The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1902-10-21
THE TARIFF IN 1904
The Prospects That It Will Be the
Leading Issue Are Daily
q Increasing. ''.-
T. Is Thought That the Trust Issue
May Be Lifted Out of Politics
"E
=, Before Then.

From, Tho Journal Bureau. Roons s.. Psss
building. Washington.
Washington. Oct. 21.-The prospects are
increasingly in favor Of the proposition
that the tariff will be the political issue
Of 1904, Thanks to the intelligence and
foresight of President Roosevelt, the trust
question, by that time, will probably not
be a political issue. The republican party
Will commit itself to some form Of proper
restraint and supervision and leave the
democrats nothing to stand on. But no
administration program can correct the
inequalities, daily becoming more glar-
Ing. Of the Dingley schedules. Congress
Is the only body with power in that di-
reCtiOn, and in 1904, as in the present
year, the efforts of the democrats will be
focused on the election OF a house of rep
resentatives, for after all has been said
1t Is in that body that tariff revision must
originate. Former President Grover
Cleveland, In public utterance in New
York, seems to believe that tariff reform
Is to be the leading issue in 1904, and he
advises his party to act accordingly. The
idea that the tariff should 'be revised by
Its friends, not by it's enemies" is we'll
enough, If it Is to be followed by intelli-
gent action by the republicans; but IL it
Is held out merely as a temporary ex-
pedient for purposes of delay. the country
will find 1t out, and the political pendu-
lum will swing to the democratic side with
resistless power.
So. the weather-wise political observ-
ers are saying. In both parties they are
watching events closely. The democrats,
notwithstanding Mr.. Clevelands state
ments, which may have been intended
merely as a warning, do not believe that
tho republicans will be able to revise the
tariff or make any important. move in that
direction by 1904. Republicans who view
the situation without prejudice were a
month CT two ago inclined to agree with
them; but in proportion as the policy Of
the president disposes Of the trusts as an
issue In politics. these republicans think
they see a possibility of tariff revision
without friction, either in a special session
next spring Of the congress to be elected
next month"; or l nthe session following
the presidential election, some definite
pledge regarding revision to be given the
people in the latter event.
Mr.. 6abcock's Position.
Representative Babcock Of Wisconsin,
chairman Of the republican congressional
committee, spent a day in Washington
this week. going over the politics of the
coal strike with the president While not
caring to discuss for publication the strike
or its possible political effects, he was
willing to talk bit about tariff revision
and the republican principle Of protection.
What he bad to say will dovetail very
nicely into what has already been said in
this article. Te begin with, Mr.. Babcock
has been very unfairly death with by the
country at large in it's discussion Of his
bill for the removal of the duty on steel
products. He Is g. republican, believing
in the principle Of protection, and stand
ing by all the party's cardinal doctrines.
He has not changed front and Is to-day in
hearty sympathy with the president on
the tariff and related questions. -,
my position said Mr.. Babcock, SIS as
old as the days of Clay and the other faith
of the protective policy. have mere
ly tried to restate 1t. There was danger
that some Of US might substitute the tariff
schedules for the great principle Of pro-
lection underlying them. The schedules
must change to meet new conditions
from time to time; the principle never
changes. Clays idea of protection was
duty that would not permit the COM
petition in the home market of foreign
made goods with homo goods on a basis
unfair to home labor and home capital.
That Is protection. Anything more than
that Is prohibition; anything less, tariff
for revenue. Protection should occupy
the middle ground between these two, and
necessarily the schedules Of any protection
statute must change from year to year
to meet changes in the markets. Any
tariff law that does not so change be-
comes a proper subject for criticism, for
in time 1t must fail in many respects to
meet the popular requirements. A law
which was logical in 1897 is not necessar-
fly logical in 1902; and II amended to meet
1902 conditions, it may again be out of
date In certain particulars by 1910.
II argue for the soundness Of the prin-
ciple Of protection, but not for the per-
manent soundness Of the several sched-
ules which make up any protective law,
I hope that the people will make this dis
tinction, for failure to do so has led to
much Of the faultflnding and uneasiness
OF the past year or two.
LET me make a concrete illustration
Of what I mean: If an article costs ST in
this country, and $3.50 in Europe, tariff
or Is per cent Is protection; Of SO per
cent, prohibition: Of 10 per cent, tariff for
revenue. If we adopt the rs per cent
tariff. or protection, and the price Of the
article in Europe should suddenly and un-
expectedly be reduced, tariff should
be raised to meet that reduction. If these
changes are not made from time to time,
the tariff law in places becomes illogical