, 1872-11-07

Austeo W La6 Cauelou5, Moiloab; Nnanu1ersj
Pomeroys, Creswells, Robesons, and Murphys
Of the past, it will be q foredoomed failure.
REVENUE REFORM.
The nomination Of Mr.. Greeley, at Cincinnati,
necessarily checked, for time, all discussion
upon the branch Of Revenue Reform included in
the revision Of the tariff, and the reduction OF
duties to n revenue standard. Now that the
election is over, this question inevitably comes
up again. The necessity for tariff reform is
none the less imperative than it was year ago.
Many of the Revenue Reform leaders left Gin
cinnati, and became advocates OF the election OF
General Grant. Conspicuous among these WAS
the New York Ece'ing Post, the Nation, hir.
Edward Atkinson, David A. Wells, c. F. Adams,
Jr., Judges stallo, Hoadley, and Matthews, and
many Of the ablest men in Congress. During
the Presidential campaign, the Free Trade
League Of New York closed its doors, and, per-
haps tacitly, supported General Grant. These,
and probably others, will now renew their atten-
ton to one of the greatest Of all our public
abuses.
The revenue Of the Government for the year
ending June 80, 1872, was, in round numbers,
5404, 10000 The actual expenditures for the
Government were $3.50. 1000, and for interest
and the sinking fund on account OF the public
debt, 9110,000,000. The surplus revenue WIS,
therefore, in OF 9100, ,00o 600, The revenue
collected from customs WIS $21G, ,000, 600. The
t1+n For
1ected in any previous year. It will be seen,
therefore, that taxation for National purposes,
instead Of being diminished since the war, has
slightly increased, although the sources have
been somewhat changed. The Government has
by repeal reduced the number OF the objects Of
taxation but the taxation itself remains as high
as ever. The experience Of our Government
since 1866 is that OF all other Governments that
q reduction of the objects of taxation does not
diminish revenue; that taxation is withdrawal
Of certain sum from the means at each mans
disposal; and that to release tax upon given
object is to leave the amount of that tax in the
hands of the consumers to be expended in other
taxed commodities; the Government, therefore,
loses no revenue, and tho people at large have q
greater amount Of useful commodities. Since
1866, Congress has repealed taxes which, when
in force, yielded $3.50, ,00o 900 year; and yet the
actual revenue of the Government has increased
a repeal of taxes equnl to the surplus revenue
of the Government would not be followed by q
corresponding reduction Of revenue but would
leave to the public ali increased sum for their
own comfort.
The policy OF our Government has, however,
been to repeal those taxes which are levied for
revenue alono. Thus the tax on stamps and L.
censes, which WAS all paid direct into the Treas-
ury, have been repealed, while the tax on cotton
cloth, OF which the Government receives not
over 80 per cent, remains undisturbed. The one
all revenue; the other tax is 70 per cent pro-
lection. By reducing the tax on cotton cloth so
per cent, the consumption Of the article would
be increased, and the revenue from the tax
would not be diminished. The same result
would be obtained if the prohibitory duties Oh
wool and woollens were reduced to q revenue
standard It would reduce to consumers the
cost of all articles of wool1en manufacture per-
haps 40 per cent, and would yield to the Govern
ment as much revenue az is now received from
the same articles.
In all parts Of Europe there has been an ad-
vance in the price of iron and Steel caused by
the increased demand, and the comparative gear
city of coal and ore. This advance in the
price of foreign iron is equal, perhaps,
to so per cent; that is to say,
foreign iron costs so per cent more now
than it did g. year ago. There has been no fail
ure in this country in the supply of either ore or
coal; on the contrary, the mining companies
have adopted the policy Of reducing production
in order to increase the selling price of coal.
Under these circumstances the retention Of 8
duty of 81 per ton On pig iron, or any tax at all,
as measure Of protection, 1s one OF those e1-
treme outrages for which even Protection can
offer no apology. We are now producing iron
and steel at perhaps 80 per cent less cost that it
can be produced for in England, and yet We levy
a tax Of 81 per ton on such as We have to i'm
port to supply the deficiency. Such 4 tax
is preposterous, and should he swept away.
With corn selling at Is cents bushel, it is i'm
portant to the farmer to know why he is taxed
so to rs per cent on his plow and his clothing,
when only one-third Of the tax is paid into the
Treasury IS revenue. Let that part Of the tax
which does not go into the Treasury be repealed
for the relief Of those who have to pay it. In