West Virginia argus. [volume] (Kingwood, W. Va.) 1877-1946, 1895-02-07
WnoecgMT FAvoalrlsM."
An Exposure OF Piece or Sauseatins
Republican tnnt.

An Exposure OF Piece or Saussating
Republicans Cant.
We find in the editorial columns of
republican journals some very queer
criticisms OF the new tariff. For ex-
ample, the New York Tribune, which
Is never weary OF calling the Mckinley
act, with all it's purchased taxes, 1.-THE
wisest and bravcst tariff laws vet
framed now talks about leases of in
decent favoritisn" in the new tariff.
and in the same sentence specifies 1.-The
y defense of steel beam aud some other
monopolies by duties meant to be pro-
/ hibitory."
! But il the duty on steel beams In the
new tariff (very much lower than the
/ duty in the old ouc) was meant to BIO
prohibitory" and is an example of ..in-
decent favoritism," and is therefore to
be denounced, how will the Tribune
characterize the steel beam duty in the
Mckinley tariff? We may ask the
same question about the duties on
steel rails. Here is comparison of
the duties per ton:
Mckinley New Tariff.
steer fnS.-.........@.....s-0i5 sI34i
steer rails ........s........... 1874 7.Si
III duty OF Sl3.4i per ton on beams
Is indecent" and ''meant TO be prohib-
TORY" was not the Mckinley duty of
500 10 more indecent" and prohibitory
in greater degree? Was not a duty
OF Sl34i on rails much more 'indecentr
than one of 81. 81 can be? And does not
The Tribune know that in the senate
these duties of Sl34i on beams and
S7.S4 on rails were substituted for the
very much lower rates of the house bill
100 per cent. and % per cent. respect
ively) at the suggestion or command OF
MIR. Quay, of Pennsylvania, the repub-
lican senator by whose vote alone the
sugar trust saved it's differential pro-
tective duty of g of cent pound. a
duty worth at least $40, 900. 900 in three
years to that organization?
IL this tariff is, as the Tribune says
In connection with its remarks about
the steel beam duty, "blll of sale u.
monopolists," was not the Mckinley
tariff bill of sale" in which the
prices realized were larger because the
favors granted were more valuable?
The duty of Sl3.4l on beams in the
new tariff does not defend a monopo.
ly," because the combination Of the
manufacturers of steel beams NJ LONGER
exists. We think the duty shpnll have
oeen made lower, bat the combination
was dis solved two years ago. The
Tribune knows this. 1t has repeatedly
published the fact in it's news columns
md referred to it in it's editorial arti-
cles. The mbiuation was dissolved
by the action of Mr. Carnegie. Some
OF our republican contemporaries have
never forgiven him for breal1in this
ring and thus causing a reduction of
prices to competitive basis which
made it impossible COR them honestly
to defend the Mckinley tariffs tower
ing duties ON the product in question.
the republican tariff in force from
1883 TO October 6. $780, "indecently"
gave this combination. the existence of
which was freely admitted in the last
three or four years of that tariff by
the members OF it, n protective duty
oil S2S per ton, and within the last
twelve months American beams have
been soll at s25. Und n the shelter of
this duty of SIS the ring maintained for
three or four years, without variation,
the price OF S73.92 per ton. or $40
cents pound. 1t could take advan-
tage not only of the duty of S2s, but
also Of natural protection equivalent
to not less than 25 per cent. For about
two years after the passage OF the Nc
kinlcy tariff the same combination,
! with the assistance OF the indecent"
Mckinley duty OF $40. Is, exacted uni
form ring price of S60.I4 per ton, or
lilo cents pound. This was freely
admitted, and was shown by the re-
! ports OF every trade journal of the iron
and steel industry.
| But after the withdrawal Of Mr.. Car
negie and the resumption of primary
competitive conditions in the steel
beam business, the price fell in short
time more than 40 per cent. There
after il declined more slowly, until
beams were sold at l ITO cents n
pound, (s2i64 per toni. or just one
third OF the old ring price exacted by
Chairman Jones, of the Republican ma
tional committee, and his associates in
! the combination. The price to-day at
Pittsburgh is / $40 cents pound. or
SEP. l2 per ton. There is no combina-
ton.
Our neighbor should avoid any refer
ence TO the duties on steel beams.
Even in the case of the sugar trust,
/ the Tribune has admitted. and The par
| tvs tariff leader and highest authority
In congress freely says that the pro-
tcctive bonus given TO the trust in the
| new parih ~ not quite Jhree-quarterS
OF the protective bonus given TO it by
the Mckinley tariff, 4215 cents. as
against 60 cents per hundred. Earnest
and consistent advocates of tariff re-
form have just ground for complaint
about many of the provisions of the
new tariff. but the cant OF the thick
and-thin supporters OF McKinleyism
md the Mckinley tariff, with all its
hu2e jobs. about indecent favoritism"
and 'prohibitory duties" in the bill re-
Gently passed is more dishonest. insin-
cere and nauseating than anything of
the sort thatca DC foun IN the history
/ OF American polities.-N. Y. Times
what we Have Saved.