The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1897-06-12

Some OF the Southern newspapers OF the
anti-anysslng type are trying to make it
appear that the Republicans are divided
because CONGRESSMAN Dingley is In favor
Of protective tariff. while Senator AID
rich wants also TO provide a revenue. There
Is no difference between them as to the
objects to be Immediately sought. but the
Republican party Is progressive party
and IL not content to live on the achieve
mcnts Of the past.
Senator Al6rich does not outline pol
Icy. but states seif-cvideut fact when he
says that IL the tariff succeeds SO compIet-
ly In protecting the American markets
from foreign importations that II keeps
out all taxed goods. the revenue will fall
OF, and mat other sources of revenue
must be sought II Ia as mach To be kept
In mind as the fact that when a tariff pro-
;ec,s an industry when II does not need
protection. or keeps prices above fair
proportion, IL must be taken OF. The OBJ
Ject of protective tariff is TO keep Amer
lean labor busy and American capital en-
pioyed When IL goes beyond that IL Is
me.eiy a means OF creating monopolies.
This IL the danger which congress has to
guard against. and It is the justification
for the commission proposed by Congress
man Fowler. Congress is capable OF deal
Ing with the subject. and is able to do II
commission would: but there is a still bet
ter safeguard In competition. That conpe-
tition is not so much the rivalry of man
ufacturers OF the same goods as the
rivalry OF other manufacturers using the
goods. This influence Is at work now. II
Is seeking to keep down the tariff. on wool
and hides. for instance. Wooden manu-
facturers and tanners want TO buy hides
and wool in the cheapest market, and they
will be keen TO see and quick to act in
presenting TO congress any undue advan-
fage to wool and hide dealers IL the tariff
affords them profit In excess of a reason
able percentage over the amount for which
similar raw materials can be obtained
abroad
1t In manifest. however. that II the tariff
ASepH uus ah SoouS WhtCH. ptliiE uutitshlS,
cannot come into competition with home
manufactures. the revenue will fall OF.
and an internal revenue must be obtained.
This Is why 1t Is proposed to tax beer. tea
and other Iuxuries. There IL a difference
OF opinion among Republicans as to the
ACCESSIBILITY OF taxing such articles. and
Senator platt has, for one. announced his
opposition 10 It. lie proposes instead to
impose "a tax, such as exists In England
upon receipts. notes and other commercial
transactions. All receipts In England over
s. must hear a-eent stamp. which Is
usually affixed like postage stamp and
cancelled By being written over. The peo-
pie there have become accustomed 10 f.
but II IL q nuisance and It's only recon-
mendation Is that II costs very little to
impose II. both payer and payee being di-
roctiy interested Iii seeing that the stamp
IL affixed. failure To observe 1t being an
ofrense by both.
1xcep, for the additional cost. the tax
on beer Is preferable. because the con-
sumption OF beer "a optional. while the
use OF receipts Is not II man chooses
no, 70 drink beer or tea he need pay no
tax. and IL he wishes to drink il, the In
flnstesiniai contribution he makes to the
cost OF government IL no; felt by him.