monopolists; that he is taxed on his iron and steel, his hardware and cutlery, his cotton and woolen goods, and on everything that he uses, forgetting to tell him that as an offset he is protected on everything he produces, and that all this protection inures to the benefit of the labor of the country and to the United States Treasury. There is not a single production of the field, the orchard, or the dairy that does not share this protection, in proof of which I an nex the following table compiled from the report of the chief of the Bureau of Statistics for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1871, exhibiting a few of the leading agricultural productions imported into this country during that year, together with their value and the duty thereon: Duty.

Animals, living, of all kinds....

[blocks in formation]

Value.

$5,287,669 12 $1,165,533 83 1,091.374 87 193,720 50 376,395 37 6,872.741 36 13,431,781 27

[blocks in formation]

1,128.395 81

Potatoes

225,972 48

[blocks in formation]

Wheat

Wool, raw of all kinds. Flax, and tow of flax... Jute-butts, jute, and

[blocks in formation]

563,536 38 245,753 79 157.805 28 45.143 75 3,632.484 78 290,982 90 100,902 91 911,823 73 9.906.031 03 763,818 00 1,165,404 00 3,584,862 00 2,756.186 03 721,518 00 53,119 00 1,196,779 44 114,535 74 70,802,398 69 1.449,198 50 .$132,854,540 03

Total.........................

-100.530 07 3,428,097 72 1,343,178 14

240,612 77 107,985 00 724,420 40

169,006 41

43,664 80 31,561 06

10,138 76 721,479 80

72,702 20 10,553 48 167,055 36 4,515,103 72 65,468 59 92,926 33

510,527 33 2,281,653 79 87,214 28 17.071 50

592,170 63 80.508 27 32,585,120 16 1.262,197 62

$50,620,202 52

Thus we have the fact established by figures from an undoubted source that the leading agricultural productions represented in the fore going table, amounting to nearly one hundred and thirty-three million dollars, are protected by an aggregate duty of nearly fifty-one million dollars, or an average duty of about thirty-eight per cent., in which the great graingrowing, stock, and wool-producing States of

the West and Northwest fully participate; and yet the delegations from those States, with few exceptions, are opposed to protection. Wipe out or even reduce the tariff on grain, stock, and wool, and no class would suffer more than western farmers. Canada, with her cheap labor and unbounded pasturage, could drive them from the markets.

The States of Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Minnesota, produced in 1870 one hundred and twenty million bushels of wheat, or over one half the entire crop of the United States, on which they enjoyed the benefit of a duty of twenty cents per bushel, amounting to $24,000,000 protection, and yet they received per bushel but little over one half the price received by the New England States. The same is true as to price of other cereals; and the reason is obviously because in the West probably nine tenths of the labor is employed in agriculture, while in New England it is divided between agriculture and manufactures. Our importations the last fiscal year exceeded $518,000,000, on which we collected duties amounting to largely over $200,000,000. Now there can be no doubt but that a critical examination would show that from thirty to thirty-three per cent. at least of these importations was made up of articles strictly agricultural from which full average duties were collected. And, so far from being robbed, as has been alleged, the farmer fully and equally participates with other producers in the benefits of protection.

Let the West diversify her productions by a more judicious division of labor; let furnaces, forges. cotton and woolen mills, and other manufacturing establishments be spread over the Mississippi valley as they are over the New England States, and the difference in the value of farm productions in the two localities will soon disappear. Every laborer transferred from the field to the factory, together with each member of his family, still remain the annual consumers of an equal number of barrels of flour, with pork, beef, and other agricultural productions in proportion, thus relieving the farmer of a competitor, giving him a new customer, and saving the cost of sending just so much to a distant market.

Free-trade economists, with untiring zeal, argue that any rate or per cent. of duty charged upon imported articles adds precisely the same rate or per cent. to the value of all similar domestic productions, and they usually take pig iron for a basis, and argue thus: if the duty on pig iron be seven dollars per ton, then it follows that every ton manufactured in the United States is just seven dollars higher to the consumer than it would be without the duty; and the same argument is used in regard to every other description of iron, as well as leather, cotton, and woolen goods, and all the minor productions of American manufactures.

It seems entirely pertinent as well as interesting to the producing classes to inquire whether without protection we could at the present prices of labor ever manufacture a single ton of iron, a side of leather, or a yard of cotton or woolen cloth, or anything else, and whether a failure on our part to manufacture would not place us at the mercy of foreign manufacturers, and compel us to pay prices far higher than they now are; whether our condition as a dependent nation would not be pitiable in time of peace and helpless in time of war; and whether, if we should still strive to pay our national debt, the whole burden and weight would not fall upon agriculture?

No nation in the world, however rich and productive in soil and genial in climate, which has failed to diversify her labor and combine manufactures with her agriculture, has ever reached the rank of even second class among the nations of the earth; and notwithstanding all that nature has done for this country, if the day shall ever come when the Government shall fail to protect and defend alike the farmer, manufacturer, and laborer, through whose in

dustry and energy alone the resources of this grand country can be developed, then and from that day will the current of poverty, deg radation, and dependence set in, and a new system of slavery be inaugurated by which the labor of our hands and the products of our soil will contribute to the wealth of the nations of Europe instead of our own.

AN ABSURDITY.

If it be true, as alleged by free-trade disciples, that the duty on imported articles of manufacture adds just so much to the price of similar articles of domestic manufacture, which, as they say, goes into the pockets of manufac turing monopolies, then it must be equally true that the duty on imported articles of agriculture adds just so much to the price of similar articles of domestic production, which must, according to their own showing, go into the pockets of agricultural monopolies; in which case, it strikes me, the farmers will have the best of it, and I as a farmer certainly have a right to examine and report upon this question. We produced last year in round numbers two hundred and forty million bushels of wheat, protected by a duty of twenty cents per bushel, making $48,000,000; also eleven hundred million bushels of corn, protected by a duty of ten cents per bushel, making $110,000,000; also two hundred and fifty million bushels of oats, protected by a duty of ten cents per bushel, making $25,000,000. Thus we have on these three articles alone an aggregate duty of $183,000,000, which, according to the showing of free-traders, is a tax upon the consumer of $4 75 per capita for the benefit of farmers. Now, if we add rye, barley, buckwheat, potatoes, butter, cheese, beef, pork, bacon, live animals, wool, and all other agricultural productions which are protected, and then ascertain the aggregate duties thereon, we shail have an immense sum amounting to hundreds of millions, and proving conclusively that the farmer has quite as much protection as the manufacturer.

Experience has fully demonstrated the fact that the only way to cheapen the productions of either the farm or the factory is to protect and stimulate both, by which our own producers will compete not only with each other, but also with Europe, for the American mar ket. It has become a common expression that the industries of the country are always in danger when Congress is in session, and it is to be regretted that our unsettled and vacillating course affords ground for the remark. Gentlemen are always to be found in this House who, if not clamoring for free trade, are advocating such reductions of duties as tend to cripple and paralyze the industrial enterprise of the country.

A tariff that will do justice to all classes and all interests by distributing the burdens of taxation equally, and yet discriminating in favor of American productions, is in my judgment what is desired by the people; and the question arises, have we such a tariff now? My answer is in the affirmative and emphatic, in proof of which I need only refer to the unparalleled prosperity of the country during the last decade; and especially since the close of the war; agricultural productions have steadily increased, while mining and manufacturing operations have in many instances more than doubled, and our progress in the arts and sciences, and in the development of the material resources of the country during the last five years, are without a parallel in the history of the world, all of which must in fairness be attributed very largely to the benefi cent workings of the tariff, and regarded as the healthy results of protection to home industry.

COMMITTEE'S BILL.

Mr. Chairman, the House and the country have been anxiously awaiting the result of the long and seemingly arduous labors of the Com. mittee of Ways and Means on the question of a reduction of taxes, it being well understood

[ocr errors]

that leading members of both Houses favored a reduction in gross of about $50,000,000. A majority of that committee have reported the result of their labors in the shape of a bill entitled "A bill to reduce duties on imports and to reduce internal taxes, and for other purposes. This bill proposes to reduce import duties in round numbers $19,000,000, and internal taxes to the extent of $13,000,000, or a gross reduction of $32,000,000 instead of 550,000,000, which the Treasury can very well bear, and which would greatly relieve the country.

Now, it is to be regretted that the committee manifestly desired to retain tea and coffee as articles from which a large revenue was still to be collected in contravention of the wishes of a large majority of this House, as expressed by their votes on two separate occasions. But since the discussion on this bill commenced, and when it had progressed but two days, Congress, in deference to the expressed wishes of the people, has by an overwhelming majority of both Houses enacted that from and after the 1st day of July next tea and coffee shall be imported into this country free of duty, thus relieving millions of our best citizens, though poor, of a tax upon articles once regarded as luxuries, but now conceded to be of prime necessity, second only to meat and bread.

Hence the discussion of the bill must continue with its most objectionable feature, that of taxing tea and coffee, removed from the contest, and now, having reduced taxes by this act about seventeen million dollars, let us go for ward in the good work until we shall have taken off $33,000,000 more, which in my judgment, after enlarging the free list to the extent of a few millions, should be taken from internal duties, and the question of reducing taxes, I think, may be regarded as settled for this session at least.

The majority of the committee introducing this bill have seen proper to strike at woolgrowers and wool and iron manufacturers by reducing duties on each of these productions full twenty per cent., which if carried into law must result in great injury to labor and in many instances ruin to proprietors, as well as to retard, if not completely check, any further enlargement of these industries for long years to come. The committee have also laid their hands heavily upon the manufacturers of leather and cotton goods, and upon lumber. men, farmers, and stock-growers, and upon many other industries, in all of which labor forms the basis and is the principal element.

The internal list, the most odious of all taxes, is touched lightly by the committee, less than $13,000,000 covering the entire reduction, while they propose by this bill to take over $14,000,000 from such imported articles as come in direct competition with American products, thus virtually transferring that sum from the pockets of our own people to the coffers of European monopolies.

But some gentlemen of the committee, actuated doubtless by their favorite theory of revenue reform, express their disapprobation of this meager reduction, as they term it, and aver that it should be at least double. Mr. Chairman, if such views are to be incorporated into our domestic policy, the progress and development of our material resources in coming years will compare most unfavorably with the past. The fact that our national wealth has increased from $16,000,000,000 in 1860 to $32,000,000,000 in 1870, exceeds our highest expectation, and staggers the faith of the most sanguine. Why should Congress interfere with the growth and development of our domestic industries by reducing the very moderate protection now afforded to their products, while we are collecting, and, without a modification of our internal revenue laws, will continue to collect directly from the earnings of the people $130,000,000 annually? The act making tea and coffee free will be heartily approved by the people, and

[ocr errors]

a large reduction from the internal list will doubtless be equally approved.

IRON IMPORTATIONS.

Our importations of iron and steel manufactures during the past fiscal year amounted in gold value, with duty added, to $62,000,000. Under the provisions of this bill the duty is reduced full twenty per cent., which will doubtless increase importations another year, with duty added, to at least $75,000,000, to the great injury of our own manufacturers and laborers, and to the financial ruin of many proprietors. The same is true of woolen fabrics, of which we imported last year in gold value, with duty added, $72,000,000, and now, if the duty shall be reduced over twenty per cent., as is proposed, there is good reason to believe that our importations of these fabrics next year will approximate $100,000,000, to be paid for in gold or in products at gold value. If increased importations of European manufactures are desirable, it cannot be doubted that this bill, if it receives the sanction of Congress, will fully accomplish that object

Perhaps the country was never in greater suspense or more nervous on the tariff question than it is at this very hour. No merchant or manufacturer, no man engaged in any of the industrial enterprises of the country, can rest while bills are pending in Congress, the passage of which would prostrate his business and perhaps sink his entire capital. Hence the necessity for a steady and enlightened policy, with as little vibration as possible, adapted to the encouragement of arts and manufactures, making a more judicious division of labor, giving confidence to capital, stability to manufactures, and fair wages to labor.

OBJECTS OF A TARIFF.

I believe it is conceded that the objects of a tariff in this country are threefold: first to raise revenue for the support of the Government by indirect rather than by direct taxation; second, to so levy the duties as to protect our own people in their industrial productions, and enable them to compete with foreigners in the American markets; and third, to encourage the development of our own material resources to the end that we may be self-reliant in time of peace, and independent of the outside world in time of war.

It is a fact admitted by confederates themselves that during the war of 1861 their inability to manufacture was one among the chief causes of their failure, and it has been alleged, and is believed by many, that if they had possessed the manufacturing facilities of the little State of Massachusetts alone, the rebellion would have been a success.

The most reliable statistics show that our wool production last year reached about one hundred and sixty million pounds, while we imported about fifty-two million pounds, or nearly one third as much as the domestic production.

Instead of fostering this industry until it could be made to yield an amount which would at least approximate home consump tion, this bill proposes to cut down protection to American wool growers by reducing the duty on foreign clothing wools over twenty per cent. from present rates. This may be well for non-producers, but will be remem bered by farmers; and I trust gentlemen on this floor representing farming constituencies will see to it that this great wrong shall not be perpetrated.

WOOLEN FABRICS.

From the most reliable information that can be obtained in the absence of the census report, the value of the finished productions which our woolen manufactories turned out last year can hardly be estimated at less than $175,000,000. After deducting the value of the raw material, probably not less than $80,000,000, near $15,000,000 of which was paid for foreign wools, and the remaining $65,000,000 to domestic wool growers, we still have $95,000,000 as the result of combined capital and labor in

this single industry; yet from the importations of last year we find that the country needed and used $72,000,000 worth of these goods over and above the capacity of our mills to supply, thus showing our dependence upon Europe for this immense amount of these fabrics.

The increased productions of this industry within the last ten years, and especially since the tariff of 1867, have been most gratifying, and furnish ground to hope that within a few years, under favorable legislation, we shall be able to furnish an amount of woolen fabrics at least commensurate with the wants of our rapidly growing population. But by the terms of the bill a large percentage of the protection afforded to this branch of manufactures under the present tariff is taken off, and if the bill should pass we may give up all hope of any enlargement of this industry until we can have more favorable legislation.

IRON INDUSTRY.

Another leading industry of the country whose development will be retarded and whose production will be reduced under the provisions of this bill is iron, one of the indispensable elements in the progress of civilization and power and in the development of the arts and sciences. The consumption of iron is rapidly increasing, and the demand was probably never so great as at the present time; and it has been estimated that the consumption of 1872 would exceed that of any former year by at least ten per cent., or probably greater than the world is able to supply, and so far from reducing production by adverse legislation every reasonable incentive should be afforded for the growth and development of this leading American industry.

The duty of nine dollars per ton on pig iron increased the production from 931,582 tons in 1865 to 1,950,000 tons in 1869, and the effect of competition under this protection was to constantly reduce the price in the American market. But the reduction of two dollars per ton in 1870, aside from its direct bearing upon production, created apprehension in the minds of proprietors that this was merely the inauguration of a policy designed gradually to reduce the dimensions of the iron industry, and the effect was to retard the erection of new furnaces, to cause some to be blown out, and many to curtail their operations, which has resulted in a decrease of one hundred thousand tons in the annual production and an increase of from ten to fifteen dollars per ton in price, and the same is true of other descriptions of iron.

No man can doubt that if our annual production of iron and steel were withheld from the markets of the world, prices would be much higher everywhere, nor can he doubt that a reduction of duties will curtail operations, keep down competition, and enhance prices to consumers. Protection is the only sure and potent way to arouse an effective rivalry in digging the coal and ore from the mines, and setting the furnace fires ablaze all over the land. An increased amount of raw iron will always increase the amount of the finished article, which must result in low prices to the

consumer.

Pig iron lies at the base of every iron and steel manufacture, from a needle to an anchor, just as wool and cotton form the bases of the infinite varieties of articles into which these fibers are manufactured. We need no protection on raw cotton, for the simple reason that our facilities for producing it enable us to bid defiance to the world, just as Eugland is able to defy the world to compete with her in the production of iron. The farmer in Ohio can no more produce wool without protection than the furnace-man can produce pig iron. Their interests in this regard are mutual. The one can no more compete with the poorly paid labor of Australia and south Africa than the other can compete with the pauper labor of England and Belgium.

PIG IRON.

Why is that whenever pig iron is mentioned in this Hall certain gentlemen become excited and begin at once to look around for weapons of attack? Is it because the manufacture of this article is more hazardous and involves more labor than most other crude productions, and as a consequence more proprietors in proportion to the number engaged fail in this than in almost any other enterprise, or is it because a reduced domestic production of pig iron would produce a corresponding reduction in all other grades and open a wider door for the importation and use of English iron, to which some gentlemen seem very partial if we are to judge from their untiring efforts to reduce the duty on the raw material to three dollars per ton?

In the absence of positive data it is difficult to ascertain the precise value of pig iron manufactured last year, but it is certain the value ranges between $60,000,000 and $75,000,000, and that about eighty thousand laborers are employed in its production. Still we are using annually about four hundred thousand tons more than we produce, having imported near that amount of pig and scrap last year, and having reduced the duty $2 on pig less than two years ago I submit whether it is wise while production is so far below consumption to subject the article to a still further reduction of $1 per ton, as this bill proposes, the effect of which will be to widen the margin between production and consumption.

No other domestic manufacture involves so large a per cent. of actual labor as pig iron, and probably none in which so many trades and arts are represented and directly benefited. It has been estimated that more than eighty per cent. of the value of a ton of pig iron is actual labor, and gentlemen who profess to be deeply concerned in the interests of laboring men make an adverse record when they vote to reduce the duty on this article. The gentleman from Missouri, [Mr. FINKELNBURG,] a member of the Committee of Ways and Means and a supporter of this bill, in his remarks the other day stated that the value of labor represented in pig iron was only fifteen to twenty per cent. of its cost. I have too high a regard for the integrity of that gentleman to suppose he would intentionally misrepresent the facts, but this grossly erroneous statement is calculated to mislead and ought not to go uncontradicted.

Now, if the gentleman referred only to the labor incident to the manufacture of pig iron after all the material is prepared and laid down at the furnace, he may not have been greatly in error, but he did not so qualify his remarks. Now, I hold myself responsible for saying that in my district, where about one hundred and thirty thousand tons of pig iron are annually produced, the bulk of which is made with charcoal, the actual value of the different kinds of labor which enter into its cost is over eighty per cent., and I have no doubt about the same is true in other localities.

It has been several times stated in this debate that the value of the iron productions of the United States last year was $195,000,000. This is an error. Any one who will examine the table upon which this estimate is based will find that the value of pig iron is first set down, then the value of the different grades of finished iron and steel made from the pig, thus twice including the value of the latter. In order to be correct, we must deduct from the value of the finished iron the value of the pig, say $70,000,000, which will leave $125,000,000 as the legitimate production, or a little over double the value of importations.

It is argued that manufacturers can well afford to submit to a reduction of duties, on the ground that they are now relieved of internal taxes, but it must be remembered that when they were paying these taxes gold was at a very high premium, which added a corresponding per cent. to the then existing duties, and that by

||

the decrease of the premium on gold they have suffered a reduction of protection to more than double the amount of the tax referred to. But it is said the appreciation of the value of paper is precisely in proportion to the depreciation of the premium on gold. That is true, but the benefit inures to those who furnish the raw material and perform the labor, and not to the manufacturer, except so far as his net profits are concerned.

Mr. RITCHIE addressed the committee in remarks which will be published in the Appendix.

Mr. DUKE. Mr. Chairman, in the fourth paragraph of the fourteenth section of the majority bill will be found the following pro

vision:

But nothing in this section shall be construed to exempt from a special tax any farmer or planter who shall, by peddling or otherwise, sell leaf tobacco at retail directly to consumers, or who shall sell or assign, consign, transfer, or dispose of to persons other than those who have paid a special tax as leaf dealers or manufacturers of tobacco, snuff, or cigars, or to persons purchasing leaf tobacco for export. And it shall be the duty of every farmer or planter producing and selling leaf tobacco, on demand of any internal revenue officer, or other authorized agent of the Treasury Department, to furnish said officer or agent a true and correct statement, verified by oath or affirmation, of all his sales of leaf tobacco, the number of hogsheads, cases, or pounds, with the name and residence in each instance of the person to whom sold, and the place to which it is shipped. And any such farmer or planter who shall willfully refuse to furnish such information, or who shall knowingly make false statements as to any of the facts aforesaid, shall be liable to a penalty not exceeding $500.

And substantially the same provision will be found in the bill of the minority.

Mr. DICKEY. As I see several members of the Committee of Ways and Means here, I ask why was that provision inserted?

Mr. BURCHARD. If the gentleman appeals to me, I will ask which bill he refers to? Mr. DICKEY. Either.

Mr. BURCHARD. The bill presented by the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. KELLEY] has the provision to which the gentleman refers.

Mr. DICKEY. The same provision is in both bills.

Mr. DUKE. Both are the same in that respect.

Mr. BURCHARD. That matter, if I may be allowed to state it, was referred to a subcommittee, of which the gentleman who reported the bill was a member, and that subcommittee reported those provisions.

Mr. DICKEY. I wish to ask why the man who raises tobacco must, no matter how ignorant he may be, or whether he raises it on shares or otherwise, be compelled to keep a book account, any more than the man who raises corn or wheat?

Mr. BURCHARD. Those members of the committee who gave their attention to that portion of the subject reported that on a conference with the Department it was thought desirable to lay these restrictions upon the sale by individuals, in order if sales should be made of manufactured tobacco

Mr. DICKEY. Then I understand that the man who raises tobacco must be subjected to an imposition to which no other man is subjected?

Mr. DUKE. I remarked before, and I think what has just been said by the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. BURCHARD] bears me out in the statement, that no member of that committee could have been familiar with the raising of tobacco. I am not here to blame the committee or cast any imputation upon them. I merely say that they were not familiar with the subject.

I desire briefly to call the attention of the House to this most remarkable provision. And in the first place, I merely premise that such a provision could not have been inserted in the bill if any member of the Committee of Ways and Means had represented a tobacco-growing district. It so happens (by accident, no doubt) that the tobacco interest, that interest which

pays the second largest internal tax, is wholly unrepresented upon that committee, whose special duty it is to impose all taxes. Tobacco pays about one fourth of the entire internal revenue, and yet not a solitary member of that committee comes from a district in which tobacco is cultivated to any extent as a staple crop. I do not mean to intimate that this was done by design, but, nevertheless, it is unfortunate that no member of this committee comes from a district which would be especially affected by this large tax. I have not brought this matter to the attention of the House in any captious spirit, or with a view of casting any censure upon the appointing power or upon those appointed, but simply to account for what would otherwise appear an act of great injustice to those who grow tobacco as a staple

[blocks in formation]

I

Now, what are these provisions of this portion of the paragraph? They are simply these: that a planter or farmer who chooses to make tobacco shall only be allowed to sell that tobacco in a particular way, and if he dares to sell the production of his own labor, the crop which he or his hands have produced from his land, he shall be subject to heavy pains and penalties. The farmer who raises hay, corn, wheat, oats, or any other farm product or product of the orchard, or who raises stock, shall be permitted to sell in any way he thinks proper. I can raise corn or wheat and sell it to my neighbor by the bushel, barrel, or hundred barrels; I can send it to Washington city or to Richmond, and sell it in such quantities as may see fit; I can ship my fruit crop to New York, and sell by the box or crate or fifty crates. But the poor freedman, who rents a small piece of my land and raises a few hundred pounds of fine tobacco, cannot, when he goes into the village to buy a small amount of groceries, take his tobacco with him and retail it out to those who actually need it for their own use unless he pays a special tax for so doing. He cannot sell his little crop unless he sells upon the premises or to those who buy tobacco for manufacturing purposes or for export. I can take my grain or fruit or stock to the neighboring town and sell it to whom I please and in such quantities as I think best; I can get the money for it, or I can get goods for it; but the freedman who rents a portion of my land cannot sell his little crop of tobacco in this way; he cannot sell it to consumers, unless they will come upon his premises to buy, and even then he cannot sell to an amount exceeding $100. All producers of agricultural commodities are left free to dispose of their products in such manner as they deem proper, save and except one; that one, the tobacco-grower, is fenced about and hedged in by such restrictions and limitations as will tend to diminish the produc tion of tobacco by planters who make small crops. Is it fair, is it just, thus to impose upon one class of producers burdens which are imposed upon no other? We have heard much of class legislation; could there be a more odious or oppressive instance of class legisla tion than this?

Again, you require the cultivator of tobacco to keep an account of all tobacco sold by him, and he is compelled "on demand of any internal revenue officer, or other authorized agent of the Treasury, to furnish said officer

or

agent a true and correct statement, verified by oath or affirmation, of all his sales of leaf tobacco, the number of he heads, cases, or pounds, with the name and residence, in each instance, of the person to whom sold and the place to which shipped."

« SebelumnyaLanjutkan »