Newspapers / Fayetteville Observer [Weekly, 1880-1919] … / Aug. 27, 1908, edition 1 / Page 1
Part of Fayetteville Observer [Weekly, 1880-1919] (Fayetteville, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
TO I OB , . DAILY EDITION. 16.00 Per Annum, In Advenes. '. 3.00 for 8 Months, In Advance. O 1.50 for 3 Months, In Advance. weekly Edition. P $1.00 per Annum, in Advance. II FAYETTEVILLE N. C, THURSDAY AUGUST 27, 1908. OLD SERIES VOL LXXII NO. 4,073 NEW SERIES-VOL.XXIV.-.NO 3,314 AY: , . ; . - , - r You are liable to an attack of gome form of Bowel Complaint and should . provide yourself, with the best known Remedy, Dr. Beth Arnold's .Balsam. ; Warranted by. King Drug Co. and " 0, W. Stanclll. Hope Mills. WHAT SHALL WE HAVE FOR ?' 4-DESSERTT '"-r1:"': Try JElX-O, the dainty, appetizing, 'economical dessert. Can be prepared ' Instantly simply add boiling, water . and serve when cold. Flavored Just , right! sweetened Just, right; . perfect In every way. A 10c. package makes enough dessert for a large iamily.,. All ' ' grocers sell It. - Don't accept substl , tutes. JELL-0 compiles with all Pure Food Laws, 7 flavors Lemon, Or ange, Raspberry, Strawberry, .Choco i late, Cherry, Peach, .- -. : because they are1 good nnd do their work without making a fuss about It." ' These painless purifiers sold at B. E. - Sadberry's Son's drug store," - 25o. Pain anywhere stopped In 20 ml ; utes sure with one of Dr. Shoop's '.Pink Pain Tablets. ' The formula la on the 26-cent box. Ask your Doctor ', or Druggist about this formula! Stops womanly pains, headache, pains any where. Write Dr. Shopp, Racine, Wis. for- free trial, to Drove value of his ' Headache, or Pink Pain Tablets. .. Sold . , by B. E. Sedberry's Son. V Kennedy's Laxative Cough Syrup Is It tastes nearly as good as mapie bu gar. Sold by Armneld Drug Co. RECREATION, RACES, REJUVI NAT10NAT THE CUMBERLAND FAIR, OCT. 21ST, 22ND AND 23RD. PROFESSIONAL CARDS. Q.K.NIMOCKS, Attorney and Counsellor-nt-Law, v Rooms 1 and 8 K. of P. Bnilding. - f ATBTTKVILLl, O. 'Phone 229 H. McD. Robinson. John U. Ehaw. "(Notary Public) ROBINSON & SHAW, , Attorney s-at-Law, Offices on second floor National Bank of Fayetteville. . , . H. S. AVERITT, Attorney-at-Law, . (Notary Public). Office 125 Donaldson Street, Fayetteville, N. 0. V. C. BULLARD, Attorney and .Counsellor at Law, . Notary Public, Surveyor, Office K. of P. Building, FAYETTEVILLE, N. 0. DR. WM. S. JORDAN, Physician and Surgeon. Office in Palace Pharmacy. Honrs: 8 to 12 and 8 to B.. ' Dr. E, L. HUNTER, ;',.:: " Dentist, . North-east Corner Market Square, ;" Fayetteville, N, C. ' Dr. A. S. CROMARTIE, DENTIST, Over 8huford, Rogers o Company. 'Phona 338. J. M. LILLY, M. D. , Practice limited to diseases of the ye, ear, nocc and throat Office in BlghsmtUi Building, 115 Green atreet Honrs 8 to 1 and J to 5. 'Phone No. 128. . " ,.'-7.',. ':. 0. B. Patterson. D. D. B." : - J. H. Judd, D. D. B. Drs. Patterson & Judd, Offices 219 Vi Hay Street, over Dunn ft Co.'i 8tore, "Phone U. f E.J. S. SCOFIELD, M. D. ' Otters his professional services to the citlient of Fayetteville and surround- W nnnntrV. i Office with Dr.N J. H, . Mr.ti. 29 Hav Street. 'Phone ' 77 Residence, St. Luke's Hospital, Thone 124. - - , " MacKETHAN KiT TRUST CO. ;y.""-" y.'. Market Sqnara. " ATITTIVIIJ.1,I.0. . n t r...a hnnffht Lnd lold Loan negotiated nd gniaoteed tents ana interest coiiecieu. - . ...mIumI ntivwv.nrW) made. Iinruct premium! Ukenna loanea neic ". B. R. MmCitiiaii. Att'T. ' --, Real Estate: ' - ; - . , 1000 Monroe Place, ArdVussa; $1800 Culbreth Place, 160 acres, with lnv provements, near Hope Mills; 8600 New 4 ; room cottage, .' Canal street;' $600 One' 4 room cottage, corner Mechanlo & McKay streets; $300 flne lot, Arsenal Avenue, high est point; $50 to $150 several, re maining lots Fairground Park; $50 to $75 Choice lots Normal Annex; i Tilghman lot, corner Green & Rowan streets, best vacant lot In city. v . " , . For Rent: 2 Currle Stores In Brick Row. ' PARKER'S HAIR BALSAM Cli and bmiitiflei tht JuSt ever rain to Htor wmyi Gum tmlp dit-twa It blr JfcUini. Hair to iti ynntnni voior. P-OCy?CDNOOtNOID r .tlo, how to obuio p.tojit, trd. mark I oowrttt WO N ALL COUNTRIES. , I Biuintu dirtctwUk WasUngm w Monty na ojifn int jnirni. Pttent mi InfrlnpiMat Pnotlci Exoluslvety. W. Mnut n. k! 111 llstk Stmt, on, Vnltti ItoM htert Cw, WASHINGTON, D. C. TARIFF SPEECH OF WILLIAM JEN; NING8 BRYAN. V Des MoineB, Iowa, Aug. 21, 1908. In my notification speech ; I stated that; as the campaign progressed, I weuld discuss the question, "Shall the People Rule," as It applies to the va rious Issues Involved In this campaign. begin with the tariff question, be cause It is the most lasting or our economic questions and the one upon which the leading parties nave most frequently opposed each other. Oth er questions -may come and go, but questions which affect, taxation, like Tennyson's "Brook" "go on forever" As-ttfe- Government" lsnot flTXaaf Bountiful, with unlimited "means, but merely an organization which must collect on the ope hand what It pays out on the other, the subject of taxa tion Is an ever present one. We may dlBCuss how much we should collect, what methods we should employ In col lecting, . and how best to distribute, through appropriations, the money col lected, f'.t we are never far removed from the subject of taxation. Iowa has been selected for the presentation of what I desire to say up-n this sub ject, because the Iowa 'Republicans were pioneers In the effort to secure tariff revision at the hands of the Ra- Dubllcan party. I come among them to define -and' defend the Democratic position on the tariff question, because believe it will commend Itself to them. That the Issue may be clearly Btated, I shall read you the Democratic plank on this subject,' and then the KepuDiican plans: , The Democratic platform says: "We welcome the belated promise of tariff reform now offered by the Re publican party as a tardy recognition of the rlghteoueneas of the Democrat ic position on this question; but tluj people cannot safely entrust the exe? cutlon of this Important work to a par ty-which is so deeply obligated to the highly protected interests as is the Republican party. We call attention to the significant fact that the prom Isod relief was postponed until after the coming election an election to succeed In which, the Republican par ty must have the same support from the beneficiaries of the high protec tive tariff as it has always heretofore received from them;, and to the fur tiler fact that during years of uninter rupted power, no action whatever has been taken by the Republican con gress to correct the admittedly exist ing tariff iniquities. We favor immediate revision of the tariff ty the reduction of import duties. Articles entering into compe tition with trust-controlled products should be placed upon the free list: material reductions should be niide In the tariff - upon the necessities of life, especially upon articles compet ing with such American manufactures as are sold abroad more cheaply than at ' home; and gradual reductions should 'be made In such other sched ules as may be necessary to restore the tariff to a revenue basis Existing duties have given the man ufacturers of paper a shelter behind which they have organized combina tions to raise the price of pulp and paper, thus Imposing a tax upon the spread of knowledge. "We demand the immediate repeal of tie tariff on wood pulp, print pa per, lumber, timber and logs, and that these articles be placed upon the free list.'' ; , The Republican platform Bays: "The Republican party declares une quivocally for a revision of the .tar iff by a special session of congress Im mediately following the inauguration of the next president and commends the steps already taken to this end in the work assigned to the appropriate committees of Congress, which are now investigating the operation and effect of existing schedules. In all tariff leg islation the true, orlnclole of Detec tion is best maintained by the impost tion of such duties as will equal the difference between the cost of produc tion at home and abroad, together with a reasonable profit to American industries. . "We favor the establishment of max imum and minimum rates to be ad ministered by the president under lim itations fixed in the law, the maximum to he available to meet discriminations by foreign countries against American goods entering their markets and the minimum to represent the normal measure of protection at h6me; the aim andy purpose of the Republican policy being not only to preserve, with out excessive duties, that security against foreign competition to which American manufacturers, farmers and producers are entitled, but also to maintain the high standard of living of the wage earners of this country, who are the most direct beneficiaries of the protective Bystem ' "Between the United States and the Philippines, we believe in a free inter change of products, with such limita tions as to sugar and tobacco as will afford adequate protection to domes' tic interests. Secretary Taft refers to this sub ject briefly in his notification speech only briefly but as I shall quote such passages from his speech as are pertinent to this discussion, it. is not necessary to read his remarks In full. It wlll .be noticed that th& Republi can party , has abandoned" the earlier arguments .advanced. In support of a high tariff. We hear no more of the "Infant Industries," that must be ten derly cared for "until they can stand upon their feet;" there is no sugges tion that the "foreigner pay the tar iff,"- and nothing about the "home mar ket." , These catch phrases nave naa their, day they . are -worn . out , and cast aside. - The Republican leaders are no longer arrogant and Insolent' they cannot longer defy tariff reform. Their plan pow Is to Beem .to yield without really "yielding. v J. submit that the Democratic plat' form accurately described the Repub lican position wher It refers to "the belated promise" made by the Repub lican leaders' as ,"a tardy recognition of the righteousness of the Democratic position on this question. The Demo cratic party in its platforms and through Its 'representatives In Con gress has for years pointed out that the tariff scneauies are excessively high and ought to-be reduced, but the Republicans have,, until .recently, re fused to aamit mat mere was any ne cessity for reduction. They now con fess, through . their platform and through- their presidential candidate, that the need for revision is so great an to ust fv the narty in aeciaring -un- enutvocally for a revision of theUr- work U o" be" und "trkenVtpecTar ressTon of Congress Immediately .tel.. lowing the inauguration of the next iwi . i i - J i. -a iimn t hot lha n resident. The naa ivr r.na wnra un equivocally" Indicates that those who wrote the platform recognize that they urn under susnlclon. , They want to distinguish this oromiBe from-the un kopt promises of the past, by adding br emohatlo an adjective as could be found in the dietiofrary. If former Re- I publican proml09i had been ooniolen tiously fulfilled, it might not have been necessary to thus strengthen the promise made this year. The use of the words "immediately after the Inau guration is evidence that the Repub lican leaders are conscious that the patience of the publlo has been strain to the point of breaking, and it Is al most pathetic to note the solicitude which they now feel about doing a thing -which, but for wilful neglect; might have been done at any time during the last ten years. . ' Are we not justified In saying that the people, cannot safely entrust the execution of this Important Work to a party which Is so deeply obligated to the highly protected interests as is the Republican Party?" The "fat fry ing" process has become familiar to the American, people. ' Pressure has been brought to bear upon the protect ed Interests every four years and to a less extent In the congressional cam paigns between presidential election to compel contributions to the cam paign fund in return for former favor and In anticipation of favors yet to come. It Is : difficult to overestimate the corrupting Influences Introduced into the political life of the nation by this partnership between the govern ment and the favored Industries. The literature circulated in support of a protective tariff has studiously culti vated the Idea that suffrage should be employed to secure pecuniary returns, and the appeal made by the Republi can leaders has come to be more and more a selfish one. Every man etv gaged in a protected Industry has been approached with the proposition tnat It is dollars in his pocket to maintain the system, while those who could not oossiuiy trace any tangime Denenis to themselves have been beguiled with the assurance that it was all a matter of public spirit and that they ought to support the system out or patriotic love of country. If attention was called to the fact that the farmer was taxeo for the benefit of the manufacturer, the triple answer was that it would come back to him indirectly; that it did not amount to much for each farm' er anyhow; and that a man was small minded who would begrudge so lnslg. nlflcant a contribution to the nation's prosperity. The plan has been to keep the tax-payers quiet by keeping them in the dark as to the operation of tne law, -and then to concentrate the votes and influence of the tax-eaters in ia vor of a continuation of high tariff leg islation. If a tariff of fifty per cent was imposed upon a given article Of merchandise, it was assumed tna. those engaged In the production of the article would contribute liberally to keep up the tariff. It was also assum ed that the employees would vote with their employers to keep trom having their wages reduced, and It was e$r pected that the .business men of the town would also vote for the tariff be cause of- the business brought to th community by the protected indus try. Those who are acquainted wltn the tariff fight know to what an ex tent the pecuniary argument has been used. The recent Republican platform is a bugle call to every beneficiary of special privilege, to enlist again under the Republican banner, and wnen tne election Is over and the Republican committee publishes the list of con tributors too late to make the Infor mation valuable it will be found that the Republican party has again so ob ligated Itself to the protected inter ests as to be unable to make a revis ion in the interests of the consumers. With a President who. toward the close of his term, admitted the neces sity for tariff revision, wltn a two- thirds majority In the Senate and near ly sixty majority in the House, the Republican party haB refused to per mit any revision whatever. Mr. Wil liams, the leader of the minority m the House, introduced a bill providing for a reduction of the tariff to 100 uer cent, wherever It is now more than 100 per cent. It would look like the Republican party might have tak en this step toward tariff revision, had it been deeply in earnest; but no, the bill was not even reported from the committee. Whenever attention was called to an Indefensible schedule, the answer was that they could not afford to open the subject for debate just be fore a campaign, but there Is no force In this objection because the House rules are so framed that the majority can cut off debate, prevent amendment and silence opposition. The administration has claimed cred it for the flne against the Standard Oil Company in the case which was lately reversed, but ne effort has Deen made to relieve the people from the fine which Is" imposed upon them every day by the Standard Oil Company through the operation of the tariff law which gives that company mo e than 100 per cent protection against Its chief rival, Russia. What faith can a real tariff reformer, whether he be a Republican or a Democrat, repose In the Republican leaders, when they deliberately put off all reduction until after election, and then call for con tributions, with the understanding that the public shall not know the names of the contributors until after the polls are closed? The Republican piatiorm says tnat the tariff is Intended for the American manufacturers, farmers and producers, and especially tor wage earners. ' If the fanner and tne wage earner are real ly the chief beneficiaries of the protec tive system will the Republican canai date explain why .the farmer and the wage earner have contributed-so lit tle to the Republican campaign mna; Is he willing to publish a list of con tributors on tne lotn aay oi next uc- tober and allow the relative advai- tage of protection to the manufactur er, the fanner and the wage earner to be measured by the contributions received from each class? Why is It that the manufacturers are expected to furnish bo large a proportion of the money to run the campaign,, if, as the Republicans claim, the- farmers and th a - laborers -eniov - so large' nropor tion in the benefits of the system? Is it not a significant fact that the farm era and wage earners who are always put In the foreground When the bless ings of a Jigh iariff are being enum erated are in the background when the collections are being made Is It -not significant that - the , manurcaturers, who furnish tne tunas, are so iittie aa- vertlsed as beneficiaries? Ib It not significant also that the wage earners, Instead of the manufacturers, are al ways; described as "the most direct beneficiaries , of the ; protective sys tem?" . :.'.;' , ; But let us suppose, for the sake of argument, that the- Republican party sincerely repents oi its. aeiay in Be ginning tariff reform., repudiates Its obHgatTon. to the Un rlTu to govern thrt "'"ffuSi: - 1 """" - - - - says "In all tariff legislation,' the true rlncinle of nrotectlon Is best main talnbd bv the imposition-of such du ties aB will equal the difference be tween the cost of production at home and abroad, together wltn a reason! - 1 able profit to AmerToan IndiwtrHi." Mr. Tuft andnraeir thla rule and says that "In a number of schedules the tar iff now exceeds this difference, and that the excess offers a temptation to those who would monopolize the pro duction and sale . of such - ar ticles In thl country." He adds, how ever, that "there are some few arti cles on which the tariff is not suffi ciently high to give them the measure of protection they should receive." t Will he explain upon what rule the present tariff was framed? When have the Republicans claimed more protec tion than enough to cover the differ ence In the - cost of ' production here and abroad? The "reasonable profit to-American Industries' Is an addi tion to the rule, and is likely to be used af an excuse for raising the tar iff, And, by the way, to what other business does the government guaran tee a "reasonable profit"? To the far mer, or the merchant or the laborer? To none of these. If In revising the tariff the Republican party is to work upon exactly the same plan " (or a Dlan contemplating a higher rate) what hope have we that the new tariff will be lower than the present oner Are the present leaders more honest than the ones who framed tne exis ing tariff? ... Are they not. In fact, the same men who are responsible for ta iff .extortion during the last, decade. If this new-born zeal for revision were an hundred times greater than his no tification speech indicates, what chance would the Republican candl date have of securing any real tariff reform at the hands of such Republi cans as now represent that party In the Senate and House,' the very men who represented it in the recent na? tional convention Speaker Cannon, who has suppressed tariff legislation in the present congress, was a domi nating factor In the convention and, If the Republicans retain control of the House, will be the Speaker of tne next congress-. Does his prominence afford tariff reformers any assurance of a reduction of the tariff In the In terest of the. consumers? In case, of Republican victory, Congressman Sherman will become the presiding ot- fleer of the Senate. He has been the confidential companion of Speaker Cannon, and in the convention It was Speaker Cannon who vouched for him, But as a matter of fact, Mr. Sherman's standpatlsm needed no endorsement; his record li a guaranty that no Bene, flclary of special privileges will be dis turbed. It was Congressman Sherman who, in a speech in the House on the 18th of last April, boastfully declared. We recognize the fact that we have Republican majority in the Senate, that we have a Republican majority in this House, that is ready to resorl to every legal, every proper constitu tional right to enact such legislation as it deems for the best .interest for the greatest number of our people. and which Is willing and ready to ac cept full responsibility for all those measures which are introduced here and which are not enacted into law." The Republican platform suggest that there should be a maximum tariff and a minimum, the maximum to be used in retaliation and the minimum in ordinary cases. This is merely add ing delusion to procrastination and un certainty. We have prominent Repub lican authority, Senator Dolliver and Senator Hanna, to prove that in the present law the rates were knowingly made higher than necessary with the understanding that reductions would be made to secure foreign trade. Mr. Dolliver said, in the Senate on January 13, 1903: "It is true that fn the bill which he (Mr. Dingley) reported from the committee on ways and means he did put duties up for the express pur pose of having them traded down. Mr. Dolliver insisted that the reel proclty provision in the Dingley act was as distinctly a part of the tariff policy as the coal schedule and com plained that "not one line of the wis dom of James G. Blaine remained on the statute books and that not a step had been taken to fulfill the pur pose of the last Buffalo address ot President McKinley." And yet th very men who present this new plan prevented the carrying out of the old plan. The schemes resorted to by the men who have grown rich by laying tariff burdens upon the country are more numerous than novel. Tariff measures whicn emDody tne princl pies of protection are not drawn by legislators, although as a matter ot courtesy they generally bear the names of legislators; they are real!; drawn by the representatives of th interests which demand protection,. These representatives claim to be the guardians of the laboring men, and yet they carefully avoid writing into the law anything that will require the guardians to execute the trust It is strange that so many voters have been so long deceived as to the ob Ject and the operation of the laws which are ostensibly designed for th protection of the wage earners; It can only be accounted- for on the the ory that the voters have not under stood either the theory of protection or the facts that are relied upon to SUDDOrt it In ordinary affairs there Is no dif ference between a tariff reformer and a protectionist. They meet together in business, in society, in the lodge room and in the church. In their daily life they apply the same rules and are guided by the same business rules. This similarity manifests Itself all through lite and up to the very hour of death. It a' protectionist makes will, he makes it upon the same plan that, the tariff reformer follows. As death approaches, -he estimates the value of. his property, leaves to nis wife and children what he wishes them to- have, and then makes" such" he- quests as he likes to public Institu tions and to those outsme ot the mm lly; and such part as he leaves to his wife and. children, he carefully divides among them, giving ach - a definite share. - He does not give all his prop erty to one child and ' say that ne trusts the. child to deal fairly with the rest of the family. Why?. Because he knows his children and would put a child In a position where selfishness might lead him to do injustice to other members of the family, no, ne wouia not trust hi own flesh and blood to deal fairly with those- reared at the same fireside with him; and he Is wise in not placing this temptation before one of his own family. But when protectionist comes to make, a tariff law, he acts on an entirely different plan; he votes millions, yes, hundreds of millions ot dollars to manufacturers whom he has never seen, and trusts them to be Just in the distribution of the trust fund among their employees And what has been the-result? vJust what mighLiiave been expected: the manufacturers have appropriated the trust fund to their own use and have paid their employees only such wages as trade conditions compenen. The Homestead strike occurred af ter the Republican' convention of 1892 but before the Republican candidate wrote his letter ot acceptance. Ho could not ignore the strike., for it pre sented an obieot lesson which even high-tariff Republican- could sot tall to see.: So Mr. Harrison, the candi date, reforring to the strike, said 'I regret that all employers of labor are not just and considerate and that capital sometimes -takes too large' a share of the-profits!" "Too large share of the profits"? Yes: more than that. The protected manufactur ers have secured, in many cases, a tar iff of more than twice the percentage paid to workmen In wages. The net profits of the steel .trust last year were just about equal to the entire am ount paid in wages, and the wages constituted less than twenty-five per cent of the total -value of the product According -to '- this -statement. each working man employed by the steel trust earned, on an average, not only the amount paid him, but one hundred per cent profit besides for his employ er. And, I may add, while these bene ficiaries of protection have been pre tending to make the tariff laws for the direct benefit of the emDloveet. these same employees have, as a rule, been kept close to the hunger line. wnue many of tne employers have be come the possessors of the swollen fortunes" which now menace the na tion's morals as well as its business. And yet the Republican party was not willing that a atnele Item on the steel schedule Bhould be touched, and the Republican campaign committee will not dare to publish, before the election, the contributions that have been made or will be made to the Re publican campaign fund by the men most largely interested in the steal trust. Let me show you how the tariff oper ates. I have here a statement made by Mr. H. E. Miles, Chairman of the Tariff Committee of the National Asso ciation of Manufacturers and head of the Agricultural Implement Trust. The statement appears in the American In- Qustries ot November 15th, 1907, a paper which is now supporting the Re publican ticket and making a special fight against the labor plank of the Democratic platform. Here is what Mr. Miles says: 'I have made money every year out of the Tariff Graft. Not much, but still a little. 'The tariff baronB raised their price 50,000 to me. I made a charge against the jobber of $60,000 and I know that he charged more than $70,000 for the $60,000 he paid me. Before reaching the consumer the $50,000 charge be came about $100,000 to be paid by the agricultural consumer, The manufacturer who would pros per must make a double profit, one by shrewd management of his busi ness and another by still shrewder manipulation in Washington, "We have no great difficulty in shop ping abroad for we could get as high prices as at home. We are so held up, however, by our supply people that to most of us there is very scant pro fit in foreign business. "When Congress gave us forty-five per cent, we needing only twenty per cent, they gave us a congressional per mit, if not an Invitation, to consoli date, form one great trus"t and ad- anee prices twenty-five per cent, be ing the difference between the twen ty per cent needed and the forty-five per cent given. Mr. Miles shows how the tariff rais es pnees to those who. in manufac turing, have to buy other manufactu ed products. This expense is trans ferred to the next purchaser. The job ber charges a profit on the tariff as well as on the cost of the article, and each person who handles the product collects a profit, so -that, according to Mr. Miles, the first charge of $o0,000 becomes $100,000 by the time it reach es the consumer. Mr. Miles in another article estimates the total loss to the people at $500,000,000 annually. The statement of Mr. Miles also shows that the tariff law Is an invitation to con solidate, and that having been given the tariff on the theory that it is need ed the manufacturers naturally assume that it is intended that they shall take advantage of it, even If they have to combine to do so How will Mr. Taft explain to the av ernge man the benefits of protection He can easily convince a trust that It profits by the tariff, but what about the victim of the trust? No Republican leader will now deny that reductions ought to be made, but who is to make the reductions? The only answer given by the Republicans is that the tariff ought to be reformed by Its friends: that is, that those who made the last tariff law should be en trusted with the making of a new tar iff law. But suppose the people adopt ihe Republican idea and entrust the making of the tariff law to Republican Congressmen; what will be the method of procedure? Fortunately for the vo ter, Mr. Miles explains this also. In the April, 1908, number of American In dustries, Mr. Miles says: "The people instruct and trust Congress to grant just, equitable and ample protection." Is not that just what the Republlcai leaders claim to favor? They want you to "Instruct and trust Congress to grant just, equitable and ample pro- lection. And what does that mean Mr. Miles says that Congress "trusts ihe Ways and Means Committee. And a Republican leader will tell you that this Is also proper. Then what Mr. Miles says that "this committee trusts such persons as Mr. Dalzell, and that "they they trust the trusts, The method of procedure is simple. It is a case of confidence. The voters have confidence in Republican lead ers; the leaders have confidence in Republican Congress; a Republican Congress has confidence in the Ways and Means Committee; the Ways and Means Committee has confidence the men who represent the trusts, and the trusts write the tariff law and thus secure to themselves the right to levy tribute upon the public. So accustom ed have Republican leaders become to allowing the protected interests write the tariff schedules that so emi nent and honorable a man as Senator Hoar of Massachusetts said, in discuss ing the McKinley bill, then before the Senate:. . , ... "Instead of coming before your sub committee' for a formal hearing on our Massachusetts Industries, I thought ' the best way was to carefully prepare table of all the various industries, per haps some sixty or seventy In all, and ask Brother-Aldrich: to go over them with me and ascertain what th? people wanted in each case, and it there were any cases where the committee had not already done exactly what the petitioners desired or had not in flexibly passed upon the . question, could have a hearing before you, but find In every instance the action the Committee, as Mr. Aldrich thinks It likely to be, is entirely satisfactory to the interests I represent, with the exception of one or two, and the pa pers in regard to those cases I have handed to Mr. Aldrich. Mr. Miles, whom-1 have before quot ed, says, in American Industries April of this year: i "People .asking a government rep resentative tor relief on another scehd ule were by that representative ferred to A New England manufactur the official agreeing to act In ac cordance with the protected, manufac turer s wishes. ' Said the manufactur- 'I wrote that schedule myself. I did not Intend that It should be Inter preted as severely as it has been, but having been so Interpreted, I will not consent to a modification of it. And this man's will remains the law." We would not expect a Jury to do justice to the defendant If It was com posed entirely ot the relatives of the plaintiff; neither can we ex pect a Congress to do jus tice to the masses if it is com posed of men who are in sympathy with, and obligated, to, the corpora tions which have for a generation been enjoying special privileges. There is no prospect of relief from Republican President and Congress. The Democratic party, If entrusted with power, can and will reduce the tariff. The Democratic platform not only demands a reduction of the tariff, but plainly outlines the course to be pur sued In securing the reduction. It be ns by proposing that articles which come Into competition with articles controlled by a trust be placed on the free list. What better place to begin? Years ago Mr. Havemeyer, the head of the 8ugar Trust, said' that the tariff was the mother of trusts and her chil dren are many. Secretary Taft, in his notification speech, says that an exces sive tariff serves no useful purpose but offers a temptation to those who would monopolize the production and the -sale of such articles in this coun try, to profit by the excessive rate." Now suppose the manufacturers. who have been favored by legislation do conspire against the public and enter into a monopoly. What penalty do the Republicans suggest? None whatever. These men are to be con sulted about proposed changes, and It the next Republican tariff is made like former Republican tariffs,, nothing will be done without the unanimous con- Bent of the beneficiaries. What would be the effect of the remedy proposed by the Democratic platform? Simply this: A law goes into effect at some fixed date in the future, and if the Democrats pass a law, putting upon the free list articles coming into competition with those controlled by a trust, the trust will have until that date to dissolve. If the trust considers the law too dras tic, it can avoid It by giving up its monopoly. Secretary Taft calls this remedy ut terly destructive" and in his anxiety to prevent it overlooks the fact that the Democratic party has other reme dies for the trusts. If we can succeed in dissolving existing trusts, and in preventing the organizzation of new ones, there will be no trusts agalnsl which to use the remedy of which he complains. There is now a law against trusts, but it has not been sufficiently enforced to prevent trusts. The Dem ocrats demand its enforcement; if its enforcement rids the country of trusts. then this policy which Mr. Taft so much fears will become perfectly harmless. If the Democrats secure control of both the House and the Senate, they are pledged to legisla tion which will make a private monop oly impossible. If the Republicans re tain control of part of the legislative machinery of the government and re fuse to join in the effort to make a private monopoly Impossible, they are not in a position to complain of tariff legislation aimed at trusts. If they refuse to assist us in exterminating the principle of pnvate monopoly, they cannot well object to legislation neces sary to protect the people from trust extortion. Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen: Mr. Taft did not refer to the plat- from demand that would pulp, print paper, lumber, timber and logs be placed upon the free list. Why? Be cause the President vainly besought Congress to enact a law embodying part of this demand. It Is absurd to complain of the exhaustion of our for ests while we encourage their detsruc- tion by a tariff on the products of for eign forests. But such legislation be comes not only a folly but a crime when it is remembered that a hand ful of men monopolize the benefits flowing from the tariff on these things, while the whole country bears the burden of tho tax. Hon. R. F. Petti grew, of South Dakota, in a speech made in tho United States Senate, re ferred to an important statement, which appeared in the North-western Lumberman, February 27, 1897. Sen ator Burrows of Michigan had referred to a Mr. Winchester as a man of great reliability and truthfulness, and Sena tor Pettigrew quoted Mr. Winchester as saying In the North-western Lum berman: 'There were a lot of gentlemen from the Northwest, up Minnesota way, in Washington the other day, and they were sitting in Senator Burrows' room. An interesting incident occurred there. Senator Burrows is chairman of the committee. The committee had not had a meeting for a long time. They happened to be seated in that room and one of the gentlemen from Minne sota had an envelope and lead pencil He walked around the room and ci phered up a little bit, and he said: Mr. Burrows, do you Know what $1 a thousand would mean to this crowd of men In here?' There were not as many In the room as there are here. He said An advance of $1 a thousand on lumber would mean $6,125,000 on last year's product' ". Could more conclusive proof desir ed? And the Senator Burrows men tioned is the same Senator Burrows who acted as Temporary Chairman of the last Republican National Conven tion and sounded the keynote of the campaign. How long will the Republican farm ers, merchants and laboring men per mit a few men to make the tariff laws for their own pecuniary advantage and at the expense of the rest of the coun try? The second step in the reduction of the tariff is a "material reduction up on the necessities of life, especially upon goods competing with such Am erican manufactures as are sold abroad more cheaply than at home." At present the articles used by the poor bear a higher rate, ad valorem, than the articles used by the rich This statement can be verified by an examination of any of the. schedules. A tax upon consumption, even when laid with absolute impartiality, bears heaviest upon the poor, because our necessities are much more uniform than our possessions. People do not eat in proportion to their Income; they do not wear clothing In proportion to their income; they do not use taxed goods In proportion to their Income, As all taxes must come out of one's income, no matter through what sys tem levied or collected, they are, In effect, income taxes, and taxes on con sumption are really graduated Income taxes, the largest per cent being collected . from . those with the smallest' Income : and the smallest per cent from those with the largest income, it li only fair, therefore, that in an attempt to re lieve the people from tMe. iniquities of a hlh tariff, the poor, -who are over-burdened, Bhould be given first, consideration. Then, too, a reduction in the tariff on the necessities of life brings a benefit to all the people, wMle a reduction in the tax upon luxuries would benefit but a portion of the peo ple. ' Surely no one will object to a reduc tion being made upon articles which come into competition with American manufactures which are sold abroad more cheaply than at home. The Am erican manufacturer ..who sends- his goods to foreign lands and there, with out any protection whatever, com petes successfully with the manufac turers of all the world, does not need a high tann to meet competition in the home market And there are enough articles sold abroad at a low price to assure a large advantage to the American consumers through the carrying out of thlB one plank. Mr. Taft, however, finds the greatest alarm In the following clause In our platform: "Gradual reductions should be made In such other schedules as may be nec essary to restore the tariff to a reve nue basis. He regards this threatened depar ture from the protective system as fa tal. We are here brought face to face with the theoretical difference between the positions of the two. par ties on the subject of tariff. The Dem ocratic party regards a tariff law as a revenue law, the protection It gives being incidental; the Republican party regards a tariff law as framed primar ily for protection, the revenue being incidental. As the effect of a given rate on a particular article Is the same, whether levied for the purpose of revenue or for the purpose of pro tection, it may be well to define the difference between a revenue tariff and a protective tariff. A revenue tariff is so framed as to collect a rev enue and you stop when you get enough; a protective tariff may he so framed as to collect dui nine revenue, and yet lay a heavy burden upon the people and you never know when to Btop. To illustrate: a tariff may be made so high as to absolutely prohibit Importation. If, in such a case, tne manufacturers yield to tire temptation mentioned bv Mr. Taft. and combine to take advantage of the duty, the consumers will be heavily taxed, and yet none of the money will reach the treasury. Tt us sunoose another case: it we import one-tenth of a certain kind of merchandise and produce at home nine-tenths, and the Imported domestic articles sell at the same price, then the treasury receives duty on the for eign article and the manuiacturers collect nine times as much on the do mestic article as the treasury collects on the one-tenth imported. It becomes a matter of great Importance, there fnre in the neonle at large, whether ihe tariff is intended to raise a reve mie or is framed in the Interest of the manufacturers and for the purpose of nrntoctinn No one would think: ot emnlnvine in a city, a county or state a tax svstem unaer wuiuu iue hulk nf the tax would go to the col lectors, and vet the Republican lead ers demand the continuance of a sys tem under which the protected inter ests receive far more than half the money collected from the people thfough the operation of a high tar iff aj tariff law Interferes with tne natural laws of trade, one who pro noses a protective tariff, takes upon himself the burden of proof to show first, that a nrotective tariff is ngn in principle; second, that it is wise n nnhUP no 1CV. ailU. LUliu, mat 11 is necessary. And, yet, what protec tionist attempts to present an arg: ment in support of any one of these nrnnnsitions? Is it right to tax an oi ine peupit; for the benefit of a rewr wnere community has attempted to collet taxes for the aid of an industry, e jh when the industry was to be located the community, the highest court in the land has declared such a tax to oe larceny In the form of law. If a city government cannot ngniiuny tax in the people to bring an industry Into the city, where such benefits as are conferred are more easily seen ami more universally enjoyed, who win say that a farmer in the Misosuri Val- ley can ue riguiiuiij -ri'- an ndustrv In a distant state : As a matter of public policy, is u wise that the industries that do pay should be compelled to carry upon their backs industries wfticn. accoru inir to the arguments made by tnei representatives, could not live without aid' Have we not seen una soiem Introducing corruption into pontics, and it is not building business upon an unsubstantial basis? Having se cured a tariff from one party, the bene flciaries loudly declare that the coun try will be ruined if any other pau obtains control of tne government Manufacturers have intimidated thel employes and threatened them with a reduction in wages unless a party in vorable to the system was continued in power. This is an old device, and there are Indications that it is being resorted to again. The New York Leather Belting Company has sent out a number of letters to companies with which it has business dealings, asking them to post in the factories a notice saying: "Believing that the election of Taft and Sherman means a safe and con servative administration, the day fol lowing the election we shall start this j plant on run time ana Keep going. -- Here is a direct attempt to influence the election by a bribe It is virtu il ly a promise of wages If the Republi can ticket is successful and an implied threat in case of Democratic success; but the offer is so made that it gives the employes no guaranty of Ita ful filment. The same kind of promises were made In 1896, and yet for six months after the election times were worse than they were before. There were business failures and bankrupt cies, and many institutions that prom ised their employes steady work and good wages, shut down or reduced wages. If. any factory posts up the sign which the Leather Belting Com pany Is sending out, the employes ought to get. together and ask for a guaranty as to the amount of wages they are to receive and as to the length of time during which the guar anty Is to extend. If the votes are to be bought, the purchase price, at least; should be made secure. If the em ployes' heritage citizenship Is to be sold, he ought, to be sure ot his mess ot pottage. - But the whole system is , vicious. Business should not be built upon leg islation; R should stand upon its own merit, and when it does stand upon its own merit we shall not only have pur er politics, but we shall have less fluc tuation in business conditions and a more equitable distribution of the pro ceeds Of toll. ' ! 1 v (Continued on Pact Two.) .. Y FAYETTEVIUE MARBLE AND GRANITE WORKS Strictly First-class " Work. Call at my yard or write for price - Respectfully, , . ; K. L. EEMSBURG, Proprietor, . Fayetteville, N. 0 Some of Our Old Customers . are stilling calling, for our , GOLDEN CROWN COLOGNE became it is refined, delicate and re freshing. H. I Home & Sis VIOLET AMMONIA SO REFESHING FORTH! BATH TOILET AND 15 AND 25 CTS. VIOLET WITCH-HAZEL DELIGHTFUL AFTER SHAVING - 25 CENTS. B. E. SEDBERRY'S SON, Palace Pharmacy. OUR AIM IS TO GIVE THE BEST POSSIBLE SERVICE, AND BEST IN QUALITY OF GOODS. WE SOLICIT YOUR ORDERS. A. J. COOK & CO. DRUGGI3T8 AND PHARMACI3T8, Next P. O. 'Phone 14'. GO TO THE WIDE-AWAKE CRUG STORE 1 YOU'LL GET WHAT I DOCTOR ORDERS ON THE BUSY CORNER. KING DRUG COMPANY McDuffie Drug Store. On The Square. JUST RECEIVED QUALITY Chocolate. NONE BETTER. MacKETHAN & CO. 1 'Phone 331. Druggists, f f NEW GOODSI Ne have just received a well elected aeiortment of HAIR BRUSHES AND COMBS which we are telling at email profit. Other new goodt In TOOTH BRUSHES, WHISK BROOMS, BATH MITTS, SPONGES, ETC. Arrnfield's Drug Store Hotel LaFayette Building. Prescriptions Pilled only by Reg. ' - Utered Druggist. ' ' .
Fayetteville Observer [Weekly, 1880-1919] (Fayetteville, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Aug. 27, 1908, edition 1
1
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75