Democratic Sentinel, Volume 20, Number 2, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 17 January 1896 — POLITICS OF THE DAY [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

POLITICS OF THE DAY

IMPORTED STEEL RAILS, The signing of a contract for the importation of 10,000 tons of steel rails will probably induce some of our McKinley contemporaries to assert that the reduction of the tariff duty from $13.44 to $7.84 per ton has already begun to “paralyze” the domestic steel rail industry. The truth is, however, that the importation has been invited and caused by the greed of the Steel Rail Combination, which persists in exacting a ring price out of all fair proportion to the cost of raw materials or the price of other similar products. This price is S2B per ton at Eastern mills, and $29 at mills in the West. There has been permitted no such competition as would show what Is' a fair price for steel rails in this country. Last year, when the cost of raw materials was so low—Bessemer pig iron selling at lower figures here than iu England—the price of rails was kept up by the combination. It costs but very little more to make steel rails than to make steel billets, but the price of billets now is $lB at Pittsburg, while the price of rails there, and elsewhere, is S2B. If the price of rails were determined by competition, as the prices of Bessemer pig iron and steel billets are, It would be impossible to import rails over the duty of $7.84, except at considerable loss. At present the price of English rails, free on board, is $21.87, and we suppose they can be delivered

at this port, duty aud charges added, for about s3l. Freight charges from American mills must be added to the ring price of S2B, but even after this addition has been made rails cannot be imported at this port to advaiitage. The rails covered by the contract in question are, it is stated, to be shipped to a Pacific or Gulf port, where the cost of domestic rails is considerably increased by freight charges. But imports even at such ports are clearly caused by the unlawful exactions of the domestic combination, exactions which the tariff duty enables them to make, up to a certain point.—New York Times. President Cleveland’s Comparison. In a pithy paragraph in Ids annual message the President makes the following ' striking comparison between the Wilson tariff and the McKinley law: “By command of the people a customs revenue system, designed for the protection and benefit of favored classes at the expense of the great mass of our countrymen, and which, while inefficient for the purpose of revenue, curtailed our trade relations and impeded our entrance to the markets bf the world, has been superseded tariff policy which in principle Is based upon a denial of the right of the government to obstruct the avenues to cttlf people’s cheap living or lessen their comfort and contentment for the sake of according especial advantages to favorites, and which, while encouraging our intercourse and trade with other nations, recognizes the fact that American self-reliance, thrift and ingenuity can build up our country’s industries and develop its resources more surely than enervating paternalism.” The small-fry Republicans who have been “demanding” that the President should sign a bill restoring the McKinley law, in event of its being passed by Congress, will learn from this that the author of the tariff-reform message of 1887 stands to-day where he did thenin favor of a tariff for revenue, and against all “protective” legislation.

Republican Micawbers. The proposition to re-enact the McKinley tariff law, which some of the more venomous protectionists insist upon, would not be consistent with the plan of maintaining the gold reserve by Increasing revenue. As a revenue producer the tariff of 1894 brings more money Into the treasury than did the tariff of 1890. Some substitute for the income tax will have to be temporarily adopted, as a companion piece for the McKinley monstrosity, in order to bring revenue within hail of ordinary expenditure. The Republican leaders In Congress who will really control the ■ work of legislation are not such fools as to stake the next year's elections on the hazard of popular vacillation and wavering. Whatever the spoiled Infants of tariff coddling may expect, the astute Republican leaders are only mad north-northwest in their protectionism. They will not stultify themselves by making false moves. They will prefer to do nothing they shall not be obliged to do, as the custodians of legislative power and initiative, to keep the wheels of government moving.'—Philadelphia Record. Action in Order, Not Sneers. During the years he lias been in public life Mr. Reed has been chiefly known as a critic of what was being done; He has been one-of the moit 1 ■successful faultfinders of bis generation. His sneer has passed into history, and it <? tj-o-.oiv e •

may be said that it has been partially directed against members of all parties, Including his own. He has objected and obstructed in a way which has apparently given great satisfaction to him. He has done these things tp tbe utter lack of constructive statesmanship. The time has come when he may no longer object, when he may no longer obstruct He must act.—Des Moines Leader. “Enervating Paternalism.” In his message to Congress President Cleveland speaks of “enervating paternalism.” The phrase is good. A paternalistic government is destructive of Individualism, and individualism is the safety of a republic. The socialist would have government do everything fftr everybody. The Democrat proposes that government shall do nothing for anybody that he is better able to do for himself. The Republican party is socialistic, and socialistic at its worst. The fundamental of socialism Is that the government shall be parent of all. The Republican modification of the socialistic doctrine is that the government shall be the parent of a few and the step-parent of the many. Paternal government is enervating. The citizen of a republic who should be Independent Is taught by Republican statesmen that he may lean upon government for support under all circumstances; that exertion on his part, mental or physical, need be made but per

functorily, because government will supply the strength and resource that if left to himself he would labor for. The Idea of socialistic government practiced by the Republican party when it has the chance is In substance the idea that the calf shall continue always to take Its nourishment from the udder of the cow and never assume the state and condition of the cow. They protect infant industries—industries that were born seventy-five years ago—and are still, according to Republican theory, in their infancy.—Chicago Chronicle. Treasury Receipts Improving. If the rate at which the United States treasury Is now receiving from all sources continue to the end of this month, the total for the present calendar year will be more than $317,000,000. The total receipts for the calendar year 1894 were only $301,705,070. So that this yehr’s receipts will probably exceed last year’s by at least $15,000,000. The receipts fluctuate from month to month considerably. But the chances are that those of December will be rather larger than those of November. There is therefore reason for the hope whl eh it is said the treasury officials entertain of a continued improvement In the revenue. It Is very noticeable that the customs duties collected this year are much larger than the returns from internal revenue—a fact which shows that there is no need of tariff tinkering. But even the receipts from internal revenue are now much larger than they were In tJhe summer.—New York Herald.

Protection Against American Sheep. The report cabled by the World’s London correspondent yesterday that the British Government is about to shut out American sheep, as a concession to the farming class that supported the Conservatives in the elections, is interesting and instructive. The Ohio idea in this country is that our sheep need protection against the pauper sheep of Europe. But here are the sheep raisers of England calling for an embargo on American sheep upon the transparent jdea of danger from contagion. What they really want is their own “home market.” It is a standing refutation of the disparaging contention of the McKinleyites that sheep raising can not be carried on here without the sustaining help of a tax on the clothing of all the people, that free-trade England has long sustained on her high-priced land nearly as many sheep per capita of the population as we have kept under protection on our cheap land.—New York World. Bright Outlook for Democracy. The Democrats of New England have been particularly successful in municipal elections. Every city in Rhode Island but one w’ent Democratic in the recent municipal elections. Many Massachusetts cities went Democratic for the first time in years. Democratic Boston was redeemed. The Democrats cannot complain of the results in municipal elections, and doesn’t this show that the Presidential fight next year will see some vigorous work done by the Democrats?—Utica Observer. Needs to Be Cautious. Speaker Reed is having more trouble in making up his committees than he anticipated, and he will not be able to announce them this week. Mr. Reed has appointed committees before, but never with the Presidency depending upon their personnel. It is no wonder he is cautious.—Kansas City World.