Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1894-05-30
S ON E ARE Nj AD
House Democrats at Outs With Their
Congressional Committee.
ALL OVER A TARIFF CIRCULAR
Alleged Efforts to Influence Action
on the Senate Scheme.
MR.. TARSNEY'S LETTER

O-
The democrats OF the House do not get
over their mad about the action of the con-
gressional committee in sending out as a
campaign document comparative state
ment of the rates of duty under the House
and the Senate tariff bills. The action of
the committee Is referred to as unheard of
and utterly unwarranted. 1t is the function
OF the committee to supply literature on
accomplished legislation, while this. 1t is
claimed. is intended to commit the party to
the cause of the Senate where there is a
conflict between the two houses not yet set
tied. If the Senate bill had already become
a law. 1t would be right enough to defend
1t as far as possible.
AS yet ID is not known which bill or what
bill will become a law, and this circular is
regarded as defense of the Senate COM
mittee, (which has not yet been Endorsed by
either House or Senate.
To Whip the House Into Acceptance.
1t is charged that the action is an un-
warranted attempt to use the congressional
committee to whip the House into the ac-
ceptance of the Senate scheme. 1t Is the in
tentioa of the democratic leaders of the
House to resist the Senate scheme to the
extent of their ability.
The conference committee on the part OF
the House will be composed of men who
will hold to the House bill as long as they
have the House behind them. A great deal
of feeling has been aroused by the circular.
and Ii is believed that the effect will be to
retard rather than to hasten an agreement.
The following letter written by Mr. Tarsney
of the ways and means committee Is spoken
of in terms of approval by his colleagues in
the House:
MIR. Tarsney's Letter.
I am In receipt from you of a circular let
ter Of the 26th instant with inclosure Of
printed slip. in part purporting to be a tab
ulation showing comparative rates Of taxa
ton fixed by the Wilson bill and the bill
now pending in the Senate and assuming to
show a difference in the average rates of
the two bills of but 1.27 per cent.
You request that send one of said slips
to each Of the democratic newspapers pub
lished In my district, with request that the
same be published In such papers. Believing
that said comparative statement is not
predicated upon a fair or just basis for COM
parison and that the difference in the aver
age or rates Of the two bills shown there
from is misleading; that the deductions in
tended to be drawn from such comparison
cannot be defended must respectfully de-
cline the request to give publication to the
same In my district when later 1 would be
compelled to admit the misleading character
of such statement rE
II the average rates of the two bills were
based upon the rates fixed ppob tie sa3pe
articles In each bill-if the Uffis were ideriti-
cal in the articles subject to taxation the
comparison would not be misleading; hut
as the average rate shown by the Senate
bill Is determined not only upon the rates
fixed upon the articles enumerated in the
wilson Dill. but also upon large number
OF articles taken from the free list of that
bill, the importations of which amount in
value OF $l20OOO,OOO, 1t certainly is mis-
leading. This comparative statement shows
an average rate upon the sugar schedule
n
the same schedule of the Senate bill 80 so
per cent, thus purporting to show an in
crease OF but 11.l6 per cent in taxation
upon sugar by the Senate bill over the
House bill.
Equally comprehensive and fair is your
statement which shows that while under
the Mckinley law refined sugar is taxed
one-half cent per pound and the average
rate upon the sugar schedule under that
law Is 1455 per cent. putting all sugars
upon the free list under the Wilson bill
would raise the average rate to %. 43 per
cent. '--s~
The Wilson bill as passed by the House
placed all sugars upon the free list. Under
the head OF sugar schedule" in that bill
a few articles manufactured of sugar such
as confectionery, etc., were enumerated and
rates of taxation thereon fixed. the average
of the rates thereon being 2S.43 per cent.
The Senate bill puts all sugars back on the
taxed list with an average rate of 3959 per
cent n very slight difference in figures. but
a substantial difference in taxation. The
2S43 per cent taxation under the sugar
schedule of the Wilson bill would amount
to $4,000. The 80 per cent under the
Senate bill would amount to between $45,-
600, 900 and $J0.0O0,00O.
A careful examination Of the figures of
this statement relating to the other sched-
tiles will show. though not to the same de-
gree as these. that while figures will not lie,
they can be compiled so as to be very de-
eeptive.
based upon the same Identical articles will
necessarily be unfair and misleading,
might suggest that If law were framed
practically in accordance with the English
customs schedules, taxing only spirits to-
be Geo. and few like articles of luxury. the
average rate under such law would be much
higher than that of the Wilson bill, the
Senate bill. or the Mckinley law. Yet the
people. Notwithstanding such Increase of
the average rate. would be relieved of a
very great burden of taxation.
If our only purpose was to reduce tine
general average of our rates of taxation
and not the burdens of taxation we could
have accomplished that by having no free
list and putting the articles now on the free
list upon the tax list with a nominal rate
This would greatly reduce the general aver
age. This line having to a great extent
been followed by the Senate accounts for
the satisfactory general average which they
show and present in the statement which
you ask me to have published. 1 think q
less misleading. more candid and fair
atement to give out for publica ton would
be that under the Mckinley law the people
are taxed annually S1DSOUO. .OOU; under the
senate bill II is proposed to tax them SlI3,-
COCOON, and under the House bill Sl25.00o,OJ0,
which shows difference of something
more than LII per cent. Very respectfully,
JOHN C. TARSNEY.
Appropriations for Statistical Re
.DtR