People's voice. [volume] (Wellington, Sumner County, Kansas) 1890-1917, 1897-05-20
WILSON VS.. DINGLEY.
Author Of the Present Law Crit,
cises the Dingley Bill
Says II Is "the Most Ultra PrOtectiY,
Tariff Ever PrOpOsed"-Win En-
courage Trusts and Discourage
American Labor,

sired to make it, and the bill as finally
passed was not nearly as good as when
1t first passed the house. 1t was, how.
ever. great improvement upon the Nc
Kinley bill and is a model as compared
with the Dingley monstrosity. We
quote the following from Mr. Wilson's
criticism of the Mckinley and Dingley
bills in recent number of the New
York Herald:
These bills are go nearly identical in
general structure and particular items
excepting as to the sugar schedule, that
it may be we'll to consider the effect OF
the first bill on the revenue of the coun.
try. Both bills are vast and voluminous
schemes of class taxation, the produc-
ton of public revenue being an incident
and entirely subordinate to the purpose
Of taxing all the American people fol
the benefit of small part of the peo-
pie.
The protectionist has but one remedy
which he applies whether the revenue
be redundant or deficient. II times are
prosperous, and more money than Is
needed pours into the treasury, he In.
creases taxes By scheme that turns
the larger part Of their avails into pri.
Vate pockets, and this reduces public
revenue. If times are depressed and less
money than is needed .pours into the
treasury, he seizes the pretext OF In.
creasing public revenues By adding
enormously to the amount Of private
exactiOn.
The act OF 1880, whatever fs other
effects, did reduce revenue. From q
large surplus ii swept US headlong to q
deficiency, although It weighted the
people with heavier taxes and although
another law, passed In July, 1890
turned into The treasury as part of the
general assets to be used for paying ex.
penditures trust fund of more than
$s4,00O,OOO, which belonged to the ma
oonal banks and had always been held
for the redemption Of their notes.
Even before the Harrison administra.
ton ended we should have been con-
fronted with large deficiency but fo4
the use Of this trust fund and the fur.
Their fact that Secretary Foster, BY q
change Of bookkeeping, added TO the
treasury balance $2O.OO0,OOO OF token
end subsidiary coin not before treated
os treasury asset With these extraor.
binary additions. even, we wound up the
fiscal year, June 80. 1895. with sur
plus Of only S2,341,674 as against a
surplus for the fiscal year June 80,
1890, of over $S5,OOO,OOO before the
above trust fund and subsidiary coin
were touched. And during the fiscal
year ended June 80, 1894, through all
OF which the Mckinley bill was in force,
expenditures exceeded the revenues to
che emount Of $69,SO3,26O. notwith-
standing the fact that the expenditures
OF the government were S15.952, GT4 less
than in the preceding year.
tThis statement shows how absurd and
groundless Is the claim constantly made
by the protectionists that recent def
cts IN revenues are due to the substi-
tuition Of the existing tariff for the Nc
Kinley bill Nothing is more certain
than that II the bill had been In force
during the last three years the annual
deficit would have been immeneely
swollen, while the people in q season of
Depression and hard times would have
staggered under much heavier burdens
o. taxation Even IN this disastrous Pc
Rod, customs duties under the existing
law have increased from less than Sl92,-
100000 in 1894, the last year Of the Nc
Nnley bill, to over S152, 900 In 1905
and to over sl6O,OOO,OOO In 1896.
In the sugar schedule alone the bal
sOce in favor OF the existing law Is
about S5S000000. The customs ye1-
enue reached nearly $4,000, 900, scarce-
~ any of which would have been re-
ceived under the Mckinley bill.
That the Ongley bill. present coodi-
tons considered, is the most ultra pro
tectiVe taritf ever proposed to be
enacted in this country plainly appears
from Chairman Nngleys statement
that If levied on TIE importations OF the
last fiscal year il would have increased
the revenues STA 900 ,O0o-that Is to say,
il wonid have gathered from an inpof'
tation Of $T7S,724,264 Of imported mer
chanoise the enormous sum OF S2T2,.
0OO,OO0. which Is nearly $4,000, ooC
more than any customs revenue epe1
collected In oOe year in this country IN
the past And 10 say Its rates Will
probably check tutiable imports to the
extent Of reducing the estimate to s7o.
UO,OOO IS only another way OF saying
that to that extent such rates are pro.
hibitory.
American consumers ore shut IN the
bone market TO be preyed upon by com
binstions and trusts without possible
ity Of relief from outside competition,
Such combinations by joining to keel
up prices and TO curtail production
wage more merciless war against the
employment, the opportunities and TIKI
compensation of American labor tha1
any possible competition from abroad
could do.
The falling of of importations unde,
the present law dispels the illusion
that the American laborer is anywhere
deprived of employment by the impor
tation of foreign products. The graf
flying increase in our exports of manu-
features IS equally strong proof tha'
those laws are helping us to enter ant
command new markets. which mean!