The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1910-03-20

spoken of as having voted in each in
stance for the lower rate of duties in
each or these 40 yea-and-nay votes be-
-ause the number of democratic senator's
voting the other way in these votes was
IN each instance SO extremely small and
the vote among the democratic senators
vas in each instance so nearly unani-
nous. In these 40 yea-and-nay votes
With extremely few exceptions, there were
less than two democratic senators who
1oted against the lower duties. 1t is still
more rarely found in any of these 14o
yea and-nay votes that as many as three
democratic senators voted against the
over duties.
AS above stated the votes on lumber,
these lao yea-and-nay votes Separate
mention of the votes on these three ar
ticles will be made hereafter.
This unvarying support of lower
duties by the democratic senator's in
the 140 yea-and-nay votes covering
every schedule of the bill would be a
sufficient refutation of the persistent
misrepresentation that they had favored
protective duties. But an analysis OF
these recorded votes presents the case
still more strongly, as follws:
First, let us consider the fact that
in no single instance in these 140 yea
and-nay votes did the democratic SEN
ators vote for rate of duty on any
article which could be properly clasesd
as a protective rate of duty. The only
possible exception that could be claimed
by anyone would be found in the case
where, in a contest between factions
of the republicans, two rates of duty
were proposed, one higher and one low
er, and the democrats, in choosing be-
tween the two, voted for the lower rate
proposed. although 1T was itself higher
than they desired to see adopted. More
over, the democratic senators in no in
stance, in these lao ea-and may votes,
voted for any proposition to increase
a rate of duty on any article over the
rate prescribed either in the Dingley
law or in the pending tariff bill as it
came from the House of Representa-
tives. Finally, the democratic senators
failed in no instance in these lao yea
and-nay votes to vote for any propo-
sition to reduce the rate of duty,
whether such proposition was made by
republican senator or by a democratic
seantor.
If the various propositions voted for
by the democratic senators in these 140
yea-and-nay votes had been adopted
and enacted into law, the new tariff
law would have materially reduced the
tariff rates on articles required in our
business industries and on the comforts
and necessities of life, and there would
have been lifted from the backs of the
people the heavy burden of indirect
protective tariff taxation, the grievous-
ness of which through the increased
cost of living caused the general de-
mand for the downward revision of the
tariff.
In Illustration of this fact a democratic
senator, when this tabulation of votes
was presented to the Senate, said as
follows:
The articles covered by these 14O propo-
sitions in yca-and-nay votes, upon which
the democratic senators voted against an
Increase of duties and in favor of re-
duction of duties embrace the whole
range of articles essential for the conf
fort, the health, the decency the conveniv
ence, and the reasonable Indulgence of
the people In their homes, in their per-
sons and needed pleasure, and in the
necessities of their business avocations.
They embrace the great mass and va
riety of article of everyday use and con-
sumption by the people generally-ar-
ticles which necessarily. in their procure
ment. make up the daily expense Of liv-
ing people of all classes. the rich and
the poor alike, and differing only In
degree.
1t would be manifestly impracticable to
enumerate all of these articles, because
there are many thousands of them. They
may be briefly, but imperfectly, mem
toned somewhat in groups or classes, as
follows:
4 lss4 szsss lsea q N spsms and other