mimMiMm&itmuiimtoimimmma Vl'MiafriillwU'H" i :
JULY 7, 1911
The Commoner.
KCMM4W -
added and less exports, leaving the amount con
sumed In the United States for that year, was
$530,862,522. Taking the average tariff rates
of the Dinjgley and Payne laws at 90 per cent,
as officially ascertained, it is found that tho
enhanced price of manufactured woolens which
the consumers are compelled to pay on account
of the tariff, is the sum of $251,461,247, De
ducting from this amount the amount of
revenues collected from imports on woolens
leaves the amount paid to tho woolen manu
facturers as increased price by reason of the
tariff $228,403,890. And for the purpose of
illustration, conceding that the woolen manu
facturers had lived up to their promise to divide
the tribute collected off of the American people
on tho basis of 11 cents per pound of wool on
the amount of wool produced that year in the
United States, 323,110,749 pounds, and amount
ing to $36,092,182, the woolen manufacturers
were safe in making the bargain, even if the
wool growers could have held them to the trade,
for they would have still been collecting off of
the people $215,279,461 more than they had
obligated themselves to pay out to the wool
growers to secure their support of the 90 per
cent tariff upon manufactures of wool.
While under this promise to divide profits
with the wool grower, and while the American
people have been paying, at a most conservative
estimate, from $175,000,000 to $200,000,000
annually to stimulate and encourage the sheep
industry, the number of sheep in Indiana, as
shown by the bureau of statistics of that state,
has declined from 832,856 in 1900 to 710,238
in 1909, and the wool clip from 5,537,794
pounds in 1900 to 1,644,638 pounds In 1909.
The woolen manufacturers tell us the exces
sive tariff of the Payne bill is to protect the wool
grower. Assuming the roll of philanthropist,
they say they appear not in their own interest,
but only to guard the welfare of others. This
plea of defending others is a subterfuge as old
as history. It is a pretext to hide and cover up
that which can not be openly defended. Every
man who has enslaved another man has en
slaved him under the claim of charity and
benevolence for the enslaved. Every nation
which has conquered another people to exact
tribute from them has entered upon its cam
paign of subjugation under the pretense of im
proving and bettering the state of the subju
gated. Every imposition heaped upon one man
by another by and through deceptive forms of
legislation has been heaped upon him under
the pretense of protection and safeguarding
the welfare of the burdened. Oh, farmer and
wool grower, what crimes are committed in thy
name!
To say nothing of the interests of the con
suming public, the time is at hand for the in
auguration of a new commercial policy. The
growth of our manufacturing interests will here
after not be measured by a monopolized, exclu
sive market at home, but by the development of
a broad open market abroad. Our industries,
even from the most selfish and mercenary stand
point, must no longer seek to profit by protec
tion against the world's markets, but must pre
pare to meet open competition and conquer by
merit and policy of commerce.
The merits of free raw material have been
denied in this debate as a tariff-reform measure.
Manufacturers must be free to produce from
crude products and raw materials of the earth
and to sell them without restriction from re
taliatory tariff barriers and in the freedom of
open trade, If we demand they sell at home as
cheap as abroad.
While we are denying the right to give manu
facturers undue advantage of monopoly, it is
not the purpose to place them at a disadvan
tage, but only to remove an artificial Industrial
basis and furnish a merit foundation. It Is the
purpose to compensate them for the loss of a
limited exclusive market based upon monopoly
by giving an enlarged and world market, and to
change the system of profits from extortion to
profits by increased production and volume of
business.
Taxing raw material gives foreign manufac
turers an advantage, and affords the foreign
manufacturer an actual protection against com
petition from the home manufacturer, and gives
the home manufacturer at once a standing from
which to plead for a high compensatory tariff,
and an apology for discriminating against the
home consumer.
After the woolen manufacturers have made
a plea' for and secured a tariff placed upon raw
wool, they adroitly add:
"American woolon manufacturers demand no
reduction in the duty on raw material; they
only ask that they shall continue to be suffi
ciently compensated for the increased cost of
raw material to protect them from the lower
price at which foreign manufacturers aro ablo
to obtain their wool." Julius Forstmann, presi
dent of Forstmann & Huffmann Co., woolen
manufacturers, Passaic, N. J., In a pamphlet
addressed to members of congress during tho
consideration of tho debate on tho wool schedule.
And having once justified their claim on tho
grounds of compensation for tho duty paid by
them on raw wool, and still claiming for tho
wool grower, tho manufacturers assumo tho
right to fix the limit of the compensatory duty
and make it prohibitory, all in tho namo of
charity and benevolence for tho wool grower.
And as long aa the woolon manufacturers can
plead protection under tho namo of tho wool
growers they can not only hold tho allegiance
of tho wool grower by dangling before their eyes
a division of tribute to be exacted from tho
people, but can use the wool grower as a decoy
to secure the support of the wool growers' un
suspecting friends.
Give our manufacturers free raw wool and
the right to produce from the open markets of
the world, and you take away the delusivo claim
adroitly made for a compensatory tariff and
the right to dictate the limit of the protection
thus justified.
Give our manufacturers an equal footing and
basis of production from free raw wool with
foreign manufacturers and you remove from
them the basis for the delusive plea of compen
satory duties, without which there can bo no
pretext of justification for selling higher at homo
than abroad. The raw-material rebate clause
Is a crafty device to reach out in tho world's
market while holding monopoly Intact at homo.
Give our manufacturers an equal footing and
basis of production from free raw wool with
foreign manufacturers and you remove from
them the basis for the delusive plea of compen
satory duties, without which there can be no
pretext of Justification for selling higher at
home than abroad. The raw-material rebate
clause Is a crafty device to reach out In tho
world's market while holding monopoly Intact
at home.
Our manufacturers themselves are today
recognizing the growing necessity of a broad
world market and increased sales, with profits
based upon a greater volumo of business than
upon monopoly and exclusive sales in a limited
market, and they are likewise beginning to
appreciate the benefit of an equal basis of pro
duction resulting from free raw material en
joyed by manufacturers abroad. Tho proposed
Canadian reciprocal agreement comes from tho
manufacturing interests as an effort to extend
their markets abroad, and is the one first step
which will lead to many more until greater
freedom and extension In commerce Is attained.
While the reciprocal agreement standing alono
is not fair to the interests of the consumer, the
free-list measure lately passed by this house
makes the consumer and manufacturer walk
hand in hand in the enjoyment of a greater and
more unrestricted trade.
Along with our pledges to revise the tariff is
the promise to levy the lowest duties upon
necessaries and tho highest upon luxuries and
non-essentials. While shaTing the highest re
gard for the opposing views of my colleagues,
as supported by the almost unanimous judg
ment of the caucus, and appreciating the weight
of the able argument advanced for a compro
mise ground to insure united support for tho
bill, yet, as I construe our position, the exces
sive and exorbitant duties of the wool schedule
under the Payne law should be still further re
duced, and to an average duty of not to exceed
20 per cent ad valorem with the highest rates
laid upon luxuries of dress and the lowest
upon tho common essentials of comfort; and to
avoid the claim and argument from manufac
turers of compensatory duties, wool should be
made duty free. The deficiency of revenue
thereby resulting can be made up by a tariff of
20 per cent ad valorem imposed upon rough
diamonds, raw silk, and India rubber, now duty
free under the republican free list.
On the basis of Importations of manufactured
wool for the year ending June 30, 1910, and
valued at $23,057,357.78, at 20 per cent duty
the revenue derived would be $4,611,471.55.
The Importation of rough diamonds and precious
stones for the same year ending were of tho
value of $10,657,800, which, at 20 per cent duty,
would yield a revenue of $2,111,560. The value
of the Imports of raw silk for that period was
$67,129,603, and upon which a 20 per cent duty
would bring fnto the treasury $13,425,920, and
the import of crude rubber and substitutes were
in the sum of $106,851,475, or, in all, making
a total revenuo upon tho basis of importations
for said year of $11,521,2 16.55, with 20 per
cent duty on woolens, nnd raw wool on tho frco
list. Tho duties collected under tho Payno law
for tho year ending Juno 30, 1910, with a tariff
of 44 per cont duty upon raw wool and an aver
ago duty of 90 per cent on woolens were $41,
904,549.50. Tho duties estimated for tho pend
ing bill, with 20 per cont duty on raw wool and
42.55 per cent duty upon manufactured wool,
with imports estimated at $63,831,000, aro
$40,556,200.
The iniquities of tho Pnyne-Aldrlch tariff law
aro observed by a mero glance at tho wool
schedule, disclosing exorbitant and oxcossivo
rates of duty imposed. Tho rato upon many of
tho items of this schedule aro prohibitory, and
tho pcoplo aro left without the semblanco of
protection from competition. Yarns under 30
cents per pound In value aro taxed 159.75 per
cent; blankets valued at not moro than 50 cents
per pound aro taxed 105.50 per cont; cloth
valued at not moro than 40 cents por pound Is
taxed 144.05 per cont; dress goods valued at not
above 70 cents per pound aro taxed 103.75 per
cent; flannels weighing ovor 4 ounces to tho
yard and valued at less than 70 cents per pound
are taxed 121.62 per cent. Tho present bill
under consideration of tho house reduces tho
duties by more than one-half. Tho duty on yarn
is fixed at 30 per cent; on cloth and knit fabrics,
40 por cent; on blankets and flannels, 30 to 45
por cent; with corresponding reductions upon
other items.
This bill is a good bill, but it would bo a
much bettor bill if It carried out further tho
principle of levying tho lowest taxes upon neces
saries and tho highest upon luxuries and non
essentials by reducing tho tariff on manufac
tures of wool to an average of 20 per cent and
taxing rough diamonds, raw silk, and crude rub
ber. It would be a much better bill if it In
vaded the republican free list and levied a tax
upon raw materials that enter into the produc
tion of luxuries and non-essentails and placed
wool used in tho manufacture of a vital necessity
on the free list instead. It would bo a bettor
bill If it took away from the wool trust tho
vantage ground of a' tariff on wool from which
to recruit support through delusive promises of
gain to tho wool grower from the helpless con
sumer under stifled competition.
The Chairman. The time of the gentleman
has expired.
Mr. Mann. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous
consent that the gentleman have five minutes
more.
Mr. Sims. I join In that request, Mr. Chair
man. The Chairman. The gentleman from Illinois
asks unanimous consent that the gentleman
from Indiana be allowed five minutes more. Is
there objection? (After a pause".) The Chair
hears none. Tho gentleman will proceed.
Mr. Gray. I thank the gentleman. A tariff
on raw wool, if allowed to remain, will nullify
the doctrine of free necessaries, furnish an argu
ment to restore the duties on lumber and hides,
call a halt to the further extension of tho free
list in the vital necessaries of life, and destroy
tho only principle under which the people can
hope for relief from tariff exactions tho prin
ciple that the taxing power can only be law
fully Invoked for public purposes.
If we want to be free from the burdens of
an excessive tariff, If we want relief from pri
vate monopoly, If we want to escape tribute to
the special interests, we must first ourselves
renounce the right to levy taxes for private pur
poses. We can not invoke relief under a prin
ciple while we deny and violate it ourselves.
If we believe In serving the greatest good
to tho greatest number, If we subscribe to the
policy of equal and exact justice to all and
special privileges to none, if we hold tho com
mon welfare above private gain, If we, adhere
to the doctrine that a private monopoly is in
tolerable and indefensible, we can not vote for
a protective tariff upon one of the vital neces
saries of life and justify ourselves upon the
grounds of loyalty to local private Interests.
Tho tariff is moro than a local question. It
Is a selfish question, a question in which the
selfish Interests of the few are always clamor
ing to prevail over the welfare of tho many
WHAT ARE THE WILD WAVES
SAYING?
ASIC PAYNTER OF KENTUCKY
Iffi KNOWS.
t
II
p
! f
4
r
""
.
4
'H1
m
&..i.i '
