The independent. [volume] (Lincoln, Neb.) 1902-1907, 1903-12-24


Gently internal Improvements have
taken the form OF ownership OF rail-
roads or regulation OF them by the
federal government. All through this
long argument it will be found that
those VINO favored internal improve
ments also favored protection. The
fathers of the republic, and many who
came after them, thought that the tar
if duties ought to be SO high that the
government could not only be sup
ported, but that there would be a sur
plus to carry on the internal improve
ments. This was protection, not only
of home industries, but of great ma
tional public highways, SO that the
states could be bound together and a
great nation might be formed. Those
who opposed internal improvements
opposed protection. They wanted the
tariff duties just high enough to sup
port the government, economically
administered These people were in
favor of tariff for revenue only by
which they meant that there should
be no duties levied for purposes of
protection or internal improvements.
This was the origin OF the famous
phrase, tariff for revenue only" II
it had not been for the great issue
of internal improvements, there new
er would have been any such phrase.
But ii does not now have such refer
ence On the contrary, 1t means that II
the democrats get into power tespe-
cially under the leadership OF Grover
ri dc1 yytlI
arrange the tariff in such way that
the duties will be very high on such
foreign goods as we cannot produce
and very low on such goods as we can
produce. They will not make the du-
ties any lower on an average; on the
contrary, they can make them higher,
without violating their great funda-
mental principle Of tariff for revenue
only. All that the democrats pledge
themselves to do is to levy no duties
that will encourage or protect Ameri-
can industries as against foreign in
dustries. They propose to keep their
eyes open to the one single matter OF
getting revenue enough for the fed
eral government, and to leave all of
our industries to take care of them
selves as against the industries Of all
other nations.
In reply to this. it is only necessary
to say, that If we adopt protection,
we will keep our eyes open not only
to getting revenue for the govern
ment, but we will SO arrange the tar
if duties that every American indus
try will be duly protected as against
e.sr,, In, in in
dustry, and that our own country as
nation will be duly protected as
against the aggressions of all foreign
nations; and that we will do this by
putting no tariff duties at all on such
goods as we do not wish to produce
and we will have duties on all foreign
goods (the like of which we wish to
produce) high enough to protect
American labor and American capital
as against foreign labor and foreign
capital.
This can be done without any diff
Guilty, if we keep in mind that when
revenue is wanted for the government
it is to be obtained by tax on in
comes, inheritances, or any other form
of wealth.
The issue, now, is not whether few
rivers shall be improved for naviga-
ton, not tie building of canals mere
ly, not the building of railroads mere
ly, not the making of turnpikes by the
national government, but whether all
these public highways shall be owned
or controlled by the government, so
that every citizen can use them on
equal terms.
The American people are getting
tired of free passes" for few priv
LEGGED persons. If few they say are
to have these things, why not every
body have free ride? Are we not all
citizens? Are We not all entitled to
use the public highways on equal
terms?
With the public highways owned
or under the control of the people
and the volume of money likewise
controlled by the people instead OF
the banks Tor other private corpora
tions) there will be chance for life,
liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
The most difficult monopoly to fight
Is the money power IL Is SO thor
oughly entrenched. II Is protected
by laws. II cannot be defeated with
out removing these laws.
IL Ia much more easy to defeat the |
other monopolles because there In no |