The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1894-05-10
A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

The tariff bill now before the United
States Senate is not presented as per-
feet measure. Neither is it claimed @
be satisfactory in all its details to the
Democratic party 1t is of necessity in
the nature of a compromise. Senator
Hoar declares it is neither free trade
nor a protectionist measure" The gem
tleman from Massachusetts is right, for
once, and we thank him for the state
ment
The Democratic party did not propose,
when coming before the country for the
suffrages of the people in 1892, to pass
either a free trade or protectionist
bill. 1t proposed TO reform the tariff
with the view of bringing the duties on
imports to a revenue basis, their consti-
tutional limit and purpose. The voice
of the people declared in its favor. This
was not a popular "spasm." but the
third expression of the popular will
at the polls emphasized in an unmis-
taxable manner, so emphatic indeed,
that it laid out his party fat on its
back.
The various industries of this country
have been SO pampered and fed and fat
tened by protection, that a sudden COM
plete withdrawal of that support which
high tariffs framed in their special in
terest have furnished, would not only
prove injurious to them, but be unwise
as a matter of public policy. How such
a sweeping course would have been op-
posed can be seen by the clamor which
has been raised, and is now resounding
from every section Of the country, for
special and particular recognition in the
bill under consideration.
We say it would have been impossible
to enact a measure that would suit the
extreme radical portion of the Demo
cratic party. An absolute free trade
bill would be, of course, an absolute
impossibility. No one demanded it, un-
less the term free trade is taken to
mean something approaching to the
English tariff policy. The bill in its
present state has been arranged to meet
the conflicting views and interests of
different sections of the country and so
obtain sufficient support to secure its
passage.
Because of the notifications that
have been made, Republican organs are
proclaiming it as a protective measure.
If that is true it ought to gain their
approval and be voted for by the Re
publicans in the Senate. But they ap-
pear to be fighting it just as fercely
as ever. Senator Hoar. however, sets
that question at rest. 1t is mot a pro-
tectionist measure he says.
The difference between a tariff for
revenue and tariff for protection
seems to be ignored by Republican pa
pers in their TRADES against the Will
son bill Or perhaps they are not able
to distinguish the difference when any
measure imposing duties upon imports
is under discussion. Because the
Democratic platform denounces Re-
publican protection as robbery and un-
constitutional, they contend that any
impost, whether low or high, must be
open to the same denunciation.
The purpose in view in framing al
tariff bill is the turning point in the
controversy. If the object is to raise
necessary revenue for the expenses of
the government. that is in accord with
the letter and spirit of the Constitu-
ton. If it is for the purpose of pro-
noting the interests of a certain class
or classes of the community, it is tax
ing the many for the special benefit of
a few. which is disguised robbery, and
no warrant for such legislation can be
found in that instrument
The mischief of the so-called protec-
tive system is that. in addition to the
wrong of this enforced contribution by
the masses for the enrichment of the
classes there is no line of limit to the
burdens thus imposed. But in the tar
if for revenue principle the limit is