Arizona weekly citizen., 1888-09-08
AR. HARRISON ON THE REDUCTIONS
 IN THE MILLS BILL.

GENERAL HARRISON was quick to see
 the deception used by Mir. Mills when
 spologizing for his blll because of only
 "7 per cent reductions" In A recent speech the General spoke as follows:
 "PublIc duties involve grave responsi-
 oilities. The conscientious men will not
 contemplate them without seriousness.
 but the man who sincerely desires to
 know and to do his duty may rely upon
 the fsvoring help of the good and iriend- ly judgment of his fellow citizens. Your coming from another State and from dis tsnt ht mes testities to the observing iu- terest which you feel in those questions
 which are to be settled by the ballot Tn November. The confessed Free-traders are very few in this country, but English statesmen and English newspapers con hdently declare thGt in fact We have A great many. We are told that it's only sn average reduction of per cent that is conte nplated. Well if that were true. and not 8 deceptive statement, as 1t really Is. you might fairly ask whether this average reduction does not sacrifice some American industry or the wages of our workingmen and workingwomep. You may also fairly ask 10 see the free list. which does not figure in this aver We would have more confidence in the protest of theee retormers that they are not Free-Traders if We could occasion ally hear one of them say he was Pro tectionist, or admit that our customsdu- ties should adequately favor our domes- tic industries. But they seem to be con- tent with 8 negative statement. Those who would, If they could, eliminate the protective principle from our tariff laws have, n former moments of csndor. de- scribed themselves as progressive Free Traders, and 1t is an apt designation.
 The Protective system Is 6 barrier against the flood of foreign importation and the competition of the underpsid labor Of Europe. Those who want to l lower the dyke owe those who live be- 1 lind 1t to make a plain statement of l their purposes. Do they want to invite | the flood or do they believe in the dy ke | but think it will afford adequate protec- | ton at lower levelg Whist say is on ly suggestive. l can't, in this brief talk, | go into details, but this is an sppropri- | ate and timely inquiry. With what mo- tive, what ultimate design, what dispo- sitIon towards the principle of Protec | ton is it that our present Tariff schedule | IS attacked? It may be thsi reductions should be made, 1t may be that some | dutles should be increased, bat We want to know whether those who propose the revision believe in taking thought of our American wOrkIngmen in fixing the rate pr will 1esve them to the chance effects of purely revenue tariff.
 The following IS from a speech made by MT. Harrison last Saturday.
 Let me suggest but this one thought. Do not allow any one to persuade you that this great contest H- .o our tariff policy is one between schedules. It is aot & question of per cent, reduction. It is a question between wide apart prin ciples. The principle of protection; the recognition in the framing of our trrif laws Of the duty to protect our American industries and maintain the American scale O; wages by adequate iiserIminstiug duties on the one hand and on the other denial of the conssi-, tutional right to make our custom duties Protective, on the assertion of the doc Urine that free competition with foreign products IS the ideal condition to which all our Legislation should tend.