The Coconino weekly sun., 1894-04-05

Great Britain for certain West Indian colonies and British Gmana, Nicaragua, Honduras ana Austro-Hungary. In these arrangements It has been the aim of the government to secure enlarged markets for the produce Of agricui-
 ture, which, added to their splendid home
 market, would permanently secure them from
 tho occasional depreS5tons which visit our
 agriculturists because of their surplus prod uctss
 As the result of these commercial arrange ments. and for the most part due to them. our trade has shown gratifying increase The do-
 mestc exports to Germany and Austro-Hun- gary had increased in value, up to December,
 ls9J from S47 OC0 O0) to $57 GOO 0J0 or more than 2l per cent With American countries the
 value of our exports had inc.easel up to that
 wards of 23 per cent The total in. crease in tho value of exports to all countries with which reciprocal arrange
 ments have been made had been ,02l, which sum is chiefly from wheat, flour, meat
 and dairy products, from lumber and the man ufactures of iron and steel Our imports with
 theso countries have increased also in the same period consisting of articles which VIC do not
 ourselves produce, like sugar, coffee, india rub Der and crude drugs
 During tho frst half of the year 1891 we OK ported to Cuba 14,00J barrels of flour. During the first half of tho year iS02 under the reef procity clause, we exported to the samo coun- try 331, 900 barrels, For the year ending Au- gust 3l, l89l our total exports to Cuba were sll,y000O1 For the corresponding period end ing August 3l 1892 our total exports were Sl9,- | iOO,OOO under a law not yet two years in opera ton. or this great increase nearly s4,UJ0,UJO
 were in flour, about t2,OO0oOO were in bacon, | porK and other provisions, and large propor- tion ot the remaining exports were also a2ri
 cultural products And yet the democratic | leaders in congress seriously propose to shut | the door of this splendid opportunity in the face of the American farmer.
 am not hero to discuss tariff rates or sched- ules. These are subjects to change up or down, l as new conditions require it; but my inSistence l is that these changes must ever be governed by | tho protective principle, aud within that prin- rfn rntn ,t,nu ha ahn ha md tvin ha amended as time, new processes Of manufac-
 ture and changed commercial conditions re- | Quire; but they must not fall below rate | which will adequately measure the difference | between the American scale of wages and that | of competing countries, and must always be in l favor of the labor Of our own country and the | home market for our people. The principle ! upon which they were made is not subject to ] amendment The tariff policy of this country | must be protective. That is what we contend
 for-that is what the American people mean to 1 have.
 The pretext for the proposed bill is not to | raise more revenue The declaration of its l author and the house committee is that it will | reduce the revenue The same effort at tariff | reduction has been repeatedly made ID the past
 when we had a surplus revenue in the treasury. | The present law was adequate to meet all tho | expenses of the government, and did meet | them for the first two and . half years or it's | operation. During no year Of President liar l rison's administration did the re .epts fall be- | low the expenses of the government. and when | President Harrison went out of power, while | his administration had paid of more than S293-
 900, ,000 of the principal and interest Of the na- | tional debt yet he turned over to tho adminis- 1 tration which succeeded him surplus of up- | ward or Sl24 900 GOO including the reserve fund.- | which under the republican policy had never | been cncroached upon.
 | If there ts not enough revenue now 1t is be- ! cause the proposed change of policy has had | the effect of diminishing tI The proposed pol | icy has not only distubed domestic trade, but | the import trade Tue reason the revenues are i less under the present administration is be-
 cause iuportatiOns are less, and the importa. | tious are less because our people buy less of l foreign goods just as they arc now buying less | Of domestic goods, also owing 10 their pecu-
 niary distress, and all this is because their in-
 comes and wages have been either cut of or | greatly reduced
 You cannot have large importati tions perma.
 nently unless the people are prosperous, and | the more prosperous they are the larger the lm- | poftanons When homo prosperity is retarded | inportations are checked and revenues dmin- | ish; hence the strictly revenue tarin can never
 bo depended upon m nn emergency. lmporta.
 ttonT are reduced by tho fact that the party in | power is pleuged to decrease the duties. Those | sho otherwise would import goods are infiu- | enced not to do so now because the present ad. | dinistration Is committed 10 tho policy of low. '. erng the duties from protective 10 revenue
 basis Merchants will not import gCods at a | O per cent rate when the government Is pledged 10 a 30 per cent rate, nor can home
 manufacturers produce with safety under such conditions. Importers will wait tor the lower duties, and while so waitlng importattons will
 necessarily decltnc as they arc now declining, | with tho Inevitable result which we now see, | of greatly diminished revenues ! Tho government requires large annual in- | como to meet itS current expenses. This can l only 'bo secured by taxation. Some form Of
 taxation to provide necessary revenue IS lnsep- | direct or tariff taxation Wc must either tax | ourselves and our property, our lands and our | Investments or VIC must tax the products or ! other nations seeking a market here The lat
 ter me thod is resorted 10 by all nations and has l been our chief means of raising revenue since | the government was founded. We have both | systems in operation in this country. Tho l bulk of our revenue comes from tarif taxes and
 the remainder Is secured by taxing spirits and tobacco, which of the long list are the only war i taxes remaining. l The advocates of tariff taxation are divided | into two schools Both schools believe iu rais- l iua public money by tarih, and only differ as | to tho kind of tarir to accomplish this pur- | pose. Ono school, the democratic school advo. | cates tarlff for revenue only: the other, the | republican school, advocates n tarin for reve- | nue and .also protection. A revenue tarif has | no other aim or purpose and dtSclaims every | other save revenue A protective tariff. while | raising all needed revenue, Is ever mindful ! that the taxes imposed shall be upon those ] foreign products which will most encourage | domestic production and rest most lightly 1 upon the consumer The revenue tariff Is un. | mindful of the development and prosperity of
 our country The protective tar,f, while hay l ing revenue and the needs of the treasury all l ways in view, steadily keeps in mind our own | industries and the occupations of our own l people. Arevenue tariff seeks out articles of prime necessity, often such as we cannot pro- | duce in our,own country, and makes them the | subject of taxation. Tho senate has Just intro. | duced an amendment to the Wilson bill which | Is striking illustration of revenue tarin. It l takes sugar, an article which enters into every l mans household and which flor the most part 1 WIG do not produ at homo, from the free list | and places 1t upon the dutiable list
 revenue tariff will raise revenue for timo at least, but L i3 inadequate to encourage, pro- 1 mote and protect production in our own coun- | try Protection seeks out those articles Of | foreign production which we can produce at | home anl puts tariG upon them; and, whle | every importation of such articles produces
 revenue which goes into tho treasury, ig at the | same tiino stimulates our domestic production l and sustains and defends our domestic enter- | prses So long as we have to use the taxing | power why not use 1t in the interest of our own people and their occupations? What is the | gain if we do put money into the public | treasury under revenue tarlu and thereby discourage domestic enterprise and destroy the opportunity for capital and labor | to earn money? Why tax foreign article which we cannot produce rather than one | which we canY In the former case we help no domestic industry; in the latter our tarilfs discriminate against the foreign and in favor 1 of the home product tarld levied exclu- sively for revenue encourages foreign tmpor- l tations-that is what 1t Is made for | and when such Q tariff is levied on articles the like of which we produce at homo, 1t dis courages our own producers by depriving them of tho home market which justly be- longs to them A revenue tariff encourages [ anY fn1 nnvNInt