The Price of Print: A 1878 Tariff Battle
A century and a half ago, Snohomish printers were already navigating the tension between protecting home industry and the rising costs of doing business.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
The San Francisco Weekly Bulletin thus calls attention to the increased tariff on printers' materials: The new tariff bill fixes the duty on news and hook type at 15 cents per pound, which is from 40 to 60 per cent ad valorem. The duty on job and fancy type is 30 cents per pound, which is from 40 to 100 per cent ad valorem. The annual duties collected under the present rates did not exceed $20,000. Under the rates now proposed, the duties would probably be prohibitory, a result which could only be desirable to the proprietors of the dozen type foundries in the United States. There are 20,000 printing offices in this country, which employ not less than 120,000 men, against the 700 employed in the dozen foundries. There is some competition at present on the part of the Scotch type founders, who pay duties on their imports and claim to sell a better article at the same price as American type is sold. The type foundries in this country have been doing well under the old tariff. It is quite evident that they do not need any additional protection. A tariff which cuts off revenue is not desirable. The present tariff puts about $20,000 a year in the public treasury from the sale of foreign type. This competition is far more desirable than a prohibitory tariff. The latter, while it would cut off revenue, would have the effect to increase further the price of type in this country, because all foreign competition would be shut out. The 20,000 printing offices in the United States have considerable interest in this question. No doubt the type foundries would gain an important point by a prohibitory tariff. But would this private gain be of real benefit to the country? The above is an excellent illustration of some of the evils incident to all systems of special protection by government. The small interests struggling for existence that are in danger of being killed by home and foreign competition are without means, and wholly unable to use money so as to secure congressional aid or assistance in the shape of favorable legislation, while the well-established, wealthy institutions have means so they can and do employ the best talent in Congress to secure, under the name of protection, special legislation to crush out their less fortunate rivals.
“The small interests struggling for existence... are without means, and wholly unable to use money so as to secure congressional aid... while the well-established, wealthy institutions have means.”
Today's headlines about global supply chains and protective tariffs for domestic industries are not a new phenomenon. In 1878, small-town editors in Snohomish were already grappling with how federal protectionist policies favored large monopolies over the 'small interests' of rural printers.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.