Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

THE ATLANTIAN 5 Hirshburg, The Official Photographer FOR THE ATLANTIAN 34 A WHITEHALL STREET The Making of the Tariff The New York Tribune, speaking, perhaps, with the voice of the majority of the Republican party, lately said that the tariff had grown gradually and must fall, layer by layer, lest business suffer. What business? The monopolies of taxation—the license to rob? Senator Nelson lately told from his seat that the making of a tariff bill was exactly like the prescription for an appropriation bill —the parties at interest sized up the available cash and made com promises by dickering with each other. Where support was ex pected a hand was allowed to reach the treasury; where a kicker was powerful enough he was placated by concessions; the money from the pockets of the people, collected in the law, is disbursed without regard to national needs or propriety, but as a matter of favoritism and of party necessity. It will be claimed that the party has kept its pledges and com plied with the demands of the people—the tariff will stand re vised. But what have the people received other than the demon stration that all the claims made by the Republicans in this con nection for a generation are utterly false and misleading? We have free hides; do we wear hides? The manufacturers of shoes will get the raw material cheaper, but who expects better quality or cheaper prices in shoes as a consequence? We have free oil—oil is already as cheap as water can be after transportation is paid; much cheaper than the mineral waters that flow freely from the earth and only demand passage to the hospitals and the homes of the sick. Oil and the waters both come from the earth, hut wells must be dug for the oil, and then it must be doubly and Irebly refined and distilled as well as transported, yet oil comes much cheaper than the water which is taken exactly as it comes from the spring when we can be so happy as to get it in the natural state. Will the people be helped when oil is absolutely free of taxa tion? For a long time oil has been practically free of protection save in its by-products. The Senate won and the Senate lost; the House won and tlie House lost. The party can claim that it did all it could to protect its friends, and so he prepared to demand support in contributions again. There will he gratitude either for favors extended or for favors about to be received. Each of these powers can show that an attempt was made to free the people from an unjust burden, and yet that burden was placed upon the people by the Republican party and maintained as long as possible. It galls and withers yet. If it be unjust what shall be the fate of the party that wrought the injustice and refused to heed the protests after an oppression enduring for a generation and more? Who is responsible for the wrong and for the deception? The will to do good often counts for much when the ability to accomplish results may be lacking. Side by side with the tariff as an abomination disgraceful to civilization and the twentieth century, lives our financial system, still what is, was and has long been. As an instrument of oppression and corruption the two are twin brethren, but it has happened that confession on the tariff was forced before amendment on the currency was authoritatively demanded. If the desire to make good in spirit and in truth be abroad, why is one evil cut down a peg while the other flourishes in its original ugliness? When the House deplores the sins of the past as to the tariff, why does it make no promises for the revision of the cun*ency and the redemption of Republican promises not less ardent and not less emphatic on that subject? If we must applaud a burglar who agrees not to burgle quite so boldly and extensively when confronted with a popular uprising, why not give us a chance to promise ourselves something less bad than our financial system after other civilized lands have showed us the road and given results as proofs of effectiveness?—Exchange. Is Protection Unconstitutional We can easily believe that when Jefferson proposed a tax for the raising of a national revenue with incidental protection for infant industries he had no conception of a possible violation of the constitutional provisions he valued so highly, but the title of llie Aldrich bill brings a new objection to the fore. That title reads: “An act to provide revenue, equalize duties and encourage the industries of the United States.” The Republican party is in the habit of treating the constitution with such little respect that it may be excused for ignoring it altogether among friends, but Congressman Cullop, of Indiana, rises to remark that the bill must be void and of no effect because of its title. The constitution does not. give Congress the power to protect American industries, and some effort will be made to change the title so as to save us from the open declaration that Congress can set aside the constitution like Mr. Roosevelt. Perhaps Senator Aldrich is willing to prove that when lie chooses Congress can do as much as a president along that line. To the Republican mind the form is all—the substance matters nothing. Congress has been protecting industries for many years, but that does not disturb Mr. Cullop of the Second Indiana Dis trict; he is convulsed on learning that Mr. Aldrich professes openly the desire to do what Congress has long been doing without open profession. Nor is the critic disturbed by the claim that the Aldrich hill wishes to “equalize duties”—a task it would abhor. Merely to change the title a bit would obviate the objection without chang ing the nature of the operation, but Mr. Cullop would keep the slate clean of paralyzing profession. Mr. Taft has made a note of the fact that the Declaration of Independence is not a practical working instrument—it would be too bad if the theory of protec tion proved as bad as the Declaration which we celebrate once a year. Perhaps all that fuss and fury at Washington is mere empti ness, but what would become of Congress if the people decided to economize at the expense of pretense and form?—Exchange. State Labor Bureau The last session of the General Assembly established a State Labor Bureau. We have not had the opportunity to investigate the law, but presumably it has made all necessary provisions for an efficient admin istration of the new bureau in the interests of the laboring classes of our State, and therefore in the interests of the whole public. It is to be hoped now that the-men who offer for the position of Commissioner of Labor will be of the right calibre, and that the one chosen may set a pace which, in coming years, will make the Bureau of great value. The mere fact that a man is identified and active in the cause of labor is not sufficient. He must be well-informed—he must he well-balanced—he must be prudent, and yet aggressive. It will take a strong man to fill the position as it ought to be filled; and it will be well for the Bureau, if the voters scrutinize carefully the nrn who offer themselves for its head, and make a wise selection. An unfortunate selection would not only minimize its influence in the present day, but would depreciate its value for many years to come.