Rensselaer Semi-Weekly Republican, Volume 35, Number 33, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 26 December 1902 — POLITICAL COMMENT. [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

POLITICAL COMMENT.

< The Manufacturing West. The manufacturing Industries of the West are much more extensive than is commonly supposed. According to the last census in what may properly be called Western States there were two years ago a total of 225,287 manufacturing establishments, with an aggregate capital of $3,477,587,249, and au annual product of $5,252,311,029. In New England there were only about one-quarter as many manufacturing establishments as In the West, less than half the capital Invested and an annual production of less than two-fifths that of the West The census figures give Nebraska 5,414 manufacturing establishments. With $71,982,127 capital and an annual production of $143,990,102; lowa, 14,819 establishments, $102,733,103 capital and $204,617,877 product; Missouri, 18,759 establishments, $249,888,581 capital and $385,492,784 product; Minnesota, 11,114 establishments, $165,832,246 capital arid $262,655,881 product; Kansas, 7,830 establishments, 862 capital and $172,129,398 product; South Dakota, 1,639 establishments, $7,578,895 capital apd $12,231,289 product; Colorado, 3,570 establishments, $62,825,472 capital and $102,830,137 product. All . these are Independent Industries, many of them manufacturing the same line of goods that are produced by the combinations. They gfte employment to a great deal of labor, which greatly benefits the agricultural producers of these Western States. These industries are the competitors in their field of the combinations, and as such constitute a bulwark against monopoly. The Republican party believes that these independent Industries should be sustained and it insists that in order that they shall be it is necessary to give them tariff protection. It holds that the Democratic policy of free trade for trust made articles would inevitably result in driving out of business most of the independent industries, and while it might at the same time weaken the* combinations would not necessarily destroy them. It is the judgment of many who have given the subject thoughtful consideration that the application of the Democratic policy would result in creating international trusts, or combinations; which has been shown to be practicable. The people of the West should be profoundly interested In the question of maintaining their manufacturing Industries. They are of great value and are adding hundreds of millions annually to the wealth of the West. The free trade policy of the Democratic party, if it should be carried out, would be fatal to, most of, these industries.— Omaha Bee. , • • ; Frye Opposes Revision. Senator Frye, of Maine, does not sympathize with the agitation in favor of tariff revision. Speaking of *thls question the other day he “Talk of tariff revision is absurd. T-he country is ip the midst of great prosperity. Why shbuld we spoil it by entering upon legislation which would disarrange business relations and certainly cause depression over the country? There is no demand for it in Ne.w England. I suppose there may be people in Massachusetts who want some changes, but they always have a few. cranks in Massachusetts. The Republican who ran for Congress on a re vision platform was twice defeated in a Republican district. ’ “It is equally absurd to propose tariff revision as a means of regulating the trusts. Suppose we should attempt to reduce the tariff on articles made by trusts? Smaller concerns eggaged in similar business would be affected by the new rates just the same as the trusts themselves. What would be the result? Small concerns would be most severely harmed and some of them would be driven out of business entirely, while the trusts could better stand under the new conditions and would have a greater monoply than over." Senator Frye thinks it probable the Senate will complete such amendments to the Sherman anti-trust law as to correct the more obnoxious of the evils connected with the trusts. “I like the ideas put' forth in the Pittsburg speech of Attorney General Knox,” said he. “There 4s no : h«pe of restricting trusts by an amendment to the Constitution. If such an amendment should receive the necessary votes in the Senate and House, it could never be ratified by the States. It' would lie regarded as too great an invasion of the rights of the States.” • Protection's Utility. It appears very “ridiculous” to the Burlington Gazette “to base an argument In favor of a protective tariff on the presumption that It promotes prosperity.” Has Burlington no taxes for itinerant merchants? Is there no sentiment in Burlington based on the presumption that the prosperity of the city is promoted by buying at home? Are the artisans and laborers of Burlington satisfied that it is all the same to them whether they do the work of Burlington or whether the orders are placed In Chicago or St. Louis? Prosperity even for the few cannot long continue without employment for the many in productive industry. It is ease to say that Burlington people of the laboring class who are not working have pooy credit at the store* If conditions arc such ns to enforce idleness the loss of credit Is expanded, and the lose of credit brings want, dis-

tress, business failure and panic. If things stop congestion follows, prices drop, money is locked up and the business of everybody is to make the worst of the situation. The thing to do, if possible, is to keep the machinery going and the markets open. If there is plenty of ivork at a fair price prosperity is in the air. With opportunity to work abundant It is ridiculous to make argument against prosperity. How is labor to be well employed if left to nurse its shins and suck its thumbs? There must be work to do and remunerative wages. The presumption is that Burlington doer not need to import labor for Its steady jobs, and no more does the United States. The protective policy is based on the presumption that it is wise to do as much of our own work as we can. Therefore in the business of raising revenue from imports the protective policy aims to give the advantage to home producers, to the end that our home labor may be prosperous. Protection promotes prosperity.—Sioux City Journal.

Tom Reed's Last Words. In an article contributed to the North American Review for December exSpeaker Thomas B. Reed adds materially to the sum of human knowledge and assists greatly toward a clearer understanding of the tariff and trust problem. No man who writes for publication surpasses Mr. Reed in the faculty of logical analysis and the plain presentment of facts and conclusions. Certainly no one succeeds better in the avoidance of the hysterical and the adherence to the sane and level beaded method. The spirit of prudence, moderation and conservatism rules throughout. Mr. Reed is not a believer in .quack remedies for a condition that calls for nothing mere radical than patience and common sense. Trusts are with us. So have they always been in one form or another. It is only because we are more prosperous than ever before that the trusts are more numerous and bigger than ever before. Mr. Reed is of the opinion that the trust problem will solve itself; that those will survive which deserve to survive, and those will perish which deserve to perish; that legislation of any soft at present offers no solution of the problem. Least of all, tariff legislation. On this point Mr. Reed is most convincing. Tariff tinkering as a trust remedy could not possibly prove anything but mischievous and hurtful. He s closes by saying: “We pught’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 hunt for disaster. That will come in due time.” The surest way to hasten disaster is to tinker the tariff in any way or in riny form whatsoever, whether by direct legislative action, by swapping trade privileges, or by the creation of a tariff commission. All these are good things—if let alone.—American Economist. ’ s

Coincidence to Be Avoided. Democratic papers are calling attention to the fact that since 1837 McKinley was the first President to have a Congress in sympathy with him during the middle of his Presidential term, and now President Roosevelt has the same advantage. Of course they give us good advice, anfl we can neither be too thankful for the same not too careful not to follow it. It might not be amiss to say to them, in a spirit of kindness, that if the people ever forget the hardships of 1893-96 and again intrust Democrats with the government, they should be careful not to get at the same time a Congress composed of calamity howlers and a President who hates the industries of his country. They then might expect to z live long enough to see another Democrat in the White House.—Exchange. An Economic Truth. f “We can stand high prices," says Secretary Shaw, “far better than we can stand idle labor." Here is an economic truth which may well set our Massachusetts wage earners to thinking. Of what avail is beef two cents a pound and coal sixty-seven cents a ton cheaper to the man who has no work and no money to buy?—Boston Journal. _ —»■■■■.- ■ Would Destroy lheni AIL

The Empress of Germany has • special bodyguard, comdatlng of twenty, four picked soldiers, from the taiteat men of the lofty imperial guard. * ■ - - -w