)wn.tamw.
DECEMBER 15, 1911
evor competition is impossible, government
ownership to necessary. We have our choice,
therefore, between the restoration of compete
tion and Preparation for government ownership.
I have faith that the people, when they
understand the trust question, will prefer to
rely upon competition rather thai to permit pri
vate monopolies to exist and then trust to regu
lation. And I am glad that the Tribune is call
ing public attention to the importance of the
trust issue, which has been made acute by the
Standard Oil and Tobacco decisions.
W. J. BRYAN.
The Commoner.
TO A WOOL TARIFF DEMOCRAT
Mr. Allen Moreland, Centerburg, 0., Dear Sir:
I notice in The Commoner that you claim to
be a free trader, but draw the line on wool.
Now don't you think that all your arguments
for free trade can be just as truthfully applied
to wool? Or, if you agree for a tariff on wool,
that your argument can be used with like force
on all other necessaries of life? Your 'argu
ments don't seem to hitch up well together .
they pull in opposite directions.
I take the liberty of giving a little advice,
which reminds me of what I heard a man say
once, that 'those who have made the biggest
failures are the ones generally, who are most
ready to give advice."
You live in one of the best wool counties in
the state, but you seem to fear ffee trade. It
seems to me that sheep raising ,Js the wrong
industry for you. Sell out for what you can
get and engage in something else. Don't ask
the government to bolster up an unprofitable
industry by taxing all the American people
that you and your boy and a few others may
reap where you have never sown. It must be
plain to you that a tax on things we use falls
on the consumer that a tax that can be shifted
on some one else is an unjust tax and should bo
abolished. A tax on wool is no exception, no
matter who may profit by it. It seems to me
that you are a wee bit selfish in asking the gov
ernment to protect your industry while others
are compelled to compete with the world.
I, too, have been a sheep raiser, but If the
business was unprofitable for me I did not ask
the government to continue the high tariff for
my benefit. I would rather ask for a pension.
In fact I think all those who can not succeed
in business and don't want to work for some
one else for a salary had better come out in
the open and tell the people so. The people aie
"catching on" and will soon see that it would
be more economical to pay them a pension direct
from a tax levied in an equitable way than to
tax the food and clothing of the people. They
would then know exactly what they were paying
and to whom it was paid.
I would like to see you remain in the demo
cratic ranks if you can do so with a clear
conscience, but if you can't, step down and out.
Your place will be filled by others whose eyes
are being gradually opened to the truth that is
crowding to the front the great truth that "all
men are created equal, that special privilege has
no place in a government of, for and by the
people." Yours for truth, EMMETT MILLER.
Gasconade, Missouri.
A GOOD MARKSMAN
The Outlook prints an authorized interview
"with President Taft and the following is an
extract:
"Mr. President: I suppose you have noticed
Mr. Bryan's comments on your appointment of
Chief Justice White?"
"All that I have to say about my judicial
appointments is that I have regarded my duty
in respect to them as the most sacred with
"which I am charged, and that I have spared no
effort to secure for the supreme court and other
courts the best men I could , get, with the
fullest appreciation of the fact that the federal
courts, and especially the supreme court con
stitute the chief bulwark of the institutions of
civil liberty created by the constitution."
It is strange that in the discharge of this
sacred duty Mr. Taft selected men who united
in overturning the supreme court's twenty year
ruling on the Sherman anti-trust law. Having
bo large a number of justices to appoint it la
strange that Mr. Taft could not have made one
"mistake" on the side of the people. It is
Btrange that not one man among the largo
number ho appointed agreed with Justice
Harlan who merely gave his Indorsement to
the oft-repeated opinion of the court.
Senator Culberson on Tariff R
evision
Senator Culberson of Texas has written to one
of his constituents an interesting letter on tariff
revision as it was presented to the special ses
sion of congress. That lottor follows:
Your recent letter, in roferonce to the
Farmers' Freo List Bill," which I supported at
the last session of congress, Is received.
The purpose of this bill was to place certain
articles on the free list so as to exempt thom
when imported from the payment of taxes at
ehe custom houses and thus reduce their cost
to the great body of consumers to the extent
of the taxes which wore taken off. The articles
so placed on tho free list comprised a group of
ten commodities, as follows: (1) Plows, har
rows, reapers, harvesters, farm wagons, and
all other agricultural implements of ovory
description; (2) cotton bagging and all similar
fabrics used for baling cotton, and burlaps, bags
and sacks composed entirely or In part of juto
or burlaps or other material suitable for bag
ging or sacking agricultural products; (3) cot
ton ties for baling cotton and wire for baling
hay, straw and other agricultural products; (4)
leather, boots and shoes, harness, saddles, sad
dlery and leather cut Into shoe vamps or uppers;
(5) barbed fence wire, wire rods, wire strands
and wire rope manufactured for fencing, and
other kinds of wire used for fencing; (6) beef,
veal, mutton, lamb, pork and moats of all kinds,
whether fresh, salted, pickled, dried, smoked,
dressed or undressed, bacon, hams, shoulders,
lard, lard compounds and substitutes and
sausages and sausage meats; (7) buckwheat
flour, corn meal, wheat flour, rye flour, oatmeal,
rolled oats, all prepared cereal foods, biscuits,
wafers and similar articles not sweetened; (8)
timber, hewn, sided or squared, shingles, laths,
fencing, posts, sawed boards, planks, deals and
other lumber, rough or dressed, except of ma
hogany, rosewood and the like; and (10) salt,
whether in bulk or bags, sacks, barrels or other
packages.
It will be observed from the summary given
above that tho articles placed on tho freo list
in groups one, two, threo and five were especi
ally beneficial to the farmers, while they w;ould
have shared with the general public in the
benefits which would havo accrued from placing
the articles In all the other groups on the free
list. Broadly stated, two principal and praise
worthy objects were sought to bo accomplished
by the bill: First, to take from the protected
list and consequently reduce tho price of tho .
Implements chiefly used by the farmers in grow
ing and harvesting their crops; and, second, to
reduce the cost of living to all the people, in
cluding, of course, the farmers, by placing food
products and necessaries such as boots and
shoes, harness and lumber on the freo list.
I favored the house bill as above outlined.
The vote on it in the senate resulted in a 'tie,
however, and the bill In this form consequently
failed to pass. This action was then recon
sidered, and the bill passed after the adoption
of two amendments by the senate. These amend
ments, in effect, provided: Tho first, that meats
of all. descriptions and the other articles of food
listed in group six above, and flour and tho
other -food articles liBted in group seven above
should be admitted free only from those coun- .
tries with which we had reciprocal trade agree
ments, and which admitted free to their mar
kets our cotton, wheats, oats, horses, cattle and
hogs; and the second, that Roman, Portland and
hydraulic cement and llmo should be admitted
free. The house accepted the bill as thus
amended by the senate. While the scope of the
provisions of the house bill covering food pro
ducts was somewhat narrowed by the senate
amendments, yet as finally passed tho bill pro
vided substantially the relief originally designed.
The president vetoed this bill, and thus denied
to the people the relief which It would have
afforded, and his action enured to tho benefit of
the bagging trust, the meat trust and other com
binations having for their purpose the main
tenance of high and often extortionate prices.
The principal reason given by the president for '
his veto of this measure of relief to the public
was that the so-called tariff board had not
reported There Is In fact and in law no such
thing as a tariff board, for the congress ex
pressly refused to create one. Tho president
is authorized to appoint persons (and has .done
bo) to advise him -in the execution of the maxi
mum and minimum clauses of the Payne-Aldrich
law but ho is not empowered to appoint a tariff
board. Further still, this reason of the presi
dent for vetoing the free list bill is an after
thought contrived in tho Interest of oxiBtlng
high protective dutioo, and In doflanco of tho
express declaration in Mb message of January
' .?, 1 ?tn th0 Cana(H"'i reciprocity agree
ment that action on tho agrocmont submitted
w" not interfere with such revision of our own
tariff on Imports from all countries as congress
may decide to adopt." Indicating thus In
January that (hero would bo no objoctlon to
such a tariff rovlslon as congress might docldo
to adopt, the president in August, sovon months
aftorwards, vetoed this bill upon tho ground that
his private advisors, with whom congroBa has
absolutely nothing to do, and who do not report
to congress, misnamed tho tariff board, had
not yet reported.
This freo list bill was paaBod by tho demo
cratic house of representatives and was sup
ported by practically all tho domocratB In tho
senate. This in itsolf would havo strongly ap
pealed to mo, but as an original proposition I
favored tho measure. Among other items in
the bill were freo bagging and tleB, for which
I made a special contention in tho tariff dobato
of 1909, though unsuccessful. Lot mo givo you
briefly, in addition to what I havo alroady said,
some further considerations which Influenced
mo to support tho bill and place tho articles
on tho free list. Tariff duties, ovon for rovenuo
only, are not sacrod or Inviolablo with mo.
Such duties levy indirect taxes that la, taxes
on consumption, which ontlrely disregard equ
ality of taxation and tho benefits of government.
Under that system of taxation tho ordinary man,
paying upon what ho consumes, upon what ho
oats and wears and uses, with his comparatively
small need of governmental protection, pays as
much In taxes as tho man of wealth, with his
thousands worth of property and his multiplied
needs of protection for it by tho government.
In tho main tho vast fortunes of corporations
wholly escape such taxation. Of tho hundreds
of millions of dollars which are collectod in
taxes each year at tho custom houses tho poor
and tho mlddlo classes mecesaarily bear the bur
den in what they oat and wear and use. Tariff
taxation curtails or destroys tho advantago of
buying in the cheapest and selling in tho doarost
markets of tho world. This Indirect taxation,
moreover, hoards money In tho treasury and Is
directly responsible for much of tho inoxcus
ablo and profligate expenditures on tho part of
the federal government, expenditures which
would not bo tolerated if tho peoplo wore not
unconscious of tho tax burden they nro bearing.
When, therefore, it was proposed to cheapen
agricultural implomonts, bagging and twine,
wire for fencing and baling, boots and shoos,
harness, saddles and jjaddlery, lumber for homes,
meats, flour, meal and cereals, by taking off the
taxes, I did not hesitate to support tho meaauro,
for to me it is tho democratic docti'Ino of un
taxed necessities of life. Nor was I deterred by
tho suggestion that tho federal rovenuo and
Income would thereby be .decreased. Federal
expenditures ,are already excessive, and they
should be promptly and materially reduced. The
property and wealth of the land which Is re
sponsible for the expensive machinery of govern
ment to protect and safeguard It, not the food
and clothing and homes and other necessities,
should, through corporation and Income taxes,
meet any deficit which would result from such
enactments as this. Very truly yours,
C. A. CULBERSON.
nOT RIVALRY
Funny men in tho newspaper offices are being
subjected to heated rivalry these days on tho
part of the newspaper correspondence and trust
bulletins relating to John-D. Rockefeller's "re
tirement from power" in tho Standard Oil
company. According to these sources of Infor
mation, Mr. Rockefeller has "terminated his
career as head of tho Standard Oil company."
John D. Archbold becomes president of the
New Jersey Oil company and will control its
dbbtiny.
It is all very funny just about as funny as
the claim that tho Standard Oil and Tobacco de
cisions were, in effect, hostile to the trust
system.
"SCRAMBLED EGGS'
Mr. Morgan says that it is impossible to "un
scramble eggs," but that does not justify a
man in eating moro eggs than he needs.
Scrambled eggs can be divided. Why not com
pel tho Steel trust to sell off enough plants to
restore competition.
l
i
a
tm
a
hi
t'l
v
.afc.;