Wyandot County Republican. [volume] (Upper Sandusky, Ohio) 1869-1903, 1870-06-17

arouse old political controversies
but in fact it is so framed as to pro-
duce the largest revenue upon the
smallest importations. The average
rate of duty levied extends to nearly
all articles imported in to this coun-
try. 1t would be still more protect
i've if the duties on raw products
were repealed.
The true distinction between a
protective tariff and revenue tariff
is, that a protective tariff consists
Of high duties on articles of foreign
production that come into compe-
tition with domestic productions, land
low duties on all other articles. A
purely reyenus tariff consists Of high
dn ties on articles of foreign growth
that we cannot produce, and low
duties on articles that we produce.
This would encourage importations
and swell revenues. The present
tariff levies high duties on nearly all
the productions of foreign Govern
ments, both raw and manufactured
productions both such as we cannot
produce and such as we can produce
1t is, therefore the best revenue tar
if we have ever had, yielding the
largest revenue on the same impor.
tations. Its protective features are
very much modified by the duties on
raw materials and on the tropical
food which enters into the cost of
domestic labor. The general effect
Of the present tariff has been largely
beneficial to our industry, and a
flowing stream to the Treasury land
therefore l am not anxious for its
reduction, until we have largely re-
duced our internal taxation. When
the tariff is reduced it will be a
struggle of opposing interests. 1t
should be done with great delibera-
ton. When done, it should be up
on some general principle of fnan-
cial policy, such as guided Sir Rob
ert Peel in,1S42, and by the applica
ton of general rules not to be de-
parted from by the demand ofinso
Lated interests.
If the purpose is to reduce reven-
ue duties, this can easily be done by
enlarging the free list, or reducing
the duties on tropical fruit If it is
to reduce the protective duties on
metal and textile fabrics, it should
be by fixed percentage. The mere
reduction Of small amount of
either classes of duties will not give
the country that relief that will be
given by an equal amount of reduct-
lion of internal taxes. l make these
general observation without any
desire to prejudge revision of the
tariff when the subject is presented
by the House of Representatives,
but only that I may present to you
the great relief that our surplus rev
enue enables US to give our people
by the repeal of internal taxes. In
deed, / hope that the tariff bill no W
pending in the House of Represen-
tatives, may pass at this session in
the form deemed best by the House
and then that it may be subject to
the scrutiny of the people, so that
at the next session the Senate NAV
propose such amendments as full
and patient investigation may show
to be necessary. 1t is manifest that
at this period of the session such ar
investigation is impossible; and thai
if q greater reduction of revenue
than / will propose is deemed prud
ent, it should be done by enlarging
the free list, or by reducing the duty
on few products, such as sugar
coffee and tea.
CAN THE SENATE ORIGINATE THIS
The question then recurs, wha
internal taxes ought to be repealed
How can we within the limits of ou
surplus give most relief to our con
stituents And here the COMMITTEES
on Finance were met with a difiicul
ty growing out of the necessity, il
our opinion, of continuing the in
come tax in modified form.
! We are restrained by t1e consti
tutlonal provision which declare
that the House of Representative
alone can ''originate bills for raisin,
revenue" The question occurred
whether or not a committee of tn
Senate ought to undertake to intro
duce a bill reducing revenue. It i
the general sense of the Senate tha
we have a right to originate a bil
reducing revenue. We introduc
appropriation bills every day. 1t i
the established law and practice tha
the Senate has the right to original
appropriation bills, funding bills
loan bills, and all other forms c
financial legislation except a tax bi
"raising revenue"
1 can show precedents withou
number on this point. The question
whether or not the Senate ca
originate abill which reduces reyer
ue,has never been made, because th
, occasion has never arisen. | hay
no doubt of the power of the Senat
> to do it, but while we are THROWN
{ off revenue, we propose to rene1
y and continue some portion OF th
/, income tax, which by existing Law
f expires with this year. The con
/ mittee has some doubt whether
e was wise for them to present an
bill reducing taxes, as we wished t
make no controversy or Questio
with the House land the only reaso
why 1t was done was because,in til
r then condition of affairs, thel
t seemed to be probability of s
7 great delay in the reduction I