Rensselaer Semi-Weekly Republican, Volume 35, Number 98, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 14 August 1903 — POLITICAL COMENT [ARTICLE]

POLITICAL COMENT

Fxtra Session Nov. D. It Is authoritatively announced bySenator Lodge, as the result of a recent visit to Oyster Bay, that the President has fixed upon Nov. 9 as tbe day on which Congress will assemble In an extra session, called primarily for the approval of the Cuban treaty, which was ratified by the Senate last March, qnd incidentally to act upon currency legislation akffig the lines indicated in the views and declarations set forth in various speeches by the President. Opinion varies alike as to the wisdom of summoning Congress into extra session for these purposes, and also as to the length of time that will be required to enact the legislation that shall carry into Effect the President’s wishes both as to the Cuban treaty and the improvement of our currency system. The New York Tribune thinks the session should be a short one. It says: The Cuban legislation indeed should take no time at all, for all that is needed is a simple act modifying the tariff law in conformity witli the treaty already ratified by the Senate. No question of detail calls for discussion. The simple issue is carrying out the treaty or not carrying it out. Practically every member now knows what he thinks, and the bill could properly be brought to a vote in each bouse at once. Any delay on the pretense of discussion merely means that persons who want the treaty to fail, but do

not dare to face public opinion in favor of concessions to Cuba, are taking an Indirect method to kill it. As the Senate has already ratified the treaty, it may be expected that it will vote without question to put its own measure in operation. The difficulty, if any is to be encountered, will doubtless be In the House, whore a determined element is opposed to any closer relations with Cuba from perfectly well understood jeltish motives. Without stopping to inquire why it is thought necessary to ascribe selfish motives to those who do no more than to ask that the government and the Republican party keep faith with them in the matter of the tariff protection guaranteed to them by the Dingley law, while motives of the highest patriotism are ascribed to those who seek to set up the new and strange doctrine that it is always proper to sacrifice one industry for the benefit of another industry, provided you can influence enough votes in Congress to carry out tbe deal—without going more deeply into this peculiar phase of a peculiar question, let us proceed to consider whether it is true, as the Tribune asserts, tljat "The Cuban legislation indeed should take no time at ail,” etc. We are inclined to think that the legislation necessary to consummate the reciprocity arrangement with Cuba will and'ought to take very much more time than “no time at all." The treaty has been ratified by the Senate and now awaits the sanction of the House. Before the House can reach a final vote on the question of approval \it would seem to be natural, that the'Republican majority in the House should very seriously consider and thoroughly debate the following questions, among others:

1. Is the proposed treaty constitutional? Does not the Constitution specifically require that all legislation affecting the revenue shall originate In the House? Is there a ensp on record where legislation affecting the revenue has originated in the Senate ami has subsequently been approved by the House? 2. Does it not Involve the violation by the government of a contract’ of agreement With certain producing Interests of the United States—namely, the Dingley tariff law. 3. Is It equitable, fair or politically expedient that the American farmers who grow sugar and tobacco and the American capital and labor engaged in the manufacture of cigars should alone be selected to bear nil the burdens of reciprocity With Cuba? 4. Is It economically wise to discourage American sugar production, when with the Dingley tariff duties retained for a period of less than ten years that rapidly growing Industry would completely supply tbe domestic demand and retain In this country the $100,000,000 a year now sent abroad to pay for sugar imported from foreign countries?

5. Does not tbe United, gtates run ‘ the risk of provoking retaliation and commercial warfare when it discriminates against the sugar producers of Germany, France, Russia, Bclgiupa, etc., and in favor of the sugar growers of Cuba ? 0. Are we not subjecting Cuba to the risk of provoking retaliation when we compel her to discriminate in favor ~of manufactured products from the United States and against the competing products of all other countries? 7. If the policy of protection'to all domestic* labor and industry is to be abrogated or relaxed in favor of Cuban, competitors, bow can we refuse similar favors to other and far more important countries? And where and when will sflNyibrogatlon and relaxation stop?—American Economist. Sham Reciprocity. The semi-official announcement by the Boston Advertiser of Thursday, that the Reciprocity League does not propose to try to force planks into political party platforms this year, is proof of the sagacious management of that institution. With the Alaskan Boundary Commission in session, and with Senator t Fairbanks of Indiana in amiable conference with Premier Laurier of Canada, any interference by mere political excitement would be most unfortunate. Our recent experiences with British North America have not l?ean fortu-

nate. The propcs.d Newfoundland treaty would have surrendered our entire fishing industry to our northern neighbors and secured only in return an increased market in Newfoundland for protected by patent. A few mouths ago we threw open the markets of the United States and made Canadian coal free of duty for twelve months. Canada, so far, has utterly failed to meet this advance on our part and still exacts a duty of 00 cents a ton on coal Imported into,the Dominion from the United States. This duty is maintained by the executive department of the Canadian Government, which has been authorized by tbe legislative branch to suspend Canadian coal duties by proclamation. Premier Laurier as yet refuses to make this proclamation in regard to our ccal even temporarily. The United States is so closely akin to Canada that closer relations, even a union, between Canada and the United States would not probably be averse to the great masses of the American people. ' The concessions, however, must not all come from one side. It is absurd to consider even such propositions as have recently been made under the name of reciprocity. Mere bald requests to hand over our dairy interests to Canadian farmers and our school for seamen and fishing fleet to Canadian and Newfoundland fishermen do not constitute reciprocity. They spell free trade pure and simple, and merely mean tbe development not alone of the Industry, but the sea power of our neighbor, and at our own expense.—Boston Commercial Bulletin.

Higher Duties Needed. No need of worrying about tariff schedules these properous times, and yet when the time comes for changes we must have mtfny higher duties. The Importation of $1,000,000,000 worth of goods and 800,000 people show that our doors are pretty wide open, and that we might close them a little to our advantage. With all our advantages we are not yet abte to take case of the whole world, and we owe it to ourselves to employ our own people first before we pntronlze the rest bf the world for luxuries and things we cannot produce at home. All that we can make here should be made here and not abroad.** We are now buying abroad about $500,000,000 worth of goods which we are able to make at home, nud that means a further distribution of fully $450,000,000 In wages to those abroad Instead of to our own workmen. A sum quite worth having in our own pockets. A Hone Thrust. With England’s statesmen advocating it change from free trade to protection, and our Southern neighbor, Mexico, preparing to adopt the gold standard, both wings of our Democratic party are getting a home thrust —-Lakota (N. D.) Observer. „ v