The Montgomery advertiser., 1901-10-08
Poss1BLE TARIFF CONTEST.
Many Interests Will Seek to Have
 Changes Made.

Changes Made.
 | Washington Special to New York Times. If there is to be a contest in the Re- ] publican party in Congress over the tar | iff, 1t will only be after that conflict has been developed in public that might have | been predicted at any time since Repre- sentative Babcock of Wisconsin brought
 forward his proposition to remove the tariff from articles protected for the bene-
 fit of manufacturers who refuse to give to domestic producers the advantages in price that are enjoyed by foreign buyers l of some American goods.
 The leading members of the Ways and
 Means Committee of the House and sev-
 eral members of the Finance Committed
 of the Senate have declared their opposi- tion to tariff changes and to any scheme | of reciprocity that will have the same ef- feet upon American manufacturers as would be secured by a reduction of tariff duties put on for their protection.
 The Senators from Connecticut, from New England generally, 1t may be said
 are all hanging together to resist any general reduction of tarif duties. wheth-
 CT by reciprocity or by bill. Just where
 New York's Senators will stand. with powerful manufacturing interests on the | one hand and the possibly more powerful mercantile interests on the other. remains to be seen, but when reciprocity was last before the Senate In committee and the knit-goods men in New York demanded
 that the French treaty should be shelved. 1t went on the shelf. Community of in- terest promises to bind the extreme pro- tectionists together.
 On the other hand, political considera- tions that may not be overlooked may be brought to the attention of the high pro- tectionists to modify their zeal in de- manding that the tarif be regarded as sacred in all it's parts, to be maintained in all schedules until 1t shall be decided that scientific" reduction shall be made. The Western men who ask for such re- auctions as trade conditions indicate as possible and necessary. without injury to the entire protection structure, sheer at the preaching of the high protection ists and say that if the lesson of 1892 has been forgotten the West Is getting ripe to again admonish the Republican party of its earnestness in demanding tariff reform.
 The knit-goods men and the manufac- turers of cheap jewelry, as well as the manufacturers of iron and steel, who dic- tated what the schedules of the Dingley tarin should impose in taxes upon foreign goods competing with their wares. will not be confronted only with the argu- ments of the consumers who speak | may have to be silent in the House in seeking better advantages in the United States for her wines, knit goods and oth- CT productions, but the associated bene- ficiaries of the Dingley tariff are likely to be opposed this session by such infu- entiai men as are associated with Theo- dore Search to bring about such modifica- tions of the tariff as will permit trade to expand by bringing about more equitable trade relations than now exist. Then the Western men who have objected to the course that provoked trade reprisals by Russia will be heard from, and in the Senate, where the protected manufactur- CTS have been so invulnerable since they secured an inner circle of influential Sem ators to conduct the opposition to the slightest reduction of protective rates, they will have to be counted upon.
 The Protective Tariff League will find that it is not to enter a field unoccupied by Republican champions for reasonable reductions The West does not consider the tariff a sacred thing It wishes, plain ly enough, to afford to those countries buying our agricultural machinery a chance to sell to us in order that they may have the more with which to buy. It is business, pure and simple, that is bringing around a new conflict for tariff reform and the business will be partly in the hands of men who were instrumental in making possible the tariff schedules which it Is intended to reduce or modify. The manufacturers who have met with success hitherto in oposing any back down from the Dingley rates will be pro- vided with reasons by former advocates of protection who differ but little from Garfield in favoring that protection that
 will lead to ultimate free trade"