The Daily Ardmoreite. [volume] (Ardmore, Okla.) 1893-current, 1912-10-20
Notes From Democratic National Headquarters

four months after Mr.. Cleveland took
office the second time.
Mr.. Wanamaker quites from vari-
Gus sources certain records OF dis
tress, but neglects to say that every
one of them bears date not less
than six months before the tariff bill
of 1894 became law and, as mat
ter of fact. before its terms were
known.
The truth is that neither a repuD!i-
, can administration nor high tarlll
is any protection against panics, ana
they occur, as everybody knows, eX-
cept Mr.. Wanamekr, quite without
regard to tariff changes. Our very
worst panics have, occurred under re-
publican administrations.
In 1903 the republican party IN lts
platform declared "unequivocally Tor
the revision of the tariff but this
promise soon so recklessly broken
had no deterrent effect upon improve
ment in business conditions. 1t can
not. therefore, be said that the mere
threat of tariff revision causes dis
tress, for there was no doubt In l9US
not only that the tariff was to be
revised, but that it was to be revised
downward.
Ignoring the President.
Most important, however, in Mr..
Wanamakers letter is his failure to
refer to existing conditions. He
promises all sorts of disaster in a
very general way, but has nothing to
saw about current facts Of industry.
For example, it has been well known
since 1910 that the public demanded
the downward revision of the tar'tf
which Mr.. Taft promised and later
denied. A democratic house of rep
resentatives was elected in 1910 cu
that special issue. That house passed
series of tariff measures, some OF
them over the presidents veto. On
each of these measures a number OF
progressive republicans voted wife
the democrats. One of these bills re-
duced the duty on steel. Yet, al
though a revision of the steel sche-
dule was and is pending, the steel
industry has revived, prices are ad-
vancing and, strangest Of all, from
Mr.. Wanamaker's point of view.
large investments are now being
made in new steel plants.
If the danger that Mt. Wanamaker
foresees is real, how is it that these
investments proceed? How is 1t that
manufacturers all over the country
are increasing their plans.
Mr.. Wanamaker seems ignorant
also of the actual labor conditions.
| High wages are not necessarily
sign of prosperity. AS Professor
Fisher points out, century and
half ago laborers in Rhode Island re-
ceived a wage of $40 daily, but it took
four days work to buy pair of shoes
| Nor are high wages a result OF the
protective tariff The Lawrence
strike brought out this fact vividly.
| There the textile manufacturers have
a very high protective tariff to favor
them. but the wages of their employ
es were shown to be indefensibly low.
A fair comparison is that between
| England and Germany; both thickly
populated; one having no protection
and the other high protection. How do
wages stand in these countries today?
Those in Germany are seventeen per
cent lower than English wages, and
not only so, but the cost of living in
Germany is seventeen per cent high
er: so that the protected German
workman earns the smaller wage and
pays the higher cost.
Free Trade Bogey.
Is it not truly ridiculous for MT
Wanamaker to raise the bogey of free
trade? No party advocates that, Mr..
Wanamaker must know that the dem
ocratic cotton and woolen bills are
not free trade measures in any sense.
The fact is that the republican
rlatform of 1908 as well as the demo-
cratic platform of 1908 declared for
revision of the tariff. 1t seems to me
that the only question now before the
American people is, who will give
them the downward revision for which