Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1898-05-04
THE TONNAGE TAN.

Tho Senate Committee Oh 'h'hNS' III
considering the war-revenue bill. vlrtu-
ouv eliminated from IL the tonnage-taX
,,ro,.is,on A Washington special says
that among the changes which the
po,,blican members suggested was one
striking out the provision taxing the
tonnage of foreign vessels, and some OK
the Democrats indicated Willingness
ia support this amendment.
The New York Herald, In noting this.
remarks that Mr.. Dlngley has an In
Grained idea that 1.-THE foreigner pays the
fax Really this remark is humorous
and instinct with irony, whether 1t Is In
tended to be or not. II there is anything
more clearly demonstrable than that UNI
der the Dingley tariff, the foreigner
doesn't pay the tax. we do not know
what that thing Is. Further, 1t seems very
clear that IT was never intended that tho
Dingley tariff should so operate as that
the foreigner would pay the tax The
fastening of Dingleyism upon the
country was designed to protect certain
favored interests. and from the begin
ming # was foresecn by all who gave
any study to the measure that the con-
summation Of that design would result
I'm the payment of the tax by the
masses OF this country-by the people
who could least afford TO pay 1t. Mr..
Dineley's lngraned idea fails as sadly
of naturalization in the workings of his
tariff as have his calculations as to the
he
produce.
This apart. however, there is wide
spread opinion that the imposition OF
tonnage-tax would 5e unwise and i'm
politic. and some cogent reasons are adj
vanced i'm support of that opinion. In
this particular instance, 1t would appear
on its face that the idea of the foreign
er's paving the tax would materalize.
1t is true. as has been pointed out. that
owners of foreign vessels continuing 10
ply 10 our ports would probably shift
the burden upon the domestic consumer
and exporter. But none the less, Mr..
Djngley's ingrained idea has taken hold
abroad. As consequence. Great Britain
France. and Germany have. with consid-
cradle show OF irritation. already entered
protests against the tonnage imposition
on a question OF right, and what is
necessary to prosecute the war to sue
cessful conclusion. we should not surren-
der to any Power. But since that CUES
ton is not involved the revenue to De
derived from a tonnage tax, which. at
the highest. would not be more than
81 500 600. would hardly justify us In pro-
vcking the resentment Of friendly ma
ticns. We want to retain all the friends
we have, and when no principle is at
stake it would seem common sense ana
good craftsmanship TO make, if need be,
concessions TO that end.
In the case Of Great Britain, our
strongest friend in our war with SPAN
the laying of a tonnage tax might prove
commercially an illustration Of biting OH
ones nose to spite ones face. 1t is stated
that 20 per cent of the tax would be
levied on her ships. Naturally. there
fore. a great deal Of her trade with TINS
country would be diverted to Canada
and in view of the great waterway ana
deck improvements that have recently
been made in the Dominion would, 1t Is
believed, be lost to us permanently. Our
Canadian friends have of late years peeh
stirring vigorously i'm the matter Of IN
creasing their trade with the mother
country, and could be depended upon to
make the best of the situation.