The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1912-06-22
HOW CANDIDATES
 STAND ON. } !! TARIFF
Tariff Reform Committee Offers Result of Tariff Inquiry Ad- dressed to Presidential Fossil bilities s.

E
 In order to ascertain the exact position on the tariff of the leading candidates for the presidential norni- nation, the Tariff Reform committee of the Reform Club, a few weeks ago address seven questions to the follow ing candidates: President Taft, Col onel. Roosevelt, Senators Cummins, LaFollette and Lodge, Speaker Clark, Chairman Underwood, Governors Will son, Harmon and Baldwin and Eugene V. Debs.
 The Tariff Reform committee has received full, explicit. and categorical answers to these questions from Sen atOr Cummins and from Governors Wilson and Baldwin. Letters were received from Senator Lodge and Speaker Clark. President Taft's sec retary sent copies of the Presidents woods secretary sent copies of MT. Underwood's tariff and reciprocity speeches. Senator LaFol1ette's secre- tary referred the Tariff Reform com mittee to the Senator's speeches and writings. No replies. were received from Colonel Roosevelt, Governor Harmon or MT. Debs.
 Of the answers to the following questions, those of Governors Wilson and Baldwin and of Senator Cum mins, have been copied directly from their letters. Speaker Clark's answers answers for the other candidates have been obtained from their records and speeches. No answers have been att tempted for MT. Debs. It is assumed that he, with the Socialist party, fav- ors absolute free trade. The Questions and Answers.
 l. Do you favor the present pro- tective tariff?
 Wilson: No. 5Ts
 Baldwin, do not favor the present protective duties.
 Cummins: Some of the present pro- tective duties are too high; some of them are about right. Therefore, l favor the ones that are right and am opposed to the ones that are exces- sive.' , ,-
 Clark: How in the name of Heay of the present protective duties when led the fight against. the Payne Aidrich Tariff Bill, and came within five votes of recommitting it, which would. have killed it as dead as the men who lived before the flood, and roster a Republican majority of 47.
 Taft: (Signed the present Payne Aldrich bill and pronounced it "the best tariff measure ever passed" :" Vetoed the Farmers Free List Bill and the Woolen- Bill of 1911,)
 Roosevelt: (Is staunch adyoceate of protection.) Underwood. (worked and voted against the Payne-Aldrich bill. Is the author of most of recent low tariff bills.)
 La Toilette: (Thinks present duties are too high).
 Lodge (Has generally voted against reducing tariff rates.l
 4Harmen: Opposes protection and is a strong advocate of lower tariff du- ties)
 2. Would you reduce the Tariff Duties as Means of Reducing the Cost of Living?
 Sonss . a4 l..L
 Baldwin: I would reduce tariff duties as a means of reducing the cost of living.
 Cummins: The sole purpose of re- ducing tariff duties to the proper commodities covered by the duties to the consumer.
 Clark: Of course, one reason why I fought to reduce the duties was to reduce the cost of living.
 Taft: ln his Winona speech (Sep- tember IT, 190S) he said: s'The high cost of living of which 50 per cent. is consumed in food, 25 per cent in clothing, and 25 per cent. in rent and fuel, has not been produced by the tariff. because the tariff has re- mained the same while the increases have gone On.
 Roosevelt: (In a letter to James E. Watson August IS, 1906) he said: '~The question of revising the tariff stands wholly apart from the question of dealing with so-ca1led trusts. The cry that the problem can be met by any changes in the tariff represents, whether consciously or unconsciously from the only method of taking effec- tive action.)
 Underwood: (Has estimated that if the tariff bills that passed the House during the 62nd Congress had become law, they would have saved eonsum- CTS $743,O0O,000 annually.)
 (. La Toilette: (Has repeatedly ad- vocated tower duties to reduce the cost of 1iving).
 Lodge: (Does not consider the tar if cause of high prices.)
 Harmon. (No replY.)
 S. Do you Favor the Abolition of all Duties Except for Revenue?
 Wilson: Yes, though it would be wise and necessary to avoid such radical or rapid reductions as would disturb legitimate business which has not assumed the form of monopoly.
 Baldwin: I favor the abolition of all duties except for revenue. I would so adjust the distribution of duties as to give ample protection to Amer ican labor employed in industries of such kind as to need protection.
 Cummins: I do not favor the abo-, lition of all duties except for revenue;
 Clark: I have been fighting all my life to cut down the protective duties to a revenue basis or to as close an approximation thereto as the circum- stances of the case will permit. 1 have introduced bills to that effect; I have made speeches to that effect; I have written articles for publication to that effect;-I have voted scores of times to that effect.
 Taft: In his Winona speech, he said: "The object of the revision as advocated by me was not to destroy protected industries in this country, but it was to continue to protect them where lower rates offered a sufficient protection to prevent injury by for eign competition
 Roosevelt: (In his letter of accept ance in 1904, he said: "It is a mat ter of regret that the protective tariff policy which during the last forty odd years has become part of the very fibre of the country is not now &C., cepted as definitely established"
 Underwood: Un his speech on the Sugar Bill (March IA, 1912) he said: ''The party that I represent on this floor has never contended that it is legitimate to levy taxation for any