{"newspaper_name": "The daily union.", "edition": "01", "page": "p1", "byline": ""}
{"character_count": 3648, "word_count": 625, "ccnet_language_score": [0.8913000226020813], "ccnet_perplexity": [906.2000122070312], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
the valuation. IL you take the foreign invoice as
nxing the price, then you subject to be deiraud-
ca oy false invoices; because the lower the price,
the lower the duty and the shipper is by this means
directly interested in making his prices appear as
low as possible. II you adopt home valuation,
then, SIR, will the value Of commodty the same
IN every particular have different prices in different
Ports-dePendns on the judgment of appraisers,
OF partial 10 the system, as circumstances
and loeallues may be calculated 70 superinduce. A
few years since | was told that canes shipped TO
Philadelphia paid certain duty, ad valorem of
course, but the same article the port Of New York
was admitted as wood. Nothing Of this can OCCUR
where the duties are specific. The same article
must bear the same burden in every port and not
be dependant on either the varying Judgment of
| or euslom-house oaths. Sir, as a system, no ex.
perienee will justify the adoption Of ad valorems
Throughout, and reason must always condemn it,
wan not delay TO recur TO the many other objections
TO this system. | ~, r.


should like to know, MIR. Chairman, whether
this is war measure peace measure. If a war
measure, let me ask If IL IL not litle novel TO
ehange your whole revenue system in a time OF
war, for an untried experiment. If you want To
rsise an extraordinary revenue, apply TO something
that viii produce an increase; tax something that
is now free. Why change the whole SYSTEM But,
sir, Il Is admitted that this bill will not in all proba-
bihty, produce within one or two millions as much
revenue as the present law; and with tea and coffee
out, have no hesitation in declaring that believe





iarthest. Our present system produces from the
customs about SGT ,000, 900 This last sum will not
DC sufficient for present exgencies. More is want
eds and, TO procure the addition, a new bill is in
uodueed which will not produce an amount equal
TO the law rehnquished! This puts me in mind OF
the old question" in arithmetic, which proposed
something like this: If a frog in well jumped up
the wall one foot each day, and back two at night,
how long would II be in getting oup II we attempt
to pay an increased demand with less means, how
long will we be getting out Of debt IL is not for
me TO answer this. But deny that any decrease
of duties generally increase the reyenue-generully
say. What was the effect under our tariff laws
for twenty-five years past Let US see:


1921 gross revenue under act Of 1876 sl6 $50 399
1924 gross under act Of 1916, 25,632, l55
1923, (under the tariff Of 1924, which


increased the dulies) ......,..,... 3O,Os7 ,267
| 1881, under the tariff Of 1923, the high


est of all the tariffs ............... a6,s7s, 500
1888, under the tariff Of 1892 which re-


duced the tariff Of 1928 ........... 2l,5ss, ,4s2
| 1884, under the compromise act, still


reducing the tariff Of 1882. ........ Is,ls5,sO5
1887, under the compromise act, duty


lesssning every year .............. 1861, ,l27


lessening every year .............. ls,I5l,5
1889, under the compromise act, duty


lessening every year .......:...... 24,52l, ,4l6
lS4O, under the compromise act, duty


lessening every year .............. I3,ss4,457
lt64l, under the compromise act, duty


Ie.sening every year Is,22l,OI
lo42, under the compromise act, duty


lessening every year .............. l5,Ss404
Net in ls42. ........... l2,7sOl73
1874, under the tariff Of 1872 increas.


ing duties. ...................... 2s,s5lO7s
| l645, under the tariff of l542, increas-
| ing dulles. Observation-Disclosures. 30, ,295
| Nouy this ahla sbouyo nlaarn and ;pcnnteata-