The Montgomery advertiser., 1905-06-01
THURSDAY. JUNE I. 1908.
HAS BORNE FRUIT.

It begins to look somewhat as if the administration.s bluff. if 1t was a bluff, about buying canal supplies in the cheapest market may bear fruit. after all. It seems that the Government re- quired 100000 pounds of pig-lead for Immediate use, and bids were invited for supplying it. A Philadelphia firm, so we are informed. took the precau- ton to inquire if the lead could be bought in England and delivered to the Commission without payment of duty. which Is two and eighth cents per pound" On being assured that lead so bought in 6 foreign market would be imported free of duty, the Philadelphia firm put in bid of $1.50o lower than the lowest competitor.
 Now. aside from the saving of this $1,500, which of itself is but a trifie. there are two important points in this Incident. One is that it seems to fully settle the question as to whether the panal strip is or is not foreign territory. This decision fixes 1t as part of the United States. and as a natural conse- nuence materials purchased abroad will not be required to pay any import duty Dn being landed at Panama This is a point of importance because 1t has been disputed by those whose interests led them to look at the matter from dif- ferent points of view.
 But that is not the most significant Feature connected with this compara- lively trifiing contract. The real signi- ficance of 1t lies in the fact that when the American firm found itself in con- dict with foreigners. 1t readily under bid them. No one. we presume, will suppose that this Philadelphia firm lost any money by the transaction. But if that firm had been informed that all foreign supplies for the canal work must pay the import duty they would have put up their bid just high enough |. to enable them to undersell the for eisner with the duty added. In other words. the Philadelphia men would have treated our Government just as they treat private citizens. and would have demanded and received just as much as they could get and at the same time undersell the outsiders.
 What was done in the pig-lead con- tract would be done in connection with all other contracts for supplies and ma chinery. if the administration and the Canal Commission would have the firm ness and the fairness to let it be known beyond possibility of doubt that no gouging on the part of home dealers would be allowed. and that if our own producers and manufacturers cannot undersell the foreigners. or at least sell as cheaply, then the foreigners would this would not relieve American citi- gems of the impositions practised on them by the protected manufacturers, 1t would serve to emphasize the way our own people are held up and robbed. Every intelligent person could see that if an American firm can undersell for eigners when dealing with our Govern ment 1t can do the same when dealing with private citizens. It would be an object lesson to home folks for 1t would compel the trusts to uncover their methods and practices.
 So the administrators blum has had e good effect, but 1t should have been more than blum. It should have been decided and decisive avowal. to be ad- hered to without fear or favor. Such course would bring out squealing and squirming, but would be instructive and entertaining to the great body of the American people.