Hutchinson gazette. [volume] (Hutchinson, Kan.) 1895-1902, 1897-06-03
WILL BUSINESS REVIVE?
WILL DlNGLEVS PROPOSED REM.
EDY REVIVE lT9
Marion Butler Writes an Able Answer to
the Question, VIII the Dingley BIZ
Revive Business? and Reaches the Con.
cIusion That it Will Not and eau Not.


the Dingley bill restore prosperity?
Among the articles published in the
May number in answer to this question
is one by Senator Butler. 1t is as fol
lows:
81 am asked to give my views in re-
Spouse to the question: win the Ding
ley Bill Revive Business?'
If the Dingley bill will increase the
capacity of the American people to
purchase, even to the extent ofsupply-
ing their necessities, then it will re
wye business. If it fails to do this,
then it cannot revive business. The
Dingley bill cannot open the mills and
keep them open unless there is mark
ct for what the mills produce If there
were such market, that is, if those
who desire to consume were able to
purchase, the mills would be open now
running full speed. To-day the com
F. mercial salesman finds that he cannot
place as large an order with the retail
merchant as formerly. The merchant
explains that he has not yet disposed
of his last purchase Some of the goods
are still in stock or else they have been
sold to customers on credit, who have
not yet been able to pay. The sales
man, therefore, sends in smaller and
fewer orders and, in turn, the jobbers
place fewer and smaller orders with
the wholesale man and the factory.
This tells the story. 1t is the condi-
ton of the consumer, the inability of
the masses to purchase, that has shut
down some mills and caused others to
run on short time. This condition can
not change until the condition of the
agriculturists and producing classes is
improved, and improved materially.
Now will the Dingley bill accomplish
this? Not even its author is rash
enough to make such claim.
The cause of industrial depression is
much deeper than the difference be-
tween any high protective tariff or rev.
enue tariff. We have suffered business
depression, strikes, and lock-outs alike
under low tariff and under a high
tariff. In short, we have always suf-
fered business stagnation and depres-
sion when the volume of money was
contracted or within the control of any
combination of men other than the
government itself.
The Republican party has promised
TO give the country prosperity with its
policy of protection and the gold stand
ard. 1t is an impossible task. Free
trade and the gold standard go togeth-
Ter They have promised to protect
American industry and American la
Dor against the pauper labor of foreign
countries. would be glad to see them
carry out this pledge in good faith, but
the Dingley bill falls far short of their
protection promises. Nine tenths of
the protection which it will afford will
be for few specially favored manu-
facturers. Even the labor employed
in such factories is guaranteed no pro-
lection, save such as the generosity of
their employers may see fit to grant
Besides, farming, which certainly must
be included in the list of American in =
dustries, is not protected at all against
foreign competition, There are only
about four million laborers employed
in manufacturing, while there are over
nine millions employed in the cotton
fields of the South aud in the wheat
fields of the West These men are GER
tainly as much American laborers as
those engaged in the factories, yet the
Dingley DILL does not even propose to
protect single one of this vast num-
Der. These laborers are forced to meet
the competition of foreign pauper la
borer, Just the same as the laborers in
bn6 lhCAOTIcSs ~ ID 1EuO bhdD 'llO BAEhb
agricultural industry, and the nine
millions of laborers employed in it,
cannot be protected by an import duty
because the products of their labor are
{ exported; but they can be protected by
a different method. Protection is the
principle for which the Republican
party stands. and to which it is pledg-
ed to the American people. The i'm
port duty is simply the method which
it employs to protect the manufactur-
ers. Now let the Republican party
employ some other method that will
protect agriculture and agricultural
labor. Let them apply their great
principle of protection to every Ameri-
can industry and to all American la
Dor subject to foreign pauper competi-
ton, by whatever method necessary to
give such protection. 1 submit that
there are two methods by which this
protection can be given.
First By taking from our competi-
tors in India, Russia and Argentine the
bounty due to the enhanced price of
gold, which they now enjoy to our det-
riment. The difference in exchange,