The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1897-03-23

been selected to reply to Mr.. Dingley,
but at the last moment It was learned
That Mr.. Mcmillan had been unable to
prepare himself owing to the illness
bf his wife. The task, therefore, de-
~olved on Mr.. Wheeler The latter
was unprepared, but nevertheless kept
The floor for an hour. Mr.. Bell of Col
brado, blazed the path for the Popu-
lists. Mr.. Hopkins, of Illinois. mem
ber of the ways and means committee,
also spoke
fAt the night session of the house
MIR. Bailey, of Texas. presented the
minority report on the tariff bill. The
report is signed by all the Democratic
tnsmbers of the ways and means COM
inittee, and gives the grounds of their
part as follows:
sThis bill was framed with the avow-
xd purpose Of protecting the manufac-
kmers of the United States against
koreign competition, and 1t is perfectly
/, khyious that if It accomplishes that
purpose 1t must result In compelling
Ahs consumers of this country to pay
kpore for their manufactured goods
I and for this reason we think 1t should
not pass. We rest our opposition upon
Ehe broad principle that congress was
Invested with the power of taxation
Rs a means Of collecting from each
citizen his fair proportion toward the
support of the government, and that
IL Is gross perversion of that sover-
eiSn power to employ it as a means
0f enabling favored classes to levy un.
Just charges upon the great body of
The people. We believe that, il contrib.
niing his proper share toward the
maintenance of this government every
citizen of this republic Is entitled 10
the full possession and enjoyment of
MI he can honestly earn. and we deny
the right of congress to make or en-
fierce any regulation which requires
one man to give any part Of his honest
sarnings toward encouraging the en-
terprise or increasing the fortune of
nnother.
b. mo man, however blind he may be,
would defend a system of taxation un-
der which the government first COL
iected the money and afterwards dis
tibuted 1t among Its favorites. It is
sue that the tariff act Of 1890 ven
fHred to this extent in dealing with the
sugar growers, but the disapproval
Of that policy was so overwhelming
and so bitter that the advocates of
protection have been forced to abandon
It, and they have not dared to incor-
porate any provision for a direct
bounty in the present bill.
1--WE are unable, however, to per-
oeive any difference in principle be-
tween law which requires the govern
tnent to collect money and distribute 1t
among the protected industries and a
law which enables these industries to
collect the money directly from the
people. If the government has the
right to levy taxes upon the people
for the purpose of inducing men to es-
tablish improbable industries or in
dustries which can only be made profit
able by compelling the consumers of
the United States to pay exorbitant
prices for their products, then the
bounty system Is more direct and less
complex way of attaining that end and
at least has the advantage of direct
ness and simplicity.
1.-THE majority of the committee seem
to think that taxation can be made a
blessing and that the support of the
government, instead of being a burden
upon taxpayers, can be made to en-
rich them. If this opinion Is we'll
founded, then all the struggles for
freedom which have revolved around
the question Of taxation have proceed
Cd upon false theory. and the Amer
loan colonists, when they determined
that they would not submit to taxa
tion without representation, indulged
In mistaken zeal for liberty. The pa
triotic resolve of our forefathers not
10 use goods upon which Great Britain
had laid an import duty was wrong If
the argument for protection Is right,
because, according to the argument,
the British importers were really pay