The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1882-11-03
REPUBLICAN CANT
Why Internal Revenue is not Re-
duced.

duced.
The burden of the whine of these
Democratic leaders is over the fact
that the present Republican Congress
at its first session did not reduce in.
ternal revenue taxation. Well. sup.
posing it didn't, what of it! Does
that indicate that it will not make
such reduction at its second session :
The point to look at is whether it
made any effort in that line-whether
it made any progress toward it; and
all the while these canting Democrat.
ic leaders growl at what they call
Republican disregard of the demand
of the people for reducing taxation. I"
They know that President Arthur in
his annual message to Congress. and
his Republican Secretary of the
Treasury, both recommended such
reduction; that u. bill to reduce in.
ternal revenue taxation to the amount
of 1882, $50 Immediately, and to
the amount of 50. 900 900 to take eff
feet May 1, lSsS-or 100000 In
all-came from the Republican com.
mittee on ways and means. and Was
passed by Republican House at that
session by vote of l27 yeas to 80
nays despite all the efforts Of the Demo
Gratis to defeat it. An analysis of this
vote shows that of the 1877 yeas only
% were Democrats, while l04 Repub.
licans voted for its passage while as
many as "a Democrats, only II Re-
publicans. and 5 of these parties voted
against. In other words this vote
shows that the House Democrats ,cere
hostile TO this internal rerenue reduction
IN the proportion Of three to one, while
the Republicans favored it by about
three to one!
Again, when this bill went to the
Republican Senate Republican com.
mittee reported it back to that body
SO amended as to make the total con-
templated internal revenue tax reduc-
ton about $40, 000, 900 instead of $23.-
100000. Why did not the Senate pass
this bill SD amendedi Simply because
of the determined opposition Of The Demo-
cratic Senator's, one of whom (Mr.
Becky declared i'm substance that he
and his Democratic colleagues would
fight it until next winter before they
would let it pass And they did fight
il up to the last days of the SESSION.
| The very last time Il Republican
Senator strove to get the bill up, Of
! the t,renty-sir Senator's tohO desired i'm
mediate cction Upon ii not one tcdS Il
Democrat! Yet they have the effront-
cry to complain that the Republicans
passed no internal revenue reduction
| bill at the last session of Congress
when, in spite of Democratic hOstil-
ity. they did pass bill of 1923 ,000,0 00
in the House, and would have passed
the bill, amended to $4,000 200,
through the Senate but for the most
obstinate Democratic obstruction and
prevention.
Upon what special plea can these
Democratic Congressman in either
House attempt to justify their con.
duct Some of them claim that they
are in favor of abolishing all the in.
ternal revenue taxes, and therefore
would not vote for any 'half-way
measure" 1t WAS whole hog or
none" with them. A pretty plea.
truly! And SO, because II Democratic
M Rority in both branches Of Congress
is not permitted to have its own ILL.,
considered way, therefore it would
prevent Il responsible Republican Ad.
ministration from securing, and a re.
sponsible Republican Congress from
maturing and passing, "a bill to relieve
the people of $40, 100000 annually OF
taxation. That is a kind of Demo
cratic logic that the people who wan,
to be relieved to the extent of $40,
! O00, 900 4 year will find it hard to un
derstand. Pursuing the inquiry, the
people will ask, "What has the Demo
cratic party ever done for us in the
way of taking off the burden of taxa
) tiOn which Democratic rebellion put
, upon us
What have the Democrats ever
done in the matter of reducing in
: ternal revenue taxation at any time
In the winter of lS78-'79 they coli
, trolled the House Mile the Republic
ans controlled the Senate, and be
tween the two they passed bill
which was signed by Republican
President, reducing internal revenue
taxation to the tremendous extent OF
S9,000,000! That was the act of March
|, 1879. But both branches of Con.
gress we're Democratic in lS79-'sl.
Why did the Democrats then fail to
pass any act reducing internal reve'
nue.! There was the chance if they
were 50 inclined Why did they not
embrace it! What insincerity and
hypocrisy is this, which pretends a
desire to sweep away all internal rev.
enue taxation, and yet not only has
never by itself accomplished anything
toward reduction, but has actually
prevented others from doing it, and
now has the brazen effrontery to find
fault with them for not doing it?
| What, on the other hand, has the
Republican party done in this matter
of internal revenue reduction! Let
its record answer. Under the act of
July Is, 1856, it reduced the annual
internal revenue taxation $65, 900, 900;
by that of March 2, 1867, it made
another annual reduction of SAC, 000,.
600; by that of February 3. 1858,
another of $23, 1000. 900; by those of
March 81 and July 20, 1868, another
of $45 100000; by that of July ID,
1870, another of S55,000,0 by al
lowing the income-tax to expire De-
cember 81, 1870, another of 5 l3, $780,
600 y; by the act of June 8, 1871, an
other of $40, 1851 900 making in all a
total annual reduction of internal rev.
enue taxes by Republicans alone of
$685.. $4,000, against the $9,000,0O0
reduced Ivy the act of March |, 1879,
for which the Democrats can claim
only Il part of whatever credit there
was for the passage of that insight
| ticant measure.
With such Il record in the past,
what can be expected of the canting
Democratic party if placed in power!
Nothing. But the record of the Re
publican party is record of things
done, not of things not done. There
is not doubt that the present Repub.
lican Congress will, at the next seS-
sion, do all that can be done against
Democratic opposition to pass the bill
now pending before the Senate, and
remove all the burden of internal rev
rnue taxation from the people that
can then he safely removed with a
due regard for all interests, and with
out running the risk of deficit in the
Treasury to meet the expenditures
for carrying on the government. And
the succeeding Congress will remove
still more if it sees its way TO do 80
without committing such Legislative
blunder us the Democratic leaders
Al 4