Bismarck weekly tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1884-1943, 1894-06-22

One of the best digests of Senator
Hansbrough's speech against the Wilson
tariff bill, is to be- found in the Washing
ington Star, wherein the senator's 2
ments against the bill, as seen from the
standpoint Of the western farmers, is as
follows:
While claiming to be in the interest of
the extension Of our markets for agr!cul-
tural products, it strikes down the reel
procity clause of the Mckinley act, thereby
narrowing the American farmers foreign
market by many millions of dollars. He
was sorry, he said, to be obliged to take
this sectional view of the measure, but be-
lieved there was an excuse for so doing, in
view OF the fact that the great manufacture
ing industries of New Jersey and Maryland
had been carefully protected in this bill, the
rates of duty upon cotton goods and WOOL
ems having been advanced at least so per
cent. over the rate in the original Wilson
bill, While coal, iron, steel and all kinds of
clothing had :.been highly protected. Mr..
German, he said, had declared that this
was a measure solely in the interest of
revenue, while Mr.. Hill of New York, had
stated that the bill would raise SIS, OOO, 900
more than was necessary.
He quoted from standard authorities and
official statistics to show that it is possible
for the sheep raisers of the United States,
If properly encouraged, to produce all the
wool necessary for consumption in this
country. He declared that the wool raiser
west of the Mississippi river would be
obliged to go out of the business, for the
simple reason that while the cost to him of
producing wool was from 10 to ~ cents
per pound, the cost in Australia was from
5 to 6 cents per pound, and in addition to
this, that while the freights from the
Rocky mountain points to Boston and
Philadelphia were ~ to 8 cents per pound
the carrying charges from Australia were
less than cent per pound. He was conf
dent that hereafter, if this bill passed,
sheep would be raised in the west only for
their mutton. Figures were also given,
showing the rapid increase in the wool in
dustry under protection and the equally
rapid decline in the industry under former
reductions of duties. Referring to the
grain schedule, he said that the duty which
Canada had been paying in order to sell
barley in our market was a tax upon the
Canadian farmer,,and that the money went
into our treasury as a contribution from
him, and that it was not a tax upon the
consumer of barley in this country. This,
he said, was a fair illustration, and would
apply to many other articles.
With the raw materials from that Sec
ton so completely and systematically
placed on the free list, with all protection
Withdrawn from the articles the western
people have to sell and high rates of duties
levied in favor of the articles of the east
and south, which the western people are
expected to buy, he felt that he would be
disappearing his constituents if he did
not stand here every day for the remainder
OF his term, if necessary, to help defeat the
Ubiquitous and trust-contaminated measure.
The inequality of this measure lies in the
fact that it places a high protective duty
upon all that we buy and puts upon the
free list those things that the farmers of
this county have to sell. With wheat
upon the free list, the farmers of the north
west country, from Manitoba to the further
confines of the Saskatchewan, would dump
their wheat into the markets of Duluth,
Minneapolis and Chicago, thus creating a
larger surplus for which the American
farmer must find a foreign market. Our
facilities for handling Our own grain are
already overtaxed. If We must, on top of
this, handle the surplus of the Canadian
farmer, the result can we'll be imagined.
This is the kind of reciprocity proposed by
this bill,