The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1888-04-25

| ciared that it had made It necessary
for the Republican party, which re-
NAMED in Congress during the war, and
thus forced that party TO resort to in
ternal taxes and ell the hardshipS re-
sulting from them.
Mcmillan replied that the gentleman
from Pennsylvania not only in
augurated the internal taxes of which
he complained, but he put the
tax on The railroads and in
comes and the capital deposits
of banks, nut these latter have been
| removed, and those which the gentle
man said worked hardships never have
been removed. The gentleman has not
done the very thing which he said the
Democratic party was responsible for
not doing. He (McMilian) remem-
bered the gentleman coming before the
House and saying that he favored the
repeal of the system, but that his
caucus determined otherwise. and he
bowed his neck to the yoke. (Applause
on the democratic side.)
KELLEY-Hss not that been done by
your Democratic caucusP (Applause
on the Repu olican side.)
MCMILLAN-Does your party favor
the total repeal of the internal reVen ue
system?
'KELLEY-I speak for myself.
McMILLAN-Wto will speak for your
party? Uaughter.l
KELLEY-Wll you vote for such an
amendment
MCMILLAN-I do not propose to vote
for such an amendment.
REED-Then what are you talking
about?
MCMILLAN stated that 100000, 00G
were annually received from internal
taxes. If those taxes were removed
where does the gentleman from Penn
sylvania propose to get the revenue?
Did he propose to replace the tax on
tea and coffee2
KELLEY-No.
MoMILLAN-You have not the cour-
age to do it.
KELLKY-Have you and youTpaty. the
courage to tax tea and coffeeT
MCMILLAN-We do not propose to
take off heinternal taxes.
There are none of US so brave" was
Reeds reply.
Burrows, of MICHIGAN, was the next
speaker. He said:
"Our tariff on imports was, to
day, confessedly protective, i'll that
1t was levied, not for revenue only, but
to encourage American industry and to
protec5 American labor. The Republi-
can party insisted that thea present
| protective system should not be dis
| turbed, except so far as mightbe neces
sary to correct its incongruities and
harmonic its provisions. If Congress
followed the lead of the President in
his bold declaration, and secured re-
ductlon by such revision of the tariff ss
he proposed, leaving untouched, as he
suggested, the internal revenue system,
not only would the protective system
be destroyed, but the nation would be
out on the highway of free trade. AS
the members were free-traders, or pro-
tectionists, the bill of the committee
would pc approved or condemned. The
pending measure stood without a par
allel in the history OF American
assault many of our principal indus
of the country, only IN the infancy of
its Development, was to be exposed to
ruinous foreign competition, which
would surely prove its destruction. The
majority tried to delude the people into
the belief that cheap wool meant cheap
clothing. He admitted that wool would
be cheaper when foreign rivals were
trying to destroy our industry, but
when they had eliminated from our
market 300, 100000 pounds of domestic
wool, we would find ourselves bound,
hand and foot, at the mercy of the for
cign producer. What restraint would
there be, then, CD his power or cupidity?
In the exuberanoy Of the Presidents
zeal for free trade, he wanted the entire
reduction secured by a revision of the
tariff, but even the free-traders Of the
Democratic party lacked the courage to
move on that line and occupy this ad
vanced position"
Burrows said that the Presidents as
sertion that the duty on imports en-
HANGED the prices of both foreign and
domestic articles to the consumer had
been echoed by every free-trader in the
United States, and hailed with delight
by the free-traders of England. He
challenged any man to name the pro-
duct of a single well-established Amer
lean industry that could not be bought
cheaper to-day under the protective
system than at any period unCor free
trade. The difficulty with the Pres
ident's theory was that he forgot that
the price of the commodity did not de-
pend upon the rate of the duty, but
upon the great law of supply and de-
mand, Efforts were being made, per-
sistently, to induce the American
farmer to believe that protective tariffs
were hostile to his interests.
Burrows argued that the farmer was
directly interested in maintaining the
protective system and the home mar
ket. Protection had enhanced the
value of land in the north; it would
bring it to the south; it would bring
the south an era of uneZampled pros
perity. He believed in protection not
for his State alone, but for
his country. He believed in
American Industries, in American
capital, in American labor. against the
whole world. LET me warn you, gen
tlemen of the SOUTH" he continued,
that the measure bodies no good to
you; it will arrest the investment If
capital and bring your industries to a
standstill. There is no portion of the
country where the measure should
meet with more united and determined
opposition than in the south. I'm
toward circumstances have heretofore
retarded her material progress, but the
way is now open for her to march, I'M
impeded, to splendid industrial fu-
ture. The advance is already sounded.
He who does not respond to its inspir-
ing summons will soon find himself