The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-05-05
EVERY GOVERNMENT FoR

GERMAN opposition to the proposed new
tariff law Of the United States has broken
out in the Reichstag. A few weeks ago
1t was voiced by the German minister at
Washington, and now it iinds expression
III the imperial legislature. This is all
right from a German point of view. bur
IL iserVes to emphasize the duty of the
American Congress to legislate for Ameri-
can interests. Congress for the United
States and the Reichstag for Germany is
the correct doctrine. Incidentally, the dis
cussion in the Reichstag vindicates the
policy of a tariff for protection as well as
revenue. The truth is there is not a civil
lzed government in the world that raises
It's necessary revenues without attempting
at the same time to protect, promote and
develop its own national interests and in
dustries. Taxation is a necessary evil. but
1t will exist until some form of govern
ment is discovered or devised that can be
run without money. Indirect taxation. or
raising revenue by customs duties, is the
easiest and most universal form of taxa
ton and most in accordance with Ameri-
can ideas. There is not a government in
the world that does not raise a large part.
all except that of Great Britain. much the
largest part, of its revenues by this form
OF taxation, and all adjust their tariff du-
ties in such a way as, from their point of
view, to best protect and promote their own
interests. The idea of protection and pro-
motion of home interests in the adjustment
of tariff duties is second only to revenue.
1t is so even in Great Britain, where a
larger proportion of the revenue is raised
by excise or internal taxes than in any
other government. Last year the British
government raised, by taxation, a little
over $500, 600, 600, of which about Sl1O,O 0 coo
were raised by customs duties and the re-
mainder by excise, stamp and other taxes.
The British tariff law, such as it is, is
adjusted with reference to British interests.
Those of every other country are adjusted
according to the same principle. the idea of
conserving home interests being second
only to that of revenue. In the adjustment
of its tariff and the levying of customs du-
ties no European country gives a moments
consideration to the interests of the United
States. Our products are admitted or ex-
cluded, taxed highly or heavily, put on the
free list or the dutiable list, first with ref
erence to revenue and second with refer
ence to home interests. That is natural law
and universal principle, and u government
that departed from it would be rightly
condemned by its people.
Applying these principles to Germany one
can readily understand the reasons for the
protest against our proposed tariff law.
Our present tariff is very favorable to Ger
man beet sugar, the manufacture of which
was developed under German protection.
Last year we imported from Germany ST.
OPS, 762 pounds of sugar, valued at $685. 1888.
OF course, that suits Germany very well,
and she would like To have it continue. The
new tariff increases the duty on foreign SUI
gar and will afford sufficient protection to
develop the manufacture of beet sugar in
the United States-an industry, by the way,
which is coming TO the front very rapidly.
That does not suit Germany at ali. In adj
dition TO this, the new tariff viii increase
the duties on other German products and
remove some from the free list to the duti-
able list. That will not suit Germany.
either. 1t is natural that she should regret
these changes and all others detrimental