The Kimball graphic. (Kimball, Brule County, Dakota [S.D.]) 1883-1905, 1895-11-23
JusrA WORD OR TWO, TOM.

Notwithstanding the fact that the
tariff will be the principal topic Of dis
cussion during the coming year, it is
like threshing old straw and little pre-
mature discussing it now; and, in any
event, we do not care to use up very
much space in wrangling over the mat
ter with our good friend, Thomas w.
Bishop Of the Yolga Tribune-and it is
more than likely that Mr.. Bishop feels
the same way.
Apropos Of Toms recent strike for
more protection, it is Of peculiar inter-
est, however, that his newspaper, the
Tribune, is the only paper in its town
and published in community and
county in which Democrats have long
been held as curiosities. There is very
little encouragement in such locality
for the PRONUNCIATION Of Democratic
doctrines, and it is no secret that in the
handling of all political topics the Trib-
une has invariably taken conservative
course. That this shows good business
judgment on the part Of Mr.. Bishop no
one disputes-it is the same theory which
the elder Bennett held: learn what tho
people want and then give it to them. II
was the most natural thing in the world
therefore that the recent slump Of things
Democratic should have set Tom to
thinking, but in casting about for some
thing to rake Democracy with he should |
have hit upon protection as he did passes
understanding at least. The |
record Of the party since it came into
power is enough to make almost any
Democrat ashamed OF it, but that part Of
it which should be damned the most is
the nincompoop who got the tariff
for revenue only plank substituted for
the Cleveland plank in the last national
conventioGsand not those who repudiated
it. So good a Republican as Mr.. LaFol
lctte 6f the Chamberlain Journal states
in the last issue OF his paper that there
is no difference between the two great
parties on the money question and only
8 or 10 per cent on the tariff. And he is
dead right, for the Wilson-Gorham bill
| lisnotiing but protection measure pure
and simple and differs from the McKin-
ley bill in degree only. We admit
with Mr.. Bishop that the Wilson bill put
wool on the free list zone Of the particu-
lar things in which our farmers are SO
much interested" but it was done to help
out the manufacturers of woolen goods;
and does Mr.. Bishop know that sheep
cut but an insignificant figure at the
best, their value being only four per
cent of the total value CT farm animals
in the United States? The Wilson bill
, also reduced the tariff on cattle, but
cattle have been higher this fall than
for years and the flood OF steers from
Mexico have not materiaiiZed. The
Wilson bill abolished the 5 cents per
dozen on eggs, but the Canadian pauper
hen has not driven the South Dakota hen
out OF business. Hogs were worth So
per hundred last year; today they are
only bringing $2.65-an apt Illustration
of how little the tariff has to do with the
price of the product Of the western farm.
The protectionists themselves admit
that the tariff upon agricultural pro-
ducts is aimed at the Canadian farmer
for the protection Of the American
farmer across the border. but they have
: never told us why the Canadian farmer
could on poorer soil and less favorable
climate down the American farmer on
even terms. But suppose he could, trans
portation charges would more than off
set any possible good q tariff could do
: the western farmer. We are constantly
exporting shiploads of cattle, dressed
meats, poultry, butter, lard, tallow
wheat and almost every product Of the
: western farm. So long as we have one
g pound OF meat or one bushel of grain IN
Q excess of home supply that price is fixed
e abroad and no tariff can ever change it,
Il A tariff upon agricultural products
show up nicely in the schedule, but it's
all blind to make the farmers believe
G they are getting their share Of the pot.
II Can our friend Bishop name a manu-
a featuring center in the United States
/ where four-tifth Of the factories art
closed? Can he locate one where ever
one fourth are not running? Seems t.
a us, Tom, that we wouldn't make rast
II statements like that. And will Mr.
# Bishop tell us, il a lack Of protection il
r all that ails the country, why Bric'
Gorham, Murphy, Gibson and liill-al
proteclionists after McKinley's mos
r. approved pattern not saved TO
al further.cff0rts in that line? :
er Perfection is not claimed for the vii
son-GorhaIl bill, but it is more asprotec
tion measure than tariff forErevenu
ty ten to one, and the scarcity of none
he AMI low prices to which Mr.. Bishop re
a fers cannot IN truth &c attributed to it
operations. The Democratic party ha
sins-affording Mr.. Bishop am pie oppol
in tunlties omissions and mistake
fe to answer for, but one ofithem is not
w lack of protection to American lndustrie
up to this writing. In the great manu-
featuring states OF New York, Connect
Il cut, Massachusetts, and New Jersey til
nd manufactures are not confined to Repul
III licans; and the struggle in the last COL
gress and the result shows how tcn'
ciously the average Democrat holds to
h. protection teat alongside his Repablica
brother, both Of whom gather dolla
when the western farmer CLEANS penni
out Of any tariff measure that can poss
IN bly, be devised. and against both of who
ire we OF the west should wage a commo
w. y. cause.
~,