Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1890-07-12
THE TWO. GREAT PARTIES
OF The DAY.
70 tAe Bdsor Of The .Nelrx

should be relieved or protected.
$50 in regard to the doctrine Of
local self-gOveTnment - an essen.
tally Democratic doctrine. The
party that has preached il for cen
fury has gone back on Il as il relates
10 the Territories, adopting the ex.
IRENE Republican notion Of the SUI
preme power Of Congress and other
anti-Demccratic ideas"
Perhaps a brief statement Of the
main differences and resemblance
between the two parties may be Of
interest 30 your readers.
The writer Of this is not a Demo
crat because be- thinks the Demo
cratic party n model Of consistency,
or purity, nor does he think there is
NO virtue in Republication. He
believes, however, that there are
rather greater differences between
the two parties than the above
quotations seem 10 indicate. Some
differences are us follows.
THE TARIFF.
The line OF demarcation between
the two great parties has become
very decided and definite on the
tariff within the last two years.
Never before, in my judgment, has
the line been mUredefinitely drawn.
President CIeveland's famous mes
sage declared the existence Of a dam
gerous surplus revenue, showed that
it should be reduced by tightening
the taxes on food, clothing and other
common necessities of life, and
urged immediate relief from "a con-
dition and not a theory that con-
fronts U.S.
The Republican party declared
that 4 surplus was better than a de-
felt, and that rather than surren-
der any part OF our protective sys-
tenn, we favor the entire repeal OF
internal taxes Here, then, is one
broad difference: the Democratic
party would levy taxes mainly on
luxuries, and leave necessities IN
taxed; the Republican party would
levy taxes on necessities and leave
! 4uAuAAEc Ia e. NAlrhs anu Nouatips
the internal revenue article) free
from taxation. Cheap food and
clothing versus cheap whisky and
tobacco, is I decided contrast.
1t is no answer 10 this public
avOwal and Subsequent actual prac-
tice of each party, TO say that re-
publicans like Knute Nelson
said they preferred ''cheap
lHmber, salt and clothes' to
cheap whisky, or that Demo-
Gratis, like Mr.. Dana, believe in the
doctrine Of protection. Because
some Liberals favor low taxes,
and some Peoples Party men favor
high taxes, does not show that
there is 10 difference between the
PARTIES. Some "Liberals'' are OBJ
posed 10 DISTINGUISHING the majority
here, and some of the majority are
apathetic on the question; but that
does not proveany identity between
the two parties, one Of which is
working 10 accomplish the disfran-
Chisement. the other 10 defeat il. In
pursuance OF the democratic prin-
ciple, the Mills Bill was framed. II
reduced the rate Of taxation from an
average Of g. per cent TO an average
Of e per cent,and provided that raw
wool, raw fax, hemp and jute,
lumber, salt, tinplate ami certain
chemicals should be added 10 the
free list. This bill, IL was estimated,
would reduce the revenue about
$50, 100000 a year.
In pursuance OF the Republican
policy, the Mckinley bill has been
framed. IL increases the rate Of
tax TO SIS per cent. as it passed tine
House, and 10 5l.97 per cent as
amended by the Senate. This bill.
as shown by the report Of the Senate
finance commItte, will increase the
revenue SIS, 600, 600 4 year. and this,
too, under n measure entitled, "a
bill 70 reduce the revenues"
The average war duties in 1865
were +T.S8 per cent; the highest
war duties ever reached were an
average of SiS.63 per cent. in 1865.
The Republican party is the party
Of war taxes; the Democratic party
would reduce the tariff to a revenue
basis.
The Ohio Democratic platform
says, eve demand such judicious
reduction Of the present burden
some tariff as shall result in prOduc-
ing a revenue sufficient only TO
meet the expenses OF an economical
administration Of government"
The Ohio Republican platform
says, 1--WE are in favor Of pTOkoc-
5-'e tariff, and we denounce the
Ohio Democratic platform Of tariff
for revenue only"
Tariff for revenue only. is free
trade. Free trade England collects
over Sl0O, 600 yearly frOm her
taxes on imports, chiefly luxuries:
protected Uncle Sam collects $751;
100000 yearly on imports, chiefly
common necessaries. That is the
difference, and the only difference,
between the so-called free trade''
and the sO-cal'ed "prOtectiOn." Ex-
cept on 4 few articles. there is no
such thing rs absolute free trade
or absolute protection.