Port Tobacco times, and Charles County advertiser. (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1845-1898, 1884-04-25
DortG obacroGimes
PORT TOBACCO:
Friday Morning. April Is, 1884.
Mr.. Randall's Tariff Reform.
Mr.. Randall's Tariff Reform.

Friday Morning. April Is, 1884.
Mr.. RandalPs Tariff Reform.
The following is the tariff plank of Mr.
Raudal's recent Pennsylvania Democratic
convention, as embodying Mr.. Randall's
views of tariff reform:
"We favor a tariff for revenue limited to the
necessities of the government economically ad.
ministered, and so adjusted in its application
as to prevent unequal burdens, encourage pro-
duetive industries at home and afford just com.
pension to labor, but not to create or foster
monopolies, and to this end zoe favor the ADOLF
ton Of the internal revenue system Of taz's and
such adjustment of the existing tariff duties as
will be consistent with these principles.
The following is the tariff plank in the
Pennsylvania Republican convention, that
met on Wednesday of last week:
We unquali6edly approve and demand the
continuation of system of protection to home
industry which has proved itself to be the basis
of national independence, the incentive to in
dustrial skill and development, and the guar
antee of just and adequate scale Of wages for
labor and we denounce all attempts to reduce
the rates of the tariff below the level which
will accomplish these objects.
Now, to the casual reader, Mr.. Randall's
platitudinous and euphonious declaration
upon this point is far more fair sounding
and encouraging to the tax burdened
agricultural people of the country who
under the existing law are required to
pay from 10 to 40 per cent. more for near
ly every article of domestic consumption
than the revenues require than the terse
and unequivocal announcement of tn. Re-
publican platform; but to any one famil-
lar with the subject there is no substan-
tial difference whatever in the two plat
forms upon this great economic question.
MIR. Randall Is professedly in favor Of
tariff for revenue limited to the lecessi-
ties OF the government economically ad-
ministered, and SO adjusted ETC." This is
all we'll and good and sounds very fairly
indeed, but 'to that end" Mr.. Randall ia
vors 'the abolition Of the internal rerenue
system Of tares, and such adjustment of the
existing tariff duties as will he consistent
with these principles" A glance at the
present status of these two sources of reve-
hue, as compared with what is conceded
to be the necessary revenues of the gov
ernment economically administered, will
show that when Mr.. Randall has abolish
ed the internal revenue system of taxation
that there will be but small opportunities
adjust the tariff duties upon less oner-
Gus basis.
From these considerations it would
seem to follow that there is no substantive
difference upon this important question
between such of the Pennsylvania Demo
Gratis as follow Mr.. Randall's lead and the
Republicans of that State and the country.
The Republicans de not demand any in
crease Of the present onerous tariff duties :;
they only ask that they shall not be re-
duced. They do not, it is true, indulge
in any platitudes about tariff for reve-
nue. limited to the necessities of the Gov
eminent economically administered, or say
anything about fostering monopelis y but
speak out plainly and say We demand
'.protection to home industries" and "de-
nounce all attempts to reduce tie rate OF
tariff duties below the level which will
accomplish these results" Still they do
not ask any increase Of present tariff
duties, and it is very difficult to see where
in MIR. Randall's platform admits of any
reduction, if it does not require an in
crease.
1t is true that there is prevailing opin
ion among statisticions who have care
fully studied the question that, by judi
cious reduction of the present duties upon
imports, many Of which are prohibitory in
their character, the increased importations
that would follow would result in an in
crease of revenues from this source Some
have gone so far as to say that the Morri-
BON bill,which proposes horizontal reduc-
ton of 20 per cent, will result in increased
revenues from import duties, but the bet
ter opinion is adverse to this latter pro-
position.
Why should the internal revenue taxe,,
which rest chiefly upon whiskey and to-
bacco-unnecessary luxuries-be entirely
abolished, when the tax upon imports,
which rests upon all the necessaries of life
and articles Of domestic consumption, be
kept at the preset onerous rate and made
to bear the whole burden of carrying on
the Government and reducing the war
debt? No substantial reason can he
given for such a course. Mr.. Randall, it
is true, has endeavored by argument to
justify his position !; but Mr. Randalls ar
gunent, like his platform, though some
what plausible on the surface, will not
bear examination. He says that the de-
mand OF the country is to be relieved from
the burdens of war taxation and shows
that the excise taxes originated with the
war and had no existence prior thereto ;
therefore, he says, the first step toward
Kidding our people of war taxation is to
abolish excise taxes. He also insists that
the poorer classes use whiskey and tobac-
CO and ought to be able to get them cheap
and makes the point of the great cost of
the collection of the excise taxes.
These arguments are fallacious If The
war debt was entirely out of the way and
none of the burdens resulting from the
war remained, then it might be said that
we should derive all the revenue from i'm
post taxes as in the ante bellum times :;
but even then the policy of free rum and
tree tobacco while all necessaries are tax
ed might be hard to accept. So long,
however, as the war debt remains the in
fernal tn unon llaxuriaa shaiald noska In.