Waterbury evening Democrat., 1904-10-20
Editor Democrat

Bourke Cochran Saturday night went home with q vengeance when in reftl- tation of his masterly effort his words are distorted and made to read tree trade when he said revision, what a good many republicans were saying previous to the Chicago convention, what even the godfather of the pres ent tariff, Mckinley, foresaw was in evitable. But at least they should be 1 consistent and not stultify themselves. Thus the Republican of Monday morn | ing treats MT Cochran editorially as a free trader, whilst in it's news col
 not wanting to abolish the tariff, but
 that it should be revised. Which Of
 these positiors are the readers of the Republican to hold? Bourke Cochran, after all, is no fool. Heis campaign ing In advocacy of the democratic platforms. which did not declare for free trade.
 On the front page of Monday morn fng's Republican Is pictorial argu- ment representing American indus tries under Cleveland in which factor ies md mills are represented as closed. But it says nothing of the fact that $250,0OO were paid to one
 Massac chusetts mill owner to shut down, and for what? Intimidation,
 and nothing more. But what about Waterbury's industries during Cleve-
 lands term? Were they not fairly
 prosperous? The Clock shop was here,
 the Watch shop was here, Scovill's big
 plant was here, and none of them
 went to the dogs because Cleveland
 was president. Many of the working
 men of Waterbury who now have
 h~v, or, Tn, In rl syYno fla q
 fair share of their money during those
 years. Indeed, some who made their
 money at that time have been able
 since to go into business for them
 selves. And part of the 60,0O0 pop
 ulation had it's increase in those years.
 Prosperity was, and is, bound to come to America. We are young
 nation and a pretty good one, too. Our
 natural resources are only beginning to
 be developed, and to this fact is due
 no inconsiderable share in our prosper
 ity. If these natural resources were
 wanting no amount of high protection
 would make us prosperous, for there
 would not be anything to protect.
 Give to protection what may be due
 to it, but don't rob beneficient Crea-
 tor of the credit that is due to Him.
 The fact is that there has been from the beginning general steady in- crease in industrial progress and with that increase the volume of wages and
 of products have steadily and naturally
 risen. And that steady industrial in- crease has come, high tariff or low tar If. But increasing the tariff also in- creases the price, and that on things
 which are of common use, not to say of necessity, to the people. Away
 back in the 9O's Whitelaw Reid ad- mitted as much when he dared the democrats ito put back the old duties on sugar, tea, coffee and the rest and so put up the prices again to the whole
 body of the people," If q high tariff puts up the prices for these things, why not also on other things? Take another example. When the increased duty was put on Sumatra wrapper, immediately the wholesale price of five-cent goods went up from $2 to $5. What benefit did the native producers derive from that increased tariff. It put the manufacture of cigars into the hands of millionaires and monopolists. But what about the small growers in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Perhaps Governor (then congressman La Toilette could answer the question. He was the author of the raise from tiAIl y -ASG SClbLS UO tWO uQlldIS dulk HIS fellow citizens showed their apprecia- tton of his efforts by retiring him to private life. Again, when tine McKin- ley bill increased the rate on pralnes, dried, dessicated and evaporated ap- pies. the price steadily advanced from 9S.42 to 20S.S6, and not only that, but the native producers taking advan- tage of the tariff increase raised the price on the home produced articles. Under the same bill the price of car pets, tapestry, gloves, flannels, over coatings and wool cashmeres ad- vanced, and these were the commodi- ties specially favored by increased rates in the Mckinley bill. Take two more instances of those things that the people use, coal and flour, and have not the prices been higher under pro- tective tariff than ever? What books it. therefore, to the American laborer, if he receives something more in wages than his foreign brother if he has to pay the difference in higher prices? Will the high tariff advocates be satisfied to levy simply a duty which will be equal to the difference between wages at home and abroad? Let some republican propose such tariff and see how quickly his head will be Topped off and he will be asked to retire for the good of the party.
 If the great object of high tariff is to protect the American workingmen's pay, that would be achieved by tar if that equals the difference between pay here and pay abroad. It costs very little, if any more, to mine bitu minous coal in England than it does in Pennsylvania yet there is great diff ference in the price. When the duty on steel rails was $13.44 a ton the diff ference in wages was $3.78; when the tariff on pig iron was $872 a ton the difference in labor was SPA. Did the difference go into the pockets of the laiboring man? Is it true that our in- dustries need such high tariff? Why, then. with free raw matTfal, did we undersell England in cotton fabrics?
 Why are American farm implements heavily taxed on the steel and lumber in them, found in almost every coun- try. and are sold cheaper abroad than here? When there was duty of 40 | per cent on them American saws and l tools went the world over and the 40 | per cent duty kept them at higher
 |