The true Democrat. [volume] (Bayou Sara [La.]) 1892-1928, 1896-10-03
t,1tes no excuse for attempting to meet
limitlsss waste by pitiless taxation:

tutcS no excuse Tor atSempGins W taosV
limitlsss waste by pitiless taxation:
| And if for any reason it becomes
desirable to provide for more revenue
! it can be and it should be raised by
taxes on wealth, or by tar if or excise
upon articles comparatively those OF
luxury, rather than by Increased ta&'
alton unon wool AMI sugar. For these
are the two articles which the one in
clothing and the othar in fooa-have
l'ecome at once the leading ones o.
ali those Consumed by oar people, and
those as to which the poor and tue
rich are most nearly on Il par rs to per
capita consumption; and upon which,
therefore, any tax is ideally vicious
as nc adjustment Of burdens III pro-
portion to want rather than wealth.
Even were Mr.. Mckinley correct in
his charge that the Wilson act is m
adequate for revenue purposes, his
proposal now to increase taxation
would be none the less absurd when
We consider the actual condition OF
toe Treasury. At the beginning OF
this fiscal year it contained Of tree cash
some 1910, 900, 900. that is to say,
$170, 600, 0o0 in addition to the $780,
GOO, 900 gold reserve. It is true that
of the receipts of bond sales portion
had been used to meet Treasury deh-
cits-by for the greater portion OF
these having grown under McKin}ey's
own bill. Eut as net result there
remained at the beginning OF this
fiscal year, couple of months ago,
sufficient free cash in the Treasury.
after making provision Of $l00, 000,-
900 for the, gold reserve, to have met,
without additional taxation, all def
cts for six years to come, even though
pension expenditures should during
that time remain7as they cannot-at
their late high figures, and though
postal receipts should stop increasing
as they will not-and though BUSH
ness should remain until 1902 as de-
pressed as it has been ever since, the
Treasury WAS put ut hazard. Under
sach conditions, with o surplus in tho
Treasury above the sold reserve, OF
more than 10 per cent. at the entire
circulation i'll the country outside o:
the Treasury, Mr.. Mckinley proposes,
without any necessity for revenue, and
solely rs sacrifice to the protection
fetish, further TO tax our people and
further to contr&cr the currency.
Iii. Mckinney Charges tthas American
labor is nos sufficiently r2ote ctea III.
dcr..tthe Wilson bill.
What would he hs7e9
The average duty levied by the Will
son bill upon all imports, including
free AS we'll dutiable ones, IS ABOVE 81
per cent, which is about the total Ia.
Dor cost in American products. In
tie more. highly developed mauufec'
lures it IS Of COURSE higher. OF these
those OF iron and steel and textiles
constitute the ec1star part OF our i'm
ports, ami steel rails and cotton anG
WOODEN cloths ere probably the most
representative items. Taking the re
ports for 1890 aud 1891 OF the United
States Commissioner CT Labor, we tino
that the total labor cost per ton o.
steel rails Ssirom materials in earth tc
the finished product was then in toe
United States $ll.59, IN Great Britain
S7.Sl ami Oh the Continent somewhat
higher than in Great Britain. 70 ulee1
this So. 70 difference per ton IN labo,
cost, the Wilson bill gives SIS! pei
ton protection, which, with the trans
port cost OF such bulky articles, IN
nures the American producer protec
ton of 1T least his total labor cost. II
cotton and WOODEN cloths the same re
ports show the labor cost then to have
been on the average we'll under Is pc!
cent, while the Wilson bill protect!
them by dnties averaging 70 per cent.
or, with every allowance (and adding
nothing for transportation), giving
:, protection OF more than the total Ia
!, Der cost. If, in fact, labor, with sucl
; o tariff, is not sufficiently subsidized
even from the protec:ionlst stand
point, would it not be we'll before pro
posing further taxation to find ou
what proportion OF the tariff taxes H.
. Dor actually gets, a2a into whose
pockets goes the bulk Of the ''protec
, ton claimed to be imposed for Ia
boris sole benefit?
: JOHN De Writ WARNER.
Farmers SNt; tic Nail VrCGt.