Page images
PDF
EPUB

THE UNIVERSII:

OF TEXAS

PUBLIC OPINION.

PUBLISHED WEEKLY BY THE PUBLIC OPINION CO., INCORPORATED.

WASHINGTON, D. C., THURSDAY, APRIL 15, 1886.

PUBLIC OPINION.

vice would now be on a business-like basis, and reasonable people everywhere

would be satisfied with the rules which govern its administration. But while nearly It is the purpose of the managers of PUBLIC OPINION to present every one of the old employes represents the favoritism or the political debt-paying in one paper the views of many, to give each week the pith of pre

of some Republican spoilsmen, and “ few die and none resign,” the basis of the

service will remain partisan. A law requiring the examination and reclassification vailing thought, and, in short, to impartially reflect public opinion.

of the old force, putting its members upon a plane of equality with other canchi

dates for public employment, would therefore be a measure of justice. This was PUBLIC OPINION will contain, in attractive form, printed and spoken

a feature of the civil service law, as at first prepared, but it was omitted partly opinions on leading questions, taken as they appear, without com

through fear of overburdening the machinery of the new system, and partly, it was

more than suspected, from an unwillingness of the Republicans in Congress to ment, and with due credit, from newspapers and periodicals, from

disturb their dependents and favorites who had been crowded into every place in

the service in anticipation of the passage of the reform act. The merit system, to organs of political parties, from the independent press, from the pub

be as popular as it deserves to be, should have started fairly as between the two

parties. lications of various orders and associations, and the utterances of

Washington Critic, (Ind. Dem.), April 14. professional and public men—thus focalizing many and divergent As the civil service rules now stand a great injustice is done to a large and views and opinions.

growing class of Government employes, and at the same time heads of depart

ments and bureaus are crippled in their efforts to secure expert workers of the class PUBLIC OPINION will aim to be an epitome of American thought,

referred to. These are the type-writers, for whom the rules in operation make no

allowance. If the service of a person who is really an expert in the use of the in which the reader will find prepared and arranged for instant pe

writing-machine is desired in a department no provision exists by which he or she rusal' and examination the most important comments and expressions senger, and that makes the injustice. If such a person enters into the civil service

may be employed, except in the grades below $900 per annum, as laborer or meson the foremost topics of the day. They will appear without bias

competition for the classified grades, no account can be taken of the special qualifi

cation most desired; and while such service might be far more valuable to the toward any political party, commercial enterprise, religious sect, or

public service than that of a mere copyist or low-grade clerk, yet the standing reached

in competition might be so far below that attained by the non-expert that there contending influences. Recourse will also be had to papers in this would be no chance for appointment under the rules. country printed in foreign languages, and to European publications,

THE BLAIR EDUCATIONAL BILL. for matters and opinions therein.

National Republican (Rep.), Washington, D. C., April 13. PUBLIC OPINION, in brief, is designed to be the one medium

That the bill would meet with some opposition was anticipated. There are

some politicians who would rather have the negroes ignorant and the poor whites through which will be given current and contemporaneous opinions illiterate. There are some who want the money for jobs, and hate to waste it on on subjects commanding public attention, together with a carefully

schools. There are some so eager to diminish the tariff revenues that they would

cut off every expenditure which tends to make a tariff revenue needful—a political prepared miscellany, a chronological record, and items of general

leader who fears that he will fare worse with an intelligent constituency than an

ignorant one, a jobber who wants to line his own pockets, a free trader who is deand special interest.

voted above all things to an increase of imports, and an extremist who dares not let For the purpose set forth, and believing that the Capital of the

his own State have its treasury replenished from the national vault-any of these

may naturally enough oppose a measure which is to employ national money for the Nation is the best point of observation, the Public Opinion Com

aid of education. Outside of these clauses, however, the opposition to the bill is

almost entirely frivolous. The pretense of scruples where none exist; the claim pany

will prosecute the enterprise with energy and persistence, con that the South is abundantly able to list the load of illiteracy, when from the very fident that it will meet with public favor.

nature of the case it is impossible that she could be; the lamentations over a wasteful expenditure of money, as if in the presence of so grave a danger as threatens us

from the mass of ignorant suffrage the sum proposed in the bill could possibly be THE PUBLIC OPINION CO.

better employed ; the attempts to excite State jealousy, lest, on the basis of illiteracy, one should receive a somewhat greater share than another; the anxiety over Constitutional points, as if every street-corner statesmen were wiser than the Supreme Court--all these classes of opposition to the measure are entitled simply to the contempt of those who see the need and wish to supply it in the most simple and most practicable way. If any evidence were needed to prove the good faith

and sincerity of the Southern people in their advocacy of this measure, the fact CIVIL SERVICE.

that eleven Southern States pay annually sixteen millions of dollars for education, Harper's Weekly (Ind.), April 10.

and five millions of this for colored schools, while the colored people themselves

.pay less than two millions of taxation, tells the whole story. The South is doing The President may not have known the facts. The law, under the Constitution,

its best in this direction, and will continue to do its best aided or unaided. But its vests many appointments in the heads of departments. But a President known to best is not sufficient to meet the need. To the Republican members it would seem be bent upon reform may justly assume that whoever accepts an invitatation to his that nothing of urging or persuasion should be required. Upon principle they are cabinet intends to conform to his policy. And when once such facts are known

the friends of education, and assuredly should not now stand in the way of giving to the President, as he is responsible for his own administration, and can ask any

it to the people. Let these two classes, then—the Republicans and Southern explanation or the resignation of any secretary, such facts unexplained or such

members—unite in securing the passage of this wise, humane, and philanthropic offerises unredressed necessarily impair public confidence in his own good faith.

measure, Future generations will applaud it as second only to the emancipation We certainly justify, and on the highest public grounds, removals, not for political act in the possibilities of its influence upon the unity of this nation through all opinion, but for offensive partisanship. But this is a principle which is absolutely im

time. partial.

Puck, April 14.
Indianapolis Journal (Rep.), April 12.
THE truth is, as everybody knows, except, possibly, the simple-minded old gran-

THE “Blair bill” is losing friends day by day. The more the subject is disnies acting as Commissioners, that the civil-service law as operated by this adminis

cussed, the more clearly do people see that Congress has no business to make New tration is the merest farce, and one that grows more transparent every day.

Hampshire pay for North Carolina's schools. And even if the scheme were far

sounder and more desirable than it is, it could hardly be a popular measure. The N, Y, World (Dem.), April 13.

hideous extravagance of our legislators is a burden on the country. Business men IF the clerks in the Departments and the larger Government offices had been se are tried hard enough at present by the demands of their employes. They do lected for their fitness, regardless of party relations, that branch of the public ser

not want to have trade further intimidated by the prospect of a depleted National

POLITICAL.

Treasury and the probability of increased taxation. The river and harbor bill is moaning for more millions; the pension bills go on forever, and there are limits to the amount of drain which the financial system of the country will stand. Yet our Congressmen do not seem to think so.

THE NEW TARIFF BILL,

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

N. Y. Times (Ind.), April 12. The tariff bill is based, so far as the changes in duties are concerned, on the principle of promoting home manufactures by removing or lightening the taxes on raw materials. The commodities from which taxation is in part or wholly removed are articles of universal use and necessity. They are articles of shelter, of clothing and of food, and, apart from any benefi to be derived by American manufacturers directly by the relief from the unnecessary and arbitrary increase of cost in raw materials, the claims of the whole people in regard to these are of the strongest possible character. It can hardly need demonstration at this late day that the great mass of the people of the United States, who support themselves by their labor, are entitled from their own Government to exemption from unjust taxation that increases the cost of living by increasing the cost of the houses they dwell in, the food they eat and the clothes they wear. That, at any rate, is what those believe who have brought forward this bill. We cannot doubt that they are acting in the interest of the general public, and that they will receive the support of the public.

Springpelit Republican (Ind.), April 12. IT is characteristically unfair in Messrs. Morrison and Hewitt to say that the present rate of duty on dutiable goods is 47 per cent, or “higher than during the highest period of the war," and yet suppress the fact that one-third of all imports are now free of all duty whatever. The magnitude of the free list is a very important point in determining the severity of a tariff. During the war very little was admitted free. The average rate on all imported goods is at present 30 per cent. ; on all dutiable goods between 46 and 47 per cent. The tariff bill they propose has no chance of passing the Senate, and is therefore a purely political move. They will chalk it up and take to their heels, as the Democrats have never yet dared to discuss tariff reform in a political canvass. There is a splendid opportunity for it. The country wants the free raw materials of which Morrison and Hewitt speak in their report, but from lack of brains or courage the Democrats, as a rule, never stand up squarely on the tariff issue on the stump.

Chicago Herald, April 13. IMPORTANT as April will be in the history of the British Parliament, it will also be memorable in the annals of the American Congress as the month in which Mr. Morrison introduced his bill for the partial emancipation of American business and industry from the thraldom of a monopoly tariff

. The new bill, which has already been outlined in these columns, adds many raw materials to the free list and will reduce the revenue by about $24,000,000 a year, which is now the extent of the surplus. Money taken from the people for which Government has no legitimate use is generally wasted and not infrequently spent for corrupt purposes. When the revenue is deficient it is the duty of Congress to lay taxes. When it is excessive it is the duty of Congress to remit taxation. We shall now witness a great party arraying itself in opposition to this reduction of taxation on the grotesque theory that to do away with these public burdens will be to destroy prosperity and to promote bankruptcy. To overcome this combination of error, prejudice, and self-interest it will be necessary for Americans to do some thinking for themselves. Mr. Morrison's face is in the right direction, and his triumph must come sooner or later.

Kansas City Times, April 13. The tariff reports from the Ways and Means Committee of the House are instructive reading, in that they furnish a reasonably accurate statement of the views of the two divisions into which Americans are separated by the tariff question. The minority report shows that the protectionists have grown bolder and have thrown away the plank in the Republican platform of 1880 which demanded revision. They now want everything to stay unchanged. They will not cliscuss individual absurdities in the revenue list, but clamor against all change and attach to all attempts the epithet “ tariff tinkering.” We now know what Republican statesmanship is to grind out during the coming two years.

Washington Post (Dem.), April 13. The reductions made have reference mainly to articles of shelter, clothing and food. Will any one contend that that is a good tariff arrangement which increases the cost to the whole people of the food which they eat, the clothes which they wear or the houses in which they dwell? The principle of this bill is that these things should, for the benefit of all, be exempted from taxation, and so reduced to the lowest cost. The present tariff is so constructed that for every hundred dollars' worth of manufactured goods which a man purchases he pays on an average fortyseven dollars as a tax over and above the actual cost. Is not this rate of taxation monstrous; and, if so, should it not be reduced? How many members of Congress could justify themselves before their constituents for voting to keep general taxation at the rate of forty-seven dollars on the hundred ? Mr. Morrison's calculation is that the bill will reduce revenue to the amount of $24,000,000. But this sum does not begin to denote the saving to be effected to the consumers of the country. One dollar Jost to the Treasury may be a gain of ten to the citizen, by the ending of monopoly and the cheapening of goods through the proper competition of trade. Then, free raw material will, beyond a doubt, greatly stimulate industry, and set a great many enterprises a-going on a prosperous basis. No mere manipulation of figures can measure the great good that may result.

N. Y. Star (Dem.), April 13. The new tariff bill provides for cheaper dwellings, cheaper clothing and cheaper food, by putting the raw inaterials used by the manufacturers on the free list. At the same time the duties upon manufactures of wool are reduced to 35 per cent. ad valorem, and reductions are made in the cotton schedule of about 18 per cent. The rate on sugar is also reduced. Mr. McKinley, who presents the minority report, naively confesses that it was impossible for the majority of the committee to adhere to their original purpose because of the strength and influence of the iron and steel and the pottery and glassware organizations. Organized protected manufacturers have stood for years in the way of the reduction of taxes, and the unorganized consumers have been their victims. The debate will be between the men who desire to cheapen the cost of living and the men who desire to increase the profits of manufacturers. Cheap dwellings, cheap clothes and cheap food will certainly result from the passage of the Morrison bill. The sustainers of the protected monopolies will argue, as Mr. McKinley argues in his minority report, that the bill is hostile to the farmers and the laborers. It is contended that the business of the wool growers will be destroyed, although the minority report itself shows that a protective tariff has been of no benefit to the wool growers. Under the high tariff of 1867 this country produced 180,000,000 pounds of wool; under the tariff of 1883 the production rose to 308,000,000 pounds, and now, notwithstanding protection, the price of wool is less than the cost of production. The farmers who are interested in maintaining a duty which adds to the cost of clothes are a very small percentage of those who are engaged in agriculture. The wheat growers of the Northwest, whose surplus product, sold in Liverpool, fixes the prices they obtain at home, are interested the other way. They want cheap clothes, cheap dwellings and cheap food. They want more than these; they want cheap agricultural machinery, but Mr. McKinley says that the organized iron and steel men are at present too strong for the farmers.

Philadelphia Press (Rep.), April 13. In spite of the disguise which Mr. Randall has endeavored to throw over the real views of the Administration in regard to the t riff, Major McKinley sees in the bill reported yesterday the hand of President Cleveland, through his Secretary of the Treasury, telling the committee which of the American productions can be first safely discarded, thus clearly indicating that the present tariff measure is only part of the general Democratic scheme to establish in this country the British system, and thereby impoverish American labor. The minority report most truly says: “ 'The second step will be to discard all duties upon imported articles competing with our own, and then at last duties only will be levied upon articles not produced in the United Stàtes, among which are tea and coffee.” There can be no doubt that this is the ultimate aim of the Democratic party. That the hand of the Democracy is raised against every American industry there can be no sort of doubt. When the party leaders found they lacked the strength to smite coal, iron ore, the metal schedule, chemicals and carthenware, they turned straightway to wool, flax, hemp and the textile schedules. They have for the moment de-erted the stronger group of interests for what they believe to be the weaker. And who is asking for this destruction of American industries ? It is, indeed, born of party necessity; there is no other reason for it, and Mr. McKinley says: · It is here because the Democratic party is here in control.” It will help nothing, benesit no one. The articles attacked are selling so low now that the worn-out cry of cheap food and cheap clothing has no force. American workmen know that “cheap goods, so-called, means cheap labor, and that things are the dearest when they are without the means to buy them.”

N. Y. Times (Ind.), April 13. It is generally understood at Washington that the tariff reform bill, if defeated, will be defeated by a combination of Democrats with Republicans, and that, though there are a number of Republicans who favor the principle of the bill, they will be withheld from supporting it by the policy of preventing any good legislation by the present House. The situation is very inuch the same as the reformers had to face in the last Congress. There is not much reason to suppose that they will be any better able to overcome its difficulties. The bill of this year is better and stronger than the former in that it is based on a more logical principle, and is capable of division, so that if the whole of it cannot be carried there are parts that may be saved. But the real difficulties which the Democratic reformers are unable to avoid and apparently unable to cope with lie in their own disposition. They are not ready to stake everything upon success, and until they are it will always be in the power of Mr. Randall to balk them. They have known for at least two years that they could not count on Randall and his followers. They had to choose between keeping them in the party or making some substantial measure of tariff reform the distinctive Democratic policy. They chose the former, and they must take the consequences.

Philadelphia Record (ind.), ripril 13. ALTHOUGH the minority of the Committee on Ways and Means did nothing to improve the new tariff bill they have much fault to find with it. They say that out of “thirty-one or more articles dutiable at from 100 10 358 per cent. not one is dealt with in this bill, while other articles upon which is imposed a duty of from 10 to 15 per cent. are cut down or transferred to the free list.” There is no doubt that the bill is faulty in some respects. Its friends do not pretend that it is a perfect

But when the bill comes into the House Mr. McKinley and his associates of the minority of the Ways and Means Committee will have an opportunity to move an amendment of the defects which they have pointed out.

N. Y. Tribune (Rep.), April 13. For the first time in twenty years the wool du'ies are to be thoroughly discussed. Since the adoption of the wool tariff, in 1867, which was the caresullymatured fruit of many conferences and of several conventions, the subject has been so little considered that much public ignorance and many misapprehensions prevail

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

measure.

contribute a million dollars to effect it, since it would make such a breach in the Another wise modification of the tariff under this new measure is the ten per

about it. Thus there are now found journalists and Congressmen who affirm, as tries and prosperity of the section that furnishes the men and money to crush the
others did in 1866, that a removal of duties on wool is absolutely necessary to se rebellion and restore the Union It is as vicious a piece of legislation as was ever
cure a decent price for American wool to the growers. At the same time there proposed in the National Congress. If it should become a law it would work ir-
are found some manufacturers who insist, as others did in 1866, that the manufac retrievable ruin to many of the leading industries of the country, it would lower
ture cannot grow and prosper without cheap raw material. To the dullest mind the wages of the American workingmen, and inaugurate a reign of discontent and
these two claims are irreconciliably conflicting. Yet both find place in the report suffering such as this country has never experienced. In the interests of the
of the majority of the Committee on Ways and Means in support of the pending Am can people every Republican vote in the House will be cast against the
bill. If a removal of the duty will make wool cheaper for the manufucturer, how bill; in the interests of European manufacturers and foreign traders, every Demo-
can it secure a better price for the grower? If it will secure to the wool.grower a cratic vote (with a few possible exceptions) will be cast for it.
better price for his product, how can it benefit the manufacturer by giving him
cheaper raw materials ? Events have proved that the reasoning of free traders in

Der Deutsche Correspondent (German), Baltimore, April 14.
1866 was unsound. But now the kinds of goods chiefly used in this country are
made here as cheaply as they are made in any other country, and are best made with

It is now two years since Morrison's tariff bill was rejected in the House of little or no admixture of foreign wool. Of the wool imported, 51,000,000 pounds bers, at that time, voted against it

, distributed as follows, among the different

Representatives by 156 against 151 votes. Forty-one of the Democratic memis for use in the carpet manufacture, and only 17,000,000 pounds of all other classes. In only a small part of the other manufacture would the use of foreign

States, namely: Pennsylvania, 12; Ohio, 10; New York, 6; New Jersey, 3; Cali

fornia, 4; and the States of Maryland, Illinois, Connecticut, Louisiana, Virginia, wool be an advantage. To use more than the sixth of foreign wool, in place of

and West Virginia one each. The excitement will probably be recalled which any considerable part of the five-sixths domestic wool now used, would mean ruinous prices for the growers, as they well know. On the other hand, if there were

arose in certain Democratic journals, in consequence of the action of the forty-one

Democrats, to each individual of whom political death was prophesied, and the any truth in the claim that the removal of the duty would enhance the value of

defeat of the party in the approaching Presidential election predicted as certain. 320,000,000 pounds of domestic wool now consumed, it would inevitably increase the cost of nearly all goods to consumers far more than the cost could be reduced

The Kentucky school has now matured a new tariff proposition, which is some

what milder, it is true, than the one of two years ago; but this, also, has little by reduction in the price of the one-sixth foreign wool now used.

A very few manufacturers would be benefited, at the expense of the rest of the country, by

prospect of a successful issue. Crawford, of the New York World, has already

discovered more than forty Democrats who will vote against it. Most of the the proposed change. But nearly all woolen manufacturers have united in an

Democrats who, two years ago, voted adversely to the bill, have been re-elected, earnest protest against the threatened change of tariff, and they understand the

and in the Middle and Eastern States, Morrison's bill can count upon only one
present condition and needs of the business better than the Bourbon legislators at
Washington

Democratic vote as certain, namely: that of Collins of Massachusetts. Quite as
Boston Advertiser (Ind.), April 13.

remarkable is the change of opinion in the South. Two years ago only three

Southerners voted with the Democratic minority, to-day, on the other hand, the dele. The paragraph of Mr. Morrison's tariff bill which places wool upon the free gations of the two Virginias and the Carolinas are equally divided, and from Louislist promises to be one of the most troublesome to its inventor. Not only has it iana three, from Mississippi two members, have declared themselves as adverse, alienated the Ohio Democrats and other representatives from wool-growing dis whilst the delegates from Georgia, Alabama and Florida are thoroughly hostile to tricts, but it has called out the publication of the statistics of this industry, which it. But the fact most worthy of remark is the revolution in the Southern States. present, perhaps, the most startling evidence of the impolicy of the free trade Two years ago there was in the whole South not a single protective paper, to-day idea. A reduction of the surplus revenues of the country was manifestly not the there is scarcely one influential sheet remaining which is not favorable to a reaprimary object of Messrs. Morrison and Hewitt. If a lessening of taxation and of sonable protection of national labor. But a few days ago we had occasion to rethe revenue surplus had been the object sought, it could have been most readily port a chance of saddle" of the Mobile Register, to-day is lying before us as obtained by removing the duties upon sugar, which latter article now yields one unquestionable a Southern Democratic paper as the Macon Telegraph, which fourth of the customs revenue of the United States, and is handled somewhat too says: “The Democratic party is no 'Free-trade party. To the great mass of its daintily by the Ways and Means Committee. The primary object sought by the members the tariff question is as yet a terra incognita. The South, which gave committee was evidently a reduction of protection and not of revenue.

153 to the necessary 201 electoral votes, has, since the civil war, never had a Pittsbury Penny Press (Ind.), April 13.

political contest in which the tariff question entered as a factor. When, two years. The tariff bill before the House is intended to defeat the protectionists by de

ago, Morrison's tariff bill was rejected, the Southern members, through mere comtachment. Leaving coal and metals protected is intended to capture the votes of plaisance toward the West, voted for it, and the Western leaders sought to infuse

the belief in them that thus they would most favorably represent their constitumembers from the coal and iron districts, North and South—to avoid the opposition of Randall and his Democratic protection followers, as well as that of the

encies. They were deceived; and they very soon discovered the error they had Republican protectionists for the present. The result that scheme, if it suci committed. From every portion of the South came protests. The Southern peoceeded, would be to leave those who are to be protected at present without the ple, now enlightened by their press, have taken their position upon this question, strength which they have hitherto derived from those who are interested in pro

and to-day are ready and determined to protect the industries and manufactures of tection for American wool, lumber and salt. Of course the next move or the : the country. Four years ago, in the entire great State of Georgia, there was only free traders, after thus insidiously dividing the protectionists, would be to put ores,

i one journal which ventured to give utterance to the word protection! To-day there metals and coal upon the free list—if they should have a majority in the next Con exists in our State not a single sheet of consequence that has not taken its stand gress. It would be better for all the protectionists to stand or fall together than to

against free-trade. We do not doubt whether there is a single man in the State of permit their forces to be divided now and weakened for future contests. If wool,

Georgia who could be elected as a free-trader.” Just the same revolution of lumber and salt can be put upon the free list by the present Congress, ores, metals : and Louisiana. The Democrats of Ohio are constantly drawing closer to Penn

opinion is observable in the two Virginias and Carolinas, in Tennessee, Alabama, and coal might as well go with them at once as to follow in another year or two with their powers dissipated by divisions to prevent the reversal of their defeat.

sylvania, and Kentucky, Missouri, and Texas are daily becoming more and more

isolated.
Protection must be sustained, not for the advantage of a State or section, but for
the benefit of the entire country. It cannot stand on any other foundation.

Frank Leslie's Illustrated Paper, April 17.
Boston Journal (Rep.), April 13.

The most significant feature of the proposed bill is that placing wool—the most
The latest tariff bill, from the free trade standpoint, is the best which has been

important, perhaps, of all raw materials—on the free list. This is following a prepared by the free trade interest for many years. We have not credited Mr. setiled principle of political economy, that the materials which home industry emMorrison with broad views regarding the tariff, even from the free trade position, ploy in manufacturing fabrics or articles should not be taxed by a government but the free, wool feature of the last bill indicates that the free trade committee

which desires to encourage or aid such industries. To cheapen raw products is have at least chosen their ground boldly, and, in the event of success, most wisely, to lessen the cost of manufacturing, and hence the cost of manufactured articles to since their action shows that if they can put wool on the free list, they believe that the consumer. All clothing into which wool enters as a component part will be they will, by so doing, detach the large body of men hitherto voting with the pro made cheaper by removing the wool duty. But is argued that the tax on this tectionists from that side of the question and make them the allies of the free tra le great staple should not be removed because it may injure the wool-growers of party. If they could win they could doubtless accomplish this result, since the Ohio. It is by no means clear, nor is it conceded, that the wool-producers in any men whose industry has been destroyed, having nothing at stake, would be in part of the Union would suffer detriment in the end if all imported wools clined to join the element which has no other object in view than to open our ceased to be taxed. It is very certain that the wool-growers themselves would markets to those whose cheaper labor and capital permit them to undersell the pay less than they now pay for their blankets, carpets and all their own clothing, American producer. If by any means the free traders could tempt the representa composed in whole or in part of wool, which of course would lessen the cost of tives of the districts largely engaged in woolen manufacture to vote for free wool, living. It is also certain that they would be partakers of the general benefits and thereby carry their bill through Congress, they know that they would strike a

resulting from an increase of our export trade by opening up to the domestic manblow at protection which they could not by any other method of attack. If the

ufacturers of woolen fabrics the markets of the world. foreign manufacturers could secure the enactment of this bill they could afford to

centum reduction in the duty on sugar. Sugar is such a common necessary of protection line that other parts of the system could be successfully assailed. If the lise, and is in such universal use, that whatever reduces its cost benefits the entire reductions of the burdens of the people is the purpose of the Democrats in the population. The sugar-producers in two States are too small an element to suborHouse, why is sugar left to retain nearly the same duty as the present? If manu dinate to it the interests of a whole people. With reduced duties on imported facturers are to be benefited, why is not alcohol employed in manufactures ex sugars will come cheaper refined sugars and cheaper food. The welfare of the empted from taxation? The committee have had neither of these objects in view.

largest number must control. The small reduction proposed is also judicious, Their purpose is to overthrow the policy of protection.

because extreme or radical changes in rates of duty should not be made at one National Republican (Rep.), April 14.

time or in one year. Upon the whole, the defective Morrison bill has become a Thư tariff bill is evidently drawn in the interests of the Democratic party. It

meritorious measure under the wise revision of Mr. Hewitt and others, and now protects the products of Democratic States and strikes a deadly blow at the indus

deserves to become a law, TXU

»-------=

VH*--*

[ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »