, 1900-02-22

They Lag Superfuous." is the cap
ton of an article in which a FREE trade
writer on the editorial staff of the New
York Times pays his respects to last
weeks annual meeting of the Ameri-
can Protective Tariff league. The
Times man processes to be unabbe to
understand why the league should per-
sist in existing. He is firmly convinced
tina protection is doomed to extinction
as an American fiscal policy; that
president Mckinley and the wisest
and most influential leaders of the
Republicans are feeling their way along
toward free trade" and ARE convert
ing the Republican organization into
a low tariff party"
Having argued himself into this
frame of mind, the Cobdenite hot Cos
peller of the Times readily reaches the
conclusion that
They 1.-THE Republican leaders, must
abandon the prohibitive tariff policy
or the manufacturers will abandon
them. Protection has had it's day, has
Uutllved all the usefulness it ever had,
and is now a hindrance to the expan-
sion of the industries of the country.
1t must go.
why doesn't the American Protec-
tive Tariff league go? Its vocation is
gone, its influence is shattered, 1t is
pulling the wrong way. 1t has ST.
1892 in its treasury. We advise the
league to turn over this unexpended
balance to the Society for the Relief of
the Aged and Destitute and then tran
GULLY d%isband."
On the day that the free trade con-
victions of the New York Times were
recorded as above quoted, there ap-
peared in many newspapers of the
United States. some of them free trade
newspapers, Washington dispatches,
date of ian. 10, 1900, containing state
ments based upon figures just issued
by the treasury bureau of statistics to
the effect that in the year just closed
the foreign commerce of the United
States under the full operation of the
Dingley tariff lava hindrance to
the expansion of the Industries of the
country" according to the Times
amounted to more than So, 900 ,OOO, 600,
n of this nor sum more than
three-fifths was exports and less than
two-ffths imports. The exact figures
are:
Imports, S799, S34, 500; exports, ST.
275. 4S6, 6i1; excess of exports over i'm
ports. $475, 652. O2l. The excess of ex-
ports is larger than in any preceding
year except 1898. OF the exports. man
u%factures form a larger proportion
than ever before, while of the imports
raw materials for use of manufacturers
form a larger proportion than ever be-
fore. OF the exports, more than 80 per
cent are manufactures, against 26 per
cent in the fiscal year 1897. 20 per cent
in 1895, 20 per cent in 1885, 16 per cent
in 1879, and IL per cent in 1860. or
the imports SO per cent are articles in
a crude condition which enter into the
various processes of domestic industry,
against 26 per cent in 1895, "a per cent
in 1892, % per cent IN 1889 and 20 per
cent in 1895"
Does this look as though protection
is operating as "a hindrance to the ex-
pansion of the industries of the coun-
try" and therefore must CO.?
Does this look as though the leaders
of the Republican party would be COM
BNA'NN ~ bAoANN1icLs Vi nv
manufacturers will abandon them?
Does this looks as though the indus
trial captains of the United States were
dissatisfied with the workings of pro-
lection and were anxious to see free
trade take its place?
Does this look as though the Ameri-
can Protective Tariff league had no
further reason for existence and ought
to disband forthwith?
There are many manufacturers who
would like to see protection displaced
and free trade installed as the Ameri-
can policy; but they are not American
manufacturers. The manufacturers
who banker for free trade are foreign
manufacturers for the most part. with
here and there a manufacturer of
free trade sentiment like the New York
Times.