The aegis & intelligencer. [volume] (Bel Air, Md.) 1864-1923, 1892-07-29
THE TARIFF IND THE FARMER.

The position of the Democratic
| party upon the tariff question is plain
and simple. Section of the Chicago
platform says:
1--WE denounce the Republican pro-
lection as fraud on the labor of the
great ajority of the American people
for the benefit of the few. We declare
it to be fundamental principle of
the Democratic party that the FEEDER
al government has no constitutional
power to impose and collect tariff
duties except for the purpose of reve-
nue. only, and we demand that the
collection OF such taxes shall be limit
ed to the necessities of the govern
ment when honestly and economically
administered
The people were told, when the Nc
Kinley bill first went into force, that
criticism upon it was unfair; that it
ought to be given trial before it was
condemned. For two years it has
be, II the law of the land. and who can
So the benefits to farmers arising from
i: i: By creating and fostering mono
-,les it has enabled few men to grow
.lormously rich, but the mass of the
people have become poorer. Secretary
Blaine's declaration that the McKin-
ley tariff would not furnish a market
for a single barrel of pork or a single
bushel of wheat has proved true. 1t
was enacted to crafty the greed of
men who contributed large sums to
the Republican campaign fund, who
were to be reimbursed by the robbery
of their fellow citizens. Are wheat
aud corn higher in price because of
the tariff? Can the farmer buy his
agricultural implements, his fertili-
zers, groceries or clothing for his FAM
lily at lower prices because of the tar
lift? These questions answer them
selves. The tariff is a tax upon the
farmer, the mechanic and the laborer.
Under the stimulus of a market free
from competition, combined capital
has driven out of business every indi-
vidual who dared to compete with it
in its own branch of industry, and
having a monopoly could regulate
prices to suit its own insatiate greed
The consequence has been over-pro-
duction and in order to sell manufac-
tured goods at lower prices and make
the same percentage of profit the
wages of workmen are cut down.
This is what breeds discomfort, causes
strikes and aids the anarchists A
fairly adjusted tariff, imposed mainly
on the luXuries and not on the neces-
people only for the actual expenses of
our government when honestly and
economically administered" is all
that is needed. That is the kind of
tariff the Democrats mean to have
when they elect Cleveland and get
control of the Senate as we'll as the
House Under such n tariff farmers
would once more prosper.
The Baltimore EUening Netcs, in
an able article on the legal aspect of
the Homestead strike, says that while
man may kill another in defense of
his life the law does not recognize the
same right in defense of property.
The Nea0S adds:
In brief, to epitomize the most recent au-
thority on these subjects, man i'll defence of
his property must not commit riot, or any
like crime. He must not kill the aggressor,
but before the matter becomes one of life and
1aat ha net trrrp m, fl,a fnrr n1r
A man commits felonious homicide who
kills another IN resisting an unlawful attempt
to carry away, or to retain, his property.
Those who assist him may do no more than
he may do They may not break the peace
When these principles are applied to Mr..
Frick's case he is seen to have acted unlaw-
fully. The strikers had unlawfully deprived
him and his stockholders of their mills. They
were engaged not in felony bat in trespass.
Mr.. Frick, then, should have appealed to the
courts to have dIspossessed the strikers and put
him in possession. Instead OF doing SO he as
sembled a large body OF men provided with
arms The only object of this assembly
could have been an attack upon the strikers
1t was, therefore, an unlawful assembly. If
the Pinkertons began the firing, they were
rioters. II they killed any one, they were
guilty of murder or manslaughter.
Had the Pinkertons been force of deputy
sheriffs engaged in lawful eff9Tt to take
possession of the works under the writ of a
court, the case would have been different.
But it is clear, from the Pinkerton's carefully
prepared statement, that the men on the
barges were assembled and armed at private
expense, under private orders, and not under
the orders Of any court. The one deputy
sheriff among them did not make them
sheriffs. 1t is stated that they were to be
turned over to the sheriff, but not that the
sheriff assembled them or commanded them.
They were an unlawful assembly as We said
above.
To say this is not to excuse the strikers.
They also were engaged in riot and committed
murder or manslaughter. Both parties went
outside the law to accomplish their own pur-
poses, and both should be tried, and, If con-
victed, punished.