The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1904-09-16

PAWN eNf "a 0E8&AEfk WIKI In&
Ifrasfs. No change In tariff duties can
have any substantial effect In solving
1.-THE so-calied trust Problem. Certain
Igreat trusts or great corporations are
WHOLLY unaffected by the tariff. Almost
Iall the others that are Of any impor-
Itance have as a matter of fact mum.
Ibers of smaller American competitors.
land OF curse a change in the tariff
which would work injury to the large
would work not merely IN
but destruction TO its smaller
Icompetftors: and equally Of course sucn
In change would mean disaster to all
the wage-workers Connected with
either the large or the small corpora
tons From the standpoint Of those
interested in the solution OF the trus,
problem such a change would there
fore merely near that the trust was
relieved OF the competition OF Its
weaker American competitors. AM
Thrown only into competition with for
|eign COMPETITORS: and that b irst ef-
fort TO meet this new competition
would be made by cutting down wages
land would therefore De primarily at
the cos eff labor. In the - of some
lof our great trusts such n change
might confer upon them q positive
benefit. speaking broadly. IL Is evident
that the changes I n h tariff VIII af-
the trusts for veal or for woe
simply rs they affect the whole coun-
try. The tariff affects trusts only as
liz affects all other interests. IL makes
lall these interests. large or small. prof
|itable: and its benefits can be taken
from the large only under penalty -
taking them from the small Also
There is little for me To add to this.
II il u ten years since the last at
tempt was made. by can OF lowering
the tarif. to prevent some people
from prospering too much. The at
tempt was entirely successful. Tic
tariff law Of that yea was among the
which In that year and for some
time afterwards effectually prevented
anybody from prospecting too much.
labor from ~prospering at all. I'm
|doubtedly IL would De possible at the
present time to prevent any Of the
trusts from remaining prosperous by
the simple ~expedient OF making such
Ia sweeping change in the tariff as to
paralyze the industries OF the country.
The trusts would cease to prosper:
ruined. and b w-age-workers would
starve. while IL would not pay the fa.-
mer TO haul his produce to market.
The evils connected with the trusts can
be reached only by rational effort
step by step. along the lines taken by
congress and the Executive during the
past three years II a tariff law Ia
PoNSNo eaNbS a1 SAe Al WV
|pers, as the country has prospered un-
der the present tariff law. then all
classes will share in the prosperity.
II a tarin law Is passed aimed at pre-
venting the prosperity OF some of our
people. IL Is as certain as ANYTHING
can be that this aim a be achieved
|only by cutting down the prosperity OF
all Of our people.
OF course, IL our opponents are not
|sincere in their proposal to abolish the
system Of a protective tariff. there IN
no use in arguing the matter at all.
Save that by pointing out again that
liz on one great issue they do not mean
what they say. ii Is hardly safe Il
trust them on any other issue. Blu IL
they are sincere in This matter. then
their adven to power would near
domestic misfortune and misery rs
widespread and ~far-reaching as that
We saw ten years ago. When they
|speak of protection as robbery" they
|of course must mean that IL Is immoral
to enact a tariff designed las is the
protective tariff) TO, secure Ia
the American wage-worker The benefit
of the high standard OF living which
We desire to see kept Up in this
try. Now to speak OF the tariff in this
sense as robbery" thereby giving IL
a moral relation. Is not merely rhetor-
ical: 1t is on its face false. The question
of what tariff is best for our people
Is primarily one of expediency, TO be
determined not on abstract academic
grounds, but in h light Of experiences.
1t Is a matter OF business; for funda-
mentally ours is a business people
manufacturers. merchants. farmers.
alike. Our experience as a peo-
pie in h past Ia certainly
not shown us that We could
afford in this matter TO follo9
those professional counsellors who
have confined themselves to study In
the closet; for the actual working OF
the tariff has emphatically c~ontradic:-
ed their theories. From time to Tina
schedules must undoubtedly be rear
ranged and readjusted to meet the
needs of the country: but this
can with safety be done only by those
who are committed to the cause OF h
protective system To uproot and de-
stroy that system would be TO insure
the prostration of business. the closing
OF factories. the impoverishment o.
the farmer. he ruin Of the capitalist.
and the starvation Of the wage-worker.
Yet, IL protection is indeed robbery
and IL our opponents really believe
what they say. then IL is precisely to
the destruction and ~uprooting OF The
tariff. and therefore of our business
and industry, that they are pledged.
When opponents last obtained
power IL was on a platform declaring
a protective tariff Unconstitutional
and the effort TO put this declaration
into practice was one of the causes of
general national prostration lasting
from 1893 to 1897. II a protective tariff
is either Unconstitutional or rob-
berry" then IL Is Just as unconstitution-
just as much robbery to revise IL
down. still leaving II protective. as IL
would be 10 enac IL. In other words
our opponents have committed them
selves to the destruction OF the protec-
tive principle In the tariff. using words
which II honestly used forbid them
from permitting this principle to obtain
I'm even the smallest degree.
RECIPROCITY.
Our opponents assert that they re-
lieve In reciprocity. Their action on
the most important reciprocity treaty
recently negotiated-that with Cuba
does not ear out this assertion. More
over, there can be no reciprocity unless
there is a substantial tariff: free trad
a nd ro1lnrnclf.y - mt (oUrs.fIhfr "