The Globe-republican. [volume] (Dodge City, Kan.) 1889-1910, 1901-06-27
PRODUCER AND USER.
THEY ARE INTERDEPEN DENT
UPON EACH OTHER
How the Practical Operation Of the
Protective Principle Meets the Re
s4uIre1z,ere Legislation for the Great
est Coco of the Greatest Number

J. D. Wilson of Randolph, Mo-, re
Gently addressed the following to the
edite-- of the American Economist
CUneeding that the tariff on wool
makes the grower money, who pays it
in the end, the man who wears the
wool or who2 Seems to me that legis-
1ation should be for the greatest good
to the greatest number In other words,
don't more people wear wool than
grow it2''
Answer. Questions of this sort the
Free Traders have been asking for
many, many years. always answering
them to their own complete satisfac-
ton In their way of looking at 1t
protection benefits the few at the ex-
pense of the many Our western friend
has got it all figured out in the same
way Pity it is that his talents should
be wasted away out in Darkest Miz-
zouryt'' He should have been a col
lege professor. But we shall take him
he is and endeavor to solve his
cOnundrum.
Conceding, as he says-and this is
important concession-that the tariff
on wool makes money for the wool
grower, who pays it? Principally the
foreign wool grower, who is compelled
to accept lower price for his product
in order to sell it in the United States
after the duty has been added Possib-
1y the man who wears clothing made
of wool pays some OF the tariff, but not
much Clothing is little no higher
in price than it was in days of non
Protected wool under the Wilson tariff
law. If suit of clothes could be
bought a trifie cheaper, then the wage
Garner and the farmer were none the
better off that account, because
neither the wage Garner nor the farm
had nearly much money to buy
clothes with they have now If you
Il IL Isa n
didn't have the dollar to pay for it.
you wouldn't be anything like SO well
off as though overcoats We're selling
at $40 apiece and you had SIS in your
pocket with which to buy
But the pivotal thought-the great
Free Trade conception-of our Mis-
souri, friend is to be found in his con-
Guiding proposition that
Legislation should be for the great
est good of the greatest number In
other words, don't more people wear
wool than grow it2''
Most assured1y legislation should be
for the greatest good of the greatest
number Most assuredly more
wear wool than grow it. Right
here is the strength of protec-
ton and weakness of Free Trade Not
only does protection call for legisla-
ton that involves the greatest good
to the greatest number; it 1egislates
for the greatest good OF the whole
number There is today in this coun-
try no individua1-not one-who is
not in some way distinctly the gamer
by the policy of protection Even the
importer the American agent for
foreign merchandise is the beneficiary
of state of prosperity which has in
creased the demand and likewise the
purchasing power OF the most liberal
body of purchasers and consumers the
world has ever known. The use in the
United States of foreign made articles
of art, luxury and fashion was never SO
great now, while the production and
consumption of domestic articles of all
sorts (that is to say, the gross volume
of internal trade) and the sales to for
eigners of articles of domestic produc-
ton are SO much greater than ever be-
fore that for the first time in its his
tory the United States has become the
| leading nation of the world alike in
| domestic and foreign trade, and in
stead of being in debt to the money
centers of Europe, is now creditor
| nation. The economic policy that has
| brought all this to pass may surely
| be considered as productive of the
| greatest good to the greatest mum Der.
| But our Missouri friend needs some
light on the question, Don't more peo-
| pie wear wool than grow it?'' AS we
| have said, this question must be an
/ swered in the Affirmative. So do more
| people eat wheat and corn and beef
and mutton and pork than raise those
| articles. A thousand times more peo-
| pie nails than those who make
nails. So with every article OF use
| and consumption The users and con-
| sumers outnumber the producers many
| times over Protection takes account
| of this condition and by diversifying
| production alike in the factory and on
| the farm calls into being tremendous
| army whose needs and requiem ents
| are mutual and interdependent. 1t in
| sureS to the American farmer a profit
| able market for his wool by insuring
| a steady demand on the part of per
sons who wear but do not grow wool,
| and by taking care that the cheaper
| woods of foreign countries shall not
| come in and break down the price of
/ home grown woods Otherwise the
/ American wool grower would have to
| go out of business as so many thous-
| ands did when wool was deprived of
protection in the Free Trade tariff law
| of 1S94-1897- Is it not a wise tariff pol
icy that diversifies industry in agricuI-