New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-11-07
POLITICAL OBSERVATIONS.
SENATOR CARLlsLEs SPEECH.
,nE KENTUCKY ORATOR MAKES HIS CU;ToM-
ARY SEKIES OF ELUNDERS.

TEE KENTUCKY ORATOR MAKES HIS CU;ToM-
AIRY SERIES OF ELUNDERS.
TO the Editor Of The Tribune
Sir: Believing Senator Carlisle. Of Kentucky. to be
ono of the abest expoDens Of the principles advocated
BY the Democratic party to-day, Ii was with the eA
pectaton OF fair and logical treatment OF the issues
now before the people that went 20 hear him Monday
evening. at the meeting held under the auspices o '
Reform Club, at Cooper Union.
senator Carlisle. In his speech, dealt largely win
the tariff question: and at two vital points IN I.is
argument his reasoning was most faiaclouS' Ia"
first point dealt with the cOnstitu'lonahy OF 'ne Po
tective tarih the second an attempt TO estimate
the cost to the American people OF tie eS'aohSh'N'
and maintenance Of the tnplate Industry.
To support the contention that the Protective ur"i
Is unconstitutional the distinguished Senator reaa
largely from the opinion OF Justice Miller III 'he ce
OF Loan Association agt. Topeka go WALL o''l' VIM
came before the supreme Court OF the 'Hi'cu 0'"o'
upon q writ Of TO the Circuit ''uF' III '"'
District OF Kansas and decided upon the cohsruc
zion and INTERPRETATION not Of the Constitution OF the
1n,ted States but OF the Constitution Of Kansas. This
was a circumstance in the case whlch 'he oei"O'
did not deem It necessary to consider hor ulo 'e
state that the tax there held unconstitutional uuer
the State Constitution was tax ieNel pS inc chg
Of Topeka for the payment Of bonds donated by the
CITY TO a particular company TO encourage tne rs
tahsh,nr OF mandatory OF iron bridges in that city
and lastly In quoting Justice Mlllers OPINION t'e
Senator thought 1t unnecessary TO quote th"t Viuu p
OF the opinion where the learned Justice says III IN
these cases however the decision has turhed upon
,be uuestion whether the taxation BY which this ala
was afforded 10 the building Of railroads was 1or
public purpose. Those who came to the conclusion
that II was held the laws for that purpose wand
rhose who could not reach that conclusion Held Ueni
.,o,d In all the controversy this has been The
turning. point Of the judgments OF TIE courts
The Senator assumed that a protective tarin is
ofn
publ,c II the Senator's assumption be correct aiHi
I, protective tariff can be supported on no other
GROUND than the power to tax. then the senator's
conclusion that protective tariff, being TAX ior
q private and not for public purpose Is u'co"-
stitutional, is not controverube. But III this as
sumption the Senator begged the question inc ques-
ton of the purpose Of tax, whether pubic or pr'-
yate has been the turning point, said Mr. Justice
Miller I'm all the controversy before the courts
II would have been difficult, l believe IL would
have been impossible. for Senator Carlisle 10 nave
shown that the protective tariff, whence t'e Ma
tlonal Government derives far the greater part Vi l
revenues is tax levied for purposes which are not
n,h,ic ~ the support OF the Government is not a
n, bl,c purpose II is Impossible to conceive such u
purpose. The Topeka case, on which the senator
relied is not parallel in regard to the facts on Whch
the decision rests. In that case the tax coiec'eo
was 10 be paid, not for the support OF the Govern
ment BIZ. into the hands of particular manufactur-
Justice Clifford dissenting thought that the tax was
within legislative power and constitutional courts
cannot nudity" he said, an act OF the STATE Legs
lature on the vague ground that they thinK IL op-
posed TO a general latent spirit supposed to pervade
or underlie the constitution where neither the terms
nor the implications Of the instrument disclose any
such RESTRICTIONS
The support Of the National Government being
nub,,c purpose there decision rendered by the
supreme Court Of the United states since It's organ
,zation that would lend color the belief that the
protective tariff Is unconstitutional because OF It's
further purpose Of protection to industry Least OF
all can IL be believed that Mr. Justice Miller, WITH
bs Unknown views which were broad as they
were able, could have held the tdrH uilCons.4-
futiongl There are other GROUNDS upon WHICH ue
conscIutionahU OF the tariff can De suppoL.cu. =.
IS a regulation of commerce, adjusting our co'hlorcc
with foreign nations power exercised by every
sovereign governmentand is. therefore, wlh ;,s The
power OF Congress. But senator tarllslc uiu hot
touch upon such other grounds ,,--,,.,.,.
I find ii difficult account for Senator Carhsles
error In estimating the cost TO the people Oh INC IN
upon the tinpato imported during mo hscal year
ending June so, 1892 the sum OF So 40,924.' inns
sum the Senator figures Item III the cost OF ua-
talnng the tinplate Industry. II IS hard to MINK
that the senator believes this. Every dollar OF inc
duty is used In defraling the expenses Of the NATIONAL
Government. and II the amount had not b'Fh coieeS,n
on ttDpatc il must have been collected in some other
way This amount therefore. is properly an Item IN
the necessary revenue Of the Government, and not
dollar OF II represents the cost OF maintaining te I'M
Mate industry. The which II costs 10 main
tain that industry is 10 be determined by estimating
the amount paid by the people for the home prOdnct
OF t1npate and finding how much that amount l. IN
quantity Of unplate had 1t been imported free Of duty
LOUIS HICKS.
$50 Broadway, n. Y, Nov. l. 1892.