The Denison review. [volume] (Denison, Iowa) 1867-current, 1902-11-14
PALACES OF FREE TRADE.
Protection That Are Unsound
and rroneOus.

The democratic congressional COM
mitteet and a part of the democratic
press, are seeking again to impress
the people with the belief that Amer
lean manufactured products whiG
are protected by the tariff are sold
cheaper abroad than at home, and
that at the same time the home prices
of commodities for daily consumption
have been increased by reason of the
tariff. From these assertions they ar
que that the tariff should be abolished,
says the Albany Journal.
That prices as we'll as wages have
advanced under the operation of the
tariff law which was enacted soon
after the induction into office of Presi-
dent Mckinley is true. The law would
have been a failure if it had not in
creased the wages of the workingmen
and the prices of the farmers prod
ucts, which represent the wages of
that class. The Dingley law revived
industry, gave nl.n work and wages,
and also the opportunity. fof better
living In 1895 we retained only 3.44
bushels of wheat per capita for home
consumption, and in 1899 we retained
600 bushels per capita. The American
people consumed nearly double the
amount of wheat flour and white
bread in 1899 that they did in 1898.
The same was true of beef. Notwith-
standing the high prices of beef to-
day, the American people consume
double the amount of beef that they
did in 1895, when democratic low tar
ifs closed the mills, sent thousands
of men into idleness, and reduced their
purchase power to the minimum.
The advance in prices is, in one way,
due to the tariff, in that the tariff
gave protection to American industry,
enabled the people to buy, and SO in
creased the volume of home consump-
ton as to increase prices by the nat
ural law of supply and demand. But
these increased prices are not alone on
articles produced in this country and
| protected by the tariff. The increased
| prices have been general, and more in
harmony with the increased demand,
due to increased purchasing power by
reason of increased wages.
AS to the complaint that American
manufactures are sold at lower
prices abroad than in this country, it
can be said fatty that there is no rea-
son for it. The occasional practice OF
selling surplus products for export
below the market price is not new
one, and in no way is it confined TIC
protected industries, either in this
country or any other. The British
manufacturers. without any protec'
ton from tariff, have followed the
practice for half a century. and in
British government reports it is de-
Tended as wise economic policy. II
this policy were abolished it would
often become necessary to shut dow1
manufacturing plants and deprive OPP
eratives of their employment, and the
cost of producing the reduced out
put would be increased.
But the practice has not been gen
eral among American manufacturers
In the fiscal year of 1902 there was
manufactured in this country $13,C01,
704. 900 worth of goods, of which $403,'
s9O,763 worth was exported. Of those
exports, only S3,9s2,o0O worth, OF
about one per cent. of the total. was
sold at lower prices than those
charged at home.
Through inquiries made by the in
| dustrial commission it has been ascer
tanned that about 20 per cent of Amer.
lean manufacturers occasionally
cut export prices in order to meet
competition abroad and sell their sur
plus product, while so per cent. always
charge at least the same prices as al
home and sometimes secure even high
err ones.
Thus it will be seen that these rep
reservations, of the advocates of free
trade are Just as fallacious as all thsil
other assertions and arguments. 1t i:
impossible to make a sound argumen
against the republican policy of pro
lection for home industries.
|