The Evening critic., 1884-09-23

save the foreign market TO tho farmerp
would first break down this high protective
tarln and reduce II to tarin for revenue
only break down our walls 50 you can go
abroad with your wheat and sell IL to all the
countries OF the world. Then, by making ro-
ciprocity treaties with Canada, and Mexico,
and South America, and Germany, and France,
the farmers OF this country can have market
for their grain; by this policy you will have
three or four hundred millions OF people TAX
ing your grain who don't buy a bushel OF u
to'dayi And unless this policy be adopted, or
something OF this sort be brought around, you
will BIO selling your wheat I'm less than year
at less than 90 cents bushel, as predicted
year ago.
When the nations referred to want our
wheat they want It bad, and they will buy
IL Of us, prorided they cannot buy IL cheaper
Of somebody else. But some Of the coun-
tries he refers to scarcely buy a bushel Of us
in year 1t may as well be understood by
tho American people that the nations of Eu-
rope will not buy single pound of bread
stufis from us If they can secure what thoy
want somewhere else.
But suppose our manufactures wero
broken down and they bought all our sur
plus wheat, what is to be demo with tho
hundreds of millions of dollars worth of
other American produce that is now con-
sumed In our homo market? Who Is to
consume all that, and pay our farmers for
itP Who is to pay for tho butter, eggs,
cheese, fruits, hay, oats corn, &C., now used
up in our manufacturing centres? The
mouths that consume all these products now
will then have been deported to the manu-
featuring centres of Europe or the own
ers of them will have to engage in raising
such products themselves, thus increasing
the competition against our farmers and
consequently lowering the prices aud cur
failing the income of our farmers to ruin
Gus extent.
Many Of our products will not bear trans
portation over the seas. What is to be done
with them2 Suffer them to rot, or cease pro-
ucing them? Which will be for tho best? And,
If our manufacturers are to close up, what
is to be done with the products of our
mines, our forges, our foundries and our
rolling mills? For If they are to stop,
what will become Of our markets for coal,
iron, lead, ETC., ETC.? And what is to be-
come Of the multitudes of men now en-
gagged on our transportation lines, convey
ing these products from one section of the
country to the other-from the producer to
the consumer-and from the manufacturer
to the consumer back again What are
all these men to do, and what are their
families to do?
These are the questions that arc up for
discussion now ; not whether our farmers
can buy coat, or hat, or pair of
shoes cheaper in Europe than they can
here.
What difference does it make to the
farmer in the United States how cheap he
can buy coat, If he has nothing to pay
with? And what is to become of the
towns and cities that flourish all over our
land? Will it pay our farmers to have
them go to ruin and decay?
These are questions that go to the heart
Of the question Of protection, and they show
that Mr.. Hurd is playing with his constit-
uents; that he is only showing them part
of the truth. and is conccaling from them
features of the question at issue that must
be taken into account in order to arrive at
a correct and intelligent judgment. Give
the people all the facts-show Them all the
sides of the issue, aud Republicans need
have no fears as to the result of the discus
sion. This Mr.. Hurd does not do, aud for
not doing it he is obnoxious to the charge
that he is either fool or knave, or both.