The Bon Homme County independent. [volume] (Tabor, S.D.) 1904-1913, 1909-09-23
DECLARES
PAYNE BILL IS
PARTY MEASURE
Dpholds Republicans Who Voted
for It, but Doesn't Condemn
It's Opponents.

AtS OppOucHtS.
winona, MIMI, Sept. 21.-President
Taft spoke here last night in defense
Sf the Payne tariff bill. He justified
the republicans who voted for II, de-
starring 1t was a party measure, but
paid he did not intend to condemn
those who voted against 1t. The ques-
siok was one for each member OF con
gress to determine for himself.
President Taft in particular Justified
Ihe action OF Representative James A.
Tawney in voting for the bill. Mr..
rawney lives here.
In HIS speech the president admitted
that the bill was not all he had hoped
Tor. The wooden schedule. he admitted.
commended the bill as being the best
ariff bill ever passed by the republi-
can party.
The Presidents Speech.
The president said In part:
My Fellow Citizens: So long ago as
August. 1906. in the congressional cam
paign In Maine, 1 ventured to announce
that l was a tarif revisionist, and
thought that the time had come for q
readjustment of the schedules. / pointed
out hat Ii had been 10 years prior to
hat time that the Dingley bill had been
passed: that great changes had ake
productions OF the farm, the factory and
the mine, and hat under the theory OF
protection in that time the rates imposed
n the Dingisy bill in many instances
might have become greater than the dif-
serences between the cost of the produc-
hon abroad and the cost OF the. produc-
FOR a reasonable rate OF profit to the
American producer. I said that the party
was divided OH this issue, but that In my
srystailizing and would probably result in
The near future In an effort TO make
such revision. I pointed out the diff
,ulty that there always was In q revision
Of the tariff. due to the threatened dis.
lurbance OF Industries to be affected y
.he suspension OF business in a way which
made It unwise to have too many re-
Visions.
His Own Record.
In the summer OF 1907 my position on
the tariff was challenged. and / then
entered into a somewhat fuller discussion
pf the matter. II was COMMENDED by the
30 called "standpatters" that rates be
yond the necessary measure OF projection
were not Objectionable because behind
The tariff wall competition always lowered
But i pointed out In that speech what
Seems TO me as true today as IL was
then. that the danger OF excessive rates
was in the temptation they cTeatea %
- AAOAAOROAAEo 81 NAAO
thus to take advantage Of the excessive
rates by increasing the prices. = there,
fore In order to avoid such q danger II
the question and ascertain what the
effect of the rates had been upon the
Industries in this country and whether
of production here had So changed as to
warrant a reduction In the tariff and TO
make a lower rate truly protective of the
Industry.
Always Meant Protsotion.
1t will be observed that the object of
not to destroy protected industries In this
country, but 1t was to continue to protect
them where lower rates offered Q sufh-
client sisn e p595eetIGn to Prssfns wa an'I tSe O Object ject
of the revision as advocated by me, and
II was certainly the object of the revision
as promised In the republican platform.
I want to make as clear as i can this
proposition, because in order to determine
whether a bill Is a compliance with the
terms of that platform 1t must be under
stood what the platform means. A free
trader Is opposed to any protective rate
because he thinks that our manufac-
turers. our farmers n our miners ought
to Withstand the competition OF Ioreign
or else go out of business and find some
thing else more profitable to do. Now,
certainly the promises Of the platform did
not contemplate the downward revision
any industry heretofore protected should
be injured. Hence, those who contend
reduce prices by letting In foreign compe-
tition are contending for a free trade, and
not for anything that they had the right
to infer from the republican platform.
Difference in Bills.
The difference between h House bill
and the nj bill was very much less
than reported. Now there is
nothing quite so difficult as the discuss
sion Of a tariff bill, for the reason that
meaning Of the terms and the percent
ages are most difficult to understand.
One way OF stating what was done Is to
say that the facts show that under the
Dingley law there were 2.029 Items. This
included dutiable Items Only. The Payne
law caves 1.150 OF these items unchanged.
There are decreases In 654 Of the items
OF course. that does not give full par
ticulars, but 1t does show the proportion
of decreases to have been three times
those of the increases,
In order to determine the choice of the
changes, 1t is much fairer to take the
articles in which the rates of duty have
been reduced and those IN which the rates
of duty have been increased, and then de-
termine from statistics how large a part
of the articles upo which duties have
been reduced play I'm the consumption OF
the country, n how large a part those
upon which the duties have been increased
AAI III NAAS
Such a table "a been prepared by Mr..
Payne, than whom there is no one who
understands better what the tariff is and
who has given more attention to the de-
tails of the schedules.
The Payne Bill.
Here the president went into IN exhaust.
rye discussion OF the various schedules OF
the Payne tariff bill, giving particular at
tention TO those items which were sub
jected to a change by that measure.
Speaking Of the agricultural schedule he
said:
In agricultural products, those In which
there has been a reduction of rates enter
into the consumption of the country &c
the. extent OF s4SS. 900, coo; those In which
there has been an increase enter into the
consumption to the extent of A,00O,00 0
Take the schedule of wines and liquors
the articles on which there has been ar
liner s~ase-entered into the consumption 70
the extent of $462, 100000. In cottons there
has been a change In the high priced cot
tons and an increase. There has been nc
increase in the lower priced c%ottons, and
OF the Increases the high priced cotton,
enter into the consumption Of the country
to the extent OF $41,000.0o0.
The president continued: .
Now this statement shows az conclusive.