Page images
PDF
EPUB

full power in the administration, by the same deception as that practised in 1844, namely, pretending not to stand for free trade; but upon getting power, immediately passing a free trade law, always true to his principle and the necessity, as he saw it, of a low cost for labor here. In 1912, he succeeded once more and by the same deception, Mr. Wilson having given his audiences to understand in his speeches that he was a pretty good protectionist although of a peculiar sort of his own, since he proposed so to regulate the protective tariff as to leave to the weak a better protection than ever, at the same time that he took away from the strong the protection under which they had had a too rank growth ("New Freedom," p. 157). Mr. Wilson thus earned the title of the truest Machiavelian ever on the presidential stump in America. True to his plantation birth and rearing, and the plantation party that handed him 136 electoral college votes secured by KuKlux methods which he has never found any fault with, Mr. Wilson immediately took the course of all his plantationist predecessors in a like situation, passed a flat freetrade law, to reduce the domestic competition for American producing activity and did what he could in the direction of free seas by opening the Panama Canal, free of toll, to the world and admitting vessels of foreign register to our coasting and lake trade.

Mr. Wilson was born in Virginia and reared in Georgia, South Caro

lina and North Carolina, and educated at Princeton, where he distinguished himself as an advocate of free trade against protection. (See "President Wilson from an English Point of View"-a very sympathetic point of view-by H. Wilson Harris.) His book, "The New Freedom," a bound volume of his stump speeches in 1912, is a continuous tirade against multitrack industrialism which he calls by the hard names of "monopolies" "special interests," and the like; and in general behaves exactly as what he is said to describe himself to be, "an unreconstructed rebel." There is nothing new in anything he says. against organized industry. His Southern forefathers started on the warpath against corporations which they called by the abhorrent name of "monopolies," nearly a hundred years ago; and he is merely following in their tracks, with the same purpose now which they had then. All his public acts are easily explained upon that hypothesis. He courts labor by eight-hour laws and arbitrarily higher wages, whenever it is within his jurisdiction; advocates laws against child-labor and overtaxing of women; and makes people think he is soft-hearted towards "labor" in doing these things, when his very obvious purpose-obvious to those who have the true key to his conduct-is to handicap American multi-track industrialism to its fall. For he opens the ports and exposes our industries to unmitigated foreign competition, at the same time that he further hampers and

handicaps production with these apparently philanthropic laws, the only result of which is to increase the cost of production here and diminish its output as against countries which have no such laws, but the products of which nevertheless

come into this market in free competition with our own.

This key of radical plantationism unlocks the mystery of Mr. Wilson's pro-Germanism during the first years of the war and his later insistence that the "unconditional surrender" of the Huns should be conditioned upon their being presented with a free market here under his Fourteen Points (Point

Three), if they would be good enough to surrender.

Had Germany won the war, as Mr. Wilson at first expected she would (See "The Real Colonel House," p. 177) "in a few months of swift fighting," is there any doubt that he would have made an alliance with the Kaiser to abrogate the Monroe Doctrine as to the whole of South America, and give Germany a free hand there, turning not only this market of ours but the Canadian as well over to Germany as a free gift, as is all done by Dru, the Colonel's hero? By the way, the Colonel's book was written in the latter part of 1911, when he was very intimate with Mr. Wilson.

DALLAS AND MARSHALL By Roland Ringwalt.

Seventy-three years ago we had a Vice-President named George M. Dallas. He had made excellent speeches for protection, and was looked on as a man who would stand by his word.

Nevertheless when the low tariff of 1846 came before the Senate he gave the casting vote in its favor. Old friends refused to speak to him; he was called a liar in print; he was insulted in the street, and though he knew that he deserved all this he was fool enough to invite more by pleading his case in a series of letters. No man in Pennsylvania politics ever came in for such violent reproaches, and even beyond the seas he was not safe.

[ocr errors][merged small]

account, reminded him of what he had brought upon the State that once trusted him. All over Pennsylvania in 1844 the Democratic campaign cry had been, "Polk, Dallas and the Tariff of '42." Without that pledge Pennsylvania would have gone for Clay. Angry at trickery, the State voted in 1848 for Zachary Taylor.

As May was passing out VicePresident Marshall delivered a notable speech at Atlantic City. In this address he said that he had been a low tariff man, practically a free trader, but that war had wrought many changes. He hoped that the manufacturers would prosper, because on their well being the entire prosperity of the country depends. These are impressive words from

one who may have admired Henry Watterson's references to the robber barons. The Vice-President's words did not fall to the ground. They were caught up by the Republican papers, and given a good place in the columns of the Philadelphia Record.

Query: If the Record has printed the speech of Vice-President Marshall will it print General Jackson's letter to Dr. Colman?

As George B. Curtiss in "The Industrial Development of Nations" reminds us, Washington, Hamilton, Jefferson, Monroe and Adams all recognized the importance of a protective tariff to the farmer, and Andrew Jackson, in a letter to Dr. Colman, of North Carolina, dated April 26, 1824, said:

I will ask what is the real situation of the agriculturist? Where has the American farmer a market for his surplus produce? Except for cotton he has neither a foreign nor a home market. Does not this clearly prove, when there is no market at home or abroad, that there is too much labor employed in agriculture? Common sense at once points out the remedy. Take from agriculture in the United States six hundred thousand men, women and children, and you will at once give

a market for more breadstuffs than all Europe now furnishes us. In short, sir, we have been too long chants; it is time we should become subject to the policy of British mera little more Americanized, and, instead of feeding the paupers and laborers of England, feed our own; or else, in a short time, by continuing our present policy, we shall all be rendered paupers ourselves.

This policy of Jackson's was pursued and has been continued ever since, with the exception of two free trade periods from 1833 to 1842, and from 1846 to 1860. A home market of almost incalculable magnitude has been built up and maintained-a market greater by far than all the markets of the world combined, and in this market the American farmer has for a generation and more sold over nine-tenths of his production.

Let us hazard a supposition. If a tariff bill framed in the spirit of Dingley should come before the Senate; if a few members of that body were absent; if the ayes and nays were equal, would Vice-President Marshall vote for it? That would be a strange reversal of history, and the shade of Dallas might reflect-"Had I only done likewise!"

A GOOD AMERICAN DOCTRINE.

The following paragraphs are from the baccalaureate sermon of Dr. Charles Alexander Richmond, president of Union College, Schenectady, N. Y.:

This is a very old world, and human nature is as old as the world

and will still remain human nature.

Nations cannot be merged into a supernation. Love of country will still be localized. There will still be friends among nations as there are friends among men.

The world has no use for the dilettante idealism that prates and poses, that meets in luxurious draw

ing rooms in evening dress to flirt with bolshevism as a dangerous but fascinating pastime, as children play with fire. These are enemies of this republic and they should be dealt with as enemies. And we have as little use for the well-meaning idealist whose passion for humanity blinds him to realities; who has not the daring to face the facts of life.

Vapors thrown off by an overfed fatuity of mind are sometimes mistaken for visions.

On the same day that the Presbyterian divine delivered himself of this good American doctrine the Roman Catholic Archbishop of New York, in asking a blessing upon the Governor of this State, uttered sentiments so like Dr. Richmond's in

their patriotic sanity that we repeat them here:

May the most holy sacrifice of the mass this morning put trust in you in the hearts of the people of this State and may it give you strength, wisdom and counsel to enable you to be one of the best Governors the State of New York ever had. May it aid you through these critical days in carrying your burdens, and may it aid you in keeping America for Americans and stop that so-called philosophy some of our public officials are trying to plan for our land.

Sometimes nowadays a little soft socialism or fake idealism comes from the pulpit, but it is uttered by preachers who don't know the spirit of the American people.

WARTIME CHANGES IN THE COST OF LIVING.

The National Industrial Conference Board has issued its third report on changes in the cost of living since 1914.

The first report showed that between the beginning of the war in July, 1914, and June, 1918, the average cost of living of American wage earners had risen 50 to 55 per cent. The second report covered the entire war period to the signing of the armistice in November, 1918, and the advance in the cost of living was found to be 65 to 70 per cent. The third report shows that the cost of living in March, 1919, was still 60 to 65 per cent above the pre-war level.

FOOD.

Food prices in June, 1918, were 62 per cent above the pre-war level; in November, 1918, 83 per cent, and in March, 1919, 75 per cent. These

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

ever recorded by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, being 87 per cent above the 1913 level.

Between March, 1913, and March, 1919, the following very large price increases occurred: flour, 106 per cent; bacon, 110 per cent; lard, 114 per cent and corn meal, 130 per cent. The average price of sugar was 96 per cent higher and of potatoes 93 per cent higher than in the same month six years before. All other articles showed advances of 61 per cent or over. The price of butter having dropped 19 per cent in February, 1919, increased 16 per cent in March, leaving it 74 per cent above the pre-war average.

The average price of rib roast on March 15, 1919, was 25 per cent higher than it was in the same month in 1918. The prices of other meats, coffee and butter increased almost as much, while onions and prunes went up even more. Navy beans and bread, on the other hand, were cheaper in 1919 than in 1918.

It is impossible to say whether the marked falling off in average prices in February and March, 1919, was a temporary decline or whether it represents a definite check of the upward movement of food prices. Representative retail dealers in groceries and provisions as well as meat packers inclined to the opinion that food prices would stay up for some time to come.

SHELTER.

Rents of wage earners' houses in June, 1918, averaged 15 per cent above the pre-war level; in November, 1918, they were 20 per cent higher. These estimates were for

the country as a whole, and took into account the fact that while in the majority of normal communities rents in 1918 were generally not much higher than in 1914, in some places there had been enormous increases and that from others decreases were reported.

Information as to rental conditions in March, 1919, was obtained, as in the earlier investigations, from authorities closely in touch with the local real estate situation, especially from the real estate boards. Two hundred and thirty-six separate agencies in 114 cities furnished data which were tabulated. While in most cases several replies were received from the larger cities, representing a number of different sections and types of houses, the smaller places frequently were represented by but one report. This authority, however, was often the local real estate board which should be especially well informed.

In the great majority of cities from which reports were received regarding rents of wage earners' houses, no change had occurred between November, 1918, and March, 1919. Among these there were still a few cities where no advance above the 1914 level was reported in March, 1919. These include such important centers as St. Louis and Kansas City, Mo., and Indianapolis, Ind., as well as representative cities in other sections of the country. In Pasadena and San Diego, Cal., rents were in some cases lower in 1919 than they had been in 1914.

In a number of communities, on the other hand, rents had been ad

« PreviousContinue »