The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1901-03-26
TARIFF COMMISSION.

TARIFF COMMISSION.
When Gen. Hancock saidsthat the tariff
was local issue, he stated a truth that
cost him many thousand votes, because
the people did not understand the express
sion He who has made the growth of
the material and industrial phases of a
nation careful study knows that the
question of national protection of certain
industries is, and always will be local
issue in country with capacity for
widely diversified employment.
Further any one who has given the
matter of the framing of a tariff bill even
casual attention knows that such a bill
can never be framed along the lines of
tariff for revenue only" nor on the
principle of protection for infant indus
tries. The economic principles underly-
ing the theory of protection cannot be
carried out because of the selfshness of
the national representatives. Neither can
an act embodying the principle of free
trade on basis of reciprocity be passed
for the same reason. The introduction of
any bill in congress that will affect in
any way the industries of the various
states is always a signal for a system Of
log-rolling that would be disgrace to
the Austrian reichsrath
This nation is so vast and it's interests
so diversified that what is good for one
section is bad for another The people of
favor of free lumber, but Michigan, Wis
consin and Minnesota desire protection
against Canadian pine. The inhabitants
of the Mississippi valley would not OBJ
ject to free iron ore, but the mine owners
of Minnesota claimed inability to COM
pete with the Cuban product The East
ern and many of the Western states
would be glad to have wool on the free
ing states object and if their votes are
needed to put a measure through wool
must be protected. Maple sugar is a
product Of a number of the states in
small quantities; there is good market
for all that can be produced, yet Yer
mont insisted that the maple sugar pro-
Queer be protected against the Canadian
Indians and half-breeds. Although wheat
is one of our great exports, the farmer
was kept in line for the protective party
by tariff on cereals and so on ad in
ffnitum.
sufficient number of industries must
OIL
tariff bill in order to secure the requisite
number of votes to get it through. No
economic principles are followed in de-
termining the schedules; the vote is what
is desired
That a nation is justified In protecting
its industries against the competition Of
the world is an axiom That a nation is
justified in taking advantage of SUPERIOR
resources, and by legislation compel
other people to exchange the product
of unskilled labor for that of skilled
labor in the markets of the world also
needs no proof. But the tariff laws of
a country should be framed for the BEN
eft of the nation as a nation, and not
for the benefit of a state, a section or
private industries.
The widely divergent views on the
question of tariff in this country arise
from the impossibility of securing with
our present political machinery a law
that will suit theory and be In accord
with the necessity of our Industrial en-
terprises. The only way to accomplish
this is to submit the question of tariff
legislation to a committee composed of
non-partisans, appointed for life, whose
duty should be to determine the needs
of the various manufacturing institu-
tons, cost of production and the effect
Of foreign and domestic competition; to
study the trend of trade and the drift
of development. From this expert
knowledge a tariff bill could be drawn
which when enacted into law would
make for the good of the whole nation,
as a nation. Under such a law trade
would seek its natural channels. Then
the material advantages which we pos
sess as a people would begin to appear.
Our tariff struggle for supremacy as
manufacturing nation has been any
thing but consistent The result has
been accomplished not through our laws
but by reason of our unlimited natural
resources and the positive genius of our
people for invention The arguments
used by our fathers are worn and thread
bare, but the protectionist still uses them
as if they were vital
In the early part of the century the
manufacturing East wanted protection
(for selfish reasons), the agricultural
South wanted free trade (selfsh also).
now it is a question between the manu-
featuring Eastern and Middle states and
the agricultural West. The West has
suffered from free trade with the East
as the whole nation would have suffered
from free trade with England during
the first half of the last century.
The time has come to release the pro-
Queer of raw material from this com
pulsory tribute to the manufacturer. 1t