New-York tribune., 1909-07-01
TIE SENATE'S POLICY.

NODSlUeraIloQ OF TIE StutuueS OF lllt ENt1dtS1
tariff bill having been practically completed, It
is in order TO inquire what public advantage has
resulted from the recastng of the House meas
ure under the supervision of the Finance Com
mittee-a process which has occupied more than
eleven weeks What are the fruits, political and
economic. of the exhausung labor expended on
the House bill? What has Mr.. Aldrichs leader
ship-so painstaking, SO resourceful and so per
sistent-realy accomplished? Has 1t Improved
and strengthened legislation intended 10 carry
out the promises Of the last Republican ma
tional platform as interpreted by the Repub-
lican candidate for the PresideLcy and as gen
orally understood by the Republican voters
Has it even been successful in applying and
vindica ting NIr Aldrich's own views on federal
taxation?
So far as the dutiable schedules and the free
list of the Senate bill are concerned, they have
been made to conform To the Rhode Island Sen
ator's policy of merely re-enaCting the Dtngiey
law Virtually all the advances made ID the
House bill in the way of a rational doW4WaIu
revision Of tariff duties have been nullified in
the Senate The tendency Of the Senate measure
is in fact. toward higher rates all along the
line: for although il has sanctioned reductions
in some schedules in which the Dingley rates
had MAINLY become excessive il has by reclassl-
fcations. changes from al rGloref to speclnc
duties and notifications of the administrative
customs law requiring higher valuations reaIl?
increased the duties in other schedules when
the House decided 70 leave practically un-
touched Without relaxing the protecuon al
lowed in any class Of articles sufficiently 10 in
wife freer fnlportarions and a possible increase
in revenue therefrom. the Senate Finance Com
mittee has es---ated <hat on the volume Of i'm
nortations IN the fiscal year 1906-'oI the Senate
bin would have produced S150o0000 more in
customs collections than did the Dingley law
Tie inference Is plain. therefore. that the Sen
ale measure was intended 10 produce larger
revenue through increases in duties It was
70 be an upward rather than downward re-
vision Of the DingIey law.
From polittcal point Of view the Senates
draft threw away all the tactical advantages
of the House bill. It sacrificed popularity 10
/ ..stand-natisrn" When the House bill was
nassed II was welcomed everywhere as step
forward in the rational application Of the pro
tective theory and as substantial redemption
of Republican pledges Even The New York
Times" and The New York Evening Post
among the most extreme Of the critics OF me
Dincley law. praised the House bill rs liberal
and sensible II was attacked IN no quarter,
and had the Senate Finance Committee pos
sessed the political sagacity To amend il only IN
z few minor particulars and offer il for passage
within week after its reception il would
rrohablv have become a law before the end OF
Nav and been nailed by the public as a ne"
and gratifying departure in tariff legislation II
could not have been made the subject of partisan
assault The assault on the Senate bill comes
from both parties. That bill Is almost without
defenders in either the Republican or the Demo
cratic press There are abundant indications
that the great majority Of the Republican voters
look upon It IS 4 grievous blunder. reparatton
for which can he made only by general res
rors-ion Of the House rates in the committee
Of conference.
But hevonG DingleyiZinC the House bill, has
Mr. Aldrich been able 10 carry out his own
fiscal programme? He started 10 prove that
there would be no need Of supplementary spe-
ciaI taxation. 10 which he seemed unalteTahly
opposed He predicted that there would be SUI
6cient revenue from increased customs. and
therefore discarded the Inheritance tax carried
in the House bill Now he has been forced to
support another form Of special taxation with
even fewer merits thas the Inheritance tax The
latter tax Is easily collected il has been tested
in practice and Is open 70 no constitutional Oh
iections Yet. having rejected Il as impolitc and
/ unnecessary the chairman OF the Finance Com
nittee Is now advocating the imposition of Ii
corporation excise tax. which IS in reality an
unEraded income tax on a single form Of in
come. which would he pointedly inequtable in
irs appIication which involves oppressive
/ features Of government supervision and general
publicity and which must face the risk Of being
attacked in the courts on the plea Of unconsti-
turionalitv. What advantage was gained by the
/ Finance Committees insistence that the House
( Inheritance tax must 90 because not needed,
/ when in the end a more burdensome special tax
/ substitute was 10 be embraced and advocated:
/ Here. again il would have been better policy
not 10 amend the House bill The Senate'S arTi-
tude toward tariff legislation has been Singh
/ 1srlv rnDrcoreSSive Il has been determined
more bv the traditions Of the past than by any
/ live appreciation Of the political and economic
/ demands Of the present