Jasper County Democrat, Volume 12, Number 18, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 5 June 1909 — FOR FREE RIDES [ARTICLE]

FOR FREE RIDES

A Great Struggle With the Senate Against the Proposed Duty A STRONG PROTEST NEEDED The Payne Bill Struck Off the Duty on Hides, but Aldrich Plans to Put It Back at the Demand of the Beef Trust—The Farmer Gets No Benefit From the Hide Duty—The Independent Tanners and Shoe Manufacturers the Country Over Make a Hard Fight For Their Industry. Will the United States grant a monopoly of tanning leather to the beef packers at Chicago, In addition to that which they have already in the production of beef? Thut is the real question involved in the contest for free hides now going on at Washington. In this contest there are on the one side the packing Interests and on the other side all the tanners and shoe manufacturers of the country as well as the consumers. The Packers Crippling the Tanners. The pnekers already control the production of the greater part of the hides produced in the United States. Under the present Dlngiey tariff they have for twelve years been enabled to get a high price for their hides by reason of the duty of 15 per cent on the I foreign article, and they have grown rich during this period, while the tan- ; ners of leather have had smaller profits , during these years of prosperity than ever before in a like period. These tanners have been looking forward for a long time to a revision of the tariff, In the hope for relief from the Injury they have felt from the duty on hides. , Recently the Chicago packers have engaged largely in the business of tanning leather and are now using their production, of. hldea and others which

they purchase for this purpose. The independent tanners must therefore either abandon the business or get their supplies of raw material from foreign countries. But they will be at a great disadvantage in tanning leather In competition with the packers. They do not object to a fair competition, but they do not want the government to give the packers a special advantage over them in the shape of a duty on foreign hides. In short, they do not want a tanning monopoly to be created by the tariff for the packers, thus putting out the people who have grown up In the business. All Loss and No Gain For ths Farmer. A pretence Is made that the farmers and cattle raisers get some benefit from the Increased price of hides caused by the duty. It has been shown conclusively, however, that this Is not the case, as the price of the animal is based on Its beef value and not on the value of the hide, which Is a very minor part The packer who takes off the hide and sells it Is the one who gets the Increased price because of the duty. All intelligent farmers know very well that the packers pay little or none of this Increased value of the hide to the farmer when they buy his cattle. The duty on hides does, however, add to the cost of the shoes worn by his family and the harness used on his horses. Moreover, the duty on hides does not cause the production of a single additional hide In this country, because Rattle are raised for beef and not for the hide. This country does not and cannot produce a sufficient quantity of hides. It Is therefore most absurd and wrong to injure the leather and shoe manufacturers of the country by depriving them of the raw material need'ed In their business and to give a practical monopoly to the big packers. The Consumers Must Protest. The Payne bill as passed by the House of Representatives made hides free, but It is the Intention of the senate to restore the duty of 15 per cent on hides. A vigorous protest should be made by the people against this duty, the only effect of which would be to foster a monopoly and add to the cost of a necessity of Ilf&