New-York tribune., 1896-01-01
ANOTHER "SURPLUS" SHOWN.
AND WILSON AND CARLISLE HAVE A
HAPPY NEW YEARS EVE.


PARENT ONE OF s5u.Go5 PRODUCED BY TIRE
MENDots EXERTToNs To MAKE a REC
ORD FOR THE WILSON TARIFF LAW.
fBy TELEGRAPH TO THE rRrBrNEl
Washington Dec 3l.-There are two happy men In
Washington this New Years Eve. They are POST
ma ster- General Wilson. the author. If not the
nnisher. of the present magnificent Tariff law ana
! Secretary Carlisle. under whose splendid manage
ment that law produced "surpus' in the last
month OF the year Of 1895 To he sure the sur
plus" amounts only s5il.GO5 TO be sure. this Is
only the third month In tho sixteen in which the
law has been in operation In which 1t has produced
even a momentary surplus. To be sure. each one OF
those months in which "surplus' was produced
was followed hy months Of deficiency, in
dlcating that the surplus in each case was produced
| by holding back expenditures in order - make a
showing for that particular month TO be sure the
total deficiency in the first sixteen months in which
the law has been In operation ending with to-day,
| amounts to s.OOD00OO To be sure the Mckinley
law against which this one has been pitted from its
infancy. produced IN It's first sixteen months sur
plus Of S2l.00Oo0o. against the deficiency or
$4,000 900 produced by this To be sure tho ex-
pcnditures OF the Treasury have been held down to
less than $4,000 day during the last two weeks In
order produce showing Of little more than
$4,000 surplus To be sure. the total receipts OF the
month have only been s2j.2ss sos. about 100000
less than the average monthly expenditures. To
| history OF the Wilson law in which it produced "a
! much revenue as the Mckinley law averaged per
! month during It's entire normal operation. To he
sure. the average monthly receipts under this law
have been only $4,000 O0o a month. against an aver
! age Of over s3000Oco month during the normal
workings Of the Mckinley law Yet 1t Is an ap-
parent surplus"
CARIISI.E'S Gu'ESSES WIDE OF THE MARK.
To-day clds the six,ceath month OF the operations
/ Of Tu LAY he e * le
wear and the thirty fourth month OF the rule OF
Secretary Carlisle over the Treasury Department.
| That Secretary Carlisle was not born Yankee and
tha; his guessing faculties are not ahnormaly de-
| v,loped is apparent 10y examination OF the ls
! ures which to-days statement shows regarding the
half years operations OF the Treasury Department.
ON December D. lSg when the new Tariff law had
been three months IN operation ana ought TO nave
shown something OF what II could d. M Carlisle
estimated that the revenues for the fiscal year 1856
the nrst half OF which ends to-day. would be SIG
/ FI1.io7. The year having made one-haf ts record
to-day. II ls interesting 20 observe that IN" receipts
Gncudlng those of the Postoflcc Department which
are estimated A. something more than last years.
amount % ten7.ofoo0o. which would Indicate thai
/ y Ctrsic's estimate of December ?. 1884, was
$,coco0 IN Of tho capacities OF the law.
That Mr. Carlisle recognized that he had made
slight mistake In his calculation OF what the law
could do is appsr,n, from the fact that on Dccem-
her IT, iN's. hr sent 20 Congress another estimate
= the clpts Tor mo. putting ~" total AT SJlH.
hr a triGe of Ns.oco.,'O less than hs es;lmate OF
twelve months earlier That hls estimate OF si3l.
~f'.io7 made twenty days ls likely 10 be good
many million dollars In excess OF the capacity ~ the
new Law. even under hts wonderful management IS
indicated by the fact already shown that the total
receipts for the half year are only sa. Ooo0o
even allowing the most liberal postal receipts. accu
rat" figures Of which cannot De obtained.
In this matter ~ estimates II IL rather curious and
Interesting 10 ohscrv" the work OF Secretary Car
lls. from tho beginning OF his term down to the
present moment. His hrst estimat" Of the workings
OF th. revenue system sent to Congress Dcccm-
hor TO- lsa3 He then estimated that the receipts for
the fiscal year ending June 30 1894. would be si20-
/ ~ 635. The figures produced at The end OF the
fiscal year only six months and twentv-two days
after his estimate 3,2 sO2 iss. showing that
he trinc OF ts.O0.oJo In excess OF the facts
/ In his optimistic estimate the first session
! % Congress after he became the Secretary OF
/ the Treasury II Is interesting To remark. In
ncction with this. that his estimate for the fiscal
year ending June 20 1895. which CON-
grcss also In his first report. G+.opO.10 In
excess OF What the years revenue footed up. An
other curious and interesting fact is developed by
a study OF Mr. carsle's estimates. for IT shows
that he officially admitted that he did expect
much OF the Wilson law he did of the old
Mckinley Tariff law In his report 10 Congress dated
! December I9 1893. he 1T IL estimated that
upon the basis OF existing laws the OF the
Government for the fiscal year 1895 will be sji.-
~ 7N" This estimate II must bc remembered.
made when the Mckinley tariff the existing
law" upon which he based his estimates of the
receipts. One year later when the Wilson Tariff
act had been I'm operation three months and was
the existing law he says In his report to Congress:
THE revenues OF the Government for the current
| fiscal year GS'J are estimated upon the basis OF
existing laws ti2i i2,. 7is" This shows that hc
estimated the years receipts under the Wilson
law at s3o.oooooo less than he had estimated they
| would be under the Mckinley law.
| WORKINGS OF THE LAWS CONTRAsTED
| Secretary Carlisle having thus admitted by his
estimates that the Wilson Tariff law cannot be
| relied upon to produce much revenue az he ex-
pcctcd from the Mckinley law II IL interesting to
| compare the workings Of those two laws up the
present time. And. curously. the comparison shows
that however Inaccurate and optimistic Mr. Car
Isle may have been In his estimates he was rlght
In assuming that the now law would fall far behind
III. Mckinley law in its earnings for the Treasury
Dcpartmcnt. OF course not even the hard
.ncd advocate of the Wilson law Will for a moment
assume that 1t would be fair to the Mckinley law
to compare the closing months of It's operations
with the opening months Of the Wilson law, for
a matter of course. all importatons were held back
during the months Of it's operation between the cleo
ton of 1892 and the final enactment OF the Wilson
| law In order to obtain fair comparison OF the
! suit of the laws 1t would seem to be necessary
to compare the first sixteen months of the Wilson,
| Mckinley law The result OF this compa rison shows
that the Wilson law In us first sixteen months has
| produced revenues amounting to 00.0s5.6sS. and
! that the MCKINLEY law in It's first sixteen months
! produced Sisl. .SA2. 10
| In order however, that nobody can possibly doubt
| the ability Of the Mckinley law to stand the test
| of comparison with the present law. even under the
most adverse circumstances. II may be said that the
! receipts during the last sixteen months OF the Nc
j Knley law when importers were holding back their
imports. banks were breaking and the country
suffering the greatest panic OF this generation
result Of prospective Democratic legislation. were
x420 5ss a against 500 0s56s3 In the first sixteen
| months OF the present law when importers
| pourns in foreign productions at the rate OF $780,
NsO 0O wear in excess OF those under the Mckinley
law. -, ,,.,,
| In this matter of comparison between the Wilson
and Mex nley laws II is interesting also to note the
m uch