Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1909-08-19
NORTH DAKOTA AND THE
TARIFF.

NORTH "DAkOEA AND THE
TARIFF.
Editor Matt Johnson of the Omen
ee Herald wants to ask the Tribune
some questions about the tariff bill,
and is so anxious that the questions
shall not go astray that he sends a
marked copy of his paper with the
questions editorially put, in this
wise:
"The Bismarck Tribune is a sup
porter of McCumber and feels called
upon to say something in his de-
Tense. The Tribune is usually fair
in its discussion of public affairs,
therefore the Herald hopes to get
specific answer or two from that
paper. It hopes the Tribune will not
evade by crying ''bolter, "'democrat"
<'party disruptionist," ETC., as all the
other papers that are supporting Nc
Cumber are doing. The Tribune says
that tariff bill is largely compro-
mise measure between the different
sections of the country. Then it says
''that it might be for the benefit of
millions Of people If the price of
wheat were reduced and bread made
cheaper" Now that leaves the in
ference that if the tariff of Is cents
a bushel we're taken off wheat, the
price would 60 down, in spite of the
fact that we are exporters and not
importers. This tariff on wheat is
North Dakota's end of the compro-
mise. Now will the Tribune go on
record and state positively that it's
firm belief is that wheat would go
down in price it the tariff were re-
moved? If it does believe it, 1t
should say so. If it does not believe
it, will it state what the North Dako-
ia senators got out of the ''compro-
mise. '' Then the Tribune would like
to create. the impression that Nc
Cumber stood by the president dur
ing the tariff fight. We would like
to have the. Tribune answer few
questions: s Was not McCumber a
member of the committee that had
the bill In charge? Did he not sup
port Aldrich on nearly every tariff
schedule? Was not President Taft
dissatisfied with the bill as reported
from McCumber's committee? And
after the conference committee had
revised It to comply with the presi-
dents wishes, did not McCumber
show that he was dissatisfied with
the changes made at the request of
Taft? Did he not openly say that he
was? Will the Tribune state how
McCumber can claim any credit for
the Improvements made in the bill
at Taft's suggestion? We hope that
the Tribune will not be so evasive
as the other McCumber papers are"
So far as the tariff bill is concerned
and Senator McCumbers attitude,
we beg to refer the editor of the
Herald to Mr.. McCumber's address
before the senate when the confer
ence report was up for adoption
Evidently Editor Johnson of the Her.
aid has not read that address or
he would find several Of his questions
very clearly answered there. With
reference to the tariff on wheat and
agricultural products, irrespective of
the debatable value Of a tariff the
fact is that we shall from present
indications not long be an exporting
nation, and tariffs are not made every
day or every week. A tariff on agri-
cultural products, we. believe. is de-
sired by the producers Of this state,
notwithstanding .ha some editors are
satisfied to. get along without one.
In seeking to obtain fair rates Of
duty upon what the farmers Of this
state produce, We believe Senator
McCumber was obeying the will of
the producers of this state, who are
the sole makers OF it's wealth. And
Editor Johnson is. mistaken in stating
that the tariff on wheat is the North
Dakota end of the compromise. There
is tariff levied upon other agri-
cultural products, upon milk, eggs,
cheese. live stock, poultry, sheep, hay
and upon the cereals and garden
crops that are raised by the North
s-& sEy 20 81! s. 5s:r..-f s-, ------- j