The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1888-12-28

that the growth OF wealth In Massachusetts,, as
well as Ohio. has been dsastrously affected.
But assuming that the assessed wealth Of the
two sections of country In question indicate, even
with distant approximation their relative pros
perty how Is Il to be accounted for that the peo-
pie OF the section most favored by nature are add
ing little, II anything TO their per capita wealth.
while the people Of the less favored section arc
adding to theirs 40 rapidly
This cannot be because OF any newly discovered
source OF wealth in New England. She has no new
mines she has neither petroleum nor natural gas;
she has developed no new lumber region there has
been no striking improvement In the character OF
her population But while this Is true, hardly
year has passed that some new aud Important
source OF wealth has not been discovered In one or
more Of the Western States; nad In addition the
improvement Of commercial facilities In the West
has probably been ten times as great since lsG0 Us
In New England.
Is not tho fact that the Eastern Suites are more
prosperous than those Of the Yves, to be found In
this-that the Eastern States. especially those Of
New England, are essentially manufacturing
States engaged IN The production Of protected
goods, while the Western States are mainly engaged
IN making agricultural products. which, from the
nature Of the case, cannot be protectedi In 1880
one half of oil the people Of the West who were
engaged in productive industry were engaged In
agriculture. In New England only oneiith were
40 employed. on the other hand, only onc-hith Of
those engaged In productive enployments in the
West were engaged In manufacture, while In New
Englang three hiths were 40 engaged
We hear great deal said about the bencnolont
results OF free trade between the States. But Is
trndc free between different sections Of the coun.
try. when one OF them In under the necessity OF
selling TO tho other is products at the worlds
lpI urlp INIT Ia Taslle d bv a
products Of the other section In exchange at prices
enhanced above those that obtain In the worlds
markets for such goods 90 30, 90 or 100 per cent?
This IL the sort Of exchange Of the products Of their
labor the farmers OF this country, East and North,
as well as West aud SOUTH have been engaged In
for more than a quarter Of century. Is It any
wonder that the results aro such as those have
tried 10 demonstrate?
The argument thus made by Mr. Smith,
in view Of the fact that the Senate il still
debating its pseudo tariff reform bill, is
timely, and being logical and resting upon
a basis Of facts, ought TO have weight with
the doubtful, those especially Of that class,
II any, who are engaged In farming, and
who are consequently among the hewen
Of wood and drawers OF water for the opu-
lent manufacturers OF the East, 10 whose
dollars, aud not 10 any candid considcra.
ton OF the tariff question, the country
owes the defeat OF Cleveland and the cleo
ton OF Harrison. Tho tariff laws Of the
country are well named the "Jug.handle'
laws. They are one.sidcd, and made for
the manufacturing States, rs against the
agricultural, making Of the farmer a slave
without any power Of redemption in himself
or in law. They arc properly entitled the
"robber war tariff" They are a means to
an end--the robbery Of the farming and
laboring and mechanical classes 10 present
every year bonus TO manufacturer, who
thus levy tribute, and arc pampored and
pclted in il by the Republican party. which
is the party Of tribute, Of robbery and OF
the trusts, combines and monopolics, 10
which we owo the communism and an.
archy that threatens the peace Of the coun-
try aud the prosperity OF our institutions.