The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1846-07-06
To THE EDITOR OF THE UNION.

To TIE EDITOR Oh IhE CNlON'
S,R; As the lntelligencer does not appear sgain
until Monday next and the "Union" is published
this evening, you will do me the kindness to insert
in the enclosed copy ola note TO the editors OF the
lntellIgencer
have the honor to be, very respectfully, your
obedient servant, -
Washington, 4th July, 1886
Mr. Tibbatts was not aware that we suspended
our publication on the 4th Juyl
WAsHISGroN CITY, 4th July, 1886.
GENTLEMEN In your editorial of this morning,
in relation to the tariff BILL which passed the House
of Representatives yesterday you state that "to
secure the votes Of the democracy Of the Empire
State, indispensable to the passage of the bnl,)
duty Of hVe,ity per cent upon the Ualtte HAS BEEN
upon the article of SALT, the most Indispensable
Of all the necessaries of life, without the daily
of which the poorest man in the country would be
unable TO keep body and soul together" and THAT
this duty probably would not have passed the
House, could the bill have been
passed without"
The proceedings of the House upon the bill pub
lished in the same paper show that the rscOnsidsra-
ton of the vote placing the article Of salt in the free
list which in effect operated to range it in those ar
ces bearing duty of 20 per cent, upon my
motion, though had previously throughout the
proceedings the bill, advocated and insisted on
its being made entirely free of duty.
You are, IN my opinion, correct IN supposng
that this duty on salt would probably not have
passed the House, could the bill have passed with
out. was convinced al the time made the motion
that the bill could not pass without, and therefore
made the motion for reconsideration. still believe
that was correct in that opinion, and that by con-
sentng to this duty of 20 per cent. upon salt, the
passage Of the bill was secured.
Your editorial is in my opinion calculated greatly
to mslead public opinion upon this subject and for
that reason, from your usual very candid course,
have no doubt Internationally, and through forget
fulness Of this very important fact, that by the eris
ing tariff IF 1872 the tar duty sail, which you
Justly say "is the most indispensable Of all the
cessaries of life, and which in my opinion ought to
be free Of duty, is eight cents per bushel,
hundred and hCenty per cent upon its value So that
the passage of the BILL instead Of burdenng salt icih
tar Of tioeniy per cent, which your readers who
may be unacquanted with the subject would in
fer from your editorial actually rtteres that
Try Of life from burdsnsoms iaraton Of more than one
hundred per cent upon lis palus; reducing the tax
from about 100 10 20 per cent, from cents TO
about cent and mills per bushel.
With knowledge that this would be the actual
result in the belief that by conserving the duty
of 20 per cent the passage Of the bill would be
cured-a bill which, in my opinion, in effect, by
diminishing the duties TO very great extent upon
the necessaries, and throwing a larger and more
Just proportion upon the Injuries Of life, removed
the burdens Of taxation from the shoulders of the
laoorIng classes, ana placed them upon those more
able to bear them; which relieved the laboring and
particularly the agricultural classes from the oppres
sive burdens and unjust determinations produced
by the operation Of the minimum, and misappllca-
ton OF the specific duties Of the act Of l942 which
not only relieved the West and the South from an
oppressive system of taxation for sectional advan-
tages, but placed their agricultural productions (par
ticularly the great staple of wool upon which the
duty has been increased from to 80 per cent? upon
more equal footing of competition with the rival
foreign articles, which in every way, in my opin-
ion, would operate more fairy and justly upon all
the various interests of the whole country than the
act of lS42-beleving that great a measure,
which think will be productive of much good
should not fail for small matter not being will
ling to lose all because | could not get all that
wanted, | carried out the principles of concession
and compromise which had avowed in debate, and
moved the reconsideration. Wishing to be distinct
Iy understood by the public on this subject, and
believing it will afford pleasure to you to correct
any Misrepresentation to which the public mind
might be led by the article alluded to, would re-
quest Of you the kindness to give give this note
a place in your valuable paper
have the honor to be, very respectfully, your
most obedent servant,
JOHN w. TIBBATTS.