The Coeur d'Alene press. (Coeur d'Alene, Idaho) 1892-1907, 1897-06-26
ANTITRUST TARIFF.

The amendment 10 the tariff bili pro
posed by Senater FestgTew. is hari
nat for the mS nopoly prOtectienists Il
crack. A protective tariE that protects
the faEsnez. the lahoCer and the meehsr-
&. IS well - the manufacturer, IS The
oaly last tarsf law. and Senator Petit
grews amendment propOsed 10 give the
wheae esantEy protecsioa from the
oppression 81 the traSss, The fhilatlel,
PAia Anaerscaa in commenting "a the
naeaSaFe SAYS that nothing has heen
more Irritating to the Republicans heat
on having q monopoly tariff than the
presentation al Seaasor Pcstigrews anti
trust amendment resulting in drawing
the lines sharply between 3 tariff for
the protection Of monopoly and = tariff
for the protection 81 the whole people,
This amendment was spoken OF in the
Washington dispatches as zone Of the
most troublesome subjects the Rep1h-
hcan leaders have to face" as most
puEzling matter" Yet it Is an amend
ment in no way destructive Of the tariff
either IS revenue or protective Eeas
nre; it would be destructive Of the tariff
only 80 far as it is q measure Of oPpres-
sion, and such amendment should have
been welcomed, not sparned, by prO,ec-
ticniSts. for it is certainly not the pro
fessed aim Of protection to put our
people under tribute to the protected
industries. This has been charged BY
the enemies Of the system. bet eve
vehemently denied by its friends, But
now, when ii is proposed to 30 amend
the tariff as TO put the trusts beyond the
pale OF protection, such amendment is
opposed and cast to one side by the
avowed friends OF the protective system.
By so doing, these avowed friends are
undermining the protective system: they
are paving The way to its downfall, for
they are upholding it as class legislation,
not as legislation aimed for the benefit
Of all, making OF the tariff not an iustru
ment for the protection Of all elasses.
but an instrument to enable the trusts
TO increase their exaeIions. And such
n tariff can not stand. True friends Of
protection, Of the protection that aims
10 protect the consumer no less than the
producer, should have welcomed Senator
Pettigrew's amendment But the gen
eral disposition Of Republicans Was to
get around it, and they have got round
il by voting it down and promising to
substitute an amendment of their own
preparation.-a promise that will not be
kept in good faith.
They recognised it as awkward, fol
they could not well afford to be put in
the position Of defenders of monopoly
So they strOve to make il appear thai
Senator PettigreN's amendment does
not draw the lines sharply between 4
monopoly and a protective tariff, that
adoption ct such an amendment would
wreck the bill ~ = revenue measure
withdraw protection from the innocent
as well as the guilty, that the way ID
deal with trusts Is not through the tar
III, and that therefore a vote agains,
such amendment should not be con
strued as a vote for monopoly. But il
cannot Be successfully hidden that such
= vote is vote for monopoly. for where
the tariff has heen made the shelter
from behind which the trusts have
raised prices and exAeted tribute from
our people, it cannot Be denied that the
way to deal with such trusts Is BY
6epriving them OF the shelter of tariff
Proteetisa- We mus; do it if re do not
want to lend the strong arm Of the
government to the powerful to Cypress
the weak, If ne do not want 10 lend
governmental aid 10 the trusts TO enable
them to more soceessfnlly collect q
tribuie from cur people