Evening star., 1897-03-23
Representative Bailey Presents His
Views on the Tariff Bill.
OBJECTIONS TO THE DINGLEY MEASURE
Signed by All Democratic Men,
bers of the Committee.
PROTECTION ARRAIGN n ED


was presented to the House last night. The
report was signed by all of the democratic
members of the committee. The report
says in part:
Framed to Protect Manufacturers.
This bill was framed with the avowed
purpose cf protecting the manufacturers
of the United States against foreign COM
petition. and 1t is perfectly obvious that
if 1t accomplshes that purpose It must
result IN compelling the consumers of this
country to pay more for their manufac
tured goods: and for this reason we think
ii should not pass. We rest our opposi-
tion upon the broad principle that Con-
gress was invested with the power of tax
alton as a means of collecting from each
citizen his fair proportion toward the sup
port of the government, and that Ii is
gross perversion Of that sovereign power
to employ it as a means of enabling fa-
Nored classes TO levy unjust charges upon
the the great body of the people. We be-
Heve that after contributing his proper
share toward the maintenance of the gov
ernment every citizen of this republic is
entitled to the full possession and enjoy
nent of all he can honestly earn: and we
deny the right of Congress TO make or
enforce any regulation which requires one
man 10 give any part of his honest earn
inss toward encouraging the enterprise or
increasing the fortune of another
Effect of Protection.
w Hidi. however Dnn0 ne may be,
would defend system of taxation under
which the government first collected the
money and afterward distributed II among
Its favorites. 1t is true that the tariff act
or 1890 ventured TO this extent in dealing
with the sugar growers but the disap-
proval of that policy so overwhelming
so bitter that the advocates of pro-
-uon nave been forced to abandon il,
and they have not dared to incorporate
any provision for "a direct bounty in the
present bill We are unable however to
perceive any difference in principle be-
tween law which requires the govern
rnent 10 collect the money and distribute
II among the protected industries and a
e law which enables these Industries to coll
lect the money directly from the people
II the government has the righ; to lew
taxes upon the people for the purpose of
lnducing men to establish Improbable in
dustries. or industries which can only be
made profitable by compelling the consurn-
ers of the United States to pay exorbi-
tant prices for their products then the
bounty system Is more direct and less
complex way of attaining that end and
al least has the advantage of directness
and simplicity.
The minority of the committee seem to
thlnk that taxation can be made a bless
ing and that the support CT the govern
ment. instead of being burden upon tax
payers. can be made to enrich them. If
this opinion is well founded. then all the
struggles for freedom which have revolved
around the question OF taxation have pro-
ceeded upon false theory: and the Amer
ioan colonists when they determined that
they would not submit to taxation without
repre- sentation INDUCED mistaken zeal for
liberty. The patriotic resolve Of our fore
fathers not to use goods upon which Great
Britain has laid an import duty was wrong
III the argument for protection Is right
because. according to that argument the
British importers We're really paying the
tax over which the American colonists went
to war. There cannot be found In the
wide n ecOpnrnip 1ftera trire IL
thOrfty, with the few and rare exceptions
which only serve to emphasize the general
concurrence. who does not treat taxation.
direct or indirect. as a burden: and when
remember that a protective tariff not
only collects more for the government than
is needed for its economical adm!nistra-
tion, but that IL also enables favored class
es TO collect more than the government
itself. the injustice becomes clear and
SO enormous that 1t would be a reflection
upon the Intelligence of the American peO-
pie to suppose that ii can escape their swift
and decisive condemnation"
Encourages Extravaganza.
Under the heading The Bill Encourages
Extravaganza. Mr. Bailey says:
1T follows as matter of course that a
bill based upon q vicious principle must
be injurious in it's effects and perhaps no
effect could be more pernicious than the
extravagance which the bill encourages.
The tabuIated statement embraced in the
report of the committee shows that the
bill is expected TO raise s113. 900, 800 more
revenue than was collected in customs
duties during the last fiscal year. and yet,
as l. shown by the same report the differ
ence between the government receipts and
disbursements during that year was only
s21.p1.WO. IL is We'll known that the i'm
portatiOns Of last year We're smaller than
usual, owing 10 the general depression that
existed in all circles. but. even supposing
that inportati6ns hereafter can be kept at
a level with the iTnportations of 1856 the
collect he. 10 rr1nr han
SJJ.opD.VDD annually above the require IN ents
OF our present extravagant and wasteful
appropriations.
1t may be. however. that the majority
should not be arragned for their open en-
couraSement Of extravaganza. becaus.. 4
cannot be surprising that aentlemea who
feel that money derived from taxation
ought TO be lavishly spent Nothing could
better illustrate the vice OF The protective
system than the fact that there flows from
II direct consequence the habit of
treating the expenditure Of public money
as benefit rather thar as burden to the
people II would be ,ause enough for COM
plaint If the burden were the only result
OF extravagance. but iG a free government
eNtravagance breeds tendencies of the most
pernicious character. = no. only teache;
he people 10 look to the government for
he promotion Of all kinds Of enterprises 9
whether for pleasure profit but II makes
them impatient against public servants
who believe In economy, and who believe
that public moneys are "A I!.tlst fund In he
jealously guarded.
president Jackson hardly ove-stated
the danger of a sUrplJs when ne declared
that II was more dangerous than L stand
ING army; and yet, dangerous as II Is IL
Is not so dangerous as the cxtrayaganc,.
which is always resorted TO in orGcr 10 pra-
vent its accumulation. Il cannot a.. for
gotten that many of those who nov advo
cate a high tariff and defend the cxlrav
agance which II engcnders did not hesitate
10 denounce the administration Of presi
dent buchanan because in its last wear The
appropriations exceeded the sum Of $50 :
up.rn. Our population at that time was
nearly half what II Is today aud II the
government were now properly and fr,,-
gaIly administered. expenditures in
cluding liberal pensions for the soldiers of
the late war, ought not TO- and would not
exceed the sum of SSJ1000Wo
The friends of the protective sys,em
know that 10 keep the taxes nigh they
must ind some way of spending the rnonev
which has been collected II Is therefor,
the inevitable consequence of collecting
more than Is proper that improper ways
should be devised for spending it. The ex-
travagance which necessitates the billion