Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1914-10-31

WRITES VIEWS
Disagrees With Congressman
Townsend Regarding Value
of New Tariff.

To tie Editor OF the Evening Star:
Congressman Edward w. Townsend
has asked Candidate Frederick R.
Lehlbach several questions relating
60 the laws passed by Congress since
Mr.. Wilson has been President. Elk
ercising my prerogative as a citizen,
! beg to disagree with Mr. Townsend
and the principles Of the Democratic
party as propounded by Mr.. Wilson
and advocates of free trade. This
country Is one of the greatest, if not
the greatest. industrial nations of the
world. We have 6 per cent. OF the
worlds area and per cent. of the
population. We produce Of the
worlds total production, in case of
corn, 6S per cent. wheat. 20 per
cent; cotton, 81 per cent; sugar, 10
per cent; tobacco, 35 per cent; cat
tie on farms. 15 per cent; coal, 40
per cent; petroleum. So per cent;
copper, SO per cent. iron ore, AZ per
cent; gold. 20 per cent: silver, 70
per cent. and lead. 30 per cent
Thus, we see, we have the neces-
sary fundamentals to produce the
necessary commodities needed to sus-
tain us on solid and prosperous in
dustrial and financial basis right
here In the United States.
I claim and maintain that the
Democratic principles and the Will
SON Underwood free trade tariff law
are. responsible for the industrial de-
preston that now exists in this
country. [ claim that the Demo-
cratic tariff law has been the means
by which the government Of the
United States has lost millions OF
dollars in revenue. 1t has thrown
open our markets to the world for
exploitation and placed the Ameri
can wage Garner in position where
he must conform to the standards
of the European and Asiatic wage
Garner If he would exist. The Demo-
cratic tariff law has deprived the
American manufacturer of what
rightfully belongs to him-the home
market. These facts are not merely
psychological, Mr.. Townsend, by any
means, as will prove to you.
As an advocate of protective
tariff for American industries. | take
the liberty of telling you ] would re-
peal the Wilson, Underwood tariff
law for the reasons already stated,
and because: Our imports increased
under the new tariff law S102, 900
before the war in Europe began
y
to July /, 1914, showed an increase
of seventy-one per cent. over the
corresponding time last year. Bank
ing failures showed an increase Of
sixty per cent. Railroad earnings
decreased eight per cent. In the first
five months of the year; idle freight
cars increased 212 per cent
Gold exports increased lao per
per cent. In six months. United
States steel orders at the end of July
were 1,241 900 tons less than they
were az the end of July, 1913. Idle
freight cars. the last Of July, 1914. 4
numbered 1866, compared with 3d.
455 In 1913 Our foreign trade for July
showed q falling off compared with
July, 1913, OF $4,000 900 in exports, and
an increase of 81, 100000 In imports.
The trade balance in our favor In
July, 1913, was $21, 1923, 900. In. July of
this year Ii had turned into, bal
ance against us of $6,095, 900.
believe the Democratic tariff law
should be repealed, because; The
enormous increase In imports Of
goods similar to those manufactured
in this country and the tremendous
loss In exports-$43 100000 In one
why one-quarter of
the working people OF this country
large percentage Of the balance on
short time
= I believe the Democratic tariff law
should be repealed, because. as COM
pared with July, 1913, when the pro-
lection law was In force, hosiery i'm
ports during July, 1914, showed an
Increase of As per cent The imports
Of automobiles and parts for same
increased 495 per cent; manufactures
Of silk, 22S per cent: wool of class I,
1871 per cent: class Q. 500 per cent:
class O. 55 per cent; dress goods, 201
per cent: wearing apparel, 90 per
cent; other manufactures OF wool,
1873 per cent; cutlery, so per cent;
lace, o. per cent: linen yarn, so per
cent; leather and tanned skins, 80
per cent; paper and manufactures
Of, "a per cent, and so on. You know,
Mr.. Townsend, and the general pub
liceknows, that these goods cannot be
purchased any cheaper today than
they could a year ago under the pro-
tective tariff; in fact. In many in
stances they cost more today.
To summarize, the situation Is SIM
ply this: The government has lost the
revenue because of the reduced tariff;
the wage earners have had their earn
ings reduced or cut off; the manufac-
turer has been forced to curtail pro-
duction or cease entirely, and the for
eign producer has the money that
would have been in the pay envelopes
of the American workmen If the pro-
tective law was In force.
Why did the government of the
United States for August, current
year, cost some 100000 more to
operate than 1t did the same month
last year?
Despite the loud accusati ton OF al
lodged "profiigate waste on the part
of the Republicans. which the Demo-
Gratis INDUCED in during the canvass
of 1872 they have increased expendi-
lures about s100.ooO,000 annually. SEN
ator Borah stated in Congress that
the executive departments are now
running at an average OF $3,0o0,000 a
month in excess OF what ii cost to
run the same departments under Re-
publican control. Why? en
In closing would say that If you.
Mr.. Townsend, can cite one law that
has been benefit to American in
dustries and American wage earners,
that was enacted by the Wilson ad-
ADMINISTRATION, kindly do So but give
facts and figures. Yours respectful
~, GEORGE ALLEN ROY.