The morning call., 1894-02-01

trade. but incidental protection limited by
the amount Of revenue needed for the
wants of the Government economically ad-
ministered, luxuries, and not the necessa-
ries, to bear the burden Of taxation. In
1888 the Democratic national convention
readopted the platform of 1884. and en-
phaszed its devotion to the interests OF
labor. In accepting the nomination of
1892 President Cleveland said:
I'VE wage no exterminating war against
any American Interests. We contemplate
a careful revision of the tariff rather than
free trade"
The platform Of 1892 merely reafirmed
the doctrine that the Government had no
power to levy and collect taxes except for
purposes OF revenue only and denounced
Republican protection as fraud.
Geary c0ntended that the Wilson bill did
not conform to these declarations. The
platform of the Democratic party for the
last ten years had never contemplated a
tariff that would cause such deficit in the
treasury or make it necessary to resort to
new forms Of taxation to raise needed
revenue, such as an income tax and the
internal-revenue features of the Wilson
bill. With charming disregard of the
promises of the party 1t cuts Injuries as
well as Decessaries and lays heavier hand
relatively upon the former than upon the
latter. The Democrats of California ac-
cepted the platform and the declarations of
the President as correctly defining the
policy of the Democratic party. and prom
ised California people that while those
engaged in the production Of necessaries
would not enjoy all the advantages of
former tariffs. yet the reduction would
not be so great as to place them at the
mercy of foreign producers.
He said that luxures were proper sub
jects of taxation. and in that list are al
ways found Spirits wines and dried fruit.
| BY their Interpretation Of an inciden tai
| protection policy the Democrats were en-
abled to carry California last year and the
| Wilson bill does not keep faith with the
| California people According to the
| majority report of the Ways and Means
| Committee. reductions aggregating over
| SI5, ,000, 900 had been made in luxuries and
among them were reductions as follows
In pums, prunes, raisins. figs, lemons and
oranges. 1884, ,632, aud in brandy S214, 900.
The ad valorem clause on still wines would
enable a foreign wine producer to enter
| his wines at any price be pleased, pre-
sumably the old prices that prevailed be-
fore the abolition of ad valorem duties on
still wines, cents per gallon, and this
country would lose S1,170.000 on this item.
Mr.. Geary complained OF the lack of
protection on wool and on raisins and
other dried fruit. Necessities were taxed
higher than luxuries. for cot tons were put
at from 80 to 40 per cent and silks, laceS
and veivets at from 20 to so. The tariff on
barley and hops had been reduced $780,
600 and then this wise committee c0ntem-
plated an increased tax on beer or else an
internal revenue tax on wine to supply the
deficit. Foreign brandies are reduced &c
cents per gallon.
Geary declared that the Wilson bill was
one-half free trade and the rest protection
of the Mckinley brand. and neither o1
them Democratic. He did not feel CON-
pelled to support bill which had been
formulated behind closed doors merely be
cause it had been submitted by Demo
cratic committee. He, with others. haC
been denied the right OF Offering amend
ments.
IF fres trade and high protection are
Democratic doctrines" he said, "then an
no Democrat"
| hC NC uiu HOt cCC lU w lIcs
coal and iron could result in such great
good to San Francisco, while all the res
of California suffered. because San Fran.
| cisco could only progress as the State
prospered. He was not so sure that fire.,
iron would benefit the State. for he ha(
seen some IRON from Shasta, in his dis
trict, which had beer prom ounced superior
to any in Pennsylvania. San Francisco
and California might be more enriched il
developing these mines than by trying
| foreign ore.
I'VE must develop all of California;
industries. he continued. "and stand to.
gether. / believe the Senate will so amend
the Wilson bill that when it returns to tn,
House it will be in such shape that al
Democrats can support il"
The memb bers of the delegation have re-
ceived the following kilograms from Sar
| Francisco:
Please use your best endeavor to defeat the
| Warner and other sugar amendments to Wilson
bill. II these amendments prevail they Will en-
tirely destroy the beet factories and sugar re
fning Industry on this coast.
CLAUS SPRECKELs.
We ask you TO vote against the sugar bin a
amended. We have farmers contracts now t.
deliver to us 5000 tons of beets at a pric
based upon the continuance of the bounty. Th
passage OF the bill means heavy loss thi
year, aud the utter ruin of our business after
ward. ALAMEDA SUGAR COMPANY.
Representative Hilborn, who has pait
considerable attention to the sugar featur
of the bill, is of the opinion that the Sen
ate, objecting to the income tax. will seel
some other means of raising revenue. ant
may put as much as two cents per pount
duty on sugar.