The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1897-07-08
REPUBLICAN PROMISE VS.. PERI ORMANCE

REPUBLICAN PkUm!St w.. FEhf UnMHNCC'
The new tariff act, which passed the
Senate yesterday, gives an average duty
of about "a per cent. The Senate has
thus reduced the average of the Dingley
rates from So to "a per cent. 1t is the
highest average ever levied in this coun-
try. The war tariff in 1862 averaged 81
per cent, and the average Of the McKin-
ley bill, which the people repudiated, was
40 per cent. If they rose in their wrath
against the Mckinley worse-than-war
tariff, enacted in times when people were
better able to pay high taxes than now,
is it possible that the people will calmly
accept the increase to 81 per cent. put
upon them in order to pay trusts and
other subscribers to campaign funds?
The Republicans have not only made this
average increase in rates, but they have
made many of the duties SO high that
they are prohibitory. The absurdity of
many of the duties proposed for the pur-
ose of providing revenue" is shown by
the fact that the duty collected during the
fiscal year 1896 ON each of 80 classes of
articles taxed under the proposed bill,
was less than 5000, or, on the average,
S63.SS. A further examination of the
bill shows that the Senate amendments
contain ia classes of articles on which
the duties are higher than the "Act of
1890" Among these are camphor, paints,
plaster of paris, asphalt, many kinds of
plate glass, scissors, railroad ties, shin
giles, clapboards, maple sugar, oranges,
lemons, pine apples, currants, olives, cho-
colate and cocoa, hemp, carpets, coal, lea
ther, hides.
How do these facts accord with the
promises made? In opening the debate
in the Senate, May 25th, Of this year,
Hon. Nelson w. Aldrich, the Republican
leader on tariff legislation, said:
'It was, I believe, thoroughly I'M
derstood throughout the country in
the last political campaign that, if
the Republican party should be again
entrusted with power, no extreme
tariff legislation would follow. 1t
was believed that in the changed
conditions of the country return to
the duties imposed by the Act Of 1890
would not be necessary even from a
protective standpoint.
"Nothing could be more conducive
to the return and maintenance of real
prosperity in this country than the
well-grounded belief that there We're
to be no violent changes in our reve-
nue. policy for some years to come"
Here we had the leader of the Repub-
lican party, upon the opening OF the dis
cussion, affirming the campaign pledges
for moderation Of the tariff schedules,
and promising the people two things:
/. mo extreme tariff legislation"
2. "No return to the duties imposed by
the Act of $780,"
And yet, in less than sixty days after
thissoffcial promise was made in the open
Senate the Republicans enact the most
"extreme tariff legislation" known in
history, and so far from not regarding it
necessary even from protective stand
point'' for a return to the duties i'm
posed by the Act of $780," the duties are
made higher by an average of 3 per
cent. than were imposed in the "Act Of
$780,"
We do not state these facts to accuse
Mr.. Aldrich of making false representa-
tons on the 25th OF May. He may have
been honest and sincere. If so, the
change of front is due to the fact that
the syndicates and corporations that fur
nished the money to put the Republican
party in power, upon an agreement to be
reimbursed by taxing the people, demand
ed that the covenants contained in the
bond be carried into effect. Mr.. Hanna,
Mr.. Aldrich and Mr.. Quay were forced to
comply with the demands. 1t is true they
had to break faith with the people to do
SO, but they reckon that the people have
short memories. They believe they can
win more victories with millions to spend
than to lose the big contributions by be
ing true to the peoples interests. The
result of the last election would seem
to justify their confidence.