Twice-a-week plain dealer. (Cresco, Howard County, Iowa) 1895-1913, 1901-05-31
TRUST PROTECTION.
A Question That Is Going to Give
the Republicans n Great
Deal of Trouble.

Near the close of the last congress
the chairman of the republican con-
gressional committee, j. w. Babcock,
introduced bill to abolish the tariff
on iron and steel. This was just
after the formation of the steel trust
was announced. This apparent lapse
of Mr.. Babcock from the dogma of
protection caused considerable talk,
and he was interviewed by the news
papers. In one of these interviews
he is reported to have said: "It
was to forestall similar action
by democrat" No action was
taken by the committee to
whom the bill was referred. Mr..
Babcock evidently did not expect
it, he was merely playing to the gall
leries; in fact, his bill did not abolish
the duty on iron and steel, it merely
pretended to. It provided for the re-
peal of the iron schedule, but did NOT
repeal or change section 1913, which
provides for an ad valorem duty Of
As per cent. on iron and steel not spe-
officially provided in the act. The
steel trust would doubtless be quite
satisfied with this As per cent. tariff.
Two or three democrats at the first
session of the Fifty-sixth congress
had introduced bills repeating all du-
ties on trust articles, but the COM
mittee on ways and means never con-
sidered them, the republican majority
being opposed to such action. Mr..
Babcock, therefore, did not forestall
the democrats, who are pledged by
their national platform against
trusts and the Dingley tariff, and will
certainly introduce bill to that end
when the Fifty-seventh congress as.
sembles. This will again try the
faith of those republicans who feel
that the trusts should be eurbed.
If the steel trust istto be legislated
against, why not the sugar trust, the
tin trHstSand the hundred and one
'~s,tfer trusts and combines. But to
do this would require nearly every
schedule of the tariff law to be re-
pealed, and the whole fabric of pro-
lection would be wiped out. This
would leave the republican party with
but imperialism as living issue and
with the greatest source of its cam
paign funds cut off without coun-
tervailing fountain to draw from.
A large majority of the republican
: senators and representatives have re-
ceived, and are receiving, favors from
the trusts, combines and corpora
lions, many of them are owned by the
trusts, and relief to the people from
them is unlikely and almost impos-
sible.
But there are other troubles for
the protectionists. The state depart
ment and the diplomats have become
interested in the tariff discussion,
The countervailing duties on Russian
beet sugar has been met by that
country with large increase of duty
on American goods, SO that door is
closing against US. Germany and
France are also said to be intending
retaliatory measures, and even MANY
of the English politicians are talking
the same way.
Then we have colonial tariff cues.
ton that must be settled and our new
possessions may soon be supplying
AS NAoAA sugar anu SoI1c kluuS OF To-
baoco. Free sugar from Porto Rico
and the Philippines would cut off the
revenue from that source, wipe out
the American sugar plantations, and
free tobacco would ruin the protected
Connecticut wrapper grower.
The whole tariff is complicated
but frail structure, and, like the chill
dren's house of cards, finger or a
breath will cause wreck. When YOU
have local politics, loot and diplomacy
all taking hand and inherited faith
in the doctrine they have taught
their rank and file to worship to be-
ware of one cannot envy our repub-
lican friends the job OF tariff revision
they must soon enter upon.
The democratic plan of tariff for
revenue will have to be adopted soon
er or later.