New-York tribune., 1901-02-15
BEER AND TOBACCO TAXES.
THE HOUSE SHOULD STAND UP FOR
ITS RIGHTS.
To the Editor Of The Tribune

To the Editor OF The Tribune
Sir: Chairman Payne and his fellow Repub-
licans in the House of Representatives will have
the support Of the country in standing by the
main features Of their War Revenue Reduction
bill in opposition 10 the Senate's concession TO
the wealthy beer and tobacco interests II is
doubtful if the trainers Of the Constitution ever
intended the Senate TO exercise anything more
than veto power over revenue bills. Certainly
it never meant that entirely new schemes
of taxation should be originated by the Senate
and forced upon the House. The constitutional
requirement that revenue bills originate in the
House is however, in spirit more and more
fagrantIy violated: for it cannot be said that
measure in any reasonable sense originates in
the House when il differs from that passed by
the House in almost everything but it's title and
enacting clause. In conserving. as it has fire.
quently done. to the utter notification of it's
work the House abdicates a constitutional priv
iIege of initiative and direction in the sphere of
taxation which is much its own is the
function of confirming Executive nominations
and treaties exclusively the Senate's.
Aside from this question of prerogative con-
siderations of policy point to the wisdom of the
essential features of the House bill The Re
publican party ought not TO be placed before
the country promoting the great wealthy beer
and tobacco interests in preference to the well
fare Of the large body of citizens who pay mis-
cellaneous annoying stamp duties in the course
of business transactions. The House bill made
reasonable decrease from the war revenue beer
tax, and there is no good reason that is not
political for cutting it further Beer has been
! notoriously undertaxed for years. Taxation ex-
perts long before the Spanish war were pointing
TO it as neglected source Of revenue The prof
its of brewing are enormous. No hardship has
been caused by the existing impost Of 81 So net
a barrel The reduction to 81 60 proposed by the
| House is all the brewers have any reason to
ask a fair proportion of the total reduction
proposed.
The tobacco business is also profitable one,
and the tax it is largely borne by great cor
pOrations. So far the people have paid more
for given quantity of beer or tobacco because
of the war increase in taxation they have paid
for a luxury, and have suffered neither hardship
nor incoAyenence. As a matter of fact. little,
II any, difference has been noted by them There
Is no popular demand on the part of consumers
for the reduction of these taxes. The demand
comes from the corporations wishing to swell
their already ample dividends. To accommo-
date them at the expense of the great body of
the people is indefensibIe
If the Republicans are preparing the way for
some future Democratic substitution of vast
system of internal taxation for our customs
duties they may be wise in keeping in operation
unnecessarily the various taxes on business
transactions in preference to concentrating in
ternal levies, according 10 the policy long pur-
sued, on a few articles like liquor and tobacco
recognized the world over as proper subjects OF
heavy lmpost. Such policy would please the
democratic managers as opening the door to
free trade and as giving them a good campaign
cry about Republican favors to trusts. II would
please the powerful brewing and tobacco COM
panies. 1t would revive the doubtless unjust
talk about legislative payments for campaign
contributions. But IL would not give the great
mass or American voters any satisfaction.
REPUBLICAN TAXPAYER.
New-York, Feb. II, 1901.