Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1914-12-17
ARTICLE II.

ARTICLE II.
The American public was grossly
dissatisfied with the tariff OF 1909,
chiefly because of the failure to revise
materially the duties on wool ana
manufactures of WOO (Schedule ~.
These duties were needlessly high
Wool growers and wool manufactur-
ers suffered dearly for their stubborn
ness in resisting a reasonable reVl-
sion. They dragged the rest OF us
down with them in the awful disaster
! of 1912.
Nevertheless, unpopular as it was
the tariff of 1909 did accomplish some
wholesome results. 1t would nave &C
complished more had it been adopted
as reported from the Ways and Means
committee. For example. it removed
! the senseless duty on hides 1t re-
duced correspondngly the duties on
leather goods. 1t checked forest de-
struction by reducing needlessly high
duties on lumber. 1t reduced, 1T should
have abolished, the useless duties OH
coal and iron ore. 1t reduced materl-
ally the duties on iron and steel. Wood
pulp was made free and the du'ies
on paper were reduced.
Beyond a slight rectificatlon as d
matter of equity in the cotton sched-
ule. there were no Increase cepe
on Injuries.
The one glaring unreformcd stheo-
ule was schedule X, wool and woolens'
otherwise the Payne-Aldrich tariff re-
ally was a reform measure; but, alas'
II omitted the really effective tarln
board that was expected and sunstl-
tuted merely a partial reform In TINS
direction.
The new democratic tariff neither
protects industry nor raises sufficient
revenue. 1t has absolutely no loglcal
reason for existence, as have said
except as a stepping stone to free
trade. That the country does NOT
want the other extreme of free trade
was shown by the late elections
That it is equally opposed to protec'
tive tariff, however generally satls'
factory if based merely on the de-
mands or concessions of "the inter
ests, was shown by the sudden revolt
of progressive republicans and the de-
feat of President Taft.
Now. there is no new argument 10
favor of tariff commission. There
are two weapons used effectively
against it.
1. Misrepresentation The absurd
argument that though the existing IN
terstate commerce commission mas
not curtailed the control of congress
over Transportation over railroads, an
exactly similar advisory commission
on the tariff would curtail the power
of congress over tariff schedules.
2. Corruption. The secret desire
or interested lAulPluuolo w nSSP 70
nert information from the public that
the lobby may work its will. Neither
trusts beneftting by extortionate
duties needless for protection nor for
eign steamship lines seeking to de-
stroy the relics of American shipping
wish on the one side or the other
that the plain, unvarnished truth
should be told.
Now we propose no house of gov
ernors as a substitute for congress
Neither are we advocating the founda
ton of body of advisers whose recon-
mendations in regard to the tariff
shall need but the seal of a president S
acquiescence to become law. Nation
al legislation is vested by the consti
tuition in the national congress and
should remain there.
This proposed commission is in nc
| sense body that is to take the place
or perform the functions of any exist
/ ing legislative or executive branch OF
| the government of the United States
Tariffs in the future, as in the past,