5
JULY 28, 1811
The Commoner.
bill, was under consideration In congress, Sereno
E. Payne, John Dalzoll, Julius C. Burrows,
ThomaB B. Reed Albert J. Hopkins and John H.
Gear signed a minority report on the bill. In
this report they used this language: "If ho
(the manufacturer) can make his goods any
cheaper because of free wool, he must sell them
just as much cheaper."
Q. Well, well, these big republicans admitted
that free wool was right from the consumer's
standpoint, didn't they?
A. They did.
Q. How many woolen manufacturing estab
lishments are there in this country?
A. In 1905 there were only 1,213 such estab
lishments. Q. How many sheep raisers arp there In the
country?
A. That is a difficult question to answer.
There are probably only a few thousand who are
exclusively in the wool growing business.
Q. Then, this tariff on wool is placed on a
necessary of life to help a comparatively few
sheep owners?
' A. Yes.
Q. Is it democratic doctrine to place all raw
materials of manufactures on the free list?
A. Yes.
Q. Should the question of revenue to pay
the expenses of the government enter into the
question?
A. Yes. Of course wo must raise a sufficient
amount of revenue to run the affairs of tho
government.
Q. If you can not obtain enough revenue to
run the government by levying a duty on manu
factured products, then how will you get the
revenue?
A. I would place a revenue duty on raw
materials not produced in this country, like raw
silk, raw rubber, and diamonds.
Q. Why do you say you would place a duty
on raw materials not produced in this country?
A. First, because whatever the people might
have to pay for the privilege of consuming such
materials or articles manufactured out of them
would go into the public treasury and not into
the pocket of some special interest.
Q. What is your second reaBon?
A. Well, when it became necessary to'change
the duty or tariff tax on such raw maierials
such change-would not disturb the business con
ditions of the country,
Q. But, would not this duty cause these
things after they are advanced to the finished
article to cost the people who use them more
than if they were placed on the free list?
A. But, people who wear diamonds and silk
and own automobiles are better able to pay taxes
than those who have to buy woolen clothing.
Q. Then, you would not lay down the hard
and fast rule that all raw materials should al
ways be placed on the free list?
A. I would say all raw materials out of which
are manufactured the necessaries of life should
be placed on the free list, so that the poor could
get those necessaries cheaper 'than if the raw
materials were taxed.
Q. Where would you place the highest tariff
taxes?
A. On luxuries.
Q. The next highest?
A. On the comforts of life.
Q. Then, what would you do?
A. I would place the necessaries of life on
the free list.
Q. But, if you could not raise enough
revenue in that way to run the government,
what would you do?
A. I would pass an income tax law, the most
just and equitable tax that has ever been
devised.
Q. But, another question on raw materials.
I have read in the Congressional Record where
some distinguished democrats have said, "The
raw materials of one man is the finished product
of another."
A. You mean that great democrat, ex-Senator
Nelson W. Aldrich of Rhode Island, said that,
don't you?
Q. Come off, what are you giving me? Do
you think I am so ignorant that I do not know
that Aldrich is a republican and has been one
of the leaders of the republican party for the
past quarter of a century? I don't mean Aldrich,
I mean I have noticed where democratic mem
bers of congress and senators have advanced this
doctrine in recent speeches in congress. I want
to' know who originated this doctrine, that for
tariff purposes the raw material of one man is
the finished product of another?
A. I am glad you have asked me that ques
tion;" because I believe I can give you the origin
of 'this fallacious doctrine. Back in 1888, when
the Mills bill, a democratic tariff measure, was
being considered by congress, Mr. Aldrich, of
Rhode Island, submitted to the senate a report
on this bill In which ho said: "Tho doctrlno of
free raw materials as advocated by tariff re
formers is a difficult one to enforce In legisla
tion. In the usual division of labor, the finished
product of one man becomes tho raw material
of his industrial successor."
Q. Well, it "seems that democrats who mako
that argument are following In tho footstops
of Senator Aldrich, rather than In tho footstops
of the democratic fathers. Is that true?
A. That is undoubtedly true.
Q. Well, I now think our democratic repre
sentatives and senators should advocate tho time
honorod principles of tho democratic party, in
cluding free raw materials, and reduce tho tariff
on the finished products of the manufacturer to
a strictly revenue basis. Then when wo succeed
in onacting a graduated income tax law in this
country, we can lighten tho burdens of tho toil
ing millions of this republic, caused by tho tariff
taxes on what they consume and the tools they
work with, and thereby compel the wealth of
the country to bear Its just proportion of tho
burdens of government.
A. You are right. Shake.
"UNSPOILED LAWYERS';
In a recent speech at Lexington, Ky., Gover
nor Wilson of New Jersey said:
"The lawyer has always boon Indispensable,
whether he merely guided the leaders or was
himself the leader, and nowhere has the lawyer
played a more important part in politics than
in England and America, where tho rules of law
have always been the chief instruments of con
test and regulation of liberty and efficient
organization, and the chief means of lifting
society from one stage to the next of 'its slow
development.
"The lawyer's ideal part in thlB struggle Is
easy to conceive. He, above all other men,
should have a quick perception of what . Is
feasible, of the new things that will fit Into
the old, of tho experiences which should bo
heeded, -wrongs that- should- be remedied; and
and the rights that should be more completely
realized.
"He can play this Ideal part, however, only If
he -has tho right insight and sympathy. If he
regards his practice as a mere means of liveli
hood, if he is satisfied to put his expert advice
at tho service of any interest or enterprise, if ho
does not regard himself as an officer of the
state, but only as an agent of private interest;
if, above all, he does not really see the wrongs
that are accumulating, the mischief that is being
wrought, the hearts that aTe being broken, the
lives that are being wrecked, the hopes that are
being sapped, he can not play the part of guide
or moderator or adviser in the large sense that
will make him a statesman and a' benefactor.
"The truth is that tho technical training of
the American lawyer, his professional prepos
sessions and his business Involvements, impose
limitations upon him and subject him to tempta
tions which seriously stand In the way of his
rendering the ideal service to society demanded
by the true standards and canons of his pro
fession. Modern business, in particular, with Its
huge and complicated processes, has tended to
subordinate him. to make of him a tervaut, an
Instrument instead of a free adviser and master
of justice.
"Tho lawyer seldom thinks of himself as tho
advocate of society. He moves in the atmos
phere of private rather than public service, His
business becomes more and more complicated
and specialized. His studies and his services
are apt to become more and more confined to
some special field of law. He becomes more and
more a mere expert in the legal side of a certain
class of great Industrial or financial undertak
ings. "If is evident what must happen in such cir
cumstances. The bench must be filled from the
bar, and it is growing increasingly difficult to
Bupply the bench with disinterested, unspoiled
lawyers, capable of being the free instruments
of society, the friends and guides of statesmen,
the interpreters of the common life of the people,
the mediators of the great process by which
justice is led from one enlightenment and libera
lization to another.
"One can not but realize how much depends
upon the part the lawyer is to play in the future
politics of the country. If he' will not assume
the role of patriot and of statesman; if he will
not lend all his learning to tho service' of tho
common life of tho country; if he will not open
his sympathies to common man and enlist his
enthusiasm in these policies which will bring
regeneration to the business of tho country, loss
expert hands than his must attotnpt tho difficult
and porilous business.
"Tho tendencies of tho profession, thereforo.
Its sympathies, its inclinations, Its preposses
sions, its training, its point of view, Us motlvos,
are part of the stuff and substance of the destiny
of the country."
Those aro tlmoly words. There is an increas
ing need for "unspoiled lawyers." Wo need a
few just now for tho United States bonch.
A PARALLEL CASE
The press dispatches roport that Promlor
Asquith has sent tho following letter to Mr.
Balfour, tho leader of the minority:
"Dear Mr. Balfour: I think It Is courteous
and right, before any public decisions aro an
nounced, to lot you know how we regard tho
present situation. When tho parliament bill,
in tho form of which it has now assumed, re
turns to tho house of commons wo shall bo
compelled to ask that houso to disagreo with
tho lords' amendments. In the circumstances
should tho necessity arise the government will
advise tho king to exercise his prerogative to
secure tho passing into law of tho bill In sub
stantially the same form In which It loft tho
house of commons and his majesty has been
pleased to Bignify that ho will consider It his
duty to accept and act upon that advice."
It is an interesting coincidence that such a
letter should bo sent to tho leader of tho mi
nority in Groat Britain just when a similar
letter Is being sent to President Taft, who (ac
cording to the vote cast at the last congressional
election) Is tho leader of tho minority In tho
United States. Tho following Is, In substance,
the letter which is being sent to tho president:
"Dear Mr. Presldont: Wo think It Is cour
teous and right, before any public decisions are
announced, to let you know how wo regard tho
present situation. When the tariff bills are
rejected by the senate or returned to congress
with your veto wo shall be compelled to persist
in our domand for relief from high tariff
taxation. In tho circumstances should the ne
cessity arise tho democratic party will advise
tho sovereigns the people to exercise their
prerogative to secure tariff reduction by the
selection of a president and senate friendly to
tariff reduction, and their majesty the people
have been pleased to signify by their votes
last fall that they will consider It their duty
to accept and act upon that advice. Yours truly,
"THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY."
A CHILDISH ACT
Tho Douglas county democratic convention,
made up of delegates named by the local demo
cratic machine, on Saturday passed resolutions
practically Indorsing Governor Harmon, of Ohio;
for president.
The purpose, of course, was not so much to
indorse -Harmon as to take a slap at W. J.
Bryan.
Bryan, it will be remembered, last fall hOlped
to defeat the attempt to enthrone the breweries
In the state house. Ever since then the local
democratic machine has been persistently camp
ing on Mr. Bryan's trail.
' Last week Mr. Bryan printed a list of avail
able democratic candidates for the presidency and
left out Harmon because Harmon, Is not a pro
gressive; consequently, the Douglas county
democratic machine declares for Harmon.
It was a childish thing to do and will hurt
Bryan as much as does a fly bite.
' However, the action IS likely to hurt the
democratic rank and file of tho county "and
state even though conventions count for little
nowadays because It will give the impression
that Nebraska is receding from progressive
principles.
Tho democrats of Douglas county and of Ne
braska are progressive, and they are, therefore,
hardly likely to prefer for presidential candi
date a man of such standpat caliber as Harmon
when there is so much good, progressive timber
in the field Woodrow Wilson, for example.
. Nor are the level headed democrats of the coun
ty and state likely to be switched from progres
oivism even if they happen to disagree with Mr.
' Bryan on county option or some other issue
the Douglas county democratic envention to the
contrary, notwithstanding. Omaha Daily News.
'jji fcW
?(
