Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1888-02-29
WEDNESDAY,. FEBRUARY %. 1888.
Comnronise.

We said day or two ago that, when
VIC learned that the Democratic National
Convention was to he held in June, we
took il for granted that the Democrats
in Congress expected TO agree before that
time upon a compromise tariff measure
In the same issue of our paper it was
stated in Washington telegram that the
Committee of Ways and Means OF the
House OF Representatives, assuming that
a reduction of the revenue by seventy
five millions of dollars was needed, had
determined to report in favor OF abolish
ing the tobacco-tax. thus securing re-
duction of twenty-five millions Of dollars,
and also in favor OF such changes IN the
tariff as would secure a reduction OF ten
millions on sugar, five millions from adj
diiions to the free list, and the remain
der from general scaling down OF Gus
toms and duties on the articles embraced
in the various tariff schedules. The
committee favor gil on steel rails, -. 0O
on pig iron, so cents on iron ore. and
so cents ton on bituminous coal.
This is evidently a compromise mea-
sure, though Mr.. RANDALL is re-
ported to be dissatisfied with it.
We regret that the distinguished
Pennsylvania cannot find it consist
ent with his opinions and his duty
20 Join hands with the members OF
the Committee of Ways and Means
in their efforts to reform the tariff and at
the same time relieve tobacco OF a heavy
tax. There are three hundred and
twenty-five members in the House OF
Representatives and it is therefore an i'm
possibility that every one of them can
secure the passage of bill according
entirely with his own notions. However,
we still hope that the Randallites and the
Carlisleites will find what the European
diplomatists call mOduS UiUendt-a man
ner of living together tariff bill in
support of which all good Democrats
can unite.
The reduction Of the duty on coal to
fifty cents per ton will restore the duty
that was laid upon that article up to the
time of the revision OF the tariff that was
made few years ago. The reduction
of ten millions on sugar is equivalent to
a reduction of about 20 per cent. upon
the duty upon this article, sugar yielding
revenue of over fifty millions OF dol
lars. We should have preferred the abo-
lition of the duty on sugar. Itseems to
MS to be singular argument In favor OF
it's retention to claim that it benefits
only few sugar.planters.
To reduce the duties on an article
might result in an increased revenue
from that article. 1t would depend alto
gether upon the circumstances of the
case. A prohibited article yielding not
one dollar of revenue might il the duty
were lowered yield liberal revenue.
This is another point that must be con-
sidered by Congress in making changes
in the customs duties.
Some congressman may claim that the
duties on coal and iron were not in
tended by them as protective duties.
Others may claim that these duties were
intended by them to be protective of
American miners. This point is not i'm
portant But it is all-important that the
st. Louis convention shall be able to
point TO a tariff bill which has been
agreed upon by the Democratic House
of Representatives as one in advocacy of
which the Democratic party can 60 into
the presidential campaign.