The Londonderry sifter. (South Londonderry, Vt.) 1883-19??, 1888-02-02

Protection or Free Trade.
"Farmer Jacob" In recent issue
sets forth some theories on Protec-
ton, which, to say the least, rest on
an unsound basis of reasoning. This
is the vital question before the coun-
try now and is the question on which
the next presidential election will
turn. There are many young voters
who will cast their first vote next fall
and they need to look we'll to both
sides of the controversy before vot-
ing. 1t matters not so much about
the men, but the principles they rep
resent are what we must all see to.
By this l do not mean a declaration
of principles for any party can make
declarations, but | mean that decla-
ration which comes from party that
has always stood foremost in any
sort of progress.
What party is it that has always
been in the vanguard Of human rights
and liberty? Whichever party you
think it is vote with that one. AS
parties are constituted now, there is
no dividing line which separates them.
The tariff issue is the nearest, but
that causes a split IN both parties, fol
while the Democrats are generally fol-
free trade, or tariff for revenue. Not
all Republicans believe in protection
AS consequence of this partial ANAL
gamation, party fealty counts for less
than it used to do twenty-five years
ago.
But what party shows the best rec,
ord? The Democratic party is moth
ing but burial place of issues, is
sues, which, if the party had got be
yond its narrow range of vision, anc
grappled with them in earnest, i
might have stood forth as benefac
tor of humanity rather than have beer
compelled to harp continually on the
past. Republicans do not have to dc
this they are alive to the needs O.
the country and purpose working il
accordance with their progressive, ag
gressive movements heretofore.
Labor has made this country. La
Dor owns it and a policy of stimula
ting labor rather than depressing i
must be adopted. To remove one
hundred millions of customs duties a
blow, would reduce wages in thu
industries thus deprived of protection
as low as wages on similar industrie
in other countries. 1t would be I
destruction of our fourishing Villages
and their industries. 1t would max,
all those thus thrown out of worl
producers of food instead of purchas
ers as now. One can readily see tn
effect on farming which such a condi
ton of affairs would produce. Gu
system of protection must either stan'
or be abolished. One industry can
not be singled out as a point for re
duction while others are allowed t.
remain as they are. That would b
fostering with vengeance, a thin,
which our Democratic brethren woul,
never be guilty of doing. As Jeffel
son once said, "Protection has place,
the manufacturer by the side of tn
farmer and given them the incalcula
Bile benefits of the home markets"
Tariff reformers demand first fire
raw materials, but if every dollar o
duty were taken off these articles les
than $40, 100000 would be removed
while the wool industry representa-
over 100000 farmers would b
crushed.
Could manufactures come next wit
an aggregate duty of ss,OOO,OOC
All industries which come under thi
head would be annihilated. Look
for instance, at the result of free sa,
from 1903 to 1918. Our works wer
abandoned, but instead of the fol
eign salt being cheaper, prices advar
ced, and in 1872, when the war brok
out, the foreign supply was cut o
entirely.
Unjust stop here for my missive
long enough already, but l have MOI
to say ON the subject and will say
from time to time. A.