Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1888-10-06
OUTLINE OF THE MAJORITY REPORT


mittee submitting the new tariff bill TO
the Senate has been published. 1t is no
hesitating or defensive document. Tits
aggressive, vigorous and clear. 1t makes
the point in the outset that the Repubi-
can party has so repeatedly presented,
that the surplus increase is due to the in
excusable failure of the Democratic adj
ministration to apply the national funds
as 10y law and duty commanded, and by their
retention in the national vaults. 1t will
be remembered that the order to apply the
surplus funds to the discharge of national
Indebtedness was eoolly disregarded by the
Democratic administration, until Congress
by a sharp and rebuking resolution prodded
the delinquents to action. The committee
show that within the next four months it
will be feasible to discharge in full the
SOD, 100000 debt represented by the AZ
per cent. bonds, which fall due in 1891.
The committee agree with Mr.. Cleveland
that the accumulation of surplus funds
in the Treasury constitutes a menace to
business interests, and forecasts financial
panic, but it points out how they may be
avoided by return of the money to the
proper channels of trade.
1t is not proposed to withdraw the de-
posts in the national banks, for that would
precipitate disaster, but it is urged that
the situation should not be aggravated by
further deposits, nor should there continue
any passiveness in disposing of the excess
over the current needs of the Govern
ment, in the manner indicated by the law,
The tariff question is then taken up.
The arguments advanced are scarcely sus-
ceptible of more concise statement. They
must be read with thoughtful DELHI
Grafton and in full. The committee dwells
with emphasis upon the patent fact that
the enemies of the tariff do not make
direct assault with q view to immediate
leveling of the protective system, but that
their assault is one Of approaches by detail
=" stealthy movements to accomplish de-
structive designs"
The committee charges that the Mills
bill would really cause, if in force, an in
crease instead of reduction of the rev.
enues by augmenting importations. If,
for instance, foreign manufactures in cot
ten and wool secured .one-fourth of the
market held by our own people, the rev.
enue from the duty collected upon the in
creased importation would reach some
S69,O0O,000 annually. Other instances are
cited to show that the drift of the Mills
bill Is to increase the volume of imports
and the aggregate Of revenue from duty
collections. 1t is also pointed out that the
Democratic measure makes. no provision
for. Temedy in cases of differentiation, and
meaeover that the failure to classify duti-
able articles, and the vague, obscure and in
volved passages, will make it extremely
difficult to ascertain to what classes articles
should be assigned.
1t is pointed out that the assault. of the
Mills bill will affect industries in the
United States injuriously TO the extent of
at least S26o, 100000, and affect to their ill
fully 100000 persons, and aully $3.50, 900
Others directly dependent fer their apros-
perfty upon such industries. The. COM
mittee invites especial attention to thefact
that wool has been dutiabie article since
1916, and thatefhe Mills bill Is the first
suggestion to wholly displace It and strike
at business producing 3so,o00o9a
pounds of wool, valued at 100000, 600
and which zupples nine-tenths of the
clothing wool used in American nlanufaet-
ures. The excuses fer striking down the
wool-gro~ing industry are reviewed, and
pronounced unsound The vital inter
est of the farmer in the tariff psasec-
ton to the wool industry is pointed eat,
and emphasizes the argument in favor of
protection to the wool-growing industry
by citation of the fact that after fourteen
years of a revenue tariff the total produe-
ton of domestic wool was 6O,2S4,913
pounds, or one half pound per capita,
while in 1884, after twenty-fonr years of
protection, the total production had in
creased to 30S,000,00o pounds, or three
and a quarter pounds per capita.
For its own bill the committee advances
the claim that it reduces the revenue. by
reduction of the sugar duty nearly S2S, 00e.-
600, by adding forty-two items to the free !
list with duty values that have aggregated |
nearly Sc, 100000, and by abolition of in
ternal revenue to the extent of nearly
S24, 100000. In conclusion, the committee
sums up the difference between the Senate
and the House bills. The first proceeds
upon the idea of reducing revenue income
with constant wstchfulness not to assure