Wheeling Sunday register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1882-1934, 1885-01-11

same time to attend with anything like sat
isfactoJ diligence TO the routine OF any
one Of the Republicans which demands
something in the nature Of business ability
Where Is such q man to be found in the
books. By pardon, on the staff of General
George William Curtisf Is it mot better, on
the whole to let the Independents look out
for themselves, put the management of all
the Departments in the hands Of honest and
practical Democrats whose political
gender has never been questioned and leave
the result of such a course in the hands OF
that divinity which shapes our ends, rough
hew them as we will" Certainly the men
who voted for the Cleveland electoral tick
cts in the several States never had any idea
| that the Democratic party was going to
shirk responsibility for the administration
of all the affairs OF the Federal Government
in every department. That responsibility
can not be maintained unless the affairs are
in the hands of Democrats, and it is doubt
full whether the Republican party, outside of
the oHieeholders themselves, is anxious to
see any other course pursued BY President
Cleveland.
The probability that no Independent Rep
lican would be confirmed by the present
Senate for a Cabinet position has been
touched upon already, in these columns.
There has been some talk about the chances
of Cleveland's selecting some men like
Mayor Low, of Brooklyn, who did not
openly desert his party during the am
paign, for D place in the Cabinet, on the
ground that sach q man would be perfectly
satisfactory 10 the Republicans, who assisted
in the election of Cleveland, while his con
frmatien would be a possibility. But the
suggestion is just a little far fetched, and
there is no idea either among Republicans
or Democrats at present, that it will ripen
into anything more than q vague dream Of
certain Republican politicians.
The Beck Tariff Commission bill is re-
garded as a most decided intimation to the
country at large that the revenue reformers
in the Senate do not propose to be boundi in
any a by the caucus of members of the
House of Representatives who agree with
them, which was held recently and decided
not to attempt to push any tariff legislation
during the present session. The Democrats
in the Senate are anxious TO place the onus
of the defeat of a Tariff Reform bill on their
| Republican colleagues, and that is the rea-
SON for the introduction of the Commission
bill. The most ardent Republican and the
most vigorous Protectionist can find no
fault with the principle which underlies the
bill, viz: the proposition that a COM
mission ought to be appointed to look
into the subject of reforming the
present tariff and internal revenue flows.
Nobody denies that improvements will be
made and probably NO one would deny that
these improvements must be in the direction
of lessenirg the protection upon branches
of manufacture which are no longer in their
infancy and taking the duty of Of various
raw materials. Nor will any one deny that
a commission, the duty of whose members
it would be TO make themselves thoroughly
familiar with the whole subject, is the proper
source from which such suggestions of
practical improvements should spring. But
Republicans are not willing to have the
commission appointed in such a way that
it is sure to be in the
hands Of pronounced advocates Of a reye.
nue. tariff, and Democrats are equally un-
willing to see it put into the hands of Re-
publican protectionists. The way out of the
whole difficulty would seem to lie in the di.
rection Of a compromise. Honest statesmen
ought not to be controlled by their party
affiliations or ever by the pride of consist
ency in a matter which is OF so great signfi.
canoe 10 so large a proportion Of the Amer
lean people and TO so varied an array of in
dependent interests. There is no question
that the issue has become f~earfully involved
and complicated in the public understand
ing or misunderstanding OF the principlein-
volved. No political thinker needs to go
outside OF bis own ward or his own village
to discover that. Almost every citi.
zen who talks about the issue at
all speak with more fuency than Common
sense OF the difference existing between the
high and the low tariff man in Congress in
the Democratic party or in the Republican
ranks. There is horrible confusion ofideas
involved in such expressions. A revenue
tariff is not necessarily a low one. 1t is a
tariff imposed for the purpose Of collecting
the largest aggregate amount of revenue
from the duty of each article leyied upon.
The rate Of duty must therefore be fixed so
as not 10 hinder importation and 80 as to
make the multiple of the rate per yard or
pounds or bushel into the total number Of
yards or pounds or bushels imported as large
as possible in the course Of the fiscal year.
If the rate were reduced to zero or approx
mately thereto, the multiple would also zap,
proximate to zero, and while the
lowest possible tariff would have
been levied the object of the
revenue tariff advocate would have been
completely nulliied. But it is safe to put a
heavy tariff on necessities which we do not
produce to any great extent, like coffee, tea,
spices, sugar, drugs, ETC., because their i'm
portation will be continued in any event. 1t
is not safe to put a heavy rate Of duty on
goods of the same grade or similar to those
produced in our own country. or on pure
Injuries, like fine cigars, liquors, etc be-
cause importation will be limited on all
the articles by a heavy tariff to such an ex-
tent that the aggregate revenue will be less
than it would be if the rate we're lower. The
revenue tariff men would, therefore, favor a
heavy rate of duty On coffee, tea, sugar,
spices, drugs and the like, and a low rate on
pure ~luxuries and on goods like what we can
produce in the United States.
The Protectionist, on the other hand, is
not always a hightarlf advocate. Reason
ing that the object of all duties should be to
protect our industries and not to secure a
revenue at all, or at most, only incidentally,
he would put the lower rate Of duty on
articles of necessity which we cannot pro,
duce, or would place them on the free list.
He would place a heavy duty on pure luxu.
ries, on the ground that they are calculated
only 10 satisfy q demand coming from rich
men, who ought to pay more than they do
pay toward the expenses of the Government.
But the keystone Of his position is the pro-
position that so heavy a tax ought to be put
on goods of European manufacture which
compete with American manufactures, that
it will be 10 a large extent prohibitory, and
will place the American manufacturer on a
most decided vantage ground, leaving to
internal competition the proper regulation
nr;oa Maid nv the consumer