The Washington times., 1909-03-27
THE NEW TARIFF BILL AND
THE COST OF LIVING.

For SIX or eight years the increasing
cost of living has been the most i'm
mediate, the most pressing, the most
universally observed fact about eco
nomic conditions in this country
There have been, indeed, reports from
various statistical authorities which
presumed TO demonstrate that the
wages of workers were increasing quite
as fast as was the cost of living. But
two things have been true of all these
demonstrations:
l. A large proportion of students of
the subject have declined to accept the
conclusion, and have insisted that the
figures were not based on fairly rep
resentative data.
9. 1t has been conceded that salaried
people and those drawing fixed incomes
from investments, ETC., have not had
advances in their incomes, in proportion
with the increases in the cost of living.
These classes, at any rate, have serious
ly suffered by reason of the growing
difficulty of making ends meet.
During all this period since the prob
lem of living costs has been growing
increasingly oppressive, the promise has
been held out that when the country
got around to tariff revision, something
would be done to remedy these condi-
tions."
Tariff revision has been wanted by
the country almost exclusively because
of the belief that it would furnish this
relief.
1t is not going to do so if the Payne
bill passes in anything like its present
form.
That is the long ald short of the sit
ustion. The country is going to be
bitterly disappointed. 1t IS going to
see the cost of living advanced once
more, Instead of reduced. 1t viii see
the cost of the famiIv's daily neces-
saries going up instead &c down. 1t viii
make the discovery that the revision
downward" which was promised and to
which it supposed all parties were
pledged, has really become a revision
upward, for all practical purposes.
This Is the great, practical, over
shadowing fact about this pending re,
vision What will the country say and
do if It finally becomes convinced that
another tariff for the interests, instead
Of the masses, has bee9 made?
country was willing to have a tariff
bill made frankly and openly for the
benefit of the producing interests. But
that time is past. The Dingley act
was made, openly, candidly, admitted
". with that policy in view. The people
had general and cheerful confidence
that if capital engaged in production
were given big benefits by the tariff
IT would fairly divide up with labor;
labor would prosper, and everybody
would have money enough 10 pay the
tariff prices.
Rightly or wrongly, he people have
no such simple-minded confidence now
sdays in the willingness Of producing
capital 10 divide mp on an equitabI
basis with productive labor. The ire
ruendous development OF great trusts
the multiplication Of milliouaires, the
beaping up Of what Mr.. Roosevelt
called swollen fortunes, the systematic
oYercapitalization of all kinds Of enter
piises, the consolidation and centraliza
tion Of ownership and management, In,
advancing of prices in too many case
out Of all reasOn-all these things hay,
caused a widespread distrust Of III,
philanthropic spirit of the immediat,
benehciaries Of protection. The max
ors of the new tariff law will do wei
TO be warned against the dangers o
unduly imposing on the patience an,
confidence of the people.
All this is not saying that the coun
try is any less a protection countrl
than it used 10 be. Ii anything, it i
more than ever a protection country
because the development of industry a
the West and South has raised ul
powerful Influences and interests whicl
need protection. But while this is trle
il is also the fact that in their capac
tiles as consumers the people ar
aroused TO demand such adjustment 0
their protection as shall enable them Z
live within their incomes, in comior
9nd content
1t is useless to assume that ther
ere two great classes Of people, con