The Calumet news. [volume] (Calumet, Mich.) 1907-1938, 1911-09-21

Republican platform of protection up
ON which ] was elected, ana To which
! am i'm honor bound To square my ofii-
cial act and policy. In the absence
of such adequate Information, and
with the prospect of securing IL i'm
three months. II became my bounden
duty TO withhold my approval of the
bill. What was the necessity for such
great haste I'm passing the bill at an
extra session called for another pur-
pose? The bill as II passed the House
provided It should go into effect jan
uary I, 1912 The bill as il passed the
Senate contained similar provision.
When the bill went into conference, /
am informed that the suggestion was
made that the date of January I, 1912
for its taking effect would furnish
strong argument for delaying its
passage until after December /, when
the tariff board could report. The date
OF taking effect was thereupon chang
cd To October IL. 1911. Such care
was not taken with the free-list bill
or the cotton bill, both of which were
made to take effect January 1, 1912.
PROGRESS Made Would Be Last.
schedule X had been I'm force so
long and its percentages We're SO high
i'm many respects that | had not hest
ought To he reduced. and to explain
how II came not to be reduced i'm the
Payne bin as II ought To have been
Rut II is one thing to know that a
schedule of this sort Is too high. and
It is very different thing in such a
complicated schedule To know upon
what Items the reductions should be
made and how great the reductions
ought To he. If the principal to which
| am committed, and to which the par
ty is committed i'm the strong terms
of the resolutions. which | have quoted
above, was to be observed as a policy
at all. here was the occasion for fol-
| lowing IT, II | had allowed the WOO
| bill to become a law, the progress
made In public opinion toward bet
ter method OF revising the tariff would
have been entirely lost and the policy
cast TO the winds.
Some defense Is made of the bill
on the ground that the committee or
Ways and Means had considered Il
| carefully i'm committee for n month ol
more, but the point Is that the bill
they prepared is not this bill. II Is
changed I'm all OF It's rates and ma
| terlally changed to meet by comprom'
| Use bill that was never i'm committed
at all. and the blending was done, al
was said, with "blacksmith's tools.
The House bill was n free-trade or a
least an anti-protection bill; what the
| hybrid was, who could tell? In view
of the enormous value of the wool ant
wooden industry which might he dis
astrously affected by the bill, was !
asking too much to delay the bill, un
der the circumstances, for 80 days
merely TO secure information?
thought not Indeed, | could find M
argument which would satisfy m!
conscience in signing the bill.
The Free List Bill.
"The free-llst bill was called tn
|
Of giving an impression that ii wa
passed to compensate the farmers 70
some sort of injury supposed To b
done by the Canadian reciprocit
treaty. This reason was finally repu
dated by the leader of the Democrat
on the floor of the House of Repre-
sentatives, and Is certainly not true
There was nothing i'm the CANADIAN
reciprocity bill that required any com
pensation to the farmers, for I'm yer
short period after actual operation
will appear that they, as well rs every
body else, have been improved In con
dition by our larger trade with Can
ada. But the bill was framed an
came To me i'm a form calculated |
mislead as To its effects, In the frs
clause all agricultural implement
were declared to be free and a grea
lmany were named. These sam
implements were named In the Payn
bin. and were made free In that hi
from any country which permitted on
agricultural implements to enter
! without duty. This opened to Ems
land the market of the United State
for agricultural implements. AS
| matter of fact. the price of agricu
e. tural implements i'm America is chear
b, or as shown by n report of the Burea
Ior Trade Relations of the state dc
> nartment. Co the American farmel
p than TO any farmers i'm the worl
r England Is the one country that e'
e ports agricultural implements to an
p great extent, and so successfully Is Il
, Icompetition against her i'm this coui
trv of American agricultural impl'
ments that practically very few ha'
- come i'm from England. This first claus
\ therefore. of the free-list bill offe
no boon To the farmers at all a
f though apparently drawn for the pu
s pose of inducing them to think So
. does contain some very general wor
- nj the close of the specially mentiol
1 cd articles which by interpretau'
might he made TO include $50 diifere
n articles used on the farm, but used
II other vocations also. An these arr
y cles-the hammers, the tools. the Gu
: L,ry. and the machinery of vario
V kinds-are now dutiable under I
4 metal schedule. To admit them u
u der this clause would be To destr
n entirely the symmetry Of the me-
Il | .,bod,,ia .nd nroduce such n conf