The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1910-09-29
WILSON IN PLAIN TALK
 TELLS WHAT HILL DID TO
 INCREASE COST OF LIVING

According to figures furnish
 ed by the bureau of statistics the bill passed by the senate, upon the basis of the importations of
 1907 leaves unchanged the duties
 on imports of the value of $540,- 106,000, or 64.65 per cent.
 Duties are increased on inn
 ports of the value of $149,716,-
 decrease effects imports of the
 value of $96, ,369,619 or 1883 per
 / cent. The average increase of
 the entire bill is 5.65 per cent.
 Unless the rates of this bill
 are greatly reduced in conference
 this. bill ought to be vetoed. In
 the present form it is violation
 of the promise made to the peo- pie to reduce existing rates.
 Even the lowest rates assessed
 iation of the pledges made to the people. BECAUSE EVERY RATE
 IS HIGHER THAN THE DIE PR6bneE PR6bHGTIoN IN pHTWEGN THE G3ST T4fg 2a
 AND THE COMPETING COUN-
 TRY"
 Now MT. Hill claims that, the house bill, which didn't become 8 law, was an honest bill, but Senator I4aFoIlette says it was not.
 Whom do you think the people be- lieve?
 Whom do you think Republicans believe, judged by recent happenings in the primaries of other states? an honest bill, the dishonesty and the broken pledges come home to MT H1ll in a very direct way. He not only voted for the bill, but as 2 member of the committee on Ways and Means and one of Cannon's de pendab1es, he had a very inporta mt part in making it.
 And so once more we find him de- lending a tax which takes from the poor and/ gives to the rich, which builds trusts and entrenches mono poly, for it is of the essence of Can nonism to serve the Interests first and the people last.
 In respect of the state tax, as it exists in Connecticut, and of the na- tiona1 tax as it exists in the Payne tariff bill, MT. Hil1's attitude is fairly representative of the lstandpat eIe- nent of his party. He is not, SO far, more reactionary than President Taft is, nor, so than a majority of the con gressn1en Of the Republican party are.
 But in pursuing an investigation into MT. Hill's attitude upon public questions and the part he played in Uncle Joe's machine, it was some what surprising to find that he out cannoned CannonisIn, and that, with some of the other Connecticut Con- beaten by several laps for downright opposition to progressive legislation.
 The platform of the Democratic age of an amendment to the constftu- ton, permitting the congress to inn pose a tax upon income.
 when tnis amendment, or proposed amendment, was offered MT. Hill an- nounced that he should vote against an Income tax, and he did. He did more than this. The opportunity did against an income tax. So he voted against the proposed amendment, saying by his vote, "I do not favor an income tax, and I do not intend to my own constituents, say whether or not they want such a tax
 11c I..1 c. H. ed in Vol. A of The Congressional
 MT Hill was one of the 14. # The tariff bill was a tax on the people and 8 boon to monopoly. He voted for the tariff bill, although he knew that 1t was not an honest bill.
 The income tax would be a tax on wealth and privilege, he voted against it, or rather against the pos sibility of it. although he had to leave his party behind him to do it.
 And tIlIs distinguished gentleman bears in his bosom yet another gift for monopoly. which fortunately for the country, even Cannonism has been unwilling so far to father. MT. Hill is the confessed and able champion of that monopoly of monopoIfes, a great central bank, which would hold country, extending and contractine credit at its pleasure, for the purpose of hastening that confiscation of property which is constantly going on
  tered monopolies.
 shall consider Mir .HiA's proposal for a central bank more fully at a later time.
 With legislation like this, which has been described, is 1t any wonder that the cost of living rises with giant tremb1e for the future of the coun- try?
 Forty years ago farm property was one half the total wealth of the coun- doU ir 1nc
 Fifty years ago wealth was distri- buted with reasonable equality.
 Our national wealth in 1904 exceed ed 1o7 billion dollars. Seventy per cent of it all was owned by 200 900 people. About 5000 people owned one ed by the remainder of our 90, 100000 people. Ali this robbery by tariff and tax ation is done mainly for these 5000 or 5000 rnulti-nillionaires, and for the 100000 very rich men and women. By the last census of manufacture there were 216.262 manufacturing es- ishments in this country, excIud- ing neighborhood industries. But 38 per cent of all the business was done by nine-tenths of one per cent. of these and 79.3 per cent of the business was done by 112 per cent | leaving a mere fraction of business for the other 89 per cent of esta b1ish- ments. And in this limited number of con cerns is included the great combina- 1 tions for whom our congressman of | Connecticut have such tender consid- 1 eration that they call them infant ] and vote them the tariffs 1 of the Payne-Aldrich bill. Let us look at some of these Gin | fant industries' and see whether it l Is time to wean them. These figures l are from the last census of rnanufac- | lures, issued in 1906 These figures include all manufac- | lures of tobacco, so that the profits | of the tobacco trust appear in a much | diminished form. Tobacco manufac- | turers enjoy tariff protection aver | aging 87 per cent The total value | of the product was s331, III ooO The l value of the product, after deducting | than s14.00o.Ooo in excess of the -phy- |