The National tribune., 1897-07-29
THE BURDEN oFPENsIoNPAYMEN
When it is stated that S140,000,000

payments certain class of papers SET
up shrek of horror at the immensely
of this "burden upon the tax payers. y
1t suits the purpose of these papers to
magnify this to the utmost, while rigor-
ously keeping out of sight all that may
tend to modify this burdensomeness,
and show incidental compensations.
In the first place, it is absolutely
false that pension payments are in any
degree burden upon the taxpayer.
No one can successfully allege that a
single dollar paid out for pensions is ex-
tracted from the tax payer for that pur-
pose. To put it in another way: The
Government ought to receive every dol
lar of its present revenues, and many
millions more, even though there were
not single pensioner on the roll. Our
National revenue system is based upon
other considerations than the necessity of
a certain amount Of income to meet
definite expenditures. We impose ex-
cises and duties for other Governmental
and economic purposes, and then use
the revenue so obtained for such Ma
tional purposes as seem commendable.
We do not impose duties to build war
ships, and make improvements on the
Mississippi River, but we impose them to
protect our native industries and COM
merce, and use part of the resulting
revenue to build warships and improve
the Mississippi River. 1t seems un-
necessary to expatiate at length UPON
this clear distinction, in view of the re-
cent disastrous attempt Of President
Cleveland TO exemplify the other system,
which in four years cost the country
more than would be required to pay the
present pension roll for so years. The
people of the United States have rarely
been so rejoiced to escape from any evil
as they were from Mr.. Cleveland's
scourge Of "Tariff for Revenue Only"
A single illustration will serve for the
whole: The whole Of that immense part
of the country reaching from the Ale
ghany Mountains to the Pacific Ocean
is determined that there'shall be a duty
on wool. Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana,
Michigan, Wisconsin, Nebraska, Texas,
Montana, Nevada, Idaho, Wyoming,
Utah, the Dakotas, Washington, Oregon,
California, Arizona and New Mexico
have been particularly vigorous in their
demand for such legislation. In most
Of them no party would stand any show
Of success that did not favor it. The
passage of the Wilson Bill Iniquity,
putting wool On the free list, was "a
crushing blow to more than 100000
farmers excessively engaged in wool
growing. Before the passage Of the bill
there were 47,273,553 sheep in the
United States, valued at s125, 9O9, 264
Last year there were but 3S,29S, 7S3
sheep, valued at but $50, l67, 735, show
inc a direct loss to the farmers from
that monstfous bit Of legislation OF
1 S60,731,529. If we add to this the
losses upon the chip, npon the valuation
of farms, buildings and appliances of
sheep-raising, and upon the industries
connected with it, we Shall have a total
running far up into the hundreds of
millions. Everybody in the country
was hurt by it, and nobody benefited
but the wool-growers of remote foreign
lands. Naturally, these wool-growers,
and those connected with them, have
strenuously insisted upon restoration
Of the duty. They do not care fig
what the Government does with the
money SO obtained, so long as it is used
for some laudable purpose, but they de.
manded, and should receive, the pro.
lection.
This is equally true Of the fice-growers
the sugar-beet and sugar-cane men
barley-growers, the producers Of wrapper
tobacco, the fruit growers, and SO OF
through long list.
Then turn to the other branch of oul
National income-the Internal Revenue
duties. Virtually no one wants til,
taxes on beer and whisky made an,