New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-07-04

ferred the retention of odous income tax in
Tariff bill regardless Of what the consequences may
be- Mr.. President, the course which has thus been
marked out Ia unwlse, nexcusabie and unneces-
years ago when the Democratic party was rent in
twain and Repub.icanism trIumphed for twenty
the possibility OF permanent Democratic success In
any Northern State for many years to come You
array against in almost SOLD front the entire
business men of the country. You foist upon the
party principle Of taxation never sanctioned by
any Democratic National Convention.
You do not seem 70 realize that you have no
Jurisdiction 70 add to or change the principles of
our party, but you disregard precedent In your
mad haste to adopt Populistic principle. You have
purposey and oostinately insisted upon retaining
ocrattc Senators either to vote for the income tax
or to vote against the whole bill. You have left
them no other alternative.
This was unfair, unjust. unpoIltic This course
was adopted. not thOughtlessy. but les2nedly; not
t tnat you loved tarlh reform less but you loved an
income tax more Mr.. President, as between
Populstlc income tax the hand and a Re
publican Tariff law the other choose the
latter as the least Of two evils AS between per-
nicous class legislation, fraught with dangerous
consequences to the country. on the hand. and
simply nigh tariff taxation on the other. 1 prefer
to endure tho latter. least for brief period. II
am compelled To choose between them. do this
not without some reluctance. because / always
regret 10 differ with party friends but the CON
seriousness OF right and my own self-respect forbid
any DINER course. Besides, you have made my path
OF duty an easy one The Senate bill the German
Compromise bill, az It Is now generally known in
the press throughout the country-I the bill in
us present shapes neither satisfactory to the
Democratic party nor 10 the country. There is no
m!staking public sentiment upon this point The
true principles of tariff reform have been sacrificed
IN the effort TO insure the retention Of an income
tax This the country believes: this tho country
understands We promised the people bread and
we are giving them a stone We promised them
free raw materials. and we are giving them taxed
coal taxed iron ore. taxed coke taxed lead ore and
other taxed raw materials. They expected free raw
susar' Dut ye are taxing n9t only that article but
sugar tax and an income tax but II seems that
Tralg haV tor
\ VIOLATION OF DEMOCRATIC PRINCIPLES
THE provisions of the bill are not consistent:
they vlo!at- wel!-estab shed Democratic principles
they are unfair in their discrlmna tons and their
enactment will place the Democratic party in a
false and untenable position. 1t is Gear the BILL in
us present form. should BE- changed. modified and
duty TO DO it now. before II Is too late "A II now
dates our pledges: it Exposes MS To- ust crI,iclsn
and rdicule which ought % be avoided. Eliminate
an honest consist mt and genuine Tariff bill upon
strict revenue lines. with an raw materials free
cratic Senator without the aid Of a single Populst
vote. and which the country would welcome and APP
mea sure. Numerous Senators around the Demo.
cratic side Of this chamber must feel az though
temperate principles have been surrendered or bar
compromise measure v.hlcb H. rnuy a ' o{i =,
no one. am sure that II they expressed their
honest sentiments they DO not approve this bill any
more than ! DO. Tine issue Of tariff reform had
than emascuated dlshgured ana despolei in the
manner now proposed Let there be a genuine
sincere and essential triumph for the Of rev
.hut revision or none az all II Republican pro-
tectlon was fraud and 4 robbery. as We declared
IN me Chicago platform, is Democratic protection
any the less So?
III we are 10 have income tax and a sugar
taN both. then. unless the other provisions OF the
bill prove impotent. we shall be met with an enor-
nous surplus against which we protested so Wig
Orousy a Few years ago and is IL be said
that Deinocratc surplus Is less Objectionable
than a Republican surplus? This Is not Demo
cratic PHI am sure, II Is not distinctly Repub-
mean Dill; II Is not POpulist bill entire but Il Is
MIXTURE or ALT Is a ragbag prOducton-t Is a
'taZy quit comblnation-it Is splendid nothing.
Il believe the income tax feature as a whole and
IN many or Its details to be unconstitutional But
why dctain the Senate? My objections to the bill
- p",n sttteI oyer ana over again. and Il Is
useless 70 repeat them Each Senator must be
judge Of his own duty 10 his country and his
party IN Il crisis Ike this cast no reflections upon
tho~e VINO diner with me. This bill does meet
the public expectations. but at best is an empty
ana b"ggarly fnment OF Democratic pledges
IL does those things which II ought not TO do and
leaves undone those things which II ought TO do.
Mr. PRESIDENT. do not fail 10 appreciate the
gravity Of the situation. but the course which duty
ana consistency require mo TO pursue at this hour
is rs clear TO me As the monday sun
" sink OF swim. live lie. survive or perish
cannot ana VIII not support this bill in its present
Remarks against the bill were also made by Sem |
atorS Aldrlch utep. r. H. and Chandler rep. |
Mr. Manderson Gsep. Neb) said that he would |
vote against the bill neither flesh fowl-foul
as II was In many OF It's features Il was A blow at
some OF the best interests OF the Governmental
record Of dishonesty and breach OF faith
THE BILL GOES THROUGH
The vote on the passage Of the bill was then pro-
c""'l"l with AMI the result Yeas. 80: nays g.
az given In another column McCaffery Dem. La
was hrs, called; he responded with a vote in the |
negative Before recapltulation. however he asked !