The farmer and mechanic. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 18??-19??, 1909-07-13

rect. Are not my conclusions correct
with his own premises?
I have frankly tried to answer Cap
tain Ashe, admitting his own premises
for the sake Of argument
Will he as frankly anSwer in the
same academic way some apparent IN
consistencies in his POSITION?
CD What is the comparative amount
Of standing timber III Canada and the
United States? What amount does
some Canadian hemlock, light frs, a
little white pine, etc. include?
CD If some of our hard woods
are now exported to Canada, and
abroad, does it help North Carolina
for the national government to give
the lumber manufacturer 13 Ia per
cent to As 2-3 per cen inducement to
~deforest our watersheds and hurt our
water powers and bottom lands, and
to ship abroad a perishable natural
asset that we will need later in this
country?
(3) How far will $500 bring the
taxed unit of lumber into this coun-
try by rail? and by water?
Cd Why compare the amount Of
lumber imported two years ago dur
ing a period of the greatest natural
organic prosperity this country ever
knew with the amount imported I'M
der the Wilson bill, in a period OF
III paI1tS, Ny VI
ganic reasons?
(5) Why attack only one phase ode
forestation) of a many sided article
which contained other matter as peril
nent to the general welfare Of North
Carolina.
(6) Why attempt to inject politics
into a discussion of broad interest tC.
all people of every political creed in
North Carolina? I did not mention
party. My arguments were not based
on party platforms.
90 What has been the increase in
the cost of standing timber in the past
twenty years.
60 Who control the lumber indus
try? People inside or outside the
state?
co If it is a bad principle to tax
~necessaries of life. would a two cent
tax on fifteen cent coffee be more
Ubiquitous than a $500 to 800 tax
on $500 lumber?
(10) If only a small quantity of
Canadian lumber of a kind not grown
in our country is imported, why not
tax that kind and eliminate the tax
on lumber grown in this country, with
which no one IAN compete? Such a
policy would raise the same revenue
for the government, but would not in
duce hurt to our natural resources
timber, waterpower. and bottom and
L1) Who Will the lumber tariff
help? Is it not the lumber manufac-
turer? Who will be hurt by raising
the price of lumber, which is a neces-
sary to every q and by hurting
three natural resources-timbcr lands,
water powers and bottom ands-
which should be conserved for the
benefit Of all the people? Will not
every man be hurt2 How can help
ing the few at the expense of the
many bring prosperity to a State?
My purpos in writing my original
comm -nicatlon was to offer an OppOr-
tunity for a discussion of the lumber
tariff along broad lines. AS most Of
the other arguments were sectional
lied TO the South and the West and
then localized to North Carolina, my
argument is solely from a standpoint
of North Cardinals self interest. Our
statesmen are probably very patriotic,
nationally and locally, but it seems to
me that they are mistaken. A great
a more of the rank and file agree
with me.
All students Of the tariff could read
Mr.. DOoley on that pOnredouS mass
Of hidden jokers with profit and pleas
ure. He illuminates its d~ullness. e
seems to many people that the states
man voting for protected lumber is
like Mr.. Dooley's Virginia SENATOR
Il do not quite know. But there's q
friend of mine. a lille Virginian, who
makes it. an he needs the money"
JOHN S. HENDERSON, Jr.
Salisbury, N. c.. July Z. 1909.