The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1884-08-21

of the present DISCOURSE but l shall endeavor to
express those opinions in decent manner. No
mud for me.
1t is not likely that if had not happened to
see New England and the East more than
twenty years ago, and, if / had not happened to
see those countries again about two years ago,
that would be here to speak to you tonight.
Twenty years ago / saw the manufactures of
the East in what might be called their glory.
No human being on earth, no matter how large
his imagination might be, could conceive the
mighty change that was made within those
twenty years in the manufacturing interests of
the East; where | had seen shanties twenty
years ago, saw palaces two years ago; where
few dozens or at mosta few hundreds were en-
ployed twenty years ago, there are thousands,
yes, tens OF thousands now When | saw all
this, when saw shanties turned into palaces,
not palaces for kings but palaces for workers,
and when considered the cause of this mighty
advance In wealth and prosperity, and
found out that it was caused by the enactment
of laws which protected American labor from for
eign competition, vowed that if ever any man
or any body of men-if any party, whether
Democratic or Republican, should dare to make
an attempt to ruin the industries of my adopted
country by passing laws which would either
abolish or tighten the duties on foreign manu-
featured goods of any kind which could be man
ufactured and are manufactured in America
that would use every endeavor, make every
sacrifice, and dare every danger in order to de-
feat such laws. Such an attempt has been made,
and such an attempt may be made again, and
consequently am here tonight to raise up my
humble voice against the men who, for party
ends, would ally themselves with an outside
enemy, and would destroy thep prosperity Of their
country.
Let us now glance cursorily at England and
try and find out what has made her a great man
ufacturing country, and why she wishes Ameri-
ca and every other country to adopt free trade
Here let me say, once for all, while openly pro-
Tossing to be an Irish Nationalist bear no i'll
will to Englishmen or Scotchmen individually.
Some of the best friends / have ever had were
Englishmen l only hate the government and
the political ideas which have so long made Eng
land so unpopular not only in Ireland, but in
almost every other country on the globe. 1t was
Englands inSular position that first gave her the
start as a manufacturing nation. During the
SIXTEENTH seventeenth and eighteenth centuries
the continent of Europe was devastated by al
most continual wars. Every French, German
and italian artisan and trader who could by any
means leave his native country and who desired
to make money wentto England to escape the
everlasting devastation of war 1t has been
stated that fully one-half the branches of indus
try for which England has become so celebrated
were founded by foreign refugees. England pos
sesses more mineral wealth than perhaps any
other country in the world of an equal area. All
these advantages tended to increase her wealth
and to give her a start in manufactures which
placed her in q position almost to defy compet
ton. Some twenty or more years ago she
adopted the principles of free trade, and with
ticles of foreign nations free Of duty and be-
came the apostle of free trade, She fondly
hoped that her example would so work on other
nations that they would all follow suit, and that
free trade would become universal; but she has
so far been entirely disappointed; not one of the
European nations adopted 1t, and she has had the
misfortune and humiliation of seeing one of her
greatest and supposed most loyal dependencies,
namely, Canada passing law only three years
ago by which the imports on English and
foreign manufactured articles were raised by
nearly twenty-five per cent all around. But
one of the greatest factors in inducing England
to advocate free trade was her possession of
the enormous empire of India. Few Americans
realize the greatness of that country, with its
population of 250, 900, 900. These people have
been reduced to such extreme poverty by the
English rule that the greater part of this incon-
ceivably enormous number of human beings are
in state Of absolute pauperism. England may
not have Intentionally made the Indians nation
of paupers but by her freetrade laws, her
enormous wealth and and manufacturing skill she
completely destroyed the handmade articles Of
India, and the consequences are that the entire
people of India are now almost dependent on
English-made goods their own poorer and less
skilled citizens having been obliged to give way
before the men who used steam instead of
hand power I do not want to make any
statement here tonight that cannot be
proved to be correct, and my authority for
most of the facts about India is Mr.. Keay, the
author of two articles that appeared in the great
English magazine, the SNlneUeenGn century"
entitled the sSpoliation of India Mr.. Keay
does not appear to be protectionist and, posi-
bly, without intending to do So he shows plainly
that it was free trade alone that reduced the
Indians to such inconceivable poverty. To give
an idea Of what this poverty Is, will cite few
facts from Mr.. Keay The amount required to
run the Indian government is about seventy
millions Of pounds annually; but such is the
state of inconceivable poverty to which the
nation is reduced that these 250, 900, 900 of peo
ara Ot al la In
and it is only by levying an enormous tax on
salt-a prime necessity for men who live almost
entirely on rice-that the Indian government is
enabled to collect enough money to run the
government. Salt in India is almost as dear
as -four in America. for nearly thirty millions
of pounds sterling are raised by the tax
on that article. Watching illicit salt manufac
tories gives the English officials in India almost as
much trouble as our government has in watch
ing the moonshiners in the South. The very sea
coasts of India are guarded lest some poor devil
of native should steal the water Of the ocean to
boil his rice in. Mr.. Keay relates and proves the
following astounding incident; a thing so mon
strous and so horrible that | swear it should
make Mr.. Cleveland's hair stand on end to think
of the sort of nation with which he has formed
an offensive and defensive alliance. A poor In
dian peasant living on the sea coast, stole down
to it and contrived, by carrying the salt water
into hole, and letting it evaporate, to man
ufactlre little salt, as he was too poor to buy
any, for his family were starving. The coast
guard caught him with a few pounds OF salt and
sand slowed away in the cloth that covered his
loins He was condemned to receive twenty
lashes and three months imprisonment for
having stolen the waters OF the sea. When
ever before was there uttered or put
on paper such a proof Of the evils of free
trader When the Indian made his own wearing
materials and anything else that his half civil
lied state required, no matter by what, rude or
simple operation he made them he was compar
atively well of. It was not English arms but
English laws that made him criminal for
stealing the sea water and a culprit without
having committed crime.
Let us now look at ireland. Since the union act
was passed, in 1900 Ireland has had only one
branch of manufactures to depend on, namely,
linen. It can be proved by the most irrefutabe
authorities that during the eighteen years in
which Ireland enjoyed legislative independence