Los Angeles daily herald., 1888-09-24

the Importation Oh Sucn arJlcleS us are
manufactured in America. Such is the
argument of the Republican party.
under the financial policy for which the
Republican party now contends. the
theory in respect of the tariff which OBJ
tanned for century, that revenue was
the object, protection the incident, OF
tariff legislation, must yield to the new
doctrine promulgated in the platform OF
1888. The Republican party now con-
tends that protection has equal constitu.-
tional authority as the power to levy and
collect tariff duties, and must be elevated
to the same position in the future oper-
ations of the Government-that the col
| lection of a revenue to meet the current
expenses of the Government is not the
sole purpose of the taxing power OF the
constitution. The protection principle is
declared to be an economic policy OF Tree
popular government, and will henceforth
constitute an integral part OF the politl'
cal creed of the Republican party.
assert that the leading statesmen OF
both parties prior to 1888 have uniformly
admitted that the present tariff schedules
required revision, the inequalities de-
manded correction, the rates so adjusted
as to conform to the fiscal demands OF
| LQ6 SION6Tuuout, lAdhy blntCo
upon the free list to the end that the sur
plus revenue might be reduced, to stimu-
late manufactures and commerce, to
lower the cost OF the necessaries of life
and to encourage the industries of the
country. 1t was also admitted that a rate
could be adopted on imports that would
Weld ample revenue and afford liberal
measure of protection to domestic indus
| t.:o ko r,,ootyov, 0f ,lratoofiOv, iy oxu
claimed to be a great economic and fun
It is declared to be an ''irre.
pressible conflict between two
lines of thought-two distinctive
methods of operating the Government
two economic principles at open war with
each other, essentially different in aim
and result. The political forces are mar
shalled for the contest, and each party
claims that upon its success depend the
welfare and prosperity of the country.
| The Republican party maintains that
the principle of protection is distinct
political force, separate from the taxing
power of the Government, and derives
its force and efficacy from the Constitu-
tion. Therefore, if the taxing power is
exercised for the purpose of raising rev.
|
constitutional authority to protect the in
dustries of the countries. 1t declares
that these two powers may be used con-
Jointly, or may be invoked separately
and at different times-that the one does
not depend on the other for its force or
its application.
submit quotations from the speeches
of Republican leaders to show that l
| kou ototoA thn foirlvy orI
rectly.
Mr.. Butterworth says: "The issue is
an irreconcilable difference of opinion
between the two political organizations
as to the wisdom and justice OF the pro-
tective system" Speaking to the Dem
ocratic party, he says: "You assert that
to levy duty on imports, except for the
purpose of raising needed revenue, is at
once unconstitutional, unwise, unjust
and indefensible, while we assert the ex-
act reverse, insisting that not only may
duties be levied with reference to rev.
enue. but with reference to the protec-
ton of our home industries as we'll. 1t
follows, therefore, that the political par.
ties divide on the wisdom of protection
as an economic policy"
Thomas B. Reed says: "The rev
enue reform argument is either a
; false pretense or covers the whole
ground. Protection is either in its
essence a benefit or a curse. Incl
dental protection is sham.'
Mr.. Burrows says: "Our tariff on i'm.
ports is to-day confessedly protective, in
that it is levied not with view to raising
revenue only" but to protect American
labor and protect American industries.
The Republican party believes in pro-
tective tariff; that in imposing duties
upon imports, revenue is not the only
consideration. 1t insists that our present
protective system shall not be disturbed,
except so far as it may be necessary to
correct its incongruities and to harmon
ize its provisions"
General Harrison, in his letter of ac.
ceptance, says: "The issue can not be
obscured. 1t is not a contest between
schedules, but between wide apart prin-
ciples. The Republican party holds that
a protective tariff is constitutional,
wholesome and necessary. We do not
offer fixed schedule, but a principle. "
The expressions prove that the Repub-
lican party advocates the maintenance
of the high protective system under the
sanction of the organic law of the land
that it is power which Congress ought
to exercise for the benefit Of home indus
tries. The Democratic party ac-
cepts the issue rendered with
alacrity, and boldly denies that
the Constitution authorizes the
levy and collection of revenue in excess
OF an amount required to meet the cur
rent expenses of the Government, hon
estly and economically administered.
1t aftirms that the taxing pow
er of the Government can be
lawfully exercised only for public pur-
poses. 1t comedies to ''infant Industries"
only that protection which results incl
dentally from the methods employed to
levy and collect the revenue for the sup
port of the Government. While it de-
clares that the primary object of tariff
is revenue, it favors an adjustment that
will afford the greatest possible benefit
to home industries. Revenue is the OBJ
lect, protection is the incident of tariff
legislation. The Democratic party advo-
Gates this conservative system of taxa
ton for the reason that it affords equal
and exact justice to all, and makes i'm
possible vicious class legislation which is
so justly obnoxious to the genius of Re ..
publican institutions. The power to
levy and collect taxes is derived from
section s, of Art. of the Constitution,
which says:
Congress shall have power "to lay and
collect taxes, duties, imposts and excuses
to nav the debts and nrovida for tho