The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1911-03-08

No. III Broadway Fargo, N. d.
under this remorseless hand of avarice,
1t Is no matter, so long as the tonna re
OF American iron ore holds out land /,
is mexhaustible) to build new uayies
And what field for the transport bust.
ness! Already Mr.. Schwab is predict
ing an early war with Japan.
but let us return to the question nj
reciprocity. Why is this institution
| this government by monopoIy--in favor
OF t-that is the kind that ia peu,
proposed? Not from unselfish reasons
you may be sure, notwithstanding the
| outbursts OF mock patriotism that
| would seem to have been wei pIanne7
| from 20 Wall street along with the
| monopolistic thing ithelf. Mark tbe
| acllVlty or the railway interests that
| ntersect the dominion from this side.
MARX also the enthusiasm of repre.
sentatlYes OF some of the manufacture
ing centers in the east. who not SO
| long ago were telling the American
farmer OF the great advantage 10 him
OF the policy of protection, and who
are now ready to throw these advan-
| tages all suddenly as a tub to the
great steel whale!
Why did not the last republican M
tional convention declare for IT? why
| indeed, did not President Taft give
some intimation in his December mas.
sage Of this radical change in national
pollcy--a change from protection for
the farmer to free trade for the farmer
without any change whatever for the
ut
tional convention would have spurned
u; and, second, Mr.. Taft could not
nave been elected with such an egregi-
ously laundering plank in his platform.
Nor could he himself have conceived
IL With his inadequate knowledge of
tariff matters.
But now he tells us lin his Columbus
speech) that the reductions, both upon
agricultural products and manufac-
lures will stimulate trade i'm both
countries. Had Mr.. Taft proposed this
scheme two years ago, the 1900, 600
farmers in the United States would
have asked him to be more specific
TO explain whether, as lawyer and as
judge he holds that there is no dis.
tinction between a complete removal
of all duty, as in the case of all agri-
cultural products coming from Canada
and slight, almost insignificant low
ering of duties on a very few manu-
features going into Canada? Whether
he holds it to be an equitable adjust
ment to deprive the domestic farmer
of all his protection and still permit
the domestic manufacturer to retain all
OF his? Is this equity? Is it 10 be
explained by speaking of it as "reduc-
tons, both upon agricultural products,
and manufactures Rather, is not
this new policy one of free trade in
farm products and protection for
manufacturers? And il it is to be put
in force, cannot Mr.. Taft plainly see
cannot the manufacturers themselves
plainly see-that it means absolute free
trade in the near end, not only with
Canada, but other countries as we'll?
Where does the president get warrant
for this sudden breaking down of the
American system of protection? Surely
not from the republican party?
And what becomes now of the policy
of human uprift' that some very good
persons have believed could be brought
about only by checking the flow of
population to the great cities? Back
to the land they have been crying.
con to the cities" answers % Wall
street. And this affords the most seri-
Gus phase OF the matter not so much
perhaps for this immediate generation
asffor future generations.
Gentlemen who take the neighbour
hood view OF this question are holding
the copper cent SO near their eye that
they cannot see the $40 gold piece be.
yond," So says Mr.. Hill in speech
intended to show what this strange
tariff policy would do for the large
cities at the eastern ends of his lines
Have not these manufacturing cities
grown quite rapidly under the pro-
tective policy? Gentlemen who are
telling the farmers how to farm and are
trying to take one of their great ad-
vantages away from them at one and
the same time should examine the re-
cent census statistics, and then tell us
whether, under this policy of universal
dominion by monopoly. the American
farmer Is not to be discredited and
degraded? Whether those I'm the cities
who should so back to the land" will
not remain where they are. and many
thousands of those who are now on
the land will not drift to the cities
to swell the urban population? Daes
not 1t mean an increase " pauperisnl,
ignorance and crime? Is 1t possible
to increase the power of monopoly
without establishing tyranny? And
wherever there has been a tyranny has
not there also grown up a miserable
peasantry? Is, this in accordance with
the genius of republican institutions?
Unfortunately, President Taft has
permitted himself to be persuaded that
the steel corporation aud the harvester
trust are very much in need of The
$40 gold piece referred TO In MIR. tTills
beautiful little epigrani. And WHY
shouldn't they be allowed to have 1T?
What does 1t amount 10, anyway?
Only | cent each from 1000 farmers!