The state rights democrat. [volume] (Albany, Linn County, Oregon) 1865-1900, 1891-10-23
MORE FALLAcY.


uS AANtNNN bAyos
The "rulnous high prices" predicted OF
the Mckinley bill are not dlscernable TO
the naked eye In Oregon. Not Tor many
years would bushel OF wheat purchase
10 much In the way of clothing or otner
merchandise as now, while Of sugar 1t is
useless to say that Il IL within the reach OF
the most lowly. That "horrid" rcpubli-
can bill was not such bad thing after all.
Its author will doubtless be elected In
Ohio.
Now let us see how full Of fallacy the
above Is. The promoters and defenders
of protective tariff make but two leading
arguments In It's support. One Is that 1t
secures the home market to our own pco
pie, and that Il stimulates manufacturers
and productions and thus cheapens the ar
ticle upon which the duty Is placed. Now,
why will bushel OF wheat purchase more
in the way of clothing than for many years
pas. as asserted by the HsraIdl 1t Is not
because clothing, 1--WE mean good, honest
clothing, not shoddy,) Is cheaper but be-
cause wheat Is much better price than Il
has been for years. And is wheata better
price because of the "home market
for that articlei No, Il Is because OF the
good foreign market, the foreign demand
created by failure In foreign crops, that
our farmers get a good price for thelI
wheat. This Is complete knock. out of
the "home-marke" theory. II 10 true,
aye, emphatically true that bushel of
wheat now will buy more sugar than iol
many years past, and the cause for such
good fortune that places "sugar within the
reach Uf the most lowly" Is to be found
wholly within the democratic doctrine tha
good foreign market Is much better
one for the American wheat grower thar
poor home market and The further dem
ocratic doctrine tnat removing tariff duty
from an article viii reduce the price oI
thst article, other conditions being sim
ilir. Now, then to sum up, why can ~,
buy more sugar for dollar than for many
years past Because our farmers sell theiI
wheat In the highest makret In the worlS
and, buy their sugar in the cheapest marke
Of the world. Sugar Is cheaper than Il useS
to be, not because Mckinley increased o
retained the duty on 1t, but because,in treat
ing Of the sugar question In his bill, he de
serted the principle of protection and ap-
piled :he principles Of 'free trade" by put
ting sugar on the free list. The sugar ar
ticle In the Mckinley bill has called ou
more hearty. words OF approval from ,h
protection press than the remainder of tn
bill. And this sugar article Is pure. uns-
dulterated free trade. We irus. the Her
aid will keep up It's work of calling the at
tentlon of Its readers to the vas, benefits O
good foreign marke.. and the vAster ben
efits to the "most lowly" In consequence,
of "free trade" In sugar. II they can b
made 10 see that sugar Is made cheaper b.
removing the duty, land the task Is yer
easy and pleasant one,) they will soon be
gin to inquire why may not the price o
lumber, coal, salt, binding t~ine, glass
ware, blankets, jute sacks, earthen ware
cutlery, and various other necessarles o
life be made cheaper by reducing or re
moving the duty from them. This woul,
be the only rational line of thought, beInI
the natural tendency of the campaign o
education now going on In the minds o
the people. We welcome the Herald q
the great army of educators In the tru
principles OF political economy.