The Denison review. [volume] (Denison, Iowa) 1867-current, 1906-03-29

the products of wineries, such as
argold, crude tartar, wine lees, etc.,
the United States treats the people of
all countries and the products of all
people alike.
One Of the questions which we must
soon decide is whether the United
States will continue one-price pur-
chaser or whether she will grant
special privileges to some, and impose
corresponding burdens upon others.
There are four possible policies for
the United States and there are but
four.
First, she can, as our Democratic
friends advise, adopt the policy of
Great Britain and levy tariff duties
for revenue only and grant to our own
people no advantage whatever, and
make no distinction between the pro-
ducts of foreign countries. Second,
she can follow her present policy and
protect her own people and still make
no distinction between the products Of
foreign countries. Third, she can
grant concessions to those counties
which discriminate against her, and
impose special hardships against those
who. treat her the same as they treat
others. Fourth, she can impose max
ipum duties against those who impose
maximum duties against her.
/. 1t is important that we keep these
distinctions clearly in mind. The
United States can continue one-price
purchaser, or can change her policy
and make Determinations. That is
plain. If she makes no discrimina-
lions between foreign countries, she
can proceed upon the English free
trade principle or upon the American
protective principle. That is, she
can treat her own people and the out
side world alike, as England does, or
she can give her own people the adj
vantage of protection and still treat
all the outside world alike. If she
can grant Determinations she also
has an alternative. She can show
special favors to those who discrimin-
ate. against our people and enforce
maximum duties against those who dc
not discriminate against US, or she
can discriminate against those who
discriminate against us, and treat all
those, alike who treat us as they treat
others. This and other states are just
now being flooded with literature urg-
ing that we treat those best who treat
us worst. We are asked to reduce
our tariff for those countries that in
crease theirs, and let those that take
our goods in greatest quantities pay
the ipll rate. We have not done that
yet, and am going to register a
guess that We never shall. In 1902
Germany passed. new tariff law in
which she materially advanced her
minimum tariff ana aided new max
mum tariff ON man, articles fully
fsty per cent higher set. For in
stance, she increased her minimum
tariff on corn eighty-seSen per cent,
and her maximum tariff 210> per Asnt
She increased her minimum tariff OF
rye 43 per cent, and her maximum
tariff 100 per cent. She increased
her minimum tariff on wheat 81 pei
cent and her maximum tariff 10 pei
cent. She inceased her minimum tariff
on wheat flour 40 per cent and he
maximum tariff l 81 per cent. She in
creased her minimum tariff on fres]
beef 80 per cent and her maximum
tariff 90 per cent. She increase
her minimum tariff on salt and pickle
beef 100 per cent and her maximum
tariff $50 per cent. She increased he
minimum tariff on high grade boot
and shoes SO per cent and her maxi
mum tariff III per cent. She in
.creased her minimum tariff on bicy
cles and parts thereof 300 per cen
and her maximum tariff 525 per cent
She also took large number of al
: .ticles from her free list and impose
minimum and maximum duties there
on.
This law provided that it should g
into effect by proclamation Of the En-
peror, and in February, 1905, the nee
essary proclamation was issued max
ing the law effective on March l, 1906
BY. its terms these maximum dutie
were imposed against the products {
all.countries which failed to make sa
;efontor,, oop.occ;opc En11o,,,;pr 4 I