The Greenville journal. [volume] (Greenville, Ohio) 1850-1918, 1910-07-28


day and we were face to face with an |
appalling deficit. 1t was imperatively |
necessary that the revenue should be in |
creased and the problem was how to do |
II. There was one very easy way. We |
might have placed a tax on coffee, tea |
and cocoa. A duty Of six cents a pound |
on coffee alone would have more than |
raised the necessary fifty million dollars.
Why did we not put duty on cofeeE
Simply because 1t is contrary to Repub-
lican principles to impose a duty on
any article Of daily use which is not, and
can not be, produced in this country. We
are not willing to impose a duty which
might result in an increased cost to the
consumer Of any article, unless an Amer
lean industry is thereby established and
American workingmen benefited.
What the Republican party did was to
Increase the rates on things like silks,
laces, perfumeries, fancy soaps, wines
and liquors, cigarettes and the like, all
luXuries, pure and simple, and, in addi-
tion, to impose tax upon the receipts OF
corporations over $500 a year
These increases, none of which will bear
upon the poor man at ALL and but lightly
upon the man who can well afford to pay
them, will enlarge the revenue of this
government over what the Dingley law
could have produced by at least fifty mil
lion dollars a year.
The passage of the corporation tax is
an example of the quiet effectiveness of
the methods of President Taft Without
Republican help, one of the most impor-
tant measures ever enacted. Not only
will this law produce a substantial anu
much needed revenue not less than $25,-
OO0,OOO year, but it will secure to the
government most valuable information
with regard to the conduct of the affairs
of large and powerful aggregations of
capital 1t will go far to solve the
mightiest question that faces us to-day,
the reasonable supervision and regulation
by this government Of the great corpora
tions of the country.
Ohio is interested perhaps more than any
other state in the scedules of the tariff.
Our manufacturing industries are ennr-
nous and of immense variety; our farm
ing industry is vast and diversified We
produce and consume in Ohio most of the
things that are produced or consumed in
any other state in the Union. Any i'm
pOrtant change in tariff schedules must
affect us immensely, either for veal OF
woe.
What would be the effect on the pros
perty of our people If the present Demo-
cratic program were carried out? They
propose, or at least their responsible
leaders have proposed, and 1t is not de-
MED, to do three definite things If it
should come into their power to revise the
tariff. They would put iron and steel and
all its manufactures on the free list; they
would put wool and all its products on
the free list; and all food products, in
Guiding wheat, corn. cattle, sheep and
hogs, on the free list.
How does this program, so far as iron
and steel are concerned, appeal to the
thousands of workingmen throughout the
state who are engaged in their produc-
tion? How does the program Of free wool
appeal to the Ohio farmer? Is it possible
that he can forget the dark days of the
Wilson bill when sheep We're worth fifty
cents apiece? And in addition to this,
would he relish free hogs, free cattle,
free wheat and free corn? If he does,
there is one way to get all these things,
and that is to vote the Democratic ticket
this fall.
There is only one more duty that 1
want to mention, and then l am done
with the discussion of the details of the
tariff law. That is the duty on lumber.
At the beginning of the framing Of the
Payne law, and for some years before, |
was in favor of free lumber. Not be-
| cause l believed that free lumber would
| cause substantial, if any, reduction in
the price to the consumer, but because it
seemed to me that free lumber would be
a long step in the direction of the conser-
walton of the forests. 1t seemed to me
self-evident proposition that If the Amer
lean people could draw on the world for
the supply of lumber the waste of our
forests at home would be less rapid. And
yet, while l am still inclined to this belief
l confess that it Is somewhat shaken
since listening to the testimony of experts
before the Ways and Means commit
And now a few words about the in
| creased cost of living. No one attempts
to deny that the cost of food and wearing
apparel has gone up, The prices of a
good many of these articles have de-
creased in the last few months, but they
are still higher than they were year
ago.
1t was only natural that the Democrats
| should seek to lay the blame for this
upon something that the Republican
party had done, and in casting about for
specific thing they name the Payne law.
That is an easy thing to say, but thing
| impossible of proof unless they can show
that the Payne law increased the duties
| on those things which have risen in price.
| Now, as matter of fact, the exact
| converse is true. Not only have the
| duties on those articles which have gone
up in price not been increased, but in a
| great many cases they have been sub
| stantially lowered. Lumber. has gone up
and yet the duty was reduced IS per cent !;
some kinds of shoes have gone up, and
| yet the duty on shoes was lowered 30 per
cent; hides have gone up, and yet the duty
on hides was lowered 100 per cent; meat
| has gone up, and yet the duty on meat
| was lowered % per cent: ham and bacon
! have gone up, and yet the duty was low
cred 20 per cent; vegetables have gone
up, and yet the duty on many vegetables
was lowered, and on none raised lard
! has gone up, and yet the duty on lard
was reduced 30 per cent; sugar and salt
! have gone up, and yet the duty on both
! was reduced some kinds of wooden cloth
| and clothing have gone up, and while it
| is true that the duty was not reduced, it
| was not increased one cent; tea and coffee
/ have gone up, and yet they are both on
| the free List
I shall take no time to comment on
! what may have been the reasons for the
increased cost Of living. 1 would like.
| however, to submit for your considera-
| ton one thing.
Immediately after the Payne law was
passed dealers in all sorts of articles
| throughout the country announced by cir
| culars and otherwise that on account of
| the Payne law they had been compelled
| to raise the price of their wares. In all
| these cases the fact was that the Payne
| law not only had not increased the duties
on these articles, but, as a rule had sub
stantially lowered them. These dealers
relied upon the ignorance of the pur-
| chaser as to just what the Payne law did
and succeeded, in many instances. in
gouging out of him an unfair and unrea-
sonable profit by falsely representing, or
at least insnuating that the Payne law
| had increased the duties. | think it a
mild characterization of such methods ia
call them the equivalent of obtaining
money under false pretences The plain
fact is that the increased cost of living
has come, not because of the Payne law
| but in spite of it. I" =
We are ready to meet our opponents
upon any ground upon which they may
| attack us. If it is that the tariff law is
not a compliance with the Republican
platform, or that it is responsible for the
! increased cost of living, we will confound
them with the facts.
But such attacks as these are mere sub
| terfuges: the real Democratic attack is
upon the principle of protection. Upon
| this they will meet a Republican party
united in solid phaanX. We have differed
among ourselves somewhat as to details,
but not on the underlying principles. Our
differences as to details have been due
mainly 20 the fact that none of us had
definite knowledge of all costs of produc.
eliminated by the creation of the tariff
commission. But upon the great basic
principle of protection we stand as unit
regulars, insurgents and Independents
We believe in the maintenance of Amer.
lean industries; we insist upon the main
tenance of the American scale of wages.
We welcome this issue because we be-