Vjv" """"JUiHf1'" yR' v" 'r"fFl
jt ' l
f
m
The Commoner.
WILLIAM J. BRYAN, EDITOR AN.D PROPRIETOR
M
VOL. 9, NO. 30
Lincoln, Nebraska, August 6, 1909
Whole Number 446
Texas and the Tariff
The- Fort Worth (Texas) Record presents
rery clearly the issue that has arisen between
the protectionist democrats and those who be
lieve in tariff reform. Referring to The Com
moner's editorial on free raw material the
Record says:
"The south is a producing section. Its chief
resources are raw material, and it will never
consent to compete in the markets of the world
on what it sells and be confined to the Ameri
can market for what it buys. It will object
to selling its wool, hides, rough rice, raw sugar,
ore and other products on a free trade basis
and buying its clothing, shoes, dressed rice,
refined sugar and hardware on a protective
basis."
Some of the southern representatives have in
sisted that they favored a tariff on raw material
as a REVENUE tariff, but the Record is more
frank; it wants PROTECTION for southern pro
ducts. Is there any magic by which, protection
is purged of its selfishness when it crosses the
Mason and Dixon line? Is there any difference
in principle between the New England repub
lican who wants a .tariff on what he makes and
a Texas democrat who wants protection on what
he raises?
The south is not likely; to be led astray by
the sophisms of protection. The southern demr
o'prat knows that, not one farmer in ten in any
southern state raises sheep and yet all- farmers;
as well as. all the-rest of the" population, pay
a higher tax on woolen goods, because of the
tax oh .wool.. ,. It .the . taxpayers Would only
tatch their dwn, interests as closely as the ben
eficiaries of protection watch theirs, the vote
would be overwhelmingly for tariff reduction.
"What 1b said of wool can be said of all other
raw material. A tax on raw material means,
first, an increased tax on the finished product
and, second, it means that those who want a
tax on raw material must enter into partnership
with those who want a tariff on the manufac
tured product, for protectionists must stand to
gether. . If the position taken by the Record is en
dorsed in Texas it means that Texas will join
'New England in support of protection for pro
tection's sake, that is, . taxation of the many
for the benefit of the few.
Texas will not do it. She will not allow a
coinparatively small portion of her population
her sheep growers, her cattle raisers, her timber
baToris, her sugar growers and her ore owners
to commit the state to a doctrine which would,
if adopted, make tariff reform impossible.
What the Texas people need is not to get
their hands into other people's pocketB but to
keep other peoples hands out of their pockets.
Free raw material is the key to the situation; it
CONTENTS
TEXAS AND THE TARIFF
CONSERVATIVE SENATES
AS TO PLATFORMS
THE DEMOCRATIC POSITION
A GAME OF SWAP AND SWINDLE
NO "NEW" RELIGION NECESSARY
THE INCOME TAX
EDUCATIONAL SERIES LEST WE
FORGET
SUGGESTIONS TO COMMONER READERS
GALVESTON'S SEA WALL
THE TARIFF AND CONGRESS
NEBRASKA PLATFORM
PRACTICAL TARIFF TALKS
CURRENT TOPICS
" LETTERS FROM THE PEOPLE
HOME DEPARTMENT
WHETHER COMMON OR NCT
NEWS OF THE WEEK
V
.
A GAME OF SWAP AND SWINDLE
The' whole tariff discussion has been
unspeakably sickening. Timo was whon
the American people thought they were
doing a man honor by sending him to
congress. If they still retain that super
stition, it is another evidence of the
triumph of hope over experience. From
the start of the tariff debates to their
present dragging finish it has been a
game of swap and swindle. The first
consideration has been to get the great
est possible loot for the favored "inter
ests," the next to keep the greatest pos
sible number of votes in lino for the com
plaisant congressmen; and never yet
have the interests of the people, or tho
plain call of decency received official at
tention in the tussle. There have been
exceptions brilliant exceptions tho
most constant and brilliant of them be
Senator Gore of Oklahoma. But no
fraud yet proposed has lacked a ma
jority whon the test came, and no de
cent proposition has been able to do bet
ter than rank as a bad second in a fore
doomed race.
And the utter shamolessness of somo
representatives of tho "interests" is ap
palling. Denver News.
0 .
.
will bring a reduction in the tariff on fin
ished productsthat will be a great gain for
the' consumer; and then when tho producers
of raw material no, longer profit by a , tariff
they Will join the tariff reformers and help to
secure further gradual reductions until tho
tariff is reduced to a revenue basis.
i
.Ti!
NO "NEW" RELIGION NECESSARY
Dr. Eliot, ex-president of Harvard, announces
that we are to have a "now" religion and he
proceeds to give the world an outline of it. Dr.
Eliot says:
"It will not be bound by dogma or creed.
There will be no supernatural element. It will
place no reliance on anything but the laws of
nature. It will not be based on authority. It
will not teach that character can be changed
quickly. It will not deal chiefly with sorrow
and death, but with joy and life. It will not
attempt to reconcile people to present ills by
the promise of future compensation. It will
attack all forms of evil. Its priests will strive
to improve social and industrial conditions."
It so happens that this new religion is the
very religion that Dr. Elliott has practically
monopolized for a lifetime. Its good features
have been borrowed, without credit, from
Christianity and its immaterial features need
no copyright to prevent their being appropriated.
Dr. Eliot may be a great educator, but his
prophecies are like other uninspired prophecies
half wish and half environment.
It is no new thing to have people resent the
existence of a Divine standard of conduct
some regard it as humiliating to confess that
a life can be superior to their own or to admit
that there are commandments binding upon the
conscience, but the Christian religion has grown
in influence in spite of Dr. Eliot, and It will
continue to exist even when his death with
draws the stimulus furnished by his opposition.
If the scholarly ex-president would only include
the Bible in his model library and READ It,
he would find that it does not present a relig
ion which deals "chiefly with sorrow and
death," but that it abounds in "joy and life."
He seems to have overlooked the fact that at
the birth of the Founder of Christianity angels
sang and proclaimed "Peace on earth and good
will toward men." The old religion Is good
enough.
The consumers are now learning what tariff
"revision" by "the friends of the tariff" means,
i but;they. loughb to have understood it last fall.
Conservative Senates
Why is it that stato senates, liko tho United
States senate, aro as a rulo moro slow than tho
house of representatives to respond to tho de
mands for reform? Thoro aro several reasons.
In tho first place, tho senato has, as a rulo, only
about one-third as many members as tho houso
of representatives, and as It Is only necessary
for tho corporations to control ono branch of
tho legislature in order to prevent the legisla
tion to which they object, they naturally mako
their fight for tho control of the senato. A .
story told upon Jay Gould Illustrates this. A
member of the lower branch of tho Now York"
legislature went to Mr. Gould's hotel and- sent
in his card, and was informed that Mr. Gould
was at dinner. Ho sent tho card In a second
timo and insisted that ho must see Mr. Gould
at once, end was again Informed that Mr. Gould
could not see him until after dinner. A third
timo ho sent for Mr. Gould, this time request
ing tho messenger to say to Mr. Gould that ho
had been rppointed chairman of the railroad
committee of tho houso and must see him 'imme
diately. Mr. Gould responded, "Tell him that
wo have decided to let tho bill pass through
tho houso and beat It In the senato." A survey
of the work of legislatures reveals the fact
that a groat many remedial measures are beaten
in tho senate, and thero fa generally no doubt
as to tho influence that defeats them.
Another explanation of tho fact that tho senate
Is generally morq friendly than the houso to
corporations is that a larger, percentage of tho
senators corno from tho cities. If thero la ono .
city in a senatorial district, tho Bonator in Ukoly
to come from the city, whilo at least two of tho
three representatives will como from smallor
'towns. Corporate Influence Is always stronger
in tho cities. Remedial measures of Importance
are usually protested against by tho larger com: .
merclal Interests, for the larger commercial in-;
terests are generally closely connected with tho;
favor seeking corporations.
A third reason is to be found in tho fact
that the political methods employed In the cities
give greater advantage to tho corporate ele-'
ment. The party Organization Is more potent
In the cities than in rural communities, for i,t
can collect larger campaign funds and. can uso
them more effectively. It is harder, therefore,
for tho rank and 'file of the party to control tho
party's policy and tho party nominations, and
it is likewise more .difficult for the rank and
file of the party to punish a senator who be
trays his trust.
Fourth, in some states the senators serve
for a longer period of time than the representa
tives, and are, therefore, less amenable to pub
lic sentiment.
For these and other reasons the voters ought
to carefully scrutinize aspirants for tho senate
and reduce to a minimum the senatorial opposi
tion constantly offered to legislation In the di
rection of r-form.
AS TO PLATFORM3
Senator Bailey says that Mr. Bryan can not
complain of the repudiation of the Denver plat
form because he (Mr. Bryan) repudiated a
plank in the platform of 1892. Yes, Mr. Bryan
did repudiate the plank demanding the repeal
of the tax on the notes of stato banks. But
he repudiated the plank during the campaign
and promised his constituents to oppose th'e
repeal of that tax (the repeal was Intended to
restore a state bank note circulation).
Mr. Bryan's criticism . of Senator Bailey is
not that he refuses to be bound by a platform
adopted after be was elected (although Texas
endorsed the platform on election day) but be
cause he denies the binding force of platforms
in general and still more because he advocates
a doctrine (a. tax on raw materials) which if
adopted as a party policy will, in Mr. Bryan'
judgment, make. tariff reform Impossible.
V
zm
i
:? "1
"i 'i
H
.
.
.
i ?
l
1:!
d.
4 A
t
f
lA..id