Lexington weekly intelligencer. (Lexington, Mo.) 1871-1887, 1881-02-19
PROTECTION.

Lucy CARTER.
PROTECTION. !,
DR.. d. r. M'Anslly, editor of the
it. Louis Christian Advocate, is one t
# the clearest-headed writer's i'll the e
tate. No one can doubt his sincerity,
md possessing clear, analytic mind q
le discards all lsophistry for sound
and very rarely fails to
arrive at correct conclusions. HE
1as been writing some articles ON I
;he tariff recently which are nnan-
We bave,t taken pleasure IN
thems : The following
article appeared in the last issue OF
his valuable paper: .t II
"In congress there was pnusaal
last week. What was done
will be noticed in brief presently. +
Let the attention Of the public be
first called TO W hat was not done. AS
yet the tariff question has. received
very little attention, nor is it likely
it will, during the present session.
The whole matter will most likely be
turned over to the next congress, aud
in that, parties are SO near equally
divided, that both will be afraid to
act. If some congressman stood as 7
much in awe of their Maker as they |
do OF their party,it would bS much
better for be til themselves aud their |
country, To tariff for revenue, to
carry on an economically administer.
ed government, no one at present 4
objects, although among the wfsest
tpotniCaIaeeon0mists there is wide
difference Of Jopinieu as to whether
tariff. for revenue only or q direct
tax would be more conducive to the
|public welfare but let it be admit
ted tbataat revenue tariff is proper,
then let it be, Remembered that such
y tariff as that and . tariff tor pro-
lection are quite different things.
The clamor Of the day is for q pre-
tectiye tariff on almost all Kinds OF
manufactures, under which the con-
| sumner is compelled to pay from 20 to
60 per cent more for what he buys
than would otherwise be the case.
Almost every leading branch of man
ufacture In the country. is to q greater
OF less extent protected by tariff
flaws, while the poor farmer has to
Fpay for all. 1t works this way ::
Dick, we will say, makes shoes and
aud is protected by tariff of so per
cent. ad valoram. Tom makes hats
and is protected by like tariff.
That is to say, tariff Of SO per cent.
higher than they otherwise could do,
or at 50 per cent. above the cost OF
production. Dick buys TOMS hats and
paws him the so per cent. advance,
aud Tom buys Dicks shoes aud pays
him the SO per cent. So these two
come out even, but the farmer whose
products are not protected at all buys
. of both aud pays to each just 80 per
cent. more than he would do were
there no protective tariff. This is
the principle and can be justly appli'
+ ed to every class of protected Iaans'
features. 1t illustrates the old story
of the king, the bishop and the
farmer dining together. When the
time for the toasts came the king
< gave, II rule for all;" the Bishop
Y Il pray for all ;" "and l." said th'
farmer, spay for ALL" So in thi
}. case the farmer has to pay tor all
I while he himself goes unprotected
d If we recollect Alright, the census o
!, 1870 gave the number of agricultur
lists in this country at about elk mil
8 lions. Perhaps at the present the.
q will number seven millions. Let u
II take that as standard and suppos
these seven millions oil agriculturist
exrend annually for wooden, silk an
cotton goods, tor iron work an
le farming implements, earthenwa ar
"a aud all those things needed for house
>, keeping aud to carry on farm, q
average of two hundred dollars eact
g. which is not All Over-estimate, fo
le while some families do not spen
a fifty dollars a year for these thing
others spend several hundred-an
~ two hundred. dollars to each famil
re is not high average = then tt
ID whole number would expend ann
ne ally 81, 100000, 600. But these art
= cles are protected by tariff avera,
-, ling, we will say, 40 per cent
" which rate each purchaser would ps
il $40 for what would cost him bl
q. 800 were there no tariff; aud tai
n, of the 40 per cent. tariff and Il
farmers Of the country would sa'
OF $500 ,0OO, 600 every year; and this
si- 1.-the sum which this one class OF Il
ne community has to pay for the bene
p, of the manufacturing class. Is til
III the fair thing? Is it just? rh
ey paper is perfectly aware of the pie
re- which are being urged in behalf
nd tariff laws, and also aware of t
>; futility of such pleas. No pleas CT
stand against the logic Of stubbo
so facts-facts that eau be easily unde
he stood and duly appreciated. Wh
ME return does the farmer receive f
~. the extra amount he has to pay +
lily products Let the facts of past e
icb perieuce testify.
-, But why should this paper discu
sn this matter? For no reason in
by world other than that it is interest
!. in whatever interests the VIII
psople-the opponent of all uuJt
or unfair proceedings. aud especia
os- the opponent of all class Legislation
h,e legislation for the benefit of one eli
of citizens to the detriment OF
other class and while 1t lives mnt
the the present management it will i
OF for all, aud not for few to the
her clusion Of others. 1t will do wha
can for the interests of manufactur
'"s and merchants as cheerfuliy as
the the interests of the farmer, and
nts try to promote the welfare OF all.
A political issue-A campaign q
ument.
lich
= The best OF us are apt to be me'
mouthed about three times day.
he'd
Dgs. Quite naturally fish is on
|;no weigh when he takes his scales
him.
,cu- "What makes the sea salt 2" said
,vo teacher.and Young America shou
d"' "The Goldfish that are i'll it,
rm-
and A Chicago man mistook sulph
iece acit for whisky. He thought IT.
it,, was pretty cold tor Chicago DIR
Inc The Kansas newspapers declare
shed physician of La Cygne, i'll
the state, narrowly escaped lynchlng
tho cause he invented q compound
would instantly sober q drum
'ress man. Public sentiment was aga
was any thing that tended to cause u W
pink Of liquor.