Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1888-08-15
Free Trade is Unjust to the Farmer

Free Trade is Unjust to the Farmer.
The advocates of free trade are espec-
tally earnest in their appeals to the Yves
tern farmer, as the voter most likely to
furnish aid in overturning the existing
fiscal policy of this country and once more
trying that of England. In their efforts
to this end they are untiring, ingenious,
INSCRIPTIONS. No possible resort remains
untried, no illustration unused, no appeal
long neglected. They seek toinfame the
worthy ambition to better ones condition
in life by picturing mythical market
which is at once both the cheapest for the
buyer and the dearest for the seller. They
seek to create sectional prejudice by per-
sistent repetitions in speeches and writ
ings of the antithesis Western farmers"
Eastern manufacturers"-jus t as if the
West had no manufactures, the East 10
agriculture. They ignore the common
sence inference that, if the people of the
United States paid the duty on foreign
competing articles sold in this country,
the foreigner would be by no means so
persistent for the removal of eur tariff.
In view of such tactics it will be we'll for
farmers TO keep in mind certain facts
which with practical men are likely to
outweigh all the theories of British free
traders and their attorneys in the United
States.
Money is necessary to the existence OF
government. Under our fiscal system the
main reliance of states, counties and mu-
inequalities is upon taxation of property
the exception being the sale of licenses
for carrying on certain lines of business.
Money raised by taxation comes from
owners of factories, machinery and other
personal property, as well as from farms
and farm equipments, and is the price
paid Dy the owners for defence of their
rights in property and the peaceable pur-
suit of the business of their choice.
Toexempt any one mans property from
taxation would be an injustice TO all COM
PEELED to pay taxes. Yet, this is just what
free trade proposes to DO. American own
ers of farms, houses, machinery, etc., are
to be taxed. while the same rights they
enjoy are to be given free to others-to
men who owe no allegiance to our govern
ment and who seek profits from trade
here to be spent in other countries.
Hay, barley, wheat, wool, etc., are grown
in large quantities by Canadian farmers
who never paid a cent of taxes toward
the support O. our government. If these
men prefer to send their products here to
be sold in our markets, why should they
not be taxed, at least as much as our far
mers are taxed, for the privilege? But
the free trader says no, let the foreigner
have our markets without cost, although
the American farmers taxes need to be
increased in consequence, and then COM
placently suggests that if growing such
articles under this one-sided arrangement
proves improbable our farmers can turn
their attention to some other productions.
Protection insures for our own citizens
not only the first, but always the best,
chance in the markets of the country they
have helped to build up This is both
patriotism and good business policy. It's
opposite is the un-American policy advo-
Gated by the president and other free
trade advocates, and for which they have
received the plaudits of the Golden club
and every prominent journal in Great
Britain. 1t remains to be seen if major
ity of American farmers agree with them.