The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1888-07-03
MAYOR HEwITT's LETTER.

iHcation Meeting OF June 28.
find that / cannot give any time to
politics without neglecting my official
duties as mayor. shall not, therefore,
take any part in the active work Of the
approaching presidential election; but
nevertheless cannot be, and am not, in
different 10 the novel issue which it pre-
sents. For the fist time within my recol-
lection what may be termed the personal
equation Of the candidates is eliminated
from the contest, inasmuch as either OF the
gentlemen who are put in nomination for
President will undoubtedly fill the Office
with credit and success. This fact, fortu-
nately, makes II possible to concentrate
public attention upon the principles which
the candidates represent rs expressed in
the platforms adopted by the respective
national conventions.
Discarding all side issues, IL seems to
me that there is only one question TO be
decided by the people in the coming cleo
ton. Both platforms concede that the
national revenues are largely in excess Of
the expenditures required for the econom-
ical conduct Of the government. This was
the case four years ago, and both parties
then pledged themselves TO take steps TO
reduce the revenue by a revision OF the
tariff. The pledge thus given has not been
fulfilled, because the Republicans in Con-
gress have successfully thwartcd all the
Democratic efforts 10 revise the tariff. In
1883 the Democratic party renews its
pledge 10 reduce the revenues by reducing
the taxes, but the Republican party, hav-
ing resisted all efforts looking to this end,
have been forced by the memorable logic
OF the situation 10 declare in favor OF
reducing the revenue by increasing the
taxes. Here we are confronted with an
issue entirely new in American politics,
and indeed In the fiscal history Of any
civilized nation. II is perfectly feasible 10
reduce the revenue by raising the duties
on imported merchandise, but II Is not
possible TO increase the duties without in
creasing the cost OF the article 10 be con-
sumed, whether IL be made at home or
abroad. Hence the Republican party is
confronted with the reduction nd absurdum
that high taxes are blessing 10 the con-
sumner, recalling the time when II was in
sisted that "a national debt was a ma
tional blessing"
The plain issue thus presented TO the
American people cannot be obscured by
any sophistry or by any plea for special in
| teresls OF favored classes OF the people.
Does any sane man believe that country
can be enriched in raising the taxes? Is Il
| not plain 10 the dullest understanding that
| II consumers pay more for their supplies
they must be Unidentified, II Undermined
ut all, by higher price for their productsi
But how can the farmer get n higher
price for his products when the price for
them at home is made the price which he
gets for the surplus sent abroad2 The
farmers constitute one-half OF the popula.
ton Of the country. How can they be
benefited by any increase In taxes or in
the price OF manufactured goods? Tho
artisans and the laborers employed in
manufactures may possibly for briel
period, by the aid OF unions, trusts and
combinations, succeed in keeping uT
prices and wages until the farmers ART
forced 10 transfer themselves from the
land 10 the shops In the meanwhile they
will bear all the burden without rcapinl
any OF the alleged benefits OF increased
taxation. Robhing Peter 10 pay Paul u
no novelty, but II Peter submits 10 Il nov
Il will be his own fault, for he has a ma
jority Of the votes and can use them FOL
his own protection.
have made this statement In rs simple
language as | can use without indorsinl
any particular measure for the reduction
Of taxation. The Democratic party |.
pledged 10 make this reduction ''in spirit
Of fairness 10 all interests" Tho Mills bil
may or may not fulfill this pledge; but 4
II shall appear that II discriminates I'M
fairly against any considerable existing in
dustry, II violates the Democratic plcdg,
and should be amended NJ as not 10 put
the occupations Of the people In peril In
any direction whatever. The raw materials
and waste products Of industry should b,
free In NIL cases, because the revenue col
lectcd from them Is deducted from In,
fund available for the payment OF wages
Such duties increase the cost TO the con
sumcr and diminish tho earnings Of tn,
producer. They constitute a Us, less OBJ
struction 10 the growth Of industry ant
the employment Of labor. The Mills bill
Is defective in not applying this principle
in all cases, and should be amended 10 n
TO make this fundamental principle tn
basis Of tariff reform.
In tho coming election, therefore, tn
issue Is not between free trade aud pro
lection, but tho burning question IL, Shal
the revenue be reduced by the reduction
OF taritf taxes, or shall II be reduced b.
the increase Of those taxes1 Both plan
are feasible, but both cannot be right.
we do not allow this issue TO he obscurc
the common sense Of the people will in
sure an overwhelming triumph 10 Oh
Democratic party In the coming election
Yours respectfully, ABRAM $. IlEwirT.
Nav Work Juno %