The Jasper weekly courier. [volume] (Jasper, Ind.) 1858-1922, 1909-04-16

ment II is offered for sale IN any
foreign country II comes into immedi
ate competition with foreign labor I'm
der this drawback provision OF tho
statute II places IL within the imme
date power OF the steel trust, the
harvester trust, the leather trust. and
every other trust IN the United States
90 get free raw material from abroad
manufacture the material into products
export and sell them 10 foreign con.
sumers. Such trusts as these are
therefore privileged TO not only stamp
out all opposition at home. but control
all OF the export trade. II the manu-
facturers are entitled TO free raw
material out of which 10 make their
manufactured commodities, insist.
that they should be given free raw ma.
terial 10 manufacture their commodi-
ties for home consumption so as TO
lower the price 10 the home consumer
and let the manufacturers pay the
duty upon their commodities cut OF
which they propose TO manufacture
goods 10 supply the foreign trade
say without fear OF successful con
tradiction that under this section OF
this bill. the manufacturers are able
20 get free raw material for every
dollars worth of goods entering into
their export trade. This is the worst
discrimination against the American
people ever attempted How can any
man justify his vote in favor OF this
law How can he go back 10 his con
stituents. and square his vote with
them by telling them that he voted
to levy tribute upon the eightyseven
million consumers OF manufactured
commodities In this country. and al
the same time voted 10 give 10 the
foreigner using American manufac.
tured goods free OF duty. II his nefar-
ious section remains in the bill. whilel
| am not tile prophet or the son OF a.
prophet. Vet | will venture the state
ment that instead Of the government
paving back S55.364 .02277 as II did
during the ton years under the Dingleyl
bill. in the same period Of time. r. will
pay out at least from five 10 ten times
this amount Of money and pay it toI
the trusts monopolies and combina |
tons i'm this country.
Higher Than the Dinsley Tariff.
We are told By the trainers OF this
bin that it IS a revision of duty down.
ward sat the average rate Of duty un-
dor he pr posed bin is l56 per cent
higher than the Dingley bill The bill
in its last anal sis will he found 70 be
a revenue consumer instead OF reven-
ne producer.
oppose il for the reason that I'll
raises the duty upon nearly all Of the
necessaries Of life, ! oppose II. be-.
cause II levies a duty upon tea, coffee
and sugar. the poor mans breakfast
table, ! oppose it. because 1t discrim-
ates in favor Of the foreign ship owner
and against the American ship owneri
! oppose 10 for the reason, that this
must be made up by 3
tax imposed upon the toiling masses
Of our country,
oppose II. because II provides for
a direct subsidy given TO foreign ship
owners and 20 the Trusts, Monopolies
and combinations in this country In
the way OF free raw manufacturing
oppose IT, because instead OF pro
tecting the people il protects the mo
nopolies and trusts. which need no
and fails to nrotect the
people who DO need protection
oppose it, because 1t permits ships
plying between American and foreign
ports. or between the Atlantic ar
Pacific ports to withdraw free OF duty
or internalrevenue tax, all intoxica-
ting liquors. cigars. cheroots. Gig
arettes and tobacco, 10 be used and
sold 10y the ships while making their
voyages from and to ports In the
United S.stes. thereby defeating the
government out OF millions of dollars
worth OF internal revenue tar annu-
ally,
oppose It for the reason, that THIS
Is direct discrimination against ree
American consumer of these commo-
dities and in favor OF tina ship owners