The Caucasian. (Clinton, N.C.) 188?-1913, 1909-08-12

Bill-DemOcrats Incompetent I'm
Management of State Affairs.
To the Edltor:-On the first page
of the News and Observer Saturday,
August 7th. was an article by Tom
Pence with the following headlines
In very large letters: ocean Race
Gives Taft Statement a Black Eye"
He tried to leave the impression
Its cargo in under the Dingley law,
no matter what its cargo was.
Now IL a ship had on a cargo Of
silks and high-priced laces. it nat
urally wanted to get in before the
Payne law went into effect The
higher than the Dingley rates. A
ship loaded with wines and liquors
would have preferred the Dingley
rates for <the same reason. But a
vessel loaded with iron ore would
never have rushed to get in under
on iron ore was forty cents per ton,
the Payne rate is fifteen cents per
ton. No ship loaded with pig iron,
scrap iron, cotton ties, steel rails,
cast iron pipes, wire nails, screws, or
agricultural implements would have
raced against time to get in under
the Dingley rates. | did not see the
accounts, but know that only a very
| few ships raced against mine" More
| rates, by far, have been lowered
than have been raised. Most of the
| things on which rates have been low
cred are necessities. Most OF the
| things on which rates have been
raised are luxuries. The rates on
timber, lumber, and lathes have
been lowered. Wood. pulp has been
put on the free list. The rate on
printing paper has been reduced
from s6 to 1915 per ton. Hides
were put on the free list. The rates
on band and sole-leather were re-
duced from 20 to 5 per cent ad val
orem; on dressed leather from 20
to 10 per cent; on boots and shoes
made from other feathers from rs
to 1 5 per cent. The rate on earth
enware lowered. These are articles
of everyday and common use. There
are a good many articles Of neces-
sity, the rates Of which were neither
lowered nor raised, such as wool and
woOlens, watches, clocks, hats, bon
| nets, buttons and gloves. No ship
would likely race against time to
get these things in under the Ding
ley law.
The total consumption value of
the articles on which the rates have
been lowered is $4,978,122,124.
The total consumption value Of the
articles on which rates have been
raised Is $852,512,523. That clear
| ly shows the falsity of the oft-re-
peated statements in the News and
| Observer that the Payne tariff Is
higher than the Dingley tariff. Fur
ther, of the $S5O,512,525 consump-
| ton value on which rates have been
raised, $579,85O,322 represents lux
uries. That leaves about 5,622,-
2O2 worth of products Of necessity
| on which duties have been increas-
ed Still further, about half of the
consumption value of articles on
which the rates have been increased
represents wines and liquors. Does
| the News and Observer think that
Congress should have given us cheap
wines and liquors?
| How the News and observer can
i - xxnh
hypocritical bowling about Republi-
can tariff revision is a mystery to
me. It knows that the Democrats
made a miserable batch Of tariff re-
vision in '94. It knows and partly
admits that they have made a spec
tacle of themselves during the pres
ent tariff revision. Minority Leader
Clark now claims that the Demo-
Gratis are united merely because they
voted against the tariff bill as a
whole. But that signifies nothing.
That was expected. 1t was charac-
teristic Democratic duplicity to help
put in protection rates for the pro-
ducts of their own section, and then
vote against the bill as a whole In
order to try to fool the people. No,
they are not united, and will not be
soon. The very first time a real
test comes they will be as badly di-
vided as they were on the revision
of the House Rules last spring, or
on the recent tariff revision. They
are completely demoralized. 4 The
Democratic party is like ship with
out a rudder, drifting here and
there. No, it is not drifting now
It Is stranded upon the shoals OF
bad faith and incompetency. The
waves of public opinion are rapidly
breaking it up. 1t will soon be
gone forever. Chairman Mack sale
last winter that they must find some
more Issues on which they could al
agree. No, old fellow. you need
not bother about that. You car
neither build up party, nor keeI
party together by hunting for new
issues every four years with which
to try to fool the people. Stand fol
principles that are worth while ant
} the issues will take care Of them
selves The Democratic party wa
once mighty force. To-day 1t can
not make the showing OF respectable
opposition The Democratic leader
of to-day are nothing more than al
! aggregation of hysterical grumbler
5 and demagogues.
t No, the Democrats cannot fool tn
n