The state rights democrat. [volume] (Albany, Linn County, Oregon) 1865-1900, 1899-09-15
Admit 1t at Last.

Republican papers, notably the Ore'
wouian, are driven at last to admit whai
sdkmoclats have always contended would
follow as necessary consequence Of
high protective tariG laws. Time and
sgaln we're warnings given that trusts
snd villainous combinations would fol-
0w ia the wake of such legislation, and
theee predictions have been more than
verified. The steel trust, the wooden
mill trust, the lumber trust, and scores
of Others exist and are maintained wko'-
ay from the fostering care given them by
che Dingley bill. Speaking OF the per-
.nicious affects OF the DIngley tariff law
as it effects the farmers who have to
purchase grain sacks lately landed
Portland from Calcutta, the 0regonian
says.
''The farmer paiS the duty just as lie
aid the freight, the insurance charges,
aud every other item OF expense in con-
aection with the cargo Of grain bags
6rom the time it left the Calcutta ex-
porter's hands until it reached the local
raiIroad station nearest his fa:m."
This is the truth fully aud iearlessly
cold ia the same language and in the
same spirit that any democrat would tell
ls. Does any one believe that this truth
Ia sarerelation to the oregonlang Would
any one 50 far underestimate the dis
terminating comprehension OF the editor
Of that psper as to suppose for moment G
chat he did not understand the effect of g
che Dingley tariff in reference to grain c
Gags as we'll when that bill was pending
an Congress as he does now?
That paper adds: b
s'This case (grain sack matter illus a
frates the iniquity or injustice OF a eye /,
Cam winch is adding much to the bur- I,
dens Of the producer Of the Pacific i,
coast" Q,
But why complain? Did not that edi- ei
Cor support and urge the election OF Il
pIesideat who urged the passage OF the
Dingiey bill, and also candidates for con-
gress who we're pledged to support the 90
whole echeme OF protection? IL it more til
iaiquitous TO tax the producer OF the it
rAciic coast for the benefit Of few bag nc
than to tax 10000, 900 Of m
for the benefit oil the wool wi
growers, or steel manufacturers. or coal de
barcns, or lumbermen or any other benz no
sficIary to the iniquitous Dingley tariff for
NV? Surely nos. The farmers and pro- wr
sncers Of the Pacific coast who have been
the republican ticket have no
ight to complain o. THIS burden -1nis WI
~ upon tneif gram SacSs, tor ~ 'ne viii
lassaae Of the Diugley tariff law they OBJ 10,
aimed just what they voted for. The Il,
ruth In q nut ehell is that the whole A..
'rotee.iye tariff scheme is iniquitous ~
amoral, and bad, alb initio. 1t IL the -,
ery essence Of paternalism and popu- ~,
am. The Oregonian thinks the tariff ~
a grain bags should be removed, but 1t ~.
aonld nos De reinOssu Until = - hes
layed from lumber, coal. wool, woolen ~
PODS, tan plate iron, steel, etc. There ear,
much more sense In levying this duty hs,
. grain bags than there is in levying 9 h.,,
aty on wooden goods for all the increase 80.
the price Of grain bags in consequence 49,
the tariff goee into the treasury of the : !,
Tnited Ststee, while in the case OF the ~
oolen goods it goes into the pockets of
le wooden manufacturers. Down with
10 whole scheme.