The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1912-01-24
UNwIsE ATTACK ON LEAD.

II appears that the Democratic prop.
ositiou for the reduction of duties on
steel goes very much further than cI.
ther the logic or the business features
of the situation require. Not only
does that proposition make heavy cuts
Gus cuts on other articles that have
nothing whatever 10 do with steel. arc
not in the same class, ani depend on
altogether different factors for their
treatment. Among these nou.relstcd ar.
ticIcs is lead. There is not a particle
tempt 10 yoke up the production OF
lead in this country, and the duty
| thereon, with the production and man.
ufaetuTe of steel and tho duty on steel.
This country has tho greatest steel
| works in tho world. has no occasion
| 10 fear any nation in the production
OF steel, and the difference in cost DO.
tween the production OF steel in this
country and iu any other country is
In favor of the United States.
IL rs quite different in tho matter OF
lead. In Mexico, Just on the southern
border. lead is produced by pcon la
Dor, which gets not TO exceed one-third
to one-fourth Of the wages paid TO
American miners. 1t has ALWAYS been
recognized by Congress as entirely lust
to mako the duty on The lead contents
OF lead orc correspond to the difference
in the cost of mining This difference
has been we'll known aud recognized
all along. and the present duty on the
lead contents of orc and on lead is
based on actual computations of the
difference in the cost of production.
To Interfere with the lead tariff sched.
ule. therefore, is not only an illogical
proposition from both the standpoint
Of its nonrclatiou 10 steel and from
the standpoint Of difference in cost OF
production, but direct attack upon
great American industry. On both
these accounts there is no justification
tho other hand. in Canada there is
bounty on the production Of lead, which
puts the Canadian miner on a much
moro favorable situation IN that pro.
ductiou than rs the American miner.
Here also. the difference has been fair.
" adjusted, and the tariff on lead and
tho contents OF lead ores is fixed cor.
rcspoudinCly. tho same figure practi-
cally applying against Canada as
against Mexico. the difference in cost
in tho one case and the premium in |
the other being fairly represented in
the amount of tho tariff.
For the Democrats in tho House 10
seize upon the favorable situation in |
regard 10 the reduction of the tariff !
on steel products, and use that as A |
lever for forcing down the tariff on |
articles that have nothing TO do with |
steel or steel production. is entirely |
unfair. To reduce the tariff on steel |
would be simply 10 free the steel users
in thlS country from an unjust mon.
opoly and burden. To DESTROY the |
tariff on lead would bc to kill an Amer.
lean Industry and put the lead business
Of the United States in the hands OF
McXicans and Canadians Tho differ,
cnce in the two propositions. that Of
steel and that of lead. is radical. and
II is astonishing that any American
Representatives whether Democrat or
Republican, could he unable 10 see the
destruction that is implied in med
ding with tho lead tariff.
There is the consolation attending all
this, however, OF knowing that the Sen.
ate will never agree 10 anything of this
kind. and that the proposed schedule
is drawn up, not with any expectation
Df having il enacted into law. but only
for political campaign purposes. And,
applying IL in that direction. we shall
find tha, it will bc fatal 10 the Demo
cratic party in all the cad-producing
States. Just as il ought TO he, unless
this entirely unrelated tariff on lead
IS incontinently dropped by the Demo
Gratis Of the House