The Glenwood post., 1910-03-19
SAYS Reduction Is Downward as Prom.
ised by Republicans and Is For
Protection Of Americans
COLORADO PAPER ANSWERED

The last tariff law enacted by con.
gress has been the subject of continu
Gus discussion in the editorial columns
of the national press during the past
few months and has also been the basis
for several special news articles. For
the most part these editorials and ar
tcles have been of a criticising nature,
especially has this been true of those
published in the democratic press. Once
in a while a republican paper has seen
fit to criticize the law and on the oc-
casion of the recent Lincoln day ban
quet in this city. ex Congressman Rob
ert w. Bonynge had for his subject
"The Tariff Law and discussed it at
length. He not only proved that the
law was fulfllment of the party
promises to the people, but that it was
the best law the nation has ever en-
joyed on the tariff question. After
wards Mr.. Bonynge took occasion to
address letter to the Boulder County
Miner in which he discussed the law
and its effects at considerable length.
In this letter he maintained that the
revision of the tariff was downward as
promised, and that neither the repub
lican party or press has anything to
fear on the final results that will accrue
from the practical operation of the new
measure.
Mr.. Bonynge's letter is as follows:
"I was very much surprised to read
the following article published in the
Denver Times and purporting to be e
clipping from your paper:
Don't Like 1t.
''Boulder County Miner.
''1f anybody asks you we are
one of the republican editors of Colo
RADIO who do not like 'Cannonism' or
the late tariff bill. 1t is true that we
have never read the entire bill, and we
would not know any more about it if
we did, but do have some recollection
of the bunch that put it through and
who they stand for, and that political
affiliations cut no ice in the framing OF
the bill. You have got to show us tina.
it is a test of party fealty to approve
or disapprOve of the tariff bill, or to like
or dislike Uncle Joe. and from what We
know of the sentiment of this part OF
the political vineyard we would advise
the party leaders to go mighty slow in
attempting to make it test.
1t does not seem possible to me that
you want to place yourself in the posi-
tion of condemning a tariff bill that
was passed by republican house,
republican senate. and signed by re-
publican president, who has since, after
reviewing its terms. given it his unqual-
fled approval, and to base your objec-
tion to it not upon its provisions, with
which You candidly state you are un-
familiar, but wholly upon prejudice
and personal dislike of some republi-
cans who had share in framing and
passing the bill. In all fairness l sub
init that you should examine the bill
and point out the provisions therein to
which you object and the grounds OF
your objection.
I assume that you are protectionist
and believe that continuance of that
policy of our party is necessary to the
development of the industries of the
entire country, and particularly to the
undeveloped resources of our states
Therefore, / imagine that you approve
of the new duty of 10 percentum ad
valorem placed on tungsten bearing
ores of all kinds by paragraph 100 OF
section l of the Payne tariff law, AM
which was enacted at the earnest so
licitation of Boulder county people an'
for the benefit of the tungsten mines OF
Boulder county. likewise assume thai
Won approve of the new duty provided
by paragraph 1913 of section 1 of thu
Payne bill on zinc ores, ranging from Y
of cent per pound to cent per pound
enacted to protect our zinc mines from
Mexican competition.
If you will fairly and impartial!
sxamins the provisions Of the bill, fre'