The Portland daily press., 1891-10-23

ana economy has never been snrnas assad TSxs
ssol mus Impaired has been fesponded 10
tS.a people OF enterprise and intelligence' az
cIvili|ad I've w nave tne largest population OF
cvn,nzea people, the greatest wealth, and in
SsodanParaoly sod y the best paid. best housed. best
on ;ha anu most prosperous and happy people
on sne lace OF the earth. might appropri.
a.ea, asey aaa, In passing, that not one OF the
Conditions bas aas' mas produced these grand
ana support OK the Democratic party.
10 TACT these great accomplishments ware
acnl9ve1 over the at all times bitter and de-
Thu TSrhiu5d opposition OF the Democratic party.
the nsw nol;ev sis IS great party has inaugurated
when our foreign trade will be largely in.
I creased Although but little has actually been
accompllshed as yet. negotiations are well
ae unuer way that will give US market for our
moass ana cereals and manufactured goods
not only In the West Indies. but probabIv in
lne countries OF Europe The effect OF this
Is already felt by our farmers In the in
creased price Of cattle and hogs and In our
exports OF domestic manufactures. Our far
mers come nearer possessing the American
market than ever before land they have,
contrary to the predictions and theories OF
Tree traders, achieved this through the agen-
| cy OF the new tariff)
II not already accomplished. the manufac-
turers OF your city will soon find market
for more or less Of their products in foreign
countries, and yet you were told and are
| now told by these free traders that "the Me-
kinley bill would stop our exports" They
| quote with great glibness that you cannot
sell TO country from which you DO not buy,
forgetting that no country will buy what 1t
/ does not want, and that all countries must
buy what they need. Why is all Europe
| just now, and at time when they are ours
| Ing the Mckinley law, buying our food prod
| ucts? The answer Is simple one. They
| need what we can furnish them. Why did
we, before the Mckinley bill was passed,
buy S88. 100000 worth Of coffee. rubber, ETC.
| from South America, when we sold them
but S12, ,000,0 900 worth Of our products? Be-
cause we wanted their goods and they could
not get ours. Now, under the reciprocity
feature of the Mckinley bill, we hope to sell
them as much as we buy. Why? Because
we make 1t, by the Intervention of this new
principle, their interest to buy our goods.
do not know OF more fallacious propo-
sition than the one cOntended for by all
Democrats. from Grover Cleveland to Jerey
Simpson, that tariff Is tax, and that the
consumer pays the tax. OF course know
that the proposition seems to be logical, but
in the light of the experience OF this country
the proposition has been proven to be un-
true. III the Democratic idea of a tariff to
tax articles imported into this country, but
not produced here, Is to prevail then the
| tariff is tax. This fact Is abundantly Illus
| trated by the effect Of the Mckinley bill In
admitting sugar free Of duty. The price of
| sugar has fallen the amount OF the tax. But
WHICH, 1Uu apply tu0 piUtcCtlt0 RlluCfplc-
namely, to place a duty upon articles we
produce In this country-such results do not
| follow, and this fact Is also abundantly illus
trated by the effect OF the Mckinley bill. /
have caused search to be made Of all man
ufactured articles upon which the duties
were increased by the Mckinley bill, and so
| far have found but two articles that have
Increased In price, and these are pearl but.
| tons and corsets. High-priced carpets and
rugs may also show slight advance.
fNurfoQu naarl huttou foafNrfao han
| started In this country within year, con-
| fdently believe that pearl buttons will also
| decline In price below what they were when
| the law went into force. am the more
| hopeful on this point for the reason that the
Democratic management Of the Auburn, N.
| T., penitentiary have gone into the manu-
| facture Of these buttons with convict labor.
l am grieved over the corset business be-
| cause the increased price is objectionable TO
| the ladies, causing them all to feel unkindly
toward the gallant Major Mckinley, but l
| can assure them that If they will possess
their souls In patience, it will not be long till
| Yankee ingenuity will find way to cheaper
them, provided. always, that substitute
| can be found for whaleb0ne. AS matter
| of fact. the large increase in the price of
| whalebone, not In the least the result Of the
| law, has much to do with the advance. How
| can 1t be claimed that the consumer pays
the tax when 1t is shown that there has been
| no increase OF price?
Increase of price was the whole burden Of
| their song last year. The lies they told, and
| which they succeeded In making the people
| believe, had much to do with the disasters
that befel the Republican party In the con
test OF one year ago.
The newspapers and stump speakers who
gave utterance to these now known false
hoods one year ago ought to hereafter for
generous people that they are permitted to
| enjoy the great advantage Of law they so
wantonly and wickedly assailed.
The price Of wool under the Mckinley bill
is a clear demonstration OF the fallacy of the
Democratic declaration that the consumer
| pays the tax. Observe the result Of the tariff
law upon this article. Wool, such as Is
raised In Ohio, is not worth quite so much
now as when the law was enlcted, and the
Democrats, while shouting at the tops of
| their voices that a tariff Is tax, are trying
| to make votes among the wool growers be-
| canse 1t Is proved that the tariff Is not tax.
had merchant in Philadelphia write to
wool dealer In Toronto, Canada, and
| to another In Binghampton, n. Y, asking at
| what price he could buy wool. The Toronto
dealer wrote, under date of September II,
naming from Is to 2l cents. With the
| cost a 1out 33f cents In Philadelphia. The
| dealer In Binghampton writes that they will
| sell 10000 to 10000 pounds Of the same grades
| at 81 cents, c0atse and medium; thus 1t will
| be seen that the duty on these woods, which
| Is IL cents per pound, is not pad by the con-
| sumers, bat is actually paid by the producer.
| Under these circumstances can well appre-
ciate the grim humor of the Ohio farmer,
who. when approached by Democrat and
told that his wool has not advanced under
| the Mckinley bill, answered, "Yes, that 1t is
so; but l know that 1 received u
cents per pound more than my friend, u
| farmer in Canada, received for his clip"
The collector OF the port of Buffalo reports
| that probably better idea as to Just how
| the new law operated can be obtained IRON
a brief history OF the Ferry street substation
| in this district, because we come more d.
rectly in contact with the produces pulse
there than at the larger ports. For years
quite number Of hucksters have been doing
| business over this ferry. 1t was their Gus
| tom TO travel over the country for fifty and
| a hundred miles back from the river and buy
| sheep, hogs, horses, hay, and all kinds OF
farm products In limited quantities, and
| bring them to this country over the ferry.
They had been Invoicing the eggs at
| II and IL cents per dozen. poultry at 8 aud
| cents, and butter at about 16 cents. When
| the new law went into effect this trade was
| completely cut off. The price of eggs aud
butter advanced little in this city tempor-
| arily, and then dropped back to the old
| figures. The value OF other products here
| was not disturbed. and prices In the interior
| of Canada were held at about the same fig-
| ures as before. so that the increased dnty
| precluded the possibility OF making any
| money. But In the course of few weeks
prices in Canada began to decline, and In
| the course Of time the hucksters resumed
| operations to a limited extent, invoicing
| their eggs at about 81 cents instead of II and
| l3 cents as before; poultry at 8 and 81 cents
| instead of cents butter at II and 12i cents
instead Of 16 cents, and so on through the
| list"
| The collector OF the port of Ogdensburg re-
| ports "in every instance where the tariff
rates have been increased the invoice price
\ in Canada has been lowered to correspond
with the increase, aud when the rates Of
| tariff have been reduced there has been
corresponding Increase in the purchase price
| In Canada"
Here is the palpable. incontrovertible fact
that the tariff for protection Is not paid by
the consumer, but Is, In fact, paid by the pro-
ducer; In short, do not hesitate to state
and to challenge contradiction, that this
country never yet levied tariff upon any
manufactured article that the result, Ia a
reasonable time, was not reduction In price,
and, by actual demonstration, disprove the
Oft-repeated statement Of our Democratic
friends that the consumer pays the tax,
The point is made by Mills, believe, that
when prices Of protected articles go down Ia
spite Of the tariff, 1t Is due to the superior
genius Of our people. Mills Is right In as.
eribing the reason, but Is opposed to giving
American genius chance to display itself
l will ask Mr.. Mills, or any other free-trader
| this question: "When did Amarfcan 0anins