The Coconino weekly sun., 1896-02-06
VASTLY DIFFERENT.
The Effects of Protection as Comp.rsd
 with Free Trade ResuIt.

The Effects of Protection ss Comp.r.s with Free Trade Results.
 At no time in the history of the United States have the relative merits of protection and free trade been sc clearly contrasted and brought out be. lore the people as during the period between the date of the going into eff rect or the Mckinley law and the pres ent day. During these five years, near. ly' we have experienced the workings Of both the protective tariff policy ot the republican party and the free trade system ot the democracy. It Is not diff hcult to determine to which of the two policies the people are now inclined tc adhere.
 In the campaign of 1892, and, in fact. during the five years previous thereto or from 1887, when President Cleveland promulgated his famous free trade mes sage to congress, the democracy vigor. ously prosecuted it's crusade of misrep. rescntation, which it called a campaign of education. The minds of the voters Of the country were filled with ideas oI cheapness of everything--excepting la. bor Not even passing reference was paid to this important phase of our in. dustrial system. The laboring man was told that he could buy garment for 50 cents that cost dollar at that time, and the deluded voter accepted the state. ment as truth, voted for Cleveland and democracy, but, alas! found that he did not have any work to do after free trade triulnphed, and consequently could not find the 50 cents % buy any article oi clothing. The deplorable business de. pression of the past three years nearly has been n lesson that will not be for gotten by the present generation of voters, who to-day are clamoring for Il return to the prosperous republican days of protection to American indus tries.
 It is not necessary to enter into the details of tariff argument to convince anybody that protection is Q blessing to the country and that free trade is a curse to the nation. The balance sheet at the United States treasury is suf- fcient proof of the injury done to the country by the free trade democracy.
 The only reply to the complaints made by the people at the injurious re- suits of the Wilson-Gorman tariff act is that more time must be given the law to work out its salvation. More time has been given, but the treasury situation grows worse instead of better. On January the apparent surplus" for the month amounted to $277 1869, be- ing the excess of receipts over expendi- lures for that day. On Saturday the deficit" being the excess of expendi- lures over receipts for the first IS days Of the month, amounted to $7,2S5,30 and the deficit for this fiscal year, which amounted to $15, ,117 ,03S on Janu- Gry 9, had grown to $22,6s0,o13, being an increase of $7,562,975 Comparing the receipts from various sources for the two periods. 1t is found that customs yielded $2,6s4, ,s0o more, internal rev. enue S1 1,40S.S less, and miscellaneous sources $37,4lS less in the first IS days of January than in the corresponding period of December. The marked in- SItsASC lIOul CuStOLlS, ol couIrNs IHui- cates a corresponding increase of inn portations of dutiable goods-an in- crease of more than 27 per cent.
 The most appalling feature of the workings of the democratic free trade tariff law is its opening of our markets to the world. thus increasing imports and thereby displacing so much of the American product. This has caused the suspension of business in the United States and has led to surrender of the opportunities for labor here, to other countries. All this has worked most damagingly to labor throughout the United States. The lesson of free trade has been m expensive one, but 1t has had one beneficent result: It has taught rhe people of the United States to vote hereafter with the party that does most for American institutions. That party Is the party of Lincoln, of Grant and Of Blaine. It is the party, too, that will triumph in the national political con- @as& ray% lbnuy Jonrpo1