The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1894-04-10

mating character a the incoms sax By
citing shs sneons tar Of tsE~T5, which
sxsezssd from tie psopse an aggregate
Sim Of f2E. 20. ssT-s6 OF this sum tho
Eastern ssases paid - per cent. tbs
Mit1is states s. pr esnt. SD soesther
they raid n pes cent Esu York alons
paid % per cent
He frankly declared. az prefer In
direct taxstio1 and saria reform rather
fhsn direct tases and tariff sxsinction.
prefer taxing foreign products rather
than taxing home produssIonar
He pointed out that the COMMITTEES.
While claiming that the ameaded bill. TAX
ing sugar. iron. coal and other ARTICLES
from the free list, would produces . sar-
plus. atiif retained the income tax This
10 the strength 81 HAS speech: IL shows
PLAINLY shas he - st heart . Dsmocrntic
proteesioniss of the school Of Tildsn and
Samuel J. Randall. and yet Hin had the
weakness 20 offer to voss Tor the Mills bill
Of 1851. vhi<h Randall opposed. The
Mills bill OF 1857 was sectional tariff bill.
which placed wool on the free list and
taxed sugar. There ID one logical oppo-
site TO the Republican policy Of equal pro-
lection 20 competitive Industries. whether
raw materials or manufactures. equal pro-
lection to producer and manufacture.
and thaf ID the Chicago platform OF . tarif
for revenue only. The Democracy In con-
eress has not dared keep this pledgs, Pres
idsns Cleveland has not dared keep il. and
nov even Senator Hill. while he repu-
dates the Wilson tariff bill With it, In
come ssx. offers TO support the Mills tariff
bill Of 1857. which 10 . sectional tariff. like
the Wilson tariff bill. barring the income
tai. which vas sddsd - bait TO catch
Popuiist suckers.
Senator Hill had grand chance 10 20
20 the full length Of his opposition 20 the
sectional Wilson tariff bill and demand
that his party in congress keep its pledge
made ut Chicago for tariff for revenue
only. Instead Of doing this he offers TO
vote for another sectional tariff, the Mills
blu Of 1851, which 10 in principle nothing
but the Wilson tariff bill minus the In.
come tax.
Had Samuel ]. Randall stood In David
b. Hili's shoes he would hare risen to the
level Of the occasion and insisted on the
Chicago platform Of . tariff for revenue
oniy, which taxed oil imports. whether
raw materials or finished goods, 30 or IS
Per cent. according 70 the revenue needs
Of the country. Hiii's offer to vote for
the Mills bill il the weak point of his
speech, for the difference between the Mills
bill and the Wilson bill 10 not one Of prin-
eipis bat Of degree; both are Illogical ~ IN
answer 10 the Republican policy Of equal
protection 10 both producer OF raw ma
teriais and manufacturer of finished goods.
The Mills bill and the Wilson bill both
recognize protection 20 sectional interests,
and both declared for protected sugar and
free wool The income tar, - bone
thrown to the hungry dog Of the Popu.
lists. makes the Wilson bill the more
odious Of the two. but both arc sectional
tariffs, both are hostile to the interests
of Northern Agricultural products and
labor. The farmers Of the Empire state
would repudiate this kind Of legislation,
lection TO finished goods. The people
viii have one thing or the other; they will
either have protection ell round to pro-
Queer and manufacturer. - under the Nc
Kinley bill, or they win have . tariff for
revenue only Is pledged BY the Democracy
at Chicago. No hybrid measure like the
Mills bill or the Wilson bill will ever be
endured by the people. and the wonder il
that David B. HUI does not SEQ IL
The Republicans do not care button
whether congress snacts the Wilson bill or
the Mills bill. except that the addition OF
the income tax makes the Wilson bill, the
more odious bill Of the two. II all that
David b. Hill expects to do Is to get the
Mills bill substituted for the Wilson bill
he viii not save his party from defeat. for
the North At its FIRST opportunity will re-
pndiate either Of these sectional steps TO-
ward free trade. The people will have one
thing or the other: they viii have high
protective policy or . tariff tor rcvenue
only: they viii not have the hybrid tariff
legislation OF the Mills or the Wilson bill,
which are nothing bat sectional tariff
measures, devised. defended and enacted
by the solid South ~ . policy of retaliation
and vindictivenssa
Joseph II. ChoAte. the leader of the bar OF
New York city. in . recent speech at the
Cooper Union said that the shame Of
Cieveiand's administration rs in per-
hitting the South TO wresk ven geance on
the North. They are trying to give Us
that four.foe;ed Wild beast. that Demo-
cratic what-is-it, generally known IS the
Wilson tariff bill. They are trying TO give
Us that iour-footed famoas~of-ali taxes.
an income tar. measures that represent
Southern retaliation for events which
have proceeded them"
Mr. Choate was right when he said that
the North Was determined that the At
tempt of the South to punish that seo;ion
of the country which furnished the re-
sources and the men for the great events
of 1851 must be as Overwhelmingly re-
pudlsted as Vas the attempt Of TIA. Sec
ton TO create . government one OF the
eoruer~sionss Of which was 10 be slavery
and the ether It's twin sister. freq trade.
Senator HUI sees something OF what Is
in sscre for the Democratic party. bat he
does nes see far enough. or he would never
have offered 10 vote for the Mills bill.
------------
rnR ElEcrioN IN RHODE ISLAND
The full returns of the state election In
Rhode Island held on the &sh inst sAow