The Protective system
{"newspaper_name": "The North-Carolina standard.", "edition": "01", "page": "p1", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 5668, "word_count": 974, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9311000108718872], "ccnet_perplexity": [1229.300048828125], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
The Protective System


Considered IN connection aciA PRESENT TARIFF,


tn of ttoeIUe essays, originally published IN the


WashingtOn Union oyer the signature of' B,nadeE-


c,n,d' (Writte,a by the Hon. Edmund Bsrke.)


No 4.-THe present tariff considered-H IS a


protectiUc tariff IN all its feGtures.-D~ties Gd


rGLorem, minimum, and specifc.- Those terms


eIpLGined-InjuStsce and oppression Pr0ct.eed


Wnder The minimum and specific duLies.-ILus-


trGtions By facts.


In nv last communication [ attempted to ex-
plain the principles which mark and Distinguish
tariff for revenue from one for protection, dehn-
ing what deemed Terenue and what PT0tec-
tire tariff.


In this number I propose to consider the funda-
mental principles and the peculiar characteristics
of the existing tariff, which is the only surviving
monument of the nglorious and disastrous reign
of whiggery in 1S42-except a National Debt Of
Sl7,OO0OO0.


In the first place, is in all its leading features
protective tariff: Dcducting a conclusion from
its most important provisions, it was enacted main
Iy for the express purpose of bcne6tting and en-
rching the manufacturing capitalists of the coun-
try at the expense of all other classes of our ct-
zens. 1t is MANUFACTURERS Ia
RIFF-devised by the manufacturers, voted for
in Congress by manufacturers, and designed to
benefit manufacturing capital and other capital at
the expense of consumption and labor. II dis
eliminates in favor of the manufacturer, against
the producer of the raw material, who is the far
mer. 1t also discriminates In favor of the rich
consumer against the poor consumer. Its whole
tendency is build up and fortify capital in this
country thus establishing the bascst, most sordld,
most grovelling of all aristoeracies-a n'oneyed
GristocY0cy-at the expense of the impoVerIsh-
ment and degradation of the masses of the people.
This is its character and this is its tendency, as
careful and thorough analysis of all its provisions
will most clearly prove. II is my purpose, now,
to go into this analysis and to demonstrate the pro-
positions have laid down. .t.s


Admitting, duty free, articles imported for the
benefit of the United States, philosophical appaEa-
tus for schools and colleges, certain articles used
by the manufacturers in their business tea and
coffee, Improperly exempted from duty, IN conse-
quence of the in udclous appeals, perhaps OF par
tsans of both parties 10 the pre- udces of the peo-
ple,) gold and silver, and few minor articles it
imposes on all other articles rates of duty reduced
to ad valorenl, ranging from about per cent to
over 300 per cent, as appears from actual lmPor-
tatons since its passage.


The duties which it imposes are Of three de-
scrptions viz: ad valorem, minimum, and spe-
cifc. In order to enable those not conversant
with the precise meaning of these terms, it is ne
cessary that [ should go into brief explanation
of them, illustrating, by the way, the justice OF
the first and the injustice and enormily of the two
last.


l. The all vaIorem duty. The term " ad vaIo-
rem is Latin term, which means IN proportion
to tie vaLue. Thus, when commodity is charg-
ed with duty of 80 per cent. ad valorem, the I'M
porter has to paw al the custom-house $50 for eve
ry hundred of its value If the duty is 20 per
cent, he pays $50 for every 800; and, it 40
per cent $40 for every S100~in value OF the arll-
Gle imported Thus it is evident that this descrip-
ton of duty is just and an honest duty. If the
articles are of cheap description, they are of less
value, and, of course pay less duty. If they are
valuable and costly, they pay higher duty IN
proportion. Each person who purchases the ar
ticlcs imported, whether cheap or dear, pays du'
tY only in proportion 10 its value. To illustrate
more clearly: Suppose that silks were charged
with duty of 80 per cent. ad valeren, and that
two pieces were imported-one valued at SO cents
per yard, the other at 81. Under this description
of duty, the person who purchased yard of the
cheap silk would have to pay only Is cents duty
while the person who bought the dear silk would
have to pay 80 ccnts-just double the amount
because the value is double; but both articles
paying only duty of 80 per cent. ad valorem.
Thus an Gd 0GLOrem duty, whatever may be the
rate, falls equally and impGrtinILy upon oil con
suners-tEe high and the LO1o, the rich and He
poor 1t is the only kind of duty which an hon
est, republican people should ever submit to Oh
tolerate. -..r..-s. ......... .


2. The minimum duty. l MS, IN the ianSuagt
of the trainers of the tariff of I842 is also called
an ad vaIorem duty; but, while pretending te
that character, 1t is mere SendGciO~s, traUdU
lent, aud cheating Legislature deOiee to collect
duty, in some Instances four OF flee times hsghs1
than 1t processes TO collect 1t is also Latlr
word, which means the smallest quantity possible
In the present tariff it applies only to cotton fab
rics and yarns. There are three minimuml
which apply to fabrics, all or part of which art
cotton, VIZ the 20cents, 3Ocents, and 35-cenh
minimums; and two which apply to cotton yarns
viz: the 6O-cents aud 75-cents minimums.


The following is the mode in which these
minimum duties are levied To explain the
method, will take, for instance, coarse cotton shirt
ings which cost 8. cents per yard in England
The present tariff processes TO levy on all cottor
manufactures, coarse as we'll as fine, imported
into this country, only duty of 80 per cent. ac
valorem-that is, $50 for every s10o of value i'm
ported. If however, that were the actual duty
levied on manufactures of cotton, the cloth abov'