The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1912-08-01

ZduOn more e0mpAcL ana JUS pdrIS more closely co-ordinated.
 As beginning, we examined closely the estimates. These, unless watched. grow from year to year under the nat ufal tendency of the bureau chiefs. The first estimates which were pre- scented to us we cut some e,0O0. .Oo0, and this policy we have maintained through the administration and have prevented the normal annual increase in government expenditure, so the re- suit is that the deficit of $5S, 735. 600, which we found on the 1st of July, 1909, was changed on the 1st Of July, 1910, by increase of the revenues under the Payne law, including the corporation tax. to surplus of S15.- soc, 900; on July 1, 1911, to a surplus of SAT ,234, ,000, and on July 1, 1912, to a surplus of S6.s36,O00. The expendi. lures for. 1909 were S662, 2,234. GOO; for 1910, $65e, ,7o5. GOO; for 1911, $654, 13S.. 900; and for 1912 were $654,So4, ,O00. These figures of surplus and expendi' ture do not include any receipts or ex. penditures on account of the Panama canal.
 Panama Canal.
 For the benefit of our own people and of the world we have carried on the work of the Panama canal so that we can now look forward with confidence to it's completion within eighteen months.
 The Navy.
 nA AH ha government of the United States, to- gether with it's responsibility for the protection of Hawaii, Porto Rico, Alas ka, Panama and the Philippines, as well as for the maintenance of the Monroe doctrine, require the mainte- nance of an army and a navy. We can- not properly reduce either below its present effective size. The plan for the maintenance of the navy in proportion to the growth of other navies of the world calls for the construction of two new battleships each year. The Repub- lican party has felt the responsibility and voted the ships. The Democratic party, in house caucus. repudiates any obligation to meet this national need.
 FF9tseIIve ySFlns
 The platform of 1908 promised on be- half of the Republican party to do cer- tain things. One was that the tariff would be revised at an extra session. An extra session was called and the tariff was revised. The platform did not say in specific words that the re- vision would be generally downward, but construed 1t to mean that. Dur ing the pendency of the bill and after 1t was passed it was subjected to the most vicious misrepresentation. It was said to be bill to increase the tariff rather than to reduce it. The law has been in force now since August, 1909. a period of about thirty-fve months. We are able to judge from it's operation how far the statement is true that 1t did reduce duties.
 It has vindicated itself. Under its operation prosperity has been gradual ly restored since, the panic of 1907. There have been no disastrous failures and no disastrous strikes. The per- centage of reduction below the Ding ley bill is shown in the larger free list and in the lower percentage of the tariff collected on the total value of the goods imported. e-The figures show that under the Dingley bill, which was in force IA months, the average per cent of the imports that came in free was in value 44.a per cent of the total importations, and that under the Payne pill. which has been in. force thirty-fye months, the average per cent in value of the imports which have come in free amounts to 512 per cent of the total; that the average ad yalorem of the duties on all importa- tions under the twelve years of the Dingley bill was 45.s per cent, while under the thirty-hve months of the Payne bill this was 41.2 per cent, and that the average ad vaiorem of the du- tiable imports under the Dingley bill was 25.5 per cent, while under the Payne bill it was 20.1 per cent. In other words, considering only reduc- tions on dutiable goods, the reduction in duties from the Dingley bill to the Payne bill was 10 per cent and con- sideripg both free and dutiable reduc- tions they amounted to 2l per cent.
 The Tariff Board.
 Under the provisions of the Payne bill I was able to appoint tariff board to make Investigations. into each schedule with a view to determining the cost of production here and the cost of production abroad of the arti- clas named in the schedule in order to enable congress in adjusting this schedule to know what rate of duty was necessary to prevent destrpctive competition from European countries and the closing up of our mills and other sources of production.
 In the making of the Payne bill con- gress did not have the advantage of the report of the tariff board showing the exact facts. If 1t had the bill would have been constructed on better basis, but we now have had the tariff hoafd working, and it has made report on the production of wool and the manufacture of Wooiens in this country and in all the countries abroad and has given the same data as to the manufacture of cotton. If the Republican party had control of the house of representatives there would be no dihleulty now in passing q woolen bill such as indeed as has been proposed by the Republicans in the house, reducing the duty on wool and on woolens to such degree as