Rock Island daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1886-1893, 1888-01-31
TARIFF FALLACIES.
A Plain Exposition by the Chicago
Tribune.
An Inquirer after Truth Answered In
FuII--Whv the High War Tariff Is
luxurious 20 American Interests and
Particularly to the Farmer


Particularly to the Farmer,
CRAwFoRDsvILLE. Ind, Jan. 10 Ed,
itor of the Tribune i have been a con-
slant reader OF the Tribune for several
weeks in order that might be better ia
formed in regard to the proposed legisla-
ton. In Tribune of late issue saw
you very kindly and sensibly answered
several questions propounded by some
reader who. like myself. was in the dark
regarding those issues of protection and
free trade.
1.-Will you be equally as kind to me
by answering few at my request In order
that | may plainly see the correct way to
vote in the coming election and oblige
one who is most wofully befuddled in this
matter of protection and free trade.
These questions are not, as they may seem,
the production of some country upstart,
who thinks he can outwit the editor of
the Tribune in debate, bat are honestly,
candidy and squarely from enc who has
been led to think about these great is sues
learn from the Tribune Of January that
ner by the high tariff.
2-Now, is not farmer who has his
granaries and fields full of grain and live
stock ready for sale somewhat benefited
by having market for his produce near
his farm and are not his prices regulated
in value by his nearness to or distance
from the market? 1t is not more to his
advantage to be able to sell his produce
without the expense of shipping it across
the continent, or, as it might be, across
the ocean,
Els it not far better for him to be per-
mitted to sell here than to be compelled
to ship his produce across the ocean INTO
foreign ports where, as you say in your
editorial, 1t is sold in competition with
cheap foreign markets.
4-Does not high tariff on any article
we can make induce enterprising men of
capital to embark in the manufacture of
the article2 Does not the establishment
of this factory furnish labor for many
men who were idle before2
5.-Does not home competition at once
spring up, and does not an increased sup>
ply of the said article lower the price of
it2
g. fit is an article the farmer must
have in his family, does he not make it
cheaper? Does not the establishment of
this factory for the manufacture of this
article, and the building of hundred
other factories for the manufacture of as
many other articles, tend to form a
double missoni 1t creates new
demand for labor, and at the same time
it tends to make a home and more re-
liable market for the farmers produce.
Tn your best judgment would any
capitalist have ever started the manu-
facture of plate glass in this country, and
succeeded in the venture, if II tariff had
not been first placed and kept on foreign
glass2
SIS not the successful establishment
of plate glass in this country due to tn e
tariff? Have not such works brought
down the price of glass2 If not, what
was the cauSey
9.-Will not high tariff on foreign
wool ultimately reduce the price OF
wooden goods in this country
1O.-Will not high tariff on foreign
cheap wool induce our farmers to expert
ment in the raising and breeding of finer
and different breeds of sheep, as they
have commenced doing in some localities,
and is it not probable that several years
of such experimenting would result In the
further development of sheep breeding,
so that the clip per head of finer wool
would be twelve pounds instead of six rs
it is now2
11.-Would not this increase in the
quantity and quality of wool, with the
same amount of feed and care, inevitably
lower the price of wool and woole
goods. while at the same time yielding
larger profit both to the farmer and the
manufacturer
12.-Is not this the fundamental idea
in placing q very high tariff on foreign
wool and wooden goodsf / concede that
the price of wooden goods would rise for
short time. but would not the final
result be lessening of the price of
wooden goodsS
13-Is it good policy for US to buy
manufactured goods from England when
we have all the facilities for making them
ourselvesl DUMoNT KENNEDY.
REPLY.
We shall endeavor to reply to the fore
going long string of questions in way to
satisfy bona-tide seekers after tariff
truth.
And at the very outset there are no
issues of protection and free trade before
congress and the country. The problem
is simply the best method of leaving 100
to 1875 millions of taxes in the peoples
pockets, which the government
economically, honestly, and decent
ly administered has no longer any
need of. Some ten or twelve millions
month too much money is distracted
from the earnings of the people-the
greater portion of which is taken from
the farmer. No member of congress
proposes the repeal of the tariff and the
opening of our ports to the products of
all nations FREE of tax-that would be
free trade. Only Henry George and his
Knights of Labor followers, who believe
that all tariff duties are an injury to the
industrial classes advocate free trade.
2-Our correspondents second 9ues~
ton has no revelancy whatever 10 the
question before congress of dispesing of
the superhuous surplus. He asks some
thing not in the issue. Congress has no
intention to take away any market from
the farmers near their farms. The prices
that our western farmers get for their
grain and meats are fixed and demanded
by the market quotations of Liverpool
and London, sometimes modified by
those of Paris, Amsterdam or Hamburg
The price of what is called garden
truck"-such as vegetables, fruits, eggs,
etc.-is regulated by the cities and towns
that purchase and consume it. UnforS
tunately the American or home market
only consumes a part of the food stuffs
our western farmers produce, and only
one Ouarter of that citV and TOWN nnnu.