Reporter and farmer. [volume] (Webster, Day County, Dakota [S.D.]) 188?-1946, 1894-10-18


cents a bushel He sells his bushel
OF wheat for so cents pays his ten
cents tpriff, which goes into the u.
S. Treasury, and takes 40 cents
home. Who paid that tax? 1t
would have been the same if he had
brought over "a thousand bushels.
Or, supposing a blacksmith in Mon
treal makes a pound of nails, by
hand, and brings them to Buffalo;
sells them, pays the tariff and takes
the balonce home. Who paid the
tariff on that pound of nails? 1t
would have been the same if he had
brought over a carload which he had
manufactured by machinery. 1t
would have been the same if it had
been a pound of yarn or yard of
flannel. If there had been no wheat
in the United States so that we were
compelled to buy the Canadian farm
er's wheat, then this tariff would
have been a tax, and we would have
been compelled to pay 60 cents for
his bushel of wheat, but there was a
Yankee bushel of wheat here, raised
by some Yankee farmer, that the
miller of Buffalo could buy, and the
Canadian farmer had to pay 10 cents
into our treasury for the privilege of
selling in our market. That is the
reason wheat in Winnipeg and all
along the Canadian line in Canada, is
always 10 to Is cents lower than on
this side of the line, The Canadian
blacksmith who brings n pound or
one carload of nails to this side of
the line, cannot add the tariff and
make US pay it, because the buyer of
nails on this side can buy a Yankee
pound Of nails, hat was made by
some man who ate No. l hard wheat,
and the Canadian or Englishman or
Dutchman or any other foreigner
who brings his nails here must pay
the tariff as a privilege for selling in
our market. This would not be the
case if we had no nails and were
compelled to buy of the foreigner.
Then he would add the tariff to the
price of nails, and he would get our
money and we would get his nails;
but by buying Yankee nails, made
by a man who eats South Dakota
wheat and meat, we have the nails
and the money both. And that
Englishman burns Bill Mckinley in
efigy.
1t would be just the same with
yarn, flannel, or any other article
manufactured in this country in
quantities sufficient to supply our
needs. If we manufactured no yarn,
flannel, or other articles of wooden
wear, and were compelled to buy
from England, then the tariff would
be added to u price; but thank
God and the Republican party we
have American yarn, flannel, and
other wooden wear, made in America,
by men and women fed by American
farmers, and the Englishman who
brings his goods here pays our tariff
for the privilege of selling in our
market. We have the yarn, the fan
mel, etc, and the money too, and the
Englishman burns Bill Mckinley in
efigy.
My dear populist farmer, just think
this matter over calmly, quietly.
Why was Mckinley burned in efigy
in England, and why was Wilson,
the author of the bill Kyle voted for,
so nicely treated in England that
they "wined and dined" him? Eng
land wants to sap our money. Eng
land wants to feed the man, who
made the goods, on wheat from India.
Then say that the farmer does not
need protection, and that the Repub-
lican party has never legislated for
the benefit of the farmer.
Tariff gives better wages says
the Republicans; l am here to dis
pute that" said Kyle The democrats
have been disputing it for more than
so years. The oily-tongued senator
then juggled with figures showing
that wages during our protective
periods were higher in England than
here. This is false. Here is the
table from Peck's and Carroll D..
Wright's Labor Commission report
on wages:
England. u. s..
Blacksmiths. : II $500
Boilermakers. LOG 2.32
Bricklayers. Log 1852
4 49, Oh ~ 40