Virginia citizen. (Irvington, Va.) 1891-1921, 1909-07-02
VIRGlNIANS AND
THE TARIFF,

Virginia Newspaper Man Discus.
seS the Attitude OF our Con.
ereSSmen.
WASHINGTON, ID. c., June 2s, 1909.
EDITOR THE CITIZEN:
Now that the tariff bill is in its final
stages it is interesting to analyze the
course of the Virginia delegation in
connection Herewith. To begin with.
the attitude of the majority of its men,
bers has been misrepresented. Most
notably is this true of Senator Daniel.
He has been represented as declaring
in effect for high duties. The records
show that he never so declared, and any
one who will take pains to write to Theo-
dore Shuey, official stenographer of the
United States Senate, can ascertain
that his speech, so far AS such a decla-
ration is concerned, was delivered on
the floor just as it appears in the Re-
cord. Mr.. Shuey is himself a Yirginian,
native of Augusta county, and will
certainly treat any such inquiry oour-
teously.
On the lumber schedule the Virgin
ians who voted for duty on lumber
were criticised. But did it ever occur
to the critics that the duty imposed is
less than was imposed in the Walker
tariff itself-that ideal tariff law from
the Democratic standpoint? AS mat
ter of fact, the duty in the Walker
tariff was twenty per cent, while the
duty for which the Virginians are for
voting amounted to only eleven per
cent. When did it become protection
ism to vote for duty less than the du-
ties of the Walker tariff? Further
more. the duty they voted for was low
er than the duty in any Democratic
tariff measure yet passed by an Ameri-
can Congress.
What is true Of their votes on lum-
ber applies to their votes on other items.
All the criticisms that have been made
originated with those who have never
been the genuine friends of tariff re-
form. Protection organs everywhere
have sought to make every vote for q
duty which has been east by Southern
ers appear as being breaking away
from low tariff principles. Let us be-
ware of accepting the verdict the pro-
tectionist would place upon our Sena-
tors and Representatives. Protection
organs seek To make them ridiculous
by changing Inconsistency.
The thing tn Virginia delegation has
rightly stood for is uniformity of taxa
tion. We all realize fully the evils of
protection, But ut the same time there
Is one thing that is worse even than
protection. and that is tariff levied to
the advantage of one section and the
disadvantage of another. We are all
sincerely for low tariff, but shall we
not, when 1t is mlnifestly impossible to
secure such a tariff, ask for the NEXT
best thing-a tariff that applies to all
sections ami Industries alike. Bad as is
protection, its evils multiply when il
Is administered with discriminating
hands. Are We not then justified in in
sisting that whatever the standard of
taxation 1t shall not be high in one Sec
ton and low in another? Make these
selfish New Englanders understand that
there can be no free trade or low tariff
in the products they buy until the same
condition prevails as to the things thew
sell, and they will very soon agree to
reduction.
The South has been getting a raw
DEAL Suppose you were represented
on the board of directors of a corpora
tion by director who thought four
per cent dividend should be paid, while
the majority of the directors thought
it should be eight per cent. Suppose
your director thought an eight per cent
dividend too high. and dangerously so.
Would that justify your dire .tor in ac-
cepting four per cent as your divid.nJ
while the others took eight per cent?
There you have the situation in a nut
shell.
There is glorious opportunity ahead
of the Democracy. The great middle
West has awakened to the inequalities
of the tariff. The states represented
by the insurgent Republicans, and thew
are Republicans who have read the
handwriting on the wall. are for uni
form tariff. They hold, the balance of
power in the next congressional and
Presidential campaigns. They want q
fair tariff. Let the Democracy stand
for the sort of tariff that has
characterized the Democracy for more
than half a century, and it will sweep
the country three years hence.
Why cannot the Democrats stand to-
gether for u lJ% tariff on all products,
and for all sections alike. just as the
Republicans stand for high one. The
Protectionist insists on symetrical pro
lection or none; is it not proper that
the Democrats shoull insist on a syme-
trical low tariff. Why should any man