Connecticut western news., 1892-11-03
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER, 8, 1892
NEVER HAD A FATHER.

It is amusing to behold the claims of campaign speakers and partisan news papers in regard to the present tariff on Sumatra tobacco. No one can deny that the protective tariff on tobacco as embodied in the Mckinley bill has proved blessing to. the tobacco grow CTS in the United States. In Connecti- out alone the acreage of tobacco has in- creased from 4,OOO~ to 1000 in two years, and the value of the tobacco crop has increased from $500, ,OOO to $2, 8OO,- GOO. during the same period. The in crease in the value of the crop per acre is about $2OG.0O.
 Congressman DeForest is candidate for reelection from the Fourth district of Connecticut. He is stumping his district, and every where he speaks he claims that the Democrats are entitled to the credit of the increased protective tariff on tobacco, and that Nick Staub, of New Milford, is the true and lawful father of said increase.
 Hon Joseph l.. Barbour, of Hartford, one of the best Republican orators on the stump, lets the gas all out of Mir DeForest's balloon. MT Barbour trots out the Congressional record, and says: ''the Democratic ways and means com mittee of the Mills Bill had utterly re- fused to raise the tariff on Sumatra to- bacco and every Democrat on the ways and means committee of the Mckinley Bill also voted against it. But the Re- publicans on the ways aud means com mittee of the Mckinley Bill raised the tariff on Sumatra from 35 cents to 200 per pound in spite of Democratic oppo- sition."
 When prominent men like DeForest and Barbour make directly opposite statements, problem in veracity or be- lief is presented to the public. To un- thinking minds such problem seem in- capable of solution. Happily in this in stance the problem can be solved with out impeaching either gentleman. Both seem sincere in their claims-their dad dyism but both are misinformed Both are wrong; of course they are. How can it be otherwise? Just bear in mind that the tobacco tariff never had fath- CT. Its uncle won it at raffie.
 Although the tobacco tariff never had father, it had mother. Necessity is the mother of Invention;" and Neces- sity is also the mother of the tobacco tariff. Thirteen years ago, Necessity called tobacco growers together at Hart ford to devise some plan or measures to prevent or restrict the importation oi Sumatra tobacco, which was even then running the infant tobacco growing in. dustry in Connecticut. The meeting was non partisan one. From that day to the present time the tobacco question has been agitated. We need not re. count the history of national Legislation in regard to Sumatra tobacco; suffice to say 1t was found that tariff of 35 cents per pound on Sumatra was not sufficient to protect the tobacco growers in the United States, and when Congress enact ed the Mckinley bill the tariff on Su matra was raised to $2 0O per pound and that session of Congress was th' time and place of the raffle where the to bacco tariff was won by it's uncle. A that rafle, the iron producing state won high protective tariff on iron. Th' sheep raising states won high protec tive tariff on wool. We might mention nearly 5000 other articles won at tha raffie, or in other words protected by
 tariff.
 We have shown that the tobacco tari1 never had father. We have show that it had mother; and we have tolt her name. We have shown that it ha an uncle, but it will not be expedient tt mention his name while both Democrat and Republicans are claiming to be it father. Suffice to say, the tobacco tari1 has proved to be desirable child. I has a host of friends. No wonder botl parties now claim it. even If it did g begging for adoption less than thre years ago.
 F. & R and the Boston & Maine.