Barton County democrat. [volume] (Great Bend, Kan.) 1885-1915, 1908-09-04
TARIFF Speech.
,ntinuAf IN l.aurF ur.


between the positions OF the Two
parties on the subject Of tariff. the
Democratic party regards a tarhi
law as a revenue law, the protection
II gives being incidental; the Repuo-
lican party regards tariff law as
framed primarily for protection the
revenue being incidental. As the ef'
feet of a given rate on a particular
i article Is the same, whether levied
for the purpose Of revenue or TOT
the purpose Of protection, it may be
we'll to define the difference be-
tween a revenu tariff and a protec'
tive tariff. A revenue tariff is so
framed as to collect a revenue and
you stop when you get enough; a
protective tariff may be so framed
as to collect but little revenue, and
yet lay a heavy burden upon the
whole people-and you never know
when to stop. To illustrate a tariff
may be made so high as to abso-
lutely prohibit importation. If, in
such a case, the manufacturers yield
to the temptation mentioned by Mr..
Taft and combine to take advantage
Of the duty, the consumers will be
heavily taxed, and yet none Of the
money will reach the treasury.
Let us suppose another case;
we import one-tenth Of a CERTAIN
kind of merchandise and produce az
home ninetenths, and the impo''
and domestic articles sell at the
same price, then the treasury re-
ceives duty on the foreign article and
the manufacturers collect nine times
as much on the domestic article as
the treasury collects on the one
tenth imported. It becomes mauer
of great importance, therefore, 10
the people at large, whether the TAR
| If is intended to raise a revenue or
is framed in the interest OF the man
ufacurers and for the purpose OF
protection. No one would think Of
employing in a city, county or
state, a tax system under which
the bulk Of the tax would 90 to
the collectors, and yet the Republi-
can leaders demand the continuance
Of a system under which the pro-
tected interests receive far more than
half the money collected from the
people through the operation Of a
high tariff.
As tariff law interferes with the
natural laws of trade, one who pro.
poses a protective tariff, takes up
On himself the burden Of proof To
show, first, that a protective tariff
is right in principle: second, that II
is wise as a public policy, and third
that it is necessary. And, yet, what
protectionist attempts to present al
argument in support Of any one Of
these propositions?
Is 1t right to tax all of the PEG
pie for the benefit of few? Where
community has attempted to col
lect taxes for tn eaid of an INDUS
try, even when the industry was t
be located in the community, thu
highest court in the land has declar
ed such tax to be larceny in thu
form of law. If a city governmen
cannot rightfully tax all the peopl
to bring an industry into the city
whre esuch benefits as are conferre,
are more easily seen and more uni
versally enjoyed, who will say tina
a farmer in the Missouri Valley ca
be rightfully taxed to support a
industry in a distant state?
As a matter of public policy, is
wise that the industries that do pa
should be compelled to carry upo
their backs, industries which, a
cording to the arguments made
their representatives, could not II,
without aid? Have we not see
this system introducing corruptio
into politics, and is 1t not buildin
business upon an unsubstantial ba
Is? Having secured tariff from OF
party, the beneficiaries loudly d
clare that the country will be rui
ed II any other party obtains contr
Of the government. Manufacture
have intimidated their employees al
! threatened them with a reduction
wages unless a party favorable
the system was continued in powe
This is an old device and there a
indications that it is being resort,
to again. The New York Leath
Betting Company has sent out null
J Der Of letters to companies wi
, Ing them to post in their factori
which 1t has business dealings, as
a notice saying:
Believing that the election
Taft and Sherman means safe al
conservative administration, the d