The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1895-08-09
AN ESSENTIAL DIFFERENCE.

One of the essential differences be-
| tween the Republican and Democratic
parties is involved in the question of
the tariff. That the Democratic posi-
ton on this subject may be correctly
presented, devoid of Republican quib-
bles and inaccuracies, We reproduce
the tariff plank of the Democratic plat
form of 1892:
I'VE denounce Republican protection
as fraud; a robbery of the great ma
Jority Of the American people for the
be a fundamental principle of the
Democratic party that the federal gov
ernment has no constitutional power
TO impose and collect tariff duties eX-
cept for the purpose of revenue only,
and We demand that the collection of
such taxes shall be limited to the
necessities of the government when
honestly and economically admins
! tered
We have Republican contemporary
in this city which seeks TO confuse
the public mind on this important
question. First, it denounces a tariff
for revenue only as an endeavor to
smash American industries and en-
courage foreign manufactures. Next,
it declares that the bill enacted by the
Democratic party as a tariff reform
measure is a protective measure. Then
it declares that a tariff for revenue
only is free trade. Anon it announces
that the Democratic tariff bill was
left partly protective" And finally
the same paper, after these gyrations.
makes this statement:
I'VE do not know that any tariff
was ever levied except to obtain
revenue, We do not know that any
money obtained from the tariff was
ever used in any way except to pay
the expenses Of the government"
Now the essential difference between
the Democratic and Republican doc
trines on the tariff is, that the former
IS tariff for revenue only, and the
latter levied for the express purpose
Of what is called 'the protection of
American industries" That is to say,
high duties are imposed to enable
American manufacturers to charge
high prices for their goods. If the Re
publican theory is that the tariff is
not levied except to obtain revenue,
there is no difference on this point
between the two parties
But is this true? It is not true. Our
neighbor, as is common with it when
houndering about on public topics, mas
fallen into a hole. To get out of il,
the above admission is made. 1t runs
head first against it's former assersions
and arguments. If tariff for revenue
IS free trade. and our contemporary
knows of no tariff that was ever
levied except to obtain revenue, then
we have had nothing but tree trade
from the beginning of the government
up to the present date, and there is no
tariff issue between the Democratic
and the Republican parties.
1t is true that when a tariff is inn
posed, whatever may be it's purpose the
duties collected under it go into the
national treasury. So that a tariff for
protection, which is an unconstitu-
tional tariff because the constitution
gives no authority to levy duties for
the purpose of protecting any particu-
lar class of the American people. must
be paid in to the public treasury Thus.
a Republican tariff is a tariff for pro-
lection with incidental revenue. a
Democratic tariff is a tariff for
revenue and it may operate so as to
afford incidental protection. The pur-
pose of levying the tariff in the two
cases is thus essentially different
while revenue is obtained from the
operations of either
But is it true that mo money OBJ
tanned from the tariff was ever USED
in any way except to pay the expenses
OF the governments" It is not true !
If it were there would be no contro- |
versy between the two parties on this |
question, and our reckless neighbor |
has stated that which it must know
TO be totally untrue.
The money paid out for nounties to
the sugar-makers of this country came
from the national treasury. The
money collected from duties under the
tariff went into the national treasury.
The payment of bounties vas rot enc
Of the expenses of the government. 1t
was the robbery of the many who raid
The duties, or taxes in other forms. for
the benefit Of the few. There is no
for it in the constitution.
The declaration in the Democratic
platform is true. Republican protec-
ion is fraud. The federal govern
nent has no constitutional power to i'm
pose and collect duties except for the
of revenue only, and therefore
Republican protection, with its &C
'ompanying heresy, the bounty system.
s Unconstitutional, the robbery of the
many for the benefit of the few.
NO USE DENYING 1T.