The true northerner. [volume] (Paw Paw, Mich.) 1855-1920, 1890-07-02
PAW PAW, MICH. JULY 2, 1890.
We take the following extract from


made in support of the new tariff bill,
as prepared by the Ways and Means
Committee, of which he is prominent
member:
Democrat, revenue reformer, free
trader, and Republican, all alike be-
lieve in imposing duties on imports rs
"A means of defraying governmental eX-
penses.
Nor would there be any serious con.
troversy over the rate of taxation To be
imposed if we could agree upon what
articles the assessment should be made
for all admit that il should be sufficient
to produce the requisite sum To meet
the ordinary expenses of the govern
ment, and if there was no other issue
than the question of rates, the differ
ences between the two parties could be
readily adjusted.
The real controversy, primarily, is
over the class of imported articles on
which duties should be imposed what
articles should come in free aud what
should be dutiable; and, secondly, the
rate of duty the taxed article should
bear. These are the only questions at
issue, and their determination involves
the conflicting theories of the two par
ties as To whether duties should he lev
led for revenue only, or for the double
purpose of revenue and protection. 1t
is possible To frame two schedules of
duties which would produce an equal
amount of revenue; yet one would pro-
tect American industries and the other
utterly destroy them.
The Democratic party declares i'm ia
vor OF a tariff for revenue only, while
the Republican party is equally pro-
nounced in favor of "A tariff for revenue
and protection-not incidental nor ac-
cidental, but intentional protection.
These are the two irreconcilable theo-
ries confronting us, by one or the other
of which the tariff problem is to be
solved. Here we come, as declared in
the views of the minority, Ito the part
ing of the ways"
And now, what does the Democratic
party mean by a tariff for revenue
.Only?" Do you mean that in levying
duties you are actuated only by the ne
cessities of the government, and that if
no revenues were needed for the sup
port of the government you would inn
pose no duty on imports give the world
free access To our markets, and at once
open the flood-gates of foreign importa-
ton and expose our industrial system
To swift and certain distinctions Do
you mean that? If not, are we To under
stand bya tariff for revenue only that
you would impose and collect duties
exclusively on the things we do not
produce in this country. such as tea,
coffee and the like, and thereby avoid
not only the fact, but even the sem
blance of protection or encouragement
10 any domestic industry?
Is that what you mean If not that,
do you mean by II tariff for revenue
only" that in imposing a tax on imports
your chief and only concern shall be
the necessities of the government, and
so adjust the tax as TO secure the most
certain and abundant revenue. without
regard to the effect such imposition
might have on American industries and
American labor? Is that what YOU
meang Or are we To understand by "a
tariff for revenue only" that, if prOtec-
ton comes 10 any domestic industry by
reason of duty on imports, it shall
come, not rs an end but rs an incident?
While it may be difficult to compre-
bend just what the Democratic party
means by tariff for revenue only"
and while the members of that organ
iZation themselves may not be able to
arrive ut a common understanding as
To the exact Specification of the term,
yet the party, rs an organized political
power in this country, stands to-day as
the avowed antagonist of the doctrine
of protection and the acknowledged
champion of the principles OF free trade
He who believes in free trade must
support the Democratic party, and he
who believes in protection must sustain
the Republican party, for a tariff for
revenue only" however disguised, is IA
step toward free trade, and because 1t
Is Il step in that direction the Republi-
can party opposes it,
The Republican party does not be-
lieve in Il tariff for revenue only" We
do not belive in imposing a duty on ar
ticles OF foreign production, the like of
which are not and can not proGtably
I've produced in this country but all
such products we would admit free of
duty, that the purchaser may secure
them rs cheaply rs possible i'm the mar
kets of the world. Upon this principle
we have materially enlarged the free
list in our bill, and if we have failed to
place on the free list single article of
foreign production which is not and
can not be produced ut home, it is an
error which the majority of the com
mittee will be prompt TO rectify.
If there is any article on the free list
in this bill, the like of which, by fair
and adequate protection, could be pro
duced in this country in sufficient guam
titles to meet the home demand, it is an
oversight on the part of the majority of
the committee, and if it can be pointed
out, we will move that il be transferred
to the dutiable list and given such pro-
lection as will insure its production i'm
this country.
If there is a single article on the duti-
able list, where the duty is SO low as to
expose the like domestic industry to a
ruinous foreign competition and thus
endanger its permanency, it has but to
be indicated to secure such measure of
protection as will insure its safety
If the proposed rate of duty on any
articles on the dutiable list is i'm excess
of what is required to give fair and adj
equate protection TO the competing do
nestle industry, none will be more
ready than the majority of your com
mittee to reduce the rate to the level of
such requirement.
Upon this theory the bill is construct
ed, and we present it to the Honse and
NnaW - IL.