Audubon County Republican. [volume] (Audubon, Audubon Co., Iowa) 1885-1894, 1888-10-25
Mills bill, In which the speaker described the

Mills bill, In which the speaker described the
taxes which the farmer has to pay after the
manner of the witty divine. He puts on bis
common flannel shirt taxed 95 per cent, hia
coat taxed 81 per cent, J" etc, etc, etc.
In the first place, the figures in lhls speech
are absolutely false. There is no flannel sold
in this country on which the duty amounts TO
95 per cent There are no coats sold here on
which the duty is 81 per cent Mr.. Turner
says that the farmers hat is taxed w per
cent He does not tell the truth. The duty
on the only hats which are imported In con.
siderable numbers Is So per cent lie says that
the sewing thread Of the farmers wife is
taxed "a per cent, when the duty is only 81;
aud that the yarn VIII oh she uses Tor knitting
her husbands socks is taxed 10 per cent,
although consultation OF the returns OF the
treasury department shows that the duty Is
only little more than half Of that.
These are specimen bricks from the free
trade structure. The figures are absolute
faIsehoods, and even ii they were not the In.
ference is simply deception: Mr.. turner
wants to make the farmer believe that he
wears imported flsunels. He does nothing OF
the kind. He wears flannels made in this
country, which he buys at a very much lower
price than was paid for tine same kind OF
goods by his father and grandfather before
the protective system had built up the woolien
manufactures of the country. There is NO
tax on domestic flaDnels, and IL there had
been no protection, under which the country's
industries have been encouraged and have
prosp red, the farmer would be paying more
Tor his 1annes, his hats, his coats, his warns,
and all that goes to make up his outfit and
his apparel. 1t is a significant fact, and
shows how essentially weak the free trade
cause IL, that 1t advocates cannot tell the
truth anu cannot argue the question whether
free trade or protection Is better without mis-
stating the facts which must be The basis OF
the argument
1t Is not true that the protective customs
duties have increased the price of commodi-
ties. and every free trader knows 1t. IL Is not
true that competition Is decreased by the pro-
tectve tariff. 1t is due to the tariff that We
have an enormous competition for the home
market, and that this competition has so low
cred prices that the neCessaries of life In the
United States are cheaper to-day than they
ever were before.
The farmer is certainly 100 intelligent to be
deceived by such superficial falsehoods as Mr..
Turner uttered, and which the democratic
national committee is now engaged In dis
tributing. He knows that his own business
has grown along side of the manufacturing
interests, and has kept step with them. The
agricultural states, which stand among the
FIRST are also very high up in the list OF mau-
ufacturing states, and Uce versa. This proves
that the protective system, In building up
manufactures, has furnished the home mar
ket to the farmer, which the ortginators OF
the system in this country predicted would
follow its adoption. False logic, false state
ments and false statistics appear to be the
basis aud support of the lalse economy which
would throw open the markets Of The United
States to foreign products and deluge the
country with paupcr labOrers from Europe,
until our manufacturing towns would rival
the pestholes of Europe, whose chimney
stacks are not, like ours, the signs of a pros
porous community, but the indIces of poverty
and misery and standing menaces to ciyillZa-
tion.-AeW York Mat aud LEpreSS.