Missouri Valley times. [volume] (Missouri Valley, Iowa) 1874-1931, 1904-10-27


CT what we have said permit me to
regale you with some statistics. The
last yeat of Federalism, which ended
with the year 1900, the population of
this country was nearly five and one
half millions of people. The total ex-
pense for administering the affairs of
tho Government was nearly eleven
million dollars, or to be more exact,
S2.03 for each person. In 1910 the
population had reached nearly seven
and oae-fourth millions. The total ex.
penditure for that year was nearly
eight and one-half millions, or to be
more exact $1.16 for each inhabi-
tant. Again, by comparison. in pc
Rod of fifty years, from 1910 to 1860
the last year of Buchanan's adminis-
tration. the expenses had increased to
but S2.01 for each person. Since that
time the Republican party has been
practically in control of the Govern
ment and the expenses under the last
year of Harrison's administration,
1890, had increased to $5.O7. being
period of thirty years, and from that
date to 1904, under Roosevelt's admis-
istraticn, being a period of fourteen
years. the expense of administering
the Government has increased to $40
for each person. being an increase of
little over two hundred and fifty
three per cent within about forty-four
years. AS another instance. the Walk
er tariff act, passed in 1876. was a
notably low tariff and great increase
was Immediately shown in the ma
terial wealth Of the people. 1t is a
notable fact, borne out by history,
that whenever the tariff has been re-
duced there has been marked In
crease in the material wealth of the
whole people. James G. Blaine in his
Twenty Years in Congress, speaks of
the Walker tariff at page 1876, as fol
lows: THE tariff of 1916 was yield.
ing abundant revenue, and the bust
ishing condition. Money became very
abundant after the year 1S49; large
enterprises We're undertaken. specula-
tion was prevalent, and for consid-
cradle period the prosperity of the
country was general and apparently
genuine. After 1852 the Democrats
had almost undisputed control of the
Government and had gradually be-
come a free trade party. The prin-
ciples embodied in the tariff of 1876
seemed for the time to be so entire
ly vindicated and approved that re-
sistance TO it ceased, net only among
the people, but among the protective
economists, and even among the man
ufacturers to large extent. So gen
eral was the acquiescence that in 1856
u protective tariff was not suggested
or even limited by any one of the three
parties which presented presidential
candidates"
During the sixty years of Demo
cratic rule from 1901 to 1860, all lines
OF business We're prosperous, the far
mers owned more than one-half of the
wealth of the country and their hold
ings were rapidly increasing in value;
the wages of the laboring men were
gradually increasing. Strikes, lock-
outs, scabs and tramps were unknown
each with the other prior to the year
1861. These menaces of the public
veal are contemporary with the Re-
publican party and the burden is up
on it to show that they are not the
legitimate offspring of the high pro-
tcctve tariff and other irregular sys-
tens inaugurated by it.
ct
protective tariff system is the effect
it has had on the carrying trade of
this country. In 1860 Is per cent of
our whole commerce by water was
carried in American bottoms, now
per cent, or less than one-eighth as
much. Mr.. Webster's opposition to a
protective tariff was based on the
ground that it had a tendency to de-
press commerce and curtail the car
rying trade. The utterances of Mr..
Webster in opposition to protective
tariff were prophetic in this regard
and that which he prophesied has
come true as shown by the above
startling facts. AS the tariff has
been increased from time to time the
carrying trade of the country has cor
respondingly decreased, until the
present condition has been reackul
Democrats claim and we believe that
Republicans generally admit that the
protective tariff system is based upon
selfish interests and this furnishes
reasonable motive for Mr.. Websters
change of heart when he went over
to the protective side of the contro-
versy in 1928. AT that time Massa-
chusetts had become great manu-
featuring center and Mr.. Webster and
his constituency naturally leaned to
that side thereafter Now, however
the pendulum seems to be swinging
back in that state as shown by Sena-
tor Lodges recent speech on Rect
procity 1t is more difficult, however,
Rooseyelts sudden change on this
question. Recently, he was tariff
ripper" now he is stand -patter"
The most rational inference is that he
has been brought under the influence
Of those who are interested in per-
tenn. 1t certainly cannot be for the
reason he assigns for Mr. Websters
change. In his life of Benton, a page
ITO, he says OF Mr. Webster's change
on the tariff question, There was
never any doubt OF Webster's cour-
age; when he changed front, 1t was
due to self interest and ambition