Mower County transcript. [volume] (Lansing, Minn.) 1868-1915, 1888-08-08
FREE TRADE us UNJUST TO THE
FARMER, ."' ''"5

tally earnest in their appeals to the West.
ern farmer, as the voter most likely to
aid In overturning the existing fiscal pol
icy Of this country and once more trying
that of England. In their efforts to this
end they are untiring, ingenious, un-
scrupulous. No possible resort remains
untrled, no illustration unused, no ap-
peal long neglected. They seek to in
flame the worthy ambition to better ones
condition IN life by picturing mythical
market which is at once the cheapest for
the buyer and dearest for the seller.
They seek to create sectional prejudice
by persistent repetitions in speeches and
writings Of the antithesls western farm
ers." Eastern manufacturers" just as if
the west had no manufactures, the East
no agriculture. They ignore the common
sense inference that, if the people of the
United States paid the duty on foreign
competing articles sold in this country,
the foreigner would be by no means so
persistent for the removal OF our tariff.
In view of such tactics it will be we'll for
farmers to keep in mind certain facts
which with practical men are likely to
outweigh all the theories of British free
traders and their attorneys in the United
States.
Money is necessary to the existence of
government. Under our fiscal system
the main reliance of States, Counties and
municipalities is upon taxation of prop
erty-the exception being the sale of H.
censes for carrying on certain lines of
business. Money raised by taxation
comes from owners of factories, machin.
cry and other personal property, as we'll
as from farms and farm equipments, and
is the price paid by the owners for de-
fence of their rights in property and the
peaceable pursuit of the business of their
choice.
To exempt any one mans property
from taxation would be an injustice to
all compelled to pay taxes. Yet this is
just what free trade proposes to do.
American owners of farms, houses, ma
chinery, etc., are to be taxed, while the
same rights they enjoy are to be given
free to others-to men who owe no al
]egiance to our government and who
seek profits from trade here to be spent
IN other countries.
Hay, barley, wheat, wool. ETC., are
grown in large quantities by Canadian
farmers who never paid a cent of taxes
toward the support of our government.
If those men prefer to send their pro-
ducts here to be sold in our markets, why
should they not be taxed, at least as
much as our farmers are taxed, for the
privilege? But the free trader says no,
let the foreigner have our markets with
out cost, although the American farmers
taxes need to be increased IN consequence
aud then complacently suggests that if
growing such articles under this one-sid-
ed arrangement proves Improbable our
farmers can turn their attention to some
other productions.
Protection insurcs for our own citi-
zens not only the first, but always the
best chance in the markets of the coun-
try they have helped to build up. This
is both patriotism and good business pol
icy. Its opposite is the un-American
policy advocated by the President and
other free trade advocates, and tor which
they have received the plaudits of the
Golden Club and every prominent jour-
nal IN Great Britain. It remains to be
seen if majority Of American farmers
agree with them.