The comet. (Johnson City, Tenn.) 1884-1916, 1884-05-10
LOW TARIFF.


EDITORS OF THE COMET :-"Protec-
ton" admits that he wonld bring the
English paupers to this country and
let them compete with the working
men here, Where then is the good |
sense in objecting to these same pau
pers competing with us when three
thousand miles away? Some of our
manufacturing enterprises are already
standing idle on account Of over pro-
duetiun and an over stocked market.
Without II foreign market, with our
manufacturing facilities increased by
the influx OF what he terms English
pauper labor, with the home market
overstocked and the surplus Of manu-
featured goods augmonting daily, what
could he expected but a ruinous reduc-
ton in the wages OF lahorerS, suspen-
sion8 OF factories, panics and riots
This would be the result if "Protec
TONS idea Was carried out, and he
partially admits the TACT by saying
that the army Of lnborela would glut
the market and cheaper manufactured
goods, OF course if The price of man
ufactured articles he reduced, tue
manufacturer, who cannot survive
without National aid and National
protection, could not continue to pay
the same wages as when his goods sold
higher, and the result must ncccssa-
T rily be reduction of wages in proper
, ton to the reduction in the price Of
the goods manufactured.
PROTECTION" would have our coun-
r try protected from all foreign imports
: and would have q home market for
? the products of our soil. He would
: not allow anything to come in or
1 permit anything to go out. He
r would build Chinese wall around
a the United States and set an embargo
/, on the commerce of the world. In
: the language of Frank Hurd, "God
i speed the day when the diviner thought
: Of mans brotherhood with man shall
) supercede the degrading and belittling
It one of national isolation and foreign
r exclusion"
L Protection" is very much mistaken
" when he says want the farmer pro
Is tracted. / am not in favor of the Gov
6 eminent giving ASSURANCE to bust
d ness or any enterprise, dut if the man
ufacturer is to be protected the farmer
re ought to be also. We deny the righ
a Of the Government to build up on
N man at the expense of another.
ee He changes his opinion about on
y, people growing poorer and poorer CIV
le cry year and now argues that we hay,
~ had an era of protection and prosper
ity for twenty years. He thinks tn
II fear of English money corrupting on
S? national Legislature has prevented TIL
or erection of hundreds of manufactures
or feel very little like discussing
I'd question with a man who makes state
It's ments like that without the slightes
sh foundation or excuse. 1t needs II
no further argument to show. its fallac
he than to say the corrupt party that ha
lis controlled Congress for twenty year;
ny would have long since yielded to s
ly potent an influence. He says fire
le- trade has brought poverty, fnancis
III ruin upon tho country in times pas
h and that it is 60 he Stunned MS pest
la lence. When in the history of on
Ms country have we had free trade
St America has always had protection
Ell The history OF England will show til;
/ instead Of being periods of proSperit.
he the periods of protection have bee
es- the opposite. In 1914 the manufat
turing enterprises of that countr
ed were in state of stagnation, brougl
int about by system Of protection. The
ess were unable to dispose Of their surpll
he abroad. The larger establishment
IN were closed. The poor houses wei
b. full and thousands were turned out
rt- starve. Then it was the agitation i
he free trade began, and in 1916 they su
eat eeeded and the most objectionable fe
Use lures Of protection were repeale
nd What wasthe result to English man
iacturers? The increase in businc