UC-NRLF $B SbM 13T LIBRARY OF THK University of California. GIF^T OK 5.a^....^l^..^C^..:.3'^A.UyyaJ(. ..o^ Class mm'^iw7'::^mm mm DEMOCRATIC CAMPAIGN BOOK CONGRESSIONAL ELECTION 1906 **Equal rights to all, special privileges to none'* ISSUED BY AUTHORITY OF THE DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE WASHINGTON HEADQUARTERS Munscy Buildings Washington, D. C. CHICAGO HEADQUARTERS Palmer House, Chicago, Illinois PRICE, '5 CENTS THE SUN JOB PRINT, BALTIMORE EXPORT PRICES OF SEWING MACHINES.' (Reproduced from Exporters' and Importers' Journal of May 17, 1902. published by Henry W. Peabody &, Co.. of New York, for circulation in foreign countries only.' SIOAVIXG MACHIXRS. (New Domestic Sewinj^ Machine Co.) llisfli .\ ward- The rjold Medal, ran-American Exposition. IfiuhcMt Gruile Hifth Arm Foot 3Iaeliine. No. 1 Ma oh ine. each . .$14 40 *Xo. 4 Machine, each. .$10 00 \o. 1 l/j " . 1 .-) 1 *Xo. 7 . 21 80 ♦No. 2 . 1 r. jso *No. 8 •• . 19 00 *XO. I'Vl! " •• . . Kino Desk ('a bin el . 84 00 *\o. -.', . 17 20 Di.*«4MMiiit, .Machines for Mexico. Central and Souih America and the West Indies, Xo. <{:24; for the Australasian Colonies. Africa, British East Indies. .Tapan. Philippine Is- lands and China. Xo. 5<). Note — W'Blnnt wood is used on all machines, but those with * can also be had in oak if ho ordere«l. Coronet .Se^viiiK- MachiiieH. (.Made by the Davis Sewing Machine Co.) .•7 70 No. 2. plain table with cover. 1 drawer. Price each. ... 8 60 No. :{. end leaf table with cover. 1 drawer. I'rice each. . s 80 No. .'{7. end leaf table with cover. H drawers. Price each . 10 No. ."^S. end leaf table with cover, 5 drawers. I'rice each . J> 65 No. ?>r>. end leaf table with cover. 7 drawers. Price each. 10 20 .No. .'i7, drop head, .'i drawers. Price each 65 No. .'!8. drop head, 5 drawers. Price each 1 () I'O Hand .Machine, iron b;ise. Price each 4 ."io Hand .Machine, wood base. Price each } no Hand .Machine, wood Imse -and cover. Price each <; 1(» Kor 1 and macliincs, without attachments. 15 cents less. DiMooiint Xo. 7U. The "Price Current Discount Sheet" of May 17, 1902. gives dis- count number 624 as "8%," number 50 "on amplication," and num- ber 79 "net." This makes the export pric >^f tb*- ^' r ^ nsi No. 1. $13.25. and Nos. 4 and 9, $17.48. ^ can be obtained in this country. Ordinj. Domestic range from $30 to $50. Cash w; tailers are from about $20 to $30. The prices of the Coronet (Davis) mac solves. The .\merican prices are aboui IOC DEMOCRATIC Campaign Book Congressional Election 1906 m-/^iC^'^^. '^- -i^'x-y^-rir-Kv:^ ■■-^-— ^^^' ^' >"^ „>■ ST. The price of this book is twenty-five (25) cents— hardly more than the cost of printing. If you have not remitted please do so at once. If you will enclose us one dollar ($1) we will send you, in addition to this book, copies of all campaign literature published by us. Remit to J. M. GRIGGS, Chairman, Washington, D. C. wasnmgion neaaquariers, Munsey Building, Washington, U. G. Chicago Headquarters, Palmer House, Chicago, Illinois PRICE, 2? CENTS BALTIMORE •The Sun Book and Job Printing Office 1906 EXPORT PRICES OF SEWING MACHINES. (Reproduced from Exporters' and importers' Journal of May 17, 1902. published by Henry W. Peabody & Co.. of New York, for circulation in foreign countries only.) SEWIXG MACHINES. (Xew Domestic Sewing Macliine Co.) High Award — The Gold Medal, Pan-American Exposition. Hi)g(heMt Grade Higrh Arm Foot 31acliine. No. 1 Machine, each. ..$14 40 *No. 4 Machine, each . .$19 (»(> No. 1 % '• . . 1.-) 10 *No. 7 " •' . . 21 80 *No. 2 . . 1 ."■) 80 *No. 8 - . . 10 00 *No. 2Va " . . 16 no Desk r ibinet •• . . .-{4 00 *Xo. .'5 Ma . . 17 20 •hilK^v; fill' \rMvi<.<. Xo. M8. drop head. .") drawers. Price each lo 20 Hand Machine, iron base. Price each 4 50 Hand Machine, wood base. Price each 4 90 Hand Machine, wood base and cover. I'rice each (J 10 For land machines, without attachments, l."» cents less. ULseoiiiit Xo. 7!>. The "Price Current Discount Sheet" of May 17, 1902. gives dis- count number 624 as "8%," number 50 "on amplication," and num- ber 79 "net." This makes the export pric ' tV- ^' r : snr No. 1, $13.2.5, and Nos. 4 and 9, $17.48. ^ can be obtained in this country. , Ordim. Domestic range from $30 to $50. Cash wh; - . tailers are from about $20 to $30. The prices of the Coronet (Davis) ma( selves. The American prices are about IOC I DEMOCRATIC Campaign Book Congressional Election 1906 "Equal rights to all, special privileges to none" i ISSUED BY AUTHORITY OF THE Democratic Congressional Committee Washington Headquarters, Munsey Building, Washington, D. C. Chicago Headquarters, Palmer House, Chicago, Illinois OF THE PRICE, 2? CENTS BAIiTIMOKE •The Sun Book and Job Printing Office 1906 hi SUMMARY OF CONTENTS , :^^\ THE DEMOCRATIC PLATFORM. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF DEMOCRACY. THE TARIFF— ITS INIQUITIES. TARIFF HISTORY. REVENUE TARIFF AND PROSPERITY. ^^ TRUSTS AND COMBINES. EXPORT PRICES— LESS THAN HOME PRICES. GOVERNMENT PARTNERSHIP WITH THE TRUSTS. WAGES AND INCOMES. COST OF LIVING HIGHER. PRICES AND WAGES. EXPORTS OF MANUFACTURES. WAGES— DISASTROUS EFFECT OF McKINLEY TARIFF ON. TRUSTS AIDED BY McKINLEY TARIFF. SECRETARY FOSTER AND HIS FANTASTIC FINANCING. IRON AND STEEL AND THE TARIFF. THE LIFE INSURANCE SCANDAL. JUDGE PARKER'S CHARGE OF CORRUPTION PROVEN. MR. ROOSEVELT'S DENIAL OF CORRUPTION NOT TRUE. PANAMA CANAL SUPPLIES PURCHASED ABROAD. SHIP SUBSIDY LEGISLATION. FIFTY MEN AND THEIR POWER. BRYAN ON ROOSEVELT'S ADMINISTRATION. THE COMMERCE ACT— ITS HISTORY. EXTRAVAGANT APPROPRIATIONS. DEFICIENCIES— HOW MADE. THE FARMERS AND THE TARIFF. SCANDALS— NEW YORK CUSTOM HOUSE, ETC. DEMOCRATS AND ORGANIZED LABOR. ROOSEVELT'S INCONSISTENCIES. j THE MOTIVE BEHIND THE "BIG STICK." * INJUNCTION SUITS, CRIMINAL PROSECUTION, ^'^.TC.^ FARCICAL PROSECUTION OF THE TRUSTS. WHOLESALE PRICES, 1897-1905. STATISTICS ON WAGES. APPENDICES Comparison of Export and Home Prices. Operations of McKinley Tariff by Months. Yea and Nay Votes on Party Questions. A List of Trusts in the United States. I. OF THE '^ UNIVERSITY OF Democratic Campaign Book-1906 PLATFORM OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, ADOPTED AT ST. LOUIS, MO., JULY 8, 1904. The Democratic party of the United States, in national conven- tion assembled, declares its devotion to the essential principles of the Democratic faith which bring us together in party communion. Under them local self-government and national unity and pros- perity were alike established. They underlaid our independence, the structure of our free republic, and every Democratic extension from Louisiana to California, and Texas to Oregon, which pre- serves faithfully in all the States the tie between taxation and representation. They yet inspire masses of our people, guarding jealously their rights and liberties, and cherishing their fraternity, peace and orderly development. They remind us of our duties and responsibilities as citizens, and impress upon us, particularly at this time, the necessity of reform and the rescue of the administration of government from the headstrong, arbitrary and spasmodic methods which distract business by uncertainty, and pervade the public mind with dread, distrust and perturbation. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES. The application of these fundamental principles to the living issues of the day is the first step toward the assured peace, safety and progress of our nation. Freedom of the press, of conscience and of speech; equality before the law of all citizens; the right of trial by jury; freedom of the person defended by the writ of habeas corpus; liberty of personal contract untrammeled by sumptuary laws; the supremacy of the civil over the military authority; a well-disciplined militia; the separation of church and State; economy in expenditures; low taxes; that labor may be lightly burdened; the prompt and sacred fulfilment of public and private obligations; fidelity to treaties; peace and friendship with all nations; entangling alliances with none; absolute acquiescence in the will of the majority, the vital principle of republics — these are doctrines which Democracy has established as proverbs of the nation and they should be constantly invoked, preached, resorted to and enforced. CAPITAL AND LABOR. We favor the enactment and administration of laws giving labor and capital impartially their just rights. Capital and labor ought not to be enemies. Each is necessary to the other. Each has its rights, but the rights of labor are certainly no less "vested," no less "sacred" and no less "inalienable" than the rights of tsapital. DEMOCRATIC PARTY PLATFORM. CONSTITUTIONAL GUARANTEES. Constitutional guarantees are violated whenever any citizen is denied the right to labor, acquire and enjoy property or reside where interests or inclination may determine. Any denial thereof by individuals, organizations or governments should be sum- marily rebuked and punished. We deny the right of any executive to disregard or suspend any constitutional privilege or limitation. Obedience to the laws and respect for their requirements are alike the supreme duty of the citizen and the official. The military should be used only to support and maintain the law. We unqualifiedly condemn its employment for the summary banishment of citizens without trial or for the control of elections. We approve the measure which passed the United States Senate in 1896, but which a Republican Congress has ever since refused to enact, relating to contempts in Federal Courts and providing for trial by jury in cases of indirect contempt. WATERWAYS. We favor liberal appropriations for the improvement of water- ways of the country. When any waterway like the Mississippi River is of sufficient importance to demand special aid of the Government, such aid should be extended with a definite plan of continuous work until permanent improvement is secured. We oppose the Republican policy of starving home development in order to feed the greed for conquest and the appetite for national "prestige" and display of strength. ECONOMY OF ADMINISTRATION. Large reductions can easily be made in the annual expenditures of the Government without impairing the efficiency of any branch of the public service, and we shall insist upon the strictest economy and frugality compatible with vigorous and efficient civil, military and naval administration as a right of the people too clear to be denied or withheld. We favor honesty in the public service, the enforcement of honesty in the public service, and to that end a thorough legisla- tive investigation of those executive departments of the Govern- ment already known to teem with corruption, as well as other departments suspected of harboring corruption, and the punish- ment of ascertained corruptionists, without fear or favor ori regard to persons. The persistent and deliberate refusal of botht the Senate and the House of Representatives to permit suchS investigation to be made demonstrates that only by a change ina the executive and in the legislative departments can complete* exposures, punishment and correction be obtained. FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS WITH TRUSTS. ' We condemn the action of the Republican party in Congress in refusing to prohibit an executive department from entering into; contracts with convicted trusts or unlawful combinations iai DEMOCRATIC PARTY PLATFORM. restraint of interstate trade. We believe that one of the best methods of procuring economy and honesty in the public service is to have public officials, from the occupant of the White House down to the lowest of them, return as nearly as may be to Jeffer- sonian simplicity of living. EXECUTIVE USURPATION. We favor the nomination and election of a President imbued with the principles of the Constitution, who will set his face sternly against executive usurpation of legislative and judicial functions, whether that usurpation be veiled under the guise of executive construction of existing laws, or whether it take refuge in the tyrant's pleas of necessity or superior wisdom. IMPERIALISM. We favor the preservation, so far as we can, of an open door for the world's commerce in the Orient without any unnecessary entanglement in Oriental and European affairs, and without arbitrary, unlimited, irresponsible and absolute government anywhere within our jurisdiction. We oppose, as fervently as did George Washington himself, an indefinite, irresponsible, discretionary and vague absolutism and a policy of colonial exploitation, no matter where or by whom invoked or exercised; we believe with Thomas Jefferson and John Adams that no government has a right to make one set of laws for those "at home" and another and a different set of laws, absolute in their character, for those "in the colonies." All men under the American flag are entitled to the protection of the institutions whose emblem the flag is; if they are inherently unfit for those institutions then they are inherently unfit to be members of the American body politic. Wherever there may exist a people incapable of being governed under American laws, in consonance with the American Constitution, the territory of that people ought not to be part of the American domain. We insist that we ought to do for the Filipinos what we have already done for the Cubans, and it is our duty to make that promise now, and upon suitable guarantees of protection to citi- zens of our own and other countries resident there at the time of our withdrawal, set the Filipino people upon their feet, free and independent, to work out their own destiny. The endeavor of the Secretary of War, by pledging the Government's indorse- ment for "promoters" in the Philippine Islands, to make the United States a partner in speculative legislation of the archi- pelago, which was only temporarily held up by the opposition of the Democratic Senators iA the last session, will, if successful, lead to entanglements from which it will be difficult to escape. THE TARIFF. The Democratic party has been, and will continue to be, the consistent opponent of that class of tariff legislation by which certain interests have been permitted, through Congressional favor, to draw a heavy tribute from the American people. This 6 DEMOCRATIC PARTY PLATFORM. monstrous perversion of those equal opportunities which our political institutions were established to secure has caused what may once have been infant industries to become the greatest combinations of capital that the world has ever known. These especial favorites of the Government have, through trust methods, been converted into monopolies, thus bringing to an end domestic competition, which was the only alleged check upon the extrava- gant profits made possible by the protective system. These industrial combinations, by the financial assistance they can give, now control the policy of the Republican party. We denounce protection as a robbery of the many to enrich the few, and we favor a tariff limited to the needs of the Govern- ment, economically administered, and so levied as not to discrimi- nate against any industry, class or section, to the end that the burdens of taxation shall be distributed as equally as possible. We favor a revision and a gradual reduction of the tariff by the friends of the masses for the commonwealth, and not by the friends of its abuses, its extortions and its discriminations, keep- ing in view the ultimate ends of "equality of burdens and equality of opportunities," and the constitutional purpose of raising a revenue by taxation, to wit, the support of the Federal Govern- ment in all its integrity and virility, but in simplicity. TRUSTS AND UNLAWFUL COMBINATIONS. We recognize that the gigantic trusts and combinations designed to enable capital to secure more than its just share of the joint products of capital and labor, and which have been fostered and promoted under Republican rule, are a menace to beneficial competition and an obstacle to permanent business prosperity. A private monopoly is indefensible and intolerable. Individual equality of opportunity and free competition are essential to a healthy and permanent commercial prosperity, and any trust or monopoly tending to destroy these by controlling production, restricting competition or fixing prices, should be prohibited and punished by law. We especially denounce rebates and discrimination by transportation companies as the most potent agency in promoting and strengthening these unlawful conspiracies against trade. We demand an enlargement of the powers of the Interstate Commerce Commission, to the end that the traveling public and shippers of this Government may have prompt and adequate relief from the abuses to which they are subjected in the matter of transportation. We demand a strict enforcement of existing civil and criminal statutes against all such trusts, combinations and monopolies; and we demand the enactment of such further legislation as may be necessary to effectually suppress them. Any trust or unlawful combination engaged in interstate com- merce which is monopolizing any branch of business or produc- tion should not be permitted to transact business outside of the State of its origin. Whenever it shall be established in any court of competent jurisdiction that such monopolization exists, such prohibition should be enforced through comprehensive lawg to be enacted on the subject, DEMOCRATIC PARTY PLATFORM. RECLAMATION OF ARID LANDS AND DOMESTIC DEVELOPMENT. We congratulate our Western citizens upon the passage of the law known as the Newlands Irrigation Act for the irrigation and reclamation of the arid lands of the West — a measure framed by a Democrat, passed in the Senate by a non-partisan vote, and passed in the House against the opposition of almost all Repub- lican leaders by a vote the majority of which was Democratic. We call attention to this great Democratic measure, broad and comprehensive as it is, working automatically throughout all time without further action of Congress, until the reclamation of all the lands in the arid West capable of reclamation is accom- plished, reserving the lands reclaimed for home seekers in small tracts, and rigidly guarding against land monopoly, as an evidence of the policy of domestic development contemplated by the Democratic party, should it be placed in power. ISTHMIAN CANAL. The Democracy when intrusted with power will construct the Panama Canal speedily, honestly and economically, thereby giving to our people what Democrats have always contended for — a great interoceanic canal, furnishing shorter and cheaper lines of transportation and broader and less trammeled trade relations with the other peoples of the world. AMERICAN CITIZENSHIP. We pledge ourselves to insist upon the just and lawful protec- tion of our citizens at home and abroad, and to use all proper measures to secure for them, whether native-born or naturalized, and without distinction of race or creed, the equal protection of laws and the enjoyment of all rights and privileges open to them under the covenants of our treaties of friendship and commerce; and if under existing treaties the right of travel and sojourn is denied to American citizens, or recognition is withheld from American passports by any countries on the ground of race or creed, we favor the beginning of negotiations with the govern- ments of such countries to secure by new treaties the removal of these unjust discriminations. We demand that all over the world a duly authenticated passport issued by the Government of the United States to an American citizen shall be proof of the fact that he is an American citizen and shall entitle him to the treat- ment due him as such. ELECTION OF SENATORS BY THE PEOPLE. We favor the election of United States Senators by the direct vote of the people. STATEHOOD FOR TERRITORIES. We favor the admission of the territory of Oklahoma and the Indian Territory. We also favor the immediate admission of Arizona and New Mexico as separate States, and a territorial government for Alaska and Porto Rico. DEMOCRATIC PARTY PLATFORM. We hold that the oflScials appointed to administer the govern- ment of any territory, as well as with the district of Alaska, should be bona fide residents at the time of their appointment of the territory or district in which their duties are to be performed. CONDEMNATION OF POLYGAMY. We demand the extermination of polygamy within the juris- diction of the United States and the complete separation of church and State in political affairs. MERCHANT MARINE. We denounce the ship subsidy bill recently passed by the United States Senate as an iniquitous appropriation of public funds for private purposes and a wasteful, illogical and useless attempt to overcome by subsidy the obstructions raised by Repub- lican legislation to the growth and development of American commerce on the sea. We favor the upbuilding of a merchant marine without new or additional burdens upon the people and without bounties from the public treasury. RECIPROCITY. We favor liberal trade arrangements with Canada, and with peoples of other countries, where these can be entered into with benefit to AmeWcan agriculture, manufactures, mining or commerce. MONROE DOCTRINE. We favor the maintenance of the Monroe Doctrine in its full integrity. ARMY. We favor the reduction of the army and of army expenditure to the point historically demonstrated to be safe and suflQcient. PENSIONS AND OUR SOLDIERS AND SAILORS. The Democracy would secure to the surviving soldiers and sailors and their dependents generous pensions, not by an arbitrary executive order, but by legislation which we grateful people stand ready to enact. Our soldiers and sailors who defend with their lives the Constitution and the laws have a sacred interest in their just administration. They must therefore share with us the humiliation with which we have witnessed the exalta- tion of court favorites, without distinguished service, over the scarred heroes of many battles; or aggrandized by legislative appropriations out of the treasuries of a prostrate people, in violation of act of Congress', which fixes the compensation and allowances of the military officers. CIVIL SERVICE. The Democratic party stands committed to the principles of civil service reform, and we demand their honest, just and impartial enforcement. We denounce the Republican party for DEMOCRATIC PARTY PLATFORM. 9 its continuous and sinister encroachments upon tlie spirit and operation of civil-service rules, whereby it has arbitrarily- dispensed with examinations for office in the interests of favorites and employed all manner of devices to overreach and set aside the principles upon which the civil service was established. SCHOOLS AND RACE QUESTIONS. The race question has brought countless woes to this country. The calm wisdom of the American people should see to it that it brings no more. To revive the dead and hateful race and sectional animosities in any part of our common country means confusion, distraction of business and the reopening of wounds nov/ happily healed. North, South, East and "West, have but recently stood together in line of battle from the walls of Peking to the hills of Santiago, and as sharers of a common glory and a common destiny we should share fraternally the common burdens. We, therefore, deprecate and condemn the bourbon- like, selfish and narrow spirit of the recent Republican conven- tion at Chicago, which sought to kindle anew the embers of racial and sectional strife, and we appeal from it to the sober common sense and patriotic spirit of the American people. THE REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATION. The existing Republican administration has been spasmodic, erratic, sensational, spectacular and arbitrary. It has made itself a satire upon the Congress, the courts and upon the settled practices and usages of national and international law. It summoned the Congress into hasty and futile extra session, and virtually adjourned it, leaving behind in its fiight from Washington uncalled calendars and unaccomplished tasks. It made war, which is the sole power of Congress, without its authority, thereby usurping one of its fundamental prerogatives. It violated a plain statute of the United States as well as plain treaty obligations, international usages and constitutional law; and has done so under pretence of executing a great public policy, which could have been more easily effected lawfully, constitu- tionally and with honor. It forced strained and unnatural constructions upon statutes, usurping judicial interpretation and substituting Congressional enactment decree. It withdrew from Congress their customary duties of investi- gation which have heretofore made the representatives of the people and the States the terror of evildoers. It conducted a secretive investigation of its own and boasted of a few sample convicts, while it threw a broad coverlet over the bureaus which had been their chosen field of operative abuses, and kept in power the superior officers under whose administra- tion the crimes had been committed. It ordered assault upon some monopolies, but, paralyzed by its first victory, it fiung out the fiag of truce and cried out that, it would not "run amuck"— leaving its future purposes beclouded by its vacillations. 10 FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF DEMOCRACY. APPEAL TO THE COUNTRY. Conducting the campaign upon this declaration of our prin- ciples and purposes, we invoke for our candidates the support, not only of our great and time-honored organization, but also the active assistance of all of our fellow-citizens who, disregarding past differences upon questions no longer in issue, desire the perpetuation of our Constitutional Government as framed and established by the fathers of the republic. FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES OF DEMOCRACY. JEFFERSON'S INAUGURAL ADDRESS. "About to enter, fellow-citizens, on the exercise of duties which comprehend everything dear and valuable to you, it is proper that you should understand what I deem the essential principles of our Government, and consequently those which ought to shape Its administration. I will compress them within the narrowest compass they will bear, stating the general principle, but not all its limitations. "Equal and exact justice to all men of whatever state or persuasion, religious or political. "Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none. "The support of the State governments in all their rights, as the most competent administrations for our domestic concerns and the surest bulwarks against anti-republican tendencies. "The preservation of the General Government in its whole constitutional vigor, as the sheet anchor of our peace at home and safety abroad. "A jealous care of the rights of election by the people — a mild and safe corrective of abuses which are lopped by the sword of revolution where peaceable remedies are unprovided. "Absolute acquiescence in the decision of the majority — the vital principle of republics from which there is no appeal but to force, the vital principle and immediate parent of despotism. "A well-disciplined militia, our best reliance in peace, and for the first moments of war, till the regulars may relieve them. "The supremacy of the civil over the military authority. "Economy in the public expense, that labor may be lightly burdened. "The honest payment of our debts and sacred preservation of the public faith. "Encouragement of agriculture and commerce as its handmaid. "The diffusion of information and the arraignment of all abuses at the bar of public reason. "Freedom of religion; freedom of the press; freedom of the person under the protection of habeas corpus; and trials by juries ipipartially selected. "These principles form the bright constellation which has gone before ub, and guided our steps through an age of revolution and retormation. Tbe wU4om of our sages and the blood of our WHY I AM A DEMOCRAT. 11 heroes have been devoted to the attainment. They should be the creed of our political faith — the text of civil instruction — the touchstone by which to try the services of those we trust; and should we wander from them in moments of error or alarm, let us hasten to retrace our steps and regain the road which leads alone to peace, liberty and safety." WHY I AM A DEMOCRAT. I am a Democrat because the eternal and immutable principles of Democracy are necessary to a free government, which vary only in their application and expression as the needs and exigen- cies of our country demand. I am a Democrat because Democracy means the rule of the people; the rule of the majority, freely and fairly expressed. I am a Democrat because the Democracy of the United States endorses and has always endorsed the enduring Declaration of Independence, in which amongst other things the fathers of the Republic particularly declared that: The right of petition is ours and sacred. All men are created equal * * * with certain Inalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. I am a Democrat because the Democratic party stands for "Equal Rights to All and Special Privileges to None;" which is the natural corollary of the great Declaration. I am a Democrat because the Democratic party is for the preservation of all the rights granted to the Federal government by the Constitution, and for the preservation of the reserved rights of the States, and especially for the right of the people to alter or change the fundamental law when they deem it necessary. I am a Democrat because the Democratic party stands for Home/ Rule — the right of each organized community to manage its own/ local affairs as may seem best to the majority of its citizens. f I am a Democrat because the Democratic party stands for the least taxation, national, state and local, that will support the Federal, State and local governments honestly and economically administered. I am a Democrat because the Democratic party opposes and has always opposed the centralization of power in the hands of the Federal government, other than those powers granted by the Constitution. I am a Democrat because, the Democratic party is broad enough for all men to enlist under its banner, who believe in and endorse its fundamental principles, and yet catholic enough to shelter with its everlasting wings the rich and powerful and the poor and needy, where both labor and capital and all conditions of men, can work out their own salvation with absolute equity. I am a Democrat because the Democratic party stands for the equal right of every citizen in his person and property and in their management to achieve what his own efforts entitle him to, 12 FIRST TARIFF ACT, 1789. without anyone to molest or make afraid, if he does not commit aggressions upon the equal rights of another, and this is all from which he ought by law to be restrained. I am a Democrat because the Democratic party has always opposed and is today fighting monopolies and trusts and the moneyed oligarchy, even as it fought and vanquished the political oligarchy under Jefferson and the moneyed oligarchy under Jackson. And because I believe it is the only party honestly fighting the UNLAWFUL COMBINATIONS AND CORPORA- TIONS — made possible by law, entrenched behind a prohibitive tariff, buttressed by subsidies and fostered by special rates and rebates, plundering the people with the one hand, while with the other they reach for foreign conquest and sell their product cheaper abroad than they sell it to our own tariff-taxed people. I am a Democrat because the Democratic party, in all its enviable history since the foundation of the Republic, has always been the bulwark of the people against special privilege and the defender of the many against the power of money in the hands of the few. I am a Democrat because the Democratic party is conservative enough to hold fast to that which is good and radical enough to push all necessary reforms. FIRST TARIFF ACT, 1789. The first tariff act passed by Congress was in April, 1789. It was approved by President Washington. It took effect July 4, 1789, and was entitled: "An Act for Laying the Duty on Goods, Wares and Merchandise" and began with this preamble : Whereas, It is necessary for the support of Government, for the dis- charge of the debts of the United States and the encouragement and protection of manufactures, that duty be paid on goods, wares and merchandise imported. Be it enacted, etc.: That from and after the first day of August next ensuing the sev- eral duties hereinafter mentioned shall be laid on the following goods, ^ wares, and merchandise imported into the United States from any foreign port or place, that is to say: Because of this preamble the Republicans refer to this act with unremitting joy. The Republican Campaign Book of 1896 con- tains the following: The first revenue la^y passed by the United States after the adoption of the Constitution, was one prepared under a resolution of Mr. Madison. It passed the House May 14, and. the Senate June 12; was sent to a conference, passed both Houses, and was approved by President Washington and became a law July 4, 1789. The preamble of this law recited: "Whereas it is neces- sary for the support of the Government and the encouragement and protection of manufactures," etc. This act provided for both specific and ad valorem duties. Among the former were: Boots, 50 cents per pair; tallow candles, 2 cents a pound; coal, 2 cents per bushel, etc. James Madison, who has been called the "father of the Constitution," was also the legislative "father of protectiou" to American manufactures. FIRST TARIFF ACT, 1789. 18 Here is the Act in question, fixed by the "fathers" for the "protection of manufactures" — "infants" then, as they are in 1906: FIRST TARIFF ACT TOOK EFFECT JULY 4, 1789. Articles. U. S. Act, April, 1789 Wines and liquors — Madeira wine, gallon 18c Other wines, gallon 10c Beer, ale, porter, gallon 5c Ditto, in bottles, dozen 20c Jamaica rum, gallon 10c Other rum, gallon 8c Distilled spirits, gallon 8 to 10c Brown sugar, pound Ic Loaf sugar, pound 3c Molasses, gallon 2i/^c Coffee, pound 2i^c Bohea tea, pound 6 to 8c Other teas, pound 10 to 16c Salt, bushel 10c Gocoa, pound Ic Chocolate, pound 5c Snuffs, pound 10c Manufactured tobacco, pound 6c Earthen and China ware 10% Glassware 10% Looking glasses 10% Window glass 10% Soap, pound 2c Beef, pound 5% Pork, pound 5% Nails and spikes, pound Ic Cordage and cables, cwt , 75c Twine, cwt 90c Boots, pair 50c Shoes, of leather, pair 7c Shoes, of stuff, pair 5% Shoes, of silk, pair 10c Four-wheeled carriages, each 15% Two-wheeled carriages, each 15% Harness and bridles 7%% Scythes, dozen 5% Iron shovels, dozen . 5% Hoes, dozen 5% Axes, dozen 5% Anchors 7%% Bar iron, cwt 7%% Hemp, cwt 60c Iron pots and kettles, cwt 7%% Iron stoves, cwt 7%% ' Iron castings, cwt 7^/^% Iron hollowware, cwt 7%% Tools 5^^ Candles, pound 2c Butter 5% Cheese 4c Linseed oil, gallon 5% Coal, bushel 2c Miscellaneous manufactures of metals 5% Wrought gold 5% Wrought silver 5% Brass Free Copper 5% lead Free "'mr ■•; Free 14 FIR8T TARIFF ACT, 1789. FIRST TARIFF ACT TOOK EFFECT JULY 4, 1789— Continued. Articles. U. S. Act, April, 1789 Tinplate 7y2% Sheeps' wool Free Cotton wool Free Cloths 5% Ready-made clothing 7l^% Beaver hats, each 7%% Castor hats, each 7%% Felt hats, each 71/2% Spelling books and primers 5% Novels 5% Paperhangings 7l^% Whips 7y2% Canes 71/2% Household furniture. 5% Wool and cotton cards, per dozen 50c. Leather, pound 7%% Leather manufactures 7%% Horn combs 5% Playing cards, dozen packs $L20 The Congress wWcli passed this act met April 6, 1789, and two days thereafter the House, in the committee of the whole on the state of the Union, took up the subject of the tariff, introduced by James Madison, who, in part, said: "I take the liberty, Mr. Chairman, at this early stage of the busi- ness, to introduce to the committee a subject which appears to me to be of the greatest magnitude; a subject, sir, that requires our first at- tention and our united exertions. * * * The deficiency in our Treasury has been too notorious to make it necessary for me to animad- vert upon that subject. Let us content ourselves with endeavoring to remedy the evil. To do this a national revenue must be obtained; but the system must be such a one that, while it secures the object of revenue, it shall not he oppressive to our constituents. Happy it is for us that such a system is within our power, for I apprehend that both these objects may be obtained from an impost on articles im- ported into the United States. "In pursuing this measure, I know that two points occur for our consideration. The first respects the general regulation of commerce, which, in my opinion, ought to be as free as the policy of nations will admit. The second relates to revenue alone, and this is the point I mean more particularly to bring into the view of the committee. * * * The proposition made on this subject by Congress in 1783, having received generally the approbation of the several States of the Union in some form or other, seems well calculated to become the basis of the temporary system which I wish the committee to adopt." THE DINGLEY TARIFF. 15 THE DINGLEY TARIFF. Articles. Specific rates of duty. 1! CO n Computed aver- age- ad valorem rates of duty. (Fiscal year Percent. Per Cent. Wines and liquors— Mndptra wine Gal Still wines . . • 49 66 Champagne and other snarklinc 53.76 Beer, ale, porter '* In bottles or jugs, per gallon, 40 cents 42.62 Ditto, in bottles doz. Jamaica rum gal. In other coverings, per gallon, 20 cents > Per gallon, $2.25 69.37 125.71 Distilled Roirits " Sugar under No. 16 D. S. in color, per pound from .95 ct. to 1.825 cts., accord- Tli*nwn QiiD'a'p Ih. 66.65 T^opf sne^fi'r '* Sugar above No. 16 D. S. (refined) per pound, 1.95 cents -• ..... 55 88 Molasses gal. Coffee lb. Boheatea " Per gallon, 3 and 6 cents. . . PrgQ 20 19.31 ]Pree jTf ee Salt bu. (Per 100 lbs. in bags or -< sacks, 12 cents 33.32 1 Per 100 lbs in bulk, 8 cents 83.16 flnooft - ... 11^ 16.70 nVirkr>r»lflf.A . *' 26.37 Snuffs " Mfd. tobacco " 100.72 Per pound, 55 cents (not including cigars, che- roots and cicarettes) .... 100.51 "RttTf Vipn pnfl nliinAWfiTft 68.96 Glassware 57 33 r Mirrors not exceeding ■ 144 square inches "^ Looking-glass plates ex- 45 67.80 WiTifln'w clnssfis 63.91 Soap lb. Rpiftf '* 27.11 T*pr nnmirl 2 rifliif s 20 44 Pork " 14.65 9.51 Cordage and cables owt. Twine " 16.95 44.56 Boots pair Shnp«i of leather " 25 25 50 60 60 45 35 45 45 45 45 45 Cotton < Wool, per pound, 44 cents and Stuff " »» gilk " 4-wheeled carriages ... each 2-w heeled carriages — " Scythes " Hoes " Axes " Anchors Per pound, 1)^ cents 38.18 29.09 jjemn « • " 12.72 Iron pots and kettles.. " Tron nf.rtvAH . .... . . " Pfir 1101111(1 8-1 fl o.fin t; Per Dound 8-10 cent Iron castings '* Iron hollow- ware *' 16.82 Per nound 2 cents 36.71 Tools Of metal 45 25 20 t»t t • 1 tf itit / Wax , Candles.. lb. 1 All other Butter Per pound, 6 cents. PerpQHRd,6oent8,,,,t.... 88,95 Cheese ♦1.41 16 THE DINGLEY TARIFF. THE DINGLEY TARIFF -Continued. Articles. Linseed oil gal Coal bu. Miscel. man'f r's of metals. "Wrought gold Wrought silver Brass (old brass free) Copper (unman'fM free) — Lead Tin (unman'f 'd free) Tin plate Sheep's wool Cotton (raw free) Cloths , Ready-made clothing. Beaver hats each Castor hats " Felt hats " Spell, books & primers Novels Paper hangings Whips Canes Household furniture Wool and cotton cards.. pair Leather lb. Leather manufactures Horn combs Playing cards doz. packs Specific rates of duty. a-5 oo Per gallon, 30 cents f Bituminous and shale I per ton, 67 cents I Slack or culm of coal t per ton, 15 cents Manufactures Manufactures Ore and manufactures. Manufactures Per pound, 1>^ cents. -. Manufactures f Cotton j Fibre iSilk LWool f Cotton J Silk 1 Wool, per pound, t cents and [ Fur hats Wool, U cts. per pound and 44 (Harness). .. (Sticks for). Free Gloves All other n. e. s.. Per pack, 10 cents and. Percent. 60 'O as _. -u "1 O w Per Cent. 52.06 31.59 10.74 45.21 15.75 82.25 .45 63.12 46.64 54.26 38.55 44.73 55.20 100.02 82.20 52.26 81.60 17.16 52.58 150.67 TARIFF BATES. 17 TARIFF RATES. THE AVERAGE RATES OF DUTY FOR THE YEAR ON THE THINGS ACTUALLY TAXED. Year, Per cent. 1871 43.95 1872 41.35 1873 38.07 1874 38.53 1875 40.62 1876 44.74 1877 42.89 1878 42.75 1879 44.87 1880 43.48 1881 43.20 1882 42.66 1883 42.45 1884 41.61 1885 45.86 1886 45.55 1887 47.10 Estim't'd aver- age rate un- der Mills bill 42.49 1888 45.63 1889 45.13 1890 44.41 1891 46.28 1892 48.71 1893 49.58 1894 50.06 1895 41.75 1896 39.95 1897 42.17 1898 48.75 1899 52.07 1900 49.24 1901 49.64 1902 49.78 1903 49.03 1904 48.77 1905 45.24 Year. Per cent. Year. Per cent. 1791 .. . 15.34 1831 .. 1832 ... 47.38 1792 .. 11.54 42.96 1793 .. 14.68 1833 .. 1834 .. 38.25 1794 .. 17.10 40.19 1795 .. 11.21 1835 .. 40.38 1796 .. 12.02 15.60 1836 . . 34.94 1797 .. 1837 ... 29.18 1798 ... 19.99 1838 ... 41.33 1799 .. 19.70 1839 ... 31.77 1800 ... 17.42 1840 ... 34.39 1801 ... 16.61 1841 .. 34.56 1802 .. 30.67 1842 ... .25.81 1803 .. 20.52 1843 ... 29.19 1804 . . 22.76 19.19 1844 . . 36 88 1805 ... 1845 ... 34.45 1806 ... 21.22 1846 ... 33.35 1807 ... 20.09 1847 ... 28.02 1808 ... 37.22 1848 ... 26.28 1809 . . . 18.80 1849 ... 26.11 1810 ... 14.07 1850 ... 27.14 .1811 ... 35.62 1851 ... 26.63 1812 ... 13.07 1852 ... 27.38 1813 ... 69.03 1853 ... 25.93 1814 ... 46.79 1854 ... 25.61 1815 ... 6.84 1855 ... 26.82 1816 ... 27.94 1856 ... 26.05 1817 ... 32.90 1857 ... 22.45 1818 ... 16.78 1858 ... 22.43 1819 ... 29.81 1859 ... 19.56 1820 ... 26.59 1860 ... 19.67 1821 ... 30.99 1861 ... 18.84 1822 . . . 27.13 1862 ... 36.20 1823 . . . 39.21 1863 ... 32.62 1824 ... 50.21 1864 ... 36.69 1825 ... 50.24 1865 ... 47.56 1826 ... 49.26 1866 ... 48.35 1827 .. . 53.76 1867 . . 1868 ... 46 67 1828 ... 47.59 48.63 1829 ... 54.18 1869 .. . 47.22 1830 .. . 61 69 1870 ... 47 08 THE HISTORY OF TARIFF CHANGES. RATES OF DUTY LEVIED ON ARTICLES OF NECESSITY UNDER ALL TARIFFS SINCE 1791 TO 1883. Tariff Act of the Year 1789 1790-91. .. 1792 1794-5 1797-1800. 1804-7-8... 1813-15.... 1816-19.... 1824-26.... JO.... im. ^^^^ 11841. 1842 1846 1857 1861 1867 1883 »H a> P. qq' •• rs o . o O^ 1 11 « o free 5 3c 1H 3c '!H 8c \i%. 3c J5 3c 17X 6c 35 n.o.p. 8c 20 3c 25 3c 25 8c 25 8c 24 3c 23 3c 30 free 25 free 19 free 80 3c 35 free 85 08 O free free free free free free free free o go 5 5 7>^ 10 12>i 15 30 n.o.p. 25 15@30|30-33>^ 15@50 40@45 0@80 " 0@78 0@72 5@60 30 0@24 *40 *36 40 30 24 12c. a lb. & 251ict 50c. & 351^ct 35c. & 35@40 M ho «^ rSP. S^ 6ft 3 ii 36 ao S -go So ft d d OS . 0- 1^ rt CO t— t 03 3 5 5 5 5 5 5 10 5 5 5 7X 5 5 Vi^ 7>^ free 7X 10 10 7^ 15 10 free vm 15 15 12>^ 20 12^ free 12^ 15 ,15 12>^ 20 15 free 15 mn \ny,. '5 22>^ 30 free 30 35 «5 30 45 25 free 30 20 20 25 20 25 free 30 25 25 25 n ^* .35 free 30 25 25 25 ^-^t 25 free 25 25 25 25 «nS 24 free 24 24 24 24 . * ft 23 free 23 23 23 23 ^..^ 25 free 30 ;^o 30 25 25 20 30 30 80 30 20 30 15 24 24 24 24 15 24 1 20 80 30 80 80 80 20 35 35 45 40 40 *71 20 35 45 45 40 45 10 10 10 15 15 35 20 20 20 20 !>0 20 30 30 24 25@40 25@60 The figures marked with a ♦ are the average rates collected on the next year's Imports. All the others are at the rates embodied In the law. 18 THE HISTORY OF TARIFF CHANGES. PROTECTIVE TARIFFS NOT TO BE "PERPETUAL." In 1833 Mr. Clay said: Now, give us time; cease all fluctuation and agitations for nine years, and the manufacturers in every branch will sustain themselves against foreign competition. In 1840 he said: No one, Mr. President, in the commencement of the protective policy ever supposed that it was to be perpetual. We hoped and believed that temporary protection extended to our infant manufacturers would bring them up and enable them to with- stand competition with those of Europe. If the protective policy were entirely to cease in 1842 it would have existed twenty-six years from 1816, or eighteen from 1824, quite as long as at either of these periods its friends supposed might be necessary. In 1842 he said: Let me not be misunderstood, and let me entreat that I may not be misrepresented. I am not advocating the revival of a high protective tariff. I am abiding by the principles of the compromise act. But in 1810 he had said: But it is important to diminish our imports, to furnish ourselves with clothing made by our own industry, and to cease to be dependent for the very coats we wear upon foreign and perhaps inimical country. The nation that imports its clothing from abroad is but little less de- pendent than if it imported its bread. The vote for the Act of 1846 was: House, 114 to 43; Senate, 27 to 27, Vice-President Dallas casting the deciding vote (28 to 27). Mr. Dallas in explaining his vote, in part said: "During that period ( 'high duties on imports * * for more than thirty years') a system of high taxation has prevailed, with fluctua- tions of success and failure. It ought to be remembered that this exer- cise of the taxing power was obiginally intended to be tempoeaby. "The design was to foster feeble 'infant' ( his italics ) manufacturers, especially such as webe essential to the defense of the coun- TBY IN time of WAB. "In this design, the people have persevered until these saplings have taken root; have become vigorous, expanded and powerful, and are prepared to enter, with confidence, the field of fair, free and universal competition. "The arrival of this period of time has been anxiously looked for by a large portion of our fellow citizens, who deem themselves peculiar and almost exclusive suffebees by the policy of pbotection. "They have sometimes, perhaps, imprudently, endeavored to an- ticipate it. "Their numbers, at first entitled in influence, only from their patriot- ism and intelligence, have gone on, gradually increasing as the system ripened to its fruit, and they now constitute a decided majority of the people of the Union." THE TARIFF AND TRV8TS. 19 THE TARIFF AND TRUSTS. The protective tariff has been acknowledged by one of its principal beneficiaries, Mr. Havemeyer, president of the Sugar Trust, in his testimony before the Industrial Commission, June 14, 1899, to be the "mother of all trusts" and as that statement is pretty near the truth it seems desirable to treat the tariff and trust questions under one head. DEMOCRATIC PLATFORMS ON TARIFF AND TRUSTS. The Democratic position on the tariff issue, as declared in the last national platform was: "The Democratic party has been and will continue to be the con- sistent opponent of that class of tariff legislation by which certain interests have been permitted through Congressional favor to draw heavy tribute from the American people. This monstrous perversion of those equal opportunities which our political institutions were es- tablished to secure, has caused what may once have been infant indus- tries to become the greatest combinations of capital that the world has ever known. These especial favorites of the government have, through trust methods, been converted into monopolies, thus bringing to an end domestic competition, which was the only alleged check upon the extravagant profits made possible by the protective system. These industrial combinations by the financial assistance they can give, now control the policy of the Republican party. We denounce protection as a robbery of the many to enrich the few ; and we favor a tariff limited to the needs of the government, economically adminis- tered, and so levied as not to discriminate against any industry, class or section, to the end that the burdens of taxation shall be distributed as equally as possible. "We favor a revision and a gradual reduction of the tariff by the friends of the masses and for the common weal, and not by the friends of its abuses, its extortions and its discriminations; keeping in view the ultimate ends of 'equality of burdens and equality of opportunities* and the constitutional purposes of raising a revenue by taxation — to wit, the support of the Federal Government in all its integrity and virility, but in simplicity." The national platform of 1900 declared that: "Tariff laws should be amended by putting the products of trusts upon the free list to prevent monopoly under the plea of protection." * « * «^g condemn the Dingley tariff law as a trust-breeding measure, skilfully devised to give to the few favors which they do not deserve, and to place upon the many burdens which they should not bear." There is no doubt therefore where the Democratic party stands on the tariff and the trusts. The Republican position is to "stand pat"' and "continue to stand pat," or as Speaker Cannon puts it, "stand pat and pass the hat." REPUBLICAN PLATFORM ON TARIFF AND TRUSTS. The last Republican national platform declared: "We insist upon the maintenance of the principles of protection, and therefore rates of duty should be readjusted only when conditions have so changed that the public interest demands their alteration; but this work cannot be safely committed to any other hands than those of the Republican party. To intrust it to the Democratic party is to invite disaster," 20 TARIFF HISTORY. On the trusts the Republican platform declared: "Combinations of capital and of labor are the results of the eco- nomic movement of the age, but neither must be permitted to in- fringe upon the rights and interests of the people. Such combi- nations, when lawfully formed for lawful purposes, are alike en- titled to the protection of the laws, but both are subject to the laws, and neither can be permitted to break them." Therefore: 1. The issue on the tariif question is not between theoretical pro- tection and theoretical free trade; it is between exaggerated pro- tection producing monopoly, and a fair and just revision of the scheaules in behalf of the general welfare; the former is the Re- publican position, the latter the Democratic. TARIFF HISTORY. DISPROVES REPUBLICAN PLATFORM CONTENTION. The Republican national platform claims that: "A Democratic tariff has always been followed by business ad- versity, a Republican tariff by business prosperity." That hoary Republican misstatement has been reiterated in every campaign since the war, but it remained for Senator Lodge to embalm it in a Republican platform, and to have it approved by a President of the United States. HISTORICAL FACTS. Economic crises with the accompanying tariff in difTerent countries were as follows: United States: England: France: 1866 Free Trade 1869 Protection 1873 Protection. 1873 Free Trade. 1873 Protection. 1882 Protection. 1884 Protection 1884-5 Protection. 1890 Protection. 1890 Free Trade. 1890 Protection. 1893 Protection 1893 Protection. These dates are taken from "Economical Crises," page 137, by Edward D. Jones, professor of economics. University of Wisconsin. The table shows that all the panics in this country have occurred under Republican auspices and with the highest protec- tive tariff, and in France the same conditions prevailed, whije in free trade England there has been only one panic since 1873, and that known as the "Baring panic," was purely financial. That the present "boom" will be followed by a panic is only a question of time. The present is a period of great inflation through the natural vast increase in the output of gold, and the further artificial increase through legislation. The national bank currency has been infiated 10 per cent, by the act allowing the banks to issue notes up to the par value of the bonds deposited, and the large increase in the number of banks under the act allowing national banks to be organized with $25,000 capital. So TARIFF HISTORY. 21 that, whereas in 1896 the per capita circulation was $21.42 in 1905, it had increased to $31.08, or nearly 50 per cent, more than in 1896, and now exceeds $32; thereby proving the Democratic contention of the quantitative theory of money, and substantiating the demand made by the Democrats in 1896, that the currency of the country should be increased. It is not the tariff therefore, which has produced the present "boom," but inflation of the currency and record crops in this country with a shortage of crops in other countries, and the consequent good demand for our products from England and elsewhere. IS PROTECTION PANIC PROOF? The argument used by Senator Gallinger, which was so care- fully prepared by the paid officials of the Protective Tariff League, and published as a document in 1904, under the thrilling caption, "Protection Is Panic Proof," is completely demolished by the facts above presented. Protection was certainly not panic proof in 1873. Where was the God of Protection then? Perchance, like Baal of old, he was on a journey, or, peradventure, he was sleeping. Heaven knows that the Protectionists called upon Him loudly enough, just then; for their plight was pitiable. Perhaps Senator Gallinger, or other protectionist orators, may show to their own satisfaction that under the Democratic low tariff of 1846-1857 the country was in a continual panic; but the facts would belie them, for that period was one of remarkable prosperity. Then, as now, the gold output was enormously increased by the discoveries in California in 1847, and circulation of money per capita increased, from $6.79 in 1840 to $15.81 in 1857. Immigration was on a large scale, as it is now. Crops were good here and poor abroad, as now. In fact, the country was so flourishing that the Secretary of the Treasury used to harp in his annual reports on "a new commercial era," as Secretary Shaw is now doing. Yet tariff rates at that time averaged less than 25 per cent. But prosperity was so great and the tariff produced so much revenue, that the public debt was virtually extinguished, being reduced in 1857 to but 99 cents per capita, whereas on June 30, 1905, it was $11.91, and exceeds that figure today. Hence the tariff of 1857 was purposely passed to reduce and did reduce the 30 per cent, ad valorem act of 1846 to 20 per cent, ad valorem, and Nathaniel P. Banks, a Republican, was speaker with an anti- Democratic majority behind him. Of this law Mr. Blaine in his "Twenty Years in Congress," says: TARIFF 1846— MR. BLAINE. Moreover, the tariff of 1846 was yielding an abundant revenue, and the business of the country was in a flourishing condition at the time his administration [President Pierce's] was organized. Money be- came very abundant after the year 1849; large enterprises were undertaken, speculation was prevalent, and for a considerable period the prosperity of the country was general and apparently genuine. TARIFF 1857— RESISTANCE CEASED TO LOW TARIFF. The principles embodied in the tariff of 1856 seemed for the time to be so entirely vindicated and approved that resistance to it ceased, not only among the people, but among the protective economists, and even among the manufacturers, to a large extent. TARIFF HI8T0RT. So general was this acquiescence that in 1856 a protective tariff was not suggested, or even hinted, by any one of the three parties which presented Presidential candidates. "By this law (tariff 1857) the duties were placed lower than they had been at any time since the war of 1812. "The act was well received by the people, and was, indeed, con- curred in by a considerable portion of the Republican party." The convention (which nominated Mr. Lincoln, 1860) therefore avoided the use of the word "protection," and was contented with the moderate declaration that "sound public policy" requires such an adjustment of imports as will encourage the development of the industrial interest of the whole country. The conditions of that period of prosperity and low tariff are so well stated by the New York Evening Post, May 20, 1904, that it is worthy of repetition: "With rare foresight, Mr. Blaine, in his 'Twenty Years of Con- gress,' anticipated the Senator from New Hampsnire. The pro- tectionists, he says, held that the boasted prosperity under the tariff of 1846 was abnormal in origin and character. 'It depended on a series of events exceptional at home and even more exceptional abroad — events which by the doctrine of probabilities would not be repeated for centuries. The protectionists maintain that from 1846 to 1857 the United States would have enjoyed prosperity under any form of tariff, but that the amount of exceptional conditions in Europe and America came to an end the country was plunged head- long into a disaster from which the conservative force of a pro- tective tariff would in large part have saved it,' But that sort of talk will not go down with such men as John Sharp Williams. They will insist on knowing why the exceptional conditions prior to 1857 cannot be ascribed to the low tariff of 1846. We all know that the poor crops in Europe and the big crops in this country in 1897 were due to protection, and why were not the Irish potato famine and the high price of wheat in the forties equally due to the Walker tariff? "The Blaine explanation of 1846 is an edged tool for the friends of protection. In fact, it shows us very clearly Avhat caused the panic of 1873. The low tariff of 1846 was a death-dealing device, but it took eleven years to get in its work. Senator Gallinger de- clares that the Morrill tariff of 1861 was designedly a protective measure. The new policy was in operation during one of the greatest periods of speculation in our history. But in twelve years there was the worst collapse we had ever known. Certainly, protection was not panic proof then, and how do we know it is going to be panic proof now? Only seven years (now nine years) have passed since the Dingley law was enacted, whereas the experience of 1857 and 1873 teaches that we must wait eleven or twelve years to discover whether a tariff is a tonic or a poison. Senator Gallinger did well to say nothing about 1873, but he should have steered clear of 1857 also." We will now quote from the very able report of Special Com- missioner of Revenue, David A. Wells, Executive Document No. 16, House, Fortieth Congress, third session, dated January, 1869, first classifying our tariffs as follows: 1816 to 1824, moderate protective. 1824 to 1832, high protective. 1833 to 1842, lower compromise. 1842 to 1848, higher protective. 1846 to 1857, low revenue. 1857 to 1861, lower revenue. Mr. Wells said: "Production of pig iron in 1830, 165,000 tons; in 1840, 347,000 tons. Increase in 10 years, UO per cent. TARIFF msTORY. 23 "Production in 1845, 486,000 tons; increase in 5 years, 40 per cent. "Production in 1850, 564,000 tons; increase in 10 years, 62 per cent. "Production in 1855, 754,000 tons; increase in 5 years, 33 per cent. "Production in 1860, 913,000 tons; increase in 10 years, 61 per cent. "It thus appears that the great annual increase in the production of pig iron took place prior to the year 1840, and for 30 years was remarkably uniform at the rate of 10 to 11 per cent, per annum; and that since then, no matter what has been the character of the legis- lation, whether the tariff was low or high, whether the condition of the country was one of war or peace, the increase of the production has been at the average of about 8 per cent, per annum, or more than double the ratio of the increase of population. "Again, as another curious illustration of an apparent misconcep- tion of the effects of past legislation upon the development of the country, take the following paragraph from the recent report of a congressional committee : " 'No business men of mature age need be reminded of the revulsion which followed in consequence of the free-trade system of 1846 — the decline of production, of immigration, of wages, of public or private revenue, until the culmination of the system in the tariff of 1857, with the memorable crisis of that period; the general ruin of manu- facturers and merchants; the suspended payment of the banks; the reduction of the Treasury to the verge of bankruptcy, and the un- paralleled distress among the unemployed poor.' "Now, with all due deference to the Committee, the Commissioner would ask attention to the following statistics bearing on the ques- tion under consideration : "Increase in the production of pig iron: In 1840, 347,000 tons; in 1845, 486,000; in 1850, 564,755; 1855, 754,178; 1860, 913,770. "Increase in the production of Pennsylvania anthracite coal: 1842, 1,108,418 tons; 1846,2,344,005; 1847,2,882,309; 1849,3,217,641; 1855, 6,486,097; 1860,8,143,938. "Increase in the domestic consumption of cotton north of the Po- tomac: 1840, 297,000 bales; 1845,422,000; 1849-50,476,000; 1851-52, 588,000; 1855, 633,000; 1858-59, 760,000; 1859-60, 792,000. "Increase in immigration: 1840, 84,000; 1845, 174,000; 1850, 310,000; 1854,427,000. "Increasce in public revenues: 1840, $19,000,000; 1845, $29,- 000,000; 1850, $52,000,000; 1855, $74,000,000. "Increase of national wealth: From 1840 to 1850, 80 per cent.; from 1850 to 1860, 126 per cent. In 1854 the 6 per cent, bonds of the United States, issued in 1848, commanded a premium of 21 per cent. "Commercial tonnage of the United States: 1840, 2,180,000; 1850, 3,535,000; 1860, 5,353,000. "Exports and imports: In 1840, $239,000,000; 1845, $231,000,000; 1850, $330,000,000; 1855, $536,000,000; 1860, $762,000,000. "Increase in shipbuilding: 1842, 129,084 tons; 1845, 146,018; 1850, 272,219; 1855, 583,450. "Annual increase of railroad construction: 1842, 491 miles; 1845, 256; 1847, 669; 1849, 1,369; 1853, 2,452; 1856, 3,643 miles." ANOTHER REPUBLICAN STATESMAN. Mr. Garfield in the House, April 1, 1870 (App. Globe, pp. 271-2), in urging tariff reform, in part, said: FIRST FURNACE TO REDUCE ORE ERECTED IN 1846. "I believe that the first furnace in the United States which re- duced ore with raw bituminous coal was established in Mahoning County, Ohio, in 1846. From that time, year by year, with some interruption, there has been an increase in the number of furnaces. In the year 1856, the Lake Superior ore was brought down to the Ohio coal region, and now there come down the Northern Lakes, as 24 TARIFF HISTORY. has been shown by the gentleman from Michigan, about 500,000 tons per annum of Lake Superior ore; and more than one-fourth of the whole amount is every year consumed in two counties of my Con- gressional district.'* In the same speech, p. 272, he states that: "The tariff act of 1842 was adopted, by which the rate of duty was raised and fixed at an average of 33 per cent. "In 1845, the Free Trade Party having again come into power, a heavy reduction of the tariff was made in 1846, and the rate pushed down to an average of 24 ^^ per cent." He further states: "That the Tariff Act of 1847," enacted by all political parties, "reduced the rate of duty to 24^ per cent., a lower rate than it had reached in 40 years. * * * "In the year 1861 marked a new era in the history of the tariff, in the winter of 1860-61 the rates were again raised. From the second of March, 1861, to the present time (1870) there had been thirteen separate tariff acts and revolutions, all of which have more or less increased the rate of duty, and it now averages about 47^ per cent, on dutiable articles and 41 per cent, on all our imports, both dutiable and free." REASON FOR ABANDONING THE VERY LOW TARIFF OF 1857 AND RAISING THE RATES. "That these acts were made necessary iy the war few will venture to defiy. It is also undeniable that the heavy internal taxes imposed upon the manufacturing industries neutralized the effect of protec- tive duties and made an increase of the tariff necessary as a measure of compensating protection. "But as I have already shown, the heaviest burdens of internal taxes have been removed from manufacturers and a demand that some cor- responding reduction in the tariff" rate shall be made is coming up from all quarters of the country. The signs are unmistakable tnat a strong reaction is setting in against the prevailing rates, and he is not a wise legislator who shuts his eyes to the fact of the situation." GARFIELD FOR ULTIMATE FREE TRADE. In concluding his speech, he quoted from a former address in this House in 1866, in which he said: "I am for a protection which leads to ultimate free trade. I am for that free trade which can only be achieved through a reasonable protection." Mr. Henry Loomis Nelson was Secretary to the Hon. John G. Carlisle while Speaker of the House. On July 4, 1884, Mr. Carlisle addressed him a letter, in part saying this: "Learning that you have prepared and propose to publish a volume containing a condensed statement of the arguments in opposition to the protective system in favor of a revenue tariff, I desire to say," etc., commending Mr. Nelson for his undertaking. By far, his is the most complete presentation of the operations of the low tariff of 1846 and 1857, which is herewith, in part, presented: WHAT A LOW TARIFF DID FOR THE COUNTRY. Between 1846 and 1860 the country had a low tariff. Under the law of 1846 the average' duty was about 25 per cent., and under the act of 1857 it was about 20 per cent. There was never a period of greater prosperity in the history of the country. i TARIFF HI STORY. 25 In 1850 the cash value of the farms was $3,271,375,426, and in 1860 it was $6,645,045,057, an increase of 103 per cent. In 1870 the value of farms was $9,262,853,861 in currency, an increase of only 39 per cent, over the gold valuations of 1860. In 1880 the value of farms was $10,197,096,766, an increase of a little more than 10 per cent, over the valuations of 1870. From 1850 to 1860 the value of farming implements increased 63.50 per cent. In the next decade the increase was only 36 per cent, in currency, while from 1870 to 1880 the increase was only 20.66 per cent. SOME NOTABLE COMPARISONS. From 1830 to 1840 the aggregate of real and personal property increased 40 per cent.; from 1840 to 1850 37 per cent. In 1850 this aggregate value was $7,135,780,228; in 1860 it was $16,159,616,068, an increase of 126 per cent. In 1870 the aggregate value was $30,068,- 518,507 in currency, being an apparent increase of a little more than 85 per cent. In 1860 the total State and local taxation was $94,186,- 746, but in 1870 it had reached the enormous sum of $280,591,521, an increase of 198 per cent., although the value of property had increased only 85 per cent. An examination of the report of the Superintendent of the Census for 1870 shows that the increase in the value of real and personal property from 1850 to 1860 was more than 184 per cent., instead of 126 per cent., and that instead of an increase of 85 per cent, from 1860 to 1870 there was an actual decrease of more than 3 per cent. This arises from what the Superintendent says was an under- valuation of property in 1860 by carelessness of from 20 to 80 per cent., while the nominal valuation of property was increased in 1870 from 30 to 40 per cent, through the eli'ects of currency inflation and other causes. Making the necessary allowances for these suma; we have $20,199,520,085 as the proper valuation for 1860 and $19,544,- 537,030 as the true valuation for 1870. If our wealth had increased from 1860 to 1880 at the same rate that it did from 1850 to 1860, it would have reached, in 1880, $83,000,000,000, instead of $43,500,- 000,000. LOW TARIFF INCREASES MANUFACTURING. There was some wonderful increases in our manufacturing and me- chanical industries. In 1850 the total value of the products of me- chanical and manufacturing industries was $1,019,106,616; in 1860 it was $1,885,861,676, an increase of 87 per cent., although the popu- lation of the country had increased only 35.50 per cent. From 1860 to 1870 the actual increase was only 52 per cent. PRODUCTION OF COAL INCREASED. The increase in the production of coal, which, according to the pro- tection leaders, indicates better than any other single branch of in- dustry the progress of all manufacturing enterprises, was very won- derful between 1850 to 1860. The following table shows the increase: Per Cent. Gain in number of mines 22.30 Gain in value of yearly products 182.00 Gain in value of material used 1,017.00 Gain in amount paid as wages 137.00 Gain in number of hands employed 143.33 Gain in amount of capital invested 253.00 COAL OUTPUT IN PENNSYLVANIA INCREASED. In Pennsylvania the capital invested in the production of coal was 331 per cent, greater in 1860 than in 1850, and the value of the coal product increased 179.90 per cent. In Maryland the increase was nearly 137 per cent., in Ohio nearly 127 per cent., in Indiana nearly 652 per cent., in Illinois it was 1,708 per cent., in Iowa it was 2,204 per cent., in Kentucky it was 200 per cent., and in Alabama nearly 237 per cent. 26 TARIFF HISTORY. HIGH TARIFF KILLED SHIPBUILDING. During the fiscal year our foreign trade amounted to $687,372,176, which was $45,000,000 greater than ever before. We built 2,265 ships and barks between 1850 and 1860, and only 800 during the next decade, and only 608 between 1870 and 1880. Then our tonnage en- gaged in all trades, coasting as well as foreign, was 5,353,868 tons; now, after the expiration of twenty years, it is 4,068,035 tons. REVENUE TARIFF PROMOTES INTELLECTUAL CONDITIONS. The social and intellectual condition of the people kept pace with the material progress. Schools, churches and libraries flourished. The products of the printing establishments of the United States in- creased during the same time 143 per cent. Wonderful as this is, it does not tell the story of the prosperity and growth of the preceding decade under a revenue tarifl'. Then the products of the printing houses increased 168 per cent., while the capital invested increased 235 per cent. In New England the increased product was more than 96 per cent., and in the Middle States 139 per cent. Pennsylvania in- creased her product 250 per cent., New Jersey 322 per cent. In the eleven Western States and Territories the increase was 572 per cent. The State of New York increased 104.60 per cent., and actually turned out more than the whole country produced in 1850. POSTOFFICES INCREASED. Jv 1850 we had 18,417 postoffices and 178,672 miles of post routes, but in 1860. we had 28,498 postoffices and 245,594 miles of post routes, an increase of 55 per cent., in the number of offices and 35 per cent, in the miles of routes. In 1880, twenty years later, we had 42,989 postoffices and 343,888 miles of post roads, being an increase since 1860 of only 50 per cent, in one and 42.50 in the other. MANUFACTURE OF PAPER INCREASED. In the manufacture of paper the United States increased the value of its product 106.50 per cent, from 1860 to 1870, while the capital invested increased 126.50 per cent., but from 1850 to 1860 the value of the product increased more than 108 per cent, and the capital invested nearly 180 per cent. The increase in the number of hands employed was 73.50 per cent., and in the total amount of wages paid 89 per cent. Pennsylvania alone increased her product 128 per cent. HOW RAILROAD BUILDING FLOURISHED. Up to the year 1850 we had constructed only 9,021 miles of railroad in this country, but at the close of 1860 we had 30,635 miles, being an increase of 239.5 per cent, in ten years. At the close of the year 1870 we had 52,914 miles, being an increase of a little more than 72 per cent, over 1860, notwithstanding the Government had since 1860 granted millions of acres of public lands and issued its own bonds to the amount of millions of dollars to various railroad companies to aid in the construction of their lines. In 1880 we had 88,237 miles, an increase of 66.66 per cent, during the decade. LABOR AND WAGES INCREASED. The value of the output of our woolen mills from 1850 to 1860 increased nearly 42.5 per cent., while from 1870 to 1880 it increased only 22.57 per cent. The number of hands employed increased 18.5 per cent, and the total wages increased 36.8 per cent. In New England the product of the woolen mills increased 62 per cent. ; the increase in Rhode Island being 176 per cent.; Massachusetts, 53.7 per cent.; New Jersey, 21.57 per cent.; Vermont, 61.39; Maine, 83.46. TARIFF HISTORY. 27 CARPET MANUFACTURING INCREASED. The value of the carpet manufacturers increased 45.40 per cent. The increase in the number of hands employed was 8 per cent, and in wages paid nearly 24 per cent. The compensation of each hand was 15 per cent, more in 1860 than in 1850. In the Middle States the value of the product increased 80.90 per cent.; in Maine, 47.30; Mas- sachusetts, 44.80; New York, 32.90; Pennsylvania, 138; Ohio, 208. The product of the manufacturers of hosiery increased 608 per cent. The Eastern States increased 481 per cent.; Middle States, 695.50; Western States, 445. Pennsylvania increased 276 per cent.; Con- necticut, 523; New Jersey, 379; Massachusetts, 373; Maryland, 255; Ohio, 278; Missouri, 726. REVENUE TARIFF PROMOTES IRON PRODUCTION. The production of iron ore increased 79.20 per cent, while the capital invested increased 126.30 per cent. The total number of hands employed in this industry was 45 per cent, greater in 1860 than in 1850, and the total amount of wages paid was nearly 57 per cent, greater. PENNSYLVANIA SHARED WELL. The production of pig iron increased 54 per cent, in the United States; in Pennsylvania, 82 per cent.; New Jersey, 105; Kentucky, 27; New York, 53. At the same time the price of pig iron was re- duced from $23.43 in 1850 to $21.13 in 1860. The increase in the value of bar, sheet and railroad iron was more than 100 per cent. The number of hands employed increased 66 per cent., and the amount of wages paid 80 per cent. Pennsylvania in- creased her production 106 per cent.; Delaware, 230; Maryland, 104; Ohio, 173; Kentucky, 68; Virginia, 104. Iron castings increased in the value of the product 74.80 per cent. ; in the Middle States, more than 100 per cent.; in Pennsylvania, 100 per cent.; in Maine, more than 520 per cent. In the production of hardware there was an increase of 56.70 per cent., while the capital increased 90 per cent., and the number of hands employed 53.50 per cent. The New England States increased 100 per cent, and made more hardware in 1860 than all the States made in 1850. Connecticut alone increased her production 103.80 per cent.; New Jersey, 360; Ohio, 99; the Western States, 74 percent. STEEL INDUSTRY BORN UNDER THE REVENUE TARIFF. The steel industry had its birth during the decade from 1850 to 1860. The product increased 99.5 per cent.; capital invested, over 3,000; hands employed, 1770; wages paid, 123.6. In the manufacture of machinery, steam engines, etc., including loco- motives, hay and cotton presses and cotton and woolen machinery, the value of the product increased 66.6 per cent, in the whole country, but in the Western States the increase was 217 per cent. The manufacture of sewing machines was scarcely known in 1850, but in 1860 the value of the product was $4,247,820. 28 TARIFF HISTORY. VOTES ON TARIFFS, 1789 TO 1883. A. — ^Table showing the votes, by States, given in the House of Repre- sentatives on the passage of each of the general tariff acts since that of 1789 to 1883. States. 1790. 1791. 1792. Mar. 3, 1797. 1804. July 1812. T 1816. 1824. May 29, 1828. 1 i ^ i i ^ i i ^ 1 (D \ OB i i ^ OS t New England States: Maine ...I...I...I.. 1. .,!--- I...I-- ,..•• 5 2 4 1 27 i 1 1 1 '( New Hampshire 2 1 3 2 1 6 4 1 4 3 5 1 3 1 1 2 3 4 2 10 6 1 7 4 5 "5 "i "i 1 "7 1 2 •3 3 12 3 2 8 5 15 ., '3 3 2 5 "5 ... 1 13 6 2 9 1 3 ' 1 5 7 2 2 20 "2 3 1 4 2 2 "3 "5 '1 5 5 2 26 «^ 1 3 5 ii 1 8 -1 ' 6 2 8 5 1 t 3 1 1 2 '3 "3 li Connecticut 3 2 Rhode Island 1 Middle States: New York 4 2 7 1 3 1 "2 6 Pennsvli'Tnia Delaware 5 VVt St Virginia Western and North- western SUtes : Ohio ^ 1 1 4 14 2 1 ... 13 3 1 Illinois Michigan 1 ... ... 1 Kansas ; ". ' Nebraska Colorado Southern and South- western States : Virginia 7 5 2 3 "i 4 "i 4 4 2 3 3 1 3 5 4 2 2 9 5 3 2 5 2 1 17 9 5 2 •• 14 6 6 3 7 3 1 7 '4 3 13 11 3 3 1 21 13 9 7 3 1 3 15 North Carolina 13 South Carolina 8 Georgia 7 Alabama . 3 ' 1 Florida ' 1 ... 3 3 Texas Kentucky 2 1 5 2 4 3 '.'.'. 6 3 1 2 11 2 7 12 9 Pacific States: Nevada ... ... ... .. ... ...|... ... . Total j 39J 13| SSj 21j 37] 20| 66] 2I| 98]. .| 76| 48| 88 -M-\m 102 1 105 1 94 TARIFF HISTORY. A. — ^Table showing the votes, by States, given in the House of Repre- sentatives on the passage of each of the general tariff acts since that of 1789. — Continued. States. July 14. 1832. Feb. lis. 1842. 1846. 1857. Mar. 2, 1861. Aug". 5« 1861. Dec. 24, 1861. July 14. 1862. 1 i ^ 1 1 1^ i 1^ OS i > J i i i 52; 1 New England States: Maine 6 5 1 3 8 3 2 2 3 12 1 6 4 11 "4 ■'9 1 1 5 13 6 2 19 6 21 1 4 "4 10 6 2 23 6 20 1 4 2 4 i 8 5 3 "i 15 "2 1 1 2 9 4 2 14 6 23 6 2 "9 i 15 2 3 i 3 4 1 10 1 15 1 1 3 2 3 9 4 2 18 4 22 6 i 2 5 3 8 1 1 25 3 14 "i "i 2 1 2 1 6 1 3 6 1 3 9 1 20 1 9 1 "i 6 2 2 7 1 1 13 13 Massachusetts 4 2 1 Rhode Island Middle States: New York 27 3 14 4 3 5 Delaware Maryland 8 '2 1 1 4 3 1 1 West Virginia Western and North- western States: Ohio 13 3 1 ... ... 7 2 1 6 1 8 3 1 1 6 3 2 11 5 5 3 8 2 5 3 3 1 1 15 8 4 3 13 5 3 3 1 2 ' i 3 3 "i "5 10 2 2 4 •*! 1 10 5 3 "2 "2 8 5 3 2 "i "i 6 5 4 "i 1 "i 7 5 3 2 1 2 1 1 F) H Illinois 3 Michigan Wisconsin Minnesota Iowa 1 3 Missouri 1 ... ... 1 ... 2 5 ... 1 Kansas Nebraska Colorado ■ Southern and South- western States: Virginia 11 8 3 1 2 1 8 4 6 6 1 20 13 9 6 3 1 1 3 "i 17 10 5 7 4 3 13 7 7 ? 4 1 3 2 "4 5 1 3 "2 "i "i "e 6 13 6 4 4 7 4 1 4 2 1 7 7 2 "i 8 6 1 1 3 1 North Carolina South Carolina Georgia Alabama Mississippi . . . Florida ^. Loiusiana 1 2 3 ... 2 1 ' Texas Arkansas 1 8 13 Kentu<*y 9 9 3 12 8 '"i 4 2 4 2 1 6 1 7 "i 6 2 5 1? Pacific States: California Oregon . • . . . . 1 1 Nerada ... ... ... ... ... Total [132[ 65(119[ 85|103| 99|114I 93 1 118] 72 1 102 1 43| 82| 48] 76| 29| 69| 36 30 TARIFF HISTORY. A. — ^Table showing the votes, by States, given in the House of Repre- sentatives on the passage of each of the general tariff acts since that of 1789 — Continued. States. New England States: Maine New Hampshire Vermont Massachusetts Connecticut Rhode Island Middle States: New York New Jersey Pennsylvania Delaware Maryland West Virginia Western and Northwestern States : Ohio Indiana Illinois Michigan Wisconsin Minnesota Iowa Missouri .«« Kansas Nebraska Colorado Southern and Southwestern States: Virginia North Carolina South Carolina Georgia Alabama Mississippi Florida Louisiana Texas Arkansas Kentucky Tennessee Pacific States: California Oregon Nevada June Mar. 30, i 3, 1864. 1865. oil h July July June 14, I 6, 1870. 1872 V i CO ^ V \ S3 2 i Feb. 8, 1875. Mar. 3. 1875. Mar. 3, 1883. Total I 81[ 26| 85| 43| 95[ 49|152|35 | 149| 61|136| 99[123|114[152|U6 Note — On the passage bv the House of Representatives of the act of May 1, 1872, placing coffee and tea on the free list, there were but 9 negative votes, viz : Maryland, 2 ; Texas, 1 ; Arkansas, 1 ; Nevada, 1 ; Kentucky, 2 ; Missouri, 1 ; Pennsylvania, 1. TARIFF HISTORY. tl AVERAGE DUTY FROM 1821 TO 1861. Date of Tariff Time of Dutiable Gross Average Operation Imports Revenue Duty Years. Per cent Previous to 1821 4 $264,962,457 $90,436,612 34i^ May 22, 1824 4 301,538,885 115,597,942 38V2 May 19, 1828 4 297,332,015 122,015,500 41 V2 July 14, 1832 9 625,836,002 198,263,107 31% Sept. 11, 1841 1 69,534,601 16,622,746 23 y* Aug. 30, 1842 4 295,178,151 97,109,442 33 Aug. 30, 1846 10 2,173,428,818 523,957,872 241/0 May 3, 1857 (to 1861) 3 741.213.216 144,542.956 20^ Total 39 $4,709,024,145 $1,308,546,177 29 (Ex. Doc. No. 2, Senate 39th Con., 2d Sess. Submitted by David A. Wells, Spec. Com'r Revenue.) Average rate of duty collected per capita for the periods named was: Tariff 1846 to 1857 (both inclusive) 1.88% " 1858 to 1860 " (( 1.56 " 1846 to 1860 " li 1.81 4-5 " 1861 to 1864 " a 1.841/2 " 1890 to 1893 " i( 3.163/4 " 1894 to 1897 " (( 2.18% " 1898 to 1905 " (( 2.96% By taking the average annual duty collected per capita (as published in a table contained in the speech of the Hon. James T. McCleary (Rep.), Record, August 22, 1906) and dividing the sum thereof by the number of years, we get the results just stated. The duty collected per capita, Dingley Tariff, 1905, was $3.11. (Representative McLeary's speech.) MORE REPUBLICANS COMMEND TARIFF, 1846. Senator Allison, urging tariff reform in 1870, commended the Walker tariff. He said: "It is claimed that the high rates of our present tariff are necessary because the revenue to be obtained therefrom is essential to the Gov- ernment, and that if we reduce the rates at all the effect will be the depression of all the industrial interests of the country. "The tariff of 1846, although confessedly and professedly a tariff for revenue, was, so far as regards all the great interests of the country, as perfect a tariff as any that we have ever had. If any interest was depressed under the tariff of 1846, it was the iron interest. INCREASE OF WEALTH. "I do not believe that this interest, as compared with other in- terests, had sufficient advantage under that tariff; yet when we com- pare the growth of the country from 1840 to 1850 with the growth of the country from 1850 to 1860, the latter decade being entirely under the tariff of 1846 or the amended and greatly reduced tariff of 1857, we find that the increase in our wealth between 1850 and 1860 was equivalent to 126 per cent., while it was only 64 per cent, between 1840 and 1850, four years of which decade were under the tariff of 1842, known as a high protective tariff, but the average rate of which was about 70 per cent, below the existing rate, or 27 per cent, under the tariff of 1842, as against 44 per cent, upon all importations under the present tariff. Our industries were generally prosperous in 1860, with the exception, possibly, of the iron industry. "This was the statement of Mr. Morrill, of Vermont, on this floor during the discussions of the tariff in 1864. 32 TARIFF HISTORY. "With regard to the condition of the steel industry in 1860, the steel manufacturers in 186G, memorializing Congress for increase of duties on steel, stated that 'it was reserved to Pittsburg to bring about the first substantial and enduring success in the year 1860; and, encouraged by our example, numerous establishments have sprung into existence, as already indicated in this paper.' "This shows that under the revenue tariff of 1857, which imposed only an ad valorem duty of 12 per cent, on steel, a substantial suc- cess was achieved in the steel manufacture in 1860. I have read the language of the memorial." NEW ENGLANDERS CHANGE FROM HIGH TO LOW TARIFF. The New England members of both houses, as a rule, had voted for the high tariff of 1842, opposed the revenue tariff of 1846, but realizing its beneficial effects, and desiring to lessen the accumu- lation of the peoples' money in the Treasury, all three of the political parties voted for the much lower tariff, the Act of 1857, entitled: "An Act reducing the duty on imports and for other purposes," about which Senator Wilson, of Massachusetts, said: SENATOR WILSON. "In closing, Mr. Chairman, the remarks I have felt it my duty to svibmit to the Senate and the country that the commonwealth I represent on this floor — I say in part for my colleague, Mr. Sumner, after an enforced absence of more than nine months, is here tonight to give his vote, if he can raise his voice, for the interest of his State — has a deep interest in the modification of the tariff of 1846 by this Congress. Her merchants, manufacturers, mechanics and business men, in all departments of a varied industry, want action now before the Thirty-fourth Congress passes away. They are for the reduction of the revenue to the actual wants of an economical ad- ministration of the government; for the depletion of the Treasury, now full with millions of hoarded gold; for a free list, embracing articles of prime necessity we do not produce; for mere nominal duties on articles which make up a large portion of our domestic industry, and for such an adjustment of the duties on the pro- ductions of other nations that come in direct competition with the product of American capital, labor and skill and shall impose the least burdens on that capital, labor and skill." PANIC OF 1857 WAS FINANCIAL AND BRIEF. About the operations of the tariff of 1857, Mr. Edward Atkinson, of Massachusetts, before the Industrial Commission, 1901, said: "I then come down to the tariff of 1857, the lowest ever known in this country, with the largest free list. The period from 1857 to the beginning of the Civil War saw the most steady and constant de- velopment of the textile manufacturers of this country that I have ever known. I do not think there has been any such historical coin- cidence as you suggest." Q. "As a matter of history, was not the year 1857 the year of the great panic, from which we never recovered until the outbreak of the war?" Mr. Atkinson. "It was the year of the great bank panic, in which two of the commission houses to which my goods were consigned suspended payment. That lasted but a few months and was purely a financial panic. It did not interfere with the progress of arts and industries, and in 1858 great prosperity had returned. "We were building the Lewiston mills and the Indian Orchard mills, and I was familiar with the whole business. From that time until the beginning of the war we saw the most steady progressive condition of prosperity in the textile art that I have ever known." TARIFF HISTORY. The tariff of 1857 having been purposely fixed to reduce the revenue, when the Civil War came on, of necessity, the rates had to be raised to meet the expenses of that great struggle, and were raised by the first act, approved by President Lincoln, August 5, 1861, entitled: CIVIL WAR TARIFFS TO BE "TEMPORARY." "An act to provide increased revenues from imports, pay interest on public debts and for other purposes." The Act of July 14, 1862, was entitled: "An act increasing, temporarily, the duties on imports and for other purposes." The Act of April 29, 1864, was entitled: "Joint resolution to increase, temporarily, the duties on imports." And Senator Morrill, in explaining the Act of June 30, 1864, the main war tariff, said: "This is intended as a war measure, a temporary measure, and we must give it bur support as .such." The people generally had become so wedded to the happy effects of the low tariffs preceding the Civil War, that members of Con- gress had to be assured that these war rates, in effect protective, were to be only "temporary," and hence Senator Morrill spoke as he did. Senator Henry Wilson, in the Senate, in 1861, said: TARIFF OF 1857 COMMENDED. "It is very easy for a gentleman of the Northwest to rise on this floor and talk about protection to Pennsylvania and New England and to say that his people have no protection; but, sir, standing here today, I express it as my deliberate judgment that there are not half a dozen States — and I doubt whether there be among them all one — so little interested in changing the tariff as the State of Massa- chusetts. I say further, as the representative of that State, I know that in voting for this bill I am voting against the wishes of a large portion of the people of my State, who believe the present tariff better for us than your proposed tariff; and I vote, too, against my own deliberate judgment, for I had rather stand on the tariff of 1857 than take this bill." Several Senators. "Then, why vote for it ?" Mr. Wilson. "I vote for it to increase the revenues of the Govern- ment. * * * I want no man to vote for this bill in order to protect the interests of Massachvisetts ; for the tariff of 1857, precisely and exactly as it stands upon your statute books today, so far as the productive industry of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts is con- ceraed, in all its various departments, amounting to $350,000,000 annually, is the best tariff" ever put upon the statute books of this country. That is my judgment; and by passing this bill we shall gain nothing as a State. 1 shall vote for the bill, but / vote for it to raise revenue; I vote for it as a revenue measure." These "temporary" tariffs were approved by President Lincoln, who was not a "stand patter." As early as February 15, 1861, he said: "Every varying circumstance will require frequent modification as to the amount (of tariff") needed and the sources of supply. So far, there is little difference of opinion among the people." 34 TARIFF HISTORY. He approved many different tariff acts. It was during the operation of these high war tariffs that "protection" took deep root. Special interests grew up and fat- tened, immense fortunes were amassed, arming individuals with the power to perpetuate highly protective tariffs, against which Jackson, in his farewell address, warned the people in these patriotic words: PRESIDENT JACKSON'S^ FAREWELL ADVICE. The corporations and wealthy individuals who are engaged in large manufacturing establishments desire a high tariff to increase their gains. Designing politicians will support it to conciliate their favor and to obtain the means of profuse expenditure for the purpose of pur- chasing influence in other quarters. * « * j)o not allow your- selves, my fellow-citizens, to be misled on this subject. The Federal Government cannot collect a surplus for such purposes without vio- lating the principles of the Constitution and assuming power which has not been granted. It is, moreover, a system of injustice, and if persisted in will lead to corruption and must end in ruin. There were few, if any, millionaires and no multi-millionaires, previous to the Civil War, the people generally were prosperous from 1846 to 1860, the low tariff era, but in 1864, President Lincoln had noticed a change had been wrought "as a result of the war," and on November 21, 1864, it is said, he wrote his friend William S. Elkins, of Illinois, the following letter: PRESIDENT LINCOLN. Yes, we may all congratulate ourselves that this cruel war is near- ing its close. It has cost a vast amount of treasure and blood. The best olood of the flower of American youth has been freely offered upon our country's altar that the nation might live. It has been, indeed, a trying hour for the Republic, but I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. As a result of the war, corporations have been enthroned and an eTa of corruption in high places will follow, and the money power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign by working upon the preju- dices of the people until all the wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the safety of my country than ever before, even in the midst of war. God grant that my suspicions may prove groundless. George H. Shibley's book, "The Money Question," page 232, with this foot note: The above was published in a collection of Lincoln's sayings, years and years ago, by Mr. Jesse Harper. Mr. Harper is still living, and is a respected citizen of Danville, 111. WHEN TRUSTS AND COMBINATIONS STARTED. Senator Sherman, March 24, 1890, said: "We know that within twenty years, for the first time in the history of our country, combinations have been made, involving from eighty to one hundred million dollars, combinations so strong that it is im- possible for any other combination to compete with them, combinations so powerful and exclusive as to reach every branch of trade and busi- ness in the United States. This has been going on durinff that time." (21, Cong. Rec, 2568.) TARIFF HISTORY. 36 Senator Edmunds, March 27, 1890, in the same debate, said: "These great monopolies * * * have come up mainly in the last twenty or thirty years." REPUBLICAN TARIFF CHANGES. Until the Republicans and their side partners, the protected monopolists, succeeded in securing the enactment of a tariff law that gives them practically control of the American market, by prohibiting competition from abroad on all articles of domestic manufacture, they did not regard tariff schedules as sacred as they do today. As showing the Republican record in this particular, the following list of acts from an official document issued by a Joint Congressional Committee in 1898 convicts the Republican party of conspiracy with the protected monopolists to continually tinker the tariff in their interests. The acts are as follows: Act of March 2, 1861. Act of August 5, 1861. Act to increase the duties on tea, coffee and sugar, December 24,1861. Act of July 14, 1862. Act of March 3, 1863. Joint resolution of April 29, 1864, temporarily increasing duties. Act of June 30, 1864, to increase duties. Act of March 3, 1865, amending certain acts imposing duties on imports. Act of May 16, 1866, imposing duties on live animals. Act of June 1, 1866, to protect lumbermen. Act of July 28, 1866. Act of March 2, 1867. Act of March 22, 1867. Joint resolution of March 2, 1867. Act of March 25, 1867. Act of March 26, 1867. Act of March 29, 1867. Act of February 3, 1868. Act of February 19, 1869. Act of February 24, 1869. Act of July 14, 1870. Act of December 22, 1870. Act of January 30, 1871. Act of March 5, 1872. Act of April 5, 1872. Act of May 1, 1872. Act of June 6, 1872. Act of June 10, 1872. Act of March 3, 1873. Act of May 9, 1874. Act of June 3, 1874. Act of June 18, 1874. Act of June 22, 1874. Another act of the same date. Act of February 8, 1875. Act of March 3, 1875. On March 4, 1875, the Republican party lost control of legisla- tion, and did not regain it until March 4, 1881. Then it resumed business for two years, as follows: Joint resolution of March 11, 1882. Act of May 4, 1882. Act of December 23, 1882. 36 TARIFF HISTORY. Act of March 3, 1883. Another act of the same date. On March 4, 1883, the Republican party lost control of legisla- tion until March 4, 1889, when it resumed business again, with the following result: Act of February 18, 1890. Act of June 10, 1890. Act of October 1, 1890 (the McKinley law). Act of December 15, 1890. Act of March 3, 1893. Again the Republican party lost control of legislation, but resumed on March 4, 1897, with these results: Act of July 24, 1897 (the Din^ley law). Another act of the same date. Thus it appears thi^t in forty-five years the Republicans have changed or revised the tariff law forty-eight times. Deducting from forty-five years the sixteen years that the Republicans have not controlled legislation, shows that in twenty-nine years they tinkered with the tariff forty-eight times or an average of nearly once every seven months. But at last the Republicans and their allied friends and pro- viders of fat campaign barrels, the protected monopolists, having secured a measure that has so fostered and fattened the corpora- tions that they are quite willing to stand pat, especially as they have succeeded in defeating the reciprocity treaties, to provide for which the tariff schedules were purposely increased 20 per cent, heyond the rates that the 'protected monopolists named as sufflcient to protect them from competition. Hence the people are now burdened with this extra rate plus a revenue and a protective rate — three all told. THE TARIFF LAW OF 1897— KNOWN AS THE DINGLEY TARIFF. The present tariff law of 1897 is the most nearly prohibitive of any such fiscal legislation in existence, except perhaps the new German maximum tariff rates, which are intended to prohibit other countries from competing in the German market, or to compel reciprocal concessions for German products in foreign markets. The facts about that law and the negotiations between the United States and Germany will be found on another page. WHEN REPUBLICANS FRAME TARIFFS, DEMOCRATS ARE EXCLUDED. When the Republican members of the Committee on Ways and Means in 1897 undertook the work of revising the tariff, they carefully excluded the Democratic members from participating, by holding their meetings at the Arlington Hotel. Notices were sent to most of the great industrial firms and corporations — many of whom were trusts — that if they would submit schedules cover- ing their particular industry, such schedule would be carefully considered. The result was that the hotel was for months TARIFF HISTORY. . 37 crowded with manufacturers, agents and attorneys representing special industries; and the committee incorporated in the present law the schedules they proposed, with but few changes. HOW THE TARIFF RATES \/VERE INCREASED. President McKinley was, of course, very much interested in the bill; and before it was acted upon by the full committee, it was submitted for his inspection. He demanded that a reciprocity clause with 20 per cent, concession be added, to allow reciprocity treaties with foreign nations to be negotiated; so that the drastic prohibitive rates might be modified with those nations who were willing to make similar reductions on exports from this country. The ultra-protectionists who controlled a majority of the com- mittee demurred to this proposition. But one of the arch fiends of protection was equal to the occasion, and proposed that a general increase of 20 per cent, on the rates on manufactured goods be added to the rates already agreed on, and that the reciprocity feature, sections 3 and 4, then be added. That is practically how the Dingley bill rates became so exorbitant, and virtually led to the swifter organization and sheltering of the industrial trusts that now monopolize the output, and control the price of about all the necessaries of life. The people who were to pay the taxes had no advocates there to defend their interests for, as previously stated, the Democratic members of the com- mittee were excluded from participating. After the bill had been completed a meeting of the whole committee was called together, and the bill was ordered reported by a party vote. A special rule was reported by the Committee on Rules, the debate limited to the least possible time; and the bill was passed. TARIFF RATES 100 PER CENT. OR MORE. As it is impossible to publish the whole tariff bill in this book on account of the space it would occupy, there will be found in the Appendices the Recapitulation of dutiable articles imported into the United States upon which 100 per cent, or more duty was paid during the year ending June 30, 1905. This recapitulation is taken from the report of the Bureau of Statistics of the Department of Commerce and Labor entitled: "Imported Merchandise Entered for Consumption in the United States and Duties Collected Thereon, 1905." Following that will be found a list of the principal articles of general consumption on which less than 100 per cent, was collected, taken from the same official report. Following that will be found the "free list." It should be noted that every article not named in the free list is dutiable, although not specifically included in the various schedules, for section 7 of the tariff act provides that: All articles not enumerated in the bill are taxable at the same rate as similar articles, and when composed of two or more materials, shall pay the rate levied on the article which it most resembles, paying the highest rate of duty. That is called the blanket clause so that nothing can escape paying duty unless it is on the free list. 38 TARIFF HISTORY. RECIPROCITY DEFEATED. Immediately after the passage of the Dingley bill, there was a general trend towards monopoly by the favored interests, and the organization of trusts and combines at once began. The only fear was the reciprocity features of the law which, if put in effect, would cut down trust profits 20 per cent, on such articles as were included in reciprocity treaties and in the case of some products would induce large importation, unless the monopolists would be willing to reduce their prices below the price of foreign goods. President McKinley, in good faith, appointed J. A. Kasson to negotiate reciprocity treaties; and he successfully did so with several nations. These treaties had to be ratified by the Senate (then, as now. Republican) which requires a two-thirds vote. The protected monopolists were powerful enough to prevent the ratifi- cation of those treaties through their friends, the Republican Senators; so the tariff rates are still in force at 20 per cent, above what was originally declared by the protected interests them- . selves as sufficient for them to control the home market. THE TRUSTS RAISE PRICES. The defeat of the reciprocity treaties gave a new impetus to trust organization; and at once prices began to rise on manu- factured products. SHAW LETS THE CAT OUT OF THE BAG. That the protective tariff is the mother of trusts has been admitted by the highest authority in the United States on financial matters as will appear from the following extract from a speech of Secretary of the Treasury Shaw, made August 19, 1905, at Morrisville, Vermont. He said: "The protective tariff is riot the mother of trusts, though it is the parent of conditions that makes it profitable for capital to combine." No President ever required his cabinet officers to be in such close touch with him on all public questions as President Roose- velt, and the speech of his Secretary of the Treasury, from which the above extract was taken, must have come under his notice and had his approval. Mr. Havemeyer, before the Industrial Commission, said this: "Without the tariff I doubt if we should have dared to take the risk of forming the trust. It could have been done; but I certainly should not have risked all I had, which was then embarked in the sugar business, in a trust unless the business had been protected as it was by the tariff." "Steel rails were exported at the time the steel schedule was under discussion. They were being sent to England and Scotland. They can be produced for $15 a ton; they are worth $24 a ton. Now, the reason they are worth $24 a ton is because the people, under the tariff, are mulcted for the difference. I am not talking about things that are ancient history; I am talking about things that exist. I am not talking as to whether 100 per cent, was necessary or not. I am talk- ing about the effect of the tariff today, which is the mother of these trusts which are mulcting the people, and there is not a line of it free from this abuse today." THE TRUSTS AND COMBINES. 8» THE TRUSTS AND COMBINES. Does the tariff foster the so-called trusts and combinations? Have these trusts and combines by reason of the shelter of the tariff inordinately advanced the prices of their products? Do the trusts sell cheaper to foreigners than to our own people? If the answer to these questions is in the affirmative, there can be no question but that the tariff should be revised. It has been conclusively shown in the chapter on export prices that the trusts are selling cheaper abroad than here, so that question is answered in the affirmative and need not be further considered. THE TARIFF FOSTERS TRUSTS. The evidence is overwhelming that the present tariff law has fostered trusts, as will be seen from the following: In Moody's Manual of Industrial and Miscellaneous Securities for 1900, an acknowledged authority on the organization of cor- porations, is given in the preface, pages 51-53, the capitalization of industrial corporations, incorporated prior to January 1, 1898, and from that date to January, 1900, is given as follows: INDUSTRIAL CORPORATIONS ORGANIZED IN THE UNITED STATES. MANUFACTURING— IRON, STEEL, METALS AND MISCELLANEOUS. Prior to January 1, 1898, total all states, $811,161,300. From January 1, 1898, to January, 1900, total all states, $5,059,309,911. An increase of over 600 per cent, in two years. Do not those figures conclusively show that the Dingley tariff law, fostered trusts, or how can such an enormous increase of those corpora- tions immediately following its enactment, which are protected by the tariff, be explained? The evidence is irresistible that capital, urged on by trust promoters, seeing the enormous profits possible by the virtual monopoly granted by the tariff law, also saw that if the manufac- turing plants in these protected industries could be consolidated under one management and thus prevent competition between them in the United States, that the control of their products and the control of prices was also possible. In fact monopolies could be created and the consumers be plundered. In other words the tariff having, in a great measure, eliminated competition from abroad, through imports, the trusts have also eliminated com- petition at home through combinations. In the United States Statistical Abstract, 1905, on page 541, is given the value per capita of the "leading classes of necessary articles of daily consumption from July 1, 1860, to January 1, 1906," from which the following is taken: Metals. Clothing. Misc. On July 1, 1897 $11,642 $13,808 $12,288 On January 1, 1906 17.141 19.313 18.809 Increased cost per capita per cent 47. 40. 53. 40 THE TRUSTS AND COMBINES. This shows an average increase in prices since the trusts have been organized of about 47 per cent, which is very close to the average rate of duty collected by the Government on all imports for the year 1904, which was 48.78 per cent. But this percentage must not be confounded with the average tax imposed by all the tariff schedules which exceeds 50 per cent, and on manufactured products averages over 70 per cent. As importers cannot import foreign products without paying freight, costs and import duties, there is nothing to prevent the trusts charging very nearly what the imported goods can be sold for here. All that was necessary was to eliminate competition amon^ the manufacturers in the United States, and that has been accomplished, by the organization of the trusts and combines. That the trusts have thus increased their profits, to a great extent, is shown by the increased price they are obtaining for their products since the present tariff bill became a law in 1897. Do not these facts and figures answer affirmatively the three questions asked above and can there be any doubt that the passage of the Dingley act not only fostered trusts, but protects them in advancing prices and has allowed them to sell cheaper abroad than at home. Therefore why should the present tariff law not be revised to at least the extent of reducing the trust protection so that resumption of a healthy competition from abroad will compel a reduction of trust prices on necessities? TRUSTS INCORPORATED AND UNINCORPORATED. All the trusts are not incorporated companies; there are innumerable price and rate-fixing agreements, profit-sharing pools, selling or buying agencies, product restricting agreements, etc., of which the beef trust is a notorious example. There are, however, 287 industrial combinations or trusts incorporated, of which 168 marked in the table of trusts with an X which enjoy direct tariff benefits in more or less degree, and 38 others marked with an asterisk probably receive some benefit from the tariff. The products of most of the remaining trusts are on the tariff list, but their protection is more or less nominal. Of this list 21 derive their monopoly chiefly from patent rights and 28 are based on municipal or other franchises, rights of way, etc., 19 are based on control of coal and other lands, mines, ore deposits, etc., exclusively. The balance of the unprotected trusts have in most cases some other element of monopoly which contributes to their strength. When the element of monopoly is small the general financial standing of the trust is relatively weak in nearly all eases. The table of trusts in the appendices also includes, besides industrial combinations, the large security holding (but not operating) companies in the gas, electric light, electric and steam railroad industries. Hence a security-holding company, or "trust" such as the Bay State Gas Company, is included in the list, but the Consolidated Gas Company of New York is omitted. The many consolidated transportation and other franchise corpora- tions, not embraced in this list, such as railroad, traction, lighting and water combinations would aggregate in capitalization many A TYPICAL TRUST. THE TRUSTS^ AND COMBINES. 41 billions of dollars. The list, however, is limited to what are popularly known as "industrial trusts" and are all consolidations or absorptions of one kind or another. its total capitalization being approximately $1,500,000,000. It is a true typical trust, a trust in the original sense of the word, because, as Prof. H. L. Wilgus of the University of Michigan has shown, it holds as a trustee the shares of the various constituent companies and votes for directors of the constituent concerns. Yet this trust has never been prosecuted or disturbed by the administration. Every person in the United States pays tribute to this gigantic corporation, for it controls the price of everything that is manufactured of steel, which everyone is compelled to use. THE STEEL TRUST ANALYZED. In Moody's Magazine for September, a reliable financial maga- zine, there is an article on the steel trust, from which the follow- ing is taken: Before the Carnegie Steel Company became a part of the great Steel Corporation, and while Mr. H. C. Frick had an option on it at about half the price paid by the trust, its net earnings exceeded $30,000,000 a year. Now we have a single industrial concern with net earnings of over $40,000,000, not for an entire year, but for a quarter of a year only. Its net earnings for the first half of the present year were $76,759,523, or at the rate of over $150,000,000 a year. From this $76,759,523 was deducted $3,217,578 for sinking funds; $9,674,168 for depreciation and reserve funds ; $5,500,000 for a special improve- ment and replacement fund; $11,459,833 for interest, and $23,500,000 for additional construction. The total deductions amounted to $53,351,579, leaving a Balance of $23,407,944. After paying dividends of $12,609,838 on the preferred and $5,083,025 on the common stock, there were left $5,715,081 of undivided earnings for the half year. The 1905 report gives in itemized statement of the "Rolled and Other Finished Products for Sale." The total number of tons was 9,226,386. Allowing $35,000,000 for earnings and sales outside of rolled and other finished products, it would appear that these products sold for $550,000,000, or an average of $60 a ton. This is an ab- surdly high price. Much more than one-third of the total tonnage was sold for less than $30 per ton. Probably not one-fourth sold for more than $40, and not one-tenth at more than $50 per ton. Experi- enced iron and steel men say that the average price per ton is not much, if any, above $40. The total gross sales of iron and steel, to outsiders, then, amounted to only about $400,000,000 in 1905. Adding $35,000,000 for other possible earnings and sales, we have $435,000,000, instead of $585,000,000, as the total of actual gross receipts. De- ducting the net profits of $119,787,658 and the selling and general expenses, and other operating expenses (taxes, $3,646,489.60), amounting in all to about $25,000,000, we find that the actual manu- facturing and producing cost of the product sold was at a liberal estimate, only about $300,000,000, instead of $440,013,432, as stated in the report. TARIFF PRODUCTS DISGUISED. Now, if net profits are $120,000,000 on goods that cost $440,000,000 to produce, the rate of profit is about 27 per cent. If the goods cost but $300,000,000, the rate of profit is 40 per cent, on first cost. A profit of even 27 per cent, looks bad enough to a nation that is taxing 42 THE TRUSTS^ AND COMBINES. itself heavily in order to give a tariff bonus to this profit-earning in- dustry. A profit of 40 per cent, would, if clearly exhibited to the tax- paying people, be likely to prejudice them against this particular protected corporation and, perhaps, to bring the tariff question again into politics. This might result unfortunately for the Steel Cor- poration and for its good friends, the "stand-patters." Undoubtedly the real object of padding the sales and costs of steel products is to disguise the tariff profits. That the people will, how- ever, soon take up the tariff question again and that, when they do take it up, they will make trouble for the protected "Steel Trust," is reasonably certain. In fact, the platforms now being adopted in the different States and the speeches being made by leading politicians nave an ominous sound to stockholders of this corporation. Appar- ently this "giant infant" will occupy the center of the stage when tne next tariff play is put on at Washington. It is clearly entitled to this pre-eminence. It has probably been more influential in preventing tariff revision, during the last four years, than has any half dozen other corporations. Those behind the political scenes know that its word has great weight with the Committee on Ways and Means of the House. If the head of this corporation writes a letter to Congressman Dalzell, of the Ways and Means Committee, advising Chairman Payne and the others of the committee not to open up the tariff question for any purpose or in any way, the committee may confidently be expected to "stand pat." EXPORT PRICES OF STEEL. With tariff duties removed from "all trust products sold cheaper to foreigners than to Americans," as the politicians put it, the common stock of the Steel Corporation would have value only for voting pur- poses. That this is true is evident when it is realized that the tariff profits of this corporation vary from about $40,000,000 to $80,000,000 a year. These may be roughly estimated by the difference between the export and home prices of goods sold. Although, as stated by Chair- man Gary to the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, a few months ago, and as stated in the 1905 report, "the prices received for exports during the year were materially in excess of those previously received and approached more closely domestic prices," yet active iron and steel brokers and jobbers say that the present difference will average about $5 per ton on all goods sold by the Steel Corporation. They say, however, that export prices are so well covered up, vary so greatly to different countries, and fluctuate so widely and uncertainly from day to day, that but very few persons can estimate the difference closely. All goods sold abroad are sold through the United States Steel Products Export Company, whose stock is owned by the Federal Steel Company of the Steel Corporation. Much of the business is done through its London office. On most of the goods sold abroad prices are quoted delivered in loreign ports. This selling company contracts in advance for tonnage on lines going to different foreign countries. Hence it can nearly always quote relatively lower prices delivered in foreign ports than for export from New York. The prices quoted vary with the amount of any particular product to be disposed of abroad and the foreign de- mand for this product. The prices quoted also depend upon the kind of international agreement existing as to the sale of any particular product in any particular port. INTERNATIONAL STEEL AGREEMENTS. For instance, an international agreement exists between the manu- facturers of steel rails in the United States, Great Britain, Germany, France and Belgium, which practically reserves the two American continents to our manufacturers, except that, as Canada gives heavy preferential duties to Great Britain, our manufacturers can sell in THE TRUSTS^ AND COMBINES. 43 Canada only by cutting the English prices 20 or 25 per cent. Vir- tually the most of the world is divided up between, and partitioned off by, the world's steel rail manufacturers. Hence there is, today, but little competition in the sale of rails in any part of the earth. This is one of the reasons why there is now so little difference between export and home prices — although this difference will still average about $5 per ton, in the opinion of experts. This is also one of the reasons why Chairman Gary was so anxious to testify as to export prices last spring. Similar international agreements, though, perhaps, less formal and definite, are said to exist between the manufacturers of plates, billets and other products. ESTIMATE OF TARIFF PROFITS. As the total sales of iron and steel by the Steel Corporation exceed 9,000,000 tons a year, a difference of even $4.50 a ton, between export and domestic prices, amounts to over $40,000,000. Two years ago the average difference loas not much less thorn, $10 a ton. Of course, the total sales then were less than now. Even then, the difference, esti- mated on the total tonnage, was about $80,000,000. On some products the difference still exceeds $10 a ton, or 14 cent per pound. The fact that our exports of iron and steel are increasing rapidly indicates that the export business is very profitable. For the year ending June 30, 1906, our exports of iron and steel amounted to 1,330,870 gross tons. The value of exports of iron and steel and manufactures thereof amounted to $160,984,985, which exceeded the exports of any previous year by more than $25,000,000. That there is ample margin for profits on steel rails, even at $23 a ton, is evident from statements made by Mr. Charles M. Schwab, in a letter to Mr. Frick, just before the Steel Corporation was formed, and by statements made when the last quar- terly report was made public by the directors of the corporation. Mr. Schwab then said that steel rails cose less than $12 per ton to pro- duce. Apparently the statement is now informally authorized that the new methods and processes introduced by the Steel Corporation have reduced the cost of making steel $2 a ton. FAVORITISM TO FOREIGNERS. There is no sound economic reason why our manufactured products, and especially those protected by high tariff duties, should be sold cheaper to foreigners than to Americans. Steel is the greatest of all raw materials for manufacturing purposes. Hundreds of important industries consume large quantities of it. A difference of from $5 to $10 a ton for steel means the difference between success and failure for many manufacturers. Our manufacturers of machinery, imple- ments ai^d tools are, in equity, entitled to as low prices as are given by our steel manufacturers. Our farmers should pay no more for fence wire, wire nails and tin plate than is paid by their foreign com- petitors in South America and Australasia. This un-American, sui- cidal policy has driven hundreds of millions of capital out of this country. It has gone into plants in foreign countries, where our steel and other products can be purchased more cheaply than in our own markets. President McKinley, a year or two before he died, became convinced of the evils of this export system, and was taking steps to remedy them. Some of the government reports published in 1900 severely condemn the practices of the manufacturers of steel rails, beams, plates, wire, wire nails, etc., for charging our consumers 20 or 30 per cent, more for their goods than they charge foreigners for the same goods. Notice was, in this way, served upon these manufac- turers that if they did not reform they could expect to lose their tariff protection. 44 EXPORT PRICES. EXPORT PRICES. HOW THE TRUSTS SELL CHEAPER ABROAD THAN HERE. In the campaigns of 1902 and 1904 the Republicans persisted in denying, both in their campaign books for those years and in Congress, that the tariff protected combines and associations, commonly called trusts, were selling their products cheaper in foreign countries than in the United States. The evidence, how- ever, published in the Democratic campaign books for 1902 and 1904 so conclusively proved the truth of the statements that the Republican leaders in Congress have been forced since to publicly admit the fact. These admissions indicate how closely the Republicans are allied with the trusts and protected monopolists, for they now openly defend the plundering of the American people through the sale of trust products cheaper abroad than here by virtue of the restriction of competition by excessive import duties. The first authoritative admission was made by Mr. Dalzell in a speech delivered in the House of Representatives on May 26, 1906, which was published in the Congressional Record on May 26th, pages 7643-56. As Mr. Dalzell represents Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, in the American Congress, and is entirely competent to speak for the conditions in the iron and steel industry, his admission shows that the protectionists have concluded that it is no longer desirable to deny the actual conditions. THE CHEAPEST IRON AND STEEL. ft During that speech of Mr. Dalzell the following colloquy occurred : Mr. Underwood — "Will the gentleman from Pennsylvania allow rae to ask a question, not so much as to where we sell our goods, but how we make our goods? Can the gentleman from Pennsylvania name me any steel mill in the world that can make steel rails cheaper than they are made at Pittsburg? Can the gentleman frpm Penn- sylvania name me any iron furnace in the world that can make pig iron cheaper than at Birmingham V Mr. Dalzell— "I think not; and I am coming to that question, if the gentleman \\ill have patience, in a few moments." Mr. Underwood — "Do we need protection to protect us against the market that we can meet cheaper than anybody else ?" Mr. Dalzell — "I will answer the gentleman's question in due course if he will have the patience." That question was never answered by Mr. Dalzell, to answer it truthfully would at once break down the whole theory of the protectionists, because if steel can be manufactured cheaper at Pittsburg than anywhere else, and iron in Birmingham cheaper than elsewhere, there can be no excuse for a protective tariff on such products, either to protect the manufacturers or the laboring men employed in those industries; for no one can successfully compete with them. But Mr. Dalzell continued the discussion by saying: EXPORT PRICES. 45 REPUBLICAN LEADERS ADMIT SELLING CHEAPER ABROAD THAN HERE. "Do we sell goods cheaper abroad than we do at home? Un- doubtedly, sometimes — certain kinds of goods — the kind of goods the sale of which promises us a foothold in a foreign market, and to a limited extent, to wit, to the extent of our surplus. Why? Well, for a number of reasons — all of them patent to business men. The first and foremost, because our home production exceeds our home consumption; and the excess of production must be sold in a foreign market or our factories and our workmen remain during a portion of each year idle." This acknowledgment of the Democratic claim that the trusts are selling cheaper abroad than here of "certain kinds of goods" — those goods of course that the steel trust and other combines can manufacture cheaper here than similar goods can be manufac- tured abroad, was followed by another astounding admission by Mr. Dalzell, which will be found on the same page of the Record, as follows: Mr. Dalzell — "We have in this country, by reason of the skill of our workmen, by reason of our general prosperity, by reason of our in- ventive genius, by reason of our improved machinery, arrived at a period when Ave can make in this country on an average of nine months all that the country can consume in the year. "It is a plain business proposition whether or not we shall run the year round and sell all of our goods in any market, or whether we shall run nine months and close up our factories the other three. But that is not the only reason. Another reason is because, in order to gain a foothold in foreign markets, the price must he regulated so as to meet the price in the foreign market with which we come in competition. And anotlier reason is because, in our contest for en- trance into the world's markets, we have to encounter a system of tariffs, of syndicates, of cartels, of hounties, all of which w^re made for the purpose of excluding us from those markets." This further acknowledgment that the trusts "can produce in this country, on an average of nine months, all that the country can consume in the year," show^s that about one-fourth of trust products, or the products of three months of our manufacturing, must he sold abroad unless our factories and workshops are shut down for three months out of the twelve months; although further along in his speech Mr. Dalzell mad^A labored argument to prove that the amount of goods sold abroad cheaper than here only amounted to three-tenths of one per cent, of our total manufac- tures. He quotes Senator Gallinger, another ardent protectionist, and not a reliable statistician, as his authority. Senator Gallinger obtained his estimate from the partisan majority report of the Industrial Commission; but Hon. Thomas W. Phillips, Republican member of the Commission, made a supplemental report in which he very severely attacked the majority report for suggesting that three-tenths of one per cent, is a fair estimate of the amount sold cheaper abroad than here. INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION REPORT. But what did the Industrial Commission say several years since on this subject? Its conclusions will be found as to export prices in volume 19, on pages 626-7, as follows: "In about 20 per cent, of the cases covered by the Commission's returns the export prices have ruled lower than those charged to home consumers. The practice is quite common in all countries, etc. 46 EXPORT PRICES. "That in view of the extent and protection of our manufacturers, of our growing export trade and the sharp competition being encoun- tered in foreign markets, of the practice by some exporters of making lower prices abroad than at home, and the desirability of protecting the consumer as well as the producer, without awaiting other legis- lation, the Congress provide for a commission to investigate and study the subject and to report as soon as possible what concessions in duties may be made vnthout endangering wages or employment at home, what advantages abroad may be obtained therefor, and also to suggest measures best suited to gain the end desired." Note, that this non-partisan body with a majority of its mem- bers Republican does not say "whether concessions" shall be made or not, but ''what concessions," for that some concessions must be made is evidently their opinion and recommendation. But the Republican party has paid no heed to the recommendations of the Commission of its own creation although over seven years have elapsed. Hon. Thomas W. Phillips, did not sign this majority report, but in his supplemental report he said: FOUR-FIFTHS OF EXPORTERS FAIL TO ANSWER AS TO EXPORT PRICES. "There are a large number of industries in which it is in evidence that the domestic price is much higher than the export price. I do not agree that the answers to inquiries addressed by the Commission to exporters indicate that the trusts are not chargeable with this practice to any serious extent. Out of 2,000 schedules of inquiries sent out, there were received only 416 replies, and only a very few of these replies came from corporations known popularly as trusts. (Vol. XIII, p. 726.) The fact that about 75 answers indicated lower prices abroad than at home is significant, when it is noted that more than four-fifths of those addressed failed to answer, and that natur- ally those who are chargeable with such discrimination would be the ones who would decline to reply. "Several witnesses before the Commission on behalf of the trusts admitted that their export prices were lower than their domestic prices, but they contended that this was necessary in order to work off their surplus and to keep their establishments running full time, and that the fact that their surplus products could also be worked off by lower prices at home, and that it is the tariff which en- courages them to cause a domestic surplus hy restricting domestic consumption thr'ough high prices." Why did four-fifths of the exporters fail or refuse, though called on, to answer? Because they would evidently have been compelled to admit that they were selling their surplus products cheaper to foreigners than to our own people. SENATOR ALDRICH ADMITS IT. But we have another Republican, a much greater authority than Mr. Dalzell, who at least also acknowledges that the trusts sell cheaper abroad than here. When Senator Bacon, of Georgia, was making his great speech on the question of restricting the purchase of supplies for the Panama Canal to the products of this country, he proposed an amendment requiring that no greater price should be paid than similar supplies were being sold for export to foreign countries. This speech will be found in the EXPORT PRICES. 47 Congressional Record, June 2, 1906, on pages 7943-6. During its delivery Senator Bacon yielded to Senator Aldrich, of Rhode Island, the Republican leader of the Senate, who said: "It is a well known fact, about which there is no dispute, that producers in the United States and in every one of the great in- dustrial nations sell portions of their products from time to time at a less price to people of other countries than to their regular customers at home." Thus we have the Republican leader in the Senate, and one of the Republican leaders of the House of Representatives acknowl- edging the truth of the Democratic contention that the trusts sell cheaper abroad than here. Of course they tried to qualify their statement so as to take the sting out of it, but that was to be expected from such strong partisans and protectionists with close trust connections. SECRETARY SHAW ALSO ADMITS IT. On page 19 of the Republican National Campaign Book of 1904, Mr. Shaw, Secretary ol the Treasury, who of course is the best Republican authority on the tariff because such fiscal matters are under the control of his department, is quoted as saying: "Our opponents lay much stress upon the fact that some American manufactures are sold abroad cheaper than at home. Our friends sometimes deny this, and they sometimes apologize for it, and a few in times past have downed our opponents in recommending a re- moval of tariff from all such articles. It is useless to deny, in my judgment, unwise to apologize, and a little short of foolishness to attempt to remedy the assumed evil in the manner proposed by the opposition." BABCOCK (REP.) GIVES EVIDENCE. It will be remembered that Representative Babcock, who was chairman of the Republican Congressional Committee from 1894 to 1904, introduced a bill in the Fifty-seventh Congress to revise the steel schedules, gave evidence in an interview in the Wash- ington Post, September 21, 1901, which said: "One of the points which impressed me of the desirability of re- vising the steel schedule was information I obtained in Scotland of the placing of an order for 20,000 tons of American steel. When you stop to think that 20,000 tons of steel mean more than 1,000 carloads, it will not do to say that such an order placed abroad by our manufacturers is only their surplus product." 48 OOVERNMENT IN PARTNERSHIP WITH MONOPOLIEi^. THE GOVERNMENT IN PARTNERSHIP WITH "MONOPOLIES AND TRUSTS." AMERICAN PRODUCTS SOLD CHEAPER ABROAD THAN AT HOME. Mr. F. A. Wilmot, President of the Wilmot & Hobbs Manufac- turing Company, Bridgeport, Conn., wrote to the Iron Age, May, 1901, a letter on this subject which, in part, reads: "To the Editor: ^ "Noticing that you have giyen considerable prominence in recent issues to the organization of the Manufacturers' Association" of Bridge- port, and to the end that the manufacturers' associations of other cities and other manufacturers in other cities where manufacturers' associa- tions are in process of formation or are contemplated, we would sug- gest that you give due prominence to the position which these manu- facturing associations in the various cities, particularly along the Atlantic seaboard and Canadian border, and especially in New Eng- land, are taking as regards their present handicap in the cost of raw material, such as coal, coke, iron, ore, pig iron, steel ingots and billets, and their desire to have these commodities placed by Congress imme- diately upon the free list. THEY BELIEVE THAT AS THESE MATERIALS ARE PRO- DUCED CHEAPER IN THIS COUNTRY THAN IN ANY OTHER PORTION OF THE WORLD, AND ARE SOLD ABROAD AT LOWER PRICES THAN ALONG THE SEABOARD AND CANADIAN BOR- DER, THE INDUSTRIES WHICH PRODUCE THEM ARE NQ LONGER INFANT AND DO NOT NEED PROTECTION. THEY BELIEVE THAT PROTECTION, SO CALLED, IS BUT ANOTHER TERM FOR GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE TO MONOPOLIES AND TRUSTS. THIS POSITION THE GOVERNMENT AS IT NOW EXISTS CAN ILL AFFORD TO ASSUME, NOR CAN IT ALLOW THE PEOPLE TO FEEL THAT IT IS DRIFTING INTO SUCH POSITION WHERE IT IS SO WORKING HAND IN HAND WITH GIGANTIC TRUSTS ; FOR WHEN THE PEOPLE REALIZE SUCH TO BE THE CONDITION, THEY WILL UNDOUBTEDLY RISE IN THEIR MIGHT, AND BY THEIR VOTES CHANGE THE CON- DITIONS AND THE GOVERNMENT WHICH PERMITS SUCH CONDITIONS. * * * It is to be hoped that the Government of the United States will appreciate the position and make such changes in tariff regulations or duties from time to time as will result in putting upon the free list such commodities as do not further need protection on the score of their being infant industries." — Industrial Com. Rept., Byrom W. Holt's testimony. FURTHER EVIDENCE PRODUCED. 49 FURTHER EVIDENCE PRODUCED. EXPERT EVIDENCE ON DUMPING. It would seem almost unnecessary to take more space to further prove that most of the trusts sell cheaper to foreigners than to our own people, but as at least three speeches were made in the House of Representatives denying the proposition, namely by Grosvenor, of Ohio; Boutell, of Illinois, and Hepburn, of Iowa, who substantially stated that we only sell shop-worn and obsolete goods cheaper in Europe than we are selling them at home. The following evidence is added: SfEEL RAILS SOLD 40 PER CENT. CHEAPER ABROAD TttAN HERE. Senator Bacon in his speech above quoted introduced two letters addressed to him personally, the writers of which he stated "were known to him personally and the accuracy of their statements can be most thoroughly and confidently vouched for." They are published in tlie Congressional Record, June 2, pp. 7944-5, and are as follows: Macon, Ga., February 23, 1904. Hox. A. O. Bacon, Washington, D. C. My Dear Sir — I beg to own receipt of yours of the 20th, and have careifully noted same. I recall very distinctly my conversation with you on the subject of steel rails purchased by my company from the company, and 1 take pleasure in giving you the details of the transaction, asking you, however, to refrain from mentioning the names of the parties. The extension of our road, some 40 miles, was decided upon and cash provided for it early in the spring of 1901. Owing to the de- mand at that time for steel in all forms and the probability of an advance in price, it seemed wise to take up the matter of the pur- chase of the necessary rails at once. Inquiries, therefore, were ad- dressed and mailed to all the leading steel rail manufacturers in the country, asking for tenders on GO miles of 70-pound steel rail de- livered at Savannah or ]VIaeon, the point of delivery to be optional with us. We received prompt responses, but there was practically no dif- ference in the bids, tlie eastern rail mills contiguous to tide water quoting practically the same price delivered at Savannah and a correspondingly higher price for Macon delivery, the interior rail mills making a lower price for ]Macon delivery and a higher price for Savannah delivery. It was very evident to me tnat the field had been divided by the manufacturers and that no one of them would encroach upon the territory assigned to the others. After endeavoring in vain to obtain better prices than those quoted, we finally acce}>ted the bid of tlie — Steel Company, and placed our order with them for 5,618 tons of rail at $29 per ton, based upon (leliveiy at tide water. This would enable us to arrange our own freight rate to Savannah and effect some saving in the cost of the rails. The order was declined on these terms, the Steel Com- pany refusing to make any price f. o. b. mill, but insisting upon delivered price. The matter was then taken up with interior mills, who were per- fectly willing to make a price f. o. b. mill, but we were unable to obtain any concession in all-rail rates which would reduce the cost of the rail below that quoted by the Steel Company for de- livery at Savannah. 50 FURTHER EVIDENCE PRODUCED. The whole transaction in the meantime had been handled by wire, owing to the demands of the Steel Company that it be closed at once, as the price would be advanced. I made one more effort. Some friends of mine were interested in a railroad project in Central America, and I broached the subject to the representative of the — < Steel Company who had come here to close the matter with me. I told him that my friends had made some inquiry of me as to the cost of construction in that country, and I should like to know at what price he would sell me steel rails delivered at tide water for shipment^ to Honduras. He promptly quoted me $20 per ton. Further inquiry developed the fact, how- ever, that they would only load vessels chartered to a foreign port and that the charter should be an essential part of the contract. The wall was complete. There was nothing left for me to do but to place my order and to thank God it was no worse, as within two days thereafter steel rails advanced $2 per ton. Allowing a liberal amount for cost of delivery at tide water, which in this particular case would have been very small, we American citizens paid to this American industry $33,000 in excess of what foreigners would have been compelled to pay. And $33,000 would have put up a very handsome library filled with standard books on protection. And this was a very small transaction — only 50 miles of railroad! Payments were cash, and we neither needed nor asked any conees sions in the matter of time. Because we were Americans, interested in the development of a small section of our country, involving faith and sacrifices, we were compelled to pay out as a bonus in excess of $600 per mile. These are the facts. Unfortunately, I had only the verbal quotation on the rails for foreign shipment, but I have no doubt that it was at least the top of the market, but I have the full correspondence in my files covering the rest of the transaction. Owing to the necessity for prompt action, I was unable to secure prices from foreign rail makers, but it would be foolish to imagine that that avenue had not also been closed to us. 1 have written you hurriedly, and may not have given you all the facts or as clearly as you desire. If there is still opportunity and I can further elucidate the matter, please advise me, and I shall take pleasure in doing so. For purely business reasons I must ask you not to mention the names 1 have given. Personally, I should like to see it given the widest publicity ; and if the statement is of any use to you, I shall be glad, as an American and as a Republican. Very truly yours, J. T. WRIGHT. Mr. Bacon — "I desire to say, with reference to the blanks in the letter, that, in accordance with the request of the writer, who, by the way, is from the State of Indiana, I have omitted the names; but I can furnish the names omitted to any Senator who desires to know them. I have omitted them, from this reading in deference to the request of the writer, which he stated was for business reasons solely. "I will now ask the Seeretaiy to read the next letter, which is from a gentleman w ho was then the president of the Mexican National Railroad, a railroad lying partly in Texas and partly in Mexico. That letter was addressed to me also. The caption is left off there." The Secretary read as follows: I am in receipt of your letter of the 20th. It would not be any embarrassment for me to g^ve you the information you ask if it were possible for me to do so, but I believe it will not be practicable. I am so overwhelmed with work preparatory to getting my affairs in shape for leaving my present position with the company that I have no time to devote to anything outside of my official work, and to get any accurate information would require going back into the files of the purchasing agent's office, and the man who is familiar with this whole business is leaving for Mexico City today. FURTHER EVIDENCE PRODUCED. 51 For a long time past all our purchases have been made on the basis of export prices, even though they have occasionally stopped in Texas, the competition being keen enough to produce this cut in prices in favor of the Texas shipments, so that it has been some time past sine11, if you put the question that way, I think the man with exceptional ability today has a better opportunity of be- coming a large owner or a large director in one of these great com- panies than ever before. If you say the man with capital at the start — small capital at the start — / doubt it. (Vpl. 13, Rep. Tnd. Com., p. 459.) 58 AMERICAN MANUFACTURES. AMERICAN MANUFACTURES. ARE SOLD FROM 25 TO 40 PER CENT. CHEAPER ABROAD THAN AT HOME. Prices on Agricultural Implements; Mr. Seabury to the Fray Again. Editor American Industries: A speech was made at the last con- vention of the National Association of Manufacturers at Atlanta by the manager of an agricultural implement industry, in answer to a statement made by me in an address "On Tariff Revision and the Remedy." In it I asserted that American agricultural implements were sold for export below home prices; and I also stated that Cana- dian, English and German firms were successful competitors of our American imperious manufacturers; moreover, that German manufac- turers were sending competitive wares into our home market, men- tioning Texas in particular. These statements are true. The speaker had the assurance to state that my assertions were untrue, and volunteered the statement that the wares of his establishment were not only sold at the same price for export as in the United States, but higher prices were obtained. In my general statement .1 qualified my assertion by saying that exporters of American products operated under that rule except where the wares represented a monopoly or were patented. To this statement I also added in my own behalf that we were compelled to undersell home prices in order to acquire export trade, which is also true. These facts are generally known, our surplus agricultural imple- ments bein^ disposed of at from 25 to 40 per cent, less on export orders for competitive wares. If proofs are needed to sustain this assurance an application to the undersigned at 59 and 61 Maiden Lane, New York City, will satisfy the most incredulous investigator that I spoke truthfully and that evidence will be furnished from the largest manu- facturing firms in and out of the agricultural implement syndicates or combinations and from export merchants, who ship these goods to every part of the world. Facts and statistics are unimpeachable; I have no motive in study- ing international problems other than to present our strength and weaknesses in promoting and preserving our national commercial inter- ests in any form. It is seldom that an incident like the above has occurred in my experience covering more than thirty years; whenever it has, it was inspired either through wilful misrepresentation or lack of definite information. George J. Seabury. New York, June 23. — American Industries, July 1, 1905. IT HAS BEEN CHARGED SINCE 1890 THAT AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY MADE IN THE UNITED STATES IS SOLD CHEAPER IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES THAN TO OUR OWN PEOPLE. In 1890, the Hon. Jeremiah M. Rusk, Secretary of Agriculture, under the Harrison administration, in 1890, said: "I had an opportunity to take some stock in the combination (Amer- ican Harvester Co. ) , and I know what inducements were offered. An investigation will show that this same combination is now selling or offering to sell, machinery in Russia and Australia and other wheat growing countries at a lower figure than they do in this country. This won't do, and I need not offer any argument to ])rove the weight or truth of the assertion. The first thing the farmer will do when he is acquainted with the facts will be to make a howl against trusts and protection that does not protect. Whether justly or not, he will AMERICAN MANUFACTURES. 59 charge it to the Republican party. I am as certain as I can be of anything that this Mower and Reaper Trust will cost the Republican party hundreds of thousands of votes at the next Presidential election unless it takes a firm stand against it and trusts in general." To test the matter the Farmers Call, of Quincy, 111., wrote Mr. A. B. Farquhar, the head of the Pennsylvania Agricultural Works, one of the leading manufacturers, both of the home trade and for export, of agricultural implements and machinery. His answer was as follows: "July 30, 1890. "The 'fact' is that protective laws are a monstrous swindle upon the agricultural community. As a manufacturer I was inclined to say nothing on the subject, for the reason that it was natural to suppose if anybody was benefited it was the manufacturing class, to which I belong. But, as I have exjDlained, the farmer is being destroyed. We are killing the goose for the golden egg. And I honestly believe now that it is to be the interest of the manufacturers themselves to elimi- nate the protective feature from our tariff laws. Manufactures are sold much lower abroad, we could only need protection to get better prices from our customers at home. We do manufacture and sell in Canada, South America, and Europe many agricultural implements and machines, and could we have free raw material and the commercial advantages which free trade would give us America would become the great manufacturing emporium of the world, and the farmer would, of course, share the prosperity since he would have less to pay for everything and get better prices for all he sold. Go on with your good work. When the farmer begins to think and rise up against this swindle it is doomed." EXPORTS OF AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENTS. (Statistical Abstract— 1905). ARTICLES. 1896 1897 1898 1899 Agricultural Implements : Mowers and reapers ; and parts of I'lows and cultivatons; ; and parts of All other, and parts of. . Total $3,212,423 746,604 1,217,748 $3,127,415 590,779 1,522.492 $5,500,665 927,250 1.181.817 $9,053,830 1,545,410 1.8.32,957 $5,170,7751 $5,240,68(51 $7,609,732 I 1 $12,432,197 1900 I 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 $11,243,763 2.178,098 2,677,288 $9,948,680 1,888,373 4,481,381 $8,818,370 2,791,092 4,677,278 $10,326,641 .3,169,961 7,510,020! $11,568,062 3,537,810 7,643.763 $10,559,891 2,892,060 7,269,790 $16,099.1491 $16.313,434 1 $16.286.740| $21.006,622 1 $22,749,635 1 $20.721,741 "As soon as an industry has attained the position where it can more than supply our home market and has to send its goods abroad, where they compete witn those of foreign manufacturers, it is evident that they are either giving the foreigners the benefit of lower rates than they do our own people, or that they are able to get along at home without any protection from foreign manufacturers. It is not fair that our own people should be made to pay more than foreigners for the products of our own land." — Engineering and Mining Journal, March 15, 1890. 60 AMERICAN MANUFACTURES. AMERICAN TOOLS CHEAPER IN GERMANY. On the day when the American chief was embarking for New York in order to purchase his supplies of American tools, the Panama doctor came to him and said : "I can buy those identical American tools here cheaper than you can buy them in New York! A German house orders them for me. They go from New York to Berlin, and from Berlin a second time across the Atlantic, and, inspite of all that travel, I get them here cheaper than you can in New York! (Poultney Bigelow. ) Free Trade Broadside, April, 1906. THE WATCH TRUST SELLS CHEAPER ABROAD THAN AT HOME. It is seldom you can catch a trust red handed in carrying off the swag, yet that has been accomplished in the watch trust case, which is not only proved to be selling cheaper abroad than here, but also of restricting trade and dictating the retail prices at which watches shall be sold. In a speech in the House of Representatives April 5 (see Cong. Record, April 5, 1906), Hon. Henry T. Rainey, of Illinois, fully exposed the watch trust and its method of plundering the people of the United States through the protection granted the trust in the Dingley tariff law. In opening his speech Mr. Rainey first had read an advertise- ment of Charles A. Keene, a watch and diamond merchant of 180 Broadway, New York city, which is as follows: "[The New York Press, Friday Morning, February 2, 1906.] "FOR SALE— DIAMONDS, WATCHES, ETC. "Warning! Do not buy Waltham or Elgin watches from dealers allied with the trust! "When I started this campaign against the iniquitous methods prac- ticed by the watch trust against both consumer and dealer I prophesied that the exposure of the combine's unfair methods would inevitably compel the watch trust to forego extorting extravagant profits from American watch buyers and compel them to get down to a square basis or to quit the foreign field. That alternative is now being considered by the watch trust. "The members of the watch trust are now studiously analyzing the problem created by the stupendous competition I have initiated — even the dealers are protesting against and rejecting the ironclad agree- ments heretofore forced upon them by the trust. "The cost of your watch may be a comparatively trivial affair, but the price you pay involves a principle, and a vital one. "To pay $75 for a Waltham, 'Riverside Maximus' (the price which eight out of ten dealers will ask you) may not be a willful extrava- gance from the standpoint of intrinsic value, but to pay $32.70 more than that particular watch sells for in England, Egypt or Australia simply because it is a home-made article and you live in the United States is hardly sufficient justification for paying tribute and dividends to the trust. The average man wants fair play in watch buying as in other things. "There are no better watches made in the world than those turned out of our American factories. That fact is made doubly plain by the ..high character of the goods sent abroad by the watch trust to compete with the world- renowned watches of such makers as Sir John Bennett, Jules Jurgensen, Patek Phillipe, Audemar, Constantin & Yacheron, etc. AMERICAN MANUFACTURES. 61 "It may seem paradoxical or a 'bulP to say that in order to get the best American-made watches at the lowest prices you must buy them abroad, but such is the fact, thanks to a benevolent 'protective' tariff, which enables the watch trust to hold up the American public and de- mand tribute for dividends from Americans. "Here is an illustration of how the watch trust mulcts (or milks) the American watch buyer "Walk into any jewelry store in the United States and ask to be shown the best Waltham watcli made. They will show you the 'Riverside Maximus,' at $75. "Under no circumstances are tliey allowed to sell this watch for less than $(J0, as they are bound by the 'ironclad' agreement with the trust to maintain that as the minimum price. 1 buy this same 'Riverside Maximus' in England, defray all shipping expenses, bring it back to this country duty free, and offer it to the American public at $42.30, and make a reasonable trade profit on the transaction. "The same relative price difference applies to all other grades of Waltham and Elgin watches. "It is even possible to bring Waltham movements back to this coun- try from England and retail them for $'2.75 at a profit. "All my watches are guaranteed brand new, just as they come from the Waltham and Elgin factories. The prices are all under the mar- ket; for instance, the Riverside, seventeen jewels, price $16.39. No jeweler is allowed to sell this for less than $25, under penalty of being blacklisted by the trust cuttmg off his supply. Ask some jeweler and find out. All my prices represent about the same percentage of saving. The prices quoted below are for movements alone. On request I will submit prices on any sort of case made. I do not sell movements without cases or cases without movements. They are priced sepa- rately simply for the convenience of customers: *• Waltham, Maximus, 23 jewels $42.30 Waltham, 15 jewels. No. 820 3.98 Waltham, 17 jewels, No. 85 4.78 Waltham, Crescent St., 19 jewels 16.92 Waltham, Crescent St., 21 jewels 18.98 Waltham, Riverside, 17 jewels 16.39 Waltham, Vanguard, 23 jewels 25.38 P. S. Bartlett, 17 jewels 7.98 Elgin, B. W. Raymond, 19 jewels 16.92 Appleton, Tracy & Co., 17 jewels 11.98 Laay W^altham, O size, 16 jewels. . . , 9.98 Riverside, 12 size, 17 jewels 16.39 Waltham, Maximus, 21 jewels 39.9S Elgin, Veritas, 23 jewels 25.38 "CHARLES A. KEENE, "180 Broadway, New York, Watches, Diamonds, Jewelry." Mr. Rainey then said: " "What is known as the 'big four' in the watch trust are the follow- ing: The American W^altham Watch Company, of Waltham, Mass.; the Crescent Watch Case Company, of Philadelphia; the Elgin Na- tional Watch Company, of Elgin, 111., and the Keystone W'atch Case Company, of Newark, N. J. The Waltham company make movements only, and they are put on the market and sold in Crescent cases. The Elgin National Watch Company sells their watches to the Keystone Watch Case Company for export, and they are exported by the Key- stone Watch Case Company. The New York Standard W^atch Com- pany, of Jersey City; the Philadelphia Watch Case Company, of Riverside, N. J., and the E. Howard Watch Company, of Boston, are controlled by the same eajutal that controls the Keystone company, ants showing that within the fifteen months prior to the time he started this particular business, he cabled abroad in American money over $130,000 through the American Express Company for the pur- pose of purchasing abroad American-made watches." Also a list of watch dealers in various parts of the world and he charged that to each one of these watch dealers the American Watch Trust — the Elgin Company and the Waltham Company 64 WAGE^ AND INCOMES. and the Keystone Company and the rest of them — sell watches for a mere fraction of the price they sell to the American retailer, and challenged them to show by their books that they do not do so. The following is the list referred to: "Mr. Evan Roberts, 30 St. Georges square, Regents Park, London; Mr. J. Blanckensee & Co., 48 Frederick street, Birmingham, England ; Mr. Marcel Bourdais, 62 Ruede, Tavernue, Paris; Ballantyne & Son, 52 Virginia street, Glasgow, Scotland ; MM. Les Fils de Braunschweig, Chaux de Fonde, Switzerland; E. Collins & Co., 34 Pritchard. Johannesburg, Africa; George & Co., Scotland road, Liverpool, Eng land; Hopkins & Hopkins, No. 1 Lower Sackville, Dublin, Ireland; Mr. Hurtis Sendre, 6 Old China Bazaar street, Calcutta, India; Mr. Otto Heerman, 34 Ferdinand Strasse, Hamburg, Germany." WAGES AND INCOMES. HOW THE TARIFF HAS AFFECTED THEM. The question of the increase or decrease of wages and incomes is comparatively an uncertain quantity as to the employees of the wjiole country. The Census Bureau says no reliable comparison can be made between the figures for 1890 and 1900. The Labor Bureau, in the Bulletin for July, 1905, published the "Relative weekly earnings per employee and for all employees 1890 to 1904 (see page 15), which indicates an average increase in weekly earnings of 12.3 per cent, from 1897 to 1904, the relative numbers being given in 1897 as 99.2 and in 1904 112.2." SPEAKER CANNON'S STATISTICS. Speaker Cannon, in his "keynote" speech delivered August 16 at Danville, Illinois, gave the voters some large statistics to ponder over, but it is safe to assume that Mr. Cannon would ngt have used these figures if he had known their full significance. He said: "The average number of wage-earners in 1900, as given by the Census, was 4,251,535, in 1905 the number was 5,- 492,178, not including those in hand trades." "The total wages paid," said Mr. Cannon, "in 1890 amounted to $1,891,209,696, and in 1905 to $2,661,409,858." So he acknowledges that during these fifteen years average yearly wages increased slightly less than 9.4 per cent. During the same period, that is from 1890 to 1905, the value of manufactured products, according to Census figures, increased 58.7 per cent. Does Mr. Cannon and other stand-pat Congressmen call that a fair deal? An increase of 58.7 per cent, for the Trusts and only an increase of 9.4 per cent, for the wage-earners. That certainly proves trust prosperity, but where does the prosperity for the wage-earner come in when his cost of living has increased 47 per cent. Speaker Cannon, in his fight with labor, should avoid statistics, for they are a two-edged sword in the hands of anyone that does not understand their significance, as Mr. Cannon evidently does not. WAGES' AND INCOMES. 65 As most of these statistics are totally unreliable, those for the Census of 1890, notoriously so, and those furnished from the Bureau of Labor being juggled to make a partisan showing, Mr. Cannon and other Republican orators should confine themselves to glittering generalities and attempt to prove nothing. How much wages have increased during the past nine years can be best answered by each individual for himself. He knows what he has been receiving and what he is now getting and whether his wages have kept pace with his increased expenses. WAGES OF RAILROAD EMPLOYEES. The Interstate Commerce Commission receives a report each year from each railroad corporation of its income and expenses. One of the items of this report is the number of employees and the wages paid them. As the wages of railroad men must about keep pace with those in other industries, these official govern- ment statistics are a fair indication of wages paid in other in- dustries for the year given. In the Statistics of Railways in the United States for 1904, the last published by the Interstate Com- merce Commission, on page 43, will be found the average daily wages paid to each class of railroad employee as follows: Class. United States. 1904 1903 1902 1901 1900 1899 1898 1897 General officers 11.61 11.27 11.17 10.97 10.45 10.03 9.73 9.54 Otlifer officers 6.07 5.76 5.60 5.56 5.22 5.18 5.21 5.12 General office clerks 2.22 2.21 2.18 2.19 2.19 2.20 2.25 2.18 Station agents 1.93 1.87 1.80 1.77 1.75 1.74 1.73 1.73 Other station men 1.69 1.64 1.61 1.59 1.60 1.60 1.61 1.62 Engineraen 4.10 4.01 3.84 3.78 3.75 3.72 3.72 3.65 Firemen 2.35 2.28 2.20 2.16 2.14 2.10 2.09 2.05 Conductors 3.50 3.38 3.21 3.17 3.17 3.13 3.13 3.07 Other trainmen 2.27 2.17 2.04 2.00 1.96 1.94 1.95 1.90 Machinists 2.61 2.50 2.36 2.32 2.30 2.29 2.28 2.23 Carpenters 2.26 2.19 2.08 2.i)G 2.04 2.03 2.02 2.01 Other shopmen 1.91 1.86 1.78 1.75 1.73 1.72 1.70 1.71 Section foremen 1.78 1.78 1.72 1.71 1.68 1.68 1.C9 1.70 Other trackmen . . : 1.33 1.31 1.25 1.23 1.22 1.18 1.16 1.16 Switch tenders, crossing tenders and watchmen 1.77 1.76 1.77 1.74 1.80 1.77 1.74 1.72 Telegraph operators and dispatchers 2.15 2.08 2.01 .1.98 1.96 1.93 1.92 1.90 Employees— acco'int lioatiig equipment 2.17 2.11 2.00 1.97 1.92 1.89 1.S9 1.8(5 All other employees and laborers 1.82 1.77 1.71 1.69 1.71 1.68 1.67 1.64 These wages show an average increase of 11 per cent. Since 1904 there has been a further increase, which, if in the same pro- portion, would make the increase in 1906 about 14 per cent. So the railroad men are not participating in the prosperity of the railroad managers and stockholders. What they bought for $1 of wages in 1897 now costs them $1.47, and they have only $1.14 to pay it with. The tariff fostered trusts and inflation have raised prices 47 per cent, but the average wages have only increased 14 per cent. To come out even the man who was receiving $2 a day in 1897 should now be getting $2.94. It is fair to assume that all labor is suffering from similar conditions, except perhaps a few well-organized trades, who have been able to force their wages somewhat beyond the average increase, but only after great strikes" and costly struggles. 66 COST OF LIVING HIGHER. No wonder Organized Labor is opposing the Republican party, not only on the question of labor legislation, but on the far greater issue of legislating for monopolists and giving them the opportunity to plunder the great mass of the people. HOW THE TARIFF PLUNDERS THOSE WITH LIMITED INCOMES. Those whose incomes are stationary and who get no increase to correspond with the increase in the cost of living are in worse plight than other people. The aged man or widow with a small but fixed income finds nearly one-half of its purchasing power cut off and themselves unable from age or infirmity from working to increase their incomes. Nothing remains for such unfor- tunates but the pinching economy that comes hard, when com- fort should be the rule. The grasping Trusts and Corporations are, through the monopoly, created by protectionism sucking the life blood of those with limited incomes to the tune of 47 per cent. That is Republican usury made legal by the statute known as the.Dingley tariff law. COST OF LIVING HIGHER. AMERICANS PAY HIGH TAXES FOR BENEFIT OF FOREIGNERS. "FIGURES WON'T LIE!" "The Bureau of Labor at Washington issues a bulletin to explain that the cost of living is the highest in sixteen years. Any housewife could have told them that after doing her daily shopping." — New York World. That statement of fact is a reminder, by way of contrast, of one of the funny incidents of the Presidential campaign of 1904. Everybody will remember — for who could possibly forget? — the promulgation by that bureau, just as the dullness that characterized the first two months of that campaign was beginning to be relieved by a slight semblance of interest and excitement, of a bulletin showing on its face that the cost of living had been for a considerable time tending downward. As that statement was flatly contradicted by the experi- ence of every family in the United States, and, therefore, all the people knew that it was the reverse of true, it naturally caused some indignation. But that feeling gave way to innocent merriment as soon as the country had time to take in and assimilate its grotesque absurdity. Truth has nothing to fear from fiction, even though it comes in the shape of official statistics. For, in spite of the old saw, "figures won't lie," it has come to be generally understood that "in the hands of one '3ntirely great" figures may be induced to do the most stupendous lying. In 1906 it is as well known that Americans are paying heavy taxes not for protection of Americans, hut for the benefit of foreign consumers of American products, as it was in 1904 that the cost of living had long been soaring. And it is this universal knowledge that causes recent lame and impotent attempts to deny that our manufac- turers show special and great favor to foreign customers to be dis- missed with mingled contempt and amusement " — Washington Post, May 4, 1906. PRICES AND WAGES. QI PRICES AND WAGES. THE INCREASED COST OF LIVING. As the present tariff law has greatly advanced the cost of liv- ing, it is important to know just how much is to be charged to that Republican legislation and to discover the benefit, if any, to offset that drain on the American pocketbook and if wages have kept pace with the increased expenditures. The acknowledged reliable figures of the trend of prices are Dun's Index numbers, issued every month by the R. G. Dun & Company Mercantile Agency in Dun's Review. These figures are scientifically arrived at and the following explanation of the method of preparation is taken from the Government report of the Monthly Summary of Commerce and Labor for April, 1904, under the title, "Prices Proportioned to Consumption": "In the following table the course of prices and commodities is shown, with due alloAvance for the relative importance of each. Quo- tations of all the necessaries of life are taken, including whiskey and tobacco, and in each case the price is multiplied by the annual per capita consumption, which precludes, and one commodity having more than its proper weight in the aggregate. "For example, the price of a bushel of wheat is multiplied by 5.55, representing the annual per capita consumption of 4 2-3 bushels of food and the remainder as allowance for seed. The price per pound for coffee is taken nine times, of cheese 2.3, of chemicals only frac- tions of an ounce in some cases. Thus, wide fluctuations in the price of an article little used do not materially affect the index, but changes in the great staples have a large influence in advancing or depressing the total. For convenience of comparison and economy of space the prices are grouped in seven classes: Breadstuffs in- clude many quotations of wheat, corn, oats, rye, barley, beans and peas; meats include live hogs, beef, sheep, and many provisions, lard, tallow, etc.; dairy and garden products embrace eggs, vegetables, fruits, milk, butter, cheese, etc.; clothing covers the raw material of each industry, and many quotations of woolen, cotton, silk and rubber goods, as well as hides, leather, boots and shoes; metals in- clude various quotations of pig iron and partially manufactured and finished products, as well as the minor metals, tin, lead, copper, etc., and coal and petroleum; miscellaneous include many grades of hard and soft lumber, lath, brick, lime, glass, turpentine, hemp, linseed oil, paints, fertilizers and drugs. The third decimal is given for accuracy of comparison; thus, $101,587 representing $101.58 and seven-tenths of a cent. This figure does not purport to show the exact average amount cost of living on January 1, 1902, because wholesale prices are taken and all luxuries omitted. Its economic value is in showing the percentage of advance or decline from month to month." To show how careful Dun's Review is to quote accurately and to weight properly, note the following further explanation from J^un's Review of September 7, 1901: "In many cases a large number of quotations are averaged in order to secure a representative price for the commodity, thus avoiding the special effect on one particular grade of exceptional conditions. Both raw materials and manufactured products are included, preventing the excessive influence of speculative operations in the former, since markets for finished products are more stable. In these cases the per capita consumption is so proportioned as to avoid duplication." 68 PRICES AND WAGES. The explanation of the Dun price tables not only indicates what is a strictly scientific system, it also condemns the Bureau of Labor methods as unscientific and unreliable. The Dun price tables are prepared by the leading commercial authority of this country. They are not made in the interest of any political party or to bolster up any tariff theory. The accuracy of these price tables as indicating the relative changes in the cost of living has never been questioned, even by the Bureau of Labor. Why the Labor Bureau should adopt another and totally unscientific sys- tem is clear to those familiar with the exigencies of Republican politics. Following is a table showing the relative cost of living at dif- ferent dates: DUN'S INDEX NUMBERS. 1897 1900 1902 1904 1906 July 1 July 1 July 1 July 1 July 1 Breadstuff 10.589 14.898 20.534 18.244 17.923 Meats 7.529 8.906 11.628 9.033 9.677 Dairy and Garden 8.714 10.901 12.557 10.648 12.590 Other food 7.887 9.482 8.748 10.406 9.645 Clothing 13.808 16.324 15.533 16.514 19.177 Metals 11.642 14.834 16.084 15.428 16.649 Miscellaneous 12.288 16.070 16.826 16.919 19.555 Total 72.455 91.415 101.910 97.192 105.216 The year 1897 is taken as the initial point because the present tariff law was enacted and became in force on July 24 of that year, and the odd years are omitted to allow space for the table on the page. The general trend, however, has been steadily up- ward, except in the semi-panic of 1903, when the numbers fell away to 99.456, and continued to decline during 1904. The figures of the table therefore indicate that the cost of living has in- creased 47 per cent, since 1897, the year the present tariff law was enacted. Apparently, it is mounting higher and higher and has made new records each year, except in 1903-4, since the trust era was brought to its climax by the passage of the present tariff law. The tables published by the United States Bureau of Labor are not prepared on the same scientific basis as are Dun's figures, for the proportionate amount of each class of produce and article consumed is not allowed for, so that the article, such as nutmegs, bears the same relative proportion as flour. Yet, misleading as are the tables of the United States Bureau of Labor, even these show that the average wholesale prices for the year 1905 were 29.02 per cent, higher than they were for the year 1897. (See Bulletin of the Bureau of Labor, March, 1906). ENGLISH PRICES. It is interesting to note the trend of prices in England, where there are no protected trusts, that country being on a tariff for revenue basis. For years the London Economist has published figures prepared on a somewhat similar basis as Dun's although on a less number of articles and not weighted so scientifically and the figures are here given for the same years as in the table of Dun's Index numbers. PRICES AND WAGES, 69 LONDON ECONOMIST INDEX NUMBERS. Average price level of commodities in England on the 30th da> of June, 1897 to 1906, showing the gradual rise in prices in the free trade market, due to increased supply of gold. The fig- ures; are taken from the Index Numbers of the London Economist, only the totals being given: June 30, 1897 1885 June' 30, 1898 1915 June 30, 1899 2028 June 30, 1900 2211 June 30, 1901 2007 June 30, 1902 2003 June 30, 1903 2127 June 30, 1904 2130 , June 30, 1905 2163 June 30, 1906 2362 The table shows that prices in England, where there are no protected trusts, have advanced 25^2 per cent, since 1897, and therefore there must be some underlying cause for this increase that is world wide. This 25 1/^ per cent, increase, it would seem, has been caused by the enormous output of gold and consequent inflation of the circulating medium during the past few years v,'hich has decreased the purchasing power of gold, as measured in labor and commodities. Therefore, there has been a general upward trend of prices to meet this decrease in the value of gold on an average of 25 1^ per cent. SAUERBECK'S PRICES INDEX. As further evidence of the general trend of prices and proof of the Democratic contention in 1896 of the quantitative theory of money that inflation of the circulating medium advances p-.ices and a reduction in the circulating medium leads to lower 1 rice levels is shown in the tables below. It is interesting to note that even despised silver feels the force of gold inflation and has advanced in value, as shown by the table below, from Ihe relative value of 35.6 to 49.4, an advance of over 38 per cent. Since these figures were published the Government of the United States has purchased silver at 66 cents an ounce, equal to nearly 33 pence per ounce, which will advance the index figure to 54.1. "A. Sauerbeck, London, issues the following index numbers t.f the prices of 45 commodities, under date of August 3, the average of the eleven years 1867-1877 being 100: Monthly Average. Numbers. 1878-1887 79 Dec, 1889 73.7 1886-1895 68 Feb., 1895 60.0 1890-1899 66 July, 1896 59.2 1896-1905 68 July, 1900 76.2 1894 76 Dec, 1901 68.4 1896 61 July, 1905 72.5 1900 75 Dec, 1905 74.9 1901 70 Feb., 1906 75.0 1902 69 Mar., 1906 75.7 190^ 69 April, 1906 76.5 1904 70 May, 1906 77.0 1905 72 June. 1906 76.9 July, 1906 76.4 ^0 PRICES AND WAGES. "The index number shows a further moderate reduction. Ainong articles of food, flour, barley, maize and tea ruled slightly lower, while sugar and coffee were somewhat dearer. For animal food products there was scarcely any change. In the case of materials iron and copper were a little firmer, but tin declined from £176% to £170% per ton. Cotton and. jute were easier, and foreign wool fell 5-10 per cent. No alteration occurred for sundry materials in the aggregate. "Taking articles of food and materials separately the index num- bers compare thus (1867-1877 equal 100) : Average 1895 1896 1878-87. 1886-95. 1896-05. Feb. July Food 84 71 67- 63.8 60.0 Materials 76 66 69 57.0 58.6 1900 1900 1905 1906 Feb. .July Dec. June July Food 65.8 71.2 68.7 09.1 68.7 •Materials 81.9 79.8 79.4 82.7 82.0 "Silver — The prices and index numbers compare thus (60.84d per oz. being the parity of one gold to 15i^ silver, ecjual 100) : Price. Index No. Average, 1886-1895 40 ^d 66.2 Average, 1896-1905 27 %d 44.6 Average, 1896 30 %d 50.5 End December, 1900 29 9-16d 48.6 Lowest November, 1902 21 ll-16d 35.6 End December, 1904 28 %d 46.6 End March, 1905 25 lB-16d 42.4 End December, 1905 30d 49.3 End June, 1906 30 3-16d 49.6 End July, 1906 30 l-16d 49.4 HOW THE TRUSTS HAVE INCREASED PRICES. The above index numbers of Sauerbeck's show an average in- crease in prices in England of 27 per cent, since 1896, which is 1% per cent, higher than shown by the London Economist fig- ures, probably caused by the larger number of articles used in the Sauerbeck grouping than by the Economist. But taking the Sauerbeck numbers as approximately correct they show there has been this world-wide increase in values of 27 per cent, as against an increase in the United States of 47 per cent. The combined opinion of nearly all experts charges the increase in world-wide piices to the diminished purchasing power of gold since it has become more plentiful, but that only applies to the 27 per cent, world-wide increase in prices. To what must be charged the 20 per cent, extra increase in this country? The reason is plain and incontrovertible, that the tariff-fostered trusts have, by rea- son of the protection granted them by the Dingley act, been able to force up prices beyond the world's high level. * THE FARMERS AND TRUST PLUNDERING. It is estimated by statistical experts that the special privileges granted to the Trusts and Combines by the Republican party through the tariff and other legislation takes from the people, without giving anything in return, about two billion dollars' worth of products annually — $125 per family each year^ This estimate was published in the Pennsylvania Grange News Sep- tember, 1904, the authorized organ of the organized farmers of PRICES AND WAGES. 71 that state. These figures are arrived at by adding together the monopoly extortions from farmers, business men and wage-earn- ers they probably exceed two billion dollars per annum. This is bai-ed upon four estimates. (1) In the last annual report of the Master of the National Grunge, Mr. Jones, of Indiana, a Republican, says: "More than $150,000,000 has been lost to the live stock industry in the past year by the manipulations of the meat trust. If the entire prod- ^uct of the farm— wheat, corn, hay, cotton, live stock, dairy and fruit— is taken into account, farmers have lost more than $700,- 000,000 in the past year through manipulations of combines and t:nu.ts. * * * Farmers have also suffered another great loss in the purchase of supplies needed in their business." (2) The yearly earnings in all the gainful occupations are about twenty billion dollars. That one-tenth of this goes to monopolists from excessive charges, is a conservative estimate. For example, the dividends of the Standard Oil Company for 1901 were 48 per cent, of its capitalization. And 47 other trusts aver- aged 7.44 per cent, on their capitalization of that year. This capitalization averaged about three times the amount of capital invested, making a 22 per cent, dividend on capital invested. In railways the profits for 1901 were as high as 16 per cent, on the par value of some of the stocks, which doubtless were half watered, thus making a rate as high as 32 per cent, of the capital invested in some roads. (3) The capitalization of certain specified monopolies of the country is shown in "The Truth About Trusts" to be twenty billions of dollars, while all the other capital in the country is only eighty billions of dollars. In other words, the capitalization of the principal monopolies is one-fifth the total capitalization of the country, and much of the monopoly capitalization, such as Standard Oil stock and street railway stocks, is earning so much that it sells at from two to eight times its face value. (4) The tax levied last year by means of the monopoly prices of the American Steel Trust has been carefully estimated by Mr. Byron W. Holt, an eminent statistician. He places it at $160,- 000,000. This of itself is ten dollars per family for the year. REPUBLICAN OPINIONS OF THE DINGLEY TARIFF LAW. From Speech of Governor Cummins of Iowa. "All the robberies and thefts committed by all the insurance officers since life insurance was first originated do not amount to as much extortion as the Dingley bill for one year." Authorized Interview at Washington, D. C, of Alvin H. Sanders, ^ President of the American Reciprocal Tariff League. "I have not abandoned hope that this Congress will make some move in the interest of fairer trade relations with our foreign cus- tomers. It is inconceivable to me that the leaders of the Republican party should commit the political blunder of going before the people this fall with stand-patism as one of the main issues. The corn-belt States will sooner or later send men to Washington who will represent their interests in an aggressive way on this proposition. They want honest protection to interests that need it, but they insist upon an 72 . PRICES AND WAGES. energetic effort being made to open tlie markets of Continental Europe to our corn, wheat, flour, beef, pork, cattle, hogs, etc. They believe they are being sacrificed at the behest of certain manufacturing inter- ests that do not need the excessive tariffs provided by the Dingley law of 1897. *'If we could 'tote fai*-' with Continental Europe we could sell at least $100,000,000 worth more of American agricultural products than we are now supplying. Surely this is a matter entitled to the serious consideration of the National Legislature. We have been selling to Germany, even under the restrictions imposed upon us in recent years, more than $50,000,000 worth of farm products other tlian cotton and tobacco. That this could be run up to $100,000,000 under fair recip- ' rocal arrangements is self-evident. The idea, therefore, that we can view with equanimity the closing of that outlet for our foreign sur- plus, and that we can afford to disregard the European tariff combine against us, is a proposition that cannot be successfully defended in the Middle States. "That representatives of the great farming States should lend them- selves to the perpetuation of a policy that is robbing our producers of important vents for the ever-growing surplus of our farms appears to me a monstrous proposition." Interview in New York Sun, November 14, 1905, of Representative Babcock, of Wisconsin. "What would revision by the coming Congress, through the com- mittees of House and Senate, as now constituted, amount to? Those committees are dominated by men who favor the high protection idea, Chairman Payne and Representatives Dalzell and Grosvenor would head the Republican sub-committee to draw the bill, and none of them would support such a measure, as the Republican friends of revision want.' Speaker Cannon in New York Tribune, December, 1905. "If some fellow did introduce a tariff bill, and it was argued and argued, and at the end of twelve months its advocates could gather together enough votes to pass it, the country being held up by the tail in the meantime, I think you'd find that the new law would* have just as many outrageous things in it as are found in the Dingley tariff act." WHAT REPUBLICANS SAY ON TAklFF. 73 WHAT REPUBLICANS SAY ON TARIFF. A REPUBLICAN GOVERNOR INSISTS ON FREE RAW MATERIAL. Governor Guild of Massachusetts is quoted as saying: "He would not run for governor on any platform less liberal than that of last year. He insists upon putting five articles on the free list — iron ore, coal, lumber, hides and paper pulp wood stock." Governor Guild is another Republican governor that the Roose- velt stand-pat letter leaves outside the party trenches. SPEAKER CANNON'S OPINION. An extract from a letter written by Speaker Cannon to Col. .John N. Taylor, of the Knowles, Taylor & Knowles Pottery Com- pany, at East Liverpool, Ohio, was published in the Washington Post on April 5, as follows: "I am satisfied there will be no tariff revision this Congress, but it goes without saying that the desire for a change which exists in the common mind will drive the Republican party, if continued in power, to a tariff revision. I do not want it, but it will come in the not distant future." 74 Exports of manufactures. EXPORTS OF MANUFACTURES. LARGE INCREASE FOR THE LAST YEAR. A statement issued by the Bureau of Statistics, Department of Commerce and Labor, shows that the exports of manufactures for the year ending June 30, 1905, amounted to $543,620,297, against $452,445,629 in the preceding year. The growth in ex- ports of manufactures far exceeds the growth of population or the growth in commerce as a whole. Iron and steel manufacturers supply about one-fourth of the manu- factured articles exported, the total in 1905 having been $134,727,921, as against $111,948,586 in the preceding year, an increase of nearly twenty-three million dollars. Steel rails showed an increase of $6,000 000, chietiy in shipments to Canada, South America, Mexico, the West Indies, and Japan and other oriental countries, in several chi^erv .l^.n r^ development is proceeding at a rapid rate. Ma- over Tgof A Ztn-^"" '^TT ^^ "^^^^ ^^^^ «i^ ^"lli«n dollars rioiomotivt to lap'ri f "'' '' *^ ^"^^^ '""'''^'^ '^ -^P-^« 1905, as a-ainst 74 ?n ;>. ^''^'''^^ ^^"^^"^ ^^'" ^^^^ thither in increased S purchases of' Ar-'"' ^'^'' ^^"^^" ""^ Argentina increased her mirnh.f / American sewing machines, while Japan wareTacht^^rbsSrtiri^tr^^^^ -^^^^^ -<^ ^^^^^-s' ha^rd- the^Xm'oT'secl^f^'''' consisting largely of pigs and bars, form rne item of second importance, the total being $86,225,291 in 1905 as compared with $57,142,081 in the preceding year. This growth tofr "f^ ^?^'2?^'^^^ ^" ^ single year is\ccounted for^by an V.hT K-"'r^^ ^i?'.^n^'^^^ ^^ ^^P^^^« to China, $3,000,000 to^ the, ^4 ^00 on^r^MTv: f'^^^'T t^ ^^^^^^' $3,000,000 to Germany, to'othe? countries^ $1,250,000 to Russia, and nearly $2,000,000 Refined mineral oil ranks third in the exports of manufactures, the total being $71,888,317, as against $71,753,552 in the preceding year, ihe quantity increased from 847,000,000 gallons in 1904 to 951,000,000 in 1905. Cotton manufactures present one of the striking features of the year's export record, having advanced from $22,403,713 in 1904 to $49,666,080 in the year just ended. The growth occurred chiefly m cotton cloth exports, $14,696,199 being the total ' in 1904 and $41,320,542 the figure for 1905. To China there was an increase of about 400,000,000 yards over last year's exportation of $76,- 900,000, and the value of our cotton cloth exports to that country increased from $4,000,000 in 1904 to $27,750,000 in 1905. Japnn was the only other country to show a considerable increase in takings from us, the total being 16,000,000 yards, valued at $1,125,000, as against less than 440,000 yards in 1904, valued at $55,000. Leather, and manufactures of, fourth in importance in the list, showed an increase of $4,000,000, the total in 1905 having been $38,000,000, as compared with $34,000,000 in the preceding year. In this class, also, Japan should be credited with the chief in- crease. To Japan we exported 16,000,000 pounds of sole leather, valued at $4,146,428, as against 2,000,000 pounds, with a valuation of about $500,000, in the preceding year. The increase in boots and shoes is principally in exports to the West Indies and Mexico, each of those countries being credited with about $400,000 iii excess of the 1904 figures, while the total increase in boot and shoe exports to all countries was but little over $818,000. EXPORTS OF MANUFACTURES. # 75 AGRICULTURAL IMPLEMENTS EXPORTED. Other important articles exported were: Agricultural imple- ments, $20,750,000; chemicals, drugs, dyes, etc., nearly $16,000,000; wood manufactures, $12,500,000; cars, carriages and vehicles, $10,- 666,000; scientific instruments, $8,000,000; paper and manufactures of, $8,250,000; paraffin and paraffin wax, $7,750,000; fib^r manu- factures, $6,750,000; tobacco manufactures, $5,666,000; books, maps, etc., nearly $5,000,000; and India rubber manufactures, $4,750,000. The following table shows the values of the principal articles of domestic manufacture exported from the United States in the fiscal years 1904 and 1905. Articles, Agricultural implements Blacking Books, maps, etc Brass, and manufactures of Bricks Candles Cars, carriages, and vehicles Cement Chemicals and drugs Clocks and watches Copper, and manufactures of Cotton manufactures Earthen, stone and chinaware Fiber manufactures other than of cotton. Glass and glassware Gunpowder and other explosives India-rubber manufactures Instruments and apparatus for scientific purposes Iron and steel manufactures Jewelry, and manf. of gold and silver. . . Lamps and chandeliers Leather, and manufactures of Malt liquors Marble and stone manufactures Musical instruments Oils, mineral Paints, pigments, and colors Paper, and manufactures of Paraffin and wax Plated ware Silk manufactures Soap Spirits, distilled Tobacco manufactures Wood manufactures Wool manufactures Zinc manufactures All other manufactured articles Total manufactures *. Total agricultural products Total, all other articles ^. . . Grand total domestic exports Foreign merchandise exported Total exports 1904. Dollars. 22,749,635' 597,397 4,347,304 2,557,484 499,427 510,183' 10,936,618 530,216 14,480,323 2,281,195 57,142,081 22,403,713 692,834 6,414,636 1,978,481 2,441,596 4,436,124 8,297,723 111,948,586 1,365,654 1,502,888 83,980,615 854,119 1,372,001 3,230,982 72,487,546 2,756,581 7,543,728 8,859,964 693,618 466,519 2,499,933 2,276,826 5,042,719 12,981,112 1,987.938 258,710 17,008.912 452,415.921 853,643,073 129,120,023 1,435,179,017 25,648,254 1,460,827,271 | 1905. Dollars. ^20,721,741 599,366 4,844,100 3,025,764 642,501 701,357 10,610,437 1,484,795 15,859,422 2,316,414 86,225,291 49,666,080 880,827 6,766,809 2,252,799 2,559,837 4,780,817 8,172,980 134,727,921 1,419,225 1,579,125 37,936,745 1,012,808 1,055,220 3,144,787 73,433,787 3,126,317 8,238,088 7,789,160 703,783 620,572 2,670,687 2,572,152 5,690,203 12,560,935 2,035,054 1,319,619 19,872,712 543.620,207 821,074,439 127,049,959 1,491,744,695 26,817,025 1,518,561,720 SALT INDUSTRY. A bulletin issued by the United States Geological Survey states that the production of salt in the United States during 1904 was 22,030,002 barrels (of 280 pounds), valued at $6,021,222, as com- pared with 18,968,089 barrels, valued at $5,286,988 in 1903. This is the largest production ever reported except in 1902, but the average net price per barrel (27.332 cents) is lower than that re- ported in 1903 (27.873 cents) or in any previous year, with the exception of 1902, when the average net price realized was only 23.769 cents a barrel. The most noteworthy feature of the year 1904 was the increase of 1,193,620 barrels in the production of rock ^E CAN GET; AND I AM FREE TO SAY WE CANNOT GO ON AND MAKE GOODS AS WE ARE NOW DOING WITHOUT SUCH MARKET. Q. (Bx MR. CLARKE.) DOES THE PROSPECT OF REVISING THE TARIFF HAVE ANY EFFECT ON BUSINESS GENERALLY? A. IT DOES, BUT IT IS A THING WHICH THE PEOPLE WILL GET OVER AFTER A WHILE. SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO HAVE A HERCULEAN OPERATION TO CURE A MAN— CUT OFF HIS LEG OR SOMETHING. Q. THE BUSINESS DEPRESSION, THEN, INCIDENT TO A RE- VISION WOULD NOT DETER YOU FROM ADVISING A RE- VISION?— A. NO; IT DOES NOT. I SHOULD NOT BE INTELLI- GENT ENOUGH TO MAKE A REVISION; I DO NOT KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT IT, BUT I THINK THAT TO LIVE AND LET LIVE THE WORLD OVER IS RATHER THE BEST WAY TO GET ALONG. Q. YOU THINK THE COTTON-GOODS SCHEDULE CAN STAND ANY REDUCTION ?— A. ALMOST EVERYTHING I MAKE CAN GET ALONG WITHOUT ANY TARIFF, BECAUSE WE CAN BEAT ENGLAND NOW IN MANY MARKETS. THE ENGLISH CANNOT MAKE A DRILL OF THE SAME CAPACITY, OF THE SAME STANDARD AS WE MAKE, AND COMPETE WITH US IN CHINA. THEY MAKE AN INFERIOR DRILL AND THEREFORE GET THERE. Q. If you had no duties would there be any danger of the dumping of the surplus stocks in this country so as to demoralize the market? A. I do not think so. But everybody must be treated with the same consideration, in my opinion. I do not think you can discriminate in my favor against somebody else making finer yarn. Q. NOTWITHSTANDING THE PRACTICAL DIFFICULTY OF REVISING THE TARIFF YOU WOULD STILL RECOMMEND IT? A. / WOULD RECOMMEND A LOWER TARIFF. IT OCCURS TO ME IF THERE WAS A LOWER RATE OF DUTY PROPERLY AP- PLIED TO ALL PRODUCTIONS IT MIGHT BE BETTER FOR THE COUNTRY. WE GO TO WORK AND MAKE GOODS AT A HIGH COST, AND THEN RAISE THE LABOR; AND EVERY- THING THAT LABOR HAS TO BUY IT HAS TO PAY MORE FOR, SO THAT IT IS NOT MUCH BETTER OFF. I THINK, HOWEVER, LABOR IS AS WELL PAID TODAY AS I HAVE KNOWN IT TO BE IN THIS COUNTRY. Q. ARE THE GOODS YOU SELL MORE EXPENSIVE THAN A WHILE AGO?— A. A GOOD DEAL. IT IS NOT TWO YEARS SINCE THAT OUR GOODS HAVE INCREASED IN COST AT LOWELL 20 PER CENT. THE INCREASE IS 25 PER CENT. SINCE 1888. Q. What is that increase in cost due to? — ^A. To two 10 per cent, advances in labor, which makes 20 per cent; and in the supplies THAT GO INTO IT. Q. It THE TARIFF WAS REDUCED, WOULD NOT LABOR HAVE TO BE CONTENT WITH A LESS WAGE?— A. YES; BUT IT COULD BUY WHAT IT GETS FOR LESS. THE POINT IS, THE LOWER YOU CAN OFFER A COMMODITY TO THE WORLD THE BIGGER BUSINESS YOU CAN DO. YOU CAN DO TWICE AS MUCH BUSINESS WITH CHINA WITH A DRILL AT 5 CENTS AS AT 7 CENTS. THE SAME IS TRUE IN SOUTH AMERICA; IT IS ALSO TRUE IN AFRICA. THOSE ARE THE GREAT CON- SUMING COUNTRIES OF THE COARSE PRODUCTS MADE NORTH AND SOUTH IN THIS COUNTRY. Q. Before this present war in China, were the Chinese manufactur- ing cotton goods to some extent ? — ^A. Yes ; to some extent. I do not know to how great an extent, but their goods never interfered with TARIFF SHOULD BE REDUCED. 79 well-made and well-constructed American goods. They did not take the same place. They went to' parts of China where they were willing to wear an inferior article. Q. Do you know of any reason why they cannot produce as good goods there as you can here ? — ^A. I do not think they can. The morale of the country or of the labor there is not at all commensurate or to be compared with ours. The very idea that a man can live on a cent's or two-thirds of a cent's worth of rice does not to my mind per- mit him to compete with the man that lives on a piece of beef. Q. Are you familiar with cotton goods made in India? — A. I have seen them. Q. How do they compare? — ^A. I do not think they are as good as goods made in England. Q. Have you seen any of the Japanese cottons? — ^A. Yes. Q. How do they compare? — ^A. Very well made, indeed. Q. Do you understand the cotton manufacturing industry is rapidly increasing in Japan? — A. It is said to be and must be, because I be- lieve the Japanese took something like 100,000 bales of cotton from this country last year. Q. Do you know what it costs per yard to bring cotton North from Alabama to New York? — ^A. No; I cannot tell you. I was shipping some goods to Shanghai ; I believe that is where they were to go. We had already contracted to ship some by way of California direct from the Southern mill, making the New York allowance of freight 53 points. We made some shipments that way, but it came out we could send the goods by way of New York and by way of the Suez Canal for 98 points, whereas they went for 115 from the Southern mill, against which we allowed 53 points. Q. You understand Japan is exporting some cotton yarns and cotton cloths. — A. I have heard so. Q. Do you know how wages compare in Japan with Massachusetts? A. I do not. I suppose they must be a great deal less. (Vol. XIV, Industrial Commission's Report, Page 528 to 533.) 80 WAGES. WAGES. DISASTROUS EFFECT OF McKINLEY TARIFF ON WAGE- EARNERS. When the McKinley tariff went into effect wages were cut down in nearly every industry, on the products of which increased duties were imposed. Here are a few of these reductions taken from a much larger list published in the Tariff Reform of July 30, 1892. OCTOBER, 1890. October 16. The Richland and Nelson, miners, at Dayton, Tenn., to the number of 1,200, are on a strike against a reduction of wages. October 16. Miners and mine laborers are requested to stay away from Etna coal mines, Tennessee, as there is a strike there against the reduction in wages. The place is crowded with the unemployed. October 21. The members of the Leather-Worker Protective Association, K. of L., are on a strike at the morocco factory of McDermott & Howard, Schenck street and Park avenue, Brooklyn, N. Y., as their wages had been reduced from $12 to $9 per week, and more work was expected of them than before the reduction. October 28. The silk ribbon weavers at Boss Levy's shop in New York city had their wages reduced last week about 10 per cent. The reduction is now being taken off, as the men threatened to strike. NOVEMBER, 1890. November 17. Textile workers should not go to Lowell, Mass., where the wages of the mill hands have been reduced. November 18. Spinners in Clark's O. N. T. mills at Newark, N. J., and Kearney, N. J., have had their wages reduced gradually, and since the McKinley Bill passed, instead of the promised advances, there has been a further reduction of 9 per cent. They now threaten to strike and throw out 450. November 20. Two thousand girls employed in the trimming departments of the eighteen hat factories connected with the Fur Hat Manufacturers Association, in Danbury, Conn., were locked out yesterday. November 24. The vest makers of J. Rosenbaum, 118 Avenue D, New York city, are on a strike against a reduction of wages. DECEMBER, 1890. December 4. At Brooklyn over two thousand cigar-makers have been idle a month. They make from $5 to $10 a week. December 4. The Safe Harbor Rolling Mills in Lancaster, Pa., has shut down for an indefinite period. December 11. There may be a general strike of the 5,000 pottery workers throughout the United States, as the association WAGES. 81 of potteries (the trust) has announced a reduction of wages amounting to 10 and even 40 per cent. December 11. Report from Newark, N. J., says: "Three thousand are out here because the Clark mills at Newark and Kearney are shut down." December 18. The large Pond Machine Tool Company of Plainfield, N. J., has to discharge men because of dullness instead of employing more, as they said they would under the McKinley bill. Prices of tools have increased. December 18. A general reduction of wages of 15 to 20 per cent, has been announced to the silk-ribbon weavers at Adams mills in Patterson, N. J., making the average wages now about $7 per week. December 31. Springfield, 111., miners in the West end coal mines struck against 10 cents per capita tax by the company. JANUARY, 1891. January 1. Lackawanna Iron and Coal Company, Scranton, Pa., an average wage reduction of 20 cents per day. January 1. Homestead Steel Works, Carnegie, Phipps c€ Go,, reduction of loages 10 per cent., hy agreement. January 1. Pullman Palace Car Company's works; new scale, making a wage reduction of about 10 per cent. January 8. The Frick Coke Company, in Scottdale, Pa., has given notice that they will shut down 1,100 more coke ovens indefinitely next week, which will throw about 1,200 men out of employment. No cause is given for the shut-down. There are now 4,000 idle coke ovens in that region. January 8. The shops of the Illinois Steel Works in Chicago, except the blast furnaces, shut down Wednesday night. One thousand five hundred men were thrown out of employment. January 15. Four hundred men were laid off at the Scranton Steel Mills at Scranton, Pa., owing, it is said, to the dullness of the steel trade. January 15. The Scottdale Rolling Mills and Pipe Works and the Charlotte Furnace at Scottdale, Pa., have shut down indefi- nitely. One thousand men thrown out of employment. January 16. Report from Massachusetts says the Zylonite Works, at Adams, now partly closed, are to be shut down entirely by the celluloid trust, to which it belongs. Seven hundred will be thrown out of work. January 21. The lasters are preparing for a general reduction of wages to be proposed by the Shoe Manufactory Association (the trust). January 22. A dispatch from Cleveland, Ohio, says that 16 blast furnaces, all but two in the Mahoning Valley, have been shut down in pursuance of an agreement reached two weeks ago. Ten thousand men are thrown out of employment. January 22. Mechanics and laborers are warned to stay away from Galveston, Texas. The place is crowded with men out of employment. There is no work to be had and wages are down to starvation point. 82 WAGES. January 22. The window glass works at Zanesville, Ohio, con- trolled by the United Glass Company, have shut down for an indefinite period. January 22. The employees of the Cambria Iron Company have been notified of a reduction of 10 per cent, in their wages. This will affect 5,000 men from workers to miners. January 22. A despatch from Ashland, Pa., says that orders have been issued from the Reading Coal and Iron headquarters to stop work at the North Island, Monitor, Merriam and Otto collieries. Several hundred men will be thrown out of employ- ment. January 29. One thousand employees of the Bethlehem Iron Company, in Bethlehem, Pa., have heen informed of a reduction of wages of 10 per cent, after February 1. Depression in the trade is attributed as the cause. FEBRUARY, 1891. February 2. Brooks Iron Company, Birsborro, Pa., closed and 450 men thrown out of work because they refused to accept a reduction of 7 per cent. February 2. The Crane Iron Works, Allentown, Pa., a wage reduction of 10 per cent, took place. February 6. The silk ribbon weavers of Steinhart's shop on Fiftieth street,^ New York city, who went out on a strike against a reduction of 25 per cent., have compromised with the firm, accepting a reduction of 15 per cent. February 10. Sixteen thousand coke workers strike against a reduction of wages of 10 per cent., demanding on the other hand a 12% per cent, advance and eight hours instead of nine. February 12. The works of the Ellis & Lessing Steel and Iron Company, in Pottstown, Pa., were closed on Monday. About 700 men were employed. MARCH, 1891. March 5. The Big Run colliery at Ashland, Pa., shut down on Saturday for an indefinite period. The suspension will affect 300 men and boys. March 6. Illinois Steel Company: 2,500 men idle, owing to their refusal to accept what appears to have been a reduction. March 12. Over five hundred men at the Wanskuck Mill, Providence, R. I., went out on a strike last week on account of a reduction in wages. March 12. The Scranton Steel Mill has given notice to its 750 employees of a reduction in wages to take effect March 15. March 12. Crane Iron Work laborers are down to $1 per day. March 19. The Bear Ridge, Beechwood, and Reliance collieries, at St. Clair, Pa., operated by the Reading Company, suspended on Saturday for an indefinite period. The North Franklin will shut down soon. This adds 2,000 men and boys to the number of the unemployed. March 19. Work at the coal mines of Rondville, Hocking Com- pany, Ohio, has suspended for several weeks. The miners are in a destitute condition and the families of many of them are suffer- ing for the necessities of life. WAGES. 83' March 19. Workingmen are warned from going to Blocton, Ala., more than 300 idle men in town. March 26. One hundred and thirty ribbon weavers in the Pioneer Silk Mill in Paterson, N. J., were locked out by the firm last week. March 26. The 1,000 girls and men employed by the Armstrong Bros. & Co., cork manufacturers, went out on a strike last week. March 28. The Lochiel Iron Works at Harrisburg, Pa., have shut down. APRIL, 1891. April 1. The Reading Iron Company's 2,000 employees were told on March 27 that a reduction of wages would be made. April 2. The iron mining companies of the Northwest have reduced wages 10 per cent, or more; many thousand men are getting less pay and deprived of work. April 9. Twelve brick manufacturing firms of Trenton, N. J., have announced a reduction of wages of from 15 to 20 per cent. The reason assigned is a falling off in the demand for brick. April 15. Three hundred shirt makers are locked out by their bosses in New York city. April 24. The tin, sheet and iron workers employed at the Jordan L. Moot Iron Works, New York city, are on a strike against a reduction of wages. April 29. The skilled laborers of Paterson, N. J., who formerly earned from $25 to $35 per week, complain that they average from $10 to $12 at present. April 30. Mechanics, miners and laborers are requested to stay away from Butte City, Mont., as the camp is crowded with idle men. The largest mine has been closed down and more than 1,800 have been discharged. MAY, 1891. May 7. From the formation of the trust in straw goods the workers of that trade are expecting a general reduction of wages throughout the country and the dismissal of many union men, as the managers have prepared a black list. May 7. The cigar makers of New York and Baltimore, the leather finishers of Newark, N. J., the morocco workers of Lynn, Mass., the weavers of Hopedale, Mass., the spinners of Lowell, Mass., the coal miners of Illinois, the hat makers of Melburn, Mass., and the employees of the Crane Coal Company of Catasauqua, Pa., all had their wages reduced on this day. Some of these bodies of men struck. May 14. The Journal of the Knights of Labor says: "Notwithstanding the fact that the manufacturers of sanitary ware at Trenton, N. J., even before t-ie passage of the present tariff bill, and while acting and in singly and in competition with eaoh other, were making adequate profits and needed no further pro- tection ; notwithstanding the fact that by the present tariff bill duties are so heavy that foreign competition is impossible; notwithstand- ing the fact that by the formation of a trust they can and do enact a scale of prices which must of necessity be paid for their wares, as the people have no redress and are at the mercy of the members of the trust, no sooner HAS THE NEW TARIFF LAW BEEN SIGNED 84 WAGES. BY THE PRESIDENT THAN THE TRUST ARBITRARILY IS- SUES ITS DECREE REDUCING THE WAGES OF ITS WORK- MEN 26 TO 32 PER CENT. ON THE PRICE PAID BEFORE FOR ITS LABOR." * ♦ * May 21. The Howard Match Company, of Boston, will discharge 100 men and run on three-quarter time after June 1. May 28. Nearly all the large cigar factories in Key West are closed. Four thousand cigar makers are out of employment. May 28. The Pennsylvania Saw Company, recently bought up by the saw trust, has been closed. JUNE, 1891. June 25. Fall River's 22,000 textile workers are threatened with 10 per cent, reduction. June 26. The great Anaconda Mining Company has shut down for months. There are crowds of idle miners in this camp who cannot secure employment. June 30. The Southern Steel Company, Chattanooga, Tenn., the Emma Blast Furnace, Cleveland, Ohio, Saxony Knitting Mills, Little Falls, N. Y., Merrimac Mills, Lowell, Mass., the Bates Mill, Lewiston, Me., the Adelaide Silk Mill, Allentown, Pa., all made a reduction in wages on this day. JULY, 1891. July 9. The Huntington Manufacturing Company, at Hunting- ton, Pa., which is controlled by the Iron Car Equipment Company, of New York, has indefinitely suspended operations, throwing 350 men out of employment. July 9. Six hundred men and boys in the Broad Top (Pa.) coal regions are becoming discontented because starvation stares them in the face on account of the three-month shut down. July 16. The Cooke Locomotive Works, in Paterson, N. J., employing 1,000 men will close in a few days, owing to dullness in the season. July 23. The proposed reduction in the pay of the Monongahela River miners from 3% to 3 cents per bushel is likely to cause a strike of 6,000 and the shutting down of the works between August 1 and 15. July 28. Last week five boss tailors have reduced the wages of their working girls who were locked out when they declared that they would not accept a reduction of wages. AUGUST, 1891. August 1. The wages of the Lehigh and Wilkesbarre Coal Company miners have been reduced. August 13. The American Glucose Company, which has fac- tories in Buffalo, New York and other cities, and agencies in some of the large cities, has commenced a general reduction in salaries and wages. August 13. During the campaign of 1888, when protective tariff was the issue, the employees of the Arcade File Works, of Sing Sing, N. Y., one of the largest file manufactories in America, were WAGES. 85 promised a large increase of wages if Harrison should be elected. This promise has not been kept. Wages were reduced last Friday from 30 to 50 per cent., according to the work done. August 14. One hundred cloakmakers, cutters, finishers and pressers with Julius Stein & Co., 507 Broadway, Freedman Bros., 332 Canal street, and a few with Benjamin & Caspary, Broome street. New York city, strike because of low wages and a reduction of percentage to pay pressers. August 20. Two hundred men employed by the Gloucester Iron Works, Gloucester, N. J., are out of work because they would not accept a reduction in their wages. SEPTEMBER, 1891. September 3. Trouble is ahead at Fall River. The Cotton Manufacturers Association met September 2 and voted to reduce wages. The reduction will take place October 5, and it is believed will average 10 per cent. September 12. The tobacco workers in Gail & Ax's and Marburg Bros, factory, Baltimore, Md., let their organization go to pieces just before the big trust got hold on the factories, and wages are being reduced. September 17. Girls working in the cereal works of Akron, Ohio, after submitting to a 50 per cent, reduction for two weeks, struck and issued an appeal to the Knights of Labor and the people. The firm for which these girls worked paid good wages until they were taken into the trust. September 24. The Gap furnace and rolling mill at Hollidays- burg. Pa., which has been idle for some time, were sold last week to a New York corporation, which will begin work at once. The works employ 500 men. September 24. The employees of the St. Charles Iron Furnace at Columbia, Pa., have been notified that the furnace will be blown out for an indefinite period. Nearly 300 men will be thrown out of work. OCTOBER, 1891. October 8. The American Waltham Watch Company has announced a reduction of 10 to 20 per cent, in the wages of 900 of its employees. October 22. After a conference between General, Manager Schwab, of the Edgar Thomson Steel Works at Braddock, Pa., and the converting mill employees a new scale has been decided upon. October 28. Agricultural implements at Akron, Ohio, has recently cut down wages. October 29. The watch manufacturers of Canton, Ohio, have cut down the wages of their men. NOVEMBER, 1891. November 4. John C. Dueber, Canton, Ohio, watch manufac- turer, a firm believer in the high tariff to increase the wages of the workingmen, has given his employees the benefit of a 20 per cent, "readjustment" in wages from their pockets into his own. 86 WAGES. November 6. The Union men in San Francisco breweries are to be locked out in order to break up the union and reduce wages. November 12. The entire plant of the Oxford Iron and Nail Company at Oxford, N. J., was shut down Saturday. One hundred men were thrown out. November 22. Hundreds of workmen are idle in Paterson, N. J., as many factories have laid off large numbers of their workers. November 28. The great Pittsburg firm of Jones & Loughlin has reduced the wages of 500 employees from $1.50 to $1.35 per day. The men say that they are powerless to resist and there will be no strike. DECEMBER, 1891. December 3. The famous Dickerson mine, on Mine Hill, Hack- ettstown, N. J., has suspended operations. Hundreds of families will be compelled to go elsewhere to find employment. December 17. The situation in the bituminous coal regions of Indiana, in which some 20,000 miners are on a strike against wage reduction, is a gloomy one for the diggers in the bowels of the earth. December 17. The coopers employed at Mathieson & Weichers sugar refinery, Jersey City, N. J., are on a strike against a reduc- tion in wages. December 24. The Union Coal Company, Shamokin, Pa., collieries have shut down work and thrown 600 men out of employment. December 31. John and James Dobson, manufacturers of plush in Philadelphia, have again reduced the wages of their v/eavers, and they are now 24 per cent, lower than before the McKinley bill was passed. JANUARY, 1892. January 4. The wages of the 3000 employees of the Elgin Watch Company, Elgin, 111., have been cut from 15 to 60 per cent, and they threaten to strike. Several hundred of them walked out yesterday. ***** It is asserted also that the employees of the Waltham Watch Company are about to strike against a reduction of wages. January 7. Notices of an indefinite suspension of work were posted on^ Saturday at the Red Ash Collieries Nos. 1 and 2 at Wilkes-Barre, Pa. January 14. New Year's Day was not a very happy one for the families of the unfortunate miners and puddlers of Oxford Fur- nace at Oxford, N. J. The mills of the Oxford Nail and Foundry Company have been shut down for over two months. Nobody knows when they will start up, and when representatives of the company are questioned about the matter they refuse to talk. It is a mystery how the people live. In many of the houses there has not been a coal fire for weeks. Every day children, thinly clad, can be seen going to the woods and returning with bundles of broken branches of trees to be used for fuel. ♦ * * • If something is not done soon families are likely to starve to death. WAGES. 87 FEBRUARY, 1892. February 14. Owing to the continual depression in the iron trade the Chesapeake Nail Works and the puddling department of the Central Iron Works shut down tonight, throwing between 200 and 300 men out of employment. February 20. The Pottsville (Pa.) Iron and Steel Company ^vill reduce the wages of its 600 employees at Pottsville 10 per cent. February 20. The puddling department of the Central Iron Works at Harrisburg, Pa., shut down Saturday night, throwing 200 men out of employment. The men would not accept the re- duction. February 25. The Columbia Iron and Steel Company of Pitts- burg, whose plant is located at Uniontown, Pa., have made a de- mand for a reduction of 25 per cent, in the wages of their em- ployees. MARCH, 1892. March 3. A cut from 10 to 20 per cent, was made among the piece workers in several works of the Singer Sewing Machine Works at Elizabeth, N. J., and caused great dissatisfaction among the 4000 employees. March 8. Notices were posted yesterday in three rolling mills of Lebanon, Pa., of a reduction of wages of 12^/^ per cent, to go into effect on Monday, March 21. The reduction was made to tidt over the dull trade and keep the hands employed. March 10. A general reduction in wages of about 10 per cent, is being put in operation in the iron furnaces in Birmingham, Ala. March 15. About 1000 trouser makers struck work yesterday because their employers refused to sign a contract with the union for the ensuing year. ************** March 17. Twelve more iron furnaces at Birmingham, Ala., reduced wages 10 per cent, on Tuesday because of the low price of iron. The men accept the inevitable. March 28. The Phoenix Iron Works, of Trenton, N. J., which has been working on government contracts, will permanently close. Over 200 workmen, receiving no encouragement, are seek- ing employment elsewhere. APRIL, 1892. ^ April 6. Window. glass factories will shut down May 31. * * April 7. Two hundred blacksmiths in the axle department of Carnegie's Twenty-ninth Street Mill in Pittsburg struck on Satur- day against a 10 per cent, reduction in wages. April 10. The Keystone Iron Mills of Pittsburg, Pa., employ- ing 400 men, shut down a week ago today for an indefinite period. April 10. Fifty of the best paid workmen at the Edgar Thom- son Steel Works of Andrew Carnegie at Braddock, Pa., were dis- charged this week. April 13. The Quaker Oatmeal Mills of Ravenna, Ohio, em- ploying 150 men, have shut down indefinitely. This is part of the American Cereal Company, "The Oatmeal Trust," to limit pro- 88 WAGES. duction and force prices up in order that some return can be earned on its capital. April 17. The Reading Iron Company of Reading, Pa., an- nounces that a general reduction will be made in the wages of all employees in a few days, ranging from 5 to 10 per cent. April 21. Of the eleven nail mills in Massachusetts nine are idle and the other two are making no profit. April 25. It was reported that 600 men had been thrown out of work in the Lehigh Valley coal region by the combine of the Reading with several other railroads. ********* MAY, 1892. May 1. There has been a reduction in the wages of Andrew Carnegie at his Lower Union Mills in Pittsburg. Seventy-five hi ack smiths accepted the cut of about 20 per cent, without mur- mur, but seventy-five hammermen struck. ******* May 5. The brickmakers of Philadelphia have been notified by their bosses that their wages will be reduced from $3.25 to $2.50 per day next week. A general strike will follow. May 11. Maine has lost her smelting industry. The Katahdin Iron Works, which suspended in 1890, has now removed to Pictou, Nova Scotia. May 16. The Cigar-Makers' Union, No. 90, reports that at present about 700 cigar-makers are on strike in New York city, and that 400 more will strike this week, as the bosses intend cutting down wages by introducing the team-work system. May 21. One hundred and fifty girls employed in the pearl but- ton factory, Detroit, Mich., are on a strike against a reduction in their wages. The factory was started soon after the passage of the McKinley bill and was visited by Governor McKinley at the time of the Michigan Club banquet on February 22. The girls who were making $3.50 a week will now only be able to make $3. JUNE, 1892. June 5. At a mass meeting of the Cloth Hat and Capmakers' Union in New York today over 700 men, representing twenty-six out of thirty shops in the city, discussed the grievance of the wage reduction. It was said that during the last year several reductions in their^ wages at different times have made a total reduction of 70 per cent., and that during the best four months of the year the best men have been unable to earn more than $6 a week. They will make an effort to get wages back above starva- tion point. Pitiable as is the lot of these men, it is now worse than that of hatmakers elsewhere in this country since the McKinley bill came their way. A few years ago the hat factories of Bloomfield, Watsessung and East Orange, N. J., were prosperous and gave steady employment to hundreds of hands, nearly all of whom voted for "protection." The almost prohibitive duty on hatters' raw materials has caused the business to dwindle, until now no mill in Bloomfield is running on full time and many of tbe em- ploy^e^ bftye sought work elsewhere. i WAGES, 89 June 16. The Pittsburg Forge and Iron Company, which em- ploys 1000 men in its Allegheny Works, has notified its men that on July 1 a general reduction in wages must be made irrespective of any scale or rules of workmen in the tin-plate and sheet-iron industries. June 19. The Minnesota mine at Tower, Minn., employing 1400, shut down last night by reason of a strike against a reduction of 10 per cent, in surfacemen's wages. June 30. All the glass factories at Bellaire, Ohio, have been permanently shut down, the manufacturers claiming that they cannot compete with those located in natural gas towns. About 650 men are out. June 30. Ten thousand miners in the San Juan district of Colorado will strike July 1 against a reduction of wages agreed upon by the managers. JULY, 1892. July 1. Rolling mill employees in Philadelphia, numbering ui^ward of 1000, quit work last evening because of the refusal of their employees to sign the scale of wages that has been in force for several years. *************** July 2. The Illinois Steel Company of Joliet, 111., have given their men an annual dose of "protection." The rod mill went out on account of a 45 per cent, reduction, which they refused to ac- cept. The entire plant was then shut down. * * * * About 2700 employees are affected. July 2. The 200 heaters, rollers and puddlers employed at the Hulmbacher Forge and Rolling Mills at St. Louis, Mo., quit work Thursday night and yesterday the plant was temporarily shut down. The mill people refused to sign the scale of wages as in force last year, and claim that to continue paying at the same price would mean that no profit would ever come out of their capital invested. July 12. The Elm City Brewing Company's plant at New Haven, Conn., now lies dormant, and A. F. Schneider, of the com- pany, says that there is no chance of the concern starting up svhile the McKinley bill is in force. It is dependent upon Cana- dian barley, and tlje price of this grain is now 50 per cent, higher than before the passage of the bill. 90 TRUSTS AWED BY THE McKINLEY TARIFF. TRUSTS AIDED BY THE McKINLEY TARIFF. By retaining the duty of 75 cents a ton on bituminous it caused tlie formation of the ANTHRACITE COAL TRUST, which has advanced prices on that most necessary article — coal. It (McKinley Tariff) retained the already almost prohibitive rate of 6-10 cents per pound on barbed wire and the BARBED WIRE TRUST was formed January 1, 1891. The BOOT AND SHOE COMBINE was materially strengthened by the protective duty of 25 per cent, on boots and shoes. It raised the tariff on brooms to 40 per cent, and the BROOM TRUST formed in November, 1891, has since that time raised prices 75 cents per dozen. "By the outrageous increase of the duty on pearl buttons to nearly 400 per cent, the BUTTON TRUST has been encouraged to plunder the American people." (The Tariff Reform.) The tariff on cartridges was increased to 45 per cent, and the CARTRIDGE TRUST has, since November, 1890, sold at prices nearly 100 per cent, higher than those of 1888, 'but they have not ceased to sell to foreigners about 40 per cent, cheaper than to Americans. The CELLULOID TRUST is protected by a 20 per cent, duty and on January 16, 1891, threw seven hundred men out of employment by shutting down one of its works. THE COPPER INGOT and COPPER SHEET TRUST are both protected by the McKinley Tariff and have proved very disastrous to the copper industries of the country. As there has never been any imports of cottonseed oil, there was no excuse for the retention in the McKinley bill of any duty, but its effect is to protect the COTTONSEED OIL TRUST against the reimportation of its own products, if it chooses to sell to foreigners at a price much lower than to Americans. The COTTON THREAD TRUST took prompt advantage of the McKinley act. After the increased duty on terne plates was granted by the McKinley act, two associations of manufacturers united to form the GALVANIZED IRON AND STEEL TRU^T, and prices have risen. The LEATHER TRUST was formed under this tariff. THE HARROW as well as THE HARVESTER TRUST both sell to foreigners cheaper than to Americans. The prohibitive duties upon white lead was retained in the interest of the LEAD TRUST, which has made its prices still higher, while it exports its surplus to Canada and other countries, selling there at a heavy discount. The duty on matches resulted in the formation of the MATCH TRUST, which has closed down factories, thrown hundreds of people out of employment and advanced the price of matches 50 per cent, per gross. A duty of 15 per cent, was suflScient to build up the great PAPER BAG TRUST, yet Mr. McKinley generously increased the duty to 25 per cent I TRU8T8 AIDED BY THE McKINLEY TARIFF. 91 The PLATE GLASS TRUS.T was protected by a duty of 100 per cent., and although the cost of manufacture steadily declined, the American consumer paid the TRUST ten million dollars in one year for plate glass more than it could be purchased abroad. The POCKET CUTLERY TRUST, THE POWDER TRUST, and the WOOD PULP TRUST were all helped by the McKinley TarilT. The SALT TRUST was born, and the price of salt advanced all along the line, just as soon as the McKinley act kept the duty on salt. The SASH, DOOR AND BLIND TRUST was protected by a duty of 35 per cent. The SCHOOL BOOK TRUST robs every parent who sends a child to school and was "protected" by a duty of 25 per cent. The SMELTERS TRUST was formed immediately after the election of Harrison. The McKinley act insured its life by the retention in the tariff of the duty of 2 cents per pound in pigs and bars. The SOAP TRUST was helped along by a duty -of from 20 to 40 per cent. The great STARCH AND DEXTRINE TRUST had its perman- ency assured by the McKinley tariff, and after this advanced its price of lump starch $20 per ton. The duty on steel rails was prohibitory, thereby aiding the STEEL RAIL TRUST. The McKinley act abolished the duty on raw sugar, thus giving the SUGAR TRUST free raw materials, and then left it protection of half cent per pound on refined sugar. The TINNED PLATE TRUST also obtained "protection" under this act. The TRUNK TRUST was an outgrowth of the McKinley Tariff. Duties on umbrellas were increased 55 per cent, and the UMBRELLA TRUST was formed very shortly thereafter. The tariff of 25 per cent, on watches was retained and the WATCH TRUST continues to charge Americans 25 per cent, more than foreigners. The duties on window glass, averaging about 100 per cent, were retained, and enabled the WINDOW GLASS TRUST to live and prosper. It was not three months after the McKinley bill was passed before the WIRE TRUST had been perfected, the output decreased, numbers of employees discharged, the wages of others reduced 20 per cent, and the price of wire increased. The Tariff increased the duty on screws likely to be imported, and the WOOD SCREW TRUST makes enormous profits, while selling over 30 per cent, cheaper to foreigners. The YELLOW PINE TRUST was formed after the McKinley act went into effect and advanced prices. The McKinley Act made possible the GLUCOSE TRUST. SENATOR HALE ON THE McKINLEY TARIFF. Senator Hale, January 28, 1892, said: Senator Hale: "I do not hesitate, Mr. President, in stating here and now, as the result of my observation, that I firmly believe that section 3 of the McKinley bill, which contains the reciprocity feature, 92 TRUSTS AIDED BY THE McKINLEY TARIFF. is the part of the measure which has :&oated the whole act, and which kept it from being swamped by the storm which, without reason, broke upon it from the day of its passage. The great merits of other parts of the McKinley bill might have sunk under a sea of obloquy and would never have been seen and appreciated if the reciprocity clause had not kept the whole structure from going down." (Record Vol. 23; p. 621, 52d Con., 1st Sess.) McKINLEY TARIFF A FAILURE— PRODUCER OF DEFICITS AND PANICS. The Harrison administration began March 4, 1889 — the Mc- Kinley Tariff was in operation from October 6, 1890, to August 29, 1894 — 47 months. The Cleveland administration operated eigh- teen months under this tariff — from March 4, 1893, to the enact- ment of the Wilson Tariff Act, August 28, 1894. The McKinley Tariff produced a deficit in the second month of its existence (November, 1890) ; 11 others occurred before Cleveland was nom- inated (June, 1892) ; that is, twelve deficits all told out of a total of twenty months. Moreover, it produced six deficits in 6 months thereafter and before Cleveland was inaugurated (March, 1893), and 13 monthly deficits after his inauguration, causing a total deficit of over $80,000,000 for the 47 months. There was a deficit of over $9,000,000 before Cleveland's nomination^and $4,000,000 and over between his nomination and his inauguration — all under the McKinley Tariff. The incontrovertibility of these statements is shown by a table prepared by and printed in a speech of Hon. John W. Gaines, and published in the Congressional Record June 20, 1906, pp 9044- 9045, and given herewith: Operation of the Treasury Department under the McKinley tariff act of October 6, 1890, repealed hy the Wilson tariff act of August 28, 1894, covering a period of forty-seven months. BEFORE CLEVELAND'S NOMINATION. Month. Receipts. Expenditures. 1 October. 1890 a $40,21.5,894.29 $38,036,664.24 2 November, 1890 28,986,124.71 642,570.022.40 3 December, 1890 31,370,039.87 21.888,550.00 4 January, 1891 37,055,973.25 2.3,981.309.07 5 February, 1891 29,611,318.02 631,725,009.86 6 March, 1891 29,418,330.46 631,502,941.60 7 April, 1891 26,045,831.64 25,331,194.06 8 May, 1891 27,417,425.94 629.772,085.15 9 June, 1891 31,721,749.51 635,902,971.96 10 July, 1891 34,300.344.68 639.719,651.13 11 August, 1891 28,884,851.10 20,738,020.95 12 September, 1891 28.001,247.25 23,934,801.19 13 October, 1891 28,500.552.21 631,872,268.02 14 November, 1891 26,917,162.72 627,911,002.30 15 December, 1891 27.932.085.73 631.821,889.67 16 Jinuary, 1892 30..542,728.60 635,663,522.60 17 February, 1892 80,755,904.57 27,482,059.13 18 March, 1892 30.048,806.33 28.989,589.79 19 April, 1 892 27,388,354.04 631,098,076.97 20 May, 1892 28,498,798.45 632,755,478.39 Total $603,674,423.37 $612,697,108.48 Deficit for 20 months, $9,022,685.11. TRUSTS AIDED BY THE McKINLEY TARIFF. 93 AFTER CLEVELAND'S NOMINATION. Month. Receipts. Expenditures. 21 June, 1892c $31,219,117.98 $28,940,634.25 22 July, 1892 34,571,356.25 637,249,407.04 ■23 August, 1892 34,032,928.53 32,080,779.53 24 September, 1892 31,841,278.66 28,917,798.74 25 October, 1892 31,836,138.21 631,881,250.18 26 November, 1892d 28,794,645.38 630,748,882.78 27 December, 1892 33,212,911.10 634,277,123.58 28 January, 1893 35,209,972.31 639,253,381.68 29 February, 1893 30,009,892.23 631,677,454.00 Total $290,728,240.65 $295,026,711.78 Deficit for 9 months, $4,298,471.13. AFTER CLEVELAND'S INAUGURATION. Month. Receipts. Expenditures. 30 March, 1893e $34,437,844.99 $32,372,997.73 31 April, 1893 28,599,942.29 633,771.365.73 32 May, 1893 30,971,497.64 30,872,502.79 33 June, 1893 30,983.921.85 . 29,266,451.30 34 July, 1893 30,905,776.19 639,675,888.60 35 August. 1893 23,890,885.30 633,305,228.48 36 September, 1893 24,582,756.10 625,478,010.17 37 October, 1893 24,553,394.97 • 629,588,792.34 38 November, 1893 23,979,400.81 631,302,026.41 39 December, 1893 22,312,027.00 630.058,260.51 40 January, 1894 24,082,738.97 631,309,669.59 41 February. 1894 22,269,299.46 626,725,373.84 42 March, 1894 24,842.797.79 631,1-37,560.24 48 April, 1894 22,692.364.26 632,072.836.42 44 May, 1894 23.066,994.32 629,779,140.92 45 June, 1894 26,485.925.72 25.557,021.23 46 July, 1894 34,809,339.75 636,648,582.53 47 August, 1894f 40,417,605.81 31,656,636.85 Total $1,388,287,167.24 $1,468,302,165.94 1,388,287,167.24 Total deficit for 47 months $80,014,998.70 a McKinlev Act took effect October 6, 1890. 6 Deficit. c Clevehnd nominated June 21, 1892. d Cleveland elected. e Cleveland inaugurated. f Wilson tariff took effect August 28, 1894. This table is based upon the ^'Comparative Statement of Ex- renditures and Receipts of the United States," which (see appen- dices, p. 252) issued monthly by the Treasury Department, and is printed in the Record of June 20, 1906, pp. 9047 to 9051, in so far as it covers the operations of the Treasury under the McKinley Tariff, from and including October, 1890, down to and including February, 1893 — four days before the second inauguration of Mr. Cleveland. In the face of these official figures, the Republicans charge That the first deficit under the McKinlev Tariff was November, 1892 (^^^^EN in fact it first occurred NOVEMBER. 1890, as shown above) ; that this deficit and all others under the McKinley Tariff were caused by the election of Mr. Cleveland and a Demo- cratic Congress in November, 1892; and that their election caused the panic of 1893. when, in truth, the Treasury wns VIRTUALLY BANKRITPT LONG BEFORE THE NOMINATION, ELECTION OR INAUGURATION March, 1893, of Mr. Cleveland. SECRETARY FOSTER BEFORE HOUSE COMMITTEE, FEBRUARY 25, 1893. Mr. Foster testified before the Ways and Means Committee on the condition of the Treasury. His testimony is fully reported in House Report No. 2621, Fifty-secOnd Congress, 2nd Session. He 94 TRUSTS AIDED BY THE McKINLEY TARIFF. then acknowledged that he had changed his predecessor's system of bookkeeping by including as "available" cash subsidiary coin (then about $9,000,000), and Federal Deposits in National Banks (then about $10,000,000), which two items "my predecessors," said he, has treated as "unavailable" cash. Continuing, he said: "If I eliminated those items 7iow (February 25th, 1893), there would be a showing of deficit." He further said that unlike his "predecessors" he had "little money and wanted to show that it was as large as possible," hence "I adopted" this new system. He further confessed that he had "held up" the payment of "requisitions" on the Treasury for "a day or two until we got in better shape," * * * "when someone would say that the Treasury was bankrupt and all that sort of thing." "I merely make this explanation so you may know what the situa- tion has been." * * * "I should say that the next fiscal year would show a deficit." "I think an annual increase of $50,000,000 would make the Treasury easy, and if I was going to manage it I would want to have it that way." He urged raising thai Gold Reserve from $100,000,000 to $125,- 000,000 because "by the act of July 14, 1890 (Sherman Silver Law), you have created an additional liability upon the gold in the Treasury of $130,000,000." "Now, I want to state to you these estimates are based upon con- ditions existing prior to the late election." Mr. Foster had made these same recommendations in his an- nual report three months before — December 5, 1892 — and then also said: "The estimated receipts are based upon conditions prevailing prior to the late election." "The late election" to which he alludes was the election of Mr. Cleveland and a Democratic Congress, November, 1892. Here we have Mr. Foster confessing that a deficit would ap- pear — "now" — February 25, 1893 — if he did not count as "avail- able" cash the hitherto "unavailable" cash, that is, SUBSIDIARY COIN (limited tender) AND FEDERAL DEPOSITS IN NA- TIONAL BANKS, the two items amounting then, as he said, to about $19,000,000. Furthermore, he confessed that "the next fiscal year would show a deficit.'' Moreover, the Committee reported that there would be a deficit: "* * * at the end of the ensuing fiscal year * * * to from $30,000,000 to $40,000,000. In these calculations NO ACCOUNT WHATEVER has been taken of the requirements of the Sinking Fund." "Secretary Foster stated in his opinion that the annual receipts of the government should AT ONCE be increased and that his opinion there would be a deficit at the end of the fiscal year 1894; that the annual revenue should be increased $50,000,000 * * * to meet TRUSTS AIDED BY THE McKINLEY TARIFF. 95 the conditions to which reference has been made in his report, and also for the purpose of increasing the Gold Reserve to the extent of $25,000,000." (H. R. Report, 52d Congress, Second Session, 2651.) We quote the following testimony of Secretary Foster before the House Committee February 25, 1893. Secretary Foster — "Now, I want to say to you these estimates are based upon conditions existing prior to the late election." Mr. Turner — "Taking 4nto consideration all these conditions which you anticipate, what, in your judgment, would be a fair conjecture of the condition of the Treasury at the end of the next fiscal year ?" Secretary Foster — ^*'I should say the next fiscal yeas would snow a deficit." Mr. Turner — "Can you give an approximate estimate, according to all the data accessible to you ?" Secretary Foster — "I will only say this, that if I was to have the management of the Treasury, 1 should insist upon an increase of bevenue to the extent of $50,000,000." Mr. Turner — "In order to meet those conditions which you antici- pate f Secretary Foster — "Not only those conditions, but the gold condi- tions as well." Mr. Wilson — "Did I understand you to express a general opinion a while ago that, in addition to the present sources of revenue, that the revenues of the Treasury Department ought to be advanced $50,000,000 more a year ?" Secretary Foster — "Yes, sir." Mr. McMillin — ^"Would you make that for one year or a permanent increase of revenue?" Secretary Foster — "As things are going now, a permanent revenue, for two reasons. I would increase the gold reserve at least $25,000,000 if I had the money to do it with." Mr. Turner — "But your answer just now seemed to contemplate an annual increase." Secretary Foster-^'I think an annual increase of $50,000,000 would make the Treasury easy, and if I were going to manage it I would want to have it." (H. R. Report, 2651, 52d Congress, 2d filed March 3, 1893.) REQUISITIONS HELD UP BY FOSTER. Mr. Foster — "Possibly, sometimes, when five or six or seven mil- lions of requisitions would come in in a day, for which he would have to pay gold if all were paid in a day, I probably have suggested to Mr. MacLennan that he had better wait a day or two until we got in a better shape, because I did not want to pay out gold for current liabilities." "PADDLED ALONG," PAYING UNCLE SAM'S DEBTS. Mr. Foster — "I merely make this explanation so j^ou may know what the situation has been. This has not been for the want of money. Once in a while, when large requisitions come in and pile up together, I do not want to pay them, because I would have to pay them in gold, and so we would paddle along for a day or two, when some one would say the Treasury was bankrupt and all that sort (f thing." Mr. McMillin — "Certain funds which were heretofore held by the Treasury, and not treated as available balances in the Treasury, have been treated in more recent reports as available balances in the Treasury, and I want to find out what the aggregate of that is." Mr. Miller — "The $54,000,000 for redemption of national bank notes is the only fund that has gone into the cash." 96 TRUSTS AIDED BY THE McKINLEY TARIFF. Mr. Turner — "Do you, in making that request want it to show how the fund for redeeming national bank notes was carried in the former statement ?" Mr. McMillin— "Yes, sir." Mr. Miller — *'That was a separate account. * * * That was not in the cash." NEW SYSTEM OF COUNTING THE CASH "I ADOPTED," SAID MR. FOSTER. Mr. Wilson — "Then in regard to the subsidiary coin, there has been some change made." Secretary Foster — "We count that as money. It has gotten down to $y ,000,000, or will when the appropriation for the Columbian Ex- position is made." Mr. McMillin — "I would like to have that included also." Secretary Foster — "We will show you how it is carried on previous statements, and how it is on the one I adopted." Mr. Wilson — "What items in the Treasury are how covered in as available cash which were hitherto set apart as not under that heaaing ?" Secretary Foster — "All right. Under Mr. Manning the bank de- posits were not considered as money in the Treasury. Subsidiary coin was not, but if I eliminated those items now there would be a showing of deficit." Mr. Payne — "I understand you are keeping books according to law, and that this statement they use to make was not according to law." Secretary Foster — "I do not want to say that; I do no want to say that in regard to my predecessors." Mr. Wilson — "As I understand, Mr. Payne, according to law means when I get pretty hard pressed I can take trust funds and pass them to my account, and take some of my obligations I have got on hand for sale and count them as sold." Secretary Foster — "It is not that; but the changes in the keeping of the statement are simply this : There are two items, one of money in banks and the other subsidiary coin, which were eliminated from the cash, and were not called cash. Now, I got to a point where if I did not include them in my cash my statement would show a deficit. I thought they were cash. I can take every dollar out of these banks in a minute, and I believe I have reduced the deposit to about $10,000,000." THE REAL SiaMFlCANCE OF FOS^TEWS PLAN. 97 THE REAL SIGNIFICAI\rCE OF FOSTER'S PLAN. SHERMAN SILVER LAW CONDEMNED BY MR. FOSTER. The real significance of these statements is what the Secretary at the time being wants to show. My predecessors had a great deal of money, and they wanted to show it was as small as possible. I had little money and wanted to show it was as large as possible, and I did just exactly what Brother Springer would have done if you had been in my place. There was no juggling of figures at all. Mr. Payne — "iTou went to a point where if you continued the old statement it would have showed a deficit, but you still nad plenty of money in the Treasury for all needs?" Secretary Foster — "Certainly." Mr. Payne — "The Treasury was easy at that time?" Secretary Foster — "Yes. The difficulty with the Treasury has not been any lack of money. It ought to have more money, but by the act of July 14, 1890 (Sherman silver act), you have created an additional liability upon the gold in the Treasury of $130,000,000. That $100,- 000,000 was set apart as a redemption fund for $346,000,000, and it is now nearly $500,000,000." Mr. McMillin — "Four hundred and seventy-six million dollars, I be- lieve." Mckinley tariff and sherman laws failed to MEET the "NATURAL" DEMANDS OF THE PEOPLE. "SHRINKAGE OF THE BALANCE OF TRADE." Secretary Foster — "Now, there is a demand for this gold from abroad, and the truth is we owe the money and it is natural. My best information is that our securities are not coming back here; we are shipping securities abroad, but when you take into account the shrink- age of the balance of trade as shown upon the customhouse books com- pared with former years, and then deduct from that the balance of what our people spend abroad, say $120,000,000; $30,000,000 balance freight; $25,000,000, undervaluations (and I think it is probable we are cheated that much) ; $12,000,000 servant-girl funds sent abroad (the balance on postal money orders is $12,000,000 against us) ; the Chinese send what money they have back to China ; most of the money of the Italians goes back; 75,000 American citizens go abroad every year in the steerage who spend more or less money; all of these ele- ments must be considered in determining the balance of trade. When you take all these elements into account you will find we owe money abroad." "Seeing these things, the Secretary felt that we should keep all the money we could in gold. About $25,000,000 was the limit he could pay for. He had no trouble to get gold if he had the money to get it with." HELD UP PAYMENT OF REQUISITIONS ON TREASURY. "Possibly, sometimes, when five or six or seven millions of requisi- tions would come in in a day, for which he would have to pay gold if all were paid in a day, I probably have suggested to Mr. MacLennan that he had better wait a day or two until we got in a better shape, because I did not want to pay out gold for current liabilities. "I knew just as well as I was living that this thing was going to come, ana I wanted to be as strong as I possibly could." "I MADE AS GOOD A STATEMENT IN MY REPORT AS I COULD." "So you see in my report / made as good a statement as I could of our condition, and asked you to give the Treasury more money, so this gold reserve might be increased. Now, since. $21,000,000 of this gold 98 THE REAL SIGNIFICANCE Or FOS^TER'S PLAN. has gone and I have but $4,000,000 left, I can pay any requisitions which come in promptly, because I have currency in the place of gold." WHAT THE SITUATION HAS BEEN, "PADDLED ALONG." "I merely make this explanation so you may know what the situation has been. This has not been for the want of money. Once in a while, when large requisitions come in and pile up together, I do not want to pay them, because I would have to pay them in gold, and so we would paddle along for a day or two, when some one would say the Treasury' was bankrupt and all that sort of thing. Now, I commenced with $25,000,000 in gold in the Treasury when gold exports commenced in December; $35,000,000 have gone out of the country and we have $4,000,000 left. Naw, more gold is going, I have no doubt. If the Secretary could have had $50,000,000 more money on the 1st of December he could have increased the gold to $150,000,000 and kept his reserve at about $125,000,000, but not having the money, he could not do it." The Minority Report, signed by the great leaders of the House, Mr. Payne (New York), Mr. Dalzell, Mr. Thomas D. Reed, Mr. Hopkins, Mr. Burrows, in part, said: REPUBLICAN MINORITY CONFESS. "On the basis of the statement of the Secretary of the Treasury, it would seem that the amount of the surplus or deficiency would be very small." "Small"— but it would be— and was over $69,803,260. The Report of the Majority, upon the testimony of Mr. Foster and several others, was, in part, as follows: Majority Report. DEFICIT of $30,000,000 to $40,000,000. Under the most careful estimates that can now be made it is ap- parent that at the end of the ensuing fiscal year there will be a deficit amounting to from $30,000,000 to $40,000,000. In these calculations no account whatever has been taken of the requirements of the sinking fund. In the statement above referred to — No. 6 — it will be seen that the requirements of the sinking fund were not met during the past fiscal year and no effort has been made to meet such requirements during the current fiscal year, nor can any of its requirements be observed during the ensuing fiscal year unless there is a large increase in the revenues of the Government. According to Secretary Foster's statement, above referred to, the balance due the sinking fund June 30, 1892, was $11,307,825.36 and the requirements of the sinking fund for the fiscal year 1893 were estimated at $48,693,000, showing that at the end of the fiscal year 1893 there will be due the sinking fund $60,000,000. The statement further shows that at the end of the next fiscal year there will be due the sinking fund a little over $100,000,000. It appears from these statements that the Secretary of the Treasury has charged against the sinking fund the amount of $16,000,000 paid for the redemption of national-bank notes which have gone into liquidation. Your committee do not concede that the redemption of national-bank notes is a payment of a national debt as contemplated by the sinking- fund law, and that such payments for the redemption of national-bank notes under the act of July 14, 1890, should be made out of the current receipts in the Treasury. If this amount is added to the requirements of the sinking fund, it will show $116,000,000 due that fund on the 30th of June, 1894. RECEIPTS AND EXPENDITURES. 99 DEFICIT CONFESSED BY FOSTER. Secretary Foster stated that in his opinion the annual receipts of the Government should be at once increased. He also stated that in his opinion there would be a deficit at the end of the fiscal year 1894, and said that if he had the management of the Treasury in the future he should insist upon an increase of the annual revenue to the extent of $50,000,000. This increase, he stated, should be made to meet the con- ditions to which reference has been made in this report, and also for the purpose of increasing to the extent of $25,000,000 the gold-reserve fund of $100,000,000, which increase he earnestly recommended. (H. R. Report, 52d Cong., 2d Sess., 2651, March 3, 1893.) Mr. Foster, in his report December 5, 1892, said: RECEIPTS AND EXPENDITURES. FISCAL YEAR, 1892. "The revenues of the Government from all sources for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1892, were $425,868,260.22; expenditures, $415,- 953,806.56, leaving a surplus of $9,914,453.66. To this sum was added $16,232,721.00, deposited in the Treasury under the Act of July 14, 1890, for the redemption of national bank notes. 4lS compared with the fiscal year 1891, the receipts for 1892 have fallen off $32,675,972.81. There was a decrease of $10,349,- 354.16 in the ordinary expenditures." FISCAL YEAR, 1893. "For the present year the revenues are estimated as follows: Total estimated revenues, $463,336,350.44. The expenditures for the same' period are estimated as follows: Total estimated expenditures, '$461,- 336,350.44, leaving an estimated surplus for the year of $2,000,000.00." "The following is a, statement of the probable condition of the Treasury at the close of the present fiscal year, June 30, 1893: Cash in the Treasury July 1, 1892, including gold reserve ' $126,692,377.03 Surplus for year, as above 2,000,000.00 Deposits during the year for redemption of national bank notes 2,500,000 . 00 Total amount available $131,192,377.03 Less — Redemption of national bank notes dur- ing the year $9,500,000.00 Redemption of bonds, interest notes and fractional currency during the year.. 700,000.00 $10,200,000.00 Cash balance available, June 30, 1893 $120,992,377 .03 I 100 RECEIPTS AND EXPENDITURES. FISCAL YEAR, 1894. "It is estimated that the revenue of the Government for the fiscal year 1894 will be on basis named below $490,121,365.38 Total estimated appropriations, exclusive of sinking FUND ^ 457,261,335.33 Or an estimated surplus of 32,860,030.05 To which add cash balance above Gold Reserve, June 30, 1893 20,992,377.03 Making an estimated balance of 53,852,407.08 From which deduct accrued and accruing obligations, estimated as follows 6,000,000.00 Leaving 47,852,407.08 AGAINST WHICH THERE WILL REMAIN ON JUNE 30, 1893, UNEXPENDED BALANCE OF CONTINUING APPROPRIA- TIONS FOR HEAVY ORDNANCE, RIVERS AND HARBORS, INCREASE TO THE NAVY AND PUBLIC BUILDINGS, AMOUNT- ING TO $44,000,000. "NO ACCOUNT IS MADE IN THE FOREGOING OF THE RE- QUIREMENTS OF THE SINKING FUND FOR 1894, AMOUNT- ING TO $48,600,000, BEYOND THE REDEMPTION OF PAST DUE BONDS FRACTIONAL CURRENCY AND NATIONAL BANK NOTES ESTIMATED AT $5,000,000." ANTE ELECTION ESTIMATES— THESE WERE. "The estimated receipts are based upon conditions prevailing prior to the late election." (Secy. Foster's Report, Dec. 5, 1892, p. 24.) NEEDED "CASH" AND GOLD. "OnQ of the embarrassments to the Treasury, in the opinion of the Secretary, is the inability, with the limited amount of cash on hand, above the $100,000,000 reserve to keep up a sufficient gold supply. When the demand comes for the exportation of gold the Treasury is called upon to furnish it. If this demand should prove to he as large the coming year as it has been for the past two years, gold in the Treasury would he dimin- ished to or heloio the reserve line." "In view, therefore, of these increasing liabilities, the Reserve in the Treasury should be increased to the extent at least of 20 per cent, of the amount of the Treasury Notes issued and to be issued under the Act of July 14th, 1890 — Sherman law." He then recommended that: MORE REVENUE AND GOLD NEEDED— SAYS SECRETARY FOSTER. "I think the revenue should be so increased as to enable the Treasury Department to maintain a gold reserve of not less than $125,000,000.00, and to maintain a comfortable \vorking balance in the Treasury." (Treas. Report, Dec. 5, 1892, p. 29.) It is very plain if Mr. Foster had literally said, in his report, December 5, 1892, above quoted, "that there would be a deficit during the next fiscal year," he would have said no more than what his report actually shows. When the House Committee, three months later, quizzed him on the subject, he confessed that there would be a deficit "the next fiscal year"— X894. RECEIPTS AND EXPENDITURES. 101 ANNUAL REPORT, 1890, BY WINDOM. The report of the Secretary of the Treasury (Windom), Decem- ber 1, 1890, says: "The loss of precious metal by net export, during the year was: gold $4,253,057; silver $8,545,455." The Sherman and McKinley laws took effect in the summer of 1890. MOVEMENT OF GOLD UNDER THE McKINLEY AND SHER- MAN LAWS, MR. FOSTER'S ADMINISTRATION. In his first annual report, dated December 7, 1891, Mr. Foster said: "The loss of gold by net (italics his) export during the fiscal year was $67,946,768. "The loss of gold by exports was materially larger during the last fiscal year than in any recent years. The heavy movement commenced in February, 1891, and did not cease until the close of July. The total amount exported from the port of New York during this period was $70,223,494.31. "It is gratifying to report that a return movement of gold is well under way, which has aggregated since the first of July, at the port of New York alone, $27,854,000. "In the report of the Director of the Mint will be found an article treating in detail of the movement of gold of the United States, and pointing out some of the causes which are believed to have operated to produce the same." On this subject, November 1, 1892, the mint director, Mr. Leech, in part, said: REMARKABLE EXPORTS OF GOLD. "In the Summer of 1890, a movement of gold from this country occurred, which, while by no means as serious in amount as its predecessor, was somewhat remarkable as a monetary transaction, considering the low rate of sight sterling exchange which obtained during the period. . "This movement aggregated in less than two months the sum of $15,672,982." SERIOUS TROUBLE. "In February of the present year (1891) another movement of gold to Europe commenced, which did not cease until the close of July .... caused hy far the most serious loss of gold which this country has sustained for many years. The total amount exported from the port of New York was $70,223,494.31. The heavy losses incurred by European capitalists in South American countries, the resulting financial disturbances and uneasi- ness, etc., not only greatly restricted this credit, but led to a con- tinuous pressure, more or less strong, for gold to strengthen the reserves of the banks in England, France and Germany. Russia, at the same time, withdrew from the depositories of Western Europe large quantities of gold, thus adding greatly to the drain and increasing the pressure for the import of gold from the United State?, this country being the only outside port from which gold in large amounts could be readily dra^^^l. 102 RECEIPTS AND EXPENDITURES. It is a well known fact that the Bank of England paid a premium for American gold coin, and increased that premium from time to time as the financial crisis grew more threatening." BALANCE OF TRADE AGAINST US. **The balance of trade, for these reasons, being against us, and the pressing need for gold in London, Paris and Berlin, I count very largely for the heavy export of gold during these five months." ANNUAL REPORT, DECEMBER, 1892. In his report, Issued February 5, 1892, Secretary Foster said: "The net loss of gold by exports during the fiscal year was only $142,654 against a loss in the preceding fiscal year of $67,946,768." MINT REPORT, 1892. The mint director, Mr. Leech, in his report, November 1, 1892, after repeating the causes of our export loss of gold, recited in his report for 1891 as above given, gave two additional reasons for this gold movement to wit: (1) "The Austrian Government has been making strenuous exertions during the last year to obtain sufficient gold for a strong basis in establishing a gold standard for its currency." ONE GREAT CAUSE. (2) "One great cause of continued large shipment of gold is, as stated by all exchanges and financial writers, the distrust of the United States securities raised in the minds of European investors by the large and increasing preponderance of silver over gold in the reserve held for the redemption of our paper currency." Thus we see Mr. Foster, in effect, condemns "both the Sherman and the McKinley tariff laws while Mr. Leech condemns the Sherman law as causing our troubles. Whether both or either law caused us to lose our gold, a deficit in the treasury, or the panic of 1893, or all three, the fact remains that they were both Republican laws operating under a Republican administration, and the Democrats had voted against their enactment and after- wards denounced as a "cowardly makeshift," partially repealed, the Sherman law November 1, 1893, and later repealed the McKinley tariff. In 1890, under the high protective tariff of 1883 and its successor, the McKinley tariff, and an overflowing treasury. Secretary Windom, to avoid a panic as he said, expended in buying bonds all the available money in the treasury, except the national bank redemption fund of $54,000,000. The silver coin and bank deposits he said were unavailable assets. When the Sherman and McKinley laws began operations under a Republican administration, our gold reserve was intact, our treasury overflowing, but "panic and disaster" threatened, and was partially averted by Mr. Windom buying bonds and using the bank redemption fund as his only actual surplus, but in two years, under the same administration and laws, our net gold CASH TURNED OVER. 103 exports are alarming, the treasury is empty, the gold reserve in danger, legal tenders are heing exchanged in New York for gold to replenish the reserve, and the panic of 1890 is in full bloom in 1892 and 1893. In March, 1889, the Cleveland administration turned over to the Harrison administration, exclusive of the $100,000,000 gold reserve, over $230,000,000, while the Harrison administration, four years thereafter, turned over to the Cleveland administra- tion, exclusive of the gold reserve, less than $63,000,000, the net balance in the treasury of about $24,000,000 being made up of small coins, federal deposits in the banks, and the balance of the national bank redemption fund, which, during this adminis- tration had been turned into the treasury as so much cash, amounting by this time in gross to at least $70,000,000. The United States "Treasury Department," "July 1, 1904," issued a "Circular No. 72," which shows the money paid over by the two administrations as follows: CASH TURNED OVER. END OF FIRST CLEVELAND ADMINISTRATION. CONDITION OF THE TREASURY MARCH 1, 1889, MARCH 1, 1893, MAUCH 1, 1897. "On the 1st day of March, 1889, the beginning of President Har- rison's Administration, the available funds in the Treasury, ex- clusive of the $100,000,000 gold reserve, were as follows: Agency account $64,502,445.02 Net balance in Treasury 165,846,471.10 Total $230,348,916.12 CASH TURNED OVER BY THE HARRISON ADMINISTRATION. In addition to the ordinary revenues received during President Harrison's Administration, there was covered into the Treasury by direction of the act of Congress of July 14, 1890, $54,207,975.75, which had been held in trust under the law as a fund for the re- demption of national bank notes; and such notes are now redeemed, upon presentation, from the general cash in the Treasury. On the 1st day of March, 1893, the available funds in the Treasury, exclusive of the $100,000,000 gold reserve, were as follows: Agency account $38,365,832.90 Net balance in Treasury 24,084,742.28 Total $62,450,575.18" 104 CASH TURNED OVER. SMALL SILVER COIN AND BANK DEPOSITS ON HAND MARCH 1, 1893. The amount of national bank redemption funds on hand March 1, 1893, was $22,272,061, of fractional silver $10,971,875; the two items amounting to $33,243,936. Deduct these sums from the balance stated March 1, 1893, $24,084,742.28 and there was then a real deficiency of $9,159,193.72. And if we deduct the $10,000,000 bank deposits, the deficiency is increased that much more, or to $19,159,193.72. To be able to even turn over the $100,000,000 gold reserve intact, Mr. Foster exchanged legal tenders from the treasury for gold and was in New York in the early part of 1893 for that purpose. In this way, he secured from $6,000,000 to $8,000,000 in gold and with this, and that gold which came into the Treasury in the usual way, he "paddled along" until the end of his term, and turned over to Mr. Carlisle on the day he took actual charge of the Treasury, March 7, 1893, only "$983,410 in excess of the lawful reserve." Mr. Carlisle, December 19, 1893, in his annual report, said: "The amount of free gold in the Treasury on the Tth of March, 1893, was $100,982,410, or $983,410 in excess of the lawful reserve." In a speech delivered in 1895 in Ohio, Mr. Foster said: "On the fourth of March, 1893, we turned over to the new admin- istration nearly $125,000,000 in cash, more than $100,000,000 was in gold." On December 26, 1895, General Grosvenor inserted in the Record, as part of his speech, this statement of Mr. Foster. (Record, December 26, 1895, p. 320). In this same speech, Mr. Foster also made this unexplained statement, to wit: "The plates for these bonds had been prepared while Mr. Sherman was Secretary, and quite a supply was alreadj printed and ready for execution." {Record, December 26, 1895, p. 320.) Mr. Sherman was Secretary of the Treasury from March, 1877, to March, 1881. In 1893 he was, and had been for some time, a member of the Senate, with no power, as a senator, to order such plates made. The question is, when did Mr. Sherman as "secre- tary" order these or other bond plates to be made? Did Mr. Sherman, while secretary, fix to issue bonds? Is it possible that "threatened panic and disaster" should occur under a protective tariff and a Republican administration? Indisputably and now confessedly, Mr. Foster issued a bond plate order on February 20, 1893, as hereafter shown. Mr. Foster said to the committee in February, 1893, that he had no trouble in getting gold if he had the money with which to get it, hence he, in his report, December, 1892, called on Con- gress in February for $50,000,000 more revenue and $25,000,000 more as a permanent addition to the gold reserve, and said he would have it that way if he had to manage the Treasury. OASH TURNED OYER. 105 But with the condition of the Treasury, as it was and had "been for many months, Mr. Foster could not exchange money from the Treasury many times to get gold. Some other means must be employed for him to tide over and unload an empty Treasury on Mr. Carlisle, his successor. So on February 20, 1893, he gave a "hurry up" order for the preparation of bond plates, to issue bonds wherewith to buy gold and fill up a bankrupt Treasury. M ^. FOSTER OMITTED TO TELL. Although Mr. Foster's testimony before the House Committee, February 25, 1893, covers nearly nineteen pages, yet it fails to show that four days before — ^February 20 — Mr. Foster had issued this bond plate order, which reads as follows: COPY OF FOSTER BOND PLATE ORDER. Tbeasuey Department, Office of the Secretaey, Washington, D. C, March 25, 1897. Sib — ^I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of this date, requesting the original letter, or a certified copy thereof, written by Mr. Secretary Foster February 20, 1893, addressed to the Chief of the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, authorizing the prep- aration of certain plates. In compliance with said request I submit below a correct copy of the letter in question, also a copy of the text of the proposed bond. [Copy of letter.] Tbeasuby Department, Office of the Secretary, Washington, D. C, February 20, 1893. Sir — ^You are hereby authorized and directed to prepare designs for the 3 per cent, bonds provided in a Senate amendment to the sundry civil bill now pending. The denominations which should first receive attention are 100s and 1,000s of the coupon bonds, and 100s, 1,0003 and 10,000s of the registered bonds. This authority is given in ad- vance of the enactment, in view of pressing contingencies, and you are directed to hasten the preparation of the designs and plates in every possible manner. I inclose a memorandum for your guidance in pre- paring the script, for the body of the bond. Respectfully, yours, (Signed) Chables Fosteb, Secretary. The Chief of the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, text of the bond. Washington, April 1, 1893. This bond is issued in accordance with the provisions of section of an act entitled "An act making appropriations for sundry civil ex- penses of the Government for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1894, and for other purposes," approved March 3, 1893, and is redeemable at the pleasure of the United States after the 1st day of April, A. D., 1898, in coin of the standard value of the United States on said March 3, 1893, with interest in such coin from the day of the date hereof at the rate of 3 per cent, per annum, payable semi-annually on the 1st days of October and April in each year. The principal and interest are ex- empt from the payment of all taxes or duties of the United States, ad well as from taxation in any form, by or under State, municipal, or local authority. Respectfully, yours, L. J. Gage, Secretary. Hon. John W. Gaines, Eoiise of Representatives. The original order was on file December 25, 1897 in the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, Washington, D. C. 106 CASH TURNED OYER. Senator Sherman introduced an amendment to an appropria- tion bill — Sundry Civil — in the Senate, to enact a law permitting the issuance of these bonds. The order, dated February 20, 1893, itself, in part reads: "This bond is issued in accordance with the provisions of Sec. of an act, entitled *An act making appropriations for sundry civil expenses of the Government for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1894, and for other purposes, approved March 3, 1893.' " This shows this order, dated February 20, was given to issue bonds under a law yet unapproved to be ''approved March 3, 1893." The Senate passed the Sherman amendment but the House defeated it. The Democrats inheriting an empty treasury, Mr. Carlisle issued bonds under the old law. Recent letters on this subject from Mr. Carlisle and others read thus: House of Representatives, Washington, May 29, 1906. Hon. John G. Carlism, 30 Broad Street, New York, N. Y. My Dear Sib — ^The inclosed extract from the Congressional Record contains a statement made by Gen. Charles H. Grosvenor, of Ohio, on the 26th inst. If you feel inclined, I would be glad to know whether or not the references therein made to you are correct. You will recall that the order to the Director of the Bureau of Engraving and Printing was issued by Secretary Foster in February, 1893. Mr. Grosvenor imder- takes to create the impressioij' from this letter that this order to pre- pare the plates for ine printing of the bonds was made not for the purpose of meeting a deficit in the public revenues which existed, or would exist at the end of the Harrison administration, but was made at your suggestion. I write this letter after conferring with Mr. Williams, of Missis- sippi, as we do not want the statement of Mr. Grosvenor to go uncon- tradicted if it is not correct. I would be glad to have authority to use any reply you may .make to this letter, Very truly, yours, C. L. Babtlett. Curtis, Mallet-Prevost & Colt, Attorneys and Counselors at Law, 30 Broad Street, New York, June 5, 1906. Hon. Charles Bartlett, House of Representatives, Washington, D. G. Dear Sir: On my return to the city I find your favor of May 29, with its inclosure. Two or three years ago I received a letter from the Hon. Judson Harmon upon the same subject, which I answered, stating, in substance, that I had no connection whatever with the ar- rangement said to have been made between my predecessor, Hon Charles Foster, and certain New York banks, by which they were to advance to the Treasury Department the sum of $50,000, or any other amount, in gold or otherwise. I never heard of that arrangement until some months after I had become Secretary of the Treasury, and then my information was derived from the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, to which an order had been sent by my predecessor for the printing of the contemplated bonds. I never had any conversation with Mr. Gorman or my predecessor upon that subject, but, according to my best recollection, I had interviews with both of them in relation to the amendment which Mr. Sherman had off'ered and which is re- ferred to in the letter you inclose to me. I approved of that amend- ment. In view of the condition of the Treasury Department at that time, it was my opinion that the Secretary of the Treasury should be CASH TURNED OVER. 107 clothed with tlie power which the Sherman amendment conferred upon him in order that, if it should become necessary to do so, he might procure gold by issuing and selling a 3 per cent, bond instead of bonds bearing 4 per cent, and 5 per cent., which were the only ones then authorized by law. In addition to the withdrawals of gold from the Treasury, which were then going on at a rapid rate, the monthly re- ceipts had been for several months previous to that time^, and were then, less than the monthly expenditures of the Government, as will be seen by an examination of the official records of the Department. Yours, truly, J. G. Carlisle. REPUBLICAN FABRICATION OVERTAKEN. The McKinley tariff act was in full operation throughout 1893 and eight months of 1894, that is, to August 28, 1894, when the Wilson tariff act repealed it. Therefore the first eighteen months of the second Cleveland administration was under the McKinley tariff act. Notwithstanding these well known official facts, the cringing, "stand pat" Republicans contended and charged that the "commercial failures" of 1893 and 1894 occurred under the "Democratic low tariff period," as shown by the Republican Cam- paign Book of 1904, which contains, p. 113, a table printed thus: Commercial Failures [From AND Average of Liabilities, 1880 to 1903. Dun's R eview, New York. ] Total for the year. Calendar year. Number of failures. 1880 4,735 1881 5,582, 1882 6,738 1888 9,184 1884 10,968 1885 10,637 1886 9,834 1887 9,634 1888 10,676 1889 10,882 1890 10,907 1891 12,273 1892 10,344 1893* 15,242 1894* 13,885 1895* 13,197 1896* 15,088 1897 13,351 1898 12,186 1899 9,337 1900 10,774 1901 11,002 1902 11,615 1903 12,069 Number of business con- cerns. 746323" 781,689 822,256 863,993 904,759 919,990 969,841 994,281 1,046,662 1,051.140 1,110,590 1,142,951 1,172,705 1.193,113 1,114,174 1,209,282 1,151,579 1,058,521 1,105,830 1,147,595 1,174,300 1,219,242 1,253,172 1,281,481 Per ct. of failures. 0763" .71 .82 1.06 1.21 1.16 1.01 .90 1.02 1.04 .98 1.07 .88 1.28 1.25 1.09 1.31 1.26 1.10 .81 .92 .90 .93 1.12 Amount of liabilities. '$65,752,00ir 81,155,932 101,547,564 172,874,172 226,343,427 124,220,321 114,644,119 167,560,944 123,829,973 148,784,337 189,856,964 189,868,638 114,044,167 346,779.889 172,992,856 173,196,060 226,096,834 154,332,071 130,662,899 90,879,889 138,495,673 113,092,376 117,476,769 155,444,185 Average liabilities. $137886 14,530 15,070 18,823 20,632 11,678 11,651 17,392 11,595 13,672 17,406 15,471 11.025 22,751 12,458 13,124 14,992 11,559 10,722 9,733 12,854 10,279 10,114 12,879 •Democratic and low-tariff period. — Republican Campaign Book, 1904, p. 114. Taking the only complete years during which the McKinley and Wilson tariff acts were in operation, and striking an average "amount of liabilities" for the two periods, and this result is sh()wn : 1891-2-3— McKinley tariff. .' $216,897,564 1895-6 —Wilson Tariff 199,646,447 Take the same years and "number of business concerns" failed average this: Average for period. 1891-2-3— McKinley tariff 1,169,589 1895-6 —Wilson tariff 1,180,430 108 CA8H TURNED OVER. The number of "failures" were: 1891-2-3— McKinley tariff 12,619 1895-6 —Wilson tariff 14,142 This same Republican table shows that for the six full years — 1898 to 1903 — during which the Dingley tariff was in operation the total failures were 7,181,620, or an average for the period of 1,196,696. Let the blind read: DINGLEY TARIFF. AVERAGE LIABILITIES. 1898 .- 1,105,830 1901 1,219,242 1899 1,147,595 1902 1,253,172 1900 1,174,300 1903 1,281,481 Total 7,181,620 Average per year 1,196,936 The average "liabilities" for the period — six years — ^was $124,- 241,965. MR. FOSTER IN NEW YORK EXCHANGING LEGAL TENDERS FOR GOLD. The Republicans deny that Mr. Foster exchanged legal tenders for gold, but here is the incontrovertible proof: Mr. Alexander Dana Noyes, in his book, "Thirty Years in American Finance," in part, says: NEW YORK BANKS TURNED OVER $6,000,000 TO $8,000,000 TO MR. FOSTER. "In February Mr. Foster came in person to New York to urge the banks to give up gold voluntarily in exchange for the Treasury's legal tender surplus. {New York Financial Chronicle, Feb. 11-18, 1896.) From a strict commercial point of view, there was good reason why the bank should not make any such exchange. But the plea that a panic must at all hazards be averted, combined with the argument of patriotic support of the Government at length prevailed. "The New York banks turned over to the Treasury, in exchange for notes, $6,000,000 to $8,000,000. {Neic York Tribune, Feb. 9, 10, 11, 1893; New York Financial Chronicle, Feb. 11, 1893.) *'This, with some small amounts still paid through the customs revenue, was enough to keep the Treasury afloat until March 4, when the entire problem could be turned over to the new Executive. To his successor in the Treasury Mr. Foster left exactly $100,982,410 in the gold reserve (Treas. Rep., 1893, p. 72). and barely $25,000,000 in other forms of money. (Same report, p. 96.) "Probably no financial administration has entered office under such disheartening conditions." Mr. Horace White, of New York, in his book, "Money and Banking," states that Mr. Foster came to New York city and exchanged legal tender notes for gold to tide over until he could be succeeded by Mr. Carlisle. Mr. White says: GOLD EXPORTS AGAIN "RESUMED." "Gold exports were resumed in 1892. In November of that year the gold in the Treasury had fallen from $185,000,000 (in August, 1890) to $124,000,000, and was still declining. Secretary Foster was much depressed. When he came to New York to speak at a dinner at the Chamber of Commerce, he said, among other things, that the Govern- ment intended to maintain gold payments, even if it became necessary CASH TURNED OVER. 109 to sell Government bonds for the purpose. This was an admission on his part that gold payments could not be continued without resorting to extraordinary means. Probably Mr. Foster made this speech in order to test public sentiment and to find out whether he would be sustained in issuing Government bonds in time of peace. There had been no increase of the bonded debt since the close of the Civil War, and some persons in high places denied that there was any legal au- thority to issue new bonds. Apparently Mr. Foster was satisfied by the applause with which his announced purpose was received by his hearers and by the press, for shortly afterwards he issued an order to the Bureau of Engraving and Printing to prepare new bonds. This order was dated February 20, 1893, and Mr. Foster was to go out of office on the 4th of March. Naturally, he preferred to put upon his successor the onus of issuing the bond if he could. GOT THE GOLD. So he came to New York and persuaded the banks to give him a few millions of gold in exchange for legal tender notes, enough to carry him along until the 4th of March. This enabled him to glide out of office, leaving the $100,000,000 redemption fund intact, but with only $982,410 gold in excess of that sum and with the penumbra of a deficit in full view." On November 4, 1894, Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Carlisle, in a letter to the Hon. W. R. Morrison, showed the operations of the McKinley tariff, the amount of money paid over by the Cleve- land administration in 1889 to the Harrison administration, the amount of funds turned over by the Harrison administration four years later 1893 to the Cleveland administration and stating that over $54,000,000 of national bank trust funds were covered into the treasury under Mr. Foster's administration and that Mr. Foster "had held" up the payments of Uncle Sam's debts "to a very considerable extent to avoid a reduction of the balance on aand." — Mr. Carlisle said: DEFICITS UNDER THE McKINLEY TARIFF. « ****** "The records of the Department show that during the fiscal year 1888 the receipts were $111,341,273 in excess of the expenditures; during 1889, $87,761,080; during 1890, $85,040,271; during 1891, the year after the passage of the McKinley bill, $26,838,541; in 1892, $9,914,453; in 1893, $2,341,674; and in the year 1894, during the whole of which the McKinley hill was in full force, the expenditures exceeded the receipts to the amount of $69,803,260, notwithstanding the expenditures were $16,752,676 less than in the preceding year. You will thus observe that the receipts in excess of expenditures diminished annually under the operation of the McKinley tariff act, until finally a large deficiency was the result. REDEMPTIONS. "The statement of Mr. McKinley that I had used the gold reserve to meet the daily expenses of the Goverment is incorrect. I enclose herewith a printed document containing the statements made by me before the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives in January last, from which it will be seen (see page 13) that United States notes and Treasury notes of 1890 had been redeemed in gold to the amount of $58,641,866 in excess of the re- serve fund raised by the sale of bonds. These redemptions were made with gold received from all the various sources of revenue. The total amount of United States notes and Treasury notes of 1890 redeemed in gold up to the present date is $249,808,494, while the whole reserve fund provided for by law was $100,000,000 in the first instance, and the proceeds of the bonds sold in February last, amount- 110 CASH TURNED OVER. ing to $58,560,000. Instead, therefore, of using the lawful reserve to defray ordinary expenditures, we have in fact largely used the ordi- nary receipts for the purpose of redemption, the purpose for whicli the reserve itself was intended." CASH PAID OVER TO HARRISON BY CLEVELAND ADMINISTRATION. "On the 1st day of March, 1889, the beginning of President Har- rison's Administration, the funds in the Treasury actually available, exclusive of the $100,000,600 reserve, were as follows: Agency account $64,502,445.02 Net balance in the Treasury 165,846,471.10 Total $230,348,916.12 CASH TURNED OVER TO CLEVELAND BY HARRISON ADMINISTRATION. Olcvefalld On the 1st day of March, 1893, the beginning of the present (^HPfF" son) Administration, the funds in the ireasury actually available, of the $100,000,000 reserve, were as follows: Agency account $38,365,832.90 Net balance in the Treasury 24,084,742.28 Total $62,450,575.18 This statement is made in accordance Math the form now in use, and exhibits the actual condition of the Treasury at the dates men- tioned, including all available assets of every kind." BANK FUNDS TURNED INTO "CASH." "In addition to the ordinary receipts of the Government, there was, as you know, covered into the Treasury during the Administration of President Harrison, $54,207,975.75, which was held in trust as a fund for the redemption of national bank notes. This proceeding was au- thorized by the act of July 14, 1890, commonly known as the "Sher- man Act." The item denominated "agency account" is that portion of the mis- cellaneous cash in the Treasury held for certain liabilities appearing on the books of the Treasury, but not represented by demand cer- tificates or Treasury notes of 1890 outstanding. From the 1st day of March, 1885, the beginning of Mr. Cleveland's first Administration, to March 1, 1889, the public debt was reduced $341,448,449.20, and from March 1, 1889, to March 1, 1893, the reduc- tion was $236,527,666.10." MR. FOSTER HELD UP PAYMENT OF UNCLE SAM'S DEBTS. "It is true, as you suggest, that for some time previous to the close of the last Administration, warrants upon requisition were held up to a very considerable extent in order to avoid a I'eduction of the balance on hand, but the amount of these requisitions can not now be ascertained Avithout devoting a great deal of time and investiga- tion on the subject. I think, however, they amount to several million dollars." quarterly deficits in 1891 and 1892 under the Mckinley tariff. Mr. Noyes, in his "Thirty Years of American Finance," p. 138, says: "There was a Treasury deficit in the fourth quarter of the fiscal year 1891, the first quarterly deficit in many years (Treas. Report, CASH TURNED OVER. Ill 1891, p. 33) ; it was repeated hi two of the quarterly periods of 1892; but in each case a fortunate, though temporary, expansion of the revenues of other months helped the Treasury through the year. At last came a season, when the trade from which the revenue was drawn contracted, with financial and political results as extraordi- nary as anything in our history." (Treas. R., 1892, p. 30.) OFFICIAL PROOF OF QUARTERLY DEFICITS. The receipts, as stated by the Treasury report, 1891, for the fourth quarter were $84,528,082.41; expenditures, $85,436,167.29. The total receipts for the year, $393,612,447.31; expenditures, $365,773,905.35. The Treasury report for 1892 shows the receipts for the second quarter (1892) were $83,945,762.40; expenditures, $87,196,906.20, while for the fourth quarter the receipts were $87,140,560.46; expenditures, $89,622,219.85, the total reoeipts for the year being $354,937,784.24; expenditures, $345,023,330.58. The annual surplus in either of these years is more than offset by the National Bank Fund due the banks at this time without charging off the hitherto "unavailable money" in the Treasury, the bank deposits and the limited tender silver coin. FINANCIAL STRINGENCY AND "THREATENED PANIC AND DISASTER" AS EARLY AS 1890, HARRISON ADMINISTRA- TION, UNDER TARIFF 1883 AND McKINLEY TARIFF. To avert a panic in 1890, Mr. Secretary Windom was compelled to purchase Government bonds to the amount of over $74,000,000 at a premium amounting to more than $22,000,000, and he says that the bank deposits and the fractional silver w^ere practically of no use as an actual available surplus to meet public obliga- tions, and in his report of December 1, 1890, said he could not use these two items as an "actual available surplus," but we see two years later, 1892, Secretary Foster did count and use them as part of the "available surplus" to avoid showhig a deficit. Mr. Windom also states that the national bank redemption fund was the only "actual available surplus" in September, 1890, in the Treasury, and with it "panic and disaster" were "averted." TREASURY REPORT, DECEMBER 1, 1890. Secretary Windom, in his report (December 1, 1890) said: "Tne total apparent surplus on September 10, when the money stringency culminated was $99,509,220.53. Of this amount $24,216,- 810.96 was on deposit in the bank, and presumably in circulation aifnong the people, and $21^709,379.70 was fractional silver, which had been in the Treasury vaults for several years, and was not available for any considerable disbursements. "Deducting the sum of these two items ($45,926,184.73) left an actual available surplus of only $53,583^035.80. "The amount of the bank redemption fund, then in the Treasury, which had been transferred to the available funds by the Act of July 14, 1890, was $54,000,000, being substantially the amount of the available surplus on September 10, 1890. . . . "This banl^ note fund had been in the Treasury in varying amounts for many years. In August, 1887, it was $105,873,095.60, which had been gradually reduced by disbursements to the amount above named." 112 DEMOCRATS INHERITED CONDITIONS. "PANIC AND DISASTER AVERTED" AS EARLY AS SEPTEM- BER, 1890, BY USING NATIONAL BANK FUND. "At the time when the financial pressure in September reached its climax, the extraordinary disbursements for bond purchases had sub- stantially exhausted the entire ordinary Treasury accumulation, and but for the fact that Congress had ivisely had transferred the bank note redemption fund to the available cash, there would have been no money at command in the Treasury, by which the strained financial conditions could have been relieved and threatened panic and disaster averted. Had this fund been in the banks instead of the Treasury, the business of the country would have been adjusted to the increased supply, and when the strain came it would have been impossible for the banks to meet it. The Government could not have withdrawn it from the banks without compelling a contraction of their loan, and thus diminishing their ability to give relief to their customers." m Mr. Windom says that the bank deposits could not, with safety to the banks or in justice to "their customers," be withdrawn, but Mr. Foster did withdraw them down to about $10,000,000 in 1893. He had to do so for want of money to count and use them with the small silver coin as "available cash" to avoid showing a deficit. DEMOCRATS INHERITED DISCOURAGING CONDITIONS FROM THE HARRISON ADMINISTRATION. The Democratic administration operated under the McKinley tariff eighteen months — March, 1893, to August 28, 1894 — when the Wilson tariff act took effect. The McKinley tariff proved to be a failure as a revenue producer, but a successful breeder of panics and a responsive mother of trusts. In the midst of a panic, facing an empty treasury, with our gold fleeing abroad, the Democrats came into power March 4, 1893, taking charge of the government under the McKinley tariff and the Sherman silver law, the enactment of which they had opposed, repudiated and condemned, both of which Secretary Foster criticised in his last report. From the wreckage, the old ship of state had to be rebuilt and order brought out of disorder. In speaking of the inevitable embarrassment of the Democratic administration at this time, Mr. Noyes said: "Probably no financial administration in our history has entered office under such disheartening conditions." The Democrats in extra session, November 1, 1893, partially repealed the Sherman silver law. Therefore whatever happy results followed from this repeal should be credited to the Democrats. The income tax, enacted by the Wilson Tariff Act, similar to those enacted by Congress for nearly a century, was declared by DEMOCRATS INHERITED CONDITIONS in the Supreme Court of the United States unconstitutional, about which the national Democracy in 1896 declared: INCOME TAX PLANK. But for this decision by the Supreme Court there would be no deficit in the revenue under the law passed by a Democratic Congress in strict pursuance of the uniform decisions of that court for nearly 100 years, that court having in that decision sustained Constitutional objections to its enactment which had previously been overruled by the ablest judges who have ever sat on that bench. We declare that it is the duty of Congress to use all the Constitutional power which remains after that decision, or which may come from its reversal by the court as it may hereafter be constituted, so that the burdens of taxation may be equally and impartially laid, to the end that wealth may bear its due proportion of the expense of the Government. Population and Wealth of United From Commerce and Finance, Population. 1850 23,191,876 1860 31,443,321 1870 38,558,371 1880 50,155,783 1890 62,622,250 1900 76,303,387 States (Official). April, 1904. Wealth. Per Capita. $7,135,780,000 16,159,616,000 30,068,518,000 42,642,000,000 65,037,091,000 =$94,300,000,000 $307.69 513.93 779.83 850.20 1,038.57 $1,235.86 The following official table shows the annual income tax col- lected from 1863 to 1873, when our taxable wealth was much less than in 1894 or in 1906: INCOME TAX— REVENUE FROM. Treasury Department, Office of the Secretary. Washington, D. C, December 18, 1893. Sir — I have the honor to transmit herewith the statement of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue showing the amount of tax derived from income from all sources, under the income-tax law of 1862, for the years 1863 to 1873 inclusive, called for in Senate resolution of the 11th instant. Very respectfully, J. G. Carlisle, Secretary. Hon. Adlai E. Stevenson, President of the United States Senate. Recapitulation by Years. Tears. 1863. 1864. 1865. 1866. 1867. 1868. 1869. 1870. 1871. 1872. 1873. From per- From corpor- sonal income. ations. $455,741.26 $1,589,935.28 14,799,313.88 3,656,244 . 79 20,400,671.69 8,519,527.00 60,547,882.43 8,716,881.91 57,040,640.67 7,943,796.69 32,027,610.78 8,384,426.18 25,025,068.86 9,204,824.46 27,115,046.11 9,551,301.09 14,434,949.39 3,940,438.81 8,416,685.87 5,725,611.26 3,927,252.76 1,017,517.14 From prop- erty In U. S. owned by any citizen res ding abroad and interest on U. S. securi- ties. From in- come of 1863. special duty on. $134,048.44 303,326.93 $452,550.09 Total... $264,190,863.70 $68,250,504.61 $437,375.37 $452,550.09 (♦Republican Campaign, 1904, p. 442.) 114 DEMOCRATS INHERITED CONDITIONS. Statement Showing Receipts from Income Tax, Etc. From salar- Years. Total. jfLers ^4nd Grand total. employes. 1863 $2,045,676.54 $696,181.71 $2,741,858.25 1864 18,589,607.11 1,705,124.63 20,294,731.74 1865 29,223,525.62 2,826,491.82 32,050,017.44 1866 69,717,314.43 3,717,394.69 73,434,709.12 1867 64,984,437.36 1,029,991.98 66,014,429.34 1868 40,412,036.96 1,043,561.40 41,455,598.36 1869 34,229,893 . 32 561,962 . 52 31,791,855 . 84 1870 36,666,347.20 1,109,526.42 37,775,873.62 1871 18,375,388.20 787,262.55 19,162,650.75 1872 14,142,297.13 294,564.65 14,436,861.78 1873 4,944,769.90 117,541.72 5,062,311.62 Total $333,331,293 . 77 $13,889,604 . 09 $347,229,897 . 86 The Republicans have stubbornly refused, over the protest of the Democrats, to take a single step towards the re-enactment of an income tax, because if justice were done it would inevitably compel the reduction of the exorbitant and oppressive tariff rates that foster and shelter the monopolies, combinations and trusts that perpetuate the Republican party in power. Yet, notwithstanding all these adverse conditions, the offlcial figures, given below, show that our exports of merchandise under the Wilson tariff, 1897, struck the Mllion dollar mark — $1,154,379,735, while from October, 1892, to September, 1893—12 months — our exports were, under the McKinley tariff, only $876,- 332,434. Here are the oflScial figures issued by the "Treasury De- partment July 1, 1904, Circular No. 72": TABLE NO. 1. Values of Imports and Exports of Merchandise under the McKinlby Tariff Act. Exports, Imports, domestic and foreign. October 1, 1890, to September 30, 1891 $824,716,842 $923,362,015 October 1, 1891, to September 30, 1892 837,280,798 998,226,775 October 1, 1892, to September 30, 1893 830,150,318 876,332,434 October 1, 1893, to August 31, 1894a 603,865,896 790,706,509 a Eleven months. TABLE NO. 2. Values of Imports and Exports of Merchandise under the Wilson Tariff Act. Exports, Imports, domestic and foreign. September 1, 1894, to August 31, 1895 $759,108,416 $806,670,050 September 1, 1895, to July 31, 1896 687,695,637 837,802,519 August 1, 1896, to July 31, 1897 766,296,619 1.054,379,735 TABLE NO. 3. Excess of Exports of Merchandise Aloniu and of Merchandise and Silver under McKinley Act. Merchandise Merchandise, and silver. October 1, 1890, to September 30, 1891 $98,645,173 $103,537,310 October 1, 1891, to September 30, 1892 160,945,977 175,091,707 October 1, 1892, to September 30. 1893 46,182,116 68,672,711 October 1, 1893, to August 31, 1894 186,840,613 221,327,708 TABLE NO. 4. Excess of Exports of Merchandise Alone and of Merchandise and Silver under Wilson Act. Merchandise Merchandise, and silver. September 1, 1894, to August 31, 1895 $47,561,634 $84,876,022 September 1, 1895, to July 31, 1896 150,106,882 179,560,567 August 1, 1896, to July 31, 1897 288,083,116 318,379,772 DEMOCRATS INHERITED CONDITIONS. 115 TABLE NO. 5. Annual Average Excess op Exports of Merchandise Alone. Under McKinley Act of 1890 $123,153,470 Under Wilson Act of 1894 161,917,210 TABLE NO. 6. Annual Average Excess of Exports of Merchandise and Silver. Under McKinley Act of 1890 $141,157,359 Under Wilson Act of 1894 194,272,120 TABLE NO. 7. The McKinley tariff act took effect on the 6th day of October, 1S90. Receipts from Customs and Total Receipts from all Sources under McKinley Act. Customs. All sources. Nine months ending June 30, 1891 $151,548,298.14 $280,686,613.16 Fiscal year ending June 30, 1892 177,452,964.15 354,937,784.24 Fiscal year ending June 30, 1893 203,355,016.73 385,819,628.78 Fiscal year ending June 30, 1894 131,818,530.62 297,722,019.25 Months of July and August, 1894 20,673,479.59 76,351,447.54 Total $684,848,289.23 $1,395,517,492.97 TABLE NO. 8. The Wilson tariff act took effect on the 28th day of August, 1894. Receipts from Customs and Total Receipts from all Sources under Wilson Act. Customs. All sources. Ten months ending June 30,1895 $131,485,137.86 $237,038,627.57 Fiscal year ending June 30, 1896 160,021,751.67 326,976,200.38 Fiscal year ending June 30, 1897 176,554,126.65 347,721,705.16 Month of July, 1897 16,966,801.65 39,027,364.25 Total $485,027,817.83 $950,763,897.36 The Dingley tariff act took effect on the 24th day of July, 1897. The average monthly receipts from customs only, Wilson tariff, during the last thirteen months of its operation were $14,886,- 225.25, while for the fourteen months under and preceding the repeal of the McKinley tariff the average monthly receipts from customs only were $10,892,286.44. The total customs receipts only for the two periods were: Wilson tariff (13 months) $193,520,928.30 McKinley tariff ( 14 months) 152,492,410.21 These figures are based on tables 7 and 8. The average monthly revenues from all sources, under the Mc- Kinley tariff, fiscal year 1894, were $24,810,168.27, while under the Wilson Act, fiscal year 1897, and July following — thirteen months — the average monthly revenues from all sources were $29,749,928.41, or for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1897— twelve months— $28,976,808.76. These figures are based on tables 7 and 8. 116 TARIFF ON IRON AND STEEL. TARIFF ON IRON AND STEEL A COMPARISON OF THE TARIFF LAW OF 1893 WITH THAT OF 1890. One of the Republican arguments in favor of protectionism is that exports have always increased under a protective tariff and decreased under a tariff for revenue. This claim is sophistical. It is not borne out by the facts. During the four years' life of tLe Wilson tariff the exports of iron and manufactures thereof, exclusive of iron ore, exceeded the exports of the four preceding years under the McKinley protective tariff by $128,239,783. Table showing imports and exports of iron and manufactures thereof, exclusive of iron ore, for the four years, 1893-1896 inclu- L-ive, under the Wilson Tariff. Year, Imports. Exports. Excess of Imports over Exports. Excess of Exports over Imports. 1893 , 34,937,974 30,106,482 29,220,264 32,000,989 41,160,877 4,831,492 1894 20,925,967 8,294,297 8,952,474 15,822,774 1895 23,048,515 ::::::::::: 1896 25,338,103 Total 104,250,559 132,488,612 4,831,492 Balance 33,069,545 28,238,053 4,831,492 In the preceding 4-year period (protective tariff), 1889-1892 in- clusive, we imported a total of $166,629,767 and exported only $104,288,829, leaving an excess of imports over exports to the amount of $62,340,938, as compared with an increase of exports over imports under the Wilson tariff amounting to $28,238,053. In 1880, under a Republican protective tariff, we imported $71,- 266,699 and exported only $14,716,524 worth of goods of the same class. In 1891, two years before the Wilson bill was passed, we imported $53,544,372 and exported only $28,909,614. In these two years, 1880 and 1891, of high protection we exported a total of iron products reaching only $43,626,138, or $88,862,474 less than our exports of the same class of goods during the life of the Wilson tariff. It is true that our iron industry has developed rapidly under impulse of high protection, which gives such enormous profits on cai)ital invested in the manufacture of iron and steel. But where do those profits come from? Surely, they come out of the pockets of people who use iron and steel in this country more than they can or do gold; and they constitute, to the extent of the tariff tax, just so much taken from the people and given to the manu- facturer. For while the tax on imports creates a monopoly for the manufacturer, the government gets only the amount paid on iron and steel actually imported, while the manufacturer — the great Steel Trust — gets an equal amount pro rata on all the domestic consumption. It is for this reason that the Carnegies, Fricks, Schwabs, Thaws, Corey s, Hartjes and the rest of the Coke TARIFF ON IRON AND STEEL. 117 and Steel magnates have reaped such enormous fortunes from the American people. It was for this reason that they made the Dingley tariff of 1897, nearly prohibitive, and caused imports to fall off as compared with previous years. Those who wish to retain this tariff do so either because they are deceived by false pretenses, or else because they are partici- pating in the plunder. The Steel Trust, fortified behind this pro- tectionism, plunders the American people and sells its products cheaper abroad than at home. The greater its exports under such circumstances the worse for our own people. See further re- marks herein where it is clearly proven that the Steel Trust sells its products to foreigners cheaper than to American consumers. SOME FACTS ABOUT THE SO-CALLED PANIC OF 1893. Secretary of the Treasury Shaw devoted considerable attention to the tariff question in an address delivered at St. Louis. Mr. Shaw reminded his hearers of the hard times of 1893-4, and he sought to impress upon their minds the idea that tariff legislation by a Demo- cratic Congress — the Wilson bill — Was responsible for the hard times of tnat period. It will be just as well to keep history straight. The truth is that every panic since the civil war originated under Republican rule and developed under Republican legislation. The great panic which gave "Black Friday" to history occurred dur- ing the month of September, 1869, when the Republican party was in power. The great panic marked by the failure of Jay Cooke & Co., occurred in September, 1873. Then the Republican party was in power and eleven months prior to the beginning of that panic that party had been re-elected to power. The hard times to which Secretary Shaw refers did not begin in 1894; they began long prior to that year and, indeed, long prior to the presidential election of 1892; and it is a fact, although Republican orators and Republican organs try to forget it, that the so-called panic of 1893 began and played its greatest havoc under that famous tariff law known as the McKinley bill. It may be well for Commoner readers to keep readily at hand some of the facts and figures relating to this question. The Republican party was restored to power March 4, 1889. The McKinley tariff bill became a law October 6, 1890, and re- mained in effect until August 27, 1894. The Wilson tariff law, enacted by a Democratic Congress, went into effect August 27, 1894. If any one will take the trouble to examine the Republican cam- paign text-book for 1904, pages 125, 126 and 127 he will find consider- able space devoted to a statement of business disasters from July 18, 1893, until November 13, 1894. The Republican managers expected their readers to remember that the Cleveland administration was in- augurated March 4, 1893, and that all these disasters occurred under Democratic administration; but they expected their readers to forget that the Republican tariff law was in force up to August 27, 1894, or covering more than twelve months of the sixteen months* period of business disasters as described by the Republican text-book. In their references to the panic of 1893 Republican orators and organs habitually overlook the date when the McKinley law ceased and the Wilson law went into effect. But when in their tariff discussions they are required to face the fact that that panic played it* greatest havoc during the life of the Republican tariff law they answer that it was the anticipation of tariff legislation growing out of Democratic victory in 1892 which brought on these business disasters. For this reason in their list of business disasters they place July 18, 1893, as marking the beginning of that great panic. 118 TARIFF ON IRON AND STEEL, Let it be remembered that the McKinley tariff bill became a law October 6, 1890, and that the first indications of the so-called panic of 1893-4 were given November 11, 1890, A LITTLE MORE THAN THIRTY DAYS AFTER THE McKINLEY TARIFF BILL BECAME A LAW. From that date the panic raged. The Harrison administration was inaugurated March 4, 1889, and when the first indications of this panic were given President Harrison had not exhausted the half of the term for which he was elected. It is admitted by everyone familiar with the facts that President Harri- son's administration had plates prepared for the bonds and Mr. Har- rison's Secretary of the Treasury made a visit to New York for the purpose of negotiating the bond deal. He was wired by Mr. Harrison to return to Washington. Mr. Harrison said that he had concluded not to have any bond issues under his administration, and in order to avoid the stigma the Harrison administration warded off the bond issue and unloaded it on the incoming Cleveland administration. It may not be out of place to point out that when the Democratic administration surrendered the reins of government, March 4, 1889, there was in the federal treasury the largest surplus in history. When the Republican party went out of power, March 4, 1893, there was a large deficit, and the incoming administration was finally persuaded to make the bond issues which its Republican predecessor had at one time thought to be necessary, but had skilfully avoided. The claim that the business disasters of the period referred to were due to the popular fear of tariff legislation to be enacted by Democrats is, as has been said, met by the fact that this panic began two years, prior to the presidential election day of 1892. The following will serve as reminders on this point: November 11, 1890, the reports showed financial distress in New York. The New York Clearing House Association voted its certificates to banks in need of assistance. The Boston Clearing House Association did the same thing Novem- ber. 17 Barker Bros. & Co., big bankers in Philadelphia, suspended at that time, with liabilities placed at $5,000,000. November 19, 1890, there was a run on the Citizens' Savings Bank of New York, and a receiver was appointed for the North River Bank. November 22, 1890, the United Rolling Stock Company of Chicagp assigned, with liabilities at $6,851,000. November 28, 1890, B. K, Jamieson & Co., the Philadelphia bankers, failed, with liabilities at $2,000,000. December 6, 1890, the Oliver Iron and Steel Mills of Pittsburg shut down, discharging 2,000 employes. On the same date the cotton firm of Myer & Co., of New Orleans, failed, with liabilities at $2,000,000. January 3, 1891, the Scottdale Rolling Mills and Pike Works and the Charlotte Furnace and Coke Works in Pennsylvania closed, throw- ing 10,000 employes out of work. January 18, 1891, the American National Bank at Kansas City suspended, with liabilities at $2,250,000. May 8, 1891, the Spring Garden National Bank at Philadelphia closed its doors, and the Pennsylvania Safe Deposit and Trust Com- pany m^Tde an assignment. The Homestead strike and other strikes during 1892, and prior to election day, are well remembered by the people. —The Commoner, May 11, 1906. CORRUPTION AND SCANDALS. 119 REPUBLICAN CORRUPTION AND LIFE INSURANCE SCANDAL— THE CORTELYOU SCANDAL- DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND LABOR. On the afternoon of October 24, 1904, during the closing days of the Presidential campaign. Judge Parker was visited at his home, Rosemount, by a delegation comprising several political clubs which were then aiding in his campaign for the Presidency. Standing upon the veranda of his home, Judge Parker addressed them upon the issues of the campaign, and, among other questions discussed, spoke as follows: "Many years have passed since my active participation in politics. In the meantime a startling change has taken place in the methods of conducting campaigns — a change not for the better, but for the worse; a change that has introduced debasing and corrupt methods, which threaten the integrity of our government, leaving it perhaps a repub- lic in form, but not a republic in substance — no longer a government of the people, by the people, for the people, but a government whose officers are practically chosen by a handful of corporate managers who levy upon the assets of the stockholders whom they represent such sums of money as they deem requisite to place the conduct of the government in such hands as they consider best for their private interests. * * * "Some of the enterprises which have unduly thrived through favor- itism, and which have been permitted by statute to indirectly levy tribute upon the people, have, in the course of time become so rich and strong that they can and do contribute vast sums, when it is made clear that it will advantage them, and they contribute upon the prom- ise, direct or implied, that they shall be permitted to continue to tax the people for their own benefit. "Under such promises contributions have been made not infrequently in such large measure as to induce and procure colonization, repeating and bribery in doubtful States. "The excessively protected interests which formerly poured out their treasure in order to continue existing and procure the passage of new laws permitting further accumulation, have been joined by the com- binations popularly called trusts. Their plan is to perpetuate the present administration. ^ « * ♦ * » ♦ "A corporation will subscribe to a political party only because the corporation expects that party, through its control of public officers, executive or legislative, to do something for the benefit' of the cor- poration, or to refrain from doing something to its injury. No other motive can be imagined. In the nature of things, no other motive can exist. "The relations established mean the expectation, if not the agree- ment, actual or implied, that government action is to be influenced by and for corporation interests. No sophistry can give any other aspect to the transaction in the minds of reasonable men." AND AGAIN, ON THE NIGHT OF OCTOBER 31, 1904, JUDGE PARKER ADDRESSED A MASS-MEETING IN MADISON SQUARE GARDEN, NEW YORK CITY, AND IN DISCUSSING THIS SAME QUESTION, SAID: "In the earlier utterance, I nave referred in detail to what is no- toriously going on in the matter of the collection of funds by the Re- 120 CORRVPTION A^'D SCANDALS. publican party for the campaign. Now, I know, as you know, that money is required in order to defray the expenses of a campaign. Under right conditions its collection and expenditure are equally legitimate. But the spectacle of demanding campaign funds now pre- sented to this country is, when rightly regarded, of a character to shock the moral sense. "WE SHALL DO WELL TO PAUSE FOR A MOMElST TO ASK WHITHER WE ARE DRIFTING IN OUR INDIFFERENCE TO RIGHT STANDARDS, AND TO OUR OLD-FASHIONED SENSE OF PROPRIETY IN SUCH MATTERS. "Congress creates a new Department of Commerce and Labor. Of that department the President of the United States appoints a Sec- retary. That Secretary was his private Secreary. Within the de- partment provision is made for the collection, from large corporations, including the .so-called tusts, of information which, it is to be borne in mind, is to be submitted to the President for public or private use, as he may direct. By grace of the same Executive this Secretary, through whose department this information is collected, becomes Chairman of the Republican National Committee. His chief duty it has been, and still is, to collect funds for the purpose of securing the election of the President. AND IT IS NOW NOTORIOUS THAT THERE HAS RESULTED FROM THIS ORGANIZED IMPOR- TUNITY— W^HATEVER MAY BE THE PRECISE WAY IN WHICH IT IS MADE EFFECTIVE— AN OVERFLOWING TREASURY TO THE COMMITTEE, OF WHICH BOAST IS OPENLY AND CON- TINUALLY MADE. ALTHOUGH THIS MAY BE SATISFACTORY TO THE CONSCIENCE OF REPUBLICAN LEADERS, IT MUST, I FIRMLY BELIEVE, BE CONDEMNED Ag NOTHING SHORT OF SCANDALOUS, NOT ALONE BY MYSELF OR THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY, BUT BY THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AS WELL. "It is said by Mr. Hay that the character of Mr. Lincoln furniphes the standard for Mr. Roosevelt in his conduct as President. I do not have to pause to hear you thundering 'No!' when I ask, 'Would Lin- coln have done or permitted this to be done?' The whole performance is a shameless exhibition of a willingness to make compromise with decency in order that sums of money may be gathered together suffi- ciently vast to justify the insolent boast, even now, that there is no question as to the success which, by such a course, the Republican managers so confidently predict. The performance is entitled only to the credit that it in no sense partakes of hypocrisy. It is as bold as it is improper and indefensible." Not until November 4, 1904, twelve days after the first utterance of Judge Parker on this question, did President Roosevelt deign to publicly take cognizance of the charges made by Judge Parker, at which time he gave out a public statement, in which he said: "But there is not one particle of truth in the statement as regards anything that has gone on in the management of the Republican cam- paign. Mr. Parker's accusations against Mr. Cortelyou and me are monstrous. If true, they would brand both of us forever with infamy ; and, inasmuch as they are false, heavy must be the condemnation of the man making them. * * » * * * "The assertion that Mr. Cortelyou had any knowledge gained while in any official position whereby he was enabled to secure, and did se- cure, any contributions from any corporation is a falsehood. The as- sertion that there has been any blackmail, direct or indirect, by Mr. Cortelyou or by me, is a falsehood. "The assertion that there has been made in my behalf and by my authority by Mr. Cortelyou, or by anyone else, any pledge or promise, or that there has been any understanding as to future immunities or benefits, in recognition of any contribution from any source, is a wicked falsehood." CORRUPTION AND SCANDALS. 121 ON THE NIGHT OF NOVEMBER 5, 1904, JUDGE PARKER ADDRESSED A LARGE AUDIENCE IN BROOKLYN, AND TOOK OCCASION TO REPLY TO PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT'S STATEMENT. HE SAID, IN PART: "WHETHER THERE WERE REAL DIFFICULTIES BETWEEN THESE GREAT POWERS AND THE ADMINISTRATION, DIFFI- CULTIES WHICH HAVE SINCE BEEN SETTLED TO THE SATIS- FACTION OF ALL PARTIES CONCERNED, OR WHETHER THERE WERE NO DIFFICULTIES TO BE COMPROMISED AND ADJUSTED, THEIR ACTION BEING BUT A PLAY TO DECEIVE THE VOTERS, THE FACT REMAINS THAT THE TRUSTS ARE NOT NOW OPPOSED TO THE CONTINUANCE OF THE PRESENT ADMINISTRATION. ON THE CONTRARY, IT IS COMMON KNOWLEDGE THAT THEY HAVE DETERMINED TO FURNISH SUCH A SUM OF MONEY TO THE REPUBLICAN NATIONAL COMMITTEE AS IT IS HOPED WILL SECURE THE 'FLOATERS' IN THE DOUBTFUL STATES FOR THE REPUBLICAN TICKET. «• * % ■:;• * ■» "HE SHUT HIS EYES TO WHAT WAS GOING ON, AND SINCE THAT TIME THERE HAS BEEN THE FREQUENT MEETING OF THE TRUST MAGNATES, THE MONEYS HAVE BEEN POURING INTO THE TREASURY ALL THE MORE FREELY AND ALL THE MORE PLENTIFULLY BECAUSE OF THE ATTITUDE TAKEN BY ME, AND WHICH, IT IS TRUE, I HAVE ENFORCED FROM DAY TO DAY. THE PRESIDENT DOES NOT DENY THESE CON- TRIBUTIONS NOW. * * * , * « * "He is in a position to know what contributions have been made to the Republican National Committee by the trusts; if there have been no trust contributions he could easily have said so. He did not say so. He cannot say so. He has waited until the closing hour of the cam- paign to make easier the pretense of an answer. But it is not an an- swer. It is a confession tuith a plea in avoidance addressed to a kindly and generous people. "If there was any doubt of the source of this great campaign fund, it is no longer a matter of suspicion, for Mr. Elihu Root, the former Secretary of War, frankly admitted last night that trusts and cor- porations were heavy contributors. He denied only that the total amount thus acquired or utilized was as large as in previous years. Moreover, the Republican candidate himself denies only that definite immunity from prosecution has been promised trusts for their assist- ance. He declares that he is merely to give them a 'square deal,' as the term may be interpreted not by the laws of the land, but by him- self. It is plain that when the time shall come to determine what 'a square deal' between the Government of the United States and the contributing trusts really is, the beneficiary of the generosity of the latter must either recognize their service or confess himself guilty of ^ase ingratitude." JUDGE PARKER RECEIVED FROM ONE WHO KNEW THE NAMES OF THE FEW WHO UNDERTOOK TO UNDERWRITE THE CAMPAIGN, BUT THE NAMES WERE GIVEN IN CONFI- DENCE, AND HE RESPECTED THAT CONFIDENCE. THE CHARGE WAS MADE BY HIM, NOT AT ALL WITH THE IDEA THAT IT WOULD INFLUENCE THE RESULT, BUT BECAUSE HE BELIEVED THAT SUCH PRACTICES MUST END OR THE REPUBLIC WILL SOON BE ONE IN NAME ONLY. THAT THE PSYCHOLOGICAL MOMENT TO AROUSE PUBLIC INTEREST WAS BEFORE THE CAMPAIGN CLOSED, NOT AFTERWARD, WHEN IT COULD BE CHARGED THAT THE STING OF DEFEAT WAS HIS MOTIVE. SUCH A PUBLIC INTEREST AS SHOULD BRING ABOUT INVESTIGATION 122 CORRUPTION AND 8CANDALS. OF THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF INSURANCE COMPANIES, BANKS, TRUST COMPANIES, RAILROAD COMPANIES AND GIANT-PROTECTED INTERESTS, WAS HIS AIM. THE PROOF. On September 20, 1905, Mr. John A. McCall, president of the New York Life Insurance Company, testified before the Legisla- tive Insurance Investigating Committee, and was examined by Mr. Charles E. Hughes, counsel for the committee, regarding contributions made by the New York Life Insurance Company to the Republican National Committee during the Presidential campaign of 1904. On page 639, volume 1, of the testimony and proceedings had before that committee, will be found the follow- ing questions and answers, the same being questions asked by Mr. Hughes, and answers given to those questions by Mr. McCall: "Q. In connection with another matter which has received a good deal of attention, to wit: campaign contributions. The other day there was an entry shown of some $48,000 paid to Mr. Bliss for the Republican National Committee last fall. You had. knowledge of that payment ? "A. I had full .knowledge of it. "Q. And you approved it ? "A. I approved of it, and do now." Again, on October 10, 1905, Dr. Walter R. Gillette, vice-president of the Mutual Life Insurance Company, testifying before the same committee, examined by Mr. Hughes, gave the following testimony: "Q. \Vell, do you happen to know what contributions to any campaign funds of any party was made last year out of the moneys of the Mutual Life Insurance Company? "A. Yes. - "Q. Please state what you know on that subject ? "A. We made a contribution to the National Republican Com- mittee. "Q. Of how much ? "A. I think it was — I think it was about $40,000." This testimony may be found upon pages 1351 and 1352, volume 2, of the official proceedings had before the same committee. The amount of the contribution, however, was subsequently proven to be $50,000. *0n November 14, 1905, Mr. James H. Hyde, vice-president of the Equitable Life Assurance Society, testified before the same committee in regard to campaign contributions made by his company. His testimony regarding this question may be found on page 2219 of the official report of proceedings, volume 3. He testified in part as follows: " * * * * The third purpose was political contributions. "Q. And what were they, so far as you were informed of them ? "A. I know of only one of those, whicli was for the last Presidential campaign. "Q. In what amount? "A. Of $25,000. CORRUPTION AND SCANDALS. 123 "Q. And to whom made? "A. Made to Mr. Bliss at his request through Mr. Frick. "Q. How did you become aware of the contribution? "A. Mr. Frick asked me for it, and I asked Mr. Alexander, and Mr. Alexander approved of the contribution. "Q. Upon what grounds did he suggest that^such a contribution should be made by the Equitable ? "A. He suggested that it was to the best interests to the Equitable and the best protection of the Society's assets that the Republican party should be re-elected and kept in power. "Q. Was any mention made by him of an earlier contribution made by the Society? "A. I have since learned that a contribution was made in the summer in my absence which I had nothing to do with. "Q. An amount in addition to the amount you have previously stated ? "A. Yes, sir. "Q. Do you know the amount ? "A. I have since learned the amount was $25,000. "Q. That made a total of $50,000 ? "A. Yes, sir." WHAT THE SEQUEL PROVES. The report of the Armstrong committee of the New York legis- lature, published since Mr. Roosevelt made these sweeping and a'ttparently impassioned, but really crafty, denials, proves that Parker spoke the truth, and that Roosevelt was mistaken when he said the charge was "unqualifiedly and atrociously false." A Republican member of Congress, even from Pennsylvania, Mr. Edward Morrill, summarized the matter so well in a speech de- livered in the House of Representatives, December 15, 1905 (Con- gressional Record, December 21, 1905), that some of his remarks are incorporated herewith. Mr. Morrill said: "As it is, nobody can feel safe, because nobody knows what these giants are doing. The reports which they have made to the State au- thorities (Republican officials) have been shown to be false, and the reports of the insurance superintendents are clearly worthless or worse. The Equitable Life made its own attorney, a gentleman named Pierce, State superintendent of insurance. The three great com- panies have combined in order to support a corrupt lobby at Albany. They have been giving hundreds of thousands of dollars to such men as Andrew Hamilton, A. C. Fields, W. S. Thummel and other lobbyists. The Equitable, according to the testimony, has paid $10,000 a year for a long time to Senator Piatt (Republican) for use in elections. The Mutual has on several occasions paid $10,000 to Senator Piatt for the same purposes. In the campaigns of 1896, 1900 and 1904 the Mutual, the Equitable, and New York Life, the Metropolitan, and the Pruden- tial contributed large sums to the Republican National Committee. The testimony of Messrs. Thummel, Perkins, McCall, Olyphant, Hege- man, Hon. Thomas C. Piatt, Hon. John F. Dryden and Hon. Chauncey M. Depew (Republican) discloses these facts. ''These payments wei'e not recorded in the hooks of the insurance companies. Neither were they reported to the authorities of any State in the sworn reports of these companies. Mr. Richard A. Mc- Curdy swore that if any contribution had been made by the Mutual to any New York State campaign committee he knew nothing about it. Senator Piatt in his own testimony contradicted this statement. Con- cerning such contributions, Senator Piatt said that he had received as contributions to the Republican State committee's campaign fund the sum of $10,000 a year for a period of ten or fifteen years from the Equitable Life Assurarce Society. During the same period he received 124 CORRUPTION AND SCANDALS. $10,000 a year for a number of years, but not every year, from the Mutual Life Insurance Company. The Senator explained that the contributions of the Equitable and the Mutual had always been sent him in cash by a messenger. When asked if he had ever solicited these contributions he said that he had not, but had talked with President McCurdy, of the Mutual, about funds. "On this point the questions by Mr. Hughes and the answers by Senator Piatt were as follows: " *Q. How did it happen that the Mutual Life contributed the money? Was it in pursuance of an understanding between yourself and Mr. McCurdy? — A. I simply asked him at various times when necessities were very great for money, and he said he would be very glad to subscribe.* " *Q. This was for the state campaign ? — A. Yes, sir.' " *Q. And Mr. McCurdy so understood it ? — ^A. He understood it, and could not understand it any other way, because I was not repre- senting the national campaign.' "Senator Piatt said that he had received a few contributions of $10,000 a year from Mr. John A. McCall, president of the New York Life Insurance Company, but had no personal knowledge as to whether or not the money came out of the funds of the company or was a personal contribution from Mr. McCall. "I submit the questions and answers as to the motives which prompted these contributions: " 'Q. SENATOR, WHAT DO YOU UNDERSTAND WAS THE QUID PRO QUO OF THOSE CONTRIBUTIONS? DID YOU EVER UNDERSTAND THAT THE COMPANIES MIGHT EXPECT SOME- THING IN RETURN f— A. I SUPPOSED THAT THEY WOULD EXPECT MY INFLUENCE IN OPPOSITION TO ADVERSE LEGIS- LATION.' " *Q. Did they ever ask you to influence legislation ? — A. Never.' " 'Q. Could you have done so? — A. No.' "*Q. Then what service could you render? — A. / suppose that they thought I might have some little influence with my party (Repub- lican ) .' "The 'legal expenses' of the Mutual were $347,000 in 1903, $130,000 in excess of 1902, when they were $216,000. For 1904 they were $459,000, in 1901, $243,000. In these four years the 'legal expenses' of the Mutual amounted to $1,265,000. Mr. Robert Olyphant, who is a member of its committee of expenditures, says that money for secret and confidential purposes is charged to the account of 'legal expenses.' "Mr. Olyphant said on the witness stand October 10, 1905, that the Mutual Life had paid out $200,000 on vouchers of $25,000 each, In 1903 and 1904, on account of 'private legal expenses.' "Mr. Robert A. Grannis, vice-president of the Mutvial Life, testify- ing on the same day, said: " 'If money was necessary to protect the company against adverse legislation, there was no hesitation in laying out the requisite funds.' "Mr. Walter R. Gillette, vice-president of the Mutual Life, said that the general solicitor of the company could get whatever funds he wanted without giving any reason for it." Thummel testified that he had delivered to Chairman Babcock $5000 of the money of the Mutual Life Insurance Company for the use of the Republican Congressional campaign in 1904. George W. Perkins testified that he had given Chairman Bliss, of the Republican National Committee, between forty and fifty thousand dollars, and had been reimbursed by the company after the election, so that the contribution did not appear on the com- pany's books. The New York Life, the Mutual and the Equitable contributed $50,000 each to the Republican National Committee in 19047 The Prudential Life, Senator Dryden's company, also contributed very largely. The contributions were, as Judge Parker charged^ CORRUPTION AND SCANDALS. 125 "moneys belonging to their stockholders ; moneys not given in the open and charged upon the books as moneys paid for political purposes, but hidden away by false bookkeeping." No man can honestly doubt or deny that the railroad com- panies, banks, trust companies and other great corporations con- tributed in the same surreptitious and unlawful manner to the Republican campaign fund of 1904, or that, in making the con- tributions, they all thought that Bliss and Cortelyou, as well as Piatt, "might have had some influence with the party," and would oxert that influence in the interest of the contributors. Nor can it be doubted that political influence was exerted to keep Bliss and Cortelyou off the witness stand in the insurance investiga- tion. Why has not President Roosevelt required Bliss and Cor- telyou to make restitution of the moneys thus unlawfully received by them? Why did he not urge the passage of the Tillman bill to prohibit contributions by corporations to party campaign funds in the future? Why did he not urge the passage of the Tillman resolution for the investigation of contributions by national banks to party corruption funds? Republican ex-Postmaster-General John Wanamaker says: "I have been a Republican since 1860, but my party stinks in the nostrils of decent men. If the people are willing to uphold such corruption as many of the leaders practice and to condone their dishonesty, God help the country." General Wanamaker thus spoke several years ago before the recent disclosures of corruption and fraud in his own State (Pennsylvania), and New York, both governed by Republican Governors and Officers — and laws made by Republican legisla- tures. GOOD FOR THE SOUL. HOWEVER DESIRABLE IT WAS TO DEFEAT THE FREE SILVER AGITATION IN 1896, DID THE END JUSTIFY THE MEANS EMPLOYED TO ACCOMPLISH THAT DEFEAT? IT IS ITOT TOO MUCH TO SAY THAT THE MONEY SPENT IN 1896 TO PREVENT THE ELECTION OF BRYAN RESULTED IN PO- LITICAL DEBAUCHERY. SUCH AS WAS NEVER BEFORE EX- PERIENCED IN THE UNITED STATES, AND FROM WHICH THE POLITICS AND BUSINESS OF THIS COUNTRY HAVE NOT EVEN YET RECOVERED. IT IS NOT FAR FROM THE TRUTH TO SAY THAT THE COUNTRY HAS SUFFERED MORE BY REASON OF THE POLITICAL CORRUPTION OF THE 1896 CAMPAIGN THAN IT WOULD HAVE SUFFERED FROM THE TRIUMPH OF FREE SILVER, LAMENTABLE AS THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN. BRYAN'S TRIUMPH OF FREE SILVER WOULD HAVE GIVEN THE MARKETS A TERRIBLE SHOCK, BUT BRYAN COULD NOT HAVE REALLY DONE MUCH HARM IN A PRACTICAL WAY, AND THE COUNTRY WOULD HAVE MADE -A SPEEDY RECOVERY FROM THE DISASTER, BUT IT WILL TAKE MANY YEARS TO RECOVER FROM THE EFFECTS OF THE Political debauchery which has been brought ABOUT by the abuse OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN PO- LITICAL CAMPAIGNS.— WALL STREET NEWS. But the stream of corruption continues from year to year, from election to election — and always from the same locality and same fountain head — Republican states. Republican strongholds, under Republican laws, 126 PANAMA SUPPLIES. PANAMA SUPPLIES. MANUFACTURERS' ASSOCIATION'S ACT— FAVOR PUR- CHASES IN OPEN MARKET. The Committee on Resolutions of the National Association of Manufacturers, which met in Atlanta, May 16-18, 1905, by a "ris- ing vote, rejected" a proposition calling for such a law, as shown by the following: The President — *We have another resolution from the committee. The Secretary — The chairman of the Committee on Resolutions moves the adoption of the following : Whereas, It is reported by The Associated Press that the Isthmian Canal Commission has decided (Washington, D. C, May 15, 1905) to purchase materials, etc., in connection with the construction of the Panama Canal from foreign countries and foreign producers; and, Whereas, The construction of the Panama Canal is an American enterprise, by the Americn Government, to be paid for with American money. Resolved, That the National Association of Manufacturers in annual convention assembled earnestly protests against the reported policy of purchase of foreign materials, etc., and requests that American mate- rials produced by American workmen be used exclusively in connection with said enterprise, excepting, of course, such materials as are not produced in this country. A leading member (Mr. Post) of the Association, in opposing this resolution, said: "I do not propose to take issue one way or the other on this ques- tion, but I want to call your attention to this fact, that if we pass that resolution, we, as manufacturers, must remember that we are not all of America. America is for Americans, but we are not all there is of America, and we are asking the United States Government and all of the people in America — some eighty millions of them — to tax them- selves in excess for our PARTICULAR BENEFIT." (Applause.) Other speeches were made pro and con. The President — ^The question is called for. Those in favor of the motion will make it known by saying "aye;" those opposed "no." The "noes" seem to have it. Mr. Seabury (who favored the resolution) said: "Let us have a rising vote on that." On a rising vote the resolution was rejected. PANAMA SUPPLIES. 127 FOREIGN CEMENT BOUGHT. AMERICAN CEMENT 37 CENTS HIGHER THAN FOREIGN CEMENT. SECRETARY BISHOP'S LETTER. Washington, D. C, April 16, 1906.— Sir— In the absence of Mr. Shonts, I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 16th inst., transmitting a communication from the Hon. Wm. Lorimer, dated the 10th inst., inclosing a letter from the Chicago Portland Cement Company, bearing date April 2, 1906, with reference to the last purchase of Portland cement by the Isthmian Canal Com- mission on October 7th, last. When the lot of cement in question was purchased a number of bids were received on American cement and a number also on foreign cement. THE LOWEST BID RECEIVED ON AMERICAN CEMENT WAS 37 CENTS PER BARREL HIGHER THAN THE LOWEST BID ON FOREIGN CEMENT. AFTER FULL INVESTIGATION AND TEST THE LOWEST BID WAS ACCEPTED, AND THE CEMENT FURNISHED ON THE CONTRACT HAS PROVEN TO BE VERY SATISFACTORY. AS THE QUANTITY OF CEMENT PURCHASED AT THAT TIME WAS 20,000 BARRELS, YOU WILL NOTE THAT THIS LOT OF CEMENT WOULD HAVE COST $7,400 MORE IF THE USE OF FOREIGN CEMENT HAD BEEN PROHIBITED. The statements made in the communication from the Chicago Portland Cement Company as to the desirability of purchasing materials needed in the construction of the canal as far as possible in the United States are fully appreciated, and where prices have been anything like equal home concerns have been favored. OPEN MARKETS A WISE POLICY. I think you will agree, however, that in the case of the lot of cement in question the commission would not have been justified in paying $7,400 more for American cement than for foreign cement, particularly in view of the fact that there was no doubt as to the quality of the foreign cement being fully equal to that offered by the lowest bidder on American cement. Very respectfully, Joseph Bucklin Bishop, Secretary. Hon. a. J. Hopkins, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. — (American Economist, May 4, 1906.) The Secretary of War (Taft) stated to Congress that he had saved a great deal of money for the government by purchasing supplies from Australia and other foreign countries for the use of our army and officials operating in the Philippine Islands; that he had also saved money by purchasing some of the Panama supplies in the open markets of the world, and thought it was wise to do so. But the Republicans, put and maintained in power by the Steel Trust, Cement Trust and other trusts which furnish building material, would not have the law that way, and on June 25, 1906, over the protest of the Democrats, the Republicans passed this Joint Resolution, No. 60: REPUBLICANS VOTE TO GIVE TRUSTS CONTROL. "Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States in Congress assembled. That purchases of material and equip- ment for use in the construction of the Panama Canal shall be 128 PANAMA 8UPPLIESi. restricted to articles of domestic production and manufacture, from the lowest responsible bidder, unless the President shall, in any case, deem the bids or tenders therefor to be extortionate or unreasonable." Approved June 25, 1906. By this resolution the purchase of supplies for the Panama Canal is now by virtue of the vote of the Republicans of both the Senate and House, compelled to be made of the Trusts and Com- bines, unless their bids for material are "extortionate or unrea- sonable." What is extortionate or unreasonable is left for the President to decide and not to competitive bids in the open mar- l^ets of the world, as justice to the taxpayers demands. How can the President or anyone know a given price is "extortionate or unreasonable" unless he has competitive bids? How can the President well know what a foreign concern will furnish a given article for unless the foreigners are allowed to bid? The Senate, before adopting the joint resolution No. 60, re- jected, by a party vote, the amendment of Senator Mallory to strike out the words "extortionate or." The Senate also refused, by a party vote, the substitute proposed by Senator Carmack, which read as follows: "That in all the contracts for the purchase of material and equip- ment for use in the construction of the Panama Canal preference shall be given to articles of domestic production or manufacture, conditions of quality and price being equal." The determination of the Republican Senators to compel the President and the War Department to purchase supplies for the Panama Canal of the Trusts and Combines is further shown by the text of the original resolution as recommended by the Secre- tary of War, Mr. Taft, which was as follows: "Resolved, etc., That purchase of material and equipment for use in the Construction of the Panama Canal shall be restricted to articles of domestic production and manufacture unless the President deem THE BID therefor TO BE UNREASONABLE." It will be noticed that the words "extortionate or" and the sentence following the word unreasonable were added by the Senate Finance Committee. The Shipbuilding Trust and the Steel, Trust wer6 evidently the main levers that moved the Republican members of Congress to force through this resolution, which compels the Panama Com- mission to pay $35,425 each more for 100 dredges, or $3,542,400, that being the number stated that will be purchased. Two ships had already been purchased for the use of the Canal Commission before the above resolution was adopted by Congress, and the price paid indicates that the President at that time had backed down from his position of "buying in the cheapest mar- ket" under the extreme pressure from the trust magnates and protected monopolists and the other organized protectionists. Two foreign-built ships of 6,000 tons capacity each had been offered to the Canal Commission for $750,000 each, but two Ameri- can-built ships were purchased of 5,700 tons capacity for $1,300,000. PANAMA SUPPLIES. 129 Senator Stone, of Missouri, said in the Senate (see Cong. Record, June 1, 1906, p. 7904): "Xhese two American ships, known as the Havana and Mexico^ were purchased at the price named of the New York and Cuban Mail Steamship Company of New York, commonly known as 'The Ward Line.' They liad been in commission and in active service for from seven to eight years. Last December I had occasion here in the Senate to refer to the purchase of these ships and to comment on the transaction. At that time I called attention to the fact — for it is a fact that no Senator here will dispute — that it is a rule, based on experience, for shipowners to write off 5 per cent, of the cost value of the ship for every year it is in active service. In addition to that, it is generally agreed that the average life of a ship's boiler plant is about eight years, and that the boiler plant represents about 15 per cent, of the total value of the steamer. I called attention to the fact that these ships, the Havana and the Mexico, had been in active service for from seven to eight years, as shown by the public records. Upon the strength of those facts I then contended, as I now contend, that the real market value of these ships at the time the Government purchased them could not have been more than about 60 per cent, of their value when new. In the very nature of things, tested by whatever rule, there must have been a depreciation of from 35 to 40 per cent, in the value of those ships. But at that time 1 was not able to give the original cost of the ships; that is, the price paid the builders for constructing them. Now, however, I am able to supply that information. "At the hearings had before the Merchant Marine Commission during the spring and summer of 1905 Mr. Alfred G. Smith ap- peared as a witness. See his testimony, volume 1, of the hearings. He testified that he was secretary and treasurer of the Ward Line, and he gave a list of the ships constituting the fleet of that line, with the dates of their construction. On page 131, volume 1, of the hear- ings, Mr. Smith testified : " 'We have two vessels of 5,700 tons each. They are 16-knot ships.' "These were the Havana and the Mexico. Senator Lodge inquired as to how much they cost, and Mr. Smith answered : " 'In the vicinity of $550,000 apiece; perhaps $600,000.' "So we have it directly from the lips of one of the chief officials of the company, for whom the ships were built and who sold them to the Government, that they cost originally in the vicinity of $550,000 each, or possibly, he said, as much as $600,000 each. Here, then, we have an example of how the President kept his promise, so vocifer- ously and repeatedly made, to guard the Treasury and the people against the inroads of plunderers. "Two English ships of larger tonnage were offered for $750,000, but the opportunity to buy them was abandoned under pressure and two American ships of lighter tonnage were purchased for $1,300,000, which was from $100,000 to $200,000 more than the ships cost the owners when they were built. "Be it also remembered that under the rule universally observed by shipowners of writing ofT a percentage of the value of a vessel for each year of active service these ships were necessarily worth from 35 to 40 per cent, less the day the Government bought them than they were the day the Cramps, who built them, delivered them to their owners." OTHER MATERIAL PURCHASED. In Senate Document 261, part one, there is a list of contracts aggregating $1000 or more entered into by the Isthmian Canal Commission from February 1, 1905, to October 31, 1905. That document shows that 290 contracts were entered into during the nine months named of the total amount of $6,124,658.21. A large 130 PANAMA SUPPLIES. proportion of these contracts were supplied by the steel and other trusts, and for some unexplained reason the price at which the articles were furnished is not given in the report probably because the price exceeded what the price the same trusts were selling similar articles al)road. There is also part two of the same document which contains a list of 112 other purchases of the Canal Commission from Novem- ber 1, 1905, to March 7, 1906, which in the aggregate amount to $893,387.74. Taking these 13 months' purchases of supplies as what will be required on the average, gives the annual purchases for supplies as $6,478,196.28 without including the ships and dredges and other heavy machinery and small items costing less than $1000. As it is expected that the canal will take at least ten years to build the materials will cost exceeding $64,000,000. As the difference in the price here and the price abroad on such supplies is on the average about 40 per cent, in consequence of the protection to the trusts, it will be seen that the increased expenditures under this Republican policy will be at least $38,400,000 and the increased cost of the dredges and ships, added to the above would make the total extra cost exceed $40,000,000. And that would not allow anything for the purchase of more ships and dredges. The Democratic position on the purchase of these supplies was to leave with the Isthmian Canal Commission the power to buy supplies in the cheapest market and to confine their purchases to American products if the price does not exceed the standard export price. The Republicans claimed there was no such thing as a standard of export prices, but the testimony of Mr. Shonts, the President of the Commission, and Mr. Ross, the purchasing agent of the Commission, shows that there is a standard of export prices. That testimony is as follows: Mr. Shonts — "I would favor buying in the open market for the reasons Mr. Ross has stated. I think the fact that we have that privilege enables us to get our American made material cheaper. I think that the steel companies, to illustrate, give us the benefit of their export pr'ices." Mr. Ross — "There is one other thing that I might have said. I do not know positively, as I said a while ago, that the United States steel export companies, for instance, would take advantage of. us if we didn't have the right of foreign competition, but they do put our business on an export basis now. For instance, on steel rails — ^we have bought steel rails during the last year for $26.40 a ton, delivered alongside a vessel at Baltimore, Avhile the rate that they usually charge the railroads of this country was $28 at the mill." ( See Con- gressional Record, June 16, 1906, page 8909.) That evidence also shows that foreign competition kept the steel trust and the other combines to reasonable prices, somewhere near their regular export prices, but now the law has been changed to compel the purchase of supplies in the United States, unless the President decides the price is "extortionate or unreasonable" will allow the trusts to advance prices to the point where the President should declare they are extortionate. How high the prices will be, before the President decides they are extortionate is a matter of speculation and in view of the decision of President PANAMA tSUFFLlEIS. ILL Roosevelt to "stand pat" like the other trust-favoring Republicans of Congress probably never will be decided, and the trusts will be allowed to charge "all the traffic will bear." In less than three months after this pro-trust resolution was signed by the President, what happened? BIDS FOR ENGINES TO GO TO CANAL BALDWIN LOCOMOTIVE WORKS' PRICE $458,600 FOR FORTY MOGULS— ONLY ONE RAIL BIDDER— SUB- SIDIARY OF STEEL TRUST MAKES PRICE OF $29.45 PER TON F. O. B. BALTIMORE. Bids were opened this morning at the offices of the Isthmian Canal Commission for forty Mogul engines and for 5000 tons of steel rails for use on the Isthmian Canal. The Baldwin Locomotive Works, of Philadelphia, was the lowest bidder on the engines, offering to deliver them at Colon for $458,600. The bid of the Lima Locomotive Machine Company, Lima, Ohio, was $475,200 and that of the American Locomotive Company, of New York, $526,000. There was only one bidder offering to supply the steel rails. That was the U. S. Steel Products Export Company, of New York, a sub- sidiary of the Steel Trust. Its bid was $147,250, which is at the rate of $29.45 per ton, delivered f. o. b. cars at Baltimore. An alter- nate bid, for delivery at Colon, raises the price by $16,250. THIS BID IS CONSIDERED EXTREMELY HIGH, BUT BEING THE ONLY ONE SUBMITTED MAY BE ACCEPTED.— Washington Times, September 6, 1906. SHIP SUBSIDIES AND HIGH TARIFF. John Roach, protectionist ship builder, to a special committee of the House in 1869, said: "America has lost her commerce, and what has she obtained in ex- change for it ? Simply the right of a few men to charge $9.00 per ton in gold on the importation of pig iron. Pig iron is the basis of all other metals connected with the making and repairing of ships. There has been a revolution in shipbuilding, and iron is the material from which they are now built. The high cost of iron produced by the tariff upon it is one of the principal difficulties our commerce has to contend with. I did not come here to ask a bounty. I came here to tell you that while all other articles of American produce are pro- tected to a great extent there is no protection for American ships. If Congress will take off all the duties from American iron, reducing it to the price of foreign iron, then we are prepared to compete with foreign shipbuilders. The labor question is mistaken; we are pre- pared to meet that difficulty and to ask no further legislation on the subject." Mr. Morrill, protectionist Republican, asked Mr. C. H. Cramp as to the rate of duty imposed on shipbuilding material and Mr. Cramp replied: "About 40 per cent., and if our shipbuilders could be relieved from that, they could compete successfully with foreign shipbuilders. The 132 PANAMA SUPPLIES. difference in the cost of labor would be overcome by the superiority of American mechanics. Wooden ships will no longer be built, since iron ships are superior in every respect." Senator Chandler, of Michigan, in 1872, said: "It is desirable to own iron ships, very desirable, and I hope to see the day when we shall have our old supremacy in shipping, but it never will be done in the world by subsidies. It is not the subsidized lines of Great Britain that pay the largest returns. * * * You will never restore your flag to the ocean by subsidies, I care not how great you may make them; you may increase your subsidies to $10,000,- 000 a year and you will not restore your flag." Senator Morrill, of Vermont, in 1872, said: "Is it practicable to recall our shipping? I think it is, and by the simplest process. NOT A DOLLAR OF SUBSIDIES. GIVE US CHEAP MATERIALS, AND WE WILL DO. IT. Give us the ground on which we stand, so that we shall have our materials just as cheap as they can be afforded elsewhere, and then all these shipyards and all that skilled labor will be at work at once; and you will find that we shall restore the balance of the shipping interests on the ocean, that now stands against us." Senator Sherman, May 4, 1872, said: "SINCE WE CANNOT BUILD THESE VESSELS WITHIN 20 OR 30 PER CENT. OF THE COST IN ENGLAND, WHY NOT ADMIT THEM FREE?* WHY NOT ADMIT THEM DUTY FREE, RAISE THE AMERICAN FLAG UPON THEM, PUT AMERICAN OFFICERS UPON THEIR DECKS, AND HAVE AMERICAN LINES INSTEAD OF BRITISH LINES? Why, sir, if that bill should pass, authorizing foreign ships when owned by American citizens, to be used for the present, for three years under the American flag, one- half of the lines between New York and England would be American lines in sixty days." The present Speaker of the House, Mr. Cannon, February 28, 1879, denounced ship subsidies. He then said: "Now, what is this proposition? Oh, it is to give John Roach $3,000,000 as a practical gratuity and to charge that as a tax on the cotton, and provisions, and tobacco, and wheat, and grain, and bread- stuffs, and oil that we produce. What for? To enable somebody to sell something that he has made, which it cost $1.43 to make here, while it costs only a dollar to make it in Europe, and both manufac- turers have to go to the same market, namely Brazil. WHY, GENTLEMEN, IF YOU HAD A BUSINESS AGENT WHO PRO- POSED TO DO YOUR PRIVATE BUSINESS IN THAT WAY, YOU WOULD PUT HIM INTO A LUNATIC ASYLUM OR SWEAR THAT HE WAS A THIEF OR AN IDIOT AND DISCHARGE HIM. "Commencing in the year 1847 down to the present time (1879) act after act has been passed for a similar purpose ( postal subsidies ) . I hold in my hand the official statements of the Secretary of the Navy and the Postmaster-General, which show payments of subsidies to the amount, in round numbers, of $14,500,000 to steamship lines during the period from the year 1848 to 1858. I hold in my hand a statement that shows subsidies to the amount of $7,000,000, in round numbers, since that time, making over $21,000^000 that have been paid out of the Treasury for the purpose of establishing steamship lines — $7,000,000 would buy all the steamships engaged in commerce that sail PANAMA SUPPLIES. 133 under the American flag on every ocean in the world — and more than that; the subsidizing of these steamship lines, from the 'Collins' line in 1852 up to the present time, has bankrupted every prominent man that has favored it." UNITED STATES PREDOMINANT IN IRON AND STEEL MAKING. President McKinley submitted January 29, 1901, to Congress an official "Review of the world's commerce," which at page 22 states: '"The most striking fact in our export development is the remark- able growth of the foreign demand for our iron and steel, our exports amounting to nearly $130,000,000 in 1900 against $32,000,000 in 1895. In an article in the New York Evening Post of January 12, 1901, Mr. Andrew Carnegie says the United States has not only supplied its own wants, 'but is competing to supply the wants of the world, not only in steel, but in the thousand and one articles of which steel is the chief component part,' and expresses the opinion that the increasing demand from the world at large 'can be met only by the United States.' "THE INFLUENCE OF OUR STEEL-MAKING CAPACITY, ADDS MR. CARNEGIE, 'MUST BE MARVELOUS, FOR THE NATION WHICH MAKES THE CHEAPEST STEEL HAS THE OTHER NATIONS AT ITS FEET AS FAR AS MANUFACTURING IS CONCERNED IN MOST OF ITS BRANCHES. THE CHEAPEST STEEL MEANS THE CHEAPEST SHIPS, THE CHEAPEST MACHINERY, THE CHEAPEST THOUSAND AND ONE ARTICLES OF WHICH STEEL IS THE BASE.'" (Review of the World's Commerce, 1900.) CHEAPNESS OF AMERICAN GOODS. "It is the relative cheapness of American steel that has given it pre-eminence, and it is the same with other products that are winning their way abroad. Economy of production is the master key that unlocks for us markets that seemed a little while ago to be inexorably closed. This economy of production implies not merely low prices to the foreign consumer, but a greater degree of excellence, a superior adaption to his wants. As he has been pointed out in the Reviews, as well as elsewhere, the American workingman, though receiving higher wages, produces, with labor saving machinery, at a lower unit of cost, and his greater application and ingenuity enable him to avail himself effectively of the most recent inventions and appliances for improving the quality of his special line of work. The American factory system is highly organized and mca-e efficient than any other, and if our export trade were as well developed, there would be little to fear." (Review of the World's Commerce, 1900.) With the "cheapest steel and iron" in the world, the ship trust still cries for "subsidy." With thousands of men, widows and orphans begging Congress, as they have for years, for the payment of their claims against the Government, many of which are just, a deaf ear is turned to them, but not to the ship builders — ^backed by millions. 134 PROPOSED SHIP SUBSIDY LEGISLATION. PROPOSED SHIP SUBSIDY LEGISLATION. The favorite measure of the Roosevelt administration is the ship subsidy bill (S. 529). This bill passed the Senate February 4, 1906, 38 Republicans voting for it and 23 Democrats and 4 Republicans against it. (See yea-and-nay votes in the Senate elsewhere in this volume.) The word subsidy is not used in the title of the bill, because the Constitution does not authorize sub- sidies. But the bill is entitled "A bill to promote the national defense, to create a force of naval volunteers, to estahlisU Ameri- can ocean mail lines to foreign markets to promote commerce, and to provide revenue from tonnage." When this bill was under consideration in the Senate, the last clause of the title — "to provide a revenue from tonnage" — was stricken out, because the Senate has no right to originate bills for raising revenue. The clause "to establish American ocean mail lines to foreign markets," might also have been stricken out with equal propriety; for Congress has no power to do anything of that sort, any more than it has to establish post- offices in foreign countries to handle American merchandise. The same may also be said of the clause "to promote the national defense," for Congress has no power to do that by subsidizing private corporations in time of peace. Neither has it the power to create a force of naval volunteers in time of peace. But the real purpose of the bill was not disclosed by its title. Its object was the "legalized robbery" of the masses for the benefit of a few persons engaged in the shipping business, especially the steamship trust, who had furnished money to Mr. Hanna and his associates in 1896 to help elect the Republican ticket. Indeed, Mr. Hanna is responsible for the whole scheme. It was originated under his leadership in the Fifty-sixth Congress. The Congressional Record for December 12, 1900, vol. 33, p. 789, shows how the matter was started in the House of Representa^ tives. In relation to the Hanna-Payne bill of that year, the following extract from the Record is interesting: "Mr. Richardson — I thiiik, Mr. Speaker, the rhatter I present is one of privilege — one which affects the integrity of the proceedings of the House. I hold in my hand what purports to be a bill. It is in the form of a bill — that is, the first portion of it — and it is indorsed 'H. R. 64. A bill to promote the commerce and increase the foreign trade of the United States, and to provide auxiliary cruisers, transports, and seamen for Government use when necessary.' "It purports to have been introduced on the 4th day of December, 1899, and to have been referred to the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, and ordered to be printed. "The first few pages of this paper is in the form of a bill. The latter pages — four pages — are in different type, and an argument, a partisan argument, in support of the bill. After the conclusion of the bill there are four pages of partisan arguments and facts. It is made up in part of statements purporting to show the effect of the bill, which I controvert, and which every member, or almost every member, on this side of the House would controvert. But whether on this side or that side, Mr. Speaker, and whether true or false, those statements and arguments have no place in a bill. Now, I submit, Mr. Speaker, that the rules have been grossly violated. I submit that this paper PROPOSED SHIP SUBSIDY LEGISLATION. 1?5 is not frankable by law, and any member of this House or of the other House who has sent out this paper is guilty of having violated the postal law. It is no part of the Congressional Record; it is not a bill; the words used, or printed, have never been spoken upon the floor, so far as I know, and the paper is not frankable by law. "Mr. Cooper of Texas — Who is the mover of the bill? "Mr. Richardson — I submit, Mr. Speaker, that this bill should be taken from the files, and if the gentleman desires to introduce the bill, let it be introduced as all other bills are prepared, presented, and introduced in this House. I make the point of order, first, that the paper should be suppressed — it is not a bill — and, failing in that, I shall move to strike it from the files and have it destroyed. "Mr. Burke of Texas — Who introduced the bill? "Mr. Richardson — The gentleman from New York, Mr. Payne." The Speaker sustained the point of order, and the bill was reprinted and re-referred. The same bill was introduced in the Senate by Mr. Frye under the same title (S. 727) and was debated and amended at the second session, but failed to pass. In the Fifty-seventh Congress the bill was again introduced in both Houses, but failed; and the same thing happened in the Fifty-eighth Congress. But near the end of the Fifty-eighth Congress a bill was passed enacting the Merchant Marine Com- mission, composed of five Senators and five members of the House; four commissioners, two from each house, being Demo- crats. About the beginning of the Fifty-ninth Congress, a new bill, differing materially in its title, as well as in its provisions, was introduced. It passed the Senate, as shown, but failed in the House. This new bill was prepared by the majority members of the Merchant Marine Commission, and has the earnest endorse- ment of the administration, which has failed to prosecute the steel trust and its annex, the shipbuilding interests. A fair idea of this subsidy proposition may be obtained from the speech of Mr. Spight, Democrat, of Mississippi (Congressional Record for June 27, page 9601). He is a member of the House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries and the Merchant Marine Commission. Mr. Spight, in part, said: "If no other good was accomplished by it, the Merchant Marine Commission of 1904 aided very materially in driving from cover the gigantic steel trust, which teas systematically robbing the American people for its own enrichment. I remember with what horror the 'stand-patters' on the Commission heard witness after witness of the highest respectability and greatest opportunities tell how American steel was delivered in foreign yards at prices far below those charged American consumers by the same manufacturers for the same products. I well remember that when this statement was first made the dis- tinguished chairman of the Commission, Senator Gallinger, of New Hampshire, said: " 'I WANT TO SAY, WHAT I THINK I AM PRIVILEGED TO SAY AS CHAIRMAN OF THIS COMMISSION, THAT IF THE SITUATION IS AS HAS BEEN DESCRIBED IT IS A GREAT OUTRAGE.' " 'MR. WALLACE— WE HAVE THOUGHT SO FOR SOME TIME, AND WE HAVE THOUGHT THAT IN SOME WAY IT OUGHT TO BE REMEDIED.' "The same facts were stated by many other men of equally high character, notably by Mr. G. W. Dickey, superintendent of the Union Iron W^orks of San Francisco, the largest shipbuilding plant on the Pacific Coast. He told what he saw and knew, and neither Mr. Gary, 136 PROPOSED 8HIP SUBS'IDY LEGISLATION. of the steel trust, nor anybody else has ever denied or questioned the accuracy of Mr. Dickey's statement. He told the Commission at San Francisco in August, 1904, that the steel mills in this country were favoring the foreigner. He said, amongst other things : ^ " 'IN 1900 I WAS GOING THROUGH A SHIPYARD IN DUNDEE, SCOTLAND, AND THEY WERE BUILDING A VESSEL ALMOST A DUPLICATE OF THE CALIFORNIA, THAT WE WERE BUILD- ING HERE AT THE SAME TIME, AND THEIR MATERIAL WAS BEING LANDED THERE FROM A VESSEL FROM NEW YORK, FURNISHED BY CARNEGIE & CO., WHO WERE FURNISHING THE MATERIAL FOR THE CALIFORNIA. THEY WERE PAY- ING £7 15s. 8d. PER TON. WE WERE PAYING £10 9s. 2d. IT WAS SUPPLIED BY THE SAME PEOPLE AND THE DISTANCE TRANSPORTED WAS ABOUT THE SxlME.' "These prices when reduced to our currency made a difference of about $13.80 against the American builder. It has been estimated by expert shipbuilders that a vessel of 8000 tons, which is now only medium in size, will require about 3500 tons of steel. At the rate of difference given by Mr. Dickie the American builder would pay to the steel trust nearly $50,000 more for the material in his ship than the foreigner pa id for his. It is a misnomer to call this a "profit," because the steel was sold at a profit to the foreigner. It is a rob- bery under the guise of law, and the men engaged in this nefarious business are among the most persistent advocates of subsidy legis- lation." Further on, he said: "I here offer an editorial clipping from a New York daily, The Press, of the 7th of May of this year : " 'All records in the exports of iron and steel material through New York and other Atlantic seaboard points were eclipsed last month when close on to 80,000 tons were consigned to almost every part of the civilized world. The heaviest increase was made in the shipment of steel billets, upward of 35,000 tons having gone abroad during April, as compared toith 24,000 tons exported during the previous month. THEY ARE SOLD HERE FOR, EXPORT AT A PRICE AROUND $18 AT THE IVHLLS, WHEREAS THE EXISTING QUO- TATION FOR BILLETS FOR DOMESTIC CONSUMPTION IS $27.' "It has been shown by recent testimony before the committee that the ocean freight on steel is about $2 per ton, which would make it cost $20 per ton delivered in foreign ports, against $27 to domestic purchasers. This difference of $7 per ton makes the comfortable sum of $245,000 extorted from the American consumer by the steel trust in the month of Ap7'il on the item of steel billets shipped abroad from Atlantic ports alorte. At the same ratio for one year this would amount to $2,740,000. This robbery of the American v/as going on at the very time when the witnesses of the steel trust were asking us to believe that the prices in Europe and America are the same and that steel is not sold more cheaply for export than for home use. Now, what reliance can we place on the evidence of such witnesses in any other statements they have made? There is an old Latin maxim familiar to every lawyer, 'Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus,^ which fits this case.' "I haven't seen nor heard of any denial of this statement of the the Press on the 8t]i of Maj-, and received in reply the following state- large headlines, and is presumed to have been made with a full knowl edge of the facts. But in order to verify it I wrote to the editor of the Press on the 8th of May, and received in reply the following state- ment, furnished by tlie gentlen)an who regularly supplies the paper with such information, and whose reliability is umiuestioned. I can say that the price in England (Wales) yesterday for steel billets was $22 a ton. As the freight between the mills here and Wales is around $4 a ton, American billets nuist be sold at $18 for export, as specified in the news story, in order to meet competition on the other side. PROPOSED SHIP SUBSIDY LEGISLATION. 137 The selling of billets for export at the price of^$18, or around that figure, in order to meet the market conditions on the other side has been going on for a considerable time. Notwithstanding the contra- dictions of the steel trust officials, any man posted in the metal trades here knows the fact of the discrepancy between the export and domestic prices of billets, rails and, in fact, all iron and steel material. "Mr. Hanscom, of the Eastern Shipbuilding Company, New Lon- don, Conn., who appeared before us to advocate this subsidy legisla- tion, stated that two or three years ago he had information that steel was shipped from here and landed on the Clyde at $19 or $20 a ton, when it was being sold to domestic purchasers for $32 to $38 a ton. "Notwithstanding this state of affairs, which Senator Gallinger de- nounced as an outrage, nothing has been done to remedy this evil, and every proposition to revise the tariff schedules ivhich makes possible this outrage upon the American people is met by the 'stand-patters' with the stereotyped declaration that there is neither necessity nor demand for revision, and the robbery proceeds unchecked and un- abashed. Gentlemen can not protect themselves by the comforting assurance that these facts are not established. They are proven by the testimony of a crov/d of disinterested witnesses, and are denied by no one except the 'defendant.' Any jury of honest men in any court on such evidence would write a verdict of 'guilty' in two minutes. You say: 'When the tariff needs revising its friends will do it.' The time is approaching when it will be revised, not by the friends of the tariff, but by the friends of the long-suffering American people." THE DR. JEKYLL AND MR. HYDE STAND OF THE "STAND- PATTERS." On the 18th of April last the whole world was startled, shocked and horrified by the news that San Francisco, the Pearl of the Pacific, had been practically wiped off of the map by the combined forces of earthquake and fire. The dispatches confirmed the first hurried reports — it was only too true — ^the city was destroyed. Buildings lay in ruins, streets were effaced, thousands of homes in ashes, the public parks were the dwellings of the sufferers, the earth their bed, the heavens their roof. Perhaps no call of charity was ever heeded more promptly than this. From Maine to Florida contributions were started; relief trains were hurried West; benefits were given; city after city appropriated money and supplies; in a word, the whole country came to the rescue of California. The first wants of food and clothes relieved, the citizens of the ruined city set to work with an indomitable courage to rebuild on far more beautiful lines their wrecked metropolis. Thousands of tons of iron, steel, cement, lumber, glass and other building material would be necessary and must be purchased somewhere. Naturally these people — poorer by millions of dollars — would seek the cheapest market, and ex- perience had shown that all the needed materials could be pur- chased cheaper abroad than at home, PROVIDED THE DUTY ON IMPORTS WAS REMOVED. This was not a matter of charity, simple contributions of money and clothes could not cover this question — it was a problem of national legislation. Congress, and Congress alone, had the power to remove the prohibitive duties which the Dingley tariff had laid upon these commodities. But would the watch-dogs of "protection" be charitable enough to allow this wall to be torn 138 PROPOSED SHIP SUBSIDY LEGISLATION. down for the benefit of their suffering fellow-citizens? The Democrats in Congress, alive to the exigencies of the situation, voted money for their relief, and were the first to come to the rescue by introducing a bill giving drawback bounties on all structural material imported and "actually" used in rebuilding the homes of these sufferers for the space of three years. In other words, John Doe would buy 100,000 tons of steel in Sheffield, England, 30 per cent, cheaper than from Pittsburg, import and pay the duty on it at the port of San Francisco and, upon proof that he used this steel in bona-fide building, would receive back the amount of the duty paid. But what was the fate of this most estimable and democratic measure? It, and all others like it, shared the luck invariably dealt out to any legislation which in the least interferes with the robber practices of the steel, lumber, cement and other trusts. A Republican House referred it and similar bills to the Ways and Means Committee, where it was lulled to sleep to the tune of "Stand Pat, Oh, Protectionists, Stand Pat." But the most marvelous feature of this uncharitable proceeding was the fact that not a single member in the House of the Califor- nia delegation — a solid Republican body — spoke a word, as the Record shows, favorable to this or any such measure, which was solely for their benefit and their constituents. More than this, Mr. Kahn (Republican) on June 7, 1906, made quite an extended speech to show that such a measure would be "unconstitutional," closing with the following: "The people of San Francisco want to commence rebuilding the magnificent City by the Golden Gate * * * THE DELEGATION FROM CALIFORNIA IN THIS HOUSE, LEARNING OF THE CON- STITUTIONAL OBJECTIONS THAT WERE BEING RAISED AGAINST A DRAWBACK BILL, CONCLUDED THAT IT WERE BEST TO NOTIFY OUR CITIZENS THAT SUCH LEGISLATION IS IMPOSSIBLE, and, Mr. Chairman, the failure of the passage of this bill WILL NOT DELAY the rehabilitation of San Francisco." * * * "UNCONSTITUTIONAL"— if so, the Constitution has been violated from the "fathers" to the present day, for did not Congress enact almost identical legislation for the relief of Chicago fire sufferers and those of other cities? "IMPOSSIBLE" — since when has it become "impossible" for Con- gress to come to the rescue of suffering and needy United States citi- zens by untaxing imports. How can such a course be called "impossi- ble" with the official records for a century showing that such has been done before. "WILL NOT DELAY" — the rehabilitation of that city when letters have been received from reputable citizens of San Francisco stating "that there is now a combination being formed in the City of San Francisco for the purpose of putting up the prices *to the serious detri- ment of property owners and home builders.' " Moreover, the numerous authorities which Mr. Kahn quoted to show that such an act would be "unconstitutional" also held that Congress did not have the power to appropriate money outright for the relief of American citizens. Turning a deaf ear to this ruling, Mr. Kahn voted to appropriate millions for his con- stituents' aid and succor. INCONSISTENT, that is for the people to judge. PROPOSED SHIP SUBSIDY LEGISLATION. 139 Such was the attitude of the House members of the California delegation when at Washington. Now see the change when con- fronted with the accusing fingers of their constituents at home. On September 8 the Republican State Convention met in Cali- fornia and adopted the following resolution as a plank of their state platform: "Resolved, That we favor the enactment by Congress of an amend- ment to the existing tariff law providing as a measure of relief in San Francisco. That for a period of three years all building material may be admitted into the port of San Francisco free of all duty." What a lightning change! "Unconstitutional" no longer; neither is it "impossible" to enact such legislation; the "will-not- delay" rebuilding plea does not hold in California as in Washing- ton. When driven on by the Protectionists' party whip, they dared not vote to thus "tinker with the tariff," but when bidding for votes at home and confronted with the terrible state of affairs caused by the trust "hold-up," they ceased to be "stand-patters" and fall in line with the Democrats in advocating relief from these outrageous "trust prices." The shoe is on another foot now, and the people of California do not like the footwear that the trust offers them. And so they declare, in no uncertain terms, for the very thing which the Democrats offered to give them months ago. Will they get it? It is extremely unlikely as long as trust-controlled Republican leaders stand guard over the Dingley tariff, which prevents them from building their homes, paving their streets, clothing their families, or even feeding themselves, except at prices laid down by the trusts. FREE LIZARDS UNDER DINGLEY TARIFF, BUT NO FREE BUILDING MATERIAL FOR THE HOMELESS. (T. D. 27549.) DRIED LIZARDS. Decision of the United States Circuit Court for the southern district of New York in Wing On Wo v. United States (T. D. 27496) acquiesced in. Treasury Department, August 7, 1906. Sir : The Department is in receipt of a report of the United States attorney for the southern district of New York in which he states that the case of Wing On Wo v. United States (suit 4154; T. D. 27496) was recently decided in the United States Circuit Court for that district adversely to the Government, The merchandise in suit consisted of lizards dressed and dried while stretched on pieces of bamboo. Duties were assessed thereon at the rate of 10 per cent, ad valorem as an unenumerated unmanu- factured article under section 6 of the act of July 24, 1897. The importer protested, claiming free entry under paragraph 548 of the same act, under the enumeration for drugs, such as dried insects, etc., which claim Was sustained by the United States Circuit Court in this case on the evidence presented. The Attorney-General advises the Department that no further proceedings will be directed in this case. You are therefore hefeby authorized to forward the usual certified statement for a refund ol the duties exacted in excess in settlement thereof. Respectfully, James B. Reynolds, Assistant Secretary. (39369.) Collector of Customs, New York, 140 PROPOSED SHIP SUBSIDY LEGISLATION. The people throughout the United States demanded, and the civilized world expected, that Congress would untax, as stated, imported structural material to aid these earthquake sufferers whenever they should rebuild in the United States. The newspapers, with the fewest exceptions, appealed to Con- gress. A few are quoted : . * Says a contemporary; "To reconstruct San Francisco hundreds of thousands of tons of steel, millions of feet of lumber and many thousands of barrels of cement will be needed, to say nothing of glass and other building material. Steel, lumber, cement and glass are absolute necessities in vast quantities to rebuild shops, factories, warehouses and the tenements of rich and poor in San Francisco. It is a monstrous abuse of the taxing power to impose heavy duties on these articles, which can be produced as cheaply in this country as in any other at a profit to the producer. The whole nation groans and sweats under the burden. If there were no tariff the excessive cost of transporta- tion would in any event bear hardly upon the distressed people of the Pacific Coast, but in the shadow of their great catastrophe the added tariff exactions — $11.20 per ton on steel; $2 per thousand on lumber; eight cents a hundred pounds on cement; anywhere from 40 to 60 per cent, on glass — take on a form of barbarous cruelty." There is a general sentiment against subjecting San Francisco to the burdens of the tariff in rebuilding. Even that pattest of stand- patters, Dalzell, of Pennsylvania, is willing to lead a movement to free the city of these burdens. And the burdens that it is agreed bear so heavily on San Francisco, bear just as heavily on every man in the United States who builds or rents a home or who lives under a roof. — Louisville Courier Journal, May 1, 1906. The Courier Journal was charitable to Mr. Dalzell He was, and is, a Stand-Patter. He and the Republican party in Congress re- fused to enact any law giving these sufferers any relief from the oppressive Dingley tariff rates, while the money he and his party voted out of the Treasury was used to buy food and clothes. Not a cent could be applied to rebuild their homes in ashes and ruins. Compare for a moment the Dingley tariff — a peace tariff — with what Mr. Blaine said about our Civil War tariff, and instantly reasons for tariff reform at once are apparent. Mr. Blaine said: "Even in the second year of the Civil War, in which we were struggling for life rather than glory, we had come to realize every exaction ascribed to the British system. ( Under the Internal Revenue Act of July 1, 1862) we were levying taxes upon every article which enters into the mouth, or covers the back, or is placed under the foot; taxes on everything which is pleasant to see, hear, feel, smell or taste; taxes upon warmth, light and locomotion; taxes upon every- thing on earth and the waters under the earth; taxes on everything that comes from abroad or is groAvn at home; on the sauce whicli pampers man's appetite, and on the drug that restores him to health ; on the crime which decorates the judge and the rope which hangs the criminal ; on the poor man's salt and the rich man's spice ; on the brass nails of the coffin and the ribbons of the bride." . "The system of internal revenue, of which the foregoing is no exaggeration, proved in all respects effective. Congress rendered the taxes more palatable and less oppressive to the producers <: manufacturers) by largely increasing the duties on imports by the tariff act of July 14, 1862, thus shutting out still more con- clusively all competition from foreign fabrics. "THE INCREASED COST WAS CHARGED TO THE CON- SUMER." THE STEEL TRUST EXPOSED. 141 PRICE OF STEEL RAILS "FIXED." NO MORE. NO LESS. THE POWER TO FIX AND UNFIX PRICES ALSO "FIXED." FIXED PRICE OF RAILS AT $28. New York, April 25. — E. H. Garry, chairman of the board of directors of the United States Steel Corporation, announced today that subsidiary companies of that corporation have fixed the price of steel rails for 1907 at $28 a ton. That is the price now prevailing. The Steel Trust has announced that, in spite of the great demand for rails, which would seem to justify an advance in price, the Trust will be moderate in its exactions and stick to the price of $28. That is eight or ten dollars a ton more than the Trust is glad to accept from foreigners; it is more than twice as much as Charles Schwab has said it cost to make them, and it would be impossible for the Trust to get that price if it were not for the tariff. In view of the difficulty the "stand-patters" have in keeping the tariff discussion down, an increase in the price of steel rails might cause an explosion that would throw the lid and the men who are sitting on it into the air.— Philadelphia Record, April 27, 1906. And our people pay the "fixed" price and are powerless under the present tariff to avoid this servitude. THE STEEL TRUST EXPOSED. EVIDENCE OF E. H. GARY SHOWN TO BE ENTIRELY UNRELIABLE. The Republican campaign book on page 126-7 endorses the evi- dence of E. H. Gary, chairman of the board of directors of the United States Steel Corporation, given before the House Com- mittee on the Merchant Marine. This evidence on export prices was evidently cooked up for partisan purposes to show that the Steel Trust is not protected as highly as the German Steel manu- facturers. The following communication to the "Iron Age" entirely de- molishes the Gary evidence with which the Republican Congres- sional Committee attempts to blind the eyes of Republican voters by putting false evidence in the hands of its speakers and news- papers: (FROM THE "IRON AGE," SEPTEMBER 22.) To the Editor: As is shown in the report of "The Iron Age" of April 19, lOOG, Chairman E. H. Gary of the United States Steel Cor- poration has made partially erroneous statements before the House Committee on the Merchant Marine and Fisheries on April 11 bearing on home and export prices of the German steel industry and on the general industrial conditions in Germany. Mr. Gary has stated as a fact that the home prices of the makers of other steel producing coun- tries are generally higher than the home prices of the manufacturers 142 THE STEEL TRUST EXPOSED. in the United States. This is not correct so far as Germany is con- cerned; the German domestic prices are, on the contrary, considerably lower than the American. For the month of March, 1906, the American prices were per gross ton : Billets , $27.00 to $33.00 Rails 28.00 Bars 33.60 to 41.78 Sheets 44.80 to .58.24 Calculated in dollars, the domestic prices in Germany for the same month of March, 1906, were considerably lower, as follows: Billets $22.98 Rails 27.09 Bars $28.82 to 29.50 Sheets 30.24 to 32.76 The statement was furthermore made with reference to Germany that its steel industry enjoys more extensive and better tariff protec- tion than that of the United States. That, too, is not correct. The following comparison shows, on the contrary, that the American rates are all higher than the German rates: RATES OF DUTY PER GROSS TON. United States. Germany. Steel ingots, blooms, billets and steel bars valued at 1 to l%e. per lb. . .$6.72 to $13.44 $3.63 Steel rails 7.84 6.29 Iron bars, rounds, hoops and bands. .11.20 to 17.92 6.29 Plates and boiler plates 11.20 to 24.64 $7.26 to 10.89 Mr. Gary's statement before the committee with reference to the spread in Germany between domestic and export prices for rails and shapes is also inaccurate. According to the chairman of the St^el Cor- poration, the relation between the domestic and foreign prices is $30 to $24 for rails, and $33.60 to $28 for beams. As a matter of fact, in March, 1906, the German domestic price for rails was $27.09 and the export price $25.40 to $26.61; for shapes the German domestic price was $26.61 and the export price w^as $25.50. A protest must also be entered against Mr. Gary's assertion that in Germany they do not pay more than one-half the American wages. Besides their outlays for private workmen's welfare work, the German manufacturers must bear as an addition to the wages public and social charges of about 100 to 150 marks per man, so that the German w^ork- man is protected against the dangers of old age, sickness, invaliding and accident, and thus has an important pecuniary advantage over the American workman. Quite irrespective of this, the German wages are higher than estimated by Mr. Gary. On the contrary, German w^ages in the iron and steel industry are at least two-thirds of the American wages. The fact must be considered, too, that the German manufacturers try to hold their men in bad times, while the American manufacturers dismiss their men when there is scarcity of work. All that Mr. Gary states concerning the commercial policy of the G;irman Government and the alleged payment of export bounties by it is entirely wrong. The German Government does not pay any ex- port bounties to the iron industry. There can be no question what- ever of an "artificial stimulation" of the industry' by the State in Germany. STAHLWERKS-VERBAND AKTIENGESELLSCHAFT. Dusseldorf, Germany, August 22, 1906. THE STEEL TRUST EXPOSED. 143 RAISE PRICE OF TOOLS. POWER TO FIX AND UNFIX PRICES. TO MAKE TOOLS 5 PER CENT. HIGHER. Atlantic City, N. J., May 3. — The National Machine Tool Builders' Association, in convention here, have decided on a 5 per cent, raise in the price of tools next year. — ^New York Times, May 4, 1906. EXPORT PRICES CUT. OBLIGED TO BUY STEEL ABROAD— OHIO ENGINEER, UNABLE TO SECURE MATERIAL HERE, GOES TO EUROPE FOR SUPPLIES— HE FINDS IT IN GERMANY —CHARTERS A BRITISH VESSEL AND EXPECTS THE TOTAL COST TO BE CHEAPER. ( Special Cable to the Herald. ) The Herald's European edition publishes the following from its correspondent: London, Wednesday. THE SCARCITY OF STEEL IN THE UNITED STATES IN COMPARISON WITH THE DEMAND AND THE INABILITY OF STEEL CONCERNS TO FILL ORDERS FOR QUICK DELIVERY ARE DRIVING MORE STRUCTURAL STEEL BUYERS ABROAD. MR. WARWICK, A CONTRACTING ENGINEER IN OHIO WHO WAS UNABLE TO GET AN ORDER FOR STRUCTURAL STEEL FILLED IN THE TIME REQUIRED BY HIS CONTRACT, WENT TO GERMANY AND PLACED AN ORDER THERE FOR $40,000 TO $50,000 WORTH OF MATERIAL. THEN HE CAME TO LON- DON AND CHARTERED A VESSEL TO TAKE IT TO AMERICA. HE EXPECTS TO HAVE HIS STEEL DELIVERED IN OHIO CHEAPER THAN IT WOULD HAVE COST HIM IN THE UNITED STATES. AMERICANS TO INSTALL RUSSIAN TELEPHONES. St. Petersburg, November 16, 1902. An American tender to install underground telephones in the city for 315,000 rubles has been accepted by the authorities. The tender was on lower terms and easier conditions of payment than the offers of other bidders for the work. Mr. Henry W. Lamb, a prominent sheet-metal manufacturer of Boston, testified before the Industrial Commission as follows: "The tariff trusts sell all their goods abroad cheaper than they do here, and this they are enabled to do by the protective tariff. If goods are imported into this country a duty must be paid, which enhances the price; the trusts are therefore able to a certain extent to extort from the consumers here more than they can secure if they sell abroad. They do desire to sell abroad, and they therefore sell abroad at a much lower price than to corresponding consumers in this country. 144 WHAT SENATOR DEPEW SAYS. WHAT SENATOR DEPEW SAYS FIFTY MEN IN THE UNITED STATES CAN DO. "Fifty men in these United States have it in their power, by reason of the wealth which they control, to come together within twenty four hours and arrive at an understanding by which every wheel of trade and commerce may be stopped and every electric key struck dumb. Those fifty men can paralyze the whole country, for they can control the circulation of the currency and create a panic when- ever they win."— Pilot, Oct., 1895. Mr. Depew is a leading Republican who has always stood for laws that make this condition entirely possible. Does it in 1906 Lake fifty men to "hold up" 85,000,000 of people? JEFFERSON ON PROPERTY. One hundred years ago, when Thomas Jefferson was in Paris watching the progress of the French Revolution, he came to the conclusion that it was a great evil to allow a few people in a country to hold or control the bulk of the property. In a letter written at that time to his friend, the Rev. James Madison, Jefferson said: "I am conscious that an equal division of property is imprac- ticable, but the consequences of this enormous inequality produce great misery to the bulk of mankind. Legislators cannot invent too many devices for subdividing property, only taking care to let the subdivisions go hand in hand with the natural affections of the human mind. The descent of propert}^ of every kind, therefore, to all the children, or to all the brothers and sisters, or other rela- tions, in equal degree, is a politic measure and a practicable one. Another means of silently lessening the inequality of property is to exempt all from taxation below a certain point, and to tax the higher portions or property in geometrical progression as they rise. Whenever there is in any country uncultivated lands and unem- ployed poor, it is clear that the laws of property have been so far extended as to violate natural right. The earth is given as a common stock for man to labor and live on. If for the encour- agement of industry we allow it to be appropriated, we must take care tliat other employment be provided to those excluded from the i'P[)ropriation. If we do not, the fundamental riglit to labor the eartli returns to the unemployed. It is too soon yet in our country to s.iy that every man who cannot find employment, but who can llnd uncultivated 1 vnd, shall be at liberty to cultivate it, paying a moderate rent. But it is not too soon to provide by every possible me HIS that as few as possible shall be witliout a little portion of bind. The small landholders are the most precious p.irt of a State." It is to be feared that we are drifting away from these ideas of t'le father of American democracy. We liave killed the income tax, and our whole tax system boars more heavily upon the poor than it does upon the rich. We have adopted Jefferson's ideas as to the descent of property, but we allow great corporations and alien landlords to hold more th.an their fair share of the lands of the country. Everything pos- sible should be done to make it easy for a poor man to get a home or a farm. Home owners make good citizens and good citizens con- stitute a State.— .4*707? fa Constitution, Aug. 1, 1895. BRYAN ON ROOSEVELT. 145 BRYAN ON ROOSEVELT'S ADMINISTRATION. St. Louis, Mo., Sept. 12, 1906. — A tremendous ovation was ten- dered William J. Bryan by the 12,000 people gathered in the Coliseum last night when he stepped upon the platform and took his seat. The ovation continued four minutes and was finally silenced by National Democratic Committeeman William A. Roth- well, who cut short his speech of introduction and presented Mr. Bryan with a wave of his hand. Mr. Bryan said in part: "You have cheered enough to cheer my heart, and I am glad to be here. I have been trying to find home for more than a week and I have found it so homelike everywhere that I can liardly tell where I live. ROOSEVELT APPROPRIATES DEMOCRATIC POLICIES. "Now, I want to show you it is better to trust the Democratic principles' to the Democratic party than to trust them to one man whose party denounces him for following them. I want to remind you that the most popular act of Mr. Roosevelt's adminis- tration was his bringing peace between two nations. He settled the coal strike after a loss of $99,000,000 to employers, employes and the public. It was a grand act. I applaud him for it. But wliere did he get his doctrine — in the Republican platform? No. He got it from the Democratic platform and I wrote the plank myself. If he could gain popularity by settling one strike that cost $99,000,000, why ought not our party have some credit for proposing a plan which if put into a law, would have made the strike unnecessary? Why hasn't the Republican party followed it up by making a national law that will make it unnecessary for a man to starve his wife and children in order to get justice? If the President can become the only popular man in the Republican party because he does something spasmodically along Democratic lines, what would be the popularity of the man who does some- thing and has always been a Democrat? "Where did Mr. Roosevelt find his mandate for his action regarding the rate bill? He had to go to the Democratic platform. The most important part of the Elkins bill is the penitentiary sentence for its violation. "The railroads have been the most corrupting influence in politics in the past twenty years. By the use of passes they have packed conventions. This law was suggested by the Democratic party. I shall soon have occasion to talk on railroads again, but tonight I want to impress it upon you that the railroad question solution was the product of the Democratic party. "The President has now been in office almost five years. How many trust magnates are in the penitentiary? We have a great many trusts in this country violating the law. My friends, I ask you to figure out on the basis of the number of trust magnates imprisoned during the past five years, how many generations will it take to solve the trust question?" 146 HISTORY COMMERCE ACT, 1887. HISTORY COMMERCE ACT, 1887. Beginning in the 44th Congress (1876) down to 1887, when the Commerce Act -became the law, the Democrats in Congress, led by that great lawyer and statesman. Judge Reagan, fought for railroad legislation. Two or three Democratic Houses passed the Reagan bills, and sent them to a Republican Senate, which killed them. Finally, the encroachments by the railroads became so great that the people throughout the country demanded proper legislation, and at once. As shown by the printed resolution in the Congressional Record (Mr. Reagan's Speech), the Grangers in the State of Illinois met and in convention condemned Senator CuUom, Chairman of the Commerce Committee of the Senate, for defeating the Reagan hills, with the result that the Cullom bill was reported, passed the Senate, came to the House, was, properly, referred to the House Committee, and the House substituted, for the Cullom Bill, the Reagan or House bill. Later conferees were appointed, but Congress adjourned without an agreement being reached. At the succeeding session an agreement was reached and the Cullom- Reagan or Substitute bill, composed of features of both bills, passed both Houses, and became the Commerce Act of 1887, which Mr. Cleveland approved February 4, 1887. When the Conference report was called up on January 14, 1887, in the Senate, Mr. Hale moved to recommit the bill, but this was defeated by the following vote: nays, 36; yeas, 25. The vote was: Ayes— 25. Aldiich, Frye, Mitchell, Piatt, Blair, Gray, - of Oregon , Sawyer, Brown, Hale, Mitchell, Sewell, Cameron, Hampton, of Pennsylvania . Sherman, Chance, Hawley, Morgan, Spooner, Cheney, Hoar, Morrill, Williams. Evarts, Mahone, Payne, Nays— 36. Allison, Cullom, Jones, Sanesbury, Beck, Dolph, of Arkansas, Teller, Berry, Edmunds, Jones, Vance. Blackburn, Eustis, of Missouri, Vest, Bowen, Fair, McMillin, Walthall, Call, George, Manderson, Whitthorne, Cockrell, Gibson, Palmer, Willson, Coke, Gorman, Plumb, of Iowa, Colquitt, Harris, Pugh, Wilson, Conger, Ingalls,, Sabin, of Maryland. This Cullom-Reagan bill passed the Senate by the following vote: yeas, 43; nays, 15. The nay vote was: Aldrich, Chance, Hoar, Payne, Blair, Cheney, Mitchell, Piatt, Brown, Evarts, of Pennsylvania. Williams. Cameron, Hampton, Morrill, — Congressional Record, 49th Congress, 2nd Session, Vol. 18, Part 1, P. 859. CONFERENCE REPORT ON COMMERCE ACT, 1887. 147 CONFERENCE REPORT ON COMMERCE ACT, 1887. The Commerce Act of 1887 was a compound measure made up from the Cullom and Reagan bills. The conferees of the Senate, Messrs. Cullom, Isham G. Harris (Dem.), and Mr. Piatt (Rep), of Connecticut, dissenting, made a report to the Senate. In doing so, Mr. Cullom said: INTERSTATE COMMERCE ACT, 1887. Mr. President, during the last days of the last session of Congress a conference was appointed by the two House upon the bill (S. 1532) to regulate commerce. The conferees on the part of the Senate have instructed me to make a report, which I send to the desk. The President pro tempore. The conference report will be read. The Chief Clerk read as follows: "The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendment of the House of Representatives to the bill (S. 1532) to regulate commerce having met, after full and free con- ference, have agreed to recommend, and do recommend to their respective Houses as follows:" Mr. Cullom. The conferees report an amendment to tlie Senate bill in the nature of a substitute. P. 171. The conference report is as follows: The committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendment of the House of Representatives to the bill (S. 1532) to regulate commerce, having met, after full and free conference have agreed to recommend, and do recommend, to their respective Houses as follows: That the house recede from its amendment and agree to the bill of the Senate, with the following amendment thereto, in the nature of a substitute, and that the Senate agree to the same: AMENDMENT. Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the following: — Congressional Record, 49th Congress, 2nd Session, Vol. 18, Part 1, P. 169. Then followed the bill as it passed both houses and became law — the Commerce Act of 1887. STATEMENT OF CONFEREES ON THE PART OF THE HOUSE. (Required by Rule XXIX.) The House conferees on the disagreeing votes between the two Houses on the bill of the Senate "to regulate commerce," and the bill of the House to "regulate commerce among the States, and j)revent unjust discrimination by common carriers," make the follow- ing detail statement of the changes between the House bill and the substitute herewith appended. The action of the House being to adopt a single amendment, your committee, without attempting to call attention to the precise changes made in each section of the bill, report to the House the substance and effect of the changes made as follows: The bill of the House applied only to the transportation of freight, and the bill as adopted embraces the transportation of passengers as well as freight. 148 CONFERENCE REPORT ON COMMERCE ACT, 1887. The bill of the House was limited to the regulation of such trans- portation on railroads. The bill as reported provides for the regula-^ tion of the transportation of property partly by railroad and partly' by water, when both are used under common control, management, or arrangement for a continuous carriage or shipment from one State or Territory of the United States, or the Distict of Columbia, to any other State or Territory of the United States, or the District of Columbia. The bill which we report defines the term "railroad," as used in it, to include all bridges, ferries, used or operated with any railroad, . which is in addition to the provisions of the House bill. The second section of the substitute bill adopts substantially the provision of the House bill against discrimination by special rates, rebates, drawbacks, and other devices, and declares that any one making such discrimination shall be guilty of unjust discrimination, which is hereby prohibited and declared unlawful. The third section of the substitute embraces substantially the provisions of the bill of the House, in requiring equal facilities and advantages for all shippers, without exception, and has a provision requiring equal facilities for the interchange of traffic with all other railroads for the carriage of property and passengers, and forbids any discrimination by one railroad in the facilities furnished against any other railroad. It contains a clause declaring that this act shall not be construed as requiring such common carrier to give the use of its tracks or terminal facilities to any common carrier engaged in like business. The fourth section adopts substantially the provisions of the House bill on the long and short haul, with the following proviso: That upon application to the commission appointed under the provisions of this act such common carrier may, in special cases, after investigation by the commission, be authorized to charge less for a longer than for a shorter distance for the transportation of passengers and property, and that the commission may, from time to time, prescribe the extent to which such common carrier may be relieved from the operation of this section. The fifth section of the substitute bill is a copy of the clause in the House bill prohibiting pooling, with an amendment striking out the words of the House bill "by dividing," and inserting in lieu thereof the words "or to divide," and with the addition of the words in line 3, after the word "combination" "with any other common carrier or carriers." The sixth section is a substitute for the provisions of the House and Senate bills in relation to the publication of schedules showing the rates, fares, and charges for the transportation of passengers and property. Instead of requiring the rates to be posted up, as was provided in the House bill, it requires that, after ninety days from the passage of the act, every common carrier subject to its provisions shall have printed, and keep for public inspection, schedules showing such rates, fares, and charges, and, in addition to requiring the railroads to give publicity at all of the depots on their several lines it gives authority to the commission, where it is proper and necessary to require them to give publicity to their rates to other places beyond the lines of their several railroads. It also provides that the rates, fares, and charges shall not be raised except after ten days of public notice, but that they may be reduced without previous public notice; the notice, however, shall be simultaneous with the reduction itself, and it requires that all common carriers subject to the provisions of this act shall file with the commission provided for in the bill copies of the schedules which have been established, and shall promptly notify said commission of all changes made in the same; and that they shall file with the commission copies of all contracts, arrangements, or agreements with other common carriers in relation to traffic affected by the provisions of this bill; and in cases where passengers and freights pass over continuous lines or routes operated by more than one common carrier, and the several common carriers operating such lines of routes CONFERENCE REPORT ON COMMERCE ACT, 1887. 149 establish joint tariff of rates or fares or charges for such continuous lines or routes, copies of such joint tariffs shall also be filed with the commission, and made public, if so directed by the commission. The section also provides that where common carriers subject to i its provisions shall neglect or refuse to file or publish its schedules of tariffs or rates and fares, or any part of the same, such common carrier shall, in addition to the penalties herein prescribed, be subject to a writ of mandamus, to be issued by any circuit court of the United States, in any judicial district wherein the principal office of the common carrier is situated, or wherein such offense may be committed, requiring a compliance with the provisions of the act. The seventh section of the substitute bill contains substantially the provisions of the first part of the second section of the House bill in relation to the continuous carriage of property and persons from the place of shipment to the place of destination. The eighth section of the substitute bill contains the substance of the seventh section of the House bill in regard to damages and counsel's fees, but expressed in somewhat different language. The ninth section of the substitute bill is a new section, which provides that persons claiming to have been damaged by the action of common carriers may proceed for recovery of their damages either in the courts of the United States or before the commission herein provided for, as they may elect, but not before both tribunals. This section, which gives jurisdiction to courts of the United States, does not give jurisdiction in civil suits to the State courts, as was pro- vided for in the House bill. This section of the substitute bill also provides that the courts shall have power to compel any director, officer, receiver, trustee, or agent of the corporation or company defendant in such suit to attend, appear, and testify in such case, and may compel the produc- tion of the books and papers of such corporation or company party to any such suit ; and it provides further that the claim that any such testimony or evidence may tend to criminate the person giving such evidence shall not excuse such witness from testifying; but that such evidence or testimony shall not be used against such person on the trial of any criminal proceeding. _ The tenth section of the substitute bill makes it a penal offense to violate any of the provisions of this act, and is substantially the eighth section of the House bill, except that it puts the maximum of the fine which may be imposed at the sum of $5,000 instead of $2,000, as was provided for by the House bill. The eleventh and subsequent sections to the twenty-first, inclusive, of the substitute bill contain the substance of the Senate's bill pro- viding for a commission, except as modified by the provisions of the substitute bill herein cited. It provides for a commission to consist of five persons whose term of office shall be for six years, except for tne first appointments, which are to be for two, three, four, five, and six years. The members of this commission are to be appointed by the President by and with the advice of the Senate. Their principal office shall be in Washing- ton, but they may hold sessions at other places than Washington, and a single member of the commission may take testimony anywhere, as may be directed by the commission. These commissioners have salaries of $7,500 each. The commission has the power to appoint a secretary, with an annual salary of $3,500, and has authority to employ and fix the compensation of such other employes as it may find necessary to the proper performance of its duties, subject to the approval of the Secretary of the Interior. The nineteenth section of the Senate's bill, providing for a reference of the question of pooling to the commission, is not embraced in this substitute. Section 22 of the substitute bill, among other things, provides that nothing in this act contained shall in any way abridge or alter the remedies now existing at common law or by statute, but that the provisions of this act are in addition to such remedies, with a proviso that no pending litigation shall in any way be affected by this act. 150 CONFERENCE REPORT ON COMMERCE ACT, 1887. Section 24 of the substitute bill provides that the act shall go into effect sixty days after its passage, as in the opinion of your committee it was deemed best to give the railroads sufficient time to prepare their schedules and to modify their management in accordance with the provisions of this bill. The appointment of the commission, however, is to be made at once, as it has to be organized, and as said schedules of rates and charges have to be filed with said commission. J. H. REAGAN, CHARLES F. CRISP, A. J. WEAVER, Managers on the part of the House. President Cleveland approved the bill and it became the law. SUPREME COURT DECISIONS. March 30, 1896. For the first time the Supreme Court of the United States decided that Congress had not clothed the Inter- state Commission with power to unfix and fix rates, although that body had since 1887, when the law was approved by Mr. Cleveland, exercised the right to set aside and fix rates in proper proceedings. In exactly three months and eight days after this decision, the Democratic party (July 8, 1896) nominated Wm. J. Bryan for President, and on this question declared: • DEMOCRATS FIRST AGAIN. "The absorption of wealth by the few, the consolidation of our rail- road systems, and formation of trusts and pools require stricter con- trol by the Federal Government of those arteries of commerce. Vve demand the enlargement of the powers of the Interstate Commission, and such restrictions and guarantees in the control of railroads as will protect the people from robbery and oppression." The Republican platform of 1896 was silent on this subject. Since then and previous thereto, the Democratic party has con- tinuously demanded railroad legislation. HISTORY RAILROAD LAW, 1906. The present Congress enacted a railroad law, amending the Act of 1887. It would have been law, had the Republicans been so disposed, years ago. So controlled by the railroads were many of the Republican Senators, that this bill could not have passed this (59th) Congress without the unanimous action of the Democrats, and the Presi- dent's "big stick," which drove and kept enough Republican Senators in line, to pass it. At a very acute stage of the contest the President found it necessary to request a conference with leading Democratic Senators. They gladly conferred with him and the press made great note of this unusual act. His position at that time was that which for years the Democrats had occupied, but he was forced by the opposition in his own party to give ground, and to break faith with his Democratic conferees by consenting to the "broad court review." In this way, the present law — the very best that the people could get from a Republican Congress — was passed. Nothing CONFERENCE REPORT ON COMMERCE ACT, 1887. 151 was left undone by the Democrats in either House that could possibly and honorably force an unwilling Republican Senate to act. If the Republican Senate had done half its duty, there would have been a railroad bill passed into law long before 1887. The Republican party has been in complete control of the Government since March 4, 1897, and is specially chargeable with the failure to amend, broaden and strengthen the Act of 1887. There had been two decisions of the Supreme Court (March 30, 1896, and March 24, 1897) holding that the Commission had not been given the power by Congress to fix and unfix rates. Other decisions during and since this time by the same court had nullified some of the most valuable powers theretofore exercised by the Commission under the Act of 1887, yet the Republican party during all this time have failed and refused to enact legislation covering the rate question, and other evils annually pointed out by the Commission, and by Democrats in each Congress. The Townsend-Esch bill was reported last Congress. It passed the House. It was a Republican measure. While notoriously incomplete and insufficient, it had some merit. It went to a Republican Senate, and as usual, died. The Democrats in the House tried to amend this bill to make it a better law, but without avail. They then voted for it, as the best that could be passed in a Republican House, and insuffi- cient as it was, it was too much for a Republican Senate to pass. That Senate had killed the Littlefield anti-trust bill a few years before. It had killed the Townsend-Esch bill, and the Democrats were determined, if possible, to force the Senate to pass at least the Hepburn bill, or fight the question out, if it took all summer. The result was the old Act of 1887 was amended by the recent law, which is now in effect. Even the Hepburn bill does not afford anything like a full or adequate measure of relief. Practically, all amendments designed to perfect it were voted down in the House, and the Republicans in the Senate not only sought to destroy it with the so-called "broad court review" but defeated every effort on the part of the Democrats, and those few Republicans who really desired effective legislation, to strengthen or complete it. Urgent recommendations of the Commission were ignored, and from the subjoined statement of the vital matters excluded from the bill, will be seen how serious have been the omissions of the Re- publican Congress in the matter of rate legislation, and how much more effective the law could and should have been made. For its defects and omissions, the Republicans in the House and Senate are alone responsible. For its perfection the people must look to the Democratic party. RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMISSION FOR LEGISLA- TION NOT PROVIDED FOR IN THE AMENDED LAW. The Commission in 1903 recommended Congress to authorize that a valuation of railway property be made; but the new law makes no provision authorizing the Commission to ascertain the 152 CONFERENCE REPORT ON COMMERCE ACT, 1887. value of railroad property. This is most essential and its omission may, and probably will, lead to an assault on the law. The amended law does not confer upon the Commission the broad powers to revise rates upon its own motion in proper proceedings, or to fix absolute rates under any circumstances whatever, though the Commission informed Congress that those powers are positively essential. Previous to the Maximum Rate Case the Commission, with Judge Cooley as Chairman, exercised this power. Maintaining the relation of rates to competing localities is fully as important as the making of reasonable rates in them- selves, and the Commission has often requested Congress for such power; but the new law makes no specific provision granting such authority to the Commission. Changing the classification of an article of freight usually changes the rates under which the traffic is transported. Sweep- ing changes in rates are often effected by a change in classifica- tion. Though the Commission has repeatedly recommended that it should be empowered to prescribe a reasonable classification, the amended law makes no provision conferring such authority upon the Commission. The long and short haul section of the old law was made practically inoperative by court interpretation, owing to the broad construction given the phrase "under similar circumstances and conditions." The Commission has called attention to this defect in the law and has recommended that it be given the power to determine what conditions are dissimilar; but the amended law ignored those recommendations and the necessity of their enactment into law. Under the old law the railway companies withheld important testimony upon the hearings before the Commission which they subsequently offered on the trial before the court. In this manner they succeeded in reversing the Commission and in delaying the administration of justice, although the Supreme Court vigor- ously condemned the practice. This very serious defect remains in the new law. The Commission has for many years urged legislation to reduce the long and increasing roll of slaughter of employees and passengers by the enactment of a law compelling carriers to adopt the block system, but the amended law has failed to include such a provision. EXTRAVAGANT APPROPRIATIONS. 153 EXTRAVAGANT APPROPRIATIONS. FIFTY-NINTH CONGRESS. The official statement of the volume of appropriations made by the first session of the Fifty-ninth Congress, prepared by Thomas P. Cleaver and James C. Courts, chief clerks of the Senate and House appropriation committees, shows that the grand total is $879,589,186.16. The details by bills are as follows: Agriculture $9,930,440 .00 Army 71,817,165.08 Diplomatic and consular 3,091,094. 17 District of Columbia 10,138,672. 16 Fortification 5,053,993 .00 Indian 9,260,599 . 98 Legislative, executive and judicial 29,681,919.30 Military Academy 1,664,707 . 67 Naval 102,091,670.27 Pension 140,245,500.00 Post-office 191,695,998 . 75 Sundry civil 98,538,770.32 Deficiency appropriations 39,129,035 . 45 Miscellaneous appropriations 27,173,299.01 Permanent appropriations 140,076,320.00 Grand total $879,589,185. 16 There was no river and harbor appropriation at this session. If the same amount for rivers and harbors which was appropriated in 1898 had been appropriated the total would have reached $900,421,598.07. And though there were no appropriations for rivers and harbors this year, yet the total appropriations exceed those of 1898 by $350,854,105.86. The total of appropriations for 1898 was $528,735,105.86. The details by bills for that year were as follows: Agricultural $3,182,902 . 00 Army 23,129,344.30 Diplomatic and consular 1,695,308 . 76 District of Columbia 6,186,991 .06 Fortifications 9,517,141 .00 Indian 7,674,120.89 Legislative, etc 21,690,766 . 90 Military Academy 479,572 . 83 Navy 33,003,234. 19 Pensions (including deficiencies therefor) 141,263,880.00 Post-office 95,665,338 . 75 River and harbor (including amounts in sundry civil, deficiency, and special acts) 20,832,412.91 Sundry civil (exclusive of amounts for rivers and harbors) 34,490,370.47 Deficiencies (exclusive of amounts for pensions and rivers and harbors) 9,096,417 .34 Total $407,907,801 .40 Miscellaneous 749,057 . 90 Total regular annual appropriations $408,656,859 . 30 Permanent annual appropriations (estimates) 120,078,220.00 Grand total $528,735,079 . 30 — Cong. Record, p. 10,124. 154 EXTRAVAGANT APPROPRIATIONS^. The most striking increases are those providing for the army, navy, sundry civil, and deficiencies. 1898. 1907. • Army $23,129,344.30 $71,817,165.08 Navy 33,003,234.19 - 102,091,670.27 Deficiencies 9,096,417 . 34 39,129,035 . 45 Sundry civil 34,490,370 . 47 98,538,770 . 32 The combined appropriations for the army and navy for 1898 were $56,132,578.49. The combined appropriations for the army and navy for 1907 are $173,908,835.35. This shows an increase of $117,776,257.86 in these two items alone. The expense of the army and navy is therefore more than three times as great now as it was in 1898. In discussing these extravagant appropriations, Mr. Livingston, the ranking Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, said in a statement published in the Congressional Record of July 3, 1906: "This growth in appropriations sustains the contention that the Republican party stands for extravagance in public expenditures, in order to use that extravagance as a cloak for their more objectionable purpose of maintaining a high protective tariff to' favor the trust combinations of manufacturers of the country. "A reduction of expenditures, they well know, would compel a commensurate reduction in taxation, and to that extent a lowering of the Chinese wall of protection that now surrounds the great body of consumers, who constitute the larger portion of our population, and compel tribute from them to the favored classes. "Much of this extravagance grows out of the practice prevailing with the present Administration of appointing commissions to do what Congress ought to do, and what Congressmen are elected for and paid for; thus delegating the powers constitutionally belonging to Con- gress to others who have no particular relations with, or responsibili- ties to, the public, and do not render an accounting to the taxpayers of this country." DEFICIENCIES— HOW MADE. 155 DEFICIENCIES— HOW MADE. HOW THEY HAVE GROWN IN VIOLATION OF LAW LONG SINCE ENACTED. Section 3679 of the Revised Statutes of the United States provides: "That no Department of the Government shall expend, in any one year, any sum in excess of appropriations made by Congress for that fiscal year, or involve the Government in any contract for the future payment of money in excess of such appropriations." And the Constitution provides that "no money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in pursuance of appropriations made by law;" that is, by act of Congress, since Congress alone has power to lay taxes or appropriate the proceeds thereof. If these laws were obeyed by the Executive Departments there would never be a deficiency at the close of any fiscal year. But for many years they have been systematically violated, and Con- gress has winked at the violation by ratifying the payments made in excess of appropriations, and making new appropriations to cover the excess of expenditures over appropriations. Starting with the year 1898, these deficiency appropriations have been made by Congress as follows: 1898 $8,594,447 1899 347,165,001 1900 46,882,724 1901 13,167,008 1902 13,289,314 1903 24,944,124 1904 19,651,968 1905 25,083,375 1906 38,095,378 Total $537,873,357 These vast sums aggregating more than half a billion dollars were not drawn from the Treasury "in pursuance of appropria- tions made by law," as the Constitution requires, but were spent under the Executive Department before appropriations to meet the expenditures had been made. The effect is that the purse strings are practically taken from Congress and seized by the Executive in violation of the fundamental principle of our Gov- ernment that the people's representatives in the Lower House of Congress, and no other functionary whatever, shall control the purse of the nation. The officers who are responsible for these expenditures in excess of appropriations already have disobeyed the law and should have been, but were not punished. 156 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR. PRODUCTIVITY OF AMERICAN AND FOREIGN LABOR. The Review of the World's Commerce during the year 1901 submitted to Congress by President McKinley and Secretary Hay, January, 1901, states that "the London Spectator of December 29, 1900, quotes 'a competent writer' in a British trade paper as saying: " 'From a careful calculation, made after comparing notes with other observers, and taking the figure 1 to 1^ as representing the producing capacity of the ordinary British workman, I consider the Swiss- German as finely represented by 1% and the Yankee by 2^.'" William M. Evarts, Secretary of State, in his report on the "State of Labor in Europe," 1879, said: "Tlie average American workman performs from one to one and one-half to twice as much work in a given time as the average European worker. This is so important a point in connection with our ability to compete with the cheap labor manufacturer of Europe, tliat it seems at first thought so strange, that I will trouble you with somewhat lengthy quotation from the reports in support thereof: "France — The hours of labor are from eleven to twelve, but an average American workman will accomplish as much in nine hours. (Report, Consul Bordeaux.) "Germany — I am satisfied that an ordinary workman in the United States will do as much again as will one in this district in the same time. (Report, Chemnitz, Saxony.) "An active American workman will do as much work in a given time, at any employment, as two or three German workman. ( Report, Consul Leipsic.) "There can be no question that, speaking in general terms, the quality as well as the quantity, of the work of the German artisan is inferior to that produced by the American. The workman here is inclined to be sluggish, and what he accomplishes is relatively small. (Report, Consul Sonneberg.) CONCLUSION. "One workman in the United States, as will be seen from the fore- going extracts, does as much work as two workmen in most of the countries of Europe. "Within the last fifteen years, we have demonstrated our ability, by the brilliant development of our resources, to exclude, by honest competition, foreign manufactures to a large extent from our shores." Mr. Blaine, Secretary of State, June 25, 1881, reported on our cotton goods trade of the world, said: "Undoubtedly the inequalities in the wages of English and American operatives are more than equalized by the greater efficiency of the latter and their longer hours of labor." He gave several examples as follows: "The wages of spinners and weavers in Lancashire and in Massa- chusetts, according to the foregoing statements, were as follows per week: Spinners, English, $7.20 to $8.40 (master spinners running as high as $12.00) ; American, $7.07 to $10.30. PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR. 15T Weavers, English, $3.84 to $8.64, subject, at the date on which these rates were given, to a reduction of 10 per cent.; American, $4.82 to $8.73. The average wages of employees in the Massachusetts mills are as follows, according to the official returns: Men, $8.30; women, $5.62; male children, $3.11; female children, $3.08. According to Consul Shaw's report, the average wages of the men employed in the Lan- cashire mills on the 1st of January, 1880, was about $8.00 per week, subject to a reduction of 10 per cent.; women from $3.40 to $4.30, subject to a reduction of 10 per cent." The statistician, State Department, Mr. C. S. Hill, to the Tariff Commission stated that our manufacturing in 1882 was $8,000,- 000,000 made by 5,250,000 hands, and that for the same time the product of England was $4,000,000,000 made by 5,140,200 hands, and then said: "Here is the positive proof that American mechanics in the aggre- gate accomplish exactly double the result of the same number of British mechanics. They are, therefore, very justly paid double in wages." On April 24, 1894, Senator Mills, of Texas, delivered a speech in the Senate, in part, as follows: Mr. President, we have the cheapest labor on the globe. We have the poorest paid labor in proportion to the work our laborers do that is to be found on earth. Why so ? Because we work by machinery, and one laborer in this country produces in some cases five, ten, and even over ten times more than is performed by the man who is doing the same work in other countries. Great Britain approaches more closely to us than any other country, but she is behind us. We can produce the things we are producing cheaper than anybody else on earth. I have a statement here to which I want to call the attention of the Senate, the country and especially of the wageworkers. Mulhall's Dictionary of Statistics gives the number of persons employed in manufactures in all the different countries in the world that are manufacturing to any considerable extent, the total value of the product made in each country and the number of persons employed. By dividing the number of hands by the value of the product we get precisely the amount of value turned out by each hand. This statement shows that for 1888 the United Kingdom had 5,189,000 persons employed in manufacture; that they turned out a l)roduct worth $4,100,000,000 and the product per hand was $790. France had 4,443,000 persons employed. They turned out a product valued at $2,425,000,000, or $545 per hand. Germany had 5,350,000 persons employed. They turned out a product valued at $2,915,- 000,000 or $545 per head. Russia had 4,700,000 employed. She turned out a product valued at $1,815,000,000, or $381 per head. I will print this table and will not go over it all. The United States had 3,'837,000 persons employed, who turned out a product valued at $7,215,000,000, or $1880 per head. Department of Labob, Washington, February 6, 1894. My Dear Sir — ^In response to yours of January 18th and January 26th, I have the honor to state that from the various sources which I have been able to consult I estimate the average annual earnings in all manufacturing industries in the countries named by you to be as follows: 1, United States, $347; 2, Great Britain, $204; 3, France, $175; 4, Belgium, $165; 5, Germany, $155; 6, Austria, $150; 7, Switzerland, $150; 8, Italy, $130; 9, Spain, $120; 10, Russia, $120. 158 PRODUCTIVITY OF LABOR. The above estimates have been made, so far as the United States is concerned, from the actual number of persons employed and the total wages paid to them as shown by the census of 1880; for Great Britain they have been made largely from British figures, and for the other countries the estimates have been made from statements originating with foreign authorities and verified by facts collected by agents of this department. While the actual figures given in the above esti- mates may not be more than approximately correct, the proportions, I feel sure, are fair. I am, very respectfully, CARROLL D. WRIGHT, Commissioner. Hon. Roger Q. Mills, United States Senate. The average annual rate of wages is for 1880. The number of hands and value of product is for 1888. The relative comparison is the same. The wages in all countries would be higher in 1888 than in 1880. But the relative differences would be substantially the same. «»»»♦» » I am not talking about 1890. I am taking the annual average wages paid in 1880 and comparing it with the product of 1888. It makes no difference, as I said before, that the wages are of 1880 and the product of 1888, for relatively they are the same thing. The wages for 1888 would have been a little larger in all the countries, but it is amply sufficient for the purposes which I have in view. Now, let us apply this. Seven hundred and ninety dollars' worth of product per hand in Great Britain cost in wages $204. In France $545 worth of product cost $175 for wages. In Germany $545 cost $155 for wages. In the United States $1,880 worth of product cost $347 for wages. Now, our friends point to the fact that the workman in the United States gets $347 for his annual work; in Great Britain he gets $204; in France he gets $175; in Germany $155. Ours is the high-priced workman, and these are paupers, but when we come to look at the fact, that our people are paid less than the foreigner for the amount of work they turn out, the boot is found on the other foot. Now, let us carry this thing out. Let us take the labor cost in other countries of $1,880 worth of product and compare it with ours. The $1,880 worth of goods imported into the United States is the thing that is to test the condition of our workmen. When the goods come here then the labor cost of a given amount of goods is compared with the labor cost of the same amount of goods in a foreign country. One thousand eight hundred and eighty dollars' worth of goods cost in this country $347 for labor. Table Showing Number of Employees, Total Value of Product, Value of Product Per Employee, Annual Average Wages Paid Per Employee in Manufacturing Industries in the Countries Named Below in 1880. Total value of Countries. product. United Kingdom $4,100,000,000 France 2,425,000,000 Germany 2,915,000,000 Russia 1,815,000,000 Austria 1,265,000,000 Italy 605,000,000 Spain 425,000,000 Belgium 510,000,000 Switzerland 160,000,000 United States 7,215,000,000 Product Annual Number of per wages employees. hand. paid. 5,189,000 $790 , $204 4,443,000 545 175 5,350,000 545 155 4,760,000 381 120 3,090,000 409 150 2,281,000 265 130 1,167,000 364 120 953,000 545 165 370,000 433 150 3,837,000 1,880 347 WHO PAYS THE TARIFF TAX* 159 WHO PAYS THE TARIFF TAX? ■s THE "FATHERS." 1 The Republicans speak of the "fathers," who framed the first tariff so as to "encourage and protect" our "manufacturers." We have seen that this tariff was practically no tariff compared with the Dingley rates, or any other Republican tariff ever framed. But in the House even Mr. Madison, one of the "fathers," warned Congress not to be "oppressive" in framing this (insignificant) tax rate and the Senate reduced some of the rates in the House bill. What did the "fathers" then say about "who pays the tariff tax?" Alexander Hamilton said: "Duties of this nature evidently amount to a virtual bounty on the domestic fabrics." John Quincy Adams said: , "The duty constitutes a part of the price of the whole mass of the article in the market. It is substantially paid upon the article of domestic manufacture as well as upon that of foreign production. Upon one it is a bounty, upon the other a burden, and the repeal of the tax must operate as an equivalent reduction of the price of the article, whether foreign or domestic." Mr. Clay: "If there is any truth in political economy, it cannot be that result will agree with the prediction, for we are instructed by our experience that the consumption of any article is in proportion to the reduction of its price, and that, in general, it may be taken as a rule that the duty upon an article forms a part of its price." Andrew Jackson: "There is, perhaps, no one of the powers conferred on the Federal Government so liable to abuse as the taxing power. "The taxes which it lays upon commerce being concealed from the real payer in the price of the article, they do not so readily attract the attention of the people as smaller sums demanded from them directly by the tax gatherer, and as many of these duties are imposed upon arti- cles of necessity which are daily used by the great body of the people, the money raised by these imposts is drawn from their pockets." Senator Sherman said: "I say it, and I stand by it, that as a general rule the duties paid on imports operate as a tax upon the consumer." Senator Edmunds: "In the main, all these taxes come out, of the consumer, particularly internal revenue tax, and p^rhapg all of ihese substantially." 160 WHO PAYS THE TARIFF TAXf Mr. Payne, the Republican leader of the House, March 27, 1897, said: "I want to state the proposition again. I do not want any Democrat to have any dispute or trouble about it. (1) Where we do not pro- duce an article in the United States, or (2) produce a very small pro- portion, like 10 or 12 per cent., when we put a duty on that article it becomes a revenue duty purely. Such a duty raises the price almost to the full extent of the duty, and the consumer has to pay it ; but when you put a duty on an article that we can produce in the United States and put on duty enough to allow our people to go into the business, immediately competition takes place and the universal Yankee mind is out for an invention to try to find some way to make it more cheaply, and the price of the article is cheapened in the American market until it gets away down below the former price, and very often away down below the duty." ( Applause on the Republican side. ) Mr. Payne's argument is that the consumer pays the tax in three instances: First, when we levy a tax on the article we do not produce. Second, when we produce 10 or 12 per cent, of such article. Third, when we can produce the article and there is no com- petition. Mr. Payne, in effect, admits the Republican way is ver^y narroiv for the consumer to escape paying the tax at least on the article we can produce. Man's experience is that when foreign com- petition is excluded combinations form and control or entirely destroy competition. The consumer objects to paying a price unreasonable under the circumstances, whether the article is or is not taxed. And the circumstances should not be caused by unfair or unlawful methods. Many public utterances of leading Repub- licans mightily support the contention of the Democrats, that the tariff is a tax and that the "monopolized article" should be untaxed, as suggested by Mr. Sherman, Mr. Hale and other Repub- licans, to free it and liberate and give the people a fair chance to buy in the open market and live like free men. In speaking of a monopoly in steel rails. Representative John H. Gear, of Iowa, January 16, 1880, said: - "To a State whose products are in the main agricultural, as are those of Iowa, anything which enhances the cost of railways, thereby even incidentally in the least degree increasing the expense of the transportation of her products to the seaboard, which is her great market, is a question of great interest to all. In vieAv of their greater strength and durability, which lessened the cost of replacement, all the great trunk railway lines of the country are adopting Bessemer steel rails. The manufacturers of this class of rails in the United States are controlled by a combination of not exceeding, I think, ten firms in number. "This combination is protected by a high and specific tariff, which prevents the importation of foreign rails to any extent, thereby in- creasing the cost of the railways of the country. Without discussing the tariff question in all its bearings, it may well be considered whether it is wise legislation, by a tariff exceptional in its character, to put immense profits into the pockets of a monopoly composed of but few persons at the expense, in directly, not only of Iowa farmers, but of the whole West. It would, therefore, be well to instruct our Senators and Representatives in Congress to examine into this sub- ject with a view to removing by Congressional legislation any dis- criminations which may be found to exist in the tariff on steel rails p-gainst tihe interests of Iowa producers." 'FREE LISTr 161 "FREE LIST," THE MONOPOLIZED ARTICLE TO KILL THE MONOPOLY OR TRUST. HIGH REPUBLICAN AUTHORITY FOR THIS REMEDY. Mr. Hale, now Senator, in the House, 1871, said: "Tlie best Turks Island salt can be purchased at the place produced at 9 and 10 cents per bushel. I believe there is no one question about which the reflection of millions of people day by day is so decided as it is in declaring that there should be no tax upon this article of salt. I have been asked to amend the bill introduced by me, so as to cut down the duty 50 per cent. I do not consent to that. I believe this article should be put upon the free list; that the monopoly which has obtained heretofore for the Onondaga Salt Works — ^as great and com- plete as any monopoly ever planted by the Tudors in England's most despotic times — ought to cease." May 18, 1872, Mr. Garfield said: "American salt for two years past has been sold in Toronto, Canada, at a dollar less per barrel than on the New York side of the lake. That is, we produced it, shipped it across, paying whatever portage, freights and transportation were required, and then sold to our Ca- nadian neighbors at a dollar per barrel less than it was sold to people on our shores. Certainly gentlemen will not want a duty continued that enables that thing to be done." On June 6, 1870, by vote — ayes 112, noes 78, not voting 40 (Globe, vol. 43, p. 4101) — the House passed the following resolution: "Resolved, That the Committee on Ways and Means is hereby in- structed, at the earliest moment practicable, to report a bill to this House to abolish the tariff on coal, so as to secure that important article oi fuel to the people free from all taxes." Among those voting "aye" were Messrs. Allison and Cullom, now Senators; the late Senator Hawley; John A. Logan and B. F. Butler. March 21, 1890, Mr. Sherman said: "If the combination is aided by our tariff laws they should be promptly changed, and, if necessary, equal competition with all the world should be invited in the monopolized article." The late Governor Mount (Republican), said in 1899: "I am against trusts. Remove the protection from the article con- trolled by trusts, thereby permitting open competition, and see how quickly these trusts will come to their senses." October 15, 1899, Mr. Sherman said: "The primary object of a protective tariff is to invite the fullest competition of individuals and corporations in domestic production. If the individuals or corporations combine to advance the price of a domestic product to prevent free result of open and fair competition, 162 ''FREE list: I would without a moment's hesitation reduce the duties on foreign goods competing with them in order to break down tae combination. Whenever this competition is evaded or avoided by combination of individuals or manufacturers, the duty should be reduced and foreign competition promptly invited." Senator Washburn (Republican), in 1899, said: "The Republican party has got to disconnect itself from trusts, and wherever they find the trust is depending for its exorbitant profits largely on protective duties it will be the duty of Republican Con- gressmen and Senators to remove the duties at once. This should be done with the duty on steel rails and tin plate." SENATOR SHERMAN. REDUCE DUTY. INVITE FOREIGN COMPETITION TO CURB TRUSTS. The primary object of a protective tariff is to invite the fullest competition by individuals and corporations in domestic production. If such individuals or corporations combine to advance the price of the domestic product, and to prevent the free result of open and fair competition, I would, without a moment's hesitation, reduce the duties on foreign goods competing with them in order to break down the combination. * * * Whenever this free competition is evaded or avoided hy combination of individuals or corporations, the duty should be reduced and foreign competition promptly invited. — October 15, 1889. BLAINE FOR FREE HIDES. BLAINE TO McKINLEY IN 1890. Washington, April 10, 1890. Deab Mr. McKinley : It is a great mistake to take hides from the free list, where they have been for so many years. It is a slap in the face to the South Americans with whom we are trying to enlarge our trade. It will benefit the farmer by adding five to eight per cent, to the price of his children's shoes. It will yield a profit to the butcher only — ^the last man that needs it. The movement is injudicious from beginning to end — in every form and phase. Pray stop it before it sees light. Such movements as this for protection will protect the Republican party into a speedy retirement. Yours hastily, James G. Blaine. Hon. William McKinley, Chairman Ways and Means Committee. A TAX ON HIDES IS A TAX ON SHOES. 163 A TAX ON HIDES IS A TAX ON THE SHOES WE WEAR. The shoe manufacturers of the United States demand the repeal of the 15 per cent. Dingley tariff tax on hides. They say that tax has only benefited the Cattle Trust and the Beef Trust, they being one and the same thing in effect, if not in fact. The Beef Trust is giant enough to escape punishment — having received a recent "immunity bath" under the Roosevelt administration, and confessedly disobeyed the injunction previously issued against it, and yet the Republicans "stand pat"— say this giant is an "infant" and needs 15 per cent, protection — and refuse to reduce or repeal this tax, and that too in face of the fact, that the shoe manufac- turers say, with this tax repealed, they can make and sell our own people cheaper shoes and increase their export sales. They also say, that imported hides are sold by our Hide Trust cheaper to foreigners, who come to the United States and buy them, than to our own people. The recent Republican Campaign Book (1906) states that the lariff on hides was 5 per cent, under the tariff of 1842 — a protective tariff, and 4 per cent, under the tariff of 1857 — the lowest tariff since 1812 — which the Republicans framed and helped to pass through a Republican House, presided over by a Republican Speaker, General Banks. This book further states, that the tariff was raised to 5 per cent. March, 1861, and increased December, 1861, to 10 per cent., of course to get revenue to carry on the Civil War; that rate remained until 1873, and from that date hides were "free" until the Dingley tariff of 1897 placed a tariff tax of 15 per cent, on hides. Although in the recent Republican Cam- paign Book (1906) it is stated the price of shoes have not been increased under the Dingley tariff, they produce no official table showing this. In the Republican Campaign Book of 1904, page 66, the exact opposite is shown by a table there printed here reproduced: 164 A TAX ON HIDES IS A TAX ON SHOES. Women's split shoes si ^ 1 ^ :^^ :^:«j ^:^ :i^ 0, I' ^ r-tr-( rlr-lrtrlTHr-lr-tr-lr-tr-lrH P4 1 " OOgOOgOOggWNt^Ou3(MiO»ffiMNi«»niN(M(NI-t-t-l-t- § r d a> • :;3>?+i •:;3>>+^ -S^^-m .:3>>4i •:;3>.+^ •:3 >.-ii .C3 >.+J -a Illlllii THE FARMERS AND THE TARIFF. 165 The people of the United States have paid $20,894,094.65 tariff tax on hides and skins imposed by the Dingley tariff, as shown by the following: • Hon. John W. Gaines, M. C, 1325 G Street, Washington, D. C. Sib — In response to your request of today you are respectfully informed that from July 1, 1897, to June 30, 1906, the duty collected on hides and skins was $20,894,094.65. The Dingley Act went into effect on July 24, 1897, so you can see tliat these figures practically cover the entire period that this Act has been effective. Very truly yours, (Signed) J. N. Whitney, Acting Chief of Bureau. Mr. A. W. Rice (National Association of Boot and Shoe Manu- facturers) at a meeting of the National Reciprocity convention, November 19 and 20, 1901, said: "The fact is the English or other foreign manufacturers come into this • market (United States) and buy leather made from South American or other hide^s from 10 to 15 per cent, cheaper than the American manufacturer 'can buy it. They take the leather home, make it into shoes and in competition with American manufacturers send it to Cuba or other foreign coun- tries and that is one of the reasons Cuba imports a large percentage of its shoes from Europe." (Page 68, Printed Proceedings.) THE FARMERS AND THE TARIFF. The able speech of Mr. Rucker, of Missouri, during the last session of Congress shows in another light the benefits of a revenue as against a protective tariff in the increase of farming property as set forth in the following table: Comparison of the Estimated Valuation of the National Wealth of THE United States and the Valuation of Farming Property. Year. Estimated national wealth. Value of all farm property. Total .Percent .p . , Per cent, of ^^^^^ increase. J^ _^ Increase. 1850 $7,135,780,288 $3,967,343,580 1860 16,159,616,068 126.46 7,980,493,063 101.15 1870 30,068,518,507 86.07 8,899,966,578 11.52 1880 43,642,000,000 45.14 12,180,501,538 36.84 1890 65,037,091,197 49.02 16,082,267,689 32.03 1900 95^000,000,000 45.90 20,439,901,164 27.09 Again he shows the value to the farmer of a revenue tariff: Statement Showing Increase in Acreage of Improved Farm Lands AND Value of Live Stock, 1850-1900. •L! Acreage of Years. improved Increase. Value of live Increase, farmlands. stock. Per cent. Per cent. 1850 113,032,614 .... $544,180,516 1860 163,110,720 44.30 1,089,329,915 100.17 1870 188,921,099 15.82 1,220,221,166 12.01 1880 284,771,042 50.73 1,576,884,707 29.22 1890 357,616,755 25.57 2,308,767,573 46.41 1900 414,498,487 15.90 3,075,477,703 33.20 166 THE FARMERS AND THE TARIFF. He further shows that the business of the country increased more under the protective tariff of 1880 than under the present Dingley tariff. Worthy of note here is a comparison of the in- crease in manufacturing in 1850-60 under the very low tariff of that period as against that of the table below. In 1860 the in- crease was 87 per cent., while in 1900 it was only 44.1. Mr. Rueker — I desire to read a table compiled from the Abstract of the Twelfth Census, under the title of "Manufactures." Per cent, oi Date of census. increase. 1890 1880 1900. 1890. 1880. to to 1900. 1890. Number of estab- lishments . 512,276 355,405 253,852 44.1 40.0 Capital $9,831,496,500 $6,525,050,759 $2,790,272,606 50.7 133.8 Wage-earners (av- erage number) . .5,314,539 4,251,535 . 25.0 55.6 Total wages. $2,327,295,545 $1,891,209,696 $947,953,795 23.1 99.5 Men at least 16 year old... 4,114,348 " 3,326,964 23.7 ' Wages $2,019,954,204 $1,659,215,858 21.7 Women »at least 16 • year old .. 1,031,608 803,688 28.4 .... W^ges $281,679,649 $215,367,976 30.8 Children under 16 years old 168,583 120,885 39.5 Wages $25,661,692 $16,625,862 54.3 Value of products .$13,010,036,514 $9,372,378,843 $5,369,597,191 38.8 74.5 Halt here and consider the startling figures that the table given below discloses on the subject of life — food whereby the wage- earner may support his family, the farmer may renew his strength for the plow-share, and the honest citizen of all trades may live and seek the Constitutional-given rights of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." COST OF LIVING COMPARED UNDER WILSON AND DINGLEY TARIFFS. In Bulletin No. 59, issued by the Bureau of Labor in July, 1905, I find this statement "The price of all the more important articles was higher in 1904 than the average for the ten-year period, 1890 to 1899. Bacon was 37.9 per cent, higher, eggs 30.9 per cent, higher, dry or pickled pork 25.8 per cent, higher, fresh pork 24 per cent, higher, corn meal 21.5 per cent, higher, potatoes 21.3 per cent, higher, chickens 20.7 per cent, higher, fiour, 19.9 per cent, higher, salt ham, 18.4 per cent, higher. These "conclusions," reached after a most careful and thorough investigation, are fully justified by this table contained in Dun's Review of recent date. Wholesale cost — Classes of commodities. July 1, 1897. July 1, 1905. Increase. Wilson Act. Dingley Act. Per cent. Breadstuffs $10.59 $18.83 77.87 Meats 7.53 8.61 14.41 Dairy and garden products 8.71 9.98 14.55 Other food articles 7.89 9.92 25.80 Clothing 13.81 17.99 -30.26 Metals 11.64 15.92 36.71 Miscellaneous 12.29 17.06 38.84 Total $72.46 $98.31 35.69 THE FARMERS AND THE TARIFF. 167 Nor is this all — indeed there is no branch which the tariff does not affect. Note here the effect of the low tariff of 1890 on the amount of mortgages as compared with that of the Dingley law of 1900. Here is food for thought for those farmers whose old home is under the shadow of the dreaded mortgage: Mr. Rucker — "I now read a table prepared from information ob- tained at the Census Bureau and from the Abstract of the Twelfth Census : 1890. 1900. Increase. Per cent. Mortgage indebtedness in the United States $6,019,679,985 $8,394,728,733 39.48 Number of mortgaged homes in the United States 1,696,890 2,361,606 39.11 Per cent, of families in United States owning free homes. 34.4 31.8 .... "These statistics show that mortgage indebtedness in the United States increased nearly 40 per cent, between 1890 and 1900; that the number of mortgaged homes increased over 39 per cent., while the percentage of families owning free homes decreased nearly 3 per cent." INCREASED COST OF AGRICULTURAL MACHINERY. Extracts from a speech of the Hon. Adam M. Byrd, of Missis- sippi delivered in the House April 16, 1906. . . . . A manufacturer of farm wagons, in explaining why he advanced prices 25 per cent., said: "Less than two years ago the president of the great steel corpora- tion testified that bar iron and steel could be produced at a profit for $12.50 per ton, and for steel we must pay $40, or over 200 per cent, profit. The steel magnates tell us that when iron was sold at $18 per ton the price was too low and was a breeder of panics; but we all recall the fact that in 1893 the Carnegie properties were valued at less than $10,000,000, and that after five years of panic and $18 prices, Mr. Carnegie sold his interest alone in these properties for $360,000,000. This was 350 per cent, profit in five years, or 72 per cent, annually, and in panic times too. How long, O Lord, how long, will 'the dear people' be thus fooled?" . . . . Speaking of the effect of protection, Alexander Hamilton said: "Duties of this nature evidently amount to a virtual bounty on the domestic fabrics." To the same effect John Quincy Adams wrote: "The duty constitutes a part of the price of the whole mass of the article in the market. It is substantially paid upon the article of domestic manufacture as well upon that of foreign production. Upon one it is a bounty, upon the other a burden, and the repeal of the tax must operate as an equivalent reduction of the price of the article, whether foreign or domestic." . . . . In this connection let me read you a table showing the total amount of four leading products imported into the United States in 1905, together with the actual per cent, rate of duty paid and amount received by the Government : Articles. Value. Duty. Ad valorem rate. Iron and steel products $22,044,937 $8,422,237 38 per cent. Meat products 726,664 254,332 35 " Agricultural 13,876 2,775 20 " Glass and glassware 5,776,669 3,311,715 57 " 168 THE FARMERS AND THE TARIFF. The value of these imports plus cost of the transportation and plus the duty collected, not only fixed their prices in this market, but also the prices of all like domestic products consumed . . . ." The Canadian Tariff Commission says: "Makers of threshing machines, feeders, stackers, weighers, baggers, and portable engines in the United States are selling these things in Canada at 35 per cent, below American prices. They say that the discounts are that much below what any jobber can obtain them for in the United States, and that a trade has been built up which amounts to $750,000 a year." From a report of the Census Bureau, showing the increase of wages per hour, from 1890 to 1903, we find that wages in four protected industries have increased less than in non-protected industries. Pbotected. Boiler makers 0.02 per cent. Iron molders ^^^ 04 " " Machinists ^4^*, 02 " " Blacksmiths 02 " " Non-Protected. Bricklayers 11 per cent. Hod carriers 06 " " Painters 07 " " Carpenters 08 " " Synopsis of a speech by Hon. Leonidas F. Livingston, September 12,-1905, before a Virginia Farmers' Convention: POINTS. 1. The Tariff Tax discriminates against the farmer, but is easily advocated because it is paid without conscious knowledge. 2. Economists have shown that the tariff tax is paid as follows: four-fifths by the consumer and one-fifth by the exporter and foreign manufacturer. 3. The tariff tax has unduly enriched one class at the expense of another. Every time a farmer gets $1.00 the manufacturer gets $4.50. 4. Farmers are one-third of the nation and get one-sixth of the increase in national wealth, while the manufacturers, one-fourth of the population, receive one-half. 5. Farmer's wealth doubles in from thirty to forty years; the maufacturer's in from ten to twenty years. 6. The farmer's per capita wealth was about stationary from 1860 to 1890, while the manufacturer's per capita increased six-fold. 7. Of every $238.00 bought by farmers, $18.00 goes to the govern- ment and $37.00 to protected trusts. 8. Protection does not give farmers a market for their goods, while insuring one for the manufacturers. 9. The farmer is the mainstay of the country and his interests demand a removal of the legislation which enriches another class unnecessarily, and chiefly at the farmer's expense. ARGUMENT. The protective tariff which gives an advantage to the manufactur- ing class and not to other industrial classes, must injuriously affect the improtected classes. If the protected class were in a large majority such a tariff might be defended on the principle of the greatest good to the greatest number; but if it is in the minority it it indefensible upon any principle consistent with Republican institu- tions. THE FARMERS AND THE TARIFF. 169 Now, the entire population of the United States in the year 1900 was 76,303,387 ; and a little less than 39 per cent, of these were engaged in gainful pursuits; that is, there were 29,074,117 persons fio engaged. These were so divided into five classes according to occupation. ^ The manufacturing class contained 7,085,992. The other four classes contained 21,988,125, or 14,903,133 more than the manufactur- ing class — more than three times as many. According to occupation there were; In agriculture 10,381,765 In trade and transportation 4,766,964 In domestic and personal service 5,580,657 These twenty-two million people and all their dependents, consti- tuting more than three-fourths of the entire population of the country, are discriminated against by a protective tariff in favor of the seven millions of persons engaged in manufacturing; and this is done in the name of American labor. THE AGRICULTURE CLASS AND THE TARIFF. "Now, let us," said Mr. Livingston, "consider how the farmer is affected by this system. The farmers constitute more than one-third of the whole population. They produce the cereals, the meats, and the cotton consumed by our own people." He then argued that the farmers are the exporters of those products. They must compete in the markets of the world, and cannot, therefore, by any possibility derive any direct benefit from a tariff law. Those who produce grain sell about 10 or 15 per cent, of their products abroad — never more than 16 per cent. — and yet the foreign market fixes the domestic price. They cannot sell cheaper abroad than at home; because they have no monopoly of the home market. And the same is true of those who produce meats and cotton; though the cotton planters sell a larger percentage of their crops abroad. The farmers cannot form trusts to prevent competition and keep prices high; because they are widely scattered, and also because they have not sufficient capital to enable them to hold their products for long periods. Their environment compels them to sell at prices fixed, not by themselves, but by foreigners, and according to the natural law of supply and demand. But when it comes to buying, the tariff law of this country controls. They must pay taxes on every imported article; and they must pay a price equivalent to plus the actual value of every domestic article. "THE EFFECT OF THE TARIFF ON RURAL WEALTH. "That the farmer is not given a square deal by the operation of high protective tariff law is shown by the effect of these laws on rural and urban wealth. "The growth of these two classes in wealth is shown by the follow- ing table taken from census sources. "URBAN AND RURAL WEALTH OF THE UNITED STATES. Millions of Dollars. Percentage of Total. Years. Urban. Rural. Total. Urban. Rural. 1850 $3,169 $3,967 $7,136 44.4 65.6 1860 8,190 7,980 16,160 50.6 49.4 1870 15,155 8,900 24,055 63.0 37.0 1880 31,538 12,104 43,642 72.2 27.8 1890 49,055 15,980 65,037 75.4 24.6 1900 73,786 20,514 94,300 78.2 21.8 170 THE FARMERS AND THE TARIPE. "From 1850 to 18C0, the years of low tariff, rural wealth doubled. From 1860 to 1890, during thirty years of high tariff, it barely doubled again. And from 1890 to 1900 it increased barely twenty- five per cent. *'0n the other hand, urban wealth doubled in every decade, except from 1880 to 1890, and from 1890 to 1900; and in these two decades the growth was about fifty per cent." * * * "Nor is this all. In 1850 the farmer owned more than half of the country, while in 1900 he owned but little more than one-fifth. "While the average per capita wealth of the farmers remained practically stationary from 1860 to 1900, that of the urbanites increased six-fold. "Of the $78,000,000,000 increase in wealth from 1860 to 1900 less than one-sixth of it went to the farmers who make up about one-half the population; while of the $9,000,000,000 increase during the free trade era, 1850 to 1860, more than 44 per cent, of it went to the farmers." , TAXES PAID BY FARMERS. "Mr. Byron W. Holt, one of America's greatest economists, has com- puted the tariff taxes paid annually by farmers in an admirable summary, which I reproduce for a few comments which I wish to make upon it. THE AVERAGE FARMER'S TARIFF TAXES. Purchases. Tariff Tax Paid Article and Quantity. Cost. To U. S. To Trusts. Sugar, 300 pounds $18 00 $6 50 $1 5u Woolen goods 20 00 150 5 00 Cotton goods 12 00 50 2 75 Silk goods 4 00 50 100 Linen goods 2 00 20 25 Leather goods 12 00 40 160 Hardware 3 00 05 95 Chinaware 2 00 10 60 Furniture 10 00 20 1 50 Farm Implements 30 00 25 5 00 Window glass, one-third box. 1 20 10 40 Other glass 150 15 45 Lead, in paints, etc., 30 pounds 2 00 15 35 Chemicals 2 50 30 90 Tin plate, 50 pounds 2 40 05 85 Wire and other nails, 100 lbs. 3 00 00 75 Barb and other wire, 80 lbs . . 3 00 00 1 00 Liquor, spirits, etc 25 00 50 2 50 Tobacco 10 00 60 1 90 Miscellaneous 74 75 5 95 7 85 Total $238 35 $18 00 $37 10 $55 10 "On the average every farmer buys each year of $238.35 in sugar, woolen goods, cotton goods, silk goods, etc. Out of this $238.35, the tariff tax takes $55.00. If this $55.00 went to the government there would be less room to complain, but it does not. The most careful calculations show that of the $55.00 tariff tax paid each year by each farmer, the government receives $18.00 and the manufacturing trusts $37.00. Total. $8 00 6 50 3 25 1 50 45 2 00 1 00 70 1 70 5 25 50 60 50 1 20 90 75 1 00 3 00 2 50 13 80 THE FARMERS AND THE TARIFF. Ill "OUR FARMER'S SHARE OF THE WORLD'S CROPS. "Autlientic census figures show that of the agricultural crops of the world the farmers of the United States furnish the following percentages : Of Wool 10.8% or one-tenth. Of Rye -. 20. % or one-fifth. Of Wheat 21.4% or more than one-fifth. Of Barley 37.7% or more than two-fifths. Of Corn 73. % or more than seven-tenths. Of Cotton 82. % or more than eight-tenths. "With these figures before you is it difficult to account for our national prosperity? We are the feeders of the world, and also the clothiers of the world. The farmers of the United States are the subseratum upon which our national wealth is laid, and from whom the stream of our marvelous prosperity flows with healing power." WHAT WE SELL ABROAD. Of Oats $1,850,000 Of Rye 3,143,913 Of Barley 4,662,541 Of Fruits 18,057,677 Of Tobacco 35,250,899 Of Corn 40,540,837 Of Wheat 87,795,104 Of Cotton 317,065,271 I Total $508,366,042 vWhat a splendid record! The manufacturers. Mith all their special privileges and predatory methods, have achieved nothing in comparison with it. If power and authority are the rewards of merit, the farmers should rule this country. If they only knew their own power, they would not submit to the injustices and outrages imposed upon them by selfish interests. But you ask, how shall they assert themselves? I answer, let them exert the only real power they possess, the power of the ballot, for the defense of their rights and interests. Their ballots cannot be con- trolled by trusts unless they are themselves unworthy. Let them send tariff reformers to represent them in Congress. Then, and only then, they will get justice. 172 DEPARTMENTAL SCANDALS, DEPARTMENTAL SCANDALS. SCANDALS IN THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT. SECRETARY SHAW'S ABSENTEEISM AND PERNICIOUS ACTIVITY— INEFFICIENCY OF THE COMPTROLLER OF THE CURRENCY— THE FAILURE OF THE WALSH BANKS, THE ENTERPRISE BANK AND OTHERS— LITTLE ROGUES PROSECUTED, BUT BIG ONES ALLOWED TO ESCAPE. In the Treasury Department we find the Secretary neglecting the duties of his office, traveling about the country making speeches for the stand-patters and carrying on a campaign for the Presidential nomination in 1908, but still drawing a salary which he does not earn, and setting a bad example for his sub- ordinates. WALSH BANK FAILURE. In the office of the Comptroller of the Currency there have been numerous scandals in connection with national banks by reason of the negligence or collusion of bank inspectors. The officers of some of these banks have practically loaned to themselves under one subterfuge and another the entire assets, deposits and every- thing else, while the inspectors, either through ignorance or fraud, have reported them as sound. One or two cases of recent date will illustrate this point. Let us take first the Walsh banks of Chicago. The capital of Walsh's banks was: Chicago National, $1,000,000; Home Savings, $100,000 (from Chicago Securities, 1905); Equitable Trust, $500,000, making a total capital of the three banks of $1,600,000. The deposits of the Chicago National were about $20,000,000; of the Home Savings, $4,000,000, and of the Equitable Trust, $2,000,000, making total deposits of $26,000,000. Both the State law and the Federal law provide that no bank shall lend over 10 per cent, of its capital to any one borrower. According to the report there was loaned by Walsh to Walsh $15,000,000, or 800 per cent, of the capital of the combined banks. These loans were ingeniously handled, so as, if possible, to avoid liability. The banks carried a vast amount of bonds of Walsh's railroads, coal mines, and stone quarries, and in some cases an amount stated to be $2,000,000, was loaned on notes signed by the names, but not with the signatures, of people who either were ignorant of their names being used, or, at any rate, had no interest in the transaction. The names of bell boys and other underlings about the bank were signed to notes. It was contended by Secretary Shaw, as quoted in the Chicago press, and not denied by him, that Walsh, in this system of finance, did nothing beyond what most banks do in making excess loans. Had Walsh succeeded in his plans and made a profit, that profit would have been his, and would not have redounded to the benefit DEPARTMENTAL SCANDALS. 173 u_ , , . of either his depositors or his stockholders. As he failed, it was merely incidental that the other banks saved his depositors. His stockholders certainly lost. In May, 1906, Mr. W. T. Fenton, a member of the Chicago Clear- ing House, testified before the House Committee on Banking and Cut-rency, as follows: "The banks of Chicago were called together on a Sunday; the members of the clearing house stayed up all night Sunday night; they found the Chicago National Bank was hopelessly insolvent. Not a member of the clearing house suspected that there was anything wrong with it. "The members of the Chicago Clearing House, after sitting up all night to avert what they thought would be a calamity, assumed the obligations of that bank and took the bank's assets. The immediate cause of the failure of that concern was over-loans to concerns in which the president of the hank was interested. Correspondence was shown at that meeting of the clearing house running back ^over a period of three years — and I am not saying this to cast refl'ections on the Comptroller's department or on any of the examiners or officials — ^but here are the facts, tha;^ three years before that bank closed the Comptroller's department knew that the president of the institution had loaned $5,000,000 to a concern in which he was interested; and by the night we took over the assets he had used $15,000,000 of the assets of that bank. And here is one of the results of familiarity with the violation of this law. It had been done so long, and had been overlooked and temporized with until it grew and grew, and finally absorbed the entire institution; and we were called upon, in order to maintain the financial integrity of our city, to liquidate that institution, and take its assets and assume its debts." THE ENTERPRISE BANK FAILURE. The Enterprise National Bank of Allegheny, Pennsylvania, failed in October, 1905. It had at the time about $800,000 of State funds among its deposits. It had loaned large sums, nearly $700,000 in all, to politicians, and to the Santa Fe Central Railroad and the Pennsylvania Development Company of New Mexico, which were controlled by "Bull" Andrews and other members of the old Quay ring. This failure was a Republican affair all round. A dispatch to the Washington Post, dated Pittsburgh, October 18, 1905, said: "It is conceded by all that the expose of today deals one of the hardest blows ever suffered by the Republicanism of Pennsylvania! Francis J. Torrance, head of the Standard Manufacturing Company and one of the leading Republicans of Pennsylvania, has been closely identified with the workings of the bank now in the hands of a receiver, and he is lying at the point of death. Clarke, the cashier, now dead, with W. R. Andrews, formerly of Pittsburg, now Territorial Delegate of New Mexico at Washington, and former State Senator Arthur Kennedy had, it appears, been in several large deals. One of them was the selling of railroad property to the Santa Fe road. The option, which, if closed, meant a fortune to each of those named, was not taken up by the Santa Fe people on Saturday, but was allowed to expire.'* The Treasury Department doesn't interfere with such men, unless they fail outright, nor until the matter can no longer be concealed. No doubt, the political complexion of such affairs 174 DEPARTMENTAL SCANDALS. had also much to do with the refusal of a Republican Congress to pass the Tillman resolution, directing the Committee on Finance to inquire whether or not the national banks have made contribu- tions in aid of political committees. CASSIE CHADWICK GOES TO PRISON, BUT THE BIG ROGUES ALL GO FREE. After exposures have been made by outsiders, and when con- cealment is no longer possible, the Government takes hold and eagerly prosecutes small culprits without political connections or influence, like Cassie Chadwick and people of that class, and then boasts of its great work. In a statement made by Mr. Watson, of Indiana, in the House of Representatives, June 27, 1906, it was said : v "Tl^e Government has been very vigilant in enforcing the national banking laws. Under this Administration several important cases have been tried. "The celebrated Cassie Chadwick case in Ohio was prosecuted by the Government, and the defendant was sentenced to a term of ten years in the Ohio penitentiary for conspiracy in the misappropriation of the funds of the Citizen's National Bank of Oberlin, Ohio. "Arthur B. Speer was jointly indicted with Cassie Chadwick and was sentenced to seven years in the penitentiary. "In the northern district of Iowa, W. R. Brown, a national bank official, was indicted for violation of the national bank laws. He was sentenced to five years in the penitentiary." But what about the looting of the great Maverick Bank, of Boston, the Walsh banks of Chicago, the Enterprise National Bank, of Allegheny, Pa., and the numerous other banks run in the interest of Republicans and looted by them? Why has not the administration prosecuted the criminals in those cases? Cassie Chadwick and the other little criminals went to jail, of course. But the great criminals, who habitually violate the bank- ing laws in the way that Walsh did, are not disturbed, because they have political influence. Are they able to contribute large sums to Republican campaign funds? WMAf WAS DONS During the canvass. 175 WHAT WAS DONE DURING THE CANVASS LAST YEAR (1896) BY NATIONAL CITY BANK OF NEW YORK LEADS TO CORRUPT SALE OF NEW YORK CUSTOM HOUSE. A CONTINUOUS SCANDAL FROM 1896 TO 1906 AND THE END NOT IN SIGHT. UNDER A REPUBLICAN ADMINISTRATION. "LEST WE FORGET." Mr. A. B. Hepburn promptly reminded Mr. Gage of "what was done during the last canvass" (1896), by the National City Bank, and in 1897 asks a fair return: National City Bank of New York, New York, June 5, 1897. My Dear Mr. Gage: The National City Bank, of this city, of which I recently became vice-president through the consolidation of the business of the Third National with it, is one of the banks desig- nated as a United States depository, and I write to request that in any changes which may be made under the administration we may not be disturbed in this respect. We should like to remain a United States depository as at present. / Of course the bank is very strong, and if you will take the pains to look at our list of directors you loill see that ice also have very great political claims in view of what was done during the canvass last year. Yours very truly, A. B. Hepburn. Hon. Lyman J. Gage, United States Treasury, Washington, D. C The favor was granted. Having again aided in the election of a Republican Congress in the next election, this bank asks for and receives another favor, which was "conceived in iniquity and born in sin," designed to be a fraud, is a continuing scandal and an outrage on the State of and city of New York and the Federal Government. 176 8AL^ of N^W YOUK CUSTOM H0V8E. SALE NEW YORK CUSTOM HOUSE PROPERTY. STILL EXEMPT FROM TAXES BY A "TRICK" OF GAGE AND THIS BANK. The sale of the old custom house' in New York city is one of the chief blots in the McKinley administration. This fraud and scandal was engineered by Secretary Gage in July, 1899. He sold the custom house on Wall street in New York to the National City Bank, a Rockefeller establishment, for the price of $3,265,000, about one third the value of the property, which is said to be worth fully $10,000,000. This transaction is understood to have followed a munificent contribution to Mr. Hanna's fund in 1896. It has been said that this property, now considered to be worth $10,000,000, has been practically transferred to the bank by the skill of a bookkeeper, without the actual transfer of one solitary cent of money beyond the contribution to the campaign fund. It is the most marvelous transaction in history. The Secretary of the Treasury deposits with the bank from $5,000,000 to $15,000,000 of United States funds without interest. The bank in making payment for the property simply credited the Government's account with $3,215,000, leaving an unpaid balance of $50,000. The Government continues to occupy the building, paying the bank a rental therefor of $130,600 a year. In the ten years the bank draws in rentals from the Government $1,306,000 and in interest on Government deposits probably another million. In the meantime, the Government declines to even receive a credit for the $50,000 balance on the building, thus saving for the bank. State and city taxes in ten years, amounting to $750,000, since the title does not pass from the Government until that $50,000 is paid. The Democrats in Congress have year after year opposed the appropriation of money from the Treasury to pay rent under this contract, and in 1905, succeeded in striking out the item for that purpose. But, as a rule, the payments have been regularly provided for •n the Sundry Civil bill; and this year (1906) that bill carried the usual item of $130,600 for the rental of a house to which the Government still holds the title; and, moreover, the General Deficiency bill carried a similar appropriation to cover the deficiency caused by striking the item from the Sundry Civil bill last year. The fact that such an item was in the General Deficiency bill was guarded with the utmost secrecy. No mention of it was made in the report of the Appropriations Committee. But when the bill was under consideration in the House, on June 26, 1906, Mr. Sulzer,* who has directed the fight on the fioor of the House against this appropriation for the last six or seven years, made a point of order against the appropriation. "The Chair holds that this is a debt owed by the Government and that it should be paid," said Mr. Crumpacker, of Indiana, who was temporarily presiding. SALE OF NEW YORK CUSTOM H0U8E. 177 "If it is a just debt the National City Bank can recover through the Court of Claims," Mr. Sulzer said. "It is the same old steal. That bank is withholding $50,000 of the purchase price from the Government for the sole purpose of defrauding the State and city of New York of taxes. So long as the bank does not pay the $50,000, the deed and title to the custom house property remains with the Government." Mr. Fitzgerald, of Brooklyn, said the contract was a scandal and a disgrace. Mr. Sulzer's motion was lost — 65 to 88. Every Republican in the House, except McCreary, of Pennsylvania, voted against it. John Wesley Gaines, of Tennessee, moved to deduct the $50,000 owed by the National City Bank -to the Government from the $130,600 appropriation for rent and give the bank a deed for the property, so that the State and city of New York could collect the taxes. This was voted down— 72 to 40~the Republicans voting no. After getting the custom house property for nothing, and receiving 4 per cent, interest, under the name of rent, on what it pretended to have paid to the Government under the spurious contract, the National City Bank made Lyman J. Gage president of the United States Trust Company and his assistant, F. A. Vanderlip, vice-president of the bank itself. In view of the many profitable privileges which have lately been granted to the same bank, the question is often asked whether Secretary Shaw is also to become the head of a metropolitan banking institution con- trolled by National City Bank and Standard Oil capital. Here are some of the letters that passed between the president of this bank and Secretary Gage, which show they are both guilty of this infamous outrage: The National City Bank of New Yobk, New York, August 18, 1899. Deab Sib : In accordance with the permission given us when I had the pleasure of speaking with you over the telephone today, this bank will transfer on its books tomorrow, August 19, to the credit of the Treasurer of the United States, the sum of $3,215,000 as payment on account of our purchase of the old custom house property, for which we will issue the customary receipt. Please instruct the Assistant Treasurer of the United States in this city to receive and hold as security for public moneys the required amount of United States bonds. As the check for $150,000, inclosed with our bid and now in your possession, has not been used, will you kindly return it to us? ^ We shall make the above payment of $3,215,000 upon the under- standing, of course, that we are not to be liable for any taxes or water rates upon the property so long as you remain in possession and the balance of $50,000 remains unpaid and the deed is undelivered. We presume you are forwarding today the deed and contract, as the same were sent to you last Wednesday. It seems from an examination of the title that the property contains 583 square feet less than we supposed, owing to the fact that the city has used a portion of the original tract as a street, and our attorneys advise us that it has had possession so long that probably we could not regain possession of it even after a protracted litigation. Will you please give us a formal certificate, imder seal, stating what notice you gave, by advertisement or otherwise, of the sale of the custom house property, and that, in your judgment, this was in com- pliance with the act of Congress, in respect to due advertisement. 178 DEMOCRATS RECOGNIZE ORGANIZED LABOR. Assuring you of our appreciation of your attention, I am, Yours very truly, James Stillman, President. Hon. Lyman J. Gage, Secretary of the Treasury, Washington, D. C. — House Document 264, Fifty-sixth Congress, fust session. Here is part of Gage's reply, August 21, 1899: As to the taxes against said property, you are advised that the Department's understanding of this matter is just the same as yours, and that until we deliver you the deed you Avill not have to pay the taxes to the city of New York. DEMOCRATS FIRST TO RECOGNIZE ORGANIZED LABOR. FIRST TO INTRODUCE ANDENFORCE AN EIGHT-HOUR LAW. The Democratic party met in convention in New York in July, 1868, nominated Horatio Seymour for President and in its plat- form inserted the following plank: Resolved, That this convention sympathize cordially with the workingmen of the United States in their efforts to protect the rights and interests of the laboring classes of the country. The Republican party met in May of the same year in Chicago and nominated Ulysses S. Grant for President, but failed to men- tion a single sentence in its platform about the laboring classes or organized labor. The unions appealed, through their representatives, to the Democratic convention for succor and aid, with the above result. Thus, the party of Jackson and Jefferson has the honor of being the first to champion in its platform the interests of organized labor — an enviable distinction. Nor was this all which they did for the cause of labor. The first eight-hour law ever introduced in the House of Representa- tives was brought in by a Democrat, Mr. Rogers, of New Jersey. But his efforts were in vain, for the Congress was Republican and the bill died in the committee room. Again a Democrat attempted to aid the labor party by intro- ducing in the Thirty-ninth Congress another eight-hour law. But the Republicans — then in power — quietly buried it. The same fate was doled out to the Rogers eight-hour bill, rein- troduced by Mr. Julian, of Indiana, March 14, 1867. Against the protest of such Republicans as John Sherman, General Banks by the aid of Senator Thomas A. Hendricks, finally got an eight-hour law passed in 1868. But what was the fate of this law, once it was enacted? It slept upon the statute books during Republican administrations, but was strongly enforced when the Democrats were in power. DEMOCRATS RECOGNIZE ORGANIZED LABOR. 179 It is safe to say there has not been a statute enacted by Con- gress for the relief of the "Workingmen of the United States," or "Organized Labor," that the Democrats have not given it their hearty support. THE DEMOCRACY AND ORGANIZED LABOR. "WE ARE OPPOSED TO GOVERNMENT BY INJUNCTION: WE DENOUNCE THE BLACK LIST: AND WE FAVOR ARBITRA- TION AS A MEANS OF SETTLING DISPUTES BETWEEN COR- PORATIONS AND THEIR EMPLOYEES." (Democratic Platform of 1900.) "We especially object to government by injunction as a new and highly dangerous form of oppression, by which Federal judges, in contempt of the laws of the States and the rights of the citizen, become at once legislators, judges and executioners, and we approve the bill recently passed by ine United States Senate, and now pending in the House, relative to contempts in Federal courts, and providing for trials by jury in certain cases of contempt." — Democratic Platform of 1896, reaffirmed in 1900. "We favor the enactment and administration of laws giving labor and capital impartially their just rights. Capital and labor ougiit not to be enemies. Each is necessary to Ine other. Each has its rights, but the rights of labor are certainly no less 'vested', no less 'sacred' and no less 'inalienable' than the rights of capital. "We favor arbitration of differences between corporate employers and their employees, and a strict enforcement of the eight-hour law on all Government work. "We approve the measure which passed the United States Senate in 1896, but which a Republican Congress has ever since refused to enact, relating to contempts in Federal courts a7id providing for trial by jury in cases of indirect contempt.*' The prominence given to the dispute between organized labor and its enemies by the attitude of Speaker Cannon, Mr. Littlefleld, of Maine, and the present administration in this campaign, makes it proper to review in this place the record of the Democratic and Republican parties on the labor question. On February 26, 1900, Mr. Ridgely, of Kansas, introduced a bill (H. R. 8917, Fifty-sixth Congress, first session): "To limit the meaning of the word 'conspiracy' and also the use of restraining orders, and injunctions as applied to disputes between employers and employees in the District of Columbia and the Terri- tories, or engaged in commerce between the several States, District of Columbia and Territories, and with foreign nations." The bill was drawn, according to Mr. Ridgely, "by the attorneys employed by the united labor organizations of this country." It was drawn "in the belief that it would come within the constitu- tional limits." (Congressional Record, February 18, 1901, p. 2592.) It provided: "That no agreement, combination, or contract by or between two or more persons to do, or procure to be done, or not to do, or procure not to be done, any act in contemplation or furtherance of any trade dispute between employers and employees in the District of Columbia, or in any Territory of the United States, or who may be engaged in trade or commerce between any Territory and another, or between any Territory or Territories and any State or States, or the District of Columbia, or with foreign nations, or between the District of Colum- bia and any State or States or foreign nations, shall be deemed crimi- 180 DEMOCRATS RECOGNIZE ORGANIZED LABOR. nal ; nor shall those engaged therein be indictable or otherwise punish- able for the crime of conspiracy, if such act committed by one person would not be punishable as a crime (nor shall such agreement, combi- nation, or contract be considered as in restraint of trade or commerce), nor shall any restraining order or injunction be issued with relation thereto." (C. R. vol. 34, p. 2592.) Two reports were made on this bill. The majority report, sub- mitted by Mr. Littlefield, of Maine, was concurred in by the other ten Republican members of the House Judiciary Committee. It will be found in the Congressional Record, vol. 34, p. 2590. It proposed to amend the Ridgely bill, by striking out the words, "nor shall such agreement, combination or contract be considered as in restraint of trade or commerce," and by adding the following proviso: "That the provisions of this act shall not apply to threats to injure tlie person or the property, business, or occupation of any person, firm, association, or corporation, to intimidation or coercion, or to any acts causing or intended to cause any illegal interference, by overt acts, with the rights of others. Nothing in this act shall exempt from punishment, otherwise than as herein excepted, any person guilty of conspiracy, for which punishment is now provided by any act of Congress, but such act of Congress shall, as to the agreements, combinations, and contracts hereinbefore referred to, be construed as if this act were therein contained." (C. R., p. 2592, Vol. 34.) The representatives of organized labor vigorously opposed these amendments; and the five Democratic members of the committee supported the position of the labor men, and filed a minority report, in which they said: "It is clear to our minds that it was never the legislative intent that the Sherman anti-trust law of July 2, 1890, which prohibits contracts and agreements 'in restraint of trade and commerce,' should apply to cooperative efforts of workingmen in contemplation or furtherance of a trade dispute, especially when such efforts, if put forth by a single individual, would not constitute a crime. "The first amendment proposed by the majority strikes out the words *Nor shall such agreement, combination, or contract be con- sidered as in restraint of trade or commerce." "There is no sufficient reason for striking out these words. They do not say that *no agreement, combination or contract,' etc., made by employees shall be considered in restraint of trade; but the language is 'no such agreement/ etc.; that is, no agreement, etc., to do an act, etc., which, if done by a single individual, would not con- stitute a crime. Within that limitation, and that alone, would the acts of employees be taken out of the operation of the Sherman anti- trust law by the pending bill. "The majority report does not seem to recognize this important distinction. "We think the words stricken out should remain in the bill. "The second amendment proposed by the majority is the insertion of the following proviso at the end of the seventh line on the second page. ''Provided, That the provisions of this act shall not apply to threat to injure the person or the property, business or occupation of any person, firm or association or corporation, to intimidation or coercion, or to any acts causing or intended to cause any illegal interference by overt acts with the rights of others." "If we had well-defined meanings for the terms 'threats to injure,' 'intimidations,' 'coercion,' 'acts causing or intended to cause an illegal interference,' etc., there might t^e no special objection to the purpose DEMOCRATS RECOGNIZE ORGANIZED LABOR, i 181 intended by tliis amendment. But in the absence of such well-defined ideas the etiect of this amendment will be either (1) to permit (and even to suggest by implication) such latitude of judicial construction as might negative all the good in the bill, or (2) to encumber the statute with a useless declaration of principles of recognized law." (Cong. Record, p. 2591, vol. 34.) This report was signed by Messrs. Terry, Clayton, Smith, Fleming and DeArmond. Speeches were made against the amendments by Messrs. Clay- ton, Fleming, Ridgely and Terry, and for the amendments by Messrs. Littlefield, Overstreet and Ray. Mr. Littlefield moved "a suspension of the rules in order to put on its passage the bill with the amendments reported by the committee. (Cong. Record, vol. 34, p. 2589.) And the following members voted for that motion: Alexander Bailey, Kan. Bishop Bowei-eiock Brick Brosius Brownlow Bull Burke, S. D. Burkett, Cannon Capron Coclirane, N. Y. Crumpacker Curtig Dalzell Dayton Emerson Eseh Gardner, N. Gibson (Jraham Hall Ilaugen ITawley Hepburn Hill Hitt Hopkins Ray, N. Y. Jack Reeves Kerr, Ohio. Roberts Lacey Smith, Iowa. Lanhara Spalding Littlefield Steele Londenslager Stewart, N. Y. Lybrand Tayler, Ohio. Mondell Van Voorhis Morris Vreeland Mudd Wright O'Grady Young Overstreet Payne The following members were paired: Mr. Sherman with Mr. Driggs. Mr. MetcaFf with Mr. Wheeler, of Kentucky. Mr. Henry C. Smith with Mr. Taylor, of Alabama. For this day : Mr. Eddy with Mr. Carmack. Mr. Hull with Mr. Hay. Mr. Mann with Mr. Jett. Mr. Butler with Mr, Rhea, of Virginia. Mr. Dovener with Mr. Polk. Mr. Boutell, of Illinois, with Mr. Griggs. Mr. Freer with Mr. Elliott. Mr. Woods with Mr. Noonan. Mr. Cannon with Mr. McRae. Mr. Tawney with Mr. De Grafifenreid'. Mr. Loud with Mr. Livingston. Mr. Hemenway with Mr. Howard. Mr. Weymouth with Mr. King. Mr. Kahn with Mr. Cooper, of Texas. Mr. Gaston. (Cong, Record, p. 2598, vol. 34.) The Record shows that Mr. Cannon voted for Littlefield's motion. Littlefield's motion was defeated by the Democrats, aided by a few Republicans, among whom were Moody, of Massachusetts, now Attorney-General, and Cooper, of Wisconsin. Nothing further was done in regard to the Ridgely bill in the Fifty-sixth Congress. But early in the Fifty-seventh Congress, Mr. Grosvenor, Republican, of Ohia, introduced one very similar to it, entitled, "a bill to limit the meaning of the word 'conspiracy,' and the use of 'restraining orders and injunctions' in certain cases." The Grosvenor bill differed from the Ridgely bill only by adding the following clause: "Nothing in this act shall e.\emi)t from punishment, otherwise than as herein excepted, any persons guilty of conspiracy for which punish- 182 DEMOCRATS RECOGNIZE ORGANIZED LABOR. ment is now provided by any act of Congress; but such act of Congress shall, as to the agreements, combinations, and contracts hereinbefore referred to, be construed as if this act were therein con- tained." This bill was favored by organized labor. It passed the House of Representatives May 2, 1902, without a dissenting voice or vote, as the following extract from the Record of that date shows : "Mr. Ray, of New York. Mr. Speaker, I call up the bill (H. R. 11060) to limit the meaning of the word 'conspiracy' and the use of 'restraining orders and injunctions' in certain cases. "The bill was read, as follows: "Be it enacted, etc.. That no agreement, combination or contract by or between two or more persons to do or procure to be done, or not to do or procure not to be done, any act in contemplation or futher- ance of any trade dispute between employers and employees in the District of Columbia or in any Territory of the United States, or between employers and employees who may be engaged in trade or com- merce between the several States, or between any Territory and another, or between any Territory or Territories and any State or States or the District of Columbia, or with foreign nations, between the District of Columbia and any State or States or foreign nations, shall be deemed criminal, nor shall those engaged therein be indictable or otherwise punishable for the crime of conspiracy, if such act com- mitted by one person would not be punishable as a crime, nor shall such agreement, combination or contract be considered as in restraint of trade or commerce, nor shall any restraining order or injunction be issued with relation thereto. Nothing in this act shall exempt from punishment, otherwise than as herein excepted, any persons guilty of conspiracy for which punishment is now provided by any act of Congress, but such act of Congress shall, as to the agreements, combinations and contracts hereinbefore referred to, be construed as if this act were therein contained. "Mr. Ray, of New York. Mr. Speaker, if there is no comment desired, I move the previous question. "The Speaker. The gentleman from New York moves the previous question. "The previous question was ordered; and under the operation thereof the bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading; and being engrossed, it was accordingly read the third time and passed. "On motion of Mr. Ray, of New York, a motion to reconsider the vote by which the bill was passed was laid on the table." (Cong. Record, vol. 35, p. 4995.) When the bill reached the Senate it was referred to the Judiciary Committee of that body which was at that time com- posed of Senators Hoar, Piatt, of Connecticut, Clark, of Wyoming, Fairbanks, Simon, Nelson, McComas and Depew (Republicans), and Bacon, Pettus, Turner, Culberson and Blackburn (Democrats). On May 23, 1902, Senator Hoar submitted for that committee a favorable report on the Grosvenor bill (H. R. 11060.) (See Senate Report 1650, Fifty-seventh Congress, first session.) Nothing was done with the bill until June 25, 1902, when its consideration was objected to by Senator Kean (Republican), of New Jersey, and it was postponed indefinitely. (See Cong. Record, p. 7380.) Only by imputing the vilest treachery to those who voted for it in the House, can it be assumed that they knew in advance that it would be defeated in the Senate, and passed it merely to deceive the labor unions. In the Fifty-eighth Congress, it was again introduced by Mr. Grosvenor, but it was pigeon-holed by the Judiciary Committee of the House. (See H. R. 6782.) DEMOCRATS RECOGNIZE ORGANIZED LABOR. 183 In the Fifty-ninth Congress the same bill was introduced by Mr. Little, of Arkansas. (See H. R. 4445.) Samuel Gompers, of the American Federation of Labor, Andrew Furuseth, represent- ing the Seamen's Union, and other representatives of organized labor, appeared in advocacy of the bill. The administration antagonized this bill and favored a bill said to have been prepared by the Attorney-General with the President's approval. This bill is known as the Gilbert bill — H. R. 9328— which is as follows: "(H. R. 9328, Fifty-ninth Congress, first session.) A bill to regulate the granting of restraining orders in certain cases. "BE IT ENACTED BY THE SENATE AND HOUSE OF REPRE- SENTATIVES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA IN CONGRESS ASSEMBLED, That in cases involving or growing out of labor disputes neither an injunction nor a temporary restraining order shall be granted except upon due notice to the opposite party by the court in term, or by a judge thereof in vacation, after hearing, wliicli may be ex parte if the adverse party does not appear at the time and place ordered: Provided, That nothing herein contained shall be held to authorize the issuing of a restraining order or an injunction in any case in which the same is not authorized by existing law." One labor representative, Mr. Fuller, advocated the administra- tion bill, but expressed his willingness to have the bill — H. R. 4445 — reported favorably by the committee. He did not oppose the latter bill, but thought it better to take one which had the backing of the administration, because such a bill would be most likely to receive respectful consideration from a Republican Congress. Another bill (H. R. 18171) was introduced by Mr. Pearre (Republican) embodying some extremely radical provisions. After several hearings, in which various interests took part, the whole matter was postponed until the next session of Con- gress and those labor representatives, like Gompers, who advo- cated a measure which had already passed the House unanimously and had been endorsed by all the labor unions of the country, are aggrieved. The action of Congress on January 26, in passing the bill abro- gating the eight-hour law, the alien contract labor law and the Chinese exclusion act as to labor employed in the construction of the Panama Canal, was in defiance of the labor unions of the country. The resolution and vote on that subject will be found under the head of yea-and-nay votes in the House, elsewhere in this volume. The following document discloses the attitude of organized labor towards those persons whom Mr. Roosevelt in his letter to Representative Watson, describes as the men "responsible for the handling of the present Congress:" 18^4 DEMOCRATS RECOGNIZE ORGANIZED LABOR. LABOR'S GRIEVANCES. Washington, D. C, March 21, 1906. Hon. Theodore Roosevelt, President of the United States; Hon. Wm. P. Frye, President pro tempore United States Senate; Hon. Joseph G. Cannon, Speaker House of Representatives, United States. Gentlemen: The undersigned executive council of the American Federation of Labor, and those accompanying us in the presentation of tliis document, submit to you the subject-matter of the grievances wliich the workmen of our country feel by reason of the indifferent position which the Congress of the United States has manifested toward the just, reasonable, and necessary measures which liave been before it these past several years, and which particularly affect the interests of the working people, as well as by reason of the adminis- trative acts of the executive branches of this Government and the legislation of the Congress relating to these interests. For con- venience, the matters of which we complain are briefly stated, and are as follows: The law commonly known as the "eight-hour law" has been found ineffective and insufficient to accomplish the purpose of its designers and framers. Labor has, since 1894, urged the passage of a law so as to remedy the defects, and for its extension to all work done for or on belialf of the Government. Our efforts nave been in vain. Without hearing of any kind granted to those who are the advocates of the eight-hour law and principle, Congress passed, and the Presi- dent signed, an appropriation bill containing a rider nullifying the eight-hour law and principle in its application to the greatest public work ever undertaken by our Government, the construction of the Panama Canal. The eight-hour law in terms provides that those intrusted with the supervision of Government work shall neither require nor permit any violations thereof. The law has been grievously and frequently violated. The violations have been reported to the heads of several Departments, who have refused to take the necessary steps for its enforcement. While recognizing the necessity for the employment of inmates of our penal institutions, so that they may be self-supporting, labor has urged in vain the enactment of a law that shall safeguard it from the competition of the labor of convicts. In the interest of all of our people, and in consonance with their almost general demand, we have urged Congress for some tangible relief from the constantly growing evil of induced and undesirable immigration, but without result. Recognizing the danger of Chinese immigration, and responsive to the demands of the people, Congress years ago enacted an 'effective Chinese-exclusion law; yet; despite the experience of the people of our own country, as well as those of other countries, the present law is flagrantly violated, and now by act of Congress it is seriously proposed to invalidate that law and reverse the policy. The partial relief secured by the laws of 1895 and 1898, providing that seamen shall not be compelled to endure involuntary servitude, has been seriously threatened at each succeeding Congress. The petitions to secure for the seamen equal right with all others have been denied, and a disposition shown to extend to other workmen the system of compulsory labor. , Under the guise of a bill to subsidize the shipping industry, a pro- vision is incorporated, and has already passed the Senate, providing for a term of conscription, which would make compulsory naval service a condition precedent to employment on privately owned vessels. Having in mind the terrible and unnecessary loss of life attending the burning of the Slocum in the harbor of New York, the wreck of D^EMOCRATS RECOGNIZE ORGANIZED LABOR. 185 the Rio de Janeiro at the entrance to the bay of San Francisco, and other disasters on the waters too numerous to mention, in nearly every case the great loss of life was due to the undermanning and the unskilled manning of such vessels, we presented to Congress measures tliat would, if enacted, so far as human law could do, make impossible the awful loss of life. We have sought this remedy more in the interests of the traveling public than in that of the seamen, but in vain. Having in mind the constantly increasing evil growing out of the parsimony of corporations, of towing several undermanned and un- equipped vessels called "barges" on the high seas, where, in case of storm or stress, they are cut loose to drift or sink and their crews to perish, we have urged the passage of a law that shall forbid the towing of more than one such vessel unless they shall have an equip- ment and a crew sufficient to manage them when cut loose and sent adrift, but in vain. The antitrust and interstate commerce laws enacted to protect the people against monopoly in the products of labor and against dis- crimination in the transportation thereof, have been perverted, so far as the laborers are concerned, so as to invadte and violate their personal liberty as guaranteed by the Constitution. Our repeated efforts to obtain redress from Congress have been in vain. The beneficent writ of injunction, intended to protect property rights has, as used in labor disputes, been perverted so as to attack and destroy personal freedom and in a manner to hold that the employer has some property rights in the labor of the workman. Instead of obtaining the relief which labor has sought, it is seriously threatened with statutory a'uthority for existing judicial usurpation. The Committee on Labor of the House of Representatives was instituted at the demand of labor to voice its sentiments, to advocate its rights, and to protect its interests. In the past two Congresses this committee has been so organized as to make ineffectual any 9,ttempt labor has made for redress. This being the fact in the last Congress, labor requested the Speaker to appoint on the Committee on Labor members who, from their experience, knowledge, and sympathy, would render in this Congress such service, as the com- mittee was originally designed to perform. Not only was labor's request ignored, but the hostile make-up of the committee was accentuated. Recently the President issued an order forbidding any and all Government employees, upon the pain of instant dismissal from the Government service, to petition Congress for any redress of grievances or for any improvement in their condition. Thus the constitutional right of citizens to petition must be surrendered by the Government employee in order that he may obtain or retain his employment. We present these grievances to your attention because we have long, patiently, and in vain waited for redress. There is not any matter of which we have complained but for which we have in an honorable and lawful manner submitted remedies. The remedies for these grievances proposed by labor are in line with fundamental law, and with the progi-ess and development made necessary by changed industrial conditions. Labor brings these, its grievances, to your attention because you are the representatives responsible for legislation and for failure of legislation. The toilers come to you as your fellow-citizens who, by reason of their position in life, have not only with all other citizens an equal interest in our country, but tlie further interest of being the burden-bearers, the wage-earners of America. As labor's representatives we ask you to redress these grievances, for it is in your power so to do. 1§6 MMOCRAf^ kECOamZE OMAmZ^ LABOR . Labor now appeals to you, and we trust that it may not be in vain. But if perchance you may not heed us, we shall appeal to the con- eeience and the support of our fellow-citizens. Very respectfully, Samuel Gompers, James Duncan, James O'Connell, Max Morris, D. A. Hayes, Daniel J. Keefe, Wm. D. Huber, Joseph F. Valentine, John B. Lennon, Frank Morrison, executive council, American Federation of Labor.— (Cong. Record, July 16, vol. 40, p. 10172.) See further on this subject the extracts from the messages, addresses and historical writings of Theodore Roosevelt relating to small farmers, mechanics and laborers, and the report of Attorney-General Moody in prosecutions under the anti-trust laws, elsewhere in this volume. MR. ROOSEVELT ON ORGANIZED LABOR. He regards representatives of labor unions as members of the "rogue's gallery," "sleek, oily fellows," "bulls of Bashan," "lazy, selfish, brutal, envious, violent, murderous," "a mob." Mr. Roosevelt has recently issued an executive order requiring the enforcement of the eight-hour law, which has heretofore, under his administration, been a dead letter. The result of the elections in Maine this year and the hostile attitude of organized labor in other. States toward its enemies in Congress has driven him against his will to perform a plain statutory obligation. Organized labor so understands it, and the public so understand it. Mr. Roosevelt's hostility to the labor element is no secret. He has expressed it in his books, in his official utterances and by his acts. In his book entitled "Ranch Life and Hunting Trail," comparing the Western cowboys with other classes of citizens, Mr. Roosevelt says: "They are much better fellows and pleasanter companions than small farmers or agricultural laborers; nor are the mechanics and laborers and workmen of a great city to be mentioned in the same breath." (Ranch Life and Hunting Trial, pp. 9 and 10.) In "American Ideals," referring to a delegation of labor men who appeared before a committee of the New York Legislature, he describes them in his "American Ideals," vol. 1, p. 105, as "the rogue's gallery." One of the labor men who spoke he descril^es as a "sleek, oily little fellow, with a black moustache, who had never done a stroke of work in his life," and another as "a fellow- professional of another type — a great, burly man who would speak of the Wrongs (with a capital W) of Labor (with a capital L) and bellow as if he had been a 'bull of Bashan.' " Again he^ays: "The men who object to what they style 'government by injunction' are, as regards the essential principles of government, in hearty sympathy with their remote skin-clad ancestors who lived in caves, fought one another with stone-headed axes, and ate the mammoth wooly rhinoceros. I DEMOCRATS RECOGNIZE ORGANIZED LABOR. 187 "They are interesting as representing a geological survival, but they are dangerous whenever there is the least chance of their making the principles of this ages-buried past living factors in our present life. "They are not in sympathy with men of good minds and sound civic morality." (Roosevelt's American Ideals, Vol. 2, p. 18.) The following expressions are taken from his annual message of December 5, 1905, in which he dwelt at great length upon the relations of labor and capital: "There has been a demand for depriving courts of the power to issue injunctions in labor disputes. Such special limitation of the equity powers of our courts would be most unwise." . . . "We can get justice and right dealing only if we put as of para- mount importance the principle of treating a man on his worth as a man rather than with reference to his social position, his occupation, or the class to which he belongs. There are selfish and brutal men in all ranks of life. . . . "If they are laborers, their selfishness and brutality may take the form of laziness, of sullen envy of the more fortunate, and of willing- ness to perform deeds of murderous violence . . ,. . and all honest and far-seeing men should join in warring against it, when- ever it becomes manifest." . . . "The downfall of republics has been due to the class spirit, the growth of the spirit which tends to make a man subordinate the welfare of the public, as a whole, to the welfare* of the particular class to which he belongs, the substitution of loyalty to a class for loyalty to the nation. . . . " . . . . This government is not, and never shall be, a govern- ment by a mob." The views of the members of the American Federation of Labor on these points will be found in the speeches of Mr. Andrew Furuseth and Mr. Samuel Gompers, reported in the hearing before the committee of the House of Representatives, Fifty-ninth Con- gress, first session, in relation to anti-injunction and restraining orders. These views are reasonable and just. Mr. Gompers, the president of the American Federation of Labor, having in mind the remarks of the President, said: "You will observe that the enjoining of men from committing any criminal act, we contend, is an improper exercise of the power of the equity court; yet some of our opponents would have it appear that we favor criminal acts, or that we favor their commission. "But we contend that the writ of injunction was never intended to be issued to enjoin men from committing any lawful or criminal act; that both our country and our States provide for the appre- hension and the trial by a jury of persons who commit such acts to ascertain whether such person has been guilty of a criminal act and to punish him if he is found guilty, and that organized civil society has constituted a police force, large or small, as the circumstances may warrant, for the apprehension and prevention of any criminal act, and that it is hardly fair to put it as has been stated by the opponents of our injunction bill, which your committee reported favorably. But the essence of the opposition and the purpose of the opposition, is clearly manifest. It is to avoid the jury trial." Mr. Roosevelt has often expressed his contempt for "popular clamor," which is the name by which he calls public sentiment. The only instance on record in which he ever confessed that he could possibly make a mistake was one in which he "w§?ikly^ 188 DEMOCRATS RECOGNIZE ORGANIZED LABOR. yielded to the popular voice of New York." An account of the affair is found in Will M. Clemens' work, "Roosevelt, the Ameri- can," at page 37: Soon after the opening of the session (of the New York Legisla- ture) in 1883, Mr. Roosevelt introduced a bill requiring the New York elevated railroad companies to reduce their fares from ten to five cents. Roosevelt voted for this bill; but soon afterwards on reconsideration defeated it, and, according to Mr. Clemens' account (pp. 38 and 39), said in his speech: " *I have to say with shame that when I voted for this bill I did not act as I think I ought to have acted and as I have generally acted on the floor of this House. For the only time I voted here contrary to what I think to be honestly right I did at that time. I have to confess that I wealcly yielded partly to a vindictive feeling to the infernal thieves who have that railroad in charge, and partly to the popular voice of New York." But while Mr. Roosevelt confesses with shame that he once, though only once, yielded to the popular voice and opposed the New York railroad ring, he has never confessed that he had any sympathy with the aspirations of organized labor. The working- men have discovered this and have resented in words on several occasions. In 1903, the Central Labor Union of Washington, D. C, passed a resolution in relation to the case of W. A. Miller, who had been expelled from the Bookbinders' Union and removed from the Government Printing Office, but had been reinstated in the office by the President in contempt of the adverse petitions of organized labor, in which resolution the Central Labor Union said: "Whereas, the President of the United States has seen fit to rein- state W. A. Miller, and has also committed himself to the policy of the open shop, tlie order of the President cannot be regarded in any but an unfriendly light." (Leupp's Roosevelt, p. 239.) Commenting on this case, Mr. Roosevelt said: "Of course, I will not for one moment submit to dictation by the labor unions" . . . "If these labor union men strike, not one of them will do another stroke of Government work while I am President." (Leupp's Roosevelt, p. 241.) After quoting these words, Mr. Leupp adds: "The same spirit was shown in the case of the Arizona Mining strike riots in 1903, when the Governor notified the President of the inability of the civil authorities to control the mob. Within thirty minutes of the receipt of this telegram a detachment of United States troops was on its way to the scene of disorder." (Leupp's Roosevelt, p. 241.) The position of the Democratic party has been the reverse of Mr. Roosevelt's, as will be seen by reference to our chapter on the Democracy and labor. ROOSEVELT A FREE-TRADER. 189 ROOSEVELT A FREE-TRADER, A TARIFF REFORMER AND A STAND-PATTER— WAS A FREE-TRADER FROM 1881 TO 1885— WAS A TARIFF REFORMER IN 1904— IS A STAND-PATTER IN 1906— MAY LEAD "A MOVEMENT FOR TARIFF REVISION" IN 1908. The position of President Roosevelt on the tariff question is one of prime importance at this juncture. What that position has been; what it is, and what it will be hereafter — are matters which concern everybody. Theoretically, at least, Mr. Roosevelt has been a free-trader, and there is no evidence that he has undergone any change in principle. But, in deference to the doctrine of expediency, the doctrine that the end justifies the means, the doctrine that party fealty is superior to political principles, the President has submit- ted to the dictation of the older leaders of his party, and is at this time upholding the stalwart protectionists. He has accepted for this campaign, only, the "stand-pat" position. His friends give it, however, that he is not sincere; and that, in 1908, he will be along- side of Governor Cummins and Mr. Foss advocating tariff re- vision. No better analysis of the President's views on this subject can be found than that which has been given by Mr. Leupp, the pres- ent Commissioner of Indian Affairs, who is known to be one of the closest personal and political friends of the President. In 1904, Mr. Leupp wrote a book entitled "The Man Roosevelt," in which at p. 257 he says: "In or about the year 1881, Mr. Roosevelt became a member of the Free Trade Club in New York. He found there congenial associa- tions, the club consisting largely of educated young men like himself, full of public spirit and ambition for a share in the world's activities. He remained a member through his entire legislative career." "But in 1885, after he had left the legislature, Mr. Roosevelt with- drew from the Free Trade Club, saying that he was 'a Republican first and free-trader afterwards,' (Leupp's Roosevelt, p. 259), though in fact he had been a free-trader first." * * * Mr. Leupp adds: "He still remains, however, a tariff reformer within Republican lines * * * I do not believe that he would condemn as a heresy the honest belief of a Republican that the party would be better without the protection clause in its creed. I do not think he would resent a Republican proposal to supplant a prohibitory tariff with a tariff for revenue in which the protective element shall he incidental only." (Leupp's Roosevelt, p. 259.) Finally, Mr. Leupp summarizes his review of Roosevelt's posi- tion on the tariff in the following question: "Is he not committed to a non-political, conservative and well-con- sidered undertaking, in which no special interests shall be favored at the expense of the rest, and none persecuted because they wear an obnoxious title, but in which the whole system shall be treated as if the schedules were made for the people, not the people for the 150 ROOSEVELT A FREETRADER. schedules ?" And again : "Does it seem unreasonable to assume that when the disturbance of the elections of 1904 has subsided, we shall see him leading a movement for tariflf revision?" (Leupp's Roosevelt, p. 263.) Mr. Roosevelt placed the stamp of his unqualified approval on these utterances by appointing their author to an office of great dignity and profit. He has never repudiated them; and whoever proclaims himself a follower of Roosevelt proclaims himself a free-trader in principle, a tariff revisionist in the past and for the future, and a stand-patter at present for what is in it. The President has probably read what the Hon. John Sherman said on the subject — Free Trade: Every advance toward the free exchange of commodities is an advance in civilization; every obstruction to a free exchange is born of the same narrow, despotic spirit which planted castles upon the Rhine to plunder peaceful commerce; every obstruction to commerce is a tax upon consumption; every facility to a free exchange cheapens commodities, increases trade and population, and promotes civilization. Mr. Sherman, in 1867, when our customs revenue was nearly $177,000,000 and our imports about $379,000,000, said: "It is therefore simply absurd to talk about free trade, and to talk about a protective tariff is unnecessary, because the wit of man could not possibly frame a tariff that would produce $140,000,000 in gold without protecting our domestic industries." In 1883, Samuel J. Randall, a protection Democrat, but not a stand-patter, said: "In my judgment the question of free trade will not arise practically in this country during our lives, if ever, so long as we have to raise revenues by duties on imports; and therefore the discussion of that principle is an absolute waste of time. After our public debt is paid in full, our expenditures can hardly be much below $200,000,000, and if this is levied in a business-like way and in an intelligent manner it will afford adequate protection to our industrial interests in the United States." But the Democratic party is not contending and never has contended for free trade. The Democrats demand a revenue- only tariff and not an "exclusion" or stand-pat tariff. Secretary Shaw, in his last report, stated this: "The revenues of the Government from all sources (by warrant) for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1905, were : "From ^customs,' $261,798,856.91, and our total 'receipts* from all sources last year were $697,101,269.95." He also said that our "outstanding principal of the public debt, June 30, 1905, was $2,274,615,063.84" and that our "expenditures" during the fiscal year were "$720,105,498.55," showing "a deficit of $23,204,228.60." Senator Allison, in 1870, after stating our obligations to be "an- nual interest, $125,000,000; sinking fund required, $25,000,000," said: "§9 that good faith requires at least $150,000,000 from imports," R608EVJSLT A mEE-fitADER. Idl At the same time he demanded tariff reduction, amongst other things saying: "Tlie practical question is, how shall these duties be proportioned among the various articles imported so as to take out of the pockets of the people the least possible sum over and above the actual amount placed in the Treasury, meanwhile discriminating in favor of articles of necessary consumption, and against articles of voluntary consump- tion, commonly denominated luxuries? "Impost duties thus levied, with an annual importation of about $450,000,000 in value, will certainly require an average rate of duty SUFFICIENT TO GIVE OUR PRODUCERS OF MANUFACTURED PRODUCTS GREATLY THE ADVANTAGE OVER THE MANUFAC- TURERS OF SIMILAR PRODUCTS IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES." Surely by the standard of these several high authorities, there is no room for the "exclusions," as Governor Cummins calls the stand-patters, but there is plenty of room for tariff reform along a revenue-only basis. The Republicans, in effect, admit the tariff should be reformed. But, says Mr. Secretary Shaw, we must refix the tariff after a gen- eral election and have a special session called for that purpose. If this is not placing party above tariff reform and above and be- yond a tax-ridden, tax-cursed, trust-oppressed people, what is it? But the Republican party has never been a party of the people. When Mr. Roosevelt was a free-trader, and before he had decided to be a Republican and a free-trader at once, he said : "Political economists have, pretty generally agreed that protection is vicious in theory and harmful in practice; but if the majority of the people in interest wish it, and it affects only themselves, there is no earthly reason why they should not be allowed to try the experi- ment to their heart's content. The trouble is that it rarely does affect only themselves; and in 1828 the evil was peculiarly aggravated on account of the unequal way in which the proposed law would affect different sections. It purported to benefit the rest of the country, but it undoubtedly worked real injury to the planter States and there is small ground for wonder that the irritation over it should liave been intense." (Roosevelt's "Life of Benton," p. 67.) "In 1828, the tariff, whether it benefited the country as a whole or not, unquestionably harmed the South; and in a Federal Union it is most unwise to pass laws which shall benefit one part of the country to the hurt of another part, when the latter receives no com- pensation. The truculent and unyielding attitude of the extreme protectionists was irritating in the extreme; for cooler men than the South Carolinians might well have been exasperated at such an utter- ance as that of Henry Clay, when he stated that for the sake of the American system — by which title he was fond of styling a doctrine already ancient in medieval times — he would 'defy the South, the President, and the devil.'" (Roosevelt's "Life of Benton," p. 90.) "Clay's assertions as to what the tariff had done for the West were ill-founded, as Benton showed in a good speech, wherein he described picturesquely enough the industries and general condition of the country, and asserted with truth that its revived prosperity was due to its -own resources, entirely independent of Federal aid or legisla- tion. He said : 'I do not think we are indebted to the high tariff for our fertile lands and our navigable rivers; and I am certain we are indebted to these blessings for the prosperity we enjoy.' " (Roosevelt's "Life of Benton," p. 91.) 192 ROOSEVELT A FREE-TRADER. Mr. Roosevelt has written nothing distinctly and unequivocally stating his position since he withdrew from the Free Trade Club; but it has been given out at Oyster Bay this summer that he is fully in accord with the views of Speaker Cannon and Mr. Sher- man, which have been summarized in the language of gamblers and beggars: "Stand pat and pass the hat." SECRETARY SHAW, THE CONSTITUTION AND THE POWERS OF CONGRESS. In 1904 when the Democrats in Congress were demanding that the departmental scandals, then so well known and widely preva- lent, be investigated, Mr. Secretary Shaw used the following language in one of his speeches: "IT WOULD BE UNCONSTITUTIONAL FOR CONGRESS TO INVESTIGATE A GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT." In other words, any department of the Government may be run as the head of that department may please. The greatest body, the most powerful branch of the Government — Congress — has no right to guard the people's interests in the different branches of the executive arm of the republic. Maladministration may be widespread, corruption oozing from every pore, scandal may be rife, officers of the Government in the pay of the trusts, in a word, anything may be done in a department, and yet Congress is powerless to intervene. The question naturally arises, who has the power? Perhaps Mr. Shaw can answer this, or, forsooth, perchance the Secretary of the Treasury thinks that he is all powerful and responsible to no one. THE MOTIVE BEHIND THE BIG STICK." 193 THE MOTIVE BEHIND THE "BIG STICK." Expressions of opinion by the President relative to corporations, conquest, overlordship of weaker nations and ship subsidy: ROOSEVELT FAVORS BIG CORPORATIONS IN PORTO RICO AND THE PHILIPPINES— WOULD MAKE LAWS "ADVANTAGEOUS FOR THEM." In his annual message of December 5, 1905, Mr. Roosevelt said: "The fundamental and vital help must be given through the develop- ment of the industries of the islands, and a most efficient means to this end is to encourage big American corporations to start industries in them and this means to make it advantageous for them to do so. To limit the ownership of mining claims as has been done in the Philippines is absurd. In both the Philippines and Porto Rico the limit of holdings of land should be largely raised." Here we have the real motive behind the "big stick" policy. Back of all Mr. Roosevelt's glorification of expansion stand the trusts, the speculators and gamblers, the plunderbund. In the light of this announcement one may easily guess the President's meaning when he appeals to the spirit conquest. ROOSEVELT ON "THE SHADOW OF OUR DESTINY" AND "EASY INTERNATIONAL MORALITY." "The shadow of our destiny has already reached the shores of Asia. The might of our people looms large against the world horizon and it will loom ever larger as the years go by." (From President Roosevelt's Memorial Address at Arlington, 1902.) "The general feeling in the West upon this last subject afterwards crystallized into what became known as the 'Manifest Destiny' idea, which, reduced to its simplest terms, was: that it was our manifest destiny to swallow up the lands, of all adjoining nations who were too weak to withstand us ; a theory that forthwith obtained immense popularity among all statesmen of easy international morality." (Roosevelt's "Life of Benton," p. 40.) ROOSEVELT WANTS BIG MILITARY AND NAVAL FORCE, TO INCLUDE SUBSIDIZED MERCHANT MARINE. In his annual message of December 5, 1905, President Roose- velt said: "We cannot consider the question of our foreign policy without at the same time treating of the Army and the Navy. We now have a very small army — indeed, one well-nigh infinitesimal when compared with the army of any other large nation." "Our Navy must, relatively to the navies of other nations, always be of greater size than our army. We have most, wisely continued for a number of years to build up our Navy." "Fast scouts are needed. The main strength of the Navy, however, lies and can only lie in the great battle ships, the heavily armored, heavily gunned vessels which decide the mastery of the seas. Heavy armed cruisers also play a most useful part, and unarmed cruisers, if swift enough, are very useful as scouts." 194 ' THE MOTIVE BEHIND THE ''BIG STICK:* "To the spread of our trade in peace and the defense of our flag in war a great and prosperous merchant marine is indispensable. We should have ships of our own and seamen of our own to convey our goods to neutral markets, and in case of need to reenforce our battle line. It cannot but be a source of regret and uneasiness to us that the lines of communication with our sister Republics of South America should be chiefly under foreign control. It is not a good thing that American merchants and manufacturers should have to send their goods and letters to South America via Europe if they wish security and dispatch. Even on the Pacific, where our ships have held their ow^n better than on the Atlantic, our merchant flag is now threatened through the liberal aid bestowed by other governments on their own steam lines. I ask your earnest consideration of the report with which the Merchant Marine Commission has followed its long and careful inquiry." (Note. — The report favors a ship subsidy.) In his annual message of December 7, 1903, President Roose- velt said: "Lines of cargo ships are of even more importance than fast mail lines : save so far as the latter can be depended upon to furnish smft auxiliary cruisers in time of war." MONROE DOCTRINE PRAISED AND PERVERTED— WHY WE NEED A BIG NAVY— SANTO DOMINGO AND VENEZUELA. In Ms last annual message, December 5, 1905, the President says: "One of the most effective instruments of peace is the Monroe Doctrine. ... "It is not of the slightest consequence whether we grant the aid needed by Santo Domingo as an incident to the wise development of the Monroe Doctrine, or because we regard the case of Santo Domingo as standing wholly by itself, and to be treated as such, and not on general principles or with any reference to the Monroe Doctrine. The important point is to give the needed aid, and the case is certainly sufficiently peculiar to deserve to be judged purely on its own merits. The conditions in Santo Domingo have for a number of years growTi from bad to worse until a year ago all society was on the verge of dissolution. Fortunately, just at this time a ruler sprang up in Santo Domingo, who, with his colleagues, saw the dangers threatening their country and appealed to the friendship of the only great and powerful neighbor who possessed the power, and, as they hoped, also the will to help them. . . . The previous rulers of Santo Domingo had recklessly incurred debts, and owing to her internal disorders she had ceased to be able to provide means of paying the debts. "Accordingly the Executive Department of our Government nego- tiated a treaty under which we are to try to help the Dominican people to straighten out their finances. This treaty is pending before the Senate. In the meantime a temporary arrangement has been made which will last until the Senate has had time to take action upon the treaty. Under this arrangement the Dominican Govern- ment has appointed Americans to all the important positions in the customs service, and they are seeing to the honest collection of the revenues, turning over 45 per cent, to the (Dominican) Government for running expenses, and putting the other 55 per cent, into a safe depositary for equitable division in case the treaty be ratified, among the various creditors, whether European or American." In the same message, he craftily strikes at Venezuela in the in- terest of the Asphalt Trust, and perverts the Monroe Doctrine, as follows: "If a republic to the south of us commits a tort against a foreign nation such as an outrage against a citizen of that nation, then the THE MOTIVE BEHIND THE ''BIG STICK." 195 Monroe Doctrine does not force us to interfere to prevent punishment of the tort, save to see that punishment does not assume the form of territorial occupation in any shape. The case is more difficult when it refers to a contractual obligation. Our own government has always refused to enforce such contractual obligations on behalf of its citizens by am, appeal to arms." ... "We must ourselves undertake to bring about some arrangement by which so much as possible of a just obligation shall be paid." . . . "There are of course limits to the wrongs which any self-respecting nation can endure. It is always possible that wrong actions toward this nation, or toioards citizens of this nation, in some state unable to secure justice from outsiders, and unwilling to do justice to those outsiders who treat it well, may result in our having to take action to protect our lights." There speaks the natural, unmuzzled Roosevelt, who announced in his Cuban letter: "If a nation shows how to act with decency in industrial and political matters, if it keeps order and pays its obligations, then it need fear no interference from the United States. Brutal wrong- doing or an impotence which results in a general loosening of the ties of civilized society may finally require intervention by some civilized nation, and in the western hemisphere the United States cannot ignore this duty; but it remains true that our interests and those of our southern neighbors are in reality identical. All that we ask is that they shall govern themselves well and be prosperous and orderly." (Note — See also articles on Santo Domingo and Venezuela else- where in this book.) SOME OF PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT'S INCONSISTENCIES. MATTERS AFFECTING THE PRESIDENT. He cites the achievements of Jefferson, Monroe and Polk with approval in his letter of acceptance, but denounces those Presi- dents, their policy and their supporters in his books. The inconsistencies of Mr. Roosevelt are many, but perhaps the most glaring of them all are found in his references to Presidents Jefferson, Monroe and Polk. In his letter accepting the Republican nomination for the Vice- Presidency, in 1900, Mr. Roosevelt said: "In 1803, under President Jefferson, the greatest single stride in expansion that we ever undertook was taken by the purchase of the Louisiana territory. This so-called Louisiana, which included what are now the States of Arkansas, Missouri, Louisiana, Iowa, Minnesota, Kansas, Nebraska, North and South Dakota, Idaho, Montana and a large part of Colorado and Utah, was acquired by treaty and purchase under President Jefferson. . . . "The next great step in expansion was the acquisition of Florida. This was partly acquired by conquest and partlj^ by purchase, Andrew Jackson being the most prominent figure in the acquisition. It was taken under President Monroe. . . . "Our next acquisition of territory was that of Texas, secured by treaty after it had been wrested from the Mexicans by the Texans themselves. Then came the acquisition of California, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada and parts of Coloraflo and Utah, as the result of the Mexican War supplemented five years later by the Gadsden purchase," 196 THE MOTIVE BEHIND THE ''BIG STICK." What Mr. Roosevelt says in these passages is entirely true; but in his historical writings he gives no credit to Jefferson, Mon- roe or Polk for the acquisitions of territory referred to. On the contrary, he directly denies to Jefferson any credit for the acquisi- tion of Louisiana, and denounces Monroe and Polk in unmeasured terms, thus inferentially condemning them for the part they played in our national history, not only in the acquisition of Florida, Texas and the Mexican cession, but in all things. Of Jefferson he says: "The men who settled and peopled the Western wilderness were the men who won Louisiana, for it was surrendered by France merely because it was impossible to hold it against the American advance. Jefferson through his agents at Paris, asked only for New Orleans, but Napoleon thrust upon him the great West." (Preface to Roose- velt's "Winning of the West," Part VI, dated May, 1896.) Of Monroe he says: "Monroe was an honorable man, with a very unoriginal mind, and he simply reflected the wild, foolish views' held by his fellows of the Jeffersonian Democratic-Republican school." (Roosevelt's "Life of G. Morris," pp. 301 and 302.) "I think he (James Monroe) was as much a failure as his prede- cessors, and a rasher criticism could not be passed upon him." (Roosevelt's "Naval War of 1812," p. 456.) Of Polk he says: "Polk was backed by rabid Southern fire-eaters and slavery exten- sionists, ... by the almost solid foreign vote, still unfit for the duties of American citizenship, by the vicious and criminal classes in all the great cities of the North and in New Orleans, by the corrupt politicians, . . . and lastly, he was also backed, indirectly but most powerfully, by the political abolitionists." (Roosevelt's "Life of Benton," p. 291). "The Abolitionists joined hands with Northern roughs and Southern slavocrats to elect the man who was, excepting Tyler, the very smallest of the line of small Presidents who came between Jackson and Lincoln." (Ibid., p. 292.) Not only did he thus denounce Polk and the men who elected him in bringing under our flag the vast territory which now em- braces California, Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and Nevada, and parts of Utah and Colorado, but he also denounces Winfield Scott, Zachary Taylor and Lewis Cass, who contributed to the success of Polk's administration. According to Roosevelt, the historian, "Scott and Taylor were not great generals." (Roosevelt's "Life of Benton," p. 268.) "Lewis Cass, a Northern pro-slavery politician of moderate ability." (The same, p. 329.) "Winfield Scott a wholly absurd and flatulent personage." (The same, p. 344.) Not until he found it necessary to win Democratic support for his policy of imperialism did he ever say a word in praise of any Democratic statesman or any Democratic achievement. Speaking of the founders of the Democratic party in his books, he says that they were "inferior in intelligence"; that their "whole influence was distinctly evil"; that their leaders were "doctrinaire politi- THE MOTIVE BEHIND THE "BIG STICK." 197 cians" ; that Jefferson was "constitutionally unable to put a proper value on truth"; that General Wilkinson was "a double traitor, bribe-taker and corrupt servant of a foreign government"; that Madison was "a ridiculously incompetent leader"; that Monroe was "a failure"; and that Benton was "aflSicted with a rage for the cheap pseudo-classism of Jefferson." These libellous and scandalous sayings reflect the true spirit of Theodore Roosevelt. What he now says is said only to win ap- proval for the "big stick" policy, by insinuating that such a policy was really inaugurated by Jefferson, and Monroe, and not by "the big American corporations" which he is serving, and which he seeks to enthrone in the Philippines, Porto Rico, Cuba and Santo Domingo. Even when he tells the truth, he does so in order to disguise an evil purpose, or to justify by precedent a wicked policy. Surely, no one who values sincerity will be influenced by the utterances of Mr. Roosevelt. MATTERS AFFECTING THE PRESIDENT. The President favors certain railroads and accepts gifts from them — ^Violated the interstate commerce law — Demands and re- ceives money for junketing expenses — Authorizes deposits of pub- lic money in favored banks without interest — ^Diverts funds ap- propriated for one purpose to another — Allows public money to pay for a literary bureau to boom his policy. Mr. Roosevelt has shown greater regard for the interests of corporations and less regard for the law than any other Executive the country has ever had. In 1901 and 1903, he joined with his partisans in Congress in a series of measures in the interest of the Pennsylvania and Balti- more and Ohio railroads, by means of which those two corpora- tions were given $3,000,000, in money, besides several million dol- lars' worth of lands in the City of Washington, and franchises worth at least $50,000,000. Half of the money thus given came out of the Treasury of the United States and half out of the reve- nues of the District of Columbia; but neither the United States nor the District of Columbia obtained in return for it any stock or other pecuniary interest in the railroads. Immediately after the conclusion of this deal, which was opposed by the Democrats, the President, as the guest of the Pennsylvania Railroad, the chief beneficiary of the steal, made a tour of the country, which cost $50,000, all the bills being paid by that corporation. This matter caused a great deal of discussion in the summer of 1903, and one of the leading newspapers of the country said: "The discussion about who defrayed the expenses of the trip of the President to the Pacific coast has gone on apace, but with great moderation. A friend representing the President takes up the subject in defense in the New Yorlc Tribune, and it is an admission that the President has been traveling about the country, with a large party of friends, assistants and clerks, without paying railroad fares and with- out paying for the costly entertainment provided by the companies in the way of food and refreshment. The defense made by the President is 'that he could hardly be expected to defray the cost of the special train out of his own private purse.' The railroad corporations did that and it amounted to a considerable sum. The only defense 198 THE MOTIVE BEHIND THE ''BIG STICKS attempted is that the President's predecessors established the custom of 'dead-heading,' or at least some of them did. The New York Sun in discussing the question points forcibly to the Federal law on the subject, the latest of which was the President's own corporation and 'publicity' act, signed by him in February last, and which declares: " 'Section 3 — That whenever the interstate commerce commission shall have reasonable ground for belief that any common carrier is engaged in the carriage of passengers or freight traffic between given points at less than the published rates on file, or is committing any discriminations forbidden by law, a petition may be presented alleging such facts to the Circuit Court of the United States sitting in equity having jurisdiction.' "The same law makes it the duty of the United States district attorneys to prosecute violators of the statute. Some persons are exempted from the penalties of the law, but Federal officials are not. The President is sworn to enforce the law, but in reality he became a party to its violation. It is advised to prevent such scandals that Congress should appropriate money ample to defray the expenses of these electioneering tours, for in reality that is what they amounted to." There was so much criticism of this affair that the President finally appealed to Congress for an appropriation out of the Treas- ury to meet his traveling e^enses, on the ground that he was un- able to pay them himself, and disliked to travel at the expense of the railroads. Congress, in 1906, upon the President's suggestion, and against the protests of the Democratic members of both houses, passed a bill granting him $25,000 a year to pay the trav- eling expenses of himself and his invited guests. The arguments and votes on this bill will be found in the Congressional Record for June 20, 21 and 22, 1906. The vote in the House stood, for the bill 176, all Republicans (except Bourke Cockran); against the bill, 66, all Democrats. (Record, p. 9059.) The vote in the Senate stood, for the bill, 42, all Republicans; against it, 20, all Democrats (except McCumber). (Record, p. 9238.) This bill was clearly in violation of that section of the Constitu- tion which provides that "the President shall at stated times re- ceive for his services a compensation, which," whatever it may be, "shall neither he increased nor diminished during the period for which he shall have heen elected; and he shall not receive loithin that period any other emolument — any gain, perquisite, or advantage arising from, incidental to, or connected with the office of President — "from the United States, or any of them." THE POLICY OF THE PRESIDENT RELATING TO NATIONAL BANKS AND BANK DEPOSITS. i The Secretary of the Treasury, with the President's approval, has again and again deposited large sums of public money amounting to tens of millions of dollars in favored banks without interest, not for safekeeping merely, but confessedly to benefit the banks; to enable them to buy gold abroad, or to lend money to stock gamblers in Wall Street; thus making the people's treasury an accessory in the wicked game of fleecing the people. This is a violation of the spirit of the law; though it is not expressly pro- hibited because when the banking law was passed it was incon- ceivable that such a thing could ever be done under its provisions. The President cannot escape responsibility for this abuse. He THE MOTIVE BEHIND THE 'BIG STICK:' 199 has repeatedly endorsed it, and has asked for power that would allow him to lend all the public money to the banks. In his an- nual message of December 7, 1903, the President said: "The same liberty should be granted to the Secretary of the Treasury to deposit customs receipts as is granted him in the deposit of receipts from other sources." */ This would enable the banks to handle the entire income of the country without interest. In his annual message of December 5, 1905, he admits that he has adopted measures not authorized by Congress in this respect, but "which should be provided by Con- gressional action." He says: "At present the Treasury Department is at irregularly recurring intervals obliged, in the interest of the business world — that is, in^ the interests of the American public — to try to avert financial crises" by providing a remedy, which should be provided by Congressional action." This policy of pampering favorite banks has caused so much adverse criticism that Secretary Shaw has recently announced that he will lend no more public money to any bank for specula- tive purposes; but he does not define speculative purposes, and keeps right on lending money to the banks. His announcement is a confession that he has been furnishing Wall Street with the means of rigging the market for years; and the President's utter- ances prove that it has been done with his sanction. Again, the President, in 1905, used large sums of public money without authority of law, express or implied, to pay the expenses of a literary bureau located in Washington, which was used to influence public opinion through the press in favor of his personal policy in Panama. This bureau had nothing to do with the actual building of the canal; its only purpose being to laud the President and his wonderful works and to reply to criticisms of conditions on the Isthmus. At its head was a gentleman named Bishop, whose salary of $10,000 a year was paid out of the public treasury, in spite of the fact that no appropriation had been made for such payments, and that the Spooner act did not authorize any such expenditures. The matter was brought out by an investigation of Panama affairs by the Senate Committee on Interoceanic Canals, and elicited so much unfavorable criticism that the bureau was abolished. But the President still retained Mr. Bishop's services by making him a sort of secretary for the Canal Commission and paying as large a salary as ever. The provision of the Constitution that "no money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in pursuance of appropriations made by law" has had no weight with the President. He has violated the Constitution, not only in the Bishop case, but in other cases. For instance. Congress appropriated a sum of money to build a new house for the accommodation of the Agricultural Depart- ment, and fixed the plan, the limit of cost and the location of the building. But the President changed the plan and location, and 20a PARTY HISTORY ON MONOPOLIES AND TRUSTS. spent all the money on two buildings, or wings, to be connected in the future at two or three times the cost of the work for which Congress had made the appropriation. By such conduct he proclaims his lack of re\rerence for law, and his contempt for the legislative authority, and proves himself to be a law unto himself. PARTY HISTORY ON MONOPOLIES AND TRUSTS. The principles of the Democratic party defy, and the Demo- cratic party has always opposed monopoly, whether in its old form or the new style, called "trusts." Andrew Jackson hated and crushed the bank monopoly, that, by corrupt means, strenu- ously sought to control Congress in its efforts to free the people from its crushing and demoralizing machinations. Jackson approved many bills reducing the tariff, thus avoiding the creation of industrial monopolies. Furthermore, his was the first and last administration to pay off the public debt. Under the happy influences of revenue tariff and Democratic administration, there were no trusts controlling commerce in or between the States until after the Democratic party went out of power in 1860. Nevertheless, the Democrats have at all times openly defied monopoly, and in 1856, about the very birth of the Republican party, that now stands sponsor for high tariff and trusts, the Democratic party, in its platform proclaimed that one of its many high purposes was: "To sustain and advance among us constitutional liberty by continuing to resist all monopolies and exclusive legislation for the benefit of the few at the expense of the many." The Democratic party was the first to discover and point out the existence and dangerous operations of the new form of monopoly, called "trusts," and charged that high tariffs bred, sheltered and protected them, and demanded tariff reform, "and the prevention of monopoly." To this Mr. Carnegie, of armor plate and steel trust fame, replied: "The public may regard trusts and corporations with serene confidence." Taking sides with Mr. Carnegie and issue with the Democratic party in his memorable candidacy in 1884 for the Presidency, Mr. Blaine declared: "Trusts are private affairs with which the people have no concern." PARTY HISTORY ON MONOPOLIES AND TRUSTS. 201 In 1884, Mr. Blaine, in his letter of acceptance, further declared: "The internal commerce of our 38 States is carried on without let or hindrance, without tax, detention or governmental interference of any kind lohatever. It spreads freely over an area of three and a half million square miles — almost equal in extent to the whole of Europe. Its profits are enjoyed today by 56,000,000 of American freemen, and from this enjoyment no monopoly is created. "According to Alexander Hamilton, when he discussed the same subject in 1790, 'the internal competition which takes place, does away with everything like monopoly, and by degrees reduces the prices of articles to tlie minimum of a reasonable profit on the capital employed.* "IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO POINT TO A SINGLE MONOPOLY IN THE UNITED STATES THAT HAS BEEN CREATED OR FOS- TERED BY THE INDUSTRIAL SYSTEM WHICH IS UPHELD BY THE REPUBLICAN PARTY." Trusts are private! Tariffs do not create or foster them!! Our commerce is free!!! Thus spoke Mr. Blaine. He was defeated, Mr. Cleveland elected and a Democratic House. The proposition to reach, by congressional action, trusts and combinations engaged in federal commerce was a new and extremely difficult kind of legislation, as shown by the following statements made in debating the trust bills from which evolved the Anti-Trust Act of 1890: Senator Piatt, of Connecticut, said: "It is very difficult to see that anything can be reached" — ^under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. (March 24, 1890, Record, Vol. 21, p. 568.) On April 8, 1890, Senator Hoar said: "Senators will remember that this is entering upon a new and un- trodden field of legislation. It is imdertaking to curb by national au- thority an evil which, under the opinions which have prevailed of old under all our legislative precedents and policies, has been left to be dealt with either by the ordinary laws of trade or to be dealt with by the State." ♦ * * Senator Hiscock, March 24, 1890, contended that all the bills were unconstitutional, but of these, he favored the Reagan bill, which "upon its face," said he, "it would afford some relief." On March 24, 1890, Mr. Sherman said: "The power of Congress is the only one that can bring all the parties to combinations before a tribunal and have that tribunal pronounce judgment, not in a criminal suit, but in a civil suit." (Vol. 21, Rec- ord, 2569.) In the Fiftieth Congress just before this (Fifty-first) Senator Sherman said it could only be done by the taxing power. Senator Sherman at first opposed a criminal section but after the Senate had voted the Reagan bill, March 25, 1890, into the Sherman bill, he acquiesced. March 26, 1890, Mr. Sherman had changed. He said: "The proposition made by the Senator from Texas (Mr. Reagan) is also in the right direction, and, after careful consideration of that proposition, there can be no objection to it so far as any one who is in 202 PARTY HISTORY ON MONOPOLIES AND TRUSTS^. favor of the principle of the bill is concerned. It adds a criminal clause and defines somewhat the meaning of the words in the original bill. So far so good. "There are two propositions in it (the bill) of great importance. The amendment of the Senator from Texas (Mr. Reagan) which is how a distinct and separate amendment." March 25, 1890, Mr. Edmunds said: "I should not have referred to this matter (failure of Judiciary Committee to report Reagan bill) at all if the Senator from Kansas, to whom I meant no offense, of course, had not alluded to' the fact that the substance of this measure, the hest arrangement that had been proposed, in the first instance, that I know of, the Mil of the Senator from Texas, was referred to that committee and had not been reported. That seemed to imply a reproach upon the committee, a neglect of public interests." On April 8, 1890, Mr. Edmunds, in speaking of Mr. Reagan and the Reagan bill, said: "Now, I come to the amendment of my friend from Texas (Mr. Reagan). * * * i know he is perfectly earnest about this busi- ness and I think he introduced the best and the first hill upon the subject." Senator Reagan, January 25, 1889, said: "If we have tne power to deal with this subject, it seems to me it must be under the Commerce Clause." Mr. Turpie: "There is a bill introduced by the Senator from Texas (Mr. Reagan) . It is a most carefully and elaborately prepared bill as far as the penal section is concerned." Senator Hawley, March 26, 1890 — "Nobody from the Committee on Finance has advocated this (Sherman) bill (S. 1) except the distin- guished reporter (Mr. Sherman) and perhaps its author. I do not remember that any one else has spoken for it from that committee." His motion to refer it to the Judiciary Committee was defeated : Yeas 24, nays, 29. DEMOCRATS FIRST. The Democrats were first to discover and point out and denounce "trusts." They were first to report on trusts. They were first to introduce anti-trust bills in Congress. They were first to base these bills on the commerce clause where the law now rests. They were first to base these bills on that clause with civil and criminal provisions. Judge Key (Democrat) tried and decided the first case under the Anti-trust Act of 1890. Judge Harmon (Democrat) was the first Attorney-General to win a case in the Federal Supreme Court under this law — Trans- Missouri suit. He filed the Joint Traffic and Pipe cases; they were won. These are the three leading cases under the anti-trust law and Judge Peckham (Democrat), Associate Justice, wrote the opinion of tlie court in these three cases. PARTY HISTORY ON MONOPOLIES AND TRUSTS. 203 DEMOCRATS FIRST TO INTRODUCE ANTI-TRUST BILLS. The Democrats also introduced the first bill in Congress (Fiftieth) to regulate what is known as Trusts. This fact is shown by Senate Doc. 147, Fifty-second Congress, second session, 1903, prepared by direction of the Attorney-General, who was at that time Mr. P. C. Knox. It contains and is entitled "Bills and Debates in Congress Relating to Trusts, Fiftieth Congress to Fifty-seventh Congress, first session, inclusive. Washington, Government Printing Office, 1903."' We must, therefore, presume that Mr. Knox caused to be printed in this document all trust bills introduced in Congress down to and including those in the first session of the Fifty-seventh Congress — 1903. The Librarian (Congressional) investigated and finds none were introduced in the Forty-ninth Congress. List of bills introduced in the Congresses named according to the official date of Introduction, as shown by official file numbers. House bills are marked "H. R." and Senate bills "S." 1888 — (Fiftieth Congress). H. R. 6,113 Stone (Ky.) D.Jan. 30, 1 H. R. 6,117 Rayner D. Jan. 30, 2 H. R. 8,036 Breckenridge D. Marcli 5, 3 H. R. 8,054 Thomas R. March 5, 4 H. R. 9,449 McDonald D. April 16, 5 S. 2.906 a Teller (I. R.) May 10, 6 H. R. 10,049 Springer D. May 21, 7 H. R. 10,928 Springer D. July 23, 8 S. 3,440 Reagan D. Aug. 14, 9 S. 3,445 b Sherman R. Aug. 14, 10 H. R. 11,213 Anderson D. Aug. 20, 11 S. 3,476 Reagan D. Aug. 22, 12 H. R. 11,279 Anderson D. Aug. 27, 13 H. R. 11,339 Newton D. Sept. 3, 14 H. R. 11,343 Anderson D. Sept. 3, 15 S. 3,510 Cullom R. Sept. 4,16 H. R. 11,395 Henderson (N. C.) D. Sept. 10, 17 H. R. 11,401 Culberson D. Sept. 10, 18 H. R. 11,534 Abbott D. Oct. 1, 19 aNow a Democrat. bintroduced after the Democrats had filed one of their reports on trusts, July 30, 1888, H. R. 3121, Fiftieth Congress. 1889 — (Fifty-fire^t Congress). S. 1 Sherman R. Dec. S. 6 George D. Dec. S. 62 , Reagan D. Dec. H. R. 91 McRae D. Dec. H. R. 179 Stewart (Ga.) D. Dec. H. R. 202 Fithian D. Dec. H. R. 270 Henderson (la.) R. Dec. H. R. 286 Conger R. Dec. H. R. 313 Lacey R. Dec. H. R. 402 Breckenridge D.Dec. H. R. 509 Anderson D. Dec. H. R. 811 Enloe D. Dec. H. R. 826 Richardson D. Dec. H. R. 830 Pierce D. Dec. H. R. 846 Stewart (Tex.) D. Lee. H. R. 3,294 Breckenridge D. Dec. H. R. 3,353 Lester D. Dec. 1890 — (Fifty-flrst Congress). H. R. 3,819 Lane D. Jan. 6. 18 H. R. 3,844 Perkins R. Jan. 6. 19 H. R. 3,925 Abbott D. J an. 6, 20 H. R. 3,980 Culberson D. April 3, 21 (Senate Document 147, Fifty-second Congress, Second Session). (Bills and debates in Congress relating to trusts. Fiftieth Congress to Fiftv-seventh Congress, first seesion inclusive. Prepared by direction of the Attorney General, Washington, Government Printing Office, 1905). 4, 1 4, 2 4, 3 18, 4 18, 5 18. (i 18, 7 18, 8 18, 9 18, 10 18, 11 is; 12 18, 13 18, 14 18, 15 20, 16 20, 17 204 PARTY HISTORY ON MONOPOLIES AND TRUSTS. This document, in part, shows: That the first trust bill was introduced by Mr. W. J. Stone (Democrat), of Kentucky, January 30, 1888; that the second was by Mr. Rayner (Democrat), of Maryland, on the same day. It was based on the commerce clause. The third was by Mr. Breckenridge (Democrat), of Kentucky, on March 5, while of the fourteen House bills (Fiftieth Congress) only one — the fourth — was introduced by a Republican (Mr. Thomas). The Sherman bill was tenth of the nineteen bills introduced in that Fiftieth Congress, and the third Senate bill Fiftieth Con- gress, S. 3445, while Mr. Reagan's was second, S. 3440. Both were introduced August 14, 1888. Mr. Sherman protested against referring the Reagan bill to the Judiciary Committee instead of the Finance Committee, of which he was chairman. The Reagan bill contained a definition of a trust and a criminal section with heavy penalty, and was based on the commerce clause. Hence it was sent to the law or Judiciary Committee. It was the first bill in the Senate contain- ing a criminal section based on the commerce clause. The earlier House bills by Stone, Rayner and Breckenridge also contained criminal and civil sections. The Rayner bill of January 30, 1888, particularly well framed, based on the commerce clause, where the anti-trust act of 1890 was finally based as a result of Democratic efforts — mainly of Reagan and George and Vest as the debates in the Record show. In objecting, August 14, 1888, to the Reagan bill being sent to the Judiciary Committee, Senator Sherman said: SHERMAN'S PLAN— TAXING POWER ONLY POWER TO REGULATE TRUSTS. "I wish to say that the Committee on Finance has already been charged with the consideration of this subject. I have myself given some attention to it, to see how far it is within the constitutional power of Congress to so limit trusts and combinations in restraint of trade. IT IS VERY CLEAR THERE IS NO SUCH POWER UNLESS IT IS DERIVED FROM THE POWER OF LEVYING TAXES, THAT IT IS A POWER WHICH MUST BE EXERCISED BY EACH STATE FOR ITSELF. WHETHER SUCH LEGISLA- TION CAN BE INGRAFTED IN OUR PECULIAR SYSTEM OF GOVERNMENT BY THE NATIONAL AUTHORITY THERE IS SOME DOUBT. IF IT CAN BE DONE AT ALL, IT MUST BE DONE UPON A TARIFF BILL OR UPON A REVENUE BILL. I DO NOT SEE IN WHAT OTHER WAY IT CAN BE DONE. (Record, Vol. 19, Part 8, page 7512.) Bear in mind the (Sherman) anti-trust law was based on the "commerce clause" of the constitution and not on the "taxing power." FIRST RESOLUTION IN THE HOUSE TO INVESTIGATE TRUSTS— HOUSE DEMOCRATIC— REPORT MADE. FIFTIETH CONGRESS. The Democrats were the first (January 25, 1888) to order an investigation of trusts and their operations and report a remedy. They did investigate and did report, and this report was referred PARTY HISTORY ON MONOPOLIES AND TRUSTS. 205 to by Senator Sherman and others as authority in discussing the subject in the Senate (Fifty-first Congress). The committee began work March 8, 1888, and filed a report July 22, 1888, and a final report March 2, 1889, Fiftieth Congress. HOUSE RESOLUTIONS— FIFTIETH CONGRESS. The Committee on Manufactures was directed to investigate trusts, their operations, extent, names and number, methods, etc., "and report the same to the House with such recommendations as the said committee may agree upon." This Democratic committee reported that it had investigated trusts, particularly the Standard Oil Trust, Whiskey Trust, Cotton Bagging Trust and Sugar Trust and submitted over 1,200 page§ of testimony on these trusts and stated that many other trusts were in existence and were rapidly forming, affecting "a large portion of the important manufacturing and industrial interests of the country." "They do not report any lists of these combinations, for the reason that new ones are constantly form- ing, and that old ones are constantly extending their relations so as to cover new branches of business and invade new terri- tories." "That owing to present differences of opinion between the members of the committee they limit this report to submit- ting to the careful consideration and subsequent Congresses the facts shown by the testimony taken before the committee." A minority report was filed, signed by James Buchanan, a Republican. It reads: "VIEWS OF THE MINORITY." "The undersigned deems the record in this case incomplete without the documents hereto annexed as appendices. 'A' is a very able review of the authorities bearing upon the LEGALITY of trusts. 'B' is the opinion of Judge Barrett, of the Supreme Court of New York, in the sugar-refining case, discussing the same question. *C' is the offer by the solicitor of the Standard Oil Trust to disprove certain matters in testimony relating to such trust. As these matters appear of record, uncontradicted, it would seem but fair to put upon record the offer to disprove. 'D' and 'E' are submitted as fair specimens of the CRUDENESS and limited operation of remedies PROPOSED in the measures submitted to the committee." (Fiftieth Congress, Second Session, Report 4165, Part 2.) Exhibit "A" was an ultra pro-trust article by Prof. Theo. W. Dwight, from which is quoted this: "Let us therefore be calm. Trusts, as a rule, are not dangerous. They are, however, a sign of the times. The right of association is the child of freedom of trade. It is too late to banish it." A pro-trust argument. Exhibits "D" and "E" were the first (Stone's) and second (Rayner's) House bills ever introduced in Congress to control trusts. The Stone bill contained a civil and criminal section. The Rayner bill contained a criminal section and prohibited all contracts, etc., in restraint of interstate commerce, and was based on the commerce clause. Tbe Rayner bill blazed the way rightly 206 PARTY HISTORY ON MONOPOLIES AND TRUSTS. to frame such a law and was similar to the bill that became the law, July 2, 1890. It was the pioneer bill in Congress based on the commerce clause. Yet the Republican minority ridiculed these bills, showing their love for the trusts and their ignorance of how to outlaw them, and printed pro-trust articles as part of the "views of the minority," while Mr. Buchanan suggested no hill and introduced none. FIRST RESOLUTION TO INVESTIGATE TRUSTS IN THE SENATE— SENATE REPUBLICAN— NO REPORT MADE. On July 10, 1888, Fiftieth Congress, Mr. Sherman introduced a resolution to investigate and report on trusts and had it referred to the Finance Committee, of which he was chairman. But he made no report, and no report was made in the Senate on that subject. The Senate was Republican. Mr. Sherman had plenary power to act and had the full benefit of the House report, filed July 22, and the many House bills already filed. No excuse is seen for his failure. The bill he introduced he abandoned. SHERMAN RESOLUTION TO INVESTIGATE TRUSTS— NO INVESTIGATION AND NO REPORT. Here is Senator Sherman's (Fiftieth Congress) resolution of June 10, 1888, to investigate trusts and report a bill to remedy the evil "in connection with any bill raising or reducing revenue": "Resolved, That the Committee on Finance be directed to inquire into and report, in connection with any bill raising or reducing revenue that may be referred to it, such measures as it may deem expedient to set aside, control, restrain, or prohibit all arrangements, contracts, agreements, trusts, or combinations between persons or corporations, made with a. view, or which tend to prevent free and full competition in the production, manufacture, or sale of articles of domestic growth or production, or of the sale of articles imported into the United States, or which, against public policy, are designed to tend or foster monopoly or to artificially advance the cost to the consumer of necessary articles of human life, with such penalties and provisions, and as to corporations, with such forfeitures, as will tend to preserve freedom of trade and production, the natural competition of increasing production, the lowering of prices by such competition, and the full benefit designed by and hitherto conferred by the policy of the Government to protect and encourage American industries by levying duties on imported goods." Mr. Sherman made no report, but on August 14, 1888, he intro- duced his first anti-trust bill, S. 3445, Fiftieth Congress, entitled, "A BILL TO DECLARE UNLAWFUL TRUSTS AND COMBINA- TIONS IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE AND PRODUCTION." Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled. That all arrange- ments, contracts, agreements, trusts, or combinations between persons or corporations made with a view, or which tend, to prevent full and free competition in the production, manufacture, or sale of articles of domestic growth or production, or of the sale of articles imported into the United States, and all arrangements, contracts, agreements, trusts, or combinations between persons or corporations designed, or which tend, to advance the cost to the customer of any such articles, PARTY HISTORY ON MONOPOLIES AND TRUSTS. 207 are hereby declared to be against public policy, unlawful, and void; and any such person or corporation injured or damnified by such arrangement, contract, agreement, trust, or corporation may sue for and recover in any court of the United States of competent jurisdic- tion double the amount of damages suffered by such person or cor- poration. And any corporation doing business in the United States that acts or takes part in any such arrangement, contract, agreement, trust, or corporation shall forfeit its corporate franchise; and it shall he the duty of the district attorney of the United States of the district in which such corporations exist or does business to institute the proper proceedings to enforce such forfeiture. Mr. Sherman reported a substitute for this bill. The Senate considered, amended and debated this substitute and a Republican Senate agreed to adjourn, and did adjourn Congress without pass- ing it or reporting any other trust bill or making any report on the subject of trusts. FIFTY-FIRST CONGRESS— REPUBLICAN. A Republican Senate repudiated and refused to pass Mr. Sher- man's S. 1, introduced in the Fifty-first Congress. Mr. Sherman admits, as shown herein, in his book, that none of Ms hills became the law. January 14, 1890, he reported S. 1 ivith amendments. It was ably discussed by Republicans and Democrats. It contained three sections. March 18 he reported, as usual, an "Amendment" in lieu, containing two sections. By March 25, fourteen sections had been added to this substitute, making a bill of sixteen sections. It was otherwise amended before and thereafter. The Reagan bill was bodily adopted as an amendment to the Sherman bill, S. 1, by the following vote: VOTE ON REAGAN BILL, MARCH 25, 1890. Ayes — 34. Allen, Pop. George, Dem. Moody, Rep. Vest, Dem. Allison, Rep. Gorman, Dem. Paddok, Rep. Walthoi-p, Dem. Bate, Dem. Gray, Dem. Payne, Dem. Washburn, Rep. Berry, Dem. Harris, Dem. Pierce, Rep. Wilson, Rep., Blackburn, Dem.Hawley, Rep. Pugh, Dem. of Iowa. Cockrell, Dem. Higgins, Dem. Reagan, Dem. Wilson, Dem., Coke, Dem. Engalls, Rep. Spooner, Rep. of Maryland. Cullom, Rep. Jones, Dem., Teller, Rep. Davis, Rep. of Arkansas. Turpie, Dem. Faulkner, Dem. Mandison, Rep. Vance, Dem. Nays— 12. Aldrich, Rep. Frye, Rep. McPherson, Rep. Plumb, Rep. Blair, Rep. Hi-^cock, Rep. Mitchell, Rep. Sherman, Rep. Dawes, Rep. Hoar, Rep. Morrell, Rep. Stewart, Rep. The Reagan bill defined a trust, contained a criminal section, another, making all contracts, etc., in restraint of interstate and foreign commerce unlawful, etc. Three or four motions were made and defeated to refer the Mil, S. 1, with amendments to the Judiciary Committee. They were made by Democrats and Republicans, the best lawyers in the Senate. Finally on March 27, 1890, the bill and amendments were referred to the Judiciary Committee, on motion of Mr. 208 PARTY HISTORY ON MONOPOLIES AND TRUSTS. Walthall, with instructions to report a Mil within twenty days. By a vote of 31 to 28, the bill and amendments were referred to that committee, Mr. Sherman voting "no." The Judiciary Committee was composed of Senators Edmunds, Evarts, Hoar, Ingalls and Wilson, of Iowa, Republicans, and Sena- tors Vest, Pugh, George and Coke, Democrats. Their unanimous report was filed April 2. This committee reported a new bill, striking out every word of the Sherman bill, including its title, leaving its enacting clause and number "S. 1," which the new bill inherited, of course. The bill passed (this Judiciary Committee bill) the Senate April 8 and finally June 18 and the House finally June 20, 1890, without a dissenting vote and became the law. So none of Mr. Sherman's anti-trust bills in the Fiftieth or Fifty-first Congresses became the law. Yet we find in and out of Congress the Republicans claim that "John Sherman's anti-trust bill Senate File No. 1" became the law. The speech of Mr. Secretary Shaw of March 23, 1904, found in the Republican Campaign Book of 1904 at page 192 states this: "The very first bill introduced in the Senate of the 51st Congress was John Sherman's anti-trust bill Senate File No. 1. It (John Sherman's) passed both Houses and received the signature of Benja- min Harrison." Mr. Sherman in his book, "Recollections of John Sherman," page 173, flatly contradicts Mr. Shaw. Mr. Sherman says: "In the previous Congress I had introduced a bill to declare unlaw- ful trusts and combinations in restraint of trade and production, but no action was take on it. On December 4 I again introduced this bill, it being the first Senate bill introduced in that Congress. It was referred to the Committee on Finance, and having been reported back with amendments I called it up on the 27th of February, etc. . . . I subsequently reported a substitute from the Committee on Finance for the bill and on March 21 I made a long speech in support of it. Various amendments were offered. Subsequently, however, the bill was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary with instructions to report within twenty days. On April 2 Mr. Edmunds, Chairman of that Committee, reported a substitute for the bill, and stated that, while it did not entirely meet his views, he was willing to support it. Mr. Vest, Mr. George and Mr. Coke, members of the Committee, made statements to the same effect. It was passed by the House and after being twice referred to Committees of Conference was finally agreed to, the title having been changed to 'An Act to Protect Trade and Commerce against Unlawful Restraint and Monopoly,' and was approved by the President, June 26, 1890." Mr. Sherman here admits that his trust bills in the Fiftieth and Fifty-first Congresses failed to become law and yet with the public records before his eyes, with Mr. Sherman's book, pre- sumptively, at least, in his library — certainly in the Congressional Library nearby — Mr. Shaw persists in making, along with other Republicans, the untrue and misleading statement that "John Sherman's anti-trust bill. Senate file No. 1, passed both houses and received the signature of Benj^-min flarri^pn." PARTY HISTORY ON MONOPOLIES AND TRUSTS. 209 Mr. Spooner, February 21, 1901, in opposing after stating he believed that the Littlefield Anti-Trust bill was "unconstitu- tional," said: " • • • . There is legislation on the statute books. Our juris- diction to deal with this question is derived from that clause of the Constitution which gives to Congress the power to regulate commerce among the States, with Indian tribes, and with foreign countries. So far as the power falls within the interstate-commerce clause, a law years ago was drawn which was intended to exhaust the Federal juris- diction upon the subject. I was a member of the Senate at the time. It was committed to the Judiciary Committee, A DEFECTIVE BILL HAVING BEEN INTRODUCED BY MR. SHERIVIAN. Time was taken in that Committee. Great lawyers were upon, that committee who participated in the report. Senator Edmunds was its chairman. The distinguished Senator from Massachusetts (IVTr. Hoar), than whom I know no greater lawyer, had to do with the drafting of the bill. Senator George, of Mississippi, who was a great lawyer, partici- pated in that work. That bill was reported to the Senate, and it was intended to be so, and it was so, drawn as to exhaust the Federal jurisdiction upon the subject; and so far as the Supreme Court of the United States has had occasion to deal with it, it has so held, in my opinion. MORGAN ANTI-TRUST LAW. Later when the Wilson tariff bill was under discussion here, upon motion, as I recollect it, of the distinguished Senator from Alabama (Mr. Morgan), the same provisions of law adapted to foreign com- merce were inserted in that bill and became a law, and when the pres- ent tariff law was enacted by an express * provision the Morgan amendment to the Wilson bill was continued in force and is now the law. I have not found any Senator yet who has been able to point out, in committee or out of it, aside from enlarging the penalties pre- scribed by the present la^v, any jurisdiction to go beyond it." The Senate Judiciary Bill was unanimously reported for passage by the House Judiciary Committee, April 25, 1890, Mr. Culberson (Democrat) making the report. The next day, April 26th, Mr. Heard (Democrat) introduced a resolution to make this bill a special order for May 8, and "consider it until passed." This resolution was defeated, and, on May 1st, the House con- sidered the Senate bill. Mr. Taylor (Republican), Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, yielded the floor to Mr. Culberson (Democrat) to explain the bill. He did this so well that Mr. Can- non said: "I want to thank him for his explanation. After the able presenta- tion of it by the gentleman from Texas, there is not much left to say." -There were grave doubts entertained as to whether the bill ap- plied to railroads, railroad combinations, the "Big Four Beef Trust," being named as one, and to remove all doubt, make the law so plain as to leave nothing for the courts to construe, and thereby have a perfect remedy that could be swiftly executed, Mr. Bland (Democrat) offered this as an amendment: \ BLAND AMENDMENT. "(1). Every contrdct or agreement entered into for the purpose of preventing competition in the sale or purpose of any commodity transported from one State or Territory to be sold vn another, or so 210 PARTY HISTORt ON MONOPOLIES AND TRUSTS. contracted to be sold, (2) or for the transportation of persons or property from one State or Territory into another, shall be deemed unlawful within the meaning of this Act ; provided, that the contracts • herein enumerated shall not be construed to exclude any other con- tract or agreement declared unlawful in this Act." "The amendment was adopted." (21, Record, 4104, May 1, 1890.) Mr. Bland explained his amendment, in part, thus: "It (his amendment) provides that where the Big Four or any other corporation or company are proven to be in a trust as to any com- modity, the moment that commodity leaves the State or is to be sold in another and is in in transitu it becomes the subject to this law. This provision does reach Armour & Co., without leaving the matter to the construction of the Supreme Court. It does it in direct terms in the law, and I want my friends to join with me to make that definite and certain, for there is no trust in this country that today is robbing the farmers of the great West and North of more millions of their hard earned money than this so-called Big Four Beef Trust of Chicago. AGAINST RAILROAD COMBINATIONS. "This amendment, however, goes a little further than that, and provides that where there is a combination or an agreement to com- bine between railroad companies or transportation companies for the tra/nsportation of persons or property from one State into another, 'a pool,' so to speak, it is declared to be subject to this bill. I want at least two things to be known to be covered by this bill, and these two are the most important: The transportation monopoly and the monopoly of the great cattle, industry of this country. This amend- ment will cover these two things, but God knows, or no man in this country knows what else the bill will cover. "I TRUST THE HOUSE WILL ADOPT THE AMENDMENT. THE BILL MAY REACH THE CASE WITHOUT THE AMENDMENT, BUT I FEAR IT WILL NOT, AND FROM ABUNDANT CAUTION I HAVE OFFERED IT." (Record, May 1, 1890.) His amendment was then UNANIMOUSLY adopted, and the Senate bill, thus amended, passed the House without opposition May 1st, 1890. CONFERENCE REPORT. The Senate ajnended the Bland amendment by eliminating its first provision and substituting for the second, this: I SENATE AMENDMENT. "Every contract or agreement entered into for the purpose of pre- venting competition in the transportation of persons or property from one State to another or Territory so that the RATES of such transportation may be raised above what is just or reasonable shall be deemed unlawful within the meaning of this act, and nothing in this act shall be deemed or held to impair the power of the several States in respect of any of the matter in this act mentioned." "Statement accompanying report (Jime 11) of conferees on the disagreeing votes of the two houses on S. 1": STATEMENT OF CONFEREES. ( 1 ) A majority of the Committee of conferehce on the part of the House on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on Senate Bill 1 submit the following statement. PARTY HISTORY ON MONOPOLIES AND TRUSTS. 211 (2) In the original bill two things were declared illegal, namely: Contracts in restraint of interstate trade or commerce, and the monopolization of such trade. (3) Its only object was the control of TRUSTS SO CALLED, so far as such combinations in their relation to interstate trade are within reach of Federal legislation. (4) The House (Bland) amendment extends the scope of the aot to ALL agreements entered into for the purpose of preventing com- petition either in the purchase or sale of commodities, or in the TRANSPORTATION of persons or property within the jurisdiction of Congress. (5) It declares illegal any agreement for relief from the effects of competition in the^ two industries of TRANSPORTATION and mer- chandising, however excessive or destructive such competition may be. (6) The amendment reported by the conferees is the Senate amendment with the added proviso that the power of the States over the subjects embraced in the act shall not be impaired thereby. (7) It strikes from the House amendment the clause relating to contracts for the purchase of merchandise, and MODIFIES THE TRANSPORTATION CLAUSE by making unlawful agreements which raise rates above what is just and reasonable. This conference report prepared by four able lawyers, conferees, shows they construed the original bill thus: "Its ONLY object was the control of TRUSTS, SO CALLED . . . in their relation to interstate trade." "The House AMENDMENT extends the scope of the act to all agree- ments entered into for the purpose of preventing competition, either in the purchase or sale of commodities, or in the TRANSPORTATION^ of persons or property within the jurisdiction of Congress." Here is an unfortunate construction, given by these able con- ferees, to the original bill as applying to "ONLY, trusts, so- called," industrial trusts, and as not applying to railroads engaged in the "transportation of persons or property" between the States. These conferees were thus asking Congress to con- gressionally construe, and at the same time enact, this bill as applying to and covering only industrial trusts, and not as apply- ing to or covering TRANSPORTATION as such, of persons and property between the States. Later on the Bland and Senate amendments were defeated. The four judges of the Supreme Court (White, Shiras, Fields and Gray) of the United States, in writing theirdissenting opin- ion in the Trans- Missouri case (first railroad case under this law) allude to THIS construction as showing that CONGRESS did NOT intend the Sherman anti-trust law— t^e then pending bill-TO APPLY TO RAILROADS. In each railroad case, under this law, decided by the Supreme Court, the opinions of the court have been by a bare majority as follows: Trans-Missouri 5 to 4 Joint Traflac 5 to 3 (one judge not sitting) Merger Case 5 to 4 with great douM raised since the last case as to how two of the judges may hereafter construe this law in similar cOrses. The result has been to block practically the execution of this law as to railroads, certainly its swift execution. Each case, as a rule, is appealed to and decided by the Supreme Court, after 212 PARTY HISTORY ON MONOPOLIES AND TRUSTS. years of delay, and a majority only of the Court and by "con- struction" hold the law applies to common carriers. Mr. Bland, with great force, said this would be the result and hence he protested with Mr. Culberson against the Senate amend- ment and urged at every step the adoption of the Bland amend- ment. To adopt the conference report, above given, was to adopt by Congress the construction at the original bill given by conferees. By defeating the conference report, was defeating that construc- tion and by adopting the Bland amendment the bill as amended, beyond all doubt, would apply to industrial trusts and railroads engaged in the "transportation of persons and property" between the States. To adopt the Senate amendment to the Bland amendment, it was argued, was to limit the amendment to railroad "rates," excluding railroads as railroads transporting persons and prop- erty and all contracts pertaining thereto, except those as to "RATES." The Commerce Act of 1887, then the law, made rates that were unjust or unreasonable unlawful. Hence, the Senate amendment was unnecessary. Thus the several questions were discussed, and particularly in the House. ACTION ON REPORT JUNE 12, 1890. THE HOUSE STANDS BY BLAND AT FIRST— AFTERWARDS DEFEATS HIS AMENDMENT. The speaker announced at first: "That the first matter before the House is the conference report which was under consideration yesterday evening. The Clerk will read the title of the bill." "The Clerk read as follows: "The Bill S. 1 to protect trade, etc. The question was taken on the adoption of the report; and the speaker announced tliat he was in doubt as to the result." "Mr. Stewart. Division. The House divided yeas 25, nays 54. "Mr. Stewart — ^No quorum is present. "The Speaker (after counting) — 114 present. Not a quorum. "Mr. Kerr — I demand the yeas and nays. "The Speaker — The clerk reports 116 present — a quorum. "The Speaker — The question recurs on the adoption of the con- ference report." "The question was taken. On a division there were yeas 12, nays 115." "So the conference report was rejected." — ^( Record, 21, p. 5981, June 12, 1890.) Stewart (Rep.) made a motion to instruct the conferees to abandon the Bland amendment and ask the Senate to abandon its amendment thereto, and called for the previous question. Previous question ordered — ^Yeas, 110, nays, 97; not voting, 120. (21, Record, p. 5982.) This cut off Mr. Bland from making any amendment or to move to instruct the conferees along his line. Mr. Bland said : There are two questions embodied in the motion j first, to authorize a new conference which of course we all want; and next, for instructions, that we do not want. (Rec. 5983.) He did not want the second conferees instructed to abandon his amendment which made the law plain as applying to beef trusts and railroad combinations. PARTY HISTORY ON MONOPOLIES AND TRUSTS. 213 Mr. Stewart then called for the yeas and nays on and his motion was adopted: Yeas, 106; nays, 98; not voting, 123, "so the motion of Mr. Stewart, of Vermont, was agreed to." (June 12, 1890.) The House conferees were thus instructed to kill the Bland amendment and the Senate amendment thereto. And on June 20th, the conferees — Senator Vest dissenting — insisting on the Bland amendment — reported: "That both houses recede from their respective amendments." The conference report being submitted, this occurred: Mr. Bland — ^Now, Mr. Speaker, I raise the question of consideration, in order to go to the Speaker's table and take up the silver bill. Mr. Stewart — On that question I demand the yeas and nays. The Speaker — The question is: Will the House now consider the conference report ? And on that, the gentleman from Vermont demanded the yeas and nays. The question was taken — ^yeas, 144; nays, 103; not voting, 80. So the House determined to consider the conference report, which was done. Mr. Culberson stated that he signed this conference report be- cause the House had instructed him to do so. "Individually, I thought, the amendment originally made by the House was desirable, but the House having instructed otherwise, I agree to this report in accordance with that instruction." Mr. Bland — "I regret that the amendment that the House put upon the bill was stricken out; and while I fear the bill in its present shape is not what its friends expect of it, I shall cheerfully vote for it. I raise the question of consideration simply for the purpose of going to the Speaker's table and taking up the silver bill. I am not opposed to the bill itself." On the adoption of that report and the passage of the bill as it left the Senate the vote was — ^yeas, 242; nays, 0; not voting, 85, as follows: HOUSE VOTE ON PASSAGE OF ANTI-TRUST ACT OF JULY 2, 1890. ^EAS— 242. Abbott Cheadle Haugen Moore, Tex. Adams Chipman Hayes Morey Alderson Clements Haynes Morrill Allen, Mich. Clunie Heard Morrow Anderson, Kan. Cobb Hemphill Morse Anderson, Miss. Cogswell Henderson, HI . Mudd Arnold Comstrock Henderson, Iowa Niedringhaus Atkinson, W. Va. Conger Henderson, N. C. Norton Baker Cooper, Ind. Herbert Gates Bankhead Cothran Hermann O'Nell, Ind. Banks Cowles Hill O'Neil, Mass. Barnes Grain Hitt O'Nell, Pa. Bartine Crips Holman Osborne Beckwith Culberson, Tex. , Kelley Owen, Ind. Belden Culberson, Pa. Kennedy Owens, Ohio Belknap Cummings Kerr, Iowa Parrett Bergen Cutcheon Ketcham Paynter Bingham Dalzell Kllgore Payson Blanchard Davidson Kinsey Peel Bland De Lano Knapp Penlnrtou 214 PARTY HISTORY ON MONOPOLIES AND TRUSTS. Bliss Dockery Lacey Perkins Boatner Dolliver La Follette Perry Boothman Bunnell Laidlaw Pickler Boutelle Dunphy Lane Post Bowden Elliott Lanham Pugsley Breckinridge, ArkEllIs Laws Quinn Breckinridge, Ky Enloe Lee Raines Brewer Evans Lehlbach Reed, Iowa Brlckner Ewart Lester, Ga. Reilly Brookshire Farquhar Lester, Va. Richardson Broslus Finley Lewis Rife Brown, J. B. Fithian Lind Robertson Browne, Va. Flick Lodge Rockwell Brunner Flood Magner Rowell Buchanan, N. J . Forman Malsh Rowland Buchanan, Va. Forney Mansur Rush Buckalew Fowler Martin, Ind. Russell Bullock Frank McAdoo Sanford Bunn Funston McClammy Sayers Burrows Gear McClellan Scull Burton Geissenhainer McComas Sherman Butterworth Gest McCormick Shively Bynum Gibson McCreary Simonds Caldwell Gifford McKenna Smith, 111. Campbell Goodnight McKinely Smith, W. Va. Candler, Mass. Greenhalge McMillin Smyser Cannon Grimes Mcllae Snider Carlton Grosvenor Miles Spinola Carter Hall Mills Spooner Caruth Hansbrough Moffltt Springer Caswell Hare Montgomery Wike Stephenson Sweeney Vandever Wilkinson Stewart, Ga. Tarsney Vaux Wilcox Stewart, Tex. Taylor, J. D. Venable Williams, 111. Stewart, Vt. Thomas Walker, Mass. Williams, 0. Stivers Tillman Wallace, N. Y. Wilson, Ky. Stockdale Townsend, Col. Wheeler, Ala. Wilson, Mo. Stone, Ky. Tracey Whiting Wilson, W. Va. Stone, Mo. Tucker Whitthorne Wright Strubble Turney, Ga. Wickham » Stump Turner, Kan. Moore, N. H. Nay— 0. Not Voting— 85. Allen, Miss. DeHaven Milliken Stockbridge Andrew Dibble Morgan Taylor, E. B. Atkinson, Pa. Dingley Mutchler Taylor, 111. Barwig Dorsey Nute Taylor, Tenn. Bayne Edmunds O'jjonnell Thompson Biggs Featherstone O'Ferrall Townsend, Pa. Blount Fitch Outhwaite Turner, N. Y. Brower Flower Payne Van Schaick Browne, T. M. Grout Peters Waddill Candler, Ga. Harmer Phelan Wade Catchings Hatch Pierce Walker, Mo. Cheatham Hooker Price Wallace, Mass. Clancy Hopkins Quackenbnsh Washington Clark, Wis. Houk Randall Watson Clarke, Ala. Kerr, Pa. Ray Wheeler, Mich. Coleman Lansing Reyburn Wiley Connell Lawler Rogers AVilson. Wash. Cooper, Ohio Martin, Tex. Sawyer Yardley (21, Record, p. 6314.) PARTY HISTORY OK MONOPOLIES AND TRUSTS. 215 In the face of this vote — in the face of the official facts, that the Democrats first started the fight against the trusts, and first suggested federal legislation against them, and based their bills on the commerce clause, with civil and criminal sections, made the first and only report on trusts, aided in framing the bill that became the law, and first suggested the basis for its frame work, and aided from first to last to frame and pass the existing law, and offered the Bland amendment, which broadened it, agreed to at first by both parties in the House — in face of these and other facts heretofore stated, it is now charged the Democrats tried to defeat this legislation on June 20th, 1890, when Mr. Bland raised the question of consideration of the conference report, that com- pletely destroyed the Bland amendment, and left the bill in great doubt as to its meaning and as to its application to railroads and to the Beef Trust, Today we have the Supreme Court split up on the application or non-application of this law to railroads. We still have the Beef Trust, the Standard Oil Trust, the Cotton Bagging Trust and the Whiskey Trust in existence before and at the time when this act of 1890 was passed, all which would have been covered, if the law had been made plain by the Bland amendment, but which the Republicans defeated, thus, indirectly aiding railroad combinations, the Beef Trust and their kind to rob the people. 216 INJUNCTION SUITS. INJUNCTION SUITS, CRIMINAL PROSECUTIONS AND HABEAS CORPUS PROCEEDINGS BY THE DEFEND- ANTS THEREBY INDICTED, INSTITUTED DURING THE HARRISON ADMINISTRATION UNDER THE ANTI-TRUST ACT OF 1890. Hon. W. H. H. Miller, Attorney^General, March 5, 1889 to March 6, 1892. Out of eight opinions rendered by the Federal Court during the Harrison administration or'^defore Cleveland's terni began, March 4, 1893, seven were adverse to the Government, one in equity and six indictments, fivqof which were quashed and five defendants released and in the. sixth demurrers were sustained to fourteen out of eighteen counts, with leave granted to file "special demurrers," and finally that case was abandoned during Cleveland's term. Not a single indictment filed during the Harrison administration reached a trial on the facts. Here is a list of the cases and the decisions of the courts rendered during the Harrison administration before or March 4, 1893, when Cleveland's second term began. U. S. vs. Jellico Coal Co. Coal Combination in Tennessee and Kentucky. Bill filed September 25, 1890. Preliminaiy injunction refused Oc- tober 13, 1890, 43 Fed Kept. 898, Hammond, J. Injunction granted June 4, 1891, 46 Fed. Kept. 432, D. M. Key, J. No appeal taken. WHISKY TRUST CASES. GOVERNMENT LOSES EACH AND EVERY CASE. U. S. vs. Greenhut and others. Indictment May 1, 1892, quashed May 16, 1892. 50th Kept. P. 469, Nelson, J. In re Corning (a). Indictment quashed June 11, 1892. 51 Fed. Rept. P. 205, Ricks, J. In re Terrell (a). Indictment quashed in habeas corpus June 28, 1892. 51 Fed. Rept. P. 213, Lacombe, J. In re Greene ( a ) . Indictment quashed August 4, 1892. 52 Fed. Rept. P. 104, Jackson, C. J. — (afterwards member of Federal Supreme Court). U. S. vs. Nelson. Indictment (Lumber Trust) 1892. Demurrer to all counts sus- tained. 52 Fed. Rept. 646, October 10, 1892, Nelson J. (a) The Attorney-General omitted to mention in his recent report to Congress Sen. Doc. 526 of the Corning, Terrell and Greene cases — defendants indicted under the anti-trust law of July 2, 1890. CASH REGISTER CASE. U. S. vs. Patterson. Indictment, 18. counts. Demurrer sustained as to all counts, except 4, 9, 14 and 18, with leave to file "special demurrer." 55 Fed. Rept. 605, February 28, 1893, Putnam, J. U. S. vs. Knight (-Sugar Trust Case). Injunction bill filed May 2, 1892. INJUNCTION SUITS. 217 LABOR COMBINATION. U. S. vs. Workingmen's Amalgamated Council of New Orleans. Bill filed November 10, 1892. RAILROAD COMBINATION. U. S. vs. Trans-Missouri Freight Association. Injunction bill filed January 6, 1892. Bill dismissed November 28, 1892, the Federal Court (Rmer, J.) holding the anti-trust act of July 2, 1890, did not apply to railroads or railroad combinations, SUMMARY: 4 Equity cases filed. 1 Injunction granted. Jellico Case. No appeal. 1 Injunction refused. Bill dismissed. Railroad combination. 1 Not tried. (Sugar Trust Case.) 1 Not decided. Possibly being considered by the Court (before March 4, 1893), as the case was decided soon thereafter — March 25, 1893, granting an injunction against Workingmen's etc. Council. (54 Fed. Rept. 994. Affirmed June 13, 1893, 57 Fed. Rept. 85.) 5 Indictments quashed and defendants released. 1 Indictment (Cash Register case). Demurrer sustained as to 14 out of 18 counts, with leave to file "special demurrers" — February 28, 1893. Pending. Total cases pending March 4, 1893, and inherited by Cleveland ad- ministration, 3 in equity and 1 indictment, afterwards abandoned. It is perfectly plain from these indisputable facts, that the Harrison administration signally failed to successfully enforce the Sherman anti-trust law. Not a single indictment stood the test of habeas corpus proceed- ings or of demurrer (except one, partially, Cash Register case), before the Cleveland administration. In this case, June, 1893 (59th Fed. Rept. 280) on rehearing, the general demurrer and the special demurrer, allowed February 28, 1893, were overruled and answer required. This is the last published report of this case. Attorney-General Moody states that this case "was allowed to lapse because of the consolidation of the complaining witness with defendants, said witness being in possession of the evidence relied on." It never reached a trial on the facts, nor did any other indictment found during the Harrison administration. Not a single case, under the Harrison administration had been appealed to the Supreme Court, although the law had been enacted over two years and seven months, before the Cleveland term began March 4, 1893. As yet, no one knew what construction that court of last resort would put on the law in either equity or criminal cases. The District Court (Riner, J.) had held the law did not apply to railroads or railroad combinations — a very important case and decision — while four or five Federal judges had quashed the different indictments found as "insufficient" and otherwise fatally defective, each judge in his construction of the law differing, more or less, with the other judges. 218 INJUNCTION SUITS. INCOMPETENT COUNSEL FOR GOVERNMENT— UNDER HARRISON ADMINISTRATION. In the Greenhut case, Nelson, J., said: "The indictment in this particular (having stated it) is clearly in- sufficient, according to the elementary rules of criminal pleading and charges no offense within the second section of the statute.'* Indict- ment quashed. In the lumber trust case, the court said the indictment failed to state " the facts constituting the offense." Case dismissed. "With more than six, nearly seven, cases out of eight, decided against the Government, with the Supreme Court yet to construe the meaning of the law, the Cleveland administration must have been naturally and inevitably much embarrassed in knowing how to successfully proceed under this trust law, and particularly in new cases, equity or criminal. Thus confronted, the Attorney-General proceeded, in due course, to get the Supreme Court to construe the law. The all-important, old and pending sugar trust and railroad cases, which had been filed by Attorney-General Miller were carried to the higher court. SUGAR TRUST CASE. The bill in the sugar trust case was dismissed by every court that tried it, as the offici.al reports of the case show: U. S. vs. Knight (Sugar Trust). Injunction bill filed May 2, 1892. (Harrison administration.) Bill dismissed January 30, 1894. Butler, J. Decree affirmed by Circuit Court of Appeals (Atcheson, Dallas and Greene, J J., March 25, 1894). Judgment affirmed by Federal Supreme Court January 21, 1895, 156 U. S. Rept. P. 1. Harlan, J., dissenting. The cause of this unhappy result in this case is thus explained by ex-Senator Edmunds: "If the famous Knight case had been instituted and carried forward with suitable allegations of the precise nature and history of the Knight affair, and had been supported, as it could have been, by ade- quate proof of the facts it set forth, I believe the Supreme Court of the United States would not have had the least difficulty in prevent- ing the carrying on of the combination under consideration, and put- ting an end to it, as it can still do with similar ones. The bill of com- plaint in the case was unhappily not drawn in such a way as to pre- sent the question which now so much commands just public concern. What is needed is not so much more legislation as competent and earnest administration of the laws that exist." — (Senator Edmunds' letter, June 2, 1903, to Mr. John A. Scheicher, 110 Fifth Avenue, New York, N. Y.) Senator Edmunds, as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Com- mittee, aided in the preparation of and reported in 1890 the anti- trust act of July 2, 1890, the so-called Sherman law. The criticism of Judge Edmunds, of the Attorney-General (Hon. W. H. H. Miller) under the Harrison administration, is in keep- ing with and supported by the remarks of the court in the INJUNCTION 8UIT8. 219 Greenhut and Nelson cases, already quoted. But whether Judge Edmunds is correct in his criticism or not, the fact remains that the unfortunate results finally had in the sugar trust case did more to mystify the meaning and application of the anti-trust law of July 2, 1890, and block its enforcement than any decision rendered under that statute. But the Democratic administration did not remain idle in these cases and was not deterred by the resulting adverse and discouraging conditions surrounding the administration or meaning of this law. Attorney-General Harmon (Cleveland administration) next pressed the Trans-Missouri (Railroad Combination) case to the higher courts, with the following results: U. S. VS. TRANS-MISSOURI FREIGHT ASSOCIATION. Circuit Court of Appeals (Sanborn and Thayer, Sharis, dissenting), October 2, 1893, affirmed the decision of Judge Riner (November 28, 1892), construing the Sherman Anti-trust law as not applicable to railroads. An appeal was taken and the case argued December 8 and 9, 1896, by Attorney-General Harmon in the Supreme Court, and March 22, 1897, that Court (Fuller, Peckham, Harlan, Brown and Brewer) reversed the decisions of the lower courts (Sharis, Fields, White, Gray, dissenting), and held that the law did apply to railroads and railroad combinations, and perpetually enjoined the defendants. Previous to the trial in this case the Supreme Court, this combina- tion had voluntarily dissolved, and for that reason defendants in- sisted in the Supreme Court, that the bill should be dismissed, thus raising an important jurisdictional question. But the Court repudi- ated this contention and enjoined the defendants from forming future combinations contrary to the statute. Thus, two important questions under the Anti-Trust law were, for the first time, settled in this case, to wit: First, That the law applied to railroads and railroad combinations. Second, That jurisdiction is not lost in such cases, although the un- lawful combination assailed dissolves before the trial in the Supreme Court. This is the first case won in the Supreme Court hy the Govern- ment under this law. It was the first construction of the law hy this court holding that the law applied to railroads. It is the leading case and has since been followed lyy the Supreme Court and of course hy the lower courts. This was also a great victory for Judge Harmon, the Cleveland administration and the people. Since the Supreme Court had only by a bare majority (5 to 4) and also by reversing the District Court and the Circuit Court of Appeals held that this trust law did apply to common carriers, the railroads in New York formed another railroad combination, "the Joint Traffic Association," and it is said, by high authority, they did so for the sole purpose of trying to get the Supreme Court to reverse its construction of the law in the Trans-Missouri case, holding this law applied to railroads. As soon as this New York Association was formed. Judge Harmon promptly (January 8, 1896) filed an injunction bill against it. Both the lower federal courts dismissed the bill. An appeal was taken and the Supreme Court of the United States reversed the lower courts and reaffirmed, October 24, 1898, its former construction of the law and enjoined and presumably 220 INJUNCTION 8UIT8. broke up this, a second, railroad combination. But the Supreme Court in this decision was again divided, this time 5 to 3, Mr. Justice McKenna (who had succeeded Judge Gray) not sitting. PIPE TRUST CASE FILED. Judge Harmon filed, December 10, 1896, an injunction bill against a huge pipe trust in Tennessee. The District Court dis- missed the bill, but the Circuit Court of Appeals reversed this decision, finding a trust existed and holding the law applied also to industrial combinations. This judgment was affirmed Decem- ber 4, 1899, by the Supreme Court, all the judges agreeing, except Judge Harlan, who dissented on one point. Judge Peckham wrote the opinion of the court in the Trans- Missouri, Joint Traffic and Pipe cases. In the Pipe case, the court cited the Missouri and Joint Traffic cases and reaprmed the construction of the law given in those cases. These three cases were also cited in the recent Merger case — a railroad combina- tion — and the construction of the law made in these three cases was again reannounced and followed — but again by a 5 to 4 decision. Attorney-General Harmon was most fortunate in instituting the pipe trust case, for more reasons than one. In that case the court explained the unfortunate sugar trust case decision, as holding that, Congress could not control (under the Commerce Clause) the pure and simple "manufacture" of products, thus opening the way around that decision, for the vigorous enforcement of this law. The court in the Pipe case (December, 1890) held that Congress could and Congress had in the trust law of 1890 "prohibited" "every" contract, agreement, combination or monopoly which even tended directly to restrain interstate or foreign commerce. The opinion was sweeping, clear and clean cut. HENCEFORWARD, THE TRUST ACT OF JULY, 1890, IS PERFECTLY CLEAR AS APPLYING TO INDUSTRIAL COM- BINATIONS. HENCEFORWARD, NO EXCUSE FOR LACK OF KNOWLEDGE ABOUT WHAT THE LAW DID. THE COURTS, BY CONSTRUCTION, HAVE SETTLED THAT. IT APPLIES TO BOTH COMMON CARRIERS AND INDUSTRIAL COMBI- NATIONS. The Trans-Missouri case (a railroad combination) was begun in the Harrison and ended in the Cleveland administration. The Joint Traffic (railroad combination) and pipe (industrial com- bination) cases were begun in the Cleveland and finally decided in the McKinley administration. Hence, neither the McKinley or Roosevelt administrations are to be excused for failing to repress trusts outlawed by this statute. The way and law are clear. With the law now settled as to railroad and industrial combina- tions, the Department of Justice complained about the lack of money, officers, agents and machinery to execute the law. Con- gress supplied all this over three years ago. Judge Bartlett (Democrat) on the floor of the House was first to propose an amendment to an appropriation bill — reported by the Republicans INJUNCTION 8UIT8. 221 without such an appropriation — 'giving the Department of Justice $250,000 to be exclusively used by that Department in executing this law. Whereupon Mr. Hepburn (Republican) breaking silence, promptly proposed an amendment to the Bartlett amend- ment by appropriating $500,000, which was immediately done, and the cash made available. This proved to be more money than the Department could use or did use in the manner it executed the law. Congress, therefore, diverted a part of this fund to the use of the Interstate Com- mission. Attorney-General Knox used a large amount of it to rush through to the Supreme Court the Merger case. He had it appealed and filed in that Court by May 11, 1903. On May 18, 1903, he filed a petition and asked the court to advance this case on the docket because of "preeminent public importance" and it was set for hearing December 14-15, 1903. It was then heard and shortly thereafter decided, and the defendant railroad combina- tion was enjoined, but the defendant — millionaires — were never indicted, yet the Democrats insisted that they be treated like any other law defying persons — indicted. But Mr. Knox left the beef trust case behind. It dragged its weary way to the Supreme Court and that Court affirmed the lower court enjoining this trust. But the beef trust disobeyed the injunction — as expected. The Democrats demanded that it and its members be indicted. They were indicted, hut the case was not tried on its merits. It was tried on the pleadings, and the members of this trust were acquitted and discharged by the court — given an "immunity bath." The defendant corporation only was fined, the Court held that a corporation could not claim immunity under the statute, following a recent decision in the tobacco trust case. The tobacco case grew out of investigations begun by the tobacco growers of Tennessee and Kentucky and their friends, who appealed to the Department of Justice over two years ago — ^when Mr. Knox was Attorney-General — to investigate this trust, which Mr. Knox did not do, but which Attorney-General Moody did do, with the result that a branch of the tobacco trust was indicted in the city of New York, and other proceedings are being had to overcome and break up this trust. It is true that the Roosevelt administration, more than any other, has enforced the anti-trust law, but this has been done during the administration of Attorney-General Moody and not when Mr. Knox was Attorney-General, and after Mr. Roosevelt's administration had been fully and perfectly equipped by Congress to execute the law — previous administrations had not been. Complying with the imperative demand of the people and the ancient and continuous entreaties of the Democrats in Congress — as the Record will show — the second Roosevelt administration has insisted on and has caused indictments to be found against certain trusts, but the administration, it is recently reported, proposes to fine the guilty corporations (which cannot be impris- oned) while the lawless individuals, members of the trusts, who can be both fined and imprisoned, are to be only fined. These 222 INJUNCTION 8UITS. creatures are to go free, who have so long defied the law, disobeyed injunctions, put up prices on the defenseless people, restricted their liberties and dealt out to the people just so much to eat and so much to wear, at the trust-fixed price. The Democrats demand, and the people expect, that every man, whether rich or poor,- who disobeys this trust law, shall be fined and imprisoned. The Democrats were first to suggest a criminal section to this law. They have from first to last demanded that both the equity and criminal sections be enforced and particularly the criminal section. An injunction can be and is disobeyed. But the prison cells around the guilty man compels obedience and prevents him for the time being from continuing this career as an outlaw on the outside of the prison. The law was new and undefined during the Harrison adminis- tration. That administration had no special fund for officers or agents, etc., to enforce the law. The law was not only new and undefined when the Cleveland administration began as shown, but the decisions of the lower courts, and particularly the decision in the Greene case by Circuit Judge Jackson and the railroad case by Riner, J., had been against the Government. The Cleveland administration had no special fund, officers, etc., to enforce the law. But, as shown, the Democrats had the Supreme Court to define the law in the two railroad cases and the pipe case, and also filed other suits unnecessary to mention here. Under the McKinley administration the way was clear. The law was well understood after the pipe case — 1897. The law of course has been fully understood during the Roosevelt adminis- trations, because of these and other decisions previous to his term. And in addition to this, all the money and machinery that the Department of Justice called for was given to the Roosevelt administration to enforce the law, which in the meantime was "broadened and otherwise made more drastic and powerful. There is absolutely no excuse for not, long before this, wiping out the one hundred and fifty or more lawless trusts that were several years ago shown officially to be in actual offensive existence. The people and Democrats in Congress loudly complained against trusts and the non-enforcement of the trust laws by Attorney-General Griggs during the McKinley administration. The Democrats demanded the execution of existing law, claiming it was sufficient if vigorously executed. About this time the New York World addressed a letter on the subject to Senator Sherman and on October 3, 1898, Mr. Sherman, over his own signature, replied: "The anti-trust law is valid and sufficient. If an attorney-general and court could be brought to enforce it, relief to the people would at once be had." Ex-Senator Edmunds spoke with great force on the subject and said the existing law only needed to be enforced. INJUNCTION 8UIT8. 223 THE SHERMAN BILL WAS NOT PASSED. Aiken, S. C, June 2, 1903. Deab Sib: Yours of the 27th ult. has reached me here. The statement of Senator Vest contained in the slip you inclose is correct. I have not the Congressional Record or the Senate files to refer to, but I am sure on looking them up you will find that the bill reported by Mr. Sherman from the Fmance Committee was not the one passed by Congress, but that the one passed by Congress was reported by the Judiciary Committee to which tne Sherman bill, after it was reported from tne Finance Committee and discussed and probably more or less amended, was referred for consideration; and that the bill reported by the Judiciary Committee and passed was, in every essential respect, entirely different from the Sherman bill, and was purely a substitute for it. The Judiciary Committee was, I think, unanimously of the opinion that the bill it reported was, in respect of its general scope, an exer- cise of the whole constitutional power of Congress, which could only legislate for the freedom and regulation of commerce with foreign nations and among the several states; and I am of the same opinion still. ONLY DIFFICULTY IS NON-ENFORCEMENT. The only difficulty with the bill we reported and which became the law, was the want of administration — that is to say, that the law was and is entirely capable of putting an end to such so-called trusts and such combinations as interfere with or restrain commerce among the states, etc., of the officers of the Government, having charge of the enforcement of law, understand their duty and are willing to do it, being, of course, supplied with the sufficient means to put it into force. NEGLIGENCE OF ATTORNEY-GENERAL MILLER LOST SUGAR TRUST CASE. If the famous Kiiight case had been instituted and carried forward with suitable allegations of the precise nature and history of the Knight affair, and had been supported, as it could have been, by adequate proof of the facts it set forth, I believe the Supreme Court of the United States would not have had the least difficulty in preventing the carrying on of the combination under consideration, and putting an end to it, as it can still do with similar ones. The bill of complaint in the case was unhappily not drawn in such a way as to present the question which now so much commands just public concern. What is needed is not, so much, more legislalipn as competent and earnest administration of the'laws that exist. I have no doubt that the present Attorney- General and his very able assistant will find easy means, if supplied with the necessary funds, to arrest the progress and undo the mischievous work of such great and injurious combinations as have so largely come into existence. • (Signed) Very truly yours, Geo. F. Edmunds. John A. Sleicher, Esq., 110 Fifth Avenue, New York, N. Y. While the Democrats were urging the enforcement of existing anti-trust laws, both by injunction and indictment, the Republi- cans were keeping company with the trusts by proposing a con- stitutional amendment in effect delay. The Democrats voted against the proposed amendment. Fifty-seventh Congress, because unnecessary, Congress already having sufficient power. They 224 INJUNCTION SUITS. tried to amend but voted for the Littlefield anti-trust bill, but even this the Republican Senate filled, Senators Hoar and Spooner vigorously opposing it on constitutional and other grounds. Senator Jones (Democrat) was defeated in his motion to take up and consider the Littlefield bill; the Republicans voting "nay." Even President Roosevelt undertook to chloroform public opinion and defer the vigorous enforcement of existing laws by himself in many speeches, and notably at Fitchburg, Mass., September 2, 1902, urging a constitutional amendment, giving Congress more power to overcome the trusts and destroy the rights of the states. As reported by the Associated Press, and published in the Chicago Record Herald, September 3, 1902, President Roosevelt at Litchfield, Mass., said: PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT WANTED TO AMEND THE CONSTITUTION. "I believe something can be done by national legislation. When I state that I ask you to note my words, I say I believe. It is not in my power to say I know. When I talk to you of my own executive duties I can tell you definitely what will and what will not be done. When I speak of the actions of anyone else I can only say that I believe something more can be done by national legislation. I believe it will be done. I think we can get laws which will measurably increase the power of the Federal Government over corporations; but, gentlemen, I believe firmly that in the end there will have to be an amendment to the Constitution of the nation conferring additional power upon the Federal Government to deal with corporations. To get that will be a matter of difficulty and a matter of time." This, of course, meant delay, delay, delay. PROSECUTING THE TRUSTS— CORPORATIONS GET OFF WITH SMALL FINES. COMMENTS ON ATTORNEY-GENERAL'S REPORT. The report of the Attorney-General (Senate Document, No. 526) shows that during Roosevelt's administration five indictments have been procured under the act of July 2, 1890, the Sherman anti-trust law. In one of these cases, U. S. vs. Federal Salt Com- pany, there was a conviction, and the company was fined $1,000. In another case, U. S. vs. Armour & Co., et al., several corpora- tions and their agents and officers were indicted July 1, 1905. The defendants interposed pleas of immunity in bar, and these pleas were sustained by the court as to the individual defendants but overruled as to the corporations. (Report, p. 9.) The case of U. S. vs. Virginia-Carolina Chemical Company, et al., is an indictment found May 25, 1906, against 31 corporations and 25 individuals engaged in the fertilizer business in the Southern States, charged with conspiracy to violate Section 5440, U. S. Revised Statutes (the anti-trust law of 1890). It is still pending. (Report, p. 9.) An indictment was procured in June last, against several lumber companies for violation of the same law, and is still pending. No individuals indicted. Case still pending. (Report, p. 9.) INJUNCTION SUITS. 225 In June also an indictment was procured under the same law against members of the liquorice division of the tobacco trust (U. S. vs. McAndrews & Forbes Co., et al.) It is still pending. The tobacco growers of Tennessee and Kentucky nearly three years since began this investigation. Under the act of 1890, therefore, there was only one conviction; a plea in bar has been sustained in one case, and three cases are pending, according to Mr. Moody's report. Two of the injunction bills were filed in our outlying territory — Hawaii and Alaska. Under the act to regulate commerce (act of 1887) as amended, there have been six indictments, five of which were nol-prossed and one dismissed. (Report, p. 19.) Under the Elkins act approved February 19, 1903, there have been 11 indictments for receiving rebates; 19 for granting rebates; 5 for conspiracy to obtain rebates. This act prohibits imprison- ment for granting or receiving rebates, but not for conspiracy to violate that act and the act of 1887 to regulate commerce. Only the five indictments for conspiracy, therefore, involve punishment by imprisonment. These were all for conspiracy to receive rebates, and were, of course, against individuals. In three of these cases there were convictions. In U. S. vs. Weil, et. al., the defendants severally pleaded guilty and were sentenced to pay fines aggregating $25,000 and to imprisonment. In U. S. vs. Thomas & Taggart, defendants, were convicted and sentenced to fine and imprisonment. In U. S. vs. Price & Wells, defendants, were convicted and fined, but not imprisoned. (Report, p. 17.) 226 THE PROSECUTION OF THE TRUSTS. THE PROSECUTION OF THE TRUSTS. A RECORD OF MASTERLY INEFFICIENCY. On the 29th of June, 1906, Attorney-General Moody, in com- pliance with a resolution of the Senate, submitted a statement of all suits instituted by the Department of Justice under the Sherman anti-trust law, the Interstate Commerce law and the so-called "Elkins law," and the disposition made of such suits, etc. (See Senate Document No. 526, Fifty-ninth Congress, first session.) This report contains 26 pages, but on page 19, there is a sum- mary which shows in a general way what has been accomplished with all the fuss and expense attending the pretended prosecution of the trusts under the act to regulate commerce, as amended, and the Elkins act. "SUMMARY. "CASES UNDER ACT TO REGULATE COMMERCE. "President Cleveland's first Administration, 1885-1889. — One indict- ment for giving rebates: Nol-prossed. "President Harrison's Administration, 1889-1893. — ^Thirteen indict- ments for charging less than tariff rates: 2 convictions as to one defendant: nol-prossed as to others. In one case defendant fined $3,000; in the other defendant fined $1 and costs; 7 nol-prossed; 1 acquittal; 2 quashed; 1 dismissed. One indictment for prejudice in transporting goods: Quashed. Four indictments for failure to post tariffs : 2 nol-prossed ; 2 quashed. "Two indictments for false weighing, 2 convictions — defendant in one case fined $100 on each count, in the other two, defendants each fined $2,000 and sentenced to prison for 18 months; both pardoned; 1 indictment for selling tickets at less than tariff rates, acquitted; 2 indictments for false billing, 1 conviction — defendant fined $100; 1 nol-prossed; 10 indictments for inducing and conspiring to discrimi- nate, 6 nol-prossed, 2 acquitted, 2 quashed; 2 indictments for giving rebates, 1 nol-prossed as to one defendant, other defendant acquitted, 1 nol-prossed. "Total: thirty-five indictments, 5 convictions, 18 nol-prossed, 7 quashed, 1 dismissed, 4 acquitted. "Ten petitions to enforce orders of Commission, 7 dismissed, 1 case discontinued, 1 pending, 1 granted; 2 proceedings to compel witness to testify before grand jury dismissed. "President Cleveland's second Administration, 1893-1697. — One indictment for discrimination in sale of tickets, dismissed; 4 indict- ments for charging less than tariff rates, 1 conviction as to one and nol-prossed as to other defendant ; 3 convictions, 1 case defendant fined $1,000; 1 case, two defendants each fined $4,000; 1 case two defend- ants each fined $50; 1 case defendant fined costs; 5 indictments for giving rebates, 3 nol-prossed, 1 acquitted as to one, nol-prossed as to other defendants; 1 conviction, defendant fined $500; 3 indictments for inducing to discriminate, all quashed; 4 indictments for false billing, 1 defendant convicted and other acquitted; convicted party fined $350; 3 nol-prossed; 2 indictments for issuing free passes, both quashed. "Total: Nineteen indictments, 6 convictions, 1 dismissal, 8 nol- prossed, 3 quashed, 1 acquitted. "Seventeen petitions to enforce orders of Commission; 11 dismissed, 3 discontinued, I modified order of Commission complied with and case dismissed, 1 order complied with and case discontinued, 1 pend- THE PROSECUTION OF THE TRU8T8. 227 ing. One original petition to restrain defendants from making dis- criminatory rates dismissed; 1 prosecution for contempt to compel witness to testify, defendant convicted, application for habeas corpus denied; 64 petitions for mandamus to compel filing of annual reports; 2 dismissed, 1 granted, 61 discontinued because carriers agreed to comply. "PRESIDENT McKINLEY'S ADMINISTRATION, 1897-1901. (September 14). "Twelve indictments for giving rebates, against same parties, not prosecuted; 2 indictments for departure from published rates; in both cases 1 defendant convicted — nol-prossed as to other; in both cases fined $350 ; 3 indictments for false billing, 1 nol-prossed, 1 conviction, defendant fined $1,000, 1 acquittal; 1 indictment for conspiracy, nol- prossed; 1 indictment for obstructing administration of act, convic- tion, defendant fined $500; 3 indictments for false weighing, 1 con- viction as to one defendant, fined $1,000, nol-prossed as to others, 2 nol-prossed. "Total : Twenty-two indictments, 5 convictions, 1 acquittal, 4 nol- prossed, 12 not prosecuted; 5 petitions to enforce orders of commission, 3 dismissed, 1 discontinued, 1 granted; 1 petition to declare pooling combination illegal, granted. "PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT'S ADMINISTRATION, SEPTEM- BER 14, 1901— JUNE, 1906. "Two indictments for charging less than established rates, 2 nol- prossed; 4 indictments for pooling, 1 dismissed, 3 nol-prossed. "Total, 6 indictments; 5 nol-prossed, 1 dismissed. "Eight petitions to enjoin departure from published rates, tem- porary injunctions granted and answer filed; 10 petitions to enforce orders of Commission, 1 defendant complied and petition dismissed, 3 petitions dismissed, 2 injunctions granted, 1 discontinued, 3 pend- ing; 3 petitions to compel filing of annual reports, 1 dismissed, 2 discontinued. "CASES UNDER ELKINS ACT. "Eleven indictments for receiving rebates — 5 convictions, in one case defendants fined $1,025 each, in four cases defendant corporation fined $15,000; 1 acquittal, 5 pending; 19 indictments for granting rebates — 1 conviction, defendant corporation fined $40,000, 2 indi- vidual defendants fined $10,000 each, 2 nol-prossed, 16 pending; 5 indictments for conspiring to obtain rebates — 3 convictions, in one case defendant fined $1,025, in one case defendant fined $6,000 and given 6 months in jail and tne other fined $4,000 and given 3 months, in one case defendants fined in the aggregate $25,000, 1 nol-prossed, 1 acquittal; 1 indictment for conspiring to grant rebates, pending. "Total: 36 indictments, 9 convictions, 2 acquittals, 3 nol-prossed, 22 pending.* "Six petitions to enjoin departure from published rates, temporary injunctions granted; 1 petition to enforce order of commission, dis- missed; 1 petition to restrain railroad from giving preferences and rebates, granted; 1 petition to compel filing of annual reports, dis- continiied; 2 proceedings to require defendants to testify, both suc- cessful." The Attorney-General's report shows also that between March 17, 1903, and June 28, 1906, the work of his office in the special matter of prosecuting the trusts had cost $159,709.66; and that Congress had allowed the Interstate Commerce Commission to spend in the same matter the sum of $45,000; making in all $204,709.66. (*These indictments were returned within the last month or two, and the cases will be shortly brought to trial.) 228 THE PROSECUTION OF THE TRUSTS. The Elkins Act went into effect February 19, 1903; and on March 17, 1903, Congress appropriated $500,000 as a special fund for the enforcement of the anti-trust laws. There had been great trouble about money for that purpose under Roosevelt's predecessors. But since March, 1903, there has been no lack of funds — only full and efficient action has been lacking. Commenting upon Mr. Moody's report, the Providence Journal, a Republican newspaper, says: "The report of Attorney-General Moody, recently issued, covering everything done up to date, shows that the Roosevelt administration has a clean record of failure in all six of the cases brought under the interstate commerce act, and but three convictions imder the Elkins Act; and this although a better understanding of tnese laws, due to the added length of time they have been on the statute hook, gives less excuse. Yet for some reason the administration has a record for 'doing things.' Unfortunately, many of the 'things' amount to nothing anyway, and might as well be left undone as to be so badly attempted. The latest 'fizzle' is the prosecution of the Standard Oil Company. 'After a series of conferences,' the news reports say, the Attorney- General has decided not to indict John D. Rockefeller. He decides to indict the Standard Oil Company as a corporation, out tne officials of the company are not to be 'inconvenienced.' He might as well indict the office chairs. The offenses charged against the company, for which they are to be callfed upon to answer, seem almost ludicrous. "In the light of what Texas and Missouri and Kansas did when they set themselves to break up the monopoly which the Standard Oil was building up in their territory, it certainly seems as ii the Federal Government could do more than collect a fine. Yet Mr. Moody and the ^resident are content to proceed against the trust because of rebates received under the form of discounted charges from the Lake Shore Railroad. If they get a conviction, the only punishment is a fine. And for this they pose as the stern, uncom- promising foes of all monopolies and trusts. If the responsible heads and owners of the Standard Oil Company cannot be reached, brought into court, compelled to plead to charges of conspiracy in restraint of trade, and extortion, ana take tneir chances of going to jail, then tlie Federal Government snould let them and their corporation alone, and make it clear mat it is powerless against them. For it would be." On page 9 of Attorney-General Moody's report there is also a summary of suits and prosecutions instituted by the United States under the Sherman anti-trust law of July 2, 1890, which shows somewhat better results, but is still discouraging. ATTORNEY-GENERAL MOODY'S SUMMARY. President Harrison's Administration, 1889-1893. — Four bills in equity; 3 injunctions granted; 1 dismissed. Tnree indictments; 1 quashed; 1 demurrer sustained; 1 discontinued. President Cleveland's second Administration, 1893-1897. — Four bills in equity; 3 injunctions granted; 1 dismissed. Two informations (for contempt in violating injunctions) : 1 quashed; 1 conviction. Two indictments; 1 quashed; 1 dismissed. President McKinley's Administration, 1897-1901 (September 14). — Three bills in equity; 2 injunctions granted; 1 dismissed. President Roosevelt's Administration, September 14, 1901. — June, 1906. Eleven bills in equity; 6 injunctions granted; 5 pending. Five indictments; 3 pending; 1 conviction; 1 plea in bar sustained. Two proceedings for contempt in refusing to testify before grand jury: ( 'onvictions. WHOLESALE PRICES 1897-1905. WHOLESALE PRICES 1897-1905. FROM THE BULLETIN, MARCH, 1906, OF THE BUREAU OF LABOR, DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND LABOR. Average Year. price. 1897 Salt: American, per barrei 66 1905 Salt : American, per barrel .75 1897 Sugar : granulated, per pound 04497 1905 Sugar : granulated, per pound ,05256 CLOTHS AND CLOTHING. Average Year. price. 1897 Grain bags : 2 bushel, Amoskeag 1300 1905 Grain bags : 2 bushel, Amoskeag 1533 1897 Blankets : 11-4, 5 lbs. to the pair, all wool. .750 1905 Blankets: 11-4, 5 lbs. to the pair, all wool. 1.000 1897 Boots and Shoes 9500 1905 Boots and Shoes 1.0042 1897 Carpets : Brussels 5-frame, Bigelow 9600 1905 Carpets : Brussels 5-frame, Bigelow 1.1520 1897 Carpets : Ingrain 2-ply, Lowell 4320 1905 Carpets : Ingrain 2 ply, Lowell 5520 1897 Cotton Flannels: 2% yards to the pound.. .0575 1905 Cotton Flannels: 2% yards to the pound. . .0854 1897 Cotton thrd. : 6-cd., 200-yd. spls., J. & P. Cts. .030503 1905 Cotton thrd. : 6-cd., 200-yd. spls., J. & P. Cts. .037240 1897 Drillings : 30 inch. Stark A 0463 1905 Drillings : 30-inch, Stark A 0633 1897 Flannels : with 4-4, Ballard Vale, No. 3 3113 1905 Flannels : with 4-4, Ballard Vale, No. 3 4461 1897 Leather : harness, oak, country middles. . . . .2433 1905 Leather : harness, oak, country middles .3333 1897 Leather: sole, oak 3079 1905 Leather : sole, oak 3663 1897 Overcoatings : beaver ; Moscow, all wool . . . 1.7670 1905 Overcoatings: beaver; Moscow, all wool... 2.4413 1897 Horse Blankets: 6 pounds each, all wool.. .570 1905 Horse Blankets: 6 pounds each, all wool.. .750 1897 Overcoatings: kersey, standard, 27 to 28 oz. 1.1833 1905 Overcoatings : kersey, standard, 27 to 28 oz. 1.8313 1897 Shawls : stand'd, all wool, 72x144 in., 42 oz. 4.0970 1905 Shawls : stand'd, all wool, 72x144 in., 42 oz. 2.2400 1897 Sheetings : bleached, 10-4, Pepperell 1738 1905 Sheetings : bleached, 10-4, Pepperell 2267 1897 Sheetings : brown, 4-4, Atlantic A 0490 1905 Sheetings : brown, 4-4, Atlantic A 0639 1897 Suitings : clay worsted diagonal, 12 oz 7337 1905 Suitings: clay worsted diagonal, 12 oz 1.0931 1897 Trouserings: fancy worsted, 22 to 23 oz. . . 1.7955 1905 Trouserings: fancy worsted, 22 to 23 oz. . . 2.2331 1897 Women's dress goods: cashmere, all wool, Atlantic J • 2389 1905 Women's dress goods : cashmere, all wool, Atlantic J. .' 3730 1897 Petroleum: crude 7869 1905 Petroleum: crude 1.3842 Relative price. 93.9 107.2 95.1 111.2 Relative price. 92.9 109.6 89.3 119.0 96.0 101.5 95.29 115.1 90.9 116.2 81.4 121.0 98.4 120.1 88.9 121.5 82.6 118.4 93.9 115.0 91.6 108.9 84.9 117.3 99.5 130.9 94.9 146.8 89.5 117.5 92.3 120.3 88.6 115.6 89.1 132.7 92.3 111.6 82.2 128.4 86.5 152.1 230 WHOLESALE PRICES 1897-1905. METALS AND IMPLEMENTS. Average. Year. price. 1897 Augurs : extra %-inch 1425 1905 Augurs : extra %-inch 3067 1897 Axes : M. C. O., Yankee 3938 1905 Axes : M. C. O., Yankee 6323 1897 Barb wire : galvanized 1.8000 1905 Barb wire : galvanized 2.3829 1897 Butts : loose joint, cast, 3x3 inch 0306 1905 Butts : loose joint, cast, 3x3 inch 0400 1897 Doorknobs : steel, bronze plated 1660 1905 Doorknobs : steel, bronze plated 3625 1897 Files : 8-inch mill bastard 7775 1905 Files : 8 inch mill bastard 1.0367 1897 Locks : Common Mortise 0750 1905 Locks : Common Mortise 1496 1897 Nails : wire, 8-penny, fence and common . . 1.4854 1905 Nails: wire, 8-penny, fence and common.. 1.8958 1897 Wood screws : 1-inch, No. 10, flat head. . . ! .0850 1905 Wood screws : 1-inch, No. 10, flat head 1055 1897 Zinc: sheet 4.9400 1905 Zinc : sheet 6.8250 1897 Brick : common domestic w4.9375 1905 Brick : common domestic 8.1042 1897 Cement : Rosedale. 7521 1905 Cement : Rosedale 8333 1897 Doors : pine 8125 1905 Doors : pine 1.8367 1897 Lime : common 7188 1905 Lime : common 8908 1897 Pine : white boards. No. 2 barn 15.8333 1905 Pine : white boards, No. 2 barn. 24.7500 1897 Linseed Oil: raw 3275 1905 Linseed Oil : raw 4675 1897 Pine : yellow 16.4375 1905 Pine: yellow 24.9167 1897 Shingles : white pine, 18-inch 3.5417 1905 Shingles : white pine, 18-inch 3.5000 1897 Turpentine : spirits of 2743 1905 Turpentine : spirits of 6276 1897 Window glass : American, single, flrsts, 6x8 to 10x15 inch 2.1986 1905 Window glass : American, single, firsts, 6x8 to 10x15 inch 2.7637 1897 House furnishing goods : Earthenware : plates, white granite .3991 1905 House furnishing goods : Earthenware : plates, white granite .4586 1897 Furniture : bedroom sets ash 8.750 1905 Furniture : bedroom sets ash 12.354 1897 Furniture : chairs, bedroom, maple 5.000 1905 Furniture : chairs, bedroom, maple 8.000 1897 Furniture: chairs, kitchen 3.5000 1905 Furniture : chairs, kitchen 4.7500 1897 Table cutlery : knives and forks, cocobolo handles ' 5.0000 1905 Table cutlery : knives and forks, cocobolo handles 6.6875 1897 Woodenware : pails, oak grained 1.2417 1905 Woodenware : pails, oak grained 1.7000 Relative. price. 88.6 190.7 83.9 134.7 71.3 94.3 96.8 126.6 97.8 213.6 91.2 121.6 91.8 183.1 68.7 87.7 56.3 69.9 93.0 128.5 88.8 145.7 84.8 93.9 74.3 163.2 86.3 106.9 92.5 144.6 72.2 103.1 89.0 134.9 94.6 119.9 82.1 187.7 102.2 128.5 89.1 102.4 82.9 117.0 80.7 129.1 91.5 124.2 82.5 110.4 95.6 130.9 STATISTICS ON WAGES. 231 MISCELLANEOUS. Average. Relative. Year. price. price. 1897 Rope : manila, %-incli 0631 67.6 1905 Rope : manila, %-inch 1195 127.9 1897 Starcli : laundry 0300 86.2 1905 Starch : laundry ,.. .0329 94.5 1897 Tobacco : plug, Horseshoe 3758 94.9 1905 Tobacco : plug, Horseshoe 4900 123.7 1897 Tobacco : smoking, gran. Seal of N. C 5000 98.2 1905 Tobacco: smoking, gran. Seal of N. C 6000 117.9 STATISTICS ON WAGES. PRICES AND COST OF LIVING IN THE STATES OF NORTH CAROLINA, PENNSYLVANIA, OHIO, ALABAMA. NORTH CAROLINA— 1904. Agriculure. 95 counties report an increase in cost of living. 2 counties report no increase. 81 counties report an increase of wages. 16 counties report no increase. It will thus be seen from this general statement that the in- crease of wages in North Carolina has not kept pace with the in- creased cost of living. MONTHLY FARM WAGES. Men receive from $11.07 to $18.86 per month. Women receive from $6.16 to $11.54 per month. Children average $5.50 per month. Miscellaneous factories, exclusive of furniture and textiles. 203 factories report, of which 199 employ 7,655 persons. Time, 10 hours a day. Highest wage, $2.09 a day. Lowest wage, 84c. a day. Average wage, $1.47 a day. 134 factories report an increase of wages. 1 factory reports a decrease. 56 factories report no change. Cotton and woolen mills. 304 mills employing 57,555 persons. Time, 10.8 hours the average day's work. Highest average wages per day : Men $2.13 Women $1.04 Lowest average wages per day: Men $1.62 Women 49 Children 41 232 STATISTICS ON WAGES. It will thus be seen that the cotton and woolen mill wages for men run from $16.12 to $55.38 per month of 26 days; for women from $12.74 to $27.04; for children $10.66. If the time for shut- downs in average mill work be deducted it will be seen that the wages paid cotton and woolen mill employees do not differ ma- terially from the wages o'f farmhands. Furniture factories. 86 factories report, of which 85 employ 4,847 people. Highest average daily wages: Adults $2.05 Lowest average daily wages: Adults $ .73 Children 39 Trades. 29% report an increase of wages. 8% report a decrease of wages. 63% report no change. 63% made full time. 37% made part time. 85% reported increased cost of living. 15% reported no increase. When 63% are reported as making full time, this must not be understood to be a full year of 313 working days, but full factory time from 260 to 290 days. It will also be seen that the increase in wages by no means equals the increase in the cost of living. Railroad employees. Total number reporting 12,788, exclusive of officers. Average daily wages: Station agents $1.12 Other station men 82 Engineers 2.83 Firemen 1.34 Conductors 2.40 Other train men 1.06 Machinists 2.39 Carpenters 1.71 Other shop men 1.13 Section foremen 1.41 Other track men 85 Switchmen 1.13 Telegraph operators 1.79 Other employees 1.20 The above figures are taken from the 18th Annual Report of the Bureau of Labor for the State of North Carolina for the year 1904: OHIO— 1904. Manufacturing establishments. Employees reported 343,859. Male, 290,217. Female, 53,642. 62,537 received an advance of 7.9%. 4,267 suflFered a reduction of 6.5%. 277,055 reported no change. STATISTICS ON WAGES. 233 Ignoring the very small decrease, the average increase in manu- facturing wages for 343,859 employees was but one and five- tenths per cent. These employees for ten of the leading industries were dis- tributed as follows: Average Description. Number. yearly wages. Boilers, engines and tanks 12,480 $556 Boots and shoes 14,543 349 Clothing 16,358 453 Flouring mill products 3,012 473 Foundry and machine shops 30,890 552 Liquors 4,669 666 Machinery 21,087 583 Printing and binding 10,641 471 Sash, doors, lumber 8,086 506 Steel, iron and tin 37,875 635 From these figures the average daily wages for each of the preceding occupations were as follows: Boilers, engines and tanks $1.79 Boots and shoes 1.12 Clothing 1.46 Flouring mills 1.52 Foundry 1.78 Liquors 2.14 Machinery 1.88 Printing and binding 1.51 Sash, etc 1.63 Steel, etc 2.14 The wages paid to the 159,641 employees of the preceding ten leading industries amounted to $86,503,564, or an average yearly wage of $541, or an average daily wage of $1.74 for each working day in a working year of 310 days. And as these leading industries are the highest wage industries, it follows that the average daily wage for all the manufacturing establishments of Ohio employing 343,859 persons is less than $1.50 per day, or less than $9 per week for the working year. These figures show the fallacy of calculations based on hourly wages. And when Republicans quote a higher daily rate for these occupations in Ohio they obtain it by another fallacy. They divide the actual amount paid any given number of men by the number of days they were actually employed, irrespective of the question, whether they were employed all the days in a full work- ing year or not. The shutdowns of these manufacturing estab- lishments cost each laborer from one to two months of his time, which makes his real daily wages much less than the Republican party boasts it to be. This is shown more fully in the following calculations based on the Ohio report as to its coal miners. Coal mining. Average number of employees, 36,460. Amount paid in wages, $19,113,467. Average yearly wages, $496. Average daily wages, $1.60. Days in operation, 191. 2S4 STATISTICS ON WAGES. Republicans will quote the average daily wages at $2.60 a day, as does the report from which these figures were taken. To ob- tain this result 191, the actual number of days worked throughout the year, was used as a divisor, instead of 310, the actual number of work days in the year. In other words, the operators gave the men 191 days' work during the year, which averaged $2.60 a day, but when the whole time of the miner is considered his wages were but $1.60 a day. This same fallacious method of making a higher apparent daily wage rate than can be defended on common sense principles is characteristic of Republican statistics. They ignore the idle days, not the idle Sundays which all men ignore, but the idle days necessitated by the manufacturing trusts in their effort to regulate and control the output of the mills. Of the 36,460 reported miners, 26,950 are reported as receiving an average advance in wages of 12.57%, or about 9% for the en- tire 36.460 men. This advance is attributable solely and alone to the coal strike arbitrament. These figures are taken from the 28th Annual Report of the Bureau of Labor of the State of Ohio for the year 1904. PENNSYLVANIA— 1904. These statistics are for 84 manufacturing industries of Penn- sylvania, in which 734 identical establishments report for every year from 1896 to 1904: 1. Capital invested, 1903 $269,958,813 Cost of basic material $199,030,954 Wages paid 99,270,883 Total 298,301,837 Profit, 1903 95,146,215 Profit, per cent 35 Market value of product 393,448,052 2. Capital invested, 1896 173,760,089 Market value of product 172,966,167 Cost of basic material 83,231,627 Wages paid 47,530,623 Total 130,762,250 Profit, 1896 42,203,917 Profit, per cent 24 Increase of profit, per cent., 1903 over 1896 45 3. Wages paid: 1896—124,563 persons received 47,530,623 1903—206,311 persons received 99,270,883 In 1896 the average daily wage was $1.41 In 1903 the average daily wage was 1.66 Increase in daily wages. , .25 Increase, per cent. 1903 over 1896. . 17 Profits in 1896 — 24% — were already outrageously high. In 1903 they had increased to 35%, or an increase over 1896 of 45%. Wages in 1896 — $1.41 per day — were outrageously low. In 1903 they averaged $1.66, an increase of 17% over 1896. Profits that needed no increase advanced 45%, while wages, which sadly needed an increase, increased but 17%. That is, profits increased 45%, while wages increased 17%. This is the meaning of Repub- lican prosperity. STATISTICS ON WAGES. 235 And when it is considered that the price of living during the same period advanced about 47%, the pitiful condition of the laborer who works for wages becomes more apparent. 4. t)ays in operation, 734 identical establishments. Year. Average days in operation. 1896 .271 1897 286 1898 286 1899 289 1900 289 1901 292 1902 293 1903 290 5. Per cent, of wages of value of the product. 1896 27.5 1897 26.8 1898 -. 26.4 1899 24.7 1900 .-. 23.8 1901 24.3 1902 24.1 1903 25.2 That is to say, the laborers received 2.3% less of the value of the product in 1903 than they received in 1896. The value of the product in 1903 was $393,448,052, and 2.3% of this amounts to $9,049,305. By all tests of fairness this $9,049,305 should have gone to the workmen as an increase of wages, if the Republican claim of greater prosperity in 1903 be correct. If in the hard times of 1896 27.5% of the value of the product was paid as wages, the same amount, or a greater amount should have been paid in 1903 to give the claim of greater prosperity a sound basis in fairness and logic. And in all fairness this amount — $9,049,- 305 — should have been added to the wage fund of the workmen. The increased profits of 1903 over 1896 — 45% — would certainly stand this decrease of 2.3%, and would not entail any hardships upon the employers. Distributing this $9,049,305 between the 206,311 workmen employed in the 734 identical establishments in 1903 would have given each one of them an increase of $43.80, and would have made the average annual wages within three cents of $525. This, by adopting the Republican method of cal- culating an increased daily wage, would have given each work- man a dollar and eighty-one cents per day as against a dollar and sixty-six cents actually received. And the better method of calculating daily wages would have made the difference some- what more. While this single instance of an unfair method of swelling manufacturers' profits is adduced, it is not therefore claimed that it is the only instance of the kind. It is used because it is con- crete, deducible from the figures of the Pennsylvania Report, and easily available. 6, Iron, steel and tin-plate production, being the production of pig iron steel, rolled iron and steel and tin-plate. 236 STATISTICS ON WAGES. PIG IRON. Capital invested $162,662,941 Gross tons of production 8,181,652 Realized value 131,775,613 Value of basic material $63,889,439 Aggregate wages 10,662,196 Total wages and material 74,551,635 Total gross profit 57,223,988 Per cent, of gross profit more than .... 35 In other words, the industry of iron and steel in Pennsylvania in 1903 paid a gross profit of 35% over the total value of the basic material and the aggregate wages paid. The realized value of the product, $131,775,613, when compared with the aggregate wages paid, $10,662,196, shows that the work- men received but a trifle more than 8% of the realized value of the product. When it is considered that for the whole 734 iden- tical establishments $99,270,883 were paid in wages upon a realized value of $393,448,052, or 25.2%, the miserable proportion, 8%, paid workmen in pig iron is evident. Average number of days in operation 307 Number of workmen employed 16,912 Average yearly earnings $630.00 Average daily wages 2.05 Cost of labor per ton 1.33 Tonnage per man per day 1.57 It will be observed that in the preceding calculation the gross profits is taken as the excess of realized value over value of basic materials and total wages paid. There is, of course, an additional nriscellaneous expense, but this is so small as not to vary results materially. The Census of 1900 enables us to reach this conclusion. Census Figures of 1900 for Pig Iron. Realized value of products in United States $206,823,000 Basic material $131,536,000 Total wages 18,500,000 Miscellaneous 7,463,000 157,499,000 Total profits $49,324,000 Profit per cent 31 Pennsylvania in 1900. Realized value $101,575,000 Basic material ' $64,095,000 Total wages 8,038,000 Miscellaneous 3,269,000 75,402,000 Total profit $26,173,000 Profit per cent • 34 The calculation ignoring miscellaneous expense yielded a profit per cent, of 35; the calculation by considering miscellaneous ex- pense yields a profit per cent, of 34. The difference is so slight as not to affect the general result. STATISTICS ON WAGES. 237 The realized value in 1903, as shown by the State Report, was $131,775,613, and the total production, 8,181,652 tons of pig iron. This made the average selling price of pig iron in Pennsylvania for that year $16.47 per ton. The Census of 1900 gives the following average price per ton for the different states as follows: Illinois $10.23 Kentucky $16.84 Maryland 12.69 Michigan 16.46 New Jersey 16.81 New York 15.07 Ohio 15.71 Pennsylvania 14.98 Tennessee 12.54 Texas 17.62 Virginia 15.20 West Virginia 16.57 Wisconsin 13.34 Other States 16.33 The lowest average price is that of Illinois, and the Census authorities explain this by saying that "a large part of the pig iron made in this state is consumed by the makers in the manu- facture of steel." That is to say, they, as pig iron manufacturers, sell their prod- ucts to themselves, as steel manufacturers, at $10.22 a ton. The average price of pig iron for the whole country was $14.29 per ton in 1900. This would give the steel manufacturers of Illinois, who were at the same time pig iron manufacturers, an advantage of $4.06 per ton, or nearly 40% upon their steel products. If the comparison could be made with actual prices this percentage of advantage would doubtless be materially increased. It will also be noticed that the labor cost of the manufacture of pig iron is about 16% of the cost of basic material, and not quite 8% of the realized value of the product. In all. these calculations the term "miscellaneous expenses" covers taxes, rent, interest, insurance, advertising, stamps, con- tract work and other similar expenses; the term "basic ma- terials" covers raw materials, partly manufactured materials, fuel, rent of power and heat, cost of mill supplies and freight. Falling Off of Production of Rolled Iron and Steel in 1904 as Compared with 1903. Production 1903. Production 1904. Articles. Gross tons. Gross tons. Iron and steel rails 1,125,751 825,434 Plates and sheets 1,689,824 1,565,190 Cut nails 33,509 28,162 Sailing off in Wages Paid. Aggregate wages, 1903 . ." $64,664,647 Aggregate wages, 1904 55,932,427 Falling off in Wage Earners. Workmen, 1903 99,294 Workmen, 1904 91,146 Falling of in Annual Wages. Yearly wages, 1903 $651.24 Yearly wages, 1904 613.66 238 STATISTICS ON WAGES. Falling off in Average Daily Wages. Daily wages, 1903 $2.25 Daily wages, 1904 2.09 Falling off in Labor Cost, per ton. Labor cost, 1903 (per ton) $7.97 Labor cost, 1904 (per ton) 7.19 In the production of crude steel the same decrease of produc- tion is reported. 1903. 1904. Articles. Tons. Tons. Bessemer 3,910,059 3,465,669 Open Hearth 4,264,410 4,093,100 Crucible 72,908 55,023 Total 8,247,377 7,613,792 A falling off of 633,585 tons. The same reduction is shown in pig iron. Gross tons produced, 1903 8,181,652 Gross tons produced, 1904 7,411,300 Value per ton, 1903 $16.1 1 Value per ton, 1904 13.74 Cost of basic material, 1903 $63,889,439 Cost of basic material, 1904 $54,664,808 Number of workmen, 1903 16,912 Number of workmen, 1904 14,087 Aggregate wages, 1903 $10,662,196 Aggregate wages, 1904 7,909,335 Average yearly earnings, 1903 630.45 Average yearly earnings, 1904 561.46 Average daily wage, 1903 2.05 Average daily wage, 1904 1.98 Average cost of labor per ton, 1903 1,33 Average cost of labor per ton, 1904 1.07 Average cost of basic material per ton, 1903. . . . 7.81 Average cost of basic material per ton, 1904. . . . 7.38 It will thus be seen that the basic material and the labor cost of every ton of pig iron produced in Pennsylvania in 1904 was $8.45. As the realized value of each ton was $13.74, the profit, excluding miscellaneous expenses, was $5.29 per ton, or 38%. ANTHRACITE COAL. Total tonnage mined 58,057,447 Total value on board cars $140,370,498.00 Average number of days 231 Average number of people employed 160,579 Average yearly earnings $574.28 Average daily wage, for 231 days. .* 2.48 Average daily wage, for 31'3 days 1.83 Average number of tons mined by each miner per day. 6.5 BITUMINOUS COAL. Total number of tons mined 58,175,108 Realized value at mines $59,603,146.00 Days in operation 188 Average number of workmen 93,114 Aggregate wages paid $40,133,604.00 Average yearly wage 431.02 Average daily wage for 188 days 2.29 Average daily wage for 313 days 1.37 STATISTICS ON WAGES. 239 TEXTILE INDUSTRIES. Total value of product $105,879,546.00 Average number of employees 54,011 Number of days in operation 284 Aggregate wages paid $24,541,029.00 Average yearly wage 383.39 Average daily wage, for 284 days 1.35 COTTON GOODS. Total value of product $17,457,423.00 Days in operation 286 Average number of employees 10,681 Aggregate wages paid $4,430,642.00 Average yearly wage 414.82 Average daily wage, for 286 days 1.45 WOOLEN GOODS. Value of product $44,054,932.00 Days in operation 292 Number of employees 22,160 Wages paid $8,819,725.00 Average yearly wage 398.00 Average daily wage, for 292 days 1.36 SILK GOODS. Number of employees 3,687 Average yearly wage $378.15 Average daily wage 1-34 KNIT GOODS. Number of employees 13,605 Average yearly wage $321.27 Average daily wage 1«14 FIBER GOODS. Average yearly wage $385.98 Average daily wage 1.37 CARPETS. Average daily wage $1.54 WOOLEN AND WORSTED. Average daily wage $1.14 These figures as to Pennsylvania are taken from the Annual Report of the Secretary of Internal Affairs, part three, 1904. ALABAMA, Census Report, Bulletin 43, 1905. 1312 manufacturing establishments in the eleven selected in- dustries — cars, coke, cotton goods, fertilizers, foundries, iron and steel, lumber, planing mills, cotton seed oil, printing, turpentine 240 STATISTICS ON WAGES. and rosin — forming 70% of all establishments in the state, re- ported as follows for the year 1905 : Capital employed $90,106,030 . 00 Value of products 93,953,829 . 00 Number of wage earners 54,073 Wages paid 19,283,768.00 Average annual wages 357 . 00 Average daily wage, 313 days 1.14 Miscellaneous expenses 6,705,400 . 00 Cost of basic materials 52,256,700 . 00 Profit 15,707,961.00 Profit, per cent 17 IRON AND STEEL. Twenty establishments with capital $29,044,289 . 00 Value of product 24,687,359.00 Number of employees 8,590 Aggregate wages paid 3,447,889 . 00 Average annual wages 401 . 00 Average daily wages, 313 days 1 . 28 COTTON GOODS. Forty-six establishments with capital $24,758,649.00 Value of product 16,760,332.00 Number of employees 1 1,480 Aggregate wages paid 2,457,928 . 00 Average annual wages, 313 days 214 . 00 Average daily wages, 313 days .68 UNITED STATES OFFICIAL WAGE FIGURES. Comparison of the wages of labor as shown by the Nineteenth Annual Report of the Commissioner of Labor of the Department of Commerce and Labor for 1904: Laborers. Wages per hour Wages per hour 1896. 1903. (In cents and fractions.) Blacksmiths .21.54 23.64 Grinders, plow 19.20 21.90 Cutters, boots and shoes 21.78 23.30 Stitchers, boots and shoes 30.09 31.50 Vampers, boots and shoes 19 . 48 21 . 10 Grinders, boots and shoes 15 . 25 15 . 25 Mixers, boots and shoes 16. 13 16.42 Shoemakers, female 12.60 13.34 Tone regulators 33.59 36.11 Mullers, cotton seed 6.00 6.25 Linters, cotton seed 10.26 10.78 Pressers, cotton seed 12.87 12.83 Laborers, linseed oil 15 . 00 16 . 00 Pressmen, linseed oil 16.22 17.43 Rollermen, linseed oil 22.18 18.00 Bleachers, paper and wood pulp 15.27 16.83 Calendrers, paper and wood pulp 13 . 87 12 . 51 Cutters, paper and wood pulp 8.88 9.77 Finishers, paper and wood pulp 10.48 10.84 Rag sorters, paper and wood pulp 17.11 17. 89 Rag sorters, female, paper and wood pulp .9.29 9 . 04 Pipefitters, petroleum 23.58 23.73 Kilnmen, pottery 27.01 28.29 STATISTICS ON WAGES. 241 Laborers. Wages per hour Wages per hour 1896. 1903. (In cents and fractions.) Sewers, books, female 10.71 10 . 15 Linotype operators. 33.51 26.93 Finishers, rope and twine 8.00 8.00 Hemp preparers 17.33 16.71 Laborers 14.29 14.33 Layers 14.00 14.00 Ropemakers 17.78 18.70 Spinners 13.69 12.62 Twisters 13.00 13.00 Blacksmiths, shipbuilding 28 . 24 28 . 48 Boilermakers, shipbuilding 26.33 25 . 68 Laborers, shipbuilding 17 . 02 18 . 55 Riggers, shipbuilding 26.05 25.33 Riveters, shipbuilding 25.34 25.31 Sparmakers, shipbuilding 33.07 34.66 Beamers, shipbuilding 18.33 18.19 Loom fixers, silk goods 29.05 29.70 Quillers, silk goods 10.07 9.89 Spinners, silk goods 7 . 80 7 . 95 Twisters in silk goods 25 . 01 • 26 . 14 Warpers, female, silk goods 19.16 15.69 Weavers, male, silk goods 18 . 89 16 .02 Weavers, female, silk goods 17 . 56 15 . 34 Weavers, ribbon, silk goods 24.25 20.61 Weavers, ribbon, female, silk goods 23.21 20.89 Gutters, hog 31.54 31.28 Headers, hog 26.25 28.17 Scrapers, hog 27.63 25.23 Cutters, soap 16.37 1.7.50 Holders, soap 16.88 17.71 Coopers, sugar refining 11.44 11.79 Filtermen, sugar refining 11 . 37 11 . 58 Firemen, sugar refining 16.37 19.03 Laborers, sugar refining 15.37 15.51 Water tenders, sugar refining 19.96 18.63 Weighers, sugar refining 19.31 21 . 11 Assorters, tin plate 25 . 00 25 . 00 Dusters, tin plate ..8.33 8 . 82 Laborers, tin plate 15 . 84 15 . 36 Cigarette machine feeders 7 . 50 7 .47 Cigarette machine feeders, female 10.48 . 10.48 Cigarette machine operators 13.97 15.72 Packers, cigars 15 . 42 12 . 99 Stemmers, female 7.32 8 . 56* Casers 14.22 ' 13.12 Granulators 9.00 S.SS Sorters 15.81 15.16 Combers, woolens 10.23 10.95 Dyers, woolens 12.16 13 . 55 Clampers, paper boxes, male 20.34 20.34 Clampers, paper boxes, female 13.56 13.56 Gluers, paper boxes, female 14.38 14.99 Limers, paper boxes, male 13 . 56 ' 13 . 56 Paper cutters 27 . 27 25 . 55 Scorers 23 . 84 25 . 99 Trimmers 8.53 9.43 Off bearers, brick .15.05 17.98 Lathers . .• 35 . 84 37 . 59 Roofers 23.31 26.13 Buttermakers 14 . 88 15 . 34 Cheesemakers 16 . 29 17 . 50 Candymakers 23.84 23 . 77 Burlers, carpets 13 . 24 15.91 242 STATISTICS ON WAGES. Laborers. Wages per hour Wages per hour 1896. 1903. (In cents and fractions.) Dyers, carpets 14 . 85 Loom fixers 24.53 Spoolers 11 .30 Twisters 9.74 Weavers 13.31 Weavers, ingrain 17.41 Blacksmiths, carriage and wagon 23 . 40 Bodymakers 23.61 Machine wood workers 18 . 20 Painters 21.09 Blacksmiths, steam railroad cars 25 . 65 Coppersmiths, steam railroad cars 27 . 95 Laborers, steam railroad cars 12.79 Pipe fitters, steam railroad cars 23 . 80 Cutters, clothing 24.33 Examiners, clothing 13 . 34 Finishers, clothing 8 . 85 Pressers, clothing 7 . 38 Sewing machine operators 8 . 25 Bushelmen 11 . 67 Meaters, cooperage 20 . 65 Levelers, cooperage 29 . 53 Raisers, cooperage 26 . 05 Carding machine tenders 9 . 28 Dyers 10.63 Bleachers 11 .84 Calendrers 13 . 22 Color mixers 12 . 25 Dyers, male 13 . 83 Printers 46.12 Bolters, flour. 16.37 Boilermakers 26 .26 Coremakers 9 . 84 Canners 17 . 50 Canners, female 1 1 . 66 Gas, chargers 24 . 75 Gas, laborers 16.10 Pipefitters 24.80 Retort men 23 . 28 Batchmakers, glass 19 . 40 Flangers, hats 32 . 44 Pouncers, hats 25 . 00 Trimmers, hats 13 . 76 Millers, liquors 23 .27 Warehouse men 18.19 Yeast makers 65 . 29 Coopers, liquors 24. 15 Action makers, organs 23 . 63 Case makers, organs 20.34 Pipe makers, organs 29 . 72 Pipe organ builders . ' 30 . 66 Tuners 30.69 Voicers - 41.83 These figures carefully gathered by the Government show that the actual wage scale per hour for hundreds of thousands of laborers show an actual decrease in 1903 over 1896; the cases in which an increase is shown, while not reaching an average of a 10 per cent, advance, may be attributable more to the adoption of the eight hour system than to any other principle ; the daily wages may remain the same in both years, while the hourly wages show STATISTICS ON WAGES. 243 a slight advance. The saving to the laborer is merely that of an hour or two hour's time. Many other occupations are set out in full in the report of the Bureau of Labor, which are not repro- duced here, and which show a much greater increase in hourly wages. An analysis of these advances show them to be in those occupations most clearly dominated by trades unionism, and the reason for these greater advances is attributable in no sense to the tariff, nor to the savings which follow the concentration of industries. Indeed, an analysis of the profits made by these concentrations or trusts, show that a much larger percentage of the value of the products might have been devoted to the wage fund without injury to a single industry. In other words profits are too high, owing to the tariff and the trusts; wages, on the contrary, at their highest, are too low in comparison with these profits; and at their average, these wages are unconscionably low; and at their lowest, these same wages, not only defraud their recipients of a fair living, but convict the trusts and the tariff of fastening upon American labor the pauper wage scales of Europe. APPENDICES APPENDIX A. COMPARISON OF EXPORT AND HOME PRICES. The first and second table is taken from the American Export Monthly of June 18, 1904, published by Arkell and Douglas, 5 to 11 Broadway, New York City, New York. FiEST Table. — Showing differences in discounts from price lists for for- eign and home consumers and the per cent, of difference between export and home prices; many varieties and sizes are often included under one ■ discount. Note. — Where several discounts are quoted the first figure is the dis- count from list price, the second figure is the discount from the remainder, the third figure is the discount fEom that remainder, and so on. Thus, in the line for "Augers" below, the home discount is given as "50, 10, 5." If the list price was $1 these discounts would mean 50 per cent, off from $1 (50 cents), less 10 per cent, of remainder (5 cents), less 5 per cent, of that remainder (2^4 cents), leaving 42% cents as net price to buyer. Firm or corporation and article. Export dis- count from list. Home dis- ( Dif- countfroml fer- list. ence. Russell & Erwin Manufacturing Co. : AUger bits. Swan's Jennings Locks, door Bells, cow SneL Manufacturing Co. : Augers John S. Fray & Co. : Braces Enterprise Manufacturing Co. : Coffee and spice mills A. M. Hayden & Russell, Burdsall & Ward Bolt and Nut Co. : Bolts, tire Bolts, carriage Bridgeport Chain Co. : Chains, halter Covert Manufacturing Co. : Halters, jute Halters, sisal Handles, fork, rake, hoe and shovel . . Beamis & Call Hardware Co. : Pipe wrenches, adjustable "S" Pike Manufacturing Co. : Scythe and oil stones Henry Disston's Sons : Saws, hand Saws, crosscut Stanley Rule and Level Co. : Rules, boxwood Per cent. 60 50 50,15 75 70 40,10 80,10 80, 10 70, 10, 7 50, 10, 10 40, 10 50 50 50 40 and 60 and 10 50, 10, 10, 10 Per cent. 50 40 50 50, 10, 5 60 25 to 30 72, 10 75 60,10 40, 5, 5 30 45 40 33 25 45 60 to 60, 10 P.ct. 25 20 19 72 33 30 28 39 44 33 30 10 20 50 43 53 35 > APPENDICES. 245 Second Table. — Showing difference between export and home prices on sample specified articles. Firm or corporation and article. Russell & Erwin Manufacturing Co. : Auger bits, Swan's Jenning No. 3, dozen Snell Manufacturing Co. : Auger bits, solid cast steel car No. 7, dozen. . A. & M. Haydon : Bolts, tire 1-inch, per hundred Bolts, carriage, 2-inch, per hundred John S. Fray & Co. : Braces, Spofford No. 7, per dozen Braces, Woodhead No. 117, per dozen Braces, ratchet No. 141, per dozen Enterprise Manufacturing Co. : Coffee and spice mills, wall, each Coffee and spice mills, counter, No. 4, each.. Coffee and spice mills, countw, No. 212, each. Bridgeport Chain Co. : Chains, halter. Brown, No. 4, 6 foot, dozen. . . . Beamis & Call Hardware Co. : Wrenches, "S," adjustable pipe, 8 inches, doz. Do Wrenches, combination, 10 inches, dozen Export price. Home price. Differ- ence. $1.60 $2.00 2.70 3.60 .27 .98 .30 1.35 4.80 10.80 12.60 6.40 14.40 16.80 .67 4.32 16.20 .88 5.60 21.00 2.00 2.80 7.50 4.50 13.75 9.00 5.55 14.25 I Per. ct. 25 33 10 34 30 30 30 30 30 30 40 20 22 6 [List from Exporters and Importers' Journal of June 18, 1904, published by Henry W. Peabody, 17 State street, New York City, N. Y.] First Table. — Shoicing differences in discounts. Firm or corporation and article. Export dis- count from list. Home dis- 1 Dif- countfroml fer- list. ence. Henry Disston's Sons : Levels and plumbs Saws, band Saws, hand Saws, compass Shears Squares, try Andrew B. Hendrix & Co. : Bird cages, brass Enterprise Manufacturing Co. : Fruit seeders, Nos. 36 and 38 Collins & Co. : Hinges, japanned spring Hinges, acme brass Springs, door, gem coil Covert Manufacturing Co. : Harness snaps Breast chains Cleveland Twist Drill Co. : Bit stocks and drills Boston and Lockport Block Co. : Tackle blocks Charles Parker Co. : Vises Miller's Falls Co. : Wrenches, Coes Per cent. 70, 10, 10, 10 60, 10, 10 45, 5 45, 5 50 70, 10, 10, 10 50 40 25, 20, 10 40, 10 35 50 50,10 65,10 75 25, 10, 5 40, 10, 5, 5, 7 Per cent. 70 60 25 25 30 70 P.ct. 36 23 43 43 40 36 40,10 8 30 16 25,10 30 30 24 30 16 35 40 42 30 60, 10^ 5 8 70,10 8 25 17 40, 5, 5, 7 13 246 APPENDICES. Second Table.- -Shotoing samples of differences hettoeen export and home prices in specific articles. Firm or corporation and article. Export price. Home price. Andrew B. Hendrix Co. : Bird cages. No. 301, fancy, witli R. mats, doz. Henry Disston's Sons : Hardware, saws, band, 3 to 14, per foot Hardware, saws, band, 2 to 3, per foot Hardware, saws, hand, 18 inches, per dozen. . Hardware, saws, hand. Acme, 16 in., per doz. Hardware, saws, hand. No. 7, 14 in., per doz. Hardware, saws, compass, No. 2, 16 inches, per dozen Hardware, saws, bacli. No. 4, 12 in., per doz. Hardware, saws, butcher, No. 7, 18 in., per doz. Hardware, saws, wood. No. 69, per doz Hardware, trysquare, No. 1, 5 in., per doz. . . . Hardware, trowels, No. 12, per doz Hardware, bunghole borers, No. 2, each Hardware, levels and plumbs, No. 8, per doz.. Smith & Egge Manufacturing Co, : Hardware, shears, Eurelca, No. 2 Ames Manufacturing Co. : Hardware, shovels, spodes, D. H., sq. pt, doz. . Hard'ware, shovels, spades, R. D., sq. pt., doz. . Hardware, shovels, spades, long H., sq. pt., doz Columbian Hardware Co. : Hardware, hinges. Acme, 2 I.. No. 2, doz. pairs Hardware, hinges, Acme, W. B., No. 2, doz. pairs Hardware, hinges, door springs, Gem coil, gross. Boston & Lockport Block Co. : Hardware, tackle block,14 in., single, each Hardware, tackle block, 14 in., double, each Collins & Co. : Hardware, wrenches, Coes, 10 in., per doz. . . . L. S. Starrett Co. : Hardware, hack-saw blades, 9 in., per doz.... Enterprise Manufacturing Co. : Fruit presses, Nq. 3, each Raisin seeder. No. 36, per doz Covert Manufacturing Co. : Hardware, snaps, bar. Derby, gross Hardware, snaps, bar. Jockey, gross Hardware, snaps, bar. Trojan, gross Hardware, snaps, bar. Yankee, gross Hardware, jacks, carriage, per doz Hard'ware, jacks, wagon, per doz Hardware, jacks, automobile, per doz Hardware, jacks, automobile, screw, per doz. . Sampson Cordage Works : Hardware, sash cord. No. 7, per pound Hardware, sash cord, Mass., per pound M. S. Benedict Manufacturing Co. : Hardware, teaspoons, gross Hardware, dessert spoons, gross Hardware, tablespoons, gross Hardware, forks, gross j Cleveland Twist Drill Co. : Hardware, twist drill, bit stock, 1 in., per doz. Hardware, twist drill, taper sh., 1 in., each.. Charles Parker Co. : Hardware, vises. No. 5, X, each Hardware, coffee mills, box. No. 401, per doz. . Hardware, coffee mills, side, No. 90, per doz. . Columbian Hardware Co. : Hardware, vises, solid box. No. 90, each.... Hardware, vises, parallel, 5 in., each Malin & Co. : Hardware, wire ann. tin, 1-lb. spools, per doz . . Hardware, wire ann. tin, 1-lb. spools, per doz. . Hardware, wire, barb pr. hd.. lbs Hardware, wire, blflck fencing, p. hd., lbs. . . . Geo. W. Korn Razor Manufacturing Co. : Razors, safety, each $15.00 $16.20 1.00 .75 6.00 11.51 6.37 1.22 .92 8.36 16.50 8.40 2.61 6.00 7.00 6.00 1.06 10.00 1.00 4.60 3.65 8.36 8.70 7.80 1.43 12.95 1.25 6.30 10.00 14.00 4.68 4.95 4.81 5.10 5.40 5.25 .75 1.08 7.80 .98 1.40 8.40 1.75 2.63 2.00 2.83 5.46 5.86 .48 .53 1.80 7.20 2.40 9.00 3.20 2.39 1.84 2.40 5.00 6.40 7.60 18.00 4.25 3.00 2.63 3.12 6.88 8.80 10.45 23.95 .24 .20 .33 .28 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.30 1.10 1.65 2.20 2.53 8.86 .94 10.13 1.08 I 15.40 1.44 2.88 19.20 1.80 3.60 6.40 2.25 8.00 3.00 .70 .90 2.20 1.25 .80 .98 2.70 2.00 1.08 1.20 APPENDICES. 2i1 f [List from the Export World and Herald of July 5, 1904, published by the American Trading Company, Broad Exchange Building, New York City, N. Y.] FIRST TABLE, Firm or corporation and article. Export dis-l Home dis- Dif- count count fer- from list. from list. ence. Per cent. 1 Percent. Per ct. 50,10 50 11 50,10, 5 50, 10 6 35, 5 16 33 50, 10 40 33 50 40 20 C. Atkins & Co., Indianapolis, Ind Hardware, siaw (circular) Hardware, saw (band) Hardware, saw (crosscut) Hardware, siaw (hand) Hardware, saw (back) 1 Export 1 Home | Differ- I price. I price. | ence. J. S. Barron & Co. : Freezers, ice cream, Alaska, 4-quart, each . . . Washboards, single zinc, per dozen Washboards, solid zinc, per dozen Washboards, solid zinc, per dozen Henry Chesney Hammer Co. : Hammers, farriers' No. 54, per dozen Hammers, machinists', No. 91, per dozen Knowles Scale Works : Scales, square pLatform, with wh., each 1 $1.82 1.50 2.25 2.40 1 $2.40 2.40 2.65 3.00 4.44 7.00 4.80 8.51 14.97 17.50 [Per. ct. 33 60 17 25 9 20 17 In February, 1904, the literary bureau of the Democratic Congressional Committee received a letter from Henry Rossell & Co. (Limited), SheflSeld, England, large manufacturers and dealers in files and tool steel. This letter says : "As an illustration of the unfair manner in which home buyers of files are treated by the United States manufacturers, I inclose you here- with a comparison of the prices charged to the buyers in the United States with those offered by the same manufacturers here." Some of the prices on the list inclosed follow : Comparative prices, per dozen, of Amerioa^ files in America and England. Article. Eng- United Dififer- land. States, ence. Flat bastard, 4 inches Flat bastard, 6 inches Flat bastard, 10 inches Hand bastard, 4 inches... Hand bastard, 6 inches... Hand bastard, 10 inches... Half-round bastard, 4 inches Half-round bastard, 6 inches Half-round bastard, 10 inches Round bastard, 4 inches. . . . Round bastard, 6 inches.... Round bastard. 10 inches. . . . Square bastard, 4 inches... Square bastard, 6 inches . . . Square bastard, 10 inches... $0.34 $0.92 .50 1.07 1.08 1.75 .38 .92 .62 1.07 1.30 1.87 .34 1.20 .50 1.52 1.08 2.27 .34 .75 .50 .87 1.08 1.40 .34 .95 .50 1.15 1.08 1.85 Perct. 170 114 62 142 73 44 253 204 108 121 74 30 179 130 71 From these figures we see that the American File Association, which has not revised its price list to American buvers since November 1, 1899, Is charging us for most kinds of its small files more than twice as much as it charges Englishmen for these same files, and for half-round files we must pay them three times the price charged Englishmen. 24^ APPENDICES. <1 So PiO o eo eo< CO t-os © 00< 05 tHOO iH rHl 00 COrH OO OO cod (MiH lOCO tH iHCO -^ oT c4" Oiiooi (MC^lO IOCDtH ooo O O"* 00 ©O O iH© l^ ©05© (N© O ©CO (N ©© © (M© CD iq©© TfJeo 00 d(NdiHiHCDT}Hr-5io aicicc t-ia 00 »OlOCDC0(N©C0©rS t-'^t'© ©^00 ©_ iHCO 00 CON iH (N(M lO "^'^^'^ t-" th ©'t-^ t4 iH cc Oi ciio© CO LO CO tH © C5© © O t-N •CO a a o o : p*> ; o) _ o fl "-^ n o ©., 00-^ • O O jf t-i ^ o ej p es ftt- St. ^a ft >• - OS (MCOCO 00 o 5 ^j o a a 2, ^ ft tc5 jg CO 3 O o) :3 o ^.2 ftci '^ '"CO CJ -M ■ 0) o) a> 1^ C-. u £ t^ ft-n^ be 1^ 5 u -^ a to :^?; « tc be -^-^f-oo©^ +j 05 ej-Ccc o bt(D O) C S^ ;s§tca^- c CT.S a 1^ 'd « * ^ OJ o a) ___ o fc< o S a a ^ " a ^2§« ""B^ a M w «:§ ^ ed a &;si«= a .r> o etf t- a^ w O es cj o > •S^^?^^^-o© ,'O^-N ^^«*-|+J^ 4>^ bco; Ui>. t» fc£-S S a^ a'O^n'^'ow -a ©o Mmt; oiSS":;i"^aK.o2?3 ■ii>!j'ftc8r-/2o3.S(:S-<-i ,— I — < ^^ Q ;5u Ah (^ APPENDICES. 249 to eo eoco«o W O w t- CO to 00 ooco s s IfflTjIb- 00 O lO N rH o t- OOO i ©OQO i ^ § i eo 00 rH o g^§§ iH rHrHiH rH iH T-i M rH rH r-t C^y^t-i c^ cc rH 00 05 t- T-l ^ <» im to (MC^O CO O 00 ■ 09- »5 €«- CO •* ■* (MCOiN M O a- q Q) (U o> fi >'d 3 eS . ^ u •:* ~ I'd of-d o g-d 05 O w^co .So lj fli rr Qj __ S;-.. (i> <=> n a-dgg^S ti fl .2*0 '"c^ ^ ^ o -M ti o ft 'S^ ^ -ii a '^'^ ® ^^'gga^^a^-^aT -M a I -a d fcCO 03 -M O ^«M ftd ^ a 'd' 0) .a ^3 S tt " , .ii ^ -Q *-• O^ 02 2^ «d.2S„ ^^^ a- oij .-, W '-' 2fl d o.a«*^+j S** 5^^S ri UijS 00 2 ^ a> m OJ •I'M w z: --,■ ^d-QiN'S O -, ^ en a ^-.2ci»'°02rt^^0 . J- 25 be «S -O -H _- fl oa fl CO -M *jaaj-*^t-'SCd'roJrt rt.Sc;K<^aog3>'bo3 ^' ^^'d ® a ^"^ ^-' -o 'd^o§^'S*ct- fl'ddS^^^'dfagp eJ ^ Q ffi aoa'g.S-g ^^^S-dss ^.ii^o oj o 03:2 a a; ti ?^.i4— ' si .a c o^ cj'd' 02 "» -H a d d oi o ^ ft ' 'd -^i O (U ^ > o .. w '^'S'd feft .. . aj ..Ji^-d oca'ag a^^ol :o • a '.a a'o a«w d o O+j ft (-1 . ftH' •c d <^^ a 2 *^ . cnS a a> a „ d ^ ^ o S S s 250 APPENDICES. 1 ! UJ H O lU -I -1 o o UJ oc < UJ > o o z < z UJ o UJ Q. o o 6^t "goo •^ C^ -«*« eo IN 05 b- rH © ■* '^. eo Tj< © «o OC t- rH © rH 12| t^ d id rH © l^ 1^ to •H b^ © © kO (N to C 1 lO CI eo '^ eo T-^ 00 b- CO < «-s fl . o » ^ 00 N (N CI eo 00 CI a Ig§& ^ '^. *'. to e<: CO r^ r^ CI CO T-i ^iS^ ao "~o -^ '* «o eo rH to 5 to 'i* 00 Ol '*. t- to © to ■* CO © t- 00 t r» 1^ t-^ cl CO © ci ci © rH W o © © t' M to y-t to 00 CO 00 00 (M rH 00 t- eo -* "*► 2 . to eo" -'l^ CI eo T^ eo 00 ^ CO CO rH CO T^ cf "~» © © § to © © © © © © ■* kO © 00 CO © © © © b- in t^ f? t^ t-^ Tji CO 05 05 eo 0) 0) lO © '"t* 05 r^ 00 a> to fl la b- ia rH co^ tc a j-i r-l ^. « Tf c (N 05 ^" rH © 1^ to '* to to r-i "* rH CI ' "~o co © © c CD to © to © © 00 w t- o to c b-; t- to CI to © ® (N 05 OS rA «c CO r 1- 05 -^ CO !3 (N Tt< t- rH ^ 0) u g «- S fc- S u 81 Og^(y a O « fj IJ . ''K^'q, t. § " ^^s a p CS CI CO eo ^ eo ■* b- b- eo ■^ rH ~ W CO eo ■* eo Tji eo ■^ rH 1 3 1 5 a ^ • t4 §. a 1 o .2 t 'm i2 ^ OB 1 d 3 •§ d s y^ s A •o o< fi. Oj -»-> d> a y-^ DC •a 5 d a 5 ^ S "3 be 4) 1 u : a ? ^ c fl o d V ■*j -M f» ni y (4 S A ?. 'C s l-H a ti-C ^ d a 0) 5 c u u p trf o au a •o >> a 2 o ^ a O a ? sj © .a 3. d 1 a o il Al i <1 c s se c c '^ a (■ c £ 1 If is CO o 1 O d •a d a] © d if 1 I t- a. c a C a li ,1 o d "§ ei © d ej 2 J5 ©OS o"- -oot*,-© to a ilg§:l| /^ ED >; ►^ -(J rf ' i ' 1 'C 1 u er C a - ^i Is II o a o d -o d © II ll ^1 li o o o ft SI ^§ 1^ o 3 1^ 11 r 1" 111 --> > 1| > ^ ;^ l^a§ ^ s S p n 1^ o k ^ O /2 APPENDICES. 251 Ol N O l- © O © lO CO N ® 1-; (N 00 t^ eo © 9 © t^ bi »0 T-l © © CO © iH rt rH tH iH »-I rH 1-t (M © CO \d t- t- \a tH w 00 rir t- t- © "* © T-i CO '<*< CO eo__ ci v^ (M © © © i-O © lO © © © to lO © (M © © © (M © t- © © © »o (M (N eo CO ■^ © »q eo tH ci t- 00 (N t-^ t-^ rH eo eo eo" eo \6 cT I- T»« eo © •^ © y-i (N rf« CO eo c* CO^ ©" rH tH •o © © »o »o © ~«r © © © © © © 3 lO lO »o CO kO kO iO iS> \a © \o \a -o ■d •o •d •d •d -d •d -d -d -d -d d Q d d d § d d d d d d (4 cd a vi ej OS si m 03 03 -O 73 t3 1 -d 'd •d -d •d 'd -d -d d d d d d d d d d d d d jj d 3 d j3 d d ^ a a a ft a a a o a a c a o a o a u t4 u t4 t^ ti bi u t-l aa ft*: D.4J a«- S.^ a^ a^ s^ a^-l^-a^ a^-l^- OS to r ceu ents r cen ents r cen «,« a „ a d -2 d 4; d ti 0^ »^ so g d d a*® d 0) SS3 ?, tH S »-. ?, «-l H ^ s cy-i3 o s X) (y U O O) V cp (y 0) ^i (U o S.S 0)0 01 t) Ojg OJ a Q. a a a a a^ a a a a'y a 1-1 eo ■* •* CO •* ■* ■* eo Tf4 •* eo Tf< r-l 00 T»< tW CO Tt< '-J* ■<*< eo ^ "* eo -* d d 08 d ^ o ■»-' a •d -d d d d d o o a a o3 ui d d w o fc.© a <«§ a) w d-^ O u S a d O 03 2 « g a es^ -d CD o O d 5?i a «w , - © :a d) > > o o d Mt3 d o Tl ^ 3 Ml 03 <^ •z> a «2 »3 d 55g -d " •d dTS a> d d o d eS 0) f-_, 5 4)© O d"' ^ d d fl O08 S 'd ja •^> > frt « . > 2 w o Q s CO d L, d d-w o a> cd drj dad ^ ^ d>- > a ai a § o no a If I Sgsa d tl oj ^ !i a ® ^^afe jj tl > o©S-t-» -b-oo j; od a'd d«3 g 1^1 -§ ^ sag Id a l^:-a «s Si d o 1) 1 ^d'l>»0 ^ rt S ^ * S , -d ^ d "ti i M 0353 S O o 4; 0) -^ ..fn 03 d O \^ tl "d ji: "^ •*-• a-SssSag dga>§« 4J O *" d a ^ 5 sa-g ft.. I o3 a'd d OJ— . — '- 4) 03 O-H 252 APPENDICES. APPENDIX B. OPERATIONS OF McKINLEY TARIFF BY MONTHS. Office of the Secbetaky of the Treasuby, Division of Wabbants, Estimates, and Appeopbiations. Comparative statement of the receipts and expenditures of the United States. Source Fiscal year ending June 30, 1891. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1890. Month of Oc- tober, 1890 Since July 1, 1890. Month of Oc- totcr. 1889. Since July 1, 1889. Customs Internal revenue Nat onal - bank deposit fund. . $24,934,114.05 12,840,250.54 993.720.00 1.447,809.70 $91238,718 97 49 730,301.50 6,715,260.00 6,942,864.18 $18,815,040.44 11,625,469.47 $77,085,886.99 46.356.007.00 Miscellaneous . . . 2,052,097.73 8,587.110.32 Total 40,215,894.29 154,627,144.74 32,492,607.64 132,020.004.31 expenditures. Civil and miscel- laneous War Navy Indians Pensions National lank fund, redemp- tion account. . Interest Premium Total $11,542,447.85 4,965,747.99 2,471.248.56 1,300,286.18 11,097,474.24 2.202.728.00 4,312,965.93 143.215.49 $34,821,918.79 16.130,568.89 7.730.667.82 2,286,799.74 44,837,292.67 6,093,928.50 25.826.454.52 8,451.635.39 38,036.664.24 146,159,266.32 $7,441,648.22 5,619,672.91 1,773,957.01 644,737.20 4,694,404.96 6,132,839.69 2,291,537.72 28,598,797.71 $28,885,318.54 20 381,720.42 7,250,632.93 2,669,613.23 40.182,032.33 16,426,296.86 8,600,925.49 124,396,539.80 RECEIPTS. Source. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1891. Fiscal year ending .Tune 30, 1890. Month of No- vember, 1890. Since July 1, 1890 Month of No- vember. 1889. Since July 1, 1889. Customs Internal revenue National-bank $15,227,641.28 11.322.047.31 307.450.00 2,128,986.12 $108132,662.42 62,078 611.99 7,022,710.00 9.735,658.74 $16,614,488.23 11,159,069.42 $93,704,225.71 57,517,783.85 Miscellaneous . . . 2,943,409.49 12,080,893.90 Total 28.986,124,71 186,972,643.15 ,30.716.967.14 1 163,302,903.46 EXPENDITUBES. Civil and miscel- laneous War $8,771,335.85 3,691,893.26 2.321.959.98 626,524.92 21.511,161.49 2,109,684.50 3.537.462 40 $43,593,454.64 19,822,462.15 10,052,627.80 2,913,324.66 66,348.454.16 8.236,063.00 29.363.916.92 8,451.635.39 $5,792,589.33 3,245,263.04 1,824.033.59 757.857.27 10,775,646.23 774,069.74 2,165.298.90 $34,677,907.87 23,626,983.46 Navy 9,074,666.52 3,427,470.50 Pensions National-bank fund, redemp- tion accoimt . . Interest 50,957,678.56 17,266,366.66 Premium 10,766,224.39 Total 42,570,022.40 188,781,938.72 25,334,758.10 149,731,297.90 APPENDICES. 25J iwparative statement of the receipts and expenditures of the United States — Continued. KBCBIPTS. Source. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1891. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1890. Month of De- cember, 1890. Since July 1. 1890. Month of De- cember, 1889. Since July 1, 1889. Customs Internal revenue National-ban k $16,104,533.09 12,944,173.21 263,875.00 2,057,458.57 $124,240,195.51 75,022,785.20 7,286,585.00 11,793,117.31 $15,925,107.32 11,003.848.84 $109,029,333.03 68,521,632.69 Miscellaneous 2,666,548.33 14,747,442.23 Total 31,370,039.87 218,342,683.02 29,595,504.49 192,898,407.95 EXPENDITURES. Civil and miscel- laneous War Navy Indians Pensions National- b an k fund, redemp- tion account. . Interest Premium Total $8,362,245.00 3,669,026.16 2,163,809.76 723,860.55 2,653,515.94 1,935,467.00 470,621.74 1,910,203.85 21,888,550.00 $51,955,699.64 23,491,488.31 12,216.437.56 3,637,185.21 69,001,970.10 10,171,530.00 29,834,538.66 10,361,639.24 210,670,488.72 $5,577,342.65 3,453,129.55 1,646,953.92 729,555.35 10,322,384.73 1,461,654.34 2,692,958.86 25,883.979.40 $40,255,250.52 27,080,113.01 10,721,620.44 4,157,025.85 61,280,063.29 18,662.320.94 13,459,183.25 175,615,277.30 Source. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1891. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1890. Month of Jan- uary, 1891. Since July 1, 1890. Month of Jan- uary. 1890. Since July 1, 1889. Customs Internal revenue National-ban k deposit fund . . $23,897,953.06 11,253,863.80 245,740.00 1,658,416.39 $148,138,148.57 86.276,649.00 7,532,325.00 13.451,533.70 $21,743,305.83 10,034,688.12 $131,372,638.86 78.556.320.81 Miscellaneous 2,883,164.12 17,630.606.35 Total 37,055,973.25 255,398,656.27 34.661,158.07 227,559,566.02 EXPENDITURES. Civil and miscel- laneous War Navy Indians Pensions National- b ank fund, redemp- tion account. . Interest Premium Total $9,747,655.06 4,450,327.50 2,386.295.82 963,690.10 1,080,570.56 2.461,760.00 2,851,428.66 39,581.37 23,981,309.07 $61,539,224.21 27,938,204.23 14,603,367.59 4,602,007.62 70,081.657.48 12,633,290.00 32,675,449.15 10,401,220.61 234,474.420.89 $10,144,634.31 2.859.904.57 2,193,746.33 480,596.99 2,176,772.75 7,916.800.22 2,086,335.17 27,858,790.64 $50,342,288.07 29,939,476.30 12,911,435.51 4,637.201.64 63,455,71833 26,577,996.45 15,546,518.42 203,409,634.72 254 APPENDICES. Comparative statement of the receipts and expenditures of the United States — Continued. RECEIPTS. Source. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1891. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1890. February. Since July 1. February. Since July 1. Customs Internal revenue National bank deposit fund. . Miscellaneous $18,994,189.72 9,489,629.57 338,146.00 789,353.73 $166,310,626.68 96,478,005.79 ' 7,870,470.00 15,184,875.47 $18,966,505.50 10,114,960.02 $150,810,622.46 89,317,749.81 1.784.752.72 20,326,554.31 Total 29,611,318.02 285,843.977.94 30,866,218.24 260,454,926.58 EXPENDITDBES. Civil and miscel- laneous War Navy Indians! Pensions National- b ank fund, redemp- tion account. . Interest Premium Total. $6,180,218.75 2,841,729.84 2,086,497.66 667,113.25 17,310.563.08 2.279,340.50 359.546.78 31,725.009.86 $67,719,442.96 30,779,934.07 16,689,865.25 5,269,120.87 87.392,220.56 14,912.630.50 33,034,995.93 10,401,220.61 266,199,430.75 $5,069,175,491 $55,411,463.56 2,433.849.08; 32,373,325.38 2,058,749.89 363,093.11: 13,660,764.861 14,970,185.40 5,000,294.75 77,116,483.19 518,161.88i 956,910.16; 27,096,158.33 16.502,428.58 25,060,704.47; 228,470,339.19 RECEIPTS. Source. Fiscal year ending Jmie 30, 1891. Fiscal year ending Jime 30, 1890. March. Since July 1. i f March. Since July 1. i Customs Internal revenue National-bank deposit fund. . Miscellaneous $15,373,522.85 $181,684,149.53 11,206,723,41 107,684,729.20 390,875.00 r 8,261,345.00 $20,800,765.82 $171,611,388.28 11,281,856.81 100,599,606.62 2,447,209.201 17,632,084.67 2,695.558.261 23,022.112.57 Total 29,418,330.46! 315,262,308.40 34,778,180.89 295,233,107.47 EXPENDITURES. CivU and miscel- laneous War $11,647,638.63 3,707,580.96 2,353,469.26 1,120,046.85 9,514,578.24 2.440,204.50 719,423.16 $79,367,081.59 34,487.515.03 19,043,334.51 6,389,167.72 96,906,798.80 17,352,835.00 33,754,419.09 10,401,220.61 $5,467,121.75 2,494,189.73 1,682,097.65 702,517.40 3,854,915.10 $60,878,585.31 34,867,515.11 Navy 16,652,283.05 jndians 5,702,812.15 Pensions National-bank fund, redemp- tinn np.foimt 80,971,398.29 1,339,299.79 2,094,595.85 28,435,458.12 18,597,024.43 Total 31,502.941.60 297,702,372.35 17,634,737.27 246,105,076.46 APPENDICES. 255 Comparative statement of the receipts and expenditures of the United States — Continued. BBCBIPTS. Source. Fiscal year ending June 30. 1891. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1890. Month of AprU, 1891. Since July 1. 1890. Month of AprU, 1890. Since July 1, 1889. Customs Internal revenue National-bank deposit fund. . $12,591,990.18 11,420,455.56 580.000.00 1,452,785.90 $194,276,139.71 119,105,184.76 9,145,695.00 19,084,870.57 $19,907,466.60 12,105,148.93 $191,518,854.88 112,704,755.55 Miscellaneous . . . 2,004,425.87 25,020,535.44 Total 26,045,831.64 341,611.890.04 34,017,041.40 329,253.145.87 EXPENDITURES. Civil and miscel- laneous War $14,036,844.80 4,263,705.37 2,699,898.94 771,451.98 264,191.83 1,540,686.53 2,554,951.31 $93,411,402.34 38,749,792.29 21,140,905.08 7,159,347.71 97,174,355.28 19,196,671.50 36,091,822.31 10,401,220.61 $7,915,315.97 3,698,774.81 1,921,907.74 422,425.48 9.614.610.49 $68,682,311.17 38,561,739.43 Navy 18,569,830.54 6,126,559.34 Pensions National-bank fund, redemp- tion account. . 90,583,210.88 Interest 5,660,971.85 673,917.46 34 096 372.44 Prftmium 19,270,941 83 Total 25,331,194.36 323,325,517.12 29,907,923.70 275,890,965.63 Source. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1891. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1890. Month of May. 1891. Since July 1. 1891. Month of May, 1891. Since July 1, 1891. Customs Internal revenue National -bank deposit fvmd. . $11,995,141.77 12,232,704.18 128,120.00 3,061,459.99 $205,731,913.13 132.216,628.99 8,970,065.00 22,890,360.17 $17,084,403.09 16.392,161.43 $208,017,572.19 129,500,127.32 Miscellaneotis . . . 2.002,987.24 27,019,388.57 Total 27,417.425.94 369.808.967.29 35.443.551.76 364,537,088.08 EXPENDITURES. Civil and miscel- laneous War $10,132,414.20 5,389,418.48 2,751,875.11 580,914.84 8,519.169.53 2,081,758.50 316,534.49 $103,543,816.54 44,139,210.77 23,892,780.19 7,740,262.55 105.693.624.81 20,974,680.00 36,408,356.80 10,401,220.61 $7,527,685.39 3.721,044.60 1,712,839.73 352.742.86 12,594,516.40 5 is, 584. i 7 $76,209,996.56 42,282,784.03 20,282,670.27 6,479,302.20 103,177,727.28 's4 find QfiW fii Navy Indians Pensions National -bank fund redemp- tion account. . Interest Premium 811,561.96| 20,082,503.79 Total 29,772,085.15 352,793,852.27 27,233,975.11 303,124,940.74 256 APPENDICES. Comparative statement of the receipts and expenditures of the United States — Continued. RECEIPTS. Source. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1891. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1890. Month of June, 1891. Since July 1, 1890. Month of June, 1890. Since July 1, 1889. Customs Internal revenue National-bank deposit fund . $14,168,745.47 $219,900,658.60 13,726,652.43: 145,943,281.42 89,900.00 9,059,965 00 $21,641,827,531 $229,668,584.57 12,641,939.21 142,606,705.81 Miscellaneous Total 3,736,451.61; 26,626,811.78 3,263,125.11 30,805,692.25 31,721,749.511 401,530,716.80 1 37,546,891.85: 403,080,982.63 EXPENDITURES. Civil and miscel- laneous War ! $6,595,523.30' $110,139,339.84 4,583,906.08 48,723,116.85 2,222,318.26 26,115,098.45 785,925.69; 8,526,188.24 18,721,585.56 124,415,110.37 2,274,868.50' 23,249,548.50 718,844.571 37,127,201.37 i 10,401,220.61 $5,171,942.64 2,274,377.02 1,687,837.56 231,667.94 3,761,696.22 $81,403,256.49 44,-582,838.08 Navy 22,006,206.24 6,708,046.67 Pensions National- b an k fund, redemp- 106,936,855.07 Interest 1,513,861.94 221,720.27 36,099,284.05 20,304,224.06 Total....... 35,902,971.96: 388,696,824.23 1 14,863,103.59 318,040,710.66 Source. Fiscal year ending Jime 30, 1892. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1891. Month of July, 1891. Since July 1 , 1890. Month of July, 1890. Since July 1, 1889. Customs... Internal revenue National-ban k deposit fund . . Miscellaneous $15,468,153.91 14,551,867.92 142,100.00 4,138,222.85 $219,900,658.60 145,943,281.42 9,059,965.00 26,626,811.78 $23,953,386.00 11,717,499.64 303,750.00 2,328,580.80 $229,668,584.57 142,606,705.81 30,805,692.25 Total 34,300,344.68 401,530,716.80 38,303,216.44 403,080,982.63 EXPENDITURES. Civil and miscel- laneous War $12,321,541.13 5,734,022.38 2,233,716.07 1,245,829.81 13,663,326.43 1,698,617.00 2,822,598.31 $110,139,339.84 48,723,116.85 26,115,098.45 8,526,188.24 124,415,110.37 23,249,548.50 37,127,201.37 10,401,220.61 $8,025,059.44 4,185,165.12 $81,403,256.49 44,582,838.08 Navy 2,126,919.06 262,074.98 14,863,492.39 303,750.00 22,006,206.24 Indians 6,708,046.67 Pensions National-bank fund, redemp- tion nppoiliit. 106,936,855.07 Interest 7,232,108.73 36.099.284.05 2,054,379.44} 20,304,224.06 Total 39,719.651.13 388,696,824.23 39,052,949.16 318,040,710.66 r APPENDICES. 257 Comparative statement of the receipts and expenditures of the United States — Continued. KECEIPTS. Source. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1892. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1891. Month of Au- gust, 1891. Since July 1 , 1891. Month of Au- gust, 1890. Since July 1, 1890. Customs Internal revenue National-ban Ic deposit fund. . Miscellaneous $15,164,674.61 12,501,829.02 110,870.00 1,107,477.47 $30,632,828.52 27,053,696.94 252,970.00 5,245,700.32 $20,315,879.96 12,557 852.20 2,700,540.00 1,033,177.30 $44,269,265.96 24,275.35184 3,004,290.00 3,361,758.10 Total 28,884,851.10 63,185,195.78 36,607,449.46 74,910,665.90 EXPENDITURES. Civil and miscel- laneous War Navy Indians Pensions National-ban k fund, redemp- tion account. . Interest Premium Total. $6,861,616.19 3,590,617.41 2,784,990.46 737,505.54 5.094,323.88 1,200,536.50 468,430.97 20,738,020.95 $19,205,285.96 9,381,771.36 5,018,706.53 1,983,335.35 18,757,650.31 2,899,153.50 3,291,029.28 60,536,932.29 $7,824,222.82 3,326,672.31 1,592,492.58 166,726.02 18,838,658.73 1,849,219.00 876,219.13 1,729,849.72 36,204,060.31 $15,848,282.26 7,511,837.43 3,719,411.64 428,801.00 33,702,151.12 2,152,969.00 8,108,327.86 3,784,229.16 75,257,009.47 BECEIPTS. Source. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1891. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1890. Month of Sep- tember, 1891. Since July 1, 1890. Month of Sep- tember, 1890. Since July 1 , 1889. Customs Internal revenue National-bank deposit fund . . Miscellaneous $14,120,940.30 11,946,531.71 835,693.00 1,098,082.24 $44,753,768.82 39,000,228.65 1,088,663.00 6,343,782.56 $22,035,338.96 $66,304,604.92 12,614,699.21 1 36,890,051.05 3,021,000.00 6,025,290.00 2,133,296.38 5,495,054.48 Total 28,001,247.25 91,186,443.02 39,804,334.55 114,715,000.45 EXPENDITUEES. Civil and miscel- laneous War Navy Indians Pensions National -bank fund, redemp- tion account. . Interest . '. Prem turn Total. $7,292,546.11 3,961,443.95 2,580,157.68 1,335,038.98 6,682,878.75 1,667.763.50 414,972.22 23,934,801.19 $26,497,832.07 13,343,215.31 7,598,864.21 3,318,374.33 25,440,529.06 4,566,917.00 3,706,001.50 84,471.733.48 $7,530,030.09 3,655,039.44 1,551,013.72 556,771.89 37,977.32 2,074,431.50 13,410,000 86 4,524,190.74 33,339,455.56 $23,379,312.35 11,166,876.87 5,270,425.36 985.572.89 33,740.128.44 4,227,400.50 21,518.328.72 8,308,419.90 108,596,465.03 258 APPENDICES. Comparative statement of the receipts cmd expenditures of the United States — Continued. RECEIPTS. Source. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1892. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1891. Month of Oc- tober, 1891. Since July 1, 1891. Month of Oc- tober, 1890. Since July 1. 1890. Customs Internal revenue National-bank deposit fund. . Miscellaneous. . . . $13,980,687.43 13,066,461.15 111,990.00 1,401,413.63 $58,734,456.25 52,066,689.80 1,200,653.00 7,745,196.19 $24,934,114.05 12,840,250.54 993,720.00 1,447,809.70 $91,238,718.97 49,730,301.59 7,019,010.00 6,942,864.18 Total 28,560,552.21 119,746,995.24 40,215,894.29! 154,«30,894.74 1 EXPENDITURES. Civil and miscel- laneous War Navy Indians Pensions National-bank fund, redemp- tion account . . Interest Premium Total. $8,983,729.89 2,281,916.60 2,383,305.58 850,858.99 10,976,593.69 1,221,457.50 5,174,405.77 31,872,268.02 $35,424,927.70 15,619,071.55 9,945.339.62 4,211,286.61 36,417,859.40 5,788,374.50 8,880,000.53 116,286,859.91 $11,542,447.85 4,965,747.99 2,471,248.56 1,300,836.18 11,097,474.24 2,202,728.00 4,312,965.93 143,215.49 38,036,664.24 $34,822,118.79 16,130,568.89 7,730,667.82 2,286,799.74 44,837,292.67 6,430,128.50 25,826,454.52 8,451,635.39 146,515,666.32 RECEIPTS. Source. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1892. Fiscal year ending Jime 30, 1891. Month of No- vember, 1891. Since July 1, 1891. Month of No. vember, 1890. Since July 1, 1890. Customs Internal revenue National-bank deposit fund . . Miscellaneous — $12,659,039.01 12,480,326.54 114,275.00 1,663,522.17 $71,885,786.19 64,630,234.87 1,314,928.00 9,981,352.52 $15,227,641.28 11.322,047.31 307,450.00 2,128,986.12 $108,135,662.42 62,078,611.99 7,326,460.00 9,735,658.74 Total 26,917,162.72 147,812,301.58 28,986,124.71 187,276,393.15 EXPENDITURES. Civil and miscel- laneous War Navy Indians Pensions National-bank fund, redemp- tion accoimt. . Interest Premium Total. $6,072,845.14 4,055,177.22 2,684,497.01 1,200,684.31 11,783,598.71 1,754,954.50 359,245.41 27,911,002.30 $41,497,772.84 19,674,248.77 12,629,836.63 5,411,970.92 48,200,458.11 7,543,329.00 9,239,245.94 144,196,862.21 $8,771,335.85 3,691,893.26 2,321,959.98 626,524.92 21,511,161.49 2,109,684.50! 3,537.462.40 42,570,022.40 $43,593,454.64 19,822,462.15 10,052,627.80 2,913,324.66 66,348,454.16 8,539,813.00 29,363,916.92 8,451,635.39 189,085,688.72 APPENDICES. 259 Comparative statement of the receipts and expenditures of the United States — Continued. RECEIPTS. Source. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1891. Fiscal year ending Jime 30, 1890. December. Since July 1. December. Since July 1. Customs Internal revenue National-bank deposit fund . . Miscellaneous $13,836,555.64 12,427,046.73 286,470.00 1,382,913.36 $85,722,341.83 77,057,281.60 1,601,398.00 11,364,265.88 $16,104,533.09 12,944,173.21 t ■>. m 263,875.00 2.057.458.57 $124,240,195.51 75,022,785.20 7,590,335.00 11,793,117.31 Total 27.932,985.73 175,745,287.31 31,370,039.87 218,646,433.02 EXPENDITUEES. Civil and miscel- laneous War $8,342,679.75 5,102,456.59 2,427,108.94 1,086,004.54 13,140.769.05 1,397.162.00 325.708.80 $49,840,452.59 24,776,705.36 15,056,945.57 6.497,975.46 61,341,227.16 8,940,491.00 9,564,954.74 $8,362,245.00 3,669,026.16 2,163,809.76 723,860.55 2,653,515.94 1,935,467.00 470,621.74 1,910,003.85 $51,955,699.64 23,491.488.31 Navy 12.216,437.56 3.637.185.21 Pensions National-bank fund, redemp- tion account. . Interest 69.001.970.10 10.475,280.00 29 834 538 66 Premium 10,361.639.24 Total 31,821,889.67 176,018,751.88 21,888,550.00 210,974,238.72 KECEIPTS. Source. Fiscal year ending Jvme 30, 1892. Fiscal year ending Jvme 30, 1891. January. Since July I. January. Since July 1. Customs Internal revenue National-bank deposit fund . . Miscellaneous $17,459,285.74 11,439,956.70 159,250.00 1,484,236,16 $103,181,627.57 88.497.238.30 1,760,648.00 12,848,502.04 $23,897,953.06 11,253.863.80 245.740.00 1,658,416.39 $148,138,148.57 86.276,649.00 7,836,075.00 13,451,533.70 Total 30,542,728.60 206,288,015.91 37,055,973.25 255,702,406.27 EXPENDITURES. Civil and miscel- laneous War $9,473,708.04 4,067,179.34 2.489,355.26 950,365.05 10,521,941.40 1,488,172.50 6,672,801.01 $59,271,930.22 28,842,751.63 17,545,431.60 7,448,175.76 71,871,961.23 m 10,428,663.50 16,238.680.75 $9,747,655.06 4,450,327.50 2,386,295.82 963,690.10 1. 080,-570.56 2.461,760.00 2.851,428.66 39,581.37 $61,539,224.21 27 938 204 23 Navy 14 613 367 59 r 4.602,007.62 70,081.657.48 12,937,040.00 32,675,449.15 10 401 220.61 Pensions National- bank fund, redemp- tion accoimt . . Interest Premium Total 35,663,522.60 211.647,594.69 23,981,309.07 234,778,170.89 260 APPENDICES. Comparative statement of the receipts and expenditures of the United States — Continued. RECEIPTS. Source. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1892. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1891 Month of Feb -! ruary, 1892. I Since July 1 , 1891. Month of Feb- ruary, 1891. Since July 1, 1890. - Customs Internal revenue National-ban k deposit fund. . Miscellaneous.. . . Total £$16,782,419.95! $119,896,874.59 $18,994,189.72 $166,310,626.68 ri. 12, 189, 387 .36! 101,157,232.47! 9,489, 629.57j 96,478,005.79 ■ 56,960.00 1,727,137.26 1,817,608.00: 15,220,016.16 338,145.001 789,353.73; 8,174,220.00 15,184,875.47 30,755,904.571 238,091,731.22 29,611,318.021 286,147,727.94 EXPENDITURES. Civil and miscel- laneous War Navy Indians ; Pensions National- b a n fc fund, redemp- tion account. . Interest Premium Total. $8,223,430.67 3,072,548.00 1,852,926.67 ■:. 487,763.85 11.561.447.31 $67,495,360.89 31,915,299.63 19,398,358.27 7,935,939.61 83,433,408.54 1,519.333.50 11,947,997.00 764,609.13; 17,003,289.88 $6,180,218.75 2,841.729.84 2,086,497.661 667,113.25 17,310,563.08 2,279,340.50 359,546.78 27,482,059.13 239,129,653.82i 31,725,009.86 $67,719,442.96 30,779,934.07 16,689,865.25 5,269,120.87 87,392,220.56 15,216,380.50 33,034,995.93 10,401,220.61 266,503,180.75 Source. . Fiscal year ending June 30, 1892. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1891. March. Since July 1. March. Since July 1. Customs Internal revenue National -bank deposit fund. . Miscellaneous $16,415,312.33 12,133,601.09 212,200.00 1,287,692.91 $136,312,186.92 113,290,833.56 2,029,808.00 16,507,709.07 $15,373,522.85 11,206,723.41 390,875.00 2,447,209.20 $181,684,149.53 107,684,729 20 8,565.095.00 17,632,084.67 Total 30,048,806.33 268,140,537.55 29,418,330.46 315,566,058.40 EXPENDITURES. Civil and miscel- laneous War $7,800,501.86 3,434,574.96 2,405,585.01 957,119.43 12,937,407.06 1,205,372.50 249,028.97 $75,295,862.75; $11,647,638.63 35.349.874.59 3,707,580.96 $79,367,081.59 .34.487.515 03 Navy 21,803,943.28 2,353,469.26 19.043,334.51 8,893,059.041 1.120.046.85i 6.389.167.72 Pensions National -b an k fund, redemp- tion account. . Interest 96,370,815.60 13,153,369.50 17,252,318.85 9,514,578.24 2,440,204.50 719,423.16 96,906,798.80 17,656,585.00 33,754,419.09 P»^mium 10,401,220.61 Total 28,989,589.79 268,119,243.61 31.502,941.601 298.006,122.35 APPENDICES. 261 Comparative statement of the receipts and expenditures of the United States — Con tinued. EBCEIPTS. Source. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1892. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1891. • April. Since July 1. April. Since July 1. Customs Internal revenue rTatior;al-ba nk deposit fund. . Miscellaneou?. . . . $13,709,989.18 12,048,622.17 417,130.00 1,212,612.69 $150,022,176.10 125,339,155.73 2,446,938.00 17,720,321.76 $12,591,990.18 11,420,455.56 580,600.00 1,452,785.90 $194,276,139.71 119,105,184.76 9,145,695.00 19,084,870.57 Total 27,388,354.04 295,528,891.59 26,045,831.64 341,611,890.04 EXPENDITUEES. Civil and miscel- laneous War $9,104,040.82 3,600,098.06 2,008,779.34 876,017.86 12,705,035.01 1,038,445.00 1,765,660.88 $84,354,620.22 38,950,557.81 23,811,945.01 9,774,110.85 109,552,610.08 14,191,81450 19,016,898.73 $14,036,844.86 4.263,768.37 2,099,898.94 771,451.98 264,191.80 1,540,086.50 2.354.951.61 $93,411,402.34 38 749,792 29 Na\'y ... 21 140 905 08 Indians Pensions National -bank fund, redemp- tion account . . 7,159 347.71 97,174,355.28 19,196,671.50 36,091,822.31 10,401,220.61 Total 31,098,076.97 299,652,557.20 25,331,194.06 323.325,517.12 RECEIPTS. Source. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1892. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1891. May. Since July 1. May. Since July 1. Customs Internal revenue National-ban k deposit fund. . Miscellaneous — $13,121,391.37 13,050,106 75 270,400.00 2.056,900.33 $163,264,538.64 138,763,332.85 2,717,338.00 20,968,974.78 $11,995,141.77 12 232,704.18 128,120.00 3,061,459.99 $205,731,913.13 132,216,628.99 9,273,815.00 22,890,360.17 Total 28,498,798.45 325,714,184.27 27,417,425.04 370,112,717.29 EXPENDITURES. Civil and miscel- laneous War $7,972,853.30 3,632.33907 2,603,881.81 542,253.72 12,908,339.24 1,022,684.50 4,073,126.75 $92,327,473.52 42,532,896.88 26,415,826.82 10.316,364.57 122,460,949.32 15,214,499.00 23,090,025.48 $10,132,414.20 5,389,418.48 2,751,875.11 580,914.84 8,519,169.53 2,081,758.50 316,534.49 $103,543,816.54 44,139,210 77 Navy 23 892 780.19 Indians Pensions National-ban k fund, redemp- tion account . . Interest Premium 7,740,262.55 105,693,524.81 21,278,430.00 36,408,356.80 10 401 220 61 Total 32,755,478.39 332,408,035..59 29,772,085.15 353,097,602.27 ^62 APPENDICES. Comparative statement of the receipts and expenditures of the United States — ^Continued. BECEIPTS. Source. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1892. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1891. Month of June, 1892. Since July 1 , 1891. Month of June, 1891. Since July 1, 1890. Customs Int*»rnal revenue National-bank deposit fund . . Miscellaneous $14,618,495.37 14,779,922.34 260,500.00 1,560,200.27 $177,883,034.01 153,543,255.19 2,977,838.00 22,529,175.05 $14,168,745.47 13,726,652.43 89,900.00 3,736,451.61 $ 219,522,205.23 145,686,249.44 9,363,715.00 27,403,992.64 Total 31.219,117.98 356,933,302.25 31,721,749.51 401,976.162.31 EXPENDITDKES. Civil and miflcel- laneous War $7,606,018.09 4,314,346.16 2,760,368.30 830,621.51 12,122,095.44 1,018,222.00 288,962.75 $99,933,491.61 46,897,243.04 29,176,195.12 11,146,986.08 134,583,044.76 16,232,721.00 23,378,988.23 $6,595,523.30 4,583,906.08 2.222,318.26 785,925.69 18.721,585.56 2,274,868.50 718,844.57 $110,048,167.49 48 720 065 01 Navy 26 113 896 46 Indians 8,527,469.01 124,415,951.40 23,5.53,298.50 37,547,135.37 10,401,220.61 Pensions National-ban k fund, redemp- tion account. . Interest Premium Total 28,940.634.25 361.348,669.84 35,902,971.96 389.327.203.85 ■ BECEIPTS. Source. Fiscal year ending Jime 30, 1892 Fiscal year ending Jime 30. 1891. July. Since July 1. July. Since July 1. Customs '. . Internal revenue National-ban k deposit fund. . Miscellaneous.. .. $17,205,153.00 14,866,118.33 257,025.00 2,243,059.92 $177,883.0.34.01 153.543,255.19 2,977,838.00 22,529,175.05 $15,468,153.91 14,551.867.92 142,100.00 4,138,222.85 $219,522,205.23 145,686,249.44 9,363,715.00 27,403,992.64 Total 34,571,356.25 356,933.302.25 34,300,344.68 401,976,162.31 EXPENDITURES. Civil and miscel- laneous War $8,755,801.44 3,565,087.62 $99,933,491.61 46,897,243.04 $12,343,669.77 5,791,153.95 2,233,716.07 1,245,829.81 13,663,326.43 1,698,617.00 2,822.598.31 $110,048,167.49 48 720,065 01 2,221,707.86 508,614.79 14,235,140.15 915,430.50 7,047.624.68 29,176,195.12 11,146,986.08 134,583,044.76 16.232.721.00 23.378.988.23 26,113,896.46 Indians . . . 8,527,469.01 124,415,951.40 23.553,298.50 37,547.135.37 Pensions National-bank fund, redemp- tion account. . 10,401,220.61 Total 37,249,407.04 361,348.669.84 39.798,911.34 389,327.203.85 APPENDICES. 263 Comparative statement of the receipts and expenditures of the United States — Continued. BECEIPTS. Source. 1892. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1891. August. Since July 1. August. Since Jtdy 1. Customs Internal revenue National-bank deposit fund. . Miscellaneous $18,271,668.55 14,063,459.80 553,870.00 1,143,930.18 $35,476,821.55 28,929,578.13 810,895.00 3.386,990.10 $15,164,674.61 12,501.829.02 110,870.00 1,107,477.47 $30,632,828.52 27.053,696.94 252,970.00 5,245,700.32 Total 34,032,928.53 68,604.284.78 28,884,851.10 63,185.195.78 EXPENDITURES. Civil and miscel- laneous War Navy Indians Pensions National-bank fund, redemp- tion account. . Interest Premium Total. $10,468,448.84 4.239,044.31 2.186,749.34 737,644.41 13.478,067.56 640,525.50 330,299.57 32,080,779.53 $19,224,250.28 7,804.131.93 4,408,457.20 1,246,259.20 27.713.207.71 1.555.956.00 7,377.924.25 69,330,186.57 $6,861,616.19! 3,590,617.411 2,784,990.46 737.505.54 5,094,323.881 1.200,536.50 468,430.97 $19,205,285.96 9,381,771.36 5,018,706.63 1,983,335.35 18,757,650.31 2.899,153.50 3,291,029.28 20.738,020.951 60.536,932.29 RECEIPTS. Source. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1892. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1891. September. Since July 1. 1 September. Since July 1. Customs Internal revenue National-bank deposit fund . . Miscellaneous — $17,209,947.88 13,735,887.81 43,650.00 851.792.97 $52,686,769.43 42,665,465.94 854,545.00 4,238,783.07 $14,120,940.30 11.946,531.71 835,693.00 1.098,082.24 $44,753,768.82 39,000,228.65 1,088,663.00 6,343.782.56 Total 31.841,278.66 100,445,563.44 28,001,247.25 91.186.443.03 EXPENDITURES. Civil and miscel- laneous War Navy Indians Pensions National -bank fund, redemp- tion account . . Interest Premium Total. $7,641,351.04 4,363,770.46 2,586.788.07 698,998.37 12,654,367.13 725,375.50 247,148.17 28,917,798.74 $26,865,601.32 12,167,902.39 6,995,245.27 1,945.257.57 40,367,574.84 2,281,331.60 7,625.072 42 98,247,985.31 $7,292,546.11 3,961,443.95 2.680.167.68 1.335.038.98 6.682,878.75 1.667.763.60 414.972.22 23,934.801.19 $26,479,832.07 13,343,215.31 7,598,864.21 3,318,374.33 26.440,529 06 4,566.917.00 3,706.001.50 84,471,733.48 264 APPENDICES. Comparative statement of tlw receipts and ^penditures of the United States — Coutinued. RECEIPTS. Source. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1892. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1891. Month of Oc- tober, 1892. Since July 1, 18&1. Month of Oc- tober, 1891. Since July 1, 1890. Customs Internal revenue National-bank deposit fund. . Miscellaneou."?.. . . $16,366,558.62 14,153,891.04 547,598.00 768.090.55 $69,053,328.05 $13,980,687.43 56,819,356.98' 13.066,461.15 1,402,143.00 111,990.00 5,006,873.62! 1,401,413.63 $58,734,456.25 52,066,689.80 1,200,653.00 7,745,196.19 Total 31,836,138.21 132,281,701.65 28.560,552.21 119,746.995.24 EXPENDITURES. Civil and miscel- laneous War $7,660,742.67 3,515,426.40 1,844,464.37 1,332,315.81 11,682,410.59 693,288 00 5,152,602.34 $34,723,248.18 $8,983,729.89 15,680,528.27' 2,281,916.60 $35,424,927.70 15 fi1Qn71 .'^5 Navy 8,839,32595 2,383,305.58 9,945.339.62 3,279,379.59 8.50.85^.99 4.211. 2S8.fil Pensions National-bank fund, redemp- tion account . . Interest 52,049,924.31 2,974,619.50 12,777,582.26 10,976,593.69 1,221,457.50 5.174 405 77 36,417,859.40 5,788,374.50 8,880,000 53 Premium Total 31,881,250.18 130,324,608.06 31,872,268.02 116,286,859.91 ! Fiscal year ending June 30, 1892. Source. Month of No- vember, 1892. Since July 1, 1891. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1891. Month of No- vember, 1891. Since July 1, 1890. Customs ! $14,269,379.94 Internal revenue National-bank deposit fund. . Miscellaneous 13,050,706.64 54,750.00 1,419,808.80 $84,267,893.35 $12,659,039.01 69,769,861.091 12,480,326.54 1,456,893.001 7,146,322.28! 114,275.00 1,663,522.17 $71,885,786.19 64,630,234.87 1,314,928.00 9,981,352.52 Total 28,794,645.38 162,640,969.72 26,917,162.72 147.812,301.58 EXPENDITURES. Civil and miscel- laneous War . . $7,796,814.98 4,751,186.70 2,736,096.15 559,822.47 13,431,871.00 1,108,104.50 364,986.98 $42,520,063.16 20,431,714.97 11,575,422.10 3,839,202.06 65,481,795.31 4,082,724.00 13,142,569.24 $6,072,845.14 4,055,177.22 2,684,497.01 1,200,684.31 11,783,598.71 1,754,954..50 359,245.41 $41,497,772.84 19,674,248 77 Navv 12,629,836.63 5,411,970.92 Pensions National -b an k fund, redemp- tion account. . Interest . 48,200,458.1 1 7,543,329.00 9,239,245.94 Premium Total 30,748,882.78 161,073,490.84 27,911.002.30 144,196.862.21 APPENDICES. 265 Comparative statement of tfm receipts and expenditures of the United States — ^^Continued. RECEIPTS. Source. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1892. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1891. Month of De- cember, 1891. Since July 1. 1891. Month of De- cember, 1890. Since July 1 , 1890. Customs Internal revenue National-ban k deposit fund. . Miscellaneous $16,308,334.25 14,843,836.27 145,947.50 1,914,793.08 $100,576,227.60 84,613,697.36 1,602,840.50 9,061,115.36 $13,836,555.64 12,427.046.73 286,470.00 1,382,913.36 $85,722,341.83 77,057,281.60 1,601,398.00 11,364,265.88 Total 33.212,911.10 195,853,880.82 27,932,985.73 175,745,287.31 EXPENDITURES. Civil and miscel- laneous War Navy Indians Pensions National -b an k fiind, redemp- tion account. . Interest Premium Total. $8,675,317.07 5,726,440.98 2,547,072.71 1,293,256.59 14,942,108.41 817,124.00 275,803.82 34,277,123.58 $51,195,380.23 26,158,155.95 14,122.494.81 5,132.458.65 80.423.903.72 4,899,848.00 13,418,373.06 195,350,614.42 $8,342,679.75 5,102,456.59 2,427,108.94 1,086,004.54 13,140,769.05 1,397,162.00 325,708.80 31,821,889 67 $49,840,452.59 24,776,705.36 15,056.945.57 6,497,975,46 61,341,227.16 8,940,491.00 9,564,954.74 176,018,751.88 RECEIPTS. Source. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1893. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1892. Month of Jan- uary, 1893. Since July 1, 1892. Month of Jan- uary, 1892. Since July 1, 1891. Customs Internal revenue National -b an k deposit fund. . Miscellaneous.. . . $21,102,476.50 12,052.917.57 206,920.00 1,847,658.24 $121,678,704.10 96,666,614.93 1,809,760.50 10,908,773.60 $17,459,285.74 11,439,956.70 159,250.00 1,484,236.16 $103,181,627.57 88.497,238.30 1,760.648.00 12,848,502.04 Total 35.209,972.31 231,063,853.13 30,542,728.60 206,288,015.91 EXPENDITURES. Civil and miscel- laneous War Navy Indians Pensions National- b ank fund, redemp- tion account . . Interest Premium Total. $10,451,683.25 4.270,785.65 2,319,309.60 1,167,567.03 13.038,270.40 901,929.50 7,103,836.25 39,253,381.68 $61,590,496.33 30,429,290.74 16,441,957.41 6,299,421.36 93,471,182.00 5,801,777.50 20,521.935.31 234,556,060.65 $9,473,706.04 4,067,179.34 2,489,355.26 • 950,365.05 10,521,941.40 1,488,172.50 6,672,801.01 35,663,522.60 $59,271,930.22 28,842,751.63 17.545.431.60 7,448,175.76 71,871,961.23 10,428,663.50 16,238.680.75 211,647,594.69 266 APPENDICES. Comparative statement of the receipts and expenditures of the United States — Continued. Source. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1893. Fiscal year ending June 30, 1892. Month of Feb- ruary, 1893. Since July 1, 1892. Month of Feb- ruary, 1892. Since July 1, 1891. Customs Internal revenue National-ban k deposit fund. . Miscellaneous. . . . $16,936,395.28 11,316,832.14 •311,750.00 1,444.914.81 $138,615,099.38 107,983,447.07 2,121,510.50 12,353,688.41 $16,782,419.95 12,189,387.36 56,960.00 1,727,137.26 $119,896,874.59 101,157,232.47 1,817,608.00 15.220.016.16 Total 30,009,892.23 261,073,745.36 30,755,904.57 238,091,731.22 EXPENDITURES. Civil and miscel- laneous War Navy Indians Pensions National-bank fund, redemp- tion account. . Interest Premium Total. $9,322,334.69 3,665,027.94 2,836,969.00 1,225,054.07 13.494,663.26 811,181.00 322,224.04 31,677.454.00 $70,912,831.02 34,094,318.68 19,278,926.41 7,524,475.43 106,965,845.26 6,612,958.50 20,844,159.35 266,233,514.65 $8,223,430.67 3,072,548.00 1,852,926.67 487,763.85 11,561,447.31 1,519,333.50 764,609.13 $67,495,360.89 31,915,299.63 19,398,358.27 7,935.939.61 83,433,408.54 11,947,997.00 17,003.289.88 27,482 059.13 239,129.653,82 APPENDICES. 267 APPENDIX C. YEA AND NAY VOTES ON PARTY QUESTIONS. REMARKS. Several important measures were passed at the last session of Congress without a division because they did not involve party questions. This is true of the free alcohol bill, the consular re- form bill and the naturalization bill. The Panama canal bill involved only a question of engineering, and hence the votes on it were not divided on party lines. Both Republicans and Democrats declared for the Nicaragua Canal in 1892. WAS A NON-PARTISAN MEASURE. The pure food bill — 18 Democrats voted for it and only 4 against it. On the final passage of the Railroad Rate bill, there was no yea-and-nay vote in the House of Representatives. (Record, June 11, 1906, p. 8781.) Democrats and Republicans alike voted for the bill after the Senate had amended it, though the Democrats thought it still an imperfect bill. Many Democrats tried to amend and perfect the bill when it first passed the House. The Democrats also voted for the Statehood bill after it had been properly amended in the Senate. The meat inspection amend- ment to the Agricultural appropriation bill was also passed with- out a yea-and-nay vote. The Democrats favored the inspection of meats, but insisted that the packers should pay the cost to police their wrongdoing, while the Republicans insisted that the Government should pay it, and provided for such payment by the law as it passed. The real contests of the session occurred on the several amend- ments to the Railroad Rate bill, the Foraker amendment to the Statehood bill, the bill to pay the traveling expenses of the President, the resolution restricting the purchase of material and equipment for the construction of the Panama canal to domestic products, the ratification of executive usurpations, the ship sub- sidy bill, and the amendment to the urgent deficiency bill abolish- ing the eight hour law as to the Panama canal. The votes on these party issues are given in detail below: N YEA AND NAY VOTES IN THE SENATE. On Ship Subsidy, Statehood (Foraker Amendment), Railroads, Panama Canal Supplies, and President's Traveling Expenses and Ratification of Executive Usurpations. THE SHIP SUBSIDY BILL. On February 14, 1906, the Senate passed the bill (S. 529) "to promote the national defenses, to create a force of naval volun- teers, to establish American ocean mail lines to foreign markets, 268 APPENDICES. to promote commerce, and to provide revenue from tonnage." This is the title of the ship -subsidy bill. Thirty-eight Republi- cans voted for it, while 23 Democrats and 4 Republicans (Burkett, Dolliver, La Follette and Spooner) voted against it. The vote in detail was as follows: Yeas- -38. Aldrlch Clark, Wyo. Gamble Long Piatt Allee Crane Hale McCumber Scott Allison Dick Hansbrough Millard Smoot Ankeny Dryden Hemenway Nelson Sutherland Brandegee Foraker Heyburn Nixon Warren Bumham Frye Hopkins Penrose Wetmore Burrows Fulton Kean Perkins Carter Gallinger Lodge Nays- Piles -27. Bacon Dolliver Latlmer Patterson Taliaferro Blackburn Dubois McCreary Pettus Teller Burkett Foster McLaurin Eayner Warner Clarke, Ark. Fraizer Morgan Simmons Clay Gearln Newlands Spooner Daniel La Follette Overman Stone • Not Voting — 24. Alger Burton Cullom Gorman Martin Bailey Carmack Depew Kittridge Money Berry Clapp Dillingham Knox Proctor Beveridge Clark, Mont. Elkins McEnery Tillman Bulkeley Culberson Flint Mallory Of those not voting Bailey, Clark of Montana, Martin, Money and Tillman (Democrats), against the bill, were paired with Alger, Bever- idge, Cullom, Dillingham and Elkins (Republicans) for it. (See Cong. Record, pp. 2536-7.) STATEHOOD BILL (FORAKER AMENDMENT). On March 9, 1906, when the Statehood bill (H. R. 12707) was under consideration. Senator Foraker (Republican) offered the following amendment: "Sec. 23. That within thirty days after the approval of this act the governors of the Territories of New Mexico and Arizona, respectively, shall each by proclamation order a special election to be held on the twelfth Tuesday after the approval of this act. Said elections shall be conducted in all respects, including the qualifications and registra- tion of voters, and the result ascertained and certified as near as prac- ticable in accordance with the laws of said Territories, respectively, governing the election of a Delegate in Congress. The sole question to be submitted to the electors of each of said Territories at such spe- cial election shall be stated on the ballot in substance and form as follows : " "Shall Arizona and New Mexico be united to form one State? I I Yes. I I No. "Electors desiring to answer in the alfirniative shall place a cross mark in the square to the left of the word 'Yes,' and those desiring to answer in the negative shall place a cross-mark in the square to the left of the word 'No' in the form above prescribed. The governors of the respective territories shall certify and transmit, as soon as may be practicable, the results of said election each to the other and likewise to the Secretary of the Interior, and if it appears from the returns thus certified that a majority of the electors in each of said Territories APPENDICE8. 269 who voted at such special election voted in favor of the union of New Mexico and Arizona as one State, then, and not otherwise, the in- habitants of that part of the area of the United States now consti- tuting the Territories of Arizona and New Mexico as at present de- scribed may become the State of Arizona as hereinafter provided; but if in either of said Territories a majority of the electors voting at sueh special election shall appear by such certified returns to have voted against the union of said Territories, then, and in that event, all succeeding sections of this act shall thereafter be null and void and of no effect." (Cong. Record, p. 3657.) Twenty-four Democrats and 18 Republicans voted for this amendment, while 29 Republicans voted against it. The vote in detail was as follows : Yeas — 42. Alger Culberson Galllnger Morgan Spooner Bacon Daniel Gearin Newlands Stone Blackburn Dryden Hansbrough Nixon Sutherland Bulkeley Dubois Heyburn Patterson Taliaferro Bur'-cws Flint Latimer Perkins Teller Carter Foraker McCreary Pettus Tillman Clark, Mont. Foster McCumber Rayner Clark, Wyo. Frazier Mallory Scott Clay Fulton Martin Simmons Nats— 29. Alleo Clapp Gamble LaFollette Piles Allison Crane Hale Lodge Proctor Ankeny Cullom Hemenway Long Smoot Beveridge Dick Hopkins Millard Warner Brandegee Dillingham Kean Nelson Wetmore Burnham Dolllver Knox Not Voting Penrose —18. Aldrlch Burton Elklns McEnery Piatt Carmack Burkett Frye McLaurin Warren Bailey Clarke, Ark. Gorman Money Berry Depew Klttredge Overman (See Cong. Record, p. 3657.) Of those not voting, Bailey, Berry, Gk)rman, McEnery, McLaurin, Money, Overman (Democrats), and Piatt (Republican), were paired for the amendment; while Burkett, Depew, Elkins, Frye, Kittredge, Nelson and Warren (Republicans), and Clarke, of Arkansas (Demo- crat) were paired against it. ON THE BAILEY AMENDMENT TO THE RAILROAD RATE BILL. On May 10, 1906, Senator Bailey, of Texas, offered the following amendment to the Railroad Rate bill (H. R. 12987) : "Provided, however. That no order of the Commission shall be set aside or suspended by any preliminary or interlocutory decree or order of any court or judge." ( Cong. Record, p. 6873. ) 270 APPENDICES. On this amendment 20 Democrats and 3 Republicans (Burkett, Hale and La Follette) voted yea. The vote in detail was as follows: Yeas— 23. Bailey Dubois McCreary Ilayner Burkett Berry Foster McEnery Simmons Hale Blackburn Fraizer McLaurin Stone LaFollette Clarke, Ark. Gearin Martin Teller Clay Latimer Overman NAYS— Tillman 54. Aldrich Clapp Fulton McCumber Sutherland Alger Clark, Wyo. Gallinger Millard Warner Allee Crane Gamble Nelson Wetmore Allison Cullom Hansbrough Nixon Clark, Mont. Ankeny Dillingham^ Hemenway Penrose Culberson Bacon Dolliver Hopkins Perkins Daniel Beveridge Dryden Kean Piles Morgan Brandegee Elkins Kittredge Piatt Newlands Bulkeley Flint Knox Scott Pettus Burrows Foraker Lodge Smoot Taliaferro Carter Frye Long Spooner Not Voting — 12. Burnham Dick Warren Gorman Money Burton Heyburn Carmack Mallory Patterson Depew Proctor (Cong. Record, p. 6874.) Of those not voting, Dick, Proctor and Warren ( Republicans ) , were paired against the amendment, and Carmack, Mallory and Money (Democrats), for it. CULBERSON AMENDMENT. On May 11, 1906 (Cong. Record, p. 6874), the following amend- ment was offered by Mr. Culberson, of Texas: "Provided, That if such rate so fixed by the Commission is in viola- tion of the rights of any party in interest secured by the Constitution of the United States the party so affected may proceed against the Com- mission by appropriate proceedings in equity in any circuit court of the United States of competent jurisdiction to enjoin the enforcement of such order and rate: Provided, further. That in determining what is a just and reasonable rate no consideration shall be given fictitious stock issued by the carrier, or bonds or other obligations of the car- rier, issued in excess of the fair value of its property: Provided, fur- ther, That no circuit or other court of the United States, and no judge thereof in vacation, shall annul, restrain, enjoin, or otherwise inter- fere with the enforcement or operation of a rate and order established £(nd made by the Interstate Commerce Commission provided for in this act until a petition, declaration, bill of complaint, or other proper statement of the cause of action is filed in said court or presented to said judge in vacation and the Interstate Commerce Commission is duly and legally served with a copy thereof at least ten days prior to any action taken by the court or judge thereon and until said Com- mission has had opportunity within said ten days to answer by proper pleadings and present testimony in like form as the complainants therein: Provided, further. That in such proceedings either party to the suit may appeal immediately and directly to the Supreme Court of the United States from the final decree therein, or from any inter- locutory or preliminary restraining order therein, whether granted during the term or in vacation, by which the rate and order so estab- lished and made by the Commission is enjoined in whole or in part: Provided, further. That said appeal must be taken within thirty days from the entry of such order or decree, and said case so appealed shall APPENDICES. 271 be advanced and take precedence in the Supreme Court of all cases of a different character therein : Provided, further, That the circuit court, or the judge thereof, or the Supreme Court, or any justice thereof, may direct that the final decree or the interlocutory or preliminary restraining order, from which an appeal is taken, shall be stayed dur- ing the pendency of such appeal." Twenty-eight Democrats and one Republican (La FoUette) voted for this amendment, while 50 Republicans voted against it. The following is the vote in detail : Yeas— -29. Bacon Culberson LaFollette Money Simmons Berry Daniel Latimer Morgan Stone Blackburn Dubois McCreary Newlands Taliaferro Clark, Mont. Foster McEnery Overman Teller Clarke, Ark. Frazler McLaurin Pettus Tillman Clay Gearin Martin NAYS— Rayner -50. Aldrich Burrows Elkins Hopkins Penrose Alger Carter Flint Kean Perkins Allee Clapp Foraker Kittredge Piles Allison Clark, Wyo. Frye Knox Piatt Ankeny Crane Fulton Lodge Scott Beveridge Cullom Gallinger Long Smoot Brandegee Dick Gamble McCumber •Sutherland Bulkeley Dillingham Hale Millard Warner Burkett DoUiver Hansbrougli Nelson Warren Burnham Dryden Hemenway Nixon Wetmore Not Voting — 10. Bailey Carmack Gorman Mallory Proctor Burton Depew Heyburn Patterson Spooner (Cong. Record, p. 6875.) Of those not voting, Carmack, Gorman and Mallory were paired for the amendment, with Spooner, Depew and Proctor against it. LA FOLLETTE'S AMENDMENT TO SECURE DISINTER- ESTED ADJUDICATIONS. On May 12, 1906 (Cong. Record, p. 6973), Senator La Follette offered the following amendment to the Allison amendment which provided for a broad court review: "Every Federal judge who owns any share of the capital stock or any of the bonds of a common carrier subject to the provisions of this act, or wlio accepts or uses, or who procures for the use of any person, any pass or privilege for transportation withheld from any other person, is hereby disqualified and prohibited from hearing or passing upon as such judge any motion, question, application, pro- ceeding, or from presiding at or hearing any trial arising under the provisions of this act." Forty Republicans voted to lay this amendment on the table — to kill it — while 25 Democrats and 2 Republicans (Gallinger and 272 APPENDICES, La Follette) voted against the motion to table it. The vote stood : Yeas — 40. Aldrich Burrows Dryden Hansbrough Perkins Alger Carter Elkins Hopkins Piles Allee Clapp Flint Kean Scott Allison Clark, Wyo. Foraker Kittredge Smoot Ankeny Cu)lom Frye Lodge Spooner Brandegee Dick Fulton Long Sutherland Bulkeley iJillingliam Gamble Millard Warner Burnham Dolliver Hale Nays- Nixon -27. Wetmore Bacon Culberson Gearin Morgan Taliaferro Bailey Daniel LaFollette Newlands Teller Berry Dubois McCreary Overman Tillman Blackburn Foster McCumber Rayner Clarke, Ark. Frazier McLaurin Simmons Clay Gallinger Martin Stone Not Voting — 22. Beveridge Crane Knox Nelson Proctor Burkett Depew liatimer Patterson Warren. Burton Gorman McEnery Penrose Carmack Hemenway Mallory Pettus Clark, Mont. Heyburn Money Piatt .-• (Cong. Record, p. 6973.) Of those not voting, Proctor and Warren were paired with Mallory and Money. VOTE ON MORGAN AMENDMENT RELATING TO RIGHT TO SUE IN THE COURTS. On May 14, Senator Morgan, Democrat, of Alabama, offered the following amendment: "That nothing in this act contained shall be construed as depriving any person who sues in his own right and name from instituting any suit under its provisions, or any other suit, at law or in equity, in any State court, or in any court of the United States, against any common carrier." (Cong. Record, p. 7017.) Twenty-one Democrats and 2 Republicans (Piatt and Scott) voted for this amendment, while 40 Republicans and 1 Democrat voted against it. The vote in detail was as follows: Yeas— 23. Berry Daniel Latimer Morgan Simmons Blackburn Dubois McEnery Pettus Taliaferro Bulkeley Foster McLaurin Piatt Tillman Clark, Mont. Frye Mallory Rayner Clay Gearin Martin Scott Nays — 41. Aldrich Carter Flint Kittredge Piles Alger Clapp Foraker Knox Proctor Allee Clarke, Ark. Fulton Lodge Sutherland Allison Crane Gallinger Long Warner Ankeny Cullom Gamble McCumber Wetmore Brandegee Dick Hansbrough Millard Burkett Dillingham Hemenway Nelson Burnham Dolliver Hopkins Nixon Burrows Dryden Kean Perkins APPENDICES. 273 Not Voting — 25. Bacon Clark, Wyo. Gorman Money Smoot Bailey Culberson Hale Newlands Spooner Beveridge Depew Heyburn Overman Stone Burton Elkins LaFollette Patterson Teller Carmack Frazier McCreary Penrose Warren (Cong. Record, p. 7017.) Of those not voting, Spooner was paired against, and Carmack for it. LA FOLLETTE AMENDMENT REGARDING VALUATION OF RAILROAD PROPERTY. On May 14, 1906, Senator La Follette offered the following amendment: "Section 7a. That section 19 of said act be amended by adding thereto a new section to be known as section 19a, and to read as follows : " 'Section 19a. The Commission shall investigate and ascertain the fair value of the property of every railroad engaged in interstate commerce, as defined in this act, and used by it for the convenience of the public. For the purpose of such investigation the Commission is authorized to employ such engineers, experts, and other assistants as may be necessary. Such investigation shall be commenced not later than July 1, 1906, and shall be prosecuted with diligence and thoroughness and the results thereof reported to Congress at the beginning of each regular session. Such valuation shall show the value of the property of every railroad as a whole, and the value of its property in each of the several States or Territories oi;, the District of Columbia. Every such railroad shall furnish to the Commission, from time to time, and as the Commission may require, maps, profiles, contracts, reports of engineers, and other documents, records, and papers, or copies of any or all of the same, in aid of such investigation and determination of the value of said railroad and every such railroad is required to cooperate with the Commission in the work of the valuation of its property in such further particulars and to such extent as the Commission may direct. " 'The Commission "shall, thereafter, in like manner, keep itself, informed of all extensions and improvements or other changes in the conditions of the property of the said railroads, and ascertain the fair value thereof, and from time to time, as may be required for the regulation of railways under the provisions of this act, revise and correct its valuation of railway property. To enable the Commission to make such changes and corrections in its valuation, every railroad engaged in interstate commerce, as defined in this act, is required to report currently to the Commission, and as the Commission may require, all improvements and changes in its property, and to file with the Commission copies of all contracts for such improvements at the time the same are' executed. " 'Whenever the Commission shall have completed the valuation of the property of any railroad, and before said valuation shall become final, the Commission shall give notice by registered letter, to the company or companies owning or operating said railroad, stating the valuation placed upon the several lines of .road and classes of property of the said company, used by it for the convenience of the public, and shall allow the company or companies twenty days in which to file a protest of the same with the Commission. If no protest is filed, within twenty days, such valuation shall become final. " 'If notice of contest is filed by any railroad the Commission shall fix a time for hearing the same, and shall proceed as promptly as may be to hear and consider any matter relative and material thereto presented by such railroad in support of its protest so filed as afore- 274 APPENDICES. said. If after hearing any contest of such valuation under the pro- visions of this act, the Commission is of the opinion that its valuation is incorrect, it shall make such changes as shall make the same a fair valuation of such property, and shall issue an order making such corrected valuation final. All final valuations by tlie Commission shall be prima facie evidence of the fair value of the railroad property in all proceedings under this act.' " ( Cong. Record, p. 7011.) Thirty-nine Republicans and one Democrat voted to lay this amendment on the table, while 22 Democrats and 5 Republicans (Elkins, Burkett, La Follette, Gamble and Warner) voted against the motion to table. The vote in detail as it stands in the Con- gressional Record, p. 7014, is as follows: Yeas— 40. Aldrich Clark, Wyo. Frye Kittredge Nixon Alger Crane Fulton Knox Penrose Allee Cullom Gallinger Lodge Perkins Ankeny Dick Hale Long Piles Brandegee Dillingham Hansbrough McCumber Piatt Bulkeley Dryden Hemenway McEnery Scott Burnham Flint Hopkins Millard Sutherland Carter Foraker Kean NAYS— Nelson 27. Wetmore Bacon Clay Frazier McLaurin Teller Bailey Culberson Gamble Mallory Tillman Berry Dolliver Gearin Newlands Warner Blackburn Dubois LaFollette Overman Burkett Elkins Latimer Simmons Clarke, Ark. Foster McCreary Taliaferro Not Voting — 22. Allison Clapp Heyburn Pettus Stone Beveridge Clark, Mont. Martin Proctor Warren Burrows Daniel Money Rayner ~ Burton Depew Morgan Smoot Carmack Gorman ratterson Spooner (Cong. Record, p. 7014.) Of those not voting Carmack and Money (Democrats) were paired against the motion to table, and Spooner and Warren (Republicans) for it. LA FOLLETTE AMENDMENT TO PROVIDE EMPLOYERS' LIABILITY FOR INJURIES TO EMPLOYEES. On May 14, Senator La Follette offered the following amend- ment: "Section 20 (a). That every common carrier by railroad subject to the provisions of this act shall be liable for damages for all injuries, whether resulting in death or not, sustained by any of its employees, subject to the pnovisions hereinafter contained regarding contributory negligence on the part of the injured employee: "a. When such injury is caused by a defect in any locomotive, engine, car, rail, track, roadbed, machinery, or appliance required by said common carrier to be used l)y its employed in and about the business of their employment. "b. When such injury shall have been sustained by any officer, agent, servant, or employee of such common carrier while engaged in the line of his duty as such and which injury shall have been caused APPENDICES. 275 in whole or in greater part by the carelessness or negligence of any other enij)Ioyee, officer, agent, or servant of such common carrier in the discharge of or by reason of failure to discharge his duties as such. "In every action to recover damages for such injuries or deuth the court shall submit to the jury the question whether the employee injureil or killed was guilty of contributory negligence and shall instruct the jury that if they shall answer such question in the anirmative, that they shall then answer the following question: Was tlie negligence of the employee injured (or killed) slighter or greater MS a contributing cause to such injury (or death) that the negligence or carelessness of the common carrier, or any other officer, agent, or employee of such common carrier? And in all cases where the juiy shall find the carelessness or negligence of the common carrier, or any other officer, agent, employee, of such common carrier, was greater than the negligence of the employee so injured or killed and con- tributed in a greater degree to such injury or death, then the plaintiff shall be entitled to recover, and the negligence, if any, of the employee so injured or killed shall be no bar to such recovery, and in all cases under this act the questions of negligence and contributory negligence shall be for the jury." (Cong. Record, p. 7017.) Twenty-three Democrats and 5 Republicans (Burkett, Fulton, Gamble, Kittredge and La Follette) voted for this amendment, while 42 Republicans and 3 Democrats voted against it. The vote in detail was as follows: Yeas— -28. Bacon Clay Gamble Mai lory Stone Bailey Culberson Gearin Morgan Taliaferro Berry Daniel Kittredge New lands Teller Blackburn Dubois LaFollette Overman Burkett Frazier I^atimer Rayner Clarke, Ark. Fulton McCreary Nays— Simmons -45. Aldrich Clapp Flint Long Pettus Allee Clark, Wyo. Foraker McCumber Piles Alger Crane Frye McEnery Piatt Allison Cullom Gallinger McLaurin Proctor Ankeny Dick Hansbrough Millard Scott Brandegee Dillingham Hopkins Nelson Smoot Bulkeley Dolliver Kean Nixon Sutherland Burnham Dryden Knox Penrose Warner Carter Elkins Lodge Perkins Wetmore Not Voting — 16. Beveridge Clark, Mont. Gorman Hey burn Spooner Burrows Depew Hale Money Tillman Burton Foster Hemenway Patterson Warren Carmack (Cong. Record, p. 7027.) Of those not voting, Carmack and Money were paired for the amend- ment, and Spooner and Warren against it. ON THE ALDRICH RESOLUTION. Purchase of Material and Equipment for the Panama Canal. On June 2, 1906, the Senate passed the following joint resolu- tion (S. R. GO) : ''Resolved, etc.. That purchase of material and equipment for use in the construction of the Panama Canal shall be restricted to articles of domestic production and manufacture unless the President 276 APPENDICES. deems the bids therefor to be extortionate or unreasonable, in which case bids may be invited and contracts awarded for material and equipment of foreign production Or manufacture to the extent of the consumption of such articles that may be required in the construction of said canal." (Cong. Record, p. 7957.) Thirty-nine Republicans voted for this resolution, while 16 Democrats voted against it. The vote in detail was as follows: Yeas-- 39. Aldrich Carter Foraker LaFollette Spooner Ankeny Clapp Frye Lodge Sutherland Beveridge Clark, Wyo. Fulton Long Teller Brandegee Cullom Gal linger McCumber Warner Bulkeley Dick Hale Millard Warren Burkett Dillingham Hansbrough Perkins Wetmore Burnham Dolliver Kean Piles Burrows Flint Kittredge Scott Not Voting — 34. Bacon Daniel Martin Rayner Bailey Dubois Money Simmons Clay Frazier Overman Stone Culberson McCreary Patterson Nats- TaliafeiTO -16. Alger Clark, Mont. Gamble Latimer Nixon Allee Clarke, Ark Gearin McEnery Penrose Allison Crane Gorman McLaurin Pettus Barry Depew Hemenway Mallory Piatt Blackburn Dryden Heyburn Morgan Proctor Burton Elkins Hopkins Nelson Tillman Carmack Foster Knox Newlands (See Cong. Record, p. 7959.) Of those not voting, Foster, Mallory, Morgan, Carmack, Tillman and Latimer (Democrats) were paired against the resolution, and Pen- rose, Proctor, Allison, Heyburn, Piatt and Hopkins (Republicans) for it. On the same day, June 2, 1906, Senator Bacon offered the follow- ing amendment to the Aldrich resolution : "Provided, That in making said purchases a larger price shall not be paid for any such article of domestic production or manufacturer than the price at which the same or similar articles of domestic pro- duction or manufacture are sold or offered for sale in foreign markets or for export to foreign countries; and for the ascertainment of the prices at which articles are sold or offered for sale in foreign countriear the Secretary of Commerce and Labor is hereby directed to procure, so far as practicable, and to report to the President the following information : "First. What articles and classes of goods produced or manufac- tured in the United States such as are required as material and equipment in the construction of the Panama Canal have during the year ending December 31, 1905, been sold or offered for sale in foreign countries or for export to foreign countries by the producers or manufacturers thereof, or through their representatives or agents, at prices less than the same and similar articles and classes of goods were during the same period sold in the United States by the pro- ducers or manufacturers thereof, or through their representatives or agents, having special reference in said report to all classes of tools, machinery, steel rails, cars, engines, dredges, vehicles, cement, and other material largely and principally required in the construction of said canal and in the maintenance, equipment and operation of the Panama Railroad. APPENDICES. 277 "Second. What, separately stated as to each class of goods and with specification of articles so far as practicable, was the general average during the said period of the comparative prices in sales in the United States and in the several foreign countries. "The Secretary of Commerce and Labor is further directed to make said reports as soon as practicable, and thereafter in the year 1907 and in each succeeding year during the continuance of the construc- tion of said canal it shall be his duty to procure the said information and to re])ort to the President concerning said sales in the United States and in foreign countries during the calendar year next pre- ceding the said report." (See Congressional Record, p. 7943.) Fifteen Democrats voted for this amendment and 7 were paired for it, while 37 Republicans voted, and 7 were paired, against it. The vote in detail was as follows: Bacon Clay Culberson Aldrich Ankeny Beveridge Brandegee Bulkeley Burkett Burnham Burrows Alger Allee Allison Bailey Berry Blackburn Burton Carmack Dubois Frazier LaFollette Carter Clapp Clark, Wyo. Dick Dillingham Dolliver Flint Foraker Clark, Mont. Clarke, Ark. Crane Cullom Daniel Depew Dryden Elkins Yeas — 15. Latimer Overman McCreary Patterson Money Rayner Nays— 37. Frye Long Fulton Millard Gallinger Nelson Hale Perkins Hansbrough Piles Kean Scott Kittredge Smoot Knox Spooner Not Voting — 37. Foster McCumber Gamble Gearin Gorman Hemenway Heyburn Hopkins Lodge McEnery McLaurin Mallory Martin Morgan Newlands Nixon Simmons Stone Taliaferro Sutherland Teller Warner Warren Wetmore Penrose Pettus Piatt Proctor Tillman (See Congressional Record, p. 7952.) Of those not voting, Mallory, Martin, Berry, Pettus, Carmack, Foster and Gearin (Democrats) were paired for the amendment; and Heyburn, Cullom, Dryden, Crane, McCumber and Lodge (Repub- licans) against it. VOTE ON THE BILL (H. R. 20,321) TO PROVIDE FOR THE TRAVELING EXPENSES OF THE PRESIDENT. On June 22 the Senate passed the following bill: "Bo it enacted, etc., That hereafter there may be expended for or on account of the traveling expenses of the President of the United States such sum as Congress may from time to time appropriate, not exceeding $25,000 per annum, such sum when appropriated to be expended in the discretion of the President and accounted for on his certificate solely. "There is hereby appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the purposes authorized by this act for the fiscal year 1907, the sum of $25,000." (Cong. Record, p. 9224.) 278 APPENDICES. Forty-two Republicans voted for this bill and 20 Democrats against it. The vote in detail was as follows: Yeas— 42. Allee Carter Gallinger LaFollette Smoot Ankeny Clapp Gamble Lodge Spooner Benson Crane Hale Long Sutherland Beveridge Cullom Hansbrough Millard Warner Brandegee Dick Hemenway Nelson Warren Bulkeley Dillingham Heyburn renrose Wetmore Burkett Dolliver Hopkins Perkins Burnham Elkins Kean Piles Burrows Foraker Kittredge Nays— Proctor -20. Bacon Carmack Latimer Mallory Pettus Bailey Clay McCreary Martin Simmons Berry Daniel McCumber Overman Stone Blackburn Frazier McLaurin Patterson Taliaferro Not Voting — 27. Aldrich Culberson Frye Morgan Teller Alger Depew Fulton Newlands Tillman Allison Dryden Gearin Nixon Whyte Clark, Mont. Dubois Knox Piatt Clark, Wyo. Fint McEnery Rayner Clarke, Ark. Foster Money Scott (Cong. Record, p. 9238.) Of those not voting, Clark, of Mont.; Dubois, Gearin, Money, Mor- gan, Newlands, Rayner and Whyte (Democrats) were paired against the bill; Alger, Allison, Clark, of Wyo.; Dryden, Flint, Frye, Fulton, Knox and Nixon (Republicans) for it. APPENDICES. 279 YEA AND NAY VOTES IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. ON STATEHOOD BILL (H. R. 12,707). t On January 25, 1906, the House of Representatives passed the Hamilton Statehood bill for the admission of Oklahoma and Indian Territory jointly as one State, and of New Mexico and Arizona jointly as another. The Democrats opposed the bill because, while favoring the admission of Oklahoma and Indian Territory jointly as one State, they were opposed to forcing joint statehood upon New Mexico and Arizona against the ivishes of the people of those Territories, and favored the plan subsequently adopted by the Senate in the Foraker amendment, and finally made a part of the bill as it became a law. Many Western Repub- licans joined the Democrats in this struggle for fair play — "the consent of the governed" — ^but the administration secured 195 votes for the measure. The vote in detail was as follows: Yeas— -195. Acheson Curtis Hamilton McCarthy Sibley Adams, Pa. Dale Haskins McCleary, Smith, 111. Alexander Dalzell Haugen Minn. Smith, Iowa. Allen, Me. Darragh Hedge McGavin Smith, Allen, N. J. Davis, Minn. Henry, Conn.McKlnley, III. Wm. Alden Ames Dawes Hepburn McKinney Smith, Pa. Bannon Dawson Higgins Madden Smyser Barchfield Deemer Hill, Conn. Mahon Southard Bartholdt Denby Hinshaw Mann Southwick Bates Dickson, 111. Hoar Martin Sperry Bennett, N.Y.Dixon, Mont. Hogg Michalek Stafford Bennett, Ky . Dovener Holiday Miller Steenerson Bingham Draper Howell, N. J. Moon, Pa. Snapp Birdsall Dresser Hubbard Morrell Sterling Bishop Driscoll Huff Mouser Stevens, Blackburn Dun well Hughes Murdock Minu. Boutell Dwight Hull Nevin Sulloway Bowersock Edwards Jenkins Norris Tawney Bradley Ellis Keifer Olcott Taylor, Ohio Brick Fassett Kennedy, Olmsted Tirrell Brownlow Flack Neb. Overstreet Townsend Buckman Fletcher Kinkaid Palmer Tyndall Burke, Pa. Foss Klepper Parker VanWinkle Burke, S. Da. Foster, Ind. Knapp Parsons Volstead Burleigh Foster, Vt. Knopf Patterson, Vreeland Burton, Ohio Fowler Lacey Penn. Waldo Butler, Pa. Fulkerson Lafean Payne Wanger Calder Fuller Landis Pearre Watson Campbell, Gaines, Chas. B. Perkins Webber Kansas W. Va.Landis, Pollard Weeks Campbell, 0. Gardner, Frederick Powers Weems Capron Mass. Law Reynolds Welborn Cassel Gardner, Lawrence Rhodes Wharton Chaney Mich. Lefevre Uives Wiley, N. J. Chapman Gardner, N.J.Lilley, Conn. Roberts Wilson Cocks Gilbert, Ind. Littauer Rodenberg Wood, N. J. Cole Gillett, Mass i.i^Ittlefleld Samuel Woodyard Connor Graff Longworth Schneebeli The Speaker Cooper, Pa. Greene Lorimer Scott Cooper, Wis. Gronna Loudenslager Scroggy > Cousins Grosvenor Lovering Shartel Currier Hale McCftll Sherman 280 APPENDICES. Nays- -150. Adams, Wis. Fitzgerald James Mondell Sherley Adamson Flood Johnson Moon, Tenn. Sims Aiken Floyd Jones, Va. Moore Slay den Babcock French Jones, Wash.Mudd Small Bankhead Gaines, Tenn.Kahn Murphy Smith, Cal. Bartlett Garner Keliher Needham Smith, Ky. Beall, Tex. Gurrett Kitchin, Padgett Smith, Md. Bede Gilbert, Ky. * Claude Page Smith, Tex. Beidler Gill Kitchin, Patterson, Sparkman Bonynge Gillespie Wm. W. N. C.Spight Bowers Gillett, Cal. Kline Pou Stanley Brently Glass Knowland Pujo Stephens Broocks, Tex.Goebel Lamb Rainey Tex. Brown Goldfogle Lee Randell, Tex. Sullivan, Brundige Goulden Legare Ransdell, La L. Mass. Burgess Granger Lester Reeder Swanson Burleson Gregg Lever Reid Talbott Burnett Griggs Lewis Rhinock Taylor, Ala. Butler, Tenn.Gudger Lindsay Richardson, Thomas, N. C. Calderhead Hay Livingston Ala. Thomas, 0. Candler Hayes Lloyd Richardson, Towne Clark, Mo. Heflin Loud Ky. Trimble Clayton Henry, Tex. McCreary, Rixey Underwood Cushman Hermann Pa. Robertson, Wachter Davey, La. Hopkins McKinley, La. Wallace Davidson Houston Cal. Robinson, Watkins Davis, W. Va. Howard McLain Ark. Webb De Armond Howell, UtahMcNary Rucker Weisse Dixon, Ind. Humphrey Macon Ruppert Wiley, Ala. Ellerbe Wash. Marshall Russell Williams Each Humphreys, Maynard Ryan Wood, Mo. Field Miss. Meyer Shackelford FInley Hunt Minor Sheppard Answered Pbbsent — 8. Andrus Clark, Fla. McMorran Patterson, Wadsworth Brooks, Cal. Crumpacker Otjen S. C. Not Votin G— 33. Bell, Ga. Fordney Ketchman Prince Van Duzer Bowie Garber Lamar Slemp Williamson Brussard Graham Lilley, Pa. Smith, Young Burton, Del. Hardwick Little Samuel W .Zenor. Byrd Hearst McDermott Southall Castor Hill, Miss. McLachlan Sullivan, Cockman Hitt Patterson, N. Y. Cromer Kennedy, 0. Tenn. Sulzer (Cong. Record, p. 1557.) Of those not voting, Patterson, of S. C, Bell, of Ga., Zenor, Hard- wick, Garber. Bowie, Southall, Little, Byrd, Clark, of Fla., Hill, of Miss., Sulzer and Van Duzer (Democrats) were paired against the bill ; and Cromer, Burton, of Del., Crumpacker, Scott, Ketcham, Wads- worth, Prince, Slemp, Samuel W. Smith, Lilley, Hitt, Andrus and Graham (Republicans) were paired for it. Note — On March 9, the Senate adopted the Foraker amendment ( see vote on Statehood in Senate elsewhere in this book) ; and on March 22, the House by a vote of 175 to 156 disagreed to the Senate amendments (see Cong. Record, p. 4229). But later the Democrats by practically blocking legislation on other matters, compelled the Republican ma- jority to accept tliem ( see Record, p. 8781 ) . There was no yea-and-nay vote on agreeing to the second conference report. APPENDICES. 281 ON THE RESOLUTION (H. RES. 159) RELATING TO THE EIGHT-HOUR LAW, THE ALIEN CONTRACT LABOR LAW AND THE CHINESE EXCLUSION ACT. On January 26, 1906, the House of Representatives in conform- ity with a report from the Committee on Rules, passed the following resolution: "Resolved, That it shall be in order to offer as an amendment to the urgent deficiency bill (H. R. 12320), either in the House or in the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, even although the paragraph to which it is germane may have been passed, the fol- lowing amendment: " 'The provisions of the act entitled "An act relating to the limita- tions of the hours of daily service of laborers and mechanics employed upon the public works of the United States and of the District of Columbia," approved August 1, 1892, shall not apply to alien laborers employed in the construction of the isthmian canal within the Canal Zone.'" (Cong. Record, p. 1587.) Upon this resolution, the previous question was ordered, and it was passed by a party vote, the Republicans voting for it and the Democrats against it. The vote on the adoption of the resolution was as follows: Yeas- -145. Acheson Cousins Gillett, Mass. Loud Sibley Adams, Pa. Currier Graff Loudenslager Slemp Alexander Cushman Grosvenor McCarthy Smith, Cal. Ames Dalzeli Hale McCreary Smith, Iowa. Bannon Darragh Hamilton Minn. Smyser Bates Davidson Haskins McKinley, 111. Southard Beidler Dawes Haugen McMorran Southwick Bennett, N. Y.Dawson Hayes Mahon Sperry Bennett, Ky. Deemer Henry, Conn, Mann Sterling Blrdsall Denby Hepburn Minor Stevens, Bishop Draper Higgins Mouser Minn. Blackburn Dresser Hill, Conn. Miidd Sulloway Bonynge Driscoll Hoar Needham Tawney Boutell Dwight Hubbard Nevin Taylor, Ohio. Bowersock Edwards Huff Norris Thomas, 0. Brick Ellis Humphrey Olcott Tirrell Brown Esch Wash.Otjen Tyndall Brownlow Fassett Jones, Wash. Overstreet Underwood Burke, Pa. Flack Keifer Palmer Volstead Burke, S. D. Fletcher Kinkaid Parker Vreeland Burleigh Foss Knapp Payne Waldo Burton, 0. Foster, Ind. Knowland Perkins Wagner Calderhead Foster, Vt. Lacey Pollard Weeks Campbell, 0. Fowler Landis Powers Weems Capron French Chas. B. Reeder Welborn Cassel Fuller Landis, Rhodes Wilson Chaney Gaines, Frederick. Rives Woody a rd Chapman W. Va.LeFevre Roberts Young Cocks Gardner, Littauer Samuel Cole Mlch.Littlefleld Sci-oggy Conner Gardner, MasLongworth Shartel 282 APPENDICBS. 3n ,^P,Ni.YS- -1^2. ,^o\ru Joe^iR ? Adamson Fitzgerald kl'tchin. Randell, Tex. Smith, Md. Aiken Flood Wm. W.Ransdell, La . Sparkman Bankhead Floyd Kline Bhinock Spight Bartlett Garner Liamar Richardson, Stephens, Beall, Tex. Garrett Lee Ala Tex. Bowers Gillespie Lever Richardson, Sullivan, Broocks, Tex. Greene Lewis Ky Mass. Brundige Gregg Livingston Rixey Taylor, Ala. Burgess Griggs Lloyd Robertson, Thomas, N. C. Burnett Hay McCall La. Towne Candler Heflin McGavin Robinson, Townsend Clark, Fla. Henry, Tex. McLain Ark. Trimble Clark, Mo. Hogg McNary Rodenberg Wallace Clayton Hopkins Macon Rucker Watkins Cooper, Wis. Houston Maynard Russell Webb Davey, La. Humphreys, Meyer Ryan Weisse Davis, W. Va L. Miss. Moon, Tenn . Shackelford Wharton DeArmond, Hunt Moore Sheppard Wiley, Ala. Dickson, 111. James Murdock Sherley Williams Dixon, Ind. Jones, Va. Padgett Sims Ellerbe Keliher Page Smith, Ky. Field Kitchin, Pou Smith, Pa. Finley Claude Uainey Smith, Tex. Answered Peesent — 8. Andrus Crumpacker Olmstead Reid Burton, Del. Goulden Patterson, Scott S. C. Not Voting — 130. Adams, Wis. Dovener Howell, McKinley, Smith, Allen, Me. Dunwell Utah Cal. Samuel W. Allen, N. J. Fordney Hughes McKinney Smith, Babcock Fulkerson, Hull McLachlan Wm. Alden Barchfeld Gaines, Jenkins Madden Snapp Bartholdt Tenn. Johnson Marshall Southall Bede Garner Kahn Martin Stafford Bell, Ga. Gardner, Kennedy, Michalek Stanley Bingham N. . J. Neb. Miller Steenerson Bowie Gilbert, Ind. Kennedy, Mondell Sullivan, Bradley Gilbert, Ky. Ohio Moon, Pa. N.Y. Brantley Gill Ketcham Morrell Sulzer Brooks, Col. Gillett, Cal. Klepper Murphy Swanson Broussard Glass Knopf Parsons Talbott Buckman Goebel Lafean Patterson, Van Duzer Burleson Goldfogle Lamb N. C.Van Winkle Butler, Pa. Graham Law Patterson, Wachter Butler, Tenn. Granger Lawrence Pa.Wadsworth Byrd Gronna Legare Patterson, Watson Calder Gudger Lester Tenn. Webber Campbell, Hardwick Lilley, Conn. Pearre Wiley, N. J. Kan. Hearst Lilley, Pa. Prince Williamson Castor Hedge Lindsay Pujo Wood, Mo. Cockran Hermann Little Reynolds Wood, N..J. Cooper, Pa. Hill, Miss. Lorimer Ruppert Zenor Cromer Hinshaw Lovering Schneebell Curtis Hitt McCreary, Sherman Dale Holliday Pa. Slayden Davis, Minn. Howard McDermott Small Dixon, Mont. Howell, N. J. Smith, 111. (Cong. Record, p. 1592.) APPENDICES. 283 Pairs For The Resolution. Sherman Hitt Bartholdt Cassel Bradley Morrell Ketcham Kennedy, 0. Dunwell Calder ratterson, Wadsworth Jenkins Andrews Watson Pa.LilIey, Conn. Bede McCreary, Butler, Pa. Wachter Bingham Pa. Cromer Lovering Barchfield Pearre Burton, Del. Kahn Buckman Prince Van Winkle Smith "***' Crumpacker Dovener Scott Gaillett, Cal. Smith, Samuel W. Curtis Overstreet Wm. AldenLilley, Pa. Graham Olmsted Howell Babcock Against The Resolution. Ruppert Little Lamar Gilbert, Ky. Aiken Sullivan, Van Duzer Gaines, Tenn.Kitchin, Goulden N. Y.Hill, Miss. Rainey Claude Brantley Patterson, Garber Randell Goldfogle Small N. C.Bowie Tex.McDermott Swanson Broussard Reid Gill Sulzer Granger Patterson, Gudger Taylor, Ala. Talbott Johnson S. C.Stanley Finley Southall Lindsay Bell, Ga. Maynard Glass Byrd Legare Zenor Wood Pujo Cockran Hardwick Mr. Underwood, having voted nay, changed his vote to yea in order to move to reconsider the vote. (Cong. Record, pp. 1588 and 1592.) On the following day, January 27th, the amendment abrogating the eight-hour law on the Isthmus of Panama was passed by the following vote: Yeas— 120. Acheson Dawes Hoar Parker Adams, Pa. De Armond Howell, Utah Payne Alexander Deemer Hubbard Perkins Allen, Me. Dovener Jenkins Reeder Ames Draper Jones, Wash. Reynolds Barchfeld Dwight Keifer Rives Bates Ellis Kinkaid Roberts Bennet, N. Y. ' Esch Klepper Scroggy Birdsall Flack Knapp Shartel Bishop Fletcher Knowland Sibley Bonynge Foss Lacey Smith, Cal. Boutell Foster, Ind. Landis, Chas. B. Smith, III. Brown Foster, Vt Landis, Frederick Smith, Iowa Brownlow Fowler Lawrence Smyser Buckman French Loud Southard Burke, Pa. Fulkerson Loudenslager Southwick Burleigh Fuller Lovering Sperry Burton, Ohio Gaines, W. Va. McKinley, 111. Sterling Calderhead Gardner, Mass. McKinney Stevens, Minn. Campbell, Ohio Gillett, Mass,. McMorran SuUoway Chaney Graff Mahon Tawney Chapman Gronna Mann Tirrell Cole Grosvenor Marsliall Volstead Conner Hale Miller Waldo Cousins Hamilton Mondell Wanger Currier Haskins Mouse r Watson Dalzell Haugen Mudd Weeks Darragh Hepburn Need ham Welborn Davidson Hermann Norris Wilson Davis, Minn. Higglns Palmer The Speaker 284 APPENDICES. Nays— 110. Adamson Aiken Allen, N. J. Bartlett Beall, Tex. Bennett, Ky. Bowers Broocks, Tex. Brooks, Col. Brundlge Burnett Butler, Tenn. Campbell, Kans. Candler Capron Clark, Fla. Clark, Mo. Clayton Cooper, Wis, Dale Davis, W. Va. Dickson, 111. Dixon, Ind. Edwards Ellerbe Field Finley Fitzgerald Floyd Garner Garrett Gilbert, Ky. Gill Gillespie Goebel Greene Gregg Gudger Hay Heflin Henry, Tex. Hogg Hopkins Houston Humphreys, Miss. Hunt James Johneion Keliher Kitchin, Claude Kitchin, Wm. W. Kline Lamar Lee Legare Lester Lever Lewis Lloyd McCall McGavin McLachlan McLain McNary Macon Maynard Meyer Michalek Moon, Tenn. Moore Padgett Page Pou Pujo Rainey Randell, Tex, Rhinock Richardson, Ala. Richardson, Ky. Rixey Robertson, La. Robinson, Ark. Rodenberg Rucker Russell Ryan Shackleford Sheppard Sherley Sims Slayden Smith, Ky. Smith, Pa. Smith, Tex. Spight Stafford Stanley Stephens, Tex. Sullivan, Mass. Swanson Talbott Taylor, Ala. Thomas, N. C. Towne Townsend Underwood Wallace Watkins Webb Williams - Answered Present — 11. Bradley Crumpacker Patterson, N. C. Sherman Brick Flood Patterson, S. C. Wei^se Burton, Del. Griggs Reid Not Voting — 145. Adams, Wis. Andrus Babcock Bankhead Bannon Bartholdt Bede Beidler Bell, Ga. Bingham Blackburn Bowersock Bowie Brantley Broussard Burgess Burke, S. Dak. Burleson Butler, Pa. Byrd Calder Castor Oockran Cocks Cooper, Pa. Cromer Curtis Cushman Davey, La. Dawson Denby Dixon, Mont. Dresner Driscoil Dunwell Fassett Fordney Gaines, Tenn. Garber Gardner, Mich. Gardner, N. J. Gilbert, Ind. Gillett, Cal. Glass Goldfogle Goulden Graham Granger Hardwick Hayes Hearst Hedge Henry, Conn. Hill, Conn. Hill, Miss. Hinshaw Hltt Holliday Howard Howell, N. J. Huff Hughes Hull Humphrey, Wash Jones, Va. Kahn Kennedy, Neb. Kennedy, Ohio Ketcham Knopf Lafean Lamb Law Le Fevre Lilley, Conn. Lilley, Pa. Lindsay Littauer Little Littlefleld Livingston Longworth Lorimer McCarthy McCleary, Minn. McCreary, Pa. McDermott McKinlay, Cal. Madden Martin Minor Moon, Pa. Morrell .Murdock Murphy Nevin Olcott Olmsted Otjen Overstreet Parsons Pattereion, Pa. Patterson, Tenn. Pearre Pollard Powers Prince Ransdell, I>a. Rhodes Ruppert Samuel Schneebell Scott Slemp Small Smith, Md. Smith, Samuel W. Smith, Wm. Alden Snapp ■ APPENDICES. 285 w Southall Trimble Webber Wood, N. J. Sparkman Tyndall Weems Woodyard S teener son Van Duzer Wharton Young Sullivan, N. Y. Van Winkle Wiley, Ala. Zenor Sulzer Vreeland Wiley, N. J. Taylor, Ohio Wachter Williamson Thomas, Ohio Wadsworth Wood, Mo. The following were paired in favor of the amendment. Andrns Howell, N. J. Vreeland Burton, Del. Babcock Kahn Wachter Cromer Bannon Law Wiley, N. J. Butler, Penn. Bingham Lilley, Penn. Wood, N. J. Graham Bowersock Littauer Lilley, Conn. Hitt Brick McCreary, Penn . Longworth Bradley Calder Olmsted Ketcham Knopf Dunwell Overstreet Wadsworth Morrell Fassett Pearre Scott Patterson, Penn. Dawson Smith, Samuel W.Curtis Sherman Gillett, Cal. Smith, Wm. AldenCrumpacker The following were paired against it. Sulzer McDermott Wiley, Ala. Bell, Ga. Bankhead Brantley Trimble Patterson, S. C. Small Lindsay Livingston Brousard Cockran Hearst Davey, La. Van Duzer Glass Griggs Reid Hill, Miss. Burleson Southall Grander Goulden Jones, Va. Flood Garber Weisse Burgess Sparkman Bowie Sullivan, N. Y. Gaines, Tenn. Howard Hardwick Patterson, N. C. Lamb Byrd Little Ruppert Goldfogle Smith, Md. Zenor ON THE JOINT RESOLUTION (S. R*. 60) "PROVIDING FOR THE PURCHASE OF MATERIAL AND EQUIPMENT FOR USE IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PANAMA CANAL." On June 16, 1906, the House of Representatives passed the Aldrich resolution, which had previously passed the Senate by a party vote. The resolution was as follows: "Resolved, etc., That purchases of material and equipment for use in the construction of the Panama Canal shall be restricted to ar- ticles of domestic production and manufacture, from the lowest re- sponsible bidder, unless the President shall, in any case, deem the bids or tenders therefor to be extortionate or unreasonable." (Cong. Record, p. 8918.) The vote in detail was as follows: Yeas— 129. Adams Allen, Me. Allen, N. J. Andrns Bannon Barchfeld Bartholdt Bates Bede Bennett, N. Y. Bennett, Ky. Bishop Bonynge Boutell Brownlow Burke, S. Dak. Butler, Pa. Calderhead Capron Chaney Chapman Cocks Cole Cooper, Pa. Cooper, Wis. Cousins Cromer Currier Curtis Cushman Dale Dalzell Davidson Dawes Denby Dixon, Mont. Draper Driscoll Dunwell Dwlght Ellis Fletcher Foss Foster, Tnd. Foster, Vt. French Gaines, W. Va. Gardner, Gardner, Mich. Gardner, N. J. 286 APPENDICES. Goebel Jones, Wash. McKinley, Overstreet Sulloway Graff Kahn Cal. Payne Taylor, 0. Grosvenor Keifer McKinley, lU.Reeder Thomas, 0. Hale Kennedy, McKinney Ilhodes Tirrell Hamilton Neb. McLachlan Rives Townsend Hayes Kinkaid McMorran Rodenberg Waldo Henry, Conn.Klepper Madden Scroggy Wanger Hepburn Knowland Mahon Sibley Watson Hermann Lacey Marshall Smith, Cal. Weems Higgins Landis, Martin Smith, Iowa Wharton Hill, Conn. FrederickMichalek Smith, Willey, N. J. Hoar Lawrence Miller Samuel \\ '.Wilson Hogg Loud Mondell Smyser Wood, N. J. Howell, N. J. Loudenslager Mouser Snapp Woodward Huff McCleary, Needham Southard Humphrey Minn.Nevin Southwick Wash.McCreary, Olmstead Sperry Jenkins Pa.Otjen Sterling Nays- -82. Adamson Davis, Minn.Kitchin, Rainey Wallace Aiken Davis, W. Va. Wm. W.Ransdell, La.Watkins ' Bankhead De Armond Lee Richardson, Webb Bartlett Dixon, Ind. Lloyd Ky. Williams Beall, Tex. Ellerbe McCarthy Russell Zenor Bell, Ga. Finley McLain Sheppard Birdsall Floyd McNary Sherley Bowie Fulkerson Macon Sims Brantley Garner Mann Slayden Broocks, Tex. Granger Meyer Smith, Ky. Brundlge Hardwick Moon, Tenn. Smith, Tex. ,, Burgess Heflin Moore Spight Burleson Henry, Tex. Murdock Stafford Burton, 0. Houston Murphy Steenerson Butler, Tenn. Howard Norris Stevens, Candler Hubbard Padgett Minn Clark, Fla. Humphreys, Patterson, Sullivan, Clark, Mo. Miss. S. C. Mass !. Clayton Hunt Perkins Thomas, Crumpacker Johnson Pou N. C Darragh Jones, Va. Pujo Volstead Answered Present — 9. Burton, Del. Holliday Patterson, Pollard Weeks Gregg Lever N. C. Sparkman Hinshaw Not Voting — 160. Acheson Campbell, 0. Garett Hopkins Lewis Alexander Cassel Gilbert Howell, UtahLilley, Conn. Ames Cockran Gill Hughes Lilley, Pa. Babcock Conner Gillespie Hull Lindsay Beidler Davey, La. Gillette, Cal. James Littauer Bingham Dawson Gillette, Keliher Little Blackburn Deember Mass. Kennedy, 0. Littlefield Bowers Dickson, ni. Glass Ketcham Livingston Bowersock Dovener Goldfogle Kitchin, Longworth Bradley Dresser Goulden Claude Lorimer Brick Edwards Graham Kline Lovering Brooks, Col. Esch Greene Knapp McCall Broussard Fassett Griggs Knopf McDermott Brown Field Gronna Lafean McGavin Buckman Fitzgerald Gudger Lamar Maynard Burke, Pa. Fleck Haskins Lamb Minor Burleigh Flood Haugen Landis, Moon, Pa. Burnett Fordney Hay Chas. B.Morrell Byrd Fowler Hearst Tiaw Mudd Calder E^uller Hedge Lefevre Olcott Campbell, Gaines, Tenn. Hill, Miss. Legare Page Kan. Garer Hitt Lester Palmer APPENDICES. 287 raiker Rixey Shaitel Sullivan, N.\ '.Wadsworth Parsons Roberts Sherman Sulzer Webber Patterson. Robertson, Slemp Talbott Weisse Tenn. La. Small Tawney Welborn Pearre Robinson, Smith, 111. Taylor, Ala. Wiley, Ala. Powers Ark. Smith, Md. Towne Wood, Mo. Prince Rucker Smith, Tyndall Young Randell, Tex.Ruppert , Wm. Alden Underwood Reid Ryan Smith, Pa. Van Duzer Reynolds Samuel Southall Van Winkle Pthinock Schneebelle Stanley Trimble Richardson, Scott Stephens, Vreeland Ala. Shackelford Tex.Wachter Of those not voting 152 members were paired — ^the Republicans for the resolution and the Democrats against it, as follows : Paiked For It. Currier Holliday McCreary, Burleigh Dalzell Sherman Morrell Pa. Brown Lawrence Mouser Lilley, Pa. McCall, Mich.Brick Reynolds Bradley Hitt Loud Blackburn Smith, 111. Longworth Dovener Littauer Bingham Gardner, Graham Burke Lilley, Conn. Beidler Bartholdt Vreeland Minor Landis, Gillett, Mass. Brooks, Col. Knapp Shartel Charles B.Fassett Babcock Slemp Roberts Ketcham Schneebeli Burton, Ohio Powers Wadsworth Hull Gronna Van Winkle Daemer Smith, Hughes Bowersock Alexander Haskins Wm. Alden Hiaugen Acheson Tawney Greene Pearre Gardner Mudd Campbell, Welborn Palmer Fuller Wachter Kan. Weeks Olcott Cassel Burton, Del. Esch Edwards Moon, Pa. Calderhead Dickson, 111. Ames Lefevre Mondell Calder Law Paiked Against It. Finley Kitchin, Randell, Field Wood, Mo. Kuppert Claude Tex. Byrd Williams Garrett Wiley, Ala. Patterson, Brussard Griggs Goulden Sullivan, Tenn. Bowers Hunt Stephens, N. Y.Robertson, Small Lamar Tex. Gilbert, Ky. La. Lindsay Russell Page Legare McLain Bell, Ga. Griggs Gregg Sparkman Towne Keliher McLain Little Gillespie McDermott Smith, Md. Pujo Glass Sulzer Livingston Patterson Humphreys Gaines, Tenn. Van Duzer Lewis Garber Richardson, Kline Weisse Hearst Goldfogle Ala. Lever Lamb Lester Robinson, Garrett Patterson, Underwood Lamar Ark. Ryan N. C. Southall Hay James Davey, La. Gudger Shackleford Flood Rhinock Trimble Stanley Rixey Fitzgerald Gill Kucker Hill, Miss. Reid Cockran Burnett (Cong. Record, pp. 8910, 8914, 8918.) 288 APPENDICES. PRESIDENT'S TRAVELING EXPENSES. ON THE BILL (H. R. 20,321), "TO PROVIDE FOR THE TRAVELING EXPENSES OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES." On June 20, 1906, the House of Representatives passed the following bill: "Be it enacted, etc., That hereafter there may be expended for or on account of the traveling expenses of the President of the United States such sum as Congress may from time to time appropriate, not exceeding $25,000 per annum, such sum when appropriated to be expended in the discretion of the President and accounted for on his certificate solely. "There is hereby appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the purposes authorized by this act for the fiscal year 1907, the sum of $25,000." (Cong. Record, 9055.) The vote in detail was as follows: Yeas— 176. Adams Currier Hale Littauer Ryan Alexander Curtis Hamilton McCarthy Samuel Allen, Me. Cushman Hayes McGavin Schneebelie Allen, N. J. Dalzell Hedge McKinley, Scott Andrus Davey, La. Henry, Conn. Cai I. Scroggy Barchfeld Davis, Minn . Hepburn McKinney Shartel Bartholdt Dawes Hermann McLachlan Sherley Bede Dawson Higgins McMorran Smith, HI. Bennett, Ky . Denby Hinshaw McNary Smith, Iowa Birdsall ^ Dickson, 111. Hoar Madden Smith, Bonynge Dixon, Mont, . Hogg Marshall Samuel W. Boutell Draper Holiday Martin Smith, Pa. Brick Dunwell Howell, Utah Meyer Sperry Brooks, Col. Ellis Hubbard Miehalek Stafford Broussard Esch Huff Miller Steenerson Brownlow Fassett Hull Mondell Sterling Buckman Fitzgerald Humphrey, Moon, Pa. Sullivan, Burton, Del. Fordney Wash. Mouser Mass. Burton, OhioFoss Hunt Mudd Sulloway Butler, Pa. Foster, Ind. Jenkins Murdock Tawney Calder French Jones Murphy Taylor, Ohio Campbell, Fulkerson Kahn Needham Thomas, Ohio Kan. Fuller Keifer Nevin Tirrell Campbell, O.Gaines, Keliher Norris Tyndall Capron W. Va. Kennedy, Olmstead Volstead Cassel Gardner, Neb. Otjen Wachter Chaney Mass.Kinkaid Overstreet Waldo Chapman Gardner, Klepper Payne Wanger Clark, Fla. Mict I. Kline Pollard Watson Cockran Gardner, Knapp Prince Webber Cocks N. J.Knowland Pujo Weems Cole Gillett, Mass.Lacey Ransdell, La. Wiley, N. J. Conner Glass T/Rfean Reeder Wood, N. J. Cooper, Pa. Goebel Landis, Reynolds Woodyard Cooper, Wis, . Goulden Frederick Rives Young Cousins Graff Law Roberts Cromer Granger Lilley, Conn, . Rodenberg Crumpacker Grosvenor Lindsay Ruppert APPENDICES. 289 Nays — 66. Adamson Flood James Patterson, Southall Aiken Floyd Johnson S. < C.Spight Bankhead Garner Jones, Va. Rainey Thomas, Beall, Tex. Garrett Kitchin, Rhinock N. C. Brundlge Gill Wm. W.lUchardson, Towne Burgess Gillespie Lemar Ala.Townsend Burleson Hay Lee Ricliardson, Trimble Burnett Heflin Livingston Ky. Underwood Butler, Tenn. Henry, Tex. Lloyd Rixey Wallace Candler Hill, Miss. McLain Rucker Watkins Clark, Mo. Hopkins Macon Russell Williams De Armond Houston Maynard Slieppard Zenor Dixon, Ind. Howard Moon, Tenn. Sims Ellerbe Humplireys, Moore Slayden Finley Miss. Padgett Smith, Tex. Not Voting — 125. Gaines, Tenn. Gregg Lever Mann Pou Gilbert, Ky. Kitchin, McCleary, Patterson, Southward Graham Claude Minn. N. C. Weeks Answered Present — 12. Acheson Davidson Hughes Page Southwick Ames Davis, W. Va. Kennedy, 0. Palmer Sparkman Babcock Deemer Ketcham Parker Stanley Bannon Dovener Knopf Parsons Stephens, Bartlett Dreeser Lamb Patterson, Tex. Bates Driscoll Landis, Tenn. Stevens, Beidler Dwight Chas. B.Pearre Minn. Bell, Ga. Edwards Lawrence Perkins Sullivan, Bennet, N. Y. Field Lefevre Powers N. Y. Bingham Flack Legare Randell, Tex.Sulzer Bishop Fletcher Lewis Reid Talbott Blackburn Foster, Vt. Lilley, Pa. Rhodes Taylor, Ala. Bowers Fowler Little Robertson, Van Duzer Bowersock Garner Littlefield La. Van Winkle Bowie Gilbert, Ind, , Longworth Robinson, Vreeland Bradley Gillett, Cal. Lorimer Ark.Wadsworth Brantley Goldfogle Loud Shackelford Webb Broocks, Tex. Greene Loudenslager Sherman Weisse Brown Griggs Lovering Sibley Welborn Burke, Pa. Gronna McCall Slemp Wharton Burke, Gudger McCreary, Small Wiley, Ala. S. Dak.Hardwick Pa. Smith, Cal. Wilson Burleigh Haskins McDermott Smith, Ky. Wood, Mo. Byrd Haugen McKinley, HI. Smith, Md. Calderhead Hearst Mahon Smith, Clayton Hill, Conn. Minor Wm. Alden Dale Hitt Morrell Smyser Darragh Howell, N. . J.Olcott Snapp (Cong. Record, p. 9059.) Of those not voting 96 were paired — 28 Republicans for the bill and 48 Democrats against it, as follows : Southward Lefevre Dale Hitt Morrell Dovener Mahon Foster McKinley, 111. Lawrence Powers Edwards Haskins Minor Welbirn Babcock Weeks Kennedy. O. Paired For The Bill. McCleary, Burleigh Smith, Minn. Howell, N. J. Wm. Alden McCall Olcott Acheson Bingham Burke, Pa. Brown Ketcham Hughes Lovering Landis, Sherman Charles B. Deemer Loudenslager Bradley McCreary, Bannon Pa. Rhodes Wilson Mann 1 290 APPENDICES. Paiked Agai NST The Bill. Hardwick Kitchin, Gregg Barger Smith, Ky. Bowie Claude Stephens, Bell, Ga. Shackleford Sullivan. Legare Tex.Byrd W^ood, Mo. N, Y.Sparkman Webb Goldfogle Robinson, Weisse Pou Broocks, Tex. Field Ark. Ueid Griggs Sulzer Hearst Small Gaines, Clayton Bowers McDermott Talbott Tenn. Patterson, Lamb Patterson, Little . Lever N. C.Brantley Tenn, Lewis Gudger Gilbert, Ky. Robertson, Randell, Tex. Wiley, Ala. Stanley Page La. Taylor, Ala. Smith, Md. Bartlett (gong. Record, p. 9059.) RATIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE USURPATIONS— PHILIP- PINE BLACKMAIL COLLECTIONS. On June 27, 1906, the House of Representatives passed the following resolution: "Resolved, That during the consideration of the general deficiency appropriation bill, now pending in Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, it hall be in order to consider points of order notwithstanding the paragraph relating to the ratification of the Philippines' tariff, page 4, lines 17 to 26, and page 5, lines 1 and 2, as follows, viz. : " 'That the tariff duties, both import and export, imposed by the authorities of the United States or of the provisional military gov- ernment thereof in the Philippine Islands prior to March 8, 1902, at all ports and places in said islands upon all goods, wares and mer- chandise imported into said islands from the United States, or from foreign countries, or exported from said islands, are hereby legalized and ratified, and the collection of all such duties prior to March 8, 1902, is hereby legalized and ratified and confirmed as fully to all intents and purposes as if the same had by prior act of Congress been specifically authorized and directed.' " ( See Cong. Record, p. 9652. ) The vote in detail on this resolution was as follows: Yeas — 154. Acheson Cocks Fussett Higgins Le Fevre Adams Cole Fletcher Hinshaw Lilley, Conn. Alexander Conner Foster, Ind. Hoar Littauer Allen, N. J. Cooper, Wis. Foster, Vt. Holliday Loud Bannon Coudrey Fowler Howell, N. J. Loudenslager Barchfeld Cousins French Howell, Utah McCarthy Bates Cromer Fulkerson Hubbard McCreary, Bennet, N. Y :.Crumpacker Fuller Huff Pa. Bennett, Ky. Currier Gaines, Humphrey, McGavin Bishop Curtis W. Va. Wash.McKinley, Bonynge Dalzell Gardner, Jenkins Cal. Boutell Darragh Mass. Jones, Wash.McKinley, 111. Brick Davidson Gardner, Kahn McKinney Brooks, Col. Davis, Minn Mich. Keif er McLachlan Burke, Pa. Dawson Gilbert, Ind. Kennedy, McMorran Burton, Del. Denby Goebel Neb. Madden Burton, OhioOiekson, 111. Graff Kennedy, 0. Mahon Calderhead Dixon, Mont. Grosvenor Kinkaid Mann Campbell, Dresser Hale Klepper Marshall Kan.Driscol Hamilton Lacey Michalek Campbell, 0. Dunwell Haskins Lafean Miller Capron Dwight Hayes Landls, Moon, Pa. Cassel Ellis Henry, Conn. Chas. B.Morrel Chapman Esch Hermann Lawrence Mouser APPENDICES. 291 Needham Rives Smith, Iowa Sterling Watson Nevin Roberts Smith, Sulloway Webber Olcott Rodenberg Wm. AldenTawney Weeks Olmsted Samuel Smyser Thomas, 0. Weems Otjen Sclineebeli Snapp Tirreli Wiley, N. J. Parker Scott Southwick Townsend Wilson Payne Slierman, Sperry Volstead Wood Perkins Smith, Cal. Stafford Waldo Young Reynolds Smith, 111. Steenerson Nays — Wanger •82. Adamson Ellerbe Humphreys, McNary Sheppard Bankhead Finley Miss. Macon Sherley Bartlett Fitzgerald Hunt Maynard Sims Beall, Tex. Flood Johnson Moon, Tenn. Smith, Md. Bell, Ga. Floyd Jones, Va. Moore Sullivan, Broussard Garber Keliher Murphy Mass. Brundige Garrett Kitchin Padgett Sulzer Burgess Gill ClaudePatterson, Talbott Burleson Gillespie Kitchin, S. C.Trimble Burnett Granger Wm. W.Pou Underwood Candler Gregg Lemar Pujo Wallace Clark, Fla. Griggs Lamb Ransdell, La.Watkins Clark, Mo. Hay Lee Rhinock Webb Cockran Heflin Lever Rixey Williams Davey, La. Henry, Tex. Lindsay Rucker Davis, W. Va.Hill, Miss. Livingston Ruppert De Armond Hopkins Lloyd Russell Dixon, Ind. Houston McCall Ryan Answered Present — 15. Bradley Gaines, Gre«ne Meyer Spight Burleigh Tenn. Gudger Parsons Butler, Pa. Glass Hardwiek Richardson, Dale Graham James Ky. Not Voting — 128. Aiken Dawes Kline Patterson, Smith, Tex. Allen, Me. Deemer Knapp N. C.Southall Ames Dovener Knopf Patterson, Southard Andrus Draper Knowland Tenn. Sparkman Babcock Edwards Landis Pearre Stanley Bartholdt Field Frederick Pollard Stephen, Tex. Bede Flack Law Powers Stevens, Beidler Fordney Legare Prince Minn. Bingham Foss Lewis Rainey Sullivan, Blrdsall Gardner, Lilley, Pa. Randell, Tex. N. Y. Blackburn N. . J. Little Reeder Taylor, Ala. Bowers Garner Littlefleld Reid Taylor, Ohio Bowersock Gilbert, Ky, . Longworth Rhodes Thomas, Bowie Gillett, Lorimer Richardson, N. C. Brantley Mass. Lovering Ala. Towne Broocks Goldfogle McCleary, Robertson, Tyndall Tex.Goulden Minn. La. Van Duzer Brown Gronna McDermott Robinson, Van Winkle Brownlow Haugen McLain Ark. Vreeland Buckman Hearst Martin Scroggy Wachter Burke, Hedge Minor Shackleford Wadsworth S. Dak, Hepburn Mondell Shartel Welsse Butler, Hill, Conn. Mudd Sibley Welborn Tenn.Hltt Murdock Slayden Wharton Calder Hogg Morris Slemp Wiley, Ala. Chaney Howard Overstreet Small, Ky. Woodyard Clayton Hughes Page Smith, Zenor Cooper, Pa. Hull Palmer Samuel W Cushman Ketcham Smith, Pa. (See Cong. Record, p. 9657.) APPENDICES. The following members were paired for the resolution: Hull Deemer Powers Law Bingham Bradley Greene Slemp Knapp Beidler Foss Fuller Vreeland Knowland Buckman Dale Graham Wachter Ketcham Littlefield Babcock Hughes Woodyard Hepburn Burleigh Andrus Hedge Smith, Fordney Bede Southard Edwards Samuel W. Draper Pearre Lilley, Pa. Longworth Sibley Dawes Wadsworth Butler, Pa. Dovener Rhodes Cooper, Pa. Hill, Conn. Hitt Palmer Gillett, Birdsall Le Fevre Murdock Mass . Brownlow Welborn Mudd Bowersock The following were paired against it: Slayden Kline Kitchin, Smith, Ky. Clayton Goulden Patterson, Claude Taylor, Ala. Bowers Meyer N. C. Gudger Reid Goldfogle Bowie Richardson Gaines, Rainey Aiken Littlo Ky. Tenn. Towne Robertson, Thomas, Page Glass Randell, Ten La. N. C.Reid Field Richardson, Sullivan, Hardwick Spight Wiley, Ala. Ala N. Y. Gilbert, Ky. Broocks, Tex.Southall Patterson, McDermott Garner Stephens, Stanley Tenn. Brantley Butler, Tenn. Tex. Small McLain Van Duzer Hearst Sparkman Shackleforc I Lewis Zenor Smith, Tex. Legare Robinson, Howard Official statement showing monthly operations of McKinley^ tariff from October, 1890, when it took effect, to the inauguration of Mr. Cleveland, March, 1893. The table (printed elsewhere) prepared by Hon. John W. Gaines, is based on this statement. APPEJ^DICES. 2dS APPENDIX D. A LIST OF TRUSTS IN THE UNITED STATES. This list of 287 industrial trusts — probably the most complete ever published, is prepared by Mr. John Moody, of New York, publisher of Moody's Manual of Corporation Securities, the standard reference booh: lor American investment securities of every nature. This list embraces all so-called trusts of importance, and in- cludes besides industrial combinations, the large security-holding (but not operating) companies in the gas, electric light, electric and steam railroad industries. Hence a security-holding com- pany, or ''trust," such as the Bay State Gas Company, is included, whereas the Consolidated Gas Company of New York is omitted. Likewise the Northern Securities Company is included, but the Pennsylvania Railroad Company omitted. The many consolidated transportation and other franchise corporations not embraced in this list, such as railroad, traction, lighting and water combina- tions, would aggregate in capitalization many billions of dollars. This list, however, is limited to what are popularly known as "industrial trusts." The industrial companies here embraced are all consolidations or absorptions of one kind or another. Capital Stock Bonded Debt Name of Company. Outstanding. Outstanding. X Alabama Consol. Coal Mine Co $ 5,000,000 $ ' 495,000 X Alabama & Georgia Iron Co 1,300,000 X Allied Securities Co 5,000,000 X Allis-Chalmers Co 36,250,000 Amalgamated Copper Co 155,000,000 X American Agricultural Chemical Co. . . 33,600,000 X American Axe & Tool Co 2,000,000 X American Beet Sugar Co 19,000,000 1,000,000 X American Bicycle Co 26,996,400 9,500,000 X American Book Co 5,000,000 X American Brake, Shoe & Foundry Co... 4.500,000 1,000,000 X American Brass Co 10,000,000 . • . . ^ X American Can Co . 86,466,600 X American Car & Foundry Co ........ . 60,000,000 X American Caramel Co 2,000,000 475,000 X American Cement Co . 2,000,000 930,000 X American Cereal Co 3,400,000 1,187,000 X American Chicle Co 9,000,000 X American Cigar Co 10,000,000 X American Coal Co 1,500,000 X American Cotton Oil Co 30,435,700 3,000,000 X American Felt Co 3,250,000 500,000 American Fruit Products Co 1,750,000 X American Glue Co 2,400,000 * American Graphophone Co ; . . 2,000,000 300,000 ♦ American Grass Twine Co 13,083,000 X American Hardware Corporation 5,000,000 X American Hide and Leather Co 24,500,000 8,525,000 ♦ American Hominy Co 3,750,000 1,250,000 American Ice Co 40,000,000 1,705,000 X American Iron & Steel Mfg Co 20,000,000 American Light & Traction Co 12,127,800 X American Linseed Co 33,500,000 * American Lithographic Co 4,000,000 X American Locomotive Co 49,100,000 1,312,500 294 APPENDICES. Capital Stock Bonded Debt Name of Company. Outstanding. Outstanding. X American Machine & Ordnance Co $10,000,000 X American Malting Co 28,940,000 * American Packing Co 20,000,000 X American Perfume Co 5,000,000 X American Pipe Mfg. Co 2,000,000 X American Plow Co 75,000,000 American Pneumatic Service Co 7,679,000 X American Radiator Co 7,893,000 X American Railway Equipment Co 22,000,000 American Railways Co 3,750,000 X American School Furniture Co 8,856,100 X American Screw Co 3,250,000 X American Sewer Pipe Co 7,795,700 X American Shipbuilding Co 15,500,000 X American Silver & Casket Co 500,000 X American Smelting & Refining Co 100,000,000 * American Snuff Co 23,001,700 X American Steel Foundries' Co 30,000,000 X American Stove Co 5,000,000 * American Soda Fountain Co 3,750,000 X American Sugar Refining Co 89,871,100 American Telephone & Telegraph Co... 114,748,000 X American Thread Co 10,890,475 X American Tube & Stamping Co 2,800,000 X American Type Founders Co 5,000,000 X American Window Glass Co 17,000,000 X American Woolen Co 49,501,100 X American Wringer Co 2,500,000 X American Writing Paper Co 22,000,000 X Ames Shovel & Tool Co 5,000,000 X Anthony & Scoville Co 1,000,000 Associated Merchants' Co 15,000,000 * Atlantic Rubber Shoe Co 10,000,000 X Automatic Weighing Machine Co 3,600,000 X Automobile & Cycle Parts Co 3,377,500 * Baltimore Brick Co 2,000,000 1,500,000 Bay State Gas Co 100,000,000 12,000,000 X Biglow Carpet Co 4,030,000 425,000 Booth & Co. (A) 5,500,000 * X Borden's Condensed Milk Co 25,000,000 Boston Suburban Electric Co.'s 4,500,000 * California Fruit Canners' Assn 2,891,600 X California Wine Association 4,337,200 X Cambria Steel Co 45,000,000 X Casein Co. of America 6,492,000 Celluloid Company 5,925,000 * Central Coal & Coke Co 3,750,000 * Central Fireworks Co 2,673,350 X Central Foundry Co 14,000,000 4,000,000 Central Hudson Steamboat Co 1,000,000 500,000 Chicago & N. W. Granaries Co 1,200,000 600,000 X Chicago Pneumatic Tool Co 7,500,000 2,500,000 Chicago Railway Term'l Elevator Co. . . 2,733,770 1,365,500 City of Chicago Brew'g & Malt'g Co., Ltd. 6,087,500 3,166,000 X Colorado Fuel & Iron Co 25,000,000 18,300,000 Commercial Cable Co 13,333,300 20,000,000 Compressed Air Co 7,156,300 500,000 X Consolidated Car Heating Co 1,250,000 X Consolidated Lake Superior Co 86,000,000 X Consolidated Lime Co 2,500,000 Consol. Railway Lighting & Refrig. Co. 17,000,000 '. X Consolidated Rosendale Cement Co 1,500,000 1,100,000 X Consolidated Tobacco Co 94,844,600 167,844,600 X Consolidated Wagon & Machine Co 1,200,000 X Continental Cotton Oil Co . . 3,325,686 X Continental Gin Co 2,000,000 356,000 APPENDICES. 295 Capital Stock Bonded Debt Name of Company. Outstanding. Outstanding. X Corn Products Co $80,000,000 X Coxe Bros. & Co 3,320,100 X Crucible Steel Co. of America 50,000,000 Denver United Breweries, Ltd 2,000,000 $1,000,000 X Diamond Match Co 15,000,000 X Diamond State Steel Co 4,250,000 1,000,000 ♦ Distilling Co. of America 74,011,291 5,453,000 Dominion Securities Co 3,000,000 East Coast Milling Co 9,000,000 X Eastman Kodak Co 19,673,100 • Electric Boat Co 7,041,000 * Electric Co. of America 20,368,400 * Electric Storage Battery Co 16,250,000 X Electric Vehicle Co 16,800,000 1,675,000 X Empire Steel & Iron Co 4,462,500 X Fairmont Coal Co 12,000,000 6,000,000 Federal Telephone Co. 10,000,000 Fisheries Co 2,532,757 500,000 X General Chemical Co 16.821,500 X General Electric Co 45,000,000 Great Lakes Towing Co 3,627,850 * Great Western Cereal Co 3,000,000 1,500,000 X Harbison- Walker Refractories Co 22,250,000 3,500,000 X Herring-Hall Marvin Safe Co 2,300,000 Heywood Bros. & Wakefield Co 6,000,000 • Hydraulic Press Brick Co 3,000,000 * Illinois Brick Co 7,500,000 Indianapolis Breweries Co 1,350,000 800,000 International Elevating Co 2,200,000 International Emery & Corundum Co.. 1,150,000 500,000 X International Fire Engine Co 6,500,000 International Navigation Co 14,205,000 13,686,000 International Nickel Co 24,000,000 10,000,000 X International Paper Co 39,849,400 9,169,000 International Power Co 7,000,000 225,000 X International Pulp Co 5,000,000 X International Salt Co 30,000,000 3,000,000 X International Silver Co 15,051,700 3,840,000 X International Steam Pump Co 27,500,000 3,650,000 • Jeflferson & Clearfield Coal & Iron Co. . . 3,000,000 3,000,000 Johns (H. W.) -Manville Co 3,000,000 Jones (Frank) Brewing Co., Ltd 4,000,000 2,500,000 X Jones & Laughlin Steel Co 30,000,000 X Kanawha & Hocking Coal & Coke Co. . . 3,500,000 2,750,000 X Keystone Coal & Coke Co 2,500,000 ♦ Keystone Watch Case Co 3,240,000 ^ * Kirby Lumber Co 10,000,000 . Knickerbocker Ice Co., Chicago 7,000,000 1,962,000 X Lackawanna Iron & Steel Co 20,000,000 1,800,000 Light, Heat and Power Corporation 934,300 100,000 X Magnus Metal Co 2,000,000 X Manufacturers & Consumers' Coal Co. . . 5,000,000 Manville Co 6,000,000 Maryland Brewing Co 5,000,000 9,125,000 Massachusetts Breweries Co 6,500,000 1,200,000 ♦ Massachusetts Electric Companies 29,350,500 2,700,000 Medina Quarry Co 2,000,000 1,140,000 Metropolitan Securities Co 30,000,000 Milwaukee & Chicago Breweries, Ltd. . . 7,548,500 3,500,000 X Mississippi Wire Glass Co 1,500,000 X Monongahela River Con. Coal & Coke Co. 30,000,000 9,470,000 X National Asphalt Co. . .* 19,600,000 35,963,000 X National Biscuit Co 53,061,100 1,683,000 X National Carbon Co 10,000,000 X National Casket Co. • 6,000,000 X National Enameling & Stamping Co 23,838,400 2BB APPENDICES. Name of Company. Capital Stock Bonded Debt Outstanding. Outsfanding. X National Fire Proofing Co .$12,500,000 .' X National Glass Co 2..317.000 X National Lead Co 29.809,400 X National Roofing & Corrugating Co.... 5,000,000 X National Saw Co 1,000,000 X National Sugar Refining Co 20,000,000 X New England Breweries Co 2,050,000 * New England Brick Co 3,100,000 X New England Cotton Yarn Co 10.000,000 New York Breweries Co., Ltd 3,000,000 New York Dock Co 17,000,000 New York & Kentucky Co 2.000,000 X Niles Bement-Pond Co 7,000,000 Norfolk Refrigerating, Storage & Ice Co. 1,000,000 North American Company 12,000,000 Northern Commercial Co 1,622,800 Northern Securities Co 400,000,000 Ohio & Indiana Con. Nat. & Ilium. Gas Co. 9,000,000 * Otis Elevator Co . 10,850,000 X Pacific Coast Biscuit Co 2,950,000 Pacific Coast Co 12,145,800 X Pacific Hardware & Steel Co 10,000,000 Paterson Brewing & Malting Co 3,000,000 Peninsular & Occidental g. S. Co 2,000,000 Pennsylvania Central Brewing Co 5,600,000 X Pennsylvania Furnace Co 2,100,000 X Pennsylvania Steel Co 27,250,000 Peoples' Brewing Co. of Trenton. ....... 1,100,000 .- Pepperell Mfg. Co 2,556,000 Pittsburg Brewing Co ; 19,500,000 X Pittsburgh Coal Co. .~ 59,731,900 X Pittsburgh Stove & Range Co 2,000,000 X Pittsburgh Valve Foundry & Con. Co.. 1,150,000 Planters' Compress Co 10,000,000 Pneumatic Signal Co 3,000,000 * Pressed Steel Car Co 25,000,000 * Pullman Company 74,000.000 * Quaker Oats Co 11,500,000 Railways Company General 1,200,000 X Railway Steel Spring Co 20,000,000 Railroad Securities Co 8,000,000 * Reece Buttonhole Machine Co 1,000,000 X Republic Iron & Steel Co 48,204,000 X Rochester Optical & Camera Co. 2,600,000 Rock Island Company 150,000,000 X Rocky Mountain Paper Co 1,350,000 Rogers (Wm. A.), Ltd 1,350.000 X Royal Baking Powder Co 20,000,000 X Rubber Goods Mfg. Co 24,993,100 St. Louis Breweries, Ltd 8,766,000 Safety Car Heating & Lighting Co 4,125,000 Sanitary Laundry Co 2,000,000 Sea Coast Packing Co 8,000,000 X Sloss-Sheffield Steel & Iron Co 14,200,000 X Somerset Coal Co 4,000,000 X Southera Car & Foundry Co 2,000,000 X Southern Cotton Oil Co 10,000,000 Springfield Breweries, Ltd 2,300,000 * Standard Carbide Gas Co 5,000,000 X Standard Chain Co 2,308,600 X Standard Milling Co '. 11,500,000 X Standard Oil Co 97,500,000 X Standard Rope & Twine Co 12,000,000 * Standard Sanitary Mfg. Co 3,973,000 X Standard Table Oilcloth Co. 8,000,000 * Standard Typewriter Co 1,000,000 APPENDICES. 297 Capital Stock Bonded Debt Name of Company. Outstanding. Outstanding. X Steei Tired Wheel Co $4,000,000 X Stillwell-Bierce & Smltli-Vaile Co 1,012,100 $300,000 Sterling Co 1,875,000 X Susquehanna Iron & Steel Co 1,500,000 300,000 X Tennessee Coal, Iron & R. R. Co 22,553,060 12,793,000 X Trenton Potteries Co 3,000,000 X Union Bag & Paper Co 27,000,000 X Union Carbide Co, 6,000,000 500,000 X United Box, Board & Paper Co 30,000,000 X United Button Co 3,000,000 X Union Steel & Chain Co 1,101,900 X Union Switch & Signal Co 1,495,550 530,000 X Union Typewriter Co 18,000,000 United Breweries Co 11,063,000 3,413,000 X United Copper Co 50,000,000 United Electric Securities Co 1,500,000 2,231,000 X United Engineering & Foundry Co. . . . 5,550,000 United Fruit Co 12,369,500 3,000,000 United Gas & Electric Co 1,600,000 600,000 United Gas Improvement Co. 28,250,000 X United Matchless Machinery Co 1,010,000 United Power & Transportation Co. . . . 3,125,000 United Railways Co. of St. Louis 32,411,200 28,272,000 X United Shoe Machinery Co 20,656,575 X United States Bobbin & Shuttle Co 1,651,000 300,000 United States Brewing Co., Ltd 3,500,000 2,000,000 X United States Cast Iron Pipe & F'nd. Co 25,000,000 X United States Cotton Duck Corp 13,100,000 X United States Envelope Co 4,500,000 2,000,000 X United States Finishing Co 3,000,000 1,750,000 X United States Glass Co 4.148,100 United States Gypsum Co. 7,500,000 X United States Leather Co 125,164,600 5,280,000 X United States Paving Co 2,000,000 United States Printing Co 3,376,300 United States Realty & Construction Co. 66,000,000 X United States Reduction & Refining Co. 9,808,300 3,000,000 X United States Rubber Co 47,191,500 12,000,000 X United States Shipbuilding Co 45,000,000 9,000,000 X United States Steel Corporation 1,018,809,300 358,376,636 United States Voting Machine Co . 1,000,000 X United Wire & Supply Co 1,000,000 X Universal Tobacco Co 10,000,000 X Utica Steam & Mohawk Val. Cotton Mills 2,000,000 X Virginia Carolina Chemical Co 39,948,400 X Virginia Iron, Coal & Coke Co 8,970,000 10,000,000 X Vulcan Detinning Co 3,500,000 X Washburn Wire Co 3,750,000 Western Stone Co 2,250,000 488,000 Western Union Telegraph Co 120,912,360 25,139,000 * Westinghouse Air Brake Co 10,950,000 •Westinghouse Aut. Air & Steam Coup. Co. 5,000,000 X Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co 14,788,276 3,200,000 X Wisconsin Lime & Cement Co 5,000,000 X Yellow Pine Co 1,845,700 $5,803,231,600 $1,169,^17,251 Total Stocks * $5,803,231,600 Total Bonds 1,169,217,251 Total Capitalization $6,972,448,851 Number of Trusts 287. 29& APPENDICES, The foregoing list embraces 287 industrial combinations or trusts, and includes practically everything of importance in the United States. Of these trusts, those marked "x" enjoy direct tariff benefits in more or less degree. There are 168 of them. Those marked "*" probably receive some benefit from the tariff. There are 38 of these. Two hundred and six trusts, then, are more or less tariff protected. The products of most of the remaining 81 trusts are on the tariff list, but their protection is only nominal. Of this list of trusts, 21 derive their strength chiefly from patent rights; 28 are based on municipal or other franchises, rights of way, etc.; 19 are based on control of coal and other lands, mines, ore de- posits, etc., exclusively. The balance of the unprotected trusts have in most cases some other element of monopoly which contributes to their strength. Where the element of monopoly is small, the general financial standing of the trust in nearly all cases, is weak. TOTAL CAPITALIZATION OF 168 TARIFF PROTECTED TRUSTS. Stocks $4,182,812,902 Bonds 914,081,110 Total . . .- $5,096,894,012 TOTAL CAPITALIZATION OF 119 OTHER TRUSTS. Stocks $1,580,418,698 Bonds 255,136,100 Total $1,835,554,798 Proportion of trusts enjoying tariff benefits, 59 per cent. Proportion of capital in trusts enjoying tariff benefits, 74 per cent. Tolal capitalization of 206 trusts more or less protected by tariff, $5,571,616,153. Total capitalization of 81 trusts with little or no protection, $1,380,- 832,657. Proportion of trusts not protected, 28 per cent. Proportion of capital in trusts not protected, 19 per cent. ESTIMATED STOCK OF GOLD AND SILVER IN UNITED STATES. Per Gold. capita. 1893 $597,697,685 8.93 1893 1896 599,597,964 8.40 1896 1905 1,357,881,186 16.31 1905 Per Silver. capita. $615,861,484 9.20 628,728,071 8.81 686,401,168 8.24 $1,930,996,723 26.25 $2,555,176,835 33.64 PRODUCTION OF GOLD. Gold. Value. Silver. Value. 1893 $35,955,000 1893 $46,800,000 1896 53,088,000 1896 39,654,600 .. 1904 80,464,000 1904 33,456,000 $169,507,000 $119,910,600 APPENDICES. 299 GOLD AND SILVER STATISTICS. Official Table of Stock of Coin in the United States June 30, 1905. Item. Estimated stock of coin June .30, 1904 Net imports United States coin fiscal year 1905 United States coin returned in transports from the riiilippine Islands, not re- corded at the custom- house, fiscal year 1905 . . . Coinage, fiscal year 1905... Gold. $1,285,080,291 79,983,692 Silver. $674,857,600 302,129 0843,142 9,123,971 Total. ,959,937,891 302,129 843,142 89,107,663 Total $1,365,063,983] $685,126,842] $2,050,190,825 i I I Los> Net exports United States coin fiscal year 1905. . United States and Hawai- ian coin melted for recoiuage (face value). United States coin esti- mated to have been used in the arts 52,172,615 3,431,211 3,500,000 1,973,788 100,000 52,172,615 5,404,999 3.600,000 Total $59,103,826 $2,073,7881 $61,177,614 Estimated stock of coin in the United States June 30, 1905 $1,305,960,157 $683,053,054 $1,989,013,211 a Of this amount $437,578 were in one-dollar pieces. Note. — The number of standard silver dollars coined to June 30, 1905, was 570,272,610, which, added to the Hawaiian dollar coinage of 500,000, plus the number imported from the Philippine Islands — 150,000 — and the number returned in Government transports from the Philippine Islands — 437,578 — equals 571,360,188. Since July 1, 1898, the number of standard silver dollars exported in transports has been 2,495,000, and since 1883 the number melted has been 183,083 (this report, page 21), and the number of Hawaiian dollars melted to June 30, 1905, has been 453.240, a total disposition of 3,131,323, leaving in the United States June 30, 1905, 568,228,865 standard silver dollars, and $114,824,189 in subsidiary silver coins. — Mint Report, 1905. 300 APPENDICES. WORLD'S STOCK The monetary systems and an estimate of the approximate stocli of the world at the close of the calendar year 1904 are shown in th< being used only in the absence of official information. Monetary Systems and Approximate Stocks of Money, in tlie Aggregate an^ a Monetary unit. Popula- tion. Stock of gold. 1 Coimtry. In banks and pub- lic treas- uries. In circu- lation. Total. United States Austria Hungary . Belgium Gold.. ..do.. ..do. . Dollar Crown Franc Pound sterling Dollar Pound sterling Pound sterling and rupee. Pound sterling Dollar Leva Thou- sands. 82,600 48,600 7,000 5,700 5,800 43,500 295,200 7,100 5,300 3.700 1,600 2,600 9,800 2,800 39,000 56,400 2,400 1,300 33,200 49,800 13,600 5,400 2,300 5,400 6,300 128,200 2,600 5,200 5,200 1,800 16,000 3,200 3,900 1,300 300 100 100 600 4,600 1,000 2,600 18,700 5,200 3,300 24,000 4,100 330,100 Thou- sands, a $887,800 b 240,000 b 19.100 b 111,600 b 52,500 b 194,000 e 53,300 b 41 .000 Thou- Thou- sands, sands. $460,400 $1,348,20( b 65.000! b305 00C d 10.900 bd 30.00( d 17,000 bd 128.600 (c) b 52,50( d 339,200 d 533,200 d 210,600 de 263,900 b 15,000 b 56,000 (c) British Empire: Australasia Canada United Kingdom India South Africa . . . Straits Settle- ments f ..do.. ..do.. ..do.. ..do.. ..do.. SUver. Gold.. ..do.. Bulgaria g 1,900 d 20,000 b 17,400 d 12,000 f 4,400 b 519,700 b 197,300 b 5,400 b 1,000 b 131,400 b 42,700 b 8,600 b 27,200 b 6,800 b 5,300 b 10,400 b 526,900 b 3,300 b 1,000 b 72,100 b 400 (c) d 75,000 (c) b406 700 g 1,900 d 20 000 Cuba Peseta Crown Piaster Markkaa Franc Mark ..do.. b 17,400 d 87,000 g 4.400 Finland.*.... . .. . . ..do.. ..do. . France do Ti Q9A A(\r\ Germany .do d 689 400 M ssfiTOft Greece .do. . Drachma Gourde b'200 b 10,100 (c) b 9,300 (c) b 256,800 b5 600 Haiti ..do. . bl 000 Italy ..do. . b 131.400 ..do.. ..do. . Yen b 52.800 Peso b 8.600 Netherlands Norway. . .-r ..do.. ..do.. Florin Crown Milreis Lei b 36.500 b 6.800 Portugal . do . b5 300 Roumania ..do.. ..do.. ..do. . b 10.400 Russia Ruble Dinar Tical b 783.700 b 3,300 Siam ..do.. b 1 .000 South American States: Argentina ..do.. Peso b 72,100 Bolivia Silver. Gold.. .do.. Boliviano Milreis Peso b 400 Brazil (c) ChUe b 9,500 b200 b 1,700 (c) b 9,500 ..do.. Dollar Sucre b200 Ecuador do b 1,700 Guiana (British) ..do.. ..do.. ..do.. ..do.. Pound sterling Florin Franc Peso (c) Guiana (Dutch) Guiana (French) b 1,000 (c) bi'ooo (c) blOO b 3,900 b 11,200 b700 b 72,100 b 17,000 b 20,700 d 10,000 b 2,000 n (c) b 4,800 (c) b 3,200 d 8.900 d 40,000 (c) blOO Peru ..do.. ..do.. ..do.. Sol b 3,900 Peso b 11,200 Venezuela Bolivar Peseta Crown Franc Piaster Peso b5.500 Spain .do . b 72.100 Sweden ..do.. b 20.200 Switzerland Turkey Central American States ..do.. ..do.. Silver! .do. bd 29.600 d 50,000 b 2.000 China Tael (c) Total 1.298,500 3,364,600 2,622,500 5.987,100 a In United States Treasury and national banks. 6 Official information furnished through United States representatives. c No information. d Estimate, Bureau of the Mint. € The figures for the total stock of gold in India are for the net imports since 1893-94 the production of the country. The amount in the Govern- ment Treasury is from official advices. The net imports of gold since 1835-36 — when the records begin — amount to $817,374,610 and the pro- duction recorded to $103,209,754. The tide of gold and silver has been flowing into India for centuries. APPENDICES. 301 OF MONEY. of gold, silver, and uncovered paper money in the diffetent countries following table compiled from official and unofficial sources, the latter Per Capita, in the Principal Countries of the World, December 31,1904. Stock of Silver • Uncovered paper. Per capita. Full tender. T(imited tender. Total. Gold. Silver. Paper. Total. Thousands. $573,200 (c) d 15,000 Thousands. $111,900 b 79,700 d 9.700 b 6.100 b 6.700 b 113.400 Thousands. $685,100 b 79,700 d 24,700 b 6,100 b 6,700 b 113,400 b 603.800 b 20.000 b 19,200 g 1,900 d 5,000 b 6,200 b 15,000 g400 b 411,100 b 210,200 blOO b 2,500 b 25,600 b 41,300 b 52,800 b 56,800 b 3,000 b 8,400 b600 b 101,900 b 1,500 b 22.300 (0 b 3.800 b300 b 2,900 (c) blOO (c) b200 (c) (0 b 2,400 b 3,200 b 4,600 b 173,700 b 7,600 h 10,700 d 40.000 b 5.600 d 350.000 Thousands $559,900 b 54,700 b 111,900 $16.33 6.27 4.28 22.56 9.05 12.26 .89 7.89 ' ' * '.5i ' 12.50 6.69 8.87 1.57 23.75 15.72 2.33 .77 3.96 1.06 .63 6.76 2.96 .98 165 6.11 1.27 .19 13.86 .22 * 2.97' .05 1.31 $8.30 1.64 3.53 1.07 1.16 2.61 2.05 2.81 3.62 .51 3.12 2.39 1.53 .14 10.54 ' 3.73 .04 1.92 .77 .83 3.89 10.52 1.30 1.56 .10 .79 .57 4.29 ■ 2.ii' .02 .91 '"".67" $6.78 1.13 15.99 "11.22' 2.71 .11 3.77 1.11 *4'.ii* '3'.25' 2.84 3.01 6.75 2.69 4..53 2.03 3.59 9.48 2.69 11.29 1.79 '".96' 55.02 1.78 23.00 9.59 190.00 1.00 2.00 2.00 6.00 17.50 "6.69' 5.63 6.97 13.02 $31.41 9.04 23.80 23.63 b 65,100 b 118,100 b 32,400 21.43 "b'eos.soo* 17.58 3.05 b 20.000 b 3,200 g 1,000 d 5,000 b 6,200 b 15,000 g400 b 63,700 b 173,100 10.70 b 16,000 b 20,000 g 4.100 7.39 2.13 15.62 b 10.700 13.19 10.40 'b347',406' b 37,100 b 100 g 9.100 b 110,900 b 169,800 b 16,200 b 3,500 b 150,700 b 101.200 b 48.900 b 51.200 b 6.200 b 61,000 b 11,300 4.96 37.13 22.46 9.12 b 1,000 b 11,500 b 1.500 b 14,100 b 41.300 5.38 9.26 3.92 b 52.800 8 11 b 52,800 b 4,000 b 3,000 b 8.400 b600 b 101,900 b 1.500 26.76 6.95 13.83 (c) 3.54 6.90 (0 b 22,300 b 2,500 2.80 4.48 b 286.100 b 3.200 b 368.100 b 30,700 b 741,000 b 1,300 b600 b200 b600 b 10,500 68.88 b 3.800 4.11 b300 b 2,900 23.02 (c) 13.47 190.05 (c) blOO 2 38 2.00 b200 10.00 2.00 14.00 6.00 .17 .85 11.20 .27 3.85 3.89 8.97 2.08 .49 '"■.52* 3.20 1.77 9.29 1.46 3.24 1.67 1.36 1.06 17.67 b 2,400 b 3.200 b 4,600 b 173,700 b 7,600 h 10,700 d 10.000 1.37 14.40 2.04 (c) b 125,100 b 29.300 b 23,000 19.83 10.98 (0 d 30.000 19.18 3.75 b 5.600 b 53,400 14.87 d 350,000 1.06 2.123.300 1.007.100 3.130,400 3.392.500 4.61 2.41 2.61 9.63 f Includes Straits Settlements, the Malay States, Ceylon, and Johore. g L Economiste Europeen, January, 1905. h C Cramer Frey. i Except Costa Rica and British Honduras — gold standard countries. Note — The value of the monetary stock of silver standard countries has been changed to conform to the decline in silver values. The monetary stock of Mexico and other countries where the Mexican dollar circulates is given in Mexican dollars at bullion value. 302 APPENDICES. The foregoing table of the world's stock of money is for December 31, 1904. It is submitted as giving the best information obtainable, but imsatisfactory in many respects, owing to defective returns. The world's stock of gold in monetary use foots up $5,987,100,000; of silver, $3,130,400,000, and of uncovered paper, $3,392,500,000, show- ing, as compared with the estimate of December 31, 1903, an increase in gold of $301,400,000, decrease in silver of $82,800,000, and in uncovered paper of $119,000,000. The most important gains in gold were as follows: India, $200,700,000; United States, $27,800,000; Germany, $85,300,000; Egypt, $27,000,000; Austria-Hungary, $18,200,000; Netherlands, $8,100,000. Countries showing a decrease were France, $41,900,000 (France has submitted a new estimate which this Bureau adopts as official), and Japan, $17,000,000. The decrease shown in silver is due to a reduction in the estimates for Siam and Italy. On December 31, 1904, the United States, Great Britain, Germany, Austria-Hungary, France, and Russia, with a total population of 398,300,000, held $4,783,200,000, or over 79 per cent, of the world's stock of gold. Coinage of Nations. Calendar year. Gold. Silver. 1902 $220,405,125 240,496,274 455,427,085 $193,715,362 208,367,849 172,270,379 1903 ' 1904 The above figures represent, as nearly as this Bureau has been able to ascertain, the total value of the gold and silver coinages executed in the world during the years given. The total of these coinages does not correctly represent the amount of new gold and new silver made into coins during the year, for the reason that the coinages as reported include the value of domestic and foreign coins melted for recoinage, as well as old material, plate, etc., used in coinage. COINAGE OP Gold and Silver op the Mints op the World for the Calendar Years since 1873. Gold. Silver. Calendar year. Fine ounces. Value. Fine ounces. Value. 1873 12,462,890 257,630,802 101,741,421 131,544,464 1874 6,568,279 135,778,387 79,610,875 102,931,232 1875 9,480,892 195,987,428 92,747,118 119,915,467 1876 10,309,645 213,119,278 97,899,525 126,577,164 1877 9,753,196 201,616,466 88,449,796 114,359,332 1878 9,113,202 188,386,611 124,671,870 161,191,913 1879 4,390,167 90,752,811 81,124,555 104,888,313 1880 7,242,951 149,725,081 65,442,074 84,611,974 1881 7,111,864 147,015,275 83,539,051 108,010,086 1882 4,822,851 99,697,170 85,685,996 110,785,934 1883 5,071,882 104,845,114 84,541,904 109,306,705 1884 4,810,061 99,432,795 74,120,127 95,832,084 1885 4,632,273 95,757,582 98,044,475 126,764,574 1886 4,578,310 94,642,070 96,566,844 124,854,101 1887 6,046,510 124,992,465 126,388,502 163,411,397 1888 6,522,346 134,828,855 104,354,000 134,922,344 1889 8,170,611 168,901,519 107,788,256 139,362,595 1890 7,219,725 149,244,965 117,789,228 152,293,144 1891 5,782,463 119,534,122 100,962,049 138,294,367 1892 8,343,387 172,473,124 120,282,947 155,517,347 1893 11,243,342 232,420,517 106,697,783, 137,952,690 1894 11,025,680 227,921,032 87,472,523 113,095,788 1895 11,178,855 231,087,438 98,128,832 126,873,642 1896 9,476,639 195,899,517 123,394,239 159,540,027 1897 21,174,850 437,722,992 129,775,082 167,790,006 1898 19,131,244 395,477,905 115,461,020 149,282,936 1899 22,548,101 466,110,614 128,566,167 166,226,964 1900 17,170,053 354,936,497 143,362,948 185,358,156 1901 12,001,537 248,093,787 107,439,666 138,911,891 1902 10,662,098 220,405,125 149,826,725, 193,715,362 1903 11,634,007 240,496,274 161,159,508 208,367,849 1904 22,031,285 455,427,085 0145,332^35 172^2j;0^379 Total 321,711,196 6,650,360,703^8,434,367,441 4,424,760,227 a Actual weight consumed in coinage. — Report of the Director of the Mint, 1905. APPENDICES. 303 Estimated Stock of Gold and Silver in the United States and the Amount Per Capita at the Close of each Fiscal Year since 1873. Fiscal year ended June 30 — Population. Total coin and bullion. Per capita. Gold. Silver. Gold. SUver. Total metallic. 1873 1874 1875 1876 1877 1878 1879 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904.- 1905 41,677,000 42,796,000 43,951,000 45,137.000 46,353,000 47,598,000 48,866,000 50,155,783 51.316,000 52.495,000 53,693,000 54,911,000 56,148,000 57,404,000 58,680,000 59,974,000 61,289,000 62,622,250 63,975.000 65,520,000 66,946,000 68,397,000 69,878,000 71,390,000 72,937,000 74,522,000 76.148,000 76.891,000 77,754,000 79,117,000 80,847,000 81.867,000 83,259,000 $135,000,000 147,379,493 121,134,906 130,056,907 167 ,.501,472 213,199,977 245,741,837 351,841,206 478,484,538 506,757,715 542,732,063 545,500,797 588,697,036 590,774,461 654.520,335 705,818,855 680,063,505 695,563,029 646,582,852 664,275,335 597,697,685 627,293,201 636,229,825 599,597,964 696,270,542 861,514,780 962,865,505 1,034,439,264 1,124,652,818 1,192,395,607 1,249,552,756 1,327,672,672 1,357,881,186 $6,149,305 10,355.478 19,367.995 36,415,992 56,464.427 88,047,907 117,526,341 148,522,678 175,384,144 203,217,124 233,007.985 255,568,142 283,478,788 312,252,844 352,993,566 386,611,108 420,548,929 463,211.919 522,277,740 570,313,544 615,861,484 624,347,757 625,854,949 628,728,071- 634,509,781 637,672,743 639,286,743 647,371,030 661,205,403 670,540,105 677,448,933 682,383,277 686,401,168 $3.23 3.44 2.75 2.88 3.61 4.47 5.02 7.01 9.32 9.65 10.10 9.93 10.48 10.29 11.15 11.76 11.09 11.10 10.10 10.15 8.93 9.18 9.10 8.40 9.55 11.56 12.64 13.45 14.47 15.07 15.45 16.22 16.31 $0.15 .24 .44 .81 1.21 1.85 2.40 2.96 3.41 3.87 4.34 4.65 5.05 5.44 6.00 6.44 6.86 7.39 8.16 8.70 9.20 9.13 8.97 8.81 8.70 8.56 8.40 8.42 8.50 8.48 8.38 8.33 8.24 $3.38 3.68 3.19 3.69 4.82 6.32 7 42 9.97 12.73 13.52 14.44 14.58 15.53 15.73 17.15 18.20 17.95 18.49 18.26 18.85 18.13 18.31 18.07 17.21 18.25 20.12 21.04 21.87 22.97 23.55 23.83 24.55 24.55 304 APPENDICES. No, 19. — Pboduct of Gold and Silver in the United States from 1792 TO 1844, and Annually Since. (The estimate for 1792-1873 Is by R. W. Raymond, commissioner and since by Director of the Mint.) Gold. Silver. Year. Fine ounces. Value. Fine ounces. Commercial Value. 1792 to July 31, 1834 July 31, 1834, to Dec. 31, 1844 1845 1846 1847 I 677,2501 $14,000,0001 Insignificant 362,812 48,762 55,341 43,005 7,500,000 1,008,000 1,140,000 889,000 193,400 38,700 38,700 38,700 $253,400 50,200 50,300 50,600 Total. 1,187,1701 24,537,090 309,5001 404,500 1848 1849 1850 1851 1852 1853 1854 1855 1856 1857 1858 1859 1860 1861 1862 1863 1864 1865 1866 1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 483,750 1,935,000 2,418,750 2,660,625 2,902,500 3,144,375 2,902,500 2,660,625 2,660,625 2,660,625 2,418,750 2,418,750 2,225,250 2,080,125 1,896,300 1,935,000 2,230,087 2,574,759 2,588,062 2,502,196 2,322.000 2,394,562 2,418,750 2,104,312 1,741,500 10,000,000 40,000,000 50,000,000 55,000,000 60,000,000 65,000,000 60,000,000 55,000,000 55,000,000 55,000,000 50,000,000 50,000,000 46,000,000 43,000,000 39,200,000 40,000,000 46,100,000 53,225,000 53,500,000 51,725,000 48,000,000 49,500,000 50,000,000 43,500,000 36,000,000 38,700 38,700 38,700 38,700 38,700 38,700 38,700 38,700 38,700 38,700 38,700 77,300 116,000 1,546,900 3,480,500 6,574,200 8,507,800 8,701,200 7,734,400 10,441,400 9,281,200 9,281,200 12,375,000 17,789,100 22,236,300 50,500 50,700 50,900 51,700 51,300 52,200 52,200 52,000 52,000 52,400 52,000 105,100 156,800 2,062,000 4,684,800 8,842,300 11,443,000 11,642,200 10,356,400 13,866,200 12,306,900 12,297,600 16,434,000 23,588,300 29,396,400 Total , ... . . I 58,279,7781 1,204,750,0001 118.568,200| 157,749,900 1873 . 1874 . 1875 . 1876 ., 1877 . 1878 . 1879 . 1880 . 1881 . 1882 . 1883 . 1884 . 1885 . 1886 . 1887 . 1888 , 1889 , 1890 . 1891 . 1892 . 1893 . 1894 . 1895 . 1896 . 1897 , 1898 . 1899 . 1900 . 1901 ■ . 1902 , 1903 , 1904 , ..I 1,741,500 1,620,122 1,619,009 1,931,575 2,268,662 2,477,109 1,881,787 1,741,500 1,678,612 1,572,187 1,451,250 1,489,950 1,538,373 1,686,788 1,603,049 1,604,478 1,-594,775 1,588,877 1,604,8401 1,597,0981 1,739,3231 1.910,813 2,254,760| 2,568,132 2.774,9351 3,118,.398! 3.437,2101 .3.829,8971 3,805.500] 3,870,0001 3,560,0001 3,892,4801 I 36,000,000 33,490,900 33,467,900 39,929,200 46,897,400 51.206,400 38,900,000 36,000.000 34,700,000 32,500,000 30,000,000 30,800.000 31.801,000 34,869,000 33,136,000 33,167,500 32,967,000 32,845,000 33,175,000 33.015.000 35,955,000 39,.500,000 46.610,000 53.088,000 57,363.000 64,463,0001 71,05.3,4001 79.171.0001 78,666.7001 80.000,0001 73,591.7001 80,464,700 27,650, 28,868, 24,5.39, 29,996, 30,777, 35,022 31,565 30,318 33.257 36,196, 35,7.32 37,743 39,909 39,694 41,721, 45.792 50,094 54,516 58.330 63.500 60.000, 49,500; 55.727 58,834 53,860 54,438 54,764 57,647, 55,214 55,500 54,300 57,682 .400 ,200 ,300 ,200 .800 .300 .500 ,700 .800 ,900 .800 ,800 .400 ,000 ,600 .700 ,500 ,300 ,000 .000 ,000 .000 ,000 ,800 .000 ,000 ,500 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,000 ,800 I 35,881,600 36,917,500 30,485,900 34,919,800 36,991,500 40,401,000 35,477,100 34,717,000 37.657,500 41.105,900 39,618,400 41,921,300 42,503,500 39,482,400 40.887,200 43,045,100 46,838,400 57,242,100 57,630,000 55.662,500 46.800,000 31,422,100 36.445,500 39.654,600 32.316,000 32.118,400 32,858,700 35,741,100 33,128,400 29.415,000 29.322,000 33,456,000 Total . 71.052.989 1 1,468,793,800 1 1,442,696,300 1 1,242,063,500 Grand total. . I130.519.937|2.698.080,800|1.561,574,000|l,400.217.900 — Report of the Director of the Mint (1905). APPENDICES. 305 Premium on gold, and gold value of United States legal-tender notes from 1862 to January 1, 1879. Average cur- Average gold rency value of value of gold each calendar year TJ. S. notes each calendar year Year. during suspen- during suspen- sion of specie sion of specie payments, payments, Jan. 1, 1862, to Jan. 1, 1862, to Jan. 1, 1879. Jan. 1, 1879. 1862 113.3 145.2 203.3 157.3 140.9 138.2 88.3 1863 68.9 1864 49 2 1865 63 6 1866 71 1867 72.4 1868 139.7 71.6 1869 133 75.2 1870 114.9 111.7 112.4 113.8 111.2 87 1871 89.5 1872 89 1873 87.9 1874 89.9 1875 114.9 87 1876 111.5 89.8 1877 104.8 100.8 95.4 1878 99.2 The total redemptions of notes in gold and the exports of that metal during each fiscal year since the resumption of specie payments have been as follows: Fiscal United States Treasury notes Total. 1 Exports of year. notes. of 1^90. 1 I gold. 1879 $7,976,698 $7,976,698 3,780,638 271,750 $4,587,614 1880 3,780,638 3,639,025 1881 271,750 2,565,132 1882 40,000 40,000 32,587,880 1883 75,000 75,000 11,600,888 1884 590,000 2,222,000 590,000 2,222,000 41,081,957 "8,477,892 1885 1886 6,863,699 6,863,699 42,952,191 1887 4,224,073 4,224,073 9,701,187 1888 692,596 692,596 18,376,234 1889 730,143 730,143 59,952,285 1890 732,386 732,386 17,274,491 1891 5,986,070 5,986,070 86,362,654 1892 5,352,243 $3,773,600 9,125,843 50,195,327 1893 55,319,125 46,781,220 102,100,345 108,680,844 1894 68,242,408 16,599,742 84,842,150 76,978,061 1895 109,783,800 7,570,398 117,354,198 66,468,481 1896 153.307,591 5,348,365 158,655,956 112,409,947 1897 68,372,923 9,828,991 78,201,914 40,361,580 1898 22,301,710 2,696,253 24,997,963 15,406,391 1899 18,645.015 6,997,250 25,642,265 37,522,086 1900 28,637,501 6,960,836 35,598,337 48,266,759 1901 23,776,433 446,678 24,223,111 53,185,177 1902 17,482,590 1,274,590 18.757,180 48,568,950 1903 7,154,718 1,112,527 8,267,245 47,090,595 1904 11.081.068 474,126 11,555,194 Total . 623,642,178 109.864.576 733,506,754 1,044,293,628 — ^U. S. Treasury Dept. Circular, No. 72, July 1, 1904. 306 APPENDICES. NET EXPORTS UNITED STATES GOLD COIN. The net exports of United States gold coin from January 1, 1870, to June 30, 1905, was $683,437,346, as shown hy the following table: Imports and Expobts of United States Gold Coin. Period. Imports. Exports. Jan. 1 to July 1, 1870 $6,384,250 Fiscal year — 1871 55,491,719 1872 40,391,357 1873 35,661,863 1874 28,766,943 1875 59,309,770 1876 27,542,861 1877 21,274,565 1878 $7,325,783 3,654,859 18,207,559 7,577,422 6,427,251 1879 4,120,311 1880 ' 1,687,973 1881 1,741,364 1882 4,796,630 8,112,265 3,824,692 3,352,090 1,687,231 5,862,509 5,181,512 1,403.619 1,949,552 2,824,146 15,432,443 6,074,899 30,790,892 10,752,673 10,189,614 57,728,857 40,590,947 7,779,123 8,659,856 3,311,105 3,870,320 1,519,756 5,780,607 2,236,399 29,805,289 1883 4,802,454 1884 12,242,021 1885 2,345,809 1886 5,400,976 1887 3,550,770 1888 3,211,399 1889 4,143,939 1890 3,951,736 1891 67,704,900 1892 42,841.963 1893 - - - 101,844,087 1894 64,303,840 1895 55 096,639 1896 77,789,892 1897 23,646,565 1898 8,402,216 1899 27.425,587 1900 30,674,511 1901 8,425,947 1902 9,370,841 1903 18,041,660 1904 15,682,424 1905 54,409,014 Total 1280,477,3601 Net exports. 963^914,706 683,437;346 — Mint Report, 1905, p. 34. INDEX A Abroad, evidence from 56 Abroad, what we sell 171 Adams, John Quincy, on who pays the tariff tax 159 Adams, John Quincy, on Increased cost of necessaries of life 167 Administration, economy of 4 Administration, Republican 9 Agreements, International Steel 42 Agriculture and the tariff, Hon. L. F. Livingston 168 Agricultural implements, exports of 59 Agricultural implements, exported 75 Agricultural machinery, Canadian Tariff Commission on 168 Agricultural machinery, increased cost of 167 Agricultural machinery, sold cheaper abroad 58 Alabama, wages in, in 1904 , 239 Aldrich, Senator, admits it 46 Aldrich resolution, purchase of material for Panama Canal, vote in Senate on 276 Allison, Senator, commends tariff of 1846 31 Amend the Constitution, Roosevelt wants to 224 American citizenship 7 Americans to install Russian telephones 143 American and foreign laborer, productivity of 156 American goods, cheapness of 133 American manufactures, sold cheaper abroad 58 American tools, cheaper in Germany 60 •Annual report, Mr. Foster, 1892, loss of gold by export 102 Annual report, 1890, Mr. Windom .■}-ih^'i^lK\ . . 101 Ante-election estimates 100 Anti-trust act of 1890, proceedings under 216-225 Anti-trust act of 1800, vote on 213 Anti-trust bills. Democrats first to introduce 203 Anti trust bills, list of 203 Anti-Trust Law, Morgan 209 Appeal to the country 10 Appendix A 244 Appendix B 252 Appendix C 267 Appendix D 293 Articles upon which duty at the rate of 100 •per cent, and over are collected 248 Appropriations, extravagant, Fifty-ninth Congress 153 Argument, Hon. Leonidas F. Livingston 168 Arid lands, reclamation of 7 Army 8 Asphalt Trust and Venezuela, Roosevelt 194 Atkinson, Mr. Edward, on panic of 1857 32 308 INDEX. Attorney-General's report, comments on 224 Average tariff rates, 1791-1905 17 Average duty, 1821-1861 31 Babcock (Rep. ) gives evidence 47 Bacon's amendment to the Aldrich resolution, vote In Senate on 277 Bacon, Senator, on steel rails cheaper abroad 49 Bailey amendment to Railroad Rate bill, vote in Senate on 270 Balance of trade against us •. . . . 102 Balwln Locomotive Wbrks bids for engines for canal 131 Bank funds turned into cash 110 Bid for rails for Panama Canal 131 Bids for engines for Panama Canal 131 Big military and naval force, Roosevelt on 193 Big stick, the motive behind 193 Bishop, Secretary, letter from 127 Blackmail collec1:ions, Philippine, vote in House on 290 Blaine, Mr., on tariflE 1846 21-22 Blaine, Mr., compares American and foreign labor. 156 Blaine, Mr., on taxing necessaries of life. 140 B»aine, Mr., for free hides 162 Bland amendment 209 Bond plate order, Mr. Foster 105 Boots and shoes, prices of 164 Bryan on Roosevelt's administration 145 Building material taxed, lizard free 139 Byrd, Adam M,, on increased cost of agricultural machinery .. 167 C Campaign funds, Parker's charge concerning 119 Campaign funds, Parker's charge concerning proven 122 Canal, bids for engines for 131 Canal, Isthmian 7 Canal, Panama, bid for rails for 131 Canadian Tariff Commission on agricultural machinery 168 Cannon, Mr., denounces ship subsidies 132 Cannon, Speaker, opinion of 73 Cannon, Speaker, statistics 64 Capital and labor 3 Carpet manufacturing Increased 27 Cash and gold needed 100 Cash paid over to Harrison by Cleveland administration 110 Cash register case 216 Cash turned over 103 Cat out of the bag, Shaw.lets the 38 Cement, foreign bought 127 Chadwick, Cassie, goes to prison, but etc 174 Changes, Republican tariff 35 Chandler, Senator, on ship subsidies and high tariff 132 Cheaper abroad, Republicans admit selling ^ 45 Cheaper abroad, shipbuilding material 52 Cheaper abroad, steel rails , : 49 INDEX. 309 Cheapest iron and steel 44 Cheapness of American goods 133 Chinese Exclusion Act, vote in House on 281 Citizenship, American 7 Civil Service 8 Civii War tariff to be temporary 33 Claims, political, New York City Bank 175 Clay, Henry, on who pays the tariff tax. 159 Cleveland, end of first administration 103 Coal, free, resolution on 161 Coal output in Pennsylvania increased 25 Coal, production increased 25 Coinage of gold and silver 302 Comparison, tariffs 1789-1906 13-16 Combines, trusts and , 39 Combinations and trusts unlawful 6 Combination, Mr. Sherman on 161 Commerce Act 1887, conference report on 147 Comments on Attorney-General's report 224 Commerce Act 1887, history of 146 Commercial failures, 1880-1903 107 Commission, recommendations of 151 Comparison of export and home prices 244 Comparisons on labor 158 Comparisons, some notable 25 Condition of Treasury 1889, 1893, 1897 103 Conference report on Commerce Act 1887 347 Confess, Republican minority * 98 Constitution, Roosevelt wants to amend 224 Constitutional guarantees 4 Contract Labor Law, vote in House on 281 Contract with trusts. Federal Government 4 Control, Republicans vote to give trusts 127 Copy of Foster bond plate order 105 Corporations, industrial organized 39 Cortelyou scandal 119, 126 Cost of living compared 165 Corrupt deal, New York City Bank, etc 175 Corruption, Republican, and life insurance scandal 119 Corruption fund, Parker's charge of 119 Corruption fund, Parker's charge of, proven 122 Cost of living higher. 66 Country, appeals to the 10 Counsel for Government incompetent 218 Counting cash, new system by Mr. Foster , , . - , 96 Courier-Journal (Louisville) on free building material 140 Cramp, Mr. C. H., on ship subsidies and high tariff 131 Criminal prosecutions 216 Culberson amendment to Railroad Rate bill, vote in Senate on 271 Cut, export prices 143 D Decisions, Supreme Court 150 Deficit in 1893 concealed by using national bank funds 112 ZW INDEX. Deficit confessed by Foster 99 Deficit (Republican), $30,000,000 to $40,000,000 98 Deficits, iiow made 155 Deficits, quarterly, ofllcial proof of Ill Deficits under the McKinley tariff 109 Democratic party platform 1904 3 Democratic platforms on tariffs and trusts 19 Democratic policies, Roosevelt appropriates 145 Democrats excluded 36 Democrats first again loO Democrats first to introduce anti-trust bills 203 Democrats first to recognize organized labor 178-188 Democrats inherited discouraging conditions from Harrison admin- istration 112 Democrat, why I am 11 Democracy, fundamental principles of 10 Departmental scandals 172 Depew, Senator, on the power of fifty men 144 Development, domestic 7 Dingley tariff, the 36 Dingley tariff law, Republican opinions on 71 Disaster, panic and, threatened under Harrison administration Ill Disaster, panic and, averted by using national bank funds 112 Domestic development 7 Dun's index numbers 68 Duty, average 1821-1861 31 Duty paid on hides, amount of 165 E "Easy international morality," Roosevelt on 193 Economy of administration 4 Edmunds, Senator, on who pays the tariff tax 159 Eight-hour law, Democrats first 178 Eight-Hour Law, vote in House on 281 Election of senators by the people 7 Engines, bids for, for canal 131 English prices 68 Enterprise bank failure 173 Estimated stock of gold and silver in the United States 298 Estimate of tariff profits 43 Estimates, ante-election 100 Evarts, W. M., compares American and foreign labor 156 Evidence, Babcock (Republican) gives Evidence at home 57 Evidence from abroad 56 Evidence from the Iron Age 54 Evidence, further, produced 49 Evidence of a protectionist \ 54 Excess of exports under McKinley Tariff Act 114 Excess of exports ilnder Wilson Tariff Act 114 Exchanging legal tender for gold, Mr. Foster in New York 108 Executive usurpation 5 Executive usurpation, ratification of vote in House on. . . , t 290 INDEX. 311 Expenses, President's traveling, vote in House on 288 Expenses, traveling, of the President, vote in Senate on 278 Export prices cheaper 44 Export and home prices, comparison of 244 Export prices, fail to answer as to 46 Export prices cut 143 Export prices of steel 42 Exports of agricultural implements 59, 75 Exports of manufactures 74 Exports, excess of, under Wilson Tariff Act 114 Exports, excess of, under McKinley Tariff Act 114 Exports, imports and, under Wilson Tariff Act 114 Exports, imports and, under McKinley Tariff Act 114 Exports, gold, again resumed 108 Exports of gold, remarkable 101 Exports, United States gold coin 306 Exposed, Steel Trust 141 Extravagant appropriations, Fifty-ninth Congress 153 F Fabrications, Republican, overtaken 107 Facts, some about the panic of 1893 117 Facts, historical 20 Fail to answer as to export prices 46 Failure, McKinley tariff a • 92 Failures, commercial, 1880-1903 107 Failure, the Enterprise Bank 173 Failure, the Walsh Bank 172 Farmers and the tariff 165 Farmers, taxes paid by 170 Farmers and trust plundering 70 Farming property, comparison with national wealth 165 Farming property, increase in acreage 165 Farewell advice, President Jackson's. . '. 34 Farquhar, Mr. A. B., tariff a swindle, etc 59 Favoritism to foreigners 43 Federal Government contract with trusts 4 Figures won't lie 66 Fifty men, what they can do, Mr. Depew 144 Fifty-ninth Congress, extravagant appropriations of 153 Financial stringency, Harrison administration Ill First tariff act, 1789 12 First House resolution to investigate trusts 204 First Senate resolution to investigate trusts 206 Foreign and American labor, productivity of 156 Foreign cement bought 127 Foreign supplies purchased by Mr. Taft 127 Foreigners, favoritism to 43 Foreigners, Americans pay taxes for benefit of 66 Foster confesses deficit 99 Foster held up payment, etc 110 Foster, "I made as good a statement in my report as I could" 97 Foster's bond plate order 105 312 INDEX. Foster's plan, real significance of 97 Foster, Mr., annual report 1892, loss of gold by export 102 Foster, Mr., concealed deficit in 1893 by using national banls funds.. 112 Foster, Mr., condemns Sherman Silver Law 97 Foster, Mr., got the gold 109 Foster, Mr., movement of gold 101 Foster, Mr., more revenue needed 100 Foster, Mr., and New York banks 108 Foster, Mr., in New York exchanging legal tenders for gold 108 Foster, Mr., omitted to tell 105 Foster, Mr., "paddled along" 95, 98 Foster, Secretary, before House Committee 93-95 Foster, Secretary, held up payment of requisites 95, 97 Free coal, resolution on 161 Free hides, Mr. Blaine for 162 Free list, the monopolized article 161 Free lizards vs. free building material 139 Free trade, ultimate, Garfield for 24 Free trader and stand-patter, Mr. Roosevelt 189 Further evidence produced 49 Fundamental principles of Democracy 3, 10 G Gage, Secretary of Treasury, and New York City Bank 175 Garfield, Mr., on free salt 161 Garfield, Mr., on tariff 23 Garfield for ultimate free trade 24 Gary, E. H., evidence shown to be unreliable 141 Gear, Mr. John H., on tariff tax 160 Gold, cash and, needed , 100 Gold exports again resumed 108 Gold for legal tenders, Mr. Foster in New York exchanging 308 Gold, remarkable exports of 101 Gold and silver, estimated stock of 298 Gold, production of 298 Gold and silver statistics 299 Gold and silver, stock of 303 Gold and silver, coinage of 302 Gold and silver, product of 304 Gold, premium on 305 Gold coin, net exports of 306 Good for the soul • • • • 125 Got the gold, Mr. Foster 109 Government, counsel for, incompetent 218 Government, Federal, contract with trusts 4" Government partnership with monopolies and trusts 48 Grievances, labor's 184-186 Guarantees, constitutional 4 Guild, Governor, is quoted T'S H Habeas corpus proceedings 216 Hale, Mr., on free salt 161 INDEX. 313 Hale, Senator, on McKinley tariff 91 Hamilton, Alexander, on wlio pays the tariff tax 159 Harrison administration, Democrats Inlierited discouraging conditions from 112 Harrison administration, financial stringency under Ill Havana, the, purchased at excessive price 129 Havemeyer, Mr. Henry O., testifies 57 Havemeyer, Mr., on forming the sugar trust 38 Held up, payments of requisitions, by Mr. Foster 95, 97 Hides, amount of duty paid on 165 Hides, free, Mr. Blaine for 162 High tariff killed shipbuilding 26 High tariff, ship subsidies and 131 Historical facts 20 History, tariff 20 History of tariff changes 17 History of the Commerce Act, 1887 146 History, party on monopolies and trusts 200 History, Railroad Law, 1906 150 Home, evidence at 57 Home prices, comparison of with export 244 How the trusts have increased prices 70 Imperialism 5 Implements, agricultural, exported 75 Imports and exports under Wilson Tariff Act 114 Imports and exports under McKinley Tariff Act 114 Inaugural address, Jefferson 10 Income tax plank 113 Income tax, revenue from 113 Incompetent counsel for Government 218 Inconsistencies, Roosevelt's. . 195 Increased, carpet manufacturing 27 Increased cost of agricultural machinery 167 Increased, labor and wages .» 20 Increase in exports of manufacturers 74 Increased, manufacture of paper 26 Increased prices, how the trusts have 70 Increased, postofiices 26 Increased tariff rates, how 37 Increase of wealth, Mr. Morrill 31 Industrial commission report 45 Industrial corporations organized 39 Injunction suits 216 Injunctions, Mr. Roosevelt on 187 Insurance, life scandal and Republican scandal 119 Intellectual conditions, revenue tariff promotes 26 International steel agreements 42 Investigation "unconstitutional," Mr. Shaw 192 Iron and steel cheapest 44 Iron Age, evidence from 54 Iron and steel, tariff on 116 314 INDEX, Iron and steel, United States predominant in 133 Iron production, revenue tariff promotes '. 27 Isthmian Canal 7 J Jackson, Andrew, on who pays the tariff tax 159 Jackson, President, farewell address 34 Jefferson's inaugural address 10 Jefferson on property 144 Jekyll and Hyde stand of "stand-patters" 137 L Labor, capital and 3 Labor combination case 21G Labor's grievances 184-186 Labor, organized, Mr, Roosevelt on 186 Labor, organized. Democrats first to recognize 178-188 Labor and wages increased 26 Labor, table showing comparisons of 158 La Follette's amendment to Railroad Rate bill, vote in Senate on... 272 La Follette's amendment regarding valuation of Railroad property, vote in Senate on 274 La Follette's amendment as to employers' liability, vote in Senate on. 275 Lamb, Henry W., testimony of 143 Legal tenders for gold, Mr. Foster in New York exchanging 108 Life insurance scandal. Republican corruption and 119 Limited incomes, those with, plundered by tariff 66 Lincoln, President, on war tariff 34 List of anti-trust bills 203 List of trusts in the United States 293 Living, cost of, compared 165 Living, cost of, higher 66 Livingston, Hon. Leonidas, synopsis of speech 168 Lizards, free, vs. free building material . . . *. 139 London Economist, index number 69 Lovering, Mr., tariff on machinery should be reduced 76 Low tariff increases manufacturing , 25 Low tariff, what it did for the country 24 Lumber trust case 218 M Machinery, agricultural, Canadian Tariff Commission on 168 Machinery, agricultural, increased cost of 167 Machinery, agricultural, sold cheaper abroad 58 Machinery, tariff on should be reduced, Mr. Lovering 76 Manufactures, American, sold cheaper abroad 58 Manufactures, comparison of 165 Manufactures, exports of 74 Manufacture of paper increased 26 Manufacturers' Association acts 126 Manufacturing, low tariff increases. 25 Marine, merchant 8 Markets, open, a wise policy 127 INDEX, 315 Material, other, purchased 129 Material for Panama Canal, vote in House on 285 Matters affecting the President 197 McKinley tariff, disastrous effect of on wages 80-89 McKinley tariff aids trusts 90-91 McKinley tariff. Senator Hale on 91 McKinley tariff a failure 92 McKinley tariff and Sherman law failed 97 McKinley tariff, deficit under 109 McKinley tariff, quarterly deficits under 110 McKinley tariff, panic and disaster threatened under Ill McKinley Tariff Act, excess of exports under 114 McKinley Tariff Act, values of imports under 114 McKinley Tariff Act, receipts from customs, etc., under 115 McKinley, President, states United States is predominant in iron and steel 133 McKinley tariff, operations of by months 252 Mexico, the, purchased at excessive price 129 Merchant marine 8 Miller, W. A., Mr. Roosevelt on 188 Mills, Senator, on American and foreign labor 157 Minority, Republican, confess J>8 Mint report, 1892 102 Money, world's stock of ; . . . . 300 Monopolies and trusts, party history on 200 Monopolized article, free list, the 161 Monopolies and trusts. Government partnership with 48 Monroe doctrine 8 Monroe doctrine, praised and pef verted ] 94 Monthly farm wages 231 Movement of gold, Mr. Foster 101 More revenue needed, Mr. Foster 100 Morgan's amendment to Railroad Rate bill, vote in Senate on 272 Morgan Anti-Trust Law 209 Morrill, Senator, on ship subsidies and high tariff 132 Morrill, Mr., on increase of wealth 31 Morrill, Mr., testifies 123 Motive behind the big stictc 193 Mount, Governor, on revenue protection 101 Mr. Foster, new system of counting cash 96 N National banks and bank deposits 198 National bank funds, panic and disaster averted by using 112 National City Bank of New York, corrupt sale of New York Custom House 175 Needed cash and gold 100 Negligence of Attorney-General Miller 223 Net exports United States gold coin 306 New England charge 32 New York banks and Mr. Foster 108 New York Custom House, corrupt sale of 175-178 New system of counting cash, Mr. Foster 96 North Carolina, wages, 1904 231 316 INDEX. O OflScial proof of quarterly deficits Ill Ofllcial wage figures, United States 240 Olilo, wages in, 1904 , 234 Omitted to tell, Mr. Foster .,••••. • • 105 One great cause 102 Open markets a wise policy 127 Open markets, Mr. Shouts on purchase of supplies 130 Open shop, Mr. Roosevelt on 188 Operation of Treasury Department 92-Q3 Operations of McKinley tariff by months 252 Organized labor, Mr. Roosevelt on 186 Organized labor. Democrats first to recognize 178-188 Order, Mr. Foster's bond plate 105 P Paddled along, paying Uncle Sam's debts 95, 98 Panic of 1857, Mr. Edward Atkinson on 32 Panic and disaster averted by using national bank funds 112 Panama Canal, bid for rails for 131 Panama Canal, purchase of material for, vote in House on 285 Panic-proof, is protection 21 Panic of 1893, some facts about 117 Panic and disaster threatened under Harrison administration Ill Panama supplies 126-129 Paper, manufacture of increased 20 Parker spoke the truth 123 Parker's charge of corruption fund 119 Parker's charge of corruption fund, proven 122 Partnership, Government, with monopolies and trusts 48 Party history on monopolies and trusts 200 Party questions, yea and nay votes on 267 Payment of requisites held up by Mr. Foster 95, 97 Payne, Mr., on who pays the tariff tax 160 Pennsylvania shared well 27 Pennsylvania, wages in, 1904 234 Pensions and our soldiers and sailors 8 People, election of senators by 7 Perkins, Mr., testifies 124 Perpetual, protective tariffs not to be 18 Philippine blackmail collections, vote in House on 290 Pipe trust case 220 Platform of the Democratic party, 1904 3 Platform, Democratic, on tariffs and trusts 19 Platform, Republican, on tariffs and trusts 19 Plundering the farmers, trusts and 70 Points, Hon. Leonidas F. Livingston 168 "Political claims," New York City Bank 175 Polygamy, condemnation of 8 Population and wealth of United States 113 Postoffices increased 26 Predominant in iron and steel. United States is 133 Premium of gold 205 INDEX. 317 President, matters affecting the 19 f President, traveling expenses of, vote in Senate on 278 President's traveling expenses, vote in House on 288 Press, the New York Daily, on steel trust 136 Prices and wages 67 Prices of boots and shoes 164 Prices, export, cheaper 44 Prices, export, cut 143 Price of tools raised 143 Prices, trusts raise 38 Prices, wholesale, 1897-1905 229 231 Prices, comparison of export with home 244 Principles, fundamental of Democracy , 3, 10 Product of gold and silver 304 Productivity of American and foreign laBor 156 Profits, estimate, of tariff 43 Property, Jefferson on 144 Proof, the 122 Proof, official, of quarterly deficits Ill Proposed ship subsidy legislation 134 Prosecuting ( ?) the trusts 224 Prosecution of the trusts a record of masterly inefficiency 226-228 Protection, is it panic proof 21 Protection, remove, Governor Mount 161 Protectionist, a, evidence of . 54 Purchased, other material 129 Production of gold 298 Protective tariff not to be perpetual 18 Purchase of material for Panama Canal, vote in House on 285 Pure Food Law, vote in Senate on 267 Qaiarterly deficits under McKinley tariff 110 Quarterly deficits, official proof of Ill R Race question, schools and 9 Rails for Panama Canal, bid for " 131 Railroad combinations, against. 210 Railroad combination case 217 Railroad building fiourished 26 Railroad employees, wages of 65 Railroad Law, 1906, history 150 Raise price of tools, 143 Ratification of Executive usurpations, vote in House on 290 Reagan bill, vote on 207 Real significance of Foster's plan 97 Receipts and expenditures, 1892 99 Receipts and expenditures, 1893 99 Receipts and expenditures, 1894 100 Receipts from customs, etc., under Wilson Tariff Act Ii5 Receipts from customs, etc.,. under McKinley Tariff Act 115 Reciprocity 8 318 INDEX. Reciprocity defeated 38 Recommendations of tlie commission 351 Redemptions 109 Redemption of notes 305 Reduce duty, Senator Sherman 162 Relief refund to San Francisco 138 Remarlcable exports of gold 101 Remove protection, Governor Mount • • 161 Report, Foster's, "as good as I could" 97 Report, Industrial Commission • • • • •. 45 Report, mint, 1892 102 Report, Treasury, December 1, 1890 Ill Report, June 12, 1890, action on 212 Republican administration 9 Republican corruption and life insurance scandal 119 Republican deficit $30,000,000 to $40,000,000 98 Republican fabrication overtaken 107 Republican minority confess , 98 Republican opinions on the Dingley Tariff Law 71 Republican platform on tariffs and trusts 19 Republican tariff changes 35 Republicans admit selling cheaper abroad 45 Republicans commend tariff, 1846 '^ • • > 31 Republicans vote to give trusts control »>'. .h «.. 127 Republicans, what they say on tariff. 73 Requisitio-ns, payment of, held up by Mr. Foster 95, 97 Revenue from income tax 113 Revenue tariff, steel industry born under , ^ 27 Revenue tariff promotes iron production 27 Richardson, Mr., on ship subsidy legislation 134 Roach, John, on ship subsidies and high tariff 131 Rogue's gallery, Mr. Roosevelt's . . . . ^ 186 Roosevelt appropriates Democratic policies .,. 145 Roosevelt, asphalt trust and Venezuela 194 Roosevelt, big military and naval force 193 Roosevelt on "easy international morality" 193 Roosevelt favors big corporations 193 Roosevelt a free trader and stand-patter, etc 189 Roosevelt on injunctions 187 Roosevelt, Monroe doctrine praised and perverted 194 Roosevelt on W. A. Miller 188 Roosevelt on open shop 188 Roosevelt on organized labor 186 Roosevelt on the shadow of oui; destiny 193 Roosevelt, subsidized merchant marine 193 Roosevelt wanted to amend the Constitution 224 Roosevelt'3 administration, Bryan on 145 Roosevelt's denials false 123 Roosevelt's inconsistencies 195 Roosevelt's "Rogue's gallery" 186 Roosevelt's denial as to corruption fund 120 Roosevelt's denial as to corruption fund proven false 122 Rucker, Mr., on the farmer and the tariff 165 Russian telephones, Americans to install ■. 143 mimx. ' 319 s Salt, free, Mr. Garfield on 161 Salt, free, Mr. Hale on 161 Salt Industry 75 San Francisco, lizards free but building material taxed 139 San Francisco, relief of, refused 138 Sauerbeck's prices index. . . .■ 69 Scandals, departmental 172 Scandal, life insurance, and RepublicaB scandal 119 Scandal, purchase of ships at excessive price 129 Scandal, the Cortelyou 119-126 Schwab, Mr., testifies 57 Schools and race question 9 Senators, election of by people 7 Sequel, what it proves 123 Serious trouble 101 "Shadow of our destiny," Roosevelt on 193 Shaw lets the cat out of the bag 38 Shaw, Secretary, admits it 47 Shaw, Mr., "investigation unconstitutional" 192 Sherman, Senator, when trusts and combinations started 34 Sherman silver law condemned by Mr. Foster 97 Sherman Law, McKinley tariff and, failed 97 Sherman, Senator, on ship subsidies and high tariff 132 Sherman, Mr., on "combination" 161 Sherman, Senator, on who pays the tariff tax 159 Sherman, Senator, "reduce duty" 162 Sherman's plan 204 Sherman resolution, the 206 Sherman anti-trust law. Supreme Court divided on 211 Shipbuilding, high tariff killed 26 Ship subsidies and high tariff 131 Ship subsidy legislation proposed 134 Ship Subsidy bill, vote in Senate on 268 Ships purchased at excessive price 129 Shipbuilding material cheaper abroad 52 Shoes and boots, prices of 164 Shoes, tax on hides is a tax on 163 Shonts, Mr., on purchase of materials In open market 130 Silver, small coin on hand 104 Silver and gold, estimated stock of 298 Silver and gold statistics 299 Silver and gold, stock of 303 Silver and gold, coinage of 302 Silver and gold, product of 304 Small silver coin on hand 104 Some facts about the panic of 1893 117 Splght, Mr., on steel trust and ship subsidies 135 Stand-patters, Dr. .Tekyll and Mr. Hyde 137 Stand-patters, attitude toward relief of San Francisco 138 Statehood for territories 7 Statehood bill, Foraker amendment, vote in Senate on 269 Statehood bill, vote in House on 279 320 INDEX. Statistics on wages 231-243 Statistics, gold and silver 299 Steel Industry born under revenue tariff 27 Steel trust analyzed 41 Steel, export prices of 42 Steel agreements, international 42 Steel rails, 40 per cent, cheaper abroad 49 Steel, Iron and, tariff on ' 116 Steel, Iron and, United States predominant m 133 Steel Trust and ship subsidies, Mr. Spight on 135 Steel Trust, New York Daily Press on 136 Steel rails, prices "fixed" 141 Steel Trust exposed 141 Steel bought cheaper abroad 143 Stock of gold and silver 300 Stone, Senator, on purchase of ships at excessive price 129 Stringency, financial, unuer Harrison administration Ill Subsidized merchant marine, Roosevelt on 193 Sugar Trust, Mr. Havemeyer on farming 88 Sugar Trust case 218 Sugar Trust case, negligjence of Attorney-General Miller lost 223 Supplies, Panama 126, 129 Supreme Court, divided on Sherman Anti-Trust Law 211 Supreme Court decisions ] 50 Swindle, tariff, Mr. A. B. Farquhar 59 T Taft, Mr., purchases foreign supplies 127 Tariff, the 5 Tariff Act 1789, first. 12-13 Tariffs, 1789-1906, comparison of 13-16 Tariff rates, average, 1789 1905 . . 17 Tariff changes, history of 17 Tariffs, protective, not to be perpetual 18 Tariff and trusts 19 Tariff and trusts. Democratic platforms on 19 Tariffs and trusts. Republican platform on 19 Tariff history 20 Tariff 1857 21 Tariff of 1846, Mr. Blaine on 21-22 Tariff, David A. Wells on 22-23 Tariff, Mr. Garfield on 23 Tariff, a war measure 24 Tariff low, what It did for the country 24 Tariff low, increases manufacturing. 25 Tariff high, killed shipbuilding 26 Tariff, revenue, promotes intellectual conditions 26 Tariff, revenue, promotes iron production 27 Tariff votes on 1789-1883 28-30 Tariff of 1846, more Republicans commend 31 Tariff of 1846, Senator Wilson on 32 Tariff, Civil War to be temporary 33 Tariff of 1857 commended 3«3 Tariff changes, Republican 35 INDEX. 321 Tariff law, the Dingley 36 Tariff rates, how increased 37 Tariff rates, 100 per cent, or more 37 Tariff fosters trusts 39 Tariff products disguised . . .* 41 Tariff profits, estimate of 43 Tariff a swindle on the farmer, Mr. A. B. Parquhar 59 Tariff, how it affects wages and incomes ' 64 Tariff, what Republicans say on ; 73 Tariff on machinery should be reduced, Mr. Lovering 76 Tariff, McKinley, disastrous effect of on wages 80-89 Tariff, McKinley, aids trusts 90-91 Tariff, McKinley, Senator Hale on ^ 91 Tariff, McKinley, a failure 92 Tariff, McKinley, and Sherman law failed 97 Tariff, McKinley, deficits under 109 Tariff, McKinley, quarterly deficits under 110 Tariff, McKinley, panic and disaster threatened under Ill Tariff on iron and steel 116 Tariff, high, ship subsidies and 131 Tariff tax, who pays It 159 Tariff tax. Senator Sherman on who pays the 159 Tariff tax, Andrew Jackson on who pays the 159 Tariff tax, Henry Clay on who pays the 159 Tariff tax, John Quincy Adams on who pays the 159 Tariff tax, Alexander Hamilton on who pays the 159 Tariff tax, Senator Edmunds on who pays the 159 Tariff tax, Mr, Payne on who pays the 160 Tariff tax, Mr. John H. Gear on who pays the 160 Tariff, the farmers and 165 Tariff, agriculture and, Hon. L. F. Livingston 168 Tariff, effect of on rural wealth 169 Tariff, articles bearing 100 per cent, or more 248 Tax on hides is a tax on shoes 163 Tax, income, planls 113 Tax, Income, revenue from 113 Taxes paid by farmers 170 Telephones, Americans to install Russian 143 Temporary, Civil War tariff to be 33 Territories, statehood for 7 Thimmel, Mr., testifies. . . T 124 Trade, balance of against us 101 Trans-Missouri Freight Association case 219 Traveling expenses of the President, vote in Senate on 278 Traveling expenses. President's, vote ia House on 288 Tools, American, cheaper in Germany. 60 Tools, price of raised 143 Treasury, condition of, 1889, 1893, 1897 102 Treasury Department, operations of 92-93 Treasury report, December 1, 1890 Ill Trouble, serious 101 Trusts, Federal Government contract with 4 Trusts and unlawful combinations 6 Trusts, tariff and 19 322 INDEX. Trusts, tariflP and, Democratic platform on. . 19 Trusts, tariflP and, Republican platform on. .... . . 19 Trusts and combinations, when started 34 Trusts and combines 39 Trusts fostered by the tariff ; 39 Trusts raise prices ..••.•.•/:•_- • »• •? ? ^ • • • ^^ Trusts unincorporated y. .y**>,^% ^ <#.-... ..; 40 Trust, a typical 41 Trust, Steel, analyzed . .^ 41 Trusts and monopolies, Government partnership with 48 Trust plundering, farmers and 70 Trusts aided by McKinley tariff 90-91 Trusts, Republicans vote to give control 127 Trust, Steel, exposed 141 Trusts, the. Senator Washburn on 162 Trusts and monopolies, party history on 200 Trusts, first House resolution to. Investigate 204 Trust, first Senate resolution to investigate 20G Trusts, prosecuting (?) the 224 Trusts, prosecution of, a record of masterly ineflSciency 226-228 Trusts, list of in the United States 293 Typical trust, a 41 U Ultimate free trade, Garfield 24 Unincorporated trusts 40 United States is predominant in iron and steel 133 United States official wage figures 240 Unlawful combinations and trusts 6 Usurpation, Executive , 5 Usurpations, ratification of executive, vote in House on 200 Value of imports and exports under Wilson Tariff Act 114 Value of imports and exports under McKinley Tariff Act 114 Venezuela and asphalt trust, Roosevelt 194 Vote on anti-trust act of 1890 213 Vote on tariffs, 1789-1883i 28-30 Vote in Senate on Pure Food Law 267 Vote in Senate on Ship Subsidy bill 268 Vote in Senate on Ship Subsidy bill (Foraker amendment) 269 Vote in Senate on Bailey amendment to Railroad Rate bill 270 Vote in Senate on Culberson amendment to Railroad Rate bill 271 Vote in Senate on La Follette's amendment to Raihoad Rate bill . . 272 Vote in Senate on Morgan's amendment to Railroad Rate bill 272 Vote in Senate on La Follette's amendment to Railroad Rate bill 274 Vote In Senate on La Follette's amendment to Railroad Rate bill . . . 275 Vote In Senate on Aldrich resolution, Panama supplies 276 Vote In Senate on Bacon's amendment, Panama supplies 277 Vote In Senate on President's traveling expenses 278 Vote in House on Statehood bill 279 Vote In House on Eight-Hour law 281 Vote in House on Contract Labor law 281 INDEX. 323 Vote In House on Chinese Exclusion Act 281 Vote in House on purcliase of material for Panama Canal 285 Vote in House on President's traveling expenses 288 Vote in House on ratification of executive usurpation 290 W Wages, labor and, increased 26 Wages and incomes, liow affected by tariff 64 Wages of railroad employees 65 Wages, prices and 67 Wages, disastrous effect of McKinley tariff on 80-89 Wages, statistics on 231-243 Wages, monthly, farm 231 Wages in North Carolina, 1904 231 Wages in Ohio, 1904 232 Wages in Pennsylvania, 1904 234 Wages in Alabama, 1904 • 239 Wage figures, official, United States 240 Wall Street News, extract from 125 Walsh Bank failure 172 Wannamaker, Mr., testifies 125 War tariff, President Lincoln on 34 War measure, tariff a 24 Washburn, Senator, on the trusts 162 Waterways 4 Watch Trust sells cheaper abroad 60 Wealth, Mr, Morrill on increase of 31 Wealth, population and, of United States 113 Wells, David A., on tariff \ 22-23 What we sell abroad 171 Whiskey Trust cases ^ 216 Wholesale prices of boots and shoes 164 Wholesale prices, 1897-1905 229-231 Why I am a Democrat 11 Wilmot, Mr. F. A., on monopolies and trusts 48 Wilson, Senator, on tariff of 1846 32 Wilson Tariff Act, values of imports under 114 Wilson Tariff Act, excess of exports under 114 Wilson Tariff Act, receipts from customs, etc., under 115 Windom, Mr., annual report, 1890 101 World's crops, our farmers share of 171 World's stock of money 300 Wright, Commissioner, on' American and foreign labor 158 Y Yea and Nay votes on party questions 267 DEMOCRATIC CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE CAMPAIGN OF J906 SENATE MEMBERS vANSAS — James H. Berry. i -iJiDA — J. P. Taliaferro. Idaho — Fred T. Dubois. Missouri — Wm. J. Ston*. VlRGINIA- MoxTAXA — Wm. A. Clarlc. Nevada — Francis G. Newlands. Texxessek — Edward W. Carmaek. Texas — Ciias, A. Culberson. -Thos. S. Martin. HOTTSE MEMBERS Alabama — John L. Burnett. AiiizoxA — Marcus A. Smith. Arkaxsas— Jolin S. Little. ,Califorxia — James F. English. •T'oLORADO — John F. Shafroth. f .XECTICUT — Henry F. Mooney. aware — Willard Saulwbury. i ' s I RicT OF Columbia — James L. X orris. I'i iHiDA — Frank Clark. (Jkmugia — J. M. Griggs. Illinois — Henry T. Rainey. Ixdiaxa — Wm. T. Zenor. IxDLvx Territory — C. H. Tulley. Iowa — Walter H. Dewey. Kaxsas — A. M. Jackson. Kextucky — B^rank A. Hopkins. Louisiana — Robt. F. Broussard. Maixe— Oliver Otis. Maryland — John Gill, Jr. Massachusetts — John A. Keliher. MicHiGAX — Frank H. Ilosford. Mississippi — E. J. Bowers. Missouri — James T. Lloyd. Nm-HASKA — <;. M. Hitchcock. Nevad.v — C. D. Van Duzer. New Jersey — A. L. McDermott. New Hampshire — Geo. L. Dan forth. New Mexico — O. N. Marron. New York — Wm. H. Ryan. North Carolixa — Wm. W. Kitchin. North Dakota — Willis A. Joy. Ohio — H. C. Garber. Oklaho.ma— Roy E. Stafford. Oreoox — John E. Lathrop. Pexxsylvaxia — M. C. L. Kline. Rhode Islaxd — D. L. D. Granger. South Carolixa — David E. Finley. South Dakota — C. Boyd Barrett Texxessee — John W. Gaines. Texas— Wm. R. Smith. Utah — Henry W. King Vermoxt — Morris F. Atkins ViRoixiA — Robt. G. Southall. Washixgtox — Bo Sweeney. West Virgixia — Thos. B. Davis Wiscoxsix — Chas. H. Weisse. Wyomixg — J. E. Osborne CAMPAIGN COM31ITTEE E. ,T. Bowers, Chairman. F. G. Newlands Jas. T. Lloyd. W. II. Ryan. Henry T. Rainey. I). E. FlXLEY. Chas. H. Weisse. Johx a. Keliheu. Frank Clark. Fred T. Dubois. W. R. Smith. u ^ tn f ^ 2 O ^p Ik ^ o 9^ ^^ m m o 11 (0 n ^- o Oh H M N S ^ ^ o o ^ m h-r' % C3 ^ Of 14 DAY USE RETURN TO DESK FROM WHICH BORROWED LOAN DEPT. RENEWALS ONLY— TEL. NO. 642-3405 This book is due on the last date stamped below, or on the date to which renewed. Renewed books are subject to immediate recall. JUL 5 19690* REC'D LD J JL2 '69 -10 PM RECD LD ^ '^ 2 D /,i-8PM9 8 (J60578101476— A-32 ^'^''^"'^^^J^^^^^^'^^ 5)£awc-c;t- oXlC