The Marion daily mirror. (Marion, Ohio) 1892-1912, 1909-05-07
SAYS IT,s A SHAM.

Every newspaper in Ohio ought to
reproduce an editorial appearing in
the April % issue of the Independent,
a weekly magazine published in New
York. Originally the Independent
was religious publication, but OF
late years It has launched out into
the general field of literature, politics
and history. We might add that it is
a very ardent believer in President
Taft, and an equally ardent admirer
of Mr. Taft's predecessor. This
makes the editorial all the more re-
markable. Yes, it is about the tariff
and every man and woman, and every
child who can repeat the multiple
cation table, ought to dread it, The
editorial appeared under the title,
sham Revision OF the Tariff and IS
here quoted IN full:
THE controlling majority in Con-
gress does not intend to make a real
revision of the ,arin. It's purpose IS
substantially to reenact the present
law, now twelve years old,with lew
apparent reductions of little or no
value to consumers; with a consider
able number 3f increases, ayowed or
concealed; and with the entire list
lsubject to an increase of perhaps ~
per cent. so far as four-hiths of the
Imports are concerned--for the use OF
maximum rates either as proposed
by the House, or in accordance with
the plan whicn, it is said. the Senate
committee prefers, will increase the
ordinary duties. The result of the
special sessions work can now be
foreseen. We know what the House
has done: we have the Senate Com
mittees bill, which probably will be
changed for the worse when action IS
taken concerning the rates that were
withheld from it; and the limits
within which the conference commit
tee will do its work are already quite
clearly marked
"Mr. Aldrichs explanation OF the
changes in his committees bill was
Inadequate and misleading, as Mr.
Payne's description of the original
House Committee bill had been
Only by careful examination OF each
measure have many of the objection
able features been brought to light.
We do not refer, of course, to such
changes in the Senate bill as the inn
position of a Cuty on iron ore ana
| the restoration OF substantially all
the Dingley rates on meat products,
grain and vegetables, but to the ef-
feet of reclassification and of sub
stitution of specific for ad valorem
tduties on cotton fabrics and other
goods. AS an example we point to
the report of a merchants committee
that one of these obscure changes
increases the duty by SO per cent
Again, dealar. in cutlery publishes
a table showing that the Senate bill
adds from 40 TO 81 per cent. TO the
uullbS VI IdhO - MI. AluIlCH Sdlu
that the substitution of specific rates
in the cotton goods schedule had not
increased the ola ad valorem rate
But Mr.. Lodge a member of the COM
mittee on the same day published a
statement to he contrary, rejoicing
that the change had been made.
1T is misleading to compare the
rates of this bill with those of the
House bill. Comparison should IL,
made with the Dingley tariff, which
Congress processes to be revising
For example, it is pointed out that
the high rates OF the House bill on
hosiery and gloves have been rejected
by the Senate Committee. But what
rates are recommended in place OF
them? Simply those of the present
Dingley law. Nor is it especially TO
the credit of the makers of either bill