The Portland daily press., 1894-03-29


wholly unsuited to the needs of the
country.
The Wilson bill turns to the past; away
from the present. 1t is for the plapta-
tion, not for the farm and the factory.
AS 1T passed the House it had for its
foundation principle free raw material.
It's authors argued that with free coal.
free iron ore, free lead and free wool the
manufacturers of the United States
would be placed on an equality with the
manufacturers of free trade countries,
and we therefore could not only retain
our own markets but control the
markets of the world.n Based upon this
argument,, which believe to be false,
they declared that with these great
primary products free we would have
steady employment for all the working
men of the country at good wages. And
so in this form the bill passed the Dem
| ocratic House of Representatives and is
| now the subject of angry conten-
tion in the Democratic Senate.
An examination of the bill by the
Democratic members of the finance COM
mittee of the Senate evidently convinces
them that Mr.. Wilson's bill and his argu-
ment in support of the same are alike
based upon false principles. So coal goes
back to the tariff list, iron ore to the
tariff list and lead to the tariff list,
leaving free wool alone, the only product
theory of the House bill. Even
Mr.. Cleveland Is Disregarded
for in his Madison Square Garden
speech, after his nomination in 1892, he
said:
ave believe that the advantage of free
raw material should be accorded to our
manufacturers. We propose, therefore to
stimulate our domestic industrial enter
prise by freeing from duty the imported
raw materials, which by the employ
ment of labor are used in our home
manufactures, thus extending the
markets for their sale and permitting an
increased and steady production with
an allowance of abundant profits"
T have looked with some degree of
care through the bill. / find nothing
but irritation and aggravation to the
great industries OF. the country. No in
terest suffers by it more severely than
agriculture, and labor of all kinds seems
to have been singled out as it's foremost
victim. I have examinedsit care fully to
find some section, paragraph clause or
line removing :" the great burden ofstariH
taxes from Ghe shoulders of the people,
about which we have heard so much for
orators, and have read SO frequently in
Democratic newspapers and platforms,
but have been unsuccessful in fuding
any such provision. 1t is true that
sugar, an article of prime necessity to
every household, and which the law of
1890 made free to the people, has been
tariffed at from | to l 4-10 cents per
pound, every cent of which will be paid
by the consumers of the United States.
But, doubtless in compensation for this
added burden of upward of $50, 600, 900,
and because of it, they lowered the tariff
on tobacco and have extended the
bonded period for the warehousing of
whiskey and given to the distillers eight
years in which to pay the tax. They
have restored the tariff on coal, but then
in fairness they should be credited with
having taken the tariff off OF diamonds.
They reason that the manufacturers ara
| few, forgetting that the workmen are
! many They look to the interests of i'm.
porters, ignoring the farmer and
oplivious of the fact that the agricul
turist is everywhere. Their blows are
directed against the welfare of the
masses of the people, but from them the
country will yet hear, for this is still
government of the people and the popu-
lar will has already marked them for
political overthrow. / do not believe
that the true interests of the South, nor
Of any other section of the conutry, lie
IN the direction of free trade, nor OF the
revenue tariff legislation proposed by
this Congress. The present position and
action of the Democratic leaders on ine
ternal taxes is peculiarly an anomalous
one. They are so determined to break
down the protective system that they are
willingsto resort to internal taxes which
have been opposed not only by every
Democratic National administration,
preceding the present one, from Jack
sons to Buchanan's, but also as mat
ter of principle, by every other admins
Republican, in our history. The only
excuse for the resort to such taxation
has been the financial exigencies OF
actual war.
Laws Imposing Internal Taxes
have always been repealed as rapidly as
such exigencies disappeared, and have
never before been seriously proposed in
times of profound peace. Some of the
same Democratic leaders who, during
and subsequent to the war, stood in
C ongress speaking and voting against
internal taxes and an income tax are
found today heartily favoring them.
They were unwilling to adopt these
| methods of taxation when it was
necessary to preserve the government
and the flag. but they are willing to
adoptsthem now as means of breaking
down the patriotic principles of protec-
| tion under which the North and the
| Northwest, as well as the South, have
enjoyed such unparalleled prosperity
and have attained such marvellous de-
| velopment.
To my mind another hurtful provision
of the Wilson bill, entirely unwarranted
by experience and unjustitiablee. as q
matter of wise international policy, IS
that which repeals section three OF the
act of 1850, commonly known as the
Reciprocity Clause" This, it will be
remem bered, was enacted to secure re-
ciprocal trade between the United
States and countries largely producing
sugar, molasses, coffee. tea and hides,
and under which this country has
| opened up foreign trade profitable to
| the people and of the most promising
| proportions.