The Van Buren press. [volume] (Van Buren, Ark.) 1859-1914, 1897-06-19
Senator Jones ON the Tariff.

t4ccpt iOl puDiiS Hul poctsi anu TINS
only, while the Republicans have
exercised the right to levy taxes to pro.
vide for private benefit For the
reason that almost all the tax possible
of collection on sugar goes into the
public treasury, sugar has always been
regarded by Democrats as desirable
subject of taxation. so long as the
present system continues. Four ffths,
perhaps nine tenths, of the sugar con
sumed in the country is imported
Hence when the cost of sugar is in
creased to consumers by tariff taxes,
four fifths or nine tenths of this added
cost or tax goes into the treasury
Republicans have never liked sugar
tax for this reason. A tax on wooden
goods, on the contrary, is their ideal
tax, because four ffths to nine tenths
of the wooden goods consumed in the
country are made here, and whatever
increase in cost of woolens may come
from taxation goes, four tifths to nine
tenths, TO the wooden manufacturer,
and one fifth to one tenth to the gov
eminent. Hence the wooden tax is the
ideal Republican tax, while the sugar
tax has been the ideal Democratic tax.
The present president was reported
some years since to have said, upon
taking the chair to preside over some
Republican meeting, that as between
tariff for revenue with incidental pro-
lection, or a tariff for protection with
incidental revenue, he was decidedly in
favor of the latter This clearly
illustrates the difference in Republican
and Democratic ideas of administering
this present system of taxation. AS
long as the present system of raising
revenue by taxation upon consumption
and not upon wealth is allowed to exist,
am in favor of a tax on sugar rather
than tax on wooden goods, and for
these reasons.
81 believe, however, the time has
come when the people of the country
should insist on the burdens of taxation
being placed upon the wealth of the
country, and that manhood and home,
like churches and schools, should go
untaxed. -
Discussing the equity of the ad valorem
tax as opposed to specific duties, the
senator made these strong points:
There in another feature about these
tariff taxes which do not like. know
it is frequently charged that the sugar
refners want an ad valorem tax, and
that the sugar trade want specific tax.
| know that the committee of the sugar
trade sent from New York which APP
peared before the ways and means
committee was strongly in favor of a
specific tax. | had one of the papers
written by one of the men who con
stituted the committee printed in the
Record, so that senators may see it. l
read the argument carefully / have
considered the reasons which they
presented in favor of a specific tax and
as against an ad valorem tax.
II confess that my strong predilec-
tions in favor of an ad valorem tax have
not been shaken by anything l have read
in any of those arguments. 1t seems to
me to be just and fair method.
Whenever tax is to be levied, If an ad
valorem tax can be honestly and fairly
levied there can be no doubt it is the
ideal method of leveying taxes. An
article worth | cent pound ought to
pay half as much tax as one worth 2
cents a pound, and no more and no
less. 1t is unjust and it is unfair to
provide a method of taxation which
puts the same taxation on article cost
ing cents as on one costing cent. 1t
is putting the double rate of taxation on
the low article, and one half ON the
high grade,
Il know perfectly well that the
practice of the Republicans has always
been to levy the highest taxes on the
lowest grades and the cheapest articles,
and to levy the lowest taxes on the
highest grades and the most expensive
articles. 1t has been a part of their
financial system FROM the beginning.
Ii is so now, and | can understand why
they can believe that the levying of a
specific tax is better than an ad valorem
tax, because the people who use cheap
sugar will be compelled to pay higher
rate of taxes than the people who use
high grade sugar. But l have no
sympathy with that system of taxation.
believe that taxation ought to be
equal that it ought to be ad valorem
that it ought to be levied according to
the value Of the article to be taxed.
THE one argument made against an
ad valorem tax which seems to have
force, and which l confess has force
with me, is the charge of undervaln-
alton, the charge of dishonesty in the
administration of the law. In framing
tariff law we must assume in the first
place that the government is capable of
getting honest men to administer the
laws. If men can be hired TO do wrong
under an ad yalorem tax they can be as
easily hired to do wrong under a specific
tax. If we have honest and competent
administrators Of the law, then it
eliminates that part of the trouble. Is
b nr,,- nnsier 70 carry ont frands of this