Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1902-07-09
Public Opinion on Iowa Subjects
as Reflected in the Iowa
Newspapers.
The News Of Iowa From Hun.
dreds Of Different Towns
and Communities.
CONGRESS AND IRRIGATION.

S,rS from year to year. Inere are dpoue
1S5.OO0.00O acres of this redeemapie
land. which when supplied with water
will be first class for farming or graz
ing. It would have been cinch. me
lands would be sold to settlers at Ialf
prices, but the water rates would nave
piled up the profits. Congress spolled
the scheme by providing that the gov
eminent take up the work ana as 1ast
as land was redeemed put 1t IN the
market, selling water thereafter at the
lowest practicable rates. Five million
dollars were placed at the disposal OF
the department of the interior for m
anpurating the work. This money Will
all come back to the national treasury,
the irrigating department Will De sen
sustaining, and a territory about as
large as the state of Indiana will be
converted from waste desert to fruit
ful region with salubrious Climate.
~
s. TARIFF CONCESSIONS.
ISioux City Journal.l
To confound our protective system
with all existing tariff rates has not
the merit of honest debate.
The republican party has repeated
lv rewritten the tariff law. and the
party has always stood for the protec-
tive system. In the act of 1880 tho
net of 1883 was materially changed.
When the republicans We're returnee
tn mower in 1897 they did not re-enact
the Mckinley tariff of 1880. ana no
republican at the time charged tnat .he
Dingley act violated the protective
system. The act of 1897 was TO re-
establish the protective system 10
considerable extent set ASIDE oy l'ie
tariff act Of 1894, for which democrats
were responsible.
4arhere is general acquiescence IN our
present tariff system as national pol
lev" said President Roosevelt IN ms
annual message to congress. Demo
GRATIS may dispute it. But when they
came to enact a tariff law in 1884 they
uara co1npelled to make liberal con-
cessions to the protective system. II Is
,yholly within bounds to say that there
Is general acquiescence among repup-
1fcans in the protective system.
President Roosevelt in the same mes
sage counseled against general tariii
change" Our experience in the past.
he said. has shown that sweeping re-
visions of the tariff are apt to produce
f conditions closely approaching panic
IN the business world" Yet he dld
not advocate that the tariff should be
left alone. What he had in mind te
urge was the reciprocity must De
treated as the hand maiden of protec-
ton" He advocated the maintenance
of protection in every case where II
is needed Even reciprocal concessions
for which he was pleading. ne sac
..must be determined according to the
Individual case. remembering always
that every application Of our tariff pol
lev to meet our shifting national needs
must be conditioned upon the cardina!
fact that the duties must never be re-
duced below the point that will cover
the difference between the labor cost
here and abroad" That is the broad
ground upon which our protective sys-
tenn rests. If the duties fall below that
point they should be increased, and If
they rise above that point they should
be reduced.
The natural line of development for
q policy of reciprocity" said the pres
ident, will be in connection with those
of our productions which no longer
require all of the support once needed
to establish them upon a sound basis.
and with those others where either
because of natural or of economic
causes we are beyond the reach of sue
cessful competition" Precisely; with
out abandoning the protective system
we may now, under changed conditions
modify our tariff law in certain par
ticulars to the mutual advantage OF
our own people and our customers
abroad.
The protective system contemplates
that tariff duties shall be employed to
prevent ruinous competition. The pur-
pose is to protect labor, and in order to
protect labor there must be protection
to capital employing labor. Up to the
point of necessary protection for labor
1t is agreed there is advantage to the
country in the protective system, for
labor well employed means industrial
protection for society in general. But
beyond that point we can not agree in
support of a system of tariff duties We
are unwilling to contribute to capital
more than reasonable profits after pay
Ing labor remunerative wages. Passing
the point of legitimate protection we
necessarily are called upon to sub
nit to taxation for the benefit of the
few. The protective system makes
no such demand and can be defended
on no such ground.
There is no reason to believe that
President Roosevelt is not in entire
sympathy with the views expressed
by MIR. Mckinley in his Buffalo ad
dress. That address was based on cons
viction that some of the duties named
in the act of 1897 are now no longer
required. 1t is impossible to impeach
Mr.. McKinley's loyalty to the protec-
tive system, but he saw clearly that
"a mutual exchange of commodities
is nanifestly essential to the continued
healthful growth of export trade" What
he saw to be our need was the ex-
pansion of foreign markets. Such ex-
pansion is essential il the home mar
ket for labor at good wages is to be
maintained
Tariffs that are no longer needed are
indefensible on economic grounds. If
they serve to tax unduly other home
industries than those TO which they
directly apply and TO add to the diff
culties of our customers in other
lands, popular demand for repeal or
,,,oxJ;6ootion will incraa ond r,op,I1a n