Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1908-08-25

wise that the Industries that do pay
should be compelled to carry upor
their backs Industries which, accord
ing to the arguments made by their
representatives, could not live without
aid2 Have we not seen this system
and Is it not building business upon
an unsubstantial basis? Having Sc.
GUIDED tariff from one party, the
benefieiaries loudly declare that the
country will be ruined II any other
party obtains control of the govern
| ment
But the whole system is vicious
| Business should not be built upon
legislation; it should stand upon Its
own merit, and when it does stand
upon it's own merit we shall not only
have purer politics, but we shall have
less fluctrHt'o In business conditions
and a m able distribution OF
| the proc6 eds "a Toll.
Bryan's Views of Panios.
cannot pass from this part of my
subject, without calling attention tC
the fact that Secretary Taft has al
lowed himself to be drawn into the
use of an argument which the benefi-
Charles of protection have been employ
Ing for generation. Speaking Of the
gradual substitution of revenue tariff
of the protective system. he says in
/ MS nOLlUCdtlOn SpeeC1.
THE introduction in power of q
party with this avowed purpose can
not but halt the gradual recovery from
cud recent financial depression and
produce business disaster, compared
with which our recent panic and de-
preston will seem small indeed
Here is q threat Of panic If the
| Republican party is not retained in
power. This panic argument was
! txyf,p 1xaI H., 6,,&
| prised that Republican refers to 1t in
the present campaign.
We have had three panics since the
Republican party was born: the panic
of 1873, the panic Of 1898 and the panic
of 1907. The panic Of 1873 came after
the Republican party had been In
complete control Of the federal govern
nlent for twelve years, and eleven
years before our party succeeded In
branch OF the government. The
startling panic and depression" OF
1873 occurred In the very midst of
Republican rule, just after a Republi-
can victory, and under q high tariff
Is 1t not strange that Secretary Taft
should forget this panic, when he
warns us to beware of any departure
| from the protective SYSTEM
The panic Of 1907 came after the
Republicans had been In complete con-
troll Of the federal government for
more than ten years. They had had
an opportunity to do everything that
they wanted to do and to undo every
thing that needed to be undone, and
we were under such high tariff that
even Secretary Taft admitted the nee
essity of revision. This panic was SO
bad that banks felt it necessary to do
something that they had never done
before, namely, arbitrarily limit the
amount of money that depositors could
draw on their own accounts. Ex-Sec-
rotary Shaw says that the stringency
of 1907 was "the severest the world
has ever Witnessed" With this panic
fresh in his mind, is 1t not strange that
necessary to prevent panic?
| I have referred to two Of the three
panics both of these coming under
conditions which compel the Republi-
can party to accept the responsibility
for them Now, let us consider the
panic of 1893. If that could be prop
erly charged to the Democratic party,
it would only be one Democratic panic
to two Republican panics. But can 1t
be fairly charged to the Democrats? 1t
came, 1t Is true, a few months after
the inauguration of Democratic
president, but 1t came while the Nc
Kinley high tariff was still in effect
and before a single Republican law had
been repealed, and it came from causes
that were in operation before the
election. In fact, it was the failure of
the Republican party to do it's duty
and satisfy the people that brought
brought about a Democratic Victory,
and these causes would have brought
on a panic, even Ii the Republican
party had remained in power. Now,
this Is the record, and yet, in spite Of
this record, the Republican candidate
presumes to threaten a panic in case
OF Democratic success.
Wages and the Tariff.
The third proposition which the
protectionist must establish, namely,
that the tariff asked for is necessary,
is still less considered. 1t is true
that we pay higher wages per day than
are paid elsewhere, but that does not
necessarily mean that the actual la
Dor cost Of an article is higher here
than abroad. On the contrary, the
rule is that high priced labor produces
cheaper article than low priced la
Dor. Manufacturers of hardware will
tell you that they can export hard
ware which contains a great deal of
labor and small amount of raw ma
terial, but that they cannot export
hardware in which the raw material
constitutes a large proportion of the
value. We are sending manufactures
of steel all over the world. The steam
engine, for instance, is made by skilled
labor, and yet we can send 1t abroad
and defy competition. Our electrical
machinery is made by skilled labor,
and yet we have no fear of foreign
competition, even in the foreign mar
kets. Our agricultural machinery is
made by skilled labor and yet we ex-
port it to all countries. Our sewing
machines are manufactured by skilled
labor, but the American traveller finds
our sewing machines everywhere; and
the list could be extended indefinitely
For twenty five years the American
working man has been told that he
receives higher wages than the Eng
fish workman solely because of pro-
lection, but our wage earners now
know that this cannot be due to pro
lection, because the English workman
receives higher wages than the Ger
man workman, although the German
tariff is higher than the tariff OF
Great Britain.
AS to Wages and Panics.
Protection does not make good
wages. Our better wages are due to
the greater intelligence and skill of
our workmen, to the greater hope
which free institutions give them to
improved machinery, to the better con-