St. Paul daily globe., 1894-04-30
CARLISLE IS CONFIDENT.
DEMOCRATS WILL NOT LONG DIS
AGREE ON TARiFF.
DIFFERENCES ARE THRILLING.

DIFFERENCES ARE THRILLING.
Those on Sugar are Now the Most
Serious-The Price OF Sugar In
Foreign Markets Has an I'M
portant Bearing-Favors Five
Year Limit to the Proposed In
come Tax.
WASHINGTON. April 29.-Secre tary Of
the Treasury Carlisle has authorized
the following statement in reply TO an
inquiry by an Associated Press reporter
as to whether 1t was true that he had
taken part in the conferences which it
has been said were being held for the
purpose of agreeing upon certain
amendments to the pending tariff bill:
II have had no conference upon the
subject with anybody except the Demo
cratic members of the senate committee
on finance, and, therefore. cannot state
of my own personal knowledge what
has occurred III any other confereh ces
that may have taken place. 1t is true
that an effort is being made to agree
upon such changes in the pending bill
as will secure for it the united and act
i've support of all the Democrats in the
senate. The indications now are that
this support can and will be secured
without making radical changes in the
former structure of the tariff schedules
as they were passed by the house of
representatives. In fact, regard most
of the changes now under consideration
as.
QUITE UNIMPoRTANT,
while the remainder are not of such a
character as substantially to affect the
merits of the bill as a measure for the
reformation of the worst features of
existing legislation upon this subject.
do not think we ought to permit differ
ences OF opinion upon mere matters of
detail or in regard to small increases or
reduction of rates In the bill as it now
stands to prevent the redemption of our
pledges to the people. and, therefore. l
am in favor Of securing, if possible,
without any surrender of principle and
without abandoning any part of the
Democratic policy of tariff reform, such
mutual concessions upon these points
as will consolidate our strength and
pass the measure at the earliest possi-
BILE date. So Tar as the proposed amend
ments relate to duties upon import
articles of consumption now subject to
duty, the rates suggested as the basis
for adjustment are all much lower than
in the present law, while there are only
Jew instances in which they are
higher than in the bill reported by the
senate committee.
'By far the most important single ar
ticle upon which change of duty is
now proposed is sugar. raw and re-; ID,
and it is contended by persons inl re t.
ed in the production of this article mat
the
SPECIFIC RATES
already in the bill. as reported by the
senate committee, are higher than the
ad valorem rates which it is now pro-
posed to insert. Whether this is cor
rect or not depends Oh the price of
sugar in the foreign markets from time
to time. and, therefore, it is not possible
to make an exactly accurate statement
upon the subject; but l am satisfied
that the difference, if any, between the
specified rates heretofore proposed and
the ad valorem rate now under cOnsid-
Grafton is so small as to be of no material
cocSequsGce either way. AT any rate,
1 think ia at differences OF opinion upon
this question. which have always been
trsaEiescne. should not be allowed to
alssat tie passage of the tariff bill. and
i believe this is the opinion of all in
telligent advocates of revenue reform.
"The repeal of the Mckinley act and
the substitution of Il more just and
equitable measure i'll its place are of
vital importance to the prosperity of
the country. and the people have a
right 10 expect that ali who are really
in favor of reduction of tariff taxation
will make such reasonable concessions
TO each others views as will certainly
accomplish these results. Ii the cOun-
try is to wait for tariff reform until q
measure is devised which is
INTIRELY ACCEPTABLE
in all its parts to every senator and
representative whose vote is necessary
to pass it our promises will never be
kept"
Are any changes proposed in that
pdIl OI Tue Dllt WHICH Relates 10 tue Ill
come taA%' was asked.
sit is well known" said the secretary,
"that there has been from the beginning
considerable opposition to the proposed
income tax, even among those who have
voted for and supported the bill with
that feature in it,. Much eff thissop-
position has been based upon the pro-
visions of the bill which prescribe the
methods of ascertaining and collecting
the tax, some Of which are alleged co be
arbitrary. In my opinion many OF these
Obje ctionable provisions ought to be
and can be safely omitted from the bill.
and other changes made which the ad-
vocates of an income tax can accept
and which will at the same time remove
the principal objections of its opponents
and secure their support. This method
OF securing revenue has never before
been resorted to by the government of
the United States eXeeptln time of war,
when 1t was absolutely necessary to use
every means in lis reach, and there are
many patriotic citizens who are not
satisfied that Its adoption as a per-
manent part Of our system is justifiabIe
III time OF peace when no great en-
ergency exists. This view OF the SUBJ
ject could be fairly met, think, by
limiting the operation of the law to
iedSoidUlc pcIiou-Say 1--WE yedTS-SO
that its effect upon the country could be
tested, leaving the people to decide
hereafter, in the light of the experience
thus acquired. whether it shall be
continued or expire by its own terms.
The power to repeal always exists and
the power to re-enact can promptly be
exercised if the majority of the people
approve the measure"