New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1912-06-21
CANDIDATES ON TARIFF
Roosevelt and Harmon Do Not
State Their Attitude.
REPLIES TO REFORM CLUB
Taft Cites His Speeches-Cum
Minis, Wilson, Baldwin and
Clark Give Views.

The tariff reform committee of the Re-
form Club recently sent list OF questions
to eleven Of the leading Presidential can
dldates- Republican, Democratic and So
cialist-in order to find out their views on
the tariff. Senator Cummins and Governors
Wilson and Baldwin answered each Of the
seven queries categorically; Champ Clark
and Senator Lodge wrote letters; President
Taft, through his secretary, sent copies of
his tariff speeches, and Mr.. Underwood,
through his secretary. did likewise.
With the answers and ether material suo-
mitted, the committee has sent out a cir
cular showing the attitude of each candi-
date who forwarded replies. These are the
questions and answers, as sent out by the
committee:
Do YOU favor the present protective tar
Wilson-No.
Baldwin, do not favor the present pro-
tective duties.
Cummlns-some of the present protective
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 excessive.
Clark-How In the name Of heaven do
you think | would be in favor of the pres
ent protective duties when | led the hSnt
against the Payne Aldrich tariff BILL and
came within five votes OF recommitting It.
man who lived before the food-and that
in a House which bore on its roster Re-
publican majority Of AZ?
As to Cost Of Living.
Would you reduce the tariff duties a
means OF reducing the cost OF living?
Wilson-Yes, and for other reasons.
Baldwin, would reduce tariff duties as
a means OF reducing the cost OF living.
Cummins-The sole purpose OF reducing
duce the cost Of the commodities covered
by the duties to the consumer. r
Clark-Of course, one reason why
fought to reduce the duties was 10 reduce
the cost OF living.
Against Disturbing Business.
DO you favor the abolition OF all duties
except for revenue?
Wiison-Yes, though It would be wise and
necessary TO avoid such radical or tapIu
reductions as would disturb legitimate Dust
ness which has not assumed the form OF
monopoly. -,
baldwin, favor the abolition Of all
duties except for revenue. ] would so ad-
Just the distribution OF duties as 10 give
ample protection 10 American labor em-
ployed In industries OF such a KIND as 10
need protection. MI, -.
Cummins-I do not favor the abolition OF
all duties except for revenue - no %
CTark-I have been fighting all my lie 10
cut down the protective duties 10 rev.
enue basis or TO as close an approximation
thereto az the circumstances OF the ease
will permit. | have introduced oills 10 that
effect; I have made speeches to that
effect l have written articles for puohca,
ton TO that effect: / have voted scores OF
times TO that effect.
Tariff for Revenue.
II elected President. would you sign tariff
bills designed 70 remove all tarif1s except
for revenue? 5000,
Wilson-Yes. II the bills were adjusted to
the real conditions OF the country.
Baldwin-If elected President l snould
sign tariff bills designed 70 remove all tar
IN except for revenue. with incidental pro-
lection as above defined
Cummlns-I can imagine a tarin Dill that
pretended to be for revenue only when q
protective President ought 10 sign; but a
president who believes in protection ought
not 10 sign, and l would not sign, IL Presl,,
dent, tariff bill which applied In It's real
sense the doctrine OF tariff for revenue
only -, H.,
n quarter OF a century is II not reasonable
| TO conclude that II were elected Presioent
| I would sign bills reducing the tarin TO
revenue basis II they were presented 10
Costs Of Production.
If not do YOU believe in determining the
tariff rate upon "the difference In the cost
OF production between this and foreign
countries? How do YOU determine such
difference
termlne the difference in the cost or pro-
ductlon" between this and foreign coun-
tries The experience or the Tarln board
shows this. The difference varies not only
between different countries, but between
different mills.
Raidwin-In distributing tariff duties
should regard the difference IN the cost or
production between this and foreign coun-
tries where such a difference exists. The
responsibility Of determining the existence
OF such a difference naturally rests upon
Congress but ! think Congress should
make use OF Investigations by experts in
coming TO this decision.
CummIns-I believe In general way, IN
the determination OF the tariff rates by the
difference In cost Of production here and
abroad. recognize. however, that II is not
a mathematical standard. The general test
which / apply Is a duty that will neither
permit foreign control nor domestic mon
opoly. The duties which favor are those
which will allow the American producer.
living and working under American condi-
lions to successfully enter American mar
kets and sell hts productions at fair
price.
Clark-(See his answer to next question:
Tariff Board Unpopular.
DO YOU favor the continuance Of the Tar
IN Board under the control OF the Presi-
dent and not responsible to Congress?
Wilson-NO.
Baldwin, do not favor the continuance
of the Tariff Board under the control of the
President / do favor some such agency
for expert investigation which should be
responsible TO Congress and report 10 Il:
and I think II should be made so far as
practicable such as would represent differ
emit interests and different parties
Cummns-I am in favor OF a tariff com
mission, independent, non-partisan, with a
definite tenure OF office and responsible 10
Congress. Until we can secure such COM
mission, | am in favor of permitting the
present Tariff Board To supply us with all
the information that IT can secure.
Clark led the fight to prevent the es-