The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1912-10-25
QUESTIONS ANSWERED

Once more we are asked to reply to a tariff question by the thoughtful gentleman, one of whose questions has already been taken up at some length in these columns.
 Our correspondent suggests than our reply to his query was academic though we cannot agree with him.
 Our answer certainly was not after the manner of the schools, which is academic, but by the vivid illustration of concrete existing industries and other facts. which is not academic.
 But, at any rate, our friend sug- gests another question, and he aban- dons the academic and Hypothetical form for the concrete as follows:
 CD .oThe Salts Textile works
 was running short handed and
 in a very desu1tory way in Eng
 land for many years, although it
 had all the world for it's market
 except this country.
 (2) The tariff here induced the
 company to transfer it's entire
 plant to this country.
 (3) It has since fourished
 here in Bridgeport surprisingly
 (4) Would you vote to cut
 down the tariff and so permit for
 eign importation to effect the
 market> and thus conditions in England to come in sight here?
 So here in the form of a question are three statements concluding with a question, the numbers being our own and inserted for convenience.
 As to statement No. 1, many in dustries in this country are running in a t.desu1tory fashion," with .'aIl the world" for a market Some in dustries even FAIL. We should say that the company had no business in England. And since in every land, under free trade or protection, there are industries which have. no busi- ness, we have not. so to speak, ar rived anywhere upon statement No. 1.
 s'The tarir here induced the conn pany to transfer it's entire plant to this city?" That is statement No. 2. But why the tariff HERE? There was tariff in Russia, eand one in Ger many and another in France. Doesn't it follow, as plain as the nose on your face, that there MUST have been oth CT reasons than the tariff, such as people speaking the same language, or, more probably, an OPENING for the particular enterprise, that did not seem to exist in the other tar if protected countries?
 It appears in statement No. 3, that 1t has since ..iourished here in Bridge port surprisingly, '' which again shows nothing except, that it finds business here. Are there no enterprises that flourish exceedingly in free trade England? E And now the question, No. 4, about cutting down the tariff. which we have already answered. and will ans wer again he plush business needs 8 reasonable l .ariff to put it upon even terms with l foreign plush makers, we would give t that tariff. That is the mocratic 1 position, it is the Republican position 1 t is the Bull Moose position, it is the l Socialist position, and so far as we znow to the contrary it is the Prohd- ul1O1l pOSIUAOn uPCul l<1RIAs
 In other words. dear friend, there is 10 more difference between the pres- mt tariff positions. of the political ,artfes than there is between tweedle- Ium and tweedle dee. except that the republicans have promised lower tar- ifs in their platforms and made them | Iigher in fact. .i
 fv.;a | ion. Patents" he says fare an ex- client thing, although they seem in ome cases to work hardshfps to the onsumer." In the same manner, hej sks 'fs the custom house not, as a of invested manufacturing apita1, equally a good thing?''
 The patent system was not insti- 1ted to PROTECT CAPITAL, but to ncourage invention, by insuring the houId create. His right so gained erminates at the end of IT years, or nereabouts.
 There is a certain analogy between his protection of inventors and the rigina1 theory of the tariff which vas that the infant industry shouId1 ave enough protection to put it on $ feet, and that it should then stand pon it's own merits. T. Of course the modern practical octrine of protection in this coun- y is that an industry shall have nough tariff to keep it on its feet rovfded it's ultimate ability to stand lone is not grossly impossible