The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1888-04-28
IN BEHALF OF THE WOOL GROWERS.
Tariff Speakers Attack the Dark
Lantern Bill.
Free Trade sympathy for Farmers
imaginary Woes.
Reduction the Proper Labor of the
Friends of Protection.

Reduction the Proper Labor of the
Friends of Protection.
WASHINGTON, April 27.-Mr Brewer, of
Michigan, opened today's discussion Of the
Mills bill in the House. He controverted
the assertion that-the tariff was a grievous
burden upon the people. The people were
not complaining that what they had to buy
was too dear, but that what they had to sell
was too cheap. He proceeded to examine
the bill in detail, pointing out where, in his
Judgment, the proposed reduction would re-
suit in lowering the price of the latter while
failing to reduce the revenue or surplus. He
was especially earnest in opposition to the
free wool clause, which he said would ruin
an industry national in its Importance He
was ready to cooperate with any party in
| further reducing the revenues but 1t must be
| done IN continuance of the policy laid down
| by the Republican party.
Mr.. Ford, of Michigan,
said the question presented now was one OF
tariff reduction, not its abolition. The main
object of the measure was to reduce and not
to abolish the tariff. In considering the
up the industries of any one State at the ex-
| pense of other parts or the country. but
should consider the general welfare of the
entire nation. A tariff which gave a compar-
atively small number of men opportunity to
tax millions of our citizens AZ per cent more
than their goods would sell for in the open
market, could not fail to result in building
up and maintaining vast mGnopolies and
| trusts, whose enormous profits were swelled
| by the tribute which the tariff sauthoriZed
! them to levy from the pockets of the people.
| Congress had no right to take the part OF
| few manufacturers against the great body OF
consumers. The tendency of prices to
| cheaper constantly was not on account of
the war tariff. but was due to the improved
means OF transportation and production: The
| prices of agricultural productions, which the
war tariff did not neglect to any appreciable
extent, had declined out of all proportion to
| those OF manufacturers commodities. as
usual the farmer got the worst OF 1t. His
prices declined the world over; in free trade
England and China as well as in the United
States. In this country nearly every article
on which war tariff was imposed would be
good deal cheaper today if the tariff were
reduced. He ridiculed the position that
high tariff increased the wages OF American
workmen. No industries showed more pow
| erty, more destitutiOn and more strikes than
those so-called protected ones. There was
not hod-carrier in the United States but
WIN 6dIutu uOI6 WdS6S tUdu tu6 dNcIdBc
person employed in the industries benefited
| by the war tariff
! Referring to the claim that a home market
was the best market, Mr.. Ford said, the re-
| suit of this home market swindle is that the
| the farmer is most beautifully deluded. The
high tariff party gets his vote and trusts and
monOpolists get his money while che farmer
| gets the hot end of the poker. He did not
| believe single man would be thrown out of
employment by the passage of the Mills bill.
MI mo- thnra xnQ fhnca rnQ
not compete with the farmers because the
| reduction of the tariff would so stimulate
| those industries which our natural resources
have fitted us for, that increased demand for
labor would at once spring up in those pur-
| suits. BY cheapening raw materials home
manufacturers would be able to compete in
foreign markets, and the reduction of the
tariff would result In an enormous increase
of production to supply the foreign demand
which would increase the demand for labor
to such an extent as to furnish employment
for all idle men. Trusts and combines had
| got monopoly of the market. and grip on
the pockets of the people. They nave Will
| fed and abused the advocates of a reduction
in the tariff. They appealed to every instinct
of the American people, selfish and patriotic
to sustain system of war taxation, but the
time had now come when the people would
speak in tones not to be misunderstood and
demand relief.
Mr.. Coff, of West Virginia,
spoke in opposition. The reduction Of the
tariff should be made by the friends of the
protective system, not by its enemies. Just
as the people had completed and beautifed
az edifce upon the construction of which
they were about TO enjoy the labor of their
lives, one, who, by the strange mutations of
political forces, temporarily held the place of
architect-in. chief, ,astounded them with an or
der to proceed with the work of tearing it
down. The moment one industry was self
sustaining and healthy, it invited the Presi-
dents enmity and he at once suggested the
running knife of tariff reform. President
Cleveland's cold blooded indifference to the
| benefit of the people was entitled to pre-
cedence over all emanations from the Exec
utiYe Mansion in all our history. The Mills
bill was conceived by a mind impregnated
with economic viciousness. Its passage
would be the death knell of protection. If
| they succeeded now they proposed next year
| to take another step and gradually, but sure
| ly, the people were to be marched into the
| camp of those who cOntended for tariff for
revenue only. Hedeclared himself protec-
| zionist and believer in the old biblical doc
| trine HE who provideth not for his own
| household is worse than an infdel" The
| people had been deceived in the last Presi-
| dental campaign by the declaration that
| Cleveland was a pr0tecti0nist. The hand of
| Esau would be offered again but the people
would not again be deceived The people
had at last found out the Democratic party.
| Abraham Lincoln had once said, "a polti-
cal party may fool part of the people all the
| time and all of the people part of the time;
but no political party can fool all OF the peo-
| pie all of the time"
| Mr.. Goff said he was opposed to import
| ing, under contract, the paupers and demOral-
| lied labor of the Old World and was opposed
| to importing under like contract the manu-
| factured products of that labor. He would
! not increase the surplus by reducing import
| duties. but should rather reduce it by repeal
| ing the internal revenue taxes and increasing
| the import duties. He did not believe in
| free raw material. There was no such thing
| as raw material in the sense in which it was
| used in this discussion. Coal unmined was
| raw material but when mined 1t was the
miners, finished product, and entitled to
| protection. Iron ore was the result of the
| labor OF the miner and as much entitled to
| protection as the rice fields Of the South and
the sugar plantations of the Mississippi Val
| ley. Wool clipped from the sheep, was the
farmers finished labor. The duty of 1867
| should be restored and an industry so essen
tlal to our prosperity and Independence be
| stimulated. The protective system had en-
| abled the government to perfect system OF
| finance which was the marvel Of the age. 1t
| had foStered industries, built up manufac-
| lures, opened upa wilderness to digEifed
| labor, and educated the people.
Mr.. Landers, of Illinois,
| argued in support of the bill and in opposi-
tion to the protective theory. While hearth
| ly advocating the bill, he regretted that it
touched the whiskey and tobacco taxes which,
| instead of being reduced should be increased