The times and democrat. [volume] (Orangeburg, S.C.) 1881-current, 1909-09-09
DODGED TARIFF
That is What Mr. Bryan Says OF
President Taft
In SPECIAL ARTICLE

In the Atlanta Journal the Grea'
Commoner Discusses the Differ
ence Between the Words Revised
and Reduced and Puts Tariff Out
rage Up to the Republican Party
In q letter to the Atlanta Journa!
discussing the tariff, Mr.. Bryan says
the Republican platform was amoig'
nous. and the Democratic party plat
form specific. The Republicans II
their tariff plank used the word re-
yised." The Democrats in their par
ty platform demanded a reductloi
of the rates. The word revision Is
subject to double Interpretation
while only one construction can De
placed upon the word reduction.
The Democratic senators and rep
Tesentatives who had voted for tne
imposition of duties had MADE
mistake, and whether elected upon
or before the adoption OF the plat.
form of the party, ought TO lee
hound by it's declarations.
I most heartily approve the reso'
luton offered by Senator Gore, OF
Oklahoma, proposing an investlga'
ton as to the responsibility for the
high cost of living.
Senator Gore is entirely right
The high tariff Republicans have
tried to shift the responsibility
from the manufacturers to the mer'
chants. This is important, and Il
is only right that the public shoulo
know the truth.
It has been found by experience
that unless a party formulates
platform, its representatives in otics
cannot agree upon definite policy
owing to the influence brought te
bear by favor-seeking corporations
Even when there are platforms tne!
are rnisoonstrued unless they are
positive and specific. Sometlme'
positive and specific platforms are
violated, but positive and specih'
platform is not apt to be violated
and when they are violated the gull
can be fixed and the guilty punish
ed.
The trouble with the Republican
platform Of last faif was that 1t was
not specific and definite. The tarif
plank used the word revised" in
stead of the word reduced ant
now Senator Aldrich and his crowe
construe it to mean an increase while
some of the western Republican:
insist it contemplated a decrease II
the rates.
Mr.. Taft lodged the question. 81
far as l could learn from his speech
es the nearest he ever came to
construction of the platform was te
declare, when in the west, that
meant an honest revision" at one
time declaring that while some
schedules ought to be raised ano
some lowered, the revision Woule
probably be downward.
The Republican national conven
ton was at fault in accepting sc
indefinite, so evasive and so decep
tive a word as revision" as sui
hcient promise. The voters ought te
have known that the friends of the
tariff" will never give us any ma
terial reduction.
AS to the Democrats who votec
for the imposition of duties, they
have as rule defended their con
duct on the ground that the dutle!
voted for were revenue duties, anc
thew have not been high duties
Measured on an ad valorem basis
the duty on lumber and on iron ore
are but a small portion of the price
I think that the Democrats who Vot
ed for the duty made mistake.
The Democratic platform demand
ed free lumber, and l believe plat
form is binding upon all who rur
upon it, and it ought to have weight
with the members Of the party who
were elected before the platform wa:
adopted.
Those who voted for duty or
lumber did so, l presume, because o
lumber interests in their district:
and States, but in doing so l thinl
they gave the preference to few
owners of timber lands over those
who buy lumber. There Is no State
in the Union where the consumer
of lumber do not outnumber the per
sons who profit by the tariff on lum
Der, and the man who votes for
tariff on lumber votes to tax a ma
jority of the people of his distric
and State for the benefit of a minor
ity of his constituents. But the
men who get the bentfit of the ia,
are more active in presenting theil
demands than the consumers are
in presenting their protests, and a:
long as this is true, the tax eater:
will have the advantage over the
tax payers.
If the taxpayers would take ;
little more interest in the tariff
question and chastise the representa-
tives who, ignoring the interests o
thu innncnnarc fnllnW he advice