Montpelier examiner. [volume] (Montpelier, Idaho) 1895-1937, 1912-10-18

In cities, il costs an average of
about five per cent for the merchant
to deliver goods. BY going TO the
market and bringing his purchases
home, one not only gets better sup
plies. but makes this saving as we'll.
The Dingley tariff bill became a
law early in McKinley's frat term,
and continued unchanged through
out bis incumbency Of Office and
throughout the Roosevelt admins
tration.. Meanwhile. the cost of
living had been increasing in pace
with increased wages, increased
values. in real estate, and increa. ed
values in well-nigh every thing else.
As the price of food stuffs and the
other necessities of life went higher,
q cry of protest swept over the land i,
and the tariff was pounced upon Q
the cause. Whenever anything
goes wrong, the tariff is made the
s,apegoat.
| have little sympathy with this
stereotyped cry for legislation down
ward, except as it be applied with
reason and with regard to the par
tirular schedules that are too high.
No power can ever make this free
trade country so long as the wages
of competing countries are lower
than our own. If we had started
on different economic theory, if
we had never had q tariff, and our
wages had remained on level with
the wages of Europe, with the prices
of commodities correspondingly low,
it would be quite a different matter.
But we are not in this condition,
and no political organization can
ever reduce our wages to the level
of the European wages without
revolution and bloody internal war.
A halfway protection, protection
that only partially covers the diff
ference in the cost of production at
home and the cost of production
abroad, would be little better than
no tariff at all. Il would not keep
ont foreign-made goods unless our
manufacturers reduced the wages
of employees to point where com
petition with foreign manufacturers
would be possible.
The Democratic party, in i,s
platform this year, demands q rad
ical tariff reduction, and At the same
time says that this reduction should
be 30 made az not to disturb our
industries. This looks we'll on
paper, but 1t does not ring true.
IL cannot be done. Such . tariff
plank is q rank contradiction, tht
last part neutralizing the first.
The Democratic platform goes sc
far ~ to say that the tariff is un
constitutional. This 10 twaddle
But if II were fact, which it isn't
it would be high time that we chan
ged Constitution that stood be
tween us and legitimate prosperity
Wilson, though in record free
trader, has suggested that the Ter
iff be reduced by substantial per
centage annually for period o
years. Such Q scheme of revisio,
is neither practical nor wise. Oa
wages are all the while trendinl
higher, not lower, and as they g,
higher we must have q tariff tha
will still level up the cheap wage'
of Europe With our increased wages
Failing to do this, the higher wage
cannot be sustained.
4 A tariff that will safely cove
the difference between the cost G
production abroad and At home, an
will amply protest our markets froI
foreign invasion is q high enoug
tariff. A tariff in excess Of this
too high, and should be reduced.
This statement accurately repr
, sents my position on the tariff.
do not believe IN burdensome (
( excessive tariff, but l do belle,
with the deepest conviction thi
prosperity in America depends u
: on safe, sure protection Of o.
6 industries and markets from foreil
8 invasion, and the protection of o
q wage against the cheap wage
4 Europe.