The Eaton Democrat. (Eaton, Ohio) 1875-1903, 1883-08-02
EATON. OHIO THURSDAY. AUGUST 2, Wi
ther question involved in this campaign-l

other question involved in this campaign--I
refer to the Scott law question. ] sey it Is the
only other question because, with respect to
5 bo
derstand it."
Arthur, in his % last Il message, e recommended to
Congress Substantial reduction" of the duty
ON wool; and the Tariff Commission recon-
N Woe1 and %as &spabieas
in both hbranches-adopted policy of 9 SUBJ
stantial reduction" of the duty on wool; and,
Of the duties on wooden goods, giving manu-
farmer. wen say tSs hsppbliean news.
did, not do It: the Democrats helped Il i
wSmsn wSaa nas ct. hys 5ss s apnis IND M I
tho sed years as' aso Mss RSsea pitfa @ M
epse eSe;. And An What are they going to do do
wool tariff at the first opportunity, That's
what they're going to do by their platform.
shalt BUT Il fs m the
year 1901, If could be around in Piqua and
hear the successors of Hoadly and Foraker
people, I would find-if the Republican party
would live that long, as it won't-I would find it
still waiting for the opportunity. The Presi-
dent recommended the reduction; the Tariff
Commission recommended it; the Republican
Senate adopted it; the Republican House
adopted It; but still they say that .on the first
When win that be? When they have got a
now: will it come when they have got d Re,
publican Senate? They have got ono now.
When they have got a Republican House?
They have got one now: st Like ~ tIopsy ad said,
The opportunity has got to grow" Now,
amt this pretty part? y4
!, And Judge Foraker says there is no issue
s ana ts
They had the Legislature last Winter, .Thsy
had bill; They had all the chances to adopt
tract Convict labor in Competition With free
labor in Ohio. They could have done it, and
they did not; and now they're "hell bent.
hn was ss0G never Sa Whs was m rased
Democrat; but recollect that the old men
went
Hell bent for Governor Kent,
And Tippeeanoe for Governor too!
q. loss. TO the Ohio gool-grower of about six
cents per pound, il his sale was made at the
point of shipment, and from four to six cents
it there and carried it away ut his own ex.
pense. would like Brother Foraker to tell
HE who loses that money! Does not the Ohio
loses the money which is the result of q reduc-
ton In the tariff, who pays the money which is
the result of an increase ON the tariff but the
that is as plain as that two and two rhake four
las the fact that the consumer pays the duty
IN rare cases when eS NOT
merchant forced to sell goods down below cost
tt order to get rid of them. When Govern
eha this neeessy fe down. Perry much be-
low what it was before. Now, on property
on which we also raise or create similar prop;
erty on goods manufactured in the United
States as well as in Europe, tariff has a -dou-
BILE operation. 1t raises the price of the
domestic goods, and it charges a tax on the
imported goods; and by raising the price Of
foreign goods to the extent of the tax which
is thus paid by the consumer. it compels, OF
! allows rather, the domestic vs1anufecturer to
raise l. price, and thus af1t,<': him what is
called protection, and the esssuce OF protec
tion, the key to protection, is ;;;at the con.
sumner pays the tax on an equal amount TO
every domestic manufacturer whose goods are
sold in the country Now, there amt any
more doubt about that than thdt l am stand
ing here. Yet Judge Foraker says ''the claim
is equally untenable that the tax is a tax or
the consumer" Then he goes on to what
may say is the most remarkable passage in
this speech, taken s.1 in connection with & the
| Foraker, that the carriage manufacture
can sell his goods in the foreign market:
in competition with English goods?
| That is pretty easy to answer. He can sci
| his goods abroad because he can make hi.
| goods cheaper than they can abroad, includ
| ing the price of transportation and insurance
| Let me read his answer: ut is because there
| are half dozen such establishments in tha
city, and hundreds of them in the country; al
| of them in competition with each other
| How does that answer the question? Doe
| the competition between Cincinnati manufac
| turers make goods cheaper in Japan, Chins
| or elsewhere abroad? If he can get his labo
cheaper, if he can get his raw material cheap
er, then undoubtedly he can sell his good
| cheaper. But il his labor is made dearer, q
| Judge Foraker claims it is by protectiv,
| tariff, and if his raw material is made dearer
| as undoubtedly it is by a protective tariff
| then his goods taken abroad enter into compe
| tition with English goods at a disadvantag'
beyond all question. 3
We believe in adjusting the tariff so as t,
| encourage productive industries, and SO ar
| ranging it that the burdens will not be un
equal; encouraging productive industries AM
| affording just compensation to labor. Ant
| finally, but so as not to create or foster mo
nopoly.''
Now, does Mr.. Foraker believe in that? Doe
| he believe in creating or fostering monopolies
| If he does believe in monopolies, then is tn
| Democratic State platform a '.jargon" to him
| If he believes in encouraging unproductiv
| industries, this is '.jargon'' to him. If h
| believes in a wasteful Government.and not Al
economical Government, this is "jargon" +
him. But if he believes in economy, in fru
gality, in industry, in equality of burdens an
if he hates monopoly, it is no '.jargon," but
firm and sensible and just doctrine, wisel
| conceived and well expressed.