Fort Worth daily gazette. (Fort Worth, Tex.) 1882-1891, 1888-10-15

for magnifcence snd display, for the per
+sonsl qualification OF princes aud enrich
ment OF remote branches OF the royal
family, l do not wonder that they wish
to keep the people ignorant CT the fact
that il il their money that foots the bills
but do not understand why Americans,
free men, themselves the 5overeigns,
should wish to deceive themselves as to
the amounts they pay to support the gov
ernment-thelr own creature.
It Is grcst temptation to PR figste
expenditures that revenue should be
gathered without the persons bejpe
( known from whom it is received. The
eye Of the msa who psss monsy 10 the
tax gatherer will follow It; there will be
| little extravaganza IN administration
when the taxpayers are fu,l7 informed e5
to the smount Of their con!ribu ions to
their government. Tleir vigilance will
guard the treasury which contains their
money. But II they have no money there,
or do not know tina. they have Ii there,
The erea. restraining power upon cffic.al
prodigslity will, DE ABSENT.
While these thoughts will be we'll worth
tconsideriug when the question arises be-
sTTeeu the systems of direcs and irdi-
rect tsxst!on they are submitted es sug.
gesticns merely now. for these papers
will take il for granted that the hyylng
Of tsxes by 8 tariff is proper method If
raising revenue.
II, ther, the objact of 8 tsris De to
gsther taxes to support the government
the question is, how eha1 the tax be In
posed!
|. The rate should be such IS to pro-
duce the larges. sun possible out Of the
articles tsxed. It Is manifest that the
duty might be 30 light las to prevent In
portation, and thus to prevent revenue.
Importations being necessary to the pro-
duc.ion OF revenue the tGrif should never
be so high as to limit or restrict them. A
revenue tarif Should be 80 levied IS to
promote, not discourage imports.
2. The duties being unon articles OF
consumption they should fsllrmost heav-
lily uoon Injuries and touches lightly as
possible the nacesssries:sW In this way
the wealthy, who are the most able to
pay, besr the burdens Of ts1stion, while
the poor are relieved from them. L; is too
plain for argument that if the property OF
the rich, which especially Ell oys the pro.
lection OF ths government, be exempt
from taxes, the duties of the tsr.fi,
| should be levied upon the articles they
consume. for it would be the most fag-
raut Injustice to gather the money re-
quired from the necessities of the daliy
life of the poor who hzva no sccumula.
ton OF property which they ask the gov
erpment TO take care OF.
The present tariff is Objectionable be-
csuse it violates these rules and for other
reasons:
l. The tsrf rates s.e in mos. in.
staIces too high. They were no. de-
signed tn secure the largest possible re-
suits. They restrict imports insteadadf
encouraging them. The reduction aftAS
duties cue- hsIf. with eimiiar reddctt5n,,
Of the tariff list, would not reducas4kks
revenue. This clearly shows thsFExfe
rates are unnecessarily high md .HiEthey
have nos been honestly fixed forse pur
pose Of raising revenue.
2. The duties have not been levied so
as 20 m.Se the burdens AZ light IS prsc:i.
cable for the poor. Ga the CONTRARY,
they fsll most heavily upon them. Il
WOODEN goods the highest rates are upon
the cheapest articles which the poor bur
Diswonts, lsces snd many other luxurles
are lightly tx c, Whlle duties upon