, 1875-03-13

| To tha Editor Of The CHICAGO Tribune:
In tho iFBuo OF the Inter- OCEAN Of March Q
1875, 1ul Al. articla On linseod and iinsoed oil
It not only surprises, but amuaea me, to flps
With Hhat blisrful ignorance tho author treat.
tho question OF protection aud protective tn
lit. lilo aays that j" THIS country has been beuo
Atel by tho tariff Oh linsool OIL" antl ahows, {o
cauae, that tho import is now less thnn former.
", aud then wIads up By saying
.'Wo maintain that frco trade would
10 emphatically and particularly their {tLo az.
ricultursl clasaes) ruiu." In order that you will
tho bottor understand me, Mr. Editor, must
tell you that l was not always farmer; but
lsavo spont great PARTON Of my lifo as Al srts-
san, and for some tin,o have been In the amploy
q Amcncan manufacturers. lived as artisans
uIa tAout and probably RI thoy 1.-Two now,-tle-
nendout, and from sucll conditions Of lifn de.
rived my opinions. Ny thoughts wore gov
eIuod by my knowledge, aud that knowl-
cdgo Taa cdncatcd to know my own III.
Our employers found no dlflleults il educating
ua to balicye that protective tariff would shut
OF forcagn manufacturers from our masktta,
aud tl.at, whom they had the market Rl to thoul-
OF tlelr Maro, and pay ns moro per day tor our
labor. That was true logic to nle. and I usyer
stopped to thluk that any tutcsfcrcnce with tsos
oon.tncrco would hurt my. .nolghbor who was
t44+hiA- AilAA A]VuAlHE &HQktlpl klu4 Vi NAI4 on
which tlero was no protective tarin.
But whon turned 10 bo fassner, and looked
rpnu MY fotnlos career, mist confcss that I
!9scoso,od the great error Of NY lilo,
nav that tlore was IN inevitable law of CON.
morcs not governed by auy. QUO man or body Of
lnou,. and that whcnescr tue Inv Was noullcl
with by legislation It was to tho dets;neu, OF tho
Msny, many and ospecislly injnFtous to the farmer.
motto. nnl ntson the edito. OF tho Inter f]rx1,n
exchanges tho pan for tho plow lie viii Also
p,sach . dlGorcut doctrine than Protection.
THO Inter- Ocean further Btates thkt HWs are
Syot del!ofao'y denontout upon the British East
1nlles for seed," anu sars that tLe American
Jldcscfd s much less oiI.yioldlng than Eaxt lnIis
yasetos, and thon Btatob;
Dy next u!nter ws expect to fully traYe eyer tho
gson'a a. to 70 aGls 70 e!!er our seacss draft Of
conclusive MefhoFa! TO C0nxfess etnl,oaying vcIls-
ls Of '!ntEes tuluired. Then our faftuers muss DO
tbclE PR o. oS work, By Obtaining signatures,
ths sgura meuoFals 10 their Aspsessuta-
isYes sId senators at Washiu2ton Such an array u
tA4t Will accomplish the intended result.
Nor. III. Editor, what do YOU understand by
tsio lntenaed fesu[t2 Should tho7e b. protect
i've taElH Oh tho import Of i.ax-soed? Should
tno american manufacturer pay Z higher price
fos t1e a-yiadng (as tbs Inter- 0c<aa has it}
Tor t!1e, morc-yielsli,g british East il
aa var1oties7 THO American manufacturer |
ha1 httherto boen tho uattl Of tho natson,
Ia ana' H., u congtes. should put az artificial psce
-. s -" @'@AoAR!t "NuI4 H0k IJ1k IN AuoHs tH6 !
,a'1o ~ for a guardian to knock down tile minor |
10 haI boon appointed to feed aud ctoths uutsl It
ar saSe caro- of itsolf7 II this "i"t.,utert re-
tuA does not mean to protoot tho farmers, by |
rassing = tax on tho import Ut tlax.Rosl. then
faht 10 KNOW - = rat1unal farmer mysplf. how
nc !, ,s .sr'snsara! classe. Of tue country shall or
'housd TO benefited? Feshsps III this why's
y raising, Ri import ta1 GU maiiu.
1sturea aaxon waso. aul thus maks
~ faF1lasa pay III extra artificial tariff price for
10 baaa aud coarso hemp goods, tAkt Va must
ieeessYstly have aud uss Would not that 30
'Eotcction Tor tho latcr-0 Ocean to slosify IN 1Ye
arn:1a would n.a,plr cali It dsjsction.'' Dut
hen tho l'''tf- oceaa would say thoss protected
manufacturer. y bc!ng abio to ret u h.gler p,lcs
Of thels a!tlse. BY tnasns Of ta tarlf!. they
U turn would 10 a6is to pay creator prico Tor
oar grain. and tho country would ho leaeassd.
Why have 70 not a tariG on corn7 Why have
a:iR on ryo7
suppose thero was tariff On tho manufacture
7 *heat.-l moab IN liup0rt-tax, would |
hat teosilt the country? What would ,ls
I.IeF- 0ceda say about such thinH2 Would not
hAt y meat ceitainly bensht tie agricultural
{ nas, what iu The way OF protection will beus-
t ehs 9a.mAFt Ths fAE,asf futnishaA 10 luxptl.