Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1884-08-07
WORTH READING.

1884:
"As soon as our fore fathers consel-
idated the States under national
authority, in the first Congress
assembled, they laid duties "for the
encouragement and protection of manu-
features" The laws of 1889, 1916,
1924, and 1923 were all Protective in
their character and adopted in part by
the same men and under the influence
of the authors of the Constitution
x The revenue became too great
for the wants of the Government, and
the sliding scale of 1888 was adopted
as an experiment, under the belief that
the revenue could be reduced without
the destruction of the industries which
had grown up under the uniform fos-
tering care of Congress. The revenues
were reduced far beyond the wishes Of
the authors Of the scheme, and ruin of
our domestic industry and of the pub
lie credit followed as its legitimate
result, and one of the greatest and
most distressing panics the country has
ever known became reality in 1887.
The experience led logically to the
restoration of higher and Protective
tariff in 1912, under the influence of
which industries revived, prosperity
returned, and the Treasury was again
amply supplied. But the economic
views of the opponents of Protection
again prevailed, and again the traiff
was assailed by successive Congresses,
beginning in 1916. Then again, in
1857, came bankruptcy of manufac-
lures, of trade, and of the Federal
Treasury. Once more the policy of
Protection came to the front, in 1861,
and from that time on this policy has
been perpetuated in the legislation of
the country. It has now been con-
tinually tested for period of twenty
two years. [ must decline to
ascertain from books written in the
past whether my country can be pros
porous under one system or the other.
My appeal for information on that
subject is to history, and not to the
theoretical writings Of philosophers.
I look upon the condition of the United
States as [ found it under the beams
of the rising sun this morning.
Churches, school houses, dwellings in
town and country, savings in bank,
the public treasury, mills, factories,
farms, barns storehouses, railroads,
mines, herds, focks, clothing Of the
people, popular contsntment, love of
country,-I look at all this, and ask
myself, els all this evidence Of suffer
ing under long continued system of
robbery and plumber of the people?' -
x x When appeal to the facts of
history find that, instead of retarding
immigration and embarrassing the
growth of population, there came from
the Free Trade country whose policy
you ask us to follow only $4,000 in
1860; after our system of ssrobbery
and injustice" was adopted, twice the
number, or 1000, came in 1870
from the same country, and 164 900 in
1880; and while there was under Free
Trade in 1860 total immigration of
only $50, it rose in 1870 to $780,
900, and in 1880 to $4,000. Were
all these immigrants incapa BILE of
Judging for themselves whether there
was mere profit to the laboring classes
in Free-Trade country OF in a Pro-
tective country? Did they not know
whether, on the whole, the comforts
of life and means of gain were greater
in the country which they left or in
the country to which they came?
Shall go to the writings of the Free
Trade economists to find this fact, or
am [ justified in Tearing it from the
men who had experienced both the
blessings and the wrongs under both
systems? When each 100000 of
immigrants wrote back to persuade
another 100, 900 to COME, did they do
it blindly and wickedly, or did they
do it because of the greater blessings,
the superior comforts, the better
chances of life which they have enjoy
ed? * X x x
But what is the condition of agricul-
ture under Free-Trade in England,
where the farmers instead of being
"robbed' by Protection have the
blessings of Free-Trade Let the
great Fres-Trade organ of England,
the London Times tell the story in its
issue of April 10, 1882. x x x
1t declares that England now has about
$40, 100000 less value of live stock,
and further loss of s2O,OO0,0OO in
;, grain crops, irrespective of the falling
off in yield per acre planted. That
paper says sadly, in summing up: "We
present the above statements illustrat-
ing the decline in agricultural wealth