The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1904-11-08

/ pealed the Mckinley enactment and
lowered duties. While the Wilson
law prevailed. the creation OF trusts
and combinations almost entirely
ceased as was naturally to be ex-
pected, in view OF the fact that the
atmosphere Of Democratic tariff leg
lslation and the policy Of the Dem
ocratic party is unfavorable to the
growth and development of these
particular infant industries.
The Dingley tariff law of 1897 raised
the average of import duties to some
thing over fifty per cent. and made
the high water mark In our coun-
trys tariff legislation. Its fond par
rnts nave placed upon the family re-
cord contained in their bible emit
tied; Republican Campaign Text
book, e04-" the following mention
OF the child's birth and its lovely
traits:
Went into effect July "a, 1897. known
as the Dingley Act-thoroughly protec-
tive and stated in it's title that its pur-
pose was to provide revenue for the
Government n to encourage the in
dustries- Of the United States"
1t has indeed provided revenue for
the government, but il has g~rievously
purdene the people, put public econo-
my TO shame and invited
schemes and wasteful expenditures:
and among the industries of the United
States-which it has encouraged. the
promotion of trusts and combinations
stands high on the list. In the month
OF March, 1909, a distinguished Repub-
lican membe of Congress on The floor
of the House Of Representatives. pre-
sented a carefully prepared list of in
dustrial combinations existing on the
1st day of January in that year. They
numbered 453, more than four-ifths of
them apparently organized within six
years under the thoroughly protec-
we Dlngley act. To what extent this
numbe has been increased since that
time do not know; but the work has
gone merrlly on. Whatever the number
may be-we only have to compare the
general situation and know the facts
now existing with hose existing when
the Dingley law took effect to see how
prolific this most ~exorbitant of al
schemes for tariff protection, has been
OF these industrial co~ntrivances.
| ought not to fatigue your INTEL
Sence by detailing further facts show
ing that the protective policy which the
Republican party has imposed upon the
country and which that party in the
pending campaign noisily defends. not
only has something to do with trusts.
out that by its very nature as we'll as
by its natural results it is the parent
and accessory of the robbing maruders
which Vex and affiict our peoples life
and deman tribute in every home of
our land. They dictate the prices we
ShaI pay for the food we eat. the
clothes we wear and the habitations IN
which We live. We are within their
shadow from the cradle to the grave.
Ever beyond the grave they follow US.
We hear of a Tombstone Trust. pro-
tected by a tariff duty of from 33 to
6O per cent; and the in
formed us only a few days ago that a
convention of associated undertakers
was thrown into CONSERVATION by the
non-appeaTance of it's treasurer.
You cannot wonder that l am startled
by difference between conditions low
ana those that prevailed when I visit
ed Newark IN the Presidential cam |
paign of 1884. Then the people were
not i'll the letters of trusts and comb |
nations; the expenditures of the gov !
were careful and economical |
as compared with the extravaganza Of
these later days; and the rate of tar |
IF taxation which the democracy then
condemned as yielding more tina SUI.
fcient revenue for government needs
was moderate as compared with pres,
eht exactions. l come again after twer- |
" re h %@-.cc 1
has increased by one-fourth, the eApen-
dltures OF the government have more
IMAM doubled; and hundreds of indus
trial trusts and combinations, the |
vicious progeny of extreme tariff pro-
openly or st~ealtnily search the
of our people. Again [ use
my words OF twenty years ago: The
OF the government to exact trib-
ute from the citizens is limited by it,;
exact necessitities; and every cent
taken from the people beyond that re-
cured for their protection by the gov
eminent is no better than robbery"
AS 1 repeat those words, the question is
in my mine whether the startling
changes we contemplate will add force
and emphasis to this sentiment which
in 1884 was endorsed by our country
men, or whether with these chlnges
another or deeper and sadder signif-
canoe has taken place IN our peoples
modes Of thought and their conceptions
OF American Sturdiness of citizenship.
Has the steady growth of public ex-
travagance been so artfully concealed
~ gloriflcation Of their country'S prog
ress that they no longer consider pub
lie frugality as a fundamental element
governmental duty which they can
remit either with safety to our
or justice TO their own
best interests?
Have our people been so misled by
the glamour of unsound prosperity
and SO deceived by the ~pretense that
an exorbitant protective tariff is some
way assures their happi-
ness and easy existence, that they are
willing to accept a blind faith in q
prosperity which the masses OF our
countrymen neither see nor feel. as
against the tangible evidence supplied
nv inprpaS a1 coSf IF ararv p.ooc-orv