Page images
PDF
EPUB
[graphic][merged small]

PRESIDENT OF THE SECOND WORLD'S CHRISTIAN CITIZENSHIP CONFERENCE WHICH WILL GATHER AT PORTLAND, ORE., ON JUNE 29TH

[graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed]
[graphic][graphic][subsumed][subsumed]

THE GROWTH OF AMERICAN CITIES

UPPER PICTURE: JACKSONVILLE, FLA., AFTER THE CONFLAGRATION OF 1901; LOWER PICTURE: THE SAME VIEW IN 1913. THE POPULATION OF JACKSONVILLE IN 1900 WAS 28,000; IN 1910, 57,000, AN INCREASE OF MORE THAN 100 PER CENT. IN TEN YEARS

T

AN HONEST TARIFF

HE most significant fact about the Underwood tariff bill is that it is an honest bill. It marks the beginning of a new era. It is the first honest tariff since the Civil War; for in a republic a tariff can not be called honest that is designed to enrich a few at the expense of the many, particularly if the few that are to be enriched are the designers of the schedules. In the past, Mr. Dingley, a woolen manufacturer, was the leader of the House of Representatives that raised the woolen schedule. Later Mr. Aldrich, as leader of the Senate, allowed his cotton and woolen manufacturing constituents to prepare the cotton and woolen schedules to their own liking.

In the making of an honest tariff Mr. Underwood, representing an iron and steel district, reduces the rates on these articles. As he put it, if he had to be a special pleader for the interests that happen to be located in his district, he "would be unworthy to bear a commission from the great Democratic party of this country." It is a contrast that tells dramatically the changed attitude toward the tariff. It would be more encouraging if all the Democratic members of Congress were as courageous as Mr. Underwood. Some of them, though elected on a low tariff platform, dare not advocate a reduction on the products of their own districts for fear of losing their seats. They present a sorry spectacle, and their lack of courage will leave them with diminished influence among their fellows. But in spite of these men, the new tariff is honestly conceived for the benefit of all the people of the United States.

Here, for example, is a little incident that is an indication of the difference between the spirit in which this tariff bill was prepared and the spirit in which its predecessors were made. Ever since the Payne-Aldrich tariff became law (even while it was being passed) "jokers" have been coming to light little phrases cunningly devised to look as if they meant one thing and to effect another result. While this present bill was under discussion a manufacturer appeared before

the Ways and Means Committee to ask that, in reducing the tariff on his articles, it be reduced equally on the raw and manufactured products. Before the Committee decided upon the point an unintentional “joker” crept into the bill, taking care of it. As soon as the manufacturer saw the joker he hastened to the Committee and showed it to them, explaining that so far as he was concerned he would rather lose his point than gain it in this old-fashioned manner which would leave him open to suspicion. As he expressed it, "this bill has been made with all the cards on the table."

It is a change in principles and methods, not so much a change in men. The framers of this bill are not necessarily better men personally than the framers of the dishonest tariffs. These measures were passed with the votes and support of many of the most distinguished statesmen and honorable men of the last fifty years. But this is not inconsistent. To find a parallel you have only to look back to another economic fallacy of special privilege — the institution of slavery. It, also, was maintained by as honest and as high-minded men as were in the country. It cost a war to rid us of that economic error. If the Underwood bill is the beginning of a new era in tariff making, as it seems to be, we are getting rid of this second practice of privilege very cheaply.

But it is not a perfect tariff bill. It is not even a scientific tariff bill. The men who framed it have been struggling over tariff schedules tariff schedules for four years. They probably know more about them than any one else in the country. But, in the strict sense of the word, the bill is not a scientific tariff. There can be no such thing. The ramifications of trade are so infinite and so inter-related that no human mind can prophesy all the results of a change in the rates in even one schedule. Any tariff is a restraint of trade that dams or deflects the currents of commerce from their natural channels. The rates in the Underwood bill are not fair, one compared with another. It is impossible that they should be. But they represent an honest effort at fairness, an endeavor to get rid of the most glaring schedules of favor

itism, an attempt to lighten the load of the

common man.

It is noticeable that the fear of tariff revision is not nearly so extreme as it was four years ago. When a cry of calamity would block the revision of the tariff, the cry was forthcoming. Now that it would not be effective, it is not made; and in private conversation you may hear manufacturers saying, even with pride, "Well, let 'em take the tariff off, I guess I can get along." And, of course, with few exceptions they will; for there is much more of the American spirit of independence and success in our manufacturers than they themselves have been willing to admit. Leaning upon the charity of the tariff had begun to sap their manhood. But in the face of a changed condition, which many of them have wisely discounted already, there is little fear of their fulfilling their own direful prophecies. Not that such changed conditions are easy to meet; for it is impossible to tell just what effect reductions in rates will have on any one particular factory: but even the most fearful beneficiary of protection has no serious apprehension concerning the prosperity of the great bulk of our industry.

L

THE INCOME TAX

IKE the rates of the new tariff, the provisions of the income tax bill are not perfect. That bill is an effort to raise revenue in a fairer fashion than by the tariff. Probably in time experience will point the way to a better income tax law. But in the meantime there is a fundamental merit which this income tax measure has in common with any other income tax bill: It is a direct tax that sharply brings home to the people the fact that they furnish the money that the Government spends. The old humbug that the foreigner paid the tariff can not be applied to the income tax. Because the tariff tax was merged in the price of our purchases we could not. tell just how much it was. There is no such vagueness about the income tax. Its directness is likely gradually to educate us to a less extravagant idea of

national expenditures. Certainly in this new era of a low tariff and an income tax we shall not be forced to devise wasteful means to dissipate surpluses in the Federal Treasury that were collected under a tariff that was designed as protection for favorite industries.

A RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT

TH

HE coöperation between the leaders in Congress and the President in the handling of the tariff measure and the attitude that all concerned hold toward the currency question give the Democratic party a new aspect. In spite of the Democratic stand-pat Senators, the Democratic party is fairly well knit together. It more nearly approaches being a responsible party than did its predecessor. There is a tendency toward coöperation between Congress and the President concerning the tariff which makes it more nearly like a British government measure than we are accustomed to see.

The President and the Democratic Congress were elected upon the same platform to do the same thing, and the obvious thing is to get together and do it. Mr. Wilson revived an old custom as a graceful way of making the first move in the harmonious coöperation between the legislative and administrative branches of the Government. And the President has not usurped the functions of the House nor trod upon the dignity of the Senate. Mr. Underwood's position as chairman of the Committee of Ways and Means is certainly as powerful and as useful to the public, now that Mr. Wilson goes to the Capitol, as Mr. Payne's position was when he visited Mr. Taft at the White House. The next obvious step is, not only to allow but on certain occasions to require the Cabinet members to be present on the floor of the House and the Senate. In their hands is the information upon which many of the laws should be based, and in their hands, also, is the administration of the laws after they are passed. The coördination of the Government's activities demands that Congress be able to get at the administrative parts of the Government more intimately and easily. At present, when

« PreviousContinue »