The western sentinel. [volume] (Winston-Salem, N.C.) 1887-1926, 1897-03-25
THE DINGLEY nj

"Most Ultra Protective IA Per
sss Proposed in This CouDf
Baltimore Sun.
The analysis of the DingleS Tariff
bill by the Hon. Vim. l.. Wilson,
antbor of the original draft of the
existing tariff law, brings out forci
bly, the we k points of the Republi-
can tariff policy from a moral and
sociological as we'll as practical point
OF view. Mr. Wilson in his article in
the New York Herald includes in his
review the period from 1890 to the
present time. The law in force previ-
Gus to October, 1890, he shows, was
an efhclent revenue producer, the
surplus in the fiscal year ended June
30 OF that year having been $685.
100000. The Mckinley law, then
enacted, cut down the revenue. SO
that in 1894, the last year of the
Mckinley act, the customs revenue
was but 1872, 100000. So efficient
had the high and almost prohibitive
rates of the Mckinley act been in
bringing the treasury to a deficit
that in the fiscal year ended June 80,
1898, the surplus revenue of the
government was but 50, 341 ,674, as
against the surplus, already men
toned, of $S5 100000, in 1890,
before the Mckinley act was passed.
There would have been a plain and
indispnta BILE deficit before the close
of Mr.. Harrison's administration of
some so, 100000 had not bank
note redemption fund of $54, OOO,-
900 and some $2O,O0O,OOO of sub
sidiary silver coin been utilized as
available assets-a thing unknown
before Indeed, in the year ended
June 30, 1894, while the Mckinley
act was still in force, the deficit was
500 ,oO3, 26O, though expenditures
had been cut down $15 952 GA from
the figures of the previous year.
1t will not do, then, to say that
the sO-called Wilson tariff act caused
the deficits of recent years. 1t was
the Mckinley act, With the extrava-
gance of ''the b lion dollar Con-
gress," that did it. AS a matter of
fact, the Wilson act produces more
revenue than did the Mckinley act.
In 1884 for example, the last year
of the Mckinley act, the revenue from
tariff taxes was. "a has already been
shown, but $132 100000, whereas,
| place, the customs revenue in 1895
was 1852, 900 900 and over $780,
OOO,OO in 1896 More revenue, as
a matter of fact, is collected now in
these hard times under the Wilson
act than was collected under the
Mckinley act, though Republican
orators and protectionists constant
ly assert the contrary.
The Mckinley and Dingley bills are
both against the interests of the
people. Both bills" says Mr.. Will
son, "are vast and voluminous
| schemes of class taxation, the pro.
duction of public revenue beng an
| incident and entirely subordinate to
the purpose of taxing all the Ameri.
can people for the benefits of a small
part of the people"
Bot the Dingley bill is shaped
primarily to add to the profits OF a
! particular class, not to produce
revenue. 1t is. says Mr.. Wilson, 1.-THE
most ultra protective tariff ever pro
posed in this country" 1t is calcu-
| lated, he adds, to produce "a rank
ling sense of injustice among the peo
| ple," because american consumers
are shut in the home market to be
preyed upon by combinations and
trusts without possibility of relic
! from outside competition"