Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1908-10-06
Tariff Equalization, or .sRevisionP p


Joseph c. Sibley then member of the
House from Pennsylvania, wrote to Mr.
Archbold of the Standard Oil Company in
November. 1904. after the presidential
election, and mentioned a call he had
made at the White House when he dis
cussed the tariff with the President. This
is an extract from the letter..
He wanted my views on the tariff
and l told him we needed no general re-
vision: that my opinion was that pulling
public mind and restrict production. pre-
vent new enterprise until effects of new
schedules could have practical demon
stration. Told him it might be. and prob
ably was, true that there existed incon-
gruities and inequalities. and that
thought We needed not tariff revision,
but tariff equalization.
Here is sample OF the patter which
for long time delayed the cause of tariff
revision. The proposition for a revision
of the Dingley schedules was denounced
by the standpatters as a scheme for pull
ing down the industries of the country.
1t was a trick of the free traders. Be
ware of it. Revision would mean ruin.
Business would be at a standstill while
Congress was at work on the bill and the
bill itself when it became a law would
smash things right and left. 49,
Mr.. Sibley, as a Pennsylvania, readily
fell in with this view Of the case, and
gave smooth expression to it. AT the
same time he could see the growth OF
revision sentiment, and in an effort to
adjust himself to it he invented phrase
Not tariff revision, said he but tariff
equalization. And he told Mr.. Archbold
that the President liked the phrase. Was
the old difference between tWeedledun1
and tweedledee ever more LUMINOSITY de-
scribed?
How would it be possible to correct the
inequalities of the tariff without revising
it? Inequalities are there, as the very re-
suit of the great success of the law. 1t
is the most successful tariff law ever en-
acted in this country. Everything prom
Used in its name has been realized. Our
industries under it have advanced hey ond
all previous records. and wage scales
have been maintained at figures which
make the American wage-earners the
most comfortable men in their respective
lines in the world.
But. in the very nature of things, in
equalities in. the law have arisen from its
OptIdllO tteNlSlOH SuOulU
have taken place several years ago. Mr..
Mckinley on the very verge of the grave
in 1901 saw the rising necessity, and rec4
commended action. Every year since the
inequalities have become more empha-
sized, until now even the men formerly
called standpatters are preparing for re-
vision. The wrinkles in the law are soon
to be ironed out
There never was the slightest warrant
for the charge that revision of the Dingley
law. on protection lines meant harm to
business, or that harm would follow
That was device for obstruction which
should not have deceived anybody. The
best friends of protection are those who
oppose the abuse of the policy. Industries
which need protection should continue to
enjoy it, and American wages must re-
main the best paid anywhere. Next to
the free traders, the worst enemies OF
protection are those who would continue
to apply the policy where there is nc
longer a legitimate claim upon its assist
ance