Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1902-08-20
SHAW '|.|| ON The TARIFF. 1T !.
Secretary Of the Treasury Insists
that Protection is Not the
Mother Of Trusts.
Discusses the Iowa Platform and
Says He Favors Such
Changes as are Advisable.
Believes the Farmers Would Resist
the Abolition Of the Duty on
Cattle and Meat.

Morrisville, VT, Aug. 20.Five thou
sand persons listened to Secretary of
the Treasury Leslie M. Shaw who was
the principal speaker at a Republican
rally here. Secretary Shaw lived here
when he was boy and went to school
here and the residents of all the sec
tion round about came to hear him.
He spoke in part as follows: S
I have been quoted as opposed to a
revision of the, tariff. have never
opposed readjustment of the tariff
Whenever congress reaches the con.
clusion that the friends of protection
are strong enough to conservatively
modify certain schedules so as to meet
changed conditions and at the same
time successfully resist the efforts OF
the opposition to revise the entire tar
tff law, thus paralyzing business for a
season, I am in favor of it. I have ex-
pressed some doubt, however, about
the wisdom of instructing by resolu-
tions, or exacting pledges from can
didates for congress when the effect
is liable to precipitate protracted de.
bate with very uncertain results.
I have never seen the time, since I
have given public questions consider
alton, that I would not reduce the rate
on quite large number of items, nor
when I would not increase the rate
on other items. It is not likely that
any member of either house of con-
gress-ever voted for tariff bill en-
tirely to his liking nor is it probable
that any president ever signed bill
that he would not have changed in
some particular had it been in his pow
er. am willing to concede that con-
rell bill of the COS, for instance, when
the country was involved in war,
would not be appropriate for us now,
but will not admit that the tariff is
the mother of trusts, nor will con:
cede that a tariff for revenue only win
destroy trusts on any other theory
than that fire in a wheat field will de-
stroy Canada thistles. !.
The protective tariff is not the
mother Of trusts, though it is the
parent of conditions that makes it
profitable for capital to combine and
congenial for labor to organize.
Discusses the Iowa Platform.
The Republican party in my state re-
Gently reafirmed the tariff platform Of
1901. This has caused considerable
comment. 1t has been misrepresented,
not quite as persistently but In the
same way that the memorable speech
of President Mckinley at Buffalo has
been misrepresented, misquoted, mis-.
construed and misapplied. This plat
form was unanimously adopted both
years. It declares "in favor of such
changes in the tariff from time to
time as becomes advisable through
the progress of our Industries and
their changing relations to the COM
merce of the world"
Is there anyone who is not in favor
of "such changes in the tariff from
time to time as are advisable?"
4 I am willing the jury shall be polled
on that proposition. So say we all.
It also declares sin favor of any modi-
.fication Of tariff schedules that may
be required to prevent their affording
shelter to monopoly" And. again, we
all say aye, SIR to the proposition.
There may be quite radical differ
ence of opinion as to the truth Of the
implied admission that the protective
tariff does afford shelter to monopoly,
but there would be no difference of
opinion about removing it if it did af-
ford such shelter.
A few days ago the butchers, in con-
vention assembled, declared in favor
Of abolishing the tariff on cattle and
meat to the end that this supposed
shelter for the alleged meat trust
might be removed but I am disposed
to think the good farmers Of my state
would vote quite unanimously against
such an experiment. Suppose we take
the tariff OFF beef and then suppose the
herds of cattle from Mexico and South
America are brought in by the hun.
dred thousands. They will find their
way to the stock yards and the butch.
ers will be compelled to bid against
the packers then as now. No; the re
moval Of the tariff on live stock and
meat would not restore the butchers
1 to business. It mighI ruin the farmers
but the packers could stand it; fol
nothing less than organized capital
could enter the import meat business
with packing houses in foreign coun
tries, refri igerating ships and other e2
pensive equipment. <ssI
HAS ri BEEN GoBRLED9
Reported the Canadian Pacific Con