The Plymouth tribune. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1901-1911, 1902-07-31
Protecting the Consumer.

Protecting the Consumer.
Governor Cummins' idea, in his
Minneapolis address. that "the con-
sumner is better entitled to competi-
tion than the producer to protection, "
is a catchy phrase, alluring to those
who do not look deep enough to dis
cover that its essence is free-trade.
Perhaps the governor did not mean it
that way, but that Is its last analy-
sis. 1t is the point the free-traders
have always given emphasis. The re-
publicans while not controyerting it
Numerically, have always insisted
that the way to really and substan-
TALLY protect the consumer is to create
a condition that will give employment
to both labor and capital, and thus
cOnduce to the greatest development
of our national resources and the
highest prosperity Of our people. The
protective policy conserves this pur-
pose, and under 1t the nation has at
tanned a progress and thrift unequal
ed in any other country. AS a tree
must be judged by its fruits, the con-
clusion is reasonable that free tenets,
however seductive in appearance, can
not supplant hard facts.
One phase of the delusion is ground
ed in the confusion Of ideas about
"the consumer" Who is he? Under
the protective tariff all citizens, no
matter their employment, directly or
indirectly are beneficiaries. 1t is i'm
impossible for a community to attain
general prosperity without each iu-
divldual sharing in it.
A poor man would rather be poor
man in a community where there is
thrift and opportunity than to be poor
In community itself poor and barren
of opportunity. In the United States.
under our economic system we are all
consumers, and large proportion are
producers.
The producers comprise the most
diverse vacations from field, forest,
mine, fishery. factory, commerce and
every modern indurtry to the various
professions and the retired business
man the capitalist, all interrelated
and contributing to the general result.
Any measure that destroys or cripples
these producers inevitably harms the
consumer. They are all members Of
one body" as truly as the logician
Paul defined the spiritual body.
1t is fallacious to classify theAmeri-
can people as producers" as dis
tinct class from CONSUMERS. The
vast majority of the adult male popu-
lation belongs to both classes. What
producer is there who is not a con-
sumner? How can a blow be struck at
the producer without hurting the
consumer? The fallacy of free trade
has always been that we can neglect
home interests to "buy in the cheap
est market" Whenever that has
been tried in the United States the
consumers have paid dearly for the
experiment. From this costly expert
ence arose the tariff proverb, "You
can't eat your cake and still have it. -
When England and the continent of
Europe dominated our markets our
people paid more for their merchandise
than when the tariff had built up
home industries. And thus it came
to pass that while theoretically a tax
of five cents upon a spool of thread
increased the cost to the consumer by
that amount, the unassallable fact
remains that the spool of thread sells
for less than the tariff tax! Who was
benefited in this case? Clearly the
consumer. Before we start in to
knock out the tariff on thread and 20
back to democratic 'stariff for reve-
nue." conditions, let US pause and dc
some sober thinking.-Burlington
"Hawkeye."