The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-04-07
HOW THEY FLOURISH.

are uot dcQudlnteu Wltn tdfiiA ihpo~@- tions. but when John Sharp Williams introduced a bill which provides. Tn effect that no imported article shall pay a higher duty than one hundred per cent. it met with serious opposition. It certainly seems that if any Ameri- can industry cannot live when it can sell its products for double what the imported product would cost without any duty, that industry should go out of business. Suppose for example a certain quality of goods could be bought from England and sold for fifty cents per yard to American consumers. The tariff duty of 100 per cent. en- ables the American manufacturer to sell his product for ninety or ninety-five cents per yard and still undersell the foreigner. If any of our so-called in- fant industries are so weak that they cannot live and flourish on 100 per cent protection they should try some- thing else.
 And yet we find the proposition of Mir. Wiiliams meeting with opposition because, to come down to the real meat of the matter. the trusts and their advocates are never satisfied with what they get. The New York Times has been looking into the matter and these are its comments:
 Some forms of cotton goods are tax cd as high as 201 per cent. Varieties of silk goods are taxed from 100 per cent to 221 per cent. Plate glass from fn rnff Forms of women's and children's dress goods range from 100 per cent. to f65 per. cent. In nearly ali these cases 1t will be found that the duties are heav- jest on the low-priced goods. which alone are suited to the purses of the working classes or the relatively poor ord, how it is that the tariff remains untouched. That is mainly due to the fact that large interests are dependent on tarim favors. and an organized. getic and able men are constantly on the watch to prevent interference with these favors. The interests injured by the tariff arc for the, most part scat tered and unorganized, and are large lv those of classes which suffer indI- rectly and are but imperfectly aware of the harm done them. Both these conditions are liable to change. Then there will be reckoning and revis- ion.
 In spite of these evidences of extor- tionate profits we find Secretary Shaw. Chairman Payne and other Republican leaders setting their faces against any revision of the tariff and their opposi- tion will prevail. There will be no re- lief from the present Congress and pos sibly not from any other that is con- troiled by Republicans. The only pros- pect or hope of betterment lies in the election of a Democratic Congress. and that is just what the people should do. And The New Bedford Standard, which is usually faithful to Republican doc- trines and policies. has the this to say:
 It is entirely probable that if the movement for revision does not within a few years find sufficient strength in the Republican party, there will be an election of congress which will have no hesitation about undertaking the there will be botch of it; and that Tn the end the Republican party will have to take up the work again and make another new tariff.. But this experl- can leaders would have the courage and the foresight to take hold of the lSSue DOlQly now. with Secretary Shaw giving forth counsel of timidity and Chairman Payne exhibiting an ex- cess of caution, and with other proml nent men letting I dare not wait upon l would. the country is getting ready for political cataclysm-and among those who will be chiefly responsible for 1t are those who now obstruct the yielding to a fair request.
 It is possible, of course, that If the Democrats should get control of all departments of the government the ex- tremists among them might make botch of the tariff. but it is not prob- able. Democrats know, as well as Re- publicans do. that anything approach ing free trade is an impossibility. They know that a large part of the neces- sary revenue of our government must come from duties on imports. What is more to the point. the Democrats are as much interested as the Republi- cans are in home industries. and are willing that they should have legiti- mate protection or the protection nes- essarly involved in tariff for revenue. The differences is that Democrats are not in favor of having immense fortunes built up by what Is really robbery of the people.
 
 Prospects are bright up in Nova