TARIFF REVISION 467 



That these changes which I have mentioned, and others of a like 

 character, would bring great relief to the consumers of the country, 

 the whole people, I think, can not be doubted by any one who does not 

 ignore the ordinary laws of trade. If the ways and means committee, 

 or congress believes that some or all of the relief intended for consumers 

 would be absorbed by trusts and combinations, by the thwarting of 

 the laws of trade, these law-makers should be reminded that this is a 

 poor excuse for their failure to remove burdensome and unjust taxes, 

 that their proper function is to find a remedy for acts in restraint of 

 trade, not to make fear of these wrongful acts the pretext for continu- 

 ing oppressive burdens on the people. 



If duties were reduced in strict accordance with the test relating 

 to cost of production, using cost figures that now obtain, it would 

 certainly be found that in the near future further reductions could be 

 made in accordance with the same rule. This is so on account of the 

 extent to which present costs in almost every industry in this country 

 are increased by the tariff duties themselves, making materials and 

 labor more expensive than they would otherwise be. Thus reductions 

 in one industry will make reductions possible in other industries, until 

 finally we may get down off from the unnatural level of prices caused 

 by the extraordinary tariff rates which we have had for several decades. 

 I believe that when we get down to natural conditions, we shall find 

 that there are few industries that any longer need protection from the 

 standpoint of actual inability to compete with foreign producers in 

 this market. 



I have spoken of results that might follow honest application of 

 the test relating to comparative costs of production; but I regard this 

 test as at best capable of only a very rough and imperfect application. 

 Costs vary so much for different times and places, and the difficulty 

 of getting real facts is so great, that this test, probably the best that 

 can be offered in theory for "honest" protection, is wholly unsatis- 

 factory to consumers and to the general public interest. This fact, 

 with many others, leads me to reject entirely the system of protection, 

 as a scheme which is incapable of honest application. Even if we 

 should grant the essential economic arguments of the protectionist, 

 the irresistible tendency of the system toward corruption of govern- 

 ment, toward discriminating and excessive duties and monopoly, 

 toward the encouragement of inefficient industry, would condemn it as 

 one of the greatest forces for evil existing in our present civilization. 



