The state rights democrat. [volume] (Albany, Linn County, Oregon) 1865-1900, 1883-06-08
aaLkr

s0A%A@A4A 8NAA@AA
lashing Democratic editors for praying |
for revival Of manufacturing interests |
in Oregon and at the same time praying |
with equal zeal for revision OF the
tariff. This Republican editor in a
bombastic way, fand by-the.way, it is
the only way he has, argues that the
duty imposed upon foreign manufact-
ured article win keep npsthe price OF
the article here ut home and thus
enable and justify cur home capitalists
in establishing and maintaining estab-
lishments to manufacture such articles
here. Now, this same editor, not
mo- than two months since, labored in
q bombastic way, (for that is the only
way he has, through a column article
to prove to consumers that tariff did
not cause the price of.sn article to 90
up, but in most cases caused the price
to 60 down. He quoted from Hamil-
ton, Clay. Webster and the Salem
Statesman to prove this proposition.
Aad il was a. well proven as high
protectionists ever prove any tariff
proposition. The truth Is that for the
last twenty years We have had high
protective tariff, and yet it has not
induced the Building of manufacturing
mills here. IL this gentleman knows
anything abont the tariff question at
all, he viii see the very awkward and
untenable position which be has placed
himself in.
The people have not forgotten that
under high protective tariff on wool,
the price, few years since, went up to
fifty cents per pound, aud the following
year under the same tariff duty, the
price went down to twenty cents per
pouod. VIII protection propagandists
explain this upon the theory Of "pro.
lection - We have no hesitation in
saying it can not be done. Il can only
be explained upon the ever prevailing
principle of supply and demand. If
the supply of an article ls limited aud
the demand is great, the price will run
high, and if the supply is unlimited and
the demand is small, then the price of
that article will be log. and either one
of these economic conditions is as likely
to arise under highly protective. re-
strictive, or prohibitive laws ss under
q tariff Law for revenue.
AS to free trade, absolute, there are
probably not dozen respectable news
papers in the land which favor it.
The great msjOtity Of Democratic
journals faver tariff for resenns With
incidental protection, while the great
majority of Republican papers are in
favor of a high proiestive tariff with
revenue as an ineiden.- But many Of
the ablest Republican papers in the
land are elamoring for q tariff for rese-
nue. Just as the Democratic papers are
doing.
Our bombastic editor therefore should
be castigating such able Republican
Journals as the New York Times, the
Chicago Tribune, Springfield R<patbliean,
Oregoniaa, each of which represents the
brains Of its party in its locality.
THIS sade bomaastic editor might
with equal proprieiy he making fierce,
unrelenting war upon the last eongress,
which was Republican in both branch
es, FOR passing q tariff Law that was
said. at the time, TO reduce the revenue
derived from duties upon imports at
least seventy-fiye million dollars. It
is silly at this late day to say that q
protective tariff furnishes rsnumerative
wages for workingmen. Exps-ience
shows that under such laws az from
1868 to 1875 workingmen received
good wages, bnt under the same laws
in 1877 these same workingmen were
thrown out OF fmploYment because
their employers reduced their wages
below living rates.
Why SO many strikes al over the
country if wages are goodl A noticia.
hle feature Of these strikes is taat they
occur oftenest among men who are
engaged in manufacturing articles that
are r.ost highly protecteda Some more
nuts to crack in due time.