The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1897-04-07
LET Us HAVE A SHARE !
IF PROTECTION is The RULE, Al
SHOULD DBEPao-EcTE0.

IF PROTECTION is TIE RULE, AL
SHOULD BEPao-EcTE0.
The Able Speech OF Congressman McLau
rim or the Dingley Tariff Bnl-The Sec
tienallsm Of the VI easure and It's Untsir-
ness to the South Clearly Pointed Out.
One o. the features of the tariff de
bate was the remarkable speech oil
Congressman McLaurin. of South
Carolina, in which he takes the posi-
ton now advocated by many of the
younger Democrats, that for ten years,
at least, protection will continue to
be the policy of this country. and
therefore the representatives. Of the
South should do what they can to OBJ,
tain justice for Southern interests.
The substance OF Mr.. McLaurin's s
speech as it related to the South's de-
mand for reciprocity in protection is
given below.
After some preliminary remarks
Mr.. McLaurin said:
Not long since I heard honorable
members of this body from the North.
especially from New England, defend
the single gold standard on the ground
that free coinage would cheaper the
dollar and bring loss to the laboring
people of that section whose money
was deposited in savings banks.
This statement struck me with
great force, aud I determined to in
veStigate the causes which made such
deposits possible. I was we'll aware
that NO such condition existed in my
State; that instead of the laboring
people of my section having bank ac-
counts, they had store accounts,
which majority Of them were unable
to pay when due.
BANK VS.. STORE ACCOUNTS
This statement-and I have no rea-
son to doubt its truthfulness-that the
laboring people of one section of this
country could have bank accounts,
while similar class in another section
could not, forced the conclusion upon
me that something somewhere was
radically wrong. In looking into the
matter I discovered enough to con-
vince me, at least, that the interests Of
the laboring and producing classes Of
the South had to certain extent been
sacrificed to the doctrines of free raw
material. ! imagined ! detected the
fact that the enthusiasm and heat Of
debate, together with an intense oppo-
sition to the policy and principles Of
protection, had caused US to forget or
neglect to demand just reciprocity
for our own people when at the begin
ming, as now, we fully realize that any
and all opposition will fail. Under
such circumstances, whatever consld-
Grafton is given to Southern interests
comes almost without demand and
Is always of such a character as to in
tertere as little as possible with inter-
ests in the North and East. In other
words, men who advocate the theory
of free raw material and denounce q
tariff as robbery are not in position
to ask reciprocity for their own people
who produce this free raw material
and then buy it back in the msnufac-
tured article with heavy duty added.
By reason of this unfortunate situa-
ton the people Of the South have been
compelled to stand the expense of
practical test of the doctrine of free
raw material. It is the only section
that has not filed the corridors Of this
Capitol with lobbyists and bessiged
the ways and means committee for
protection to their industries.
Mr.. Speaker, am opposed to any
further experiments in that direction.
If we are to have protection for fin
ished products in New England, de-
mand similar right for the raw pro-
ducts in South Carolina and the bal
ance of the South. # we are to have
q protective duty for cotton cloth, let
US have protection also for the cotton
out OF which the cloth is manufactUr-
ed. No one should deny the fairness
of this proposition.
Are those who manufacture cotton
cloths more entitled to governmental
favor than those who toll in the hot
sun to produce the raw cotton2 II
those who spin and weave IN New
England can have bank accounts, are
those who plant and make the cotton
less worthy of similar privilege2 /
undertake to say that one is as worthy
SIS the other, and that under truly
popular government there should be
no specially favored class, section or
Individual, but that all sections, all
classes and all industries should be
placed upon the same footing, with
equal rights to all and special privi-
leges to none" under the law.
This is my contention and the pur-
pose would seek to accomplish. We
know that the people of the North and
East during the past thirty years have
been piling up wealth almost beyond
measure. We know that the people
of the South are comparatively poor.
Whence this diference2
THE SOUTH THE ONLY VICTIM.
AS Democrats we have denounced
the doctrines of protection and de.
clared that the protected industries OF
the North and East were roooing the
balance of the nation. Believing this
to be true, and knowing that IN spite
of all our efforts for thirty years this
doctrine still continues in operation,
is it wise, is it just to our people not
to demand fair play for our section2
Must our people suffer because Of our
obstinacy or pride! Let US demand
equal privileges for all the products OF
the South to the end that If the tariff
is robbery our own section will cease
to be its only victim. If protection
really brings higher prices, as we
claim, let the people OF the South real
ize that fact when they market their
cotton, sugar, tobacco, rice, lumber,
etc.
I am sure not one OF them would
object, but on the contrary would
make excellent use of this additional
remuneration for their labor.
That the surplus money of the coun-
S,,Ie Nou, Eprlo nd and