Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1882-11-14
TIE DEMOCRATS AND THE TARIFF.

our dispatches the substance of an inter.
view with Congressman Randall on the
same subject. Mr.. Randall is an exponent
of Democratic Protectionism, but he pos.
sesses grea. influence in his party, and if he
is elected Speaker of the House, his views
will no doubt be reflected largely in the
composition of the committees, as also in
the party policy. He is of course com.
PEELED to recognize the demand for reduced
taxation, and he goes the length of admit.
ting that protective tariff with Protec.
tion as its main object, is not justified.
He thinks, however, that by maintaining
the tariff and calling it revenue tariff
with incidental protection, all difficulties
may be got over. His true bias appears in
his approval of the entire abolition of the
internal Revenue taxes; measure
which would render any useful moiifca.
ton of the tariff impracticable, since it
would throw the whole burden of the
revenue upon that system. This is the
fayorite Protectionist device at present,
and it must be concluded that Mr.. Ran.
dali, and such Democratic Congressman as
think with him, will advocate it in the
next Congress.
The Protectionists think that they can
solve the problem in this way without
disturbing the tariff. So long as the In
telnal Revenue taxes remain it will be
open to the tariff reformers to urge radical
revision of the tariff. But with reduc.
ton of $4,000 600 year in the revenue
caused by abolishing the Internal Revenue
taxes, they think tariff revision must be
abandoned. Mr.. Randall is frank enough
to admit that though he is sure the country
would not tolerate direct taxation, yet
that method would unquestionably compel
Congress to be economical, and would be
the shortest and most effective way to
reduce taxation. The assumption that the
country would not tolerate direct taxation
may or may not be justified. No doubt
there is prejudice against that form of
taxation; but if the American people can
be made to understand that indirect taxa.
ton through tariff involves the payment
of two or three times the amount which
direct taxes would demand, it seems posi-
BILE that they might change their opinion on
this matter. Mr.. Randall's ideas are of
| course not representative OF the Free Trade
Democratic element, and that is the
element which the country would be glad
to hear from just now. We have known
all along that the Protectionists would not
allow the tariff to be modified if they
could prevent it, but what nobody knows
yet is the programme the Free Trade Dem.
ocrats are prepared to adopt.
We believe the World is right in saying
that the country will certainly come
round to the side of right and reason in
this matter, and that is the side of Free
Trade. The Protectionists as usual try to
throw all sorts of difficulties in the way,
as, for instance, by pretending that the
tariff is necessary to the production of rev.
enue, that it would be unfair to tax native
productions and to admit foreign ones free,
and SO forth. But no intelligent Free
Trader has ever proposed any unfair scheme,
and all these objections are irrelevant or
puerile. What Free Traders demand is not
sudden and complete abolition of the
tariff, but careful and gradual reduction
OF 1t, beginning with those provisions
which are most inequitable and injurious,
doing away as rapidly as possible with the
Protective" features of it, and remodel
ling the fiscal system upon an enlightened
and scientific basis. The bulk of the Iu.
ternal Revenue taxes, that is to say the
taxes on whisky and tobacco, would be re-
tanned under such system. There is no
reason why these taxes should ever be re.
moved. They are placed upon luxuries,
and taxes upon Injuries are always the
least burdensome and most productive.
But the aim of reformers would be to free
from taxation the necessaries of life as
fully as possible, and above all so to ar.
range the fiscal system that all should bear
an equal proportion of the burdens of tax.
alton, and that no class should be sup.
ported at the cost CT any other class.
This is what an ever-growing element of
the American people demands, and the
question is whether the Democratic party is
prepared to avail itself of its great oppor-
tunity, or whether, as the World suggests,
it will confine itself "to a fruitless and
frivolous opposition" In considering
the probabilities it must be acknowledged
that the Democratic party has hitherto
exhibited neither sense nor courage in
this relation. On the contrary, it has
been go fearful of not initiating its oppo-
nents, that on more than one occasion of
late years it has striven to make itself out
as much in favor of Protection as the Re.
publicans. Moreover, the national De.
mocracy is at least as corrupt and decreDit
as its adversary. 1t has long ceased to
possess any strong men or able statesmen
IL is completely in the hands of Bosses"
It has for many years manifested no ca
pacity to rise above the sordid greed of
spoils. 1t has become confirmed Trim.
mer. Nobody can say what its prin-
ciples are. 1t would be great mistake
to suppose that its late successes indicate
any popular confidence in Democratic gov
ernmental ability. They only demonstrate
that the Republican party has exhausted
the patience of the people.
Under the circumstances, therefore, we
cannot anticipate any exhibition of wis
dom or courage on the part of the Demo.
cratic Congress. The Democratic lead ers
will probably be chiefly DESTROYS to avoid
all pronounced acts. Their first object
will be to make such arrangements as Will
maintain the present political situation
until 1884. There is no ground for sup.
posing that they understand public opin-
ion. Certainly they have never given any
proof of such comprehension. OF course
they may do better than they have done,
but it will be time enough to give them