SEPTEMBER 15, 1911
The Commoner
Practical Tariff Talks
Mr. Taft appears to rely for tariff revision
upon his tariff board. This is a commission
selected for the purpose of furnishing congress
with accurate information upon which it may
base future action. Mr. Taft, however, does not
make clear what basis he has for believing that
congress will make use of this information. On
previous occasions a republican congress has
had uncontradicted facts before it relating to
pending schedules, and utterly ignored them
in fixing the duties. Take the cotton bagging
item, for example. Before the ways and means
committee at the 1909 hearing the fact was
adduced that the manufacture of this necessity
of the cotton planter is controlled entirely by
three companies that have an agreement among
themselves whereby all competition is eliminated
between them and prices are fixed. This in
formation was before congress, uncontradicted,
but it was ignored.
The rate of duty on this bagging, which Is
used for covering baled cotton, is six-tenths of
a cent a square yard, which is 15 per cent ad
valorem. This rate is the samo as was con
tained 'in the Dlngley law. Each year the cot
ton planters of the country use an average of
105,000,000 square yards, of which amount all
but 16,000,000 square yards is made by the
three big concerns in America. The total duty
collected on this material in 1910 was $99,000,
an insignificant sum when compared with the
fact that it is the very instrument by which the
bagging trust takes from the cotton planters
over a half million dollars a year. To state it
in other words by reason of a tariff on cotton
bagging tho planters are compelled to pay
$610,000 more per year than would otherwise
be the case, of which sum the government takes
approximately $100,000 and permits the bag
ging 'trust to collect $516,000.
A little history of this schedule also gives the
interesting Information that when it first made
its appearance in the list of. import duties it
was higher than, the facts adduced by tho ways
and means committee of that session, the Forty
eighth congress, justified. The first request was
preferred by a man named Marshall who stated
that a duty of 15 per cent ad valorem would be
sufficient and would furnish all the protection
needed for it as an infant industry. Yet the
McKinloy bill shows a tariff duty of 1.6 cents
per square yard, which was then an ad valorem
duty of 32 per cent. That industry, under the
rates that have prevailed, has developed into an
arrogant and burdensome trust. It will be re
called that the original plea for protective
duties was that by shutting out the foreign
manufacturer the home manufacturers could
develop to the point where competition between
them would make it of no moment what the
duty was, since that competition would fix tho
price, at as low a point as could be possible.
A beautiful little bunco game that was. Be
hind the tariff wall it was proposed to erect
and which was erected home industries were
to grow and expand, furnishing American labor
a living wage and a steady job and the Ameri
can farmer a home market wherein he could sell
high and buy low. The industries did develop,
but within a short time after they reached tho
point where competition between them had a
tendency to lower prices, they were combined
Into Irnsts, a system under which they could
boost prices to the full extent of the tariff bar
rier reared against the foreigner. The cotton
bagging Industry is one of these, yet the tariff
remains tho same. The cotton planter Us also at
tho mercy of the steel trust by reason of a
totally unnecessary tariff on cotton ties, the
metal bands around bales. These are made
principally by the Carnegie and the Pittsburg
steel companies, which fix tho price. The 3-10
Of a cent duty, figured on the amount used last
year, was $324,000, which represents the excess
price paid over what would have been paid if
they had been free, as under the Wilson bill.
Of this artificial advance in cost, tho govern
ment got $1,498 in the shape of revenue upon
Imports, while the remainder was pocketed by
the steel trust Of what avail will these facts
be with the republican senators elected by a
campaign fund to which the steel trust, was a
heavy contributor? C. Q. D.
A VIRGINIA PROTEST
To the Editor of tho Times-Dispatch. Sir:
Sinco your paper purports, I believe, to bo an
organ of tho democratic party, albeit apparently
greatly enamored of Mr. Taft and his adminis
tration and, in lilco ratio, hostllo to Mr. W. J.
Bryan, may I ask in all-round fairness to Mr.
Bryan, to tho democrats who admiro him, and
to yourself that you publish tho following
speech of Representative W. A. Cullop, of In
diana, Juno 17, 1911, page 2514, Congressional
Record, thus:
"Mr. Chairman: It has boon with a great
deal of pleasure during this debate that we havo
listened to the great solicitude expressed by the
membership of tho republican party in this
house for that great commoner in tho demo
cratic party, William J. Bryan. Lot nio sny to
our republican friends that whenever and wher
ever the democratic party gathers around tho
council table for conference, his seat will bo,
in the future, as it has been in the past, at tho
head of tho table. (Applause on the democratic
side.) He has not only converted to his policies
7,500,000 democrats who follow him as their
Idol, but, from the tone of this debate, it seems
that ho has converted the leaders of the re
publican party as well. (Applause on the demo
cratic side.)"
And tho following from tho speech of Hon.
Robert B. Macon, Arkansas, delivered June 16,
page 2472, Congressional Record of Juno
24, 1911:
"We all know that he is not an angel, but
we know that he has boon one of tho greatest
apostles that ever went forth to proclaim jus
tice and right between man and man. (Ap
plause on tho democratic side.) Mr. Chairman,
I ask in all sincerity, who has done more in this
age of the world's progress for tho betterment
of the condition of our splendid country than
Mr. Bryan? Mr. Roosevelt's popularity is but
a reflection from the popularity of Mr. Bryan,
for all of his progressive ideas were first pos
sessed and proclaimed by Bryan. (Applause on
the democratic side.)
"Tho legislation that has been enacted at this
session of congress, of which so many members
have boasted, and which has received the un
stinted applause of tho American people, was
first advocated by Mr. Bryan (App!auso from
democratic side.) For sixteen years ho has
gone forth preaching the doctrino of righteous
ness and justice between man and man, and pro
claiming against special privileges of any kind,
until the minds of tho people have become so
crystallized upon, the subjects he has been ad
vocating that they have sent us hero as their
representatives to put into law tho declarations
of that great and good man. (Applause on the
democratic side.)"
Now, respectfully calling your attention
especially to the applause by which these utter
ances were greeted and punctuated by the so
large body of representative democrats, I would
fain commend to your careful and cheerful con
sideration tho whole of tho speech from which
the foregoing excerpts are taken, as a curative
for the incessant nightmare under which you
seem to labor regarding Mr. Bryan. Really,
your state of mind concerning him seems pitiful;
that is, from a democratic viewpoint, since hia
nomination by the democratic party would bo
quite as impossible as would be his nomination
by the republican party. Respectfully,
J. THOMPSON BROWN,
Arrington, Va.
IN PENNSYLVANIA
A Lancaster dispatch to the Philadelphia
North American says: There's great discussion
going on throughout the rural districts on tho
subject of locusts visit this year of 1911, in
view of the fact that "their seventeen years ar
not yet up;" but it must be remembered this is
not only a rapid ago, but one of Insurgency, and
these locusts, having renounced the leadership
of the old gang, do not intend to wait for any
length of time to assert themselves.
Some of the participants in tho many argu
ments base their reasons on superstition, and
none of them takes any stock in the reasoning
of the state scientists, who pretend to be abl
to prove that the locusts of 1902 are no kin
to these of 1911. The word epoch was being
used rather promiscuously In one of tho recent
discussions, and a fellow who was rather extra
vagant in its use was "called" to define It,
which ho did as follows: "An epoch Is an ago
of development and Is approximately seventeen
years. For instance, it will be about seventeen
years on March t 1913, since William J. Bryan
camo upon tho scene of political action with his
radical Ideas, to bo robukod by tho American
peoplo, howovor, at a cost that ntaggorod Paul
Kruger. Whether Tart's successor shall bo L
Follotto, Clark, Cummins, Wilson, Clapp, Har
mon, Root, Folk, Tom Mnrshnll or a dark horso,
ho will havo boGn elected by tho American
pooplo on a platform fashioned after tho ideas
of tho selfsame Bryan."
WATCH IT GROW
Mr. Bryan has given instructions that ovcry
now subscriber shall rocolvo Tho Commoner for
a period of two yoars (which will carry it be
yond tho presidential election of 1912) for tho
sum of ono dollar. Every Commoner reader la
asked to seeuro at least ono new subscriber.
Mnny will ho able to seeuro moro than ono.
Evoryono, however, may render somo aid in
thin work.
The following named readers havo sent in flvo
or more subscribers:
F. G. McCutcheon, Mo.; W. B. Thompson, III.;
L. II. Joffers, N. Y.; E. Mathows, Tonn.; Cary
J. King, Holland; J. S. Stanley, Colo.; J. F.
Blanton, Fla.; Sam Anderson, Mont.; A. J.
Myers,. Ind.; Jas. P. Slocum, Pa.; E. ID. Wolstor,
Pa.; Geo. E. Long, W. Va.; C. W. Dlckcrson, O.;
J. E. Mitchell, Wash.; I. W. Machamer, la.; B.
F. Sargo, Tex.; Joo Gagen, 111.; H. G. C. Wal
lace, Va.; Geo. G. Dillard, Miss.; O. U. Marsac,
Mich.; C. Summers, W. Va.; B. W. Parker, Ind.;
J. S. Scott, Kan.; P. L. Frailer, Oro.; A. B.
Ferguson, 111.; A. M. Garrett, la.; P. D. Cut
shall, Pa.; Win. Miller, Wis.; J. C. Kcopford,
Ja.; T. F. Harrison, Ind.; A. N. Rack, Nob,-?
Dr. F. D. Vanderhoof, N. Y.; J. W. Short, Tex.;
J. W. Gross, Neb.; R. F. Taylor, Mich.; F.
Allen, la.; C. R. Clough, N. D.; W. II. Baker,
O.; Ed. C. Taylor, la.; J. E. Fournler, la.; R.
T. Cauthorn, Va.; J. A. Gladson, 111.; Jos. J.
Teboy, Pa.; Chas. S. Wallln, Cal.; W. A. Pixies,
Wash.; Ben Wasson, Ind.; A. J. Champagne,
La.; D. D. Shirley, Colo.; Allen Ward, 111.; Nor
man McIIonry, Pa.; W. D. Armstrong, la.; D. 8.
Marshall, N. Y.; Jno. Anderson, Ky.; F. W.
Ahrons, Wash.; Cobb Bros., Va.; J. B. Bock,
Tex.; R. F. Taylor, Ind.; J. L. Tubbs, Cal.; E.
II. Hill, Ind.; A. E. Sentony, Mo.; A. J. Anders,
la.; F. F. Woyworth, Mo.; T. B. Breen, Md.;
G. A. Ray, 111.; Capt. Geo. H. King, Mich.; B.
F. Knott, Va.; S. R. Chappoll, Ind.; Johnson
Whole, Ore.; R. B. McGlumphy, Pa.; F. G. Sut
tan, Minn.; L. E. Westover, Ind.; II. T. Wil
son, Ky.; D. M. Christian, Ky.; J. V. Wagman,
Cal.; C. H. Fink, W. Va.; Jos. Longlnotti, Ark.;
J. H. Kennard, Tex.; F. M. Van Pelt, Neb.; F.
M. Vernon, Cal.; G. S. Punn, N. J.; E. M. F.
Schneider, Kan.; G. Purmauch, Neb.; D. C.
Seel, Okla.; H. C. Teters, Pa.; J. W. Highes,
N. Y.; Wm. M. Smith, la.; W. D. Gould, Cal.;
Chas. W. Hochstotler, S. D.; Ira H. Bedding
field, Ala.; J. W. Mordan, Pa.; C. A. Woolet,
Ore.; J. K. Montgomery, la.; W. F. Smith,
Panama; Dan'I Chapman, Ore.; Solomon Myor,
Ind.; E. L. Durham, Ind.; T. A. Jones, Ind.;
J. W. Whitehurs, Kan.; W. S. GosaTd, Kan.; O.
M. Luther, N. D.; L. V. Eithenauer, Wash.; C.
P. Burbacker, O.; T. P. Pongham, N. M.; Mrs.
E. D. Bunco, Wis.; W. I. Fischer, Mo.; M. L.
Gregory, Tox.; M. A. Whisler, Minn.; F. J.
Mangleburg, Ky.; Ralph McCauloy, Ore.; Geo.
J. King, Mo.; T. C. Ingram, N. C; S. F. Dar
yin, Wash.; B. W. Hickman, W. Va.; D. C.
Hefferman, Pa.; Mrs. W. Shelley, N. Y.; J. C.
Allcorn, Tex.; R. L. Olds, Wash.; D. C. Beams,
Ky.; A. T. Kalloch, Me.; C. C. Shaw, Ky.; Jas.
Daniel, la.; Jas. H. Cogshall, Mich.; H. S.
Weary, Neb.; W. H. Starling, Ky.; F. M. Crud
bec, Neb.; L. Hartburg, Kan.; A. J. Willough
by, O.; Nich. Nelson, S. D.; J. N. Snell, Ind.;
R. E. Parker, Colo.; T. J. Bratton, Wash.; J. E.
Cashman, I1L; J. R. Lowther, W. Va.; Leo A.
Harris, Okla.; T. Gonzales, N. M.; J. H. Marsh
bxrrn, N. C; L. Cochron, Minn.; B. R. Franz,
Okla.7 J. Waro, Wis.; I. B. Palmer, Vt.; M.
Brown, Ky.; H. R. Dickenson, Mich.; R. T. '
Cathorn, Va.; Wm. C. Pohlman, O.; Eben
Marston, Me.; M. A. Hardin, Tenn.; W. B. ;
Goodfellow, Okla.; J. P. Wolsman, O.; W. P.
Black, Ore.; D. C. Larkhart, Ky.; H. F. Pitta,
Pa.; F. F. Beardsloy, S. D.; H. M. MaTtin, Vt;.
Jas. DnBoia, Mich.; W. R. Bilyen, Ore.; K. H
Braahears, Ark.; A. R. Cross, Kan.; Idella'
Joppa, Colo.; G. S. Bunn, N. J.; J. J. Shields,
'Ark.; Geo. E. Starrett, Wash.; Isaac Abraham-,
son. Wis.; T. C. Andrews, Tex.; W. I. Fisher
Mo.: J. A. Shaw. Kan.: J. Bookllnder. N. Y
Chaa. Bryan, W. Va.; I. F. Little, W. Va.; Chas.7
D. Smith, Tex.; H. R. Dickinson, Mich.; Ellsha
.Yost, O.; W. S. Wolls, Mich.; Thos. Wold, Pa.;,s
J. R, Wash, N. M.; J. C. Conine, Wash.; P.'H.j
Boyeson, N. D.; J. B. Brooks, Tex.; J. L. Bree
son, S. C; S. F. Lane, N. M.; S. R. Chappell, Ind
'EjjgjgggWtotfSLW
MHbw
M viiftit.- . c&.r j