- w                                ~
7~17771                 777777777777777           777 7
4.~~31~1 1~~~~,a:; ~ ~ ~ ~ 9~~~ ~ i6~ ~"~~ J "4                                          ~ >  
~~~~ ~~~ E    ~. 
I ~ i -  i  ~   r~ ~) _;$~:-w        Z;
~~~~Q 4~~~~~~~~~~z4~~~~~~~~~  ~""""~
'-'r"~-  -                                                              s.4




ry.........................
HIM I
lilt                                                        n If




E.2a







f




Protection


8~






)i






J.




"THE   WISDOM      OF PROTECTION        IN THE, UNITED
STATES."
Extracts from reply of Hon. J.4MES G. BLAINE of Maine, to
Hon. Win. E. Gladstone, published in North American Review
of January, 1890, and printed in daily Congressional Record,
June 8, 1896.
Measuring from 181.?, when a protective tariff was enacted to give
strength and stability to the Government in the approaching war
with Great Britain, to 1861, when a protective tariff was enacted to
give strength and stability to the Government in the impending revolt of the Southern States, we have fifty years of suggestive experience in the history of the Republic. During this long period freetrade tariffs were thrice followed by industrial stagnation, by
financial embarrassment, by distress among all classes dependent for
subsistence upon their own labor. Thrice were these burdens removed
by the enactment of a protective tariff. Thrice the protective tariff
promptly led to industrial activity, to financial ease, to prosperity
among the people. And this happy condition lasted in each case,
with no diminution of its beneficent influence, until illegitimate
political combinations, having their origin in personal and sectional
aims, precipitated another era of free trade. A perfectly impartial
man, unswerved by the excitement which this question engenders in
popular discussion, might safely be asked if the half century's experience, with its three trials of both systems, did not establish the
wisdom of protection in the United States. * * * As an offset to
the charge that free-trade tariffs have always ended in panics and long
periods of financial distress, the advocates of free trade pointto the fact
that a financial panic of great severity fell upon the country in 1873,
when the protective tariff of 1861 was in full force, and that, therefore,
panic and distress follow periods of protection as well as periods of free
trade. * * * The panic of 1873 was widely different in its true
origin from those which I have been exposing. The civil war, which
closed in 1865, had sacrificed on both sides a vast amount of property. *    *   A half million men had been killed. A million more
had been disabled. * * * The public debt, that must be funded,
reached nearly three thousand millions. * * * The country was
on a basis of paper money, and all gold payments added a heavy
premium to the weight of the obligation. The situation was without
parallel. * * * Notwithstanding the evil prophecies on both
sides, the panic did not come until eight and a half years after the
firing of the last gun in the civil war. Nor did it come until after
i two great calamities in the years immediately preceding had caused
the expenditure of more than two hundred millions of dollars, suddenly withdrawn from the ordinary channels of business. The rapid
and extensive rebuilding in Chicago and Boston after the destructive
fires of 1871 and 1879 had a closer connection with the panic of 1873
than is commonly thought. Still further, the six years' depression,
from 1873 to 1879, involved individual suffering rather than general
distress. The country as a whole never advanced in wealth more
rapidly than during that period. The entire experience strengthened
the belief that the war for the Union could not have been maintained upon a free-trade basis, and that the panic of 1873 only
proved the strength of the safeguard which protection supplies to a,
people surrounded by such multiform embarrassments as were the
people of the United States during the few years immediately following the war. And, strongest of all points, the financial distress
was relieved and prosperity restored under protection, whereas the
ruinous effects of panics under free trade have never been removed
except by a resort to protection.


a-1,
1339392
I                                                 I




"STAND PAT ON THE TARIFF PROPOSITION."
Extract from remarks of Hon. J. HGALLINGER of New Hampshire, in daily Congressional Record, April 23, 1904.
It will be freely admitted, I believe, by all on both sides of this
chamber, that the past seven years have been the most prosperous in
the history of our country; that during these years our industrial
advance has been unparalleled; that our markets both at home and
abroad have been largely and most substantially increased; that our
laboring classes have been wondrously benefited, and that our wealth,
both in the aggregate and per capita, has been largely augmented.
all classes sharing in the advantages and enjoyments of this prosperity.
And yet, in spite of these splendid results, which none can deny;
in spite of the fact that our Western farmers have paid off the
mortgages which it was necessary for them to assume in order to get
a start in keeping with the opportunities which lay before them; in
spite of the fact that these farmers have become prosperous, and have
been able not only to acquire and possess their lands, but to increase
their stock and implements and to lay aside in the great Western
banks a surplus which is not only adequate for the necessary transaction of business in those States and Territories, but which is offered
to Eastern capitalists at a percentage about one-half of that paid
by these same farmers for the Eastern money which they borrowed
a decade or so ago; in spite of the fact that our great Southern
States are becoming more and more prosperous every year, because
they have learned to use their own raw material and to do their
own work; in spite of the fact that from one end to the other of
this great land of ours the people have been enjoying a period of
prosperity, such as has never before come to any nation on the face
of the globe; in spite of all these things, the leaders of a great
political party in Congress have been engaged almost daily for many
weeks advancing arguments to be used during the coming campaign,
contending that we should repeal the law under which we are now
operating and put in its place a Wilson bill, or a Mills bill, or a
Morrison bill, or a tariff like that of 1846 and 1857, both of which
tariffs proved disastrous to the best interests of the country.
STAND PAT.
It seems to me inconceivable that at a time when many other
nations are contemplating the increase of tariff duties a great
political party in this country should seriously advocate an abandonment of our well-established fiscal policy by lowering our tariff
to the revenue standpoint. Very recently the government of the
Netherlands has taken steps to largely increase import duties, and
everyone knows that the agitation in Great Britain for an abandonment of free trade is well-nigh irresistible, the success of which is
apparently but a question of time. Under such circumstances it
would be supreme folly for this country to do otherwise than "stand
pat" on the tariff proposition, which I feel sure the American people
are determined to do.
So wedded have our people, and particularly the working classes,
become to the idea that protection is better for us than free trade,
that our Democratic friends lack the courage to come out boldly
for a free-trade measure and in favor of free-trade doctrines. "No,'
they say, "we are not free traders, for there is no free-trade party in
the United States; our aim is simply to break down the iniquitous
protection barriers to a revenue standpoint in order that we may
compete on a level with the manufacturers of Great Britain and
the continent of Europe," and so they put it: "We go forth with
tariff reduction and genuine reciprocity inscribed on our banners."
i-S; *' *  ';'..': *   C  ~A




"BLAINE'S PROPHETIC WORDS."- "IN THE MIDST
OF THEIR SUFFERINGS THEY WILL LEARN
THE ONLY WAY THEY CAN BE
PROSPEROUS."
Extracts from remarks of Hon. J. H. GALLINGER of New Hampshire, in
daily Congressional Record, May 19, 1894.
One of the ablest and most far-seeing statesmen that America has ever
produced was the late James G. Blaine. He thus wrote of a change that
he saw must come:
"I love my country and my countrymen; I am an American, and I
rejoice every day that I am. I enjoy the general prosperity of my country, and I know that the workingmen of this country are the best paid, the
best fed, and the best clothed of any laborers on the face of the earth.
Many of them have homes of their own. They are surrounded by all the
comforts and many of the luxuries of life. I shudder, however, at the
thought that the time must come when all this will be changed, when the
general prosperity of the country will be destroyed; when the great body
of workingmen in this land who are now so prosperous will hear their
wives and children cry for bread; that the day must come when the great
factories and manufactories of this land will shut down, and where is now
life and activity there will be the silence of the tomb. And the reason why
this must be so is this The great Southern wing of the Democratic party are
determined to establish the doctrine of Free Trade in this land. They will
be assisted by the Northern allies. There is a great body of visionary, but
educated men, who are employed day by day in writing Free Trade essays
and arguments in favor of the doctrine, which find their way to every newspaper in the land. The great body of our people have never experienced
themselves the sufferings which always result when protective principles
are laid aside. Poisoned and excited by the wild statements of these writers,
and the demagogic appeals of the Democratic speakers, the result will be
that in the very near future those forces which are now working, will be
strong enough to defeat at the polls the party advocating the doctrine of
protection. It must inevitably follow that uncertainty and doubt will ensue.
The business men of the country, fearing the destruction of the principles
of protection, will decline to engage in business; consequently, mills will
shut down, and the workingman will be thrown out of employment. The
people will then see as they have never seen before, that they cannot be
prosperous and have work while the principle is threatened. In the midst
of their sufferings they will learn that the only way they can be prosperous and happy is to vote for the party that has built up the industries bt
which they have gained a livelihood; because they will then see clearly that
when the manufactory is shut down there is no demand for the only thing
which they have to sell, and that is their labor."
In the light of the events that have occurred since November, 1892, we
can see that every word of that remarkable statement has been literally
fulfilled; and many will think that Mr. Blaine must have been inspired to
foresee so correctly what would so speedily come to pass; but it was not
inspiration at all. He simply applied to conditions which he knew would
arise a principle which the history of our country for over a hundred
years had proved to be as invariable as the law of gravitation, and as inexorable. That principle has already been stated, but can properly be repeated: Whenever Free Trade, or a Tariff for Revenue Only, has prevailed,
or there has been a threat of either, with a probability that that threat
would be executed —we have had widespread business depression, lack of
confidence, lack of credit, stoppage of business, lack of employment, bankruptcy, disorder and ruin, with all their attendant evil consequences. This
rule is not a matter of opinion, nor of argument, but of stern, impartial
and unimpeachable history. On another occasion Mr. Blaine said: "The
benefit of protection goes first and last to the men who earn their bread
in the sweat of their faces. The auspicious and momentous result is that
never before in the history of the world has comfort been enjoyed, educations acquired and independence secured by so large a proportion of the
total population as in the United States of America."
Mr. Gladstone, the eminent leader of the free traders in England, admits the marvelous increase of wealth acquired by the United States under
a protective tariff, but insists that the results would have been even larger
under free trade. He produces no facts to sustain his views, and therefore
it is simply an expression of opinion.
But undisputed facts are infinitely stronger and more decisive than
opinions or arguments, no matter how great or how able are their authors,
and therefore the facts shall decide this question.
Mr. Blaine marshaled these facts clearly and forcibly from the very
best authorities as follows:
"In 1860 the population of the United States was in round numbers
31,000,000. At the same time the population of the United Kingdom was
in round numbers 29,000,000. The wealth of the United States at that time
was $14,000,000,000; the wealth of the United Kingdom  was $29,000.000,000. The United Kingdom had therefore nearly the same population,
but more than double the wealth of the United States, with machinery for
manufacturing four-fold greater than that of the United States. At the
end of twenty years (1880) it appeared that the United States had added
nearly $30,000,000,000 to her wealth, while the United Kingdom had added
nearly $16,000,000,000, or about one-half.
a-3


Il




"OUR LAWS SHALL IN NO EVENT AFFORD: ADVANTAGE IN OUR MARKET TO FOREIGN INDUSTRIES."
Extract from remarks of Hon. JOHN F. LACEY of Iowa, in daily Congressional Record, January 25, 1904.
I wish leave in this connection, as some controversy seems to exist
as to the views of the President upon the tariff revision, to insert an extract from a speech delivered by him on April 4 last at Minneapolis.
EXTRACT FROX SPEECH OF PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT.
We are now in a condition of prosperity unparalleled, not merely in
our own history, but in the history of any other nation.
This prosperity is deep rooted and stands on a firm basis because
it is due to the fact that the average American has in him the stuff out
of which victors are made in the great industrial contests of the present
is now able to use and develop his qualities to best advantage under our
well-established economic system.
We are winning headship among the nations of the world because
our people are able to keep their high average of individual citizenship
and to show their mastery in the hard, complex, pushing life of the age.
There will be fluctuations from time to time in our prosperity, but
it will continue to grow just so long as we keep up this high average of
individual citizenship and permit it to work out its own salvation under
proper economic legislation.
The present phenomenal prosperity has been won under a tariff which
was made in accordance with certain fixed and definite principles, the most
important of which is an avowed determination to protect the interests of
the American producer, business man, wage-worker, and farmer alike.
The general tariff policy, to which, with regard to changes in detail,
I believe this country is irrevocably committed, is fundamentally based
upon ample recognition of the difference between the cost of production
-that is, the cost of labor-here and abroad, and of the need to see to it
that our laws shall in no event afford advantage in our market to foreign
industries over American industries, to foreign capital over American
capital, to foreign labor over our own labor.
NEED HIGH TYPE OF LABOR.
This country has and this country needs better paid, better educated,
better fed, and better clothed workingmen, of a higher type than are to
be found in any foreign country.
It has and it needs a higher, more vigorous, and more prosperous type
of tillers of the soil than is possessed by any other country.
The business men, the merchants and manufacturers, and the managers of the transportation interests show  the same superiority when
compared with men of their type abroad.
The events of the last few years have shown how skilfully the leaders
of American industry use in international business competition the mighty
industrial weapons forged for them by the resources of our country, the
wisdom of our laws, and the skill, the inventive genius, and the adrhinistrative capacity of our people.
It is of course, a mere truism to say that we want to use everything
in our power to foster the welfare of our entire body politic. In other
words, we need to treat the tariff as a business proposition from the
standpoint of the interests of the country as a whole, and not with reference to the temporary needs of any political party. It is almost as necessary that our policy should be stable as that it should be wise.
TARIFF CHANGES.
A nation like ours could not long stand the ruinous policy of readjusting its business to radical changes in the tariff at short intervals,
especially when, as now, owing to the immense extent and variety of our
products, the tariff schedules carry rates of duty on thousands of different articles.
Sweeping and violent changes in such a tariff, touching so vitally
the interests of all of us, embracing agriculture, labor, manufactures, and
commerce, would be disastrous in any event, and they would be fatal to
our present well-being if approached on the theory that the principle of
the protective tariff was to be abandoned.
The business world-that is, the entire American world-can not
afford, if it has any regard for its own welfare, even to consider the advisability of abandoning the present system.
Yet, on the other hand, where the industrial conditions so frequently
change, as with us must of necessity be the case, it is a matter of prime
importance that we should be able from time to time to adapt our economic policy to the changed conditions.
Our aim should be to preserve the policy of a protective tariff. In
which the nation as a whole has acquiesced, and yet wherever and whenever necessary to change the duties in particular paragraphs or schedules
as matters of legislative detail, if such a change is demanded by the interests of the nation as a whole.
In making any readjustment there are certain important considerations which can not be -disregarded. If a tariff law has on the whole
worked well, and if business has prospered under it and is prospering,
it may be better to endure some inconveniences and inequalities for a
time than by making changes to risk causing disturbance and, perhaps,
paralysis in the industries and business of the country. * * 
THE TRUSTS.
One point we must steadily keep in mind. The question of tariff
revision, speaking broadly, stands wholly apart from the question of dealing with the trusts. No change in tariff duties can have any substantial
effect in solving the so-called trust problem.
Certain great trusts or great corporations are wholly unaffected by
the tariff. Practically all the others that are of any importance have.
as a matter of fact, numbers of smaller American competitors, and of
course a change in the tariff which would work injury to the large corporation would work not merely injury, but destruction, to its smaller
competitors; and equally, of course, such a change would mean disaster
to all the wage-workers connected with either the large or the small
corporations. *  *  *
a-4




"PROTECTION."-"WHAT IT IS AND THE PRINCIPLES
ON WHICH IT IS FOUNDED."
Extract from remarks of Hon. THOMAS B. REED of Maine, in
House of Representatives, May 19, 1888. (Congressional Record, Vol. 19. page 4442.)
Perhaps the best argument I can make for protection is to state
what it is and the principles on which it is founded. Man derives his
greatest power from his association with other men, his union with
his fellows. Whoever considers the human being as a creature alone,
by himself, isolated and separated, and tries to comprehend mankind
by mathematically adding these atoms together, has utterly failed to
comprehend the human race and its tremendous mission. Sixty millions even of such creatures, without association, are only so many
beasts that perish. But sixty millions of men, welded together by
national brotherhood, each supporting, sustaining, and buttressing
the other, are the sure conquerors of all those mighty powers of
nature which alone constitute the wealth of this world. The great
blunder of the Herr professor of political economy is that he treats
human beings as if every man were so many foot-pounds, such and
such a fraction of a horse-power. All the soul of man he leaves out.
Think for a moment of the foundation principles involved in this
question, which I now ask. Where does wealth come from? It comes
from the power of man to let loose and yet guide those elemental
forces, the energy of which is infinite. It comes from the power of
man to force the earth to give her increase, to hold in the bellying
sail the passing breeze, to harness the tumbling waterfall, to dam up
the great rivers, to put bits, in the teeth of the lightning. Footpounds and fractions of a horse-power will never do this. It takes
brains and the union of foot-pounds and fractions of a horse-power
working harmoniously together.
To grasp the full powers of nature, to reap the richest wealth of
the world, we must utilize the full power of man, not merely muscles
and brains, but those intangible qualities which we call energy, vigor,
ambition, confidence, and courage. Have you never remarked the
wonderful difference between a sleepy country village, lying lazily
alongside an unused waterfall, where more than half the energy of
the people was lost for lack of the kind of work they wanted to do;
where, whenever three men met together in the road, the rest looked
out of the windows, idly wondering what the riot was about, and
that same village, after the banks were lined with workshops and the
air was noisy with the whirr of the spindles, and every man was so
eager to work, that there never seemed hours enough in the day to
tear from the powers of nature their imprisoned richness? If you
have, you have also seen the contrast between men left to themselves,
so many foot-pounds and fractions of a horse-power, and men incited
by hope, spurred on by ambition, and lighted on their way by the
confidence of success.
For a nation to get out of itself or out of the earth all of the
wealth there is in both, it is not necessary for the nation to buy cheap
or sell dear. That concerns individuals alone. What concerns the
nation, is how to utilize all the work there is in men, both of muscle
and brain, of body and of soul, in the great enterprise of setting in
lotion the ever-gratuitous forces of nature. How shall you get out
f the people of a nation their full powers? Right here is precisely
he dividing line. The let-alone school say leave individual man to
is own devices. The protectionist school say let us stimulate comined and aggregated man to united endeavor.


a-5




"A PROGRESSIVE ERA UNDER A SYSTEM THOROUGH.
LY AMERICAN.S
Extract from remarks bf lIon. WILLIAM McKINLEY, of Ohio, in
House of Representatives, and printed in daily Congressional Record, May 7. 1890.
We have now enjoyed twenty-nine years continuously of protective
tariff laws-the longest uninterrupted period in which that policy
has prevailed since the formation of the Federal Government-and
we find ourselves at the end of that period in a condition of independence and prosperity the like of which has never been witnessed at any
other period in the history of our country, and the like of which has
no parallel in the recorded history of the world.
In all that goes to make a nation great and strong and independent, we have made extraordinary strides. In arts, in science, in literature, in manufactures, in invention, in scientific principles applied
to manufactures and to agriculture, in wealth and credit, and national
honor, we are at the very front, abreast with the best, and behind
none.
In 1860, after fourteen years of a revenue tariff, just the kind of
a tariff that our political adversaries are advocating to-day, the business of the country was prostrated, agriculture was deplorably depressed, manufacturing was on the decline, and the poverty of the
Government itself made this nation a byword in the financial centers
of the world.
We had neither money nor credit. Both are essential. A nation
can get on if it has abundant revenues, but if it has none it must
have credit. We had neither, as a legacy of the Democratic revenue
tariff. We have both now. We have a surplus revenue and a
spotless credit. I need not state what is so fresh in our minds, so
recent in our history, as to be known to every gentleman who hear
me, that from the inauguration of the protective laws of 1861, the ol
Morrill tariff —which has brought to that veteran statesman the highes
honor, and will give to him the proudest monument-this condition
changed. Confidence was restored, courage was inspired, the Govern
ment started upon a progressive era under a system  thoroughly
American.
With a great war on our hands, with an army to enlist and prepar
for service, with untold millions of money to supply, the protectit
tariff never failed us in a single emergency, and while money wa
flowing into our Treasury to save the Government, industries wer
springing up all over the land-the foundation and corner-stone o
our prosperity and glory.
a-6


I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I




I




"OPINIONS OF PRESIDENTS." —"WHAT THESE GREAT
MEN THOUGHT OF PROTECTION."
Extracts from remarks of Hon. J. H. GALLINGER of New Hampshire, in
daily Congressional Record, May 16, 1894.
OPINIONS OF PRESIDENTS.
It may not be uninteresting nor unprofitable to learn what these great
men thought of Protection.
George Washington, in his first annual message, speaking of our people, said: "Their safety and interest require that they promote such manufactures as tend to render them independent of others for essentials, particularly military supplies." In his eighth and last annual message Washington said: "Congress has repeatedly, and not without success, directed
their attention to the encouragement of manufactures. The object is of too
much consequence not to insure a continuance of their efforts in every way
which shall appear eligible."
John Adams, our second President, in his last annual message congratulated the country upon the great prosperity then existing, and added:
"I observe, with much satisfaction, that the product of the revenue during
the present year has been more considerable than during any former period.
This result affords conclusive evidence of the great resources of the country,
and of the wisdom and efficiency of the measures which have been adopted
by Congress for the protection of commerce and preservation of the public
credit."
Thomas Jefferson, our third President, often referred to as the Founder
of the Democratic Party, in his second annual message, in enumerating the
landmarks by which we are to guide ourselves, mentions as one of the most
prominent: "To protect the manufactures adapted to our circumstances."
Again he wrote: "The general inquiry now is, shall we Thake our own comforts or go without them at the will of a foreign nation? He, therefore,
who is now against domestic manufactures, must be for reducing us either
to a dependence upon that nation, or to be clothed in skins and live like
beasts in caves and dens. I am proud to say I am not one of these. Experience has taught me that manufactures are now as necessary to our
independence as to our comforts."
James Madison, our fourth President, recognized as "the Father of the
Constitution," in a special message to Congress, May 23, 1809, said: "It
will be worthy of the just and provident care of Congress to make such
further alterations in the laws as will more especially protect and foster
the several branches of manufacture which have been recently instituted
or extended by the laudable exertions of our citizens."
James Monroe, our fifth President, in his inaugural said: "Our manufactures will likewise require the systematic and fostering care of the
government. Possessing, as we do, all the raw materials, the fruit of our
own soil and Industry, we ought not to depend, in the degree we have done,
on supplies from other countries. Equally important is it to provide at
home a market for our raw materials, as by extending the competition
it will enhance the price and protect the cultivator against the casualties
incident to foreign market."
President John Quincy Adams, who succeeded Mr. Monroe, was also
a strong friend of protection, and in his fourth annual message discusses
at some length our agricultural, commercial and manufacturing interests,
and shows that "all these Interests are alike under the protecting powers
of the legislative authority," and proceeds to make himself clear and explicit in his defense of the principles of protection.
President Andrew Jackson said in his annual message, in December,
1832, concerning the results and benefits of eight years of protection under
the Tariffs of 1824 and 1828: "Our country presents, on every side, marks
of prosperity and happiness, unequaled, perhaps, in any other portion of the
world."
President William H. Harrison, a Whig and a strong protectionist,
succeeded Mr. Van Buren, but he lived only a month after his inauguration
and had no opportunity to make his opinions felt.
President Zachary Taylor succeeded Mr. Polk, and in his first annual
message said: "I do not doubt the right or duty of Congress to encourage
domestic industry. I look to the wisdom and patriotism of Congress for the
adoption of a system which may place home labor, at last, on a sure and
permanent footing, and, by due encouragement of manufactures, give new
and increased stimulus to agriculture and promote the development of our
vast resources and the extension of our commerce."
President Fillmore in his annual message in December, 1851, said:
"The policy which dictated a low rate of duties on foreign merchandise,
it was thought by those who established it, would tend to benefit the farming population by increasing the demand and raising the price of our agricultural products in foreign markets. The facts, however, seem to show,
incontestably, that no such result has followed the adoption of this policy."
James Buchanan, the last Democratic President before 1861, in his
annual message said of that distressful free trade period: "With unsurpassed plenty in all the productions and all the elements of natural wealth
our manufacturers have suspended: our public works are retarded; our
private enterprises of different kinds are abandoned; and thousands of useful laborers are thrown out of employment and reduced to want. We have
possessed all the elements of material wealth in rich abundance, and yet,
notwithstanding all these advantages, our country is in a deplorable condition."
Every President from Washington to Buchanan, except Polk, and possibly Van Buren and Pierce, were in favor of protection to home industries,
and their statements have been quoted in proof thereof. As protection has
always been a cardinal doctrine in Republican platforms and policy, so all
Republican Presidents have been firm defenders of protection.
a-7




HON. THOS. B. REED.
"YOU MUST ASSURE TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
AMERICAN     MARKETS."
From remarks of Hon. THOMAS B. REED of Maine, in daily
Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Session, page 4668.
The revenue reform argument is either a false pretense or covers
the whole ground. Protection is either in its essence a benefit or a
curse. You cannot dilute a curse and make it a blessing. Ratsbane
and water are no more food than ratsbane pure. Incidental protection is a sham. Tariff for revenue only goes down before the
same arguments which are used against protection. If protection
be a tax for manufacturers' benefit, then it is the same tax if it be
the result of even a revenue tariff. Incidental protection is, of the
most, inexcusable. It is an accident which ought to be avoided like
a railroad disaster. If you take one dollar from the citizen for the
Treasury, and four for the manufacturer, is it any the less robbery
that you call it a revenue tariff?-Page 4667-8.
On the face of the earth to-day there are but two sets of people
who believe in free trade, whether pure and simple or disguised as
revenue reform, and those two are the masked majority of the Committee on Ways and Means and their followers and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, with Ireland suppressed.
Russia, the granary of Europe, has abandoned free trade, with the
striking result that whereas, in 1876, before the duties were raised,
she bought eight million hundred-weight of British metals and paid
therefor thirty million of dollars (eight for thirty), she got the
same quantity in 1884 and paid only seventeen million for it (eight
for seventeen). Three dollars and seventy-five cents per hundredweight before tariff and $2.121/ after. Austria, Germany, Italy,
Mexico, and the Dominion of Canada, that child of Britain herself,
have all joined the army of protection. It is the instinct of humanity
against the assumptions of the book men. It is the wisdom of the
race against the wisdom of the few.-Page 4669.
There is only one way to get the best work out of men, and that
is to give each the work he can do best. You can only accomplish
this by diversifying industry. To diversify industry completely in
a country such as ours, there is but one way given under Heaven
among men. To enable the American people themselves to supply
all their wants you must give and assure to the American people the
American markets. What does this phrase mean in practical life?
It means that we, the nation, say to capital, "Embark yourself in
the manufacture of such and such articles, and you shall have a
market to the extent of the American people."
Capital then says to labor, "Go with me into this new field, all of
you who like this work best, and we will share the results." Then
begins a new industry. Multiply this by hundreds, and you have a
community where every man honestly minded will get what on the
whole suits him best, and the nation will get the greatest amount of
the ever-gratuitous forces of nature.




"NOT OPEN MINTS, BUT OPEN MILLS."
xtract from McKINLEY'S Letter of Acceptance, 1896; printed on page
415, Appendix to bound Congressional Record, 1st Session, 55th Congress; part of remarks of Hon. C. H. GROSVENOR, in House of Representatives, July 19, 1897.
Our shops are closed or running on half time at reduced wages and
mall profit, if not actual loss. Our men at home are idle, and while they
are idle men abroad are occupied in supplying us with goods. Our univaled home market for the farmer has also greatly suffered because those
ho constitute it —the great army of American wage earners-are without
he work end wages they formerly had. If they can not earn wages they
an not buy products. They can not earn if they have no employment, and
hen they do not earn the farmer's home market is lessened and impaired,
and the loss is felt by both producer and consumer. The loss of earning
power alone in this country in the past three years is sufficient to have
roduced our unfortunate business situation. If our labor was well emloyed, and employed at as remunerative wages as in 1892, in a few months
very farmer in the land would feel the glad change in the increased deand for his.products and in the better prices which he would receive.
NOT OPEN MINTS, BUT OPEN MILLS.
It is not an increase in the volume of money which is the need of the
ime, but an increase in the volume of business. Not an increase of coin,
but an increase of confidence. Not more coinage, but a more active use of
the money coined. Not open mints for the unlimited coinage of the silver
f the world, but open mills for the full and unrestricted labor of American
worKingmen. The employment of our mints for the coinage of the silver
of the world would not bring the necessaries and comforts of life back to
our people. This will only come with the employment of the masses,
and such employment is certain to follow the reestablishment of a wise
protective policy which shall encourage manufacturing at home. Protection
has lost none of its virtue and importance. The first duty of the Republican party, if restored to power in the country, will be the enactment of
atariff law which will raise all the money necessary to conduct the Government, economically and honestly administered, and so adjusted as to
ive preference to home manufactures and adequate, protection to home
labor and the home market. We are not committed to any special schedules
or rates of duty. They are and should be always subject to change to
meet new conditions, but the principle upon which rates of duty are imposed remains the same. Our duties should always be high enough to
measure the difference between the wages paid labor at home and in competing countries, and to adequately protect American investments and
American enterprises.
OUR FARMERS AND THE TAARIF.
Our farmers have been hurt by the changes in our tariff legislation
as severely as our laborers and manufacturers, badly as they have suffered.
The Republican platform wisely declares in favor of such encouragement to
our sugar interests "as will lead to the production on American soil of all
the sugar which the American people use."  It promises to our wool and
woolen interests "the most ample protection," a guaranty that ought to
commend itself to every patriotic citizen.  Never was a more grievous
wrong done the farmers of our country than that so unjustly inflicted during
the past three years upon the wool growers of America. Although among
our most industrious and useful citizens, their interests have been practically destroyed and our woolen manufacturers involved in similar disaster.
At no time within the past thirty-six years, and perhaps never during any
previous period, have so many of our woolen factories been suspended as
now. The Republican party can be relied upon to correct these great
wrongs, if again intrusted with the control of Congress.
RECIPROCITY AND ITS EFFECTS.
Another declaration of the Republican platform  tl;ht has my most
cordial support is that which favors reciprocity. The splendid results Of
the reciprocity arrangements that were made under authority of the tariff
law of 1890 are striking and suggestive. The brief period they were in
force, in most cases only three years, was not long enough to thoroughly
test their great value, but sufficient was shown by the trial to conclusively
demonstrate the importance and the wisdom of their adoption.  In 1892
the export trade of the United States attained the highest point in our
history. The aggregate of our exports that year reached the immense sum
of $1,030,278,148, a sum greater by $100,000.000 than the exports of any
previous year. In 1893, owing to the threat of unfriendly tariff legislation, the total dropped to $847,665,194.  Our exports of domestic merchandise decreased $189,000,000, but reciprocity still secured us a large
trade in Central and South America and a larger trade with the West
Indies than we had ever before enjoyed. The increase of trade with the
countries with which we had reciprocity agreements was $3,560,515 over
our trade in 1892 and $16,440,721 over our trade in 1891. The only countries with which the United States traded that showed Increased exports in
1893 were practically those with which we had reciprocity arrangements.
The reciprocity treaty between this country and Spain, touching the
markets of Cuba and Puerto Rico, was announced September 1, 1891.
The growth of our trade with Cuba was phenomenal. In 1891 we sold that
country but 114,441 barrels of flour; in 1892, 366,175; in 1893, 616,406,
arid in 1894, 662,248. Here was a growth of nearly 500 per cent., while
our exportations of flour to Cuba for the year ending June 30, 1895 -the year following the repeal of the reciprocity treaty-fell to 379,856
barrels, a loss of nearly half our trade with that country. The value of
our total exports of merchandise from the United States to Cuba in 1891
the year prior to the negotiation of the reciprocity treaty-was $12,224.888; in 1892, $17,953,579; in 1893, $24,157,698; in 1894, $20,125,32i,
but in 1895, after the annulment of the reciprocity agreement, it fell to
only $12,887,661. Many similar examples might be given of our increased
trade under reciprocity with other countries.


~a-9




"WHAT PROTECTION HAS DONE FOR GERMANY."
Extract from remarks of Hon.WM. D. KELLEY of Pennsylvania, h
the House of Representatives, January 81, 1866. (Congressiona
Globe, page 556, 39th Congress, 1et Session.)
Before the establishment of the Zoll-Verein, which occurred in 1835
Germany exported raw materials. Having sold her skins for a six
pence, she bought back what few tails she could at any. price. Her
laboring people were poor, and, as is now the case in Ireland, in sucd
excess of her ability to feed and clothe them, that she was ever
ready to sell a contingent to any party that might be engaged in war
and, if need be, to swell the ranks of both contending armies. In th
absence of protective duties, there was nothing of so little value to
her as an able-bodied German peasant. But the establishment of thai
Customs Union has changed all this. It protects her industry, and a
a consequence, she imports raw materials from America and all other
countries that adhere to her ancient semi-barbarous policy, and
exports her grain and wool condensed into broadcloth and the multi
form products of well-protected industry. The annual crop derivec
from her soil increases per acre steadily as that of England, anC
in about the ratio of the diminution of ours. Wise laws have here
again demonstrated the truth that there is a harmony between the
varied interests of the people of a country, and that by a wide anc
universal diversification of employments, the welfare of each and al
is advanced.
Forty years ago England had not perfected her protective systen
so far as to admit all raw materials free of duty, and Germany sold
her thirty million pounds of raw wool, upon which she collected a
duty of twelve cents a pound, part of which, when manufactured inte
low grades of cloth, she sold at immense profits in Germany. Bul
thirty years of protection have changed all this. Germany now raises
over one hundred million pounds of wool and imports very considerable quantities; and having compacted her grain and wool into fine
cloths, she exports them to all parts of the world.
"When the Zoll-Verein was formed," says Henry C. Carey, "the
total import of raw cotton and cotton yarn was about three hundred
thousand cwts.; but so rapid was the extension of the manufacture
that in less than six years it has doubled; and so cheaply were cotton
goods supplied that a large export trade had already arisen. In 1845
when the Union was but ten years old, the import of cotton and yarn
had reached a million of hundred-weights, and since that time there
has been a large increase. The iron manufacture also grew so rapidly
that, whereas, in 1834, the consumption had been only eleven pounds
per head, in 1847 it had risen to twenty-five pounds, having thus
more than doubled; and with each step in this direction, the peopJle
were obtaining better machinery for cultivating the land and for
converting its raw products into manufactured ones."


4
I
i
r
h
r
II
I
D
t
s
r
I
i
e
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
t
a
I
1
1
I
II
r
I


I




HON. WM. D. KELLEY OF PENNSYLVANIA.
"SOUTHERN POLITICIANS REFUSED TO ACCEPT ANY
POLICY EXCEPT FREE TRADE."
Extracts from remarks of Hon. WM. D. KELLEY, of Pennsylvania,
in House of Representatives, printed in daily Congressional
Record (50th Congress, 1st Session, page 3190.)
It was in vain that the friends of protection appealed to the fact
that the duties levied on foreign goods did not necessarily enhance
their cost to the consumer; that the competition among home manufacturers and between them and foreigners had greatly reduced the
price of nearly every article properly protected; that foreign manufacturers always had and always would advance their prices according to our dependence upon them; that domestic competition was the
only safety the country had against foreign imposition; that it was
necessary we should become our own manufacturers, in a fair degree,
to render ourselves independent of other nations in times of war, as
well as to guard against the vacillations in foreign legislation; that
the. South would be vastly the gainer by having the market for its
products at its own doors, to avoid the cost of their transit across the
Atlantic; that, in the event of the repression or want of proper
extension of our manufactures by the adoption of the free-trade
system, the imports of foreign goods to meet the public wants would
soon exceed the ability of the people to pay and inevitably involve
the country in bankruptcy. But Southern politicians remained inflexible and refused to accept any policy except free trade, to the
utter abandonment of the principles of protection. Whether they
were jealous of the greater prosperity of the North and desirous to
cripple its energies, or whether they were truly fearful of bankrupting the South, we shall not wait to inquire.
PAGE 5717:
Why, sir, the Southern States, with native tin ore, and fuel, and the
labor of a million of people now practically idle, can dig the steel,
mine the coal, gather the limestone, smelt the ore, convert it into
steel, and roll and hammer it if need be into first-class steel plates
and sheet-iron. They can do all that within the limits of the old
Confederacy, and in doing it not only give employment to more than
a million of idle men, but invite millions of capital and tens and
hundreds of thousands of skilled men into that region to deal with all
the metals in which the South so abounds.
PAGE 5501:
In 1856 the rate of duty on the aggregate of our imports was 20.3,
and the number of immigrants were 200,436; in 1859 the rate of
duties had been reduced to 14.6, and the number of immigrants fell to
121.282. In 1861, by the acts of March 2, August 5, and December
2., the rate of duties was further reduced to 11.2. This broke the
camel's back. So many men were thrown out of employment and
wages sunk so low that none but agriculturists could come to us with
any prospect of improving their condition and immigration sank to a
point lower than it had been since the ever-to-be-remembered freetrade crisis of 183740. In that year but 91,920 immigrants arrived,
and the depression continued through the next year,and the number
of immigrants was but 91,987. By the act of July 14, 1862, the duties
were raised, so that in 1863 they were up to 23.7, and the immigration
nearly equaled that of the two preceding years, having gone up to
176,282. By the several acts of 1864, 1865, and 1866 the duties were
increased, so that the duties on importations of 1866 averaged 40.2
per cent., and the immigration went up to 318,554. Last year, when
the West was further oppressed by the increase of duties on wool and
copper, they averaged 41.2, and the number of immigrants went up to
352,569; and the Commissioners of Immigration assure us that this
year the number will exceed 400,000.




"PROGRESS IN MANUFACTURE IN THE UNITED
STATES."
Extracts from remarks of Hon. M. E. OLMSTED of Pennsylvania, in dafll
Congressional Record, June 20, 1904.
The report of the Moseley Industrial Commission closes with a general
statement, entitled "Progress in manufacture in the United States at the
end of the nineteenth century." It begins by calling attention to the fact
that manufactures, which formed in 1875 but 16% per cent. of the exports
of domestic merchandise, formed in the period 1899-1901 291/ per cent. of
the exports of domestic merchandise. It also calls attention to the fact that
the growth of exports.of manufactures from the United States from 1889 to
1901 has been much more rapid than the growth of manufactures exported
from the United Kingdom, and says:
Comparison between detailed headings in the trade accounts of the two
countries is probably somewhat unsafe, but some idea of the prospect of the
United States becoming a greater exporter than this country-the United
Kingdom-may be gathered by noticing that the values of machinery exported as well as that of the total exports of iron and steel manufactures,
which were both, five years ago, less than a quarter of the corresponding
values in this country, amounted at the end of the century to more than halt
those values.
It also calls attention to the fact that the production of pig iron grew
from 4,000,000 tons, average, in 1884 and 1885 in the United States to
13,705,000 tons in 1889-1900, while that of the United Kingdom only grew
from 7,614,000 tons to 9,191,000, and that the growth in production of steel
in the United States was even more rapid.
It also calls attention to the growth of the tin-plate industry in the
United States, saying:
Previous to 1890 the United States produced practically no tin plates
and sheets, and the industry owes its existence almost wholly to the protective tariff placed upon these goods in 1890, which became operative on July
1, 1891. The growth of the industry since that date has been very remarkable and has resulted in this country (the United Kingdom) to a large
extent losing its best customer. * * * Much of our loss, due to the
closing of the American markets against us, has been made good by markets
having been found elsewhere; but, in spite of this, the blow to the trade has
been very severe.
In closing the general discussion of prosperity in American manufactures, the report says:
Before concluding, it may be as well to suggest, briefly, the causes that
have contributed to the enormous expansion of manufacturing industries in
the United States. This is not the place to discuss in detail the causes which
may be credited as political. That a certain proportion of the growth of the
manufacturing industries of the United States Is attributable to the direct
action of government, and especially to the operation of the tariff, is obvious, and, indeed, has been referred to incidentally in discussing the growth
of tin-plate manufacture in the United States.
A word, however, may be said as to the causes of growth which depend
on the natural advantages possessed by the United States and the personal
characteristics of her citizens.  Under the first head come the enormous
coal resources of the United States, coupled with the rich deposits of Iron
ore. Under the second comes a whole group of characteristics, which to a
large extent evade statistical analysis. There is, first, the readiness of the
manufacturer to adopt, and of the workman to accede to, the use of laborsaving devices. Allied to this is the largeness of scale, with its resultant
economies, with which manufactures are conceived and carried on.
The Moseley Industrial Commission, composed of officers of the leading Labor Unions of England, visited the United States in 1902. Each member was required to carefully investigate and report upon conditions of
American labor in the industry which his union represented, and also to
make specific answers to certain questions supplied to each member of the
Commission. The words here quoted are from the reports submitted by these
men after their return to England.


I
I
I
I


a-12






IBENEFITS     RECEIVED      THROUGH      HIGH   TARIFF    ON
STEEL."
Extract from remarks of lon. J. H. GALLINGER, of iew Hampshire, in daily Congressional Record, May 17, 1894.
Prior to 1870 the tariff duty on steel rails was so low, and the
wages of American laborers in that business were so high in comparison with those of English laborers, that it was impossible to
compete with the British iron masters in that business. But in 1870
Congress laid a duty of $?8 a ton on steel rails and ingots, and the
results have been even more wonderful than in the wool industry! In
1870 only 30,000 tens of steel rails were made in this country, but
in 1888 we manufactured 1,386,277 tons of steel rails; and from 1877
to 1890, inclusive, we made 16,763,116 tons of steel rails, enough to
build or relay over 150,000 miles of railway; and over 5,500,000 tons of
Bessemer steel ingots for other industrial purposes.
The average cost of this 22,300,000 tons of steel was about $50 per
ton, amounting to the enormous sum of $1,115,000,000. Suppose we
allow $220,000,000, or about twenty per cent., as profits to the manufacturers, a profit probably much larger than the actual profit, we
shall have left a balance of $895,000,000 to the credit of the laboring
men, who converted that great mountain of iron ore into first-class
steel. Who can say that protection has not been a benefit to the
laborers of this country?  Nearly nine hundred millions of dollars
divided among the laborers engaged in a single industry in twelve
years! Were these workingmen growing poorer under protection.
Again, suppose the American Congress had followed the advice of
our free-trade friends and not put on that duty of $28 per ton, not
any other protective duty. Of course we should have been obliged
to import from England all that enormous quantity of steel. The
free trader asks: "What diffeerence would this have made with our
workingmen, cur capitalists, and our country?"
This: The British workingmen would have received nearly $900,000,000, or its English equivalent, for that labor, instead of the American; the British capitalists would have pocketed that $220,000,000
of profits, or its English equivalent, instead of the American; and
Great Britain would be hugely enjoying that $1,115,000,000, or its
English equivalent, instead of the United States. True, we would
have had our rails and our ingots; but the resulting benefits to our
nation would have been as follows: On the one hand, free trade, plus
the steel, but minus $220,000,000 of profits, and minus $895,000,000
of wages; and, on the other, protection, plus the steel, and plus
$220,000,000 of profits, and plus $895,000,000 of wages.
But this is not all the benefits we have received through this high
tariff on steel. The New York Press of May 4, 1891, stated a truth
well known to protectionists in these words: "In 1870 the price of
steel rails was $106.75 per ton, but from that date, by means of
competition and improved machinery, the price has gradually decreased till it has reached $28 per ton, and even less, and the duty
has been reduced, while the average wages of the men employed have
increased. As stated above, we made in 1888, 1,386,277 tons of steel
rails, and used them at home, while of foreign steel rails we imported and used but 63,000 tons; but in 1890 we made, and our home
market consumed, 1,867,837 tons, a gain of 481,560 tons in two years,
while our importation of foreign rails fell off to 204 tons."
Who can estimate the value of the home market which this mighty
industry has created for our agricultural and manufactured products
to supply those laborers and their families with food and clothing
and the other necessaries and comforts of life?


a-13




"PROTECTlVE TARIFFS HAVE NOT INTERRUPTED
OUR EXPORT TRADE-IT HAS INCREASED
UNDER THEM."
Extract from remarks of Hon. WILLIAM McKINLEY of Ohio, in
House of Representatives, and printed in daily Congressional Record, May 7, 1890.
Protective tariffs have not interrupted our export trade, but it has
increased under them. In the year 1843, being the first year after
the protective tariff of 1842 went into operation, our exports exceeded
our imports $40,392,229, and in the following year they exceeded our
imports $3,141,226. In the two years following the excess of imports
over exports was $15,475,000. The last year under that tariff the excess of exports over imports was $34,317,249. So during the five years
of the tariff of 1842 the excess of exports over imports was $62,375,000. Under the low tariff of 1846 this was reversed, and, with the
single exception of 1858, the imports exceeded the exports (covering
a period of fourteen years) $465,553,625.
During the war and down to 1875 the imports, with two exceptions, exceeded the exports. From 1876 down to 1889, inclusive (covering a period of fourteen years), there were only two years when
our imports exceeded our exports, and the total excess of exports
over imports was $1,581,906,871 of the products of our people more
than we brought into the United States. The balance of trade has
been almost uninterruptedly in our favor during the protective tariff
periods of our history, and against us with few exceptions during
revenue-tarilf periods. This would seem to indicate a healthful business condition with the outside world, resulting from the Republican
economic system, and an unhealthful condition, where we had to send
money out of the country to pay our balances under the Democratic system. The chief complaint against this bill comes from importers and consignees here on the one hand, and the foreign merchants and consignors abroad. Why do they complain? Manifestly
because in some way this bill will check their business here and increase the business of our own manufacturers and producers; it will
diminish the importation of competing foreign goods and increase the
consumption of home-made goods. This may be a good reason to
influence the foreigner to oppose its passage, but it is hardly a sound
reason why Americans should oppose it.
If the bill checks foreign importation of goods competing with
ours, it will increase our production and necessarily increase the demand for labor at home. This may be a good reason why the cheap
labor of other countries should be unfriendly to this bill, but furnishes the best of reasons why the workmen of the United States
should favor it as they do. We do not conceal the purpose of this
bill-we want our own countrymen and all mankind to know it. It is
to increase our production here, diversify our productive industries,
enlarge the field, and increase the demand for American workmen.
What American can oppose these worthy and patriotic objects?
Others not Americans may find justification for doing so. This bill
is an American bill. It is made for the American people and American interests.
a-14




"ROYAL TRUMPETERS OF FREE TRADE WI1 TAKE
SIDES AGAINST THE UNITED STATES               I1
ALL COMMERCIAL CONTESTS."
lfxtract from  renmarks of lion. J. S. 3MORRILL, of Vermont, in
Hot.ie bf Reprelsenlaftives, December 8, 1881. (Congre.siolnl Record, Vol. 13, pdge 58.)
If royal "cowboys" who attempted to whistle down Americ;.n independence one hundred years ago ingloriously failed, so it may be
hoped will fail royal trumpeters of free trade, who seem to take sides
against the United States in all commercial contests for industrial
independence.
Among the branches of manufactures absolutely waked into life
lby the tariff of 1861, and Yhich then had no place above zero, may
I e named crlockery atid  frinaware. The number of twhite-ware factories is now fifty-three, with forty decorating establishments; and
the products, amounting to several millions, are sold at prices 25 to
50 per cent; below the prevailing prices of twenty yeai's ago. Clay
and kaolin, equal to the best in China, have been found easti west,
and south in such abundance, as to promise a large extension of
American enterprise, not only in the orditairy, but in the highest
branches of ceramic art. Steel may.also here claim its birth. No
more of all sorts than 11,838 tons were made in 1S60, but 1,397,015
tots were made in 1880. Those who obljectedt to a duty o steel have
found they were biting something more than a file. Silks, in 1860,
hardly iuwound from the cocoon, Were creeping along, with only a
small Bhdwifh of scwigti  silk and  fe\W trimmrings, but nowv this
industry rises to national implortance, furnishing apt employment to
many thousand women as well as to men; and the annual products,
sharply et ompetihig With even the Bonnet silks of Lyons, amouilt to,
the round sum of $34,500,000.  Notwithstanding the exceptionally
heavy duties, I am assured that silk goods in general are sold for
25 per cent. less than they ttre twenty years ago.
Plate glass is another notable m:anfacture, requiring great scientific and mechanical skill and large capital, whose origin bears date
since the tariff Of 1861. It is rtiade in Missouri and it Indianrli, and
to a small extent in Kentucky and Massachusetts; but in Indiana it
is made of the purest and 1est quality by an establishment which,
after sttrmnoutiig maihy petils, has iow fe'w equals in the magnitude
or perfection of its productions, whether on this or the other side of
the Atlantic, and richly merits not only the favor but the patronage
of the Governiment itself. Copper is ariotlhei industry niion which
a specific duty was imposed in 1861, which has had a rapid growth,
and now makes a large contribution to olr mineral wealth. The
amount produced in 1860 Wtas less thai one-fifth of the present production, and valued at $2,2SS,1892 while in 1880 the production rose
to the value of $8,649,961.  the capital invested increased from
$8,525,300 to $31,675,096. In 1860t the United States Mint paid from
twenty-three and one-half to twenty-five cents per pound for copper,
but has obtained it the present year under a protective tariff as low
as seventeen cents. Like olir Ihihes of inexhaistible coal had iron,
copper is found in many States, some of it superior to any in the
world, and for special uses is constantly sought after by foreign
governments.
Many American productions sustain the character they have won.y being the best in the world. Our carpenters and joiners could
not be Hired to handle any other than Ainerican tools; and there are
lno foreign agricultural implements, from a spade to a reaper, that
<n American farmer would accept as a gift. There is no saddlery
h.ardwarie ior hdotie-furnishihg equal in quality and style to Ameri(cin. Watches and jewelry and the electric gold and silver-plated
vaare of American workmanship, as to quality, have the foremost
ltace in t    ts t  hhe WOrld. The superiority of bOr Staple cotton goods is indisputable, as is proven by the tribute of frequent
counterfeits displayed abroad. The city of Philadelphia alone makes
r:any better cearpets and thore in quantity than the Whble of G'eat;ritain.  These are noble achievements, which should neither be
c:'scured nor tost by the sinister handling and industrious vituperatin odf fre$tr^d  itorgraphists.
a-15                                               Sig. 2






"THE PROTECTION AFFORDED TO OUR INDUSTRY
LAWS."
Extract from remarks of lion. Wil. D. KELLEY, of Pennsylvania,
in House of Representatives, January 31, 1866. (Congressional
Globe, page 557, 39th Congress, 1st Session.)
THEN AND NOW.
Sir, let us contemplate for a moment our condition when the chainpions of slavery and free trade fired on the flag of the country
April, 1861, found us unable to clothe our soldiers or furnish thre
with implements and munitions of war. When the President called
for seventy-five thousand troops, and that number of the flower of
our countrymen promptly responded, they were clad, not in blue alone,
but in gray, the chosen color of our enemy; in black, in red, or any
other color, because we had not the proper material with which to
clothe them. We had not the quality of iron to fashion a gun barrel,
nor could we make it. We had no blankets to shield our men fron
rain or frost, in camp or bivouac; and as the people regarded the
base character of the articles with which our army was provided,
many of which had been made from American rags in the shoddy
towns of Yorkshire, they raised a universal cry of "fraud" against
both public officers and contractors. Our mills, forges, furnaces, and
factories stood still. The frugal laborer was living upon the earn
ings of past years. Commerce, having dwindled from the expiration
of the protective tariff of 1842, had ceased to animate our ports
The crops of the West stood ungathered in the fields, and the bank
ruptcy of 1857, from which we had not yet recovered, had returned
to sweep away the few who had withstood the surge.
But the case is altered now. Necessity has compelled us to do
what reason and experience long ago suggested. The fact that we
determined to pay in gold the interest on our bonds and to obtain
the required bullion by collecting the duties on imports in coin, has
done much to animate and diversify our industry. This fact and
the general results of the war-for the duties we lay on raw materi
als and our internal taxes more than counterbalance the protection
afforded to many branches of industry by our tariff laws-have
enabled us to recover from our prostration and started us in a
career of prosperity and progress; and if wisdom guide our legisla
tion, the waste lands of which I have read will soon be reinvigorated,
the ancient village will be absorbed in the expanding city; new towns
will mark the plain and river bank; and where the mean white and
the negro have loitered listlessly through the months, diversified an
well-paid industry, quickening their energies and expending thlei
desires, will employ all their hours, and enable each to carve his wa
as an American citizen should do, in a career that will afford ki
pleasure or profit.
a-16


I
I
I
I)
i
f
I
y
0
1,
n
e
1,
y;t
d
In
d
c
I
d
S


I






IPROTECTION      BEGETS     COMPETITION      AND    CHEAPENS THE MONEY VALUE OF COMMODITIES.":xtract from remarks of Hon. WM. D. KELLEY of Pennsylvania,
in House of Representatives, January 31, 1866. (Congressional
Globe, page 661, 39th Congress, 1st Session.)
PROTECTION CHEAPENS GOODS.
But protection begets competition, and invariably cheapens the
mooney value of commodities. This is not mere theory; it is a fact
established by the experience of all nations that have protected their
industry. Washington's Secretary of the Treasury understood this
as perfectly as the adept in social science understands it to-day.
Every nation that ever protected its industry improved the quality
and lessened the price of its productions; and no people, while not
protecting their manufactures, have ever been able to hold a fair
position among the commercial nations of the world, because they
could not compete in cheapness with protected industries. While
Holland protected her industry more adequately than England, she
sold her cheap goods in that country and maintained her supremacy
on the seas. It was then that the Dutch raised the ire of Andrew
Yarrington, by taunting Englishmen with their want of skill, and
England with her want of civilization, in selling her raw products
at the price others would give, and buying back part of them when
manufactured at the price at which others would sell. But when
England perfected her protective system, her superior advantages in
coal and iron gave her commercial supremacy, by enabling her to
cheapen articles she had believed herself unable to produce, and to
employ British ships in carrying English fabrics to mere growers
of raw material in every part of the world.
France, as I have shown, protects her industry, and her silks, laces,
cloths, cassimeres, and products of iron and steel hold their place in
the markets of the world in spite of England's larger commercial
marine and more abundant supply of coal and iron. Has protection
increased the price of anything but labor in Germany? Before the
establishment of the Zoll-Verein, or Customs Union, she exported
nothing but raw materials, and was only too happy, as I have shown,
to send with these her peasantry either for war or civic purposes; but
under the influence of protection the value of man has risen in Gerrany, and that of German products fallen in the markets of the
world, till her cloths and the multifarious products of her diversified
industry compete with those of England and France in the markets of other nations whose people devote themselves to the production of raw materials. Even Russia, with her thirty millions of
I cently freed serfs, who enter upon the duties of freemen without
i'sturbance, because the wise Emperor who enfranchised them had
s cured employment and wages for each by protecting the industry
cv all, is now entering into the general markets of the world in comp tition with France, Germany, Belgium and England.


a-17




HON, JUSTIN S, MORRILL OF VERMONT,
"BOTCHERY OF THE TARIFF BY THE DEMOCRATIC
PARTY."
Extracts from remarks of lion. JUSTIN S. MORRILL of Vermont,
printed in daily Congressional Recotd (50th Congress,
1st Session, page 3018).
The tariff of 1846 was left untouched until 1857, when, in conse.
qttiden  of t temporary surplus of revenue, it underwent Some further
reductions, resulting in an insufficiency for the annual Support of
the Government. The condition of the country was graphically desefibed by Pfesidentt Bucihatan in his message of December 8, 1857,
as follows:
"In the midst of unsurpassed plenty in all the productions and in
&ll the elements of national wealth we find Otri manufactures suspended, our public works retarded, our private enterprises of different kinds abandoned, and thousands of useful laborers thrown out
Of einployenft nfld reduced to want."
It will be remembered that, for the lack of d protective tariff,
nearly the whole of the six hundred and forty millions of gold prodtte&ld i Califoriia from 1849 to 180O had to be at once exported to
foreign lands, where it wonderfully developed and fertilized foreign
industries instead of our own.
The fafilacidi rtevulsions Of 1827, 1847, and 1857, and the general
wreck of business affairs, fairly attributable to unwnise reductions and
botchcryi of the tariff by the party at the time in power, are as in-.fttcedbly redorded in history as the poiitical revolutions which followed in the overthrow and rout of the Democratic party.
PAGE S020:
Fifes, prior to the tariff of 1861, were nearly all imported, and
those of the ordinary Sibe were sdld at from six to seven dollars per
doz.ens Mr. Nicholson, of Rhode Island, invented a machine for their
maiiuitctfure which proved a success, and to-day We have one hundred
and fifty file-works established, entirely due to a proteCtive tariff, and
find that files of equal merit are now sold at from $2 to $2.30 per
dozef. Of files oniy to the amount of $40 were imported in 1887, but
some thousands of American workmen tow find employtient in their
manufacture.
PAGE 3019:
The mtarveldus incPease of the wealth of our country withih a
score of years is an unfailing source of public felicitation, but I fefer
to it merely to say that even free-trade authorities concede that"'f pitPorti0n to the increase bf capital the relative shate of the
total product falling to the capitalist is diminished, while, on the contrary, the laborer's share is relatively increased."-Bastiat.
Ah additidnat fact may be stated that the deposits ii savings-banks
of no other country approach the aggregate deposits of the savingsbanks of the United States, where they are chiefly made in monthly
flr-Ihet  t by iabOring iren and woren, and heire, under a protective
tariff, the amount in 1872, $66g329,917j had in 1886 increased to
$1,235,736,069. While this was being accumulated $947,325,816 of the
prifitiel of the debt was paid by obr country tp to Match 1, 18gS,
besides a large sam of interest. Thus it appears that these laboring
men and women have on deposit in these savings-banks a sufficiert
amount to have paid on March 1, 1888, the whole of our h natidnl
debt of $1,802,454#714 and still have thirty-three millions surplus,
This illustrates the great fact that while, under the operations of a
pifotefet e tariff, domiestic productions are largely increased, yet i
the distribution the laborer's share, compared with that of the baptalist, is always relatively most increased.
a-18


I




HON. THOMAS B. REED.
"A  FEW    FOOLISH    FREE-TRADE IDEAS."
extract from remarks of lion. THOMAS B, REED of Maine, in
daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Session.
Does your mouth water at the prospect? What market do you
ive up for all this? Where is the best market in the world? Where
he people have the most money to spend. Where have the people
he most money to spend?    Right here in the United States of
merica after twenty-seven years of protectionist rule. And you are
zsked to give up such a market for the markets of the world! Why
he history of such a transaction was told twenty-four hundred years
go. It is a classic. You will find it in the works of Aesop, the
abulist.
Once there was a dog. He was a nice little dog. Nothing the
atter with him except a few foolish free-trade ideas in his head.
Ie was trotting along as happy as the day, for he had in his molth
nice shoulder of succulent mutton. By and by he came to a
tream bridged by a plank. Hie trotted along, and, looking over the
ide of the plank, he saw the markets of the world and dived for
hem, A minute after he was crawling up the bank the wettest,
he sickest, the nastiest, the most muttonless dog that ever swam
shore.-Page 4673.
Let me give this great truth of Bastiat's another application.
sature produces all. That is the origin of the much-abused phrase,
"The farmer pays all."  Whenever the farmer goes beyond his farm
or the gratification of his desires, Bastiat, the free-trader, shows
hat he must then share his riches. Now whom shlall we share with,
lie mechanic at home or the mechanic abroad; his fellow-citizen or
in alien? Which is for his interest?
Let me put it in another phrase. Which is it better for a farmer to
1n, send his surplus wheat a thousand miles to the seacoast, three
hlousand miles across the water, pay the freight, sell it to the
in'chanic who gets less wages, or sell it right here at home to the
Tcehanic who gets more wages?     The answer seems obvious.'ge 4670,
For a nation to get out of itself or out of the earth all the wealth
the re is in both, it is not necessary for the nation to buy cheap or
etl dear. That concerns individuals alone. What concerns the nation
s how to utilize all the work there is in men, both of muscle and
)1-:in, of body and soul, in the great enterprise of setting in motion!1 ever-gratuitous forces of nature. —Page 4668.
a-19


I




"ALL SHIPPED THERE UNDER THE DINGLEY TARIFF
BILL."
Extracts from remarks of Hon. E. J. HILL, of Connecticut, in
daily Congressional Record, Jan. 21, 1904.
Mr. Chairman, I desire to apologize to the House for taking
any more time, but the gentleman from Minnesota asked a question
which I should like to answer. It is as follows: "Do you think
it would be for our best interest to have the Chamberlain policy
carried out?" I will answer that by telling a story. Two years
ago I stood on the deck of a Japanese liner in the harbor of
Vladivostock, Siberia. In the hold of that ship was 700 tons of
American agricultural implements that had come across the Pacific
Ocean from America for the use of the peasants of Siberia. They
came under the Dingley tariff bill.
Right over across the other side of the harbor was an English
tramp ship loaded with American steel rails from  Pennsylvania
that had been shipped there to be used by the Siberian Railroad,
and shipped there under the Dingley tariff bill.
That day I went ashore and at night at the hotel in Vladivostock
I was introduced to a gentleman who told me that he represented
the Baldwin Locomotive Works, of Philadelphia, and had just
finished a contract by which he had put into operation on the Siberian Railroad 150 Baldwin locomotives, shipped there under the
Dingley tariff bilL
The next day I rode 500 miles up to the Amur River over American steel rails shipped there under the Dingley tariff bill. The
day following I got aboard the steamer to go up the Amur River
1,500 miles. It was a steel steamer and had in tow two steel
barges, both made in Pittsburg, Pa., sent there-12,000 miles, to
the other side of the world-and shipped there under the Dingley
tariff bill.
The first night oit we wrecked one of these barges and the freight
had to be unloaded. There were all sorts of American products
in that cargo of freight. Ten thousand miles from here, gentlemen, in the little Siberian village of Gorbitza, consisting of a dozen
log houses, in a little store not over 8 by 10, we bought packages
of candy wrapped up in paper on which was printed the picture
of William McKinley to popularize that candy among the peasants
of Siberia, all shipped there under the Dingley tariff bill. [Applause
on the Republican side.]
All the way across Asia my journey on the cars was made safe
and pleasant by the Westinghouse air brake made in Pittsburg, Pa.,
and shipped over there under the Dingley tariff bill.
The finest stores in all Europe-in Vienna, in Berlin, in Paris,
and in London-are those which are selling American shoes shipped
there under the Dingley tariff bill, and I say from personal knowledge of my own town that they are selling them at prices which
are higher than they are sold at in the United States of America,
all shipped there under the Dingley tariff bill.
I went to London and I called on a friend, an English gentleman
who had been in charge of a transportation company in this country for thirteen years. I said to him, "How's business?"
"It is bad."
"What is the matter?"
"Matter enough."
"What is it?"
"Our ports," he replied, "are wide open to you and yours are
closed to us. If I had my way, I would put a duty on everything
that comes from your country into Great Britain, and then I would
have something to give to you in return for like concessions on your
part"
Now, that is the Chamberlain policy, and I want to ask my friend
from Minnesota [Mr. LIND] if, when he goes into a battle, he striups
his armor off and hands it to his enemy? Would you by a Democratic policy put this country into the same position as England
is when England is trying to get out of it in order to protect herself? [Applause on the Republican side.]


a-20




I
t
1
t
t
II
I
I
A
I
fQ
II
i
I
I
I
1
11
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I


I


HON. WILLIAM McKINLEY OF OHIO.
"WISE STATESMANSHIP COMMANDS US TO LET
WELL ENOUGH ALONE."
rxtracts from remarks of Hon. Wm. McKINLEY of Ohio, in the
Houlse of Representatives, printed in daily Congressional
Record (50th Congress, 1st Session, page 4751).
What country can show such a trade as ours, such commerce,
such immense transportation lines, such a volume of exchanges, and
rsch marvelous production from the raw material to the finished
product. Its balance sheet is without a parallel in the world's
history-richest in agriculture, greatest in its domestic trade and
traffic, and leading in manufactures any nation in Europe. Why
abandon a policy which can point to such achievements and whose
trophies are to be seen on every hand? The internal commerce of
the United States is greater than the entire foreign commerce of
Great Britain, France, Germany, Russia, Holland, Belgium, and
\ustria-Hungarv. Why, a single railroad system in this country
(that of the Pennsylvania Railroad Company) carries more tonnage
and traffic in a single year than all the merchant ships of Great
Britain. The whole of Europe has not luilt as many miles of railroad as this country has during; some recent years, and in 1880 the
whole known world did not lay as many miles of track as were
laid across this country. Great Britain's foreign commerce equals
abolt one-sixth of our domestic commerce. Can we do better under
any other fiscal policy? We say not. Our own, history supports the
answers. Wise statesmanship commands us to let well enough alone.
PAGE 4749:
Free trade in the United States is founded upon a community
of equalities and reciprocities. It is like the unrestrained freedom
and reciprocal relations and obligations of a family. Here we are
one country, one language, one allegiance, one standard of citizenship, one flag, one Constitution, one nation, one destiny.  It is
otherwise with foreign nations, each a separate organism, a distinct
and independent political society organized for its own, to protect
its own, and work out its own destiny. We deny to those foreign
nations free trade with us upon equal terms with our own producers.
'The foreign producer has no right or claim to equality with our
own. He is not amenable to our laws. There are resting upon him
none of the obligations of citizenship. IHe pays no taxes.  He
performs no civil duties; is subject to no demands for military
service. He is exempt from State, county and municipal obligations.
He contributes nothing to the support, the progress, and glory of the
nation. Why should he enjoy unrestrained equal privileges and
profits in our markets with our producers, our labor, and our taxpayers?  let the gentleman who follows me answer. We put a
)llrden upon his productions, we discriminate against his merchandise, because he is alien to us and our interests, and we do it to
protect our own, defend our own, preserve our own, who are always
7rith u. in adversity and prosperity, in sympathy and purpose, anc,
i' necessary, in sacrifice.
PAGE 4752:
During the last fiscal year over $233.000,000 in value of foreign
merchandise was imported into the United States free of duty, and,ver $450,000,000 additional was imported which paid a duty. Is
ithis not enough?
Slmmning up these figures, 9,50O men, working for 300 days, would
have been required to produce the $50,000,000 worth of iron and
ieel which we imported last year. Do you want that volume incr eased? Two million eight hundred and seventy-four thousand is
lie aggregate number of days' work that were taken from American
mvorkingmen, every day's work of which they could have performed,:il were waiting ready to perform.
This Government is made for Americans, native-born and natural-; 'd: and every pound, every bushel, every ton, every yard of foreign
i;roduct that comes into this country to compete with ours deprives
'roerican labor of what justly belongs to it.
a-2




a-21




"THE GLORY AND TRIUMPH OF PROTECTIONISM."
Extract from article entitled "WHY FIRST VOTERS SHOULD BE PROTECTIONISTS," printed in daily Congrcssional Record, January 12,
1904.
Long after the output of manufactured articles in this country was
greatly in excess of that of the United Kingdom, and even up to the time
when it became equal in volume to the combined production of Great
Britain and Germany, writers for the British press and authors of books
published in England were accustomed to speaking of the United States
as an agricultural nation. And when they used the term they were still
under the domination of Cobden's idea that Americans "were created by
Providence to dig. delve, and plow for the benefit of Great Britain."
They were confirmed in this remarkable belief by the vast quantity
of American farm products annually dumped on their shores. They saw
so many of the products of our soil that they unthinkingly concluded that
we must be devoting ourselves wholly to agriculture. They had been taught
by their master that it would be fatal, or at least highly injurious to our
true interests as cultivators, to divert any of our capital from the soil, and
it did not occur to them that it might be possible for us to have several
irons in the fire at once and keep them all at a white heat.
But we did. We made good the protectionist claim that man succeeds
best when he depends upon his own efforts. We showed that inexperience
and unaptness are not synonymous terms, and we have conclusively proved
that there is not a single industry prosecuted in England which we may not
hope to carry on with equal or greater success than it is carried on in that
country.
It is the glory and triumph of protection to have demonstrated that
the whole world may be made a workshop, and that mankind need not be
dependent upon a little corner of it. The greatest achievement of protectionism is the fact that it has practically taught the Western World that
national progress receives its greatest impulse when the people of a country
resolve to do for themselves.
During the years in which protection has been most rigidly adhered to
the country has made its greatest gains in productivity. In these years
have been built up the enormous industries the existence of which refute
the vain assumption of the free trader that protection proves a hindrance
to advancement.
Within the past thirty years, while the free traders of Great Britain
and the United States have been proclaiming that manufacturing could
never succeed in a country hampered by protective duties, there has been
developed an industry the volume of whose output exceeds that of Germany
and Great Britain combined.
In 1870 the value of the manufactured products of the United States
was $4,232,325,442; in 1900 the colossal total of $13,039,279,566 was
reached. Nor was this enormous production attained at the expense of
agriculture. The free trader assured us that any artificial stimulus applied to the development of manufactures would impede the profitable use
of our soil, but we have seen concurrently with the growth of our factories
such an enlargement of farming operations within our borders as was never
witnessed before in any country on the globe.
Had protection resulted in paralyzing agriculture in the United States
as free trade did that industry in Great Britain, the American advocates of
the promotion of production might have hesitated. But when they saw
the predictions of the Cobdenites falsified by the event; when they saw
American agriculture expanding year after year, the rate of increase impeded only by the inability of the world to consume the products of our
farms at a price that would pay to raise them, protectionists were profoundly convinced that whatever might result from the policy of diversifying
resources, it could not possibly be injury to agriculture.
That conviction can not be disturbed so long as the census discloses
a continuous increase in the value of farm  property and products as
it has decade after decade since protection has been the nation's policy. In
1870 the farms of the United States were valued at $8,944,857,749, in 1900
at $20,514,001,838: in the same years the annual value of farm products
increased from $1,958,038,927 to $3,764,177,706.
When we inquire into the details of the American farming industry
we find a state of affairs the very reverse of that which the Cobdenites
predicted and exactly the opposite of that produced by the free-trade policy
in the United Kingdom. In the latter country the tiller is abandoning the
soil; in the United States the number of farms and farmers increases
steadily  In 1870 there were 2,659,985 farms in this country; In 1900
the number was 5,735.372. Thirty years ago the United Kingdom had six
or seven millions more sheep than it has now; the number of sheep in the
United States increased from 40,853,000 to 62,039,091 during the same
period.
In the thirty years during which our manufacturing industry has
made such enormous progress as to astonish the world, agriculture, too, has
kept pace. We have increased our output of pig iron from 1,665,179 tons
in 1870 to over 17,000,000 tons in 1902; but while the men in the foundries
and factories were accomplishing this result the farmers also made an
equally astonishing record. In 1870 they had 25,484,100 cattle; in 1902
the number was 61,424,599, In 1870 the number of horses was 8,248,800;
in 1902, despite the introduction of the trolley, the bicycle, and the automobile, the number of horses had Increased to 16,531,224. We now raise
enough swine to provide the world with bacon and hams, the number increasing from 26,751,400 in 1870 to 56,981,142 in 1901. Our production
of wool during the period increased from 162,000,000 pounds to 316,341,032
pounds; of wheat, from 235,884,700 bushels to 670,063,008 bushels: of
corn, from 1,094,255,000 bushels to 2.523,648,312 bushels, and of cotton,
from 4,347,006 bales to 10.680,600 bales.
No other nation can make such a showing as this. Had we hearkened
to the free trader, however, it would not have been made. Our agricultural
development has been stimulated by the utilization of our manifold oesources.
a-22




HON. JOHN SHERMAN OF OHIO.
'WITH THIS KIND OF FREE TRADE I AM              IN HEARTY
SYMPATHY."
7Extract from remarks of Hon. J01HN SHERMAN, of Ohio, printed
in daily Congressional Record (50th Congress,
1st Session, page 201).
During the fiscal year ending June 30, 1887, there was imported
from foreign countries for consumption in the United States merchandise to the value of $683,418,981. Of these there was admitted
free of duty merchandise of the value of $933,093,659, giving absolute
free trade in domestic productions to the sixty million of our people
with each other and with all the world, and free trade in over
one-third of all the articles of foreign production consumed in this
country. These articles are mainly such as cannot be produced here
by reason of climate; they do not come into competition with
domestic industry; and a tax upon them would be simply a burden
without any redeeming benefit. With this kind of free trade I am
in hearty sympathy, and would extend it to every article of common
uve, the growth or production of which is not profitable in the United
States. If Senators can name any such articles not already on the
free list, they will have my hearty assistance to place them upon
the free list. It is exactly the opposite policy that is proposed by
the President and the school to which he belongs. They seek to place
taxes upon articles now free, such as tea and cofee, in order that
a greater reduction may be made on articles that do come into
competition with home industry.
PAGE 202:
Both parties admit that luxuries should be taxed higher than
necessities, whether by tariff or internal taxation, yet it is well known
that diamonds, jewelry, and such things are not subject to so high a
tariff duty as woolen or iron goods. This is because their great
value and small bulk make smuggling so easy that a great duty could
not be enforced.
Taking from the other schedules of imported goods a great variety
of expensive fabrics, including expensive clothing, porcelain, and
other articles of luxury, and adding their value to Schedule E, it
will appear that the value of such articles is not less than $120,0,000,000
and the duties collected on them not less than $60,000,000, or nearly
one-third of all duties collected. It certainly cannot be said of
these duties, in the language of the President, "that they impose
a burden upon those who consume domestic products as well as
lhose who consume imported articles, and thus create a tax upon
all our people."  On the contrary, these duties have imposed the
chief burdens of taxation upon articles of voluntary luxury, and
still have incited our own artists and mechanics to compete in these
branches of industry with the most skilled artisans of Europe and
Asia. In this way we have made the most remarkable progress in
these expensive productions, and have brought within the means of
rleat masses of our people porcelain, table ware, ornaments, clothing,
(tcorated and enameled furniture, and a multitude of other articles
ot taste and luxury, the work of American mechanics. To reduce
th1 duty on these foreign luxuries is but to transfer the burden of
t xation from those who willingly bear it to the shouldcrs of the
Iople.




HON. WILLIAM      McKINLEY OF OHIO.
"FLEECING THE AMERICAN PUBLIC BY REDUCING
THE IMPORT DUTIES."
Extract from remarks of Hon. WM. McKINLEY, of Ohio, in the
House of Representatives, printed in daily Congressional
Record (50th Congress, 1st Session, page 4756).
There is a trust or combination made up of all the plate-glass
manufacturers of Europe. I have here a circular which is dated
London, 25th of April, 1887, and which reads:
"DEAR Sia: We beg to inform you that the Associated Plate-Glass
Manufacturers have revised their prices for plate-glass of all descriptions, and that, withdrawing all previous quotations, we inclose
you herewith our tariff of prices, the discount from which will be 33
per cent., with the exception of glazing-glass used for silvering purposes, the discount from which will be 25 per cent."
This trust is still in force. Here is a foreign combination to control the price of plate-glass, and the gentlemen on the other side are
engaged in making the monopoly more complete and controlling by
reducing the import duties now paid on their product and by relieving them of a burden they now have to bear, and thus enabling them
to break down American competition, which alone has reduced the
price of plate-glass, and prevents the most extortionate exactions for
the foreign product upon American consumers.
PAGE 4757:
Here, again, is an importers' trust in the same line of goods. I
read from the New York Herald, of February 28, an account of
the investigation by the New York Legislature:
"Mr. James H. Heroy, an importer of plate and French glass, was
next called to tell what he knew about the glass trust. Colonel Bliss
asked the witness to identify a circular. It is a very peculiar circular, and will open the eyes of the public, if not the eyes of the conmmittee. It is as follows:
" HENRY C. MARRINNER,
"' Plate and sheet glass importer, No. 126 South Fifth avenue:
"'We beg leave to quote you O7, 10, and 5 per cent. discount from
the price-list, January 20, 1887, for French window-glass. In case you
wish to make any large purchases we can make you extra discounts.
"'For orders of twenty cases or 2,000 feet or more at one time, 10
per cent. discount.
"'For import orders of 7,500 feet or more of cathedral and one
hundred cases or more colored, enameled, and ground glass we wili
make special prices, according to the conditions of the order.
" Yours, very truly,
"'HEROY & MARRINNER.'
"There was no doubt about the intention of that trust. Mr. Herov
said 'it was simply' to make prices below which they would not sell
their goods. At the last meeting he attended he thought it was the
desire of the combination to reduce prices, and added, 'We have not
yet decided what to do in the case of a man who undersells us. We
do not decide these things in a hurry.' As a result of the combination
prices have advanced."
I have also in my possession a copy of the trust contract. Not con
tent with making this combination among themselves, they sought ill
every way possible to induce our American producers of plate-glass
to join them and assist in fleecing the American public.
There is a foreign trust on china and earthenware. I have the
evidence here in the London Pottery Gazette of March 10, 1888, from
which I read:
"If any manufacturers are not true to the rules of the new association the bond they will have signed will enable their fellow-manufacturers to sell them up 'rump and stump.' Nothing but the state of
dire necessity into which the trade has fallen would tempt men to put
their hands to such a bond. The scheme has just been successful with
the china manufacturers. They have just obtained a second advance.
"If the keen buyers who always want to beggar the trade and
reduce prices, say to a manufacturer who will not sell at lower than
the fixed rate, 'Well, if I am forced to pay the association price I
will not buy from you,' such manufacturer can reply, 'All right; if
you buy from another, and I have to stand for orders, I shall get
my pull out of your business, for our rules will not let me suffer
through refusing to reduce at your request.' So you see one manufacturer cannot be played off against the others."


I


I




l -WE STAND    FOR A POLICY WHICH         IS AMERICAN      IN
ITS HIGHEST AND BEST SENSE."
Extract from remarks of Hon. E. SAUERIIERING of Wisconsin,
in House of Representatives, March 31, 1897, and printed in
Appendix to bound Congressional Record, Vol. 30, page 39.
Now, just a few words concerning the tariff on wool. No one
any longer questions the necessity of a tariff on wool. The experiment of free wool, as given us in the Wilson bill, has convinced
everybody who has given the subject any attention that wool can
not be grown in this country in competition with foreign countries..It has brought destruction to a large proportion of our flocks.
It has not brought any appreciable benefits to anyone, and has
brought bankruptcy to many. In this case, again, we find that the
price of wool fell exactly the amount of the tariff on wool in the
McKinley law when that law was repealed and wool placed on the
free list. But that was not all our farmers lost by free wool. Up
to the time of the Wilson law, which placed wool on the free list,
a very large proportion of our farming lands was devoted to
raising sheep and wool. A great many farmers devoted all of their
lands to this purpose. But when wool was put on the free list,
and it fell from 10 to 15 cents per pound, our wool-growing farmers
gradually cut down their flocks, devoted part of their lands to
raising grain for market, and gradually shifted from wool growers
to general farmers. This change could not help but work great
injury to those already engaged in that kind of farming, and it stands
to reason that they will receive great benefits from the proposed
tariff on wool, which will again establish our wool industry and
take a large part of our present farming lands out of active competition in the production of grains, corn, milk, butter, cheese, etc.
A tariff on wool is what this Administration owes to the American
farmers, and we hasten to do what justice demands.
Mr. Chairman, our friends on the other side of this House object
to this measure because they say that tariff is a tax. Now, I would
like to ask these gentlemen, how in the world do you propose to
run this Government without taxation? Does not the experience of
the last four years show that we need taxes, and need them badly?
Was not this extraordinary session of Congress called for the specific
purpose of devising means for raising money wherewith to pay our
legitimate expenses? We propose to levy a tax, and we propose to
do it in a way which is least burdensome to our people. Every
American feels proud of*this great nation, feels proud of our splendid
and successful form of government, proud of our magnificent system
of public institutions, unparalleled in the history of nations. We
have achieved great things in the past, and, God willing, our history
in the future shall be more brilliant than it has been in the past.
But we all understand that such a government as ours can not be
run without money. Uncle Sam's expenses for twelve months amount
to the enormous sum of almost $500,000,000. It requires nearly one
ind one-half millions of dollars to keep the wheels of this Govern-?nent running from sunrise to sunset. Now, who is to be held
responsible for this daily bill of Uncle Sam's?
We stand for a policy which is American in its highest and best
sense; a policy which stands for the independence of the United
States from all the rest of the world; which stands for the developnent of all the natural resources of the country; which stands for.he founding of cities, for the building of railroads, for the exten-ion of telegraph lines, for the digging of canals, for the growth
-f internal commerce, for the employment of our own people in
oxr own country. It stands for the production within our own,orders of all the necessaries and all the possible luxuries which;r people require. It stands for the American farm, the Amori-: n factory, the American mine, the American laborer, at American
ages. This policy, during the years it was in control, advanced:le United States to the head of nations in accumulated wealth,
~ the miles of its railways, for the transportation of the property
f the people, in the output of its factories, and the product of its! idnes.
a-25




"ANTTXINO THE HUMAN HAND TOUCHES CEASES TO
BI  RAW   MATERIAL,"
Extracts from remarks of Hon. WM. D. OWEN of Indiana, page
5551 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Session.
There stands a 50-foot tree in the pineries. It is raw material.
What will you take for it? Ten dollars is a big price. I cut the tree
down and haul it 5 miles to a mill. When I lay it at the mill door
it is worth $$5. What makes it worth $25? Plainly the labor I put
into it. But a saw-log is raw material. No, it is not; anything the
human hand touches ceases to be raw material, and has started into
the process of manufacture. To cut down that tree and haul the logs
to the mill is as necessary a part of manufacturing as planing the
weather-boarding or framing the door of the house. The very first
step of labor in the process of production, cutting down the tree and
delivering the logs at the mill, has added 150 per cent. to the value.
Ultimately from this raw tree we have 4 bureaus worth $15 each; 4
bedsteads at $10 each; and 90 kitchen tables at $5 each; P5 desks for
school-children worth $4 each, Here labor's work has fashioned $300
worth of value out of $10 worth of raw material. The cabinetmakers and wood-workers are no distant manufacturers;, they are
located in our little towns all over the country.
"VERY LITTLsE CAN BE CATJLLJD RAW            MATERIAL.!"
Extract from remarks of Hlon. HENRY M. TELLER of Colorado,
page ) 206 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, Ist
Session,
A distinguished Englishman when compiring American laborers
with English, saidt "'Where the American laborer gets 72 per cent.,
capital gets 13 per cent., and Government gets 5 per cent., our
laborer gets -1 per cent., capital gets 36 per cent., and Government
gets the balance." That is the English testimony. We get the bulk
of what is paid out to manufacturers. All manufactures arc made
up principally of labor. In some cases it is nearly all labor, 90 or 95
per cent., and on an average 80 per cent. of everything manufactured
is labor, if you follow into computation the labor put upon what is
called raw material,
Mr. EDMUNDS (in his seat). There is no raw material,
Mr, TELLER. A Senator suggests in my hearing that there is
not any raw material, There is very little that can be called raw
maerial. It is said, I believe, by those who are now advocating this
message that wool is raw material. The farmer in Ohio does not believe that it id raw material. It has cost him care, it has cost him
money, it has cost him attention to get it from the sheep's back.
It is to him something more than raw material. So you may say of
everything else.
a-26




"TARIFFS MEAN THE MAXIMUM OF SECURITY FOR
CAPITAL AND THE MAXIMUM OF INDUCEMENT."
Extract from    LONDbON    DAILY    TELEGRAPH       printed in daily   Congressional Record, January 5, 1904.
The key of cormpetitive power in the mode'n age is the            nebouragement of capital.   Now, it is obvious that tariffs in countries like America,
Germany, and France mean the maximum           of security for capital and the
Tmaxirhurm  dt indticcierit.  tree inmpoirt  making ofid cduntty the dumping ground for thfe tutplt of af ll tih   a ft afid btfBsitIt the iiobe ifintifacturer to the attacks of ftreign rivals, who are all irotected by their
tariffs from his counter operations-free imports under these circumstances
must necessarily mean the minimum       of security for capital and the minimunm  of ifdudement.     That is Out   tedl iduustrditl tatady.    TAdi t  i bour
redt nationdal peril.
A  oorrespoident requests us tb tlinch the case by shoWing in detail
in what trades our progress has been paralyzed and in which articles the
importd of foreign manufactuies have increased.         We therefore give the
folldwilhg  omparisot. Look on this pietdre. it shi*s:
British manufactured          exports in    ten   leading    lines
[Amounts in million pounds steriing.]
--  --— ~-~-   ---  — ~ ---          1890.    il    o
Iron  and  steel.................................................  3.5    29.0
Steam engines and machinery.......................,.   16.4       18,7
Hardware and Cutlery...................................          2.7        2.1
Cotton manufactures......................................    62.i-       5.0
L in en s...........................................................  5.7     5.4
W oolens.......................................................  20.4      15.2
A pparel....................................................... 5.6   6.2
Haberdasey...............................................    2     1    1.7
Earthenware................................................        2.5        2.0
Chem  icals, drugs, etc.........................................  8.9        9.5
T otal......................................................   58.    1.8
And look at the opposite picture:
Manufaotured        imports into      the   United    JKingdom
in leading lines.
[Amounts in million pounds sterling.]
181)     1900.
Cotton  m anufactures..........................................     3.       4.7
Iflass manufactures......................................   2    g.2
I on and steel manufactures...................................1      8.$
I,eather  goods........................................     8.4       11.1
ilks............................................................  11.3     14.2
Woolens..........................................           11.1       11.4
IPaper and pasteboaird nt     ttI factt-res..............       1.        4.4
\\W atches and  clocks............................................  1.       1.9
Z inc...............................................................4.5
Miscellaneous..19.6                                                           28.')
T otal......................................................  61.3      87.7
These, we repeat, are astounding figures. tWhat would Cobden have
tiought if he could hawe    foreseen thl  titie when    Oe shouli, be be uyers of
fottons as well as buyers of corn-buyers of metals as well as buyers of
cat;    and when our imports of teitiles and iron would show            in one
'ecade' a greatetr Iaboldtf ifcre'se, tn   fibhiSefg   lagiSs fi6fatifV  incras',
than  i'ff etpottS df these cemnioditie'?
NOr is there' any mystery about the process by whitfh ordt trade, apari
rom  the colonies, is driven in at the circumference and attacked at the.;lse. The American has his home market of nearly 80,00(,000 souls and
-tts of 4d,600o,ofO.
The Gerima    htas hie iome itiatkt of helfit,OqYffff0OO NouIs dnd outr
(f 4a00,000. The British hmanufaeturer has to share hi9s 6nm         f're inarket
i;tth all his rivals. It is not possible for insular capital to compete under
tiese conditions, or for insular enterprise to survive.     * 
It i ds cetain that capital id dais&outrged, enterpride rteresd8, dnd
c<nploy#mti festictdd inde' ftee imtpoitS i      this oduhtatf as Ihdt all tifb"
s ive bee* stimrsuted during the latt deade in the gre           eomempetiive nrF
4tons under tariffs.
a-27






"WtAr t S A PROTEOCTIV  TARIFFPP"


Extract from remarks of Hon. WILLIAM McKINLEY of Ohio,
page 4748 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Session.
What is a protective tariff? It is a tariff upon foreign imports so
adjusted as to secure the necessary revenue, and judiciously imposed
upon those foreign products the like of which are produced at home
or the like of which we are capable of producing at home. It imposes the duty upon the competing foreign product; it makes it bear
the burden or duty, and, as far as possible, luxuries only excepted,
permits the non-competing foreign product to come in free of duty.
Articles of common use, comfort, and necessity which we cannot produce here it sends to the people untaxed and free from custom-house
exactions. Tea, coffee, spices, and drugs are such articles, and under
our system are upon the free list. It says to our foreign competitor,
if you want to bring your merchandise here, your farm products
here, your coal and iron ore, your wool, your salt, your pottery, your
glass, your cottons and woolens, and sell alongside of our producers
in our markets, we will make your product bear a duty; in effect,
pay for the privilege of doing it. Our kind of a tariff makes the
competing foreign article carry the ourden, draw the load, supply the
revenue; and in performing this essential office it encourages at the
same time our own industries and protects our own people in their
chosen employmen ".
"PROTECTION SAVES US OUR OWN MARKET."
Extract from remarks of lion. O. II. PLATT of Connecticut, page
1016 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Session.
Protection does another thing-it saves us our own market.
It makes a demand for labor in this country, and that is, after all,
the real thing which results in high wages. Strike down the protective duty, open our ports to foreign manufactures upon the ground
that we should buy where we can buy the cheapest, and by so much
you have destroyed the home market and lessened the demand for
labor, and made it impossible for high wages to prevail in this
country.
"TO UTILIZE ALL THE WORK THERE IS IN MEN."
Extract from remarks of Hon. THOMAS B. REED of Maine, page
4669 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Session.
For a nation to get out of itself or out of the earth all the wealth
there is in both, it is not necessary for the nation to buy cheap or sell
dear. That concerns individuals alone. What concerns the nation
is how to utilize all the work there is in men, both of muscle and
brain, of body and of soul, in the great enterprise of setting in motion the ever-gratuitous forces of nature.
How shall you get out of the people of a nation their full powers?
Right here is precisely the dividing line. The let-alone school say
leave individual man to his own devices. The protectionist school saf
let us stimulate combined and aggregated man to united endeavor.
Association is the instinct of humanity which grows with its
growth. First the family, then the tribe, and then the nation. The
race will come by and by. Faithfulness to each in their order is the
true route to the next.
a-28




,TEIRTY-XINE-rOtRTI1ETS OF MANKINiD 'tElt UIATS
FREE TRADE TO-DAY."
Extract from remarks of Hon. L. E. McCOMAS of Maryland, page
3838 of daily Congressional Record, 60th Congress, 1st Session.
It was to convert the world, and after forty years no nation has
adopted it.
Enterprise was to be paralyzed and invention stifled where free
trade did not prevail. It was to confer great benefits on its votaries,
and impose evils on those who rejected it.
Free trade to-day comes with the broken promises, the disappointed
hopes of its early supporters and founders.
Protective France and Belgium rival England, while Germany is
surpassing her, and after five years of protection Bismarck says,
"Germany fears nobody but God," while the United States has far
outstripped England in enterprise and inventive industry. Thirtynine-fortieths of mankind repudiate free trade to-day.
Prophecy has been falsified by history. One year ago, outside of
England, of all the wise and thoughtful men in Europe and America,
no ruler or minister dared to propose free trade. After forty years
of trial all statesmen outside of England have united in rejecting it
as one of the "puerile doctrines and illusions of mankind." The
modern statesmen we find all protectionists:  Thiers, Gambetta,
Clemenceaux, Grant, Garfield, Bismarck, Sherman, and Blaine.
Whenever there is universal suffrage the producers the world over
have repudiated free trade. When free trade won in England the
working people were excluded from the suffrage.
"A FREE-TRADE WITNESS."
Extract from the remarks of Hon. O. I. PLA'TT of Connecticut,
page 1014 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st
Session.
I like a free-trade witness once in a while. Here is Consul Schoenhof, consul at Tunstall, who was sent abroad with a roving commission to see if he could not undo what some of our consuls had been
doing to enlighten the people of this country as to the cheapness of
the necessaries of life here as compared to their cheapness abroad,
and as to the wages paid in this country as compared to the wages
paid abroad. This is one of his recent reports. I quote it from a
newspaper article, but I have verified it so that I know the quotation
is correct. Writing from Tunstall, he says:
"I find cotton goods fully as cheap in the United States as here.
Shirtings and sheetings, if anything, are superior in quality for the
same price. Articles of underwear for women are superior in workmanship and cheaper in price in the United States. Nor are men's
shirts, when chiefly of cotton, any cheaper here. Of boots and shoes,
factory made, the same may be said. Articles made to order are
cheaper in England, owing to lower prices of hand labor, but the
difference in prices of ready-made things is not so marked. In workmanship and finish I find the corresponding articles of wholesale
manufacture superior in the United States. This is true of clothing,
as well as collars, cuffs, and like articles."
There is a standing challenge in the office of a protection newspaper in the city of New York (with the samples ready to be shown
to any free trader) to show that clothing in this country is not as
cheap as it is in England. The truth is that everybody, except the
dude and millionaire, can be clothed cheaper in this country than in
England, and in woolen clothing, too; and I apprehend that we are
not very anxious to reduce the tariff duties for the purpose of benefiting the dude and the millionaire.
a-29




I


"OUR POLICY IS TO KEEP OUR HOME MARKET."
Extracts from remarks of Hon. JOSEPH H. WALKER vf Massachusetts, in touse of Piepresentatives, March 31, 1897, and
printed in Appendix to bound Congressional Record, Vol. 30,
pafiy 915,
O1UR POLICY IS TO KEfEP OUR HOZIEB           MAREiT.
A cotpllplisoil Of the results of thle Goid'ali-Wilsoi tatiqt, wlich
vwas not half as disastrous as Would hlttVe beel the Wilsoh tariff pure
and simpnl, is shoWn by the following statement, taken from the Statistical Abstract of 1896, which proves to any candid man that tlhe
policy of this country is to conserve, protect, and keep to ourselves
oi Ti rIom1 madrket, ihich a fte,-t-ade tdPilf turns over to foreigners,
t~ tht daeti-tment of Oiz' obu  people.
EFFECT OF THE WILSON-GORMAN TARIFF ON THE
FARMkR.
And the farmer is equally interested with the mechanic in the protection of our home market; The value of the home marktet to the
farmer is nowhere shown any more conclusively and the Democratic
free-tl-ite asssettionis moe coniltislvely prOsen untirue than by the
Uniited States  t reasury St tisticsal Abstract. The consumptlon of
iitr farm products by our people reached its maximltum ih 1892  POasing over 1893, the year of the panic, and taking 1894, it shows that
more than 51 per cent. more pounds of our raw cotton were consumed by bur own people in i892 undeir the Itepublican tari' than in
the veAr 1894- udtier the threat of a Democratic fiee-trade tariff;
that miore thtn 73 per cent niore wheat Was consured by our people
in 1892 than in ]S94; that more than 33 per cent more corn was
consumed by our oLwn people in 1892 than in 1894; that more than
32 per cent more pounds of wool were consumed in 1892 than in
1894.
On top of this curtailment of our market in reducing the power
of our people to buy and consume the products of the farm because
of tihe threat of free trade ih tile process of enacting the GormanWilSon free-tr'ade tariff ih 1894, bour otal eexports of domestic merchandise to each man, woman, and child in the land were 2 per cent
more under the ltepublicani prolective tariff in 1892 than under the
Demnocrativ free'-trade tariff of 1894.  Not only thigi but b6it total
imports Were also J'A per cent more in 1892 than ill 1894.
Thus does the mere threat of and the process of enactment, much
moire the actial operation, of a free-trade Democratic tariff destroy
oUit owih maiket by closing factories and making people idle sb they
can not earn Wages to buy either hetne products or imported products.
The statistics of this country prove to any man who is not absolitely bliided by tfree-trade theories that to increase our foreign
trade We must have a protective tai'ff in order to mattke oour people
prosperous in an opportunity to eatri tire monoey to buiy tiported
goods as well as dominestic goods. Great as was the falling bff in
the consumlption of agricultural prodiucts, the consumption of manut'factured products fell off very much more under the threat of the
DeMocrAtti tariff of 1894 than the falling ot in the consminptipo  of
the products of the farmer from 1892. Mat'kctP are in the tMD IOlumne of waqyes peaid, and not in the numbers of poople. Tkvs laTs of
employment of the artisan and laborer hurts the farmers first rnd
mort of all classes in the conmmunity.
EXTENT OF THE AMERICAN MARKET,
Ini nhrrmal proteetivc-tariff conditions, suth as l89P, it is stated I)
Mulhall that the production and consumption of thle manufacture 1
products in the United States is one-third of that of the world. The
inhabitants of the world are given as from 1,400,000,000 to i,5oo,000 -
OO, Oie    etountty -as 70,000,000. This fadt shows that the market
of the 70000000 of people in this country I'i tiwe Mh   Wtagfs mtd t -
comes they average to receive is equal to one-half of the people of the
rest of the world, or 700,000,000 of average people. Of whena,
coIl.rn, c6tton, and wool we consumed 47 per cent more in 1890 thai
in 14. Ih 18t   iabut miarket equaltd 700,000,)00 under the ftepibth -
run ptotectlve tariff. The Democratie free-trade tariff preiealy
reduced our market in 1894 to the equivalent of 371t000,000 of te
average people of the world.
a-30




-THE PROTECTIONIST POLICY OF KEEPING OUT
OF DEBT IS A SOUND ONE."
Eilracts from article entitled "Why First Voters should be Protectionists,"
printed in daily Congressional Record, January 12, 1904.
THE BALANCE OF TRAMDL
If anyone should tell you that the right way to save and get rich is
to run into debt and to consume more than you produce you would doubtless think him crazy. You would be justified in holding such an opinion,
for it is impossible to prosper except by thrift and the expenditure of energy.
Nevertheless you will be seriously told by free traders that nations
may prosper by practices which bring disaster to individuals. And if you
are incredulous you will be reminded that Great Britain annually imports
$850,000,000 more of commodities than she exports.
It will be found on investigation, however, that whenever peoples who
have not already established the right to draw from foreigners more than
they give in return buy more than they sell they run into debt. This process may be continued for a time, but the utimate result must be greater
exports than imports, for there is always a day of reckoning for the debtor.
It is only by investing in foreign countries that the people of a nation
can for any considerable period import more than they export. It was
through the exercise of skill and the practice of thrift that the British put
themselves in the position of being able to draw upon foreigners, and not by
importing more than they export.
The present ability of the British to import on so large a scale is directly traceable to excess exports in former days. During a considerable
period Great Britain drew upon her natural resources, coal and Iron, to
establish herself in the position of a creditor nation. She temporarily
profited by parting with these resources and invested the proceeds in other
lands whose resources her capital is now helping to exploit.
Thus we find the London Statist, in an article recently published, discussing as follows:
'Thirty years ago or so a very large part of the Government debt of the
United States was held lnf Europe. Now the amount of the debt so held if
hardly worth talking of. Ten years ago the amount of industrial securities
held in Europe was enormous. Ten years hence the amount that will still
be held by Europe will in all probability be quite trifling.  The United
States in another ten years will be a great ship-owning country, will own its
own securities, and send its goods on board its own ships, and we shall not
only have to pay freight, but insuralce and commission likewise. When
our imports from the United States exceed our exports to the United States
by ~100,000.000 or more, what will become of our money market, and how
shall we make the payments which somehow or other will have to be bma4l?"
No Cobdenite has attempted to answer the question propounded by the
London Statist. AnY attempt on the part of a free trader to do so would
expose the utter folly of the assumption that excess of imports ildicate a
healthy industrial condition. The free-trader's response, if he tried to
make his theory fit with the condition which the Statist says confronts
England, would be: "GO on Increasing your imports."
But the London Times told why this can not be done. It recently said:
"The workingmai's occupation is going, and occupation is income. Gapital is also going. It has been lost altogether to a large amount by the falling oft in our industries, and it is further scared into seeking abroad the Investments which business ceases to offer at home."
If the workingman's occupation is going; if capital is gohig and Is being lost by the falling off in British industries, how can the people of Great
Britain hope to increase their imports?  The Times has evidently lost faith
in the efficacy of the Cobdenite panacea, for it adds:
"That is a serious condition of affairs for all of us, and most of all for
the workingman. We can not meet it by cheapening food, we can not even
prevent food from becoming dearer, and the country is asked to consider
"whether there are no means of getting more money to buy food with."
The young voter who has any doubts about the soundness Of the balance-of-trade theory as interpreted by protectionists is asked to note that
the London Statist and the London Times, both hitherto regarded as exponents Of the free-trade idea, unconsciously use the terms which wotild
make them obnoxious to the charge that "gold and silver are the  Irnly fal
wealth."  The Statist wishes to know what will happen to the British
"money" market when Americans cease to be indebted to Britons and the
latter are compelled to continue importing more from the United States
than they export, and the Times says the country will be asked to cclsider
"whether there are no means of getting money to buy food with,"
These queries disclose the true state of affairs. They make it perfectly clear that the Cobdenite assumption that free trade is to be credited
with British ability to annually import several hundred million dollars
more than she exports is erroneous, and they expose the fact that tbe teal
reason why Great Britain can now do so is because she is receiving returns
froSa thestments made in other countries by her people in former years.
When the returns from these diminish or entirely cease, Britlsh Imports must inevitably decline. That is as plain as a pikestaff, am  all the
theories In the world will fail to prevent that result. Some nations may
P:roW rich by trading when other nations consent to be exploited for their
ake, but when a determination manifests itself in every country tor the
s)eople to make the best of their resources, then trad  becomeS what it
should be-an auxiliary to the work of production-and not a parasitic
7rowth which threatens to smother the producer, as It is under Conditions
in which the middleman is of more consequetce than the one who devote
imself to producing things.
The development of a manufacturing industry in the United States and
rn ther protectionist countries is rapidly clearing up the obscutities in
which the question of the balance ol trad  has bee&n shrotied. That is
roved by the admissions of the Times and the Statist. Very soon ey'ee
he free trader may be able to grasp the idea that production is the prime
Hing antd that the nation which fails to do its share in the work of proiucihg thinge must go backward.
Then the absurdity of the Oobdenite contention that 4 country caa gro;ich by letting other countries produce for it will be fully eposed, and even
Ameticdw tree tatlers will be forced to admit that the protectionis poicy
f kepiag 6ut of deb<t is48  oQiftd ote.


a-31




ALL CHANGES IN THE TARIFF SHOULD KEEP I
MIND AT ALL TIMES REPUBLICAN PRINCIPLES."
Extracts from remarks of Hon. WM. P. HEPBURN of Iowa, in daily Con
gressional Record, April 3X, 1904.
In the county conventions of the State of Iowa "the Iowa idea" is pt
to rest. [Applause on the Republican side.] The Republicans have asserte
themselves, and have asserted themselves in harmony with the doctrine
of the party and in harmony with the doctrines of the lamented McKinley
Oh, "the lamented McKinley!" How the gentlemen on the other sid
phrased with tenderness that sentence-he upon whose devoted head all th
vials of their wrath, vituperation, vilification, foul abuse, and fouler slande
had been hurled until the very hour of his lamented death. If there is an
one thing that in my mind calls for the indignant rebuke of Republicans
it is the insolent claim that McKinley and Lincoln, the men most abused
the mren most vilified, the men most slandered, were in complete harmony
with the Democratic party, and that they are ready to take them into th
galaxy of their sainthood. Bah'! It is contemptible on the part of men
who have pursued this persistent course, the course of malevolence, t
whine and snivel at the tomb of those who for a lifetime they have vitu
perated. [Applause on the Republican side.]
Mr. Speaker, the Republican party of Iowa stands by the platforms
Ah, they stand by the sentiments of the last speech that was eve
uttered by the last of its martyrs. And they rebuke the efforts of Democ
racy, by forgery, by partial readings, by the omission of qualifying and controlling sentences, to torture that speech into a pretense of support fo
their theories.
Mr. McKinley never uttered a word-never a word in that speech or
any other-varying from his constant insistence that all changes in the tarif
or enactments in the tariff should keep in mind at all times Republican principles and should be written with complete regard to the protection of the industries and the labor of the country. [Applause.] You can here and there
pick out a sentence, cut it in two, perhaps leaving off a qualifying or controlling clause, and in that way may be able, by the forger's tricks, to secure some countenance in his declarations for your theories.
But what of harmony in the Democratic party? What are you doing?
What dare you say except the simplest, simpering platitudes? Here we
have an illustration: A great convention, the greatest of the Democracy
in the records of this year, has been held, great because it was expected
that it would launch a Presidential candidate.  What is there in that
declaration of so-called "principles" that might not have been written on
any day that any so-called "Democratic convention" ever assembled in the
UNited States?
Think of the Attitude of the Democratic party to-day! Here came a
young gentleman out of the West, from California. He regarded himself,
and many of his people regarded him, as a fit candidate for the Presidency
of the United States. He moved over the troubled Democratic waters. IIe
ave quiet and peace here and there, and he gathered about himself a vast:ollowing. And it at once became apparent that unless something should
bb dbnei and that quickly, this young man, HEARST, who was not in favor
here with the Democratic leader of this body-he was not in favor, perhaps, with more than two-thirds of the Democrats of this House; he was
not in favor with many of the Senators-that this man would be nominated
if something were not done.
And so the men who said, "None but Cleveland," the men who said
"None but Gorman," the men who said "None but Olney," all rushed together in conference, and scratching their ranks as with a fine-tooth comb,
they finally discovered a man who, perhaps, had never uttered a political
sentiment, who had, perhaps, voted the Democratic ticket, who was a friend
of Mr. Cleveland, who is understood to have voted for Mr. Bryan, and
who had the friendship of the one and on the other side the advantage of
regularity.  At once they baid, "This is our man."  Ah! If the Sphinx
lhad been here, if he could have changed his habitat from Cairo to NeW
Tork, he would have been of all gentlemen the most acceptable. [Laughter
and applause on the Republican side.]
He not only never has said any fool things, but he could give guaranties for the future [laughter]; but they could not get him, so in N<o
York they accepted their next best but not inferior man, and they are now
engaged in putting him forward. Why? Ah, when the masses of the BRe
publican party will name by acclamation Theodore Roosevelt [prolonged
applause on the Republican side], it will be because they know him. It will
b9 because they know his sentiments, and approve them; because th:Y
'6w his integrity, and approve it; because they know his intelligence and
wisdom, and indorse them.
a-32


I




'OUR CONDITION UNDER PROTECTION-OUR CONDITION EIGHT MONTHS LATER."
atrtract from McKINLEY'S Letter of Acceptance, 1896' Printed on page
415, Appendix to bound Congressional Record, 1st kession, 65th Congress; part of remarks of Hon. C. H. GROSVENOR, in House of Representatives, July 19, 1897.
OUR CONDITION UNDER PROTECTION.
In December, 1892, President Harrison sent his last message to Congress. It was an able and exhaustive review of the condition and resources of the country. It stated our situation so accurately that I am
sure it will not be amiss to recite his official and valuable testimony.
"There never has been a time in our history," said he, "when work was so
abundant, or when wages were so high, whether measured by the currency
in which they are paid or by their power to supply the necessaries and
comforts of life. The general average of prices has been such as to give
to agriculture a fair participation in the general prosperity. The new
industrial plants established since October 6, 1890, and up to October 22,
1892, number 345, and the extensions of existing plants, 108. The new
capital invested amounts to $40,446,060, and the number of additional
employees, 37,285. During the first six months of the present calendar
year 135 new factories were built, of which 40 were cotton mills, 48 knitting mills, 26 woolen mills, 15 silk mills, 4 plush mills, and 2 linen mills.
Of the 40 cotton mills, 21 have been built in the Southern States." This
fairly describes the happy condition of the country in December, 1892.
What has it been since, and what is it now?
OUR CONDITION EIGHT MONTHS LATER,
The messages of President Cleveland from the beginning of his second
Administration to the present time abound with descriptions of the deplorable industrial and financial situation of the country. While no resort to
history or official statement is required to advise us of the present condition, and that which has prevailed during the past three years, I venture
to quote from President Cleveland's first message, August 8, 1893, addressed
to the Fifty-third Congress, which he had called together in extraordinary
session. "The existence of an alarming and extraordinary business situation," said he, "involving the welfare and prosperity of all our people,
has constrained me to call together in extra session the people's representatives in Congress, to the end that through the wise and patriotic
exercise of the legislative duties with which they solely are charged the
present evils may be mitigated and dangers threatening the future may
be averted.
"Our unfortunate financial plight is not the result of untoward events,
nor of conditions related to our natural resources. Nor is it traceable to
any of the afflictions which frequently check national growth and prosperity. With plenteous crops, with abundant promise of remunerative production and manufacture, with unusual invitation to safe investment, and
with satisfactory assurances to- business enterprises, suddenly financial distrust and fear have sprung up on every side. Numerous moneyed institutions have suspended because abundant assets were not immediately
available to meet the demands of frightened depositors. Surviving corporations and individuals are content to keep in hand the money they are
usually anxious to loan, and those engaged in legitimate business are surprised to find that the securities they offer for loans, though heretofore
satisfactory, are no longer accepted. Values supposed to be fixed are fast
becoming conjectural and loss and failure have invaded every branch of
business."
A STARTLING CHANGE IN BUSINESS CONDITIONIS
What a startling and sudden change within the short period of eight
months, from December, 1892, to August, 1893! What had occurred? A
change of Administration; all branches of the Government had been intrusted to the Democratic party, which was committed against the protective policy that had prevailed uninterruptedly for more than thirty-two
years and brought unexampled prosperity to the country, and firmly pledged
to its complete overthrow and the substitution of a tariff for revenue only.
The change having been decreed by the elections in November, its effects
were at once anticipated and felt. We can not close our eyes to these
altered conditions, nor would it be wise to exclude from contemplation;>ad investigation the causes which produced them. They are facts which
we can not as a people disregard, and we can only hope to improve our
Iresent condition by a study of their causes.
In December, 1892, we had the same currency and practically the same
vlume of currency that we have now. It aggregated in 1892 $2,372,599,501; in December, 1895, $2,194,000,230. The per capita of money, too,
hI;s been practically the same during this whole period. The quality of the
t1!oney has been identical-all kept equal to gold.
It is a mere pretense to attribute the hard times to the fact that all
o r currency is on a gold basis. Good money never made times hard.
l Tlose who assert that our present industrial and financial depression is the
Ir sult of the gold standard have not read American history aright or been
( reful students of the events of recent years. We never had greater pros1 -,rity in this country in every field of employment and industry than in
tl e busy years from 1880 to 1892, during all of which time this country was
o, a gold basis and employed more gold money in its fiscal and business oper' ions than ever before. We had, too, a protective tariff under which ample
r venues were collected for the Government and an accumulating surplus
v aich was constantly applied to the payment of the public debt. Let uI
1 tld fast to that which we know is good. It is not more money we valif
V-hat we want is to put the money we already have at work. When money
i employed, men are employed. Both have always been steadily and re-! lnmeratively engaged during all the years of protective tariff legislation.
V hen those who have money lack confidence in the stability of values and
ii vestments, they will not part with their money. Business is stagnated,
t: e life-blood of trade is checked and congested.




"AMERICAN      WOMEN      MADE INDEPENDENT."
"IN  THIS DIVERSITY        OF B1MPLOYIMENTS RESULTIN
FROM TARIFF PROTECTION, AMERICAN WOMEN
HAVE BEEN ELEVATED AND MADE
MUCH MORE INDEPENDENT."
Extract from remarks of lHon. J. S. MORIRILL of Vermont, page
3020 of daily CongBresional Record, 60th Congressj 1st Session.
In this diversity of employments, resulting from tariff protection,
American womeln have been elevated and made much more independent. Largely participating in the world's useful work, thce
were never more elharming than to-day. There is much fine arid light
Wotk, Often that connected with the manipulation of machinery,
where their tact and aptitude has been found superior to that of
nmtn and the wages of Women for a week now often exceeds what was
fqtmrly p&id for a month. Far more than men would the fortunes
of women be adversely affected by any steps toward the British goal
of fgro trades
xgtract from remarks of Hon. B. BUTTERWORTH of Ohio, page
4394 of daily Contgressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Session.
I will engage to go with you, Mr. Chairman, into any shop ot factory ift my district where the Workmen I have alluded to are emplkyed, and select a man at random, and you will not find one who
cannot read the Constitution of his country in one language or two
lantuage#S Or who does not understand the rights it secures aid the
obfltgations it imposes. G  with him to his home. In that home yot
will And not merely the ordinary comforts and conveniences of fife,
but als  the irtcontestible evidence of education and refinement.
Books and rutsic will be found there. The daughter of that household
will be found not only equal to the discharge of the duties which
peftalft to holsewfery, but taking her place at the piano, she will
dlscourse the rarest music from  Wagner, Beethoven, and other
masters in that science.
gsttcaet from teedrks of lon. J. I. GALLINGER of New HampSte#, page 3688 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress,
lot Session,
In a locality 7 miiles from Birmingham, sixteen thousand English
women-wives, mothers, and daughters-toil by day and by night
maki   t mflI. atnd rfiets. A writer in the London Standard speaks
thus of their remuneration:
"The remuneration th4y receive is incredibly small.  It is no untsual thing, indeed it is the usual custom, for a family of three or
fottr peroslf, after working fourteen hours a day, to earn $5 in a
Wveetk out of which scanty amount deductions are made for fuel,
rpiritlrg machinery, etc., which makes the actual pay for three perS6s $4. 18 per week, work commencing at half past 7 in the morning
and eontiinng all through the weary day until late at nightf with
o tfb)stenftil food."
tirade from remarks of ton. THOMAS RYAN of Kansas, page
48b  of daily Congressional Redord, 50th Congress, 1st Session.
In tfie manufacture of cloth in the district of Potsdam-Frankfort
o  the Oder there are said to be about  I,000t hands employed,,f
whOm abftt 14M40 are women, at a weekly wage of Ia to 12 marits
($0a@ to $sg)
'th tI  eeCtor for the Iresden district gives the following as tl e
atelYag  wagea paid in his district:
Cents,
w~ oikmAettp e................ pet hour.. 3% to 5
Fqtoy o~peratives.t...  do...  5.. to 51
Penile WOrkes.........           do......  to14 to 3!2
Yitttgfrtion   fu(irteen to sixteen years old....do..... '4 to 20
To ae Md twelv to fourteen years old. i.....do.../o.  to I
a-34


I




i
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
i


m
0


MR. COBDEN SAID THE UNITED STATES WOULD
ABANDON THEIR PREMATURE MANUFACTURES."-"HE WAS MISTAKEN."
rtiract from  speech of lion. JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN at Birmingham,
England, printed si f daily Congressional Record January 6, 190:4.
[From the Scotsman.]
sPEECH OF JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN AT BIRMINGHAM
NOVEMB3E 4.
Mr. Chamberlain, who was received with great enthusiasm and the
iinging of "For He's a Jolly Good Fellow," said:
"MR. CHAIRMAN, LADIES, AND GENTLEMEN: I thank you for the welome that you have given me. I am glad to be amongst my own people,
Cheers.]  It is now almost exactly six months since, in Iddressing my;wn constituency in the town hall, 1 called their attention to our relation
sith our colonies, to our present fiscal conditions, and I asked themi 
nvited them, to a discussion. I invited them  to consider whether the
jme had not come when some modification of those conditions would be
ecessary and desirable. It was not for the first time that I had spoken on
lie subject.
"Hlere is one of the great changes which we have to recognize. which
ave altered the whole situation since free trade was adopted. Mr. O0bien based his whole argument upon the assumption that he made in good
aith that if we adopted free trade it would mean free exchange between
hie nations of the world ['Hear!' 'Hear!']; that it we adopted free trade,
ve years, ten years would not pass without all other nations adopting
similar system. That was his belief, and upon the promise the preiction which he offered, the country adopted free trade. Vniortunately
ie was mistaken. He told the country of his day that what he wanted
o do was to keep England as the workshop of the world, and the rest of
he world was to be the wheat field for England. I came across a pasa.ge in Mr. Morley's 'Life' the other day which really, now when you
hink of what has actually happened, seems to be almost astounding.
"Mr. Cobden said that the United States of America, if free trade
ere adopted, would abandon their premature manufactures [laughter],
hat the workmen in their factories would go back to the land [laughter],,nd-now I am quoting his exact words-'they would dig, delve and plow
or us.' [Laughter and cheers.]  If that had been true I doubt whether
[should have been here to-night. [Laughter.]  But it wasn't true. The
imericans have not so conceived their national destilny.   [Laughter.]
They have not believed that they were created by Providence in order to
iiq and delve and plow for us. [Laughter.]  They have thovught that they
tad natural resources even greater than our own; they have thought that!hey could manufacture as well as us; and I am afraid that their ideas,f t1he future have been much more correct than Mr. Cobden's. C'Hear '
Hear!'] We have to deal with altogether different conditions. What happened when free trade was adopted in this country?   Foreign countries,
vhich, as I have said, were backward in those days, were not manufacturers-their governments put on tariffs against our manufactures.
"I dare say it is quite possible they may have suffered in the first
nstance. They thought of the future, they thought of their children, and
hey thought of their country-all very good things to remember occasionlly. ['Hear!' 'Hear!']  What was the result?    Behind the tariffs, beind the tariff wall, they built up their industry. Gradually during the
wenty-five years in which we were so prosperous after free trade, gradully they became more and more manufacturing nations; gradually they
ot a firm hold on their own home markets and kept us out, and estabished the industries which, not satisfied any longer with their own home
narkets, are now invading ours. ['Hear!' 'Hear!']  I don't blame foreign
ounDtries. I don't appeal against their policy. But I ask you as sensible
ron, are we really so conservative a nation that when such a change as
hat has taken place in the whole conditions of our trade we are still to
ay, 'We stick to our well-tried policy?'  [Laughter and cheerei.]
"Now, gentlemen, let us see how this works. Cuba, a great island,
nly requiring the good government which it now has under American
rotection to make it one of the richest countries in the world, was handed
vpr to the care of America, end our idea was that our conditions of trade
ith Cuba would be respected. They have not been respected. PerhaDs
heo Americans did not understand them in the same sense as we do. Be
hlat as it may, all representations by us have been fruitless, and the
tmerican Government, the American President, proposes preferential arnirgemcnts with Cuba, treating Cuba exactly as I want you to treat our
olony of Canada.  [Cheers.] IHe proposes to make a preferential treaty
With Cuba, the result of which will be that no more English qoods will
10 to Cuba, and all the traffic between Cuba and. the United States will
e done in United States ships,
"Not merely that. I am told a large trade is done between Rangoon
i(d Cuba in Indian rice, and that is now done by British ships, but th
'erslt will be that rice will go to New York and from there to Cuba in
lirrican ships. And once more a portion of your trade has been snipped
ft. and because you have gained somewhere else you have the Cofbdqn
i b still holding high its flag and saying. 'See how great is our trade 
cqi what a magnificent people we are and the losses we can sustain withqut
)nlplaints I' Now, I say that in this matter of shipping something shold
i;one.  ['Hear!' 'Hear!'l  Our colonial premiers on the last occasion,
'iong other resolutions besides the one asking us for preference passed a
ilution asking the British Government to consider the conditions under
hid.h the coasting trade as between ourselves and our colonies is carried
0n and the premier of New Zealand has already I believe, proposed a! A to his own Parliament in which he recommends that the same treat.
'     oit should be measured to foreign countries that they meaure to the:ritish Empire.  ['Hear!' 'Hear!']
"Where they keep their coasting trade to themselves, New Zealand
l''1 the mother country should keep their coasting trade to themselves."
a-35






"THE PEARL BUTTON TRADE"- "THE JEWELRY
TRADE."-"INFLUENCE OF THE TARIFFS."
Extracts from speech of Hon. JOSEPH CHAMBERLAIN at Birmingham,
England, printed in daily Congressional Record, January 5, 1904.
"Will you take our trade? ['Yes!'] Well, take one of the oldest in
Birmingham, the pearl-button trade. In the pearl-button trade 6,000 work
people used to be employed. To-day there are about 1,000, and very few
of them have full employment. Why is that? Well, it is largely due to
the influence of the tariffs, which shut out the pearl buttons from America,
and it is partly due to the 'dumping' of pearl buttons from the Continent
into England and even to Birmingham itself.
"Well, I wonder what has become of the 5,000 pearl-button makers
who were once employed, and who have lost their employment. [A voice,
'Making jam!' and laughter.]  I will only give you one more.   [Cries
of 'Go on!'] I am going to take this time a comparatively new Industry,
Take the cycle trade. Now, what is the case there? Our exports to the
foreign protected countries fell ~566,000 in ten years, and our exports
to the colonies rose in the same period ~367,000. Why was that change?
When the foreigners found that the manufacture of cycles was rather a
good thing, they put up their tariffs-the tariffs now on cycles range up
to 45 per cent.-and, not content with that, when the time of depression
was strongest in America, the Americans dumped their cycles down here
at prices with which English manufacturers could not compete.      In
1897 the United States of America sent to the United Kingdom alone
~460,000 worth of cycles, and at the same time they flooded the colonies
and sent them ~340,000 worth, all of which we might have had if we had
had a tariff here to prevent unfair competition and if we had had a preference arrangement with the colonies which would have kept the trade for
us. [Cheers.]
"Take the jewelry trade.  ['Hear!' 'Hear!']  We have only statistics for three years. Before that time the board of trade did not separate
jewelry. In 1900 we sold to foreigners ~50,000 worth, we imported from
foreigners ~137,000 worth. ['Shame!'], and we were ~87,000 to the bad.
['Shame!'] Yes, that was 1900. But in 1902 we were ~170,000 to the
bad.  ['Shame!']  That is to say, in those three years in this foreign
trade we are twice as badly off as we were in 1900. Well, what is the
reason?  What is the reason 2 Well, there are tariffs; tariffs which prevent you from sending your jewelry into those foreign countries, and which
range up to 45 per cent. Then they say, 'Very well; if it be true that your
trade is falling off, that your primary industries are decaying, well, you
had better bear the evil that you know sooner than risk an evil that you
wot not of. You can't make any change.' Again-what a curious argument for a Radical!-'You can't make any change without being worse
off, and, above all, if you are foolish enough to listen to Mr Chamberlain
you will find the price of your food increase [laughter], the old bad days
will return, destitution will be your lot, famine will stare you in the face.
If you don't mind starvation yourself [a voice, 'Quack, quack!' and laughter] think of your families, think of your children.' Gentlemen, I beg
of you to treat the arguments of our opponents with more respect.
[Laughter.]  Well, now, I have to say that all this prediction of evil as
resulting from my proposals-a prediction which you ought to suspect,
because it comes from prophets who had always been wrong-this prediction is a grotesque misrepresentation."  ['Hear!' 'Hear!']
THE RESOLUTION.
Mr. E. Nettlefold, treasurer of the Birmingham Liberal Unionist Association, proposed, "That this meeting thanks Mr. Chamberlain for his
address and is of opinion that the time has arrived for the reconsideration
of the fiscal policy of the United Kingdom (1) in view of the continually
increasing restrictions of foreign markets and the unfair competition to
which British manufacturers are subjected, and (2) for the purpose of
consolidating and developing the Empire; and that this. meeting accordiingly approves of the policy of His Majesty's Government in asking for
a free hand in negotiating with foreign countries, including the power
of retaliation where no concession is made by them on their present hostile tariff, and also cordially supports the principle of reciprocal preference
between the mother country and her colonies and posessions, which, without increasing the cost of living in the United Kingdom, will extend imnperial trade to the mutual advantage of every part of the Empire."
A Conservative workingman, Mr. C. C. Cooke, seconded the motion,
which was carried.
MR. CHAMBERLAIN'S REPLY.
Mr. Chamberlain, in reply said:
"Ladies and gentlemen, I thank you for the resolution which you
have just passed with so much cordiality. I am encouraged by the support of my friends in Birmingham, and not only by your support, but ')y
the way in which my appeal upon this subject has been received by tile
working classes in other parts of the country. I pointed out at Liverpo l,
as Mr. Cooke has reminded you, that the issue was one which under olr
existing parliamentary system, so different from that of the days of the
Corn Law League, when every workingman who Is a householder aid
every lodger who cares to claim has a vote, that the result must nec ssarily be decided by the majority-that is, by the working classes of t is
country; and I should be merely running my head against a brick wTll
if I attempted now to do what was done those long past days to carry
legislation which was contrary to the wishes and aspirations of the majority of the people.
"Therefore it is that I say, finding, as I have found, such frien( ly
acceptance, such generous consideration, such patience and attention, I
do not believe that we are wrong.   [Loud cheers.]  Ladies and gent'emen you will not separate to-night without the usual vote of thanks to
the chairman, which we shall heartily tender to Mr. Lowe.    ['Hea:!'
'Hear!']  Here in Birmingham, and, I am inclined to think, in the dstrict round it, we shall be united, as in past days. Here, at any ra e.
the free trader will cease from troubling and the tariff reformer will be
at rest."  [Laughter.]
a-36


I




FTHE FRAMERS OF THE CONSTITUTION REGARDED
PROTECTION AS THE INSPIRATION OF
OUR    FREE INSTITUTIONS."
'i:tracts from remarks of Hon. W. P. BROWNLOW         of Tennessee,
in House of Representatives, March 25, 1897, and printed in Appendix to bound Congressional Record, Vol. 30, page 66.
The wise and Heaven-directed framers of the Constitution-that
mmortal document which is the golden girdle of the Union-regarded
protection as the inspiration of our free institutions and the bed
rock of our national development and prosperity.
In referring to our nation as "a free people," this meaty and
significant paragraph occurs in President Washington's first annual
message:
Their safety and interest require that they promote such manufactures
as tend to render them independent of others for essentials.
Thomas Jefferson, the alleged founder of the present Democratic
party, and whose memory the free traders profess to revere so
greatly and gratefully, used this plain and spirited language in reference to protection:
The general inquiry is, Shall we make our own comforts or go without
them at the will of a foreign nation? He, therefore, who is now against donestic manufactures must be for reducing us either to a dependence upon
that nation or to be clothed in skins and live in caves and dens. I am
pIroud to say that I am not one of these. Experience has taught me that
manufactures are now as necessary to our independence as to our comforts.
The prohibiting duties we lay on all articles of foreign manufacture,
which prudence requires us to establish at home, with the patriotic determination of every good citizen to use no foreign article which can be made
within ourselves, without regard to difference of price, secures us against
a relapse into foreign dependency.
My opwn idea is that we should encourage home manufactures to the
extent of our owa consumption of everything of which we raise the raw
material.
James G. Blaine, the famous author of reciprocity-a piece of
diplomacy that has saved this country hundreds of millions of dollars
-— and who was one of the most studious, observing, and biggestblrained statesmen of his tinme, said, in referring to the McKinley
tariff:
The benefit of protection goes first and last to the men who earn their
bread in the.sweat of their faces. The auspicious and momentous result is
that never before in the history of the world has comfort been enjoyed, educations acquired, and independence secured by so large a majority of the
total population as in the United States of America.
In 1816 John C. Calhoun, that true and tried Democrat whom the
D)emocracy of the South followed with the same consuming devotion
tiat the French battalions foilowed Napoleon, in a strong speech in
favor of a protective tariff, said in the course of his invincible argul),nt for this policy:
When our manufactures are grown to a certain perfection, as they will
lim(ler the fostering care of Government. the farmer will find a ready market
for his surplus product, and what is of almost equal consequence, a certain
and cheap supply of'all his wants. His prosperity will diffuse itself to
every class in the community. It (a protective tariff) is calculated to bind
to,ether more closely our widespread Republic and give greater nerve to the
(aeliM of Government.
Andrew Jackson, the autocrat, idol, and now the patron saint of
tlh Democratic party, in 1824, then a United States Senator, declared:
Providence has filled our mountains and our plains with mineralsW i.h lead, iron, and copper-and given us a climate and soil for the growhil; of hemp and wool. These being the greatest materials of our national
'1, rense, they ought to have extended to them adequate and fair protection,
thiat our manufacturers and laborers may be placed in a fair competition
Wi-h those of Europe, and that we may have within our country a supply
(f those leading and important articles so essential in war. We have too
l(;!g been subject to the policy of the British merchants. It is time we
i iuld become a little more Americanized, and instead of feeding the pau' Rs and laborers of Europe, feed our own; or else in a short time by conti suing our present policy (the tariff for revenue only of 1816) we shall
t!' be rendered paupers ourselves. It is my opinion, therefore, that a carefi: and judicious tariff is much uwanted.
a-37


I




"SWIFT    WITNEBSSS      AGAINST      FREE-TRADE      PABRICATIONS."
Extract from  remarks of Hon.. S. 3.MORRILL of Vermont,
page 3020 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st
Session.
The reckless assertion has sometimes been made that the cheaper
cost of living in Great Britain fully compensates for the lower rate
of free-trade wages. In the thirty-five years ending in 1887, 4,222,000
immigrants from the British Kingdom came into the UnitedStates,and
their action brands the assertion as a colossal inveracity. The meaning of this is further accentuated by the fact that the total number
of foreign-born residents in the United Kingdom at the last census
was less than the half of 1 per cent. of the population. The British
low-grade wages and living breed discontent at home, and attract no
Americans, but expelled last year 281,487 of their own subjects, of
whom 72 per cent came to the United States, and all are swift witnesses against free-trade fabrications.
The wages of laboring men, beyond all dispute, are far greater in
the United States than in any other country in the world, dnd the
cost of subsistence here is only increased by its higher grade and
more generous amount. Undoubtedly it is more difficult for our
sixty-two million of people to find profitable employment in 1888 than
it was for thirty-five or thirty-six million in 1861, and the difficulty
would be greatly augmented should free trade or the policy of nonprotection ever become dominant in tariff legislation.
"WAGES THAT PUT HEART AND HOPE INTO A MAN
ARE THE BEST OF INVESTMENTS."
Extract from remarks of Hon. JOIN i1. FARQUHIAR of New
York, page A,487 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress,
sat Session.
It has cost the American workmen millions of dollars in wages and
lost time to reach the vantage-ground in work and wages which they
now occupy. The capitalist and the wage-earner, the employer and
the employe, after fierce years of struggle and misunderstanding,
now generally respect and consult each other's interests. What benefits one benefits the other. Arbitration is supplanting strikes; cooperative production will succeed arbitration, as co-operation is the
child of confidence. He is a mean workman who begrudges his employer fair remuneration for his capital, and he is a mean employer
who does not pay a fair day's wage for a fair day's work; for good
labor at good wages is cheaper than poo  br l at. poor wages, Professor Thompson says:
"The lowest wages that you can get a man to live on will not get
the best work out of him. Put a whole people on such wages, and
keep them there, if you can, for two or three generations, and you
will have crushed the energy, the spirit, the heart out of that people,
and made them a very inferior and unprofitable class of workmen.
On the other hand, wages that put heart and hope into a man, that
make him feel that his personal efforts and his best work are needed
to keep them at present rates, that offer him the prospect of becoming his own master by frugality, that enable him to educate his
clildren to fill a place like his own intelligently, or perhaps to rise
to a higher place, such wages are in the long run the best of investments."




I


a-38






9
I
1,
t
I11
I
11
I
t


I




'DOMESTIC COMMERCE IS MORE PROFITABLE THAN
FOREIGN,"
r;,.tract from remarka of Hon. WM. D. KELLEY, of Pennsylvania,
in 1iHouse of Representatives, January 31, 1866. (Congressional
Globe, page 560, 39th Congress, 1st Session.)
DOMESTIC    COMMIERCE      IS MORE     PROFITABLE       THAT
IO!]IQGN.
There *is other commerce than that between foreign    nations.
France and England lie nearer to each other than New Jersey and
Ohlio, or than Indiana and Missouri. Commerce between New England and the Pacific slope takes place at the end of longer voyages
tlon that between New and Old England. A quick market and
ictive capital make prosperous commerce. Interest on borrowed
capital is often a fatal parasite, and a nimble sixpence is always better than a sluggish shilling. Commerce is the traffic in or transfer
of commodities. It should reward two capitals or industries-those
of the producer of each commodity; and where trade is reciprocal,
and really free, each man selling or buying because he wishes to do
so, it dues reward both. It is, therefore, apparent that if we consume American fabrics, as well as home-grown food, these two
profits, and a third (two of which now accrue to foreigners, one
absolutely and the other in great part), would remain in the country. These are the profits on the production of raw material, on its
manufacture, and on its too often double transportation. But trade
Ietween a country in which capital is abundant, and the machinery
f which, having paid for itself in profits already realized, is cheap,
is is the case in England; and a new, or in these respects, poor country, as is ours, is never reciprocal; for the party with capital and
lnghinery fixes the terms on which it both buys and sells.
In addition to keeping both profits on our commerce at home and
doing olr own carrying, the diversification of our industry will insure
markets for all our products, and render the destruction of any one
of the leading interests of the country by a foreign commercial
iaower an impossibility. By securing the home market to our indusry and giving security to the investment of capital in furnaces,
forges, mills, railroads, factories, foundries, and workshops, we can
teadily enlarge the tide of immigration. Men will flow into all
)arts of our country-some to find remunerative employment at
alior in which they are skilled; some, finding that land, mineral
Wcalth, water-power, and commercial advantages are open to all in
in eminent degree, will come in pursuit of enterprises of moment,
iid each new settlement, and each new branch of industry estabisled, around which thousands of people may settle, will be a new
narket for the general products of our skill and industry; so that
ce shall not only become independent of Great Britain in so far as
lot to depend on her for that which is essential to our comfort or.elfare, but independent in having a population whose productions
'ill be so diverse that though the seas that roll around us were, as
ciferson once wished them, "seas of fire," our cormmercial, mannf'turing, and agricultural employments could go on undisturbed
)y what was happening in other lands. When we shall have attained
lbis condition of affairs we will have foreign commerce, for we will,z e that to carry away which, being manufactured, will contain in,,j'kages of little bulk our raw material, food, mechanical skill, and
hc labor of our machinery; and in exchange we will get whatever
o~: material we do not produce, and the ability to retain the basis
) a sound currency which England and France, by the free trade
l"s pretch but do not practice, now draw from us and other counri s in the position we so humbly occupy of producers of raw matei;i, and whose people lack the foresight or the ability to supply
h::inselves with clothing and the means of elegant life.


I




THE IMPORTANCE OF TEE HOME MAREET.
"THE HOME MARKET EQUAL TO THE ENTIRE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE OF THE WORLD."
Extract from remarks of Hon. C. H. GROSVENOR of Ohio, in daily Co/gressional Record, February 1, 1904.
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to place in the Record a very
carefully written and wholly non-partisan discussion in regard to our
foreign and interstate commerce, by Hon. 0. P. Austin, of the Bureau lof
Statistics of the Department of Commerce.
[Address delivered before the Rochester (N. Y.) Chamber of Commerce, by
0. P. Austin, Chief of the Bureau of Statistics of the Department of Commerce and Labor, Thursday, January 7.]
Before beginning a study of the question with reference to the markets
of other parts of the world, let me call your attention to the importance of
our home market.
Before stating the figures of the value of our internal commerce, however, I want to give you a standard of measurement, a great unit of value
by which we may measure its importance and its growth. The international
commerce of the world, the entire foreign commerce of all the nations and
colonies of the world, so far as we can measure it, amounted in the year
1900 to about 20 billions of dollars. That is the total of imports and exports combined of all countries and colonies of sufficient importance to maintain any sort of a record of their commerce.
A third of a century ago, in the year 1870, the international commerce
of the world was 11 billions, but the devolopment and use of steam and
steel and electricity in transportation and commerce, by land and sea,
during the wonderful period in which this generation has lived has brought
it to 22 billions in the year 1903.
The internal commerce of the United States was in 1870 7 billions of
dollars, and in 1900 it was 20 billions. With this definite basis of 20
billions in 1900 and knowing what rapid development has occurred in all
lines during that period, we may safely and conservatively put the internal
commerce of the year 1903 at 22 billions of dollars-a sumn which actually
equaled the entire international commerce of the world in that year.
Think of it, men of Rochester; you producers and manufacturers and
merchants and traders and bankers and transporters, think of it! The
market of our own country, the home market, in which you can transport
your goods from the door of the factory to the door of the consumer without breaking bulk a single time, is equal to the entire international commerce of the world.
Not only is this true that our home market is equal to that offered
by the international commerce of the entire world, but it.is evidently growing far more rapidly than international commerce, for, as I have said, the
internal commerce of the United States has grown from 7 billions in 1870 
to 22 billions in 1903, while the international commerce has grown fromn
11 billions in 1870 to 22 billions in 1903, or, in other words, while the international commerce of the world is now twice as great as in 1870, the internal commerce of the United States is now three times as great as in
that year and equals the entire commerce between all nations.
Now, let us see some of the results: In 1870 our production of wheat
was 235,000,000 bushels; in 1903 it was 637,000,000, or nearly three times
as much, while the population had but little more than doubled. Of corn,
our production in 1870 was 1,000,000,000 bushels: in 1903 it was 2,250.000,000. In 1870 our cotton production was about 3,000,000 bales; in
1903, practically 10,000,000 bales.
In 1870 our production of steel was less than 100,000 tons; in 190',
more than 15,000,000 tons; and our production of pig iron and steel is
now greater than that of England and Germany combined, and about onethird that of the entire world. In 1870 our production of copper was bilt
13,000 tons; in 1903 it was 280,000 tons, and we now produce one-half of
the copper in the world.
And now for some of the financial results so far as relates to our own
people. The internal commerce, as I have already said, has increased from 7
billions in 1870 to 22 billions in 1903; foreign commerce, from 828 millions
to 2,445 millions, and the exports alone, from 392 millions to 1,420 millions.
With this increase in production and commerce has come increased wealth
and financial accumulations. The total money in circulation in 1870 was
675 millions. In 1.903 it was 2,466 millions, or nearly four times as much
in 1903 os in 1870, while population was but little more than twice as much.
The result is that the money in circulation in 1903 is over $30 phr
capita, while in 1870 it was but $17.50 per capita. With this increase in
money in circulation has come increased wealth per capita and increaset
bank deposits.
The total wealth of the country in 1870 was stated by the census at $n
billions of dollars; for 1900 it seas estimated at 94 billions, and to-day it
may safely be put at a round 100 billion dollars.
The average wealth per capita, according to these figures, would be, in
1870, $780 and in 1903 $1,250, an increase of 60 per cent. in the average
per capita wealth in 1903, as compared with 1870.  The effect of this
increase of money and wealth is seen in increased bank clearings and,
what is much better, in increased bank deposits among all classes of oir
population.
The bank clearings of New York City grew from twenty-eight billions
in 1870 to seventy-five billions in 1902, and the bank clearings of the wh:le
country from fifty-two billions in 1887 (the earliest available figures) t,
one hundred and sixteen billions in 1902, having thus doubled in fiftesn
years. The total deposits in the various classes of banks in 1875, tIt'
earliest year for which we have data, were, in round terms, $2,000,00(1.000; in 1902 they were nine billions, havinq thus quadrupled in twenty/seven years.
But the most gratifying feature of this picture of banking and financial
conditions in our country is the fact that deposits in savings banks-thcse
institutions for the safe-keeping of the earnings of workingmen and wido'ws
and orphans and children of the country-have increased from $550,00'000 in 1870 to two thousand nine hundred and thirty-five millions, or alms Si
$3,000,000,000, in 1908. What say you, business men, of the future of a
country whose workingmen and working women and children have tbrec
thousand millions of dollars laid aside for a "rainy day."
a-40


j




"THE AMERICAN IDEA"-"PROTECTION THAT IS
ABSOLUTELY PANIC PROOF.".Axtracts from remarks of Hon. J. H. GALLINGER of New Hampshire, in
daily Congressional Record, April 23, 1904.
INCREASE OF 3HOME MARKET POSSIBLE.
Referring very briefly to this quest of our Democratic friends after
foreign markets, I should like to draw attention to the fact that we have
at our very doors, without crossing the seas, with its expenses for freight
and the various disadvantageous accompaniments of foreign exports, a
market which seems well worth considering and well worth cultivating, but
which sometimes is apparently overlooked by tariff reformers.
We are now importing anually over $1,000,000,000 worth of goods,
about one-half of which could be produced in this country.   We are
importing over $50,000,000 worth of cotton manufactures, about $20,000,300 worth of woolen manufactures, some $50,000,000 worth of manufactures
of iron and steel, $75,000,000 worth of sugar, $35,000,000 worth of manufactures of silk, and many other millions worth of manufactures in metal
and wood, which could well be made in this country, giving to our own
labor the advantages of employment in those industries. It is not necessary
to break down our tariff laws by lower duties or treaties in order to obtain
an increased market for hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of manufactured products in our own country. The market is right here in the United
States, and while it is but a small proportion of the total value of our home
market, which we already possess, it certainly is well worth acquiring.
TWENTY YEARS' PROGRESS.
The following table gives at a glance a view of the progress of our
country in its material industries during the last twenty years, in spite of
the disastrous results which we experienced under the low-tariff period of
the last Democratic administration. These figures speak so eloquently for
themselves that it is not necessary for me to more than call attention to
them:


I tems.                      188I.
DIeposits in savings I anks........$,0241,86,787
l)Dpositors   in  savings    banks,
u   ber........................         2,876,438
'1'otal ban k deposits..............  ua2,755,938,(05'
Xold in circulation...............     44,649
(, old certificates in crculatlio..     $59,807,370
TIotal money in ei cuilation.....1.,230,3(S0,696
Per capita money in circulation                $22.91
Bank clearings, United bltates... j$f52,126,704,488
'.Til plate, importe..... pounds..        484,088188
tin plate, manufactured..do.....              None.
oirld production...................       $830,00000
Silver production...$.............        $4t,200,000
O:ali production...........to ns.         102,8617,969
Pi t-iron production.........do..           4,595,510
ietel production.........       do...       1,78,5i
('Opper production..........do...             51,574:atw silk, nmported.... pounds..            4,209,015
I?dfia rubber, inported...do.....          21,646,320,tanufaetul rers'   matetials, imported...........$.............       $2   787,778, 91( 
f x ports of unanufact tres........       $134,228,,ttal imports...................  $728,180,914 
To tal exports...............8.........  $823,'t,4(.
'sxcess of exports over im ports        $100,t58,488
rt: 1882.                   b 1887.


1898.           19083.
$1,785,150,957  $2,985,204,845
i4,830,599       7,t'05,228
$4,586,218,170   t9,673,885,803. $4t8,t585,668  $627,025,092
$92,642,189     $404,070,929
$1,596,701,245   82,449,168,418
$24.06           $30.21
P58,880,682,465  $1 14,1168,87,569
628,425,902      109,913,293
99,8193,2       819,840,00
$85, 955,00      $i80,00o,000
$77,575,757      $71,757,575
162,814,977     269,081,049
7,124,5W2       18,009,252
4,019,995       14,947,250
147,043          294,428
8,310,548       15,270$53
41,547,680       55,010,571
$8312,915,815    $1480,828,88(
8158,02;,11,8    $4107,526,159
$866,400o,922i  1,(Y25,719,237
$847,6t65,1944  $1,420,141,679
C$18,735,728  i $94,422,442
c Excess of imports.


THE TRUE POLICY.
And now, Mr. President, I wish only to add that we have all heard of
Iowa idea, of the Minnesota idea, of the Massachusetts idea, and pert:ps some corner or some citizen of some other State or Territory may have
at'me other idea; but, Mr. President, such ideas can not long live. There
i only one idea that we should cultivate and nourish and maintain, and
tIat is the American idea, a pcolicy not beneficial to one locality or to a
siqgle industry, but a fiscal policy that protects all alike in every part of
r r great and qrwing country, that protects the farmer and the factory
ld, the ma nufacturer and the artisan, the professional man, the laborer
I:'fl income earner in every walk of life. Such a policy is fully exemplified
Io our present most successful tariff law, a tariff that was the causative
i:ctor in restoring prosperity, the saving factor in maintaining it, and the
li:.t of all a tariff that when adverse conditions exist, when folly and finance
t'r a time go hand in hand, iwhen even the very elements seem to conspire
aIfainst us, insures the preservation of prosperity, because of protection that
iS absolutely panic proof.
a-41




"WE HAVE OAPTURE i          THE:MARKETS OF THE WORLD
FOR AL, OF OUR PRODUCTS."
Extract from remarks of tHon. 1. J  GALLING IE of New 11ampshire, in dily Congressionnal Record, April 23, 1904.
HOME MARKET BEST.
We have captured the markets of the world for all of our products,
both agricultural and manufactured, and in, domestic products we
stand to-day as the first exporting nation on the face of the earth.
This has been accamplisheIt under the operation: of a protective
tariff without sacrificing any of our own markets, without lowering
our bhigh setale of wages, and without submitting our own people
to the competition of the pauper labor of other countries,   It is
the greatest and most substantial victory, ever recorded in industrial
warfare in all history, and yet this remarkable foreign trade, which
has beep built up under our protective tariff, is only a small part of
our industrial achievement.
Foreign markets for surplus production is all very well in itself,
and very welcome when it can be gained without sacrificing any
portion of our home market; but it is this home market of ours,
Mr. President, which has been built up and maintained through
our protective tariffs, and particularly during the operation of the
law now on our statute books, which is not only the pride of every
American citizen, buit the envy of every foreign producer. A most
conservaotire estim ate of the value of this internal commerce is
$t2,000,000,000 annually, equal in value to to the combined markets of
the world for the purchase of foreigqn productions. Could we control the sale of all the goods which enter every port on the face of
the earth, it would only equal that which we now supply to our
own home market, an assured market which is constantly increasing.
This grand home market of ours can not be maintained if iwe let
down ourr protection bars, and adopt low tariffs, or if we enter into
reciprocity arrangements in competing articles, which is the same,
or at least a long step toward this same free-trade notion.
The value of our home market has never been more forcibly and
clearly presented than by lion. 0. P. Austin, Chief of the Bureau
of Statistics, Department of Commerce and Iabor, in a speech delivered in the city of Rorhester, N. Y., on Thursday, January 7, 1904,
from which I take the following brief extract:
The internal commerce of the United States was in 1870 seven billions
of dollars, and in 1890 it was twenty billions. With this definite basis
of twenty billions in 1.900 and knowing what rapid development has occurred
in all lines during that period, we may safely and conservatively put the
internal commecree of the year 1903 at twenty-two billions' of dollars-a:
sutm which actually equaled the entire international commerce of the world
in that year,
Thifnk of it, you producers and manufacturers and merchants and
traders and bankers and transporters: think of it! The market of OUr
own country, thie home marfet, in wz!ich, /ou can transport your (foods froPm
the door of tle factowr to the door of the consumer nw'ithout breaking bulk,
a sirgle time, is equal to t!ie entire international commerce of the world.
Not only is this true that our home market is equal to that offered
by the international commerce of the entire world, hut it is evidently growing far more rapidly than international commerce. for, as I have said, the
internal commerce of the United States has grown from seven billions inll
1870? to twenty-two billions in 1903, while the initernational commerce has
grown from eleven billions in 1870 to twenty-two billions in 1.903, or, in
other words, while tho internatinatal Cornmerce of the world iis now twice
as great as in 1870, the Internal commerce of the United States is now three
times as great as in that year and equals the enitire commerce between alla
natiton s.
1'his internal commerce of ours has been made possible only because
of our splendid wage system, which has broug'ht:about a higher
standard of living and a demand by our masses for more than the
mere necessaries of life. It is not necessary for mse at this time
to more than call attention to this feature of our tariff and industrial system. It has been made clear time and time again, and vet it
would seem   as if our opponents persist in losing sight of this
splen'did market at: our very doors in their desire to gain for our
producers ani insignificant percentage in our sales to foreign countries, thousands of miles away from our farms and factories. Zfuch
better would it be to sacrifice a Iarge portion or eren the whole of
ou-r foreifgn sales, than any considerable portion of our home marke1'.
But the figures which I hare given show that it is not necessary to
rMaacany sacrifices whaitever tunder the beneficent operations of,
protetive tariff,. We have not only maintained and increased on:,
home:arket during these past fewt years, but cwe have constantb!
increased our foreigmr  markets at the sane timen, ad more rapidl/
than any other eountry of the world.




"iUNITED STATES TARIFFS HINDER THE PLACING
iO ORTERS I           GREHEAT BIRTA!N.'
L,,*tractS from GLASGO IV HERALD, printed in daily Coqressional Record,
January 5, 190.4.
[From Glasgow Herald, September 2.1
Views oi ~cottish Woolen Trade on Foreign Taitf1s.
With the view of obtaining reliable information regarding the effect
rf foreign tariffs on the Scotch woolen trade, the South of Scotland ChanmI:ier of Commerce recently invited its members to answer several questions.
lhe following answers have been received from thirty-three members of
the chamber, all of thnri ipl-eslerltiUg btlsihes firlrms of considerable Importance, and many being partners in very large concerns:
United States Tariffs.
Qpestlon. What, in your opinion, has been the effect frorm time to
lime pf the various tariffs levied on woolen goods by the United States?
AnWsers. No. 1. Yarn spintier-To greatly resti'tt, and latterly to
certainily put a stop to biisiness In Scotch woolen yarlns.
No 2. Tweed manufacturer-Roughly stated, as tariffs rose, exports
to thg United States fell.
No. 3. Manulfactureti of iFancy tweedt, worsted sritings, etc.-The
ptresbnt tariff we find to be paractically prohibitive.
No. 8.  Scotch tweed merchants, and also of English manufactured
goods-At present it is not possible to sell in the United States, owing to
the ligh t tarli, except to houses doing a high-Class trade, where price is
a secondary consideration.
No. 9. Tweed mnanufacturers-Reduced our trade to practically nil.
No. 10.   Woolen and worsted manufacturer-To stop the trade in
bulk, What remains jbeing specialties in cloth or design.
No. 11. Scotch tweed manufactueres —The effect has been most selious, as it has, since the McKinley tariff entirely stopped what business
we had with the United States and thrown all that output (which was
very large) into the home market, which has since that time been seriously
congested, aiaking trade unremunerative.
No. 12. Manufacturers of hosiery and woven underwear —To hinder
the placing of orders in Great Britain.
No. 13. Woolen merchant-Ruinous to the woolen trade of this cotncry, eitfhout the haddow of a doubt.
Nb. 14. iHosiery manufacturers-Almost entirely stopped the tradb
with the United States In hosiery.
No. 15.   Manufacturers of high-class tweeds-To curtail of nearly
stop business except that buyers look at our styles to get educated, buy
a few bits to gave their shame, and then make up their bulk in cheiaper
goois on this side Or know better what to buy on the other. We losb
patlence when speaking of this country, which takes 95 per cent of a start
-or, rather, 125 per cent., counting all-and then struts about as lirds
of creation.
No. 16. Tweed manufacturer and yarn spinner-They have practically
closed the nmarkets.
No. 17. Manufacturers chiefly of tweeds and fine Worsteds-The effect has been very injurious upon our business.
No. 18. Woolen merchant, handling from medium up to best quality
of Scotch goods, also English Worsteds in fancy and plain coatings —
Most adverse to business. Having a separate business in Boston, U. S. A.,
I can testify to an enormous increase in the use and production of local
manufacturers. Every season the newest designs made in this country
are copied both ifni fabric and colors; and I have seen surprising imitationsi more especially in botany and crossbred worsteds. If it were not
for the better class of Americans being determined to be exclusive and to
wear only imporl;ted goods< the present limited trade would be snuffed out.
wearing the best Class of British goods is one of the ways by which an
American 'showg hts importance financially.
No'. 19. Manufacturers of fancy woolen and worsted goods-The effect
undoubtedly has been to practically destroy the trade in fancy goods. A
smaill trade is still done, but in my opinion makers would be bettyer Without
it. It only exists because- British makes and styles still lead the fashion
in men's goods, and American merchants buy them in small quantities for
the sake of educating themselves in order to "coach" the domestic manufaturer.
No. 20. t'Ifancy Woolen and Worsted manufacturers ---A    d6ciasing
trade,
No. 21. Hosiery manufacturer-Foreign trade too small to warrant
giving opinion.
No. 22. Matufacturers of Scotch tweeds-Never did a direct trade
wibh United states.
No4. 23. Tweed manufacturer —Distinctly against the industry of this
districte
No. 24. Tweed manufacturer-Very injurious.
No. tHr. Tweed manufaeturer-~Sine     the present higkh tariff has been
pt' on woolen geod-i otur trade has been practically nil.
No. 26. Manufacturer of high-class woolens for men's wear-Staple
golitds which formerly were bought for this market in large quantities,
a   prfactically shut but. Merchants who used to order 1,000 yards to
a oloring are now.conteat' with 50 yards or less.
No. 27. Scotch tweed manufacturer- -Every rise in the tariff has had
the effect of reducing the quantity of trade and making remunerative prices
-rise dfitctfi to obtain.  OnW e direct effect of the present high tariff is
tb.:t hiew des|ins mafnde tli thls country are immediately copied in AmeriC- lads, ad tlh     mhanufatuetr in thtis counitry does not get a fair
'reli for hi ]ingeianuity, ifn lpr'oducing i`4  d6siga.A or fabries.
N.O 28; Varn:me'rihafitt-i) Whim the taritf Was purely fiscal I, e.,
o? rIiaenu  purpIfes onlyI I British eports in *woolen goods were most
vx siave.  (2) When iti    tariff  'cahm^ in   protectiver  exports decreaead.
flce^ the tarif f becadim  pfohibi i', as' it i1 nZw, exports have pfiaeth,:-ity cease, withi thee ixNptioh of sp3elal desfig, 'Weves. or qualittwtchli the,Americaun  anufacturer can not yet produce.




HE DFFENCE BE                             REE-TRADE AND
PAOTECTI          REVENUE;Y
financial and commercial conditions as far down as such figures can
possibly be obtained, then I wish briefly to endeavor to refute the
accusation made by our friends upon the points that I have mentioned, and I will also set forth the reasons why the outlook is so
propitious, and why prosperity will not only continue to rule, but
will rule with increased vigor in the years to come, if we continue
to maintain our present tariff principles and do not allow ourselves
to be converted to the disastrous and destructive economic doctrines
of our opponents.
Or Democratic friends are fond of talking of a revenue tariff.
The following table is instructive in that point, showing, the difference between free-trade and protection revenue:
Year ending Juine 8:0-.       i 
Y:;:::  ear ending Julie: 30-    C 0iCustomns re- Total receipts.    celpts.
18a.........................................  $ 2,158,617   3 8 9;..
189.....0..............................................160,02 2..26,976.,.1897^: ^..................... I.................i 176,54,127  3 47,721,705
A verage..................2911499         29...........................
8;.. 9.$                         7 6...  2 1............................4..... 577; WSim i
18fl................                         2.....................  206,128,482  515 960,62]
JI!.....................................................  2 164,871  67,240 85
19i...t 0 0                                    J.233,164,871 567' 5.19ff.................................... i..............   '  8,586,456  5  587,685,18
1902.............................................  254,444708  562,478,21;:
1903...................2.................................   284,479,582  5W0,39t6,74
Avera ge.................................  $2 27,729,6t9r 4  $s 3,180,aX0
It must be remembered that the internal-revenue receipts are
affected by the tariff law as well as customs receipts, for in prosperous times, such as we enjoy under a protective tariff, the receipts
from internal revenue are largely increased over the receipts during
a low-tariff period. The result was that during the low-tariff years,
1895-1897, we had a deficit of over $76,000,000 added to a deficit in
1894 (which was also a practical free-trade year) of $70,000,000
or $146,000,000 in the four years, while during the four yearsending
1003 there was a surplus of over $300,000,000. We have repealed
war taxes to the amount of over $100,000,000, and sti  o  receipts
aref i  e0cess of our expenditures. This, Mr. President, illustrates
the difference between the reen e   nder low tarifs, and protectiee
tariff.  This is the reason why we are able to undertake the buildingof the great interoceanic canal, involving as it does the expenditure of between $100,000,000 and $100,000,000  and possibly even a
greater amount than that.
So much for the Treasury surplus. Now how does the balace
stand regarding our foreign trade, about which our Democratic
friends are always so solicitous? The official figures are as follows:
Imports and exports of amerhandise, 1895-1903.
- -  Exports                 Total
Year ending   Import    of  anufac-   Total pornd           xes
Imeports. efportxpsr                       s
June 80                  lures     exports.
U-                                    exp~orts.  exptures.or.
*W0-5........ l $731,969,945  $183595,74  $ 807.538,165 6 3 10 $75,56w25
6...  779,571,178  882,   8  1 t,662,31,612  10,882
'228;571;!78   898 8                i;~
7.....-.. —  7 2   277,285,305          1,1,286,26.1
8......6...   604,654    290,67,4  11,482 0; 1,84731,984  61i54837.6
19.          j 7.,....8.9.  39592,46 1,   3    1 924,171,791  ^874 
1w:00.;    1 849941,11 4. 81,7    1,394,48,,082" 2,244,424,26.6 1 544,548i!m1............... 82,7,6 I 410,932,24         2,44 7,764,91156, 4,.                                             i _.........,420,.....14 7  8lJ 1




.-:s b.: h:::;:p.UP:ii:,;g illa of te U Natioal I C overno mcnt. It'
cardinal principles have been the maintenance of the Declaration of
4  Independenceiternal improvements,  a tariff to protect our labor and
A   industries anl to pay Government expenses, the buildiny up of our
Navy, preserving purity in elections, for the diffusion of knowledge
and happiness among all the people, for an honest medium of exchange, the maintenance of a common standard of value and an elastic currency. It has stood for honor, dignity, integrity, patriotism,
Progress of the


proeress, prosperity, happiness,  lawI, and ortler.
Following these principles we have prospered; we have advanced
along the lines of accumulating wealth, furnishing employment for
cur labor, as well as good prices for our products; and in everything that makes opportunities and advantages for our people. VWe
have attained that remarkable degree of American prosperity.which
is the culmination of the prosperity of the people of the earth; but
as we have advanced in population, progress, prosperity, intelligence,
and happiness our expenses have also increased.
United States.


Population.:      Wealth.                     Statistics of farms.
Per                         Numnealr  P   n   alue of farms VIalue of
eo arms. In agri-e  and farm   products.
mile.                                 culture.   property.


Years.


Area.


Sq. miles.                                  Dollars.       Dollars.                   N;tumber.   I    Dollars.          Dollars.
1850....................                               2,980,959      2,191,876        7.78     7,185,780,000 3907.69          1,449,073............,967,343,580.............
1860......................................      3,025,600      81,443,321      10.389   16,159,616,000       513.93     2,044,0077...........,980,493,060...
1870..........................................   8,025,600      88,558371       12.74    36,068,518,000       779.83     2,659,985 '   5,22,471        8,944,857,749    1,958,030,927
1880......3.........................................,025,600  50,155,783    16.57    42,642,000,000       850.20     4,008,907     7,713,875      12,180,501,538    2,212,540,927
1890..,           62.......  3,2i,600  2,622,250  20.70  65037,091,00  1,038.57  4,564,641  8,565,926   16,082,267,689    2,460,107,454
1900;..'. -...\'..... I.'..'.....;......,... I.........    8,0295,600     76,33,387       25.22    94,3,000,000       1,235.86     5739g,357   10,438,219       20,514,001,83  8, 764,177,706
Farm    animals.                                           Production of principal commodities.
Year.
Total value. i      Cattle.        Horses.          Sheep.         Mules.          Swine.          wVool.        VWheat.            Corn.!. Dollars.   i.;~u~ —~" tuber.  2 ber.~ — 2~rumber.  2 ber.
Dollars.       INa um   erauber. i  Numumber.   Number.        Number.         Number.         Pounds.         Bushels.        Bushels.
150.......................................  544,180,516      17,778,907      4,336,719      21,773,220        559331       30,354,21       52,516,959     100,485,944       592,071,104
1860.................................. i  1,089,329,915  25,616,019  6,249,174  22,471,275  1,151,148  88,512,867  60,264,918  173,104,924  888,792,740
1870...................,........     1,822,827,577     25,484,100       8,248,800      40,853,000       1,179,500     26,751,400     162,000,0oO    2,35,84,700       1,094,255,000
1880................................            761756         33,258,000 i    11,21,800       40,765,900       1,729500      34,034,100     282,500,000     498,549,868      1,717,43443
1890........2...4..18,766,028                            52,801,07       14,21837       44,8,0           2    086,02  51,602 2027 51,602,780  276,000,  99262,000     1,489970000
1900........................................       2,228,123,134      43,902,414     13,587,524      41,883,035       2,086,027     37,079,856     288,636,621     52,229,505       2,105,102,516


S
a:
no
'~ 0
0 
0 u


)-f
m.t
m
IC=
*   - *
ITt
3 -OS^
'o o
Is 
m
2
3.:




"PROTECTION MAKES GOOD T                     "
Extract from  remarks of fo4:O:,;. t it t.SILTON. of Michigyal
in daily Congressional Record, April 14, 1904.
'At the' fitst ession of the Fifty-sixth Congress we tried to submUi
a resolution to tle people providing for an aamendmuent to the
Constitution permitting the Federal Government to follow, regulate, and control corporations generally, but it takes two-thirds
of Congress to do that, our Democratic friends refused to vote for
it, arid It failed.
Failng in that, in ithesecond session of the Fifty-seventh Congress we passed (I) a law providing for a Departmenit of Coinmercee anti Labor, witth a Coirimissioiner of Corporations charged
with the superVision of corporations engaged in interstate cornInerce, also providing for corporate publicity.:    i iasunch &s itS iis o use to manufacture if you can not get
your produet to' the cofsutite, and inasmuch as it had been for
sorm  tiune the1 cause of just complaint thlit railroad companies,
endtwed with the power.of eminent domain, whose dutv it is to
serve the publiC impartially, had been giving prefertntial freight
rates to preferred shippers, wlhereby shippers so preferred were
treigthetned into nionopolies, arbitrarily fixing prices to buyers and
seiers. 4fid driving comietietors out of business, we passed the antiette~laW~, w  ~idth prohibits under  r penalty the givihg, demanding,
or receiving of pieferences and provides the preventive remedy of
inj unction.
(i Wfe also passed ai law to "expedite the hearing and deterifinatioti of suits in equityy" under the antitrust law, and Under
hig law, to expedite heaiings the Northern Securities Case "caime
on to be heard."
The only antitrust law on the Federal statute books bears the
nMme of a Republlcacn    entlor. Tes law creat:ng an Interstale
Conmlere Commission     betstr  the nndme of antler Reupublicanf
enaitor ad all the law is beinft rnforced by a Repubtlian President,
Bmit genttlemen insist that trusts are fostered under proteetioi and
that the way to remove trusts is to remove the tariff.
It is not true tr hat tr'sts  re fostered by protection exept in!the teie that protection wmakes fgood times, and when times are
good ft hy are good fo r W0eerybod4y. If it be true that when times
ate good they are good for everybody, the converse must be true
that whef timies are bad they are bad for everybody, and if to
discipline trusts it is necessary   to make times bad for everybody,
It iis ndt unlikely that those least able to bear it would suffer most.
L 'ianyinig aside the fact that trusts are organized under English
free ttade as well as German, Austrian, anid American protection,
it is susceptible of absolute, demonstration that ArmOrican free
trade wovid operate i ithe interests of trusts and againmt the interest -of Amnerican labor;
it appears by the Tweifth Census thwt only 12.8 per cent. of the
total himanufaitured output of the United States is mnadv by trusts;
iltht only i..1S per cent. of the food supply of the United States
is controlled byl trusts, a  fhat only 7.5 per cent. of the labor
ermpolyoed in rmanufactctfit iis employedI by trusts, and the word
"trust' as hete employed Is rised to mean all corporationis organized In.'cent years. Since the taking of the last cetshs,. however,
it aiseas that the capitalization of combinations which ctlrihinated
i t  yeair 1901 is rapidly falling off.
Now, if1 it Is true that only 12.8 per cent. of the maniifactred
output of the United States is trust made, then the retraining 8.
per cent. is made by competing independent industries.
And if it be true that only 7.5 per cent. of the labor employed in
manufactuiring industries is employed by trusts, then the felBaiining ~5. per cent.L of labor employed in manufacturitng Is eniployed
by competing, -indpendent industries.
Therefore, if you remove the duty from    the 1;24. per cent, of
trust-made products you, remove it from    the remaiining 87.2 JI et
cent. of products made by competing,1 Independenit irdustriA e npioing 90.5 per cent. of all the labor employed *in rmanufa turiJ
industries in the United States  and inasmuch as Ak    teal. woILI
probaby go to t he wall first, trusts which would then beg ierln  it
benefit of free ra t mateerial would remain and-n:t oly' dlctote
terms to labor, which would then be seekinig employme        in 5
roded labor market, but would dictate terms to vonmetse fp'
ilded they thesWelVesO  Wereable to. survive coimpeitioi  with HW
tr~StR $.
aM,1.1.


I




IA MAN IS A FREE TRADAD             OB PROTECTIONIST" —
"THERE IS NO MIDDLE GROUND."
petracts from remarks of Hon. WM. D. OWEN of Indiana, page
6545 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, lt Session.
Mr. Chairman, there is no middle ground on this question. Such a
claim is a mere pretense. A man is a free trader or protectionist.
If a free trader, as far as the revenue is raised by tariff, he wants it
levied without reference to protecting industries. If he is a protectionist, he wants it levied with special reference to its industrial
benefits; and when an industry is self-supporting, or experimcnt has
proven it incapable of development, he withdraws the protection.
The lines that separate them are as 2widely separate as the poles and
is clearly defined as any different policies of government. The tariff
'reformer is a politician, a citizen who is not anchored to any governiental principle. He is a speculator on political chances. He is an
indtustrial mugwump, who, when you scratch his back you find a
man who reforms every one else, but wants to protect the industries
in his own district.
For me to defend and protect an industry in my own district, and
support the free-trade policy against other industries elsewhere, shows
e as really acknowledging the value of protection, but that as a
politician I am willing to join my party in a crusade against others.
t is of seed such as this that trouble is brought to governments.
"THE DEMOCRATIC POLICY IS FREE TRADE AND
NOTHING SHORT OF THAT."'3
xtract from remarks of Hlon. S.L.L, MIILI.EN of Maine, page
4255 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Session.
But to conclude, let me say that the issue is now fairly and clearly
ade between the great parties of the country, the Democratic free
rader and the Republican protectionist, and I am glad it is so. We
ee no more such dodgery of this question on the part of our Demoratic friends, as they have hitherto attempted with such success as
heir skill obtained by long experience in that art entitled them to.
he President's message, the Mills bill, and the tariff debate in this
(ouse have done one good if no other. They have disclosed to the
ountry that the Democratic policy is free trade and nothing short
f that; and if the present bill goes not quite to that length, its
Advocates do; that is sustained upon free-trade ground and no
other, and that the Democratic party only awaits a convenient oportunity to come out of its already broken shell into as fully fledged
champion of free trade, pure and simple, as the most ardent of its
eaders or the most radical English members of the Gobden Club, to
lTich it has contributed so many adherents in this country, could
tsre. 
a-47






"ENGLAND LEARNS FROM EXPERIENCE-DEMOC
RACY DOES NOT."
Extract from remarks of Hon. CHARLES DICK of Ohio, in. dail
Congressional Record, Jan. 6, 1904.
ENGLAND LEAIRNS FROM EXPERIENCE-DENOCRACI
DOES NOT.
On the day on which Mr. Balfour was delivering his splendid
address in favor of a protective tariff, in which he showed that
this policy had given tremendous development to the trade and
industry in the United Stated St ates at.the expense of his own country,
thie Democratic party in convention assembled in Massachusetts
adopted a platform which contained a vicious denunciation of om
protective tariff and of our great industrial organizations, which,
according to the testimony of Mr. Balfour, have been the very means
by which the United States has gained the commercial supremacy
now enjoyed. The platform reads:
We favor the immediate regulation of trusts under the interstate-comn
merce and taxation powers of Congress, and the admission, free of duty, oi
articles controlled by the trusts, raw materials of manufacture, and the
necessaries of life.
We have thus    presented 'to our attention the astounding spectacle of the prime minister of Great Britain openly advocating the
abandonment of free trade and the adoption of the American policy
of protection, while on the very same day the Democratic party
of Massachusetts, and in this respect the party in Massachusetts
voices the sentiment of the party throughout the country, demanding the destruction of an economic system    which, not only by tik
e idence of our own senses but on the testimony of Mr. Balfoau
has brought us unprecedented prosperity      and transferred Greai
Britain's commercial supremacy to the United States. Could political folly go further?
WHY GREAT BRITAIN ADOPTED FREE TRADE.
Mr. Balfour lately * issued a pamphlet entitled     "Insular Free
Trade," in which lie further explains his views.    The contest between protection and free trade, which came to an end in Great
Britain in 1846, was a struffggle between two opposing ideas, viz.
whether the country should become: more and more a manufacturing nation or whether agriculture was to be maintained at whateer
cost. The conclusion then was in favor of the first alternative, ans
Mr. Balfour says that the conclusion was right at that time, for ti
reason that an agricultural nation could neither have furnished th
men nor the money necessary to enable Great Britain to carry on
her imperial mission. To support a manufacturing community 
is necessary that luxuries and necessities be imported and that
large export trade be built up in order that sufficient capital mat
be raised to pay for the imports, and further that sufficient capita
shall always be available for home investment and furnish employ
meatt for a rapidly growing city population.
They failedMr. Balfour saysto foresee that the world would reject free trade, and they failed to take f1
account of the commercial possibilities of, the British Empire. If they 1'
been right on the first point-if free trade had Indeed become a unvers
creed-no controversy about our commercial relations with any fiscally in
dependent community could possibly have arisen. If, on the other baut1
they had succeeded in giving us imperial free trade, the protective tendencie
of foreign nations would in the long run have been but of secondary impsor
ance. The double error has established insular free trade, with its inov
table limitations, and left us bearing all the burden, but enjoying only bP
the advantages which should attach to empire.
The ocean we are navigating is smooth enough, but where are we bei
driven by its tides? Does either theory or experience provide any coasts
atory answer to this question? Consider some of the points on.which
have commented in these notes-the injury which foreign protection is Uc
culated to inflict on a fre(e-trade country; Its need for open m-arkets
threatened contraction of existing free-trade areas; the increasing sevcrit
of tariiffs tn,protectionist areas; the building up of vested protected'interis
in new countries, which may be discouraged now but not hereafter; t
effect'f this protection on oour future corn supply; the uncertainty and 10;which tariff-protected plants are inflicting and may hereafter inflict upi
Britlsh capital invested in Britain. One and all of these evils, actual a
prospective, are due to protection. The man who says that their cumulatdi
effect is so small as to bh negligible can hardly describe himself as a f
trader-at least he,can attach but a very small value to free trade.
man, who admitting their reality does not anticipate their increase, has
seems to me) not learned the lesson which theory and experience agroc
teaching. 'The man who admits their present reality and the probabi
of their increase, and yet is[: too contentedly prosperous even to consio
whether ay mitgation is practicab       rs little short of reckless.


I
I
I
y
d
t
d
11I:s
I
1,
S
y
11
e
I
UI
1
6
k
I


I


a-48


I




"EXCESS OF EXPORTS OVER IMPORTS." —"AN UNFORTUNATE SUBJECT FOR THE
DEMOCRATIC        PARTY."
Extracts from remarks of Hon. HENRY CABOT LODGE of Massachusetts, in daily Congressional Record, Feb. 4, 1904.
Mr. President, an extension was given to the somewhat casual
remarks which I made yesterday by the Senator from     Maryland
(Mr. GoRMANr]. This was something which I did not anticipate,
because I had no desire when I spoke, to do anything more than
touch on the question of the St. Louis appropriation and the general economy which has been preached in various quarters during
this winter. But the Senator from  Maryland thought it necessary
to infer that I had admitted the failure of our policies, because
I had alluded to the fact that we liad been told that there was
likely to be a deficit in the revenue this year.
Mr. President, for the seven months of the year which have already passed, there is, if I am correctly informed, no deficit; we
are about $4,000,000 ahead in income.
The Senator from  Maryland referred also to the decline in the
excess of exports over imports.  The amount of that excess no
doubt has fluctuated, but I think it was an unfortunate subject
to open for the purposes of comparison.-I- mean unfortunate for the
Democratic party.
I have drawn up, stated in millions, the amount of imports and
the amount of exports since 1893, which I will ask to have printed
with my remarks; and I find that the excess of imports in 1893
was $35,00,000; the excess of exports in 1894, $215,000,000; the
excess of exports in 1895, $61,000,000; the excess of imports, that
is, the adverse balance of 1896, $84,000,000.
Mr. President, I think it is worth while to compare those four
years, in two of which there was an adverse balance and in the
other two a favorable balance, with the years which have followed.
The excess of exports in 1897 was $268,000,000; in 1898, $594,000,000;
in 1899, $606,000,000; in 1900, $521,000,000; in 1901, $647,000,000;
in 1902,.452,000,000; in 1903, $395,000,00.
Excess of IExcess of
Yea r.         Im ports.       t Exprt pors. 
m~93.........................  7 60,0 I  831,0 X).. 35,000000...........
8444 8...............  I 54,  I  8(). X,0X )..............  2.15,l ),0.l..t. o........,,.....*....... * di7,X2,000,000  79 3,0(00,)....  6(,000000
B9(,..........................,!.779,10(0,0()  813,00)0,  0
5)7.764,000,000) 1,03.2,00.....
89i;7........................... 68, (wX
a1.....,,................ 6i 1..,tl,000  1,210,) 0,0X)..............  594,00,000(
',.................  t...  67,(X000,00   1,208,000,000..............  606,000( )
3,00...............,             0,00....,.        2......21,000,00
WI..,......................  82i3,000,000  1,460,000,000)..............  647,000,0o
2..... _.....................  9.3. 01,00 0,(0  I. 55,000,0...............  452  00 0,
9.........................  1,025,000,000  1,420,000,000..............I  39,00o0,000
There never has bee  in the history of the coun.try a period of
ia equal number of years or of all the years together -hich has
ipproached the years since 1897 in the favorable balance of trade
o the United States.  There has been a decline in the last two
cars from the great balances of 1901 and 1899, but in order to
nd a comparison which shows a falling off in the excess of exports
0ver imports in the last two years the Senator from Maryland is
3lied to compare them with other years of Republican ascendancy.
n this last year, which he pointed out as so bad, the excess of
'aports  over imports was far larger than in the two favorable
ears of Mr. Cleveland put together.
As for the revenue, even after the great reductions which we
ave made, I think it is well for the Senator to remember that in
rder to meet the deficit incurred during Mr. Cleveland's term
hey found it necessary to borrow, in a time of profound peace,
2;000O,000, adding that amount to the permanent debt of the
Oeantry.
Wee were charged with the expenses of a war. We met the war.
e tnet those expenses. We met the great loan which was rendered
ecessarv. Yet we have a balance in the Treasury to-day more than
iual to that loan, and we have been steadily reducing the perma'et debt ever since. We have had no deficit and we have issued
0 bonds to meet current expenditures.  I do not think, Mr. Presieat, it is possible to make a comparison more in favor of the wis~a of Republican policies than those figures show.
a-49
{e 




"UNITED STATES LEADS IN EXPORTS."
Extract from   remarks: of Hns. HENERY S. BOUTELL of Illtnols, in daily
Congressional Record, January 86, 1904.
Your soothsayers told the people that It the Republican tariff bill was
adopted terrible thinga would happen. You said that with a Republican pro.
tective tariff our exports would fall off. Instead of that our exports begaa
to increase imm-ediately upon the passage of the present Dingley tariff act,
I hold in my hand a statement from the Bureau of Statistics, showing the
increase in the exports, which I will insert in the Record.
It is only within recent years that the United States has taken her place
at the head of'he list ofof the world's great exporters of domestic products.
In 1875 the exports of domestic products by the world's great exporting na.
tions were as follows:
United Kingdom...................................... $1,097,497,000
France..............................................       747,400,000
Germany................................   693,052,000
United States.........................................           497.263,737
In 1885 the domestic exports of these four countries stood as follows:
United Kingdom..                                           $1,037,124,000
Germany........................................         680,551,000]
United States.6...9................................      673,593,596
France......9.....................................       596,000,000
In 1895 the domestic exports of the four countries were as follows:
United Kingdom..................... $1,100,452,000
United States................................    807,742,415
Germany...*..........................................    789.660,000
France..............................................          651,100,000
In 1903 the relative rank of the four countries In the exportation of
domestic products was as follows:
United States.........................................$1,457,565,783
United Kingdom........................................ 1,415,617,552
Germany a......................................... 1,200,000,000
France b..............................................            812,000,600
a Nine months' figures and estimate for closing quarter of the year.
b Eleven months' figures and estimate for last month of the year.
The table which follows shows the exports of domestic products from!
the United States, United Kingdom, and Germany in each year from 1875 tio
1903, the figures being in all cases for the calendar year:
Year.               United States. Uit     King      Germany
dons.
1875...................   $497,263,737  $1,008,497,000t   $593,052,W.
1876..................................   575,75,804    76410,000      605,886,0
1877..................................  67,566,495   967,913,000     656,982
1878................................ 1  723,286,821  3988,500,000  i 68,671,(;
1879................................  754,656t,755  932,090,000j  660,352.(
1880................................  875,564,075  1,085,521,000  688,500,t()
1881..................................  814.1.62,951  1,138,873,000  707,978,0(
1882..................................  749,91159,175,099,0X X)i  758,817,5
1883..............             777,528,718   1,166,982,000    778,257,0
1884..................................  733,768,764  1,134,016,000    7-02,4832.0
1885...............................  673,593,596   1,037,124,000    680,551,00
1886..................................  69,519,480  1,0)5,223,000    710,186,00X
1887..................................  708,319,692  1,079,944,000  745,896,0
1888.................................  679,597,477  1,141,363,000    762,444,001
188................................  814,154,864   1,214,442,000    753,222,0M
1890..................................  845,999,6  1,282,474,000   791,717,#0
1891...............................  957,333,551   1,203,1669,000   7555,771,00
182..................................  923,237,315  1,105,747,000    703,078,
893.................................   54,729,454   1,062,162,000)   735,86,01
1894...............................  807,312,116  1,051,198,000    704,826,(0
1895..................................  807,742,415  1,100,452,000  789,660,01
1896..................................  9086,30,0)80  1,168,671,000  838,981,0
1897.                                 1,079,834,296  1,139,882,000    865,124,(
189.................................  1,2;3,558,140  1,185,642,000  894,063)1
1899..........                        1,22807,150,000               1,001,278,0
fiC 1900..                        1.  1,453,010,112  1,417,086,000    97590
lo...................................           1  7,0 097,09,
1901.................................., 438,078,(651  1,862,727,000  l,054,685,
1902.......................,33,'288,491              1379,282,000    1,118,3130
190..................................,457,565,783  1,415,617,000  a)1,200,0,0
aEstirate for closing quarter of year.
The exports during the calendar year just closed amounted to $1,457'
000,000, the record year in exports of the United States to foreign countrla
nearly double the entire exports in the year 1895. But another thing Vt
is. very gratifyinfg to us all, gentlemen, partisanship aside, gratifying 0
every American in this House, is that during the past few years our grei
VRepublic has changed its place from foIurth:in the list of exporting ntios
to first, and to-day  we leadt Great Britain, Germany, and Prance.
Again it Iws predicted that the volume of money in the country wovi0
decrease, but it has not; it -is greater nosw than it ever was before   Tt Wt
predictedi thfat the cold in the Treasury would decrease, but it has noi
we have more gold in the Treasury now than there ever was in the Urnii
State Treasury before, and wje have more gold coin and bullion in the Uniti
*States Treasury ithan was ever collected at any one spot before in the hist0O..of the world-nearly seven hundred millions, of dollars.     It was predil
that t'waes all over fthe country twould go down, but on the contrary,. ir
the inauguration of PI'rcsident McKinley up to this year Just closed, t
average rate -of twages all over this country has gone ip.                 I
Not only the average money wage, but the actual wage as eompaS
with the cost of subsistence.
a-S0




"TARIFFS           AND TRADE BALANCES.-EXCESS                                       OF
IMPORTS UNDER LOW TARIFFS-EXCESS
OF EXPORTS UNDER PROTECTIVE
TARIFFS."
extract from    remarlks of Hon. C. H. G. ROSIrNOR            of Ohio, in daily ICongressional Record, November 27, 1903.
TAWREKP          AND TRADE BALANCES, 1790-1900.
Years in which low tariffs and protective tariffs, respectively, Ihave been
in operation in the United States, showingq the excess of imports or exports
in each year and the total excess of imports or exports under each system.
(Compiled    fIom   offlicial statements of the      Bureau    of Statistics.)
Low tariffs.                              Protective tariffs.
8spcal year.    Excess of                    Fi cal year.
Fiscal year    Excess of       Excess of                     Excess of      Excess of
imports.        exports.                      Imports.       exports.
1790..........    $2,794,844                     3...............          851.017
1791..........     10,187,959.............  1814.......       $,07,559...........
1792..........    10,746,902............    1815.......    60,483521........
1793..........   4,990,428............    18.........      5,182,948.......
1794.....           1552.......... 1..............i.............        49,028
1795..........    21,766,1.)6..:::.........  1826i.......  5,202,722..............
1796.........      22,861,5                  i 1827.......................
'ZB~~~ 1 2'2,6n 1,9.............  182-S.........  '           2.9 i7,(dI
1797..24,084,696....        j 1828.........      16,998.8736......
11798..........    7,224,289....   182.......................,     345,716
1799.......          40:3,626.......       1.0..................i             8,94 9,779
1800........    20,280,988...........               23,589,527..............
1..........       18,42,998       18.......     13,601,159..............
8024.......... 71 1883.........                               13,519,211...........!i.........         8,866,63 1.............. 1844..5..........              40,892,225
1804...........   7,00926.........     184.................           3,141,226
1805...........   25,033,979.               1                  74.....,211........,....
1t)11..........   27,873,037 i.............. 1846a........  4,165,409.............
1807.         0,156,850....             i862.................              1,313,824
1808..........   34,5519,040...        183...........    9,71,68 63........
1809).........    7,196,767........... 184........          157,609,295............
1810..........   18,642,01).......0....   18 7........    72,716,277...............
1    1........................  $7,916,832   1866.........    85,952,544.
181.2........    38,502,764......      1867.........    101,254,955...............
1817..........    11,578,431.........    186.. 75,3,541...........
1818........      28,468,867.......     1869.........      1,88,682.
1819..........    16,982,479..............1870........        4,18,640.............
1820........       4,758,331............. 1871.........    77,403,506..............
1821.......................          75,489   1872........    182417,461..............
1822..........    18,521,594......      1873......       119,656,28..........
1823.........   4,15.5,; 28...          1874.................      18,876,698
1824.:::::::.1   11,197,06                  11.........     19,52,725.
1824.....,1 706..........    181,62,725..............
18,4.........      6,349,485.       176..............       79,643,481
18135..........  21,548,49.............. 177.............         151,152,094
186...........    52,240,450.....878........... 1...  j   257,814,234
87........        029,.......... 1.................     264,661,666
1....9.............     9,008,22    1880.................       167,68,912
81<S.9..4..'' '..  44,245,283.........      1881.. i...            259,712,718
1819....................... 1 25,410,226  1882.......................  i,902,6
141..!           11,140,073.......   1883............... 00,658,488
1842.................         3 8,802,924  1884......................      72,815,916
I841.........    4,165,408..............  1885....................... 1  164,662,426
1847....................... 3,4,317,249     1886.......................    44,088,694
1848..........   10,448,129..............  1887.......................   23,8618,448
1849..........       855,027.............  1888.........    28,0 2,f607...............
1850....          9,1,800..         18..8.......       2,730,297........
1851..........    21,856,170...........     1890....890........................  68,518,275
18.5"2..........  40,456,167.1891........................  8,564,614
1853..........   60,287,983..............  1892........................     202,875,686
1854.........   60,760,030.............   1893.........    18,7:35,728..............
1855........      38,899,205............    1894................... I...  2g7,145.950
[185H 1.........  29,212,887............   1898......................     615,42,676
j7..........     54,604,582............. 1899........1...:  529,874,813..........                        8672,620  I 1900........................   44,541,898
89..  38,431,290.............. 1901......................  664,592,826..........  2040,062...... 9........47.............   98,45
1861..........,  69,756,709.....................................  894,422,442.8.5...............       75,568,200 
89......................   102,8'.2,264........................    286,268,144 
Total.,.,,, $108,872,161      $553,917,230   Total..... $1,371,897,064    $5,470,428,925
a Half year.
net excess of IMPORTS under low tariffs..................       614,954,t31
oxet exceas of EXPORTS under protective tariffs....................4,099,026,861
a-51






"THE UNITE STATES KNOWS HER BUSINESSR
Extrrct tr 0a7LNON DAILYb TELXI^      iALPI0,P printed In daily Congres.
sainalt "Record, January 5, 1904.
in spite of the alarming predictions of the Cobden Club the United
States adopted the McKinley tariff.. They knew exactly what they wanted;
they believed that the more comnpletely they secured their home narhct for
home eanterprise the hiqher would be the devetopme-t of their internal in.
dustry and the greater, therefore, its success in foreiqn trade. No esti.
mate was ever more brilliantly verified, against all the calculations of tha
prophets of free Imports, like the late Mr. Gladstone, who declared, we
believe, that America was not naturally fitted to excel in the production
of iron and steel. The steel trust, with its ~300,000,000 of capital, ha,,
been created since then. What MoKinileyism meant to the textile and tinplate trades in this country we know, hut this is what It meant to America
herself (Sir A. E. Bateman's memorandum on foreign trade)
Ameritcan    zxports, of   arntufactured Articles.
[Amounts in miilion pounds stel-iiin.j
Decade before the McKinley bill:
1880...............................................   21
1890....................................................  a   31
Decade after the McKinley bill:
1891.5...................................  5
1900.i
1@00f...i r r..... ~..........er............................ 90.
a33 per cent. Increase.          90   er cent Irease over 1890.
There Is no putting back the clock in that contrast.
Germany, under Bismarck, abandoned the system of approximate free
trade in 1879 in the teeth of all the jeremiads of her doctrinaires. She has
since achieved marvelous expansion in manufacture and commerce with
which we have had cdgent reason to be well acquainted. She has stopped
the stream of emigration from her shores; that is the test. The Klaiser's
subjects would have continued, as before, to flow abroad by millions if prospects of prosperity previously unknown had not been opened up at home
after the free-imports systemn was abandoned. No competent witness can
deny the immense subsequent Increase of employment and the remarkable
advance in the general well-being of the German people. These things
have occurred in spite of the strangely misinformed comments of the Radical press, and even of some UnioniPt free trad rs upon the Socialist successes
in the Reichstag elections. It is when Jeshrbun is waxing fat that he kicks
most lustily against a jack-boot system. Prosperity increases the sense of
democratic independence. The Socialist party In Germany was founded and
became formidable under approximate free trade, and only complete ignorance of German conditions can Imauine that the army of protest uinder Bebe5
and Singer would be disbanded by free trade.  (Sir A. E. 3Blateman's memorandum on foreign trade.)
German Exports of Manufactured Articles.
[Amounts in million pounds sterling.]
1880 (when free trade was abandoned)........................ 83
1890   (10  years  after)......................................... l07
1900  (20  years  after)......................... *.............. b149
This has not been due to the tariff alone; other causes have cooperated.
But what these figures absolutely prove is that free-trade theories can not
be so important as their professo3rs would have us believe,  Free Tradc
may he excellents better trade is better.
But the case of France is the most remarkable of all. The Meline tariff
of 1892 was the negation of free trade. Upon every calculation of the Cobden Club it should have ruined the French export of manufactures. But
what has happened?   They have Increased more rapidly and stpadily than
before. Observe the following figures for maximum years of trade:
French Manufactured Exports.,
rAmounts in million pounds strrling.J
Before the Ieline tariff:: 1882.................................................      7
1890...........................................  80
After the Meline tariff:.1893.............................................    70
1902......,....9............................95
Our foreign trade has show1n nothTing approaching thins ratio of increase
for thirty years, and this in spIte of the colossal burdens of the French
people-fa national debt twice as large as our own (also far heavier bounties
an  subsIdies to shipping), and a normal peace taxation equal to our recent
war taxation. France has dinisgsshed her exports of raw material, but in.
creased her sales of.-finished articles; while of us, apart from our colonial
trade, the converse has wbeen true. Here are aill the prophecies of the Gobden
anub falsified by facts in three cases as w idel different as could well bV
imagined. We are familiar with the orthodox explanation in the case of
Americta. She has succeeded, we are assured, on account of her boundless
resources; not because of protection, but in spite of f. Could anything be
mnore ludicrous than this solemn affectation of superior intelligence by our
doctrinaire mandarins at the expense of the most acute business nation Is
the world? Americans, for their part, adopted the tariff in order to secure
certatin results; they believe the results have been secured through the
taiff, tand could not have been secured without the tariff. Germany Isa
poor comuntry, with a bad seaboard, which can not compare with our oawn
in Its natnral advantages for industry and trade, and it has doubled the
heresy of protection by toe heresy of conscription. Upon free-im)ort principles, if the tariff succeeded in the United States on account of their enormous internal resources it ought at least to have failed in the Fatherland,
According to Cobdenite doctrines the competitive success of the German
people against a nation lifke ourselves, enjoying all the blessings of a small
armytaS popular governmfent, open ports and unlimited cheap consumption,
ought to 'have been impossible. But German manufacturers and the greater
majority of the Germana people are as convinced as Americans that the development of home production secured by the tariff is the true basis of succissful attack uipon foreign markets. In1 France, where the old free-trade
a3r   W ^tybllcomicalg extinct, no widespread section of 'public opinion thinke
for...moment of reversing M. Meline's economic policy.


a-52




THE MAIN STRENGTH                OF AMERICAN BUSINESS
DEPENDS UPON THE COMMAND OF THE HOME
MARKET, SECURED BY THE TARIFF."
stract from LONDON DAILY TELEGRAPH, pIrinted in daily Congressional
Record, January 5, 19 O 4
Across the Atlantic capital is accumulating with incomparably greater
pildity than it has recently done here. The American manufacturer pays
o income tax, and we have not the advantage of the returns; but there
~n be no doubt that capital in the United States now possesses a much
reater accumulative and progressive power than does capital in this coun-. Mr. Carnegie, who ought to know, has always maintained that the main
CIeagth of A zerican business depends upon the almost absolute command
its home  arket, secured by the tariff.
The Americans have great natural resources. But their idea of efficient
rganization absolutely rejects dumping-ground principles as a system in)mpatible with the encouragement of enterprise and the confidence of cap-;al. Every protected manufacturer makes for two markets. He has a moopoly of his own, and freedom in ours. The governing law of cheap prouction is quantity of production. The larger the output the lower the cost.
'he foreign capitalist who makes for two markets, the one from which he
xcludes us by tariffs and the one to which we admit him by free imports,
iust and does possess an immense pull over, the British manufacturer, who
nvy makes for one market and is never sure of that. Pure free trade may
e an indisputably sound principle.  The combination of hostile tariffs
broad and free imports at home, giving the foreign producer the best ol
oth worlds-that, it will be seen, is a principle which the common sense of
be country must investigate and will, indeed, reject.
In spite of the alarming predictions of the Cobden Cluh the United
tates adopted the McKinley tariff. They knew exactly what they wanted;
aey believed that the mnore completely they secured their home market for
ome enterprise the higher would be the development of their internal inustry and the greater, therefore, its success in foreign trade. No estimate
as ever more brilliantly verified, against all the calctlations of the prophets
f free imports, like the late Mr. Gladstone, who declared, we believe, that
L[erica was not naturally fitted to excel in the production of iron and
teel. The steel trust, with its ~3000,000,000 of eapital, has been created
ince then. What McKinleyism meant to the textile and tin-plate trades in
1is country we know, but this is what it meant to America herself (Sir A.
Bateman's memorandum on foreign trade):
American Exports of Manufactured Article.
L[A?1ounts in million pounds sterling.]
)ecade before the McKinley bill:
1880.......................................  21
1890...................................................... 31
)ecade after the McIKinley bill:
1891.......   *.....................................  85
1900......................................................  90
There is no putting back the clock in that contrast.
Germany, under Bismarck, abandoned the system of approximate free
rade in 1879 in the teeth of all the jeremiads of her doctrinaires. She has
ince achieved the marvelous expansion in manufacture and commerce with
vbich we have had cogent reason to be well acquainted. She has stopped
he stream of emigration from her shores; that is the test.
German Exports of Manufactured Articles.
[Amounts in imillion pounds sterling'.
i880 (when free trade was abandoned).......................... 83
890  (10  years  after).........................................  107
900  (20  years  after).......................................  149
But the case of France is the most remarkable of all. The Meline tariff
1892 was the negation of free trade. Upon every calculation of the Coben Club it should have ruined the French export of manufactures. But
that has happened? They have increased more rapidly and steadily than
kfore. Observe the following figures for maximum years of trade:
French Manufactured Exports.
[Amounts in million pounds sterling.]
ofure the Meline tariff:
1882.............................................  76
1890.....................       *............   80
fter the Meline tariff:
189.3.............*..................... 70
1902........................ 95
We are familiar with the orthodox explanation in the case of America.
he has succeeded, we are assured, on account of her boundless resources;
bt because of protection, but in spite of it. Could anything be more ludio5es than this solern affectation of superior intelligence, by our doctrinaire
wdarins at the expense of the most acute business nation in the world?
oericans, for their part, adopted the tariff in order to secure certain reIlts; they believe the results have been secured through the tariff, and
tid not have been secured without the tariff. Germany is a poor couny, with a bad seaboard, which can not compare with our own n its natural
vantages for industry and trade, and It has doubled the heresy of protecon by th.3 heresy of conscription. Upon free-import principles, If the tariff
a       Ieneded in the United States on account of their enormous internal re>rees it ought at least to have failed In the Fatherland. According to
badenlite doctrines the competitive success of the German people against a
otion like ourselves, enjoying all the blessings of a small army, a popular
e'ernment, open ports, and unlimited cheap consumption, ought to have
a>n impossible.  But German manufacturers and the greater majority
the German people are convinced as Americans that the development of
ente production secured by the tariff is the true basis of successful attack
(n foreign markets. In France, where the old free-trade party is becomeg extinct, n. widespread section of public opinion thinks for a moment of
versing IM. Meline's economic policy.
a-53
i.a 




I


"EFFECT OF THE DINGLEY LAW."
Etract from remarks of Hon. C. H. GROSVENOR, of Ohio, in daily Co
Pressionat Record, November 27, 1903.
The gentleman from Virginia [Mr. SWANSON] has argued that o
present attitude on the tariff question is about to destroy our foreign trad
The Democratic party is largely interested in the foreign trade of 
country. It has always taken steps to promote it, and the pathway ov
which It has traveled, instead of being strewn with the growth and develo
ment of our foreign trade, is a graveyard of buried hopes and unfulfill
anticipations.
It sounded very strange to me to hear a Democratic Representati
talking about our foreign trade and charging the Republican House
Representatives with doing something, somewhere, and in some way,
the detriment of our foreign trade. He especially placed himself upo
the ground that the passage of the Dingley law noted and built a mon
ment at a point where, by our hostility to other countries, the downfa
of American supremacy would take its origin. I want to encourage a
Democratic brother on the other side to study this question of the trat
of the United States with foreign countries before he makes anote
speech, and I am going to put into my speech some tables showing t,
exports of commodities from and imports of commodities into the Unit,
States during the whole period of our existence as a government, and
will give my friend on the other side from Virginia (Mr. SWANSONI
synopsis which I received in an official form on yesterday.
It is a letter from the Bureau of Statistics. And I might say rig
here that the pulse, the thermometer, of national progress in this beha
at least, is largely the question of how much we sell abroad and how mu
we buy from abroad. And when the balance of trade is running in o
favor, so that we are selling more than we are buying, there is no can
for alarm and there is no cause for an attack upon the protective-tar
system. I was delighted that the gentleman located the beginning of 
trouble at the beginning of the operation of the Dingley law. That is t
question that we are interested in.
What is the effect and what has been the effect of the Dingley la
In order that any gentleman interested in this matter may not be misli
I have in these tables shown to him what the situation was in the yea
immediately preceding, when in large part the Chinese Wall was thro
down and substantial free trade upon many of the larger productions
American industry was given to the people of the world. Later I
coming to answer the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. CLARK], who pll
out that at some time or other somebody said that somebody was afrt
that somebody thought that there would not be money enough in
United States Treasury and undertook to borrow money to fill up the
Nowwhat is the situation? Here it is:
Replying to your telephonic inquiry of to-day, regarding the exc
of exports over Imports from 1790 to June 30, 1897, and from June
1897, to June 30, 1903, I have the honor to hand you the following sti
ment taken from the records of this Bureau
Total excess of exports of merchandise from 1790 to June 30, 18
$356,808,822.
Well, that was a rather respectable showing, considering the
that during a large portion of that 107 years we had a whole lot
Democratic Administrations, and we pulled through with a better rec(
considering the war times and all that, than we had any reasonable ri
to expect, and if there is any student of this subject here who wants
get the exact details I will furnish him the opportunity to ascertain
whose Administration it was that these three hundred and fifty-odd i
lion dollars grew up., Now, I have another statement that I coma
to the Democratic agonizers on the other side of the House.
"The total excess of exports of merchandise over imports of merci
dise from July 1, 1897, to June 30, 1903, was $3,227,263,106."
That was the balance in favor of the American nation.
Ye fearful saints, fresh courage take I
Those clouds ye so much dread                  ~
Are big with mercy and shall (continue to) break
In (Republican) blessings on your head!
[Laughter and applause on the Republican side.]


11
f,I
I
t
I
0
It
a
m
1
LA
I
91
al
ui
oi
u
01
tl
11
1
laI
I
a
It
ra
t
g
cl
I
8
t.1
s
I


I


a-54






"GREAT     BRITAIN    PREPARING       TO   ADOPT     REPUBLICAN   PROTECTIVE        TARIFF."
I EItract from remarks of Hon. CIAR  LES DICK of O.hio, in daily
Congressional Record, Jan. 5, 1904.
Mr. Chairman, in the debate to which we have listened in this
House the last few days and which has covered a wide range of
subjects we have heard the same old Democratic claim that the
Itariff is the mother of trusts, that the consumer pays the tariff
duty, and that the people are being robbed of millions in unjust
taxation in order to pile up a tremendous and unnecessary surplus
for the Secretary of the Treasury to manipulate and hand out to
favored banks as political favors. We know there is no truth in
these charges. The American people have met these issues and,
have passed upon them. In 1896 they condemned the Wilson tariff law, and in 1900 they indorsed the Dingley tariff. The Democratic party, however, learns nothing from experience. The lessons
of the past are lost upon them.    It forgets the soup houses of
1893 to 1896, the smokeless chimneys, the closed factories, the idle
workmen, the suffering and want which marked that period of
depression, the result of the last Democratic tariff revision. It is
becoming more and more apparent that the tariff is to be the issue
for 1904.
The debate to which we have listened here this week is the opening skirmish in the Presidential campaign.   Whether the Democratic party marches under the banner of tariff for revenue only
or under the new flag of tariff reform the campaign will be directed;against the Republican policy of protection. The assaults of the
enemy will be aimed at the mragnificent industrial edifice created
by Republican tariff policies. Jealous of the splendid prosperity
of American manufactutrers, which has enabled them     to invade
the markets of the world and compete successfully with foreigna
manufacturers on their (ow  ground, Democracy is already threatening to reduce that tariff protection which has built up our present
r tremendous volume of foreign and domestic trade.
The latest official figures show there is no decrease in that great
volume of food products and manufactured articles which are
leaving our ports to supply the demands of foreign markets. The
Treasury statement for October, 1903, shows that the United States
exported  merchandise  that month   to  the aggregate value of
$160,370,059, a volume of business which has been surpassed only
once in all our history. The greatest year in our export trade
was 1900, and in that year our October exports exceeded the exports of last month some $3,000,000, but as compared with October
of last year the increase is over $16,000,000. WThile our exports
increased last month, the imports declined, giving us a favorable
trade balance of $78,439,054, or an excess over the trade balance of
the same month in last year of $121,535,(696.T The November exports
slightly exceeded those of October, while the imports fell off, making a balance in our favor of $83,000,000, or $5,000,000 better than
the October figures. The favorable trade balance for the United
States during the first ten months of the present calendar year
is nearly $309,000,000, as against a balance during the same period
of 1902 of $298,000,000.
These encouraging figures showu how slizht is, the ground for complaint over present trade conditions. While the rich men of Wall
street have been going through a period of industrial depression,
the country at large has been contnuinu g its onward progress in
the path of prosperity and business development.
While tariff reform  is being advocated inr this country by the
Democratic party, one of the great political parties of Great Britain
is also raising the issue of tariff reform and is educating the voters
in preparation for an appeal to the country upon that issue. But
tariff reform  in Great Britain means exactly the contrary from
what it means in the United States. In this country tariff reform
means a lowering of tariff duties. In Great Britain, under tihe
leadership of some of her greatest statesmen, tariff reform means
the enactment of tariff duties as a substitute for tfree trade. The
free trader in the United States and the advocate of a tarifT for
revenm   only has long pointed w'th pride to Great Britain as illustrtintq the beauties of the free-trade system.  The leaders of the
Conservative party are now attacking that system an^d 1malndg plain
that it is retarding the country instead of assisting it in the g-reat
co-ntet now  being waged   between   the nations for        ' commercial
Oupremaey.
a-55


I




"I    S iNOT WELL WITH BRITISH TRADE.
Extract from remarks o    on. CHARLIy DTCK of Ohio, in daily Cosqr e-.
sional Record, January 5, 1904.
JOSEPH CMBERLAIN'S SPLENDID FIGHT FOR A
PROTECTIVE TARIFF.
I turn now to the recent publics utterances of Joseph Chamberlain, whi
letired from the English cabinet in order that he might be free to fight the
battle of protetion as against free trade. ' He is the special representative
of the great middle class of England, of the industrial and commercial
Classes. The working classes of England look up to him as their special
friend. -He has been their champion on many a hard-fought battlefield, ani
they repose great confidence in his unselfish devotion to their interest. Hi,
present appeal to his countrymen to support him in his new crusade for a
protective tariff has met with a prompt and enthusiastic response. IHe
minces no words in describing the weak spot in England's present commercial condition. I quote from a letter he addressed last month to the
London Daily Telegraph:
"It Is not well with British trade. After a long period of success the
policy of unrestricted foreign imports has now shown evident signs of failure.
Our exports are stationary in amount and declining in character. We receive from our competitors a larger proportion of manufactured goods and
we send them a larger proportion of raw materials than we used to. 0,.r 
supremacy in what have always been considered our standard Industries has
been wrested from us or is seriously menaced. One by one our markets,
once profitable and expanding, are closed to us by hostile tariffs. We have
lost all power of bargaining successfully for the removal or rejection of thene
barriers to our trade. Our colonies alone continue to increase their purchases, and even here we must abandon all hope of expansion, and we 're
threatened with the loss of our existing trade If we are unable to meet their
requests for reciprocal preference.
"Any duty on food imposed to secure preferential trade with our colonies will be a small one. It may probably be wholly paid, and will certainhl
be partly paid, by the foreigner. The additional cost, if any, to the working classes will be fully met by an equivalent reduction in other articles
of food equally necessary to their existence.  The 'dear food' cry Is an
imposture and the 'little loaf' a bugbear.  The question of tariff reform
ma6 be considered on its merits without any fear that the cost of liviny
will be increased to the poor. On the other hand, our tariffs may be revised
so as to secure the following advantage:
"First. An increase of trade with our fellow-subjects and best customers,I
who not only take much more per head from us than foreigners, but take
it in the shape of manufactured products whose production involves the employment of the greatest amount of labor.
"Second. The power of bargaining with our competitors and thereby securing either that they shall take more of the productions of our labor in ex
change for the products of their labor or that they shall leave the Britis',
market more completely to British labor.
"Third. In either case this change and the increased trade with our col.
on!es will provide more employment for our own people and. a greater demand for our own labor.
"Fourth. If the demand for labor Increases, the wages of labor must rise
also, and full work at fair prices will enable our manufacturers to pay,
higher wages without loss to themselves."
In a preface to a pamphlet published a few days later Mr. Chamberlain
declares that"Every other nation and all cur own self-governing colonies have refused
to accept the doctrine of Cobden, and yet they oueght, according to its dogmas, to be in the last stage of declisme; beet they have grown during the last
twenty years ihn wealth, pop-ulation, and trade, and in everything that goes
to mafke lup the greatness of a nation. Those who maintain, in a spirit of
blind obscurantism, the absolute inspiration of the antiquated doctrine will
have much to explain."
Continuing, Mr. Chamberlain declared:
"It Is difficult to believe that the results of the investigation will not
convince every impartial man of the necessity for some reconstruction of the
system which has remained stationary and unaltered for more than half a
century, while every other policy has been modified and adapted to meet
modern requirements."1
Continuting, Mr. Chamberlain points out that the prosperity of the working classes has Increased in greater proportion In the protected countr-le
thian in the United Kingdom, and says:
"Free: trade, If t had ever existed, might have secured for us all that its
promoters promised; but free imports without free trade have brought us
face to face, with problems which never entered Into Cobden's calculations
Amerlcan trade and the American surplus are minutely deat  with and
are summied up as follows: 
'The ft         us in  ea fre, plain end undenible, that' McKiuleyisfs
has not produ ed the issesoediote results which it should have produced if the
ecOnmie dotrineupon which (os-r fiscal system is based really contied
the whoe truth of econswic science.   hich is the most prudent corse, le
treat the facts with disdin, or to reconsider the doctrfine "
a -56






44..TR T FFF. BT$ULT THE3  MILL^, SET UP THE.1;.:1:      MACHIN. 'B*:'^
xtract from remarkc of ion. THOMAS. IBRED of Maine, page
4671 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Session.
Stimulated by the theory of "labor-cost," the chairman ordered
ninvestigation into the oldest manufactories in New England.
What industries did he select? Cotton sheetings and cotton prints;
tton goods, the very articles, and perhaps the only articles which
ave had continuous, unbroken, effective protection since 1824. He
lects industries which, under all tariffs, have had sixty-four years
fsolid protection, shows by them higher wages for labor and lower
rices for consumers, then boldly wraps the flag of labor-cost about
hn and proclaims to a wondering world that tariff has nothing to do
ith wages. I wonder what Edward Atkinson thought of his new
isiple at that moment.
Oh, no; tariffs have nothing to do with wages. It is coal and
eam and machinery. But what set up the machinery? What caused
e cotton factory to be built? Why, the tariff. So, then, the tariff
uilt the mill, set up the machinery, the machinery increased the
ages, but the tariff did not. Is not that very much like sayin. your
ther was your progenitor, but your grandfather wasn't. How could
ou improve machinery you didn't have? Htow could you increase the
iciency of machinery that didn't exist?
PROTECTION." —IT       WILL    DEVELOP     OURI   NATURlAL
RESOURCES; IT WILL FUIRNISHB EMPLOYMENT
FOR OUR LABOR."
xtract from remarks of Ion,. BOOTHMAN of Ohio, page
6751 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, Ist Session.
Mr. Chairman, the theory of protection properly applied, results
no such absurd and untenable position. It confines the place of
pply to the United States as to the things we can produce in suffiient quantities to meet, or approximately to meet, the demands of
r people. In doing this it does not confine its beneficial effects to
ne industry or to a few favored pursuits; but it declares that as
all industries which are or may be established and which are likely
time to supply the demand of our people we will confine the
urchaases of such things by our citizens to our own home markets as
ar as a tariff reasonably can or ought to do so; that this will keep
ir money at home to be invested in home enterprises; that it will
eoelop our natural resources in all directions; that it will diversify
c occupations of our people; that it will thus furnish employment
or our labor; that under this system our laborers    need not be all
armers or all anything else, but may be profitably engaged among
ia nearly if not quite all the busineRs pursuits and industries known
r tai,
*' ~~"d


I




"THOSE COUNTRIES WHICH HAVE ADOPTED PR
TECTION HAVE IMPROVED IN A GREATER
RATIO AND MORE RAPIDLY THAN
WE HAVE OURSELVES.
Extracts from   ipeech of Hon. JOSEPH    CAMBERLIJN       at Liverpoe
printed in daily Congressional Record, January 5, 1904.
[From the London Daily Telegraph.]
SPEECE OF JOSEPH COH                  BIAXBA      AT 0LIVPOO
Mr. Chamberlain,' who was given a very hearty reception, said:
"I desire to express to you the hearty thanks of Mrs. Chamberlain at
of myself for the cordial welcome which you have' given us to Livero
['Hear: ' Hear! ], and to say that while I come here with great pleas
to talk to you upon what I think to be the most important controversy
our time in'ear!' 'Hear!], I am especially pleased to think that I co
at the invitation of a great workingmen's association.  [Cheers.] I sha
tell you why directly, but, in the first instance, I want, to put before yq
the position at which we have arrived. What is my case? What are t
arguments by which I support, it?  What are the objections of my opp
nents? Well, my case is that the trade of this country, as measured-s
I think it right to be mainly measured-by the exports of this country 
foreign countries and to British possessions, has during the last twenty 
thirty years been practically stationary; that our export trade to all tha
foreign countries which have arranged tariffs against us has enormousi
diminished, and at the same time the exports to us have enormously iD
creased. Then it is part of my case that those foreign countries whi
have adopted protection have, in the elements by which you have been s
customed to test the prosperity of a nation, improved in a greater rat|
and more rapidly than we have ourselves; and I have also to point out t4t
this tendency, which has become so manifest in recent years, is lkely, 
every sensible man of business knows, to be accentuated as time goes oa.
"Whatever may be our losses now on possible trade, our losses in tt
future are e likely to be much greater if we continue our present systeg
['Hear!*' 'Hear!']  And the reason for that is obvious. Not only are t1
old causes continuing to exist, but new causes are coming into operatiti
There is that process the name for which we have borrowed from the Unit~
States, and which is known to you as 'dumping.'     What is dumpins
Dumping is the placing of the surplus of any manufacture in any Counto
which is able to.take it. Dumping takes place when the country whin
adopts it has a production which is larger than its own demand. Not beit
able, to dispose of its surplus at home, it dumps it somewhere esi
[Laughter. ] Now, England., the United Kingdom, is the only country whs
this process can be carried on successfully, because we are the only countw
that keeps oven ports. Every other country-all the great countries, ths
is to say —if dumping takes place, immediately put on a tariff, large
small, to keep out these dumped articles.
"They are surplus stocks which are being got rid of, and just as y
find that a great surplus sale at some gigantic emporium may have t!
effect of ruining all the small shops in the neighborhood, so the surpli
of the products of all the producing countries in the world may very we
ruin the trade of this country.  [Cheers.]  Now a curious thing is ti
'dumping' only takes place seriously when the country that has recourse
it is in a state of depression. As long as any country is able to take I
all its own supply for its own demand it does so, but when the time coa
that trade is depressed, either in Germany or in the United States, or
any other of these countries, then under our present system they do n
do what we do under similar circumstances.: they do not close their shoN
blow out their furnaces, shut up their factories. No: they go on rtmaki
the full proportion at the lowest possible price, amid they sell the su-rp
for what it will fetch in hnsrland. A very good policy for them; a very t
policy f       (r meS. [Cheers.]  How do I propose to meet this state of thing
I propose, in the first place, to meet the foreigner with his own weapol
[(Hear" ' 'Hear!']  I propose to treat him as he does us, until he tire
us better [cheers, and I propose to treat our colonies better than we hio
hitherto done. And in connection with this, I hope for something greatV
in my opinion, even than increased trade greater, certainly, than materi
prosperity. I hope to lay firm and deep the foundation for that imaperi
future which fills my heart when I look forward to the history of the worl
What is the whole problem   as it affects the working classes of t0
cou*try?  It is all contained in one word-employment. ['Hear!' 'Hears
Cheap" food, a higher standard of living, higher wage, all these thin!
important as they are, are contained in the word employment. (['Hea
'Hear "']  I  this policy will give you Tmore employment, all the otbe
would be added unto you. If you lose your employment, all the othO
put together will not compensate you for that loss.   ['Hear!  'Hear!
It is rather an interesting thing, which seems to me to have escap
altogether the attention of any of my opponents, who probably have v
read th.e history of the anti-corn law movement, that when free trade W
carried out the working classes were neither represented nor consultI
['Hear*' 'Hearf!'   1 don't say that that makes free trade good or bs
but it Is a fact "that the movement was a manufacturers' and a midd!
class movement. ['Hear!' ' Hear!'1
*"The leaders of the movement, or some of the leaders of the mroo
ment, admitted that they thought it would enable wages to be kept at w{
they called, a reasonable level. They thought that it would give crs
food, and that if the laborer had cheap food he could afford to work 
lower Wages, and that they, therefore, could afford to carry on a co'
petition with which they were threatened in the goods they manufact:ui
And it is rather ctrilous to rememnber that long after free trade, was carriE
even  late a    1888, r     Bright, Mr riht, in writing to a friend in' America A
protest                 in against the do ctrine of protction, points out to him that.ft 
mecan  made protection their soli!c theyt would have to give hli
wages to      iorking classes-['Hear!' 'Hear!'l-hiqher wages i
sorter ihours. Well, I do not think that that would be a disadvantage
any casbut what at I want to point out is that, rightly or wrongly, the le
era of the free-trade movement believed that the big loaf meant 1sa
wages."
a-58




'a
I
I


I


i


THE PROPHECIES OF THE FREE TRADERS HAVE
TRE          TEMSE           S       PY TURED TEMSELVES TOPSTURVY."
rtract from  LONDON   DAILY TELEGRAPH        printed in daily Congressional Record, January 5, 1904.
rEAT BRITAIN HAS LOST THE BALANCE OF TBADE
IN NANUFACTURES.
Twenty years ago we sold twice as much manufactures to our Euroern and American competitors as we purchased from them. Ten years
go the balance was still substantial. Three years ago it existed. Now
has disappeared, and by the complete inversion of the whole Cobdenite:pectation we are not only dependent upon foreign nations for food and
aw material, but we actually purchase from our chief rivals more finished
oods than we sell to them,
If the balance is against us upon the manufactures, how in the end are
e to pay for our imported food-for the cheap food which is evidently
play so large an electioneering part in this issue?   As a matter of
imparing predictions with facts, e      reis   o the rop   e  arly free traders,enm to have turn   hemselves topsy turvy and to be all walking toward
dfeillnment upon their heads.
Richard Cobden was a manufacturer. A very large majority of manuicturers in this country have been convinced by bitter experience that the
lly wisdom in these matters Is justice; that for equal progress in the
orld's trade we require equal opportunity; and that tariffs ought to be
et by tariffs and freedom offered only in exchange for fredom. It is not
unreasonable presulmption that if Rtichard Cobden were ia presence of
e state of things under which Europe anrd Aerica not otnly supply Rus with
rod and raw material, but sell in our hosme market more manufactret s thani
ey purchase, his masculine intelligence would repudiate doctrinaire disle.s who tell us that, however much we tnay be handicapped in trade by
e fiscal methods of other nations, England's onlty policy is impotence.
* * * t Preference is the only guaranty of increased supply and future
eapness. But for the cabinet inquiry, we presume, and for the ordinary
an the determining question will not be what is Mr. Sauerbeck's index
umber of the current price of food, but what are the position and prospects
our national prosperity —the future security for capital, employment, and
ages. What, therefore, is the measure of our reiative well-being under free
ports? Let us take the various t et tes that eminent statesmen in admirable
eeches have proposed in the course of recent debates.
There are two classes of free-trade critics, the optimists and the pessiists. Two irreconcilable conceptions of our social state are, indeed, often
ost incongruously mingled in the same speeches. The workingman is told
at his condition is one of unparalleled prosperity under the unparalleled
ccess of free imports. Lest that should not move him, he Is also told that
whole third of the workinq classes in this country are on the brink.of
trveatioon after fifty years of free trade. These inconsistent dialecticians
n not have it both        n ways. They must really declare on which horse they
sean to win, and they  must decide w  ehether they mean to argue that we
eght not to chang e free trade because we are prosperous, or that we dare
t change t because we are wretched. Let us takle the optimists first, or
least their optimism first. Lord Goschen has referred, in a fine oration,
the evidence of the savings-bank deposits.
Those deposits in the free-trade sland seem  satisfactory. But how
they compare with the savings-bank deposits of the peoples under proetion? We do not ourselves think the point of any real importance either
ay for the reason that the British workingman is a heavy consumer. He
ves less out of higher wages than his continental brethren, or their wives
r them, contrive to save out of lower. The international figures may
ve that improvidence rather than poverty is the complaint of the British
orkman. They certainly prove nothing as to his exceptionally prosperous
ate under free trade. In the "Journal de Statistique Suisse," M. Fatio
ve the following estimate of the savings-bank deposits in different counies per head of population.
Savings banks in eleven countries, 1900.
Co p  untry.               '       Per head of
~Cou~n~try-c I population
I  ~  s. d.
ebnark.......................................................} 1   1  1  6
witrzerland................................................* *.......* *   0  2
im a iy l.................................................  7  10  (i
terlany.............................        7     7
uslatr la....................................................I  7 6  41
glg io..i.................................i....................  i  7  0
sited States of America.,......................::  6  4 1
ustria-Hungaryt...............................-.......5    8  13
ede'n...5 1 
W de...................i  I....................... 
ran.e.e.                                                        4,..............................  4  8 
'treat B rIt......... 4                        2  5
Tet  B.rit in,....n................................... t f4  2  5
The only country, therefore, which possesses free imports is at the bota of the list. Cobdenism is not necessarily to blame for that, but cerily the Cobdenltes had better leave the savings banks out of the question.
a-6:9


t




I
II


"AMERICA HAS INCREASED HER SALES iTO US B
ABOUT 45 PER CENT. SHE HAS CUT DOWN
HER PURCHASES FROM US BY MORE
THAN 40 PER CENT."
Extract from LONDON DAILY TELEGRAPH, printed in daily Congr,
sional Record, January 5, 1904.
HOW THE H'XINLEY ACT INJURED GREAT BRITAI2
Up to the adoption of the McKinley Act our exports to the vast as
rapidly increasing people, to whom we were as valuable as nearly all oth
customers put together, had shown their natural increase. We threw 
ports open to American trade. The great tariff policy associated ai
the name of the late President was meant to shut out ours. It has su
ceeded with tolerable efficiency. The board of trade figures also tell the
own tale; and though the comparison they suggest Is not quite so bhais
as it looks, owing to the fact that the freights included in the cost of t
American products are mainly earned by British ships, the statistics sc
wit perfect ccrac y how our exports to America have been beaten down
vrotection and how her sales on this side have increased under free tra
bf leats and bounds. In the year before the McKinley Act came Inforce the account was as follows:
Year 1890.
Imports from United States.............................    9,280,
Exports  of  British  produce..............................  32,0Ooi
Now look at the reverse of the medal after unconditional Cobdenis:
has been pitted for twelve years against consistent McKinleyism:
Year 1901.
Imports from United States.............................. 141,000 '
Exports of British produce........................ 18,390,0k
In other words America has increased her sales to us byt about 45 p
cent. She has actually cut down her purchases fromn us, in spite of 5
immense expansion of her population and industry, by more than 40 P
cent. There is not much pabulum here for those who maintain that pro
tection stifles the commerce of countries adopting that heresy, and th
free trade alone is enough to promote the interests of those who meeki
imbibe the pure milk of that word. And if these things are done in th
green tree, what shall be done in the dry?  The prospects of any drast
modification of the American tariff, as suggested in Mr. McKinley's la
memorable speech, have disappeared with the tragedy at Buffalo. To tb
power of the tariff has now been added the power of the trusts. The 
tremendous organization ever known in the sphere of international compe
tition is rendered impregnable by an ironclad defense against the effor
of all external rivals. It is developing an immense equipment with whit
to attack in the future its rivals in their own market. And upon this sii
there Is no obstacle whatever to its operations.  Its strategical base npn
the other side of the Atlantic is unassailable. Upon this side it can stri
whenever it pleases at our center.
GREAT BRITAIN GREATLY FEARS OUR "TRUSTS."
The policy of the steel trust has been repeatedly declared by M
Schwab. Sooner or later it will be put into practice, and we shall ham
to meet it.
In that day some minds which are dark to the meaning of Mr. Char
berlaln's warning may regard it under a very different light. The ste
monopoly, with a capital of over ~300,000,000 sterling, has been occupie
since its foundation with the home demand. That demand is building u
to still more menacing dimensions its formidable power. When the Ameri
can boom breaks, as it must eventually, the immense process of masse
production, upon which the whole position of the steel trust is based, ca
not be suspended.
There can be no shutting down. The output must be maintained, at
a.market must be found for it. If it does not exist at home, it must i
created at any cost abroad.   Mr. Schwab has never concealed what '
the Intention of his directors <when that emergency arises. It is to des
cend apon foreign markets, and, above all, upon the British market, wit
the full weilht of the industrial power which is accumulating behind t
American protectionist system  like water behind a floodgate. A specil
project of Mr. Schwab's is to strike in between England and her colonies
and to "cut off" our export, as he once expressed it, to Canada, SoUtI
Africa, Australia, and India alike. Some day the steel trust will be s
plemented by a cotton trust. America is manufacturing more and w'
of her cocna cotton in her own mills. Every other country has some glsw
anty against the swamping of its home and foreiqn markets by the trwst
ie ahve no quaranty, and if we still have none when the boom breaks i
America itself we are likely to meet surprises in the fight for trade hardl!
less remarkable than our military astonishments at the beginning of t!
Boer war.
This situation at once brings us to the root of the argument. Whol
does free trade mean? When Cobden and his companions introduced thf
system they imagined that all the world would follow our example. By fie
trade they meant free exchange —the throwing down of the barriers on eat
side. This is the only state of things under which trade could be fr
In thai sense, free trade does not exist-it has never existed. There 
no such t hitug, 1/hat we have are free imports only. We do not say Vol
that this system is necessarily bad in Itself, but let us call the system 
the name which corresponds with facts. We have a free importation  f f61 
g  products; but to British products no Important foreign market In tli
world is free. We imported from the United States in 1901 to the ens1
mools total of L108,000,000. The United States in return, took the pro]
duce of the.United Kingdom  to the extent of something over ~18,000,0q
oy. We purchased from our great protectionist competitor exactly I
ftisas smuchs se purchased from us. We question whe      ther ere
eve e  anyhing ie that disparity in the commerce of nations.


I
el
I
il
i
t
I
0,
191
I
II
r
I
I
a
r
t
11
i
I
I
i


I






'THE PROCESS OF PAYING FOR THE RAZOR WHICH
IS TO CUT YOUR OWN THROAT.",extact from LONDON DAILY TELEGRAPH, printed in daily Congressional Record, January 5, 1904.
What was it, in the name of all that is notorious, that displaced British
griculture if it was not our free imports of American agriculture? You may
ure that if labor was displaced in the furrow it was employed all the more
the factory? 'True. We allowed agriculture to be overwhelmed because
[e had manufacture to turn to. But when your manufacture itself is attcked, as now, in an open market by the power of protected capital, what
then? Let no workman be so foolish as to imagine that the fate which
eached the farmer and the rural laborer can in no circumstances reach
im.:
When free imports are pitted against the tariff-insurance system of our
r.ials, every industry in the protected market is guaranteed, but not a
inaqle industry in the unprotected market can consider itself secure. The
British silk industry, for instance, was doomed to the fate of agriculture
hen our ports were thrown open to France. The woolen trade is the most
ncient and national of all our manufactures, but while our export of
voolen goods is now about ~15,000.000 our import of woolen goods is
Iready over ~11,000,000. Some older industries have been destroyed; new
dustries have not been created. The development of the electrical trades,
or instance, has been far slower here than it has been abroad-the most
ignificant among all symptoms of the extent to which enterprise in this
ountry has been handicapped in the last twenty years. The foundations
f the iron and steel industry are being sapped by the underselling operaions of foreign syndicates and rings, against which no counter attack can
e directed by the British capitalist. Tariffs protect them. Free imports
xpose him.
It is perfectly possible for certain kinds of free imports to injure and
estroy home industry, while hostile tariffs simultaneously force us, as we
[ave seen, into less advantageous methods of paying for our imports. The
entimental doctrine that international business is a mutual-benefit system
n all its forms, and that it does not matter what we import and does not
atter what we pay, is demonstrable and dangerous nonsense. To the final
rofit of our annual transactions both these things matter vitally.
The first and non-competitive phase of imports-that of raw material
was wholly and universally beneficial. When imports began to be cometitive, but meant cheaper food, they were still mainly beneficial, but
Iready, by depressing agriculture, they were partly destructive.  But for
England, and England alone, the only great industrial country which gives
reign rivalry free footing, the process is advanced to a third and most
angerous stage, where competitive imports in the form of finished goods
ecome mainly destructive and are only partly beneficial. Competitive food
ports attacked the interests of agriculture only in favor of manufacture
t large. But with competitive manufactures themselves coming into the
ountry in the third phase at the rate of over a hundred millions sterling
nnually, it is clear that every manufacturing interest in the country is
ither already attacked or liable to be attacked.
For the farmer, who was told that it was his patriotic duty to be ruined,
nd that he should scorn, like a true Briton, to protest, there are infinite
ossibilittes of grim humor in the situation. Imports are remittances for
xports, no doubt. But if machinery is on the free list as well as ore, we
ake it as easy as possible for foreign nations to send us the machinery.
o with boots and shoes instead of the leather, and woolens (as now in the,,se of France) Instead of the wool. This, as we have already said, is
hte process of paying for the razor which is to cut your own throat, and it
s a process from which Germanv, Belqium, France, and the United States
-though, according to the Cobden Club, they are not intelligent countriesa2e good care to be free.
Protection and the navigation laws did not go until they had placed
ur industrial and maritime supremacy upon a fIrm foundation. Cobden
ad nothing to do with the laying of the foundations of our prosperity, as
(me people imagine, though he enlarged the house and put modern doors
nd windows-too many of them, perhaps, for the complete security of small
roperty-into its solid old front. It was a protectionist nation that won,dia and North America in the great trade wars of the eighteenth century.
t was a protectionist nation which won the carrying trade of the world,
-stained the twenty years' crisis of the revolutionary wars up to Waterloo,
randed machine industry, invented the locomotive, and gave an example
f triumphant vigor and success, of force of character and genius of mind,
uch as no people ever has surpassed. We drew in complete safety the raw
aterials of our industry from every clime. They were worked up here
n the central mart and workshop of the world. Then the finished goods
tent out again, far and wide, to all the nations of the earth that could be
eached by traffic from the sea. We laid the world under, tribute, and even
hf power of Napoleon could not break the bond. The armies he led were
o*thed and shod to no small extent with the British manufactures he proibited.
That was England before free trade.
Then came the second era, when imports no longer subject to dutiest of
ny kind by which home industry could benefit entered upon their cometitive period. Rural England was soon a scene of shrinking culture and
tindling population, and agriculture decayed in spite of Cobden's early
'strances to country meetings, on his faith as a farmer's son, that free
ade could influence nothing unfavorably but rents. In this second period,
owever, the complaint of the farmer and the squire was a feeble note of
iscord lost in the swelling praise of an optimistic nation. *  * 
Foreign competition since the general abandonment of free-import
rinciples by other nations after the seventies introduced the third era
f imports —thtt of the immense influx of untaxed manufactures from
ountries whfch keep down our exports by hostile duties. That this process
test be mainly destructive to the interests of our industry it is not possible
r any cool and searching thinker to deny..: 0  


4-41




"ROTECTIVE TARIFFS ALWAYS DEVELOP FOREIGN
TRADE."
Extract from LONDON DAILY TELEGRAPH, printed in daily &onagreesion
Record, Janary 5, 1904.
PROTECTIVE TARIFFS ALWAYS DEVELOP
FOREIGN TRADE.
The American, German, and French tariffs of the flst twenty years
have been followed, not by the decline, but by the rapid development of
their foreign trade. Let us repeat once more upon that head the figure
we have previously given:
CManufactured exports (four countries).
United    Germ an                  Uniteda
ear             Kin         Germany. Idom 
1882.....................0.....0...  4,00(,000  I,00 628,000),
-.902....................  235,(0,000  1515,0 000   95,  84,000,(X>
Increase..............  8,         61,000, i,000,000   56l
Increase per cent.........        8I                    25 
In every one of these cases you see, that the tariffs of your rival
have pron oted foreign trade more rapidly than free imports have promoted
your own. Mr. Chamberlain's policy woiuld develop our colonial commerce
and your home industry, But it would not inflict one particle of injury
on your foreign trade. It would improve that also, in improving your
commercial position: all around. * * *
Capital can move from trade to trade, and from country to country
though not without waste. There is always some damage involved in a
compulsory transfer of tthe kind  But still capital can disengage itself fro
the wreckage of a beaten industry, as a rule, even though'it suffers a ers
tain degree of. loss in the process, and can find another Investment. Yoa
have seen an example' of that process in the fact that the tariffs of the
United States and the Continent have compelled many well-known Britits
employers to transfer their undertakings to foreign soil and to find employ.
ment for foreign workmen. A firm which sets up a factory in France
o   nce obtains the freedom of the French home market and retains the whole
of its former freedom in this market. Capital then can move from thie
country, and has already been compelled by foreign tariffs to move, abroal
to a, considerable extent.
But to a oworkingoman the trade he has been taught is his very life
I-.is whole fortune and the happiness of all dependent upon him are boon
up with his success in the particular trade to which he has been appren
tcoed.  Cobdenism  talks thel most cruel nonsense of all its stereotype
pedantry when it tells him that if his trade, is killed he can turn to an
other. In all cases but the one in a thousand, he can do no such thing
If the ordinary skilled artisan can not find employment after he. attain
full manhood in the the trade to which he has been brought up, he is ruine'
-unless he emigrates to a country like Aomerica, a country with a tari
not only wiUWing to give him    employment, but giving him an absolltU
guaranty against the 'displacement of his labor by foreign competition
Any workman who examines the matter must see that the free Import
of foreign competitive manufacturers are simply incompatible with his
security in his livelihood, and that the whole theory of traditional Cob
denism  is irreconcilable with the principles upon which all that is bes
in trades unionism Is founded.
FOOIROUSES A FREE-TRADE LEGACY.
The Wordkhouse system that exists to this day, repulsive and hatefo
from the first to the. mass of the people, was the creation of the classica
economists. It levelved misfortune with disgrace and condemned honorabi
age and stricken poverty to the same dreary fate that was reserved fo
the sot, the wastrel, and the vagabond. That was the classic free-tradi
idea of provision for old age. It was heartless, but it was the syste
No matter how staunchly and well you had done your social duty in t
time of your health and strength, no matter what blow of fate or ho
reavement might have rendered you helpless, nothing but the blank wal
of the social' prison-house could be provided for you lest the "sturdy inds
pendence of the people"' should be sapped. This was one example of tN
tender mercies: of the good, as the free-trade economists endeavored
make them prevail in British legislation.
"Buy in the cheapest and sell in the dearest market," even when ti
negotiably commodity is flesh and blood, and regardless, of all collateor
circumstances-.:That was and Is the fundamental maxim      of the f
importers.creed.   In pursuance of this creed, you workmen whom 
address have always -been, and still are, sacrificed without a moment' hesi
tation by unintelligent pedants to a short-sighted, ideal of immediate cheas
ness.  When in America or, in any continental country home labor
seriously depressed by foreign competition, the state steps in,. checks tb
invasion, and gives' the threatened industry time to form square. You
protect your own interests by your combinations when you have nohi
but domestic competition to face, *but as soon as foreign competition e
gins to displace your employment and to depress your wages the weapo1
of combinat ion is broken in your hands. If you are undersold-well,
Abraham   Lincoln might have put it, upon   free-import principles-ye
are  ndersold, and there's an en.


I




THE PROTECTED COUNTRIES ARE PROSPERING,
AND THE FREE-TRADE COUNTRIES DECAYING."
*tract from LONDON DAILY TELEGRAPH, printed in daily Congressional Record, January 5, 19O4.
WHY WE SHOULD CHANGE.
Comparative exports, 1872-1902.
[Amounts in million pounds sterling.)
1872.  1890.  1,900.  1902.
ritish exports:                                 I,1I To British possessions..............  (i1    87     94 1    09
(2) To foreign countries.....................  19  176  197     174
Total.......................................  257  2 3  291  i  28
Irma lClr exports................1................116.  1066  238  241
re (ilI  exports..................................  150  i  164  170
ited  States  exports............................  89  176  1  304  282
PRINCE BISMARCK'S PROPHECY, 1879.
I base my opinion on the practical experience of the times we live in.
see that the protected countries are prospering and the free-trade counieo decaying. Mighty England, like a powerful athlete, strode out into
ne open market when she had strengthened her sinews, and said: "Who
ill measure with me?   I am  ready for all."   But England herself is
owly returning to the protective tariff, and some years hence she will
dopt it in order to keep at least her home market. (Bismarck's speech on
reaking with free trade, May 2, 1879.)
THE COUMNSEL OF DESPAIR, 1903.
We have now examined in all its main aspects the greatest controarsy of our time from the standpoint of an observer with every original
rejudice in favor of free trade, but forced by the study of foreign facts
> change insular convictions. Cobdenism was presented and adopted fifty
3ars ago as an infallible recipe for success. It was to be the universal
tinciple of commercial policy equally applicable to all nations and to all
roes. Rejecting it you could not prosper. Embracing it you could not
ii., If hostile tariffs should be continued against us by some erroneous
xrtion of mankind, these perverse systems would only injure their authors
od benefit ourselves. For Britain, at least. the stimulating pressure of
pen competittion would be the sure guaranty of perpetual vigor and imrovement. While her pampered rivals under protection, deprived by state
id of the true incentive to personal exertion, were bound to become laniid and remiss, the merchants of England, relying upon themselves alone,
ould possess the superior secret of efficiency. Look at it closely and you
ill see that the whole question lies there.
PROTECTION PRODUCES INDUSTRIAL EFFICIENCY.
These theories have been disproved by modern facts. Free trade is no
nranty of industrial efficiency.  Protection does not prevent industrial
ciency. In America and Germany alike the views of the thinkers who
jeted Cobdenism from the beginning have prevailed. In America and
Crmany alike we see commercial energy and intelligence working at a
gher power than in this country. Two generations ago, before the old
iriff system of this country was destroyed, we were first in everythingrst in invention and enterprise, first in every department of manufacture
td transport.,
Before free imports existed we had Invented steam power, railways,
ixtile machinery. We have done nothing of equal Importance since. What
re we first in nowf In iron and steel we are not even second. In Cobden's
vit trade-cotton-Lancashire mill owners have lately discovered that they
usft take lessons in point of technical progress from the protected mill
kmers of America. Germans have the fastest steamers upon the Atlantic.
shipbuilding alone we are still far ahead, but we are already told that
e depend in that branch upon the cheap importation of German iron and
|eel. If that is so, the transference even of our shipbuilding supremacy
the land where the materials are most cheaply produced can be only a
latter of time. The United States has now the largest home production, the
orcigest home market-"the best weapon," as Mr. Carnegie most truly
narcks, "for the conquest of markets abroad."
In other words, those who produce most must be able to sell most if
flowed to keep their own market for themselves and to exploit yours also.
This must be the case whatever becomes of the trusts in their present
5aggerated form. When the boom across the Atlantic breaks as as we all
low it must, we shall find what American dumping power means, and
e shall need no second teaching.     Meanwhile, as the figures at the
aWl of this chapter show, German exports have again begun to gain upon
hand over hand. In foreign trade alone she has already beaten us.
te present rate, and within little over ten years, she will outstrip us
1orether in spite of the advantage in colonial trade by which we still
er the lead. You are told that exports are not everything. Those who;ou so are superficial sophists. They lay stress in the same breath
o the amount of your investments abroad; but your investments abroad
Present past exports and nothing else. Germany Is now acquiring wealth
export precisely as you did formerly. She has now over ~1,000,000,O 'nvested abroad.
nited States. Accumulating Wealth Faster Than Great Britain
in another generation of your present system Germany and America
I1 -;urpass you even in accumulating wealth. Do not mistake the meanO f these facts. The creed of immediate cheapness is the creed of ultite decay
a-63,,,,   *..                Sig. 3




"THE WORKSOP OF THE WORLD HAS BECOME THE
DUMPING GROUND OF THE WORLD.'
Extract fro  LONDON DMLY      BELEBRAPH, printed in daily Congressiota
Record, January 5, 1904.
When Mr. Chamberlain says to the nation, "Look to your armor," let
every business man exposed to foreign competition, let every workingnman
in a trade exposed to foreign competition, ask himself whether the colonial
secretary has spoken too soon.
We know the Cobden Club answer.      They will talk with scolistle
solemnity of "Mr. Sauerbeck's index numbers" and tell us that the apparent
stagnation of our European trade is a mere case of decline in values. We
shall at once knock the bottom out of that argument. The decline in prices
has affected every nation's exports equally. How is it, then, that the manu.
facturing shipments of every competing country have expanded even in
value at a far faster ratio than ourst  Upon that point take the following
comparison to clinch the argument as to relative rates of increase, new
ships being included in the British and German figures:
Manufactured Exports (Four Countries), 1882 and 1902.
[Amounts in million pounds sterling.]
a  Great  Ger-    United 1 c.
Yea"r.          { fBritain. many. States.
1882.......................................  217  94       28       76
1102........................................  235  155    84 
From this we may see that the Cobdenite argument from shrinkage of
prices only recalls Mrs. Siddons's famous inquiry, "Will it wash?" and that
the answer is decidedly in the negative. The respective percentages of increase in manufacturing trade during twenty years have been as follows:
nrgland, 8 per cent.; France, 25 per cent.; Germany, 64 per cent.; United
States, 200 per cent. And in our case the whole of the increase has occurred In trade with the great self-governing colonies. Take the figures as
we like, they will prove that in the last few decades, since our three great
rivals commenced in earnest the giant struggle of universrl protection
against isolated free imports, our European exports, apart from coal, have
shown an absolutely marked and, relatively, an immense decline by contrast
with the general progress. not only of Germany and America, but even of
France, whom we had considered out of the running.
THE ]FOREIGN INVASION.
[Amounts in million pounds sterling.]
1882   1890.  1900.  1902.
Exports of British manufactures to competi- 
tive ountries (all Europe and the United 
States).....................109            110 I  103 
Imports of foreign manufactures Into the
United Kingdom......................    55     63     93 
Balance.................................   54  47    10......
No one who knows anything of public opinion or the conditions of bust
ness can doubt that a tax, and a stiff one, upon foreign manufactures wo4l
be one of the most popular as well as one of the wisest imposts ever levie
in this country. Either the foreign manufacturer would pay the 'duty or th
home manufacturer would get 'the trade. That internal trade, which tb
free-mports system has enabled protected capital to capture, is, as we se
immense. It is better worth fighting for than all the foreign markets of tb
world. Our fiscal system has thrown this vast business at home into tit
hands of competitors who shut us out from their sphere abroad. Its recov
ery would mean increase of output, and therefore cheapening of productio
and Is indispensable to the success of our renewed assaults in the futur
even upon foreign markets. The benefits would be shared in the shape
profits and wages by every single class of society. If we can get back th
trade, we ought to levy the tax for the security of capital and the advanta
of labor. If we can not get that trade, we ought as obviously to levy t
tax for revenue. In both cases the foreigner would either pay or fail
our market, precisely as we do in his; and in either case we should son
have the governments of competitive nations offering at last to lower the
tariffs in our favor.
These figures show how in twenty years the workshop of the world 
become the dumping round of the world. But let us be certain of this, th
a d:umpng ground for goods is a slumping ground for capital. That is t
key of the whole question, and it is by far the greatest economic and socic
issue for the nation in the present controversy, Glance again at the statia
tics heading this argument. Cobden imagined that under his system M
should always go on exchanging manufactured goods for foreign food a
raw material. While that state of things continued even free imports wit
out true free trade wasl an Idea system in our Industrial nterests.
were the workshop, or instance, and America the wheat field. All th
e could desire under such circumstances was the unfettred facility to d
That golden aqe of free trade disappeared forever before the iron a;e 
foreign competition, wh n America and Germany after their wars set nip
business for themselves. They proved to us that manufacturing power w
fo monopoly. They repelled our goods from their markets, disputed t
ground with us in neutral markets, and, above all, they invaded us in o
own.
We are thus struck a threefold blow by every industrial country whnl
puts up a hostile tariff against us and utilizes to the full the free-iwp0
%                                    {~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
0:  g  S X  0::;::::


I




THE HIDEOUS HUMBUG CONTAINED IN THE PROMISE OF T           CHEAP LOAF.",rtacts from article entitled "Why First Voters should be Protectionists,"
printed in daily Congressional Record, January 12, 1904.
THB CHEAP LOAP.
The Cobdenite will doubtless scorn the imputation that the policy he
dvocates has any other purpose in view than the freedom of trade, but the
idence is indisputable that the practice in Great Britain is to make it fit
e fiscal plans of those who guide the destiny of the nation.
It is an admitted fact that during the repeal agitation orators in the
ties told the British workingmen that the abolition of the corn duties would
ve them cheap bread. In the country they told a different story. They
ied to reassure the farmer by pointing out that he had a natural protecon in the distance of foreign competitors which would assure him against
ing undersold, and they even added that the increased business which
ould result from the change in fiscal policy would redound to the advange of British agriculture.
If my reader has any doubt regarding the accuracy of this statement,
may consult Trumbull's Free Trade Struggle in England, in which the
consistent attitude of the Cobdenites is described with charming naivete;
he may turn to J. Thorold Rogers's article on "Free trade" in the Enclopedla Britannica, where the writer, as late as 1876, declared British
riculture was safe from the assault of foreigners. The pages of Mills's
inciples of Political Economy also contain testimony which establishes
e truth of the assertion that it was the common belief in the United
ngdom that its agricultural interests would benefit rather than suffer
m freedom of trade.
It was long after the battle had been won and not until the British
riculturist had begun to feel the evil effects of the practice of foreign
untries dumping their surpluses of food stuffs on the markets of the UniKingdom that the cold-blooded doctrine was preached that if a man
s ruined and driven out of one industry he could turn his attention to
me other mode of gaining a livelihood.
But the British are beginning to realize the heartlessness underlying
easy assumption that men driven out of one pursuit may easily adapt
emselves to something else, and they are now rapidly coming to undernd the hideous humbug contained in the promise of the cheap loat.
What a mockery it is to speak of the cheap loaf in the same breath
t the admission is made that millions are starving for bread in the UniKingdom. How can that be regarded as cheap which is unattainable
30 per cent. of the population of Great Britain?
This is not a protectionist accusation. It is evidence furnished by Sir
nry Cvmpbell Bannerman in a speech made by him at Perth on the 5th
June, 1903, in which he denounced Colonial Secretary Chamberlain's
ferential plan of treating the colonies. Sir Henry said:
"In this country we know, thanks to the investigations of Mr. Seebohm
wntree and Mr. Charles Booth, that there is about 30 per cent. of our
pulation underfed and on the verge of hunger. Thirty per cent. of fortymillions comes to something over twelve millions."
Bear in mind that this is not a protectionist attempt to emphasize the
lure of the "cheap-loaf" policy, but that it is the deliberate admission
a leading British free trader, and that it was backed up by the formation
"anti-starvation" clubs throughout the United Kingdom.
In short, the net result of over half a century of free trade in Great
tain has been to bring to the verge of starvation twelve millions or more
its population, and the only defense that can now be urged in favor
the retention of the policy is that it must be adhered to in order to
vent other millions from starving.
Dearness and cheapness are meaningless terms when interpreted by
e lists. True cheapness can only be measured satisfactorily by ascering the standard of living of peoples.
Iv they have plenty to eat, and plenty to wear, and may gratify their
heic desires, people are living cheaply, no matter what the nominal
t f things may be.
British free traders say that the United States is a dear country. So, and it is so because the standard of living of the masses is high. And
slandard is high because higher waqes are demanded in this country.
teff American worker attains real cheapness; he gets things. That is
t(u chstone.
Great Britain has the claim made for it by the free traders that it is
hep country, but it is a dear land for the toiler to live in. Twelve
lon out of 41,000,000 Britons are on the verge of starvation.
China is a cheap country also; so is India. Human labor is held very
P1 int both those lands, and the result is that the masses are conti s;teeped in poverty and menaced by starvation. In spite of the sol Xcheapness" the people don't get things.
N' repeat it is only in the so-called "dear" countries that the masses
th ags, and the degree of attainableness is about in the ratio of the
Hi 5.,






"IN THE UNITED KINGDOM TRADE HAS BEEN PRACTICALLY STAGNANT FOR THIRTY YEARS."
Extracts from: speech of!ion. JOSEPH     CI1AMBEIRLAIN     at Glasgow,
printed in daily Congressional Record, January 5, 1904.
SOME SOUND PROTECTIVE TAIFIF TRUTHS PFRIO HON.
JOSEPH CHAC          ERLAIN, OF IEGLAND.
[From the London Daily Telegraph.]
SPEECH OFB JOSEPH CHAMBEtRAIN, AT GLASGOW,
OOTOBER 6.
Mr. Chamberlain, on rising to speak, was received with loud cheer.
ing, the audience rising and waving hats and handkerchiefs. When silence
was restored, he said:
"Sir Matthew Arthur, my lords, ladies and gentlemen, my first duty
is to thank this great and representative audience for having offered me
an opportunity of explaining for the first time in some detail the views
which I hold on the subject of our fiscal policy. [Cheers.] I would desire no better platform than this. [Cheers.]
"Ladies and gentlemen, I am not afraid to come here to the home
of Adam Smith and to combat free imports. I don't say to you, gentlemen, that I anticipate any catastrophe so great or so sudden for British
trade, but I do say to you that I see signs of decay ['Hear!' 'Hear!'] —
that I see cracks and crevices in the walls of the great structure; that
I know that the foundations upon which it has been raised are not broad
enough or deep enough to sustain it.  [Cheers.]
"What are the facts? The year 1900 was the record year of British
trade. The exports were the largest we had ever known. The year 1902
-last year-was nearly as good, and yet if you will compare your trade
In 1872, thirty years ago, with the trade of 1902 ---the export tradeyou will find that there has been a moderate increase of twenty milliors.
The actual increase was twenty millions with our free trade. In tlhe same
time the increase in the United States of America was one hundred and
ten millions, and the increase in Germany was fifty-six millions. In the
United Kingdom trade has been practically stagnant for thirty years. It
went down in the interval. It has now gone up in the most prosperous
times. In the most prosperous times it is hardly in the least degree better
than it was thirty years ago. Meanwhile the protected countries, weich
you have been told, and which I myself at one time believed, were goin!
rapidly to wreck and ruin, have progressed in an infinitely better proportion than ours.
"That is not all. The amount of your trade remained stagnant, but
the character of your trade has changed. When Mr. Cobden preached his
doctrine he believed, as he had at that time considerable reason to s'uppose, that while foreign countries would supply us with our foods and raw
materials we should remain the workshop of the world, and should seind
them in exchange our manufactures. But that is exactly what we have
not done. On the contrary, in the period to which I have referred we are
sending less and less of our manufactures to them and they are sending
more and more of manufacturers to us. ['Hear!' Hear!' Now, I know
how difficul it is for a great meeting like this to follow figures. I shall
give you as few as I can, but I must give you some to lay the basis of my
argument.   ['Hear!' 'Hear!']  I have had a table constructed, and upon
that table I would be willing to base the whole of my contention. I will
take some figures from it. You have got to analyze your trade.    It is
not merely a question of amount; you have got to consider of what it is
comprised.  Now, what has been the case with regard to our manufactures? Our existence as a nation depends upon our manufacturing capacity and production. We are not an agricultural country. That can never
be the main source of our prosperity. We are a great manufacturing
country. Now, in 1872 we sent to the protected countries of Europe and to
the United States of America ~116,000,000 of exported manufactures. In
1882, ten years later, it fell to ~88,000,000. In 1892, ten years later, it
fell to ~75,000,000.
"IBn 1902, last year, although the general exports had increased, the
exports of manufactures had decreased again to ~73,500,000; and the
total result of this is that after thirty years you are sending ~42,500,000
of manufactures less to the protected countries than you did thirty years
ago. During this period of thirty years in which our exports of manufactures have fallen ~46,000,000 to foreign countries, what has happened
with their ex-ports to usf  They have risen from sixty-three millions iS
1872 to one hundred and forty-nine millions in 1902. They have increased
eighty-six millions. That may be all right. I am not for the moment
saying whether that Is right or wrong; but when people say that we outgh
to hold exactly the same opinion about things that our ancestors did, n'Y
reply is that I daresay we should do so if circumstances had remained the
same. [Laughter and cheers.]
"But now, if I have been able to make these figures clear, there is
one thing which follows —that is, that our Imperial trade is absolutely es,
sentlal to our prosperity at the present time.  ['Hear!' 'Hear!']  If that
trade declines, or If it does not increase in proportion to our population
and to the loss of trade with foreign countries, then we sink at once into
a fifth-rate nation. ['Hear!" 'Hear!'] Our fate will be the fate of the
empires and kingdoms of the past.       We have reached our higaesi
point, and Indeed I am not certain that there are some of my opponent
who do not regard that with absolute complacency. I do not.     ['Heari
'Hear!']
"Now, what is the history of protection?  In the first place a tarit
is imposed. There are no industries, or practically none, but only a ttrif
Then gradually industries grow up behind the wall, the tariff wall. ID
the first place they are primary Industries, the industries for which the
country has natural aptitude or for which It has as some special advan'age
mineral or other resources. Then, when those are supplied, the secontary
Industries 'spring up; first the necessaries, then the luxuries, until at Is
all the ground is covered. Now, these countries of which I have been spea'
ing to you are in different stages of the protective process. In Americ  w
process has'been completed. She procea everything: she ecludes eve
thlig. [Laughter.]  There is no trade to be done with her but for a
try 'six shillings per heafd."
a-G6
oe~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


I




'PROTECTION COUNTRIES HAVE OUTSTRIPPED THE
UNITED KINGDOM."
EXTRACT FROM LONDON DAILY TELEGRAPH, PRINTED
IN DAILY CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, JANUARY 5,
1904.
TliE HIOME MARKET-SOMtE INDEX FACTS —PROTECTION COUNTLIIES HAVE
OUTSTRIPPED THE UNITED KINGDOM.
(1) TOTAL CONSUMIPTION OF PIG IRON.
[Amounts expressed in million tonis.]


Year.
)...............................
Zct19i~),*W..........................:.............!I crease per cent in 20 years.....


United ] United                ra
Klingdom.   Stat.es 
6.2       4.2       26 
6.8       93        4.8        2
7.7!    13.6       9          2 
24       221       24611.8.9


(2) TOTAL MAKE OF STEEL, 1880-1902.
[Amounts expressed in million tons.]


Year.
I s:...............................................
1902.............................................
li{crease per cent............................
(3) COTTON CONSUMPTIO:
[Amounts given in


United      United    Grm
Kingdom.n     States.     e.        1.4         1.2  i       0(),7
4.8       15            7.8
9.       20 1      1,150        1,030
N, 1891 AND 1899.
1,000 bales.]


I


{ United
Year.                         j Kingdom.
18.............................................    3,384
189..............................................,519
Increase per cent................................              4


iUnited    IEuropean
States.    continent.
2,'367        3,31
419           83


(4) ANALYSIS OF BRITISH IMPORTS, 1890 AND 1900.
[Amounts expressed in million pounds sterling.]


--- 1-1 -



1890.   i1900.     Increase...................... 
I i Per cent.
177.4 i    219.7          24
63.2       93.2          48
165.0      1192.0         16


l


Food and tobacco....................................
ioreign manufactures........................
Raw materials for hoime manufactures..........


I




(5) Comparative imports of raw material for all industries.
[Amounts expressed in million pounds ste: ling.]




Year.
Is  )............................................
I900........................................................
I n,:rease per cent in 10 years.................


United 
rngdo. ernianny  F rance.
IIKingdm l 1 6
'i"i"


165 i
192 I
16


89 1
140 i


94
121


57 I 29,)


1(.ow  free imports depress wages-a contrast, 1890                  and    1902.
Produce of British labor.
Ex,ported from United Kingdom:
0................................................................ 229,868,743
I:)02a.................................................................  229,212,625
D ecline..........................................................  656118
Produce of foreign labor.
lin!forted Into the United Kingdonm:...........................6................................  63,218,167
02 i)...................................................................  90,050,648
I ncrease.............................................  35,82,481
"In every one of the great industrial countries, in the United States,
(I(lermany, and France alike, industrial consumption and production have
dVlanced more rapidly under the tariff than they have advanced here under
Irree imports."
a-67




"ENGLAND CONSUMES ONLY 37 PER CENT OF W1HAT
SHE    RO0DUCES."
Extraot from remarkF of Hon. 1B. P. KENNEDY of Ohio, page 457
of daily Congressional Record, 60th Congress, lt Bsssion.
England is a free-trade country, and why? Simply because sh
consumes only 37 per cent of uhat she produces or manufactures
and is compelled to find a market for the remaining 63 per cent
of all her productions. In other words, when a British manufacturer
makes three articles he can sell only one of them at home, and is
compelled to find a foreign market for the other two; otherwise hi
factory must close.
America consumes 92 per cent. of what she produces, and send
only 8 per cent, abroad. Therefore, if America should sell nothing
abroad, only one man out of every twelve would be thrown out o
employment. We would not have a repetition of the mobs of London
Sheffield, Birmingham, and Manchester.
"INDUSTRIAL CRISIS IN         ENGLAND SINCE 1875."
Extract from remarks of Hon. JOHN KEAN, Jr., of New Jersey
page 4256 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1s
Session.
The revenue tariff only has prevailed during that period in England
and Ireland. The result there is also known to the world. Has i
proved a benefit to Ireland? Let her people, escaping by the milli
to this and other shores, answer for her. What do Englishmen sa
for themselves? They certainly are competent witnesses in their ow
affairs. For years they have been bewailing the losses and ruin whic
hlave come to their agriculture, both in reduced production and r
duced prices. The depression in manufactures and trade have b
come so public and serious that a parliamentary commission w
recently appointed to inquire into its causes. That commission in i
report declares that the industrial crisis in England has continue
since 1875, which was the year when the remarkable prosperity of t
United States became evident after the passage of the act for t
resumption of specie payments. This commission gave as the reaso
for the depression the low profits of manufacturers.
An English writer, from whom I shall quote further presently, co
menting on the commission's report, says:
"'That low profits mean reduced wages of labor or the employme
of a less number of laborers and less consumption by the worker.
"Low profits for the Lancashire and Birmingham manufacture
mean narrowed circumstances in this country.
"For many decades we have not seen such a cheapness of wh
and manufactured goods as we see now, and yet we are sufferi
from a crisi" 
I call the attention of the Democratic lovers of the Englih sys
to this notable admiio.
a-68


I




"THE BALANCE OF TRADE IS TURNING AGAINST
GREAT     BRITAIN."
Extract from LONDON DAILY TELEGRAPH, printed in daily Congressional
Record, January 6, 1904.
THE BALANCE OF TRADE IS TURNING AGAINST
GREAT BRITAIN.
To make this point clear we now give one of the most remarkable
Isets of figures we have had yet to present, showing how the profits of corn
Imercial exchange, despite the philanthropic theory, are unmistakably
Iturning against us. Sir Alfred Bateman's figures used at the head of this
article do not show the full gravity of the case, for, in accordance with
Icustomary classification, the chief statistician of the board of trade excludes from his tables of foreign manufactured imports chemicals, wines,
and beet-root sugar. a  These are products of skilled industry, like the
famous "pickles and jam,' and we have reckoned such articles on both!sides with the manufactured rather than with the crude commodities. We
then get the true analysis of the change since 1875-chosen as a good
average year, midway both in time and circumstances between the inflaItion of 1872 and the depression of 1879-in the character of our trade
with the five competitive countries, Germany, Holland, Belgium, France,
and the United States. This is the statement:
British imports from    competitive nations, 1875 and 1902.
[From Germany, Holland, Belgium, France, United States.]
1875.     1   1902.


iRaw material, food, etc...................7.......,1.117,700,000
Manufactures..................................    50,100,000


~156,100,()00
116)500,000


Total................................i ~167,800 000  i  6272,00,000


a This understatement is remedied by the new classification adopted
for the board of trade returns, which show that imports of "articles wholly
or mainly manufactured" are now coming into this country at the rate of
~135,000,000 a year.
British   exports to     competitive nations.
[To Germany, Holland, Belgium, France, United States.]
i    1875.   I    1(32.
Raw material, etc................................. I ~8,1,00,0   ~ ~21,400,000
Ianufactures.......................  71,800,000  57,600,000
Total...................................         79,400,)000  ~79,000,0)
Thus the total volume of our exports to our five chief competitors was
actually less in 1902 than it was in 1875.      But the compositin of those
xports had undergone a portentous change.       We sold to Germany, Holand, Belgium, France, and the United States ~12,000,000 more raw         maerial than we did twenty-eight years ago, and nearly ~14,000,000 less
anufactures.   But in the meantime, while our finished and half-finished
xports to these great competitors had fallen from      ~71,300,000 to ~57,00,000, their sales of manufactured goods had increased in our market
y 130 per cent.-from    ~50,100,000 to ~116,500,000.     The significant deails for each country may be set out, thus:
Manufactures exported to England.
From                              1875.        1902.
ermnany and Holland a...............................  ~10,500,000    46,900,XX0)
Relgu    b.............................................  8,600000 1'9,000,(0a
rae c.........................................   29,000,000    86,700,000
ed    States d.........................................  2,000,000  1,700,000
a Increae oer 3        per cent             Irease, 120 per cent.
c Increase over 26 per cent.              d Increase, 585 per cent.
Manufactures imported from           England.
To                               1875.        1902.
'en,any and Holland a...........................  ~8-,500,000   ~22,000,(X0
ktnl1  u  b...............................................  5,200,000  6,400,000
na I  t ce c................................................  12,300,000  9,600,00)
i ted  S tates a.d.......................................... |,l 2, 0 0,00,(.................. 20,600;000               19,500,(X)0~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


I
I
I
I


l


a Decline over 30 per cent.           b Increase, 23 per cent.
c Decline, 22 per cent.               d Decline, 5 per cent.
Under our present system a heavy check is already placed upon that
(t ululation of capital. Americans are steadily buying back their own
CrIcties, At this rate the time must arrive when we shall begin to trench
P   ao capital itself, and nobody is quite sure, or can be quite sure, that we
re not trenching upon it now.
Thus the whole elaborate contention upon which our stopped-clock
Ecollmists rely is a house of cards which comes down if you breathe
a69 it
I%-8 




5a


A"I;IXD DRANK TMHE FR EE-TRADE CUP 0 O TO


^;:;:VERY DREGS."
Extract from remarks of Hon. WM. P. FRYE of Maine, page 65
of daily Congressional Record, 50t Cngresgres, 1st Session.
Ireland once supported in reasonable comfort 8,000,000 of peopl
Her manufacture of linen, silk, wool, and cotton, protected by tariff
and encouraged by subsidies, absorbed her capital, employed hi
laborers, promoted a diversity of industries, and insured prosperit
England, her next friend, advised, cajoled, and flattered her int
tile belief that she could raise raw materials on her fertile soil, se
them to her, buy of her the manufactured products more cheap]
than she could make them, and that free trade would be a nationa
blessing. Beguiled by her, Ireland consented, her tariff was gradual
repealed, horizontally destroyed, her subsidies withdrawn. Since the
she has been raising raw material, selling it to England, buying h
manufactured goods of her at prices determined by England alon
and to-day, with only 5,000,000 of people, is the poorest, most di
tracted and harassed country on earth. She drank the free-trad
cup which England pressed to her lips to the very dregs. Thomn
Francis Meagher, the Irish patriot, in a speech made at Dublini
1847, thus summarized the results to his afflicted country of England
friendship and advice:
"The cotton manufacture of Dublin, which employed 14,000 oper
tives, has been destroyed; the 3,000 silk looms of the Liberty ha\
been destroyed; the stuff and serge manufactures, which employe
1,491 operatives, have been destroyed; the calico looms of Balbrigga
have been destroyed; the flannel manufacture of ltotterdam has bee
destroyed; the blanket manufacture of Kilkenny has been destroyed
the camlet trade of Bandon, which produced ~100,000 a year, ha
been destroyed; the worsted and stuff manufactures of Waterfori
have been destroyed; the rateen and frieze manufactures of Carri
on-Suir have been destroyed; one business alone survives, thrive
flourishes, and dreads no bankruptcy.    * * That favored an
privileged and patronized business is the Irish coffin-makers."
And yet, England hopes and the Democratic party expects th
every Irish-American citizen of this Republic shall, in the comi
Presidential election, vote for free trade!
"THE    COBDEN      CLUB." —" AN     ORGANIZATION        TH
BODES DEATH       TO IRISH    INDUSTRIES."
Extract from remarks of lon. WM. WOODBURN of Nevada, Pa
4002 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Sessi
I am anxious to know if the adopted citizens of Irish birth and the
descendants will continue to perpetuate the political power of a piar
the leading members of which adorn the roll of an organization th
bodes death not only to American but to Irish industries. Cobd
free trade means that parliarentary independence in Ireland
'utterly valueless. It has scattered them like the Israelites over eve
portioln of God's footstool, robed them  in rags, and made th
"hewers of wood ad drawers of water." Can they knowingly supp0
at the ballot-box fo the high office of President of the United Stat
a leader of that party, when they are informed by the London ca
dispatchesf the   8t        ofth 8th y   January last that the surplus fl
of the~ Cobden 0Club are intended as reinforcemenets for CleveIl
in his e#fforts to haid over the control off American market
Britih traderff:,:                  f: a-70;;:::f0 X00:::00f:000:;:: 0 0: i i::::~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


1
5
le
t
I
e
)I
I
I
e
I
I
i
I
e
c


I




"THE FA CT OF GROWTH UNDER PROTECTION AND
OF DECAY UNDER FREE TRADE IS CLEARLY SET
FORTH IN THE EXPERIENCE OF ENGLAND.'"
Extracts from remarks of Hon. P. P. CAMPBELL of Kansas, in
daily Congressional Record, April 1, 1904.
Under the policy of protection the British Empire became the
greatest commercial power in the world. Its commercial enterprises
became a very hive of industry, and its commerce covered the seas.
Alison, in his History of Europe, speaking of the growth of England under the policy of protection, says:
There is perhaps no example in the annals of mankind of a nation
having made such advances in industry, wealth, and numbers as Great
Britain has made since the peace.
In the thirty years that have elapsed since the battle of Waterloo,
during which it has enjoyed, in Europe at least, almost universal peace. its
population has increased more than one-half, having advanced from 18,500,000 to 28,000,000 its imports have doubled, having risen from ~32000,0000 -to ~70,000,000; its exports have more than tripled, having swelled from
~42,000,000 to ~130,000,000, exclusive of colonial produce; its shipping has
doubled, having grown from 2,500,000 to 5,000,000 tons. * * *
During the same period the agricultural industry of the country has
been so far from falling short of this prodigious increase in its commercial
transactions that it has signally prospered; the dependence of the nation on
foreign supplies has steadily diminished until the grain annually imported
had come (on an average of five years, ending with 1835) to be more than
a two-hundredth part in average years of the annual consumption; and the
prodigy was exhibited of a rural industry in an old State possessing a
narrow and long-cultivated territory not only keeping pace with but outstripping an increase of numbers and augmentation of food required for the
purpose of luxury unparalleled in any age.
This is not an exaggerated picture of England as the nations of
the world have known her. But in the midst of her marvelous prosperity she yielded to the siren voice of the free trader and in 1846
adopted that policy. Since that time she has witnessed the growth
and prosperity of the commerce of her competitors, while her own
has been diminishing year after year.
In a recent article Sir Guilford L. Molesworth has said of England's experiment with the theory of free trade:
Free trade, so called, has had a patient trial of more than half a century, and it is now time to take stock of the results in order to see how we
stand. The results may be briefly summed up as follows: Under our policy
of free trade we have lost that commercial and industrial superiority we
acquired under the policy of strict protection. Our policy of direct taxation bears heavily upon our industries and reacts on the working classes
in reduction of wages and employment. Our aqriculture has bhcc ruined
and our industries are struggling hard for existence.
Other nations, under a policy of strict protection, are beating us in the
race of competition. not only in neutral, but in our own markets. The policy
of free trade has not secured for us either the cheap loaf, low prices of
provisions, or reduced cost of living: for all of these have been equally
secured by nations under a strict protective policy. We have sacrificed the
substance for the shadow.
This has been the experience of England. The theorist may exhaltst the vocabulary in demonstrating his proposition, but the
actual fact of growth under protection and of decay under free
trade is clearly set forth in the experience of England.
But, Mr. Chairman, we need not confine experience under the
policy of protection and the theory of free trade to the people of
the British Empire. We have had experience of our own. *      *  *
We have seen the first half century of our country's history rising
iunder the protective policy to prosperity and falling under tariff
revision by the Democratic party to adversity. A condition of pros)perity came with the policy of protection and a condition of adversity came when the theory of free trade was yielded to, and
this has been without an exception.
It is not strange, then, that among the first laws enacted by the
Ilepublican party was a law putting into effect the policy of protection-a policy that was sustained for almost a third of a century after its adoption in 1861.
Mr. Chairman, the fact is that no like period in the history of
thi or any other country has ever witnessed such marvelous devei pment of resources and such unparalleled prosperity of industry.
Agriculture and manufacture have grown up and prospered togerher. The farmer has a market at home for his produce. The
mainufacturer has not had to go abroad with his wares. Both have
tprspered by practicing the profitable economy of eliminating distalces from the question of trade. The policy of protection has
Preserved the Amrerican market for the products of American manuf(v'turers, and American manufacturers have made markets for the
products of American farmers, and together they have established
the high standard of American  ving and made possible a high scale
of American wages. [Applause on the Republican side.]
a-71




":I C-;      '            I 0    I 0 f                        F
"OFFCIAL BRITISH              FIGURWES."-"SMETHING
WRONG WITH THE FISCAL SYSTEM"'
Extract from remarks of Hon. CHARLES DIOK of Ohio, in dail1
Congressional Record, Jan. 5, 1904.
THE BRITISH BLUE BOOK ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE,
Soon after this pamphlet was issued there appeared a Britis
Blue Book of 500 pages, showing the trade of the leading nations
of the world and reviewing the various aspects of British and for.
eign commerce and the industrial conditions which prevail in the
United States, Russia, Germany, France, Austria, Great Britain
and Ireland.
One of the most important phases dealt with is imports and
exports. The tables show that exports from Great Britain to th
United States declined from    $145,000,000 in 1890 to $97,000,500 in
1909, while the imports rose, $485,000,000 to $635,000,000. The tot
exports to   all foreign   countries declined   in  the  same  period
$90,000,000, though when the colonies are included the decline only
amounts to $5,000,000. Figures are also presented for twenty-two
years, from   1880 to 1901, showing the amount of manufacture
oods, the finished products of factories and workshops, purchase
by the four leading countries in those twenty-two years and the per.
centage of increase,
I take the following figures from this official British publication
THE OFFICIAL BBRITISH FITGUES.
Imports of manufactured goods.
Country.                   1880.      1901.    Increase
Per cent.:United Ringdom....................... $416,000,000  $718,500,000  71,
Germany.....................................  195,500,000  266,000,000  36
France........................... I  120,000,000  154,500,000  28
United  States.........................  279,5000 00  886,6000   20
Observe that in the twenty-two years the United Kingdom has increase
her purchases of other nations' manufactured goods to nearly twice as grea
a degree as any other of the four, and three and a half times as much 
the United States. With all her workshops and her shopkeepers she
becoming more and more dendendet upon the workshops and shopkeepe
of other lands. Now, let us look at the amounts of manufactured good
sold by these same four countries in the same years:
Exports of manufactured goods.
Country.                   1880       1901.    Increase
Per cent
United Kingdom.......................... i 991,000,000  $1105,000,00011
Germany..................................  417,00,000  728,000,000
France......................................  0,
F~E~rance.868,000,000                              450,000,000
United  States.........0...............  1 28,000,000 20T
Observe, again, that Great Britain has increased her sales of factor
products least of all-less than one-sixth as much as Germany, and le
than one twenty-sixth as much as the United States. In brief, the "nati
of shopkeepers" and the "workshop of the world" is rapidly becoming 
nation of purchasers from the shopkeepers and workshops of other natio
1What wonder that the British prime minister thinks it possible that the
is sonmething  wrong with the fiscal system under which such retrogressi
is being effected!
The proportion of the United Kingdom exports, as between protect
and unprotected countries, in the markets of the world has been revers
since 1850. Then it was 56 per cent. to the protected countries and 44 p
cent. to the others. In 1902 the proportion was 42 per cent. to the p
tected countries and 58 per cent. to the others. Much attention is devot
to the tin-plate industry and the effect of the Dingley and McKinley tart
The figures show that the total exports of tin from the United Kingdom ha
declined only a little over $5,000,000 since 1897, with a marked inerea
in the quantity produced and in the value of a number of mills since 189
COMPARISON OF WAGES.
The question of wages and the cost of living especially the prlce
food, whch has figured so largely in the recent Chamberlain agitation, t
up pages, and is summed up as follows: "The average level wages in s
United States  e one and one-half times greater than in the United 1iI
The percentage of family Inom~es taking New York as the ca4pita
he United States, is esmated (on the basis of 100 per cent. for the Ul
Kingdom) for the United States,: 12  per cent.; for Prance, 88er fes
and for Germany, 69 per cent, The mean weekly rate of wages i    g: l
Kingdom at 100                              prper cOnt.,
9/1%7.                                                      U:;:::::::   f:::::::~~~~~~~




"THE BRITISH CONSUMER IS BY NO MEANS SO
WELL OFF AS THE AMERICAN CONSUMER."
Extracts from LONDON DAILY TELEGRAPH printed in daily Congres
sional Record, January 5, 1904.
It may be generally stated without the slightest fear of refutation
that in no country under the tariff has the general burden upon the people,
as consumers, been so great as the general profit to the people as producers.
We can bring this matter to a very simple test. Everyone knows that
the average American consumer pays more than the average British consumer.  Yet the British consumer, in spite of that advantage, is by no
means so well off as the American consumer. We make petty gains upon
our expenditure under the present system, but we forfeit larger gains that
would otherwise accrue to us in the shape of revenue. The Inquiry Blue
Book gives two budgets showing the weekly expenses and weekly surpluses of British and American families of relatively similar situation. The
comparison is based upon the data of inquiries made in 1890 and 1891
by the United States Labor Department.
The results, however, give a perfectly clear comparison of conditions
under the high-price and the low-price systems, with the great commodity
of labor itself selling at a higher price under the tariff and at a lower
under free imports.  The weekly earnings of a number of English families
worked out at an    average of 32s. 2 % d. The corresponding wages in
America would be 48s.   There is no American table for that exact sum,
but there is a table showing the expenditure and surplus of a large group
of American families earning on the average 46s. 4%4d. a week. But even
this section showed a larger weekly surplus than that of English families
earning rather more than a strictly corresponding rate. Here are the two
comparisons:
Comparative budget for British and American families of approximately equal earnings relatively to the
standards of wages in the two countries.
[English standard equals 100; American standard equals 150.]
BRITISH BUDGET.,   d.
Average weekly income per family...........................32      2%4
Average expenditure:                                    s. d.
Food.....................................   15  3
Rent...................................  3  9
Fuel,  etc.....................................  2  0Yd
Clothing....................................... 6      7
Sundries....................................  5 7  /
Total expenditure.................................. 31  1%
Weekly surplus......................................            1 
AMERICAN BUDGET.
s.   d.
Average weekly income per family..........................46      4%
Average expenditure:                                    s. d.
Food...................................... 17   8V4
Rent.........................................  6  6
Fuel,  etc....................................  2  6%
Clothing................................. 6  7%
Sundries......................          9  9 /2
Total  expenditure...................................   43   1 %
Weekly surplus..........3......................      3
ENGLAND'S LOSS FROM FREE TRADE-EXPORTS.
Comparative total exports of principal commercial countriesthirty years, 1872-1902.
[Amounts in million pounds sterling.]
1  I        Per cent of Increase
1872. 1890. 1900. 1902.  or decrease In 1902
compared with 1872.
British exports. 
To British possessions......  61i 87   94   109  79 per cent increase.
To foreign countries........ 196  176  197  174 21 per cent decline.
Total....................... 257  26  291  283  10 per cent Increase.
ermnan exports................ 116  166  238  241 108 per cent increase;
nited States exports..........  89  176 i04  282 217 per cent increase.
Comparative exports of manufactures (four countries.),
1882-1902.
United      ermany      Fran.       United.
v~ rmany.   France
lKingdomn,         -y                States..802...2...,~2170,00,0X00           ~94,00       76,000,000  000  28,000,000::::.............. 2 0...i.............................  25,000,000            95,009,00   84000,000
Increase........      18,000,00   61,000,000  19,000,000   66,000,000
ucrtease per cent....            8          64          25          200


I




iI
i
I


"A UNIT LOST TO BRITISH POWE."-"TO NOURISH THE IN
DUSTRIALVIGORof our MOST FORMIDABLE COMPETITOR,
Extract frome London Daily Telegraph, printed in daily Congressional
Record, Jani., 1904.
When the British emigrant, instead of settling under the flag
becomes a citizen of the United States, what happens?     He not
only takes away his savings and the capital value of his personal
efficiency, but he is a unit lost to British power, a unit lost to
British production  and, above all, a unit lost to British custom
Instead of taking ~6 worth yearly of home goods and providing
therefore, ~6 worth of home employment, he does both on the
6-shilling scale only. But that is not all. Settling under a pro
hibitive tariff, he is another consumer gained for that vast nationa
monopoly-the American home market; he is another producer gained
to swell the population and to nourish the industrial vigor of ou
most formidable competitor; and in the contest for trade supremacy
he works with deadly effect in a commercial sense against the
country that bore him, and against his fellows at home. We gralm
ble at the British workman. Is it because we do not know how te
manage him or because our system of free imports, with the letharg
of enterprise and restriction of employment it creates, prevents s
from offering him the inducements and opportunities which seen
to transform his character when he crosses the Atlantic? Americ
at least, is only too glad to get him, and when she has got him sh
turns him into one of the keenest workers in the world. It i
notorious that British emigrants are everywhere among the mos
efficient artisans in the States.
These remarks, it is unnecessary to say, are not prompted in th
faintest degree by any feeling of unfriendliness toward America
Friendship with the great English-speaking Republic must remai
the foundation of our external policy. The cause of Anglo-Amer
can amity would be a little affected by preference on this sid
as it was by the McKinley tariff on the other side. These are purel
business readjustments, which every nation has the right to mank
and which every nation but ourselves does make. The cry of r
taliation, like the cry of the dear loaf, is part of the mere mel
drama of Radical stage management.       But what has become
matter of life and death to this Empire is that every nerve shoul
be strained for the purpose of inducing the vast majority of th
King's subjects who leave the mother country to settle under
flag. Of the four great expanding peoples, the American, the Gee
man, the Russian, and ourselves, the British Empire, owing to ou
utter neglect, under the era of free imports and laisser faire, o
the deepest of all our questions, has now considerably the smalles
white population. Not only so, but all the others are increasin
far more rapidly, as we shall presently show, than we are. Ever
thoughtful politician has long since realized that our political an
economic future alike depend upon the success of some resolu
attempt to modify present tendencies and to stop the steady dri
of our people away from their allegiance. Year by year, to t
number of more than a hundred thousand annually of our bes
they are lost, not only to England, but to the Empire; not only
the Mother country, but to the flag. Year after year they go 
advance the development of the great trans-Atlantic competit
whose industrial advantages were already almost overwhelming I
the meantime, while the growth of population bounds in the Unite
States, it creeps in the colonies. At the present rate, when the i
habitants of the Canadian Dominion and the Australian Commna
wealth alike increase by a poor half million or so every decad
it would be fifty years hence before either of these great State
of the Empire counted as much as 10,000,000 souls each.
Since the free-imports system was completed in 1861 the relative po
ulation of the five leading powers of the world has changed approximate
as follows::      ( [Amounts expressed in millions.) ]
Presenlt
Countty.                  1861. 1881. 1903. rateof P
decade.
British Empire (mother country and colonies).  82  42 
United  States...................................  82  51 )  78
*Germ any............................................  88  46   68
rance.............................................  86  88 
unssia  (Slays).....................................   70   90 120  4
0 74.,:


I


I
I
I
11
t
5
1
I






'ALL PROTECTIVE NATIONS PROSPER MORE THAN
THE UNITED KINGDOM."
Extract from remarks of Hon. CHARLES DICK of Ohio, in daily Congressional Record, January 6, 1904.
In a speech delivered at Greenock Mr. Chamberlain said he was a free
rader and wanted to live harmoniously with his neighbors; but he desired
ree trade that was a real free trade and gave England the same concessions
which she gave to other nations. If other nations would not exchange on
hose terms, he was not a free trader at any price.
The policy of their competitors and the policy of the United States is
o use tariffs to support the home trade and exclude foreign trade. Under
his policy the United States, Germany, and France are steadily increasing
heir foreign trade, while Great Britain is as steadily losing her trade with
oreign nations. Mr. Chamberlain asked why all protective nations prosper
nore than the United Kingdom, and declared if the free traders can satisactorily answer that question he would ask to be allowed to hide his diminshed head. It is unnecessary to add that no answer was given him. The
itatistics of any period during the last thirty years, he declared, would support his arguments; even a small nation, like Sweden, under a protective
arif. had prospered more in that time, proportionately, than had Great
Britain. The policy of protection, as supported by the late President McKinley, and long before by the greatest of Americans, Abraham Lincoln, at
later day by Bismarck, and by other distinguished statesmen, had a great
eal behind it. Continuing, he declared:
I say that you are inconsistent; you are adopting a suicidal course. If
fo, proceed in the present policy your-workmen must either take lower
Wages or lose their work.
Mr. Chamberlain proceeded to refer to the enormous output of the
United States Steel Corporation works and the diminishing home demand
or steel in the United States. He quoted from an American paper an interiew with a director of the steel corporation on the failing demand, in which
he director declared that they had no intention of diminishing the output
Idl throwing out of employment thousands of American workmen.    Initead, they would invade foreign markets.
Mr. Chamberlain contended that this steel would be sent to Great
Britain, the only free market, and said:
I warn you that within two or three years you will have dumped here
0,000,000 tons of American iron, and thousands of British workmen will
lose employment for the sole benefit of American manufacturers and Amerian workmen. I sympathize with American workmen, but after all I beong to England, and I am not cosmopolitan enough to see the happiness
nd prosperity of American workmen secured by the starvation and misery
f the British.
FIGURES OF ENGLAND'S DECAY.
Concluding a general restatement, the speaker said that agriculture in
rreat Britain was practically destroyed, the sugar trade was gone, the silk
Irade was gbne, the iron and wool industries were threatened, and the same
ate would come to the cotton trade. He continued:
How long are you going to stand it? England is not afraid of foreign
Sountries, She is the greatest market in the whole world, and foreign counries are her best customers. If a tariff war came, England would not come
[ut second best. One reason advanced for America's prosperity is her enornous population of 70,000,000; but the British Empire has 60,000,000, all
White, and some 350,000,000 of other races, all prospective customers of the
other country.
The official tables of diminishing export trade show too plainly the need
f a new fiscal policy. The exports of British iron and steel amounted to
36,00,000 in 1872. They had dropped to ~31,500,000 in 1882, remained
t the same figure in 1890, and showed a further drop to ~29,000,000 in
902, an annual loss of $35,000,000. Hardware and cutlery exports were
5,10,000o in 1872 and ~3,000,000 less in 1902. The export of linen manuactures dropped from ~8,200,000 in 1872 to ~5,400,000 in 1892, a loss
t nearly $15,000,000. Woolen manufactures exported in 1872 amounted
o ~32,400,000, and were less than half as much in 1902, or ~15,200,000,
loss of $85,000,000. The haberdashery export trade dropped from ~6,600,{0 in 1872 to 1J,000,700 in 1892, a loss of nearly $28,000,00.
NIGLISH: FIGURES OF ENGLISH: TRADE LOSSESMANUFACTURES.
Year.            Cotton.     L nen.    Woolen.      Total.
2  e........., X 63,500,000  '8,200,000 4,32,400,000  104,1)00,00
*........................  62, 0,) 0  5,900,00  18,7(X,000  87,500,
( *-..........:-.......  2,000,000  5,700, 000  20,400,000  88,100,().....65,      5,400,000  15,200,0t00  lS,600,t)t
-~ -~ —..I tl-_*-~-llll  ~1 1~~- - ^UI            -




I


"EXPORT TRA&DE O THE UNITED KINGDOM TO PRO.
TECTED AND UNPROTECTED COUNTRIES."
Extract from statement published in daily Congressional Record, Januar/
5, 1904.
From the British Blue Book on Foreign Trade, 1903.
EXPORT T ADE OF MTE UNITED KINGDOM TO PBOT OTED AND UNPROTETED FOREIGN
COUNTBIES AND COLONIES.
The following memorandum with tables deals with the course of the
export trade of the United Kingdom carried on during the last half century with protected andunpr3tected countries and colonies, respectively,
with special reference to exports of manufactured and partly manufactured
articles:
The following is the selected list of "principal protected foreign countriese:" Russia, Spain, Germany, Portugal. France, Italy, Belgium, AustriaHungary, Holland, United States.
The only countries in this list which require explanation are Holland
and Belgium. Holland is hardly to be described as a protectionist country,
and the Belgian tariff is less protective than those of most continental
countries. It is, however, necessary to include both countries in the list,
because a large part of the trade recorded in our official returns as between
the United Kingdom and Holland and Belgium is in reality trade with Germany which passes through Rotterdam and Antwerp, so that it would be
misleading to place Holland or Belgium in a different list from Germany.
The only British colonies which it has seemed proper to consider as
"protected" over the period throughout which the statistics extend are
Canada and Victoria. India is shown separately, and the remalnder are
grouped under the head of "All other colonies and possessions."
The table following shows for each year 1850, 186,  1 1870, 1880, 1890,
1900, and 1902 the percentage distribution of (A) exports of all articles
of British produce; (B) exports of manufactured and partly manufactured
articles among principal protected and other countries and colonies:
Princlipal  All other  Total to all
protected   countries:     0.
Classification and years.      countries   and col-     nd cobt
and col-     onle      and ol-es
onnes.            o nles.ac r


I
i
i
I
i
i




I


A.Exports of all articles of British
produce.
1850.........       **...... *................ * *. 
1870.......................................
1880.......................................
1890.........................
1 (O..................................'....
1902.........................................
B.-EBxports of manufactured and
party man      cfacturedsarticles.




Per cent.
56
51
68
49
46
45
42


Per cent.
44
49
47
51
64
66,
68


Per cent,
100
100
100
100
100
100
100:  I 1








18...................................    67           48           100
1860....................................    60           60           100
18O.............................  560        50           100
1880.**. **......................................                100
50           50          100
1890......................... l    44            6           100
44           56          100
19...........................  42  58  101
1902.......................................  88      62           100
The summary shows that in the period 1850-1902 the proportionate
distribution of our total exports as between the protected and unprotected
markets of the world has been reversed, the proportions in 1850 being 56
to protected and 44 to other markets, whereas in 1902 the proportions were
42 to protectd   nd 58 to othe   markets.
Taking the category of manufactured articles separately, the change
has been even more marked, the proportions in 1850 being, protected, 57;
other, 43; and in 1902, protected, 38, and other, 62. The change has been
a continuous one, but it operated most rapidly during the first decade
(1850-1860) and during the last few years (1890-1902). No doubt solme
allowance should be made for the expansion of the British Empire whicl
took place during those two periods-e. g., the consolidation of the Indian
Empire in the fifties and the extension of British dominions and protectorates in Africa in recent years. But after allowing for this there can be
no doubt as to the effect of continental: and American tariffs in checklag
our export trade, especially i   manufactured articles, with the group et
"protected countries  during the last two decades.


I




"FREE TRADE AN EMPTY NAME AND A VAIN FARCE."
Sxtract from remarks of Hon. CHARLIS DICK of Ohio, in daily Congressional Record, January 6, 1904.
PBEMIEB BALPOUR'S CAMPAIGN FOR PROTECTION.
Premier Balfour delivered a speech at Sheffield October 1 in support of
a protective tariff. This speech has been referred to as the "most momentous speech in the history of England."  He referred to the fact that
for a long time there has been great uneasiness among all parties in England as to the condition of British trade in relation to the trade of the world.
The last sixty years, he declared, had been filled with refutations of the
prophecies made by Cobden and the great tariff reformers associated with
him in the movement of 1846. While the reforms of that year may have
been necessary at that time, every year of the last thirty had contradicted
their prophecies. Cobden, he declared, was a great man, but he failed to
foresee the developments of the last half century, which had made free trade
an empty name and a vain farce. For fifty years England, without making
a sign, ad watched the wall of hostile tariffs growing up and dividing
nation from nation. He continued:
And our own colonies, our own flesh and blood, the very sinews of the
growing empire, are building up vested interests under another system of
protection, which when it reaches its logical conclusion will make it as hard
to export to them as to America or the other protected countries. And during
the whole lifetime of those I am now addressing we have done nothing whatever to hinder a state of things so absolutely inconsistent with free trade as
Cobden understood it. I confess that when I hear criticisms upon American
and German policy, which caused those great industrial nations to accompany their marvelous commercial expansion with protective duties, which
must have thrown a most serious burden upon the consumer, I feel that
they have a retort to which I have no reply. They may well say that,
although protectionists, they have established permanent free trade within
the limits of their own country, where everything which can hamper production or limit the increase of wealth has been abolished by their patriotism
and foresight, and they may well ask us whether we in the British Empire
can point to a similar picture, and whether our vaunted free trade includes
those great self-governing colonies which we proudly boast are to be the great
buttresses of our Empire in the future.
Free trade is, indeed, an empty name and a vain farce if it is a fact
that foreign nations are setting themselves to divert our industries, exclude
our manufactures, and limit the international play of supply and demand.
I know of no cure, but I do know of a palliation. The ill has gone too far.
You will not get the great commercial nations of the world to abandon protection. I fear that you will not get the great self-governing colonies to
retrace the steps which we, without remonstrance, permitted them to take.
I am here, therefore, to recommend a palliation which I believe to be still
possible. Cobden hoped and believed in free trade throughout the world.
What in fact we have got to deal with is a world where international commercial relations are regulated entirely by treaty. It is common sense that
we, the greatest commercial nation, should come forward and say, "We want
to arrange treaties with you, but we have nothing to give you, nothing to
withhold from you. We throw ourselves upon your mercy and consideration.
Please remember how good we are to your commerce, how we throw no impediment in its way, and how we do all we can for you, and please don't forget us when you are making your next treaty." [Laughter.]
Are the negotiations between nations which have to deal with duties
upon manufactured goods different from other negotiations carried on for
other purposes? Did any man ever hear of successful negotiations without
a nation having something to give, which, in case of necessity, it might
withhold?
Concerning the question as to whether it was intended to reverse the
verdict of the great case of Free Trade v. Protection, of 1846, his answer
was that the controversy of 1846 was of no interest to the present generation, and was utterly inappropriate to 1903. He said
Our grandfathers fought the battle in view of the actual situation. I
ask the nation to-day to follow their example and not be misled by misty
debates. The second question is, "Do you desire to reverse and alter the
fudamental fiscal tradition which has prevailed for two generations?"  My
answer is, "Yes, I do."  [Loud cheers.]
He proposed to ask the country to reverse, annul and altogether delete
frot their maxims of public conduct that they must never impose taxation
exrept for revenue. In his judgment the country ought never to have stood
etf-deprived of that liberty, and it should publicly resume in the face of
Pit^)Ope and the world the liberty of which it deprived itself-the liberty
h, ich every other country in the world possessed, and that of which no
"I' itry should deprive itself-the liberty of negotiatiting, and also some- -
th;iOg to negotiate with.
To the next question, Why they should want to resume this liberty,;e(:ug how well the country had prospered without it, he would reply:
My object is to mitigate to the utmost the injury done us by hostile
No free trader can deny that England has suffered greatly of late from
fol ign traffics, and that her commerce and industry have fallen into evil
wa 5  Cobden never dreamed of a situation where England alone had free
tr~'t and all other countries would be under a protective tariff, and which
as resulted in causing great damage to British capital and British workitn. Mr. Balfour's argument is that as the United States, through a proeticve tariff, has passed England as a manufacturing nation, his counltry
Sh uld seriously consider the advisability of adopting a like policy.
7ir         0;:


Ki




"ONE-HALF THE REVENUES OF GREAT BRITAIN. S
DERIVED FROM PERSONS LEAST ABLE TO PAY."
Extracts from article entitled "Why First Voters should be Protectionists,'
printed in daily Congressional Record, January 12,, 1904
When the Cobdenites gave the name "free trade" to their fiscal policy
they thought they were acting shrewdly. There is something about the
word "free" that is very alluring. It appeals to most men in a way that
no other word can. It is not astonishing, therefore, that it "caught on" at
once.
In a very short time after the term had been coined hosts of writers
began to sound its praises. They accepted the cue furnished by the impressionists of the Manchester school of economists, and began to laud a
system which they said would bring peace to the earth and produce good
will among men.
Doubtless many who gave expression to these ideas believed all they
said, and some of them took pains to point out that "free trade" did not
mean exactly what the two words implied; but the most of them obscured
the fact that there must be taxation of some kind, and that therefore it
would be impossible to devise any plan by which production could escape
its share of the burden of government.
In short, the glamor of the words managed to conceal from the people
most interested —the British masses-that the purpose of free trade was to
shift the incidence of taxation in such a manner that the people best able
to pay should be called upon for the smallest contributions.
Many years before the abrogation of the corn laws, Adam Smith, in his
Wealth of Nations, had pointed out that taxes on the necessaries of life
did not work an injury to the toilers. He said with exceeding plainness:
"The advanced price (caused by taxation) of such manufactures as are
real necessaries of life and are destined for the consumption of the poor
*  *      m* must be compensated to the poor by a further advancement of
their wages."
Not only have the toilers of Great Britain recognized the axiomatic
force of Smith's assertion, the class to which he spoke directly also took it
to heart and put his suggestion into execution. The learned doctor said:
"The middling and superior ranks of people, if they understood their
own interest, ought always to oppose all taxes on the necessaries of life,
as well as all direct taxes upon the wages of labor. The final payment of
both one and the other falls altogether upon themselves, and always with
a considerable overcharge."
Here we find the mainspring of those who framed the fiscal policy of
the United Kingdom. They knew that taxes on necessaries could not be
made to stick to the workingmen, so "the middling and superior ranks of
people,' under the disingenuous pretext of helping the poor, abolished taxes
which the foremost economist had explicitly declared could not affect that
class. They went a step further, for Adam Smith's suggestions were well
rounded out. He did not confine himself to describing the kind of taxes
which could not affect the workingman; he indicated those which could be
made to stick. He said:
"Taxes upon luxuries have no tendency to raise the price of any other
commodities except that of the commodities taxed."
Here was a pointer. It was one that appealed to "the middling and
superior ranks of people," because it indicated a mode by which the heaviest
part of the burden of taxation could be placed on the masses.
It was swiftly acted upon. As rapidly as possible the incidence of
taxation was shifted. The taxes on necessaries were removed, because they
could not be made to stick to the worker, for the reason mentioned by Smith,
and a careful system of taxing luxuries was devised, which had for its obect the imposition of the major part of the burden of taxation upon the
toiling masses.
obacco, tea, rum, spirits, and beer, which are chiefly consumed by the
workers of the United Kingdom, were made dutiable or subjected to excise,
while kid gloves, silks, and all the other articles used by the rich were
exempted from taxation.
In 19;Q the total sum derived from taxation in the United Kingdom
was ~122,5 9,000. Of this amount, ~31,047,000 was from customs, ~31,598,000 from excise, ~14,251,00  frfom estates and duties, ~7,772,000 from
stamps, ~2,502.000 from land tax and house duty, and $35,379,000 from
incomes. 1i this enumeration of the sources of British revenue is scrutinized the ingenuity of the framers of the tax will at once be realized. It
will be seen that more than one-half of the total revenues of Great Britain
is derived from those persons least able to pay.
The ~10,567,706 from tobacco, the ~5,792,967 from tea, the ~2,211,811
from rum, the ~6,399,227 from sugar and glucose, the ~17,647,421 from the
spirit excise, and the ~13,276,073 from beer are almost wholly taken from
the working classes. A large part of the land tax and house duty amounting to ~   02,502,00  is passed on to tenants who are often toilers, and while
the income tax Is supposed to bear directly upon those from whom it is
derived, it may reasonably be assumed that men whose revenues are gained
from industrial or trading operations practice methods which enable thea
to place a good deal of this tax on the shoulders of the poor.
When it is stated that more than half of the taxes are drawn from tile
toilers of the United Kingdom the claim that free trade works in the interest of the masses is at once dissipated, and when to this statement is added
the fact that 0in the United Kingdom less than 2 per cent. of its familie
hold about three times as much private property as all the remainder, and
that 93 per cen:t of the people hold less than 8 per cent. of the accumul
lated wealth, i t is at once seen that the entire system of taxation is so
arranqged that it relieves the rich and oppresses the poor.
In this inequXta.le distribution of the burden of taxation we find tie
real m otive: for the hange in he e incidence, and in the fact that the United
Kingdom collects f31,047,000 from customs duties we have a refutation of
the claim- that trade is: free.
aThe mo   the question.is nvestigated the more thoroughly convinced
mutfbe themlpartial Investigator of the British, fiscal system become that
itrie objet tis to shift the chief burden of taxation onto the shoulders
tbeto ear it.      dtthat the result is proving disastrtous.
a  48.


I




OiM UNPLEASANT tUfwi              t$ Ft FREE TRAOERSft
tra -t from  LONDON DAILY TELEGRAPH, printed in daily Consressvn)al Record, January 5, 1904.
TED STATES COMPETITION SO DANGEROUTS BECAUSE BASED ON PROTECTION.
jere, at least, we bring the whole question once more to a clear
iue. When American competition is mentioned the ordinary ''free imter" throws up his hands and talks of natural laws. He tells us that
ce the Lake Superior ore beds were discovered the overwhelming
Pre;i acy of the United States in total output of iron and steel was
ured. But America has no natural supremacy in textiles-not in silk,
ii;. linen, not in wool, not even in cotton. It costs as much to carry
( tton to a mill in New England as to a mill in old England.      In
i ills of the cotton belt itself labor is less efficient, while the heredly aptitude of the Lancashire worker Is unmatched in the world.
Further, we have a unique advantage in the dampness of our climate.
erina has to Import the best wool and silk and flax, just as we have.
t in textiles, as in every other branch of industry, her advantage lay
the superior efficiency, enterprise, and inventiveness of capital under the
if by comiparson with capital under a free-imports system. This is what
t appened since the McKinley tariff came into operation:
American textile factories.
NuIan-                Persons
Year.                             Capital.
la.jber.  Clpna.   jemployed
3.....4...............................  4,276  I l 60,000,000  528,00KX
I..........................................  4,832  217t,0t, 000  0-8,00K)
What has happened in this country in the meantime?       In the four
rs 1895-1898 alone, according to thle latest labor department statistics,
total number of persons employed in British textile factories of all
ilis actually decreased from 1,076,000 hands in 1895 to 1,037,000 hands
1898.
PROTECTION DRAWS FOREIGN CAPITAL AND
FACTORIES.
Finally comes the most important point of all. Mr. Andrew Carnegie,
o is fervently in favor of free trade for every country except the United
tes, where his own business interests happen to be situated, once raised
hymin of praise because the McKinley tariff had forced many of the
test firms in the British textile trades to set up establishments in
erica. "Protection," says Mr. Carnegie, "has brought to us so many
tish manufacturers to establish industries, and thus develop our rerces-the Clarks and the Coats, of Paisley; the Daolans, of Yorkshire;
Sandersons, of Sheffield; and last, but certainly not least, a great prize
m Halifax. Who would not expect us to extol our idea of protection if
capture the Firths?"  Who, indeed? That is the point.
OME TUNPLEASANT FIGURES FOR REBE TRADEBRS.
In the twenty years before Cobdenisns,m say 1825 to 1845, we tripled
output of iron, It is a remarkable coincidence that the United States
Germany did exactly the same thing in the two decades of protection,
8-1900. France, in the same period, after breaking with the Cobdenite
trine, increased her consumption of iron 60 per cent. We Increased
consuming power for iron by 24 per cent. That is the master fact
ring upon the relative progress of home trade. During the last twelve
rS the iron and steel industries have been immensely helped by the
onslrruction of the fleet at a far greater cost than that of the Siberian
ilway. We may well wonder what would have been the stagnation of
bonme market in respect of iron and steel without the exceptional advan(I it has enjoyed in the demands of the admiralty. Take, now, the foling two tables showing the astounding change which has come over our
ition with regard to the industry upon which the manufacturing success
every country must in the long run depend:
Comparative output of pig iron.
[Amounts given in thousand tons.1
i Great              United
Year.             fg         G ermany.            f World.
Year.   Bitain.;  States.
-  -~ —~ —~ — ~~ —   ----------:; —~ ---:- ~~~~~~-  -  ~ --- -— ~ ----  -  ~- — ~ --— ~...r..~.......................!  7,749  2,685  I,8        17,950....~......   I.............i.....  7,904  4,583    9.2103     27,150......... ^...~...~..........:9,302  7,920  l,t21 3I9,752 -Comparative output of steel.
[Amounts given in thousand tons. ]
Great                United
Year.               Britlan.  Germany.| Itat        World............................  1.375   728      1,247      4,205
L~;~,................  I...........  i,679  2,127  4,277     11,902
' ~..r~..,.................i  5oo00o  6,189  10,639     26,685
)- *.............................!  4,800  7,800  15,00  I   30,000
1 'se are far more startling figures than any which can be brought
aril from the statistics of our foreign trade. In 1880 we still made
nuoh iron and steel as the rest of the world put together. The posi(It the present moment Is this: We are third now, and without a, change
fiita syste' we shall remain third. The United States* output of iron
stetel is nows more than double our own.
a-^9~~~~~~.~.Sig. 4


1






"MR. CHAMBERLAIN PRO                       ES PROP ES PREVENTIVE I
OCULATION WITH AMERICAN PRINCIPLES."
Extract from LONDON DAILY TELEGRAPH, printed in daily Congres8ion
Record, January 6, 1904.
What Mr. Chamberlain proposes is a mild form of preventive inooe
lation with American principles.   Under any circumstances, Washingtt
could not logically, much less justly, object to the partial application,
our interests, of methods which she declares vital to her own. The Amer
can protective system  was founded immediately after the Declaration
Independence by Alexander Hamilton's famous memorandum. That doc
ment has influenced "the wealth of nations," in the long run, more the
Adam Smith. Germany, like every other continental country, has follow
the American example, not ours. The Republic is the patentee of tarij
She sells to us, as we have shown, six times as much as she buys.
* * * We have shown that the mass of our European trade in rece
years has been absolutely and relatively far less than is generally imagine
But now let us take the character of that trade; let us take its progress.
glance at the subjoined figures will show that our continental commerce 1
been steadily declining with respect to manufactured articles for the la
thirty years. In the character of our trade as a whole there has been an il
nmense deterioration. We showed on another page that our exports to Ge
many were sinking except in respect of coal and kippers. The same stat
ment is true of our sales to all our industrial competitors-to France, Ho
land, Belgium. And not only of them, it is true of Europe as a whole. O0
exports of manufactures to the Continent have been steadily sinking fi
nearly thirty years. We have made up the balance and effected an appare
increase, not by sending our competitors more manufactures, but by sendin
them less and less manufactures, and more and more coal to manufactu
with. We have been parting with more and more of our fixed capital
order to help our foreign rivals to swell their curent profits. It is coal, an
coal alone, which explains the mystery. Coal, and coal alone, has conceal,
the truth about the condition of our foreign trade.
And now to our figures. We do not share the opinion that In view
remote contingencies we should hoard our coal as Indian peasants do the
silver. If nothing but keeping that residuum locked up in the country wou
prolong our industrial life by a few decades in the far future. we should b
in any case, past saving. Let us, by all means, sell what we have that
marketable, and get the money for it, instead of refraining from immedia
business through the preoccupations of a remote and problematical futur
But at the same time do not let us mistake one thing for another. Do i
let us think that we are maintaining our manufacturing position because
are merely selling more coal.
A workman out of employment might as well boast of maintaining h
position by selling his tools. We might continue to do a roaring trade in t
way of disposing of our primary raw material to foreign producers if eve
loom and forge in our own country were stopped. Excluding the new slii
entered since 1899, which would only vitiate the value of the compariso
we now give the following remarkable table showing the decline of,
European trade in everything but coal during the last thirty years. TI
figures in the left-hand column are taken partly from Prof. Adolph Wagner
excellent and careful study in "Agrar und Industriestaat" and partly fro
the Blue Books. With respect to coal we have ourselves taken the thirl
years' figures from the Blue Books.
Total British exports to all European countries (in years c
maximum and minimum trade) compared with
exports of coal, 1872 to 1902.
[Amounts in million pounds sterling.]
l IM
Years of mnaxiraurn and   ininlumn trade.,}Total     Coal.   l:ih.
exports.             1
1872...........                                    108.0      7.2    I1
1879b.............................................  79.5  5.3 
1886b.,.            74.0 7.4
18w0a..................................................  14.2 7.1
1M   6..................................  I........  -....i  * 4.0  7.4  I  1
189W f................................................   92.4  14.24  
1894.......83.4 13.1
1896la................................ i  87.3     12.0
1898a...                                       I 93.2 14.1
e1899a..................................................  103.6  18.3
19..............................................   115.2  80.7
1901................................................   98.7  2  
f  f,................e...............................   96.1  20.4
a Maximum year.                 Minimum year.
There is no getting. over this statement. It is one upon which it rwe
be.impossible for Englishmen to ponder too earnestly or too long. T]
have been fluctuations for good years and bad.:In periods of inflation to]
has been a temporary recovery, But on the whole, the course has v
steadily downward.
a-80


il
ItI
I
r;
i
I
9
e
e
t
213
Irl
e
t
ol
)u
f
e
In
I
i
n
I
ei
jlj
b
i
P
1(
h
II
i
11
t
r
rl
0
r
I.,
t
1
t",
i


I






"FIFTY YEARS OF FREE TRADE IN GREAT BRITAIN"
-"'THREE MILLION PAUPERS ROTTING
IN FORCED      IDLENESS.'
Extracts from remarks of  on J. H.. QALL1KNR  of New Hampshire, in
daily Congressional Record, May 16, 1894.
FIFTY YEARS OF FREE TRADE TRAIF                       IN HGR:AT
BRITAIN.
What has it done and what is it doing for her toiling millions? England collects annually from customs duties on articles which she does not
produce, but which her wage earners regard as necessaries of life, the sum
ot $100,000,000. The laborers of England pay more than three-fourths of
this sum. 0 They pay a duty of seventy-five cents or more a pound on tobacco; on coffee, three to four cents a pound; on tea, twelve cents; and
other things in proportion. Then look at the places they call "homes."
In Manchester great numbers of houses have but one small room, and this
is used for all purposes by the family because they have no other. In
London over 60,000 families are similarly situated. It is no better in
Dundee. In Glasgow 45,000 families live each in a single room. In Scotland one-third of the laboring families live each in a single room. It is not
unusual to find in these single rooms all over Great Britain families numtoring from six to nine persons of all ages and both sexes. Is such life
iving, or is it herding? In one year the public authorities furnished relief to English laborers as follows: in Yorkshire to 50,000; in London to
o00,000; and in all of Great Britain to 922,000 persons. In London, the
wealthiest city of the world, one out of every nine died in the workhouse,
and in Great Britain one out of every seven died in the workhouse. The
aupers of England number nearly 1,000,000, or one to every thirty-six
ersons, and her pauperism and consequent crime cost her over $80,000,00. A house owner among workingmen is seldom found, Land is going out of cultivation, and already 2,500,000 acres have been abandoned
lo foxes and birds. In ten years, 1871 to 1881, sheep decreased in number
1000,000, farm and farmers, ten per cent.; and the number of those enaged in gainful occupations decreased about 3,000,000. Women and girls
y tens of thousands are obliged to work in coal mines, in coal yards,
n brick yards, in nail shops, and in other degrading places, at the merest
ittance of wages. As black as is this picture of England's laborers much
ore could be added, and with all of these discomforts and disadvantages
hey have no single advantage that our workingmen are deprived of.
SOME ENGLISH OPINIONS.
Lest it may be thought that this description of the English laborers
as the prejudiced opinion of an American protectionist, I will briefly
uote from a few Englishmen of high standing:
JOHN RUSKIN: "Though England is deafened with spinning wheels,
er people have not clothes; though she is black with the digging of fuel,
bhey die of cold; and though she has sold her soul for grain, they die of
unger."
JoHN BRIGHT: "PNearly one-third of the whole people dwell in homes
f only one room; and more than two-thirds of the people of Scotland dwell
o homes of not more than two rooms, We find poverty and misery.'"
JOSEPuH CamaaBEAIN;: "The class of agricultural laborers of this
ouatry (Great Britain) are never able to do more than make both ends
e-t, and have to look forward in times of illness, or on the approach of
Id age, to the workhouse as the one inevitable refuge against starvation.
he ordinary conditions of life among the large proportion of the popuatioU are such that common decency is absolutely impossible; and all this
oes on in sight of the mansions of the rich."
JOHN MoLOEY: "It is an awful fact-it Is really not short of awful
that in this country (Great Britain) with all its wealth, all its vast reUries, all its power, forty-five per cent. —that is to say, nearly one-half
(o the persons who reach the age of sixty are or have been paupers. I
a it is a most tremendous fact, and I cannot conceive any subject more
y0tty of the attention of the legislature, more worthy of the attention of
THOMAS' CARnLYL: "British industrial existence seems fast becoming
bugae poisoln swamp of reeking pestilence-physical and morala hidUs living Golgotha of souls and bodies buried alive. Thirty thousand outt needlewomen working themselves swiftly to death.   Three aillion
5POs ro tting in forced idleness; and these are but tems in t  sad ledger
ga-81


I




"A BRITSH PROTECTiONlISTS BELIE."
Extracts from remarks of Ron. M.B. OLMSTED, of Pennsylvania, in daily
Congressional Record, June ~0, 1904.
SIR GUILFORD     MOLESWORTH      ON PROTECTION-A       BRITISH   PRO.
TECTIONIST'S BELIEF IN THAT POLICY AS A
FISCAL RELIGION.
[By Sir Guilford Molesworth, K. C. I. E.I
Extremes are injurious.
Unlimited free import is one extreme, prohibitive tariffs the other, pro.
tective tariffs the practical mean.
It is a fallacy to suppose that a tariff must necessarily raise the price
of the article taxed.
As a general rule, when an article is or can be produced at home, a
tariff, if it be not prohibitive, stimulates production, promotes internal competition, prevents a permanent increase of prices, and in many cases eventually decreases the cost to the consumers.
When, however, an article is not of home production-such as tea,
coffee, cocoa, tobacco, wines, etc.-the tariff naturally increases the price.
A tariff on a competing import is frequently paid by the foreign producer, and does not fall on the consumer.
Experience has shown that the imposition of a tariff is frequently followed bya fall in the price of the article taxed.
It sometimes happens even that the anticipation of a tariff causes a fall
in the price.
The imposition of a tariff frequently kills a foreign monopoly, or enables a new industry to arise.
Unrestricted foreign competition often prevents the establishment of
a new home industry, or crushes out an existing one.
Even when a tariff raises prices, it adds to the revenue and saves other
taxation.
Direct taxation of capital and profits is a burden on our industries and
reacts on the working classes by reductions of wages and employment.
Industries burdened by direct taxation are at a disadvantage in competition with those foreign industries which do not share that burden.
Indirect taxation derived from tariffs, is in many cases no burden.
In the United States the periods of protective tariffs have uniformly
been marked with prosperity, and the periods following their several repeals
have been marked by depression and distress.
The prosperity which we enjoyed in the "fifties," although unfairly
claimed as the work of free trade, was due to other causes, namely, gold discoveries, inventions and science, steam navigation, railways, etc., which have
been shared by foreign nations.
Having laid the foundations of our industrial prosperity under protection, and having thereby secured the command of the world's markets, we
were not merely the first but the only country able to utilize these new
forces that then came into play.
For more than twenty years fortuitous events, such as the Crimean war
In the "fifties," civil war in the United States, and continental disturbances
in Europe in the "sixties" and early "seventies." retarded the progress of
foreign nations.
As soon as foreign protectionist nations were able to avail themselves
of the new industrial conditions they successfully competed with us even in
our own markets, and our country is flooded with the productions of the very
nations which we formerly supplied.
Since that time most of our industries have either been ruined or have
struggled hard for existence.
Our colonies are also becoming more and more protectionist, and are
flourishing under that policy, and Canada and our South African possessions
are able to give the mother country preferential treatment, and to their
honor do so as yet without reciprocity on our part.
Many of our best workmen have emigrated to the United States, where
they obtain higher remuneration for their labor.
The capital recklessly expended by us In purchasing abroad that which
might have been produced at home has armed protectionist nations with the
sinews of war in competition with us.
Instead of fostering our own industries and providing employment for
our working classes, we purchased from the foreigner in 1901 produce to the
value of ~416,000,000, much of which we could well have produced ourselves
or in our colonies. The value of exports to those nations in return was only
~175,000,000.
Canada is being thrown into the arms of the United States by our policy
and our refusal to respond to her advances for reciprocal trade.
We are constantly raising our direct taxes, while the United State
lower theirs.
Since 1868 our direct Imperial taxation has increased from ~19,000 000
to ~59,000,000, and our direct local taxation by rates from ~20,0001000
to ~40,000,000.
The cost of food and the necessaries of life is not less in England than
in protectionist countries.
The wages in protectionist America are, in the majority of cases, nearly
double those prevailing in our "free-trade" country.
The prophecies which induced our people to adopt free trade   avMe
proved to be false.
We stand alone excepting Denmark, as "free traders" amongst Flvt
lized nations,.and free trade is now recognized as either all British or
savage custom.
The predictions of ruin to those countries which have adopted protc'
tton have altogether failed,
Since the passing of the McKinley bill in 1891, which the free-tra
apologists prophesied would ruin the United States, the industries of taI
country lhave developed by leaps and bounds.
The special exports of the United States increased in 1898 by ~76, )0
000 whei compared with 1890, while those of the United Kingdom decrea~0
by  80,000,000    *
a-82


I






I


r


"EXPORT DISCOUNTS-.-"A MERE BUGABOO"
Extract from remarks of Hon. J. H. GALLINGER of New Hampshire, in daily Congressional Record, April 3, 1904.
I wish briefly to take up a subject that seems to have given our
Democratic friends much concern and anxiety, namely, the question
of export discounts, or the practice of selling our wares cheaper
in the foreign than in the home market. When this contention is
advanced by our opponents it is invariably asserted that it is the
wicked trusts which adopt this pernicious business method because
they are protected by the iniquitous tariff.
Now, to begin with, the policy in some instances of selling cheaper
than the market price is a custom that prevails the world over in
every line of industry and commerce known to the human race.
It is practiced by the fruit vender on our sidewalks, who, at whatever price he can get, disposes of his fast decaying and almost unsalable wares. It is practiced by the merchant, when annually or
semi-annually he has his great mark-down sale to dispose of shopworn and damaged goods, fabrics out of date, and of a surplus
stock to make room for more seasonable goods. It is practiced by
our manufacturers for several reasons. Sometimes it is to dispose
of a surplus stock in order that the mill may not be shut down
and that the workingmen may not be deprived of employment and
wages. Sometimes it is to introduce into a foreign market a new
article or a new model in order to gain a foothold, and to introduce
a line of goods where they have not before been sold.
Sometimes it is to retain a market that, because of most zealous
omlpetition, is liable to be lost unless a temporary sacrifice is made
to hold that customer. There are various other reasons why this
business policy is sometimes resorted to, but, Mr. President, it is
by no means a custom known only to American manufacturers. It
is adopted by the manufacturers and merchants of every country
on the face of the earth, and it is considered good business policy
when it is undertaken, or else it would not be resorted to. But I
must also emphasize the fact that the percentage of such goods sold
as compared with our total output is so insignificant as to make
the whole subject a mere bugaboo, not worthy of notice were it
not for the fact that its constant reiteration has dignified it almost
to the level of a campaign issue. Whoever will take pains to look
into this question, studying most carefully the report of the recent
Industrial Commission, which went into the matter fully, and whose
report upon the subject is exceedingly clear and intelligible, will
find that this percentage of goods sold at an export discount is, in
round numbers, as follows:
Total annual value of manufactures............... $15,000,000,000
Exports of manufactures.........................    400,000,000
Value of exports sold at lower prices abroad.......     4,000,000
TSo this extent, then, we are willing to concede that our manufactturers resort to this practice of cutting foreign prices, for the
re asons which I have already mentioned.   Allowing the greatest
mf-rgin possible, we have a total amounting to only 1 per cent of
Our manufactured goods sold abroad, and goods sold abroad amount
to tess than 3 per cent of our total output. This great bugaboo,
the, consists of less than three one-hundredths of:1 per cent of
or total manufactures, admitting, as we are quite willing to do,
all that our opponents claim.
li the face of these returns, which, by the way, are not prize
statistics but authoritative figures in every instance, shall we, because
~f the fact that three one-hundredths of 1 per cent, or $4,000,0Q
V'c thh, of our manufactured goods are sold abroad at a lower figure
tln, at home, tear down our tariff wall and submit the other
$1w6000,000 to the ruthless competition of the hungry horde of
pa Per-paid foreign competitors?  It, is, Mr. Presid nt, a most
asgtFutnding proposition to come from even the Democratic press and
the fre4e-trade elent of this country.


t




"DEMOCRATIC PARTY STANDS FOR FREE TRADE."
Extracts from speech by Hon. M. A. HANNA at Chillicothe Ohio, Septenmer
19, 1908, and printed in daily Congressional Record, June 20, 1904,
as part of remarks of Hon. M. E. OLMSTED of Pennsylvania.
Stand by Roosevelt and Republican Principles.
The whole country has its eyes upon Ohio, knowing that this is the
skirmish battle for 1904, and I Join with Senator FORAKER, in making the
appeal to our people, to send a word of greeting and confidence to the young
President at Washington, and let him know that Ohio never falters in the
right, and will not this time, and that we will lead in the campaign of
1904.  [Long-continued applause.]  Do that. Show by your action, show
by your votes, that you intend to stand by those principles; that you Intend that the men who represent you in the Halls of Congress and in the
legislative body of the State shall be sent there with instructions to carry
out these principles, and that you will have no other kind of representation.
[Prolonged applause.]  Do that, and this country is just as far from any
prospect of distress, to say nothing of panic, as it was three years ago.
We are better off in every way than any other nation.
These conditions, my fellow-citizens, in this country are normal. That
is to say, they are not abnormal. There is no reason why we should not
have long and continued periods of prosperity in this country, because our
natural resources are beyond those of any nation in the world. This great
cosmopolitan people have shown themselves better as a nation, Industrially,
commercially, politically, than any other nation in the world. LEnthusiastic cheering.] We have achieved that position upon pure merit, and that
merit is exemplified in the fact that under these influences and during the
times of peace we are making such rapid progress in industrial development
that we can enter the markets of the world with our products and still
maintain the American price of wages.  [Great- applause.]  That is even
a prouder prestige, my friends, than the new political power which has
come to us since the Spanish war, because that prestige is an inspiration to
every man who works with his hands, to every man who has the ingenuity
which God may have given him, to prepare for himself conditions, within
the limits of his ability, atong the line of those industries which gives him
equal opportunity with any other man.
Democratic leaders stand for absolute free trade.
There Is a serious side to it, because if, through ignorance of the true
conditions or through any undue excitement created during a campaign,
the laboring men should be led away from the party and the principles
which have done so much for them, then it would be serious, because that
element which leads and dominates the Democratic party to-day stands not
for tariff for revenue, but absolute free trade. Mr. Clarke qualifies his
position on the tariff by saying that he would take the tariff entirely off of
every article manufactured by trusts. What does that mean? Every iron
and steel industry in the United States, everything connected with the
metal trades, with the cotton trades, and in fact nearly all of our great
industries come within the scope of his proposition.
Why, is there any Intelligent man among the workingmen of my State
who does not know what would be the result of that policy. Absolute free
trade through all the schedules of our tariff would shut up T5 per cent. of
the industrial institutions of the United States until we could get lab
down to the prices where we could compete with Europe. That is what yoe
are up against, boys. [Laughter and long-continued cheering.] They fooled
you in 1892 by the "clack" about "tin cans."  They pulled the wool over
your eyes about the McKinley bill. But McKinley, although his bill was
defeated, never lost courage, and I have heard him say many times, "Yes
it is hard, but it is no humiliation to me, because I know I am right, and
I know that soon the people will be right. I am only thinking of those
homes where suffering and want will enter during the period which must
pass before the men come to their sober senses and learn from bitter experience what it means to have this great structere of protection, built ui
in their interests more than any other, stricken to the ground, and all
through the influences of demagogy.  *   * 
No, as tar as your interests lie in the direction of national questions.
let me repeat, the questions have not changed, the principles have not
changed, the results have not changed, and you stand here to-day just extctly where you stood years ago in this State, when, under the leadership
of the gallant man who believed in the protective policy and in safe rrone,
you followed him to the polls and year after year registered your verdict
eand that was the policy for the workiny classes of this State and couMtrry
[Enthusiastic applause.]
A  solemn warning against Socialistic doctrines.
Now, in conclusion, my friends, I want to sound a note of warning not
only to my Republican friends, but to every man who owns a home in the
and all other counties in this State. If the socialistic doctrines advocated
by this new form of Democracy should by any possibility become a laW,
or that policy could by any possibility become established, then God help
us. Whenever that socialistic, anarchistic, populistic doctrine seizes the
minds of the people of this or any other State. so as to dominate their reasos
and their judgment, and lead them to do almost what I would call an act
of political suicide, then God help us.;  Because all that we have sought for in the past, all that we bha
gaine through our efforts and industry, all the battles we have fought f0
liberty to man, all the efforts that we have made to make this country #t3t
it is-an example to the world, the most powerful Christian infience tD
the worlId-to build up a government which belongs to the people as
wich looks to the people for its enactment and for the enforcement of te
laws which will protect it; when such "isms" as that can prevail thea t!
is lost. It:is  serious thought that I want you to take home. Republit
or Demtoera t  ke it home to-night and think it over. Comnpare the co;
dittons by your fireside to:-day with those which existed eight years ago as
then make up your minds, and when you have reached a decision "ta:t
pat."  Goodby. [prolonged applause.]


-s84I




"THE UNITED STATES HAS ADVANCED BY LEAPS
AND BOUNDS."
trlicts from remarks of  on.. M.. OLMSTED of Pennsylvania, in daily
Congressional Record, June 20, 1904.
The Moseley Industrial Commissipn, beaded by Mr. Alfred Moseley, a
rominent British capitalist and manufacturer interested in the prosperity
the industries and workingmen of his country, was composed of the
cretaries of the trades unions representing the principal industries of the
nited Kingdom. They visited all the great manufacturing centers of the
nited States, investigated during the months of October, November, and
eecember, 1902, the various classes of industries in which they as pracal men, through their practical knowledge, felt a personal interest, and,
turning to England, presented an elaborate report or series of reports.
Mr. Moseley himself, on the opening page of the report, says:
In my travels around the world, and more particularly in the United
tates, it became abundantly evident to me that as a manufacturing counA, America is forging ahead at a pace hardly realized by either British
ployer or workman. I therefore came to the conclusion that it would be
ecessary for the workers themselves to have some interest in these develpments, and I decided to invite the secretaries of the trades unions repreenting the principal industries of the United Kingdom to accompany me
a tour of investigation of the industrial situation across the Atlantic.
* *
In my previous trips to America I had been favorably struck by the
p-to-date methods of protection there, both from a business standpoint
id as regards the equipment of their workshops. The manufacturers there
o not hesitate to put in the very latest machinery at whatever cost, and
om time to time to sacrifice large sums by scrapping the old whenever
provements are brought out. Labor-saving machinery is widely used
erywhere and is encouraged by the unions and welcomed by the men, beuse experience has shown them that in reality machinery is their best
lend. It saves the workman numerous miseries, raises his wages, tends
ward a higher standard of living, and, further, rather creates work than
duces the number of hands employed. In England it has been the rule
r generations past that as soon as a man earns beyond a certain amount
wages the price for his work is cut down, and he, finding that working
rder and running his machine quicker brings no larger reward, slackens
s efforts accordingly.
In the United States the manufacturers rather welcome large earnings
the men so long as they themselves can make a profit, arguing that each
an occupies so much space in the factory, which represents so much
pital employed, and therefore that the greater the production of these
en the greater must be the manufacturer's profit. * * * The United
stes has advanced by leaps and bounds. She is beginning to feel the
nefcial effects of the education of her masses and an enormous territory
elming with natural resources as yet but meagerly developed.  At the
esent time the home market of the United States is so fully occupied with
sown development that the export trade has as yet been comparatively
tle thought of; but as time goes on and the numerous factories that are
ing erected all over the country come into full bearing, America is bound
become the keenest of competitors in the markets of the world. * * *
How is it that the American manufacturers can afford to pay wages
per cent., 100 per cent., and even more in some instances both ways,
d yet be able to successfully compete in the markets of the world? The
swer is to be found in small economies which escape the ordinary eye.
at the American workman earns higher wages is beyond question. As
consequence, the everage married man owns the house he lives in, which
t only gives him a stake in the country, but saves the payment of rent,
abling him either to increase his savings or to purchase further comforts.
od is as cheap (if not cheaper) in the United States as in England, whilst
neral necessaries may, I think, be put on the same level. *  *  *  It
ge:nerally admitted that the American workman, in consequence of laborving machinery and the excellence of the factory organization, does not
ed to put forth any greater effort in his work than is the case here, if
't uch. He is infinitely better paid, therefore better housed, fed, clothed,
d, moreover, is much more sober.
under such conditions he must naturally be more healthy. *  *  *
el and raw material are much the same price in the United States as in
rorIe, and it therefore can not be claimed that he has very much advane ia this; but facilities for transport, both by rail and water, are unlbe dly better and cheaper.  * *   In the United States one hears a
at deal against "trusts" (as they are known,: or what we term "large
rp' ations"), but personally I am rather inclined to welcome these conrns because large organizations that employ capital 'are best able to
fP)'!'e in manufactures on the most economical lines, can fearlessly raise
ge within given limits, are in position to combat unhealthy competition,
n rovide up-to-date machinery ad libitum, can erect sanitary and' welllti ifed workshops, and generally study better the comfort and well-being
tea" workmen thanr small individual manufacturers struggling against
suilent capital and old machinery. It is in the organization of capital
tie one hand and a thorough organization oab   on the other that I
the solution of industrial problems will be found.


a-5




j


"THE BENEFIT OF PROTECTION GOES FIRST AND
LAST TO THE MEN WHO EARN THEIR
BREAD IN THE SWEAT OF
THEIR FACES."
Extract from reply by Hon. JAMES a. BLAINE of Maine, to Hon. W7i
LIASM. GLADSTONE, published in North American Review of Jae
ary, 1890, and printed in daily Congressional Record, June 10, 189i
Mr. Gladstone feels sure that, though the protected manufacturers
the United States may flourish and prosper, they do so at the expense
the farmer, who is in every conceivable form, according to the free-tra
dictum, the helpless victim of protection. Both Mr. Gladstone and 
American free trader have, then, the duty of explaining whv the ajrici
tural States of the West have grown in wealth during the long period
protection at a more rapid rate than the manufacturing States of the Ea
The statement of the free trader can be conclusively answered by referri
to the census of the United States for the year 1860, and also for the ye
1880:
In 1860 eight manufacturing States of the East (the six of N
England, together with New York and Pennsylvania) returned an aggi
gate wealth of $5,123,000,000. Twenty years afterward, by the census
1880, the same States returned an aggregate wealth of $16,228,000,0(
The rate of increase for the twenty years was slightly more than 216 
cent.
Let us see how the agricultural States fared during this period.
the census of 1860 eight agricultural States of the West (Illinois, India
Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska and Wisconsin) returned
aggregate wealth of $2,271,000,000. Twenty years afterward, by the ceni
of 1880 (protection all the while in full force), these same States retura
an aggregate wealth of $11,268,000,000. The rate of increase for i
twenty years was 396 per cent., or 180 per cent. greater than the increa
In the eight manufacturing States of the East.
The case will be equally striking if we take the fifteen Southern Sta
that were slaveholding in 1860. By the census of that year the aggreg
return of their property was $6,792,000,000. But $2,000,000,000 was sla
property. Deducting that, the total property amounted to $4,792,000,0
The aggregate return of wealth by the census of 1880 was $8,633,000,0
The rate of increase for the twenty years was 80 per cent. Consider t
during this period eleven States of the South were impoverished by ci
war to an extent far greater than any country has been despoiled In
wars of modern Europe. Consider that the labor system on which prevli
wealth has been acquired in the South was entirely broken up. And
at the end of twenty years the Southern States had repaired all their en
mous losses and possessed nearly double the wealth they had ever kno
before. Do not these figures incontestably show that the agricultural s
tions of the country, West and South, have prospered even beyond the man
facturing sections, East and North?  And all this not merely wituh p
tection, but because of protection I
As Mr. Gladstone considers protection immoral, he defines its spec
offense as "robbery." To have been fully equal to the American stand
of free-trade vituperation, Mr. Gladstone should have denounced our mae
facturers as "robber barons." This is a current phrase with a class I
are, perhaps, more noisy than numerous. The intention of the phrase
to create popular prejudice against American manufacturers as grow
rich at the expense of the people. This accusation is so persistently
peated that its authors evidently regard it as important to their cause.
may perhaps surprise Mr. Gladstone to be told that out of the fifty lars
fortunes in the United States-those that have arrested public attent
within the last ten years-certainly not more than one has been deri
from protected manufacturing; and this was amassed by a gentleman
the same Scotch blood with Mr. Gladstone himself. The forty-nine Ot
fortunes were acquired from railway and telegraph investments, from V
estate investments, from the import and sale of foreign goods, from ba
lag, from speculations in the stock market, from fortunate mining invn
ments, from patented inventions, and more than one from proprietary in
cines.
It is safe to go even farther and state that in the one hundred lars
fortunes that have been viewed as such in the past ten years not five x
been derived from the profits of protected manufactures. The origin
be found in the fields of investment already referred to. Moreover,
fear of the evil effect of large fortunes is exaggerated. Fortunes rapt
change. With us wealth seldom lasts beyond two generations. There is
one family in the United States recognized as possessing large wealth
four consecutive generations. When Mr. Jefferson struck the blow
broke down the right of primogeniture and destroyed the privilege of
tail, he swept away the only ground upon which wealth can be secured
one family for a long period. The increase in the number of heirs in
cessive generations, the rightful assertion of equality among children
the same parents, the ready destruction of wills that depart too far t
this principle of right, and, above all, the uncertainty and the a~crid
of investment, scatter fortunes to the wind and give to them all the un
tainty that betides human existence.
In no event can the growth of large fortunes be laid to the cl:crg'
the proteetive policy. Protection has proved a distributer of great s
of money, not    agency for amassing it in the hands of a few. Th'e
ords of our savings banks and building associations can be appeale
in support of this statement, The benefit of protection goes first ant:i la
the men who earn their bread in the sweat of their faces. The auiTc
and momentous result is that never before in the history of the w.r.
oomfort been enjoyed education acquired, and independence securei b
rge a proportion of    total poputltion as in the United States of rA
a-86


I
I
I
II
Z
I
I
I
II
a
9
I
D
t
II
I
a
0
8
I
p
c
I
e
I
n
t
'I
I
i
a
el
a
I,e
i
it


I






"'REMEMBE THOSE LSSONS WHICH HAVE BROUGHT
PROSPERITY AND HAPPINESS TO YOU."
Extracts from speech by Hon. M. A. HANNA at Chillicothe, Ohio, September 19, 190, and printed in daily ConQressional Record, June 20, 1904,
as part of remarks of lion. M. E. OLMSTED.
MR. PRESIDENT, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, AND FELLOW-REPUBLICANS:
A political campaign is always interesting, and it is particularly so this
year because of conditions which can not be understood from observation.
It is unique. The Republican party with its proud record behind it, with
present conditions which have redeemed every promise made and which hold
out bright hopes for the future, is our position before the people to-day.
We have opposed to us the Democratic party. I don't recognize it. [Laughter and cries of "Nobody else!"]  I think we may naturally ask ourselves
the question, "What is it?"  [Laughter.] A nondescript party with a crazyquilt ticket and without a single flavor of Thomas Jefferson in its platform.
We hold the fort. We have strengthened our position year after year
by adhering to the fundamental principles upon which the foundation of
this party rested, We never have swerved from those principles since the
day the party was born. We have grown stronger in their advocacy because
we have appealed to the reason of the people and from them have received
the response that we were right. And they have upheld us and convinced
others that we were right. * * *
Now, there are other issues, my friends, and, briefly, I want to touch
upon those regarding national questions. Mr. Clarke, whether he did it
thoughtlessly or intentionally, in a public utterance at Akron, Ohio, I believe it was, made this statement: "This country is on the verge of financial and industrial collapse."  He sounded that note of danger. Why so,
God only knows. But to my mind it was a criminal act, because it is not
true. As far as the financial and industrial interests of this country are
concerned, they never have been in any better shape than to-day. There
is nothing to interfere with the onward progress of this development except one thing, and that one thing is to shake the confidence of the people
in the principles and policies exercised by the party in power. * * *
It is worse than criminal. A man who assumes to speak for a great
party and who has at heart the best interests of the men who have been
associated with that party, and who are inclined to take the utterances
that fall from the lips of their leaders as truth, is, I say, worse than criminal to thus deceive ignorant men.
Suppose that, predicated upon that speech, an alarm had been sounded
that would have had practical effect. Suppose even-which is not truethat conditions in this country had been such that a spark like that would
have ignited the dynamite, and then, after the harm was done, after wretchedness and woe had come to thousands of families, after it had been demonstrated that there was no cause for alarm, but merely the vaporings of a
politician seeking to bewilder the minds of honest people, what ought to be
done with such a man? Is he fit or is any such man fit to stand before an
intelligent people, such as we have, and be called a leader or an adviser
as to the best methods and best policies to be adopted in the interests of
our country?  Oh, my friends you have had experiences; you have had
object lessons, and the results of those experiences and those lessons have
not yet faded from your memories. There is not a, workingman in this
county nor in this State who has not had them vividly impressed upon him
through avenues that reached his heart, because they have caused misery
at his fireside
The change came, and it became the privilege as well as the duty of
our own dear William McKinley to come to the front with the confidence
of the whole people behind him, and assuming the reins of government at
that opportune time, not only by his living example, not only as a result
of those principles which had guided him all his life, but preeminently
because during that public life he had stood the friend of the workingman
and had taught the principles which had filled their minds and filled their
hearts with gratitude until confidence grew so that they were willing to
follow him, and, to a man, they did follow him in 1896 and in 1900.
Those principles are living to-day, although he has gone from us forever. [Applause.]  But he has left behind a record which every Ohio man
cherishes as a heritage to him. He has left behind an example to that
class of which I speak, and if he could speak to-day it would be to remind
every man in the State of Ohio who works with his hands: "Remember
all that you have passed through in years gone by; remember how, step
by step, you learned those lessons of economic policy which have brought
prosperity and happiness to your hearthstones, and, remembering that, reumember the party and the teachers of these policies, who have been your
friends in all the past, and stand to-day where they stood in 1896, when the
umillennium came. [Great applause.]
I say, my friends, that the only danger that can possibly come-and I
make this statement from the standpoint of a business man, and I think! know my business [great laughter and applause]-the only danger that,an possibly come to the people of this country is through their own acts,
by their own power, and the will to change those policies which have made
's what we are to-day.
It it were thought that the heresies of Tom Johnson and his socialstic followers could make any impression upon the people so as to change
h political conditions here, I will tell you what would happen. The men
'ho control these great industries, the men whose power and money are
moving all this enormous trade, the men who are associated with them as
*artners, together with the men who work with their hands in this great
~usiness development, would be the first ones to take notice of that change
it were imminent, and they would act upon the hypothesis that it is better?Q wait and know the truth than to surmise it and speculate upon it. The
esult would be-and I tell you it is true-that if a single cloud came into
me commercial sky of this country which looked to any change of policy
Ifferent from what we hae ha  hd in the last six or seven years, the change
mould come, the wheels of industry would slw down, and there would be
waiting policy-waiting to know what the result might be; waiting to
now whether the American people would tire of the conditions which have
rought to them wealth and prosperity, Just for the sake of a change, as it:d In 1892.
a-87




U. S. GRANT.
"THE AMERICAN SYSTEM OF LOCATING MANUFACTORIES NEXT TO THE PLOW AND THE PASTURE
HAS PRODUCED A RESULT NOTICEABLE
BY   THE    INTELLIGENT       PORTION       OF
ALL COMMERCIAL NATIONS."
Extract from   Seveath Annual Message of PRESIDENT U. S.
CGRANT Dec. 7, 1875, printed in Congressional Record.
In this centennial year of our national existence as a free and independent people, it affords me great pleasure to recur to the advancement that has been made from the time of the Colonies, one
hundred years ago. We were then a people numbering only 3,000,000.
Now we number more than 40,000,000. Then industries were confined
almost exclusively to the tillage of the soil. Now manufactories
absorb much of the labor of the country. * * * Our progress
has been great in all the arts-in science, agriculture, commerce, navigation, mining mechanics, law, medicine, etc.; and in general education the progress is likewise encouraging. * *  *
In 1776 manufactories scarcely existed even in Maine in all this
vast territory. In 1870 more than two million persons were employed
in manufactories, producing more than $2,100,000,000 of products
in amount annually, nearly equal to our national debt. From nearly
the whole of the population of 1776 being engaged in the one occupa
tion of agriculture, in 1870 so numerous and diversified had become
the occupations of our people that less than six million out of forty
miltion were so engaged. The extraordinary effect produced in our
ounttry by a resort to diversified occupations has built a market for
the products of fertile lands distant from the seaboard and the
markets of the world.
The American system of locating various and extensive manufctories next to the plow and the pasture, and adding connecting railroads and steamboats, has produced in our distant interior country
a result noticeable by the intelligent   portion of all commercial nations  The ngenuity and skill of American mechanics have been
demonstrated at home and abroad in a manner most flattering to
their pride. But for the extraordinary genius and ability of our
mechanics, the achievements of our agriculturists, manufacturers, and
transporters throughout the country, would have been impossible of
attainment.
The progress of the miner has also been great. Of coal, our pr,duction was small; now many millions of tons are mined annually. So
with iron, which formed scarcely an appreciable part of our products half a century ago, we now produce more than the world
consumed at the beginning of our national existence. Lead, zirn.
and copper, from being articles of import, we may expect to be lar-e
exporters of in the near future. The development of gold ail
silver mines in the United States and Territories has not only been
emarkable, but has had a large influence upon the business of Vll
commtercal nations. Our merchants in the last hundred years have
0had Wa asuccess And have established a reputation.for enterpribe,
sagacit, progress, and integrity unsurpassed by peoples of old r
nationaltie. This d"good name" is not confined to their homes, bit
gs oit upon evpery sa and into every port ihere commerce ente rs




"WE CAN ENTER THE MARKETS OF THE WORLD
WITH OUR PRODUCTS, AND STILL MAINTAIN THE AMERICAN PRICE OF
WAGES."
It-tracts from speech by Hon. M. A. HANNA at Chillicothe, Ohio, September 19, 1903, and printed in daily Congressional Record, June 20, 1904,
as part of remarks of Hon. M. E. OLMSTED of Pennsylvania.
The change came, and it became the privilege as well as the duty of our
own dear William McKinley to come to the front with the confidence of the
whole people behind him, and assuming the reins of government at that opportune time, not only by his living example, not only as a result of those
principles which had guided him all his life, but preeminently because during that public life he had stood the friend of the workingman and had
taught the principles which had filled their minds and filled their hearts with
gratitude until confidence grew so that they were willing to follow him, and,
to a man, they did follow him in 1896 and in 1900. [Long-continued applause.]
Those principles are living to-day, although he has gone from us forever. [Applause.]  But he has left behind a record which every Ohio man
cherishes as a heritage to him. He has left behind an example to that class
of which I speak, and if he could speak to-day it would be to remind every
man in the State of Ohio who works with his hands: "Remember all that
you have passed through in years gone by; remember how, step by step, you
learned those lessons of economic policy which have brought prosperity and
happiness to your hearthstones, and, remembering that, remember the party
and the teachers of these policies, who have been your friends in all the
past, and stand to-day where they stood in 1896, when the millennium came.
[Great applause.]
The only danger that can possibly come to the people of this country is
through their own acts, by their own power, and the will to change those
policies which have made us what we are to-day. It it were thought that
the heresies of Tom Johnson and his socialistic followers could make any
impression upon the people so as to change the political conditions, I will
tell you what would happen. The men who control these great industries,
the men whose power and money are moving all this enormous trade, the
noen who are associated with them as partners, together with the men who
work with their hands in this great business development, would be the
first ones to take notice of that change if it were imminent, and they would
act upon the hypothesis that it is better to wait and know the truth than
to surmise it and speculate upon it. The result would be-and I tell you
it is true-that if a single cloud came into the commercial sky of this country which looked to any change of policy different from what we have had
in the last six or seven years, the change would come, the wheels of industry would slow down, and there would be a waiting policy-waiting to
know what the result might be; waiting to know whether the American
people would tire of the conditions which have brought to them wealth and
prosperity, just for the sake of a change, as it did in 1892, and were prepared to throw aside the benefits and experiences of those principles and
try new pastures or not. * * * There is no reason why we should not
have long and continued periods of prosperity in this country, because our
natural resources are beyond those of any nation in the world. This great
cosmopolitan people have shown thenmelves better as a nation, industrially,
commercially, politically, than any other nation in the world. [Enthusiastic
eheering.] We have achieved that position upon pure merit, and that merit
is exemplified in the fact that under these influences and during the times of
peace we are making such rapid progress in industrial development that we
can enter the markets of the world with our products and still maintain the
American price of wages.  [Great applause.]  *  *   *  No, as far as
youir interests lie in the direction of national questions, let me repeat, the
questions have not changed, the principles have not changed, the results
have not changed, and you stand here to-day just exactly where you stood
Ye(,rs ago in this State, when, under the leadership of the gallant man who
btoeved in the protective policy and in safe money, you followed him to
41t: polls and year after year registered your verdict, and that was the
Pt;icy for the working classes of this State and country.  [Enthusiastic
i lanause.]  I want to sound a note of warning not only to my Republican
ri.ads, but to every man who owns a home. If the socialistic doctrines advt? Sted by this new form of Democracy should by any possibility become a
liti us. Whenever that socialistic, anariststic, populistec doctrine seizes
th minds of the people of this or any other State, o as to dominate their
rc::on and their judgment, and lead them to do almost what I would call
at act of political suicide, then God help us. Because all that we have
s' lght for in the past, all that we have gained through our efforts and inut try, all the battles we have fought for liberty to man, all the efforts that
wi have made to make this country what it is-an example to the world,
ti most powerful Christian influence in the world-to build up a govern""'t which belongs to the people, and which looks to the people for its
eia tment and for the enforcement of the laws which will protect it; wen
N'i "isms'" as that can prevail, then all is lost. It is a serious thought
'."IfI want you to take home. Republican or Democrat, take it home tonl t and think it over... 
9 f.-.


t




I


"AMERICA IS BOUND TO BECOME THE KEENEST OF
COMPETITORS IN THE MARKETS OF THE
WORLD."
Extracts from remarks of Hon. M. E. OLMSTED of Pennsylvania, in daily
Congressional Record, June 20, 1904J.
SIR VINCENT CAILLARD ON PROTECTION VERSUS FREE TRADE.
The following are extracts from Sir Vincent Caillard's discussion of
the effect of free trade in England as compared with that of protection in
the United States and Germany. His work on this subject, entitled "In.perial Fiscal Reform," has attracted much attention in the United States
and abroad:
As a concrete example of how far events falsify the conclusions of the
sanest minds owing to change of conditions, I will cite the manner in which
Lord Farrer in 1886 considered the question of the competition of the United
States with ourselves in the matter of trade. After stating that the labor
and capital of America were largely employed in providing Europe, and
England especially, with food, and that to tax that food would be to drive
her into providing the manufactures we want to sell to her, he continues:
"At present, in spite of, or possibly in consequence of, her system of
protection, the sale of her highly forced and highly priced manufactures is
in a great measure confined or nearly confined to her own subjects and she
is no rival to England In her own markets or in the markets of the world,
* * * In 1880 we exported to her twenty-four and a half millions of
manufactures and imported from her two and a half millions. Out of her
total exports about 10 per cent. are roanufactures and 90 per cent. food and
raw materials, chiefly agricultural produce. But if we deprive her of her
market for agricultural produce we shall drive her into manufacture, and
there is no saying how formidable a rival she may become."
The Inference is that if our markets remained unrestrictedly open to
her, her rivalry was not to be feared either in our own or foreign markets,
possibly in consequence of her system of protection. Our markets have rematined open, her system of protection has only been intensified, and the
comparative figures are now as follows:
In the year 1880 our total imports from the United States amounted to
~107,081,000, and our exports to her to ~37,954,000; in 1899 our imports
from her were ~120,081,000, and our exports to her ~34,975,000. Out of her
total exports in 1880 about 10 per cent. were manufactures and about 90
per cent. food and raw materials; in 1899 about 29 per cent. were manufactures and about 71 per cent. were food and raw materials.
These percentages say something, but the absolute figures say more.
The value of her manufactures exported in 1880 was ~17,165,000, and in
1899 $75,698,000; of food and raw materials in 1880, ~154,490,000; in
1899, ~185,329,000.
As to the general foreign trade of the two countries, the following table
1; very instructive:
[Expressed Into thousands of pounds sterling.]
United Kingdom.          United States.
Year.
Imports.a   Exportsa i Im    rt Eports.b  ts
18.......................  47,876  i  248,935  136,721     171;18 9.........  361,1    248,9135    152,711     152,142
18 * --- —--- -— * — -419-,941    d25,83  1    155 7      2  I027
a Foreign and colonial produce reexported not Included.
b Retained for home consumption.
c Of domestic produce.   *
d Not including shipping (9,111,000) previously unrecorded.
Thus while our export trade in 1899 showed an increase over that of
1880 of ~32,000,000 that of the United States showed an increase of ~90,000,000, while of that total fifty-eight and one-half millions are accounted
for by the Increase of her exports of manufactures. * * *
As a further comment upon Lord Farrer's complacent observations, the
following quotation from a paper read by Mr. A. S. E. Ackerman, recently
returned from a four-months engineering tour through the United Stotes,
before thievil and Mechanical EAngineers' Society, on January 2, 190,- is
pointed enough.
"Americans have been very much awake for many years past, and tlei1
roress durin   the past six yeas has been phetnomenal. Each day al 0s
slee them, surpass us in some brancht of trade, and to my mind it is anst
opeless for us to get ahead of them again."
At least equally interesting and to the point, and still more recent, ar
Mr. Moseley's remarks in his preface (p. 7) to the reports of the Mo lec
Industrtal Commisaion, in the course of which, after pointing out that Wtl
United SItate  have already attained the position of the leading mantfac'
rturin Country of the world and that they must be placed "in the same P,
sitiol relatively that England herself occupied some fifty years ago, 1
continues thus:l
t is Imore than necessary that both capital and labor should bear tit
point Ie   n mInd. At the present time the home market of the t
iStates sofy occupied with its own developments that the export raJ
has as y   een  oparatively little thought of; but as time goes on an.I t
numerous factories that are being erected all over the country come lt:.,
bearing, Amera    s bound to become the keenest of competitors 
market9f the world.
a-90


I
I
6
11
s
f
f
I
p
e
I
t
s
I
0
'I1
I


I






-CREE TRADE WOULD SHUT UP 75 PER CENT. OF
THE INDUSTRIAL INSTITUTIONS OF THE
UNITED STATES."
T-artracts from speech by Hon. M. A. HANNA at Chillicothe, Ohio, Septemher 19, 1903, and printed in daily Congressional Record, June 20, 1904,
as part of remarks of Hon. M. E. OLMSTED, of Pennsylvania.
Mr. Clarke, whether he did it thoughtlessly or intentionally, in a public
tterance made this statement: "This country is on the verge of financial
asd industrial collapse."  He sounded that note of danger. Why so, God
only knows. But to my mind it was a criminal act, because it is not true.
As far as the financial and industrial interests of this country are concerned, they never have been in any better shape than to-day. There is
nt hing to interfere with the onward progress of ths development except
oiec thing, and that one thing is to shake the confidence of the people in the
p;inrciples and policies exercised by the party in power. *  *. *  Either
Mr. Clarke knows. absolutely nothing about business affairs or else that
single utterance, standing alone, as affecting the results of this campaign,
should condemn him   and the party he represents to oblivion forever,
[Long-continued applause.]  It is worse than criminal. A man who assumes to speak for a great party and who has at heart the best interests
of the men who have been associated with that party, and who are inclined
to take the utterances that fall from the lips of their leaders as truth, is,
I say, worse than criminal to thus deceive ignorant men.
Suppose that, predicated upon that speech, an alarm had been sounded
that would have had practical effect. Suppose even-which is not truelthat conditions in this country had been such that a spark like that would
have ignited the  dynamite, and then, after the harm  was done, after
wretchedness and woe had come to thousands of families, after it had been
demonstrated that there was no cause for alarm, but merely the vaporings
of a politician seeking to bewilder the minds of honest people, what ought
to be done with such a man? Oh, my friends, you have had experiences;
you have had object lessons, and the results of those experiences and those
lessons have not yet faded from your memories. There is not a workingI man in this county nor in this State who has not had them vividly impressed upon him through avenues that reached his heart, because they have
caused misery at his fireside. *  *  *  *  I say, my friends, that the:only danger that can possibly come-the only danger to-the people of this
cotuntry is through their own acts, by their own power, and the will to
change those policies which have made us what we are to-day.
If it were thought that the heresies of Tom Johnson and his socialistic
followers could make any impression upon the people so as to change the
p;litical conditions here, I will tell you what would happen. The men
iwho control these great industries, the men whose power and money are
n oving all this enormous trade, the men who are associated with them as
irartners, together with the men who work with their hands in this great
business development, would be the first ones to take notice of that change
if it were imminent, and they would act upon the hypothesis that it is better to wait and know the truth than to surmise it and speculate upon it.
1The result would be-and I tell you it is true-that if a single cloud came
into the commercial sky of this country which looked to any change of
ohlicy different from what we have had in the last six or seven years, the
h:auge would come, the wheels of industry would slow down, and there
woild be a waiting policy-waiting to know what the result might be;
wariting to know whether the American people would tire of the conditions
which have brought to them wealth and prosperity, just for the sake of a
htoange, as it did in 1892, and were prepared to throw aside the benefits and
experiences of those principles and try new pastures or not. *  *  *  *
Show by your votes, that you intend to stand by those principles; that
Yo\ intend that the men who represent you in the Halls of Congress and
i1 the legislative body of the State shall be sent there with instructions to
Ctlary out these principles, and that you will have no other kind of represe:tation. [Prolonged applause.]  Do that, and this country is just as far
frrm any prospect of distress, to say nothing of panic, as it was three years
ago.
These conditions, my fellow-citizens, in this country are normal. That
is to say, they are not abnormal. There is no reason why we should not
hayve long and continued periods of prosperity in this country, because our
X ltural resources are beyond those of any nation in the world. This great
uco-mInopolitan people have shown themselves better as a nation, industrially,
co:fmercially, politically, than any other nation in the world. [Enthusiastic
cheering.] We have achieved that position upon pure merit, and that merit
s sxemplified in the fact that under these influences and during the times
of eace we are maling such rapid progress in industrial development that
we can enter the mlnrkets of the world with our products and still maintain
t, American price of wages.   [Great applause.]  *  *  *  Mr. Clarke
(ti; lifles his position on the tariff by saying that he would take the tariff
(; irely off of every article manufactured by trusts. What does that mean?:t''y iron and steel industry in the United States, everything connected with
the metal trades, with the cotton trades, and in fact nearly all of our great
i l -.stries, would come within the scope of his proposition. Why, is there
a i ntelligent man among the workingmen of my State who does not know
'M"rt would be the result of that policy? Absolute free trade through all,t'' schedules of our. tariff would shut up 75;per cent. of the industrial in"~tions of the United States until we could get labor down to the price
i:'re we could compete with Europe. *  *   *  *
Now0 in conclusion, my friends, I want to sound a note of warning not::. to my Republican friends, but to every man who owns a home In this
iii all other counties in this State. If the socialistic doctrines advocated
y this ~ new form of Democracy should by any possibility become a law, or
th t policy could by any possibility become established, then God help us.




I


"SCORES OF NEW PLAN&". — LARtGELY INCR~ASED
W"s
W AGES."
Extracts from remarks of lion. M. M  E. OLMSTED, of Pennsylvania,
in daily Congressional Record, June ~0, 1904.
Mr. Chairman, having shown how trained and experienced experts
in various branches of trade and commerce in other countries view
the effect of the present Republican tariff upon the labor, industries,
and commerce of this country, as well as of their own, I present a
few figures from my own State, showing the difference in effect
between the Democratic Wilson-Gorman tariff bill enacted during
the last Cleveland Administration and the present Republican Dingley protective tariff bill enacted during the first year of President
McKinleys Administration.
I propose to compare the condition of our iron, steel, and tin-plate
industries in 1896, the last full year of President Cleveland's Administration, with 1902, the first full year of President Roosevelt's
Administration. The figures are for these great industries in the
State of Pennsylvania only, but they represent fairly the conditions
in these lines in all parts of our country. The completed figures for
1903 are not yet available. For the following official tables I am
indebted to Hon. Robert C. Bair, the very efficient chief of the
bureau of statistics of Pennsylvania:
Employment, wages, yearly and daily earnings in the manufactures of piq
iron, tin, tin plate, and iron and steel rolled into finished form in the
State of Pennsylvania, in the years 1896 and 1902, respectively, slhowing
thel increase in 1902 over 1896.:   *  ~~~~~~~~':,:          jPer cent.
Increase    of ln1896.     1902.  1902 over   crease
i?~~~ ~           ~1896.  1902 over
1.  1896.
PIG IMON.
Production.......... ross tons..  4,026,350  8,111,642  4,085,292  101.7
Workmen employed............      11580     17,101     5,521       47.
Average days of employ ment...                 3 14       25,
Aggregate wages paid to work-'
men.........................  $4,589,165  10,191,759  $5,602,594  121.2
Average yearly earnings......              $5.97 $51199,67        5.2
Average dally wage............     $1.37     $1.89     $0.52       37.9
IRON AND STEL, l(tLEnD. 
Iron and steel rolled into fin-J
Islied form...........net tons..  8,757,070  9,129,365 I5,67.1,295  15::
Workmen employed.............     53,573     95,720    42,147      78.
Average days of employ men t...     251        285        34       j31)
Aggregate wages paid workmen,      $23,832,628 $60,721,858 $36,889,230  1 57
Average yearly earnings......:  $444.89      $634    $189.11      12.
Average dally wage..............   $1.77     $2.23     $0.4        20
BLACK PLATE TIN WO.KS.
Total production of black platej
tor tinning...... p     d... ds.. 158,306,490 428,443,592 270,17,102  170
nuantlty tinned        do.......  97,814,762  52,544,992 254,730,20  20.1
orknIen employed.............      8,194     8405       5,711      1
Aggregate wages paid wor kmeL. $1,47,22   $4,50(i,105  $3,0688079  2{.1
Average yearly earnings,......   $4.55     $50.(y2    $49.47      lO. s
Average daily wage............     $1.80     $2.55      $0.75       1
Number of plants............      13        22     0   9 
STEEL' PRODUCD.
Bessemer............gross tons..  2,202,814  4,208,B54  2,00(5,544
Open heartli..............do......  1,009,08  4,220,279  38,210,071,
Crucible...................... do.....  48,107  82,562  9,455     1..."Front the foregoing figures it will be seen that in the iron, st(`l,
and tin-plate industries alone there were employed in Pennsylvan1
3,379 mtore men in 1902, under President Roosevelt, than there were
189  under President Cleveland, and that these employees received
in wages in  90a total of $,419,         as against $29,859,019 in 196,
a difference of $45,560,703 in favor of a Republican Administratio".
FIroim the s.ame source I learn that a comparison of results in 543,plants operating in 44 other different industriies shows that the aggregate nnmber of mten employed in these 548 plants was, in 1896, $8,349,
Jand in 1902, 131 15, an increase of 43,26. The aggregate of wages
paid in these 548 plants in 1896 was $33,151,563, and in 1902, $6,'
618,463, an increase of miore than 100 per cent.
But even ts does not take into account the scores of new plants
which hav   sprng up since 1896 and are therefore not involved i
the comprison.Toere wa        ot only afforded employment for mthol
sands o  fadditional m ein.1902, ut also each man received largel
Iinreased wag,
a-82




I


I




"THE TIN-PLATE INDUSTRY II THE UNITED
STATES."
Extracts from remarks of Hon, M. B. OLMSTRD of Pennsylvania, in daily
Congressional Record, June 20, 1904.
THE TIN-PLATE INDUSTRY.
The British Iron and Steel Commission after its visit to the United
States in 1902, devotes a chapter of Its report to a discussion of the tinplate industry in the United States, and begins by saying:
The tin-plate industry is one of the most recent in the United States and
has been built up on the McKinley tariff of 1890, which levied a duty of 2~
cents per pound on all tin plate Imported into the country and practically
caused the customs to claim as much on imports into the United States as
the price of the product at works in the principality.
At the time the McKinley tariff came into force there was practically no
tin plate manufactured in the United States, and the imports of that commodity ranged from 300,000 to 400,000 tons a year. In the following year
the home production was only 552 tons, and the imports of British tin plates
were 327,882 tons. Since then the American production has increased year
by year, while the American imports have as rapidly declined. In 1900 the
total American output of tin plates exceeded 400,000 tons, and the imports
had fallen to only 58,000 tons, or about a sixth part of what they were in
1890.
The following table shows the British exports, American imports, and
American output of tin plate for the last thirteen years:
Exports     Imports into
from Great    U   nitued        erlc
Year.               Britain to all  States of     produecountries.    Amerca.          tion.
Tons.         Tons.         TonLs.
1 89..................................  43(0,623     83 1,311................
18f0,.................................  421,797     829,435................
1891..................................  448,732      827,882           552
1892.,...............................  895,580       268,472         18,803
1893...................................  879,23   253,155         55,1 82
H94..................................  854,081      215,068         74,260
185..................................  365,082   219,545        118,666
1896..................................  266,955   119,171        160,362
18 97.................................  271,230       83,851        256,598
1898..................................  250,93       67,22         326,915
18}99................................  Q256,629     58,915        1 8,767
19)0.................................  273,954      60,986       8302,665
191.................................. 17157..........
The imports of the past three or four years have been confined almost
entirely to tin plates, which are reexported in the shape of cans containing
oil, fruit, fish, etc. By the terms of the Dingley law 99 per cent. of the duty
originally placed on such tin plate is refunded by the Government on its
reexport.     *   *
It seems to be pretty certain from the available records that whatever
"virtual monopoly" of the tin-plate trade the steel corporation may have
possessed when it was founded, or whatever the amount of control exercised
over the trade at an earlier date by the American Tin Plate Company, competitive concerns have increased largely and rapidly, until the twenty-six
tin-plate works under the control of the steel corporation are less than onehalf of the whole number. While, therefore, the action of that consolidation can not be regarded as uninfiuential in the affairs of the tin-plate trade,
it is not likely to be all important, as it would have been while independent
concerns were less numerous.
The number of completed tin-plate works in the United States at the
end of 1901 was fifty-five, compared wFrh sixty-nine in April of 1898, and
the same number at the end of 1895. Hence the number of existing works
at the end of 1901 was less than that of either of the two previous periods.
But the amount of enterprise being shown at the end of 1901 in adding to
the productive capacity of American tin-plate plants was greater than at
either of those previous dates, Mr. Swank's figures show that at the end
of 1901 no fewer than seven new tin-plate works were in course of construction, against one in April, 1898, and four at the end of 1895. Of the
new works being built at the end of 1901, three were in Pennsylvania, two
in West Virginia, one in Ohio, and one in Wisconsin, while one other was
at that time projected in Illinois. The aggregate capacity of the whole of
the tin-plate works of the United States is not quite known, but it is compruted at over 700,000 tons, which is a good deal in excess of any actual
output hitherto reached in the United Kingdom.  *   *  *
EFFECT OF THE TARIFF ON PRICES.
The Americans generally dispute the argument that a tariff for protection tends to keep up prices to the home consumer, and in support of their
attitude on this subject they point to the fact that the prices of coal, iron,
oseel, and other commodities are, and have been, materially lower in the
I'nited States than in Great Britain. This view opens up questions of vast
oange, which it would take much space to handle. The other side of the
argument obviously is that prices of commodities in the United States have
declined, not because, but in spite of the tariff.  *  * 
At the same time it is by no means clear that a high tariff does,ecessarily involve a high range of prices in the protected country, and in
i,, e United States within the last few years prices have touched a very low
l-:el tin spite of the tariff. Take as a case in point the statistics of steel
rails. When the steel-rail industry was begun in the United States, in
];67, the rate of duty  on imports was 45 per cent. ad valorem. This rate
Vwas continued until 1871, when it was made a specific duty of $28 per ton,
'hMich was reduced to $17 per ton in 1883, to $13.44 in 1890, and to $7.84?i 1894. at which figure it has since been mainined. In spite of these
Wuties, however, the average price of steel rails in the United States fell
Irom $28 in 1897 to $17.62 in 1898, and in the latter year the average
A mierican price was probably under the average of any other country.




"TH:E FORE G  N D&O R  OPENS OU TWtARD     THE BRITISH INWARD."
Extracto from remark H of i o L Tt, E. OLSTED, of Pennsylvania, in daily
Congressional Record, June 20, 1904.
[From the Pall Mall Gazette, London, Nov. 21, 1903.]
THE S]TORY OF AMERICAN TIN PLATE.
The story of the tin-plate trade and its experience of
American hostility is typical enough to be made the test of
all that is in dispute about our fiscal policy. Our average
amnual export of this commodity to the United States
before the days of the McKinley tariff was 304,695 tons,
valued at ~4,278,667. We mention quantity as well as
price just to assure the Cobdenites tlat there is no loophole
such as they sometimes look for in the "fall of values.
The export in 1902 was 65,142 tons, valued at ~887,432.
The demand for tin plates has not fallen off, for other
countries have increased their requirements very fast.
Their orders, which amounted in 1887 to 94,634 tons,
valued at ~1,403,974, had risen last year to 246,727 tons,
valued at ~3,445,734. The gain in one direction does not,
as often suggested, counterbalance the loss in the other,
for there is a net deficit of 87,460 tons, of the value of
t1,349,475. And this is obviously nothing like the ineasure of what the foreign tariff has cost us. We see the consumption of tin plates by other countries than America
rising by leaps and bounds, and our home demand must
have risen at a substantial rate to keep the total production
at the level we are told of. If we had continued to enjoy
not free trade in tin plates with America, but admuission
under the old duty, the fair inference is that we should
have claimed her too, for a much larger customer than she
was fifteen years ago.
The effect of foreign protection upon the output for the
American market is that instead of rising to twice the dimensions of 1887 (which is a conservative estimate) it has
declined to one-fifth, and even that proportion we retain,
as Mr. Chamberlain says, only on sufferance, while the
American industry, established behind the tariff wall, is
developing to its fullest capacity. This is an example of
the first stage in the conflict between protection and free
imports. The foreigner begins by cutting off our exports
to his own country. The Americans have all but completed
this process in the case of tin plates, and they are busily
laying the foundations cf a similar achievement in tle case
of cotton. When our competitor has succeeded in monopolizing his home market the time is ready and the conditions are always favorable for carrying his conquest into
ours. The foreign door opens outward, the British inward.
The tariff-armed foreigner is only confronted by the proverbial "man in his shirt.:  The way is open for him to
captur one trade aft   er another, first in it export branches
and then in the market at its doors. A d if in the face of
this process we nareto go to sleep in accordance with Lord
Roseibery's suggreso    'ti    ital industries will probay awak-enaB   t last mas 2 the Irishman said, to find that they
are already corpses.
a-94




I
I
t
I
I
I
I
11
I
i
I
I
11
i
t
I
i
fI
f

I


i


rEVELOPMENT OF THE TIN-PLATE TINDUSTRY HAS


RESULTED IN LOWER PRICES."
'tracts from remnarks of Hon.   1. E. OLMSTED, of
Pennsylvania, in daily Congressional Record, June
20, 1904.
VELOPMENT OF THE TIN-PLATE INDUSTRY IN THE UNITED
STATES HAS RESULTED IN LOWER PRICES TO CONSUMERS.
I call particular attention to the showing made by the
n industry in one of the tables I have already given.
hat industry in America is purely the product of the Reiblican protective tariff. The first tin-plate plant in this
iintry was established in the city of Pittsburg in October,
71. At that time foreign tin was selling here at $14.r box. In 18 73 another plant was established at LeechIrg, and still another at Demmler, known as "The United
tates Iron and Tin Plate   Manufacturing Company."
hese plants were mechanically successes, but financially
qy were made failures by the action of the British manuicturers, who, under the prevaililng low tariff of that
r;od, flooded the country with their product, reducing
eir prices more than 50 per cent. below that they had
narged before the American plants were started, and the
tter were finally driven out of business. After the fail'e of the United States Iron and Tin Plate Manufacturwg Company, no further attempt was made by that or any:her firm to make tin plate in this country until after the:sage of the AcKiinley tariff law, the tin-plate clause in
liicll did not become operative until July 1, 1891.
In the presidential campaign of 1892 the increased duty
i tin plate formed a prominent feature in the arguments
f free trade or 'tariff-for-revenue-only' orators, who conndled that tin plate could not be successfully made in this
entry, and that the only effect of the tariff would be to
Tlcease to the American consumer the price of the foreign
rtiele. Their predictions have utterly failed, for, as I
ae already shown, there were in 1902 employed in this
il,]stry in my State alone 8,905 men, who received in
'sa an aggregate of $4,506,105. The result of encourti  and enabliing our own citizens to engage in this inutsiry, instead of increasing, has actually decreased the
9st of tin plate to the consumer. The lowest price ever!ad ied before the present tariff was imposed was $5.18, to
ii h figure our British friends reduced it in their successIl tffort to drive the early American plants outof business
os:on as that was accomplished they put it up again at
i  as high as $7.50. But to-day, the domestic industry
x-v'g been protected since 1891 by a heavy tariff, our
lv~i people are able to, and do, produce and sell tin plate at
a-95






I


"ITIS ONLY BY A: PROTEC     TIVE TARIFF THAT TH
HOME:MARKES CAN BE RETAINED."
Extract from  remarks of Hon. M. E. OLMSTED,
Pen sylvania, wi daily Congressional Record, Ju1
20, 1904.
BEiNEFIT OF0   THE RIPUBLICAN PROTECTIVE TARIFF.
One by one the low-tariff countries of the world hali
recognized the advantages of protection and adopted ii
principles, and now the stronghold of free trade, Grea
Britain, seems about to surrender to the popular demand
for protection.
With the prosperity which came to the United States
to France, and to Germany through the protective system,
the principal European countries, with the exception oi
Netherlands and the United Kingdom, have adopted th
protective system.  More recently, Japan, India, aii
China have increased their tariff duties) the increase o0
many articles being large; and now the two remainiri
countries of consequence, Netherlands and the Unite
Kingdom, are respectively moving toward protection. I1
Netherlands a new tariff has recently been proposed by thb
Government which increases materially the rates of duty
especially on many articles; and, as is well known, a strou|
demand is now being made in the United Kingdom fo
the adoption of a protective system.
The chief argument urged in the United Kingdom it
favor of abandoning free trade and the adoption of pro
tection is that it is only by a protective tariff that the hoin
markets can be retained to the home manufacturer ani
workman. The Germans, with low wages, skilled medhan
ies, plentiful supplies of raw material, and the highel
technical education known to the manufacturing world
have invaded the British market on the one side, while o0
the other hand the manufacturers of the United State
produced with highly paid labor, but with effective machir
ery, great supplies of raw material, low-priced fuel, chea!
transportation, and the economies resulting from great or
ganization are also proving a serious competitor in th
home markets of Great Britain and her colonies. This di6
satisfaction is based upon the fact that, under the fre
trade system, the importation of manufactures into the
United Kindom from the United States, Germany, Net.
erands, Belgium, and France, nearly all of these beini
protective countrie, has grown from $250,000,000 in 187I
to $580,000,000 in 1902, and is intensified by the furtet
fac that the exports of manufactures to the same pro
ted   countries fell from $355,000,000 in 1875 to $285,
000,000 in 1902. These two great facts-that the coxne
tries whse manufacturing systems are developed under
ptective tariff are capturing the home markets of
United   ingdo    and at the same time    excluding h
a figures published by the British Govment-a
0the prle:c  use of te rigoros demand rnow beng 
Enland for th adoption of the protective system.:.:6


1;
I
I
i
I
I
V
I
I
5
I
I
I


I






THrE UNITED STATES TARIFF FROM THE BRITISH
POINT OF VIEW."
Extrtacts from reports of British Iron and Steel Commission, printed in
daily Congressional Record, June 20, 1904, as part of remarks of Lon.
X. E. OLM8TED of Pennsylvania.
From the British point of view the main interest in and the chief effect of the United States tariff takes two forms-that of excluding our
products from the markets of that country and that of underselling us in
our own. As regards the former, the fact is so well known that I need
not pile up figures to prove it. Suffice it to say that our total iron and
steel exports to the United States are now only about one-fifth of what they
were ten years ago, although even now the tariff does not entirely shut
out European iron and steel, seeing that pig iron and billets are being
imported from Europe while I write. *  * *
I may here point out that while Great Britain, according to the official
records of the United States, took from that country an average of more
than $500,000,000 worth of merchandise during the last four years, the
average imports of British produce into the United States have not exceeded
one-third of that figure, while of that one-third from one-half to two-thirds
are subject to more or less prohibitory duties. This is not a trade relationship which the people of this country can regard with perfect equanimity. Americans can hardly be surprised if in Great Britain there is an
increasingly strong impression that in matters of commerce our American
friends, like the Dutch described by Hudibras, have a habit of "giving too
little, and asking too much."
Effect of the tariff on prices.
The Americans generally dispute the argument that a tariff for protection tends to keep up prices to the home consumer, and in support of
their attitude on this subject they point to the fact that the prices of coal,
iron, steel, and other commodities are, and have been, materially lower
in the United States than in Great Britain. This view opens up questions
of vast range, which it would take much space to handle. The other side
of the argument obviously is that prices of commodities in the United States
have declined, not because, but in spite of the tariff. *  *  *
At the same time it is by no means clear that a high tariff does necessarily involve a high range of prices in the protected country, and in the
United States within the last few years prices have touched a very low
level in spite of the tariff. Take as a case in point the statistics of steel
rails. When the steel-rail industry was begun in the United States, in
1867, the rate of duty on imports was 45 per cent. ad valorem. This rate
was continued until 1871, when it was made a specific duty of $28 per ton,
which was reduced to $17 per ton in 1883, to $13.44 In 1890, and to $7.84
in 1894, at which figure it has since been maintained. In spite of these
duties, however, the average price of steel rails in the United States fell
from $28 in 1897 to $17.62 in 1898, and in the latter year the average
American price was probably under the average of any other country.
Many hold that the tariff has mainly been responsible for the great
fortunes made by the typical millionaire, and the case of Mr. Andrew Carnegie is often quoted as a conclusive proof of this theory. I should not
have dealt with an individual example in this connection but for the fact
that it stands out so prominently in the recent history of the American iron
trade as to make it almost impossible to ignore it in the consideration of
this phase of the question. Moreover, I have had the privilege on more
than one occasion of comparing notes with Mr. Carnegie and of knowing
something more of the facts than "the man in the street;" and while I
would not, of course, make use of any of the facts and figures brought to
my knowledge in this way, I am quite at liberty to deal with facts that are
common property in the light of the aspects thus presented.
Everyone who makes any pretensions to a knowledge of the recent
history of the American iron and steel industries must be fully aware that
during one of the most critical periods in its career the operations of manufacturing firms, and not the least so of those engaged in the steel-rail industry, were not uniformly successful. In the years 1896-1898 the principal firms connected in the American rail industry were the Carnegie Steel
Company and the Illinois Steel Company, afterwards merged In the Federal
Steel Company. But it is a well-known fact that over a large part of this
period the Illinois Company failed to make profits, while the Carnegie Steel
Company did remarkably well. The difference of results is mainly, if not
wholly due to differences in location, resources, and administration, and it
is hardly likely to be claimed that the tariff was the cause of those differentes, since its influence equally affected both. No doubt in the earlier
history of the rail trade profits were large, but on a relative small product,
for in 1875, when the Carnegie Company started, the total American production of steel rails was only 259,000 tons.
Trusts and the tariff.
In America the question has been many times raised of late whether
tlhele is not a large degree of interdependence between industrial combinations and tariff duties. On this subject the United States Industrial Comluisson recently reported:
"Protective tariffs do not seem to have been of special significance in
the formation of industrial combinations in Europe, although in many cases
thie combination has been enabled to take advantage of the protective tariff
in the way of securing higher prices. In free-trade England the combinatioe movement seems to have developed considerably further than in protectionist France; but, on the other hand, the movement toward combination has gone much further in extent in Austria and Germany, both proteclionist countries, than in England although in England the form of comhbiation is generally more complete. Doctor Liefmann, in an article on
co1:1binations in England, expresses the opinion that the chief reason for
the lesser development of monopolistic combinations in England and the
continuance of severe competition in branches of industry in which in Gerttlaiy there have existed for a long time very rigid combinations-for examaIle, the coal industry-ascribes the cause rather to the principle of extresme individualism in England, which has a much firmer hold on business
mea in his judgment, than in Germany, and this appears, on the whole, to
be the right conception.
a-97


I




'ANOTHER TRiBUTE TO PROTECTION FROM
ENGLAND."
Extract from remarks of Hon. MA. E. OLAIbTED of Pennsylvania,   in da:ily
Congressional Record, June 20, 1904.
Another tribute to protection is paid by another representative comiis.
sion from England which visited the United States in 1902, namely, the
commissioners appointed by the JBritish Iron Trade Association to inquire
into the iron, steel, and allied industries of the United States. This commission, which visited the great iron manufacturing centers of the United
States, presented an elaborate report, forming a volume of nearly %00
pages. Throughout this elaborate report the writers point to the advan.
tageous conditions existing in the United States, the higher prices wai4
for labor, the better conditions of the laboring men than those of their own
country, England, and the wonderful prosperity which has come to the iron
and Steel industry in the United States, where, in the words of the seore.
tary of the commission, Mr. J. Stephen Jeans, "In no country has protection been adopted in such a whole-souled manner. In no other counctry
have the shibboleths of free trade been more emphatically held at arm's
length."
l Commenting upon the remarkable development in the United States in
this industry, Mr. Jeans says:
The cost of production of iron and steel is made up of three main elements-raw materials, iabor, and transportation. No one of these matters
can properly be dealt with unless in relation to the others. Raw materials,
however cheap and abundant, are of little value as a basis of industrial
prosperity without cheap transport and labor at a reasonable cost. Similarly
cheap labor is of little value without adequate supplies of raw materials
of the right kind plus a reasonable rate of charge for transport. The interrelation of these three subjects has made it necessary to devote much space
to all three of them in this report. Labor is perhaps the most fundamentnal
of the trio, because in one formor another the ultimate cost of all commodities Is mainly that of labor. In the United States, paradoxical as it may
appear, we have to face conditions that make at onc   hethe dearest and the
cheapest labor that is probably to be found in any part. of the world-dearest with respect to -nominal remiuneration, the cheapest with respect to industrial and economic results.
It is the purpose of the following pages to demonstrate how American
Ironmasters and engineers have been able to so discipline and apply thi
labor at their command as to reconcile high wages with cheap production
In a degree not hitherto attained elsewhere.  *  *   *  The influence of
trades-runiontsm is not nearly so strong nor so aggressiv  n the inthe Unite
States as in Great Britain. *  * *   The almost absolute freedom of labor
has been the chief instrument whereby it has won such conquests in the
field of industrial economy during the last quarter of a century. In all
countries industrial processes have been greatly cheapened during thatn
period, but in America the cheapening appears to have been carried farther
than anywhere else..Within that time a wire-rod roller has seen his earnlugs per ton reduced from $2.12 to 12 cents, and yet he earns larger wages
at the lower figure, while 5 cents are paid to-day for heating billets to make
wire rods against 80 cents during the period referred to.     * *  *  Wages,
in short, are generally so good and the men have their futres so much in
their own hands th that they have every encouragement to do the best they can
botah fbor their employers and for themselves. The human factor and the
personal equation appear to cotnt in the United States for more than tae!w
generally do in Eirope. Workmen appear to enjoy a larger measure of
independence, based on a knowledge of. the fact that work Is more easy to
obtain than in the older countries, and they are able as a rule to save.
money and arc therefore less dependent t ha   when living, as is not 'nusual in 9urope, from hand to month. and that they are living under I
political rfgime which is.founded on democratic principles.
The commissioners naturally found that the influence of the corporatioti
was almost all-pervading in certain districts, and that Its future policy an1
its financial issues were regarded from very different aspects and with veri
different ideas by different observers., The United States Steel Corporation,
in the opinion of the majority, has. come to stay. As it controlled nearly,
two-thirds of the total iron ore, coke, pig-iron, and steel capsaities of ttic
United States at the time of Its organization, it is natural that it should be:
looked to as the leader of all movements of prices and wages, and the
prominent part which it tookL in the settlement of the Important labor 
dispute ot 1901 supplied an evidence, if any were needed, that It mealns
to use its power iand influence.when occasion demands that It should do co.
At the same time, there is reason, to believe that its power is not relatively
Increasing-In other words, that the production of iron and steel contro l^id
by independent concerns, or likely to be so in the near future, is or wli
be greater than that at the time of the consolidation.|
It- is natural. that both here and on the other side of the Atlantic thec
vast influee and the comunmanding position secured by the United Statc'
Steel Corporation should have induced a degree of apprehension lest smc1er
plants 'tmay be swamped, and both production and price become largey a
matter of monopoly. This is not, however, the opinion of the best inforcc"
and imost far-seeing men with wlon I have had the opportunity of discussitng.the' situationf in the United States. That private enterprise in hlat
country Is -not afraSid of the Steel Corporation is made evident by the 115.precedented activity that is being displayed in the establishment of nec
independent.plants while I write. In every part of the United States pla no
a.re eatterlag the lists to compete against the Steel Corporation, and the
capaty oif t.he: private plants opposed to it to-day is probably considerablyi
greater than, it war. at the time it was founded, although that was oni
ebruary,.1901. A recent writer has accurately noted that. small p iii'
well located and economically.managed are remarkably tenacious of len
It has also bee  observed that the best returns on American capital dun11o
th Mperiod lkanownas athe. "lean. years" were 'not generally those of the 1aorg
est enterss, but those of aow few smaller firms, and those in some ca'.euteidethe range.of what are bmown 'as "the cheap centers." 
R-98




ITIE TARIFF MOVEMENT."-"DAMAGING RESULTS
TO BRITISH INDUSTRIES."
E;racts from article by C. J. PEJARS in London Boot and Shoe Journal,
printed in daily Congressional Record, June ~0, 1904.
The appearance of foreign competition really commenced in 1876. First
Amorica, then France, Germany, Belgium, and Italy, began to attack our
trade, and it only remains for me to give you a rapid history of the tariff
movement before showing you the damaging results to British industries.
From 1861 to 1865 the United States duties were largely increased.
Why? In order to encourage the American capitalists to invest their money
in and create new industries. Of the many men who have benefited under
protection probably none have done so more than Mr. Andrew Carnegie,
who tells us that after the American war the Government asked how much
would induce manufacturers to enter the steel trade? Thirty per cent. was
the reply; and they got it, and everyone knows thresults  today supplied with cheaper steel than any other nation, and it is certain that
a large part of the world is to be supplied by the works of that country, and
it clearly proves that the country in control of a profitable home market can
successfully invade the foreign market.
France followed in 1871, and after ten years' experience-in 1881 —
raised her duties by 20 per cent. England protested, but France made the
unanswerable reply: "The British markets were free to all alike, and sinace
France enjoyed no special privileges in the British markets, how could she
claim any special exemption from French duties?"
Germany followed in 1879, when Bismarck, with marvelous foresight,
said: "I base my opinion on the practical experience of our time. I see
countries under protection prospering and the countries under free trade
decaying. England, herself, is slowly returning to protection, and some
years hence she will adopt it, if only to save her home markets."
The Iron Chancellor gained the day, and all but the poor Cobdenite
Iealized that the free-import doctrine had received its death blow.
Eighteen hundred and eighty-one the Russian tariff was increased, and
1884 still further. Eighteen hundred and eighty-five the German tariff was
again increased. In 1887 and 1888 the Russian and Italian tariffs were
again increased.
In 1890 the Americans, well satisfied by their previous tariff experience.
passed the McKinley bill, and in 1897 the Dingley bill. The effect on our
trade is shown below:
Exports to United States.
1890...................................................~32,100,000
1891 (first year after the McKinley bill)................... 27.500.000
1902........................................... 23,800,000
o. a decline in twelve years of ~8,300,000 at the same time our population
had increased.
Imports from United States.
1890.........................................97,233,349
1902......................0............................126961.601
an increase of ~29,728,252.
Yet, in the face of these figures, it we follow the illogical advice of some
politicians we must utterly disregard America, because she is a young and
energetic country with wonderful natural resources, and therefore we must
"lie down" and allow her to beat us in all the markets of the world, more
eSplecially in our colonies, and then, I suppose, these keen-sighted gentlemen
will "be against" whatever government may be in power when the crisis
arrives for allowing such a state of affairs to have existed? Neither America
nor Germany was always one huge Republic or one huge Fatherland. After
the~ir wars they settled down, combined together, and established free trade
W ithin their domains and raised a protective wall against all foreigners.
This is precisely Mr. Chamberlain's idea. He wishes, as far as possible, to
establlsh free trade within the Empire, to make us self-contained and, with
ti;b help of the wonderful natural resources of the colonies, dependent on no
otuer country for our food supply. In fact, to make It cheaper for one end
of the Empire to trade with the other than with any foreign country. *  *
AF I approach British trade I find:
(1) That under free imports we have made less progress than any prote:ctPonist country, as the following figures show:
(From the Daily Telegraph.]
1872.       1 I' 2.  Increase.
r1:;ish exports:                                          I Per cent.
TIo British possessions.................  61,000,000  ~109,t,00,  79
To foreign countries..................  196,000,i000  174,000  i  all
Total..................................  257,000,000  288,000...........
11  a  exports.................    42,000,000  74,00,000        7
A 1*lro-Hisuugarlan exiports...............  9,000,000  8 I,000,000 | 108:  ian   exports................................  46,(XX), 10,000 1 
te d  itates exports...................  8),0,000  282,110000  2 17


a Deererse.




K"SAMUELBOWLS,.A'ED0IToR OF SPRINGFIELD
REPUBLICAN"
"SBNT A PTITION TO CONGRESS ENTREATING IT Tr
REVISE TIM TARIFF OF 1846 IN THE
ZNITEREST OF PROTECTION."
r  from remarks of Mon. J. M. G ALLINGIRI of New Hampshire, in
2enate of the U. B., May 16, 17, 19, 1894; printed in the Congressidol
ecr d.
In 1850 Mr. Samuel Bowles and other representative citizens of Massa.
chusetts sent a petition to Congress entreating it to revise the tariff of 1846
in the Interest of protection, and this is what that well known editor of the
Springfield Republican and his associates said at that time:
4'Previous to the passage of that law the manufacturing and mechauical
interests in this community were In a flourishing condition. Since that time
the condition of things has entirely changed and it is fully believed thai
much of the stagnation of business may be traced to the operation of that
law. Manufacturing languishes, mechanics are thrown out of emnployment,
business of all kinds is dull, and unless protection can be afforded to our
laboring classes poverty will overtake them.  The subscribers therefore
pray that Congress will so alter the tariff of 1846 that it will protect thte
labor and capital of the country from foreign competition."
In 1854 we find Hunt's Merchants' Magazine, a well-known free trade
*journal of that period, declaring that
"Confidence is shaken everywhere and classes are made to realize the
insecurity of worldly possessions. The causes which led to this have been
a long time at work. Goods which have accumulated abroad when the
demand has almost ceased were crowded upon our shores at whatever advance could be obtained, thus aggravating the evil."
A little later, January 6, 1855, the New York Herald said editorially:
"Elsewhere will be found some mention of large failures at Boston and
New Orleans. The epidemic is traveling over the whole country. No city
of any note can hope to escape."
An address of the unemployed working men's committee to the Mayor
of the City of New York was published in the Herald of that same date,
These workingmen said:s:"We do not come as beggars, but we ask what we deem right. We aso
not alms, but work. We don't want a little soup now and cast-off clothing
to-morrow. But we do want work and the means of making an honeest
livelihood. The condition of the working classes is most piteous. They
want bread. Is there not enough in the city? They want clothes. Is there
none made nowadays?"
Can it be possible that those were prosperous times?  If idleness, low
wages, hunger, failures, bankruptcy, are evidences of prosperity, then indded did the Walker Tariff bring prosperity to the country, but not otherwise,
But the democracy was still in power and was so infatuated with
British free trade that notwithstanding the fearful state of things just described, It would not stop the import of foreign-made goods that our people
might have work, nor the flow of gold to Europe to pay for them. * * *
In 1857 the Democrats, urged on by the South and by their natural
tendency to free trade, as. repeatedly shown in their national platforms,
again reduced the duties,' already too low, to the lowest rates we have ever
had since the adoption of the Constitution; and again financial revolution,
appallingt in its widespread severity and distress, involved the nation and
for more than four years tortured and impoverished our people and exhaeusted our, resources.
Both of these latter tariffs (1846 and 1857) were intended as tariffs
for revenue only. Whether or not they were successful the resulting reveaues shall demonstrate.
From 1847 to 1857 the expenditures of the Government exceeded its
revenues by $21,790,909 and the public debt increased in the same period
$13,149,629. Yet, notwithstanding these facts, the act of 1857 kept in force
the principles of that of 1846, and reduced the duties on all articles that
Involved the doctrine of protection.
From this time to 1861, when a protective tariff was enacted by the
Republicans, the public debft increased nearly $46,000,000 and the expenditures exceeded the receipts by $77,234,116 in the same time. So much far
tariff for revenue only.
Hear what James Buchanan, the last Democratic President before the
rebellion of 1861, in his annual message said officially of that distres lid
free trade period: "With unsurpassed plenty in all the productions and all
the elements of natural wealth our manufactures have suspended; our pibli works  retarded; our private enterprises of different kinds are abaanloned; antd. thousands of useful laborers are thrown out of employment ad
reduced to want. We have possessed all the elements of material wealil
in rich abundance, and yet, notwithstanding all these advantages, our co0ntry, in its monetary interests, is In a deplorable condition."
Butchana&, like Fillmore. not only depicts the complete failure of lo
'tariff rates, but also proclaims the unutterable misery and ruin wh-ich
invariably and Inevitably follow such low duties. Why, under Buchanan ad
the tariff of 1857 our rvenues were so small that it became necess arjy i
btain loans to meet even the epenses of the Government; and these loills
culd   e had only by paying eaorbltant rates of interest, running from ei71t
to twelve er cent., so low were our national credit and resources.
Per


I




WHY I AM A PROTECTIONIST.;tract from American Economist, published in daily Congressional
lIecord, June ~0, 1904.
y Hon. Justin S. Morrill, former United States Senator from
Vermont. father of the Morrill tariff act of 1861,
First. It brings together diversified industries which never fail to
stly increase the personal intelligence, industry, and wage earnings
the people.
Second. It adds prodigiously to the power of increasing, by mainery and steam and water power, the necessaries of life and of
dvanced civilization, and also greatly cheapens the cost of substence.
Third. It furnishes an opportunity for every person to find the
ployment best adapted to his or her genius and capacity that will
cure the largest income or the greatest happiness.
Fourth. It creates a home market, without which the cultivators of
nd in America would be but a little better off than our aborigines.
Fifth. It is the bulwark of national independence in peace or war.
y Hon. George F. Hoar, United States Senator from Massachusetts.
I am a protectionist because I think by that policy the workmen of
nmerica will be well paid and not underpaid.
Because I think by that policy the variety of industry will be creted here which will make America strong in peace and in war.
Because the industries so fostered will develop the skill and brain
ower of my countrymen and raise the people of the United States
the first rank in intelligence among the nations of the earth.
Because that policy has already made us the richest and strongest
[ation on earth, and under a properly restricted immigration will
ring to us much that is most valuable in the population of other
ands.
By Hon. S. M. Cullom, United States Senator from Illinois.
First. Because as a result in a large degree of our protective-tariff
ystem the United States has become one of the foremost nations of
he world.
Second. Because by the policy of fostering American industries
he development of our manufacturing interests have been secured;
he inventive genius of our people has found a field; American labor
as become the best paid, and consequently our laborers the best
oused, clothed, and fed; and the wonderful development and progess in this country in all that makes a people great, have elicited the
drmiration of the civilized world.
In view of these facts, which are well known, I believe in such a
rotective tariff as will secure reasonable protection to American
abor and industry.
By Hon. William P. Frye, United States Senator from Maine.
Because facts confront us, not theories. I have seen the wagearniers of Great Britain and continental Europe; know how they
ive; that they are homeless and landless as far as ownership is coneried; that they are helpless and hopeless as to any brighter future
or themselves or their children; that in their scant wages there is no
margin for misfortune and sickness. pauperism being the only refuge.
I know that in this Republic the prudent, temperate, and indusri,;os worker is sure of an abundant reward; that his ambition to
lc e:ed seldom meets with failure; that he owns land and home;
hat luxuries to the European laborer are necessities to the American.
)ow then can we compete with the former and maintain our superoril: in these regards? Steam and electricity have made of the
or ld one neighborhood, eliminating largely the protection once
ff:sded by time, distance, and transportation. There is one way only
f Slving this problem: Legislation for our own, a tariff for proec on.,
By Hon. N. D. Sperry, M. C., of New Haven, Conn.
lecause I am an American citizen and wish to see the people of
is country prosperous. Experience of more than forty years in
usiess has staught me that under a low, or revenue, tariff, business
eession and financial distress has been the rule, while under proetion good business and general prosperity has been the result.


4-101




"I AM A PROTECTIONIST BECAUSE I AM AN AME
CAN.";Eitrctce  from American Economist, printed in daily Congre^sio
Record, June S0, 1904.
By Col. William   L. Strong.
First. I am a protectionist because I am an American, thorou
imbued with American ideas, American principles, American en
prises, andAmerican thought.
Second. For the reason that it guarantees to the wage-ear
whether male or female, a better remunerattion for their services 
they can possibly obtain in any country on the face of the globe;
this remuneration does not apply simply to factory operatives, na
facturing textile fabrics, but applies equally to the employed in cve
vocation in life.
Third. It has caused the balance of trade to turn in our fa
during the last thirty years to such an extent that the nations of
earth, during this time, have paid us eighteen hundred millions of d
lars, and our country is just that much richer than it would h
been had it not been for our system of protection.
Fourth. For the reason that it encourages manufacturing ent
prises of all kinds to increase throughout the country, and the c
petition between the manufacturers prevents large profits from bei
made and prevents monopolies of all kinds in consequence of t
competition. The result of our manufacturing interests is we f
nish the people a better class of goods at a less price than they wo
have to pay if these different manufacturing establishments were
established in this country, creating a demand for our agricullu
products and realizing a better price for them in our own ho
market than we get abroad.
Fifth. The United States Government collected in 1890 about $2
000,000 from imports, and the most of this revenue was collect
from importers who bring in a class of merchandise that is not u
generally by the medium and lower classes, and particularly so si
the duties have been taken off sugar.
The lowest estimate of the amount of money earned by the wa
earners of all classes in this country is about fifteen thousand milli
of dollars annually, an excess of at least six thousand millions o
the earnings of the same number of people living in other countries,
Can this country do away with our protective policy without
ducing the wages of the bread-winners to the level of wages paid
foreign countries? If not, then the wage-earners could well afford
payt the $30,000,000 collected by the Government, mostly from
eign producers, in 1890, and keep up the present rate of wages.
As the wealthier classes use at least seven-tenths of the amount
our imports, that portion of the duty paid by consumers bears V,
lightly on the poorer classes of people.
By Hon. D. B. Henderson, former Speaker United States HoI
of Representatives.
First. Because the civilized world substantially protects itself, th
forcing us to protect ourselves.
Second. Because all the conditions of men and of women in 
country are better than in other countries, and protection is need
to preserve our happier conditions.
Third. Becamse I want labor to get the best possible wages for
efforts.
Fourth. Because I want agriculture to find a near, sure, and r
market.
Fifth. Because I want to keep the capital and labor of this co0
try all actively employed, each helping the other.
By Edwin A. Hartshorn, of Troy, N. Y.
Because protection insures the greatest possible good to the greC
est possible number.
Because steam and electricity have practically annihilated sp1a
while climatic conditions render living impossible upon the samei
come in all countries.
Because self-government under a labor system so degrade( as
prohibit universal education is an impossibility.
Because protection is the first law of national, as well as
dividual, preservation, and self-preservation is the first law of:at
Because cheap labor and free foreign trade were the fundamenn
p inciples of the Southern Confederacy, which threatened he
struction of our priles Government. 


I
I
I
I
I
i


I


a-102


I




'A  PROTECTIONIST —FOR           THE    FOLLOWING       REASONS."
Printed in daily Congressional eRecord, June 20, 1904, as appendix to
remarks of lHon. J. T. McCLJARY of Minnesota.
By David 3. Hill, D.., LL. D., President University of Rochester.
I am a protectionist for the following reasons:
First The policy of protection enables our country to develop industries of which other countries, if it were not for protection, would
enjoy a practical monopoly. Although not profitable in the United
States unless protected, these industries are important to our national
development and independence and should not be allowed to become
extinct.
Second. A protective tariff unquestionably increases the rewards
of labor (a) by creating a demand for skilled labor, (b) by diversifying the kinds of labor in a country and thus differentiating both demand and supply, and (c) by making for producers of every kind a
home market. This increase of the laborer's reward is not confined
to the protected industries, but elevates wages in every sphere (a) by
the sympathetic effect of high wages generally and (b) by withdrawing from the non-protected industries and from agriculture a surplus of wage-earners who would divide and reduce wages if they
competed against each other.
Third. Although a protective tariff increases prices immediately
after its adoption, the resulting activity and the abundant home production under protection tend constantly to reduce the prices of
manufactured articles as industry becomes better organized. As a
result the country becomes wealthier both absolutely and relatively
-absolutely, because the aggregate of home-produced commodities
is vastly increased; and relatively, because wages are kept above the
European level by a high-tariff barrier to foreign competition. Under
free trade or a tariff for revenue only we would have to send our
gold out of the country to pay for imported goods and to compete
with the entire world in disposing of our own products at home, thus
lowering our wages to the level of those paid to the cheap labor of
Europe.
Fourth. The United States is a continental nation and should adopt
a continental policy. Free trade is adapted only to insular nations,
and no continental nation has adopted a free-trade policy. We are
the most continental of all the continental peoples and have the most
diversified products. A naturally specialized nation, like Great
Britain, can always drive us out of the market in that nation's
specialty in the long run, because it must do so to maintain its own
existence. On the one hand, we should not plunge our people into
so desperate a competition with a specialized competitor, for this
could end only in driving our people from the field; and, on the other
hand, we should not permit our country to be itself specialized by
being limited to those productions only in which it has a natural
superiority under existing conditions. The only way out of the dilemma is to protect those industries which it is necessary to foster
in order to secure diversified and harmonious national development.
Fifth. The deepest root of my adherence to a protective policy is,
however, a moral one. I believe that we, as a nation, have great material advantages for the building up of a free, intelligent, and happy
people such as the world has not yet seen. I believe that these advantages are surrendered if too widely shared. We are divinely set
as a nation to work out the political problem of mankind. As a
patriot, I claim that, having a manifest national destiny to be worked
out by a historic process, we should not part with our birthright. As
vell might a father of a family, just started in a prosperous business with a small capital, distribute his little property equally among,he poor of his neighborhood, depriving himself of the means of providing for and educating his children, as for this nation to share with
the Old World every increment of power and superiority to be found
na the new, assuming its burdens of mendicancy and debt, and re-:eiving the peasant as the peer of the American citizen.
The greatest anomaly in our history is the free reception actorded!) those who have come to our shores to claim rights which they were
efitted to exercise. Free trade secures to evy   ery  t   country all
he advantages that belong to this, as soon as it is adopted, by puting American labor in open competition with the labor of Europe
rnd Asia. Free immigration at least obliges the participat in Amerian prosperity to come to America; free trade would send hi  the
muit of American industry without the trouble of crossing the ocean
a-103




"THE FARM, THE SHOP, THE MINE, THE FACTORYEACH FURNISHES A MARKET FOR THE
OTHER."
Extracts from American Economist, printed in daily Congressional
Record, June 20, 1904, as appendix to remarks of Hon. J. T.
McCGLEARY.
By Hon. George H. Ely, of Ohio.
It is obviously the right and the duty of this nation to care for its
own. Whatever, from geographical position, commercial relations, and
existing social and industrial conditions, may apparently be the policy
of any other nation, it is our duty to make the utmost of American
resources-resources in men and in material things. That was the
underlying thought of the new nation, planted on the new continent.
It proposed a higher type of manhood than could be realized under
Old World conditions.
It meant, first of all, a higher wage level. Men, not class interests,
were to count in the new social and political framework. That higher
wage level aimed at by the fathers of the Republic, the policy of
protection which they inaugurated secured and still maintains. By
carefully adjusted rates of duty the low-wage products of other
countries which compete with ours, or with such as we can and ought
to produce, are made to pay to a large extent the necessary expenses
of our Government; while our free list of non-competitive products
swings wide open the gates in every clime to the products of our
agriculture and manufactures.
The instrument is a diversified industry, which, along the whole
range of invention, discovery, and human labor, lifts into the sunlight the dormant and unutilized natural resources of our country.
By this policy the farm, the shop, the mine, and the factory each
furnish a market for the other, and while taxation of foreign products
at the gates is an unfailing reliance for revenue, home production,
with competition the moment the defensive duty has established the
industry, invariably lowers the cost of commodities to the consumer.
In other words, "the tariff is a tax" only on the foreign producer. In
no other land does a day's wages secure to the toiler so much to
cover his necessities and to brighten his life. Whenever, at different
periods in the one hundred years behind us, this economic policy has
prevailed, and to just the extent it has been fully operative, its vindication has glowed upon the pages of our national history.
By Judge William Lawrence, of Ohio.
I favor protection because it is essential to national power, wealth,
and independence; it makes a demand for skilled labor, including
that for infirm men, for women and children, who would otherwise
be idle; secures fair wages and adds to general intelligence; it makes
a home market, alwavw reliable, and the best for farm products and
for vegetables and fruits which can not be exported and for which
there would otherwise be no market; it improves the productive
capacity, especially by stock raising and the value of lands; it saves
to the world the useless expense and labor of shipping products
from one country to another and turns these into productive sources
of wealth; it secures national revenue paid largely by foreigners, arid
multiplies the sources which share the burdens of local taxation; il:s
ultimate effect is to furnish more abundant and cheaper products 1by
home competition, by preventing foreign monopoly and extortion, and by the invention of labor-saving machinery; it adds to
the sources of individual wealth, education, comfort, and happiness.
Every period of adequate protection has been prosperous; every
period of "tariff for revenue only," unaided by abnormal conditiotr
has been attended with depression in business and consequent idleness and crime, verif tng the truth that "he that provideth not fer
his own household is worse than" a protectionist-he is a free tradri
or free traitor.
By HSon. Joseph Nimmo, Jr.
1. Because protectiop is in conformity with the dictates of comm"n
sense and patriotism.
2. Because protection is founded upon the hard teachings of experience, and not upon any fancied eternal fitness of things.
3. Because protection defends home markets entirely our own and
in the' ag-gregate at least five times as large as the total forein
market,l  i which we are forced to compete sharply with all otler
nations14
a-104




"NO ATTACK BY REPEALING THE DINGLEY ACT CAN
HURT ONE WITHOUT HURTING ALL."
"IS THE REPUBLICAN PARTY READY TO OPEN THE
BOX, KNOWING THAT ONCE IT IS OPENED,
ONLY HOPE IS LEFT BEHIND?"
ixtract from article by Hon. THOMAS B. REED, printed
in daily Congressional Record, June 2o, I9o4.
Let us put this into a few words of a practical character.
We have a tariff carefully drawn, which has served us
well. That tariff is only five years old. It has brought us
away up on the hillside of success. It has no connection
with great corporations, except what it has with small corporations and individuals. No attack by repealing the DinglAt Act can hurt one without hurting all. Any disturbance
of that kind would disturb trade in ways with which we are
all too familiar.
A tariff bill at any time is not and can not be the creature
of one mind. It means the result of a contest by all interests
and all minds. Hence, whgenever any man thinks of a tariff
le would make, he always thinks of a tariff bill which will
never be enacted.
There was once a President of the United States of great
ower and influence. For four years he had no Congress
behind him, and he dreamed of such a tariff-reform law as
woeuld suit him. By and by he had a Congress of his own
party, and he started in to make such a law as would please
1ot gods and men. There are those who remember the dist11I looks of the 3embers of the House zw hen they yielded to
he S3 enate, and the averted looks of the President as he let
lic bill pass by, unsigned and friendless. To those men it
c;rne apparent, as it should be to the whole world, that the
arie enacted is always different from the act in your mind.
L the Republican party to open the box, knowng that
1c     i it is opened only hope is left behind,
a~105 




"AT ALL HAZARDS THE AMERICAN WORKINGMAN
MU$T BE PROTECTED."
hreacts from Public addresses and works of President Roosevelt, Printed
WHAT PEIDENT RDOSEVELT SAYS ABOUT TjH PERO.
~ ~    'TEOTIVE TARIFF.
Our aim should be to preserve the policy of a protective tariff. in which
the nation as a whole has acquiesced, and yet wherever and whenever nec.
essary to change the duties in particular paragraphs or schedules as mat.
ters of legislative detail, if such change is demanded by the interests of
the nation as a whole. (Minneapolis, Minn., April 4, 1903.)
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 in labor cost here and and abroad; in
other words, the recognition of the need for full development of the intelli.
gence, the comfort, the high standard of civilized living, and the inventive
genius of the American workingman as compared to the workingman of
any other country in the world. (New York, November 11, 1902.)
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.   (Logansport, Ind., September,
1902.)
A nation like ours can adjust its business after a fashion to any kind of
tariff. But neither our nation nor any other can stand the ruinous policy
of readjusting its business to radical changes in the tariff at short inter.
vals. (Logansport, Ind., September 23, 1902.)
If a tariff law has on the whole worked well and if business has prospered under it and is prospering, it may be better to endure some inconveniences and Inequalities for a time than by making changes to risk
causing disturbance and perhaps paralysis in the industries and business of
the country.  (Minneapolis, Minn., April 4, 1903.)
The real evils connected with the trusts can not be remedied by any
change in the tariff laws. The trusts can be damaged by depriving them of
the benefits of a protective tariff only on condition of damaging all their
smaller competitors and all the wage-workers employed in the industry.
(C3tincinati, September 20, 1902.)
The tariff affects trusts only as it affects all other interests. It makes
all these interests, large or small, profitable; and its benefits can be taken
from the large only under penalty of taking them from the small also,
(Minneapolis, Minn., April 7, 1903.)
There is general acquiescence in our present tariff system as a national
policy. The first requisite to our prosperity is the continuity and stability
of this economic policy. Nothing could be more unwise than to disturb the
business interests of the country by any general tariff change at this time.
Doubt, apprehension, uncertainty are exactly what we most wish to avoid in
the interest of our commercial and material well-being.
Our experience in the past has shown that sweeping revisions of the tariff
are apt to produce conditions closely approaching panic in the business
world. Yet it is not only possible, but eminently desirable, to combine with
the stability of our economic system a supplementary system of reciprocal
benefit and obligation with other nations. Such reciprocity is an incident
and result of the firm establishment and preservation of our present economic policy. It was specially provided for in the present tariff law.
Reciprocity must be treated as the handmaiden of protection. Our first
duty is to see that the protection granted by the tariff in every case where
it is needed is maintained, and that reciprocity be sought for so far as it
can safely be done without injury to our home industries. Just how far this
is must be determined according to the individual case, remembering always that every application of our tariff policy to meet our shifting national
needs must be conditional upon the cardinal fact that the duties must never
be reduced below the point that will cover the difference between the labor
cost here and abroad. The well-being of the wage-worker s18 a prime consideration of our entire policy of economic legislation.  (Annual message.
Fifty-seventh Congress, first Session.]
Stout of heart, we see across the dangers the great future that lies beyond, and we rejoice as a giant refreshed, as a strong man girt for uie
race; and we go down into the arena where the nations strive for mastery,
our hearts lifted with the faith that to us and to our children and o0r
children's children it shall be given to make this Republic the mightie:t
among the peoples of mankind. (Detroit, Mich., September 22, 1902.)
No nation has ever prospered as we are prospering now. and we must ~ee
to it that by our own folly we do not mar this prosperity.  (Speech at
i-aon League banquet, Philadelphia, Pa., November 22, 1902.)
Wherever a deed is done by an American which reflects credit upon out
country, each of us can walk with his head a little higher in consequence;
and 'wherever anything happens through the fault of any of us that is dio'
creditable it discredits all of us more or less. (Danville, Va., September 9i
1902.)
Throughout our history no one has been able to rnder really great service to the country if he did not believe in the country.  (Speech at
Augusta, Me., August 26, 190.2.)
It is all right and inevitable that we should divide on party lines, but
woe to us if we are not Americans first and party men second. (Speech at
Logansrport, Ind., September 23, 1902.)
Practical politics must not be construed to mean dirty politics. On the
contrary, in the long run the politics of fraud and treachery and foui Pe
ar'e unpractica  politics, and' the -most practical of all politicians ti ts
politician who is clean and decent and upright. ("The manly virtues an
practical politics," American Ideals, p. 58.): The A ierican who is to make his way in America should be brougH t
among his fellow-Amiricans. ("True Americanism,". American Ideals p. 4i...The. -prostperity *o *any; o~f us can best be attained by measures that 
promote the psperity ofall. The poorest motto upon which an Ame i05s
an act s the motto (of "Some men down" and the safest to follow is tuba
Of"Allmen up." (Speech at opening of Pan-A   erican Exposition, Mav 
a-!06




I
i
I
I


I


I


"as I DESIRE tMY NATIVE LAND TO                  E ON THE APEX
OF PROSPERITY, I AM A PROTEGTIONIST."
ti t-act from remarks of Hon. J. T. McClear, in Congressional Record,
June 20, 1904.
Some years ago the American ESconomist called upon a number of leading
Americans for a brief tateent of their reasons tor being protectionists.
Some of the answers are given below.
By P.trof. R. H. Thurston, Of Cornell University.
I am a protectionist because I can see very clearly that the political independence which every patriot would sacrifice his life to preserve to his
country, can only be safely assured' when we are industrially independent,
and I am glad, if it requires that lesser sacrifice, to forego a Lew pennies
of my savings to do my part to secure that assurance.
I a  a protectionist because I can see, I think with equal clearness, that
the greater the diversification of our industries the greater the prosperity of,ur people.
I am a protectionist because it seems to me evident that a carefully arranged tariff-arranged, I should say, by a special commission of honest,
disojnterested, and wise men-must be kept up to preserve us from industrial
crises and disturbances due to foreign industrial changes Lnd crises,
I am a protectionist because I think that ultimately we shall insure the
monst uniform, moderate, and satisfactory markets when the manufacturing
and the agricultural classes are most thoroughly intermingled, so that we
shall have a minimum expenditure for transportation and maximum labor
applied in actual production.
I am a protectionist because I find my views confirmed by the practice of
the whole world, with the single exception of Great Britain. where I see
that the principles Just enunciated are violated by excess of productive capaeity in manufactures, and, naturally, to relieve her people from their difcfllties,: open markets and free-trade must be sought by that nation. Great
Britain in this respect standing alone.
By Hon. H. B. Metcalf, Pawtucket, R. I.
Why am I, an American citizen, an advocate of such a tax upon Imports
as will actually assure to American industry the highest attainable degree
of prosperity, whatever law imay be required to that end: or, in other words,
why am  I "Protectionist?"
Because for forty Years I have been both an active business man and an
actual observer of actual events, I have read and listened to the theories
of the opponents of protection and actually seen those theories refuted In
living experience, I have studied the policy and promises of the advocates
of protection, and actual evidence on every hand confirm those promises.
I have seen it to be an actual fact, abundantly sustained by evidence,.hat under the system  of protection every hour of honest toil purchases
more of material comfort for the toiler than is attainable under any other
system, the degree of such advantage being contingent upon the completeess and accuracy of the application of the protective system. This advantage comes directly or indirectly to all classes of toilers, be they weavers,
spilners, carpenters, palnters, machinists, farmers, doctors, editors, or
teachers.
i amf convinced that the system of protection fosters a spirit of national
seif-lndependence, such as Is indispensable to the highest standards of citiZership under a government of the people.
By Hon. Henry M. Hoyt, ex-Governor of Pennsylvania.
I am a protectionist because the welfare and happiness of the people in
America depend on their ability to enjoy the necessaries conveniences, and
comforts which our mnanufacturers supply. There is no other source of adequate supply for many such commodities except American manufacturers,
to that the American manufacturer is more indispensable to the American
people than the American people is to the manufacturer.
While American labor is more efficient and more productive than labor
lasewhere, it yet remains incontestibly true that there are thousands of
commodities which can not be made by our artisans in competition with
low-priced labor elsewhere. If the laborers here are to consume this class
0o manufactured goods, the industries which produce them must be shielded
rom destructive competition or the producer must live in some other couutry, If he lives here he must either make them or go without them; he can
not buy them, for the reason that there is no "something else" he can do by
wlchh be can earn the purchase money for the foreign article. Nobody but
an economic idiot would now contend that the protective duty adds a "son
nma ique:" to the cost of the commodity. Its only effect is to give the market
to the American producer. The free trader may ibeat about the bush with
his peculation, dogmatism, sophistries, and insolence, but the root of the
a"iter lies within the compass of the foregoing proposition of facts.
By David H. Mason, of Chicago.
All the prosperity enjoyed by the American people-absolutely all the
priosperity, without any reservation whatever-from the foundation of the
I0t ted States Government down to the present time, has been under the
relgn of protective principles; and all the hard times suffered by the AmeriEtu' people in the same period have been preceded either by a heavy reductlIn of duties on imports or by Insufficient protection, thus refuting all freetrI ^e theories on the subject. As I desire my native land to be on the apex
Ofrosperity, rather than under the heel of,hard times. I am a protecY George M. Steele, D. D., principal Wesleyan Academy, Wilbraham, Mass.
I am in favor of the protective policy:
'rst. Because it furnishes a steady and uniform market to our prors at a cost ost whch is insignificant In comparison with the benefts it
Scond. Because It tends to multiply the industries to which our country
ell fitted, and this is a vast advantage to our workingmen, 
nT ird. Because, by the multiplication of industries in a nation where they
Won. id not othetrwise exist, fthere is an increase of competition: andil  a
diT nlitionn 11  the price of ommodities, ma&ing thereby an, advantage1 to:.ll
zoJ a-menrs.
-107


t




'I AM A PROTE TIONST BECAUE I LOVE MY OWN
COUNTRY BETER THAN FOREIGN COUNTRIES."
xtracts from American 0onmist, prted in daly Congressional Record,
fJune 0, S904, das aenfas to remarks of Hon. J. '. McCieary.
By   B. XK. Thurber.
I am a protectionist because thrift follows the enactment of wise laws.
Because I love my own country better than I do foreign countries.
Because protection builds up our towns into cities and enhances the value
ef our houses and lands.
Because every dollar sent abroad to purchase goods that we can produce
at home makes us a dollar the poorer.
Because protection in this country gives labor better wages than tree
trade.
Because it is better for this country to feed, clothe, and house our own
labor in this country than to support foreign labor in other countries witlh
our money.
Because it is true, as Peter Cooper well said: "No goods purchased
abroad are cheap that take the place of our own labor and our own raw
material."
By Hon. Ellas H. Roberts, Treasurer of the United States.
n my judgment the purpose in raising revenue -should be first to promote
production, from which spring a nation's wealth and power. Consumption
will follow.
In home production the whole cost of the commodity is kept here to buy
materials and to pay wages.
With agriculture and manufactures developed by stable protection a surplus will be produced to seek external markets      s by ships made by American
mechanics from our native products.
Home markets are best for our own producers, and their development is
the condition of a foreign trade large and varied enough to endure and
expand. 
B y Hon. P., C. Cheney, ex-Governor of New Hampshire.
I believes  n the inherent right of self-preservation, both for man and
government, My observation and experience, both in this and foreign cous
tries, assure me that a "free-trade" policy for America inures only to the
benefit of those abroad. All foreign nations know this, and hence urge nI
to adopt it Our loss would be their gain. Only by protection are we enabled to pay the highest for labor and sell the lowest to the workman.
This condition makes the United States conspicuously prosperous.
Our Government should be as exacting from foreigners as from Americans. Make them pay duty while we pay taxes.
By James M. Swank, general manager of the American Iron
and Steel Association.
I am a protectionist because I am an American. The free admission of
foreign commodities, or their admission at rates of duty which are levied
for purely revenue purposes, may suit the economic conditions and meet the
financial needs of other countries, but history teaches that the prosperity of
our own country is best promoted by a tariff which is levied for protection
as well as for revenue. Many of our great ndustries. including the silk industry, the pottery industry the carpet industry, and the steel-rail industry,
had only a nominal existence until adequately protective duties were imposed on competing foreign products.
All other considerations aside, older manufacturing countries could command lower wages for labor than this country, and protective duties were
therefore needed to equalize the labor cost of production. Our tin-plate indugstr is to-da  an n     innt iustsry because we have not had a protective
duty on foreign tin plates. We shall always need protective duties as long
as our people insist upon a higher standard of wages and scale of living
than prvl abroad. If they were now willing to accept the same wages
and the same social conditions which the people of other countries are corne
pelled to accept, our protective policy could be greatly modified, if not
wholly dispensed with. VWhatever it may have been in the past, this policy
i therefore to-day chiefly a  estion of wages.
By Hon. William      W. Bates, former Commissioner of Navigation.
1. Because instinct and reason teach the right and duty of self-defen;e
for individuals, families,: soiety, and the State.
2. Because protection assures peace, without which human life has no
true objet, intellectual and moral improvement  o prospect, and the gsneral good no existence..3 Because I believe In human freedom, in the improvement of man, and
the happiness of mankind. To this end everyone should direct his course:
each government ntelligently guide its people, securing to each employment
and toa all a due reward for toil. t:
4.:f ause I prefer my owt  country to every other: and to develop it
rtsou^rcs increase Its wealth, augment its power, and improve its people,
before any:other,  the bounden duty of loyal citizens.
5.  ecause w without u protection sall 'these things are left to chance -.-t
doom and dsfeappinteti-the poor to ive i ignorance and vice. the weak
to f;all before t  strong, and the good to serve the bad. As wisdom le*v't
no:th:ing to chance, so good  erl0t tnent cares for every useful pursuit, tit
it ma te     It spillarffs o  solid ground. 
a-108




;PROTECTION DI0VERSIFIES EMPLOYMENT AND RELIEVES WAGE-EARNERS FROM FOREIGN
COMPETITION.
From remarks of Son. J. 2T. McCleary, of Minnesota, printed in daily
Congressional Record, June 20, 1904.
Some years ago the publishers of the American Economist called
upon a large number of leading Americans for a brief statement
of their reasons for being protectionists. Some of the best answers
are given below:
By Hon. B. F. Jones, of Pittsburg.
I am a protectionist because our country has prospered with protection
and languished without it.
Because revenue can more easily, more surely, and with less objection be
raised by judicious protective tariff laws than otherwise.
Because protection diversifies employment and largely relieves wageearners from foreign competition, thereby enabling them to be liberal consumers as well as producers.
Because, as has been demonstrated, the effect of protection is the cheapening of products.
Because defense, against injurious importations is as necessary and justifiable as is an army and navy.
Because the theory of free trade between nations is as fallacious, imns
practicable, and utterly absurd as is that of free love between families.
Because protection steadily enlarges the home market for farm products,
England buys the world's surplus wheat. She demands "a big loaf for
tupence."  Accordingly, she gluts her markets from every source and usually is able to dictate unprofitable prices for American grain.
When our exportable surplus is large, prices are rarely good: when
small, always; so that, strangely, a deficient yield is sometimes good luck
for the farmer.
Well-paid wage-earners are generous consumers.
Protection alone insures American labor against European pauper wages.
When, under protection, American industries shall employ bread eaters
sufficient to nearly consume American cereals, then the farmer will no
longer sell his grain at cost of production or less. He will escape the competition of the ryot and the serf. His industry will be profitable, his calling
honored and truly independent.
By Hon. Thomas H. Dudley, of New Jersey.
Because protection promotes the prosperity and welfare of the country
by giving employment to labor and developing the resources of the nation.
The more general the employment of the people, the larger the production,
and the greater the production the cheaper the price of the commodities
produced will be to the consumers who use them. Protection or self-preservation is a principle implanted by God upon all animated matter, and it
is better, not only for the nation itself, but for the people of the whole
world, that such protection should be given to labor in each nation as will
produce the same results in production in each separate country.
By Hon. J. P. Dolliver, United States Senator from Iowa.
I believe in the doctrine of protection because the facts of our national
experience thoroughly exemplify Its truth. No great American statesman,
except the haltf-forgotten leaders of the slave power, have disowned the protective system. The importers' trust and the slave trust have been alone in
th eir hostility to that system, each for obvious reasons peculiar to itself. If
thte doctrine of protection is not true, our people have blindly followed a
btlid leadership. If the policy of protection is not wise, it indicates that
tile human race, outside of England, has not sense enough to take care of
itPelf. I will not thus disparage the average common sense of our own
nifntatry, nor thus discredit the average common sense of mankind.
By David Hall Rice, of Boston.
3etween nations but two systems have ever existed, the free-trade-tariff
system and the protective-tariff system.
'The fruit of the free-trade-tariff system is, in the words of the British
Bu yal Commission, intermittent and consequently dear production and abseTce of reliable;profits; in the words of General Booth, over S.000,000 of
I 'pless, and starving British workmen, begging for work to earn the bare
fad of daily existence; in the words of Cardinal Manning, "the capital
th  stagnates" and "the starvation wages of the [BritishJ labor market."
she fruit of the protective-tariff system is-by reserving the sure home
mt Arket to the competition of American:producers-continuous and conse4U\ntly economical and profitable production, giving cheap prices to the
utimate consumer, fair returns on invested capital, and the highest wages
itI the world to labor. Under it neither capital stagnates nor labor starves
bt botha do their work together.
a'hat is why I am a protectionist.


I


a-109




'TH     PRINCIPLE WHICH UNDERLIES PROTECTION I
THE SECURING AT ALL, TMES TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE THE MARKETS OF AMERICA."
Extract from article by Hon. Thomas B. Reed, of Maine, printed in daily
Congresnal s    oRecord, June 20, 1904.
The proposed treatment of corporations, even if something ought to be
done, is a fine example of how easily men mistake their wishes for their
reasons. It is proposed to repeal such portions of the tariff act as have
made these corporations prosperous, Of course, this is not intended to at
tack the tariff. All we are trying to do is to sap the prosperity of institutions which have grown so large as to frighten us. Why do they frighten us? Because they are great and strong and wealthy. Of course, then,
their greatness and strength and wealth are fundamental facts beyond dispute. No tariff law, of course, can be made which does not apply to all.
Hence, if the tariff is so reformed that the big, strong, and wealthy cor
porations go to destruction, how are small ones to be saved? Really, to the
calm and judicious mind this seems like free trade for its own sweet sake.
Protection in some lands may be the subject of discussion and debate.
How it can be that in this country, and at this time, passes all understanding. In the United States the policy of protection has had a century and a
quarter of alternate triumph and defeat. The triumph has always been followed by prosperity, the defeat by hard times. The last decade has been cf
striking example. We saw fit to try tariff reform in an act called the
"Wilson Act."  So prompt were the evidences of failure to meet the hopes
of its framers that the country rose as one man, repealed the act, and substituted therefor the Dingley Act, which was the result of care and skill;
and immediately there followed a demonstration of the advantages of protection the like of which was never seen, even in this country. Owing to
a combination of circumstances we found other countries ready to take our
surplus, and, owing to the fact that we had not fairly started our demands
on our own workshops, we had a surplus to send abroad.
This large export trade was misunderstood. It only indicated tuat, with
strong prices abroad, with England paralyzed by a strike, and with our own
demand only just awakening, we could send many things abroad. It did not
mean that we could always do this. It meant that the primacy was in
sight, but not yet gained. When our own demand reached its proper increase we found we could not supply it. On the contrary, we used up not
only what we made, but in the article of iron and steel alone we have imported in the last year a million tons. Unfortunately, our exports came at
a time when we were expanding, and everybody's mind was filled with' the
idea that we could supply the world. The free traders seized upon this
state of the public mind and declared that we needed protection no longer
and that the tariff must be abandoned. This idea that protection is in the
nature of medicine, to be dropped as soon as possible, is an idea we had
better examine. What if it is food?  The medicine notion comes from toe
early arguments for the selection of infant industries to be fostered and
cherished.
Time and experience have enlarged that notion of protection. They 'have
showu that protection is not a privilege but a system. A privilege might
be robbery. A system must justify itself by results. The principle which
underlies protection is the securing at all times to the American people the
markets of America. It means that the work of this nation shall be done
by the people of this nation. All wealth comes from the marrying of labor
to the raw material. in a country like ours, extending over such vast regions, there can be no lack of materials. Any system which enables our
people to do our own work is the system which can give, and has given, the
best results. The enemy have all along sneered at the ilea that taxes can
make us rich. But this is simply to beguile by words. Would it be any less
absurd to say that taxes gave us good currency? And yet they did. We tax
State currency. We do not raise one cent by the tax; it simply bars out
the State currency.
We used the tax as a way of accomplishing a result, as means to an
end. In like manner we used the taxing power to create a barrier behind
which we could do our own work. All the theorists, the men who thought
there was nothing in the world they could not think of, declared that we
would be ruined. We have not been ruined, but we are to-day a very lively
example of a people who do their own work. What would you say was the
ideal industrial condition of a nation? Everybody at work. Just now we
have everybody at work. And yet we think we want something else. If we
keep on fussing we shall get it. With all the world, except England, including her own colonies, of our opinion, with success embroidered on all
our banners, we are invited to surrender our views and give place to a
beaten world.
Why?   Simply because of that human unrest which is part of the history of the race. We, being also of limited knowledge, are much given to
be beguiled by generalities. Here is one line of generalities. "Is the Dingley tariff bill the end of wisdom? If not, then it can be improved. A tariii
bill could be framed, we think, which would be free from all the errors of
that celebrated bill and retain its virtues." Where would you enact such a
bill? Why, in your own mind, of course. Unfortunately, a bill enacted in
the mind has no extraterritorial force. A bill enacted by Congress, like the
progress of the world, is the result of a fierce conflict of opposing human
interests, and must be so. When men talk carelessly of tariff revision tney
talk of a tariff never yet established and one that never can be. They
dream of a tariff which exactly suits them individually, while a real tariff
bill is one which measurably satisfies the country as a whole.
But can we not have, sitting in perpetual session, a body of men nonpartisa, judicious, wise, and incorruptible? Yes, in your mind. You can have
anything in your mindl., imagination is unlimited, and it is very delighitful
to wander round among possible impossibilities.  Just think of a nonpartisan free trader sitting on a tariff tax! Of course, he would be above
any prejudice except his own. I saw one tariff commission sit in 1882, and
its report was not enacted into law. All -its mistakes were, and the resuit
was satisfactory to nobody, 
We ought to let the tariff alone; we ought to defend it against all comers
for the good of the nation. We are doing more than well and need not hunl
for disaster. That will come in due time.
a-110




THE TRUSTS."-"TARIFF              REVISION.'-THE          PRESIDENT AT MINNEAPOLIS.
itract from remarks of Hon. JOHN F. LACEY of Iowa, in daily Congressional Record, January 25, 1904.
EXTRACT FROM SPEECH OF PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT.
THE TRUSTS.
I wish leave in this connection, as some. controversy seems to exist
to the views of the President upon the tariff revision, to insert an exat from a speech delivered by him on April 4 last at Minneapolis.
The extract is as follows:
* *   *  One point we must steadily keep in mind. The question of
rift revision, speaking broadly, stands wholly apart from the question of
alirng with the trusts. No change in tariff duties can have any substantial
cct in solving the so-called trust problenm.
Certain great trusts or great corporations are wholly unaffected by
e tariff. Practically all the others that are of any importance have,
a matter of fact, numbers of smaller American competitors, and of
tr.se a change in the tariff which would work injury to the large corration would work not merely injury, but destruction, to its smaller
mpetitors; and equally, of course, such a change would mean disaster
all the wage-workers connected with either the large or the small
rporations;  From the standpoint of those interested in the solution of
e trust problem, such a change would, therefore, merely mean that the
Ist was relieved of the competition of its weaker American competitors
Ad thrown only into competition with foreign competitors, and that the
rst effort to meet this new competition would be made by cutting down
ages, and would therefore be primarily at the cost of labor.
In the case of.some of our greatest trusts such a change might confer
on them  a positive benefit.  Speaking broadly, it is evident that the
tanges in the tariff will affect the trusts for weal or for woe simply
they affect the whole country.  The tariff affects trusts only as it
ffects all other interests. It makes all these interests, large or small,
rofitable, and its benefits can be taken from the large only under penalty
taking them from the small also.
To sum up, then, we must as a people approach a matter of such
rime economic importance as the tariff from the standpoint of our business
Iee(ls
We cannot afford to become fossilized or to fail to recognize the
ct that as the needs of the country change it may be necessary to meet
ese new needs by changing certain features of our tariff laws.  Still
ss can we afford to fail fb recognize the further fact that these changes
ust not be made until the need for them outweighs the disadvantages
hich may result, and when it becomes necessary to make them     they
ould be made with full recognition of the need of stability in our economic
ystem and of keeping unchanged the principle of that system, which has
ow become a settled policy in our national life. We have prospered rmarelously at home. As a nation we stand in the very forefront in the giant
ternational industrial competition of the day. We can not afford by
ny freak or folly to forfeit the position to which we have thus triumphantly
ttalned. * * *
TARIFF CHANGES.
A nation like ours could not long stand the ruinous policy of redjusting its business to radical changes in the tariff at short intervals,
pecially when, as now, owing to the immense extent and variety of our
roducts, the tariff schedules carry rates of duty on thousands of different
rticles.
Sweeping and violent chances in such a tariff, touching so vitally
he interests of all of us, embracing agriculture, labor, manufactures, and
ommerce, would be disastrous in any event, and they would be fatal to
ur present well-being If approached on the theory that the principle of
he protective tariff was to be abandoned.
The business world-that is, the entire American world-can not
fftord if it has any regard for its own welfare, even to consider the adisability of abandoning the present system.
Yet, on the other hand, where the Industrial conditions so frequently
hange, as with us must of necessity be the case, it is a matter of prime
rPortance that we should be able from time to time to adapt our economic
olicy to the changed conditions.
Our aim should be to preserve the policy of a protective tariff, In
h ic8h the nation as a whole has acquiesced, and yet wherever and when'ter necessary to change the duties In particular paragraphs or schedules,
O matters of legislative detail, If such a change is demanded by the inSre:-1s of the nation as a whole.
In making any readjustment there are certain important consideralon which can not be disregarded. tIf a tariff law has on the whole
crtAed well, and if business has prospered under it and Is prospering,
m-ay be better to endure some inconvenience and Inequalities for a
1me than by making changes to risk causing disturbance and, perhaps,
Maraysis in the industries and business of the country. The fact that
ie change in a given' rate of duty may be thought desirable does not,tli the question whether it is advisable to make the change immediately.
ver tariff deals with duties on thousands of articles arranged In hunra:(. of paragraphs and in many schedules.
These duties affect a vast number of Interests which are often con"ii'kg. If necessary for our welfare, then of course Congress must conldril the question of changing the law as a whole or changing any given
at<. of duty, but we must remember that whenever even a single schedule;  c-gsidered some Interests will appear to demand a change In almost
y schedule In the law; and when It comes to upsetting the schedules
erally the u the effect un the business interests of the country would be
tiiOUgs


fi111




"DISASTER HAS ALWAYS FOLLOWED THE ENACT.
MENT OF A TARIFF WHICH FAILED TO
FURNISH ADEQUATE PROTECTION."
Exntract from remarks of Hon. J... McCLELARY of Minnesota, in
the House of Representatives, and printed in the daily Con.
gressional Record, June 20, 1904.
Some fruits of protection.-From  1861 to the present day, save
and except the four mournful years from 1893 to 1897, this country
has had the policy of adequate protection to American industries.
At the close of the period of inadequate protection the nation had
a bankrupt Treasury; to-day the Treasury is overflowing. At the
close of the period of inadequate protection the Government, which,
as usual under that kind of legislation, had been running into debt,
had so lost its credit among men that it found itself unable to borrow
money in sufficient quantities to meet its needs, though it offered 8,
10, yea 12 per cent for the money; to-day it can borrow all the money
that it wants at the rate of 2 per cent, and its bonds issued at that
rate stand at a premium in the market places of the world.
Under a protective policy this nation fought the greatest war in
the history of the world, a war which left the Southern section of
the country prostrate and bankrupt, a war which took from the productive industries of the Northern section of the country more than a
million of its sturdiest sons and devoted four years of their time to
destruction instead of construction; a war which used up all of the
enormous income of the Government for four years, amounting to
more than a thousand millions of dollars, and yet left us with a debt
of nearly three thousand millions of dollars. Upon that debt we
have paid more than eighteen hundred millions of dollars of the principal and nearly three thousand millions of dollars of interest. As an
expression of our gratitude to those who saved the Union we have
paid out in pensions more than three thousand millions of dollars,
and are now Fpying about a hundred and forty million dellars a year,
But, notwithstanding these enormous losses in population and in
wealth caused by this war, our population has increased from a little
over thirty millions in 1860 to more than eighty millions at the
present hour. Our wealth has increased from sixteen billions in 1860
to more than ninety-four billions in 1900, or from an average of $513
per capita in 1860 to $1,235 per capita in 1900. That is, our wealth
has increased more than twice as fast as our population. Our savings-bank deposits have increased from   $149,277,504 in 1860 to
$2,935204,875, Or from an average of $4.75 per capita in 1860 to
$36.52 per capita in 1903. That is, our savings-bank deposits (the
best index of the condition of workingmen) have increased nearly
nine times as fast as our population.
1. That disaster has always followed the enactment of a tariff
which failed to furnish adequate protection. Such a tariff has neither
furnished protection to our industries nor raised sufficient revenue
for the Government. The so-called "moderate" protection has always
proved a delusion and a snare. It is less worthy of respect than
frank and open "free trade," for so-called "moderate" protection
always "keeps the word of promise to the ear but breaks it to the
hope." Its advocacy by a well-informed man may generally be rated
as cowardly evasion.
2. From  the disaster resulting from  such tariff legislation our
country has never in a single instance recovered except through the
enactment of a tariff law giving adequate protection.
3. With one possible exception, that of 1873, we have never had
a panic or widespread business depression under a tariff act giving
adequate protection to home industries. Even the collapse of certain
speculative enterprises of large capitalization during the last two
years has simply gone to show that "protection is panic proof."
4. The business depression of 1873 was not due to the tariff, but
ccurred in spite of the tariff. It came from two sources chielyfirst, it was a part of the reaction from over-speculation during and
following the civil war; and second, it was part.of the "sobering up
in our currency maatters, when we were painfully getting back tfr0
greenback fiatism to the solid basis of the gold standard.
5. But even in the case of 1873 the suffering was mainly arnoO9
the speculative classes and was not specially felt among the pcople
generally. The country during that period advanced greatly in
wealth, and the recovery came under a protective tarifi., 6 Nver in our history have we had general and ong-contiud
businss depression when we have had both of the Republican two
bases of prosperity-a protective tariff and a sound currency.


0
1
I
I
e
11
I
v
11
f
A
f
i
0
11
t
II
I
1
1
1
11
11
I.-11t






I
I
I1
I
i
i
I
i
i


I




OUR INCREASE IN IMPORTS MOSTLY ARTICLES
CONSUMED BY MANUFACTURERS."
xt(rat from speech of Hon. J. 1I. GALLINGER          of New Hampshire, in the United States Senate, June 65, 1902.
FOREIGN COMMERCE.
I have given glimpses of our domestic trade under the Dingley
ariff and the wonderful advances we have made under protection.
Jlow about our foreign trade-the sale of our surplus abroad?       In
rider that we may consider the matter intelligently, I present a
Iale showing our exports and imports since 1890, taking my figures
rom the Bureau of Statistics of the Treasury Department.
Imports and Exports of Merchandise, 1890-1901..............
V ir  endrino g  I ports.  xports   Total i nI-      E  cess..J..ne                              pors ao Im Eports. Ex ports. rt and
exports.  imports. Exports.
i.................789,8 10,409  $857,828,684  $1,647,189,098  1....6.......  $8,518,275!1 1............   844,916,196 i  884,480,810  1,729,897,006...........  39,564,614,92 ',..... t... 827,402,462  1,030,278,148  1,857,680,61... 202,875,686.............  866,400,9S22  847,665,194  i 1,714,066,116  18,735,728  i............................  54,994,6.22  892,140,572  1,547,135,194...........  287,145,950
5................   731,969,965  1  807,538,15  1,539,508,10............1  75,568,200
1.................  779,724,674  1  882,606,938t  1,662,331,612......... 2,2264
97......,........ 764,730,412 | 1,050,993,556  1,815,723,968...........  286,263,144
8..............  616,049.654  1.231,482,330  1,847,531,984...........i  615,432,676
39..,...............  67,148,489  1227,02302,924,171,791...........  529,s74,81.3
)...................  849,714,329  1,394,479,214  2,244,193,543............  544,764,8
).................  823,171,165  1,487,764,991  2,310,937,156............  664,592,826
'The figures for the fiscal year 1902, while they will show a falling
fi in exports (owing to our short corn crop of last year and the
reat home consumption of manufactures) and an increase of imorts, will compare favorably with recent years. Under the operaon of the Dingley tariff we have become the leading export nation
f the world, passing Great Britain, with her wonderful prestige of
nturies.  It will be seen that our balance of trade differs very
uch now from the years 1893 to 1897. In 1893 the balance was
gainst us, and for the five years from 1893 to 1897, inclusive, the
verage was only $175,000,000, while during the past five years the
erae has been about $600,000,000, making a total favorable balance
der the five years of the Dingley law of $3,000,000,000.
We are changing under this trade balance from       a debtor nation
a creditor nation, if, indeed, we have not already done so. We
ive an immense freight bill to pay annually, large interest disburseents, and exchanges on account of tourists' expenses abroad, so that
ith much less than our favorable balance we would have to ship
ld abroad in large quantities to pay our bill, as we have had to
o in low-tariff times. It will be seen from the table that our exerts are nearly double those of 1895. Nearly $1,000,000,000, or twoirds, are agricultural products, which Europe must have regardss of tariffs and yet it is in exports of manufactures that we have
ade the largest relative gain.
We are exporting double the amount of manufactured articles that
6 t)ere under the Wilson-Gorman law, and we are gaining markets
e)very quarter of the globe for every product of our mills and
ctories, and still the free trader keeps up the cry for "free raw
aterial," in order that we may capture the markets of the world,
1oi0ant or forgetful of the fact that we have already 99 per cent
ee raw material for all that enters into exports or manufactures.
Right here I want to call attention to our great increase in imrts. this increase consisting mostly of crude or partly manufac'Of( articles which are consumed by our manufacturers in turning
t teir finished product. Thus we see the perfect workings of the;ingi y law in our exports and imports. It is safe to say that in
Otir r half decade, if our present tariff law is undisturbed, our
P rtls will exceed $2,000,000,000 annually, which, while but a small
O11'iti as compared with our domestic trade, is still a remarkable
hit:ion of American progress.
i llg


I




"WE ARE PRACTICALLY INDEPENDENT OF THE REST
OF THE EARTH."
Extract from speech of Alon. JI.. GALLINGER of New Hampshire, in the
United States Senate, June 25, 1902.
HOW WE COMPAIE WITH THE REST OF THE WORLD
Our progress under the Dingley tariff has been such that we no longer
compare the United States with other nations, but with all the rest
of the world combined. With less than 5 per cent. of the population and
only 7 per cent. of the area, we are, nevertheless, about equal industrially to half the remainder of mankind.
We equal or surpass all the rest of the world in corn, cotton, eggs,
petroleum, leather products, copper, and forest products.
Of the following we produce two-thirds as much as the rest of the
world: Coal, pig iron, steel, and three-fifths of the total food and agricultural products and manufactures.
We produce one-half as much as the rest of the world in silver, iron
ore, fish; one-third as much in gold, wheat, oats, hay, butter, and cheese;
one-fourth as much in hops and beer; one-fifth to one-tenth as much in
barley and wool,
We consume, reckoned in value, twice as much corn as all the rest of
the world combined, one-fifth as much wheat, one-third as much oats,
one-third as much cotton, one-fifth as much wool, one-third as much
sugar, one-half as much fish, nearly as much coffee, one-fourth as much
tea, about three-fifths as much meat —all food and agricultural products.
We have one-third as much wealth as all the rest of the world, onethird as much gold, one-fifth as much silver, one-tenth as many sheep,
one-third as many cows, as much forest area, two-thirds the railroad mileage, or, counting total track, about as much as all the rest of the world
combined. We have twice as much life insurance in force, one-half as
much savings-bank deposits, we spend two-thirds as much for education,
we have one-fourth the spindles in operation, nearly one-fourth as much
shipping, one-fourth as many exports, about one-tenth as much revenue
and expenditures, and less than one-thirtieth as much debt.
Taking everything into consideration we produce and consume about
half as much as the rest of the world combined.  Remember, the corn
parison is not with the world, but with all the rest of the world besides
ourselves.
There is not much better index to a country's condition than the freigat
carried. According to the junior Senator from New York (Mr. Depew),
who should be an unquestioned authority on railroad business, the freight
carried on the railroads of the United States equals the freight carried on
all the other railroads of the earth and by all the ocean shipping. To
this should be added our immense lake and coast trade.
Ex-Speaker Reed estimated that the people of the United States, when
our population was about 70,000,000, were equal as consumers-as a
market for our own and the world's production-compared with the reit
of the world, to 700,000,000. The same comparison seems to hold good
to-day, and our 77,000,000 people are equal to 770,000,000, or one-half the
rest of the world. That is, every man, woman, and child in the United
States is equal to ten persons outside of the United States, particularly
as consumers of our own and the world's products of agriculture, mim'
ing, and manufacture.
As regards power of production, Mulhall has shown that a farm hand
In the United States does as much as two in the United Kingdom, three
in Germany, five in Austria, and seven in Russia. The farm laborers of
Europe do nine times the work to get double the result of the tar"
laborers in the United States. That is, it takes four and one-half Europeans to equal one American. Extend the comparison to Asia and Afrlca
and we find that the average' United States producer is equal to ten
the world over, outside of our own country. This comparison is ernpha
sized by our coal consumption and steam power, and finally by our products
of manufacture.
We are to-day practically independent of the rest of the earth. In t
few years we shall raise our own sugar and fibers, manufacture our o0
silk, and, in fact, we shall produce almost everything used by mankid.
The onclusion, then, is warranted that in another generation, I the
present system of protection is continued, the people of the United State
and Territories will equal or surpass in production, consumption, and
wealth the peoples of the rest of the world combined.






a-114


I




"A PHENOMENAL INCREASE IN OUR MANUFACTURING
INDUSTRIES."
Ertracts from remarks of Hon. 0. H. GROSVENOR of Ohio, in daily Oogreesional Record, June 18, 1900.
GROWTH OF MANUFACTURES, 1890 TO 1900.
There are three methods by which it is practicable to measure in some
degree the growth of domestic manufactures in the decade just ending,
and for which there are as yet no census figures. One of these is to study
the increase In the importation of the classes of raw material which
manufacturers must use. While our manufacturers      naturally utilize
home materals as far as practicable in their industries, there are certain
materials which they require which are not produced at home, while in
others the supply from home production is not sufficient to meet their
requirements. In crude rubber and silk, for instance, all of the materials
utilized must be imported, while in the vegetable fibers, such as hemp,
flax, and certain high grades of cotton, hides and skins, and other articles of this class, they are compelled to draw a part of their supplies
from abroad.  By following the course of importation of these "manufacturers' materials," or, to use the technical term of the Bureau of
Statistics of the Treasury Department, "articles in a crude condition,
which enter into the various processes of domestic Industry," it is practicable to measure in some degree the activities of our manufacturers
since 1890.
Manufacturers' materials imported in 1890 amounted to $178,435,512,
or 23 per cent. of the total Importations, while in the fiscal year 1900 the
importations of this same class amounted to $310,000,000 and formed 35.8
per cent. of the total importations. It is thus apparent that our manufacturers are to-day drawing from abroad fully twice as much material
for use in manufacturing as they did a decade ago, since the actual value
is nearly double that of 1890, while it is a well known fact that prices
of manufacturers' materials are now much less than those of a decade
ago and that a given number of dollars now represents a larger quantity
than at that time. It is also gratifying to note that this class of material.
that required by manufacturers, now forms nearly 36 per cent. of the
total imports, against 23 per cent. in 1890,
INCREASED EXPORTS OF MANUFACTURES.
Still another evidence of the activity of manufacturers is found where
the values of manufactures exported Is shown. In the fiscal year 1890
exports of domestic manufactures amounted to but $151,000,000, and in
the fiscal year 1900 to $425,000,000-an increase of nearly 200 per cent.
DECREASED IMPORTS OF MATNUFATURES.
Meantime, importation of manufactures has been greatly reduced,
having been, in 1890, $346,678,654, and forming 44.8 per cent. of the total
imports, while in 1899 it was but $259,862,721 and formed but 37.9 per
cent of the total imports.
Thus, in the study of imports of manufacturers' materials and the
imports and exports of manufactured goods all the available data show
a phenomenal increase in our manufacturing industries during the decade 1890-1900, in which we must depend chiefly upon these data in determining the growth of manufactures. A study of the period shows, first,
an increase of nearly 100 per cent. in imports of manufacturers' materials;
second, an increase of nearly 200 per cent. in the exports of manufactured
goods, and third, a decrease of 25 per cent in the imports of manufactured goods; while manufacturers' materials form every year a larger
Proportion of the total imports, and manufactured goods form   every
year a larger proportion of the total exports.
Despite the claim  of the supporters of the Wilson law, that their
measure would especially benefit manufacturers by giving them tree raw
material, the importation of raw material in the years ending Juu, &o,
1895, 1896, 1897, all of which were under the low tariff, averaged less
than those of the fiscal year 1893, all of which was under the McKinley
Protective tariff and most of it under President Harrison, and that the
years ending June 30, 1899 and 1900, under the Dingley law, show a laraW
imnortation than that of any year under the Wilson low tariff, the lmPortatlon of raw material in the year 1900 being 50 per cent. greater than
the annual average importation of raw material under the Wilson law,
nd the share which raw material formed of the total imports was, in
the year 1900, 36 per cent., against an average of 26 per cent. during the
entire Period that the Wilson law was in operation.
a-115






"FREE TRADE WOULD LEAVE US UTTERLY UNPRE.
PARED FOR WAR."
Extract from remarks of Hon. T. T, McCLEARY of Minnesota, i
the House of Representatives, and printed in the daily Con.
gressional Record, June O20, 1904.
Even protectionists sometimes say that while they do not believ
in free trade as a practical policy they are willing to admit that it
seems good in theory.   The saving word in that statement is the
word "seems." In fact, free trade is not good even in theory. Prima
facie, no theory is good that does not "work."  Without the demon.
stration it is at best simply a hypothesis.  The late Hon. W. D,
Kelley of Pennsylvania, well described free trade as "the science of
assumptions."
The first and fundamental fallacy of free trade as a theory is its
lack of patriotism. It professes to entertain a broad humanitarian
ism. It prides itself on having as much consideration for people at
the uttermost ends of the earth as it entertains for the people of it
own country. Mr. Chairman, I would feel like doubting both the
virtue and the good sense of any man who considered, or professed
to consider, everyone as much entitled to his solicitude as the memr
bers of his own family. By law, both human and divine, a nation
is a great family whose interests are directly interdependent. Pro
tectionists take as the basis of their policy the Scriptural precept:
"He that careth not for his own hath denied the faith and is worse
than an infidel."
The first duty of a nation is to be prepared at all times to defend
its existence. Free trade, both as a theory and as a policy, would
leave us utterly unprepared for war. Surely the people of the
South should, through bitter experience, have thoroughly learned this
lesson. Wedded to slavery, they looked down on labor. They were
"consumers;" they had only contempt for "producers," hence they
thought only of getting manufactured goods cheaply.
They had no desire to accept or enjoy the legitimate fruits of protection. Indeed, for nearly a generation before the breaking out
of the civil war, except the four years from 1842 to 1846, this country
had been dominated by the Southern idea of aversion to a protective
tariff. When the Southern Confederacy was established it perpetuated its free-trade ideas by embodying in the Confederate consti
tution this provision:
Nor shall any duties or taxes on importations from foreign nations b
laid to promote or to foster any branch of industry.
On the other hand, just before the breaking out of the war the
National Government had enacted the Morrill tariff law, which gave
adequate protection to our industries. So that here we had a test
of the two theories as to their relative usefulness in war.
In this connection I quote the eloquent words of former Senatot
John P. Jones of Nevada, in his great speech in the United States
Senate in 1890-one of the greatest speeches on the tariff ever delivered-entitled "Shall the Republic do its own work?"
The most instructive lesson of American history-indeed, the most t1'
pressive economic lesson of all history-is that afforded in a great crisis bt
the industrial impotence of our Southern States, resulting from their per
sistent neglect of the mechanical arts and of diversified industries.
When the South declared war it was found that its people could creat
nothing of practical utility. Their orators and stump speakers, who ed
them into the war, could spin "yarns," but not of cotton; they could weave
sentences, but not woolens. They could make speeches, but could not make
engines, They could make verses, but not vestments. They could talk lean'
edly of the rights of man, but could not supply the wants of man. Thel
could write flaming essays on courage, but could not make a gun or caniste
of powder. They could organize armies, but not industries. They could
inspire their troops with enthusiasm, but could not supply them witt
blankets.
With all their cotton, they could not make a handkerchief. With qusa
titles of sheep and all natural facilities for producing wool and turning I
into cloth, they could not make a coat. With every opportunity for tbe
establishment of manufactures, they could not make a needle, a knife,
bayonet or a button. With ample natural resources, and with opportuniti"
equal to those of the North, the people of the South, looking only to Oh
moment and never to the morrow, permitted iron, coal, and other valuabl
minerals in illimitable quantities to lie inert and useless in their fields.
They could produce nothing. but the raw materials of agriculture at
but little variety even of those. Theirs was a civilization that "disdaine
to be useful, and was content to be stationary."
When, therefore, in the hour of their utmost need they wanted clotheis
arms, munitions, and means of transportation, they were without factorie
foundries, mills, machine shops, railroads, tools, and skilled workmen, B.
it not been for their slaves they would have been without food. Their s0
diers suffered for want of proper clothing, some of them even dying of colr
and many, especially toward the close of the war, wearing uniforms mSO
from rag carpet. Like helpless aborigines, they were obliged to lookt to t
ynemy for every rwoure of iorfare.
a-116


I




"THE DINGLEY LAW-EVERYTHING PROMISED IN ITS
NAME HAS COME: TO          PASS."
Extract from remarks of Hon. J. T. McCLEARY of Minnesota, in
the House of Representatives, and printed in the daily Congressional Record, June 20, 1904.
In 1897, after an experience with a Democratic tariff-an experience
still vivid in the memory of even young men-the Republican party
was returned to power, the foremost champion of a protective tariff,
William McKinley, having been elected President. Shortly after his
inauguration President McKinley called Congress together in extra
session for the purpose of revising the tariff. The result was the
Dingley law. Its operation has been such as to compel words of
praise even from those who opposed its enactment. It has justified
itself a hundred times over.
Everything that was promised in its name has come to pass. American industries that had been languishing have revived and are
flourishing. New ventures have taken root and are prospering. Work
is plentiful and wages are good. Farmers, except those who had
been "buying more land," have almost forgotten what a mortgage
looks like.
All this is admitted. And yet there are those who would endanger
all this for a theory; a theory, too, whose unwisdom has repeatedly
been shown by experience here and elsewhere.
Are tariff schedules sacred? No; but the welfare of our people
should be sacred to those whose actions may greatly promote or
greatly retard it. Should our tariff laws never be revised? Certainly
they should. When? Whenever it becomes evident that there is
smore to be gained than lost by the people of the United States
through such revision,
How shall we know when the time for revision has arrived? That
question will certainly not be determined by vague talk about
"changed conditions" since the enactment of the existing law. It
will be necessary for those demanding tariff revision on such grounds
to specify just how "conditions have changed," and just what it is
therefore wise to do. We shall certainly not allow ourselves to be
"beguiled by generalities."
Nor should we be moved by the veiled threat that if we don't revise
the tariff-whether such action seem wise or unwise-the chance to
revise it will be given to the Democrats.
Mr. Chairman, I have an abiding faith in the might of right and
in the common sense of the common people. So far as I am concerned, I shall unhesitatingly choose the path of duty to my country
and let results to myself take care of themselves. To such of my
friends as may differ with me I can only say that I am not at
liberty to sacrifice their interests to my ambitions. If the time should
ever come when I fail to prefer their good even to their good will,
greatly as I prize that good will, at that moment I should cease to
be worthy of being their representative.
During the forty-three years since the Republican party first came
into power that party has four times made a general revision of the
tariff. Two of these revisions, those of 1861 and 1897, were revisions
of Democratic schedules. Two of the revisions, those of 1888 and
1890, were revisions of Republican schedules.
Of course it goes without saying that whenever the proper time
comes for the revision of the present tariff act the revision should
be made by the friends and not by the enemies of adequate protection to American Industries.
In this connection, however, it must not be forgotten, Mr. Chairman, that a dose of poison is just as fatal if adminsstered by a friend
as by a foe. For example, in 1883, under a demand for tariff revision,
such a revision was made by the Republican party. Under popular
de lnand, or what was thought to be popular demand, the wool schedule
\rnas made too low. The fact that this act was passed by a Republican
Congress and was signed by a Republican President did not save the
sheep industry cf the United States, for immediately thereafter that
indtstry was reduced by millions of head. The wool schedule of the
act of 1883 was a staggering blow to the sheep industry of this
couiatry, one from which it never recovered until the passage of the
NMc Fiinley law, which gave adequate protection to wool.
TIhe Republican party is not committed to any particular schedule,
hXt. it is committed to a great principle governing the construction
of +11 schedules. It is not dominated by stubbornness or by pride
of (pinion; but it does recognize its responsibility relative to the well.
being of the people of the United States, and it has business sense
7aough to know the importance of stability of conditions as rCelt4d
O business prosperity.






"WE OUGHT TO LET THE TARIFF ALONE-WE OUGH
TO DEFEND IT AGAINST ALL COMERS, FOR THE
GOOD OF THE NATION."-THOMAS B. REED
ON   TARIFF     REVISION.
Extract from remarks of t orn. J. T. McCLEARY of Minnesota, n
the House of 1epresentatives, and printed in the daily (ot
gressional Record, June 20, 1904.
One of the greatest men whom it was ever my privilege to kne
personally was the late Thomas B. Reed of Maine, for twenty year
a Member of this House and its Speaker through three Congresses
He passed from    earth in December, 1902. Almost on the day o
his death-in the North American Review for December, 1902 —ap
ipenred the last article that he ever wrote on public questions.
It comes to us as the counsel of a man of superior intellect and
absolute honesty; as the matured judgment of one who was thor
oughly informed on the fiscal history of this and other countries
It comes to us as the garnered wisdom     of more than three-scor
years. It comes from one who had voluntarily retired from publi
life at a time when he was occupying the exalted position of Speaker
of this House, a position in our country aptly described by himse
as "having but one superior and no peer," a position to which 
knew he would be unanimously reelected. It comes as the sage advic
of one who had no other purpose to serve than to contribute to t
well-being of his country.
I esteem it an honor to append that entire article to these remark
I do so with the consent of the publishers of the North America
Review, who own the copyright to it. To be entirely candid aboui
the. matter, I do this in order that, being thus made frankable, it ma
be circulated in all parts of the United States during the coming ca
paign. I do this as a high service to the American people. To have
read that article carefully and thus studied out its full significance
is to have received a college education on the questions of the day.
In that article Mr. Reed discussed with the spirit of a philosope
and the sagacity of a statesman this question of tariff revisio
Here are some of the things that he said:
What would you say was the ideal industrial condition of a nation
Everybody at work. Just now we have everybody at work. And yet
think we want something else. If we keep on fussing we shall get it. W i
all the world, except England, including her own colonies, of our opinlo
with success embroidered on all our banners, we are Invited to surrendl
our views and give place to a beaten world.
Why? Simply because of that human unrest which is part of the histo
of the race. We, being also of limited knowledge, are much given to be 
guiled b generalities. Here is one line of generalities: "Is the Dingle
tariff bil the end of wisdom? If not, then it can be improved. A tariff bi
could be framed, we think, which would be free from all the errors of ti
celebrated bill and retain its.virtues." Where would you enact such a bill
Why, in your own mind, of course. Unfortunately, a bill enacted in the min
has no extraterritorial force. A bill enacted by Congress, like the progr
of the world, is the result of a fierce conflict of opposing human interes
and must do so. When men talk carelessly of tariff revision they talk of
tariff never yet established and one that never can be. They 'dream of
tariff which exactly suits them individually, while a real tariff bill is o0
which measurably satisfies the country as a whole.
*         *          *         *         *         *          C
We have a tariff carefully drawn, which has served us well. That tari
is only five years old. It has brought us away up on the hillside of succes
It has no connection with great corporations, except what it has with sm
corporations and individuals. No attack by repealing the Dingley Act c
hurt one without hurting all. Any disturbance of that kind would distu
trade in ways with which we are all too familiar.
A tariff bill at any time is not and can not be the creature of one mi
It means the result of a contest by all interests and all minds. Hen
whenever any man thinks of a tariff he would make, he always thinks of
tariff bill which will never be enacted.
There was once a President of the United States of great power andt
fluenee. For four years he had no Congress behind him, and he dreaned
such a tariff-reform law as would suit him. By and by ne had a Congr
of his own party, and he started in to make such a law as would please b
gods and men. There are those who remember the dismal looks of the Me
bers of the House when they yielded to the Senate, and the averted looks
the President as he let the bill pass by, unsigned and friendless. To te
men it becae apparent, as it should be to the whole world, that the ta
enacted is always different from the act in your mind.
What we had better do is to remember where we are and what otr d
gers are. Enterprises of business are not entered upon by helter-skeltl
They are the result   calculation. On of the first inquiries of the prom0'
or maker is, how many of our present conditions are to remain?  f th'
are to be uncertainties in the future he will not dare to act. What cen
imagine that would dampe a business man's ardor more than to be cal
on to gues what a new tariff bill would be! The prophetic instinct in
human creature is there beyond its limit.
We ought to e0t the tariff alone; we ought to defend it against al co
ers for the good of the nation. We are doing more than well and need I
hunt fortdisaster. Tat will come in due time.
a-118


I




"WHY DEMOCRATIC PROMISES CANNOT BE
TRUSTED."
Extract from remarck of Hon. J. T. McCLEARY of Minnesota, in the Houe
of Representatives, and printed in the daily Congressional Record,
June 20, 1904.
As I said at the beginning of these remarks, while this question of
the tariff is primarily a question of business it is in this country also a
question of politics. It is proper, therefore, that the probable political
aspect of the queston in the coming campaign be clearly stated.
T'ihe Democratic party to-day owes whatever hopes it may entertain of success in the coming campaign to the existence of what is
known as "the solid South." It is important that we get, if possible,
a just conception of the significance of that fact.
The Democratic party knows in advance that it can with absolute
certainty count on the electoral votes of the States of the South.
Hence in a convention it is not necessary to seriously consider the
wishes of the South, either as to a candidate or as to a platform.
The problem of the Democratic managers will be to get the remaining electoral votes necessary to an election. These must be secured
in the North. A large city offers the best field for certain Northern
Democratic methods, so the Democratic managers pick out New
York State, with its great metropolitan city, and Illinois, with its
Chicago, as the best fighting ground. Then it will be necessary to
carry, in addition, one or two States of the size of Indiana, New
Jersey, and Wisconsin.
In general, then, the problem  before the Democratic campaign
managers is how to carmry those Northern States. New York City
can be made to supply a generous majority; but in these days of
"publicity" there is a limit to such possibilities. The Republicans
must be kept from   "coming down to the Harlem" with an overwhelming majority, so a candidate must be selected and a platform
must be framed that will appeal to the people "up State."
But the platform  must be such as to help in carrying those two
States and also the remaiining States required. It must be framed
with special reference to carrying the Northern States required.
Those Northern States have business interests whose owners must,
by the platform, be soothed into a feeling of security. Above all
things, then, the platform must have the appearance of conservatism.
Inasmuch as the issue this year will be the tariff, the Democratic
plaform will, for several reasons, probably not be as frank and outspoken as it was in 1892. It will probably contain some "glittering
generality" about "tariff revision along conservative lines."
But there is a very plain and easily understood reason why Democratic platform promises can not be relied on.
It all hinges on the existence of that "solid South."  At election
the "solid South" can be absolutely depended upon to give every one
of its electoral votes to the Democratic nominee, so that in the convetition, which frames the platform, the wishes of the solid South
can be safely treated with indifference. But when it comes to passing
a tariff act in Congress, after the election, the South will largely
control the situation, because the South will furnish the bulk of the
votes necessary to pass the bill. In other words, the platform must
be made to please certain States in the North, but the bill must be
m*ade to please the State.,a of the South, who entertain different opinions. The promises will be dictated by the Northern States, the
performances by the Southern States. Hence Democratic performiances can not reasonably be expected to square with Democratic
prcmises. The people of the South regardless of views about the
abstract beauties of "free trade," will take mighty good care to see
that the things in which his people are interested shall have full and
((e quate protection.
Mr. Chairman, they are "free traders" as to everyone's products
exC pt their own.
this was illustrated in both of the bills framed under Democratic
tiipices in the last forty years-t-ie Mills bill of 1888 and the
VW ison-Gorman law of 1894. For example, in the Mills bill, which
pinsed the Democratic House, but was defeated in the Republican
Seiate, a high rate of duty was placed on rice, a southern product,
ani an entirely inadequate rate on barley, a Northern product. The
Mills bill put a high rate of duty on the cane sugar of the South,
1t, put on the free list the peas, beans, vegetables, tomatoes, milk,
n'i:ts, and poultry of the North. Thle central feature of the Mills
bill was the removal of all duty on wool, one of the chief products of
Northern farms; the same general policy prevailed in the Wilsos bil.
A r. Chairman, a Democratic tariff bill is always sectional —aev
national-in its spirit.
a-119






"A NATION LIKE OURS COULD NOT LONG STAND
THE RUINOUS POLICY OF READJUSTING ITS
BUSINESS TO RADICAL CHANGES IN THE
TARIFF AT SHORT INTERVALS."PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT.
Extract from  remarks of    on. J. T. McCLEARY of Minnesota, in
the House of Representatives, and printed in the daily Con.
gressional Record, June 0, 1904..
PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT ON TARIFF REVISION.
In his Life of Benton, page 224, President Roosevelt says:
Now, whether a protective tariff Is right or wrong may be open to ques.
tion; but if it exists at all, it should work as simply and with as much cer.
tainty and exactitude as possible; if its interpretation varies, or if it is con.
tinually meddled with by Congress, great damage ensues. It is in reality of
far less importance that a law should be Ideally right than that it should be
certain and steady in its workings. Even supposing that a high tariff is all
wrong, it would work infinitely better for the country than would a series of
changes between high and low duties.
In a speech at Providence, R. I., on August 23, 1902, President
Roosevelt said:
The upshot of all this is that it is peculiarly incumbent upon us in a
time of such material well-being, both collectively as a nation and Indivtd.
ually as citizens, to show, each on his own account, that we possess the
qualities of prudence, self-knowledge, and self-restraint. In our Govern.
ment we need above all things, stability, fixity of economic policy.
At Minneapolis, Minn., on April 4, 1903, President Roosevelt delivered an address which exhibited a statesmanlike grasp of this
great question and a judicial temper in considering it. From this
noteworthy speech I submit here some extracts that are pertinent to
the matter now under consideration, and print the entire speech as
part of the appendix to these remarks.
The present phenomenal prosperity has been under a tariff which was
made in accordance with certain fixed and definite principles, the most im.
portant of which is an avowed determination to protect the interests of the
American producer, business man, wage-worker, and farmer alike. The
general tariff policy, to which, without regard to changes in detail, I believe
this country is irrevocably committed, is fundamentally based upon ampl
recognition of the difference between the cost of production-that is, the cos
of labor-here and abroad, and of the need to see to it that our laws shal
in no event afford advantage in our own market to foreign industries over
American industries, to foreign capital over American capital, to foreign
labor over our own labor. This country has and this country needs better
paid, better educated, better fed, and better clothed workingmen, of a highe
type than are to be found in any foreign country. It has and it needs a
higher, more vigorous, and more prosperous type of tillers of the soil than is
possessed by any other country.
*         *          *         *          *         *   -      *
It is, of course, a mere truism that we want to use everything in our
power to foster the welfare of our entire body politic. In other words, we
need to treat the tariff as a business proposition, from the standpoint of the
interest of the country as a whole, and not with reference to the temporar
needs of any political party. It is almost as necessary that our po01c
should be stable as that it should be wise. A nation like ours could not long
stand the ruinous policy of readjusting its business to radical changes in te
tariff at short intervals, especially when, as now, owing to the immense
extent and variety of our products, the tariff schedules carry rates of duty
on thousands of different articles.
If a tariff law has on the whole worked well, and if business has prospered
under it and is prospering, it may be better to endure some inconvenience
and inequalities for a time than, by making changes, to risk causing disturb,
ance and perhaps paralysis in the industries and business of the countrY
The fact that the change in a given rate of duty may be thought desireab
does not settle the qutestion whether it is advisable to make the change Sir
mediately. Every tariff deals with duties on thousands of articles arranged
in hundreds of paragraphs and in many schedules.
These duties affect a vast number of interests which are often conflit
ing. If necessary for our welfare, then, of course, Congress must conside
the question of changing the law as a whole or changing any given rate
of duty. But we must remember that whenever even a single schedule Ii
considered some interests will appear to demand a change in almost eveY
schedule in the law, and when it comes to upsetting the schedules generalm
the effect upon the business interests of the country would be ruinous.
~*:  '  '      *     *S       *          *         *,
To sum up, then, we must as a people approach a matter of suoo
prime economic importance as the tariff from the standpoint of our businesg
needs. We can not afford to become fossilized or fail to recognize the fat
that as the needs of the country change it may be necessary to meet thee
new needs by changing certain features of our tariff laws. Still less can
afford to fail to recognize the further fact that these changes must not *
made until the need for them outweighs the disadvantages which may rt
suit *   *  *  We have prospered marvelously at home. As a nation 
stand in the very fore front of the giant international competition of th
day. We can not afford by any freak or folly to forfeit the position P
which we have thus triumphantly attained.
a-120


I




I
 I
1


I


ik


"FREE TRADE BETWEEN                   COUNTRIES COMPELS
EVENTUAL EQUALIZATION IN CONDITIONS OF THE PEOPLE."
lxtract from remarks of Hon. J. P. JONES, of Nevada, in the Senate of the
United States, Sept. 10, 1890, and printed in the Congressional Record.
The only thing that now restrains a tendency to equalization between
this country and the countries of Europe is the tariff wall which we have
erected. Were it not for this the cheap products of foreign factories would
flood our markets, would destroy our workshops-those greatest of all, our
schools. We expend millions of dollars annually for the elementary education of our young men-an education that merely prepares them to enter
these great schools of life, in which they continue their studies. No one
doubts that we should provide liberally for our public schools. The great
workshops of the country, filled with deft, thoughtful, and studious young
men, are in the true sense an extension of the public schools-they constitute advanced grades-in which the students not only pay for their own
tuition, but pay back to the country much more than was expended on
their elementary education.
Without these workshops and workmen we should soon find ourselves
reduced to the necessity of exchanging a large amount of the raw material
of our soil for a very small quantity of the finished product of foreign factories. It would be discovered when too late that the work of supplying
the wants of our own people, a people that earns more and spends more
than any other people on earth, had been bartered away for the poor
privilege of supplying the wants of the squalid and poorly paid inhabitants
of other continents.
England very well understands this principle of equalization. When
she looks toward France and Germany she wants "fair trade," which
means protection, because she knows that in dealing with those countries
her people would have to equalize downward. When she looks toward the
United States she wants "free" trade, because she knows that in dealing
with us they would be equalizing upward.
I maintain and repeat that free trade between countries compels
eventual equalization in the conditions of the people of those countries. To
accomplish this may take a longer or shorter time, according to the circumstances of each case, but the process begins at once.
If it be desirable that the aspiring workmen of this country shall
maintain their present grade of living, and shall not be pressed down to
the condition of the ill-fed and ill-paid workmen of other lands, then all
idea of a low-tariff policy and of a policy of international free trade must
be abandoned, and the tariff wall must be maintained sufficiently high to
exclude all articles whose manufacture or production here would require
no greater expenditure of mental or physical force than must be expended
in their production elsewhere.
If we have high wages and high civilization for the masses in this
country, then in order to keep wages and civilization on a high plane a
tariff is indispensable.  If we are to permit the product of the labor
of the foreign workman, underpaid and underfed as he is, to compete in
our home market with the product of our own workmen, shall we permit
that competition to take placewlithout exacting any return for the privilege? Shall our people, who consume twice as much food per head as the
People of Europe, expend six times as much per head for education, cheerfully contribute of their earnings in many other directions to support the
civilization of this country, and stand ready to defend it if need be with
their lives-shall they permit foreign manufacturers from a distance of
thousands of miles to carry on business in all the towns and cities of the
United States without contributing in any way whatever to the support
of our institutions or Government?
Shall we permit them to compete in our own market with our own
People on perfectly even terms? If so, the consequences will not be slow
to ~nake themselves felt. The competition for the present may be only with
the English, the French, or the Germans, but it is a progressive competition. What is'to make it stop with the competition of Europe? If cheapness is the desideratum it can not stop there. Reaching beyond the Englislhman, the Frenchman, and the German, our competition will soon be
with the half-clothed Hindoo, and, beyond him, with the naked inhabitant
of the Congo. Is this to be the measure of the ultimate civilization of the
United States
a-121


I
I




"THE TARIFF A NATURAL, NOT AN ARTIFICIAL WALL,
Extract from remarks of lon. J. P. JONES, of Nevada, in the Senate of 
United States, Sept. 10, 1890, and printed in the Congressonal Record.,
THE NATURAL WAGE.
A tariff upon imports, instead of being an artificial creation, is,
my judgment, the natural and proper thing for a nation. Free foreig
trade is the artificial thing. A nation must be regarded as a family, all
whose members should stand together. As between the members of tha
family, undoubtedly, unrestricted trade is the natural condition, becaus
equalization between them is the condition suggested by nature and by th
mutual interests of the members of the national family. Any advantag
given to one member of that family over another would be unnatural an
intolerable, but to deny to strangers benefits that we might confer o
members of our own family would not be unnatural. On the contrary, i
would be in strict conformity with nature. The same law should gover
the national family.
One of the highest duties of government is the adoption of such ec.
nomic policy as may encourage and develop every industry to which th
soil and climate of the country are adapted, and, when established, t
preserve and protect such industries from destructive foreign competitioa
industries which, owing to climatic or other insuperable barriers, it wouli
be manifestly impossible to develop should not be attempted, or, if foolishbl
attempted, should not be encouraged or protected. I should not think o!
raising bananas under glass, nor encourage an attempt to plant in thi
country the India-rubber tree, nor to develop a tea or coffee plantationleast not with our present information regarding the probabilities of success
in the growth of tea and coffee in tne United States. But I lay this dow
as the correct and fundamental idea of a tariff: That whenever a given
degree of mental and physical force exerted in this country will accomplish
results equal to those accomplished by an equal degree of such force exerted
in any other country, our tariff charge can not be too high.
With that principle in practical operation, the compensation for labo
would be regulated, not by competition between our workmen and thos
of lower forms of civilization, but by the natural and unrestricted competi
tion among workmen wholly within the borders of our own country, who ar
partakers of and contributors to the same civilization, who are the suppor
and defense of our institutions and are prepared to sustain with their lives
the   perpetuity of our Government,
I maintain that the natural wage of every man-the amount to which
he is fairly entitled-Is the amount he can earn in free and unrestricted
competition in his own country with men who are subject to the sam
laws and responsibilities, accustomed to the same manner and standard o
living.
To subject men to any keener competition than this or to exact a lower
standard of wages than would result from the operation of that principle
would be substantially to declare the ultimate and fundamental standard of
wages for the world at large to be that rate at which the least skilled
workmen of the lowest civilization will consent to work and procreate,
The American workman will never accept such a standard, and he never
should do so. He will not consent to be pressed down into the penur
and squalor to which the laborers of other lands are subjected and with
which, in the main, they are contented.
It is much better to do justice at the outset-to concede that the
nation is one great family, and that no member of that family has a moral
right to supply his wants with a cheaper workman than his own country
affords. A country that will employ cheap labor will find that it react
on those who employ it, and that, in the long run, instead of a profit, they
will experience a loss by the operation.  Our workmen are entitled to
the control of our markets for the product of their industry. They pay
the taxes; they constitute the people. It is right that they should refuse
to be subjected to the barbarous competition of people who are living under
the shadow of standing armies, and who, through ages of oppression, have
become accustomed to a grade of existence that to our people would make
life not worth living.
There is no reason whatever why    very man in the United States
should not be willing to pay such rates of wages as shall obtain by the
free and unrestricted competition of all workmen in his own country. The
compensation which he receives for his own services in whatever occupation
he may be employed-and there are few of our people who do not workIs based on the average wages of his own community. He is not entitled
to get other men's labor at any cheaper rate, in proportion to value of
service, than he charges for his own; and this is what an adequate tarid
justly prevents him from doing.
Under such tariff we are sustaining the conditions of life to which out
people are accustomed. At the same time we are creating new comforts
and inventing new devices by which human wants may be supplied witt
less of human sacrifice. Nor under it can we be in any danger of losin
the benefit of such Inventions as may be made in other lands. Science and
invention are great travelers, and with the maintenance of such economin
policy as may keep at a high level the conditions of all our people our
country willa      alway attract men of choicest skill In every department of tb
arts.
The condition of our people being universally acknowledged to be
superior to that of any other people on the globe, the tariff wall is nleeC'
sary to protect tm        the squalor and misery prevailing elsewhere;
If this be a Chinese wall it is only so because it walls out the poverty O
ess favored  tountrie ad  walls It the prosperity of the United States o
America.
a-122




HE SYMPATHIES OF THE FREE TRADER GOES TO
THE PURCHASER OF GOODS; HE HAS NO SYMPATHY WITH THE PRODUCER OF THEM."
tract from remarks of Hon. J. P. JONES, of Nevada, in the Senate of the
United States, Sept. 10, 1890, and printed in the Congressional Record.
THE "NECESSARIES OF LIFE."
The sympathies of the free trader go out in unstinted measure to
e purchaser of goods; he has no sympathy with the producer of them. He
ishes the duty taken from the "necessaries of life." In behalf of whom?
aot the producer of those necessaries, but the purchaser. He ignores the
ct that it is in the production of those very necessaries that nine-tenths
four people are engaged. If the tariff charges are to be taken from
necessaries of life," there will be no need of a protective tariff; there will
nobody to be protected. Under the pretense of benefiting the purchaser
he Democratic party would destroy both the producer and the industry.
If we examine the list of productive pursuits followed in this country,
e shall find almost all of them dealing with "necessaries of life."  Proction should be given to all pursuits, so that the largest variety of indusries may be encouraged. The fact that only a few persons are engaged
a particular industry is no reason why that industry should be deroyed, our country deprived of the art, and other industries overcrowded
ith the displaced labor.
In the idea, therefore, that all tariff charges should be taken off the
necessaries of life," there is nothing but an appeal to "consumers," in
he hope that the producers of the country, being also consumers, may be
eceived by mere names.
Before the great protective system was inaugurated by the Republican
arty a very large number of articles now deemed by our people to be
'necessaries" were luxuries of life. The daily living of the masses of this
ountry has in thirty years, under protection, come more and more to conist of things that prior to that time were beyond their reach. With the
rotective principle thoroughly understood and universally applied, there
s hardly an article in the present category of luxuries that would not, as
ime passed, become part of the daily life and daily needs of the masses of
he American people.
It will be generally admitted that worsted shawls come fairly within
he designation of "necessaries of life" in this country. Suppose the duty
n worsted shawls to be high and the duty on camel-hair shawls low. Our
ree-trade friends would characterize this as a gross wrong. Let us see.
here are thousands of people in this country engaged in the manufacture
f worsted shawls. With one accord they assert that if the tariff charge
houeld be taken from those articles it would either destroy the industry in
his country or relegate all those engaged in it to a grade of living inconistent with citizenship of this free Republic. They therefore unite in a
equest that the duty be not taken from imported worsted shawls,
So, also, the American sheep-raisers who supply the wool for those
shawls, living in isolation and self-denial, entreat us not to subject them
o a competition with the cheap labor of South America and Australia.
It is manifest, if we are to have a protective policy at all, that the policy
should extend to every industry existing in the country; otherwise it would
be a partial and unjust policy. By a duty on wool and on worsted shawls
we protect the people engaged in the manufacture of those articles from the
competition of European labor.  But in examining the subject, to see
against whom a discrimination would operate in case we put only a comParatively light duty on camel-hair shawls, I fail to find American labor
engaged in raising camels. I have seen no camel ranches in this country,
nor have I heard of anybody in the United States being engaged in the
manitufacture of camel-hair shawls.
Whom, therefore, should we protect by an extraordinarily high tariff
ch z~ge on camel-hair shawls?  An industrial policy, to be worthy of a
gretat nation like this, should enable its people to do all their own work,
uDtouched by competition from the squalid labor of other lands.
By the protective feature of the tariff we secure all the revenue needed
It the Government, and whether luxuries are highly taxed or not, it would
be absolutely destructive of the interests of our laboring men to take the
a riB charge from  foreign importations of articles that may be called
'laessaries of life." By taking the duty off "necessaries of life" we should
sl:ect our producers to a competition that would deprive them of work,
t'l! work being the production of those very "necessaries."  As I have
ae elsewhere, it is the producer to whom the highest consideration is due.
A, except the aged and infirm should be producers, and even these are
3:iIded for by the protection which the tariff affords to those whom nature
ai appointed to care for them. Industrial policies can not be planned
"11 he interest of those who produce nothing, who contribute nothing to the
0'-0 Imonwealth. States can live without them.


a-123




"THE QUESTION IS NOT BETWEEN FREE TRADE AND
TARIFF-THE QUESTION IS SHALL TARIFF BE SO
LAID AS TO PRODUCE REVENUE ONLY, OR
THAT IT SHALL ALSO ENCOURAGE AND
PROTECT AMERICAN INDUSTRIES."
Extract from remarks of lion. J. T. McCLEARY of Minnesota, in
the House of Representatives, and printed in the daily Congressional Record, June 20, 1904.
Not long ago I received a letter from an intelligent constituent of
mine, asking how much of the money paid by the people of his
county to the county treasurer goes to the support of the United
States. He said there had been quite a dispute in his neighborhood
over the matter. Of course the answer to the question is that not
one cent of the money paid to the county or city or town treasurer,
or whoever may be collector of local taxes, goes into the Treasury
of the United States. It all goes to the State and to the institutions
conducted under authority of the State. It goes to support the local
schools, to build the local highways, to construct the local bridges,
to support the local poor, to meet the expenses of the school district,
the town, the village, the city, the county, and the State. Not one
penny of it goes to the Treasury of the United States.
Under our Constitution, it is the State and not the Nation which
protects its inhabitants in their persons and in their property; and
so the State and not the Nation has the moral and constitutional
right to tax their persons and their properties. On the other hand,
it is the Nation and not the State which provides for the common
defense-which raises and maintains armies and navies. It is the
Nation and not the State which regulates international commerce.
What more natural, then, than that the Nation should derive the
income for its support primarily from the field in which it does
its work and thus derives its moral right to levy taxes at all? That
is, having for its field of service the regulation and protection of
our entire international commerce, the General Government naturally
derives its revenue from taxes levied on our foreign commerce. But
our Constitution forbids taxation of exports, so the United States
can tax only imports.
It is for this reason that the United States always has derived,
derives to-day, and always will derive its principal income from taxes
levied on goods imported into this country. In the language of the
Democratic national platform of i884, "From the foundation of this
Government, taxes collected at the custom-house have been the chief
source of Federal revenue. Such they must continue to be."
From what I have said it must be clear that the tariff question is
not "Shall there or shall there not be a tariff on imported goods?"
When the Government was founded that question was settled for all
time and settled in the affirmative.
To provide for the common defense and do all the other incidental
thiigs that our Constitution authorizes and requires the General Government to do necessitates the expenditure of hundreds of millions of
dollars a year. As I have shown, that money must be raised in large
part from duties on imports, no matter what party is in power.
The tariff question, then, is not one between free trade, properly
so called, and tariff taxation. It is between two methods of taotf
taxation. The question is not "Shall there be a tariff on imported
goods?" but "How shall that tariff be levied?"  The question is,
"Shall that tariff be so laid as to produce revenue only, or shal it
be so laid that while producing the necessary revenue it shall iso
eacourage and protect Amenrican industries?"  That is the question
of the tariff, all others bein incidental and subsidiary.
a-124


I


I




"IS THE TARIFF A ROBBERY?"
ftrct friom remarks of Hon.,J. P. JONES, of Nevada, in the Senate of the
United States, Sept. 10, 1890, and printed in the Congressional Record.
The free traders and revenue reformers assert that tariff is a "robbery."
Can it be a "robbery" of any one to secure to the people of this country
the opportunity to supply our national wants by the hands of our own
oluntrymen? That is all that the highest conceivable tariff can secure.
In times of armed conflict our citizens are required to leave their
hmes and families to take up arms, and at the risk of their lives defend
ibe country against armed invasion. Why should not the country in time
ft peace protect the labor of those men from an industrial invasion no less
estructtve?
If the tariff be a "robbery," it is first to be observed that all classes
i people, the robbed as well as the robbing, are better fed, better clothed,
Mnd better housed than the people of any other country in the world. That
s the crucial test of economical policies.
It is undeniable that the most perfect suiting of occupations to the
arious aptitudes of all the members of the community will be produced
y the carrying on of the largest variety of industries.
Is it not then the duty of a country to maintain such industrial policy
s will secure the greatest possible extent and variety of production, leavng to the natural competition between individuals the function of preenting undue profits on the part of any? There are 23,000,000 of active
orkers in this country.  Among that large number the contests and
ompetitlon of those engaged in the same business may be relied on to adjust
rices so that none can make a profit greater than the average profit of the
oemmunity.
But let us see whether there Is any robbery effected by a tariff.
As to such portion of the money collected as is paid to the Governnent, that goes into the public treasury and aids in defraying the exeenses of the nation. Inasmuch as all the people share in its benefits, that
ortion can not be considered "robbery."
It will hardly do to assert that the foreign manufacturer is "robbed"
y our requiring him to deposit in our Treasury a sum of money in the
ature of a license-fee for the privilege of selling his wares in this country.
The "rob" therefore must consist of the difference between a reanable price and the price now charged by the manufacturer. If such diference exists, it must constitute a margin so ample as to become a strong
ncentive to the people of any section claiming to be robbed by it to
rganize for themselves competing establishments and thus wholly protect
hemselves against the exaction of the robber. The tariff protects them
gainst the foreigner, and all that is needed to protect them against the
ative robber is for themselves to do the work-to produce the article.
hy do they not produce it?  If they have not the skill, they can employ
t. There is ample skill in this country ready to go wherever sufficient
ducement is offered.
The law operating equally and impartially on all sections of the Union,
he people of any section claiming to be robbed, yet refusing or neglectng to set up establishments for the manufacture of the article through
hich the robbery is effected, confess, by such refusal or negligence, that,
otwithstanding their complaint, they get the article for less than they are
illing to produce it for themselves. If through the adoption of sinister
olicies the domestic manufacturers should be driven out of business, then
oth they and those who now complain of robbery would be equally helpless
gainst the exactions of the foreign manufacturer, who, the field being
11 his own, would continue, and, at will, enlarge upon the "robbery."  If
he "rob" is not sufficient to induce competition on the part of those who
lalm to suffer by it, it can not be very great-it can not exist at all
xcept in the imaginations of those who believe that the exigencies of a
olitical party are more to be consulted than the interests of the country.
Under keen competition in all industries, how can any one be robbed?
n order that we may arrive at some idea of the possibility of robbery
y our manufacturers, let us inquire as to the character of the competition
isting.
As the census figures for this year are not yet available, the figures
t command apply to a population not of 65,000,000, but 50,000,000. I
o nt doubt that they are 40 per cent. greater now than in 1Sm0, but I will
Ike them as they then stood.
According to the census of 1880 there were 17,972 boot and sho
actories in the United States. Has anybody in this country, then, a
onopoly in the making of boots and shoes?  With the keen competition
aintalned by nearly eighteen thousand establishments, it is likely that
urchasers of boots and shoes can be "'robbed?"  It is probable the numer of establishments is now twenty-five thousand.  No one of these
stablishments, if it would get trade and keep it, can charge more for
os and shoes than its t  icompetitors charge.
The census of 1880 also shows that we had 3,841 carriage and wagon
ctories. Is not that number enough to afford the purchaser of carriages
ad noagons ample protection against over-charge, against "robbery'?"
We had 1,943 manufactories of agricultural implements. This is an
era:ge of fifty such factories for each State in the Union. Is it at all
roba le that with active competition for business among so many estabshii ents any one of them could succeed for any length of time in "robing' its customers?
aWe had 1,005 cotton factories, working 230,223 looms and 10,921,147
tndlies Is that number not enough to maintain sufficient competiton in
h  oManufacture of cotton goods?
rVe had 4,958 machine shops. Is not this number enough to keep
P a fair competition insthe production and price of machinery?
We had 6,008 factories of furniture and upholstery.   Surely that
tnn ber of competitors should make it impossible for any one of these facries to make more than a fair average profit in the making of furniture.
Arle had 1,005 separate establishments for the making of iron and
teel Considering the intensity of the competition in that business and the
rge amount of capital employed (which in 1880 was $230,000,000), the
'rort of each establishment to get business, as against its competitors,
nder it certain that the profits of the business must bear a normal ratio
tho general range of profits throughout the country.
Where competition is free among so vast a population as ours there
bPe no robbe  ina  tariff, no matter hw hw Lh.
a,,126




"GREAT BRITAIN IS LOSING HER GRASP WHILE THE
PROTECTED NATIONS ARE GROWING STRONG."
Extract from remarks of lion. J. T. McCLEARY of Minnesota, in
the House of Representatives, and printed in the daily Col.
gressiona Record, June 0, 1904.
SOME SUGGESTIVE COMPARISONS.
It may not be very important where a nation happens to be at a
given moment, but it is supremely important the direction in which
he or it is headed.  Condition may be unimportant; tendency is
vastly important.  By means of some brief tabular statements I
propose now to show the tendency of Great Britain, and side bv
side with her the tendency of France, Germany, and the United
States, all of which have a protective tariff of greater or less efficiency. (These figures are taken verbatim from an official English
source-based on the reparts of the British National Board of Trade
-and the money values are expressed in pounds sterling as in the
original.)
British imports from   competitive nations, 1875 and 1902.
[From Germany, Holland, Belgium, France, United States.]
8. 75      1902.
- - - - - - - -.- - s - C ^ - - - - - - -...........................................................................-..................................
Raw  material, food, etc..~......................  117,700,000  (,1,
M anufactures.....................................  j  0,1 0 10006,.5  0,(
T otal........................................................O, 0. 272,XX),(X.
British exports to competitive nations.
[To Germany, Hollland, Belgium, France, United States.]
Raw  miaterial, etc...................................  100,000 21,4 I' 
Manufactures...........................    71, 00,0 0   57,60(0,:(1
Total.........................7......9............400,000..79 000.,
It will be noted that the total volume of British exports to her five
chief competitors was actually less in 1902 than 1875. Moreover, the
composition of those exports had undergone a most portentous change.
It will be noted that British exports of raw material had nearly
trebled, while her exports of manufactured goods had fallen off
about 20 per cent.
On the other hand, looking at the imports of Great Britain, it will
he noted that her rivals had more than doubled the sale of their
manufactured goods in British markets.
Now let us examine the movement from the other side of the line.
Here are some very suggestive tables:
FRANCE.
Manufactures e xpo ted to         Manufactures I m p o r t e d
England:                          from England:
1875......................  20,00000000  1875................   2,.300,00
1902......................  8(700,100  19.02.......................  9,Wx))00
Increase over D2e per cent.       Decrease, 22 per cent.
BELGIUIM.
Manufactures expo ted to          MIanufactures im n ported
England:                          from England:
187.-.................  ), 0  1875.................... 5,2(10,(Xt!
19t02..............  19,0,U000  i  1902....................  6,4OW,tK)
Increase, 120 per cent.           Increase, 23 per cent.
GERMIBANY AND HOLLAND.
Manufactures exported to        i Manufactures   p o r t e d
England:                          from England:
l87..... 1....................00   1875..............   3...... );,(000X}
M10  2to..*...............  46,900,000  102...................  2 (
Increase over 40 p er             Derease over 30 per cent
cent.
UNITIED STATES.
Manufactures exported to          Manufactures iu ported
England:.                       from England:
W 75W......~...............  42,000,000  18.75.. i...................20,,(ilW
190 2.....................  18,70000  1902........ l19. a),(  t
IXcreasei, 5 per cent.            Decrease, 5 per cent.
The above tables reveal a tendency making an unanswerable argu'
ment in favor of a protective-tariff system. Great Britain, once the
workshop of the,world, is evidently losing her grasp, while the protected nitions are growing strong.




I


a-126


I




,WATCH SPRINGS-THE FREE LISTy                   THE &UTIABLE LIST?"
"THE TWO POLICIES ARE LOGICALLY THE OPPOSITE
OF EACH OTHER7 —"WE HAVE THE WORKMEN SKILLED IN THAT CRAFT."
xttixrct from remarks of lion. J. T. IMcLEAIRY of Minnesota, in
the House of Representatives, and printed in the daily Congressional Record, June 20, 1904.
Tct us assume that the Democratic party has declared for a tariff
for revenue only and has carried the election, Let us assume that
the party has resolved to carry out to the letter the promises made
to the people and prepare a tariff bill in strict accordance with the
principle of "a tariff for revenue only."
Let us watch the committee making up its tariff bill.
'Thousands of items are to be considered, but the principle is never
to be lost sight of. They come to the item of watch springs. The
tcst question is, "Do we in this country possess the raw material out
of whilc  watch springs are made, and do we possess-or can we
Ilcqtiirc —the workmen through whose labor and skill watch springs
aln be made economically and in sufficient quantities to meet the
demilands for watch springs on the part of the people of the United
Stttes." Tlhe answer to that question is "Yes.  In the United States; tir nulmberless mines producing the best of iron. -We have the men,
a;dl the men have thle skill to take that iron and work it up from
its crude state, process after process, until finally is made that wonderful product, a watch spring, worth more than its weight in gold."
WVhere, then, would our Demtocratic brethren place watch springs
in their tariff bill? Would they put them on the free list or on the
luitiable list? A tariff on watch springs would not only produce a
aevenue to the Government on all watch springs that might be imlo!itecd, but would also provide protection to an American industry,
txi,'l;g or economically possible. But Democrats believe in "a tariff
for revenue only."  So the only losgical thling for the Democrats to
do woulld be to put watch springs on the free list.
Now, let us suppose the Republican party in power and making a
htriffl bill. Tlhey come to the item of watch springs. What would
tie llepublican party do? The course of reasoning would be this:
"lh ie making of watch springs economically and in sufficient quantlities to meet the demand for watch springs in the United States
i's ai industry either existing or entirely practicable in this country.
\We      hale t  raw material. We have the workmen skilled in that,'':i ft. Watch springs are or can be produced economically in the
U l: ed States. They can and should be produced in quantities to
sutly the demand of the people of the United States who desire;t'ih springs of American make.    Therefore, a duty on watch
s'Ithigs would raise revenue for the Government and at the same
tflo, wouldl afford protection to an American industry. Therefore:,t 'i springs should be put upon the dutiable list."  Look at the
lii lc-y Act and you will find them there.
'Alths we see that while the purpose of each party is and must be
',, ~h.,e revenue required for the support of the Government and to
'' a  it through duties on imports, the two policies are logically the
*; opposite of each other in specifyin  t     s   pon which the,II:-  should be laid. Each party would have a "dutiable list, or
lai! tf articles: upotl which a duty should be laid, and each would have
a ':ree list," or list of articles upon which no duty should be laid.
'la each would logically put on tie dutiable list the things which the
oth.t would put upon the free list.: 127                                              sig. 6:,:o: e lit
X:                       7:~~~~4,




"HOW GERMANY IS PROGRESSING- LET US TAKE~ A
GLIMPSE AT       HER    HISTORY."
Exctract from Irewrks of ion. J. T. McCILEAIRY of Minnesota, in
the fnouse of Representatives, and printed in the daily n:,.
gressional Record, June 20, 1904.
We are accustomed to think of Frederick the Great only:s a
mighty military genius. But a large part of his real greatness con.
sists in what he did to develop the industrial capacities of his pceople
and his country. His most eminent biographer, Carlyle, says of time:
In Improving the industries and husbandries among his people, his
success, though less noised of in foreign parts, was to the near observer
still more remarkable.
Utnder Frederick's successors, "who intensified all the faults anil
neglected all the good points of his system," "free trade" becani
the recognized policy in Prussia. After various experiences, in 18$33
a number of the German States united to form a zollverein —that is,
a customs union or tariff league, having a protective tariff against
the rest of the world, but practical free trade among the 26,000,000
people living within the territory of the zollverein.
The report of D)octor Bowring, who wavs sent by the British Goveminent in 1841 to examine and report upon the Zollverein, shows
the following:
1. That protection had vastly increased the power of the Germian
people to command the services of other people, as shown by tli
fact that the importations had risen steadily in amount and qualily,
instead of decreasing, as had been predicted by the opponents of the
Zollverein.
2. The wages of labor had been largely raised for both farm hands
and factory hands. NNot only was more money paid for a day'
work, but so wmuch more was paid as enabled the workingman to conmand a much larger amount of material comfort.
3. The farmer had not lost what the manufacturer had gained, but
had gained equally with him, the prices of raw materials and of
manufactured goods having steadily approximated each other as the
factory was brought nearer the farm.
4. The total consumption of articles of prime necessity had increased in a ratio far exceeding the growth of the population.
5. The enormous difference between rich ant poor had been dimiisished, and the middle class of prosperous and intelligent people ld
gained greatly in nunmber.
6. The German people, formerly dissevered by the frontiers of
petty principalities, had been dran'n inuto national and political until
k>y the industrial policy that had recognized  the identity of the
material interests of the severed parts.
It was this Zollverein that made the ideal of German unity popular.
It was the memory of this Zollverein and its remarkable industria
successes which made United Germany, under the leadership of Bismarek, possible of accomplishment.
But with all their strength of character, with all the demonstration of the success of their Zollverein, like the people of the United
States some fifty years ago, they yielded to the seductive argumoenc
for "free trade," gradually reducing their tariff rates below the ploin
where they afforded adequate protection, and suffered the same con.
sequences that were suffered in the United States. And it was not
until 1879, under the leadership of the sagacious Bismarck, thItA
reunited Germany returned to1 the policy under which the ea lic
Zollverein had prospered so enormously.
During' the course of his speech on the tariff in 1879, when iS'
marck was pointing out to the German parliamrnent the reasons -lit
Germany should return to the protective policy, he said:
The success of the United States in material development.Is the m-s
illustrious of modern times. The American nation has not only successful!
borne and suppressed the most gigantic and expensive war of all histnrt
but immediately afterwards disbanded its Army, found work for all its so
4diers and marines, paid off most of its debt, gives labor and homes to ail
unemployed of Europe as fast as they arrive within the territory, an-1 a
by a system of taxation so indirect as not to be perceived, much 'less ei'
Because it is my deliberate judgment that -the prosperity of Amerin a
mainly due to its system of protective laws, I urge that Germany has no
reached that point where it is: necessary to imitate the tariff system off i
United States.:* * * 'I tbase may opinion on the practical experience tft
timhes we live in. I see that thte protective countries are prospering anr t t
free-trade countries decaying. Mighty England, like a powerful ataief
strode out into the open market when she had strengthened her sinew ao
said, "Who will measure with me? I am ready for all." But England ihe
self is slowly returning to the protective tariff, and some 'years hen s!
will adopt it in order to keep at least her home market.


a-128






t HE TARIFF IS THE PRICE WHICH FOREIGN MANUFACTURERS PAY FOR THE PRIVILEGE
OF SELLING IN OUR MARKET."
a:/t(),f from remanrks of lion. J. jT. McCLEJA: RY of Minnesota, in
fir h  Itouse of Represeatatives., and printed in the daily Co,[flretssionall Record, June 20, 1904.
A; an illutstration of the fact that our tariff compels foreign pro{ia rs cloming into our markets; to accept smaller profits here than
s.sewhcere, I take from  the report of the United States Industrial
cuImission the following froml the testimony of Mr. John Pitcairn,
resident of the Pittsburg Glass Company, relative to the operations
fEuropean makers of plate glass:
Various manufacturing powers in Europe have combined into one strong
}ternational syndicate in order to regulate and divide among themselves the
or0d's markets. Only the United States is left out of this protecting cominaation. This market (the United States) is therefore a desirable dumping
round for the surplus of European production, and exceptionally low prices
re being made by the foreign manufacturers for glass intended for the
cIited States. For example, the present European price for polished plate
ass cut to size is, for the United States, 40 per cent. and 5 per cent. disouiit from a certain price list; for England, 10 per cent. discount from the
olme price list, which means a difference in price of 58 per cent. European
iscounts for stock sizes of polished plate glass are, for the United States, 30
er cent. off the list; for England, 5 per cent. off the same list, which shows
difference of 36 per cent.
IIn other words, the tariff is the price which foreign manufacturers
ny for the privilege of selling the products of foreign labor in our: a ket. The Democratic party says that we should charge them
ss for this privilege. The Republican party declares that, if anyillg, we should charge them more.
Atnd why shouldn't the foreign producer pay and pay well for
il:cring our market?  -le does not live among us. He is not subject
service in time of war. He gives no employment to our people.
pe pays nothing otherwise toward the expenses of the Government,
cal or general, yet he gets the benefit of the protection guarantee(l!our Government. It is perfectly right in every way that he should
required to help pay the expenses of the Government which furshes him with protection to his property and enables him to pursue
x:business in peace and safety.
'The beauty of it is that, under a protective tariff, whatever part
the tariff is paid by our citizens is paid by those who are both
Ilc and willing to pay it-by the rich, who feel that they must have. p(orted" goods.
(C;i this point Abraham Lincoln, discussing the protective tariff in
i;ddress to the people of Illinois issued March 4, 1843, said:
Bly this system the man who contents himself to live upon the products
his own country pays nothing at all; and surely that country Is extensive
oit gh and its products abundant enough to answer all the real wants of its
oprIe. In short, by this system the burden of revenue falls almost entirely
tile wealthy and luxurious few, while the substantial and laboring many,
o live at home and upon home products, go entirely free.
A\td in discussing the Mills bill on the floor of this House on May
1F88, William McKinley, then a Representative in Congress, said
re[]ation to the protective tariff:
What is a protective tariff? It is a tariff upon foreign Imports so adnti,! as to secure the necessary revenue, and judiciously imposed upon
oS,' foreign products the like of which are produced at home, or the like of
ht: we are capable of producing at home. It imposes the duty on the foro oompeting product. It makes it bear the burden or duty, and, as far aS.ss 'le, luxuries only excepted, permits the noncompeting foreign product to
nii in free of duty. Articles of common use, comfort, and necessity which
e::n not produce here it sends to the people untaxed and free from cuslrt-iouse exaction. Tea, coffee, spices, and druns are such articles, and
dlr our system are upon the free list. It says to our foreign competitor,
y- want to bring your merchandise here, your farm products here, your
al nd iron ore your wool, your salt, your pottery, your glass, your cottons
lt ',oolens, and sell alongside of our producers in our market, we will make
ur product bear a duty-in effect, pay for the privilege of doing it. Our
nci of tariff makes the competing foreign article carry the burden, draw
e.ad, supply the revenue; and in performing this essential office It enui -ges at the sameie e our own industries and protects our own people
tl': ir chosen employments. That is the mission and purpose of a proteoeta ri.:r  f


I




'LIRNCOLN ON THE TARIFF.
"MR. LINCOLN'S SUGGESTION                 MADE FIFTY-SEVEN
YEARS AGO HAS BEEN FULLY JUSTIFIEDI.
Extract from remarks of Hon. J. T. McCLEARY           of Minnesotia, in
the Iouse of Representatives, (dand printed in the daily Cnt.
gressional Record, June 20, 1904.
LINCOLN'S VIEWS ON THE TARIFF.
In 1846 Abraham Lincoln was elected to Congress from Illinois. In
the campaign of 181f6 the tariff question had been quite prominent
For years before that camnpaign Mr. Lincoln had been making a study
of the subject with the view of determining the wise policy for this
country. After the election he made further study of it with the
view of discharging properly his duties as a Member of Congress.
So earnest was he in the matter that he made careful memoranda of
his studies and his conclusions. In one of the memoranda then made
he said:
I stppose the true effect of duties upon prices to be as follows: If a cer
tain duty be levied upon an article which by nature can not be produced In
this coutttry-say, 3 cents a potud upon coffee-the effect will be that the
eonsumer will pay 1 cent more per pound than before, the producer will taki
i ceat less and the merchant 1 cent less in his profits, But if a duty
amountin to ftull protection be levied upon an article which can be produce
here with as little labor as elsewhere, as iron, that article will ultimatel;
and at no distant day in consequence of such dtEty, be sold to our peopUl
cheaper than before.
In another memorandum on the tariff question, written just before
taking his seat in Congress in 1847, Mr. Lincoln said:
To secure to each laborer the whole product of his labor, or as nearly sc
as possible, is a worthy object of any good government. Will the protec.
tive tariff principle advance or retard this object?
The habits of our whole species fall into three great classes-usetui
labor, useless labor, and idleness. It appears to me that the labor done in
carrying Yatiles to the place of consumption which could be produced in sut
flcient abundance and with as little labor at the plaee of consumption is use,
less labor. Iron and everything made of iron can be produced in sufficient
abundance and with as little labor in the United States as anywhere else In
the world; therefore all labor done in bringing in iron and its fabrics from a
foreign country to the United States is a useless labor. The same preeiselt
may be said of cotton and wool and of their fabrics. The raw cotton grow
in our country, is carried by land and water to England, is there spun, wove
dyed, stamped, eta., and then carried back again and worn in the very country Where it grows, and partly by the very persons who grew it. Why shouli
it t ot  sE gpun,, w t etc., in the very neighborhood where it grows and is
consumed, and the carrying be thereby dispensed with.
Mr. Lincoln's suggestion, mnade fifty-seven years ago, that the pro'
tective-tariff principle siwold be applied to the development of our
iron and cotton industrles, has been fully justified by events, In
1847, when the suggestion was made, the pig-iron production of the
United States amounted to 800,000 tons. From 1847 till 1861 we had
a tariff that furnished inadequat     roctn,       d   e prooduction
of iron was practically stationary. In 1861  was passed a protective'
tariff act, and the protective-tariff system has been largely operatie
ever since. In 1$70, ten years after the election of the first Repub'
lican President, pig4ronn production has reached 1,665,000 tons; i
ISk it was over 4,000,000 tons; in 1890, over 9,000,000; in 1900, over
13,000,000, and in 1903, over 18,000,000 tons, and the price has fallen
from   0.5 in X1847 to $15 a ton in 1904.
q ally justified   as beenw his suggestion and predietion relati e
to cottof manufactures. In 1847 the cotton mills of the tnited State
took 1i8,5O000 balts of domestic cotton for manufacture.     By 190
-the  onsimptio-n of our cotton mills had grown to over 4,00:
bales; and thef price of standard prints, a staple article of cO ttoe
rmanufacture, has fallen from  10 cents per yard in 184T to 5 caet
per yard (  leFq in 1903, s shown by the official figures of the Bvreai
of Statstcls.
On anoter occasion Iincoltn is reported to have used this ebrac'
teristle llustration. "itf my Wife buts a dress ibn hgland for $0!
we have the drs    and   ngland has tie $20. If he bs that;res
in ths United States we hae both the dress and the $ o."


I
II
I
I
t
3
1
I
I
I
I
r
11
j
B
c
11
r
I
e
s
I
11
Iq
a
5


I


a-130


I




'THE FOREIGN PRODUCER                  MUST PAY ALL OR
NEARLY ALL OF THE TARIFF ON THE GOODS
WHICH HE SENDS HERE."
xtr-ct from remarks of lion, J. T. McCLEARY of Minnesota, in the House
of Representatives, and printed in the daily Congressional Record, June
20, 1904.
WHO PAYS THE DUTIES?
The question is sometimes asked, Who actually pays the money that
he Government collects through the custom-house?    Former President
Cleveland is on record as having said at one time something to the effect
that "the tariff is a tax, the amount of which is added to the price of the
article, and is paid by the consumer."
Even If this were wholly true it would not be a valid argument in
eavor of free trade, so called. The revenues are collected for the support
of the Government, and it would not be asking too much to ask each citizen
to pay his fair share toward that support. Moreover, the tariff, whichever
policy it is levied under, is laid upon goods coming from foreign countries
into this. So, even under the definition of Mr. Cleveland, each person
can, in some measure, determine for himself how large a tax he shall pay.
But with a tariff for revenue only-that Is, a tariff levied on goods
the like of which we do not produce in this country-the policy advocated
by our Democratic brethren, two things are noteworthy:
First. Under this system of tariff for revenue only, Mr. Cleveland's
proposition about the tariff being paid by the consumer would be practically correct. That is, there being no similar articles produced in the
United States, the importers would not have to meet American competition.
Being subject only to competition among themselves, they might add most
of the amount of the tariff to the cost of the article? thus passing it on to
be paid by the consumer as a part of the cost of the article.
Second. The articles upon which the tariff would be laid are articles
of very general consumption, such as tea, coffee, spices, and drugs. These
articles are used by everybody, used by the poor quite as largely as by
the rich, so that such a tax necessarily falls upon the poor very much
more heavily than upon the rich in proportion to their ability to pay.
Now, let us consider the question as related to a tariff levied not for
revenue only, but for revenue plus protection.
When the tariff is first laid upon an article not produced In the United
States but capable of being produced here economically and in sufficient
quantities to meet, or nearly meet, the demands of the American people,
the first effect of the tariff may be to increase the cost to the people of
the article upon which the tariff is laid. (We are assuming that there
is no Industry in this country of the kind on which the tariff under consideration was laid, but that the tariff was laid for the purpose of establishing
such an industry.)  The foreign producers, having at first no competition
here, control the market and determine the price. On bringing the goods
into this country they must, of course, pay the duty at the custom-house;
but, having no domestic competition to encounter here, they can largely fix
the price at which the article shall be sold, and they may add to the
impart price the amount that they paid in the way of tariff.
Thus, even under a protective tariff Mr. Cleveland's proposition may
be applicable-at first. But even at first the price would probably be temporarily lowered from what it had been before the tariff was laid, by reason of the effort of foreign producers in possession of the market to preveft the establishment of such industries in this country, the object being to
defeat the purposes of the law and thus open the way for its repeal.
But the protection from destructive competition from foreign capital
anld underpaid labor, if the protection be adequate and stable, soon brings
Am'terican capital into the business of supplying the article. As one factory after another is established, competition here at home begins to reduce
the priice of the article to our people. Then the foreign producer finds
ltha hle is not able to get back all that he has paid as duties, and he must
be satisfied with a smaller profit than before. And as the American factor!tes increase in number and their operators increase in skill the prices
beime lower and lower, and the foreign producer selling in this market
Is able to get back from the consumer less and less of the money which
he laid for the privilege of coming into this market; so that he pays more
and! more of the tariff and must be satisfied with smaller and smaller
Pril:ts. 
Briefly then, when a protective tariff is first levied the foreign proT      Y:r may be able to add the tariff to the price, and tie consumer may
t   u*r:Z orarily have to pay all the triff ast a part of the cost of the article.
tot ras the industry grows and thrives In the United States prices fall, the
al'-imer pays less and less of the tax even on the imported goods which
"  ibys, and the foreign producer pays more and more of that tax till
the pioint is reached where, with the American factories nroducing abundeti' the foreign producer, desirous of selling goods in this country, must
bt oticessity pay all or nearly all of the tariff on the goods which he sends.er regarding it as part of the cost of getting them into this market and
a1g for himself a smaller profit.
a131




"DEMOCRATIC CHEAPNESS A CHEAPNESS OF MEN
REPUBLICAN CHEAPNESS A CHEAPNESS
OF METHODS."
Extrarct from remarks of fHona. 0. H. 7ROSVENOR of Ohio, printed  t l^
daily Congressional Record of April 4, 1904.
The cheapness that our Democratic free-trade friends are seeking
means an ultimate cheapness of men, an inferiority of citizenship,
cheapness that submits men to squalor of living. This form of cheapnes
is odious and repulsive. In order to get cheaper goods for the moment the
would cheapen our institutions. The aspiration of the Republican party
not for that form of cheapness, but for the cheapness developed by scen
and promoted by art, the cheapness that results from improved methods j
production.
I maintain that the first duty of the government of a republic Is t
adopt and maintain such economic policies as shall protect its citizens from
a degrading competition with "cheap" people, with those who have no alternative but to take what is offered or starve, men who are obliged to
accept In return for their labor the smallest amount that will sustai
animal life.
' With the free trader the dream of life Is "cheapness." Hie uses thi
word as if it were a fixed and Immutable quantity and not a mere expressio
of temporary relation. He says we ought to have "cheap" clothing without
regard to the method by which the cheapness is effected. If we baoove to
keep the wool grower., the wool spinner, and the cotton weaver In squalor
in order that we may have cheap clothes; if we are to keep the shoeomatr
on the edge of starvation in order that we may have cheap shoes, rver
man In the community will find in "cheapness" a two-edged blade, one edg
cutting the manxfrom whom he buys, the other cutting himself.
ONE CHEAP MAN BEGETS ANOTHER.
All industries being interdependent, the prosperity of all depends os
the prosperity of each. One "cheap" man begets another,    If the bttter
must have "cheap" shoes, the shoemrnaker must have "cheap" hats. IV
both must have "cheap" clothes, there must be "cheap" men to r;'ise
the wool, "cheap" spinners to spin it, "cheap" weavers to weave it, "chear
sewing-women and "cheap" tailors to make it into clothing. 'In suppl
"cheap" machinery for the shoemaker and the hatter, we must have "cheap"
machinists'; to:supply the needs of existence for all these, there muts I
"cheap" agriculturists, and "cheap" grocers; to repair their houses nilt.
be "cheap" carpenters and painters.
So there must be cheap railway cars, cheap locomotives, cheap engi
neers and conductors-and so on throughout the entire body of Ilior
This frms of cheapness would be the destruction of civilization. The way
to cheapen:things is not to cheapen the price without regard to the effort
involved in production-not to clheapen the men who make them, bht t
cheapen the.processes by which they are made-to reduce the amount o
iuman sacrifice that enters into their making; in other words, to coupCr
the forces of nature to do the work of man,.Whoever buys "cheap" must sell "cheap."    This rule is inexorable
it has but one exception. If a man has a monopoly of a product he
may sell "dear" and buy "cheap;" but where no monopoly exists, where,
from the nature of the business, it is impossible to have a monopoly, then
cheapness on the one side will involve cheapness on the other. Cheapnsre
in buying will involve cheapness in selling.
TRUE CHEAPNESS IS EFFECTED WHEN LESS SACRIFICE
PRODUCES 1THE ARTICLE.
The true cheapening of an article takes place when its prodiction
demands less sacrifice from him who prodruces it, not when its purchTtse
demands les sacrifice from him who purchases it. The gauge of eheapness'
is the sacrifice incurred by the producer, not that incurred by the consumrer,  There Is no producer who is not also a consumer; there are 'onsumers.wh-o -are not producers. With the -exception of the aged ant  t'
Infir.lm, men are entitled- to -regard only in so far as they are prodiSces
IttIs the manwho'works, not him who idles, that is entitled to consi0eration.I The producers.are the 'strength and buttress of the State. The 0wll
g idlers, whether rich or poor, and the majority are rich, are its ''at
nBeS. Nomistake can be made by consulting the interest of men in hei
capacity of producers, By consulting the interests of men as "co'-n r111
era" merely we undertake to protect the interests of the idle rich-the uoOpoducers-at the, expense of the producers.,.To' get cheap shoes the -free trader would either buy the prodrrt t
rteign. labor, which he would admit free of duty, to enter into compe itif
with'-the product'.   Of ou  shoemakers, or if he bought the home- 0oo^
article it would be at the low price of the European shoe. So he wor*b
cndemnalla our artisans, in turn, to the lowest grade of compeansatioe  h"
cause he ould buy at less outlay Iin dollars and cents the products of Io:1re
p      labor..The truth is that no class of people in this country are entitld
to goods.any cheaper than lthe other classes of our own people can  or't
them$at. wagesthatcompo   with the requirements of American civili-othor': Our people not being able under present: conditions, to compete 0lt
th6e foreign mVanufacturer in the. production of tithe various article( rie
manded by our clvilizatiobn  a larger proportion are driven into agrir' trt01
than the.ineeds..of ouroewni country rqitre~, and more than Is con^4e1
witha proper adjustment of Industry. The consequenoce Is that large titS
ers of men find their life-work Uncongeolal or repulsive,
men a-13l or ~ repit 2ve:


I




'VARIETY OF INDUSTRIES                 NECESSARY         TO THE
NATIONAL DEFENSE."
Xtract from remarks of Hon. J. P. JONES, of Nevada, in the Senate of the
IUnited States, Sept. 10, 1890, and printed in the Congressional Record.
How, in an inventive age, is the "common defense" to be provided for?
Sha11 we accumulate enormous supplies of cannon and military stores of
the kind now most approved?   They would be worthless in a few years.
Shall we build great fleets of armored vessels which no gun of to-day may
inetrate? Their armor would be as tin-foil to the cannon of the future.
Anad If we buy guns and ships of the most modern pattern, how many,tall we have? For how long a war and how great a war shall we preIpare?
Is it not manifest that the most powerful of all means for promoting
the common defense is the development and maintenance of the highest:ind most varied mechanical and inventive skill among our people? Had we
a sufficient number of weapons of the latest design wherewith to arm every
able-bodied man in the United States, these weapons, in the absence of
skilled workmen and of large manufacturing establishments constantly at
work would, in a short time, be comparatively worthless. While this country might possess the article other countries would possess the art. They
would possess not only great and indispensable plants, but the brainy
and ingenious workman who, as occasion arose, as our own experience has
shown, would invent new weapons of destructive power infinitely surpassing
the old. The possession of skilled workmen who can make guns is of far
greater consequence than the possession of the guns themselves.
But apart from the manufacture of arms, what more effective instrumentalities can a nation have of providing for the "common defense"
than citizens who can make structural iron, erect bridges, construct steam
engines, and build ships of all kinds, including armor-clad vessels of the
highest class, and not alone who can construct all these, but who can invent
entew and improved designs in every department?
And if the makers of iron are necessary for the "common defense,"
whiy not, equally, weavers of cloth, artificers in leather, in brass, in copper,
in steel, in tin, and in all the other materials of art and industry?
The larger the nation the more indispensable such artisans are to its
safety and independence. They can not be had in large numbers without
the existence of extensive manufacturing establishments, and even with
these, they can not rely upon constant employment-the indispensable prerequisite of skill, and consequently of invention —without the encouragement and material support arising from the supplying of all the wants of
their own country. The workmen of the country are entitled to the assurance of that support. With that assurance and that support we shall have
no lack of skilled artisans upon whom, in these days, fully as much as upon
soldiers in the field, depends the existence of nations. That assurance and
asupport can not be extended except by the adoption permanently of the
policy of protection.
GROWING IMPORTANCE OF THE MECHANIC AS A
FACTOR IN WARFARE.
More and more as time passes will the workman in his shop become
of greater importance than the soldier in the field. Less and less as invention develops will success in war depend on the man who holds the
'eaplon; more and more on the weapon itself and on the man who invents
and constructs it, Time was when war consisted of the wielding of clubs,
and success depended wholly on the physical energy expended in their
hansling. But "times change and men change with them."    The strength
thi e arm has been transferred to the finger, and the bullet outdoes the
bludgeon. Power has been shifted from   the field to the factory; from
mSi:cle alone to the combination of muscle and mind. The armies that have
a't artisans at their back, that have not the latest product of the everheliing brain and untiring hand of the alert and aspiring mechanic, may
loo:r well On paper and on dress-parade, but they will not win battles.
In order, then, that we may have, and constantly maintain in the highICt (egree of efficient training, a numerous body of mn skilled in the
110e:;,anical arts, we must encourage the growth and development of extenvi \ plants, not in one direction or department alone, not in one section of
T)i" Union merely, but in all directions and departments of the arts, and
S" "I sections of our common country. Such enterprises are not the spon1! u':is offerings of nature; they will not grow while we sleep, nor will they
u~ sswith waiting. Neither, for emergencies, can they be had by act of
A large manufacturing plant is not a ready-made article which, like a
[ic~P of real estate, may be secured on the instant by the expenditure of
1 iSant nmoney. A great mechanical organization is a growth, a develop"'t; a result of evolution. In all new fields of industry, and in most of
ih <Id, it finds its birth In the shop of the single machine, to which, as
f'Ouess Increases there is added a second and a third. Thus, as the human
bwins- arrives at maturity by the natural growth of each added day, so the
w0[, ':'hop grows, from the smallest to the largest proportions, by almost
U"l'fceptiblhe stages. But as men can not by taking thought add a cubit
t  i;cr stature, neither can they by resolution effect at once that which
-ii.n alone and the intelligent adaptation of means to ends can accomplish.
yiven assuming that great plants could, on emergency, be obtained
we should be without the skilled workmen to utilize them, and
I  -iti:it the talent to organize or Intelligently direct the work.
I 133






"RATES OF DUTY IN GREAT BRITAIN ARE GREATLY
HIGHER THAN THOSE IN THE UNITED STATES?"
Extract from remarks of lon. J. T. McCLI~ARY of Minnesota, in the Hofeaosj
Representatives, and printed in the Congressional Record, June 20, 0Iboi
Since 1846 Great Britain has collected her duties on imports under tIb
policy advocated by the Democratic party. Let us see how the policy i,
operated there and what the results are:
For the information of those who may not have convenient access
to the Statesman's Year-Book, I submit the following table showing the
sources of revenue of the Government of Great Britain for national par.
poses for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1903, the latest for which data
can be had. (In the Year-Book the amounts are expressed in pounds sterling. A pound sterling is worth a few cents less than $5. For convenience
of computation I have called it exactly $5 in translating the English money
into American money for the purposes of this table.)
Customs duties:
Duties on exports —coal............................. $9,958,835
Duties on imports:
Tobtacco.......................................  62,257,3635
Tea..........................................  29,877,410
Sugar, glucose, etc......................,... 22,393,535
Grain,   etc......................................  11,733.98'i,
Rum......................................  11,1409,360
W ine.........................................  7,619,20S
Brandy.................................     6,4. 6,405,57!
Other spirits.......,..........................   6,143,9(5
raisins.......................................  1,024.55
Coffee.........................................  893,140
Cocoa.........................................    774,605
Currants......................................     577,620
Other  articles................................  1,495,120
Total revenue from customs duties..................$172,304,358
Excises:
Spirits............................................  90,$21,795
Beer..                     ~...........      66,819,450
Other  sources......................................  3,598,115
Total revenue from excises................................$160,739,300
Estate, etc., duties:
Estate  duties......................................  48,501,810
Legacy  duty.......................................  15,008,965
Succession  duty.....48.............................  4,28,365
Corporation duty.,,.............................        2!39,235
Total revenue from estate duties, etc. 8.......3..... *    78-5
StamWs excluding fee stamps, ete,):..eeds...........................................  $19.499 19
Recei pts.......................................   7,842,.15
Bills of exchange....................               34.........  3,498,545
Companies' capital duty.............................  8,123, 79f
Patent medicines.,....................................  1,666,8655
Insurances....................................... 1,437,74'
Bonds  to  bearer................................1..    51,14
Licenses,  etc.......   I...*...........................  858,68
Other sources............................................................  2,319,015
Total revenue from stamp taxes................. $41,093.015
Land tax............................................... $3,808,77
Hous duty..................................   9,168, 5:
Property and income tax,.........................       1932,22930
Total revenue from taxes.....,.............  $648,96.45
Considering only national taxation proper (omitting direct payments ti
the Government for direct services, like the postal revenues and sucti
things), the total national revenues of Great Britain amounted last ycar'
In round numbers to $648,000,000, or about $16 per capita, while in ti
United States they amounted to $284,479,582 from customs, $230,8110,1
from excises, and:about $3,000,000 from other source s —in all to,abn:b
$5,000,000,0 or less than $6.50 per capita, That is, with twice as i'an'
people we collected for national purposes $130,000,000 less than did,reat
Britain,  in other words, or taxation for natioaal purposes is consider Ci
les than half as f  heavy in proportion to population as that of "free-trtalde'
In these indisputable facts there is very little comfort for those rwb
have a sort of vague notion that free trade as Illustrfated in Great BritA'o!
would in some vway mean freedom from taxation for national purposes. -A
a matter of fact, investigation shows that the cost per capita for the sar'lport of our National Government is smaller than that of any other civ'i"
cotntrfy in the world.
In the second place, the customs duties In Great Britain, Ineludinc!ae
export duty collected on coal, amount to about $t.39 per capita, whiti' u'.I
this country the total amount of customs duties amounts to only about 0:;';
per capita.
n. the third place, the table above reveals how few are the artsic'
going into Great Britain upon which the tariff duties are collected; tit i'
tow few are the articles the like of which they do not produce in i'.rwee
Britain, and consequently the enormous amount that mast be pro"t1''1 -en each of thoe few Items, As a result, tAe rates of duty in Greati Blrt
are very greatly hight r than those in the United States 
In th to frth place, many of these articles on which these enornmUso l
high rates of duty are laid are what may be regarded a. n
the poor man's tabe-tea, sugar, raisins, coffee,: cocon, curra.t, ex.
tat t is evident that the poor man feels every day as a pcal burde. tO
Biish policy of "a tariff for revenue o  "; 
As a mattfer of fact, our people simply would not tfocrata in timns "
peace such burdensome tamt ion on the necessarics of life.




I


a-434


I
I
I
I
1




"DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN PRICES OF MANUFACTURES-OF EVERY $100 WORTH OF MANUFACTURED GOODS LESS THAN THIRIY CENTS' WORTH
SOLD ABROAD LOWER THAN AT HOME."
Extrf',ct from remiark of lion. J. T. TMJeLlA RIY  f Mif nonsota, in the House of
Representatives, and printed in the Conrl-essiwoal Record, June 20, 1904.
ORtEIGN ANqD DO[EtSTIC PRICES OF GOODS.
In the effort to undermine the confidence of the A.merican people In
the operations of the Dingley Act much will be said in the coming campaign
to the effect that goods are sold by American manufacturers in foreign
markets cheaper than at home. tMuch will, of course, be made of the little
amount of truth contained in this assertion.  Let us examine this matter
and see how much weight should be attached to it.
According to the census of 1900 the total value of the goods manufactured in the United States in that year was a little over $13,000,000,000.
In the year 1900 we exported from the Inlted States $433,851,756 worth
of nmanufactured goods; that is, Mr. Chairman, we exported 3 per cent. of
what we produced. The stupendous fact, Mr. Chairman, the fact which
we must not lose sight of nor fail to estimate the importance of, is the fact
that out of the entire $13,000,000,000   worth of goods manufactured In the
United States our own pcople have been able to use or keep 97 per cent.
Why, Mr. Chairman, rather than let go of the counditions under which
such a mighty result has been accomplished we could well afford, if necessary, to throw the other 3 per cent, Into the ocean 
But we have not thrown it into the ocean. The goods have been sold
in foreign lands, Even if they had all been given away or sold for less
than the selling price at home, that fact would be of small relative importance. But instead of being sold at smaller prices than at home, more than
90 per cent, of them were sold as high or higher in foreign lands than in
the United States,
Mr. Chairman, careful statistics have been gathered on this subject of
the prices of American manufactured goods abroad and at home. These
statistics show that of the stupendous amount of manufactured goods produced in the United States, 97 per cent. is consumed in the United States.
They show also that of the 3 per cent. sold abroad, more than 90 per cent.
is sold as high or higher than at home, and that less than 10 per cent.
of that which is shipped abroad is sold for a lower price than at home.
In order that we may see the point more clearly, let us think of it In
another way. Of every $1.00 worth of manufactured goods produced in the
United States we consume at home $97 worth. Of the $3 worth shipped
habroad more than 00 per cent. Is sold as high or higher than at home.
That accounts for $2.70 worth more, or $99.70 worth of the goods in all.
That leaves less than 30 cents' worth sold abroad lower than at home.
Demnocratic statesmanship invites ius to let go of the $99.70 worth in order
to (ct a chance at a part of the 30 centrs' worth!
Mr, Chairman, let us now look for a moment at this little 30-cent
busiha ss, of which our Democratic brethren will undoubtedly try to make
laach,
The sale of a portion of our products abroad at a reduced price is not
mt ill a question of thie tariff. It is a etere question of business. Great
lrintain, with her so-called 'free trade," always has practiced that policy
50,d does to-day. Some of these sales are 'for the purpose of getting rid
01) ou t-of-date goods; some of them are for the sake of getting rid of a
I  nmporary surplus, so thatt the factories may not be closed down; some of
them are due to the fact that the sales are cash sales and in considerable
IItquailites; some of them are due to the struggle for a new market-that is,!v.ri one of these sales is umade for a psrely bbusiness reason, wholly discn(rc ted from oitr htaving or not havitng a. protective tariff.
But, Mr. Chairman, whatever may be said on this subject, let us not
forge, that the whole thing is relatively only a "thirty cent" matter, and
that in whatever consideration we may give it we must not lose sight of
the f:ct that under our protective system our people have grown so eaor'tiou;iy in their power to consurme, they are so well housed, so well clothed.
io 'V:ll fed, and have and enjoy so many of the comforts of life, that we use
f'er? at homne 97 per cent. of o'ur entire nmaifactured product.
According to Mulhall's (English) Dictionary of Statistics, the people
l 1f tii: United States manufactured about one-third of all the goods manufactutred in the world, It can readily be seen, therefore, how valuable a
htc," our home market is and therefore how exceedingly careful we should
b t- protect and defend it in the interests of our own people. Those whi;'oull have us chase after foreign markets at the risk of losing our own.
rget if they ever knew, that the internal commerce of thle United State
aointts to more thainr twice as much each t/ear as the international comer.c of all the rest of the world pmtl togetler I Let us not be beguiled., ihbairman, into forgetting this fact, the most important fact connected
'il this whole question.
) Our market, Mr. Chairman, is the cream of the earth, You cin'it erich
rea  by adding atkim mllk to It I


0 1 3 




"THIS'    ISRTHE TESTIMONY               01F7 PRACTICAL' MV-N,
RECOGNIZED LEAERS IN THEIR RESPECTIVE
CRAFTS IN GREAT BRITAIN:'
Extract front remarks of lHon. J. T. TMcCLEfARY of Minnesota, in the lint
lepreentetise ss and printed in the Congressional Record, June 20, 19 '4,
In October, November, and December of 1902, a commission b sa
by Mr. Alfred Moseley, a prominent capitalist and manufacturer of Englandi
visit ed all the great manufacturing centers of the United States a, In.o
vestigated the various classes of industries in which the members, onfi
commission were interested.   Tilhe conmmission consisted of twenty —trir
mien, the leading officers of the trades onions of the pincip'ul mduTittit
-of Great Britain. Among the associations represented were bookbinders,
conpositors, printers, bricklayers, carpenters, plasterers, cotton spinnr
cutlery operatives, engineers, iron and steel wvorkers, boot and shoe makars,
tailors, paper makers, lithographers, leather workers, shipwrights, a
wev esers.
The men who came were recognized as experts in their line, each ia
ilng had a long training and having achieved recognized tsuccess(   Ead
Investigated the kind of industry with which be was most familiar san
each made a written report of his impressions and discoveries,  On tae
return of the commission to Englanid the reports were printed iunder me
title, "Reports of the Moseley Industrial Conrnission to the United  it.e
of America, October-December, 1902."  On the opening page of the voilueMr. Moseley himself says: 
"*   *  *  The United States has advancedi by leaps and bounds. A'
the present time the home market is so f"tll'y occupied with its own, devo
opmenta that the export trade has as yet been comparatively little thosel
of; but as timrne goes on and the numerous factories come into full beariniti
America is bound to becose the keenest of competitors in the markeis o.
the world. *   *  *  That the Asetirtsan worktran earns hIigltr stf/- 1
bey/ond qu7estion. He is infinitely better paid, therefore better housed, fei.
clothied, acd, moreover, is much nomre sober.
"**  *  *  In the United States one hears a great deal about 'tritst<
(as they are Iknown, or what we term 'large corporations'), but perstittly
I am rother inclined to welcosse these concerts, becasuse large organizationr
that employ capital are best able to compete in rmaufactures on the mt st
economical lines, can fearlessly raise wages sithin given liusits, a D in
position to combat unhealthy conspetition, can provide sup-to-date maschosery
ad libitum, can erect sanitary and well-ventilated workh!hops, and generali
study better tho comfort and Well-being of the workmen than smal.l 1Its N611ft
manufacturers atruggling against insfstficient capitsil and old inachrbra
It is in the organization of capital oni thei one hand ani a thorough Or1'jas21
ration of labor on the other that I believe the solution of industrial psni
lemiswill be found."
Among the      iterestig  iersto      of James Cox, representing tht'
A  onga thele interesting ob-servatiocin  u
Associated Iron and Steel Workers of Great Britain, swere the folloit^
"I- would like to indicate Lthree general features of American indmifoto' 
to which I largely attribute tbheir success: (1) The enornnous ninoral I
posits, waterways, and cheap transit.  (2) The control or ownersbri t
the manufacturer, through comtbinration or direct pscIhase, o. the raw
anaterials-ore, lime, coal, and coke, (3) The nsrsrtvelous engineriering Ilgeniity and initiative, resnarkable through everyI phase of mnanufactsss i5
its reduction of. manual labor cosibuined swith greiat prol-uctiveness. *
in the matter of wages, the Acerican otorkscran is [ta blii ttic,r o,ff thai it I
enn~tey   *  *  *  The cuestion may ibe a1sked, Is it possible for It ji-b
produsers to compete in the Anerican market?    T conisfess I tChink it i
long as the present tarsiff exists."
Mr. P. Wal, of the National Federation of Blast Furnace Mn, sid
among other things%:
"After a careful investigation I come to the con clusion that, comp Ott"
wages and the cost of living, there is an average of at least 25 per cet, in
favor of the American workmnan. A careful, sober man can iudouf civ
save more money than in England.. The encotsragemesst given to insv(;Tlkn
has, no doubt, contributed to the Anmericans having mnore modern machlitiP!
buit there is, above anse beyond all othe cc rrses, tie tai/ff. If we take 
granted that the cost of production is equal in both countries and that 'i At
opn markt equal profits could be made, what an enormous advantalge tl.
tariff gives to the American gmaanufactrtrer who ihas (tnm alost sirrtli
ftwin martket,"? Mr. T. Jones4, representing the Midland Counties Trades Federatioe, 
pressedthe followinig Opinion:
"Asohw Amesrica Is abOle to pay higher wages and yot ucces' ilt
coompete with us in the marktets of the world, I believe it is due to thi- v"'
natuiral sesosirot she ha o in mnlnes and mineralIs, improved methods in t1lag, the utilization of. her vast waterways, and the superior railwavs sh P -
sen, & combined with the low rates charged for transportation of all 1it1
ofprodcts,3 to which must be added the more modern and ever-hcb 't
mhianery, t~he adoption of every improvement, no matter how often tn
dueda, 0stheis'safety frorm foreign competition in consequaence of theit 1)o
Adinlosing the general discussion of the prosperity: so obvi'l(l's
American manufactres, the report says:
"efore concli  It may be   well to suggert. briefly, the  '
that have contributed t the enorsooss expansoton of manmifacturing i
tries in the Uniated States.' This Is not the placed to discuss: in dct; 't
cuses which miy be credited as political. That a eertain proporly: 5
the grtowth of: th  sanufaeturling inddustries of the United States Is atittt
he to te direct actnof government, oad especially to the operat!r
the trif Is obvious,"
ih2-Ei~ %II~  I                                       '1: jt, pt &*Q~f;~~  ~~gt
estimony of thesaetenor        found all through. the  port.
renieusbcr that this Its the testimony of practical mTCeo-tlhe recolote.o
ledr  i tIheir respect1v  crafts in Oreat. Britain — men,who -eamlP
with all the preljuldies and national pride for wlch englishmen a 
the world over.
a-I136


I




;; HON. BENJAMIN      HARRISON.
i1 BELIEVEE THE PROTECTIVE SYSTEM A MIGHTY
INSTRUMENT FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF OUR
NATIONAL WEALTH AND A POWERFUL
AGENCY IN PROTECTING THE HOMES
OF OUR WORKINGMEN,"
Brpract from message to Congress by PRESIDENT HARRISON, December
6, 1892, printed in Congressional Record,
I believe that the protective system, which has now for something
nmore than thirty years continuously prevailed in our legislation, has been a
migfhty Instrument for the development of our national wealth and a most,owerful agency in protecting the homes of our workingmen from the InvmsnO  of want. *  *  *
The result of the recent election must be accepted as having Introduced
a new policy. We rmust assume that the present tariff, constructed upon the
Iiies of protection, is to be repealed and that there is to be substituted for
it a tariff law constructed solely with reference to revenue; that.no duty
i- to be higher because the increase will keep open an American mill or keep
up the wages of an American workman, but that in every case such a rate of
(1lty is to be Imposed as will bring to the Treasury of the United States
the largest returns of revenue. *  *  *
It is a matter of regret that this work must be delayed for at least
tlhree months, for the threat of great tariff changes introduces so much
nicertainty that an amount, not easily estimated, of business inaction and
oef dliminished production, will necessarily result.  Those who have advocatel a protective tariff can well afford to have their disastrous forecasts
of a change of policy disappointed. If a system of customs duties can be'
frn:a:mcd that will set the idle wheels and looms of Europe in motion and
crowd our warehouses with foreign-made goods, and at the same time
lPkefp our own mills buPy; that will give us an increased participation in
the "markets of the world" of greater value than the home market we
surrender; that will. give increased work to foreign workmen upon products
to be consumed by our people without diminishing the amount of work to
be done here,  *  *  *  the authors and promoters of it will be entitled
to tile highest praise. We have had in our history several experiences of
the contrasted effects of a revenue and of a protective tariff, but this generation has not felt them, and the experience of one generation is not highly
instructive to the next. The friends of the protective system with undiminIshed confidence in the principles they have advocated will await the results
of the new experiment.
I('ROVER      CLEVELAND         WAS ELECTED."-"BANK%RUPTCY BECAME AN EPIDEMIC."
BLxt e(act from, remarks of Hon. CHARLES B. LA.NDIS of Indifana, in daily
Congressional Record, January 27, 1904.
In 1892 Grover Cleveland was elected. That was the greatest mistake
the Democratic party ever made. They found themselves facing the people of the country in the midst of a domestic prosperity never before
equaled. They were pledged to improve it. Capital was employed; they
Pron"ised to employ it better. Wages were high; they promised to make
tlle': higher. Labor! There was not an idle man in the United States of
ANricea unless he was idle from choice; and you are acquainted with the
Scarce three months passed until the idle men commenced roaming
5,fv the country. Bankruptcy became an epidemic. Idleness got to be6 a
a;r;;:sion, and hard-times festivals became popular social functions. You
id that, gentlemen. You brought about that condition of affairs-you
|i ''lts, you promtisers, you arraigners. You packed the side tracks of, d'f Iilroads of this country with empty cars. You sent the price of corn
): w it was burned as fuel. The farmer fed 30-cent wheat to 2-cent
io;E: and horses were not worth wintering, and sheep shivered and died
1 '7' re range because they were not worth sheltering, and as many as 100
il-t Ien were found on single trains roaming this country in searcL of;t the end of four years everybody in the United States admitted
thi:5verything was wrong and tt it was simply a question as to the best
t3i';:   i to bring us back where we were when Benjamin Harrison was Pres'    f"~! f the United States.,
1 3 7 




"POLITICAL INDEPENDENCE CANNOT BECOME EN.
TIRELY SECURE WITHOUT INDUSTRIAL
INDEPENDENCE."
Extract from remarks of Hoan, J. T. VecCILEARY of Minnesota, iu
fthe House of Repr:sentatices, and printed in the daily Con.
gressioenal Record, June 20, 1)904.
A  fundamental fallacy of free trade is its inability to compre.
hend the truth that political independence can not become entirely
secure without industrial independence.
To maintain our political independence it may be necessary at any
time to defend ourselves against hostile armies and navies. We are
now so powerful and so far removedl from other great nations, that
there would seem to be little danger of our getting into war. But
no one can guarantee us continued peace.      In 1898 or 1897 who
would have dared to predict that within a year or two we would be
engaged in a foreign war? It came in 1898 like a thunderclap from
a clear sky.
H ow shall we prepare for such a possibility?     Shall we go on
heedless of what may come? Shall we depend on buying from forelgn countries in the hour of need our Imuniitions of war?  What if
the country from which we expect to buy should prove to be our antagonist? Shall we buy in advance and store the things we may need?
If so, how much shall we buy, and how long will it be before our
purchases hasve become obsolete? Or would it be wiser to develop
our own resources and train our own people in making what we
~ need? If so, why not develop also those resources and train those
faculties needed in times of peace?
"Free trade" would have us satisfied to acquire the article; protection demands that we acquire the art.
As a matter of fact, in 1898 we were very poorly prepared for
war; but with our great resources of material and skilled mechanics
we soon got ready. We do not need a large standing army so lone
as we keep up the high standard among our workingmen. They and
their skill to "do things" constitute our best "reserves."
This suggests another fundamental fallacy of "free trade' both as
a theory and as a policy, namely, that it overestimates the worth of
things and underestimates the worth of men; it reaches for the article but spurns the artisan. Protection, on the other hand, cares, first
of all, for the artisan, knowing that with him the country will get
both the art in its highest form and the article on the most favorable
terms.
In the eloquent words of Senator Jones, in the speech before referred to:
Free trade would banish those establishments and would exchange
skilled mechanics for cheap doorknobs or cheap cutlery. It would rejee, the
knowledge of useful arts in order to save for the moment a few cants a
yard on woolen cloth or cotton ties or a few cents a pound on tin plates.
Protection secures te ars and protects the artists. It transforms ignerance
into knowledge, ndifference int zeal, e i  inertia into activity, impotence it
power.
* S       *          *         S*         *                   *
In none of this work would free trade aid or encourage us. On the contrary, its motto is to buy wherever it may buy cheapest to-day, without regard to the future or to the country in which it buys. It Is distinctly foatldet
on indvidual selfishness. It looks only to the temporary advantage of the t1
dividut, and takes no thought for the future or for the community. TVe
protective policy is founded on a higher for-m of selfishness, the selfishalts oa
the nationf whih is 'but another name for patriotism.
Free trade brings the watch, protection brings the watchmaker: fre
trade brings the machine, protection the machinist; free trade brings tihf eugine, protection the engineer. Given the rmen, we can not lack the machQlnes
Hating the art we shall not t   an for the article. Possessing the producer,
we shall not want for the product. Between them, who shall hesitate Ns to
which is the more valuable to the country?  Men found communities. ms'
chines do not; men constitute a society, machines do not.
The instinctive attitude of the free trader brands his theory as
having had its origin int a state of society where producers were
1looked down upon as not worth considering.;The: theory: had its origin in a state of society founded on 1la1s
distinctions, where sonce were born to rule and others to toil;  h,ere
the industrial end aimeat was cheap goods to the rulers-the "coie
sumers-and -   to that end to the toiler low wages-or none af: li
What more natural, then, that: free  ders should be more than wil
ing that our '"proMducers" should hae' to meet in "free' ompeitiol
on absolutelyequl terms, the lowest-paid workers i: th   world
a: 3


I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i


I




HON. 0 JAMMES A. GARFIELD-I"THE TARIFF!'
jiVERE WE TO      BGLECT THESE GEAT INThRESTS AND
DEPEND UPON OTHERII NATIONS, IN WHAT A
CONDITION OF HELPLESSNESS SHOULD WE
FIND O0URSELVES" 
wx.tS from remarks of Hon. JAMES /A. GARPIELD im the.f oawe of  epresentattivef June 4, 1878, on the Wood tariff bil.,
printed in the Congressional Record.
If all the kingdoms of the world should become the kingdom of
the Prince of Peace, then I admit that universal free trade ought
tl prevail. But that blessed era is yet too remote to be made the
La"sis of the practical legislation of to-day. We are not yet members of " the parlialmernt of man, the federation of the world'" For
ttre present, the world is divided into separate nationalities; and that
other divine command still applies to our situation; "If any provide;ot for his own and specially for those of his own bouse, he hath
denied the faith and is worse than an infidel" and, until that better
era arrives patriotism tnust supply the place of universal brotherlvoodI. For the present Gortschkloff can do most good to the world
by taking care of Russia. The great Bismarek can accomplish most
for his era by being.. as he is, German to the core and promoting the
welfare of the German Empire. Let Beaconsfield take care of England, and MacMahon of France, and let Armericans devote themselves to the welfare of America. When each does his best for his
ownI nation to promote prosperity, justice and peace, all will have
done more for the world than if all had attempted to be cosmopolitan.
Too much of our tariff dliscussion has been warped by narrow
and sectionfal considerations. But whlen we base our action upon the
(conded national importance of our great industries, whlen we recognizte the fact that artisans and their products are essential to the
wefllbeing of our country, it follows that there is no dweller in the
humbrllest cottage on our remotest frontier who has not a deep personal interest in the legislation that shall promote these great national
indaIstries. Those arts that enable our nation to rise in the scale of
civilization bring their blessings to all and patriotic citizens will
cheerfully bear a fair share of the burden necessary to make their
country great and self-sustaining. I will defend a tariff that is
national in its aims, that protects and sustains those interests without
whlic(h the nation cannot become such.
So important, in my view, is the ability of the nation to manufacture all those articles necessary to arm, equip and clothe our
people that if it could not be secured in any other way I would vote
to pay money out of the Federal treasury to maintain government
ironl and steel, woolen and cotton mills at whatever cost. Were we
to neglect those great interests and depend upon other nations, in
wNhat a condition of helplessness should we find ourselves when we
were again involved in war with the very nations on whom we were
depending to furnish these supplies. The system  adopted by our
fathers is wiser, for it so encourages the great national industries
iats to make it possible at all times for our people to so equip themseves for war, and at the sanme time so increases their intelligence
1ndit skill as to make them better fitted for all the duties of citizenslip both in war and in peace. We provide for the common defense
by system which promotes the general welfare. * *   * *
Ilet it be remembered that P2 per cent. of all the laboring people
of the country are artisans engaged in manufactures. Their culture
hais been fostered by our tariff laws. It is their pursuits and the
siil that they have developed that produced the glories of our Centeo tial Exposition. To  em the country owes the splendor of the
po3-t1ion it holds before the world more than to any other equal number of our citizenus. If this bill becomes a law it strikes down their
0cE ipatton and throws into the keenest distress the brightest and
Sie elemrents: of our population. I implore this House nt to permit
us   be thrown into greater confusion either by letting this bill beantie a law or by letting it hang over the country as a menace.d  I
h    w e shall sit here to-night until the second reading of the bill
i. iuenced, when I shall propose to strike out the enacting clause.
t   e C Qe mittee w'1 do th t we can kill the bill to-day. It is not
sioilyv a stalking horse  on which gentlemen tan leap to show their
t  en:manship in debate; it: is not an innocent lay fgure upon which
g i5-n en may spread the gaudy wares of their retoric without
',-but it is a great, dangerous monster, a very Polyphemus which
s"i s throughi the land.
lMonstrf. horrendum, iu-fore, igens, cai lumen adeaitua
I-*t us cut off Its hea, and d   the  Iyl
4139




I


"ENGLAND IS BEING STIRRED"-"BALFOUR ON AD.
VANTAGES OF PROTECTIONS"
Extract from   remarks of Hon. J. 2'. McO LEARY of Minnesotea in
the House of IRepresentatives, and printed ina the daily Cogressional Record, June 20, 1904.
EALFOURI ON SOME ADVANTAGES OF PROTECTIOYI
With remarkable courage and sterling patriotism      Chamberlain is
now pointing out to his countrymen the path of national wisdom, tnd
England is being greatly stirred by his arguments,
Here in my hand I hold the famous pamphlet entitled "Econ(omai
Notes on Insular Free Trade," by the Right Honorable Arthur Jarn>s
Balfour, M. P., recently issued. AMr. Balfour, as everyone knows, is
the prime minister of England. It will be well worth while for us
to note some of the things that he says on this subject.
Mr. Balfour opens his argument as follows:
In the following paper I propose to discuss some of the more fiIdamental economic questions which, as I think, require consideration on the
part of those who desire to arrive at a sober and unprejudiced estimate of
our fiscal policy. *    *
It may be as well to premise that I approach the subject from the treetrade point of view, though the free trade is, perhaps, not always that whitch
passes for orthodox In the House of Commons or on the platform. There is
inueled a real danger of the controversy degenerating into an unprofitable
battle of watchwords, behind,  hich there is nothing deserving to be called
independent reflection at all.
Toward the close of the pamphlet we findl the conclusions of MrI
Balfour's argumcent. Among other things Ihe says this:
Now, there are three things that it is peculiarly difficult for a manuf6cturer or combination of manufacturers to do, and at the same time peculiarnly
desirable.
The first is to run their works eveanly-that is to say, without unadue
pressure at one period, without dismiseing workmen and leaving the plant
unused at another. 
The second is to deaifn their works on the scale whica shall secure tie
freatest economy of production, which, in the language of political economy,
shall take the utmost advantage of the "law of Increasing returns."
The third Is to secure a footing in foreigan markets which are already
occupied.
Now, in the attainment of these objects any manufacturer or combhination of manufacturers who have, wtith the help of protection, obtained a conmand of their home markets, are at an immenrse advantage compared witw
their rivals in a free-trade country.
liemember, Air. Chairman, that this is the prime minister of Enigkind who is talking thuis; and, as hic himself says, he is talking from
the free-trade point of view. Mr. Balfour proceeds thus:
The unprotected manufacturer is compelled either to restrict his plant to
a point well within what may sometimes be required of it or in oradirnary
ntimes to leave it partially idle. Even a small excess of supply may lower
the price of his goods out of all proportion; and if it does, he not only lose,
heavily in respect to this small margin of overproduction, but in respeltt of
his whole output.
Now. there is no reason to expect that the plant erected to meet an
average demand would reach the exact size most conducive to economny oi
nisnufacture. Should it prove to do so it could only be by accident. Neither is it
practicable to arrange fthat the plant shall always be kept workintc ntti
tume. If It Is, there must evidently be recurring periods, during wbcn
overproduction, with the consequent evils just described, must inevitably
take place.
Such is the ordinary position of the manufacturer under free trade.
Compare it with the position of his protected rival, who controls his hom'e
markets. le is not haunted by the fear of overproduction. If the home
demand slackens, compelling him, if he desires to maintain prices, to lit
home supply, he is not driven, like his less favored brother, to attain t-hi
result by also limiting output. He is not obliged to close part of his wo.?'A,
or to dismiss some of his hands, or to run his maclhinery on half time. On
the contrary, so long as other countries are good enough to offer him open
markets he can dispose of his surplus abroad. * * *
I was told the other day of a shipbuilder who was able to obtain corntracts solely because he had secured a consignment of German steel nt a
price lower than It could possibly have cost either a British or German i'romaster. Why should we refuse to our shipping trade a bounty which It
Germans are so generously anxious to confer?  *  *  *
In the first place, it disorganizes industry. The manufacturing cap,'.,
ist, when Investing his money in costly plants has, in any case, many rnit
to run-new discoveries, new inventions, new fashions. Add to these nt
loss, actual or anticipated, through the operation of foreign protection, an
his burden becomes insensibly increased. But add yet again the further '"
certainty and the further loss due to the system I have just been describing
and he Is overweighted indeed. Will the hostile combination keep togeinel
long enough to ruin him? Can his credit stand the strain? Is it worth W wile
holding on in the face of certain loss and possible ruin? These are q es'
tions which the leaders of the threatened Industry can not but ask.  It1
surely: the mere fact that they have to be asked must shatter that bn  io1
energy which is the very soult of successful enterprise.
Mr. Balfour concludes his pamphlet with these words:
It can not be right for a country with free-trade Ideals to enter 1-nts
competition with protectionist rivals, self-deprived of the only Instrumei bY
which their policy can conceivably be modified. The first and most essen, I
object of our rational efforts should be to qet rid of the bonds in whici e
ve gratuit     ously ertangled ourselves. The precise manner In which bt
should use our regained liberty is an important, yet after all only a sece(
ary, issue. What is fundamental is that ourW liberty should be regained,


I




"THE HARMFUL RESULTS OF PLACING PROTECTION
TARIFF RATES TOO LOW."
p,' iw.ct from renmarks of Mlion. J. T. McCiLEARY of Minneso'ta, im
i..he.Houre of Representatives, and printed in the daily Conrtssio-nal Riecovd, June 20, 19014.
T   he Iistory of our own and other countries is invariable in record-!i.n the harmful results of placing protective tariff rates too low;
Jii'!;uistorv doe.s not record a single instance where harm has followed
m!n'ii'~ the rates highh ena'-nh to fIurnish an ample margin of protcci;,l —......y/'l for  hall emcrefci ie3.
Tinis is one of the most important facts in this controversy, a fact!th:l fist hbe nnderstood if one would reach a true and cor-rett conl~ui-nn on this subject of the tariff.
cVmInocrats will rely on the not uinatural feeling in the minds of
piople who have not had time or opportunity to study this matter
Ii< roughlv that high tariff rates necessarily mean high prices for,inufactured goods.
As a matter of fact, the opposite is true. That is, our whole historv shows that the gqreate~t rediuctioas mi prices of manufactured
ijo,,ds have been ini those products in whicl the tariff rate has been
i.; i hii ihst ail the lofgest colinttibued. For example, in 1870 the
price of steel rails in the United States was $1.00 a ton in gold. In
cthat year Congress laid a specific duty of $28 a ton on steel rails.
W\iilin a few years steel rails were selling in the United States for:loot a, third of their price when we had to buy them from England.
So with carpets, tin plate, and scores of things that could be menIf the rate of alleged "protection" be inadequ ate, the foreign manufad,-urcr, already established in business and determined to destroy
Amt rican competition, can overwhelm   an American who may be
~s(seb;ling men and materials to make a start in the manufacture of
i ik  product. This done, the foreign manufacturer will naturally
re prices hi(gher thanu ever in order to recoup his losses.
If the rate of protection is jnust barely adeq uate under normat l con4(i9i4. only a fe onf the nmost venturesome of our citizens will dare
tI take the risk of be1ginninng the work of manufacture. Even they
da;r, anol: build, to use the language of Balfour, elsewhere quoted.
o'(.H the scale that shall secure the greatest economy of production."
A\!, not kniioowing how long even the barely adequate protectiol will
e iouelhsafed them, they must endeavor to make a large temporary
preofit rather than undertake to establish a permanent market throug!h
t cwIs:,e mnargin of profit. So they simiply can not produce in such
rutetr as to reduce Iprices.
flut suppose that a defi/nite policy of amply adequate protection
b imnaugurated, based upon the intelligent conviction in the minds
nof our peopl.e that such a policy should be definitely adopted as the
ji,~-;,naent policy of the couuntry. Then there will be manuy meti
if capital who will enter into mtnnufacturing  not simply the venti:!or-nine, but also the conservative and steady going -who from en11uIiened self-interest will prefer fair profits with a large growing
-ia -et to large 1iroits on s-mall sales.
'tlen, with our mtarlet secure from  foreign invasion but open to
q'u:4l comnpetition an4 ng our own petople, we shall have lower and
4n''"- nuifoilrn prices for manufactured goods than if we leave ouro,-t, subject to the chances and moods of foreign conditions of
-ptritruito. Tlxni, too, with a diefinite policy of amply adequate proI   4t0r.,!;  our trade will 1;e tinoe steady and umore along legitimate busi-,cs: lines and less along  speculative lines, rendering business less
}:!4' {imdous and making 1 )isa;sible of being done on narrower margins,!..:c: givimng the people:nore stable and lower prices on mnanufact    g mlgoods.
13l, i80(6 Thomas Je fl-rson said:
-'he prohbititng duties we lay on all articles of foreign manufacture,
h'i:   i priudence requires us to establlish at home, with tilhe patriotic deteri:::tion of every good citizen to use no foreign article whicht can be made
J'b.i:, ourselvces, without regard to dieffetrece of pmrice, secures us against a
Ii:'e: into foreign dependency.
I'i in the rimemoranda just quoted Abirahami Lincoln said:
Bu!t it a duty ao.mounting to full protection be levied upon an article
- can be produced here with as, little labor as elsewhere, as iron, that
w ill ultimately and at no distant day, in conscquence of such duty,
*;'.... to our people cheaper tha)n before.
s;sjideint Roosevelt, in a speech in New York on November 11,
19<  saidi; 
I The general tariff policy to which, without regard to changes In detail,
lver this country o       ree irrevocably committed is fundamentally based
Ui ample recognition of the difference in labor cost here and abroad.


*  141




l"THE RfaEPUBrLCAN PARTY STANDS BY' THE OLD
ORIGINAL DOCTRINE OF THE FATHERS."
strat   ~ frm refm~iarks s of lion. 1. '. ]IeCLEARY of Minnesota, in
the IHowse of RepreMsentatives,, and printed in the daily ~oan
gressional Record, Juone 20, 1904.
THE TWO TARIFF VIEWS.
Our last great national contest on the tariff question was in tie
Presdential election of 189. In their platforms of that year the
two contending parties stated their views with admirable clearness
Stripped of all extraneous matter, the gist of the Democratic po.
sition was squarely stated in the following sentence from section 3
of the Democratic national platform:
We declare it to be a fundamental principle of the Democratic party
that the. Federal Government has no constitutional power to impose and col.
lect tariff duties except for the purposes of revenue only.
That      a clear and courageous statenient of Democratic" faith,
It declared what, ever since 183, haIs been the real position of 
large majority of the Democratic party, though the party has not
always had the frankness to state its position thus plainly and unequivocally.
With equal candor and courage the Republican party made its
declaration in the following language:
We believe that all articles which can not be produced In the United
States, except luxuries, should be admitted free of duty, and that on all In.
ports coming into competition with the products of American labor thers
ould be levied duties e.qual to the difference between wages abroad and at
home.
In other words, Mr. Chairman, both parties realize that this is a
great country-vast in area, in population and in wealth. Both parties
realie that, therefore, even with all proper and reasonable care and
prudence in the management of national expenditures-and in proport-ion to population ours is the least expensive government in the
world-ithe income of the General Government must necessarily run
up into the hundreds of milins of dollars every year. Moreover,
both parties realize that, whichever party may be in power, about onehalf of the required revenue must, under our system of government,
be raised through duties on goods imported from foreign countries.
And until 1832 all parties agreed that in levying these duties the
policy should be, while raising the necessary revenues for the support of the Government, to give "encouragement and protection"
to American industries. In 1832, for the first time in our history,
was enunciated the doctrine that tihe Government should levy duties
"for revenue only" and sshould not, even incidentally, afford "encouragement and protection" to the products of our farms and our factories. How this new doctrine came into being will be told in due season,
The Republican party stands by the old original doctrine of the
fathers, the doctrine of those who franed the Constitution and put
it into. operation, guiding tine nation wisely and safely through the
dangerous davs of its early career-the doctrine advocated by every
Presdent Sfrom Washington to Jackson, that is, by George Washington, by John Adams, by Thomas Jefferson, by James Madison, hy
James Monroe, by John Quincy Adains, and by Andrew Jackson
During those early days the way in which protection could best he
given through duties on imports was not as well understood as it
is to-day after a century of experience, but the purpose of the fathers was clearly defined and repeatedly enunciated.
The Republican party has always stood for adequate protection
to the industrial interest of the entire country. It stands for a
policy tOat is national, not sectional, in its scope and operation.
The Republican party was born to present organized opposition
to the extension of human slavery; so, as was to be expected, there
was no mention of the tariff in its first national platform-that of
1856. But in1 the Republican national platform of 1860, the plat for
on which Abraham Lincoln was first elected President, was the foloing "plank;"
Resolved That While providing revenue for the support of the GeaerAl
overnment by duties on Imports, sound policy requires such an adjustmet
of these Imposts as to encourage the development of the Industrial itrsresls
of the whole country; d  w  commend that policy of national exclamgeO
whi   secres oto the workingmen liberal wages, to agriculture remune-ti
ps-Ies, to mechatnic and manufacturers an adequate reward for their ski1
abor and   trpri    anfd to the nation commercial prosperity and idependence.,,. 
['bus: it will f be seen that the first Republican platform an the!
last Republican platform on this subject are entirely consistent wit,eahother,'ahnd  examination will show thar t all the intervening naton
R 'epublican. platforms are similarly consistent.':


a-142I




I
i
i,pROTERCTION OUR PROPER, PERMANENT POLICYWE OWE IT NOT ONLY TO OURSELVES, BUT TO
THE REST OF THE WORLD, NOT TO PERMIT
ANY LOWERING OF OUR STANDARD
OF LIFE AND PURPOSE.
]tfirlct from rer'arks of i)on. J,. T1 McCLEARY of Minnesota, m
Jloae /f         rl,      prt     in  he e of  e t,  d  rit  in the daily Con-!yressional Jlecord, June 2O, 190/3.
IPROTCECTION OUR PROPER PERIANENT POLICY.
Protection, on the other hand, is based on the fundamental Ameri-;ln idea of o)pposition to class distinctions. Protection is founded
aor the idea of the real and inherent dignity of labor directed with
intelligence to a worthy end. Protection recognizes usefulness as the
supreme badge of nobleness.
President Roosevelt struck the keynote of the whole matter when
he said at Minneapolis on April 4, 1903:
Thts country has and this country needs better paid, better educated,
better fed, and better clothed workingmen, of a higher type than are to be
found in any foreign country. It has and it need:s a higher, more vigorous,
and more prosperous type of tillers of the soil than is possessed by any other
country.
I'rotection takes into consideration the entire sweep of history.
It sees man in his beginnings in Asia, under the oriental idea of
ilmaster and slave — -few masters and many slaves. Protection recalls
the movement of manr toward the west, into Europe. For "the people" the movemenlt was "westwartd and upward," until, on some islands just off the west coast of the continent of Europe, popular
sovereignty, after various struggles with the throne, established luman liberty and ilntrenched it in wisely ordained principles of law.
Mr. Chairman, from my boyh!ood up history and the problems of
ovrernment have been my favorite studies. Themy lhave been to me
a lifelong labor of love. And it does seemr to me, sir, that a careful
student of history can scarcely fail to be impressed with tle idea
that He who holds the fate of lnations in the hollow of His hand has,
from the beginning of human life on this globe, had a special purpose to serve by and through this beloved country of ours.
Think of our location and tile territory that we occupy! HIere we
are in the North Temperate Zone, the ztne of the highest possibilities
of civilization, removed alike from thie heat of the lTorrid Zone, which
limadermines ambition, and the cold of the Frigid Zone, which renders
it fruitless. Here we are with national limits ilclosing the most fertile
of lands, the greatest of forests, the richest of mines —with natural
resources practically boundless.
Then look at our people. Who are they? In the main, our people
'are those from other lands, or their descendants, most characterized
by loftiness of aim and sturdiness of purpose. In the main, the people who have come to our shores have abetonged neither to the class
enervated by wealth and station nor to the o)pposite class whose
splirits have been broken by want. Our country has lbeen the land
of promise to those who have determined to establish a home and
who have had the courage to break away from old associations-sacred though they be —and make the dangerous voyage across the sea
to accomplish their purpose.
Think, Mr. Chairman, how old hulmanity was before this nation
was permitted to be established! Think how much of training the
world was required to pass thronPt h before this experiment in governilent was permitted to be tried!
Why, Mr. Chairman, this country and its institutions are the fruit-;gte of the ages. Here, in a country separated from all other great
rtatlons bv the lbroad waters of the oceans, it has been ordained shall
te wrought out the highest and noblest problems of human existence. We owe it not oly to ourselves, but to the rest of the worldyeC, to Him who has given us this opportunity-we owe it to every
ci-.ideration t.hat can move men to lofty aim and earnest endeavor
ait to permit (ny lowleriny of our stfadar  of life ad of fpurpose.
So, Mr. Chairman, for the sake oft the people of other lands as well
'is tf our own, we must at all hazards preserve and continue to exalt
o"r high standard of living -mraterial, mental, and rmoral. From
winatever standpoilnt we look at the matter and by whatever standard
we determine our )path of national dtty, we find it best to remain
trae to the proposition tha:it "the work of Amnlrica must be done by
the sons and daughters of America.'"  And to that end we should
lefunitely fix as our proper permanent policy that of amply adequate
protection to American industry.


I


Sig. 6




"GREAT BRITAN RAISES MORE MONEY EVERY YEAR
THROUGH TARIFF TAXATION THAN DOES
THE UNITED STATES."
Extract from remarks of Hon,. J. T. McCLEd.ARY of Minnesota, i
the House of Representatives, and printed in the daily Co,
gressional Record, June 20, 1904.
It is evident that there is quite a general impression that (ireat
Britain has "free trade" in the sense of having no tariff taxation or
duties on imports. But the simple fact is, Mr. Chairman, that in
proportion to her population Great Britain, raises more mon0e
through tariff taxation or duties on imports than does the UJnite
States. 
lere in my hand I hold the latest edition of the Statesman's Yearbook-that for 1904. Here on page 48 is a table showing the r+e
ceipts of the British Government for its fiscal year ending MIarc
31, 1903. The total receipts from duties on imports (that is, from
tariff taxation, not counting nefarly $10,000,000 of dutties on exports)
were ~32,469,103, or, in round numbers, $162,000,000. As the poplulation of Great Britain is about 40,000,000, the dutes on imports in
that country amounted to over $4 per capita-that is, $4 of duties
on imports, on the average, for every man, woman, and child in
Great Britain.  In the United States we collected for our fiscal
year ending June 30, 1903, from duties on imports, $284,479,582. Our
population being about 80,000,000, we raised from duties on imports
about $3.50 per capita, or 50 cents less per capita than is raised from
the same source in Great Britain.
CUSTOMS REVTENUES IN GREAT BRITAIN AND THE
UNITED STATES.


I
'i
I
I
r
s
q
E


I


Year.


1894......................
1895..   *............
1M 6i..........................
1897........................
1898........................
1899........................
x1900).......................


Aggregate duties collected.           Per capita.I
Great    VI nite,
G-ireat Britain. UUnited States,   '. Gtat       te
Britain.   Sn S aes
8.       1 8 491,4! I~   $81,818,530       2.50      i.!.  100,6f4,940    152,158,617      2.56      2.2'.i     10t,812,05        160,021,752     2.60      2.2
10(tt,:B3(,655    176,54,127       2.71      2.1.   108,961,290       149,575,062      2.78      2.05.         710;7,7 1, 115   206,128,482     2.73
1105217,360       233,164,871      292       o 2.92


I
I
i
I
I


I




1901......................  1  85;4,795  238,585,456  8.33  i:n0
1902.........................  a61,787,S75  254,444,708  4.05.22
190...........            a172,804,850  1  284,479,582  4.30  13.4
a Including comparatively small sums collected as export duties.
THItE TWO TlARIF VIEWS ILLEUSTURLTED.
Inasmuch as Great Britain raises, in proportion to her populatiol.
more money annually from      tariff taxation than does the United
States, it certainly seems absurd to speak of Great Britain as having
free trade.
It is time that we were all getting it through our heads that our
Democratic brethren have no purpose of trying to mlake iMternatioa
trade free in the sense of removing all tariff taxation. It can hardi'
be repeated too often that no matter what party is in power in the
United States, hundreds of mxillions of dollars must be raised annualll
for the support of the General Government and that, no matter wlhat
party is in power, about half of all that vast sum must be raised
from duties on imports. The only question in debate, then, is, Under
what policy shall the tariff be levied?
Since 1832 the majority of the Democratic party has generally been
headed toward the position described by the words "a tariff for
revenue only." But, for reasons that will be given later, the majority
does not always rule in making the platform      declarations of the
Democratic party, and that party has not held steadily to one
position, its platform  declarations running all the way from    free
trade, or tariff for revenue only, over to what it adroitly suggested
might be "moderate" or "incidental" protection, as party exigencies
seemed to require. But uniformly since 1832 its attitude has beel
against adequate protection, to American industries.    The historic
position of the Republican pt       te prt   t   position from  which it has
never:wavered, either in its platform promises or in its. legislatite
performances, has been and is "a tariff for revenue, plus adequail'
protection to,4American industries." 
That is, Democratic policy aims to accomplish only one tiingo;
Republican policy aims to accomlplish two things-"to    ill1 two birds
wit one stone," as it were.:: ~31,s.: 










ecip ocity
roB




"REPUBLICAN          RECIPROCITY           KEEPS ALWAYS i
VIEW THE PRESERVATION OF THE HOME
MARKET AND THE WELL-BEING OF
THE WAGE-EARNER."
Extracts from  remarks of IHon. JOHN    DALZELL of Pennsylvania, 
daily Congressional Record of March 1, 1904.
Republican reciprocity is reciprocity in noncompeting articles and in
nothing else.  [Applause on the }Republican side.]  I know of no better
definition of it than that given by ex-Postmaster-General Charles Eno0ry
Smith. He says:
When rightly understood the principle is axiomatic.   Brazil grows
coffee, but makes no machinery. We make machinery, but glraw no coffee,
She needs the fabrics of our factories and forges, and we need the fruits
of her tropical soil, We agree to concessions for her coffee; she agrees
to concessions for our machinery. That is reciprocity.
And I know of no better definition of its purpose than that given by
President McKinley in his inaugural address:
The end in viewlie saysalways to be the opening up of new markets for the products of our
country by granting concessions to the products of other lands that we
need and can not produce ourselves and which do not involve any loss
of labor to our own people, but tend to increase their employment.
In other words, Republican reciprocity, like protection, keeps always
in view the preservation of the home market, the primacy of our manufacturers, and the well-being of the wage-earner.
If the committee will bear with me, I propose very hastily and as
briefly as possible to review some of our national experiences with respect
to this subject. I deal with reciprocity with Canada, because arguments
have been made upon the Democratic side of this Chamber looking toward
a renewal of reciprocal trade arrangements with Canada, and because
arguments have been made elsewhere with like purpose of a sensational
character by men whom we cannot regard otherwise than as covert enemies of protection, although they appeal to Republican hearers.
Our reciprocity treaty with Canada was made in 1854 and abrogated
in 1866. As to the effect of the treaty, let me quote quote Senator Morrill, ol
Vermont, who was thoroughly familiar with the subject. lie says:
Our exports to Canada in 1.855 were $20,828,676, but under the operation of reciprocity, then eommenced. they dwindled in twelve years down
to $15,243,834, while the exports of Canada to the United States increased
from $12,000,000 and odd to $46,000,000 and odd. When the treaty began
the balance of trade had been $8,000,000 annually in our favor and that
paid in specie, but at the end the balance against us to be paid in specie
in a single year was $30,000,000. Here was a positive yearly loss o!
over $5,000,000 of our export trade and a loss of $38,000,000 specie, all
going to enrich the Canadians at our expense.
So that the reciprocity of Arthur and Harrison and Blaine and
Dingley and McKinley is still the reciprocity of the Republican party.
I know that certain gentlemen, enemies of protection, have contended
that President McKinley in his last speech at Buffalo, on the eve of hi
tragic end, abandoned the doctrine whose advocacy throughout his loni
life had made him famous. I think they do him an injustice. There are
detached sentences in that speech that, taken by themselves, may be construed to mean almost anything; but taken as a whole the speech was a
McKinley speech. It was a. speech, I grant you, in advocacy of foreign
trade, but at the same time its keynote sounded the supreme and cona
manding importance of the home market and was a protest against any
curtailment thereof or of any industry therein or of any harm    to its
wage-earners. Note what he says:
By sensible trade arrangements which will not interrupt home prDo
duction we shall extend the outlets of our increasing surplus.
And then again:
We should take from our customers such of their products as we ca0
use without harm to our industries and labor.
And all through that speech, in which he glorifies our prosperity, he
attributes its existence to the policy of protection. Whether that be so
or not, the faith of the Republican party to-day on this subject reuniOs
as declared in 1900 at Philadelphia:
We favor the associate policy of reciprocity, so directed as to opeo
our markets on favorable terms for what we do not ourselves produce in
exchange for free foreign markets.
Now, why change this policy at all?    Why not cling to the spol0
of reciprocal relations with respect simply to noncompeting articles, nod
so preserve our home interests?  Oh, they say, becautse we want to get
foreign trade. Well, what is the matter with our foreign trade? Thlere
certainly Is nothing of criticism to be said about its present status, sad 
do not indulge in the fears that some gentlemen express as to its f ture
I apprehend that in the adjustment of world conditions it will take care ot
itself In the future, as it has in the past,  Why, during the last thirtd
years our foreign trade has grown more than that of Great Britain;
has grown more than that of Germany; It has grown more than tht ~t
France; It has grown more than that of Russia; it has grown more
that of any nation In the world.
b-I


I




i
I
I
i
I
I
II
I
I
t
t
1.I
I
I
I
I
I
f
ic
I
I
I
I
I
I
1
4
I
I
I
j
I
i


il


I


'REPUBLICAN RECIPROCITY."-"AN EXCHANGE OF
NON-COMPETITIVE COMMODITIES."
y.rerts from remarks of Hon. J. H. GIALLINGQER of New HIampshire, in
daily Congressional Record, April 23, 1904.
The Republican party and Republican leaders have been and are still
}n favor of reciprocity. They do not talk of "real" reciprocity or "genuine"
reciprocity, because the simple word itself earries with it the full meaning
o tbe policy. There has never been in any IRepulicai     platform an alluion to reciprocity which has not meant an exchange of non-competitive
an iinodities, to the disad vantage of no part of our country or portion of
our peiople  There has never been a single utterance, not one, of any Repibhlcln statesman at variance with ti1s definition of the word reciprocity,
hch imenans equality of exchange.
If we can enter into a treaty of non-competing products thaft.would
fji w   dvytta ta  o o r co  try equal to that wghich we     fiveto tohe other,
hnR the Republican party is ready to enter into asuc   a treaty.
An exahple of reciprocity that reciprocated is found in the growth of
eour trade with Cuba under the reciprocity clause of the McKinley tariff
nt, and with Hawaii under the treaty of 1876. Those countries had articles
ihat we could not produce, which they exchanged for our products which
they could not produce. That is reciprocity of the proper kind. The result
was, tbhat our exports to Cuba in 1889 amounted to $1,500,000, and In 1893
they had increased to $24,.1.57,000. Our Imports from Cuba in 1889 were
ps2,000,000, and in 18983 they had increased to $78,706,000. Our exports
to H-awaii in 3876, the year in which the reciprocity treaty became operative, were $779 257, and in 1900, the year in which Hawaii was annexed
to the United States, they bad Incrcaeed to $13,609,000. Our imports from.
jawaili in 1876 were $1,227,000, and In 1900 they had increased to $20,707,000. It will thus be soen. that our imports and exports increased in
3naout the same ratio, and when it is remembered that the exchange wasr In
non-competitive products the wisdom of a reciprocity treaty of that kind is
self-evident,  No such reciprocal trade relatioos could possibly be established between this country and Canada, the products of both countries
being substantially the same.
In order to show the result of our former experience under so-called
reciprocity with Canada, I give the following table of our trade with that
country, Including the two years precejding and the two years following the
operation of the treaty which existed from  September 11, 1854, to March
17, 1866:
IImports Into i Exports from
Fliscai years,              j  n-U ted States  Uniuted States
from Cantada,.    to Catida.
1852..............................................  $5,4$,4 415  $10,229,608? 3............................................  6,527,5559  1  12,432,597
1A.............................................J8,7184,412   24,078,408
').....................................1........  15,118,281)    27,741,808
1..........;.................4..................  21,276,614  i  29,)25,349
57,.......................................... 22,3,t16  I  24,11 848
1^8.....................................S...........  1'0t?~i ~   L;5,7,8:   23,64.522
Is e................................................^   19,287,550j  28,109,496
~...........................................| 2, 7 71  ' 22 95 ) 4
No._                                              2;:Yi72,7ts6      22, 9:,1924.............................................. 23,724,4891  22,676,518
12..............7...............         ' 8,1             0,71,0
8    I..........~.....................................  17,*4 4,786i  27,119,811
H4i4..............................................  B2,6,736 j  2>,574.1124
^ i5.............................................  3;,264, 0.  i  21,219,404
a......................................  48,328,628  21,828,880........................,...........,...  2',044,00    21,02,0,8Q0,..................................     2e,2(1d,379  i   24,080,777
a.Nine nionilis of year under recilprocity
Before the treaty we were selling the Ca0nadlans twice as much as we
bou'ht from  them, while long before the te     iato     of the treaty they
5ire selling us mach more than we sold them, and during the last year of
O'le treety their sales to us were double ours to them.  That may be freetffdei reciprocityi or Df.3rocrotic reciprocity or "genfine" reciprocity, but
it is not lepumblican reciprocity/.  Now, look at our commerce wish that
Porunitry under the Dingley tariff law:
PORTS ANAD EX.PORTS OF NEB1HANDISE INTO AND
FROX THE UNITED STA"vIS AND CANADA.
Fiscal year.                        Imports. Exports.
hHH>-~....................................3. l,870,486  83 1,714,086W..............  31,220,1167  87,974,961
w................................       9   074  I  W lB m,wkll                                                 9~~~~~~~~~~0311114 i5,31l197i0,.      '     ''~..................................  42 48 2,I1 i  105,789,214
48..,176,124  1i}09,642,9)3
""i~lt........................................................  54,060,4.10  123,472,416
U seems to &re that we are dolng very well with Canada in spite of her
ifprfef7ntial tariff of 33 1-3 per cent. In favor of goods from  the United
^ 2


Iil
t
I




"REPUBLICAN RECIPROCITY."
HExtracts from remarks of Hon. C. f. GROSVENOR of Ohio, in daily Con.
gressional Record, April 9, 1904.
"Genuine reciprocity!" What is that I will tell you what we on this
side say genuine reciprocity is. I will give it to you in my own language
and I will give it in the language of the great champion of protection in
this country, William McKinley. Republican reciprocity is such an ad
justment of the tariff schedules with relation to the products of our coun.
try and the countries with whom we make treaties as that the product;
of foreign countries, the like of which we do not produce, shall come into
this country at such a low rate of tariff, if duties are exacted at all, as
that it will compensate the foreign country to give special benefits in their
tariff legislation to the products of our country. That is Republican reciprocity, and based upon a substantial adherence to these principles that
is as far as I am willing to go.
Mr. CI.APK. And where did Mr. McKinley ever use that language,
anyhow?
Mr. GRosvsENO. He said it in his Buffalo exposition speech. No man
has ever been so misrepresented. After having attacked McKinley's position upon the tariff question as long as he lived, in the usual course of the
Democratic party they seized upon him and tortured his language and
garbled his speech in order to show that he was in favor of a reduction
of the rates in the Dingley bill. He sent a tariff message to the Congress
Did he ever say anything, or did he ever think any such thing as that?
On the contrary he stood always upon the proposition that never, never
would he consent to the reduction of the tariff upon articles of our production so as to endanger the home market by introduction of articles from
a foreign contrwy, and that is where the Republican party stands to-day,
Said President McKinley in his Buffalo speech, so often quoted:
"Isolation is no longer possible or desirable."
That is very true, and we are certainly no longer isolated, as is shown
by the tremendous advances we are making in the world's trade the world
over. Again he said:
"What we produce beyond our domestic consumption must have a vent
abroad. The excess must be relieved through a foreign outlet, and we
should sell everywhere we can and buy wherever the buying will enlarge
our sales and production, and thereby make a greater demand for home
labor."
That is the true test, in buying where the buying and legislate vhere
the legislating will not cut down the value of home labor and the demn-ni
for home labor by unjust competition from abroad. Then he said:
"The period of exclusiveness is past."
Look at our foreign trade and see if be were not right.
"The expansion of our trade and commerce is the pressing problem."
That is true, and the more we get the better.
"Commercial wars are unprofitable. A policy of good will and friendly
trade relations will prevent reprisals. Reciprocity treaties are in harumony
with the spirit of the times; measures of retaliation are not."
Then comes the language over which our Democratic friends have
stumbled and fallen so often:
"If perchance some of our tariffs are no longer needed for revenue or
to encourage and protect our industries at home, why should they not be
employed to extend and promote our markets abroad?"
There is the whole business, There it is, "If some of our tariffs are
no longer needed for revenue or to encourage and protect our industries at
home," then why should they not be used as subjects of reciprocity? SS
said William McKinley. So say I. So say all the Republicans whon I
know anything about.
know anything abott. Then he said that we have an inadequate steamship
service, and he spoke strongly for the encouragement by legislation of our
merchant marine. He said:
"We must encourage our merchant marine. We must have more ships,
They must be under the American flag, built and manned and owned ib
Americans. These will not only be profitable in a commercial sense, theY
will be messengers of peace and amity wherever they go."
And yet since the opening of this Congress no opportunity has beso
allowed to slip which has not been availed of by some Democrat to lenounce every possible measure, every possible scheme, looking in the srt1,:l
est degree to the upbuilding of the American merchant marine. Here is a
brief quotation which is the whole spirit, in the light of a fair construction,
of McKnley's Buffalo speech:
"We should take from our customers such of their products as we can
use witout harm to our industries and labor."
So say we all. When we get ready to make a revision of the tarif
or a reduction of rates, we will not send for the gentleman from Misseouri
but will go ahead and do it ourselves, without any suggestion from him or
of anybody oppoed to our views on the tariff and who favors free trade of
revenue tariff.
b-3
rj:~:0::b S: 
a::: 






'RECIPROCITY     IN  COMPETITIVE GOODS           IS SIMPLY
FREE TRADE."
xtracts, from remarks of Hon. ANDREW       J. VOLSTEAD, of
Minnesota, in daily Congressional Record, February 8, 1904.
Mr. CHAIRMAt: I desire to tmake a few remarks Lupon a subject
that appears to interest the Northwest particularly. In a speech
delivered. some -time ago by my distinguished friend from  Minneapolis [Mr. IrND   e tok ocasion too oao  o commend free trade with
Canada, and more particularly to urge upon this House the -ir
portance of the free importation of wheat. I regret that I can
aot agree with my friend.
Minneapolis and Detroit are the two great exponents of Canadian
free trade, and see in Canada great possibilities for the future. In
almost the same language they condemn the tariff and argue that
trade is naturally along lines of longitude north and south instead
f east and west. They seeml to think that we are violating nature's
aw and committing a crime against its decrees. This is one of
those generalities which has in it enough of truth to be deceptive.
Trade must of necessity be between sections of country that have
products for exchange. The people who produce and consume
nearly all of the exchangeable conmmodities live in the temperate
zones, which extend east and west around the world, and trade as
a consequence is naturally east and west.
The market for the surplus agricult-ural products of the United
States and Canada have got to go caset to Europe or west to the
Orient.  As a wholesale or jobbing c(enter Minneapolis can not
expect to retain Canadian business. As soon as Canadian business
in the Northwest assumes any large proportions distributing 'ce1 -ters will be established there against which Minneapolis can not
eompete, for they will have the advantage of cheaper rates. The
factory for building farm machinery will do there just as it has
done here. It will find a location in some of their wheat fields,
The loss in the home market would be infinitely greater than the
gain from the Canadian market.
In vriew of the altilude of Chambl.rlrlain in reference to a protective tariff against: the importation  f o ur wheat into England,
it would seem the height of folly to open up our markets for the
importation of Canadian products. SMlould the policy succeed, we
may have to depend very largely upon our own market to afford
the farmers a living profit. * * *
This is not a question of Canadicran reciprocity, though I find it
is called such by persons who are annions to conceal the real issue.
It is an effort on the part of local interests to hide under the
name of reciprocity their demand for free trade for certain
('tnaldian products.  * * * No one objects to have Canadian grain
(OTne through the American market or to have it ground there, prouidtd it is exported to foreign coluntries for consmnption, but we
io strenuously object to have it: brought here for home conslumption
n competition with the home prolducts of our own people, and
ik is not fair to mislead   the public as to the real issue.
* *  No one can point out how the agricultural element of the
United States can be benefited by hav.ing free trade with Canada.
They can not obtain from   Canada agricultiural implements nor
tapnfa.ctured products to any extent, as; Cl na.da does not supply
its own markets, but is dependent upon the United States and England to supply them. * * * If we c.n do anything toward buildI'tl.p trade with Canada without; doin  m  ore harm to ourselves
dt5h' qfood, I shall be glad to see it done, I believe in the reciprocity
of BJlaine and McKinley. reciprocity in non-competitive,goods, but
ot0 i. reciprocity in competitive go>ds, which is simply free trade.
I o!ieve in the beneficent policy of Republican protection under
1'h lil this country has prospered so marvelously, and under which
the farm has secured this immense home market, but I do not want
that market traded away for the benefit of the milling and jobbing
iterests of a few cities on the border. To take from the farmer
tis market without giving him anything in return, as is proposed,
is a-bsolutely unfair and unjust.
M4


I




"'SENSIBLE      ATIONS 'DO NOT TRADE MARKETS TO
THE DISADVANTAGE OF THEIR OWN PEOPLE"
Extrat:t fom f emarks of Ho. E. L. HAMILTON, of Mi chigan,
in daily Congressional Record, April 14, 1904
kECIPROCITY.
When the golden rule becomes internationall law and other nations.
open their markets to us without duty; when oliher nations come
up to our standard, not when we go down to theirs-lthen will be
time enough for us to think about opening our ports to other nations without duty; not till then.
That would be the reciprcity of international free trade.
But obviously, free trade, whichc ives away our vmarkets in advitlr?
and leaves us nothing to exchaange, is not reciprocity. 
In his last speech at Buffalo, Awhich is to be read and construed
in connection with his whole political career, William  McKinley
said:
Reciprocity treaties are in harmony with the spirit of the times.
If some of our tariffs are no longer needed for revenue or to encourage and protect our industries at home, why should they not
be employed to extend and promote our markets abroad?
Certainly; why not? "If some of our tarif's are no longer needed
fo   vee or r e or to encourage and protect our indufstries at home,"  why
notf
The Blaine theory of reciprocity was reciprocity in things the like
of which we do not grow or produce.
Reciprocity is an exchange of markets, Neither men nor nations
trade things or markets without the hope of gain by the exchange.
When men trade horses they do not knowingly trade clean limbs
for spavins, and sensible nations do not trade markets to the disadvantage of their own people,
The American market belongs to American capital and American labor, American producers and American consumers, American
buyers and American sellers; and a government of all the people
has no right to displace American industries, giving employment
to American capital and American labor, furnishing markets for
American farmers, and building up American homes, and substitute therefor foreign industries, employing foreign labor and foreign
capital and withdrawing American capital from   the channels of
A merican trade.
Therefore William McKinley said, in his Buffalo speech:
"By sensible trade arrangements which will not interrupt our
home production we shall extend the outlets of our increasing surplus."
Ad therefore the Republican party said in its national platfolrm
of 19w00:'We favor the associrated policy of reciprocity so directed
as to open  ur markets on favorable terms for ewht we do not s,-trselves predmce in return for ree foreign markets.",
b-6


I




iDOUBTFULA ABOUT RECIPROCITY WITH CANADA "
Extract from remarks of flon. JOHit F. LAiCEY of Iowa, in daily
Congressional Record, Jan. 21, 1904.
R    epublicans are heartily in favor of reciprocity, but they watt
Ui of the kind that will reciprocate.
The difficulty about reciprocity with the people of the Dominion
of Canada is that they are producers of the same things that we are.
They are our rivals and competitors.
From 1855 to 1866 we had a treaty providing for free trade between the United States and Canada in the "natural resources of
both countries"'
This treaty was ratified with much gratification and in the hopes
that it would be of great mutual advantage. When we consider
the schedule of "natural products" we can readily see the inequality
of such a bargain. The articles admitted free were "breadstuffs,
meats, fish, raw cotton, vegetables, fruits, poultry, eggs, hides, furs,
skins, stone, dairy products, ores, fertilizers, lumber, wood, flax,
hemp, tow, and unmanufactured tobacco."
As Canada could raise neither cotton nor tobacco, the raw material
necessary to her cotton and tobacco factories was a matter of
necessity to her, and the other articles were competing products
in which she had the advantage.
The civil war intervened and made it somewhat difficult to determine the nerits of the agreement. but in the last year and nine months
of that treaty, in 18(65 andi 1I86, we remitted duties to Canada,mniointing to $70,152,163, alnd the balance of trade was against us in
the same year and nine months in the sum of $28,134,749,
The Canadians are a thrifty people and in possession of a vast
domain.  They have by pelagic sealing killed off nearly all the
great seal herd whtch we supposed we had obtained by our purchase of Alaska. They ruthlessly slaughtered the mothers of this
herd out at sea, allowing their helpless offspring to starve in the
rookeries on the American islands.
Any treaty that we make with them     hereafter should provide
means to save the remaining seals from utter extermination.
Their preposterous claims to the ownership of Skagway, Dyes,
and the Lynn Canal in Alaska were asserted with such apparent
earnestness that an arbitration was required to clear up a title
which had never been disputed as against either Russia or the
United States until the discovery of the Klondike gold caused the
necessity for an elastic boundary sufficient to include a Canadian
seaport. Some ill feeling is maiiftested by our neighbors over the
defeat of this wholly unfounded claim by the high court of arbitration.  Flimsy as their claims were, the Canadian arbitrators
insisted upon their pretensions until the last.
This proceeding is so recent as to manke it doubtful about obtainilg any reasonable treaty of reciprocity with Canada in the present
state of mind of the Dominion government.
At this juncture it is proposed to solve the question by the simple method of free and unrestricted trade with Canada. We have
about 80,000,000 of people, she has about 5,500,000. It is proposed
to furnish Canada 80,000,000 of the best customers in the world
in free and equal exchange for the trade of 5,500,000 of people,
There are fifteen persons in the United States to one in Canada.
The people make the markets.
There~ore the reciprocal treaty we are asked to undertake is not
exactly the ratio of 16 to 1, but 15 to 1. We are asked to trade
Ithe certainty of fifteen good customers for the chances of oneone certainly no better, if as good.  Besides, that one customer
Produces nothing that we can not produce ourselves. Such an agreel(ment would no doubt put our neighbors in a better humor than
they are at present. The Wilson law was popular in Canada.
In the last Canadian fiscal year ending August 31, 1903, Canada
sld us goods to the amount of $71,209,96. During the same period
we sold Canada, including raw   cotton, unmanufactured tobacco,
and other raw   materials for manufactire, to the amount of
$lI4,764,S375.
Jnder reciprocity in natural products the balance of trade was 
"against us over $20,0)00,00( a year at the close of the period when
t      ant treaty was in operation.  Under present conditions, with a?ariff i, b[oth cotoutri balance of trade: is more than $0,000,000
il Our favor. To renew the old arrangement of free trade in natural
Prod(tiets, bte would again give our neighbor our vast market in
eqult exchoang for a much smaller one ai the expense of the Amerian farmr.
e:


I




TECIPROCITY." -          McKINLEY." -        THE DINGLEY
BILL":
Extract from remarks of Hon. C. H. GROSVENOR, of Ohio, in
daily Congressional Record, Nov. s7, 1903.
Whoever has said at any time that William McKinley, anywhere
on earth, wanted to strip the protection from an American industry by reciprocity, that anybody has misread the declaration of
William McKinley [applause on the Republican side], for behind
and underneath all his argument was his declaration that he would
not take any step or do any act that would cut down or impair
the price of American labor. And that is the whole of this question
in connection with reciprocity. Reciprocity upon articles that ice
do not produce we are entirely willing to go into; but reciprocity
that strips any American industry of its protection we are not in
faor of. Did I believe, Mr. Chairman, that in the pending treaty
there would be serious injury to any product of American industry
I certainly  would never vote   for it.   My   position  on that
subject has been a long time established and placed upon the records
of this House.
Now, again, it is said that the Dingley bill-and here I propose
to trench on ground that I have not often touched upon-it is
persistently said that the duties of the Dingley bill were purposely
-with deliberate purpose-made so high in certain schedules for
the purpose of using them as a means of reciprocal trade with
foreign countries. Now, I can not only answer that proposition.
but I can answer the charge made by the gentleman from Missouri,
that there was some kind of similarity in the treatment of the Wilson bill in this House when it came from the Senate and the treatment of the Dingley bill when it came here from the Senate. The
Dingley bill when it came here with the Senate amendments came
before the House of Representatives after a long ten-day session
of a conference committee. I had the honor to be a member of
that committee. There are now in this House, on the Republican
side, three gentlemen who were members of that conference conmittee. There were five Republicans from the House of Representatives and five from the Senate. Ten of us sat for ten long days in
the red-hot weather of July, going over that bill item by item and
agreeing at last upon the entire measure-five of us representing
the majority of the House of Representatives, all of us from the
Ways and Means Committee, and five gentlemen from     the Senate
representing the Finance Committee of that body. Item by itelm
we took up that bill and perfected it.
Now, then, as to the charge that the increase of duty made in
that bill were for a purpose. I do not claim to have had greater
intimacy with Mr. Dingley than anybody else had, but I was vith
him during all that long struggle. I had known him ever since
I came into Congress and long before. I never heard him make an
intimation that there was a single item of that tariff bill in whirc
the duty was left, for the purpose of reciprocity, higher than it
ought to be, except the single item of sugar; and with reference
to that he told me, as he told a great many others, that he consentedt
to what he thought an unnecessarily high duty on sugar becautse
as he said, it was one of the articles which in the long run we ni'qlt
have to use as a matter of reciprocity. And it should be borne in
mind that that was six years ago, when the beet-sugar industry
had not come forward and developed into its proportions of to-day.
Therefore it was that beyond doubt he was lookin    distinctl t
the fact that the cane-sugar product of the country was shrinkingl
that the beet-sugar product was not increasing, and therefore the
enormous importations of sugar into the country suggested to hiii
that we might possibly use that part of the tariff schedules for
purposes of reciprocity.
b-7




I.THE HOME MARKET IS EQUAL TO THE ENTIRE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE OF THE WRLD."
ytracts from remarks of Hon. J. H. G(ALLTNQGER of New Hampshire, in
daily Congressional Record, April 28, 1904.
i  T3ANSPORTATION COMPANItA
Closely allied with this great prosperity of our farmers, their demand
ior manufactures and luxuries, and the demand of the consumers of the
wthol country for the products of the farm, is the great volume of business enjoyed by our transportation companies. With the fall of certain
tistrial stocks during 1908I we beheld day after day railroad shares
wumloing as well, yet these same railroads were carrying on their busi-'
ess limited only by the facilities at their command.    Record-breaking
Mgwres were shown month after month, and the cessation only came when
the elements seemed to conspire to prevent the normal amount of transportatlon. This, however, was temporary, and with the clearing of the
racks and the advance of spring we shall no doubt again return to the
wonderful record which has prevailed year after year since the enactment
of the Dingley law.
It seems pertinent, in passing, to show how our great railroad companies have withstood, under a protective tariff, the assaults made upon
the values of stocks and bonds during 1903. From the Railway Age, of
Chicago, I take the following figures:
j Placed un1der receivershdpsi Sold under forec/losure.
XYears,      j Numn-         Stoo!s atlri Nun.t   d -  Stocks iand
er o    i          ads. ' ~ - t1bonds, tO- u.
i roads.                   roads.o
i    ollars                   Dollars..............         74 } 29,340  1,781,046,000 j '25  1,618  79,924,00)
4.....................  38  7,025  39>,791.000  42   5,64:   818, 91,t000.I.9................... 1 31.  4,089)1  8n69,075,0)  52  12,a3i  761,791,000t
9................................  4  5,441  275,57,0  58  13,730  1,150,77,)
I9....................   1is  1,537  ) 92,l909,00  42  (i,675  517,1680,001)
1;(9....................  18  2,069  188,701,00)  47  60,054   252,910,)000
1899....................  10  1,091  52,285,000   2   4,2941  267,5;,0XiX).............          1    1,1lt5   78,234,1)000  241: 3,477}  lt)0,874,00X)...................    4     7       1,627,000   18   1,1      8,88,?22....................  5  273i,85,10   i      I;!1:C 89,885,0tiM.................    9     22     18,8,0      1     55 1 0   5,885,(001
This home market of ours., Mr. President has been built up and maintained through our protective tariffs, and particularly during the operation
of the law now on our statute books, which is not; only the pride of every
IAsierican citizen, but the envy of every foreign producer. A most conservatirve estimate of the value of this internial coummerce is $22,000,000,000
'nnurally, equal in value to the combined markets of the world for the purchase of foreign productions. Could we control the sale of all the goods
ich enter every port on the face of the earth, it would only equal that
which we now supply to our own home markiet, an assured market which
is constantly increasing.  This qranid hlone m-arket of ours can not be
'isfnttfiianed if we let docn our protection bars and adopt low tariffs, or if
Ve enter into reciprocity cir oan qpeow f s i cepeti.a a-rticles, which is the
saie, or at least a bon? step towarn this saone free-trade notion.
The value of our home market has never been more forcibly and
cearlny presented than by lion. 0. P. Austin, Chief of the Bureau of Statistics, )epartment of Commerce and Labor, in a speech delivered in the city
" Rochester, N. Y,, on Thursday, January 7, 1904, from which I take the
fI ollong brief extract:
"The internal commerce of the United States was In 18T7 seven billions
Of dollars, and in 1900 it was twenty billions.  With this definite basis of
twenty billions in 1900 and knowing what rapid development has occurred
fl all lines during that period, we may safely and conservatively put the
iternal commerce of the year 1903 at twcenty-two billions of dollarsI si.e which actually equaled the entire international commerce of the
"'ord In t hat year."
"Think of it, you producers and manufacturers and merchants and
t!:raoers and bank ter  and transportes:  ink of it!  he   arket of our
5M -)ountry, the honme marklet, in athicht you can trianport your goods from
1 dtoere ofr the factori to tie door tf thes hcos. r gr ithonut breaking biulk  a
`g5le time, ts equal to thie entire inte-rnational commerce of the world."
"Not only Is this true that our home market is equal to that offered
Y the- international commerce of the entire world, but it is evidently growa]l ir more rapidly than international commerce, for, as I have said, the
"ItFiial commerce of the United States has grown from seven billions fn.:'O  twenty-two  billions in 103, while the international commerce has
R     from ~ eleven billionsr In 1.870 to ohtwenty-two billions in 1903, or, int
threr words, while the International commerce of the world is now twice
w reat as in 1870, the internal commerce of the United States is now three
me- as great as In that year and equals the entire commerce between all
'`his internal commerce of ours has been m'mde possible only because
C     splendid, watge si/stem, which has brought abou$ a higher standard
ill 9'''  and a demand by our masses for more than the mere necessaries


4-8




"REPtUBLIAN RECIPROCITY-TO OPEN OUR:MAR.
KETS ON:FAVORABLE TERMS FOR WHAT WE
DO NOT OURSELVES PRODUCE, IN RETURN
FOR FREE:FOREIGN MARKETS."
Extract from remarks of Ion. J. T. 1McOLEARt     of Minnesota, in
the House of Representatives, and printed in the daily Cottgressionat Rb eord, June  0, 1904.
What is the Republican position on this matter of reciprocity? It
is clearly set forth in the Republican national platform of 1900, as
follows 
" We favor the associated policy of reciprocity, so directed as to
open our markets on favorable terms for vwhat we do not onrselvei
produce, in return for free foreign markets."
An example of Republican reciprocity was seen in our arrangeme nt
with Brazil under the McKinley law. Brazil produces coffee, whiidt
we do not and can not produce economically and rlt sufficient qcuan
tities to supply any considerable fraction of the wants of our peopl)1e.
So Awe said to Brazil: "Adtmission to the great mark-et of the UTnIiteil
States for your chief export is a very valaitble thinrg to you. Grrnlt
to our agricultural and other products terms that our PresideAt sldll
deem reciprocally equal or we authorize him to place on your coffe,
by Executive proclamation, a duty of 3 cents per pound. Then,
with the coffee of other coffee-producing countries admitted here
free, in accordance with our general policy, your Brazilian, coff.ee
producers wvill not be able, under such conmpetition, to pass the dtiuty
on to the consumer, but will have to pay it yourselves, reducing your
profits to that extent."
Under such repre sentation Brazil pronmptly and cheerfully entered
into an agreement with this country which promised to be mutually
profitable. Under that agreement our wheat and whbeat flour, corn
and conm meal, rye, rye flour, buckwheat, buckwheat flour, barley,
potatoes, beans, pease, hay, oats, pork, and several other things
were admitted to Brazil free of duty, while lard, butter, cheese,
canned and preserved meats, fruits and veget-ablles, and atanwy
other things were admitted at a reduction of 25 per cent from the
regular rates. Under this agreement our people were increisiTng
their sales in Brazil and the outlook was that the arrangement wot(ld
prove mutually satisfactory to both countries.
fSimilar arrangements were made with several other countries of
Central and South America-the countries that Jamnes G. Blamie wass
so especially anxious to reach with our trade as affording our niost
promising outlet. In fact, it was under his guidance as Secretary of
State that these treaties were entered into.
But in 1893, by a strange whim of the people, the Demnoerattie
party came into power and, without even the courtesy of reasonai)l
notice or a word of explanation, abruptly abrogated all those reclprocity agreements.
So it will hardly come with good grace from. them now to menlion
reciprocity, "genuine'" or otherwise. Their theory is incomupat:l i
with it and their practice unfriendly to it.
These agreements illustrate the only kind of reciprocity ever ativoeated by:: the Republican party or bS1y any recoglnized leader, oa' it
They were negotiated under thle McKinley law 'of 1.890 and well
illustrate what our martyred President meant wvhen, at B1ffto.
he said:
"Bv sensible trade arrangements, whlich will not interrupt our iol'se
production we shall extend the outlets for our increasing surpaiiR
* -** *  We:should take from our customers such of their prodiits
as we can use Withouat harm to our industries and labor. Reciproeity
is the *natural outgrowth of our wonderful industrial developieroa
nder the dfomestic policy now finrmly established."
B:ut no: epublican national convention ever declared for ";ri-t
procity" in competing products, nor did any recognized leader of the
party ever seriously aadvocate such a thing. To do that would te t~
ific    the interts of some of our own people to the intere sts o
others0of our own.people, which would be entirely out of haril'W
witht:e spirit and purpose of a protective tariff.:,::




iiDEMOCRATIC TALK ABOUT RECIPROCITY IS SIMPLY
A FLANK MOVEMENT AGAINST ADEQUATE PROTECTION TO AMERICAN INDUSTRIES."
ew{yict from remarks of Hlon. J. T'. McCLEARY of Minnesota, in
thfe House of Representatves, and printed in the daily Congressional Record, June ~0, 1904.
O-tr Democratic brethren seem    quite taken just now with what
o- friend fromr MAissouri, Mr. CLAKr, calls "genuine reciprocity."
Buit utnder the tariff policy atlvocated by my friend no such thinfg as
ifcipjrocity is logically possible.
(lUnder his proposal of seven years ago, when he declared that he
ewild tear down all custorn-houses "from turret to foundation stone,"
o>f course it is entirely plain that, having no such thing as a tariff
at all, it would be impossible to nmake tariff concessions to the people
of Iany other counltry.
With the necessity for taxing to the limit the comparatively few
nonomnpeting articles that we import in large quantities in order to
raise the required revenues, and with competing articles admitted
free of duty-as in England, where Brother CLARI'S tariff ideas are
in;actual operation —what opportunity would there be for reciprocal
arrangements with any foreign country? As a matter of fact, sir,
uwder a system of 'tari'f for revenue only," reciprocity is both logic(lt0i and practicallq! impossible!
lThis was concedei d by Lord Salisbury, then prime minister of
lEnI:gland, in a sp)cc(h at IHa stia;gs, England, in M1ay, 1892, when he
said:
We live in an age of a war of tariffs. Every nation is trying how it can,
by agreement with its neighbor, get the greatest possible protection for its
own industries, and at the same time the greatest possible access to the markets of its neighbors. The weapon with which they all fight is admission to
their own markets-that is to say, A says to 3, "If you will make your
duties such that I can sell in your markets I will make my duties such that
you can sell in my market."
But we begin by saying we will levy no duties on anybody, and we declare that it would be contrary and disloyal to the glorious and sacred doctrine of free trade to levy any duty on anybody for the sake of What we
ran get by it. [Cheers.] It may be noble, but it is not business. [Loud
cheers.]
But a tariff for revenue wilh inadequate protection is the same
in its results as a tariff for revenue only; that is, the foreign prodl-cer in either case, witih his lower priced labor and with tools such
as wIe have taught the world to make, can undermine and destroy
Americran competition and dominate the American market. So wlh
lhould he make any sacrifice to us as to his home market, when with
rt inadequate tarif inin this country, he would already have all that
l(e could ask?
So tthat fr-om any vtiewi poilnt there is logically no place under Democratic liolic for reciprocity of any kind, "'enuine" or otherwise.
Why, then, do ou.r Di)emoeral:tie brethren talk in favor of reciprocity?
The motive is shown in the magazine article of my friend, Mr.
WnV  AMs1,: the i)ernocratic leader on this floor, to which I referred
e:rlier in these remarks. TIn that article ---the one with the significant
title "What Democracy noaw stands for" —lhe says;
There is also a tariff revision b5y piecemeal, which is the handmaiden of
the other system. It is very important in its place, although it ought never
to be permitted to handicap the larger movement by general legislation.
this is tariff revision by reciprocal trade agreements ufh th oter nations.
So, frankly — and one reason for the regard in which Mr. WILLIAMS
is eld on both sides of this Chalmber is his entire frankness-the
t:lder of Demnocracy in this House, and practically its leader in the
tire country, stat-es that DIemnocratic talk about reciprocity is
'iply to use what seems at this time a popular demand as a basis
fr tIhe revision of the present tariff law.:Do Democrats really care for reciprocity?    Listen to what was
sali: of it in the official Democratic campaign text-book in 1902:
Reciprocity Is based upon the same false theories as is protection, and,
like protection, is a sham and a humbug, and to most people has been, and
wil ever continue to be, a delusion and a snare.
Tl'aiking all these things together we get an insight into the entire
1'-'rpose of our Democratic brethren in talking about reciprocity.
I^) t.lle  it is simply a fiank mov7rement ayainst adequate protection to
A -ierican industries.
I hat this is the real animus of the whole business is shown in the
f tlewing from the magazine article of Mr. WILLIAS of Mississippi,
before referred to:
The general principle that protectionism is wrong, morally wrong, a
Prostitution of government to private ends, should never be forgotten. The
goat ought not to be lost sight of.


b-iO




"RECIPROCITY*.
GRANARTHrUR-dHARRISON —MoKINLEY.
"UNABLE TO FIND A REASON THAT WOULD JUSTIFY A
TREATY WITH CANADA IN NATURAL PRODUCTS."
-"PRACTICAL RECIPROCITY: DUTIES REMITTED IN EXCHANGE FOR CONCESSIONS
BY NATIONS WHO SEND US NONCOMPETITIVE        PRODUCTS."
Extract from remarks of Hon. JOHN DALZBLL of Pennsylvania, in Hfwloa
of Representatives Feb. S9, 1904, and printed in Congressional Record.
I have been unable to find anywhere, and I have given considerablt.
attention to the subject, a single solitary reason that would justify a
reciprocity treaty with Canada in natural products.
PRESIDENT GIRtANT.
In his first annual message to Congress, under date of December 8,
1869, President Grant alluded to the Canada treaty in terms of disapproval
on account of its lack of true reciprocity. I quote this extract from his
message:
"The question of renewing a treaty for reciprocal trade between the
United States and the British provinces on this continent has not been
favorably considered by the Administration. The advantages of such a
treaty would be wholly in favor of the British producer. Except possibly
a few  engaged in the trade between the two sections no citizen of the
United States would be benefited by reciprocity."
PRESIDENT HARRISON.
I quote now from another distinguished President-President Harrlson
— from his message of June 20, 1892:
"A reciprocity treaty limited to the exchange of natural products (referring to the case of Canada) would have been such only in form. The
benefits of such a treaty would have inured almost wholly to Canada.
Previous experiments on this line had been unsatisfactory to this Government. A treaty that should be reciprocal in fact and of mutual advantages
must necessarily have embraced an important list of manufactured articles
and have secured to the United States a free or favored introduction of
these articles into Canada as against the world."
Now, you will observe that in the declaration of the statesmen from
whom I have read the principal point made is that natural products are not
the proper subjects of reciprocity. During the Arthur Administration the
idea of tropical reciprocity seems to have originated. A letter of Secretary
Frelinghuysen, contains the following important announcement as to the
true principle of reciprocity between nations:  "The true plan, it seems
to me, is to make a series of reciprocity treaties with the States of Central
and South America, taking care that those manufactures and, as far as
is practicable, those products which would come into competition with our
own mainufactures and products should not be admitted to the free list."
PRESIDENT ARTHUR.
Mr. Arthur, in his messages, announced the same principle:
"The need has long been recognized of some arrangement by which
the natural market of the large communities lying at our doors should
be secured under beneficent terms for the principal productions of the
United States. In return for this we grant certain reserved favors, whereby
the articles, mainly raw materials or food products, which this country does
not produce, or produces in inadequate quantity, shall reach their natural
market of consumption in this country."  And again, on another occasion.
he rTecommiended: "A series of reciprocal commercial treaties with the
countries of America, which shall foster between us and them an unhampered movement of trade. The conditions of these treaties should be the
free admission of such merchandise as this country does not produce in
return for the admission free, or under a favored scheme of duties, of dutie  o
own products."
In 1889 the Pan-American Congress concluded its sittings and reconmmended a series of reciprocity treaties between the several States constituting that conference and the United States. Mr. Blaine, who was theTn
Secretary of State, made his report, the conference having been called at
his suggestion in in the first instance, and Mr. Harrison sent that report
to Congress with a message. And that was the beginning of practical Republican reciprocity. The plan was that instead of placing our non-cornpetitive articles on the free list they should receive duties, and that thoss
duties should be remitted by the President in exchange for concessi oss
to be made by the nations who sent to us non-competitive products.
PRESIDENT McXINLEY.
I know that certain gentlemen, enemies of protection, have contended
that President McKinley, in his last' speech at Buffalo, on the eve of his
tragic end, abandoned the doctrine whose advocacy througihout his lorg
life had made him famous. I think they do him an injustice. There are
detached sentences in that speech, that taken by themselves, may be c0nstrued to mean almost anything; but taken as a whole the speech was a Ml'Kinley speech.  It was a speech, I grant you, in advocacy of foretga
trade, but at the same time its keynote sounded the supreme and coi.manding importance of the home market and was a protest against asy
curtailment thereof or of any Industry therein or of any harm to its wag(earners. Note what he says:
"By sensible trade arrangements which will not interrupt home produetion we shall extend the outlets of our increasing surplus." And then again:
"We should take from our customers such of their products as we can use
without harm to our industries and labor." 
And all through that speech, in which he glorifies our prosperity, he
attributes its existence to the policy of protection.
b-ll




Trusts and Tariff
C




"TRUSTS~ AND THE TARIFFS
Exract from remarks of lon,   ORiWE TV. RAY of New Yorkc, ain daily Con.
gressional Record, June 2, 1900.
On the question of the responsibility of the tariff for trusts and monop.
olles, I repeat what I said in my report on the constitutional amendmsnt:i
THE PROTECTIVE POLICY NOT RESPONSIBLE.
It is asserted by some that these vast combinations and monopolies
are the result or natural outgrowth of the protective policy adopted by the
Congress of the United States; that protection destroys foreign competition
and therefore enables the industrial enterprises of the United States to
combine and monopolize manufacture, etc. Therefore they oppose the vesting of power in Congress to suppress or control these combinations eld
monopolies. The long and the short of this proposition is that in the inter.
est of foreign manufacturers and producers, and at the expense of our ows
manufacturing and producing industries of every kind, and consequently
at the expense and to the detriment of our own home labor, these opposers
would strike down protection in an experimental effort to destroy a monopoly or repress a combination. They would close workshops and factori?'
in the United States, throw millions of our citizens,' out of employment"
destroy home markets, turn the balance of trade against us, and enrilch
foreign countries rather thanu let the people of the States grant to Congress
this beneficent power,
The remedy proposed by the opponents of this amendment is worse than
the disease. But their proposed remedy is no remedy at all. As matter of
fact monopolies and illegal combinations, or so-called trusts, are not fostered by or the result of our protective policy. A monopoly, a combination, or a trust in importation and in the sale of imported articles is more
easily formed than in the manufacture and sale of the products of American fields and factories. So-called trusts and monopolies never so fatted
and flourished as under the act of August 27, 1894, known as the Wtilson
tariff act. The inability of the masses of our people to engage in importation is so well understood that it need not be dwelt upon, but It Is selfevident that when our great manufactories are closed the army of the unempoloyed will overrun the country; that home markets for the producte
of the Arerican farm and shop' will be crippled or destroyed and price.,larely reduced; that money will go abroad; that the peopi of the United
States will be at the mercy of Importers of foreign goods, and that the cost
of many necessaries will then bhe largely increased.
Monopolies, trusts, and combinations, both at home and abroad, that
feed no American laborer, enrich no American town, benefit no Americae
farmer, but that feed foreign labor and build up foreign workshops and enrici foreign countries, would, should protection be abandoned, succeed toc
those now existing and control most fields of industrial enterprise and grow
rich while the people of the United States would grow poor.
Who can deny that monopolies, combinations, and trusts swarm and
flourish in free-trade countries?  Industries now successfully carried on
in this country without the aid and independent and in defiance of trusts,
combinations, and monopolies, if deprived of protection, will, througb
foreign competition, be forced into coimbinations, trusts, and monopolies.
to the detriment of all our people, especially our laborers. Destroy the protective policy of the United States and thle foreign monopolies and comcbinations wsill substantially control cnanufacture and the price of merchandise
and farm products.
Prior to the enactment of a law protecting the tin-plate Industry in tdi
United States, and which has resulted in its establishment and prosperity
here, the production of that article was controlled absolutely by a tln-plate
monopoly In Ebnoc-land, which controlled the price and mnarket., Suppose that
a sugar monopoly should control 75 per cent., a paper monopoly 65 per centi,
and an iron and steel monopoly 85 per cent., and smaller concerns the balance of the production of sugar and paper and iron and steel, and all tariff
protection should be denied them and Lthey compelled to contend with the
competition of free-trade countries and their cheap labor, can it be doubted
that the smaller plants would be ruined-driven out of the business-while
the monopolies themselves, by reason of their vast capital, would survive,
and by combining or conspiring with foreign monopolies form one vast and
world-wide combination and absolutely control production and prices?
This is but an illustration of what might and would occur should protection be denied our productive Industries-,. This is an answer to those NIho
propose to destroy monopoly in any given direction by denying it the beaefits of our tariff laws. The proposition is unwise, impracticable, and wouald,
If adopted, intensify the evils now alleged to exist.
We are not willing to abandon our protective system at the request Oe
free traders and State rights advocates. The American home is too sacricl
the prosperity and growing strength of this nation are too dear to every
American heart to permit the thought. We are able to protect ourseilve
at hompe and abroad, command respect everywhere, and if given legislative
power to control, and when necessary suppress, all monopolies, Illegal conbinatlons, and so-called trusts, and so maintain home competition withtlo
sacrificing any just principle or (as a mere experiment) opening wide tie
door to foreign competition.
The truth is that the great majority of those who charge up so-ci-'led
trusts and monopolies to the protective policy are enemies to that systefl
and would see it destroyed. They are not as a rule opposed to trusts, 1il1e15
combinations, or monopolies, but sustain them.


044




"TRUSTS EXIST IN FREE-TRADE COUNTRIES' —
"WE CAN MANAGE OUR CORPORATIONS,
BUT NOT BY CLOSING ALL
FACTORIES."
Extraet from remarks of Hon. CHARLES E. FULLER of Illinois,
i daily Congressional Record, March 26, 1904.
We have all heard the argument-we shall doubtless continue to
hear it in the next campaign-that the tariff fosters trusts and
great monopolies. No one can deny that such trusts and monopolies exist in free-trade countries as well as in this country; no
one can deny that they exist in non-protected as well as in protected
industries. But the mere fact-and I admit it is a fact-that they
derive benefit from a protected tariff is used as an alleged argument against the entire policy of protection. Would you take away
the benefits of protection from all industries, from all the people,
because some great corporations are benefited? I would not. The
rain falls on the just and on the un'just, yet I have never heard
any one argue against the plan of an all-wise Providence in that
respect. The wicked as well as the good, the rich as well as the
poor, high and low alike enjoy all the blessings and the benefits
of sunshine and shower, yet who would deny the actuality of the
blessings or the benefits or propose to alter or change the Divine
plan in order that the undeserving might be shut out from the
enjoyment of such blessings and such benefits?
The protective system benefits all and is for all our people. I
would not crush out a small industry to injure a larger industry.
I would not think it a blessing or a benefit to deprive a thousand
or a hundred thousand or a million of our people of their employment, of their chance to earn a livelihood, even if by so doing the
greatest and richest corporation on earth could be driven out of
business. If it were to never rain again, if the sun were to never
shine again, the righteous would suffer quite as much as the sinners.
Strike down your protective tariff system and not the trusts alone
would be crippled, but the prosperity of all would be destroyed.
We can manage our great corporations; we can control them; we
will manage Iand control them, but not at the expense of all business, of all industries; not by closing all factories and all avenues
of production; not by throwing all our laboring people out of
employment, but by wise and enlightened supervision and control.
I believe that even with our present tariff laws we are getting
quite as much of foreign manufactured goods shipped into this
country as we need. If it would shut more of them out I would
be willing to increase rather than reduce the tariff rates. The
last fiscal year, 1903, our imports increased over the year previous
by more than $100,000,000. The imports of manufactured articles
for the year were more than $412,000,000. That is quite a large
aeough amount of manufactured goods from abroad to be admitted
into this country in a single year to compete with our own manufocturers, especially when we consider that if the same goods had
been made here by our own people fully $300,000,000 of that amount
would have gone into the pockets of the laboring men of this country. Does it seem reasonable in the face of these figures that any
laboring man would vote to take down the tariff bars and admit
unlimited quantities of such foreign manufactured goods?
Can the laboring men of the land be induced to ever vote again
for a policy that will close these factories and throw them out of
employment?   The days of free soup houses, of Coxey's armies,
of millions of men out of employment and looking for work, are
altogether too recent to be wholly forgotten.
Mr. Chairman, the logic of events has made the one and only
issue of the coming campaign. It is the paramount issue, if you
please, and the issue that will continue President Roosevelt and
a Republican Congress at the helm. It is the issue that will insure
the continuance of our wonderful prosperity in every avenue of
trade and commerce north, south, east, and west.
There is one issue, and oe only, on which the two great political
parties of this country are divided to-day, precisely as hey have
been divided in the past. That is the issue of protection to Amei(can industries and American labor. There is no other issue-for
ihis campaign t  een e nhereher issue-upon which every Republican stands on one side and every Democrat upon te other:




"''TRUSTS."    'TH:E     RISE   ABOVE ALL TARIFFS,
WHETHER PROTECTIVE OR FOR REVENUE
ONLY."
Extract from remarks of Hon. A, C. THOMPSON of Ohio, p'     a
4319 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Session.
There is a tendency, it is true, to combination on the part of
capital through corporative organizations, trusts, and what not, that
is antagonistic to the welfare and happiness of the people which,
while not growing out of, are made possible by the modern facilities
for rapid commuiication and transportation. These agencies make
possible the great combinations of capital which center in New York,
London, and other great cities, and thence to reach out to the whole
world demanding tribute. They are not confined to any one country;
they rise above all tariffs, whether protective or for revenue only,
and exist wherever capital is found, and greed of gain and unscrupulousness combine with opportunity. It will not be claimed that a
protective tariff gave rise to the Standard Oil combination, nor
that a tariff for revenue only is responsible for the great English
combinations of capital which exist to-day, nor that the revenue
policy of France is responsible for the recent French copper syndicate. The tendency grows out of the peculiar commercial and business conditions of the age and must be met by legislation aimed at
them directly, and of a character that will restrain the abuses of
which they are guilty, and surely this end can be better attained by
a study of the extent and character of their operations and the
true and real causes of their existence than by an outcry against the
tariff upon the demagogic assumption that it is responsible for them.
"IF WE ARE TO HAVE xONOPOLY, LET IT BE OUR OWN,
WITHIl 0OUR REACH, UNDER OUR OWN LAWS."
Extract from remarks of Hon. CH     R.LES N. BRUMM of Pennsylvania, page 6220 of daily Congresioal Record, 50th Congress,
It Session.
You say, sir, that the protective system fosters monopoly. I point
you to coal oil, the telegraph, the railroad; to anthracite coal, to
blocktin, to whisky. Which of these interests is protected? Whoever heard of laying an impost duty on a telegraph, railroad, coaloil, anthracite coal? Show me a monopoly that is more exacting than
any other, more powerful, more damnable in its evil effects than
any other, and I will show you that it is of a product that is not
imported at all, and therefore not subject to any tariff duty.
No, sir! Wall street, with its stock-jobbing; the railroad combines of the country, with their transportation tyrannies; the unlimited franchises and unbridled licenses of corporations, and the
internal-revenue monster are the sources of your monopolies. But,
sih if we are to have monopoly, let it be our own, within our
eae, under our own laws, and of our own kith and kin, rather
than  der the merciless heel of the foreigner, beyond our reach,
not under our control, not subject to our laws, not interested iL
our welfare, sharing none of our blessings, bearing none of our
burdens, enjoying none of our greatness, fearing our competition,
antagoniing our progress, and hating our free institutions. If we
must have a devil let it be one that we know and that we may in
tie subdue, rather: than one we do not know and that is entirely
d  our reach and -control.:.  8a...  i     w/:


I




4THE SHERMAN ANTI-TRUST LAW."-"THE MOST
EFFECTIVE ENGINE OF SUPPRESSION OF
UNLAWFUL AND INJURIOUS TRUSTS."
seract from renm-rks of Hon. C. H. GROSVENOR of Ohio, n daily ~Confressional Record, April 9, 1904.
The first thing that Theodore Roosevelt did that I commend him for,
As his having so wisely and promptly done his duty at the time o the
coa1 strike. I know that some of you gentlemen from the standpoint of
ptilosophy and strict legal knowledge condemn him, and you say that
lhere was no law for it, and so say I, and that is one of the strongest
grounds why I approve of him for doing as he did. He did not think there
tvwas any either. You say that there was no warrant in the Constitution.
Hie says there was none, also. But I will tell you what there was. There
was a condition in this country on the 1st day of October, 1902, which
was more critical and more dangerous to the life of this country and the
upholding and perpetuity of its free institutions than at any other period
since the time of Appomattox. And I believe there is not an intelligent
Anmerican citizen on the continent who does not believe exactly what I
tbeieve and what I state.
Now, the question comnes whether you will put forward so-me one against
-a candidate for President who had the courage,S t-he ability, the genius,
to extricate this country from the danger that it was in, and that we all
felt, who went forward and landed the country upon a position of safety
4a peace and prosperity, and condemn the President for the act the benefit
of which the country had, and all men rejoiced. I have not the time to
enlarge upon that at this time. It was not the first great distinguishing
act of Theodore Roosevelt after he had promised at Buffalo that he would
execute the policy of President McKinley. lHe accomplished it. He knew
what he wanted to do and he knew how to do it, and he went forward and
did do it, and next November 250,000 coal miners in the United States
will pay the debt that they owe to him for having done what he did in the
hour of their extremity.  [Applause on the Republican side.]  And you
may make what you please out of that,
Again, he found a condition-and I am not going into the details of
it-that I am very familiar with. It is not worth while to haggle over
little statements of when this lawsuit was begun and when that lawsuit
was begun. I was a Member of Congress when the Sherman antitrust law
was passed, and I say now, and I challenge contradiction of this, there can
not be found in the records of Congress, nor in any Democratic newspaper,
nor int any President's message, nor in any resolution of any Democratic
(lonvention a word of praise or a word of approval for the Sherman antiraust law. And I say further, that the Attorney-General under Mr. Grover
Cleveland, whom to-day sonie of yon would like to nominate for Presidenta great, man, an able man, a pure man, a man thoroughly imbued at the
tmae with the popular notion of the Democrats of the country said that
tse law was ineffective and impossible of execution and wholly worthless,
Ior ords at least of this import. That is what Mr. Olney said. You need
ant dispute it. It is a matter of record in the Department,
I recollect with a great deal of pride that I was hauled over the coals
in tnis Hoase with great earnestness by some of my friends on the other
kie of this House because I said that there was no human language that
uld make a law more effective for the purpose of breaking up the trusts
than that law was already, and because I denied that there was any necessityr for anything else at the time the gentleman from Maine (Mr. LITTLIELD] was so eloquently and ably arguing in favor of additional legislatesi It dented that it was necessary, and that was the general opinion of
tihe Republicans of the country,  Now, what has happened?  It was left to
T he idore Roosevelt. The gentleman who spoke this afternoon, the eloVbnt iet gentleman from Iowa (Mr. WAD3sl, said that there were thousands
of truests in the country yet,
That is very true; but the trees are blazed, the pathway is made
Pl'. the trail is flagged, and because the Attorney-General saw fit to say,
U'il g a cant phrase, that he was not going to "run amuck," out at once
1ame the Democratic cry on this floor condemning that gentleman because
r' diid not say he was going to C"run amuck," because he did not say that
ile s'ats going faster than was necessary to attack all the business interests
t 13i^ (country. It is enough for Theodore Roosevelt to say that he has a
101t7 thiat had been condemned by the Democratic party and cast out as
'Ot ttlless and has made it the most effective weapon, the most effective
Ofarme of suppression of unlawful and injurious trusts that the dream of
' f>   has ever dreamed could <be put upon the statute books of tihe country
lo 3much ftor the trusts, The stone that these Democratc builders rejected
has become the head of the corner in the structure of legal opposition:: to
bnej erious trusts and combines.


I A




"TUSTS I Te1e UNITED KINGDOM""PRUc
OF COBDENTE FREE TRADE:
Extracts fro*m 0       of  o. WALt     S DIC     of Ohio, in ii'
Congressional Record, June 9, 1900.
Tru: t are not the outgrowth of a protective tariff; they are ntpeculiar to the United States. On the contrary, they had their
existence in England long before the Dingley tariff was franel oi
became a law, and long before the enact-ment of the MiKinley ta ri
of 1890.: I want to place on record before the House some ftacit
regarding the organisation and combination of some of the largest
trust Iin the United Kingdom. The facts given are authentic an,
official, and they clearly show that the trusts of to-day are as mutls
* creature of free trade and a tariff for revenue only as they are of
v protective tariff.
A surface examination of the conmmercial methods of the Uietei
KXigdom does not reveal such a great change when contrasted with
those sf ten years ago but if we examine into the subject more
inutely jwe see how deep a root the same principle of amalgamation has struck into the businesses of the United Kingdom as well as
those of the United States. In view of the importance, both tot1 -mercial and financial, of the inauguration of this new era in companytl'l
promotion, I think it well to bring vividly before the House tile
extent to which the new movement has already goine, and the f?!lowing table shows at a glance a list of some of the large cormbine>l
recently formed in the United Kingdom:,:::ta~?:               / [ Nv:X -rNu hern
Date.  |              Name.               of busi| Cap itmal.
1       8 1 Salt Un on, L i d..l:   ed................................................ X
Nov. 1lt  Ulnited Alkal Co., Limited.............  4;S  0i,l
July  14896  J J.&P. Coats, Limited.......................  -4  -  O,X
Nwo. 6, 1897 rnglish Seawing Cotton Co., Limited.....  15  2 2,7,(i1
May 260 1898 Fine Cotton Spiniers and 1)oublers',7,I.,  L imited.........................  1  I 
Dete  14,1898  Bradford Dy e  rs.....................e2........  2  4,5 )1O)w
Jtly 4 1898 Yorkshire Indigo, Scarlet, and Colourl..:  Dyers...........................i.fi..xK..t
July 6,1898 Bradftrd Coal Merchants and lCoiisu:-ersi  a;  ',,i!
Oct. 9, 1898 Yorkshire Wool Comnabers.........0...'
Nov. 1,1818 United Indigo and Chemical...........  8,
Nov. 16 18W Textile Maehinery Associat iot..........,.. 1.; 7 15w 1
Dec.  8, 189,  Calico Printers.......................  1.....  2,Xi
eb.W: 2, 111 00 all Papneor Manufacturers.....   28'     1210(
Mar. 1, 1W  United Velvet Cutters............      4 
Apr. 4, 190  Brlitish Cotton and Wool DS-ers...........  4  2' 4
Total............4................8  4:.ere is a list, and it enmbraces only some of the largest truass t1
free-trade England, in. which there are 328 different business concerns amalgamated, with a capital of ~46,970,000, or $230,000,0ll.
And there is not the shadow of an excuse to be found for their
fomation in the shape of a protective tariff. They are solely, thorougfy., and absolutel the product of the sEnglish system of Cob'
d:en i free trade, or a tariff for revenue only.
In a word, free-trade England has completely gone over to anld
become intoxicated with the trust mania. That such comlbinnationl
ofCatpital in that country are not the creation of a protective toari0i
Is self-evident. Englis laws compel the giving of information t1
stockhol erS in a corporation. Upon the payment of a fee of 1one
shlling (.5 cents) they can learn at any time the accurate tfian1cia
condition of the companies in which they are interested. There i
no such law in the United States, but, in my opinion, there should beh:Anothet point, Mr. Speaker,, that is worth consideration is this
We are now compelled, in striving for a share of the world's cofl"
merce, to make our goods of such a quality and at such a price thtIt:fe can compete with the manufactures made by these English
trusts.' A-nd ths competition will increase, not decrease. Itl 0der1
then, to keep our factories busy and to employ our labor, whi(ih i:the greatestconsumer of the products of our mines, forests at"1
factorie, should we not regulate rather than destroy such comnir"1:of -capital   are necessary t able to enable us t ompete in tue
A sumgi:ng thit we must do this, I believe in and will.advoate
te; proper regtlation of- all of our large combinations of capital 1 ':law. We Wmst. preserve in them whatever is good and advantacgoti5
0tote aeeope i a large; but;  t the same time we must eiminate all
ti::heti d00   evil    which is in a   way calculated to interfere


I




PROMINENT DEMOCRATS STOCKHOLDERS IN THE
GREAT ICE TRUST."
Lz!racts from remarks of lon. GEO. W. RAY, of Nlw York, in
daily Congrressional Record, June f, 1900.
Thie following prominent Democrats are members of and large
t(dckhiolders in the great ice trust operating in New York City. I
iake t;he list from the New York World, a Democratic paper:
[New York World, June 2.]
BIG STOCKHOLDEBS IN THE ICE TUST-A PARTIAL
LIST, MOST OF THE NAMES BEING FROM OFFICIAL
CERlTIFIED RECORDS IN POSESSSION OF TIE WORM)D.
liechard Croker (Demoocrat), leader of Tammany Hall.
F. A. Croker (Democrat), son of Richard Croker.
Elizabeth Croker (Democrat).
P:obert A. Van Wryck (Democrat), mayor of New York.
Augustus C. Van Wyck (Democrat), ex-justice of the Supreme
Court.
John F. Carroll (Democrat), deputy boss of Tammany Hall.
J. Sergeant Cram, president of the dock commission.
Charles F. Murphy (Democrat), dock commissioner.
J. Berry Lounsbury (Democrat), confidential clerk to dock cornmissioner.
Peter F. Meyer.
H. S. Kearny (Democrat), Tammany commissioner of public buildinTps, lighting, and supplies.
Judge Rufus B. Cowing.
Judge Martin F. McMahon (Democrat).
Judge James Fitzgerald.
Judge Joseph Newberger.
Th'e judges bought ice-trust stock as an investment, most of them
on D)eputy Boss Carroll's recommendation. As they are not executive
officers of the city, there was no official impropriety in such investHugh J. Grant (Democrat), former mayor of New York.
'Thomas F. Gilroy (Democrat), former mayor of New York.
HXugh McLaughlin (Democrat), boss of Kings County Democracy.
(xeorge V. Brower, park commissioner, Brooklyn.
W. H. Gelshenen (and family), president of the Garfield National
tBunk (the Croker-Carroll ice-trust bank).
Anthtony N. Brady (Democrat), of Albany.
BIll & Co. (Democrats), Richard Croker's brokers.
Robert Maclay, former president of board of education.
\Arthur Sewall (Democrat), of Maine, Democratic candidate for
\ice-President in 1896.
Charles T. Barney.
Leander A. Bevin.
H. H. Brockway.
G(. S. Odell, New York.
John E. MeDonald, New York.
H. R. Hoyt, New York.
Arthur Braun, New York.




: THE INTENION              OF f        THE REPUBLICAN PARTY
TO WRECK THE PROSPERITY OF THIS COUN.
TRY IN ORDER TO CONTROL THE TRUSTS,"
Extrat from remarks of Hon. P. P. CAMPBELL, of Kansas, in;daiy Cngressional Record, April 1, 1904.
Now, Mr. Chairman, if it were true that the policy of protection
made trusts possible in the first place and made their continuane
possible in the second place, we must still object to the retnedy
the Democratic party proposes, to wit; If any trust is engaged ini
the manufacture of a protected commodity, put that commodfit
in open competition with the products of the world. This plan of
the Democratic party would open the markets of this coantry to
all the world if any of the articles manufactured in whole or in
part, produced in whole or in part, by aggregations of capital
known as trusts, That would be just like shooting into a chicken
coop full of chickens with a double-barreled shotgun with both bhar
rels forthe purpose of killing a weasel. [Laughter and applause.]
Twenty fimurnacess are independent, five furnaces are in a trust,
all:produce a like product. The products of the whole are put
upo: the free list for the purpose of destroying the trust. Three
hundred factories are independent, 10 are in the trust. The pro1 -ucts of all are put upon the free list for the purpose of destroyintg
the 10 in the trust.
When you draw the fire in a furnace or close the door of
a factory, whether it is one of a combine or maintains its
independence, you throw     the workmen employed by that
furnace or in that factory out of employment.
Nothing is truer than that if the people of this country are supplied by the manufacturers and labor of foreign countries, whether
the purpose be to destroy trusts or to establish free trade, the
manufacturers and laborers of this country will not be called upon
for those supplies, and just to the extsent that they are not called
upon for them will our factories close their doors and our labor
go without work. There is no question that the proposed remedy
will accomplish its purpose. It will destroy the trusts, but their
destruction will tak  with it the last employment of thousands and
tens of thousands of men and darken with despair homes now
bright and cheery with prosperity.
The trust question Mwas not a serious one from 1893 to 1896, when
industrial paralysis extended into every avenue and industry in
our whole country.
Now, Mr. ChairTman, it is not the intention of the t Republican
party to wreck the prosperity of this country in order to
control the trusts,
A patriot and a statesman at the White House, conscientiously
devoted to the well-being of the whole country, alert alike to the
welfare of the rich and the poor, the employer and the employed;
with competent and able assistants in all the Departments of Government, is controlling and regulating, rather than destroying, the enterprises of this country, by whatever name they
may be known. [ Applause on the Republican side.]
Now, as to the c-arge that the products of manufacturl re are sol
cheaper abroad than at home, et ergo. we should put the countryl
upon a free-trade basis.,It has not been my privilege to see a list of the articles that are
sold cheaper in foreign markets than they are in our own, and I
do not deny that it is done in some particulars. I have heard it
stated, however, upon as good authority that the price    quoted
by those who make the charge is the retail price at home and tlhe
manufacturers price to the jobber. abroad. It was charged twe
years ago that sewing machines:aand reaping machines were sellinlr
cheaper in foreign markets than to our own people. It has beelr
stated upon the authority of dealers in Svdnev, Australia, that tlth
Deering binder sold there for $155 to $18, while it sells here f,r
$15; that the McCormick binder sold in Sydney for $165 to $194,
and sold at home for $1l. The New Home sewing machine sold(
in Sydney, Australia, for $55 in this country for $35.
Bfit if'that allegation is true, it is better that American ma antfactuXers get into foreign markets by that method than that
foreiga  n mantfacturers come into American markets by ti1
same  Imethod. [Loud applause on the Republican side.]


I
I


'I


c-7


I
Ii
II




TVSTS-."-WE M:UST NOT SO INJURE INDUSTRY AS
TO DESTROY        ITS EXISTENCE."
ztroct from remarks of lion. C. B. BRECKINRIDUGE of Arkansas, page 6329 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress,
1st Session.
Now, sir, whatever mray be our hostility to trusts, we must always
erember that when we wish to take away from a trust the power to
ppress the people, we must not do that which may so injure the
andustry as to destroy its existence. The committee followed that
0urse with the sugar trust. They hIve lowered the margin of
rofit. But if they put refined sugar on the free list and leave a tax
n raw sugar every gentleman knows perfectly well it would not
nly destroy the trust, but it would utterly obliterate the sugar-refing industry, becauso it would tax the raw material and leave no
equivalent tax upon the finished product. That is only analogous
as a line of action; not strictly analogous to this case in other
features. We reduce the tax here until we bring the price of the domestic article and the price of the foreign article within 11/ cents
of each other. The difference at other times has been very great.
it ias been as great as 2 and 3 cents a pound.
"THE TARIFF HAS NO LOGICAL CONNECTION WITH
TRUSTl." 
iErtract from remarks of Hon. GEORGE E.ADA1'MS of Illinois,page
6331 of daily Coagressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Session.
I desire to oppose the amendment of the gentleman from Arkansas. I wish simply to congratulate the gentleman from Arkansas on
having announced that it is illogical and inadmissible to place a tax
n the raw material when you put the finished product on the freelist  I only regret that when the subject of crude glycerine and
(c:ustic soda was under discussion this bill was not in his charge, but
iin the charge of another member of the Ways and Means Committee.
I also congratulate the gentleman on having discovered that where
a trust exists it is not ralways a remedy to put the articles subject to
that trust on the free-list. That is what many of us have said, because we judged the tariff has no logical connection with trusts.
The truth seems, if I judge rightly and understand the gentleman
Tightly, to be already dawning on his mind.
"THE GREATEST TRUSTS ARE DEMOCRATIC TRUSTS."
Ex'racts from remarks of lion. SAMUEL Rf. IPETERS of Kansas,
page 6497 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st
Session.
But I say to you that if a trust has been fostered and encouraged
by the Republican party, why is it that your side with its majority
in all these years has not brought forward some proposition to crush
them.I                                           o
Whien you come to talk on the other side about trusts, I wish to say
to you the greatest and most iniquitous trusts to-day are Democratic
trLsts. Take the Standard Oil Company; it is a Democratic trust.
It has representatives high up near the Democratic throne. Take the
Sugar trusts in America to-day, and it is a Democratic trust. Take
the iron trust, and it is a Democratic trust.
And there is the whisky trust, which is also a Democratic trust.
That trust, which is so dear to the Democratic heart, has its inspiratieu, its motive power direct from the Democratic party. So gentle'enn who go on enumerating trusts as having been fostered and enConraged, should know they are Democratic in their inceptin and
Dernocratic in their tendencies.
0-8




"A     RICAtN iFREE TRADE WOULD OPERATE IN THE
INTERESTn OF TRUSTS AND AGAINST THE
INTEREST OF AMERICAN LABOR."
Extract from remarks of Hon.. L. LHAMILTON of Michigan, in daitE
Colngressional Record, April 14, 190'.
nExOVAx or TAEIFF NOT THE zxEEny roY V                      TusTns
But gentlemen insist that trusts are fostered under the policy of pro.
tection and that the way to remove trusts is to remove the tariff.
it is not etrue that trusts are fostered by protection except in the sense 
that protection makes good ttnse, and when times are good they are ood 
for everybody. If it be true that when times are good they are good for
everybody the converse must be true that when times are bad they are
bad for everybody, and if to discipline trusts it is necessary to make timec
bad for everybody, it is not unlikely that those least abte to bear it woaujd
suffer most,;Laing aside the fact that trusts are organized under English free
trade as well as German, Austrian, and American protection, it is usaeep.
tible of absolute demtonstration that American free trade would operate in
the interest of trusts and against the interest of American labor.
It appears by the Twelfth Census that only 12.8 per cent. f the total
manufactured output of the United States is made by trusts; that only
8.13 per cent. of the food supply of the United States is controlled by
trusts, and that only 7.5 per cent, of the labor employed in manufactulrils
is employed by trusts, and the word "trust" as fheure employed  s sed toi
inAn all corporations organized in recent years. Since the taking of the
last census however, h t appears that the capitalization of combinationt
which culminated ina i the year 1901 is rapidly falling off.
Now, if it is true that only 12.8 per cent. of the manufactured output
of the United States is trust made, then the remaining 87.2 per cent. is
made by competing independent industries.
And i it b e true that only 7. per cent. of the labor employed in
manufacturing industries is employed by trusts, then the remaininig 925
per cent. of labor employed in manufacturing is employed by competing,
independent industries. [Applause on the Republican side.]
Therefore, if youy reneove the duty from the 12.8 per cent, of trust-made
preo vts you remove it from the remaining 87.2 per cent. of products made
by  ametingfr independent industries employing 92.6 per cent. of all the
labor employed in manufacturing industries in the United States; and inasmuch as the weak would probably go to the wall first, trusts which would
then be given the benefit of free raw material would remain and not only
ditate terms to labor, which would then be seeking employment in a
crowded labor market, but would dictate terms to consumers, providedi
they themselves were able to survive competition with the trusts of Europe.
This would at least be a temporary solution of the labor and capital
contrersy, but it would be like making a desert and calling it peace.
Logically protection is in restraint of trusts,
Behind it independent producers capitalized on a healthy basis, comnpeting with overcapitalized, topheavy combinations, in the natural order of
thnig  o   t: to get their share of a domestic market which consumes 90
per cent of our product and which is constantly increased by the prosperity
of American labor.
Why give It awsay?
n     laonsidering the tariff question it must not be forgotten that the
nations of Europe, except Great Britain, which is now considering thle
advisability of abandoning free trade, protect their own markets fraon
foreign invasion.
o. t on:ly that, but the further the nations of Europe are advanced comnmrtdially the more their industries have combined, and in Germany and
Austria the courts sanction and the Governments uphold trusts.
Not only that, but the nations of Europe are combining among thaensees: to rsist American commercial invasion, while In England Mr. Balfowur antidMr. Ohxcmberlain, though differing as to the advisability of protoetia   for E;ngland, agree In advocating a colonial commerial union,
whereb* preference shall be given English colonies.
e,hif: protection we can regulate American trusts as time goes ornand: we have taken a long step in that direction by the decision In the
NortheronScuritles Company case —but we could not regulate internatiosal
trusts f fth heade  ters beyond seas. Aided by free trade, they would:  eove pr; otectio4  and you immediately begin to dividqe ouor home
maket with foPreign producers, paying lower wages than we pay here,
whereby American wages would be forced down and Aerican manhood
would be forced dowz.
0 -9:::,::f  c 


I




AS A NATION WE HAV BEEN BECOMING WEALTHIER AND MORE PROSPEROUS."
trIact from remarks of Hos. J. HE QALLINIGER of New Inampshire, in daily Congressional Record, April 23, 1904.
TRUSTS.
There will be no attempt to deny that under, but not because of,
he tariff now in operation, great industrial concerns commonly
known as trusts, have been built up during the past few years.
It will not be denied, Mr. President, that out of the hundreds and
housands of such consolidations, some one or some few may have
Ieen constructed upon a very unfair basis, may have been operated
mith questionable intent, witl results beneficent to neither produecers nor consumers of the wares manufactured by those concerns. It matters not that the same state of affairs exactly exists
in free-trde England and in other countries of Europe, our Dlemocratic friends insist that our trusts are due to the tariff.  It
natters not that our greatest trusts are those producing that upon
which no duty is imposed; our Democratic friends still insist that
tte trusts are due to our tariff.
Some of these so-called trusts have been founded and constructed,y issuing stocks of fictitious value, and in some cases abnormally
itflated. It did not require a Napoleon of finance to foresee that
in time these great bubbles must burst, and tlat these values must
fall to a more equitable level, and this very thing has happened
during the past year. We have seen the prices of industrial shares,
and with them  the prices of railroad shares, fall day after day,
week after week, and even month after month; yet, Mr. President,
when in our previous history has there been such a falling of prices
in Wall street unaccompanied by any widespread industrial disaster
throughout the country?  Never before have we gone through a
period of such falling prices in stocks without a panic, without
rastly increased commercial failures, without business depressions
and without disaster requiring years to recover from.
Accompanying this fall in stocks, accompanying this so-called
"speculative debauch" in Wall street, have been various abnormal
conditions, each and every one almost serious enough in character
to cause a panic under ordinary conditions. Foremost among these,
perhaps, have been the great strikes, beginning with that of the
mliners in the summer and fall of 1909 and followed by the great
strikes in the building, textile, and other trades during 1903. When
a hundred thousand men, earning on an average four or five dollars
a day each, are idle for several weeks or for several months, not
only must the influence of such idleness be felt in the loss of
wages and profits, diminishing our purchasing power and resulting
in the withdrawal of savings, but the lessening demand for the
material used by these men for construction and other purposes
mrust also affect to a large degree many other industries, the output
of which must necessarily be decreased.
The abnormally high price of cotton for so many months, while
b/ringing somewhat increased prosperity to one portion of our
country, brought embarrassment and a loss of production to another
portion. Yet in spite of a lessened output in some industries; in
spite of wages voluntarily given up for months at a time in certain
large cities; in spite of a curtailment of production because of the
QIbnormal high price of certain raw material; in spite of the de(reased demand for certain construction material; in spite of the
irnpossibility of moving for many hours, and sometimes for days
together, huge trains bearing freight from one part of the country
to the other; in spite of weather conditions which had their effect
to a greater or less degree upon all communities and upon all classes
of people, statistics show that a. a nation we have been going forlacrcd during all these months, becoming wealthier and more prosperous, putting aside millions and millions of dollars in our savings
(inks, increasing our life insurance, and increasing vastly many lites
of business as shown by the large advance made in our postal
rteipts, which accurately reflect the business and industrial conditions of the country.
I seems to me well worth while, Mr. President, when our friends
01 the other side are telling us that we are going backward, to say
tohem that although the elements and to some extent our own
folly seem to have combined to try to the utmost the Republican
policy of protection, yet they have utterly failed to undermine it.


I   -10
0            t




"MR. CLEVELAND AND THE TRUSTS"-WHY|
NOTHING WAS DONE."|
xftracts from Address by Hon. L.., SMHAW,,Secretary of the Treasaur, I
priute4 its ofaity Congressional Record, June 20, 1904.
Hon. Leslie M. Shaw, Secretary of the Treasury, before the YoUo
Men's Republican Club, Providence, R. I., "Wednesday evening, March 2tj>
1904. said in part:
No sooner was the result of the merger case announced than the, pposl5
tion inaugurated widely varying and inconsistent tactics to rob the Adm1i),,
tration. of the fruits of its victory.
-The most amusing effort to avoid a comparison of Republican and Dem.
ocratic Administrations, to the great advantage of the former, appears iu a
recent Interview by ex-President Cleveland. lie does not claim to hae
recommended any anti-trust legislation during either of his Administrautions
He does not claim that any anti-trust legislation was passed during eithcr (I
his Administrations. He does not claim credit for any litigation ever istituted to suppress -ay trust or combination during either of his Adminiasrations. He simply seeks to explain why nothing was done, and he places the
responsibility therefor upon the courts and the Constitution and upon the
fact that the Northern Securities Company was not organized during his
Admintilstration. 
MAr. Cleveland  as first inaugurated President March 4, 1885, Neither
In his inaugural address nor in any message doesa he mention the subject of
trusts until immediately preceding the election of 1888. In his last insaag
preceding that campaign he refers to the existence of "combinations frquently called trusts," and closes with this sage conclusion:
'Thie people can hardly hope for any consideration in the operation of
these selfish schemes."'
RHe recommends no relief and suggests no remedy,    Nevertheless, the
Congress to which this comprehensive statement of fact was submitted, a
majority of the.Members of which belonged to his school of political thougLt,
appointed a commission to investigate the subject,  *  *  *
Two days' before the inauguration of President Harrison the commission
made Its report, setting forth what evidently appeared to the commission a;
a most deplorable condition;
"Your committee respectfully report that the number of combinations
and trusts formed and forming in this country is, as your committee hasl
ascertained, very large, and affects a large portion of the important manufacturing and industrial Interests of the country. They do not report any
list of these conbinations, for the reason that new ones are constantly fornIng. Your committee further report that owing to present differences of
opinion between the members of your committee they limit this report to
submitting to the careful consideration of subsequent Congresses the facts
shown by the testimony taken before the committee."
Both the President and the committee acknowledge the existence of
harmful trusts and combinations, but neither holds forth to the people aus
ray of. hope except at the hands of those who were about to fill their seats.
The.Republican Congress was not long Inactive. The very first bil
introduced in the Senate of the Fifty-first Congress was John Sherman's
anti-trust bill, Senate File No. 1. It passed both Houses and received the
signature of Benjamin Harrison.
The passage of this act was followed by several suits for its enforcement, and several decisions by the Supreme Court were secured, declaring
it constitutional and applying it to various conditions* Then, on March 4,
1893, President Cleveland was again inaugurated, and In his inaugural address he refers to trusts, saying:
"These aggregations and combinations frequently constitute conspiraces against the interests of the people, and In all their phases they are unnatural and opposed to our American sense of fairness.  To the extent that
they can be reached and restrained by Federal power, the General GovYernmeat should relieve our citizens from their interference and exactions."
He suggests no modification of the Sherman Act, and recommends
nothing In Its place, but in harmony with the teachings of State sovereignty
statesmanship, of which he always had been, and therefore always will be,
a diligent student, he suggests that It is very doubtful whether the Federal
Government has any jurisdiction in the premises,
That was in his Inaugural address. He does not again refer to the sublet of trusts in message or proclamation until December, 1896, after the
election of William McKinley, when he can throw the responsibiilty upon
another. In this, his last message, he denounces comnbinations of every description In language as Intemperate and inflammatory as was ever employed by. his party's more recent candidate for the Presidency, Re says;
"Their tendency is to crush out Individual independence and to hiader
and prevent the free use of human faculties and the full development of
human character."
He then discouraged Federal legislation by saying:
"The fact must abe recognized, however, that all Federal legislation on
this subject may fall short of its purpose because of the complex charascter
of our governmental system, which, while making the Federal authority mipreme i Its sphere, has carefully limited that sphere by metes and boendos
that can, not be transgressed. The decision of our highest court on tiais
precise Question renders it quite doubtful whether the evils of trusts aad
monopolies can be adequately treated through Federal action unless they
seek, directly and purposely, to Include in their objects transportation ir
intercourse between States or between the United States and foreign couatries."
'Thils, so far as the record shows, Is his last utterance, official or ot'Aerwise, on the subject of trusts, until he explains, in his recent interview,
the reason -why nothing was done during either of his AdministratkinsWhile the platform on which he was elected the second time promised m'ci
in *.the way of ant -trutst legislation, nothing was done except to includca  i
the~ tariff act of 1894 A provision rendering "null and void any comli a5 -tin., conspiracy, trusl, agreement, or contract between two or more permona
or corporatin  tengaged ain Importing articles from any foreign country into
t'heUPniterid;States i~.ntended to operate in restraint of trade or to increase the
makepic   o-Qf atntyImoPrted article or any manufacture into which c1i'
portedarticles hav  entered."*.0-11


I




THE PRESIDENT HAS MORE EFFICIENTLY ENFORCED THE ANTI-TRUST LAW THAN ANY
OF HIS PREDECSSORS.
xtracts from  remarks of lHon. JOHIN   C. SPOONiER of Wisconsin, in daily Congressional Record, April 18, 1904.
T'he President has, I think, nore effticiently enforced the antirust law, all things considered, than afny of his predecessors. He
ias recommended a number of measures which have been enacted
lcreasing the efficiency of that law  and of the interstate comerce law.  He brought the Northern Securities suit.   I spend
ittle time upon it. The bringing of that suit has been much used
against him and made for him many powerful enemies within his
arty, and intensified the hostility of many powerful men without
is party. He needs no defense for what he did, here or anywhere.
He knew what it involved.
The matter was brought to his attention through the action of
the governors of several of the Western States and the protest
laid before him by the attorney-general of Minnesota that it was
a violation of the Sherman anti-trust act. He was so advised by
his Attorney-General, a lawyer of learning, fearlessness, and consummate ability. He brought the suit, as it was his duty to do,
and prosecuted it to an issue. The circuit court of appeals unanimously sustained the suit. 'The Supreme Court of the United
States by a divided court, affirmed the decree. But for that suit,
determining in limine the great question involved as to the right
of combining in that way through a holding company parallel and
competitive railroads engaged in interstate commerce, it is safe to
say that many similar combinations would have followed.
I doubt if there would have been 10,000 miles of railway in the
United States at this time not in the hands of holding cornpanies,
'ith a -votiume of securities passing comprehension almost in magiIltude. The question now raised would have been raised some
time, and in such circumstances a judicial declaration of invalidity would have brought upon the country a panic the like of
which we have not seen. Or, should the validity of such combinations have been sustained, it would have forced Congressional relief
int the exercise of a clear constitutional power, an alternative fromi
which thoughtful men of all parties shrink.
Will you criticize him for that?  What do the Senators mean
when they sy a  he is "utnsafo to the business of the coruntry?"  Do
they refer to his bringing that suit?  Do they refer to the coalstrike intervention?  If not, to what do they refer? Is your safe,
sound, sane man to be more complaisant to combinaitions, more
tender of business interests which violate law, than he?  That is
the inference.
Every President is solicitous for the prosperity of the country,
a;nd consequently for the conservation of every legitimate business
interest throughout the land. To all such interests, and to the generl public interest, President Roosevelt is an entirely safe President. To any business the prosperity of which is dependent upon
ia 1sccessful violatioo of Federal law President itoosevelt is "unS0Ite," and to none other.
MTr. President, a Senator says they will give us a hard tiraht
rierhlaps they will. But we will "be there" when it comes, I hive,0 doubt myself that the peop!,  of the United States will reelect
President Roosevelt. They knlr w him. lie does not need to call
aty witnesses as to his politics or as to his position on public
(tuestions. They know him to be honest. They know him to be
brave. They know him to be law-abiding. They know       him to
cherish one great ambition, and that is to give the people of tbl:i!(co0try a strong, able, impartial administration of the laws and
Of government. They know that he believes in a government of
lIw. that he believes there can be no class in this country, rich or
pi)or, high or low, excluded from the protection of the law or pert'i!ed to trample upon the law. The people will have no ear for
YrorT frantic charges that he is a czar or a lawbreaker. They know
T ley will say, "We know Roosevelt; we believe in him."


('e12::




"MR. CLEVELAND BEWAILs HIS MISFORTUN El
Extract from  addres  by Hon. L. M. SHAW, Secretary of the Treasary,
printed in datily Conire8sionl Reccord, June 20, 1904.
The most amusing effort to avoid a comparison of Republican and
Democratic Administrations, to the great advantage of the former, apptar
In a recent interview by ex-President Cleveland. lie does not clain tp
have recommended any anti-trust legislation during either of his Admin.
istrations. He does not claim that any anti-trust legislation was paspt
during either of his Administrations. He simply seeks to explaiin yiY
nothing was done, and he places the responsibility therefor upon the court,
and the Constitution and upon the fact that the Northern Securities Coin(
pany was not organized during his Administration.
Mr. OCleveland was first inaugurated President March 4, 1885. Neither in
his inaugural address nor In any message does he mention the subjecti, of
trusts until immediately preceding the election of 1888, In his last message
preceding that campaign he refers to the existence of '"combinations frn
quently called "trusts, and closes with this sage conclusion: "The peopl
can hardly hope for any consideration in tile operation of these selih
schemes,"  lie, recommends no relief and suggests no remedy, * * * Oa
March 4, 1893, President Cleveland was again Inaugurated, and in ils
inaugural address he refers to the trusts, saying:
"These aggregations and combinations frequently constitute consplracies against the interests of the people, and in all their phases they are
unnatunral and opposed to our American sense of fairnesss. To the exteht
that they can be seached and restrained by Federal power, the General
Government should relieve our citize.ns froenm their intrierennce and exa!:.
tions."1
He suggests no modification of the Shernman Act, and recommends nothnlag In its place, but in harmony with the teachings of State sovereignty
statesmanship   e suggests that it is very doubtful whether the Fepderl
Government has any jurisdiction in the premnises. That was in his inaugural address,  He does not again refer to the slcobcct of trusts in riisage or proclanation until December, 1.898, after the election of Wiliaam
McKinley, when he can throw the responsibility upon another. *   *  *
And now I want to refer to the language of Mr. Cleveland's explanation for the sadl neglect of his Administration, as set forth In his authorIzed Interview. He says:
".The question of the Government taking legal action against the aocalled 'trusts' was given much consideration during my last Administratlon,
from, 1893 to 1897. I recall that I examined closely the law and received
reports from  Mr. Olney, who wao then Attorney-General.     I' was most
anxious to have something done, but we were blncked by decisions of the
Supreme Court, which at that time tied our hands.  *  *  * The decisions
of the Supreme Court, as pointed out In my message, restricted our action
against trustst unless tfhey were engaged in interstate transportation. There
was a distinct differncoce drawn between railroads and purely prodAcing
combinations. It could not be said that the sugar trust, or the beef trust
or the Standlard Oil Co'pany was directly DoageaCd in interstate transportation."
I think Mr. Cleveland has overlooked the fact that Attorney-General
Knox has at this time an Injunction in full force against seven corporations, one copartnership, and twenty-three individuals engaged In the production and transportation of meats and meat products, restraining them,
as tie optinion siows, from  requiring their purchasing agents to refrain
from biding against each other when making purchases; from bidding op
the price of live stock for a few days to Induce large slhipments, and lthbes
ceasing to bid, so as to obtain live stock at prices less than it wouvld brien
in the regular way; from agreeing between themselves upon prices to be
adopted by ail; from restricting the quantities of meat to be shipped; friom
requiring their agents to Impose uniform  charges for cartage, and fromn
making agreements with transportation companies for rebates and other
discrimination  rates.  Of course this action is based upon the allegation
admitted in the demurrer, that these packing concerns are engaged not oaly
in the production of articles entering Into interstate coammerce, but that the
concerns are themselves engaged in Interstate conmmerce. Admittedly tne
Federal Government has no jurisdiction to restrain combinations between
individuals or corporations, except such ast is derived under the promvi sioof the Constitution giving Congress control of interstate and foreigin commerce. Thus what Mr. Cleveland just last week said can not be done is M5
accomplished fact, and the action was brought under the Sherman Act, r'
enforced under the direction of the present Republican President,   nI.
while the cabe has been appealed, it stands and holds and will remain Offetive until reversed. Listen to the explanation he gives for his ow-n in
activity:
"There was then no opportunity to take any such action as this 'erger
miut. The case did not present itself. If contracts existed among thesn
bnsiness comabinations for the restraint of tradle, they were kept secret an'
so evidence offered itself on which to act. At that time this merger of rail,
roads had not eean formedeso that there was no action of this sort to tale.".How unafortainate it is for so mtany of us that opportunIties never present themselves In our times. Of all men we are mosst miserable. Anir` so
Mr. Cleveland brwatil his- misfortuane, in mauch the same tone, if not Is tIhe
Wne language, ~ that Ben King employs:
"xtane Jones keeps talkJn' to me all the time,
An' says yoni must make it a rule
To study your lessons 'nd work hard 'nd learn,
An' never be absent from school.
Rememtber the "tory of 1llihu i3urritt,
An' ow ti clum up to the top,
G3ot all the knowledge 'at he ever had
Down in a blacksmithing shop?
Jiane Jones sbh honestly said It was so I
Mebbe he didI dunno!
0' course "what's a-keepin' me 'way from the top
is not never havin' no blacksmithing shliop."


I




"THE TARIFF AND THE TRUSTS."
pec t of iHon S. M. CLARK of Iowa, in the House of Representatives,
Monday, July 19, 1897.
MtR. SPEAKIE: There has been much clamorous Insistence there should
te adlditional anti-trust legislation in the pending tariff mneastre. It is
easy to show the public intelligence that in disregarding this demand the
E;,publican Congress is not indifferent to the public wel;are.
The tariff and the trust are wholly different legislative and economic
aeasures.
Production and sales are controlled by trusts in England, Germany,
France, and the countries that would take possession of the American
market If the Congress could or should destroy American trusts and establish free trade.  Thus American manufactures and labor would be displiaced in America by foreign manufactures and labor controlled by trusts.
Trusts are a natural and normal result of the evolution of modern
business and civilization, and they are more salutary and beneficent than
the foolish and ill-digested legislation attempting to suppress them.
Labor, or that factor in production which receives wages, Is organized
as a trust. This is useful to the welfare of mankind; this compels the
orga.nization as a trust of that factor of production which pays wages.
And the organization of the latter as a trust is just as beneficial to mankind as the former.
Laws attempting the suppression of the organization as a trust of
that factor of production which receives wag-es have failed because those
laws hindered the progress and well-being of mankind. Laws trying to
suppress the organization as a trust of that factor of production which
pays wages have also failed, because they are equally an attempt to
hinder the progress and welfare of the people.
The welfare of mankind requires there should be high wages for labor
and low prices of products made by machinery. This necessitates that
the waste made by unprofitable competitive labor and the was;te made
by unprofitable competitive capital should be done away with, so that
the gain made by stopping the waste of unprofitable competitive labor
shall be equated with a like gain by stopphig the waste of unprofitable
competitive capital, and thus give high wages for labor with low prices
oef inautfactured products, Waste is a moral and ecotonmic evil, destructive
of industrial well-being. Trusts are the device of the highest intelligence
of the modern industrial and commercial world to secure high wages for
labor and low prices for products by minifying waste.
As everything of human origin is attended by both good and evil
lconsequfences, some evils will attend the non-competitive organization of
labor and the non-competitive organization of capital. The province of
'egislatlon and government, so far as these have anything to do with
the matter at all, is not to seek to destroy the organizations, but promote
their benefits; and restrict their ills.
That factor of produection which receives wages can only be paid or
~n3ployed when that factor (,f production which pays wages can market
phi products of both factors at a profit. Without a market and a profithbls market the whole industrial system of the modern world collapses.
Markets are now controlled by more or less organized national, interatotinal, and world-wide conditions. It is now no more possible for the
iTdividual wage payer or the individual wage receiver to get a place for
hi pro)ducets in the markets of the world tlha  it would be for the individual
so.diers of great armies to achieve campaigns without executive manageftInt and leadership.
Trusts are but co-operation, and the whole world seems to be moving
toward co-operation. The workman or craftsman once went by himself.
TItn he combined in the lodge or society, then in the guild, now in labor
otur~.)s or syndicates as wide as nations or as Christendom. The emplo:yer once conducted his own business with his own capital.  Then he
atautl a patnership, then a co rtpatny, thet a corporation  a tut or
ctrT-oration of corporations. The evolution has been as natural and initable tor one as the other. The States that have passed anti-trust laws
i    u!<: tsually expressly exempted labor trusts and farmer trusts. That exe^nution surrenders the whole principle of anti-trust legislation. Once the
heaid of each family was a priest.  Then a congregation followed, then
a church, The Society of Christian Endeavor, the Epworth League, are
r    iat religious syndicates making into combined co-operative strength the
fo'trerly individual and Isolated congregation or Sunday school.  The
tendency is everywhere.
Tc-14


I




"THE TRUSTSLET US SEEWHAT THE DEMOCRATIC
PARTY DID WHEN IT HAD THE RESPONSIBILITY."
Extracts from speech of Hon. CHALS..I ITTLEFIELD of MAai3n
in the House of Representatives, June 1, 1900.
"There is not a svllable of legislation except that provision upon
the tail of the Wilson bill that has not been put upon the statute
books by the constructive action of the Republican party. But our
Democratic friends here stand and say that they are to be relied
upon by the American people to construct legislation that will control
this- evil. That statement in the light of their record is simply
grotesque.
"In 1888 the Democracy had charge of Congress. They introduced
a resolution on January 25 authorizing the Conmmittee on Manun
factures to investigate and report recommendations in relation to
trusts. That Cormmittee went on investigating from January 25, 1888,
up to July 22, 1888, and then they made a partial report. * *
But the IDerlmcrats continued investigating. Perhaps I should call
your attention right here to the fact that while the committee, wal
l     Rvestigating, two national conventions were held, one Dnuocratic nI(n
the other Reptblican. The Democratic convention introduced into
its platform this plank:
" 'Judged by Democratic principles the interests of the people are
betrayed them, by unnecessary taxation, trusts and combinations are
permitted to exist which while unduly enriching the few that combine,
rob the body of our citizens by depriving them of the benefits of
natural competition.'
"Not a word as to the remedy; not a promise that they would
correct it; not a hint that they would correct it. It was a generality
that did not even glitter. Let me read the plank in the platform
adopted by the Republ'ican contventilon in 1888 while our friends, the
Democracy, were investigating here in the city of Washington.
"'We declare our opposition to all combinations of capital, organized in trusts or otherwise, to control arbitrarily the condition of
trade among our citizens; and we recommend to Congress and the
State Legislature in their respective jurisdictions such legislation
as will prevent the execution of all schemes to oppress the people
by undue chearges on their supplies, or by unjust rates for the transportation of their products to market. We approve the legislation
hy Congress to prevert alike unjust burdens and unfair discriminan between the States.'
"The man that drew that resolution was a lawyer. He was a
member of the House of Representatives and lie well knew that the
jurisdiction of Congress was confined to the enforcement of the
provisions of the Constitution known as the interstate commerce
Itause and that other legislation as to trusts would have to be
enacted by the States. That resolution therefore recommended Conress to act and it also recommended the various States to act. I
aid he was a lawyer. lie was a Republican, a statesman and a
patriot, and was then a member of the House of Representatives
IHe came from the State of Ohio and his name was William McKinley,
Jr. He was Chairman of that Committee on Resolutions.
"I want to stop right here to call your attention to the fact that
thirty-one States and Territories have since that resolution enacted
anti-trust legislation. *  * *
"Let me go back to this Committee that was charged with the duty
of *investigating these trusts. *  * * Let us see what the DemOcratic party did when it had the responsibility of initiating and constructing legslation.   *  * In 1899 this Committee had had under
investigation four trusts for more than a year and what conclusion
did they reach?
" 'Your Committee further report that owing to present diference$
of opinio  between the members of the Committee, they nlmit this
report to submitting to the careful consideration of subsequent CIOf
gresses the facts shown by the testimony taken before the Conm
mitte. "




I


415






"MEN, WOMEN AND CHILDREN NOW LIVE BY A WAGE
SYSTEM-IF WE DESTROY IT ALL PERISH."
sxtlract from remarks of Hon. B. M. CLARK of Iowa, in House of Representatives, July 19, 1897.
There must be some cogent causes for trusts, since they are the prodlcts of the largest business experience in a very enlightened period, and
whea the people have a controlling power In government that they never
before had in the history of mankind. These causes must be found:a
what they have done that Is salutary.
When I was a boy, in a country home, the feeble light making darkness visible in the household when the night came was of home production.
'There was unrestricted competition as to that. It is strange in that pervading gloom that any child escaped blindness.  The era of petroleum
c;lme, but it was scarcely better in the home. Coal oil was so expensive
ttiat farm economies used it sparingly. That was the era of competition
a.nd costly production and sale. Then came the period of the Standar;
til trust.  I go back to the country home of my childhood now, and
it is ablaze with light.  The Standard Oil trust has made oil cheap.
Upon a small margin of pro fit assured to it by a known and controlled
m:arket the company has grown rich while it has lowered prices to the
o.asulner and paid high wages and salaries to its employees. That Is
tle economic basis upon which a trust rests. If it achieves these results,
its existence is justilled, and it is beneficent to the people. If it fails in
this, then it may need to be subjected to the punitive restraints of legislation.
Mr. A. B. Salom recently made in an industrial paper a showing of
cr tie of the things trusts have done as to prices. In 1872 the Standard
Oil Company was formed. The price of oil then was 25 cents a gallon.
The oil was crude, explosive, and dangerous. The American Sugar Reiining Company or trust was organized in 1887. It now sells for 4 cents
a pound the same grade of sugar that was then selling for 7 cents. Rubber goods are lower than In 1892, when the United States Rubber Company or trust was organized. The United States Leather Company or
trust was organized in 1892. It sells leather for much lower prices than
then prevailed. Cordage sold for 10 cents a pound when the cordage
lrust was formed; it now sells for 6 cents. The telegraph companies combined in 1866. It then cost $2.20 to send a ten-word message from New
York to Chicago; it now costs 40 cents. In 1873 it cost 2.21 cents to
move a ton of freight a mile by rail; in 1897, eighty-four one-hundredths
of I cent. A corresponding decline has taken place in steel, glass, cottons,
sitks, and nearly every product made by combined capital and combined
labor, while the sum paid to American working people to buy those cheapewing products with has increased from $620,000,000 in 1870 to nearly two
and one-half billions now; and the average wages for the individual from
$302 in 1870 to $485 in 1890.
With individual employers and under competition, the workingman
was often unable to get his wages after he had earned them. This hardship seldom happens now under syndicated employment. This is a good
service to mankind that a   nt t be inconsiderately assailed by blundering
and hindering legislation.
Ideal republics and Utopias can not be made by laws. It may be
that the present societary Iystemn, in which those having capital for the
iurpiose of expanding it employ and pay wages to labor, may not be
the system the future has in store. The future will determine that. But
ae hbave to deal with what is, not with what Tnay be. Men. women, and
children now have to live by a wage system. If we tmpair it, men, women,
and, children suffer want. tt we destroy it, all perih. Whatever the societatry system of the future, it will con:me a, a iatir;al ev:,i tion and slowly.
l.'gislators can not enact it into beingl otlffnd and ex ca.thiedra.
Anything we do destroying or impairing the confidence and prosperity
| tahose Individuals, partnerships, companies, corporatior:s, and trusts that
nso employ or would employ what they have in the further production of
I wealth throws labor out of employment, reduces the sum of wages paid.
alld adds to the volume of human suffering and sorrow. I have seen in
past years the pallid faces of women bending over the feverish cheeks
Oft ~he children of want. I have seen strong men grow feeble and into
dielSpair, wanting employment and not finding it. This because there were
A^t erican lawmakers who in a fierce, blind prejudice struck down AmeriGat employers under the pretense of sympathy with American labor,  I
witl have no part or lot in such lawmaking nor in the spirit which iaI le16
~ ---1~






I






Prices
at
Home and Abroad
D




:I


"ARTICLES      OF COMMON        USE, WITH      PRICESP"
Extract from remarks of Hon. E. J. HILL of Connecticut,' i; 
Congressional Record, Iebruary 18, 1904.
I submit a statement of articles of common use, eleven of thlle
being on the free list and twenty-one dutiable, with prices ragilj
from July, 1896, a year before the enactment of the Dingley i.f l
law, and down to January, 1904. 
Of the eleven items on the free list every one of them has girtl
advanced in price since 1896, the average advance on all beitng,3.
per cent.
Of the twenty-one items on the dutiable list twelve have adv:.ced
in price, three are the same now as then, and six have been redtic(ed
The average advance on the dutiable list is 8.6 per cent., as aaiars
53.54 per cent. on the free list.
The articles are all taken from the list of articles controlleld b
trusts, found in the Democratic campaign text-book, beginninD 0n
page 369, and includes every article named therein as free aiid
twenty-one dutiable ones.
The prices from 1896 to 1902 are as therein given, and the t1903A
and 1904 prices are from the Bureau of Statistics.
I commend the showing, on several points, to our Democratic
brethren.
Items on free list.
J u., Ju ly,1.  I  ly[  Ju1l  I!  1809.l  )  1901.  1  902.  1908.,
190].        ~gL~~~~~I


Anthracite,stove coal (f. o. b. New.York)........................ per ton.. S8.881.......r................... er pound,...15
Flax, Kentucky.................d..dlS,Jute, spot...................r....... )...
Petroleum, crude (at well). per barrel..  0825
Petroleum, refined......... per gallon....016
Petroleunrm, refined (150 per cent test
for export)................per gallon...1087
liubber, Island.......... per pound...84
Sisal, spot.................    d........   0362
Binder twine......................  do....0675


$4.236........ $480 
3.50)!........  4.55.17   $1).225 l.1 25,.1J(.  5..........(015.0(1)25.045
1.1887 1. 22     ].0.019  i.074.14
1075.1 I. 100.86.7.'87.05(i62i.0195.11{72.097.   t 1 425 i.145 )


li  0l
*a i~t).iii
Iy 09


I.


I
I
c
t
I
I
I


I


Items on dutiable list.


i,,: Jal$,dJanu-l
July, Jul Jl- y, Jl t   Ju S 1tly,I Ja
1896.  1901.  1902.  11901. | 155,
11904.


Alcohol (94 per cent)..per gal..
Brick7.e.......... per t ousan d.. 
lBread, Boston crackers. per lb.


9$2.31  '2.43  $2.51 1
5.25    5.75   6.25.0 5.08........
f d!P-1  t ilo.

$2.48
5.25.08
AOC


$2 40   92.'25 pi......  25 p..07   20i 10. 
i (?  j  "Zil -~   {


'oon. o  nanneit..... per yamrl...!0) o.o.............o i.
j  jup.
Cement, iosendale... per bbl.W.85  1. ().95.9   ).5  8c. 1:
Fis8h, canned salrnon. per doz. l.6 165.7 lt 1.65   165   0 p. 
Ginghamis............per pyrd. y.0425.0475.... ).08  S 45 p
Glassware, pitchers...per doz.. 1.25  1...........i       p.
W ire nails.:............ per keg..;.-15  2.  211  2.054 2.1 ) i.  I2, 
Cut  nails.................. do.....'  2.0  10  2.5  2.20  1.95  i. c. }I
Fresh beef sides.......per l..  17,. 09.......  1.5 125 2ct. pI
Salt beet............... per 1bbl.. 1 fO0  21.50  22.50  1.50  I 1J)  5c. p
Salt pork.................do......   8.2 5.   11.7i  175,17.75   1i.50   25 p. 
Hams,:moked........... do....I.1t5.125.175.12  5c,. I"
Pig Iron, foundry, Pbiladel- '                           I
pha..................per  ton..  2.75  1 87  22..75  18.57,)  15.X)  $1  i
Rice............per lb...0525.0517.0575.55.4  2c. 
Sugar, centrifugal.  do.......... O3.0425  3.871.056.0347 1.HS'
Sugar, granulated........ do......046.0524.0475.017.04  $1.136
Steel rails, Pittsburg.. per ton..i 2,.00  28.00  28.00  28.00  2800  $784
t
Ashtaon sal...........per bush..   2.1 2.25   2.2  2,2 5  12c. iTin p ate...............per cwt.. 3.45  4 4.1 9 4.10  4.00 l.80  li 
d-1


'ii~
I I
Illi


r




IFFERIENCE       IN   PRICES U N              MER THE WALKER
TARIFF AND THE PRESENT PROTECTIVE    POLICY."
i(tws from renmarks of Hon. LEONIDAS 0. HOUK of Tennessee, page
f.i03 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Session.
In a speech I made In 1884 at London, Tenn., in my district-my friend
a trhe Chattanooga district will know the gentleman I am going to rafer
- - was trying to argue this question of protection. I looked over to
side of the room and discovered in the crowd Capt. Jack Hall, a proma;n Democrat, who owned a good river farm, raised splendid crops and
t fine horses, sheep, cattle, and everything else that goes to the adornet of a modern farm. What I said to him was taken down In shortnd at the time and published in the Philadelphia Press and other papers;
i 1 want to read as part of my remarks that dialogue between me and
ck. I said:
1How much did you get for your corn under the Walker tariff of 1846?
A. From 10 to 12% cents per bushel.
fHow much do you get for the same kind of corn, raised on the same
in and delivered at the same place, under the present Repblican; protive policy?
A. Sixty cents per bushel at the heap.
Pow much did you get for an average pony horse in those days?
A. From $40 to $60.
fHow much do you get no* under the present policy for the same kind
a horse?
A. From $100 to $125.
How much did you get under the Walker tariff for your wheat per
hbel?
A. From 25 to 35 cents.
How much did you get for the same kind of wheat under this present
publican policy?
A. From 80 cents to $1.25 per bushel, owing to the demand.
How much did you get in those days for a good cow?
A. From $8 to $12.
Hlow much do you get for the same kind of a cow now under the prest policy?
A. From1 $25 to $45.
How much did you get per hundred for flour under the Walker tariff
1846? 
A. From $1 to $1.50.
THow much do you get for the same kind of flour now?
A. From $4 to $6 per hundred.
Hlow much did you get for a good sheep in those days, Jack?
A. Fifty cents for a good one.
Itow much do you get for the same kind of a sheep now, under this
putblican policy?
A. From $1.50 to $2 (a voice in the crowd, "Yes, $2.50 for a good
lHow much did you get per hundred for your hogs under the Walker
igf Of 1846?
A. From $2-.6 to $3.
lrxow much do you get under the present "rascally Republican protec'e olicy?"
A. From $5 to $7 per hundred.
Jack, did you make butter for sale in those days?
A., We made butter, but there was little sale, for there was nobody to
Well, when you sold any what did you get for it?
A. Sometimes as high as 6 pence per pound.
Do you make and sell much butter now, Jack?
A, Ye3s; a good deal.
HDow much do you get per pound now, under this rascally Republican
't-t:tve  policy? 
A. I have a standing contract now in London, with the employees enPed in the manufacturing establishments here, at 25 cents per pound
'e y'ar round.
ack, how do you account for the difference in prices under the Walker
i1't1 f 1846 and the present Republican protective policy?
A. We had no manufacturing establishments here at London, then.
' teire were but few people, but now you see there are a great many
(rhoTs employed, in these establishments here, and they:give us 'a market
r ail our surplus truck, and we sell a great deal of stuff and get the
'nt for it that we used to throw away, because there was nobody to conn'e  it.'
c"l0, 1Jack, what did you have to pay under the Walke tarif per yard
r caeo to dress up the "old woman" for Sunday?
in From a shilling to 25 cents per yard.
hs h can you get the same kind of calico for now, Jack?
F. Prom 4~% cents to 8 cents per yard.
"hat did you have to pay for a good Sunday wool hat in these day.
From $2.50 to $4.: 
asat do you have to pay for the same kind of a hat now, Jack?
i, From '50 cents to $1.25. 
d'hat did the farmers' have to pay for trace-chains in those days?
~ Two dollars for anything like good ones.
'hat do you pay for the same kind of chains now?
For real good ones 60: cents per pair.,:
4,                                                    -


I




"PROECTION HAS BRUGHT:DOWN THE PRICES
"FOR MANY ARTICLES WE PAY LESS THAN
IS PAID IN EUROPE."
Exracts from reply by Hon. JIAES 0. BLAINE, of Maine, 
lion. iTVm. F. Gladstone, published in North American Reeie
of January, 1890, and printed in daily Congressional Record
June 8, 1896.
In 1860 the population of the United States was, in round nu
rs, 1,000,000. At the same time the population of the Unite
Kingdom   was, in round numbers, 29,000,000.  The wealth of t
United Stes at that time was fourteen thousand millions of do
lars; the wealth of the United Kingdom was twenty-nine thousan
millions of dollars. The United Kingdom had, therefore, nearly th
same population, but more than double the wealth of the JUnite
States, with machinery for manufacturing fourfold greater than th
of the'Unitcd States. At the end of twenty years (1880) it appeare
that the United States had added nearly thirty thousand millions 0
dollars to her wealth, while the United Kingdom had added near
fifteen thousand rmillions, or about one-half.
During this period of twenty years the United States had incurr
the enormous loss of nine thousand millions of dollars by intern
war, while the United Kingdom was at peace, enjoyed exception
prosperity, and made a far greater gain than in any other twent
years of her history-a gain which during four years was in larg
part due to the calamity that had fallen upon the United State
The United Kingdom had added 6,000,000 to her population durin
the period of twenty years, while the addition to the United State
exceeded 18,000,000.
By the compound ratio of population and wealth in each coutntr
even without making allowance for the great loss incurred by tl
civil war, it is plainly shown by the statistics here presented tha
the degree of progress in the United States under protection f
exceeded that of the United Kingdom under free trade for the perio
named. In 1860 the average wealth per capita of the United KinTgdei
was $1,000, while in the United States it was but $450. In 1880 ti
Unite       d Kingdom  had increased her per capita wealth to $1,230
while the United States had increased her per capita wealth to' $87
The United Kingdom had in twenty years increased her per cait
wealth 23 per cent., while the United States had increased her pe
caoia wealth mare than 93 per cent. If allowance should be mnad
for war losses, the ratio of gain in the United States would far ex
ceed 100 per cent. * * *   In the year 1860, the last under a free
trade policy, the ppulation of 31,000,00 in the United States boughi
carpets to the amount of $12,000,000.  Nearly half of the ttoa
amount was imported. In 19r8, with a population estimated a
63,000,000, the agregate amount paid for carpets was nearly $60,
000,000, and of this large sum, less than $1,000,000 was paid for for
eign carpets and about half a million for Oriental rugs. Does an
free trader in England belfeee that the United States, wiflt at
pIrotective tariff, could have attained such control of its own carpe
manufaeture and trade? It will not. be unnoticed. in this contmnction
that under a protective tariff the population, by reason of etic
wages, was enabled to buy a far greater proportion of carpelt; tha1
unr   free trade..Nor must it escape observation that carpe: ar
now furnished to the American buyer under a protective tariff mnI
cheaer than when a non-protective tariff allowed Europe to senf
iargit  a proportion of the total amount used in the Unied S'ftes
These illustrations might be indefinitely multiplied. In, wT' let
in cottons, in leather fabrics in glass, ia products of lead, of:ras
of copper; indeed, in the whole round of manufaetures, it v l ti
found that protection has brought down the price from tha rat
charged by the importers before protection had:ui}t up the ciet
ing manufacture i America. For many articles we pay less tia
paid in Europe. If we pay higher for other things than i paid
across the sea to-day, fig   painy indicate that we pay les r thia
we should have been     melled to py if the protective system
had not been adopted.
d-8


I




i
I




I


"(POTWVIION DO"S N~OT RAISI PRI&OW.P


ftrat from remarks of Hon. THOMAS B. REED of Maine, page
0^ 9-70 of daily Congressionat Record, 50th Congress, fst Session.
I meet this question squarely and asseverate that protection does
t raise prices. The opposite statement and the argument which
cks it up I propose to state fairly, for we now come to the famous
venpe-reform dilemma. You tell us, they say, that protection is for
pe urpose of enhancing prices to enable high wages to be paid,
d yet you say that protection lowers prices. This Is flat contradicon So it is as you state it. But your statement, like all revenuefonn statements, flourishes only by assumption.
In order to make yourself clear, you have utterly omitted the eleent of time, You assume that we say that both our statements of
giher prices for higher wages and lower prices for consumers are
w the same instant of time. No so. When you begin there are
glher prices for higher wages, but when you establish your manuctories, at once the universal law of competition begins to work.
he inanufactories abroad, urged upon by the lower prices which the
riff forces them to offer in order to compete with us, cause every
cment of economy in manufacture to be set in motion. Every Intelet is put to work to devise new machinery which will produce at
wer cost, to seek out new methods of utilizing waste, to consolidaon of effort to lessen general expenses, and the thousand and one
evices every year invented to get more work out of the powers of
ature.
That lower prices will come at once, we have never said. That they
ill come and grow lower and lower so that in the series of years
hich make up a man's life all he needs will cost him less than under
venlule reform we asseverate and maintain, and all history is behind
ur asseverations.
OUR PROTECTIVE TARIFF HAS STILULATED INVENTION AND BUILT UP GREAT INDUSTRIES."
xtruct from remarks of LHon. MARK S. BRE WER of Mich'igan,
p)age S605 of daily Congressioiwl Record, 50th Congress, 1st
Session.
I concede that prices of home-made articles are higher for some
ire after a tariff law goes into effect, but upon most articles this
ctreased price is but temporary. The correctness of this statement
s fully confirmed by actual experience in our own country. We see
ini the case of Bessemer steel, of woolen and cotton goods, of nails,
dW, axes, of table cutlery and crockery-ware, and all other articles
hat:an be named which are produced here in such quantities as will
ear(y supply our own wants. Our protective tariff has stimulated
ntlion and imlprovemtent, and built up these great industries which
10n compel foreign countries to compete with us tor our home market
ulr-ct; to the duty upon their goods whiclh Wet iake them pay forsuch
iul?.etitio.  The more factories there a(re the more competition we
lv;tui:nd the clieaper goods we get. It is said that if protection
el^:ni to chieapen rmanufactured goods, what advantage is a protective: to the prodlcer or manrfoall  turer? I will answer that a protecive  riff tends to give him a tmore stable market for his wares, and
l ur sW him a fair price for his product, and aids him in getting
starti in building up his business, while at all times it saves him
froi:. an unjust and unequal competition with the foreign producer.
d4:,:




"THE DUT     HAS BEEN THE       MEANS OFi REDUC!
THE PRICE OF PRODUCTS TO THE CONSUMER,"
Etraicts from rtearks of Hon. J. C. BURRO 1VO of Michigan, pual xc
of daitly Congressional Record, 50th Congress, Ist Session.  2
It is not true that a protective duty enhances lby
much the price of the article. It is not true that ti,:e d(t
on the foreign product raises by so much the whole v,
ime of the competing domestic product; and in siippo
of this denial I can summon as unimpeachable wit:esss
every established manufacturing industry in the iUnit
States. Call the roll of your industries, your iron, ste
glass, pottery, the whole array of American industries am
they will hear concurrent testimony to the fact that thl
duty of which you complain has been the means of redi
ing the price of their products to the constumer.  hel
lenge any man to name the product of a single well-esta
lished American industry that cannot be bought cheape
to-day under our protective system than during any ler~i
of our history under free trade or a tariff for rev eMi
only. 
Take as an illustration our steel-railway industry aIt
let us see if t  hetheory of the President is correct. Tl
first Bessemer-steel rail made in this country was in 1S86
At that time there was a duty of 45 per cent. on the fo
eign product, which continued until January 1, 1871
a specific duty of $28 a ton. In 1867 steel rails were sell
ing in the American market for $166 a to n icurrency, o
$138 in gold. In 1870 the price had fallen to $106.75
when th duty of $28 was imposed. Now, if the thee
of the President be correct, the imposition of the dat
of $28 would have had the effect of advancing the pri(
by the amount of such duty from     $106.75 a ton t
$134.75. But what in fact was the result?   Under th(
stimulating effect of this protection the product of ou
steel-rail mills rose from 2,277 tons in 1867 to 2,101,90)
tons in 1887, giving investment to millions of capital ani
employment to thousands of laborers, while the price well
down from $166 a ton in 1867 to $31.50 in March, 18S$
In the light of this example what becomes of the theory
that the duty enhances the cost and becomes a tax 11pon
the consumer?
Take the ease of blankets," to which the chairman al1uded. A pair of 5-pound blankets were recently importel
at the lowest possible cost. The statement of the ostl
duty paid, is as follows:
Cost in England at wholesale.................. $4 45
D uty........................ 
Customs fees.............................  65
Total.............................. 3O5,If the. theory is true, these blankets ought to sel for
$9.35:  a pair; but, as a matter of fact, American blatD!et
of.preeisely the same weight and.quality were sellin:: at
tt time for $5.20.i  What becoms of the theory th the
duty is added to the ost? [Applause.]: 


I
I
I
I
II
i


1


d-5


I
i




IN ALL COMMERCIAL COUNTRIES EXPORT PRICES
ARE AT TIMES LOWER THAN DOMESTIC    PRICES.",.tr,:rf from remarks of lion. E. L. IIAMILTON of Michigan,
iil daily Congressional Rlecord, April 14, 1904.
EXPORT TRADE.
But a some gentlemen say that some manufacturers are selling
filc goods cheaper abroad than at home, and if they can do thit
llat: i the 1eed of protection? Let us examine this.
A malufacturer will tell you that his mill has a certain capacity;
Ihat Ie c(an umanufacture cheaper, and therefore sell cheaper, by
irnling full time at full capacity than by t running part time at;art capacity; that when the mill slacks (down to part time or no
ine at all men are thrown out of employment while interest and
ust eat on, and the whole system of labor, capital and machinery
disorganized by alternate spasms of activity and idleness.
iHe will tell you that at the end of a year, or a specified time,
avir:g run full time at full capacity, he is likely to have on hand
tsulrplus beyond the demands of his regular trade, but which lhe
au;t' sell before it becomes stale.
IlIe will tell you that event if this surplus: is sold at cost or even
it a loss, still the regular price of his product to the consumer is
s: thea it would be if he attempted to run haltingly, trying to
ifuqe his product to current demand.
it appears that in all comnmercial countries export prices are at
imeis from  various causes lower than domestic prices, and that
trinong these causes are:
First, the sale of out-of-date stock;
Second, the sale of a surplus without slacking down, it being
)oire profitable to sell low at times and keep running than to lie
dle; and
IThird, the lowering of prices to introduce goods, thereby widenn r markets and stimulating production at home, on the theory
Iat the more there is sold at home and abroad the more there is
nade at home, and the more tEI re is made at home the cheaper
t cani be made at hoIme, and the cheaper it can be made at home
lie cleaper it can be sold at home, even though at times and in:lac(s; prices are lower abroad than at  orme, and the more there
s ir;lde at home the  more m labor employed at home, and the more
1abor employed at home the more wages paid at thome, the more
iagts spent at home, and the more homes built at home.
OUXR JOINT AND SEVERAL INTERESTS.
No matter how capital combines or how labor combines or how
itv differ among themseles their interests are inseparable and
it oihlit to be plain to botth that they can not afford to go out of
s:;l'ss iln favor of foreign labor adt foreign capital by abandonllh lhe policy of protection.
l;:nr the last seven years we have been going onl in a procession of
ii alest andards till all the world wonders and other nations are
1i:,:ymig us the compliment of substituting foreign names for Ameri'~,,I names on American goods, setnding experts here to study our
cli(,:ions and threatening to combine against us comnercially.
I;yes and profits have moved up together, so that on: the 1st
a, of January, 1903, railroads and large corporations generally
U.m'.ulghout the country raised wages 10 per cent., which, added to
tlI  eneral increase of wages durilng the three moIths next pre(:i'(I  that that ime, raised the ainnual earningq power of labor in the,'.:'  jtates, it is tsaid by iabout r75,t00,0 0,0 an increase unpreeaek:ed in industrial history within so short a time; and all these
a'-i ig'1-s have constantly been flowing back into the channels of
r^I trade.: is claimed that an occasional industry here and there has cut
'I';ii  wages or shortened hours of work since that time, but there
hi  e }een no general reaction.  We have more money in use and
l''i: olation now than ever before, and the increase of nearly $I1,(''00 tO in our savings banks dili;ing the past year, and the fact
il'l -rterd by Bradstreet's, that of all the people in business in the
y(  1903, only 0.76 of I per cent. failed, is proof of our eontinuin
1t" a~dvancing prosperity. 
| r - 65  1  1  1  1 J 




"fHE AMERICAN FARMER AND LABORER AND RAI
ROADS BENEFITED:BY THE SALE OF AMERI.
CAN RAILS IN FOREIGN          COUNTRIES."
Extract from remarks of Hon. L. E..OLMSTED, of Pennsy/lrvqn
in daily Congressional Record, Dec. 7, 1903.
Great lamentation has been heard from that side of the Charab
because of the fact that the Pennsylvania Steel Company hi
recently, in competition with German and other manufacturer
secured a contract for the future delivery of Q0,000 tons of rai
for the Mecca Railway at prices alleged to be somewhat lower th
the preset prevailing price in this country.
The gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. BEx: Y] declared that th
country had been injured to the extent of the difference betwee
the price to be received abroad and the ruling price of rails her
and the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. WILLIAIS1 seemed to co
sider it a crowning outrage that four great railroads have, as
lleges agreed to make a reduction of 33 1-3 per cent, in the rat
of transportation upon all steel products intended for export.
Well, now, the farmer, in whom our friends on the other si
just about election time always evince so much interest, did hov
to "gnaw a file" during the last Democratic Administration, bu
he never has been, to any considerable extent, a consumer of rail
The only customers for rails are railroads, and, if, as the gentle
man from Mississippi [Mr. WILLIAMS] alleges, the railroads them
selves are encouraging this outrage, I do not believe that eithe
they or the farmer are, after all, so much outraged as the gentl
man from New Jersey se ems to think.
Now, I am one of those who believe that the American farme
and  he American laborer and even the American railroads them
selves are benefited by the sale of American rails in foreign coun
tries, The plant of the Pennsylvania Steel Company is at S3teelton
in my district, three miles from the city of Harrisburg, in whic
I live, It is not a trust nor contrsolled by a trust; it is not a con
bintion of any kind; it is not the result of the merger or con
sodation of two or more corporations. It is just a single corporr
ion, operating its own plant in competition with the United State
Steel Corporation and other great rivals. It is operated upon ver
intelligent business principles by very competent and intelligent
business men.
I have no personal investment in it in any way whatever, but I
do take a great interest in its welfare because of my friendship
nd respect for its officers and because the interests of so many of
my constituents —farmers, coal miners, and merchants, as well as
steel operatives-are dependent upon its success. Within pne year
after the last election   Grover Cleveland it, along with other
manufacturing establishments in my district, went into the hands
of receivers.
In October, 1896, It employed 3,602 men. Since the election of
President M  Cfinley and the passage of the Dingley tariff bill t
has had more than 8,000 men upon its pay roll at one time. It
now yields a fair though not excessive return upon the capital in
vested. The sale of,f00 tons of rails abroad (and that is oaly
one i:tem out of e\a number.; it has within the past few days cotamcted to deliver O8,00 tons in the City of Mexico) will, of WiSlfi
b      over  4,000 of foreign money into this country, and a
Weas  0 9 pe  cnt. of it will reacth the pockets o the laborers wsh
made the steeSlor mined the coal and iron ore which entered into
its production.
F oeign-made rails have been imported into this country and
sold here for $145 per ton. Now they are made and sold here at
f., Our railroads thus get cheaper rails, while our miners an"d
iron and steel workers do the work and from     their wages ar
enabled to and do become the best customers for the products f
our farms.: f sel:   our steel products in foreign markets heP
to brtWg about, or   ntinue  or improve these conditdion, wtoy 
our ffriend  objsct?
d-7


I




HE POLICY IN SOME INSTANCES OF SELLING
CHEAPER THAN THE MARKET PRICE PREVAILS THE WORLD OVER."
rlfrfis from remarks of lron.,11. if, G/ALLINGER of New Hamp-;h.'e, in daily Con7gressioial Record pri, pl, 1904.
i,.ill confine myself to the question of goods sold abroad at a
wer price than at home.
I have admitted that goods are sometimes thus sold; but I must
so emphasize the fact that the percentage of such goods sold as
Wpi'(ped with our total output is so i.naignificant as to make the
ole subject a mere bugaboo, not worthy of notice were it not for
e fact that its constant reiteration has dignified it almost to the
rel of a canmpaign issue. Whoever will take pains to look into this
iestion, studying most carefully the report of the recent Indusia Commission, which went into the matter fully, and whose report
en the subject is exceedingly clear and intelligible, will find that
]i percentage of goods sold at an export discount is, in round
hmbers, as follows:
tal annual value of manufactures..$................$15,0000000
xports Cf mantlfactures.........................   400,000,000;tl of exports sold at lower prices abroad.......... 4000,000
To this extent, then, we are willing to concede that our manufaerers resort to this practice of cutting foreign prices, for the reais which I have already mentioned. In volume 13 of the report
the Industrial Commission there are tabulated 416 replies bearg up0n this question. The report says:
The great majority of the anpswers indicated that prices are no lower
tra than they are for domestic consumers, and a considerable number,dicate that foreign prices are higher.
nAmong those who stated that they sell a portion of their goods
road lower than at home the following reasons are given:
Cash payments and large purchases in the foreign trade, whereas the
mestic trade is based on credits and small purchases.
The drawback or rebate of the tariff on imported raw material of goods
anufactured for export.
To overcome the tariff of other countries.
To secure new markets.
To hold a market against new competitors.
To clear out surplus stock or to prevent a shut down and increased
st of production by keeping mills running and men employed.
To get rid of samples and out-of-date goods.
Because the expense of selling and advertising is less abroad than at
ome.
Now as to the amolnt which is sold abroad at these lower prices.
have already given it as $4,000,000 annually, although the total
ers reported to' the Industrial Commission were only about oneird of this amount, and the average difference in price, it may be
lded, was less than 5 per cent. Allowing the greatest margin posile then, we have a total amounting to only 1 per cent. of our manu'lctred goods sold abroad, and goods sold abroad amount to less
1in 3 per cent. of our total output. This great bugaboo, then, conts of less than three one-hundredths of 1 per cent of our total
nl facturres, admitting, as we are quite willingt to do, all that our
jlporents claim.
In the face of the.e returns, which, by the way, are not prize statis's5, but authoritative figures in every instance, shall we, beeause
f     fke fact that three one-hundredths of 1 per cent., or $4,000,000
|'trt of, our manufactured goods are sold abroad at a lower figure
hasn it home,7 tear dow-n our tariff wall ani submit the other $14,396V/00,000 to the ruthless competition of the hungry horde of paser-raid foreign competitors. It is, Mr. President. a most astound9 ' proposition to come from even the Democratic press and the
re-tfrade element of this country.
T'le policy in some instances of selling cheaper than the market
tIr  is a custom that prevails the world over in every line of indusITrl ind commerce known to the human race, It is practiced by the
t{ill vender on our sidewalks, who, at whatever price he can get,
I'PJlio: s of his fast decaying and almost unsalable wares. It is
rn(atl'ed by the merchant, when annually or semiannually he has
is?veat mark-down sale to dispose of shop-worn and damaged goods,
')rbi:s out of date, and of a surplus stock to make room for more
5acs8inRble goods. Itf is practiced by our manufacturers for several
Irfscot. Sometimes it is to dispose of a surplus stock in order that
he ill not be shut down and that the worklignen may not be detrihid of employment and wages. Sometimes it is to introduce into
mo ielign market a new article or a new model. It is adopted by
e Tlanu ters and merchants of eery country on the face of the
trtt and it is considered good business policy when it is undertaken.
d- 


I
m~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:
m~~~~~S:O




"EXPORT PRICES"
"THE MERICAN CONSUMER COULD ILL AFFORDT
EXCHANGE PLACES WITH THE FOREIGN
CONSUMER."
Extract from remarks of lion. P. P. CAMPBELL of Kansas,
House of Representatives, March f9, 1904.
Now, as to the charge that the products of manufactures are so
cheaper abroad than at home, et ergo, we should put the countryl up
a free-trade basis.
It has not been my privilege to see a list of the articles that a
sold cheaper in foreign markets than they are in our own, and 
not deny that it is done in some particulars. I have heard it state
however, upon good authority that the prices quoted by those wt
make the charge is the retail price at home and the manufa(ctrer
price to the jobber abroad. It was charged two years ago that se
ing machines and reaping machines were selling cheaper in forei,
markets than to our own people. It has been stated upon the authi
ity of dealers in Sydney, Australia, that the Deering binder sold the
for $1)55 to $8i2, lwhile it sells here for $125;h that the McCormi
binder sold in Sydney for $165 to $194, and sold at home for $12
the New Home sewing machine sold in Sydney, Australia, for $;
in this country for $35.
But, if the allegation were true, it is better that American man'
facturers get into foreign markets by that method than that for(ci
manufacturers come into American' markets by the same methi
Mr. Pou. Will the gentleman allow me a question?
Mr. C^AMrPEIL. Certainly.
Mr. Por. If the American manufacturer can sell his goods
Euarope cheaper than he sells them at home and still make a prorf
I ask the gentleman why that particular manufacturer still nee(
any protection?
TMr. CaMParEr..  Well, we have had experience-our markets ha,
been exploited by foreign manufacturers.
In 1846 iron rails sold in the United States for $50 per ton. A
soon as the tariff was removed by the Democratic party irn 18
English manufacturers reduced the price of iron rails to $10 rv
ton, swamped the American market, then after ruining that indiistr
in this country they raised the price to $75 per ton for iron rails.
And that was not our only experience. Our markets were exploitc
by the manufacturers of foreign countries at another time when w
were under a tariff revised by the Democratic party. As far eac
as 1819 Monroe says in his message of that year, referring to the wa
foreign manufacturers ruined our manufacturesTheir manufactures have been shipped by the manufacturrrs
the United States and in many instances sold at prices below the
current value at the place of manufacture. Although this practli:
may, from its nature, be considered temporary or contingent, it
not on that account less injurious in its effects.
We wrew then under the tariff act of 1516. Foreign manufacture
were exploiting our markets, ruining our manufacturing establlis
ments, and establishing the sale of their products here.,Mr. Polrl If the manufacturer in this country can make a prif
by selling his goods across the water at the prices they there com.manr
why should he be forced to go out of business?
Mr. CAMPXIMEL. It is not proposed to force him to go out of bs
ness. [Applause.] To whatever extent the products of America
manufacture, protected or otherwise, are sold in foreign mairkei
cheaper than they are sold at home. the American consumer could tl
afford to exchange places with the foreign consumer. A factorey. 
shop a furnae, an industry of whatever nature that is estalli li
here becomes a part of the property of the great body of the A nme'
ican people. Taxes are paid, schoolhouses are built, and s:hol
maintained, churches are built and maintained, the institutions n f t
coantry are supported by the industries of the country.
The: manufacturer who is not engaged in producing articles tn 
protected sched     could not afford to have a neighboring faector
engag edin some other product that is on the protected selbidl'
trnsferred, with its employees, to a foreign country. The f ir1e
could not afford to have a manufacturing establishment engaged 
producing a protected article that is sold cheaper abroad tha it; I
at homie, removed to the place abroad. So I say, to whatever extNe
the pac     is  lloe d, t is flowd,  better for us that our manufac iUre
practice it in foreign markets than that the manufacturers of f re
rountriers slild practice it in our markets.
d-9


I




OWER:PRICES       IN  THE   UNITED     STATES THAN        IN
ENGLAND."
ntrit from remarks of Hon. C. H. GROSVENOR of Ohio, in the
atiily Congressional Record of April 4, 1904.
ftle claim is ofteln made thatt whil e wauges are higher in tle United
its- tile cost of lidinng is eorreaipon(ingly cheaper in Great Britain.
at; thlis statement is erroneous can be proved by official statistics
taind siimulttanieously in both countries. In 1892 the Senate Comnittee( on Finance nmade an extensive report on "Retail prices and
iageqs" in leading cities of thle United States and Europe at different
iriods from June, 18fi9, to September, 1891. Among the cities conilereid in thlis report were St. Louis, lMo., and Manchester, England,
ties for which wage comrparisons have just been made.
A e(omnparison of th-e prices of articles of identically the same
(script tion, obtailed at the same tinme, namnely, June, 1889, and Sepaiiber, 1891, in both cities, shows that instead of the necessary cornmoditles of life being higher in the United States than in England
csr acre, on the contrary, as a rule much lower. This is shown in
ie table which follows. A glance at this table shows that most of
ne necessary food products, such as bread, eggs, lard, bacon, roast
ef, hamrs, mutton, milk, starch, and canned vegetables, were mllch
wer in St. Louis than in Manchester, while the prices of the few
marining food products averaged about the sanle in both countries.
With regard to clothing and cloth goods, we find that nmen's hosiery,
ttotn shirts, sheetings, shirtitngs, and cotton and woolen dress goods
f the same description and quality were cheaper in St. Lotuis thant
Il ncehester; that carpets, flannels, and cotton underwear! averaged
lout the sarme, a.nd that only in the case of men's hats was there allny
eeidced difference in favor of the Manchester purchaser.
Ilocisehold articles, such as earthenware, glassware, and cutlery,
c'ri nearly the saume in price in St. Louis as in Manchester, with
vi}ery slight difference in some cases in favor of the latter city.
n tire other hand, furniture costs from about one-fifth to one-half
s mruch in the United States as in Great Britain, so that for the
t culf one bedroom set in Manchester one could buy from two to
ice sets in St. Louis, and for the cost of one dining table at Mani(i'1 *r a wh1ole dining-room set could be bought in St. Louis.
Bltc the question may be asked, "If the American workingmen
Trn aso mutch more and pay so much less for what they consume, whly
re tiey not all wealthy and contented'?" The answer may be found
1 t: sEtatement of the emimnent French scientist, Prof Emile Levasuar, in his work on "L'Ouvrier Americain" (The American Working4nr,, After sutmming up the conditions of labor in America as cornIrad withi Europe. he says that wages in, the tUnited States are about
Oulft*, the wages in Europe; that obj ects of ordinary consumption by
Yiorkig people (excepting dwelling houses) cost less in the citics
f tire United States than in those of Europe; that the American
3'nrigmanc lives better than the European; that he eats more subItluTutl1ly dresses better, is more comfortabty housed and more often
rd s dwelling spends more for life insurance and various social
ccc ni"efieial associations, and, in sJtort, has a. utch higher standard
t' 3 than thef EUIropean, wor iSn ia 
( l,0.:1                        A             0   '; '   '






"PRICES OFr AMERICAN 0GOODS HIGHER                      IN EUROp
THAN INT THE UNITED STATES-WHENEVER THE
PRICE WAS LOWER THERE WAS A GOOD
REASON-A MODEL FOUR YEARS OLD."
Extract from remark   of bon. J T. XcCLEARY of Minnesota, printed
daily Congressional Record, June 20, 1904.
In the summer of 1901 I spent several months in Europe investigati
conditions.  One of the lines of my investigation was this very one
prices of American goods at home and abroad. In different cities In 
ten countries visited I made it a point to go into stores and, as a possit
customer, ask the prices of articles with whose prices at home I w
familiar.  Practically without exception I found the prices of America
good higher everywhere in Europe than in the United States.
And wherever the price was lower there was always a &ood reas
for it. For Instance, in Scotland I found a man who had Just bought
new McCormlck binder. I asked him how much he paid for it. He sa
~19i about $95 in our money. Inasmuch as a new McCormick binder wou
cost in Minnesota about $120, I made investigation to ascertain why an
bow he was able to buy such a binder for what was apparently less t!
the Minnesota price. It soon developed that while the machine was ane
that is, while it had never been used, it had been made in 1897 (a mod
then four years old in the United States) and could have been boulgat
Minnesota for $8!5
Mr. Chairman, careful statistics have been gathered on this subje
of the prices of American manufactured goods abroad and at home. The
statistics show that of the stupendous amount of manufactured goods pr
duced in the United States, 97 per cent. is consumed in the United Stat
They show also that of the 3 per cent. sold abroad, more than 90 per cen
is sold as high or higher than at home, and that less than 10 per cent,
that which is shipped abroad is sold for a lower price than at home.
In order that we may see the point more clearly, let us think of
in another way. Of every $100 worth of manufactured goods produced 
the United States we consume at home $97 worth.       Of the $3 wort
shipped abroad more than 90 per cent. is sold as high or higher than
home. That accounts for $2.70 worth more, or $99.70 worth of the good
in all. That leaves less than 30 cents' worth sold abroad lower than a
home, Democratic statesmanship invites us to let go of the $99.70 wor
in order to get a chance at a part of the 3S cents' worth!
Mr. Chairman, let us now look for a moment at this little 80-cen
business, of which our Democratic brethren will undoubtedly try to ma
much.
The sale of a portion of our products abroad at a reduced price is n
at all a question of the tariff. It is a mere question of business. Grea
Britain, with her so-called "free trade," always has practiced that polic
and does to-day. The advice of Lord Brougham    in 1816, which I qnote
earlier in my remarks, is to the point. Some of these sales are for t
purpose of getting rid of out-of-date goods; some of them   are for t
sa"1e of getting rid of a temporary surplus, so that the factorles may n?,
be closed down  some of them are due to the fact that the sales are ca?
sales and in considerable quantities; some of them are due to the strugt'
for a new market-that is, every one of these sales is made for a pt''
business reason, wholly disconnected from our having or not having a pro
tective tariff.
But, Mr. Chairman, whatever may be said on this subject, let us an
forget that the whole thing is relatively only a "thirty-cent" matter, an
that in whatever consideration we may give it we must not lose sight 
the fact that u    nder our protective system our people have grown so enormoulsly in their power to consume, they are so well housed, so,^
clothed, so well fed, and have and enjoy so many of the comforts of lit1
that we use here at home 97 per cent. of our entire manufactured p rodictc
It is a matter for just pride, Mr. Chairman, that we have so grentiu
increased the amount of the manufactured goods which we export, a"'1
to     whoe who believe in the Dingley bill can point with pride to the fact that
under its operation the value of our manufactured goods exported has, 
seven years, practically doubled.
But Mr. Chairman, there is another fact in this connection that is o
immensely greater importance.
According tote census of 1900 the ns  total value of the goods manufac'
tured in the United States in that year was a little over $13.00 o) 
In the year 1900 we exported from the United States $433,81.,756 iw0m111
of manufactured goods; that is, Mr. Chairman, we exported 3 per cet'N
of what we produced. Out of the entire $13,000,000,000 worth of gi;'
manufactured in the United States our oin people have been ablel tC ia''
or S:keeQ7 per cent..Why, Mr. Chairman, rather than let go of the 00o0i
tions uader whi:c  such a mighty result has been accomplished we o;;i,
wl afford, if bnecesary, to throw the other 3 per cent. into the ocean!
B:ut we have not thrown it into the ocean. The goods have beh e 
in foreign lands. Even if they had all been given away or sold f,':]C
than tfie seinttg price at home, that fact would be of small relative iup0'
ance.  But instead of being sold at smaller prices than at home, aar
than 90 per cent. of them were sold as high o    erhiger in foreig t lanads tbah
in the United States.
d-ll


I






lepublican Prosperity
E




'PROSPERITY IS GENERAL; DISTRIBUTED THROUGH
OUT THE WHOLE COUNTRY; COMMON TO
ALL THE SECTIONS."
Extract from remarks of lon. J. B. FORAKER of Ohio, ia dait
Cngressional Record, Feb. 4, 1904.
During the years that have passed since the McKinley Alrani
istration commenced until now our foreign cormmerce has so grown
and grown in our favor, that the annual balance of trad(e wi
average more than $500,000,000, every dollar of which the fiation
with which we trade have been compelled to pay to us, and to pa
to us in gold worth 100 cents all around the world. There hav
been no 50-cent Bryan dollars in those transactions. As a resul
of it, Mr. President, we have to-day in the Treasury of this coua
try more gold belonging to the United States than was ever hel
by any government in the history of the world.
Not only has our foreign trade grown in that manner and t
that extent and with that success, but the prosperity which it in
dicates is general; it is universal; it is distributed throughout thi
whole country; it is common to all sections, and to no section mon
than to the Southern States.
A  few days ago there was made in another place where mei
legislate a very brilliant speech, in the course of which the spcake'
quoted from   newspapers, the leading newspapers from     almos
every State throughout the whole South, in order to show whit tii
conditions were, according to those papers-almost every one o
them a Democratic paper-on the 1st day of January last.
Mr. PATTERsox. If prosperity is as great as it has been, if it hai
not diminished and is not diminishing, how does the-Senator fron
Ohio account for the material cut in the wages of twenty-five o
thirty thousand of the worknen and workwomen engaged in the New
Enilanditextile: fab:ric mills, a;reported cut in wages in all the stee
industries, and that there is now assembled at Indianapolis i nationa
convention of bituminous coal miners threatening a national strikt
because they have been notified that after a time soon to come tfie
wages they are receiving will be materially lessened?
Mr. FFoAKER. Mr. President, there is no trouble in answering
the Senator. I am not going to answer him in detail as to all the
cases he puts, because it is sufficient to answer him as to one, and
either that or some similar answer will be found as to each of tih
others. He puts the case of the cotton manufacturers. It is the
price of cotton, Mr. President, which has gone so high-whether
on account of legitimate demand or whether on account of manipulation of stock brokers and dealers it does not matter-has  one
so high as to cripple that industry, to stop a number of factories
and to turn, in consequence, a number of men into idleness.
For other causes, having nothing to do with the general policie
of the country, but originating in and having their effect in spite
of those policies, the steel industry has been temporarily affected
and the mining of coal has been temporarily affected, perhaps. 1
am not able to answer as to detailed facts ail the suggestions tnad
by the Senator, but we know that it is no unusual thing to see
the representatives of labor and the representatives of capital tlect.
ing in national convention for the purpose of considering questions
of wages and other questions of a similar character.
We do know, however, Mr. President, this to be a fact, that
when the Republican party is in power and the people of tili
country are satisfied with the industrial legislation, there is tever
any strike, except for differences as to wages or hours or other
terms. Labor srikes when it knows if it quits work to-day! r(l1
go back and find work to-morrow; capital strikes and goes it Iol
busiWnes when you institute policies in which the peopl h(-: e n:
confidence. That is the difference between strikes under i1em0'
eratic and strikes under Republican policies.
You are liable to have strikes under any Administration, altl otl'
from  different causes.  How was it under Cleveland?     V.bodtlO
struck then because he: was getting less wages than he wanted. 7tz
trouble was to get any wages at all. The only striking an/iiJo
did was to strike out for a job, the first one he could hear tcl 1 o
ad pursue it and get it, if he could, anywhere and at "a,^; aid
price" on any kind of terms.


I
I
I
I
I
11I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
c
I
I
I
I
I


I


0-1






HE SOUP HOUSE HAS DISAPPEARED IAND THE
MARKET      HAS TAKEN      ITS PLACE."
Itra,4 from remarks of Hon. P. P. CAMPBELL, of Kansas, in,aily Congressional Record, April 1, 1904.
r\ov. sir, as to the objection that our products are kept out of
Ireirl markets by the policy of protection. The most emphatic
tswer o that objection is that it is only true in theory, and that
is in no sense true in fact.
iWhv, sir, we have advanced from year to year under the proctivie policy, from one of the lowest exporters among the great
htions of the earth, until to-day we rank first. Our exports last:ir were one and a half billions in round numbers, while England's
)orts were one billion four hundred millions; Germany's one bitn two hundred thousand, and France's eight hundred millions.
We have extended not only the amount but the variety of our
ports from year to year, and the year that has just closed has
ownl the greatest export from this country that has ever been
cde by any one country in any one year.
GROWTH     OF EXPOlTS OF PRS   THE UNITED       STATES.
In 1875 the exports of domestic products by the world's great
porting nations were as follows:
inited Kingdom.............     I *............. $1,087,497,000
ance...........................................  747,400,000
manly..........................................  593,052,000
ntited States.........................         497,263,737
In 1885 domestic exports of these four countries stood as follows,ited Kingdom................................... $1,037,124,000
rinany..........................6...............  680,551,000
nited  States.....................................  673,593,596
rance...........................................  96, 0,000
In 1895 the domestic exports of the four countries were as follows:
nited  Kingdom.................................  $1,100,452,000
nited States...................................   807,74,2415
rmany....................................  78,660,000
ranee.....................................   651,100,000
In 1903 the relative rank of the four countries in the exportation
domestic products was as follows:
nited  States....................................  $1,457,565,783
nitcd  Kingdom................................  1,415,617,552
eraany,...................1........ 1,200,000,000
ance.......................................  *..   81,000,000
But we are told that we can not sell our products in the
orld's markets while we refuse the world the privilege of
1iUng in our markets.   But we do.   [Applause on the ltepubcan side.]  Why, I knew a man once just like the Democratic
irty. He called every beautiful day a "weather breeder."   He
v1er got comfort or satisfaction out otf anything. [Laughter.]
It is said the cost of living has increased in a greater proportion
an the wage-scale has been raised, therefore the tariff should
revised by the Democratic party.
Now, conceding for the sake of the argument that some of the
eces:ities of life are higher now than they were from 1893 to 1896l
dle the last revision of thie tariff by the I)emocratic party. Bread
Id tleat were cheap in those days, but people went without food.
lolthg was cheap, but people went witlhout raiment. Hardware and
nbtllr were cheap, but men did noi. buid houses. Land was cheap.
it Ipeople did not buy farms. Live stock was cheap, but farmers
fid nt buy stock. Everything was cheap, but no one could buy.
To-i ay bread and meat may be a little higher, but no one
Ats lungry.   Clothing may be a little higher, but all are
a  E Hardware and lumber may be a little higher, bu;
rio: hout the whole land people are building houses     Farm
a1l have doubled in value, but all over the country men are
ugYi": farms. Many farm animals have more than doubled
1 vlue, but all over the country men are buying stock.
ltes for industries are higher and material and labor are
ight;:  but enterprising   men   are  purchasing    sites  and
ate(ial and establishing   industries.   Wages are higher,
ut em:aployers are employing men. The soup house has disPpered and the market has taken its place. P[Loud applause
n ti- Republican side.]




"NOT A SINGLE PROPHECY OR PREDICTION OF 0U;OPPOMENTS HAS COME TRUE."
Extracts frro omars of lion. EAILiER        J.  BUIAEiT,
jNebraska, in daily Co'a#resional Jecordc Jan. A70, 1&V,
Every four year, and sometimes oftenre in the past, our De
ratic frends hatu  htad to change their paramount issue anit kI,
a   w  xcuse for eisting longer as a party.
We ttRepublcans are never in that unfortunate condition, 0
positions and our policies are enduring.
I remember the first time I ran for Congress, in 1898, the par,
mount issue of your party out in my district was the MeClea
bill. I do not know whether any of you had to run up against
or not. Probably it was a good bill, for it bore the name of I
distiniguished colleague and co-w orker in the committee from Minn
sota. I never happeted to hear particularly about that bill ua
some gerintlmein came fromr the Easta an declared it was the par
inount issue. For sixty days we had to go over the district tal;
Ing about the McCleary bill, and nobody 1has ever heard of it sine
In 1896 the paramtount issue of the Democratic party was ti
free and unlimited coinage of silver at the ratio of 16 to 1, witllo;
the aid or consent of any other nation on earth."  There is al
one of you who can say that as smoothly as I did,
You have not tried it since 1896, yet in 1896 every Democratl 
you was authority on 16 to 1. You went out of that conveylti
in Chicago, every mother's son of you, and you got a piece I
white metal sixteen times as big as a piece of brass, and you hua
it on: yo  coat lapel and strutted up and down the streets an
the-lanes of this country swearing you stood for 16 to 1 or bui
and every  ne o f you busted. [Laughter on the Republican side
Now, let us go back further, as the gentleman from   Missou
[Mr. CoxeUANJ] said, to 1892. Your paramount issue then was fr
trade. When Garfield was the candidate, it was the force bi
When Hayes was the candidate you said if he was elected lie w
going to turn the temples of liberty over into the hands of ti
money changers, or something of that kind. When Grant was
cidildidate it was militarism, and when. Lincoln was a candida
it was imperialist.t Every four years you have had a new par
motrot issue,
When that convention met in Chicago in 1896 there was not
I)enocrat here that had any idea that they could nominate a cal
didate for President with any hope of electing him. We had hi
four years of Democracy in this country, four years of free trad
We had had four years of the hardest times that the America
people had ever gone through, and I pray God that we will nevx
be called upon to go through four more such years as we wet
through from  18992 to 1896. When your convention met in 1@l
not one of you thought it was worth. while to nominate a candidal
for President. From that convention came forth the propositiO
of the free and unlimited coinage of silver at the ratio of 16 to
etc. You went before the people, and I must say you made cot
siderable stir, [Laughter.]  Do you wonder that so many peopi
voted for Mr. Bryan in 1896, when you recall the predictions an
prophecies which were then made?
If you elect a gold-standard candidate it will make the ric
richer and the poor poorer, decrease happiness, increase distresi
destroy opportunity to work.
Ther is where    they almost caught me. I always like to work
and when I read that declaration that if the gold-standard candi
date was eleted "it would destroy opportunity to work," I mu
say it almost caught me.
Now,   read from page 40.
Ifyou elect the gold-standard candidate it will encourage ioard
ing of money.
In other  seeches such statements as these were madei  TI Iele
tion of the gold-standard candidates willRu.in the farmer-TInjure the wage-earner-Reduce empl rla"t
-Discourage enterprise.-Paralyze   industry.-Bust   the. n
bans.t —Ruin,the depositor.-Decrease  salaries.-Destroy rOaa
factures, ---Make impossible for husbands and wives to pay mno(
gages.-Close public schools*-Make dearer money —Cheaper pro0
er~ty.Harder times.-More: crime.
Yet:McKinley was ele  cted, and we adopted  the gold stlndair
and not:a s.ingle prophesy or prediction of our opponents ha. c0~
tr ue, The whole eountry has grown richer., e-3:                                          ]


~'i


I
I
I
i
0
n
s
I
I
I
il
L
I
I
n
I
II
I


I






I


"ALL ALIKE                TELL THE STORY OF PROSPERITY:'
trlrafCtr fromn remarks of lon. J.. B. ORAKER of Ohio, in daily Congres.
sitcnal Record, February 4, 1904.
A few days ago there was made in another place where men legislate
very brilliant speech, in the course of which the speaker quoted from
newspapers, the leading newspapers from, almnost every State throughout the
whole South, in order to show what the conditions were, according to those
papers-aliost every one of them a Democratic paper —on the 1st day )f
January last.
It was a happy thought that induced this speaker to cite these newspapers. lie commences with the State of Missouri.
The Kansas City Star says:
"Bank clearings are not always a definite indication of business movements, but they may be taken as a reliable basis of comparison in noting
progress in any one city. The clearings in Kansas City for the past year
were one thousand and seventy-five millions, or an increase of eighty-six
millions (9 per cent.) over the record of 1902. Building records and real
estate transfers show similar increase. Both the wholesale and retail merchants report gains."
I am not going to read all of these, but I want to read a few of them
I just to show how universal they are and how all alike tell the story of
prosperity. The St. Joseph Gazette says:
"The country upon which St. Joseph depends for its maintenance is
prosperous to a most gratifying degree. Crops have been fairly abundant;
prices for the products of the farm and range far in excess of the average
for many years."
Now I come down to Virginia, skipping quite a number of citations
from other papers in Missouri. The Despatch, of Norfolk, says:
"The cities of tide-water Virginia have experienced a solid and incrcasiy,growth durbig the past ten years. Norfolk is in many, many ways better
oft to-day that a year ago. Churches, schools, charitable organizations. and
business organizations have flourished and grown and improved within the
year. Iocal bank deposits have shown a steady increase during the year,
and local bank clearings also indicate an increase in the volume of business
done in the city, and the record of the year past is the largest in the history
of the city."
Mr. President, to go on with thi", I could read to the same effect from
the Petersburg Index-Appeal, to the same effect from  the Jacksonville
fimes-Union, and from the Peniacola News, as to the conditisn of thingos
in Florida; and I could read to the same effect from the Leader, a paper
published in Lexington, Ky., as to tle conditions existing in that State, and
frot the Louisville papers to the same effect.  All these papers, let me remind the Senate, are of date January 1, showing the condition only a month
ago, as published in these Democratic papers in their respective localities.
the Atlanta Constitution, January 1, says:
"Annual reports of (ill city officiala show a bright chapter in the history
of Atlanta, the /ear 1903 having been one of the most,rosperous in its
history. The clearings of 1902 Nwere increased by $13,791,580.34. The year's
record is a remarkable one, and is considered as a strong indication of the
s6ibstantiability and growth of business in Atlanta."
The Augusta Chronicle and a number of other papers in that State are
quoted,
Then he goes to North Carolina and fromn the Rural News and Observer
be quotes this:
"The year that closed last night has been a good one for North Carolina
and the American Republic. Crops have been large and prices good. It has
been a specially good year for farmers."
I quote now frdm the Wilmington Morning Star:
"The steady Increase in the commerce of Wilmington is extremely gratifying to the people of the city, andti the growing importance of the chief
sal)port of North Carolina will alike be a source of gratification to the people
of the entire State."
Now, I comte to South Carolina, that blessed old State, so ably represented on this floor always, and particularly now. The Charleston Newe
arnd Courier is quoted from, as follows:
"The banks of Columbia show by their reports that they have had a very
successful year, and it follows that the people of the city have cause to be,
in a large measure, satisfied with the last year's business. The total deposits in the five banks amount to $3,503,907.50, a very large sum for a
t'ltt of the population of Columbia. Compared with former years, the d:posits, increased very much, and the bankers seem to be full of confidence
of.still greater proportionate increase during the present year."
Now let me read from another paper, the Greenville News:
"The year 1903 has been one of unprecedented growth and general lmpirsovent,. Something like $2,000,00 has teen expended during the year
II tte erectlon of public and private buildings, manufacturing plants, and
varitos othei commercial enterprises. The most successful year in the!sitr.-y of Gcreenville has passed. Nineteen hundred and three has left the
fity fr'ce?', richler and more prosperout than when it caire.
Then I could read to the samce effect from the papers of Memphis and
aNiiiville as to the conditions of prosperity obtaining in the State of Tenne.i5, and so on throughout the Sottth. I might gy on reading to a very
niLth greater extent than I have, biut I have read sufficiently to support
hIt I I want to state, that this prosperity about which we talk is a pros-,crit,ot for    r        stio   n      y o particuular class, taut a proaPVI it: for our Goverm'nei',tl a prosperity for our cotuntry and our whole
co0u`tr, a prosperity for every section of our countrry, a proslerity for every
cIta.s ni our country.




Sig. 7




"WE WiLL NOT DISTUTRB: THE i            BUSINESS: OF THIS
COUNTRY."
Extract from  remarks of lHon, 0C. H. GROSVEN1OR of Ohio, i
daily Congressional Record, April 9, 1904.
There is no such condition of things as the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. DX AaraMOo] has presented.     His question to us i.;
"Why don't you reform the tariff; why don't you revise the tariff;
why dn't you do something about the tariff?"   That is all so muchi
wasted language, because we do not want to reform      the tariff;
we do not want to revise the tariff; and if we do we are going
straight ahead when we get ready, and we will do these things if
we see fit to do so. We will not disturb the business of this country. We will not bring about the condition of 1893, that will break
up the flow of prosperity of this country. We will give notice to
the people of this country when we are going to revise the tarilf.
We believe that there can be nothing done by a political party
more adamaging to the best interests of the people of the country
than. to announce a determination in advance to do some radical
thing; in legislation that will halt, paralyze, and eventually upset
the business of the country. The business of the country is sensi
t:ive, and the mere induction of the Democratic party into power
with its present threat of demolition of the tariff situation would
paralyze business throughout the country as it did in 1893. It
does not need the full consummation of their purpose; their allegation, with the power in their hands to do harm, is all that is
necessary for the great work of injury and destruction.
And I: call the attention of the country to the fact that gentlemen
on the Democratic side of the House, Democratic members of the
Senate,:.Democratic newspapers,  Democratic   orators everywhere
are proclaiming to the' business interests of this country, "Put us
in power and we will do something to the tariff. We will either
repeal it or we will revise it or we will cut it down or we will do
something with it."  Gentlemen, that is exactly the greatest harm
that you can do to the business interests of the country, and if
your speeches during the last sixty days had been made by Republicans under the guise of Democratic speeches, they could not have
been more effective to drive the people of this country to a resolute
determination that the Democratic party shall not come into powuer
with that threat upon their lips.   [Applause on the Republican
side.]
It is the very thing that the business interests of this couwtri
dread. It is the v     th r ng the business interests of this country
will not have. They will not trust the Democratic party, coning
as they do with that threat that they will repeat their transactions
of 1898 and thereby again destroy the business of the country.
"'But," say a number of those gentlemen, and I reply only cursory
and for a imoment, "there is not any prosperity anyhow."  I listened
to an hour's speech the other day and one-half of it was devoted
to proving that there is no prosperity in the country and the other
half 'to proving that the great prosperity of the country was
brought; about: by Democratic action.  [Laughter.]  I have but a
very few and very condensed statements to make on that subject
I do not care what produces it. -I do not care who is responsible
for it. It is enough for m8e to know that from the beginning of
the history of the Democratic party whenever they have made a
tarif agitation- in this country bankruptcy and hard times and panic
have followed. 
I am going to: the country, so far as I shall be heard in the
campaign, and submit a single question to the laboring men of my
district, the business men of my district, and the farmers of InV
district.  I will put this one question to them, and upon their
answer I will stand or fall: "You lived here in 1892 and forwardi?  " "Yes."."You lived here in 1896 and forward?".Yes."
" Which oe of these conditions would tyou rather have, that utlder
Iemocrati0 administration or tht r  hat u   Republican adminaisfra
tionr?"  I will submit that question and abide by their judgtmient
thereon  What: is the use of making speeches when every man wlo10
gets them absolutely knows he was hungry in 1892 and forward anrd
he isrich atd prosperous to-day?
It is enough for; me to know it was.in a condition of Democratic
supremacyt't'when troubles came, and it is at fact which nto wmah
co    en  that itt wk-s ina conGdition of Republicam suremcy whs~  |,
good time cm.: 




"THE LEAN AND THE FAT YEARS::
*lt*nct from renlm s aof Hon. E. L. HAMILTON of Michigan, in daily;ongre ssonal Record, April 14, 1904.
D''or seven years, under the Administrations of William McKinley and
sie(dore Roosevelt, labor and capital have been prosperous, with prac-,cally no interruption except the interruptions of their mutual differences.,Eight years ago the Republican party marshaled its hosts in the
ahlow of Industrial depression-in the shadow of closed factories and
ispended banks.
We were running in debt then at every tick of the clock, accumulat-,g an overdraft in our Treasury, fed by selling bonds and drained by an
dleass chain, recruiting Coxey's army and reading Coin'sx Financial
The years were lean and the earth was lean, and lean-faced men as
iaht camne on came out of their hiding places in the alleys of depression
(ii lifted up strange voices on the curb and in the deserted market places,
Ieaiching the doctrine of discontent and "larding the lean earth" with
rornlses of things to be gained by depreciated money and national disoriesty. [Applause on the Republican side.]
Then no man trusted his neighbor if he could help it. A man with
dollar ahead refused to loan money to his neighbor on a first mortgage
('cauSe, first, he was afraid of being called a plutocrat; second, because
e was afraid his neighbor would pay him in depreciated money, and,
iird, because he was afraid his security would vanish away.
(Out of the ruins of that time we have built up the shining edifice of
ol:werity and "scattered laughter with a spendthrift hand."  And yet,thing has happened-nothing but a Republican Administration.
There is something about the Republican party that sends things up
1oi~e par, and something about the Opposition that sends things cown
clo - par. Above par is sunlight, summer, hope, and plenty. Above par
tle firelight dancing on the walls of contentment to the song of the ketie singing on the hearth of Plenty. Below par Hunger and Want and
anlkruptcy sit brooding by dead ashes, while the candle of life gutters
own to the shape of a winding sheet. LApplause on the Republican side.]
It is possible to go below par again. A very little ballot in the hXands
t a ery small majority will do it.
Now, from the offices of stock jobbery to the highest of political econwy, it Is everywhere apparent that we are prosperous.
Gentlemen on the other side express divergent views as to the cause
t  it,
Some deny it in the midst of it with the proceeds of it on their perSome say it Is just the natural reaction from  hard times to good
Vies, but it is a singular coincidence that we always have a reaction
'' 'at hard ti-mres to good times when the Republican party goes into power.
Somane, while drawing rations from the Republican commissary of prosrity, concede it, profit by it, and criticise its quality;:ana some more
"odest than Aesop's fly on the wheel, say they did it themssclves indirectly.
I notice that geese always bow their heads when entering a barn door,
*sing an erroneous impression as to their own height.  [Applause.]
Of course, if they have done it at all they have done it indirectly, and
they have done It indirectly while out of office it is inore than they have
(ne directly while in office, and this suggests an admirable arrangement
f!r the future which ought to appeal to the patriotlsm. of our frields
hereby they may continue to cooperate iadeflniteiy 'indirectly externally
p the prosperity of our country.  [Applause on the Republican side.]
Some ay, however, that our prosperity is only 'apparent prosperity."
ti ths be true, then our average arnual balance of trade for the last three
'aats;f.$51.000,000 is only an apparent balance of trade, and the deposit
2f 0.2S01,54SiP5 in the savings banks of our country, ior the most part
Posited by' labor-an increase of $185,0217,555,, over a year ago-is only
l' flarent savings;deposit, and the $3,000,000,000 pay roll of.6,000,000
hPle? employed in 5130,00 factories, having an annual output of $13,000,O,9( is" tThe "'insubstantial pageant", of an optimi tic.dreca. [ |Applausd
a the Republican sid.] 


eI 6




"tHE REFUT        TION OF MR. BRYAN'S PROPHECIEs
Extracts from remarks of H.       BC        of on J. BB  of  isconsin, i
daily Cogresonal Record, June 7, 1900.
At the end of the third year of President Cleveland's last ter
the money in circulation was, in round numbers, a billion and a
half of dollars. At the end of President McKinley's third year it was
$2,000,000,000. In the third year of Cleveland the circulation of
money was $1*:3 zper capita of the population. In the third year o
McKinley it is $26.12 per capita. This does not look like makin
money scarce. At the end of President Cleveland's third year th
gold circulation was $490,000,000;  but at the end of President le.
Kinley's third year it was $786,000,000, an increase of nearly thre
hundred millions.
Two-thirds of the increase of circulation has been in gold, the metal
that Mr. Bryan said would make money scarce and throw the country
into poverty and decay. To complete the refutation of Mr. Bryan's
prophecies, there was nearly $75,000,000 more of silver in circulatio
at the end of President McKinley's third year than at the end of
President Cleveland's third year of his second term.
Let us now turn to Mr. Bryan's prediction of the stagnation of
industry if his "16 to 1"' policy was not accepted by the people
The figures of our domestic industry as a whole are not accessible.
They are not necessary, as every intelligent man knows whether
or not labor is plenty, wages good, and agricultural prices away
above the quotations of three years ago.
For our foreign trade we have the figures. During the first three
years of Cleveland's second Administration our imports amounted t
$2,898,000,000; during the first three years of McKinley's Adtrinistration our imports amounted to $2,296,000,000, or under the Dingley
tariff act, during prosperous times and great activity, our imports
were $602,000,000 less han during the same period of the Cleveland
Administration, when the country was filled with distress and want
Now glance for a moment at our exports. During the first thre
years of the second Cleveland Administration our exports amounted
to $3,58,000,000, and during the first three years of the McKialey
Administration our exports amounted to $3,898,000,000-a difference
of $250,000,000 in our favor in exports, and a difference of $602,000,000 in ou orf      in imports, which, added together, make a grand
total of $852,000,000 in our favor during the three years of Republican rule.
During the first three years of the second Cleveland Administration
our excess of exports over imports was $679,000,000; during the firs
three years of the McKinley Administration our excess of exports
over imports was $1,531,000,000, showing the same results, or a ne
gain of $852,000,000. This condition is the result of a wise tariff la
and the pronounced position of the Republican party on the mNone
question, which has given confidence to all of our great manufacturing enterprises.
But I have not yet told the brightest part of the story. That part
consists in:the figures concerning our export of manufactures. Manufacturing implies silled labor, skilled labor means high wages, and
high  ages mean a good demand for all the products of agriculture.
In the three years of President Clevelandw to which I have so oftea
referred, our exports of manufactures amounted to $568,000,00 00. but
in the three years of President McKinley they amounted to $998,(000,
000, an average gan of $143,000,000 per year.
A gratifying fact in the increase of our importations is that nearly
one-half now consists of materials for use in our domestic manufacr
turte  These crude materials do not compete with our own products;
but, on the contrary, giveincreased employment to labor engaged in
producing for the home market and enable us to send our manufar
tures out into the markets of the world.
The Wilson tariff of 1894 professed to be, abov aall things. 
free raw material" tariff for the encouragement of our mnanufactUr'
ing export trade. Yet our largest yearly export of manufactures uan
der it was less than $*30,000,000; and now, four years after the
high-water mrk:of the Wilo     tariff, our yearly export of manU'
ctues is touhing the $00,000      mark under the Dingley tariff
This year, too, we are importing $300,000,000 worth of lanl1r
fcturers' material   large pa   of whch is to be sold abroad, aftei
paying wages to American skilled tla r.
7.


I




fTHE PROSPERITY OF AMERICA DUE MAINLY TO ITS
SYSTEM OF PROTECTIVE LAWS."-Bismarck.
Extracts from remnarks of Hon. CHARLES DICK of Ohio, in daily
Congre.ssional Record, June 9, 1900.
The German Empire was organized in 1871 by a political union of
pru1sia and the German States of central Europe. Prior to that
lime they had been drawn into closer relationship by a zollverein or
customs union based upon the tariff law of Prussia. Immediately
after the establishment of the Empire in 1871 a protectionist party
was organized to combat the theories of free trade and soon found
a strong supporter in Prince Bismarck.      By 1875 the strength of
lthe protection policy had greatly increased.   There was the usual
cry of "robber barons," "monopolists," and "plutocrats," but such
arguments did not deceive Bismarck.         
In a speech in the Reichstag Bismarck said: "'I -wish we could Immediately create a few Ih'indred millionaires. They would spend their money
ii the country, and this expendIiture would give fruit to labor all around.
They could not eat their non1ey thecmselves; they would have to spend
the interest of it. Be glad, then, when people become rich with us. The
commaunity at large, and net only the tax authority, i1 sure to benefit."
A conference was held at Heidelberg to consider financial conditions, and an increase in duties was recommended. An address from
the throne shortly after (Febrsuary 1., 1879) said:
''I am of the opinion that the country's entire economic activity has a
right to claim all the support which right adjustment of duties and taxes
can afford, and whichb in the lands with which we trade is perhaps afforded
beyond actual requirement, I regard it as my own duty to adopt measures
to preserve the German marlet to national production so far as is consitent with the general interest, and oar customs legislation must gradually revert to the true principles on which the prosperous career of the
zoilverel-n rested for nearly half a century, but which have in Important
particulars been deserted in our economeic policy since 1865. 1 can not
deem that, actual success has attended this change in our customs policy."
On May 28 of the same year Prince Biemarck, in a speech in the
Reichstag which lasted for more than an hour, said that the German
market had becomne the mere storage space for the overproduction
of other countries.   Countries which were inclosed, he said, hadl
become great, and those which had remained open had fallen behind.
Were the perils of the protectionist rule so great as sometimes painted
France wouldl long a0go have been ruined, instead of which it is more prosperos, after paying the five millions, than Germany to-day. And protectioniit RuRssia, too —olok at her smarveloos prosperity,  MIanufactures there
have lately been able to save from 30 to 35 per cent., and all at the cost
of trhe tieromn market. Let us close our doors and erect somewhat higher
tbaorriers, sail the Chancellor, "and let us take care to preserve again at
least the German market and German industry."
Speaking of the depresi;lon in ag riulture as a result of free trade,
he said:  "Not only agriculture, but the present state and the German
Empire itself wouild go to ruin,'
Tie regarded the German farmers, however, Pas wise enough to take care
oft their own Interests, and added - "Twenty million farmers will not allow
thflemselves to be ruinpd. It ts only necessary that they should become concioeus of wlhat is efofere thPrn and they will try to defend themselves by
legal And conztitutional methodz.
On another occe-a4sion. Prince BiTmlzarck recommending still higher protFction, said:  "The 'anccess of the United States in material development
Is tIe moaet lliusFtrious of modern times. The American nation has not only
'stcctsfully borne and experienced, thb  most gigantic and expensive war of
ll hitoryj btit immediately afterwards dishbanded its army, found work
far all its soe4l*liers and marines, paid off amost of its debt, given labor and
honties to all the u.nemployed of Eurlope as fast as they could arrive within
the territorv —and still by a systemi of taixation so indirect as not to be
otpressive, mneb les! felt. HIene it is my deliberate judgment that the
P01' Pieritf nf Aimericai is dile m,'inli to its sustem, of protective laws.  I
'rae thtf (Gerrv'fna lies ncoe ve' mierl that point where it is necessary to
a'in th fsti tariff of the United Statess."
lis advice was accepted.     Germany became a thoroughly protcttive country, and the world knows the result in the fact that
0enrmany is now   one of the most prosperous —perhaps the most
irIspTerouas ---of the industrial and exporting countries of all Europe,
Of its prosperity a British official representative at Berlin, Mr. Gastreli, the commercial attache to the British embassy at that capital, in
t I1ma1iunication to the British Government on January 29, 1899,
said;..                                           '
After cornm1leting his famous political work, Prince Bismarck directed
li5silf to (lirecting the energies of the people to peaceful and commercial
o i"~ asnoi he aSchieved P  cess beyteond his most sanguine hopes. When
i  retalzed that in 19897 the value of German exports ofr doiesttc produce
onlyv 5gooot000 popnds less thnn similar exports of British origin, and
tf tn nproportion thereof ner hbad of population has tended to rise in
Yia.ssy and fall in England, perhaps the British public will begin to dq
''" closer attention to oenommanercial and Indostrisal development on the conii t. Aided by the state and protected by a moderate tariff from severe
0eE.M competition, German industries sond commercial enterprises of al'
'nR came into existence, developed, and flourished.
e8


I




"TUE MAR gLo3US         INCR:EASE O F THE ~WEALTa o
OUR COUNTRY."!7xtt from remarks of Hon. J.. MORRILL of Vermont, to
S019 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congres, 1st-Selo,
The marvelous increase of the wealth of our country within a scor
of years. is an unfailing source of public felicitation. The deposit
in savings-banks of,no other country approach the aggregate deposi
of the savings~banks of the United States, where they are chlig
made in monthly driblets by laboring men and women, and here undl
a protective: tariff, the amount in 1872, $669,329,917, had in:188i i
creased to $1,2353,6,069. While this was being accumulated $947,
3S5,816 of the principal of the debt was paid by our country up tl
March 1, 1888, besides a large sum of interest. Thus it appears thii
these laboring men. and women have on deposit in these savitng
banks a. sufficient amount to have paid on March 1, 1888, the who:
of our national debt of $1,209,454,714 and still have thirty-three iril
lionsh surplus
This illustrates the great fact that while, tunder the operations of
protective tariff, domestic productions are largely increased, yve i
the distribution the laborer's share, compared with that of th e rf t  '
taist, is always relatively most increased.
"IN  EVERY     PERIOD OF LOW       TARIFF, THE PRECIOUS
I:- ETALS WERE DRAINED OUT OF THE COUNT=Y."
Witrct from remarks of -Hon. THOMAS Ml. BAYNE of Penumwol
t ua:io, page 4771 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Colotrees
1st Session                                              '
The Democratic party in the past, whenever it came into power,
has reduced tariff duties. During the ninety-nine years of our national existence under the present Constitution there have been over
one hundred and thirty-five acts of Ctogress relating to tariff. '11ih
history of the country presents periods of alternation between protection and tariff for revenue. Every period of tariff for revelnue
was the result of Democratic ascendency, and every period of protection was the resnit of the' success of the Whig or Republican ptarty
4During the progress of this debate one great and important feature
of the system of protection has not been elaborated anything like:ii
fully as its imtportance would seem to require. I refer to the effect
which tariff legislation would have upon our financial system. The
student of history will ascertain by an examilnation of our past thaih
itn every period of low tariff the precious metals were drained ouit if
the country. Tbphe precious metals were sent abroad to purchase ft'l
products of foreign countries. I.1The panic of 1837 and the panic 0o
1857 occurred after and in consequence of the tariff of 1833 and after
and in consequence of the of tariff of 1846. The gold and silver had beet
drained out of the country. The banks were unable to redeem their
paper. Up to 1860 the United States mints had coined over six hut
dred millions of dollars in gold, and yet at that time there was hut
about one hundred and fifty or one hundred and sixty millions of
gold in the United States. Four hundred and fifty million dtol1iar
of this sum and all the gold we had obtained in the years preccdln
that ime had gone abroad. Now, the presence of gold and siter
coin, and the; paper of the banks and of the Government redeewnin
paper currenr, with gold and silver coin, make t he paper currenci
of the country eqnally as good as coin. WVe have now a paper cor'
renty whilch is just as good as gold. It is just as good as  ild l-b.
*atIe It can b(  e coverted into Lgold at any fmoment of time:::0b00 0::::::  j




_ 1 ~   _   ~ _

The Repluli-can party has no apology to make. Its history since
its birlth in 186' is tie history of progress and prosperity.  Its
leaders have always had the welfare of the country at heart. It
has never taken a backward step, but has always been the supporting pillar of the National Government. Its cardinal principles
have been the maintenance of the Declaration of Independence,
internal improvements, a tariff to protect our labor and industries


and to pay Government expenses, the building up of our Navy,
preserving purity in elections, for the diffusion of knowledge and
happiness among all the people, for an honest medium of exchange,
the maintenance of a common standard of value, and an elastic
currency. It has stood for honor, dignity, integrity, patriotism,
progress, prosperity, happiness, law, and order.
Following these principles we have prospered.,




Progfress of the United States.
Production of principal commodities.


Year.
i
1850.......................
1860...............................I
1STO7.................................
1880.....................!890...............
19*00.- J i....................
1g *. s *. * *. * * * + * - - - * * * + * ffi - r z * * 0* * - -~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


I


_ _ _ _.


Cotton.    Sugar. '    old.     Silver.


Coal.! Petroleum.   Pig iron.
eum;      rn


6I__I  __ ____  _ I' Production
Steel.  'oppe. of minerals.
Steel.  ' Copper..  


Bales.
2,38,718
4,861,292
s,114,5>92
5,761,252
7,311 '22
9.436,416


rr110,5
4611.,04
4gi,6(t.S
92,802~
149,191


Dollars.       Dollars.        Tons.        Gallons.         Tons.         lons.       'Tons.; Dollars.
50,.O(,000        50,000     83,158,899..............     56,755.5..............
46,000,( 000      50,(t       8,513.1281     21,000,000       821,223..............       7.200 i........
50),00,(0X     16,00(,0(0    32,8683,x000   220,951,2)0      1,665,179        68,7^0      12,;00     218,598,994
86,w000,0   S 39,200,000     68,822,880    1,104,017,166     8,85,191      1,247,315      27,000     869,319.000
32,845,00     70,485,714    140,866,931   t1924,552,224      92 02,708     4,277,071     115,966     619648,925
79,17 1,00     74,538,495   240,788,238    2, 61,23,568 '   13,78, 242    10,188,1.9     270,588    1.063,620,548


sa
017
"'a
0'.
ao
5 '~
"0."
a
~a


-'- 
_I
-n c:
rn
_ - 
O0 C=
rI1
3;:1
m, 


Ye..
Years.


Total manufacturing Industries of the United States.       Manufactures of iron and steel.              Tin plate.
Nurnberof   Average                             Numbrer              Vaue of                                 PrNduceslablish- number                       d       of      e Wages paid
rents.    enplof oyeestabli-                    i       es          p     i du  ts. IImports. Exports. Imports. 
ets  employeessalariespaid   products.                            P "s.


1650.....................
1870................
1880...............
1 S90...................
1900....................


i Dollars.         Dollars.
12,.025        957,0 59     236,755,464    1,019,106,616
140,433      1,811,246      378,878,96   11,88581,676
252,148      21053,896      775,584,843    4, 22,125,442
258,852      2,712,595 I    947.951,795    5,369,579,191
55,415 i       l4.712,622 i  2,283,216,529  i9,S872,437,283
512,734 }    5,71t,1, i37  2,735.4 80848  13,(i93279.5966


Dollars.       Dollars.      Dollars.............:.,................   20,145,067........................................58,21 5
808      40,514,981   0207,208,696   40.273,682
1,005:   55.476,75     296,557,685   71,266,699
719 9i5,76,192         478,687519    41,679,591
725     134,7;.9,004   885,759.034   20,478,728


Dollars.     Pzounds. ' Pounds.
1,911.820.................
5,706,024.........................
11,002,902  150,932,268............
12,60)5,576. 279,902,880............
25,542.208  6 0,00,.25.......
121,i)918,48  147,963,804  677,.969,600




"THE SUMMIT OF PROSPERITY, AND THE QUAG.
MIRES OF DESPAIR."
Entrct from remarks of i4on. JAMES,. WATSON of India
in daily Congressional Record, Nov. 23, 1903.
I was much amused yesterday at the efforts of my glib-tongiue
friend from Missouri [Mr. CLARK] to show that Mr. Foster had
made up hs mind to issue bonds because of the financial condi.
tion of the Unitkd States at the time when Harrison went out ind
Cleveland went in. I do not know whether the Secretary prepared to
issue bonds or not. I do not know whether he prepared plates or nt,
nor do I care.
What I do know is this, Mr. Chairman, that after Grover Cleve.
land was elected President of the United States there came a change
over this country. Everybody knows that. Everybody knows that
the merchants quit buying, because they did not know what the
price of products would be the next d:y. Everybody knows that
the factories quit running, because the manufacturer did not know
what the price of his wares would be the next day. And everybody
knows that the wheels stood still. Everybody knows that these great
hives of industry were deserted and that the great smokestacks
stood above them   like tombstones above our ruined prosperity.
Everybody knows that countless thousands of laborers tramped the
highways of the nation out of money and out of food, and that
they marched to Washington in Coxey armies in order to ask for
relief. Everybody knows that soup houses were erected in everv
city and village of the land to feed the people turned out of doors
by this policy.
Everybody knows that we began importing more than we exported, and that the balance of trade was against us, and that the
yellow tide of gold flowed from our shores to Europe in order to
make up that balance of trade. Everybody knows that the endless
chain was instituted that drew the gold out of the Treasury in
order to pay the current expenses of the Government, leaving us
bankrupt and with a deficit on our hands. Everybody knows that
whatever Mr. Foster may or may not have done. it is quite sure
that Mr. Cleveland did issue bonds; that he did plunge us into
debt $2i6,000,000; that he did mortgage the present and pledge the
future in order to try the very policy these gentlemen would now
adopt. Whoever heard of an endless chain under a Republican
Administration? It is the product of incompetent Democracy.
And,  Mr. Chirman, we all know that in 1892, we stood on the
summit of prosperity, and we know that a year later we were
floundering in the quagmires of despair.
What catsed that mi!tjhtyl upheaval?. Why, sir, the oni  chan-oe
that occurred was in the tariff policy of the countrW. We had the
sam farts ns and the stn.me farmer.s:' we had the samre labor and tft
same capital; we had the same minex.hautible resorcest, and 'tle
at the one time we were never so prosperous? and at the otherf tima
wef were never so depre.ss.ed. What did it? The tariff policy of the
Democratie party. [Applause on the Republican side.l
We all know ioo, sir, that in 1296 iwe were still camping on tIe
lowlands of despair, but that in.1897 the fogs had lifted, the cloedt*
had diappearedf, and:' we found our.selves marching up the moarntatw steeps towar  the s       nd ttoward t.he most marvelous erS
of our hi-tory. What did it?
Why, the o.ly thifl t t hat happened between thoe ho ttwo periods of
depre son and pros erptiy was the election of a Republican PJ Ident. That is enough to kniow. rApplause an the Republican sitc.i
And the people who went to school during the freetrade period f
Mr. Cleveland, the people who sat on the sharp side of a rail endl
ate Democratic soup, know too much to get into that scrape ar:dti
as long as they have sense enough to stay out of an' insane asyvinul
What is the ideal condition. of a country? Why, Mr. Chairmn"l
the ideal condition of a country is, first, a sound money. Iho
money must be safe and sane and sound. It can not be made thet
tool of speculators. It must be good every day and everywcre
and must be worth 100.ents in every money market of the world.:The tRepublican  party has given you that condition.  Whst 
the second condition of a nation's prosperity? The steadr ertplow
ment of its laboring people at remuherative wages. Ah, has Ibor
ever been so steadily employed as to-day? Have wages ever beeT
so high as to-day?
e-11


I




HE REPUBLICAN PARTY IS A PARTY OF DEEDS
AND   ACTIONS."
tract from remarks of Hon. C(IIA ZRLES DICK, of Ohio, in daily
Congressional Record, Jan. 5, 1904.
he Republican party deserves conlfidence and support because
has redeemed all the pledges it made in 1896 and 1900; because
has secured for American trade the "open door" in China; bese it has successfully put an end to Canada's claims for a valle portion of increasingly valuable Alaska; because it has made
educational and commercial success of Porto Rico.
he Republican party should be continued in power because it
t down insurrection in the Philippines (unfortunately encourd by the "anti-imperialists" and their allies) with a minimum
of life and property; because it has men in its ranks like
esident Roosevelt, Secretary Hay, Secretary Root, Governor Taft,
ivernor Hunt, and many others who are equal to all emergencies
ising in the government of the necessary outside territories we
ve acquired; because it made a glorious success of our war with
ain for the freedom  of Cuba; because its temporary military
cupation of Cuba was a success in every way; because it has
ade the American flag respected as the emblem    of liberty the
de world over.
The Republican party is the party of deeds and actions. In the
se of Venezuela it successfully upheld the Monroe doctrine for
entire continent of America as against the powers of Europe.
promulgated and put in force the doctrine of "protection to
merican industries."  As William McKinley said:
"You do not fhave to guess what the Republican party will do. The
rid knows its purpose.    It has  embodied them   in law   and
ecuted them in administration."
The Republican pdrty has earned the right to four years more
power because it has given the country uhat William McKinley
ked for at Niles, Ohio, on June 20, 1896, when he said: "What
rant in this country is a policy that will give to every American
orkman full work at American wages;" because it has preserved
e pulrity of the American dollar; because it prevented the attack
the sacredness of the S1upreme Court of the United States;
rcause it paid the expenses of the Spanish war with no more strain
the people than the purchase of a few postage stamps; because
j relations with Spain are now more cordial than they ever had
en before the war, and the trade between us is increasing both
ays.
The Republican party is entitled to the vote and interest of every
tizen because it has increased the number of factories in the
nited States from less than 350,000 in 1896, running on short time
r not at all, to 600,000 in 1903, running o0n full time; because it
iis:Ireased the number of factory workers from less than 4,000,000
1 896 to over 7,000,000 inl 1903; because it has increased the yearly
rod;lct of our factories from less than $10,000,000,000 in 1896 to
er $f 5,000,000,000 in 1903.
The Republican party has increased our yearly exports from
82,010,000 in 1896 to $1,420,000,000 in 1903; has increased our
Ports from $77T9,00,000 in 1896 to $1,0P,000,000 (nearly one-half
telrials for manufacturing) in 1903; has increased the revenue
~0lr Government from $326,000,000 in 1896 to $558,000,000 (with
the war taxes abolished) in 1903  On such a record the party
Colntent to; stand. It can not fall.


e'l,,& 




"DOES THIS LOOK LIKE THE RICH GROWING RICHE
AND THE PRPOO         OORER?"
IEtracts frmn remarks of Hon. CHIARLES DICK of Ohio, i di
Congressional Record, Jan. 5, 1904.
The conditions existing from  1893 to 1896 were the work of
men who are now asking the people to again put them into pow
The assertions of what would follow the adoption of Republic
policies were made by the very men who are to-day leaders in 
Democratic party.;What were the principles upon which they then made their 
peals to the people? Free trade and free silver. What were th
assertions as to the effect which the principles of the Republic
party would have upon the country?      That protection could t
bring} prosperity, and that the gold standard could not increa
the currency. Only free silver, they asserted, could give suficie
currency, and only free trade could give prosperity.  Now, let
see, briefly, whether these assertions have stood the test of tic
If they have not, do we want to accept the advice of those men no
The national wealth was set down by competent authorities
1:895 at $77,00,000,000.: In 1900 it was put by the same authori!
at $94,000,000,000.  At the same rate of increase since 1900-a
nobody will deny that the inrease has been quite as rapid sin
that time-the total wealth of the country at the present tire nm
be1; conservatively put at $100,000,000,000. This is an increase
$23,000,000,000 since 1895, a gain of 30 per cent. in eight years, a
it 1will be conceded by all that whatever gain has come began su
sequent to 1896. It is an increase in the average wealth of fr
$1,111 per capita in 1895 to $1,250 per capita in 1903.
But the reply t    this will, of course, be that this increase
wealth has beent solely by the trusts and corporations. It is
logical sequence to the cry of 1896 and 1900 that "'the rich
growing richer and the poor poorer."   Now, let us see about th
The reports of the Comptroller of the Currency are accepted
everybody as reliable a:nd trustworthy. They show that the depos
in. savings banks:were, in 1895, $1,810,000,000, and in 1902 we
$2,750,000,000. These deposits, it must be recognized are those
the masses. Trusts andt cor)orations do not deposit their mnom
in savings banks, but the employees of trusts and corporations
deposit in:-those institutions.  Compare thee deposits of 1903 wi
those of 1895 and you will see that there is an increase of just
per ~cent. in the amount. Then compare the national wealth of 1l
with that of 1895 and you will find the increase to be 33 per ce
Who is it, then, that has made the greatest gains relatively? I
Mational wealth hat grown 33 per cent. the deposits of the peoi
i —. the savings banks have grown 50 per cent. in the same t.i
Does this look like the rich grtoxing richer and the poor poorer/"
The consumption of pig iron is recognized as an accurate baroi
cter of general business conditions. If free trade is so good a thi
for this country, how was it that the production of pig iron iin
United States-1 say "production," because practically all of 
pig iron produced, in the United States is consumed at honme —15
was it that the production of pig iron, which had been over 9,0000
tons in 1890, fell to six and one-half million tons in 1894, thte ye
in which your low-tariff bill became a law, and that it increas
to eleven and one-half million tons in 1898 under the protect
tariff and to seventeen and three-fourths million tons in 1902?
Coal is another measure of business activity. If the low tar
uM as so good a thing, how was it that the coal production of 
United States fell f rom  160,000,000 tons in 1892 —the last year
Republican control —to 152,000,000 tons in 1894, the year il wi
your low-tariff act was put upon the statute books, and remain
almost stationary during the existence of that act, increasing
1898 to M196,0,0000 tons and in 1902 to 969,0,0000  tons? liere.two'great factors of industry-coal and iron..In each case
production, and therefore the consumption, for they are practic
all,consumed at home, fell as soon as a Democratic bill was ofe
and it became apparent that it would become law, and continu
*at a low statej ofI production and consumption until that mct 
reoveid and: the protective tariff resumed, when an enornmoUl
crease immediately occurred.
o-13


I




"THE RiEPUBLICAN PARTY HAS NEVER TAKEN A
BACKWARD STEP."Y,rr( ts from remarks of Ron. GILB dERT N., HAUGEN of Iowa, in
caily Congressional R.ecord, April t23, 1904.
7TI(' Re'publican party 1'as so Op(ioqJwy  to make. Its history s9ince -its
ijzis the history of pro qress av 4 prosperity. Its leadfjs have aiweus.1,,j Ote welae of the coutyath-tI          as never _ale  abckward
t pobt has always bers, the siqyportsflq pillar of the, National Governpt its cardinal tprinciples have been the maintenance of the D~eclaraiiaof Independnece, internal linprovoeinnts, a tariff to protect our labor
iIindustries and to pay Government expensecs, the;building uhp of our
-,pre-serving purity in elections, for the, diffusion of knowledge andi
appiness amiong all the poop>e, for an lionest medium  of exch'ange, th
iwiptenance of a commonos standard of value, anid an elastic currency. Ii
sto or honor, dignity, Integrity, patriotism''r, progress, prosperty
I.fpp 0055, law,;and order.
Following these, principles- we have prospered.  I will Insert In the
tp,c rd tables relati've to a-ricultnre~ corornerce, and other matters perlthming to this country.
a    FK        a zi;     oiy     m
ao~~axcr aug xj.................  ~a.........i...rx ~ a i......
as-s-sos.........  -
V'-vnswa,  -iss-as-   55 ~~.z      -s~.-O~f.-ia-s~' 5~5.
Z —s,oasS.annl   asO-4-5 4as-on-.scar15-S —I
-s        555 Itcs~ 
I 4~    5I     5~55
5511 055.4ps                 ~             ~-as 
I    ss4~ ssC. as-is'-Z' a-sOSO   -1s-:-I — s. —O -I  a-as
O                                                   7-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 
aotsss-na- l-a  s-esa ssss~as —snns —4S
-I-i~~~~~~~~~0                           'N5~-isI5'I'i-5I~-~ —sI-  s
~~asn~~s-;s~~~L~SOI~ m s -sa-is ai* s ---1S.-Os-5
-   Sdo -i as  srSCc-. ~aasashsi
-aia-s~0ss i-s-s~ras- s sias~~slO5s-,aa
s --- —-— ssss-sF asa-is        ----,  -~~~~~~~i'~
ins-s-a —a-55 —.55-55ia —i-:anasg  — i —S S~assrO~Z 5
isaa V  C-i-an-iga -s — v-n  a     Vs-  t s-9ai ---1~ ~
-R,~~~~~~~~~~II  K, ~~~n 4: ~~~y _- 4 — ' ----  -- s —l-CS 1~5IsS-lI
-z  C  "d <_    cz       Z  —: cr,  isa- 1C-= —_s'o  a
cz:s-X-,  V sa-s-sI aX 5 a-  a, -    -     s-s-' f-l~~s a  a' $~~s-50Z  isia'g)      ki --  s,s
~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~t~~t ~ 
-- ---  i-5-i —4~~~~~~~~~s4,-.s.(
-sZ  -4  Oic —'i5Osi55iSa                      soasss-a —
-  s-i-,   s-s —s ---' —s-s-S-'S             In; 
- -  ~~~~~~~~~~~~C  4- 4 ',~"
-4  C O   ar- assO- -as-iA O  -I
- - - - asa-~~~ ~~ ~.-os ---I~~ss~~55 S~0Css-s-  a'aasSO -
S 5550s CISs-I~k  I-assaR S.sSOia- 40bas isI -nisg
t-14~~~~~

I




i   WHO:' IS::  OMPLAINING, ANYWAY?"f
Extract fromt remarks 0:of:l:on  (HAU4    S D1CK    of Ohio,
dailq Congresss'ional Record, Jalt. 5, J 1904.
Who is complaining, anyway, unless it be the Democratic p
tician, hungry for the loaves and fishes of patronage?  Who el
has a right to nomplain?
Why should the advocate of a protective tariff to build up e
industries complain when the importation of tin plate dropped fr
1,03l,000,000 pounds in 1891 to 117,880,000 pounds in 1901, an
the amoulnt manufactured in this country jumped from nothin
to,400,000 pounds?
Why should the small investor complain because a rich man
panic on Wall street has taken more than $6,000,000,00 worth
wind and water out of stocks, put a stop to reckless speculation
placed tusiness on a sounder basis, and increased the valtue
money so that it is now almost impossible to sell at par gilt-edge
municipal securities bearing 4 per cent. interest?
Why should the banker complain when the total money in ci
culation in the country has increased from  fourteen hundred mil
lion dollars in 1890 to twenty-two hundred and fifty million dollar
in 1902, or 50 per cent., and circulation per capita from $2?gS t(
$28.43, while deposits in bank have grown from $3,000,000,000 t
nearly six billions, or almost double, and deposits in savings bank
have Increased in number from   four and one-fourth millions t
six and two-thirds millions, or over 50 per cent?
Why should the man proud of the material greatness of t
eountry complain When the value of manufactures in the:Tnite
States Increased from nine and one-third billion dollars in IS90 t
over $13.000.000,000 in 1900, or almost 50 per cent.: when exrort
of mercandise per capita have increased from $13.50 in 19n t
$17.49 in 1902, while imports of merchandise per capita have de
creased in the same time from $12?.35 to $11.43; when exports n
iron and steel and manufactures of those commoditles have in
creased from twenty-five and a half million dollars in 1890 to neoar
one hundred and twenty-two millions in 1900, or Iamost fiveftl
while the falling off since has been diue entirely to the enorrmanli
increased domestic demand, which has been beyond the rapacity re
of our own mills to supply; when exports of manufacttures e
increased from  one hundred and fifty millZorwQ to tfour: hntrd
millions and we lead tJie world in the pro&dction of gold, petrolae
pirl iron, steel. wheat, corn, and cotton?
Why should the farmer and dairyman complain when the armen
of loleomartarine made in this country the year before the prmeni
Republican" oleomargarine law was passed was 16.315,4247 pound
and only 71*,11$,44 pounds the first year after the law w  as pased
a loss of 55,104,183 pounds, or 44 per cent., whieh caused an at
ditional consumption of butter to the value of $11,080.36. or th
output of 650 creameries of averae e size, which raised the averaS
price of butter to 90 cents a pound?
Why should the wage-earner omplain when, according to l)d'n
Review, there has been a very material reduction In the  ost of
living over a year ago? Meat is lower than at any time since th
prices went up two years ago: breadstuffs and cereals are chefare~
and the splendd crops now being harvested are an asstrance thfe
will become ftill rheaper. Tn almot very line the cost of lidf
has been reduced. On the other hand thie advance in wages the
past year has been almost universal. Railwan trainmen are hne
fiing from  a 20 per cent. rasse, white.Wrilled labor generatl i
enioving wage increases varyin  from A to 15 per cent. Labor i
gettin;ts:share of the common prosperity.
Why should tfe friends of expansion complain when the impntw
into 'he United States from    Porto Rico have increased frm
O,.t8lm0tO  in 1897 to $11,0$1,195 in 1903 and the exports frm t~h
nited States to Porto Rico have increased from t $1981A.q" in
1:07 ti $10i,462,53 in 1903, and the mp iports nto the Tnited 5tnte
fror the Philippines have increased in the am  time tme from  t..1S^'i
to $11t37,lr84 and the exports from the United States to the Philt
ippines, exclusive of supplies sent by the Government, from $9459
in' 1R9:to $4.038,900t9 in 9: 03
Why: should the exporter complain when our total export to
PortoE Rico, Hawaii, and the PhiliptneAs have grown fr sf i IaX
fthree-fourth mllion dollars in 1897 to towenty-seven and onewiehth
millions in i903, mior than quadrurled, while the total er.orn of
the Ut0ted States in thaO peitod haew roawn from f one bl^ te:over one billion foer* 7-ndred mllwiow, a.ain of over flo,000,fO 0
each ad r ery day   tf ts* yart
e-415.


I




HE AMERICAN INVASION OF FOREIGN MARKETSU*
ret fromt relmarks of Eon,. CHAR/LES DICK of Ohio, in daily Congressional Record, January 6, 1904.
SEB "AMERICAN INVASION" OF FOtREGN MARKETS.
Our goods and our machinery are being sent all over the world. A
ingie manufacturing concern in this country received this year orders from
ngland, France, Germany, Austria, Sweden, Belgium, Japan, South Africa,
uastralia, New Zealand, Patagonia, Chile, Argentine Republic, and Canada.
abroad and you will find American goods everywhere. It is known now
every country in Europe as the "American invasion."  Many American
ravelers have told of it during the last year or two. None have given a,are vivid account of it than Frank A. Vanderlip, formerly Assistant Secreary of the Treasury. HIe said that American locomotives, running on
cmerican rails, now whistled past the Pyramids and across the long Siarian steppes. They carried Hindoo pilgrims from all parts of the Empire
the sacred waters; of the Ganges.
Three yearc ago there was but one American locomotive In Great
ritain. To-day American engines pull trains on all English roads of imortance. American bridges span rivers on every continent.   American
ranes are swinging over many foreign moles. Wherever there are extensive
arvests there may be found American machinery to gather the grain.
n every great market of the world tools can have no better recommendation.
than the mark "Made in America."   We have long held supremacy as a
rolducer of cotton. We are now gaining supremacy as a maker of cloths.
Anerican cottons are going into every country. You will find them in
Manchester as well as in the native shops of the Orient. Bread is baked
in Palestine from  flour made in Mlinneapolis.  American windmills are
working east of the Jordan and in the land of Bashan. American phonogiaplis are making a conquest of all tongues. The chrysanthemum banner
f Japan floats from the palace of the Mikado from a flagstaff cut from a
Wasington forest, as does the banner of St. George from Windsor Castle.
Thie American typesetting machines are used by foreign newspapers, and our
cash registers keep accounts for scores of nations. America makes sewing
machines for the world. Our bicycles are standards of excellence everywhere.
Our typewriters are winning their way wherever written language is used. in
all kinds of electrical appliances we have become the foremost producer. In
many European cities American dynamos light streets and operate railways. Mutch of the machinery that is to electrify London tram lites is now
being built in Pittsburg. The American shoe has captured the favor of all
Suerope, and foreign shoemakers are hastening to import our machinery that
they may recover the power to compete with us.
In the far East, in the capital of Korea, the Hermit Nation, there was
recently inaugurated with noisy music and flying banners an electric railway built of American material by a San Franciso engineer, and it is now
operated by American motormen.
What is the cause of all tthis remarkable prosperity?  Does anyone
dfubt that it is the resvlt of the policy which kept our manufacturers from
1tcif7 destroyed by destructive competition, before they became firmly establiheadt, with the established manlufacturing concerns of Europe?  Realize,
if you can, the great change that has taken place. We paid England $150
Per ton for steel rails in 1.866, and now we are building railways and
briges and furnishing locomotive- in Burma, in Egypt, in Great Britain
here f, and laying down the steel in those countries to do this work, or
ensdilng the finished product thbru made of steel at $1S per ton. Could we
'ver have donse this had not our manufacturers and our laborers been proteeted by a tariff while we were learning bow to do it? Atnd now, in the
fite of all this prosperity, annd all this marveloQts growth, of which the
'/itced States i gettting the fult benefit, the Democratric party is demanding
tif: ee hf ange 4mr tariff policy ie order to adopt a tariff for revenue only.
It d ths' at the very momenten wiceh every country in the worrld has abatsotifd. that system except Gre  Bt,      nd   he Great  tB d when  itain herself
` citffpaed in a. sreat struggle to chain-e back to the protective system,
BcaisSe of the rtealization that under the free-trade system they can not
Imet thie competition of American manufacturers, and realizing that if the
a'::](e of Great Britain. do not agree to the change and wih th e establishment of a protective tariff the British Empire will decline from being
the tirst power of the world to a fifth-rate position.


e-16




"THEREPUBLICAN PARTY STANDS READY TO PRO.
TECT THE MANUFACTURER AND LABORER OF THIS COUNTRY."
Exrtracts from debate in daily Congressional Record, November 27, s93S.
Mr. GaRiOSVENoR. I have In my hand a little paragraph that somcisi
handed to me, a special telegram to a newspaper from Berlin. That is in
the country to which it is said we have been unkind and from which they
are going to drive us out. This telegram reads:
B.3IaLzN, November 15,
The Frankfurter Zeitung's Constantinople correspondent says the Penla.
sylvania Steel Company has been awarded the contract for 20,000 tons 0a
steel rails for the Mecca Railway, in competition with the Krupps am
several other German and Belgian establishments.
Mr. BENnY. Does the newspaper article that you read from also cor,tain this statement: "The price is $22.88 per ton delivered at Beirut. Thi
price of steel rails in the United States is $28 per ton, which is the highesa
average price in ten years?"
Mr. GRosvraooR. That is right, I suppose.  [Applause on the Deimo
critic side.]
Now, if the gentleman gets the floor at somne point of time, not nesc.sarily in this debate, but at any time during this Cuonsress, will he tell l
in an official manner how much harm has been done to the people of the
United States by breaking into that monopoly of the Krupps on the othirs
side of the water and selling steel rails even at a price lower than thi:
can afford? Has not the material of thsese steel rails to be taken from the
mines of Lake SRuperior, transported down to the blast furnaces, manufact-redl into billeae  and, steel rails, all to be wrought out by the labor of
Americans and paid for by American money?     Who cares what they gel,
~then,'for the steel rails?
Mr. WILLIAAMS of Missis.sippi.L If it be true, are the prices at which
these rails are sold there a reasonable price, giving a profit to our steel
industries or not; and it a reasonable price, giving a profit to our steel industries, why should those industries at home, under the shelter of a taril
charge a higher and therefore extortionate price to the American railroads,
and through the American railroads to American travel and commerce?
Mr. GGROSVEORB. Why, that i:s the whole of this discussion.  The Iepmblican party of this coumtry stands in  - arms, panoplicd, with a hisitor
Ibeore the country of being ready to protect the manfrrfacturcr and taborer
oIf this country, and ready to absoib and control the American market.
[Loud applause on the Republican side.]. And they are readv and willing
that the price here at home shall be regulated simply and solely by the
competition among the manufactures of steel and every other commodity.
Mr. W-ILLIAAms of Mississippi. If they have sold them abroad at a
rea.sorable profit, does; it not follow that If they sell them at home at a
higher price than than they sell them abroad it is extortionate profit and price for
the home market?
B Mr. ORaOSVFBnoR. Not at all. Why, Mr. Chairman, the CONstoRasSSiO''1
R:EcomaR  has beer crowded in the last eight or ten years with a compltce
unianswerable refutation of the suggestion of the gentleman.
I remember a ery well coming across the water nearly three years aso
with the representative of one of the great steel organizations of this country, not the United States Steel Company, but a company organized an'i
manufacturing a certain peculiar item of steel manufacture, and he tosid
me that he had sold at prices that inured to their loss of a million dollars
during that year. This year I met him again. He told me that that money
was the best used money that his company had ever used; that they had in'
trodnced their commodities into the -markets of the country at prices thae
insured their successful competition, and they were now selling their crommodities at a fair and Just price.
Why, the American people have always done that. They have forc:ed
theircr way into every market of Europe.
Our. factories in this country send their surplus not into their o';"
marikets to be sold under price, but tiey send them to European markcet
tlht they may nowt destroy the home market, in order that they may rc:lt~s
their surplus. The whole of these arguments amount to nothing. We have
not stifled competition, and competition answers all the arguments of gentileae on. the,other rside. I, have seen steel rails sell in the United States:t
one hundred and forty-odd, dollars a ton. Now they are down to $28 a:o11 -Competition has done all that. The first steel rails that ever were sold in the
United States were sold at $145 a ton, and gradually, under this systs1m
of ours that keeps foreign competition out and opens theI foreign miariA
to our: surplus, these steel products have steadily gone down to $28 a ton
and that.$28 Is a part of the prosperity of the country, and the differ 'C"
between that and the lowfigures of steel rails is paid to the laborer of tlNI
country, or 95 per cent of it
e-17




"DEMOCRATIC I POLITICAL           BUGABOOS."
'Iis('ts from remarks of Hon. HENRY R. G.IBSON of Tennessee,
ia, daily Congressional Record, December 14. 1899.
DEMOCRATIC POLITICAL BUGABOOS.
*-Ihe priests of some religion, doubting their ability to rule their
Ite by 'appealaing to their rteason an   ciscieuices, resort to
atlidts lof terrror, land analrufacture at'ul idels and iillIStrlls
avcn In'es and perform    variou9s incaiitworis and groteslql
ices, attired in robes of terror, with horns on their heads and
aes painted in imitation of imaginary monsters.
So the high priests of the Democratic party have for the last
srty years becln trying to terrify the people with imaginary political
ieaboos.
When Lincoln was first a candidate the Dermocratic high priests
pt   a p   awful bugabhoo they called "abolitionism," and deceived
Itiplied thousands of the people.
When Grant was our candidate for the Presidency they manuctured twin butgaboos, called "centralization" and "military despoti," and sceared lmany timid persons into btel"ieving that if Grant
is elected oar liberties would all be taken away frorn us.
When Hayes was our candidate they paraded before the public
e caricature denomiinated a "bloated bondholder," and tried to:ike us believe that it was the llepublican party in disguise, ald;:it if Hayes was elected the bondholders would take all of our
roperty fromn us and feed us on husks.
When Garfield was our candidate these high priests of Democracy
sieated a most fearful bugaboo devil called the "force bill," and
rrified the Southern people within an inch of their lives by swearS that if Garfield was elected a vast armty would be sent South
lhold the elections, and that none but republicans and negroes
ould ble allowed to vote, and as a consequence the South would
e lcstroyed -lanid life for a Democrat would not be worth living.
WVicena Harrison was last a candidate these saml.e eDernocratic
igh priests got together:anrd invented a brand new lot of frightful
Ugiboos, whomrn they denomuinated "robber barons," and rushed them
1 i over the country" to the terror and dismay of millions of innocent
nd unsuspecting Democrats, and created such an epidemic of apprecnsion and fear that Cleveland was actually elected President;
dl ivow we are told by these samne D)emocratic high priests that
levelandt was a worse devil than all of the awful "robber barons"
oamlbined! [,Laughter.]
tllen McKinley was our candidate for President three years ago
ie Democratic bugaboo rmakers brought out a st;pendous crawling
lsaister of antediluvian proportions and branded it a "Goldblug,
id swore that it was the Republican party and that if McKRiley
as chosen President this Paleozoic monster woulldl devour the sub-;lance of us Americans as the caterpillar and the palmerwormx del1urid the crops of the children of Isrtael in the days of old.
We were told that the IRepublican party could not be trusted,
alit all the usurers, all the money sharks, all the bloated bond-;lhrs, all the robber all the   thegoldblugs, all the corruptionists,
i tle enemies of the laboring man, and all the foes of the farmer
ere in the Republican party, and that if that party elected
lr-Ililey as President awful and manifold would be the calamities
Iv. would inevitably fall upon the American people, and the salt
t lil erty wolld so lose its savor that our very freedom would be
Ile ihe blazonry of silks ind jewels in the gloomr of the grave.
PROSPERITY IN SPITE OF PROPHECY.
I l4 out of the-se nettles of predieted danger havre  pruany the
be(lufifult blossoms of safety and prosperity. Instead of money betf'iii ft scarcer, it haS becomne nmoore plent/iftd; instead of agrictltulral
P  ts going down to noeathinrl, themy have yrenatly increased in price;
F115fad a of laborers' wagfes being cut dM11own to paunper rates, they have
ger greatly raised; instead of railroads having nothing to do, they
aottof enough cars to carry their passengers aind fareights;i instead
O       f rt business men being  ground to powder' ini thep bankruptcy
ti8tts, they have never been happier or more prosperous; instead
I0/ 0it manufacturing establishments closing their doors,: all of hthe
oid ')0es3 are in full blast and new oe8s arer springing iup on every




"DOES THIS LOOK AS THOUGH A PROTECTIV
TARIFF WAS DESTROYING OUR MARKETS
ABROAD?"
Extract from remarks of Hon.. B. SHATTUCK of Ohio, in daji
Congressional Record, March 31, 1900.
Does this look as though a protective tariff was destroying 0o
markets abroad?
Take the single item of corn. The exports in 1896 were 99,000,0
bushels, and in 1899, 174,000,000 bushels. Does this look as though
protective tariff was destroying our foreign markets?
The exports of wheat in 1896, under the Democratic low tari
were 60,000,000 bushels; in 1899, under the Dingley protective tari
139,000,000 bushels. Is there any devidcnce of destruction of ou
foreign markets in this figure?
The value of wheat flour exported in 1896 was $5i2,000,000; in 189
$73,000,00  of oats, il 1896, 13,000,000 bushels were exported; i
1899, 30,000,000 bushels; of oatmeal, in 1896, 38,000,000 pounds; i
1899, 58,000,000 pounds; of rye, il 1896, less than 1,000,000 bllsliel
in 1899, more than 10,000,000 bushels. Is there evidence of destrue
tion of our foreign markets in any of these?
In provisions a comparison of the conditions of 1899 with thi
of 1896 is equally discouraging in the attempt to find support fo
the Democratic doctrine that a protective tariff destroys fortigi
markets. The total exports of provisions, which in 1896, under
low tariff, were $133,000,000, were in 1899, under a protective tarif
$ 75,000,000.
Bacon exports increased from four hundred and twenty-five t
five hundred and sixty-two million pounds; hams, from one hundre
and twenty-nine to two hundred and twenty-five million pounds
lard, from  five hundred and nine to seven hundred and eleve
million pounds, while the value increased from thirty-three to forty
two million dollars during the period under comparison, 1896 to
1899.
Dairy products show an equally healthy growth under the pro
tective system, which, according to the Democratic theory, destroyed
markets abroad, the exports of batter increasing from $9,937,203 in
1896 to $,263,951 in 1899; cheese, from 36,000,000 pounds in 189
to 78,000,000 pounds in 1899, and milk, from $270,453 in 1896 t
over $1,000,000 in 1899.
In cotton, another great article of agricultural production, and
entering largely into our foreign commerce, the exports of 1896
were four and one-half million bales, and in 1899 nearly seven and
one-half million bales.
Exports of cotton-seed oil, in which our Southern friends are so
much intereted, amounted, in 1896 under a low tariff, to 19,000,000
gallons, valued at a little over $5,000,000, and in 1899, under pro
tection, to 50,000,000 gallons, valued at over $12,000,000, while th
total exportation of cotton-seed meal, which in 1896 amounted to
404,000,000 pounds, was in 1899 more than 1,000,000,000 pounds
having considerably more than doubled in quantity, and actualli
trebled in value during that time.
Of fruits and nuts the exportation in 1896 amounted to five and
one-half million dollars and in 1899, seven and one-half million
dollars.
Of hops, the exportation in 1896 was one and one-half million
dollars, and in 1899, three and one-half million dollars; vegetables,
in 1896, one and one-half million dollars, and in 1899, two and onehalf million dollars; and of seeds of various kinds, in 1896, one and
one-half million dollars in value, and in 1899, five millions.
In two articles of farm   production there has been a nlmrked
falling off in our exportations.
In 1896, under the Democratic low tariff, we exported 7,000,00i
poundsof wool, and in 1899 only one and one-half million pounds;
and of sheep the exports in 1896 were over 3,000,000 in number, as
against less than 1,000,000 in 1899.
ere, perhaps, is a single evidence around which the Democratic
party may rlly in support of the theory that a protective tari
destroys foreign markets.
Under athe Iow-tariff law, which afforded absolutely free trade
in wool, we: were exporting four times as many sheep and foLu
times a;s much wool as under the protective tariff.
N0t::onyso, but in 1896 we imported 28300,000 pounds of wo001
and in 1899 but 76,0,0.
e-19


I




i
I
I
I
I
i


I


iPROTECTION        AND    PROSPERITY."-"REVENUE
TARIFF; INDUSTRIAL          DEPRESSION0"
r tir: s from  remarks of Hon. J. C. BURROWS of Michigan,
paigqe 34/f9 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st
eession.
Hencry Clay, speaking in the United States Senate of our indusrial coirdition immediately preceding the tariff of 182-1, declared:
i"If I were to select any term of seven years since the adoption of
e present Constitution which exhibited a scene of the most wideiprcad dismay and desolation, it would be exactly that term  of
even years which immediately preceded the establishment of the
riff of 1824."
But this era of protection was followed by the tariff of 1824 and
[82, which enthused new life into our languishing industries and
sroasht to the country a period of marvelous prosperity. The leadmg mletropolitan journal epitomizes the history of this period as
fillows:
"So soon as the tariff of 1824 went into operation the whole aspect
it1 course of affairs were changed. Activity took the place of
ilutgishness. Capital was invested; labor came into demand; wages
d vanced; mines were opened; furnaces built; mills started; shops
n utiplied; business revived in all its departments. Revenue flowed
IDioilsly into the coffers of the Government. The debts created by
w:,o expensive wars were entirely paid off. Such a scene of general
prosperity had never before been seen by our people."
President Jackson said in his annual message December 4, 1832:
"Otr country presents on every side marks of prosperity and hap7ies5Si aUnequtaled in nany other portion of the world."
Mr. Clay, in speaking of this era of protection, said:
'"If the term of seven years were to be selected of the greatest
prosperity which this people have enjoyed since the establishment of
ti'ir present Constitution it would be exactly that period of seven
eRiars which inlrmmdiately followed the passage of the tariff of 1824."
But tnfortunately this era of protection and prosperity was folowced by the compromise tariff of 1833, which provided for a gradual
adituction of duties until they should reach an average of not to
exceed 20) per cent. And what was the effect of this change of
p(jliic? Long before that limit had been reached the evidences of
is p', rniiomlus influence were everywhere visilel. Capital invested in
iltustrial enterprises, to save itself from  absolute destruction, was
ilhtildawn. Contemplated expansion of business was abandoned, our
mantfalctures, one after another, went down under a torrent of
fo{rcig r  imnportations, while American labor stood idle and emptyI;ntied in presence of the appalling and widespread desolation which
(claminated in the frightful panic of 1837. And not only the people,,it the Governmenat itself became so impoverished that the Presiideti' of the United States was forced into a broker's shop to raise
his o(vrerdue and  nplaid salary.
1n 1842 the protective system was again invoked, and under its
fllttry influeInc e our droopig inindusties revived and prosperity
itook thie place of disaster. The general effect upon the country of
the tfrirff of ISC4 is best described by President Polk in his annual
message in 1S46:
"iabor in all its branches is receiving an ample reward. while
i* (l'li.tion, science, and the arts are rapidly enlarging the means of
s.,oci:l happiness. The progress of our coiuntry in her career of
j    i'"'lltiBcss, not only in the vast extension of our territorial limits or
inl tlie rapid incrcase of our population, but in resources and wealth
ifl in the happy condition of our people, is without an example
i'1,th.e history of nations."
|t Rt this brief period of prosperity was quickly followed by the
irenute tariff of 1846 and 1857, which brought to the country another
er' if industrial depression, culmninating in the panic of 1857, the
list rous consequences of which are still within the memory of
vl:i men. Universal bankruptcy overtook the people, and the
|('T;lrnment with an empty Treasury was forced in times of peace
iO itrrow money at a discount of from   12 to 30 per cent. Then
I';~r'?:> the eraf of protection in 1861, which has now been extended over
0' ft:riod of more than a quarter of a century, and who does nlot
l:",i, that duri n  thoese eventful yiears o1ur industrial adane ment 
1::;:,(:, steady d(xild w ithout a parallel in the history of the Republic?


i


Sig. 8




"W    HILE THIS PROTECTIVE T:HERY           0S MAINTAINE
OUR' COUNTRY WILL GO ON IN ITS ACCUMULATIOI
OF WEALTH AND PROSPERITY."
E:ixtract from remarks of Hlon. A. JI.  lOPKIN  of Illinois, pa
4036 of daly Congressional Record, 50th Cotngress, 1st. Si.s 
I cannot sympathize with those who denounce protection of h-omt
industries as a species of robbery. The argument in favor of pro
tection rests upon the great principle of the advantage of divetrtfie
production. Every industry is stimulated and benefited un(ler
well-regulated tariff law. It keeps the currency in circulation ani,
our people instead of draining our country of it and sendingtlt
abroad to purchase products manufactured in foreign countries arn
thus avoids financial distress. It brings the consumer and prorduce
together and saves the cost of transportation. Fifty men comtlrn.ain
a community all engaged in agriculture would each only lihave one
consumer for his products. Diversify their interests by placing thle
in groups of ten, and each group of rooducers would have his ioWn
market increased fivefold. If each engaged in a separlate iundiir'
each would have fifty consumers for his product, land they toge:tfr
would become a self-sustaining and independent colmmunity. Soum
economic principles require that so far as may be practicable, ev\r
section and locality in our country shall have diversified inll;re ts
numerous enough to be self-sustaining. Economically considertdl 
is the development of that political idea which has made tlhe Ner
England township the. model political organization of the world,
little republic in itself. And las the great Frenchtman, De rTocqj
ville, said, while it exists the Republic will flourish,
So while this protective theory is maintained our country will gr
on in its marvelous accumulation of wealth and prosperity.
EVERY: INDUSTRY ISNDUTiY INTER:ESTED THAT EIVEEN
OTHER IXDUSTRY SHOULD LIVE AND FLOURIStL"
xZtract from remarks of Hon. SEIRTH L. MILLIKiTN of Afila
page 4263 of daily Congressional Record, 5iuth Coanyresy,  i
Session.
Gentlemen talk of the protected industries, and say but 21:!',
cent: of our seventeen millions of laborers enjoy the fruits o:f pr(,
tection; that is, they are not engaged in protected industries.  iatt
a narrow and absurd view on the subject. The protection and rlihtenance of one industry helps all other industries. It not ol/ n i'
creases the market for their products, but every avocation dlii1tt~l
tinued must send out its employes to compete with workingr! it' l
other avocations, or into idleness and poverty. Ience every iniiltr
s nterested that every other industry should live and flourish.
Why, suipose our manufacturing should cease to exist,:q t~ t
Mi   bill provides, where would the millions of men emploryed iit
go.? Some other avocations would have to be crowded with tl' 11i'
support them in the poor-houses of the country. And yet this rti
bate ias developed the fact that our manufactories are the clie
objects of attack in this bil.
e-2,


I




it:RY PERIOD        OF PROTECTION        HAS GIVEN      PROSFERITY;      EVERY TARIFF      FOR REVENUE
DISASTER."
I.s,,'L~^t from reunarks of lion. NAThAN    GOFP', Jr., of West
Iirginai, page; G6.15 of daily Congressional Record,.50jo h Congress,
l;t S ession.,
( Chaiirman, every period of protection in the history of our,,<i:   let' as given it prospc rity every era of tariff for revenue hias!, li[tHr   to  it disastecr.
('l.snidcnt Jackson in his message of December 4, 183:2, said:
a.,"r country presents on every side marks of pr'osperity and hapi:',,s, unequaled, perhaps, in any other portion of the world. If we
i'il appreciate our comIparative condtition, existing causes of di:haoti:it will appear unworthy of attention, and with hearts of thank',i:i ss t that Divine Being who has filled our cup of prosperity,
a... s:ll feel otur resolution strengthened to preserve and hand down
ik: p:osterity that liberty and that union we received from our fathers,
hhl wMich constitutes the source of our blessings."  * *
i:4a1)mb.her, if you ptleaise, Mr. Ch airman, that this epitome was
aimi.~'cn by a 1)e:moer:atic President, "of Jeffersonian simplicity," and
(irin.r the highest protection period of our history, to that date.
A:.ter that caine the "revenue only tariff," the compromise tatriff,
1fro  3833 to 184:2. Bvy virtue of it our industries were paralyzed,
our capilal uncmplo'ycd, our tlabor idle. Our importers were busy,:d foreign maln  faf'turers supplied our markets. Our own establi.snts for mamlfactu ring were closed and our consumers paid
hi:i'cr for neiessitis ithan ever before. Our people tasted of the.riy dregs of the bitter cup of "revenue reform."  The burden was::-.;, tha.n they could bear, awlt they re-enacted the protective..iia' in t843. This is whaL:t Presi(ent Polk said of the situation
u!.:   h ttat enactnaenut. I read from his message of December 8,
'.i,   voee vour last session no afflicting dispensation has visited orti
r~i:i'v;  x'etir;Il,"good health has pirevailed; abundance has crowned
iH, lo! of/ " ti.e,ust.aIdnm in  at~dl ilabor in all its branches is rceivHi;., mit am ple reavx;t rd, v<laie. educ:ation, science, and the arts are
"';ixiv cilar:irim, i tlie Inmeans of socia.l happiness. The progress of
'l:   a "rortrv in ther carereerof greatnrss, not only in the vast extension,,iF rrr ter ritori tlimits nond the rapid increase of our population,
I,N't in ' r esources  alnd wealth, and int the happy condition of our
n,'I:.. is withliot ani ex:imple in tle history of nations.""
'j}:,'Thn c(:amne e the re'pe:l of the act of 1342. Although "Polk andl
ni:t.adh "    h:ad lbcen elected ais friends of that measure, Dallas cast the
ti -'>' ih:t lde:tIroved it, and wx'e haid the revenue tariff of 1846, knoxwn.... tSh "\Walker act.." Irom another like it "Good Lord, deliver us."
' few years after its cnactment, while it was still in force, President
t]riinore said- I quote from his message of Dec. 2, 1851:
t'Hle vatlue of our exports of breadstuff s andt provision-s, which it
'.:.,; supposed thle incentiv f o   tariffa r  and large importations!"     1 airo id xottild ha)ve irrelitl aiugaiented, has fallen from $6fiS,-?.'1:_.9'1 in 1847, to $.t6;,051'373 in 1.850, and to $231.84i,653 in 1851,
";: al strong pribh,'bilitv, amounting almost to a, certainty, of a still
C:I:!her reductio  in in the current year. * *  * The policy which
d'iia:f;etd a low rate of duties on foreign merelhandise, it was thought
i.i. iose who pro noted and established it, would tend to benefit:i:' farming popiulattion of this country by increasing the demand
"     sin r:isi ne the pricei of agricultural products in foreign markets.
I'. fi eao(ing i'( ctls, lhowever, seem to show incontestably that no:"'- res lt has f'olawed the adoption of this policy."
eadt from the message of President Buchanan to the Congress,::il;t December 9, 8657:
" 'he earth has yielded her fruits abutndantly and has bountifully
r"'d     vrded the toil of the hitsbandman. Our great staples have conm'*:!ied: igh prices, and until within a brief period our manu1' r::ring, minera,,l, and mechanical occupations have largely par". of the genieral prosperity. We have possessed all the elements
':ttrianl xwealth in rich labundance, and yet, notwithstanding ail
'i    d v a odvantatt:e,-, our country in its monetary interests is at the:'i....:nt momnot in a deplorable condition. In the midst of unsurit' de( pentv in all the productions, and in all the elements of
a':    xl withi, 'twe find our manuffactures Suslpe)nded, our public
'|:" retarded, o(u,-r pI'ivate enterprises of different kinds abandoned,
d: thousands of useful laborers thrown out of employment.::-22


I




"THESE ARE THE RESULTS OF REPUBLICAN LEGIS.
LATION."
Extract from remarks of Hon. JAMES I. WAT$ON          of o. J E  E. W ON of India,
in daily Congressional Record, Nov. 14, 1903.
My Democratic friends, what have you done in order to warrant
the people of this country in giving you control of tilhe Governnment?
What great act of this country that has added glory to the flag
or prosperity to our people has ever sprung from the sterile brain
of lDemnocracy? What orne in the last forty years? Can you name
it?  Why, the Republican party took charge of this country in
1860.  We have had charge of it continuously ever since except
four years from 1893 to 1897. Absolutely every act that has mande
this country great and grand has sprung from the luminous genius
of Republican stafesrna'nship. The only act that was passed under
Mr. Cleveld was      e trif act that scatered tor and act that scattered terror and disy
everywhere and left us disimanntled and broken. Is not that true?
Why, my friend>, that was the only national act that was passed
under Mr. Cleveland. Did that conduce to national prosperity?
Did it not rather retard our developrent many years?      All the
acts that ever conduced to this tremendous prosperity have come
alone from the Rtepublican party, and shall I go further into details about it? Why, as my friend has already said, our wealth
then was $16,000,000,000. Now it is $95,000,000,000.
Our Democratic friends used to say to us that we did not give
them  enough money Nwith which to do the business of this country.
What is the truth in regard to that? In 1860 the gold in circulation
was,$28,000,000;   now it is $630,000,000. Then the silver in circulation was none, and now it is $164,000,000. Then there was not
a single gold certificate; to-day there are $379,000,000.  Then there
were no silver certificates; now there are $455,00000,000. Then the
total circulation was $435,000,000; to-day the circulaition is $2,i76,000,000, and every dollar worth a hundred cents in every money
market in tthe world. Then the per capita circulation was $1:3.85;
now it is $29.57. Then we hiad no national banks in the country;
now we have 4,939. Thein, of course, we nhad no national-bank capital; 1now we hrave $74-3,000(000 of that capital.  Then loans and
discounts were nonre; now $3,415,000,000.   Then the bank clearings
were $7,2.31,000,000; now they are $76,000,000,000. T'hein the deposits
of national  arinks were none; now $3,200,000,000. Then the deposits in savrings banks were $149,277,000; now they are $2,750,000,000. Then the total deposits were noane; now $9,258,000,000;
placing us easily the first amrong all tihe nations of this world as t0
our present financial condition and our industrial prosperity.
Then the total receipts for all purposes were $109,000,000, now
$1,097,000,000. Then the total imports were $353,000,000; now they
are $1,025,00,0,000 an increase of imports of $736,000,000. The total exports then were $334,000,000 and last. year were $1,420,000,000,
or an increase of $1,087,000,000. 'Ihe excess of imports over exports
then were $20,000,000. The excess now of exports over imports is
$395,000,000. That is the difference from the time we took charge
of this country.  There were twenty millious more imports tihn
exports, and last year we sent out out $396,000,000 more than we received, and the yellow tide of gold is rolling into this country to
pay the balance of trade in our favor. These are the results of
llepublican legislation. [Loud applause on the iRepublican side.)
How about nmanufacturing?    Ihen the number of establishmemnt
weret 140,000, now 512,300. Then the number of hands employed
was 1,311,000, no   5,719,000. Then the wages and salaries p'il
namounted  to $378,800,00;   now  they  amount to $2,735,400,000.
Then the products cere $1,880,000,000; now they are $13,200,000,000,
which is greater than the combined output of any other three nitions in the world, and places us proudly first among the mnni-1
facturing nations of the world. While they were paid wages -nd
salaries of $378,000,000 then, and now $2,735,000,000, I call attention to this further fact, that then the per capita wages paid to the
men was $288, while now it is $47t, one-fhalf greater than the average for all of Europe. [Applause on the Republican side.]:is not\. f/is *a recor-d3 of      can be hproud?    s it i l
record of which we May justly boests   And over aginast thai inc
Dem-ncraaiw pWity.sets itself up and wiants to destroy the   ii
egenql ne /nh/n les mseade posible lthis marre/on   p-asperity fhdI. i
tl-day etins  onde and admiratiod n of the world.
e-23$


I




"OUR NATIONAL GOVERNMENT IS THE MOST ECONOMICALLY ADMINISTERED OF ANY IN
THE CIVILIZED WORLD."
i;tits from    remarks of lton. J. A. TIEMEN'WAY        of Indiana, in
duily Congressional Record, April 28, 1904.
The expenditures of our Government in their aggregate, as exhibited
by the appropriations of Congress are large, and by unthinking persons,
and especially by misguided newspapers, are denounced as extravagant,
and yet according to the very best authority, ourr Natioeal Govern-mcnit is
fhej wosat economically ladministered of any in the civilized world.
The following table, compiled and officially published by the Bureau
f Stattistics of the Department of Commerce and Labor, shoaws the populatnio, expenditure, and per capita expenditiure in the nmore important countries of the world in the latest available year:
Courntry.              Population..Ex pe nditure. IPer ca pit:.
New Ze  laind........                  788,{(X)1  ' >:.2411(,X0    $8.38
tralia...................................................,772,   142,]4,0  7(X), 9!nlited Ki ngdomrn.................  41,961,(1()  8297,790,0i0    21.39
I Ka l  nce...........................  ),0250,0  )         17.84
Bel ~:itii n................................... 0 i 6  1  tJ;,SrtX)i  17.40
[neead.....y.............................., 030  1,(X ) i  17.1:
AIstri a- tnLgary.......................,   4 0,40.> 1i()  ( t;47,9i 1  )  1 4,27
Ar'entim-.............................  4,71)4,000  I (0,757,.X 1   12.08
('t, ha............................... ]0  57iW,0 |   195150 )  2.40,Netherlands............................. i.5,47,0!i)  (i 1,468, Ig)  1.1.49
}'ori t l a........................  5,429,I00   i )2170,(X)     1.1.45
Hpain.............................  18,(   i    187,46,X)         101)
Sweden................. _................  5 i. 0O0   I  49r59,0t0  9.54
6 e rm1 an Em pire...............    5,549,t),000,  553 2220001    9.45
('anada.....................................  5,457,(X)  5,759, 000  j  30; 1li ted St ates...................................  80,72,000  40,28,000  7.97
Compared with the regular annital appropriation bills passed at the
last session of Congreinss, the appropriation bills of this session exhibit no
substantial disparity, except with reference to three of them. The naval
appropriation bill shows an increase of $16,128,349.51, and amounts in the
aggrc:,gate to $98,005,140.94, a sum large in coimparison with the amounts
annually devoted to the naval establiihment during the two decades immediat'ly following the civil war: but in every detail the bill provides only
for what is requisite to continue the construction of ships heretofore
authlorized and now in course of construction and for the adequate meaintena:c5, of ships already in commisnsion. For towent./ years Cou'grc.s hins respondced to the manifest denand of the people for the uplbuilinig of the
American Navy. Many millions have been ex'pelded in1 this great natioiu.tl
worlz without a charge of extravagance or a  an accusation of dishonesty, and
to-dati we have a navy in which every citizen takes comnmendable pride.
The post-office appropriation bill, appropriating in all $172,574,998.75,
sbows an increase of $19,063,449. Of the later sum, $8,180,000 is alone
(on account of the rural free-delivery carrier service, for which an entire
stlfl of $20,180,000 is provided for the next year. The postal service is
the oie function of our Government th  affects intimately every individual
in the nation, and no one fcathre of tilis oiret  bi'.siness organization is so
iP'ouiar with the aQricultural nmasses or has bi'oueglt to themn so.much that
tf.'Y valite as lie rural frce-delivery service, which was inaugurated
tlr:,-gh an appropriation of $50,000 made in 1897 by a Republican ConAt this session an emergency river and harbor bill, carrying $3,000,.,15)< has been enacted, providing for the unaintenance of the channels of
existing works and limiting the amount that may be expended to not exceei-ng $50,000 on any one project. But for reasons that are manifestly
Prl'(im r, no general river and harbor bill has been pasclsed. More than $37,0rj.iiO0 of appropriations heretofore miade for river and harbor improvean'isn'm: are now unexpoended. The large number of projects heretofore allthor'.-ed have taxed the Engineer IDepartiment,almost beyond the ability of
thJl:,members of that efficient corps to properly execurte theim. An increase
Sf t5i., number of engineers has been a)uthorized in order more expeditiously
a,1.;"ftliciently to accomplish the work now in hand.
tlnder an act of Congress passed in 1.883, authority was given the
S   c,,ary of the Treasury to use any surplus money in the purchase and
c'it ntent of bonds, in addition to to tho;e required for the sinking fund.
'Ind.'r this authority bonds have been purchased and retired aggregating
'i S  which, if it bad. been applied under the requirements of the-sinking
iia,, v would have anticipated and exceeded the same up to the close of the
last fsal year by $335,220,100   During the last four fiscal years —1900
I:'1., Inclusive —under the Administrations of Mr. McKinley and Mr.
mIet,.ltdhere: was applied to the sinking fund $212,790,239.75. During
oim r fitcal years 1.893 to 1896, inclusive, covering Mr. Cleveland's last
Imi imstratott, the whole amount so applied was only $1.3,400,047.98.


e-24




"WHEN TIMES ARE GOOD THEY ARE GOOD                          ORg
EVERYBODY."
Eixtract from speech of lIon. EDWARD L. HAIIMILITON of:i.
igan, in the House of Represe'ntatives, February 19, 1902.
PROSPERITY.
This also is called by some people conmmercial greed. But v!-tii;
our friends on the other side are exercising themselves "witl ln.i:
jangling" about imperialism and comnmercial greedt, and the Si!n
of Sulu and other infidels in remote parts, let thea   not forgei tfo
language of the Scriptures, wherein it is wr itten:
"If any provide not for his own, and especially for those a of.
own house, he hath denied the faith and is worse than an infidel?"
We have blazed a way for business enterprise by the restor::ii,
of business confidence.
Instead of an overdraft in our Treasury fed by selling bontdb a:ll
drained by an endless chain, we have set up a stable staindar o'
commercial value around which the infinite trnansactions of a b
day are carried on, not only here, but in the islands of the sea,,i
by which they are measured.
Our financial standard is aas uncquivocal as our flag, and both cnmand respect at home and abroad.
In 1898 we added to our interest bearing debt of $8,17.B364,'J <
further debt of $198,792,660 for expenses of our war with Spain.
But from   March 1, 1897, to September 1, 1901, we paid.1'
$63,517,520 of our public debt and cut down our annual hintcr-:i
charge by nearly eleven million dollars.
FI:rom September 1, 1901, to Feb!rary 1, 1902, we still ftrl!,'i
reduced our public debt by $4364f1,7i60, and still fhirthlr reduceid it
annual interest charge by $1,744,-064.
In all, within the last five years we have paid $107,03i,280 ot)  i
interest-bearinf public debt, and reduced our annual interest cir:
by $12,485,01.50.
The sum of our trade balances in the last three years, it is 'Sil!
equals the sum of all the gold in all the banks and treasuries 01'
Europe.
Instead of our Government making depreciated tioney at our i'mint
our whole population have been mtaking money of full-face valtu i'
all our industries.
When times are good, they are good for everybody, and when th,':
are good for individuals they are good for comhbinations of iividuals. You can not draw the line in favor of some and ag:;.'i
some.
We are buying less and selling more abroad than ever before.
We are buying more and selling more at home than ever beifre,
because people have got something to sell aind something to buy.ti:
We have more ntoney in use and citrculation thirta ever hefore; 0 o 'e
money per capita than. ever before; more mioneittey il.avi;!r....
than ever before; the dollar has larger purchasi'ng power than t'W
before, and the laborina man- lives better than ever before.
The ships of every business venture have come to port laden ri:t
better returns than ever before.
But prosperity is not eternal and it is possible to go backvh-;
We were not invading foreign markets to any extent from 1S:i'
1897. W6e were too hungry to go far from home. Some olf' cil:r
population were confined to a, soup diet. Then vacancy, bankr;,and dull despair looked out of broken factory windows at mtic',
of work and women in want, and the whole nation, yellow     ''~
jaundiced, and stagnant, stumbled on, a prey to political quack -;i''
soothsayers, until a voice from a vine-clad porch in Canton, (Y'i"
the voiee of William McKinley, now forever silent-began to?('claim the doctrine of commercial salvation, and men forgot   )
dream of wealth without work, of transferring 40 cents' wor
silver into a dollr by the touch of the Government stamp, and vN-."'l
began to turn again, and money began to flow    back again intri thl
witered arteries of trade,


er25




'! AM TIRED OF VOTING AGAINST PROSPERITY.":;,drI."t from speech of IHon. J,. GALLINGER of New IHampsire, in the United States Senate, June 25, 1902.
PROSPERITY THE ISSUE.
M3r. T'resident, I ha ve presented briefly many of the material belei    cs which we as- a nation and as a people have derived from ttI
lert~!ion of the D)ingriy tariff. But I have by no means told the
vcIle story. We can estimate the production and consumption of
i rnecessaries and luxuries of life, but the comforts and contentment
1d lmppiness of the American home is inestimable. How can we
'illcuIlte the joy of the farmer or mechanic in being able to give his
i.ns a college educ-ation?
l1,w can we calculate the pleasure of taking home the latest
10<k; of taking the wife or sweetheart to the play or concert, or!lvio' the piano for the daughter; or filling the vase with flowers;
f t:linLr home the candy and toys for the little ones? Why, it is
t'ristmas the year round in millions of American homes. The birthn!ts are joyful days. The summer trips to the mountains and seahiare and country in vin vaat   time are not to be measured by dollars
id( cents in the happiness and health they give to millions of wives
1lI children.
No, MrI. President, there is no computing the blessings and benefits
t, protection. We cannot measure happiness by the yard or pound
r qtPirt or dollar's worth, but we can produce it and enhance it andl;llti;tue it by continuing protection and prosperity.
I met an old farmer recently, a sterling old man who voted for
ra:ilklin Pierce and has voted for every Democratic candidate for
residient and Congress since.  I asked him, "Well, how is the
taral?" 'Without answering, he said, "Senator, I want to tell you,rethliting. I am going to vote the Republican ticket next fall and
in 1t01 and as long as I live." "VWhy, how is that?" I asked. Ie
rt lied: "Simply because I am tired of voting against prosperity."
T'isere is the whole thin, in a nut shell. Not only the truck farmer
if New England, but the wheat grower of Minnesota, the corn
groxer of Kansas, the sugar grower of Louisiana. the cotton planter
f (i n orgia, barck to the wool grower of Ohio and the tobacco planter
Virginia and Connecticut, way to the fruit grower of Californiaie c<apitalist, the millworker, the railroad hand, the merchant and
i'!e1, the professional man-every one, from the most elevated posii,1 to, the humblest — must vote for or against prosperity.
Ati, right here let me quote again from Mr. Cowles's address:
I" wise wag once said( in response to the toast, 'Here's to your
prosperity. May you stand it like a man.' 'That's a better sentiment
tliaT1, ou think it is,' said he. 'It takes a clever man to stand pros1'i{'.". Any fool can stand adversity; he has to.'"
Of. friends on the other side are looking for an issue. They need
O!t v,rry, the issue is looking for them.  Prosperity is the issue, and
itl er questions are secondary. The American standard of living,
O'lrn ~eln nManhood and American homes are but the resultants of
1p0'h!lican legislation. the sequences of a protective tariff which
l'(1itt to us and will continue to give us an unprecedented age of
1t'tna, an unparalleled era of prosperity.


*a -2S




I












A


U 




THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY ALWAYS GOESINT
PARTNERSHIP        WITH    CALAMITY."!
Extract from remarks of Hon. WM. E. HUMPHREJY of W^h.
ington, in daily Congressional Record, April 3,1 1904.
If there is one thing that characterizes the Democratic paotr V
it is its overwhelming desire to advise and its eternal failre ~to
perform. As I have sat in this House day after day and lins.teild
to the ever-ready, never-ending, gratuitous advice coming fro"0
the other side of the House, I have wondered what has givei birtmh
to this assurance, this self-asserted wisdom. Why are the gn itie.
men so confident that they know all things?   Why should a;.'rt'
that brouyht upon us the horrors of the last: Democratic Adliris,,
tration, that went hysterical over free silver, a party that Ahnr
learned nothing in forty years, a party that has forgotten n:otl,iin
in forty years, a party that has not kept a promise in forty?;erUS,,
a party that ha.s tnot been riyht r in forty years- whly should tiON
party assutme that with it wisdom   shall perish from  the ewril
[Applause.]
The people of this country only once in forty years have li:,icnti
to Democratic promises and followed Democratic advice and placard
that party in power. Then that party revised the tariff; it c-..acted the Wilson law, that the gentlenlan from   New York tMr,
CocxKBA]x has so eloquelntly condemled, aind that law withered oui
prosperity as do the hot winails of the desert the blossoming iari
vests. That party applied to the land the doctrine they now advoeate for the sea. During that Democratic Admtinnistration onn
national debt increased a half million dollars each day. Each ii'v
we lost a half million dollars in. foreigni trade. lD)uring that Admlinistra-tion the value of farm  products tlecresed   more tIhan
$500,000,000. lThe lbusifrcss of this nationi in two months after the
enactment of the Wii son law decreased 6 per cent.    l n nendinteil
upon the passage of that lawv fear, distrust, and panic paranlvi d
the great industrial system  of our country; miinks closed their
doors; business htouses aissignned; the balance of trade was againIst
us; bonds were issued; capital withdrew from. the fields of letitimiate enterprise into secret pl:rces; labor was forced into unviiliitg
idleness; we had deserted mills, smokeless factories, silent mnnachinery,
We had tramps anid beggars and industrial arinnies, starviing wm:inns
and children. In the nmtidst of planity, with bountiful crops rotteniing uimharvested in the filld, at a million hearthstornes sait fnnmie
pitiless and cruel. Twio million rmen were out of employment annid
begging for work-begging for an opportunity to earn bread to
feed the starving lips of thiose they loved. Wi'iltinn 1 ctcKintey *I
elected, the sqstemr of protection was restored, and in eight nmo ntl
1,000,000 idle men had yaone to work.
What lias the Demnocratic party done to commnnd confaidnce
that gives it a right to assumine ti:n advise the American peplen
The Democratic party asks ahcays to be judlued by' fthe futture ami,
not by the past. It alwatys asks to be jlCdled by its proniisee *n
not by its performancesx.
That party in fiftye years Ihas added nothing to progress; nathiug
to the sum of human happiness; notlinrg to the cau.se of lili:riy:
nothing to freedomn; nothinig to tthe glory of its counntry. It an;
goes into partnership with calamityi. It feeds. own disaster an(f fit
tens on despair. The only time it hIs hadl control of this cori ntr
during this generation it slut the door of industry a-nd citl'ded
labor in rags. It fought tinder the dishomnored bainner of free sI'rn
it subscrited to th' driveling, stunpidity thltt a nnntion can  relf
value by law-that the Government could stamp a lie ulpon 50,cint
worth of silver and make it a dollar. It opposed keeping our flag
in the Orient, and advocated that it be lowered in retrent urinI
trailed in the dust of dishonor.
The Democratic partyv alway; s  nhas its face to the past ni; i it'
back to the funture. It never sees an opportnfitity until it is pim!,
and never gets on the righit side of ani., i'ss   unti! it is settled.
Such is the record of this self-constit.nted keeper of the "Minn
try's conscience and the comntrv's welfare, tihe oft-defeate  djS
couraged, disorganized, disgraced, divided, decrepit old ID)rmi:r"t
party. It stands to-day without an issue, without a prinicipler wnld
out a policy, without a platformn, wvitihont a leader, 'nd a vit l l
hope. The highest possible pranise the Democratic party can ltoe:
upon th   bill is its opposition. [Applause.]


11
I
R
4
y
9
i
(I
Ir,
r
I
iT
v
I.
VI
v
r
t
i11
I
n
e
li
1)
9
c
I
I
t
II
I
I
I
1
I
I
I


I


f-1


i
a




OVER CLEVELAND WAS ELECTED."- BANKRUPTCY BECAME AN           EPIDEMIC."
fwrot from  remarks of ion. ICHARLES B, LANDIS, of
wldicaa, in daily Coagressional 'Iecord, Jan. 27, 1904.
It 09902 Grover Cleveland was elected. You secured control of
I[.i r~andcles of this Goxvernment, and I con tend that that was the
I.o illr ilke ilM  Democratic party ever made. They found.-.ives tacing t p e}ople of the country in the midst of a doi,iicpresperity never before equalled. They were pledged to
it. Capital was eimployed; they promised to eml)loy it
dt'.  \ Wages were high; thely promised to make them  higher.
[;;.o:,  There was not an idle man in the United States of America
i'::.;}w h I twas idle from choice; and ii You. are acquainted with the
[,t').i Scarce t hree months passed until the idle men commenced
JIF. oxer the coiitry.
[iLruptcy   became an epidemic.     Idleness got to be a::;i-'::iSIoA:, and hard-times festivals became popular social
os.  You did that, gentlemen.  You brought about
oi:t condition of affatirs-you prophets, you promisers, you
r:::'if.elr's. You packed the s de tracks of the railroads of
i5 ctountry with empty cars. You sent the price of corn so low
i,    ii rned as fuel,.  he farmer fed 30-cent wheat to 2-cent hogs,
stl e.,cses were not worth winteriuni, and sheep shivered and died on
I.;E,,iege bccausc tlhey were not worth; sheltering, and as many as 100
lie:.c: were folund on single trains roaming this country in search
f wo rk.
At tile end of four years everybody in the United States adi     al tat evervttlhing was wrong and that it was simply a qtuesion:s to the luest policy to bring us back where we were when
itij;in:arrison was President of the United States. *   *  *
'  ue:eatleman can not point to a single article mnanufactured
i: ti:s country on which there is a protective tariff that!no:t cheaper to-day thain it was the day the protective tariff
ins iplaced on the article, and he establishes the reverse by
is ilustration.
I a:cave here an illustration that I desire to submit in contrast
tImite gentleians   favorite banana theory," illustrating, as it
(Is ".o well, the practical workings of the protective tariff.
In 1883 there were no wire nails produced in this country. They
ire then selling at $6 a keg. We manufactured that year 50,000
j2"% when a tariff of $4 a keg was placed upon wire nails. In
iA.S we manufactured 75,000 kegs, and the price dropped to $5
In 1885 we manufactured 0i0,000 kegs, and the price dropped
i': t i keg, which was exactly the tariff duty. In 1886 we mannur; e       O 500,000 kegs, and the price dropped to $3.40 a keg. In
HTi: we m-inufactored  00,00000 kegs, and the price dropped to
YIi.  a keg. In 1888 we manufactured 2,000,000 kegs, and the
'W~%  dropped to $2.60 a keg.  In i889 we made over 2,500,000
I'IS, a(dI the price dropped ta $2.10 a keg. And all this time the.
1i:x was $4 per keg. The average price in 1902, the latest availie eport, was $.15.
Ttisn, is te way the  Republican policy of protection works. [Apan,-, on the Republican side.]  And it has worked this way
Oil rference to steel rails, and with reference to tin, and with
efe     to every other manufactured article produced in this crunir 'i;oni which there is a protective tariff. [Applause.]
xT*:;e within the sound of my voice will remember how, in 1890,
i it w as proposed to put a tariff upon tin plate, some one in
)is!ouse arose and said that he would take a contract to eat all
lle ti< plate manufactured in this country during the next ten years.
eiI, the Democratic stomach is equal to almost anything,
i;t:t was not equal to that proposition, because we are
I^aar~ tTocturing' almost a billion pouinds of tin plate in this
~UQ:i';iry every year, and the price of tin plate within three
Zial, after the tariff was placed upon it was lower than tin
i* lhad e Qver been before in the United States.      That is
rI it works with all these articles.


Ifl,




"MR CLEVELAND WAS ELECTED."-THE COUIT
DID NOT WAI              'IT — AT ONCE SOUGHT COVER
AND PREPARED ITSELF FOR THE STORMS"
Extracts from remarks of oon. JOJIN F. LA7EY of Iowa, in doiny 
gqressional Record, May 4, 1900.
LEST WE FORGET,
All logical reasoning is, after all, founded on memory. We apply t
recollection of the past to the facts of the present. The lamnp of expe
ence gives the only safe light. Let us invite the American people to l0
upon the two pictures and study them well before choosing a White Hio
tenant for the next four years.
No one hat-a given such graphic descriptions of the condition of t!
country from 1893 to 1897 as our Diemocratic and Populistic opponlentt
[Extracts fronm some Democraticc newspapers- t892.
On the 17th of July, 1892, the New York Hieraid remarked:
"The business of the country is in a provoklrigly healthy con i!;
*  N* ew  industrial enterprises for manutfacturing iron, c;otton.;,_
woolen fabrics are going into operation in various secttions.  *  * 
the face of such condition of things the calamity howler must r.poai
silent."
On July 15, 1892, the Boston Herald, a pronounced advocate of Cle
land and free trade, asked:
"Where is the idle woolen mill to-day? There is none.    * 
only are the great majority of the woolen mills employed, but many * 
are contemplating f"ilargements and improvements."
On the 10th of September, 1892, the Dry Goods Economist, also fIar
ing free trade, nVao constrained to remark that
'"Dress goods manufacturers   ought to be happy this season, because the
re busy delivering the goods already ordered and booking orders for moI',
* * * They can confidently look forward to a continuous run of bi::.i,;::
for the next six months."
R. G. Dun & Co.'s Report (non-partisan), In Juily, 1892, said:
"A. fiscal year never matched in the history of the country in the v!
utme of industrial productions, in magnitude of dontestic exchanges, cr 
foreign trade has just closed"
Theo eminent free trader, Edward Athinson, says, speaking of the eou
try under Republican rule;
"There ha:s never been a period in the history of tihis or an':, oIth
country when the general rate of wages wvas as high as it is now, or ti
price of goods relative to xwxages as low as they are to-day."
Mr. Cleveland was elected tpDcn a platform not only favoring free trad
but declaring protection ineonmistiftntional. The only radical legislation teha
was assured was the revision of the tariff upon the lines of the Demscr'at!
platfornm of 1892, and that becatme certain when the results of the electi'o
and the changed condition of the Senate were lknown.
The cotntr!/ drid not icwait for tihe repeal of th[e McKinley bitll Itf
once sought cover and prepared itself for i/he,tortm. The story it a fei'
one. It is wfll otn 'm-nt, ba it it?tati be for',t i.te'n., Thc way to keep the p:1,
pie right is to be  i'e that the  rentember thie lesons of experielce,
INDUSTRIAL PANIC-DIEYOCRATIC EVIDENCE.
On August 18, 189:3, Mr. f-aines, of New York, in a speech ' tDt
question of a bill repealing the purchasing clause of the Sherman Act
said:
At the present moment its [his district] agriculture and its cono'lter
are languishing, its factories are shutting down, its mechanics and tlaib
ing amen are suffering in enforced idleness, and their families are in wa"l
The farmers of the West and South-and I do not blame thetm for eittn
wild when they think of it ---hae lost millionas of dollars by the fatli
prices.
On the same day Mr. Simpson, of Kansas, addressing the losme on t'
same general subject, said:
I want to go over a few ot the conditions that I think have broatht f! 
people of this country almost to the verge ofi bankruptcy, a few of tI'e 
ditions that have produced paralysis of busines', and thrown laboring 'tla-..
out of employnient until I "stppose to-day thoere are not less than 4, '.G0,~!;
men 'asking for work in this country. — Co qrssitnalf tRecord, volume n33
page 492.
From a. speech of Mr. Talbert of Soutith Carolina, made on tle sa
day as the foregoing and on the same subject'
When I stand on the portico of this Capitol and look out over tis ci
I am inclined to agree, Mr. Speaker, that this is a great countrcy!t
when I go to the honmes of the American farmers, among whom 1' 
what do I see therea?  I see and hear nothing but the song of hart 'i:,
and worse coming. Go into the hoames of thev working people, the '"A ctrl
people, and what do you '-oe? Nothing biut starvation, poverty, and ieti's
Mr. Richards, of Ohio, August 19. 1893, spoke as follows:
To-day all over this land there,are people who biut a few wciec 7s
were in, happy homies —..everywhere husiibaids aid fathers willing to '::rK'
surrorunded by wives and children whom they loved, men with brawni" sar
that were willing to work to mnaititain themselves and their loved on'
to-day with mills and the mtachinery of the coutntry idle, the farmer t 'oit.'
a proper market, for his crops, anrid the idleness and desolation tlhi 'ftla
been brought on throughout all sections of' the country, they are:'-t w
time standing surrounded by their families wondering to Heaven w'l:' B
shall do next.
On Thursday, December 7, 1893, Mr. Bailey, of Texas, said o tid
floor of the lon1se:
In atAlmost every comomauinity of this land to-day there are men Wi,/;
lessly' inve1ved. {in t.deblt, so hopelessly, indced, that thfir creditors - "m
'no -reasonabhle expectation 'of receiving any payment, and the itfo;'';,"j
debtors tthemselves, realizn?' how timpossible: it is to pay every'thi: "'
making no effort to pay anything.
f-3


I




LET US SEE WHAT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY
DID."-"IT      PARALYZED        BUSINESS."
sixrm:c from remarks of tHon. 0. If. G(rOSVENOR of Ohio, in
otuse of Represet:atolivies   uly, July, a7llnd printed in, AJppetdixr
I  bound Congressional Record, Vol. 30, page 284.
Wt! re is the market and what is the market for the ituminorr s coal
f hio, Pennsylvatnia, Indiana, and Illinois? These markets lie in the
ve'at cities and small cities, in the large towns and small towns, of
ie Middle dWest and the points around the Great Lakes and way up
|K) Cmnada. This answers the question, Where is the market?
>Xow, what is the market? The market is the household, the factory,
le rolling mill, the forge, the foundry, the electric-light plant, the gas
I:tu, the railroads, the steamships, all the mighty enginery of manuatiure and commerce which. are warmed, heate 1, pt inhto motion, or
hiv:n by steam or electricity. The great power of progress, the
Yia:,'iy rmoving enginery of civilization, is in heat. As somebody has
|1c!! said, the greatest controlling condition, the g   difrential
5re!Uti on, between the brute and the man is that the man can set,a' itl: control and utilize it and the brute can not. And these fires
i l:very form are patrons and promoters of the industry of coal
j Now, then, having thus described the location of the market and
hiait the market is, let us see what the Deamocratic party did. It
rsir;ayed oine-half those fires by the repeal of the M3cKinleay lahw ald
te eaactment of the TW1ilson lavt.  It shut up the glass works, it
aried the door to the iron and steel m n factories, it closed up a
nra numnber of the gas works, and shut down electricity aild drove
o.i: of action; it curtailed the business of the railroads, the spines ceased to hum, the smokestaacks ceased to emit their-volumes of
noe atestifying that down. below there were tires and the consutmpaio of coal. This is what the Democratic party did. It is not worth
'i/le to discuss it any furlther. Yout all W,,tderstand it. It paralyzed.
irnies, and the price of coal mining fell.
Fell why?  Fell because there was no market for the coal; fell
cause the production was greater than the consumlption; fell be'sae out of the markets that I have described were drivea the agents
lb the coal miner, who were selling his product.  'l here was no call:r h1is product, and the blight that beoran at the factory, at the rolle3 mill, the poisonous vermin of inaction, of indolence, of idleness,
nlee:I in at deadly tide btck over the business of trade and commerce,
lowne too the railroad lines, (down to the steamship lines, down until it
i ryzed the pick of the miner in the coal milnes of the country. I
',eat with feeling. 1 speak with interest. I speak because I have
'ln it, I have observed it. I h:iave seen the coal miner who in 18913
1 ai 1.891 was mining the coalt of the valleys wherte I live at 75
<it: piteously praying for labor at 45 cents a ton, and I have seen
t~'nood blush and American sentiment pate before the inflictions
li p>verty that came upon that industrious people.
Amid now, Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, the coal miner can see this.:I is intelligent. His interest lies in the vast development of otir
uiiirial system, and he knows enough to knowv that the volume of
Ie i; fing of coal depends upoI the volume of the industrial developnert ".f the counItry, and te knows enough to know that the policy
f t11t party which seeks to introduce the handiwork and production
f i'on:ign labor into this country is his enelmty, and he kntows enough
1 k;:v that that party whinch dem(natds the American market for the
trla~n producer is the )party that will open the factory and start
*e fires of industry and prosperity; and as a member of the Reputbica: party, jealous of its future, proud of its history, confident of
':s iP'Y,,enat position, I am ready to subsmit the issue to the laboring
(, of the United States.
f 4


I






I


"ELECTION OF GROVER CLEVELAND"-"DISASTE
CAME UPON THE COUNTRY."-"DEEP IN A
HOLE FOR THREE YEARS."
Extract from remarks of HIon. J. HI. GALLlNVER of New,.,
shire, in daily  onyressionti Record, May 11, 1;900
The anticipation of free traide canietd greater disaster Ih-1!
enactment itself, because the fult forcc of the intended.-..
never reached us. That disaster cnmie upon the country:[l it;
mediately  after the victory at the pols. of the so-c/lhcd,n
reformers in 1892 is easy of demoastration.
The great financial institutiions of the counitry were the!:'i;
suffer. Every saving's bank in the United States practtiell '
penided payment before the naufacturers were seriously c1.1},,
The truthfulness of this stalemeat may a  be (questi1oned, but the f1:,
that the savings banks posted sixty days noti:ceSt anCd refuseoi  p
depositors on demand beyond a mere pittance of alebiout $0 at  i
and that depositors who wished to withdraw even that snmall mi
were compelled to stand in line in many inslances for hour:a;
sonmetimes for days attests the fact that the savings banks did i
tically suspend payment.
The American Economist of February 16, 18941, said:
The savings banks of New Ycirk State:ive a remiarkable record,t'
effect of the year of free trade. Drinig 193 the aeoaunt of ne011o!y,c3o
drawn was $34,518,091 in excess of the amount deposited. As copawith the prosperous year of 1892, the deposits of 1893 were twei-;:,!:
millions less and the withdrawals were twe  ityeven millions arger l
showing the aggregate loss during the two year of $51,00.  00. I'i
whole loss fell upon the wage-earniers, who usuailly put tv heir savi_,'- ' v:
on deposit, but who, under the free-trade Administration. lost 1 51, 4,
in 1893 as compared with 1892.
A statement of the number of banks that fariled in the, l~nit
States between May 1 anid July 23, 1893, was made by the Ma;.:i
tnirers' Record. The list was -iven in detal and bv Stahl,;.
aggregated a total of 301 failed rid suspended bankiingi  s   i  iy:'
with a capital of $38,951,033. This made an average of 3.6 lh!:ii
concerns tied up on every one of the eighity-three dlays.
The Vermont Standard of March 1, 1894, said:
The lesson of 1893 closes wvit this handwriting on the blackboa4;'I
ay 4. 1893, to October 3, 18931, withdrawn by the people from m:i,:
banks, $378,000,000.
Loans called in by national banlks, $318,000,000.
National banks and other banking institutions suspended pdayentt
1893, 585.
Railroad property gone into the hands of receivers, over $L2ft:.0'(!i
000.
The money lost to thonusands of men and women rePresenti:'l alvTe
form and grade of labor, estimaited by Mr. )aivid Wells to be more tan
thotsand million dollars, or more than one-third of the amont  t
national debt at the close of the war.
At no tiOme in the history of the United States have so many  I,
been out of work,
Cause: Distrust.
Distrust of banks? No.
Distrust of currency? No.
Distrust vwidespred, puiblic distrust ---in, t1he leoltotive brancl! I, 
Governmient, with its Democratic majority and possibilities.
J. Edward Simmons, president of the Fourth National BI       k
the eity of New York, who, in the New York Sun of N.:m, 1892, said "The election of Grover Cleveland can only be r;r:
by all conservative business men as a fortunate thing f" '
country," also said in the New York Herald of May 20, 1896, "P
We have been so deep in a hole for three years that things 
yet any lower."
The $prin   dd (Mass.) Morning Union of February 8, 19, s
wDurig 192 the earnings of all the natio nal anks in the oited '
were $0668,50,00; In th194 they were less than $42,000,000; in 185'
was ani Increase of '25 per 'cut. in the number of bank faillures 1
pensions pas ompareid with '1894, mostly in, the State1 and privatl
Tb savijngs banks tell the story of hard 1iass and privatinis. -A.
off-of!50,009 depo~s-tors an4 'of $37,000.0100 in Sb" amouit of airn
posited eaud of more than a dollar in the average per capita; of sa'
the Whole people o6f the VUnited 'States all point a moral and teach I
ofi wliving  rm band to mhouth, with a' struggle to make both en'
without being able to put away a dollar for old age.


Ii
I
i
h
V


I


~4


II
II
i
i




rTHE WILSON GORMAN LAW SPREAD A DEAD SEA
STAGNATION OVER THE INDUSTRIES OF
THE WHOLE COUNTRY."
l s from remrnrks of lion. W. P. BRZOWNLOW of Tennessee,
i.ouse of Representatives, March 2-5, 1897, and printed in
ppendix to bound Congressional Record, Vol. 0, page 63.
yi-IQOTECTION A DEBT EXTINGUISHER' FREE TRADE
A DEBT CONTRACTOR.
I  I4860 the interest-bearing debt of the Utnted States, in eonseye e      of the war, was $2,333,331,20S. From  tis time to 1892,
* the people changed the complexion of the Administration
f    Itepublien to )Demaoeralie, emhbraemig a period of twentyhIyears, protection to Airricao labor prevailed. tTnder this
pic the Republican Adaaiistrations tdcereased this debt by the
atf of $11747301,30, and meetit;g at the same time the accrued
]I,(. The balance of tis- debt in 1892 was $535,029,330. In
jsK the ycasr of Cleveland's second inaumpration. the intcrest-bearHebt was $583,034,260, and on March 1, 1.896, it had increased to
X22615,170 under the operations of the GJormin law. The financial
r     upresentative of the free-trade Presitent, who presided over the
of the Treasnury Deptrutinhct, liad not pa iid a dollar of this
Indebtedness in a lite(ral sense, but Cleveland and his free-trade
oatdjutors in the swift destruction of the revenues anti the prospets of the country had addeid $237,580,910 to it. The average
xlnimi. decrease of this d(lit during the twenty-seven years of proa-Jll xw as $614,71,9S't, iand the average annatal increase of this debt
to; the free-trade period when Mr. Cleveland was directing the
k."ditlies of this great coiuntry was $79,193,637. The average Repubicmt monthly decrease of the debt from 18(66 to 1893 was $5,701,r The averate lDuemocratic mionthly increase of the debt fron.
1S^to j17896 was $7,502,921 28.
Mr. larrison, with his prtotection Adlministration, lessened the
lty $224,819,530.
At,. Clevelmntd, with his free-trade Admaiistration, increased it by
37,580.910. Not this alone: this eminent De)cmocratic statesman
ul 'Oledr, "called to be an apostle of t1axrir Nireform," and who had
bi the alnlant and entbusiastic cohorts of Deaoeracy to glorious
0vi y in two hotly contested canipailigts, was compelled, on iaceouint
rf ruinous effects of his revexrae policv, to sell 1)0o11s to meet
Is'fp ti."u.rent expenses of the Govxremednt. Alad not this alone; in hiis
inegotiations for the sale of the first bonds, amounting to
it tfC O@, he further dishonored aw( hubminrcited this proud and
4rer*t nation by piecing it in the thra l of a sIndicate of foreign
'i s^l ts.
The Wilson-C oGrwon Ian' the nost perfect piece of free-trade
'I  ItMisMo Constructed, prnced an electric paradyzer of labor. It
a    Dead 8ea sta{/nlitio  over the industries of the whole counteg.
It I its fatalt blig  upon every cat ipris- in whinh tie bread
iner had the least interest as a toiler. It trinsferred the patronage
tt is country frenm its needy and deserving workingmen to the
rs of foreign countries.  It sent American prosperity on a
"y?' le to regions yet undeisove0red with the command to never
Pathnder thle McKiats Act the constant cry was for more
's. No man had to waste time and nmoney hunting for enm4lo e  Jinploteiit hunted him. The establishment of new
I ries kept pace Cwith tie increse of the working population.
tithle free-trade Gotman slaughter act onte-half of the working
wxere tu rined out of the shops and mills and discharged from
th yalroads and public works.




"THE     DISTRESSING       CONDITION:S       BROUGHT       UPON
THE PEOPLE BY THE WILSON LAW."
Extract from remarks of lion. W. P. BROWNLOW         of Tennesste,
in House of Repre.sentatives., March 25, 1897, and printed it
Appendix to bound Congressional Record, Vol. 30, page 60.
Fires out in the furntaces, closed mills, silent factories, cities andi
towns unable to feed and house the hungry and shelterless, woiittn
and children beggared and in helpless want, the highways crowtded
with tramps whose tatters covered armies of skilled and willing
workers, billions hoarded in the vaults of the cities and no montne
in the pockets of the masses, the national debt constantly increasing
bond deals to meet current expenses, the country in the hands atit
at the mercy of money sharks, woe on every side, end wails from
every quarter. Bank failures were an everyday occurrence,     there
was a general feeling of dread and insecurity in financial circles,
and one man's paper was about as gtood as another's. Values sit mpei
to almost nothing, and the accUrmulatdions of years disappeared iJ'
a day. Such weas the sard and distressing conditions brought upon
the people and the nations by the enactsnent of
THE WILSON LAW.
A  strictly partisan measure, ostensibly passed to lighten the
burdens of the people and at the snme time to provide an amptl
revenue for an economical administration of the Government, it
signally failed to accomplish its purlose, as "Cheap John" statesmen and economists had declared that it would. Coddled as a choice
mneaisure of reform by a party held together by the cohesive powcr
of anrt inordinate greed for office, it prJ rted a Pandora box of disasters
itnequnle    d and  nutterable.  And the four years these plagues
oevre upon the land will be known in tihe anMals of the future as
the "black period of American history."
Tle Wilson law, conceived in sin, shapen in iniquity, brought
forth in crime, its accouecherurs blind to the interests and manifest
destiny of this rea.t country, rocked in the cradle of fanaticisnm
'and nurtured upon the pabalrnm   of party heresy and rancor, it
was entirely within 'the natural order of things that it should become the prolific parent of immrneasurable evils. It was an incendiary, applying tlte torch of destruction to the substance of ther
people. It was a robber, snatching clothing from   the backs anti
food from the hands of the t:'liing masses. It was an evictor, driving
men, women, and children into the woods and highways.      It was
a riot breeder, filling' the streets with frenzied mobs yelling fior
tork, bread, or blood. It was a monnster, gorging it:self upon thi'
dlistresses and woes of a stbmrnerged people, in comparison wit,"
which the ancient Minotaur of Crete that fed on Athenian yoluth'
was a patron saint.
An inscrutable Providence permits nations to scourge themsc'Ilv
as well as each other, and this accounts for the blind infaturti"'
that betrayed and mIisled the majority of American voters viwhen
they elated the Democratic party in charge of our national affair
in 1892.: Intoxicated. with the,ower so loln, withheld from ls irrn
and iI the insanity of their zealt to show themselves the masters
of the situation, v'ith precipitite fur-y and reckless abandon thi
addressed themselves o o the task of oblliterating every vestige of the
iepulblican policy and legislation lt.ha;!t had brouight the counai!r
triumphantly through its nto:-t trying ordeals and added to tint
deliverance processes of recuiperation and resources of wealth ttilt
secured incornparable prosperity and of substituting' in their sle:'i
measures of reform and relief in consonance with Democratic nimxi.'ts
and the accepted standards of Democratic statesmanship.
THE REACTION WAS QUICK AND CRUSHING.
Tndmstrial prostration, paralyqsis of business, financial distrat,'
ernd private and open adets in bonds, repres.enting $262,000,000 )
oner T-reasury deflc.ictind to keep the machinery of the Gov-,'e
iment in operaion,   fiere was no mod ification of these untow'1'i
coatditions,utntl the Democratic banonetr went down in ijfnomnili to',
de-feat. lthe people repented of their folly in sackcloth and ash'S<
and prayed the God who emancipated ancient Israel for deliveranOi
from  a living death ainld the res toration of the possibilities ant1
opportunities from  xloch they had so blindly and perversely tuornl
away. An ansxver a to these fervid anud persistent appeals cattie j
thet election of a Republicanr President and Congress.






f4


4






THE BLIGHT AND CURSE OF DEMOCRATIC MALAWMI NISTRATIONVY"
Krw' front remarks of Hion. W. P. BROTNLOW of Tennessee, in
IHouse of Representatives, March 25, 1897, and printed in Appendix to bound Congressional Record, Vol, 30, page 60.
7         i/ Republican party nrecognizes the conservation and promotion
f Ike people's inlerests s th(e paramonunt function of government.
t mo kes vigorous 'wand aggressive war against all tendencies to party
iggi-rndizeinent to the detiriamena of the public service. In the pheullienati emergency now 1upon( tile country, andd directly produced by:he light and curs-e of Demncraietic malarldministration it is deterii'ed to reinstate  t hal meIancure of tariff taxation whose wisdom
tit efficiency are attestced in the tlappinecss, affluence, and general ad'cement of the peoptle.
('Coaparisons raty be odious, Ibut they pierfrni a wholesome service
i3 (13ter ninig the relativJe 113tIs a1nd1 deimernits of the matters com)ired.'I The Republican p'tr'tx' courts a close atnd honest investig ation
f tce results of protection in direct connection with those of its old
attgonist.
Under protection financial, conaiercial, and1 industrial disturbances
er3e rare, of short duration, and attendel  with no serious results
affecting the general public. 1Under "tariff retforn" disaster followed
saster in all departamelts of business, int.licting universal injury,
'ad there was no (ily without a collapse and a panic. Failures, if
Etey spread dismay, elicited no surprise and but a passing coumment,
i i the gteneral query was, "Who:eaxt, anld wllhat nlext?'"  Under protPtio1r  tecre were no Treasury 'ar1d1 bond dexals.  Under "tariff
rfusrm" Treasury deficit, was tise unchanging status and bond deals
tle regular order of busines". Under the McKiney lafw, that "crownicg iniquity" which was so ofenshive to our liernocratic friends, and
wio exhausted their stock of curses in. damning it to everlasting
inft '3iy, the revenue was s(uflcie'nt to mieet every (Government demand,
andt until overthrown by a D)enocratic Adnlnistration it annually
(3l'a.rgped the volume of circulation with the comfortable sum  of
Sl00,000Q. "Under a "tariff fotr revenue oidy," its immediate suc'oessor, tbere was a deficit of $l.3,3O1,9 1.. The total Treasury recipts during tle' first thirty nsonths of the McKinley law were $916,Mli, d, and (durinig the first thirty luonths of the Wilson-Gorsan law
th'y were $763,43S,i'51l; loss in thirty months under the Democratic
aif 1i  for revenue only," $153,18$,299., During the first thirty monthis
f thies McKinley law the customs re-eipts were $1S7,959,561, and dur`34 the first thirty -months of the Gormain-Wilson law they were $381,'i,  los;  1ss1 rr  a 1)emlocraftIc "I arif for revenue only," $106,927,"i. Doring the first thirty mnonths of the McKinliey law the internal
''.Viie receipts were 83S{IOGti, 1(i, 11a1d oider the Wilson-Gorman law
'35- 28,175; loss unader a "tariff for revenue only," $43,338,241.
Th'ese cullings from the records of the Treasury are striking and
''in"nt. T'hey compass thie whole matter. They appeal to the sober
1"3* altnd dispassionate judgment with the inexorable logic of actual
w', which are certainly miore convSincing than the current and cunitg sophistries of "tariff-leform" andvocates and free-trade econoIny sehould settlie at once the fierce ansd prolonged contention
i3 I.ven prote('tionI and a "tariff for revenue only." This brief excur'm1 irto the field of statistics discovers to us the cause of the
DEFICITS AND BOND DEALS.
riig the unfortunlate Administration of President Cleveland and
13'R addition of $262,00,Ot  to our national debt, which would have
k>  decreased by twice that amount under the skilful financial
csI ement widhs always cisaraclerizcd Republican administrations.
w 0 nw discover the proliic sour0ce of tle iliad of our woes.
oelection means the uiliaio   of ie orcs    the full compass
A tuilral advantages, solid progress, constanlt and sturdy growth.
ifs




"SO-CALLED TARIFF REFORM                 HAS NOT PROVEi
SATISFACTORY" '
Extract from remarks of Hon. JOHN F. LACEY of Iowa, it JIoil,
of Representatives, March 23, 1897, and printed in Appendix t
bound Congressional Record, Vol. 30, page 70.
It is not necessary in this debate to attempt to prove thllt: th
recent experiment of so-called tariff reform bis not proven satis
factory. Failures in business will occur and miisfortunes will c0onn!
under any system, but the evidence points without controver:/,t
better times in our country when the protective system   has' bKevi!
fully recognized than when the opposite policy has prevailed. I wtll
not go back into remote history, but I have compiled a st.ae.:cii,
of the liabilities of failing debtors during the four years win,
have just closed, and also during the previous four years of (Gcar:rl
HI arrison's Adminiistration.:For the latter four years the amount increased nearly A50 plr
cent, as comrpared with that of the Harrison period.
Total liabilities of failing debtors in the United States during Harrison's arid
Cleveland's Administration.
HARRISON'S.
1889................................................  $148,781,;33;
18 0............................. *..............   1 89,856l,9 i
1891................................................  189,8%68s,36i
1892...............................................   114,044,1!7
Total.........................................  $64?2,554,10;S
CLEVELAND'S.
18 93................................................  6,7 9 "8's 9
1894................................................  179   o   9:, 99, 6
1895...............................................  173,196,O 
189..........................................**....... i  6,09,
Total.........................................  $919,063,P63 9
But notwithstanding our recent experiences, we are again regal.kd
with the old saws of the past.
We are gravely told that we propose "to imake people rich adl
happy by taxing them."    This hoary-headed phrase has done duityi'
in many a free-trade campaign.
W   are a also told  a that the proposed bill will inmmediately increase
the price of everything, and therefore it will be an injury to tl
people.
The same speakers who last fall were proposing to double til
price of everything by changing the standard of value and w',
shouted "free silver and high prices" are now engaged in w:ar'irg
us that an increase in prices is a dangerous thing.
The issue between the two parties is a very simple as well a's 1t
very ancient one.
Our forefathers in 1789 set the wheels of this G(overnument. 
operation* The first bill they passed was an act defining the I'"l
of an oath that, should be taken by United States officials, ant ii:
provided that Congressmen and other Federal officers should swc;ir
to support the Constitution. Many of the members of that I-irt
Congress had sat as members of the convention that framed tie
Constitution. The second act of that First Congress was a proic'"
ive-tariff bill, and it recited in the preamble:
Whereas it is necessary for the support of the Government, forl tie
discharge of the debts of the United States, and the encourager:fit
and protection of manufactuerers, that duties be levied on god tl,
wares, and merchandise imported: Therefore, Be it enacted, etc.
And yet, during the present debate, gentlemen have discussed  'le
constitutional pow'er of this Government to enact  a ta a  riff bill l p
protective lines.
It is a striking fact that the first Congress that ever assetsi 'ol
shold pass as;: is first law an act requiring an oath to support ili
Constitution of the United States. and thenl in the next bill, i''1
ceed to violate it bv enactinga a protective-tariff law. But P1rSident Washington celebrated the Fourth of July, 1.789, by sigpi'gi
thefrTt ttrfflaw enated upon the lines of the policy of Alexaifdc
Hamilton.
f-9


I




01i1flRING  THE   DEMOCRATIC        LOW-TARIFF       ADMINISTRATION THE RECEIPTS OF THE GOVERNMENT WERE INSUFFICIENT TO MEET
THE CURRENT EXPENDITURES."
f'~~.,'''t from r -earks of lion. IE. SA IT IIERHERING  of Wisconsin,
ho; House of Representatives, March 31, 1.897, and printed in
vppendix to bonad C'on re'Sionalt Record, Vol. 30, page 37S'.
u friends on the other side of the House tell us that low tariff,r!rv tirade will increase oar iraIde with foreign countries.  Now,,ial do the fatl shlow?  The'1y sow exactly tile reverse to be the,    s-',{,. strange as it may seem. And why, you ask, shoiuld not free
i:r.e- Incase our trade with fora i n countries?  I will tell you.
'o' redcedl te A mrericait po ople to a st,-'it approacld i  beggary,;~,! -is,'l~ cl}tacitv to tly., 'lTins ki proveltn hv siatistics and can not,e!ried..1n the first year uuider the McKiinley law our foreign
tsc itcreased '9:2,00t0,0(}0, or 5.6 per cent. IDuring the second year,
11.2. it iinreased 12.S per cent over that of 18910, or over $210,000,()00.
I 1.8,93, unmder the threat of youir WVilson hill, that $210,000,000
ihr:;nk 'to less thlI an  't,OO,O00O, anld if thle catse had continued all
OI;,;' t[ie iirtgiles wuilit h lave gone below those of 1s90. Your free-ir.ie legislation dicreasedt Ot" sturpllus foreign trade of 1893 more!     v,:   to-thirds, more than 6S.1 per cent.  Under your Wilson
OIa!il or foreign trade, our total imports and exports, fell off from
i!; figlures of 1890 $100,(00,000), olr (. per cent. In the next year
it fll    $f 107,0t(),000, and in ii t96, when, hv the growth of the
t!,it,:tiion, it ought to have incereased! $6(i6,Ot),00, it. had only got
i;),000,)0 ablove that of 18990.
Now. let us glatce for a mttoment at our national finances. The
ii civil war left tuhis coullntrv etncumbered with a national debt
o l;:.ive that fniuru-"s fail to consvey an adeqtuat  conception of its
U:iittled. It seecited itls:s;itle that this country could ever fully
r~'c.ver from thi atwful rburden, or do much more than get started
i Hte rtt od to reeovery ttur'in  the next century. However, a start
t*'t.:s matde soon after Ithe war, and every year a portion of the
p   ei'ic detlt wats discharged, so that in 1892 we found we had already
'i-posed of more than two-thtirds of this enormous debt, thus again
ai'toIstrating the wontderful 'tative resources of our land and and our
o'it't'i'. 'The report of the Treasuirer sitows that the revenue receipts
i'-.! n alltt  sources for 189:2, the last year of the lHarrison AdminisIf'lt*ii;  amounted to $t25,8(8,2t;0.32, and the expenditures for the:;!*e period arnttnted to $41,95.3,)i806.56 leaving an excess of receipts
",* expenditureCs of $9,914,453.(60. D)uring this year $10,570,467.98 had
ai,.'n paid on the public debt, which bad beent reduced since March 1,
I'::<!, by $2t59,076,890, and the annual interest decreased by $11.,68,cg'ining with the first fiscal year of the Cleveland Adrmtinistrati-'n, July 1, 1893, the daily balancee sheets of the United States
';.asiiry almost invariably shows an excess of expenditures over
t''*iplts. Every anrnual report of the United States Treasurer since
i! t day shows a large deficit, as follows:
',,i fiscal year ending June 30 -1594.......................................  $ 9,803,260.58
I..S95........................................... 4,5,318
1896.........................           25,  03,245.70
tticdth means that during the three years of Democtratic lowT'iff administration the receipts of the (overnment   were insufaik';~'",t to meet the current expendtitures, to say nothing about the
'!ic dlht, by $137,81.1,729.46.
r wee there there any signs that this condition of things would
sI:,Ip as long as Cleveland and free trade remained in power.


f-10




" THE WILSON BILL"U'LET US OBSERVE ITS
WORKINGS."'
Extract from remarks of Hon. I. P.   FIISCHER of New York, in
House of Representatives. March 2S3, 1897, and printed in Apj
pendi to bound Congresiolnal Recorcd, Vol. 30, page 20.
The workings of the Wilson bill have proved disastrous eve~ tai
importers, for while it is true that the arrangements enabled te;mi
to bring goods into our market at lower prices than they coueld
under a protective tariff, yet the misery which it brought to Amierikain
homes and the panic it caused in our commercial affairs have left otir
people without money wherewith to purchase at any price, arid oen
importer whom I know personally has confessed to me that lie xwo ld
rather pa  5 me      eey $5 ore  e ry 100 worth of goods under conditions iex:
isting under a protective policy (knowing lhe could bring them into
this country and dispose of them amongst a prosperous people) tlian
to save that impost and bring them into a poverty-stricken countlr
where there is no market, as was the case during the existence otf i tl
Wilson tariff law.
The Democratic party, at the time of the adoption of the Wil<si
bill, promised much to the farmers of our country, and predicted thai:
its enactment would insure the success of the Democratic partsy, whid
meant prosperity to them. T     hey were to havte the markets of til'
world thrown open to them under the beneficent workinlgs of fire
trade. Let us observe its workings:
In 1892 we sold to the world 2,800,07To bushels of barley fr',
$i,751,445, while in 1895 we sold only 1,53ji,754 blushele, for $t7, ()1SI
a falling off of 236,321 bushels andr a loss of $984t,227.
In 1892 we sold to the world 637,9-20T bushels of beatns ant!d peas ifr
$945,767, while in 1895 we sold only '42,682 bushels for $4^29.00)/;
falling offoff 395,90 bushels and a loss of $51.6,761.
'To show you how farmers captured the markets of thre world, I
wish to call your attention to a few more figures. In 1892 foreign
farmers sold to us 874,050 b]ushels of beans and peas of the v nlu:
of $957,824, while iIn T894, under the Wilsoni-Gornmiani tariff, tliy
sold us 1,535,913 bushels for $1,548,749. Thus the Anmerican farinelr
on this one class of product suffered tre loss represented by tlhi
difference, anroanting to $590,925.
In 1892 we sold in the markets of the world cattle of the nv l.e
of $35,099,095, while hi 1895 we sold olty $30,603,796, a lo-s of nctarly
$5000,000.  On the otier hand, "the world" sold to us in la-IV
$47,466 of cattle, while in:1895 "the world" sold to us $765,853, a ';,i"
for the foreign dealer of over $718,00).
In 1890  we raised 70,626,5S8 acres of corn, amounting to l,t".'f
464,000 bushels, of the value of $,itS,146,6i.0, while in 1895 we rak;'i'l
82,075 830 acres of corn, amounrtinhg to 2,151,138,580 bushels, of i13 '
value of $567,509A,06. tOver 11,0000 imore acres of corn, prodiucal;
over 500,000,00 bushels more in i895 tiha  in 189?, vet thle sma;nii'
crop of 1892 was worth $75,000,000 I more than the larger cro o')?
1895.
In 1892 we exported flour of the value of $785,494,928, while il
1895 we exported only $'5i,651,92S, a, fallijng off of about $23,0300:ii;'
In 1892 we raised 150,000,000 bushels of potatoes on 2.411.i.;!-'
acres, worth $100,950,000, while in 1895 we raised l 297,237,470 bussel' 
onl 2,954,95  acres, w orth o ly $78,981t,901i-nearly twice as Ti t'v
bushels yet worth only,aboutl $1,0,00000 less than the smaller clrp
In 1892;0  we h 44    h3ad  o4,93,3;5   head of  ep, worth $116,131,37 0.I
1896 we have only 38298,783, worth only $65,167,735, only a little
over half.          '
In 1892: we sold to the world wh eat to the value of $161,399,1ti'
leT in 1895 we sold the same commodity to the value of $43,805,i;3
a loss of over $117,00000. '
ov           OKt:00 


f11




"THE   PARALYZING       EFFECT     OF   THE    LOW-TARIFF.
PROPOSITION"
lxtract from remarks of i-on. CHARLES DICK of Oho, in daily
Congressional Record, Jan. 6, 1904.
If Democratic control and the low tariff which it brings with it are
aood for business, how was it that the number of telegraph messag es sent fell from 76,000,000 in the year ending June 30, 1893,
to 69,000,000 in 1894, and made no perceptible increase during
Demnocratic control, increasing under Republican control and the
prosperity which came with it until a total for 1902 was 89,000,000
as against an average of 70,000,000 annually during the national
control by your party?  Bank deposits are another measure of
buisiness activity and prosperity. The deposits in the banks of the,Un'ited States, which averaged about four and one-half billion dotlars in the years of Democratic control, were in 190. nine and onehalf billion dollars, having thus practically doubled under the prosperity which came to the country with the restoration of a prot:etive tariff. Savings-bank deposits alone increarsed from, one and
thLree-fourths billions of dollars in 18,94 to two and three-foiurths
i.llifons in 1902.
INCREASED PROSPERITY OF FARMIERS.
|it is hardly necessary to call attention to the increased prosperity
of the farmers. This speaks so loudly for itself through the increafsed prices and increased demand, the cancellation of farm mortgages, and the general prosperity. Yet, I can not forbear meni:ioning the fact that the value of farm animals alone, as reported
by the Department of Agriculture, fell from $2,461,000,000 in 1892
to $1,f655,000,000 in 1897, but immediately began to increase upon
restoration of protection and the demand for farm products which
carne with it, until the value of farm animals reported by the DeRtartment in 1901 was over $3,000,000,000, or nearly double that
shiown in 1897. In other articles of farm production the increase
in value has been equally striking, and with it the increase in the
general prosperity of the farmers.
Still another evidence of the paralyzing effect of the low-tariff
pro.position which the Democrats are urging the country again to
adopt is found in the fact that the tons of freight carried by the
railroads fell from 730,000,000 in 1892 to 674,000.000 in 1894, and
in 1900 was 1,071,000,000, and in 1901, 1,084,000,000 tons.
BUSINESS FAILURES WORSE UNDER DEMOCRATIC
ASCENDENCY.
Business failures are another method by which we may measure
ttie prosperity.and general conditions of the country. In 1892,
tideir.Republican Administration, the liabilities of the failing
il:tsiess concerns of the United States were reported by Dun's
ir'view at $11.1,000,000; in 1893, the first year of Democratic contrio, and with the prospect of a change in the tariff, the liabilities
iii 'tased to $346,000,000, and in 1896 were $12(6,000,000, while in
19Ifl they were $113,000,000, and in 1902 $117,000,000.: MONEY IN (TIRCULATION.
loney in circulation is another measure of prosperity.   The
i'^?ocratie party told us in 1896a that there could be no permanent;Or ease in the circulating mediumv of the country, and therefore
g eneral prosperity, wit hout the free and tnlimited coinage of
*;?~;^ir, as well as free trade.  Yet, notwithstanding that fact, the
"ofo;  money i circulation, which at that time was  1,,506,000,000,,te under protection and the gold standard reached $2,000,000,000
a,900, cand in 1903 was $2s.36700M,000. 
The fact that the manufacturing establishments of the country
"s mlrned during the entire period of your low tariff law an average
f alt about $200,000,000 worth of imported raw material, and that
iw:y consumed $375,000,000 worth last year under the protective
t;tiff is a suggestion as to th  relatve ativiaty and amount oA
':nfactures turned out under the two system. 
f-12




"EFFECTS OF THE FREE-TRADE ECLIPSE."
Extracts front article entitled "Why first voters should be Protectjo.wf.,~
printed in daily Congressional Re'cord, JdciuMry 12, 1904.
In the light of the evidence presented no student of the question wai
be decelyed for a moment by the charge that protectionists oppose thl-t
tension of foreign trade or that the effect of the policy has beon to rt;:-t i
its growth. Tih  more the young voter investigates the subject the" str,
thoroughly he awill be convinced that it is only by strict attention to i;
development of our resources that we can hope to attain a position in th,,
commercial world analogous to that once held by Great Britain.
The assertion has been repeatedly made that advocates of a   t,.
tive tai ff are hostile to external commerce: that they desire to bil":i
Chinese wall about the country and exclude themselvese from the comit::,
nations. The raink absurdity of thae chat'go is at onc made  manife:  v
an examination of the tariff schedutles prelamre  by protectionists. wivv
provide for the free admission of alla csaes of articles whicah awe are, 
capable of profitably producing for our::elves.
Amterican protectionistls are not opposed to foreino t   thrade; they c, —.
early eacoraee its oroicth bitt ttheq expect it to develop alotW,  lhtine:
will not interfere  icth the deelopoc.t of A.incrican ivrltsir1 I Ti h,   ",-:
to promote the free interchau.nt  of non-compceting prodtis's. They 'b-i!vx.
that  by sensible tr     arrad e arrancemcnts which vill  not intcirrulptl our 1',-.,
production we shall extend the outlet for our increasing surplus."
The country, under protectionist auspices, has for yeaar's been ni:
upon this sensible plan. Vbhen. those who have framed protective tt he iee h
have found that tariffs were no tlonger neeeded for revenue or to enoil;:
and protect our industries at homeic, they heave been removed. Tlb  I s i;consistent history of Repoblictan tai ri't leislation, arnd the re:u!ts are vi:ci!c,!
in a constantly increasing volu! le of iroports: aj)d explorts.
The imputation of motives to protectioni:sts which they never enc -
tatned has tended to cloud the iminds of profe ooal economtists, but it f:;,
never for a moment interfered with the lenlentcy of the sys.tem l  tio re
their assertions. While free trade   0(  1 a scd traders nave amuses thee ives talkingti- i
the protection wall reared about te iUnited States the external comitrl -'of the country has grown at a rate which makes the growth of irinii-'h
trade seem snail-like,
In 1870 imports into the United States were valued at $436,000,0t,t:
in 1902 they had Increased to S903t000,i)00. Iluring the same period i H
exports increased from  $376,i000000 to $,355,8000.000.  British imipt-1:
which were $1,259,000,000 in 1870, were -valued at $2,210,00(ii000 in i'.-:
while the exports rose from $9710t,000,000 to $1,3;;'000'i) o Tte ' -p.,l
value of the external trade of the United States Wa: - $1, ' t00t,000t in" i'
and in 1902 it was $2,258,1)000.000. In the sait,am   period 13ritish extpt.qI
trade increased from $2,230'.000,000 to $3,573000,000. The foreign t::
of the United States increased $1t,446,000,000, while that of the iU't.e,1
Kingdom showed an enlargement of only $1.213,0cil,0
These comparisons will serve to emiphasize the denial that protect},o
tends to exclusiveness, for they show that the United States, whimch" Si:
the reputation of being.a ntitrly self-sufficig nation, has actually:i-l
creared its dealings, both absoluitely and relatively, with tte otmtrhide romore rapidly thai Great Britain ---a notoriously dependett ritrv t  -it *-y
pellcd by lamck of -raw ntaterials and a deficienut food stupply to draniw ':
foreigners or go out of the business of manufacturing for export.
luaving thus disposed of the stupid assumption that it is the putrr'
of Protectionists to make a hertmit nation of the Unitted Stamtes, It mIa ":
judicious to explain that w hmile they do not desire to discoutnige a rati —;'
external trade, they believe that the swiftest mode of prottiliting tor(i,'e~`
commerrce is through the development of internal production and trade.
Experience has demtonstrated thaet whenever the latter is mad'e iheoJeetivb of statesmien foreign eincommerce expanfds nmore rapidly than b imlt -
taws designed to tempt to tept tat reult. Thie record of Amnerican exports 
imports shows that every, attempt to promote thern by an approac'h teo f-*i,dom of trade has caused tbhemt to shrink. Tariff legislation "for revrx-'e
only" has almost invariably been folloed by a dimuinItinu of ouir f
etrade  devotion to the extension of doimestic industry has produced e
opposite result.
No one will attemspt to dispute this assertion after exalrdining i:
American   co, nomist's graphic presentation of the "E'ffects of the free:-t.:'ioJe
eclipse," published in 190.0, which broughtt out the fact I am dwelling i:~-POr
more markedly than any other.
It showed that under a tariff levied for the prim urpose p of prom'nnJrt
domesitc industry our foreign trade rose from $1,647,139,093 in 189IS  to
$, 857,680,6 10 in 1892: that under the menace of at interference,'it
protectiim  it fell off to $1.662,231,6t12.in i896, and tfiat after  hat nte,
owing to tie stimulating influence of the lingley Act, it steadily Incre   ei,
reacihng $22-:i4,193:,543 in 1900. And when the presentation is contt,
as it doubtlessa will fbe next year, the total wVill probably exceed.$2,500,a '10,-.000-it wa $2,445,889,652 for the fiscal year ending June $0, 1903.,t can not be repeated too often nor empiphasized too strongly that tbe
true way to promnote trade, both foreign and dormestic, is that which pri'*:-<'-*
tiohist statesmen have adopted. By stimOulationa the delvelopjnmet of re
smiees of all kns and by     eploying the eneries of the pipuato     i
every tprafticable form. of incdustrry there is prodctiona.n an enoro.t s
*see, amnd' it iPs impossible for that to ihappena without there being a  mom,:spod/y  tlrget. Things whe n 'lrodiced inn ' i nda 'eocre erehcab t'n
41 -:t'mw:<?f.;cA)t1reg Wdt'mn7Sltituis 6t  e. and this fact sTh'utl
snggest to the, ost obtuse that the ontly solid foundation upon whi<-'" 
great  oam merce ca   be ereeted and maintained is domestic producti. i't.
That, assured,:thetriestand yprosperIty follow as a matter of course.
f13


1




"THE GENERAL          WRECK OF AMERICAN ENTERPRISE."
':driIs from remarks of lion. WI. P. BROWNLOW of Tennessee,
it House of Representatives, March $5, 1897, and printed in,i~ppendix to bound Congressional Record, Vol. $0, page 6$.
'IT  American flock master had the upper hand of his foreign
ipm titor in his home market.   He could sell his crop to the
ym~erican mills at a profitable figure, and his mutton was clear
thiin; the grade of the wool was superior, and the cloth into which
it wHS nmanufactured was of the best quality. But a change came;i 1i!,. The prosperity of the industry disappeared in the general
eck of American enterprise. The foreign wool grower displaced
\ine A:\erican flock master in, his own market.  What he should
i,:ae jiingled in the pockets of the wool grower in the United!i;n,(thin, France, Germany, South  America, China, and other
vtries. Sheep and wool had gone down in price one-half. The
iilnice was transferred to the wrong side of the ledger. Mr. John
rillB, thle venerable prophet and high priest of free trade, as long
as his own interests are not interfered with, was the chief mraster
of hce situation; without let let or hindrance lie could dump the whole
Astralian wool clip, becaulse he is the first mortgagee of the
Anulstralian sheep farms, on the American market and fill hlis pockets
with American gold by the operation. During the McKinley tariff.he average annual importation of wool was 133,617,812 pounds,
vthliwed at $16,951,276. In 1895, when the country was just beginning
ti retalize the glories and beauties of the Wilson-Gorman law, that
put all grades of wool on the free list, the importation of wool,ams 2418,889,917 pounds, valued at $33,770,159. It is safe to assert
lhat the flock masters of the United States have lost the comfortoble samn of $40,000,000 by the free-trade-in-wool policy of the Dem. —
irearH party. This gold crossed the waters never to return, and is
now scattered, a free gift from  the Democratic party, among' thI
f'orlcign wool-producing nations. What a mighty help these forty
minions would have been in paying the obligations of American
ti!lllors and canceling the mortgages on their farms. Whilst the
AmlTerican farmer is shearing his sheep the foreign sheep raiser, with
tHIe Democratic shears of free trade is shearing him, and he cerl;tiiv realizes the fact when lie remembers that he got 60 cents a
aim;d for his wool under the McKinley law of protection, and notw
iidar the Gorman Act of oppression and repression less than oneh.if of this amount is the top of the market.
Ii. 1893, when Cleveland was inaugurated the second time, the
wool crop was 364,000,000 pounds. When he was returned to power,
aitlh a Congress in full sympathy and cooperation with him, the
coiintry was sure that the threat of free trade would be carried
ito execution. This feeling had a most depressing effect upon the
w'i t industry.  The purpose to pult wool on the free list was
Ictired at the beirinning of his Administration, and the sheep raisers
"iarized the fact that their harvest was about over. The price of
vIoo began to decline rapidly and the owners began to put their
she-p into the markets for mutton, so that the crop in 1894 shrank
to:928,000,000 pounds, in 1895 fell off to 964,000,000 pounds, and
)i!S96 fell off in a corresponding proportion.  In the first two,:e:i.< of Cleveland's Administration  the decrease  amounted  to
I 0,0I(00,000 pounds, inflicting a loss Qf:$60,000,000 to the American!ie.ole. This decrease in the homedclip had to be made up by
m'ipo,rting foreign wool, or the American mills had to discharge
i~. operatives and shut down. In consequence of this necessity
i; wool importation enlarged from 55,000,000 pounds in 1894 to
2t000,0)0,000, an increase of nearly 500 per cent.; has always been the contention of the free traders that the
tfl' ~I"~l: of free wool would be to so reduce its price that woolen
d,,,:l^ics would not be adulterated by cheap admixtures. This is
m:'iic i claptrap. In the last fiscal year of Harrison's Administration,
t!g Jimune 30, 1894, the importation of shoddy was 175,744 pounds,?Il'l in the next fiscal year, ending June 30, 1895, under the Wilsoni;man law, the implortation of this adulteration was 14,7742,690
li u',ds, an increase close in the neighborhood of 1,000 per cert.!   9 6;~.t). the American mills were stocked up with  0,0000000 pounds
litf thoddy. In 1896 the Democratic/ Administration dealt in shoddy,
w;.':a.e rags, and other rascally adulterations on a still more stupenidii:  scale.
f-14




"THE CRIME OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY,"
Extract from remarks of Hon. T. 0. STURTEVANT of Pen asiyt
sia, in House of Representatives, March S1, 1897, and pri,1t1
in Appendix to bound Congressional Record, Vol. $0, page.107,
Mr. Cleveland said that the country needed an "object lesson
Hie gave it to our people, and, if I interpret the lesson of the election
of last fall, they do not want any more of it, They know it by heare
The siren song of the free-trade speakers of 1892 lured the pet:,l
with the false hope that, with free raw material, our manufac tursr
could capture the markets of the world. They promised to pal
higher wages to labor and sell the products of that, labor cheaptte
No party had ever before had the audacity to make such a proposi.
tion, so absolutely contradictory to common sense; but that is swhn
the Democratic party did, and on that proposition they led the aur
satisfied and the simple-minded to the polls, like lambs to thf
slaughter. The Republican steakers warned them that free trad
meant low wages and little work, an increased importation of foreign
products and a decreased American production; that the uswe of
foreign products meant the employment of foreign labor, and the em
ployment of foreign labor meant the idleness of American labor.
Experience had taught this and common sense had confirmed it
yet the stampede went on and protection was doomned. Mr. Cleveland's election at once threw the mannufacturing interests into a panic
They believed that the new Administration would carry out their
pledge to repeal the McKinley law, and they knew that a, business
crash would follow. It was their duty to  reprcare for the stormn, and
they did it at once. They began by reducing expenses. They ceased
buying raw material. They disposed of stocks on hand as best ther
could. They discharged part of their workmen, and reduced the
wages or hours of those retained. They made every possible retrenchment to meet the new condition and escape absolute bankruptcy. That started the worst industrial panic the country had ever
seen, and continued it with increasing intensity until McKinley wts
elected. I tell you, gentlemen, that thourgh the act may have been
done in the form and under the color of law, the change wroungt
in the cotntry by the tariff legislation, in the rU/n it wrought, i 'the
capital it destroyed in the labor destroyed, in the labor it made idle, in the army of tgranli
it recruited, and in the begafarq it entailed on mnen, momen, a 
children, causes it to rank, in the black annals of history, as the criMe
of the, nineteenth centaury. In the year 1893 the railroad stocks of
this country depreciated to the extent of $,00,000,d000, and men of
wealth were made poor; nor did the rich alone suffer; the estatess
inherited by widows and orphans, many ef them in amounts of a few
hundred or a few thousand dollars, were reduced. The capital ao:t or
rendered unavailable made sad inroads into the business interestis nld
drove many to bankruptcy. Every clas;- seems to have been undi - ti1e
free-trade ban. Like the locusts, of Egypt, it has devoured all inri
spared none. Like the plague, it has been no respecter of pert: 1i1:
Its rule was strictly a case of equal ruin to all and special prinl..'.ie
to none. There ere were no e tions and even the soup houses were
open to the rich and the poolike.
Nearly every Democrat who has spoken on this bill has givesn s
a reason for his opposition to it that "it will build up rich corpora8
tions      make th rich richer and make  the poor poorricher andhis i the
cheapest kind of campaign trash, and is an insult to the intellirerent
of the American people to whom it is addressed. A rich man imvnst'
his money in b usins that he may become richer. If this bdill rj
ak tihe ri h richer, it will do so b  / cmakng bus/ness better. I' tIhe
historic words, of Fianagan, "That is vhat stwe are here for."  i ar)
sure that is what the members on this side of the House are here for,
an(d Ihope that the vote on this bill will indicate that some o the
members on the other side are here for the fo r the same purpose. We ie
had an object lesson given us by the Cleveland Administratieo, in
placing the country in a condition In which the rich could havoe o
hope of becoming richer, but the poor counid have increased fatc iti
fo becoming poorer. The resultas that capital retired fronm l;l''
nets and labor was Idle.
f-15


i




THE PANIC     OF   1893   COMMENCED        THE    MORNING
AFTER THE ELECTION           IN 1892.";owt'frct from remarks of Hlon. J. B. FORAKER, of Ohio, in daily
Congressional Record, Feb. 4, 1904.
Wlat happened following the election in November, 1892, and
-hast was the cause of it? In order that we may rightly undertand that, we must recall the character of platform declaration
ipon which MIr. Cleveland came into power.
It. will be remembered that in the platform of 1892 the Democr ti< party denounced the McKinley tariff law as a culminating,trocitv-I think that is the phrase they used-arnd they demanded
is inmmediate repeal, and gave a' pledge to the country that if they
hiould succeed at the elections and have the power intrusted to
tlhea necessary thereunto, they would repeal that law and they
otuld substitute a tariff-for-revenue-only law, which is only another
rame for free trade. They succeeded.    The morning after the
election it was announced to this country not only that Mr. Cleveland had been a second time elected President of the United States,
)ut also that Congress would be Democratic in both Houses-a
Derocratic Senate and a Iemocratic House of Representatives.
So, Mr. President, the announcement of that election was an
aitllounncement that we were not only to have a Democratic President and a Democratic Congress, but a Democratic President and,. Democratic Congress pledged to repeal the McKinley law, to
change the industrial policies of the country, and substitute instead of the policy of protection the policy of free trade, or the
near approach to it of a tariff for revenue only. What was the
consequence? Every prudent business man in this country knew
that if the industrial policies were to be thus radically changed,
it would be well for him to consider what the consequences would
be upon him in his business.
We commonly speak of the panic that broke upon the country
in 1S93 as the panic of 1893. But Mr. President, that panic which
broke upon us, apparently very suddenly, in 1893 was a panic that
(omraenced the morning after the election in 1892. That panic
comTnlenced when the thoughtful, prudent, and conservative business men of this country read the result of that election and commrented to study what would be its consequences.
If a man was a banker he knew that a radical change in our
industrial policy made it necessary that he should consider what
would be the effect upon him, and, not knowing the measure of
the effect, or perhaps whether it would be good or bad, determined,
s Xhe went to his place of business that morning, that he would
iook over the list of bills receivable and see which of his debtors
he should call upon to pay; and every manufacturer, as he went
to his place of business, considered whether or not he could not
shlelten the pay-roll, and men who had given orders for materials
to bet manufactured commenced to consider whether they could;nt cancel the same or modify them.
So it went on until shortly it became known to every man in
)lsiness that all his neighbors were feeling just as he was feeling,
'nd when this feeling became general then came the breaking upon
the country of that panic which brought us so much disaster and
fontinued throughout the period of that Administration.
Ditring two of the years of the Cleveland Administration the
W!tnces of trade were against us. During only two of the four
rearl were those balances in our favor, and, then only small bal-:nls they were. But the very moment that the Republican party
sti successful at the elections of 1896 business conditions began
prove, slowly, hesitatingly for some months, until the Adminis-!tr ti i  had come into power, and until it could be made plain
t'0 tle country that less than a majority of this body would be able
It "    legrislate with respect to the tariff as to repeal the WilsonG"rnan law and substitut   e theDingley law, as it is now known,
in  stead.:if as soon  as that was an accomplished fact, the wheels began
to,?anr; men were called from idleness to employment; business
j  t^Uions revSited, and prosperity set in and has continued without
fl"tfruption until now wve have the greatest prosperity in the his| f;s of this or any other country on the face of the earth.




"'THE GREATES CALAMITY TO THE HUMAN RACE,
Extract from   rentarks of ion. EBEN     W. MARTIN, of _nOit
Dakota, in daily Congressional Record, Nov. 27, 1903,
I lave taken the trouble to examine some of the official figuI
and I am able to assure the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Ci.ARK
that lie was scientifically and historically accurate in a stai,:ir:
which be made upon the fieor of this House in the month of Fe.
ruarv, 1902, when he said in our hearing that the second etcclopq
of Grover Cleveland was the greatest calamity that has hap1 al
to the human race since the fall of Adam.
'The last two and a half years of the Administration of Benjarmin
Harrison were under the operation of the McKinley tariff. I)nr.
ing that enti re Adnninistration of Benjamin Harrison the receiipks
exceeded the disburserments of a Republican House and Senate ibyl
$205,000,0,)00, and during the HIarrison Administration the liepuh.
licans were  able to reduce   the national debt in the sum orf!
$:259.000,000. The first eigliteen months of the Cleveland Adliin.
isttration only were utidcr the McKinley tariff law. During thoie
inmonths it is true that the Deniocratic expenditures exceeded thci
receipts by several million dollars, but the discrepancy in the 'T'rhes.
ury during that period was due less to the McKinley tariff t1ha;
to the great and yawning disparity between the receipts and iithe
budget of Democratic expenditures.
If the expenditures of the first year and a half of the Clevl(ndd
AdmninistratiIon had been no greater than for the like period of' the
Harrison Administration, there Awould have been a surplus of something il;e $30,000,000 during Cleveland's Administration under the
McKlinley tariff.   The fact stands out in history that upon thie
adoption of the nWilson-Gor:nan tariff, in August,  9, 94, the receipt
begatn systematically to be reduced. There was no reduc tion., hi
a in ncrease, in expenditures. There was not a year during l.le
Cleveland 'Administration that the expenditures were not ova tl
in eVess of the receipts; iand taking the four years together th-1
'xpenditures under their Demnocratic budget were $ 87,000,000 in
excess of their receipts.
Thlie exact firures are:as follows:
March     1893, 93, to March 1, I894: Receipts $323,463,100.76; diisbnrsem ens, $371,269,576.23; deficiency, $47.806,475.-2.
March 1,,       o  a89c, to March 118953:  Receipts, $308,72,5,956.95;  is'
burscnients, 366,650,14 1.79; deficiency, $57,924,485.21.
March I1, 189;5, to March 1, 1896: Rleceipts, $32.5,5t,564.51; tdis
bursements, $351,0914,307.:5; deficiency, $2,5,839,97413.02.
March, 1896, to March 1, 1897: Receipts, $308,81,047.69; dislurseiments, $361i,559,067.55; deficiency, $56,078,019.86.
For thle four years: Receipts. $1,655,924,669.54,; disbursements.
$1,4.53,573.:93.15; deficiency, $1 87,648,723.61.
T'hi]e MeKinlce tariff becamue operati ve October 6, 1890, and tie
Wilson-Gormain ltariff, Auzust -8. 1895.
Durring the period of thLe McKinley tariff, under the Hiarri,;,:,s
Adminiisi. ration, t there ]was a sirplus of receipts over disburse;ie;n'
of $54,504,Q28.80. During lthe pcriod of the AWilsmn-Gon n ert ffi
of the Cleveland Administration, which was practically the 1tt
two and one-half years of that Administration, the expend itur,'s
exceeded the revenues by $110,879,005.48. It is evident, therefore,.
that the trouble with the Cleveland Adminiistration was not hI
McKinley tariff'.  The trouble, with that A4dlnmiistration was,q
inadequate rer'enue from  the Wilson-Gorman tariff and extir 'gant expenditures in 4 period of profound period of profound ace.
'There is another side to this. Notwithstanding the Spanish wair
and the immense expenditures incident to it, and the wider respa;d'
bilities mouir Government has assumed, we have systematically reduitced  the national debt until the annual interest chargc of
$3,00!,000, bequeathed to us by the Cleveland Administration;  h
bIeen reduced to- an annual interest charge of twenty-four rmifl!0,n'
We have during this period issued something like '1i     ',5 00,0!: per cent, bonds iith which — "s have redeenmed a large proepliti'.
of the 4 and 5 per cent. bonds of Cleveland's Administration I
other outstanding S per cent. bonds. Our 9 per cent bonds ar;e,l'
a premiumi so that the highest rate of interest you can realiz' 0 1
a Governmenit bond purchased in the market to-day is 1.7 per e.


f-17




pD CHEAPNESS PRODUCE HAPPINESS-                  '-"NO; IT
PRODUCED MISERY."
i,f.f0,, fro-m remarks of lioh, 3K. N. JOHltNSON, of North Dakota,;. ou;se of Rtepresentatives, March 24, 1897, and printed in Apj.ih..x to bound Cojnreseional ]Record, Vol. 30, page 207.
\-r 1leveland taught the idoctrine in 1S87 that the tariff was a tax
ei }c,es were too high.
'Tihy held out to the laboring men of the country these promises
pi.p:( c breatd, cheap clothing, cheap everything. The gentleman
'n: Virgeinia  3Ila, SnwANsX.iSj yesterday was well within the hbound>
fi>t~imocratie orthodoxy whsti hlie said that for every dollar that
nict a protective tariff actatolly reaches the Federal Tretasury lice
[i:|!.s stop in the coffers of the protected industries. Trhat is l)emndi   e doctrine. Four yeears a go many people believed it Wias souilnd
i trte.!r a proniise to siop this robllcry and make cverything cheapi: >cocratert s and loglaists got control of the coutryi. We agreCt
ci   1 t1m thatt if these theories were put into governmental iloper;an tiey would proiduate cliapness, but we denied that cheatnme6
hit }lappiness. That wais the difference between us. The result
'is,-!a't Nwe predicted. A tariff for revenue only resulted in clicaptr
i, a.heaper bread, (ci aier everythiilg; thiere wals no doubt about
at; i    l ed;td cholrapness prodiuce happjiiess, as they said it tiuul?/;'i: produced  iserg, jli  i as 'we said it would.
S,,~'~ thein, insiead of 1adm11ittiig tile folly of their phib:,Sa)1i,
A: a   ti of couining to tihe altar as peniteiits, last fall they exiloit il
il~i:itl' hLtumibtlg to tia e peo}le. [.Lauglite r.l  Now, t, then s tee vxerx
g;ic ~cntletce  -who foir ycars ago protmised hatppiness throughI;.;i.s ctry otut agains: "fallino h prices,"  "shlrinkage of vtlues," ati
i,:i yonym istr ethe 'cleagpncss" tlhev deliuberately produced, and
iw"l)y' tried to nmake poi ole  ieve  fnthat it was the remote and
ixl: i:ive act of 187J3. anld not- thie act of 1894, that gave us both
jciiess and misery. 'ihen the cry was, "stop thle robbery, no aintir it stops our indusitrics."  Niow the j ugglery is to try and n:iike
oat:,riners and laborers believe that they will get higher prices iaIid
x:'l.-r wages if only paid in a depreciated curremncy. Then they were
sf..laies of cheapness; now they are preachers of inflation. The prolitT.rs of the country want the blest dollar in the world; anid if they
l:n on:ly get again the prit.es and wages, the pmarkets anti opportunim   ley irhad, even duri.ig the poorest years of Republiccat slup)reimacy,
liev  hi'l! be very thtankful. In the tariff debate in 1892 I made a
an'll,-ioin wxlicn   I will now read. It is found iln tihe COa;RuSSI: AtL
a:<. ri, volumnic              t pue pge   l  then snidi::3i::.,p industry, like c.cvy oidaer iuiliiustry, ihas its niatiral antd ini::iernlem c inres, agia:ibt wxiii  it mit:st be siccessfully defended before i: can thrive aitdl prosper. Sheep tire costlanlly exposed to the
(l/iiir of injury from vicois dogs mudi wolves, and scab and fooa
it,.',d Democracy.
Ii;itd laughter and applause.]
tiif most destructive of all these is Democracy. The enactment of
lis ':w would be fatal to more sheep in a single season than have
-;estfroyed by the tomboied depjredations of doys and wolves and,nh -td foot rot in twenty years.
[I   x vnetwd applause.].leniige search froma one end of tlhe Old Testament to the other
foi  phophleev that hims been more literally fulfilled than this.
l;   iter antd applause.] At thatt timie we ihad 47,000,000 sheep,; nuw
',' ":e only 36,000,000. The destruiction wrought is not measuredi
i ll.; loss of the 1I,000l00tt 0 tih ep tilit lmve had their throats cut;
A"'o,;ly by the depreciated value of the survivors, amounting t:.,:O000:, but by the still gireater loss in the depreciated value of tihe.
' tip, amountiny to 899,000,000 in, thes four years. 
fi18






"AFTER     DEMOCRATIC       SUCCESS IN 1892."-"CON
DENCE FLED, AND THE COUNTRY WAS EN.
GULFED IN THE VORTEX OF COMMERCIAL RUIN."|
Extract from remarks of Hon. E. D. CRUMPACKER of I ndi
in House of Representatives, July 19, 1897, and printed in A
pendix to bound Congressiownal Record, Vol. 30, page 27.
The permanent: redemption fund in the Treasury was i'ivern
jeopardy until after Democratic success in 1892. No one serious
questioned the ability of the Government to keep all of the corrcen
at par with gold until after that fateful event, though the isstue
silver and paper currency had more than doubled since the amount
the redemption fund was settled.
But, sir, a change, a fundamental change, in our industrial polib
was decreed by the American people, and its effects were imernedia
and startling. The details of the policy to be inaugurated could n
be known until the incoming Administration give the country its pr
posed tariff-reform  law, but it was known that the policy 9
protection would be superseded by somne kind of a free-trade suL
stitute. Enoutgh was known to create   a condition of deiise tna
impenetrable uncertainty. Eanough was know'u to stifle enterprise t(
paralyze activity. Importers, upon whose business operations the rev,
nues of the country largely depended. reduced their importations 
the minimum. This was in obedience to plain business law. A low
sc'hedule of duties was to be enacted, and no prudent merchant or in
porter would attempt to carry any considerable stock of dtlatiab
goodq in the face of that fact.
All kinds of enterprise dependent on or affected by the tari
began at once to prepare for the advent of the new policy. Th
result was inevitable, "Comning events cast their stlidows befor
them." A material decrease of inmportations resulted in a. correspond
ing falling off of the reveinues. This effect was noticeable hduring th
last two months of the Hairrison Administration. It was anticipator
entirely, and Secretary Foster, with characteristic sag acity, foresan
it, and advised measures to fortify tihe gold reserve, which would in
evitably be endangered. The gold reserve is not a segregated fund
but is liable for the payment of general demands against the Gon
erminent. It consists only of a general alance which the Governmen,
keeps- in gold coin for the purposes of redemption, and thereby maintains all other currency at panr with -gold.
This fund fell from $124,000,000 in November, 199, to $103,000,00t
in February, 1893, and the tcndeincy was still downward. It was ob
vious that the reserve could not he maintained at the minimumn d
$100,000,000 in the face of a rapidly decreasing revenue, resulting
from the falling off of of importations under the influence of a prl
posed radical change in the tariff policy of the country; conseqinntly
Secretary Foster advised the issue and sale of $50,000,000 of Government bonds, under a power vested in the executive department t. 
provide for the redemption of Treaesury niotes. The gold balance was
greater in November, 1892, than in any other month during the year,
oxcepting March. It was in a safe condition, and under a continua'
tion of the Republican tariff policy there was nothing to excite apIprehension or cause alarm.
But early in 1893 it became manifest that business principles were
asserting themselves; thlIt the revenues would become inadequate
and the gold reserve be endangered. This uncertain and ltalrming con'
dition, combined with former shipments of gold to Europe atil
general domestic overtrading, mit in double t abile ality of the Goneminent to keep the silver and paperr currtcncy at par with eoel. It
seemed likely that g'old would ito to a premium, and money blders
made a mad rush upon the Trea,'rsur  to secure that metal 'f:o' the
purpose of hoarding. Confiidecnci fed. and the country eafns* hb1ftlesl'
engulfed in the awful vortex of co  mmenrcial riin. That fd,(~rfI
national disaster. sr,  1wa-f the lo rical. the nece,-ary result of h, proposed repeal of the protecteie policy. The havoc was amimnrravat '  hy
contributory forces, but that cause precipitated the trouble. '! tii.
the Judgment of eeonoaie law 4and the price of Democratic victr' l




I


f-19


I




Ii
i
I
1
I
t
i
I
I
i
I
I
's


i


HE ILLS NOW            COMPLAINED OF ARE THOSE
WHICH ARE THE PRODUCTS OF
PROSPEROUS TIMES."
i      0wt ''iro" i rCemr1c,5 of lon. JOHN F. LACEY of Iotwa, in daily Cor, cies'd,,,al Record, Ja;nuary "I1, p 1904,
Th' Republican campaign  magxinh in 18192 was founded upon very satis,,,rg t existing. conditions. The people were very prosperous, labor was
Jiiv':}, bisiness steadily ihicrea:i-ig, and the slogan of the party of proaion -,as theu voiced in four words, "Let well enough alone!"  Our
IHcratic opponents raised the battle cry, "Let us have a change!"  If
cins.i.ed that wxe were "'doin g  ell r ioeligh," the answer was to the efflect,
l'wo *ta qit it."  If we answered t hat we were "prosqperotCs and in a sound,
i, a    "! secure condition," the answer was, "Move on; never stand still."
ThIe demand for "a chainge, coistant change," was asserted with great
ci j   cii every part of the country. lI'e hhad a Ic rlifie. Wte omoved octt of!o ioio 1893. We passed from the lfiqc.t i;tj o i   otet r dailr'!ces.. W'hat the
pi   a u ianted was a cBainge of rioe '- an1d a change of laws, coupled with
iretention of existing good cotnditions. Ve got the change of rulers alt
t, change of laws. This chalue theoy thought tley waniteid. They got
o a chtiantg of conditions; a thing they di niot wait, s 'telie; colId (it leIst
i iat tliet'y iere oii s8iai;dii)' still: tiLey weore mocinig, biut they weocre
dii   oii;c; (dofihill  'IThe coTutry rellel1be1s, thes'e conditions,  It can not
Iiy foret the!oi.  tult our adiversity renaitied uiitil tihe people once more
turcid to protectioen and decinared for the gold standard and -sound money.
it lawi was chaniged, and the conditlioi's respoini l ded with good cheer.
|In 18.96 our Demnociratic opponents did not have the heart to resume
r    taults on th   c  ive protective policy. Thoe foaur years were exceptionally
saLnitous to the farmier. It was thought that by the adoption of the Wil[n law though we might lose somewhat on our home market, our
fi)orts would greatly increase so far as agricultural products were
i;icerned.  We threw away our great- home market for the n:mirliets
the world. But the markets of the world did not respond. 'l'The De
loiaes (fowa) Register, a sterling protection newspaper, prepared fromn
licial sources a report of the loss of the farmers during those four years,
hich I will here insert in my remarks:
Four Years' Loss on Farm       Crops.
is on  farm   animals.................................. $2,5(0,422,968
oss on  wheat  crops.................................  300,832,581
os,  on  corn  crops...................................  363,725,658
oss  on  oat  crops....................4...........    138,481,331
ios on hay crop., three years.......................   464,739,066
ili; (.n potato'crops, three years.......................  83,291,365
-i: oin barley crops, three years.....................     7,250,377;,s1 o  cotton crps....................,........       221t,863,355
ss on 'wool crorps.........................  111,272,023
Ois in tobacco crops, three years.................       29,873,51 7
i;n rye crop:', two, ye;ri........................  1,864,142,*iii on buckwhe:,t crop, two years,....,................   172,137
Total loss on: fonr years' crop:-s....................$,283,787520
Loss on farm     products-Exp    orts.
Y ear.                  7Total exports;    ee ax
',:<..................................................  $7 5 ' $':'  i. ).2...........i 5.
i..................................................  t)i.....,'  1 170,9, l............................:i.2, (2 i             ] 72,'i,.2
i'<.......-..........................................  71, 4  22 28, 7
Total loss otl 4 years  Ctx ports................... 8....1 4291i,457,0S:'
In-.teid i,f the farmer's' iprodutits beiin 'x,pXlorted in an increased volmiie.
': eictlpareod wxith the periold of tI he b!'.Kinloy Axct in 1892, the four years
"iwiid the remlarkable fallinc off of more than $800,000,000, We thrlew
iwy,r home miarlket and wel ti skirmishlini for tihe "markets of the worl'l."
i',,i'vi:  a 'icay  the substanle for t(ic shiadow:.  W11   fo'i id it a  decreas 5i.,(:tls1
'ib   iie ieocrci sicurrenldearcd back t;/c'ir ill-uiscd piow;er in/ 18.97, il' t/he
''.'.s  settled  tile E   ino c(i i qcstli   /Iy /adoptini I the.gold  sttitldairldl  iilnd.Ft- six years these twiiin r,:'tiies hive beeni in siuceisl ful operation.
I'l,, I o(  co.'l  ii t o f i iei  t.-.,' ohli( i re toie  p)'rodtiiucts  of  prospero u s
aiI'',;:. increased capital and wealth have been actompalitied by cominbiti< ~,'hic.h^ have been declatred illegal lby law. T1hc p;re/.ent A.41mini.ir tio,/,. i
s.'io:,e vigorously   e tforci   lia t wi S  a z y it.tI trcusts  ont  c nbinaitiniis  thian. ha.s
'.y.f its predecetssors. Tle solhtion of th e tlus'h qi'est/ioi is onot to destroy
"'Pitfl, but to control its operations.






"THE UNITED STATES UNDER DEMOCRATIC ADMj
ISTRATION HELPLESSLYf INSOLVENT?."
Extracts from rcnoriirs of Hon. C. II.  R;SVINO       io, of Ohito.i., 
grcssional Reeord, ANovember ~ 7, 1905.
Upon the election of President Cleveland there was a pract.:l 
pension of income, of the revenues of the Goverenmient, into the Trii.a:;~p
lhe United States. It was natural; it was inevitable. It would, Ia.t
again if somebody othter than Roosevelt should be elected Presild,:th
year.  It was inevitable because the Deumocratic party camne in'iy pOW
witht this same proclamation of hostility to the AllcKtiniey law.
Now, Mr. Caii'man, it was inevitable, becatse   trade atood stii, 
alyzed, waiting to see what the Demilocratic piarty wo;lld do; and:,
in the mouth of February there was a conditiom of u nc ertainty as to wh,>R
the Treasury might be able to meet its reiuiaremeuts, Not dsrinl: Kl
ministration  of HIarrison.  My   frienllds are ai.  wlrog upo i tt;t. 
whethr, projecting   e conditionditions orward i  a ew earayi nmotlintJ, of
Adnministratton of the incomning President, thre iniighlit it be ': -'ia i
of inability tipon the part of the Treasury to te.iet its requiieii:;i.:,
espoeiaily to maintain the gold reserve at;$-i0t O,,'..(;01.
ThereutpoNs Mr. Secrtetary Foster, after tOtl t iiC.nii. of the twii. hi i
ject and discutssion with the President, approached the tilcomimg AtiL i
tration throuI.gh its supposed Sec'retary ofW' the TrcsuIry.
Now, M'r. Chairman, I wish to send to tihe Cil'l 's cl:k: nd::.i;, 
self of the brief teriod thiat it will take the Cleri to reai.l a letter s;::
tary Foster:
oit, i. J. j  RA   R FoOASTOIA, Oi IiT, rT, O Atoer,  Jir;: 
Ciciu nnatii Ohio.
My Di ARi S ENATORt: Your fa'vor of the 27th tis lt  ometl ntil recet4, O!i
monr's statemitent is quite vague. He sais: s " ii  S: 1893: wtien the )ii.:i
party cane into power the Republican Administra tion [uad batl kratt i i|
Goverunmeat. When Cleveland entered the Wfahie.totse tlierac w.1::: b;'i:i
already sigtned by the Republicall Admn i.traiL    Thiy   adi bart a,;a
aged to tide over unitil we got ituto oftice, tandi then we had to take thL ui;.
that catme as the result of their unwise aditainittratill."
The char/ge that the Gourcinil-et:  btli k;rpfit tui5)c,: Clt'il!: ct!io
iito potnier is ridicutulous. Thie r.~ u pi  ti  i "r tt, ad ta, itit I
ithat f/iscal:/year, exceeded the e.rpei'tdi!r:s. Tlbe usuIal charge i:-1 t. t ot
made by GAINrS in 'the Nrashville American, copied in thile Eiquir;.. t it
21st, that "Secretary Foster prepared plate., for bonds to tide over a..icit.
The facts arc tchat as soon aI' it was 0 laaown tti at Clevela.nd lva.t e' rI,. ii
November, 1892, it became appiarertit that. there was great dnRtlgr, o,;.:.:{:;.i
of importations being held black tfor loi-wer dutie:, that thegold h lr.;
would fall belotiw $10t00, 000,00ti  requiabed, not by law, bu by impriti: tio ii,
law. After consulting fully with Sen' tor Shelirmani, I mandoe lit) rl, t.:l t]:
it wars mip duty to maitntain the gold reserve even if I had to do iby v
sale of bot-ds. The only boads authorized were those of the rIs/ia t p.r si
of 1875, all bearing hligh rates of inter<::t  I i''i rtting a rlnag tin,
I suppose to o ssitt ute, Senattor Stherian ialroducedo at aemeviii 'tn l'dmn toC
apipropriation bill in thei Senate autliorlzinr.g  isiie of'  a 3 per cant., i or'
time bond. Mr, Carlisle, who w:s thent kli,'a;n, to be the irncotietg Secrii
twast coislted b  the SettOlr aId al)Ptvftid r, SiI. s-rtln' I li''ti:iti
pa::e d ti/bi Senate by an 1almnost unanii,.,1  vteo. This  i w tR aboit Ih:e 
of Februatry. Utpon its passage, feariig that I might. be con piel ti'i i:
boids for th  p   te purhase of gold, I direc'ttd' tie utirintident of tb.'.i:,;
offtee to prepatre plates for ltils bonl -a. bei -te:r bo1,i1d foi ly purpoIl  lls::  ti
those already atithorized. I lid this up tebi  a  beli e If iat the tihte itat a;:
approved by th(e iltcoming Secreiarly that ipv:-t:ed tlOe Se;rate. receivilln, a htr
sliare of the Demiocrat3tic votes of toat bo:)y, would alsO paIsa ill li:o-tI  ~
InI this I Was mitiraken. The lHoit'te ef-,          ai d the tl   i 
noft prepared, and there wiere nos bod:t  a lready i d s 'n'i, ot,-ttated by '
moa'. Bmut my letter directing the preparationt is used in ervidlonce
plates were prepared and that a deficit ex1S.';*a d.
To go a littlo furthera it tflis niater, 1 hr" d fixt  up:on $5t 00,i0'i't ' i a!
stl:oittmt of gold I would buy,,and I hd I an understanrding / ith the 0... 'It;
in New York to tiis effict, butt thiey s'tiail t h5oi t'ake tt l '"!. is;,
instatlmeits of $10,000.000 a waek.  Itt t5h, was l:re it wou tl (]0olvi  ii
Secretary Carlisle to exeicute a lpart of nS, -otriact1,. t. iThe bao;inkeirt. "t'
S frfetary Carlisle's concurat ltrc- i. i thet' timtntt. f In tZ."in itLn:!
aalled upon Senator GtO.tfiAN, stating the flreet'  bI'i i and iI, y'n: thi: itut'
of nmy Repiblican friends thoughlt  I had bfetr i-t, d:o anythitr  in t '/:'t 
of thie malintenance of the gold' reserve, y.t i deemed it siy dity  n- ~c:
trry of the Treasury to catinue to; do utiJl t h  last hour of my' t!e:r:-:,I
wouild do if I *were to be continued in oi;ce., Inl this I was suIsti'Jl t'i
Senator Sherman.
MIr. GlORMAN heartily appro1ved mid sent a  ess c eis:ner faor Mr.:
Mr. Cear/tsle sona mide  is tiipPara'i. ad see(:c d,ratlit plle:asE C;, ri;d  '
I proposed, and tnext day went   ito e et Mr. Clfc'telcitcd. Uponi his ritir.' I:
informed that he wotuld exierute ftie part of tie ptan that would doevoi'Cil  ll:
him:, and that Mr. Clevelantd  /also (raipp':ct'cd.
To sum up, the Treasury, was not  altilt an t at n   time, and till'i-e v'
no deficit at any time, no plates for, boltl, ttlnd.1o bonds were;signtes
No bonds were sold.   Imanagcd to maintain ti    gold reserve, I/itrti!d
over to my successor about $,1.03,000,t000.
I believe that if the Harrison Adi-ministration had been contii"! w
revenues and the gold reserve would havea increatsed and the condiltli Ai,
prevailing would have improved.
The lpanic and drcploirae cu(i''diiotn f:lCrt.i'ii  deflan'; S ele lctait d;t:I
wa/o//y dure to two causes: tirst, itthe I'swit/t' purptIose  of ithe Deitrocrlt, 's;-i '
to adopt a Trevenue tariff, wh. ici ar t ofice fi'ecttd the ivpports cod />,::.1'i':':"]
all indtustries and business, ad. ii, son   thie 7ow.l i', mItcd pf, t'.. oif )!  ' /;",'i '
oerdtic party thten comte  ing i;t-to p ow r It.t (lfrc t ci'on e;fficient al!t' I7'ef
af~terw ards so painfullyI demtnostraterd.
Very truly, etc.                          CHtiAntIa  iFos"i't:s:,,
Mr. GROSVENOR. AMr Clhairfmn, tlat sn'cems to be ctandid.   ", I'n"te':ii
Foster loo1ked forward into the futot.ie 'lsd saiw tbat the Trepasur  it1
Ui.ted States omust, under aDeaocrratic.d. Adrtinistration, i;eCoate hopetl':l ]
soivent and before the admlnistratiaon ort (Grover Clevelatnttd cloRed '"
werte [Oimerrs then of the House were called upron to vote for loans:.m'i
Ing in the aggregate to $262,500,000.
f-21






FO!.LOWING      THE    ELECTION      IN   1892." —"CONFI-!DENCE WAS DESTROYED ' —'A HALT WAS
CALLED IN ALL THE GREAT INDUSTRIAL ENTERPRISES,",,'!;s from reimarks of lion. Gf7OlGJtE IF. ISTEef'ILE of Indiani,
i llHouse of Iepresetntatives, M11arch 25. 1897, al(nd pritedl in
jippendix to: bound Congressional Record, 1Vol.f 30, pae/i J/,
I   xxol1owing the election in m1892, there was a great chanige iln t:he
itiirial outlook.  Confidence was destroyed in anticipation of
is;I:tionn inimical to the development of manufactures, and a hall
tis cled in all the great indiustrial enterprises wMhich uwere (addlit.i
ij f/; wealth and population of the Stilt t, and to the proaipcurityf of
Is p,'/ople. Merchants bega   to rin trim their sails like tice mariner
si clie face of an impending stormn, expenditures were curtailed, alndt:(e;.ods mianufactured during the winter of 1892, in anticipatioi.
0f ready sale in 1893, became a glut on the market land went bicghi? for purchasers. In the end the maninfacturers wexre forced to
id l'the output of their mills ait ta price below the cost of production.
It xxax under such conditions that the manufacturers of Alabaiima,
iwho ihave been referred to, sold products albroad at ruinously low
Iices for the want of a better market at home.
5s a necessary consequence, factories were closed by ihuindreds,
aInd thousa.nds upon thousands of wage earners were ldepirived of
eimtployment. Many of them took the roadi as tramps whox would
i,, I: hlave dreamed of so doing undcer the conditions which preVil  in this country prior to 189.2. Some. of temr, whxo ha;d before
lHi:n h1le willing customers of farmers and gardeners, tihemtselves
bic~,. e competitors of those whom  they lad forlerly patronized,
1ind raised vegetables in their own little gardens. lThere was a
dccr4:ased consuwmption of agricultural products, caused by an inaiiixv of the factory emiployee to supply his real wantis  ly purchase
r.a-m the farmer, who also suffered. 'there  was a deicr1ase exver ii in
aitthe:tyournt of wheat consumed in the United Stiates fromn 1H92 to
5i5!)3 of over 2 bushels per capita, tnotwithsltalinz ticie grieatly red:cd
)rife of this commodity.
'ei. conditions prev;ailing in the Indin;a gu;:s bclt lfroml 1.8SS to
'i:? camrie within my personal knowledge. I I:nxow thait otlaring that
peri:;d all those who desired emlploymant could oii:htain it at gooid
V:,:s in. the. multiplying manlifactories of that: sect ion. Wage earn'.rs were buying lots and building their own. i'iromcs, furnishiing them
lsicf'ully, dressing their ifanilies vwell, sen.diai  their children to
schol, anid providing for the wants of those wxho dependet d ulo.ii
I.;ii in a liberal manner. They were accuxmulating noney in savings
ht,,ifgs and building and toan associations. tUader such cOlceditiotnll
i-y w~ere -willing and able to pay to the farmer and manrket g; rdilcr,.
ihc tradesman, merchaunt, and miechanic, a fair price for whait he
t:I o sell, and let mre here bear testiamony to the fact tl:At ther
i no class of people which more cheerfully pays a fair price for
'Ei    of's of Contisumpltoi tharn the emtplo Yexs of oUi' m:Ml facturill
lh:,!tldshiments when they rec'eive fair compensat ion and steadly eni
p     la meit.
i can look back over the four years to 189:2, anId see hualdrelis
t;!Td hundreds of factories filled with thousands of hap)py and contite,:d  enmployees, great pillars of flame arisiag froim  tle chimneys.f imusy factories, and can hear the roar of the furnaces anid the
wii of tuiring wheels, the surround{ings of these eniployees Mi
lx{ei homes denotinxg a generally diffused prosmperity.  Withi.a  x
o,'-'" of that, tlime scores of fireca  eslaitBlih.ei.1lxts nfiod idle, wiilf
/e,:,i fuurmnaces an1d broken,wintdow [-iTh jiR dleuoti  the b/lixighl iwhich
L;~i fallen upon indtustry. In the ho iies otf their idle eImpiouesC;
whtrr were evidences of povOerty. Two and three families wce
c;.,:'ted into houses    r f ormerly occulpied b/! o.e. IRomes they f irrc(,i..rl ing  aid paiinlg for had to he sacrificed.
'I'Te effect of the reductions made by the Wilson -Gorman law on
f   ri:  products is is demonstrated by reference to the statistical rei,.aort
'r ihe Secretary of Agriculture for the year 1896 in the1 State whichi
fI h'n:' in part the honor to represent, viz:
" S3O80 the live stocak of Indin;: a wax: s valued at $78,g8(;.21S, ing*''-,i~i stexadily i, value until IS93, xwbn I iixxh-w; itatetr mark- wi.rl
":c  at $113,785.it, an  li rea se ofl  ' $1,979)9(i. I' rom.i 193 to
i   'l; here was a dece ase, from $11.3,i85,2,4, to $0 7,301,5lti, a differ'   to the had of g$46,483,288.


I 




"CLEVELAND WAS ELECTED PRESIDENT.: —'iT
BUSINESS OF THIS COUNTRY WAS
EVERYWHERE PARALYZED."
Extract from remarks of lion. S. i BA RNEI  Y of Wis'conn jI
Hoaew of Represelttivest, lotr'h 30, I.'.97, afnd prinlted hi,`i.
petndim to bouid ' ongr ot/resslownt ecord, 'ol. 30,,paye 13,
Our Democratic friends were continually going up anm dtow t
country howling to the people about how they were paying in:xe
upon their hats, upon their coats, upon their shoes, and upoln een
thing which they ate upon tIhe brteakfast table or upon. the dihtt:
table, and that they were lying downi at night and sleepin' 1}9
a taxed bed, and were being robbed on all, hands by this roi(oln
system  of taxation.  Yet, notwithlstanlting all this, durilng ithess
twenty-five years the people of this cottntry prospered as no }peOpit
have ever prospered in the history of the whoe whitc world; and I anu:dei
take to say that the- materiml wealth of this rcot/trtq icreaet d cset
rapidly in those years than it ever hqd before itn this or atny oh/
contry for a century.
There is another fact to whichi I desire to cali your attent:tion is
this connection, and that is that not onlyi had tlhe manufacturin;:
interests and the business men of this tounitry pro:spercld Iliri;I
those times, not oxilt' had tle farmers and the p)rofession'alm inm:,
prospered, but there niever wss a }priod in the history of the wli~-:
world wlten the commion everydayv laborer prospered' as be (ld
during aill of that tine; and I venitire thie statseiment, without, o',
fear that it can be successfully contradictted, that there never w:v
a time when a day's wages wottld buy more of the necesstarie',
and even luxuries, of life thian it woulad on the Ist day of Jafnfmar,
1892, and more, thlit there was not a sitngle man.ta in this contrual,
North, South, Etnst, or West, who co'ultd not get emnployment nt
good. remunerative wagres if he wished to work.
In the campaign of 1892, which all of us well remember, our
Democratic   fric friends went up antd downt the country telling thesev
satme people, who were then prospering as they never had pro..
pered before, that they were being oppressed; that they were biing
robbed by this system of taixation., and tat all that was iaecc'si:t r
to do in order to bring about complete happiness to the peopI:le 1t'
this country was to tear doxwn this systemii of protective tariffll <'ii
establish a tariff for revenue only. 'They were chanting the s~ae
song that they have been singing    up0on this floor ever since ili:u
bill ha's been under discussion. Well, the people of this countr%:,
prosperous as they were, were convinced that tIis was true, a'11
in the Presidential campaign of that year voted for a changr' e t
American policy; voted in favor of a patrty whitich. for the i
time in the history of this country, placed in its platforn i'
sttatemient that ai tariff for protection wax'is;t1tonstitutit)i:;li i
therefore void; voted to place in power a party which wais pledgdhctt
to rise th      ole revise he whole revenue system of the country and to give ~'
a tariff bill framed upon the principle of raising rtevenue as;agsin:t
that of both revenue and protection. Now, whtt was the resli it
that changer?  Within less than six months atfter the news f;t i'i'i
through the country that Grover Cleveland was elected Pres:',-1U1
of the United States the business of this countrcy winas parni,: —'i
everywhere. HunIdreds of thousands of omen wetre turned     ' o;: 0 '
emplo'yment,; mills vere closed; factories were stopped; banktL el/::;4
wrecke!d;  business nmen failedl, attd desotlaoiona spratcd over the;Cii
where for years before that tinme there had been prosperity aCm nd.''J
times; and from that day to this this p]all of depression has cU'~"
tinued to rest upon this country. Laboring men are out of enPr''
muent; those who have employment are working upon short tint,,'
at reduced wages. Men who are willing to work are traveliLt o'l:
highways begging for bread. and for the first time in the hiti '-r
of this country, not long after the election of 1892, an arn:;.'l
tramps was even besieging the capital of tlis country.


I
Ii
I!


f-23






"THINGS TO BE REMEMBERED."
xtract from remarks of Hon. CHARLES DICK of Ohio, in daily Congressional Record, January 5, 1904.
There can be no general prosperity in this country until we stop the
nspiracy of those who would make gold the only standard of the world.
Bryan's First Battle, p. 41.)
If we are defeated in this campaign, there is nothing before the people
ut four years more of hard times and greater agitation and then victory
ill come. (Bryan at Baltimore, September 19, 1896.)
We know that victory did not come for Mr. Bryan     n 1900, but was
is defeat in 1896 followed by four years more of hard times?   Let the
nassailable figures answer.
1897 (fiscal  I1901 (fiscal
year).        year).
x p o r ts.......................
r potrts.................................   $1,00,000,000  $1 487,(8),00 0
1pr ts^.........................................  i  764,000,(o0  8253,000,000
Aovernment revenue.......................       847,0000      5i87,()0,00
actory production..........................  10,000,0,    14,000,w00,4000
xport manufactures.............................  20(,000,(000  40,o),(0. 0
4,91t receipts.............................  82,0(X,000   111,,;000,0
ailroad  mileage............................     184,591       198,787:old  production,................................... 57,0      78,000, 00
ilver production.................                 000.........  69,(,000  77,(000,0(
uterest on  public debt...........................  4  00000 (I  2, )0,000
told in  Treasury..............................   6,( )    1,124, 000,000
ieposlts, national banks..........1....1......  1,l,(0,00 i,0,44,000,O00
eposits, savings banks.......................  1,5,000,0    2,6}5,000,000
ailroad earnings, net............................ 369,000,000  58,000,000
Mr. Bryan predicted four years more of hard times unless the country
ent Democratic in 1896, but it went Republican, and instead of four
ears more of hard times, things got better each year, resulting in no
ecreases (except $5,000.000 decrease in the yearly interest on the pubic debt), but in increases all along the line.  Giving his prediction the
uil four years to become effective, analysis of the above figures shows
ncreases in the fourth year as follows, under Republican policies and
ontrol:
Increases 1901
over 1897
xports....................................            $437,000,000
mports,,.............................      59,000,000
overnnment revenue....2.......................           240,000,000
actory  production.................................  4,000,000,000
ostal  receipts......................................      29,000,000
rdduction of gold...............................            21,000.000
roduction  of  silver.................................      8,000,000
old  in  Treasury....................................    428000,000
pospits,  national  banks..............................  1,431,000,000
eposits, savings banks..............5.........            715,000,000
ailroad earnings, net...............................       189,000,000
Total Republican increases...............$...... $7,557,000,000
And the list of increases might be largely extended.
These results prove that Mr. Bryan's false prophecies and reckless
ssertions did more harm than good to the Democratic cause in 1896, and
epeated their mischief with worse results to Bryan's party in 1900.
THINGS TO BE REMEMBERED.
Remember 1893-1896 and the days of Industrial gloom.
Remember 1893-1896 and the thousands of capable mechanics looking
o vain for work.
Remember 1893-1896 and the hundreds of thousands of laborers walkg the streets from sunrise to sunset looking for the work which could
ot be found,
Remember 1893-1896 and the countless number of women and children
aiting, faint with hunger, for the bread which never came.
Remember 1893-1896 and the heartsickness, the worry, the unpaid
nd unpayable debt's, and all the many ills that attend the man out of
'ork.
Remember 1893-1896 and the landlord waiting at the door for the rent
onery, which could not be provided.
Remember 1893-1896, when the factory whistle failed to blow for
nother day's work, another day's pay.                         f
Remember 1.893-1896 and the wives and children wanting clothes.
Remember 1893-1896 and the home comforts which were wanting.
Remember 1893-1896 and the un-American soup houses and other
rnms of charity necessary to relieve those who need no relief when they
an get work.
Remember 1893-1896 and the delusive promises made by the Pemcrati party in the campaign of 1892.
Remember 1893-1896 and the fulfilled promises made by:the Repubtan Party in the campaign of 1896.
Remembering those Republican promises and their fulfillment in the
ars since, calling to mind the unfulfilled Democratic promises and the
ttr Years of 1893-1896, what will you gain by voting the Democratio
ct i 19047 i 
f                                      '.:


I




::"T IM    E OF DEMARCATION."
"THE CONFEDERATE CONSTITUTION."-"NO DUTIES To
PROMOTE INDUSTRY." —"THE REPUBLICAN PLAT.
FORIM. "-"ADJUSTMENT OF IMPOSTS TO ENCOURAGE THE INDUSTRIAL INTEREST."
Extract from remarks of Hon. C. JI. GROSVE1NOR of Ohio, page
4640 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Session.
But I wish to put into my speech on this point, as marking the line
of demarcation, just two things. In the first place, I will ask the
Clerk to read section 8, paragraph 1, of the CONSTlTUTIOuN or THE
CONXEDERATE STATES.
The Clerk read as follows:
"SEC. 8. The Congress shall have power"1. To lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts, and excises, for rcvenue necessary to pay the debts, provide for the cotmmon defense, atnd
carry on the government of the Confederate States; but no bounties
shall be granted from the treasury; nor shall any duties or taxes on
importations on foreign nations be laid to promote or foster any
branch of industry; and all duties, imposts, and excises slhall be
uniform throughout the Confederate States."
The Clerk read from the Republican platform of 1860:
"SEc. 12. That, while providing revenue for the support of the
General Government by duties upon imports, sound policy req-ires
such a: adjustment of these imposts as to encourage the developmetn
of the industrial interest of the whole country; and we commend
that policy of national exchanges which secures to the workingmet
liberal wages, to agriculture remunerative prices, to mechanics and
manufacturers an adequate reward for their skill, labor, and enter
prise, and to the nation commercial prosperity and independecle."'
"THE BOY     PROTECTIONIST."
Extract from remarks of Hon. TWM. E. MASON of Illinois, ptyi
4831 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Sessiona.
I am like the boy who hired his sister to make his shirts. Son
one said, "You could have taken those shirts to the factory an}d id
them made and saved $2." "Yes," said the boy protectionist, 'Sistr
Sally got a pretty fair price. She always pays me well for whlat 
do for hetr. That two-dollar bill is still under the same roof withi li"
and if sickness or trouble or hard luck comes to any of our ftamily
that money is there in the house."
The free-trade boy calls his sister a New England tariff:robber
f-25 


0,I
I
s
R
y
e
e
It
d
B
d
I
d
r
I
I
I
I








H-E DEMOCRATIC PARTY." -THEY                   WANDERED
FROM    THEIR ORIGINAL POSITION.
tiracts from remarks of Hon. W. B. SHB AT"TUC    of Ohio, in daily
(cotfUressional Record, March 31, 1900.
Is 156s the-Democratic party announced in its platform that- -.
tlhe time has come for the people of the lUnited States to declare themlIves in favor of rrogressive free trade throughout the world.
IJ 1i860 they reaffirmed this proposition, and the people rl jected
tir free-trade proposition by the selection of an electoral college
whiich 59.4 was against them.
In 1864 they were so busy in declaring the war a failure that they
tited altogether to discuss the tariff question.
1 I 1868 they so far forgot their free-trade principles of 1860 that
e declared in their platform forA tariff for revenue and such equal taxation under the internal-revenue, as will offer incidental protection to domestic manufacturers and best
tote and encourage the great industrial interests of the country.
'Tis led the people in that year to return an electoral college of
clic 72.7 per cent was adverse to the Democratic party.
11i 1872 they wandered still farther from  their original position
iree trade, and announced in their platform thatFticcgnizing that there are honest but irreconcilable differences of
iioil in regard to the various systems of protection and free trade, We
iit tice subject to the people in their Congressional districts cand the deiocus of Congress thereon.
'lTe electoral college in that year giving 81.9 per cent of its vote
tie Republican candidate.
iTe abandonment of their original free-trade proposition having
oIv'cd an utter failure, they, in 1876, concluded to return to their
nrcer position, and in their platform announced that —
We denounce the present [protective] tariff. It has cut down the sales
Amertican manufactures at homne and abroad and depleted the returns of
eciecan agriculture.
This assertion that the protective system was cutting down the sales
irAmerican manufactures at home and abroad and depleting the
turns of American agriculture reads queerly to-day in the light of;sequent history.
Ic 1880 the party declared for a "tariff for revenue only," taking
re to make no detailed reference to protection or free trade. This
atform and the candidate were rejected by an electoral college
ich gave to the Republican Presidential candidate 58 per cent of
total vote.
In 1884 the Democracy made another great wobble. It found its:-trade principles distasteful to the American public.
t therefore declared thatThe Democratic party is pledged to the revision of the tariff in the
1it o ftair3ess to all interests; but in raking reductions in taxatiotn!t is
t prTi)sed to injure any domestic industries, but rather to promote their:lthy growth. Many industries have come to rely upon legislation for.essul continuance, so that any change of law must be at every step
Iardful of the labor and capital thus involved.
Srrangely, in 1888, the Democratic party, notwithstanding the fact;t they had in 1884 been successful upon a platform  which promnised
ctection to labor and capital, so far departed from the principles
that success as to say in its platform that'Ae indorse the last annual message of President Cleveland as the corct i;,terpretation of the platform  of 13S4 "upon the question of tariff
l;iction,"
Ancd as this message, thus indorsed as "the correct interpretation
the platform of 1884," was the celebrated free-trade message, the
01p in the election of 1888 rejected the Democratic party and its
nlidtte by an electoral vote of which 58.3 per cent was in favor of
t ltepublican protectionist candidate.
n 1892, by a series of misrepresentations and denunciations of tle
Kinley protective tariff, they succeeded in again inducind.i  the
i's to make one more experiment in free trade. The result of that
ction of 1S92, which brought into power a free-trade President and..ress, was a lesson to the people of the United States which they
not likely to soon forget.
i'a m 1892 to 1896, while the Democratic party was last in control,
depression of business, the suspension of manufacturing interests,
tle sufferings of workingmen whose earnings depended upon
'i05 prosperity and activity, which had resulted from Republican
tcctioin in earlier years, formed a record such as this country had
Seren and such as its voters are not likely to again desire to see.
f-26                     *100 '




"THAT     TARIFF REVISION         BY THE DEMOCRAT
PARTY-IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO EXAGGERATE
THE DEVASTATION THAT FOLLOWED."
etract: from  remarks of Hon    P. P. ' A0MPBhBLL, of Kaar
printed in the Daily Cwoyressional Record ipr   1, 1904
In 189, in the midst of plenty, surrounded by unusual conditio
of prosperity, the Democratic party raised the old banner of opp
sition to the protective policy and again asked for an opportuni
to revise the tariff. Th poicy of protection was then caled a sy
tern of robbery that made tie rich richer and the poor poore
and hothoused into prosperity one industry at the expense 
another. The people had forgotten their country's history an
said: "We'll try it.'" The depression and ruin that was inaugurate
with that tariff revision by the Democratic party Is vivid in th
minds of all. It is impossible to exaggerate the condition of deva
tation that followed upon the ruins of every industry througho
the "land. Banks susp)ended, factories closed, furnaces drew the
fires, mills  uspended work, agriculture was prostrated, industr
of all kinds languished, values of farm products and farm aniIna
went downward, farm values went to a low ebb, values of all co
modities went d(own to the ruin of alh industry.
There was little or no incentive to work upon the farm and noth
ing to do in the factory. This wreck of industry resulted in tl
loss of employment to more than 3,000,000 of workingmen, an
those who were not let out of employment entirely were workir
upon less than one-half time.   Railway employees, except t01
on scheduled trains were fortunate if they made one-third of the!
usual wages; coal miners were fortunate if they made one-four
of their customary earnings, and factory operatives in all branch
fared no better. Revenues were insufficient for expenses, and h
Governtent took its bonds to the money lenders.
There were no complaints about trusts or combines. There w
just one great organization brought into being during that periodCoxey's army-an army made up of men without work, who wante
something to do. These honest men had voted for tariff revisiol
by the  )emocratic party. They were now marching upon Wash
ington, deanding nothing but an opportunity to work.
These men, and all who went out of employment with theml unde
the Gorman-Wilson tariff revision, had been, under the Republicai
policy of protection, large consumers of the best products in wel
supplied markets, but  der the Democratic revised tariff they sul
sited upon soup provided in large part by public charity. So sul
den a change from a condition of employment that made possibl
a demand for better pay, as was done in 1892, to a condition of I
employment at all, could only be repeated by again permitting
Democratic party to revise the tariff.
But, Mr. Chairnan, it did not take long to get enough of l
Goran-Wilson tariff revision, and the election of 189ii called upo
the Republican party to again give the American people the beneli
of the protective policy.
The Dingley act restored that policy, and with that restorati0
came a return of prosperity. The whistles blew, and idle lab
found its way to industries that were opening their doors throug
out the land. Smokestacks throughout the country began agal
to emit in ceaseless streams the emblem of a country's prosperit
and the hum of spindles made a song of gladness that echoe
throughout the land. The 3,000,000 of men who went out of e
ployment with the revision of the tariff by the Democratic pa
found employment in the enactment of the Dingley law by the BI
publican party, and a million and a half have been added to tn
who have employmentn he industries of the country. Agricult
revived; banks rechartered and opened; industry of every kind 
quired new life and energy.   very field of industrial life bect
a field of industri   activ  The railroads of the country add
dred     d thousands of men to their employ es  *     *
The:value of farm aimls for the four years from 18   to 1
inclusive was ine and threequarter billions of dollars, in ro
numbers. The value of farmanimals from 1893 to 106, inclu
was $8,000,000,000, in round numbers-nearly two billions less 
value of farm products from 1889 to 19, iclusive-that is, cot
wheat.ad oats-was five and a quarter billions of dollars, a
he value of con, wheat and oats from 189to 1896 was thrfee
threequarter bill  s of dollars; and the value of fam alia
or t    seven  ar foleowin the e actwnt of the Diney law 
twe ty  dSa, qa^    r b'lnom  of dolars,      ttvie     f o
wheat and oats, nine billions of dollars.


I




iS
11
11
I
I
(1)
O
t
(11
II
I
I
I
I
I
i
i
I
4


I


"THE CLEVELAND BOND ISSUES."
ztYraict from  remrks m  of Hon. CEORGI N. SOUTHIWICK of
New York, in House of Representatives, March S1, 1897, and
printed in Appendix to bound Congressional Record, Vol. $0,
1p:e 203.
To the present generation, tiherefore, the four Government bond
sues during the four years of uemocratic ascendency at Washagton which followed the triumph of November, 1892, were a fiscal
norraly. Never before had it witnessed the issue of Government
hiaotCles in a time of profound peace; never before even a Treasry deficit at the end of a fiscal year.
THE CLEVELAND BOND ISSUES.
Between March 4, 1893, and March 4, 1897, the Cleveland Admin-;tration issued bonds to the par value of $ 62,315,400, on the sale
f which the Government realized $293,481,894. There were two
s;nes each of $50,000,000 of 5 per cent ten-year bonds and two
ssues of 4 per cent thirty-year bonds, one of $62,315,400 and one of
100,000.000,  When 5 per cent shall have been paid on $100,000,000
or ten years, and 4 per cent shall have been paid on $162,315,400
or thirty years, it will be realized that the elevation of the Cleveand Democracy to power in 1892 cost the country, in the principal
nd interest of additional public debt, the enormous sum    of
507,093,880.
The Cleveland Administration during its four years of bond issues
estred the public debt of the United States to the figures of 188.
t offset the steady reduction of the debt during the preceding seven
rears, On July 1, 1886, the principal of the public debt was $1,783,38,697.  On November I of the four rears of bond issues the
rincipal of the public debt made this exhibit:
'0ovember 1, 1893.. $1,549,556,353  November 1, 1895.. $1,717,1R1,779
ovember., 1894.. 1,626,154,037  November 1, 1996.. 1,785,412,610
Note the steady increase in the principal of the public debt as
onds were issned to raise money with which to pay current exinses and meet the const.ant deficit in the revemne!
A HIGHER ANNUAL INTEREST CHARGE.
Note also the steady increase in the nmost obnoxious of all our
lllnar expenditures-interest on public debt-during the four years
f bond issues! The total payments for interest during the fiscal
ear en dinl with June 30, 1892, were $2,378,116. The four fiscal,ears following make this comparison:
Tine 30,189, 3..,. $27,264,392  June 30. 1895........$ 30,978,030
une 30, 1894......... 27,8-1,406  June 30, 1896.......... 35,385,029
Conipared with the last full year of Republican administration,
t will be seen that the Cleveland bnd dissues increased the annual
lharre for the 1896 year over the 1892 year by the enormous sum
)f E?,006,913, a sum which amounts to nearly 2%1/ per cent of the
ntire annual expenses of the nation for all purposes.
SULPLlUSES FOR OVER TWENTY-FIVE YEARS.
Perimit me to call attention to the extraordinary showing made
inder the various revenue laws enacted by the Republican party
rom the close of the heawv war expenditures in 1866 down to the
iTTe when Mr. Cleveland and the Democracy were voted into power,
ledtlete to overturn the protective system  which had prevailed
ine e the day When the  ira. ture of Abr.ibam  T incoln gave the
indina effect of law to the' Morril tariff bill of 1861. Every fiscal
earls close, as already  stated, netted the Treasury a surplus of
T'verle over expenditures. The surplus fluctuated from a maximum
hf 43tj.913ll1 in the year endmin with June, 1S99. to a minimumn of
2    734t1,74 for the year ending with June, 1893-the last fiscal year
if a surplus. To my mind no greater testimonial to the capacity
If the Pepublican partv to manag the fiscal affairs of this great
ottvernment of ours wiselv and well could be adduced or even
asiPr, d than the record of the vears intervening between 1866 and
DEMOCRATIC DEPRE0SITON          AND   DEFICITS.
I,oowt of no more startlinq evidence of the ineapacity of the;ePmorar.t  part. to admtnist er the afrairs of this vast and complex
"i^ltn,"mren!t of the Urnited Stattes wsleli, and well than thei wreck
i'e;ihan the deficits and tihe bond issues, w'hieh marked the period
nitqi.faq wit h March 4, l. 89, and1 ( conat,.i a for four years,
henr., between 1866 and 1893, every Republican year produced an!meRR of national receipts over expenditurea Between lS94 and 1897,
'vry Democratic year produced a deficit.




"DEMOCRATIC INCOMPETENCY.""T HE SAME 0
FREE-TRADE HERESY."
Extract from remarks of Hon. ELMER J. BURKETT of A'ebras,
i daily Congressional Record, Jan. 30, 1904.
rThere never was an hour from the time that the civil war cose.on.an average, down to the beginning of the Administration
Grover Cleveland, when the Republican party did not pay
$174,000 of the indebtedness of this country-every blessed hoi
that you and I.have lived since the civil war. [Applause on ti
Republican side.]  They paid that indebtedness because they h~
a surplus, and they had a surplus only because they did ifoi
those rules. if the gentleman will go back six months prexviots
the time of the election of Grovcr Cleveland, he will find the Nor
American IReview and the Forum     and the financial journals
the country, with this sort of articles in themt: "What shall we
with the surplus in the United States Treasury?"."What &l
we. base bank notes upon whein the national debt is paid?' Ti%
was the problem during all those later years of the Harrison Ai
ministration.
Grover Cleveland was nominated and he was elected, and betote
that time and the 4th of March the income of this countery q
absolutely shut off, and why? Because business stopped. The pei
pie of this country understood, or thought they did, at least, i
conditions under which, they could bring goods into this conlS
as soon as Grover Cleveland should be inaugurated and Deimocre
policies put into operation, and they absolutely stopped imnpori:tiii
into the country, as the records show. As the imnportations Nw:
decreased, the revenues were decreased, the surplus decreased, andI
that last year, instead of having an. enormous surplus, just as
had had every year before, in 189:3 our income was cut down.within two and a half millions of our expenses.
It was a close call, I admit, for a Republican Administratli
but it was a surplus. It was a pretty tin margin to skate on, in
sirs, thin as it w-s, close to the line as, it was, it: ioas miles an
ileas better than your sixty-nble millions of deficiency the ve
next year.
After you ha     a had control of affairs four years you handi
them back to us, glad to escape the responsibility, and the ve
first thing that the Republican party had t do  when it c(ame in
'power after that Democratic Congress and that Democratic A/
ministration was to appropriate in deficiencies, to pay the debts
this Government that your party did not have the money )to
'to an amount of $347,165,001.82. Not only that, but during ti
four years you went four times to the money markets of the wor
and you borrowed $113,000,000, specifically to pay running expel"
and issued bonds for it.- You issued more bonds during that It
but this aount is amount is bsoluely traceable to running expenses of
Government. ' In short, you borrowed $113,000,000 on the bond(
the country and  three hundred and forty-seven millions on or
account and then left thle Treasury empty and official salaries ulmI)'
Now, that was the management of the Demn-ocratic party dtrl
the time they had the reins of government in their hands in tl
country. Why shouhld we expect you to do better in the fI'
than ifou have in the past when you adhere to the same old /
trade heresy?
Now.let me continue where I leIft off when interrupted.1
last year I gave you was 1897, when you Democrats in timel
peace had a deficiency of more than $18,000,000. The next!
year, or that of 1898, was the first year under the McKincty:
ministra-tioon. It took us a little while to get our macninery slort
and then the Spanish war came UIponl us, and then the PhilipPI
war, and they -made millions of extra expense.
The first year of that Administration, or 1898, we had a. deitcie"
of thirty-eight millions.  In 1899 we spent eighty-nine omitih
more than our income. But thcere the story changed. In 190 1 1
surplus was nineteen millions; in 1901 it was seventy-seven miflliI
in 190-2 ninety-one millions, and in 1903 our surplus was fi'0
millions. With that stupendous amnount of surplus we h' c
paying our debts.: We always do. That is also Republicaii P'iI
When..the Republican party turned the. Government over it
hand of Democracy in 1393 the public debt, less cash in tihe T:ry, was ex(acty $833,909,475.75. When you Democrats *9W o
9of oe in 1897, after four years of peace that public deb  


I




FROM BRYAN'S CHICAGO SPEECH.
'THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY TOSSED ABOUT ON THE
HIGH   SEAS OF DISRUPTION."
gxtact from remarks of Hon. GILBERT N. HAtUGEN of Iowa,
in daily Congressional Record, April f6, 1904.
I want to express my sympathy to the Democratic party in their,our of turmoil, confusion, and distress, wandering about like a
rudderless ship encountering shoals, and rocks, tossed about on the
high seas of disruption, without issue or hope of reaching an
grerement on either candidate or platform.
For the information of those who have cherished the hope of a
reconciliation of the Democratic party, I read to you from Bryan's
Chicago speech on the New York platform, the reorganized Democratic party and its prospective candidate —the party eulogized and
defended by the eloquent gentleman from New York, Mr. COCKnRAN,
in his two hour free-trade speech of last Saturday:
PLATFORM FOR A DODGER.
The New York platform is a dishone.st platform, fit only for a dishonest
prty. No one but an artful dodfer would st(and upon it. The submission
of svc a platform to the voters of a State is an insult to their intelligence,
f, it is intended to deceive them. and a deliberate attempt to deceive. especi1lly so clumsy an attempt as this platform, is a reflection upon the brains
ft those to whom it is submitted.
This platform proves that the opposition to the Kansas City platform
Is not opposition to silver, but opposition to every needed reform and opposition to all that the masses desire.
I had expected that a platform prepared by Mr. Hill for Judge Parker
would be evasive and lacking in frankness, but T did not conceive that any
body of men calling themselves Democrats would present such a platform as
a recommendation of a candidate. *  *  *
Can, anyone doubt that with such a platform as was adopted in New
Yo rk and with a candidate whose conscience would permit him to run upon:?ich a platform-does anyore doubt that with such a platform and candidate the partqy would be mortraged beforehand to the corporations that are
sw using the Government as a private asset and plundering the people at
*ill? * *  *
I for one am not willing that the Democratic party shall become the
tool of the corporations. I am not willing that it shall be the champion of
'rganized wealth.
ADVICE TO DEMOCRACY.
Let us drive out of the pgrty every Democrat who betrays his trust.
every official who would administer the office for his private advantage.
1Tet us make Democracy stand not only for good government, for hone-t
toverninent. but for a government "of the people, by the people, and for the
)eople."
Indeed, you are entitled to sympathy. With this disruption in your
ranks and your distracted condition, confronted    with progress.
prosperity, and a happy condition of the people, brought about
under the seven years of Republican rule, Republican principles,
and Pepublican policies, it is plain to-you and to everybody that
your defeat is certain next November. This is unfortunate for you,
viewing it from  a political standpoint; but how   fortunate it is
for the American people that we have sltch a clean, fearless, honest,
atrtiotic President.
One who has labored so earnestly, conscientiously, and faithfully
to fulfill his burdensome duties, always in thorough sympathy with
the best interests of all the people, always pursuing his duty with
fleltp, dignity, and rectitude of purpose. dominated by noble and
lftv ideals; a statesman, a diplomat, fortified by a wealth of
learning; a man whose character, success, record, both private and
1ublic, is without a stain of immorality, decetion, fraud or corruptirn, his loraltv to principles. his devotion to truth, his untiring
ier, m, his loftv ideals and conscientious work, entitle him to the
Iresect and admiration of all.
SPch ia: Theodore Roosevelt, the man whom the Republican party
wil present as its candidate in the coming election; and, gentleen, you are wasting ink, time, and energy in circulating such absllrd misrepresentations.
f  )




"MR. BRYAN        S ADDRESS"-"A DISHONEST PLAT
FORM FIT ONLY FOR A, DISHONEST PARTY."
Etleract from speech of Hon. E. deV. MORRELL of Pennsylvania, in datl
Congressional Record, April 80, i90..
Perhaps at this moment It would be well to retd what Mr. Bryan say
concerning the Sphinx in a speech delivered by him In Chicago on Apri
23, as reported in the Nebraska State Journal of April 24, 1904, his sub.
ject being "The New York Platform.'"
MB. ElRYAN'S ADDRESS.
His address was chiefly as follows:
"By the platform adopted by the New York State convention, and tak
ing this platform as a text I am sanguine enough to believe that I ca
prove to every unbiased mind that Judge Parker is not a fit man to
nominated either by the Democratic party or by any other party tha
stands for honesty or fair dealing in politics.
"What are the issues before the country? The trust question is ee
tainly an issue, and yet there is nothing in that platform that gives an]
encouragement to.the opponents of the trusts. There is not a word o
syllable that binds, a person elected on such a platform to do anything tha
the trusts are unwilling to have done. The Kansas City platform state
the party's position on the trust question, but the New York platform
only fails to indorse the last national platform, but also fails to propos
any definite or positive plan of relief.  * *  *
"On the tariff question no issue Is joined. It was reasonable to sup
pose that on this question, at least, something would be said, but Mr. HII
and Judge Parker seem to be as much afraid of the tariff question as
other issues.
"The money question is ignored entirely. No reference is made
bimetallism at any ratio —not even to international bimetallism, to whic
Mr. 11Hill seemed to be so attached in the Chicago convention. No referene
is made to the measure now before Congress to melt up nearly $600,000,00
legal tender silver dollars into subsidiary coin that is only a limited lega
tender. Nothing is said about the asset currency which is a part of tU
scheme of the financiers. * * *
"The platform ignores the income tax; it fails to indorse the eleeteo
of Senators by direct vote, and also omits the plank of the Kansas Cit
platform denouncing the corporate domination in politics.
PLATFORM IS DISHONEST.
"The New York platform is a dishonest platform, fit only for a dig
honest party. No one but an artful dodger would stand upon it.
"The subminssion of such a platform to the voters of the State Is a
insult to their intelligence, for it is intended to deceive them, and a delib
erate attempt to deceive —especially so clumsy an attempt as this platfor
is-Is a reflection upon the brains of those to whom it is submitted.
"The platform proves that the opposition to the Kansas City platfor
is not opposition to silver, but opposition to every needed reform and oppo
sition to all that the masses desire.!"I had expected that a platform prepared by Mr. Hill for Judge Paries
would be evasive and lacking in frankness, but I did not conceive that an
body of men calling themselves Democrats would present such a platfor
as a recommendatlon of a rcandidate.
"If we are to take the New York platform as an indication of what tb
next Democratic platform is to be in case the reorganizers control the con
vention, then who will be able to deny the' secret purpose of the reorgan,
izers t to turn the party over to predatory wealth?
QUESTION OF HtUMAN RIGHTS.
"The issue presented to-day in the trust question, and in all the othen
questions with which we have to deal, is the question between human rigbt
and the so-called 'property rights' —or, more properly speaking, between
ordinaryi people and the great corporations.
"I., for one, am not willing that the Democratic party shall become th
tool of the corporations; I am not willing that it shall be the champion no
organized.wealth. And it is because I believe that the party has a highe
mission than to be the exponent of plutocracy that I am protesting agains
the schemes of those who would put it into competition with the Republica
party for the support of Wall street financiers. It is for this reason that
protest against mortgaging the party to the capialists to secure an en0nr
motis corruption fund.
"If any who are present to-night or who read what I say think that
am trying to interfere with the Democratic success, let me answer that 0
Democrat is more anxious for the party to, succeed than I am. No one as
suffered more from dissensions and divisions in the party, and no one,
believe, Is more eager for the country to enjoy the great benefits which 
triumph of real Democracy would bring.
* "But I do not desire that the party shall win offices only. If that aI
the only purpose of the, party, let its principles be abandoned and its plat
form simply declare the party hungry for the patronage. The lesson i
1.894 thows the folly of hoping to win by a surrender to the corporatio0,
but even if success could be bought in such a way it would not be worth
the price.
POOREST KIND OF PLATFORM.
"The New York.platform is ambiguous, uncertain, evasive, and dis,
honest. It would disgrace the Democrats of the nation to adopt sunc I
platfor, and it: ought to defeat as an aspirant for a Democratic noninas
tion any man who would be willing to have it go forth as a declaratlon 
his views on public questions. In Illinois, in Wisconsin, in Michlgan, In
Minnesota, in Indiana, in Ohio, and in every State that has not atefd, it
behooves the Democrats to arouse themselves and organize to the end that
they may prevent the consummation of the schemes of the reorganizers. J
"Their scheme begins with the rank and file of the party. It l  to
followed up by *the debaching of the public with a campaign fund secure
from the corporations, and it is to be consummated by the betrayal of tlb
party organization and of the country into the hands of those who are PI
day menacing the liberties of the country by their exploitation of the P
ducers of wealth,"'


f-31




E DEMOCRATIC PARTY."-''MFOR FREE TRADE."
raet from  *peedh of lton. Joih   DALZELL of PennsyIvania,
i daily Cona' ressional Re'cord, April PO, 1904.
lat is the attitude of contending parties on the subject of tariff
ion. or tariff reform?   Is the Democratic party honest in its
arations of conservatism  now made by so many of its leaders
ediately preceding a Presidential election, or is the Democratic
y still, as it always has been, under whatever pretense to the
rar, a party advocating the doctrine of free trade?      It will
ntereitlng, Mr. Speaker, for us to compare some of the dledaras of Democratic party leaders heretofore made when not under
stress of a Presidential election with the declarations of those
e parties and others made in the stress of a Presidential election.
me call attention very briefly to the declarations of at least
gentlemen who are on record in 1897, when the Dingley bill
under discussion, and who are also on record during this present
ion of Congress. I refer first to my genial' friend from Missouri. CtsARK, and I quote from a speech made by him In 1897. While
gentleman from North Carolina, then a Member of this House.
Linney, was on the floor making a tariff speech, he said:
Is there a member of this House who would have the duties strilken
eferring to the duties of the Dingley bilL
The dfstinglshed gentleman from Missouri fMr. CL.ARKI, who cuts a
"itd flgure here, would, I undertake to say, like to have them Dut on
free 1i3t, beesause he would, if he could, with the arm of a giant, tear
n any custom-haouse in these United States, if I understood him corYr. CLARPK of Mi9ssouri. Just so, exactly.
r, L:NNFsY.,Yes; he says he will do It.,
ubsequently Mr. CLARK obtained the floor himself, and, in course
is speech, said this:
Mr. Chairman, after nine days of sore travail at least one truth has
brolught forth on the Republican side of this House, and that by the
teiman from North Carolina when hp said that I would destroy every
sm-hosse in America. He is entirely correct. If T h.ld 1riy 1 ml: to-day,
ict-sld tear themn all down from turret to foazsdeatio, stone, for from
beari-nidn  they ha ve been nzothing but a den of robbers,
hen he went on to say:
I repeat, so that all men may hear. that I am a free trader, and proudly
nzry (tand with Sir Robert Peel, Richard Cobden. John Bright, and
ry Georgei. T may be an hXtumble member of that ill ustrious company,
it is betoter to be a doofrkeeper in the bhouse of honest free traders than
wvll in the tents;of wicked protectionfists  
ow, I desire to call attention to the declarations of another
tleman vwhoe influence in this House is not surpassed by that
anv mran.   My friend the gentleman      from  Mississippi  Mr.
LITAMS], the minority leader on the floor, on March 24, 1897, during
same discussion of the Dingley bill, said:
The home market! This fetich with which the Ignorant among the
'lultiral classes have been conlured to aid: in cutting their own Indua1 thrtts.  *  * ** What is lockiRng, Mr. Chairman, is not at the mandtirers- end of the line of exchange. It is at the consumer's end of the
snil the consumer is chiefly the farmer. 'What Is lacking is the ultie nunlia aing power. By years of iniquitous class legislation, both in
'ay of customs duties and in the wtay of currency revolution. you have
'1ped In "killting the goose which laid the golden egg."" +  *  As
'ion rat who believes in, free trade, or the nearest possible anproach to
rePjicfed in the passalfe of the, Wilso-n-torman bill. Not because the
feeatures of it were Democratic ---for. on the contrary, they were proiVe-butt because the act contained the Income tax, *  *  *  There
within it a gferm from which something approaching free trade might
1ome by evolution.
aut Mr. Speaker, the latest declaration of the policies of the
"cratic party were had here on Saturday last. A distinguished
eoqtuent orator-I may say one of the most distinguished and
ient of whom I know anything-a representative of Tammany,
itiix of the great State of New York, regarded as the pivotal
te in the coming Presidential campaign, instructed and delirhted
for a period of two hours in a very able speech. It was for
traide without pretense; frank, open, manly free trade. No
itlelse was held out that any laborer of this country, that any
ner of this co untry, that aty manufacturer of this country,
1ipel}  for anything by wav of tariff from the Democratic party.
declared thal tariff in any shape or form    was simply publhic
rider  He unfurled tlle banner of free trade and inaited his
Ocl' tic brethren to follow him, and such enthusiasm, 0o much
tim1 so tluch approval as he received in this House I have never
hn any previous occasion. I     ssurnem therefore, that he speaks
is party.
-32


t




].':        SPEECHES OF MR' COCKRAN"'
"WHAT BRYAN STANDS FOR-"TO PARALYZE
fOUSThtY,"       'FOR PROSPERITY, FOR JUSTICE,
E9xtracts from remarks of Hon. JO     NLY DALZELL of Pennsy,
in daiy Congressional Record, April A0, 1904
Mr. Speakeri, I desire now to call the attention of the Hlo
what was the conception of the gentleman from        New York
oCntitAj   -] of his dfty in the McKinley campaign.:I read
an interview nn the New York Journal of August 3, 1896:::   WhAt is your opinion of the present political situation?-A 
gard it as' tthe!raest in: the history of tthe country, exceedinq in impir
the crisis of 1860. ~.The.secession movement was but an attempt to i
this country 'between two governments, each of them    designed to p
property withinfthelimts of 1 its jurisdiction.  The movement aunch
Cbiicgoo.*(' n,Attentpt to paralyze industry by using all the powers
Government to take property from the hands of those who created it
placeit in the1 haids of those who covet it. This is a question of a
as well as of potlites, No po litical convention can isue a valid lient
commit pffeneas aypainsf morality, and I decline to follow Mr. Bryan
crusade against hotnesty and the riqhts of labor.
Q. Do you mean that you will actively oppose the Democratisc
or abstain from active support of itt? —A. In a contest for the exists
civilization no man can remain neutral.  Whoever does not support
forces of f order aids the forces of disorder. If I can do (anyfthinq to t
a movement the succees of iwhirch I would renard as an irreparable cal
not only to tlis country but: to civiliCed society everywhere, I shall cer
do it.      
Now, why, did the gentleman from      New York abandon the
plane of his moral purpose of 1896 and indulge in this canm
in 1900?   There have been some excuses given for it; but I
give Mr. CocKraAN's own excuse. Take the last Congressional Di
tory and you will find that he says in his autobiography:
In' the election of 1900 he supported the Democratic candidate
President on the ground that the result could not in any way affect
coqinage of the country, owing to the cornplexion of the Senate, swhi
believed the' defeat of' the, Republican party' would of itself have sut
to "expel iperialisn from  our political system.
tIn, other, words, if the Republican party had not been in p
in this' House he would not have been with you Democrats. [LIaug
and applause.]    He says to himself.    But he favored Mr. B
because he was opposed to imperialism.      Opposed to imperial
Now, look you.    He was in favor of the debasement of the
rency; he xwas in favor of the destruction of the Supreme Co
he was in favor of the nullification of the President's powers
was in.favor of a disturbance of the fundamental conditions
civilized society  becasuse he was opposed' to imperialism! He
in faor of everything that he was opposed to in the McKi
'campaign, because he was opposed to a policy which would ~
have^ existed had it aot been for the influence of Go!. Willi'
Bryan, who procured the necessary votes to ratify the Spanish tr
in the Senate.,
Now, I 'have here some extracts from     speeches of Mr. Cocs!
made in the Bryan campaign.
[IExtract fromn the Chicago Inter-Ocean, September 30. 19001
OCXRA'$W SPEECH AT CHICAGO TFOR 3YAX.
' The gentlemen who- talk from the Republican platform talte oi 
"-Lperity as if the prosperity of the country was shown by the prlice of se
Now, that; iF onoe evidence, but by no means conclus ive. The conc
evidene *of prosperity, the one which never can betray or mislead, is
rate of wagesq paid to laborors. Now, I do not say that with. any expr1
of special eafection for the man who works with his hands, but be
labor must prfoduce thi fuaod from which its wages are paid. If the
are high, its production  must e 'expensi ve. When production Is expe
commodities are abundant, and when commodities are abundant prose
must be general, and when prosperity is general yyou and I and atl10
iiut s'hare.' NOWK. prosperlty is forced to find openings for coamnod
faitry distributel among those who produce them. I say that.Mr. P.eCletoio   w illmake; for that form of prosperity, *and I say, morreover,
o real' value in this country will be depreiated by his election,
[Cocxniot:B's speech' at Prospect Hall In elosIng the cam paign i (
Counoty,-, N..V. From the -Brooklyn Daily Eagle, Noember  I
WHAT BYAN STANDS FOR.
Mr0. G   Koc*nAaX says:
"M. Bryan itn this campaign stands for peace; he stands forei 
me'waet';!;   b srtantdf:t foe the empt o f every person in thii coin0ti''i,icultiva ttono the1:t of th: co untry or the thntgs whichgare prOe1
the   l he tan     or the - mployment of every dollar of capita 
of prodctl ven udtr.Hemust. thereforre stOand for abundanre 2~ '
a   itie, fo' poperi, for contentment, as' h. stads f or justie


I
I
I
I
II


I


f-33






V.BOURKE COCKRAN.' —GREENBACKER, SOUNDMONEY MANj, FREESILVER MAN."
traEcts from speech of Hon. JOHN DALZB LJ of Pennsylvania, in daily
Coegressional Record, April 30, 19f04.
What s::the, gentleman's history?  lire started out as a greenbacker.
aughter and applause on the Republican side.j  He traveled up and
tIhe State of Maine endeavoring' to: p}ersunde those Yankees that the, way tO get money was to -get it from a Government printing preas.
advocated fiat money, a hundred cents of fiat on the dollar. Yet in the
lKinley campaign he could not join the other side!  He could not stay
the t  McKinley eide, because he was for sound money!  [Laughter on
e epublican side.]
For sootnd money in 1896; travelino all over the continent in support of
*i in 1900; greenbacker, souInd-money man, Ifree-silver man. Hei has
il a Bryanite'; od an anti-Bryanite,
But ntya:fiendf has been a 2Tammanyite, and as saucl he has been a
',ber of Congress, Ile has been an anti-Tammoanpite, and as such I,.e
Msed to be a mnermber of Congress.  [Laughter and applause on the Reblican side.]  The gentleman'is a  mTamnnanyite again, and now again is a
nber of Congress. [Renewed laughter.]  '
On October 29, 1903, the New York Tribune published an article enled "A denial accepted, with specifications," and I want to read it to you:
Mr. CGOCKRAN has evidently been deeply incensed by the charge that
was willing to sell his oratory to the fusion cause in this campaign and
actually been hired for a large price by Tammany. We give him the
I benefit of his indignant denial that he has received money for his
eches in behalf of Tammany. iBut he should have refrained from utttrces calculated to create an impression that the Tribune invented that
ry and gave it all its circulation. What we did in the article printoVd
tSaturday morning to which he has angrily referred, was to publish a
rrent report, which we expressly described as such, and whSich, as a mat,of fact, had appeared in print the afternoon before and was repeated
several morning newspapers simultaneously witb its publication in the
ibune. It was a report, moreover, which was pretty generally credited,
reasons which Mr. COClRAcN, in his calmer moments, surely has disnIment enough to appreciate.
When his present excessive heat has passed off he should be willing to
nfess to himself that t it was utterly naitural to suppose that he must
ve accepted a pecuniary compensation for adopting a course so amazing
I so abhorrent. There was no process of logic by which to account for
paid (levotion on his part to Tammany this year. If by a long series of
itical somersaults Mr. COCKRAN had not accustomed the public to assote him with the class of men whose services in the line of campaign
caliing are procurable on a cash basis, the circumstances of the present
ipaigan were such as as almost of necessity to suggest the idea which he
sents,
Mr. COCuIRAN'S assaults on Bryan in 1.896 were unbridled, and he
ed for McKinley., In 1900 he flopped over and gave Bryan his support.
years after Tammany had raised him from obscurity, or something
rse, hlie was its darling, but at length, owing to causes of which Mr.
rome seemt to have knowledge, he incurred Croker's disdain and became
enemy of the organization. In 1.897 he cheerfully voted for General
acy, but two years. ago he had got far enough back to support Mr.
Iepard, with whom Tamrmany was trying to mask its infamies.
Until within a few weeks, as he now acknowledges, be disapproved
ery single thing that Murphy was doing: but in obedience to his creed
a non-partisanship in local politics is a heresy, he suddenly embraced
rphy and all that Murphy stands for.    The fervor with which Mr.
ICKlAN attempted on Tuesday night to give an appearance of moral conteny to this harlequin record justifies lis in crediting his assurance that
>w, as always, his speeches are gratuitous; but it would be a piece of
nstrous audacity for anybody to pretend that there was no excuse for
contrary impression commonly entertained last week.
In find also in the newsaoaper of his colleague [Mr. HEARST], under
te of October 26, 1897, th. following in lines one-eighth of an inch
rge across the top of the page:
KA    EIRED TO STUMP 3OB TBACY —COOEEA
WILL STUMP FTOR TRACY-CONSENTS AT LAST
TO TiE FERVENT ENTREATIES OF, WALL STREET.
W. BOURKnn  COCKeAN is to take the stump for General Tracy. The
-Tammany Hall Demosthenes yesterday finally agreed to assist Senator
Mr. COcKXAN was seen at his office, at No. 31 Nassau street, la~st
ening, and said:
"Yes; I am going to speak for General Tracy. I am very busy. No 
IeO is to be only one speech. It will be delivered either on Friday or
turday night. I don't know where, but I can't speak before then er after.
g0t a letter 'from the committee,
"Am I to be paidi Oh, you'll have to see the committee. I am very
sy.;
[Laughter on the Republican side.]
And last of all I find in the Philadelphia Press of April 25 of this
a',a over the signature of an entirely responsible and accomplished newsPer reporter, Mr. M Walter Wellman, the following:
WRO PAID COCXRANP
UhIlrKET COCRbAN'S indignant denial that he was paid for the speeches
eb: be, made against free 'silver In 1896 Is understood to refer to any pay
ts alleged to have. been made to him by the Republican national corn
te, Mr. CocKRAN sis wholly in the right. The.Republican national
iuittee did not pay iro a cent and bad no dealing with him in that cami   f any sot. Probably MAr. COClroAss fooUld not den  that he was
44w5,00. for fifteen.speeches by theL'PalmerlBwsener  ancpaijnm  oatf-a34


I




"HE STOCK IN TRAtE OF THE DEMOCRATIC PAR
IS OPPOSITION TO THE PROTECTIVE TARIFF.'
Extracts from remarks of tHo. G. W. RAY of New York, pr
in daiy Congressional Record May $1, 1.900.
The stock in trade of the Democratic party is opposition to
protective tariff of Blaine, McKinley, and Nelson Dingley, t
champion  of the people and of Republicanism. Not a calam
that can befall mankind; not a disease that flesh is heir to but
attributed to protection. Even war, pestilence, famine, and ex,
sion are evils having their origin and propagation in protectiun,
Democracy is to be relied upon. The committee examined this e
tention carefully and in a non-partisan spirit. It has no merit, p
tective tariffs have little, if anything, to do with monopoly. Mif
polies and combinations to control production, trade, and prices gr
to alarming proportions and were the subject of denunciation a
governmental decrees in free-trade countries hundreds of years
fore protective tariffs were suggested or devised.
Free trade would be an incentive to monopoly and illegal co
bination*  Our protective system has not only stimulated and p
tected competition, but it has protected the people against fore
monopoly. Should it be claimed thatbut for the existence of wea
there would be no capital to combine and therefore no monop
that protection has enabled our citizens to thrive and prosper,
business, keep money at home and bring it from abroad, and so
aggregating capital engage in great enterprises and form and ca
talize great corporations necessary to the growth of the nation, so
of which sometimes overstep the bounds of legitimate business a
seek to stifle competition and control prices and production, we
be compelled to plead guilty.
If the true remedy for the evils of monopoly and "combines"
to destroy capital, tear down manufactories, deprive labor of
ployment, cripple the market for agricultural products, and imp
erish the American people, then let us open wide the door for f
trade and the product of foreign labor. Let the factories and wo
shops in the United States close their doors. Let the tide of
portation of American goods cease to flow and let each incorni
wave bring to our shores the ships of Europe richly laden with
finished product of her labor. Let us return to the days of 1895 a
1896, when, under the operations of Democracy, in three years' ti
the deposits in national banks declined $1,000,000. In April lst
exported $43,459,765 more than we imported, showing that bala
in our favor, that addition to our wealth. Free trade, even a Wil
bill, would end all this prosperity.
Mr. Speaker, by abandoninn protection and reducing all pen
to penury, closing all our industrial enterprises, we might possi
escape the exactions of some of the monopolies created and doi
brsiess in the United States, but not to our advantage. The gr
corporations would then crowd out the lesser ones having smallca
tal, and combining together, and also with foreign monopolies, wo
absolutely crush industrial enterprise in the United States, and
people would be at the mercy of uncontrolled and uncontroll
foreign corporations and combinations. The old remedy of
trolling crime was to drown the world, and so the deluge came. 0
one pair of each species of living creatures was permitted to surv
The opponents of this joint resolution seem to think that the OD
true remedy for the evils resulting from the existence of industr
trusts, combination, and monopolies is to destroy the agencies 
of which they may be created. Destroy wealth, therefore, and sti
all industrial enterprise, and monopoly will be impossibleI Dest
all mankind, the guilty and innocent alike, and crime will cease
exist! This is the argument.
Mr. Speaker, we are not stiffering because the manufacturers
Europe are not permitted to complete with our industrial enterprt
and seize our markets if possible, but for the reason that conmp
tion among our own people is prevented. By this proposed a"'
ment we purpose to remedy evils that would be unrestrainabl
any possible legislation if tariff duties should be removed froaM
ported trmaterial entering into the products of these combines or trti
The proposed remedy would only aggravate the disease. It is
sugested by anys save those who are opposed to the protective p0
of: the Republbean prty. When we observe the present prosper
of oIu people, study the history of legslation, reason from cause
effect, nd contemplate the  agnificent grwth of the nation in 
c:ation iion, enterprise, and material wealth, we are more tha
tent with the operation of protective-tariff laws.
f-35


i






i
j ~ 0 1




G




"THE LABOR QUESTION." —"RECORD OF THE R
PUBLICAN PARTY."
Extracts fromf remarks of tlon, C. Ii.. GROSVENOR of Ohio, in daily C
gressional Record, April 4, 1904.
Mr. Chairman, the subject of the record of the forthcoming candidl
whoever they may be, on the two great tickets of the country for Pre
dent, touching the labor question will be very important and will attra
great attention during the campaign. I point with great pleasure to
record of Theodore Roosevelt in this behalf. I challenge criticism. I ch
lenge disapproval. I call fbr approval by the American people. I also poi
to the record of the Republican party. *  *   *
Slavery.-The great revolution which exalted labor and freed the cou
try from the curse of slavery was accomplished by the Repuiblican par
against the fiercest opposition possible by the combined forces of the Der
crats and their allies. Still true tQ its original ideals of freedom, the R
publican party, after a lapse of forty years since the emancipation prodl
matlon of Lincoln, abolished slavery in the Philippine Islands. (Act pa-ss
by a Republican Senate and Republican House and signed by Preside
Roosevelt July 1, 1902.)
Involuntary servitude of foroeigners.-In 1874 the Forty-third Congre
which was Republican in both IHouses, prohibited under heavy penalties s
holding to tnvoluntary services of any person forcibly kidnaped in any sti
country.
Peonaae.-The act abolishing this kind of forced labor was passed
the Thirty-ninth Congress, when both Houses were Republican, by a la
majority, March 2, 1867.
The coolie trade. ---The legislation prohibiting the coolie trade is the Vo
of the Republicans. The act of 1875 closed our doors to the paupers
criminals of Europe, and the exclusion act of 1882 stopped the immnigrati
of the Chinese. Upon the annexation of Hawaii in 1898 the immigration
Chiinere thereto was prohibited by a Republican Congress, as was the m
gration of those already in Hawaii from the islands to continental Unito
States. In President Roosevelt's Administration the Chinese-exclusion lai
have been extended to the entire island territory of the United States. (A
passed by the Fifty-seventh Congress and approved April 29, 1902.)
The importation of foreign laborers under contract was first prohibitd
in 1885, but, owing to defective provisions tor enforcing the law, contimi
almost unchecked until the amendments made in President Harrison's A;ministration. (Acts of the Fifty-first Congress, which was Republican
both branches, and of the 'Fifty-second Congress, signed March 3, 1891, a
larch 3, 1893, respectively.)
The law abolishing the contract system of labor for United States co
ricts passed the House March 9, 1886, and the Senate February 28, 1S,
All the votes against the bill were Democratic.
The law providing for the construction of new United States priso
and the employment of convicts therein exclusively in the manufacture
such supplies for the Government as can be made without the use of M
chinery was pa.sed by the Fifty-first Congress, which was Republican
both branches, and signed by President Harrison. (Chapter 529 of the ac
of 1890-91.)
Protection of seamen.-This was accomplished by the Forty-seco
Congress, when bcth Houses were Republican, and the Forty-third Congres
also Republican.
Inspection of steam vessels. —Accomplished by the Fortieth Congr:
which was controlled by the Republicans.
Inspection of coal mines mn the Territorics.-Provided for by the Fift
first Congress, both Houses being under the control of the Republicans; ai
proved by President Harrison.
Saefty appliances on railways.-The original act providing for autO
matic couplers and power brakes on locomotives and cars used in interst
traffic was passed by the Fifty-second Congress, and signed by Presid
ilarrison March 2, 1893. Owing to decisions of the courts, new legislati
became necessary, and the Fifty-seventh Congress (Republican) passed
greatly improved law, which was signed by President Roosevelt March
l903.
The first eight-hour law in this country was enacted by the Fortit,
Cougress and approved by President Grant in 1868. It applied to ail alf
sans and laborers employed by the Government.
In the Fiftieth Congress (1888) the eight-hour day was established [o
letter carriers. The bill passed the Senate, which was Republican, Nwith0
division.
In President Harrison's Administration the eight-hour law   as5 e
tended to include persons employed by contractors on public works. (Cba
352: of the acts of:1892.)
The act creating the United States *Bureau of Labor was passed by 
Forty-eighth Congress (1884) and signed by President Arthur. I1
Fiftieth Congress (1888) the Bureau was removed from the DepartuOenti
the Interior and made an independent Department of Labor, all the vo
cast against the bill being Democratic. In 190. a Republican Congr
established the Department of Commerce and Labor and made its head
Cabtnet officer.
g-1


I




E AMERICAN WORKINGMAN                    MUST BE PROTECTED IN HIS STANDARD OF WAGES.";ct from revoarks of lion. C. H. GROSVENOR of Ohio, in daily Conarcoowal, Record,, April  904.
TBACOTS FROM TEODORE ROOSEVELT'S PUBLIC
PAPERS AND ADDRESSES.
I;nder thil coptlon are incladed extracts from the messages of Theodore
cvelt while Governor of New York and as President of the United
besides excerpts from his most important addresses on the rostrum.
stamp him as a man of broad views, one worthy of the confidence of
righti- thinking citizen.
D ACCOMPLISHED THRiOUG'I ORGANIZED LABOR.
it must always be a peculiar privilege for any thoughtful public man to
ss a body of men predominantly composed of wage-workers, for the
ation of our whole social structure rests upon the material and moral
aeing, the intelligence, the foresight, the sanity, the sense of duty, and
rolescme patriotism of the wage-worker. This is doubly the case now,
addition to each man's individual action you have learned the great
of acting in combination. It would be impossible to overestimate the
eacting influences of and, on the whole, the amount of good done
gh your associations. *  *  *  In our cities, or where men congrein masses, it is often necessary to work in combination —that is, through
-ations-and here it it that we can see the great good conferred by
rorganizations, by trade unions.  (Speech on September 3, 1900, at
lhicago Labor Day picnic,).it all hazards, and no matter what else is sought for or accomplished
n:~gcCs of the tariff, the American workingman musat be protected in his
(1'd of wages ----that is, in his standard of living-and anuast be secutred,liest opportna:ity of employment. Our laws should in no event afford
nta,.ge to foreign industries over American industries. They should in
vent do less than equalize the difference in conditions at home and
ad. The general tariff policy to which, without regard to changes in
1, I believe this country to be irrevocably committed is fundamentally
upon ample recognition of the difference in labor cost here and abroad:
her words, the recognition of the need for ftll development of the intelce, the comfort, the high standard of civilized living, and the inventive
is of the American workingman as compared to the workingman of any
r cuntry in the world. (Address at Logansport, Ind., Septeamber 23,
REICAN WORKERS TAKE PRIDE IN THEIR WORK.
American wage-workers work with their heads as well as their hands.
aver, they take a keen pride in what they are doing, so that, independof the reward, they wish to turn out a perfect job. This is the great
t of our success in competition with the labor of foreign countries.
sage to Congress, December 3, 1901.)
WISE LABOR LEGISLATION OF MORE BENEFIT.
On no subject is it more important to have wise and sound legislation
where the interests of labor are concerned. When such legislation is
It probably accomplishes more real benefit to the community than can
ccomplished by any other kind of law, but crude and hasty labor legisn either wholly fails to accomplish anything-being so drawn as to be
active-or else works harm instead of good to the very people supposed
benefited. (Message to New York Assembly, April 3, 1899.)
0 SHIELD THE,INTERESTS OF WAGE-WORKERS.
it Is not only highly desirable, but necessary, that there should be legiswhich shall carefully shield the interests of wage-workers and which
discrlminate in favor of the honest and humane employer by removing
isadvantage under which he stands when compared with unscrupulous
ct!tors who have no conscience and will do right only under fear of
shment.  (Address on   "National Duties" at Minnesota State Fair,
eapolis, September 2, 1901.)
THE DUTY TO PROTECT THE WAGE-WORKERS.
During the pest year very valuable labor measures have been enacted
laws, and they are well enforced.  *  *  Additional legislation will
itbtedly fromn time to time become necessary, but ssany vitally needed
have already been put upon the statute books. As experience shows
detects these will be remedied. A stringent eight-hour labor law has
enacted. This is working well as a whole. In nothing do we need to
ke cooler judgment than In labor legislation. Such legislation is abson necessary, alike from the humanitarian and the industrial standpoints,
1t is as much our duty to protect the weaker wage-workers from oppresar: to protect helpless Investors from fraud. (Annual message to the
Yirk Legislature, January 3, 1900.)
HEAPVESS AT       SACRIFICE      OF   GOOD    CITIZENSHIP.
It Is even more important to reach contractors who do the State work
h retah the public servants of the State proper. Cheapness secured by
eaPloyment of gangs of men under the padrone system is cheapness f'or
0 -,e State pays altogether too dearly, for it is obtained at the cost of
nCcaittce of good citizenship. It is therefore just that tie ordinary eme of the State and of contractors who do State work should work- for
e1i'11t h1ours and should receive a rate of wages not less than that paid
tr e: bor of the same kind where the structure is to be put' up, this
icterfering with the purchase of a finished product. (Memorandum filed
12, 199, with approved assembly bill regulating hours of labor on
t work in New York State.)
PRISON LABOR.
Ai rec(nt decision of the court of appeals has decided unconstitutlonal
V   ahtichli provides that there shall be a-. mark on prison-made goods
';iti~f that they tare such. This aidtter should receivce the attention of
cil 'urmcc ii, order that some mcans mcty be devised whereby the free
lccc shall rost be brought into competition with priSon tabor.  (Anttuai
tae  t the New York Legislature, January 2, 1899.)


f2




HO. JOHN SHERIMAN OF OHIO.
"THE RATE OF WAGES IS FROM 50 TO 100 PER CE
HIGHER HERE THAN IN ANY COUNTRY
IN  EUROPE."
Extracts from remarks by Hon. JOHN SHERMAN, of Ohio, pri
in daily Congressional Record (50th Congress, 1st Ses., page 204
The quality and quantity of food of laboring men is confesss
better and greater here than in Europe. The rate of wage
from 50 to 100 per cent higher here than in any country in Eur
and in some industries much higher. The President does not
pute this, but appeals to the manufacturer, who has been represe
as a robber, a conspirator, and extortioner, not to reduce the w
of the workingman, but to pay him out of "surplus profits"-pr
very often found on the wrong side of the ledger-profits yiel
on the average less than legal interest on the money.
What workingman does not feel that this is sheer mockery
that the inevitable result is to reduce his wages by inviting a 
compettiton with pauper labor? He must share the fate of his
pjlyer and divide with him the loss. The all-sufficient answer
the President is that the American laborer does not travel east
across the ocean to better his condition, but the European lab
comes to America, where labor is respected and the laborer is be
fed, paid, and clothed than in any part of Europe or Asia. Whet
this shall continue to be true depends upon the action of Congre
supporting or repealing this protective policy.
PAGE 205:
Sir, the question before us is one purely of wages. If wag
the United States were no greater than in England, France,
Belgium, our chief competitors, we would, no doubt, now comn
with all the world in all metallic and textile fabrics. Is it wis
this country to pursue a policy that will compel the reduction
wages of laboring men employed in manufactures to the stand
now general in European countries?   We know    from docu
furnished by our consuls the rate of wages there 
The Senator from Maine [Mr. Frye], in a recent speech mad
Boston, gives in detail the most striking information gained by
from personal observation and inquiry in the workshops of se
countries of Europe as to the low, starving rates of wages, and
degradation of labor existing there. God forbid that such ijM$i
and wrong shall ever exist here. Our free institutions could
survive such scenes. Mantufactories conducted upon such a y
would be an unmitigated curs. Cheatness purchased at soj
price Would be crime. lAnd yet without protective duties re
either abandon our manufactures or reduce wages to the EPr~1
standard. What more evidence do we need than the hbndredS
thousands of people who come to us annually from European c1
tries, bearing the most indisputable testimony to their poverty
sufferings,,and their distress? 


g-3


I




SAM UEL GOMPERS
t should be our purpose to endeavor to prolong this
era of morq general employment."
'tractts frmn remarks of Ilon. CHARLES DICK of Ohio, in daily Congressional Record, June 9, 1900.
1893.
"Since August of this year we have been in the greatest industrial
rnro,:ion this country has ever experienced.  It is no exaggeration to
i shat more than 3,000,000 of our fellow-toilers throughout the country
Ne ithout employment and have been so since the time named. This
int:atable industrial condition is attributed by many to various causes,
ni it seems to me that the accurate statement of them here is both
ai.site and appropriate, so that we may be better enabled to so frame:r iegislation that it may tend to a proper solution of the problem deI.idlLt upon the wage-workers for solution. Never in the history of the:rld ilas so large a number of people vainly sought for an opportunity
r earn a livelihood and contribute to the support of their fellows. In a
Cci ty where such abnormal conditions prevail there must of necessity:;omething wrong at the basic foundation."
1897.
"That terrible period for the wage-earners of this country which began
1893 and which has left behind it such a record of horror, hunger, and;.sery practically ended with the dawn of the year 1897. Wages had
eton steadily forced down from 1893 till toward the end of 1895, and it
~a: variously estimated that between two million and two and a half
iilion wage-earners were unemployed. IT IS AGRiEED BY ALL THAT
['l-iQ WAGE-EARNERS    ARE   THE    PRINCIPAL    CONSUMERS      OF
tI.PiRICAN PR:ODUCTS, ANI   IT NECESSARILY FOLLOWS THAT A;:D)UCTION IN WkAGES  NVOLVES A DIM[INUTION IN THE POWER
)F CONSUMPTION, AND CONSEQUENTLY          A PROPORTIONATE DEft;AASE: IN PRODUCTION, AND, NATURALLY, ALSO IN TIHEI FORCE;tF LABOR REQUItIED FOR THE PRODUCTION. A REgDUCTION OF
iVAG.HS, THEREFORE, RESULTS IN AN INCREASE IN THE AR.MY
IF TH-I  UNEMPLOYED, and any circumstance or combination of cirinustances that will check reductions in wages, and hence the diminution
ni consumption by the masses, is a humane act, based on the soundest laws
f economics and of progress."
1899.
"The revival.f industry which we have witnessed within the past year
a one for general congratulation, and it should be our purpose to en-.avor to prolong this era of more general employment and industrial
'tivity. In this effort no power is so potent as organized labor, if we
t follow a right and practical course.  IT IS BEYOND    QUESTION
1      IAT TIEl WAGES OF THlE ORGANIZED  WORKERS HAVE       BEEN
':CRE.ASElD, AND  IN  MANY INSTANCES THE HOURS OF LABOR
CtI'-T 14t REDUCED OR AT LEAST MAINTAINED. The report which
'lur officers are enabled to submit to this convention, so far as the growth
~i progress of our movement during the past year nare concerned, is of
nmost gratifying character. At last we are realizing some of the fruits
f the years of unceasing sacrifice, devotion, and uninterrupted work of
sr fellow unionists."
The first of these quotations by Samuel Gompers is tSaen fromr
Iage 11 of the Proceedings of the American Federation of Labor
onvention, held on December 11, 1893, during the last Democratic
mininistration of our national affairs.
The second statement, that of 1897, is taken from a signed article
': Samuel Gompers, president of the American Federation of Labor,
published in New York on January 1, 1898. I would draw your atlotiioa, Mr. Speaker, to the difference noticed by the president: of
lie American Federation of Labor within less than a year of the
nauguration of President McKinley and the present Republican
Adminnistration.
The third quotation is from the report of President Gompers at
tle convention of the American Federation of Labor held at Detroit
I) December 11, 1899.  It is a standing memorial to the benefits
terivjed by American labor under a Republican Administration and
-epublican laws that are designed to protect our wage-earners and
nable them to secure the highest possible rate of wages in return
for the labor which they have to sell.
t is but right to state here that Mr. Samuel Gompers, the presidnt of the American Federation of Labor, is now, and always has
(t6le, an uncompromising Democrat. His frank and unsolicited testi^on!y to the better conditions of labor under a lRepublican Admin
t'rution should, therefore, have soma influence with our friends on
the other side.
g4                        *                            Sigg. 9




dTHE AMERICAN PIOPLE D0 NOT WANT AMERICA
LABOR TO WORK FOR THE LOW WAGES
THAT FOREIGN LABOR IS WILLING TO WORK FOR."
Extracts from  remarks of lon. VWM. S. GREiENE      of Massachusetts,
daily Congressional Record, Aprli 28, 1904.
Mr., OsAIRMAr: I Introduced in the House of Representatives in Fe
ruary, 1903, Fifty-seventh Congress, second session, a Joint resolution pr
viding for a Joint commission to inve.stigate the policy of internatioua
navigation. This resolution provided that the President pro tempore of tlh
Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives should be author
ized and directed to appoint a joint commismion of the two Hlouses 
Congress, to consist of five Senators and nine Rtepresentatives, of who
at least two members of the Senate and four Members of the House of Rep
~resentatives should belong to the minority  party, to which was to b
added the President pro tempore of tlhe Senate. and said comrnssio0
were to be authorized and directed before the meeting of the Fifty
eighth Congress to investigate our present policy of international navi
gation, to trace its effect upon our merchant marine, to consider ho
we might constitutionally encourage it in the foreign trade, thereb
regaining our lost position on the sea and effect a renewed dlevse
opment of our shipping: power. And said commission were authorized
make a full and complete report of such investigation and submit its co0.
clusions thereon, together with a bill for its consideration, to the Fifty
eighth Congress to investigate our present policy of international naviga
tion.
The bill H, R. 7056 embodies the same features that were included i
the Joint resolution which I presented to the Fifty-seventh Congress. *
We have the commerce to carry, the means with which to build tih
carriers, the nmaterials for shipbuilding, the skill and the labor unequalel
and In the greatest abundance ready for employment In shipbuilding. W
then, do we not build the ships?  Simply because investment in American
built ships under present conditions Is unprofitable. So, capital being ut
willing to Invest in American-built ships, our materials are unused, oe
skill and labor are unemployed. The result is that foreign materials, for
eign skill, and foreign labor supply us with the ships that are employed i
doing our foreign carrying. The free trad(er says that this Is a natural
and proper condition; that if'the foreigner will do our shipbuilding mor
cheaply than our own people will do it, that it is to our advantage to en
ploy the foreigner and use our labor in employment that is profitable.
These same free traders, however, would have foreigners spin oU
cotton cloth, because they are able to do It more cheaply than our ow
people are. Nevertheless we place a high duty on imported cotton manus
factures, in order that our own people, even at higher prices, shall hae
employment in the manufacture of cotton.
The suggestion, therefore, that it is to our advantage to have alins
build our ships, because they can build them more cheaply than we can
if a good one, should be equally good applied to cotton manufacturing. I
foreigners can manufacture cotton cheaper than we can, why should they
not? The answer is that tfle Amnoerican people do not want Aumerican lahoO
to work for the low wages that foreign labor is willig to twore for ie cotton manufacturing;   they desire to maintain unimprired the Amrerica
standard of wages in cotton manufacturing, and if it is more costly th
American people are quite willing to ' bear the higher cost, feeling an
believing that the country is stronger, safer, and more contented with it
labor earning good wages.
For the same reason the American people will be willing to have the
ships required for our foreign carrying trade built in the United States.
The people do not ask nor do they wish that the American labor eipnoyVIe
in building ships shall work as cheaply as the foreign labor that is empioye/
in building ships any more than they wish or desire that American laWbo
employed in making cotton goods should work for the same wages that for'
eign cotton operatives receive. To be sure, we could get the ships we ceed
by buying them abroad and putting them under the American Aag and run'
ning them with foreign officers and foreieign crews and feeding them the sane
cheap way that the officers and men employed on foreign ships are fed,
but that ls not what is back of the demand for an American merchat
marine.
Our Democratic friends have a warm    feeling, for alien labor, they
abhor and detest the protective system, so they tell us to buy our ships
abroad, because they are built more cheaply abroad, and put them undeir
the American flag. They say let us have "free ships," and "free shiP'
meansta nothing unless it means alien-built ships. And that is all tha the
Democrats setemt to stand for —the employment of underpaid foreign las0r
instead  f the empym    t o properly paid American labor.
g-5


i




li
I
i
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
t
11
w,,I
1(
11
ti
11
t,
0
p
tj
a
F
t
f,
I
d
p
9
i
i
f
I
I
i
i
t
I
I


I


'IT IS ABSOLUTELY IMPOSSIBLE TO RECONCILE
FREE TRADE WITH TRADES UNIONISM."
iorac from speech of Hon. JOSEPHI CtiAMBERLAIN, at Liverpool, printed
in. daily Contgtressioanal Iecord, Jo'vueory 5, 1904.
[FPro  the London Daily Telegraph.]
RtO= SPrEECH OF J0SEPH CHAMBERLAIN AT LIVER,POOL, OCTOBER         27.
"TRADES UINIONISN AND IR3BEE TRADE."
"I want you to bear in mind that it is alsoluteliy iimpossible to reconcile
1fce trade with tradcsa ',tiiounisiv. You can have one or you can have the other,
but yotu can not have both, and I a.m glad to say that in saying that I have;he suppeort of a tradles unionist with whom  I have disagreed upon almost
overy other question, Mr. Keir Hardie. Speaking in the House of Commons,
dr. Keir liardie said: ''Cree trade in the abstract is all. but an impossibility.
there is no member of this House who supports trades unionismn who can,iairn to be a conAsiste.t free trader.' LCheers.]  And then he goes on to
ay, 'trades unionistol of this country have no intention of allowing the
sweating and underpaid laborers of continental nations to enter into compeittion with them'.' ['Hear!' 'ear!']  Js that your opinion?  ['Yes!']
w('ell, they are brave words. You won't have them?  'Well, then, you will
lot be free traders.  [Cheers.]  There is no getting out of the dilemrnma,
the gentlemen who oppose me becauso they say I am a protectionist, and
t!:o then go down to the B'fo se of Comntons in order to catch workingene's votes in Radical constituencies, declaring themselves supporters of
ilien emigration and the prohibition of prison-made goods, of shorter hours,
and so on, these men —well, they are inconsistent. [Cheers.]
"The Trades Union Ccngret"s was not alnays of the opinion of the,,'ngress that mnet this year. In 1888 the parliamentary committee offered
a report in which it said this 'The denmon of cheapness'-the present trades
'oamgress makes a god of cheapness; the parliamentary committee in 1888
spoke of it as a denoin ---'tihe demon of cheapness has pervaded our whole
systene, and while the clheapness of goods has been a matter of wonder purIhasers seldom or never 'ive a thought to the human blood and muscle that
bits been ground up in the proiduct'cn of the:rticle.'  ['Hlear! ' 'Hear'!"
that IP. admirable, and if I had time I could preach a sermon from   it
vaices, 'Go on!'] and IT think it would be well to preach that sermon
defore the present Trades Congress. [Laughter.]  My first point, therefore,
is thl, that i  otis o,el rlitl the conasumner you hi ave.ot to conisicer; the pro'air(,, is of still;ore imtporta'ncc, and to bi.y i the cheapest mnarket is not
the sole duty of wan, and it is not in the best interest of the working
LEGITIMATE OBJECTS OF TRADES UNIOINISX.
* "Now, what ite the legitimate obiects of trades unionism?  In my
0pinkin therere e five. In the first place, to enable wori'ingmen by union
ad comrabination among theimselves to meet employers on equal terms, and
t0 bargain with them. If there were no trades unions and no combination,
"apital would he too strong. laborr would be at the mnercy of capital, and
it is to prevent that, amsong othler things, ist thrades unions were founded.
iTsen, the next object is to secore the highest wanes which are consistent
with tIhe condtitiois of each tra   to rai  the standlardl of living, and to
i, reVnt uanfair competition  to insist on propner precautions for the health
and safety of those employed. and, laItly, to provide for those of their fellows who, owing to temptirary illness or misfortune, are. deprived of their!nioans of livelihood. Now, these are legitimate objects, in my judgment,
and i heartily atpI)roive of all of theimt, although I have not always been able, alIpprove of all the mlethoods by which they have been sought to be obialned. Butt tone thing is certain, while we have done much to secure these
it:,t' whitle the noass of the people, to whatever class they belong, have
allnptthilzed with them, and have passed legislation, such as the factory
-0,,i, the mimncs nacts the truck acts. the cotmpenstiion to workmen act,
lii fair was'es clauses, the prohibition of prison-made goods, and a niumber
Ii athlr minor acts of the same kind, every one of these measures is oppoeied to hbe stri-ct doctrine of free tr ade.
''Free trade ta'ys you are to buy il thie cheapetst market; free trade
say. yriu are not to interfere with the freedoms of Independent man, not to
r""'~eribe to an employer wb'it Ih shall or ahall not do, but leave him free
to bargain as le liles with his work pIeople. Anid, on the other hand, you
are not to nmnke combiniato'-tn? which tend in the slightest degree to de'ttroy the liberty of the wortkl.,L;:n to sell as high as he pleases. Those are
the doctrines of free trladLe, and all thes'e dectrines we have put aside now
tor twenty years in our 6nde:alvor to btnefitm the condition of the workingmran
tnia to raile the stanhd:a.rd of livingu: and it is a little too much now to come
down rned tllt me that I ani)t a heretic; thimat I ought to be putt out of the conr'gatinn, Ifor.soett.b, because I will mnmtt allow to be sacred and inspired these
tocth in, s thli  thtose  a'C'mme tite hos 'e who  e  e hae aandoned long ago.  But there
is an'tier most Importamnt piint which I w;nt workitng people to consider.
Iant alI this legiatlation, atnd msuch more of the same kind, I warn you
i will b abholutely futile unless you, are prepared to go further.
"     wow, whatt is the g/ooed, I asca in the tee n of oe  t comnimo  sense, of prohl,iNi`t siteatien in thi/s couEntry if ioun allow sweated, goods to come isa
'"i!'orciin coutdet'rie'?  [Loud 'heers.]  If you insist on limitations of
aotur and iupon precautions for security, bear in mind that all these things
tdi  o tlhe co't of production, ta the difficulties of'the manufacturer in sell'*'r,i,. ioss, id ucmnle'aS you give him siome increased price, somrse increased
lltlaat-lrg  in cenpeisaton te,.het he cai t  not carry on competition any
^i'':. 'All tlhe.e condithions in tliIe long run will result, not to your advani9I, for you will have no work to do, but to the. advantage of the for-'i:~rabs who ti, not0 so struputous, and whon conducts his work without any
0! tt:e'e conditionsa   v I say, tehen, if It were pussible to calculate exactly
w'llit tlheae plreceauitio n  cost over anid -above similar precautions taken In
lset  tioutintrieas with which we are competing, we should be Justified sith(nat te slightest infractiiont of the true principles of free trade in putting
on a duty corresponding to that cost..[Cheers.,




HON. BENJ. BUTTERWORTH OF OHIO.
"PRICES HAVE BEEN REDUCED, WAGES
CONSTANTLY ADVANCED.'
Prom remarks of lion. BENJ. BUTTERWVORTIH of Ohio, in dai
Con~gressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Session.
Workingmen find opportunity for increased comfort in the fad
that the prices of things needful in life have heen constantly reduce
while the rate of wages paid has been constantly advanced, mountin
up 25, 50, 75, 100, and in many instances 300 per cent above whi
it was when the economic philosophy of our Democratic friends hel
sway in the Government.
Doubtless nine out of ten of the communications received by gentle
men upon this floor from their constituents protesting against tb
assault in the Mills bill upon the industries in which those constituent
are employed, refer to the difference in cost of production betwee
their shops, mills, or factories and the cost of similar articles im
ported from foreign countries as due to the increased wages pai
in the United States. In the production of the greater part of t0
output of our manufacturing establishments labor contributes th
larger share; such contribution ranging from  10 to over 90 pe
cent.-Page 4393.
With us the paramount question is, shall those who contribute t
our prosperity by their labor, the wage-workers, be remitted to tb
condition of those upon the other side of the water, or shall th~
continue to share, as now, in the profits resulting from a unio oi 
capital with labor in the field of productive effort ---Page 4393.
I will engage to go with you, Mr. Chairman, into any shop 
factory in my district where the workmen I have alluded to are enl
ployed, and select a man at random, and you will not find one wl'
can not read the Constitution of his country in one language o
two languages, or who does not understand the rights it secures an
the obligations it imposes. Go with him to his home. In that homl
you will find not merely the ordinary comforts and conveniences 0
life, but also the incontestible evidence of education and refinement
Books and music will be found there. The daughter of that lhous
hold will be found not only equal to the discharge of the duti
uhich pertain to housewifery, but, taking her place at the piano, is
will discourse the rarest music from Wagner, Beethoven, and othe
masters in that science. Upon the walls you will find paintings whi
are the handiwork' of the members of that family. There will
found worthy example upon the part of the parents and filial pie
on the part of the children.-Page 4394.


I
i
11
i


I


g-7


j




IENGLISH WORKMEN               RECEIVE HIGH WAGES.""BUT AMERICAN WORKMEN RECEIVE WAGES
FROM 50 TO 100 PER CENT. HIGHER."
xtract from LONDON DAILY TELEGRAPH, printed in daily Congressional
Record, January 5, 1904.
In politics and commerdfe alike Cobdenism means disintegration. The
riff in America and Germany is nothing more or less than a method
securing an adequate measure of national combination in the interests
atiotnal industry. It they will not give free trade for free trade, you
ust meet their unity by your unity. *  *  *
Both in the United States and Germany, income has increased much
ster than in this country. That can not be denied. If you are rerred to the savings banks, the reply is exactly similar.  The working
sses in the United States and Germany have been increasing their
inags faster than the working classes here.  You have increased your
tput of iron and steel, and your import of raw materials for textile
anufacture; but that does not alter the fact, as we have previously
own, that the United   States and Germany     have  increased  their
n and steel production so much faster that you now hold the third
ace, where only twenty years ago you held the first. And if you point
ain to the volume of your imports, the answer is that, in respect of
e best kind of imports —raw material-all the leading protected countries
e increasing their industrial consuming power far more rapidly than
iurs has increased.
You buy. indeed, far more sea-borne food, because you have diminhed your internal agriculture, and you buy more foreign manufactured
ads than any other country because you are the only nation which
mits competitive manufactures free,  Englisht worlmen receive high
aees under free trade. But American workmen receive wages from 50.100 per cent. higher under the tariff.
When Bismarck broke with free trade in the determination to secure
e German market for German enterprise, his countrymen were leaving
e shores of the fatherland at the rate of 200,000 a year.  Conditions
home have been so much improved, in spite of conscription and jackat militarism that emigration from  the fatherland is now little more
an 20,000 a year. The Iron Chancellor was told exactly as Mr. Chamrlain is now, that if free imports were abandoned the foreign trade of
ermany would be ruined. The actual result is that Germany has doubled
r foreign trade. It is a very remarkable circumstance that when the
rman Government introduced the new tariff it also referred to the
Iings banks, the income tax, the increase in shipping, the general rise
the standard of life, and all the rest of it; but it applied all these
imnents of our Cobdenites with at least as much force in precisely the
posite senreI in these terms:
'Strengthened by protection, our industries have been able to inease their production, and have thereby afforded fuller employment and
sing wages tohe working classes.
"With the larger turnover the traffic on our railways, rivers, and
nals has grown and our merchant marine has experienced a considerable
d constantly increasing expansion, and its freight services for foreign
lntries have been a source of great profit to Germany.  At the same
ne the investment of German capital in foreign enterprises has increased.
igration has very substantially diminished.  The effect of the growg wealth of the nation may be seen by the visible progress in the contions and in the life of the broad masses of the people, especially of
e workngmen.  The improvement in the standard of life may be seen
the large proportion of taxpayers who pay upon moderate incomes;
Rm the improved yield of the income tax; from the growth of savingshk deposits: from the expansion of life insurances, and from the rising
numption of the more expensive articles of food."
E AXERICAN WORKMAN THE MOST PROSPEROUS,
BEST FED, AND BEST CLOTHED.
This is the German testimony. It turns inside out all the favorite
bdenite arguments of the moment. But take the American testimony.
Carnegie proved in his latest book, The Empire of Business, that the
st of living in the United States has been much exaggerated, and after
number of detailed demonstrations of his point, he summed up as follows:
"How are we to account for the general impression still lingering in
itatn that the cost of living is higher in the United States?  Simply
r this rtason, that while it is true that a pound sterling in the United
atec to-day will purchase more of the necessaries of life for the masses
he people than it will in Britain, and while the American workman
s Treat advantages over his fellow  British workman in consequence,
11 it does not follow by any means that the American workman lives
cheaply as the Briton-far from it. He has much higher wages. The
ort of the Senate committee, recently made, shows that the average
r'e'entage of American wages obtained by the British workman is only
' Per cent.-not much more than half-the principal handicrafts being
ade the basis of comparison. Having higher revenues, the American is
I't cotnt  to live without what would be considered luxury- n any of
Oe ld countries of Europe. He earns more and he spends more."
I  t comparison with twenty years ago, the nation is better off.  But
t.ne sam  comparison our two protected  lvals, having nothing but the:?  s   mrystem in common with each other, are better off still.  We are
'stito,a, fbut at a relatively feeble rate.  We are progressing, and
ro the rate of progress is 8sl(oing down.  We are progressing,  t not
ih to prvent 'bein  driven dt n by the two great proteted countrie,e th-irdt place in the world's commerce, long before the twentieth cenJy:entered upon Its second quarter.
g-8
I*0        




1


"EARNINGS OF RAILWAY EMPLOYEES."
Extract from remarks of Hon. C. H. GROSVEN   OR of Ohio, in daily Co 
gressiontl Record, AprU.4, 1904.                               TI1
AILWAY LABO&.
The average yearly earnings of all railway employees in the United
States,. according to the Interstate Commerce Commission, have ranged be
tween $55 and $570 in the last six or eight years. Reports fromn tweInty
seven companies, employing more than 90 per cent.. of all the railway men
in Great Britain and Ireland, showed that in the first weelk of December
1902, the average earnings were $6, which would make the average year
income not more than $312...On the state railways of Prussia the avera;,
annual wages of the employees in the budget of 189S-99 were $335,,
elusive of shopmen and trackmien, whoie earnings, bei ng considerabir
smaller, would, if included,'bring down this average. In France more tjhO:
80 per cent. of the railway employees receive le.ss than $1 per dav. s0 b
average in fact being about 75 cents, which would make the annual earuinl
lie betwee4 $230 and $270, according to the anumber of working days.
UNIToED STATES.
[From Statistics of Railways of the United States, published by the Inter
state Commerce Commission.]
Number of Amount of sa!
Year ended Ju ne 30-              employees arm, a dwa
ons 3une   (top 99 jpere 11
all emr ployees
5....................... 7.............................,084,50,261
1896.....8..........................................  826,620  468,S4,1z
1897.7...............................4145,44..................  826,0  461,82,:
189148..................................................  874,57586  490 511,1
1899..........................................  928,924   522,967,69
1900.....................1,01..5....................... 1,017,53  577,26,d1
f1~ W   1  r............................................  610,71,701
19.1....; 1,071,169 1     619,714,701
1902..................................................  1, 189,315  676,028,
GRiAT BRITAIN AND IRELAND.
Number and per cent. of men (adults) employed by prineipa
railway companies, at specified weekly        rates
of wages, 1891.
[From Bulletin of United States Department of Labor, January, 1899.]
Weekly rate of wages.                 Number Per cent
U nder  10s.  (..................................................  210.
109. tio   16s8.  t;44   to   $805)................................... I........,18  2,
lOS. to 1aS. (.  $3.65).8,181
s. to.20s.  $3.65to,................    12 2............. 
20s. to 25s. (4.67 to $6. )...............................  2'90,472 2.
25   s. tO   80.  to  7.0)..................II........  49,1807  1;,
80s. to8S.  7.30 to $8.52)........................................  20,732 
l85s.  to l s $. 2to   $ 7..  to.7 ).........................................  s%  21
40o. to   45s.   to 10.95)............:::::::...........................  9, 974 
458. t0O  508. i  hto$I2.7)...........I.....................  l,397  I
50s. to  60s.  2.17  to  14.60).....................................  891  i
60s. ($14.0) or  over..............................................  436
T otal......................................................  314,520  I6
More than one-haif of the employees receive under $6.08 a week, nd
the most numerous class are those who earn from $3.05 to $4.87, weekly.
Average weeky earnings of British railw         ay employees in tbh
first week of December.
[From Ninth Annual Abstract of Labor Statistics, by the British Labor 9e
partmnent.]
iib N    umber NA u tubell r
| of corn-  Jef -    Averag
of co ea      wages,..  paules. ployees.
England and Wales.................        1     383 8   2....................................  5  45,240  23  1/ii 4 
Ireland.......,................*................  7  19M806  19  $
100, United Kingdom......27                  44......2.f  14. 1.
1900, United K  4igdom......................  27   440;17  25  l:.
3W~low, UnittX gdom...*........... 4..........J  27  44Q0r47  253  L;':~ 'i
189, United  Kingdom.....,................. [. 27.431.858,  25 ) 
ted K om.................   7    412.   I 24 
i8O7, n.... g......dm....          27     398,.I8  24  4 -O I11~c~


I
I
I
I
I
6
Iq
I
I
I
NI
1.
11I
I
11
I,
i
1
d
1
1
2
6
f


I


g-9


I




MUTUAL INTERESTS OF CAPITAL AND LABOR."
pracs    i from   remarks  f.Presidaent ROOSEVELT at Syracuse, N. 7.,
prin-ted in daity Congressional Record, April 4, 1904.
In speaking on Labor Day at the annual'fair of the New York State
ricultural Association, it is natural to keep especially in mind the
i bodies who compose the majority of our people and upon whose welire dqpends the welfare of the entire State. If circumstances are such
ia thrift, energy, industry, and forethou!ght enable the farmer, the tiller
ltie soil, on the one hand, and the waqe-worker, on the other, to keep
e    seles, their wives, and their children in reasonable comfort, then
ic State is well off, and aoe can be assured that the other classes in the
mninty will likewise 'prosper.  On the other hand, if there is in the
ng run a lack of prosperity among the two classes named, then all other
iropi ity is sure to be more seeming than real.
It has been our profound good fortune as a nation that hitherto,
lsrea;rdinrg exceptional periods of depression and the normal and inIitatle fluctuations, there has been on the whole from the beginning of
ITr overnment to the present day a progressive betterment, alike in the
ndition of the tiller of the soil and in the condition of the man who,
his manual skill and labor, supports himself and his family, and enisvors to bring up his children so that they may be at least as well
as, and if possible better off than, he himself has been. There are
courlrse, exceptions, but on the whole the standard of living among the
rnmera of our country has risen from  generation to generation, and the
ealth represented on the farms has steadily increased, while the wages
labor have likewise risen, both as regards the actual money paid and
regards the purchasing power which that moneyv represents.
Side by side with this increase in the prosperity of the wage-worker
I the tiller of the soil has gone on a great increase In the prosperity
rng the business men and among certain classes of professional men,
If the prosperity of these men has been partly the cause and partly
e consequence of the prosperity of farmer and wage-worker. It can not
ton often repeated that in this country in the long run we all of us
nd to go up or go down together.
rf the average of well-being is hifhh. it means that the average wagefrict.. the average farm er, and the averaoe business man are alike well
k If the average shrinks, there is not one of these classes which will
t feel the shrinkage. Speaking broadly. it is true that if prosperity comes
1 of us tend to share more or less therein, and that if adversity comes,
icb of us, to a greater or less extent. feels the tension. Unfortunately, in
lis world the innocent frequently find themselves obliged to pay some of the
nalty for the misdeeds of the guilty, and so If hard time' come, whether
ey bo due to our own fault or to our misfortune, whether they be due
Pnome burst  of speculative frenzy that has caused a portion of the
rl5n5ess world to lose Its head —a loss which no legislation can possibly
pOIy —or whether they be due to any lack of wisdom    in a portion of
o world of labor, in each crase the trouble once started is felt more or
so In every walk of life.
Tt i< af!-.,r.ntial to thl contiroConre of or'i healthy national life that
e should recognize this community of Interest among our people, The
rl'; nf each of us is dependent funda-mentally upon the welfare of all
Is, and therefore in public life that Tman is the best representative of,h of.i who seeks to do good to each by doing good to all: in other
ordis, whose endeavor it is. inot to represent any special class and proate merely that clars's selfish interests, but to represent all true and
rneiet men of all sections and all classes and to work for their Interests
'5:r lnog for our commonr country,
We can keep our Government on a sane and healthy basis. we can
s' ard keep our social system what It should be, only on condition of
eaing each man, not as a member of class, but on his worth as a
ai. TfI is an infamouts thing in our American life, and fundamentally
iarhlrous to, ur institutions, to apply to any man any tfst save that
tis per-rsonal worth, or to draw between two sets of men any distinction
Itvp tire distinction of conduct, the distinction that marks off those who
i ell and wis-ely from those who do ill and foolishly. There are good
tizeanR and bad citizens in every class as in every locality, and the atrtue of decent people toward great public and social questions should
0 %termlned. not by the accidental questions of employment or locality,
l by thosef deep-set orinciples which represent the innermost souls of men.
The failure in public and In private life thus to treat each man on
o,cn merits, the recognition of this Government as being either for
l" Tp0r as such or for the rich as such, would prove fatal to our ReIlric. as ruch failure and such recognition have always proved fatal In
le st to other republics. A healthy republican government must rest
'"'. irliiad'ls, not upon classes or sections.  As soon as it becomes
i[c.nt by a class tor by a section it departs from the otd American
al b  *y *                    c    i de
Mi rn sincerely interested in the due protection of property, and men
eicrlc interested in seeing that the just rights of labor are guaranteed,
'ait alike remember not only that in the lone run neither the capitali''" the wagae-joorker canl be helped in healthy fashion save by helping
i, thr: bhut also that to require either side to obey the law and do
f ill duty toward the community is emphatically to that side's real
There is no worse enemy to the wage-worker than the man who
rnnpis mob violence In any shape or who preaches class hatred; and
r~l5 th0e slightest acquaintance with our Industrial history should teach
in tin most short-sighted that the times of most suffertng for our peo0[?, a whole, the times when business Is stagnant, and capital suffers
l' 'hrrinlkase and get.s no return from its investments, are exactly the
5ls ef hardship, and want, and grim  disaster among the poor. If all
-lsting in'strulmentalities of wealth could be abolished, the, first and
"  ls"t sffering would come among those of us who are least well off
O,'' "nt  The wage-worker is well off only when the rest of the couni; L~}'ll of.; and he: can best contrlbute to this general well-being
lh  u '  g sanity and a firm purpose to do justice to others.


I'1O




.. HON. HNRY M, TELLER: OF COLORADO.
"AS LABORERS WE GET MORE MONEY THAN ANY
OTHER PEOPLE IN THE WORLD."
E       xtracts from remarks of Hon.:IENR Y M. TELLER, of Colomr
in United Sltates Senate, printed in daily Congresionial.   Record (50th Congress, Ist Session, page f206).
They pay in Great Britain two and a half times more to supper
their paupers than they do to sustain their public schools. And ye
we are told that the American laborer should adopt English methods
and that we should open the door so that the products of Englis
labor may come here and compete with ours. Nay. Mr. President, n
only the English laborer, but the laborer of India, the laborer
China, the laborer of Japan, the pariah of India, who pays for la:.
to cultivate his field six cents a day-he is to be lpt in competi!l
with American labor. The Chinaman, wo    orks for six cents a dia
is to be put in competition with American labor; the Japanese, wh
considers himself most magnificently paid if he gets fifteen cents fto
fifteen hours' labor, a cent an hour, is to be put in competition,il
American labor.
Mr. President, we are told that we can rcomnpete with the wo'll
So we can if we ve live as those people live. So we can if we adop
European methods, if we live without meat, without butter, and veith
out milk; if we live as they do in London, six families in one rooim
where, as: Mr. Chamberlain said, tens of thousands never knoI tif
luxury of milk. As laboring people, we eat three times more nlw
than European people. We wear better clothes, and spend mnal
money on ourselves and our children, as laboring people, than an]
other people in the world; while, as laborers, we get more roitne
in proportion to the payment of a dime than any other people in tie
world.,;::,:. PAGE     05:
Mr. Duncan writes: "For work done by the week, in all classes 
work, American' wages re a   near l ely as possible double those peti
in Greatt Britain." 
'If it is not true that the American laborer gets better ptay, gl
better compensation for his labor, ttan any other laborer in the woee
why is it thatt since 1860 there have come to this country 9,1-.90
foreigners? Why have they come? Why have they sought this reg0i
if it is not to better their condition? They are laboring people. Te
do~ not flee entirely from bad government, and they did not come, si
is frequently said here and elsewhere, to get our cheap lands. W'
shoul  more than 700,000 Canadians, with cheap lands in Cari<d
come to the United States? They do not come for that purpoe:
all..Where do tthy go when they come? They go to the manuafTttu
ing States and the manufacturing cities, where labor is compensate
where t is well paid. I have before me the census reports slhowil
where they go. Of the 6,679,943 foreigners in the United Stetes 
1880, how many were found in the State of Alabama? Nine thloil
seven hundred tand thirty-four. In Arkansas only 10,350. Does asi
body. ssay Jthat Arkansas:and Alabama ado not present an attracti
ield for the agriculturist? Texas only had of this great number 
peopleacomparatively few, 114,616 only. Examination of the repo
wll farther show that Boston had 114,000 0of them; that MXss
ehusetlts, without any agricultural groutndst for them, had 4I3i
that  iltitimore hiad 5,lia;  that St. Louis had 105,013; anld N 
York had 478S,64.': 




a
I
11
I
i
11
i
f
II
I
I
I






HON. tNELSON DINGLEY, JR., OF MAINE.
OUR PATRIOTIC POLICY          MAINTAINING OUR HIGHER
WAGES."
gfracts from remarks of Hon. NELSON      DINGLEY, of Maine,
printed in daily Congressional Record (50th Congress,
1st Sessiojn, page 3921).
lDriven to the uwall, the last refluge of the free trader is in the
ssumption that our protective polic) has nothing to do with mnainlainlg our higher wages, )but that these are the result of our cheap
tnd s:and abundant natural resources.
U:andou tediT Clheap land and abundant natural resources did secure
it:er rewiarnds for labor in the United States than in Europe before
single matnufactuimring industry was established here.  But is
fhere.any lone who1 believes that outr w:ages of labor would -have gone,
in increasing from c'dctde to leecade, as they lhave, if we had not
it-eased the opport uitites of1 and demiind for labor by introducing
irn ftee' luring iindulstries and diversifying our employfments?  And
fw cot11d( we h-aveT suce.ssftullvt established and maintained these
id struies with our wages of labor fromr the start higher than in 
iriope, and this superiority of wages constantly increasing as new
dnillstries were opened, if we had not adopted the policy of encoureilcg home industries lby placinig pro(tective duties on such imported
rettiles, made by cheaper labor of EFrope, as would come inlo
i.stiot competitioln xwith similar articles which we were seeking to
tk'- at home?
PAGE 6156:
After twenty-seven years' protection of wool-growing, woolen cloth
S >i) per cent ciheaper than it was before the war under non-proettion. There never was a time when clothing was so cheap, and:Ie wlorkintgnman can buy a co7at in the United States for two-thirds
le (abor that he can buy a similar colat in Great Britain. In addiinni to tthis loss, the dest ruction.; of the wool-raising in this country
to uldl have a serious effect on the supply of meat and increase the
prie of mutton which nlow forms so large a p)art of the  leat supply
f toe people. And beyond this, whatever tends to discourage shee:pr:i~iiivr mljuriouasldy afteets the fertility of our farms, for it is well
(FUwnI that sheep hs ve a. most beneficial influence in renovating
lii-t latIn ids on which they are pastured.
PAGE 6417:
l r, Cha irman, the gentletman from Pennsylvania [Mr. SCOTT] has
said ii;t the farmer.s are not protected. Mr. Chairman, my district
Is I-r.;..jEv composed of farrmers. I Iknew thactdistrict when almost
tS isoie indultry was farming. and I know it to-day since mIanue'X tn'Tng,industries have come in. And I say that thereX is not a
mfarme in jmty district who does not appreciate that the building
lp ot mtranlfiacturing industries there has obtained for him a better
r -. "| —a: home market-and higher rates for his products than he
I;d   'tre. e  I know that farmers forty years ago found it talmost
pons il;die to obtain cash for the products of their farms. They
|ehnt out.} and bartered them at almost any price to obtain.those,'s; tnat thev were compelled to have.
I    it condition of things has been altered. The farmer now has
dy       ket for all of his products at good prices near his home.
I+A,:ri200X


i




itHt OO'J0)'F LAO  R    A? I EO?Y.


I


Extract from rearks of   on. WM. P. PFRY"   of Maine, page 651 of
daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Session.
With all these advantages we cannot compete successfully with the
countries of Europe. Why not? There is, there can be but one
answer, we are handicapped by the cheap labor there.
Why, is labor s factor in production sufficient to overcome all of
our advantages? Undoubtedly it is. Labor, on the average, makes
one.half the cost of all production. I do not mean to assert that the
cost of a yard of cheap cotton cloth is one-half labor, but iron ships,
machinery, furnaces, forges and factories are 90 per cent, labor,
A year or two since I was in the Waltham Watch Factory. The
superintendent showed me some watch screws so fine that the naked
eye could not see the thread. I asked him to figure out their cost by
the ton. He complied, and found it to be a little over $4,600,000, seven
times more precious than gold, and yet laying in the earth the ore was
not worth more than one dollar and a half. Whether the labor converting the ore Into the screw was one or two dollars a day would
make a marvelous difference in its cost. But the free trader insists
that after all there is not much difference between the cost of labor
here and in Europe; that the living is not so expensive there as
here. Now, this is a question which must be settled according to the
facts. It is fundamental, vital; and a mistake in its determination
may be fatal to our industries.
1:::
"SI: DOLLARS' WORTH OF RAW MA TERIAL AND TIES
"MANUFACTURED PRODUCT WORTH $4,000"
xtract from remarks of iHon. WM. D. OWEN of Indiana, page
5651 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Sessio&.
Twenty tons of iron ore asleep in the hillside; $5 is its full valu
Here are 4 tons of coal in another hill; that is $1. Now, we have
$6 investedi and I will let the Pennsylvania Railroad shops at Altoon4  build a steam-engine from   raw  material. They build it
properly, so a to get the best service, and when that engine is cora
pleted and on the track for us it has cost $4,000. Six dollars' worth
of raw material and the manufactured product worth $4,000! Not
made for sale, but cost to the company from its own raw materi l
to thet our of putting the engae on the track an expenditre of
4,000.: This is their ow  cost, and it is one of the most conservative
and thoroughly business-like organizations in the world. Six dollars
is the value of the raw material; $$094 is the 4ominio of lfabor.: 0R::l 


I


6-.. o


II




I
I
t11
i
v
f
7
I
il
t,
a
I
r
h
t
iI
tI
I
I
I
I
I


I


'LABOR   AND    CAPITAL.-'"     THE    TENDENCY       IS  TO
EMPLOY ARBITRATION           AND   CONCILIATIONS."
rtract from remarks of 1lon. CLnIAnRLES DICK of Ohio, in daily
Congressional Record, June 9, 1900.
LABOR0 AND THE TRUSTS.
"Down with the trusts," is one of the slogans of the Democratic
arty this year, and its agents will endeavor to capture the laboring
na's vote because they say that trusts lower the wages of the
rorkers.
But what is the truth? Not one single instance can be cited where
ilarge industrial institution, eimploying  hundreds or thousands of
e;ple, has attempted to reduce their wages. Neither can it be
hewn that a single one of the hundred national and international
raed and labor unions of this country is fighting the large com-!nations. Instead of fighting them, they are getting closer together
very day. The growing tendency between labor and capital has
(en toward annual conferences to determine wage scales, hours
f work, and conditions of employment. The tendency is to employ
rbitration and conciliation in the settlement of diff'erences. This
ietlfid has long been in vogue betweep the railways and their emlnyees, with the steel-rail makers, with the wire-nail makers, with
in-plate manufacturers, with the steel-beam  producers, with the
ainalgamated Association of Iron, Steel, and Tin Workers, with
he newspaper publishers, with the employing book and job printers,
nd with the International Typographical Union. The more that
ibor and capital concentrate their interests individually, so much
he more are they endeavoring to concentrate their interests colctively. Large and small labor unions, instead of fighting indusrial combination, find it to their interest to join hand in hand with
h:m. There is no better combination in the United States to-day
hIa the American Fedeyation of Labor.
Speaking for the vast army of wage-earners employed in the iron,
teel, and tin industry, Theodore Schaffer, president of the Amal-;amated Association of Iron, Steel, and Tin Workers, before the
Federal Industrial Commission, has declared that the effect of trusts
1ad been beneficial to them. "As a general rule," he said he beieed that the members of his organization "would prefer to deal
ith combinations and large corporations rat:ler than with smaller
rdependent mills."  His experience was that he always received
air treatment in negotiating with these combinations, and he was
crtain "they did not prevent competition."
)Democratic politicians "point with pride" to the fact that there
fave been more labor disturbances and strikes in the past year or
o than in the four years of Democratic administration. Why all
tese strikes then?
Thie average wage-worker never thinks of going on strike on a
Ill  nImairket, and certainly not on a falling market under Demoratic rule. When business is stagnant and factories are silent and
i'e land is full of unermployed labor, the voice of the agitator is
fhause there is little employment
Kvery labor organization in the country, be it large or small, for
e Past two years reports steady employment for its full memberhip, increased pay,~ shorter working hours, and a general improveent in all its conditions. The whrole world is engaged in paying
thute to the 'wonderful productivity of our farms and factoriesUelng a marvelous tale of American prosperity, proving conclusively
neral distribution of the flood of wealth being poured into
his favored land.
g-14




" WAGZES HIGHER PRICES OF LIVING LOWER.
e...,  - ~ S   I   In i1t.R CE EP   LIV 7\:




Extract from remarks of Hon. 0. H. PLATT of Connecticut, pu,
1016 of daily Congressional Record, S0th Congress, 1st Sesioa
Mr. President, the laborer of this country is better off than he ever
was before. With wages higher on the average, with the price of
living lower on the average, he is in this respect immensely better oF
than anywhere else in the world. The wage-earners in this country
own more property than all the other wage-earners of the world
put together. Nay, more, I think I would not overstate the matter
if I make it stronger. I see my friend, the Senator from lihode
Island [Mnr Aldrich] sitting by mne. The wage-earners in Connecticiu
and Rhode Island own more propertytn h         a-earer        th the  e-ar ers of t
whole world outside of the United States. This effort to make thl
laboring man believe that he could live as well and as cheaply here
under a system of free trade as he lives now under a system of protection is not worthy of even a free trader, in view of all the staststic
and the refutations which have been made.
"TIN   PLATES." —"I'E     PRODUCED      IN   THIS    COUNTRY
24,000 PEOPLE COULD        BE EMPLOYED
IN  THIS INDUSTRY,"
Extract from remarks of Hlon. SAMUEL J.:RANDIALL of Pensnylvania, page 5686 of daily Congressional Rlecord, 50th Coowress,
1st Session.
How far-reaching is this whole matterI   It has relation to an
enormous production of iron ore, or limnestone, coal, coke, pig-irono
and every article connected with its production, and why should not
all these be encouraged and produced in the United States? I tlink
$17,000,000 a year is too much money to go out of this country when
the people of the United States, without harm to the consumer, in my
judgment, and without ultimately enhancing the price of these commodities, can produce the very articles themselves. We have within
five years contributed $100,000,000 to Englaud, and have drained our
country to that extent.
How does it affect the producing interests of the country? Does
it affect the labor of the country —the wage-earner? To-day there
are coming to the United States $17,000,000 in value of tin-plates
if those tin-plates were 'produced in this country twenty-four thousand people here could be employed in this industry. The labor in
Great Britain and Wales required to produce the tin plates we con 
sume amounts, I am advised, to $9,000,000, and it is only fair to
conclude if we produced those tin-plates in this country the laborers
engaged in that work would receive from   it some ten or twelve
millions of dollars.
"THE    GREATEST ADVANTAGE OF PROTEOTION                 IS TO
BE SEEN IN     THE CONDITION OF LABOR."
Extract from remarks of Hon. EZRA B. TAIYLOR of Ohio, pae
6931 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Sessio'0.
The greatest advantage of protection, however, is to be seen inl tle
condition of labor under its mantle. Wages are not only higher thSa8
in England, Ireland, Italy, Hungary, Poland, and other free-trade
or semi-free-trade countries, but the condition of the laborer is iltioiLely more bearable and hopeful. He may live comfortably and respected, and he may educate his children and expect them to laeoot
worthy, usefl,and leading citizens. They are eligible to all place
under the Government, capable of any business enterprise, and mn'Y
hold, any social position. This state of things exists only where Pro'
tection is general, and it is that only in the United States'. Goods art
cheap in Italy, in Hungary, and in Poland, but labor is cheaper, ad
the laborer cannot buy. The laboring man emigrates from freetrade
countries to protective ones, not from protective countries to fre
trade ones.


3
F
I
I
r
II
I
II
I
I
I


I


g-9i






1 "P  LOTECTION TO AMERItCAN LAORB."
Xtract from remarks of Hon. J. B. CHEADLE of Indiana, pags
4601 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Session.
Mr. Chairman, 1 have heard gentlemen upon the other side of the
hamber declare that protection does not protect the laborer here in
iaerica. I am not a theorist, and yet if the great industrial system
f protection to American labor does not protect it I have wondered
hy it was that hundreds of thousands of men and women left their
moes in Europe every year and emigrated to America to become
itizens of the Republic and co-workers in its manifest destiny. Sir,
il you believe that all these thousands come here to be made slaves?
Would they flee from the oppressions of Europe to become still more
oppressed here by an industrial system that is talked about, studied,
and prayed for in every humble cottage in Sweden, Germany, Ireland,;herever there is a resolute heart that yearns for larger liberty,
itier wages, and a greater margin of profit from daily toil?
"THE WORKINGXANiS PARADISE.'
eftract from remarks of Hon. WMtI. WOODBUtRN of Nevada, alge
4(003 of daily Congressional Record, 50rth Conryress, 1st Session.
It placed the American laborer and mechanic upon a plane so elekated that it is an insult to commnon intelligence to institute a compirison of their condition with the white slaves of Europe.
It htas made America the workingman's paradise. Here he drinks
n knowledge gratis from the sparkling fountains of education. To
limr lies open every avenue that leads to wealth and political station.
je feels he is a man, a sovereign, an integral part of this Republic,
one of the pillars on which it rests. He is so different in manner and
dress from foreign workingmen that the myriads of foreign visitors
to the Centennial Exposition looked in vain for the laborers of
America.
'THE FEAST TO WHICH THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY INVITES THE PEOPLE."
Extract from remarks of Hion. J. H1. GALLINGEtR of NeTw IHampsfiire, pig!e 3688 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress,
1st Session.
Such are the utterances of British statesmen, and that is the feast
to which the Democratic party invites the people of this country.
llut before accepting the invitation let us ask some of these same
1lrilish statesmen what free trade has done for the people of Great
Britain.
lhomas Carlyle declared only a few years ago that —
"British industrial existence seems fast becoming one huge poison
0'ampt of reckless pestilence- lphysical and moral-a hideous living
0lgothia of souls and bodies buried alive. Thirty thousand outcast!edle women working themselves swiftly 4o death. Three million
Paupers rotting in forced idleness; and these are but items in the sad
edger of despair."
What a picture that is for American working men and women to
Catemaplate, and what a feast is that to which free trade invites
hrem?




"FIn TRAD       S:  MAAWST TESPMOOB XAN."
XEtraet fro  remarks of Wio. LOUIS E. MeCOMiAS of Maryl:age S839 of daily Cogressional Record, 50th Congress, i,:To-day ever old soul-driver of the South is a free-trader. Fre
trade is against the poor man and in favor of the rich man when
lets the rich man buy what he wants abroad and employ the foreig
workers at lower wages in place of the American producer who stan
ready with his capital, the workman's skill, his practical knowledge, hi
industry, his strength, his health. In this country to-day the workin
man has the ballot to defend him against the competition of unde
paid workmen anti plethoric capital in Europe, and Coolie and Ci
nese labor in Asia, for all of them by cheap ocean freights are no
brought near our door.
"VEifRY AVENUE OONO, O OO OF PREIEBRXBMNT AND 0O
DIsTINCTION OPXEN        O TO  E LABORER HEIEE."
Extract from remarks of Hon H       Y. HENY  TELLER of Colorad
page e20   of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, s
Session.
Will the Senators who talk about free trade point me to a natio
on the earth that has accumulated money as we have accumulate
it? Will they point to a nation in the world where labor is so we
paid, where it is so much respected, where every avenue of progress
every avenue of honor, of preferment, and of distinction is open
the laborer as i iis here, where the people have engaged in such mag
nificent enterprises and accomplished them, where the gret charitie
aRve been managed and kept alive as nowhere; else?    Why, Mr
President, we have sent relief abroad to suffering Ireland, and w
have sent it to other nations of the world. The missionary peopl
in this country send more than $6,000,000 a year to the heathen, a
the laborig girls who work i kitchens and the boys who wo0rk 
stables every year send to Ireland more than $15,000,000 to sa
their kindred from the effects of free trade in Ireland; and so as 
suggested to me by the Senator from Vermont [Mr. Edmunds, their
own condition is 100 per cent. better than it ever was anywhere else
or than is that of their kindred at home. More than three and a hal
millions of Englishmen, including the Irishmen in the number, hav
sought an asylum in this country and are here. Do you want 
apply English methos, to put your labor where the English pu
theirs? If they are better off there why do they not stay there, wo
do they come here, and why are they coming here whenever they ca,
and why if it t   hey never return?
00"COMPETION OF TEJ PAUTPER MILLIONS OFP EUOrS
UNDER A FREE-TRADE POLICY."
Extract from  remarks of Hon. JOSEPH     N. IDOLPH of Ore90,
page 0116 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st
If the labor of this country cannot stand the competiton of the
Chinese upon the Pacific coast, and a few thousand imported Italia
laborers upon the Atlantic coast, how could it stand the compe
tlon   40 000:of i4Chis 4,00,00,000 of Japanese, the 60,000,0M
of the population of India, and the pauper millions of Europe unde
a free-trade policy.
g-17


I




'A TARIFF TO $EQUALIZE LABOR CONDITIONS HERE
AND ABROAD AND PROTECT
AMERICAN LABOR."P
etr!Cet from, remnarks of Hon. E. L. HAMILTON of Michigan, in daily
Congressional Record, April 14, 1904.
In the first quarter of the nineteenth century there were few or no
American labor organizations.
About 1825 labor began to be more conscious of itself as a distinct
etity, and labor unions began to be formed.
Local unions increased in number and gradually, as means of transortation and communication Increased, labor began to organize itself
nto national unions and to think of political action as a means of social
letteritent.
There were strikes, a Labor party, a Reform party, an Anti-monopoly
party, indictments of trades unions for conspiracy, and fights between union
Lnd non-union men as early as the decade between 1830 and 1840.
In those days the laboring man rightly wanted shorter days and better pay, and he wanted his pay in good money at stated intervals instead
f now and then at the option of his employer, and he wanted a lien for
his pay on the products of his work.
Fe works eight and ten hours now instead of twelve and fifteen then.
Ie gets his paly in good money now, although he came near lapsing into
bad money in 1896, and labor laws are framed for his protection,
For years the Republican party has materialized in practice the profound truth lately expressed by Mr. Gompers, president of the American
Federation of Labor, at Boston, that "no industry, no country, has ever
ecome great, or ever can become great, founded on the poverty of its
workers."  [Applause on the Republican side.]
In its policy of protection to American labor and American Industries
one of the strongest arguments of the Republican party has always been the
abor argument.
That is, first, if a foreign-made commodity can be laid down in Amerian markets cheaper than a home-made commodity by reason of cheaper
wages abroad, then we ought to maintain a tariff to equalize labor conditions here and abroad and protect American labor.
Second, if by protection we can produce a commodity which we are
not producing, we ought to maintain a tariff to create and foster the production of that commodity.
Third, That behind protection existing industries have been multiplied
and new industries have been created which, by competition among themselves have reduced the price of commodities even below the tariff imposed,
so that from the vantage ground of a protected market we are not only
'slpplying our home market, but are shipping a surplus abroad, whereby
ve have ststained the wages of labor at home, multiplied employment,
stimulated invention, increased the p )rrchasing power of every American,
iven t d.e Aimeriran farmer a coinstantlu increatsinc market at this door, and
madte te American iman the best all-around man that walkt the earth todao. [Applause on the Republican side.]
PROTECTION AND PROSPERITY.
The history of protection is a history of prosperity. The history of
free trade or approximate free trade is a history of depression.
From the first tariff law down to now, when, with the railroads of the
United States we could put a girdle around the globe at the equator,
have enough left to parallel the railroads of Europe, and keep their tracks
oht with the traffic of our prosperity, there has never: been a time when
American capital and American labor have been "deflected" from  any
Prfltable pursuit, except when the Democratic party has been in power.
[Applause on the Republican side.]
Mr. Chamberlain, of England, has also recently described protection,
in his Glasgow speech, October 6 last, he says:,  ow, what is the history of protection?  First, there is tariff and no
andurtries. Then gradually primary Industries for which the country has
PItural facilities grow up behind the tariff wall. Then secondary industries spring up; first of necessaries then of luxuries, until at last all the
groirnd is covered,
I put this description over against that of the gentleman from MissisilrTll::
"First the blade, then the ear, after that the full corn in the ear."
PROTECTION AND MANHOOD.
In this connection Mr. Chamberlain further said:
IThe vast majority of the workmen In the colonies are protectionists,
Cr4 d I am disinclined to accept the easy explanation that they are all fools..t itse policy of protection to American labor and American industries
[he lepulblc:an party has always held the qurality of American.manhood
tl'.e the cost of a fabric, and in the long run this policy has not only
ltni.ecl American labor, but has reduced the cost of commodities to the
Pilrt wiore the humblest artisan of to-day can commonly have th things?hhhE1 the wealth of kings could not cormanand a few years ago. Not only
t t, but this polcy has put money into the pockets of labor with which
I0 uh these things. [Applause.]
g-18


I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 




I"TSZO    92 AZ    WOIXI." I


Extract from  remab s of lion. IVILLIAM    McKINLEY of Ohio)
page 4763 of daly ongessional Record, O0th Congress, 1
I beg to cite, against the unsupported statements of the gernt llelii
who have already spoken upon the other side, th tle estimoIy of
American 'workingen whose opportunity for information fromtt ex
perience in both countries, and otherwise, makes their evidence in
controvertible. From the statements made March 10, 1886, befor the
Committee on Ways and Means Mr. Roger Evans, workinmrani
speaking upon the same subject, said:
"Of course, you must not gauge the American workingman by ths
amount of coarse bread and meat which will be necessary for hli
to subsist upon. It cannot be. The American workingman must, hav
other things than those. He must be fed and clothed and be able t:
maintain his family as becomes the dignity of an American citizen,'
Another, Mr. Philip Hagan, spoke as follows:
"The produce on which I lived in England came mostly from tli
United States, and certainly, I ought to get it as cheap here as in
England. I worked for 5 shillings a day in England, and I get i
sflilligs a day here. Consequently, I am able to send my children a
afchoot and they are gettiny an education, which their father did c!
fet umder a free-trade government. I want to see these childmr
raised, p and educated as citizenws."
Mr. Thomas P. Jones swaid:
"It has been shown here to-day, and, as I think, very clearly, t1h'r
this tinkering with the tariff is not for the best interests of th.
ccuntry; is not for the best interests of the wealth-producers, o
the men who built up this country. Then, gentlemnen, I take it tha
it is your duty to throw this bill to the dogs. If you will, in spite o
our remonstrances, go on destroying our interests and shutting ui
he in dustries of the country, our working people will be ere oIo
sufficently educated to step forth and say, 'Gentlemen, thus far s-i i
you go, and no farther.': We will elect men and send them here t
legislatefor our interests if you will not do so. We have the^po0lst
tgentlemen, and:you kow it."
"HOMES:OF LABORING MEN, OHOflES O              THRIFT ANl
COFO':T AND NEATNESS." 
Extract from remarks of                               ewon. J. H. GAYLLLJVGEIR of  eI W
shire, page S 88 of daily Conressional Record, 60th Co:tyr'
1st Sessibn.
Go to Leeds, England, and see the condition of the working peco!i
there, and then tenll me, men of the South, do you want the 1ai)r'ii'
m:en of the United States reduced to their level?. A few years ag 
the inspector of police in Leeds was asked if he knew a single i
stanee in that great industrial city of 320,000 souls where a Lwoking;
tialn-a skilled artisan, rmechanic, engineer, carpenter, or n rtsn"
owned the house in which he lived and the ground: on which it Hio0'
and the reply was: "If I was on my oath in court I should be ligi<
to answer no."'
NMow come with me to any New England town or city and S'e ti!
hoes ofthe    echanics        org men, hmes of trifth   and c01
fort and n:eates. and then insist, if you will, that the labori rle
in Europe are as well paid and as prosperous as they      re  i trlit
oetry;;   ut yotu must not expect to deceive inteligenn t workvlgea
by such false  nd misleading statements.


I
I
I
)t
t
I.1!1,
t
O
 S
I 0
1
1;
r.
11
I,,
1
11
i
k


g-49


i
i
i




"LEGISLATION IN THE INTEREST OF HUMANITY."
gtracts fron remarks of Hion. C. if. Grosvenor of Oho, in daily Congressional Record, April 4, 190f4.
IWoman labor.-Next to children, the greatest victims of abusebY
greedy employers when unrestrained by law are women.      InvsttionS
have shown that their condition is sometimes pitiful where employers are
given free scope In their employment. Their protection in the interest of
bumanity and morals has also been the subject of legislation In nearly all
civilized countries. In the United States, twenty-seven States have legislated Iupon this subject.  Of these twenty-seven States, twenty-two are
Republican and five are Democratic!   Reducing these figures to a proportionate basis, we find that 82 per cent. of the Republican States and
only l9 per cent. of the Democratic States have laws regulating woman
labor.
Seats for females in shops.-Legislation on this subject needs no comment. Any man who has a daughter or sister employed in a shop or store,
and every physician, knows what a hardship it is to a woman to be compelled to stand all day at a bench or behind a counter. Fortunately, in
thirty-one States legislation has been enacted, requiring employers to provide seats for females. Of these thirty-one States, twenty-three are Republican and eight are Democratic.
Sweat-shop legislation.-There is no greater menace to the health of
the working people, and nothing which tends more to lower and degrade
hiluman beings, than to crowd them  together in small, filthy workshops,
where they are often compelled to work, eat, and sleep without regard to
health or morals, and where the hours of labor are often so long that the
victims, who are usually foreigners unacquainted with our language, are shut
oult from all opportunities for education or betterment of any kind. The
scenes observed in these shops by official investigators have been revolting
beyond description. Long ago efforts were made to regulate these so-called
"sweat shops," and twelve States have enacted laws looking to this end. Of
these twelve States, eleven are Republican and one is Democratic. Nothing
vmore need be said on this point.
Truck syistem.-This legislation prohibits employers from paying their
employees in scrip or orders on their company stores and which are not
redeemable in cash.  At present twenty-three States have such laws in
force, of which fourteen are Republican and nine are Democratic, or 61
per cent. of ail the Rpublican and 39 per cent. of all the Democratic States.
Mediation and arbitration.-State %boards of mediation and arbitration
have been established in fifteen States to aid in the adjustment of industrial
dlsplttes. Of the fifteen b'oards.; eleven are in Republican States and only
tiour in Democratic States.
Free employment bureaus.-One of the great needs of wage-workers
iwho are engaged for only a week or day at a time Is some agency that will
assist them in obtaining a situation when they are out of work. Private
Iagencies have, so frequently exploited their poverty by extorting registration fees for situations that are never procured, that churches and charitable societies now support free employment agencies in many leading
citlis. A few years ago State and municipal governments also entered the
fteld and now there are public employment bureaus (free) in fourteen
States, of which twelve are Republican and only two Democratic.
Employers' liability laws.-Since the introduction of steam  and machinery workingmen are exposed to such great risks of death and injury
that enlightened States have enacted legislation which requires employers
to furnish safe work places and appliances, and makes them  responsible
in damages,~ for any injury that may befall an employee through their
negligence. Twenty-seven States now have employers' liability laws, most
of them  relating to railways.  Of the twenty-seven States fifteen were
ipu.: tlican and twelve DemocratIc in the last national election.
Eight-hour lawt.For many years labor organizations have been endeavoring to secure legislation prohibiting labor on Government worts or
ubl contracts for over eight hours per day. They have succeeded thus
lar In securing sueh legislation in twenty-one of the forty-five States of
the LJaion,, Of these twenty-one. States sixteen are Republican and:fiveare
Democratic. In other words, of the twenty-eight Republican States, 60 pr
cent, have enacted the eight-hour law, and of the seventeent-   Dmocrati
States only fve, or 29 per cent., hae yielded to the demands of thelabor
rgansizations in this regard.
g..20                                                   Sig. 10
f:::~~~~~~~~9


I




"THE S.WEAT-SHOPSYST^EM. "GOVERNOR ROSE
VELT'S VIEWS ON THE SUBJECTS
Extract from   remarks of Hon. 0. IL. GROSVENOR          of Ohio, in
daily Congressional Record, April 4, 1904.
UNECONOMIC, UNWHOLESOME, AND UNAMEBRICAN
SWEAT-SHOP SYSTEM.
Governor Roosevelt's opinion concerning the evils of sweatshop
labor, that he formed while member of assembly as a result of his
seachn   inquiry into the unhealthful tenement-house system      i
manuacturing cigars, did not undergo a change during the Seventeen yeIars that intervened between 1882, when the investigation was
minade, anti 1899. In truth his views on the subject in the latter year,
when he urged the legislature to adopt radical measures to suppress the harmful system, were even more pronounced than those
to which he gave utterance while serving as an assemblyman. These
were his ideas in 1899, as expressed in his annual message:
Another very important phase of this subject Is the sweat-shop system,
which Is practically the conversion of the peoorest class of living apartnsents
into unwholesome pest-creating and crime-breeding workshops. Laws have
been enacted by the legislature to-.suppress this vile phase of industrial life
in our large cities by prohibitin the use of dwellings for the purposes of
manufacture. Although the law is quite explicit and the intention of the
legislature obvious, great difficulty has been experienced in Its effective enforcement. It is everywhere agreed that this tenement-house or sweat-shop
system is degrading to the unfortunate individuals engaged in it and to the
social and moral life of the community in which it exists, How to enforce
the law on this subject has perplexed the statesmen of other countries and
States as well as our own.
The most effective and uninquieitive means yet devised for accomplishlag this end is that recently adopted by Massachusetts, viz., providing that
buildings used for manufaeturing purposes must have a permit or license,
such license or permit to be granted only on conditions that the appointusent
of the huiling fulfill the requirements of the law for manufacturing purpoes. These permits or licenses ought to be granted by the board of factory inspectors, who should be held responsible for the proper inspection of
the buildings and the enforcement of the law
There are several reasons why this simpl6 method would be effective.
It would at once classify buildings used for manufacturing purposes, as a
building so used without a permit would be violating the law. It would
prevent much friction, because all requirements of the law would have to be
fulfilled before the building was used. This would be a great advantage in
the erection of new buildings, as proper conveniences, Including accessible
fire escapes, guarded elevators, and other appointments would be required
and easily furnished when new buildings were being erected or when old
ones were being changed for manufacturing purposes.
INor does this involve any radical Innovation. It is simply applying the
recognized principle upon which boards of health now everywhere act ia
requiring that the plans for erecting new buildings or alterations of old ones
must be submitted to the building and health department and a certificate
of approval granted before the building can be erected, alterations made, or
the premises occupied. Legitimate manufacturers will not object to this,
beqause they are desirous of furnishing safe and wholesome appointments for
their employees. Only those who desire to evade the law and disregard the
comimon demands of sanitation, domestic decency, and wholesome industrial
methods will object, and it Is these the law desires to reach.
I subit this to the serious consideration of the legislature, and suggest
that an amendment to the law embodying this idea be adopted, to the end
that the uneconomic, usnwholesome, and un-American soeat-ohop system
shall disappear from our industrial life.
Though the governor's ideas were not embodied in their entirety
inthe law that ensued, it contained the essential features recommended by him. Its provisions made it unlawful to manufacture,
alter, repair, or finish articles of clothing, feathers, artificial flowers, cigarettes, cigars, or umbrellas in a room or apartment in ailY
tenement or dwelling house, or in a building situated in the rear
of a tenement or dwelling house, without a license from the factoryinspection department.
The -elaw  has worked admirably.     From  the time that it went
into effect-September 1, 1899-according to the records of the
New York Bureau of factory inspection, up to September 30, 1903,
the date of the issuance of the last annual report of that burearO
th efficiency of the act in interfering with sweat shops was fully
Illustrated by the fact that altogether 10,439 licenses were refused
to applicants becase of the insanitary condition of their lilN
rooms or of other parts of the buildings, while 3,814 licenses Wsere
for s     reasons.  These latter house shops doubtless
would now he in operation were it not for this law and the strict
manner of its execution.   In the time above mentioned there wre,       instances  where      were tagged in -tenement, workroons
whereinthe law had been violated, and a large number of pr0e'
~Cutlonsl -and           t;~:~ Avict ioMS:~io h~i~t~~*6          lf Fe
and convictions       resulted from its enforcement. At 0
loseofltSeptember there were in New York State 30,890 licensed
or    places, which have undergone at least one critical inspection
each year.
g-21-. 


I




I
I
I
i
I
I
i
a
T
I
r
ri
t
t
i
In
II
i
I
I
i,i
4


I


FIlGURES OF SURPLUS EARNINGS REFUTE THE
STATEMENT THAT THE COST OF LIVING
HAS INCREASED MORE THAN WAGES
AND INCOMES." 
1trdct from remarks of Hon.    I.J. I, GALLINIER of New Hampshire in daily Congressional Record, April S3, 1904.
These figures of surplus earnings refute most emphatically the
tatement that the cost of living has increased more than wages and
incomes. I am quite willing to admit, however, that it does cost us
ill more to live than it did during free-trade times. It costs more
o wear shoes than to go barefoot. It costs more to live in a comfortable house than in a single barely furnished room. It costs
nore to eat meat twice or three times a day than oatmeal, corn
iread. or free soup. It costs more to wear well-made and fashionable
lothes than it does to dress in rags and shabby raiment. It costs
ore to send the children to school and college than it does to have
them in the street. It costs more to buy books and magazines and
iewspapers than it does to go without. It costs more to have a sewing
nachine than it does to work with the needle. It costs more to use
\s and coal than it does to use candles and coke. It costs more,
far more, to live as does the fully employed. well-paid workman in
protection times than it does the idle or poorly paid laborer of freerrade times. It costs more, far more, to maintain the American
taindard of living than it does the hand-to-mouth earistence of onehird the laborers of free-trade England and the entire population
f some countries of continental Europe.
HIGH STAMDARD OF LIVING MADE POSSIBLE.
This high standard of living, now reached and maintained by all
classes of our people from one end of the country to the other, is
nade possible because of the fact that as a people we are doing
almost all of our own work, and for this work are being most handsomely remunerated. When the millions of working people, so called,
as well as the more wealthy classes, are consuming the farmers'
products and are able to pay for them a reasonable and profitable
price, then our thirty millions of agriculturists and their families
reap the benefit which is reflected back in their own consumption of
rmanufactures, and the luxuries and conveniences that go to make
up the comforts of the American home.
The laboring classes of this country were more prosperous during
the year 1903 than ever before in our history. This will be seen,
in the first place, from figures showing the savings of the peo)le.
The aggregate deposits in our savings banks amount to $3,000,000,000,
and to show tile amount of money in these banks during the past
few years I introduce the following table:
June 30:
1S1895i,15,9 5:..................$1,7851 50,957
189.4.1...............1.........  1,747,961,280
189 5  t*** *,S"-'*    '  '* ' *  *  * i  '**..'*.........  1,810,597,023
}$9,4  ] I '.  ]  * ~] ~] *] i ]]]]] *.    7 -,  *,27 * I  * - -,,907,-5  t7
1^R7.. * * * * * * *** - * * * **?........          1,939.376.035
lS7     r....* q....................................... 1,298
]899  *  i  t _........................................... 0 2,,230,'3 66,952 4
19010  *..'...................................  2,449,547,885
1902..................       2,597.094,580
1902t2.,*1...  2...............................  27 0,  17 7,290
i903 i:.,*,,* **.*;................2................  2,935,204,845
1901  (estimated)...........................  3,176,000,000
Deposits in savings banks.
It will be seen that more savings were withdrawn than were
denpoited in 1894, the year of the Wilson-Gorman tariff law, and
that the increase for the next year or two was very slight. Since
197, however, when the Dingley tariff became operative, the increase
each year has been large and continuous. For the six years it amounts
to 81l00o,000,000, almost two hundred millions of this being added in!903. This indicates that our laboring classes, whose surplus earnlogs for the most part are found in our saings banks, had all that
"as necessary during last year and considerable besides, and it puts
ot oif commission the so-often asserted Democrati claim that the
sot of living has increased much '      more than the income  f the
g-22;:;::




"E          O     QN A ROOTIVETA                    AI
AT THE WAGES OF LABORZING: MN."
Extract from remarks of Honi. J. S. MORRILL of Vermont,
302 of daily Congresionl Recrd, 5th Congress, 1st Session
The attacks on ag protective tariff, however masked or disguise
are aimed at the wages of laboring men, and are not removed by t
vain-glorious assumption of free-trade orators, destitute of all sy
pathy for manual labor, that Americans can do more work per da
than the people of any other country. If it were true, then tl
extra wear and tear of human life should not go unrewarded; b
it is not wholly true. Foreign workingmen not only work for ie
pay but more hours for a day's work than are required here, T
output of a great part of manufacturers is, moreover, inexorab
regulated by machinery with fixed speed or revolutions for perfe
work. The best machinery is eagerly sought after and quickly di
tributed throughout the world. It is the lower and unequal wage
of foreign workmen alone with which Americans have to conten
We should not, however for any consideration impair the superio
physique of American workmen by compelling them      to perfo
greater tasks than are allotted to any other people.
"WAGES IN MASSACHUSETTS 77 PER CENT HIGHEB
THAN IN GREAT BRITAIN."
Extract from remarks of Hon. NELSON DINGLE Y, J., of Main
page 390 of daily Congessional Record, 50th Congress, Ist
Session.
For many years free traders denied the fact that wages are mucii
if any, lower in Great Britain than here. But since the investigations
of Col. Carroll D. Wright, a few years ago, then commissioner of
labor for   Massachusetts, but now Commissioner of Labor of the
United States, which showed that on an average wages in Massachusetts are 77 per cent. higher than in Great Britain, running from
38 per cent. in cotton manufacturing (where less skill is required
in most grades of cottons made in this country than in other manufacturing industries) to ovr 1   er 100 per cent. in industries requiring a
high degree of skill, the claim has been set up that whatever advantage
a workingman may have in this country over a similar workingman
in Great Britain is offset by the increased cost of living.
"THE WORKSHOPS OF EIUROPE."-_LOW                    STAVING
RATES OF' WAGES."
Ewtract from remarks of Hon. JOHN SHERMAA -of Ohio, pay
05 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Session.
Sir, the question before us is one purely of wages. If wages in
the United States were no greater than in England, France, and Belgium, our chief competitors, we would, no doubt, now compete with
all the world in all mnetallic and textile fabrics. Is it wise in this
country to pursue a policy that will compel the reduction of wages
of laboring men employed in martufactures to the standard now
eteral win European countries? We know from documents furnished
by our consuls the rate of wages there.
The Senator from Maine, [Mr. FRn]I, in a recent speech made in
Boston, gives in detail the most striking information gained by him
from p        oersonal osertio  and inquiry in the workshops of severa
ountries of Europe as to the low, starving rates of wages, and the
degada:tion of labor existing there. God forbid that such injustice
and wrong shall eer exist here. Outr free institutions could not sur
viwe such scenes. Manufactories conducted upon such a basis aotd
b: an unmitigated curse.. Cheapnes purchased at uch a c price wo~ud
be crime. tnd yet without protective duties we must either abaf
don our;manufactres or reduce; wages to the European stanEdard
at more evidence     o we 0need than the hundreds of thousands 0t
people who come to us annually from European countries, bearing
the m   t:ndisputable testimony to their poverty, their sufferingS
and their distress?:


1
a
I
a
e
R
I
6
'I
I
I
1
7
1
I
I
I
I
I


I


g-23


I




HE LABORING CLASSES OF THIS COUNTRY MORE
PROSPEROUS DURING 1903 THAN
EVER BEFORE."'
tracts from remarks of Hon J. H. GALLINGER of New Hampshire, in
daoly Congressional Becord, April 3S, 1904.
Since the enactment of the Dingley law wages have not only increased
large measure, but employment as well. For nearly seven years now
l(ost every man in the United States who has wanted work and was
rtby to have It could not only obtain it for six days in a week and fiftyo wfeeks In a year, hut he has been paid for that labor at a rate never
fore known in this or any other country. There have been times in this
riod iwhen it has been impossible to obtain the necessary help to harvest
r crops, manufacture our goods and care for their transportation and
stribution.
It is neither my province nor purpose at this time to say a single word
r  agr aainst labor unions, or for or against the many strikes which have
d such a serious result upon our laboring classes. I wish only to emasize the fact that when a hundred men or a hundred thousand men are
lintarily idle for weeks or months, the loss is by no means confined to
en alonne, but involves other hundreds or other hundred thousands that
e compelled'to be idle because of the action of the men on strike.
It has been most conservatively estimated that the strikes of the year
03 lessened the purchasing power of the people by fully $1,000,000,000.
I propose to show by a few figures that, in spite of what idleness there
ay have been and in spite of what loss of wages and decreased purchasing
wer may have resulted; the laboring classes of this coultry were more
osper ous during the year 1903 than ever before in our history. This will
seen, In the first place, from figures showing the savings of the people.
e deposits in our savings banks amount to over $3,000,000,000 and to
ow the amount of money in these banks during the past few years I tntroice the following table:
Deposits in Savings Banks.
se 30:                          June 30:
1893.......... $1,785,150,957       1899........ $2,230,366,954
1894.......... 1,747,961,280       1900.......... 2,449,547,885
18.95.........  1.810,597,023       1901.....       2 597,094,580
1896. 6....... 1,907,156,277      19(2.......... 2,750,177,290
1897........   1.939,376,035        1903.......... 2,935,204,845
1898.......... 2,065,631,298        1904 (estimated) 3,176,000,000
It will be seen, that m.ore savings were withdrawn than were deposited
1894, the year of the Wilson-Gormran tariff lan, and that the increase
the next year or two was very slight. Since 1897, however, ohen the
inqley tariff became operative, the increase each year has been large and
ltimots,  For the six years it amounts to $1,000,000,000, almost two
Mdred millions of this being added in 1903. This indicates that our
boring classes, whose surplus earnings for the nlost part are found in our
vings banks, had all that was necessary during last year and considerle besides, and it puts out of commission the so-often asserted Demoatic claim that the cost of living has increased much more than the in"le of the people. lBut these savings-banks deposits are only a part of the
boring mnanls surplus. There are the large sums invested in building
d loan associations; there are the Instalments paid upon the home, and
o'tIps upon the furniture, which is being acquired from year to year and
"00 month to month; and there are also the premiums paid upon the life-.usrasce policy.
'The exhibit made by the Metropolitan life Insurance Company is Ined marvelous. The outstanding insurance of this company at the end of
93 eas $353,177,217. Ten years later, at the end of 1903, it was $1,2,381,457, a gain of almost $1.,000,000,000. The gain in 1903, its greatt year, was $398,889,074. The exhibit of the Prudential Insurance ComnY Ralso shows a most remnarkable Increase, the gain for 1903 being $293,l8,l42, of which $190,386,294 was in the industrial department. These
o companpiesa alone have $2,273,000,000 of outstanding insurance, a large
rtion of it being in the industrial departments, and written during the
st seren years.. But though these figures illustrate the large amount of
"rance taken out last year and other recent years chiefly by the work9 classes, the same wonderful increase of business was shown by our
ger great Insurance companies among, all classes of our people. The year
03 was by far the largest known, proving beyond question that the AmerlPeople-farmers, mechanics, clerks, merchant.s, manufacturers, and
fessional men-not only added largely to savings a.nd other surplus, but
ereable more than ever before to take out life insurance, the ibest mode
I aing and providing for the future.
Ihese gures of surptuis earnings refute most emphatically the stateent thiat the cost of living has increased more than wages and incomes.


I-24




"WAG ES PID:IN THE UNITED STATES COMPARE
WITHITHOSE PAID IN GREAT BRITAIN."
Extract from remarks of lon. I. F. FISlCHE, of Ae?
York, n House of Representatives, March 23, 1897, am
printed in Appendix to bound Congressional Record
Vol. 30, page 21.
T desire to read here a table collated by Mr. Nathanie
McKay, under date of Auigust, 1896, showing wages pai
in the United States compared with those paid in Grea
Britain.
Mr. McKay is a gentleman who had devoted much t;im
and energy to the investigation of matters of this charan
ter, and from my knowledge of the man, I have no hes
tancy in declaring my belief in the absolute truthfulnes
of the statement:
In the United States a blacksmith receives 102 per cent
more than in England.
In the United States a bricklayer receives 125 per cen
more than in England.
In the United States a carpenter receives 165 per cent
more than in England.
In the United States a calker receives 126 per cein
more than in England.
In the United States a conductor (express) receives 34
per cent. more than in England.
In the United States a car driver receives 38 per cent
more than in England.
In the United States an engineer (locomotive) receive
191 per cent. more than in England.
In the United States a fireman receives 188 per cet
more than in England.
In the United States a machinist receives 138 per cen
more than in England.
In the United States a plasterer receives 111 per cent
more than in England.
In the United States a plumber receives 143 per cet
tmore than in England.
In the United States a telegraph operator receives t0
to 154 per cent. more than in England.
In the United States a train dispatcher receives 315 P0
cent. more than in England.
Lahboring men in London................ 1,912,00
Trades union societe s, 519....:.  1,000,00
Average pay of English workmen...........   $1t
Aveage pay:of American workmen.....,     $8'


g25                                     I




"THE AMERICAN          WORKINGMAN          LIVES      ETER
THAN THE EUROPEAN."
Extract from remarks of Hon. I. H. G ROSVEyNOR, of Ohio, in
daily Congressional Record, April 4, 1904.
LOWER PRICES IN THE UNITED STATES THAN
IN ENGLAND.
The claim is often made that while wages are higher in the United
States the cost of living is correspondingly cheaper in Great Britaisn. That this statement is erroneous can be proved by official
statistics obtained simultaneously in both countries. In 1892 the
Senate Committee on Finance made an extensive report on "Retail
prices and wages" in leading cities of the United States and Europe
at different periods from June, 1889, to September, 1891. Among
the cities considered in this report were St. Louis, Mo., and Manchester, England, cities for which wage comparisons have just been
mnde.
A comparison of the prices of articles of identically the same
description, obtained at the same time, namely, June, 1889, and
September, 1891, in both cities, shows that instead of the necessarv commodities of life being higher in the United States than
in England, they are, on the contrary, as a rule much lower. This
is shown in the table which follows. A glance at this table shows
that most of the necessary food products, such as bread, eggs,
lard, bacon, roast beef, hams, mutton, milk, starch, and canned
vegetables, were much lower in St. Louis than in Manchester, while
the prices of the few remaining food products averaged about the
same in both countries.
With regard to clothing and cloth goods, we find that men's
hosiery, cotton shirts, sheetings, shirtings, and cotton and woolen
dress goods of the same description and quality were cheaper in
St. Louis than in Manchester; that carpets, flannels, and cotton
underwear averaged about the same, and thaft only in the case ofmen's hats was there any decided difference in favor of the Manchester purchaser.
Household articles, such as earthenware, glassware, and cutlery,
were nearly the same in price in St. Louis as in Manchester, with
a very slight difference in some cases in favor of the latter city.
0.n the other hand, furniture costs from  about one-fifth to onehalf as much in the United States as in Great Britain, so that for
the cost of one bedroom  set in Manchester one could buy from
two to three sets in St. Louis, and for the cost of one dining table
at Manchester a whole dining-room set could be bought in St. Louis.
Bul the question may be asked, "If the American workingmen
earn so much more and pay so much less for what they consume,
why are they not all wealthy and contented?" The answer may be
found in the statement of the eminent French scientist, Prof. Emile
Levasseur, in his work on "L'Ouvrier Americain" (The American
Wtorkingman).  After summing up the conditions of labor in
America as compared with Europe he says that wages in the United
States are about double the wages in Europe; that objects of
ordinary  consumption  by  working  people  (excepting  dwelling
houses) cost less in the cities of the United States than in those
of Europe; that the American workingman lives better than the
Vluropean; that he eats more substantially, dresses better, is more
Comfortably housed and more often owns his dwelling, spends more
for life insurance and variouts soal      benfici adbnefal associations
and, in short, has a much higher standard of life than the Eluropea
Torkingman.
g-26




"ABOR LEGISLATION              IN REPUBLICAN AND DEMO.
CRATIC STATES."
EIxtract from remarks of Hon. C. H. GROSVENOR, of Ohio, i,
daily Congressional Record,  pril 4, 1904.
LABOR LEGISLATION IN REPUBLICAN AND
DEmOCRATIC STATES.
There i no better way of judging the merits of a political party
than by the laws which are passed by the legislators who are
elected to office from  its ranks. With regard to legislation for
the protection of the workers, much remains to be done before
they received their full measure of protection and justice; but, as
can be shown by the statistics of the different States, nearly all
protective labor legislation in the United States was first enacted
by Republican States and then adopted by way of imitation by
the Democratic States.   At the present time the proportion of
Republican States having protective labor legislation is much greater
than that of Democratic States. This is plainly shown in the tables.
Labor bureaus.-There are few agencies which have done more
toward giving a clear insight into the problems of labor and capital, that have brought employer and employee nearer together,
that have furnished the laboring people with -facts for arguments
in favor of protective legislation, than bureaus of labor and labor
statistics. The table shows that at present there are 33 State
labor bureaus in the United States. Of these, 23 are in Republican States and 10 are in Democratic States. Reducing these
figures to a proportionate basis, we find that 23 out of 28 Republican States, or 82 per cent., have labor bureaus; 10 out of 17
Democratic States, or 59 per cent., have labor bureaus.
Factory-inspection service.-It is well known to all working
people that protective labor laws are practically a dead letter in
any State unless there is a factory-inspection service organized for
the purpose of searching out and bringing to justice persons who
violate such laws. It is easy enough to enact protective legislation,
but it is another thing to enforce it. If a State, therefore, enacts
such laws and fails to organize a service for their enforcement,
it is betraying those whom it pretends to favor. Let us again,observe the tables: We find that twenty-one out of twenty-eight
Republican States, or 75 per cent., have established    factoryinspection services. We also find that three out of seventeen Democratic States, or 18 per cent., have factory-inspection services. In
examining the other subjects of labor legislation which follow we
must not lose sight of the fact that only three of the Democratic
States have factory-inspection services organized for the purpose 
of carrying out the provisions of the labor laws which will be under
consideration.
Inspection of mines.-Public inspection of mines is required on
the same grounds as inspection of factories. The tables show that
fifteen of the twenty-eight Republican States and nine of the seventeen Democratic States have established this service.
Child labor in factories. — Ever since the introduction of the factory system, over a century ago, the greatest sufferers from the
greed of inconsiderate and cruel employers have been the helpless
children, who often at a tender age tire placed in factories and
are ruined physically, morally, and mentally by their work, their
surroundings, and their loss of opportunity for education. It is
a principle recognized in all civilized countries that children under
12 years of age should not be employed in factories, and in nearly
all European countries laws have been passed placing a limit of
12 or 14 years upon such child labor. In our. country thirty-one
out of the forty-five States prohibit the employment of children
under 12 years of age from working in factories. Of these thirtyone States twenty-one are Republican and ten are Democratic. In
other words, 68 per cent. of all the Republican States and only
32 per-tent. of the Democratic States have laws prohibiting children
under io years of age from working in factories.
Child labor imiintes.-Twenty-four States prohibit the employment of children under 12 years of age in mines. Of these, sixteen
are Republican and eight are Democratic States.




AMAN EARNS DOUBLE AS MUCH IN AMERICA AS IN
ENGLAND;
xtract from remarks8 of Hon. WM. D. OWEN of Indiana, page
6547 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Session.
A man earns double as much in America as in England and the
rchasing power of a dollar is very nearly equal. The total cost
supplies for a family in America is about 5 per cent. more than
England. The official statistics show that the price of ordinary
nifly supplies are not more than 5 per cent. in the excess here.
pow, you do not comfort a worker greatly to tell him that if he will
te for you he can buy for 95 cents what now costs him a dollar,
pecially if you "tell the truth" that at the same time instead of
tting a dollar for a day's work he will get 50 cents. He is too good
figures to surrender 50 cents in order to save 5 cents. Now, this
per cent. more that a man's family costs him here than in Engad can be lpaid for the entire year by the extra American wages
receives in two weeks. That is, in two weeks' work the amount
wages he receives above what he would get in England pays the
per cent. extra expenses for one year. For the other fifty weeks
the year he can save his extra wages and still furnish his family
e salne tilings that it would require the whole of his wages to
)ply if he lived in England. In other words, if the families lived
ist the same, the American wage-worker will at the end of the year
ve fifty weeks of the extra A merican wages in his pocket. The
sglish workman will not have a dollar.
TO GET THE BEST WORK O1T OUT OF MEN.-DIVERSIFY
INDUSTB,."
2tract front remarks of Horn. THOMAS B. REED of Maine, page
4669 of daily Congressional Records, 50th Congress, 1st Session.
There is only one way to get the best work out of men, and that
to give each the work he can do best. You can only accomplish
s by diversifying industry. To diversify industry completely in a
untry such as ours, there is only one way given under Heaven
ong men. To enable the American people themselves to supply
I their wants you must give and assure to the American people the
aerican markets. What does this phrase mean in practical life?
mTeans- that we, the nation, say to capital, "Embark yourself
the manufacture of such and such articles, and you shall have a
arket to the extent of the American people."
(Capital then says to labor, "G-o with me into this new field, all of
u who like this work best, and we will share the results." Then
giins a new industry. Multiply this by hundreds, and you have a
antulity where every man honestly minded will get what on the
le suits him best, and the nation will get the greatest; amount
work from the greatest number.
f:28


I




"WAGES~I THE JNMIT          STATES- AOT TWCE A
HIGH AS!N "EUROPE"'
ERtract from remarks of Hon. H. aROS VEINOR of Ohio,
daily Congressional Record, April 4^ 1904.
WAGES IN THE UNITED STATES AND EUROPE.
Owing to the vastly superior resources of the United States an
the wise legislation which thas protected American industries an
thereby maintained the American standard of living, wages in th
United States are, on the average, about twice as high as in Europ
The following table shows the average daily wage in certain citie
of Europe and America, according to statistics gathered by t}
United States Bureau of Labor:
Great Brit-  Paris,     United
Year,             ain (27 quo-i France (21 States (2
tat ons)  quotations). quotationi;870,... I,._7*..........................
1870.......-1.1 2i 
87.................................,....   1.4,  1.12,
1886....................................... [i  1.839  1.26  '
189.......................................      1.049.82
19 2..................................  1.45  1.84     2.
The latest comparative statistics of wages are contained in a
official report made by the statistical office of the board of trad
and published by order of Parliament in August, 1903. The dal
relate to years between, 1895 and 1909 (mainly to years betwee
1898 and 1901) and pertain to fifteen skilled occupations in tl
chief city and other cities in the United States, Great Britair
France, and Germany, and the totals are as follows (corrected t
a standard year):
Average weekly rates for 15 sklll
trades inCountry.
Chief cities and Other cities an
towns.         towus.
s. I. d.
United States..............................  75=$18.00  69  4  1.i
Great Britain and Ireland.....      42- 10.00)   36   -: 
France......................................  8'=  10.
Germany.............................      24-       -.75  22 
WAGES NEARLY TWICE AS HIGH IN NEW YORK AS I]
LONDON.
It therefore appears that the average wage for the fifteen tradi
is nearly twice as high in New York as in London and more tha
twice as high as in Paris and three times as high as in Berlin. 
the smaller cities the superiority of the United States is equlal
marked, as may be seen in the following comparison:
Ger-           Great Ui It
many.   rance. Brtan   tt
Britain. 1  Sta I tes
m an........................
C  lta  eit  ie s..t........................  1  00  175 
Otfer cities and towns...................  10   15 l   159 I
her~   nd0~ twns.. — 18;0 |   100   159     1
The fact that wages in the United States range three times a
high as in Germany -in the skilled trades is accompanlied by sinilt
vidence for unskilled labor. Thus the German Government relpor
on,workigmen's insuraince against sickness and accident (a co0
pulsory system conducted by the Government) showed that on Jlan
ary 1, 190,  the average daily wage of adult male laborers il t
thirty-three large cities was only 67 cents, in fifty-eight small citi
(places witha population of from 10,000 to' 0,000 'each) 5. cein
while In the, agricultural districts it was 49 cents in- the west a
33 cents in the east.
The' average family tincome was 23 per cent. larger than that
Great Britain, 48 per cent. larger than that in France, and 78 P
cent. larger than that in Germany. But since 1891 wages have r
more rapidly than in France or England.


I
I
I
1
-1
a
I
e
i
t
I(
I
11'i
iIJ
"i
b
1
a
I
I
I
I
I


I


g-29


I






I


"THE PRESENT SCALE OF WAGES WAS UNKNOWN
DURING ANY DEMOCRATIC ADMINISTRATION,"
Extracts from remarks of Hon. CHARLES E. FULLER of Illinois in daily
Congressional Record, February 8, 1904.
Mr. Chairman, I have observed that in the great district which I represent and which is one of the greatest agricultural and also one of the
greatest manufacturing districts in the West-the great factories of that
listprict, Mr. Chairman, during Democratic times, when Cleveland was Presifdeat and the Democratic party controlled both branches of Congress, were
closed or running at half time and with half force. Hundreds and thousands of men in that district were out of employment and could find no
work to do; but when Mr. McKinley was elected in 1896, when the Republican party again came into power, when the odious Wilson bill was repealed
and the Dingley bill became the law of this land, once more the doctrine of
protection was declared as the doctrine under which this Government should
be conducted, those factories opened up, the smoke started again from the
chimneys that had been smokeless before, the people again went to work,
and during the days since 1896 and since 1897, when Mr. McKinley was inruftLrated as President, a period of prosperity started and has continued
since in that district and in that State and throughout this country such as
the world has never known before in the history of this or any other
rtcountry.
My earliest recollections were of another Democratic period, when
James Buchanan was President of the United States, but I have no recollection that in those days we had very much prosperity "in spite of a Democratic Administration." In fact, my recollection and my reading of history
both tell me that during that period of free trade or low tariffs, when
the doctrine of protection had been relegated to the rear, in "spite" of
all that, prosperity &vas not in evidence to any considerable extent. Listen
a moment to what so good a Democratic authority as James Buchanan himself had to say upon that subject. In his message to Congress, December
8, 1857, he used this language:
The earth has yielded her friuts abundantly and has bountifully
rewarded the toil of the husbandman.   Our great staples have commanded high prices, and up to within a brief period our manufacturing,
mineral, and mechanical occupations have largely partaken of the general
prosperity. We have possessed all the elements of material wealth in
rich abundance, and yet, notwithstanding all these advantages, our country, in its monetary interests, is at the present moment in a deplorable
condition. In the midst of unsurpassed plenty in all the productions of
agriculture and in all the elements of material wealth we ftnd our mantufactures suspended, our public works retarded, our private enterprises of
different kinds abandoned, and thousands of useful laborers thrown out
of employment and reduced to want.
Those were the good old Democratic times, and such were the conditions that existed in spite of such fact.
Comparing Republican times of to-day with any period of Democratic
ascendancy of which I have any knowledge, I say again, Yes, we are proud
of the record of the Republican party. tApplause on the Republican side.]
I believe the high rate of wages of the laboring man in this
country is due to the fact that under protective tariff laws the factories
of this country are enabled to run and to qive employment to all men who
desire employment. I believe that when you have a policy of free trade
or a revenue tariff only and the factories are compelled to close and the
laboring man is without work that then in the surplus of labor you can
hire men at anything that will permit them to live. Labor unions never
increased wages when there was no work to be had.
Mr. VAN DUZER. Then, why is it that under the high-tariff sstem
existing at the present time the wages of the men in the silk mills and
In the steel factories are being reduced?  Why is it that throughout New
Eigland, where you have protection as the policy of the Republican party,
wages to-day are on a decline, and the workingman Is receiving less
than he did two or three or four years ago?
Mr. FULLER. Oh, I can answer that without any trouble whatever.
The price of wheat is not always the same; sometimes it goes up and
oMi'etimes it goes down. The law of supply and demand to a great extent
governs these things. Wages may be high to-day, and next year or next
Moith they may be lower. They are higher now than they ever were
ia Democratic times.  Wages will not always be on the same high
Plane that they were last year or the year before. But wages are to-day
hifther upon the average, very much higher, than in any other country in
this world to-day, and that I believe is due to the fact that the Republican
Party is in power, that a Republican tariff law is upon the statute books
of the United States, and that the doctrine of protection prevails. Certain
it is that the present scale of w ages was unknown in this country even
duitng any Democratic Administration.
g-30




"~UNION LABOR INGOVERNMENT WORK." 'PRESi.
IOENT ROOSEVELT'S ATTITUDE."
Extract from remarks of bom   0. H. G1 0   ESV  rOit of Ohio, in daily Con.
gressional Record, April 4, 190.4.,
In his first message to Congress, in 1901i, President Roosevelt recom.
mended that "provision be made to render the enforcement of the eight-hour
law easy and certain," and also that the Government should provide in its
contracts that all work for it should be done under "fair" conditions.
By this expression it is understood th th the President meant that aO
contract should be given or no contractor employed by the Government
who would not agree to pay the union scale of wages; in other words, no
contractor should, in any way, be allowed to obtain a contract from the
Government by lessening the price paid the employees for their labor to
point less than the "fair" or union scale of wages or by, working more than
the usual number of hours per day which had been fixed for the trade.
While 'thus favoring the union standard of wages and hours in Government work the President recognizes the illegality of any discrimination
for or against members of a union. Thus in the case of William A. Miller,
who complained that he was removed from his position of assistant foreman in the Government Printing Office, in violation of the civil-service law,
because be had been expelled from Local Union No. 4 of the International
Brotherhood of Bookbinders, the President ordered Miller's reinstatement
and explained the rule governing public employment in the following cotmmunication to Secretary Cortelyou, in whose charge the President placed
the Investigation:                  OYSTER BAY, N Y., July 13, 1908.
MY DEAR ScsRETARY CnORTELYOU; In accordance with the letter of the
Civil-Service Commission of July 6, the Public Printer will reinstate Mr.
W. A. Miller in his position. Meanwhile I will withhold my final decision
of the whole ease until I have received the report of the investigation,n
Miller's second communication, which you notify me has been begun to-day.
J uly 13.
On the face of the papers presented, Miller would appear to have, been
removed in violation of law. There is no objection to the employees of the
Government Printing Office constituting themselves into a union if they so
desire, but no rules or resolutions of that union can be permitted to override
the laws of the United States, which it is my sworn duty to enforce.
Please communicate a copy of this letter to the Public Printer for his
information and that of his subordinates.
Very truly yours,                  THIEODORE ROOSEVELT.
Hon. GroaRE B. CORnTLYOU, Secretary of Commerce and Labor.
OYSTER BAY, N. Y., July 14, 1903.
MY D     tAR MR. CORTSLYOU: In connection with my letter of yesterday, I
call attention to this judgment and award by the Anthracite Coal Strike
Commission to its report to me of March 18 last:
"It is adjudged and awarded that no person shall be refused employment or in any way discriminated against on account of membership or
non-membership to any labor organization, and that there shall be no discrimination against or interference with any employee who is not a member
of any labor organization by members of such organization."
I heartily approve of this award and judgment by the Commission appointed by me, which itself included a member of a labor union. This commission was dealing with labor organizations working for private employers.
It is, of course, mere elementary decency to require that all the Government Departments shall be handled in accordance with the principle thus
clearly and fearlessly enunciated. Please furnish a copy of this letter both
to Mr. Palmer and to the Civil Service Commission for their guidance....Sincerely, yours,               THEODORE ROOS.EVLT.
Hon. GsOmtEa B. CoRTEaLYOU, Secretary of Commerce and Labor.
Mr. Palmer, the Public Printer, on Wednesday, July 16, notified Mr.
Miller that lie had been reinstated and might report for duty any day.
On September 29, 1903, the President gave a; hearing to members of
the executive council of the American Federation of Labor on the subject
of pending labor legislation. Following is the official account of the hearing:                                            SEPTEMaIBER 29, 1903.
Pursuant to the request of Samuel Gompers, president of the American
Federation of Labor, the President granted an interview this evening to the
following members of the executive council of that body: Mr. Samuel Guompers, Mr. James Duncan,   r. John Mitchell, Mr. James O'Connell, and Mr.
Frank Morrison, at which various subjects of legislation in the interests of
labor,, as well as Executive action, were discussed. Concerning the case of
William A. Miller, the President made the following statement:
"I thank you and your committee for your courtesy, and I appreciate
the opportunity to meet with you. It will always be a pleasure to see you or
any representatives of your organizations or of your federation as a whole.
"As regards the Miller case, I have little to add to what I have already
said. In dealing with it I ask you to remember that I am dealing purely
with the relation of the Government to its employees. I must govern coy
action by the laws of the land, which I am sworn to administer, and whic(h
differentiate any case in which the Government of the United States is a
party from all other rase-s whatsoever. These laws are enacted for the benefit of ihe whole people, and can not and must not be construed as permitting discrimination against some of the people. I am President of all the
people of the United States, without regard to creed, color, birthplace, occiipatton, or social condition, * My aim is to do equal and exact justice as
among them all. In tlhe employment and dismissal of men in the Government service I can no more recognize the fact that a man does or does not
belonguto a union, as being for or against him, than I can recognize the
fact that he is a Protestant or a Catholic, a Jew or a Gentile, as being for
or against im.
"'na the communications sent me by various labor organizations prot        aesting against the retention of Miller in the Government Printing O1cC
the grounds alleged legd are two fold: First, that he is a non-union man; second.
that he" is not "personally fit. The question of his personal fitness is one
to be settled In the routine of administrative detail, and can not be allowed
to conflict or to complicate the larger question of governmental discrimination for or against him or any other man because he is or is not a member
of.:a union. This is the only question now before me for decision,. and as to
this my decision is final." 
In 'the'foregoing statement of policy President toosevelt merely reilterated 'tis wel-nown conviction that the law muAt be administered with h -
solutely no discrimination.
g-81




4THE PROTECTIVE POLICY GIVES THE LARGEST
POSSIBLE REWARD TO LABOR."
Elrracts from remarks of HIon. TIVILLIAMI  McKINLEY, of Ohio,
in House of Representatives, and printed in daily Congressional Record, May 7, 1890.
The accumulations of the laborers of the country have increased,
and the working classes of no nation in the world have such splendid
deposits in savings banks as the working classes of the United States.
Listen to its own story. The deposits of all the savings banks of
New England in 1886 equaled $554,532,434. The deposits in the saving's banks of New York in 1886 were $482,686,730. The deposits in
the savings banks of M5assachusetts for the year 1887 were $302,948,624, and the number of depositors was 944,778, or $320.67 for each
depositor. The savings banks of nine States have in nineteen years
increased their deposits $628,000,000. Our operatives deposit $7 to
the English operative's.y1. These vast sums represent the savings of
the men whose labor has been employed under the protective policy,
which gives, as experience has shown, the largest possible reward to
labor. * * *
With a debt of over $2,050,000,000 when the war terminated, holding
ont to the protective laws against Democratic opposition, we have reduced that debt at an average rate of more than $62,000,000 each
year, $174,000 every twenty-four hours, for the last twenty-five years,
and what looked to be a burden almost impossible to bear has been
removed under the lepublican fiscal system until now it is $1,020,000,000, and with the payment of this vast sum of money the nation
hlas not been impoverished. The individual citizen has not been burdened or bankrupted. National and individual prosperity have gone
steadily on, until our wealth is so great as to be almost incomprehensible when put into figures. * * *
Notwithstanding the complaint that is made about the decadence
of our foreign commerce, Mulhall informs us that Great Britain's
proportion in the foreign commrerce in 1830 was 27.2 per cent. of the
commnerce of the world; but in 1870 it had fallen to 24.5 per cent.,
and in 1880 Great Britain's proportion was but 21.2 per cent. In
1S;0 the United States had but 3.7 per cent. of the commerce of the
warld; in 1870 it had risen to 9.2 per cent.; and in 1880 she had 11.5
p)er cent. of the foreign commerce of the world.
While Great Britain lost between 1870 and 1880 13 per cent. of her
trlade the United States gained l 22 per cent. And if the United States
would give the same encouragement to her merchant marine and her
steamship lines as is given by other nations, this commerce on the
5s;; under the American flag would increase and multiply. When
tie United States will expend from her treasury from five to six
mli!ions a year, as do France and Great Britain, to maintain their
lseamship lines, our ships will plow every sea in successful competition with the ships of the world.


Ig-32.,.




irS ~Mo::op I7~ \                 usi   m     PRE.
FE ANYBODY MAKES A PROFIT OUT OF US, WE PRE
PER THAT IT SHALL BE THOSE WHO GIVE
GOOD WAGES TO AMERICAN
WORKMEN."
Extract from remarks of Ho.W.        W. D. KELLEY, of Penn sylvia,
in House of tRpresentatives, March 25, 1870. (Congressionall
Globef, Appendix, page 214, 41st Congress, 2d Session.)
PROOF THAT PROTECTION CHEAPENS GOODS.
The gentleman from Indiana (Mr. Kerr) speaking of my argumeft on Bessemer rails, said that as America produced but 30,000
tons per annum, the establishment of her works could have had no
inflence upon the price of English rails, because the quantity produced wa relatively so small. I propose to illustrate the fallacy of
that argument by the contents of the little box I hold in my hand.
So long as America was unprepared to make Bessemer steel no Englishman would sell a ton of rails for less than $150. I have told the
stor  to this committee once, and will not now repeat the details.
But when in 1865 the works of Griswold & Co., at Troy, New York,
and the Freedom Works, at Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, were ready to
deliver Bessemer rails, Englishmen, who had been swearing that they
could not sell them at less than $150 a ton immediately offered them at
$130. And when our works increased from two to six they dropped
their price down to $100, and, if necessary, they will drop it to $50,
or until they force the owners of our establishments to abandon the
production and apply their premises and machinery to some other
use.
Their policy is to crowd out our works; or, as Lord Brougham
advised in 1815, just after the close of our war, "to spend any
amount of money to strangle in the cradle the infant industries the
exigencies of the war had called into existence in the United States."
They wil spendany amount of money to crowd out these five or six
Bessemer rail-works, and then put the price up to figures that will
be satisfactbry to themselves.
I said I would illustrate the argument by the contents of a small
box I hold in my hand. It contains a very few small articles and
specimens of the material of which they are made. They are gastips, of a kind that till quite lately were made exclusively in Germany. They then sold in our market at from $6 to $12 per gross. I
cannot tell you whether this afforded so grand a profit as Bessemer
rails'did at $150 gold per ton. But, as recent events prove, it must
have paid splendidlW. Since the cloe o the  arhe war there has been found
in the interior of Tennessee a deposit of talc, of which these are
pecimens (holding up small pieces). This is carried, not in foreig
-ships,;but by our transportation companies, to Boston,:giving busi-:nes to our railroad companies between the heart of 'ennessee and
Massachusetts. There Yankee ingenuity converts the talc into gas
ips, which will not corrode, such;as the Germans make, and for
which they had the monopoly of our market. These American imen
have embarked a large capital in this enterprise and employ lma;ny
people in Tennessee and Massachusetts. They are busy nmakinl
these little gas tips and creating a market for Western grain, and
converting newly-arrived laborers from Europe into well-paid Amerlan workingmen.
What effect has their enterprise had on the price of porcelain
gas tips? The German manufacturers who could not sell them for:less than $ to $10 a gross now suddenly drop their price and are
flooding the market with them at $.  a gross. At this price they will
soon destroy their Yankee rival and regain their old monopoly.
'^yNowl are we wrowtg when we say that if anybody makes a profit
out of  s we prefer that it shall: be t ehos who feed on Amer ica
wheat, wear American wool, give good wages to American work1et/
The little gas-tip illustrates the truth that American competittion
cheapens small foreign commoditiesquite as well as    i wghtier
artile of steel rails.


I


g-3S




CONSTANT EMPLOYMIENT AND.WELL PAID LABOR
PRODUCE GENERAL PROSPERITY."
Ftraot from speech of July 25 and  7, 184.6, by Hon: DANIEL
rVEBSTER of Massachusetts, in the Senate of the United States.
(Congressional Globe, pp. 1143, 1151, 29th Congress, 1st Ses.)
But, sir, before I proceed further, I will take notice of what
palI)lrs to be some attempt, latterly, by the republication of opinwilns and expressions, arguments and speeches of mine, at an earlier
and latter period of my life, to place me in a position of inconsistency
on this subject of the protective policy of the country. Mr. Presi(lelt, if it be an inconsistency to hold an opinion upon a subject of
puhlio- policy to-day in one state of circumstances and to hold a
lifferent opinion upon the same subject of public policy to-morrow,
in a different state of circumstances, if that be an inconsistency, I
admjait its applicability to myself. * * * * The interest of every
ilaboring communlity requires diversity of occupation, pursuits, and
ojencts of industry. The more that diversity is multiplied or extended the better. To diversify employment is to increase employmeant and to enhance wages. And, sir, take this great truth; place
it onI the title page of every book of political economy intended
for the use of the United States; put it in every Farmer's Almanac;
let it be the heading of the column in every Mechanics' Magazine;
proclaim it everywhere, and make it a proverb, that where there is
work for the hands of men there will be work for their teeth. Where
there is employment there will be bread. It is a great blessing to
the poor to have cheap food, but greater than that, prior to that, and
of still higher value, is the blessing of being able to buy food by
honest and respectable employment. Employment feeds, and clothes,
(nd instructs. Employment gives health, sobriety, and moralE. Constant employment and well-paid labor produce in a country like ours
general prosperity, content, and cheerfulness. Thus happy have we
seen the country. Thus happy may we long continue to see it.
*    * * *I hope I know more of the Constitution of my country
thnl" I did when I was twenty years old, I hope I have contemplated
its great objects more broadly. I hope I have read with deeper intere st the sentiments of the great men who framed it. I hope I have
stUdtlied with more care the condition of the country when the contCetion assembled to form it. *  * *     And now, sir, allow me
to say that I am quite indifferent, or, rather, thankful, to those condoetors of the public press who think they cannot do better than
oIw and then spread my poor opinions before the public.
g-34




"TO DIVERSIFY EMPLOYMENT IS TO INCREASE EM
PLOYMENT AND TO ENHANCE WAGES."
Extracts from remarks f    o.      GALLI           of onNew Hrapn
shire, in daily Congressional Record, May 16, 1894.
Daniel Webster made one of his greatest speeches, running throug
three days, July 25, 27 and 28, 1846. He said:
"The interest of every laboring community requires diversity of
occupations, pursuits, and objects of industry. The more that diver.
sity is multiplied, even extended, the better. To diversify employ.
ment is to increase employment and to enhance wages. And, sir,
take this great truth; place it on the title-page of every book of
Political Economy intended for the use of the United States; put
it in every Farmers' Almanac; let it be the heading of the column
of every Mechanics' Magazine; proclaim it everywhere, and mrake
it a proverb that where there is work for the hands of men there
will be work for their teeth. Where there is employment there will
be bread. It is a great blessing to the poor to have cheap food, but
greater than that, prior to that and of still higher value, is the blessing of being able to buy food by honest and respectable employment.
Employment feeds and clothes and instructs.   Employment gives
health, sobriety, and morals  Constant employment and well-paid
labor produce, in a country like ours, general prosperity, content and
cheerfulness."
"You indulge in the luxury of taxing the poor man and the laborer!
That is the whole tendency, the whole character, the whole effect of
the bill. One may see everywhere in it the desire to revel in the
delight of taking away men's employment. It is not a bill for the
people or the masses. It is not a bill to add to the comforts of
those in middle life, or of the poor. It is not a bill for employment.
It is a bill for the relief of the highest and most luxurious classes
of the country, and a bill imposing onerous duties on the great
industrious masses, and for taking away the means of living from
labor everywhere throughout the land."
In a speech in Albany, in August, 18,44, he said: "In Colonial times, 
and during the time of the Convention, the idea was held up that
domestic industry could not prosper, manufactures and the mechanic
arts could not advance, the condition of the common country could
not be carried up to any considerable elevation, unless there should
be one government to lay one rate of duty upon imports throughout
the Union; regard to be had, in laying this duty to tohe protection of
American labor and industry. I defy the man in any degree conversant with the history, in any degree acquainted with the annals
of this country from 1787 to 1789, when the Constitution was adopted,
to say that protection of American labor and industry was not a
leading, I might almost say, the leading motive South as well as
North, for the formation of the new government. Without that
provisiot in the Constitution it never could have been adopted."
In a speech on the 8th of July, 1833, he said: "From the close of
the War of the Revolution there came a period of depression and distress on the Atlantic coast, such as the people had hardly felt during the sharpest crisis of the war itself. Ship-owners, ship-huilders,
merchanics, artisans, all were destitute of employment, and some of
them destitute of bread. British ships came freely, and British ships
came plentifully; while to American ships and American products
there was neither protection on the one side, nor the equivalent of
reciprocal free trade on the other. The cheaper labor of England
supplied the inhabitants of the Atlantic shores with everythling.
Ready-made clothes among the rest, front the crown of the head
to the soles of the feet, were for sale in every city. All these things
came fre  f from any general system of imposts."
g-35




"UP-TO-DATE METHODS OF PROTECTION."
rItracts from remarks of Hon. M. E. OLMSTED, of Pennsylvania,
in daily Congressional Record.
THE MOSELEY COMMISSION.
M r. Moseley's commission was composed of twenty-three men, seeIetaries or leading officers of the trades unions representing the
rincipal industries of the United Kingdom. Among the associaions represented were cotton spinners, engineers, compositors, bookinders, iron and steel workers, carpenters, shipbuilders, plasterers,
aper makers, tailors, furnishing tradesmen, cutlery operatives, boot
nd shoe makers, lithographers, printers, leather workers, iron founers, bricklayers, shipwrights, weavers and several general trades
ouncilors and federations. Each of these twenty-three representaives of great labor organizations was required to present a report
pon his observations of conditions in the industries of the United
tates. Mr. Moseley himself, on the opening page of the report, says:
* * *   In the 'United States one hears a. great deal against
trusts" (as they are known, or what we term "large corporations"),
ut personally I am rather inclined to welcome these concerns, beause large organizations that employ capital are best able to comete in manufactures on the most economical lines, can fearlessly
aise wages within given limits, are in position to combat unhealthy
ompetition, can provide up-to-date machinery ad libitum, can erect
anitary and well-ventilated workshops, and generally study better
he comfort and well-being of the workmen than small individual
anufacturers struggling against insufficient capital and old machinry, It is in the organization of capital on the one hand and a thorugh organization of labor on the other that I believe the solution
f industrial problems will be found. *  *  *
In my previous trips to America I had been favorably struck by
he up-to-date methods of production there, both froml a business
tandpoint and as regards the equipment of their workshops. The
anufacturers there do not hesitate to put in the very latest machinry at whatever cost, and from time to time to sacrifice large sums
y scrapping the old whenever improvements are brought out. Laboraing machinery is widely used everywhere and is encouraged by the
ions and vwelcomed by the ren, because experience has shown them
uat in reality machincry is their best friend. It saves the workman
numerous miseries, raises his wages, tends toward a higher standard
f living, and, further, rather creates work than reduces the number
'f hands employed. In England it has been the rule for generations
ast that as soon as a man earns beyond a certain amount of wages
he price of his work is cut down, and he, finding that working harder
and running his machine quicker brings no larger reward, slackens
is efforts accordingly.
In the United States the manufacturers rather welcome large earnigs by the men so long as they themselves can make a profit, argutng that each man occupies so much space in the factory, which
rpresents so much capital employed, and therefore that the greater
the production of these men the greater must be the manufacturers'
rofit, * * *  The United States has advanced by leaps and bounds.
She is beginning to feel the beneficial effects of the education of her
I*msses and an enormous territory teeming with natural resources as
yet bt b meagerly developed. At the present time the home market
f tie United States is so fully occupied with its own developments
hat the export trade has as yet been comparatively little thought of;
ait as time goes on and the numnerous factories that are being erected
all over the country come into full bearing, Amterica is bound to beatrie the keenest of competitors in the markets of the world. *  * *
I-ow is it that the American manufacturer can afford to pay wages
50 per cent., 100 per cent., and even more, in some instances both
Ways, anld yet be able to successfully compete in the markets of the
world? The answer is to be found in small economies which escape
the ordinary eye. That the American workman earns higher wages
is beyond question. As a consequence, the average married man owns
the ilouse he lives in, which not only gives him a stake in the country, but saves payment of rent, enabling him either to increase his
lavings or to purchase further comforts. Food is as cheap (if not
Cheaper) in the United States as in England, whilst general necessaries may, I think, be put on the same level. * * *  It is generally admitted that the American workman, in consequence of laborsavilng machinery and the excellence of the factory organization, does
alt aneed to put forth any greater effort in his work than is the case
here, if as much. He is infinitely better paid, therefore better housed,
ed, clothed, and, moreover, is much more sober.
g-36, 




"iAMERICAN WORKERS PAID BETTER AND LIVE BET
TER THAN THE ENGLISH WORKERS."
tra     frm rem arks of tion. M. E. OLMSTED, of Pennsylhani
in daily 'Congressional Record.
Mr. W. Dyon, of the Amalgamated Paper Makers' Unioin,
the question, 'Are the American workers better paid than the Eng
lish?" responded: "Yes; they are paid better, and they live bette
than the English workers." To the question, "How does the price o
food in America compare with that in England?" his response was
"There is very little, if any, difference." To the question, "How doe
the average wage in your trade in America, expressed in money, cor
pare with the average wage in England?" his response was: "I shoul
estimate the average wage in American paper mills for skilled labo
to be 25 shillings per week higher and unskilled labor 10 shillings pe
week higher than in England."  To the question, "Are a larger 
smaller proportion of American workingmen dependent upon t
public purse than in England?" his answer was: "A much small
proportion."  To the question, "Do you consider the general cons
tions of life of the workman better in America than in England?
his response was: "Yes. The great majority of American workm
certaily follow their occupation under more favorable condition
than the English workmen, there being more attention paid to san
tary arrangements, ventilation, etc., which, of course, tends to kee
a man fresh and more active."
Mr. C. W. Bowerman, of the London Society of Compositor
to the question, "Are American workers better off than the English?
said, "American workers are able to keep a better table; food, mea
etc., being considerably more reasonable in price than in this coun
try; fruit also is very plentiful and exceedingly cheap. They are
well clothed and at about the same cost as here." To the questio
"How does the average wage in your trade in America, expressed i
money, compare witth e average wage in England?" his respons
was, "An average of about $1 per day more than in England." T
the question, "Can the careful, sober, steady man, whilst keeping him
self efficient, save more in America than in England?" his respon
was,. "Wages being generally much higher, and taking into accou
the difference in the cost of rent, I am satisfied that a careful, sobe
steady man is in a considerably better position to save money 
America than in England."
Mr. W. Coffey, of the London Consolidated Society of Journe
men Bookbinders, t the question, "Are the American workers bette
off than the English, and how does the price of food in Americ
compare with that in England?" answered:
"So far as I was able to observe there is a general appearance 
good health and physical vigor amongst both men and women worke
in our trade, leading to the inference that they are on th:e whol
well cared for and properly nourished-a proof that food is n
higher than with us. Meat has risen considerably in tile last 
years, but, notwithstanding this result of the trust, the prices r:an
about the same as our market rates."
To the question, "How does the average wage in your tradc 
America, expressed in money, compare with the average rate
England?" his response was, "Wages rule at from 70 to 100 per cen
higher than in England." To the question, "How does the value 
the American wage compare with that of the English, cost of livi
being taken into account?" his response was, "The workman in 0
itr::    Am-eriea is qute 25 per cent. better off tha his English co0
le~Fagu. A man who is careful, sober, and steady can certainly s,.more money than is possible here.",The Moseley Industrial Commission, composed of officers of
leading labor unions of England, visited the United States in l
lach member was required to carefully investigate and report 
ox  ions fof American laobor in the industry which his union rep
s:and al  to make specific answers to certain questions s?
plied to eaci member of the Commission. The words here qut
are tto  the repots       tted by, these men after their retinri 
England: 
g-47


I




"ALL AIMING AT ELEVATING THE LABORING
CLASSES AND: MAK ING THEM FEEL
THAT THEY WERE CITIZENS."
tract from remarks of ion. M. E. OLMS~TED, of Pennsylvania,
in daily Congressional Record.
Mr. 1. R. Taylor, an officer of the Operative Bricklayers' Society,
Eingland, responding to the question, '"How does the average wage
youlr trade in America, expressed in moniey, comrpare with the
erage wage in Ernglland?" said: "'Much higher. The lowest wage in
gland is 13 cents per hour and the highest 21 cents, while the
west wage paid in any of the towns I visited in America was 45
nts per hour." To the question, "flow does the value of the Ameran wage compare with that of the English, cost of living being
ken into account?" he said: "I feel that I am well within the mark
saying that the American bricklayer is quite 50 per cent. better
Othan the English bricklayer."'
MIr. M. Deller, representative of the National Association of Oper ae P1lasterers, in response to the question, "Are the American workbetter off than the English?" said: "It naturally follows that with
ages much higher in America than in Einlland those who desire
live well can do so much easier than in England." rTo the quesoi, "How does the price of food in America comnpare with that in
ngland?" his response was: "Favorably."  To the question, "How
es the average wage in your trade in America, expressed in money,
nmpare with the average wage in England?" his response was: "More
an double." To the question, "How does the value of the American
age compare with that of the English, cost of living beingr taken
to account?" his response was: "At least o25 per cent. better."
Mr. 1. Crawford, of the General Union of Operative Carpenters
d Joiners, states, in concluding his general discussion, that "in
ndon the average weekly wage for joiner arid carpenter is ~2 2s.; board and lodging, 15s., leaving a balance of ~1 7s. 6d. In New
ork the wages, he says, "are, for forty-four hours (as against fortyght in London), ~5 3s. 6d.; board, ~1l 9s. 2cd., leaving a balance of
3 14s. Hence the American can save nearly double, though he
orlis four hours less per week."  To the question, "How does the
erage wage in your trade compare in America, expressed in money,
ith the average wage in England?" his response was, "Very much
igimer." To the question, "Can the careful, sober, steady man save
ore money in America than in England?" his response was, "Yes; if
chooses certainly he can."  To the question, "Do you consider
e general conditions of life of the workman better in America
an in England?" his response was, "Yes; I found there was plenty
f employment and generally much better paid. I found all classes
iming at elevating the laboriang classes and making them feel that?cv were citizens with dtties to perform to the State."
Mr. Harry Ham, of the National Amalgamated Furnishing Trades
ssociation, responding to certain of the inquiries, and answering the
lestion, "Are the American workers better off than the English?"
Csponded, "Yes." To the question, "H"1ow does the price of food in
merica compare with that in England?" his response was, "A trifle
igher, but not a great difference." To the question, "Do more workrs, relatively, own the houses they live in than is the case in Engand?" his answer was, "Yes; they are receiving better wages, and
ipltoymnent is more secure." To the question, "How does the averge w age in your trade, expressed in money, compare with the averg Nvage in England?" his response was, "The hours worked in A ierRa vary from  forty-four to sixty, wages from  $2.25 to $3.75; in
ngland the hours from forty-eight to fifty-five, wages from 71id. to
1/4d per hour."  To the question, "How does the value of the
merican wage compare with that of the English, cost of living
ir taken into account?" his response was, "'Most favorably." To
h question, "Can the, careful, steady man save more in America
hain England?" his response was, "'Undoubtedly."
Tlhe Moseley Industrial Commission, composed of officers of the
Cd^ing labor unions of England, visited the United States in 1903.
act maember was required to carefully investigate and report upon
alditions of American labor in the industry which_.his union repremteal, and also to ma;ke specifie answers to certain questions suplied to each member of the Commission. The words here quoted are
r     the reports submitted by these men after their return to En

g-38




"AMERICAN WORKERS BETTER OFF THAN THE
ENGLISH."
Extracts from remars of Hon. M. B. OLMSTED of Pennsylvania, in 
Congressional Record.
Mr. C. W. Bowerman, of the London Society of Compositors, to
question, "Are American workers better off than the English?" said, "An
can workers are able to keep a better table; food, meat, etc., being
siderably more reasonable in price than in this country; fruit also is 
plentiful and exceedingly cheap. They are as well clothed and at 
the same cost as here."  To the question, "How does the average wage
your trade in America, expressed in money, compare with the average w
in England?" his response was, "An average of about $1 per day more t
in England." To the question, "Can the careful, sober, steady man, wv
keeping himself efficient, save more in America than in England?" his
sponge was, "Wages being generally much higher, and taking into ac
the difference in the cost of rent, I am satisfied that a careful, sober, ate
man is in a considerably better position to save money in Amterica than
England."
Mr. W. Coffey, of the London Consolidated Society of Journeym
Bookbinders, to the question, "Are the American workers better off t
the English, and how does the price of food in America compare with t
in England?" answered:
So far as I was able to observe there is a general appearance of go
health and physical vigor amongst both men and women workers in 
trade, leading to the inference that they are on the whole well cared
and properly nourished-a proof that food is not higher than with us. M
has risen considerably in the last few years, but, notwithstanding this
sult of the trust, the prices range about the same as our market rates.
To the question, "How does the average wage in your trade in Amer
expressed in money, compare with the average rate in England?" his:ponse was, "Wages rule at from 70 to 100 per cent. higher than in E
iand."  To the question, "How does the value of the American wage co
pare with that of the English, cost of living being taken into account?"l
response was, "The workman in our trade in America is quite 25 per ce
better off than his English colleague. A man who is careful, sober, a
steady can certainly save more money than is possible here."
James Cox, Secretary of the Associated Iron and Steel Workers
Great Britain, said in h.is report:
It was my first visit to America. I could not avoid many preconcel
ideas. I had been led to expect one perpetual rush and hustle prevadi
every aspect of life. I was also led to believe that this hustle and rush pe
meated and actuated all kinds of workmen in every department of lab
The cost of living was another matter upon which I had wrong impressio
To the ordinary traveler the difference will be perhaps two to one, but
the ordinary workingman the cost of living is not so much higher
America as we are led to believe. *     *  The total production of p
ron in the United States in 1901 was 15,878.354 tons. *  *     I In 
production of these enormous quantities It is generally thought that t
United States Steel Corporation has a complete monopoly,
I remember well the panic caused by the reports of its formation. 7
fact of a billion-dollar steel trust being formed was such an unheard-of a
gigantic combination as to almost turn the brains of English manuf
urers. *   *  *  Manufacturing prices had sharply receded in the Unit
States Just at that period-October, 1900-and the American manufactur
taking advantage of our abnormally high prices, slipped in and complete
winded the English manufacturer. The pity is that several of theo ee
recovered. The Briti'h iron trade and the workmen engaged in it wouid
nfinitely better off if an earthquake could swallow up many of the woriks
manufatctrers who bleed their works to death in times of good trade a
grind their workmen in periods of adversity.
Large trusts have their inherent defects, but I am convinced froma
investigations th  the workman has less to fear in the long run from
operatios o concentrated capital than he has from the Impecunious e
ployer in his frantic efforts to dip into the wages of his underpaid workru
*:0 *  *  During the years of depression from 1893 to 189T American 
dustry was much more depressed than our own; failures and bankruptcl
were common, and a general demoralization of trade existed xnequaled it 
tensity throughout the world.  The present cycle, unprecedented in t
United States, has lasted longer and contained greater elements of stabiii1
than in our own country, and to a far greater degree than in BelgiUm 
Germany. *    *  *  In the matter of wages the American workaan is 
better off than in t his country. *  *  * The question may be askied 
it osssibe for British producers to compete in the American marketi
confess I thin   not so long as the present tariff exists.
Thei Mos ey Industrial Commission, composed of officers of the led
labor:unions of England, visited the:United -States in 1902. Each mea0
was r   red to carefully nvestigate and report upon conditions of Armeri
labor in the industry whis union represented, and also to make Sehe
answers to certain questins supplied to each member of the1 Com1i5m0
Te word here q-uoted aw  from tAhe reports submitted by these meO
their freturnf to  gla e
~"~    ~:~    ~~t~  ~a~:;lfs~:~;t~t-:~Oi~::  WU;feZ;~  ~:;-:e
iXt0:a g - '9 


I




000,000 OF MEN WHO WENT OUT OF EMPLOYjENT WITH THE REVISION OF THE TARIFF BY
THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY FOUND EMPLOYMENT IN THE ENACTMENT
OF THE DINGLEY LAW."
crCts from remarks of Hon. P. P. CAMPBELL of Kansas, in daily Conircssionato Record, April 1, 190-4.
yfr. Chairman, we have seen the first half century of our country's
ry rising under the protective policy to prosperity and falling under
ff revislon by the Democratic party to adversity. A condition of prosty canme with the policy of protection and a condition of adversity came
jthe theory of free trade was yielded to, and this has been without an
It is not strange, then, that among the first laws enacted by the Reican party was a law putting into effect the policy of protection-.licy that was sustained for almost a third of a century after its adoption
And yet, if we are to believe anything alleged and deliberately deed by the Democratic party, we must believe that the farmers of the
th and West have been robbed through all these years to hothouse into'
/perity and wealth the industries of others.
r. Chairman, the fact is that no like period in the history of this
ny other country has ever witnessed such marvelous development of
kurces and such unparalleled prosperity of industry. Agriculture and
ufacture have grown up and prospered together. The farmer has a
ket at home for his produce.  The manufacturer has not had to go
[ad with his wares. Both have prospered by practicing the profitable
omy of eliminating distances from the question of trade. The policy
rotection has preserved the American market for the products of Amerimanifacturers, and American manufacturers have made markets for the
ldcts of American farmers, and together they have established the high
dard of American living and made possible a high scale of American.cs. [Applause on the Republican side.]
The farmer of the West has learned and the farmer of the South
ht to learn that when the factory is closed he not only loses customers
his products, but also meets additional competitors in his production.
workman, losing his employment in the factory, settles upon a truck
and becomes a producer of the products he formerly bought from the
er. The prosperity of the farmer depends upon the prosperity of those
bv his products.
But in 1892, in the midst of plenty, surrounded by unusual conditions
prosperity, the Democratic party raised the old banner of opposition to
protective policy and again asked for an opportunity to revise the tariff.
policy of protection wras then called a system of robbery that made the
richer and the poor poorer, and hothoused into prosperity one industry
he expense of another. The people had forgotten their country's history
said: "We'll try it."  The depression and ruein, that was inaugurated
t that tarif revision by the Democratic party is vivid in the minds of all.
is impossible to exaggerate the condition of devastation that followed
in the ruins of every industry throughout the land. Banks suspended,
lories closed, furnaces drew their fires, mills suspended work, agriculture
prostrated, industry of all kinds languished, values of farm products
Tfarem animals went downward, farm values went to a low ebb, values
i11 coemmodities went down to the ruin of all industry.
There was little or no incentive to work upon the farm and nothing to
In the factory. This wreck of industry resulted in the loss of employt to w.ore than 3,000,000 of workingmen, and those who were not let
f em(etployment entirely were working upon less than one-half time.
Blut, Mr. Chairman, it did not take long to get enough of the Gormana0n tariff revision, and the election of 1896 called upon the Republican
ty to again give the American people the benefits of the protective policy.
7lhe Dingley act restored that policy, and cwith that restoration came a
5o5 Of prosperity. The whistle blew, and idle labor found its way to
'str'es that were opening their doors throughout the land. Smokestacks
'ghoait the country began again to emit in ceaseless streams the emblem
a conltry's prosperity, and the hum of spindles made a song of gladthat echoed throughout the land. The 3,000,000 of men twho went out
70*Plonmenltt with te revision of the tariff by the Democratic party found
Pl:t?!e nt in the enactment of the Dinglcy law by the Republican party
a million and a half have been added to those who have employment
tlie dtustries of the country. Agriculture revived; banks rechartered
O~enlefl; industry of every kind acquired new life and energy. Every
o industrial life became a field of industrial activity. The railroads
the country added hundreds and thousands of men to their employees,
a(oring to take care of the commerce of the people.:I  ~;4:




"THE TERRIBLE EXPERIENCES OF FREE TRADE,
Extract from remnark  of Hon. CIARLEjS DICK of Ohio, in daily Cotr
aional Record, June 9, 1900.
i"LEST WE rOBtGET" —A           EW PACTS ASBOUT 18938-1
WHICH WORKINGMEN SHOULD ZEMEMEBE3 I2N 1
Mr. Speaker, the voters of the United States are about to be cal
upon to determine which party shall control the affairs of the Guoe
ment during the next four years. It seems scarcely possible that the t
rible experiences of free trade could be so soon forgotten, but as this see
to be; the only assumption upon upon  hich their votes can again be asked
those dangerous propositions I propose to put on record a few extra
from that generally accepted and always accurate authority, the Americ
Cyclopedia, on conditions which existed during the Democratic period, 18
1896, in which the actual experiment of free trade was made.
[From Appleton's Annual Cyclopedia, 1893, 1894, and 1895.]1
July 18, 1893: Denver, Colo.; four banks close their doors and th
are runs on other financial institutions.
July 19: More, banks close their doors.
July 22: Two bank failures in Milwaukee and runs on banks in ma
other places.
July 24: More bank failures in the West,
July 26:   New York; two stock exchange firms fail.
July 27:   Ten banks suspend, most of.them   Northwestern. Ot
business failures reported.
July 28: More failures and suspensions, including nine banks in
West and one in Kentucky.
August 1: Collapse of the Chicago provision deal. Many failures
commission houses. Great excitement in the board of trade.
August 8:   The Chemical Bank, one of the strongest in the count~
is unable to fill its weekly orders for small currency.
August -: Madison Square Bank suspends.
August i7: Much excitement on east side New York among Hebr
laborers..Police called out.
August 22: Encounter between anarchists and socialists averted
police In New York.
August 23: Meeting of anarchists broken up by police.
August 30: Kansas coal miners' strike ended with nothing gained,
January 15, 1894: Secretary of the Treasury Carlisle announces
intenttion to issue bonds.
January 17:    'Ihe Secretary of the Treasury offers a $50,000,0
loan for public subscriptions, according to his announced intentions.
January 24:   Strike in Ohio of 10,000 miners.
January 27: A mob of foreign miners destroy property at Brantvil
Pa., and elsewhere.
February 16:    Many New York silk factories close on account
strike.
February 18: In Ohio all the mines of the Massillon district closed
strike.. February 20: In Boston a riotous assemblage of unemployed workm
dispersed by police.
March 2: Six thousand miners in Jackson County, Ohio, out of
ployment.
Paterson, N. J.:  General strike among the silk weavers.
March 3:   In West Virginia striking miners burn the railroad brid
and commit other lawless acts.
March 13: At Paterson, N. J., riuoteus proceeding on the part of t
striking silk weavers.
March 17: In Colorado Governor Waite orders State troops to Cripp
Creek to suppress mining troubles,
March 20: In Boston a large body of unemployed workingmen marn
to the State House and demand employment.
March 24:    A movement inaugurated in various parts of the Nor
ern States, known as, the Army of the Commonwealth. Coxeyites, etc., p
posing marching to Washington and demanding help at the hands of Co
gress.
March 81: Coxeyltes are a source of terror to certain Western tovw
upon which they quarter themselves.
April 1: In South Carolina a large force of State militia is dispatcit
to tbe scene of the whisky war in Darlington and Florence.
In Ohio a mob of strikers at East Liverpool becomes riotous and seve
persons are Injured.
April 2:  In Chicago 5,000 plumbers, painters, etc., go on a strike.
At Connellsville, Pa., 5,000 coke workers strike.
April 3: In South Carolina the governor assumes control of the poli
and declares martial law in all the cities of the State,
April 4: ~In Pennsylvania 6 men killed and I wounded in coze riot
April 13: General strike for higher wages on Great Northern  ailafwa
In Alabama: The general council of United Mine Workers orders
strike affecting 8,000 men.
April 16:   Strike on the Great Northern spreads to the Northl
Pacific,
April 20: In Omraha a mob seizes a train of box cars and attempts I
deport Kelly's Industrial; army, but the army refuses to go.
April 21: About 1]50,000 miners stop work in sympathy with the cA
strikers of *Pennsylvania. '
April 28i  Arrival of a division of the Coxey army at Washington;
* A division bof the Ooxeyites arrested at Mount Sterling for holding
a     railway tratin.
United States troops ordered to assist the civil authorities in the f
West..'On' the Great Northern Railroad system  the Knights of Labor
called outoli strike.
Apri 2l: Kelly's army, 1,200 strong, at Des Moines.
April I80: Strike of 2,000 painters in Chicago.
May 1:    Attempted demonstrations of Coxey's army on the steps
the Capitol.
g-41


I




,"POTECTION IS 'HE BEST FOR -WORKINGXEN."ONLY POSSIBLE DANGER IN A CHANGE
O01 POLICIES,"
trracts from speech by Hon. M. A. HANNA at Chillicothe. Ohio, September 19, 1908, and printed in daily Congressional Record.
Mr. Clarke qualifies his position on the tariff by saying that he would
take the tariff entirely off of every article manufactured by trusts. What
e that mean? Every iron and steel industry in the United States, everyhig connected with the metal trades, with the cotton trades, and in fact
early all of our great industries would come within the scope of his propotion.
industries would close until price of labor went down to Europenan level.
Why, is there any intelligent man among the workingmen of my State
who does not know what would be the result of that policy? Absolute free
trade through all the schedules of our tariff would shut up 75 per cent. of
tie industrial institutions of the United States until we could get labor down, the price where i-e could compete with Europe. That is what you are
p (W,/ainst, boys. [Laughter and long-continued cheering.]  Tjuey fooled
you in 1892 by the "clack" about "tin cans."  They pulled the wool over
your eyes about the McKinley bill.
NcKinley's thought was for suffering of those deluded through
demagogy.
But McKinley, although his bill was defeated, never lost courage, and I
have heard him say many times, "Yes, it is hard, but it is no humiliation to
sme, because I know I at right, and I know that soon the people will be
right. I am only thinking of those homes where suffering and want will
enter during the period which must pass before the men come to their sober
seases and learn from bitter experience what it means to have this great
structure of protection, built up in their interests more than any other,
stricken to the ground, and all through the influences of demagogy."
Now, as always, protection' is best for workingmen.
No, as far as your interests lie in the direction of national questions,
let me repeat, the questions have not changed, the principles have not
changed, the results have not changed, and you stand here to-day Just exactly where you stood years ago in this State, when, under the leadership
of the gallant man who believed in the protective policy and in safe money,
you followed him to the polls and year after year registered your verdict,
and that was the policy for the working classes of this State and country.
[Enthusiastic applause.]  *  * *
Oh, my friends, you have had experiences; you have had object lessons,
and the results of those experiences and those lessons have not yet faded
from your memories. There is not a workingman in this country nor in
this State who has not had themn vividly impressed upon him through aveeases that reached his heart, because they have caused misery at his fireside.
The change came, and it became the privilege as well as the duty of our
own dear William McKinley to come to the front with the confidence of the
whole people behind him, and assuming the reins of government at that opportune time, not only by his living example, not only as a result of those
principles which had guided him all his life, but preeminently because duritg that public life he had stood the friend of the workeingman and had
ta.lhte the principles which had filled their minds and fille their n hearts
ith r qratitude until confidence grew so that they were willing to follow him,
Oed, toe a man, they did follow him in 1896 and in 1900. [Long-continued
applause. ]
TlcKinley's   advice would    be, "Remember the policies and
party that brounght prosperity and happiness."
Those principles are living to-day, although he has gone from us forever. [Applause.]  But he has left behind a record whichb every Ohio man
cherishes as a heritage to him. He has left behind an example to that
claes of which I speak, and if he could speak to-day it would be to remind
every man in the State of Ohio who works with his hands: "Remember all
that you have passed through in years gone by; remember how, step by
step, you learned those lessons of economic policy which have brought prosperity and happiness to your hearthstones, and, remembering that, remember the party and the teachers of these policies, who have been your friends
in all the past, and stand to-day where they stood in 1896, when the millenrtlem came. [Great applause.]
Only possible danger in a change of policies.
I say, my friends, that the only danger that can possibly come —and I
Plakae this statement from the standpoint of a business man, and I think I
knew my business [great laughter and applause]; better, at least, than my
friend Clarike does, any way [renewed laughter and great applausel-the
Only danger that can possibly come to the people of this country is through
their own acts, by their own power, and the will to change those policies
awbich have made us what we are to-day.
A suspicion of a change would check industry.
If it were thought that the heresies of Tom Johnson and his socialistic
followers could make any impression upon the people of Ohio so as to change
the political conditionis here, I will tell you what would happen. The men
Who control these great industries, the men whose power and money are
moving all this enormous trade, the men who are associated with them as
Partners, together with the amen who 'work with their hands in this great
tuesineess development, would be the first ones to take notice of that change
If it were imminent, and they would act upon the hyopthesis that it is
better to wait and know the truth than to surmise it and speculate upon it.
The result would be-and I tell you it is true-that if a single cloud came
ltn the commercial sky of this country which looked to any change of
Policy different from what we have had in the last six or seven years, the
change 'would come, the wheels of industry would slow down, and there.Ould be a waAting policy-waiting to know what the result might be; waitP'eg to know whether the American people would tire of the conditions which
hav brought to them wealth and prosperity, just for the sake of a change,!i      r did in 1892, and were prepared to throw aside the benefits and exPerences of those principles and try new pastures or not.:-42


I




REE TRADE AND PROTECTION, FROM THE BRiTIS
WORKMAN S POINT OF VIEW."
Printed in daily Congressional Record.
FREE TRADE AND PROTECTION, FROM THE BRlITIS
WORKMAN'S POINT OF VIEW.
[Extract from paper by M. Maltman Barrioe in Nineteenth Century.]
What is the value of Mr. Chamberlain's proposals to the British work
man? Are they good enough? Are they any good? Are they useless? Art
they actually injurious? Which of the three policies-free trade, free Im.
ports, or protection-is best for him?  Is the best attainable, and how
These are the questions I propose to examine.
The first point to be observed is the condition-the economic condition
— of the worker. What is that condition? I am averse to the use of strong
language —it usually weakens the effect of an argument; but, after al
things should have their proper names, and, in my opinion, the econom
condition of the worker is one of slavery. I know there will be protesto
and objections here, but protests are not evidence. Let us look at the facts,
Nominally, no doubt, the wage-paid worker is a free man, but practically
he is a slave. Indeed, he must work harder and longer, and with less security  for the means of life, than did the average slave in slavery days,
and under penalties for default that the slave had not to fear.  * *
Such is the condition of the worker, a virtual slave, condemned to labor
on a subsistence wage. How is that condition to be altered? How is the
doom to be evaded? To answer that question we must first ascertain why
the worker is in that condition, what is the cause of his economic subjection.
The cause lies upon the surface; it is competition. This competition confronts the worker in two forms-firstly, in the form of the labor of his fellows in the labor market, and, secondly, in the form of the finished article.
the product of foreign labor, in the product market. *  *  *
Some years ago I witnessed a curious incident bearing on this point. A
large building In a leading London thoroughfare was being erected. All the
outer walls were up, but the woodwork was barely started. At this stage
the Society of Carpenters and Joiners, for some reason or other, ordered a
strike, and called their members off this particular job, amongst others. I
observed the society's "pickets" for some time, and saw them turn back
several "blacklegs" who wished to go In to work. So far, well. But presently down the street came, slowly and leisurely, an open lorry laden with
ready-made doors and windows, an importation from Sweden. The gates
of the works swung slowly on their hinges and the lorry, with its load,
passed slowly in. The "pickets," who would have broken the head of any
iEnglishman who had gone in that gate to make those doors and windows.
lifted no finger, uttered no word to prevent the passing of the finished
foreign-made article. To have done so would have been a "violation of
the sacred principle of free trade."
In striking contrast to the free-trade religion of the average Brittis
trades-unionist leader is the protectionism of the working class In all our
colonies and the United States of America. These workmen are as ardent
trade unionists as are their British fellows; but they are protectionists to a
man. The reason for this is, in my opinion, that these colonists and Americans had the advantage of starting life in practically new countries, under
virgin conditions, and absolutely untrammeled by prepossessions. They
were free to judge all questions on their merits, and had a clean slate on
which they could write their own unbiased judgments.
Whtat is free trader It is free exchange. But we have not got it. ie
have free inports, with sliqfht exceptionsw, and taxed exports, with sliqht exceptions, and all the other nations and our own colonies have practically
protection. Free exchange, the absence of all obstacles to commercial intercourse, is, no doubt, the ideal method of exchange from the consumer's point
of view, for by it he would obtain his commodities at prices lower than
would otherwise be possible. * * *
What, on the other hand, is protection? It is a system by which nations set up barriers at their ports and frontiers against the trade of other
nations, The barriers take the form of duties, or taxes, levied on such trade,
and are erected for two separate and distinct objects. In some cases the
tax is levied for the sake of revenue only; in others for the purpose of
wholly or partially excluding from the country commodities which the country can, and wishes to, produce herself. The effect of this tax, or customs
duty, is, of course, to increase the natural cost of the commodities so taxed,
and protection is therefore as obnoxious to the idle consumer as free trade
it acceptable, * * *
To the merchant who buys and sells, the manufacturer who producnss
and sells, the carrier, and the dealer free trade is likewise preferable to protection, being more conducive to the expansion of commerce.   But to the
manufacturer, at least, it is essential that the free trade shall be universali
that he shall not be handicapped in the race by having markets closed
against him that are open to his rivals. And if he can not have general
free trade he would prefer, with all its waste and restrictions, general protection. Whichever it is to be, he asks that it shall be equal all round, a
fair field and no favor, so that every man shall obtain such results as hiS
skill /and energy deserve.,
But to the worker free trade is and must be most disadvantaqeous, foe
under it the product of his labor is subject to the competition of the wlJoie
world. And to he worker n highly civilized and prosperous communities
like Great Britain, our own great colonies, and the United States of America
free trade is or would be specially disadvantageous,   for the competition O
the poorer and less civilized races of the earth would tend inevitably to
lower his standard of living
g-43


I




A GREAT DISPLACEMENT OF BRITISH LABOR."
*acts fro. remarks of Hon. MM.E. OLMBTE   of Pennsylvania, in daily
coQngressional Record.
I present as an indication of the general interest which is being felt in
m,~bjj ct of protection, some extracts from a series of letters contributed:i iondon Shoe and Leather Record. These were offered in response
proposition by the editors of that journal to award prizes aggregating
t $300 in value to those presenting the best arguments in favor of the
tin of the protective system in the United Kingdom.
T Mr. J. Macpherson, I Mortonhall road, Edinburgh, said:
Isn: Availing myself of your invitation to your readers to express
views on the fiscal question, I write in support of the proposed change
Iolcy, and I submit the following propositions as the chief points in
r of the proposed alteration:
(1) That the export trade of this country is practically stagnant,
eas the export trade of our chief commercial rivals has increased Imse!y in recent years.
(2) That the nature of our export trade Is changing, and that to our
us disadvantage. Formerly we exported mainly manufactured goods,
malking of which gave employment to large numbers of work people;
we export larger quantities of raw material (the production of which
ires less labor), including coal, and the exportation of coal lessens our
lnal assets, as it can not, like other goods, be replaced.
(3) That the nature of our import trade is likewise changing. We
art less raw material and larger quantities of manufactured goods which
pete with and displace our home products, thus lessening the demand
labor as well as the profits of the employers. The position is aggravated
the fact that many of these imported articles are sold under the dumpsystem at less than the cost of production, and moreover our manufac>rs work under restrictions as to sweating, factory regulations,- hours,
from which our foreign competitors are free.
(4) The foreigner, not content with excluding our productions from
markets by high tariffs and capturing our home trade by dumping his
plus stock here, is competing with us in neutral markets, such as our
colonies, and seriously impairing our trade with them.
(5) That our colonies are desirous of giving us a preference in their
kets over our foreign rivals, but expect that we shall reciprocate by
ng them a similar advantage in our markets for their produce. The
sting of this demand would tend to bind the colonies closer to the mother
ntry, thus strengthening the Empire.
I do not propose to argue at length in support of these propositions,
while not wishing to trouble your readers with too many figures, I
Id point out that our exports of manufactured and partly manufactured.t in 1890 amounted to ~228,805,000, and in 1902 to ~227,645,000, thus
ing a decrease of over one million sterling. The German export of.ffactured goods in 1890 was ~107,000,00,0   and in 1900, ~149,000,000,
increase of no less than 79 per cent., while the American exports in the
e period rose from ~31,000,000 to ~90,000,000, showing the enormous
rease of 190 per cent. Of the twelve leading articles in our export trade
oe has been during the last ten years a decrease in nine, including cotgoods, steel, woolen goods, hardware, linen, steam engines, and leather.
last item, in which your readers are specially interested, has fallen
one and a half millions. All these decreases mean a great displacement
ritish labor. * *  *
I will now deal with the argument of those persons who hold that
er the dumping system we are not losers but gainers, and that the
sper the foreigner sells us his goods the better for us. To purchase
material at the lowest price is certainly a good thing, but it is another
ter when manufactured goods are sent into a country at prices below
cost of production, or under conditions of manufacture which render
Ilpo-sible for the home producer to compete with success. It is not
the national welfare for a people to become merely a distributing na-. and goods may be bought too dearly, however low their nominal price,
heir purchase leads to a decrease of employment and an increase of
PeriRtm. I was told a few days ago by a Bermondsey currier that there
scores of men bred to the tanning andr currying trade in London who
now sweeping the streets or doing any odd Job they can get because of
depression in their own trade.
I may also point out that there has been an alarming increase in the
ber of paupers in this country in recent years. In 1878 the expenditure
ie relief of the poor was at thoe rate of ~307 per 1,000 of the population
1in 1 901 it was ~367 per 1,000. In 1878 there were 21,000 able-bodied
es in the workhouses; in 1902 there were 39,852. The proportion
the population in 1878 was 86 per 100,000 and in 1902 it was 121. On
0ther hand, it is said that the deposits in the savings banks have insed, but as a matter of fact they have increased at a greater rate in
ry other country in which a savings-batnk system exists. Our country
actually at the bottom of the list in this: respect,
The object of these foreigners who dump their surplus goods on us is
to benefit us at all, but to displace us from our position as a great
niacturing nation. Whenever they have killed competition in any parIr line, their prices will go up. While our exports of manufactured
ds hare fallen, as stated in a former part of this paper, our imports of
Ifactured articles have increased by 50 per cent., equal to ~50,000,000.
winder our paupers are increasing.
1On the 'ground of fair play to our own countrymen, is it right that
I we impose factory rules and regulations for the preservation of the
0ib and cormefort of the employees, we should allow goods made In eounis Where no such restrictions exist to be. brought here to undersell our
Productions?
It has been pointed oxt that it is absurd to protect labor, as we do in
eouotry by factory legislation, etc., and to leave the products of labor
qPrtejee. Municipal corporations, such as the London county council,
"e lare contracts for tramway rails, etc., with foreign firms, and conitla  thlemseilves that they are saving a few thousand pounds to the
'Payers. Are they really saving?. By sending their orders abroad they
't to swell 'the ranks of the unemoployed at home and thus to increso
lrl"ands 'for poor.relief. They save so much in their contracts 'and pay
1Uch more in poor rates. is that sound policy?
a-44


I




"IN THE MATTER OF WAGES THE AMERICAN WO
MAN IS FAR BETTER OFF."-"JAMES COX,
SECRETARY ASSOCIATED IRON WORKERS OF GREAT BRITAIN."
Ex0tract from remarks of Hon. M. 0. OLMSVTD of Pennsylvania, in
The Moseley Industrial Commission, composed of officers of the lea
labor unions of England, visited the United States In 1902. Each mee
was required to carefully investigate and report upon conditions of An
can labor in the Industry which his union represented, and to also
specific answers to certain questions supplied to each member of the
mission. The words here quoted are from the reports submitted by
men after their return to England.
James Cox, secretary of the Associated Iron and Steel Workers of G
Britain, said in his report:
It was my first visit to America. I could not avoid many preconeel
ideas. I had been led to expect one perpetual rush and hustle perra
every aspect of life. I was also led to believe that this hustle and rush
meated and actuated all kinds of workmen n n every department of il
The cost of living was another matter upon which I had wrong Impress
To the ordinary traveler the difference will be perhaps two to one, but to
ordinary workingman the cost of living Is not so much higher in Ane
as we are led to believe. *  *  *  The total production of pig iron In
United States in 1901 was 15,878,354 tons. *   *   *  In the produc
of these enormous quantities it was generally thought that the United St
Steel Corporation has a complete monopoly.
I remember well the panic caused by the reports of its formation.
fact of a billion-dollar steel trust being formed was such an unheard-of
gigantic combination as to almost turn the brains of English manu
turers. *~  ~     Manufacturing prices had sharply receded in the Un
States just at that period-October, 1900 — and the American manufactu
taking advantage of our abnormally high prices, slipped in and comple
winded the English manufacturer. The pity is that several of them
recovered, The British iron trade and the workmen engaged In it would
infinitely better off if an earthquake could swallow up many of the wor
manufacturers who bleed their works to death in times of good trade
grind their workmen in periods of adversity.
Large trusts have their inherent defects, but I am convinced from
Investigatlons that the workman has less to fear in the long run from
operations of concentrated capital than he has from the Impecunious
ployer in his frantic efforts to dip into the wages of his underpaid wor
*  During the years of depression from 1893 to 1897 American
dustry was much more depressed than our own; failures and bankrupt
were common, and a general demoralization of trade existed unequaled
intensity throughout the world. The present cycle, unprecedented in
United States, has lasted longer and contained greater elements of stabh
than in our own country. and to a far greater degree than in Belgium
dermany. Undoubtedly the greatest factor In America has been their
Increased requirements resulting from the natural development of
country.    * * 
The boom is as much a surprise to the American manufacturers as
anyone. At the beginning of 1899 there were only 200 blast furnaces Mb
ing, but before the year was out I am told by a good authority that many
the producerp earned an amount equal to the entire investment of 
plant. tnder great consolidations prices are immediately controlled I
Kreater uniformity and lowered to a more reasonable level, and it is, I
latve, largely attributable to this fact that no such collapse occurred
America as took place in this country. Throughout the United States th
are universal evidences of having entered upon a new era in the demand
iron and steel for purposes hitherto undreamed of. The home demands
requirements are stupendous, and the resources of the producer have
taxed to the utmost. *  *  *
The tin-plate industry of the United States is of relatively recent
win, dating practically from 1890 and built up under their tariff, V
imposes an import duty of 1% cents per pound. Prior to 1892 the S
obtained practically all their supply from this country, and in 1891,
year their tariff came into operation, they imported nearly 335,000
Many attempts have been made by American manufacturers to produce
tin and, terne sheets during' the last fifty years, but such was the cn
iver the American mnarkets by British manufacturers that they were all
ctcessful. In the agitation for a protective tariff in order to develop th
Industries the reports on Welsh wages were constantly cited. This s
tnately was secured, and from that period their Imports have decres
almost in ratio to their increased manlfacture.
In 1892 they produced 18,803 tons; in 1896, 160, 362 tons; i1
339,291 tons.   *         would like, In concluding to Indicate thre l
ral features of American Industries to which I largely attribute thelir 
e0,ss:  1) The enormous mineral deposits, waterways, and cheap tran
(2) The control or ownership by the manufacturer, through combinatio
direct purchase, of the raw materiala-ore, lime, coal, and coke. (3)
marivelos engineering Ingenuity and Initiative, remarkable through es
phase of manufacture In Its reduction of man'nal labor combined with t
poroductiveness.  *       d:  n the nmatter of *waot the Amserfeo,Nr
is far bette  than in this eountrY. *  *  *   The question may 
s it possi   Qr Briis   pruert compete tin theAmric          Oan
cnfes    ti    not so long   the present tariff eV s


g-45


I




HERE ARE:GREATER OPPORTUNITIES IN AMERICA
FOR THE WORKINGMAN TO RISE."
tract from remarks of Hion. M. E, OLMSTED of Pennsylvania, in daily
Congressional Record,
Mr. J. Madison, secretary of the Friendly Society of British Iron Foundi said in his report:
I have come to the conclusion that the American moulder turns out someing like 25 per cent. more work than the English moulder. Ten per cent.
cay be due to extra effort and the other 15 per cent. to better facilities. I
me now to the important question of wages, which I conclude will work
t at three and one-quarter dollars per day, equal to ~4 Is. 3d. per week.
ur investigations were confined to large centers of industry. Therefore
aparison should be made with our own large centers, where the wages are
2 per week. It will thus be seen that the American's wages are more than
sube those of the English moulder.
Replying to a series of questions which each member of the commision was expected to answer, Mr. Madison, In response to the question, "Are
ere are greater opportunities for the workingman to rise in America than
England?" said: "There are greater opportunities in America."  Rending to the question, "Are American workers better fed than the Bngsh?" his answer was: "Yes; they are better fed."  Responding to the
uestion, "How does the price of food in America compare with that in
agland?" he said: "I should say, taken on the whole, it is about the
same."  Responding to the question, "Are the American workers better
lothed than the English?" his answer was: "They are probably a little
etter clothed." In response to the question, "How does the value of the
merican wage compare with that of the English, cost of living being taken
nto account?" his answer was: "Undoubtedly the American has a great deal
he best of the English worker-that Js to say, he will have a much larger
esidue after living out of his wages."
Mr. P. Walls, an officer of the National Federation of English Blast'urnace Men, said in his report:
Skilled mechanics and leading men in our factories-the iron and steel
arks-are as well clothed and fed as the same classes in America, but when
it comes to the unskilled or the general body of workers there is a marked
ifference. In the former case the difference in wages is not so great, but in
the latter it is not less than 60 per cent., and when we come to what is
termed the "common laborer" the Americans get practically double the
vwages paid in England. After a careful investigation I come to the conclusion that, comparing wages and the cost of living, there is an average of at
least 25 per cent. in favor of the American workman. A careful, sober
man can undoubtedly save more money than in England. The encouragement given to invention has, no doubt, contributed to the Americans having
more modern machinery, but there is, above and beyond all other causes,
the tariff. If we take it for granted that the cost of production is equal in
both countries and that in an open market equal profits could be made,
what an enormous advantage the tariff gives to the American manufacturer,
who has an almost unlimited home market.
Responding to the question, 'Are the American workers better off than
the English?" Mr. Walls answered: "As a whole, yes."  To the question,
I"How does the price of food in America compare with that in England?"
his response was: "The difference is little; if anything, it is cheaper."  To
the question, "Are the American workers better clothed than the Snglisht"
his response was: "Better; generally much better; only artisans dress
well." To the question, "How does the average wage in your trade in Amerla, expressed in money, compare with the average wage in England?" his
answer was: "About 40 per cent. higher."  To the question, "How does
the value of the American wage compare with that of the English, cost of
living being taken into account?" his answer was: "Cost of food is no
higher; the chief difference is in rent. Making allowance for that, the
American is fully 25 per cent. better off." To the question, "Can the careful, sober, steady man save more in America than in England?" his answer
was: "Yes." To the question, "Is a larger or smaller proportion of American workingmen dependent upon the public purse than Is the case In England?" his response was: "From what we were told, a smaller proportion."
To the question, "Do you consider the general cnonditions of life of the
workingman better in America than in England?" his answer was: "Yes.
Better education, better houses, better wages would pay our employers in
the long run."
The Moseley Industrial Commission, composed of officers of the leadi'g labor unions of England, visitl t th  United States in i}t02. Each melmber was required to carefully investigate and report upon conditions of
American labor in the industry which his union represented, and also to
eakle specifi answers to certain questions supplied to each member of the
Commission. The words here quoted are from the reports submitted by these
men after their return to England.
v46 4 }1




"CONDITIONS IN THE COAL INDUSTRY."


I


Extracts from  remarks of Hon. M. E. OLMSTED, of
Pennsylvania, in daily Congressional Record.
Through the kindness of lHon. Frank Hall, clief of the
bureau of nines of Pennsylvania, I am able to submit thle
following table, showing conditions in the coal industry in
Pennsylvania, viz.:
Annual production of coal in Pennsylvania in both the anthracite and bitu
minous regions rofor the years 1892, 1898, 1896, and 1908.
Year.            lAnthracite. Bituminous Total.
18:...92.. -... =.....................  51,226,978....................... 7, 3 4
189W.1.....................................  52, 421,898  96,2t8,(' 
189.5..1....9.....,848,2.50  50,273,657  104,116lt,)f
1..................................  75 232,535  103,496,012  178,728,597
This table is also very signlificant.  Eighteen hundred
and ninety-two was the last year of President Harrison'
administration. In 1893, the first year of President Cleve
land's second term, the coal production was actually reduced about one and a half million tons, and in 1896,
President Cleveland's last year, the total production was
less than six and one-half million tons greater than it had
been four yers previously, while 1903, the last year under
President Roosevelt, showed an increase of more than 71.500,000 tons over President Cleveland's last year.   The
amount of wages paid for mining coal in Pennsylvania in
1903 was over $100,000,000 in excess of that paid in
1896.   It makes all the difference in the world whether
Ameriean money is being paid out in the purchase of foreign produets or is being expended at home among our own
people. It is a l o  estimate that the workmen of Pennsylvania alone received in 1903, under President Roosevelt,
$200,000,0000 more than they did in 1896, under President
Cleveland. Wha it means to every interest in a State to
have hat vast additional sum expended I need not stop to
discuss. The benefit is too apparent to require argument.
g-47




'AMERICAN WORKMEN LIVE ON A HIGHER PLANE
THAN THEIR COUSINS IN ENGLAND."
tracts from remarks of Hon. M. E. OLMSTED of Pennsylvania, in daily
Congressional Record.
Mr. T. Jones, rprpresenting the Midland Counties Trades Federation of
ugland, responding to certain of the inquiries which each member of the
onmission was expected to answer, in answer to the question, "How does
he average wage in your trade in America expressed in money, compare
ith the average wage in England?" said: "It is higher." In response to;e question, "How does the value of the American wage compare with that
f the English, cost of living being taken into account?" he answered:
The American has the advantage."  Responding to the question, "Can
he careful, sober, steady man, whilst keeping himself efficient, save more
America than in England?" his answer was: "Yes."
Responding to the question, "Are a larger or smaller proportion of
merican workingmen dependent upon the public purse than is the case
England?" his answer was: "Smaller."   Responding to the question,
Do you consider the general relations of life of the workman better in
merica than in England?" his answer was: "Yes, in many respects."
nhis general statement Mr. Jones said:
As to how America is able to pay higher wages and yet successfully
iopete with us in the markets of the world, I believe it is due to the vast
atural resources she has in mines and minerals, improved methods in
ining, the utilization of her vast waterways, and the superior railways
be possesses combined with the low rates charged for transportation of
11 kinds of products. Manufacturers are helped by these considerations,
which must be added the more modern and ever-changing machinery,
he adoption of every improvement, no matter how often introduced, and
heir safety from foreign competition in consequence of their protective
ariff.
Mr. T. Ashton, secretary of the Corporation Cotton Spinners of Engand, responding to questions propounded to each of the members, said:
The average wages of mule spinners of the New England States are
16, or ~3 6s. 8d. per week, against ~1 18s. in Oldham, being an advance
f 75 per cent. Taking into account the cost of living, I consider the Amerin spinner has an advantage over the English spinner of fully 40 per cent.
his wage-earning power. I am of opinion that a careful, sober, and
teady workman, whilst keeping himself efficient for his duties, can save
ore money in America than he can in England, and I am confirmed in this
'iew by the evidence of workmen residing in America who formerly lived
Lancashire. As to whether the American workmen are better fed than
e English, my impression is that they are, and this is the opinion of worken who formerly lived in England, but are now working in the American
actories. There are fewer of the American working people, in proportion
their number, who are dependent oit the public purse than is the case in
dngland. The American workingmen consider it almost a crime if they
re compelled to go-to a poorhouse on account of their poverty. I consider
tiht the general conditions of life of the American workman are better than
otat obtain in England.
Mr. T. A. Flynn, secretary of the Amalgamated Society of British
allors, said:
The amount of capital invested in American clothing factories must be
normous. It can not be claimed that any invention has yet superseded the
ssential principles of the old sewing machine; that is, nothing similar to
he automatic machines, where the workman gives the machine. its daily
Wd and lounges around during the time the digestive process completes
self. Every detail of the old machine has been subjected to the perfecting
and of human ingenuity. In every factory visited experiments were being
ried with some form of improved machinery. The American manufacturer
rganizes his factory with the object of turning out a suit of clothes very
uch superior to that placed upon the market by nine-tenths, if not all, of
e English manufacturers. *   *  * There can be no doubt that the
merican workmen-and this includes women-live on a higher plane than
eir cousins in England. The cost of food is very similar, but the Amerlan workman gets more of it and of a better quality.
Clothing is as cheap in America as it is with us-that is, for those
ho buy inferior articles. The whole trend of opinion in America, howVer, is against cheap or "sloppy" suits. Wages in the tailoring trade are
verned by conditions of labor. If the best firms in London be taken as
Igalnst the best in New York and Chicago, American tailors are paid 200
er cent. higher wages. Outside these centers wages vary n first-class
ouses; but even in these, if taken against the ordinary English towns,ages are from 100 to 150 per cent. higher. How far these wages enable
he Anerican workman to save is a Question for statisticlans, So far as inlrles give result, there is no manner of doubt that the working classes
t America save more money and save it more easily than the working
lasses of England.
The Moseley Industrial Commission, composed of officers of the leadg labor unions of England, visited the United States in 1902. Each memr as required to carefully investigate and report upon conditions of
erican lbor in the ndustry which his union represented, and also to
ake specifl answers to certain questions supplied to each member of the
enmision. The words here quoted are from the reports submitted by these
In after their return to England.


1Ig48




"STTU         OP KOSCIUSZKO."-"AN OFFER OF UN
Extract from remarks of ion. GEORGE P. IVETII ORE of Rhode IsiT
in daily Congressioral Record, April 11, 1904.
STATUE O03F       OSCIUSZKO.
I am directed by the Committee on the Library, to whom was rcferre
the joint resolution (I. J. J.  es. 84) for the acceptance of a statue cf Gen
Thaddeus Kosiusziko, to be "presented to the United States by the Polis
American citizens, to report it favorably without amendment, and I seubmu
a report thereon. I ask unanimous consent for its immediate consideration
The SeCretary read the Joint resolutioh; and by unanimous consent ti
Senate, as in Committee of the Whole, proceeded to its *consideration. I
acceptsithe offer of a statue of lGen. Thaddeus Kosciuszko, to be erecte
on one of the corners of Lafayette square, in the city of Washington, D. C.
by and at the expense of the Polish-American organizations and of th
Polish-American people of the United States generally, as an expressionf 
their loyalty and devotion to their adopted country, for the liberties 
which Kosciuszko so nobly fought, which offer has been made theroug
Theodore M. Helinski, president of the central committee of the Potlih
American organizations of the United States. But the selection of the itb
on Lafayette square, the approval of the statue offered, and the manner o
its erection shall be. under the control and direction of a commission, con,
slating of the Secretary of War and the chairmen of the Committees 0
the Library of the Senate and Housie of Representatives of the Fifty-eight
Congress.
The joint resolution was reported to the Senate without amendment
ordered to a third reading, read the third time, and passed.
The statue referred to In the resolution was offered to the United State
in the following letter to the President:
CMIcAGO, ILL., January 14, 190-4.
SmI: We, the undersigned representatives of the respective Polish or
ganizations to which our names are hereunto attached, composing an agre
gate membership of more than 250,000, on behalf of such organization
and on behalf of the Polish people of the United States in general, hao
authorized and empowered Mr. Theodore M. Helinski, president of ti
Pulaski Monument Polish Central Committee and a member of the FuT1las
Statue Commission, to confer with you and with all other persons, 'con
mittees, or commissions that may have authority to consider the samn
concerning the presentation by such organizations and by' the Polish peoni
of the United States of a suitable statue of Thaddeus Kosciuszko to tt
United States Government, and, if acceptable, to offer, on behalf of suc
organizations and- of the Polish people of the United States, such stati
to the United States Government.
It is the desire of such organizations and of the Polish people that
place be reserved for such statue on Lafayette Square in the city of Wash
Mr. Helinskl has also full authority to accept any and all condition
that may b   imposed in regard to to the design, completion, cost, and pre
sfentatin of such statue, and all, expenses in regard thereto, including, o
course, the cost of such statue, are. to be borne by the organizations by u
represntead, and by the Polish people of the United States.
We offer this gift to the Government as a token of the loyalty etn
devotion felt by the Polish people of the United States for their adlpt
country, and for the liberties of which, now so happily enjoyed by tlhef
Kosciuszko so noy fought
nobly fought.
M. B. STECRYrUJLK,
Polish National Alliance, United States of North Anmerica.
LEON SZoPINrSKI,
Polish Catholic Union of America,
A. KonurcJGa
Catholic Federat on of Trinity Chaurch.
B. W. REIC.EKI, 
Polish Turners' Alliance of Ame 'ica.
W. YELLNGN
Polish Singers' Alliance of America.
J. M. IStNasowicG,%.Yocung Men's Alliance of Anmerica.
TIDSORo    ROOSEvELT,
President of the   nited States.
This generous and patriotic offer was transmitted to Congress bY the
President by special message, as follows:
To the Senate and House of Representatves:
herewilth lay before the Congress a letter from the Polish organii -
tions of the United States, and the report thereon, from Col. Thbomas 
Symons, superintendent of public buildings and grounds. In view  ef tI
reeom~mendation of  oltonel Symons, I advise that the very patriotic e
of the *Polish organizations be accepted, and that instead of the s6Utacee
Pulaski (whrich in the judgment of his Polish compatriots should be aa
equetrtan statue. and *which it is now proposed to place in *reservation 3
on the north side of Pennsylvania avenue, between Thirteenth uan(,d 0'
teenth streets) there be a pedestrian Istatue of Kosciuszko accepted bY t
'Government, to be placed on *one of the four corners of Lafayette q5aor
These four corners would thus ultimately be occupied by statues of I!af:yette, Rochambiieau, Von- Steuben, and KosclusZko, all of whom in the stir
daysw    hich saw the birth of the Republic rendered service which can ne
be forgotten by our people.                   THEODORE RoosEWT.T
Wl ITTF Hose, January 28, 1904.
The statue' proposed will probably cost $40,000 to $50,000, It l
to the United -States' as- a free gift by our Polish-American fellow-cize
While It honosoie oftheir eoipatrits, and thus of course    ono le
It adds another      I e n artsic baieaty.and. historical interest  d t
naton'   l cafital city. This Is *an offer of unprecedented generosity, a 
committee takes pleasure in recommending Itsprompt acceptance.


0


I


g49


I




HE ADVANTAGES WHICHLABOR HAS UNDER OUR
SYSTEM."
tract from remarks of Hon. M. E. OLMSTED of Pennnylvania,
it daily Congressional Record.
PRESEXTATIVE ENGLISH WORKINGXEN ON LABOR
CONDITIONS IN THE UNITED STATES. 
a greater compliment could be paid to the protective system
the United States and the great manufactur       in industries which
ve grown up upnder it than that of the visit of the Moseley Indusi! Ctommnission in the closing months of 1902. This commission,
(led by Mr. Alfred Moseley, a prominent British capitalist and
nufacturer interested in the prosperity of the industries and worknen of his country, was composed of the secretaries of the trades
ons representing the principal industries of the United Kingdom.
ey visited all the great manufacturing centers of the United States,
[estigated during the months of October, November, and Decem1r, 12, the various classes of industries in which they as practical
h, tlhrolgh their practical knowledge, felt a personal interest, and,
tirning to England, presented an elaborate report or series of rerts, %under the title, "Reports of the Moseley Industrial Commisn to the United States of America, October-December, 1902."
om these reports of these experts-men of long training in the
rious industries which they here investigated-I propose to quote
tracts and statements showing their views regarding the manufacring system of the United States and the advantages which labor
s under our system as compared with that of free-trade England.
0in his return to London Mr. Moseley wrote the London Times as
elows:
IMERICAN VIEWS ON BRITISH TARIFF PROPOSALS.
the Editor of the Times.
SIR: I find on my return to England that there Is a vast amount of
riosity on the part of the public as to how Mr. Chamberlain's proposals
eviewed by the mercantile community on the other side of the Atlantic.
Of course they realize that a tariff imposed upon our imports would
t be to their advantage; nevertheless they do not allow their judgment
be warped by the conslderationn of their own personal Interests, and I
ind on all sides but one comment, amounting practically to "Why has
not been done before? We could never see the utility of allowing other
tions to dump their surplus products on the market and put one's own
ole out of work."  This was the opinion of every business man with
hm I conversed, with the exception only of Mr. Carnegie.
The subject of our tariff-reform movement is as interesting to the peoe of the United States as it is to ourselves, and it is continually discussed
the newspapers and forms the topic of endless debates in thir universities
d societies. Nowhere have I heard it condemned as being unpractical.
heir authorities on political economy, with many of whom I discussed
e subject, one and all agree that it is the only course open to England
vitew of the conditions that have arisen since she adopted free tradenngst whom I may name Mr. John H. Gray, professor of economics at
orthw;estern University, Chicago, who expressed wonder that there should
any opposition to Mr. Chamberlain's scheme except from "cranks" and
Ople incapable of moving with the times  Professor Gray, I may state,
considered in the United States as a high authority, and he, was chosen
o years ago by their Government to come to this country to investigate
bor conditions here.  The result of his inquiries are to be published
ortly by Commissioner Carroll D. Wright, of the United States Labor
ureatu
Whilst I was in America I read a report of a speech by Lord Goschen,
w hich he stated that whilst we were about to adopt protection the United
ates was tending entirely in the opposite direction, toward the removal of
rlffs  No one of course, doubts his sincerity in making this assertion,
-t it shows how lamentably he is out of touch:h with conditions as they are.
he taiff question there is absolutely a closed book; all that the people of
e Sttese ever propose to discuss is whether perhaps they are not taxing
eOl.qser es unnecessarily in certain industries by the high tariff that exists,
la there is a disposition in some sections of the community (although
ten thlese are not very large) to make a revision,of the tariff by reducing
lie dty on certain articles; but nobody dreams for a single instant that
tIc l reuction should be sufficiently large to allow the foreigner to come in
ad Ctampete with them  lowering thle standard of wages and injuring inL      hfei w The workingman of the United Statesss qeuite sufficiently alive to
is own interests to keep this matter always before bim, and no Presidential
"Ittil.te would hae the smallest chance of election if he proposed to at't. anything in the way of tariff reform likely to lower the tandard of
"l end affect the wage-earning power of the American workman,
Yours faithfully,                            A. MOalwaY.
UJNION B BK BUILDING, ESLY PL.AC 
London, E. C., December 2, 1903.


V5 0                                                        I 




"LABOR AND C        APTAL. —SUPREMACY OF THE L
Extracts orm  public addresser  o  Pireident Rooeet, printed in
CosnIgressyionatl  ecord, Jusne 20, 1904.
The man who by the use of his capital develops a great mine; the
who by the use of his' capital builds a great 'railroad; the man wlho by
use of his capital, either individually or joined with others like him, 
any great legitimate business enterprise, confers a benefit, not a harm,
the community, and is entitled to be so regarded. He is entitled to ther
tection of the law, and in return he is to be required himself to obeb
law. The law is no respecter of persons. The law is to be admlainte
neither for the rich man as such nor for the poor man as such. It ils ty
administered for every man, rich or poor, if he is an honest and law-abhi
citizen; and it is'to be invoked against any man, rich or poor, who viol
it, without regard to which"end of the social scale he may stand at; \it
regard to whether his offense takes the form of greed and cunning otr
form of physical violence. In either case, if he violates the law, the law
to be invoked against him; and in so invoking it I have the right to ch
lenge.the support of all good citizens and to demand the acquiescence
every good man. (Speech at Butte, Mont., May 27, 1903.)
We have the right to ask every decent American citizen to rally to
support of the law if it Is ever broken against the interest of the rich ma
and we have the same right to ask that rich man cheerfully and gladly
acquiesce in the enforcement against his seeming interest of the law, if
is the law. Incidentally, whether he acquiesces or not, the law will be
forced, and this whoever he may be, great or small, and at whichever
of the social scale be e may be. (Spokane, Wash,, May 26, 903.)
This Is an era of great combinations both of labor and of capital.
many ways these combinations have worked for good; but they must wo
under the law, and the laws concerning them must be just and wise or th
will inevitably do evil; and this applies as much to the richest corporati
as to the most powerful labor union. Our laws must be 'wise, sane, heaitl
conceived In the spirit of those who scorn the mere agitator, the me
inciter of class or sectional hatred, who wish Justice for all men, w
recognize the need of adhering so far as possible to the old American
trine of giving the widest possible scope for the free exercise of individu
initiative, and yet who recognize also that after combinations have reac
a certain stage it is indispensable to the general welfare that the nati
should exercise over them, cautiously and with self-restraint, but firm
the power of supervision and regulation. (Charleston, April 9, 1902.)
This is not and never shall be a government of a plutocracy; it is
and never shall be a government by a mob. It is, as it has been and as
will be, a government in which every honest man, every decent man,
he employer or employed, wage-worker, mechanic, banker, lawyer, iarm
be he who he may, if he acts squarely and fairly, if he does his duty
his neighbor and the State, receives the full protection of the law and
given the amplest chance to exercise the ability that there is within hii
alone or In combination with his fellows, as he desires.  (Butte, sMon
May 27, 1908.)
Above all, the administration of the government, the enforcement of
laws, must be fair and honest. The laws are not to be administered elti
in. the interest of the poor  an or an or the interest of the rich man. They a
simply to be administered justly-in the interest of justice to each man,
he rich or be he poor-giving immunity to no violator, whatever form
violation may assume. Such is the obligation which every, public serva
takes, and to it he must be true under penalty of forfeiting the respect b
of himself and of his fellows. (Charleston, S. C.. April 9, 1902.)
Least, of all can the man of great wealth afford to break the law, even i
his own financial advantage; for the law is his prop and support, and it
both foolish and profoundly unpatriotic for him to fail In giving liea
support to those who show that there is in very fact one law, and one ia
only, alike for the rich and the poor, for the great and the small. (Syr
cuse, N,  Y., September 7, 1903.)
Corporations that are handled honestly and fairly, so far from being
evil, are a natural business evolution and make for the general prosperity
our land. We do not wish to destroy corporations, but we do wish to ma
them subserve the public good, All individuals,, rich or poor,' orlvate
corporate, must be subject to the law of the land, and the CGovernment i
hold them to a rigid obedience thereto. The biggest corporation, like t
humblest private citizen, must, be held to strict compliance with the will 
the people as expressed In the * fundamental law. The rich man who dio
not see that ths iis n his interest is indeed shortsighted. When we ma
him obey the law we insure for him the absolute protection of the la
(Cincinnati, Ohio, September 20, 1902.)
Modern industrial competition is very keen between nation and nat!o
and now that our country is striding forward with the pace of a giantS
take the leading position in the international industrial world. we sloe u
beware how we tetter our limbs, hohow we cramp our titan strength., Wil
striving to prevent industrial injustice at. home we must not bring up
ourselves industrial weakness abroad. This is a task for which we need li
fest abilities of the statesman, the student, the patriot, and the far-seel
lover of mankind. (Speech at opening of Pan-American Exposition, a
20, 1901.)
~ The mechanism of modern husiness is altogether too delicate and too cooi
plicated for us to sanctton for one moment any intermeddling with it Ii
spirit of ignorance, above all in a spirit of rancor. Something can be die
somethitng is being done now. Much more can be done if our people resO
tutely. but temperately will that it.shall- be done. But the' certain w yffl
bringing great harm upon ourselves, without in any way furthering the
lution of the problem, but, on the contrary, deferring indefinitely It P1roP0
soilutio, would be to act in a spirit of ignorance, of violence, of rancor, In
livebecause we are not satisfied with some of the details of its managei
(Fitchburg, Mass.,,September 2, 1903.): As  nation we stand in the very forefront In the giant: internati
dustrial competition of the day. We can not afford by any freak or ill' i
forfeit the position to which we have thus triumphantly attained. (
apolis, Minn.. April 4. 1903.)
g-Sl


I




AFBOR AND CAPITAL HAVE COMMON INTERESTS."
-ROOSEVELT.
f.i9vs from public addresses of Pstrvsidcet Roosivelt, printed inS daiy
Congressional Record, June 20, 1904.
We aire no more against organizations of capital 'than against organizabls of labor. We welcome both, demanding only that each shall do right
sall remember its duty to the Republic. (Milwaukee, Wis~, April 3,
'0ie average American knows not only that he himself intends to do
t what is right, but that his average fellow-countryman has the same
setiona and the same power to make his intention effective. Hle know?',
ether he be business man, professional man, farmer, mechanic, employer,
wage-worker, that the welfare of each of these men is bound up with the
[Ifare of all the others; that each is neighbor to the other, is actuatedi by
same hopes and fears, has fundamentally the same ideals, and that all
ke have much the same virtues and the same faults. Our average fei-.citizen is a sane and healthy man, who believes in decency and has a
olesoeme mind. He therefore feels an equal scorn alike for the man of
baith guilty of the mean and base spirit of arrogance toward those who
le lss well off, and for the man of small means who in his turn either
els or seeks to excite in others the feeling of mean and base envy for those
0 are better off. (Syracuse, N. ~., September 7, 1903.)
L[i:ieor present-day conditions it is as necessary to have corporations in the
[siness world as it is to have organizations-unions —among wagerkers. We have a right to ask in each case only this: tlhat good. and not
irin, shiall foliow. (Providence, Ri. I., August 23, 1U02.)
l'here is no worse enemy of the wage-worker than the man who condones,
sb violence in any shape, or who preaches class hatred; and surely the
ightest acquaintance with our industrial history should teach even th"
Ist shortsighted that the times of most suffering for our people as a whole,
e times when business is stagnant, and capital suffers from shrinkage and
ts no return from its investments, are exactly the times of hardship and
tat and grim disaster among the poor. (Syracuse, N. Y., S-psti. 7, 1908.
iou. mnust face the fact that only harm will come from a propositilon to
tack the so-called trusts in a vindictive spirit by measures conceived
Iley with a desire of hurting them, without regard as to whether or not
scrimination should be made between the good and evil in them, andi
ithout even any regard as to whether a necessary sequence of the action
auld be the hurting of other interests. The adoption of. such a policy
ould mean temporary damage to the trusts, because it would mean tempoiry damage to all of our business interests; but the effect would be only
aporary, for exactly as the damage affected all alike, good and bad, so
e reaction would affect all alike, good and bad. (Cincinnati, Ohio, Sepiraer 20, 1902.)
The upshot of all this is that it is peculiarly incumbent upon us in a
me of such material well-being, both collectively ass  nation and' tudi-!iually as citizens, to show, each on his own account, that we pIossess the
alitiles of prudence, self-knowledge, and self-restraint. In our GovernInt, we needt above all things stahiilliy, ilxity of economic policy, while rmuemberjng that this fixity must not be fossilization; that there must not le
ability to shift our laws so as to meet our shifting national needs. There
re reai and great evils in our social and economic life, and tlnese evils
tand out In all their ugly baldness in time of prosperity, for the wicked
i'o prosper are never a pleasant sight. There is every need of striving in
i posiblwe ways, individually and collectively, by combinations among ourives and through the recognized governmental agencies, to cut out thooe
Vils. All I ask is to be sure that we do not use the knife with an igoIsant zeal which would make it more dangerous to the patient than to
bO disease. (Providence, R. I., August 23, 1902.)
it would be neither just nor expedient to iuuish the big corporations as
) cr(orations; what we wish to do is to protect the people froml any evil
bat may grow out of their existence or maladminstration.   (Cincinnati,
(lestber 20, 1902.) 
hAbove all, let us remember that our success in accomplishing anything
spends very IAuch upon our not trying to accomplish everything. (ProvlR5e, 0. l., August 23, 1902.)
Very much of our effort in reference to labor matters should be by every
aiice and expedient to try to secure a constantly better understanuang beIiin employer and employee. PEverything possiblb should be d(one to i'-m
a4se the sympathy and fellow-feeling between them, and every chance
ione to allow each to look at all questions, especially at questions in disLte, somewhat through the other's eyes. (Sioux Falls, S. Dak., April 6,
veryy man who has made wealth or used it in developing great legitia'e business enterprises has been of benefit and not harm to the country
it large. (Spokane, Wash., May 26, 1903.)
I  it foolish to pride ourselves upon our progress and prosperity, upon cur
U'::: ding position in the international industrial world and at, the samome!!:i' i.ave nothing but denunciation for the moen to whose commanding posi)a iwe in part owe this very progress and prosperity, this commanding
m;aon,  (Cincinnati, Ohio, September 20, 1902.)
lbs foundation of oulr whole social structure rests upon the a:,-terial and
l1oral well-being, the intelligence, the foresight, the sanity, tce sense of
I1t, and the wholesome patriotism of the wage-worker. (Address: at La"b Day picnic, Chicago, September 3, 1900.)
'i~cre is no objection to the employees of the Government Printing Office
c0iitituting themselves into a union if they so desire; but no rules or resolutions of that union can be permitted to override the laws of the Uniteil
b~aites, which it is my sworn duty to enforce.  (Letter to Secretary CoryClim, July 13, 1903.)
Wliere possible, it is always better to mediate before the strike begins
to!a try to arbitrate when the fight is on and both sides have grown
[;aubbora and bitter.  (Address at Labor Day picnic, C bicago, Sept.;.IOsic.?^l `i4 factory laws —laws to forbid the employment of child labor and' to
leguard the employees against the effects of culpable negligence by the
$41IPoyer-are necessary, not merely in the interest of the wage-worker, but
the interest of the honest and humane employer. (Stoux Falls, S. Dais.,
2, 1908.)
g-62






"IF A THING IS MADE AT HOME                   OME LABOR
E"tract from speeh of Hon. E, L. HAMILTON of Michiga,
the Sous of Representatives, February 19, 1902.
PROTECTION vs. FOREIGN COMBINATIONS.
For many years the policy of protection has needed no stron
argument than the labor argument.
It has proceeded upon the theory that on the whole about s0
cent. of the cost value of finished products represents labor.
If a thing is made at home, home labor is employed; if abro
foreign labor is employed. Wages are lower abroad than at ho
If a thing can be made cheaper because labor is cheaper, then it c
be sold cheaper.
If foreign products can undersell our home products on our a
soil, then our home factories must go out of business and our labI
Ing men must go out of employment.
This argument applies with certain modifications to corporati
as at present organized into combinations.
A duty, therefore, high enough to equalize the difference betwec
foreign and domestic labor has heretofore created, fostered, a
developed home industries, and by virtue of domestic competitia
prices have been reduced in many cases below the duty levied, whii
the wages of American labor have been sustained.
But it is said that home industries so created, fostered, and d
veloped have not only ceased to compete among themselves, but ha
combined; that corporations with equipments which exhaust t
resources of mechanical science, whose price list none dispute, hoa
the field alone, except where some smaller industry is permitted
exist from motives of trade policy; tha thhey not only hold the fie
at home, but have crossed the sea, invaded European markets, an
are disputing sales at the very doors of competing foreign factori
at prices in some instances lower than at home.
Therefore it is said that the duty should be removed from articl
so triumphantly bearing American labels over seas and the tide o
pauper products should be let in to see if, perchance, it can not sa
the foudations of our growing commerce and humble the power o
our enterprises.
Assuming mechanical facilities here and abroad to be equal, whio
they are not, and assuming the American workman to be the bette
man, which he is under our system, still the effect of tariff remov
would be to aovel down instead of up, and after everA other reduc
ion had been made down to the margin of a living profit labor woal
probably  uffr some reduction in competition with foreign chea
labor.
robably many American manufacturers woud continue to do
business. The weaker would die first, of course.
Probably combinations would continue to combine. Certainly inter,
national combinations would be easier.
If individual manufacturers have not been able to compete success'
fully unproteted against cheap foreign labor in the past without
reduction of wages, it raises the presumption at least that American
obrprate combinations would encounter the same difficulty.
Men would probably continue to go on strikes, but they would
strike n vain against an inexorable industrial system  that would
compel our better-paid labor to compete with the cheaper labor of
Europe.
f foreign combinations should get possession of our markets
what assurance     have  that they would not raise prices, and if the
should raise prices what redress have we?
The domestic corporation is a combination of American capital
and America   labor receiving and disposing of its wealth on Ame
an soil, which we   ay now regulate to some extent,  and which Wy
hope to rgulate more, while the foreign co bilnation would einrich
tself t aourexp ise, woul            eld caerryi w th  ea  wold
be beyond our controL
r68~ni     w~aedon1etemri               fa iigpftlbrw


I:~



HE TARIFF HAS PROTECTED OUR PEOPLE AGAINST
THE COMPETITION OF UNDER-PAID WORKMEN."
1,tiraet fromt remarks of 'Hon. J. P. JONES of Nevada, in the
Senate of the United States, September 10, 1890, and printed in
the Congressional.Record.
WHAT HAS THE TARIFF DONE.
The tariff has protected our people against the competition of
ie uder-paid and under-fed workmen of foreign countries.
The condition of those people is such that no friend of humanity
xn wish to see it duplicated on this continent.
The ruling classes of Europe consist of countless numbers of aristoatic idlers who at tie expense of the mlasses, consume of the
roducts of land and labor, without themselves creating wealth to
e vallue of a blade of grass.
)During the feudal ages their ancestors, or predecessors in privilege,
icred a monopoly of the land, which they still hold out of reach
the masses. They maintain their power and privileges by the aid
fsttnding atrmie-s composed of millions of men who, also at the
qpense of the masses, consume without producing.   These great
iarins of idle men of both classes live on the producers and eat up
eir substance.  It is a fair estimate that at least one-half the
roducts of the labor of Europe are practically confiscated to support
nd maintain in idleness the classes namred.
After centuries of what is styled a "high civilization" we still see
ie great body of the European people sunk in the lowest condition
f ignorance and misery —illions of them often, if not always, on
e verge of starvation. rWe see those millions unable to grasp the
laning of liberty, forbidden to think for themselves, unwilling or
nnale to assert their anlillood, and, while not devoid of the aspirai1ns of their race, so depressed by their conditions and environment
to lack the independcnce iand self-assertion that characterize the
orkers of the United States.
The tariff has operated to bar out from competition with our people
e peoples of those countries. That is precisely what a tariff proplv adjusted should do alnd is intended to do. At the same time it; kept the peop)le of our own country busy in their shops and
blirtiorlies working, investigating, and inventing.
T HAS DEVELOPED OUR WORKMEEN AND THEN PRONOTED PRODUCTION.
Tihe discipline and trainiing thus received by virtue of the protive policy of the country "has plrolduced here a class of workmen
lie like of which has never been seen in the history of the world.
ntelligent, fearless, aspiring, they are menl fit to constitute a great
'tion and to be clitizens of a great Republic. As the workers must
iwwas form the great bulk of the people, so must they constitute
he bulwark of the nation  It is o  their love of lierty that repubican grovernment depends. They man the armies in time of war and
'lltribt:te to the coruntry all the wealthl it has, whether in war or
ce. Their prosperity,     ror, erefore, should be the especial concern
F t~he Republic. It is impossible that true patriotism, virtue, or
rogress namong the masses should exist in the presence of ignorance
'dl squalor.
Itihe industries which have been most higldly protected  in this
0suntry are those in which, not only the greatest improvements have
Ciln effected, but the greatest reductions of price have taken place.
Wlht reductions, however, are not those that result from the cheaptilg of men or the crushing out of humanity. They are the  f isult
f tle cheapening of rnethlods by requiring less sacrifice to bh exclvdd in production. The truth of this is evident froxm the fact
hit vages have not only not declined, btt have risen.
BY means of modern invention —foir the lmost part the work of
merlcans —even the servant girl is able, with her American wages,
t wear better clothes, eat better food, and enjoy more of all the
(furlts of life than could Queen Elizabeth:have done with the 'in1e1ic of a monarch and all resources of her timre.
TIle mere pecuniary result of invention, the saving to society, thie
freeint for purposes of progress and advancement of much of the
ohieh).ry reward of toil., many be indticted by the mere suggestion
that the sewving-machine must save to the people of this country alone
not less than $50,000,000 a year. It enables millions of mothers to
lo ite sewing of their families who could not possibly do so without
it  aid, 
K-. 4                                    -,


I




"LABOR LEGISLATION        IN REPUBLICAN AND DEM
CRATIC STATES COMPARED."
Extract from remarlk of Hon, 0. H. GROSFENOR of Ohio, printed in 
daily Congressonal Record of April 4, 1904.
In Republican States.
States             o. |       P |
having laws 'g  ~  I 3. I
aEa 0202 ~cd h2
in force  ~;s   i o   g
-',y.......
California... Yes. Yes. Yes. No No.. Yes. 12 years Yes., Yes.i Yes.
tonnecticut.  Yes.! Yes. Yes.! No..  Yes. 14 years Yes. i Yes. No,
Delaware.... No. Yes.' No. 'No.. No.. Yes.  Yes. Yes. No
llinois.....Yes. Yes.j Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes., 14 year, No.. Yes. ()
Indiana...... Ye. Yes. Yes. No..i Yes. Yes.! 14 years Yes. | Yes., Yes.
Iowa........ Yes.j Yes.J No. No.. Yes. No.......... No.. Yes. Yes,
Kansas.     es. Yes. No Yes. Yes. Yes.......... No.. Yes. Yes.
Maine....Yes. Yes. No. No.. Yes. No. 12 years Yes. No No
Maryland..  es. No. Yes. Yes. Yes Yes. Yes.a 14 yrs. Yes. Yes. (b)
Mass.      Yes. Yes. Yes No. No.. No.. 14....  yar Yes.No.. 14 years   Yes No
Michigan... Yes. Yes. YesNo  Yes, No.. 14 years Yes. Yes.Yes.
Minnesota.. Ye  Yes. Yes. Yes.  No.. Yes. 14 years Yes. Yes.i No,
Nebraska... Yes. Yes. No. Yes No.. Yes. 10 years Yes.i Yes. No.
New tHamp. Yes. No  No. No.. No.. No.. 12 years Yes. Yes. No.i
New Jersey. Yes. Yes. Yes.: No.. Yes. No.. 14 years Yes. Yes. Yes N
New York..Yes Yes.   s. Ye. Yes. Yes. 14 years Yes. Yes Yes
N. Dakota... Yes. No. No. No. No..  No.. 12 years Yes. No No.
Ohio........ Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes Yes. Yes. 14 years Yes. Yes. (
Oregon.'.... Yes. Yes.N. NoNo.. No. No.. 14 years Yes. No. o 
Penna       es....... es. Yes.Yes. 13 years Yeg Yes. Yes (b) 
R. I.......... Yes. Yes. No. No.. No.. No.. 12years Yes. Yes. No.
f. Dakota.. No. No. No.J No.. Yes. No........... Yes. |No. No
Utah......... Yes. No. Yes. No.. Yes. Yes...... Yes. Yes. No 
Verimont.... No.' No. No.i No.. No.. No.. 10 years Yes. No. Ye, 
Washington' Yes.1 Yes. No.I Yes. Yes. Yes. 14 years Yes. Yes. Yes. 
W. Virglnia. Virga Yes. Yes. No  Yes Yes. Yes. 12 years Yes. Yes. Ye',
Wisconsin.. Yes. Yes. Yes. YesNo. Yes. 14 years Yes. Yes.es. 
Wyoming.... No.. No. No. No..' Yes. Yes....  Yes Yes, Yes..
Total,............ 
28 States.' 23 - 1.11 1r2 | 15  10  21  22   23  14 I
a City of Baltimore.     b Held to be unconstitutional.
Democratic States.
Alabama. No.. No. o.%.; N.',  Yes|  i N  o 1years; No.[ Yes| I  i|
Ja:'   1.                     Il' P               I
Ala         oNIo 12 years No                     Yes Nao
Arkansas..I.. No.N No.. No o.. Yes. I No. 12 years;N No  J N.Yes.j
Poloa~rado.... YesMi.! No..Ye. N.1 Ye i Yes. 14 years  es.i ices. No. N,.2                i ee.0
Florida,.,,.:o.. No,.: No.,; No,,! No,.:e N o.NoNes......... N(o.e
Georgia..  No..  No.  No..No.  No!..........\ No. Yes  Y
StNates je's-0aNo             0 N
Ida o.......Yes. INo..  Y es. No..iYes. Yes.i.........  No. No '(N,,
Yes. Yes No..1 No.. Yes. No.I     o. No
havinglaws ~es  Yes.$
Loubana... Yes. Yes.. Yes..No.. No. No. 12 yt   o  14.  Yes
Arkansas.... No. No. No... Ys.12 years.   ' 
ord.... Yes. N Yes. Yes. N.. Yes. Yes. 14 yearsNo Y. es N y 
Florida..... No..' No.. No.. NoY. No.. Ne....... No. NoYs N
Georgia.i NO..Y'No.. N.. No.. No............  No. 
daso.. Y.No..  Ys.1 Yes.......... No. No IN
N   carolna. Yes.i No.. No.. No.. Yes. No. 12 years No. No  N 
Carolida..is No.. No..i No.. NoiNo. o. Os...llyearsNo. Yes.
Meisori.... Yes.1i oYes. i No.. Yes. No. 1 years No. No. I'
Montana..!. YesYes. Yes. Yes No. Yes. Yes..   No. N
~_Texas.~No..; No.o...' No..o No..' No. No.......No. N o Ye.
CVirginia..... Yes. eNo..,No.. N.. No N. 12 years Yes. Yes I 
States. 410            2               9 2  o8
Tennessu ee.- A fter May 1, 1904; 12 years, May 1 190.. 




I




HAT DOES IT MEAN TO HAVE 3,000,000 MEN
IDLE?"
tract from speech of Hfon. J. Hf. GALLITJNGR of New Hampsiire, in the United States Senate, June 25, 1902,
EMPLOYXMEXT AND EARNINGS.,SaupPly Nwill always be goxverned by demand and demand will depend
ability to buy, so that pulrchasing power is the basis of prosperity.
r spendable income id governed by the amount of employment and
raings of all classes, and in this respect we are breaking records
iO' alfter yeair under the continued successful operation of the
i;gley tariff.
Samuel Gompers, president of the American Federation of Labor,
tinmated that 3,000,000 men were out of employment during the
-tariff period from  1893 to 1897. Not only that, but the wages
those employed were constantly forced down, many working only
rt time at that.  Now, Mr. President, what does it mean to
re 3,000,000 men idle? At $2 per day it means a loss of $1,800,000OO a year in wages, or $9,000,000,000 in five years. That is more
art all the gold and silver in the world. It means a loss of $3,000
ch to 3,000,000 families, and $3,000 will buy a large quantity of
od and clothing and education and comfort and happiness. The
raings lost during the low-tariff period cannot be calculated, but
atever they were we have a different story to tell of the past five
ars.
Not only is labor all over the country fully employed, but wages
-ve been increased again and again. It is impossible to give exact
res of the number of persons employed or the amount of wages
aid, and yet we can get a relative idea from  the labor bulletins
the different States. Take Massachusetts, for instance, a typical
alaufacturing State. The Bureau of Statistics of Labor presents
con time to time an index figure indicating the level of employment
ad earnings. In the May number of the Labor Bulletin a comarisonl is made between April, 1902, and February, 1898. Starting
ith 100 as a base, the following result is shown:
j Febru-  April,
ary, 1S98.1 1902.
Wul tlon......................................................  100  09.65
"plo lyrnent..............I.............. S             1 11l6.76
reekly earnings....................................  100  137.6
That is, employment has increased nearly twice as fast as popution, and earnings have increased twice as rapidly as employment,
four times as much as population, and if the comparison were
rtde with 1895 and 1896, tlhe contrast would be nluch greater. What
true of Massachusetts is no doubt true of New York New Jersey,
cnnslsivania, Illinois, and thle other industrial States.
This is the result of Dinlevism:; this:is the foundation of our
lendid home market; this is the demand that keeps our mills runhg nighlt and day, our railroads freighted to their utmost capacity,
rt( uar farmers busy and well rewarded with sales of their entire
rlihs product at good prices.
N-t only is every incomie earner employed at high salaries1 and
iges, but the hours of labor have been shortened, with its conseteat hour or two more 0of1 domestic and social intercourse and
lP~irreas          f0 


Ol ge 56




"AN OFFiCL WHOSE INTEREST IN THE WEAL 0
THE PLIN       PEOPLE     NEVER DIMINISHED."
Extracts from remarks of lion. C H. GR OSVENOR of Ohio, in 
daily Congressional Record of April 4, 1904.
E AL OFP THE PLAIN PEOPLE.
While the labor problem in a very broad sense is s old as t
human race itself, its modern form    is a creation of steam an
machinery, which have replaced local production within the hoe
for family needs with factory production for a general market. I
the course of this evolution the ownership of the tools and oth
means of production passed from their actual uses to those tvw
understood the need   of th e ee   o   market and possessed the ability
assemble materials, organize the workers, and dispose of the produ
where it was wanted. Formerly each worker was both capitalist an
laborer, and, therefore, himself controlled the conditions under whie
he worked. 3But when the worker lost the ownership of his too
he could no longer control the conditions of employment; and it
his struggle to regain such control and to gain a larger share of tl
joint product of capital and labor that constitutes the modern labo
problem. This is the problem that President Roosevelt in his fir
message to Congress described as the most vital problem with whi
the country has to deal. Few statesmen of this or any other count
have grasped that problem as firmly as has Mr. Roosevelt. His co
tributions to its solution may be found not only in his addresses a
writings, but also in his actions as a public official.
Theodore Rooserelt ever will be remembered as an o2fficial whos
intrst in0 the weal of the plain people never diminished from th
day that he eormenwced his public career as a member of assembly o
the State of Newu York lp to the present time. The principles o
justice that governed his course in advocating the enactment of labo
and reform legislation when he took part in the legislative procee
ings at Albany in 1882, lS83,S and 1884 wernswervingly maintain
while he was governor of New York in 1899 and 1900, and have be
conscientiously adhered to during his incumbency as President 0
the United States. By comparing the first important event connecte
with his life work with one of more recent date it will be readil
observed how unvarying have been his views on matters of moten
affecting the general commnunity.
The initial event referred to occurred more than twenty years ag
when, in the interest of the public health, as well as the wage
workers in   e t  tobacco industry, he vigorously opposed the contin
unnce of the sweating system in the manufacture of cigars in tene
ment houses. The courageous spirit that prompted his attitude i
that affair was demonstrated again in 1902, when, owing to his timel
intervention in the celebrated anthracite coal strike, peace was re
stored, a terrible calamity to the country was avertd, and an adjustment of the dispute finally resulted through the decision of the
commission appointed by him. Not a few problems have reached
solution by reason of the wisdom displayed by Theodore Roosevelt
and other advanced thinkers whose support he has had in his unremitting efforts to induce the State to pass laws looking to tle
amelioration of social conditions, and by pursuing this evolutionam'
plan of creating wise and sound regulations to obviate glaring ine
qualities in the industriai system the State has checked a growl
spirit of unrest,
Deeds speak for themselves, and tie facts respecting his positio
en questions involving the well-being of the great body of working
people are matters of official record well worth careful consideratio
by rmen of thought and  ction who have at heart the stability of oau
republican form of government.


g-57




"THE EMPLOYER AND THE WORKMEN."
frac! from remarks of HIon. J. P. JONES of Nevada, in the Senate
of the United States, September 10, 1890.
he free traders assert that our manufacturers make too much
ney. But we do not hear that, on the whole, the owners of our
nt faiituring establishments are as rich as the manufacturing
ons of free-trade England, nor of those of Germany or France,
rare our manufacturers credited with making as much money in
ortion to their plant.
IWo or three persons are occasionally mentioned in the public
s who, it is said, have realized fortunes in some manufacturing
siness. Nothing is said of the thousands of men throughout the
try who have devoted their whole lives to manufacturing pursuits
hrve simply paid their way and made ordinary profit. It is
ethinrg of a hobby with our free-trade friends to ascribe to the
iquities" of the tariff every fortune made in this country.,he majority of American manufacturers find no greater reward
tlhe money invested than is found by other business men for the
nev otherwise invested. As soon as it becomes evident that inIntent in any special line of business in this or any other country
more profitable than the average investments of the community,
ital, ever on the alert, invades the more profitable department
reduces the profits. This rule applies to manufactures as to
rything else.
f the whole amount of money received by the American manuturer, the workmen get a part and the employer a part. In other
rds. hetween them the employer and the workmen of this country
all that is made in the business.
uppose it to be agreed that at the end of each day the workmen
e their employer should sit down to divide or consume directly
products of their labor. Suppose there should he nine workmen
otone employer. Suppose it were agreed that those products should
transformed into a dinner for ten. Imagine the nine workmen
ted around the table, with the employer at the head. Imagine the
rlnmen, after eating what bhd been set before them, rising from
rltable, pale, gaulnt, and hungry, having received hardly enough to
if:y the first stage of animal hunger, and imagine the employer
ng from the same table, his stomach gorged with terrapin-stew
i canrvas-rbck duck and his veins distended with potations of
ormery Sec or Mumm's extra dry!
That, in effect, is the picture which the free-traders give us of
releation between employer and employed in this country. And
' do they propose to remedy that state of affairs?  What subtute do they offer the workman for this modern form of Barmet's ftast'?  To' give them a. share of the good things? Oh, no.
mnI' to t take from the head of the table and from the American
iloer the terrapin stew, the canvas-back duck, and the other
iieahCs of life, and give them to the English, French, and German
Plover, leaving the place at the head of the American table as
re as the other places, and giving the workmen no chance to secure
re than they now receive. The remedy proposed by the Repuban partv is one which says to the workingman seated at the table,
his dilner is for all, employer and employed; divide it out between
ai aecording as you shall a(ree. It is for each of you to see to it
"t yoCu et vyor fair share." And the workman is rapidly learning
mn ik after his interests in that regard.
There is no law in this or any other country which prescribes the
Mpensation of labor; and there is no doubt that there are in this
mlntrR as in all countries, greedy employers who would, if they
aid pay their workmen but one-half their present wages. But
lrVy rnin knows that in this country the employer does not have
1n s all his own way by bany means. The workmen "Know their
ght,s and, knowing. dare maintain."
Tivey very well understand that the only method by which the terms
ItlF o are fixed is by agreement of both sides, and they show a
tUfl'tl;y increasing confidcnce in their own power to protect theml    o'es from unilust exactions. But instead of being benefted by the
'i nv which the Denmocratic pnartNy favors, whatever profits now
'(rne From the products of labotr twould by that policy be destroyed,
di}lw the wmrkinamakn, no matter bow earnestly he may struggle,
aid Treceive no more than he now receives, because there would be
1 more to divide. The only change which the Democratic party
llcmnlends is one by which all would leave the table-employer and
ployed alike —lank and emaciated.


s                           II




"THE ATTEMPT TO ALARM LABOR."
Extract from remarkls of ton. WM. Tf. STE SWART of Nevada, in darly 1,
gressiona? Record, March 27, 1900.
The attempt to alarm the laborers of this country by the false aF
tion that the acquisition of these islands will let In Chinese labore
isi demagogism-   Our exclusion laws apply to Chinese from      wihatl
country they may come. The law that excludes Chinese Immigrat!or
this country can be made applicable to all our possessions and the Chir
residents of the Philippines may be' treated in the same manner as t
Chinese residents of the United States.
The suggestion that laborers from  the islands who are not Ch!n
may migrate to this country and compete with American labor has
foundation to support it. Nature marks the line which laboring     ilr'a
tion must follow. Vitness our own country. The Swedes and the No
wegians find congenial homes along the Northern Lakes and Canadia
bordGes.  Germans follow along a little farther south. The Irish pref
the central regions 'of the United States as corresponding more near
to the climate' of their native land. The Italians generally go f:r'h
qouth and on the Pacific coast to find climatic conditions similar to bai
Italy.  Never in all the ages has the population of the Troplcs crrc'::
the isothermal lines to Inhabit and cultivate the soil of the te mper"
zones, nor have laborers from the north succeeded in cultivating tIrNopi.
lands. Merchants, traders, bankers, and business men readily accore-:n
date themselves to the climate of the torrid, temperate, or frigid zo,
Blusiness and professional men from    the north enjoy southern elili
and the same Is true of business and professional men of the south whs
they emigrate to the north. But successful labor follows but does not cr'
the line separating t.he tropical from the temperate zone.
The resources of the United States in everything found in the ten
perate zones are inexhaustible and practically untouched.   Modern a
chinery and the genius of American people can always produce mo
of the products and manufactures of the temperate zone than the Pe(a
can use. These islands under -American control and enterprise will pr'
duce vastly more tropical products than they can consume.     The i'.
change of the products of the farm., the mine and the factory for tI
sugar, coffee, tobacco, fruits, and other products of these islands v
give eamployment to anillions in the United States as well as is 
islands. The storm of criticism  and the rancorous vituperation of disa
pointede ambition will soon pass away, and when the American peMP
are In full enjoyment of the new acquisitions they will view thebm
*renely and with as much satisfaction as they now contemplate the tee
ing population and the wonderful productions of the countries acqu!r
during the administrations of Jefferson, Monroe, and Polk, and pros-e'
will wonder why' anybody could have opporsed the rich Inheritance!:5r
the 'war against Spanish cruelty brought to the United States, a's 
now wonder why it was that, the acquisitions of territory which we ha
heretofore made were opposed by persons otherwise considered sarWe   '
sensible.
The establishment of self-government and the inauguration of
dustry under the benign Influence of the principles of the Decla.rat1
of Independence in the gems of the sea, which good fortune has pln'c
within the reach- of the American people, are delayed and emibarrass
by the timidity of the friends of expansion and progress. The su, <';e&
that there is some nebulous, open-door policy In, the Far Bdast 5''t
would prevent the United States from   extending oiuir customs law '- " '
the Philippines is a dream  of folly which will not disturb the A,':-er'i
people.  The idea that the United States will hold the Philippiners 
maintain their ports free to all the world and at the same time;Ie"'
them  from our country by a tariff wall which would exclude thbei r1
our markets and deprive us of the benefit of their trade can not
seriously considered.
The contention that any of the islands which we wrested from S:r (
rule would injure American industries on account of their produc! i5'v 
pure invention. Some gentlemen seem to regard it as a nmatter of 5: 5'
sequence that the consumers are compelled to pay $250,0,00.,000 a;'' r
tropical products which these islands will produce, and that the f',:v?"
and manufacturers of this country would be deprived, by the loss <f t
acquisitions, of, an annual market of frome three hundred to five 
million dollars.,


g-59




E WHO BELIEVE IN PROTECTION ARE RELUCTANT
TO SEE A SINGLE DAY'S-WORK FOR AMERICANS
DONE    ELSEWHERE        THAN     IN  AMERICA."
tiret from remarks of Hon. J. T. McCLEARY of Minnesota, in
the lHouse of Representatives, and printed in the daily Conressitonal Record, June 20, 1904.
Let us imagine the Republican party in power and making up a
riff bill in accordance with its principle that noncompeting articles,
cept luxuries, shall be admitted free of all dulty and that the duty
ll be laid on articles the like of which we do or can. produce
onolically and in sufficient quantity to meet or nearly meet the
me demand.
The first thing that the Republican party would discover in lookg aroulnd to make a list of dutiable articles-that is, of articles
dlih we do or can produce ecolnomically and in sufficient quantities
supply the demands of our own citizens-is that the number of
oe articles is very large. From this it would follow that the rate
dutely upon any one of these articles need not be very high. What
uld determine the rate on each article?
In settling that question the Republicans would refer to their great
riff principle. Let us see again what it is. It is admirably stated,
I have said, in the national platform of 1892. Here it is:
"We believe that all articles which can not be produced in tahe
nited States, except luxuries, should be admitted free of duty, and
at on all imports coming into competition with the products of
merican labor there should be levied duties equal to the difference
hiteen wages abroad and at home."
Now, let us watch the committee at work applying the principle.
comes to an item that is to be put upon the dutiable list. In order
determine the rate of duty the question to be settled is simply
e of lobor and wages. Has the making of this article called for
rich or little labor?  Has the article gone through many or few
recesses? Is the labor required to make such an article skilled or
skilled and does it therefore require and demand a high or a
V rate of wages? In short, what rate of duty on this article will
"equal to the difference between wages at home and abroad?"
his being determined, the rate would be fixed accordingly. UpolI
tieles not far removed from the crude material and requiring little
ark and comparatively little skill in the making the tarifff ratie
uld be low. On articles which are the product of many processes
acl succeeding step requiring the services of men of greater and
rater skill, and who, therefore, properly can and do demand and
mf'rind high rates of wages, thle tariff rates would be correspondrly high.
Take the Dingley law and test it by that rule and you will find
at it was constructed with exceptional skill along the very lines
ich I have indicated. 
Mr. Chairman, we who thoroughly believe in protection are relucat to see a single day's work for Americans done elsewhere than in
Oerica,.'We stand by the proposition thlat the people of the United States
an iot their own work, fight their own battles, solve their own
cobb Rbn5,"
g -()


I




"UNDER A DEMOCRATIC POLICY IF WAGES FALL i
EUROPE OUR INDUSTRIES STAND IN
DANGER OF DESTRUCTION."
Extract from remarks of Hon. J. P. JONESS, of Nevada, in the Senate of
United States, Sept, 10, 1890, and printed in the Congress'ional Recor&.,WAGES IN THE UNITED STATES.
There is no reason whatever why every man in the United Sta
should not be willing to pay such rates of wages and such prices of rnnio
ities as shall naturally result from the free and unrestricted,omi:dtU
of all our own people.
When trade between a people is perfectly free, as in this countr
there can not, on, the average and in the long run., be higher wages pa
to those employed in one industry than to those in another. Wherev
any one industry gives indication that the compensation paid to thl
engaged in 'It is on the average greater than the compensation paid
other occupations, the industry paying the higher compensation is inva
by men from the occupations paying less, and thus wages constantly It
to an equalization. This invasion may continue to a point at which, by t
overstocking of the labor market In the favored industry, wages may final
decline to a:point lower than the average rates prevailing in other indu
tries.
Under the Democratic policy If wages fall in Europe our Industrt
stand In danger of destruction. On the other hand, while professing to
the special friend of the workingman, the Democratic party would set
foot a policy which would render impossible any increase in the wages
our own people.
I favor the erection of a tariff wall so high that no possible redu
tion of wages in Europe would enable the foreign manufacturer to sea
it. I would have it so high that absolutely nothing but the competiti
of our own workmen with one another would fix wages in this countr
That is competition enough among 28,000,000 workers. The people- of tb
country are entitled to such wages as result from the unrestricted compes
tion of their own producers.
In the debate on the tariff in both Houses of Congress long discnuslof
were had as to the exact amount of duty which should be levied on airport
goods to make up for the difference, between wages in this country aa
wages abroad. In these discussions the Denaocrats affected to admit It
their object was to keep the duty at such point as would provide for th
difference.
But such an admisPion presupposes that wages in this country are no
exactly what they should be. This I deny. My idea as to the prope
rates of wages for American labor is that they should result from the u
restricted conmpetition of our own people.
It is sometimes charged as a reproach against the protective polic
that in some special protected industry wages tend to a minimumi. WhMr
this occurs it is an unerring indication of the viciouas distribution of indu
tries and one of the most distressing consequences of their maladjustmen
The remedy Indicated is, not a reduction of the tariff, but a wider diversifies
tion and distribution of industries, so that all persons who want employmea
may not be compelled to seek it in the same occupation.
It is obvious that if industries be relatively few, with large numibe
of men seeking employment, those men must distribute themselves as be
they may, and without intelligent adjustment, among the few Industries
operation.  If a, larger number enter into any special pursuit than a
needed to meet the demands of production in that pursuit wages will in
evittaby decline. The function of a protective tariff, carried to its farthe
limit, is to obviate the necessity for this. Its tendency is to encoura
the ettabnlishrent of a variety of industries and thus to increase opp)5rtun1
ties for employment, not In one or two, but in a great diversity of occupa
Lions.
No. inference Injuriouas to the tariff can therefore be drawn from tl
fact that.at times in some occupations wages tend to a minimum. This I
rather a sign that the tariff is too low to encourage the establishment of
sufficient variety of industries to absorb hall the labor of the. community.
But whatever the condition of labor in this country, it is infiaitl
superior to the iconditions of labor in the home of free trade.
What is the testimony on that point of those who have personal know
edge? '
e John Morley, speaking of Great Britain, makes the following strikld
statement:
"It is an awful fact-It is really not short of awful —that in ti01
country, with all its wealth, all its vast resources, all its power, 45 Po
cent., that is to say. nearly one-half, of the persons who reach the ag?,
sixty are or have been paupers. I say that it Is a most tremendous fat
and I can not conceive any subject more worthy of the attention of 
legislature,t more worthy of the attention of us all."
Said John Ruskin:
"Though England is deafened with spinning wheels, her people bvO
not clothes; though she Is black with the digging of fuel, they die of cold,
and though she has sold her soul for grain, they die of hunger."
Let me read from an article published in the London Evening NeWs o
November 14, 1888:
IT.1.  "n.P TTi El% ON    HIS AMERICAN          TRIr
" 'Last night the executive committee of the Workmen's Associatlosn 
Defense of British Industry held their first meeting since the return of tbei
secretary from the United States. That gentleman   gave at conus eidraIe
length of his experience of that country.
Mr. Pettifer said lie wa.s stre that 'rce trade between this cournry al'
America would n 'the long run be Injour'4us to the British workman. a ":
of the first results oof it would be the triingiug down of American:
the English level, or even below it, and with. reduced wages the An.1^'"1rc''
would not only become our great competitors in foreign markets. but '0 0d
also lose their present purchasing power, and consequently could no1t:lY
as8imuch of us as they do now,
'The only people he found In America who were in favor of w"It 
there called English free trade were the professors of political economy03 i
the different colleges."


g-61 




S WE EXCLUDE THE CONTRACT AND THE PAUPER
LA.BOREf, WHi AD!!T THEIR GOODS?"
rc!I from remarks o!f lon.  H. HGROSVEXOIr of Ohio, printed in the
daily Congressional Record of April 4, 1904.
Our free-trade friends vote for laws Intended to keep out that class
labor known as contract labor. Yet the objections that apply to the
iract laborer himself apply with greater force to his goods, the products
bhis labor. If he is "cheap," his goods are cheaper. If he deprives our
rkmea of their work, so do his goods. There is no logic in excluding
one and admitting the other. To be consistent the Democratic party
uld oppose all laws that restrict the immigration of contract laborers, for
~y bring what that party regards as the most desirable attribute which
iety can covet, namely, cheapness.
Wihile assisting the Riepublicans in the passage of laws to keep out
echeap laborer, the Dernocrats have no objection to his remaining in his
n country, and while receiving much less wages than American labor
eives, shipping annually millions of boxes and bales of his goods in
re to be sold in competition with the products of American labor. I
intain that it were better to have the laborer than the products of his
E CAN REASON WITH THE LABORE1R-WHAT ARGtIMENT CAN BE USED WITH BALES OF GOODS?
The foreign workman coming here becomes inspired by his new-found
edom. Belonginog to our own race, he becomes moved by higher aspiraas: he soon joins the labor associations of his American fellow-workers;
becomes in all senses, except that of birth, a true American. With him
workmen can reason; to him they can appeal. But what argument
be used with boxes and bales of goods? How can men reason with a
ir of bIankets or of shoes? So, as long as the foreign articles are on the
veles of our merchants, American labor must constantly tend to equalizaof conditions: with thome who maake them. Our workmen will not acpt European conditions so long as there is an acre of unoccupied land in
ecountry. They will prefer to take the land. In doing so they take from
r farmers one consumer; and worse, add a producer and a competitor.
If cheapness is the desideratum  the contract laborers are the very
borers who should be brought in.   If they come to this country in
rson, then to the extent that they consume they will furnish a market
our farm products, and will consume infinitely more of those products
re than they) would consume in Europe.
Would it not be better for the American farmer to have the European
borer brought In person to the neighborhood of the American farm,
ore he will earn American wages, such as he had never earned before,, the products of American agriculture. as he had never eaten before,
d pay for them two or three-fold what he he had paid before, than to send
ne products across the ocean to be sold to the same laborer under condias which would render it impossible for him to pay the cost of their
uction? If we are to have no tariff, our people, farmers and mechanics
'be, will be obliged to compete not nmerely with the pauper laborer who
aes here, but.with the pauper laborer who does not. If.our people. have
conmpete with pauper labor, they had better compete with It here than to
pete with it in foreign lands.
aN OUR WOIV0IRME            COMPETE WITH EUROPEAN'
PRISON LABORP
Suppose the governments of Europe should organize in their prisons
Ot systenms of manufacture, with all the most modern machinery, set
ir prisoners to work, and ship the products of their labor to this coun_, Sill it for a moment be contended that the product of the labor of our
rkmnen could compete in the home market or In any market with that
ss of merchandise?  It will at once be admitted that the prisoners reive bhut the barest necessaries of existence. Yet according to the stateeats of all witnesses there are millions of people in Europe, outside thA
Isns, who, in all the essentials of life except greater liberty of movement,
e no hbetter off than the prisoners. Should our workmen be subjected to
aPe:ititon with those merely that some non-producers may, for the
mnent, be able to save a few cents?
01%OR WITH THE CHINESE?
Suppose the people of China, by the aid of European or American superafing skill and the adoption of the latest improved machinery for manucturlg 'cotton goods, should undertake to compete with Europe and
"rica In the manufacture of such goods. With their hundreds of millions
ehep and imitative laborers they would soon become te most extensive
auf, cturers of such goods in tthe world, If we imported their cottons it
ould be in vain that we excluded themselves.
Sh'ould the Chinaman come here in person, while he would be an undeable ccession to our population, while he would not amalgamate with us,
ntcld never become part or'parcel of our civilization, we could at least
IOei him to pay his share of the' expenses of the Government under
ch he conducted business. But with free trade, with the unhindered
r' o>f entrance given to the product of his labor performed In China, he
s'id contribute nothing to that object, but, while carrying'on his busineass
stieally aiong us,.nd under the protection of our Government, would
O'? all men of our own race entirely out of any business which the Chime 0fgbht invade.
T E EtIUROPEAN PAUPER LABORER IS TO CONTROL
O~U INDUSTRIAL AFFAIRS, WHY NOT, WITH AS
I-UCH REASON, OURt POLITICAL AFFAI$RS?                   '.
l_}UnBr *the doctrine of the Democratic party, while the foreign laborer
1g alrenain physically tn hlawn tountry, blae would be liere no less actol ia the form of boxes and bales of goods.
g-g2


I




"THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES CAN DO TH
OWN WORK, FIGHT THEIR OWN BATTLES,
SOLVE THEIR OWN PROBLEMS."
Extract from   remarks of Hon. J. T. McCLEARY of Minnesota
the House of Representatives, and printed       in the daily C
gre sional Record, June 20, 904.
Mr. Chairman, we who thoroughly believe in protection are
luctant to see a single day's work for Americans done elsewhere
here in America.
We stand by the proposition that the people of the United St
can do their own work, fight their own battles, solve their own p
tems.     0:: 
In' our judgment, sir, nothing is cheap to the people of the Uni
States which leaves our own resources undeveloped and our own
pie unemplovyed.
Free trade looks abroad for its products and for its safety; 
tton knows that both     can best be secured at home. 
Free trade would have us depend on' others; protection thiik
wiser to depend on ourselves.
Free trade thinks that wealth is created by trading; protect
knows that it results from   producing.
Free trade would have us content to buy things; protection wo
have us cultivate the ability to make things.
Free trade fears that if the rest of the world were blotted
this country would be unable to survive; protection has faith 
we would still move on, practically undisturbed, and achieve a gl
ous destiny.
Free trade, in the last analysis, is based on shortsighted individ
selfishness; protection is based on that larger and wiser selfishn
that we call patriotism.
A  recent article in the San Francisco Chronicle states the wh
fundamental doctrine of protection so briefly yet clearly that I
not forbear quoting from it, as follows:
The economic policy known as protection is a cooperative agreemr
enacted into law whereby by means of duties on imports reasonable p
tection from the competition of foreigners is assured within the protec
area to all domestic industries which, under such protection, are capable
supplying the home mrket. Its justification is economic and social; e
nomic in that it conserves the natural resources of the land, avoids.waste of unnecessary carriage, and makes the nation self-sufficing, 
thefrer  able in peace or war to support its population in comfort with
regard to other nations; social in that It tends to maintain for future ge
rations that standard of comfort which is the national Ideal.:  rotection is Strictly national and can be nothing else, because natio
areas are essential to its effective operation and because nothing less t
national authority will suffice for its enforcement. Conversely, the P
teoted area must be coterminous with the national jurisdiction, beca
otherwise the law  rotects one part of the people against the competition
another part and is therefore unjust. Within the protected area competit
is unlimited.
XIf, under the protection of the tariff, effective combinations are in
case able to oppress-a condition which can only occasionaly arise-it 
matter for regulation by domestic law.
Protection must be impartial for all industries worthy of protect
When the protection of any worthy industry is impaired those concen
with that industry are made economic foreigners, forcibly expelled from i
economic body politic, condemned, if they remain in that industry,
standards of life below the national ideal.
Of necessity they become economic enemies of their protected fello
citizens, and for their own protection must unite with other outside intere,
to break down the protective wall. The victims of "reciprocity" dick
drift naturaiy into the free-trade canp. If compelled to sell cha p t0
want to buy cheap. If forced to a lower standard of life they have no 
terest in maintaining a higher standard for those who were the cause
thfeir own degradation.  *  *  *
Th  power of protection to affect the lives of mankind varies with t
size and diversity of the protected area. Small countries which can not
come self-ficing may be compelled to sacrifice something which they wsi
have in order to obtain other things which they must have. Germany is
example of a country which would be strictly protectionist, but is compelt
to make reciprocit trades. Prance is te most nearly self-sufficig coulti
of  urope, but it can not produce cotton.  ussia, when fully developed, 
be self-suffieing, and we may be sure will be rigidly protectionist
all the naton     the world, the United State  alone is aseolutely self-sJ
fcng, *      * *:   Wit h f isuh a; b:asis foreign trade ts merely the outlet for the co'mPa
tively small surpluses at a profit, or a loss, as circumstances maype
In this happy positon the United States now stands. The business affairs
is peopler adjusted to existing conditions. We are at the, plnnaCle
present material prosperity. We command the sources of Immeasurable ~
portuoity. All tha t we need to do is to stand fast where we ar-wad res tlStt
re{ese to fitter our advantCages awayi.


I
I Ai
I
i
I
I
I
f
h
I
I


I


g-63::




Fhe Farmer
H




"PRO:SPERITY        OF    THE     FARMER. —      MORE     TH
$4,: 0 CO,000 U   ADDED  TO   HIS WEALTH."
Extracts from remarks of Hou. C. I.i GROSVENOR of Ohio
daily Congressional Record, June, 8, 1900.
Mr. SPENAKERJ: The disposition of our friends of the Democtnr
party to try to make it apparent that the prosperity of to-da;i
not real leads me to present and make a rmatter of permanent rec'
the views of a well-known publication, the American Agricultur
on the prosperity which has come to that substantial and ldesenr
class of our people, the farmer. It is published in its issue of )ia
11, 1900, and therefore presents a view of their present cotditi
It will be seen that it shows a gain of more than $/4,000,00 0,00 in
value of their farms,       their cro  antheir live animals, and a red
tion of three hundred millions in farm. mortgages, compared ';
three years ago.  Is the reduction of a hundred millions a. year
nmortgages and an increase of over a billion doltars a yeanr in val'
of pr(operty owned by a single class 'iiietitous prosperit?"  If
ltt us have more of it.
Prosperity of the Farmer-.-.More than $/,O000,000,000 added to
Wealth in Three Yeors ---lTestimony of the American Arlrir
Iurist to the prosperity of the American Farmer utnder protecti
Amoount.
Gain In  live stock............................0.........  $6. 9,0;'0,(0X) 
Gain in staple crops................................  401,000,000
Gain  in  live-stock  produce................................  70,000,(0
Gain  In  other  produce......................................  2,000,000,
Total gain...........................  1,1609,000,
Gain  in  real estate...0.................................  2,550,000,0(
Aggregate advance........................................  4219,000,(0
The astounding improvement in agricultural conditions now c
trsted with the depths of depression in 1894-1896 is as littte api'
ciated by the outside pubc a was the farmer s conditios during
hard times. It tis conservative, however, to say that the produce
United States farms in 1899 will realize to tthe farmers over $l,6i
000,000 more than their produce was worth in either of the depre'
years of 1894-1896. This is an average advance of 31 per cent
values compared to the low point.
The vaue eof live stock on farms in January of this year was 
thousand five hundred and fifty-eight millions of dollars, an imere
vof six hundred and ninety-eight millions over 1895-96, or 27 per cc
Implements and machinery show a natural gain within the past
years, but owing to the fact that these goods have been sold at si
low prices of late years their total value to-day is probably abut I
same as a dozen years ago.
The total investment in American agriculture at the present ti
is thus set down as having a value of seventeen thousand five hlund?
and fifty millions of dollars, or a gain of some three thousand thl
hundred millions over the extreme depths of depression, and a gi
of nearly one thousand six hundred millions over the comparativC
high basis of values indicated by the Federal census taken in Ju
1889.
This table compares the average farm    price of leading stap
durin  theu period of extreme depression with the farm   value I
bushel, pound or ton of the same crops grown last year.
per celll
L ow point.      Crops of 1899.  adac
~;   Total value. Total value., 4,3 ^a
Corn............ 1896  $0.215  $488,000,C00  $663,000,000  $0.303 41 
Wheat.......   1894   A.41   226,000,000  4,000,000.t584,0
Oats.........  9.187  134,000,000  218,(X00,000.249
Buckwheat....  89 18          6,000000   7.s000.00.557  42'
Barley......  18960..  1  23,000,000  119,000,000.408 3  2 
ye............. 189.408    10,000,a00 i  1,";(XoX).5 11 
Potatoes...... 1895.27    77,000,000  9X,.89   44
Cotton......... 1 894.046  25,000,000  8338,000,000. 605j 
Tobacco..... 1 89 I..08   2,000,t0 44t,0.08  18 
ay............ 80 8 -0 4, 00,00        428,000,000  7.27
gate................  1 59,000)....
h-:


p
I
I
I
I
t
I
i




IINE HUNDRED'      M.ILLIONS LESS RECEIVED BY THE
FARMER UNDER:THE WILSON LAW THAN
UNDER THE McKINLEY LAW."
ItrOct from remarks of  on of lon. 1V, S. KERR of Ohio, in House of
Ilepresentatives, M1arch 31, 1897, and printed in Appendix to
gbound Congressional Record, Vrol. 30, page 36.
During the last eight months of the McKinley law we bought
om abroad $16,800,000 of woolen goods, at the, rate of $20,000,000
year. In 1895, under the Wilson law, we bought $57,559,000, an
rease of thirty millions a year.
In the last full year under the McKinley law (1.893) we bought
o iabroad 111,000,000 pounds of wool and paid for it $13,000,000.
1895, under the Wilson law, we bought 248,989,000 pounds, and
id for it $33,000,000. In the one item  of wool the farmer lost
arlet of $20,000,000 in wool.
In the last year of the McKinley law we imported 229,000 pounds
sholddy.
In 1895, under the Wilson law, we imported )0,000,0 00 pounds of
ddy, every pound of which took the place of a pound of Ameriwool.
Besides buying increased quantities of goods from  abroad, we
ve been deprived of large markets for our agricultural products.
hat we need particularly is a foreign market for our flour, and
se enabled to get rid of our surplus wheat. In Liverpool we
et the wheat of the world, and we can no longer rely iupon favort' tnmarkets for raw wheat.
l:ler the reciprocity of the McKinley law we built up a very
ontarIntl trade for Americlan llour.  In, Cuba in three years we
rcsed our sales of flour from 1)50,000 barrels to 662.000 barrels,
is getting rid of 3,300,000 bushels of wheat on one island.
n the West Indies and Bermuda we buillt up a trade for 400,009
rrels of' lour, or 2,000,000 bushels of whleat; in Brazil a trade for
)0 lf barrels, or 1,000,000 bushels of wheat.
in Germany, under the reciprocity, our trade in flour wsent from
1 barrels to 286,000 barrels. All this has been destroyed by
\Vlson bill and tile farmers compelled to compete at Liverpool
h thle cheap wheat of the world.
h-o two itelms just mentioned are serious enough, but the next
nis  uch more damagring to the farmer, namrely, the falling 'off
home consumption. He lost a la1rge part of his best mnarket-the
ae nrarket.
few facts will show the extent which this shrunk. In the year
s-96 the consumption of wheat per capita was 4 bushels; th-at
1891-9, 5.7 bushels per capita. In 1891-92 the non-agricultural
ilation each was able to pay tile farmer for his wheat.$4.7;
eat was 83 cents a bushel. In 1895-96 each one paid the farmer
1i; wheat was then 54 cents a bushel.
that does this show?
t slows that of thle forty or forty-five millions of people who
their bread each paid the faramer $2.11 less for wheat than in
ihis alone reduces his home market immensely.
U still greater decrease in the consumption of corn is shown.
n 1.892 the per capita constumption of corn was 30 bushels, in
it w was only 16 bushels.
ihe following sunmmary as to thle thirteen principal agricultural
~citis will show what the farters have lost by a change in the
if laws: 
n S191 *the following articles, namely, Nwvheat, corn, rye, oats,
hi, aity, potatoes, woiol, barley, buckwheat, tobacco, hogs, and
P hOr) og0lt the ftarmers of the United States, or were valued at,
la(o0:o,000.  In 1895 these saune articles broulght them  $2,061,-,lO0. Ninie h'undred  tillions less receimved bq the farmer under
o'ilton lawu than uwnder the MoKinley law, and both years were
de the same money las. What caused the loss?      Free trade,
COurse 
IM


I




" THE FARME         DEPENDS      UPON THE GOOD TH
COMES FROM PROTECTIONS.
Extract from remarks of Hion. WALTER EVLANS of Kelatu
in House of Representatives, April 9,; 1897, and printed
lAppendi to bound Congressional Record, Vol. $0, page 7,
THE,AB.EBR.
And, Mr. Chairman, I want to express the profound convicti
that there is no class of our community whose interests have b
better protected and guarded than the farmers.    There was
man upon that committee, so far as I know, who was not willi
to accord to the farmer all of the protection he deserves, 
measure and running over, indeed. Many of us were farmer bt
I go back to the farm myself. I was born on a farm. The fa
has always been dear to me, and there is nothing about the farl
that I can not sympathize with. As much as any class of
people, the farmer depends upon the good that comes from p
tection. If the people who labor are prosperous, the farmer c
readily and profitably sell his product at good prices. Other
he can not ata suffers. Now, I should like to ask my friends fr
Texas if they think there should not have" been some sort of
protective duty levied upon cattle?  I should like to know if
was a tax, in an offensive sense, to guard by a customs duty
great plains of Texas against the incursions of the cheap Mesi
steer. I should like to know if it is an offense in their estimati
to protect the great wheat and corn fields of Texas against
possible corn crop or wheat crop that may be produced in Me
by the peon labor of Mexico.
We have put atduty upon cattle that may be too high or may
too low, but we have carefully investigated the subject; we i
felt that Texas needed protection for her cattle; we have felt
Texas was as much entitled to that, with its 100,000 Democra
maority, as the State of Kentucky, with its 265 Republican majori
[Applause.] I believe that no Texan here would be so untrue
the Lne Star State as to say that we did wrong in putting a pi
tective duty upon cattle, or corn, or wheat.
So it is upon the Canadian border. It is true that the far
who raises corn in my State, or in any Central State, or 
raises any crop in a Southern State, may not be materially inju
by competition from Canada; but we can not frame a tariff bill wi
out haing some regard for the people who live along the gr
*stretch of border land from the coast of Maine to the coast
Washington.
We know that, extending for thousands of miles, there is anot
country on the other side, largely separated from our own eoune
only by an imaginary line, but sometimes by a lake or river of 'a
navigability.
We must guard the people who have to pay American wages 
their labor against the cheap products of Canada, where they do
pay what we call American wages.
And while it is true that possibly the influence of that pro te
tariff is not felt very far from  the Canadian border, yet if
allowed Canada to come into the United States and compete i
cur farmers upon equal terms, it might be that those farmers al
the border would push a little farther down upon their neighbos a
those in turn farther down, until the corn of Canada, and the whl
from Canada, and the produce from Mexico might exert a 
material influence upon the prices of products of like character
in the interior of our country. 
So that we had to consider all those things, and the meC11ber
*the Ways and Means Committee, looking at the existing cundit
o things, not being bounded by any little selfsh interest, It 
$       fin  simply the welfare of their own constituents, but e&dt
ofxin  to have in mind the interests of the people of th si 
contry everywhere, r    ds    o            ardlsss of potc, erdles 
or preious condition   ve done their best   give to this ltluOs
il that wll meet with the apprval of the people of the coutry
a              ftepeprvle of t he


I
I
0
1
1
11
1-(
p
ic
I




h-3






gE tA1lF  X   O OW HAS A i&ADT t iAaXZt:00A AtL
OF HIS PRDUCTS AT GOOD PRICES
NEAR HIS HOME."
itract froim remarks of lion. NELSON   DINGLEY,
Jr., of Maine, page 6471 of daily Congressional Reord,
50th Congress, 1st Session.
Mr, Chairman, the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr.
conT] ha said that the farmers are not protected. Mr.
1hairman, my district is largely composed of farmers. I
new that district when almost its sole industry was farmg, and I know it to-day since manufacturing industries
ave come in. And I say that there is not a farmer n my
istriet who does not appreciate that the building up of
aniufacturing industries there has obtained for him a
etter market-a home market-and higher rates for his
roducts than he had before. I know that farmers forty
ears ago found it almost impossible to obtain cash for
e products of their farms. They went out and bartered
em at almost any price to obtain those things that they
ere compelled to have.
That condition of things has been altered. The farmer
ow ha a ready market for all his products at good prices
ear his home.
HOME MARKET THE FABRMERS MAIN DEPENDLCEP."
xtract from remarks of Hion. L.. McCOMAS, of Maryland, page 388 of daily Congressional Record, 60th
Congrs,  1t Session.
Itvas born upon a farm; its fragrant fields, its mead
ws and clover bloom are redolent of the memories of a
appy boyhood.  I live among farmers andrepresent
rgely a farming constituency.  As I consider their wants,
eir burden  their troubles, God forbid I should ever
ote to add to their present evils by a ds of English frade tariff for revenue only, the los1 of their lpa9 Wret, te farmer'esmeain d dpene, for the fE:fi 8aur-:Us roducts  [Applause.} 
ree trade may cheapen a few oft: famer su      ie;
i still more cheapen the:auhe of his:f:m a     jts
o^diits, decrease manufactures, and increae fa r
h4                                       Big. I1




"McKINLEY TO FARMERS."-"THE HOME MARK
~IS THE BEST FRIEND OF
THE FARMER."
Extracts from remarks of Hon. C. H. UROSVENOR of OQlo, in House
Representatives, July 19, 1897, and printed in Appendix to bound C
gressional Record, Vol. 80, page $08.
There is no better statement than is contained in the speech of. Ma
McKinley, after his nomination for President, to a delegation of farme
from Knox county, Ohio, in which he said:
It gives me very great pleasure to meet and greet the citizens of Kn
County in the city of Canton and at my home. I am glad to welcome
old comrades of the Grand Army, my fellow-citizens who are engaged
agricultural industries, and my fellow-citizens of all occupations who a
here assembled this morning. Your meeting demonstrates that you have
keen interest in the public questions which are now engaging the people
the United States, and that you want this year, as you have always want
in the past, to vote for those principles and those policies which will achie
the-greatest good and the highest welfare to the country.
I am glad especially to meet the farmers of Knox county, for the far
ers of the United States are the most conservative force in our citizensh
and in our civilization, a force that has always stood for good governme
for country, for liberty, and for honesty.
WHAT THE WILSON LAW DID.
Under the Republican tariff law of 1890 we imported in the calend
year 1893 over 111,000,000 pounds of wool, valued at over $13,000,000.
In 1895, under the Democratic tariff law, we imported 248,000,0
pounds of wool, valued at $33,770,000. Nearly $20,000,000 worth more
wool was imported under the Democratic tariif law than under the Rep
licon tariff law in 1893. The imports of woolen goods in 1894 amount
to $16,809,000, and in 1895 to $57.494,000. From the reports of the
partment of Agriculture, at Washington, we find that there were 47,273,0
eheep in the United States in 1892, valued at $125,909,000. On the lest
January, 1896, there were 38,298,000 sheep in the United States, valued
$e5,000,000 —a decrease of 9,000,000 in the number of sheep, and of $6
000,000 in value.
Two million two hundred thousand dollars' worth more of shoddy w
imported under the Democratic tariff law than under the Republican ta
law. In woolen goods the difference is more than $40,000,000 in favor
the foreign manufacturer and against the domestic producer. The to
loss in these three items to the American wool grower and the wage earn
in American woolen factories is more than $62,000,000.
So with other agricultural products. During the last seventeen mon
of the Republican tariff law there were imported into this country 140,
tons of hay, and during the first seventeen months of the Democratic ta
law there were imported 393,000 tons. The Wilson law gave the forei
producers a market for 253,000 tons more than they had enjoyed in
last seventeen months under the Republican tariff law. This loss exce
$2,000,000.
The total wheat, rye, barley, oats, and corn crops for 1895, amoun
to 3,556,900,000 bushels. The total of this product exported was 182,0(
000 bushels, or a little more than 5 per cent. of the total product annual
The great bulk.was consued by your own fellow-citizens, your own natu
consumers and customers. In 1891-92 we exported $1,442,000,000 wos
of agricultural products. In 1895-96, the first two years under the De
cratic tariff law, we exported $1,123,000,000 worth. We exported, the
fore, $319,000,000 worth less in the two years under the Democratic ta
law than In the two years under the Republican tariff law.
LOW TABISTS ALWAYS B3INMG HAD TIMES.
Depression in agriculture has always followed low-tariff legislation.
was so after l~ae tariff of 1846;.and it has been so wuder the tariff of I8
You can not help the farmer by more coinage of silver; he can only
helped by more consusmers for his products. You can not help him by f
trade, but, as I have shown, he can be hurt, and seriously hurt, by the I
introduction of competing products into this country. Better a thous
times enl         arkets for American products than to enlarge the m
for the silver product of the world.
A HOME MARKET IS WH.AT IS NEEDED.
' The le home market -is the best friend of the farmer.  It is It s 1
market. It is his i only reliable market. It is his own natural market.
hotuld be protected in its enjoyment by wise tariff legislation, and this ho
market should not be permitted to be destroyed by lessening the dea
for American labor and diminishing the pay of American workm el,
thereby diminishing the demand for agricutural products.
Theo    y waytoelp the farmer Is to increase the demand for
farm products. This can be done by preserving a home market to hail
by xteding ou r markeWt, which we rdid in 1892, 1893, and 1894. u.der
reciprocity provisions of the tariff" law of 1890. The best. consue ner
hle American tarmer are those' at home, They cons ume eighteen timl
much of the products of the American farm as the foreign consume. T
*eariiing  ower cut oft makes our home market lets desirable..
Prosperity of mwufactures is inseparable from the prosperit: of
culture,   t allo'W whteie In  otion, set all Vour espindle:s whirn. set
our men at work on full time, start up the idle workshops of the cou
bring back confidence and business, and the farmier will at once 
influence of the greater. demand fr- his products in the better prices
wouild retve. 'le-e  Wants.-to be protected by wise tarif legislation?ei
compettiion of 'the other side; and then he wants the mines and 1wiils
factforie's of hit own country uim  ng with bisy industry, empio0t in
patd woarmen, vs ho can buy and consume his products.


I




AT TflB AGRIotiLTirEi^ WA<S Alut oo2atrMEBS, CONSXMERS AT HOME.'
tract from remarks of Hon. WILLIAM    McKlNLEY     of Ohio,
page 4751 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st
session.,
Wiy, Mr. Chairman, the establishment of a furnace or factory or
in any neighborhood has the effect at once to enhance the value
all property and all values for miles surrounding it. They produce
reased activity. The farmer has a better and a nearer market for
products. The merchant, the butcher, the grocer, have an ined trade. The carpenter is in greater demand; he is called upon
bluild more houses. Every branch of trade, every avenue of labor,
feel almost immediately the energizing influence of a new instry. The truck farm is in demand; the perishable products, the
its, the vegetables, which in many cases will not bear exportation
which a foreign market is too distant to be available, find a cont and ready demand at good paying prices.
'hat the agriculturist of this country wants more than anything
after he: has gathered his crop, are consumers, consumers at
e, tmen who do not raise what they eat, who must purchase all
y consume; men who are engaged in manufacturing, in mining,
cotton-spining}, in the potteries, and in the thousands of protive industries which command all their time and energy, and
e employments do not admit of their producing their own food.
E HAVE INCREASED OUR COMMERCE EIGHT TIMES,
WHILE ENGLAND HAS NOT QUADRUPLED HERS."
tract from remarks of Hon. J. H. GALLINGER of New HampOhie, page 3687 of daily Congressional Record, 60th Congress,
1st Session.
ur farms have increased in number from two millions to five
oIS, and our wool product from sixty million pounds to three
dred million pounds. In that time we have increased our cornCe eight times, while England has not quadrupled hers. Our railds have grown from thirty thousand to nearly one hundred and
thoalsand miles, and the rolling stock of our railroads is worth
e times the merchant marine of England. In that time 55 per cent.
&U the wealth added to the earth has been contributed by the
ted tates. What a mighty result is that! In all human history
lng can be found to equal it, and yet we have croakers in
gTes who are talking of the decay of our institutions. In Engler cent, Vof:the wealth goes to pay labor, 26 per cent. to
~tal nd 23 per cent to government, while in the United States
t e  74 per cent,, capital 01 per cent., and the Government 5
Cent


I




"FFECT OF t      ftOTECTiON AND FhEE TfADE
RE6ARD TO SHEEP."
Extracts from remarks of ion. C. H. GROSVENOR of Ohio,
daily Congre    ional Record J"une 7, 1900.
The4       reports of th UWit   Ste Govrnment upon the s,
ject of sheep raising and sheep values, which I will preset, teac
wonderful lesson.
From 1878 to 1882, inclusive, tte Morrill tariff (protection) e
in force, and the number of sheet throughout the country incren
by over 11,00,000 during this period.
The tariff of 80   was il force from 1883 to 1889, inclusive. 
duties mposed by this tariff upon raw wool amounted to no mn
than a revenue tariff on yarns and some other goods produced fr
woof:; conseqeniU y the result of this tariff as a whole was nt p
tective. Under its operation the number of sheep throughot 1
United States decreased by about 6,000,000.
Te McKinley tariff, p       iasd i 1890, was a scientific tariff as
plied to wool growing,   ith the result that the number of st
throughout the country increased by nearly 4,000,000 before the fr
trade election of 18911.
The Wilson tariff, with free trade in wool, practlcally went il
effect when Mr. Cleveland was elected, and immediately the flo
throughout the eountry began to dcrease, and from    1693 to 11
decreased by about 9,000,000.
The Dingley tariff reimposed the scientific schedules of the 3
Kinley tariff, and with tie promise of protection through the i
tion of William McKinley and a Republican Congress the she
raising industry immediately began to prosper. From 1896 to and
eludingi l0 te num    r of sheep increased by 1,042,411.
The effect of protection and free trade in regard to the number
sheep owned throughout the country is not more impressive than
effect as to value.  Uader the Morrill tariff the lwest price
head was $.09 and the highest $.$45. Under the tarff of 1883
lowest price per he- d was $1.91 and the highest price was $
Under the McKiney tariff the lowest price was $2.49 and the higt
price $f.66. Under free trade the lowest price was $1.4 and
highest price $1.. Under the Dingley tariff the lowest price 
$2.75 per head, and now the value has advanced to $3.90 per h(
the highest average price in the history of the nation.
Report of the tUnited States Government on sheep raising from 1878
1898, inclusive, and report for 1900, based upon the sheep-raising (
Mi:Of tlzs AMeArican Frfte-cttve Tariff Leafue.
Average   TotA
X:  Year.i Number i Avpeage             To
Year.            p      r     ice        val"
_..Ttie.........       *.._peri........ 
The kMoutltlrX-  2;:; tari4                  1:        |
1878,..........................................,12 800  g.9   TO,
j~ ~~~~~~-OIC..


I
r
i
I
I
I
r
8
a
I
I
I




18,......0...........................*  I  4,576,899
1881...........I................................  45,016,224
1882..........................................  49,237,291
The tarif f of 1888
1888.................................i 50,626,626:184.....................               248
1885.................................   48,822,8 1
1886*.........                        4 79:.........3. 44 34
1887..........................................  43,544,755;........................................  42,599,079
1889.................................       44,336,072
The MeKinley tariff:                     '             - 
18w.........................................  48,4 1,1 6
1892.........................................   47,273,558.......88,298,788
The DtUgley tariff8, eaeo..93                                        87,656.............  8,17
189 8e.........................................,114,458
1....,...,......;*.......;....... **.............. 6,1214,81
W0000f:fff ffft SffSSt, ar   0 tS  f f f: f - 0 f 


2.52  1 24,
1.37  l I94,
1   1071,
14 I 1341,
1.91   9'
2.27.,i
2.49  i:
158,6,
2.66   25,1'
i.08   8,:
1.70   6J
2.75! '


37
511l
W,
16
0)
8
44
17
27
65
SV2
9)
it'
18
in
16"j
Ill


0,
O4
72,
N
i
1
11
A,
IN
lT,
[i
-1
Iw


TIn 186 we had arrived at the lowest stage of the woobe     n, and possessed   tOl81843 sheep, I
nde.sthe. otering, amr of poatection, were increased to~ 3.lp
Thevalueof "our' sheen in 1 90 was $67,020,942, and     edtr
fos eof protecton has reahed the enormus value of 
175,33. In the: istor of industrial and economic conditincs 
world no more wonderful resut can be shown,


h-7


I
i
I
i




IFFERENRCE IN THE VALUE OF SHEEP                        UN
FREE TRADE AND PROTECTION."
iracts from  remarks of Hon. C. H. GROSVENOR of Ohio, in
daily Congressional Record, June 7, 1WO.
A remarkable illustration of the difference in the value of sheep
er free trade and protection occurred in connection with an
gnce's sale of the estate of a farmer in Jefferson County, Ohio, in
ober, 1894, a few weeks after the passage of the Wilson bill with
free-wool clause. The animals sold were all fine black-topped
rinos. The files of the Ohio State Journal show that 40 ewes sold
this sale for 69 cents each, 30 lambs for 30 cents each, and a
stered buck was knocked down for 50 cents. Other lots chosen
m the same flock sold at similar prices, and all were fine Merino
p.
t is reported that a farmer in Fulton County, Ohio, recently sold
head of sheep for $800, being $6.40 per head. The farmer of
ton County will tell you that under the Wilson law that number
sheep would not have produced $125, perhaps less, and that
ers would have had to look around a long time for a purchaser
any price.
Let us devote a moments attention to a section of the country
om considered save in connection with its mineral prouctions,
usually left out of the reckoning of agricultural possibilities. I
er to the mountainous little State of Nevada, where sheep raising,
der fair and favorable conditions, is assuming proportions of
ked importance in relation to the wealth and prosperity of the
ple. Among the letters received by the American Protective
iff League in response to its cards of inquiry regarding relative
p values in March, 1896, and in March, 1900, I am permitted to
te the following:
The American Protective Tariff League-Gentlemen: Nevada has seen
andertul change for the better since 1896, from almost starvation and
vency to good comfortable homes and fat bank accounts. When the
Ion bill passed everything seemed to stop. It crushed rich and poor
e, and men with large flocks were no better off than the poor sheep
er, as wool was raised at a loss.
Wool sold in San Francisco as low as 6% cents per pound. Deduct
cents for railroad freight and Y2 cent for commission, and that left
sheep man but 3% cents per pound for wool on the ranch. His flock
d average about 6% pounds, and this would amount to 22% cents per
Now, I sold wool in April, 1900, near Battle Mountain at 15% cents.
t, with the same average, would make $1.02% per head. That is the
erence between the Dingley bill and the Wilson bill or free trade. Under
Wilson bill In 1894, 1895, and 1896 I paid herders $25 and $30 per
th. In 1894, 1895, and 1896 1 sold Wethers for $1.25 and $1.50
head, in 1897 at $3 per head, in 1898 at $3.20, and in 1899 at $3.50
head.
Farmers have done as well with their cattle-from 2 cents gross in, 1895, and 1896 to 3V, cents in 1897, 1898, and 1899. There are no
men in the country. Money is plentiful at 6 per cent. per annum,
lnst 10 and 12 per cent. per annum in 1894, 1895, and 1898.
All the Republicans in Nevada are praying for is four more prosperous
ALPINE, NEV., May 2, 1900..W.    W WILAMS.
fter listening to this testimony from a practical sheep raiser and
liable witness, can anyone wonder that the sheep owners of Nea have pushed "16 to 1" into the background, and now regard the
tetive tariff as the paramount issue in the campaign of 1900?
he same kind of a story is told in the experiences of the sheep
rs of Idaho. As told lately by the senior Senator of that State
tory goes thatUnder the Harrison administration, when wool was protected by the
Inley tariff, Idaho sheepa were worth from  $2.25 to $2.50 per head.
Cleveland was inaugurated they commenced to go down and down
', when the Wilson bill was passed, they were worth $1.27 per head.
McKinley was1 inaugurated in 1897 they at once advanced 45
Is In 1899 they had advanced to $2.38 and this year, according to the
tte of the Agriculture Department, the average valoe of every sheep
dlho on January 1 last was $2.80, as compared with $1.27 at the time
nley was inaugurated.
In order that ybou  y appreciatte the force of this ar ument there are
OO 2.00 000 sheep in the State that have gained more than  0  per cent.
lue since Mcdinley was elected, because of Republican tarif legislafan you bltame the sheep farmers, who mostly votd the Deiocratic
et in 189  because they believed that th e free coiage of silver would
rs the value of their sheep, for wanting to keep the Republican patty i.
r! Are they going  take any tchaneS? Take the prit  of Wo   for 
aPIet whNsh 61d    1   nt a   pound unfler the MeKinley tariff law
tithe Hdrrtison Adminlistfatlon.
while leveland tas President it dropped to 6 cents a pound, and tlow,
the Dingley ttariff, t is slling for frot  18 to 25 ents a pound.
have advanced an average of $10 a Btd since McKinley Was elected,
I ~rses are worth fomt $5 to $10 per head more than a year agoi Our
* re not fels. They know what is good tor them and with these
tbulign out of every ma n' l pocket do ywou suppose he i gong to vot
e restoration of Democratic supremacy an fre trad   agat glf
re8 o     16                         ' 1                  f 


I




"UR INDSTRIAL POLICY IN C                                TION W
THE FARMER."
Extracts from remarks of Hon. B. P. BIRDSALL of Iowa, in daily C
gresCtonal Rcord, December 16, 1903.
Mr. Chairman, I desire to vary this discussion for a few minutes w
a few observations upon    our industrial policy in connection with
farmer. I conceive, sir, that of all the factors among our people-oits elements-no element is mo         resterested or deeply concerned In
economic policy of the nation than the agriculturist.  With this thou
in my mind I have not risen to chant the praises of the protective poll
That Is sung in the humming spindle, in the roar of countless thousa
of Iron horses that draw the products of our land from ocean to oce
In the sunny faces of happy children, in the millions of homes of co
fort and contentment.
In 1892 the farmers of my State were beguiled into helping turns
a Repubican Administration and instituting the Democratic Administ
tion of Grover Cleveland. It was a time of uncxampled prosperity throu
out the agricultural regions of the West. But they were fooled-I use
term advisedly-fooled into believing that they were paying too much
manufactured articles; and at the behest of our then Democratic gover
of Iowa they decided to clasp hands witn the free-trade barons of Wall sir
and install in power the Democratic party and the policy of a tariff
revenue only. What was Its effect!
On June 30, 1891, the amount deposited in the State and sav
banks was, in round numbers, $33,000,000. On June 30, 1892, this
had increased to $42,467,000-an increase of about $9,000,000. In 1
it stood substantially at the same figure-.$42,000,000.   In 1894 it
decreased to $41,000,000. In 1895 it had increased to $43,000,000.
1896 it stood at $43,000,000. In 1897 it had Increased to $45,000,0
in 1898, to $59,000,0000; in 1899, to $77,000,000. So it increased e
year from  1896 to 1903, when in February of that year, as shown
this report, the amount on deposit in the State and savings banks of I
was $131,406,000. In other words, during the experience of the D
ocratlc "tariff reform," from 1892 to 1896, the deposits In the State
savings banks remained stationary throughout our State, while from I
to 1903 they increased $90,000,000.    The State and savings banks
peculiarly the places of deposit for the farmer and the laborer.
Statement of deposits in State and savings banks of Iowa from 1891 to 19
Num-    Due depo
Date.                         ber.      tors.
June,18. l................................................|  2.....
June    18 92..............................................  245  42,;,
June  80, 1898...............................................  5  42151,1
June  80, 1894.......................................*.3. *i )  D
June 8 0, 1895....................................... ~....  34:,
June 30, 1 9................31 '..................   370  4Y401W!
June   l  898.................................    37[.  12  45,4412 
Jun e3, 1898.....................................83..  Mi8
June 30, 189................................  4112  r7405~i
June80, 1909......!...............I........      448  911?,7,48
June3le0,-190........4..................   474  14,7
june.............. 1.11..................:   ~ 1m2j
September 15, 190&....................... I................
JDe em be    r 8, 1t902..........................................   1..  1
eFe  bruary 6 1903...                                         13.4.....................-......  56  181,40N, 
This is only one item. In 1892 the value of live stock disoserd
in the Union Stock Yards of the city of Chicago amounted to the gr
total of $25 3,000, 000. That value declined every year from 1892 to 1
when the total raced the mark of $188,000,000, a decline of sixtY
mill:ons during the Democratic Administration, a loss to the farmer s
the Northwest In those four years upon the Item of live stock Ilonea
shown by the record of the Union Stock. Yards in the city of hide
amounting to over $150,000.000.
Yet. In the face of this record, with the memory of the, bllghting
blasting years from  1893 to 1896 full upon them     the gentleman
Mississippi and the gentleman from   Texas tell us that the farmers]
ripe for revolt and ready for tariff reform.   I do not believe it.
ei a thinking, acting, conservative individual a           can be 00
relid upon to reflet upon, disastrous conditions he, was beguiled ito
tering  a 189$   y the specious argument of the free trader   Tie t
is inreste d in t'he prosperity of the laboring man more than an l
factor, because he knows that the better paid, the labor ing me 1
more bread be will eat. the more meat he will consume, and 13e e
clothes he will wear, and by increasing consumption wUill incea
demand for the.product s of the farm.
He knows that from 1893 to 1896 three millions.of honest boie 
trudging over this county in search of labor at any wage, any tihg
productswhich theretofe hbad ben     onsumIed by them theW lay ro
the field. ad In the granar y.
h-9


I




"T OBACCO IS AMPLY PROTECTED."
(tracts from remarks of Hon. GEO. C. PERKINS of California, in daily
Congressionfal Record, December 5, 1903.
In tobacco Cuba is a competitor of the United States, but our own proicers are protected against this competition by a tariff which, reduced by
i per cent.. is still enormous. The average value of our tobacco crop of
)02 was 10 cents per pound, yet it is protected by a tariff of from $1.85
i$2.50 per pound on tobacco for wrappers, and from 35 to 50 cents per
aund on tobacco for fillers. Our own production is principally tobacco of
quality suitable for fillers, yet it is protected by a tariff from three and
Ibalt to five times its average market value. If a reduction in protection
28 and 40 cents a pound on tobacco whose invoice value averages 45
ts is not sufficient to protect our own growers, I am unable to see how
can help them unless we give them, in addition to a protective tariff, a
d hig bounty. That the tobacco interests will not be injured by the
oposed reduction is made clearly evident by the lack of protests against
from tobacco growers and manufacturers.  I have received only two,
think, since the Senate voted on the treaty last March.
It seems to mie, Mr. President, therefore, that tobacco is not only amplky
tected, but none will come into this country except for the consumption
those who imagine that the tobacco grown in Cuba is much better than
t prowrn here. I have no doubt that the tobacco produced in certain
alities there is better. California can raise almost everything, but she
lnot been successful in raising tobacco. It is said that the dew of North
rolina and Virginia gives an aroma and taste to the tobacco raised in
se States which makes it superior to any tobacco which it is possible
us to raise west of the Rocky Mountains.
I also want to say that Virginia and North Carolina can beat California
this respect. So it is in Cuba. There are certain localities there where
tolbacco is of a splendid quality by reason of the general topography
the country, where the sun and the dew fall upon it and give it its great
ute.
Some time since, like many of my friends here, I visited Europe. I
e been through the famous vineyards in Germany, in France, in Italy,
Spain, and in Portugal. In Germany there is a spot called the "Johannes
yard."  I looked at its mounds and slopes and said: "I see nothing
erent in this locality from that which is all around us for hundreds
miles."  True, there was nothing apparent to the ordinary eye, and yet
rays of the sun struck those vineyards, giving a flavor to the grape
th produced the wine which commands ten times the price of wine which
roduced from grapes in a vineyard not a thousand yards away from that
So it is with the Cuban tobacco. All tobacco grown in Cuba is not
very excellent. The tobacco of Virginia is in many respects tar superior
it. But the~ tobacco grown, in particular localities In Cuba has gained
a reputation that the connoisseur will pay, an extra price In order to
In that particular quality of tobacco.
I think it may be accepted as proven beyond a reasonable doubt that
Proposed reduction in the Cuban tariff will injure no American industry.
t Will not, and the reciprocal reduction of the Cuban tariff on American
1s will benefit us, there can be no valid reason why the treaty shall not
aade effective. In 1899 we sold Cuba products worth $29,000,000 and
iht from her $37,000,000 worth. In 1901 we sold her $25,000,000 worth
bought $44,000,000 worth. Thus, while we bought more from her, we
less, which is not a satsifactory condition of affairs. Our percentage of
to Cuba has fallen from 43 per cent. to 41 per cent., while Germany
in thie same period doubled her percentage of sales to Cuba, and EngPr Fance, and other European countries have materially increased their
These facts show that we are being beaten by Germany, France, and
gland in the market which is at our very doors —in fact, are being
ded out of it.
uloss the tide can fbe stemmed we shall find our enemies, in an induss1 sense, an possession of a market which should be virtually ours exiely and while we buy all or nearly all, of Cuba's productse we shatl
fem iet nextto nothin  Itg seems to me that thit is sa state of affairs
houid appeVal to every business man, and should enlist h  o  the
of ~c treaty which will give us an advantagel of from  0 to 40 per
ovtr our,competitors, and will enable us to maintain and strengthen
Comarercial foothold in Cuba,:: l




:"CUBAN:    UAR CANNOT SUCCESSFULLY COMPET
WITH BEET SUGAR."
Extract from remarks of Hor, JAMES E. WATSON of Indianao, i dai
C: f  wwl9t ieeor*,  November $8 190-.
Ma. OHAsMAN:     Like the distingulshed gentleman from  Iowa (
HEIPBTRN] who has just addressed the committee, I, too, am a protectioni
and in my advocacy of the pending measure I abate not one jot or tittle fro
my devotion to that cardinal doctrine in the Republican creed, for I rega
the protective tariff principle as fundamental in the Republican party —p
tectton to American labor wheresoever employed, and to American capit
wheresoever invested.
But, says one of my friends from Michigan, can we not with prop
encouragement produce enough sugar to supply the home demand?
most surely can, Mr. Chairman, and that would bring sugar within 
definition that I have above given.  What justfication, then, is the
for any Republican believing in the fundamental principle of protectio
as I have defined it, voting for this reduction of 20 per cent? Only thi
That the tugar schedule is so high that this 20 per cent. reduction
Cuban sugar alone will not injuriously affect that great ndustry in t
country.
e will consume n the United States this year approximately 2,50
000 tons of sugar, not more than 950,000 tons of which will come to
from Cuba. The price of this staple commodity is fixed at Hambur
because Germany is its greatest producer and exporter. Every student
economics understands, therefore, that a 20 per cent reduction on the amou
we import from Cuba can not possibly affect the price in this land; and
it does not lower the price it can not affect the producer.
But what else? I believe that Cuban sugar can not successfully co
pete with beet sugar n either Chicago or Kansas City, which are the pri
cipal markets for beet sugar in this country; and if I had time I would re
from the hearings of the Ways and Means Committee evidence which see
to me absolutely conclusive on this fundamental proposition.
The cost of 100 pounds of Cuban sugar f. o. b. at Habana is $2. T
freight to New York is 9 cents per 100 pounds. The duty, after a 20 p
ent reduction-the duty being 1.685 now-would be 1.348. The cost
refining is known by all to be 0.625 for every hundred pounds, without a
proflt to the refiner. The freight to Chicago is 29 cents a hundred. So t
to land 100 pounds of Cuban sugar already refined in the market
Chicago would cost exactly $4.35 a hundred, and to land it in Kansas Cl
the freight from New York to Kansas City being 86    cents, would 
$4.42 a hundred. Now, t might go on and read the testimony of vario
gentletmn who are ntterested In the production of beet sugar in the UnIt
States to show that under no circumstances can it cost that much to pla
American beet sugar in competition with this Cuban sugar in the marl
of Chicago or in the market at Kansas City.
N. H. Stewart, president of the Kalamazoo Beet Sugar Company, wh
before the committee, made the following statements:
Coming to the cost of manufacturing sugar in Michigan, it costs $5
for I ton of beets; $1.08, cost of supplies per ton of beets; $1t., cost
labor for entire year per ton of beets; $1.09. cost of repairs and d
lation per ton of beets; 91 cents, cost of interest, insurance, and ta
per ton of beets; 6.3 cents, cost of selling sugar per ton of beets. T
makees  a total cost per ton of beets of $9.833; total cost per 100 ponD
of reined sugar, $4.682. 
The above estimate Includes 5 per cent interest on the total capital 
vested and  per cent annual depreciation on the value of the plant. Lea
g out these two items, the cot of manufacturing each 100 pound of
fined sugar is reduced $0.67t, or to $4.011.
To this sum should be added 13 cents a hundred pounds, the freig
chare from KalamazWo to Chicago, so that it would cost the Michi
producer of t0et sugar $4.141 to land 100 pounds of his product in t
Chicago market, while it would cost $4.35 for the Cuban planter to do
W. L. Churchill, president of the Bay City Beet Sugar Company, tt
i am frank to.say, gentlemen, that I have not a full, detailed staten
that t can make to you in regard to this year; but I can assure You t
we willI mak sugar this year at a cost of not to exceed $3.60 or $3-75
hundred pounds. 
Asuming that the freight rate Is 1  cents a ahundred it would
at ompany not to exceed $4.05 to lay down 100 pounds of its produt
the C hiao  market, as against $4.85 for the Cuban plnter, a differ
in favr of the0 home product o 30 cents a hundred, a diffrene g
0enoug  t: lft the Mici   grower above the possibility ofharm fr
dusky empettltor.
h-ill:::
1




i
f
j
i
i


i


isE   PROPM: THIN  TO DO    IN;: PIOXOTINGQ   AGRICULTURE IS TO MXLTIPLY MANUFACTURING PLANTS."
Extract from remarks of Hon. JAMES F. WILSON of Iowa, page
2867 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Session.
Our protective policy has, in spite of the obstacles it has enoultered, most suggestive results in this regard, and these results
ttave not all been absorbed by the manufacturing industries. Aqriiltture has gathered a part of the harvest to itself.
In the ten States embraced in the foregoing tabl one effect is
mide apparent by the statistics of the census of 1880, which should
te studied by all, and especially by those engaged in agriculture. In
11 of those States there are counties in which manufacturing industries have been established, and others in which this result had not
een realized. Taking the ten States together the average value per
cre of land in the counties in which manufactures had been planted
ias $35.86. In the other counties the average value per acre was
22.41. This shows an average value per acre in favor of the counties
xi which manufacturing industries were present of $13.45. In a large
rajority of the counties embraced in the ten States named manufacturing industries did not exist. This suggested that the rroper
thing to do in the matter of promoting the interests of agriculture
is to multiply manufacturing plants, and to induce a distribution of
hemn amongst localities where they are not now present. This cannot
)e done by applying the methods recommended by the President in
is; message. If we follow his suggestions and give effect to them we
aill not multiply manufacturing plants and distribute them to regions
qhere they do not now exist. On the contrary, we will embarrass
hose now in operation and repress the tendency to invest capital in
Others.
NO PEOPLE MORE BENEFITED BY THE INCREASE OF
MANUFACTURES THAN THE FARMERS
THEMSELVES."
irtract from remarks of IHon. JOSEPH E. BROWN of Georgia,
paye $152 of daily Congressional Record, 60th Congress, let
Session,
Not only that but the price of land is greatly increased by their
Proximity to and diminished by their remoteness from manufaeturag e'nters. You may find land selling at $50 an acre within a few
iles of a manufacturing town, and you may buy the same quality of
and at $5 an acre 50 or 100 miles from manufacturing centers. And
-hy so? Because not only the good housewife has a market for her
utter and chickens and eggs and cheese, and everything of that
haracter that Is produced upon the farm, but the farmer himself
as a market for every bushel of corn, wheat, rye, etc., and for every
ple, peach, pear, melon, and everything of that character that he
akes upon the farm when located near a manufacturing center;
ad he gets the best price for his corn, flour, meat, and other necesS1y articles produced upon the farm. So, in every view of it no class
f people in this country are more benefited by the increase of manu1Ituires and the diversity of labor, thus putting down the price of
1nu1factured articles and putting up the price of labor and the price
t tarin products, than the farmers themselves.




I


"WHAT McKINLEY PRINCIPLES MEAN TO THE
FARMER"
Extracts from   remarks of Hon. C. H. GROSVENOR of Oio, in House n
Rlepresentatives, July 19, 1897, and printed in Appendtix to bound oen.
pressitol Recotr, Vol. s0, page 803.
We used to supply two-thirds of the world's wheat market         Now VI
supply but one-third, and do!t in competition with 13-cent wheat lali
down in the London markets at a cost of 60 cents a bushel, all told. Ii
it surprising that wheat is low?
What is the remedy?
Two things.
First. Create a home market for your wheat.
Second. Vary your production.
How are you to do this?
First. Create a home market by supporting a protective tariff, which
will bring business to manufacturers and employment to idle millions, whi
will thus have money to spend freely for your farm       products.
Second. Sapport the party which oave you reciprocity on farm product,
and protection for wool.
The repeal of the McKinley tariff law caused the importation of foreigi
wool to increase from 55,000,000 pounds to 206,000,000 pounds in a singl
year, an  increase of about 300 per cent.     Besides this enormous increas
in raw wool, the importation of manufactured wool increased from $19,.
000,000 in value under the McKinley law to $36,000,000 in value under the
present or Wilson law. Under the McKinley law the importation of rag
was only about 100,000 pounds, while the Wilson law in its first yea
brought in 14,000,000 pounds of woolen rags and shoddy from the hovelsi
and hospitals of Europe to be worked into clothes for our people, and dis
placing good clean American wool. The result of all this was a decreass
in the value of the flocks from    $126,000,000 under the McKinley law tc
$65,000,000 under the Wilson law.
Think what McKinley principles mean to the farmer:
Better prices abroad for his wheat by means of reciprocity, which re
duces foreign tariffs on his grain while other wheat growers of the world
still pay high rates of duty in the countries to which our grain would obtain
access at low rates.
An increase in home demand for grain and other farm          products b3
such a protective tariff as will enable the manufacturers to start their mill
and their employees to begin spending their money freely for a comfortabl
living.
Such a protective tariff on wool and other farm    products as will shi
out from this country the farm products of other parts of the world.
Do you realize what the effect of the Wilson tariff was on the farmers1
Read the following table and see the enormous increase in the impor
tatlon of all farm products in the first year of the Wilson law as compared
with the last year of the McKinley law. Then look at the table which fol
lows It and see the decrease in the exports of farm products which followse
the destruction of reciprocity by the repeal of the McKinley law and tbi
adoption of the Wilson law.
THE OFFICIAL FIGURES.
The fiscal year 1894 closed two months before the end of the oper
ations of the McKinley law, and the calendar year 1895 began four month
after the'Wilson law had begun Its work. Each year's figures may there
fore be assumed to present a fairly normal picture of the workings of t
two laws, and thus to give an absolutely accurate official comparison
their operations as affecting the great class of citizens of the United State
dependent on agriculture.
Imports of farm products.
McKinley    Wilson ia
law, fiscal   calendar
year 1894.    year 19i.
Tobacco.................................................  $11,001,798  $1,2257,
W ines...................................................  6,739,425  7'2Il
W l...........................................   6,107,488  8;  77U0l3
~~~~.Leather....................................     4,508,330     7,745(
Cotton (un    anufactured).............................   3,010,205,71,(
Rice.....................................................  2,464,226    95
Anim  als..............................................  2,411,066 42i2
S eed s.....................................................  2,4516 6,
Breadstu W ~a~l)........................................  1,981,8 17  %,886
Provisions (all).........................................  1,797,847    2,t0(,1
Flax (nunmanufactured)...............................     1,   84       2,
Cheeese..1...........       1247,198,
H ay.............................................       761,987      2,37
Hay....761,937 'l19i&
W heat.....I..;-..........................!    761,177       121.1
Feathers................................................  726,692     (S,
Exports of farm products.
Cotton.I.......................................... $210,869,218  l  N"90
Breadstuffs (all)........................................  166,774,%58  1L
Provisions aall)...................................     145,22,27      1 '.28
flour...                                  6~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~(9,271,760,n?,k.~
W be  t...............................................  59,470,041.
W  t de..................                          40,40,Nl,
Lard............ I.......................................  40089,721.<i: *
Bacon..............................................      88,8187.
A n im als  (all).........................................  35,698,180 
Cattle.-.....33,4559.......'....
h-13


II
a
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
I
I
I


I


I




"THE L          tOSS  USTAINEJf BY THE FARMING COMMUNITY BY VIRTUE OF FREE-TRADE
LEGISLATION."
Extracts from remarks. of Hon. J1. If. DA VIDSON of Wisconsin,
in House of Representatives, March 31, 1897, and printed in
Appendix to bound Congiressional Record, Vol. 30, page 121.
In 1892, under the protective system, the consumption of wheat
in this country was 5.7 bushels per capita. In 1895 it had decreased
to 4 bushels per capita, showing a loss of 1.7 bushels per capita,
or about 120,000,000 bushels less consumed in 1895 than there were
in 1892. The decrease per capita in the consumption of corn in
the same period was 14 bushels, or 980,000,000 bushels less consumed
by the people of our country in 1895 than were consumred in 1892.
But it will be said by some that these figures can not be correct,
for the reason that our population was greater in 1895 than it was
in 1892, and that men must eat whether they work or not. But I
say to you that when men are working on short time at low wages,
or, worse still, are out of employment and are walking the streets
looking for a job, and are obliged fromn necessity to accept the
offerings of charity to keep their wives and children from starvation, I say to you tlat those families do not consume upon their
tables as much bread and meat and the many different agricultural
products as they do when the head of the famnily is receiving steady
employment at good wages.
But the loss sustained by the farming community by virtue of
free-trade legislation has not been alone in the decrease of consumption, nor in the amount of the products shipped to other countries,
biat in the shrinkage of values of the products which they have
raised. Take the three great staples, wheat, corn, and oats, which
are largely raised by the farmers of the United States, and we find
that in 1891 theyv brought the following amounts of money
Wheat,.............................................  $513,472,000
orn..............................................  836,439,000
Oats...........................................,   32,321,000
Total..................................       1,582,23-2,000
In 1895 the same products brought to the farimer the following
amounts of money:
Wheat.........................................  $237,938,000
orn...............................................  567,930,000
Oats..............................                163..  1,655,000
Total............................. $969,523,000
Thus the farmers lost on account of the chbange in our tariff laws
the sum of $619,709,000 in the value of these three articles alone
between the protective-tariff year of 1891 and the free-trade year
of 1895. But it was not the cereals alone that decreased, but farm
animals as well. The farmers' hogs, Jaintary 1, S893, were worth
$295,42.5,000; on January 1, 1896, they were worth only $186,529,000,
a decrease of $108,896,000 in three years. ()n January 1, 1893, the
Pheep of this countary were worth $12.5,909,000; on January 1, 1896,
hey were worth $65,167,000, a loss or decrease of $60,742,000 in
three years. In 1893 the horses of the United States were valued
t $1007,593,000:; in 1896 they were valued at $500,140,000, a decrease
$f $07,453,0000, and a loss in these three items alone of $677,091,000
t the farmers of this country as a result of Democratic legislation.
Tlhe value in 1891 of the wheat, corn, rye, oats, cotton, hay,
otatoes, wool, barley, buckwheat, tobacco, hogs, and sheep in this
Country was $2,957,000,000; in 1895 the same atrticles were valued
t $2Q061,000,000, showing a decrease in the value of these thirteen
rticl 's of $900,000,000 between the year 1891, under a protectivetriff law, and the year 1895, under the Wilson free-trade law. Can
hhere be any question, then. obult that this great depreciation in values
I 01 these prodlucts of the farm  was directly traceable to the tariff
^isltation made possible by the last Deimocratic Administration?
hpeople of this country are entitled to our own mnarket, and they
boutl( be allowed to occupy it and to supply it with everything that
raised or manufactured in this country,, and such legislation
olll be: enacted as willv prevent the: foreigner from entering this
arket until he has:paid; a tax at least equal to 'that paid by the
ieople of our own country for the maintenance of the Government.


I1':




"VALUE OF PRNCAL FARM CROPS IN ThE: UNITED
STATES, 1875 TO 1899"
Printed in daily Congressional Record, $.M 1I, 1900.
i::::;:::::::::::: \\\\::..................... *...... iii nn            i.1.......
* ~7'TC ~.......j............   i.   i  i... i..   i.  i...  
i   ~.............................: i::::::.....::::::...:....::..::1:..:.:.            I::.:.:::::i.  *:::...:::::::::::::::.   |..::.:::::.:::..:::::::::::::::  i..i  i   i.....i;.......  i i.  i  
I  i  i i  '.  i i       I.t.i.i.i
'I       Ni..e..ii i!.....s..i i! i.....   i.  i..i 
g.......................  i i.. j i.  i. ii...:..::  i
h-f5.................................
g~ ~    ~~......................  *.......~s   141....................................;s
P P~ ~~.......................................................................:      C.............................  
L2  ~sg r-q


I




j
I
i
j
i
i


I




W i  it:FOR A  ARMBIR TO DO I'"


Extract form remarks of Hon. T. B. IREED of Maine, page 4670 of
daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Session.
Which is it better for a farmr to do, send his surplus wheat a
thousand miles to the seacoast, three thousand miles across the water,
pay the freight, sell it to the mechanic who gets less wages, or sell
it right here at home to the mechanic who gets more wages? The
answer seems obvious.
"THE FARMERB.'" —"THE HOME MARKET."
Extract from remarks of iHon. N. P. HA UGEN of Wisconsin, page
4233 of daily Congresoal Record, 0th Congress, 1st Session.
Much has been said about the farmer and whether he Is benefited
by protection. The farmer in my part of the country is decidedly a
laborer. He is almost universally a small land-owner, small a compared with the farmer of the prairie States west of the Mississippi.
The number of farms in Wisconsin in 1885, was 130,10  or about one
farm to each 11/ inhabitants, the population being 1,568,413. The
aggregate value of farms was $568,187,288, averaging $4,174 each.
The value of farms is governed largely by their distance from cities
and manufacturing towns, showing that their productive value increases accordingly as the market is accessible.
The home market saves transportation, charges of middlemen, and
consumes articles which would otherwise swell the volume to be exported, and which would, if exported, help to reduce prices by flooding the foreign market. Besides all that, the home market is somewhat within the  ontrol of the seller. If he does not receive fair
treatment and fair prices the causes are within reach of his own
investigation. Every farming community       welo     greeting to
any kind of manufacturing whose establishment it can secure, from
a saw-mil down to a cheee facto, and williny taxes itself to get
it, wisely considering such contribution money well inested.
"EVERYTHING THE FARMERS MAKE S N:EEDED BY
THE iPEBSONS XNGAGED IN MANUFACTURING."
Eztraet from remarks of Hon. JOSEPH      E. BROWN of Georgia,
page S151 of daily Coonjressioakl RBord 50th Congress, 1st
Sesson.
You go back into the portions of the country far distant from
manufacturing establishments and you will find chicken selling at
10 to 12 cents apiece, butter at 10 to 15 cents, eggs t 10 cents a
dozen, and everything pruced on the farm    or in the dairy at a
price that is scarcely remunerative.
Now change your latio    and go Into the neighborod of one or
more large factories where tere is a large number of oficers, employees, ad operatives engaged in manufacturing.   They produce
0ne of these thns,  They w    t to bu  evryt      of the character
mentioned that is  ade    n the far, ip te gardn, or the dairy,
and instead of ch     beig l 0 to 1 cents piece they are from 20
to 30 cents; instead of eggs being worth 10 cents a dozen they are
W0rth 20 ti 29 cents; instead of butter being 10 or 15 cents a pnd
it is wort 4  cents a po      an  so with everytn t      ie farmers
and the far rs' wives waJ    fr  le which is      4 by the large
Dumner of persons eaged in maufae      n   who do nt m*ake these
aeeessary articles.
b46::                ':'! 02!9




"NUMER AND VAUE OF FARM ANIMALS FROM
1875 TO 1899."
Printed in daily Congressiona'l Record, Jun e 18, 1900.
& 4
-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-rl -            I
4                                 sp
4H A4 O            0~
-QI 14    -'C-C- i' hC- 
tr, -'          "g-rt,-,-  &-%  CD
-  -C-CC-'   ~~~~~~~c ZVI?C?  -  AC+jCQ  ZC-CC4  44 
C?  -CCCCC —t —qa  C   ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  - '
to of  C 
-p C —Cl5 -J-Ic-.. J                    I
C-  --                             Z'  CCI VIIt  I —'s
S  Cn~~~~~s-4~~~~a  C tV~~C   <~
CC~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~C
-                                  0~~~~~~:  a3  O I
k e
C tttrbb~bbto~tz44$~1p p
sp  given~~~~~
Iz,"  "V-13-:1-D t'~~~  ps:  C
C  j?2P~~to-~$A;t~, '~
4t 0C0* IO -ti- 
-to-  C?,-.C.4tooz-zC  A




b417




I
a
LI"
0
f
il
s
f
v
f
(11
11
c
a
I
11
A
t
r
8
t
li
I
I
i
t
I
I
Ii
I
i
I


[
[
[
[
E E[
|


JCLUBS OF GREENHORNS IN THE RURAL DISTRICTS"


Lxtract from remarks of Hon. ED WARD P. ALLEN,
of Michigan, page 4979 of Daily Congresqional Record,
50th Congress, 1st Session.
The New York Evening Post, in commenting editori
ally and favorably on the speech of my young and brilliant colleague [Mr. FORD], proceeds to tell the farmers
of the West how mistaken they are, and how little they
know about what is really good for them, closing with a
freetrade estimate of their common sense in the following gem:
"Yet we find clubs of greenhorns in the rural districts
still holding weekly meetings and passing resolutions in
favor of a higher tariff on potatoes and hops and garden
vegetables and two or three other things of which we import a small quantity now and then when we have an unfavorable season and a short crop at home. To these selfdeluded grangers the tariff debate in Congress will prove
helpful, since it can not fail to put the other side of the
case before them and compel them to read it and talk
about it in their neighborhood meetings."
But who is it that calls my constituents "greenhorns ill
}lie rural districts and self-deluded grangers?' It is need
less to say he is a free-trader and a member of the New
York free-trade club, which holds, among other fundamental principles, the following:
"That the only commercial policy which is in its nature
permanent and unchangeable, and which, therefore, assures stability in all kinds of business, is free trade between nations as between the States of the Union."
"THE FARMERS ARE IN FAVOR OF ENCOURAGING
MANUFACTORIES."!xtract from remarks of Hon. J. T. JOINSTION, of
Indiana, page 6961 of daily Congressional Record, 50th
Congress, 1st Session.
r te farmers of my district know well that they have
as good agricultural land as is in the world. They also
iknow that the farmers of the East make more money off
inferior land than we do in the West. The reason is that
the armer of the East has the manufacturing establishMernts in his midst. He sells his products to support the
lablers, while the farmer of the West must pay the transPort:tion to the East on the surplus he raises. Knowing
this they are in favor of encouraging manufactories, bringig rhem to the West, and thus save this cost of transportati n: 
hI[8




"W~At nit A  tosr: fl ASIlE IS A oo00) 


I


MARKET."
Extract from remarks of Hon. GEOR      E 0O. SYMFE   of Colorado
page 4S15 of daily Congressional Record, 5Oth Congress, is
Session.
What the farmer most desires is a good mrket. What he has t
buy is not a question so serious with him as what he has to sell. I
you will only give him a good market in which to sell his product
make his market as easy of access and as convenient as are his place
of purchase, I   will ask no odds in the battle of life. This is fas
becoming the case now under the benign influences of the America
stm of protecton       The great cities of Chicago, St. Louis an
Xns    City are fast becoming the leading markets of the world.
T     great State of llinois is one vast work-shop. Missouri, wit
her rich mines of iron, coal, and zinc, is only held back by the mirag
of free trade. Kansas is rapidly following with her smelting fur
naces, glass factories, foundries, and machine shops. The farmer o
the West welcomes them as the best friends of his interests. In the
he sees a market which is far preferable to that of London, 4,00
miles away. Engaged in thse in  dustries, he sees thousands of co
sumer employ ed who are his customers, and who, if not so employed
would be his compettors in agricultural pursuits, thus doubling th
prodcetions of the farm, which must necessarily result in an over
supply of the home market of al sch commodities as the farmne
produces.
"WB] WAMT TO CONTINUE TUAT SYSTEM WHICH
BUILDS UP ALL INDUSTRIES."
Ewtrat fr    remarks of Hon. CHARLES P. WICKHAM of Ohi
page 496 of daiy Congressional Record, 50th Congress, Is
Session,.
It will e s orry day for America when her farming industry sha
show signs of decay. That portion of our population engaged i
agriculture ar at one the safety and the glory of our nation.
Thy are intelligent, conservative, patrii  They are attached t
the land and love their country with intense affection. They dra"
their substance directly from the bosom of mother eartl, and so ar
0m  t intereste in preserving us against invasion or any other ev
tat may threaten us.
Shal ts great and important portion of our population be abao
dontd in the lajustment of our tariff duties to the remorseles CO
tpetin   f wool-growers and flax-raisers of other lands, where lab
or aI i  or   th a- cheaper? Or shall we prcerve our magrificet
markets for their u, ant      enable them to coninue to hold the
prq; l place am.on te toilers of America 
We wa:nt in W is eut     no sucbh  ne-sided monopolistic system
that w    ich  rses  ngltndbut      want rater to continue tis
syt0 teni-^hte' wihno gs   dbuilds; up. all industries and all labo
whether engaged in manufacturing or in producing the fruits of th
g the u:
field.
h-19


0
i
t
r
J
n
0
0
a
a


I




xOR.TGAGB ON; W"tI*                  rAit s.""MOAGVOsd
ON NXGLIS LANDS."
fxtraet from remarks of?o*. L*. SL  MeCOMAI   of Maryland, page
l838 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Session.
Learn from England, ye farmers of America, how free trade benets agriculture.
There agriculture has reached a state of collapse. Every farmer
40 per cent. poorer than he was twelve years ago. The tenant
farlers are now paying their renrt out of their capital. In ten years
th loss of income to owners of land was 30 per cent. and to tenant
arners 60 per cent.
The farm Laborer now works for I or, at most, for 2 shillings a day,
a oss of 20 per cent. of his wages.
The land is rapidly going out of cultivation, and free trade has
ade wheat growing unprofitable to the English farmer. Within ten
ears 1,000,000 acres, one-fourth of the whole wheat area of Britain,
ias gone out of cultivation. Dairy farmling is extinguished. The best
f the farm population is crowding into the great cities, no longer
ustomers, but competitors.
To the doctrinaires it is a pretty pastoral scene; free-trade Englaid, a grass country without gates, cropped-tail horses, and foxes
a(l hounds running oin forever and ever.
The howling dervish of free trade, with his epileptic froth over the
mortgages on Western farms, should remember that while mortgages
oio farms here are 20 per cent. of their value, the mortgages on English lands were over 58 per cent. of their value (says Mullhall) in
1876, and since then the value and income of these lands has fallen
off from 30 to 50 per cent. The number of farming bankruptcies in
lBritain have increasetd six times in ten years.  Bills of sale have
aultiplied ten times in five years.
"CONDITION OF INDUSTRIAL AFFAIRS IN                     GREAT
BRITAIN UNDE:R THE FREE-TRADE SYSTEM."
rxtract from remarks of Hlon. WM. W. MORROW       of California,
page 4271 of daily Conigressionlal Record, 50th Congress, 1st
Session.
I beg leave to citll your attention to the following extract from a
letter of Mr. Howard Vincent, M. P., to the Loondon Times, concern-,g the condition of industrial affairs in Great Britain at this time,
itld( r the, free-trade system prevailing there. Ie says:
'N'o national party could possibly ignore the serious state of affairs now prevailing. It is detailed fromt day to day in your columns.
I.jalid worth front 25 to T5 per cent. less than forty years ago and
ilajilost unsalable; arable land thrown into pasture, yet fewer animals
il tihe fields; agricultural distress very sirmilar to that described by
iosnili Shaftesbury as prevailing about 18414; in the towns hundreds
Stit rvitlg, owing to the factories being closed or working only on half
tilrlv  deputations to local authorities praying for relief works; in the
lMetrj opolis.ihungry men at every cornler; pauperism increasing; disltiatent rising; employment everywhere scarcer, while the population
is ri l)dly mnultiplying.
'1Tnhere is no class, no nrrofession, no avoctation, no calling unaff ct:ul( in some degree. Distress must always be felt more in some
|l!'(ialiad in some cormuni ties than in others. But the. general: fact
is otil eniiable. The coiluissioner of police of the metropolis,. the
sttrie si, the guardians of the poor, 1as well as philanthlropic societies
"t1 statesimen, may open registers for the unemployed, but will not
I rooA ile the employ ment, for little or none is to be found in town or
r'i ty. fTemporary remedies may be applied, but they will not be
miioe effect"ual thian palliatives to a malignant cancer.
I'I ftyltwo charmbers of commerce have officially declared that
forlign tariffs and bounties and foreign competition' are 'most injur lius to British trade' and 'at bottom of 4all0 our. troubXles.' The
i     o.i comilssionl oi the depression of trade annd industry indorsed
this declaration. Take the bills of lading at lny port in the kingdom,
5tii d1 with the unemployed at the gates of any railway station and
the fact is apparent."
1t-20                                              dig. 15




"SHEEP      AND       D WOOL INDUSTRY." —"RUTHLESS
SLAUGHTERED."-"REGENERATED
AND RESTORED."
Extract from remarks of lon. 0. H. GROSVENOR of Ohio, in di
Congressional Record, June 7, 1900.
Inquiry cards were sent out by the American l'rotective 'lIarj
League early this year to sheep raisers throughout the JUnited Stat,
asking for information on the following points:
Number of sheep owned in March, 1896 (Wilson law, free-wx
period). 
N; umber of sheep owned in March, 1900 (Dingley law, protected
wool period).
Average value per head in March, 1896 (Wilson law, free-wo
period).
Av:erage value per head in March, 1900 (Dingley law, protected
wool period).
Up to June 4 a total of 964 replies had been received from slice
raisers in thirty-nine States. Their reports present some startlin
contrasts between conditions prevailing after two years and eigh
months of restored protection on domestic wool and the conditioni
which prevailed three years and four months after 'the election 01
a free-trade President of the United States. If anything were ime
needed to condemn to everlasting obloquy the destructive reghie
installed by the electoral vote of 1892, these sheep census figure
furnish the materials for such condemnation. Hlistory records fe
meaner atrocities than that which was perpetrated upon the s.iee
and  wool indutry of the American farmer when the free-trad
satraps decreed the free-wool clause of the tariff law of 1894.
I have already given some instances of the fearful blight which
fell upon American sheep and wool in consequence of the change froe
the wise protection granted by the McKinley tariff to the free tIrad
of the Wilson tariff. I-ow ruthlessly the sheep and wool indistlr
was slaughtered as a result of "The crime of 1894" is already a matter of history. My task now is to show the obverse side of the
picture, to show how splendidly that deserving industry, involviegq (;
it does the welfare of so many thousands of American farmzers, hts
been regenerated and restored through the enactment of the protective tarff of 1897.
Suppose we begin with a section of the country where for a time
the belief was strong that if you would see prosperity you must iloo
through silver spectacles. T'ake Montana, for example, which il
April, 1899, had 3,218,802 sheep. Seventy-two reports from Montaei
show that in March, 1896, the persons reporting owned 304,374 slieep,
with an average market value of $2.12 per head; whereas in 51 arcI1
00, thee same persons had increased their flocks to 525,4.31, andi tle
average value per head had grown to $415, or only 9 cents less tb:h.
double the value in 1896. For 1900 MAontana will show flocks nIulIbre
ing fuly 5,000,000, and protection will be worth to the sheep risCer
more than $10000,000 as compared with free trade, to say nothieng 0
an increase of more than $2,000,000 in the value of each year's wO0I
clip. Silver spetacles did not enable the farmers of Montana it set
this i:mmene   gain in their wealth.;:Fifen Utah farmers state that in 1896 their flocks num- ered
O58070, valued at $1.81 per head, and that four years later this 1menbr had increased to 72,600, and the value per head was now     i 89
it a present total of more than 3,000,000 it ought not to be.ere
difficlt to convince Utah sheep raisers that the country made a o00d
choc when it rejected free silver and free wool for tprotectior and
a 100-eent dollar,
In Colorado according to the reports from 33 owners the!ioct::have increasedtom 154,039 in 1896 to 185,5A24 in March, 1900 an
te average valtue per head has been increased from $2.03 to 13.9 
It would     e tthe e onbined i   profits of a good many silver mlin"c
under a 16 to i   rato to equal the gain which Colora'do has relizcd
on her sheep and her wool.


f    1:                                     I 




i


"EVERY FARMER UNDERSTANDS THAT THE NEARER
HIS MARKET TQ HIS FARM THE MORE
ABUNDANT HIS PROFITS."
E7iJract from remarks of Hon. J. C. BURROWS of Michigan, page
3452 of daily Congressional Record, 50th Congress, 1st Session.
f(:an it be possible that the farmer can be deluded into a belief
tlirt a policy which destroys his home market and forces him into
the distant markets of the world with his surplus products, with all
fhle attending and enormous cost of transportation, will redound to
his advantage?  Every farmer understands that the nearer his
intiiket to his farm the more abundant his profits. Therefore, any
Im'licy which tends to diversify our industries and give employment
to a large class of our people outside of agriculture, and who thus
become consumers of the surplus products of the farm   at home,
mint inure to the benefit of the American farmer; and any policy
Il hich tends to diminish these industries and force the capital and
lil.r employed therein onto the farm, to become producer rather
toriT consumer, must from necessity increase the agricultural product,
whlile at the same time lessening the demand therefor. I can conceive of no calamity more appalling than that which would overtake
tour vast agricultural interests by the destruction of our mannfacturing industries and the consequent annihilation of our home
minaket. The importance to agriculture of a diversification of our
ildustries and consequent creation of a home demand for the surplus
1roeduct of the farm was strikingly set forth by Alexander Hamilton
iinrly a century ago:
"TIhis idea of an extensive domestic market for the surplus produce
of the soil is of the first consequence. It is of all things that which
Imust effectually conduce to a flourishing state of agriculture. To
secure such a market there is no other expedient than to promote
ietnufacturing establishments. Manufacturers, who constitute the
most numerous class after the cultivators of the land, are for that
rcason the principal consumers of the surplus of their labor."
But the advantage of such a policy does not rest for its support
qupon a theory. It is affirmed by experience, and it may be well
to igain remind the President that "it is a condition that confronts
1s, not a theory." It is estimated that to-day our population is not
iis than 60,000,000, of which only 20,000,000 are actually engaged
ihi any gainful occupation, 9,000,000 of whom are engaged in agriculture, leaving 11,000,000 employed in other pursuits. Nine million
fatiners are feeding a nation of 60,000,000 of people. How does
tliii advantage the farmers? The estimated value of the products,f our farms, exclusive of cotton and tobacco, is $3,000,000,000
till:ually, and yet 94 per cent of this enormous product is taken
in mur own market and consumed by our own people. The farmers:tre compelled to export only 6 per cent of their products. In this
co aection it is worthy of note that while the value of our manafac ures reaches the almost fabulous sum of $7,000,000,000 annually,
yet more than 90 per cent of this is consumed within our borders.
It s estimated that the value of our industrial products of farm
O{ut~ factory will aggregate annually $11,000,000,00 and yet nearly
10 00,000,000, of this is disposed of in our market and consumed
hy umr own people. And yet, with a home market of such absorbing
ip mcity, built up and sustained by a diversification of our industri:: tthe advocates of free trade are constantly holding up the
Phe tom of the markets of the world as the one t ing chiefly to be
d sred- 
12-22




:::t *   O:  O;TZ     TO      n:h f:
C          ~ P- R8UIT."
Extract from remarks of Hon. MARK S. BREWER of Michigan,
page S605 of daily Congressional Record, 60th Congress, lst
Session.
Supposing that our Democratic free trade, tariff-for-revenue-only
friends shall succeed in passing this bill, every industry it strikes
must either reduce the wages of the people employed therein or else
close the shops, furnaces, and factories which give them employment.
In either event we will witness increased "strikes," "lock-outs," and a
million of wage-earners that are now finding work will be thrown out
of employment and of necessity be driven to tilling the soil. These
men, who have been consumers of the products of the farm, will become producers. The farmer needs no more competition in his chosen
pursuit. That which he produces to-day scarcely compensates him
for his labor. If these people who are now engaged in other pursuits
are to become tillers of the soil and producers of wheat, corn, and
potatoes, where are the agriculturists to find a market for that which
they produce? We shall not find it in our own country, because by
our over-production we have ruined our home market. We have increased producers and decreased consumers, and increased our productions beyond any foreign demand. We shall in fact become a
nation of agriculturists, and no nation ever has been or ever will be
prosperous where its people are wholly or chiefly engaged in agriculture.
"EVERY FAR1tER KNOWS WELL THAT HE MUST RELY
UPON THE HOME MARKET."t
Extracts from remark of Hon. MARKi S. BRE WEER of Michigan,
pag; W6    of daily Congressionaul Record, i0th Congress, 1t
Session,.
It is our protective tariff which has largely built up our varied industries, and which has tended to make us the most prosperous nation
in the world. A protective tariff tends to aid and build up all our
industries, to bring the producer and consumer nearer together, and
therey largely save the cost of transportation. This has made more
valuable the farm and given a better market for its products. This
is what has made lands near our large cities more valuable than those
more distant. This is why the lands in rough and rocky New England
and in sterile New Jersey are more valuable than our fertile lands in
Michigan and Minnesota. Every farmer knows well that he cannot
sd to foreign lands his potatoes, vegetables, and many other things
whh he grows upon the farm, and that le must rely upon the home
market for the same. Hence it is all important that he should feel
a,     interest in the building up of manufacturing towns and cities
ar his home, where he can market his surplus productions. It is
for this reason that we see them often voting a tax upon themselves,
or     g  y a voluntary contribution to assist in building railroads
and in the erection of factories. They understand perfectly wel that
t i  to their avantage to bul up these towns ad    bring the consuerof their produs near to them, and to make distant market
re     ccessble. Every farmer who produces wool understands full
wel that he can not raise wool in competition with that which is produced in Austraia or Sfot  America. The President of the United
States and  rei-tra  Cong    men may try to convince them that
fr:ip rted      l wi be to their adv atage, but their own practica
expe       tells them othe e.
h-23






I


"THE SHEEP FARMERS ROBBED OF $60,OO000 BY
THE PLACING OF WOOL UPON THE FREE LIST."
Extract from remarks of lion. S.S. BAIRNEY of Wisconsin, in
House of Representatives, March 30, 1897, and printed in Appendix to bound Congressional Record, Vol. 30, page 14.
Within the last year I had a conversation with a gentleman
engaged in the milk business in one of the most prosperous manufacturing towns in my district-that is, it was one of the most
prosperols manufacturing towns in Wisconsin prior to the election
of Cleveland in 1892-and this gentleman told me that after he
panic of 1893 the consumption of milk alone in that city fell off
about one-half. Families which before that time had taken 9 quarts
of milk took but 1, and those which had taken 1 quart thereafter
took a pint. Many of them were not able to buy any at all. This
gentleman called my attention to another fact concerning that
same city, showing the depression caused to the farming industry
on account of the general stagnation in the manufacturing industries. Surrounding that city were hundreds of acres of good farming lands that before that time had lain practically idle by reason
of having been subdivided into city lots. Just as soon as the
factories in that city were closed and men were turned out of
employment, hundreds of these laboring men went out upon these
lands just outside of the city and spent their time there raising
potatoes and garden vegetables, such as they needed for their own
use, and also some to sell to the wealthier classes in town, thus
depriving the farmers of that locality of the market which they
had theretofore had for their milk, butter, cheese, potatoes, and
garden vegetables, and in fact all products of the farm.
It has always seemed to me, Mr. Speaker, that the makers of
the Wilson-Gorman law   appeared to have a particular grudge
against the farmers of this country, because it does seem as though
that law was framed to hit them harder than any other class of
people. The idea of putting wool upon the free list and at the
same time keeping up a reasonable duty upon the manufactured
article is absurd, and about as audacious a piece of business as
Congress was ever guilty of. In the fall of 1894, in traveling through
my district, I found that the highways in some localities were lined
with flocks of sheep that were being driven to the market and
sold for almost nothing, because at that time they had been rendered
valueless by the placing of wool upon the free list. Before that
time we were told by the free traders that this duty on wool,
the duty on barley, the duty on the other products of the farm,
did not make any difference in prices; that the farmers would get
just as high a price if they had no duty; that it was a humbug
and a snare, and in the interest of the manufacturers and not in
the interest of the farmers and laboring men of this country; and
yet I call the attention of the farmers of this country to the fact
thfat since the passage of the Wilson-Gorinan act the wool of this
country has sold in the market for just about as much less as the
amsount of the tariff; and it is a remarkable coincidence that the
sane can be said of barley, butter, cheese, eggs, and most other
products of the farm. If you injure the sheep farmer of this
cofuntry you injure every other farming industry, because the sheep
f rPmer is compelled to drive his flocks to the butcher and go out
of that kind of farming business and into some other. He must
nticssarily raise something else; he must raise either barley, corn,
a!seat, cattle, hogs, or go into the dairy business and compete with
o0her kinds of farming industries. A blow at the sheep farmer is
a blow at every variety of farming industry in this country.
l'he Staststical Abstract of the United States for the year 1l96
sh ows that in the year 1893 there were in this country 47273,553
sihep, of the value of $125,909,244. In the year 1896 there were in
ti;s country 38,298,783 sheep, of the value of $65,167,735, a decrease
o about a5 per cent in the number of sheep and o almost 0 per
ct-lt in their value; in other words, that the people of ths country,
4"d necessarily the sheep farmers, have been robbed of $60,000,00
b the placing of wool upon the free list.




h-24




"dTHEAMERICAN       ARMER: HAS PROFITD 'ENOR.
"MOIISL      UNDER THE BDtCINGLEY TAR "IF"
Extracts from remarks of Hon, J... GALLINGER of New I1amp.
shire, n daity Congressional Record, April 23, 1904.
The year 1903 was as a whole the greatest industrial year of our
history. It is not necessary to more than briefly refer to the great
prosperity which has been enjoyed by the agricultural classes of.
this country under the Dingley law. I showed in a speech made
in this..Chamber, two-years ago that the increase in the annual
value ofi our farm  products and farm animals had amounted to
considerably over $2,00000000000,000 since1 1896. Again last year the
value of our:tarm products and farm animals showed an increase
over all preceding years.
Ten of our staple products-wheat, oats, corn, rye, barley, buckwheat, cotton, hay, tobacco, and potatoes, foot up in value over
3,000,000,000, while for the first time in our history the value of
farm animals "last year was also in excess of $3,000,000,000. By
the census of 1890, Mr. President, the value of all our farm products
was placed at less than $2,500,000,000, but in this period of good
times and prosperity it is safe to estimate the total value of our
agricultural products at from five to six billions of dollars. These
figures for the most part represent labor, and should be included
among the wages of our working classes just as much as are the
wages of mechanics, artisans, and workers in our factories. It is
not necessary to present figures proving that the American fartvr
has profited enormvouly under the Dingley tariff, and that to-day
his prosperity is fully m'intained and still pointing upward. Thegreat iagricutltural States of the West and Southwest were never so
prosperous as they are to-day.
The figures of bank clearings, * * * show an increase of 150
per cent for 1903 over the year 1894, and considerably more than
100 per cent over the best years of the period covered by the WilsonGorman tariff.
I call attention to the increase that has been made in our postal
revenue during the past few years. The following table shows tihe
revenue of the Department from 1893 to 1903:
1893................................................... $75,896,.9.:;
1 0894.................................................75,080,479.9.........:...............................................  76,98..,128
1896.................................................  82,499,208
1.897........  2,665,461
1899.................................................  89,0121,61
1900.................................................  102,354,579
1901.................................................  111.631,193
1902.................................................  121,848,047
1903.............................................  134,224,441
This shows that the revenues for 1903 are 80 per cent greater thl;a
they were in P193. These postal receipts reflect the condition 'of
our people in a way just as much as does the hundreds of billiois;
of bank clearings. They. represent the necessary business commuoications in every industry. and they represent also the social con —
munications of: all classes of our lpeople.
Kindred to the postal business of the country in a large degre-'
is the business of our telegraph and telephone companies, and the(
too, show that, 1903 broke the record as has every peceding yea
since,18917.. The iincrease. in telephone business is shown in the follov 
ing statistics of the American Telephone and Telegraph Compati'
and the. operating companies connected with it1897..  11)3&
Total em ployees.......................................   14,425.
Tol...........        325,24.  1,277.
-the increase |in both employees. and subscribers being almost 4'`
per cent or the, six years.
AndsoImighi   t:contlnue, AMr. President, and show that both t
fiscal and calendar yIcar of 1903 waas as:a whole the greatest indotrial year of our history
h-25






HA, T THE REPUBLICAN PARTY HAS DONE FOR
HE DOMESTIC SUGAR PRODUCING INTERESTS."
Itraits from remarks of lIon. G0E. 0. PERKINS of Californi,
in daity Congressional Record, Dec. 15, 1903.
Mr. President, the opponents of the Cuban reciprocity treaty
eI tIo me to be on the wrong tack. They are like the captain
1 shapes the course of his vessel by dead reckoning north-northst to reach a certain port, when the true course, which he might
ve ascertained had he taken the trouble, is northeast. He therere mfust not be surprised if he brings up on the rocks.
It is asserted by those who oppose this treaty that it will injure
rtailn great interests of the United States-sugar, citrus fruits,
it tobacco. But I think that if they had taken "an observation,"
the captain referred to should have done-in reality, have asrtained the facts-their argument would not have been in danger
shipwreck. It is true that Cuba competes with American sugar
oducers, beet and cane, but our sugar growers are protected
'linst her by, I think, the highest tariff which we enforce, which
oiunts to 102 per cent. ad valorem at the present prices for the
ime grade as beet sugar.
The Cuban treaty does not by any means put our producers at
e mercy of Cuban planters, for the proposed reduction will leave
protection of 78 per cent. on raw sugar and 82 per cent. on
fined, which should be quite sufficient for the encouragement of
y enterprise.
The fears expressed as to the dolorous fate of our domestic cane
id beet sugar growers arises from the fact that it is feared that
te market price of sugar may be reduced. If it is not reduced,
onestic sugar will not, of course, feel any effect from the reducon in the duty. * * Other foreign sugars fix the price at which
uban sugar will be sold here, the cost to us has always depended
the cost of sugar at Hamburg, and will so depend whether
ba sells us 1,000,000 or 2,000,000 tons or more a year.
Cuba can get in our market only what wce are obliged to pay in
e iworld market. No matter how much she may pour into the
merican market, Cuba can not change the price a shade. If she
an produce cheaper than any other country on the globe, all her
early product would not affect the American market, for we are
tmpelled to buy two-thirds of our sugar from    other foreign
urces, and the price of Cuban sugar would conform to the price
e paid her rivals. If she were abte to supply our entire consumpon, the price of Cuban, sugar would still be qoverned by the
Wlid price. She could not go above it and would not go below.And this world price, plus freight and a duty of 102: per cent.
d valorem, is the price with which our domestic producers have
U compete. Cuban sugar does not enter into the price problem
t all. 
Wlhat the Republican party has done for the domestic sugarroducing interests can be told briefly. In 1890 sugar was on the
le list, and a bounty of 2 cents per pound was paid on beet and
ne sulgar produced in the United States. The Wilson-Gorman
ill obolished the bounty and placed a duty of 40 per cent. ad
dlorcm on imported sugar. By the Dingley bill this duty was
cre;s!ed so that now it equals 98 per cent. ad valorem on the price
f raw: sugar in the New York market.
I tbink it may be accepted as proven beyond a reasonable doubt!mt ihe proposed reduction in the Cuban tarif' will injure no,er;cwan industry. If it will not, and the reciprocal reduction of
1e Ctban tariff on American goods will benefit us, there can be
0 v:lid reason why the treaty shall not be made effective. In
S99 e sold Cuba products worth $29,000,000 and bought from her
7,00:)0,000 worth. In 1901 we sold to her $25,000,000 worth and
uglt $49,000,000 worth. Thus, while we bought more from her,
We sod less, which is not a satisfactory condition of affairs. Our
(reentage of sales to Cuba has fallen from 43' per cent to 41 per
nt., while Germany has in the same period doubled her percentge;' sales to Cuba, and England, France, and other European
ni'ties have materially increased their own. These facts show
*at v-e are being beaten by Germany, France, and England in the
rrkt; which is at our very doors-in fact, are being crowded out
fit.                                            a
ing-ss the tide can be stemmed we shall find our enemies, in
n ina tstria:sense, jin possession of a market which 'should be:vir
ily ours exclusively.
h -6                                                  '.  *


I




"OUR BEET-SUGAR PRODUCERSHAVE NOTHING T
Tstraot from remarks of Hon. S.    W. McCALL of Massachusei
in daily Congressional Record, November     19 1903.
Reciprocity goes upon the theory that there are oftentimes,
the relations of two people, conditions that make it peculiar
proper that they shall have reciprocal trade arrangements with ea
other. The position of Cuba, her political relations to this con
try, the fact that American interests predominate there, the fac
that we buy nearly all she has to sell, and sell her a great portio
of what she buys, make her case, it seems to me, as strong a oi
as could be imagined for the application of the principle o
reciprocity.
Xow, with reference to the peculiar trade relations of this cou
try and Cuba   During the last fiscal year we took of Cuba's tot
exports some 77 per cent., and we sold to her about 42 per cen
of what she bought from the rest of the world. This was takin
a larger proportion from her of.what she sold than she took fro
us of her. purchases, and the treaty recognizes this fact, for whil
it levies a uniform reduction of 20 per cent. upon Cuban product
coming into our markets, it gives our products going to Cubat
reduction of from 20 per cent. to 40 per cent.
The details of the Cuban trade which have been brought to th
attention of the committee by my colleagues show the evidern
upon which we may expect a great gain to our own commerce
There were, for instance, under the head of alimentary articles
articles of food and drink-brought from   the United States in
Cuba about $3,700,000 worth Vper year, and from  other countrie
about $13,000,000 per year. These articles are largely the produe
of our agriculture and of our fisheries, and under the duties whic
are prescribed by this bill the United States will almost inevitab
get all this trade. Then there is another item of wearing appare
of boots and shoes, and cotton, and similar articles, of which t
Unite  States last year sold to Cuba $1,127,000 worth, while Cub
bought from the rest of the world $10,186,000 worth. This ite
will almost certainly appear in the trade of the United State
And then in cattle-Cuba imported from the United States cattl
to the value of $,347,000, and from the rest of the world $6,772,000
The effect upon te beet-sugar industry has caused alarm, an
very naturally so, to those Representatives in this House that coe
from  States largely interested in the manufacture of beet sugar
I do not think it' is in a particle of danger. Suppose that th
reduction proposed by;this bill to 1.35 cents a pound upon ra
sugar should measure the entire protection that would exist upo
sugar  fter the passage of this bill-and I feel confident that i
will not-I think it is susceptible of demonstration that the pro
tection will be substantially what it is at the present time. I
the testimony taken before the Committee on Ways and Mean
two years ago our collector at Habana, Mr. Bliss, testified that he
had examined the returns from eight different plantations and he
found the average cost of making sugar there and of taking it t
the port of shipment was 2 1-16 cents. Mr. Atkins, who is a, sue
cessfu business man and a sugar manufacturer, reached, substantially th  same conclusion.
All the evidence that could be called evideene     t to sth1
that it cost the Cuban at least 2 cents a pound to make his raW'
sugar. Now, if to that you add this 1.35, and if to that you ad
the freight ate      an the insurance and other charges, he can int
afford to sell his sugar in the New York market for less th1l"
three and about seven-eighths of a cent a pound, and it must after
that be refined, so that a price would be reached at which it:;ouh
clearly be profitable to make refined sugar here.
Mr. -Oxard, who has been as much identified with thel marln
facture of beet sugar as any man in the United States, put fort
a statement after he had been engaged in that business nine yeari
to the effect that at t  cents a pound and allowing the fanr $r
per ton for hi bees there was then a profit of about 43 per cent
uon te cost of the material and labor employed, and thjt 1i
seding th wrefined product at 4 cents a pound. Not a small proft
by any means. As a matter of fact he would get nearer      tha
4 cents a pound. Is it not, therefore, clear that under this dut
of 1.33 per pound, wheih is a specific duty equivalent to;n ad
vtalorem duty of nearly  0;per cent. including the freight, ourl bt
sugr producers have nothing whatever to fear?
h-27


I




"LOSSES TO THE AGRICULTURAL INTERESTS OURING THE FOUR YEARS OF CLEVELAND AND
TARIFF REFOM,."
Extracts from remarks of IHon..    H. GALLINGER of New Hampshire, in
daily Congressional Record, May 11, 1900.
The losses to the agricultural interests of the tnited States growing
out of the free-trade tariff experiment of 1.891-1897 were tremendols6 and
mountited up into billions. Let us undertake the vast computation by starting with 1892, a year of hitherto unequaled prosperity, brought about in
a great mreanure b' the splendid workings of the McKinley tariff of 1890
As a basis of reckoning we will take the total home consumption of wheat
and corn for the five years commencing with 1892 and ending with 1896.
From the official reports of the United States we glean the following facts:
Wheat Consumption.
Y'eart.            I ~rPopula-     Total      Per     Decrease
lion.      bushels.  capita. from 1892.
Bushels.
2 m..................................  t1e5,408,0  8 8,F 1,7 0  5I.91..............
1893................................. 66,826,000  844.106,100  4.85  42,l25i073
1894.................................  8,275,000  282,177,500  2.41  153,718,423
1895................................ 69,751,000  816,678,620  4.54  69,853,110
189............................  71,26',000  340,637,140  4.78     45,894,590
Total decreased consump-               
tion of wheat in the Unl- 
ted States   during fouar
years.............................                  81188,196
Corn Consumption.
18192...(55.................., 65,408,000  2,082,672,090 I 80o......88.......
188................................ 66,826,000I 1,581,103,160  M 23.66.02,669i 0
184........................       8,275,000  i 1,558,939,000  22.70  5290,781,9910
1895................................  69,758,000  1,204,405,940  16.98  879,267,056
18196................................. 71,263800  1,0 59,000,014,73  1,034959,9000
Total decreased consutnp-1
tlon of corn in the United i 
States during four years.................................  2,945,629,870
Add decrease in wheat, as above..........                           8........... - l.............,
Total, decrease four years................................... 8257,516,066
Note the enormous decrease of more than three and a quarter billions
bushels of wheat and corn in the consumption of foodstuffs during the
four years of Cleveland and tariff reform. The less a man earns the less
he eats-not from    choice, but fromn necessity.   The per capita consumption of wheat fell off from   5.91 bushels in 1892, a MctKinley tariff year,
to 2.41 bushels in 1894, the first year of the Wilson tariff, and the total
con'uamption of wheat in those memorable "lean years" fell off 311,886,196
bushels. As to corn the result was Ptill more startling. Ftrom a per capita
conrqumption of 30.33 bushels in 1892, the average fell to 14.73 bushels in
1896.
Parm    loss on -wheat crops.
Total                    D)erease
Year.                       o         otal value.  Decrease
bushels.                 from 1892.
1s92........................................  515,49,0  22,111,881:  19,........................................  6,11,725  218,171,81  108 40,
1;94.......................................  460,267,416  i  225,92 25,20986
1S..9.................................  467,I02,047 12,93 9     84,19752,983
1965........................................  427,684,816 | 110,602,589  11,50,,842
Total decrease In value of United
States wheat crops during four,
years..............0                                         5..  8.......................................  800,
li'ar    loS  on  crl 6irops.
i 2............I..................................   1,628,4(,0 00  $642,146,630 
8........................................  11,   5911,62527 
04...........4.....................  1,212,770,052  554,719,162  87,427,468
185..2...................................,151,1880  567,0 106  74,87,524
1,6.............................................  2,288,875,165 1  1,00967   15,18t8
Total decrease In value of Uuited...
States corn crops during four                 j
years..
y eafi...............................7.6
Add total farm  loss on wheat during 
ihe four years........................................
Total loss on Wheat antd corn..............................
h-28




:"FRUIT     F'THE LOWI-TARIFF EXPERIMENT OF:     T -,8 93 -7. 
Extract from remarks of:.     JGIOSVENOR in daily Congresuional Record, June 13, 1900.
Figures, published in the Statistical Abstract and others prepared
by the Departnent of;Agriculture, showing the value of crops aln
of farm animals in each year during a long term of years, indicate
the tremendous losses t the farmer whlich accompanied and was tlhe
legitimat    e fruit of the low-tarff experiment f 1893-1897.
Take firt the single iteim of wooL  The Wilson law, as, is well
known, gave the country in the item of wool an example of the
effect of genuine Simon Pure Democratic free trade. It was to
the free-trade mind the one redeeming feature of that act whose
feeble attempts at retaining a shadow of protection was denounced
as an evidence of "party perfidy and dishonor."  Under that act
importations of foreign wool which had never but once reached so
much as 150,000,000 pounds, were in its very first year more than
200,000,000 pounds, and in its closing year exceeded 350,000,000
pounds. As a consequence, wool fell nearly 50 per cent in value,
the October price of washed clothing Ohio fleece wool, medium, dropping from  33 cents per pound in 1892 to 19 cents in 1896, but increasing to 29 cents in 1897, immediately following the restoration
of the protective tariff under the Dingley law, and to 33.5 cents in
the month of October, 1899.
Another table, which is compiled from the Statistical Abstract of
the United States, gives the home production of wool, the average
price per pound, the per cent which the foreign product forms of
the total wool consumption in the United States, the number of sheep
on farms and their value, also: the value of import of wool and wool
manufactures in each year from 1875 to 1899. An examination of
this table shows that foreign wool which, under protective tariffs,
formed from 16 to 33 per cent of the domestic consumption, increased
to 40: per cent in 189:5, 46 per cent in 1896, and 57 per cent in 1897.
As a consequence of this increased importation of foreign wools
and the accompanying reduction of nearly one-half in price the
number and value of sheep on farms was greatly reduced, the number
of sheep on farms in 1893 being 47,273,553, and their value $125,909,064. By 1896 the number had fallen to 38,298,783 and the value
to $65,167,735, the actual value having thus been reduced one-half,
meaning a loss in sheep alone of more than $60,000,000 to the
farmer, while his wool clip during that time was correspondingly
reduced. Another effect of the rates of duty on wool and woolens
is. shown by the columns stating the value of imports of wool and
manufactures of wool. The value of the foreign wool imported
prior to 1893 had not for many years reached so much as $20,000,000;
but in 1895 it had exceeded $25,000; in 1898 exceeded   $32,000,000,
and in 1897, the last year of the existence of the Wilson law, was
$52,243,191, while imports of woolen goods, which in 1892 amounted
to $35,000,000. were in 1896 $53,00,000, and in the fiscal year 1897
$49,000,000.
VALUE OF FARM ANIMALS REDUCED BY LOW TARIVr,
BUT RESTORED BY PROTECTION.
It::-is not in sheep alone that tihe value of farm animals was
affected by the low-tariff law and the depression which accompaied it   Anoter table, shows the value of the various classes
of farm  animals as reported by the Department of Agriculture
in each year from 1870 to 1900. It shows that the value of horses
on farms fell from more:than $1,000000,000 on January 1, 189: 2
to $500,000,000 in 1896 and $45,000,000 on January 1, 1897, a loss
of $540,000,000 in this one item during the five years under consideration.  In mules the value fell from  $175,000,000 in 1892 ti
$92,000,000 in 1897; swine, from $41,000,000 in 18992 to $166,000,00C(
in 1897, and of all farm animals the value fell from $2,461,755,69h
on: Jianary 1, 1892, to $1,655,414,612 on January 1, 1897, a loss o0
06,086, W:hile the figures for January 1, 1900, show that thi
two-billion line has again been crossed by the restoration of valuehl
ccompanying the Dingley protective tariff and the prosperity whici
brught to th    farmer by increased home consumption as we 
is increased foreign markets. The American Agriculturist, a well:mcwn publication, in a recent number, says that the live stock o
ieiontry in, 1900 is worth $700,000,000 more:than it was durin
e.ea     ofdepression under the low-tariff act,




I
I
I
I
II
i
k
f
I
i
i
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I


I


"THE BLIGHTING CURSE OF THE FREE-RADE
HERESY."


Extract from remarks of Hon. W. P. BROWNLOW of Tennessee,
in House of Representatives, March 2f5 1897, and printed in
Appendix to bound Congressional Record, Vol. 30, page 61.


I have already shown the relative effects of the McKinley and
Wilson-Gorman laws as regards the public revenues, and now I
propose to go into some details and show their relative influence
ua)os the business interests of the country.
SUMMARY OF FARMEtRS' LOSSES FROM JANUARY 1;
1892, TO JANUARY       1, 1896.
I here submit a brief summary of the aggregate losses to farmers
in the slump in the value of their leading crops and in their live
stock during these four years:
Depreciation in annual farm     values.


i 'or.............per bushel. 
II h "at..................do....
t        I ye.....do......1
Oats......................do...... 
''o)tto i........ per pound..
Ia y...................per ton..
PI*ottoes.........per tbustie..
Wool.....,,.per pound..
rlev............ per bushel..
BIncltkw  eat:.........   t......
TIb:cco.....e... per potund..n


Value.
1891. l.  185.
(.et/s.   Cents.
40.6      26.4
88,9t)  ' Fi50.9
54.8       44
31.5      19. 9
8.6       7.6
8.91       8.35I
67.:1      2..6 
17         9
54        13.7
53.4  i    45.2
8.4       7.2


Total va I lues.
1891. I         1895.,


$836,439,228
51I,,472,711
25,542,01}0
232,312,267
297,377,014
411,110000)
8:3,475,00O
52.258,256
40,500.1UO
6,048,000
40,000,0100
t.;.(}' 8$F)
tw,(oX30o


$567,509,106
'27,938,00)8
11,964,826
1683,655,068
259, 1,64,640
3tl,3. 185,6(.
78,984,901
26, 86,705)
29,31 2,415
35,574,000
$1,810,712,5)97


Total..................................2,539,434,47
A\ Ilutial loss on cr)lops  four yearsl,,728,721,879.
Depreciation in live-stock values.


Value per head.
Jan. 1,  Jal. 1,
1,892.    1896.
ilei t.,.....................   $2.50   $1.70
St ir8     ~e, e.. 9 4.60  4.,15
*i.....................    4.60     4.35
Mi l i, cows............    21.40    '22.55
'tith.r  ( cattle1...............   5.  15.86
i{ tir:es.........................  65.01  3:3.07
It lli s......................|......  7  45.29
Total( values.............................


Total valrues.
Jan. 1,1892.   IJa. 1,181.


t $116,121,270
241,031,415
351,378,182
570,749,1t55
1,007, 5938,636
147,882,070
82.,61,755,678


$65,167,7315
186,529,745.
863.(9 55,54
50,8,28,411
500,140,1 8(
103,204,457
$1,727,9026,184


Ail1nial toss on live stock in four years.............................  $733,82,54
A\ii  - iat loss ol (cr, )ps  ill ifour7 years...............................  728,721,879
Total aln nal  loss to  farmers............................  $1,462551,473
A id to be added to these appalling figures is a similar depreciatio0 in the value of dairy products, eggs, fruits, poultry, nursery
Sti(, the products of truck and seed farms, and the rice crop.
At 'ie same ratio, the losses of the farmers in the years 1893 and
189~ will swell the aggregate to a greater amount than the cost of
the var. Is it any wonder that the stricken and helpless wealth
Pro1:icers, who saw their hard earnings melting away like snow in a
surLm:er's sun, reverted to the era of their marvelous prosperity
tthd r the protective tariff fathered by President McKinley, and
er), -stly worked and enthusiastically voted for its reinstatement?
1 i; any marvel that they wanted their own prodcts and all other
Par  ets of American indstry safe-guarded againt the blightng
c'r.,   t of the free-trade heresy?
l 30




:DEBTS MREDU CED MOORGE 0:CANCELED, PROS.
PEROUS FARMERS:AND HAPPY HOMES."
EBtrets from r      s of Hon. W. B. tSHATTUO of Ohio, in daly
OonreSnional Record, Mareh 51, 1900.
If there was any feature of the Democratic tariff which was held
up as an absolutely perfect exemplification of the real, genuine,
simon-pure Democratic tariff theory in perfect practice, it was that
of free wool.
Under it the importation of wool amounted in 1896 to 230,000,00
pounds, and in 1897 to 357,000,000 pounds, while, as I have already
said, in 1899, under a protective tariff, it was but 76,000,000 pounds.
As a result of this enormous flood of imports of foreign wools
under Democratic free trade, "Ohio XX washed clothing wool" was
sen    on July 10, 1896, the date of Mr. Bryan's nomination, at 17
cents per pound in the New York markets, while on February 9, 1900,
under the protective tariff, it was selling in the same market at 36
cents per pound, or tmore tha  double the price under the Democratic
tariff, which professed to be framed in special interests of the
farmer,
No wonder our farmers were driven to a disposal of their sheep
at any price under the low tariff and that the exportation of sheep
in 1896 reached more than 3,000,000 in number, and that in this particular branch of our foreign commerce the protective tariff caused
a reduction in our sales abroad.
On tis general question of prices of farm products let me add
a few further facts.
Grains of all kinds, as is well known, have advanced in price since
that time, and in every single instance stand at a higher price to-day
than at the date of Mr. Bryan's nomination.
In the principal articles which farmers must buy prices have in
most cases fallen, while the prices of all the articles which they sell
have advanced.
In a few exceptional cases, such as binding twine, due to the abnormal and temporary conditions in the Philippines; manufactures
of iron and steel, due to the general advance in prices and a demand
which exceeds th power of production, there has been an increase in
prices of the articles which the farmer must buy.
But in scarcely an instance does it equal the percentage of increase
in prices received by the farmer for his wool, while in most of tilese
ass of increased prices of articles consumed the advance is [temporary and due to exceptional causes,
It is not necessary to multiply examples of increased prosperity
among the farmers under the protective tariff as compared wth
that which existed under the low tariff, which was in force dlrilng
189, and with which the Democratic party in that year exprcs;ed
its complete satisfaction.
Debts reduced, mortgages canceled, prosperous farmers and ha pPY
ho e areof themlv      a sffcit idene of this.
But it may be well to add a single one further statistical steent
hich should put an end to the Democratic assertion that a low t: riff
is a       tageous to agricultural interests, and tat tt his: Isi I; the
isca years 1895 ad 1896, und er the Democratic low tariff, the:tal
ex     tion of' agricultural products amounted to $1,120,000,000 and
in the fiyscal yarsf   and 1899, under the Dingley protective triff
tley amounted to $1,648, 0,000, an increase of about 50 per tcet
Doesths ook a     tl hogh a protective tariff destroyed our fot-1ei
markets or was disadvantageous to the farmer?


h-31


I




"THE DEVELOPMENT OF MANUFACTURES TENDS
TO ENHANCE THE VALUE OF AGRICULTURAL LANDS."
EExtract from remarks of Hon. J. 0. BURIOWS of Michigan, page
4653 of daily Congressional Record, 60th Congress, 1st Session.
Where, then, on the face of the globe can the American farmer
market his surplus? At home or nowhere. This home market, therefore, should be to him the object of his deepest solicitude and protecting care, for upon it the future of agriculture in this country dei ptid&. But with a steady market at home, created and sustained by
our diversified industries, the demand is steady, and every farmer
knows that when he sows he can reap with profit. Another advantage
to the American farmer from the establishment and maintenance Of
manufacturing industries is the enhanced value of his acres. You
cannot luild up anywhere a prosperous manufacturing industry without enhancing the value of the farm lands adjacent thereto. Cast
you eye over the map of the Republic and indicate the localities
Awhere industries are the most diversified and the fewest people are
engaged in agriculture, and there you will find the highest-priced farm
lands. Mark the localities where farming is the chief occupation of
the people and other industries are the least developed; there you
will find farm lands of the least value. To demonstrate the truth of
this assertion I will insert a table in which the States and Territories
are divided into four groups, in the first of which is embraced that
portion of the country having less than 30 per cent. of the people
ealgaged in agriculture; the second, over 30 and less than 50; the
third, over 50 and less'than 70, and the fourth having 70 per cent. and
over engaged in agriculture:
VI    of,Value IPer cent.
Classes.           Acres.     ValEer o             in
Ifarms.  I  ce.   agriculture.
irst............................  77,250,742  $2,985,641,197  $38.i5,  i  14
Second.........................  112,321,257  3,480,91,5,767 i  30.55  42
Third...........................  237,873,040  3,21 8,108,970  18.53  58
Fourth......,.....     108,686,796 |  562,430,842  5.18     77
From this table it will be discerned that where 77 per cent of the
pe:ople are engaged in agriculture the average value of farm lands
is only a trifle over $5 an acre, while where only 18 per cent. are engaged in agriculture farm lands average over $38 per acre. What is
tritue in the country at large is equally true in counties and States.
iThe principal manufacturers in Pennsylvania are to be found in
thirteen counties and the average value of farm land within these
cIounties is $86.73 per acre, while in the remaining counties it is only
$21.0'2. The farm lands in the twelve chief manufacturing counties
of Ohio average $67.85 per acre, while in the balance of the State
they are worth only $42.46. The farm lands of Ohio, with only 40
p]~r cent. of her people engaged in agriculture, are worth $46 per
1wre, while in Kentucky, separated only by the Ohio, but with 62
p"r centl engaged in agriculture, they are worth only $14 per acre.
lie rugged land of Pennsylvania, with 21 per cent. of her people
(enaged in agriculture, is worth $50 per acre, while in Virginia,
Nx here 51 per cent. are engaged in agriculture, they are valued at only
'~U an acre. By the census of 1880, in the six States of North Caroiia, South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, and Arkansas,
7T per cent. of the people were engaged in agriculture and only 5
I'r cent. in manufactures, and the average value of the farm lands
iri these six States was only $5.18 per acre.
IL is an astounding fact derived from the same census that the
v:luc of the o00,000,000 acres of farm lands in the eleven States comIpsing the late Confederacy are not equal to the 1o6,000,00 acres of
fmi lands in the States of New York and New Jersey. I beg to
n:`;ure the gentlemen of the South that I have drawn this contrast in
ro invidious spirit, but only in confirmation of the fact that the devclo ent of manufactures tends to enhance the value of agricultural
l::s. It seems to me, however, that there is a lesson to be drawn
f1ota this of inestimable value to you. The South needs this develop*ient. Protection has brought it to to the North-it will bring it to you.
I[Applause.]
h-32




"WE    LEAD ALL NATIONS IN AGRICULTURE, IN MUN.:IN, INMANUFACTURING.          THESE ARE THE
TROPHIES OF A PROTECTIVE TARIFF."
tract from remarks of     on  WILLIAM McKINLEY, of 0hi%, i,
H ouse of Representatives, and printed in daily Congressionit Record, May 7, 1890.
We lead all nations in agricuture, we lead all nations in mninng,
and w   lead all nations in manufacturing. These are the troplies
which we bring after twenty-nine years of a protective tariff, Can
any other system furnish such evidences of prosperity?  Yet in the
presence of such a showing of progress there are men everywhere
found who talk about the restraints which we put upon trade and the
burdens we put upon theenterprise and energy of our people. rlThre
is no country in the world where individual enterprise has such wide
and varied range, and where the inventive genius of man has such
encouragement. There is no nation in the world under any system
where the $same reward is given to the labor of men's hands and the
work of their brains as in the United States. We have widened the
~phere of human eudevor iland gien to every man a fair chanen in
the raeB of ife,i and in the attainment of the hihest possibilties of
human destiny.
To reverse this systerm means to stop the progress of the Republic
and reduce the masses to small rewards for their labor, to loiner
hours and less pay, to the simple question of bread and butter, It
means to turn them from ambition, courage and hope, to dependence,
degradation and despair.
Our railroad mileage and tonnage further illustrate the growlh
and extent of our domestic trade and commerce. In 1865 the nu/nber of miles of railroad in operation in this country was 35085; ii
1887 in equaled 150,000 miles. We now have one-half f the railroads
of the world. Estimting the cost of road and equipment at $35,000
per mile, the amount expended in twenty-two years equaled $4,039 -495,000 a: yearly expenditure of over $183,000,000. According to
Poor's Manual, the totaltonnage for 1882 was 360,490,375 tons; for
1S83, 400,453,439 tons; for 1884, 399,0r4,749 tons; for 1885, 437,040,())
tons; af6, 4824,254 tons; for 1887, 552,074,752 tons.
Mr. Poor estimates that the net tonnageof 1887 of 7of all the rai!roads i the country equaled 41,500,000: the number of gross toeimoved in 1887 on all the railroads of the United States per head  f
population equaled nine tons. In 1863 the gross tonnage mow: 
equ aled  nly two tons per head. The same authority estimates tht
the va! e of the total net tonnage of the railroads of the Unit' I
Statess tequal to the sum of $13,7,$0,Oo; and at this estimate te I
atlue -of the toniag   moved in 1887 equaled p$eW  per head of the
popuilationof the country.', '..      ';,      \ t
T    iBcr: se;invalue: of the railroad tonnage of the country ia
1887 eu:  ad $1,660,000,000 or0$96,000 ein excess ofS the value
f ti xports for the sate year.    i t C   aill this have been: secur d
un4der y ouren oile system? Wouild they have:been possble under 
any^other than the proe  te st em?;- 




I






"THE TREATY WITH CUBA."
Extracts from  remarks of ion. F.    McL. S13MMONS, of North
Carolina, in daily Congressional Record, Dec. 15, 1903.
Mr. President, it is suggested that this slight reduction in the
duty upon sugar will destroy the sugar industry of this country.
That is a familiar argument. It is an argument that we are in
the habit of hearing in this Chamber and around this Capitol and
from certain special interests in this country whenever it is suggested that there should be a repeal or slight reduction in any of
the existing rates of tariff duties.
But that aside, I do not believe that this slight reduction of duly
on sugar iwill destroy any sugar interest in this country or even
naterially cripple it. If I did, if I thought the passage of this
hill would destroy the sugar industry of Louisiana or the beet
industry of the West, or even materially cripple those industries,
one or *both, I would not vote for it. Baut I do not believe it will
have that effect.
Everyone, I believe, admits that the passage of this bill and the
reduction of the duty upon sugar will not affect, certainly in the
immediate future, the price of sugar in this country, for everyone
IQnows, everyone concedes, that the price of sugar in this country
is the world's price of sugar, with the duty imposed by our tariff
and the transportation in bringing it from other countries added.
If the treaty with Cuba becomes effective and the duty on Cuban
sugar is reduced as therein provided, the price of sugar in this
country will, other conditions being the same, continue the same
it now is, and that price will be the price of sugar in ItHamburg,
where the world's price of sugar is regulated, plus the duty and
freight to New York. The German and the Frenchman will get
the same price for his sugar in this market; the American producer will get the same price for his sugar; the American consumer will get his sugar for no less; the Cuban will get the same
price in our market for his sugar, but he will have a larger net
profit than his foreign competitors, because he will not have to pay
quite so much duty on his sugar as will his foreign competitors.
But, Mr. President, my chief reason for voting for this measure
is not that it will help Cuba, although I have no objection to doing
that, and would be glad to help in doing it, but because, in my
judgent, this legislation will be of great benefit to the whole people of the United States.
In the near future, it may be predicted, within the five-year life
of the proposed treaty, that the import trade of Cuba will reach
$100,000,000. We now get only about 42 per cent. of her import
trade. The balance of it goes to European countries-to France,
to Germany, to England, to Spain. If this treaty shall become,perative by the passage of the pending bill, w3e shall be given in
the Cubanr markets an advantage in the sale of our goods ranging
from 20 to 40 per cent. over our German-. our Spanish, and oaur
3nglish competitors, and with tat advantage, instead of selling
ter $25,000,000, as now, upon the basis of her present trade, we
ulght to sell her $50,000,000 worth of our goods, and in the life
if this treaty we ought to sell her, instead of $50000,00 0 worth,
s80,000,000 or $90,000,000 worth.
Cuba purchased last year about $6,000,000 worth of cotton goods..Before this treaty expires she will buy over $12,000,000 worth, I
iave no doubt. We now get only about $400,000 worth of this cot'on trade.  With the advantage this treaty.will give us over our
wturOpean rivals (an advantage ranging from 30 to 40 per cent).ce ought to sell Cuba all the cotton goods she consumes. Give
vur manufacturers these concessions, give them this advantage of,rom 20 to 40 per cent. over their English, German, and Spanish
ompetitors, who are now getting 58 per cent. of that trade, and our:erchants will at once begin diligently to seek this trade.:They will
'emodel their goods so as to suit the nicest and most delicate retiuirements of the Cuban consumer, and will incur any and every?xpense necessary to do that, and they will sell to Cuba practically
all that she buys from abroad.
h-34




. *I  -: I               g.... '':.....
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~::::::::-::::::::::: -:....... o.............j  j aj ^ a@  a^l4"
4!~ ~ ~~:.
'::::'~::::::::~~:
mS~~~M 
I  I |
II iL^.^ Pci0~'W
15 1  "r2 a:-~:5!~P.,:..:....::
U3ONA.O31.!a. J.. ~3S'cAO.N....  O.I.U.g.P
FI,?   ^:^ ^   "b:::::: |  l  ".
1..?..~..~   1.1... 1.
fa ~~~~ru+a 
Up   V  (/ 5.!tf
41    4jj  &;og  Q  s.4 w  ft&i;   - 4- '
^~~    g~~ sa         -i:B tS 8
|.......::......
Ot......~o.~r.^.ap.t.^r '. " ~...  
1^  ij if 5^  ^a ^i ^'  i&. <:::|&&
QP~~~d              P
lj  ~ j 0- 7 3  16b
Sio t!  ca^  as^  ^^ y ^gt  sieg..  ^  ^^^  te
+4 4ri  i 1 ~a WD y ^^ siw  ( wD ~ n, 3a'- eMw  f
*Sfi5 ~ ~    T5 I5 4iO  ~."  O -iri O   ffyC5 9........
i a   r~F~1u~iAt vS~
I~ ~ j: i  | |:<o:    i:::::i.5 1....3. i.. 3:   i I.   P?3::::! *  '  * -.
1.....  i. 3.............?a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~";: s '0 ^a  iii^ ^~1  ^f:  i;: i
1~c  |: d1  j |:    t^  l^::
1-'  ~a   ~   ~, ~~ ~ >  '  * ft y:*** 
a  j3  9 F     Wk6:::: J: J
$,   j;  ^;;  '.. '...................  '.....
i  |  i:::!: *  JJ:H i1  i::ji tari  I J
i  i:1 ^ ^;^::  ^!^;^
F      i::::::::::;~::*::::  ~ I::: '::; 
j:: ".:..:::....  
J....,.,.,. <...  ^.   *  a   ~  *........^...: 
* I JJJ.H,..............I..::::::~
'...........
*s::.:m s...    I.
i r.:;::i_             1 
i:So:: ~:~0~ g: 0  ~~  ^,.............
i; fa O P^Qa Sf~^S r  o:a riraO^  I.....:......
~"sddiav:: i  anodi      i;i.o..tn.N.o.....
oc  ii Z   0~ ii 
jrrri~~~~~~~a ~~1 -- iB
lilsIu MAWB~  n: 
~~30n  0 V-  400Id, di Oc




64OOO        LOSS IN TWO         EAftlIN LIVE STOCK!,at from  temarks of lton, PRANCIS E. WARREN, of WFoinro, ii n the Senate of the United States, and printed in the
daily Congressional Record, January:et 1896.
pifarison between Republican and Democratic Administrations as shown
by the values of domestic atiindls,.
we reutied spcte payment in 1879 bur domestic anis, horses, mules, cattle, sheep, and swine, were valued
'...:.,* 4                                      544.0 i2... 4 4.  *...................... $t,446,423g 62
the ensuing six years, until the election of Mr. Cleved in 1884, the values Incse Ased to........... 2,467,868,924
A gain during six years of Republican rule of...... 1,022,448,862
g the ensuing four years, until the election of Mr. Hara in 1888* values decreased from................. 2,467,868,924,,.*.................................*....     2t409,043,418
A loss during four years of Democratic rule of......  58,826,566
ag the ensuing four years, until the second election of, Cleveland in 1892, values again increased from..  2,409,043,418.........................................            461,75,6 8
A gain during four years of Republican rule of......  5,7i12,280
ag the last two years, under the secontd administration
Mr. Cleveland, and under proposed and accomplished
trade and sweeping tariff reductions, values again deased fromt........2............  *i 2,483,506,681
e comparatively insignificant total of...........*..  1,819,446,306
Showing the enormous loss in two years of Democratic
rule  of...........................   664,060,375
r. President) over $664,000,000 loss In two years in live stock 1
I classes Shrank except milch cows.
\  3Number. i  Value.
1h colxs alone gainedA........................  17,229   3.,?0S,0iSb
es shrank....................................  187,821  192,494,219
s  shirank...................  4................ 1912  '  35,304,77
tIand other cattle shrau k..............   2,243,952  58,79W,618
ilshrank....................................   1,040,782  0,888'35
ut it remained for sheep to show the most disastrous shrinkage.
SHEEP TABLE.
884, under Republican policy, our sheep were 50,626,626
nIitinbers and of the value Of o...................... $119,902,706
r influences of the threatened Mills bill they shrank to,599,079 in numbers and to the value of.............  90,640,36
A shrinkage of 8,027,547 head and in value........  29,262,337
the lowest point recorded under the Mills bill fright up
1893, under Republican guardianship, sheep increased
47.273 553 in numbers and to the value of...........  125,909,264
An increise of 4,674,474 head and an Increase in
value  of.....................................  35,268,896
again upon Mr. Cleveland's second election we turn
kward and downward as usual under the blighting,
thering influence of a wrong policy, and in two years
eP decreased to 42,294,064 head, of the value of......  6,685,76t
A loss of 4,979,489 head and a loss in value of......  59,223,497,shrinlkage in tlwo short years of nearly one-half!
THE OTHER SIDE OF THE LEDGER.
Ov to exhibit the other side of the ledger.
Imports of wool (in pounds).
{ Ten months ending
Ocdtober18)4.      18
^.........._. I........................................ 25.807,46.2  i  113j72,709.2841,4                                            2     18.....................................  2,8 41   i  1,7 8........ I.;.........................................  54,574,386  80,652544
T..'........................................  ^,211,057 8
(l r1 %t^asccte g i*........,......................  17,,1441,1,  ww `t__~o__ ww. S. w_> _ wwWW — a~- _e _... ~..~.._  _. W. _.,^


4.36




: THEARMER A TRUE AMERIAN TYPE"
Extracts from public addresses of President ROOSE0
printed in daily Congressional Record, June 20, I!
It remains true now as it alvays has been, that in th
resort the country districts are those in which we are
to find the old American spirit, the old American hab
thought and ways of living. Conditions have changed
country far less than they have changed in the cities, a
consequence there has been little breaking away fro
methods of life which have produced the great major
the leaders of the Republic in the past. Almost all o
great Presidents have been brought up in the countr
most of them worked hard on the farms in their youit
got their mental training in the healthy democracy of
life. (Speech at Bangor, Me., August 27, 1902.)
The countryman-tlhe man on the farm, more tha
other of our citizens to-day, is called upon continually
ercise the qualities which we like to think of as typical
United States throughout its history-the qualities of r
independence, masterful resolution, and individual e
and resourcefulness. He works hard (for which no I
to be pitied), and often he lives hard (which may 
pleasant); but his life is passed in healthy surround
surroundings which tend to develop a fine type of citize
In the country, moreover, the conditions are fortunately
as to allow a closer touch between man and man that
often, we find to be the case in the city. Men feel more
ly the underlying sense of brotherhood, of conmmnai
interest. (Bangor, Me., August 27, 1902.)
The man who tills his own farm, whether on the p
or in the woodland, the man who grows what we eat an
raw material which is worked up into what we wear
exists more nearly under the conditions which obtaied
the "emlbattled farmers" of '76 made this country a 
than is true of any others of our people. (Sioux Fal
Dak., April 6, 19o3.)
The true welfare of the nation is indissolubly lboun
with    wlfare the  efarme r an the  wage-worker —
man who tills the soil, and of the mechanic, the ha' dici
man and the laborer. If we can insure the proseicr
these two classes we need not trouble ourselves alt'
prosperity of the rest, for that will follow as a  ol:tt
course. (Speech at opening of Pan-American Exptos
May -20, 1901.)
The success of the capitalist, and especially of tie tai
is conditioned upon the prosperitv of both workin ln:ma
farmfer. (The Law of Civilization and Decay-_-\1ne
Ideals, p. 367.) 
In a country like ours it is fundamentally tru tlh
well-being of the tiller of the soil and the wage-worker
well-being oof the State.  (Sioux Falls, S. Dak.. Ap
1903.)
h-37


I




HAT MADE THIS INCREASE OF $2,000,000,000?               IT
WAS THE DEMAND OF A FULLY
*  EMPLOYED PEOPLE."'
I ratis from speech of Hon. J.. GA LLIN.GER of New Hampshire, in the United States Senate, June 25, 1902.
AGRICULTURE.
wish to show now, Mr. President, the effect of these immense
niligs upon our agriculture, then upon our manufactures. First,
regards agriculture. Said the Orange Judd Farmer, in its issue
OcEtober 19, 1901 
hlle most prosperous year in the history of the American farmer
ranwing to a close."
Xid yet last year we had an unusually short corn crop, a small
ato and apple crop, and, with the exception of wheat, only a
ial crop in all staples.
*         *         *         *         *        *
Jere is an increase in value of over $1,000,000,000 in these crops
an increase of over $1,000,000,000 in the value of farm animals,
it must be remembered that 1901 was a poor year and 1896 a
yi ear in farm production. What made this increase of over
0,000,000?  It was the demand of fully-employed, well-paid
ple, due to a tariff that enables us to do our own work instead
hiring the cheap labor abroad to do it for us.
roI 31893 to 1897 we had practical free trade. From 1897 to
1 ie had protection. No one claims, Mr. President, that the tariff
anything to do with the size of crops, but I do maintain that
ts much to do with values. The 3,000,000 idle men of 1896 could
buy much bread. They could not eat as many potatoes, apples,
Iother products of the farm, and as we consume 90 per cent. of
farmr products at home, our farmers are dependent on the pursing power of the people for both quantity disposed of and
received.
protective tariff insures the farmer against the disaster that
ld otherwise attend a short crop because the people can afford
say the enhanced price. That is. why the farmer got nearly twice
lucih for his short corn crop of last year as he did for his good
of 1896. I showed in this Chamber two years ago that the
iters of the country lost $10,000,000,000 because of low tariff
ation and operation. Since the Dingley law went into effect they
' gained in increased prices and enhanced values much more
this amount. They have paid off mortgages to the amount of
Y millions; they have bought millions of dollars' worth of new
hiinery and implements; they have improved their property, and
Y ftrm values are to-day double what they were in 1895 and 1896.
ring the fiscal year 1901 we exported nearly a billion of dollars'
tb of agricultural products against a little more than half a
On dollars' worth in each of the fiscal years 1895 and 1896. The
rage agricultural exports during the years 1898, 1899, 1900, and
1 exceeded $850,00,000 in value against $550,000,000 in 1895 and
a in of 00,000,000 a year, and yet the crops of 1895 and
"W "e abnormally large.
1a5l to emphasize this fact, Mr. President, that it is not the
of tiie farmer's crop, but the value of the crop which rewards
Dlil ry: and the value must and does depend on the tariff, which
good wages the year round to all consumers. And the very
hperl y which comes to the farmer goes back to the manufacturer
tnerchant and railroads and labor of all kinids in the increased
ellPtion of~ implements, clothing, building material, and necesa 1d luxuries of a thousand and one kinds. So we all become
rd1l'tident, and protection scatters its benefits and blessings far
-38


I




1


"ED CATION OF THE YOUNG PARMERS"
Extract frot Message of PRESIDENT McKINLEY, in dai Cg,rsiomal Record, D8ereber;, 1899.
The Department of. Agriculture is constantly consulting the ne
of producers in all the States and Territories. It is introdue
sees and plants of. great value and promoting fuller er diversifica
of crops. Grains, grasses, fruit, legumes, and vegetables are 
ported for all parts of the United States. Under this encouragemi
the sugar-beet factory multiplies in the North and far West, se
tropical plants are sent to the South, and congenial climates
sought for the choice productions of the far east. The hybridizii
of fruit trees and grainsis conducted in the search for variec
adapted: to exacting  eonditions. The introduction of tea gard
into the Southern States promises to provide employment for i
hands, as well as to supply the home market with tea. The subji
of irrigation where it is of vital importance to the people is be
carefully studied, steps are being taken to reclaim injured or abt
doned lands, and infoiration for the people along these lines is 1e
printed and  distributed.
Markets are being sought and opened up for     urplus far 
fatory products in Europe and in l: ia. The outlook for the Ae
tion of the young farmer through agricultural college and expe
neat station, with opportutity given to specialize in the Departmn
of   griculture, is very promising. The people of Hawaii, Po
Ri:o, and the Philippine Islands should be helped, by the establi
eint of experiment stations, to a more scientific knowledge of 
production of coffee, india rubber, and other tropical products, 
which there is demand in the United States.
There is widespread interest in the improvement of our public hiN
ways at the present time, and the Department of Agriculture
co-operating with the people in each locality in making the b
possible roads from local material and in experimenting with si
tracks. A more intelligent system of managing the forests of 
country is being put in operation and a careful study of the wi
forestry problem is being conducted throughout the United Stat
A ver extensive and complete exhibit of the agricultural and hoi
cultural products of the United States is being prepared for 
Paris Exposition.
On June 30, 1898, there were thirty forest reservations (cxclus
of the Afognak Forest and Fish Culture Reserve in Alaska), 
bracing an estimated area of 40,719,474 acres., During the pasty!
two of the existing forest reserves, the Trabuco Canyon (Calif~or
and Black Hills (South Dakota and Wyoming), have been cCon
erably enlarged, the area of the Mount Rainier Res~erve in
State of Washigton, has been somewhat reduced, and six addlitio
reserves have been established, namely, the San Francisco Mount,
(Arizona), the Black Mesa (Arizona), Lake Tahoe (Califor
Gallatin (Montana), Gila River (New      Mexico), and Fish
(Utah), the total estimated area of which is' 5,905,775 acres.
makes at the present time a total of thirty-six forest reservati
embracing an estimated area of 46,021,899 acres  This est mated
is the aggregated areas within the boundaries of the reservs.
lands actually reserved are, however, only the vacant pubic te
therein, and these; have been set aside and reserved for sale or e
ent in order that they may be of the greatest use to the people.
Protection of the national forests, inaugurated by the Depart
of the Interior in 1897, has been continued during the past year: much has been accomplished in the way of preventing forest
and the protection of the timber. There are now large tracts cso
by forests which will eventually be reserved and set apart for 
uses. '.XUntil that can be done Congres Vshould increase tIme a
priatlons for the work of protecting the forests.
proec foess


I
i
t
I
i
II
I
i
i


I


h-39






I
I
q
1
1
I
t
I
t
I


I


rHE EFFECT OF FREE TRADE ON AGRICULTURE."
tret from remar  of Bow* J, P. JONe, of Nevada, i the Senate of tb
United States, Sept. 10, 1890, and printed in th  nfoprestionalt ecord
Men who seriouslY reflect on the sublect will find it difficult to  e
ecnclusion that long persetence in a policy of free trade would, wr
ietrnolg the present system of farming, effect the ruin of the Republic.
our population increased (as increase it will, and rapidly) the absence
a sufficeency of mechanical industries would drive people more and
ore fnto agricultur  As there wouald be but little opportunity for the
vestment of capital, except in land, which the people must have, large
ipitalJts would be quick to grasp their opportunity. Their only resource
profit would be In the ownership of great landed estates, on which
ex.ploit multitudes  teame o  tenaner whom they would exero
dogmatic authority of lords-paramount.
Thei free American fame  r of to-day would disappear, to be replaced
rst by the lessee, next by the tenant at will, and later on, in the future,
F the exploitation continued and became more Intense, by men who, how'or free in law, would In fact, like the Coloni of Rome. become attachets of the soil on which they wored, for all practical purposes the
rmonal property of the landed magnate.   Let us take a lesson from
tIory.  "(Great etatest," said Pliny, "ruined Ttaly."  The greed and
flshness that destroyed Italy are still doing their perfect work among the
ions of the earth.
An excellent authority estinrates that in order to have an equilibrtum
tween agriculture and all other industries In any nation the number of
rsons engaged in agriculture should not exceed one-third the number
igaged In all occupations.
That is the prop       whose labortin, properly applied, can produce the
od lpply of all the people without leaving a surplus. If more than
is proportion are farmers their competition with one another reduces
an abnormal and unremunerative degree the compensation which they
iould receive in so arduous an occupation.  According to the  enoilu of
80 the number of separate farms in the United States was 4,008,907:
e number of persons engaged In agriculture, 7.67o0493  the number of?rkmen engaged in all occuptions, 17.392.099. The farming class therere, constituted 44 per cent, of the whole working body.
THE- ABSENCE OF DIVERSIFIED INDUSTRIES, TENDENCY TO OVERCROWDING OF THE
PABMER'S OCCUPATION.
The conrtarit tendency, in the absence of sufficient protection and
icouragement for manufacturing industries, is to an overproportion of
i}tivators of the soil. Agriculture being a primitive occupation. requiring
r Its conduct on a small scale but little capital and comparatively little
Ill, may be undertaken by persons who for any reason fall to find occulion in any of the great fields of manufacture. Whatever, therefore, tends
discourage the establishment or maintenance of manufactuores or to
nit their variety tends in the same degree to encourage men to engage
agriculture. That is to say, men who fail to find employment In their
llstomned occupation, having no skill in any other, are necessarily thrown
ico to the land, from which by hard work they may hop      e to  ureat
Rat a subsistence. Workmen in any and every indiulstry thrown out of
ployarent by a reduction of the tariff, therefore, swell the great army
those who cultivate the soil. EBvery such addition to the number of:rlocltorlpsts not only tends by competition to reduce the price of agrliltural products, but at the same time reduces the number of persons
i would be consumers of those products.
According as we Increase the number of our skilled workmen, we d
Dt diminish the number of farmers. As we dIminitsh the number of
illed workmen we increase the number of fnrmers. When the farlmer *
c tiln Is invaded he has no recourse.  Not being a skilled mechaant
Ocan not In turn invade some other occupation. All mechanics can become
rmers without preparatory training; no farmer cnn become a mechanic
thooo ucih training. When we shall possess the utmost diversity and mulP'lcatlon of Industries, therefore, we shall have comtnarativeit fewer farm8 anl0 a relatively greater number engaged in skilled Industries..
The trend of population from farming to Industrial pursuits will then
Te R tendency to make manufactured articles relatively cheaper and
m products relatively dearer. The farmer, therefore, has everything to
In b: a policy which Induces the people of this country to do all their own
ori*:
Instead of precipitating increased numbers Into farming by lowering the
t and reducing the numbers employed in the work-shops, if we can
scteed by a high tariff in widening our Industrial development and renrlng it unnecessary for our skilled workmen to have recourse to the
oD otusr natural Increase of population will in a few years enable our
ctotesia to consume all the products of our farms,
In a properly adjusted system of industry the artisan is as necessary
the agriculturist as- one blade of a pair of shears Is to the other; and
Oth a? Indispensable to the State. It may be said by the free tradera
0t t0'dt1 foreign mechanic can supplement the American agriculturist and
at he will cost les. But this places the agriculturist in one country
ue thbe consumer of his products In another, 3000 miles away. The:pro<e'r t- Europe has but little means wherewith to pay for the agricultural
'aduta o our annrmers; and It he be a good workman, he ts where the
O ft our farmers can hav  none of the advantages of association with
tr of oistructf o  in his art,
h-, I




"THE FARMERS INTEREST IN PROTECTION- -T
NEARER THE FACTORY IS TO THE FARM THE
HIGHER THE PRICE OF FARM PRODUCTS
AND THE LOWER THE PRICE OF THINGS
THE FARMER HAS TO BUY."
W;trat from remarks of Hon. J. T. McCiLEIARY of Minnesot,
the Hous   of Representatives, and printed in the daily Co
gressional Record, June 20, 1904.
Of all the classes of our people those who have the most perni
nent: interest. in. protection are the farmers. They secure lIelti
oth directly and inidirectly. The direct benefit comes from the i
mediate protection of their individual products.
4In 1846 England remfoved the direct protection to her agricuiiHr:
interests. Let us see the result. In 1851 the number of perso
eng    aged in agriculture in England and Wales was 1,676,900. Fift
years later, in 1901, the number of persons so engaged was 981,63;
These are the official census figures. Thus we see that the nmnbe
of persons engaged in agriculture under "free trade" has flle
almost 50 per cent in those fifty years. By way of contrast, look
Germany. Before the adoption of her protective tariff the farcme
of Germany had to look abroad for a market for their wheat an
many other food products.     In 1875 Germany shipped to Gr'(;i
Britain 11,000,000 bushels of wheat. To-day she is using her ecti!
wheat product at home.
tUinder the Wilson Act the tariff on barley coming into the I rnih
States was materially reduced, and during those years the price 
barley under Canadian competition was ruinously low.      Under t
Dingley Act barley has had adequate protection, and the prices hn
been much higher than under the Wilson Act. 
But the indirect benefit to the farmer is by far the most importan
Under a system of adequate protection our industries are diversifie
Opportunity is afforded for the development of all our resource
of material and all the various talents of our people. The mor
these industries are diversified the fewer the competitors of tl
farmer and the more the consumers of his products. The nearer ti
factory is brought to the farm the greater becomes the diversity o
the farm product, because there is thus provided a market for prod
ucts which are perishable in their nature and can not be shipped loln
distances. 
The nearer the factory is to the farm, the higher the price o
farm  products and the lower the price of the things the farmer Iha
to buy. The more we increase our manufacturing industries and th
greater becomes the number of persons engaged therein the greale
becomes:the Anarket for the farmer's products.
In tbe language of Benjamin Franklin, the patriot and phlilos
pher —
Every manufacture encouraged in our own country makes a honi maRi
ket and saves so much money to the country that must otherwise be e)
ported. In England it is well known that whenever a manufactory is eQtab
Ilthed: which employs a number of hands it raises the value of the land i
the neighboring country all around it, partly by the greater demand near a
ha   for the products of the land and partly by the increase of money draw
by:the manufactures to that place. It seems, therefore, to the interest f
all our farmers and owners of land to encourage home manufacteres I
preference to foreign ones imported from  different countries.
Quoting again from that great speech of Senator Jones, which ever']
intelligent American citizen should read and study:
According as we increase the numbers of our skilled workmen we d
not diminish the aumber of farmers. As we diminish the number of skill
workmen we increase the number of farmers. When the farmer's:ccupa
tion is invaded he has no recourse. Not being a skilled mechanic he lan no
in turn invade some other occupation. All mechanics can become ':rrer
without preparatory training; no farmer can become a mechanic ithow
such training. When we shall possess the utmost diversity and multiplice
tion of industries, therefore, we shall have comparatively  fewer tA.rme:l
and a relatively1 greater number engaged in skilled industries.
The trend of population from farming to industrial pursuits wi11 tih
have a tendency to make manufactured articles relatively cheaper a: far
roducts relatively dearer. The farmer, therefore, has everything )o g
by a policy which induces the people of this country to do all tbir w)
work.
-Instead of precipitating increased numbers into farming by b weri
theetariff and reducing the numbers employed in the workshops, if e caR
succeed -by a high tariff in widening our industrial development and riended
iug It unnecessary for our skiUed workmen to have recourse to t e l8n
our natural increase of population will in a few years enable our.:Gti'
to consume all the products of our farms. 


I
I
-i
I


I


h-41






O:  *S
~!fl


I, — ~f ~~-^u..  ~-~'-rrrr-  he ----~.~.~~r~ ~-l-~~ --- —~-~S — I-Y II



"PRESIDENT          ROOSEVELT'S           FIRST      MESSAG
SOUNDED THE KEYNOTE ON IRRIGATION."
Extract from remarks of Hon. J. M. DIXON of Montana, in daily Co,
atonal Record, April 26, 1901.
One of the first acts of President Roosevelt was to send for the
who had been working for national irrigation. He discussed the c
tions with them, and told them of his belief in action by the National
eminent and his intention to make irrigation one of the topics of his
message to Congress. No President had ever mentioned irrigation i
United States In a message before. At once affairs assumed a far more p
ising aspect; the friends of western development took courage, redo
their efforts, and began a vigorous campaign of education. The Presid
message more than met their anticipations and strengthened the hands o
of the workers. In short, the President rallied the disorganized forces
gave them the definite policy which they followed to victory.
President Roosevelt's first message, sent to Congress December 3,
sounded the keynote of the Administration on irrigation. It not only
shadowed, it actually brought about, the successful legislation passe
Congress during the succeeding spring months. After speaking of th
of the forests as natural reservoirs, the President said:
The forests alone can not, however, fully regulate and conserv
waters of the arid region. Great storage works are necessarly to eq
the flow of the streams and to save the flood waters. Their constr
has been conclusively shown to be an undertaking too vast for pr
effort. Nor can It be best accomplished by the individual States a
alone. Far-reaching interstate problems are involved, and the res0
of single States would often be inadequate.    It is properly a nat
function, at least In some of its features. It Is as right for the Nat
Government to make the streams and rivers of the arid region usef
engineering works for water storage as to make useful the rivers and
bors of the humid region by engineering works of another kind,.
storing of the floods ain reservoirs at the headwaters of our rivers is b
enlargement of or ipreent policy of river control, under which levee
built on the lower reaches of the same streams.
The Government should construct and maintain these reservoirs
does other public works. Where their purpose is to regulate the fio
streams the water should be turned freely into the channels in the
season to take the same course under the same laws as the natural
The reclamation of the unsettled arid public lands presents a 1ff1
problem.  Here it is not enoetqh to regulate the fiot Of streams,
object of the Government is to dispose of the land to settlirs who will
homes upon it. To accompUoAh this object water must be brogl ht
their reach.
The pioneer settlers on the arid public domain chose their homes
streams from which they could themselves divert the water to reclaimn
holdings. Such opportunities are practically gone.  There remain, I
ever, vast areas of public land which can be made available for home
settlement. but only by reservoirs and main-line canals Impracticabl
private enterprise. These irriq/ation wtorks should be built by the Nat
Government. The lands reclainedl by themn should be reserved by thei
ernment for actual settlers, acid the Cost of construction should, so f
possible, be repeid bus the land reclaimed. The distribution of the w
the division of the streams among irrigators, should be left to the se
themselves, in conformity with the State laws and without interfe
with those laws or with vested rights. The policy of the National CrGo
ment should be to aid Irrigation in the several States and Territori
such manner as will enable the people in the local communities to
themselves and as will stimulate needed reforms in the State laws
regulations governing irrigation.
The reclamation and settlement of the arid lands will enrich
portion of our country, just as the settlement of the Ohio and lissis
valleys brought prosperity to the Atlantic States. The Increased des
for manufactured articles will stimulate industrial production, while 
home markets and the trade of Asia will consume the larger food suP
and effectually prevent western competition with eastern agricul ture
deed, the products of irrigation will be consumed chiefly in upbul!
local centers of mining and other industries, which would otherwise
comse into existence at all. Our people fs a whole will profit, for scce?home making is but another name for the upbuilding of the nation.
The necessary foundation has already been laid for the Inauturati
the policy just described. It would be unwise to begin by doing too
for a great deal will doubtless be learned, both as to what can and
can not be safely attempted, by the early efforts, which must of nef
be partly experimental in character. At the very beginning tl   '
ment should make clear, beyond shadow of doubt, its intention to P
this policy on lines of the broadest public interest. No reservoir or"
should ever be built to satisfy selfish personal or local Interest',~ but
in accordance with the advice of trained experts, after long tno"esti
has shown the locality where all the conditions combine to malke the
most neededed and fraught with the greatest usefulness to the no,"1[
as a whole. There should be no extravagance, and the believrs 15
need of irrigation will mosPt benefit their cause by seeing to It that
free from the least taint of excessive or reckless expenditure of te 
moneys. *       *
'hbe direct result of his action was the passage of the reclamati0o
The reclamation act sets aside the proceeds of the disposei f P
lands in thirteen Western States and three Territories for natl"11 'al
tion. The fund thus created is placed at the disposal of tho see
of the Interior for surveys. examination, and construction of wor]
Is not a donation, but the money must ultimately be returinedst
Treatury by the persons benefited, to be used over again in t-o;cs
tton of other works.


i-1I




THE REMANING1 PUBLIC LANDS SHOULD: BE HELD
RIGIDLY FOR THE HOME BUILDER."P.Jriracts from  remarks of Hon. WM. A. REEDER        of Kansas, in
daily Congresionasl Record, April '3, 1904.,president Roosevelt in his messages to Congress has urged the
treat importance of the public-land question, and he has discoursed
tpon its far-reaching possibilities at various times and at various
iaces, both before and since he has been President, in his own
nimitably forceful style; but I recall no statement that, more clearly
spreess  the truth than in his speech at Stanford University Mav, 1903. In this he said:
T'r establish a family permanently upon a quarter section of land or,
of esire, upon a less quantity, if it is irrigated land, is the best use to
which it can be put.
Tbe first need of any nation is intelligent and honest citizens. Such can
eore only from honest and intelligent homes, and to get the good citizenThip we must get the good homes. 
It is absolutely necessary that the remainder of our public land should
be reserved for thle ho-ite mi Plkor.
And again:
tt is time for ns to see that our remaining public lands are saved for
thi homen miaker to the utmost limit of his possible use. We want to see
he f ree farmer own his own home.
The bhest of the public lands are already in private hands, and yet tbo
rote of their disposal is stfeadily increasing. More than 6,000,000 acres
wsre patented during the first three months of the present year.
Mr. Chairman, more than 6,000,000 acres of our public domain in
tree months-2,000,000 acres in one month-500,000 acres each week.
How many hundreds of possible homes for poor families gone each
eek-and Fone where. Largely into the hands of the land grabber
and the syndicate; and thus will our nation's lands become a menace
n our institutions, while if reserved for and made into homes for
he people they would become a bulwark to the Government.
Is it to be wondered that those who hope to see the public domain
made a rich garden by our beneficent irrigation law and given to
he people for homes to the building tup of the nation and the
betterment of humanity, should feel discouraged when they are
assired that there is no hope of legislation this year and that
millions of acres of our best public lands will, during another year.
pass into the hands of speculators and great land interests? Do you.
pentlemen, who prophesied failure for the national irrigation law.
not realize that if we do not heed the demands of the President.
he Secretary of the Interior, and many of the great organizations of
'oamnerce, labor, and agriculture, as well as many of the great
reMpWRfapers of the land, and stop this disposal of the best of o1r1
Pbliic lancd at the rate of several million acres each year. we prirntilyV force upon ourselves failure in making homes of the publifc
nmamin hy means of the irrigation law?
And here is what President Grant said in one of his messages?
T renew my recommendation that the public lands be regarded as thb
hoerftoae of onr children, to be disposed of only as required for occupation
snd fur actual settlers.
And now see what President Roosevelt says:
4'o far as theyl are available for aqriculture, arnd to whatever extent they
000 Ii' relalnomed undfer the national frriq7atitn  leaw, the remainin#a publit
Rq shoild 'be held rioidlu for the home bbuilder, the settler who lives on
h0 loi1t, and for on one else, In their actual use the desert-land law, the
toho r and 'tone law, and the commutation clause of the homestead law
haoe l een so nerverted from the intention with which they were enacted
3 tO permit the acquisition of large areas of the purlblic domtnn for other
thon actual settlers and the consequent prevention of settlement.
Tthe Commissioner of the General Land Office, in his report of 19011
tatets as follows:
omYnnense tracts of thLe most valuable timber land, which every eon'iderf tion of public interest demanded should be preserved for public use.
"te become the property of a few individuals and corporations. In many
InSt"I(e-s whole townships have been entered tinder this law in the interest
of Qo person or firm, to whom the lands have been conveyed as soon as
rit -ts for the purchase price -were issued.
Se retary. Wilson, in his annual report for 1901, makes the follown   k 'eclarattion:
b hile all the land laws were doubtless intended to benefit settlers,
they have in practiceP in the arid region too often benefited speculators.
i^^ndls of filingsq made under the desert, preemption, homestead, and.
t0be( -culture acts have been made by people who never were farmers and
ler.'xpected t6 become farmers. It is to gtuh filtlns that scores of merti
Irrigation enterprises owe their failure.  The repeal of the projPti    and timber-culture acts and cutting down desert-land entries from
5 t: 320 acres have Improved the situation, but it can be still furthbr
Peyed by an entire repeal of the desert-land act and by requiring setdrs i'n homesteads to cultivate as well as to live on their farms. Tlh
sr act was an economic mistake.
i-2


I




.;;J1    ^:::;;:;     -           S::::
"RLAMTIOi O                  E ARID LAN.-'-PREER.
VAIO    OF0 THE: FSORESTS4
Extract from mnessage of PRSIDENT ROOSEVELT, publ;,ish
in daily Congressional Record, IDec. 7, 1903.:The work of reclamation of athe arid lands of the West is progressing steadily and satisfactorily under the terms of the law
setting aside  he proceeds ffrom the disposal of public lands. The
corps of engineers known as the Reclamation Service, which is conducting the surveys and examinations, has been thoroughly organized,
special pains: being takenf to secure under the civil-service rules
a body of skilled experiencced, and etficient men. Surveys and examinations are progressing throughout the arid States and Terri
tories, plans: for reclaiming works being prepared and passed upon
by boards of engineers before approval by the Secretary of the
Interior. In Arizona and Nevada, in localities where such work
is preeminently needed, construction has already been begun. In
other parts of the arid West various projects are well advanced
towards the drawing up of contracts, these being delayed in part
by necessities of reaching agreements or understanding as regards
rights of way or acquisition of real estate.  Most of the works
contemplated for construction are of national importance, involving interstate questions or the securing of stable, self-supporting
communities in the midst of vast tracts of vacant land. The Natital
as a whole is of cours the gaainer by the creation of these honmes,
addidg as they do to the wealth and stability of the country,  nd
furnishing a home market for the products of the East and South.
The reclamation law, whileperhaps not ideal, appears at present
to answer the larger needs for which it is designed. Further legislation is not recominended until the necessities of change are more
apparent.
The study of the opportunities of reclamation of the vast extent
of ar id land shows that whether this reclamation is done by individuals, corporations, or the State, the sources of water suppl'l
must be effectively protected and the reservoirs guarded by the
preservation of the forests at the headwaterof  t the streams. The
engineers making the preliminary examinations continually eniphasize this need and urge that the remainiing public lands at the headwaters of the important streams of the West be reserved to insure
permanency of water supply for irrigation. Much progress in for-|
estry has been made during the past year. The necessity for perpetuatrmg our forest resources, whether in public or private hanids,
is recognized now as never before. The demand for forest reserves
has become insistent in the West, because the West must use the
water, wood, and summer range which only such reserves can supply.  Progressive lumbermen are striving, through forestry. to
give their business permanence. Other great business interests are
awakening to the need of forest preservation as a business min ter
The  Government's: forest work   should  receive  from  Conres
hearty support, and especially support adequate for the prote- tii0
of thet forest reserves against fire. The forest-reserve policy of
thee Goermett has pasd beyond the experimental stage ane has
reached a condition where scientific methods are essential t its
successful prosecution.  The administrative   features of   I rest:reserves ar at present' unsatisfactory, being divided between 'ilree
Bureaius of two Departments./ I t is therefore recommended tht
ama. ers pertaining to forest eerves, except those involvi    or;
pertaingto land titles, becosolidated in the Bureau of Fo; strmY
of tthe Deprtment of A             ' *. ':; Agriture




HE RECLAMATION AND SETTLEMENT OF THE
AMID LANDS WILL ENRICH EVERY PORTION
OF OUR COUNTRY'.
ract from remarks of Hon. JOHN P. LACEY of Iowa, in daily
Congressional Record, April 98, 1904.
jr. SPEAKER: Except in the original thirteen States and in Texas.
re l here were no public lands, the United States was the great
do ower, and to-day the nation still owns about one-third of the
area of the country. Once there were between one and two
isand million acres of public lands, and there are still about
hundred millions left, not counting Alaska.    Since President
oln signed the homestead law in 1863, it has been the policy of
Government to give its public lands freely to the men who
Id make homes. Under that policy other laws were passed to
iin the general purpose, and millions of settlers went out and
pied the public domain. The great West was filled with thrifty,
ustrious families, and new States grew up and added their stars
te flag. But the best of the public lands were all taken uplminds for which some of these land laws were passed-and new
ditions arose, which the makers of the laws had never foreseen.
Icle Sam had been rich enough to give every man a farm, but
most of the land on which a man could make a living without
ation was gone. There was more demand for farms than ever,
epeople coming to settle-more need for good land just when
was less land that could be taken than ever before.
or years there had been talk about national irrigation- -— abol1
duty of the nation to reclaim the arid lands of the public domain
ake homes for the people-but nothing came of the talk. PresiRoosevelt's first message to Congress changed all that. After
rring to the effect of forests on the water supply, he said:
The forests alone can not, however, fully regulate and conserve the
rs o, the arid region. Great storage works are necessary to equalize
o1w of streams and to save the flood waters. Their construction has
connlusively shown to be an undertaling too vast for private effort.
ean it be best accomplished by the individual States acting alone.
Far-reaching Interstate problems are involved, and the resources of
e States would often be inadequate. It is properly a national function
oast in some of its features. It is as right for the National Governito make the streams and rivers of the arid region useful by engineerworks for water storage as to make useful the rivers and harbors of
humid region by engineering workz of another kind. The storing of the
fin reservoirs at the headwaters of our rivers is but an enlargement
or pre'ent policy of river control, under which levees are built on the
r reaches of the same streams.
The Government should construct and maintain these reservoirs as it
other public works. Where their purpose is to regulate the flow of
nos, the water should be turned freely into the channels in the dry
I to take the same course under the same laws as the natural flow.
The reclamation of the unsettled arid public lands presents a different
rm. Here it is not enough to regulate the flow of streams. The obof the Government is to dispose of the land to settlers who will build
8s upon it. To accomplish this object water must be brought within
reach.
The pioneer settlers on the arid public domain chose their homes along
0ls f rom which they could themselves divert the water to reclaim
holdiogs. Such opportunities are practically gone.  There remain,
Ier. vast areas of public land which can be made available for homeset:ement, but only by reservoirs and main-line canals impracticable
private enterprise. These irriation works Should be built by the NnGCvelrnment. The lands. reclaimed by them should be reserved by
Io vernrment for actual settlers, and the cost of construction should be
r as possible be repaid by the land reclaimed. The distribution of the
I. tht; division of the streams among irrigators. should be left to the
re themselves in conformity with State laws and without interference
toas, laws or with vested rights. The policy of the National GovernI h:to1d be to aid irrigation in the several States and Territories in
naamrer as will enable the people in the local communities to help
e've:, and as will stimulate needed reforms in the State laws and
tiore governing irrigation.
he 'eclamation  and settlement of the arid lands will enrich every
on 0 our country, just as the settlement of the Ohio and Mississippi
" bi -ught prosperity to the Atlantic States. The increased demand
'n1r tictured articles will stimtulate industrial production, while wider
Omioe-tts and the trade of Asia will consume the larger food supplies
eect sally prevent western competition with eastern agriculture. Inthm 'roduets of irrigation will be consumed chiefly in upbuilding local
rs o minng and other industries, which would otherwise not come
eist nce at all. Our people as a whole will profit, for successful
01'i nog is but another rname for the suphbildinq of the nation.
e tie national reclamation act was passed, but not before the
et had used his personal influence successfully to improve
lI i. the interest of the actual settler and against land speculaan e orry form. He was mainly responsible for the passage of
real law, which will give homes to the West, and therefore home
rets tr the manufactured products of the East.


I








i
i; f
i
11


i
i
f
i
i


II Iq,DV*
I


I
II
i
I
9I
i
I


A i                     -   --
i
-i                              11-1 --- - -  -


m




RURAL FREE DELIVERY.-" GOOD ROADS,'
Extract from Messrge of THE P''RESIDENT publis
in daily Congressional Record, Dec. 7, 1903.
The rural free-delivery service has been steadily 
tended.  The attention of the Congress is asked to t
question of the compensation of the letter carriers a
clerks engaged in the postal service, especially on the n
rural free-delivery routes. More routes have been install
since the first of July last t.han in any like period in i
Department's history.   While a due regard to ecOmilo
muist be kept i. mi nd in the establish ent of new rout
vet the extensis s rt:i        fraeeliv   y systelm In
be continued, for reasons of sound public policy. No g
enrmental movement,      cent t years has resulted in great
i e r Ineat e   to tbti  OpeAofe Gf the n-ntry distric
Ruralf4ree delivery, ta ken in connection with the te
phone, the bicycle and the trolley, accomplishes much
ward lessening the isolation of farm life and miakillg
brighter and more attractive. In the immediate past t
lack of just such facilities as these has driven many
the more active and restless young men and women fro
the farms to the cities; for they rebelled at loneliness ai
lac  of mental companionship. It is unhealthy and anl
sirable for the cities to grow at the expense of the.co~ntr
and rural free delivery is not only a good thing in ilsel
but is good because it is one of the causes which che~ ti1
unwholesome tendency towards the urban concentration
our population at the expense of the country districgs.
is for the same reason that we sympathize with and artpo
of the policy of building good roads. The movement i
good roads is one fraught with the greatest benefit to t
country districts.
j-1






ORURAL       REE      EUVRY."             UN         REPUL        AN
RULE THIS SERVICE HAS BEEN NURTURED"
txptract from remarks of Hon. J. H. DAVIDSON of Wisconsin, in daily Congressional Record, April 80, 1904. 
The subject of rural free-delivery service is one of commanding interst and importance-interest, because it is a comparatively new proposition,:dan important because of the very great benefit it confers on a most worthy
class of people.
Postmaster-General Wanamaker in 1892 first recommended the establishment of this service. In three or four years following small appropriations were made  but not expended, and the system   was never given a
taorough trial until under President McKinley's first Administration, when
a usonmber of routes were established and a thorough tesmade. Since then
each annual report submitted by the head of the Post-Office Department
ias made special reference to this service, to its development, and to the
nefits accruing to the people through its establishment.
Postmaster-General Gary, in his annual report, in speaking of rural
free delivery, aised the following language:
"It would be difficult to point to any like expenditure of public money
aticea has been more generously appreciated by the people or which has
tiifatrred greater benefits in proportion to the amount expended. In every
Instance the introduction of the service has resulted in an increase in the
aiount of mail matter handled. There is no doubt of the desire, wherever
tie System has been tried, that it should be made permanent."
Postmaster-General Smith, in referring to this service, said:
"The benefits accruing from  the extension of postal facilities to the
rural communities may be sugmmarized as follows:
"Increased poostal receipts, making many of the new deliveries almost
tomediately self-.supporting.
"Enhancement of the value of farm lands reached by this service anti
otter prices obtained for farm  products through more direct comunicaticn with the markets and prompter information of their state.
"Improved means of travel, some hundreds of miles of country roads,
specially In the Western States, having been graded specifically in order
obtain rural free delivery.
"Higher educational influences, broader circulation of the means of pubic Intelligence,d and closer daily contact with the great world of activity
xtended to the homes of heretofore isolated rural communities."
In 1900 the Postnmaster-General spoke of rural free delivery as follows:
"The extraordinary extension of rural free delivery during the past two
ears has proved to be the most salient, significant, and far-reaching feaarce of postal development in recent times.r
In 1901 the Postlmaster-General, in speaking of the service, said:
"The policy of rural free delivery is no longer a subject of serious dis>te. It has unmistakably vindicated itself by its fruits."
In 1902 he said:
"Rural-delivery service has become an established fact. It is no longer
o the experimental stage, and undoubtedly Congress will continue to inrease the appropriation for this service until all the people of the country
re reached where it is thickly enough settled to warrant it."
In 1900 President McKlnley in his message to Congress, In speaking
' the postal service, used language as follows:
"Its most striking new development is the extension of rural free dellvmry. *  * *  This service ameliorates the isolation of farm  life conives to good roads, and quickens and extends the dissemination of genrat Information. Experience thus far has tended to allay the apprehension
iat it would be so expensive as to forbid Its general adoption or make it a
rntas burden. Its actual application has shown that it increases postal reipts and can be accompanied by reduction in other branches of the service,
that the augmented revenues and accomplished savings together materially
tduce the net cost."
In his first message to Congress President Roosevelt said:
"Among recent postal advances the success of rural free delivery whereer established has been so marked and actual experience has made its
nesets so plain that the demand for its extensison is general and urgent.
t is jst that the great agricultural population should share in the im'vemnent of this service."
Again, in his last annual message, the President says:
"The rural free-delivery service has been steadily extended. The atQtfon of Congress is asked to the question of the compensation of the letr carriers and clerks engaged in the postal service, especially on the
ruiral free-delivery routes. More routes have been installed since the
t ef July last than in any like period in the Department's history.,While
5"^ regardl to economy must be kept in mind in the establishment of new
tes yet the extenslion of the rural free-delivery system must be continued
r reasons of sound public policy. No gfovernmental movement of:recent
Orv ias resulted in greater aimmediate benefit to the people of the country
Rural free-delivery, taken in connection with the telephone, the bicycle,
the trolley, accomplishes much toward lessening the isolation of farm
s ni d making it brighter and more attractive, In the immediate past
ha Ii of, juCst such facilities as these has driven many of the more active
cr tvless young men and w                    set1omen from the farms' to 'the cities, for they
at loneliness and lack of mental companionship. It is unhealthy
*v Ui desirable for the, cities to grow at the expense of the country; and
'at i ee delivery is not only a good thing in itself, but is good because it is
Of the causes which check this unwholesome tendency toward the urban
icenW ration of our population at the expense of the country districts."
Th5se indorsements demonstrate beyond the possibility of question that
er ep'b~ican rule this service, fraught with so much good to the people
le ural communities, has been 'nutrtwured  d eared for until it ha
Pme one of our permanent institutions, against which no political party
i e"r dare r'aise a voice.
wls service under the present Adminitstration is being rapidly exdidit During the fiscal year ending June' 30, 1903, 8,839 routes' were
"eted and" 6653 established..
total tnumber of routes In operation at that time was 15,119, and
arch I, 1004, the total number had increased to 22,000.
j-2


I




TIONA
Extracts from remarks of Hon. GEORGE IV. NORRIS of Nebraska, i. dail
oi0gressional Record, March 16, 1904.
The inauguratirtl of rural free felivery in the inited States was bex
with many difficuties,  in its infancy it was pounced upon by the Dem
errati party, a fparty that bhaas an unbroken history of never missing an op
portunity to try to throttle the life of every Infant industry that may be 
unfortunate as to meet It upon the great highway of progress. In maki
kappropriatios for the Post-Office Department for the fiscal year endi
June 30, 1894, the sum of $10,000 was appropriated for the purpose of ma
ing an experiment in the rural free delivery of mail.
This money was available from and after the 1st day of July, 1891
The coulntry was at that time under a D)emocratic Administration. Ti
Post-Office Depariment, "headed by tfe Democratic Postemaaster-General, ow
not only opposed to ritral free delivery, but it refursld and neglected to Inae
tiny experimentes or to institute any rural free-delivery routes. As an ex
cope for this failure and neglect to obey the mandates of the law tlb
Assistant Postmaster-General, in his report transmittedito Congress in PD
comber, 1893, expressed strong views against rural free delivery and th
Postmaster-General of this same Democratic Administratioln approved thea
views, and in his report to this some Congress spoke of rural free deliver
as followS: 
"Although i t was provided by Congress in the appropriation bill for th
fiscalyear ending Junae 30, 1894, that $10,000 should be devoted, at the dis
cretion of the Postmaster-General, to testing the feasibility of 3establishing
system of free delivery in rural districts, it has been found impossible, b
reason of the pressure of more Important questions, for the officers havir
that subject in charge to give the subject the study and consideration that
demands, much less to establish such rural free delivery. It was soon di
covered, furthermore, that the appropriation for this experiment is not 
all sufficient for thorcugh and reliable tests, for, in order to give the rur
free-delivery system a fair and thorough trial, tests would have to be ma,
in many localities, differing, necessarily, in density of population, topoI
raphy, class of interests, and condition of highways and thoroughflare
To inaugurate a system of rural free delivery, it would require an appr
priation of at least $20,000,000. I therefore adopt the opinion of the Fir
Assistant Postmaster-General that the Department w'ould not be warranti
in burdening the people with such a great expense, when it can more pro:
erly, adequately, and 'economically meet the requirements of postal extcnsi'
by widening Its scope along reasonable and conservative lines and by esta
lishing additional post-offices wherever the communities are justified
asking for thnem."
Mr. MUDo0CK. Is, it not true also that before this report Postmaste
General Wenamkaker, In 1892, recommended strongly this service?
Mr. NoRRIs. I think it is. I think the recommendation was made
the Republican Postmaster-General that preceded this Democratic one.
The reasonable and jtst demands of 40,000,000 of our people, tie ve 
bone cad stzew Of our Redpubldc, were thus ruiheissly cast aside by o Ota
of   e h    of this great Democratic Postmaster-Genoeral.
Not only was the Administration against rural free delivery, but ti
Deamocratic opposition included the other Democratic branches a  f O
Nationa Goverfnment. The HOuse of Representatives was also Derocrai
at that time, and on February 27, 1894, the Committee on the PoOt-0
and Post-Roads in reporting to the House the annual post-office app]
priation bill, used the following language in reference to rural free deliver
"It has been found impossible, by reason of the pressure of more i
portant questions, for the officers having that subject in charge to give
iubject the study and consideration that it demands, much less to eiabii
such rural free delivery. It was soon discovered, furthermore, tl t
appropriation for this experiment Is not at all stiucient for thorotg1
reliable tests; for, n order to give the rural free-dellvery systeno a ri
and thorough trial, tests  ould have to be made in many localities, di'iffer
neceesari, "In density of population, topography, class of interests, oa:d co
dilon of highways a     hro   f are.:  Mr. THOMAs of North Carolina. What report is that?
Mr. NORRIS. This is a report of the Committee on the post-0 rce -
Post-Roads snade ---Mr. THOMAS of North Carolina. I simply wanted to know unl a
~11opostmaster-General         teitt was.ratoh.
Mr. NORw/S. Well, this was under a Democratic Adminlotra an


I
I
I
i
r
r
i
I
c
el
I
D
I
i
i
t
I
0


I


j-3


i
I




URAL fltEE DELIVERY 8ERt"1It0OWt ITS EXISTENCE TO THE REPUBLICAN PARTY."
tra:te from   remarks of Hon. 6EORGR           W. NORRIS       of
Nebraska, in daily Congressional Record, March 16, 1904.
Under a Demoeratic Administration, the Post-Office Department,
aded by the Democratic Postmaster-General, was not only opposed
l ral free delivery, but it refused and neglected to make any
erimnents or to institute any rural free-delivery routes.   As an
enuse for this failure and neglect to o6ey the mandates of the
iw the Assistant Postmaster-General, In his report transmitted to
ongress in Decenmber, 1893, expressed strong views against rural
ree delivery and the Postmaster-General of this same Democratic
(nilnistration approved these views.
'lhe first Postmaster-General under the McKinley Administration
his first annual report, in speaking of rural free delivery used
e following language:
It would be difficult to point to any like expenditure of public money
hich has been more generously appreciated by the people, or which has conoi
rrdCCi greater benefits in proportion to the amount expended.  In every
stance the introduction of the service has resulted in an increase of the
ount of mail matter handled. There is no doubt of the desire wherever
e system haasA been tried that it should be made permanent. There is
nally no doubt in my mind that, as stated in the report of the Committee
the Post-Office and Post-Roads to the Piftylfourth Congres, the coninuanee of the rural frtee delivery will "elevate the stadar4 of Intellieice and promote the welfare of the people."
This Postmaster-General, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, used the
ollowilg language, and it is Postmaster-General Smith, of the
cKinley Administration:
The benefits accruing from  the extension of postal facilities to the
ral communities may be summarized as follows:
Increased postal receipts, making many of the new deliveries almost
mediately self-tsupporting. In Great Britain, where an extension of rural
e delivery on a broader scale has been in Progress since 1897, the numor of additional letters mailed because of additional facilities afforded is
timated at 50,000,000 for the present year.
BEhancement of the value of farm lands reached by this service and
tter prices obtained for farm products through more direct cowmunication
ith the marketc and prompter information of their state.
Improved means of travel, some hundreds of miles of country roads,
pecially in the Western States, having been graded specifically in order
obtain rural free delivery.
Xigher educational influences, broader circulation of the means of
ublic intelligence, and closer daily contact with the great world of activity
ttended to the homes of heretofore isolated rural:comlunities
In 1900 the Postmaster-General under this same Administration
poke of rural free deliery as followsi
The extraordinary extension of rural free delivery during the past two
ears has proved to be the most salient, signllcSat4, and far-reacing feature
f postal development in recent times.
*            *            *            *           *
Free delivery in rural communities has been regarded as too costly and
urdensome to be adirtssible. On these grounds tte movement encountered
sreat opposition when first proposed, and even wen  Oftgress authorised
he experiment there was reluctance in trying it. It took atte and; expertnce to develop and enforce the more fust view, first, that the great body of
eople who live cutside cities and tiwis are entitled to share in advanced
Rail facilities even if the cost exceeds the returns; and second, that the
arrier of unbalanced expense is not: torWn BtW   as was apprehended.
~:           1*..             t.           1
With all these results clearly Indicated by the experiment as thus far
rled, rural free delivery is plainly hwe  to stay.
In 1901 the postmaster-General estimated that in four years the
iervice would be extended to the entire    untry and recommended
ch extension.
In speaking of the service he said:
The olicy of rural free delive-, is no longer, a tiubjeet of serious, disPtae. It asno umieg t ably vidicat te  by t  fruits. 
In 1902 the Postmaster-General spoke of rural fr       delry  y as
follows: 
l ural-delivery service has become an established fact.
I will thMas be sWn that        t    freeliey srvice owes its
istnecs its advnwcest and its presesi      high state of ec ncy
to ft/L Republican party, and that h  cImfr a        pItw   ss Whh
cft ra  i o te ^omes of    0io   of: our p   h   ds fde t     watchfal eart oft th  Repu4blian party an4in t   t  Of th   fct tt the
itm5.cratic  r    t     t ttit      tts, P:O o*  i:          t of it
5 it infanlcy


I




"FREE RURAL MAIL DELIVERY,"
Extract from rEmrk. s r. SCOTT of Kanas, i in
Oenf    o   l Krfectrd  1kt lDecember 17, 190,.
In a colloquy the other day with the gentleman from Iowa seet
gentlemn  on the other side made assertions which left the impression t
the Demorratic party was the author and finisher of this system of
rural mail delivery which has become so popular during the past few ye
I apprehended that this sort of scheme would make Its first appeara
officially in the reports of the Postmasters-General of the United Sta
I have therefore examined these reports with some care and for some ye
hback. The first reference; which I find to this system appears In the re
of the Hon. John Wanamaker, Postma-ster-General during the Harrison
ministration.
The recommendation which was made by Postmaster-General Wa
maker, and to which I have just alluded, was followed up by the Admn
tratlon and resulted in an appropriation for experiments in the direc
suggested*  These experiments in the first place were in the nature of
tending free delivery to' villages and small towns. At the close ot
Harrison Administration the experiments which had been set on toot un
the direction of Mr. Wanamaker were proceeding with great satisfac
to the country and to the people, and propositions had been made to
tend these systems still further so as to reach out into the rural regio
That was the situation which prevailed when a Democratic Adminlstrat
the second Cleveland Administration, came into power. Referring to
matter, the First Assistant Postmaster-General under that Administrat
made the following report. After having discussed in a discouraging s
the entirre ystem, he says:
""It would require an appropriation of at least $20,000,000 to inaugur
a system of rural free delivery throughout the country."
Following the recommendation of the First Assistant, the Postmast
General, Bissell, Inorporated the following in his annual report:
"Although It was provided by Congress in the appropriation bill for
fiscal year ending June 30, 1894, that $10,000 should he devoted, at
discretion of the Postmaster-General, to testing the feasibility of establl
ing a system of free delivery in rural districts, it has been found imnp
sible, by reason of the pressure of more Important questions, for the offlc
having that subject In charge to give the subject the study and cons
eration that It demands, much less to establish such rural free deliv
It was soon discovered, furthermore, that the appropriation for this
periment Is not at all sufficient for thorough and reliable tests, for in or
to give the rural free-delivery system a fair and thorough trial tests wo
have to be made in many localities differing necessarily in density of Po
lation, topography, class of interests, condition of highways and thoroug
fares. To inaugurate a system of rural free delivery It would require
appropriation of at least $20,000,000."
He R:then, refers to the report of bis First Assistant, and lndorses
recommendation made there that the attempt be not made.
The next official reference which I find to this matter appears In
second report of; William I.:Wilson -as Postmaster-General, in which
says, referring to the appropriation which had been made in the preced
year and which he had not used*
"Should Congress see fit to make it available forthe current year, I 
m:ake the experiment ordered by the best tests I can devise; but the diffi
ties fn the way of such experiments and the reasons for viewing the w
plan:: a Impracticable arefully set forth in the report of the House cons
tee on the Bost-oflce -appropriation bill, second session of the Fifity-thi
It will: he seen, therefore, that Mr. Cleveland's Postmaster-G(en
after two years of study and reflection upon the subject, after having ab
lutely refused to use the money which Congress placed at his disposal
this purpose, gave it as his opinion that the whole plan was impractica
and should be abandoned.
The next official allusion to this matter to which I wish to a.sll:attention of the: House appears in the message of President Cleveland
Congress, under date of December 4, 1893. Referring to the matter of tr
rural delivery he says:
"I am decidedly of the opinion that tbe provisions of the present
permit as general an introdi tion of this feature of mail service as i  e nC
ary or dirable, and that It ought not ot to be extended to smaller c(rsillU
tiei that ar n' owdeitg nated. 
I next call attention to a single sentence from the annual message
the following year, by President Cleveland, in which he says:
h    estfimBatted cost of rural free delivery generally is so very lr;get
it eh:t'tootto be consiidered in the present condition of affairs.":   Thus dismisiIngit with a wave of the hand as an utterly impr-e&tiCt
seehuem by reaon of the vast expense 1that would be involved.
IVt appears therefore, Mr. Chairmen, that a Democratic pUsn^
Gneral, the Democratic chatirman of the Committee on the Post-O01 iC
th0e Post-Roads, and: a Democratic President all united in agreeing that
establishment o  reIeruraldelivery was i an impracticable propositdo'
0:0 A A0;: S f Xf 0:d 


I




I
I
I
t
9
I
I
I
I
I
I
r
iI
II
I
I


URAL     FREE     DELIVERY."-"A           SERVICE      SIDETRACKED, NEGLECTED, AND ABUSED UNDER
DEMOCRATIC ADMINISTRATION.'
ract from remarks of Hon. GILBERT N. HAUOEN of Iowa, itn s  Iy
Coanressionat Record, April $8, 1904.
What would our cities, towns, and villages be without the agricultural
irests  What would our railroads be?  Our farms certainly furnish
butlk of the freight traffic. What would our manufacturers be without
am?
What would our export trade be without our farms and farmers?
ty and ninety-eight one-hundedths per cent. to 8384 per cent. of our
irts; for the last one hundred and four years came from the farm. We
orted 3,543,043,022 pounds of cotton last year, valued at $316,180,429,
ag nearly $1,000,000 per day, The first eight months of this fiscal
r we exported 13,394,562 barrels of flour, valued at $53,037,418;
784,299 bushels of wheat, valued at $33,053,949; 172,064,186 pounds
bacon, valued at $16,914,013, and 135,513,538 pounds of ham, valued
$15,833,620. We exported in 1902, 234,772,515 bushels of wheat and
028,688 bushels of corn. Our industrious tillers of the soil furnished
the fiscal year ending June 30, 1901, for exportand  corn  meal....................................  $84,593,415
ieat and  flour.......................................  166,231,093
tal bread  stuffs.....................................  275,594,618
tite and  beef  products...............................  81,792,299
gs and  hog  products..................................  120,199,968
6aeco and manufactures of tobacco.................... 28,172,818
ton and manufactures of cotton........................ 333,945,861
al domestic agricultural products..................... 943,811,020
Being nearly $3,000,000 for every working day in the year.
The balance of trade in our favor for the last fiscal year was $394.-,498. Without our domestic agricultural export trade the balance of
de would have been against us to the extent of $478,900,440, this amount
ag ten times as great as the gold coinage and sixteen times the silver
nage in 1902. Our domestic agricultural exports for the last fifty years
f in the aggregate $23,957,997,735, being more than one-quarter the
i1 wealth of the United States. What would our supply of money be
hout the income from the farms?  * *  *  *  * For the fiscal year
iing June 30, 1887, under the Democratic Administration, Congress appriated $654,715 for agriculture. For the fiscal year ending June 30,
i4, under Republicaa Administration, Congress appropriated $5,978,160
agriculture, an increase of more than 800 per cent. For the year 1887,
gress appropriated $23,753,057.21 for the Army, and for 1904, $77,-,752 83. In 1887, Congress appropriated $16,489,907.20 for the Navy,
In 1904, $81,876,791.43. For 1887, Congress appropriated '$54,365,-,25 for the Post-Office Department, and for 1904, $153,511,549.75. For
7, Congress appropriated $82,075,200 for pensions, and for 1904,
9,847,600.
The appropriation for rural free delivery was then $10,000; this year
have appropriated $20,180,000. * * *  *
We all agree that the post-office bill contained no item of greater imance than the $20,180,000 for this service which is yet In its infancy.
ar years ago not a single route was in operation in my district-very
1n the United States-a service sidetracked, neglected and abused under
ocratic Administration. After these seven years of fostering, nourIlg, and friendly encouragement by a Republican Administration it has
fornom a $10,000 appropriation to over $20,000,000. During the last
I year 48,954,390 pieces were collected and 390,428,128 pieces of mail
re delivered by Uncle Sam's 15,119 carriers; 8,339 routes were inttgated, of which 6,653 were established and 1,714 were rejected. On
se 30, 1903, there were 15,119 routes in operation, an average number
4t ft- each of the 386 Congressional districts. On that day there were
700 petitions for routes awaiting investigation, and on April 1, 1904,
re wre 22,537 rural free-delivery routes in operation, or an average
59 ts each Congresional district.
With the liberal appropriation made for this service for the coming
r, beeore the next fiscal year ends we will have in operation more than
100 rtutes, extending the service to the fresides of more than 3,000,000
aes. We hope in the near future to extend the service to every counhome where it is practical and possible, a recognition justly due a
evsirte people, the bone and sinew of our great Republic, where love,
alty, atriotism, virtue, and morality prevail, adding much to the bless', Cataoaccseenta advantages, happiness, comfort, and convenience of a
Pte 0ito have contributed so much to our progress, prosperity, stability,
itt, -xd peace, and who have always been found in the foremost ransk
Pour:y/ of unpleasantness, gallantly marching on to victory i timw
pixlQ";:
I



"RURAL FREE DELIVERtY"                  DEMOCRATIC N
LECT EAND ABUSE" —"REPUBLICAN                  ENCOURAGEMENT AND ENTHUSIASM,"
Extract from    remarks of    Hon.   EOROW      W. IVORIS
Nebraska, in daily Congressional Record, March 16, 1904.
Now   in this report, made by the Postmaster-General, wher
he gives the account of these tests, as well as in all other repo
made by Democratic officials, there is not one senteM-e and not
word in favor of rural free delivery, no word for its encourayee
no hope for its life. From Democratic officials there never has b
a recomendation in its favor, but, on the other hand, every rec
meadation has been against it, every effort was to discourage
every move was to delay it, and every attempt was to kill it.
But now, Mr. Ctihairian, we come to a time when the De
cratic party, as far as rural free delivery is concerned, passes i
a state of "innocuous desuetude."
On the 4th of March, 1897, the Republican party took charge
the national branches of our Government, and rural free deliv
was given a new lease of life. It had passed through the De
catic purgatory of neglect and abuse, and in a weak, strugg
condition it became the ward of the McKinley Administration.
was now about to be touched with the magic wand of Republi
encouragement and enthusiasm, and to become a bright and a liv
reality at the fireside of a million humble homes. From  that ti
on rural free delivery has been given encouragement by every
ficial connected wth ih t in any way.
It has been given respectful consideration, friendly encoura
ment and favorable recommendation in every annual report of
Post-Office Department since the Republican party took charg
1897. Nowhere in any report of any Republican official is t
any word of condemnation or discouragement. The officials devo
themselves to the expansion and the upbuilding of the service, 
at no time did they neglect it or refuse to perform their duty
reason of "the pressure of more important questions," as tl
Democratic predecessors admittedly did.
I should like to read at length from some of the reports of
Republican officials, showing the favorable consideration given
rual free delivery since the beginning of the McKinley 'Adin
tration, but as my time is limited I shall read only a few extra
First, I desire to call attention to a report from  the Cornmi
on the Post-Office and Post-Roads, made to this House in the Fif
fourth Congress.   It must be remembered that at that time
House of Representatives was Republican, and this commi
necessarily Republican. This committee, in speaking of rural f
delivery, said:
While the demand for rural free delivery comes from the people In
maine it has 1bee made the subject-matter of discussion by the Post-0
Department from  time to time, and it is agreed by those who
inVestigated the subject that there is no good reason why such acco0
lations shoutld be withheld.
Thefist Po       ster-General under the McKinley Administrat
in his first annual report, in speaking of rural free delivery, u
the following language:
It wuld tbe difficult to point to any like expenditure of publi mo
which h:s been: mor e g rously apreciated by the people, or which
conferred greater benefits in proportion to the amount expenled. In ev
instanet the introduction of the service has resulted in an increase o
amount of mail nMttter handled. There is no doubt of the desire where
the ystem ha    been tried tat it should be made permanent. yThe"
equally no doubt in mty mind that, as stated in tbe report of the Coamli
on the PostOffice and Post-Roads to the Fifty-fourth Congress, the 
tinuance of the rural free Aelivery will "elevate the standard of tnteglli
and 0prmote the welfare of the people."
This Congress that he refers to is the Fifty-fourth Con.iress,
eublisan Congress frorq the report of whose          mittee on
ost-f       and i Post-Roads  the Postmaster-General make 
quotation. He says further:::t h  unquesttonbly proved itself a potent factor in the attaeiaent
hat sh-   d be one of the chief t i:ms os our Government, the.graatila
the hlt possible poftal facilities to the farmer and his family.: In 199 the0Posttmaster-Seneral under the McKinley Adriinit
o   spoke in the higWt terns of the service and exprt",   e
opin thU0t g l a n would be desirable.: -:


I




ELEPHONE DELIVERY OF SPECIAL RURAL MAIL
MATTER."
rct from debate in daily Conressional Record, April 5, 1904.
Sr., FAIRBANKS. I offer the amendment which I send to the desk, to
e in at the end of line 7 on page 31.
The SEcEETARY. On page 31, line 7, it is proposed to Insert:
For experimental telephone delivery of special rural mail matter, under
direction of the Postmaster-General, $20,000.
Mr. COCKRELL,. Let us have some explanation of that amendment, Mr.
sient.
Mr. GORMAN. What does the amendment mean?
Mir. FAIRBANKS. The Postmaster-General has this to say upon the subin his last annual report:
The extension of the rural free-delivery service and the consequent inge In the use of the mails by the patrons residing along the rural routes,
ether with the extension of the telephone service into the farming discts of the country, has suggested the propriety of extending the privilege
the special delivery of such letters, or the contents thereof, by means
thl telephone, it being proposed that a special stamp be provided coverthe cost of such transmission, the use of which stamp would authorize
postmaster at the office of delivery to open such letter and telephone
contents to the person to whom it is addressed. It will be seen that if
plan is feasible, twenty-four hours' time will be saved in the transsion of important messages to many people residing along the lines of
rural delivery routes. I would recmmnend that a small appropriation
made by Congress for the purpose of enabling the Postmaster-General to
estigate this subject.
I will state to the Senator that since this same matter was before the
ate last year it has received pretty careful consideration In some sections
the country. There are a great many people In the rural districts who
leve it Is an entirely feasible proposition. it is simply carrying into the
tr by the telephone the special-delivery service which is enjoyed in
cities throtug  special-delivery carriers.
Mr. COCKRELL. Who pays for it?
Mr. FAIRBANKS. It will be paid for by those who get the special serThe special-delivery service in the cities is more than self-supporting.
Government requires a special stamp upon special-delivery letters,
ch is intended to cover the cost of the extra service; and thus far the
eerament has received a considerable excess over and above the cost of
ltaining the service. The service proposed In the country will not ime any burden whatever upon the Government, because it will be paid for
ly by those who enjoy it.
Mr. CoCeSRI.L. Of course the man who gets the stamp pays foir t.
Mr. FAIRBANKS. Yes.
Mr. COCKRELL. But who pays, and how is the telephone company paid,
transmitting the message?
Mr. FAIRBANKS. In most of the districts the farmers have telephones,
rthe 1se of which they pay rpnt, as is done in cities.
The contents of urgent special-delivery letters may be transmitted over
farmer's own telephone by the postmaster in the adjoining city or vile. The details will all be worked out by the Postmaster-General. It is
1ly experimental, just as rural free delivery was for several years.
Mr. TmULtR. It may be that this is a good thing to do, but it seems
me hardly justifiabie under the conditions existing. It does not seem
te that a farmer need to he in such haste to get his mail that be will
cessarily call on the postmanster in his neighborhood to open his mail and
d it and telephone it to him.
'That is paternalism run mad, it seems to me. Let us leave something
the farmer himself to do. Let him go to town and let him communite with his friends, if they are near enough, by telephone; and he can now
ePhone a couple of thousand miles without much trouble.
If the point of order will lie against the amendment, I make it.
Mr. FAIRBANKS. I should like to ask the Senator from Colorado If it
Ty i,ore paternalistic than the special delivery in the cities, and if there
n0Y veood reason why the farmers of the Unitred States should not enjoy
't as great special benefits as are enjoyed by the inhabitants of cities and
aMr TELLER. The delivery in the great cities is an absolute necessity.
ke the city of New York  You would have to have Innumerable ofles,
to man would ever know to which office his letter was coming. It is
tessary in the city. It is not necessary in the rural districts at all.
Thee PRESIDENT pro tempore. Does the Chair understand the Senator
tr Colorado to make the point of order?
Mr, TIJLrP. I make it.
T - PRutSIDENT pro tempore. The Chair sustains the point of order.! M-,. FAnIRANKS. I understand very well that the same point of order
Uldi lie tgainst it that was made agalnst the amendment lIst year. I
lefd the Senator would not interpose it.


1   -i:




"FREE RURAL DOE IVFERY.'-CONC               LUSIVE- PRO:OF ITS BENEFIT AND        WISDOMS."
&tratsf from   emtrk of:   o. ARTHUR L. BATIS of )Penn
vania, in daily Congressional Record, March 15, 1904.
Mr. BATES. Mr. Chairman, the existence, growth, and pdevel
ment of free rural delivery are the best evidences in recent ye
that this Is a government of the people and for the people. 1
service has been called a "luxury.  Itt is more than that; and
eagerly has it been sought after in all portions of this country 
so thoroughly apprciated wherever bestowed that it has come t
regarded as a necessity by the millions who enljoy it.
As late as June 30, 190, the wer re only sonme 8,000 rural rou
established, and on the 1st day of April, 1904, there will be 21,
rual routsn operion in ter      country, aportion th oted among
several States and Territories of the Union larely in proport
to the number of petitions received.
It is my belief that the $f1i,0,0000  appropriated in this beh
bris more dire    bent netto the inhabitants of this Republic wh
it afaects than almost any other appropriation made by the Gene
Government.
Forty years ago everyone went or sent to the post-office for
mail, and the farme in te busy season, when his horses and tea
were working in the fields, could sometimes only receive mail
himself and family possibly once a week-on Saturday afterno
Now it is not only delivered several times daily at the homes
places of business of the inhabitants of more than a thousand citi
but fr the last six months of the fiscal year (January 1 to aJune
1903) there were delivered by the carriers of this service s
310,r00,000 pieces of mail on rural routes throughout the Uni
States to farmers and inhabitants of sparsely settled regions.
ncreased facilities always bring increased use and enjoymen
more letters are written and received; more newspapers and ma'
zines are subscribed for.
INCREASED VALUE OF FARM LANDS OF THE COUNT
The testimony adduced from   all over the country proves 
by reason of rural free delivery the actual value of our farm l
has been increased. Many farmers state that they would not d
pense with the service for $50 or even $100 per annum. It h
been estimated that the value of farm lands has h risen by this ne
asi hih as $5 per acre in several States. A moderate benefit
the farm lands of the whole country would be from $1 to $3 per ac
BETTER PRICES FOR FARM PRODUCTS.
The producers, being brought into daily touch with the state
the marets ands in better communication with those who buy th
products, are able to obtain better pices for all that the farm p
duces, More definite knowledge of trade conditions is always
great advantage.
GOOD ROADS ENCCOUAGED.
Good roads have been built and induced as an incentive for ru
freedelivery establishment and to better encourage their mainte
an ee.  The Department wisely states that as a prerequisite to t
granting of the benefits of rural free delivery there must he go
passable roads at all seasons of the year. In many localities t
farmers have taken the matter of good roads into their own haan
and through their pathmasters and supervisors have lowered grad
built bridges, turned waterways, and aided in this way the gener
communication between different points.
FE 3   DE  tIVERYT   OPPOSED    BY   LAST DEMOCRATIC
re                           t Cleveland w i sd
j:00-9ADMINISTRATION.
During the last Administration of President Cleveland the syst
of rural free delivery was condemned and rejected by the Hle
Committee on PostOffices and Post-Roads, and under the sanITe A
ministration, in 189  Postmaster-General Bissell refused to lDU
use of the appropriation of $10,000 offered him to inaugurate
service, tating  at the prject was impracticable and unwise  1
entire service has been practically established and built up wit)
the flast sevenyears, until it has become one of the most beiCfiC
wise, and useful items of legislation provided-by the Fede   - C:gress  The $aiyg and    i unnitnity with which It has been 5
for and used by the people at large I conluve proof of it' ben1
fit ad wisdom. 
j-9


I




----   -  -----.
K


I




"THE PAAMA CANAL QUESTION."
Etract from remarks of Hon.      H. GROSVENOR, of Olio,
daily Congressional Record, Feb. 1, 1904.
I say that the brightest star in the galaxy that to-day shi
upon th   pathway of the candidate of the Republican party
his course in the Panama Canal question. [Applause on the I
publican side.] 'It was not unduly precipitate. It was intellige
wise, and characteristic of the Administration, doubtless in SO
part advised and recommended by the distinguished Secretary
State, than whom we have had no better, more clear-headed Sec
tary of State within the memory of living man.    [Applause
the Republican side.]
And the people of the United States are in favor of the m
who did it. If you want to be wise you must not drive the ra
and file of the American people to vote for Roosevelt because
his action on the Panama Canal, and that is what you are lik
to do. He will be nominated by acclamation, and among the stro
arguments that we shall make in his favor will be two things: Fir
when you say he is overstrenuous, overactive, overimpetuous,
will ask you, "What has he done?"  Name the thing now. Whe
was he overimpetuous? What public act of Roosevelt would y
criticise to-day on the stump of the United States. What act h
he done that the Republican party can not indorse in its convl
tion and the people of the country can not indorse at the poll
[Applause on the Republican side.] What is it? There is not 0
such act.
He promised at Buffalo to execute the policy and principles a
iered t by William MeKinley, I challenge any man-not to g
up and interrupt me now-but I challenge him to take time a
come here and tell me and tell the American people what princip
what act, what policy of McKinley Roosevelt has not executed. A
when we go to the American people and say to them,' "You mu
either vote fo       v     or sevelt  ou must condemn McKinley," a
when yot stppliemet a    tatt by sayiin, in addition, "You mu
condtimn he policy of the Arerian nation in the eyes of the who
wor't because of the Panama question," you will find yourselv
in a dilemma that I hope you will never get into. [Applause on t
Republican side.]
Mr. SMITH, of Kentucky. Will the gentleman allow me to a
him a question for information?
Mr. GrnosvEoR. Yes, sir.
Mr. SMITH, of Kentucky. I observe that the official correspo
dence between our representative on the Isthmus of Panama an
the State Department here in Washington indicates that a know
edge of the revolution was possessed here before it was down ther
Mr. GRosvnxor. I do not careMr. SMITH, of Kentucky. What I want to ask the gentlema
is this: Thinking that he might be able to throw some light 
that question, I would like to know if he can give to this commite
any information showing that the State Department derived i
knowledge of the revolution from Panama first-I mean, whethe
there was any official correspondence sent to the State Departmen
from Panama before this message was sent from the State Depar
ment to Panama advising that a revolution had occurred or wa
about to occur?
Mr. Gosxroa  a. I did not get my information in that way.
got my information in July. I read it again in the London Time
of the early days of September, that there was in motion an elemen
In Colombia sure to result in revolution in Panama if that treat.
was defeated, and I believed it, and I believe the gentleman no
believes it; and whether the President of the United States hear
of it first or not, I do not know. Where he got his informatio
I do not know. But I will tell the gentleman from Kentuck on
thing. Roosevelt may be impetuous and he may be strenuous, f 
he is honest, he is truthful, and he would not lie, even under t
pressure of the Senate of the United States. [Applause.] Wih
ever he says about the matter I implicitly believe, and so d
10,0, 00 voters of the American people, as they will show i
gentleman in good time,
Mr. SMITH, of Kentucky. I wish to say that I have the utrfos
confidence n the Presidents ntegrity, and I have asked these queS
Utons simply to get Information, if It were possible to elicit it frt
the gentlemaa.
k-4






PANAMVA" -THE CRWNI              ING    GLORY OF THE
TWENTIETH CENTURY."
Xtract from remaswis  f  n. nLBRiT    - HOPKI S, of Illinois,
i! daily Congressional Record, February 8, 1904.
The President w     knew  ttif the threats of the leaders of
eprovince of Panama were carried into execution, and the peoe, as I have already shown, were ripe to support any declaration
findependence upon the part of their leaders, that Colon anda
anama and the line of the railroad would be the first points of
lliion between the Colombian Government and the people of
nama. It was his duty   s the representative of our Government
take every precaution to protect our rights under the treaty of
16 and to preserve the lives and property of our citiens in those
ties and on the line of therailroad. Instead of being subjected
criticism  for the promptitude with thich he #nt our ersers
b Colon a~d other poirts he is entitled to the greatest praise. To
mind, Mr. President, nothing that has occurred in his entire
dministration reflects greater credit than the foresight that was
sercised and the promptness with which he took the necessary
eans to protect American interests when Panama had In fct de.
ared her independence.
Mr. President, when we come to the last analysis on this whtle
ibject, the President is condemned for carrying out the wishes
f the great majority of the people of the United State  He is
enouned for promptly responding to an overwhelming American
sentimnt  n protecting American interests on the Isthmus, in
eeognizing the new Republic which was established in Panama, and
promptly negotiating a treaty which, if ratified, has securd to
United States the construction of this great canal, which has
en the dream of navigators for four hundred years, an enterprise that will bethe crowning glory of the twentieth century.
Mr. President, Theodore Rosevelt needs no defense at my hands.
is administration of the affairs of our great Republic has been
ch as not only to endear him to the people of all sections of
r common country, but to stamp him as one of the greatest men
f this generation. He is a typical Ameoriem. His every aspt"aton
t for the greatness and glory of his country and the wtel-beinq
of the veople. Carping critics may jeer at him; caluminators ma;v
revile him: but, Mr. President, they can not destroy him. Tt is
the fate of greatness to be reviled and deounced. Our President
will survive all this, as other great men of the past have survived
the calumnies and slanders that have been hurled at them during
their lives.
What ambitious ends have our President and Secretary of State
other than the good of our common country? The recognition of
the Republic of Panama and the negotiation of the treaty known
as the Hay-Varlla treaty are for the interests o   our common
country, not to enhance the power or disnltt of either of these
great men. There was a time, Mr. President, when Mr. Lincoln
was thought to be as bad a man as the junior Senator from Colorado now seems to think President Roosevelt. There was a time
dnring his life when he occupied that treat office of President
when Democratic Senators and Representatives denounced him as
a usurper and as a violator of the Constitution, nnd indulged in
language that makes the criticism of President Roosevelt of to-day
aeem tame indeed.
During the life of Mr. Lincoln no man was more reviled by
Iemocratic members, both North and South, than he.     In compartson with the language used during the Presidency of Mr. lncotln
and eneral Grant the criticisms that have thus far been indulged
In against President Roosevelt seem like a gentle ephyr compared
with a Kansas cyclone.
But for the purpose of placing the Republican party in a false
light, and for the purpose of dwarfing the influence of President
Roosevelt before the American people these Republicans, who
Were traduced by the Demorats of a generation ago, are taken
P as models, tr virtues           their great acts referred to
n complimentary language, and their names placed high on the
lif ithe hored staten        of this country.
4 generation from wm, Mr President. will t^d President Reooevolt placed in this great.awy' of Republica    Presidets nOd
ttotemen, and the Dmocrat c statesmen of the days in the ftulre
l! rfer to 7Aim, t h   sa#  eoCOpientary trms that are Wo,
ed wh     any.of  Wp:: oood fr en  on the     oo s id o!p M  of the,tmber refer to the    realt fmea Sm te'e or iAt "Sient Solder.'
k-2


I




PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT                   OUL      TAKE NQOTHE
COURSE THAN TO RECOGNIZE THE NEW
GOVERNMENT OF PANAMA."
Extracts fromt remarks of Hon. SHELBY A.CULLOPI of Illinois, in dai,
Congressional Reor,?ebruar-y 22, 1904..Mr. CtULOM. Mr. President, I do not feel like allowing the discuss
in tlhe Senate on the general question of a treaty with the Republic of Pa
ama and the conditions, history, and law, national and International, 
volved, to pass without asking the attention of the Senate for a little whi)
on this general subect.,
iThe I sthmian Canal Commission, authorized by Congress to make th
Investigation, reported In favor of the Panama route. The Spooner Act VV
passedand the President under authority of that act negotiated a treaty wit
Colombia,. That treaty was promptly and almost unanimously ratified by t
United States Senate, sent to Colombia March 18, 1903, where it was unani
rmously rejected by the Colombian Congress with very li ttle conslderatio
on October 18, 1903, and on October 31 the Colombian Congress adjourn
*   * *On November 3, three days after the Colombian Congress ad
journed, Panama seceded and peaceably regained her independence.
The secession of Panama could not have been a surprise to either ti
Colombian Government or to the United States. The correspondence show
that Senator Obaldia, a prominent Senator from the State of Panama, opeln
declared that should the canal treaty be rejected Panama would secede an
would be right in doing so.  *  *   *
Allt of the ecrrespondence in possession of the; xecutive Departrmnen
has been laid before thie Senate, either in,open or executive session. The
hlas *been no concealment on the part of the Executive. That correspondenr
has been gone into in considerable detail here, and there is not one parti
of evidence to show that any officer of the United States encouraged or in
stigated the revolution. *  S
There was no resistance to the revolution by Colombia, and on Novem
her 4 the three consuls, constituting the provisional government of Panama
notified thee Secretay of State officially that in consequence of a popula
and ispontaneous movemaent of the people of Panama,. the independence 
theIsthmus rwas proclaimed and the BRepublic of Panama instituted and
provisional government organized.  An envoy extraordinary and mlnists
plenipotentiary was later appointed by the new Government of Panama 
the United Statls. On November 6 our conasul at Panama notifled the Stat
Department that the situation was peaceful, that the movement was a su
ces, and that no Colombian soldiers were on isthmian soil. After receivn
that message,on.November 6, our consuls at Panama and Colon were In
strued4 to reogizebthe new Government of Panama, -.
will not go into the correspondence pertaining to this revolution fur
ther at this time; but, in my judgment, that correspondence shows that
President Roosevelt could take no other course, under the circumstances,
than to recognize the new Republic.
There were no.Colombiana officials in charge, on the Isthmus, and if wO
did not recognize the new government there would have been no govern
mcnt at all on the Isthmus to which we could look for the protection of our
citizens and their property.  *  *   *
Every act of our Executive, every order fgtiven to the comniander Of o ur
vessels of war dsurinq and after this revolution, has Oeen justif ied by our
treAt of 1846.
The treaty, entered into in 1846 with the end in view of the onstrucetion of a canal or railroad across the Isthmus; as Is shown. in -President
Polk's message, in article 35 provides:
The United States guarantee positively and efficaciously ta New Gramada the perfect neutrality of the before-mentioned Isthmus1 ewt lithe vieW
thatthe fre transit from one ^ to the other sea may noitbe' iaterrpted r
embarrassed- in, any future time while.this. treaty exists,
This treaty nas made in 1846 and still continues in full force; It, Ws
survived a number of revolutions. New Granada has become the 'Republic
of Colombia. One revolution has succeeded another, ""placing dIffrent parties
in control, art the 1treaty has remane  and has -bten recognized by every
succeeding  overnment, and the; United State  s  a number of times exer,
cisod Its right under Article XXXV to keep the sIsthms 8open.
Th t reaty of 1846 continues in force even thoug h th Staitef Panaoa
has seceded  fromI the Repttublc of Colombia. Nolonger bindifng upon co,
lomttbiaPt, \aftfeers I sheb4a  loter qsovereignty over the tevrrfitory to "which-. Artice
XXXV refers, it is now binding and its riaghits and obllgations 8.ve '5
ceeded toa the new ftBRepuhlic of Panama.  a:other wmrd s,"lith  thirtn-flftb
articlea of-the treaty of 1846 is bindingan  descends 'to any 1gover n ent
which.exercises sovereignty over the Istlaus of Panama. L   4**
Wthout ouraid thea people of the Istahmuso have t  declared; and reigald
their Independence and have, set up a government.of their elwn; no wvare
bes a re- Wus ftnc.s, tco ld~      t he PA'exists, a'nd peace prevaila.' 'Underthfe circumsanes it Culd not e e^
pected thatthe Unted; States wouldW' forcibly overthtrow* thlet net1 evpbNih
o~r 'woutldpamlt aif'vil *wart -to be waged on,the, Isthmus.
k-S


1




I


I


i


L — -: --- -— 1 --- —--- ---—:*_- __  _____ _ 1_____ _  ___ __


OUR PEOPLE WILL -NEVER AD COLOM81A IN THC
INFLICTION OF WRONG UPON PANAMA."
itrocts from remarks of Hon. HENRY CABOT LODGE of MassachgfP'*
in daily Congressional Record, January 5, 1904.,Mr. President, I desire to call attention now to the feelings and
he attitude of Panama. I want to show to the Senate that the
evluation, about which Senators speak as if it were the creation
f  n moment, represents not only the preparations of months, but
at it represents the feelings an  thad  e hostilities of years. I am
irlo to read from  a speech made by the Senator from     Alabama
Mr. MoA a]a on the 20th of December, 1902. I could not hope
tself to put in better or in such eloquent language the feelings of
he people of Panama toward the Government of Colombia. The
enator then said:
They remember what the people of Panama can never forget-that
heir State, once sovereign and independent, was the first State of this
emisphere, after the United States of North America, that achieved their
ndependence and sovereignty.
Neither can they forget that the church party has stripped that badge
honor and power from their national flag and has reduced Panama to
department of Colombia, ruled by a governor appointed at Bogota. It
s as if Ohio should be reduced to the former condition of a part of our
orthlwestern Territory. Above all, they can not forget the degrading
todage of the concordat that the church party In Colombia has forced
pon them In the agreement of 1888 with Pope Leo XIII. While memory
these events lasts in Panama peace will have only a precarious and
eiporary residence there.
These thoughful men know that agitation in Panama will be Incessant
enlarge the canal concession we may obtain from   Colombia into a
ond of unon wh the Uited States, and no occasion asthat promises sucess will be overlooked to promote and intensify that feeling; and they
now that even the security of the canal property will be made a reason
hy the United States should accept the annexation of Panama as a
measure of necessity. This is not a new thought or an abandoned hope
n Panama. I dread the thought of placing such a temptation, so lit up
ith the hopes of restored liberty, honor, and sovereignty, before those
eople, unless they could be again realized in their separate independence.
If Panama could be aaain restored to her sovereign independence, I
ould hail the event with3 oy, but I will not consent to an agreement
Twth Colombia that may drive Panama into our Uion to escape her presnt bondage to Colombia.
Above all else, we should be careful and entirely frank in our dealings
with Colombia. The belief or the pledge that we will even aid her actively
in fastening upon Panama the fetters of the concordat of 1888 or in
maintaining her hold on Panama against the will of her people, if they
hooFme to throw It off, will prove to be a mistake that may deceive Colombia, for our people wil not sustain us in supporting such a pledge.
Our people will never aid Colombia in the infliction of wretg and
Injustice upon the people of Panama at the will and pleasure of that
Government, and this appears to be the pledge we are asked to give. They
will never extinguish or prevent the rekindling of the light of liberty,
idelpendence, and sovereignty in that once brilliant star that ho t been
striicken from the galaxy of American republics by the fratricidni hand
Of Colombia. A casual concession offers no temptation to the p#tlple of
the United States for an act that is so unnatural.
It would be a far better use to make of the $40,000,000 we are asked
t" pay the Panama Canal Company for a title that is a mere possession
OP a property they are anxious to get rid of to pay $30,000,000 of it to
Colomnbia for the restoration of Panama to independence and $10,000,000
to Panama for the concessions claimed by the New Panama Canal Comanvy. The French could then work out their concession, if they wish
to do so, and it they can get the money, or it not, they could forfeit it
o the United States.
*        *         *;  *        C       *        *
I When the treaty of 1846-1848 was made Panama was a State with
soe reign powers. Now she is a department of Colombia, and that treaty
aas made the United States accessory to her degradation. I can never
Oote for its renewal. To, pledge the protection of Colombia In her sovofein tyr over one of her departments, without restriction as to any abuses
' p-wer over those people, is to bind our country to assist Colombia in
rn0 policy she may choose to adopt toward them. It is not a pledge of
ilottPction to Colombia against foreign aggression, but a pledge of as-,istanle to that Government against any resistane by the people of Panama
i' any policy or law Colombia may choose to impose upon a people who
ire;-ready degraded in their political rights from  the proud position:n sovereign statehood to that of. a, meret department that is governed from
Togota. j.,
r. MORGnAN.:-r. President- 
'lie  PRESIIENT pr  tempore. Does the Senator from MassachuStts yield 
MNr. LODGE, Certainly; with pleasure.
rN. MOasa,. I have no word in that statement to change-no
tliitent, no thought, no word. I have not changed it, and 1 do
hot propose to change it.
k4




"THE PRESIENT WOULD HAVE BEEEN CENSURABL
IF HE HAO &OT TAKEN EVERY PRECAUTION ON THE ISTHMUS."
Extracts from remarks of Hon. HENRY CABOT LODGE of Masachusets
in daily Ctonareio" a Rcord, JXanuWry 5, 1904.
All the world knew last summer that there was revolution impendin
The correspondent of the New York Evening Post for December 8, sa
that they were planning revolution in Panama early In May. I happen
to be out of the country, seeing only foreign newspa ers In London as
elsewhere, but It was a matter of common knowledge there In Europe an
ngland that revolution was impending In Panama tf the treaty was a
agreed to.
That knowledge, of course, came to the Executive. He had Informa
tion also from our naval and military officers, which has been cited in hi
message. It was his business to keep informed, but the fact of Infotmartl
does not imply asurances or connivance, and the insinuation. of cotnnivan
and Icitemfent have already been denied In a manner which requires nel
ther repetition nor support from me or anyone else. The President woul
have bee in the highest deree censurable if he had not taken every prop
precaution to prepar for the event which the reports of the disturban
on tie Ithmuts suggested. He was bound to carry out the provisionsg 
the treaty of 1846. We have always construed that treaty to mean th
we wee charged with the responsibility of keeping opn the transit acro
the Isthmus; that we were not charged with the duty of enforcing th
power of Oolombla if there was a revolt; that we were there to protec
t      staans  foreign aggression, but that our primary duty was to keep I
open and uninterrupted.
All this information had come in upon the President, and he had a
in duty bound considered It and watchd events. Finally there came wha
constitutes the first act of our Government. There came news that Colo
bia was about to land a force of 6,000 men at Colon, and the Acting Sec
retary of the Navy on November 8 sent this dispatch:
Maintain free and uninterrupted transit. If interruption threatens
by armed force, occupy the line of railroad. Prevent landing of any arme
force witth hostile Intent either nover.nment or insurgent, either at Colon
Porto Bello, or other point. Send copy of instructions to the senior office
presnt at Panama upon arrival of Boston. Have sent copy of Instruction
and have telegraphed Dixie to proceed with all possible dispatch fro
Kingston to Co on. Government force reported approaching the Isthmus i
vessels. Prevent their landtg iff in your judgment this would precipitat
a conflict. Acknowledgment Is required.
That was the first step, The next day, November 3, a press bulleti
having announced an outbreak on the Isthmus, the Acting Secretary o
State telegraphed to the consul at Panama:
Uprising on Isthmus reported,  K eep Department promptly and full
informed.
The reply goes back that there was no uprising, that It was expecte
that night  Within a short time, a little more than an hour came th
dispatch:
Uprising occurred to-night, 6  no bloodshed, etc.
Mr. President, the preparations that have been very largely talke
about, and which I have no doubt were adequately made, really resulte
in the presence of one vessel of war at Colon. We landed from that vesse
forty-two sailors and marines.  The landing party was commanded wit
judgment. The captain of the Nashville showed the utmost discretion an
firmntes.  He pr evened Iwith an even hand either party from "using the railroad. He prevented bloodshted. He kept peace on the Isthmus.
Now, Mr, President, the President hae been assailed for landing troops.
He has landed no troops. Some sailors and some marines have been landed,
and he has been charged with having made war by that act of recognition
and by the ldin t he lnd he forces of the United States.
It is perfectly certain, Mr. President, that the act of recognition by!
all the best authorities Is held not to be in itself an act of war. As for]
the landing of those sailors and marines to keep order, we have done iti
over and over again. We did it i 1900; we did It In 1901; we did iti
In: 902.. *   * *  * 4 
The tUnited States recogntied Panama on November 13, then France,
Chla, Austria-Hungary, Gernany, Denmark, Russia, Sweden and Norwayi
Belgium  Nicaragua, eru, Cuba, Great Britain Italy, Japan, Costa Rica.
and Swiizerland.
List of 0overments e lwhich ha   recognized the independence of Panamafl
ith dates ot recognition.
United Sttes...... Nbv. 13, 1903 ] Nicaragua........ Dee. 15, 190
Prance............ Nov. 1e, 1903 I Peru...............De. 19,.*031
China............. Nov. 26, 1903  Cuba............     Dec. 23, 1903
Austria-Hungary.....Nov. 27, 1903 i Great  ritain.,... Dec. 24, 1903
Germany.......... Nov. 30,1903   Italy...............Dec. 24. 1903
enmark..:::De. 3, 19o03 Japan.De. 28, 1903
Russia............Dee. 6, 1903 i Costa Rica.......... De. 28, 1903
Sweden and Norway.Dec. 7, 1903  Switzerland........ Dec. 289, 903
Belgium...........Dee., 19  t i
Those recognitios i nd0icat that the rest of the civilized world do 0ot
think it was a very unresonable thing for us to hawe rDeognised that Det
Republtc quickly.
k-5




ALL THE GREAT POWERS INDORSED THE ACTION
OF THE UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT."
rtracts from remarks of Hion C. C. H ROSVENOR of Ohio, in daily Congressional B or4d, February I, g04,
Mr. Chairman, I shall not attempt in the very brief moments that I
all occupy, to discuss in detail the speech of the gentleman from Mastchusett [Mr. T  R]l   There is nothing that I could say, and thre
s othlt he ha said, Nlt has been repeated,.hundred times in ths
apitol during the last ttree months.  I have no disposition to rter
respectfully to any branch of the Qovernment; but if there ever was a
bject worn threadbare, worn out, until it became odious to the ears
td obnoxious to the nostrils of the American people, it has been this
dless and infernal iteration of a lot of platitudes about the recognition
f the Panama Republic. So I shall not try to say anything new about it.
I have this to say, however, that I have a lawyer's training and a
awyer's instinct about the question of the receiver of stolen goods, and
can not by any possibility disconnect the act of the acquirement of the
sthmus of Panama from the receipt of it afterwards and the enjoyment
f it afterwards. By no ethics, by no logic, no argument that I can make
an I disconnect the criminality of the one, if there is any, from  the
aracter of th  other; and, therefore, when the gentleman says, "We
ant a canal and we are going to have It," he has admitted away all
is ease, and stands indictable at the same bar, by the same grand
ury, and upon the same evidence that he brings against the President.
Now, I want to  say another thing. If the United States was guilty
a violation of international law, it was that violation and that alone
hat made any republic, or government, or combination, whatever it may be
lled, possible in the Isthmus of Panama.
Bear in mind that my argument consists, in the first instance, of
his: "Whatever there is of the Republic of Panama," says the gentlean, "was born of a conspiracy between somebody in the United States"nd by insinuation born within the knowledge at least of the President
f the United States-"and a little irresponsible coterie down at Panama,"
Il of which now is laid bare by the gentleman, and all of whch is known
the whole eivilszed world; and yet, over the protest of Colombia, and
et with just as much information as the gentleman from Massachusetts
as, and without any purpose of partisan advantage, England, France,
ermany, Russia, Holland, Austria, Spain, Portugal, all the nations, all
he great powers of the world, with every South American republic, have
sme itn fd indorsed the action of the United States Government by rating, as it were, the recognition of this new Republic.
So when the gentleman, for partisan purposes, assails the President
of the United States and assails the fair fame of his own country, he is
satting the intelligence and law-abiding character of th  wole civilized
Ild,
For more than a hunred years we have been trying by every process
t diplomacy and by every Inow   acquirement of knowedge to build a
anal, and the time has come when the country is acutely in favor of
t, when the necessity for it is pressing much stronger upon te great
ricultural region o the    th tha  It is upon the North.
And when all the people looked forward and witnessed the gre attle
that was fought here with s much dstinguishd sces and abilty by
he gentl wan    my left [Mr. HstrPBB ] chairman of the great ooaiton Interstate and Foreign Commerce, in favor of the Nicaragua Canal,
td finally, when that question seemed to turn the other way, all the
People of the country said, "We are in favor of now going forward," and
it ceased to be a party question, or had reduced itself down to the struggle
f a few men. Then came the question. We accepted the proposition of
Colombia, because that was in fact what took place. The treaty that was
terwards reected was a treaty drawn in effect and agreed to absolutely
by their own agent.
The  te came to a point where they undertook to Jocey with us
atd fore ith  payment of a larger sum of money. Believing that the
resident:position now   is true; that when it had passed   beyond the
DPW(,r of the President to negotiate for the Nicaragua Canal, actuated by
the mere purpose of attemptaig to bold up the Governmet of the U*nted
States y    igt by 1the toat.pd.ocoping the pay     nt of ten e tl0n more dollars to tm, and whn  n that  ttempt came,nd the popWe
t tifs contry winessd te uprsng       f a Panam-that was the time
then the ptitottism o t hs country said, "We have settled the great quesi    t0n of the world by tIegeniu of American diplomay and the Amrcan
urasge of action."
t8                      * ~


I




..... COULD ~WEW DEAL?"
OM ELS
Extracts from remarks of  on.. B. HYBURN of Idaho, in daily Co
pressional Record, February 5, 1904.
I do not feel cafled upon to apologize for any act or thing that haw bee
done by the Republican Administration in dealing with this question, N
apology is necessary, because no act of the Adatinistration ha been b"yona
the scope of its powers and without the" scope of witsdom.
The proposition to dig a canal across the Isthmus of Panama is prdci
tically as old as is the history of that country.
Those efforts were not relaxed until in 1843 the Government of Ne
Granada sent its representatives to the strong governments of the earth t
see if it could not enter into some arrangement wih them that would resrio
in the construction and operation of this canal. To England, to Frauin
to Germany, and to the United States their representatives went. Th1i
action resulted, so far as we are concerned, in the making of the treaty a
1846, which gave us a right of way and a right to participate in the eni
Joyment of any other rights across the Isthmus.
That treaty was not negotiated with Colombia. Senators have spoket
of It as a treaty with Colombia, and of Colombia's rights under the treaty
That treaty, so far as the Isthmus of Panama was concerned, was one il
which the guaranty of sovereignty and of neutrality ran with the land tP
which  It was applied-'to  Panama. Panama was one of the states oi
provinces which by compact constituted a larger government at that time
She was recognized as such and spoken of as such by Mr. Polk in the mes
sage with which he transmitted the treaty to the Senate. It was thi
Province of Panama.
New Granada, being the center of power that governed Panama and thI
other provinces that constituted the Government of New Granada, speaklni
for this province and for the things that peculiarly belonged to it, to wit
the Isthmus of Panama and the right to cross it, entered into a treaty witl
the United Sttes that the United States should guarantee the neutralitJ
and the sovereignty of Panama. The language confines that guaranty t<
Panama. They did not undertake to guarantee the neutrality or sovereigntq
of New Granada, but only of Panama. So long as Panama was a part o
the Government of New Granada, of course no question could arise as to thi
local application of this treaty, but just as soon as Panama ceased to be 
part of the Government of New Granada, then the question did arise as t(
the application of this provision in the treaty that guaranteed the neutralitj
and the sovereignty.
I maintain, Mr. President, that our guaranty In the treaty of 184(
does not extend, nor did it ever extend, beyond the geographical limits o0
Panama; and in whatever hands we find the Government of Panama, then
is where the obligation of the treaty attaches. It did not attach to BogotE
or to any other portion of what then constituted the Government of Net
Granada, but attached to Panama, and from the hour that we recognized
Panama as a sovereign Government, it did not become us, nor was It nec'
essary for us to consider the rights or the will of any other governiaeni
than that of Panama. It we guaranteed the neutrality and the sovereignty 0o
Panama, then after the recognition of Panama we could go there and w(
could prevent the troops of any other country on earth from landing there,
because our obligation attached to that political geographical government,
and1 no other. 
If that is true, all the criticism as to the protest and the rights to be
given to Colombia, as represented by its Government at Bogota, falls to the
ground and th e President eas entirely within the scope of his power,; c
was within the letter and the spirit of the law that governed him wh-'n he,
dealt solely andt alone with Panama as a separate government. I dI not
care, Mr. President, if that Government had not been organized an 'oUr,
More than one of the great governments of the earth has come into 'power
in an hour,.and the power has been sustained through centuries. Tihe pro0
cess of revolution Is not a growing process. It is one that turns with the
hand. of time —quick, conclusive, just as though it had come up ti iough
the process of a constitutional convention and ratification by the peol e.
TThe Government of Panama is recognized by all the great powc rs o
the earthl. in what position would we stand to-day if we were to at'etliP
in any measure to discredit Its sovereignty or its existence? Wjith ohoti
else could we deal for any rights that related to the Isthmus of P:tana
to-day but With the Government of Panatima?  Panama is the vsoi:1
and the only sovereign, power with which to deal, and we must meas  the
acts of the Adminilstration as they are applicable to that sovereign: 
naot     y.are applicabe; to the sovereignty of olomNbia. 


I
3
1
1
I
I
I
t
a
I
f
Ii
I
I


I


k-7


i
r
4




i
t
I
1
i


I


i


NO ONE DOUBTS THAT                WAS THE DUTY OF THE
PRESIDENT TO KEEP THE HIGHWAY
OPEN ACROSS THE ISTHMUS."
ltracts from remarks of lion. CHAUNCEY M. DEPEW of New York, in
daily Congressional Record, January 14, 1904.
AMr. President, the most interesting and vitally important question to
American people is the construction of the Isthmian Canal. There il
balolute unanimity of opinion for the work to be begun, prosecuted, and
fnipleted at the earliest possible moment. *  *
'The Republic of Colombia recognizing this need sent here a diplomatic
epresentative carrying a proposition. With scarcely any modification on
ar part this tentative agreement presented by Colombia was embodied in
e lay —lerran treaty. In that instrument was the most generous trleat
ent of all interests to be acquired. We were to buy the plant and the
roperties of the French Company for $40,000,000. We were to give to
olotnbia $10,000,000 for a franchise which would be of incalculable benefit
that country. *     *  *  *  This Colombian treaty, agreed to by the
resident, approved by the Secretary of State, and ratified by the Senate
the United States, was carried back to Bogota by the Colombian minister.
* Then began upon the stage of that capital a drama of unequaled
terest, whether we look upon it as tragedy, comedy, or opera bouffe. *  *
The Congress, to the tearful regret and over the wishes of the dictator
d vice-president, rejected the treaty by an almost unanimous vote and
ten adjourned. The Senators and Representatives who participated in this
icturesque drama of national aggrandizement said that the object of the
djournment was to wait until the old concession of the Panama Canal
nmpany had expired, in October, then to recall Congress In extraordinary
esson In November, declare the concession canceled, and seize upon the
roperty of the French Canal Company. Then, they said, we will offer to
he United States the properties of the French Canal Company for the
40,000,000 which are to be paid that corporation and the ten million which
re coming to us. *    *   *  This leads us at once to the new phase
the problem presented by the organization of the Republic of Panama.
anama was one of the first settlements made in the Western Hemrishere.     *:                                      *;1  1   " )"
When General Bolivar succeeded in the revolution which he organized,
formed a loose-jointed republic out of the States of Colombia, Venezuela,
cuador, and Panama. There was little in common, territorially, commerally, or industrially between these States. After a few years Venezuela
ceded and formed a separate government. Three years afterwards Ecuaor did the same. Panama remained to all Intents and purposes an indeendent Republic. In the new arrangement which was made Panama joined
lonrnbia under a constitution which distinctly recognized the right of
cession for any cause, and bound the several parts only to federal con.
ribittions according to their judgment. This relation continued practically
ri, 1861 to 1886.
Then a dictator arose by the name of Nunez and got control of the
rny and navy and all the resources of the country. He suspended the
onaitution, the Congress, and the laws, and governed the country according
hhis own despotic will for a number of years. He subjugated the several
tates, overturned their sovereignty and forced them to become mere deai'tments of the centralized power at Bogota. *  *  *  There have been
any revolts in Panama in the effort on the part of tyrannized, plundered,
tnd patriotic citizens to regain their liberties and rights. Every one of
hen has been sternly and ruthlessly suppressed by the central Governent at Bogota, The success of the Bogotan Government was due in nearly
very instance to the fact that the United States would not permit inter'alinm of transit across the Isthtmus. When the revolutionists would have
eite the railroad which connected the oceans, the United States was the
lly (f the Bogotan Government to keep that open,
Tlhe result was that it was easy for the Government forces every time
Paut down a rebellion because the recruits of the State could not be gathredl aito a successful army. But lo! the working of this provision the other
'ay, Citizens of Panama in November of this year, without a dissenting
oice, reasserted the sovereignty of the State, which they had never sur'eldeaed, anid proclaimed a Republic. The Colombian army joined the revolution  With the military forces of the Bogotan Government enlisting
der the flag of the new Republic, the authority of,Panama was complete
'ulthout all its borders. When, therefore, some time after the Republic?.d '^en established and was in working order, and had at Panama its
rray a Colombhian army landed at Colon for the purpose of invasionu and
ttita the United States took toward it the same position that it had toward
1-e rt1 volutiontista in the many efforts made by them for tle freedom of
'S 1atna.!; 11; *  '  '  "':  -1' S  * **  '  ''  *  1"  '  r   the   f  of
ir Government simply said to these soldiers, "You can not take posses'a of this railroad and interrupt traffic across the Isthmus. You can not
iagl in a battle or a series of battles which would stop communication
or a  n                   *   * 
ir a  Indetfinte period.'  * *     No one doubts that it was the
[ty ae the President to keep the hihway open across the Esthmus. No
Ie d' ubts that if the rights of American citizens were in peril because of
't0luion or anarchy, the United States must have a force oa the sot.rit or their ot ott 
_t-8


I




"THIS ADMINITiRATION NEED 1NOT WAIT #OR TH: VERiQT OF HISTORY TO APPRVE
iTS PANAMA POLICY."
Extracts from remarks of eBon. WM. M. STEWART of Nevada, in dail
Confresstona Record, January 27, 1904.
Mr. PRasm ET: The honor o the country is assailed under a misappr
hension of facts. After the Spanish rule in Central America was broke
a conBderacy was formed between Panama, Colombia, Vesneuela, as
cuador.    This confederacy, as the records will show, was for eomm
dfense against foreign aggression. There was a full recognition of ti
right of secession.
In 154$ a treaty was formed between this confederacy, which was thl
known as    e  Gw Granada. and the United States. By this treaty the Ne
Granadfa  Government grants to the Government of the United States"the right of way or transit across the Isthmus of Panama upoa any mod
of ommunication that now exist or that may be hereafter constructed she
be open and free to the Government and citizens of the United States." A
the United S tates"'uaraztees the rights of sovereignty and property which New Granada bh
and possesses over said territory.
Venes; elf seceded from the confederacy of New Granada. Afterwar
cua0dor did the same. Another confederacy was then formed between C
lomia an    Panama. having the same object as the former eonfederac
n$1ely, defense against foreign aggression.
The riht of secession was epreasly reserved in this new confederac
There was no trade or ommercial relations between Panama and Colombi
No pubic improvements were imade in Panama, but the vast aeeumul
tIons from customs: ad oher resources -were spended at Bogota. T
treatment of the people of Panama by the oligarchy at Bogota was ney
d  d by Spain:a ary of her proviaces, Weyler's rule nl Cuba not
Uprisings and revolutions were almost continuous from the beginnet
of 1850 until the final revolution in 1908, whereby Panama acquired h
depenae.;During all this time the influence and authority of t
Unritd States were exerted to prevent the rebels of Panama acquiring th
indepndence   fIt was timssible for the people of Panama to conduct
war    r independence without making the transit across the Isthmus t
theatre    act      The bulk of the po   atthe p atn  f the  sthmuas is at t
cities of Paama and Colon and along the line of the Panama Rallros
FU'h;    at eithe  of these cities or along the line of the road woe
ecessarily intrfre with travel and commerce, and the United States st
guard ever the only part of the tsthmas where a war for Independen
ould be coduted and thereby upheld and maintained the wicked at
tyrannical rule of the oligarchy of Colombia t
s it w:ong, after the usurping President Marroquin and his c
worke0s ha   rejected the treaty for a canal without  ebate, after it
keen given  ut froJm hil sources fn flogota that, twenty-fav  millions we
wanted from the Uitta States, besides the forty millions that this count
s aibout to iay the   rench comany, for the President of  e Unid tat
t0 refuse to suppress aloter revoltionon  te [stws?     a it ro    aft
the elgates from Panama at Bogota had given    otice that there would be
rwed tept onf t     he par o f Panama o idependence for the Preside
to0 'drectour sh!ips t Panamaand Colon to protect the      tereats of t
United 8ate?: 
Was it wrong, when the soliers of oolombia were threatening the liv
ot Qur0:ps ple a xt    destruct of oth property of   citizens of the Unit
Stwat, fo.i tin President to cause troops to be landed for the protecti
of the hiv  0nd0 property of Amerieans? 
This   0i  istration 'eed 0i t w  iai fo   the vdict of h story t a
prove its Panasna poicy. Thatl poieyi has areadty been approved b t
nations of t:;he wotd i tteir s   recognatio of the slover nt m f Pa:ma  If by tie honest and patrtotito eoUrse of tie Adj   istrato tn
Uni;ted States have acquired   a right of way to bild the canal ars tl
s v       hots been injur;ed?   The peole w ant the cana0, Te fl
Dand Metrdvagaate of Colombia cleared thee  y.   he new   overnent
graa4 the Ig        ad privteges whB^c are neeswsary      the vast unde
takg of onnectingt the two oceans b   a waterway.    cteizt    aw pt
rs a'nXt e'     tntiO      the Amerier  people 'are  romoted *   / te aet
t te Mm4    n et~raMoe' I have   o intention to discuss dtails,i but I 
upon t     ent  y     est agaist^ refieutionu  poin thee hoaor of tl
Govemiat bas;ed upon a    to:tal misappehenAst* #,
k-9


I
I
I
I
I
r
1
1


I




I




'PANAMA HAD A Rl6HT 0T GO0 INTO:REBELLON."
f*tracts from remarks of Hon. J. B. FORAKER of Ohio, in daily Congresos ioal Record, December 17, 190S,
In the first place, Mr. President, when it was resolved that we would
iuld an isthmfan canal, negotiations were entered Into not only with Coombia but with Costa Rica and with Nicaragua. Then protocols were
gned with all those countries. A protocol was signed With Colombia, one
ondition of which was that we should pay her $7,000,000 it finally we
etermined that we' would accept the Panama route,  We then undertook
he negotiation of a treaty with Colombia in aecorrdance with th;ei terms
ud conditions of that protocol; bhut when we had turned from the Nicaragua
site, and had accepted the Colombia route, instead of a cash payment of
7,000,000, she demanded the payment of $10,000,000 in cash. She exacted
enm us other terms and conditions that were severely criticised in thlis
thamber, but finally, after a. long debate, the treaty was ratified. We sent
there. That treaty embodied every demand that Colombia had made of
\, whether of noney or other kind of terms andt conditions. What hapened?  Instead of ratifying it with these increased paymnents and other
rms and conditions that she had demanded and we had generously granted;
erths passed, when finally the treaty was rejected unanimously, without
ay consideration whatever having been given to it by the ratifying power
Colombia.
No official explanation was offered to this Government for such action.
he only explanation ever given was an informal explanation given out by
distinguished citizen of Colombia, who apparently journeyed all the way
am Colombia to New York to give us that information. He gave it in
eshape of a newspaper interview, In which he announced that they could
ot agree to the treaty unless we struck out $.0,000,000 and inserted
25,000,000.
At once it became known through the newspapers-not by any agent
at here or sent elsewhere, but as common knowledge, reported by the
ssociated Press and otherwise-thbat the people of Panama were in a state
discontent and that they would not submit to such disregard of their
terests by the Government under which they were then living.   It beae at once known, in other words, that she was proposing to secede and
t up an independent government for herself.
That was published everywhere. I read of It. I spoke about it in pubspeech during the campaign in Ohio. No agent came to the President
the United States. The President of the United States sent no agent to
mam:a. It was not necessary. Panama was acting In her own interest.
e was exercising her right to object to the action of her Government, and
r overnment persisting in wronging her, she had a right, if she saw fit, to
into rebellion,
In other words, weelks before she declared her independence It became
sowTn that she would take that step-not officially, but it became known
every man who sttudied the situation and considered what hubman nature
uId do under such circumstances. The clouds were gathering. Should
United States, through its Administration at Washington. be unmindful
that fact?  Not at all. It was- our duty to be watchful with respedt
it under any circumstances, but particularly so in view of our obligans to preserve that transit free froml interruption.
Ever since 1846, when the treaty between this Government and New
alada, as that country was then called, was entered into, we have been
der that obligation. Time and iegain we have landed our marines to
eserve order and to protect that transit from. interruption and embarrassat. Repeatedly weQ have done that at the request of Colombia; we have
e it in a number of instances on our own motion. The President of
i Unted States, seeing the storma coming, seeing the action that was
eatetied, remembering his obligation to preserve peace and order and
tec( that transit from interruption, but did his duty in taking all preinary necessary steps to preserve order when such a contingency should
ise 
IMr, President, as Is suggested to.me, suppose he had not done it;
PCoS the rebellion had come;i that secession had been accomplished;
t war had ensued, and all the results that accompany       war had
Wted, what would have been the criticism then of our friends on the
r side?  It would have been a criticism, not that the President had
eid piecipitately, not that he had acted without cause, btUt that he 1hda
act 0 at atl; that he had lost the canal after the United States ha d
reunt 19 her preference for it, and after the people of the whole country,
hoet regard to party and without regard to section, had demanded it.


I


Sig. 13




"A REVOLUTION iN PANAMA WAS INEVITABLE.""INTERVENTION APPROVED BY THE NATIONS.
Extract from remarks of!Hon. LOUIS B. McCOMAS of Maryland, in dail
Congressional Record, January 4, 1904.
Those who criticise the President are few, and when all the facts b
come known will be fewer still.
Under the treaty of 1846 we have often been called on to intervme
for New Granada and Colombia, as now we have intervened for Panama
the third successor to this isthmian territory. The treaty guarantees th,
"The right of way or transit across the Isthmus of Panama upon any
the modes of commuqication that now exist, or that may be hereafter co
structed, shall be free to the Government and citizens of the United States
while the United States in turn guarantee for that consideration "the pe
fect neutrality of the above-mentioned Isthmus, with the view that the frt
transit from the one to the other sea may not be interrupted or embarrassi
in any future time." Bound by this treaty of 1846, against foreign invasio
against domestic dissension, we have time and again intervened to prote
the transit of the Isthmus.
For half a century, as I remarked to the Senator from Georgia [MI
BACON] a while ago, we have again and again repressed the aspirations
the people of Panama for liberty. We have helped put down their rey
lutions.
This people have again revolted when Colombia's corrupt schemin
was about to drive away from their Isthmus the great canal. Are wte n
to be ask.ed to suppress the established Republic, recognized by all t
world?  Are we to repeat the Hawaiian folly of 1893?   Are we to Rna
war on Panama merely to destroy a republic?
if the President had not been so prompt, so decided; if he had ke
our ships away from the Isthmus, whereon we were bound to keep pea
and to keep open the transit, we might now behold devastation and massac
there. We might now expect the French Republic, when called upon by t
French canal company to protect its franchises and interests, to send Fren
ships and French soldiers to hold its unfinished canal to defeat the sham
less spoliation of the French company by Colombia.
The correspondence sent to Congress by the President acquaints us wi
the spirit and the proceedings of the Colombian Congress. The treaty
ratified was never really considered by that Congress.
In the late summer I apprehended and stated in the press and on t
stump, and other Senators here apprehended and stated in the press a
on the stump, as I have heard them say, that there was impending a rev
lution in Colombia, and that it would surely occur if this treaty were 
feted and Panama was robbed of her canal. Every thoughtful Americ
either did fresee or ought to have foreseen that a Panama revolution w0u
follow the rejection of the Hay-Herran treaty, as the President has stat
in this message of to-day.
The President knew-what every ordinary citizen knew-from all tT.
channels of information, as well as from additional direct information, ne
which he received officially from our minister and our officers, that a re'
lution, in Panama was inevitable.
He did his best to get war ships there. The world Is large and 5
Navy small. We are becoming more and more proud of its prowess a
power, but it could not be everywhere. He contrived to have what? No
fleet, but one cruiser there in time to protect American life and propel
and to keep open the transit. He ought to have had a war vessel on es
side, but the revolution was almost too quick for his resources. The Pre
dent has since htrried other war ships and marines to both sides of 
Isthmus to guard the transit. He did his duty, and no more.
The Government of the United States, in a near-by sea, where 1
year at this time we wehad the whole fleet under Admiral Dewfey, haPPe
to have In November one vessel which could land forty-two marines on 
side of the Isthmus, and yet for fifty-seven years, during which we
been bound to protect that transit, were we never so ill prepared to 1i
forces from one side an  from the other ilde to protect that isthmian trs
sft and th life and property of Americans in that country.
This duty so often performed by our Navy and our marines was ne
mre promptly, more discreetly, or more bravely done than In Noveal
last. American lives and property were protected. The isthmian rail,
was guarded.  Was It our next duty to stand aloof until the new Bepu
be drowned in blood or wasted by long civil war?
ftis intervention, I repeat, has been quickly approved by th natW
ithin te pale of internatioala law. They recognized this new   P't
They agree witl President Roosevelt that Colombia has forced us to t:decisive steps to bring to a  end a condition of affairs that had ~eC
intolerablr"  The tine had come and the Justification is already plan': 1.j td0


I
I
1,
i
I
I
I
iI
I
i
I
v
a
v
t
t
I
t
I
I


I




THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE WILL BE CARRIED OUT;
THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE CANAL
WILL PROCEED."
tract from remarks of Hlon. W1M. M. STEWART of Nevada, in daily Congressional Record, January 6, 1904.
When the Congress of the United States adopted the Spooner amendent and gave preference to the Isthmus of Panama for an interoceanic
anal the real character of the Colombian Government was forcibly disiayed. The $10,000,000 offered In the Hay-Herran treaty to Colombia for
e privilege of constructing the canal was rejected at Bogota without deate. It now appears, however, that the treaty would have been discussed
it had been $25,000,000 instead of $10,000,000, but there is every reason
o believe that no action would have been taken until the expiration of the
oncession to the French company. The patriots of Bogota would then have
pposed that they would be in a position to demand the whole thing-the
orty millions and the twenty-five millions-and as much more as they
eired.
When Colombia rejected the Hay-Herran treaty and put In jeopardy
e construction of any canal across the Isthmus, had not the people of
anama a right to rebel? They did it openly and above board. They de
ared their purpose before the treaty was rejected that Panama would deare her independence in case of such rejection. When Panama did declare
er independence and was in visible possession of the entire Isthmus, what
as the duty of the President?  Was he compelled, under the treaty of 1846
land marines and fight for the sovereignty of Colombia?  Had not the
Ner of the United States kept the dark shadow of Colombian sovereignty
er the Isthmus long enough? Had it not enabled the oligarchy at Bogota
levy enough tribute upon the highway of nations?
The President had the alternative either to recognize the Republic of
aorana or to crush it by force of arms, because in any event the United
tites was under obligations to keep the Isthmus open for the transit of
amerce.
Among the fortunate circumstances connected with this transaction is
e ct that the President has demonstrated that he is neither a quibbling
tifogger nor a slippery diplomat, but a straightforward, common-sense, who acts promptly when occasion requires. It is significant that many
blic men in the country who are opposed to the President politically and
lose constituents enthusiastically approve what he has done with regard
Panama devote themselves to criticising the manner of doing it. They
1gest that he knew beforehand that Panama was going to declare her
dependence. 1Tas that a crime? Did not everybody else know itf  Did
t Panama proclaim it months before? It is then suggested that our war
ps were at the Isthmus. Where else should they have been, when it wa.
e dity of the United States to keep the transit across the Isthmus open?
en, again, it is suggested that the recognition was too hasty, that the
'sident ought to have waited. The people of Panama have been in praca1 rebellion always against the extortions of the foreign rule of Colombia.
not an uprising or a revolution every year for nearly fifty-seven years
scient to satisfy anyone that the people of Panama desire their indeidetce? Is it not the fact that the revolution was unanimous and that
the people favored it and now acquiesce in it sufficient?
I do not object to the kind of criticism that we have heard with regard
the Republic of Panama. The fact that they are small side issues only
e to prove that the main action was right.
It has given the American people what they wanted-a right of way
rss the Isthmus to construct a canal; a right that no honest man ever
tht to have questioned.
The people of the United States, conscious that the President has done
ht and gratified that he has obtained a right of way free from further
lakmail, will strengthen the hands of our Government. The will of the
le wil l be carried out; the construction of the canal will'proceed. The
Ple of the United States have so determined. The fault-finders with the
the thhing has been done will subside as they have always done when
great governmental enterprise has been undertaken and accomplished.
will be as it was with the acquisitions of Louisiana, Florida, Alaska, the
dwich Islands, Porto Rico, and the Philippines. In all these acquisitions
Pliaits were made as to the manner of bringing them about, however
'eci.l the result might be.
There is no political capital in criticising the manner of acquiring the
h of way across the Isthmus or in complaining of the fact that it has
acaquired. Candidates for popularity, if they consult their own interest,
get out of the line of obstruction.
the people are satisfied with the acquisition by President Roosevelt of
iht of way which was dedicated to the public hundreds of years ago.
k-12


~~~~~~~~~~I~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~




"UNDIISTURBEDTRANSIT ACROSS THE ISTHMUS OF
TRANSCENDENT iMPORTANCE TO
THE UNITED STATES,"
Extrat from mesgage of PRESIDENT ROOSVELT, published in daily Con
presionaal Record, December 7, 1908.
In the year 1846 this Government entered into a treaty with New Gran
ada, the predecessor upon the Isthmus of the Republic of Colombia and 0
the present Republic of Panama, by which treaty it was provided that th
Government and citizens of the United States should always have free an
open right of way or transit across the Isthmus of Panama by any modtl
of communication that might be constructed, while in turn our Governmen
guaranteed the perfect neutrality of the above-mentioned Isthmus with ti
view tha thhe free transit from the one to the other sea might not be intle
rupted or embarrassed.   *   * *
Last spring, under the act above referred to, a treaty concluded betwee
the representatives of the Republic of Colombia and of our Government w%
ratified by the Senate. This treaty was entered into at the urgent solic!
tation of the people of Colombia and after a body of experts appointed. 
our Government especially to go into the, matter of the routes across it
Isthmus had pronounced unanimously in favor of the Panama route. I
drawing up this treaty every concession was made to the people and to
Government of Colombia. *    * *
*  *   *  when the Colombian Congress was called to ratify it the vo
against ratification was unanimous. It does not appear that the Goven
ment made any real effort to secure ratification.  Vhen it became evideo
that the he treaty.was hpelesly lost, the people of Panama rose literally i
one man. Not. a shot was fired by a.single man on the Isthmus in the ii
terest of the ColCmonbian Government. Not a life was lost in the accomplisi
merit of the revolution. The Colombian troops stationed on the Isthbma
who had long been unpaid, made common cause with the people of Panam
and with astonishing unanimity the new Republic was started. The di
of the United States in the premises was clear. In strict accordance wi
the principles laid down by Secretaries Cass and Seward in the official
ments above quoted, the United States gave notice that it would permit
landing of no expeditionary force, the arrival of which would mean cha
and destruction along the line of the railroad and of the proposed cani
and an interruption of transit as an inevitable consequence. The de faC
Government of Panama was recognized. *      *  *
The control in tihe interest of the commerce and trafc O the 0w
ciiized oworld, of the means of undlisturbed transit across the Isthmils
Panama has become of transcendent importance to t he United States.
have repeatedly exercised this control by intervening in the course of 
mestic dissension, and by protecting the territory from foreign invasil
In 1853 Mr. Everett assured the Peruvian minister that we should
hesitate to maintain th nutrality of the n e thmusrality oin the case of war betW
Peru and Colombia. In 1864 Colombia, which has always been vigilant
avail itself of. its privileges conferred by the treaty, expressed its expec
tion that hat In the event of war between Peru and Spain the United St
would carry into effect the guaranty of neutrality. There have beean
administrations of the State Department in which this treaty has not, eit
by the one side or the other, been used as a basis of more or less importi
demands. *    *  *
The above recital of facts establishes beyond question:  First, thlat
United States has for over half a century patiently and in good faith car
out its obligatiomns under the treaty of 1.846,; second, that when for
first time it becapossi ble oi  for Colombia to do anything in requital oi
faervices thtus repeatedly rendered to it for fifty-seven years by the a.l 
States, the Colonbhian Government peremptorily and offensively refuse i
to do its part, even though to do so would have been to its advantage
immeasurably to the advantage of the State of Panama, at. that tice uti
its jurisdiction: third, that throughout this period revolutions, rot.s,
factional disturbances of every kind have occurred -one after the otb
almost uninterrupter d succession, some of them lasting for months sod 
for years. while the central government was unable to put them dowo
to make peace with the rebels: fourth, that these disturbances il:'t~.!
showing any sign -of abatng have tended to grow more numerous aln
serWous in the immediate past: fifth, that the control of Colombia ove
sthmus of Panama could 'not be maintained without the armed inter"en
and assistanee of the United States. In otber words, the Gove! mern t
Colombia, though wholly unable to maintain order on the lIthmus,?.': n
theless declined to ratify a treaty the conclusion of which opnened i5^
chance. to secure its own stability and to.guarantee.permanent pe
and the construction of a canal across, the Isthmus.             e,
Under such circumstances the, Government of the Uniited St'' 
hve been guilty of folly and weakcness, amauting in thetir mu  ',:
against the Naton, had it eacted othevise than it did when the re'
November S la   took place n Pnama.


a
I
o
I
i
3I
Ii
I


I


k-13






WHEN COLOMBIA LOST THE CANAL THE ETERNAL
PRINCIPLES OF RIGHT PREVAILED."
stracts fromn remarks of Hon0. F. McL. SIMMONS of North Carolina, in
daily Congressional Record, January 27, 190S.
The President has assured us in a formal message to this Senate in
te miost emphatic manner that he did not, consciously and intentionally,
nany way, direct or indirect, incite, encourage, or promote this* revolution.
The fact, Mr. President, that as long ago as last August, when the
rnehian Congress, had begun to show an unfriendly disposition toward the
aety, there were mutterings of secession; that later, when it became
pparent that the treaty would not be ratified, there were thinly veiled
treats of separation uttered upon the very floors of the Colombian. Conrs, ~which later broke out into bold, open, and defiant threats of secession,
ith at Panama and at Bogota; the fact that there was at Panama, long
terior to the revolt, an organised hand actively engaged in the organizai of the insurrection; that these conspirators had, under the pretense of
rganizing a fire department, organized a military Irrce of over 400 picked
o in the city of Panama and arranged for the cooperation of the Coloman general and the forces under his command stationed in that city, as
rll as with the commander and the marines under him of one of the two
olombian gunboats then stationed in that harbor, tends to show that in
sir desperation the Isthmians, acting on their own initiative, had made
p their minds to seek renmedy for their wrongs in revolution.
It may be-in fact, It is almost certain-the Panaman conspirators
zew what course this Government would pursue in the event of insurrecia in the Isthmus and that they counted on that action to msake their
evolution successful.  If they had such information-and, as I said, I
ink they did-.-' do not know how they obtained it, but I can see how it
ight have been acquired without the actual or guilty knowledge' or comicity of either the President or the Secretaries of State, War, or the Navy.
Such secrets are notoriously hard to keep. The possession of this Inroation should not, in r my judgment, be accepted as contradicting or disreditlng the positive statement of the President. In entire deference to the
Meus of others-on this side of the Chamber who nayi differ scith me in this
isn.,f I think that the statement of the President in this respect should
accepted, ancd for mnyself I do accept it.  Undoubtedly the President
new of the forthcoming revolution in Panama, and so knowing it was his
ty, in view of the iimrinsence of insurrection there, to have on the ground
stffilcient force to protect the lives and property of American citizens.
Mr. President, I can not find it in my heart to blame the Panamans
seceding from Colombia. If oppression, if tyranny,, if despotism ever
stifted revolutions, they were justified I.n revolution. They were bound
a State which had never felt or shown any interest in them or in their
lfare. They were forced to pay ruinous taxes with only nominal repretation, without receiving in return tany of the benefits of taxation in
verment or administration, In public improvements or in the education
the people.
The canal was their only hope for relief from the miserable and
retched conditions to which Colombia's gereed and tyranny bad reduced
710, and even that the Government at Bogota deeiied them.
Perhaps their aspirations for freedoom were wrong, but our forefathers
der like conditions did not think so,  Perhaps they should have subtted supinely to oppression, but our forefathers under similar conditions
e', for liberty and with the help of France achieved it.
On the -other hand, Mr. President, I can nor enthuse over the alleged
5egs of Colombia. The treaty we made with her was of her own seekIt was signed by her authlorized agents, with full knowledge of its
tie ts. It provided for the construction upon her own territory of the
55c te  work of internal and international.iemprovemrent and development
Yr e(sayed- by man.
TyY duplicity and treachery she defeated that. treaty, not Dbecause she
I ^o want the canal, and would not have gladly taken it upon the terms
0'iNed therein, but because she we.e.eted in en indirect way to exatrt e nore
oe: from us or the Panamra Canal Company, or perhaps from both.
lier treachery toward Panama and toward us in this canal matter Illustes both her traditional policy toward Panama and her standard of diplo0Y  In all of her history I kncow of nothing to excite the admiration of
b t efnane man or any patriotic libertyl-oving American citizen..
Pr President, when I consider the wirongs Colombia has perpetrated
lai.t Panama,, and when I consider this last great act of indifference
thes Welfare of that long-suffering people, the conclusion forces itself
no  e that when Colombia lost the canal, when Panama succeeded in
bish iog her independence, the eternal principles of right and righteous
onice again prevailed,
k-14


I




"POQICY     OF PRESIDENT          McKINLEY REGARD IN
CANAL        QUESTION. ":: "
Extract fromn debate in daily Congressional Record.
Mr. HANsxA. Mr. President, I can not let the opportunity pas
without challenging a portion of the statement of the Senator fro
Alabama [Mr. MoRGAX] with reference to the policy of the lat
President McKinley regarding this canal question. If I understoo
the Senator correctly, he stated that President McKinley up to th
time of his death was in favor of the construction of an inter
oceanic canal by the Nicaragua route, and that had he lived n
doubt a policy would have been carried out resulting in the con
struetion of the canal by that route.
I desire to state that in 1899, when for the first time it came t
his knowledge that the Panama Canal Company's property coUI
be p)urchased, President McKinley seriously considered the propQ
sition:  he investigated the question, and the result was that h
asked this body troug   the instrumentality of the Committee
Commerce, to report an amendment to the river and harbor bi
appropriating the smfn of $1,000,000 for the further investigatio
of ll routes on the Isthmus, with a view of constructing an isthmnia
canaL       ' 
What I say I say from personal knowledge, obtained in person
interviews with the late President as to his ideas and as to h
future policy. He became so impressed with the importance of t
qestion and the eligibility of the Panama route that he determine
as far;as lay in his power, to have a full knowledge of all th
routes, and in his recommendation to Congress that was his so
purpose and desire.
After the appropriation was made and he had obtained authorit
to appoint a Commission, through frequent conferences with hi
personally, as I was a member of the committee having charge
the subject, I knew of the interest he felt that all possible rout
across the Isthmus should be thoroughly investigated, and in th
selection of that Commission he was extremely careful. He too
plenty of '   time, diligently inquired into the reputation and fitne
of every man who was considered for a place on that Commissio
and when the personnel of the Commission was completed he f
that as far as lay in his power he had done his whole duty to s
cure the aid and advice of the best talent which the country afforde
for such a purpose. It was his intention, so far as his policy w
concerned, to be guided by the report of that Commission.
As to the alleged change of policy after the death of Preside
McKinley, the present Executive has made no change, becau
President McKinley had decided to follow the advice which m:in
be given by the Commission of his own creation as to the ultimal
route to be established in the construction of that canal.
I make this statement because I am unwilling under the present sit
ation that such statements as have been made by the Senator from Al
bama should go before the country when I know to the contrary.
Mr. MORGAXr. Mr. President, the Senator speaks from   person
conversations with President McKinley, which I have no oppo
tunity in the world of testing in any form. I had no personal
political intimacy with President McKinley that would have justifie
me in asking him his private opinions upon any question. I
upon his record-his public record-and his public record was th
he did, in 1899, recommend the appointment of this Commissio
that on November 30, i1900 the Commission made their. report t
him, and that on the next morning he made the agreement-t
solemn compact with Nicaragua and Costa Rica. Therefore he ho
become. convinced of the correctness of the report of this Co
mission which he had selected with such great care in the effort
secure wise, just, honorable, and upright men, so that he could
ford to stand on what they said.
Mr. HAxrSA. Mr. President, in reply to that statement I ha1
only to say, in confirmation of what I have said before, that Pre
dent Mciney was willing to abide by the decision of the Co
mission. On the flrst report of that Commission, when the pr
for the property of the Panama Canal Company was fixed
$104,000,o000, it was decided to stand by the report in fainor
Nicaragua':. But when it is stated that President AMcKinley thig
that the Nicaragua Canal route was the better route, I know
the; contrary.  It was the question of price and the conditio
under which that price was made to this Government that led
the pt   ol of whiehiheSinator speaks. 
f:ekJSf;35: 


I




'THE EXISTENCE       OF PANAMA       IS  A  FACT    ACCOMPLISHED."
xt;rot from remarks of Hon. JAMES P. CLARKE of Arkansas, in
daily Congressional Record Feb. 10, 1904.
The Republic of Panama has received the recognition of this
overnument through the act of the President in receiving her minter and in negotiating a treaty with her. This action on the part
f the President, in my opinion, is not subject to review in any
roceeding, directly or collaterally, connected with the ratification
f the pending treaty. The recognition, no matter whether by the
ction of the Congress or by the President alone, is the act of the
overnment of the United States and is to be respected and suprted as such. The recognition is final, and the existence of
anama is a fact accomplished, and this, to borrow a phrase from
israrck, removes every objection and silences every dispute. Aproval of our course, if approval by others of anything this counry does can ever be deemed to add anything to its validity or juske, is shown in the action taken by other governments, as followss
ist of governments which have recognized the independence
of Panama, with the dates of recognition.
nited States.......Nov. 13, 1903  Nicaragua......... Dec. 15, 1903
ranee..N......Nov. 16, 1903 I Peru....,.......D ec. 19, 1903
hina.............Nov. 26, 1903  Cuba..............Dec. 23, 1903
ustria-Hungary... Nov. 27, 1903  Great Britain.......Dec. 24, 1903
rmany.....N...   ov. 28, 1908  Italy..............Dec. 24, 1903
enmark............Dec. 3, 1903  Japan...........   Dec. 28, 190,
ussia.............. Dec. 6, 1903  Costa Rica.........Dec. 28, 1903
seden and Norway..Dec. 7, 1903  Switzerland.........Dec. 28, 1903
elgium............Dec. 9, 1903  The Netherlands.....Jan. 10, 1904
The terms of the treaty being satisfactory and the technical comtency of the parties to the contract being established, my support
this treaty would follow naturally and without further question.
ut it is objected that while the recognition of the Republic of
anama may conform   to the mere forms of the law governing
ich matters, the facts which preceded it show such an utter disgard by the President and those acting under his orders of the
rdinal principles of right and justice as to make it the imperaWe duty of every right-thinking man to condemn his actions and
refuse to take any steps that can directly or indirectly be conrued into a condonation of his course. *  *  * Such investigaon and consideration as I have been able to give to the matter
s not enabled me to reach the conclusion that I should oppose
ratification of the treaty on the grounds which have been stated
')pposition to it. * * * *
I do not find it necessary to deny that I believe that the President
the United States knew what was taking place on the Isthmus
wvhat was likely to take place there. If it is necessary to show
9 iqnorance of events there in order to establish his integrity,
aintaiin that this can only be done at the expense of his intelliaee and sagacity, if not his fidelity to his duty. Every wellormed observer of public events knew it. It was the logical
d necessary culmina.tion of forces which the Colombians themVes had set at large. After the rejection of the treaty in the
Sner it was done we owed to the Colombians nothing and could
ord to laugh when their calamity came. Our only duty in the
emises was to ourselves, and that was to respect the cardinal
nciples of right and justice, refraining religiously from clandesey or openly inflicting wrong upon her. That we did so refrain
hye no doubt. * * *
Leaving out of the view of the President's denial, not because
hare any doubt about its sincerity, for I have none, the developnt of the facts show no aid or comfort given to the revolufists prior to their declaration of independence, and any haste
thereafter extending recognition to the new Republic was a matof detail and largely within the discretion of the President.
jury composed of nearly all the nations of the civilized world
rendered its verdict of the issue tendered by our action, and I
[n1o reason why we should view it with less favor than thtey. Any!paihy bestowed on Colombia is, in my opinion sympathy wasted.
Iemocratic legislatures, Democratic boards of trade, and Demoe citizens throughout the country have manifested their approval
pen, unmistakable, and enthusiastic expressions.  And indisable Democratic votes to-day will make it a certainty.
k-tG


I




":THE TIME HAS COME TO BUILD THE ISTHMIA
CANAL"
xtracts from remarrs of Hon.     ENRY T. RAINEY, of Xllinois
itn dai  Congtressional Record, Dec. 15, 11098
Mr. Chairanial, in the brief time I propose to speak I shall ad
dress  yf remarks to the recent events occurring on the Isthmu
of Panama which have attracted-the attention of the civilized world
I propose to, consider the building of the Panama Canal in it
relation to a deep waterway from the Great Lakes to the Gulf o
Mexico. The Republic of Panama is an established fact. Nothlinl
t can say will in any manner alter existing conditions. It has bee
recognied -by the great world powers, and: so far as I ax conl
cerned as a citizen of this Republic and' representing here/ in pal
one of its greatest States, I would not alter existing conditions i
I could. * * *       * S 
I: 'the great events which have just occurred, I do not think th
President dud his advisor1s have acted at the dictation of any part
or:in 'the interests of any party. They have simply become tI
instrutments to carry into effect the fixed determination of 80,000,0
people. In the history of the centuries the. time has come to buil
the Isthmian canal, and the strongest nation in all the world pro
poses now to build it. *   *  *  *: *   I see no reason why w
should not police the seas in the vicinity of the proposed cana
[Applause.] We ought to prevent the landing of troops by Colonabi
on the Isthmus. The personal ambitions of a few professiona
agitators and revolutionists in that part of the world must no
be permitted to stand in the way of such an enterprise as this.
But there 'is another and a more potent reason why no man wh
lives in the Mississippi Valley ought now to complain of rece
events or object.
The time has arrived in the history of the western world whe
the east and west movement of commerce is, in a measure, abou
to end, 'and when the north and south movement of commerce i
*about to commence. The building of this canal is a most importas
step in t    direction, and its immediate construction becomes
matter of vast importance to every man, womnan, and child livin
in that part of our country which lies between our great mouc
tain ranges.
During the past century and a quarter of our national existece
commerce has moved: along east and west lines. IOur developnien
has been from the Fast toward the West. Raw material has bee
brought fro>m the West to the Eastern States. The manufacture
product has been shipped back from the East to the West.
As a result of these conditions great transcontinental railwae
haye been constructed. The idea heretofore has prevailed that ther
is some normal law which compels the movenent of commerc
across meridians: of longitude. As a matter of: fact, the natura
direction for commerce to move on this continent and in the wora
is,across paralels of latitude. The north and south.movement
about to commence., 
The different sections of our country are becoming self-sustaie
ing. When that happens commerce must naturally' travel acro
paXallels of latitude. in order that the products of colder clim
may be more readily exchanged for the products of tropic
countries.:The; northward movement of our agricultural population, the co
pletion by Chicago of her great canal, large enough to permit t
passageof almost any  essel that could go through the Suez CanT
andi the prospect that this Government will in the immediate fttu
complete the canal commenced by the French across the TstftlUn
thus. opening the enti re Pacific Ocean to the north-and-south MnOs
mtient:of commerce-all. these things concur and mark unmistakahbt
the beginning.on, this continent of a movement of commerce ae
parallels of::latitude.;  The 4development of a great waterway from the Lakes to the GuI
and through tihe Gulf to Atlan   ports, and through the Istlmia
canalto,the South;Pacific Ocean.is now. almost an assuredl fa
It requires only a little more excavation between the Chicago DPra
age Canal and th Illnois River, the removal of th e locks: and da
inthat river,: At little dredging some provision for protectins V1
lands' by leve-es against the increased flow of water through 
an:the thing s done, and the coast line of:fthe.: United Osta t
i in eftect double 


k-lT 




"PROTECTION       TO   AMERICAN      INTERESTS       IN  THE
ISTHMUS."
Extracts from remarks of Hlon. EDGAR D. GtUMPACIER, of
Indiana, in daily Congressional Record, Dec. 15, 1903.
Mr. Chairman, in my judgment the attacks upon the Administration for the recognition of thle tepublic of Paanama are unusLified and unwarranted from any standpoint. In 1846 this Government negotiated with New Granada the treaty that is so common
in the literature and discussion of the day. By the ternms of that
treaty the Government of the United States assumed certain responsibilities respecting the neutrality of the Isthmus and the preservation of the sovereignty of the Republic of New Granada over
i   *   * During the fifty-seven years of the existence of that
reaty there have been fifty-three rebellions, revolutions, and riots
f a political character upon the Isthmus, and upon six distinct
casions during that time the United States has been compelled
o land sailors and marines upon the Isthmus to patrol the railads across the Isthmus and to prevent disorder and destruction.
And on three or four other occasions the Government of New
ranada and the succeeding Government of Colombia have called
pon, nay, have demanded of the United States that it intervene
o preserve the sovereignty of those Governments against Peru and
ther powers in South America.
The history of recent legislation on the canal question is in the
inds of all members of the committee. In 1902 the Congress
ecdared that the time had come when the United States should
nter upon that great world undertaking, that it should enter upon
construction of that mighty enterprise, and it passed what is
own as the Spooner law, vesting in the President the discretion
negotiate for the right to construct a canal across the Isthmus
f Panama, and, in the event that he should be unable to do that,
take steps to construct the canal upon the Nicaraguan route.
A broad discretion was vested in the President lby that law, and
'ngress, in unmistakable terms, declared its preference for the
sanam route. The Eay —lerran treaty was negotiated in pursuce of that law, ratified by the Senate of the United States, and
bmitted to the Colombian Congress for consideration, and it was
jected by unanimous vote of that Congress.
The people of Panama arose practically as one man and deounced the action of the Colombian Government in refusing to
gree to a treaty that meant so mnuch to them; a treaty that would
ake the Isthmus of Panama the great commercial thoroughfare
f the hemisphere  Revolution was tbhe result, and I say it was
e natural result, and the people of Panama arose with practical
nanimity and established a government of their own.
The United States was then confronted with this situation: The
facto Government of Panama was the only Government in coni1 of affairs, as far as control existed anywhere. There was an
soalute absence of authority upon the part of the Republic of
olornbia to perform the responsibilities of sovereignty and afford
rotection to the rights and interests of the United States.
What was the duty of this Government in that exigency? Where
d it owe its highest and first duty? Why, to its own interests.
had interests there that required to be taken into consideration
ithomit delay. It could not stand supinely by and await the result
f a long and tedious warfare between the insurgents and the forces
f the Colombian, Government. Its interests were at stakel, and
re of such a character that they required immediate protection.
B President #did that which I believe duty and good conscience
quired. He recognized the provisional government as. the only
iernmesnt able and willing to carry out the fonditions. of thee
eaty of 1846 and afford protection. to American interests in the
I insist, Mr. Chairman, that not a single precedent has been rerred to in the course of this debate and not a single one can
found that is not in harmony with the action of the Administran ir recognizing the independence of the Republic, of Panama.
Was the de facto government, clothed with all the machinery,
(fficers, the public agencies necessary to enable it to discharge
Public dutieps
kUl:




PANAMA.-U NUALiFIED INDORSEM ENTOF THE
COURSE OF OUR GOVERNMENT.
Extract from remarks of Hon. J. C. BURROWS, of Michigan, in
daily Congressional Record, February 23, 1904.
Mr. BUvnows.   I present a preamble and resolutions adopted
by te Detroit Board of Comrnerce, relative to the recognition of
the Republic of Panama. I ask that the resolutions be printed.
There being no objection, the resolutions were referred to tlhe
Committee on Foreign Relations, and ordered to be printed in the
RECOaD, as follows;
The action of the National Administration in accrediting the
Government recently established upon the Isthmus of Panama has
been subjected to undeserved criticism, upon the accusation that
United States officials incited the revolt and that our Government
showed unseemly haste in recognizing the newly formed Republic.
It is not reasonable to predicate the revolution in Panama upon
any outside influences. The relations between Colombia and that
State furnish provocation sufficient to incite revolt. The central
Government at Bogota imposed heavy burdens of taxation upon
Panama without the consent of that State and without giving it
adequate representation in the confederated Senate, at the same
time expending the revenue not for needed administrative work
in the territory where it is raised, but in other parts of the Confederation. It was guilty of many acts of oppression which had
been a cause of irrtation for years.   Our Government, by its
own avowals and by other unimpeachable testimony, is acquitted
of the charge of inciting the revolution, but it could not fail to be
aware that such an event was impending, for its prospect was seea
and discussed by the public journals of this and other countries.
It would have been unpardonable negligence for our officials not
to be aware of its approach or prepared for the emergency.
It is a recognized rule of international law that "a state shall
not be recognized as independent until it has shown its ability t
maintain its independence."  But it is also an accepted doctrine
that there are exceptions to this rule when treaty rights or nationa
interests and safety or interest of collective civilization are -involved
Under all these'exceptions the United States was, beyond questio
or peradventure, justified in recognizing the Panama Governmen
as the only alternative to a condition of disorder that would haw
put in actual peril American rights and interests, and would haw
jeopardized a work that was of great importance to the whole con
mercial world.
This country was the first to recognize the new Republic, an
very properly, because it was more immediately concerned thsi
any other. That the administrative action was judiciously take
is confirmed by the fact that the new Government was speedi
recognized by the great nations of the earth, including Great Brital
Germany, France, Austria-Hungary, and Italy.
When the Republic of Panama declared its independence o0
Government was confronted with a new situation in respect t
the great improvement which the whole commercial world expects i
to makethe construction of a canal across the Isthmus. "On th
one hand," as stated in a communication from Secretary Hay, "stoo
the Government of Colombia, invoking in the name of the treat
of 1846 the aid of this Government in its efforts to suppress th
revoluton; on the other hand stood the Republic of Panama, th
had come into being in order that the great design of that treat
might not be forever frustrated, but might be fulfilled. Tb
Isthmus was threatened with desolation by another civil war. T
interests of the whole civilized world were involved. The Republi
of Panama stood for these interests; the Colombian GovernnenI
opposed them. It recognized the independence of the Republic 0
Panama, and upon its judgment and action in the emergenc t
tpoers of the world have set the seal of their approval."
Resolved: That the action; of the United States Governmnt 
recognizing the Government of Panama is deserving of ungqzalifl
support and    0 commendation.
Resolved, That it i:e for the best interests of this cotntry  0,da
the whole commercial world that the pending treaty with the etsp
e f Panama bepediy ratified and tha the construction      f ': tr canic c:an:al be immeditiiely begun and advanced to co5f)p
l         ftion-:: praet j.; rp l a pratia:bl.:  I


I
It
I
I
f
I
I
3
t
I
I
I
t
111
K
I


I


k-19


I




"THE PATH OF TRANSIT WE WERE BOUND TO KEEP
OPEN."
Eztracts from remarks of Hon, ROBERT B. HITT of Illinois, in
daily Congressional Record, Dec. 11, 1903.
The Congress gave the initiative to this movement. This body
and the Senate directed the organization of a great commission of
earned men, of skilled engineers. They reduced the question to
two possible canals, one at Nicaragua and the other at Panama.
After the conditions had all been gone over, and some of' them had
been greatly changed by events, Congress determined that the canal
at Panama should be built. * *
A treaty drawn up by the Colombian Government was presented
by the representative of Colombia here, and after modification was
at last assented to, was+i ratified by our Government, and taken
back to Bogota to be ratified there. Tlen followed strange events.
'o the grasping men at Bogota, who now had in hand a treaty
iving them ten millions, a higher game seemed easy. Their ideas
went up to fifteen millions and then to twenty millions and then
twenty-five millions. When they had convinced themselves that
t was probable that this amount could be obtained from the Yanees, they rejected the very treaty they had proposed and urged
pon us.
The people in Panama now looked at the prospect in utter desir. They had long and anxiously hoped to see the canal contrcted in their midst by a route of 47 miles, believing they had
he best line, as against the 189 miles of the Nicaragua route. Now,
y the greed of those at Bogota, who were a long way from them,
ad had very little interest in the affairs at Panama, all was
warted.
Their action was immediate and unanimous, and they tossed off
he cntral government with that South American facility not easily
nown to us. * *
The United States, says the gentleman from Arkansas, caused
d upholds the Republic of Panama, and is unquestionably mainaining it by its armed forces and resources and agents.
The President of the United States had no agents there except
o very low-salaried consular officers and one clerk. He couldn't
t any more;   he had   no money   for any purpose except
hat had been appropriated by this body. Why, if there had
een any such plot or scheme by the ruler of this country, if he
d had any such purpose in view of kindling trouble there, would
not have had our ships there at least? There was not a ship
n the Panama side. There was only one on the Colon side, and
landed its slender force to keep order and protect American
roperty, as had often before been done by our ships. * * The
etleman has made much of certain words in the telegrams, which
ave all been placed before the public (and first before this
onse), thtat our Government sent to all the officers, civil or naval,
o were concerned in the affairs that took place in the beginning
November. He says they indicate that our Government anticited the revolution. Why, sir, our Government is not adminisred by men so ignorant as to be unaware of the current of events.
here was not a man in this House, there was not an idle wayfarer
h passed through the galleries, who did not know that for weeks
d months preceding newspapers all over the world had been
eassing the critical state of the Isthmus of Panama, the liability
those people to have disorder.
Our officers received the orders which the gentleman read in part
d which are given fully in the official documents. Some were
Sued by the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Navy,
in and again repeating that injunction, which is a commonplace
the Navy, that naval officers at Panama are to obey the injunction
d engagement of the treaty of 1846,f to keep that pathway of
ansit open. Every President has given that injunction when diser arose there or threatened to arise-not Republican Presidents,
t Dem.ocratic Presidents, but American Presidents have all done
at, keeping the solemnn faith of the nation in the treaty of 1846
tleo(r away any end all obstruction and disorder in that transit.
ey htae driven away government troops, they have driven away
'rrectWionar oops ay to  a that came in the path of transit which
'Were tbound to keep open, which pledge we have faithfully e6xtfed for now over fifty years. There were no American troops
e, no agents of the Government there wh  th  rvolution broke
to aid in troubles, as  is inimated.
k-20:


I




TRUSTEE OF THE INTERESTS OF THE WHOLE CIV.
ILIZED WORLD."
Extract from remarks of IHo. HENRi Y CABOT LODGE, of Massachusetts, in daily Congressional Record, Jan. 5, 1904:Mr: President  his question is an American quesion, and or
interests i it are very profound indeed. The portion of the country which  I have the honor to represent in part is far removed
from the canal, and yet it is of iamense interest to the people 0
New England that there should be that quickened communicatio n
to the East. Deep as our interest is far up there on the Atlantic
coast, it is nothingo o the interest of the people of the Gulf-t
the people who are selling their cotton as well as their manufac
tures" in the East. Most important of all, Mr. President, more im
portant than any commercial advantage, is the fact that it make
the coast of the United States practically contincuous fron
the Columbia to the extremest boundary of Maine.
Mr. President, the commercial interests, the interests fo
ou selfprotection, involved in that canal are of the larges
possible kind. It seems to me that it gives us a stake i
that Isthmus which can not be overestimated.           We als
stand before the world as the nation which has taken up thi
greattask of opening communication between 'the Atlanti
and the Pacific. The civilized world has committed that tas
to us and has gladly committed it to us. We stand in relatia
to that Isthmus not only for our own interest, but as the trust
of the interests of the whole civilized world. The people who liw
there, who own it if any people in the world own it absolutely. at
anxious that we should go there, and build a canal on oour own term
We are not taking it from the people who dwell there. The
are only too anxious to have us go there; but there are a fe
people up in the mountains and on the great plateaus in the i
terior, farther removed from Panama, so far as actual commun
cation goes, than we are in the United States. They have unde
taken to say that Panama shall not have that canal; they propos
to take from Panama, if they could make a treaty, every doll
that is involved In iit-people who do not own the territory an
whose interests are trivial compared to the rest of the world.
I do not think, Mr. President, that those people have the rig
to stand across the pathway of the world's * commerce and sa
4Here it sall not come."  I think that it is part of our dut
to do just what we hyave done. I think we should have bee
fal*e to our duty if we had not done it, and there is nothin
whatever in all the action of the Colombians, of whom our trea
ment bas been more than generous, which should make us repe
of any act that has there been committed.
Mr.President, this seems to me-if it can be, said truly of a
question-to be a qutestion that is not one of party. Certainly
is a question in which the interests and the hopes of all the peop
of the Utnied States-North and South, Democrat and Republic
-are alike:bound up. I think it is a great achievement, in whi
we should all be, proid to take a part.
I;confess the attitude assumed by some portions, at least,
the Democratic party is very curious and interesting.
I know that t       re s:ome  members of that party and lar
sections of that party outside of Washington who are as zealo
and as eager for the promotion of this canal: and the ratificati
of this treaty as any people can possibly be. I know there a
others —for I have- read debates which have occurred elsewhere
who, while they; protest their hatred of the sinner, seem perfect
willing to embrace the sin.
* Mr. President, think of the proposition of making political ca
tal out of a question of this onature. As a Republican I sh
ask nothing better than to have the Panama Canal made the iss
in the impending campaign.    I think a 'good deal of vaies'
ateria.l has already been given us in that 'direction, but, I b0
be very sorrvt,  s an A.nericran, to see the work of buildh:  t
ean:al aeiaed, and I think, Mr. President, that when it is tfaile
over seriously by the Democratic party *they will see that t"h
are more judiios courses than to oppose simply because the o0:arty proposes  There tmust be grounds of opposition more elrd
han tthat if you would satisfy the American people.


k-21


I 




i'THE  PANAMA     QUESTION      TRANSCENDS        THE    NARROW    BOUNDS OF PARTY."
irflract from remarkls of Hion, C, WV. PFA BIffANKS. of Indiana, in
daily Congressional IRecord, Feb. 2, 1904.
There are several conclusions which the record seems to establish. They may be summarized thus:
The revolution of the people of Panama was due to a long series
of wrongs inflicted upon them by the Government at Bogota, and
aore particularly to the rejection of the Hay-Herran treaty.
The revolution was initiated by the people of Panama and was
not inspired by the United States. 
It was the duty of the President to adopt such measures
as he deemed necessary to preserve the freedom      of transit
across the Isthmus and to protect the lives and property of
American citizens, and of citizens of other countries upon
the line of transit.
The independence of Panama was accomplished by the people
of the Isthmus. 
There was no vessel or armed force of the United States at the
city of Panama, and only one vessel, the Nashville, third rate, at
Colon; only 42 lmarines were landed at Colon. They were landed
to protect the lives of American citizens who were in serious
and imminent peril and were returned to the ship after accompilishing their purpose.
The President recognized the fact that Panama had secured her
independence three days after the revolution.
In recognizing the independence of the new Republic the President acted solely within his constitutional rights. The duty of
recognition rested upon him, and having exercised it ghis act became
binding upon the United States.
The independence of the Republic of Panama was recognized
b) France and many other powers soon after recognition by the
United States.
Within eight days after the recognition of the new Republic she
signed a treaty with the United States, through her accredited
minister to Washington, granting to the United States the requisite
concessions for an isthmian canal.
When the Republic of Panama concluded the treaty with the
United States, she was in the exercise of sovereign power. She
was discharging fully her domestic and international functions and
had full capacity to enter into a valid convention with the United
States.
Under the treaty of 1S46, the United States obtained rights and
incurred obligations in Panama. She.obtained the right of free
transit across the Isthmus and the right to preserve the freedom
of such transit. She also guaranteed in consideration of this right
and other privileges the sovereignty of the government in Panarma.
By the transfer of sovereignty upon the Isthmus to the Republic
of Panama, the obligation to guarantee her sovereignty against
foreign aggression rests upon the United States.
If the new treaty with the Repub:lic of Panama is ratified by
the Senate, the United States will obtain adequate concessions,
rights, and privileges for the construction and perpetual maintenance of an isthmian canal.
Mr. President I have endeavored to consider only the more salient
features of the Panama question, and those which appear to me
to be controlling. Much more might be said, but there would apjpear to be little profit in unduly prolonging the discussion.  In
o1le form or another the isthmian canal qlestion has beeen under
colnsideration for several centuries. The time for decisive action
bls come..We have but to call the roll of the Senate upon the treaty
vith Panama, and we will instantly set in motion the machinery
'hich will soon accomplish the great desire.,
Others have said that this is an Anmericaan question, and
n8 it is. It transcends the narrow bounds of party. It is as
wide as the ample limits of the Republic.
"/Who dotubts in th:e present eondition    of affairs that the
aRiama Canal will be built?   It will have back of it the best
Pedge any vast undertaking can have, for it will have the
0ssurance of the United States. What we say for and against
t Will swiftly fade away and be gone forever, but the canal-the
Oic fruit of four centuries ofo hope and human effort, the colossal
t1bui0e of our people to the commerce of the world-will standr
we can well believe that it will survive the pyramids.
1k22


i




"GWVERNMENTS WHICH HAVE RECOGNIZED TH
INDEPENDENCE OF PANAMA."
Extract from remarks of Hon. ALBERT J. HOPKINS of Illinois, in dailo
Congressional Record, February 8, 1904.
If the President had violated any principle of international law in
recognizing the Republic of Panama, those who would have been first heard
to 0cmnpilin would have been our commercial and industrial rivals, the
nations who are competitors with us for trade in the Orient. Have any of
the great commercial nations of the world filed any protest against the early
action taken by the United States in the recognition of this new Republic?
I affirm, Mr. President, not one. On the contrary, I hold in my hand, and
will insert in my remarks, a list of the governments which have recognized
the Republic of Panama, and the dates of such recognition.
List of governments which have recognized the independence
of Panama-the dates of recognition.
United States...................................November 13, 1903
France.   *.......................................ovember 16, 1903
China........................................... November  26, 1903
Austria-Hungary................................. November 27, 1903
Germany........................................November  30, 1903
Denmark...........................................December 3, 1903
Russia....................D.......................December 6, 1903
Sweden and Norway......Dcm...   7....   1...........   Deembr, 1903
Belgium...........................................  December   9, 1903
Nicaragua................................... December 15, 1903
Peru.~...D..........  *.............................December  19, 1903
Cuba.......................................December 23, 1903
Great Britain...................................December 24, 1903
Italy........................................... December  24, 1903
Japan........................................ December 28, 1903
Costa Rlca......D.........................ecember 28, 1903
Switzerland...........................December 28, 1903
Guatemala......................................January  14, 1904
Netherlands...................................... January 19, 1904
I find that within less than sixty-five days fromi the date of the declaration of independence on the part of the Republic of Panama twenty governments have recognized the independence of this little fRepublic. This lis
of countries, Mr. President, which have followed so quickly the example of
the United States is the best refutation which it is possible to make of those
charges made on this floor by Senators who are opposed to the ratificatios
of tihe treaty between the two Republics, the United States and Panama;
that -the President has violated international law by the alleged precipitate
manner in which he has recognised the  epublic of Panama. *  *   *
During the progress of the debate on this question a number of Senators
animadverted with a good deal of severity on the conduct of the Presiden
in having the Nashville at Colon and other war vessels and marines at
Panama and Colon for the protection of American interests and to maintain
a free route across the Isthmus. They have Insinuated rather than made
the direct charge that our Government, through the President and his Cabinet officers, connived at the uprising in Panama and are responsible for the
breaking away of that province from the Colombian Government.   I sha
said, Mr. President, they have made no direct charge to this effect. No
self-respecting Senator could well do that in view of the statement made by
the President on that point, which I desire to again call to the attention Of
the Senate. In his message sent to the Senate January 4, in speaking upon
this identical point, he said:
I hesitate to refer to the Injurious insinuations which have been made
of complicity by this Government in the revolutionary movement in Panama. They are as destitute of foundation as they are of propriety. The
only excuse for my mentioning them is the fear lest unthinking personfs
might mistake for acquiescence the silence of mere self-respect. I thinls
proper to say, therefore, that no one connected with this Government had
any part in preparing, inciting, or encouraging the late revolution on the
Isthnus of Panama, and that save from the reports of our military and
navalg officers, given above, no one connected with this Government had anY
previous kaowledge of the revolution except such as was accessible to any
person of ordinary intelligence who read the newspapers and kept up
current acquaintance with public affairs.
Our honored Secretary of State, Mr. Hay, in his response to General
Reyes on January 5 was equally as emphatic. He said:
Equally so is the insinuation that any action of this Government prior
to the revolution in Panama was the result of complicity with the plan0
of tie revolutionists. The Government sees fit to make these denials, an"
makes them finally. 
I, for oae, Mr. President, am willing that that Issue, If issue It has 0
be, be made here and before the people of this country. Whatever ns!y be
charged against   r President, it never can bie successfully intinmated thO'
he is not a thoroughly honest and truth.ful man. Nor can it be ch(arge
that hee h:aS not  e coQurage of his convictlens. Had our Government in al
manr connived with te revolutionists to create a rebellion in Panama an
cause the separation of that province from Colombia, President Rooseot
is the man who has the courage to state that and justify his acts eior


his countrymen.
k'23




"A CANAL ACROSS THE ISTHMUSK."tHE DREAM
OF THE AGES."'
rFtiract from remarks of Hon. ISHELBY Mi. CULLOM of Illinois,
in daily Congressional Record, April 27, 1904.
PANAXA OCAiAL.
The diplomatic complications which had for years stood in the
wav of an interoceanic canal connecting the two great oceans have
been finally disposed of during the last two Republican Administrations, and the practical work of constructing the canal is about
to commence under the Administration of President Roosevelt.
A canal across the Isthmus connecting the Atlantic with the Pacific
Ocean, in the interest of the commerce of the world, has been the
dream of the ages. For almost three-quarters of a century an interoceanic canal has been a policy of every party and almost of every
Administration.
In 1850 the Clayton-Bulwer treaty was entered into between the
United States and Great Britain. That treaty contemplated that
the canal should be constructed by private capital under the joint
protectorate of the two governments; its effect was to prevent the
United States itself from  constructing the canal and having exclusive jurisdiction over it. A few years after the conclusion of the
Clayton-Bulwer treaty it was found that that treaty stood almost
as an effectual barrier against the construction of any canal across
the Isthmus, and hence it was that almost every Administration, both
Republican and Democratic, sought, but in vain, to secure its peaceful abrogation.
It remained for the McKinley-Roosevelt Administrations, through
the diplomacy of Secretary I-ay, to successfully negotiate the HayPauncefote treaty with Great Britain, by which the Clayton-Bulwer
treaty was finally superseded and the Unlited States given authority
to build a canal and assume the responsibility of safeguarding and
regulating its neutral use by all the nations of the world on terms of
equality.
The way was thus opened for the negotiation of a treaty with
one of the two Governments which had sovereignty over the two
available canal routes, Colombia or Nicaragua. Congress expressed
its preference for the Panama route, A treaty with Colombia was
ratified, and rejected by Colombia. The State of Panama seceded
and regained her independence, and is now a complete and independent Republic. A new treaty was negotiated with Panama, much
superior to the one which Colombia had rejected, which gives to
the United States every concession which we desire or could ask
for the construction of a canal. The property of the Panama Canal
Company has been purchased. That purchase has been finally consulmmated, the necessary money appropriated, a commission for the
actIal construction of the canal appointed, and is now in Panama
making the preliminary investigation.
Unless something unforeseen occurs, within a few years the canal
Will be constructed and in operation.
Mr. President, the discussion in this Senatte of the Colombian
treaty and afterwards of the Panama treaty, together with all the
faets in relation to the Panama revolution, its success and recog1ition by our Government, are so recent and fresh in our minds
tiat I Shall not discuss it further than to say that the President in
dealing with Colombia has pursued an honest, straightforward, and
petn course, as he does in all things.
This is only another illustration of the success of the Roosevelt
Administration in bringing to a triumphant termination a question
which other Presidents had failed to settle.
Thas under the short three years of President Roosevelt's Admintlration more progressX has been made toward the construction of
l54 interoceanic canal than in three-quarters of a century of our
Preko    history.
k-24
*:


t




SPlECIALt ACTS JUSTIFY OUR CONDUCT IN DEABL
ING WITH BOTH COLOMBIA AND PANAMA."
Extracts from remarks of Hon. ALEXANDE R S. CLAY of Georgia, in daih,
Congre   onal Record, February 9, 1904,
Mr. PRESIDENT: I shall not contend that, under the general ruls of
International law regulating the conduct of nations in dealing with each
other, we can Justify o.ur; treatment of Colombia. There are, howe:ver,
special facts and circumstances connected with this transaction that wiin
take it out of the general rules of international law, and to some cxtlr
justify our conduct in dealing with both Colombia and Panama. This ca;e
must be tried by every fact and circumstance connected with it. I prtpose to consider this controversy from three different standpoints.
First, our treaty rights with Colombia; second, Colombia's conduct;in
rejecting the Hay-Herran treaty; third, the importance, not only to oi,
commerce, but to the commerce of the world, necessarily involved ina tl,
construction of an isthmian canal. These propositions I will consier:i
their order, and each proposition will demonstrate to thoughtful men tbli
our Government was not bound by the general rules of international law
in, recognizing the Independence of Panama. In 1846 our Government eni
tered into a solemn treaty with New Granada; Colombia succeeded to tlie
New Granadian Government, and that treaty sets forth fully the duties asnd
obligations we owed to Colombia, as well as the duties and obligatioen.
Colombia undertook to discharge to us. * * Colombia guaranteed to the
United States that'the right of way or transit, across the Isthmus of Panama,
upon any modes of communication that may now exist or thati may be hereafter constructed, shall be open and free to the Government and citizens of
the United States, and for the transportation of any article of produce, manufactures, or merchandise of lawful commerce belonging to the citizens oi
the United States. *  *   *
Colombia also guaranteed in this treaty that the transit across the
Isthmus leading from Panama to Colon should always be kept open; that
at no time should -the; passage leading from one ocean to the other be
stopped by war or any other means. *   *
In return for the benefits which we were to receive by virtue of thi,
treaty, our Government guaranteed positively and efficaciously to Colorabia
the perfect neutrality of the entire Isthmus  * *  the United States guaranteed.the rights of sovereignty and property which Colombia has and possesses over said territory.
What does the treaty mean? Hlow is it to be c6nstrued? What is a
reasonable construction?  Colombia entered into 'a solemn obligation to
keep the transit free and unobstructed. Nothing would excuse Colombia
from violating this feature of the treaty. If she failed to do so, clearly wc
would have the right to go there and force Colombia to perform her part
of this contract.
Now. inasmuch as Colombia obligated herself by: a solemn treaty, cati
she in any way obstruct, hinder, embarrass, or delay the passage across the
Isthmus?, To state the ease more plainly: If Panama seceded and resolved
to separate from the mother country, and organized an independent govenment, and Colombia resolved at the same time to subdue the revolution and
to force Panama to return to the Colombian Government and: submit t
its sovereignty, what would this mean?  Colombia would at once enter into
Iwar with Panama, Panama would resist, and then the Isthmus would be.
come the te theatre of war.
If such civil war interfered with travel and commerce across the
Isthmus, under our treaty, in my judgment, we would have the undoubted
right to say to Colombia: You dedicated this Isthmus to peace, you are
under a solemn promise to keep open and free to transit the route across
the Isthmus leading from ocean to ocean, and you shall not violate tha'
solemn treaty. It Leas clearlt contemplated 'by the terms of the treaty tift
passage across the Isthmus should not be obstructed, by any means whetre V
It was intended, so long as this treaty lasted, that this transit shoude
always be free and open, and that no war, either foreign or domestic, should
ever at any time interfere with such transit. We would have no righte
however, to interfere with the internal quarrels existing between Colothubi
and Panr:ama, unless such quarrels were likely to interfere with travel ant
commerce from ocean to ocean across the Isthmus....If we sent sctour war ships there simply to keep the transit open eal
protect the lives and property of American citizens in the event of a re'0'
ltion, then swe did not violate the treaty of18!6, *  * 1  *
I am unwilling to say that the President In his message has not,tol
us the truth so far as the Executive branch of the Government is concerned
Hie may be impulsive, but I do not believe that he Is dishonest. I d: 5l't
believe  the  American people have ever elevated a dishonest in -e 
the high office he now occupies. To make such a charge would reflect oi
the intelligence, the wisdom, and honesty of the wisdom, and honAmerican people. I -;te
for the treaty becausQe 0  this issue I find in favor of the intcgrity 
oon country and in favor of the honesty of an American Preside t,  I ll
be a sad day for this Republic if any man Is ever elevated to the hig
ofPresident who is dshofiest.




k-25


j




I
I
i
I
f
i
4
i
1,WHEN COLOMBIA LOST THE SOVEREIGNTY SHE
LOST THE OWNERSHIP."
w:ft7uact8 from remarks of Hon. JOHN C. SPOONERi of Wisconsint, in daily
Congressional Record, February 26, 1904.
IINTERNATIONAL LAW J'USTIFIED TUE PRESIDENT IN
ENTERING INTO RELATIONS WITH THE REPUBLIC OF PANAMA NOVEMBER 6.
TIbe President's action in recognizing on the 6th of November the indiip dence of the Republic of Panama by entering into relations with it,~as not only within his power, but was strictly in accord:nce with the
litd principles of international law upon the subject. On thait date there
[: longer remained-and none can challenge this statement-a, vestige of
[ldiombian authority or power on the Isthmus of Panama. The Colombian
troops which had been sent there had sailed away. The governing power
f the Isthmus Nas a provisional committee, which had created a. temporary
overnoment under the name of the Republic of Panama. It was a republic
lJich, it is true, had no constitution. It had no laws of its ow'n enactment,
oexcept so far as the governing body, supported by the people. changed exis:ing laws. It was supported by the people. It enforced law. It protected
lfe and property.
It had definite boundaries. It ruled within the ancient limits of the
lfrmer State of Panamia, with none within its boundary to dispute its au-s.t,:rity. It bad a supreme court. Its mnuicipalities -were in operation. It
1a'l an army. It had nearly as much of a navy as Colombia had. It had
the Pa'illa, one of the strongest of the naval ships of Colombia. It had a
nAg, and on that date it was the only power on the Isthimus. to which the
U[Tited States or its citizens or any other government could look for prol:ction, or with which it could deal. It was the sole s sovereignty there, and
its sovereignty was complete and undisputed.
Mr. President, I emphatically assert that when the President found
that Government established, with no strunggle for its conquest in pro grctss
or threatened, exercising sovereignty and jurisdiction  througi'iaout the
Ithm us, enforcing law, protecting propert —inndpendent in fact —it was his
miltt and his duty to recognize it promptly, and the facts do not warrant any
_n an in this country in impeaching either his wisdom or honestc ol puorpse
o doing. *  *   *
THE E].ECT OF RECOGNITION AND INDEPENDENCE.
The moment the Republic of Panama became Inrdependent, that meoieat, from the international standpoint, it was as completely free froma
Colom.bia as if from the beginning of time the Republic of Panama had
ixiuted as an independent nation. Colombia became absolutely a foreign
State to the Republic of Panama. Its people are no longer under the CO —,
1mbian constitution, and what legal result follows from that? The Senator
roaI Alabama argues, and upon my life I can not comprehend such a conaltion, that Colombia still owns the canal concessico and the railway c,1 -esieon, and that neither can be transferred to the Government of the UnitedI
States without her consent. That is an impossibility, Mr. President, in law.
The moment the Republic of Panama became sovereign and Independet it became the successor in sovereignty and proprietorship to Colombia
f the railway concession and the canal concession as fully as If she had
riginally granted them. They are all on territory now a part. of her dosine, Being independent, Colombia has no more sovereignty over her terrlry or ownership within her boundaries than I have over the thome of the
Senator from ~Michigan [Mr. ALG:ER] in Detroit. It mus't be atdmitted, of
0urse, that so long as Colombia, maintained her sovereignty over the
sNhthmus she retained her rights of property'; 1no longer.  All money sahe
eceived by way of rentals from the railroad concession and for extensions
01 time to the canal company before Panama became Independent are herm.
fiey were rentals and money received by the proprietor during the pro-!aittorship. The ownership by operaton ocf law has changed. It inheres
a ihe sovereignty, and when Colombia lost the sovereignty she lost the
~hnership, and the nation which acquired the sovereignty acquired the
~vnership. *  *
IIt is not to be expected tha.t the harsh voife of criticism, will be hushed
'Ctil next Novemlner. That need not and will not disturb the President,
He may take to himself with e xultant pride the sate ssiaurvrice that this
rinu,?, h  iExec'utssve achiveemnent which he has wrouloht for this country,
*r he South American    rre tBicS, a3nd for the aworld tEill be the chief gloryi
t hi",Adi'nitistratiobn and the ern driln foundationi of tis fame; and it will
/tt be forgotten by history in praise of him thOat out of his prompt and wisre
tiaori there has also come, with out breach of national tradition, violation
1Il natlonal or international law, a new repblitc, asomrding to a long-sufferPeople    the Isthmus opportunity of life, liberty, and preoperity. For
1t 1 ie deserves and will receive not only the plaudits of thoughtful men
urw own day, but the grateful remembrance of posterity.




Sig. 14




"PANAMA.0"-a"ANOTHER idLORIOU                       COHAPTER I
THE HISTORY OF THE REPUBLIC."
ttfracas from remarks of Hon.w GEORGE F,. HOAR of Massachusettts,
daily Congressional Record, February ~2, 1904.
I  tiitrodued a fesoilution on the 9th of December eallihng Upon t
President to give such lformation as he might deem      not inconsistet
with the public interest as to what had been done Ii deatling with Colo
bia and the new Republic of Panama so far as it affecter the canal treat
Mr. President, there was a very peculiar condition of things at th
time. A large portion of the press of the country, iDemocratic and wh
is Called "independent," were making very bitter charges against t
President. The echoes of those charges were beginning to reach us fro
foreign countries. They charged the President with instigating the revy
loutin  in Panama. *  *    These charges were, in my judgment, foul ar
Infamous. *    *  Now, I pointed out In what I said, atfirming with a
my might, that I did not believe a word of them   myself; that it the
weft to be contradicted by a history of the transactions we ought
have the whole of it.
Mr. President, Whether I was right or wrong, the President and tI
Secretary of State seem    to have agreed with    me.   They   sent I
first a few days after I spoke, and again still later, two messages gisvi
all the history. of the transaction and of our relations with Colotnb
and New Granada, arguing all these questions very powerfully, so f
as they are matters of argument, and accompanied by emphatic and:
dignant denials of all the Imputations to which I referred, expressin
at the time my own belief that they were false.     *  *
By the language of the treaty of 1846 the United States guarante
"positively" and "efficaciously" to New Granadaas special compensation for the right of way and the advantage and favo!
of the treaty, the perfect neutrality of the before-rmentioned Isthmus, wit
the view that the transit from one sea to the other may not be interrupt
or embarrassed at any future time.     * *
fBut, Mr. President, this obligation is, in my Jadgment, limited 1
all rlson and In all justice by the absolute necessity of the case to t
protection and guaranty of that sovereignty only when It is so exert(
that it gives no occasion or justification for a lawful resistance by t
people over which it is exercised.  We did not mean to bind ourselv
in violation not  yo  f of our own Declaration of Independence but of tJ
doctrine we had been preaching from the beginning to all South America
republics that an oppressed people had no right to overthrow a tyrannic
government, and that if they undertook to do it our power was to
pledged to their suibjugation. *  *  *
I hold, therefore, Mr. President, that although, In rmy opinion, t
treaty of 1846, as expounded again and again since, required us to pr
tect the sovereignty of Colombia against all assailants, either foreign 
domestic, and of course bound us to respect it ourselves, yet that th
only boud us to guarantee and protect It it   its lawful exrceise. When
became intolerable, so that its subjects had a fair right of revolution
principles which we ourselves have declared are the fundanrental a
natural rights of every people, we were no longer bound by the obllgatio
And the question whether that condition of things had arisen was ne0e
sartly and solely fbr the rEecutive.
Now, Mr. President, if this doctrine be sound, and I do not thl
It likely to be questioned, what follows?  The moment Panama declao
her independence and had established it, of which the President is th
sole Judge, our obligation to defend the sovereignty over that Isthmu
which had come down from    New Grapada to Colombia, came down fr<
Colombia to Panama. She had the right to claim the advatage as 
had succeeded to the obligation of the treaty of 1846, just a  she 
have the fight to claim thet right and succeed to the obligation of t
treaty of this year it the Hay-Herran treaty with Colombia had b
ratified on otides and e had accomplishe hd ccomplished her revolution aft
war'ds.  *  *  *
All the facts, all the history affecting that transaction were w~
known to the President when be acted. There were reasons for proml
hste growing out of our relations with that Isthmus and by reason
the necessity of having some power with whom we could deal in the pea0
Ing negotiations relating to the Isthmian canal.
The iPreideat has declared, as I did, that having once treated it
worthy of attention it Is better to make his denial conmplete and absoll
as he has done, and enable the American people and foreign critics
the mena who are to write history to judge of the transaction by the who
story and not by a* hast narrative which begins on the gd of NoveYola
I shall, Mr. President, cordially and gladly support this treaty,
said, when I spok    the other day, it was myv hope and expectation 
do. I sallm si   e fte exltation of the whole' p!ple when in lh 'e
fiuture, the rostruco  of the cantl shall be beg"un by the only powaer I
arth 'competent to complte it, and another tlrious chapter in the List~
of the world will be also andther  Torious  hate in the history of 
RepubOlic.
*^f::r~: zO~  glJg' —;.~~~~


I






i


'THE SOLEMN CONT:RAT TO SAFEGUARD PFO4                        HE
ISTHMUS.'
gEtiract from message of PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT, published in
daily Congressional Record, Dec. 7, 1903.
When the Congress directed that we should take the Panama
route under treaty with Colombia, the essence of the condition, of
course, referred not to the Government which controlled that route,
but to the route itself; to the territory across which the route lay,
not to the name which for the moinent the territory bore on the
nmap. The purpose of the law was to autri       the the Preident to
imake a treaty  with the power in actual control of the Isthmus of
Panatfa. Thii purpose has been fulfilled.
In the year 18146 this Government entered into a treaty with New
Granada, the predecessor upon the Isthmus of the Republic of
Colombia and of the present Republic of Panama, by which treaty
it was provided that the Government and citizens of the United
States should always have free and open right of way or transit
across the Isthmus of Panama by any modes of communication
that might be constructed, while in tulrn our Government guaranteed the perfect neutrality of the above-mentioned Isthmus with
the view that the free transit from the one to the other sea mikht
not be interrupted or embarrassed. The treaty vested in the Unifed
States a sutbstantial property right carved out of the rights of
sovereignty and property which New Granada then had and possesseld over the said territory. The name of New Granada has
pissed away and its territory has been divided. Its successor, the
Government of Colom}bia, has ceased to own any property in the
Istlhmus. A new Republic, that of Panama, which was at one time
a sovereign state, and at another time a mere department of the
successive confederations known as  New Granada and Colombia,
has now succeeded to the rights which first one and then the other
formerly exercised over the Isthmlus. But as long as the Isthmus
endures, the mere geographical fact of its existence, and the
peculiar interest therein which is required by our position, perpetuaute the solemn contract which binds the holders of the territory
to respect our right to freedom of transit across it, and binds us
in return to safeguard for the Isthmu.s and the world the exercise
of tha   t inestimable pniveiege. * *  *
Last spring, under the act above referred to, a treaty concluded
between the representatives of the Republic of Colombia and of
)our Gtvernment was ratified by thle Senate.    This treaty was
enltered into at the urlgent solicitation of the people of Colombia
and after a body of experts appointed by our Government especially
to go into the matter of the routes across the Isthmus had prolnonced untanimously in favor of the Panama route. In drawing
np this treaty every concession was made to the people and to the
Government of Colombia. *       *  *  Nevertheless the Government
of Colollmia not mlerely repudiated the treaty, but repudiated it
is such a manner as to tmai e it eviadent by the time the Colombian
Congress adjourned that not the scantiest hope remained of ever
gettilng a satisfactory treatv from them. * *' 
Imrlmediately after the adjournment of the Congress a revolution broke out in Panama. The people of Panama had long been
discontented with the Republic of Colombia, and they had been
kept quiet, onlv by the prospect of the conclusion of the treaty,
lhich was to lthem  a matter of vital concern, When it became
evident that the treaty was hopelessly lost, the people of Panama
rose literally as one man. Not a shot was fired by a single man;n the Isth;:us in the interest of the Colombian Government. Not
a li  as lost tn the accomXplishment of the revolutionr  The Colomblia troops stationed on the Isthmus, who had long been unpaid,
maue common cause with the people of Panama, and witt astonMOisi unanimity the new Republic was started.   The duty of the
l ni td SCtattes i hn the premises was clear. In strict accordance with
ithe riprincples laid down by Secretaries Class and Seward in the
Ofifait documents above quoted, the United States gave totice that
it would permit ithe lnding of no expeditionary force, the artrival
of which would mean chaos and destruction along the line of the.'ilroad and of the proposed canal, and an interruption of transit
-as qa inevitable eow'seaqsm~.




"HIS   OVNMENT DID NOT UNDERTAKE TO SET
ON FOOT TIE REVOLUTION."
ertracts from remarks of Hion C. WV. FAIRBANKS of Indiana, in ti1it
Congressional Record, Fe bruary 2, 1904.
For centuries attention has been directed to securing a waterway acroe>
the Isthmus of Panama.
in all the centuries the most significant and decisive step was take
by the Congress of the United States less than two years ago when it enacto
into law the bill presented by the very able and distinguished senior Sea
ator from  Wisconsin. *  *   *
The act authorized the President to secure the property of the Ne~
Panama       l Company and to obtain the requisite concessio ns from Cro
lombia for a canal across the Isthmus. Being thus clothed with the author
ity of law, the President proceeded with the utmost dispatch to negotiate
treaty with Colombia for the necessary property rights and franchises ft
the construction and maintenance of the Panama Canal. He also agrcf
with the New Panama Canal Company upon terms for the purchase of it
property which were to be effective when the requisite concessions were ob
talied from Colombia.
The treaty with Colombia in due time was ratified and transmitted t
the Colombian Government for its approval. *  *   *  As early as May 
1903, our minister informed the Secretary of State that"Private discussion, which perhaps more clearly reflects the real situa
tion, is to the effect that the price is inadequate; that a much greater sun
of money can be obtained, and that the United States can be obligated t(
Pguarantee the sovereignty of Colombia ports outside the Department of Pan
ania against the invasion or seizure by foreign enemies. The one grea
determining point, however, is the belief that the price can be greatly aug
niented.On October 31 follow'ing he was obliged to report:
"Congress adjourned to-day. No action has been taken upon the las
report concerning the canal   Therefore, nothing more than the vote o
August 12 rejecting treaty done. *   *"
Panama saw in the machinations at Bogota, the possible ruin of he
long-deferred hope. *  *  They took counsel of their own future welfare
they laid carefully their plans; there was no division of sentiment amine
them, and on the 3d of November, 1903, they moved as by a common im
pulse.  They took possession of their own country, and set up their ow
independence. They were guilty of no barbarities; they avoided bloodshed
and treated their oppressors with rare forbearance and kindly consideration
For nearly sixty years the United States has had very important righti
across the Isthmus which were derived from the treaty of 1S846. By artict
35 of the convention New Granada (Colombia) stipulated —. "The Government of New Granada guarantees to the Government of thl
United States that the right of way or transit across the Isthmus of Panams
upon" any modes of commrunicatlon that now exist, or that may be hereafti
constructed, shall be open and free to the Government and citizens of th
United States; and for the transportation of any articles of produce, manau
factures, or merchandise, of lawful commerce, belonging to the citizens o
the United States."
It further provided that"In order to secure to themselves the tranquil and constant enjoyrment o
these advantages, and as an especial compensation for the said advantages
and for the favors they have acquired by the fourth, fifth, and sixth article
of this treaty, the United States guarantee positively and efflcaciousl to
New Granada,- by the present stipulation, the perfect neutrality of the beI
fore mentioned Isthmus, with the view that the free transit from the one t
the other sea may not be interrupted or embarrassed in any future tim
while this treaty exists; and in consequence, the United States also guar
antee, in the same manner, the rights of sovereignty and property whid1
New Granada has and possesses over the said territory. *  *  *
Accepted interpretation. of the meaning and effect of fhis guarant
is that the United States did not undertake to maintain such soverepigt
except against foreign powers; that she did not engage to protect her agains
overthrow by dometi convulsion. *     *
The President was in the very nature of the situation clothed wit
large discretionary power, and it seems to me, in view of all that occurred
and in the light of all that has followed, no one can say that he did no
act well within the limits of sound executive discretion.
IHe informed Congress in his last annual message that his instruction
were in accordance with our rights as interpreted by formef Admin:itr'
tigins. "The duty of the United States in the premises," he says, "wa
clear. In strict accordance with the principles laid down by Secretaries
Cass and Seward     * *  *  the United States gave notice that it swou
permit the landing of no expeditionary force, the arrival of which woutl
mean choas and destruction along the line of the railroad and of the proI
posed canal, and an interruption of transit as an inevitable consequence."
* We ma e thte positive assurance of the President of the United S:it
that this Government did not undertake to set on foot the revolution. lieTh
was nothing occult, or sinister," to employ the language of the oppositio'
lfi the course of ftie 'Government. It had no advices with respect to ti!
contemplated uprising which were not possessed by every observer of passin
events. In hs message of the 4th of the 4th of last month the President says:
"I think proper to say, thinkefore, that no o copropernected withto say,, therefore, that no one connected with this GO"
ernment had any part in preparing, inciting, or encouraging the late rev'
lUtioi on the Isthmus of Panama, and that save from the reports of Ou
military and naval officers, given above, no one connected with this Qa'
eminent had any previous knowledge of the revolution, except such a8' WSe
accessible to any person of ordinary i ntelligence who read the newspap5er
and kept up a current acquaintance with publie affairs."


k-29I




"PANAMA.X
"THE   INSINUATIONS       OF   COMPLICITY ARE         DESTITUTE OF FOUNDATION."
Extract from mnessage of PRESIIsENT ROOSEVELT in daily Congressional Record, Jan. 4 1904.
To the Senate and IHouse of Representatives:!
I lay before the Congress for its information a statement of my
action up to this tinme in executing the act entitled "An act to
provide for the construction of a canal connecting the waters of
the Atlantic and Pacific oceans," approved June 28, 1902.
By the said act the President was authorized to secure for the
United States the property of the Panama Canal Company and
the perpetual control of a strip 6 miles wide across the Isthmus of
Painama. It was further provided that "should the President be
unable to obtain for the United States a satisfactory title to the
property of the New Panama Canal Company and the control of
the necessary territory of the Republic of Colombia * * * within
a reasonable tinme and upon reasonable terms, then the President"
should endeavor to provide for a canal by the Nicaragua route.  * 
When this Government submitted to Colombia the Hay-Herran
treaty three things were, therefore, already settled. One was that the
canal should be built. * * Second. While it was settled that the
canal should be built without unnecessary or improper delay, it was
no less clearly shown to be our purpose to deal not merely in a spirit
f justice but in a spirit of generosity with the people through whose
hand we might build it.  *  *  *   Third.  Finally the Congress
(leflnitely settled lwhere the canal was to be built. It was provided
that a treaty should be made for building the canal across the Isthaus of Panama; and if, after reasonable time, it proved impossible
to secure such treaty, that then we should go to Nicaragua. * * *
When in August it began to appear probable that the Colombian
legislature would not ratify the treaty, it became incumbent upon me
to consider well what the situation was and to be ready to advise the
Congress as to what were the various alternatives of action open to.us There were several possibilities. One was that Colombia would
at the last moment see the unwisdom of her position. * * A second
flternative was that by the close of the session on the last day of
October, without the ratification of the treaty by Colombia and
aithout any steps taken by Panama, the American Congress on
assermbling early in November would be confronted with a situation
in which there had been a failure to come to terms as to building
the canal along the Panama route, and yet there had not been a
lapse of a reasonable time —using the word reasonable in any proper
sense-such as would justify the Administration going to the Nicaragua route. *  *  A third possibility was that the people of the
Isthmus, who had   formerly  constituted an  independent state,
lild who until recently were united to Colombia only by a loose tie
Of federal relationship, might take the protection of their own vital
lterests into their own hands, reassert their former rights, declare
their independence upon just grounds, and establish a government
Wroapetent and willing to do its share in this great work for civilizati01,  This third possibility is what actually occurred. Everyone
knew that it was a possibility, but it was not until towards the end
Of October that it appeared   to be an    imminent probability.
Alth)ugh the Administration, of course, had special means of knowl'dge, no such means were necessary in order to appreciate the posSilitly, and toward the end of the likelihood, of such a revolutionary,
OUtbreak and of its success. It was a matter of common notoriety.
QlotItions from the daily papers could be indefinitely multiplied
to shlow this state of affairs.  * *
I~-s 3f-~


1                                                      9




In view of althese facts:I     d the Navy Department to issue
instructions such as would insure our having ships within easy
reach of theI Isth s in the event of need arising. *   *  *On
November 9 when, the Colombian Congress having adjourned, it was
evident that the outbreak was imminent, and when it was announced
that both sds were making ready forces whose meeting would
mean bloodshed and disorder, the Colombian troops having been
embarked on vessels, the following instructions were sent to the
commanders of the Boston, Nashville, and Dixie:
"Maintain  free and uninterrupted transit.- If interruption is
threatened by armed force, occupy the line of railroad. Prevent
landing of any armed force with hostile intent, either Government
or insurgent at any point within 50 miles of Panama. Govern.
ment force reported approaching the Isthmus in vessels. Prevent
their landing if, in your judgment, the landing would precipitate
a conflict."
These orders were delivered in pursuance of the policy on which
our Government had repeatedly acted. * * *
On November 3 Commander Hubbard responded to the abovequoted telegram of November 2, 1903, saying that before the telegram had been received 400 Colombian troops from Cartagena had
landed at Colon; that there had been no revolution on the Isthmus,
but that the situation was most critical if the revolutionary leaders
should act. On this same date the Associated Press in Washington received a bulletin stating that a revolutionary outbreak had
occurred. When this was brought to the attention of the Assistant
Secretary of State, Mr. Loomis, he prepared the following cablegram to the consul-general at Panama and the consul at Colon:
"Uprising on Isthmus reported. Keep Department promptly and
fully informed."
Before this telegram  was sent, however, one was received from
Consul Malmros at Colon, running as follows:
"Revolution imminent. Government force on the Isthmus about
500 men. Their official promised to support revolution. Fire department, Panama, 441, are well organized and favor revolution,
Government vessel Cartagena, with about 400 men, arrived early
to-day with new   commander-in-chief, Tobar. Was not expected
until November 10.    Tobar's arrival is not probable to stop
revolution."
This cablegram was received at 235 p. m., and at 3.40 p. m. Mr.
Loomis sent the telegram which he had alrread  preprd to both
Panama and Colon.     Apparently, however, the consul-general at
Panama had not received the information embodied in the Associated Press bulletin, upon which the Assistant Secretary of State
based his dispatch; for his answer was that there was no uprisixng
although the situation was critical, this answer being received at
8.15 p.. Immediately afterwards he sent another dispatch, which
was received at 9;.50 p. m., saying that the uprising had occurred,
and had been successful, with no bloodshed. The Colombian gi-lboat Bogota next day began to shell the city of Panama, with tlhe
resultof killing one Chinaman. The consul-general was directed
to notify her to stop firing. Meanwhile, on November 4, Comman:dlr
Hubbard notifed the Department that he had landed a force to
protet the lives and property of American citizens against the
threats of the Colombian soldiery.
Before any step-whatever had been taken by the United States
troops to  tore order, the commander of the newly landed Colombian troops had indulged in wanton and violent threats against
American   itienwhich created serious apprehension.   As (1ommander Hubbard reported in his letter of November.5 this oficer
and   s; troops practically  egan war against the United States,
and only the forbearance and coolness of our officers and me,


preved bloodshed. * * * * 
k-30 —2
I




This plain offlcial account of the occurrences of November 4, shows
at, instead of there having been too much prevision by the Amen-.n Government for the maintenance of order and the protection
f life and property on the Isthmuas, the orders for the movement
f the American war ships had been too long delayed; so long,
fact, that there were but forty-two marines and sailors availle to land and protect the lives of American men and women.
t tcs only the coolness and gallantry with which this little band
f men wearing the American uniform faced ten times their numer of armed foes, bent on carrying out the atrocious threat of
e Colombian commander, that prevented a murderous catastrophe.
t Panama, when the revolution broke out, there was no American
an-of-war and no American troops or sailors. At Colon, Comander Hubbard acted with entire impartiality towards both sides,
reventing any movement, whether by the Colombians or the Panaans, which would tend to produce bloodshed. On November 9
prevented a body of the revolutionists from landing at Colon.
hroughout he behaved in the most creditable manner. * * *
I hesitate to refer to the injurious insinuations which have been
ade of complicity by this Government in the revolutionary moveert in Panama. They are as destitute of foundation as of proriety. The only, excuse for my mentioning them is the fear lest
nthinking persons might mistake for acquiescence the silence of
ere self-respect. I think proper to say, therefore, that no one
nnected iwith this Government had any part in preparing, inciting,
r encouraging the late revolution on the Isthmus of Panama, and
1t save from the reports of our military and naval o0tcers given
bove, no one connected with this Government had any previous
olnedge of the revolution except such as was accessible to any
rson of ordinary intelligence who read the newspapers and kept
a current acquaintance with public afairs.
By the unanimous action of its people, without the firing of a
ot-with a unanimity hardly before recorded in any similar case
the people of Panama declared themselves an independent Reblic. Their recognition by this Government was based upon a
ate of facts in no way dependent for its justification upon our
cion in ordinary cases. I have not denied, nor do I wish to deny,
ther the validity or the propriety of the general rule that a new
ate should not be recognized as independent till it has shown its
lility to maintain Its independence. This rule is derived from
e principle of non-intervention, and as a corollary of that prinpie has generally been observed by the United States* But, like
be principle from which it is deduced, the rule is subject to exptions,; and there are in my opinion clear and imperative reaMs why a departure from it was justified and even required in
be present instance.  These reasons embrace, first, our treaty
ghts; second, our national interests and safety; and, third, the
terests of collective civilization. * * *
That our position as the mandatary of civilization has been by
0 means misconceived is shown by the promptitude with which
l powers have, one after another, followed our lead In recognizI Panama as an independent State. Our action in recognizing
e new Republic has been followed hy like recognition on the
rt of France, Germany, Denmark, Russia, Sweden and Norway,
learagua, Peru, China, Cuba, Great Britain, Italy, Costa Riea,
'Pan, and Austria-Hungary.
k-o0   3


I




"THE PANAMA CANAL."
ztta,   froma-m address by Hfoi,   lisur RBoot, at Chicago, Pebruary,,
190, printged in Congressional Record, June ~1., 1904.
ReluctaXatly, and with at sense that It was unjust exaction, the United
States agreed to pay $10,000,000 down, and $250,000 per annum   in per.
petuity —substantially the entire amount exacted by Colombia. We were
not going into the enterprise to make money, but for the common go,:dL
We did not expect the revenues of the canal to repay its cost, or to receive
any benefit from it, except, that which Colombia would share to a higher
degree than ourselves. * * *
The concessions made in the treaty to the Government of Colombia, how.
ever,.seetmed merely to Inspire in that Government a belief that there wN:V,
no limit to the exactions which they could successfully impose. They de
omanded a further $10,000,000 from the Panama Canal Company, and upn,
its refusal they rejected the treaty.
This rejection was a substantial refusal to permit the canal to be built,
It appears that the refusal contemplated not merely further exactions freos
us, but the spoliation of the canal company. That company's current fra'achise was limited by its terms to to the 31st day of October, 1904. There was
an extension for six years granted by the President and for which the conm.
pany had paid 5,000,000 francs., These patriots proposed to declare the
extension void and the franchise ended and to confiscate the $40,000,00i}j!
worth of property of the company and take from the United States for
themselves, in payment for it, the $40,000,000 we had agreed to pay nth
company. *    *  *
By becoming a party to this scherme we might Indeed have looked forwaril
to the time when, the appetite of Colombia being satisfied at the expense o;
the unfortunate stockholders of the French company, we could proceed with
the work, but such a course was too repugnant to the sense of justice thIt
obtains in every civilized community to be for a moment contemplatol.
We had yielded to the last point beyond reason and justice in agreeing L0
pay for a privilege to which we we were already entitled, and we could nt
with self-respect submit to be mulected further. We could negotiate no faur
ther. Rejection of the treaty was practically a veto of the canal, *.  *
These were the conditions existing when the revolution of November:
happened.  To an understanding of that revolution a knowledge of the cha.,
nater and history of Panama is essential. Some uninformed persons ha-e
assumed that It t was merely a number of individual citizens of Colombia
living in the neighborhood of the proposed canal who combined to take po:asession of that part of Colombiaan territory and set up a government of ti:
own. No conception could be more inadequate. The sovereign State if
Panama was ran organized civil society possessed of a territory exten(:i:.:
over 400 miles in length, from Costa Rica on the west to the mainland (,,
Soith America on the east. It had a population of over 300,000. * *
The people of Panama were the real owners of the canal route.; It wva
because their fathers dwelt in the land, because tihey won their tndepe!n
dence from Spain, because they organized a civil society there, that it was
not to be treated ars one of the waste places of the earth. They owned tl:at
part of the earth's surface just as much as the State of New York oweo
the Erie Canal. When the sovereign State of Panama confederated iHs':f
with the other States of Colombia under the constitution of 1863 It did not
part with its title or its substantial rights, but constituted the Federal Government its trustee for the o representation of ts rights In all foreign relations and Imposed upon that Government the duty of protecting them.  ihe
trustee was faithless to its trust: it repudiated its obligations without the
consent of the true owner; it seized by the strong hand of military powar
the rights which it was bound to protect: Colombia itself broke the bhn';i
of union and destroyed the compact upon which alone depended its right to
represent the owner of the soil.
The question for the United States was, Shall we take this treaty froe
the true' owner or.shall wem ake It frrom the faithless trustee, and for otlh:
purpose a third time pirt back the yoke of foreign domination upon the neck
of Panama, by the request of that Government which bas tried to play 1n '
ward us the part of the highwayman?      There was no provision of o'`
treaty with Colombia. which required us to answer to her call, for our guaranty of her sovereignty in that treaty relates solely to foreign aggres i n
There was no rule of International law which required us to recognize tl"
wrongs of Panama or the justice of her cause, for international law 4~:
out c'onern itself with tbe internal affairs of state. Blt I pt it to ft'
conscience of the American people, who are passing Judgment upon tihe a'
tion of thieir goverment, whether the decision of our President and Secretary of State and Senate was not a righteous decision.
y all the principles of justice among men and among nations that h 't
have learned frotm 6ur fathers, and all peoples and all governments sho!i
maintain, the revolutionists in Panama were right, the people of PanWnee,
were entitled to be free again, the Isthmus was theirs, and they were of'
titled. to govern it; and It would have been a shameful thing for the -1'
eminent of the United States to return them again to servitude.
It is hardly necessary to say now that our Government had no pns is
devising, fuomenting, or bringing about the revolution on the Isthmus Ui
Panama. President Roosevelt said in his message to Congress of Januai'y
4, f1904:
"i hesitate to refer to the injurious Insinuations which have been ma'e Pf
complicity by this Government in the revolutionary movement in Paoanso1
They are as destitute ofi foundation as of propriety. The only excuse for mP
mentioning them  is the fear lest unthinking persons might mistake io
acquiescence:the silence of mere self-rspect. I think proper to say, them'
fored with this Government had any part in preparlr,;
ncitiang, or encouraging the late revolution on the Isthmus of Panatma, i
that, save from the reports of our navTl and military officers, given ab0l
no one connec ted with this Government had any previous knowledge of t
revolution except such as was accessible to any persono of ordinary lirt
gon     o e who read the  ewspapers and kept up a current acquaiatance
public taffaIrs.     '..
The   people of theUnited States, without distinction of party, will give to
that' statensent their unquestioning belief.
k31


I






C~uba
Lo




"RECIPROCAL COMMERCIAL CONVENTION BETWEEN
THE UNITED STATES AND CUBA."
Printed in daily Con qressional Record, December 14, 1908.
ARTICLE 1. During the term of this convention all alrticles of merchandise being the product of the soil or industry of the United States
which, are now Imported into the Republic of Cuba free of duty and all
articles of merchandise being the product of the soil or industry of the i
Republic of Cuba which are now Imported into the United States free eo
duty shall continue to be so admitted by the respective countries free of
duty.
AnRTICLE IT. During the term of this convention all articles of merchandise not included in the foregoing Article I and being the product of the
soil or Industry of the Republic of Cuba imported into the United States
shall be admitted at a reduction of 20 per cent. of the rates of duty therCe
on as provided by the tariff act of the United States approved July 24, 1897,
or. as may be provided by any tariff law of the United States subsequently
enacted.
ARTICtLE III. During the term of this convention all articles of merchandise not included In the foregoing Article I and not hereinafter eniumerated being the product of the soil or industry of the United States imported into the Republic of Cuba shall be admitted at a reduction of 20
per cent. of the rates of duty thereon as now provided or as may hereafter
he provided In the customs tariff of said Republic of Cuba.
AaTrTcLE IV. During the term of this convention the following articles
of merchandise as enumerated and described In the existing customs tariff
of the Republic of Cuba being the product of the soil or industry of the
United States Imported into Cuba shall be admitted at the following respective reductions of the rates of duty thereon as now provided or as may
hereafter be provided In the customs tariff of the Republic of Cuba:
SchIedule, A. To be admitted at a reduction of 25 per cent.:    Machinery and apparatus of copper or its alloys or machines and apparatus
In which copper or its alloys enter as the component of chief value; cast
iron, wrought iron, steel, and manufactures thereof; articles of crystal and
glass, except window glass; ships and water-borne vetsels of all kinds, of
iron or steel; whiskies nd btrandies: ftsh, salted, pickled, smoked or marinated '  fish or shellfish, preserved in ol6 or otherwise in tins: articles of
pottery or earthenware now elassified under paragrapha 21 and 22 of the
customs tariff of the Republic of Cuba.
Schedule B. To be admitted at a reduction of 30 per cent:    Butter;
flour of wheat; corn; flour of corn or corn meal; chemical and pharmacettecal products and simple drugs; malt liquors in bottles; non-alcohei'te
beverages: cider; mineral waters; colors and dyes; window glass; cots
plate or partly made up articles of hemp, flax, pita, jute, henequen, ramie,
and other vegetable fibres now classified under the paragraphs of group t
Class V, of the customs tariff of the Republic of Cuba; musical instruments; writing and printing paper, except for newspapers; cotton   and
manufactures thereof, except knitted goods (see Schedule C); all articles
of cutlery; boots, shoes, and slippers, now classified under paragraphs 197
and 198 of the customs tariff of the Republic of Cuba; gold and silver
plated ware; drawings, photographs, engravings, lithographs, chromolithographs, oleographs, etc., printed from stone, zinc, aluminium or other ma,
terial, used as labels, flaps, bands, and wrappers for tobacco or other pur'poses, and all the other papers (except paper for cigarettes, and except ng
maps and charts), pasteboard and manufactures thereof, now classifed
under paragraphs 157 to 164, inclusive, of the customs tariff of the aepublic -of Cuba; copemon or ordinary soaps, now classified under paragraph
105, letters A and B, of the customs tariff of the Republic of Cuba - vegetables, pickled or preserved in any manner; all wines, except those eow
classified under paragraph 279 (a) of the customs tariff of the Republic
of Cuba.
Schedule C. To be admitted aat a reduction of 40 per cent:    Manufactures of cotton,. knitted, and all manufactures of cotton not included iI
the preceding schedules: cheese: fruits, preserved; paper pulp; perfumnry
and essences: articles of pottery aMl earthenware now classified   mlde
paragraph 20 of the customs tariff of the Republic of Cuba; porcelainl
soaps, other than common, now classified under paragraph 105 of the cu?
toms tariff of the Republic of Cuba; umbrellas and parasols; dextrine at"
glueose; watches; w an manufolactures thereof; silk and manufactures thereof; sk and manur
thereof; rice; ric; attle.
AaTVC1lr XT. The present convention shall be ratified by the aPPr~&
pilate authorities of the respective countries, and the ratifications shell be
excihanged at Washington, D. C., United States of America, as soon as as
be before the 31.st day of January, 1903, and the convention shall go into
effect on the tenth day after the exchange of ratifications, and shall cea"
tinue in force for the termi of five years from, date of going Into effecrt a5,d
froam 'year to year thereafter until the expiration of one year from t1e
day when either of the contracting parties shall give notice to the other of
its Intentlen to terminate the same.




1-1


I




'THE  TREATY:    SECURES:      O   T THE  UNITED STATES
ADVANTAGES AS GREAT AS THOSE GIVEN CUBA."
tessage of PRESIDENT ROOSE VIEL2T printed in daily Congressional Record, November 10,.1903.
o the Senate and  1ouwse of Tepresentativesz
I have convened the Congress that it may consider the legislajin necessary to put into operation the commercial treaty with
uba, wlich was ratified Iy the Senate at its last session, and subequently by the Cuban Governmtent. I deem such legislation deanded not only by our interest but by our honor. We can not
itt propriety abandon the course upon which we have so wisely
rbarked. When the acceptance of the Platt amendment was reired from Cuba by the action of the Congress of the United
tates, this Government thereby definitely committed itself to the
olicy of treating Cuba as occupying a unique position as regards
lis country. It was provided that when the island became a free
d ind ependent Republic she should stand in such close relations
ith us as in certain respects to come within our system of interational policy; and it necessarily followed that she must also to
certain degree become included within the lines of our economic
lsicy. Situated as Cuba is, it would not be possible for this counyto permit the strategic abuse of the island by any foreign miliry power. It is for this reason that certain limitations have been
mposed upon her financial policy, and that naval stations have been
needed by her to the United States, The negotiations as to the
etails of these naval stations are on.the eve of completion. They
re so situated as to prevent any idea that there is the intention
ver to use them against Cuba, or otherwise than for the protecon of Cuba from the assaults of foreign foes, and for the better
afeguarding of American interests in the waters south of us.
These interests have been largely increased by the consequences
f the war with Spain and will be still further increased by the
uilding of the isthmian canal.   They are both military   and
lnomic. The granting to us by Cuba of the naval stations above
uded to is of the utmost importance from a military standpoint,
nd is proof of the good faith with which Cuba is treating us, Cuba
as made great progress since her independence was established.
he has advanced steadily in every way. She already stands high
mong her sister republics of the New World. She is loyally observg her obligations to us; and she is entitled to like treatment by us.
The treaty submitted to you for approval secures to the United
tates economic advantages as great as those given to Cuba. Not
a American interest is sacrificed. By the treaty a large Cuban
rket is secured to our producers. It is a market which lies at
r doors, which is already large, which is capable of great expanion, and which is especially important to the development of our
port trade. It would be indeed shortsighted for us to refuse to
ae advantage of such an opportunity, and to force Cuba into makg arrangements with other countries to our disadvantage.
This reciprocity treaty stands by itself. It is demanded on conderations of broad national policy as well as by our economic
trest. It will do harm to no industry. It will benefit many
dtustries. It is in the interest of our people as a whole, both beause of its importance from the broad standpoint of international
olicy, and becamse economically it intimately concerns us to develop
id secure the rich Cuban market for our farmers, artisans, merhants, and manufacturers. Finally, it is desirable as a guaranty
f the good faith of our Nation towards her young sister Republic
the south, whose welfare must ever be closely bound with ours.
e gave her liberty. We are knit to her by t:he memories of the
odd and the courage of our soldiers who fought for her in war; by
h memories of the wisdomr and integrity of our administrators
h0 served her in peace and lwho started her so well on the difficult
ath of self-government. We must help her onward and upward;
nd in helping her we shall help ourselves.
he foregoing considerations caused the negotiation of the treaty
th Cuba and its ratification by the Senate. They now with equal
r support the legislation by the Congress which by the terms
the treaty- is necessary to render it operative. A failure to enact
eh legislation would come perilously near a repudiation of the
iged faith of the Nation.
t transmit herewith the treaty, as amended by the Senate and
fied by the Cuban Government.
]m wHoiIus, November 10, 1903.         TtEODORB RtOOSEVBT.
1-2


I




"R^ECIaPROCITYa WITHM CUBA-                 IT IS;    A BILL To
CARRY OUT A NATIONAL PLEDGE?.
Extract from debate in daily Congressional Record, November 16, 1903.
Mr. DALZELL. Mr. Speaker, Just a single word in explanation of th,
rule that has been read at the Clerk's desk. If adopted, it will bring btFo
the House for immediate consideration the bill reported by the WVays ar
Means Committee on Friday last, 'a bill to carry out the provisions of tl,
treaty Between the Republic of Cuba and the United States.
Mr. WILLIAMS cf Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, this Is perhaps one of tth
most drastic rules that have ever been Introduced into the House of Repreo
sentatives.
Now, the minority has wanted to offer an amendment to this bill, an
I want to explain the character of that armendmeDt, so as to show how un
just this bill is.:Mr. Dr ARMOND. I am glad to be able to say, I am proud to be abl
to proclaim, that I believe there is not a solitary vote on this side of tlh
House that will be cast for this rule; that not a solitary gentleman upos
this sIde of the House present and able to vote will refrain from the exerct
of that high duty arid that great Democratic pleasure of voting against th
adoption of the.rule.
Mr. DALZELL. This is a bill to carry out a convention heretofore en
tered into by the President and the Senate with the Republic of Cuba. It i
a bitt to carry out a national pledge, to stand by the national honor, an
you gentlemen know that we must take that treaty as it is made or we nmu
leave It. An amendment to this bill would necessitate a new conventio
between the Republic of Cuba and the United States.
I w   as coming to the point of showing the hypocritical attitude of th
Democacy as o tohis rmeasiure. They claim that they are all for it, and ye
insist upon an opportunity to offer an. amendment which if pla;ced upon it
in the words of their own0i representativ es, will wcork the defeat of the hil
[Applause on the Republican side.]
tMr. GROSVrENOR. Mr. Speaker, the direct, immediate question pendlin
here is not a question of what tbhis House may or might do upon an iude
pendent bill involving the points that have been suggested by the gentleina
from Mississippi [Mr. WtLLL4aS] and the gentleman from Missouri [Mr
DE ARMOND]. The question here is a question concrete in form and easil
understood by every Member of the House, and about which and the resultt
growing out of which no man here is ignorant.
The attitude of the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. DE AaaMOND] is thi
put In a simple formr: Here is a matter that we are all in favor of. "W~
Democrats,"says that gentleman, in effect, "we want to pass this bill
we are; in favor of it because it has something of reciprocity I int, a
furthermore, we want to pass it because it reduces the tariff, possibly, con
tingently upon certain products of a foreign country coming into this conn
try. But. we want to mutilate this bill so that no Republican can vote fO
it and maintain his position toward the protective principles of the party, Rn
then we want to. pass it afterwards..What I am aiming at i:s this: The gentleman from. Missouri says thl
he is willing to defeat this treaty. I can understand that, Mr. Speaker, pers
fectly well. The gentleman and his party owe nothing to the promise, anl
the attempt to fulfill that promise, implied, If not expressed, made by tb
Administration in this country.  I am  willing to take upon myself ti!
burden of stating that no duty was ever more seriously incumbent up01
the. President of the United States than was made incumbent upon t0
present President of the United States by the action of his predecessor all
by the concurrent history of the period in which this question grew, UP
The. duty devolved upon him to try to carry into effect the treaty whick
we are to vote upon next Thursday. Bravely and truly he has discharge
the great duty of his office..Mr. P~rxs. Mr. Chairman,. the question of reciprocity with Cuba ca5i
before the country some  three years ago. It was, as is well known, i,
accordance with the desires and designs of the late President Mcirinle
that relations of this kind should be entered into between the United tates
and the infant Republic. On the other side of the House, we were t
we are to  t-day, that they were in favor of the treaty; that, fguraiel1
speaking^, t;.hey were crying for the treaty and desired to have it pass'ed, a6M
still they were for this amendment, which they believed then and ~5
they stateto-day will kill the bill and kll the proposition that carme sfw"
the Howuse


"1-3




I
1
f
i
i
i
I
I
t
t
u
I
iij
11
a
O
il
I
I',
h
v
ill
t
t
8
v
t
I
i,
t
I
I
i
t
I
I
I
I
I
ii
I
I


I


"WE OUGHT TO HAVE ALL OF CUBA'S MARKET."
Wxtract from remarks of Hon. CHAUiNCEY Ml. DEPEI      W, of New
York, in daily Congressional Record, Dec. 14, 1903.
('tba imports,'$60,000,000 worth of goods anniually, of which we
dlI i20,000,,i0. They nare all article.S /.se either produace or man,'ticrt.ure, and i'e ha, e a ferry to the isltld as against the Atldtie
Oceta to omr competitors. With the corIesX.ions in our fa'tvor hby
ihis treaty we ought to have all of Cuba's marker. It will yrow
iith the population and in time will amount to /200,t00,000.
Now, as to fears of the trouble which will come to the beet-sugar
iterests of the country and cane-sugar interests of Hawaii and
Lnuisiana, the testimony shows that the profits upon beet sugar at
iresent are such that 20 per cent. can be yielded in the tariff and
tlie beet-sugar interests still receive a very handsome profit.
'The beet-sugar men testified that if uncertainty is removed and
they can be secure by this legislation for five years they will feel
iuch safer and more ready to increase their factories and areas
of planting than they would if uncertaint;y and agitation continue.
l'is testimony also shows that there is anl increase of consumption
n the United States proportionate to the increase in population,
tnounting in the neighborhood of 6 per cent. per year. The beet
and cane sugar production so far have not grown any more rapidly,
or hardly appreciably more rapidly, than the consumption of sugar
in the United States.
The speech of the Senator of Louisiana developed what I suspected before, what every man who has studied this question knows
-that there is to be an internal fight to the death in this country
between the beet and cane interests and between the beet and
beet interests in different sections.  The Senator says that cane
will produce one ton of sugar to the acre in Louisiana. The beets
I1 Michigan and States which are farther north, laving a more
htumid. climate, and with less sunshine, will produce about three tons
to the acre, while in the favored land of my friend from Colorado
ceets yield up to 10 tons per acre, and the same can be done in
California.
With this difference of three times the production per acre of
saccharine matter in certain sections of the country over others,
ihlen production becomes greater than the demand, then Colorado,
Nevada, Utah, 'and California will make for Kansas, Michigan, and
Xew York sugar producing difficult. The future will regulate itself.
1'he fact that 3-ton-per-acre land can prosper while other territories
produce 10 tons to the acre bears remarkable testimony to the
profits of the business.
We are in the habit in this country of predicting trouble. It
is almost a national peculiarity. We are a highly imaginative, a
sensitive and apprehensive people.  Two-thirds die before their
time from worrying about what never happens. IWhen Hawaii was
aout to be annexed, the wail which went up in both Houses of
Congress, which shook the rafters of the sugar planters' houses in
Louisiana, and sent terror through the beet-sugar States, is only
equlled by the peril which so scares my distinguished friends now.
When Porto Rico received a reduction to 15 per cent. of the
rates of the Dingley tariff we all remember that you.could cut
the blue in this Chamber with a knife. Even those of us who were
on the Committee on Pacific Islands and Porto Rico, who had extniieed the question and knew by the facts that these dreadful
tsasters could not happen, had our apprehensions aroused. Now
Porto iico's products are admitted free and the ghost has vanished.
So will it be with Cuba. To be sure there is, as stated by the
15enttor from  Louisiana, land entough in Cuba lpossibly to raise
1ll, tse sugar that we could consume in the United States, and!ay!be all the sugar enough for the world. So there is land enough
tl thie United States to raise all the wheat, if devoted enttrely to
tha, or all the corn, or oats, or barley. But in the science of prometiona )peoples and neighborhoods adjust themselves to conditions,
Ild if there i more sugar land than it is profitable to cultivate,
lat same land will be devoted to the raising of other products
^thic are more profitable, and for which there is a better demand.




"OU:  R FTURE RELATIONS W1TH CUBA."
Etract fraom  remarks of Hlon   HENRY CABOT LODGE, oj
Matsachusetts, in daily Congressional Record, Nov. ~3, 1903.
Joint resolution (S. R. 15) inviting Cuba to become a State of thb
American Union.
Whereas, the Reptblic of Cuba is desirous of securing comme
cat union with the United States; and
Whereas, the best comrnerinal union can be secured by and throg
political union by means of the admission of the Republic of Cub
as a sovereign State in the Union: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, etc., That the Republic of Cuba be, and is hereby, in
vited to become a State of the United States, upon terms of equali
with all other States of the Union.
Mr. LonoE. Mr. President, I regretted very much the introdul
tion of this resolution, but I do not regret the discussion that ha
arisen this morning, for I think the resolution has made some su
discussion absolutely and immediately necessary.
The question what this resolution means is to us of no conse
quence. The important thing is the impression that it has mad
or is likely to make upon the people of Cuba. Here in Congres
it is well understood that to read a bill twice and refer it to
committee means very little. It often represents nothing but a
individual opinion  nd it very frequently does not represent eve
the opinion of thi Senator or Representative who introduces it.
The enormous gap that exists between the introduction of a bi
and its enactment into legislation is not well understood even i
this country and among our own people. We know that the intr
duetion of a resolution or a bill is not a very serious thing, an
that it is very far removed from any affirnmative action. But i
our Owin tpple do not understand the distinction, how can we expe
the peope of Cuba to understand it? To them the resolution i
troduced by the Senator from Nevada appears a very serious matte
I think iit ought to be said that in the opinion of some of us,
Iefst that resolution does not in the least represent the opiiai
of the Government or of the people of the United States. O:elatios with Cuba, as the map shows, must always be of a peulia
kind. The importance of Cuba to the United States was set for
many years ago by     ohn Quincy Adams and Henry Clay. 
has been the polic of all succeeding Adainistrations to watch car
fuly over all that concerns Cuba. We have made the world unde
stand that our relations to that island must always be differen
from  our relations to any other territory lying outside of ou
boundaries.
Mr. Preside   t whent   in the fullness of time it became necessar
to cut tile knot of the difficlties that had there arisen, when t]
flag of Spain went back across the Atlantic, whither, I hope,
the process of the years all European flags will return, the dete
ainatlon of our future relations with Cuba, at last free and in
pnen  t, became a very immediate and important subject of tf
policyof the United States, We determined those relations b
what is known ss the Platt amendment, in my judgment one 0
the most statesmanlike and far-seeing pieces of legislation ee
plaed by Congs un the statute book.
My -own dsire, and I beleve it is the desire shared by the grea
mass of the Amnerican people, was that under these relations tl
Island of Cuba should have a prosperous, successful, and independe
Government.
i thi, Mr.t: President, it is our duty to offer to the Cubans eve:enouragement. They have done wel. We want them to contial
to proser and be sucesful. It seem    to me that every reflectin
manx  ist:p  e that the conditions will never arise under whic
we should   ai      to extend our control of Cuba any furte
We Are gade to be her protector   gainst the other nations f th
world, but; we prefe tht she   should be an indepndent State, wi
her. own Goermet carried on by her own peopl f




1-5


I




"RECIPROCAL TRADE ARRANGEMENTS                     EtWEtN
THE UNITED STATES AND CUBA
PROPER     AND RIGHT."
Extracts from the remarks of Hon. JAMES B. McCREARY, of
Kentucky, in daily Congressional Record, Dec. 11, 1908.
Mr. PamIDENT: The relations of Cuba to the United States are
unusual and unprecedented. No nation in the world occupies such
relations to the United States as Cuba. When war was declared
by the United States against Spain we proclaimed to the world
that our object was to give to Cuba a stable and independent government. We have complied with that promise fully and literally,
and in all the history of our country there is no more glorious
record than that we rescued Cuba from tyranny, gave to her people
freedom  and popular government, and made Cuba a free and
independent republic.  We must not hesitate now in the grand
work so auspiciously commenced; we must not mar our nation's
splendid record of justice and magnanimity, but we must, as far
as possible, gie to Cuba industrial prospeity and commercial progress.
I voted for the Cuban reciprocity treaty last March, which contained a proviso that it should not take effect until it was approved
by the Congress, and the enactment of the pending bill is necessary
to give effect to the treaty providing for reciprocvl trade between
tur country and Cuba. The bill comes to the Senate after having
received the almost unanimous inldorsement of the House of Representatives —335 votes having been cast for it and only,1 against it.
Reciprocal trade arrangements between the United States and.
Cuba seem proper and right when we consider the contiguity of
Cuba to;our country, her political relations to our country, and
that we should sell her a great portion of what she buys, and buy
fromi her nearly all she has to sell; besides, the bill under consideration reduces the burdens now pressing s) heavily on both
Amuericans and Cubans, and enables Americans to buy Cuban
products at more reasonable prices, avd enables Cubans to buy
American products at more satisfactory prices.
Reciprocity with Cuba caused our export trade t tthat island to
nearly double in 1893, when the reciprocity treaty rwas in force, and
it also caused our imports from that island to advance very much.
We have a right to expect the same good results when the new
treaty takes effect.
I may also add in this connection that when the Platt amendnment was made a law by our Congress the Cubans accepted it in
good faith and by our request put it in their constitution. That
ametndment seems to prevent Cuba from making commercial treaties
lith other nations, and under these circumstances our Government
should, in every proper way, grant trade relief to Cuba.
If we want the trade of a people we must deal fairly with them,
tind buy their products if we desire them to buy our products. If
there is a tariff wall in the way and we can lower it or make a
treach in it, we should do so, and agree, as is provided in the pending bill, that if Cuba will allow the products of the United States
to enter her ports at from 20 to 40 per cent. reduction, we will
allow the products of Cuba to enter our ports at a reduction of
0 per cent. of our existing duty. *  *      The President in a
srecial message declares "the treaty submitted for approval secures
e United States advantaes as great as those given to Cuba.
o't an American  nter est is sacriieed.  *  * *  It is demanded
n considerations of broad nartional policy as well as our economic
ierests. It will do harm  to no Industry. It will benefit many
Idstrie^."
1-          




"RECIPROCITY WITH' CUBA." —   "        THE TREATY WIll
HELP US AND PROVE OF BENE::IT TO CUBA."
Extract from remarks of Hon. SHELBY M. CULLOM, of Illinois,
in daiy Congressional Record, December 7, 1903.
The important thing which we obtain by this treaty is the
great market for our products, including farm and manufacture.,The Cuban market will, with prosperity, continue to increase. Conservative authorities estimate that the Cuban imports will amount
to $100,000,000 in a few years. If these estimates are nearly corect, if our manufacturers, our producers succeed in obtaining the
Cuban market, the concessions in revenue on the part of the United
States will be amply repaid.
From  the investigation and examination of our situation with
reference to Cuba, our trade relations, etc., which I have been able
to make, I state without hesitation that this treaty is the most
advantageous one to the United States which we could ask
or expect, considering our small 20 per cent. concession.
Reciprocity with Cuba will not be a new experiment. In 1892,
uider the reciprocity section of the McKinley Act, we entered into
a reciprocity treaty with Cuba which remained in force for three
years. It resulted in; the greatest benefit both to Cuba and the
United States. After that treaty went into effect our exports to
Cuba increased almost 70 per cent.
The subject of reciprocity with Cuba has been before Congress
for three years or more. Earnestly supported by that great protectionist the late President McKinley, it has been no less ardently
alvocated by his successor, President Roosevelt.
While it is true that the United States desire to and will expand
our trade and increase our markets by the ratification of this
treaty, yet, s has been submitted to us, when the acceptance of
the Platt amendment was required from Cuba by the action of the
Congress of the United States this Government thereby definitely
committed itself to the policy of treating Cuba as occupying a
unique position as regards this country.
No other nation in the world  stands in the close relation to us
that the Republic of Cuba does. She has consented to our imposing
limitations upon some of her powers as an independent government.
She has eased to us coaling stations on her island. Under these
circustances we can afford to and will treat Cuba as we treat
no other nation in the world. If by the ratification of this treat
we give to Cuba permanent prosperity I am sure it will meet ith
the unanimous approval of the people of the United States. The
treaty will not injure in the least the United States or any
porton of our people, but on the contrary will help us, and!
at the same time it will prove of benefit to Cuba.
In the language of President Roosevelt:
We gave Cuba liberty; we are knit to her by the memories
of the blood and the courage of our soldiers who fought for
her in war; by the memories of the wisdom         and integrity
of our:adinistrators who served her in peace and whO
srted her so well on the dimicult path of self-government.
We must help her onward and upward, and in helping her
we shall help ourselves. A failure to enact this legislatiof
would  cotme: perilously near a repudiatio   n  of the pledgee
faith of t     nation.
1-7: 0 00::::~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


I




i.
I
11
I
I
II
I
F
T
F
a
1(
8
il
d
0
v
el
1
i,
v
I
I
li
I
II
I
II
Ii
II
II
I


'THE UNITED STATES WILL HAVE THE ADVANTAGE
OVER EVERY OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD."
teracts from remarks of Elon. ALEX. S. CLAY of Georgie, in
daily Congreassional Record, Dec. 1/,J: 90.h.
Mr. PRESIDENT: I shall occupy only a few minuLes of the tine
if tle Senate in giving my reasons for voting in favor of tins
neasure. * * There are certain things in the United States that we
pill be able to send into Cuba cheaper by 20 per cent. thanx any
theer countries in the world will be able to send the sam e articles
ilto Cuba. Now, what will be the result? The result will be sitply
hat the United States will have the advantage over every other.ountry in the world in regard to the sale of th ose articles. There
ire certain things that we can get into Cuba at a reduction of
3i per cent. and certain things at a reduction of i4 per cent. Now,
what will be the result? In my opinion the result will be simply
this: Instead of the United States to-d;y selling to Cuba. $26i,000,00
worth of its agricultural products and of its manufactured products we will sell then in all probability $35,000,000 or  0,,000,000
worth per year.
I am frank to confess that I have not been able to understand
why it is that Cuba only buys from us about $26,000,C000 per year,
when she buys from other countries about $37,000,000 per rear.
But, Mr. President, it is something worthy of investigation,
worthy of our attention, and I took the trouble to see what constitute the $37,000,000 sold to Cuba by Germany, by IFrancae, by
England, and other countries.  What did I' fiad?   Le t us see.
these figures are partly taken from a speech made by lion. W. G.
BRANTLEY, a Member of Congress from my State, a painstaking
and accurate Member, and a comparison with the Treasury Department will show them absolutely to be correct.
For the year 1901 Cuba's imports amounted to $65,050,14.1  Now,
let us see how much of this trade the United States received.
She received $28,078,702, leaving the balance of $37,00t}00 that
went to other countries.
Now, let us see what constituted that $37,000,000. i find that
in 1901 Cuba bought $6,000,000 of cotton goods. flow much oiet f it
did she buy from the United States? Four and one-half per cent.
of it.
Again, Mr. President, I find that Cuba bought nearly $700,000
worth of woolen goods. How much did the United States supply?
Only $22,000. She bought $,000,000 of vegetable:. How     much
did we supply?  One hundred and seventy-oone thousaed dollars.
She bought $2,700,000 of wines, and we supplied her only $39,000.
She bought $2,589,000 worth of oil, and we sold her only $713,000,
when we ought to have supplied her every gallon that she bought.
Again, Cuba bought $1,053,000 worth of cbemicals and drugs.
How much did we sell her?    We sold her $422,000 worth. She
bought $8,000,000 worth of cattle, and we supplied her with only
11,994,000 worth.  She bought $1,638,000 worth of manafactured
leather, and we ought to have sold it all to her. Of this amount
we sold her $4.05,000 worth. She bought $3,335,000 worth of rice,
and we sold her $3,000 worth. * *     I do not believe this legaitlation will in any way affect the sugar interests,
Now let us see. We know that the United States is the greatest
sugar-consuming country except Great Britain in the world.
MB. TELLER.. Per capita.
Mr. CLAY. I mean per capita. If I renmen:her correctly, the
United States consumes nearly one-third of all the sugar produced
in the world.
NoW, suppose every single pound of sugar produced in Cuba
should come to the United States. We produce he:re, if I remember
correctly, about 233,000 tons of beet sugar. We produced also
Ihis year, I understand, about 261,000 tons of canee sugar in the
United States, leaving out Porto Rico and the Sandwich Islands.
W ith those two combined, we produced about 900,000 tows of sugar,
about one-third of what we consume in the United St-ates  Bring
all the sugar that Cuba produces here and then we will have to
send to other countries and get 700,000 tons in orde to meet the
Eonsumption of our own people.
Mr. President, now mark you it is estimated that it willtae at
least five or six years to enable Cuba to produce 2,000)000 tons of
SUgar, and by the time Cuba produces enough su2gar to supply
th demands of the United States this treaty will be at an end,
the five years will have passed.




"THE VITRUS-FRUIT INDUSTRVY
Eutrats from remarks of Ho. ai   RO. 0.. PERKIS, of    otaif
in daily Congrssion   Record, Die. 15, 190J.
There is another point where the   onen      f the reaty thi
that we may be injured by Cuban compeition if our tariff is 
duced   This point is the citrus-fruit industry. The objections
he treaty on this score might be met with a chapter like the famo
one dealig with snakes in Ireland. At least, if there are oran
and lemons in Cub, there are so few as to cut no figure whatee
in a question of competition with California and Florida citr
fruits. Cuba never has raised enough oranges and lemons to devel
an export trade, in spite of all the advantages of proximity
a vast market,  favorable climate, cheap land, and low freights.
Less than three-tenths of 1 per cent. of the soil under cultivati
is devoted to citrus culture, and it is unlikely that under the mo
favorable conditions there would be an increase in production tha
would enable Cuba to become a rival of American growers. Citru
fruit growing is what may be called a scientific occupation, r
quiring for good results great intelligence, great care, botanic
kowledge as far as relates to trees of this character, and grea
patience and industry. The ordinary native planters of Cuba pos
sess none of these qualities, and in consequence turn to horticultur
pursuits, in which nature does all the work required except tha
of the crudest kind, which is within the scope of native ability.
In consequence, although there is a vast market for citrus fruit
/n the United States, "the cultivation of oranges," as the Cuta
census states, "has been generally abandoned since the developmen
of oranges cultivated in Florida and California."
The value of the imports of Cuban oranges from 1898 to 190
Inclusive, were, by years, as follows: $1,991, $622, $474, $,7, $560
The value of lemons ranged from $4 to $545 per year. The dut
on oranges is now 71 per cent. ad valorel, and a reduction of 2
per cent. would still leave a protection of 57 per cent. ad  alore
for the American grower, and it is:hard to see how this sligh
reduction, leaving as it does the Cuban grower at a great disad
vantage, can stimulate is intellectual faculties and imbue him wit
the energy that will be necessary if he is to raise citrus fruits fo
the American markets. It is. impossible for him to compete wit
the American grower now, for he has no oranges to sell, and i
would be five or six years after the expiration Of the life of thi
treaty before groves planted this year could be brought into bear
ag, and this fact, if there were nothing else, would act as a deter
rnt to planting citrus-fruit trees.
Qutick rturns are what the Cuban desires. He is cnstitutionally
a"erse to waiting a year or two for things to grow. In consequence
sugar and tobacco will recehie his attention in the future as in the
pat, and th FPlorida and California growers wil be left in posse
ion o otr citrus-fruit market.
If there is any doubt as to the effect of reciprocal reductions in
tariff on the exports of the United States to Cuba, one has only
to trn back t the time of James G. Blaine, whose theories of
reciprocity were adopted by the Republican party and by it developed in practice. Reciprocity with Cuba under the terms of
the tariff act of 1891 went into effect in September of that year
and it wil hbe interesting and instuctive to see what was the effect
upon our export trade with Cuba. These exports from        1$888 to
1:90 averagd about $11,000,000 per year. In 1891, which had only
four months of reciprocity, they Increased to over $12,000,000.
The yar 199, however, when reciprocity was in full swing, showed
eorts amounting to      17 5f,7, and the net year, 189      to
57 98. Our exports to Ouba doubled in two years.
n view of these fiures and those of succeeding years which told
anoter story, there is no wonder that the Republican national cof
vetion of 186 condemned the repeal of the reciprocity maures
by the Dmocratie party as a national calamity.  And n the platorm which was then ftramed it demanded the renewal and extension
of the riproci ty provisio  of the tariff act which embodied Mr.
e,  s     ideas on tht subject. "Protection and reciprocity' said
the platform, "are twin masures of Republican p     and g hand
in hand. Demodratilrl has       kles   tck down both and both
must be reestblishe."


-9




U
r


I


The Philippines
and the
Pacific
M




"THE PROBLEM IN THE PHILIPPINES."
Eixtract from address of Secretary WM. H. TAFT, printed in daily cy.
gressional Record, April 28, 1904.
[Address of Secretary of War W. H. Taft on the Philippines before t
Chamber of Commerce of New York City, April 21, 1904.]
The people of the United States have under their guidance and cottrost
in the Philippines an archipelago of 3,000 islands, the population of;w'hic
is about 7,600,000 souls. Of these, 7,000,000 are Christians and 60i),00
are Moros or other pagan tribes. The problem of the government of the
Moros is the same as that which England has7 had in the government, o
the Straits Settlements or India. The government of 7,000,000 Christia
Fillpinos is a very different problem, and one which it lhas fallen to tu
lot of the United States only to solve.
The attitude of the American people toward the Philippine i';slad
may be described as follows: There are those who think that the Declara.
tion of Independence forbids our accepting or mai nitaining sovereignty ove
them; there are those who, without respect to the Declaration of I u.i
pendence, believe that colonial possessions are likely to lead to expen>s
and corruption and demoralization, have little faith in the solution of 'he
problem  by teaching the Filipino the art of self-government, and are
anxious to get rid of the islands before they have done any harm to 1}
United States,
Then there are those who hold that fate brought these islands unale
our control, and that thus a duty was imposed upon us of seeing to i
that they were not injured by the transfer. As a friend of the Filipitt
it is my anxious desire to enlarge that class of Americans who have a c ir
interest in the welfare of the islands, and who believe that the United Stati
can have no higher duty or function than to assist the people of the island
to prosperity and a political development which shall enable them to secrs
to themselves the enjoyment of civil liberty. (Applause.]  *  *  *
In the Philippine Islands 90 per cent. of the inhabitants are still ii
a hopeless condition of ignorance and utterly unable intelligently to wivld
political control. They are subject, like the waves of the sea, to the i-,
fluenee of the moment, and any educated Filipino can carry them in one
direction or the other, as the opportunity and the occasion shall permil
The 10 per cent. of the Filipinos who are educated have shown by whil
they have done and what they have aspired to and what they are tha!
they may be taught the lesson of self-government and that their felos
by further education may be brought up to a condition of diserimilnatiig
intelligence which shall enable them to make a forceful and useful publi
opinion. But that It will take more than one generation to accomplish
this every one familiar with the facts must concede.  * * *
My -own i dea of the mission of the United States in the Philippine Is
lands is that it ought to be maintained and encouraged by the people o
the United States without regard to the question of its cost or its proftable results from a commercial or financial point of view. *  *  *
The islands themselves give every indication of furnishing revenie
sufficient to carry out the plans which the United States may properly
carry out in the material and intellectual development of the country ami
its people. * * *
The Philippine Archipelago is the only country in which can be pmrduced. what is known as "manila hemp" or what is called in the Spaniti
language "abaca."  This is 'a.fiber of enormous strength, of from 6 to 1
feet in length, which is stripped fromn the stalk of a banana plante-n
the ordinary banana plant, but a plant of the same family which does not
produce fruit. Many parts of the islands are very rich in cocoanuts. The
cocoanut grove is planted 200 to a hectare; tfhat is, 200 to 2i, acre". It
takes four or five years for cocoanut trees to bear. After that they will bear
for 100 years, and a low price a tree for annual rent is $40 gold a year,n
acre.
The sugar and tobacco industries in the islands are capable of a considerable increase. The island of Negros contains sugar land as rich a
any In the world, and the provinces of Cagayan, Isabella and Union contain tobacco lands, which, next to Cuba, produce the best tobacco in thl
world, but the trouble is that the markets for such sugar and tobacco have
been, by tariffs Imposed in various countries, very much reduced. Stoul!U
the markets of the United States be opened to the Philippines it is cerraii
that both the sugar and the tobacco industry would become thriving, ane
although the total amount of the product in each would probably not safe0c
the American market at all, so extensive is the demand here for bit
tobacco and sugar, it would mean the difference between poverty and prosperity it the islands.
I know that the reduction of the tariff for this purpose is much op:
posed by the Interests which represent beet sugar and tobacco; but I
believe that a great majority of the people of the United States are in f>r
of opening the markets  t  to the Philippine Islands, conscious that it wil
not destroy either the beet-sugar or the tobacco industry of this cou'itrY,
and feeling that as long as we maintain the asoociation which we now have
with the Philippine Islands it is our duty to give them the benefit of ta ~
markets of the United States and bring them as close to our people aen
our trade as possible. * *
There are 7,600,000 Fillpinos.  Of these, the 7,000,000 Cbri:tiaa
Filipinos are imitative, anxious for new ideas, willing to accept them,  1
ing to follow American styles, American sports, American dress, and Au'>rcan customs. A large amount of cotton goods is imported into the is!:i:;a
each year, but this Is inearly all from England ad Germany. Their i;;
no reason why these cotton goods should not come from America.  *
The first requisite of prosperity in the Philippine Islands is tranqellity
and this should be evidenced by a well-ordered government. The Fitiu10o
must be taught the advantage of such a government, and they should lea,
from the government which is given them the disadvantages that art.:e '
everybody   the country from political agitation for a change in the fit'i
of government in the immediate future. Hence it is that I have venmri1'
to oppose with all the argument. that I could bring to bear the pe 'it0i
to the two political conventions asking that independence be promist l1
the Filipinos. It is not that I am oppooed to independenc n the is the  and,
shouiild the people of the Philippines desire independence when they are!lted[
tor it, but it is that tho great preast need in the islands is tranpquiltlT


m-1




I
i
I
I
II
4
I
Ii
I




"OUR DUTY IN THE PHILIPPINES"- HOLD ON TO
THE ISLANDS AND ASSUME THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR FUTURE."
rartct from remark. of Hon. ~CHARLE8 DICK of Ohio, in daffy Congressional Record, June 9. 1900.
We can't turn back-Bishops Potter and Thoburn on our duty,in the Philippines —conditions in the Islands exhaustively
reviewed by one who has no political bias, and a. convincing   statement made of the reasons for th.
American people going forward with the work
of establishing    peace.
Mr. Speaker, there has beoen much criticismrn of the course of the present
Admiauistration in the PhilIppiies. e  desire to present staternemts by two
emiaent men whose standing with the people, of the United States is such
ftht no nman will c all ito question their integrity. while the fact that they
raRke their statement" after a careful personal tirntv of the coauntry and
the people affected will give equal assurance of their abltity to reach accurate and just concIusiona.
The two distinguiished men to whlom  T refer are Bishop Potter and
Bi'shop Thoburn, men well known to the public, and imen wihomn two of our
great religious organizations have given the highest honors and highest
evri:ence of confidence.
*BISHOP POTTT',S VINWS.
Both these men speak after a personal study of the people of and situatron in the Phllippirne:  and. BPihop Potter says frankly that he reaches
his conclusion in the face of what was at first an adverse opinion on this
subject. His first view was that the course of this Government in the Philippines was of doubtful wisdorn, but after a visit to those islands and a?t'ad, of the sitrntlin and people he returned to the United States, and In?! interview said:
"There is but one thing for us to do now: that is to hold on to the
'i.st;ds and assume the responsibility for their future."
BISHOP THOUIVRN'S VIEWS.
Bishop J. M. Thoburn, of the Methodist Church, is also a. min of high
atrnding in this great religious organization, and if his name is less known
In the people of the United States than that of Bishop Potter It Is because
at his long absence In the Orient, where he has been for years engaged in
'rali4onary work, and where he had especial opportunities to study the Philiimines and the Filipino. He xsont to Tndia  a a missionarv In 1859, and
wes chosen missionary bishop of T-ndia andt Malaysia in 188R.  He has
i':ited the Ph!llpp1Tne' a nami br of times within the tast fifteen years
n 1 has devoted mach time to sturdy of the Filipinos. Ils last vtilt was
'Te,ls1t preo ions to hti retaucn to America.
Btishop Thoburn is a qluiet, unobtrusive man, a keen observer and
eliolar, and broad In his religloras vtews. The Theburn fanmily Is proud
4 its loyalty to the flan. Col. Jose-h Tboburn. a brother of the bishop,
"-Bn killed in the civil war at the battle of Cedar Crirek l hbile leading a
svision. Bisho p Th'oburn, then, knows what he is talking about.
In reply to an Inquiry the bishop said:
"To leave the people of the Philippine Islands to themselves, would he
to proclaim general anarchy for years and generations to came, and had
such an attempt been made the confusilon which wourld have reultned, wtha
i1l its attendant bloodshed and maTisery. would have created such a spectactlce
liat the whole civilized world would have exer'rated iur.
"A great many extraordinary mistakes are made by writers and ispeakerrs'
r'-n diRcURssing this 'ubiect, owing to the very limited kanowledge which
hie outside world posse;'"a, ceonerarninr the actual st:antas of theX People of
ls islands. It secnis impsbble fior nanny iotl ltgent persons to compreh'rTir tfh f, ct that fhfr- art t  'In.y. eht  fferent trlhes or races of peotip inhabiting. the PhiMlipiner. ThP islandsf aA a whole have never been?i'dugated by Spril,. Her title to many of the more soluthern.islands has
i'en only nominal.
"The class of persona known as the FIl1pinos belong almost exelusavely
tr the Island of T,*rznn. They are by no mennsa   nop1rlar among tlh  othbr
*adslSd, Por has Afgtananldo or any other man ever succeeded in winning the
ma'fidence of the islanlders generally.
"Like all Mohammedan Malays, the peoploe Inhabiting the southern poroisoa  of the archipelago are treachearonls. wartliko. and turbulent,. in the
R1e civilized islands, inhabited by the Viraay race. the Filininos constiute a very small minority, ard If the parties were left t themselves In
a aaort time a bitter enmrait  vwoutladl manifest ittelf even  mearn   the mOst clvil-:'cd portions of the notrthern and central iflands. At every hazard and every,0a it becomes the solemn duty of the American rpeople, a diuty from which
'ia evilized world will, never absolve them, to put down all warlike opposltIon
ala'1 give peace to to the iland of L.ion, and also provide for a good goysmm'n t throtiuhor, t the whole archipelago.
"In any and e'verai case there should be no mention of our retiring from
the fe'7. lie did not seek this noreit r.espuasiailiti. aurt t Inas thrust upon
';. To retire now ic, i nlri hc to sihraIk from a,Sanaifrst dtt?, to make a con-,"*';,:,0 of naotiodal timidit,'. orald to call dowin rpon o   s  as0 a rqntion the rii-.
'II:l and consteerlat. if not i,ired tie eFre CTrtianr, of the cisi iired ipworld.
"WFe have tatken up our burden an.d,oe must carry it patientfy and fulfill
' in aFesJIichi  Slate pro'aviatce aoatf rodl. os 7f rri7',  b eliere, ha:s tha, ast upon
I'*:- A few veara hence tAho wahor eitiAtiotli  will wear a different aspect.
eft will be restored to these adisturbed islands and a new career set before
';.ople who have been carrying,;rievous burdens and suIffering, unspekabi wrongs for more than three hundred years."
m41k'


I




THE UNITE STATES WILL BECOME THE PREDOM.
INATING POWER IN THE PACIFIC."
xtrct from remarks of ion. SHELBY fM. CULLOM of Illnois, in daily|
Congresstonal Record, April 27, 1904.
The aqutlsitlo   of the Hawaiian    Islands was the first important
achievement in the conduct o oour foreign relatlons after William McKinley
became President on the 4th of March, 1897.
For three-quarters of a century American statesmen had discussed and
attempted to bring about the annexation of the islands to the United States,
but without result. Daniel Webster, when Secretary of State, in 1853 said
that it is obvious from the circumstances connected with their position that
the interests of the United States require that no other power should col.
onize or possess the Sandwich Islands or exercise over their government
an influence which would lead to a partial or exclusive control in matters
of navigation or trade.
The Hawaiian Islands were finally annexed by joint resolutio of Congress approved by President McKinley July 7, 1898. They were organized
as a territory of the United States and are now enjoying the prosperity incident to our country generally.
The geographical position of the islands, situated as they are in the
Pacific, between our own western coast and the countries of the Far East,
the splendid harbor and coaling station on the island of Hawaii; our
increasing interests and commerce with the Orient, make the islands of the
greatest importance to the United States.
Halt a century ago that great statesman, William   H. Seward, said
thatThe Pacific Ocean, its shores, its islands, and the vast region beyond
will become the chief theater of events in the world's hereafter.
As we look back on the events which have transpired In the Far East
in the past few years in the struggle among the great nations for supremacy
in the Orient and on what is taking place there to-day, Secretary Seward'a
word seem to be almost prophetic.
It seems to be destined that the United States will one day become the
predominatig power in the Pacific.
The acquisition of the Hawaiian Islands was the first step which gave
to the United States a foothold in the Pacific and was the beginning of our
great expansion under the McKinley Administration. *   * 
TUB PUoIIC iiPPIBS.
More than four years have passed since the flag of the United States
was raised over the Philippine Islands.
When we assumed control of the islands, under the treaty of peace
with Spain, the natives were in a state of revolution against the authority
of the Spanish Government. That revolution continued for a time against
the sovereignty of the United States, notwithstanding the Filipino people
were assured thatWe eome not as invaders and conquerors, but as friends, to protect
the natives in their homes, in their employment, and in their personal and
religious rights.
But at last peace has been restored, a comparatively small army of
somet 1,006 soldiers remaining to secure order. We have provided the
Philippines with a complete civil government and as large a measure of
local elf-government as they are capable of exercising.
While the ac  i3sttioa and government of the Philippine Islands have
caused the United States much trouble and expense, still our possession of
those Islands is advantagous in many respects. From a business standpoint the trade and commerce of the Philippines is not unimportant. Their
imports for the year 1902 amounted to $41,105,034 and their exports were
S27,157,087. As a result of returning prosperity under American rule the
exports of he Philippine Islands have increased nearly $12,000,000 during
the year 1003. With prosperity and development, under American rule,
it i diffiult to estimate what the total trade of the Philippines will be In
the years to ome.. The resources of the Islands are boundless and It is
not     nafe to   that the total value of the trade, exports and mports, will
eventually amount to several hundred millions annually.
romn the standpotl t of trae:, of securing foreign markets for our own
product  the acquis ition of the Philippines will prove a profitable investmet for the United States,    h    n. 
But this is not all  Their geographical position near China and Japa
will prove a  advantage to the United States in securing control of thtse
rich markets. It has been said that Manila in no far distant day wfill be.
coe t    great commerca cner o theo Orie$. 
I  d   o  to all th, as Haia   w  the first ste toward our becosWi
the pstonisting vpowe in the Pasflc, so the aquisition of th: P    ^ilippiesI
s aniother important 4tncew.  t that dt;ctot,.
m- 
f:;                 f 




THE FIUPINOS CAN NEVER HAVE A FREE COMMONWEALTH UUNLESS WE STAY THERE
AND TRAIN THEM FOR IT,"
ttract from remarks of Hone HENRY A. COOPER of Wiconin,
i daily Congresrional Record May 6, 1904.
All of the disinterested, competent witnesses agree that the
ilpinos are not now capable of maintaining a free representative
vernment.  I might cite much unimpeachable testimony on this
tint, but shall content myself by reading from the report of the
churman Commission-President Schurman, of Cornell Universityt
dmiral Dewey; General Otis; Hon. Charles Denby, and Professor
loreester-five men selected by President McKinley to examine and
port as to conditions in the Philippines. This commission of disiished men, after a thorough personal investigation, submitted
President McKinley a voluminous and exceptionally able rport,
ivering every phase of the Philippine problem. In this report they
y-I read from page 103:
First it is Impossible, even approximately, to fix a time for the withraal of American sovereignty over the archipelago, as no one can forIer when the diverse peoples of the Philippine Islands may be molded toether into a nationality capable of exrcising all the functions of Indeendent self-government  They are certainly incapable of such a work
-dny; whether in one or more generations they can be trained to it only
i future can disclose. And, se(ondly, if American,sovereignty over the
hipelago should evrr be relinqlIshfd., if all American, authority over
e people horl d ever ceaws and determlnfe th theth T United Statee should reounce all obligations to foreign nations for the good condiret of the Fillpig lL Undoubtedly the raising of the American fiae in the Philippine Islands
as entailed great responsibtilites upon us: hut to guarantee external proction while renouncing Internal dominion Is no way of escaping from them;
the contrary, sh ile Iou pull dtown the fleao!/or fle?/ pile up dificelties,'
Again say this commission, in their report, page 183:
Should our power by any fatality be withdrawn —
Fatality I Fatal to what?   Fatal to whom?     Not to the great
epublic of the United States; not to Russia, who would like to
0osess these islands; not to Japan, who wants the islands; not to
ermany, who wants the islands; not fatal to either of these nations,
t fatal, sir-utterly fatal-to the Philippines in their hope of free
presentative government.
Here is the opinion of Schurman, Otis, Denby, Worcester and
dmiral Dewey:
Sholld our power by any fatality be withdrawn, the commission be-,,ves that the government of the Philippines would speedtly lapse into
sprchy, which would excuse, if it did not necessitate, the Intervention of
her powers? aind the.eeventual division of the islands among them.
Now follows a sentence pregnant with meaning:!Ontli throt?,r  American occopftion, therefore, is the iLdea of  fee,
elf-iqover-.iqlf, eand united Ph.ilippine common.welth at ctll coneivabl e.s
Mr Speaker, the Filipinos can never have a free commonwealth
less we stay there and train them for it.
And the indispensable need, from the Filipino point of view of mainalnhg A.erican sovereignty over the archipelago is recognized by all inllJsnot tflipinos and.aven by those insurgents who detinre a t American
oteetorate. The latter, it Is true, would take thl revenues and leave Us
s; responsibilities. Nevertheless they recognize the indistutahle fact that
[li Pilipnnos ran not stand salne, Thus the welfare of the Filtipnos coin-?ie with the dictateP of national honor in forbidding onr abandonment of
e arehipelago. We ecan not. fron any point of view, scape the responlility of government which our sovereigtnt entrails, and the commlsslon s1
rmngly persuaded that the performance of our national duty will prove a
1rateat oblessing to the pp f  te Philippine Tlsnds.
In the great debate two years ago on te Philippine civil governent bill.gentlemen on the other side of the Chamber declared with
ucl vehemence that that legislation was being enacted for the
press purpose of exploiting the archipelago.    Two years have
pse ad a  now, sir, it is in order for any gentleman on that side
f the Chamber to point out a single case of exploitation in the
rhilipine Islands. We were told that men from the United States
gre going there to seize the timber, mining, and a  eriultural lands
m1eans of great franchises, and that the wealth of the islands was
o hl centered in a few greedy monopolists.
Will a'ny gentleman here or elsewhere tell the House and the
Amperican people w  her e there has been even one instance of exploita-,i0n in the Philippines? Not an instance. On the contrary, the comlalt in the islands now is that the Congress of  e United States
fi t in its wisdom to enact a franchise law which is too stringent,
hich too completely hinders the investment of capital, and thereby,
that extent, injures the real interests of the people of the Philip^S.                        -.a.  U *.  ** 5




"OR FUTURE P            OINTS TO THE DEVELOPMENT           0
tCOMMERCE UPON THE PACIFIC."
Extracts from remvarks of lon. T. Jf. CARTER of Montana, in dai
Congressional Record, June 6, 1900.
The farmers, finding a new market on the Pacific Ocean for thei
grain and produce, will begin to feel the benefits of a great Orienta
trade. The farmers are not wanting in clearness of perception. The
understand that the raising of a surplus in this country is of litti
avail unless a market can be procured for that surplus. It is knowr
that the markets of Europe, overcrowded and the scene of keen col
petititon from everywhere, can not but be depressed by great addi
tions from our newly opened fields.
Wee mut fitd a market in the Orient for the products of our faram
or easie to grow agriculturally in this country. That market is avain.
able. Going about, through the Suez Canal, a distance of 11,000 miles
we find the German Emnperor endeavoring to get a lodgment in ti
Orient. And for what? 'For the sale of German products. We fin
the French Rtepublic entering that great: Asiatic field for the purpos
of opening up new markets for its goods and the product of its i
dustries. We find England, and even Italy, endeavoring to partici
pate in this newIl  developed and developing field. Russia, with bhe
mighty railway system extending across Siberia and up into China
is reaching out for that market.
It is the dispo.ition of the people of the United States, in n!
humble jueadgmeInt, to fnsist that this Government of ours shall no
stand passively by ad perimit the opportumnity of the hour to pas
from -therm.   The function of the Government in this particular i
very clear to my mind. The people individually can not cope witll
all the governments in the world. We must send out a police fore
over the Pacific Ocean which will protect our commerce floating 0a
all the sas and abiding in every port.
We: rust have it understood that where an American merchan
or an American shipowner makes a contract that contract will b
enforced with the strong arm of this Government, and that hereafte
no American merchant or sailor will be humiliated by being compelle
to pass the American consulate and go for protection in his right to
the British, the 'German, the French, or some other consulate, as un
fortunately Ihas occurred In the past.
Mr. President we are upon the threshold of a century of mighty
promise, We have unlimited resources in the United States. Our
agricultural possibilities have scarcely been developed to the extenm
of a meaget fraction. With millions of acres of land still unclaimed
and unreclaim ed. with a people of superior intelligence, with a mini
mum of  lliteracy compared;with any other people on the globe, wit]
our railroads constructed to such an extent that we reach every cente
of industry and every center where raw materials are available, w
have'the ability to push our marketable products to tidewater wit
thfe least possUile delay.
What we need is transportation on the sea, and that transportation
on the sea wvill avail us little unless we have the naval force to pro
tect it and sustain our merchants in their just demands everywhere.
We an not protect the naval force in turn unless we have the coaling
stations.and landing places where our naval and merchant vessel
mayV be secure in coal, shelter, and repairs.
Thi's calls, the, for the e.tabIsh ment of our merchant marine, fP
the development of our Navy, not to fight the nations of the earth
not to bully the weak nor to dare the strong, but to police the sea.'
and protect American rights.
Oar frture points to the development of commerce upon the Pt '
eifie Ocean, and that, too, in a marvelons degree, during the next
quarter of a century. The first year of the quarter of a century i;
at hand, and a trade is opening which will eclipse on the Pacific the
commerce of any ocean on the globe-a commerce beside which the
commerce of the Atlantic will pale into insignificance.
There are 150,000,000 people on the other side of the Atlantic.
They iar      roduce the same kind of things we produce. We sel
them only enough to fill up deficiencies here and there. On the We"t
sie o the Pa c, within 2000 miles of Manila, more than half the
population Of the g e rei. China, Japan, Korea, the PhilipprifW%
anad all the islands and smaller states connected, promise a trade
which is visiblto the eye of every enterprising nation in Europe sad
of every enterrising mer  t in Europe as well. Our people are ntl
bi~nd to th0e epportumity. By all the rules the Oriental trade is chiefl


I




-- I -- II I II I II


i


i


"1 AM A DEMOCRAT BUT NOT AN AUTOMATON."
Uxtracts from remarks of Hon, J. 0. McLA URIN of South Carolina,
in daily Congressional Record, February 28, 1900.
Our nation has grown by obeying the instinct of development. We
re to-day "Greater America," but that greatness will be lost if we
rget the political philosophy which has made us great-expansion
f American thought, territory, mechanical skill, civilization, andi
pe philosophy of development. This is an auspiciou moment for the
reation and development of our export trade. The unexplored anti
tadeveloped markets of Asia furnish the opportunity. All other
Ilds have been occupied, and to attempt to wrest them from other
ltions is a doubtful contest. In the Orient the commercial possiuities exceed the wildest dreams of the optimist. No wonder there
- an irrepressible conflict between the great powers of the world.
te outgrowth of commercial competition. Russia, Germany, Engind, France, and Italy have received rich territory under the guise
so-called "spheres of influence."  The United States was thus
onfronted by Europe in the East when the battle of Manila occurred.
he result of that battle has been the acquisition of the Philippine
slands, which gives us a foothold from which, instead of suppliant
clasing for the "open door." we are upon a footing of ecquality with
dier nations. But it has been asserted that our trade in the East
a mere figment of the imagination and that conditions render it
possible to make it valuable.
The experience of the past decade contradicts this dogma. In
893 our whole exports to China of cotton cloths were only 35,000,000
ards. In 1896 its volume increased to 72,000,000 yards. In 189-7
was 140,000,000 yards, and in 1898 it was 921,000,000 yards. In
99 our Asiatic exports of flour were 1,725,388 barrels, against,40,563 in 1898, and while the total increase in our exports of
our to all countries between 1898 and 1899 was 20 per cent., the
sports to Asiatic countries increased 39 per cent. There has been
gradually growing increase in all of our other exports. In the
alst our trade has been mainly along what might be called the lines
f least resistance-that is, with nations speaking the English lanage.
As a consequence of this policy, the United States has only had
7 per cent of the commerce of the world, while England has had.3 per cent and Germany 10.8 per cent. The United States is the
ealthiest and largest manufacturing nation. Since 1876 her export
_ave largely exceeded her imports. The value of the annual product
the manufacturing industries of Great Britain are 44 per cent,
ermany 35 per cent, and France 30 per cent of that of the United!ates. With our factories running eight months in the year, we
n supply our domestic market; hence there is a necessity for an
tlet for our surplus products. They are suited to the climate and
eople of the East. We can supply the teeming millions of China
ith cheaper products than any other nation. Chinese ports in these
sys of steam and electricity are much nearer to us than California;as to Washington in 1848. As a nation we must recognize changed
lnditions, and I believe that by properly utilizing our advantawges
the Philippines our trade will continue to increase, until most of
or surplus products find remunerative markets in the East.
I am a Democrat, loyal to the party and its principles; but I am.t an automaton, nor a slave to be moved by the party lash. I
ii trying to represent what I believe is best for my people and my
[tion, and am content to let the future speak for itself. The Contitlition, as the handiwork of the fathers, has my love and reveree: but, Mr. President, there is something higher than the letter
the law. Whenever in our past history the Constitution has come
to conflict with the national sense of right and duty, it has givel
ty. Like the Sabbath, the Constitution was made for man, not man
~r the Constitution.
Uinder a destiny unforeseen and uncontrolled by us, the power and
tutltotions of the United States have been planted in the East. I
h)ieve that if we do our duty, it means not only the elevation and
Qllifting of the peoples of that far-off land, but that it will add to
iet Power and glory of our free institutions and the commercial
Prenracy of the nation.




WHO WOLD tHAUL D-DOW     WN THE FLAGG?
Extracts from remarkl  o f HQ1. J. C. SIBLEY    of Pens, ylra
in daily Congressional Record, February 1, 1900.
Shall we keep the Philippine Archipelago and Puerto Rico? EverVy
foot   No nation on the globe has higher rights or better title to
a rod of soil  We hold by a double claim-the right of conquest
and the right of purchase. My belief is that where once our banners
shadow has fallen, there will survive a race of freemen.
And again I echo the President's query, "Who would haul down
the flag?"  Who- planted it there? What Cabinet council?   What
warriorP What tatsman? What Senator or Representative? What
body of men fr    d anyplan of conquest? The cries of suffering
humanity, ground down beneath the iron heel of oppression, rang
in our ears, and we stopped our ears. Their groans we heard, but
we answered not. We saw them stripped and wounded on our way
to Jericho, and like the priest and Levite passed by on the other
side. Xot unheard at the throne of heaven were those groans and
prayers.
In order to awaken us from our torpor and almost criminal indifference the Almighty permitted the enemies of His wrath to hurtle
their thunderbolts under the bows of the Maine lying peacefully
at anchor in Habana Harbor. Nor keenest sighted statesmen nor
most daring warrior had even contemplated the possibility of gain,
growth, or greatness to us as a nation to come out of the war of
which the blowing up of the Mainae was the first declaration.
These lands and people, unworthily ruled, were, in the wisdom
of the:Almighty, to pass from the house of Saul to that of David
God and the valor of Almerican arms gave us this territory, aot
because we are a nalion altogether free, altogether pure and blameless, but because, working through human instrumentalities, He has
iven i t to the boldest, fret, tm ost progressive, most enlihtened,
and -most Christian of all the nations of the present age.
Sir, I am an optimist. My belief is that on this continent God
has willed to plant a people who shall carry the arts of peace and
the story of the cross to the nations of the earth. You deprecate
war:not more than myself; but, sir, under certain conditions war
is to the body politic what the plowshare in the mellowed mold
is to the husbandman.    Noxious growths and thorns and briars
miumt be exterminated and uprooted, that the fairer fruitage may
develop.        -                            -.. 
Within the bosom of our soil the Almigihty has stored, throlug
countless ages, the treasuries of mineral. From fher breast, clothed
with forests and golden with ripening harvests. He will house and
feed a race which will hasten the dawn of that morning wIhc;
through a thousand cycles w    shall be banished, the swords beat
into     shares and the spears into pruning hooks, and men, untii
time shal be no more, shall look into the eyes of each other and
recognize the bonds of brotherhood. We go forth as a nation, not to
teac  tihe doctrine of the survival of the fittest, but to make men
fit fto survive.
Do gentleten recoize the fact that in.one hundred yea,
from'to-day this  ill be a nation of 400,000,000;sotds? With suc
ao      t soil, wit  h, material resour cs,,nd with such a.. people, wh
would ha1ul., down..-the1,  g ffrom: e.nlarged boundaries?  Who 01,d0:nvron and stile betwee to oeans the energies of suchh a:e iila
tsoni  Who   would pent up its powers within the confines of a
rm-T




"RESULTS OF THE WAR WITH SPAIN."
tract from remarks of Hon S      BY. BY. CULLOM of Illinois,
in daily Coagressional lecord^ A pril 27, 1904.
CUBA.
In order that no selfish motive might be imputed to the United
tes in entering upon the war with Spain, five days before the
ssage of the resolution declaring war against Spain a resolution
as passed by Congress stating thatThe United States hereby disclaims any disposition or intention to
ercise sovereignty, jurisdiction, or control over the island of Cuba,
cept for the pacification thereof and asserts its determination,
hen that is actromplished, to leave the government and control of
island to its people.
We have kept this pledge to the very letter. It has been well
id thatThere is no other instance in modern history where such a declaraa of self-tnegation was first made and then completely fulfilled.
This bright record of disinterested and national faith will grow
eeer and sweeter in the. memory of those who pride themselves
tthe sons of a great, free, and honorable nation.
We retained control of Cuba for a time until she was in a contion to establish her own government; we assisted her in estabhing a republican government; we only asked that she should pledge
not to enter into any compact with a foreign power which would
nd to impair the independence of Cuba or permit a foreign power
obtain lodgment in or control over any portion of the island; not
assume or contract any public debt to repay which the ordinary
ienues of the island would be inadequate, and giving the United
ates the right to intervene for the maintenance of her independence.
These pledges which we exacted of Cuba are substantially the
portant provisions of the so-called "Platt amendment"   They
in the interest of Cuba more perhaps than they are in the
erest of the United States. With these exceptions, Cuba is as
ependent of the United States as she is of the rest of the world.
Cuba has adopted the provisions of the so-called "Platt amendnt" as a part of her fundamental law, and a treaty has been
nluded and recently ratified by the Senate embodying these
edges in the form of an international compact.
We not only engaged in war to free Cuba from Spanish misrule,
cessitating the expenditure of millions of money and the sacrifice
the lives of htundreds of American soldiers, but the Government
the United States, after establishing Cuba as an independent
public, under the constant urging of President Roosevelt, proded for reciprocal commercial relations with that island in order
give to Cuba material prosperity and to bring the island into
ser comtmercial relations with the United States.:
This reciprocity treaty has been ratified by the Senate and carried
to effect by Congress, and provides in brief that Cuban products
all be admitted into our ports at a reduction of 20 per cent. below
Dingley tariff act, in return for which Cuba grants concessions
Amnerican products varying from 20 to 40 per cent., which will
able the United States to secure a large part of the Cuban market.
To enable the United States to maintain the independence of
haa and to protect her people, as well as for the defense of our
it country, Cuba has leased to the United States two splendid
iaing stations, Guantanamo and Bahia Honda.
These stations are not only of value for the defense of our own
untry, but they are very important from  a strategic standpoint
the defense of an isthmian canal, when it shall be constructed.
RESULTS OF THEZ WA, WITH SPAIN.
The termination of the war with Spain freed Cuba and gave to
le Uited States Porto Rico and the Philippines. But there were
ore important results.  That short, though momentous, conflict,
a!l1 though it was in comparison with our own civil war, had
sot as important an effect upon the subsequent history and policy
the United States.
Oar war with Spain brought the nation to a self-consciousness
'io other event in oar history has done. That conflict aroused
to a realization of the fact that more than a century of remarke internal industrial development had rendered us an important
(tor in the world's system.
il der the Administrations of McKinley and Roosevelt the United
ae has obtained a position amnong the nations of the world which
4aeer occupied in any fmrner period of our natiosl life.
-8




"CUBA, POTO RICO, AND THE PHILIPPINE ISLAND
SPEAK VOLUMES FOR THE CONSTRUCTIVE
POLICY      AND   ABILITY    OF    THE
REPUBLICAN       PARTY.":lr7.-::::::1V~_:-:::  0..   _. _ _:
Extract from remarks of Hon. CHARLES B. LANDIS, of IndilW
in daily Congressional Record, Jan. 27, 1904.
I contend now, Mr. Chairman, that the brightest page that h
been written by the Republican party in the last seven years h
been writtitn with reference to those questions that followed o0
war with Spain. That war lasted only ninety days, but the prol
leIm  that camne with it are with us to-day and they will rema;
vwith us until our children are in their graves.:You remember, how after that war came to an end, our frierd
oni the other:side of the Cthamber insisted that Cuba should i
mediately be given her freedom  and independence. The man i
the White' House said no, they are not ready. You said, "Yo
have lied to Cuba; you do not intend to give Cuba her indepen
ene'."  We said, "She is not ready for it; we want time to pr
pare her for her independence."
We broullht a carload of school-teachers from Cuba and educate
them. We sent scores of Americans down there to teach thema tE
principles of self-government. We went down there and cleane
'her cities and towns and put in sewerage systems, and on the 201
of May a year ago Columbia presented Cuba with a pure whit
parchment of human freedom, and she has been able to take car
of that freedom  and is happy and independent to-day. Had w
done as you wanted us to do, yellow fever would be thri
ing in Cuba to-day.      evolution would follow     revolutio
as -in  Central America, South      America, Santo    Doming
and other Spanish-American republics until w e would hbw
b:een 'involved with other nations of the r-.-,i.:
Take Porto Rico. Well-informed gentlemen from the island 
Porto Rico state that prior to our occupation of that island smau
pox had infested parts of it for three hundred years. One of t
first things we did when we went there was to take 900,000 peop
and vaccinate every) one of them, and for the last four years the
has not been a single ease of small-pox in all Porto Rico.
Over in the Philippine Islands when our soldiers went over the
it was prophesied that it would take an army of 100,000 men twent
years to establish conditions in those islands so that there woul
he peace and order and good government.
Those islands have been pacified; law and order have been esta
lished, and the army 'has been reduced to 18,000 men. We hla
spent vast sums on their dlocks; we have spent millions on thei
roads;, 15,000 people are working to-da, on one road leading ii
intof the mountains from Manila. W'e have established liblrarie
we sent a ship loaded with 1,000 school teachers over there to lig
thietorch. Last month 100 Filipino boys came to this country t
be-educated.:They will go back to educate their fellows.
We have started normal schools over there. We have organize
trade schools, and we have reorganized their courts in accorda.n
with the dictates of Anglo-Saxon justice. We have given the
religious liberty. We 'have given the farmers of the Philippil,
primers, translated into their own language, so that they may i
tellitently cultivate the soil. They have homes now    in plat
of huts over in the Philippine Islands,      Those islands ar
blossoming   as a  ro s.;And every dollar expended ecome
from  the revenues:of those islands.
Have:   e done right?   If we have not, then civilizati0n I
a fraud, enlightenment is a lie, and the Christian churcd ia
a w   thited'sepulcher.  Cuba, Porto Rico, and the Philipi: l
Islands- in their condition to-day speak volumes for the con:
structive policy an.d ability of the Republican party.        <
have given the nations of the earth new ideas relative to tb
control of cilonial goivernm2ents.
Whre did'the administration of Theodore Roosevelt begin an
that of:William McKinley end? No one could tell. One merrte
into tle other naturally; the same policy has been carried 0
under Theodre Roosevelt that was followed under Wili1t
ei Kinley.   A nd that is the reason I am for Theodore Foosm
velt as 0otur  ext nominee ftr nTident of the United State


I
I
I
L
i
II


I


m-9


i
i
i
i
i
I




"THE OPEN DOOR IN CHINA.":tltrcts from remarks of Hion. SHELBY M. CULLOM of Illinois, in daily
Congressional Record, April 27, 1904.
The United States has stood for the open door in China, and as a result:icet diplomacy and influence of Secretory HIay freedom of commerce has
een secured and the division of China among the powers has been preented. *  *  *
In September, 1899, Secretary Hay addressed communications to the
overnments of Great Britain, Russia, Germany, Italy, and Japan, suggestg that as he understood it to be the settled policy and purpose of those
oultries not to use any privileges which may be granted them in China as a
eans of excluding any commercial rival and that freedom of trade for
bern in that ancient Empire means freedom of trade for all the world alike
e considered that the maintenance of this policy is alike urgently deanded by the commercial communities of these several nations and that
t is the only one which will improve existing conditions and extend their
erther operations..le further suggested that it was the desire of this
oivernment that the interests of its citizens should not be prejudiced
irough exclusive treatment by any of the controlling powers within their
espective spheres of interest in China and that it hopes to retain there
open market for all the world's commerce, remove dangerous sources
international irritation, promote administrative reform, etc. lHe acoringly suggested a declaration by each of them in regard to the treatnit of foreign trade and commerce in their spheres of interest.
Without inconsiderable delay the Governments of Great Britain, Russia,
ermany, Italy, and Japan replied to Secretary Hay's circular note, giving
ordial and full assurance of the principles suggested by our Government.
Thus was successfully begun the since famous open-door policy of the
inited States in China.
B3ut this great triumph in the interest of freedom of commerce of the
rld in China was followed by the famous Boxer outbreak in 1900  *  *
In the midst of the intense excitement throughout the world, when the
onfall of the Empire of China seemed almost certain, Secretary Hay,
th the foresight which so distinguishes his official acts, issued a circular
tte on July 3, 1900, to all thte powers having interest in China, stating
he position of the United States, that it would be our policy to find a
olution which would bring permanent safety and peace to China, preserve
s territorial and administrative entity, protect all rights guaranteed by
reaty and international law, and safeguard for the world the principle of
qual and impartial trade with all parts of the Chinese Empire. This note
early stated the fixed policy of the United States, and during that ex-citing
eriod gave notice to the world that the United States would not permit
he dismemberment of China.
This had not been the policy of some of the European nations, yet
t was so much in harmony with the principles of international justice that
tmet with the approval of the world,
After relieving the legations and the suppression of the Boxer troubles
y the allied powers, there followed a long negotiation between the allied
wers and China; and an enormous and exorbitant demand was made by
he allies as an indemnity, which China would probably never be able to
ay. The representatives of the United States in this negotiation constantly
tervened to reduce the demands of the great powers of Europe. *  *  *
Since the signing of the final protocol we have negotiated with China,
th most liberal commercial treaty which China has with any other foreign
Svernment.    *  *
Secretary Htay has very recently gained another diplomatic triumph
the interest of China. It had been apparent for some time that war beecn Russia and Japan was inevitable, and it was realized that that war
ight seriously impair the integrity of China and the benefits of the openor policy.
Secretary Hay, on February 10, 1 904, addressed to the Governments
Rlussia, Japan, and China, and to other powers interested in China, a
cte of the following tenor:
It is the earnest desire of the Government of the United States that
the military operations which have begun between Russia and Japan,
e neutrality of China, and in all practicable ways her administrative
lity, shall be protected by both parties, and that the area of hostilitieq
halII e localized and limited as much as possible, so that -undue excitement
d disturbance of the Chinese people may be prevented and the least
Oxsible loss to the commerce and peaceful intercourse of the world may be
c'asioned.
This measure was recognized as so wise and was so generally comendfd by the nations of the world that not only has it been accepted by
h neutral nations, but it has been accepted by Russia and Japan themel've's
These measures of our Government respecting China are of the greatt sgia:ficance and importance, because they not 'only tend to the peace
the world, but to preserve the extensive territory and enormous popution of that Empire to the free and untrammeled trade and commerce of
a11 ( c nttries.
Too mnuc/h credit can not be given to the Adminfistration of President
Roo'5,velt for tlee splendid manner in which this delicate and complicated
hine.e and Eastern question has been managed by the admirable statemanlip antd diplomacy of his great Secretary of State.




"COMMRCIAL BENEFITS OF COLONIZATION."
Extract from remarks of Hon. CHARLES DICK of Ohio, in de
ongressionMal Reord, June 9, 1900.
The commercial benefits of colonization are indicated in some deg:
by tables, which show the exports of the United Kingdom to 1
colonies in recet tyears.
The United Kingdom in 1897 exported to her colonies goods val
at $413,-21i,102 out of a total exportation of $1,431,598,345; thus
per cent of her total exports were sent to the colonies,  The to
imports.of her colonies in the year were $1,21(6,984,637, and 
amount twhich they took from   Great Britain, $423,212,102, forr
34.8 per cent of their total imports. To the non-British world 1
United Kingdom sold in the same year goods valued at $1,008,3,8(2,9
and 1this- amounted to only 13 per cent of the imports of the a(
British world in that year. Or, to putt i in other words. kur
Ulrittain was, through hfer retltiols with her colonies, able to sllp]
thetr with 31,. per cent of their imports, while to the non-Brit
worldt she wai;s only able to supply 13 per cent of its imnports. EV
the case of the United States, from swhich her purchases are eni
lmos,:  whose people speak the same language and have extrein
cosse business relations with hter, she only supplied in 1899, T1 i
cent of its total imports while supplying 34.8 per cent of the i
ports of her colonies.
The imports of the British colonies, as already indicated,
$1,216,284,637, and had Great Britain supplied to them   only I
proportion —13 per cent-of the imports she was able to supply
the non-British world it would have amounted to but $158,1C0,(
instead of the $ 2S3, 212,102 which she actually did send to them.
Thus in the year in question, upon this estiomate, she matde
market in her colonies for $265,000,000 worth of goods in excess
what she would have solde slthem had they held the same relatio.,
her that does the non-British world generally. Even had she be
able to supply them as large a proportion of their imports as 
supplies of the irmports of the United States her sales to them untl
such extremely favorable circumstances would have fallen $218,O000,
below those actually made.
It is apparent from this study of the commercial relations of Cr
Britaind h and her colonies and of the non-British world, respective
that lher sates to her colonies were more than twice as large as th
would have been had the colonies not held this relation to h
Kow, let us apply this general fact to Great Britain's commerce wi
ier colonies during a. term  of years. The exports of the Init!
NK ingdom to her colonies from 1868 to 1898, a term of thirty yea
have amounted to $11,580,000,000, and a.pplying to this vast sum t
estimate already made that she sells to her colonies more than dout
the:  amount which they would buy did not the colonial relatii
ship exist, it will be apparent that she has by her colonial enterpri
made for.her manufacturers and producers a market during t
last thirty years for more than $6,000,000,000 in clear excess of ti
which they would have had with this same territory had nott
colonial relationship existed.
Now, to takethe other side of the case: All manufacturing c(u
tries and countries of the temperate zone now find it necessary
import large quantities of tropical products, partially for man
facturing and partly for consumption of their people-coffee,.?
cooa, spices, hemp, jute, rubber, etc. By making these purclhas
in the colonies the mother country benefits those of ier own cifize
whose capital is invested in great producing enterprises in 
coloniesl and at the same time obtains a permanent and regul
supply of 0ther articles which she must have for her factories a1
breakfast tables.  Of the total imports of the United King)edom
the last thirty years, more than $12,000,000,000 worth, or 23 per cer
has bee tkent from her eolonies, while of her exports in the decrt
1869 to 1878, 25 per cent went to the colonies, and in the follow'
decade  t per cent while in 1898 more than 30 per cent w:nt
thfee colonies.. 
Thus in the past thirty years the United Kingdom has, throunh h
colonial enterpries, made a market for fully six thousand dnl/l
dolla' worth of goods in excess of what she would have sold 0 tl
same territory had not the colonial relationship existed, whle se A'
expended among the people of those countries $12),000,00ft0 0 i t
pitfrchase of artsiclts ruired by her  opulationt for food or a 111
factui0;t, andths be    ied to a great etent both the peope M,
colonie a   those of her own people having business relt ons it 
colonies.
mn-ll


t
I
t
i
1)
i
j
I
I
II
L
I
I
I
I
I


lI




ROOSEVELT. —"AOUT EXPANSION AND THE PHILIPPINES."
Extracts from public addresses and works of PRESIDENT ROOS0VELT,
prinited in daily Congressional Record, June 20, 1904.
The inevitable march of events gave us the control of the t'huilppiue
Islands at a time so opportune that it may without irreverence be called
providential. Unless we.show ourselves weak, unless we show ourselves degenerate sons of the sires from whose loins we sprang, we must go on with
[e work we have undertaken. I most earnestly hope that this work will
ver be of a peaceful character. (Speech at San Francisco, Cal., May 13,
1903.)
If we are wise, if we care for our reputation abroad, if we are sensitive
f our honor at home, we will allow no question of partisan politics ever to
enter Into the administration of the great islands which came under our
tag as a result of the war with Spain. (Speech at Memphis, Tenn., Novembr 19, 1902.)
If we do our duty aright in the Philippines, we will add to that national
renown which is the hilghest and finest part of national life, we will greatly
iboefit the people of the Philippine Islands, and, above all, we will play our
part well in the great work of uplifting mankind. (Strenuous Life, p. 20.)
Fundamentally the cause of expansion is the cause of peace. ("Expansion and peace," Strenuous Life, p. 34.)
The guns that thundered off Manila and Santiago left us echoes of glory.
but they also left us a legacy of duty. If we drove out a mediaeval tyranny
only to make room for savage anarchy, we had better not have begun the
task at all. It is worse than idle to say that we have no duty to perform
cnd can leave to their fates the islands we have conquered. Such a course
ould be the course of infamy. It would be followed at once by utter chaos
in the wretched islands themselves. Some stronger, manlier power would
have to step in and do the work. (Strenuous Life, p. 11.)
Our greatest statesmen have always been those who believed in the naol-a-who had faith in the power of our people to spread until they should
Ibcome the mightiest among the peoples of the world.  ("Manhood and
otatehood," Strenuous Life, p. 205.)
f government Is the essential matter. The Tagalogs have a hundredfold
the freedom under us that they would have if we had abandoned the islands.
Wlse are not trying to subjugate a people; we are trying to develop them
aid make them a law-abiding, industrious, and educated people, and we
cpe ultimately a self-governing people. In short, in the work we havp!dne we are but carrying out the true principles of our democracy.  We
sotrk in a spirit of self-respect for ourselves and of good will toward others,
n a spirit of love for and of infinite faith in maakind. We do not blindly
etfuse to face the evils that exist or the shortcomings Inherent in humanty; but across blundering and shirking, across selfishness and meanness of
motive, across shortsightedness and cowardice we gaze steadfastly toward
the far horizon of golden triumph.  ("National duties," Strenuous Life,
P 243.)
Our warfare in the Philippines has been carried on with singoular huCJasoity. For every act of cruelty by our meno there have been innumerable
ts of -forbearance, magnanimity, and generous kindness. These are the
qualities which have characterized the war as a whole. (Memorial Day
adlress at Arlington, May 30, 1902.)
hTe progress of the American arms means the abolition of cruelty, the
_ringing of peace, and the rule of law and order under the civil governtent. Other nations have conquered to create irresponsible military rule.
Qe conquer to bring just and responsible civil go ernmenet to the conquererd.
(Memorial Day address at Arlington, May 30, 1902.)
Taking the work of the army and the civil authorities together, it may be
uoesntioned whether anywhere else in tnodern times the world has seen a
btter example of real conservative statesmanship than our people have
given in the Philippine Islands. (Annual message, second session, Fiftyseventh Congress.)
No policy ever entered into by the American people ha: vindicated Itself
more fignal manner than the policy of holding the Philippines, Ttae
ihumph of our arms, above all, the triumph of our laws and principles, has
0ne sooner than we had any right to expect. Too much praise can not be
vgivn to the army for what it has done in the Philippines both in warfare
nad from an administrative standpoint in preparing the way for civil govronment't alnd similar credit belongs to the civil authorities for tbhefay in
eWhiich they have planted the seeds of self-government in the ground thus
tade reardy for them. (Annual message, second session, Fifty-seventh ConrI: dealing with the Philippine people we must show both patience and
tirengath, forbearance end 'teadfast resolution. Our ainm is high. We do
D"n desire to do for the islanders merely what has elsewhere been done fcr
itrope peoples by even the best foreign reovernments. We hope to do for
Ilihesp what has never before been done for any people of the tropics —to,lake them lit for,elf-gve ' rnment after the fasbhion of the really free natii.sas  (Annual message, first session, Fifty-seventh Congress.)
I have felt that thae eveonts of the last five or six years have been steadily
stalaing the dAiy when the Pacific vwiil 1oomn in the world's commerce as
lhe Atlantic now loonms, and I have ~wi.shed greatly to see these marvelous
camntunities growing up on the Pacific slAope. (Barstow, Cal., May 7, 1903.)
iOur place as a nation is anmd must be with the nations that have left inelibly their impress on the centuries. Men will tell you that the great.Paneding nations of antiquity have passed away. So they have; and so
ave all others, (San Fralcisco, CalI, May 13, 1903.)
Tihe insurrectioa among the Filipinos has been absolutely quelled. The
Ia' has been brosght. to an end sooner than even the most sangauine of us
'acel tao hope. Tb' w'orld, has not in recent years seen any military task
ao1e with more soldierly energy and ability; and done, moreover, in a spirit
0i gara himinanity'.  Philade ia, Pt, aNoember 22, 1902.)
There is no question as to our not having gone far enough and fast
eunugh in grianting Aelf-governtment t the Fil ipinos; the only possible daner hast been lest we siould go faster and further than wais in the inter,
Ot the Filiplnos themselves. (Memphis, Tenn., November 19, 1902.)
l 1p,


I




"THE SACRED MISSION WHICH THE UNITED STATE
IS CALLED UPON TO PERFORMS"
Extracts from speech Of lion. HENRY A. COOPER of Wliscosil
in; House of Representatives, June 19, 1902.
A SACRED MIISSION.
We are in the Philippines to discharge a duty, a duty which w
owe to ourselves, to the people of the archipelago, and to the caus
of civil liberty everywhere throughout the earth. We are in tl
islands, and, despite all harsh utterances to the contrary-there hav
been many of these of late-we are there for no other purpose tha
to set wider the bounds of freedom, to secure liberty and opportunlit
and all the benefits of the best of modern civilizations for a down
trodden race to whom, through hopeless centuries, these blessing
have been denied, and in the place of an ancient, decrepit monarch
and the divine right of kings to establish the invincible young repuib:and the inalienable rights of man.
This is the high, the sacred mission, which, in the course of htlmna
events and under the providence of God, the United States is calle
upon to perform. On distant shores, in the immediate presenceat the very door —of oriental despotism, and under circumstances s
conspicuous and commanding that our work and its results sha
forever be seen of men, this Republic is laying the foundation fo
a new order of things. No other event, sir, since the nation-savin
civil war, so brings to mind and justifies the prophetic saying of th
great Scotchman: "The world is all so changed; so much that seeme
vigorous has sunk decrepit, so much that was not is beginning 
be!. What sounds are these, new in centuries?  Behold democrac
announcing that she is born and will envelop the whole world I"
*         *         *         *         * *                 *
Whthther we succeed or fail in these islands, we are engaged in
business the results of which will profoundly and forever affect ti
prestige and influence of this Republic, and so, in its ultimate cons
quences, th e      welfare of the whole human race. We should remenmb
what we are. The United States of America is to-day at the highe
point in its career. Never before has it stood forth in the presenc
of the world in such majestic plenitude of power-T7,000),000 o
people without a master, occupying the sublimest position amtin
the  ations of the earth —free and invincible. Like a city thst i
set upon a hill, our work cannot be hidden. If we fail in the Phili
pines, our failure will be seen of all the world, and seen forever.
But we shall not fail. The nation, which in the awful days of ISa
to 1865, wrought and fouht t  hrou gh  a gloom and disaster to endu
ing success, will not fail now to carry to a triumphant consummn
tion its lesser task in the Philippine Archipelago. We will fill lth
and with school-houses. We will sever church from state, and ea0J
shall be the stronger and the better for the separation. We Vi
establish justice and macke its administration pure. We will pla
firmly the principles of free government and fix forever all of tlb
priceless guaranties of civil and religious liberty. We will emalci
pate a race from the thraldom of centuries and lead them in t
pathway of the world's highest civilization. And then, when in talt
years the current of transforming, vitalizing influences has ITad
ti, philippine Islands, the home of contentment, the abode of in
dustry, and of all the arts of peace, we who are permitted to pirtirt
pate n this initial legislation, will look back, with hearts filled wit
gratlfrl. honorable pride, to this hour, and say, "Thank God, we-w
a l.i-Nret a part in the glorious work of a people's redemption."


m-I3


I




"BILL OF RIGHTS FOR THE PHILIPPINES."
tract from Philippine Civil Government Law, passed by Conrgres,
Sec. 10. That no law shall be enacted in said islands which shatr.t;prive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process
law, or deny to any person therein the equal protection of th(ws.
That no money shall be paid out of the treasury except in purance of an appropriation by law.
That in all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right
be heard by himself and counsel, to demand the nature and cause
the accusation against him, to have a speedy and public trial, to
ect the witnesses face to face, and to have compulsory process to
mpel the attendance of witnesses in his behalf.
That no person shall be held to answer for a criminal offense witht due process of law; and no person for the same offense shall be
ice put in jeopardy of punislmnent, nor shall be compelled in any
iminal case to be a witness against himself.
That all persons shall, before convictipn, be bailable by sufficient
reties, except for capital offenses, when the proof is evident or the
esumption great.
That no law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be enacted
the legislature.
That the rule of taxation in said islands shall be uniform.
That no person shall be imprisoned for debt arising out of or
sanded on contract, express or implied.
That the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus shall not be susaeded, unless when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety
ay require it.
That no ex post facto law or bill of attainder shall be enacted.
That no private or local bill which may be enacted into law shall
brace more than one subject, and that subject shall be expressed
the title of the bill.
That no warrant shall issue but upon probable cause, supported by
ath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be
arched and the person or things to be seized.
That all money collected on any tax levied or assessed for a special
urpose shall be treated as a special fund in the treasury and paid
it for such purpose only.
That no law granting a title of nobility shall be enacted, and that
o person holding any office of profit or trust in said islands shall,
ithout the consent of the Congress of the United States, accept of
ny present, emolument, office, or title of any kind whatever from
y king, queen, prince, or foreign State.
That excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imnsed, nor cruel and unusual punislhmentr inflicted.
That the right to be secure against unreasonable searches and
izures shall not be violated.
That neither slavery, nor involuntary servitude except as a punishent for crime "'whereof the party shall have been duly convicted,
all exist in said islands.
That no law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech or
f the press, or the righlt of the people peaceably to assemble an(d
tetitcn the Government for a redress of grievances.
That no law shall be made respecting an establishment of religion
pr ohibiting, the free exercise thereof, nld that the free exercise
adI enjoyment of religious profession- and worship, without discrimatiosa or preference, shall forever be allowed.
h1-14


I




"'He OPEN DOOR POLICY IN CtiNA
Extracts from remarks of Hon. B.:BARTHOLDT of Missouri,
daily Congressional Record, February 23, 1900.
Since the birth of the human race the restless spirit of migrati
and the desire to expand beyond the narrow confines of the hot
Jave moved it. Man started from the Himalaya, in middle As
in a westerly direction, and after thousands of years is still wand,
ing. Persia, Arabia, Palestine, Egypt, Phoenicia, Greece, and Rol
in rotation became his home; then northern and western Eurol
until, in search of a waterway to India, he discovered Ameri
Nearly a thousand years had then elapsed since England had be
settled by the Angles, the Saxons, the Jutes, and other Teuto0
tribes, but after the safety valve was once found it began sendi
forth streams of warm human blood across the Atlantic Ocean a
is doing so to the present day. It required but four centuries
settle and civilize this vast continent, extending from ocean to oce
and from Polar region to the Tropics. Nor will the star of emnp
in its incessant course stop on the Western Hemisphere. As t
teeming millions of Europe found an exit across the one ocean
America, so will the masses of America, gradually thickening, fi
an exit across the other ocean to Asia.
The sun of Western civilization and modern enterprise is rapi(
melting the ice surrounding the barbarian countries of the Orie
The Chinese wall has already crumbled to dust; England a
Germany have broken into the Celestial Empire and the Unit
States has taken the Philippines, and soon man will again find hi
self in the country of the Paradise, whence he had started thousan
of years ago. Having once "swung around the circle," he will ta
a new start; his second migration will again take many centuri(
but his mission of carrying the blessings of culture and civilizati
into every vacant spot can be stopped, his purpose of finding ro
and eking out an existence for himself and the unborn millions
come can be frustrated neither by mountains nor oceans, nor ev
by the learned arguments of constitutional lawyers.
The material welfare of the American people depends, like th
of every other nation, upon commerce and trade, and in this intc
national struggle, as much as the philosopher and philanthropist m
deprecate it, political systems and forms of government are qul
tions of no consideration. The Russian absolutist has precisely t
same chance as the American democrat, the French republican t
same as the German monarchist, and he alone has the advantage w
by the right of sovereignty, can control great markets to thee
clusion of the other. It is, indeed, a question of customs laws, t
same as is presented in. the pending bill. Give us the right
shape the customs laws of a country and we can snap our fingers
every competitor.
Look at what has happened in this respect. We can hardly reali
what great strides we have made in a ridiculously small space
time. We have not only retained, under a wise system of prote
tion, the largest home market of any one country in the world. b
we also have it in our power to regulate at will the customs syster
of Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the Philippines, and Cuba. And more thi
that, by a diplomatic master stroke we have secured the consent
the commercial nations of the world to an open-door policy in Clhil
The question may well be asked here whether that consent wvou
have been so readily given if we had not, by the fortunes of wr
be ome the close neighbors of the Chinese Empire  By this diplonat
triumph the present Administratioi has arrested the dismemberre
of tha vast esmpire, oecause a guaranty of equal trade advatitag
to all ntions renders the right of sovereignty or ownership n( o, 
supe rfo   u", but robs it of all charm.
If there ever was a European conspiracy or merely a hidden (tesir
having for its object the parceling out of the domain of China amo
the powers, it has been frustrated. The danger of America ever beli
sh ut o from the Chinese markets has been forever removed, aind ti
American people have secured to themselves those great advantag
w  hih the  niistration refused to secure by a particpation in l
grabbing performances which would have been beneat     r  itio
m-15


i
3
I
I
I
i
0
1
t,
I
I
I
t
I
11


I




HE PACIFIC HENCEFORTH TO BE AN AMERICAN
SEA.L",tracts from remarks of ion. C. A.  G ROW  of Pennsylvania, in
daily Congressional Record, December 19, 1899.
I have never had any fears for the future of the Republic by reason
the expansion of its territory and the extension of its free institions. Pending the repeal of the Missouri compromise in Congress
1854, I then said relative to expansion:
"Who believes that the territorial expansion of the Republic will
tcontinue until it covers the whole continent? It is one of the
idents of our position, resulting from the habits of our people and
echaracter of surrounding nationalities. While the pioneer spirit
esses on into the wilderness, snatching new areas from the wild
ast and bequeathing them a legacy to civilized man, it is in vain
u attempt to stay his progress by meridian lines or legislative
actments.
"The habits of his life and the promptings of his nature are stronger
an the river or mountain barriers of nations. When he has covered
whole continent with the abodes of civilized life, seizing the
adard of the Republic, he will bear it, with the spirit and genius
free institutions, across the mighty deep to regenerate old dynasties
d breathe new life into decaying empires. This, no matter what
ay be the views of statesmen or the policy of legislation, is our
ssion, our manifest destiny. For energy, intelligence, and superior
terprise are destiny, and whoever attempts to stay it may be borne
sn by the tide, but he can not change the current."
These words, uttered in no spirit of prophecy, and which at the
e were only a plain statement of the characteristics of the Ameran people and the surrounding conditions of national existence
-day, are, by the fortunes of war, prophecy fulfilled. But what
ophetic ken can pierce the veil of the now overhanging future?
e Atlantic Ocean, rolling between two mighty hemispheres, is a
erman, French, and English sea.  But the Pacific Ocean, with
lost twice the area of waters washing the shores of nationalities
ntaining two-thirds the population of the globe, is henceforth to
an American sea covered with American ships laden with the
oduicts of American industry. The commerce of half the world,
lizing the dream of Columbus, will go westward to find the Indies.
England, facing eastward, carrying her Magna (harta of personal
hts and all her great institutions of civil and religious liberty, and
United States of America, first born of these institutions, facing
stward, carrying the same institutions, with the practical experience
tover a hundred years in self-government, will some day meet in
e far-off Orient, having belted the globe with institutions of civil
d religious liberty and constitutional  free government for all
nkind.
The white man can never lay down his burden so long as oppression
c national injustice and wrong exist among the children of men.
ations, '[e individuals, owe something to a common humanity, for
iy are the trustees of civilization. It is ordained in the retributions
that overruling Providence which controls in the affairs of men
at nations can not shirk their responsibilities to liberty and
aanity when cast upon them, in the course of human events, witht bitter retributions soon or late in national disasters.
The ships will part the unknown sea,
The march of thought will reach the strand;
The onward wave of destiny
Will change the features of the land.
n-16


I




"THE PH:ILIPPIEtS.-.-THIS IS OUR POLICY, TO G
AHEAD WITH AN HONEST PURPOSE."
Extract from speech of SENATOR SPOONER of I:
consin, ' i the United States Senate, May 31, 1902.
R:lEPULICAN POLICY IN THE PHILIPPINES.
Senators demand that we tell them what our policy is
the Philippines. I    ere it is in this bill. We propose to ma'
no foolih prmise to the Filipinos, at this juncture, or ai
other. They have had enough from Spain. We do not i
tend to furnish there an eleent of distraction. We do ]
intend to put there anything to promote agitation. Y
want the mind of the Flipino t be on progress,t be on t
upbuilding of government, to be on the education of 1
childre  to be on the lxelleuee of our institutions, ai
up:on the earnestnes of our purpose to safeguard liberty
that land.
T;hat is our policy. To go ahead; to feel our way,
course, but to go ahead with an honest purpose and with 
the wiso   we cain ommand. And we want your help, Se
ator of the minority. We are entitled to it. We will'
better if we get it. If we cannot get it, we are going a
without you, and it will not be the first time. 
I hope a h d pray that the time will come when we c
truthfiully say: We took, reluctantly, because by the f(
tunes of war' w    ere there, the title to the Philippi
Archipelago.;We subdued resistance to our authority. Y
filed he islands with schools and with homes owned iby
people: We established a school for government in whi
were aughtl the lessons of liberty restrained by law. V
separated the church from the State. We lifted the de
hand of ecclesiastieal ownership. We gave them our bill
rights and an indepedent judiciary to enforce its guara
ties. /-We:emnanaiiipated the peasant from feudalism. 
drove fromk the archipelago the scourge of ladronisin. 
eneouUtered obstaces, but we surmouned them. We aina.mistakes, but we cotrreted them, We educated the inhab
ants for self-govermnenlt, and although occupying a tr:
tory oi our own, we extended to them the principles of t
Dclsration of n dependence, eonsltted, when tlhey 'were
their: wshes as: to goernment, and aided them iW:the ert
tion tof a "Reputblic in Asia." We thrw the shield f o
proteting power around them. In; the end we left l or 
lfloting there among agrateful, f iudy, aed m  ed I
ngl I a  griendly, and indei
people-a 'tsign of welcome, safety, and rest to the mairin
of our Reputblic  ho'sail te far Pacific and a remin t'
the Filipinos and tir children of the rich fu1fill1eit
Mcin[le!  ' pithe   that it would not lse "its gift of I
dictiol in its world-wide jourey to heir shor
zn-I


1
1
1
i
I
I
I


I




"IMPERIALISM.
ftrat from  remarks of Hon       0. T..  'POON.E, of Wisconsin, in daih,
Congressionaa Record, May 9, 1900.
From the time that treaty was ratified, which has been declared or
aracterized as a declaration of war, we have had an agitation In this
untry. Mr. Bryan, to whom I reer rf espectfully, came here and labored
r the ratification of that treaty.  If it was a declaration of war he
ust take his share of the responsibility for it, If it in itself involved
perialism he was a promoter of imperialism.
Before the treaty was ratified, January 9, he published in the N^w
ork Journal an elaborate article upon the subject, urging the ratificaon of the treaty, and a declaration of future policy as to the Philipnes, strongly I thought, and think, foreshadowing. in the event C'
lure to make such a declaration, an aggressive issue against Imperialan or colonialism, and from that time in all the speeches he hags made.
lch I have read, he has made anti-imperialism   the paramount feature
f hit political creed.  Without impeaching the sincerity  of his vtiew
glnst imrperialism, as I understand it, or colonrlalism  when the time
ones to decide that question, I have thought? and do thirnk  that It was
attempt to make an issue where there is no Issue, apparently born
tt of the necessity to obscure in some respects the Issues of 1896.
For I insist, Mr. President, that there is not in this day, nor has there
een any legitimate foundation for an issue of isnperir'!Ksm  and Ont-~periti-im.,  Mr. Bryan is the most conspicuous and pow-rful leader of
te Democratic party at thintime, and he has done more, in the way of
abile speeches and writings, in attack upon what he calls imyperialism
an any other man in the country, and that is manifestly what he seeks
d has sought to make the principal issue in the ca.mpalgn upon which
eare shortly to enter.
Where is the Issue of Imperialism and anti-imperialism?  Upon what
eundation of fact does it or can it rest now?  Who has proposed Im~rialism  in the Philippine Archipelago?  Who could speak under teb
onstitutlon upon that subject?  The President has had but one policy
ad that is the policy of an. executive,  It is the policy to carry forward
lto execution the law.  We ratified the treaty.'   We might have reeted it. We take our share of the responsibility for laying that founation. We have passed the military bill. We had placed these sold1ers
it his command, knowing and intending, Mr. President, that he should
e them, that he would use them to assert and maintain the sovereignty
the United States in the Philippine Archipelago.
Who can dispose of itf     The President?   No.  The President haf
ade no speech in which, as I recollect it, he did not assert that the
Ower of disposition Is in Congress. Hie says In hs last annial mesage
hat the whole power of government there is in Congress.      The Conttution provides that Congress shall have power "to dispose of and
alke all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory of the
nited States."  The President can not do it. It is for Congress to do it.
t s for Congress to say whether we will withdraw our Vrmy from     the
Philippines or not, whether we will cede the Philippines or not, how
e will govern the Philippines if we retain them, or how long we shall
etain them. It Is not for the President to say, nor has he arrogate8
to imself that function.
In the years to come, Mr. President, if there shall be a time when the
Pilippine people, having under out tutelage and guidance been uplifted,
having by years of participation in local government become familiar i
a way with that science  when edtucation shall have been more largely
difuNtfed in the islands; when they have come to know, as they will come
tI0 noW, that we are their friends, not their enemies; swhen, In the
opinion of the  ntelligent, patriotic people of the lUnited States, the
Pli:,?pine people are capable of self-government, capable of maintatning
a -overnment which will discharge the duties of a government, which
vdl1 protect life and liberty and property, which. if yot    please, tan
0sebarge the obligations between n:tions, then, M/r. President. if they
It independenice, and there shall be a party in this countrjy which sta. s
yes  and a party in this corntril th.ich. sctm "'no, n we  i7t,ill fi:,vc'l t-hegnr
toternT  as a teritory or colony," that will be an issue of imperialsm  ad
antimpertlisnt m. J can not come until then, antd can not be settled snaless
M,ntl it shall hotme Come. I is not here now.s
m-18




"JEFFERSON WAS THE INEER IMPERIALISTT.
Extracts from remarks of Hfon. WM. M. STEWART of Nevada, in daily 
gressional Record, February 16, 1900.
Why should not the present generation enjoy opportunities similar
those furnished our fathers by the acquisition of Louisiana, Florida, Tez
New Mexico, and California? Why should not the wealth, power, and
terprise of the American people be increased and encouraged?   May
the acquisition of the islands of the Atlantic and the Pacific wrested f
Spain place the United States in the near future foremost as a manut
turing, commercial, naval, and political power?
The suggestion that the acquisition of territory is imperialism
refuted by the fact that neither Jefferson, Monroe, Jackson, Polk, nor 
ef their associates are regarded as imperialists. The imperialism  th
advocated made homes for patriotic, liberty-loving, self-resecting c
sent, whose loyalty to the Government of the United States is unsurpas
by the people of any of the thirteen original States.
If to assist the people of the Philippines to establish local self-gov
ment after the plan adopted   y Jeffro     ipero  i i rialism, then Jeffers
was the pioneer imperialist of the United States. The Philippines will nev
be dependent colonies. They will be allowed to conduct their own affal
with the assistance of such officers as it may be necessary to appoint
aid them in establishing local self-government. They will not have a vot
in the legislative councils of the nation until Congress shall ascerta
and determine that their admission as States would be desirable. INo
withstanding the treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo promised to make Stat
of the territories acquired from Mexico, New Mexico is still a Territor
The suggestion that we must not trust the future, that those who w
come after us will admit the Philippines as States, whether aualified
not, is an assumption that our system    of republican governmet is
failure and that patriotism  will become extinct when the seats in th
Chamber are filled by our successors,
No person occupies a seat here to-day but myself, who was a mem
of the Senate in the Thirty-eighth, Thirty-ninth, Fortieth, Forty-fir
and Forty-second Congresses. I was impressed during that time wit
the anxiety of many Senators for the future and their forebodings
calamities which they contended would necessarily follow   if the op
nents of the Union in the Civil War were again allowed to participate 
the government of the country. They assumed in their arguments th
future Congresses could not be trusted and that the Government was
danger of being utterly subverted. How they misjudged the future
the heroic patriotism  and valor of the soldiers from every State in '
Union in t      at   a  the lat  w arth Spa i n the  ar-off Philippines b
witness. The patriotism and fidelity to the interests of the whole countr
exhibited in both Houses of Congress by members from      the South a
well as from the North prove that a reunited people now enjoy a mor
perfect union than ever before.   I have faith in my country and!
the American people that they can extend a helping hand to the Filipin0
and enable them   to peacefully assemble and perfect in due time 100i
self-government where life and property will be as secure as it n0o
is in any State of this Union. I have seen order grow out of confusio
in that vast territory acquired from Mexico until the governments of ti
far West are as efficient n protectin g life, liberty, and property as the best
governed State of the East.
No one pretends that the Filipinos are now fit for statehood, but
repudiate the suggestion that they are not fit for just such governmel
as Jeferaon extended to the Louisiana purchase and Monroe to the acqui
sition of Florida. There may not be enough Americans in that countr
o organize a State government without Congressional or Executive acti0o
as in the case of California; but if the same Congressional and Executit
care that were extended to all other acquisitions of territory except Cal
fornia are extended:to the Philippines, they will progress-it  maY 
owly, but they will progress in working out good government for the
s   elves  nd  urity for ifte and property, which will bring prosperity a
re    to them and great commercial and political adantages to us,
m-19




Shipping
N




"THE RESTORATION OF THE AMERICAN FLAG C
MERCIALLY ON THE OCEAN."
Extracts from remarks of Hon. WM. H. DOUGLAS of New York, in. da
Congressional Record, April 26, 1904.
Mr. SPEAKBR: It     ives me great pleasure to record myself stron
in favor of and in syniathy with the passage of the present resolution
appoint a conference committee to carefully consider and report at our ne
session what means cal likely best be adopted to lead to the restoration
the American flag commercially on the ocean.
Vith a ccmmerce already in excess of fifteen hundred millions in
ports, and a thousand millions in imports, practically all of which is carri
by alien vessels, it is well to call a halt and admit that we have now reacl.
a point of national degradation which should go no further, or we will pra
tically have no ships whatever engaged in the deep-sea water trade.
have to-day probably not more than one hundred and fifty to two hundr
thousand gross tons so employed against the necessary tonnage of at lea
10,000,000 gross tons to carry even 60 per cent. of our vast and growl
necessities. England alone possesses a merchant fleet of 12,000,000 gro
tons.
So much has been written and spoken on the question that it won
be fruitless, and is, in fact, almost useless at this late date to go into
elaborate argument as to the conditions which have led to the decline
our supremacy. It Is, however, admitted by those who are not absolute
prejudiced that the chief causes of the decline have been the antiquat
navigation laws which we have allowed to stand for so long a period
our statute books, and the precluding of American citizens from buying
building abroad and securing United States register.
A potent factor also was the civil war and the natural loss to shl
ping caused thereby, but probably above all reasons,r and the most destru
tive to our glory on the sea, was-the passing away:of the wooden clipp
and the building'of iront and *stleel steanmrs and satlers.. We are as y
In no position to compete In this industry o n a parity with others, althou
I trust we shial be within a few years, and It is well-known that the co
of sailing an Atmerican ship, by reason of the high wages that must
paid and better provisions for the crew called for rightly by our laws, al
counts largely against us. Had it not been for our fortunate and wise pr
visions protecting the coastal trade, the condition of that branch of o
carrying business and national,;r:osperity, of which we are to-day so prou
would also be in as bad a shape as is our foreign trade.
The Republican party is in potevr. and they should no longer comp
the nation to further suffer in pncl t', a.nd pride and lay ourselves open to t
grave chances which would confront a:cs in case of war between two of t
great European nations. If we were called upon to face emergencies
this kind, while we might secure some shipping, there would not be su
clent tonnage available for our prompt needs and requirements, and in an
ease the greatly increased price that we would have to pay for the hi
would be a heavy drawback on our export business, and we would probabl
lose as much If not more in six months or a year than we would have
expend on any judicious system of relief in twenty-five years.
It is absurd to deny or claim that all the great world nations of eto-d'
are not safeguarding and protecting their shipping interests in every jw)ss
bWe manner. It is stated by some that England does not protect her tram
steamers by subsidy, which is, in a measure, correct; but we must not for
get that In many indirect ways she does help her merchant vessels. W
should not shut our eyes to the fact that she Is naturally a maritime natio
and her fleets secure the preference through community of interests i
trading between her home ports and her extended possessions in variol
parts of the world, enabling them to obtain outward and home cargoes
She therefore has a decided advantage over others, and the German. ati0
and the French nation are following in her footsteps.
Many claim that the French have not made a success of their protec
tive policy in shipping: but this is hardly true, as they have succeeded i
keeping on the ocean the French flag and to-day have a splendid deepose
tonnage and many steamers specially built for the Government requt1'i
mentsa n case of war that can be called upon at a moment's notice; an
we must further recollect that the French nation is not in as advant:oJ11I
a position as England3 or ourselves to accomplish results. While Er iand
therefore, it is true grants no direct measure of relief, she is most libera
in het payments to the permanently established lines under the ple
mall subsidy or  ayment for carrying the malls,


1n





IF WE I0 OUR OWN CARRYING WE MUST BUILD
OUR OWN SHIPS.
ttracts from remarks of Hon. WM. I. H UMPHRE Y of Washington, in daily Congressional Record' April 3 1.904.
USEr Or THE PRESENT GONDITION OF OUR SHPPIPNG
Why does the United States, with all its wealth, with all its
real foreign trade, with all its energy, fail to carry her part of
Ie commerce of the seas?  It is simply a question of wages and
sitdy. It costs one-fourth more to build a ship in this country
an it does in Europe. Why? Because of higher wages. It costs
e-third more to operate an American than a foreign vessel, so
Ir.as labor is concerned. Why? Because of higher wages. 
I needr not stop to cite illustrations, examples, or statistics to
rcve this assertion, for evidence would have 1no weight with those
iho would deny the statement. Add to the price of labor the subdies and you have the causes that have driven American ships from
Ie oceal. One-half of all the ships that sail the sea are running un[r havy subsidies. We must overcome this disadvantage of wa7nes,
isx disadvantaqe of subsidies by national aid and that quickly,
our shipyards will become desolate places and our flag will enrely disappear from the sea.
FR'EE SHIPS.
The world's history shows that those who have built ships have
vrigated them. If we do our own carrying, we must build our
wn shipes. tWhy is the shipbuilding industry in this country to-day
nguishing? Because capital can not be profitably invested therein.
i long as the world remains as it is men will not engage in an
indertaking in which there is no hope of.reward. The remedy for
is condition advocated by the gentlemen on the other side of the
liose is registry for all ships bought by American citizens wherever
ilt, or, in other words, their remedy is "free ships."  No more
there reason why. we should employ foreigers to build our ships
an that we should employ foreigners to build our houses.
If we were to make it possible for cheap labor from Europe to
me here and construct our buildings, the entire country would
rotest -and justly so, against the outrage. American labor would
e, a ita should, and sweep into eternal oblivion any party that
auld for a moment advocate such a policy. But the advocate of
ee ships does more. If the foreigner should come into. this country
o 1o our work, we would at least get a part of his wages for suporting him while he was doing it; but when he builds our ships
i do not feed him or clothe him or shelter him. " We receive the
ished product.of his toil, wrought in other lands. Of all cometition that cheapens American labor, that destroys American
rosperity, this, is the most dangerous, the most deadly, the most
excusable.
The doctrine of free ships is the infamous doctrine of free trade
the land applied to the commerce on the seas. Fortunately
r this country, fortunately for the wage-earners of this na[n, the record of ruin wrought by the last Democratic Administrao0 has made this doctrine "a hiss and a byword" so odious to the
nrarican that no man anywhere within the confines of this great
epublic has the assurance to stand up and defend this doctrine
i disaster and death. For its advocates to disguise it by another
ame does not make it smell more sweet. [Applause.]
OUIR ONLY UNPROTECTED INDUSTRY.
Situated as we are between two great oceans, with our extensive
0ast line, with our vast interests, it is our duty to assert our rights
thie sea as much as it is to protect our interests in our immense
4rnain on the land. This nation has given protection to every in[ustry on.land and d sea except only our foreign commerce. We
ure built canals. We are undertaking a great system of irrigaitqn. We are going to lunite the waters of two great oceans.. We
'Re subsidized our rivers and harbors. Each year as surely as
Ie rivers- run to the sea. so certain does there flow millions from
te National Treasury into rivers and harbors. We have prote:d our manufacturing, and we are tthe greatest manufacturing
ttion of the earth. The manufactured product, of this country
s rstly more than that, of any other two nations, and the labor
'                                                   teed therein is the best-paid labor of its class in all the world.
{ie.have plrotected every industry except= the foreign, menrc:hamt
ritte, and every other industry has prospered andd fourished bedN those of ay other nation n all the word's history.


It-2




"OUR MERCHAN              MARINE IN THE FOREIGN TRAD
IS LANGUISHING."
ts fm  e    of Ho. B. de V. MOfR ELL of Pennsylvania i d
Congressional Record, April 30, 1904.
This bill provides for a "Merchant Marine Commission" composed
five Senators and five Representatives, at least four of whom-two Senate
and two Representatives-shall belong to the minority party. These met
bers are to be appointed by the presiding officers of each House. T
commission Is not to legislate, but to "investigate and report what legi
lation Is desirable for the development of the American merchant nar
and American commerce." it Is required in carrying on Its investigati
to: give to al whose interests are involved a reasonable time for hearing
just as committees of Congress are accustomed to do; and it may appoil
"subcommissions to make Investigation In any part of the United States."
The amount appropriated by the bill for the expenses of the comminssi
is limited to $20,000. The question pre ss ed      here is  e the co
dition of the merchant marine shall be properly investigated with a vie
to its speedy rehabilitation. As one of the witnesses before the commitrt
put It, "It is an Investigation now, gentlemen-investigation to-day or ii
quest to-morow."
It is admitted on all sides that our merchant marine in the foreig
trade is languishing. It is admitted that unless some remedy for pres
conditions is devised before losng it will practically be swept from the sea
The majority of the committee realized this situation and have repJort
in favor of the bill, but the minority favor supine inaction. They say:
The opponents of subsidy should rally against this bill. * * * Sue
a bill passed the Senate, and its irrepressible promoters and beneficiari
are pushing this bill.
Mr. Speaker, who are the beneficiaries of this bill?  It is a bill fh
collecting and reporting information, and surely nobody could or would re
ceive greater benefit from the passage of such a bill than those who ar
opposed to legislation for the revival of our shipping interests, becaus
they do not understand the subject. Compulsory education may not alway
7 thle Cmost aoreeable thing in the world, but it is often the nost necessa
thing. Nor was there ever an instance in which it was more necessar
than the present. The minority are as illogical as they are obstinate.
The ultimate object of the investigation proposed by this bill ist
enable Congress to discover some plan for rehabilitating the foreign cor
merce of the country and that portion of our merchant marine which
engaged in the foreign trade. Its proximate object Is, as I have alreai
said, to provide a method for ascertaining what is the best means of at
taining that end.
Four of the members of the proposed commission would be Dem
crats and would have full opportunity to develop Democratic theories as
the merchant marine. The commission is not to be merely the mouthpie
of those who are already committed to any one plan over another. Th
are to Investigate all plans. The end in view is perfectly clear to all
us. But the best means of reaching that end is not clear. The great ma
jority of us, I presume, have not at present sufficient knowledge of the sub
ject In all its ramifications to feel perfectly sure of arriving, without fur
In 1828 our foreign commerce carried in American bottoms amounte
to 757,908 tons, being 88.9 per cent. of our total foreign trade. Then eam
the Democratic "free freighting act," enacted in the interest of forei
shipowners-an act which is even now in force. That actand the treatie
following it destroyed entirely the advantages which American shipowne
enjoyed under the protection of discriminating duties. But it gave -s D
compensating advantages whatever.
Between 1828 and 1902 this proportion gradually diminished. In i89
it was only 12 per cent., as against 88.9 per cent. in 1828, and it is no
still less. I am told that t is not to-day more than 5 per cent. In 190
it was 1.75 per cent. of our exports and 3.25 per cent. of our impos
After seventy-five years of unprotected carrying under the free-freightiD
act and Democratic reciprocity treaties only 5 per cent. of our immens<
exports and imports were carried in American bottoms.
But the effect and the expediency of discriminating duties, as well
of the subsidy plan and all other systems of developing our shipping in
dustry and its related industries, would be thoroughly investigated and ex
pounded by the tmerchant-marine commission. Our doubts as to the Wis
dom of the 0protective scheme, which was crippled and eventually destrye
by the freefreighting act of 1828, passed by a Democratic Congress and car
ried into effect by Democratic Presidents, might be thereby removed.
But however this may be, we all need the information con     tea
by this bill  We need eligtenment on this subject.


3
I
I
i
I
I


I


n-3


I




HE AMERICAN PEOPLE WANT AN AMERICAN MERCHANT MARINE FOR OUR FOREIGN CARRYING.'
racts from remarks of Hon. WM. S. GREENE of Massachusetts, in daily
Congressional Record, April 28, 1904.
Mr. Chairman, this question of American shipping is a very simple
e Strangely enough, however, there is thrown over and around it a
gree of mystery and misrepresentation that so confuses and complicates
equestion that many people give up its solution in despair..The shipg question i3 entirely a labor question. *  *  *
The American people want an American merchant marine for our
reign carrying. *  *  *  What they need to see is American shipyards
y building the ships needed for our ocean carrying.  They know that
ehave an abundance of shipbuilding material equal to every possible
d; that our soil is full of iron ore and coal-the two chief ingredients
moder shipbuilding.
They would like to see our great railroad and water transportation
ncies and the American labor they employ engaged in carrying the raw
terials required in shipbuilding to the mills and factories, and alter
ey have been fashioned into the proper shapes at the mills and the facrips by American labor they would like to see them again carried to our
ipyards, there to engage American labor in assembling the different parts
o the finished ships. *  *  *  *  The Democrats would have us buy
r ships abroad, officer and man them with aliens, in order to solve the
oblem of an American (?) mercantile marine. The difference would be
it the net earnings of the ships, after all of their expenses had been
d-say 5 per cent.-would come into the United States; foreigners would
ve the remaining 95 per cent. of the gross earnings of the ships under
e Democratic plan for the rehabilitation of the American mercantile
rine. What real benefit, therefore, would it be to the American people,
d to the United States as a nation, to have our ships built abroad,
cered and manned by aliens?  The capitalist only would be benefited by
iis Democratic free-ship policy; American labor woud be benefited nothing
hatsoever.
bor's concern    with  shipping-a     plea  for protection    for
American deep-sea shipping in order that 30,000
workingmen may be given employment in American shipyards.
y John McNeil, president o~ the Brotherhood of Boilermakers and Ironship Builders of America.]
I am the president of an organization of American workingmen all of
hom are dependent upon shipbuilding for their livelihood. We have a
nebership of 30,000, Scattered over the country among 500 different
dges. We are mostly concerned in securing work at our trade. There
ere never so many of our members seeking employment at their trade as
are are to-day.
We find ourselves in a country where the wages are far higher than
ey are in any other country. We do not desire any reduction in the
erage rates of American wages. *   *  ~   *  Considering the wages
id to our men in the shipyards, the prices of materials, and other exenses connected with shipbuilding, it is impossible to produce a ship in
iis country as cheaply as it can be' produced in other countries. If we
sere steadily employed, like locomotive and bridge builders, year in and
ear out through a great widespread demand for our product, we should
n, no doubt, be able to build ships as cheaply, if not more cheaply, than
reigners do, just as our locomotives and bridges are constructed as cheaply
rmore cheaply then foreign locomotives and bridges are constructed. * *
Great and permanent demand for ships for the deep-sea trade is what
wanted. The problem is how to get it. Just such a situation existed
this country fourteen years ago with respect to the tin-plate industry.
e knew how to make tin plate, we had all the facilities with which to
ake it, the skill, the materials, and the demand for tin plate. The price
as the obstacle. Americans could not make it as cheaply as foreigners
5lld, So Congress laid a high duty on imported tin plate, and we all know
at in the fourteen years that have passed since that duty was laid we not
iry make all of the tin plate we need for ourselves, but we also export large
santities.
If the high protective duty were withdrawn doubtless we should soon
se the manufacture of tin plate. It was through the action of Congress
iade worth the wbille of American capital to invest in the tin-plate making
this country  The wages of men employed at tin-plate manufacture were
it reduced to the foreign level, but the cost of the foreign product was so
creased as to enable Americans to make it and still pay the going rates
' wages in the United States to the workingmen employed in tin-plate
rnufacturing.
We ask Congress to do for the shipbuilding industry precisely what it
i for the tin-plate industry. First, to realize that ships will not be built
ere for the foreiqn price, and, secondly, to matce it profitable for American
Oital to invest in American-built ships. And we ask Congress t do this
n our ships employed in the deep-sea trade just as it has done it for the
-Plate industtry-throtuh protection.  We have tried free trade in ocean
asportation so long that the results of the trial are manifest to everydy. We ha-,e now 800,000 tons of ocean shipping where a generation and
rre ago we had 2,500,000 tens. *  *  *
The denial of protection to American ships in the deep-sea trade!ients to a denial of employment for men of our craft at our trade in the
ited States; that the injury falls upon American labor, and not upon,er ean capital. It is idle to tell us that we can prosper by accepting
f treign rates of wages: we could not if we would, and we would not if
could. W; want to be as good as other American workingmen in every
epect; we-want to earn as good wages, to enjoy as many of the necessaries,
cmforts, and the luxuries of life as the rest of our fellow-workingdo, and' since acts of Congress have created and long maintained a
nh    d standard of wages for American workingmen in all other trades than
i we still cling to the hope-long deferred, to be sure-that Congress
illt see and then rectify, the injustice it does to American workingien omployed in building ships through its persistent refusal to protect
ritean ships that compete with foreign ships in our over-sea trade.
nh-4




T S    NATION:: HAS  EN  P TETION    TO   EVER
INDUSTRY EXCEPT OUR FOREIGN COMMERCE."
Etractt from remarks of Hlon. WM. B. IIUMPHl      EY of Wa
ngto, i daily Congressional Record, April ~3, 1904.
Situated as we    - are between two great oceans, with our extensi
coast line, with our vast interests, it is our duty to assert our rig
on the sea as much as it is to protect our interests in our 
mensed domain ont the land. Ihis nation has given protection
every idustry on land d and se except only our foreign commnter
We have built canals. We are undertaking a great system of 
rigation. We are going to unite the waters of two great ocean
We have subsidized our rivers and harbors. Each year as sure
as the rivers run to the sea, so certain does there flow millio
from the National Treasury into rivers and harbors. We have pr
tected our manufacturing, and we are the greatest manufacturi
nation of the earth. The manufactured product of this count
is vastly more than that of any other two nations, and the lab
engaged therein is the best-paid labor of its class in all the worl
We -protect farming, and we are the greatest agricultural nati
on earth.' Te products of this industry last year was more th
$4,000,000,000, and the labor engaged therein is the best-paid lab
of its class in all the world. We protect mining, and this indust
produced last year more than $1,000,000,000, and the labor engag
therein is the bestpaid labor of its class in all the world. 
have subsidized railroads by money and by land grants of min
than   00,000,000  are, and we have the greatest railway s
ternm  ndthe cheapest rates on earth, and the labor engaged in t
industry is the best-paid labor of its class in all the world.'
have protected our coastwise -and lake shipping, and it is the chea
est transportation on earth, and the labor engaged in this indust
is the best-paid labor of its class in all the world.
We have protected every industry except the foreign mercha
marine, and every other industry has prospered and flourhed b
ond thse of any other nation in all the world's history. Whi
forty years ago we carried three times as much foreign commer
as we carry to-day, yet to-day we have four times as nmch co
nere# as we had forty years ago. This, our only unprotected 
dustry, is the only one in which American labor and Americ
capital has practically no part. It is the only one in which forei
labor and foreign capital has driven out American labor and Ame
can capital. It is the only unprotected industry, and it is t
industry that charges the highest rates, gives the poorest retur
on the investment, and pays the lowest wages of all Americ
industries.
TiSE BENEFIT OF LABOR.
The workingmen of this country are more deeply interested
this question than any other class. Thousands of foreigners a
to-day performing labor that should be done at home. It is t
workiginan who is losing most by having our commerce carnri
by others. It is the woriingman whose work and wages are take
from him. This loss of work and this loss of wages affect t
laboring class more directly han ay  other. If we were to p
$50,000,000 annually in subsidies and that  aymen      ld w cal
uw to& build our own ships and in them carry our own trade, th
stwmnQwold return to us more than threefold each year in wages (ldo
To build our own ships and do our own carrying would gi
investment to more than $700,000,000, and would give employnme
to 500,000 men, who would earn more than a million dollars I
wages each day. Even this is not the limit that would be gie
to; the employment of labor. Labor must fell the trees in l
forest; labr:   must move the timber and operate the mills
manufacture the lumber; labor must digf from mines the coal an
the iron for the furnaces and forges; labor must transport the
products from mine and mill to the shipyards. The farmer mrl'
furnish bread and clothing for all these countless toilers. T
question toches every interest, every class, and every section.
-:    a question tat directly interests all who by the sweat (
their -face eat bid.  It is a question that enters into every faimil
that comes to every fireside in America. It is one of the hie
utpoes, one of; te most sacred duties of the Government, to t
itswok and its wages to its own. Yet each day's sun sees t
ation take fromFAmerican labor a million dollars in uwork and
milion dollars in 'wagas and give them to those of another ela
owing allegiance to aoth0er flag.


n-5                                                 I




I
i
Ii
1,
t
t
11
I
I
I
I
II
i
I
I
I


I


I


T IS  ADVISABLE TO         BUILD    PART    OF   OUR   SHIPS
ON   THE PACIFIC       COAST."
tract from debate, in daily Congressional Record, February 25,
1904. 
iMr. WILLIAMS, Of Mississippi. Mr. Chairman, this is a fair samIe of the degeneration of reason and the disease of imagination
at comes from a system of protectionism.   - Here is a proposition
ow deliberately to pay out of the public Treasury 4 per cent.
ore to people in a certain section of the United States for doing
rtain work than is paid to other people in other sections for doing
sactly the same work. Where is it going to stop?  After a while
ihen the Post-Office Department wants to get certain material, when
e War Department wants it, when the Interior Department wants
ertain work done, are we to say that we must pay 4 per cent. more
it is done on the Pacific slope than if it is done in Mississippi,
r 3 per cent. more if it is done in Pennsylvania than if it is done
[New Jersey?
The protection of the United States against the balance of the
orld has been partially dignified by the adherence of a great
iny nien of intelligence, but protection of one part of the United
tates against another is mere disease of the imagination in ecoli-tics, and this is as good a time to strike it down as any other
me that can possibly present itself.
Mr. CUSHRMANs. Mr. Chairman, in rising to support the amendient offered by my colleague [Mr. HUmIPHrsE     Of Washington]
address myself first to the gentleman from    Mississippi [Mr.
IiLIAMS], who is opposing this amendment. I am not at all surrised that, belonging to the political party that he does and
ntertaining the views that he does on the subject of protection
enerally, he has made an onslaught on the proposed amendnment
this bill, which amendment embodies a feature of the protective
aw,
It is somewhat surprising, however, to think that the gentleman
rom Mississippi, who was so earnestly in favor of a million-dollar
i)propriation being made at this same session of Congress to prot the cotton industry of Texas from the ravages of the devastatng cotton worm, can work himself up into such a tremendous
lpasm of virtue over this provision. That WRS a provision to  p{ppropriate money to protect an agricultural industry of the South.
T hi s ia provision to appropriate money to protect a manfactufrog industry of the West. He was in favor of that. He is against
[tii. I always admire the somersaulting proclivities of a political
ocrobat whenever I am privileged to witness them.
Now, then, it is to the interest of this Government for numerolus
reasons to have part of the battle ships for our Navy built on the
Pacific coast.
First, it is advisable to build part of our battle ships on the
Pacific coast because experience has taught this nation that the
i'ery best specimens of naval architecture, not of this nation alone,
but of the world, have been turned out of the Pacific coast yards.
Second, it is advisable that part of our battle ships be built on
the Pacific coast in order to maintain and stimulate a healthy
Ompetition in this gigantic and necessary work.
As I have heretofore stated, if there is no competition the (Govranmernt is powerless to control the price in any degree.   Anv
ctmpetition, in order to be of any benefit to the Government, mttrt
be real competition. All the large steel plates and all the heavy
inaterial that go into a battle ship are produced on or near the
Atlantic coast, and from there they must be transported to swhatever
Piace the battle ship is to be built. And if a battle ship is to be
buit on the Pacific coast at all, the Pacific coast contractor must
hip all this heavy material, hundreds and thousands of tons, across
Ie continent and pay 75 cents per hundred freight charges on it,
And for these reasons we have to-day offered and are supportlog this amendment to the naval appropriation bill, which amendlnent in substance provides that the Secretary of the Navy shall,ive a 4 per cent. preferential to Pacific-coast bidders.
a-6






"FREE    TRADE!: FREE -SLVER!' FREE          SHI       TH
DEMOCRATIC TRINITY OF DARKNESS!"
Extracts from remarks of Hon. WM. E. HUMPHREY of I f.
inrton, in daily Congressional 'tecord, April 2, 1904.
The whole country has awakened to the imperative, necessity
aid for our merchant marine. Even in the Middle West, wheie
few years ago there was much opposition to national aid bei>
given, they have become aroused to its need, and our conmiitt
has been receiving communications from  many of the comman eri
bodies of that great section urging us to enact some law that wi
bring relief. That something should be done is no longer a que
tion. The only question to-day is, How shall we do it?    Whl
method should be adopted?   To ascertain a remedy is tile prine
pal object of this bill. I am  n fiavor of anything that will yi
us American ships to carry Americain trade, provided it be ti
done at the expense of some other American interests.    If di
criminatig duti es wilt accomplish this result., then I am in f/m
of discriminating duties. If subsidies will produce this result, th
I am in favor of subsidies. If the two combined will produce th
result, then I am in favor of the combination. As the gentleme
on the other side of the House have expressed themselves as o0
posed to certain measures, so I, too, am opposed to some propose
remedies. I am opposed to buying ships built in other countri(
-to free ships. I am opposed to any system that gives anothi
nation work that can be done at home; that gives investment t
foreign capital that should be given to Anmerica  capital. I am
opposed to any plan that will send our money abroad. I am nl
in favor of any scheme that would remove the tariff upon articl
the like of~ which are produced in our country.
I am not in, favor of trying the delusion of free trade either o
land or sea. I oppose any plan that will reduce American wNage
I am eternally and everlastingly opposed to any scheme —in an
shape, in any form-thatt will not give the investment to Amer
can capital and the employment to American labor.    [Applanusc
F;ree trade!  Free silver! Free ships! The Democratic triti
of darkness   No longer dare its worshipers bow down to the far
two except in secret; and when we have an opportunity to tear (c
the mask of the third and expose it in all its hideous deformi;t
we will compel them to recant as to it as vehemnently as they ar
to-day denying free trade and free silver. [Applause.l
THE RBESULT.
To build up a merchant marine sufficient to carry our own trtl
is a question that interests the entire country. It would increas
our exports. It would widen our foreign markets. It would re
duce freight. It would increase the price of what we sell. 1
would decrease the price of what we buy. It would build up ou
shipyards. It would increase the demand for labor. It would in
crease the wages of those who work. It would keep at home wnor
than a half million dollars every twenty-four hours that now goto Europe. It would give to American labor more than a milllo
dollars each day.
It would benefit all trades, all classes, all sections. It wouli
return to the nation manyfold every dollar given it. It woull
maket us independent of every other nation on earth. It woul
nmake our flag more revreed, at home and more respected abroad
It would give us an auxiliary that will make our Navy really greal
It would protect us in war ad add to our wealth in peace. I
would make the great Republic truly a world power-the mighties
nation- ever builded by the children of men. [Applause.]
ALL BENEFICIAL LAWS REPUBLICAN.
Every tlaw that has been written upon our statute books in fort
years that added to the prosperity, the greatness, or the glory e0
our country has been made and written by the Republ.ican paIrt.
int opposition to the Democratic party. By laws written by th
Republican party in oppositiono the Democratic party we hav
become the greatest manufacturing, the greatest mining, the greatesi
farming, the greatest selling, and the wealthiest nation in all th
world'shistory;. In all industries upon land we stalnd supreme, an,
the R epublica  party, i spite of Democratic opposition is goi!
pto wsrte a law  upon our statute books that will restore t
ianient prestige and. greatness of our merchant marit. that '1il
cause our own ships to plow every sea and our flag to fly -n ern
port of the world. [Applause on the Republican side.] 
fl-v




I
F
I
c
h
h,
h
t
a,
L
rL
I
I


I


F


WHAT HAS BEEN DONE FOR THE TIN-PLATE MANU- 
FACTURERS IN THE UNITED STATES CAN BE
DONE FOR AMERICAN SHIPBUILDERS."
ptracts from remarks of Hon. WM. S. GREENE of Massachusetts, in
daily Congressional Record, April 28, 1904.
In 1890 the United States was confronted with the necessity for esiblishing the tin-plate industry in the United States. At that time aliens
pplied practically all of the tin plate that we consumed, and the reason
by aliens supplied it was because alien labor produced tin plate more
eaply than American labor could or would produce it. That was a conition of affairs that was entirely satisfactory to our Democratic friends,
d they did not wish it disturbed any more than they now wish to have
eforeign monopoly of our ocean transportation disturbed. But the Reblicans were dissatisfied, and so they determined to build up tin-plate
Lanufacture In the United States.
Our Democratic friends came along and told us that it would ruin
e American consumers of tin plate if they were compelled to buy Amerlan-made tin plate, costing so much more than foreign tin plate cost,
cause the American labor employed in its manufacture would insist upon
ceiving the American wage standard, a standard far above that received
ythe foreign tin-plate wage-earner. Nevertheless, Congress went forard under the leadership of the lamented McKinley and placed a high
rotective duty on imported tin plate. There had been no duty on imerted tin plate. There had been no duty on imported tin plate up to that
ie. From one end of the country to the other our Democratic friends,
ho are our free-trade friends as well, insisted that we could not manuacture tin plate. They also insisted that our people could not afford to
nsnume American-made tin plate. The people were fooled into believing
Pe Democrats for a short time-long enough to take William McKinley
emporarily out of public life-but the tin-plate manufactories were establshed, American labor received the American standard of wages in the
aking of tin plate, the American consumption of tin plate increased.
Everything the Democrats said we could not do we did; everything
hey said the people would not do the people did. We have the tin-plate
ndustry now firmly established in this country. We manufacture practiclly all of the tin plate that we consume. Indeed, we export large quanties of American manufactured tin plate.  And all of this has been
ccomplished because the Republicans gave protection to tin-plate manuacturing in the United States. American materials, American demand,
merican skill, and American labor have done all the rest. We make our
wn tin plate; we employ our own labor in making it. The millions we
'orerly sent to aliens in alien lands to pay them for making tin plate
or us we now pay to our own countrymen in the United States; we have
he tin plate and we have the mtoney expended for tin plate besides. In
in case of shipping it is different; we have the ships, but aliens built
hen, aliens run them, and aliens own the larger part of them.
What has been done for the tin-plate manufacturers in the United
tates can be done for American shipbuilders and American shipowners.
way will be found, and there will be neither degradation of American
abor nor a reduction in the wages paid to those who produce the materials
it of which the ships are built or of-those who build the ships or of those
rho operate them when built. * * *
And what do the Republicans propose? Their concern is not so great
or the capitalist as it is for the workingman. First of all, they insist
hat when we build up American shipping upon the seas, it must be com)osed of vessels constructed by American labor out of American materials,
iat is the first demand of the Republicans. They will have nothing but:hat Then they will require that the ships be officered by American citizen, that the crews shall be composed of American citizens so far as posible, and that the food scale shall be ample and generous, as befits good
ereican citizens. That provided for, then the extra expense of the contruction and the operation during the time that our ships are securing
e carrying trade will be met by some protective system, just the same
Ls the extra cost of American labor in other fields of industry is now proiided for by our protective system. *  *  * *  *  It is estimated that
Very year $200,000,000 is paid out by the American people to foreign shipWeers for the transportation of American foreign commerce. Think of it;
'Vyr fiv e years a billion dollars! During the past forty years probably
i of $5,000,000,000 has been paid to foreigners for carrying the imports
d exports of the United States I During the next quarter of a century,
things remain as they are, the people of the United States will pay out
foreign shipowners in freight charges another $5,000,000,000.  The
lited States will be just that much poorer in wealth, in resources.






. "AMERCtAN -SHIPS,:FLYING THE AMERICAN FLA(:SHA L4L GCARRY AMERICAN COMMEERCE,"
Bxtracts from remarks of Hon. WM, E. HUMPBREB          of Was
ingto, i daily Congressional Record, April 23, 1904.
The total number of steamships engaged in our foreign trac
last year was 1.368, and of all that number only 133 bore the Sta
and Stripes. But to-day, while we are the greatest manufacturi,
nation onl earth while we are the greatest agricultural nation 
earth, while we are the greatest exporting nation of the earth, whi
the balance of trade in our favor last year was $400,000,000, win
our foreign trade carried in ships for 1903 was $2,240,797,420, y
this mighty nation, of ours, bounded by two great oceans, with 
great coast lne   ith its magnificent port, with its inexhaustib
resources, its immeasurable wealth, its tremendous energy, caCr&
but about 5 per cent of this trade. We paid to the foreigner f
carrying the remainder the enormous sum of g200,000,000.
It is a well-known fact, stated by the highest authority, thi
during the Spanish war, even had we possessed another naval flee
we had not the officers and men to equip it. It is equa lly we kno
that our Government was compelled by; foreign nations to p:
exorbitant prices for inferior crafts during this war, and we a
know that there can not exist a navy truly great without a merechi
marine, yet this necessary axiliary to our Navy is almost entirei
neglected, while we contribute to build up the auxiliaries of foreip
navies $(00,000,000 annually. What do these figures mean?
They m:ean that we actually pay for the benefit of the foreign
a surm ten times: greater than the interest on the national debt;
sum equal to allf the customs duties we collect; a sum more tha
twice what we are spending to build up and maintain our Nay
a sum twice  e        as we spend to maintain our Army; i iis ha.
as great as the entire cost of our war with Spain it is a sum f
greater than all the pensions we are paying to all our soldiers f(
all our wars; it means that more than a half million dollars eac
day is paid to foreign labor; that more than a half million dolk
each day is taken from American labor and given to the foreignel
it means that a half millionZ  dollars in wnages leaves this con 1tt
each day that could remain at home. Not only are we paying th
vat sumrI to foreign labor, but we are training foreign sailors, hbnil
ing forein vessels that may be used against us at any time in eve;
of war   It. means that each year we are placing ourselves mlo
and more at the mercy of other nations.
It means that we are constructing for possible enemies thle
mightiest weapon, that may at any time be used to our destructiom
It means that a tribute is to-day levied upon the American farne
*the American.mer1chant, the. American mechanic, the American worn
ingT3an to build   the nations and navies of Europe. These figur
demonstrate that we are utterly unable to cope with any of tl
great powers of the world. These figures tell an alarming stor
of.our national weakness, of our national danger, national neraec
nationa l humiliation, and national disgrace. What a ie these figorc
give to our boasted assertion that we are a world power. No pat:riti
American can contemplate these figures without feeling his chee
redden with the blush of shame. I hope and believe that the f/'at?
M:policy  oth  nation, steadfast and unswerving', teill be that Amenritc
ships, bmiltby American cpital i American yards, by Amen i1
labor Paid Ameican wages, manned by American seamen, flying t
A    mer Wan f, shalli carry American commerce. [ Applause.
The following table.of tonnage for deep-sea commerce stri ki-ta
shows the. humiliating conditions of our shipbuilding at the prI-set
time as; compared.withsome of the other nations::UItaly;     *............................................  830
IPt  (   **-    *  * *V I* I  I 0** ~* Iw                    oil t t* * ** *  C,*   1t~
France......................................;0* 0*:,'. *,. -...  *.*.........,....*...  *. *,  X. 1 60,0
UGermany,.....*....................................,900
Brit-sh Empire.........      4000:This tableshows that te United States actually has o-day.'
t   engaged in foreign commerce than she had ninet- fe'
years ago 
n-9


I
I
I
I
I
I
i
i
I
1
I
I
I
I
I


I




TheN~~~~~OOfk  WPRi
0.

Sig. 15




"W     tMUST    MAINTAIN     AND    DEVELOP      OUR    NAVAl
STRENGTH."
Extracts from remarks of Hon. ADOLPH MEYER of Loui.ialn
n daily Congressional Record, February 19, 1904.
Mr. Chairman, it seems that some sentiment is sought to ii
created against the steady growth of the Navy, it being urged t{lt
we already have too many ships, too many men, too many gtln
that the Navy is top-heavy, and that the money needed to enlarg,
it or to maintain it should be devoted to the improvement of ou
rivers and harbors, public buildings, etc. Sir, as a representativ
of one of the States bordering on the Gulf of Mexico, intereste
in the improvement of its waterways and seashore, I would in
sacrifice the great commercial interests of that section for mcr
pride of power or the glory of possessing a great navy. I regar
such work of improvement as second to none in its benefits to ti
people, to the farmers and producing classes, and to our commer
cial interests.
Commerce is the great adjunct of civilization, industry, and pro
gress, and our lakes, rivers, and harbors, provided by nature fo
its facilities, are arteries that may not be neglected in scieritifl
improvements to meet the expanding needs of navigation; but ai
these and other requisites can be provided without encroaching upl
the means for national defense.
The great Mississippi Valley can not permit the mouth of th
Mississippi River, its natural outlet for commerce, to be blocke
by a hostile fleet any more than by those natural obstructions t
commerce which science is now removing.
The denizens of the Atlantic and Pacific coasts are keenly aliv
to the protection of their cities and the development of trade tc
Australia, South America, the Orient, and, in truth, to all th
world.
With a rapidly growing nation and a developing commerce wit]
all the world, we need the "open door" for our trade, as far as i
is possible to have it, and we need also the ability to protect ou
commerce and 'our markets.  How can we do this, or evem attemp
to do it, without a strong a nd efficient navy?
This is not all. Let us remember, sir, that we have a line o
seacoast on the Atlantic, the Gulf, and the Pacific to defend whic
can not be less than six or eight thousand miles; it is far greatef
than that of any European nation. In addition to this we havi
Alaska to defend, both by sea and by land. Alaska does not rep
resent the new-fledged policy of greed and foreign conquest. W
bought her from Russia many years ago, and she proves to hav
great resources. Then there is Hawaii, which we secured by agelecie
which some regard as more questionable, but it is an importani
outpost on the Pacific, and that people have certainly been greatil
blessed by our rule. I did not favor its annexation, but I do favoi
its defense, if necessary.
We have made Cuba free and independent, and we can not an0
will not permit any European government to establish dominior
there.  In order to make ogood our position there and projerlf
guard our interests in respect to Cuba, we must maintain and develop our naval strength. The same is true in respect to Porto itico
I think the truth of these observations can not be denied by any
intelligent man; but there is another and a fixed policy of tli
United States handed down to us by our ancestors to whichl wV
have to look. I refer to the well-known Monroe doctrine.
In this cursory and imperfect review I have said nothing of t1
proposed isthmian canal. At an early day the construction of sut
a canal by the American Government will be commenced to be,pai
for out of our own Treasury, to be under American soverei nty
and to be operated, managed, and guarded by us. It is proose1
to  xpend $20   00,00000  and more on this canal, which could b
destroyed in forty-eight hours by any country having a suerio0
fleet to our own. I favor the canal, but I favor also a navy ccaPb[
of dfending it. [Applause.]
I do not wih to see the commerce of this country or the sa0or
of this country lying at the mercy of any one of the half a deo
nation -which may be superior to us in naval power. I think th
with an adequate navalforce proportioned to our wealth, com:nrceC
foreign trade and domestic resources we are far more apt tc pr
serve peace with foreign nations than if by neglect or shortsi:ite
ess we suffer ourselves to fall behind in naval power.


1)
4
8
61
11
v
0
r
r
I
r
0
D
i
d
l
t,
il
I
I
r
i
I
I
r
I
f
I
I
I
I
I
I


I


o-l


i




"THE VERY ~ESSENCE OF DEFENSE OF OUR~ COMMERICE IS THE NAVY."y
1> 'ract from remarks of Hon. A. G. DAYTON of W~est Virginia,
in daily Congressional, Record, February 20, 19104;.
N~ot until about fourteen years ago have we gone t       okss
teinatically and earnestly to get ourselves a fleet on the sea that
woald be an honor and a credit to our country and to our flag.
As a rcsult of it, of course, these expenditures have increased; but
we have been able to stand it; we have heenr able to bear it without
hie country ever feeling it, and the remarkable state of affairs exist to-day that the strongest sentiment for the United States Navy
is in those sections away from the sea-in the, great Northwest', ill
iiielatain countries like my' State-while about the only protest that
eclotns is from a gentleman representing the State of New York.
Now, as to the cost of it, the Secretary of the Navy,, in his aniata1 report has taken occasion to give us some figures. touching
wliat this naval expenditure has amounted to.
AlMr. Chairman., by your leave, I will ask the Clerk to read for
mie the Passage which I have marked from this report, including
tle table given by him, in order that members of the committee
n)(iV see, after all, that while it is a $100,000,000 appropriation bill,
it is substantially for the purpose of defending our honor, our
country, and our flag and maintaining our peace. I hope gentlemien
wil! listen to the table, so that they may see how small the actual
insurance rate is compared with the wealth and the value of this
oun.Ttry.
Th'le Clerk read as follows:
The cost of military protection has frequently been compared with that
ansorance upon property. The comparison is not inapt, and ha-, a special
paiti~fcance in considering naval expenditures. I hare caused a comparison
be made between the national valuation anod naval expenditures. The
na~iation of the total property of the United States was obtained by taking
ffi figures of Mulihall tip to the cesisus of iS5o and then the figures of the
cvu1~us. This gives only the valuation of every tenth year, beginning with
q\tO. The valuation of the interniediate years Is approxiatly obtained by
',di lg to each year an equal propertion of decennial Increase. The average
vloution for each decennial period is thus readily obtained. The naval exin,1,(litures can be obtained with absolute accuracy. The, expenditures given
kn not include the cost of the exeautive establishment. The following, table,
cosinuted In this manner, shows the percentage of the total property of the
Uinmted States devoted to the support of~ the Navy by ten-year periods in the
`1 century. The whole period shows an average annual expenditure of
S0.')1 23 for each dollar of the valuation.
A-veragel val-  Average
Years.             ulation (Cor1-  nI av al  Pcrioii.tna-e.
puled).   exp~enditure.
'1  1310.......................  $1,821,245,1)0  $1,68)1,782  0.M1)12511
1......1,732,470,(1)                       4,6715,51)21..1.11.0........,.........,..2.  2,33i10 0,00i1  3,20,5.086.0141
I 4 lxi.................  3',1,iiili15,lit  5,041,751.001152
is11 13).                       t17,1),il      7,237,061.15129)
I 11150..........       12,198,889,) i0   11,911i14177  I.155)1S
ts 870..............       28,718,414,1(0x)  4)1,818,78)).19017
3111380....   Bi,9m311,P33,l00  19 655 70~~~~~~~I)1.001)535
I '3   119 go..............    54,95P31800,))50  1i,8si7,ti21  1.0)3))
~~531011)..,.........81,1131,i   0, 950   3,3,14.)07
General average, $0.00123
The expenditures for the fiscal year 1903 were $82,018,034. Bhy reason'1k approximation the valuation for that year was $100,239,200),872. Thus
muwas expended for this year for each dollar of the, national valuation
077. If the average of the last century had been reached, the exIns "o~tames would have be-en $130,074,298.25.
A Ir. DAYTON. N ow, Mr. Chairman, absolutely for the common
dfiluse and t he peace of this country we pay less than one-thoukin othj of 1 per cent. upon the actual propetyvluation of this
(lu tryj.  Suppose we take it from  the commercial standp)oint of
There is not~  ~ asnlman in this House but wha knows that
tle very, essence of defense of our commerce is the Navy of the
edStates; that it is a hopeless thing to attempt to extend
~0111 nercee and protect it unless we do it by the strong arm, of the
(Co '~rnment, exercised through its war ships.  Let~ us look at it
Irai thle point of view as an, insurance premium   upon the com11 ofthe country. Regarding it as such, the naval expenditue
'iidonly be twenty-two thousandths of a cent,: an'd when conSilt ti~aton is taken of the cost of insuring the industrial enterprises
of arcutry thne members of the committee cnsehow small,,
1101 insignificant, is this rate.




"WE BEL-IEE IN PEACE BACKED UP BY PREPARA
TfON FOR WAR."
Extracts from remarks of lion. GEORGE E, FOSQS of Illinois, in daily C0o
gressional Record, February 25, 1904.
We started to build up the American Navy in 1883, more than twenat
years ago. fHow many battle ships hav    e we to-day?  Eleven battle ship
built. How many under construction? Thirteen battle ships. How manr
in all?  Twenty-four battle ships-a little more, Just a little more, thai
one battle ship a year. How many has England to-day?.She has fift
built. How many has she under construction?     Nine. HIow much does
that mak e In all? Fifty-nine battle ships. We will have twenty-four, she
will have fifty-nine, nearly sixty.
Now, my ft lends, there are other things to be taken into considera
tlon. The gentleman has called attention to the fact that we are expending
here upon our Navy, or maintenance of the Navy, in this appropriation bil
$96,000Y000. He calls attention to the fact that England's naval appropria.
tion this year amounts to $170,000,000, although I saw in a morning papes
that she bas put in estimates to the amount of $184,000,000.    France
Russia, and Germany have large estimates also. Wle are all for peace, bu
we believe in peace backed utp by preparation for war. WVe believe in thai
peace which comes from being prepired. The father of our country said
that one of the most effectual meaawts of preserving peace is to prepare fov
war.
That is why the debate on this battle ship is so important. We are all
for peace-peace among the nations of the globe, peace between other nations and ourshlves; but we do not believe in striking down that ship that
stands for the lrgest 'arm nment, for the largest ordnance, for the largest
guns; that ship that is the fighting arm of the United States Navy. That is
what makes the stgnlficance of this debate Fo great.
I am welt awaUre that the Czar cf Russia called the representatives ot
the foreign countries together at that great peace celebration at The Haglie,
ade those represtetatives in solemn convention resolved upon the disaraiamerit of the military establishments; but I awm also reminded of the fact
that no sooner: wa that resolution passed by the representatives of all the
countries than the nations themselvs began to build their military estabshments with greater vgor than ever before. And i say here to you today that we must continue this policy of building the American Navy.
Why, you remember when the Spanish fleet, in the Spanish-American
war, started fror the other side and we knew not its destination there was
a shudder that went down the whole New England coast, and many of those
estimable gentlemen who live along there and preach in times of peace about
the cost of war and the necessity of cutting down the military establishme;nt
would not go to their summer resorts on the shore, but, on the contrary,
went to their safety-deposit vaults, and took their boxes and heels into the
Interior.  [Laughter.]  Now, I tell you, in time of war we see the necessiy for a navy,
If we are. to t    ur our backs tp  f the Philippines; if we are to give
them  up and our islands of the sea  it we are to refuse all protectlon to
American commerce wherever that commerce goes; if we are to say, "Oh,
yes, there Is nothing but peace; there will never be any war," why, then,
I say let us stop building battle ships, stop building all kinds of ships, disWmnt!ll the guns along the coasts, and refuse to. put a single dollar into
Why deeen the rivers and harbors?      What is the use of reratisg
a foreign commerce unless you can protect it?  Why not go back into so,:e
corer of te world and there hide iaway in solitde and isolation? Yes,
why not take dwn froim the masthead of our battle ships tfat old filay of
lor, p l aced in the sy by the united work of the Army and the   avr" bi
every grea natoal strugge, plaed there by the bravery of our soldiers
ad oursaiors, oi:fl the way fromA  Washington to Chaffee, Cdlfthe way froe
Esek Hopkits ad ol Jack Rasry to Dee/ y. 
Wy not take down:     tt flag and run up to the masthead the white
flag of peace; that kind of peace that means surrender of national dutY,
of natlona obgatbon, of:natina responsibility?  And then take ourselves
way ito soe remote: corner of the earth and pray God may we carry Old
Glory along with us as a sweet and gentle reminder that we were orce a
nation and once a people. Go back, I say, into some isolated corner and
sit ontl   and write the word "Nation"' so smal that nto people on the face
of the i -    can sea It, and we:ourselves ashamed to looik at It, and i there,
wtb humilatin an     grief, tmoun  ver the btter and more glorous day5
of the Republle. [lud applause.]


1.
y
y
y
I
I
tI
tI
t
I
t
s
I
t
Al
A
I
t
t
II
r
I
I


I


0o-3


I




'THE   FUTURE     OF THE     MONROE      DOCTRINE      IS  IN
THE CUSTODY OF OUR NAVY."
tZracts from remarks of Hon. CHAUNOESY M, DEPEW        of New
York, in daily Congressional Record, March 8, 1904.
I am not at this time going into a discussion of the reasons why
we will find stronger arguments every year for establishing closer
relations with the Philippines, but I will say that I believe no one
ow living will see those relations weakened. I believe that the
extraordinary progress which has been made by those people, as
testified to by Governor Taft, in education, in civilization, and in
the industries, will continue with accelerated speed as the schools
ecome more enumerous, the education more general, and the comumlication between the United States and the Philippine Islands
nore constant and rapid. I do not think we yet fully understand
wo things. First, how much the Philippine Islands are to be advantageous to us in their own development; what they are to grow
to when they have absorbed the spirit and are putting in practice
the principles of American liberty, American law, and American
nterprise. And the other, that we can not yet comprehend until
the war clouds in the Far East are over and years have passed by
the increasing importance to the United States, on its commercial
and industrial side, of the possession of those territories, with their
harbors and their depots so near to that market for which all the
world is contending. * *
But, sir, we are and have become within a few years, in being
a world power, subject to perils and conditions which never existed before. We have obligations to the island of Cuba, where we
have said to the world we will protect her against assault or invasion, against any attack upon her independence or the integrity
of her territory or her institutions. We have Porto Rico, which
can be defended only from the sea, as Cuba can be defended only
from the sea. We have Tutuila, Guam, Hawaii, and the Philippines,
far from the United States, all of which must be protected from
the sea.
But we have assumed another obligation which is much greater,
and that is the isthmian canal. We have the longest line of seacoast of any power in the world except one-7,000 miles, and in
addition to that Alaska. Alaska is growing in wealth and in population to an extent which is enlisting attention everywhere, and
has to be defended from the sea.
But, sir, the isthmian canal has opened a new era for America
and the world. Already the treaty has been signed, the negotiations have ended, the Commission has been appointed. We are to
establish soon a government upon the tract ceded to us and assume
the responsibility for order and law. The spade is on its way.
The steam drill and the dredge will be heard within a few months.
One of the most inspiring lines of literature is Emerson's, "Here
once the embattled farmers stood and fired the shot heard round
the world," and the sound of the dredge and the drill on the Isthmus
will be heard around the world, because it is to alter the paths of
commerce and to change the relations of nations,
The future of the Monroe doctrine is in the custody of our Navy.
Its peaceful recognition will be the tribute which other nations
pay not to the doctrine, but to our sea power. * * *
Now, when through the isthmian canal all products of the indlstrial energies of this country can reach that market just as
quickly and cheaply as can the manufacturers of the Old World,
then, sir, will come a competition which will be most acute because
of the skill of our artisans and business talent of our people. There
1will be no difference between it and competition between individuals. We all know what competition means between men, firms,
Or corporations, and in the progress of civilization all great nations
have become business concerns, each looking in a materialistic and
husiness way for the production of manufacturing and agricultural
Products which shall give employment to and support its people
and a market for the surplus of those products.
N w, sir, we can not protect that commerce by an army or treaties
low,.  We can not protect our commerce and expand our trade
by arbitration at The Hague alone. We can only maintain our
Onraerce by having a sea power adequate for its protection, for
the ecurity of our islands, and to prevent a hostile fiet from d4 -troaOng in a week the isthmian canal after it has cost us two to
fti hundred million dollars and ten years to build-a sea power,
r, which will not be aggressive, but will stand for and keep peacs.
o4




1


THE     BIGGEST -GUNS, THE        FI NEST SHIPS, ARE THE
HERALDS OF PEACE."
Extract from remarks of Hon. C. E. WROSVENOIR of Ohio, 
daily Congressional Record, February 24, 1904.
I have no confidence, Mr. Chairman, no belief, in the doctrine
that a great Navy is an invitation to war. That is the argunent
of my  olleague, that it is a sort of invitation, stating to the woreld
"Here is our great Navy, and, therefore, we invite you to come
and test the question." Now, I think you may start at the smallest
boy who gets into a fight with his smaller neighbor and carry your
investigation clear up through the growth to manhood, the aggregation into States, and the aggregation into an administration vwith
a great navy, and from the smallest boy up to the great navy the
question involved in a dispute, nine times out of ten, is whe her
the other fellow can lick you or not. That is humnan nature,; nil
human nat:ure controls the action of men and the action of natitms,.
Now, we are told that if we build a great navy and go on th)
perpetuate the naval question, the foundation of which was laidl
by tihe approval of the Administration in which Mr. Chandler wasI
Secretary of the Navy, and which was taken up and enlarged with
great intelligence and great patriotism by the first Cleveland Administration, with the lamented Whitney at the head of the Navy 
Department-that if we do all this we are doing it With a danger
threatening us that somebody will want to go to war with u.s.
Does anybody suppose that when President Cleveland figurativcely
shook his fist at Great Britain when he believed they were imponi
ing upon Venezuela that if we had been a small nation with srnlll
power Great Britain would have settled the matter in the mamrll 
that she did? Great Britain is no better nor no worse than other
nations, but she is particularly careful to see to it that the ectimate of: guns and men and material shall enter largely into t(ir
national diplomacy.
I want to:call the attention of the House, for this is a very
important question that we are debating, to the condition titt
we were in six years ago. Some of us wanted to go to war verv
badly; some of us were not so anxious to go to war. What w;es
the condition of the country then?  We are told that for evrit
cannon mounted or in use, every effective gun that we had in nil
the world at that time, we had four loads of ammunition, and nl
more. We had just about small arms enough to arm 25,000 n.et
and no more, and ammunition enough for forty rounds for eoch
one of those men, and no more.
Now, it happened that we went to war with an inferior nation;
yet we learned enough to know that if that demonstration of power
and belligerency that we put forth to that inferior nation halI
been made to one of the great nations of Europe-well, I thinli
there would- have been several States that would have called (outl
its militia to protect its seacoast.
Very soon after that declaration of war there would have vbe Il
a condition that none of us would have liked. As it happened, wc
prepared ourselves at a rate of progress never heard of befori.
But what did it cost us? I should like to have the gentleman fronil
Ohio, when he admits the possibility of a war with a naval poswer,
take the figures of our purchases in ships in 1898-bought at the
best price at.which we could buy themr-indispensably necessUryV
to the outfit of our small naval force, and then take the figiirs
at which those vessels were sold, and see what it costs this G;vemirnent to supply itself with an indispensable naval equipm ant.
Take also our furnishing of our soldiers-the accoutrements, lit:
equipments, the camp and garrison equipage, and everything 1litt
went to fit out the soldiers in the field. The purchas.es, upo- )
baJ s of the true standard of value, turned out to have cost rts tie|
tinest more than the property was worth; and all of this bectSej
woe were carrying that flag of peace that my colleague has sp /i;
about to the front.
So that it will be seen that after all the argument that disar"lat
menat tends to peace is nmect and overthrown by the learning, tlhe
wisdom, the experience, and the human nature of mankind, w tit
recognizes that if you want to have "peace on earth and good xiI
to men" you must have thlie biggest guns, the finest ships, and the
ot  of; them. 0f0XThey are the heralds of peace; they are the lii
sionaries of good, will,.; they are the harbingers of equal rights -lni
fair dealing between the nations of the earth. It does not fti
that beeauseW', the United,States becomes a great naval po:''.'.
because she goes "world0 owe rig —*that she shall abuse an.yt ly;''
provoke atbody.
o5


r
i
I
I
I
I
I


I


i




TVIERE   IS  NO   BETTER:INSURANCE          POLICY    THAN
A:NAV Y.
xtracts from remarks of eon. CHA UVNCY Ml. DEPEW, of Ne
York, in daily Congressional Record, March 3, 1904.
I have no doubt, in addition to the tariff walls which have been
ut up all over Europe against us, and which prevent further exansion of our trade on the Continent of Europe, that Mr. Chamerlain will succeed in England. I think he will be defeated in
he next general election, but the sentiment will grow, and there
ill be a short life for the party which comes into power on the
id free-trade programme. Mr. Chamberlain will find himself ill
oe or six years, with an increased majority behind him, coming
nto power on an entire reversal of the traditional policy of Great
/ritain.
The example of the United States, the tremendous development
f our resources and industries by reason of the protective tariff,
tul enormous growth in wealth, because we have made America
or Americans, have already made Germany, France, Russia, Italy,
nd Austria adopt the protective system.
Their tariff walls are raised against us because the enterprise of
ur manufacturers and the skill of our artisans and cheap transortation are naking   r comtiti     dangerous. When England
verses  er polic,        e ceases to be a dumping ground for
r surplus, when her ports are no longer open to our cereals, our
bhrics in cotton and wool, our manufactures in wood and steel,
Ihen she enacts a tariff which will keep her factories going and
r own workmen employed at living wages against foreign proucers, then we will find that the American business man, the Amerian factory, the American farm, and the American workingman
ill demand that we enter those markets of the East, which will not
opened and kept open for us except by an adequate Navy. * *
No matter how large our Navy, wherever it is it will stand not
or war but for peace. No matter how great our Navy, it will
and not for aggressiveness, but for defense. I do not believe
at the admiral of the fleet in the Eastern waters was seeking for
rouble or would have involved us in a war with any nation out
lere or into taking sides with either of the combatants even if
e had not been ordered away. We have twenty-four great ships
ow in those Eastern waters in the neighborhood of the hostilities;
nd we can absolutely trust their commanders, while preserving
e honor, the rights, the trade, and the territories of the United
tates, not to invite trouble with anybody.
There is no better insurance policy than a navy. I am, a believer
insurance. A large navy, adequate to the needs of the country,
sich is strong enough both to protect and defend it, is a minister of
ace.  * *
Now, as to our ability. We are a nation of 80,000,000 people.
rcording to Mulhall we have one hundred and twenty-seven thound million dollars of wealth. Great Britain has 42,000,000 peoe and $65,000,000,000 of wealth.  France has 39,000,000 people
nd $54,000,000,000 of wealth. Germany has 56,000,000 people and
15,000,0,,000 of wealth.
The commerce exports and imports of the United States last
ar were $2),606,000,000; of Great Britain, $4,000,000,000; of
ran e, $1,669,000,000 and of Germany, $2,453,000,000. Germany
tn'ler us by $150,000,000, and France is under us by nearly oneAri d yet the cost of the navies now on the sea and in course of
nstiuction are $629,000,000 for Great Britain, with one-half of
Or lopulation and less than one-half of our accumulated wealth;
7,t00,000 for France, with less than one-half of our population
id lss than one-half of our accumulated wealth, aid $182,000,000
[r (Cerma.ny, with less than three-quarters of our population and
ss than one-half of our accumulated wealth.
lTh actual cost of the vessels in commission and those that will
wlien tie present construction is carried out for the United States,
inttt lthe figures for these other countries, will be $18,000,000,
he lnited States now occupies the fifth place, with 294,405 tons,
s auinst 387,874 for Germany, 416,1.58 for ltussia, 576,108 for
ali,, and 1,516,040 for Great Britain.
O6h


I




"LET US ECONOMIE ANYWHERE RATHER THAN I
OUR NAVY."
Extracts from. temarks of Hon. B. B. VREETLAND of New York, in dail
Congressioal Record, Marcth 10, 1904.
Why do we need a navy? I suppose, Mr. Chairman, we could get alon
without on:e If we disagree with other nations, if the rights of America
citizens of the United States are infringed, I suppose we can surrender. I
is always easy to surrender. I suppose we can pay money for damages t
placate the possible foe. I suppose we might turn over a slice of our terri
tory to save ourselves from the wrath of those who have not ceased to buil
navies and to maintain armies. But, Mr. Chairman, none of us believes tha
the American people will consent to do these things. We all know that th
American people are a proud people, a high-spirited people. We knao
there is no nationon n earth which will quicker resent an insult to its flag
we know that there is no people on earth which will more strenuously stanr
for Its rights when it is convinced that its rights are being infringed. We
know, Mr Chairman, that no lack of preparation which might exist woul
prevent the American people from resenting injuries to their interests 0
insults to their flag, or that would prevent them from rushing into wa
should they consider that there was necessity for it.
Our De.ocratic friends hate dwelt for a day or two upon the statemen
that the Democratic party are a peace party. But, Mr. Chairman, whil
they no doubt are a peace party, while the American people are a peace
loving people, while they will not williigly take up the gage of battle if an
other honorable course can be found, yet I believe that even the Democrati
party could not prevent the American people from rushing into war if the
believed that their Interests demanded it. I say that, because I remembe
that when the Spanish-American war was imminent, our friends upon th
other side were not seeking to hold back the United States from engagin
In battle, but I remember that no other citizens of the United States wer
more urgent and strenuous n their demand that the United States shoul
interfere in that conflict than were our friends upon the other side.
remember that they were so eager or war that they were unwilling to wal
until he who then sat in the Presidential chair was able to prepare tt
forces of the United States for the conflict. And so, Mr. Chairman, I ai
afraid that we could not depend upon the Democratic party to keep us ou
of battle in time of need.
*  *   *  for the purposes of maintaining the Monroe doctrine or the for
eilg  policies and interests of the United States our 80,000,000 of people
with wealth and energy and resources suffcient to build  d d equip a thou
sand battle ships, woiuld stand helpless upon our shores white the honi
and interests of the United States would depend upon our wetr shfis whir
ere built and equipped and ready to engage the enemy. It seems probabt
that n future wars t       mand of the omnd sea, and all the trementdous ad
vantage which goes with it, will be determined in the first thirty days 0
conflict. The wars of the future will not wait three or four years for us t
build and equip battle ships.
Mr. Chairman, what is there in our history whicn leads gentlemen 
say that the possession of a navy is likely to tempt us into unnecessas'
war? Do they mean that we must keep our forces so weak that we slha
not dae aiiOt our rights and protect our interests? Never in our bistor
perhaps with the exception of the Mexican war, have our people enters
upon a war of conquest or aggression, and that was a war brought on by tb
slave power to furnish room for the extension of slavery to offset the grow
Ing forces of freedom.  * *   *  Let us economize anaywhere ratlter tlt
in our Na"y, which represents the power of our country in its intercollrs
with foreign nations.
Sothe slighting remarks have been made during this debate about tb
United States as a world power. The able leader of the minority has talkl
about the United States going up and down the world "a world-powe"i ng
Some gentlemen seem to long to return to the condition we were in sevaent
five or a hundred years ago, when the energies of our people were e tire!
1absorbed   n developing our own cotttry and we had little interest n t.
affairs of other countries. But tihe gentlemen might as welt Wtsh thet tt
couttt  e childtre  again. The United States has simply gsrown to nma -h00
t stands a Colossus, with ever-widening nfluence among the tvdtions f t/
earth. It s first in agriculture and flrst In mining. In the vatle 'f I
mantilctured products it exceeds any other three nations. The va:e 1
the products of its mills and factories and farms exported to all parts of t
earth exee   the of ay other nation. We have grown beyond thi p0i
where the energies of our citizens cane be confined to theb dvelopt!'eat
our own country, and supplying tth nedsi of our own citizens.
o"7


I




"THE POWER AND DIGNITY OF THE UNITED STATES
REPRESENTED BY A POWERFUL NAVY."
Extract from remarks of lion. JOSEPH    V. GRAFF, of Illinois,
in daily Congressional Record, FIebruary 25, 1904.
The United States of America has more money invested in manufacturing enterprises than the Kingdom of Great Britain. The
United States produces 32 per cent. of all the food products of
the entire world. It will always remain true. In view of the increased productive power, as a resultant from these great factories
already built, from American invention, and from the steady employment of American workmen, a large surplus is being produced,
and will continue to be produced unless there is retrenchment in
the production in the United States, unless the American workman
ceases to be employed so generally, or ceases to be employed all
the time throughout the year.    So that the pressing problem
before the United States, whether the De1mocratic party wilns at
the next election or whether the Republican party wins at the next
election, is, How  are we going to provide for the consumption
and sale of the surplus of our farms and our factories?
In what direction are we looking for that? Shall we presume
that European nations will continue to furnish an outlet for the
most of the surplus of our factories and farms? Ah, no. Already
a public sentiment has been sufficiently aroused in England, intrenched as she is by past experience and by prejudice in the
principles of free trade, to protect herself against the invasion of
her markets by the products of American factories. The direction
in which we must look is toward the Orient and if this Congress should go before the people of the United States at the
coming election and confess that they       thought that an
isthmian canal was so necessary that it warranted us in expending two hundred millions of the people's money and then
provided no navy commensurate with this great enterprise
for protecting our interests with relation to our foreign trade,
present and prospective, we would meet with condemnation
at the hands of the intelligent citizens of the United States.
The people of the United States have an interest in regard to the
open ports in China.
Who believes that we could have succeeded in obtaining those
open ports if it were not that the power and dignity of the United
States was partially represented by a power'ful navy, willing to
back up its just demands? Any intelligent student of the present
time knows that there is a conflict going on. You may talk of
peace, but there is a conflict, not of arms, but of commerce; a
conflict between the railroad land transportation of Russia and
the transportation by water by the balance of the European powers
and the United States. It was in view of these facts that the
people of the United States unanimously demanded the opening
of the Isthmus of Panama by a canal. The South recognized the
demands and the necessities of the hour for better facilities for
the sale of her surplus cotton in oriental markets. Ah, but you
say that the present trade with China is insignificant. Fifty years
ago Japan would not permit one of her citizens to go beyond her.borders nor permit a foreign citizen to enter into her gates under
penalty of death, so exclusive was she.
We have discovered, in studying the characteristics of the Chinese
and the Japanese, in the last year, that the Chinaman contains as
nlany of the faculties for development for receiving the impress
of western civilization as the Jap. Already railroads are being
oenened up in China. Already there is a large and increasing deiand in China by her citizens for the products of the nations of
tl:e West.
We can reasonably look for a change in China industrially
similar to that now so evident in Japan. If the per capita consumption in China of American products were to increase to the
present per capita consumption in Japan, China would be to-day
very large customer.
to! Naval stations in the Philipines, fortifications there,
an'd like improvements in the Hawaiian Islands, and the inarease of our Navy are necessary to preserve our cxmmercial
iterests abroad, in which every citizen of the United States
is vitally interested.
0 -8




W"WE; HAVE INTERESTS WHICH NECESSITATE A
GOOD-SIZED NAVY."
Extracts from remark   of Hon. GEORGE EB. FOSS of Illinois, in daily
Congressional Record, February 19, 1904.
Mr. Chairman, it has been said in some quarters that we ought to
stop building up the American Navy, that the Navy is large enough, that
we have too many ships already. That voice has come to us, but I do
not believe that It Is the voice of the American people. It has been said
that we ought to spend more money on internal improvements, that we
ought to deepen our rivers and harbors, that we ought to erect post-office
buildings, that we ought to promo te expositions; that that was a wiser
expenditure of public money; but, Mr. Chairman, I do not agree with
that position. There Is no necessity for ever drawing the issue between
building up the American Navy and providing proper and needful expendltures for internal improvements.  I recall the fact that during the last
six or seven years, as every Member of this House will recall the fact,
that we have been building up the American Navy faster than ever before, but at the same time we have also been expending more money
upon internal improvements than ever before.
Why, since the Government began we have expended $450,000,000
for the deepening of our rivers and harbors, and yet since the 4th of
March, 1897-and I take that simply as a convenient time-we have appropriated $150,000,000 of that $450,000,000.  Not only that, but we
have made greater appropriations for building post-offices during that
period than ever before, we have promoted more expositions than ever
before, and yet I say during all this time we have been making greater
progress in the construction of the American Navy than ever before.
There Is no necessity of drawing the line between the Navy and Internal
improvements. This country is rich enough and great enough to make
proper appropriations for necessary needs at home and abroad, but, sir,
if the issue shall be drawn between building up the American Navy as
It stands to-day and putting our money into deepening rivers and harbors
and building post-offices and promoting expositions-I say if that issue
should ever be drawn, though there is no necessity for it, I have no
question as to where the American people will stand.    Foremost and
above all must stand considerations of national defense, the maintenance of our foreign policy, and the protection of American citizens all
over the globe.
Take it on the basis of expenditures. Our expenditures for all the
different Departments of the Government will amount, in round numbers, to $700,000,000; perhaps, to be a little more accurate, $660,000,000.
Placing it on the basis of spending $100,000,000 on the Navy, that would
be about 14 per cent. of our total expenditures.  This is not as large
a proportion as we expended on the Navy in 1800.    In that year the
naval expenditures were 29 per cent. of the total expenditure, according to a statement prepared for me. In 1820 we expended 20 per cent.
of the total expenditures on the Navy. In 1840, 21 per cent. In 1870
only 7 per cent. That was when our Navy had been allowed to go to
pieces after the civil war.
To-day, even if we should increase this bill to one hundred millions,
the percentage would be about 14 per cent. of our total expenditures,
less than  our forefathers appropriated, in  percentage, one. hundre
years ago.
Now, take it, for instance, on a larger and broader scale-on til
wealth of the country. Treat, if you please, the American Navy as t1e 
insurer of American wealth, and 'where do we stand?   It has been e
timatedhat that the total wealth of this country is more than $100,000,000,000.
If we should appropriate in this bill $100,000,000 for the Americ a
Navy, what percentage would that be of the total wealth of our countrye?
One-tenth of i per cent. The Secretary of the Navy in a very able r<port has st fort has setorth how cheaply we have insured ourselves during the pa;t
century with the American Navy.
We have interests which necessitate a good-sized navy.  We ha e
a great coast line to protect. You may say that we are isolated on ti:b
hemisphere and do not need a navy. That was the argument of yea's
ago, but it is not an argument of to-day. It is an obsolete argumert,
because science is annihilating space every day. The crossing of t1Ce
Atlantic or the Pacific is no longer a question of weeks, but it is a queC'lion of days. The ships are moving faster and faster across the bosto0
of the ocean. Not only that, but foreign nations have established coiIng stations near our coast. So the old argument that we are Isolatld
on this hemisphere and therefore need only a small navy Is fast beitg
relegated to the rear.
j.,. And. then,, too, we, are buildtng here upon ths hemisphere the Painaanal-a mighty work which' will bring two great oceans nvto everlastlaS
feiowsahlp'-and we will jnee- a de ense for that canal.
0-9




"OUR FOREIGN TRADE IS ENTIRELY AT THE MERCY
OF FOREIGN NATIONS."
k.rtracts fromT remarks of FHon. WM. F. H7UMPHREY of Washingtor. in
daily Consgressional Record, April 23. 1904.
Our foreign trade, our foreign markets, our country's prosperity, is
ertirely at the mercy of foreign nations. During the little Boer war England
sithdrew sufficient vessels from our trade to increase freight rates on many
products more than 150 per cent. It affected the entire trade of the country
and was felt by every industry. On the Pacific coast it reduced the price
of wheat 25 per cent. During our ninety days' war with decrepit old Spain
we had to rely on British vessels, to a great extent, to carry our troops and
sapplies. Even to-day, in time of peace, we are compelled to send our
supplies to our little army in foreign ships. What American is not ashamed
and humiliated by this fact? What, then, would be our condition in case
of war between England and Germany, or between either of them or any
other great power?
Our foreign trade would be banished from the seas, our foreign markets
would be blotted out, our products would rot in field and factory, labor
would be forced into idleness, there would be beggary and want, panic and
disaster beyond description and beyond comprehension. IndustrIally we
would suffer all the devastations and horrors of war. That such awful
dlisaster many come upon us at any time is entirely within the range of
probability. What, then, woulld be our condition if we were to become engaged in a mighty struggle with somte great nation?  Were our condition
fully understood, the statement of this question alone would be sufficient to
arouse the self-interest, the pridet, the loiyalt of evetry /patriotic American
to snteh an extent that he would demand thie  ieiate i eie construction and
control of our nerchant narine regardless of the cost. The very statement
of this question to-day is sufflcient to appall every lover of his country.
Let us hope that a lesson so terrible shall not be necessary to compel EP,
to perform our duty.
SUBSIDES PAID BY OTHERl NATIONS.
One-half of the ships that travel the seas to-day are sailing under
heavy subsidies. For forty years England has paid as subsidies an average
of $5,000,000 annually. Last year she paid $6,000,000. This year she will
pay more. In addition, she is going to build a great line of fast steamers
to be run between this country and England and make it a gift to a company to operate. Germany pays to her ships as subsidies about $3,000,000
annually, Prance over $7,000,000, Austria-IHungary over $1,724,000, Spain
$1,629,000, Japan, that little country of the Orient that only a few years
ago emerged frcm medieval darkness, is paying annual subsidies of more
than $2,500,000, and as a result she has a magnificent fleet of steamers
and is carrying a large part of our commerce on the Pacific. Shall we not
profit by the example of others? Shall their experience be no light to us?
Shall their success teach us no lerson?
Why are these vast subsidies paid? They call it for carrying the malil,
buht in reality it is paid to put their products in the markets of the world
and to build up an auxiliary to their navies.
Millions are to-day being expended to drive our flag from the ocean.
Cat it be possible that it is worth more to foreiqn, nations to keep our flat
froam thle seas than it is worthi to us to keep it on the seas?  Shall we, then,
hesItate to spend millions if need be to keep it there?
The present condition of our merchant marine Is deplorable, hunmliati'g, and discreditable. Last year from New York there sailed for Europe
26:; steamships. Of these, only 6 bore the American flag. There sailed
form. New York to Australia 8, and on not one did our flag appear. From
r:.v York to Africa ther  ere re 12, and not one American. From New Yozit
to Cthina, Japan, and the Far East, 17, and not one American. From New
Yo';i. to South America, 50, and not an American. From New York to
Cut!a, West Indies, and Mexico, 71; Amer ican, 22. From  Baltimore to
fti iign ports, 73; American 3. From. Boston and Charlestown to foreign
pNits, 74; American, 9. From Newport News to foreign ports, 18; America',! none. From Portland, Me., to foreign ports, 6, all British.  From
Pa as'maquoddy, Me., to foreign ports, 4; American, 2. From Galveston to
f0r. gn ports, 249, and not one American. From Mobile, Ala., to foreign
P)is, 43; American, none. From   New Orleans to foreign ports, 127:;:
Aieirican, 5. From Pensacola to foreign ports, 44; American, none. From
Al );ka to foreign ports, 39; American, 31.  From Tampa, Fla., 3; all
Vn' rican. From Hawaiian ports, 15; Amlerican, 6. From Port Townsend,
P8q h., 88; American, 16. From San Francisco, 61; American, 26. From
foroi Rico, 37; American, 2. From Phdladelphia, 64, and not one American,
'-10


I




"'WME NEED A NAVY T6 LOOK AFTER OUR COMMERCE
AND OUR COMMERCIAL INTERESTS
IN FOREIGN WATERS."
Extracts from remarks of Hon. KNUTE NIELSON of Minnesota, in daily
Congressional Record, March 5, 1904.
We have got to look abroad. In Europe we have almost exhaustea
ourselves; we have almost got to "the end of our rope."   Owing to the
hostile tariff legislation which some of the European countries have enacted,
and more that Is threatened, and, as the Senator from   New York [Mr.
DjsWr:] intimated to-day, *such as the changed policy that is likely to take
place in England, and owing to the commercial jealousies which exist in the
countries of the old world we are subject to great competition and have
great difficulties. The great field for American commerce and for the extension of our trade lies in the Orient.
In 1892 our total commerce with oriental countries was $102,583,634,
and in 1903, eleven years later, it was $213,701,048, more than double in
eleven years; and, mind you, that increase occurred while the Boxer rebellion was on in China, which prevented the full measure of trade that we
should otherwise have had with those countries.
Look at the territory In the Orient, China proper consisting of eighteen
or nineteen provinces, with 1,353,350 square miles and a population of 383,000,000; there tI Manchuria, with an area of 362,000 square miles and a
population of between seven and eight million; there is Korea, with an area
of 82,000 square miles, as big as the State of Minnesota, which I have the
honor in part to represent here, and with a population of over 10,000,00(.
Then there is little Japan. progressive, the Yankee of the Orient-little
Japan, with an area of 162,000 square miles and 50,000,000 people.
Right here in the midst of this beehive of humanity, right at its very
doors, are our own possessions-the Philippine Islands. With those islands
in our possession we are placed in a position to dominate the trade of the
Orient. Manila eand the Philippine Islands being in our possession, thcuy
will become the jobbing and distributing center of the oriental countries;
and we need a navy, not for the purpose of keeping peace int the Philippine
Islands-for peace reigns there to-day —but ve need a navyp, as oll cottatries do, to look after our commerce and our commercial interests in foreifar
waters.
Mr. President, there is no part of the globe where we can hope to maker
such commercial conquests and acquisitions for the next twenty-five year'
as In the Orient and with the Panama Canal constructed, as we are now
about constructing it, it will place the cities of the Atlantic seaboard- -
Boston, New York, Baltlimore, New Orleans and the other cities on the Guilf
— as close to the large conmmercial centern of the Orient, YokohAata and
Shanghai, as London and Bremen and the other great cities of Euirope aire
by way of the Suez Canal. Can we afford to fritter away this commercn 
When we acquired those islands from Spain, we were confronted by a great
moral problem, which was this: Could we as a civilized nation dare to turn
those Filipinos back to the Spaniards?  That would have bee'n cruelty of
the grossest and most oppressive kind. Could we afford to turn them over
to themsel-ves It their condition?  They knew nothing about governme-tI
they were practically, as you might say, a mob. To Wtlrn themn over to
themselves would have been a matter of political suicide and destruction.
To abandon them would have bee to make them thee spoil of the contenta'-i
and plunder of the great nations of Europe. Manifestly we could not do
that. There wo  onily one honorable, priht, and manljy thing: for the r (-at
American people to do, and! that was jst what uwe did-F-take the count, w/,
occupy it, c  izthe th  people, give themt a good government, 'and estab!l
law and order there.  That is exactly what swe have done.
With that country in our possession and under our rule, Mr. President,
we have got suci a footing in the Orient that we can dominate and control
that trade. Htving that possession, we need a fleet, not to take care of)
the Philipplfe Islands, to keep them It our possesston and to preserve pie.c'
and order there, but we need a feet In eastern waters to took after:r
commercia interests, to subserve them, and take care of tihem.
'here is *no country that has greater interests in the Orient than we
have, and it is necessary that tat the American ntion should exercise a mr
influence, and a moral influence comes from the fact not only that we reN
a great and strong nation, but from the fact that we have a good, eagg 8'
sive navy. I think every American citizen who believes in the protess
and arosperity and growt of the country, who wants to build Up our coUfry,
as and West, North end Sout, and to promote Its interests n all uae:e'S
of the glob, ought to do his utmost to bufld up our Navy. We an vszt
ihae t any too large.


3




"THE NAVY A GUARANTY OF PEACE*"
rxtracts from public addresose and workt of PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT, printed in daily C'ongressional Record, June 2, 1904.
We need to keep in a condition of perparedness, especially as regards our Navy, not because we want war, but because we desire
to stand with those whose plea for peace is listened to with respectful
attention. (New York, November 11, 190*.)
Unreadiness for war is merely rendered more disastrous by readiness to bluster; to talk defiance and advocate a vigorous policy in
words, while refusing to back up these words by deeds is cause for
humiliation. It has always been true, and in this age it is more than
ever true, that it is too late to prepare for war when the time for
peace has passed. The shortsightedness of many people, the goodhum.ored indifference to facts of others, the sheer ignorance of a vast
number, and the selfish reluctance to insure against future danger
by present sacrifice among yet others-these are the chief obstacles
to building up a proper navy and carrying out a proper foreign
policy. ("Washington's forgotten maxim,",Anlerican Ideals, p. 274.)
A nation should never fight unless forced to; but it should always
be ready to fight. The mere fact thatt t is ready will generally spare
it the necessity of fighting.  ("Washington's forgotten maxim,"
American Ideals, p. 284.)
The American people must either build and maintain an adequate
navy or else make up their minds definitely to accept a secondary
position in international affairs, not merely in political, but in commercial matters. It has been well said that there is no surer way of
courting national disaster than to be "opulent, aggressive, and unarmed."  (Annual message, first session, Fifty-seventh Congress.)
There never is and never has been on our part a desire to use a
woeapon because of its being well tempered. There is not the least
danger that the possession of a good navy will render this country
overbearing toward its neighbors. T'he direct contrary is the truth.
(" Washington's forgotten maxim," American Ideals, p. 284.)
We ask for a great navy,,we ask for an armament fit for the nation's
needs, not primarily to fight, but to avert fighting. Preparedness
deters the foe and nlaintains right by the show of ready might without the use of violence. Peace, likle freedom, is not a gift that tarriea
Iong in the hands of cowards or of those too feeble or too shortsighted
to deserve it, and we ask to be given the means to insure that honorable peace which alone is worthl having. ("Washington's forgotten
mnaxim," American Ideals, p. 288.)
If in the first decade of the present cenltry the American people
and their rulers had possessed the wisdom to provide an efficient fleet
of powerful battle ships, there would probably have been no war of
181,; and even if war hadt come, the immense loss to and destruction
of trade and commierce by the blockade would have been prevented.
Merely from the monetary standpoint the saving would have been
incalciulahie; and yet this would have been the smallest part of the
gain. ("Washington's forgotten maxim," American Ideals, p. 278.)
In public as in private life, a bold front tends to insure peace
ard not strife. If we possess a formidable navy, smnall is the chance
indeed that we shall ever be dragged into a war to uphold the
lMonrce doctrine. If we do not possess such a navy, war may be
forced on us at any time. ("Washington's forgotten maxinr, America n Ideals, p. '81.)
In all our history there has never been a time when preparedness
for war was any mentrae to peace. On the contrary, again and again
we have owed peace to the fact that we were prepared for war, and
in the only contest which we have had with a European power since
fitl Revolution —the war of 12 — the strggle and a   is al tsttendant
i':fasters were due solely to the fact that we were not prepared to
finer, and were not ready instantly to resent, an attack upon our
h1.or and interest, while the glorious triumphs at sea which redeemed
titet war were due to the few preparations whichN we bad actually
asde. i  We are a great, peaceful natvion -- a nation of merchants and
Maaufacturers, of farmers and nmechanics; a nation of workigmen 
shlt labor incessantlT with head or!handl. It is idle to tal of such a
nation, eer being led into a course of 0wanton aggressioni or conflet
Wi.h miiitary powers, byw the poseSsn of a.nsuei ent navy. ("-W
inglon's forgotten maxim," Amerincan; Ideals:, p. 66.) 




"THE TRUE END OF A GREAT AND FREE PEOPLE
SHOULD BE SELF-RESPECTING PEACE."
Extracts from public addresses of PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT, printed in
daily Congressional RIecord, June 20, 1904.
As civilization grows warfare becomes Iess and less the normal condithin
of foreign relations. The last century has seen a marked diminution fI
wars between civilized powers; wars with uncivilized powers are largely
mere matters of international police duty, essential for the welfare of thie
world. Wherever possible arbitration or some similar method should be
employed in lieu of war to settle difficulties between civilized nations, although as: yet the world has not progressed sufficiently to render it possible,
or necessarily desirable, to invoke arbitration in every case. (Annual message, Fifty-seventh Congress. second session.)
Th  true end of every great and free people should be self-respecting
peace, and this nation most earnestly desires sincere and cordial friendship
with all others. Over thew entire world of recent years wars between the
great civilized powers have become less and less frequent. Wars with barbarous or semi-barbarous peoples come in an entirely different category,
being merely a most regrettable but necessary international police duty
which must be performed for the sake of the welfare of mankind.
Peace can only be kept with certainty where both sides wish to keep it;
but more and more the civilized peoples are realizing the wicked folly of
war and are attaining that condition of just and intelligent regard for the
rights of others which will in the end, as we hope and believe, make worldwide peace possible. (Annual message, Fifty-seventh Congress, first session.)
There seems good ground for the belief that there has been a real growth
among the civilized nations of a sentiment which will permit a gradual substitution of other methods than the method of war in the settlement of disputes. It is not pretended that as yet we are near a positio in in whidh it
will be possible wholly to prevent war, or that a just regard for national
interest and honor will in all cases permit of the settlement of international disputes by arbitration; but by a mixture of prudence and firmness
with wisdom we think it is possible to do away with much of the provocation and excuse for war, and at least In many cases to substitute some other
and more rational method for the settlement of disputes.  (Annual me:sage, second session, Fifty-seventh Congress.)
We want friendship; we want peace. We w ish well to the nations of
mankind. We look with joy at any prosper!ty of theirs; we wish them suecess, not failure. We rejoice as mankind moves forward over the whole
earth. Each nation has its own difficulties. We have difficulties enough at
home. Let us improve ourselves, lifting what needs to be lifted here, anol
let others do their own work; let us attend to our own business; keep o ir
own hearthstone swept and in order. Do not shirk any duty; do not shirt
any difficulty that is forced upon us, but do not invite it by foolish language. Do not assume a quarrelsome and unpleasant attitude toward othnr
people. Let the friendly expressions of foreign powers be accepted as tokens
of their sincere good will and reflecting their real sentiments, and let us
avoid any language on our part which might tend to turn their good ~vill
into ill will. (Wauhkesha, Wis., April 3, 1903.)
Boasting and blustering are as objectionable among nations as among individuals, and the public men of a great nation owe it to their sense of
national self-respect to speak courteously of foreign powers, just as a brave
and self-respecting man. treats all around him courteously. (Washington
D. 0. November 13, 1902.)
I would like to impress upon every public man, upon every writer in the
press,, the act. that strength should, go hand in hand with courtesy, with
scrupulous regard in word and deed, not only for the rights, but for tis
feelings, of other nations. (Waukesha, Wis., April 3, 1903.)
It is a good lesson for nations and individuals to learn never to hit if it
can be helped, and then never to hit softlyW  I think it is getting to be fairt'v
understood that that is our foreign policy. (San Francisco, Cal., May:13,
1903.)
The duties of peace are with us always; those of war are but occasional;
and with a nation as with a man,.the worthiness of life depends upon *i'
way in which the everyday duties are done. The home duties are the vi al
duties. (Sherman statue unveiling, October 15, 1903.)
The period of war Is but a fractional part of the life of our Republic, va.i
I earnestly hope and believe that t t will be an even smaller part in the future than it has beenni the past. (Chattanooga, Tenn., September- 8, 190Li
We all of us earnestly hope that the occasion for war may not arise, l:i.t
if it has to come then this nation must win. (Annapolis, Md., May 2, 190~.).The American flag stands for orderly liberty, and It stands for it abro;ad
as it stands for it at home. (Memphis, Tenn., November 19, 1902.)
Of course, the very first     thing that any nation has to do is to keep In
order the affairs of its own household; to do that which is best for its own
life. (New York, May 20, 1902.)
The army never has been and, I am sure, it never will be or can be a
menaee to anybody save America's foes, or aught but a source of pride to
every  ood and far-sighted American. (The Presidency, p. 10.)
Again:and again in al nation'-s  istory 1the time may, and, indeed, 8soi-,tm cme when the nation's highest duty Is war. But peace i w
be the normtal condition, or the nation will come to a bloody doom. Tv-SIe
In greattcrises lia; n1'776 and 1861, and twice In lesser crises, in 1812  id
1898, the nattion was called to arms in the name. of all that makes;.i
words "honor," -"freedom," and "justice'.other than empty sounds. 0)
ethe ntet result of the wIrar    greatly for the benefit of ciwn"~
kind, But on each# occasion this net result1 was of benefit only because af tf
thewarm       e paeam   justice and order and liberty (.Speech at Galeni,
Ill, on  r      rthday, APOril 2, 1000,)
r0413,:.;.




cD
6 -L-      -
k     - ~~~h
%. CD)
1::src




"HOW    RIDICULOUS      AND    CENSURABLE       IS A SUPE.
RIORITY    FOUNDED      ON  COMPLEXION."
Extract from remarks of lon. P. IH. GILLETT of Massachusetts,
in daily Congressional Record, March B8, 1904.
And if we ridicule and censure an imaginary superiority founded
on wealth, how much more ridiculous and censurable is a superiority
founded on complexion. It sometimes leads to grotesque absurdities. I was traveling in the South not long ago when the men in
the smoking department were discussing social conditions in a way
so narrow and unintelligent that I occasionally suggested a few
questions, and in a short time was engaged in a good-tempered
argument, which resulted in their sage conclusion that I must be
from  Massachusetts and of course could not comprehend their
point of view-a very easy and comfortable way for them to dispose
of my troublesome questions. One of the most loud and extreme
of the party, who stated that his occupation was what we in New
England would call a "rum-seller, and who was clean neither in
his language nor his linen asked me if I considered a negro my
socia: equaL  I responded that whether a man was equal to me
socially depended on his qualifications and not his complexion.
Whereupon he loudly exclaimed that he considered every white
man his equal, but that he was superior to every negro.
I felt like admitting the first part of hsi statement, but the preposterousnes of the last part impressed me, and yet I suppose it
is the view which has been so carefully cultivated in the South
that it has become general. Here was this rum-seller, inferior to 
Booker Washington, for instance, in every quality you can think 
of-inferior in physique, in cleanliness, in intelligence, in knowledge, in  ultivation, in morality-incapable of comprehending the
aspirations which govern that negro's conduct, and yet, in the
ignorant self-satisfaction of race pride, loudly asserting his su- 
periority.
If on  man is superior to another socially in this country, it is
because he has greater refinement and courtesy, and for no other
reason. It matters not wethter he lives in a palace or a hovel,
whether he has the skin of a Caucasian or a Hottentot or a Chinese,
if he has developed those qualities which humanity the world over
recognizes as making a gentleman he is entitled to a gentlemanls
treatment.  Yo  are not obliged to associate with him-every oaf
can choose his own friends-but to pretend that you are sociwaly
his superior i to proclai your ignorance or your insincerity.
You gentlemen from the South in this House are not ignoranlt.
You are not ignorant of the facts. You know that in a country
where there are no titles of nobility, where there is no legal aristo   y equality   n have but one standard-merit; and yet, knowing these thigs, you are afraid or unwilling to admit them. YtO
have not the courage to state  hat you know. How, then, can you
be surprised if there comes to us, who note this occasionally, the
suspicion that tis whole attitude upon the negro question is ar ti
cal and     siere, and is encourage     d ctd and cultat d a  mi
taned a an easy way to continue political supremacy and olidity
and to e. preser tat ueid0  et seolid South.
pI4




"THE RIGHT OF THE NEGRO TO VOTE
xirac from remarks of fon, IWfPW4f Pde V. MOWRAL of Pennsylvania,
in daily Congressondal RtecordAl, Apsril' s, 19eOl
Mr, CoArewiAki: On the 27th of January the gentleman from Georgia
It. HADIAWcOxT], tRaking for his text two resolutions that had been adopted
the Union League Club, of New York City, delivered a somewhat unprotried address in this aouse on what is commonly called "the negro ques-,io'e a question touching the right of the negro to vote, which seems to
t- thie legitimate bequest of the slavery diseussion. *  *  *
Notwithstanding the immense majority in Congress and of States by
hich theos aimendments were ratified, the gentleman fromi Georgia has the
osuranee to say:
The fourteenth and fifteenth and  drents were adopted, if adopted at
11, against the will at: a majority of all the people in the Union, by trickery
nd treachery in the North and by force and violence in the South.
He announces that awful things NNill happen if the United States shall
hae the temerity to attempt to enforce these amendments,. It -will cause a
yclone, a hurricane, possibly an earthquake, The fourteenth amendment
saoides that awhen the right to vote for president, Representatives in Coness, or State  icer is denied to citen of the United States "except for
larticipation In rebellion or other crimes, the basis of representation therein
ball be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citiSs bears to the whole number of male citizens 21 years of age in said
tate."
And here the gentleman from ('eprgia raises his voice and exclaims:
If Congress should be unwise enough to elect to exercise the discretionry power vested in It by section f of Article XIV, it will not only be the
oset serious strain of the present cordial relations so happily existing beswe.n the sections, but it will requires  a readjustment of the basis of repePlentation that will not start at the Potomac and at Rio Grande, but will
Sttch from Hatteras to the Golden Gate, from Maine to Florida, and will
iubrace in its majestic sweep every State and Territory in the Union and
eu our new islands of the gea.
By this comprehensive menace the gentleman from Ceorgia means that
uider section 2, Article XIV, it is prescribed that when the right to vote
is denied to any of the male inhabitants" of any State who are "21 years
f age and citizens of thep United States, or in any way abridged, except fur
'articipation i rebelliMon or for other crimes,/ the basis of. representation ln
that State shall be reduced accordingly.
I adnit the contention. That is whhat it means,
Of the 9,000,000 so-called negroes in the United States, 8,000,000
are in fifteen $loothern States. Of males 21 years of age the negroes number
traot 2,000,000 in this nation. The gentleman from Georgia alleges that
of the more than a million and a half negro males of voting age' in the
etoven States that once constituted the Southern Confederacy "three-fourths
fii a million can neither read nor write."
I would ask him if he is proud of this record  if he e xperiences selfstisfaction in the reflection and the declaration that a majority of the
igyoes of the South can neither read nor write, lHe s.ays that the illiteracy
l the southern negro has been rapidly reduced since be hwas; made free;
ta negro illiteracy in those States was 77 per cent in 1880, 3 per cent
i 1890, and 49 per cent, in 1900-ln other words, that more than ounhalf of.he negroes of the South can now read and write, and that the numler who can read and write to-day. Is 50 per cent. greater than it was when
incoln issued his emancipation proclamation.,
This would seem to be a marvelously good showing, but it is argued
therwivse. It is insisted that while thie southern negro is more intelligent, he
more wicked and pernicious. Or, in the language of the gentleman,
"During t       Phis anie period his criminality increased in more rapid ratio than
illiteracy decreased,"
lEven if, as it is a'sulied, crime has increased among the negroes, why
ooiild education be blamed for this?  Surely this is an unfair conclusion.
thinkj everyoe will admit that ilcota t at. bis feen of beneftt to a great
NoC segroes. Iff on the other hand, some hve not profited by thLe ediuWoni, that they have received, is it fair that we sho d say that the d0ti4c of the negro is a m.istake and deprive all negroes of eda ftion?
On the 12th of last February, at a meeting in New York, the question
O negro industrial education and its bearing on the race problem was disnax  Andrew Carnegie presided. President Eliot, of Harvard, was among
tht speakers.
tBooker T. Washington, whom the gentleman from Georgia would disanchise because of his color, was the leading spealer at this eonyocation
It great men, I quote from his speechb a paragraph which was not,
u't might have been, spoken in reply to the gentleman, from Georgia:
After making careful inquiry I can not find a half dozen cases of a man
a wvoman who has oompleted a full courrse of education in any otf our repu"Lle i4situtij s lile Hampton, Tuskteegee, Fske, or Atlanta, who are inasnned. TIe.records of the South show that 90 per, cnt, of the eolored
Pi"e ijmprisoned arem without knowledge of trades aad  11 pe  cent ars
p-2                                                     Sig.n 16




"HE     NEGROES       IN  MiSSISSIPPI      NOT   TO      BE  AL
LOWED TO PARTICIPATE IN STATE OR:  OUNTY GOVERNMENTS. 
fE8tract fro: remarks of Hlon. THiOMAS SP'IT of Mississippi
in daily Congressional Record, March 16, 1904.
Mr. Chairman, I wish to speak a little while upon a subjee
which is attracting attention all over the country, not il a spir
of retaliation, nor for the purpose of indulging in harsh criticisr
but to show by comparison the injustice sometimes done one se(
tion of the country and incidentally to vindicate the people of t:Si
section against the general charge of brutality and barbarism, atI
at the same time to show that those people have clearer concep.
tions of the remedy for existing eviih in their own commuliitie
tian have those who are more remlote.
What is called the "negro problem" has become a question o
national interest and demands attention whbeirever, North and 'South
the negro appears in any considerable numbers. Practicall a
of the Southern States, in which the negro forms such a perceniaa
of the population as to make him a political factor to be reckone
with, have by costitutional provision deprived himn of his powe
for harm in the administration of our domestic affairs, and wt
have done it because it was absolutely necessary to protect ou
people from financial ruin and to preserve our civilization. Fo
a time we were compelled to employ methods that were extrevele
distasteful and very demoralizing, but now we are accomplishii
the same and evern better results by strictly constitutional and leyg
procediwre
For more than ten years the negroes of Mississippi have under
stood that they were not to be allowed to participate in State 
county gfvernments, and as a result we have had but little troubi
with them, and they have been better satisfied and more prosperos
than at any time since their emancipation. We recognize that th
negro is a producer of wealth, especially in our cotton fields, an
this fact, coupled with the naturally kind feelings entertained fo
him by th   e whitpeople with whom he has lived all his life, give
him an opportunity for honest, productive labor not enjoyed by
his race anywhere else. We de/,y him the right to vote, under cer
tain conditions, and to hold office, but have never denied him ti
right to work for an honest living, as has been repeatedly done ii
some of the Northern States. We sometimes kill them     for out
rageous crimes, but never because they want to work. [Applause.
Much has been said of race prejudice in the South. We ha'
enough of this prejudice, if you wish to call it so, to forever debd
the negro from active participation in our State governments, t
exclude him from our dninng rooms except as a waiter, and to hu
the door tiht and fast to any approach to social equality. * *
Since the practical disfranchisement of the negro he has been bet
ter contented and me-re prosperous than ever before, and this woul.
continue to be true if lie is "let alone;" but dangerous influeet
are at work fraught with untold evil to both the white and colorea
races. One of the first of these was the surprising practical i1is!
tration of social, equaliy given by  te Phe re    sidnt
States when he took a negro into his dining room at the VIlit
House and sat down to dinner with him as graciously as if lie th
been the governor of the State of New York. I have always fcCe
sorry that hBooker Washington didn't have more sense and sef'
respect than to accept the invitation. It would have been iliut i
to his credit if he had declined. This one incident has done rl(o
to inflame the passions of the negro and give him a perverted ide
of his importance and his near approach to' social equality tiaa
anything that has been done during the last ten years. *  * * 
Now, 'Mr. Chairman, I haven't made these remarks for the pit)
poseof arousing any unkind feeling, but to show how unjust liii
been the wholesale denunciation of the South by the Northern itti:  and people,, and that we are all of the same flesh and blood,.'
that upon si0milar.provocation we all are prone to indulg the heor
passion for vengeainc.:I have endeavored to show, too, the PWt't
shadoing danger of teaching thle utterly false doctrined of polt1ic
anxd social equalityt of the back and white races. All the lt'oh
velts-: that livenow ever did or ever will live can never induce it
'proud   ited pure-bloded Ano        ons of the South to ase:uch a S;  nal heresy 
p'-3




i
f
ill
t
4
f
t
a
v
v
tf
11
L
h
Il,
i
c
d
f
Y3
V
e
r
i
t
N
f
t
I
fI
I
I
I
I
I
i
I


I




'THE   FIFTEENTH       AMENDMENT."           "IITS  EFFECT
HAS BEEN TO        PROVOKE SWIFT         RETRIBUTION   AND    BLOODY     VIOLENCE.";i.fract from remarks of io0n. M. R. PATTERSON of Tennessee,
in daily Congressional Record, March,J 1904.
Mr. Chairman, taking advantage of the latitude permitted for
iiseussion, I want to say something on the political conditions as
they formerly existed and now exist in the Southern States.
TIhe fifteenth amendment to the Constitution was conceived
in an hour of passion and designed as an act of vengeance.
It was a cruel penalty inflicted by an inflamed foe upon a fallen
and beaten adversary. It chained the South to a corpse.
It created and held prominent false and meretricious issues beftore the country.
It was a gift which the negro did not know       how to inteleigently use, and its only effect has been to breed false
notions of social equality and to provoke swift retribution
aand bloody violence.
Who does not now believe that his life, liberty and property,
hildch every good man wishes him to enjoy, would have been more
sicure without than with political equality?
With all the black men, in the majority in some States and in
nany particular localities, led by unscrupulous adventurers, intlvnt on public plunder and using the negro as a tool, what was:      are reasonable or necessary for self-preservation than for all
Southern men to ally themselves with another party?
Before the war the South was the storm    center of political
activity, where issues were discussed upon a high plane, so necessary in a republican government and for the development of a
i:i i order of statesmanship.
It has been suggested why not attempt to divide the negroes
vloiticalhlv; but this would have been a hopeless and ruinous task.
Tad they been open to reason, w hich they were not, still the South
cos:ld not yield the vital principle for which it always stood, nor
id it (dare by encouraging political to invite ultimate social equality,
for it is apparent that if the white people of the South were divided
politically and the negroes were likewise divided the negro vote
oulid decide nearly all the political contests; and thus brought in
close communion the inevitable end would have been the utter
rUin and confusion of both the races.
lo matter what the political opinions of Southern white
ttea might have been on national questions, or however much
th(ey may have divided under different conditions, their votes
rIet massed for the white man and civilization against the
blaiek man and ruin.
'IThe unspeakable dread and horror of the time when political
tq.;illity would obliterate the lines which mark the boundaries of
tlie races has nerved and sustained the Southern man through every
i^isitude of fortune and carried him safely through every ordeal
Mic:h vexed the temper and tried the souls of men,
At: Appomattox the Confederate soldier surrendered his arms
ans renewed his vows to the Union. HIe returned to a desolated
silt and found his old slaves his political masters.
\Without aid or bounty, in proud and incorruptible poverty, true
l0 himself and false to none, lie has lived and will die. He is now
iturrying to the silence of the shadows which lay thick and heavy
aT'rth,;s the river, and soon will join the comrades who have gone
b'tfore at the ghostly camp fires of the bivouac of the dead. * * 
That the South was justified in adopting the only alteralt:ve presented for self-preservation is being understood
iad admitted by the intelligence of the entire country.


i




"MR., CLEVELAND PRACTICED SOCIAL EQUALITY A
THE WHITE HOUSE AND CONDONED
MISCEGENATION."
Extract from debate in daily Conqgressional Record, April 12, 190.
Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Chairman, as a text for some of the remarks w-bic
I wish to offer I shall ask the Clerk to read an article from the Atilasi
News of March 7. 1904, over the signature of Tom E. Watson.
The Clerk read as follows:
[From the Atlanta News, March 7, 1904.]
Mr. Cleveland should be the most distasteful candidate who could b
offered to the South.
His second Administration was an orgy of the corruptest class legqs
lation. le went into office pledged to reform, and he violated every pledge
lie allowed GoniarA, of Maryland, to mutilate the tariff bill of Williai I
Wilson with amendments in favor of the sugar trust, and every other trun
until it was a most sickening surrender of the rights of the public to t
rapacity of the corporations.,
i e allowed the Wall street gamblers to pull gold out of the Treatur
with the endless-chain racket, which they worked with the silver nott
until he had erected a mountain of bonds to weigh down the taxpayers o
the land.
Ile practiced social equality at the White House and condoned mis
cegenation by the fulsome attentions he showered upon Fred Douglat
and his white wife.    Ile refused to put Into operation the law fo
the experimental free delivery of mail to country people at a time whli
he was signing bills which provided for the delivery of malls to the cap
italists of the big cities every half hour during the day.
He appointed a negro man of the well-known type —"Democratic nlg
ger"     to be minister to one of the white republics of South Africa.
Any impartial citizen.who will reflect a moment will see that it 
really better for the South that we should have an honest Republica
President, such as Roosevelt, rather than a pretended Democrat like Cleve
land. The reason is plain. When Roosevelt signs a bad law, or goes toc
far with the negro, we can at least "cuss him out" and arouse a stor
of public criticism, which makes him more cautious and conservative. Bu
when Cleveland did things of exactly the same sort the Democratic paper
were silent and the South had to submit without a murmur. Thus th
negroes were enabled to make greater advances toward social equality unde
Cleveland than they have done -under Roosevelt,
TOM B. WATSON.
Mr. SCOTT. I wish to be entirely fair to Mr. Cleveland, and I wil
therefore ask the Clerk to read the following letter, which I clipped fro
a recent copy 01 a Washington paper.
The CxTASimAN. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
W. E. AB.NaOTiY, Esq.,                    Pnixieo, N,., N.J., March 27.
DEAB SIrt: My attention has been several times called to the state
monte of Mr. Tom B. Watson, to the effect that Fred Douglass was invitel
to my wedding reception, and, further, that while governor I signed a bil
providing for mixed schools. I have already written two or three letters
denying these allegations, and do not propose to spend any more time deny
lng statements so absurd and emanating from so impossible a source,
Each and every one of Mr. Watson's charges (if they can be so called)
as they have been presented to me, is false. They are about as far fros
the truth as they can be, and they were made, I have no doubt, withoue
the least reason to believe them to be true, and entirely in a spirit
which even Mr. Watson ought to be ashamed.
Yours, very truly.                        GaRO'VE  CLEVELAND.
Mr. SCOTT. Mr. Chairman, I have no disposition to intrude.   I fin
In the Augusta Chronicle, of Monday, April 11, signed by Tom E. Watson
in which he takes occasion to say that the Washington Post gave an elb.
orate account of the wedding reception which President Cleveland gave t
his bride in its issue of June 16, 1886, and adds that the names of Fre
Douglass and his wife appeared in that account as guests at that reception
Mr. Cleveland denies, with great emphasis also, not only in a Ilete
which has just been read, but in another letter which was published In thb
Post this morning, the statement that he, while governor of New York
signed a bill providihg for mixed schools. Again disclaiming any wish t
Impeach the veracity of Mr. Cleveland, I will ask the Clerk to read Chap
ter 248 of the laws of New York, one hundred and seventh session, 188
The CHAirbMANse. The Clerk will read.
The Clerk read as follows:
CIIAP. 248-An act in relation to public education in the City of New  ort
Passed May 5, 1884;  three-fifths being present.
The pople of the State of New York, represente in    te and in  senate an
bly, do enact as followRs:
SECTION 1. The colored schools in the City of New York, now existn
and in operation, shall hereafter be classed and known and be contimner
as ward schools and primaries, with their present teachers, unless suei
teachers are removed in the manner provided by law, and such se rO1
shall be under the control and management of the school officers of t~
respective wards in which they are located In the same manner and t
the same0 extent as other ward schools, and shall be open for the educat
tion of pupils for whom admission is sought, without regard to rame 0e
color.
2. All acts or, parts of acts inconsistent with the provisions of til
act are hereby repealed.
8. This act shall take effect Immediately.
Mr. WWIIAM  S Of Mississippi. Do I understand the gentleman frt
Kansas to make the statement that Mr. Cleveland ever indorsed nixe
sehools ~or the two races?
Mr-. 80,. I simply had read from the Clerk's desk one of the l
of the State of New York which was passed and became a law during M
Cleveland's govrorship of New Yorfk, a law providing for mixed scboOl
Ip

I




",R. CLEVELAND         APPOINTED       A  NEGRO     MINISTER
TO ONE OF THE WHITE REPUBLICS."
plxtract from remarks of!ion. CH.1ARLES F. SCOTT of Kansas,
in daily Congressional Record, April 12, 1904.
Mr. Watson says further that during his term as President Mr.
Cieveland appointed a negro minister to one of the white Republics
of South Africa, while Mr. Cleveland in his letter, which was read,
enies that statement. In view of that denial I shall ask the Clerk
t0 read the following letter.
The Clerk read as follows s
DEJPARTMIENT OF STATEI,
WVashington, April 2, 1904.
iull. ICHARIELkS P. SCOTT,
Hlouske of Reprcsentatives, Washingtont, D. 0.
DEAR Sin: In compliance with your oral request, I have to Inform you
ltat the records of this bureau sh'ow that Charles H. J. Taylor was nominaJted as minister to Bolivia on September 11, 1893. No action appears to
ave been taken upon this nonmination during the session which closed
N,:vember 3, 1.893, and Thomas Moonlight was nol.niated for the office on
January 19, 1894.
Very respectfully, yours,       ROBErT BRENT MOSHER,
Chief Breau of AppiOntmeuts.
I offer this letter from the State Department merely to show
Ithat Mr. Cleveland had either forgotten something which transpired
tlen years ago, or that he was denying simply the letter and not
tie spirit of Mr. Watson's statement. Mr. Watson, it is true, said
iat Mr. Cleveland had appointed a negro minister to a "South
African' republic. Obviously he meant a "South American" republic, and the proof of that appointment has been read at the
Jlerk's desk.
Now, how can there be a more pronounced recognition, Mr. Chairman, of any man's social status than to send hiln abroad as the
official representative of this whole nation? For it must be remerm-!e red that our ministers represent us socially as well as politically
atnd commercially. Will allnyone contend tliht such an appointment
is less a recognition of social equality than a maere accidental and
informal courtesy tendered in a wholly private way?   I think no
such contention will be made, and yet I am sure the records of
this House will not show any Democratic protest against this "disgrace and degradatiron and humiliation."  You insist that there is
no partisan politics in your assault upon President Roosevelt, but
in view of your continted allegiace to 3 Mir. Cleveland, and in view
of your canonization of Tliomnas Jefferson as the patron saint of
your party, notwithstanding the fact that both of these committed
such more flagrant offenses in the same direction, from your own
standpoint, are we not warranted in the conjecture that the head
and front of President Roosevelt's offending lies, after all, in the
fact that he is a iRepublican aid not a Democrat? [Applause.]
I know that gentlemen upon thle other side resent with great
oiphasis the suggestion that they are "playing politics" on this
raie question.  I want to give them credit for entire candor in
tiYs matter, and vet I confess that: there are certain things that
are hard for me 'to explain on this hypothesis. If it is not the
wishi to make an issue of this question, what has been the purpose
of the numerous' \speech es on the subject that have come up from
the other side of the Chamber? Are there any measures pending
Ire calling for a discussion of the race problem? I know of none.
And yet during the past few weeks we have heard not less than
fihe set speeches by gentlemen on the other side of the Chamber,
idtied wholly or almost wholly to this saubect. Were they called
tot by anything that had been said on this side of the aisle? Most
/sii redly not. During the three years I ha.ve been a, Member of
ti5s Hlouse I have never heard this subject even remotely alluded
Ioby any Republican except in direct reply to sometlting that had
first heen said on the other side of the Chamber. If gentlemen
o not wish to make an issue of the question, why do you initiate
the discussion of it?
Are these speeches made to influence sentiment in the North?
ouit will hardly contend that they are. Are they made to influence
the action of this House on measures pending here? I have already
itid there are no such measures pending here. What conclusion
tml:ains, then, except that they are made to influence sentiment
i the South; that they are made to persuade the people In that
tioeta that the race question is still a political Issue?


I




"PRESIDENT CLEVELAND ENTERTAINED AA NEGRO
Extract from remarks of Hon. CHA RLES F. SCOTT of Kwisa
in daily Congr   iona Record, April 12, 1904.
Mr. Chairman, in an address which he made upon the floor of isii
House on the 1st day of March, the gentleman from         Kentuck:l
[Mr. Gis.BExa] took occasion to animadvert rather severely, ujpi
President Roosevelt for what has been commonly alluded to as '1bU
Booker Washington incident."   At the close of his remarks I steiit
that in this matter President Roosevelt had but followed Dilc i
cratic example, inasmuch as President Cleveland while in the Whit\
iHouse had entertained in the same   way C. Ht. J. Taylor, a nepn
from my own State. Two or three days later the gentleman ifri
North Carolina [Mr. WE-BB] read to this House a letter from the
Hon. Grover Cleveland, in which he emphatically denied the sta,:ment I had made. It seemed to me at the time, and I confess it
still seems to me, that the ex-President in his letter betrayed d
degree of irritation entirely out of proportion to the magniudet
of the unintentional offense I had committed.
I felt as I heard that letter read a great deal as I imagine 
man would who by accident had trodden upon the corns of hin
neighbor, and had been haled before a criminal court on the chalrdzt
of assault with intent to kill. It struck me that there was a re
markable discrepancy, also, between what the ex-President himftn 
aid of Mr. Taylor and his indignation on account of what I said!
He himself said that Mr. Taylor was a man of high character ai)M
great intelligence who had served his country well; and yet 1i
deelared that the, simple statement that he had shown this sawm
mail some courtesy and hospitality was an evidence of my "evi
propensities."  liHe admitted that he had appointed him    to a ipsition which compelled a large number of white men and wo!"P
not only to associate with him daily but to take orders from himi
and yet he was fierce in his denial of the simple statement that
he himself had shown this man some social attention.
In spite of the inconsistency, as it seemed to me, of these staite
ments, I made no comment upon the letter at the time furinel
than to give its writer full credit for his denial, following t-1
simply by a statement that my own remarks had been based iip'l
common and widespread rumor which I supposed to be true.
I should not have again recurred to the matter, Mr. Chairumia
but for the fact that when it was last before the House ccri:i
questions were asked me which seem to carry the implication tl'i
I 1%ad acted in bad faith througoughout and had never really see,
or heard anything which would warrant the statement which
made. In view of those questions I feel justified at this time
presenting to the House a few brief extracts from     a few of ti
many letters I have received, which will, I trust, mnake it clear th:i
the statement I made was not a fabrication of my own.
I read first from a letter addressed to me from Rochester, NN Y.
by an entire stranger, who says:
I was much interested in your statement as to the hospitality extend'(
by President Cleveland to the Kansas n.Pgro politician. I had previoisl~
seen the same statement and had never seen it denied.
A Kansas man writes as follows:
It was a colmmon boast of Taylor, according to my Information, tla
he had hlmched or dined with President iCleveland. Whatever Mr. Clevwi'a:1
may have done or said about it, Mr. Taylor certainly made no secret oi ta
intimate personal relations existing between them.
You were certainly right in your statement that Kansas newsp pcr'
published a report th-at O. 14. J. Taylor had been ent.ertained by PreesidA'
Cleveland st fich1on or dinner at the White House. I saw such  ft1 c
ments myselff 'and distinctly remember the talk about the incideo't at ti',1
time, It was well understood in Kansas at the time that Taylor was til
turn the whole negro vote of the State over to the Democratic( party. w
we all supposed that the entertainment at the White House and his apti11t'
merat as recorder of deeds for the District of Columbia were President Cfe'e
land's contributions to this object,
Still another K ansas man,' well known all over the State, w.iai
this:
I wish to say that I dlstinctly remember reading in 'Kansas papers t
story about C. II. J. Taylor having been, invited to lunch, at the V"'1'
House by President Cleveland, to which you alluded: recently on the fl'!0'
The matter was common talk in Kanams.at the time, and I hbd never hBrt
It denied until Presiden.t oleveland's letter a  'wa read in thie Hotuse, 
may make whatever use you like of tbisn letter.
1  p4.....;:,^..../




MWE STUFFED BALLOT BOXES; WE SHOT THEM; WE
ARE NOT ASHAMED OF IT."'
4tracts from  remarks of ffon. BJN3IJAMIN    R. TILLAIAN     of
South Carolina, in, daily Congressional Record, February 26, 1900.
I have exhumed the bloody' tl irt for a brief moment and am
aving it like a red flAag to a bull and the latter will not fight or
ite, and I will call the attention of In.Y frieands fromr the Northhhave a great Iany on that side, I am prouid to saty-to the fact
at they do not know yet, and nevxer will lnow until they come
outh and live witli us, jus t whoat wsi: hit 0e had to contend agaiinst
iid Julst what we hasve to contend a.:ga.in it even now. They do not
elSize it; they can not realze it and it.t is for the purpose of trying
i 'lhavey them stity tis questionl of race a little Ilmore and analyze
t 1hat I have attenipted, in rmy febcle way, to intrude on this body
or the brie f retmnlirks TI have aniade onr this subject.
I wvill tell you, white 1 a-1m talking aboult negro suffrage, why ther
re so dangerous as voterrs, In any State whbere the whites divide —
nd they have divided in every- Southern Sitate except mine and
Ihsissippl-into Populists and Democralts the neoro has been the
daiance of power, throiughi w hich oune side or the other has controlled
he elections by menlii; otf lri)ribeirS, for tie inegrl'o voter was a puriasEble one.
Therefore we Vhave been corifronted by tlte conrldition of a large,
norant, debased vote, thrust uponl us by the fourteenth and fifteenth
rcOindinents. Other States, not so peculiarly situated as mile, have
rtained that neg ro vote, Thye htve taken no steps looking to its
iitnination by educational qualifications or any otlher syster. That
te to-day stands as a  tmenatce to the freedoim,: to the purity of the
tllot-box, to the purity and honesty of elections, to the decency of
overnment, and it is there forever -until there is a constitutional
rovision made here which will relieve us fromrn it.
I should hte glad to see an education qualifica-tion throughout the
torh. I believe 1no ranr is fit. to be an elector unless he is able to
edl and write Tand lnd(ctrit t smeth int1g boult: gaovernmalet and iatS
reat principles. 3But who  pe:op  to see tthat?  No party at the Nort l
'ii dare to undertake to limit suffrage in that wa1y, because iit
taIld mean at the first election that thie vote which they ldreadl would
n to the other party and they wotuld be beaten, and the demarogues
Iloth, parties would pleat.d that you mu:nst have equality of nmanhood
itliout regard to patriotism or intelligence or decency dr ability
'apy other qualification which mlakes a man fit to vote. * * *
tot re tell you how s  we ere sif;uated in our State. We had a
tin-red nlid twenty-five thousand nmegroes of voting age and we hatd
iatundred thousand whNIbites. Nonw'!r, can yoan lift yourselves over tlhe
nice withia your boot. straps ald be)at that by honest mnethods? Yet
li stood tip here and insisted ftiat we il;must give these people ai
fi:e vote anld a. fair count."t They iad it for eight years, as long
S the bayonets stood there. and ir 1f87i they sent more bayonrets,,caiuse we lhad got the devil in u  by that timne and we dtid not
re whether we had any government. 'We preferred to have a United
4ils Army officer rather tholar a governmtt ent by carpetbaggers and
Ietes and scaill 7wags tiad scoundrels, who had stolen everything in
ilt. and had lmortgaged posterity; Mwhlo had run their felonious paws
to thle pockets of p*osterity by issuirng bonds.
II Ohen thal haphpiteed, weo took the gyoermLsnenat a-way. We stuffed
Ie tallot boxe.s. IWe shot them, InWe are not aslhomed of it,
ith thllat system-force, tissue ballots, etc. —we got tired ourves. 'So, we called a constitutionatl convention, and wve eliminated,
s said,, all of the colored people whom we could tinder the fournttl: and fifteenth ainendmentts.
P8~$0 02 




'WE TOOK POSSESSION OF OUR STATE, AND DEFIE[




YOU TO PREVENT IT."
Extract from speech of SET   AO     TIlLLMAN of SESoil
Carolina, in the United Slates Senate, May 7, 1902 
Mm. ITIrLMAN. "i have in view riglt tnow that after tlhad seen our ex-slaves —.po  or, ignorant creatures -givc ti|
ballot, after we had seen the election held under the!;ov
net and with a numerical majority of 30,000) negroes sl
ducted into the control-of the State of Solth Carolina, "l:
there being to-day 235,000 more negroes in my State thar
there are whites, and 300,000 more negroes in Mississipi
than there are whites-you declared that, a man 21 year>
of age without regard to any other qualification, was fit t,
vote, and that the right to vote carried with it the righlt t
govern where they were in the nmajority.,
"I could go back, and I Ilmv done so dulrin the debctt
with my friend from Wisconsin [Mr. SPOON lER ], some txw
or three years ago, in which I caine out boldly and, like 
brave and true msan, told you when we found wfl   e could n
overcome this numerical majority by any fair and laswf
-means, that we simply asserted our manhood as A-nglo
Saxons, and asserted it by whatever means we thought no(
essary, and we took possession o ouf r State and defied vot
to proest against it or prevent it
"Grant had sent a regiment of ten conipanies of IJUioi:
troops into my own county of Edgefield; sent there to re
Dr   the 'rebels;' sent there to subject us to the governlicn
of those negroes and their carpetbag leaders. They \wret
ordered to preserve order, to prevent us from terrorrizipn
the negroes, to keep them  from being kept fromr the polls
and to let. them vote.."They obeyed their orders as well as they could, but tin
reult f the election was that, with a numerical lmajoirit!
of 2,000 more negroes who were 21 years of age, and ix]'
under the dispensation of my friend from Maryland f[M
MolCO{As], were entitled to vote, and ought to be allowed t,
vote now-witht ten coprnl.Iies of troops and  0,000,0(
more back here to go down there if it was thought they wCrI
needed to keep us down, how did they come out in tit
strggle against white manhoed and white brains? 
only beat them 3,900 votes. But we could have be:atle
them 6,900, or 9,900, or 99,000 if it had been necessar'.
-fM'. MOCOoMAS. "If the Senator will allow ne, I a0]
amnazedat their moderation-only 3,900!"
Mk. TXiiLMAl,   Well, that was all we needed. c  * *
MR. TiLLMAh. "We have not had any water cures i
the South on the neroes but one Senator said the other &
something about the sand cure.
"   t say, from my klowledqe of t e situation, that.ti
we get ready to put a negro's head in the sand, we  t
ody thre too." 
p4


i
f
II
I
I
I
I
I


I




Post Office
Investigation
Q




"THE INVESTIGATION OF THE POST-OFFICE DEPARTMENT SEARCHING AND UNRELENTING."
Etracts from   remarks of lion. JOHN C. SPOONERI of Wisconsin, in daily Congressional Record, April 18, 1904.
The investigation of the Post-Office Department had its genesis
in an appropriation of $5,000 obtained by the Postmaster-General
after consultation with Mr. Loud and Mr. Bromwell, the undisclosed purpose of which was to inaugurate investigation and carry
it forward after the Congress should have adjourned. This fact
is corroborated by letters from Mr. Loud and Mr. Bromwell, and
also stated by the President in his meminorandum upon the Bristow
report. The President also says in his memorandum:
Some time in January information was laid before me by Mr. Seckendorff tending to show improper conduct by Beavers, general supeninteident
of the division, of salaries and allowances, and 'Machlen, general superintendent of the free-delivery system; and by Mr. William Allen White tend
lng to show corruption by or under Tyner, Assistant Attorney-General for
the Post-Office Department. First Assistant Postmaster-General Wynne also
informed me that he had become suspicious of the integrity of both Machen
and Beavers. After full consultation with Mr. Payne it was decided that
Fourth Assistant Postmaster-General Bristow should make tbhorough and
exhaustive investigation of the charges in question and of all matters that
might be developed in connection with them.
And thus under the direction of the President, with the cordial
and constant cooperation of the Postmnaster-General, there proceeded in those three divisions, at least, of the Post-Office Departmnent as searching and unrelenting an investigation as ever was
conducted, and one which for thoroughness could not be approximated by any Congressional investigation.
Neither carping nor innuendo, from whatever source or wherever
uttered can blind the people to the searching and vigorous character of that investigation, and the unwaverinq determination of the
President, the Postmaster-General, and the other officials charged
with the duty that it should be exhaustive, and should take no noc
of party affllations, political or personal friendships. The people
know,that as it went on it involved not only officials in the Departmients, but private citizens of different degrees of prominence.
and that no consideration of friendship or influence was allowed to
modify its thoroughness and energy, exposure, and prosecution.
Mr. Payne was criticised early in the investigation for not suspending Machen sooner than he did. HIe informs me that he told
Mr. Bristow that he would suspend Machen the moment he reported
to him  that his investigation would justify it or that the public
interest required it, and the moment Mr. Bristow so reported
Machen was promptly suspended.
Mr. Bristow bears testimony to the earnestness with which Mr,
Payne cooperated with him throughout the investigation, and to
the value of that cooperation.
And on conviction of Machen and his associates the President
took occasion to address to Mr. Payne a letter, testifying his ap
prediation of his work and fidelity, as follows:
WHITE HOUSE,
Washinyton, February 27, 1905.
MY DEAR MRl. POSTMATASTER GENERAL: While all the work of the Po?'t
Office Department and the Department of Justice in connection with thc
postal frauds Is not yet over, there is already to the credit of the Departments, and therefore primarily to your credit, such an amount of substantiv'
achievement that I take this opportunity to congratulate you persona:
upon it. It is Impossible to expect that corruption will not occasionally occr
in any government. The vital point is the energy, the fearlessness, and thI'
efficiency with which such corruption is cut out and the corruptionists pu-e
ished.
The success of the prosecutions In this case, as compared with pre
vious experiences in prosecoting Government officials who have been guilty
of malfeasance or misfeasance, is as noteworthy as it Is gratifying, as'
must be a source of encouragment to all men who believe In decency anr'!
honesty In public life. What has been accomplished by you, bs those.:"h
have worked under you in y/our Department, and by! the Department of 1J'tice redounds to the credit of our whole people, and is a sitnan triumph  /
the cause of popular govesrm ent. If corruption goes unpunished In poplar government, tien government by the people will ultmately fall; a'
they are the best friends of the peoLle who make it evident that whoev,'
In public office, or in connection wiltb public office, sins against the fun:"mental laws of civic and social well-being will be punished with unsparin',
rigor...
Sincerely yours,
THTIEODORIE ROOSEVELT.
Hon. H. C. PAYNE.
Pest rmast er C eneral. 
That tribute from his chief was due to this Cabinet officer.
q-4




"THE POSTMASTER-GENERAL HAS PUSHED THE INVESTIGATION      IN EVERY     DIRECTION,"
Extract from remdarks of l.on. HENIYY CABOT LODGE, of Massachusetts, in daily Congressional Record, Dec.,  1903.
Congress has twice investigated that portion of the postal service
which was found to be most in fault. A committee of the House
of Representatives investigated it and gave them a clean bill of
health. A committee of the Senate investigated it; the acute eyes
of the Senator's friends of the opposition were there looking for
what they could discover, and they gave a clean bill of health. The
two committees of Congress, with the best intentions in the world,
found nothing wrong. There is no clumsier machinery of investigation anywhere than a committee of Congress. Both Houses tried
to discover what there was wrong in the Post-Office Department
and they failed.
This investigation was ordered by the President and conducted
by the Poststmaster-General through the proper officer, the Fourth
Assistant, who is the head of the inspection and detective service.
He had at his command a great detective force. The PostmasterGeneral has pushed the investigation in every direction and in every
part of the country; and with that detective force at his command,
a force which this Congress can not command, he brought together
a great mass of' testimony and evidence, which is now lying at
the Post-Office Department waiting to be printed under the order
of Congress.
What we failed to find in our investigation they have found; and
before Congress undertakes to go to work to hold a useless committee hearing the proper thing for us to do is to see what las
been accomplished. We only know in a general way. My belief
is that ten times as much has been done as any committee of Congress could possibly do in the way of investigation. We want to
have that testimony brought here and examined, and until it is
brought here and examined I, for one, do not propose to have the
Senate or the Committee on Post-Offices and Post-Roads, of which
I happen to be a member, committed and compelled to an investigation. Let us look into the testimony already gathered, let us know
something about the facts in detail, and then we can tell what further investigation, if afny, is needed.
Mr. President, I do not know whether the Senator from Maryland in some of the intimations he made as to higher officers referred
to the officers who conducted this investigation. If he did, I can
tell hin that the Postmaster-General and the Fourth Assistant have
pushed the investigation with all the machinery at their command
-and it is very thorough-and with the utmost force in every
possible direction. There is only one sensible thing to do. It is
to have the testimony that they have gathered printed; to have
all their evidence made a public document. Then we shall be in a
position to know what to do next. To begin now to hold a public
hearing, with our clumsy methods, going over what they have been
months in going over, is simply a waste of the Senate's time.
This old cry about stifling investigation is something which has
so meaning to me. The investigration has been made. It has been
wade under the authority of the President of the United States.
It has been made by the Post-Offce Department and by the Postaster-General, and has succeeded where Congress failed.  th ink
we had better see what their investigation is before we compel a
committee of Congress to give up its winter in trying to do over
again what has been a thousand times better done. Let everything
that has been gathered be spread before the public. I want it. nted. 
q-2




"POST-OFFIC         DEPARTMENT INVESTIGATIONO?
Extract from debate in daily Congressional Record, Jan. 6, 1904.
POST-OFFICE DEPARTMENT INVESTIGATION.
The PREsIZT pro tempore. The Chair lays before the Senate
a resolution coming over from a previous day, which will be read.
The Secretary read the resolution submitted by i Mr. CAUMACK
December 16, 1903, as follows:
tResolved, That the Committee on Post-Offices and Post-Roads, in view
of the charges of corruption, extravagance, and violations of law in the administration of the affairs of the Post-Office Department, is hereby instructed
to direct the Postmaster-General to send to the cornmittee all papers connected with the recent investigation of his Department, and said committee
ihal! maake further inquiry into the administration and expenditures of the
said Department, and make report thereon to the Senate upon comntpletion of
said investigation on or before the ist day of May, 1904.
Resolved, That said committee shall have power to send for persons,
books and papers, examine witnesses under oath, and sit, by subcommittee
or otherwise, -during the sessions of the Senate st such times and places
as the committee may determine.
Mr. LorGE. I move to refer the resolution to the Committee on
Post-Offices and Post-Roads.  I do not think it is good practice
to enter upon sweeping investigations simply on the request of one
Senator and without any committee having examined into the sunjeet. and decided whether an investigation should be entered upon
or not. That is the reason why I mnade the motion, and I hope
it will prevail. *  *  *
Mr. President I do not want to be misunderstood in what I
said in regard to Congressional investigations.  I of course did
not refer to investigations relating to legislation or the slubjects
of legislation. With those I think Congressional investigations are
not only necessary, but, as a rule, are, extremely important and
'valuable. I was referring to investigations for the purpose of discovering crimnes and misdemeanors in the service, and I say those
investigations as a rule, so far as my observation goes, arc pretty
worthless.
_A committee of the House investigated AMr. Machfaen,   A  committee of the Senate investigated Mr. Mlachen, and they both cleared
inm at the very time when he was 7engaged in the precise practices
for which he is now under indictment, those practices haoeiny been
discovered by the departmental inestigation. * 
Mr. SrooxEn. That thecre has been inefficiencv of administration
nobody will dispute. It began under Mr. Cleveland's Administration. He was an honest man in administration. It began while
Mr. Bissell was Postmaster-General, He is dead now. He was
an  honest man.   It does not follow in every indtane,e, although
greatly to be deplored, that you can charge the Postmaster-General.with inefficiency because there happens to be in an army of emnployees sonie man who can not resist temptation or some man who
is inherently vicious.
Mr. LoDGor. My objection was to having an incomplete investigation, if one was entered on. It has taken eight months for trained
inspectors to investigate one branch. If you are going to investigate it at all, and a committee are to do it, you must not tie their
hands and make them     come in with a partial report. All they
may have done up to that time will be.public; but you can not bind
them in. the way you propose, becauce it shows you- do not mean
a thorough ilnvestigation, that all you are after is a little campaign,,
capital.
Now, there Is nothing in this that I have the least objection to
having ing investigated and torn open as much as possible. It has all
been done in one branch under the present administration. All
the facts iw  have and that have been read here to-day have come
from a Republican,Assistaant Postmaste  eeneral under an incestigation directed by a Republican Postmaster-General. It is we who
have probed it to the bottom   and carried it back through mo-t
thanone zAdministration, even, to the last Administration of Demoeratie reform, whero we find Mr. Machen originated.
Mr. President, let us have all the daylight there is. There is
not a document that I am not willing to have fromn any Department at any time; but I do say, and I say without hesitation, tha
what we shall ask for and the way we shall ask for It is in tfie
ands of the responsible tmajority of this Chamber, and we II
not propose,, at least  for one do not propose, to submit to having
that responsibility taken out of our hands. If there is any inquiry'
to be made and questions to be asked, they shall be asked 'in a wavy
hich the majority arove       and not I    a wy dictate  d by 
leader of the minority.
q-3




"IN THE POST-OFFICE INVESTIGATION THE SOURCE
OF CORRUPTION WAS FOUND IN A DEMOCRATIC     ADMINISTRATION."
Extract from remarks of ion. ALBERT J. BEVERIIDGE, of
Indiana, in daily Congressional Record, April 1, 1904.
Mr. President I shall not detain the Senate for more than a minute or two. Indeed, I rise chiefly to give my thanks, and the thanks,
I am sure of my colleagues on this side of the Chamber, to the
distinguished Senator from  North Carolina [Mr. SiMMONs] for
warning us that we must fight for our lives in the coming campaign.
The warning is valuable, even if the grounds for the warning are
hardly sufficient.
So I shall speak but a moment, and only then to call attention
to the circumstance that in the long and vigorous and, from his
point of view, lucid address of the Senator from North Carolina
he succeeded in establishing the fact that in the Post-Office investigalton the source of corruption, the fountain head from   which
flowed the whole miserable business, was found not in a Republican,
but in a Democratic, Administration, and that it was a Republican
administration which applied the lancet and let free the poison.
Certainly then, Mr. President, that can not be the ground upon
which the Senator warns us that we nmust fight for our lives —
that a  tepruliXcan Adixildtration has fearlessly investigated, exposed, punished, even thouegh in the search original guilt was found
in the last Democratic Admiinistrration.
I asked the Senator during the course of his address, not desiring
to interrupt him more than was necessary, whether he could show
in the course of his own distinguished public experience, or within
his recollection, or within the history of the Government, another
instance where an investigation had been inaugurated by a President concerning malfeasance of office under himself and where the
malefactors when discovered were fearlessly exposed and justice
wrought upon them, and tlle Senator could not answer.
It is an illustration, Mr. President, of openness in the conduct of
public administration and of swift punishment for offenses against
the law unexainpled, I make bold to say, in the history of our
country. I fancy the people will be found pretty well content with
an Adhtiniistration which did not hesitate to say, "Let no Igilty
man escape," and th'en enforced that order. I call the attention
of the Senator to the fact that that expression came from another
illustrious Republican President.
So the Senator cerftaiail can not warn vs that we will have to
fight for our lives upon the ground of th is investigation.
It is an invesatigation which he and every other Senator speaking
upon that side has greatly approved.
Yesterday, or the day before, I asked sonme Senator speaking
upon it whether or not he believed the statements in the report of
the Fourth Assistant Poststastr-General to be true, and he said
that he did. Then the conclusion forced itself that if that were
true all that Senators ir opposition are asking for is the investigation now of an investigation which the  themselves applaud.
We have heard golden references made to the report of this
investigation. They say it is perfect. They say it is fearless. They
say it is truthful.  Yet they were not content, and ask us to gild
gold which they themselves declare to be already refined.
I wish I could recall the eloquent words of the Senator in describing the condition of the people of this Republic —"prosperity luxuriant as never before," said he, or something like it; "the gold
of the world flowing in upon us," said he, or words to that effect;
"all the happy conditions which good government and wise policies
bring to a free people prevail," said he, and the Republican party
in power   What a syllogism from which to draw Democratic inspiration and hope!
Does the Senator see in that any justification of his prophecy
that we must fight for our lives? Does not the Senator imagine
that when the people find the gold of the world pouring in upon
us, as he says; that when the people find themselves enjoying a
prosperity unexampled, as he declares, and then reflect that the
Republican pary is presiding over the destinies of the land at a
period so fortunate-does he not think that when the people conider, they will give a verdict at the polls that they are pretty well
atisfied?
q-4




"EVERY WROGDOING HAS BEEN LAID BARE."
Extracat from remarks of Hon. C. H, GROSVENOR, of Ohio, in
daily Congressional Record, April 9, 1904.
We are opposed to an examination and investigation of the PostOffice Department for the manifest reason that the Post-OQfice Departmeat has been thoroughly investigated, and, as we say —and
defy your contradiction-every wrongdoing has been laid bare,
[Applause on the Republican side.]
The examination of the Post-Office Department made during the
summer fand fall, before the beginning of this session of Congress,
was, ill my opinion, more radical, far-reaching, and minute than
could by any possibility be made by any investigation Congress
might order. Whatever the spirit was that animated outside counsel and the inside offliciais, there can be no doubt that the numerous
recesses of the Post-Office Department were ransacked and scrutinized for the purpose of developing any irregularity or any wrongdoing that might be found. Hence for the House of Representatives
to inaugurate an investigation would be time lost, money wasted,
public excitement created, and no good could follow,
Now, come to the scratch, and tell us what else you know that
ought to be laid bare. Mr. Chairmran, I havne been here ever since
last November, trying to do thle best I could as a Member of Congress. So has tihe gentleman fromn  Missouri [Mir. DzE Aaton]j.
I have some little ability to be looking around and seeing what is
going on. The gentleman has a great deal of ability in that respect.
I have not turned up any crime in the Post-Office Department. I
will ask the gentleman what he has done? Tell me, now, with all
the zeal that the Democrats have shown in this house-and I am
not att liberty to speak of the other branch of the legislative department-what irregularity, what wrongdoing, has been discovered
and brought to light which was not discovered and brought to light
by the Post-Office Department itself?  [Applause on the Republican
side]. You have been here during all of these months, and now
I turn upon you and say your entire outcry, yoiur entire libelous
attacks have been based upon nothing but a deliberate purpose to
tarnish the Atdministratio{- of yoiur Government in, the interests of
party politics. [Applause on the Republican side.]
Now, Mr. Chairman, before these gentlemen are ready to go to
the country with their appeal that we have not started an investigation, let them  come into this House, not with a mere resolution,
which will say nothing and will mean nothing and will be of no value,
but with a single charge, put in writing, vouched for by a Member
of the Democratic side of this House, alleging that somewhere somebody committed a crime in the Post-Office Department, and they
will have an investigation instantly. [Applause on the Republican
side.]
The people of the country can not be deceived by the mere shouts
of a political organization bent upon the creation of issues and
beint upon theI unhappy practice of laying the foundation for
oratorical stump attacks on political organizations lduring a Presidential campaign. IHere is the place to make specific allegations.
Here is the place to come directly to the front with averments of
wrongdoing, with respectable assurance of proof, or else I demand
that you gentlemen on the other side "shall forever after hold youer
peace."
There has been-and I say this to the country and defy contradictin-thiere has been brought to the attention of the American people, there has been brought to the attention of this House,
therde has been brought to the attention of the Post-Office Department, there has been brought to the attention of the President of
the United States by the Democratic minority here no crime, lo'
irregularity, no wrongdoing of their discovery; and that is enough.
Therefore it is the duty of this side of the House to take the
responsibility to investiga  if they believe there is anything to investigate, and refuse upon their responsibility to investigate if in
their view of Mthe        no good can come. Believing that tile
whole matter has been. done successfully and exh'austively, the Republicans on this sid of the -House are willing to stand upon their
record and let the storm rage around them.




"H1ENRY C. PAYNE NEVER BETRAYED A TRUST NOR
TO A FRIEND PROVED UNTRUE."
Extract from   remarks of lion.. IJ. i   A. D VIDSOV of 'Wisconsin,
in daily Congressional Record, April 20, 1904.
Coming from the State in which the Postmaster-General has his
residence, I want to say' here that I hope this debate may be extended long enough to citable those Members who, a few days ago,
under the heat of passion, saw fit to unjustly criticise him and to
use language toward him that no gentleman ought to use toward
another, to rise in their places and acknowledge that their cruel
criticism  of him  and his Fourth Assistant was not warranted by
the facts. Henry C. Payne never intentionally wounded the feeliays or stained the honor of any man. Bie never betrayed a trust
nor to a friend proved untrue. I know that he would not gratuitously insult any:tMember of [tiis House. There is not a Member
here who does not know that there is not a door of any office in
any department of this Government which swings as often and
as easily to the Members of this House as the door to the office
of the Postmaster-GeneraL     Applause on the Republican side.]
There is not a mian in official life who ever greets the Members
of this Htouse more courteously and kindly than does the Postmaster-General.
It has been my plcasure and honor to know him      for a number
of years. In the Stale where he resides he is known as one of the
most reliable and successful business men of that State.
I know him to be a man of character, of integrity, of honesty.
His great executive ability has been fully demonstrated in the
magnificent manner in which he he has disehargied the duties of his
position. Without noise or excitement he came here and procured
funds with which to conduct an investigation of his own DepartmentL   Without fear or favor he directed that investigation to be
made. 'He bore in silence the jibes of those who complained because lie would not publish froni the house tops each successive
step taken or contemplated by those making the investigation.
When the proofs were complete he turned them over to the Department of Justice.    The indictments and convictions are now
matters of public knowledge.
Not for an instant during that whole trying period did the
Postmaster-General waver in his purpose.     Regardless of his own
physical condition he remained at his post of duty through the
heated season of last year, until the work undertaken was thoroughly
completed.
That it was an uiipleasant duty will readily be conceded. That
no matter how unpleasant, it was performed, conscientiously and
with the firm determination to convict the guilty, there can be no
question.,Results confirm  it, every fair-minded citizen admitso it, and the
President in his frank and honest manner put it beyond question
when he wrote the Postmaster-General as follows.
WmITE Housn1
UWa:hirngton, February 27, 190}4.
MY DEAR POESTMASTERs F-GENRAL: While all tlie work of the Post-Office
Department and the Department o J'ustice in connection with the postal
frauds is not yet over, there is already to to the credit of the Departments, and
therefore primarily to your credit, such.m  n an a 'o0rt of substantive achievement that I take this opportunity to congratulate yout personally upon it.
It is impossible to expect that corruption will not occasionally occur In any
government. The vital point is tlie energy, the fearslessness, and the efficelency with which such corruption is cut o;t anI thie corrptionlsts punished.
The success of the prosecutios in this  case as conipared with previous
experiences in prosesutig Government ofiicials who larve been guilty of
rmalfeasance or misfoea.sa'ce is as notewvorthy as it is gratifying, and must be
a source of encouragement to all men r   who believe in decency and honesty in
public life. 'What has sbeen accomplished b:i y?!o.?bS those whlo have worked
under you in your Department, and by tihe Department of Justice, redounds
to the credit of our whole- pcople ad it is a sinlot tri:mph for the caiuse of
popurlar 9foveri enit. If corruption goes, unpunished in popular governnmet, then government by the people will ultimntely fai; asnd they are the
best friends of the people who make it evident that whoever in public office,
),r in connectioe with publlic ofce, sin against tl  fuidarnenital laws of civic
anid social well-being will be punished with unsparing rigor.
Sincerely yours,
THEiODORiE ROOSEVE3LT.
1lion. IL... PAYNE,
Postmaster-General,




"THE ZASES HAVE BEEN INVESTIGATED-INDICTMENT AFTER INPDCTMENT HAS BEEN FOUND.S
Extracts from remarks of Hon..J. P. DOLLI:VER of Iowa, in daily
Congressional Record, March 31, 1904.
I have wondered all through this session what purpose is in the
mind of our brethren on the other side of the Chamber in their
continual clamor about the frauds in the Post-Office Department.
They certainly do not mean to impeach the Administration of the
Post-Offiee Department, for one after another they have borne a
lng and a perfect testimony to the integrity of the head of
th  Departmet, including all the assistants of the PostmasterGeneral.
The whole theory of our executive administration has been to
create an inspectors force, charged with duties and qualified by
skill and experience to take charge of, to make report of, and to
correct such minor defects in administration as from time to time
occur. And no more substantial eulogy could be pronounced upon
the efficiency of the Post-Office Department than the limitations
which the facts in this case have put upon the clamor of our friends
on the other side.
Has anybody heard anything charged against the Post-Office
Department in these debates which was not closely read out of
the book containing the report of the Fourth Assistant PostmasterGeneral? I confess for one that I have listened from the beginning of this controversy until now for somebody to speak who had
sonie information, some rumor, sosome suspicion, some hearsay on
the subject of corruption in the Post-Office Department without
reading it out of Mr. Bristow's report.
And the fact that no such suspicion has been raised here, that
nobody in this Chamber knows anything of corruption in the PostOffice Department or of suspicions gathered about any bureau of
the Post-Office Department without consulting that book is, in my
judgment, the most complete vindication that could be made in
favor of the efficiency of the administration of that office,
And for fear I may be wrong about that r ask any man in this
Chamber, on either side, whether he has any knowledge, whether
he has heard any report, whether he knows of any hearsay, rumor,
or suspicion connected with the Post-Office Department that Is not
dealt with at length in Mr. Bristow's report?  If there is anyone
here who knows of such a thing, he owes it to the integrity of the
Government of the United States to stand up here and say so.
There is not in this Chamber, on either side, a man who is so
lost to a sense of his public duty that lie would not willingly rive
investigation to any authenticated or partially authenticated suspicion against any Department of the Government of the United
States.
But that is not our case. We are dealing with a PostmasterGeneral who, as everybody admits, is a man of integrity and ability.
We are dealing with an administration of the Post-Office Department, at the head of every bureau of which are men admitted on
all hands to be men of character and ability, and we are dealing
with a situation which has already been so far investigated, so
perfectly examined, that nobody in or out of Congress knows anything against the Post-Office Department or has heard of anything
that was not brought to light and plainly set forth in that extraordinary repot of the Fourth Assistant Postmaster-General, which
details every transaction in connection with the Department that:hs ever fallen under suspicion or could in the nature of the case
be discovered and unearthed. * * *
A4nd it is to he everlasting honor of the Administration, from
ths Chief Magstrate down to the humblest inspector in the PostOffice Department, that the cases involving fraudulent dealing
aain the Government have been investigated so thoroughly that
indi:0tet after indictment has been found, and these recreant
officias who had abused the trust that was confided to them by the
oIng-continued confidnce qof the Government wuder several A dmti
itratione haw at last reached the end of their cheap and dishonorable carers. 
hXt I  old, the retoe, that instead of spending time here clamorng
for investigations tht have aready f been  ade, wating the vaNl
l hioursf the Senate, this body would be in a good deal better
businessexamining those provisions of law which have bee  made
in the pending bill, to make such mafe        these public offices
impossible in the future,:: D;              0d5:




OST-OFFICE:INVESTIGATION"'-"A          WORK      WELL
BEGUN, WELL        CARRIED     ON, WELL       FINISHED."
triacts from remarks of lion. ORVILLE II. PLATT of Connecticut, in daily Congressional Record, Jan. 8, 1904.
POST-OFFICE DEPiARTMEiNT IMNVESTIGATION.
T'ile PatESIDNTr, pro teimpore. The Chair lays before the Sen"e all of the resolutions relating to an investigation of the Postsce Department and all amendments offered to the same.
Mr. PLATT of Connecticut. We as individual Senators do not
nsider that we have lhad the time, the opportunity, or that we
vc the information to determine whether, after this elaborate,
arching, thoroughl, and, I repeat, merciless investigation, there
still further need for an investattion. If tliere is we welcome
-we want it. If there is not, we do not consider it worth while
enter into a needless investigation.  *  *  *  I think I may
eak for my fellow-Senators when I say that we are as anxious
hayve wrongdoing on the part of any official of this Government
oked into, investigated, probed, and punished as any Senators
Ion the other side.
But to my mind there is a serious question as to wlether further.gestigation into this matter is necessary. I do not believe any
ingressional invstigationa, certainly nonvesince I have ben familiar
iti Congressional proceedintgs, has ever been conducted with the
0 roughness, the impartiality, the determination to expose wrongiing which have characterized the investigation carried on by
Ie Postmaster-General during the eight monlths in which all powers
the Government were put in his hands.
Now, if Senators say there is something which he did not disover, if they specify other matters which should have been instigated and which he did not investigate, and the committee,
pon the matter being referred to them, are of the opinion that
lat is true, then I with them  should want those matters to be
ivtstigated. If they say that as to any of the matters investigated
Assistant Postmaster-General Bristow there has been any want
thoroughness, any failure to pursue it to the utmost limit and
ge, then I want the matters which have been already investigated
be reinvestigated. * * *
Since it has been suggested that Republican Senators wish to
void a thorough and conmplete investigation of delinquencies, rallsance, and crimes in the Post-Office Department, I desire to say.at the President of the!United States and the Postmaster-General,
ating under his direction, have, in my judgment, intended to make
eis examination just as thorough as it was possible to make it;
iat the President, a directin it, and the Postmaster-General, in
"rying it. out, have lived up to the letter end the spirit of the
eclaration made by a former President on a somewhat similar oesion, "Let no guilty man escape.' 
It is somewhat strange, M:r. President, that in all this discussion
h have not heard from the other side a genuine hearty word of
rTIpliment or praise for the President, the Postmaster-General. and
Fe Fourth Assistant Postmaster-General in this matter.
To be sure, we have heard mild disclaimers that it was not in'nded to charge that there had been any shortcomings, but we
ave not heard one genuine hearty word of praise for what has
een done or sympathy with it
I think it was a work well begun, well carried on, well flnished,
far as it has been finished or can be fnieshed without the aid of
e courts; and if there be any one thing that a Committee on Postfices and Post-Roads says has not been done, I say, as we all
ry, I wish it to be done.
Now, that is the only issue there is between us. I am not going
qto a discussion of the matters brought out in the report of Genral Bristow. I have no desire to, defend a guilty official of the
overnment, and I do not propose to be placed in the attitude of
Wing that suspicion rest upon me.
But I do say, Mr. President, that the proper way of proceeding
all these matters, where investigations are called for by the
solution of a single Senator that are of consequence enough to
taken notice of by the Senate at all, is that it shall be referred
the proper committee, to the committee charged with the matters
which It rates, to determine whether an investigation is'necessary
q_8




"THES       INVESTIGATIONS SEARCHED AS WITH Ft
THE POST-OFFICE DEPARTMENT."'
Extracts from renarlk  of lion. EUGENE HALE of Maine, in daily Ce
gressional Record, January 18, 190-4.
Well, Mr. President, I think this: The Investigation is going on';
Department is committed to it by every energy that It can summon, thi
has never been in the history of this Government so thorough, so complyI
so severe an investigatgation, followed by the results which I have indkcat:
as this one.
It has only been going on a little more than a year. The best mii:..
of the Postmaster-General have been directed to it; the best men It 1:
could summon to his aid In the Department, his subordinates, have he
put on the track of every one of these grievances, malfeasances, and 0o1'!cn
and they have been followed. The only complaint I have heard is from t
friends of the accused; -with a "relentlessness," to use their words, a
as never has been, as they claim, shown before.
Mr. President, 'I have seen something of Congressional investi:a4ti
in my thirty years and more of service in the two Houses of Congre
I saw the investigation into the Union Pacific Railroad —the Credit Mobili
-the investigation into the Pacific mail subsidy, the investigation i
contracts in. the District of Columbia, the investigation into the p0o
tradership scandal, the Investigation into contracts for armor plates, a]
the later investigation, as I am  reminded, of the sugar trust, anl t
star-route investigation  and others.  Putting them   all together,
President, diverse as they were, covering almost every imaginable subje
being of great importance, in the one result of detecting and exposi
and indicting and punishing all of these combined do not stand in smaoP
tude for one momaent with what the Post-OfOice Department has done in t1
great investigation which it has conducted.
Yet Congress'was behind those investigations and there was more 
less public Interest. '   They involved great transactions, in some cases miu
greater in amounts of monCey than this; but the history is this; and I 
the DRepartlment shoenld be credited with it, and the President, who hf
backed up the Postmaster-Generacl day in anid day out, night in and nig
out, in the conferences and the vigils which they have kept upon this,:i
jeert-matter, should be credited, and are, a-s I believe, credited by the publ
with these great results ita these investigations.
These investigations, Mr. President, penetrated broad and large; t'i
searched as with fire the Post-Office Department: they went out into Stl
after State and followed the' course of proceeding in the vast business th
had been conducted through offending subordinates in the Department, wi
men outside who were in equal complicity with them against the law. Wli
once on the track in * any case the track was never abandoned; the tr
never grew too fresh for the Post-Office Department. I find here recit
by the Postmaster-Gendral a list, which certainly is illuminating as sIoi
ing what has been done by this great investigation. The Department su
moned its chief detectives: It took them from other work, useful work, a
set them upon this work of following and finding these offenders and the
offenses; it put into the field inspectors in charge of four divisions, sev
in number; it put in local inspectors in: the cities, eighteen in number;
put In all its field inspectors, who traversed the country broad and Iarg
who -took testimony, affidavits, interviews, and gained knowledge of fact
seventeen in number.
Mr. President, as a result 'they secured resignations that were force
four in number; removals, thirteen in number; and indictments found i
the coufrts of the country against those offenders, both in and out of t
Departments, sixty-fouir in number. *  *  *
More than this, these things are now being carried on, as a natur
sequence of the great work. of the Post-Office Department, in the courts,
the, United States in-half a dozen different States, districts,' and Terrionri
There is to-day In War:hington going on under processes of law, under rult
and Opractice that elicit truth and discover guilt and punish it, a ieadir
trial in these cases, and the best of counsel have been employed-and
shall pay for it —to follow this to the end.
Mr. President, you may have a dozen Congressional committees, ani tb
may, under the practice of Congressional committees, investigate this caCse
any portion of it, and altogether they will never bring out so clearly t
m ethod of doing. business in the Post-Office.Department, the relatiors th
ts hadt outsiders, and                 wrongdoing the won s gdoing that w as going o
will this one trial that is going on in Washington, whereevery word tha
aid and every.point that s made are printed In the newspaprs and tlrof
o   aen to the public,


I




rHE MOST EXHAUSTIVE AND HONEST IN'ESTIGATION EVER MADE."'
xiract from renmarks of HIon. HENRY M. TELLER
of Colorado, in daily Congressional Record, April 11,
1904.
JIo put this in a nutshell, the Fourth Assistant Postaster-General, M1r. Bristow, who we are told has made
ie most exhaustive and honest investigation ever made by
ny official in the world, and that it is not possible that any
rookedness could have been overlooked by him, although
de id not pretend to investigate more than a portion of
Ie Department, tells us that Beavers and Machen, and
tlir people of that stripe, did not themselves make so
pry nll much moiey.  I think he says that Beavers made
boutt $26G,000 tand Mtachen about $20,000, and nobody
Lows how much some other people made. But he says
iat the Government lost more than $3,200,000.
'That is what we are particularly interested in-that the
overnnlent has been robbed. Of course it is a very small
l: compared with the total expenditures of the nation,
nd I suppose it is only fair to say that probably we shall
ever have an Administration under which there wuil not
e some corruption, and some peculations, and some graftuil and some loss. But that is a good deal more than
ght to have occurred in any one Department.
'Mr. President, I am not a partisan suificiently strdng to
sist that these peculations, these fraudulent transactions,e:rred because the Republican party was in power, nor; t think it is any answer when I comnplain, as I do comain, that. this investigation has not been carried( on as it
(toild have been carried on to say that AMtellenr was ti
'lteocrat. It is not any answer, Mr. Presidenlt. Suppose
e,as a Demlnocrat. Suppose he came in under. a  ermodice Adlinistration. Somebody in my rear suggests to
ic that he turned( Republican. I have no doubt that he
ielged his politics with the Administration, for that class
it leople can always (do that. The Senator from M1aryland
ili,. GoRTaAN1 says to me' he changed his politics.  I
illd suspect that.
Ill the first place, I do not suppose he would have been
Hi.d there if he had not changed his politics; but he was
Is does not add anything to the offense to say that
(eavers was a IRepublican.  I do not believe stealing is
lznied to any one political party in this country, and it
feVr will be.
q-10


I






I




A:::
"0   ~~~~~~~:?1::           ~~~~~~~~~~~~1
-::       ~~~~i
an-           t~~~~~~~~~i
_w               00t
3: J             Ii




PENSIONS TO VETERAN SOLDIERS."-"THE RU
SO FIERCELY DENOUNCED IS ONE OF ADMIN.
ISTRATION      PURE AND SIMPLE."
Extracts from remarks of Hon. JOHN F. LA CEY of Iowa, in d
longressional Record, April 9, 1904.
House resolution No. 278 was read, as follows:
Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary be instructed to nnqti
and report to the House whether, in the opinion of said committee, there
any authority of law for a recent order of the Secretary of the Interior
the effect that all persons who served in the Army or Navy of the Ultal
States during the war of the rebellion and who have reached the age ofi
years shall be rresumred to ha.ve incurred such disabilities as to entitle th
to receive pensions under the act of Congress approved June 27, 1890 a
if no such authority be found to exist, the said committee i inst ru:cter
report whether the issue of such order amomnts to a usurpation or inva:i
by the Executive of the powers vested by the Constitution in the legisata
department of the Government, and what steps, if any, should be talen
vindicate the constitutional authority of Congress, and particularly ofe ti
House, over the raising of revenues and the expenditre thereof.
Mr. DALZEU.L    The committee has reported this resolution bas
with a recommendation that it lie on the table.
Mr. LacEY. Mr. Speaker, the question involved in this resoluti
where it assumes that the privileges of the House have bee a
sailed only arises out of a forced construction of the rude adpit
by the Pension Office. Prior to the act of 1890 most of the p)Csiw
rates were fixed specifically by law; so much for the loss of
etc:.so much for the loss of hearing; so much for the loss of
leg, and various disabilities rated in dollars, but the act of 18
provited that for disabilities not shown to have been contracted
the service the rate should be based upon the impairment of t
ability of the pensioner to earn a living by manual labor. Cr(
missioner Raum first adopted the rule that in estimating the ra
undier the act of 1890 he would apply the same rule that had alres
iexisted under thei old law.
'The Secretary of the Interior held against this rule on an appe
case, and after that the rule applied was based upon "inability
the pensioner to earn a living;' and three years after the law a
passed, with ie f*rie        the Department then hd, th ey adopt
an age ru!e tas iving the half rate of $6, and 75 yea
giving the full rte,4;ori$l, age being p resumed to creae disa'ili
to the extent that I have stated.
This age rule only recognizes a presumption, based on the 
perience of the offce, that soldiers at 65 were disabled onc-la
and at 75 the disability to earn a living by manual labor was lot
But it was 6only a presumption, and if the medical examinsti(
s}howed ability, notwithstanding age, the presumption was rebutite
Now, since that they have had eleven years' more experien
and have adjudicated several hundred thousand more claims. Wi
this additional experience, with this additional observation, wi
this enlarged view of the situation, the Pension Office has adoptr,
the order complained of, a graded rule between six and twel
dollars, beginning three years earlier than the rule of 1893, $6 at 6
$8 at 65, $10 at 68, and $12 at 70.
It is the same rule adopted in 1893 modified in the light of a
ditional experience of eleven years of the Department. VW      a
knew about it. I was on the Pension Committee and I knew     nbot
it. I approved of it, and I did not look to see the Dome of t
Capitol falling around our ears because President Cleveland }?I
adopted the age of 65 for a pension disability rate of $6. TI'
was eleven years ago, and we have survived eleven years; and o,
with the additional experience the intermediate grades have 0ec
adopted between six and twelve dollars, and a few years earli
in life had been decided upon.
The taking of several hundreds of thousands of cases and a:diji
dicating them in the light of the various surgical examinatiors i
each case gave to the Pension Bureau a very wide range oei 
perience upon which to base its ratings, just as life-insurance cI0t
panics use their own experience in arriving at conclusions,ts p
health and expectancy of life. The rule is not a rule of law; t 
a conclusion of fact, based upon a past knowledge and observix 0t
Congress did not attempt to point out specific ratings, as r;-'
the old law eases, but gave the general direction to rate the di'
ability as it might affect the ability to earn a living by manl'
laltor, and the details of administration were left to the exerclti"
department. The rule so fiercely denounced is one of adminifstrJi~"
pure and $im.ple, and  at clearly delegated by Congrwess  tthe Pe
tio  Ofic*.
m: f  rl  C


I




LD-AGE PENSIONS." - "COMMISSIONER                        WARE
INTERPRETS THE NEW ORDER."
act from WASHINGTON POST, printed in daily CongresMional Record,,April 12, 1904.
-a.re Pensions —Countless Veteraens to be aided under New Order-Allowance at 62-Years to count as Proof of Disability in Cases of Claima'its-Cormmisioner 1Ware iteprets the 'New Order-Veteran Applicants Will be.saved Time and iMony and Bureau's Expenses will be
cut dowon $3100,000 —Mioimumi Age Limit fixed at 62 Years and Maximum at 70.
romrmissioner of Pensions Ware, with the approval of Secretary Hitchk, yesterday promulgated the nost important pension ruling that has,n issued in a long time. It directs that, beginning April 13 next, it
re is no contrary evidence and all other legal requirements have been
laninlants for pen~ion unlder the general anot of June 27, 1890, who are
r  years old shall be considered as disabled one-half in ability to perit manual labor and shall be entitled to $6 a month; over 65 years to;over 68 years to $1 0, and over 70 to $12, the ulsal allowances at higher
[ continuing for di-oabilities other than age. The order follows:
"'Oardere'd, In the adjudicaot.on of pen iion claims under said act of June
1 90.'as aimended, i. s'hall be taken and considered as an evidential fact,
the contrary does not appear, and it all other legal requirements are
p0erly met, that when a claimant has passed the age of 62 years he is
bled one-half in ability to perform manual labor and is entitled to be
ed at $6 per month; after 65 years at $8 per month; after 68 years at
0er _month, and after 70 years at $12 per month.
"Allowance at higher rate, not exceedimng $12 per month, will continue
be ma-de as heretofore, where disabilities other than age show a condition
inability to perform manual labor.
"This order shall take offect April 13, 190,. and shall not be deemed
roactive. The former rules of the o(flice, lixing the minimnum and maxum at 65 years and 75 years, respectively, are hereby modified as above."
FIXINU THE AVERAGE,
The order itself is preceded by a preamble which. after citing the law,
~: the Pension Bureau has established with rea:sonab!e certainty the averr ature and extent of the infirmity of old a~e that thirty-nine years
er the Mexican war Congress, in 1887, placed on the pension roll all
xican war soldiers who swere over 62 years old.
Commissioner Ware, just before leaving for a trip South for his health,
>tbe as follows regarding the order, which he said would save both the old
tiers and the Government a great deal of money and time:
"There has long been in the Bureau a rule fixing a maximum age limit,.'i2 for 75 years. This )vas made during Mr, Cleveland's Administration
Coummissioner Lochtern, now lFederal Judge in Minnnesota. The 65-year
ihimum limit has been a long whlile in force in the Bureau, but I am not
hised by whom it was established, nor is it particularly material, since
meat with general acquiescence.
'bThe act of Congress which was passed in the latter part of January,
87, and approved by President Cleveland, put all the Mexican war vetaii on the pension roll thirty-nine years exactly after the end of the
exic.an war. Tile Mexican war ended officially by the treaty of Guadape-Jidalgo, February 2, 1848, although hostilities had ceased before that
me by the capture of the City of Mexico.
"It would seem that if thirty-nine years after the expiration of service
Mexican war soldier was entitled to a pension at 62 years and no other
r.i ite for drawing a pension ':iould exist except age, to soldiers of the
v1l war, who fought vastly more and longer, at loeast as good a rule ought
apply.
"The Mexican war limit of (2 years was probably brought about by the
n!l-known army limit of 62 years at which officers are retired. There
eris to be a general consensus of opinion that at 62 years the disabilities
old age have set in.
THE THIRTY-NINE YEAR LIMIT.
"The order could not have been issued earlier, because it is only now
|at the thirty-nine years fixed by the Congressional limit has been reached.
be civil war ended April 13, 1865, and in enlistmnents in the loyal States
iose who enlisted after that time are held to have no pensionable service
tring the war of the rebellion. Hence the thirty-nine years would expire
tlhe 13th of next mouth, and it is very proper that the order should be
staii fixing the 62 years as the minimunm age limit and the biblical three.or, and ten as the maxinmnm..
"There is an advantage and saving to the Government In the use of
is order, because every old soldier who has reached the age of 62 years
able to prove, almost without possibility of doubt, that he is one-half
isiabled from earning his support by manual labor. This being so, it seems
awi e to put a soldier to the expense of time and tramnsportation to go to,Place where a medical board can examine him to find that fact out, and
the other hand It seems unnecessary for the Government to keep boards
tIablshed and then pay $6 for the examination of a soldier when the result
i thf examination can be so accurately foretold.
"I am of the opinion that this order will save the Government a good
t of money. Of the 200,000 examinations in the last year, if one-fourth
tht-m were saved It would make $300,000, and perhaps an equal amount
tirle and transportation to the old soldier who would have to go and be
h~a rt~ ned.
THE ABILITY TO LABOR.
"'The experience here in the Pension Bureau has practically established
4t mi'anual-labor limit. In the rulings of the Department the inability to
mn a support bv manual labor does not include brain work, but applies
all who can by bodily labor earn support. This is what Congress en(,vnred to do, and did do,o and In the legislation is continuing to do, and the
besrv of the term  and Ift leral construction are well known and long
i'iasced in. Hence, in the Bureau, where so many examinations have
ten made through a long series of years, the disabilities arising from age
re alm'ost definitely fixed, so much so that it may be conceded that at1 62
'hri an old odider Is at least one-half disabled from earning a support
I manual labor, and under the law he would be entitled to $6",
r2                     t    I




"ENS!IONS-"T HE FACT,OF DISABILITY IS TO
ESTABLISHED ANDITHE DEGREE OF IT
IS TO BE ASCERTAINED,"
traots tfrom ~remarkcS of Hon. C. H. GROSVENOR of Ohio, in dail C
' gressional Record, April 9, 1904.
House resolution No. 278 was read as follows:
Resolved, That the Committee on the Judiciary be Instructed to
quire and report to the' house whether, in the opinion of said commit
there is any authority of law for a recent order of the Secretary of
Interior to the effect that all persons who served in the Army or N
of the United States during the war of the rebellion and who have reaR
the age of 62 years shall be presumed to have Incurred such dlsalblit
as to entitle them to receive pensions under the act of Congress ap)i,ro
June 27 1890.
*        *        *         *        *                 *
Mr. GROSVENOR. Mr. Speaker, we appropriate one hundred and tuIrs
odd millions of dollars and hand it over to the Secretary of the Inter
to be paid out for pensions.   Then we prescribe exactly who shall
entitled-that is, the great classes of men who shall be entitled-to p
sloa. First, the man who Incurred disability during the war; see
the man who served and whose health was impaired, or who lost a HI
or was wounded or whatever may have happened, he comes into the cl
of pensions depending upon the degree of disability which he inciur
during his service in the Army.
Then comes another class, the widows of deceased soldiers; then
children under certain. ages. Then comes the act of July 27, 1890, whi
provides that persons who are honorably discharged from     the servI
and who served ninety days, and who have a permanent physica
mental inability to earn a support sball te entitled to a pension ini
that act, based upon the degree of disability which they are sufferi
from at the time of their application.
There we have the law. It does not make any difference from sw
cause, so It Is not his own bad and vicious habits. It may be that
has fallen from a building; it may be that he has been wrecked in
railroad collision; it may be that he has grown old, and If the gerlt
man will only put his mind down on the single proposition he will
rid of all the trouble that he has apparently been suffering under, T
basic proposition of this statute relates to the ability or Inability to ea
a support by manual labor.
Now, there is the whole foundation stone upon which that act pi
poses to administer pensions.
Let me read the statute, so that I can plant myself on what I
lieve to be unassailable ground:
"That all persons who served ninety days or more and have an Ibon
able discharge, etc., and who are now —'
That Is, at the passage of the law"or who may hereafter be suffering from a mental or physical disabili
of a permanent character, not the result of their own vicious habi
which incapacitates them  for the performance of manual labor in su
a degree as to render them unable to earn a support, shall have a pe
don, etc."
Showing that the basic proposition, the underlying controlling Id
of the whole of this statute, is that by sonie reason, no matter what, p
vided it is not caused by the bad habits of the applicant, he shall hia
a pension commensurate with his lack of power to earn a support 
manual labor up to $12. And now I ask the gentleman to bear in nlii
that the degree of disability to be compensated in money betwveen
and $12 Is left to the, sound discretion of the Secretary of the IiterI(
The whole of this questiotn has come incidentally out of' that power giv
to him, or that discretion given to him to administer the law, to asce
tain by such steps as he may see fit to take what the disability is. *
Now, the question of fact being remitted to the Secretary of the I
terior, he may establish his own rules of evidence. Does anybody de
that?  Why, Mr. Speaker, when you come to get at the very kernel
this whole discussion, it amounts to this and nothing more, that the S$
retary of the Interior, charged with the difty of ascertaining a fac t, 
prescribed a rule of evidence and istued Fhis order mtcking known tIo 
people of the countryl what the mile of evidence is. I do not condemn tI
action of the Department, and by no means do I criticise the oriyin
acti on of Mr. Cleveland's Administration In ithis behalf. Mr. Cleve, la
Administration at an early day, long ago, before this rule became a
signiflcant, used this language:
In a case in which the pensioner has reached the age of 75 yea
his.rate shal not be disturbed if he' Is receiving the maximum or $1
but if he Is not a pensioner he shall receive the maximum   for s enl
alone if there are no special disabilities shown.
Now, that is the fundamental principle laid down by Clevelari
Administration. What Is It when applied to a pension claim?   The re
vant fact is, How much is this man disabled?   The Secretary of the I
terlor is authorized to establish his own processes of ascertaining. * *
Now, what has happened?      The application is made, the app
priatton Is there, the fact of disability Is to be established, and the Jehof It Is to be ascertained: and the Secretary of the Interior says, tISI
by the common knitowledge of men, no mart at 62 years of age can. e
a. livelihood with thesae degree of efficiency that he could Ewhn
was 83. And so we see-as a zguess, It you please-as I have sliSc
ttat all these ascertalnments are mere estimates   at last   He fi05
sys, ' will estite that the soldier has fallen off In ability one-all
and then be,goes on, by the scale which the law authorizes him t 
ta~blish, and taket s thes continuance of these presumptlonts the fact., Mr. Speaker I. fb ei   the cOcsuntrv will approve thi order; I 
hieve that te sohiers o of the contry will actptrove it.:4


I




"THE ROCKS ON WHICH COMMISSIONER WARE'S
ORDER      IS  BUILT."
i;xtract fr(mn remarks of Hon. HENRY R. OIBSON of Tennessee, in daily
Congressional Record, April 12, 1904.
And I venture the prediction, Mr. Speaker, that after the' pending
Presidential campaign is over, and the urgcnt political necessities now
spurring Democratic politicians to cry out have gone by, the whole
nuntry will agree that Commissioner lVare's age order and President
Roosevelt's approval of it were wise, just, considerate, opportune, economical, patriotic, and strictly within the law; and the Democratic politicians
will all say, "Well, we knew Ware and Roosevelt were in the right about
it; but how in the name of the devil could we afford to say so when a
Presidential campaign was on hand and we so scarce of campaign
material?"
Observe the relative positions of the two parties, Mr. Speaker. Here
Ia the Republican party saying to an old soldier over 70 years, "Prove
your age to be over 70 years and you shall have a pensiou of $12 a month."
And there is the Democratic party saying to this old soldier, "We Democrats
don't care how old you are, you mustr ttvel and pay your expenses to where
the pension board is, and you must here strip off ---like slave dealers cornpelled negroes to strip before a sale was made-and you mtiust be examined
thoroughly, and all your disabilities written in a book, and rated and reported, or you shall have no pension at all."
COMPARATIVE TREATMENT OF THE SOLDIERS
How will the old soldiers like this treatment? Are Democrats so hard
pressed for excsess to find fault with President Roosevelt that they are
willing to trample the (ld soldier under their feet in order to be able to
reach and injure himf Oh, Mr. Speaker, it will do the Democratic party no
reood for their leaders to say they are in favor of pensions, but want them
granted in a different way. They remind me of the old planter who declared
he was in favor of his negroes being religious and saying their prayers, but
he wanted all such things attended to on Sutnday at the meetinghouse. The
Deniocrats do not realize that with the old soldier, "Now is the accepted
time; behobld, now is the day of salvation!" 
It is really wonderful, Mr. Speaker, to what extremes Democratic
politicians will go to aid the Democratic party.  The first crime I ever
heard them charge on the Republican party was when, in my boyhood.
they abused the Republicns for using the Declaration of Independendence to
shield and befriend the downtrodden and oppressed, and the last crime I
have heard them charge against the Republicans now, in my old age, is
tilat the Republicans are using the Bible to shield and befriend the old
Union soldier. The Bible says:
The days of our years are threescore years and ten; and if by reason
f strength they be fourscore years, yet is their strength labour and sorrow; for it is soon cut off and we fly away.
The Congress of the United States has it effect declared a soldier
penslonably disabled at 62 years, and the B3ble and the experience of the
Pension Bureau declare him totally disabled for manual labor at 70 years.
These are the rocks on which Commissioner VWare's order is built and the
gates of D)emocracy shall not prevail against it. [Applause.1
Mr. Speaker, by permission of the House I will append to my remarks
for publication in the RTIcoan  an official copy of the Bureau age order.
Pension TBureau oard, r in relacion to presmnption of disabilities arising
from age:
DEPATITMINT OF THE INTERIOR,
Washisngton, March 15, 190i.
THE COMMISSIONER OF PENSIONS.
SIa: Your letter has been received, submitting for my consideration
an order touching the rate of pension  llowed under the act of June 27,
1890. The order in question is as follows:
DEPA:RTMENT OF THE I N'viRTmO, BUREAU OF PENSIONS,
ORDai  No. 78.1                                     AMarch 15, 90Q4.
Whereas the act of June 27, 1890, a? amended, provides that a claimant shall "be entitled to receive a pension not exceeding $12 per month
and not less than $6 per month, proportioned to the degree of Inability
to earn a support, and in determining such inability each and every infrmity shall be duly considered, and the aggregate of the disabilities shown
to be rated;" and
Whereas old age Is an infirmlty the average nature and extent of
which the experience of the Pension Bureau has established with reasonable
certainty'; and
Whereas by act of Congress in 1887, when thirty-nine years had
elapsed after the Mexican wa. all soldiers of said war who were over 62
Years of age were placed on the pension roll: and
Vv ereas thirty-nine years will have elapsed on April 13, 1904, since
the ci',i war, and there are many survivors over 62 years of age; Now,
Itherilore,
Ordered, (1) Tn the adjudication of pension claims under said act of
lJne 27. 1890, as amended. it shall be taken and considered as an evidential fact, it the contrary does not appear, and if all other legal reritlrements are properly met, that when a claimant has passed the age
or 62 years ae is disabled one-half In ability to perform manual labor, and
it entitled co be rated at $6 per month; after 65 years at $8 per month;
after 68 years at $10 per month; and after 70 years at $12 per month.
2. Allowances at higher rate, not exceeding $12 per month, will contnue tc be made as heretofore, where disabilities other than age show a
condition  of inability to perform manual labor,
3. This order shall take effect April 13B, 1904, and shall not be deemed
rt'(roactive. The formoer rules of the office fixing the minimum and maxirtimrm at 65 years and 75 years respectively, are hereby modified as above.
E. F. WARn,
Comirnssioner of Pensions.
In response thereto I have to state that one copy of the order has
been approved by indorsement tbereoa, and l herewith transmitted for the
flies of yout otffce
Very ripeetfullly.              E. A. HICKuCOcm, 8retary.
- 'A




"TRYING TO PLAY POLITICS AT THE EXPENSE OF
THE MEN WHO FOUGHT TO SAVE THE FLAG."
Extracts from remarks of Hon. J. A. HEMENWAY of Indiana, in daily Congressional Record, April 18, 1904.
Mr. Chairman, the gentlemen on the other side of this Chamber have
been walking around for the last few months striving to find an issue for
this campaign. They think they have it now. We are willing to meet
them on the issue. Gentlemen talk about an order of the President. I
have not discovered any order of the President of the United States, but
I have in my hand an order made" by the Commissioner of Pensions; and
what is the substance of this order?  In what does it differ1 from other orders heretofore made?,' I say it absolutely does not differ in principle.
The first order made along this line was made by Mr. Lochren, iP
Mr. Cleveland's Administratton, when he said in substance that when a
soldier became 75 years of age that under the law of June 27, 1890, it
should be held that he was totally disabled. Following that came an order in Mr. McKinley's Administration, on which Commissioner Evans said
that when a soldier became 65 years af age he should be considered onehalf disabled and when he became 75 years of age he was totally disabled.:Why?  Why,, because the experience of the Pension Department in
passing upon thousands of cases: demonstrated that that was the fact, and
that there was no necessity of making the old soldier go to the expense
and trouble of proving a fixed fact, when the experience of that officer had
taught him it was a fact.,. They knew from the evidence furnished in all
these cases when the soldier arrived at that age he was disabled to that
extent, and there was no reason in requiring him to go ahead and get up
proof of what Commissioner Evans knew to be true.
Now, then, since that time Commissioner Ware also learned something
more. He has learned that a soldier at 62 years is one-half disabled. He
learned it by taking into consideration the evidence filed in thousands of
cases, from which he saw that when a soldier was 62 years of age he was
one-half disabled, and to compel him to prove what experience has proven
to the Commissioner would be to compel him to prove what was known to
be true in every case, and they held that a soldier when he was 65 years
of age as an actual fact was two-thirds disabled. So the Pension Office
fixed that.
Does the gentleman from Alabanao say that —does the gentleman from
Mi-ssissippi say that the old soldier 62 years of age is able to do more thea
rve-half a day's manual labor?  Do you want to go to the country with
that kiind of an issue? If you do, twe are willing to meet you, because we
say that the Commissioner of Pensions, keeping within the law, had a rig-lt
to say that these old veterans did not have to go out and hunt up evidence
to prove what the experience of the Pene-ion Commissioner's Office hba:
proven to be absolutely a fixed fact and it is not necessary to prove it
again. *   *  *    The Commissioner of Pensions has determined, after
taking into consideration all the evidence filed in thousands of cases there,
that at 62 years of age it is a fixed fact that a soldier is disabled at leat
one-half; that at the age of 65 he is disabled two-thirds; that at the
age of 68 he is disabled three-fourths, and at the age of 70 he is totally
disabled. And now if you gentlemen on that side want to go to the country and say that these old soldiers are not disabled to that extent, you
are welcome to do it.
Then this order has another effect. All over this country the old
soldiers are being sent for examination every day on these claims for increases. The oxamination is absolutely unnecessary. The experience of tibe
office has taught the Commissioner of Pensions they are entitled to to t
rate when they reach this age, and by the passage of this item of $1,500,000 and by enforcing this proper construction of the law we will sa5e
during the next fiscal year $500,000 of money expended by the Governmeat for examininig these old soldiers.
We will not only save that $500,000 for examinations, but we will
save to the to the old soldier, who is bard up, many of them, who has hartIly
enough money to, live on, the expense of traveling to adjoining tow's.
and going to the patns and trouble of an examination. We will save
to himb his board.bill when he goes there, and you Igentlemen oughit
to know twhat that means.
The sum the poor old soldier is receiving now is a mere pittance, ael
he has to paay his railroad fare to adjoining towns, and he has to pay
hotel bills there; he has to take these examinations which the Cormmn  -
sioner of Pensions determines, and properly determines in this order" are
unnecessary; he has to go go hunting up evidence to prove what the Cownmlssioner of Pensions by experience knows is unnecessary, and which co-t'
the old soldiertime and money.
Not, yonu g:entlemen may dlodge all you want to; lyoui may hunt a'ro'ii
i,,L' Vit wsant to; you maqy offer all the amendments 1/ou desire here to-dblY,
ut you can: not get away from the- fact that you are trying to play poliO s
at the, e.ese of. the  sisg who fog h.t to save.the flea acid keetp 'the st s
Wi tinif:t an  make this a  nite4 an d prosperous country.  [Prolonged;'[~
plause on the Republican side.]
r-5




"THIS DEMOCRATIC HULLABALOO ABOUT THE PENSION-AGE ORDER        IS GOTTEN UP WHOLLY
FOR POLITICAL EFFECT."
Extract from remarks of Hon. H. GE Y.  IBSON of Tennessee,
in daily Congressional Record, April 12,, 1904.
Mr. SPEAKER: Referring to the discussion of the recent age rule
of the Pension Bureau, to which we have been listening for the
last two hours, I maintain that the only legitimate question at issue
is one of construction. * * On the 27th of'June, 1890, Congress
passed an act providing that every Union soldier who served ninety
or more days during the war of the rebellion and received an
honorable discharge and who was incapacitated for the performance
of manual labor by a mental or physical disability, not the result
of his own vicious habits, should be entitled to a pension of not
less than $6 nor more than $12 a month.
I call attention, Mr. Speaker, at the outset that it is not the
loss of mental vigor, it is not the absence of vigor of the mind
that entitles the soldier to a pension as a great many gentlemen
seem to suppose; it is the loss of vigor of the body. The language
of the statute is incapacity for the performance of "manual labor,'
not mental labor.
I concede, as we all must concede, that there are many men at
75 years of age in full possession of their powers of mind, and yet
all know who have attained that age that the powers of the body
are greatly impaired. A man who works with his mind may be
able to work eight hours a day when he becomes 70 or 75, but let
himr try working with his hands-"manual labor"-using an axe,
a saw, a plane, a hammer, a hoe, a spade, a scythe, or any other
implement of manual labor, and one hour's work will exhaust
him. *      *  I call attention to the fact that the first age order,
the one making the age of 7-5 vears a presumptive right to a maximum pension, was made while Cleveland was President.
Mr. Cleveland now says that the recent order of Commissioner
Ware is correct, and I will put Grover Cleveland's judgment on
thi:s occasion against thEe judgment of any man on the other side
of this House. Did any of these Democra tic champions of liberty
and the Constitution raise any outcry against Clevelaid and his
Democratic Pension Commrissioner, Judge Lochren? Not a solitary
outcry. On the other hand, Cleveland honored Lochren by appointing him a United States judge, and the Democrats in the Senate
voted to ratify and confirm the appointment. No objections then
to age being considered presumptive proof of disability to earn
a support by manual labor. If it t was right then for Cleveland
and Lochren to make old age proof of physical disability, why is
it wrong now for Roosevelt and Ware to do the same thing?  Oh,
ye Democratic defenders of liberty and the Constitution, say, is it
rifht for Democrats to violate the Constitution and the principles
of liberty and only wrong when Republicans do it?
Mr. Speaker, nothing so fully and glaringly demonstrates the
insincerity, hypocrisy, and falsity of these Democrats now abusina
Iloosevelt and Ware, because of this pension-age rule, as the fact
that they approved and indorsed the same sort of a rule when:made by Cleveland and Lochren, and only object to it now because
inade by Roosevelt and Ware. This, Mr. Speaker,- is overwhelming and concllsive proof that alt this Democratic hullabaloo about
the recent Bureau pens-io,-a.ye ord'er is gotten up wholly for political
effect, just as the stentorian hubbub about the Panama Canal treaty
vaas fabricated for political effect.
The Panama hubbub proved to be a boomerang that slaughtered
more Philistines than Samson's sword, and destroyed one Democrat's chances for a Presidential nomination, and if Parker joins
his champions on this floor in denouncing this pension-age order,
he, too, will be slaughtered by this boomerang. Go on, gentlemen,
denouncing Roosevelt for such great acts of his as building the
Panama Canal and pensioning soldiers because of their old age,
and you will have no more chance to defeat him next November
than the Parker and Cleveland gold-bug wing of your party has
to get the support of the Bryan and Jones freevsilver wing in the
couing cimpaign. 
r-6




"YOU ARE MAKING VOTES -FOR ROOSEVELT AND ARE
MAKING THE OLD SOLDIERS UNANIMOUS FOR HIM:"
Extract from remarks of Hon. HENRY R. GIBSON of Tennessee, in dailyd
Congressional IDecord, April 12, 1904.
You are making votes for Roosevelt every time you open your mouths
and are making the old' soldiers unanimous for him. And itf you keep on
you will not only elect Roosevelt President but will make Commissioner
Ware your next Vice-President. Mr. Speaker, the traveler to the Demiocratic graveyard after the next November election will see a new tombstone
over a new grave,, and if he will stop to read he will find on it the name
of the next Democratic candidate for the Presidency, -and under it these
words:
'What, Mr. Speaker, Is the secret of all this vociferation aboult Cormmissloner Ware's order?   Why all this weeping and wailing, and gnashing of teeth?  Hoplty bectase this order robs the Democratic party of a
n    little scheme they had concocted to get the Republican party in a hcl4e,
The Democrats, have been instigating the old soldiers to demand a servi:epension law at the present session of Congress, not because at heart they
favor a service pension, but because they hoped that by the time a servbciapension blll got through Congress it would amount to so many million
dollars-,say fifty millions the first year- -that if President Roosevelt signed
it he would lose New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Rhode Island, and
if he vetoed it he would lose Indiana, West Virginia, Colorado, Nebras&ka,
Utah, and perhaps other States of the West. In either event Roosevelt
would be beaten.
So the Dermoratic schleme was to hurrah for a service pension and to
swear that they were in favor of pensioning every Union soldier who served
thirty daysr at from $1 2 a month up, every Union soldier's swidow at fronm
$12 a month up, every Mexican-war soldier at $24 per month, and every
widow of a Mexitean-war soldier at from $12 a month op. They h'vped to
get a bill amended up to $50,000,000 a year and force the Rtepublian Congressmen to vote for it or to defeat them at the polls if they voted agaelt
it, anid if it passed, then, a.- I hav.e ialrady stated, they felt sure they had
Roosevelt defeated whether lie si,ned it or vetoed it.
Oh,.it was a deiep pit thee  De3noeucrats had dt'g for the Rep;ubliean
party to fall into, uand now they..are in a rage becat;-e Counommsioner Ware'order bridges the pit and en:lll-s the R tepitiltnis to pti; over, while ti,: 
Demiocrats, by tryingr to tenrs up the order, have themselves fallen into the
very pit they had digged for us.
This Is the explanation of all these fiery denunciations of Commission,'r
Ware's order. This is the cause of all these thunderings about Presidernt
Roosevelt having violated the Cont.tituttion and robbed Congress of its rights
when he approved. Ware's order. This is the secret of tFe awful troublos
the Democratic speakers and editors are having over this age-pension order.
B'it every howl th,: -;, send ip I   akes leopubicpn vote's. Evey ptimne th
thuzsder aL:oit-nt  this -order the o/df so/dier hastens to Republican shelter.
Evert-. den'-Wte iation they iutter dri-vs the sons of thte soldiers awtay ftro
the Democrathi cawp.'
WAR'S PENSION ORDfR —AN EXPLAINATION OF IT
WASHfINGTON, D. C., March 2,8. 190i-.
To tlheJournal and Tribune: As I amn in receipt of many letters frotm
old soldiers and others., as to the meaning of Commissioner Ware's recent
pension order, I ask you to publish this letter in explanation.
1. The order makes no new law and changes no old law. The Comtmissioner had no power to make laws or to change laws. 'But he can. mnke
rules of evidence, and this is all he has undertaken to do, and his order
-provides that where the contrary does not appear a soldier shall be presumed one-half disabled under the act of 1890 when he has passed the age
of 62, and will consequently be pensioned at' $6 a month th that after 65
he will be presumed entitled to $8 per month, after 68 to $10, and after 70
to $12 per month.
2. This order applies exclusively to the act of 1890, sometimes called
"the new law;" but a soldier drawing less than $12 a month under the old
law a    entitled to. more. under Mr. Ware's order may file an application
under the new law (the act of 1890) and get what his age entitles him t,.
3. A soldier drawing under the new law less than his age' will gi-ve
him must apply for an increase on thbe ground that he is entitled to more
by reason of dshability to performt manual labor rersulting from his age.
4. Applications for the Increase allowed by Mr. Ware's order shmo,
not be, made until April 13, 1904, as the order does not go into effect until
that date; but applications, for ncrease under the new law, now pending,
will probably be acted on under the order..I-fa soldier thinkshi himself entitled to a greater increase than h!?
age gives himn, he must specify his disabilities as thought the order did n it
exist; but If a soldier should do this, and the board should report that iie
has no pensionable disability, or is not entitled to any increase, as the cr.I
may be, hw may lose his are pension, because the report of the board aii
rebut the prerumption of disability resulting from age..
i6. When the application is b:ased on age alone, no medical examinati.i
will be made It the proof of asge be sati4sfactory. The Burean will probal Iy
look at the soldier's age as given in the muster roll. 
7. This order does not apply to widows, parents, Spanish-war soldiers,
or soldiers.of. the Regular Army. It applies only to those soldiers 'iid
sailors of the war of, the rebellion who served ninety or more days taId
were honorably 4discharged.
~ 8. The order is not retroactive and gives no back pension. Nor is tle
pension based on age an extra Oer additional pension. The lavr never giv1s,
or a       m:llows the samne person to draw, two pensions. A soldier entitled to
draw under two or more laws must choose which law he will draw under;
but if dissatisfied with his cioice he ray choose again, but he can not dr:W
more than one pension     at the same t ne.! wil! add that the Com missioner was ftly j1steied by botht late ed
precedent in, mak~cingt th~e ordgr referred Ia,4to,   w here thear is one poerr0
*to ind fatt thIere are fifty to. 'praise it         o!.7^B%~              ~        If:r     %.;    g Hl*


I




"PENSION ORDER OF THE INTERIOR DEPARTMENT."
E'tract from. Setate Proceedings in daily Congressional Record, March 29,
1904.
The PiEzrSuENT pro tempore laid befoare the S-na'te the following commrunication from the Secretary of the Interior; which was read:
DIEPATrT;N, OFi THE INTTROR, I    nas'a tnhgton, March 2S, 1904.
THi.t PRESIDeNi PRno TEiMPORE, United States Sceate.
SiR: Replying to Senate resolution No. 1., I hve the the honor to state
that an order has recenily been issued regulating the administration of the
ict of June 27. 1890.   is. iot considered, /however. that th is Departoment
haes tf/i  1t/ioi'ity te hoit to cnlare the cprovisions of that act or in anfy iway to
i]t'ect its just interpl>retation or that the order referred to does citicr. A
copy of the order is contained in the report of the Acting Commissioner of
Pensions, transnmittecd herewith.
As some misunderrtanding with riference to the interpretation and
purpose of this order has existed, a brief review of pension legislation and
the administration thereof in this Diepartmient is submitted for the purp,,se
of showing that the order refer'rtcd to is clearly within execctive authorittu
itid in conforiwity ivilh existing lawo and the mnetlods whitich have heretofore
/prcvailed in itfs cdoiniistratieion.
Before the act of June 27,!S90, no pensions were granted except upon
proof that the death or disability for which the pension was sought resulted
fromx actual service. This act, however, provided that any person who had
served ninety day s or more and wlho bad been honorably discharged should
receive a pension of not less than six nor more than twelve dollars per
month, itf proof were furnished that lie was suffering from a permanent
disability, inot the result of vitcious habits, which incapacitated him "from
the performance of matnual labor in such a degree as to render hiim unable
to earn a support."
Jisability, partial or complete, to perform manual labor is the sole
imasure of the right t a pension under this act. Tfhe element: of manual
labor is fundamental. If, in the adjudicatlon of a pension caiOm, it siall
be determined that the applicant's pensionable disabilities render him
wholly incanpaecltated for manual la.bor, his pension rating will be accordingly, even though  e  pplicant may   the applican t m  occupied, with dstinglhed
usefulness, In some field of Intellectual endeavor. It is well understood that
there Is a natural! decay of the physical powers, due solely to age, which
uip'airs rian's capacitv to 'earn a support'" by his own manual labor. Not
inly does the act Itself provide that "each and every infirnmity slall be duly
considered," but the decisions under it uniformly recognize the priuciple that
disabilities due to senility alone are pensionable.
By an order (No. 241) issued by the Pension Bureau In September,
1893, a copy of which is transmnitted herewith, it was determined that "in
a case In wvhiclh the pensioner has reached the age iof 75 years his rat",
shall not hbe disturbed if be is receiving the maximumni ($12), and if he is
not a pensioner he shall receive the maximum for senility alone, if there
are no special disabilities shown."
In the case of applicant Patrick Carroll the Department In February,
189., decided that "old age or senility Is a legal disability under the act of
June 27, 1890, and the surgeons should have given their estimate of the
amount of disability arising therefrom for the performance of manual labor
and the earningg of a support thereby." In July, 1895, in the case of applicant Jaseiob Itnkle, the Department affirmed the above named order No. 241.
Later,. in July, 1i97, in the case of Francis Frank, it was held by the,epartment talot "a claimant for pension under the act of June 27, 1890,
who has attained the age of 65 years shall be entitled to at least the minimum rate of pensionm provided by that act."
Although age, in connection with other disabilities, has always been
considred In determnining pension ratings under the art, there hasq never
lIeen any uniform rule for rating the Infirmities due to tIhe eIement of age
with the exception, of the two classes namied. Suich ratings therefore seem
t'" have been governed by the varyin'n opinicns of the maniy who have been
ccupied with that duty, thereby imparting to that feature of pension ad'rinistration somethinig of uncertainty and inequality.
To this fact, together with the growing; imnlortahce of age conditions, Is
die in considera ible imeasure the necessity for action on the line of this order
specifically defininlg as far as praeticable, ratinmgs from the  eset attainable
diata for Infirmities due to senility. To the adoministration of the pemision:'w;'s and the consideration of the Itn.men:e numaber of caoiE  that ore pending
under every act It it  is impossible to secure uniformity and expedition in decisions without laying down convenient rules for the weighing of evidence
'ad primao facie pre'sunmption which long experience justifies. This has been
the uniforin course of the Pension Bureau since Its establishmoent.
The:ordelr in question merely lays downi as a convyuie ent rule of decision
'mld a rebuttmable presumption of fact that one uwho is otherwcis entitled and
is, 6. years of aome is partially distalled from earning a livelihoodi bit his
ra,nds, that one. wh.o is 65 is dmore disabled for mnani:il wiorc, that onue who
iS 68 is in a still greater detqree *incapable of earninsq a sutiport fb?! ma nual
nlbor, atd thiai one of 70 is comnplcteBI1 disabled it, this reijiard. Certainly
such a pre'mmnptin is jmption i tied by general experience in aiMatinma life.
Whern it is mondoretonud that in the adjudications under thik act age has
always been considered a factor in connection with other disabilities, and
when it is further considered that for more than ten years there has been
an establishrd rating (the Imaximum al.owned ib  law)' bar-ed solely on the
a:e of 75 years, and that for nearly seven years there has been an establislied rating (the mininmum provided by law) based alone on the age of 65
Ypara, it will be apparent how largely problemaaatcal munst be any estimate
0f increase of ex penditures under, the order of March 1 5, 1904.
The Acting Corommit'sioner of Pensions has given attentive consideration
t; the second paragraph of the resolution, and by reference to his report It
Will be seen thlat he estiAates that the order of March 15, 1904, 'will result
It an increased expenditure annually of $5,400,000.
Attention is particularly Invited to this branch of the Commisstoner's
"port, which, while it shows the processes by which this result s result I reached
rid that It is the best approximation to accuracy practicable, reveals the
tact that the calculation is to some extent necessarily -speculative.
Respectfully, 
X. A. HrrcacocK, secreuwy




I1


'PENSION CASES., —"THE ORDER WHICH HAS SO
DISTURBED THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY."
Extracts from remarks of ion, JOHN C, SPOONER of Wisconsin, in daiy
Congressional Record, April 18, 1904.
Another count which the Senator from    Maryland made In his idictment of the President for being a czar (it seems to be the principia
point to the Democratic indictment) is that the President has boldly legi
lated in the order of the Secretary of the Interior relating to proof in pesion cases. I do not wish elaborately to discuss it, but I am convinced,
after a careful examination of the matter, that the order is entirely within
the law, and that it modifies an order made in 1893 under the Administration of Mr. Cleveland, as follows:
[Order No. 241.]  Di)P'. OF THll 1t: 3Oi ns ]E.,-kAU O0. PENSIONS,
Washington, D. C., September 2, 1893.
The circular of June 12, 1893, in respect to rating cases under the act
of June 27, 1890, is withdraun. Hereafter, in fixing rates under this act,
the medical referee or the medical officer in the board of revision shall weigh
each disability and determine the degree that each disability or the cobined disabilities disables the claimant from earning a support by manual
labor, and a rate corresponding to this degree shall be allowed. In cases in
which the pensioner has reached the age of 75 his rate shall not be disturbed
If he is receiving the maxinmumn, and if hlie is not a pensioner, he shall receive the maximum'for senility alone it there are no special pensionable
disabilities shown.
WM. LOCHmEN, Commissioner.
Why is it, my good friend from    Maryland, that this recent order
creates such distress among you, puts you in such fright over the perpetuity of our institutions, while to the order made under President Cleveland and administered for years creating absolutely an old-age pension
you found no objection? Is it a matter of politics? Is it because the
sour(ce of thet order was a Democratic President and this order comes Uider f Republican President?   Is it that?  The Senator shakes his head,
and I am bound to believq him. But it Is funny. [Laughter.]    And the
people are going to ask why is It that the distinguished Senator from Maryland and the distinguished Senator from Florida [Mr. MALLORY] and -11|
these distinguished Senators could find nothing unlawful in the order made
In Mr. Cleveland's time, which entitled a man absolutely without any proof
except that he was 75 years of age to $12 a mouth, and yet are thrown
into fits over this order making the age of 62, etc., an evidential fact suabfeet to rebuttal.
I said, Mr. President, that In my opinion this order Is within the
law. Here is the act of 1890:
SEc. 2. That all persons who served ninety days or more in the military or naval service of the United States during the late war of the rebellion, and vwho have been honorably discharged therefrom, and who are
now or who may hereafter be suffering from a mental or physical disability of a permanent character, not the result of their own vicious habits,
which incapacitates them from  the performance of manual labor i-n. such
a degree as to render themn unable to earn a support, shall, upon maki:q
dtae prmof of thie fact, according to such rules and regulations as the Secretarf of the Interior mayc provide, be placed upon the list of invalid pensioners of the United States and be entitled to receive a pension not exceeding $12 per month and not less than $6 per month, proportioned to thie
degree of inability to earn a support.
Now, Mr. President, there never was a plainer act of Congress; never,
There never was an act passed which left more absolutely to the discretion
of a Department its administration than that. "Due proof of the fact" of
the inability to earn a support by manual labor. Who is to decide what is
"(ifne prooff" The Secretary of the Interior and the pension officials wsw
administer this law. "Due proof, under such rules and regulations as he
nmay provide."
Here is the order which has so disturbed the Democratic party:
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, BUREAU or PENSIONxS,
Mlarch 15, 190.
Whereas the act of June 27, 1890, as amended, provides that a claim-l
ant "shall be entitled to receive a pension not exceeding $12 per monti
and not less than $6 per month, proportioned to the degree of inability
to earn a support, and in determining such inability each and every infis'titIs shall be duly considered, and the aggregate of the disabilities shown
to be rated;" and
Whereas old age is an infirmity the average nature and extent of
which the experience of the Pension Bureau has established with reasonable
certainty; and
Whereas by act of Congress In 1887, when thirty-nine years I ad
elapsed after the Mexican war, all soldiers of said war who were over ~>2
years of age -were placed on the pension roll; and
Whereas thirty-nine years will have elapsed on April 13, 1904, since
the civil war, and there are many survivors over 62 years of age; Now,
therefore,
Ordered, (1) In the adjudication of pension claims under said act
of June 27, 1890, as amended, It shall be taken and considered as as
evidential fact. if the contrary does not appear, and If all'other legal requirenments are properly met, that, when a claimant has passed the age
of;2 years, he is dIsabled one-half in ability to perform manual labt.
and is entitled to be rated at $6 per month; after 65 years, at $8 per
month; after 68 years, at $10 per month, and after 70 years, at $12 per
month.
(2) Allowances at higher rate, not exceeding $12 per month, will continue to be made as heretofore where disabilities other than age show a
condition of inability to perform manual labor.
(3) This order shall take effect April 18, 1904, and shall not be deemred
retroactive. The former rules of the office fixing the minimum and maxstmum at 65 and 7i years, respectively, are hereby modified as above.. FP. WAnE, Comnis eoer of Pensions.
Approved: S. A.,U HU cqcovc, Hecretary.






"THE WELFARE AND WELL-BEING OF THE VETERANS."
Extract from rea turks of lion. CHARLES DICK of Ohio in daily
Conegressioilal lZecord, Jaan. 5, 1904.
Mr. CaIAIAITAX. The Republican party has just cause to be proud
4f its pension record. With the aid of patriotic imen in other parties, it waged to a successful conclusion the greatest war of modern
times. It has never ceased to honor the officers and men who composed the victorious Army. Every Republican President elected
since the close of that war was a conspicuous and gallant officer
iin the Federal Army. Thousands of other men who wore the blue
aind served their country gallantly and well have held and are to-day
holding positions of honor and trust at the hands of the RepubI ican party. The tri-colored insignia of the Loyal Legion, the
fironze button of the Grand Army of the Republic, and the badges
of other soldier organizations to-day adorn the highest places in
he fh land. The soldiers of the Grand Army which fought four years
for freedom and the Union are found in the Cabinet, on the Su)reme Bench, in the halls of Congress. They are governors of
States and trusted leader:, and counselors in all walks of life.
[lMore liberal provision for its soldiers no government ever made
than this government provides for its defenders. Magnificent provision has been made for their shelter and comfort in Soldiers'
Homes scattered all over this broad land. The States have rivaled
[the benefactions of the National Government by similar provision
for their own citizens who wore the blue. Instead of maintaining
ain immense standing army as a menace to the peace of the world,
mnid drawing hundreds of thousands of young, able-bodied men
froam the ranks of industry and production, we devote an equal or
Ireater sum to help mainitain those who survive of that brave army
v hich preserved the Union.
It is to the great credit of President Roosevelt's Administration
that business in the Pension Bureau is now more nearly current
titan ever before. Himself a hero of our last war, no President
h/!as felt more solicitude or interest in the soldiers of that greater
v[ ar. No man appreciate:, more thoroughly the tremendous, worldwide importance of that gigantic struggle.' No man who was not
old enough to be a factor in that struggle could give his heart and
s:oul more ccmpletely to the welfare and well-being of the veterans!who fought for liberty and right in the days of '61 to '65.
His Commisioner of P ensions, Eugene F. Ware, a brave soldier
of the civil war, his btien zealous and faithful in the discharge of
1his duties, and brought to th!ose duties a high degree of administrative capacity.  lIe! has so capalbly administered his office that
hi has caught up with the -c cumulated mass of, pending applications, and long delays:a-st no longer necessary in disposing of
claims. Where the proof" is filed and satisfies the requirements of
tohe law, an early allowance is made. The division of the bureau
/ hich is worked the hardest to-day is the certificate division, which
issues the notice that ia pension has been granted. The office was
never conducted more efficiently, never more in tIhe interests of pensioners and claimnants.
NEARLY THREE BILLIONS PAID IN PENSIONTS.
The total amount disbursed for pensions since 1861 amounts to
/ d2,942,178,145.93. The act of June 27, 1890, is a fitting illustration
If the generosity of thre tleimblican party toward the veterans of
thle civil war. This law was passed by a lRepublican Congress, was
sigaed by a Republican President, and tbrough its administration
Ithere ways expenided during the last fiscal year a total amount of
$68,798,360.71. The umaaber of soldiers receiving the benefit of this
eact amounted to 443,721, while the number of dependents relieved
Iby this act was 171,259. The gain in tlje numnber of pensioners
ander this act over the previous year was 8,643, and the gain since
June 30, 1899, was 40,993.
Republican legislation for the old soldier, his widow, and hisl
minor children has been generous and bountiful. The invalid pension law of July 14, 186?2, and the dependent law of.!nue 27,. 1890.
are monuments of Republican achlevemnent and beair witness to the
country's tender care for its soldiers and its sailors and their
families. The pension laiurs are every year  being made more liberal,
(ie enlarginf the circle of those intcluded within their beneficence, and
Trising the rates for pensionable disabilities. As long as the Republican party continues in power, this generous policy will be
pursed.
r-10


I




"A SERVICE PENSION." - "GRATITUDE TO THE
MEN WHO BORE THE BATTLE"
Extracts from remarks of H!on.,J. P. DOLLIVER of Iowa, in daily Congressional Record, March Si, 1904.
The Senator from Maryland undertook to disparage the President of
the' United States because he had taken the function of legislation out of
the hands of Congress, and was about to transact all that business In the
absence of Congress, and even in its presence, without its assistance. ite
cited here an order of the Consmmissioner of Pensions issuing a regulation
to govern the allowance of pensions to broken-down old veterans of thi
Union Army.
I do not think the Senator from Maryland was fortunate In that. lHe
should have know n that in that order no departure was made from the established policy of the Pension Bureau, He should have known that the act of
18590 expressly requires the Commnistsioner of Pensions to establish the
regulations unnder which that law should be administered. Hie should have
known that as early an IS98, when Judge Lochren was Commissioner of
Pensions, it was not thought out of the way for a Commissioner to lay it
down asa one of the regulations that a man of 75 had reached an age and an
Inftirnity thatkmade no further inquiry into his physical condition necessary.
He should have known that as early as the first year of the la;t
Admtinistration a regulation swas established in the Pen;lon Bureau fixing
the agesr of 65 as the limit at which further testimony should not be required
on the question of na man's ability to earn half his living at manual labor.
And this new order, heraolded ecvrywhere as a violation of law, turns oial,
in the light of precedent nad fact, to be only that benignant interprctation
of the statsters of thie tfniteted Sti.tes which accords with the sense of gratiNtide which the American people feel oan all sides for the surviving veterans
of the old Union Alrt'-.
I wias asked earlier in the session, and I accepted the trust gladly, by
the committee representing the Grand Army of the Republic, to preseint
in the Senate hthey bll whih thy had reparpared for a service pensionL It was
a simple mftasue and, in my humble judgment, ought to be taken up by
the Congress of the United States at as early a date as practicable and
placed upon the statute books of the United States. It was from the begin"
ning beiWed and misrepresented, especially by the metropolitfan press of tle
United States.
It was described as a raid upon the Treasury, as an effort to bankrupt
the Go'vernment of the United States. It wa.s nothing of the sort. It was
a simplni measure of justice in accord with all of the precetdents of our
national history. The only question about it was whether the time had yet
come to place su oh a statute upon the books of the United States. I have
no doubt that the Congress of the United States will in good time take tip
that measure and put it through.
In the  ea    e t he Presiden t the President of the United States is entitled to, credit
and honor, and nor, and  t to  riticism  and disparagement, because, pending thie
action of Congress, withnout interfering with tbe function of the legislative
branch of the Government at all, omit of the goodness of his heart and out
of his symipathy for those broken-down old sveterans of the Union Army,
he has given, as I understand —
Mr, Q0vas. Does the Senator think that the reasan for the adoption
of the order was because he could not secure the passage of a service-pension
bill?
Mr. DoLrins s:. I do not think so. 1 think this order was issued because the experience of the pension Buireau in its daily business hbrd
shown that at the. age of 62 year: veterans who had served their country
in the field were at the end of their activities as men of affairs, and espeeially so as regards manual labor.
Mr. Ovl:aMi. If the I   cootr  thihe  nto   that sees tat wa  the proper constructi,
of the law of 1899, why did he introduce a service-pension bill? And does
he not think that that order -was an assumption of legislativep authority?
Mr. Dosi:Virvn. I do not. I think it wcas the business of the Conmmissio' ri
of Penoasis to interpret the law of 1890 liberally, and I for one am gilxt
that the C'ommissioner of Pensions,T an old soldierl himself, ha-s interpret d
that law with the authority-at least, the pernmtssion-of the President of the
United States ad the Secretary of the Interior, in order to extend its advahitpes to these olh vteraacns of the Union A ring^,
If':   the Senator thinks that that act of the President is going to dishonor him, to degrade him, to discredit him In the opiio  of the pople 3
thle Unit  States. he. has yet a good deal to lern "about thatt sense of grnc'
tee andd geood will wohich everywhere in the United States goes out to ihte
mIn who bore the battle, and to their widows and their orphan childJen,


t 11




THAT COUNTRY WHICH        THEY STOOD      BY IN   HER HOUR
OF NEED IS    NOW   STANDING     BY THEM    IN.
THEIR HOUR OF NEED."
ttract from remarks of Hon. HENRY B. GIBSON, of Tennessee,
in daily Congressional Record, Jan. 4, 1904.
SERVICE PENSIONS.
There is another matter that this House will probably be called
oan to consider, and that is the question of a service pension;
d I want to submit a few figures on tihat question from the reprt of the Commissioner of Pensions. According to the report
the Commissioner of Pensions there are about 200,000 ex-Union
Idiers now living and not. on the pension rolls. When we conder, Mr. Chairman, the age of the Union soldier and the infirmies consequent upon age, and when we consider the inclination of
mlan to get what the Government offers to him, I question very
iuch whether there are as many as 100,000 ex-Union soldiers not
rawing pensions to day.  But let us put them at 100,000. A
reat many of them never served ninety days and a great many
f them have defective records, and these two facts explain why
'any men are not applying for pensions. But put them at 100,000
nd how will it figure out? There are 37,000 soldiers now drawig pensions at $6 a month. Suppose we raise them to $12; that
ids $2,664,000 to the annual pension payments.
There are 34,000 soldiers drawing $8 a mo'nth; put them    up
)$12, and that adds $1,632,000 to the annual pension payments.
here  re  4,000 soldiers drawing $10 a month; put them up to
1", and that will add $576,000 to the annual pension payments.
ddling these three classes together, the aggregate is $4,872,000
dded to the annual pension payments. Now let us suppose there
re 100,000 men not drawing anything who would be pensioned
nder a service law giving every one of them $12 a month. That
lould add $14,400,000 to the annual pension payments. But, Mr.
ihairman, when we cut out the men who served less than ninety
(ys —when we cut out tlose with defective army records-when
'e limit the age to 60 years, and perhaps require them  to have
rvred six months in the Army, how many thousand do you think
conservative service pension will add to the pension roll?  It
*ill never add 50,000 names. Before they all get on that roll 50,000
f those now on will drop off by death.
SERVICE PENSIONS NOT BURDENSOM1E.
I say the year has come and ought not to be allowed to endhe day has come and the clock ought not to be allowed to strike
gain, if it be within the power of this House under parliamentary
ldes, without our adding to our pension roll the name of every
tx-Union soldier with an honorable discharge who served six
Nonths or more and is sixty years of age or over. The country
'an stand it-the country will never know   it.  Mr. Chairman,
lSen wey get to appropriating $138,000,000 a year for pensions,
h people of the United States do not care a nickel whether it
ten millions more or ten millions less. This pension appropriifion never has hurt our country. It goes into every section. It
s taken out of the pockets of the rich and put into the pockets of
he poor. It is taken out of the pockets of those who have pros)ered-the result of the prosperity of our country —and is put into
he pockets of those who saved our country that it might be prosRer us.
It goes into the pockets of tlhe widows of those who now sleep
[der the sod, having given their lives that our country might
eep) its life. We honor those who are dead when we honor those
ohe survive,
I have no patience and no sympathy with the men who will go
ito vulgar fractions ia order to find a. way to pirevent the men
Ito served in the Federal Army from 1861 to 18C5 from obtaining
UI a. pension from the Federal Treasury that in their last days,
tien they behold the last sun setting upon their lives and the flag
Of!heir country stil hMigh in the heavens, they may feel that that
0;try which they stood by in her hour of need is now standing
the  i their hour of need. [Applause.]








CID
CID
A-5
(/)- 
~ 
X   _ _  




"THEODORE ROOSEVELT."
No man ever made a better Impression for himself and for his.par
than Theodore Roosevelt made in the campaign of 1900.    [Applause
the Republican side.]  That was the start. Then he came to this cit
modestly took his place under the constitutional provision, and preside i
the Senate of the United States. It Is not a place or a grand opportwit
for a man to display greatness, or characteristics peculiar to special typ
of manhood, yet there never was a word of criticism, so far as I can recal
as to his dignified presiding in the Senate and his modest demeanor spam
the Senators and his actions among the people of the United States who
he met here.
Then came    p    the crisis n  is life. William McKinley was dead, a
the tears of the Democratic party began to gush out for the first tims
The man who had been denounced with all the bitterness that the langu 
can communicate was wept over by the same men; and Roosevelt wa
called by the Constitution and by the call of duty to appear at Buffalo an
take the oath of office and become President of the United States, and the
It was that the people of the United States began to know him, and then
was that he entered upon a policy, a wider and grander field of operadt
for the kind of a man who becomes a great man, than he ever had befon
The first thing he did, standing almost over the dead body of McKinvel
was to state that, In     d  b the presence of Almighty God, he assumed the duta
of the President, and promised that he would carry nto faithful es, acuto
all the policies of William  McKinley.  That sentence, Mr. Speaker,
itoosve that te  the loss to the people of this country in money alone 
hundreds of millions of dollars.
At the death of a President, and that, too, a President who stood
the champion of a great policy, and who held n his hands the threads b
the govern tental action n so many directions that affected trade th  duti co
merce, it was natural ptoftse  that hwe all did fear, that ithreul woult be
panic It Wall street         t spread to the country and moight preelpi
all the polintry of  itnaaM Msirable stat selte ofnc'  Mre st pear
It uwas seared that there was a panic almost ready to break out ne
very many centers of the country, and which would have extended iwho  s
to Europe, but the voice of the man In whose integrity of purpose the peopl
had confidence stilled the rising tide as the voice that on the lake sp is
the-words, "Peace, be still," and allayed the storm. He spoke to the aus
still," was the promise faithfully to carry out the work of MKinley.
It was the statement of the un, and the public believed that he wts
take up the work of McKinley; take up the broken chain of his Adminth  it
tion and go forward to the discharge of his duty, fol owing the impulse p
a generous nature and guided by the Cabinet that McKinley had he 
(Applause on the Republican side.]  And I stand here to-day a friendoe
McKinley-lthat t    true, as suggested by the gentleman-knowing som
thing as to whom his real friends are, knowing something of whom hi
assumed friends are, and I say that there is not one of the leading an
distinguished friends of William McKnle take upy in the United States of Americ
whose name and opinion h      come to my knowledge of m ods duty, who Is not ready
all times to say without hesitation and always that he has been treat
with kindness with cordiality and with the strongest kind of support l
Theodore Roosevelt. pApplause on the Republ d I stcan side.]
Looek at the men who stood by McKinley and see who the men se
that were t aken  hi   rel counsel andd eadvice of Roosevelt. I do not 
now to enumerate them, but the man who above all other men stood eadinre
to McKinlhey, the rmand   who loved him like a brother, transferred his A e
tion instantly at Buffalo to Theodore Roosevelt, and from that day uat
e himself passed away never faltered n his utterances always and trert
wthere, that Roosevelt had cordially and earnestly and honestly red upee
the pledges that e made at Buffalo. [Applause on the Republican sde  ie
I deny that he has dictated anything to Congress; I deny that hie 
we        ken fno thth e and Intent and letter of the Consitution ot a
nOw to nenmerate them, but the man aho answa al other men stood nes:vising Congress as to what he desired, fulfilling his duty as Presiderit
the: United States, and I have had some knowledge of public men. I ha
bel in the country a long time, much longer than has the gentleman fr
North Carolina [Mr. CLAUDE KITCmN], and I will say that I have u6c:known a pu:blic man holding a high position that was more amenable t t
aetimet of public declarations and the advice of his party and those gi
rundin     him     i Theodore R<*  Boosevelt.  (Applause on the Repu iit
MAC]J:0: 


I




i
f
I
I
I


I


I


WELL DONE, THOU GOOD AND FAITHFUL SERVANT
OF CIVILIZATION."
fact from remarks of Hon. J. P. DOLLIVE       of Iowa, ist at   0ofressionat Record, January 22, 1904.
Somebody says that the Government of the United States never had
y right to do anything in the Isthmus of Panama without the reque
the Government of Colombia,    I deny it.  No such construction of
at treaty can be made. If that were a proper construction of the treaty,
e whole history of the United States in respect to it there has been 
olation of that provision of the treaty.
To rmy mind it Is incredible that with this enormous interes  t at ake
e United States should have been called upon by that treaty to stand
y by and see life and property and commerce destroyed without tnterning, waiting for the request of the Colombtan dictator and relying for
paratlon upon an action in damages against that bankrupt, helpless
iltical institution.  t deny that it has any sense in it, and I deny that
accords with the history of the people of the United States.
If it did, what did President Buchanan mean when he came to Coness and asked the authority of Congress to take an army to the Isthmus
Panama whenever we needed one there?     If he had no right to us
except at the request of the insurrectionary peoples inhabiting that
iPhborhood, what did he mean when he asked Congress to give him an
press authority to take the Army of the United States down there and
cupy the Isthmus of Panama for the purpose of protecting our property?
I say, then, Mr. President, that we have In that Isthmus, and hate
d for fifty years, a property right carved out of the sovereignty first
New Granada, and then of Colombia, and now of the State of Panama,
ait warrants every order the President of the United States has issued
d every act that has been done either by our bluejackets or by or
arZnes in either harbor of the Isthmus of Panama.
I do not propose to stand here one minute apologizing either for what
s been written down on paper or what has been done by the gallant
eers and seamen and marines of our little fleet down there at Colon
d at Panama. I have got to a point where I propose to stop apologisg for the Government of my own country in order to add to the comfort
d solace the feelings of people who reside in foreign countries.
I have reached a point in my patriotism where I propose to stand with
e United States and let the other peoples of the world take Care of their
an governments. Without Intending to irritate or disparage anybody, I
Y to my brethren upon the other side of this Chamber that there is
tthing to be made politically by embarrassing the movements of the Govnment of the United States in these great transactions which involve
relations with foreign countries.
I dismiss, as the President of the United States very properly dislssed, with contempt the proposition thatment o the Govement of  e  d
taes is capable of any untoward, underground intrigue in connection
ith this great business. I say that the whole history of it is written.
is a history of anarchy and despotism for forty years upon the Isthmus
Panama. If there was no other law of the United States or of nations
(it jistified our conduct, I would suggest the existence of a law which
',:o thae once has directed the history of this wordld, and that ts the'
-I of exhausted patience,
The time had come and had long been passed when the United States
l1ld any longer afford to be mixed up in an attitude hostile to that
t tl community huddled along the Panama    Railroad, fighting for its
berty and longing for the time when it might enjoy the advantages in
(commerce and its business which must come from     the interoceanlo
anal. I rejoice that after all these years the time came when with honor
d with dignity and with dispatch the Government of the United States
ault wash its hands of that despotism, could put an end to its alliance
ith that anarchy, could bid an affectionate good-bye to that cunning
etatorship at Bogota, and extend for the first time In its history the
ight hand of fellowship and defense to the population of the Isthmus of
lanma.
Among all the statesmen ewhose names are honorably connected with
hb superb enterprise there is one-brave, direct, and manly in his life
io;-e he entered upon the duties of President; brave, direct, and manly
ll under the burdens:of tha treat offlce-for whom   above all others
tcry witlt reserve, after these noises are all silent, its choicest benediction
o;enl done, thoi good ad ft    l   rvant of civilisationJ   [Applause
the galleries.]
T11e PSiSmTr pro tempore. Applause is not permitted in the galleries.


I
I
1




"A BRAVE MAN N N THE WHITE HOUSE."
Extract from remarks of Hn. CHARLE      s B. LANDrS of Indiana, in qaQ
Conqressional Record.
And, Mr. Chairman, I want to say that I am not one of those who la
claim to being the original Roosevelt man. Years ago I antagonized Ai
Roosevelt and the theories he then espoused. I accused him in my ow
newspaper. It came to be a habit with me to say hard things against hi
I questioned his honesty. I said in my own newspaper that he was a shai
reformer and a pretender. But, Mr. Chairman, I have changed my umin
with reference to Theodore Roosevelt. Neither patronage nor selfish pol)i
led me to change my mind. ie won me, as he won miltions of other of 
ontrymen, by his seal, by hs forcefulness by his patriotism.
I began to appreciate how I had misjudged him when I saw him, i
the face of threatening war, infuse into one of the great departments
this Government, stagnant with the monotonous routine and dry rot of
third of a century, the red blood of activity and timely preparation.
realized what an erroneous estimate I had placed upon him when I sa
the announcement that he had decided to resign a place of honor and r
posibility andd lpower, which insured conspicuous performance in the ver
theater of war, to raise a regiment to lead to the front.
It seemed to me this was the supremest test, for it involved good-by
f not farewell, to little children and their mother. Later I knew how feai
fully I had wronged him when, with my colleagues on the floor of thi
house, I read bulletins which told how he, at the head of his regimen
under a blistering sky, the target for a hundred sharpshooters, had gie
a modern exhibition of that courage, that daring, that heroic valor whic
for more than one hundred years had compelled all nations to subscrib
to the verdict that the American volunteer soldier is the greatest sol lie
in the world.
We are told that he mixed up In the Northern Securities affair. Yec
he did. With hundreds of thousands of his countrymen he realized tha
conservatism had lost its head and that capital had gone mad. He invoke
the law passed by this Congress and he called a stop on combination an
speculation that was running wild in the Republic. That law was passei
by this Congress at the earnest solicitation of the American people.
One of the richest men in New York told me that the country wolE
never know what a service Theodore Roosevelt had rendered when he start,.
the machinery of that litigation. Ie stated that had matters been pf.
mitted to go on?unchecked wue would have had a panic that would 1h
been without a parallel in the history of American financial devastatli
The men who are criticising him most severely now are those whor i
saved from the consequences of their own rapacious folly.
We are told that he injected himself into the anthracite coal str~i
He did. And who is there who will say that he erred?
The President saw passion and greed facing each other, hostile an
uncompromising, and he said to them: "Come, let us reason together." S
brought about a settlement of that strike, and he did it without sacrificin
i any manner the dignity of his office.
We must not forget the situation as it existed then. Millions of peop
were without fuel. Diseasea  wras claiming its victims and the chill of deat
was In many a cottage.
Do you not think it was time for some one to speak? A coward In t
White House would have remained silent. But there was a brave mnl i
the White House, and he acted, and that strike was settled, and the n:titl
was sove-t from a series of riots that might have ripened into a revolut.io
His conduct in the Northern Securities case and in the anthracite coal sit
atlon elevated him In the confidence and esteem of the American pewop]
and his course in the Panama achievement has placed him so securely 
the affections of his countrymen as to protect him absolutely fronI t
plotting of Democracy and assure his vindication next November.
Theodore Roosevelt will occupy a unique place in our history. A
mittedly he has won the greatest victory tha  t it is possible to win in thi
Republic, a victory over ease, a victory over leisure. It is not di.icO
f   or a poor boy to climb and conquer in this Republic-that is the:fie
that is the natural thing. Ask those captain's of industry, who from pac
of power and responsibility issue their orders, whence came the o rio:i
inspiration that ripened into their success, and they will point to the day
when want and adversity forced the industry that won the victory,
That one who bis born in the lap of luxury has the real strugrge t
make in this country to win for himself a name. 
That youth who can despise ease, which has come as a gratuity w
cn place the proper stamp on luxury, which is the gift of others; whb c
mock at every invitation to idleness, which is the chief patrimony o t:
rich, and who can go out Into the world with a clear head, an honest::'1
and a assin for::toll and achievement and win the laurels of success —irl
itft my hatt to such a man and am willing that his name shall be insc tb
on the port;als o Columbia's proudestt temple.


it
a
11
N
rl
LT
11
t
I
I
I
I
I
rl
s
11
I
El
I
I
I


I


-3


I




HE GENIUS      AND    COURAGE      AND   SKILL:   AND   PATRIOTISM     OF THEODORE ROOSEVELT."
tiacts form remarks of flon. C. Ht. GROSVENOR of Ohio, in
daily Congressional Record, April 9, 1904.
Ic't us take up this very question of the Post-Office investigation.
Hflw does Theodore Roosevelt stand to this country in the matter
ltis execution of his duties as President on this question?  Has
I een lacking?  At the very first intimation that there was any
ch thing as w rongdoing in the Post-Office Department he put
foot an investigation that was more than sufficiently zealous
Iunt down every vestige of wrongdoing.   if I were going to
iticise Theodore Rloosevelt in this connection it would not be for
It having enough zeal; it would be for his selection of some of
e:gencies he dii select when he thought he ought to pacify the
nmocn.tic party in s-electing their instruments to make this instigation. But I do not criticise him for that.  I say that in
e months that are to come-the months that are to follow the
journment of Congress and are to be closed by the election in
avember-the An-erican people will say that Roosevelt has done
that it was possible for any man to do wzithin the scope and
nriiew of his office, limited by the Constitution.  Nobody has
ggested anything to the contrary.
These are some of the great events of his career, excepting two,
iwhich I will refer. lie came here as President of the United
ites suddenly, and found pending a great proposition of rerocitv with Cuba. It was not a very popular measure with a,at nmany people of his own party. It was not universally popar in the House of Representatives. It would have been a very
sy thing for Theodore Roosevelt to have dropped that subject,
have given it up, retired behind the Republican platform, as
amnight have construed it-retired behind the utterances of Relicans, as he might have construed them-and gotten rid of
whole of what was a great and vexatious responsibility. But
codore Roosevelt was not that kind of a man; he understood
tt you understood, my Democratic friends, and what I underOd —that there was embodied in the negotiations between the
ad President and his Cabinet and the living authorities of Cuba
implied agreement that something of this character should be
Ie. And unpopular as it mright be, great as the danger might
of the destruction of the harnony of the Republican party,
eodore Roosevelt put up conscience, judgment, patriotism  as
baist the danger of party inharmony, and led the column that
-t forward to the redemption of the great promise that to-day:onte of the shining stars in the crown of oar national rejoicing.
oiid applause on the Republican side.]
Again, from  time immemorial, from   the period that but one
ing man in both branches of Congress can remember, the quesi of the Panama Canal was agitating the people of this country;
it was a most complicated question-a problem   most difficult
ssolution. A French claim upon the property on the one hand,
claim of Colombia upon the other hand —a controversy between,caragua and COslti  icfa ulpon, tthe one hand and Panama on the
tr; and in all of it there seemed to be impediment after imrnient, so that we vent forward slowly and retrograded rapidly;
-erences of opinion everywhere-halting, uncertainty-until the
at mass of the people of the United States became vexed and
rb ted because of the apparent impossibility of solving the
1)em. It came to Roosevelt.
I0o not think that it was his genius that invented the situation.
n':w that he had no part or lot in its instigation. But the period
e when all the world looked at Panama and said, "What about
PIanama Canal?" And then it was again that Theodore Roosetrose in his own person, in his own power as an individual and
President of the United States, and solved that problem in such
Iasnner that all the world looked on with admiration, so that
6ody in the United States to-day raises an important and potenoic re against the operation ff our Government in that behalf.
W( have got the canal, we are going to build it; and when the
t vessel goes through it, carrying the American flag from one
o f the canal to the other, that flag ought to have, in addition
ith Stars and Stripes of the American Republic and the eagle,
r coat-of-arms-it ouglt to have a banner alongside of it comiditory and commemorative of the genius and courage and skill
Il: atriotism of Theodore Roosevelt. [lLoud applause on the Relii a side.]
8-4C


I




"THE PEOPLE KNOW WHAT THEODORE ROOSEVEI
STANDS     FOR."
xtras from remarks of Hon. HENRRY S. BOUTELL, of Illino
i daily Congressional Record, Jan. 6, 1904.
It does seem to me that this is an occasion where we can all
joce in this splendid prosperity, this unequaled prosperity, t
exists al through our country.
And now I do not claim that this is all due to the Republican pi
tective tariff; not at all. Mr. Chairman, no one who even tr
to think as a statesman would ever make any such claim as th
The only claim I make, the only claim the most ardent Republic
could make, is, and it can not be denied, that the principle
protection is an American principle; that the principle of prot
tion has always been recognized on our statute books; that t
Dingley revenue act is the wisest and most beneficent tari
act for all sections of the country that has ever been plac
on the statute book; and this story and that which I have rc
tend strongly to prove this claim.
This story shows that the blight and mildew which were predic
as the certain results of Republican victory seven years ago 
not be found in any part of the country. And so, as the campai
is coming on, the platform   of the Republican party ne
nothing but its record during the last eight years. [Appla
on the Repul       side.]
And, Mr. Chairman, there Is no more doubt about our lea
than there is about our platform    Applause on the Republi
side.] I know that some gentlemen on the other side of the Ho
have censured our President for being impetuous; but I want
say, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, that the people of the Uni
States would rather have a President who is impetuous and fr
than a President who would be suave and subterranean. The p
pie know what Theodore Roosevelt stands for, and he ne
no defense in this House or before the people. I want to t
you that we love him and you fear him for the enemies he I
made. [Applause on the Republican side.] Has he forfeited
Democratic esteem  because in season and out of season he
been zealous in enforcing the laws against illegal combinatio
Censure is the tax that strong men pay for doing rig
and Roosevelt has always been a heavy taxpayer of this ki
Has there been anything in his attitude toward any of the p
lie questions of the day in which he has not shown himself equa
strong, frank, and manly in dealing with them?  Let me sav
those on this side of the Chamber who read with misgiving t
this man or that man or the other man in our party is lookinrg
another Presidential candidate that such statements are no n
thing in our history. Why, away back, even in the time of (GeO
Washington and the early Presidents, every President who wa; e
elected to a second term had to meet at the close of his first te
the intrigues of personal enemies and even the schemes of ^ri
And so it has been all the way down through our history.
There is no question as to who will be the nominee of the t:ep
Mcan party. With the record of the Republican party behind
for the Ist seven years, and no question about our leadership, th
can be no question   as to the result  Our record will be ou pl
form and Theodore Roosevelt will be our candidate, and li
b  reelected by the- same knd of majorities that were given
Li0n n to Grant, and to McKinley.
I tell you my friends on the other side of the Chamber, if t
were not so m    among you down in your country who are me
hat I call"geographical Democrats" or "social Democrat;W
oth    ords, if you    d your honest convictions on financial
teionomi questions next November, Theodore Roosevelt wolid
relected    as large an electoral vote as was iven to Prsid
Monroe in 18i0. [Applae       on the Republican side.]


"I
o
I
11


I


s-5


I




4
i
I
i
I
II
I
I
t
t
II
t
t
f
I
t
I
I
I
i
I
t
I
i
I
t
I
I
I
I
I
II
I
I
I
i
I
I
i
I
i
i


I


"THE SILLY      BATTLE CRY, PERSONAL DETRACTION
AND PERSONAL ABUSE OF THEODORE
ROOSEVELT."
E rtracts from  remarks of Bon. C. II. GROSVENOR? of Ohio,
in daily Congressional R1ecord, April 27, 1904.
I do not doubt that the sharp criticisms of Roosevelt and his
personality and his past speeches and writings are all born of the
dread the Democrats hlave of the man as our candidate.
I believe that President iloosevelt represents in his own career,
ia his own utterta(ces, in his owen position to-day, the highest ideals
(tai best sen limnent of the Republiecans of the United States.  I
balieve that his whole c:areer has been a protest against the demoralizing, anttiquated, aind obnoxious ideas of the Democratic party,
I believe that the people of the United States have confidence in
his integrity, and I know they have. I believe his career as lPresident has been one of the most brilliant that has ever graced and
alorned the headl of thhe Government of the United States, and I
speak with no extravagance when I say that his judgment upon
ithe great public questions of the day has been unerring. I speak
calmly and deliberately, and measure my words when I say that
he is in exact and perfect accord with tle best sentiment and the
truest Instincts of the Republicans of the United States, and yet
the Democratic party's manifest purpose is to enter the campaign
of 1904 with the silly battle cry, "Personal detraction and personal
albuse of Theodore Roosevelt."
And that seems to be your object and purpose. You have no
principles; you can not agree upon them. You gathered together
the wisdom  of the Democratic party of the United States, and
went over to Albany, N. Y., to promulgate a platform, and, having
got through with it, you can not tell to-day whether it was the
utterance of a Democratic platform or the soliloquy of some student
in a Sunday school or country debating society.  [Laughter and
applause.]  Colorless, unimportant, odorless and unsatisfactory
tasteless and insipid. And if you will only nominate a colorless
candidate, and put him upon a colorless platform-and you can
not get any other one agreed to-we will show you that the people
of the United States believe in a man that says something, believes
im something, believe in a man that does not undertake to secure
a nomination for President without daring to tell the convention
that nominates himn, or the country, whether he stands on his "head
or on lis heels upon the great questions of the hour."  [Applause
on the Reptiblicah side.]
The American people will not be satisfied with a candidate for
President whom  they do not know.    They will not be satisfied
with a President who will go into the Presidential office unpledged to
any party policy or any political action. It is typical of Democratic
policy to suppress from the people all knowledge of their candidates and their past, and in the present case we are threatened
very strongly it seems to me with the manifest purpose of the
Democratic p)rty to make a platform of scattering generalities and
m,1ike personal assaults upon thle President of the United States,
assail the Administration of the country and disgrace it as far as
possible in the estimation of mankind, and then bring a colorless
and odorless candidate and place him upon a colorless and odorless
platform and ask the people of the United States to cormmit themselves to the horrors and uncertainties of a Democratic Administration 'unpledged to anvythiny.
And there will be nobody cheated when we nominate Roosevelt
at Chicago. We know who he is, what he is, and what he is in
favor of. Can you say as much for your candidate? Who of you
caT guess? What is he? Nobody knows. What is he in favor of?
N' body dares to undertake to say. What is his platform? There
is no platform upon which you can agree.
411 these attacks upon Roosevelt only attract the attention of
th, people to the sterling character of the man and the brilliancy
of his career. No man in this country ever had a brighter, a more
Ir liant career. He undertook that task which men coming before
hil had attempted and in which they had usually failed. He undertook the task of holding his party in line and standing by the platfo*m and doctrines and teachings of his party, coming to his high
offtce as he did, by the death of the President; and he has succeeded
heIond the hope of his losest friends. [Applause on the Republir*n side.]
8-6




"THE PRESIDENT. HAS KEPT BY HIS SIDE ALL THE
COUNSELORS WHO WERE CLOSEST
TO McKINLEY."
Extract from remarks of fon. J. P. DOLLIVER, of Iowa, in dl!ay
Congressional Record, March 31, 1904.
I listened yesterday to the distinguished Senator from Marylaed
[Mr. GoMAX] pay his unconscious tribute to the President of the
United States. He pictured him beyond the dream even of those
of us who have sympathized with his public acts and have Iookld
forward wih th enusiasm to his election to the high station whichl
he occupies. He placed him above all the great leaders and heroes,
among men in all ages.
He represented him  as swaying the House of Representatives
by a hint from the other end of the Avenue. He represented him
as a man swaying a great political party, which has reduced its
enemies to an almost ludicrous minority in the United States, amnd
holding it in his hand as a child would balance its playthings. lie
represented him as a man who, without even entering the Senate
Chamber, by a simple suggestion to the western side of this Capiol
could take this great body and paralyze its activities and leave it
limp and helpless with only one anxiety and purpose in its heart,
and that the anxiety to disperse and get away from this Capitol.
Now such a tribute to the greatness and genius and leadershil
of a public man was never before heard in the Senate Chamber of
the United States.
We on this side, his followers, his friends, who have watched his
career since he first came to this capital, while we think a good
deal of him, have never felt impelled to frame a eulogy like that
upon the President of the United States. On the other hand, fwe
recognize him as a plain, blunt man, who came to his great respmon
sibilities, under terrible disadvantages, in an hour of national anxiety
and of universal public sorrow.
We have never seen any disposition in him that would seek to
subvert the just functions of either House of Congress. We have
seen him in these three years in almost daily consultation with those
on this side of the Chamber who, by reason of their experietnce
and their wisdom and their knowledge, are competent to act 'as
counselors and guides in our public affairs. We have not thought
of him as undertaking to intimidate the Congress of the Unittd
States either by calling it in session when it ought not be called or
by seeking to adjourn it before its business had been finished.
We think of him rather in the character in which he appeared
on the day when he took the oath of his great responsibility.  lie
said then that he would follow in the footsteps of William McKinleyi
and faithfully he has kept that pledge. He has kept by his sild
all the counselors who were closest to McKinley, the men who in
the Cabinet had the ear of the late President, and had been guiding the public policies of the previous four years. These men iet
has kept close by his side. He has kept close by his side those
men whose wisdom and knowledge and leadership in both Hou:es
of Congress have given them a right to be consulted in the pul ic
affairs of the people of the United States.
Not only has the President kept close by the counselors Of
McKinley, but he has kept close to the great national policies wt 'I;l
characterizeda that epoch-making Administration. He has not,;pte  from tho: at all, and to-day his followers, the men of 1l
politica  faiths who put: their confidence in Theodore Roowsetl'!
resent0 the-impftation: that he has either trampled upon our it tr'
or oversteppfd the prerogatves of his great office. 
8-7


r




"ROOSEVELT'S INTERVENTION IN COAL STRIKE""OF INCALCULABLE BENEFIT TO THE
NATION."-JUDGE           GRAY.
trcacts from rnemarks of lin, C. H. GROSVENOI of Ohio, in daily Congress-snmal Record, 4prii 4., 1904.
The President has frequently emphasized the need of more sympathy
heiTween employers and employees and deprecated the cultivation of class
ft ling wfth its resulting antagonisms. Ile said at Sioux Falls In April.
P)3v ~'Very tuch of our effort in reference to labor matters should be
t eversy device and expedietnt to try to secure a constantly hbetter und-rianding between employer and employee. Everything possible should be
isr to increase tbe syupipg ty and fellow-feeliing between them, and everv
chanee taken to allow each to look at all questions, especially at questions
i"dispute, sOMewhat thirouigh the other's eyes.  Tf met with a sincere
v ire to -ct airly by one another, and if there is furthermore, power by
h to appreciate the other"s standpoint, the chance for trouble is minim.'
i    I suppnose every thinking nian rejoices when by inediation or arbitrna
iii it Proves Tossible to settle troubles in time to avert the suffering alnd
iierness caused by strikes.  Moreover, a conciliation committee can do
V t work when the trouble is in its beginning, or at least has not
ine to a head   When the break has actually occurred, damage has been
nrte, aid each side feels sore and angry, and It is difficult to get them to-.her, ditkicult to make eithei forget its own wrongs and remember the
r4lts of the other  if possible, the effort of conciliation or mediation or
i itration shrould be mtade in the earlier stages, and shonld be marked by
as wilh oi the part of both sides to try to come to a common agreement,
i tbh each shall think in the interest of the others as well as of itself.
titen we deal with such a subject we are fortunate in having before \is
an admirable object lesson in the work that has just been closed by ltb'
Anthracite Coal Strike Cornriission, This was the coni-mision which wan
apioiuted last fall, at the time when the coal strike in the anthracite rei
ums threatened our nat ion with a disasteAr second to none a hich has hep    us lice the dcays of the civil war. Their report was made just before
Is Senate adjc>:rned at the special session, and no Gtovcrnenint document
01 recent years mnarks a more important piece of work better done, and
tiere is none which teaches sounder social morality to our people.  The
emmisosion consisted of seven as good men as were to be found in the coIny, representing the bench, the church, the Army, the professions, the einployers, and the employed. They acted as a unit and the report which they
nanimously signed is a masterpiece of sound common rsense and of sount
dortrine on the very questions with which our people should most deeply
incern themselves. The intsmediate effect of this conitnission's appoinmft feln
d acctio ncwas of vast Cand incoalculable beeolit to the nation, but the ultiet effect 1in1 be even better if caitanlisfs, aocmooelrr,  n(d lawmaker
t A's wallfke to itrert and act uo'ni tlte lessons set forti in the report themj
ae mande."
The appointment oPf this commission, which resulted in the termination
f the great coal striet of 1902, is perhaps President Roosevelt's most
ile.ly known amIld generally appreciated contrlbution toward the improveent of industrial relations. When the efforts of all other peacemakers
ad come to naught and the coal famine rerauined utnbroken at the near
iPproach of wtinter Mr. Roosevelt, as a representative Anmerican citizen,
iaded wIth the operators and miners to terminate their disputs and resume
Ite mining of coal. Public opinion supported his action so strongly that
ih sides to fts dispute agreed to resiume work and leave to a commission
be appointed by the President the determination of the conditions of em
ltoyment concerning which they have been unable to agree.
President Rooxeveltl's successful interventtion in the coal strike mimi
ilti the almost umnanimious apprioval of the people, irrespective of their
i imcatl afflliations.  It was not until the conmisslon's   award had been
de, and thought of the great disturbance nearly banished from the mindmI
the people, that criticism of his conduct, arising out of the resentment
I the coal mine presidents and the desire to make nolitical -apital, beg-o
o ppear, based on the allegamtion that his interference amounted to a modi
a ion of property rights. But the criticism was hushed almost as soonu
it appeared by the declaration of Judge Gray. a member of the political
I'ay opposed to the President, that "the President's action, so far from
trferfinmg with or infringingm upon property rilhts, tended to roimserve thenm "
iuige Gray's statement, which appeared in a New York City newspaper
pteember 1, 1903, was as follows:
"I have no hesitation in saying that the President of the United States
ai confronted in October, 1902, by the existence of a crisis more grave aitri
irtatening than any that had occurred since the civil war.  T mean thna
ie cessation of mining in the anthracite coal country, brought about by
e dispute between the miners and those who controlled the greatest naturitl
|  poly in this country and perhaps in the world, had brought upon moore
t one-half of the American people a condition of deprivation of one of
e necessaries of life, and the probable continuance of the dispute threat-!5 not only the comfort and health, but the safety and good order of the
Iatlon. He was without legal or constitutional power to interfere, but his
In ion as President of the United States gave him an influence a leader"1, as first citizen of the Republic, that enabled him to appeal to the
trI'otism and good sense of the parties to the controversy and to place
is, them the moral coercion of public opinion to agree to an arbitrament
tne strike then existing and threatening consequences so direful to thfle
ii. o country.  le acted prioomptly and courageously, and -in so doille
caed thfe dangers to ilhich I have alliuded. So far 'from Interfering or
artnging upon property rights, the President's action tended to conserve
ieTt   The peculiar situation as regards the anthracite coal interest was
Sit they controlled a r.atural monopoly of a product necessary to the comt and to the very life of a large portion of the people. A prolonged
at vatlon of the enjoyment of this necessary of life would ha.ve tended to
*tpitate an attack upon these property rights of which you speak, for,
i. all, It is vain to deny that this property, so peculiar in Its conditions,
i which Is properly spoken of as 'a natural monopoly,' is affected with a
-itc interest. I do smot think that any P1resident ever acted mnore wisel1,,
i' eously, or pronmptl iii a notiuonalm crisis. JMr. Roosevelt deserves E-u
^ 4d praise for what ee did."
&8.


I




"PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT. — EXCEPTIONS TO THE
OPERATION OF THE CIVIL-SERVICE RULES."
Extracts from remarks of Hon. P. H.H. CLETT of Massachusetts, in daily
Congressional Record, April 80, 1904.
Mr. CitArBaAN: A statement was recently printed in the RECORD Specifying sixty Individual exceptions to the operation of the civil-service rules
which President 'Roosevelt he ad made dtring his Administration, and fran
this basis the argument has been drawn here and much more "elaborately
and unfairly in the press that the President has excepted more persons than
his three predecessors combined, and that he has In these sixty instances
violated both the letter and the spirit of the letter and the spirit of the law.
It Is not of much intrinsic Importance to the service whether these,
sixty cases were properly excepted from the 150,000 now covered by theI
law, but it is of great importance whether the President has, as charged,!
violated in these cases the spirit of the law which he has always advo-:
cated; whether he has, when put to the test of experience, abandoned and
discredited the strict principles which he has always professed in theory.
I have examined the subject with some care, and the conclusion is to
me clear and irresistible that his conduct as Executive has been governed
by the same principles which he professed as a private citizen, that his
practice has squared exactly with his preaching, and that none of his predecessors have surpassed himn in exact obedionce to both the letter and the
spirit oI the civil-service law. He has, it is true, excepted by special rule
sixty p'srsons, but each of his three immediate predecessors excepted a far
greater number, not, indeed, often by special rules for each individual, but
by rules covering each from 1 person to 8,000 persons.
Under former Administrations any exceptions that were made were
in the nature of general amendments to the rules and admitted whole
classes, even where the necessity existed only with respect to individuals.
Under the present Administration practically all such general exceptions
have been abrogated, and the application of the fundamental principles
laid down In the civil-service act has been made uniform throughout the
service.' In doing this It has been recognized that, as contemplated by
the law, occasional Instances might arise where adherence to the strict
letter of the rules would operate against the best interests of the service,
and such cases have been treated as exceptional and by direct Bxecutive
order removed from the operation of the rules, and the reason for such
action has 'been frankly stated and published.
It is impossible now to determine accurately how many were excepted
under each Administration, but as well as I can ascertain President Cleveland exeepted in his first Administration over 600, while he Increased the
classified service from 15,000 to 27,000. President Harrison excepted ove
200, besides the railway mail clerks, and increased the service from 27,00
to 42,000. President Cleveland in his second Administrttion excepted ove
200, and still further increased the service from 42,000 to 86,000. Presi
dent McKinley excepted by one order over 8,000 and increased the servic
from 86,000 to 120,000, and President Roosevelt has excepted 60 and mad
the increase from 120,000 to 150,000, the present number. Certainly th
numbers compare favorably.
Under his Adnministration the number within the classified service wa
far greater than any predecessor, and nevertheless his exceptions halv
been far less. It is true his exceptions were made for individuals and tb
others mainly for classes, but I fail to see why that Is to hiisiscredit o
why it Justifies the charge that he has made more exceptions than an
predecessor. Being temporary and not permanent, it affects the sescvle
less. it of course gives the opportunity to designing persons to misiea
the public and make a statement which is technically true but wlill]
unfair in saying that he suspended the law In more individual ciaes
than any predecessor.
Examinatlon shows that these were cases where for one reason 0
another the places could be filled better by appointment than from the rgul
lar eligible list. Each case as it occurred has been fully set forth In the an
nual printed report of the commission. Hardly any of the appointees,er
known to the President personally. As a rule, the exceptions were firs
requested by the head of a Department or bureau from the Civil SesviIC
0ommission,. That bipartisan Commission examined it and approve, Ui
O there could be no politics n it, and then on their recommendatlor th
President acted, and by special rule made the exception. Whenever tb
csnmission recommended against such action, the President refused to ex
ceptThere was no partisan advantage to be gained;    there were no Per.
al friendships to be gratified; there was no political "pull" to be ea
ouragd; but they were      ases were  here the best administrattion demniad
that the power given by law to relieve any over-rlgidity of the sy tei
should be exercised.
s~9




"FEWER APPOINTMENTS WITHOUT COMPETITIVE
EXAMINATION UNDER PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT
THAN UNDER ANY OTHER PRESIDENT."
F;'ytract from statement of lIon. 1V. D. FOUiLKJ, printed in daily Congressional Record, April SO, 1904.
APRsI 16, 1904.
DZAR Si pu: Criticism of President Roosevelt has recently been made in
Congress and elsewhere on the ground that he has made a larger number of
irregular appointments to the classified service than any of his predecessors.
Tie present members of the Civil Service Commission have only been in
office a few months, and as these alleged facts occurred in your administration I take the liberty of asking your opinion of the ground for these assertionus.
Very truly, yours,                 FRnEDERICK iH. GILLETT.
Ron. W. D. FoULKsnua,
Washington, D. C.
AP'au 16, 1904.
DuAi Sio: The assertions you speak of are untrue. The fact is exactly
the other way. There have been fewer appointments without competitive
examnation under President Roosevelt than under any other President, and
there has been no Admitnistration sin-e the passage of the ciil-sereice act
in which the competitive system has advanced with greater rapidity and cerioiatty. it has been necessary for every President to permit certain positionus to hbe filled without examination. The number has been reduced from
tine to time and the range of the competitive system extended. This process has gone on faster under President Roosevelt than under any other
resident. Of the sixty cases of suspensions of the rules during his Adoinistration, only thirty-three are of persons who were allowed to enter
bie service without examination.
In other words, out of over 70,000 appointments to the competitive seroibe since Mr. Roosevelt became President it was deenmed unnecessary in
these thirty-three cases to require competitive examination. These cases
lforin less than one-twentieth of 1 per cent, of the appointments.  They
co'prise, for Instance, a steward in the White House, a coachman itn the
Navy Department, two special agents in the Bureau of Corporations, the
Superintendent of the Government Hospital for the Insane, and other cases
where, on account of special reasons, the application of the rules was conidered impracticable, unwise, unjust, or unnecessary. These cases are explained in detail in the annual reports of the Civil Service Commission.
tey were usually imade on the recommendation of a Cabinet officer and
tith the approvaln of the commission. In all of these cases the person was
xcepted and not the position. This has been found by experience to be
tuch the better plan. If, for instance, the position of coachman had been
xeepptcd generally, and not the particular man, it would be found that the
tibher of coachmen would increase and many exceptions would creep in
ustead of cne,
The statement of Representative HAy that during the Administrations
i Presidents Cleveland and Harrison there were no suspensions of the rules
ad only three during the Administration of McKinley, while in Roosevelt's
injinistratlon there have been sixty, leads to a most erroneous inference.
inder precious Adintinistrationis exceptions were not usu8ally made by means
f suspension of the rules, but by means of changes in thle rules, thus exceptff certain classes of positions from conmpetitive erarmination. From time to
tme Presidents Cleveland, Harrison, and McKinley exceIpted from ceinpetiton hundreds of positions which had been competitive.  On one occasion
aone-May 29, 3899-8,047 such places were excepted. Buit these excepions were not, in the main, In the form of "suspensions of the rules," which
tas the only matter called for by the House resolution, President Roosesit, however, made, them In the form of such suspensions for the express
rpop-e of limiting their number.
Moreover, prior to April 15, 1903, there was a provision allowing apointments without examination where the position to be filled required
such peculiar qualifications in respect to knowledge and ability, or such
etntifitc or special attainments, wholly or in part professional or techical, as are1 not ordinarily required in the executive service of the Jnite'd
stes."  Under this provision President McKlinley made twenty-one apintaments and President Roosaevelt only five,  Instead of making appointlilts- of this kind under a general rule, President Roosevelt preferred to
al with each ease separately by a suspension of the rules, and several of
sn thirty- three appointments referred to are of this character, as, for
itance, that of a cable engineer in the Signal Service in the Philippines.
During the last year 4.688 more appointments were made tlhtotgh comtitijve examination than in the previous year, and 3,007T more appointents weret made in that year than in the year before,  Under President
eosevelft ab(fut 30,000 pos9*itioT.n have bleen added, to fte classified service,
Heretofore extensions of tbhe classifid service have usuAflly taken place
ar the close of an Administration and the exceptions made soon after the
0w Administration cotnuoenced. Butt President Roosevelt, at the very be0'ilg of his Admrrinistration, began to eutestd the nuimber of competitive
'oitionfs and to strengthen the rules'. He also dealt out snmary justice
offlendcers, several of 'homr held *high  osititons ino his own hparty.
It is gratifying to note that the' most actute convulsions *of horror at the
efsdent's 0alleged betrayal of civl1-service reform coie fron t those who,
e Senttotr *BAfuui8Y and Represehtative HAy (who" voted against the approiation for the Civil Service Cotminision), proclain tihemselfVes the advoites of the spoils sys tem in anil its brutality; while te life-loig advocates
tie coripetitive system recogniraed in Presdent RooYievelt the most conmtnt and efficient supporter of that system who has ever occupied the
*c utive chair,
Thcou eOmmell of the National' Civil Service Reform League, at its last
eniing, If Decemtber, 1903, with knowledge of these exceptions, congratu0tu the country on the revision of the civil-service rules approved by the
tet. *     *:This is th first Administration since the ovgatnioi of
league whee three years have psse    without any seo'ts crticis  o
eat~~~~~~~~~W *eyiH 
s4 0-1  1  '.  ^1:1....^W.iD                  * W 111;1
8-10


I




"THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSIONEfRS ARE DEPUU
TIES OF THE PRESIDENT TO JUST THE
EXTENT THAT HE SEES FIT."
Extract from debate in daily Congressional Record, April 15, 1904.
Mr. DALZELL.  Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. I;AYI,
who has seen fit to attack the President on his civil-service record, adnmii!
that the President acted entirely within his right. The gentleman is a littho
unfair, however, in not giving the reasons why the President exercits:.what the gentleman concedes to be his right. It was because these ca(s
or nearly all of them, were provided for in appropriation bills, the vetoif)
of whicht would have necessitated an extra session of Congress. BesiaieD
those appointees were not outsiders, but census clerks and war emerg(mnc
clerks. It was unfair to the men and women who, acting on the ~od
faith of the Government, had incurred the trouble and expense of getting
their names on the eligible list. It is doubtful if public opinion would ltagv
sustained the President in making an issue with Congress over it.
I send to the Clerk's desk and ask to have read in my time all of th1
article in the Washington Post of to-day, entitled "What the merit
tern is."
Mr. HAY. I do not suppose the gentleman wishes to misrepresent ri
MrI. DAtZELzr. Not at all.
Mr. HxY. The cases I referred to were not cases that were put vindl
the civil service by an appropriation bill. They were sixty indiv.idia
cases- 
Mr. DAriZELL. I am willing: that the gentleman's statement shall g
alongside of the statement that the Clerk is about to read.
Mr. H.AY. No reasons were given, or if any reasons were given th,'
certainly were not the reasons given in the article to which the gentletmai
refers.
MIr. DAZExL.L. I am content that the comparison shall be made.
The Clerk read as follows:
WHAT THE MERIT SYSTEM IS.
It is the custom  of the Civil Service Commission, in its annual reportl
to Congress, to state the number of exceptions made by the President t:
the rule requiring that entrance to the classified service shall be throis 
competitive examination. Sixty exceptions are named in the latest rept)io
as the total of President Roosevelt, whereas President McKinley's totalc~
only three. Whereupon the Cleveland Plain Dealer, in couinnon with nma:l
other newspapers, makes loud complaint.   The Plain Dealer says:
"President Roosevelt is charged with being twenty times a greate,
offender than his immediate predecessor. Sixty cases are reported in whici
he suspended the civil-service law for the purpose of original appointmer t
transfers, or promotions. Whether there were good reasons for these sus
pensions i not, stated in the report and may not be known to the corn
missioners. The point is that President Roosevelt, who had gained the rep
utation of being the most strenuous of civil-service reformers and who ha
served six years as Civil Service Commissioner before becoming Preslidlnt
has since his occupancy of that office taken advantage of the position t
repeatedly suspend the operation of the civil-service law in order tha
appointments, illegal under it- provisions, might be made with impunity.'
There are a number of assertions in that brief extract which reveal t0
absence of the Plain Dealer's usual accuracy of statement.   In the firs
place, the commission, mindful of its duties,and knowing that the Presi
dlent has exercised only his- lawful right In those exceptions, has sO
"charged" him with anything. In the second place, it is decidedly errs
neons to call those exceptions. made under ample authority of law, '"sus
pending the operations of the law," It would be a gross violation of officia
decency for the commission to question the propriety of the Presideat'
conduct. It is not lts official business to ask for his reasons in any saiu
case, nor is he under any obligations to enlighten the commission on tha
score.
it does not seem to be understood that the merit system, as embodicd i
the civil service act of 1883 and a long series of Execautive orders, conist~
entireiy of Executfiie concessions, alterable at any time at the discretih, o
the Executive. Great as Is the authority of the legislative department, i
can not limit or set aside the duties and prerogaives of the Executive a
prescribed by the Constittitution. One of those prerogative is is the appoiti
power, and it is as completely beyond the control of Congress as are ttih
functions of the $Supreme Court. By Executive concessions the oridgin
machinery of the merit system was created, and by Executive concession
the area of its operations has been greatly extended. As a matter of /a!
the Civil Service Commissioners are deputies of the President to just til
exrtent that he sees. fit, and it is with/in his lawful right to reduce or ei  J
that extent as h-e stna  see fit.  He could make a hundred exceptions an
day or modify or repeal any of the extending orders without doing vio enc
either to the spirit or letter of the supreme law of the land.
The. Post has no data on which to base an opinion of the wisdom or 11
wisdom *of the sixty exceptions mentioned in the commission's report 
was a remarkable circmnstanceb that during the first six or eight mooths:
President Roosevelt's incumbency a larger number of irregular apiD-)tI
menits to the classified service were made. than in the entire term of a'1
of, his predecessors.  But these, or nearly all of them, were provided f i
appropriation bills, the vetoing of which would have necessitated an:xt
session of Congress.  Besides, those appointees were not outsiders, b
census clerks and war emergency clerks.
It was unfair to to the. men and women who, acting on the good fat It
the Government, had incurred the trouble and expense of getting     h
names on the eligible list. But it is doubtfuil f public opi nio  would i ha
sustained the President in making an issue with Congress over it.
A.ppointments, transfers, or promotions are always fairly open to pa
dicuastion, but it should.be remembered that the President is respein I:ls
for the conduct of tbe Elxecutive Departmtents,, and that freedorn of ap:l/i
ment, transfer, and promotion go with that responsibility. Nor shouldi
be forgotten that the President, not the Ciit Service Commission, t 
Chief Executive, and that concessions and deputizations do not tme se.41


I




"THE PRESIOENT WILL NOT TOLERATE WRONG IN
ANY PUBLIC OFFICIAL, HIGH OR LOW."
K.t1,racts from remarks of HIon. JOHNr C. SPOONER of Wisconsin, in daily
Congressional Record, April 18, 1904.
Ivery good citizen, Democrat as well as Republican, deplores the fact
thilat there was corruption in the Post-Office Department. Every man knows
th.at that constitutes the gravest menace, wherever it exists, to our system
of government. It is "nmoral treason to the state;" and it is more dangerous, Mr. President, to the state than the treason of the Constitution is, as
the work of the sapper and miner is more dangerous, because more insidlious, than the open contest on the field of battle. It happens to all Administrations; it happens not only in the General Government, but it
occurs in the governments of all the States. There is no State absolutely
exempt from it in its history. It happens in the various municipalities of
the country; in the larger ones generally more than in the smaller ones.
It is a menace. It is the duty, I agree, of all nien, Demnocrrats land Republi0ca005s, to unlite in its extir'ption, and every maon foumnd guilty of breach of
trust to the pseople should be exposed and punzished. *  *  *
The Senator from Maryland [Mr. CORMANT] made a speech the other
day to which I listened with great interest. It has been followed by a
speech from the Senator from North Carolina [Mr. SIMmbON]j and other
Seonators, arraigning us for not having adopted the Penrose resolution for
a general investigation of the Post-Office Department, with the amendamnt proposed to it by the Senator from Maryland. *  *  *
The resolution of the Senator from Pennsylvania reads:
Resolved, That the Committee on Post-Offices and Post-Roads, in view
of the charges of corruption, extravagance, and violations of law in the
adiministration of the affairs of the Post-Office Department, is herebyI read it as amended by the Senator from Marylandinstructed to direct the Postmaster-General to send to the committee all
papers connected witb the recent investigation of his Department, and said
committee shall make further inquiry into the administration and expenditlres of the said Department, and make report thereon to the Senate upon
completion of said Investigation on or before the 1st day of May. 1904.
The counsel of Mr. Machen and Mr. Beavers and the remainder of
those who have been indicted could have asked no better thing than the
adoption of this resolution. The counsel for thosae men had sought, in
fact, in New York, as they had sought in the court here, Mr. President,
by judicial processes to reach and bring, subject to their inspection, a part
f the very papers which would have been given to the world if this resoltion had been adopted.
What did the resolution cover?  It covered the reports of the postoffice inspectors and all of them. It would include the exhibits connected
with those reports; it would have laid bare to these men- who are under
dictnment every sh redt of evidetnce upon which the Governmsent relies to
contvict and bring thenm to justice. *  *  *
A Senatorial investigation into the Departmnent could not possibly have
been made within the time limited by the Senator, because it is made by
Serators, each of whom is on other comnlittees, each of whom is charged
With the duty of legislating, each one of whom represents a Commonwealth in
he Senate, each one of whom is subject to the legitimate calls of his constituents, each one of whom is already burdened with the routine duties
Icident to life in the Senate.
Whatever our friends on the other side say about the President, I am
tisftied that the igreat mrass of the people, Denmocratic and Republican, will
ai;ee wcith me, that fron the 'beginning he has shown that he will not
tolerate, and he is keen to searclr it out, tcef;lo in any public official, high
or tow. I think a Senate committee would not have made, and could not
a've made, the investig.tion that has been made by Mr. Bristow. After
(,eks of work I am told that a bright inspector found at midnight a 'lead"
05 Mr. Machen, because among an immnense number of vouchers be was
hr 'ck by the similarity of the amounts of remittances made to Mr. Lorenz
h Ohio. These men are detectives. They have run down clews all over
he United States. They have aiding them. always the ambition of men,
be hatred of men, the jealousy of men.
Thousands of suspicions and rumors are communicated to such men to
explored.* Many of them, of coutrse, turn out to be malicious and empty.
lut this is essentially the work of detectives.
And the Senators ask the Senate, and berate us because we did not fall
to it, to pass, uppon the theory that because some, thieves have been found
tije aPost-Office Department the Department is full of thieves, a resoluBr. providing for a short investigation by a committee of Congress eandbn
8-12.:


i




"THE:AMERiCA:lN PEOPLE BELIEVE IN THEODORE
ROOSEVELT."
Extracts from remarks of lon. C. H. GROSVENOR of Ohi, 'w
daily Congressional Record, April 9, 1904.
The American people believe in Theodore Roosevelt in that behalf, I believe that they understand him to be a genius, a man
of great power, a man of unlimited patriotism. [Applause on the
Republican side.J  I have told you what he has done as a Republican; I have told you what he has done as President of the Unite(S
States. I now point to him as a citizen, as a gentleman, as a t yp
-a true type —of the American citizen of this country. Now, teli
me whalt le did that was wrong. You can not do it. Are yod
not surprised at yourselves when you try to think of it? You say
he is not safe. Well, when a man has served his country nearl
ten years in various offices, on the battlefield, and in the high offied
suddenly thrust upon him as President of the United States, anl
ou can not name an affirmative act he has done that was not riglt
it is not worth while for you to come around here and say tht
you have not confidence in him. I am not expecting that everybody
will have confidence in him, but I will tell you what we do expect
that from the Atlantic t the Pacific, in the coal mines of the in
terior, in the lumber camps of the North, on the vast prairies oa
the great West where grow the cereal crops of this country, in thl
great manufacturing centers of this country, there will go up
voice that will not only ratify the action of the Republican part
in this Congress, but will approve without criticism or condemntatio
the public acts, the life, and the character of Theodore Roosevelt
[Applause on the Republican side.]
There never was a time in the history of this country when tB
Republican party had a right to stand in better light to itself tha
it stands to-day and I will tell you why. During the past tsw
Presidential campaigns you have been ashamed of yourselves. Yot
could not attack us;  All you asked was, for God's sake to let yo
alone; but having, as you think, gotten, rid of the environment
that pulled you down, that destroyed you, that broke you up inlt
fragments, you have been very vigorous in attacking the Repub
lican party. You have done it very ably; you have done it as wet
as it:ould be done by anybody in the world. You are strong 
that direction, You are a party of negation. You are not a part
of progress and going ahead. You stand holding onto the co
ilof the world, holerting "Whoa " whenever it attempts to Bmov
[Applause and laughter on the Republican side.]
You are wonderfully eficient to block the wheels, but whee i
comes to probatory action, when you come to doing somethiz?{
whe:n you 0come' toagr   g agree about something, you are in the an
fortunate position, of the prty that has been broken up into frag
Meits: through all the past years of two splendid Administratio
bytthe Republican party. Indeed, so far as you are concerned
the seeds of sin were sown in the early days of Cleveland's Adminis
tration, and you could very well say, quoting the old couplet
Soon as we drew our infant breathAs a' party in power-:
The s eeds:  of sin grew up to death.
[Laughter on the Republican side.].:And so it is not trange that to-day you can not tell what y0
want, and certainly you can not tell how to do it.
r, Cthirtmant it is gratifying to the IRepuolican part  to ksOi
tht the people of the coutry stand by the principles that   e
have advocated; it is gratifying to the Republican party to k'0n
that heret, within two moths of their coming nomination,, the wo
conelnsus of the American people who voted for McKinley a"
who voted against Bryan are to-day: standing by the same pr Pi
SS~ e:~~~; ---I:~~ iW~ h:0Y  g%;   2d1f~  l g  W  P J  r;}:s'tions, the same principles; and it is gratifying for us. to k?101
tht at th ha:ed of the colf un, carryint the banner of his pred
tasor, is Theodoe Ro-oseelt our 'candidate, a d that victory W
som aain t:o the Repb: ican party.  [Loud applause on the '
publicaan side.].
s-13






I


sTHE NAME OF OUR NEXT PRESIDENT S THE NAME
OF THE PRESENT PRESIDENT, THEODORE ROOSEVELT"
Extrqat from  remarkrs of lon. ALBERT J;. BEVERIDGE of Indiana, in
daily Congressional Record, April 1, 1904.
Mr. President, as I stated, I only intended to speak a moment or two,
but I have still another thought, inspired by the remark of the Senator
from North Caolina, delivered with a good deal of explosive energy, that
we must fight for our lives. "Fight for our lives!"  Why?  Certainly not
llupon the showing which the Senator made upon the post-office investigation: certainly not upon the showing which the Senator so eloquently made
concerning the conditions of prosperity in this coulntry; cetainly not upon
what has been accomplished since Theodore 'Roosevelt has been President.
Consider the achievements of his Administration. In the great questio of legislation concerning modern industrial organization, so wise have
been  the policies which: the Republican party, under the leadership of
Theodore Roosevelt, Fhas proposed, that all the power of partisanship was
not able to consolidate that side of the Ohamber against them. This side
of the Chamber stood a solid phalanx in favor of those measures concerning
trust legislation, and you of the opposition, admitted that they were so
excellent that you divided upon them, many:of you being forced by the
merit of those measures to give them the approval of your votes*
Then we catme to Cuban, reciprocity, a measure of national honor and
of national good business, too; and so wise was that measure that, declaring
you would oppose it forever, wha It came to a vote a large number of you
of the opposition supported it.:
Then we came to that great world work of the centuries-the Panama
Canal,.the eternal wedding of the two great oceans of the globe in the
interests of the commerce of mankind and the on-going and welfare of
the humian race. It was fought for weeks by a distinguished leader of the
opposition, who was in desperate search of an issue, and he thought he
had found in PanamaI a new one. Yet so wise was the Administration
policy that you could not, by all the power of partisan discipline, consolidate your votes against It.
So that in every great constructive measure of the Republican party
in the last three years you yourselves have not been able to solidly oppose
them.
Well. then, when all the powers of partisanship; and partisan discipline
can not unite your own votes against those Republican measures here in
the enate, do y       y haou     can appeal to the American people with
very musch confidence to unite against thent
Does the Senator find, then, in what we have done, and what all the
power of partisan discipline could not unite that side of the Chamber
against, any ground tor his prophecy that we  ust light for our lives?
But, as I said a moment ago, whether the Senator has any good grounds
for it except a militant desire to do battle, it was exceedingly chivalrous
upon his part to give us warning of the mighty conflict hs is about to force
upon us. Perhaps, Mr. President, he had in mind all the time as the
ground for his challenge, not the prosperity of his country, not an investigatlon unparalleled in effectiveness and fearlessness inaugurated by a Republican Administration, not measures which were solidly supported on
this side of the Chamber and which the other side of the Chamber divided
upon, so great was their excellence, but instead a mysterious something
which the Senator himself felt was too precious to intrust to the confidence
of the American people.
Well, I do not think the Senator has pursued his usually excellent
lgieC. The Senator tells us that we have agreed upon our candidate. That
is true. -We have. He aays it has been in obedience to some power that
those on their side have not been able to fathota and do not know what it is.
I will tell him what that power is, although I am not surprised, from
reviewing the political history of the last eight years, that the Senator and
his colleagues do not know what that power tis.
'The power that has causeld us to agree upon our candidate is thfat power
own    sthe people. That is the power to which- we have yielded a willing
ond glad obedience, and alwoys will; and it is because that has been our
co urse of conduct that we are in power to-day and will continue to be for
many year's to come.
es we 7have agreed upon our candidate, and the power that caused
u, to 'aree is the people. And that power which caused agrqgwent upon
hi  as a canSidate, will: cause agreement upon him at:the polls, and the
tlame of our condidate, the name of our:net ~President, ai the name of the
Present Presiegt of thef United 8tatesf Theodo'eI Roosvettlt and we are
glad and prsu to delae               -; t 
8-14           itiao' IT


L


-r-F) -     -w




"THE PRR ES            fT AND- TRAIES-UNIONISM."F-"OR
THE UPRIGHT MAN, RICH OR POOR'
Extrdat from   remarks of Hon. 0. H. GROSVENOR            of Ohio, is
daily Congressional Record, April 4, 1904. 
THE PBESIDENT AND TRADES-UNIONISM., 
While intelligence and character still count as essential elements
of success in individuals, there remains room   for associated action
in large enterprises where the individual is swallowed up in the
multitude and personal contact of employer and employee is no
longer possible.
This fact is fully recognized by President Roosevelt in common
with the political economists and other leaders of thought at the
present time. Thus in hs address at Sioux Falls, S. Dak., April
6, 1903, he declared that "much can be done by organization, combination-union among the wage-workers," and went on to explain
the change that has come about in modern industry, as follows:
The wage-workers In our cities, like the capitalists in our cities, face
totally changed conditions. The development of machinery and the extraordinary change in business conditions have rendered the employment of capital and of persons in large aggregations not merely profitable but often
necessary for success, and have specialized the labor of the wage-worker at
the same time that they have brought great aggregations of wage-workers
together. More and more in our great industrial centers men have come to
realize that they can not live as independently of one another as in the old
days was the case everywhere and as is now the case in the country districts.
Of course, fundamentally, each man will yet find that the chief factor in determining his success or failure in life is the sum of his own individual
qualities. He can not afford to lose his individual limitation-his individual
will and power, but he can best use that power If for certain objects he
unites with his fellows.
Similarly, in his first message to Congress, in 1901, the president
declared that "very great   good has been and will be accomplished
by associations of wage-workers when managed with forethought,
and when they eombine insistence upon their own rights with lawabiding respect for the rights of others.      The display of these
qualities in such bodies is a duty to the nation no less than to the
associations themselves."
In his second message to Congress, in the year 1902, President
Roosevelt elaborated this thought as follows:
This is an   oedera o  ration and combination.. Exactly as business men
find they must often work through corporations, and as it is a constant tendency of these corporations to grow larger, so it is often necessary for laboring men to work in federations, and these have become important factors of
modern industrial life. Both kinds of federation, capitalistic and labor, can
do much good, and as a necessary corollary they can both do evil.
Oppoition to each kind of organisation should take the form of opposition to whatever is bad in the conduct of any given corporation or union,
not of attacks upon corporations as such nor upon unions as such, for some
of the most far-reaching beneflcent work for our people has been accomplshed through both corrations and unions. Each must refrain from arbitray  or tyrannous interference with the rights of others. Organized
capital and organized labor alike should remember that in the long run the
nterest of each must be brought into harmony with the interest of the general public, and the conduct of each must conform to the fundamental rules
of obedience t the law of individual freedom and of justice and fair dealing
toward all. Each hshould remember that in addition to power it must strive
after the realization of healthy, lofty, and generous ideals. Every employer,
every wage-worker, must be guaranteed his liberty and his right to do as he
likes with his property or his labor so long as he does not infringe upon the
rights of others.
It Is of the highest importance that employer and employee alike should
endeavor to appreciate each the view point of the other and the sure disaster
that will come upon both in the long run if either grows to take as habitual
an attitude of sour hostility and distrust toward thether. Few people deserve better ot the country than those representatives both of capital and
labor, and there are many such who work continually to bring about a good
understanding of this kind, based upon wisdom and upon broad and kindly
sympathy between employers and employed. Above all, we need to remenlber that any kind of class ahimosity in the political world is, if possible
even more wiccke, Oen more dstructive to national welfare, than sectiona1
race, or religious animosity. We can get good government only on condition
that we keep true to the principles upon which this nation was founded, and
udge each man, not as a part of a class, but upon his individual merits. All
that we have a rigt to ask of any man, rich or poor, whatever his creed, 
occupation, his birtplace, or his residence, is that he shall act well and
honorably by his neighbor and by his country. We are neither for the rich
man as such nor fr te poor men as such; we are for the upright tnai
rich r poor. So far                   po   s oa t  ontitutialpow   o the  atlonal Oovernmen
to uch tse matters of general and vital moment to t   natin thtey should
be exercise in  onformity with the principles above set ortLh.


I
I
I
I


I


I 5






i
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
i
i
I
I






"OEMOCRAt            MtSRE RESENTTI                   IN REGARD
TO WHITE HOUSE, EXPENDITURES"
xtract from resrks of Hon. OILBERT N. HAUBN of Iowa, 1 daily
Cotn  sional Record, Aprit 6, 1904.
The Republican party speaks for itself, and the wisdom of ts policies
and counsels are attested to-day by the grandest epoch of prosperity the
nation has ever known. It is not to defend it that I rise here to-day, but
rather tot corret 'reckless 'perversions of facts With regard to; th*present
occupant of the White House. If anythinis needed to show te straits
to which the Democratic party is driven for material for the coming campaign, the best example is furnished by these wholesale misrepreenations
of facts in regard to White House expenditures.
There   e some facts generally known to all of us, especially those of
you who have investigated and given this matter thought and attention.
You know and I know as stated in these article, that the charges mae W
false and without foundation.
First, as to the new stable for the White House, a matter which has
been discussed more or less on the floor of this House; To start with, no
recommendation was made by the President for an appropriation for this
purpose. Again, the stable is located on unhealthy ground, and on ground
set aside for memorial purposes, and sooner or later the stables will have
to be moved, and the recommendation made b he he Supertedent of Public
Buildings and Grounds was proper. The President's stable is carried on
exactly as it was carried on under Presidets Cleveland, Harrison, and
McKinley, and his other predecessors. It is chiefly used for Government
horses and carriages. The President's own horses and carriages have been
paid for by himself, not bythe Government. The President pays for the
coachman and for the feed of his horses.
Relative to the Mayflower and the naval review, the facts are exactly
as stated in the article in The Outlook, and every patriotic citizen will
approve of what was done in this respect.
Next, as to the alleged expenditure for furniture and decorations of the
White House: While the plans carried out may not meet the approval of all,
whatever work was done was authorized by Congress on its own  otion, without any suggestion or recommendation from the President. Democrats and
Republicans alike agreed that the work was absolutely necessary. Mmhers on your side were among those who took the lead in the Senate and
House in advocating the change. The building had come to such a condition
that it was necessary to prot up the foors whenever a reception was held.
The eost of these mprovements, including the erection ad furnishing
of the new Executive office building, was not much over half the sum
stated in the article mentioned, and incidentally the expenditure of this
noney removed the necessity of a much larger expenditure within a very
feo years to rebuild the White House. The changes that have been made
will stand for: a century to come.
In the White House the upper floor is used only for the President's
family. The two lower floors, with the exception of the kitchen and diinng
room.are used for the public, the family of the President never otherwise
using these two floors unless in connection with receiving the public. Between 150,000 and 200,000 citizens every year visit the White House and
go through these two floors, or are received personally by the Presidet and
Mrs. Roosevelt. Almost the entire expense of the rebuilding of the Wi e;
House was for these two floors used by the public. The only thing done
with the rooms on the floor used by the President and his family was to
repair them, put in modern plumbing, etc.; in short, to alter them only sc
as to make them fit for habitation.
All the unusual expense was for the two floors which are used for the
Publi, and which aret except the kitchen and dinig room, used by the
Presle&t and his famty only to receive the public  In the same way the
expense for the maintenance of the White House is almost entirely for the
a     finten ance ane d eare of these two floor and for the attendants who look
after the people who come to see the White House, who average over 500
e-r day, On       oo w       the oorwherethPresident and his famil live almost all
ttU wor is done by thoe whom; the President personally pays.
I it:e same way the entertaiin:done b    thle President is paid for
' fIhis own pri ate purse when he is in the White Husest as       hen
he i.tt Oy ster Bay. The state dinrners, w-here he henterta:its the Cabinet,
Seators,. Members of the Lwer House, J   iees  the Surem    Court, and
for it.gn.eprieontatioe's no less than the sialter dinners and 40th  entertainf tets, are paid for out of the private purse of th  President, he being put
to a:leaey outly from his own private pue in order that he may suitably
rlal:l some of the necessary function of his poition a Chief Magistrate.


I


Sig.




"LAORRE O THEO       OOSEVELT."
Extract fr<)om  8-~r bf Hon. 0.. GROSVENOR     f Oio, in daily Con.
gressional Record, April, 1904.:. furnish here to-day the record of the gentleman who will be the Republican candidate for President, It will furnish good~ reading for the
campaign into which we are so. rapidly moving. It will give our Democratic
friends food for thought, and it will inspire the toiling man of the country
with the pleasant consciousness that the old Republican party, the party of
Lincoln, of Grant,: of McKinley, of Hianna. is offering for the Presidency a
man, a worthy successor to them all and who stands invincible in his record
of fealty o the fbest interests of the laboring man of the United States,
LAABOR RECORDOF THEODORE ROOSEVELT.
"The most vital problem with which this country, and for that matter
the U hole civilized world has to deal'"Said President Roosevelt in his first message to Congress —
"Is the problem which has for one side the betterment of social conditions,
moral and physical, In large cities and for another side the effort to deal
with that tangle of far-reaching questions which we group together when
we ppeak of'labor,'"
I TOME OF THEODOIRE lROOSEVELT'S ]FAVORABLI
ACTION ON LABOR LEGISLATION.
As member of assembly in New York he voted for billsAbolishing tenement-house cigar making in New York City.
Restricting child labor In: factories and workshops.
Regulating the labor hours of minors and women in manufacturing
establishments.
Safeguarding the lives and limbs of factory operatives.
Regulating wage rates of laborers employed by municipalities.
Making employees preferred creditors.
Providing for building mechanics' liens.
Prescribing the lien rights of working women.
Protecting mechanics and laborers engaged in sinking oil or gas wells,
Abolishing contract child labor in reformatory institutions.
Creating a commission to examine into the operation of the contract
system of employing convicts.               e
Establishing the bureau of labor statistics.
To promote industrial peace.
For a ftve-cent fare on the New York City elevated railroad.
Incorporating the New York Free Circulating Library.
For free public baths in New York City.
As governor of New York he approved these measures;
Creating a tenement-house commission.
Regulating sweat-shop labor.
Empowering the factory inspector to enforce the scaffolding law.
Directing the factory Inspector to. enforce the act regulating labor hour|
on railroads.
Makng the'eight-hour and prevailing-rate-of-wages laws effective.
Amending the factory act(1) Protecting employees at work on buildings.
(2) Regulating the working time of female employees.
(3) Providing that stairways shall be properly lighted.
(4) Prohibiting the operation of dangerous machinery by children.
(5) Prohibiting women and minors working on polishing or buffingj
wheels.
(6) Providing for seats for waitresses In hotels and restaurants.
Shortening the working *hours of drug clerks.
Increasing the salaries of New York City school-teachers.
Extending to other engineers the law licensing New York City engineers
and making It a misdemeanor for violating the same.
Licensing stationary engineers In Buffalo.
Providing for the examination and registration of horseshoers in cities.
Registration of laborers for municipal employment,
Relating to air brakes on freight trains.
Providing means for the issuance of quarterly bulletins by the bureau
of labor statistics,
In addition to the foregoing, while governor of New York he recommended legislation (which the legislature failed to pass) in regard to
employers' liability.
State control of employment offices,
State ownership of printing plant.
Devising: means whereby free mechanics shall not be brought into cornpetition with prlsotn labor.
AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES HE HAS SIGNED BILLS —
PRenewing the Chinese-exclusion act and extending its provisions to thle
Island territory of the United States.!Prohibiting the -employment of Mongolian labor on Irrigation weoIre
providing that eight hours shall constitute a day's labor on such p-oAbolishing slavery and Involuntary servitude In the Philippine Islanls,
violation of the as  being puiftsable' by forfeiture of contracts and a fine of
not less 'than $.1 0,000.
Protecting the lives of employees in coal mines In Territories by re U"
lating'the' amount of ventilation and providing that entries, etc., shall be
kept well dampened with -water-to *cause coal dest to settle.
E*xenptinag from taxat ion i1 the District of Columbia *household 
longingst th te value of $1,000 wearing apparel, libraries, sehelboc,
family portraits, and h erlooms.
-Re    ring roprtetors of ellployet offces   the Dstriet of Colo
to pay a license tax~ of $10 per year.
Creating the.Department of Commerceand  abor and making Its ad
Improvingtheset relan a  to safety appliances on 'railways,
Increasing.the. restrtio'ns upon the Immigration of cheap foreign ils a1or
47r^:;                                       *


f




INTERVENTION       IN THE COLSTRIKE. — "NO             PRESIDENT EVER DID A WISER OR MORE PATRIOTIC THING."
Extract from remarks of lion. JOHN 0. SPOONER, of Wisconsin,
in daily Congressional Record, April 18, 1904.
It has been fashionable in certain circles to attack the President as "unsafe" for his intervention in the anthracite coal strike,
and that count in the Democratic indictment against him has been
under the Dome of the Capitol within a week exploited, not by
the Senator from Maryland or his Democratic colleagues in this
Chamber. It has been often said that the action of the President
was an unconstitutional invasion of the sovereignty of Pennsylvania.
I wondered that the Senator from Maryland and his colleagues
overlooked the President's relation to the coal strike. It probably
will not be overlooked later.
There never was a more baseless suggestion than that he
violated the Constitution or invaded the sovereignty of a
State. There would be as much sense in charging the Civic
Federation which sought to adjust the coal strike, with invading the sovereignty of Pennsylvania. No President, in my
judgment, ever did a wiser or more patriotic thing than this
President did in that behalf. He sent no troops into Pennsylvania,
lHe did not usurp any function as President. He did nothing as
President of the United States. On the contrary, H informed the
gentlemen who upon his invitation came to him representing employees and the employers that as President, under the Constitution, he had no jurisdiction whatever over the subject.
But, Mr. President, he saw the terrific menace to the people of
the United States. The winter was upon us. The coal strike had
locked up the mines and stopped the sources of fuel production.
It bid fair to be indefinitely prolonged. Already the supply had
almost reached the point of famine. He knew and everyone else
knew that if it continued without interruption there would come
upon the country a horrible trouble, absolutely unspeakable and
absolutely destructive.  I suppose your "calm, judicial-minded,
safe  President would have felt himself constrained by the Con,
stitution to sit in the White House unmindful of the great calamity which threatened to overwhelm the people. Not so, thank God,
with Theodore Roosevelt.    He, as an individual occupying
the White House, invited these people before him     and entreated them  to end the difficulty by arbitration, and they
permitted him, not as Presilent, but as an individual who
happened to be President, to name the arbitrators, and that
arbitration proceeded to the settlement of that strike.
Otherwise what would have happened? What would your calm,
sane, safe neutral President have done in the White House? He
nust have done what President ioosevelt did, or he must have
one nothing. And in less than thirty days there would have
een a mob in every city of the United States tearing down
uildings for fuel, stealing the coal stored by the transportation companies for fuel, thus paralyzing the commerce of the
Country, because when men's homes are imperiled, when their wives
nd ehildren are freezing, when a calamity that means death to all
ear to a man in his home is impending, and is universal, it means
orce, it means violence and it would have come. There would have
een millions of socialists made in a week. There would have been
stablished a precedent in this land which would have set us
ba:k a hundred years, in my judgment.
Congress, without a word of criticism of the President, passed
he appropriation to pay the expenses of that arbitration. And
et you will find, as you already find it, on the stump in this county in the campaign to come, men pointing to the action of the
~resident in the coal strike as evidence of his lawlessness, his willngness and tendency to usurp power.
s-18 


i




"R#QS EVELT"~THIEAM5RIOAN STANDARD                              UV.
1NG."'WISE TARIFF OAND IMMIGRATION
Extract from   r~mark    of Hon:. X. H. GROSVENOR         of Ohio, in
daily Cnyressio    i Record, April 4, 1904.
THE AMERICAN STANDARD OF LIVING.
Under' the American form     of government the bulk of the legislation for the protection of wage-workers must be the work of
the individual Commonwealths, and when he was governor of New
York State Mr. Roosevelt, as has been already indicated, took an
active part in promoting such legislation.
But the Federal Governm   ent can accomplish a great deal for the
maintenance of the relatively high standard of comfort that prevain the United Sttes by excluding the products of cheap foreign
labor and also shutting out workmen from lower civilizations who are
incapable of rising to the American standard of living. Such competition may be prevented by wise tariff and immigration laws, and
on these questions the President expressed himself strongly in his
first message to the Fifty-seventh Congress, under the date of December 3, 1901, in the following language:
With the sole exception of the farming interest no one matter is of such
vital moment to our whole people as the welfare of the wage-workers. If the
farmer and the wage-worker are well off it is absolutely certain that all
others will be veil off too. It is therefore a matter for hearty congratulation that wages on the whole are higher to-day in the United States than
ever before in our history, and far higher than in any other country. The
standard of livia is also higher than ever before. Every effort of legislator
and adtmitnistrato should be, to secure the permanency of this condition of
things and its improvement wherever possible. Not only must our labor be
protected by the tariff, but it should also be protected as far as possibl;
from the rese-nce in this country of any laborers brought over by contract
or of those who, coming freely, yet represent a standard of living so depressed that they can undersell our men in the labor market and drag them
t.a ower level. I regard it as necessary, with this end in view, to reenact
immediately the law   excluding Chinese laborers, and to strengthen it
wherever necessary In order to make its enforcement entirely effective.
Our ^ present immigration laws are unsatisfactory. We need every
honest and efficient immigrant fitted to become an American citizen, every
rmmigrant who comes here to stay, who brings here a strong body, a stout
heart, ana goo      d a resolute purpose to do his duty well in every way
and to bring up his children- as law-abiding and God-fearing members of the
community. But there should be a comprehensive law enacted, with. the object of working a threefold improvement over our present system,  First, we
shouldt ai~ to exclude absolutely not only all persons who are known to be
believers In anarchistic principles or members of anarchistic societies, but
also al persons.who are of a low moral tendency or of unsavory reputation.
rhis means that we should require a more thorough system of inspection
abroad nda more rigid system of examination at our immigration ports,
the former being especially necessary.
The second object of a proper immigration law ought to be to secure by a
carefid and not merely perfunctory educational test some intelligent capacity
to appreciate American institutions and act sanely as American citizens,
this would not keep out all anarchists, for many of them belong to the intelligent criminat class. But it would do what is also in point —that is, tend to
decreasthe ae sum of ignorance, so potent in producing the envy, suspicion,
malignant passion, cnd hatred of order, out of which anarchistic sentiment
inevitably springs. Finally, all persons should be excluded who are below a
certain standard of economic fttness to enter our industrial field as competitors with American labor. There should be proper  of of p ersonal capacity to earn aAmerican living, and enough money to insure a decent start
under American conditions. This would S<top the influx of cheap labor and
the- resulting omonpeitition which gives rise to so much of bitterness in American industrial life, and it would dry up the springs of the pestilential social
conditions in our great cities, where anarchistic organizations have their
greatest possibility of growth.
Both the educational and economic tests in a wise immigration law
shotild be designed to protect and elevate the general body politic and social.
A very close supervision should be exercised over the steamship companies
*hichina:tiy;br;Ing over the immiarants, and they should be held to a stirlt
accountability for any infraction of the law.
CHINRSE:flOLUSION LAW RENEWED AND EXTENDED
TO THE iSLAND TERRITORY.
Acting    upon   these6 recommendations, Congress      renewed    te
Chise-exlusion law and extended it to      he sland territory, where
te syste m  of contract labor had previously existed. This act prohibits the immigration of Chinese laborers from such island territory
to the mainland of the United States, and from        one portion of
said island territory territory toanother portion, bt permits teir trasit
from one island to another island of the same group.
A MORW STRINGENT IMMIGRATION LAW.
C. ngress also enacted, and President Roosevelt approved, a mor
stringent immigration law.
8-19


I




"INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION." —THE                HAGUE
TRIBUNAL."
Ei'xtract from remarks of Hon. SIHELBY M. CULLOM of Illinois,
in daily Congressional Record, April 27, 1904.
INTERNATIONAL AlBITIATION.
No previous Administration and no country have done more
toward the settlement by peaceful methods, rather than by war,
of the differences which arise among nations than have the Administrations of Presidents McKinley and Roosevelt.
The Hague international conference for peace was an important
step in the direction of international arbitration.
When the Czar of Russia issued his invitation to the nations in
1898 to unite in a conference to consider the subject or disarming
and the promotion of peace, President McKinley was one of the
first to give response, and he sent to the conference at The Hague
a commission of our most able diplomats and expert military
men.
That conference adopted conventions with respect to the customs
of war on land, the adaption to maritime warfare of the principles
of the Geneva convention of 1864, and other declarations of less
importance.
The result of the conference was in a measure disappointing, but
it accomplished one important work. When the delegates assembled,
it became apparent that the divergence of views made difficult any
agreement on most subjects, but, through the earnest efforts of the
American delegates, an agreement was reached on the subject of
arbitration, and a convention was signed creating a permanent court
of arbitration at The Hague, which was one of the valuable achievements of that historic gathering.
While we all recognize that there are some political questions
which it may not be proper to submit to The Hague Tribunal, still
the conclusion of that convention is a great step in advance for the
promotion of peace, as it was a recognition by the leading nations
of the earth that arbitration is the best method of settling their
disputes.
The second international conference of American states, representing the various republics of North, Central, and South America,
adopted a convention, submitting to arbitration at The Hague all
laims for pecuniary loss or damage which may be presented by
their respective citizens and which can not be amicably adjusted
through diplomatic channels when they are of sufficient importance
to justify arbitration. That conference' also unanimously agreed
to a protocol giving the adhesion of the North, Central, and South
American republics to The Hague conventions.
It is gratifying to us as Americans to know that our Government
was the first to show to the world its faith in the efficiency and
utility of The Hague Tribunal. During the Administration of
resident McKinley the claim of the Roman Catholic Church of the
pperCalifornia, known as "the Pious Fund claim against Mexico,"
accruing since 1869, was submitted for decision to the Permanent
Court of Arbitration at The Hague. The decision of the court
rendered in 190t awarded to the claimants the sum of $1,420,68, and
ovided for the payment by Mexico perpetually of an annuity of
300.
This decision was a satisfactory solution of the controversy over
the so-called "Pious Fund of the Californias."
Again, during the last year President Roosevelt, who had been
invited to settle the controversy between three of the powerful
ations of Europe and the feeble American Republic of Venezuela,
declined the trust so flattering to his reputation for integrity and
impartiality and referred them to the court at The Hague as an
ppropriate place to settle their differences. The outcome of that
ubmission has not proved satisfactory to many of us, but the settlenent there made was better than a continued recourse to warlike
measures. The principle announced in the award does not meet
'ith our approval, but another case of similar character may lead
o a different decision, and one adverse ruling should not destroy
ca confidence in the judicial method as the best means of adjusting
~u international controversies.
it is not the least among the deeds which distinguish the Adminst ations of McKinley and Roosevelt that they have always striven
foi peace in their relations with other rulers and sought to promote
od    ill among the nations.


I  20            j                                ig.




"THE SETTLEMENT- O            THE ALASKAN BOUNDAR
CONTROVERSY ONE OFTHE MOST NOTABLE
DIPLOMATIC TRIUMPHS OF OUR
GOVERNMENT."
Extract from rmtarks of Li. SHtELBY MM. CULLOM of Illinois
in dail Congressional Re cord, April 27, 1904.
A ASKAN BOUNDARY. 
The long-pending controversy between the United States and
Great Britain over the boundary between Alaska and Canada i
another very important diplomatic question which has been settled
under this Administration.
The treaty of 1868 between the:United States and Russia, b
which we acquired  Alaska, in describing the boundary of Alask
adopted the description contained in the treaty of 1825 betwee
Great Britain and Russia. Years ago, however, it was demonstrate
that the boundary described in the treaty of 1825 was incorrect as 
geographical fact.
While the country remained unsettled the definite boundary wa
not so material, but since the first Cleveland Administration th
Alaskan boundary has been an important subject of dispute. Thb
feeling over the boundary among our people in Alaska, Washington
and our extreme northwestern States, as well as among the peopl
of Canada, had become very bitter.
A provisional boundary was agreed upon in 1878 and in 189
for revenue purposes, but this was only a temporary arrangemen
and unsatisfactory.
By executive agreement in 1899 a joint high commission wa
created by the Governments of the United States and Grea
Britain for the purpose of disposing of all unsettled question
between the United States and Canada, embracing twelve subjects
among;which was the Alaskan boundary controversy. The join
high commission made considerable progress in adjusting thes
questions, but failing to reach an agreement as to the Alaska
boundary the commission' adjourned without disposing of any o
the subjects in controversy.
In view of our long and undisputed occupation of the territor
oin question,  President Roosevelt declined to allow the referene
of the Alaskan boundary controversy to a regular arbitration a
The Hague court, but instead he proposed the creation of a judicia
tribunal, composed of an equal number of members from      eac
country, feeling confident that our claim  would be successfull
established by such a body. Against much opposition and man
predictions of failure, on January 24, 1903, a treaty between th
United States and Great Britain was signed providing for such
tribunal.
The treaty was ratified and the members of the tribunal appointed
Assembling on September 3, 1903, and being presided over by th
lord chief justice of England, it reached a conclusion on October 20
resulting in a complete victory for the United States and sustainin
every material contention of our Government
Thus was confirmed the wisdom of President Roosevelt's action
peacefuly settling this irritating controversy, which was believe
by some would eventually cause war between the United States an
Great Britain and which certainly stood as an obstacle to the main
tenne of peaeful relations with Canada.
The settlement of the Alaskan boundary controversy and tO:
restorati   f goo  relat ions with our northern neighbor has proNe
one of h   mot notable diplomatic triumphs of our Governmnen:::


I




"OUR REUNITED COUNTRY."
Extracts from  public addresses of PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT,
printed in daily Congressional Record, June 20, 1904.
If ever the need comes in the future the past has made abundantly
evidert the fact that from this time on Northerner and Southerner
will in war lknow only the generous desire to strive how each can do e
the more effective service for the flag of our common country. The
same thing is true in the endless work of peace, the never-ending
work of building and keeping the marvelous fabric of our industrial 
prosperity. The upbuilding of any part of our country is a benefit f
to the whole, and every such effort as this to stimulate the resources
and industry of a particular section is entitled to the heartiest sup- r
port from every quarter of the Union. Thoroughly good national
work can be done only if each of us works hard for himself, and at 1
the sae time keeps constantly in mind that he must work in conjunetion with others. (Speech at Charleston, S. C., April 9, 1902.)
The war with Spain was the most absolutely righteous foreign war
in which any nation has engaged during the nineteenth century, and 
not the least of its many good features was the unity it brought
about between the sons of the men who wore the blue and of those -
who wore the gray. This necessarily meant the dying out of the old
antipatliy. Of course embers smolder here and there, but the country
at large is growing more and more to take pride in the valor, the self.
(levotion, the loyalty to an ideal, displayed alike by the soldiers of
both sides in the civil war. We are all united now. ("Fellow-feeling
as a political factor," The Strenuous Life," p. 59.) 
Nobody is interested in the fact that Dewey comes from Vermont,
Hobson from Alabama, or Funston from Kansas. If all three cane
from the same county it would make no difference to us. They are
Americans, and every American has an equal right to challenge his
share of glory in their deeds. As we read of the famous feats of 
our army in the Philippines, it matters nothing to us whether the
regiments come from Oregon, Idaho, California, Nebraska, Pennsylvania, or Tennessee. What does matter is that these splendid soldiers
are all Americans; that they are our heroes; that our blood runs in
their veins; that the flag under which we live is the flag for which
they have fought, for which some of them have died. ("Fellow Feeling as a Political Factor-The Strenuous Life, p. 61.)
The devotion, the self-sacrifice, the steadfast resolution and lofty
daring, the high devotion to the right, as each man saw it, whether
Northerner or Southerner-all thse qualities of the men and women
of the early sixties now shine luminous and brilliant before our eyes,
while the mists of anger and hatred that once dimmed them have
passed away forever. (Speech at Charleston, S. C., April 9, 1902.)
Virginia has always rightly prided herself upon the character of
the men whom she has sent into public life. No more wonderful
example of governmental ability, ability in statecraft and public
administration, has ever been given than by the history of Virginia's
sons in public life. (Speech at Charlottesville, Va., June 16, 1903.)
I am sure that none of my friends who fought in the Confederate
service will misunderstand me or will grudge what I am about to
say when I say that the greatest debt owed by this country to any
set of men is owned by it to those men of the so-called border
States-the men who in statesmanship followed Clay and the Crittendens and the Blairs; the men who, as soldiers, fought on the same
side with Thomas and Farragut; the men who were for the Union,
without regard to whether their immediate associates were for it or
not. (Speech at Washington, D  C., December 9, 1902.)
Besides the material results of the civil war, we are all, North and
South, incalculably richer for its memories. We are the richer for
each grim campaign, for each hard-fought battle. We are the richer
for valor displayed alike by those wh  fought so valiantly for the
right and by those who, no less valiantly, fought for what they
deemed tie right. We have in us nobler capacties for what is great
and good because of the infiite woe and suffering, and because of
the splendid ultimate triumph. (American Ideals, p. 19)




"RESPONSIBELI           TIES RESTING ON THE EDUCATED
MAN."
E:tracts from public addresses of PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT,
prined in daily Congressional Record, June f0 1904.
A heavy responsibility rests on the educated man. It is a double
discredit to him to go wrong, whether his shortcomings take the form
of shirking his everyday civic duties or of abandonment of the nation's rights in a foreign quarrel  He must no more be misled by
the sneers of those who always write "patriotism" between inverted
commas than by the coarser but equally dangerous ridicule of the
politicians who jeer at "reform." It is as unmanly to be taunted by
one set of critics into cowardice as it is to be taunted by the other
set into dishonesty.  ("The Monroe Doctrine"-American Ideals,
p. 359.)
The man who is content to go through life owing his alma mater
for an education for which he has made no adequate return is not
true to the ideals of American citizenship. He is in honor bound to
make such return. He can make it in but one way; he can return
what he owes to his alma mater only by making his alma mater proud
of what he does in service rendered to his fellow-men. That is the
type of return we have the right to expect of the university men in
this country. (Speech at Charlottesville, Va., June 16, 1903.)
Where the State has bestowed education the man who accepts it
must be content to accept it merely as a charity unless he returns it
to the State in full in the shape of good citizenship. I do not ask
of you, men and women here to-day, good citizenship as a favor to
the State. I demand it of you as a right, and hold you recreant to
your duty if you fail to give it.  (Speech at Berkeley, Cal., May 14,
1903.)
If a college education means anything it means fitting a man to
do better service than he could do without it; if it does not mean
that it means nothing, and if a man does not get that out of it he gets
less than nothing out of it. No man has a right to arrogate to himself
one particle of superiority or consideration because he has had a
college education, but he is bound, if he is in truth a man, to feel that
the fact of his having had a college education imposes upon him a
heavier burden of responsibility, that it makes it doubly incumbent
upon     to do well and nobly in his life, private and public. (Cambridge, Mass., June 25, 1902.)
Every educated man who puts himself out of touch with the current of American thought, and who on conspicuous occasions assumes
an attitude hostile to the interest of America, is doing what he can to
weaken the influence of educated men in American life. ('The Monroe
Doctrine," American Ideals, p. 858.)
If an educated man Is not heartily American in instinct and feeling and taste and sympathy, he will amount to nothing In our public
life. Patriotism, love of country, and pride in the flag which symbolizes country may be feelings which the race will at some period
outgrow, but at present they are very real and strong, and the man
who lacks them is a useless creature,  mere inumbrance to the land.
("The ollege Graduate and Public Life," American Ideals, p. 75.)
If a man does not have belief and enthusiasm, te chances are small
inded thathe will ever do a mans work in the world; and the paper
or the college which, by its general course, tends to eradicate this
power of be ef and enthusiasm, this desire for work, has rendered to
the young men under its influence the worst service it could possibly
render. ('The C        Graduate and Public Life," American Ideals,
p. 69.)
An educated man must not go into politics as such; he must go in
simply as an American; and when he is once in, he will speedily
realz that he must work very hard indeed or he will be upset by
some other American ith no edcation at all, but with much natural
capacity His education ought to make him feel particularly ashamed
of himself if he acts meanly or dishonorably, or in any way falls short
f th ideal of good citizenship, and it t  oht to make him feel that
he 'must     that he; has profitd bly it; buat it should certainly give
himno fein of superioi     ntl by actual work he has shown that
supriorit.   n thewords, the educated man must realize that he
is living in a democracy and under democratic conditions, and that
he is entitled to no mt   re resct and consideration than he can win
by actual performa     (t'he College Graduate and Public Life,"
American Ideas, p. S:.)




"ABOUT THE FOREIGN-BORN AMERICAN."


Extracts from  public addresses and works of Presidenl
ROOSEVELT, printed in daily Congressional Record:
June 20, 1904,
From his own standpoint, it is beyond all question the wise
thing for the immigrant to become thoroughly Americanized. Moreover, from our standpoint, we have a right tc
demand it. We freely,extend the hand of welcome and of
good-fellowship to every man, no matter what his creed or
birthplace, who comes here honestly intent on becoming a
good United States citizen like the rest of us. ("True
Americanism," American Ideals, p. 45.)
The only way to teach our foreign-born fellow-citizens
how to govern themselves is to give each the full rights possessed by other American citizens. ("Phases of State legislation," American Ideals, p. o02.)
We can not have too much immigration of the right kind,
and we should have none at all of the wrong kind. (Annual
message, second session, Fifty-seventh Congress.)
We need every honest and efficient immigrant fitted to
become an American citizen-every immigrant who comes
here to stay-who brings here a strong body, a stout heart,
a good head, and a resolute purpose to do his duty well in
every way, and to bring up his children as law-abiding and
God-fearing membners of the community. (Annual message,
Fifty-seventh Congress, first session.)
Not only must our labor be protected by the tariff, but it
should also be protected, so far as it is possible, from the presence in this country of any laborers brought over by contract
or of those who, coming freely, yet represent a standard of
living so depressed that they can undersell our men in the
labor market and drag them to a lower level. (Annual message, first session, Fifty-seventh Congress.)
A Scandinavian, a German, or an Irishman who has really
become an American has the right to stand on exactly the
same footing as any native-born citizen in the land, and is
jutst as much entitled to the friendship and support, social
dtn political, of his neighbors. Among the men with whom
I have been thrown in close personal contact socially, and
\\ho have been among my stanchest friends and allies politically, are not a few Americans who happen to have been;orn 1on the other side of the water, in Germany, Ireland,
Scandianavia, and there could be no better men in the ranks
o)f our native-born citizens. ("True Americanism," American Ideals, p. 48.)
s-24




"HE IS NOT SAFE FOR MEN WHO WISH TO PEROSECUTE SELFISH SCHEMES TO PUBLIC DETRIMENT."
Extracts from remarks of Ron. ELIHU ROOT, at Union League Club, New
York, printed in daily Congressional Record, June ~0, 1904.
I count it, my friends, one of the greatest privileges of my life to have
been able, when         hethat sad day came-the day that I can not recall without
the deepest emotion, when our President McKinley was taken away-to have
been able to stand by and hold up the hands of his true and loyal successor.
[Applause.] I am told that he is not popular in the city of New York;
that he, who was born and grew to manhood among us. old members of this
club, who made his first essay in public life going to represent us in the
legislature at Albany more than twenty years ago-that he Is not popular
here in the city of his home! I am told that some people say that he is not
safe. I could not come back to you-come back to you between whom and
me there have been no concealments for all these thirty-five years-and not
say to you what I feel on that subject. Men say he is not safe. He is not
safe for the men who wish to prosecute selfish schemes to public detriment.
[Applause.]  He is not safe for the men who wish government to be conducted with greater reference to campaign contributions than to the public
good. [Applause, and cries of "Good!"] He is not safe for the men who
wish to draw the President of the United States off into a corner and make
whispered arrangements, which they dare not have known by their constituents.
But I say to you that he has been, during these years since President
McKinley's death, the greatest cons'rlvative force for the protection of property and our Institutions in the city ol "Vashington. [Applause.]  There is
a better way to protect property, to protect capital, to protect great enterprises than by buying legislatures.  ["Good ' and applause.]  There is a
better way to deal with labor and to keep it from rising into the tumult of
the unregulated and resistless mob than by starving it or by corrupting its
leaders. There are some things to be thought of besides the speculation of
the hour. There is the gieat onward march of American institutions; there
is the development of our social system; there is the underlying faith and
trust of our people in the laws under which they live; and the man who Is
put in the chair of the Chief Magistrate of this great people, President not
only of you and me here in New York, but of all the eighty millions of people scattered from sea to sea, is charged under his high responsibilities so to
administer the law that it shall have the respect and the confidence of the
people who make the law.
I have said that President Roosevelt was the greatest conservative force
for the protection of property and of capital in the city of Washington during the years that have elapsed since President McKinley's death. He has
been that Indeed. I could give you specific instances where he has stood
between the wish of men in Congress who greatly desired to pass extreme
and violent measures, by the strong and unwavering declaration, "I will
veto your bill if you pass It;" and he has been able to do that because he
was so fair, so appreciative of the rights and the feelings of every part of
the great people whose President he was, that they trusted him, and he
dared to say, "I will veto an unfair measure against capital."  [Applause].
I have said there was a better way to protect capital than by buying legislatures; that there was a better way to deal with labor, and to keep it
from becoming a mob, than by starving it. That way is that capital shall
lbe fair; that taking all the high rewards of brain —of the inventive, discovering, organizing brain, all the rich, the magnificent rewards that come
in this country of enterprise and boundless wealth to the brain that invents.
that discovers, and that organizes-yet capital shall be fair; fair to the
consumer, fair to the laborer, fair to the investor; that it shall concede that
the laws shall be executed (applause); that its treatment of the laborer
shall be so fair that the reasonable and most intelligent men among the laborers of our country shall have their hands held up, their strength increased, their power to lead their fellows supported, and that they shall be
enabled to hold the labor of America solid for American freedom, and believing in American freedom as against the demagogue and the agitator
who seeks to turn labor into a mob.   [Applause.]  Never forget that that the
men who labor cast the votes, set up and pull down governments, and that
our Government is possible, only so long as the men who labor with their
hands believe in American liberty and American laws. [Applause.]
And I say to you, my friends of the Union League Club, that our present
President has, by fairness, by just sympathy with all his people, acquired
the power to do more for the protection of the material interests, and for
the spiritual Interests of our country as well, than any man could ever
have acquired by following the dictates of a narrow and limited view, which
looked only to the speculation of the day, or the interests of particular enterprises. [Applause.] Take the large view the large view of the statesman, and think
of the future of America! The one thing that is needed is not what you
and I will make to-morrow, not the success of this or that corporation for
next year, or the next ten years, or during our lifetime, but for the perpetuity of our institutions, that our children and our children's children
may live among a people devoted to American freedom and American justice. One thing necessary for that Is that the great toiling mass of th9
American people shall feel that laws are just and justly administered; that
every boy has his chance for the future. [Applause.]  And it is that-it
is that supreme and sacred interest that Theodore Roosevelt has been safeguarding in these years. [Applause.]
Property should be protected, capital should be preserved, enterprise
should be fostered, liberty should be protected, the laboring man should have
his fair wage. Yes'   Yes! But the one thing needful is that truth and
honor and love of country, and the service of mankind, shall be the goal set
before the eyeof the President of the Pesient of the United States; tat the boys of America shall believe that the honest man, that the true man, that the loyal man,
has honor in this land; that no arts of the politician, that no cajolery of
wealth, that no social influence, that nothing but faithfulness to the duty rf
truth and honor and ustice shall receive the supreme reward. And I would
rather have my boys taught to think that the finest thing in-life is the
honesty and frankness, the truth and loyalty, the honor and the devotion
to his country of Theodore Roosevelt than to have them in possession of
all the wealth in this great metropolis. [Applause.]




"HONESTY IN PUBLIC LIFE."
Extrats from publc a  ddresses and works of PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT,
printed in daily Congressional Record, June 20, 1904.
No community is healthy where it is ever necessary to distinguish one
politician among his fellows because "he is honest."  Honesty is not so
much a credit as an absolute prerequisite to efficient service to the public.
Unless a man is honest we have no right to keep him in public life, it matters not how brilliant his capacity, it hardly matters how great his power of
doing good service on certain lines may be. ("The eighth and ninth commandments in politics," The Strenuous Life, p. 108.)
We need absolute honesty in public life; and we shall not get it until we
remember that truth-telling must go hand in hanand with it and that it Is
quite as Important not to tell an untruth about a decent man as it is to tell
the truth about one who is not decent. ("The eighth and ninth commandments in politics," The Strenuous Life, p. 112.)
We can as little afford to tolerate a dishonest man in the public service
as a coward in the army. The murderer takes a single life; the corruptiontst in public life, whether he be bribe giver or bribe taker, strikes at the
heal-t of the Commonwealth. (Speech at Sherman statue unveiling, October
15, 1903.)
There can be no crime more serious than bribery. Other offenses violate
one law, while corruption strikes at the foundation of all law. Under our
form of government all authority Is vested in the people and by them delegated to those who represent them in official capacity. There can be no offense heavier than that of him In whom such a sacred trust has been reposed, who sells it for his own gain and enrichment; and no less heavy if
ihe offense of the bribe giver. He is worse than the thief, for the thief robs
the individual, while the corrupt official plunders an entire city or State.
He is as wicked as the murderer, for the murderer may only take one life
against the law, while the corrupt official and the man who corrupts the
official alike aimtn at the assassination of tle Commonwealth Itself. Government of the people, by the people, for the people will perish from the face rf
the earth if bribery is tolerated. The givers and takers of bribes stand on
an evil pre-eminence of infamy. The exposure 'and punishment of public
corruption Is an honor to a nation, not a disgrace. The disgrace lies in
toleration, not In correction.  (Annual message, second session, Fiftyseventh Congress.)
We can divide and must divide on party lines as regards certain questions. As regards the deepest, as regards the vital questions, we cannot
afford to divide, and I have the right to challenge the best effort of every
American worthy of the name to putting down by every means In his power
corruption in private life, and above all corruption in public life. And remember, you, the people of this government by the people, that while ths
public servant, the legislator, the executive officer, the judge, are not to be
excused if they fall short of their duty, yet that their doing their duty can
not avail unless you do yours. In the last resort we have to depend upon
the Jury drawn from the people to convict the scoundrel who has tainted
our public life, and unless that jury does its duty, unless it is backed by the
public sentiment of the people, all the work of legislator, of executive officer, of Judicial officer are for naught. (Washington, D. C., November 16.
1903.)
There are plenty of questions about which honest men can and do differ
very greatly and very intensely, but as to which the triumph of either side
may be compatible with the welfare of the state-a lesser degree of welfare
or a greater degree of welfare, but compatible with the welfare of the state.
But there are certain great principles, such as those which Cromwell would
have called "fundamentals," concerning which no man has a right to have
more than one opinion. Such a question is honesty. (Washington, D. C.,
October 25, 1903.)
It is well for us in this place, and at this time, to remember that exaetly as there are certain homely qualities the lack of which will prevent
the most brilliant man alive from being a useful soldier to his country, so
there are certain homely qualities for the lack of which In the public servant no shrewdness or ability can atone. (Washington, D. C., October 15,
1903.)
There are many qualities which we need alike in private citizen and in
public man, but three above all-three for the lack of which no brilliancy
and no genius can atone-and those three are courage, honesty, and common sense. (Antietam, Md., September 17. 1903.)
It is an even greater offense to sin against the Commonwealth than to
sin against an individual. The man who debauches our public life, whether
by malversation of funds in office, by the actual bribery of voters or of legislators, or by the corrupt use of the offices as spoils wherewith to reward
the unworthy and the vicious for their noxious and interested activity in
the baser walks of political life-this man is a greater foe to our well-being
as a nation than is even the defaulting cashier of a bank or the betrayer of
a private trust. No amount of Intelligence and no amount of energy will
save a nation which is not honest, and no government can ever be a permanent success if administered in accordance with base ideals. The first requisite in the citizen who wishes to share the work of our public life,
whether he wishes himself to hold office or merely to do his plain duty as an
American by taking part in the management of our political machinery, is
that he shall act disinterestedly and with a sincere purpose to serve the
whole Commonwealth. ("The Manly Virtues and Practical Politics,"
American Ideals, p. 51.)
There are not a few public men who, though they would repel with indignation an offer of a bribe, will give certain corporations special legislative and executive privileges because they have contributed heavily to campaign funds; will permit loose and extravagant work because a contractor
has political influence; or, at any rate, will permit a public servant to take
public money without rendering an adequate return, by conniving at Inefficient service on the part of men who are protected by prominent party
leaders. Various degrees of moral guilt are involved in the multitudinous
actions of this kind, but after all, directly or indirectly, every such caie
comes dangerously near the border line of the commandment which, in forbidding theft, certainly by implication forbids the connivance at theft, or
the failure to punish it. ("The eighth and ninth commandments in polltics," The Strenuous Life, p. 109.)
36..




"OUR FOREIGN POLICY-THE MONROE DOCTRINE."
Extracts from   oblio addresses of PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT, printed in
daily Congressional Record, June 20, 1904.
The Monroe doctrine is simply a statement of our very firm belief that on
this continent the nations now existing here must be left to work out their
own destinies among themselves, and that the continent is not longer to be
regarded as colonizing ground for any European power. (Speech at Augusta,
Me., August 26, 1902.)
We of the two Americas must be left to work out our own salvation along
our own lines; and if we are wise we will make it un!Asvstood as a cardinal
feature of our joint foreign policy that on the one hand we will not submit
to territorial aggrandizement on this continent by any Old World power,
and that on the other hand, among ourselves, each nation must scrupulously
regard the rights and interests of the others, so that, instead of any one of
us committing the criminal folly of trying to rise at the expense of our
neighbors, we shall all strive upward in honest and manly brotherhood,
shoulder to shoulder. (Speech at opening of the Pan-American Exposition,
May 20, 1901.)
It is for the Interest of every commonwealth in the Western Hemisphere
to see every other commonwealth grow in riches and in happiness, in material wealth, and in the sober, strong, self-respecting manliness without
which material wealth avails so little. (Speech at opening of Pan-American
Exposition, May 20, 1901.)
I believe in the Monroe doctrine with all my heart and soul; I am convinced that the immense majority of our fellow-countrymen so believe In
it; but I would infinitely prefer to see us abandon it than to see us put It
forward and bluster about, it, and yet fail to build up the efficient fighting
strength which in the last resort can alone make it respected by any strong
foreign power whose interest it may ever happen to be to violate it. (Washington, D. C., November 13, 1902.)
I believe in the Monroe doctrine. I shall try to see that this nation lives
up to it, and as long as I am President it will be lived up to. But I do not
intend to make the doctrine an excuse or a justification for being unpleasant
to other powers, for speaking ill of other powers. We want the friendship
of mankind. We want to get on well with the other nations of mankind,
with the small nations and with the big nations. We want so to carry ourselves that if-which I think most unlikely-any Quarrel should arise, It
would be evident that it was not a quarrel of our own seeking, but one that
was forced on us. If it is forced on us, I know you too well not to know that
you will stand up to it if the need oomes; but you will stand up to it all the
better if you have not blustered or spoken ill of other nations in advance.
(Waukesha, Wis., April 3, 1903.)
When a question of national honor or of national right or wrong is at
stake, no question of financial interest should be considered for a moment.
Those wealthy men who wish the abandonment of the Monroe doctrine because its assertion may damage their business, bring discredit to themselves, and, so far as they are able, discredit to the nation of which they are
a part. (The Monroe Doctrine, American Ideals, p. 260.)
We do not wish to bring ourselves to a position where we shall have to
emulate the European system of enormous armies. Every true patriot, every
man of statesman-like habit, should look forward to the day when not a
single European power will hold a foot of American soil. At present it is
not necessary to take the position that no European power shall hold American territory; but it certainly will become necessary if the timid and
selfish "'peace at any price" men have their way, and if the United States
fails to check at the outset European aggrandizement on this continent.
(The Monroe Doctrine, American Ideals, p. 252.)
The United States has not the slightest wish to establish a universal protectorate over other American States, or to become responsible for their
misdeeds. If one of them becomes involved in an ordinary quarrel with a
European power, such quarrel must be settled between them by any one of
the usual methods. But no European State is to be allowed to aggrandize
itself on American soil at the expense of any American State. Furthermore,
no transfer of an American colony from one European State to another is to
be permitted, if, in the judgment of the United States, such transfer would
be hostile to its own interests. (The Monroe Doctrine, American Ideals,
p. 248.)
The Monroe doctrine should be the cardinal feature of the foreign policy
of all the nations of the two Americas, as it is of the United States. Just
seventy-eight years have passed since President Monroe in his annual message announced that "the American continents are henceforth not to be
considered as subjects for future colonization by any European power."'
In other words, the Monroe doctrine is a declaration that there must be no
territorial aggrandizement by any non-American power at the expense of
any American power on American soil. It is in no wise intended as hostile to any nation In the Old World. Still less is it intended to give cover to
any aggression by one New World power at the expense of any other. It is
simply a step, and a long step, toward assuring the universal peace of the
world by securing the possibility of permanent peace on this hemisphere,
Annual message, Fifty-seventh Congress, first session.)
If the Monroe doctrine did not already exist it would be necessary forthwith to create it. (The Monroe Doctrine, American Ideals, p. 246.)
The Monroe doctrine is not a question of law at all. It is a question of
policy. It, s a question to be considered not only by statesmen, but by all
good citizens,.Lawyers, as lawyers, have absolutely nothing whatever to 
say about it. To argue that it can not be recognized as a principle of international law, is a mere waste of breath. Nobody cares whether It is or is
not so recognized, any more than any one cares whether the Declaration
of Independence an    Washington's   arewell Address are so recognized.
(The Monroe Doctrine, American Ideals, p. 248.)
s-27 




"THE PRESIDIENT AND THE COAL STRIKE OF 1902."
Extract from renarks of Hon. 0. H. GRQOSVENOR of Ohio, in the
daily Congressional Becord of April 4, 1904.
The President has frequently emphasized the need of more sympathy between employers and employees and deprecated the cultivation of class feeling with its resulting antagonisms.
"Very much of our effort in reference to labor matters," he said
at Sioux Falls in April. 1903, "should be by every device and expedient to try to secure a constantly better understanding between
employer and employee. Everything possible should be done to increase the sympathy and fellow-feeling between them, and every
chance taken to allow each to look at all questions, especially at
questions in dispute, somewhat through the other's eyes.
"lf met with a sincere desire to act fairly by one another, and if
there is, furthermore, power by each to appreciate the other's standpoint, the chance for trouble is minimized. I suppose every thinking
man rejoices when by mediation or arbitration it proves possible to
settle troubles in time to avert the suffering and bitterness caused
by strikes. Moreover, a conciliation committee can do best work
when the trouble is in its beginning, or at least has not come to a
head. When the break has actually occurred, damage has been done,
and each side feels sore and angry, and it is difficult to get them
together, difficult to make either forget its own wrongs and remember
the rights of the other. If possible, the effort of conciliation or
mediation or arbitration should be made in the earlier stages, and
should be marked by the wish on the part of both sides to try to
come to a common agreement, which each shall think in the interest
of the other as well as of itself.
"When we deal with such a subject we are fortunate in having
before us an admirable object lesson in the work that has just been
closed by the Anthracite Coal Strike Commission. This was the commission which was appointed last fall, at the time when the coal strike
in the anthracite region threatened our nation with a disaster second
to none which has befallen us since the days of the civil war. Their
report was made just before the Senate adjourned at the special
session, and no Government document of recent years marks a more
important piece of work better done, and there is none which teaches
sounder social morality to our people. The commission consisted of
seven as good men as were to be found in the country, representing
the bench, the church, the Army, the professions, the employers, and
the employed. They acted as a unit and the report which they unanimously signed is a masterpiece of sound common sense and of sound
doctrine on the very questions with which our people should most
deeply concern themselves. The immediate effect of this commission's
appointment and action was of vast and incalculable benefit to the
nation, but the ultimate effect will be even better if capitalist, wageworker, and lawmaker alike will take to heart and act upon the
lessons set forth in the report they have made."
U:LTIMATE EFFECT.
The appointment of this commission, which resulted in the termination of the great coal strike of 1902, is perhaps President Roosevelt's
most widely known and generally appreciated contribution toward
the improvement of industrial relations. When the efforts of all
other peacemakers had come to naught and the coal famine remained
unbroken at the near approach of winter, Mr. Roosevelt, as a representative American citizen, pleaded with the operators and miners
to terminate their dispute and resume the mining of coal. Public
opinion supported his action so strongly that both sides to the dispute
agreed to resume work and leave to a commission to be appointed
by the President the determination of the conditions of employment
cloncerning which they had been unable to agree. The President's
commission not only adjusted the dispute in the coal regions, but in
so doing formulated principles of very general application to the
orgatization of industry at the present time. The immediate effect
of the commission's appointment was, as the President has himself
stated, "of vast and incalculable benefit to the nation, but the ultimate
effect will be even better if capitalist, wage-worker, and lawmaker
alike will take to heart and act upon the lessons set forth in the
report" of the commission. The coal industry is typical of all the
great industries of to-day that are organized on the principle of
large-scale production, and its treatment of the labor problem is
therefore highly illuminative.
s-28




"IDO NOT THINK THAT ANY PRESIDET V                      ACTED
MORE WISELY,COURAGEOUSLY OR PROMPTLY
IN A NATIONAL CRISIS-MR. ROOSEVELT
DESERVES UNSTINTED               PRAISE FOR
WHAT:    HE DID"-JUDGE GRAY.
Etrat fom remarks of;    on. 0. H. GBROSVNO       of Ohio, 'm the
daily Congressional Reeord of April 4, 1904.
T E      SID      T AND PROPEBTY rIGHTS.
President Roosevelt' successful intervention in the coal strike met
with the almost unanimous approval of the people, irrespective of
their political ailiations. It was not until the commission's award
had been made, and thought of the great disturbance nearly banished
from the minds of the people, that criticism of his conduct, arising
out of the resentment of the coal mine presidents and the desire to
make political capital, began to appear, based on the allegation that
his interference amounted to a modification of property rights. But
the criticism was hushed almost as soon as it appeared by the declaration of Judge Gray, a member of the political party opposed to the
President that "the Preside's action, so far from interfering with
or infringing upon property rights, tended to conserve them."
UDGE GRAY'Sl STATEMENT WHICH APPEARED IN A
NEW YORK CITY NEWSPAPER SEPTEMBER
1, 1908, WAS AS FOLLOWS:
"I have no hesitation in saying that the President of the United
States was confronted in October, 1902, by the existence of a crisis
more grave and threatening than any that had occurred since the
civil war. I mean that tht   cessation of mining in the anthracite coal
country, brought about by the dispute between the miners and those
who control the greatest natural monopoly in this country and perhaps
in the world, had brought upon more than one-half of the American
people a condition of deprivation of one of the necessaries of life,
and the probable continuance of the dispute threatened not only the
comfort and healtl, but the safety and good order of the nation.
He was without legal or constitutional power to interfere, but his
position as President of the United States gave him an influence, a
leadership, as first citizen of the Republic, that enabled him to appeal
to the patriotism and good sense of the parties to the controversy
and to place upon them the moral coercion of public opinion to
agree to an arbitrament of the strike then existing and threatening
consequences so direful to the whole country. He acted promptly and
courageously, and in so doing averted the dangers to which I have
alluded.;-,. -                                   g     
"S  far from   nterfeEring or infringing upon property rights, the
President's dacti  ton d      serve them. The peculiar situation as
reards the     racit coal interest was  at they controlled a natural
m0onopoly of a product necessary to the comfort and to the very life
of   large portion of the people. A prolonged deprivation of the enjoyment of this n   sary of life would have tended to  recipitate an
attack upon the property rights of which you speak, for after all,
it isatin to deny tha his property, so peculiar in its conditions, and
which is property sp ke  f as  "natural  onopoly," is affected with
public interest.
"I do not think that any President ever acted more wisely, e0ora/eo  ty, or promptly iG a   tional crt. si-. Mr.  oosevelt desrveN
unstinted praise for what he did,
-29 '




E PRESIDENT AND THE WORKINGMAN."-"PER
SONAL EFFORT THE FIRST REQUISITE
act from remarks of Hon. C. H. GROSVENOR of Ohio, printed in the
daily Congressional Record of April 4, 1904.
The most extended discussion of the condition and interests of worken that Mr. Roosevelt has offered since he became President is coned in his address at the New York State Fair on Labor Day, 1903,
h is printed elsewhere in this pamphlet. To appreciate his attitude
must read the entire address as well as the following quotations from
r addresses and public papers.
Personal effort and the homely old-fashioned virtues are the first
isites of order and progress in every community. Thus in an address
ansas City, Mo., May 1, 1903, the President said:
"No device that the wit of man can produce, no form of law, no form
ssociation or organization among ourselves, can supply the lack of
amental virtues, the presence of which has meant a great nation, the
ce of which has meant the downfall of any nation since the world
a. No smartness, no mere cleverness unaccompanied by the sense
oral responsibility, no governmental scheme will ever supply the place
dherence to certain fundamental precepts put forth in the Bible and
odied consciously or unconsciously in the code of morals of every great
successful nation from antiquity to modern times. Always in any
nmment, among any people, there are certain forces for evil which
many shapes, but which are rooted In the same base and evil charactics of the human soul, in the evil of arrogance, in the evil of jealousy,
vy, of hatred, and to some people the appeal is made to yield to one set
vli forces, to some it is made to yield to another set, and the result
qually bad in such case.
"The vice of arrogance, the vice of hate, and brutal indifference on
part of those with wealth to those who have none is a shameful and
dful vice. It is not one whit worse than the vice of rancorous envy,
atred, and jealousy on the part of those who are not well off for those
are better off. The man who by either practice or precept seeks to
to any man or to withhold from any man any advantage in war, or
ally, or in the working of society, or in business because of his wealth
because of his poverty is false to the traditions of this Republic. We
Aot have to face the tremendous problems with which you of the years
'61 to '65 were brought face to face, but we have problems of our
THE PIRESIDENT AND TRADES-UNIIONISM.
"While intelligence and character still count as essential elements of
ess in individuals, there remains room for associated action in large
rprises where the individual is swallowed up in the multitude and ieral contact of employer and employee is no longer possible. One of 5,000
e-workers employed in a factory could never hope to induce the emers to reduce his hours of work from fourteen or sixteen to ten a day,
if all of the 5,000 workmen unite in such a request they may accomplish
r object and effect a change so momentous in the lives of workingmen.
fact is that in a large-scale production the workman is at a hopeless
dvantage in making an individual bargain with the employer. His only
ation lies in joining his fellow-workmen and making a collective bargain
the employer regarding wages and the conditions under which they
1 work. In forming a union and choosing their officers and representas the workmen are simply following the example of capitalists, who
a corporation and delegate their powers to directors or trustees."
THE NECESSITY OF TRADE UNIONS.
This fact is fully recognized by President Roosevelt in common with
political economists and other leaders of thought at the present time.
s in his address at Sioux Falls, S. Dak., April 6, 1903, he declared that
Jch can be done by organization, combination-union among the wagek:rs," and went on to explain the change that has come about in modindtustry, as follows:
"The wage-workers in our cities, like the capitalists in our cities,
totally changed conditions. The development of machinery and the
aordinary change in business conditions have rendered the employment
caoital and of persons in large aggregations not merely profitable but
a necessary for success, and have specialized the labor of the wageekr at the same time that they have brought great aggregations of
e workers together. More and more in our great industrial centers men
al come to realize that they can not live as independently of one
ther as in the old days was the case everywhere and as is now the case
he country districts. Of course, fundamentally, each man will yet find
the chief factor in determining his success or failure in life is the sum
his own individual qualities. He can not afford to lose his individual
tation-his individual will and power, but he can best use that power if
certain objects he unites with his fellows."


j30a~










I




he Democratic Candidate
T






"A COLORLESS CANDIDATE UPON A COLORL
PLATFORM."
Extract from remarks of Hon. C. 1H. GHROSVENOR in House of Reprcse
lives, April 22, 1904.
You have no principles; you can not agree upon them. You g
ered together the wisdom of the Democratic party of the I
States, and went over to Albany, N. Y. to promulgate a platf
and, having got through with it, you can not tell to-day wheth
was the utterance of a Democratic platform or the soliloquy of s
student in a Sunday school or country debating society. [Lalng
and applause.] Colorless, unimportant, odorless and unsatisfact
tasteless and insipid. And if you will only nominate a coloi
candidate, and put him upon a colorless platform-and you car
get any other one agreed to-we will show you that the peolpi
the United States believe in a man that says something, believe
something, believe in a man that does not undertake to seem
nomination for President without daring to tell the convention
nominates him, or the country, whether he stands on his "head o
his heels upon the great questions of the hour."
The American people will not be satisfied with a candidate for 
ident whom they do not know. They will not be satisfied with a 1
ident who will go into the Presidential office unpledged to any p
policy or any political action. It is typical of Democratic p(
to suppress from the people all knowledge of their candidates
their past, and in the present case we are threatened very stro
it seems to me with the manifest purpose of the Democratic 1
to make -a platform of scattering generalities and make pers
assaults upon the President of the United States, assail the Ad
istration of the country and disgrace it as far as possible in th
timation of mankind, and then bring a colorless and odorless c;
date and place him upon a colorless and odorless platform and
the people of the U. S. to commit themselves to the horrors and
certainties of a Democratic Administration unpledged to anythi
And there will be nobody cheated when we nominate Roos
at Chicago. We know who he is, what he is, and what he is in f
of. Can you say; as much for your candidate?  Wlho of you
guess? Whbat' is:     he?  Nobody knows. iWhat is ^he in favor
Noboy dare to unidertake to say\ What -is his platform? T
ino platform   pon which you can; agree.:     -:
Without detaining my friends, I have simply to say that all t
attacks upon Roosevelt only attract the attention of the peopi
the sterling character of the man and the brilliancy of his ca
No man in this country ever had a brighter, a more brilliant cae
He undertook that task which men coming before him had atteem
and in which they had usually failed. He undertook the tasi
holding his party in line and standing by the platform and doct
and teachings of his party, coming to his high office, as he dit
the death of the President; and he has succeeded beyond the
of his closest friends. [Applause on the Republican side.] *
I do not doubt that the sharp criticisms of Roosevelt and his
sonality and his past speeches and writings are all born of the d
the Democrats have of the man as our candidate.
I believe that President Roosevelt represents in his own ca
in his own utterances, in his own position to-day, the highest i
and best sentiment of the Republicans of the United States. I
lieve that his whole career has been a protest against the der(
izing, antiquated, and obnoxious ideas of the Democratic party
believe that the people of the United States have confidence in
integrity, and I know they have. I believe his career as Prcsi
has been one of the most brilliant that has ever graced and ado
the head of the Government of the United States, and I speak
no extravagance when I say that his judgment upon the greet 1
lie questions of the day has been unerring. I speak calmly and
liberately, and measure my words when I say that he is in exact
perfect accord with the best sentiment and the truest instirct
the Republicans of the U. S., and yet the Democratic party's 
fest purpose is to enter the campaign of 1904 with the silly b
cry, "Personal detraction and personal abuse of Theodore Roo ev
I warn the gentleman from North Carolina [Mr. KITCHUI ]
that rock upon which he is pounding-the eternal principles of 
and justice and Republicanism-is too securely anchored to be r
by any such attack. The waves may dash against it in vai,.
me remind the getleman-usin the l  anguage of Scripture — i
pointed out that some of us were not originally believers in t2
velt, and we agree to it; but let me tell him the times have c]l
and the stone that the builders tried to reject has become tie
of the  epuban corer.
t-1


I




"MR.ll~L~~ BR~~~~2~:~                R~IE:~AI6f
"MR. BRYAN'S OPINION OF JUDGE PARKER."
tract from remarks of Hon. M..       TD in House of Representatives,
printed in daily Congressional Record, June 20, 1904.
Quite frequently within the past few    days gentlemen upon the
other side of te floor have been sounding the praises of one Judge
Parker, of New Tork, wh, itis said, is     be the Democratic Presidential nominee. So little is  n  n of him here that one gentleman
upon this floor, most earnest in his behalf, was unable, in response
to interrogatories by the gentleman from   Indiana [Mr. LANxIS], to
give either the first name or the postoffice address of his candidate.
His chief political manager is Ex-Senator David B. Hill, of New
York, and under his manipulation and control the recent Democratic
convention in that State indorsed Judge Parker for the Presidency
and adopted a platform which is understood to be to his liking and
upon which he is willing to stand. The suggestions in that platform
are put forth in the hope that they will be adopted by the Democratic national convention. Mr. Bryan, the idolized standard bearer
of the Democratic party during the last two Presidential campaigns,
has some views upon this New York platform and upon the candidacy of Judge Parker, which can not fail to interest Republicans
as well as Democrats and they are worthy of consideration here.
They were delivered within the past 48 hours before a vast assemblage
of people in the Second Regiment Armory, in the City of Chicago.
SPEECH OF MB. BlUYAN-ADDRESS AT THE SECOND
REGIMENT ARMORY.
I regard as available all condidates who are in favor of making the
Democratic party an honest, earnest, and courageous exponent of the
rights and Interests of the masses; and I regard as unavailable all who
are in sympathy with or obligated to the great corporations that to-day
dominate the policy of the Republican party and seek through the reorganizers to dominate the policy of the Democratic party. I have no favorites among those on our side and no special antagonism to those who
represent the reorganizers. I believe that the line should be drawn between
principles, not between men, and that men should only be considered as
they may be able to advance or retard the progress of Democracy. *  *  *
When, some two years ago, I became satisfied that ex-Senator David
B. Hill was planning to be a candidate I pointed out the objections to
his candidacy. When the Cleveland boom was launched I pointed out the
objections to his candidacy, and now that Mr. Parker seems to be the
leading candidate (though not the only candidate) among the reorganizers,
I desire to present some reasons why he can not be considered as an available candidate for a Democratic nomination, and I find these reasons not
in his personality, but in his position upon public questions. For a year
he has been urged to speak out and declare himself upon the important
Issues of the coming campaign, but he has remained silent.
If this silence meant that nobody knew his views, those who have been
loyal to the party in recent years would stand upon an equal footing with
those who deserted, but it is evident now that while to the public generally
his views are unknown they are well known to those who are urging his
nomination. Whatever doubt may have existed on this subject heretofore
has been dispelled by the platform adopted by the New York State convention, and taking this platform as a text I am sanguine enough to believe
that I can prove to every unbiased mind that Judge Parker is not a fit
man to be nominated either by the Democratic party or by any other party
that stands for honesty and fair dealing in politics. I can not hope to
convince those who favor deception and fraud in politics, but I am satisfied
that we now have evidence sufficient to convict Judge Parker of absolute
unfitness for the nomination. If he did not know of the platform in advance,
if he did not himself dictate it or agree to it, he has allowed it to go out
as his utterance, for the convention was dominated by his friends and
adopted a resolution presenting him as the candidate of the State. * * *
The fifth plank reads:  Opposition to trusts and combinations that
oppress the people and stife healthy industrial competition.
This is the antitrust plank of the platform I At leastt is the only
plank in which the trust is mentioned by name. The plank contains fourteen words and it will be noted that the opposition is not to all monopolies,
or even to all trusts, but simply to those that "oppress the people and
stifte healthy industrial competition." That is the position taken by Judge
Brewer in his separate opinion. He contends that the Sherman law was not
Intended to prevent all restraint of trade, but only "unreasonable restraint,"
and so Mr. Hill and the other New York friends of Judge Parker so have
worded their trust plank as to make their meaning uncertain. They have
so worded the plank as to present the trust view of the question, rather
thathan the view entertained by the people at large.
In order to excite the opposition of the friends of Judge Parker the
trust must be shown to be "oppressive."  It must be shown that It is not
only stifling Industrial competition, but that it is stifling a "healthy industrial competition."   The trust magnates claim that the object of the trust
Is to stifle unhealthy industrial competition and to promote a "healthy
Industrial competition."  The qualifying words used in this very brief and
ambiguous plank destroy whatever vitality it might have had without them.
The Kansas City platform declared a private monopoly to be indefensible
and intolerable. It not only arraigned private monopoly as an unmitigated
evil, but it pointed out specific remedies for the destruction of this evil.
Compare the Kansas City platform with the cowardly straddling, anti-trustor rather trust-plank of the New York platform and you will understand
why Mr. Hill and Judge Parker are so afraid of the Kansas City platform.
The New York platform is a dishonest platform, fit only for a dishonest
party. No one but an artful dodger would stand upon it. The submission
of such a platform to the voters of a State is an insult to their intelligence,
for it is intended to deceive them, and a deliberate attempt to deceiveespecially so clumsy an attmpt as this platform is-is reflection upon the
brains of those to whom it is submitted,
t2




I


"THEIR PLAN IOF 1                CAN THEY MAKE IT WORK
NOW?"
I"NORTHE3          STATES HAVE BUSINESS INTERESTS
WHOSE OWNERS MUST BE SOOTHED INTO
A FEELING OF SECURITY."
Extract from remarks of lon. J. T. McCLEARY, printed in daily Congressional Record, June 20, 1904.
If I were to make a guess, Mr. Chairman, I should say that this year,
exactly sixty years later, our Democratic brethren would try to repeat the
essential parts of their plan of 1844. Can they make it work now?
The only way for the Democrats to win the election in 1844 was to
nominate for the Presidency a southern man of not very pronounced or
well-known views on the tariff question, but who could be trusted to
co-operate with the southern Democratic leaders, and then to nominate for
Vice-President some northern man well known to be a protectionist, so that
the party could stand for "free trade" in the South and for protection in
the North. James K. Polk, of Tennessee, was made the nominee for the
Presidency, and George M. Dallas, of Pennsylvania, for the Vice-Presidency.
In the South the cry was, "Polk, Dallas, and free trade!" In the North
the cry was, "Polk, Dallas, and the tariff of '42!"
The nomination of George M, Dallas for Vice-President appealed to the
State pride of Pennsylvania, which was then as now a strong protectionist
State. Under the impression that Dallas was a protectionist and that therefore the ticket was a "safe" one, the State of Pennsylvania went Democratic and Polk and Dallas were elected. *  *  *
The Democratic party to-day owes whatever hopes it may entertain
of success in the coming campaign to the existence of what is known as
"the solid South."  It is important that we get, if possible, a just conception of the significance of that fact.,
In the first place, it will not be denied anywhere that-regardless of
who the Democratic nominee may be or what may be the platform on which
he stands-the Democratic party knows in advance that it can with absolute certainty count on the electoral votes of the States of the South.
fHence in a convention it is not necessary to seriously consider the wishes of
the South, either as to a candidate or as to a platform, so long as the
candidate is personally reputable and decent.
The problem of the Democratic managers will be to get the remaining
electoral votes necessary to an election. These must be secured in the
North. A large city offers the best field for certain northern Democratic
methods, so the Democratic managers pick out New York State, with its
great metropolitan city, and Illinois, with its Chicago, as the best fighting
ground. Then it will be necessary to carry, in addition, one or two States
of the size of Indiana, New Jersey, and Wisconsin.
In general, then., the problem before the Democratic campaign managers is how to carry those Northern States.
New York City can be made to supply a generous majority; but in
these days of "publicity" there is a limit to such possibilities. The Republicans must be kept from "coming down to the Harlem" with an overwhelming majority, so a candidate must be selected and a platform   must be
framed that will appeal to the people "up State."  A candidate from New
York State itself can naturally be relied on to appeal to State pride, and
hence a New York man would, per se, have strong claims on the nomination for President.
But the platform must be such as to help in carrying those two States
and also the remaining States required. It must be framed with special
reference to carrying the Northern States required. Those Northern States
have business interests whose owners must, by the platform, be soothed
into a feeling of security. Above all things, then, the platform must have
the appearance of conservatism.   Inasmuch as the issue this year will
be the tariff, the Democratic platform will, for several reasons, probably
not be as frank and outspoken as it was in 1892. It will probably contain
some "glittering generality" about "tariff revision along conservative lines.'
But whatever the platform promises may be, Mr. Chairman, the thing
to remember is that Democratic platform promises are absolutely unreliable.  I say this in all kindness, with the full recognition of the fact
that there are untold thousands of individual Democrats who are men of
the highest integrity.
But there is a very plain and easily understood reason why Democratic
platform promises can not be relied on.
It all hinges on the existence of that "solid South."  At election tie
"solid South" can be absolutely depended upon to give every one of its
electoral votes to the Democratic nominee, so that in the convention, whicl
frames the platform, the wishes of the solid South can be safely treated
with indifference. Sut when it comes to passing a tariff act in Congress
after the election, the South will largely control the situation, because the
South will furnish the bulk of the votes necessary to pass the bill. la
other words, the platform  must be made to please certain States in the
North, but te bill must be   ade to   ease the States of the South, who
entertain different opinions. The promise will be dictated by the Northera
States, the Xerformancese by the Southen States.
t-3




I








I




RERGANIZED DEMOCRATIC PARTY ANMW ITS
CANDIDATE,"
tra:tt from remarks of Hon. GILBERT N. HA UGEN in House
of Representatives, April 5, 1904.:
I want to express my sympathy to the Democratic party in their
hour of turmoil, confusion, and distress, wandering about like a rudderless ship encountering shoals and rocks, tossed about on the high
seas of disruption, without issue or hope of reaching an agreement
on either candidate or platform.
For the information of those who have cherished the hope of a
reconciliation of the Democratic party, I read to you from the Washington Post of April 24, reporting Bryan's Chicago speech on the
New York platform, the reorganized Democratic party and its prospective candidate-the party eulogized and defended by the eloquent gentleman from New York, Mr. COCKRAS, in his two hour freetrade speech of last Saturday:
PLATFORM FOR A DODGER.
The New York platform is a dishonest platform, fit only for a dishonest party. No one but an artful dodger would stand upon it. The
submission of such a platform to the voters of a State is an insult to their
intelligence, for it is intended to deceive them and a deliberate attempt to
deceive, especially so clumsy an attempt as this platform, is a reflection
upon the brains of those to whom it is submitted.
This platform proves that the opposition to the Kansas City platform Is
not opposition to silver, but opposition to every needed reform and opposition to all that the masses desire.
I had expected that a platform prepared by Mr. Hill for Judge Parker
would be evasive and lacking in frankness, but I did not conceive that any
body of men calling themselves Democrats would present such a platform as
a recommendation of a candidate. * * *
tCan anyone doubt that with such a platform as was adopted in New
York and with a candidate whose conscience would permit him to run upon
such ^ platform-does anyone doubt that with such a platform and candidate the party would be mortgaged beforehand to the corporations that
are now using the Goverpment as a private asset and plundering the people
at will? *  *  *
I for one am not willing that the Democratic party shall become the
tool of the corporations. I am not willing that it shall be the champion of
organized wealth.
ADVICE TO DEMROCACY.
Let us drive out of the party every Democrat who betrays his trust,
every official who would administer the office for his private advantage. Let
us make Democracy stand not only for good government, for honest goveriment, but for a government "of the people, by the people, and for the
people."
Having been driven to this unfortunate condition, some have seen
fit to avenge themselves by maliciously attacking our worthy President, charging him with extravagance and unjust expenditures.
It is to be regretted that you should stultify yourselves by resorting to the use of absurd, malicious, contemptible falsehoods and misrepresentations, manufactured and inspired by yellow journals, and
which are without foundation or a word of truth in them,
Indeed, you are entitled to sympathy. With this eruption in your
ranks and your distracted condition, confronted with progress, prosperity, and a happy condition of the people, brought about under
the seven years of Republican rule, Republican principles, and Rtepublican policies, it is plain to you and to everybody that your defeat is certain next November. This is unfortunate for you, viewing it from a political standpoint; but how fortunate it is for the
American people that we have such a clean, fearless, honest, patriotic President.
One who has labored so earnestly, conscientiously, and faithfully
to fulfill his burdensome duties, always in thorough sympathy with
the best interests of all the people, always pursuing his duty with
fidelity, dignity, and rectitude of purpose, dominated by noble and
lofty ideals; a statesman, a diplomat, fortified by a wealth of learning; a man whose character, success, record, both private and plblic.
is without a stain of immorality, deception, fraud, or corruption,
his loyalty to principles, his devotion to truth, his untiring energy,
his lofty ideals and conscientious work, entitle him to the respect
and adnmiration of all.
Such is Theodore Roosevelt, the man whom the Republican party
will present as its candidate in the coming election.


I




Extracts from remarks of HD                   V. MORRELL in House of
Representatives, April 22,.1904.
Perhp 4at this moment t would be well 'to read -what his old friend
Bryan says concerning the Sphinx in a speech delivered by him in
Chicago on April 23, as reported in the Nebraska State Journal of 'April
'24, 1904, his subject being "The New York platform."
MR. 3):BRYAN'S ADDRESS.
As It- is somewhat unusual for a political speech to be made as this
One is to-night, let me preface my remarks with an explanation.
I have hired this hall and I introduce myself because I do not care to
speak 'Innder the auspices -of any club- or organization which Is committed
to -any particular aspirant for office. My concern is not about the name or
the personality of the nominee, but about the principles for which the
Democratic party is to stand. While many of the papers, seem to assume
that the contest for the Democratic nomination is necessarily between Judge
Parker and Mr. HlBAST, and that every Democrat must either be for one
or the other, such a position Is is illogical and without foundation.
Those who: are classed as reorganizers-and by that I mean those who
would, carry the: party back to the position that it occupied under Mr.n
Cleveland's Administration ---are not entirely agreed among themselves as
to the proper candidateo upon.whom to concentrate their votes, and so those
who are in sympathy with the spirit of our recent platforms may differ as
to the relative availability of those who represent the progressive element
of the party. My: own position is one of neutrality.
I regard as available all candidates who are in favor of making the
Democratic party an honest, earnest, and courageous exponent of the rights
and interests of the masses, and I regard as unavailable all who are in
sympathy with, or obligated to, the great corporation that to-day dominates
the policy of the Republican party and seek, through reorganizers, to dorminate the policy of the Democratic party. I have no favorites among those
on our side, no special antagonism to those who represent the reorganizers.
PARKER WILL NOT DO.:When, some two years ago, I became satisfied that ex-Senator David BP
Hill was planning to be a candidate I pointed out. the objections to hiU
candidacy. When the Cleveland boom     was launched I pointed out the
objections to his' candidacy, and now that Mr. Parker seems to be the
leading candidate. tbough not the only candidate among the reorganizers,
I *desire to present 8some reasons why he can not be considered as an available candidate for a Democratic nomination, and I find these reasons, not
in his personality, but in his position uponr public questions:
For a year he has been urged to speak out and declare himself upon
the important issues of the c ing cming campaign, but he has remained sileut.
f this sifence meant thsilence me an t nobody knew his views, those who have been
loyal to the party'in *recent years would stand upon an equal footing with
those who deserted, but it is evident now that while to the public his views
are unknown, they are- well known to those who are urging his nomination.
Whatever doubt may have existed on this subject heretofore has been
dispelled by the platform adopted by the New York State convention, and
taking this platform as a text I am sanguine enough to believe that I can
prove to every unbiased mind that Judge Parker is not a fit man to be
nominated either by the Democratic party or by anyo other party that stands
for honesty or fair dealing in politics.
ISSUES BEFORE THE COUNTRY.
What are the issues before the country? The trust question is certainly an issue, and yet there is nothing in that platform that gives any
encouragement to the opponents of the trusts. There is not a word or
syllable that binds a person elected on such a platform to do anything that
the trusts are unwilling to have done. The Kansas City platform stated
the party's position on the trust question, but the New York platform not
only fails to indorse the last national platform, but also fails to propose any
definite or positive plan of relief.
Imperialismt i s an issue. ' Our Government is now  administering a
colonial policy according to to t  political principles employed by George III.
a century and a quarter ago, and yet there is not in this platform a single
word relating to the question of imperialism, not a plank that defines the
party's position on that subject, not a protest against the surrender of the
doctrines of self-government, The Kansas City platform stated the party's
opposition to a colonial policy, but the New York platform not only fails
to indorse the t Kansas City platform, but falls to take any position at all
on this important question.
PLANX ON TARIFF LAME.
On the tariff question no issue is joined. It was reasonable to suppose
that on this question, at least, something would be said; Mr. Hill and Judge
Parker seenm to be as much afraid of tariff questions as of other issues.
The. money tuestion. is ignored entirely. No reference is made to bimetalissm at any ratio-not even to international bimetalism, to which Mr.
Hill seemed to be so attached in the Chicago convention. No reference
is'made to the measure now before Congress to melt up nearly $600,000,000
legal tender silver dollars into subsidiary coin that is only a limited legal
tender. Nothing is said about the asset currency which is a part of the
scheme of the financiers.' The platform ignores the incom'e tax; it fails to
indorse the election of 9Senators by direct vote, and also omits the plank of
the Kansas City platform denouncing the corporate dominatio  n n politics.
PLATFORM IS DISHONEST.
The New -York oplatform is -a dishonest platform, fit only for a dishonest party. No one but an artful dodger would stand upon it.
The subisaision of such a platform to the voters of the State is an
insult to their intelltgenc e, for it is intended to deceive them, and a deliberate attempt to deceive-especially so clumsy an nattempt as this platform
is-is a reflection. upon the: brains of those to whom it is submitted.
This platform proves that the opposition to o the Kansas City platform is
not opposition to silver, but opposition to every needed reform and oppos;ition to all that the masses desire.
I had, expected that a platform prepared by Mr. Hill for Judge Parker
would be evasive and lack-ing fin frankness, but I did not 0onceive that ani
body of men calling themselves Democrats would present such a platfors
as a recommendation of a candidate.
If we are to take the New York platform as an indication of what the
next Democratic platform Is to be in case the reorganizers control the conovention, then who will be able to deny the secret purpose of the reorganizers
to turn the party over to predatory wealth? *  *  *


r- ) 




:1
m
m
m
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
1
4
t
1
I
II


I




TO,
" N O T A F IT   MA N T O E N O MNl         'Y  TEN
Extract from speech of bon. WILLIAM      i JNNiYG  BIAKin     Ccago,
prtnd in daily Congrcssional Record. June 20, 1904.
Now that Mr. Parker seems to be the leading candidate (though not the
only candidate) among the reorganizersI desire to present Some reasons
why he can not be considered as an available candidate for a Democratic
noaination, and I find these reasons not in his personality, but in his posl
tion upon public questions. He has been urged to speak out and declare
dm elf upon the important issues of the campaign, he has remained silent.
ift this silence meant that nobody knew his views, those who have been
loyal to the party in recent years would stand upon an equal footing with
those, who deserted, but it is evident now that while to the public generally
his views are unknown they are well known to those who are urging his
nominartio.  Whatever doubt may have existed on this subject heretofore
has been dispelled by the platform adopted by the New York State convention, and taking this platform as a text I am sanguine enough to believe
that I can prove to every unbiased mind that Judge Parker is not a fit man
to be nominated either by the Democratic party or by amy other party that
stands for honesty and fair dealing in politics. I can not hope to convince
bI te who favor deception and fraud in politics, but I am satisfied that we
Inow have evidence sufficient to convict Judge Parker of absolute unfitness
for the nomination. If he did not know of the platform in advance, if he
did not himself dictate it or agree to It, he has allowed it to go out as his
utterance, for the convention was dominated by his friends and adopted a
resolution presenting him as the candidate of the State. *  *  *.What are the issues before the country?  The trust question is certainly an Issue, and yet there is nothing in that platform that gives any
encouragement to the opponents of the trusts. There is not a word or
syllable that binds a person elected on such a platform to do anything that
trusts are unwilling to have done. The Kansas City platform stated the
party's position on the trust question, but the New York platform not only
tails to indorse the last national platform, but also fails to propose any
definite or positive plan of relief.,
Imperialism is an issue. Yet there is not tn this platform a single
word relating to the question of imperialism; not a plank that defines the
party's position, on that subject, not a protest against the surrender of the
doctrines of self-government. The Kansas City platform stated the party's
pposition to a colonial policy, the New York platform not only falls to Indorse
the Kansas City platform, but fails to take any position on this question.
The labor question is an issue. The laboring men have been before the
numerous committees of Congress endeavoring to secure three important
easures,   One is the arbitration of differences between corporations engaged in interstate commerce and their employees. Both the Chicago and
Kansas City Platforms declared in favor of arbitration, but the New York
platform not only fails to refer to the arbitration plank of these platforms,
but It fails to write a new plank covering this subject. *  *  *
The money question is ignored entirely, No reference is made to biretalism at any ratio-not even to international bimetalism to what Mr.
tilII seemed to be so attached in the Chicago convention.
I had expected that a platform prepared by M-r. Hl1 for Judge Parker
ould be evasive and lacking in frankness, but I did not conceive that any
body of men calling themselves Democrats would present such a platform as
a recommendation of a candidate. If we are to take the New York platform
s an indication of what the next Democratic platform is to be, in case the
reorganizers control the convention, then who will be able to deny the secret
purpose of the reorganizers to turn the party over to predatory wealth?
I for one am not willing that the Democratic party shall become the tool
of the corporations. I am not willing that it shall be the champion of organhzed wealth. And it is because I believe that the party has a higher mission
than to be the exponent of plutocracy that I am protesting against the
chemes of those who would put it into competition with the Republican party
for the support of Wall street financiers. For this reason I protest against
mortgaging the party to capitalists to secure an enormous corruption fund.
If any who are present to-night or who read what I say think that I
am trying to interfere with Democratic success, let me answer that no
Democrat Is more anxious for the party to succeed than I am. No one has
suffered more from dissensions and divisions in the party, and no one, I
believe, is more eager for the country to enjoy the great benefits which a
triumph of real Democracy would bring.    Put I do not desire that the
party shall win offices only. If that is the only purpose of the party let
its principles be abandoned and let its platform simply declare the party
hungry for the patronage. The lesson of 1894 shows the folly of hoping to
sin by a surrender to the corporations: but even if success could be bought
in such a way, It would not be worth the price.
No one can defend the Democratic party without defending its principles, and its principles ought to be so clearly set forth as to be easily
aoderstood. We ought to appeal to the conscience of the public. Let us
drive out of the party every Democrat who betrays his trust, every official
Sho would administer the office for his private advantage. Let us make
Democracy stand not only for good government-for honest governmento tfor a government 'of the people, by the people, and for the people."
Aod the first step in this direction is the adoption of a platform that recogtizes the right of the people to decide public questions as well as their
apacity for understanding public questions. To present a platform which
is evasive and ambiguous shows tnat those who wrote the platform either
istrust the people who are to act, or have purposes they desire to conceal.
-'The6 New York platform is ambiguous, uncertain, evasive, and dishonst. *It would, disgrace the Democrats of the nation to adopt such a piatorm, and it ought to defeat as an aspirant for a Democratic nomination
Ty man who would be willing to have it go forth as a declaration of his
lews on public questions. In Illinois, In Wisconsin, in \Michigan in Minltsota, in Indiana, in Ohio, and in every other State -that has not acted It
ehooves the Democrats to arouse themselves and organize-to the end that
to;y may prevent the consummation of the schemes of the reorganizers,
fbIeir scheme begins with the deception of the rank and file (of the party.
t is to be followed up by the debauching of the public with a camMpaign
tuad secured from;the corporations, and it is to be consummated by the
strania of the party organza~tiofa and of the country into the hands of
'isewho  ar  to-da  menacing   the liberties of th  cou yby   their  e lo tfeafth    roducers ofwealt
^.. - *!.   *,.. *i; " 1:  -  -    -:-        *; 






SOFVOTESIUWSTAR:~p~om             II 'SbdG~  B~kc~C A  -ft the
Rxtract tram statement by.:  TROAS ('. MoRAIC of Arkansas in th3
Rose o:f Represe-ntatXes, March- 1  1900, and printed;in  on ^ores:: In t:   Hou  Dece    r 1I      -O   the question,: Shall the, bill:pass? ittwastdc idd  in theaf: r v e. Yeas —lW9  Republicans, 11
D:emocras. Nays —14- 5 Dmra   ts, 5 Populists, $ Silverites.
YaAehon::::Adams   exander Aen, Me. Babcock; Bailey,
Ka       Biket; B anrha; Barney; Bartholi; Bingha; Borin
I;e:Boute,; B tll, Me. Bowersock; Brick; Bromwell -Brosius;
Browna B:;wow;; Bull; Burke, S. Dak.; Burkett; Burleigh; Burton; Butler; Caderhead; Cannon; Capron; Chickering; Clarke, N
HL:C; laton, N. Y. Cochrane, N. Y.; Conn        oper, Wi; Corliss: Cusins   Cromer; Crump; Crumpacker; Curtis; Cushman;
DaMe, Wis.:; Dill -Davenport, S. A.; Davidson; Dayton;    Denny;
Dick Do-lliver:; Dovener; Drigg; Driscoll; Eddy; Emerson; Esch;
Fais- Fit;zgerald, N. Y.; Fletcher; Fordney; Foss; Fowler; Freer;
Gamble;   Gardner, Mih.;r Gardner, N.fJ.; Gibson; Gll; Giltett,
Mass.; Graff   Graham   Geen e, Mass.; Grosvenor; Grout; Grow
Hamilton; Haugen; Hawley; Heatwole; Hedge; Hemenway- Henry,
Conn.; Hepburn; Hill; Hitt; Hoffecker; Hopkins; Howel}: Ht-l;
Jack; Jenkins; Jones, Wash; Kahn; Kerr; Ketcham; Knox; Lacey;
Landis; Lane; Lawrence; Levy; Linney; Littauer; Littlefield; Lrng;
Lorirter Loud   Loudenslager; Lovering; Lybrand; McAleer; Mel; MCtleary    McPherson; Mahon; Mann; Marsh; Mercer; Me
sick  Metcalf   Miller;  Minor; Mondell; Moody, Mass.; Moody,
Org.; Morgan; Morris; Mudd; Needham; O'Grady; Olmstead;
Qtjen; Overstreet; Packer, Pa.; Parker, N. J.; Payne; Pearce, Mo.;
Pearre;  Phillips  Powers; Prince; Pugh; Ray; Ieeder; Reeves;
Roberts, Mass.; Rodengerg;   Rppert; Russell; Scudder; Shattu;
Shelden; Sherman; Showalter; Smith, Ill.; Smith, H. C. Smith,
Samuel W.; Smith, Wm. Alden; Southard; Spalding; Sperry;
Sprague; Steele; Stevens, Minn. Stewart, N, J.; Stewart, N. Y.;
Stewart, Wis.; Sulloway; Tawney; Tayler, Ohio; Tayer; Thomas,
Iowa; Thropp; Tompkins; Tongue; Underhill; Van Voorhis; Wachter; Wadsworth; Wanger; Warner; Waters; Watson; Weaver;
Veeks; Weymouth; White; Wilson, N. Y.; Wright; Young, Pa.REPUBLICANS, 179; DEMOCRATS, 11.
Nays-Adamlson; Allen, Ky.; Allen, Miss.; Atwater; Bailey, Tex.;
Ball; Bankhead; Barber; Bartlett; Bell; Benton; Berry; Bradley;
Brantcy; Breazeale   Brenner; Brewer, Brundidge; Burke, Tex.;
Burlson; Burnett;Caldwell; Carmack; Chanler; Clark, Mo.; Clayton, Ala.; Cochran, Mo.; Cooney; Cooper, Tex.; Cowherd; Cox;
Crawford; Crowley   Curmmings; Cnsack; Daly, N. J.; Davenport,
S. W. Davis; De Armond; De Graffenreid; De Vries; Dinsaiore;
Dougherty   Elliott; Epes; Finley; Fitzgerald, Mass,; Fitzpatrick;
F    temin.  Foster; Fox; Gaines; Gaston; Gilbert; Glynn;  ordon;
Gren,:Pi.; Griffith; Griggs; Hall; Hay; Henry, Miss.; Henry, Tex.;
Howard;   Jet; Johnston; Jones, Va.; Kitchin; Kleberg    kluttz;
Lab; Lanham; Latimer; Lentz; Lester; Lewis; Little; Livingston;
Lloyd; McClellan; McCulloch; McDowell; McLain; McRae; Maddox;M ay; Meekison; Meyer, La.; Miers, Ind.; Moon; Muller;- Naplen;: NMeville; Newlands;  Noonan; Norton, OOhio; Norton, S. C.;
Otey; Piere Temn.; Polk; Quarles; Ransdell; Rhea, Ky.; Rhea, Va.;
Richardson; Ridgely; Ribrdan; Rixey; Robb; Robbins; Robinson,
ad.;: Robinson, Nebr.; Rucker; Ryan, N. Y.; Ryan, Pa.; Samon;
Shackelford;   Shafroth; Sheppard; Sibley; Sims; Slayden; Small;
Smith, Ky.; Snodgrass; Sparkman; Sight; Stark; Stephens, Tex.;
Stokes;  Sulzer; Sutherland; Swanson; Talbert; Tate; Taylor, Ala.;
Terry; Thomas, N. C     Turner; Underwood; Vandiver; Wheeler,
Ky,  Wil;liams, J. R      ts W. B.; Williams, W   Miss.; Wilson,
Idaho; Wilson, S. C.; Young, Va,; Zenor; Ziegler. —DE MOCiRATS,
142; POPULISTS 5; SILVERITES, 3.
Same bill in th;Senate, February 15, 19W.
te question s       the i (H. R. 1) pass, it w  decided n tle
afrmative, Yeas-44~ Republicans, 2 Gold Democrats. Nays-I le*
publcan, 23 Democrats,   Silverites, 2 'opulists.
Yeas-Aldrih; Allison; Beveride; Burrows;       Caffery; Carter;
Ctark, Wyoo; Cullom; Davis; Debe; Depew; Elkins; Fairbanks;
Forker;, Foser; Frye; Gears Hale    Hann; Hansborough;' Hawley; Hoar; Kean; Lindsay    Lodge McBride; McComas; MeCut —
r; MeMilltn     Man n     elson;  Penrose; Perkins; Platt, 'Ca.
Platt, N. Y.; Ptr    d  Quar; R; Scott; Sewe!!; Shoup; S
ma; Spooner; Thu' rston; Wetmore;    Wolcott-RE   PUBLIEANS,
44; DEMROCRATS,. 
Nay - a       e; Brry  Butler; Chandler;:Chiton  Clark,    ont.
Clay    kll;, Gulb   n; Daniel;   ari; Heitfeld J'es       k
Jones,: Nev, IKenne; Mi   cEnery; McLauni;  Martin; M     oney; IMCrgan; Peus; Rawli gs; Stew art Sullivan; Talaferro; Teller; Tilf:man; Turley; Vest-DEMO   CRATnS,    a; SILVERITES, 8$ PO'
JL1STS;, V; REPUBLICAN, 1.;I It7 <








Him




UNIV. OF MICIL
JUL f 92
SOUND




w~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~i
7777 ~1777
77777777 77
777777777777-~I
4'::-~~~~-; —~ —~~~~~~{ 4~~~:~d"-i~~~~~~'"'"~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~  ~~;~,;W?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ vk j a 
4  ~;                                                   4~~~~9 ~~~-:":" 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~  4~~~~~_;,                                     _~~:~ s~i i~IPr"; 
~~~~~rr5                                               ia:-.                                                          ~~ —