Evening capital. (Annapolis, Md.) 1884-1910, 1892-11-01
THOMAS G. SHEARMAN
THE ABLE WRITER PuNCTURES
M'KlNLEY'S SENSELESS CLAIMS.

Mr.. Shearman Applies the "Reductio al
Absurdum." and Shows How 1t Would
BE impossible for Trade to Continue
Under Present Alleged Conditions.
A great many people assert that every
tariff is tax, and great many more
shout that no tariff is tax. When you
ask the first set of people how much of
a tax is the tariff on common earth,
which no one wants to import, whether
taxed or free, they are puzzled. When
you ask the second set why the McKin-
ley bin made raw sugar free, if the tariff
upon it was not tax, they are angry
and say that we know that revenue
tariff is tax. But why did they not
say so in the first place?
However. we make some progre IS. II
is not merely conceded-it is insisted
by those who have been declaring for
years that 1.-The tariff is not tax" that
after all revenue tariff is tax. And
now Mr.. Mckinley goes little further,
and boasts that every tariff is a tax; only
he asserts that tariff for protection is
tax upon foreigners, while tariff for
revenue only is tax upon Americans
He says that the Republican party pro
poses to collect the tariff taxes from
foreigners. while the Democratic party
proposes to collect them from Americans.
1t is only very short time since the
chosen representatives of the American
Protective Tariff league denounced as a
downright lie the assertion that the
tariff was n tax at all, and here is the
foremost champion of their cause assert
ing that every tariff is tax, either upon
Americans or upon foreigners.
So at last we can agree upon few
points. Let us make these clear.
Every tariff is tax law. 1t lays taxes
ard does nothing else. In some cases
nobody pays the tax, because nobody
wants to bring in the article taxed. But
tax is tax. whether it is ever paid or
not. Every tariff is tax, although not
every tax imposed by the tariff is col
lected.
All the money received by the govern
ment under a tariff (amounting to an
average of about $211 900, 600 a year for
the last ten years. is tax.
All the money thus collected upon ar
ticles which are not produced in our own
country i'll sufficient quantities to reduce
the price below that at which foreigners
would sell to us is tax upon our own
people, Thus the duty on sugar was
tax upon ourselves, although a large
amount of sugar is produced here, but
not enough to supply the wants of our
people, SO that we were compelled TO
buy more from abroad.
All the rest of the money collected
under tariff is tax upon our people,
except SO much as can be shown to be
collected from foreigners only.
Only small part of the taxes thus
collected are laid upon luxuries such as
are used only by the rich. The rich peo-
pie are not numerous enough to enable
the government to collect large reve-
nue. from taxes upon their Injuries.
And as the necessaries and decent com
forts of life are sold to the comparative
poor in far greater amounts than to the
rich, the tariff taxes SO far as they are
paid by our own people are paid mostly
by the poor.
All these statements are agreed to by
I0is N4CfNAdnO, 0uN-
Kinley, Senator Sherman, Senator Mills
and every intelligent protectionist, tariff
reforner or free trader.
We have now some common ground
of agreement, from which we can pro-
ceed TO talk together about matters upon
which we do not all agree, with some
chance of understanding each other. A
revenue tariff is a tax, and every tariff
TO the extent to which it produces any
revenue is a tax. And these taxes are
mainly paid by the poor. The rich pay
but a small part of them.
Now we come to points upon which,
we all do not agree. Mr.. Mckinley says
that the taxes imposed by protective
tariff are paid by foreigners, and that
the great difference between his tariff
and a revenue tariff is that he makes
foreigners pay the taxes, while the
Democratic party proposes to make the
Americans pay their own taxes. He and
his party also assert that when no rev
enue is collected by the government un-
der an item IN the tariff no one pays
any tax in consequence of it. The OPP
ponents of protection maintain that
Americans cannot make foreigners pay
any share of American taxes worth talk
Ing about, and that they ought not to
try. They also maintain that an enor-
mons tax is collected by few Amer
lean capitalists and landowners for their
own benefit in consequence of tariff
taxes, which are purposely made 50 high
as to prevent the government from col
iecfing anything.
Let rs first consider whether foreign
ers do pay or can be made 10 pay any
large share Of our tariff taxes. Mr..
Mckinley himself has furnished as q
test by which we can decide this ques-
| tion. He abolished the taxes ON 1ssw
sugar, especially because they we're