The Farmington times. (Farmington, St. Francois County, Mo.) 1905-1926, 1910-08-25
TARIFF AND TRUST TWINS.
Largely Responsible for the High Cost
of Living, Says the Minority Of the
Senate Committee.

III u vigorous ana illuminating re-
port the minority members OF the
senate committee, appointed to as
certain tho cause OF the high cost
of living, take issue with the Re
publicans and declare that the tar
| if, trusts and combinations are
chiefly responsible for the high
prices. Among other things the re-
port says:
1.-THE Payne.Aldrich bill took
broom corn from the free list and
made IL dutiable at 50 per ton.
ThereupOn the price to the consumer
advanced Sl.2O per dozen brOoms,
the tariff being represented by about
One-fifth of cent and the graft by
81. l4i-j, the consumer being the vie
tim.
ain all the United States there
were D per cent of the people di-
rectly financially interested in main
tanning the exorbtant tariff on wool
on goods and perhaps less than
per cent of this per cent got % per
cent of the spoils beyond living,
and yet every citizen must have
wooden garments and blankets.
1--WE doubt not that every increase
III NbSl VI lIlfSt HbDIS has uNlutu It's
thousands Of victims to the silent
tenants of the cemeteries and grave
yards; yet every effort to reduce
even the most prohibitory duties so
ms to permit every American citizen
to be warmly clad at "a reasonable
cost was persistently voted down.
This discrimination in favor of
the rich and against the poor was
distinctly pointed out to the Senate
while the Payne Aldrich bill was I'M
der consideration. 1t was shown
that raw silk was admitted free of
duty and the manufactured article
averaged only 50 per cent, while a
duty of 49, per cent was laid on
WOODEN or worsted cloths valued at
not more than ~ cents per pound.
an article largely in use by vast
number of our people.
Champagne was put on the schcd.
ulcs at from ~ to &c per cent while
wearing apparel was taxed from 80
to " per cent. Drinking champagne
was to be encouraged and wearing
WOODEN clothes discouraged. So
with hats, those bringing not over
N4.JO per dozen were taxed - per
cent and those valued mt more than
Sl3 per dozen t. per cent.
THE result of protection is great
fortunes for the few and great suf-
fering for the many. We believe
that the amount OF the tariff Is added
to the price and taxed to the con-
sumner; that but for the tariff the
commodities we buy upon which that
tax is laid would be cheaper, APP
proximately to the extent Of the tar
i'll; and that when We do not buy the
imported article the protected manu-
facturer puts approximately the
amount OF 1t on the goods produced
by him.
Taking up the subject of trusts,
combinations and monopolieg, they
declare that there are few trusts
that could survive u revenue tariff.
They flourish only under the shadow
OF high protective walls. Standing
behind those walls that shut off for
eign competition, and destroying do
mestic competition by consolida-
lions and absorptions, they are lin.
tied only to selling at fraction less
than the foreign price plus the pro-
tective duty.
at is about sixty years since
Great Britain adopted free trade,
and during that time, according to a
table published In Whitaker's AL.
manac, wages have increased ST.
per cent and prices only 3 per cent.
1t is, therefore, well seen that the
abolition of the tariff in England did
not bring down the rate OF wages.
Neither would it in this country. If
we remove the obstruction, allowing
prices to sink to their natural level,
the question of wages may be trusted
to take care OF ITSELF