The Marion daily mirror. (Marion, Ohio) 1892-1912, 1910-08-11

the new tariff law" the remainder is
$6a9, ,57s.e es2. The ordinary receipts for
the fiscal year 1907 were s6ss, 1851 $50,
which Is s2s,545, OF greater than the
"ordinary receipts Under the first full
year of fhe new tariff law"
In other words the men In Washing
ton who have been using pencil and
paper today have been able to satisfy
themselves. without recourse to the de-
tails OF receipts under the new law,
first, that 1t was an upward and not
downward revision; and, second,
that the officials of the Treasury who
prepared the statement were willing
to have the public have the impress
sion that the receipts Of customs un-
der the Aldrich-P Payne law are greater
than those during the last normal
fiscal year under the Dingley act.
Washington, Aug. 11--A review Of
the figures issued by the treasury
department on the revenue returnes
for the first operative year of the
Payne -A,,lrich tariff law today shows
that the customs receipts, exclusive
OF all other revenue sources, were $3,-
116,154 less than the customs re-
ceipts for 1907, the banner year.
Democrats here seized upon the
convenient neglect" as they term Il,
of the treasury department to draw
this comparison in their public state.
The treasury department gave out
only comparison of the total reve
nuc returns including 1910 the returns
from the new corporations tax. This
statement showed a gain in receipts
for the lest year. of some fifteen mil
lion dollars over 1907. The total was
referred to i'm the statement as the
total ordinary receipts of the Payne
Aldrich law" which the Democrats
assert would mean, to the layman,
the returns from the revised tariff.
The Payne Aldrich law, though
unusually thought of an the law af-
fecting customs duties. covers wide
field including internal revenue, the
new corporation tax and various
minor miscellaneous items. In fact
of the grand total Of s67S,s50,SlG
revenue produced under the new law,
only 1929, ,117.20S was produced by Gus
toms
The corporation tax. n provision
which was not contained in the pre-
vious In v. produced some twenty
seven million dollars. This. together
with the revenue gained by Collector
Loeb through the detection of long
standing fraud, was largely RESPONSE
BILE for lie total surplus shown In
the treasury. statement.
Comparisons are made with 1907 be-
cause that was the greatest revenue
producing year In the history OF the
country prior TO 1910. II is a fact
that the customs returns under the
new law when compared with any
year in tho past, exclusive of 1907
show an increase. The Democrats
however. point out that this cannot
be credited entirely to the new bill
inasmuch as n greater customs reve-
nue. was produced under favorable cir
cumstancts i'm 1907.
These calculations and compare
sons are destined to play n big part
in campaign oratory this fall. ac-
cording 70 the manner in which the
leaders OF the two parties are working
over them at present.
One argument drawn by the Dem
ocrats from the comparison of the
cHstOInS NTtctiDtS WIN tnOSe Ol i5O
is that the import tariff has been re-
vised upward insomuch as the vol
ume of duties has decreased. This is
deducted on the so-called mckinley
theory" that the higher the duty the
less the imports.
The Republicans, however, put for
ward the claim that 1907 was not In
any respect a normal year. Every
thing was on the boom and customs
receipts naturally totaled an extra
ordinary amount.
The Democrats aver that the new
law will not keep up the record that
1t has established for itself in its first
year. Ai,
Treasury department officials, as
against the Democratic charge that
they avoided comparison OF Gus
toms receipts. point out that both the
corporation tax and the internation-
nj revenue are part and parcel of the
Payne-Aldrich law, and should right
ly be counted in any comparison of
revenue. just as internal revenue re-
ceipts were counted under the Ding
Law and nthar ~ laNug