Barton County democrat. [volume] (Great Bend, Kan.) 1885-1915, 1888-08-23

Grant, Garfield, Arthur, Seward and VIII
son rs Revenue Re6Ormers.

|
feed, that his unreasoning and uncOm-
promising attitude should bring re-
proach upon the moderation of the
wise elders and grand old pillars of the
party?
Grant, Garfield. Arthur. Seward
Sumner and Wilson are great names,
and numerous lesser ones could be
cited, all of which are identified with
protection, and yet every one Is on
record as either actively advocating or
emphatically supporting changes in
the existing tariff. which Henry Cabto
Lodge now declares would break
down the entire protective system
within two years"
The Mills bill cuts off less than one
eighth of our present customs revenue.
Had it been introduced by some Re-
publican under President Arthur's Ad-
ministration it would have been re-
garded by safe and cautious Republic
ans as a measure containing substan-
tally the recommendations of the
President in his repeated messages to
Congress. To-day it is met with deris-
ion and dread as a threatening over
ture to - free trade" by the same Re-
publican journals that praised Arthur's
message of December 4, 1882, in which
he used these words:
The present tarin system is in many respects
unjust 1t makes unequal distributions, both
OF its burdens and its benefits. This fact was
practically recognized by majority OF each
House OF Congress in the passage OF the act
creating the tariff comm ssion. The report OF
that commission will be placed before you at
the beginning OF this session. and will, trust,
AFFORD you such information as to the condition
and prospects of the various commercial, agri-
cultual, manufacturing mining aud other in
terests OF the country, and contain such suR-
gestions for statutory revision as will practi-
cally aid your action upon this important sub
ject
Without entering into minute detail, which,
under present circumstances, is quite unneces-
sary, recommend an enlargement OF the free
list so as to include within it the numerous
article, which y cid inconsiderable revenue, Il
simplification of the complex and inconsistent
schedule Of duties upon certain manufactures,
particularly those of cotton, iron and steel.
and a substantial reduction OF the duty upon
those articles, and upon Sugar, molasses, silk.
wool and wooden goods.
Eighty years previously President
Grant, in his annual message to Con-
gress, had advocated the very idea in
relation to free wool which is now en-
bodied in the wool clause of the Mills
bill, and which we are told would
break down the entire protective sys-
tenn within two years. In his message
of December z, 1874, we read:
The introduction, free OF duty, of such woods
as we do not produce would stimulate the
manufacture OF goods requiring the use OF
those we do produce, and therefore would be
benefit TO home production
AS far back as 1857 Senator Wilson,
speaking on tariff bill under discus
sion in that wear, said:
The manufacturers, Mr.. President, make no
war upon the wool-growers. They assume that
the reduction of the duty on wool, or the repeal
OF the duty altogether, Will infuse Vigor into
that dropping interest, stimulate home pro-
ductton. diminish the importation OF foreign
wooden manufactures and afford q steady and
increased demand for American wool.
Since the reduction of duties in England
since wool was admitted free, her wooden m IN
ufactures have so increased so prospered that
the production OF native wool has increased
more than one hundred per cent. The expe4
rience of England, France and Belgium dem
onstrates the wisdom OF that policy which
makes the raw materials duty free. Let US
profit by their examples.
Senator Seward and Sumner spoke
on the same bill, and heartily in
dorsed the views of Mr.. Wilson. It
was in this same year, after having
lived eleven years under a low tariff,
that Congress voted to make it still
lower, and every Massachusetts, mem
Der voted to support the reduction.
There is hardly a single recommen-
dalton in President Cleveland's last
message but could be backed up, line
upon line. by the most unimpeachable
Republican authority. He who should
undertake to prove this from the rec
ords of the Congressional debates
since Grants first term would have
an easy contract on his hands. Sim
liar bills to Mr.. Mills have time and
time again been offered as Republican
measures, and John Sherman is on
record as having within a year advo-
Gated most of the very tariff revisions
which are all of a sudden held to be
SO awful and SO dangerously tinged
with - free trade"
Why has the high protectionist skin
become so raw all at once? The Mills
perate measure of tariff revision, such
as Grant, Garfield, Arthur and long
list of Republican Congressman have
advocated. So strongly is
this bill backed by recorded Republic
an authority that many incline to the
belief that the party leaders are chief
ly distressed because Mr.. Mills has
taken the wind out of their sails. This
theory would be more plausible were
the truculent protected interests and
their party allies even willing to admit
that they were in sympathy with the
moderate provisions of his bill, under
any manner of qualification.
No, the exigency of the times has
driven the war tariff extremists to lock
horns squarely with any attempt to re-
duce the existing rates of taxation.
Growing upon what they have so. long
fed without challenge. the oyer-Dro-