Daily capital journal. (Salem, Oregon) 1903-1919, 1913-06-13
PROTECTION INDEFENsIBLE.

dustries is indefensible no argu-
ment can be advanced in favor
of the principle that a six horse
team cannot be driven through Pro
lection is based upon the theory that
a man engaged in a given occupation is
entitled to the privilege Of receiving
more for the products grown or made
by him, than the price for which
others would furnish the same product.
The Oregonian Thursday calls atten-
tion to the injustice done Umatilla
county farmers by the removal of the
duty on oats, and speaking from the
viewpoint of the eastern Oregon farm
err says:
"They see that oats are to be on
the free list and they wonder what
benefit would accrue to them if large
crop in Umatilla county came in the
same year as short crop in other
sections Of this country and heavy
crop in Canada Four years ago, when
there was such combination Of events,
Umatilla farmers got $50 a ton for
their crop, being shielded from Cana.
dian competition by protection. With
barley on the free list, they would have
to share their good fortune with Can
ada, perhaps give that country the bulk
of it,"
But in plain English, the above state
ment means that when crops are light
elsewhere, the Umatilla farmer with
big crop, should be Permitted, in or
der to get big price for the same,
to compel all users of that crop to
pay an exorbitant price, in order to
benefit the Umatilla farmer The con-
sumer must pay an unusual price, to
benefit a certain few. The consumer
Of the oat crop that is the purchaser,
is the city teamster, contractor, or per
sons engaged in an unprotected bust
ness. They have right to be pro-
tected just as much as the farmer
or anyone else. They are entitled to
protection from the man who is pro-
tected, as great as he has to be pro-
tected against others.
The Oregonian advances the idea
that with the protection Of barley or
oats, the farmer who had a great crop
"would have to share their good luck
with CANADA, perhaps give that country
the bulk Of il"
Admitting this to be true, let's look
in the other end Of the telescope. I'm
der the conditions named the consumer
would have no one to share his i'll luck
with, the law having made him the
goat. The good fortune of the man
with the big crop-would be not in
the size of his crop so much as in
the privilege given him by law to
charge an exorbitant price, and have
his "good luck" at the expense of
the "'ill luck of the other fellow. The
same paper also speaks Of Canada
sending wheat to California. As Cali.
fornia now ships millions Of bushels
of wheat and the price is fixed in
London, Canada would ship her wheat
to London, or IL she sold IL in Cali.
fOrnia, the purchaser would ship it
there, making profit on it, The great
American consumer is going to have
his innings. He is going to buy in a
market where prices are fixed by sup
ply and demand, not by law, and he
will no longer be satisfied to be the
victim of special privilege,
As a general thing the producer is
helped but little by the tariff. It's
benefits go to the middle man, the
speculator. This is great free coun'
try, or should be, where everyone
should have the same rights and priv
ileges as his neighbor, The govern.
ment has a right to tax the people
to carry on the government, but II
has no right to delegate the right 20
levy a tax, for their own benefit, to
any man or set Of mon,