Weekly national intelligencer. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1841-1869, 1857-03-28

eneayors of the chief of the finances enforce strict
accountability throughout his Department. expend
lures have ougrown every former precedent Con-
federacy, whether in in peace How, then, shall
they be reducedi answer, by curtailng the revenue,
and by that alone Even under the system of indirect
alton, which than any other dimnshes the respon
by of the Government to the people for extravaganza
the amount of the revenue is strong practical limit
upon expenditure Increase your to one hun
dred millions and my word for it. the expenditures viii
grow with it, but cut it down. and the people will not
permit their servants to create public debt in time Of
peace.
glad, therefore to see general concurrence in
the opinion that the be reduced In truth,
the increasing surplus threatens derange the operations
Of business, and alarms the commercial classes The
question before is how and to what extent shall this
reduction be made?
willing to take the standard the expenditures
of three years SINCE lavish as they were have shown
that the amount then 401S 249. will add
81 900 900 more, and make SIS 000 900 my limit Here
then. is the required Last year the customs
yielded $685. and the average for three years has
been $780, 424, 282. The revenue from public lands
last year 644 and the average for three years
was S9,62s 497. You do not therefore, need quite as
much $50 C00 900 from customs to make total reye
of fully S45,000,000. 1t follows that may and
should cut of at least S4 900 of taxes Imports
as to bring expenditures down to even decent
economy This would be reduction of forty per cent?
and if base the estimate upon last years revenue in
stead of the average of three years. the reduction ought
to be still larger But reduce the forty
for lower the tariff will stimulate Importation These
S24 00O0 600 which Government levies on the con-
of the imports to lavish the consumers OF tax
may then be spent in purchasing other imports The
articles of consumption viii be cheaper and the demand
for them extensve and in estimating the revenue
from the reduced tariff you must calculate upon the basis
of an increased importation.
next proceed to compare the several propositions be-
fore the committee with this estimate and cannot see
how its correctness be disputed.
First the gentleman from Indiana Mr.. MAoE) proposes
uniform duty Of fifteen per cent and though do not
think that the same duty be the true duty
for all articles yet this rate is low to do great
injustice any one and it will in my opinion, yield an
ample revenue Next, the gentleman from South Caro-
lima A1r BoToE proposes to reduce all the schedules
twenty per cent in the present tariff to that rate
This would be great relief to the industry of the coun
try and would yield enough, and perhaps even
too much. Next come the amendments of my colleague
from Virginia. (bIr. MILLsoN and Mr. FAULKNER. who
each propose rateabe reductions the present sched
ues. The former reduces the hundred per cent d
ties fifty the forty per cent to twenty-five, and the
thirty twenty The latter preserves the present sched
ues and makes general reduction of thirtythree and
one-thrd per cent on all.
OF these propositions prefer the most thorough and
radical for we need strong remedy in the present dam
gerous condition of the Treasury but willing to
take either.
come next to the amendment of the minority Of the
Committee of Ways and Means reported by esteemed
colleague Mr.. LETcHER.)
Mr.. WAKEMAE That has been Withdrawn.
Mr.. GARRETT. l understand not. 1t was introduced
last session in despair of any thing better Its reduc
lions are accompanied by other features which
cannot approve. know they to be regarded the
price be paid for the reductions, but submit that the
price too high for small concession. My colleague
and thoroughly agree in our views and principles on
this subject and never differ from him any financial
question without sincere pain and ddence; for know
his large experience his tried ability and his matured
judgment But sir, viii general reduction of twenty
per cent. the present schedules of duty accomplish
degree With the stimulus must give to importation
you cannot expect that twenty per reduction of
duty will diminish the than ten per cent,
about So, 000 900; and for my part doubt whe
Their it would bring below the $50 000 Co., the average
of the last three years Now ask is it worth while to
enter upon readjustment of the tariff for this petty
reduction? Especially is the gain sufficient to compen-
safe for the departures from the arrangement of duties
in 1896 The tariff of that year contains great prin
cipls which commended it to the country the ad
Uatorea principle specific duty taxes the poor
much upon his cheap clothes and plain subsistence
the rich upon his costly raiment and luxurious
living The tariff of 1916 wiped out that ubiquitous sys
tenn from the statute book as trust forever and SUBJ
suted the universal principle of taxing every article of
consumption according to its value and thus making
every contribute to the support of Government in
proportion to his ability Next, by general reduction
and eadusment of duties every where approached
nearer to a revenue standard Yet it still contained
many duties that highly protective and which could
be justified only transition to purer system
Now, sir, am willing, if | do better, to leave
the arrangement of articles in that tariff untouched for
the present and to make general reduction in sche-
dulles of fifth, fourth, third half as the House
may agree. But if any change is to be made, insist it
must be made in the direction of free trade will not
agree a rerograde step towards protection and here
is my objection to this minority amendment. 1t does
alter few of the schedules and every alteration is to-
wards protection. Sir, out of all wooen manufactures
selects blankets article of large Importance the
aborers of the Southern States and indeed of universal
consumption throughout the entire Union and while
the duty is reduced all other woolen goods blankets
are excepted and subjected to heavy tax as ever
Meantime sir, wool itself is brought down eight per
1t stood before at the rate with woollen
nufacures. Why change it now? If it be said that it
will lower the cost of production and thus cheaper the
manufactured goods, answer that the diminished cost
of production will only swell the profits Of the manufac-
turer and benefit the consumer unless it so dinin
shed wholly to exclude the foreign article for that
must always sell for enough to the foreign cost with
the duty added And the very fact of importation proves
that the home manufacturer sells at the price; and
to enable him to buy his wool cheaper is only to swell
his profits and not diminish his price The chief cost
in all manufactures is the labor the raw material
and while that much dearer here than abroad it
vain to talk of underselng the foreign goods with
the present heavy duties But if the home manufactu
could undorse the foreign woolens with the pro-
posed duty of wenyfour per added to their cost
what would be the effect? You would not only lose re-
by the largely diminished duty raw wool, but
give up still larger the Woollen goods then abb
soluely excluded And you must therefore, make your
taxes bear heavily cottons sugar, iron &c., in
order to let the woolen manufacturer buy his mate
rial cheap and sell his goods nearly twenty per
higher than they could be bought abroad.
Sir, repeat that protective concessions such these
not to mention the navigation premiums Of section third
of the amendment, much to pay for the incon-
siderable reduction which is here proposed predict
that if this amendment prevails it will next year be call
ed COMPROMISED and all know that in the legislative
jargon Of these days compromise means a law forced
the WI inf eted mar ties