The Portland daily press., 1890-07-18
MIR. RIaIne's Proposals Again.

Speaking few years ago to an assem-
blage of his fellow citizens Of Maine, the
Hon. James G. Blaine uttered these words !:
The constitution gives to the House of Repre-
sentatiyes the sole and exclusive right to origin
ate bills of revenue, and this great power should
DC KEPT Wnere IL can pc controlled by the direct
wen that sundry articles of Canadian product
should be admitted free, or with diminished duty;
Vantageous to admit certain articles from us free
Of duty Let each country, decide the question for
II ge ay % Inc SgaSSpg feature Of
Interests will be sacrificed in order that other
things may pc promoted. Let us simply place
commissioning her products, or admitting
them free, according to our own Judgment Of the
interest Of our own revenue, and the pursuits and
needs OF our own people.
1t had been suggested about the time these
words were spoken. by the Democrats, that
0 our taxing power might be used for the pur-
pose of E making se@e advantageous trades
with our neighbors across the border, and
that we might compel Canada to take off
some of the restrictions that she was impos-
ing upon our products, and thus secure for
Americans an extension Of their market.
But Mr.. Blaine said no-"this great power
should be kept where 1t can be controlled
by the direct and unbiased vote Of the peo-
ple." that is, in the House of Represents
tives. And then he went on to say that the
true rule for us to follow in our treatment of
the products Of foreign countries was to i'm
pose such duties upon them as appeared to
be In the interest Of our OWE revenue, leav-
ing foreign countries to do the same with our
products.
A few weeks ago Mr.. Blaine appealed to
Congress to revise an Important section of
tariff bill which had passed the body to
which the constitution gives the sole and ex-
elusive power Of raising revenue so that its
provisions should be operative or inopera-
tive, according as the President of the United
States, acting within certain limits,
might decide. The purpose of this
request was clearly stated to be that the
section In question might be used to procure
some advantageous concessions to our prod
ucts from foreign nations, or in his express
sive phrase Of some years before, that there
might be some "log-rolling." 1t is obvious
that this request Is in conflict with the prin-
ciple laid down in his speech to his Maine
constituents which opposed using the tariff
TO trade with
But we are not among those that believe
that 1t is the business Of statesman always
to be consistent. II he has committed him
self to principle or policy which expert
ence subsequently teaches him is wrong or
disadyantageous. it is much more creditable
to abandon it than to pig-headsdly cling to
1t for the sake of consistency. III Mr.. Blame
thinks now that the rule Of tariff legislation
which he laid down some years ago as the
true one Is not Of so general application as
he then supposed, and that state Of facts
has arisen which calls for its modi-
fcati0n or reversal, it is creditable
and courageous for him to reverse
1t. The question of Mr.. Blaine's consistency
Is not the issue. The only question is as to
whether be is right in supposing that his
general principle is less sound than he be-
lieved when he enunciated 1t, and that GER
tain conditions existing or assumed to exist,
make 1t expedient to set it aside-in the wav
he suggests.
Let us examine all the conditions surround,
ing the subject matter and see. For dozen
years now the question of the revision of the
tariff has been under consideration by the
people Of the United States. There has
been substantial agreement among all the
people, whether believers in the doctrine Of
free trade or the doctrine Of protection, that
a revision was necessary for two rea-
sons. First, because we were raising more
revenue each year than we needed and were
thereby constantly accommodating surplus
In the treasury. Second, because changed
conditions had made many Uf the provisions
of our tariff obsolete and unequal. Several
times the Democrats attempted revision
and failed. Finally an appeal was taken to
the country to determine the lines along
which revision should be made, and the
county determined that 1t should be along
the line OF protection, and the present Con-
gress was commissioned to undertake and
complete the work. The House of Represen
tatiVes, the body empowered by the constitu-
tlon 10 originate revenue bills, promptly
obeyed the mandate and passed a tariff re-
vision measure. One Of the most conspicu-
Gus sections In that bill, and the one most
universally understood and approved, was
The one that repealed the duty on sugar.
Some of the sections were sharply criticised
oven by protectionists. but this one received
practically universal approval. In his
speech at the banquet Of the Home Market
Club In Boston early in June the Hon. Nell
son Dingley, Jr., than whom no man more
clearly understands the needs of the farmers
especially commended this feature of Tho
bill as CT very great value to them. Az we
produce but very little sugar the duty on
that article was a tax upon the consumer
and 1t was clearly understood that its re.