Press enter after choosing selection

Objections To The Mills Bill

Objections To The Mills Bill image
Parent Issue
Day
26
Month
July
Year
1888
Copyright
Public Domain
OCR Text

The only consistent defenders of the Mills bill, which was passed by the house of representatives in congress last Saturday, are the out-and-out free traders. These men think that it is desirable to break down as rnuch of the tariff as possible. If they can only make a beginning by placing wool, lamber and salt on the free list, they think that a great step will have been gained, and they will act with the party which promises to do most in that direction. They admit that the Mills bill does not go far enough to suit them, but say that they expect more. Believing, as they do, that no tariff should be placed onanything produced in this country, these honest free-traders are the only consistent defenders of the Mills bill. The Democratie party contains many free-traders, but only a few who boldly confess that their main object in supporting the Mills bill is the breaking down of the tariff systeni. The majority of the Democrats hide their real purpose in supporting the Mills bill by the plea of necessity of surplus reduction. They are not consistent, for, if a reduction of the surplus is of such vital importance to the business interests of the country, they ought to have adopted a policy which would be accepted by both houses of congress for the speedy and sure diminution of the treasury receipte. The method is of minor importance and they should not have insisted upon any one. The reduction of the tariff rates is not a speedy and sure way ; for the precise effect on the revenues of reduction of tariff rates can not be foretold. The great Pitt once increased the revenue of Great Britain's exchequer by lowering the duties of certain imported articles, - the lower duties causing greater importations and consequent increase of revenue. If, then, the Democrats are honest in niaintaining that a reduction of the surplus revenue is of supreme and immediate importance, they are unpatriotic in insisting upon a nieasure which they knew could not become a law, and the effects of which in reducing the revenue could not be foretoKl with accuracy. Thoy are willing to jeopardize the business interests of the country rather than give up their way. But of course the feais of the Democrats concerning the surplus are as sumed largely, and have no real weight with them. The Mills bilí isreally airee trade measuremore than anything else. The leading Democrats struggle to make t appear otherwise, but it is useless. One great objection to the bill is that it saus under false colors. The most humiliating spectacle is presented by those Democrats who believe in protection but who have obeyed the party mandate and voted for the bill. Our own Tim Tarsney, who talks protection to his constituents but votes to admit lumber free, is a particularly obnoxious example. Of course, all Republicans, except a few free traders, will earnestly oppose the Mills bill, and it will not become a law. It is doubtful if the Democratie managers would have voted for it in the house if they had supposed there was any danger of its becoming a law before the November election. They don't somuchdesire free trade or the revenue reduced as they desire the control of patronage. They really fear losing the postoffices more than they do the piling up of a treasury surplus. The Register wants to see the IJ. S. Senate kill the Mills bill quickly and decisively because it is an unnecessary measure and because it would be harmful. If it is so extremely necessary to to reduce the revenue, it might be accoinplished in a much simpler and more effective way. As a matter of fact, the government will soon need every penny in the treasury with which to meet its debts. It is unfortunate that the bonds are so fixed that they cannot be paid now ; but the Republicans, if they had control of congress, could by their superior fiscal ability, get around this difficulty and apply the apparent surplus to theprofitable liquidation of the public debt. The great objection to any reduction of tariff rates at present is the fact that it will unnecessarily disarrange the business interests of the country. Why should the tariff on wool, for instance, be taken off, when the government will need the revenue derived from it, and when the business of the country is adjusted to it? If the tariff were to be taken off now and put on again when the government needs all the money it can get to pay its bonds, there would be two wholly unnecessary shocks to important branches of industry. It is a good principie to lay down, both by moderate and high protectionists, that no reduction or increase of the tariff should be made unless itis clearly needed and promises to be reasonably permanent. The record of the Republican party, and the utterances of its Garfleld, Hayes, and Arthur, give every suarantee that the spirit of the party is against the gathering of unnecessary revenue. The Republican party, if it were in power, would manage this whole question in a business-like manner. It would not blindly rnake unnecessary changes which would disastrously affect thousands of deserving citizens. Will not our Democratie friends who are wool-growers see the point, and vote for Harrison and Morton and for Capt. Allen ? _________ A NUMBKRof Washtenaw farmers who see clearly that their i nterests lie in the direction of maintaining the tariflf on wool, but who have become so accustomed to voting the Democratie ticket that their digestión is Bindered by the thought of voting anything else, excuse themselves for supporting Cleveland by saying that the Mills bill or anything like it cannot become a law anyway ; the senate will prevent that. Isn't this a splendid reason for supporting a party? Ilonestly, we think the farmers ought to be ashained of themselves for talking like that. Support a party because it cannot do harm '. Support a party because its opponent will keep it f rom doing anything injurious! Gov. Ogi.esby, of Illinois, has set a good example to the heads of other states by appointing two women on the State board of education. Both ladies have been long and favorably known in connection with educational matters in their respective communities. Itisa fact that the service of wornen in administrative positions on school boards and as county superintendents of schools is a demonstrated success in Illinois. Some of the best conducted counties in the state as to school matters have long been in the hands of women, repeatedly elected to the office of county superintendents of schools. Arthur T. Ly.man is the name of a Bostonian who will act with the Demo-# crats this time, although he has been a Republican. We think its about time for him to get out of the party ; for he is almost too selfish to live. He is pleased with the Mills bill in that it takes the duty off woo!, and retains a duty of 40 per cent. on woolen goods. That is, he wants what he manufactures to be protected by a high tariff, but would like what the farmers produce to come into the country free, so that he can get wool cheaper. He claims to be a protectionist, too. TiiEConduct of some of the state inilitia while stopping at Cadillac, last week, on their way to Mackinac, in interfering with and breaking up the salvation army march, by insulting the women, assaulting the men and taking the instruments away from the ïnusicians, was low-lived and cowardly. It was the work of bumnieis and the proper authorities should punish the offenders. The young men, wearing the blue of our nation's defenders, and supposed to be the protectors of the weak, must feel proud (?) of their dirty work if they have any manhood at all. Fkom the reckless riding and driving done on out streets, especially in the evening, one would infer that a pedestrianhad nothingto say about it. Butsome day these rapid youths will run over some one and then learn that a person on foot always has the right of way, and is not obliged to be continually on the look-out for danger from this source. Xow that the poor old tottering Courier has told the editor of the Argus that he lies, we may presume that the eaupaign is opened. To a farmer these times, 10 cents a pound less on wool is a big item.

Article

Subjects
Old News
Ann Arbor Register