Evening star., 1911-06-10
TARIFF REVISION BILL
FROM TWO VIEWPOINTS
Mr.. Warburton, Insurgent,
Crihclses; Mr.. Peters,
Democrat, Defends.

Representatives Cordell Hull Of Tennes-
80, Peters Of Massachusetts,. Robinson
Of Arkansas and Warburton Of Washing
ton occupied the time Of the House yes
terday during general debate ON the I'm
derwood wool revision bill.
Mr. warburton, who is a republican in
surgsnf, serving his nrst term. attacked
the wool bill and criticised Congress for
letting millions Of dollars 60 to waste
that should be collected in the internal
revenue taxes on tobacco.
IF the government would put a reason
able tax ON tobacco. which may be con-
s3dsrsd q luxury" said Mr. warburton.
1T could let In woolen goods. cotton
goods and sugar withut any tarin what
ever. II this country taxed tobacco as
ENGLAND or France does, we could close
tho doors OF an the customs houses. ex-
cept as to the importations OF liquors and
tobaccos."
Obliged to Adopt Protection.
Mr.. warburton said the democrats had
been afraid to reduce the duties on wool
any further for fear OF the consequences
at the next election II the woolen industry
was prostrated by the removal Of pro-
lection He said the democrats had been
compelled to adopt the republican doctrine
of protection. and excused themselves on
the ground Of needing revenue.
And In the meantime" said Mr.. War
burton, american people are paying six
times as much tax to the government on
sugar as they are on f1ve-cent cigars;
twelve times as much on sugar as on ten
cent cigars; thirty times as much On
sugar as on twenty-flve-cent cigars. and
sixty times as much on sugar as on fifty
cent cigars. The rich man who smokes
thirty-five-oent cigar pays 1.2 cents tax
on each dollars worth Of them, while his
pays cents tax on his dollars worth,
and his washerwoman, who buys dol
lars worth Of sugar, pays SO cents tax
on it."
From the Other Viewpoint.
REPRESENTATIVE Peters Of Massachusetts,
a democratic member Of the ways and
means committee. which framed the wool
bill. said wool and wooden goods would
have been made free but for the necessity
Of rising revenue. He said the duties
had been placed as low as was consist
ent with securing enough tariff revenue
to run the government.
Mr.. Robinson discussed the action OF
Gov. Donaghey of Arkansas in vetoing
Constitution after the legislature of that
state had ratified 1t. Mr.. Robinson de-
clared that the governor of state had
no authority to interfere with the ratifica-
ton Of federal constitutional amend
ment. but he did not believe the Congress
ought to allow the action OF the Arkan-
sas official to go unohallenged.
By No Means Necessary.
"It has been customary for governors
to ada their approval to the formal ac-
tion Of the state legislatures In ratifying
amendments" said Representative Rob-
inson, "but it is by no means necessary.
This is the first time that the question
has arisen whether governor has
right to veto such ratification"
Mr. Robinson cited the fact that In
many OF the notices Of ratification now
being received by Congress Of the in
come tax amendment that is pending be-
fore the various state legislatures the
governors have not deemed it necessary
to sign the act s-of legislative approval.
He said that under no construction could
the disapproval Of the Arkansas exec
utive be considered as binding.