The daily Gate City. [volume] (Keokuk, Iowa) 1855-1916, 1910-05-25

Burlington Hawk-Eye. suppose ..
w. Brookhart Of Washington county,
instead of Charles A. Kennedy, OF Lee
county. had been the representative IN
congress from the First Iowa district
at the extra session last spring ana
had voted as he now talks against the
new tariff. what would have been the
essence of his vote9 For what prin-
ciple, and for what schedules, would
he have voted against? 1t is well TO
get away from glittering generalitles
and down to hard and tangible facts.
Mr.. Brookhart is a Cummins dew
otee and with him holds that the new
of the Republican national platform
for a revision and justifes the senator
in voting against the bill on its final
passage. If Mr.. Brookhart had been
in the house at the time he also
would have voted against it for the
same reasons, to-wit: that it does not
make enough changes in the Dingley
tariff and not enough of a downward
cut.
Now, what are the facts9
1T is the best tariff law ever en-
acted says President Taft
II represents the greatest reduc-
ton that has been made in the tariff
at any single time since our first rev
enue law was signed BY George Wash
ington, says Congressman Mccall,
who was the Massachusetts member
of the conference committee.
Apply the test Of 2,024 items
of the Dingley tariff. S74 were chang
ed. there being Goa decreases of duty
and go increases. The increases
were largely on Injuries, and the de
creases chiefly on the necessaries.
The figures show three times as
much revision downward as revision
upward Mr.. Brookhart in his
speeches and personal canvass of the
district, neglects to mention the fore
going facts. Nor does he take into
account the additions to the free lis.
But now let us see how Mr.
Brookhart would have voted had he
| been congressman instead of Mr.. Ken
nedy:
Mr.. Kennedy voted to reduce the
tariff on beef. veal, pork and lard %
per cent. Mr.. Brookhart, if he haG
voted against the bill ON It's final PAS
sage, as he says he would have done
/ would have voted against these down
/ ward revisions.
/ Mr.. Kennedy voted to reduce thu
rates on bacon and nam 20 per cent
Mr. Brookhart would have voted
against the reduction.
Mr.. Kennedy voted for reduction
Of per cent cut on corn meal, 10 pc
cent on salt and 331s per cent on cab
bage- Mr.. Brookhart would have vote,
against these downward revisions
The Iowa farmer is willing to stans
his share of downward revision bI
Mr. Kennedy thought the foregoing
figures were all that ought to be aske,
OF his country constituents. Are W,
to understand Mr.. Brookhart woult
have voted no because the cut is no
enough, or because it is too much
Either way he chooses to answe
leaves something to explain
Mr. Kennedy voted to reduce tn
tariff on soft coal SO per cent. Nj
Brookhart would have voted agains
the reduction. Why?
The tariff on wood and manufacture
of wood was greatly reduced. NJ
Kennedy voted for the reduction; VIII
would Mir Brookhart have voted no?
Reduction on boots and shoes G
, per cent. Mr.. Kennedy voted We.
Mr.. Brcokhart would have voted n,
: Why, if sincere revisionist dow
) ward, would Mr. Brookhart follow NJ
Cummins in voting no?
Harness and saddles were cut 80 pc
cent. If that is a benefit TO hors
!, owners why does Mr.. Brookhart b
gludge them the supposed benefit?
4 There has been complaint that til