The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1892-10-08

THE DBMOCRATIC TARIFF POLICY.
A tariff for revenue only would mean
absolute free trade in every product and
manufacture of American labor and capt.
tai with tariff duties levied for revenue
only on tea, coffee, sugar and other arti-
cles not produced nor manufactured in
the United States. What does this mean
to the farmer? It means the repeal of the
protective duties ON wool, barley, buck
wheat, corn, wheat, oats, rye, rice, to-
bacco. broomcorn. beans, eggs, cabbages,
hops. honey, hay, onions, peas. potatoes,
straw, vegetables, apples, grapes, beef,
poultry, vinegar, fax and hemp. and the
abolition Of the sugar bounty.
It would mean this to the farmer under
the promise of free raw materials and
protection for finished goods which Mills
argued for in the campaign of 1880, for
every article grown or produced on
farm is q raw material. With free raw
could the farmer purchase any cheaper
than now7 His great home market for
his products would be impaired by the
competition Of cheap foreign producers of
raw materials, while protection would
DO continued to the manufacturer.
If "tariff for revenue only" was enforced
so that protection was withdrawn from
both the Western producer of raw ma
terial and the Eastern manufacturer how
would that help the farmer? The aboli-
ton Of protective duties ell around would
reduce the price of the farmers products,
and he could only buy cheaper by the COM
petition Of foreign manufacturers forcing
down the price of labor. With the
ruin of American manufactures and
the impairment of the great home
market, which the farmer now pos
sesses, how would the farmer be bene-
from both producer and manufacturer, in
accordance with the Chicago tariff plank,
or whether protection was withdrawn
from the producer of raw materials and
continued to the manufacturer of finished
goods. according to the Mills-Cleveland
idly limited at by Cleveland in his letter of
acceptance.
The Mills bill declared for free trade in
lumber, which the United States produces
to the value of 1890, 600 900 annually; it de-
clares for free trade in wool, of which we
produce 35o.O0o,00O pounds annually; for
free trade in salt. of which we produce
nearly 10000, 900 bushels annually.
Free trade in fax, hemp. jute and other
fibers.
Free trade in cement, potash. lime and
brick.
Free trade in meats, game and poultry.
Free trade in vegetables. peas and beans.
Free trade in stone.
Free trade in at least LOG other articles
produced in this country. which would be
produced in sufficient quantities for home
consumption if properly protected.
This policy of the Democratic party
strikes at every great industry on the Pa
citc coast. In the words of Senator
Dolph: by placing wool on the free list,
removing or reducing duties upon fruit,
admitting from Canada under reciprocity
in natural products all the products of
uring system and destroying our no ne
market, il would ruin agriculture. By adj
hitting Canadian fish free il would de-
stroy our fisheries. BY removing duties
from coal and lumber it would cripple
those industries; and by admitting free
lead ore and silver ore containing a large
percentage Of lead. ore produced by the
cheap labor of Mexico, it would ruin in
their infancy the mining industries of the
Pacific coast and stop the development of
our mines"
How would the farmers of Washington
like the repeal of the Mckinley duties on
wool and hops1 How would our mill
men and loggsrs like free lumber2 How
would our miners like free coal; free ores
How would our fishermen like free fish
Every article grown or produced on the
farms OF Washington is raw material, and
Grover Cleveland, in his letter of accept
auce, stands for absolute free trade in raw
materials. Would the prices of farm pro-
ducts be increased by free and unlimited
competition with the Canadian farmer,
who enjoys the advantage Of cheaper farm
lacor3 Whether the Democratic party
stands by the Chicago tariff plank. which
declares for tariff for revenue only, which
means the withdrawal OF protective duties
| from both raw materials and finished goods,
| or stands by Cieveland's letter of accept.
snee, which declares for free trade in raw
materials and protection of manufacturers,
| the Western farmer aud producer ceg,
tainly gets black eye. Under the Re-
| publican policy OF protection to both
! producer and manufacturer the farmer
certainly cannot complain he gets better
| prices for what he sells and he pays less
as a rule for what he buys.
There was a time when we oouli no,
ssA dsGssi.s Slnsaans es cal,evss. Eys.y.