OCR Text |
Show Does Consumer Pay If So, Why Are Foreigners So Eager To Break Down Our Tariff? When the administration through Its Secretary of Commerco proposed to enact nntl-dumplng legislation, It admitted tho falluro of tho Underwood Under-wood Tariff, if I-'reo Trado is a good thing, anti-dumping legislation Is unnecessary. un-necessary. The purposo of anti-dump-lug legislation is Protection. It Is tho Democratic Idea of Protection, but under another nnmo. As near as we can understand tho nntl-dumplng Idea, It is to prohibit foreign manufacturers from selling their products here at such n prlco that tlte domestic iranuiacturcrs can not compete with them. In other words it proposes to compel tho foreign for-eign mnnufi.cturcr to tnko moro for his products than ho Is willing to sell them for. This Is a good thing for tho foreign manufacturer hut highly poor for the American consumer. Resides, tho government gov-ernment gets nothing. Under tho Protective Pro-tective Tariff idea, tho foreign manufacturer manu-facturer has to add to his prlco tho dllYcrenco between tho cost of manufacture man-ufacture abroad and tho cost horc. This dlfferenco goes to tho govern ment, and helps pny running expenses. expens-es. Tho Democratic Idea Is to glvo tho foreign manufacturer tho difference In cost and tho domestic consumer 1b not nllowcd to buy any cheaper than ho docs under n Protective TarifT, whllo tho government gets nothing. It has been maintained many times by tho Democratic party that tho domestic do-mestic consumer pays tho Tariff and that if tho Tariff Is taken off, tho consumer saves by just so much. This wns exploded in tho few months of 1914 when tho Undorwood Tariff was In free operation, hut what can be snld of anti-dumping lcgUlntlun which proposes to hand tho dlfferenco to tho foreign manufacturer without any compensation to tho government? If tho consumer pays the Tariff, wiiy docs not tho nntl-dumplng- legislation legis-lation hit him Just as hard? Those who havo nn idea that the consumer pays tho Import tax known as tho Tariff Bhould have read the report re-port of tho recent trial In New York City printed In theso columns somo weeks ago. In brief It wns to tho effect that Hie Italian Fruit Importers Union nnd two Sicilian fruit growing societies raised $HO,000 to reduce, tho duty on lemons In tho Underwood law from $1.20 to 135 cents n box. Tho" im-portend im-portend raised $10.",000 and tho Sicilian Sici-lian societies $35,000. They did It by organizing tho Italian Ital-ian born voters or their descendants for Woodrow Wilson nnd when ho was elected with a Democratic congress, con-gress, tho goods wero delivered to them. If tho consumer pays tho tax why was It worth $35,000 to tho Sicilian, fruit growers to havo the tax reduced 85 cents per box? If tho consumer pays tho tax why did tho Importers ralso $105,000 to havo tho tax reduced? Tho Importers and the Sicilian fruit glowers aro not philanthropists and It Is safo to say that a largo proportion propor-tion of tho 85 cents per box which tho Underwood Tariff took nway from tho government got no further than tho pockets of those who paid for tho reduction. When tho Democratic pnrty hands out its usunl guff about tho moneyed Interests who dictnto Protcctlvo Tariffs, Tar-iffs, therd Is a court record in Now York which is sufficient evidence that $140,000 was paid to elect an administration admin-istration which would hand over to tho Importers and forelsn lemon growers grow-ers $1,600,000 on n reduction in tho slnglo itom of lemons. In a congressional Investigation nt Washington, It was brought out that certain importers and European manufacturers maintained a regular ofllco In Charlerol, Belgium for the purposo of rnlslng large sums to fight tho Payne-Aldrlch Tariff bill in U'09. Why should they euro if tho consumer con-sumer pays tho bill? lloston Com mcrclnl. |