Washington sentinel., 1855-03-08
REDUCTION OF THE TARIFF.


Many important measures were enacted
during the late session of Congress- 1t was
emphatically working session, but yet there
was one thing demanded by the public interest
which was, we regret to say, left undone. We
allude 10 the revision and reduction Of the
tariff so as to make the present operation Of
our revenue laws more in accordance with
those free trade principles which prevailed IN
their formation.
Our readers are aware that we did not sane
tion the plan of reduction proposed by the
Secretary of the Treasury. That plan would,
in our opinion, have reduced the income Of the
government by protective determinations,
whilst we ought to equalize taxation By avoid
ing protective determinations in making pro-
vision to meet the public expenditures. The
Committee Of Ways and Means did not sane
tion the views Of the Secretary Of the Trea-
sury, and this fact may have had some infu-
ence in preventing all action on the subject of
the revenue. However this may be, it is much
better that the tariff should remain as it is,
than that it should be altered after the manner
proposed by the Treasury Department.
The Chairman of the Committee of Ways
and Means drew up plan of reduction, which
was attached as an amendment by the House
of Representatives to the Civil and Diplomatic
Appropriation bill. This amendment was de-
feated in the Senate; and its opponents in that
body seemed to sustain themselves principally
by urging the improperly Of diminishing the
income of the Government just at this time,
when the Public Treasury is subjected to ex-
traordinary demands, and by insisting that it
was bad policy to make new Revenue Laws in
the form Of amendments to Appropriation bills.
1t is needless to discuss this latter point now
but we freely confess our general opposition 10
the practice of uniting incohgruous objects in
the same bill by the process of amendment, or
by any other process whatever. Indeed, We
apprehend much evil from efforts to make ne.
cessary, proper, and wholesome measures carry
along by their strength improper, unnecessary,
and unwholesome legislation. But whilst We
do not mean to advocate the reduction which
was proposed, We do not see clearly the impro-
priety or incongruity of attaching an amend
ment to raise revenue to bill making appro
priations Of public money, more especially when
the amendment to raise revenue emanates
from the committee which reports the appro-
priation bill. The two subjects are not incon,
gruous. They are intimately connected, for
every expenditure should be made with due
regard to the ways and means necessary 10
meet il.
We attach but little force to the other idea
that it would be improper to diminish the in
come of the government just at this time, as a
reason against reducing the tariff. We believe
that most Of the present duties are higher than
the revenue principle justifes and that con-
siderable reduction could be made and great
relief be afforded to the industrial interests OF
the country without diminishing the income Of
the government. Indeed, the Secretary of the
Treasury says, in his last annual report, that
he did not recommend reduction Of the duties
on the thirty per cent. schedule to t,centy PEI
cent under the apprehension that a reduction
would increase importations to an extent that
would make the income f'the government too
great. Now, when it is remembered thai the
thirty per cent. schedule is that under which
the great bulk Of the public revenue is collected
it is plain that considerable reductions in the
tariff can be made without diminishing the
Treasury receipts. Our own conviction is, that
most important reductions could be made which
would equalize taxation aud diminish the bur
ihens Of the government and at the same time
increase the Treasury receipts.
But it should be borne in mind that large
receipts will, Of necessity, occasion large expen-
ditures, and consequently that the only method
Of avoiding extravagant expenditure is by lin
iting the Treasury receipts to what may be ne.
eessary for an economical administration Of the
Government. Whilst thereis an extraordinary
surplus in the Treasury, there will always be
extraordinary demands on the Treasury. We
think, therefore, that the tariff should not be
reduced, because OF those extraordinary de-
mands is untenable; because reduction could
be made without diminishing the public reve.
nue, If il be desirable to retain the present in
come; and, secondly, because such an income
is calculated to breed extravagant appropria-
lions. In submitting these remarks, we do
not wish to be understood as doing more than
to express our regret that proposition to re.
duce the present tariff, founded on correct
principles, was not successfully made during
the recent session. The character Of the par.
ticular proposition which was submitted, and
which failed, may not be right; but we reserve
any discussion on that point for future day.
We say, however, most emphatically, that the
tariff ought to he reduced, whether the revenue
be reduced or no, and that freetrade princi-
pies must be consulted in making the reduction
whenever il is made.
The present tariff was framed on free trade
principles; but many causes have conspired
10 make its present operation different from its