THE AMERICAN TARIFF.

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 11951, 29 March 1894, Page 3

THE AMERICAN TARIFF.

DIYEBSB OPINIONS. About the middls of December a special correspondent of the London Daily Chronicle in the United States interviewed some of the Party leaders at Washington to ascertain their views on the tariff question, The following extracts from his letter show how wide apart aro these opinions :— Mr Wi'son, Democratic leader in the House dMep.-rsentatives, introducer of the Tariff Re^Kffiirflill, said he expected the Bill to pass" Substantially as drafted. The fundamental idea of the Bill is the cheapenH ing of the cost of the raw material and of I industrial processes. The great items are I the freeing of wool, coal, iron, &c, the things utilised in manufacture. Our Bill is in the interest of American manufacturers, plough the Protectionists say the opposite. The Bill will help English and European industries. It is not drawn up with that specie intention, but it will incidentally have that effect. And so much the better. The idea of helping oneself by injuring other people is nonsense ; it is false economy. Still, the object of the Bill is not to help your people over the sea, but to help ourselves. Our objects are twofold : to cheapen goods to the consumer, and to secure markets abroad for surplus products. And we are going to secure these markets — even to Europe. We think, with cheaper raw material, and liberty to purchase anywhere, we can in time compete with England in most of her markets. We think our ultimate industrial supremacy is certain, and we want to hasten the day. As to the Republican claim that high tariff means high wages, and that cheapening the product means lower wage, and conscduently lower standard of living, we say that wages are determined by the relative profitableness of an undertaking. Our American theory is that direct taxation should be levied by the State, and indirect, by the Federal Government. If our gigantic pension system, which now amounts to 166,000,0D0d01s per annum, were got rid of our Government could bo administered for 250,C00,000d015. a year, and that could easily fee raised by our immensely productive on spirits, wines, tobacco, and certain other luxuries, while leaving the mass of commodities untaxed. That is the aim of the Tariff Roform Party, and this present Tariff Bill must be taken as simply an instalment ; it represents our present possibilities and our minimum demand. Mr Reed, Republican hader, a possible candidate for the Presidency, said : " Wo shall fight this Tariff Bill with all our might, and we shall Btand by tho McKinlcy Act. We say that the McKinlev Tariff has never had a fair trial. It was passed about the same time that the financial difficulties, which issued in the Baring crash, were in operation, and results due entirely to those troubles were attributed to the tariff. The Baring crisis destroyed confidence, closed I mills, threw people out of work, and then ■ the blame was put on McKinley. The preBj^ent troubles here are largely due to uncerflHainty about tariff legislation, aided, of BBOourso, by. the finanoial troubles. Our BBnanufaj^j'rcrs don't know what to do ; they HBon't Wm on what basis their business is HBo be carried on. We need security and perBBbanence. and the Democrats won't let us ■Have jt. Of courso this sort of thing is BBvcU enough for your country ; your people HH.ro already preparing to flood our markets, ■Hut it doesn't suit us. They may do that BJftwing to greater cheapness. We don't beBBJieve in cheap production; for that means B)ii wages for tho workpeople. Tho wages ■JBf labour, plus the raw material, equals the RKotal cost. The high tariff has gons with, HK.nd will go with, high wages and permanBEnco of employment. That is our doctrine ; ■Hive believe that is so." IB "What do you say, Mr liced, to the BHiconomists? They aro generally against ■V " Considering," said Mr Reed, "that the Beheading political economists have been BBmroved to be wrong on neatly every other ■■point pn which they have pronounced ■■judgment, the probability is that they arc Hgvrong here too. We don't bolicvo in the ■■imaginary van. drawn by political cconoBjßnists. Life is a complex thing, and must fl^Me looked at from other than the purely B^Econonric point of view. Our nation is a [JJEreat complex whole, and it has been IpKrought to that position by tho diversity of BEEur industries. That diversity is the result R^Kf the Government's fostering care through PBKhe protective tariff. This is our historical flJßSnethod as a nation, it has been set forth H^BLy nearly all our leading statesmen, while p^Hhe English free-trade system is opposed to B^Bhc whole structure of our Government and P^Hbe history of our country." fl^B " But what of the high prices to the conB^Bcumer caused by your high tariff ? " Hn " The MoKinley Tariff lowered prices," HBsaid Mr Reed deliberately ; " that is the [BHmct, though, of course, it doesn't suit tho ■^Rreetradc organs to admit it." jH Afterwards I asked Mr Wilson if this was ■Jl g O [ •• Prices have, owing to more ellloient production, fallen in some cases," said he, PB " in spite of the McKinley tariff." BB Mr Simpson, a npted "Populist" Bfl meniber of the House, a single taker, hailHyng from Kansas, said :— " Yes, I shall vote BJBor the Pill, though it is a poor measure, a compromise thing which no Bflßpnc cnn cc ' nn ? oQ thusiasm about. lam HBn favour of abolishing tariffs altogether, ■■Bind in getting our revenue out of great corHBHLratlons that have been mado wealthy by jnßbcir command of natural monopolies. I BflVvould tax these monopolies, as high as we ■9Vould go. The men of wealth are grabbing BJ^Kverything they can lay their hands on, and B^Rjothing is done. lam a Populist because have need of a new party. When things HBLgot I;/ 1 here and no redress can bo got, our flßßveotA, start a new pary, and so we started ■BHtis Party. And the coming ■JBHEttle will be fought between us and the ■^Monopolists. We shall have a fair, square, ■■Hand-up fight before long. Our party is BBKining ground all the time, and we shall ■Jflßiow gains at the Congressional elections HHScxt year. Yes, our fight is the same as ■^Hours over there— a fight between the mass lionest people who work hard and the H^Bionopolists who grow 'rich 'on ill paid EJ^Kbour." BflflHur Morrison, another Democrats possible ■BKccessor to President Cleveland, and the PJ^Bionccr of tariff reform said, "Let me tell ■■Pjou how the M'Kinley Bill was made. There BBB'as a man in my constitueucy who made R^PjHaßSware, and who helped largely to secure Bflßbv defeat, though personally we were on BBBdnii terms. When the McKinley Bill was BBBBoiug through Congress, this man came to PjßJyashißgton, and I met him, and asked

him how he wao doing. ' Oh, well enough, 1 said he, ' but I could do bettor. I want tc liavo some littlo glass phials protected bj tho new tariff,' and ho took one out of his pocket to show me what they were like. ' 1 want to sec M'Kinlcy and got him to looli after my phials. That mau went into the Ways and Means Committee-room, where McKinley, who was busy, told him to write down his own terms, which ho did ; they were adopted and aye in the Act, and so our Government was utilised to make that man's fortune. And that is what this whole tariff business is, it is simply a means of utilising the Government to help to make the fortune of individuals. The whole thing is rotteu. Tho Bill will pass. The Democratic party will undoubtedly suffer for tho Bill at the Congressional elections, as business will not have readjusted itself to suit the new tariff ; but we shall come right in time. Foreign nations will be somewhat benefited, apparently at first, at our expenses. But the interests of all are ultimately the same ; and the tendency of the world is towards the equalising of economic conditions amoug all civilised countries."