Fergus County argus. [volume] (Lewistown, Mont.) 1886-1946, 1892-10-20
NIB. SMITHS SPEECH.

MR. SMITHS SPEECH.
The Democratic meeting last We'd
nesday evening was quite largely at
tended by Republicans and Democrats
alike, attracted by the fact that Rob-
ert B. Smith, heralded as the great free
trade orator of the state, would ad-
dress the meeting. MI. Smith is a
forcible and plausible speaker, and
made a very good argument from a
Democratic standpoint. However, it
is safe to say that even the Democrat
ic portion of the audience were not a
little disappointed, as Mr.. Smith was
not nearly up to what they had been
led to expect, either in argumentative
force or oratorical ability. The fact
Is simply this: Mr.. Smith speaks from
the old and threadbare free trade
teachings, like all of the tariff debaters
in the Democratic ranks, of which our
people have had enough. Most OF his
statements are rash, and are not war
EtuICo ny IL iaSlS as OhCy ICohiJ CAioo
Besides his rash statements, his speech
was noticeable for the omission of
some of the questions before the peo-
pie.
To one unacquainted with Mr.. Smith
it might appear that he is a poor la
boring man, deprived of the necessar-
les OF life because of what he calls the
"infamous tariff tax" instead of the
| petted child of the Democratic party
in the state, who held a federal Office
under the administration of Grover
Cleveland, and who longs to hold it
again. He stands upon the free trade
plank of the Democratic national con
vention, and attempts to reconcile
that plank with the tariff planks in the
former platforms OF that party. HI
pleads. for a tariff, in which 'protec
ton, if any, is merely incidental, thus
eliminating the doctrine OF protection
from his creed. From this text b,
made the regulation free trade argu
mont. deploring the fact that laborin,
men are compelled to wearc clothes AND
eat; but he failed to state, in that con
nection, that all articles of food, ant
nearly all articles of apparel ar
cheaper in the United States than il
free trade England. Neither did he at
tempt a comparison of the wages o
American and English laboringpeople
He also failed to explain the grear
prosperity of the American people dur
ing all of the years Of Republican rule
Another fact very noticeable was hi!
failure to say anything aboutfre lead
neither did he explain why the Demo
cratic party had wholly failed to re
peal the 'hated and obnoxious Nc
Kinley BILL" when that is the pledg'
upon which they carried the country
two years ago. However, Mr. Smith
did spring upon his audience his fam
Gus plea for free wool, the same ont
he made two years ago, and attempted
to show them that free wool would
enhance the price; but he did not ex
plain how free wool could make WOO
higher to the wool grower, and at the
same time make wooden clothing
| cheaper to the laboring man, but hi
argued both OF those propositions
However, no part of This speech did any
harm to the Republican cause in the
county, and his free wool argument
destroyed the little effect the Other
portions of his speech might otherwise
have had. He evidently forgot that
he was in the greatest wool growing
county in the state, and that our PEG
| pie know more about the workings o
| the tariff upon the wool growing in
| dustry than he did.
Mr.. Smith also made an appeal fol
direct taxation by de%nouncing the Re
publican party for repeating the income
tax, the tax on national banks, tht
8 per cent. tax on manufacturers; an6
| claimed that these taxes were taker
from the rich, which was the reasor
for their appeal. 1t is evident to every
person that if tax is collected upor
any of these people, the poor maj
eventually pays the tax, for the reason
that money would be higher, manufac
tured articles would increase in price
and everything else would go up to al
amount sufficient to meet the amount
of the tax. Aside from that, the in
come tax was not collected from tn.
rich alone. for the writer very well re
members that his father, who was 8
poor man by the way, regularly PAID
an income tax. He also denounced
the opposing party for all OF the finan
cial legislation following the war, and
in his arguments he followed the lead
OF such old greenbackers and fiat
money men as Ignatius Donnelly
That legislation needs no defense at
| nR