The weekly tribune. [volume] (Great Falls, Mont.) 1891-1894, 1892-05-07
A WORD TO wORKINGMEN.

Up W december l, 1881, there had
been under the working of the new
tariff law a decrease of s1O6, SAG ,5OS in
the value Of dutiable imports. In other
words, the workingmen Of this country
were kept from buying abroad to that
extent, cheap clothing, cheap under
wear, cheap hats, cheap buttons, cheap
hardware and other necessaries. As for
every dollars worth of imported goods
sold in this country under the old law,
there was five dollars worth of American
goods made and sold, the shutting out
OF s1O7 100000 worth of foreign goods
means that the tariff barons have been
able to sell some %s6OO,OOO,OOO worth of
their products at the higher Mckinley
prices. The republican high takers will
claim that this is an argument for pro-
tection-that it shows home production
has been stimulated and somebody's
money has been put in circulation.
This is undoubtedly true. The home
manufacturer finds an increased demand
for his products and as he is relieved
from foreign competition no is able to
command higher prices for inferior goods.
The stimulation of home manufactures
is seen in the prosperity of over 100
shoddy mills now in operation turning
out over lW,OOO.OOO pounds of shoddy
every year which is made into cloth and
passed off on the workingman as"genuine
all wool. 1t is quite true, too. that some
body's money is put in circulation. The
workingman having to spend nearly al
his wages for the bare accessories of life
Is unable TO lay by anything for a rainy
day. Without the high tariff and the
consequent high prices he might be able
to save something and eventually be-
come moderately well off. if not rich.
Thus he is protected from the shares of
wealth. A good deal can be said, there
fore, from the protectionists standpoint.
for a policy which uses up all the aver
age mans income in necessary expenses
and imposes the risks + wealth on the
exceptional man. Our paternal govern
ment of course knows best what is good
for the average citizen.
The republican high-taxers overlook
the other feature of the case-that to
force a man to pay more for an article
than it sells for in an unprotected mar
ket is to destroy part of his money. If a
w~orkingman is forced--as he is-to nay
$40 for a coat that without protection
would cost him only Sc he is robbed of
81. To him that 81 might as well be
thrown in the fire. The line of argu-
ment with which the hlgh-taxers attempt
to Justify their policy would also justify
them in going into a workingman's
house and destroying his bedstead on
the plea that replacing it would give
employment to a Michigan bedstead-
maker. How would the Montana work.
ingman like that? Would he, if the
question was brought directly home to
him, instead of indirectly, hand over 40
per cent of his earnings to the support of
Michigan man? This policy of de-
the poor mans wealth is SO
odious that in his last message President
after Boosting of the amount of
goods excluded by the Mckinley
tariff, took a new tack and gloritied the
republican party for promoting free
[rade. In the year ending September 30,
1871, there was, according to the presi-
lent, an increase of free imports of SllS,-
making the percentage OF free
IMPORTS 1918, instead of 34.27, as it was
n the preceding year. In the last half
If that period, since free trade in sugar
vas in%augurated, the percentage of free
IMPORTS has grown to 55.37.
Now was that a good thing or a bad
hing! The protectionists are taking
'reat credit to themselves for cheaper
ng sugar by making it free and maintain
With perfect sincerity that it was a good
hing for the workingmen. But they
a~refully avoid considering metals, cloth
nd other necessaries in the same light.
I free sugar is a good thing why not
rec wool, free clothing. free tin and free I
Iardware? Will free trade in these \
commodities put up their price, while
rec trade in sugar puts the price of
ugar down? That is something for
he workingmen of Montana to think
bout.