Washington sentinel. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1853-1855, 1854-02-21

|
ton? Ii varies in different governments. In
some it is to depress the masses, and secure
the permanent domination of the few.
In our country we 90 upon different idea,
IN theory at least We consider the governs
ment as merely trustee for the benefit OF the
people, and taxation as only means to execute
the objects OF the trust We regard taxation as
an evil in itself, but an evil TO be endured that
greater good NAV be accomplished--the car
| rying on of government. With this general
idea in view, the first principle OF taxation with
! US should be to take as little as possible from
the people directly or indirectly. ] apprehend
| no one will dissent from this principle. The
| second principle is equally clear, that the bur
dens of taxation should bear upon all classes
and sections with as much equality as possible !;
third that there should be as little interference
as possible with the industry Of the country !;
fourth, that the mode of taxation should be
constitutional.
Noextended argument is necessary to estab-
lish these principles. For what wisdom is there
in wringing from the people their hard earnings
beyond the wants of the government? 1t is ut
terly indetensible for while it impoverishes the
people, it corrupts the government. Besides,
what right have we to more Of the peoples
money than is necessary for the purposes OF
government? None whatever. All beyond
that point is injustice, extortion, robbery. Ii,
therefore, by any means, by direction or indi-
rection, government depriyes the people Of
more money than is necessary. for its wants, It
violates the trusts reposed in it. Again, what
principle can be more consonant with the great
ideas ofjustice upon which repubGcanism rests,
than equality OF taxation TO all classes and sec
tons? 1t was III support of this great princi-
pie OF equality III taxation, violated only in q
preamble, that our ancestors drew the sword in
the revolution, and mingled their blood with
the dust OF Lexington, and Kings Mountain,
and Bunker Hill, and Camden, and other glo-
rious battlehelds. This is emphatically the
great American principle, sanctitied by the
struggles Of our ancestors, and vindicated on
the most memorable pages of our history.
Where is the man who would now abnegate it
Further: what is more reasonable than that
government should interfere as little as posi-
bic with the industry OF the country? What
more sagacious prompter Of industry than self
interest? Whatmore superlative folly than for
government to attempt TO give direction to
individual enterprise ? Besides, what greater
injustice than to interfere with labor, the most
valuable right of the greatest number? That
the mode OF taxation should be constitutional,
in government Of limited powers, is selfevi-
dent.
Such tariff as is consistent with these prin-
ciples | favor. | say a tariff, because, though
a system OF direct taxation might be more per-
feet in theory, yet there are so many difficulties
in the way at this time, that do not urge it.
| Before undertake to state the practical re-
suits deducible from the principles have indi-
| Gated, will endeavor to show what system of
taxation is inconsistent with them. That sys-
tenn which so arranges the duties on imports
as to cherish one form of industry at the ex.
pense OF all other FORMS which We know as the
protective policy, is inconsistent with them.
This policy does not take as little money as
possible from the people; for, in addition to the
amount paid government, it transfers to the
manufacturers large amount in the enhanced
price OF commodities. As an illustration Of the
operation OF this system, take the duties on
iron. Assuming the quantity OF iron consumed
in the United States to be one million of tons per
annum, which is rather under than over the
mark, at an average cost of $50 per ton, that
being the cost of railroad and bar iron import
ed in 1882 we find that the whole value OF the
importations Of iron, by the treasury returns OF
1852, was Sl9,957,993, say Sl9,000,000. De-
Quoting that value from the total value of the
consumption, $30000,000, leaves value OF
Sll,OOO,O00 to be furnished by the home manu-
features, which, being enhanced in price to the
extentof the duty, shows that we pay S3,3O0,000
as an indirect tax to the iron manufacturers of
the country.
An examination of the effect Of our high
protective duties on other manufactured arti.
cles would show similar results, for the same
principle runs through them all. The indirect
tax imposed on the country by this system
cannot be less than from $50, 100000 to $40,-
100000 per annum-a sufficient amount to
carry on the government, if economically ad-
ministered And for what is this great viola
ton of principle? To enable the manufactur-
ers to continue business naturally unproGta-
BILE. The protective policy violates the great
principle OF equality. While it processes to
benefit one class. it does so at the expense of
all other classes. Agriculture and commerce
are the great interests of our country, and they
are natural allies to each other; for while it is
the great idea of agriculture to sell where it
can sell dearest, and buy where it can buy
cheapest, commerce spreads its sails for this
exact purpose. and exacts from this necessity.
| Agriculture naturally desires an external vent
| for its surplus commodities. This vent is com
merce. But the protective policy interieres to
| check this vent by discouraging importations;
anu 10 GNleHi llttt We EdHllOt lEOlu
! eigners they cannot buy from us. Thus agri-
culture and commerce are discouraged.
This protective policy is manifestly unequal
to classes, but its inequality to sections is still
more obvious. The manufacturing interests
are in a great degree confined to the northern
section Of the Union, 1t benefits portion of
that section at the expense ofNll other sections.
To illustrate this, We will suppose the southern
planter wishes to exchange his cotton for cotton
cloth, or wooen, or iron. Under the opera
ton of protective tariff he must exchange his
cotton for less quantity of those articles. If
he burs the foreign commodity, he must pay
government at least one-fourth of its value
for the privilege of bringing it within the coun-
try. To escape this tax he must buy the home
made commodity at price enhanced to the
extent of the duty on the foreign article. Five
sis;as Of our cotton crop is exported to Europe
to be exchanged for their products but, as we
cannot import those products without paying
duty Of twenty-five or thirty per cent, our abil-
ity to receive these products in exchange is
diminished and, as their means of buying
from us depends on our means of buying
from them, they cannot afford TO pay ns the
A. , IL.