Evening journal., 1890-11-25
NEWSPAPER OPINION.



Louisville Courser-Journal.
If there is one man more unhappy Just
now than a Republican free trader IL is
a Democratic protectionist.
In the late campaign the issue WAS
made up between revenue reform 10 the
direction Of lower duties, and revenue
reform in the direction of higher duties
There was no installing the position
OF either party The Democrats 10 their
last National Convention Endorsed the
message of President Cleveland and
pointed to the Mills bill as practical in
depreciation Of the principles expressed
by the president.
Mr. Mckinley, who, in Congress, had
led the Re3nblican opposition to the Mills
bill, wro'e the Republican National Plat
form He promised an increase OF duties
II intrusted to power. He said that
rather than surrender 'any part OF the
system Of protection he would abolish al
revenue taxes, and the Mckinley bill is.
on the whole, very fair Interpretation
of the Republican platform.
The great distinction between the
Mills bill and the Mckinley bill is not
one of detail, but of principle the two
measures look in directly opposite d.
rectiOns
The Mills bill Is the first step in the
direction Of trial for revenue only.
The Mckinley bill is step in the d.
rection Of prohibitive tariff.
The Mills bill was formed for the pur-
pose Of re iuc ng the revenue by reduc-
ton OF taxation.
The Mckinley bin was formed for the
purpose of reducing the revenue by in
creasinp taxation
The Mills bill says the tariff is too
high the Mckinley bill says the tariff is
too low.
The Mills bill puts wool on the free list
and reduces the rate of taxation on
materials made Of wool
The Mckinley bill increases the duty
on wool. and advances the duties on all
materials made of wool.
The Mills bill reduced the pro eotive
duties, that Is, the duties collected by
the manufacturers, while the Mckinley
bill increased these duties, and sacrificed
the revenue duties
The Mills bill was an attempt to re
duce war taxes to peace basis, while
the Mckinley bill was an effort to in
crease in peace the burden OF war taxes
The intention Of the Mills bill was to
reduce the cost of living, while the
effect, as we know. of the Mckinley bill
was to increase the price of every article
of daily consumption.
In other words. the Mills bill was the
legislative expression of the principles
aud practices of the Democratic party.
IL was in Inc with oil the party has done
from Jefferson to Cleveland, and was
declaration OF an mistaken faith In the
ideas underlying the tariff Of 1916
On the other hand, the Mckinley bill
was the expression of the faith of the
Republican organization That party
believes In the miraculous power of gov
ernment. IL believes wealth Is created
by taxation. IL believes in strong gov
eminent as distinguished from free
government. 1t holds that man is not
only to care for himself. but must be
cared for, protected and enriched by
paternal legislation
Both bills were before the people.
The difference was seen to be irTecon
cilable One must be taken and the
other left The people had to decide
whether they preferred taxation for rev
enue only, or taxation for protection
only, and declared in behalf Of revenue
tariff.
Some Republicans still hope TO recon
cile the people to robbery under the law
by talking reciprocity. Some Democrats
who. for the past ten years. have opposed
every movement of the party, are striving
to attract attention to themselves, by
saying the tariff had nothing to do with
the matter, and that the election was
merely triumph of organization
Instead the eleetiOn was n Z inct1v q
peoples victory. The managers and
bosses everywhere we're surprised Ii
was such an awakening as organization
can never produce It is the result oil
fifteen years Of education on the tariff,
and It is an order from the people to the
Democratic party to move forward.