The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1883-11-30
Mr.. BLAlNE'S PLAN.
THE TROUBLESOME "suRPLus." AND
HOW TO GET RID OF lT.
MIR. Blaine Suggests That 10 be Col
lecicd by the Federal Government
and Given TO the States Some
Interesting Figures.
ArGrs1A, Me-, November %, 1885.


Augusta. Me-, November %, 1855.
charles Emory Smith, Esq, Editor Press:
Nv Dear sir.--I have your note inquir-
ing il should be willing TO give. In the
more authentic form OF letter over my
own signature. certain views which / eX-
pressed in conversation several weeks since
touching an important financial question.
understand YOU TO refer 10 some Obscrva-
lions made 10 one OF your assistant edi-
tors in regard 10 the proposition OF the
Republican State Convention OF Pepnsyl-
yania for the distribution OF the surplus
revenue az the national Treasury among
the states. | understand you 10 refer still
more particularly TO n suggestion Of my
own as Il substitute for the Pennsylvania
proposition, 10 which thought | saw fatal
objections. I have no reason for with"
holding my views. and admit the wisdom
of your suggestion that | would better
state them myself than 10 have them posi-
bly, miSStatcd by others.
The proposition OF the Pennsylvania Re-
publican Convention i TO distribute
"among the States any surplus IN the ma
tiona, Treasury that may arise from q re-
dundart revenue" The first objection
which see 10 ;hiS proposition is the utter
iiNAi tsAiiAN ~ it'f ntttNhtAA WI ANNhhattht
revenue" II may bc one million or it may
lie one hundred millions. The amount.
depending - It does on so many cOntin-
gencics, cannot be determined in advance
with even approximate eNactness and the
States could not therefore depend upon n
steady resource. Unless steady it would
not bring relief. because il would not en-
able the states 20 dispense with any part Of
their own systems OF taxation. An occa-
siona gift from the national Treasury
would not nc valuable. That was proved
by the distribution Of the revenue under
the act Of 1886 IN the presidency OF Gene
raj Jackson. IL did no good. 1t was frit-
tered away IN all the states. Here in
Maine they made an absolute per capita
distribution OF il among the entire pOpu-
latiOn-a uiiling sum to each. That OF
course threw contempt upon the whole
measure.
There i a second objection to the Penn
syNania proposition which in my iudg-
ment is still more serious. ii you simply
resolve 10 distribute the redundant ma
tional revenue" among the States, you
impose on senators and representatives. a
divided interest which would he en-
barrassing and huTtful. For the benefit Of
their Specially OF those States that
might be IN pressing need Of mOney-sena-
tors and representatives would desire the
REDUNDANT revenue TO be as large as
possible. This would present a constant
temptation TO withhold appropriations from
objects Of a really national character. 1t
would be unfair 20 senators and representa-
tiyes TO lay upon them and before them OBJ
legations and motives which would con-
stantly tend TO turn them from the straight
path % duty 10 the National Government.
You cannot have the National Government
and the State governments joint owners In
the same Treasury without miSchleyous
conflict. such partnership l. at war with
the wel-being OF both State ana nation.
A third objection TO the Pennsylvania
proposition i that il proceeds upon the
assumption Of q continuing redundancy OF
national revenue. This j. opposed to all
sound views Of administration. The Gov
eminent wants Just enough revenue. a
redundancy always leads to extravaganza,
10 many forms OF corruption, and TO all
manner Of schemes for getting rid Of the
money. 4 Congress assembling with tens
of millions Of surplus at its disposal would
be very sure 10 hold sessions which would
prove profitless to the people and perilous
To it, own members. Since the war closed
we have had no embarrassing redundancy
OF revenue because The payment OF the ma
tional debt has afforded at once the readieSt
aud the wisest mode OF apprOprlating
every dollar not needed for the current eX-
penses OF the Government.
The time j. rapidly approaching. how
ever. when. 10y the terms in which the ma
tiOual debt i funded, the payment OF the
remainder must OF necessity be postponed
for yearS-the largest part OF ii, indeed, To
the next century. This brings with il the
necessity Of reducing the national revenue.
The present system OF taxation is yielding
more than hundred millions beyond the
amount required for the ordinary expenses
81 Government. lis reduction will soon
become an imperative duty. Indeed. Il
strong movement i already on foot for the
repeal Of the entire system OF internal
revenue-On the assumption, which Is
justified by fact, that receipts from
customs will afford abundant revenue for
the needs OF the Government. The pro-
teciioni~is desire this; but not they alone.
Judge Kelley is not more earnestly i'm favor
OF II than is Mr.. Cox, Of New York. who
is most intelligent representative OF the
free-trnde interest. Many of the leading
free-traders in Congress are opposed TO the
continuation Of the tax on spirits. 1t Is,
therefore, quite cvident-it Is at least
highly pTObahlc-that a coalition Of men
holding mtagouistic views on the question
u protection will AT the first opportunity
elect the abolition OF the system OF inter-
nal revenue.
This conjuncture Of circumstances gives,
in my judgment, rare opportunity TO re-
ieve taxation III the States. And it is
under the State Governments that taxation
1, felt most severely. The National Gov
eminent has the benefit OF easy because In
diIeet forms of taxation. II is the direct
tax that is felt TO be oppressive. At the
beginning Of the war the National Govern
ment levied a direct tax Of twenty millions
OF dollars upon the StateS-abOut sixty
six cents per capita on the whole popula-
ton. II frightened the people, and the ell
feet was 80 depressing that all kinds OF
composition and adjustment were invented
10 avoid payment. But coucurrently with
the fright occasiOncd 10y this direct tax
hundreds Of millions were raised in sim
ole wear by customs and by excise without
a word OF protest or a sense OF hardship.
our state and municipal taxation Is d.
rect. II comes upon the property win
crushing force. There are few commune
ties i'm the United States that pay so little
as per cent. per annum on the actual
Of their real property. There are many
communities that pay more than per
cent. OF the actual value. The houses, the
farms, the factories, the stores, the shops.
all feel IL as a heavy burden-a burden un-
relieved By any form Of indirect taxation.
WHY, therefore, should not the states be
permitted 10 have the tax on spirits for
their own benefit if the National Govern
ment does not need il! The National and
STATE Goyernmeuts. as | think | have