Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1904-09-30


treaties. which the Republican admin
iStraIinn. implicitly ut least. promised
t. Negotiate Having on this promise
secured the Increased duties, the Re
publican party leaders, Spurred on 10y
protected interests. defeated the
treaties negotiated by the executive,
aII How these same interests cling to
the benefit of these duties which the
people never intended they should have
and To which they have no moral right
Even now the argument most fire.
iurntly urged in behalf of the pingley
tariff and against tariff reform general
ly is the necessity of caring for our i'll
FAINT industries Many of these indus
tries after Il hundred years of lusty
growth are looming up as industrial
giants. In their case ut least the Ding
ley tariff invites combination and mo-
nopoly and gives justification to the
expression that the tariff is the moth.
or of trusts.
For the above mentioned reasons,
among many others, the people de
mand reform of these abuses and such
reform demands and should receive I'M
mediate attention.
The two leading parties have always
differed as to the principle of customs
taxation. Our party has always adj
vanced the theory that the object is
the raising of revenue for support of
the government whatever other results
may incidentally flow thercfrom. The
Republican party, on the other hand,
contends that customs duties should
be levied primarily for protection, SO
called. with revenue as the subordinate
purpose, thus using the power of tax
alton to build Zip the business and prop
erty of the few at the expense of the
many.
This difference of principle still sub,
Gists, but our party appreciates thrt the
long continued policy of the country,
as manifested in its statutes, makes il
necessary that tariff reform should be
prudently and sagaciously undertaken
on scientific principles. to the end that
there should not be an immediate rev.
OlutiOn in existing conditions.
In the words of our platform we de-
mand IA revision and gradual re-
duction Of the tariff by the friends of
the masses, and for the common veal,
and not by the friends of its abuses,
its cXtortions and discrlmpations."
1t is true that the Republicans, who
do not admit in their platform that the
Dingley tariff needs the slightest al
teratiOn, are likely to retain ma jOr-
ity of the federal senate throughout the
next presidential term and could, there
fore, if they chose, block every at
tempt ut legislative relief. But it
should be remembered that the Re
publican party includes many revision
lists, and l believe it will shrink from
defying the popular will expressed I'M
mistakably and peremptorlly at the
ballot box.
The people demand reform Of exist
ing conditions. Since the last Demo-
cratic administration the cost Of living
has grievOusly increased. Those hay
ing fixed incomes have suffered keenly;
those living on wages, if there has
been any increase, know that such in
crease has not kept pace with the adj
vance in the cost of living. including
| rent and the neceSSaricS of life. Many
today are out of work, unable to Sc
cure any wages Mt all. To alleviate
these conditions In So far as Is in our
power should be our earnest endeavor
Trust Remedies.
l pointed out In my earlier response
the remedy which, in my Judgment.
can effectually be applied against
mOnOpolies. and the assurance was
then given that if existing laws, in
| Guiding both statute and common law,
proved inadequate, contrary to my eX-
pectatiOns, l favor such further legis-
latiOn within constitutional limitations
as will best promote and safeguard the
interests of all the people.
| Whether there is any common law
which can be applied and enforced by
the federal courts cannot be determin-
cd by the president or by candidate
for the presidency.
| The determination Of this question
was left by the people in framing the
constitution to the judiciary and not
to the executive. The supreme court
Of the United States has recently con-
sidered this question, and. in the case
of the Western Union Telegraph COM
pany versus the Call Publishing COM
pany, to be found in the one hundred
and eighty-first volume Of the United
States supreme court reports, ut page
81, it decided that common law prin-
| Hin1ns nnnld hn onnlinI hv nj tnI
States courts in cases involving inter-
state commerce in the absence of Unit
ed States statutes specifically cover
ing the case. Such is the law OF the
land.
Reciprocity.
In my address to the notification
committee l said that tariff reform ''is
demanded by the best interests Of
both manufacturer and consumer"
With equal truth it can be said that
the benefits of reciprocal trade trea-
ties would enure to both. That the
consumer would be helped is unques-
tiOnable. That the manufacturer would
receive great benefit by extending his
markets abroad hardly needs demon
stratiOn. His productive capacity has
OutgrOwn the home market. The very
term "home market" has changed in
its significance. Once, from the manu-
facturers' point of view, it meant OK
pansiOn; today the marvellous growth
of our manufacturing industries has
far exceeded the cOnsumptive capacity
Of our domestic markets, and the term
"hOme market implies contraction
rather than expansion. If we would
run our mills to their full capacity,
thus giving steady employment to our
wOrkmen and securing to them and to
the manufacturer the profits accruing
from increased production. other mar
| kcts must be found. Furthermore,
when our manufacturers are depend
ent on raw materials in whole or part
| imported, it is vital to the extension
of their markets abroad that they Sc