New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1910-10-02

t,,o AGAINST their better judgment I'M
al, 10 increase their pay or reduce the
| b,rden of their duties
THO general public is not aware of the
ovistence and exercise of such influence
"a do not hesitate to pronounce il a
earious governmental danger that calls
g. wise legislative and executive action.
am now directing an inquiry into
,ba efficiency and economy Of the de-
rartnents the aim being to improve
tba service and lower the cost of gov
eminent
Democratic Statements Refuted.
Our population has vastly increased.
our tax producing capacity has grown
| in proportion and the annual expenses
| of the government under the new con-
ditions that surround II have become
greater by many millions. Our Demo-
cratic friends are in the habit of saying
| that our government is taking out from
the people in taxes billion dollars a
year and spending II for the expenses
of government. This is an erroneous
statement.
The net expense of running this gov
eminent derived from the proceeds of
taxation, is about s650,0O00O a year.
not billion dollars a year. The total
or appropriations is not true indica-
ton OF the expenses deriving from the
! taxation
AS an illustra ton | cite the PostOf-
fee Department In addition to the net
ordinary expenses of $3.50, 900. 900 ap-
pTopriated for by Congress last year,
there was also appropriated for the ex-
penditures of the PostOffice Department
Falone approximately s250,0OO,0OO. But
the postal revenues are practically
equal TO the postal expenditures and the
burden of that department upon tax
payers this year will therefore be prac-
tically nothing.
OIJr 10 f,;a 40
if the Democratic party came into power
1t would reduce the expenses of this
government $500, 100000 Do they mean
that the Democrats would abolish the
pension list? Do they mean that they
would give up the navy and disband the
army? Do they mean that they would
abandon Porto Rico and the Sandwich
Islands and the Philippines? Let us
have little specification.
What are such statements worth I'M
! less the gentlemen who make them give
| us the details of the expenditures that
! they criticise and expect to avoid il
| they are let into power and become
! themselves the national government?
| 1t is possible to save money in carry
| ing on this government, and we are
| struggling in this administration to find
out how modern principles of business
! organization and efficiency may be APP
piled to a governmental structure that
| years and has never been reorganfzed
with the idea of securing modern bust
ness economy. But it is hard work, and
when one speaks glibly of S'p,pp,vp
| being saved each year in the ordinary
conduct of the government and Wnen
| that saving is to be made under the Ill
| rection of a party SO lacking in every
thing that goes to make up business CO
| hesiyeness and singleness of aim and
| view as the Democratic party. we may
regard the statement as Pfckwickian-
Reicices in Stmson's Nomination.
| T cannot close these remarks without
q reference to the action taken by our
| marty in the State of New York during
| the present week. The cause OF RepuD-
licanism has been heartened by brave
declaration of principle and by the nomi-
nation of an exceptionally satisfactory
| ticket with 4 candidate for Governor OF
| the highest character and ability.
| Henry l.. Stimson has been the power
ful allv of good government in this al
| ministration and the last. He has been
| a terror to evildoers. j rejoice in his
selection.
II is nossible in such a government as
| ours to lose deserved popular approval
! through misrepresentation and mtsunder-
| standing But mistakes of this kind are
not permanent. Let us constantly re-
member that If we stick to- our prin-
| ciples. if we insist upon efficiency in gov
| eminent. if we perform our promises in
| the future as in the past, when oppor-
tunitv offers If we stand shoulder to
shoulder In the determination to carry
on the work of progress as we have un-
derstood it, then because we are an et-
| fective and progressive party, because
we do know how practically TO carry on
government because we have possible
principles by which we propose TO stand
| in the face of victory or defeat, we shall
| certainly be continued in power.
Congressman Longworth. son-in-law OF
| Colonel Roosevelt, was the first speaker
He referred frequently to Taft and
Roosevelt as the leaders of the Repub-
| lican party and each time their names
were mentioned there was round of
applause. Mr.. Longworth's speech was
! principally devoted to defence of the
| Payne tariff law. He said:
| The main pledges in the tariff plank of
| the Republican platform were two-that the
revision should be based on the principle
of protection and that sufficient revenue
should be provided for the needs of the gov
| eminent No one has ever questioned that
| these two pledges have been carried out
| Criticisms just and UNJUST, nave been dl-
| rected at details.
| we revised the tariff on necessities down
ward. This is no longer questioned by any
one who has either the desire or intelligence
/ to understand the facts The average rate
! on necessities has proved to be not less
/ than 10 per cent lower than the Dingley
| law and several per cent lower than the
Wilson law The duties ON more than So
| O00,O 100000 worth of articles annually con-
sumed by the American people have been
! reduced and on less than S215,Oo0.000 in
! creased, and the free list has been ex-
| tended that about one-half of everything
| imported into this country pays no duty
whatever
! Duties have been increased on articles of
| luxury and the revenues have been supple
mnted thereby by more than $500, 600.
Most important of all, the Payne law es-
| tabliShed a tariff commission, and later the
| Republican Congress strengthened its hands
and endowed ii with ample funds for the
| carrying out of It's functions.
The point is this-and / want to lay
special stress upon il because | believe II
! lies at the very foundation of the whole
controverSy-that the attack upon the Re
publican position upon the tariff Is. and
| cannot be anything else, but an attack
upon the principle of protection.
! We admit that the Payne law is not
/ fawless, but our position is that whatever
/ intersections ii may have come from the
| system of making tariffs both under lie
publican and Democratic administrations.
We propose TO change that system. We
propose in the future to revise separa te
| items OF the tariff instead OF revising it all
| in i lump. We propose. further. through
| the medium of the tariff commission to get
| at the facts and, when we find that there
are duties which are not fair measure OF
| the difference in the cost of production mere
and abroad. TO make them so. That Is the
Republican position on the tariff to-day.
The placing of the Democratic party in
power can only mean The breaking down OF
! the system OF protection and the substitu
/ ton of tariff for revenue. as they call il.
ltx 1NK hoe 81