Cañon City record., 1910-03-17

adopted III the thirteen colonies nau
not been willing to compromise some
of their differences. From that time
to the present compromises on some
features have been found necessary
in all important legislation for a
country of such vast area, with such
varied resources, and with the con-
fiicting interests of our different sec
tions and our people. The Payne tar
iff law is no exception to that general
rule. On the whole however, an un-
biased examination of its provisions
cannot fail to satisfy you that 1t is a
compliance with the pledges of the
Republican platform.
You Will ascertain, if you will make
ne examination, that in the revision
there were 874 changes made in du-
ties, 654 of those were reductions and
fore prevailing. The increases were
almost exclusively confined to luxu
ries and were made for the purpose of
securing much needed additional rev.
There were a few exceptions to the
rule that the increases were upon lux
uries. / have mentioned two of them
in this letter-the duties on lead and
tungsten ores. The increases were
only made, as in the cases just cited,
where 1t was shown that new duty
was necessary to afford adequate pro-
lection to some industry.
A recapituIaion of the results Of
the revision will demonstrate that the
Payne act lowered the duty on arti-
cles whose yearly consumption in this
country amounts in value to s5y000,-
100000. II raised the duty on articles
whose yearly consumption amounts to
$3.50 y00O, 900, about twe-thirds OF which
were luxuries. The net result, then,
is that the duties were lowered on ar
ticles Of the value Of $5,000, ,000, 900
against an increase Of duties on arti-
cIes Of the value Of $3.50, ,OO0, 900, In
cluding necessaries to the value Of
about ss70, 100000.
submit for your candid considera-
ton that this shows a revision down
ward and a compliance with Republi-
can pledges.
have written this letter In the
hope that you will not permit your
self to be carried away from Republi-
can mooring by unreasonable preju-
dice. II you will stop 20 consider.
you will recollect that the Mckinley
bill had to meet similar unfair criti-
cism as is now being directed against
the Payne bill. William Mckinley,
after the passage of the Mckinley bill.
was as roundly denounced as any of
the present leaders of the Republican
party. He was retired from congress.
The country had not sufficient oppor-
tunity to familiarze itself with the
provisions of the bill before the next
election took place. The result was a
Democratic victory for which the
and Colorado especially, paid
dearly. Ask any of the wool growers
OF Colorado how they thrived under
friends gave them in the Wilson-Gor-
man bill. That is only one illustra-
tion. All Industries of the country suf-
fered. A brief experience with De-
mccracy was sufficient for the coun-
try. The Republican party was re-
turned to power with William McKin-
ley. who had been SO greatly abused
for his part in the passage of the Nc
Einley bill, as its standard bearer.
Then followed the Dinsley bill. You
know what prosperity the country en-
joyed under its provisions. Every su-
gar beet factory in Colorado today
was erected because of the protection
given to sugar by its terms. The
Payne bill continues practically the
same duty on all sugar imported into
the United States except 100000 tons
of Philippine sugar, which is a mere
bagatelle because we have to import
annually at least 100000 tons to
meet our domestic consumption.
| ask you to remember these facts
and to bear in mind that it is better
in the end to remain faithful to the
principles of our party than even 70
win temporary victory. If we should
be driven from power because of the
unjust and unreasonable attacks of
cur critics. you may rest assured that
history would repeat itself, and after
the country had had another expert
ence with a Democratic congress and
Democratic tariff measure. the Re-
publican party would be restored to
power. as it was under Mckinley.
stronger than before and free from
any charge of having abandoned its