Ladysmith news-budget. [volume] (Ladysmith, Rusk County, Wis.) 1907-1927, 1909-07-22
ar,,rlrurunnn OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES
WASHINGT ON LETTER
by John j. Hannah

Washington, July 19.-The influence
which President Taft will exert upon
the lowering Of the tariff schedules and
the fact that the President was bringing
pressure to bear upon the conferees to
lower certain items in the schedules
furnished the gossips food for talk dur
ing the week which eliminated with
the visit of large delegation of Con-
gressmen and the issuance of a state
ment from the White House. The
Congressman came to protest against
the lowering of the duties on certain
raw materials, or the placing of certain
raw materials on the free list. Much
was made of the fact that the Presi-
dent was firm in his conviction that
iron ore, coal and hides should be on
the free list. Lumber should also take
the low duty provided in the House bill
rather than have the high duty of the
Senate bill.
The attitude of the President has
been greatly exaggerated and unduly
emphasized in order to create the i'm
preston that after all there is to be
real revision downward. 1t is import
ant that coal and hides and iron ore
and lumber be placed upon the free
list. But there are other schedules in
the bill which ought to be reduced in
order to make the bill conform to the
pledge made to the people and in order
to make it real revision downward
which will be of material benefit to the
people
The oil of this country is controlled
by Standard. It's prices will be fixed
by Standard and whether it is on the
free list or on the dutiable list will cut
very little figure in the price which the
consumer will have to pay. Free coal
does not mean that there will be a re-
duction in the price of COAL The Anth-
ricite coal field in this country is abso-
lutely controlled by the coal trust.
The Bituminus coal fields of Pennsyl-
vania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Okla
homa, Wyoming, Utah, Washington
and Montana are absolutely controlled
by the coal trust. 1t is true there is a
limited coal field in Canada and another
in Mexico but it is provided for rec-
procal agreements to cover whatever
competition there may come from these
sources. The consumer would get but
little benefit from free coal but he
should be given the opportunity to get
that little.
Free hides will make difference for
it will be possible to import hides and
to give the consumer the benefit of
cheaper shoes, provided the duty on
shoes is reduced. Right in this connec-
ton is the nub of the business. Not
only should the President advocate it
be placed on the free list, but the duties
upon the articles manufactured from
these products should be reduced.
The consumer of shoes will get but
little benefit from free hides unless the
duty on shoes is reduced. The con-
sumner of nails and wire and harvest
ing machinery and of all the manufac-
lures of iron and steel will receive but
little benefit by the placing of iron ore
upon the free list unless the duties on
the manufactured products of iron are
also reduced.
The duties in the present bill have
been fixed upon the basis of a duty
upon the raw material. Placing the
raw material upon the free list changes
the entire basis and should change
the entire bill.
1t is extremely gratifying to the
friends of downward revision that the
President declared in favor of free raw
materials. The statement given out at
the White House was as follows:
THE President said he was not com
mitted to the principle of raw free ma
terial, but that he was committed to
the principle of downward revision of
the tariff, which he had promised, and
that he was obliged to look at the mat
ter, not from the standpoint of any par
ticular district, but from the stand
point of the whole country. and also
from the standpoint of responsibility
for the entire Republican party.
''The President repeated the platform
of the Republican party, and said he
had always understood that it meant al
downward revision in many instances,
though perhaps in some instances an
increase might be needed; that he
reached this construction of the plat
form on what he understood to be the
principle of protection and it's justifca-
ton, namely, that after an industry
was protected by a duty equal to the
difference between the cost of produc-
ton abroad and the cost of production
IN this country, including a fair profit
to the manufacturer, the energy and
enterprise of American business men
and capitalists, the effectiveness of
American labor, and the ingenuity of
American inventors under the impulse
OF competition behind the tariff wall |
would reduce the cost of production, |
and that with the reduction in the cost |
OF production, the tariff rate would be-
,lx,