Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1905-11-20
NO TARIFF REVISION
According to the Iowa Dele
sat On.
MR.. KISsICK'S QUERIES
BASED ON GOV. CUMMINs' SPEECH
ON THE 18th INSTANT.
Una nlifv of Po1iaf tho po,>liee. T1, =
Mr.. KISSICK'S QUERIES
Unamity of Belief in the Replies That
There Should Be No Change in
Present Schedules.

sentatives, Oh the wisdom or undesirablity
OF tariff revision is at hand. 1t was pro-
Voked by Mr.. Robert Kissick of Iowa. who
wrote letter to Governor Cummins and
followed it up by communications to the
congressman, from whom he received re-
plies. The whole appears in the issue of
the Protective Tariff Leagues official or
gan, which came today.
Governor Cumimns said in part:
IF I were a member of Congress and
could write an iron and steel schedule, the
duties upon the articles I named would
certainly be reduced from their present
point to from one-quarter to one-half of
what they now are"
MI. Kissick's Question.
Mr.. Kissick then addressed this letter to
the Iowa delegation in Congress:
IF it be true-as positively asserted by
Governor Cummins in his address before
the Polk County Republican Club on the
18th instant-that most if not all of the
iron and steel products can be produced
in this country as cheaply as in any coun-
try in the world, and this after the pay
ment OF all the compensation to labor
that can be wrested by the associated
workingmen from their employers would
you. as a member of the Congress, support
bill for the repeal of the entire tariff, or
any part tHeTeOI, on SuCn products or art1-
cles If so, why? If not, why not?
The governor also claims in his address,
believe, that the present tariff on iron
and steel products operates as robbery
of the American people. Do you agree
with him? Is 1t robbery"
The Iowa Senators.
Senator Allison, in the course OF his re-
ply, said
II can only say now in a general way
that it would not be wise to put all iron
and steel products on the free list. To do
SO would be to abandon the policy of pro-
lection as respects one of the most import
ant industries in our country There are
undoubtedly certain articles included in the
schedule that can be produced in this conn
try nearly, If not quite as cheaply as
abroad. This is shown by the fact that
these articles are sold here as cheaply as
they are abroad because of home competi-
tion In their production. In many articles
of iron and steel there is q sharp competi-
tion In our country which keeps down the
price.
1T must also be remembered that under
the Dingley bill, SO called, there were very
few increases made in the iron and steel
schedule, and some reductions were made
even below the duties provided for by the
Wilson bill of 1894, a democratic measure
So that, whatever there is In this schedule
both political parties are responsible for,
and whatever criticisms are made can be
as of the republican bills of 1890 and 1897
But l have no doubt that when the tariff
is again revised changes can be made in the
iron and steel schedule providing for re-
duCtfons as compared with the present
law"
Senator Dolliver said:
When the tariff law was framed some
desired higher duties on articles included
in the iron and steel schedule, others, Of
whom l was one, desired lower, and after
long controversy the matter was compro-
missed by re-enacting the duties described
in the Wilson tariff law of 1894. 1t is prob
able that some of these duties are too high,
and If tho question could be separated from
the general disturbance of the tariff law
would have no hesitation in voting to re-
duce many Of them. l would not. how
ever, feel that this reduction would result
in decreasing the price of iron and steel
products. for SO great is the demand for
these articles in our own country and
throughout the world that the price would
undoubtedly be controlled by general COM
mercfal conditions. | need not add that 1t
is not part of my faith that the adequate
protection of our industries is robbery in
any sense of the word
No Tariff Revision Needed.
Representative Lacey said, In part: "A
new tariff should only be made when the
necessity for such changes IS sufficient to
justify the injury to business that always
goes along with tariff agitation and revi-
sion.
1--WE are often asked if there has not been
great change In conditions since the Ding
ley law was passed.
Certainly. That was what the bill was
passed for. We wanted the improved con-
ditons and we got the change. / am not
impressed with the logic of the suggestion
that now. inasmuch as times have improved
we should repeal the laws which brought
the Improvement"
no question but many of the schedules
could be changed without injury to the
principle of protection. The question before
Congress is, and has been for the past four
years, whether more benefit would come
from. making the change than from letting
the present law operate. The oyerwhelm-
ing opinion in Congress and among the best
business men of the United States has been
that no substantial good would come from
tinkering with the tariff, and very positive
harm might follow
II do not believe that the law which went
into force in 1897. and under which every
year since has seen an advance in our ma
terial prosperity and an increasing volume
of trade. both at home and abroad, is doing
very much harm to the American people,"
Representative Cousins had this thought
among others:
'I have lived in times when my father
and both my grandfathers traded a bushel
OF wheat in Iowa for two yards OF calico,
and l have been pretty close student Of
pubic questions, and especially of the
tariff. for a quarter Of century, and 1t is
my deliberate Judgment that the present
Dingley law is the most intelligent and SCI
entific measure we have ever had, and that
1t has operated more justly and proftably
for all classes of our people than any tariff
law We have ever had. This is the reason,
and the only reason, that since the date
of Its enactment have spoken In its favor
and for its retention, and / believe now
that President Roosevelt and all others who
have helped to retain the law and who have
advocated conservatism In the matter of
tariff legislation deserve the confidence of
all classes of laborers In the United States"
Robbery With Benefcent Results.
Representative Hedge took umbrage, ap-
parently. at the word robbery as applied
to the Dingley tariff and said:
IT'S robbery, as the governor calls It, be-
gan with President McKinleys adminlstra,-
ton. and was Just as wicked then as 1t ia
today. It Is robbery that has brought
benefcent results to every worker and pro-
ducer In the United States Referring par
t1cular1y to the steel schedule. can ind no
oppression IN any pxiosa am compeiled ID
pAy II steal prodaactas and understand