Los Angeles daily herald., 1890-01-29
wEDrEDAY. JANUARY SEQ, 1890.
Carlisle i'm the Forum.

Carlisle Ina the Forum.
The tariff is receiving great deal Of
attention of late. In the breeze excited
by the articles contributed by Mr.. Glad
stone and Mr.. Blaine to the last issue of
the North american RevieW for January
not as much interest has been developed
in q remarkable article entitled "The
Tariff and the Farmer" written by Hon.
John 6. Carlisle for the January number
of the Forum, and which contains as clear
statement of the anti-protection srgu-
ments as could possibly be made. In all
his productions Mr.. Carlisle is very care
ful to eschew rhetoric of any kind. His
methods are logical in the extreme, and
he has no use whatsoever for mere orna-
ment. He takes up the great protection
argument that the farmer is dependent
on the home market for his prosperity,
and shows that according to the census
of 1880 there were employed in all the
manufacturing and mechanical estab-
ishments of the United States only
2,734 ,595 persons Of all ages and sexes.
OF these 2,019 ,035 were men and BOYS
over 16 years old, 531. .639 we're women
and girls over Is years old, and 1S1, ,92l
we're children and youths.
Mr.. Carlisle reaches the conclusion
that there we're not in the United States
over 5000, 900 persons engaged in 1886
in any branch of manufactures. He
next takes the figures of Mr.. Edward
Atkinson, who claims that the average
annual expenditure of the working peo-
pie OF this country for themselves and
families is sbout $73 per capita, and he
reckons two children under ten years of
age as equal to one adult consumer. The
grand total of $219, 1000, 900 would thus
seem to represent the extreme amount of
the expenditures Of the industrial classes,
and be reduces that amount to $3.50, ,OO0-
900 because much of this expenditure is
for sugar, rice, tea, and score of other
products that are not purchased from the
American farmer but come from abroad.
In fact. as q result of putting a great
many fantasies through the alembic of
fact, Mr.. Carlisle takes his stand on the
postulste that $50, 100000 is the extreme
figure that has annually reached the
farmer from American operatives. This
is certainly in marked contrast to the
rosy pictures drawn by the Blaine school
of political economists.
Mr.. Carlisle next proceeds to show, to
his own satisfaction and that of many
clear headed men like himself, that while
protection cannot increase the prices of
our domestic agricultural products, it
does largely increase the prices of great
part OF the manufactured articles which
the farmer is compelled to buy and use.
The great Kentuckian devotes himself to
an article contributed to the Forum by
Senator Cullom, Of Illinois, who stated
that "the result with steel rails is but q
typical case of the working of protec-
tion." This is the favorite comparison
with ali the gentlemen who make elab-
crate protection arguments. Mr.. Car
lisle insists on stating that portion OF the
debate "a little more in detail and with
a little more accuracy" than Cullom
stated it. "His (Cullom'sl contention, -
says Mr.. Carlisle, sis, that the price of
"steel rails in this country has been re-
"duced by protection; and in order to
"make the contrast between the prices
sin 1867 and 1887 more striking, he gives
'tthe price in deprecated currency for the
tformer year and the price in gold for
"the latter one." Mr.. Carlisle then pro-
ceeds to show that under protection the
people Of the United States paid from
1871 to 1882 just $159, ,312 ,216 more than
they would have been obliged to pay if
they had been allowed to buy their rails
in England.
Mr.. Carlisle certainly makes no weak
presentment of any phase of the argu-
ment against protection. He points out
the fact that according to Cnllom's state
ment, 1,042, ,921 tons of steel rails were
imported into this country during the
same period of twelve years before re-
ferred to, upon which the" people paid du-
ties to the amount of $29 POI, ,788 in gold,
making the whole extra cost $l88. .514 ,O04.
"In other Words" said Mr.. Carlisle, sin
s'order to protect this industry, the
"people were taxed $1S8. .514, 004 in
"twelve years, out Of which the govern.
"ment received for public purposes the
"sum Of 9,2O1 ,78s, and the manufac-
s'turers of steel rails received for their
"private use the sum of $159,312 ,2l6.
"In the language of the Senator, this is
"a typical case of the working of
protection and if we had such data
''as would enable US to take up each pro-
Elected article and show how much this
restrictive policy has added to it's price,
"the farmers of the country. who cannot
increase the prices OF their products,
s'would be astounded at the enormous
"sum they are compelled to pay every
"year in order that others may realize
''large profits in their business"
Mr.. Carlisle's peculiarly logical way of
stating things could not perhaps be bet
ter exemplifed than in the following
concise and sledge- e-hsmmer passage "If
''our manufacturers could afford to
make and sell steel rails for $27.5Ol