Freeland tribune. (Freeland, Pa.) 1888-1921, 1890-05-15
A Thing of Shreds and Patches.


the tariff bill of the majority of the Ways
and Means Committee has been pre-
sented to the House. The popular de.
mand for a reduction of taxation has
alton. Every schedule but one increases
existing rates. The sugar duties are
wiped out, but this reduction is offset
many times over by increased taxes on
other articles. The bill will not even re-
duce the revenue taxes, and the amount
which the people will be compelled to
pay for private benefits, if the bill be
enacted, is increased to an indefinite but
enormous extent.
With all their efforts to secure harmoni-
GUS action the Republican members of
the committee were unable to agree
Mr.. Mex emma, of California, dissented
and presented bill protesting against
the sugar schedule and the proposed
bounties on that product and raw silk.
"The bill in its sugar schedule" he
says, "makes an arbitrary and invidious
distinction between the sugar industry
and other industries, Il distinction incon-
sistent with the principle upon which
the bill is framed and upon which it can
alone be justified. Protection, as under
stood politically, is the clear right of all
industries or none. A tariff may be tax
bounty certainly is. A tariff tax les
sens with the production it encourages,
while bounty increases with the pro-
lection. A bounty is as useless as it is
burdensome, and as odious as it is use
less. 1t has no justification in either the
practice, the principles or the professions
of the Republican party. If a bounty
is useful for sugar, why not for other
things? In all the range of articles with
which the bill deals are none fit for the
bounty but sugar? i a bounty is a tax
of less burden than is tariff, why are
sugar consumers selected for favor? A
Republican House Of Representatives
should not set this example. Who can
say where the contagon of it will stop?"
Speaking of the best sugar industry of
California, Mr.. McKenna says: "Must
an industry be able TO supply the home
consumption before il is entitled to pro
lection? Other industries have not done
this, industries that have been protected
in every tariff bill and are protected in
the present bill. 1t is submitted, then
upon every principle upon which pro
tective duty can be applied to an Ameri
can industry, it must be applied to sugar
Upon every principle upon which pro
tective duty can be denied to sugars i
must be denied to every other American
industry. Protection must be universe
or not at all. 1t must be national or no
at all. This bill presented gives bount,
to silk cocoons and raw silk. 1t is as OBJ
jectionable as a bounty on sugar."
OF Mr.. McKennas S argument it is sufIi
cient for the present to say that from ;
protectionist standpoint it is utterly un
assailable. No protectionist can success
fully attack Mr.. McKenna's position
| He is wrong, not because be dissents from
protectionist doctrine, but because he
agrees with and upholds it. He is wrong
because the carrying out of his theory
that the benefits of protection should be
equitably distributed is an utter impossi
bility, and it is this fact that makes pro
lection the gigantic fraud that it has
proved itself to be in practice.
The committee has vacilated to sucl
an extent that it has lost the confidence
even of the Republican party. Nobody
would venture to predict whether its bill
will receive the approval of the House o
undergo further changes in that body
If it ever goes to the Senate the proba
bility is that when it comes back Nc
Kinley would not recognize it. If tn
bill shall pass the House it will ge
through by leg rolling with the silver in
flationists. But it is uncertain whethe
there is really serious intention on tn
part of the majority to enact it at thi
session, or whether it is offered merel
for the purpose of catching votes in tn
fall elections.
Democrats need have no fear of il
effect. One thing may be regarded a
certain: Nothing that this Congress wi
be able to agree upon will take the tari1
question out of politics even temporarily
Popular education on this subject ha
gone so far that the tariff fight will en-,
only when the principle shall be recog
nized and acted upon that government
has no right to levy taxes on the peopl
for other than purely governmental pur
poses; that the taxation of the many TO
the purpose of enriching the few is moth
ing less than legalized robbery.
They Don't Know Their Real Enemy.
/ l,,, - e., ,Dfl