The Owosso times. (Owosso, Mich.) 1897-1926, 1918-08-02
Washington Letter.
JAPAN SETS THE PATTERN

| iAVh ooPoii, cuS uyt
there are about to ask the government
to establish protective tariff to safe
guard them against disastrous compe-
tition from Germany at the close of
the war. Since the German supply of
dyes was cut off, the Japs have con-
! structed a number of dye plants, re-
latively small in output and have
operated them in the manufacture of
the simpler dye materials. They have
not yet developed methods of manu-
facture of the higher grades of dyes
but they hope to do so if their manu-
facturers are not driven out of bust
ness by the competition of chemists
who have had the advantage of years
of experimentation in Germany.
The situation that confronts the
Jauanese dye producers is similar to
that which faces the dye manufac-
: turers of the United States. We have
built up dye industry-not yet up to
the German standard but in fair way
to equal or surpass the industry
which Germany fostered for so many
years. Our industry is partly, but
inadequately, protected. With the
advantage of superiority in the pro-
duction of some kinds of dyestuffs,
Germany could undoubtedly conduct
ruinous competition if she under
! cookbook it systematically. Japan has
one advantage over the United States
in an industrial competition of that
kind-her lower labor cost. The
United States has an advantage over
Japan in the greater inventive gen.
ius of her people. But neither coun-
try is in a position to compete with
the more highly developed industry
of Germany, unless adequate protec-
tive tariff laws be enacted.
And the same is true of some other
lines of industry. For years we have
been buying pocket knives, table cut
lery, tools, razors, and multitude of
other articles from Germany, because
the manufacture of those articles was
more highly developed there and we
were content to buy there rather than
build up our own manufacture to the
German standard or establish pro-
tective tariff high enough to shut out
the German product. Whatever the
reason, the records show that we
bought the goods bearing the "Made
in Germany" trade mark.
: There are few people who believe
that when this war is over the hatred
of Germany will be so great that we
shall not buy German made goods.
Quite likely we shall not buy much,
if anything, bearing the German
brand. But German industry is
shrewd enough to put it's product on
the market without brand, if neces-
sary, and to ship it to us through 9TH
er countries, thus concealing the origi-
nal source. The only safe thing for
the United States to do is to establish
an adequate import duty, regardless
of the origin Of the imported article,
and encourage American producers to
build up enterprises so extensive that
our home competition will result in
production at the lowest cost consist
ent with an American scale of wages.
=
7 There are some indications that the
Democratic party contemplates an in
crease in import duties in the pending
revenue bill-partly to increase rev.
enues and partly to offset the tariff
as a campaign issue. 1t is not likely,
however, that the American people
will be deceived by any tariff legisla-
tion based upon expediency rather
than principle. A true protective
tariff must be framed by its friends
rather than it's enemies. The party
which has so consistently favored one
section of the country in it's tariff
legislation cannot be trusted to frame
tariff law for the development and
maintenance of all lines Of industry in
all parts of the United States. Any
attempt of the Democratic party to
enact a protective tariff law is an ad-
mission that it has been wrong, and
that the advocates of protection,
should be entrusted with the task OF
re-establishing the economic policy
under which American manufacture
was built up.
From four to twelve per cent on
earned incomes and sixteen per cent
on unearned incomes is said to be the
plan of Chairman Kitchin in drafting
the new revenue law. A comparison
with the British scheme of taxing in
comes will show that Mr. Kitchin is
far more lenient than Bonar Law. In
this country the earned and unearned
income of $4,000 is taxed the same.
In England the earned income of that
amount pays $3.50, and the unearned
pays 1897. In the larger incomes
the difference is even more marked.
With us, an earned income of $100,0
pays $21, ,7S750 in England it pays
$4,000. A British earned income of
that sum pays 47,187.50; with us 1t
pays $16,220. Yet this discrimination
against thrift and industry Mr.. Kit
chin plans to perpetuate.