The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1902-09-30

American to require Americans to pay on Amerl-
can soil q higher price for American products
than is charged on foreign soil to foreigners"
Tn this o~uotation we have the plain truth about
the matter, and not only the plain truth, but the
prevailing sentiment of the people, II we Judge
the signs cf the times correctly-that prevailing
sentiment by which the statemen and politicians
who wish to ride the waves successfully had bet
ter steer their crafts.
TARIFF REGULATIONS AND MONOPOLY
And this reminds us that we were perhaps not
entirely accurate in our last weeks comment on
the Presidents attitude toward tariff revision.
It appears that in the same Cincinnati speech
from which we quoted, the President also de-
clared himself as follows:
"If in any case the tariff is found to foster a
monopoly which does i'll, why, of course, no Pro
t~ectionist would object to a modification of the
tariff sufficient to remedy the evil"
Very positive and plainly spoken is this, but
if the President intended it for literal truth he
is wofully mistaken. No one should be deceived
into believing that the tariff is the chief support
of monopoly, but it is an undeniable fact that the
tariff does foster some monopolies that do ILL.,"
1t is also an undeniable fact that there will be
long and loud objections among Protectionists
to any notification whatever R~
The larger and more significant fact noNeha~~
is that Mr.. Roosevelt has, by implication at least,
declared himself opposed to all tariff regulation
that foster "monopolies that do i'll" There's 1o
other construction to put on what he says.
The President has also declared in favor of
the appointment of a nOn-partisian commission
to take up the whole tariff question and recon-
mend legislation. This recalls the fact that such
a commission was appointed in President Arthur's
administration twenty years ago. It did some
work, but it's recommendations were ignored by
the partisan majorities in Congress.
THAT CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT
IDEA.-Roosevelt's advocacy of a Constitutional
Amendment has not been very favorably received.
Many people believe with the Outlook that we
should first test the powers that we have; others
reject it because the President has not shown why
it is needed; many laugh at the whole scheme as
impracticable. Mr.. Bryan opposes it because of
its conflict with what is left of the States Rights
theory. And there is some wisdom in his atti-
tude, something worth bordering in the question:
Gan we do this without perilously increasing
that Capitalization of authority which has been
the bane Of all historic republics, and endanger-
ing that local self-government and that Individual
liberty which are the distinguishing character7
istics of the American Republic? o.
AS we see it, Their is no reason for the States
surrende~ing any of the rights they now have, but
there is great reason and great need for sens
bic and effective cooperation between the Sta
and the Federal Government. We have our State
Railroad Commissions and our National Intert
State Commerce Commission Cor the semblancd =
OF 1T yet, though Congress has robbed it of mos
of its rightful powers.) In the same way, we be-
lieve, there must be cooperation between TIL
State and National Government for the contro
OF great corporations other than railway corpora
tions.