ore.

Cleveland's absurd theory of prices was entirely killed by the acual price of American tin plate. During the war the United States urnished more tin plate than all he world combined. This was the ruit of Republican intelligence, triimphant over the misrepresentaion and opposition of the Democratic party and the advocates of ree trade.

On the second of September the House passed the bill increasing the duties on pearl buttons on the ground that Japanese industry with cheap labor has virtually driven American manufactures out of the market.

The manufacture of pearl buttons is one of the many object lessons that show the true source of the industrial development of the United States.

Previous to 1890, with the Western rivers paved with raw material, there were no pearl buttons made in the United States. They were imported free of duty and everywhere sold at an exorbitant price. But the McKinley tariff put a heavy duty on them; the Democrats did not make their usual kick, because they regarded them as a luxury used mostly by the rich; and to tax the rich is one of their articles of faith.

The result was that pearl button factories were established all over the Middle West; and their home production, together with the price they sold for, was a striking proof of the utter fallacy of the Democratic assertion "that the duty is always added to the price," for their

price went down, down, down until the little girls in the tenement house district were using them in making their dolls' clothing.

In normal times increased American ican production always decreases. prices and decreased American production always increases prices.

The Payne tariff law made several reductions, in order to reduce prices to the ultimate consumer, the result was that in every case, without an exception the reduction was followed, not by lower but by higher prices. The inevitable effect of decreased American production is increased American prices.

Every tariff reduction in the United States tells the same story, and tells it plainly: when the duties are lowered enough to curtail the production, the price of the commodity invariably advances.

To illustrate this fact: The Dingley tariff levied a duty of fifteen per cent on hides; the Payne tariff put them on the free list, it also reduced finished leather from twenty per cent to five per cent, and boots and shoes from twenty-five per cent to ten per cent ad valorem, and all other leather goods in proportion.

The general tone of the arguments that influenced these reductions was that they were necessary to cheapen the price to the Ameri

can consumer.

That tariff law was passed August 5, 1909. The result was that within three months after its enactment, there was a general advance in the price of boots, shoes and all other leather products in the United States; and during the ten

interjacent years they never returned to the lower prices that prevailed under an adequate tariff law.

The Payne tariff law had to bear the odium of that advance, which has never been denied by an intelligent, reliable person; but through Democratic duplicity the general public was made to believe that the advance in price was caused by increased and not by decreased tariff duties.

While there is no possible doubt that the tariff was responsible for the immediate increase in the price, yet no truthful person will claim that the tariff is wholly responsible for the present excessive price of shoes. The war was and is partially responsible for the high prices of all commodities, but not entirely. Many of the exorbitant prices now demanded can be traced to the incompetency of the Democratic party, from the time they assumed full control, when the extra session of the Sixty-third Congress

was convened on the seventh day of April, 1913, until the close of the Sixty-fifth Congress in March, 1919. Gone but not forgotten!

Discontent is the unacknowl edged shibboleth of the Democratic party. Their only hope of regaining power is by traducing the intelligent, contented and prosperous wage earners of the United States, who enjoy the highest standard of living and civilization that ever existed among the world's workers.

Their sympathy, for political purposes, with the "poor, downtrodden worker," is a libel on the independent wage earners of this prosperous country.

In 1895, during the darkest days of the Cleveland free trade panic, the late James Kier Hardie, the Socialistic British Labor leader, made a thorough inspection of the East Side tenement house district, in New York City, and reported that the conditions were very much worse in London than here.

should be supplemented by some insight into Hamilton's plans for public credit, the decline and fall of the United States Bank, the gold from California, the State Bank era and the days of Chase in the United States Treasury Department. We cannot swallow our history at a gulp. We learn it at sundry times and in divers manners.

Mr. Williams has referred to a pathetic chapter in our history—a time

of depressed industry, of commercial failures, of low credit at home and abroad. A statement coming from a man in a position so prominent as his necessarily attracts much attention. No matter how heavy the pressure of his duties he has found time to study our nation's archives, and such research is commendable.

Why, however, does Mr. Williams omit to mention the famous speech of Henry Clay in which the dark conditions of the seven years preceding the tariff of 1824 are contrasted with the revival during the seven years that followed it? Clay's words admirably reinforce his own, and go far to show why the country in 1821 was at so low an ebb. A student of our nation's annals will not accuse Clay of exaggerating the business depression; on the contrary, Mr. Clay's statements are borne out by the history written by Woodrow Wilson, and so often cited by newpapers not in political accord with the present administration.

At the cost of no great labor Mr. Williams could have reproduced Lord Brougham's account of the British goods thrown on the American market, and the disastrous effect of such imports on our young manufactures. He might have told his hearers what Thomas H. Burton said of the active

sheriffs and the cessation of general activity. He might have referred to Andrew Jackson's fear of nationwide bankruptcy and his support of the protective tariff of 1824. These quotations would have been helpful to young persons and to prospective citizens of foreign birth.

Before John Skelton Williams had mastered the alphabet, Daniel Webster was known all over the land as "the expounder of the Constitution." His Albany speech of 1844, wherein he discussed the term "regulation of commerce," is not, as Macaulay would say, "known to every schoolboy," but it is doubtless familiar to the Comptroller of the Currency. Did not Mr. Williams lose an excellent opportunity to quote Webster's forceful language:

The term was well understood in our colonial history, and if we go back to the history of the Constitution, and of the Convention which adopted it, we shall find that everywhere masses of men were assembled and the wants of the people were brought forth into prominence, the idea was held up that domestic industry could not prosper, manufactures and the mechanic arts could not advance, the condition of the common country could not be carried up to any considerable elevation unless there should be one government to lay one rate of duty for imports throughout the Union, from New Hampshire to Georgia, regard to be had, in laying this duty, to the protection of American labor and industry. I defy the man in any degree conversant with history, in any degree acquainted with the annals of this country from 1787 to the adoption of the Constitution in 1789, to say that this was not a leading, I may almost say, the leading motive, South as well as North, for the formation of the new government. Without that provision in the Constitution, it never could have been adopted.

Exclusions of foreign manufactures had, in the days of Jefferson,

called many workshops into being. The war of 1812 had barred out many cargoes. Unwise tariff reductions in 1816 brought in upon us importations that crippled our industry. Great landed estates were sold for inconsiderable prices. Hard times in

grim earnest came upon us and the Comptroller of the Currency, as he meditated on the conditions of 1821, had an excellent opportunity to treat a great question broadly, instead of dealing out to us so small a quantity of illuminating history.

We are in a bad way here in England, but it is nothing to be compared with the condition of affairs in Germany. Her railroads are worn out and she lost £170 millions on them last year in Prussia alone. Indeed, railroads and coal are greatly occupying the industrial mind of Germany. The conditions in both these essential industries are so bad that every one concerned regards the position with gravest anxiety. The German government is straining all its powers to overcome the tremendous difficulties facing the country, but there are few who express the hope that Germany can look forward to any great amelioration for a long time to come. The last financial year resulted in a working loss on the Prussian lines of 3403 million marks (at the nominal rate of exchange this equals £170 millions), while at the present moment the railroads are resulting in a daily deficit of £500,000. Passenger traffic has shrunk to 15 per cent of peace time traffic, express trains to 4 per cent of the pre-war

number, while the increased service provided during the summer months represents only 42 per cent of the service run prior to the war. Even this small service cannot be maintained and arrangements have been made for

considerable reduction in both goods and passenger traffic.

Ger

Germany has, at present, few goods to transport, but the lines cannot cope with even the small quantity extant, especially as preference is given to coal haulage. Before the war many had 22,000 locomotives; now she has 23,000, even after making deliveries to France under the Peace Treaty. But this is no test of fitness, because more than half are useless, as many of these engines were built during the war of ersatz (substitute) metals, and have been run with ersatz fuel, to the serious damage of the engines. The repair shops are generally quite unable to cope with the volume of business of repairing and constructing new engines. The German government has just placed orders to the value of £50 millions for

rolling stock, but the deliveries are much behind the scheduled time. At the date when 400 locomotives should have been delivered by the shops, 270 were still unfinished, while 14,411 wagons are overdue at this moment. Owing to the introduction of the 8hour day the daily run of an engine now is 153 kilometers against a previous run of 200.

Everything turns on the coal question. Coal production in Germany used to be about 190 million tons a year, now it is 70 millions, of which 40 millions must be delivered to the Allies. Nor is this diminution to be attributed to decreased output per man, which is about the same as before, but, according to Herr Oeser, to the fact that a shorter day is being worked and that since the armistice 17,000 miners have left the mining districts. A recent computation was made to the effect that in the Ruhr district alone 150,000 extra miners would have to be employed in order to compensate for the loss of time, and this is technically impossible. The effects of the coal shortage are experienced at once, of course, in the delay on the execution of railway orders. Its effects on the railway service are such that whereas in peace time the railroads used to carry stocks for 90 days' full service, although stock for 20 days was really enough, nowadays stocks have been reduced to a quantity sufficient for only ten days' running on a reduced. service, and in Berlin itself for only two days. This explains why conferences are being held with the miners and the mine owners to consider

ways and means for increasing the output sufficient to cover the quantity to be delivered to the Allies and to provide Germany herself with means of subsistence. After all devices have been resorted to, it is only hard work that will save Germany from the dangers that threaten her all around.

PROTECTION IN AUSTRALIA.

The position in Australia is simply this: that five million people owe about £700 millions. They must produce more in order to pay the giant interest charge, and they must expand their industries so that there may be profitable employment for a growing population. To this end a strong protectionist party has been formed in Melbourne and the government is now definitely committed to a policy of effective protection. There is not any doubt that Parliament will vote for the highest possible range of duties.

The spirit in which these will be adjusted to study the interest of the newest protection (1) protection; (2) revenue; (3) worker; (4) consumer-will be best appreciated by the government proposal. They contend that it rests on the people of Australia to insist on more protection and higher efficiency in rural and manufacturing industries to enable Australia to carry her war debt. Since war started the Commonwealth has learned protectionist lessons. She has seen how the great key industries of Australia, notwithstanding past efforts, have been allowed to remain practically undeveloped. For eighteen.