The Washington times., 1910-10-22

If ten years ago farm of 100 acres was worth
$40 an acre, it represented $4,000 If today that
same farm is worth soc an acre. it would repre-
sent $4,000. If it Is worth 800 an acre. it would
represent $4,000 Six per cent interest on 81 OO0
would be $120 year. Six per cent interest on
$4,000 would be 5000 year. The farmer is en-
titled to interest on his investment as well as 10
a proper percentage Of profit on the things he
grows and the cattle and hogs and sheep he raises
The legitimate charge Of interest on the greater
investment, added 70 the higher price for farm
labor, whether mans own labor, or that of some
one he hires-these, together with the increased
cost OF handling and, in fact, increased expense
everywhere, are the principal causes Of the hig
price OF foodstufs- The high price Of the hous
IN which We live IS caused by the high price
labor-the labor that makes the bricks, that 5u
the lime, that saws the lumber. and that shat
these materials into.a house
Still another thing has entered into the high C.
Of living, and that is the increase in the val
Of the ground on which our houses are built a.
on which our merchandising establishments D.
business. Interest must be paid on this higher
price Of ground even interest must be paid %
the higher cost Of a building. 4
It does not stop with rentals OF interest charges
but is extended to the clerks and delivery system
the bookkeepers. and everybody who has to do with
the handling Of the things We eat and the things
wear. and the furniture that gives comfort 70
our homes.
This added cost is expressed in so many andi
varied ramifcations that the subject could not be
covered amply and adequately in dozen big voIi
umes- But what I have said will perhaps serve
some Of you in helping to clarity this much-be-
fogged problem as to the increased cost Of living
That it is due mainly TO the causes I have sug-
gested, seems 10 me TO be so clear and so much a
commOn-sense certainty that It is beyond dispute
If I am right in my analysis. should we not
be wise 90 slowly in the matter Of assaiing our
tariff system, which makes progress possible -
this country at wages which, at all events, are
satisfaction to US even though the net results are
not so much better than lower wages would b
With lower cost Of living?
somehow fancy that bigger wages and moreS
generous expenditure tend TO shape up bigge
race Of people. race Of greater confidence and
Of more self-respect-which means better citi-
zenship.
I want 70 say Ole word more about the tariff. The
special session of Congress called by President Tat
two years ago 10 frame a new tariff BILL got prett
badly tangled up in its efforts TO reduce the tari
and at the same time increase the revenue wit
a view TO meeting the expenses OF the governments
from this source. If Congress had forgotten all
about revenue and had started out with the single
purpose Of creating tariff that would protect our
labor from the cheap labor Of Europe and would
do no more. all this row and mania about LEGIS-
LATING DOWNWARD would have been obviated.
We cannot mix up the problem Of raising reve-
nue. with that OF merely protecting our labor and
make good Job Of it
My own wish is that the question Of raising reve-
nue. be eliminated from the proposition. and that
we stick closely to the single purpose of protecting
our labor. and in this protection I would not OBJ
ject to a slight margin of safety over the actual
difference in the price of labor IN Europe and the
price of labor in America. I would not want, how
ever, this margin to be more than a safe margin
of, say, perhaps or 10 per cent When we go be-
yond this point. when boost up tariffs for
the sake of increasing our revenue We are furnish
ing protection to manufacturers that they do not
need and which is good neither for them nor for
our people as a whole.
This matter Of the high cost of living and its
relation to the tariff should be an economic cues
tion political 1t is as an economic ques-
ton that I have considered it AS my conclusions
shade for or against any party faction, they so
shade because see the problem have stated it
am keenIy interested in the advance OF this
country-keenly interested in constructive policy
not destructive policy. MUNSEY'S MAGAZINE
has never been committed to the undertaking
theory. and never will be- undertaking is one thing
and progress is quite another.
We recognize war when we hear the roar of can
and know that two great armies are pitted
against each other in the death struggle. But that
is than is the struggle that is going
today in this recognizing process now in the
field There Is war between the old methods and
the new-war between the progressive spirit Of
today and the Old Guard, beth in politics and In
finance. The old methods are passing and must
make way for the new.
The domination of capital that ran things with
high hand in this country, and the domination Of
the politicians that made puppets Of voters, have
got TO give way. And the sooner they yield to the