Orleans County monitor. [volume] (Barton, Vt.) 1872-1953, 1893-12-04
THE NEW TARIFF BILL.

The new tariff bill prepared by the
democratic majority of the ways and
means committee is partly good and
partly bad, a mixture Of wisdom and
folly. It is not SO bad and foolish as
there was at one time reason to fear
that it would be. For that measure OF
relief let the country be duly thankful.
The bill bears many infallible marks
of having been modified under the
influence Of the recent elections.
The new tariff bill is not constructed
on the lines Of the Chicago platform.
1t is not measure embodying tariff
for revenue only. 1t is not a total
abandonment of the protective prin-
ciple. Those who believe in the right
eousnesS and wisdom of the protect
i've principle will look upon the bill
with regret and relief-many great
American industries; relief that the
arm which is uplifted proves to have
been in considerable degree para
lyzed. On the whole, the country will
breathe more freely than it has been
able to do since last Maj ch. The worst
is now known. It is not SO bad as it
might have been. Moreover, there is
yet hope for better things. It viii be
attacked at many points, not by re-
publicans alone, but by democrats as
well. Almost certainly it will undergo
notifications in committee Of the
whole, and these notifications viii be
in the direction Of protection, not in
that of free trade. In other words,
the bill will have some of its fangs
drawn before it is permitted to bite.
That it is not framed on lines of tar
iff for revenue only is apparent on the
most casual inspection, and still more
apparent on careful scrutiny. The big
free list proves that. Tens Of millions
of revenue could be raised by moder-
ate duties on wool, coal, iron ore, lum-
Der, sugar and salt, not to mention
scores of minor articles, on which no
duty at all is TO be levied, if the bill
passes in it's present shape. Nothing
can possibly be palmer than the fact
that tariff for revenue only can con
tain no free list at all. Whatever may
be the reason for admitting any article
free, the reason cannot be the raising
revenue, for no revenue is obtainable
that way. A free list is a protective
list; therefore the Mckinley act con-
tains the largest free list eyer known
in the tariff legislation of this country,
that being the most effectively pro-
TO 10
ing an extensive free list the demo-
cratic majority of the ways and means
committee have proceeded along the
lines of the McKinleyism which their
platform insanely denounces as a
eliminating atrocity.' The princi
pie is the same in both cases.
With regard to specific points, a full
expression of opinion cannot be made
intelligently at this writing, because
of the immense number of items in
volved, many Of which will call for
special study and comparison. But
number of leading features stand out
in such bold relief that a just verdict
can be rendered at once. AS to sugar,
there is much to commend and little |
to condemn Fidelity to the Chicago |
platform demanded a reimposition of
the duty on raw sugar, and, for that
matter, on tea aud coffee too. A tar
if for revenue only could not by any
possibility sacrifice the vast sum Of at /
least $50, 900, 900 per annum that might
be easily obtained from duties on /
those articles. But consistency is not /
SO great a jewel as common sense, and
the democrats exhibited a degree of
common sense at once gratifying and
when they decided to fol-
low, in the main, republican prece-
dents in regard to sugar, tea and cof-
fee.
The gradual extinction of the sugar
bounty, beginning in July, 1894, and
continuing through oipht wears ic not |