The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1906-12-09
Who Can Promise?

Probably the strongest argument
made in favor of postponing tariff re-
vision till the spring Of 1909 is that
offered by President James W. Van
Cleve of the National Manufacturers
company, publishers Of American In
dustries, paper representing the man
ufacturers of the country and spokes-
man for them in their controversies
with organized labor.
Mr.. Van Cleve opposed revision Of
the tariff by the next congress because
revision made at that time with a
presidential contest just ahead would
be sure to be Influenced by political
considerations. The needs Of business
and labor would get no intelligent hear
ing. Party leaders, he says, would
have their eyes on the big prize of the
presidency and party advantage in
maneuvering for the presidential con-
test would be the consideration which
would shape the schedules.
A tariff act, he thinks, framed under
such conditions, could not be expected
to stand six months actual test with
out arousing a demand for another re-
vision. This would prolong the neces-
sary business disturbance and infict
damage if not serious disaster upon the
business Of the country. Following this
argument, he says: EDO we want the
tariff torn up twice within two or
three years9' If the republicans can
not revise the tariff in 1907 so as to
meet the approval of the country under
the test of experience during the next
year, it would certainly be very unsafe
for them to present to the country
now set Of schedules destined to be
superseded by further changes by a
party hostile to the principle Of pro-
lection, within the next two years.
Mr. Van Cleve's idea is that whereas
the republican party has been promis-
ing from time to time to revise the
tariff "when conditions demand it,
and whereas that has been interpreted
to mean indefinite postponement, 1t is
time for the republican party to fit a
date when the work Of revision will
begin, and he would have that date
fixed in March, 1909. That would be a
time when the work could be done
fIeest from influence by the approach
of presidential election. Mr.. Van
Cleve's argument against special ses-
sion for the next congress, beginning
with the work of revision in March
next, is the best we have heard.
1t is not new idea that tariff re-
vision in 1907 might be made with ref
erence to the election of 1908, and we
have not regarded that as an altogether
unfortunate condition of things. When
the tariff revisers are obliged to take
notice of the fact that their work will
be voted upon by the people at an early
date, they are very likely to consult
what they believe to be the popular
wish; but, upon the chance that they
may not please the public and get its
approval for their scheme and that the
control Of the government may be
turned over to those hostile to the pro-
tective principle and another revision
undertaken Immediately, there is force
in the argument for postponement to
definite time no longer away than two
years from next March. F a+.
II the country can have definite
pledge that tariff revision will be
undertaken at that time and assurance
that it will be done, not only might
it be inclined to wait, but business
could better adjust itself to the situa.
ton, having due notice Of the proba-
bility Of reductions in many important
staples. The only difficulty with this
plausible plea is, who is authorized to
make the promise Of revision in 1902
The president can't do it. Congress
can't do it. Nobody can do it author;
itatively except a national convention,
and there will be no national conven-
ton before the summer Of 1908.
This being the situation, we will have