The Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1860-1888, 1888-03-30
CANA, BUTTE Co., CAL.
March II. 1888.
EDITOR TELEGRAPH.

EDITOR TELEGRAPH.
Any one from old Kenosha or county
that comes to this state and fails to
come to northern California fails to
see this state in its greatness. We
have had very severe winter, but no
damage to fruit. Peaches, apricots
and cherries are all in full bloom and
the great wheat fields look fine. Stock
is looking somewhat thin, but feed is
good, and so stock is on the gain.
| am somewhat astonished that no
one answers that free-trader from
Bristol on his false ideas. He says
that by putting wool on the free list
the wool grower would be benefited,
but fails to explain how. We here in
California, who are making sheep
keeping business, know little some
thing about the effect the lowering of
the tariff has produced in this state
since the tariff reduction of 1888. For
several years prior to 1888 California
produced 100000 pounds of wool;
in 1884 the clip decreased to 81, 900, 900
pounds, and this year the full clip was
only 100000 lbs. Now, if the taking
off only part of the duty has such an
effect, what will be the result if it is
put on the free list? The result will
be, the sheep men will have to quit
sheep and take up something else. In
your issue of March 2 is an item from
Bristol. Il presumeit comes from the
same penn. 1t says: "Quite number
of farmers delivered their wool clip at
Trevor on Tuesday and Wednesday.
The price paid was 26 cents per ID.
James G. Blaine and John Sherman, big
candidates for President of the United
States, want the carpenters, black
smiths, shoemakers. tailors, painters,
wagon makers, ETC., ETC., to make the
price up to IS cents per Id. by contri-
buting 8 cents per Id. out of their daily
wages. This would enable the sheep
men to grow wool and grow rich and
make sheep husbandry so profitable
every farmer would 60 into it. Then
so much wool would be grown the
price would be lowered again to what
it was before the tariff, and the car
penters, blacksmiths, ETC., would get
their clothing cheap and sheep men
would be growing wool at loss again,
and have to destroy their flocks to save
themselves" Now, / will ask any
candid man would it not be wiser to
enrich our own sheepmen in preference
to the Australian or South American
But if free trade is such a grand thing
for country, why don't they tell lis of
the good it has done. We have had
free trade and what was the result
Let the Bristol man tell.
The prOtectionists can point with
pride to the result of protection. They
can show results such as no other
country can show.
They tell us that the duty is paid by
the consumer. Now, If that be so, why
should it make any difference to the
foreign manufacturer about paying the
duty? But he is the one that even
spends large sums of money to have us
reduce the duty. 1t is a mistake to
say that the duty is paid by the con-
sumner. The large surplus which is
in the U. S. treasury is mostly foreign
money. and is not taken from the PEG.
pie. If it were taken from the people,
they would become poorer. But such
is not the fact, for the savings banks
show the fact that the working people
of this country are having larger sums
OF money in saving banks than ever
before. Protection is the laboring
mans friend, while free trade is his
enemy. Yours respectfully,
JOHN SAUBER.