The morning call., 1894-04-30
WHAT THE CHANGES WILL BE
That on Sugar Will Make but
Little Difference.
TROUBLE win THE INCOME TAX.
Some Parts of 1t Must Certainly Be
Modified Before 1t Will Meet
With Approval.

WASHINGTON. April 29.-Secretary Car
Isle has authorized the following state
ment in reply to an inquiry by an Asso-
ciated Press reporter as to whether 1t was
true he had taken part In the conferences
which it has been said were being eld for
the purpose of agreeing upon certain
amendments to the pending tariff bill:
II have had no conference upon this
subject with anybody except the Demo-
cratic members OF the Senate Committee
ON Finance, and therefore cannot state of
my own personal knowledge which has
occurred in any of those conferences that
may have taken place. 1t Is true an
effort is being made to agree upon such
changes in the pending bill as will secure
for 1t the united and active support OF all
the Democrats in the Senate.
"The indications now are that their sup
port can and will be secured without
making radical changes in the rates OF
duty or material alterations in the form or
structure of the tariff schedules as they
were passed by the House. In fact l re-
gard most of the changes now under con-
sideration as quite unimportant. while the
remainder are not of such character as
substantially to effect the merits OF the
bill as measure for the reformation of
the worst features of the existing legisla-
tion upon this subject.
II do not think we ought to permit diff
ferences Of opinion upon mere matters OF
detail or in regard to small increase or
reduction of rates in the bill as it now
stands to prevent REDEEM ption OF our
pledges to the people, and therefore 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 con-
cessons upon these points as will consoll-
date our strength and pass the measure at
the earliest possible date.
$50 far as the proposed amendments re-
late to duties upon important articles OF
consumption now subject to duty, the rates
suggested as the basis for adjustment are
much lower than in the present law, while
there are only a few instances In which
they are higher than in the bill reported
by the Senate committee.
"Ry far the most important single ar
ticle upon which a change Of duty is now
proposed is sugar, raw and refined, and it
is strenuously contended by persons in
terested in the production of this article
that the specific rates already in the bill
as reported by the Senate committee are
higher than the ad-valorem rates which it
is now proposed to insert.
whether this is correct or not depends
on the price of sugar In the foreign mar
kets from time 20 time, and therefore it is
not possible to make an exactly accurate
statement upon the subject; but I am sat-
isfied that the difference, If any. between
the specific rates heretofore proposed and
the ad-valorem rate now under considera-
tion is so small as to be of no material
consequence either way. At any rate,
think differences of opinion upon this
question. which have always been trouble
some and vexatlous. should not be allowed
to defeat the passage of the tariff bill, and
l believe this is the opinion Of all intelli-
gent and sincere advocates of revenue re-
form.
"The repeal of the Mckinley act and the
substitution of a more equitable measure
is Of vital importance to the,prosperisy of
the country, and the people have right to
expect that all who are really in favor OF a
reduction of tariff taxation will make such
reasonable concessions to. each others
views DIS Will suCoo
results. If the country is to wait for tariff
reform until measure is devised which is
entirely acceptable in all its parts to every
Senator and Representative whose vote is
necessary to pass II. our promises will
never be kept"
"Are any changes proposed In that part
of the bill which relates to the income
tax?" was asked.
ut is well known" said the Secretary.
"that there has been from the beginning
considerable opposition to the proposed
income tax, even among those who nave
voted for and supported the bill with that
feature in 1t. Much Of this opposition has
been based upon the provisions of the bill
which prescribe the methods of ascertain
ing and collecting the tax. some of which
are alleged to be arbitrary and inquisi-
torial
I'm my opinion many of these objec-
tionable provisions ought to be and can be
safely omitted from the bill. and other
changes can be made which the advocates
Of the income tag can consistently accept
and which will at the same time remove
the principal objections Of its opponents