Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1902-10-21
Coal and Oil Trusts Protected by
High Tariff.

1t has been the general belief of
most writer's and speakers that Meth
er the Standard oil nor the anthra-
cite coal trusts were protected by
tariff duties on petroleum and anthra-
cite coal. President Roosevelt re-
fiected the popular error on this sub
ject when he said, in his speech at
Cincinnati on Sept. 20, in speaking
of the proposal to take the duty off
articles which are made by trusts:
Furthermore, the product of many
trusts are unprotected and would be
entirely unaffected by any change in
the tariff, or at most very slightly so.
The Standard Oil company offers Il
case in point; and the corporations
which control the anthracite coal
output offers another-for there is no
duty whatever on anthracite coal"
These are strong assertions, even if
the Dingley tariff act is what it, on its
face, appears to be.
Clearly the anthracite coal trust is
protected by the duty of 81 cents per
ton on bituminous coal. We import
great quantities of coal from Nova
Scotia and British Columbia and BIZ
luminous completes with anthracite
along our entire Canadian border.
New England, especially, is burdened
at all times, by the duty on Nova
Scotia coal and compelled by it. to use
much more anthracite than it would
use if all coal were on the free list.
Besides, there being practically no
anthracite on this continent and al
most none like ours in the world, out
side of this country, il is apparently
superfuous to put duty on any but
bituminous coal.
The Standard Oil trust. likewise,
was not without protection either in
former tariff bills or in the Dingley
bill, even on its face. This trust manu-
features several hundred products all
of which Except refined petroleum.
parafin and possibly a few others).
are now. and have been for years. pro-
tected by tariff duties of from 20 per
cent to As per cent or more. Besides
this trust is by far the greatest bene-
ficiary of our draw back tariff law
and, simply because it is big and can
afford to obtain drawbacks which
it will not pay small manufacturers
to obtain. receives benefits because of
the existence of tariff duties, on tin
plate especially.
Under these conditions and circum-
stances, which have existed for many
years and under all recent tariff bills,
any man, with even a superficial
knowledge of the tariff and of the
coal and petroleum Industries, would
hesitate TO assert that these trusts
"are unprotected and would be entirely
unaffected by any change in the tar
iff.'' unless he were making a stump
speech and knew his hearers would
not take him seriously. Certainly our
president is supposed to have more
than a superficial knowledge of law
which it is his duty to enforce and of
conditions concerning which he as
sumes to instruct the people from the
stump or the train.
But the Dingley bill. like its proto-
type. the Mckinley bill, is not what it
appears. on it's face. to be. 1t was
iuggled in the senate, which is the
rendezvous of the trusts.
1t is in the finance committee of the
senate, presided over by the smooth
and cunning agent of the protected
Senator Aldrich, that the
trusts get in their fine work.
Both the coal and petroleum sched-
ules of the Dingley bill were juggled
in the secret committee room of the
senate and presumably in the inter
ests of the trusts whose agents are
always on hand at opportune times.
When the Dingley bill went to the SEN
ate all anthracite coal was clearly on
the free list as it had been since July
IA, 1870, and bituminOus coal was du-
table at as cents per ton. As the bill
became law it reads paragraph 415):
Goal, bituminous, and all Goals con-
tanning less than % per centum of
fixed carbon, and shale, 81 cents per
ton of % bushels, so pounds to the |
bushel," and in the free list (para- |
graph 523), Goal, anthracite, not