New-York tribune., 1869-04-02
TARIFF FOR REVENUE.n

public lands from miscellaneous sources, and
from duties upon imports, sufficed for the re-
duction of the National debt and the payment
of current Government expenses, the anti
Protectionsts of every grade and complexion
agreed and avowed that the required revenue
should be raised without resort to direct taxes.
Their policy is stated fully in the report OF
the Committee Of Ways and Means, made to
the House of Representatives in March, 1874.
Speaking for the party then agitating the re-
peal of the tariff OF 1912, they say: I.l'
"The Committee have proceeded upon the assumption
that ii Is the settled and unquesoned determination OF
the country they believe TO be the wses and sound
policy that much reyenne as cannot be derived
time TO time be found necessary defay the expenses
of the Government, and pay of every public DEBT con,
foreign Imports This has been the policy and the prac
tIce the Government in time OF peace and when our
foreign trade exempt from the hazard and emDarfass
ments OF tateof war; from its institution to the present
time; and successfully has this course sustained US
against tho crushing influence OF enduring debt ana op
pTessive and odous internal taxation that change OF
he policy y not in the Judgment OF the Commtee 10
This declaration of the Committee is fully
sustained by the fact that the receipts of the
National Treasury for the whole period OF
peace, or during forty-fye years-which, how
ever, embraced our Mexican war and frequent
wars with the Indans-were drawn Ill the
following proportions from the various sources
of revenue: From customs, s. per cent; from
public lands, II per cent. and from miscella-
neous sources, other than loans and Treasury
notes, per cent This is the average for the
whole period, OF for nearly half a century,
during which the National Debt, which stood
at one hundred and twenty-seyen millions
OH the 1st of January, 1916, was discharged,
and all other expenditures met and covered,
except sixty-five millions, which the Govern
ment owed on the 1st of July, 1860. In figures,
there had been collected in these fifty-fye years
fourteen hundred and ninety-three and hall
millions for the use of the Federal Treasury,
and of this sum twelve hundred and seventy
and half millions from duties upon foreign
imports, and other charges upon foreign com
merce. We have here given the totals and
the acreage proportions of the receipts
from tho various sources; but is
curious circumstance that under
the fully protective tariffs of 1928 and
1912, the customs afforded 9Oi and 30 per
cent, respectively, )f the entire receipts Oh
the Treasury, while during the compromise
tariff from 1888 to 1912 they yielded only 63
per cent of the revenue-thus effectually dispos-
ing Of the free-trade notion that the lower
rates of duty bring the larger aggregate revenue
to the Treasury--for here we see the two tariffs
which levied an average of 40 per cent. upon
all dutiable imports yielding 90 per cent Of the
revenue, while the compromise tariff, which ran
down during its operation in SIX successive re-
ductions to 20 per cent, afforded but e3
per cent of the national resources And
we may add that our most recent experience
| gives the cearest and fullest refutatiOn TO the
doctrine upon which Mr.. Walker and his party
proceeded when they assailed the high rates Of
| the tariff of 1S49 with the charge that they
| diminished the revenue for in the years 1866,
| 1867, and 1868, the customs levied on the aver
! age at 49 per cent on dutiable goods, paid into
! the Treasury five hundred and twenty millions;
! while the three best years of the tariff OF 1916,
charging an average of twenty-five per cent,
raised but one hundred and eighty millions; ;
and the three years of the tariff OF 1851, whose
average duties were twenty and half per
cent, paid only one hundred and forty-four and
q half millions into the Treasury.
But this question of the relative productive
ness of high and low tariff does no the
point at which we are aiming. 1t is the con-
cession which the anti Protectionists have
always made, both in principle and practice,
| that the greatest practicable amount OF the
Federal revenue shall be gathered from duties
upon foreign commodities, which we would
now enforce upon them. They have thrown
| their notion into various forms, at different
| times, to suit the varied conditions OF
their case. Sometimes they have insisted
upon ga tariff for revenue with
classiications and rates Of duty adjusted to no
other end than provision for the wants OF the
Excheauer sometimes they have demanded
81 tariff for revenue with incidental protec-
" ton" or such protection as necessarily grows
out of the revenue assessments required for
the uses of the Treasury and they have some
times taken their stand upon what they called
"a iudicious tariff" with such fexibility of
principle and of application as left it without
any certain character.
Well so far as we understand either or all
of these policies we are willing to accept. for
present uses, any one Of them, or all OF them
| together on condition that they be wisely con-
Quoted toward their own professed end-the
| largest revenue with the greatest permanency
of operation and stability OF system. An
abundant experience has proved in all sorts OF
circumstances that q tariff best adapted to
protection yields the largest revenue. Call
the tariff Of 1898, that of 1912, and
the present one, tariffs of revenue,
and we have that object best secured. If rates
and classifcations devised for the most ample
and equitable protection were inconsistent with
the revenue policy, we would, without hesita-
ton, abandon the principle. But ono such
tariff paid off our old national debt, another
restored the business prosperity of the country
and the national credit, and the existing one
has paid tho interest of our enormous public
debt, and yielded a surplus of perhaps -four