Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1908-08-22


toward tariff revision. had 1t been deep
ly in earnest; but, no, the bill was not
even reported from the committee.
Whenever attention was called to an
indefensible schedule, the answer was
that they could not afford to open the
subject for debate just before cam
paign, but there is no force in this OBJ
lection because the house rules are SO
framed that the majority can cut off
debate, prevent amendment and silence
opposition.
The administration has claimed cred
it for the fine against the Standard Oil
company in the case which was lately
reversed, but no effort has been made
to relieve the people from the fine
which is imposed upon them every day
| by the Standard Oil company through
| the operation of the tariff law which
gives that company more than 100 per
cent protection against its chief rival,
Russia. What faith can real tariff
reformer, whether he be republican
or a democrat, repose in the republi-
can leaders, when they deliberately put
off all reduction until after election
and then call for contributions, with
the understanding that the public shall
not know the names of the contribu.
tors until after the polls are closed?
BENEFITS Gauge Contributions.
The republican platform says that
the tariffs intended for the American
manufacturers, farmers and producers
and especially for the wage earners
| Ii the farmer and the wage Garner are
really the chief beneficiaries of the
protective system, will the republican
candidate explain why the farmer and
the wage Garner have contributed sc
little to the republican campaign fund
is he willing TO publish list of con
tibutors on the 18th day of next Octo
Der and allow the relative advantage
of protection to the manufacturer. the
| farmer and the wage Garner to be
measured by the contributions received
from each class? Why is it that the
manufacturers are expected to furnish
so large a proportion of the money tC
run the campaign, if, as the republi
cans claim. the farmers and the labor
ers enjoy so large proportion in the
benefits of the system? Is it not a sig
nificant fact that the farmers and wage
earners who are always put in the
| foreground when the blessings of {
/ high tariff are being enumerated are il
the background when the collection:
are being made? Is it not significan
that the manufacturers, who furnish
| the funds, are so little advertised a.
benefciaries? Is il not significant alst
that the wage earners, instead of tn,
manufacturers, are always described al
the most direct benefciaries of tn,
protective system?''
No Rule for Revision
But let us suppose, for the sake O
. argument, that the republican part
sincerely repents of its delay in be
ginning tariff reform, repudiates it
obligations to the contributing manu-
facturers and honestly begins ere
vision" What rule is to govern tn
, revision? The republican platforr
, says:
in all tariff legislation. the tru
principle of protection is best mail
tanned by the imposition of such dutie
as will equal the difference betwee
, the cost of production at home an
abroad, together with reasonabl
, profit to American industries"
/ Mr.. Taft endorses this rule an
tho Eio &c
f the tariff now exceeds this difference
, and that the excess offers a Tempt
ton to those who would monopoliz
c the production and sale of such art
: Giles in this country" He adds. hoy
;. ever, that there are some few art
+ cles on which the tariff is not suf
. GENTLY high to give them the me
r sure of protection they should r
: ceive''
J. VIII he explain upon what rule II
, present tariff was framed? Whe
n have the republicans claimed MOI
+ protection than enough to cover Il
O difference in the cost of productic
). here and abroad? The "reasonab
O profit to American industries" is q
n addition to the rule; and is likely
IF be used as an excuse for raising Il
a tariff. And, by the way, to what 9th,
G business does the government qua
n antee a reasonable profit?" To Il
! farmer. or the merchant or the
: borer? To none of these. If in +
!. vising the tariff the republican par
: is to work upon exactly the san
: plan Tor plan contemplating
O higher rate) what hope have we TIL
n the new tariff will be lower than ii
!. present one? Are the present lea
ers more honest than the ones WI
a framed the existing tariff? Are the
. not, in fact, the same men who al
: responsible for tariff extortion durir
). the last decade? If this new-bol
zeal for revision were an hundFe
times greater than his notificatio
/, speech indicates. what chance wou
= the republican candidate have of s
: curing any real tariff reform at Il
o hands of such republicans as now re
resent that party in the senate al
y house, the very men who representa-
q it in the recent national convention