No one should object to reciprocity, when limited to such commodities as are not produced by both of the countries making the exchange, but reciprocity that proposes to forward one interest at the expense of another is dishonest.

cam

All this and much more a commission will or should save us from, and anything that takes the subject out of the political discussion of national paigns, save as a question of national policy, will prove advantageous. It will prevent the periodical disturbance of business and will admit of a continuous policy running on indefinitely, instead of a constant interruption and often complete destruction of all policies every four years.

President Roosevelt has set for himself a task well worthy of his effort, and if successful will be entitled to the gratitude of the country. He should have, and I trust will have, the support of every patriotic man who believes in a tariff for protection.

ing importance, is not an easy one.

It is perhaps too much to expect that from the discussion of such a question it would be possible wholly to eliminate political partisanship. Yet those who believe, as we all must when we think seriously of the subject, that the proper aim of the party system is after all simply co subserve the public good, cannot but hope that where such partisanship on a matter of this kind conflicts with the public good it shall at least be minimized.

It is on every account most earnestly to be hoped that this problem can be solved in some manner into which partisanship shall enter as a purely secondary consideration, if at all; that is, in some manner which shall provide for an earnest effort by non-partisan inquiry and action to secure any changes, the need of which is indicated by the effect found to proceed from a rate of duty on a given article; its effect, if any, as regards the creation of a substantial monopoly; its effect upon domestic prices, upon the revenue of the govern

THE TARIFF.

DOES NOT FAVOR IMMEDIATE REVISION, BUT SUGGESTS A TARIFF COMMISSION TO GATHER NECESSARY DATA.

NE of the last speeches made by President Roosevelt before he was compelled to abandon his Northwestern tour by reason of a necessary surgical operation, was delivered at Logansport, Indiana, September 23. In the course of his speech he said:

An essential for any community is perseverance in the economic policy which for a course of years is found best fitted to its peculiar needs. The question of combining such fixedness of economic policy as regards the tariff, while at the same time allowing for a necessary and proper readjustment of duties in particular schedules, as such

upon home production, and upon consumption.

In other words we need to devise some machinery by which, while persevering in the policy of a protective tariff, in which I think the nation as a whole has now generally acquiesced, we would be able to correct the irregularities and remove the incongruities produced by the changing conditions, without destroying the whole structure.

There are two or three different

methods by which it will be possible to provide a readjustment without any shock to the business world. My personal preference would be for action which should be taken only after preliminary inquiry by and upon the findings of a body of experts of such high character and ability that they could be trusted to deal with the subject purely from the standpoint of our business and industrial needs. But, of course, Congress would have to determine for itself the exact method to be followed.

the means for gathering most of the necessary data and can act whenever it is the desire of Congress that it should act. That the machinery exists for turning out the policy above outlined I am very certain, if only our people will make up their minds that the health of the community will be subserved by treating the whole question primarily from the standpoint of the business interests of the entire country, rather than from the standpoint of the fancied interests of any group of politicians.

The tariff rate must never fall below that which will protect the American workingman by allowing for the difference between the general labor cost here and abroad, so as to at least equalize the conditions arising from the difference in the standards of labor here and abroad, a difference which it should be our aim to foster in so far as it represents the needs of better educated, better paid, better fed and better clothed workingmen of a higher class than any to be found in a foreign country.

At all hazards, and no matter what else is sought for or accomplished by changes of the tariff, the American workingman must be protected in his standard of wages-that is, in his standard of living-and must be secured the fullest opportunity of employment.

Our laws should in no event afford advantage to foreign industries over American industries. They should in no event do less than equalize the difference in the conditions at home and abroad. The general tariff policy to which, without regard to changes in detail I believe this country to be irrevocably committed, is fundamentally based upon ample recognition of the difference of labor cost here and abroad; in other words, the recognition of the need for full development of the intelligence, the comfort, the high standard of civilized living, and of the inventive genius of the American workingman as compared to the workingman of any other country in the world.

a

1. The United States has tried Democratic tariff in our day and the industrial wreckage and ruin both to capital and labor ought not to be forgotten so early in the new century.

2. Massachusetts was the first state to be infatuated by the free trade sorceress. She also was the first and humblest repentant sinner to return.

3. Give publicity to the fact that the Dingley tariff law has done more to increase the wages, to give steady work, to enlarge the annual earnings of laboring men than any other legislation ever did.

4. Working men and women of the United States put nearly $700,000,000 more in the savings banks in 1901 than in 1896.

5. There were twenty-five per cent more persons employed in factories under the Dingley tariff than under the Wilson tariff, a total increase of 1,000,000 in ten years.

In

6. In 108 years before the Dingley tariff we exported a total of only $383,000,000 more than we imported. five years under the Dingley tariff we exported SO much that the balance above import was seven times as much in five years as in 108 years. The average excess of exports under the Dingley tariff was almost twice as great each year as in the whole 108 years previously.

7. Give publicity to the fact that the conditions of wage-earners are better in the United States than in any other country, best in Republican states, best of all in Massachusetts.

8. Give publicity to the fact that Massachusetts was the first in the world to create a labor bureau, first to establish factory inspection, first to establish an eight-hour day for wage-workers in the state's service, first to prohibit child labor, first to regulate employment of women, first to require seats for women in factories. Why don't labor leaders try to secure labor legislation in some Democratic state?

9. Give publicity to the fact that $440,000,000 more were paid wageearners in factories under the Dingley tariff than under the Wilson bill, an increase of twenty-five per cent to wage

THE TARIFF AND FOREIGN TRADE.

SOME DEDUCTIONS FROM ACTUAL EXPERIENCE IN RECENT YEARS.

It is often argued that protection hampers the protected country in the development or increase of its sales to other countries. There is nothing in that notion. If our goods are right and our price right, the other countries will buy them, even though our protective tariff was as solid as the Chinese Wall used to be. Let the figures of 1896, low tariff, and 1902, high tariff, tell. Our constantly increasing sales to Canada, with its preferential tariff in favor of England, prove this, as also do the following figures, using millions only:

Or, put it this way. The excess of exports from the foundation of the government to the enactment of the Dingley law was $356,808,822.

The excess of exports since the enactment of the Dingley law, five years only, has been $2,852,834,543.

But, they tell us, "high tariff keeps down imports and lessens Government revenue."

Again they are wrong. The figures of imports above quoted, in the hightariff years 1899-1902, prove the contrary. Nor do the customs receipts help their fallacious argument. In the fiscal year 1902, just closed, we collected $254,456,927 duties on imports, being nearly $100,000,000 more than in the low-tariff year 1896.

Our Democratic "no-policy" friends must try some other tack. They can never make port on this one.

WALTER J. BALLARD. SCHENECTADY, N. Y., September 14.