The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-04-07

Tn ana trusts. some DorrOW the hB at V used by Havemeyer. the president of the Sugar Trust. and declare that the tariff ts the mother Of trusts. others declare that the only relationship Is that Protection Is the mother of Pros- perity. and that trusts are but one or the evils growing out cfNgood times. Between these two definitions of the relationship there come all sorts ol views and opinions. The extreme pro ponent of the Mother of Trusts" theo- " has what he regards as con vincing array of figures to prove ms case. His opponent Is ready to de- clare that there are just as many trusts. proportionateiy. in Free Lraae ca, and that they embody just as many evils as the American trusts.
 Some see In the, cutting of of the tariff an excellent solution of the whole trust question. They argue that when trust seeks to kill all its com petitors, all that Is necessary Is 10 turn loose upon 1t the dogs of foreign competition and there will be an end to It's tactics. Others exemplify their position by the parable related recent ly by former Attorney General Bona parte A farmer, according to the par able, had a lot of hogs. Some or them were fuil-grown porkers, others were shotes, and the remainder were pigs. Now the farmer had them all in one pen, and when feeding time came the porkers got most of the swill, the shotes got little, and the pigs next to none The farmer couldn't sfand for the crowding out of the pigs so he cut of the swill entirely. Result: A whole pen full of hungry, squeaIing' measly razorbacks. To the mind Of MT. Bonaparte the minute protection is ta- ken away because the trusts get an undue share of 1t, the whole industrial world would come to the uphappy end of the porkers, shotes and pigs. An- other prominent political leader de- ciares that 1t is no more right to stop protection because lof the evils that grow out of the prosperity he asserts that 1t brings about. than it would be to blot out representative, government because a. few representatives have be- trayed their trust
 The pet theory of the Democrats. Is that the trusts add the tarin to their prices at home. and thereby make un- \ told millions out of the American con- sumer. One of their statisticians, By ron w. Holt, has figured the matter down to rather fine point. He esti- mates that the American. people con- sume s14.00e.000,0o0 worth of stuff a year. and that the trusts make tar- fir profit of Is per cent thereon. or a total of more than s2,o0o. .ooo,oo. View ing the situation from another stand point, that isg taking the difference between American and European prices, he finds the tariff profits bil- lion and half dollars. The student of The Congressional Record Is im- pressed by the frequency with which such tables as those prepared by Mir. Holt are used in the course of single session. IHS the House and Senate had to listen to their reading they would have the pleasure of hearing the same thing read from dozen to half hun idred times.
 One of the greatest arguments against any intimate relation between the tariff and the trusts in past years was that petroleum was on the free Hist. and that yet Standard oil was the greatest trust of them all. A year ago, Representative Kustermann, (Mich), exploded that argument. He called the attention of Congress to the fact that while petroleum was appar- gentiy on the free list, it was in reality Subject to a duty ranging from 100 to 200 per cent He called attention to little joker in the Ding1ey bill. which provides that any county which levies an import duty on AmericAnN oil shall pay a like duty when importing oil into the United States It SD happens that Russia is the one other great ofl- producing country on the globe. and that she levies a very high duty against American oil. Consequently, when Rus- ssia seeks to enter her oil into American ports the rate is fixed by her standard which is practically a prohibitive rate.
 When Representative Kusterman was telling the House about this. the tDemocrats thought they had a wonder ful indictment against the framers of the Dingley bill. But their applause and joy was shortlived, for Mir. Kus- termann promptly informed them that the very same clause was in the Will son -Gorman law, and was placed there by Democrats. MT. Kusterman. who is strong protectionist. estimated that this little "countervailiffg duty" joker costs the American people s37.000 a day.
 The Papare Trust has been getting the benefit of tarfff of about $6 per ton. on print paper. In speaking of this In the House when the duty on wood pulp was under discussion. Represent ative Perkins stated that 1t was now annually, the timber from an acreage of land equal in size to the State of Rhode Island to supply the American newspaper publishers de- Inands for print paper, He suggested that under present conditions 1t would be better to pay bounty on wood pulp imported into the United States than to assess duty against 1t. This is perhaps the only time that a serious minded statesman has suggested bounty on imports.
 The one interesting development of the tariff question in the recent past is the gradual growth of the number of manufacturers who advocate exten- sive revision downward. Without ex- ception they place themselves on the platform of Henry clay--that he is the best friend of protection who seeks to have it applied where necessary and cut on where unnecessary. Not long ago the American Academy of Politi- cal and Social Science published . symposium of views on the tariff queA- ; tion. D. M. Parry. the great vehicle manufacturer, was one of the contrib ntors to this symposium. He declared that whenever home prices fall below 7 foreign prices there is temptation in the tarin to eliminate home competi- ton by combination.
 z H. E. Miles, another protectionist \ who has stood for revision downward, comes to terms even more specific. He .. says that in the line of manufacturing ls In which he is engaged all the duty necessary Is Is per cent, or 20 per cent at the outside, yet the Dingley law gives 45 per cent. He declares that under this the Dingley law permits, s if 1t does not indeed invite, combina- tion to increase the home price by 20 per cent. and thereby treble or quad ruplo the profits. He holds that his own concern could have added nearly . half-million dollars to its profits had