Centre Democrat. [volume] (Bellefonte, Pa.) 1848-1989, 1882-09-07
Democrats and the Tariff.

Tree trade party. This they do in view
OF the approaching election and in the
hope of deccving workingmen whom
they have frequently deceived with the
same false cry before.
Hon. Sumuel j. Randall is reasonably
good Democratic authority. In the
House, on May 9Th last he said
81 favor, therefore, AS speedily as pos
sible total abolition of our internal
revenue system, and | am ready To Join
hands with any and all in this House in
favor of an equalization Of our duties on
imports. No one who understan nds the
existing tariff laws will deny the justice
and necessity OF revision. The present
duties were for the most part levied dur.
ing war and for the purpose of raising a
large revenue. IL will suffice in this
connection TO quote the Industrial
! League as unausweaTable in this regard.
as it is An admission on the part of those
who iaAor the highest protective duties
"They consider such revision deslra.
| ble for the interests Of both for the in.
| du,trcs affected and those of consumers
| partly on account OF some original i'm.
| perIections In the present tariff, and
/ partly on account OF the notifications
which demanded by the changes which
/ have occurred in conditions of produc
| ton and commerce.
There should be, however, no vi.
cious assault on these laws. Changes
should have a firm foundation in rea.
| son, and especially should we avoid
mere experimental aud purely speech.
! letlve efforts on this vital subject. Our
| excess OF revenue now approaches IN
amount the annual receipts from inter.
nal or excise taxes. IT proper economy
| be exercised in expenditures they can
be made to be within the limits Of our
/ ordinary resources of taxation, enabling
u, without jar or friction torepeal inter.
nal tax laws, which are Inqulsltorial and
/ offensive in the highest degree. These
| taxes reach vcXa,iOu-ly every citizen in
! his business, in his household, and IN
the affairs Of every day life until they
| have become almost uncomfortable. There
! is no longer an excuse, in my opinion,
l for their con jinu9nCc.'
We repeat. Samuel !. Randall is rca.
/ sonahly good Democratic authority. DO
/ they favor free trade?
The candidate for Vice President on
/ the Tildcn ticket Is reasonably good
| Democratic authority. 81 are Scuator-
/ Beck Of Kentucky, Blyarl Of Delaware,
/ Coke Of Texas and Williams of Ken.
| tucky. Let "a. see what their uttcraucgs
/ have been.
Mr. Hendricks says: a horizontal
/ tariff is impossible
/ Mr.. Beck says: Nobody asks or cx.
| poets this Congress to establish free
] Il 4
In adjusting taxation on imports
with view only 10 obtain revenue or
/ for revenue only we never thought
/ Of discrimination against American in.
! dus,rics, or o: depryinE them OF the in
/ cIdeu,nl benefits or protection a proper
revenue tariff would afford
/ Mr. Eayard says; The power TO tax
I by laying duties upon imports may be
/ 40 exercised a. 10 do what il has done
/ ever since the foundation OF the govern.
\ meut, and that is TO give Al advantage
! equivalent TO the amount OF the tax 10
I the American producer or manufacture,
and this becomes his protection.
/ Mr.. Williams says: Nobody is for
I free trade just now
Mr. Coke SAYS. "As an inevitable
consequence domestic manufacturers
and producers Of the articles upon
which such revenue impost duties are
laid to that extent protected against
/ foreign competition
/ Mr.. Carlisle Of Kentucky, in substance
/ reiierates these sentiments. So they all
/ say, with rare exception.
jefferson was for discriminating du.
! ties, j." Jackson for "iudicious tariff,
and Slas Wright for incidental protec.
/ ton
Let us hear further froil Mr.. Randall.
| In his jth May speech he said
"ln my judgment this question Of
I free trade will not arise practically in
\ his country during our lives, if ever 50
/ long as we continue to raise revenue hy
\ duties on imports. and therefore the dis
| cussion OF that principle is an absolute
waste Of time. After our public debt Is
paid in full our expenditures can hardly
| be much below 5000 100000, and if this
| is levied in an intelligent and business.
| like manner II will afford adequate pro.
/ lection so every industrial interest in
\ the United States. The assertion that
the Constitution permits the levying OF
/ duties i'm favor Of protection for the sake
] bl IIOAftllpl ~ f'lAhtll hHtHtAtd tbI
and unnecessary. Both are alike delu.
sorry and not involved IN any practical
administrative policy. II brought to
! the test believe neither would stand
for a day. Protection for the sake of
protection is prohibition pure and sim
pie OF importation, and il there be no
/ duties collected and consequently no
revenue, leaving the necessary expenses
Of the government to be collected by
direct taxes--for internal taxes would
interfere with the protective principle,
and when the people we're generally
asked to bear the burden of hsevy taxa.
lion to sustain class legislation and the
interests Of portion OF our people ut the
expense Of the great bulk ofour popula.
tion there would be an emphatic and
conclusive negative. So. too. with free
trade, there is hardly man in public
life who advocates it pure and simple.
Nobody wants direct taxation, although
| Il trot,fd hrfng taxatiou an near and sn