The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1891-12-02
CRISP AND MILLS ON THE TARIFF.

The HERALD, though DESTROYS of seeing
ROGER Q. MILLS elected Speaker of the
House OF Representatives, is not in sympa-
thy with those newspapers which oppose
CHARLES f. CRIsP on the alleged ground
Of his being RANDALL, or protection,
Democrat. Mr.. CRISP has been unfortu-
nate in some of his friends, who advocate
his election because to them he seems the
most available asp rant with whom to de-
feat Mr.. MILLS. Thus the New York Sun
and the New York World with we'll
known anlmus, take the side of Mr. CRISP,
just as they would that of Mr. McM1LLIN
or Mr.. SPRINGER, or Mr.. HATCH, if either of
these gentlemen presented to their view
better chance to accomplish the purpose
at hand. The defeat of Mr. MILLS on suy
ground, whether of superior parliamentary
capacity, personal popularity, or what not,
would, In consequence of his identhcat on
with tariff reform agitation, and his posi-
tlon on the ways and means committee, be
naturally and logically blow at the lead
ing issue of the Democratic party. Such
defeat could not have an effect Ga the rest
of the Democratic candidates other wise
than to shade them in the public mind re-
garding their complete accord with the
party, as pronounced in the platform of
1858 and in every convention since This
might, and probably would, be unjust,
for we have NO idea whatever of auv
contemplated treachery, in case Of the
choice of any one OF Mr.. MILLS opponents,
TO the great and overshadowing political
principle that is foremost in the peoples
minds. But nevertheless, whilst all of
these gentlemen are doubtless true and re-
liable, the ideal representative and cham
pion around whom Democratic expectations
cluster is unguestionably the member from
Texas.
A week or so ago the New York World
addressed queries to both CRISP and MILLS,
asking each to what extent he could DE con.
sidered free trader. Mr.. CRISP replies
that on the tariff he has always favored
genuine reform and positive reduction
bis first vote was for CARLISLE against
RANDALL. Later he voted TO r the MoRRI-
son bill and the MILLS bill. In his tariff
speeches, in and out of Congress. he has ad-
vocated reduction of duties. He quotes
Modify the existing tarif laws; reduce taxa
ton; permit some reasonable competition in
the market; destroy trusts; accord equal rights
TO all and special privilege TO none. Give him
free bagging, in which the farmer of the west
sacks his corn and with which the farmer OF
the south wraps his cotton. Give him free iron
ties, with which in the south he binds his cot
ton bales and with which in the west he bales
10 haty IN iros ral,,
on his wooden clothes and on his cotton goods,
In that way, and in that way only, can YOU
benefit the great mass OF farmers of the south
and west You cannot increase the price OF
their products by protective tariff duties, but
you can decrease to them the cost of produc
ton and Of living by reducing the tarir on
those articles used to make their crops and on
those articles of necessity which all families
must use.
So much for Mr.. CRISP, and it cannot be
denied he stands on firm ground. Mr..
Mills reply is, Of course, not less unmis-
would try, II had the power, to make the
tariff low for the United States. l would ex,
empt from taxation all raw material Why?
Because We could then produce cheaper than
any other people, and sell in markets now
closed to us by reason of the higher cost which
the tax on material makes. That would give
vastly more employment to our labor, and con-
higher wages than any proposed sys-
tenn OF taxation. The first question the legisla
TOR must ask himself is, How will It affect EN-.
ployment OF American labors
Having rendered free from taxation all raw
the rate on the finished goods should
20 reduced to that figure that will bring the re.
luired revenue and no more. This reduction
If rate win be reduction OF price to the con.
lumer. and largely increase home consumption