Republican news item. [volume] (Laport, Pa.) 1896-19??, 1906-03-08
MODERN BOSTON IDEA
TOO MUCH INDUSTRIAL PROSPERITY
IN TRfS COUNTRY. :" = ~. :.

CONVENTIONS For Special Tariff Dis
criminGiion Pointed Out--WouId In.
iurc Western Farmers.
The weakness of the Massachusetts,
contention for special tariff discrimina-'
ton III favor, Of certain local interests
TO the detriment Of far greater inter-
ests having ut least an equal claim to
consideration: IN the distribution Of the
benefits of protection as. national pol
icy is admirably. set forth in. the fol
lowing letter of J. l.. Waite. editor of
the Burlington Hawkeye, to Hon. Hen
ry B. Blackwell chairman of the Bos-
ton committee of one hundred. organ
lied 10 press for free trade in raw
materials" for immediate tariff re-
vision and for Canadian reciprocity us
the entering wedge for tariff destruc-
ton through Il general system of reefs
procity In competitive products: "
Hon. Henry Il. Blackwel:
My Dear Sir-I am in receipt of your
request to publish ypur argument for ''im-
mediate tariff revision" and reciprocity
with Canada. which you say will be urG-
ed upon congress by the senator's and rep.
resentatives of Massachusetts" =
l am very glad indeed that the senators
and representatives of Iowl will n0t'unite
in the movement, as it Is wholly adverse
to Iowa and Iowa interests and, as l be-
lieve, 10 the material welfare of the, peo-
pie of the entire republic, including, Mas
sachIsetts.
beg leave to call your attention to sew
cral erroneous conclusions, you peach in
your letter. especially as regards Iowa
and the western states. You demand free
81 al Irpit
specifically, that EVERY branch of manu-
facturcs is gradually sprnging up amid
the western prairies and on the southern
plains. No one knows this better than
the people OF the west, and they frankly
admit they li!Sa it and do not want the
growth of their Industries checked by
revision of the tariff. You will hardly, deny
that your plan of revision would have
that result, fer In the latter part of your
article you deporc the rapid development
of American industry and reach the re-.
markable conclusion: Tar better would
it have been for the United States if the
development OF her industries had been
more gradual if European competition
had limited profits and prevented monop-
oily and graft" In other words, and very
plain words, you think there is too much
Industrial prosperity in the United States,
too much capital invested and too many
men employed and toe high wages paid
in this country. All these would have
been loss, just as Xou say if there had
been more European competitions | ad-.
mire Your franllness, while / lament your
lack of patriotic enthusiasm for the de-
veopmcnt of our diversified American
industries. ..,
If you are of reasoning and logical
turn of mind you will readily perceive
why your proposition does not faEorably
impress the people of Iowa and the Mis-
sissippi valley, who are enjoying unprece-
dented prosperity under present economic
conditions. They see no reason and have
no desire for change at least until they
have some ASSURANCE. based upon prac-
tiCnl experience, that conditions can be
made still better by change. Your sug-
gestion Of free trade with Canada reviVes
memories of the unfavorable experience
which led to the repeal OF a former reci-
procity treaty with Canada. Upon this
point the testimony of several presidents
and cabinet ministers aud foremost states
men of the republic removes the necessity
for further argument.
But / beg leave to especially call your
attention to the protest by the greatest of
western interests the f;il'iner'"" against
your proposition for free trade With Can
ada in natural products You must con-
cede, you do copccqe, that New England
now has a large volume of free. trade with
Canada. TO quote your own words,
Nearly one-half of the present Imports
amounting to more than ..SiDp:000, 900 ap-
nually, are already the free list" II
must be, and is- a liberal tariff which
does that and still. claims TO be protective.
What more could be. asked, reasonably.
than that--upless il is. proposed to do
away with the protective system entirely
and substitute free trade? If that is your
real, if not revealed. purpose. that would
practically end all discussion, for ! only
seek to point To the error Of your con-
clusions If YOU claim to base them upon
continuance of.protection. - ?
You say openly '.,.'This trade can be
greatly extended If the present artificial
barriers are removed. The United States
needs Canadian coal, lumber. iron ore,
wood pulp, wool. hides, hay, fish, poultry
and dairy products. In exchange Canada
needs thousand manufactured articles
which the United States only can. supply"
THIS being. true. why should the. Iowa
or Illinois farmer pay taxes. to. support
the national government aud admit free
into the United States the untaxed prod
ucts of the Canadian farmer to ent out
the home market of the western farmer?
You admit manufactures are developing
in the prairie states. under the protective
tariff. but make the strange claim that
they ere developing too rapidly. Are you
nsw to be understood that western agri-
culture. is, developing too raPldlSs and.
like manufactures. it would have been
better "if European .(Canadlan) cornpeti-
ton had limited profits" etci2 That you
honestly believe the free Importation of
Canadian farm products would cut down
the profits Of the farmers OF the western
states Is revealed In yorr statement that
during; a recent "trip through British Co.
lunlbia on the line of the Canadian Pacific
railway and Crossing soon -afterward
he 4 f,I,..