The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1909-09-18


-.
the method of taking evidence and
| the determination was made IN a
methods of obtaining the evidence l
have never known subject that Will
| evoke SO much contradictory evl-
| dence as the question of tarin rates
and the question of cost of produc-
| ton at home and abroad.
Hides and Shoes.
The tariff on hides was taken off
because it was thought that it was not
! necessary to the man who raised cat
tie and that the profits of the cattle
| business were sufficient without I'M
posing duty, and that the duty was
! likely to throw the control of the sale
! of hides into the hands OF the meat
packers in Chicago.
| I'm order to balance the reduction
on hides, however, there was a great
reduction on shoes, sole leather and
| harness.
on coal of 63 1s per cent. All counter
vailing duties were removed from oil,
naphtha, gasoline and it's refined pro-
ducts.
Lumber was reduced from 50 to
$1.25 and these are all on articles Of
prime necessity. 1t is said that there
might have been more. Personally, I
am in favor of free lumber. In the
controversy the house and the sem
ate took middle course, and who can
say they were not justified?
with respect to the wool schedule
agree that it is too high and that it
ought 20 have been reduced. When 1t
came to the question of reducing the
duty at this hearing in this tariff bill
on wool Mr.. Payne, in the house, and
Mr.. Aldrich in the sfenate. found that
in the Republican party the interests
|of the wool growers of the far west and
the interests of the wooden manuIac-
l1nN 81
reflected through their representatives
in congress was sufficiently strong to
defeat any attempt to change the wooden
tariff, and that had it been attempted
it would have beaten the bill reported
from either committee. I am sorry this
is so, and could wish that it had been
otherwise. 1t is the one important de-
feet in the present Payne tariff bill
the platform to reduce rates to diff
ference in thu cost of production With
reasonable profit to the manufacturer.
Best Tariff Bill Ever Passed.
ION the whole, however, I am bound to
that think b the tbp ay the
party ever passed: that in it the party has
conceded the necessity for following the
rates accordingly. This is substantial
achievement in the direction of lower
to be accepted as such Critics of the bill
utterly ignore the tremendous cuts in the
subject to criticism in all the tariff bills
That schedule has been reduced so that
a monopoly Of the business is very much
lessened and that was the chief purpose
of revision of the tariff downward under
s'The severe critics of the bill, pass this
reduction in the metal schedule with a
the iron interests of the country. Well,
of course 1t did not hurt them 1t was
not expected to hurt them. 1t was ex7
n1otad OnlV reduce excessive rates and
the very character of the criticisms Is an
indication Of the general injustice Is OF me
that it was the promise of the Republican
party to hurt. the industries Of the coun-
try by the reductions which they were 10
make in the tariff, whereas it expressly
Indicated in the platform. that all indus
by foreign competition, and the promise |
only went to the reduction of excessive
rates.
Increased Cost of Living and Tariff.
THE high cost of living has not been
produced by the tariff, because the tariff
has remained the same while the in |
change of conditions the world over. Liv-
ing has increased everywhere in COST
in countries where there is potection.
Now, the. revision downward of the
destroy the industries of the country: Ger
tainly it is not intended to. All that it is |
the aeei tariff where it viii protect industries
here from foreign competition, but II VIII
not enable mOnOpOlleS TO Tx EXCESSIVE
prices by taking advantage OF excessive !
rates. If the country desires free trade. |
and if the country desires revenue tariff
and wishes the manufacturers all over the |
country to go out of business, and to have
cheaper prices at the expense or the sacri- |
flee of our manufacturing interests then 1t |
ought to say so and ought to put the |
Democratic party in power, If 1t thinks |
tina party can be trusted to carry out any
affirmative policy in favor of a revenue
tariff Certainly in the discussion In the |
senate there was no great manifestation |
on the part of our Democratic friends in |
favor of reducing rates on necessities. |
They voted to maintain the tariff rates |
on everything that came from their par
ticular section.
Duty of Republicans Plain.
eff we are to have free trade, certainly /
If can not be had through the mainten-
ance of Republican majorities in the sen
ate and house and a Republican admins |
tration And now the question arises
what was the duty of a member of con-
gress who believed in a downward re-
Vision greater than that which has been
ACCOMPLISHED who thought that the wool
Schedule ought to be reduced, and that
nerhans there were other respects IN
Which the bill could be improved? Was It
his dIIty because that in his JUDGMENT it
did not fully comply with the promises of
the marty platform as he interpreted it
end indeed. as had interpreted it, to
Vote against the bill? am here to jus-a