NIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 5AN 0\£ SITY OF Pllllllllll 3 1822 00446 2065 ^ Central University Library University of California, San Diego Please Note: This item is subject to recall after two weeks. Date Due 1,1AR2G 1990 MAR R ]QQn CI 39 (1/90) UCSDLib. PROTEOTIO^^ ECHOES y- - FROM THE CAPITOL. EDITED BY THOS. H. McKEE, Assistant Lihranan of tlie United States Senate. ASSISTED BY Hon. W. W. CURRY, Of Indiana. EMBRACING 1,254 SELECTIONS FROM THE GREAT TARIFF DEBATE ON THE MILLS BILL IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,, AND ON THE president's MESSAGE IN THE SENATE, FIRST session, FIFTIETH CONGRESS, AA'D OTHER IMPORTANT TARIFF INFORMATION, TO WHICH IS ADDED THE EXISTING TAR-IFF AND MILLS BILL IN PARALLEL COLUMNS, — COMPARED. PT-BI.iSItEn BV McKEE & CO., 3:W PENNA. AVENUE. Washington, D. C. G. S. Fellows & Co., New Yoiuc. EDITOE^S KOTIOE. This work is arranged by subjects, in alphabetical order, each selec- tion having a number. The numeral order will be followed in the Index ,^ and not the page of the book. Each selection is credited to the person from whose remarks or speech it was taken, showing the page of the Congressional Record on which it is found. The cross numbers refer to selections bearing on the same subject, and may be cited without consulting the Index. T. H. McKEE, Editor. N\x3 PREFACE. One hundred years of discussion, and a like period of experience, places the United States in the advance in teaching and legislating on Hfcal and economic questions. Since the adoption of the Federal Constitution, in 1789, Congress has been in session 112 times and occupied 13,627 days. During this period 125 bills for raising revenue upon imposts have become laws. The best thought expressed in all this debate forms the basis of the present discussion on the Mills bill. Four thousand one hundred and seventy- six large quarto pages of the Congressional Record contain this debate in about 200 set speeches, running through sixty -six days. In editing Pko- TECTioN Echoes from the Capitol, we made 1,254 clippings from this great volume of tariff history, and have in this handy volume the gems of that controversy, giving prominence to Labor and Wages, Farming, Manu- facturing, and Home Industry. We send it on ite mission to sixty mill- ions of thoughtful people, hoping it may somewhere meet, in this polit- ical canvass, " Free Trade Echoes," and favorably represent the cause of American homes. Protection. T. H. McKEE. SPEECHES DKLIVEUED IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ox THE MILLS BILL. Abbott, J., Texas, May 15, Record, 513). Alien, C. H., Maaaachusous, June 9, Kecm-d, 540i. Allen. Edward P., Micliigan.May 16, KicotU, lUTy. Allen, John M., Mldslaslppl. May VI, Kocord, 4^57. Anderson, (ieorgo A., Illinois, May IT, Kecjrd, !l587. AndoraOD, A. R., Iowa, May 18, Record, 15a3. Atkinson, Louis E., Pennsylvania, May lo, Record, 1105. Bayne, Thomas M., Pecnsylvanla, May lb. Record, iTOi) Baker, Jehu, Illinois, May 19, Record, lOGl. Baker, Charles S., New York, May 10, Rtcord, IIVI Belden, James J., New York, May 10, Record, 42r.-2. Bland, Rlcliard P., Missouri, May 5, Record, illi. Boothmau, M. M., Ohio, July 12, Record, 6740. Hound. Franklin, teiiDsylvania, May 10, Record, 4481 Boute.le, Cnarles A., Maine, June 1, Record, 5435. Boutelle, Charles A., Maine, July y, Record, 6049 Breckinridge, C. R., Arkansas, May IT, Record, 53T6. Brecklundge, Wliliam C. P., Kentucky, May 18, Record. 1C14. Biewer, Mark H , Michigan, April 27, Record, 3003. Brewer, Mark S., Michigan, July IJ, Record, 0753. Browte, Thomas M., Indiana, April 26, Record, 3521. Browne, T. H. B., Virginia, Juuo 28, Record, Tinv. Brumm. Charlts N., Penn.sylvaula, May 10, Record, 5218. Buchanan, James, New Jeihoy. April 26, Record, 3561. BucKalew, Charles R., Pennsylvania, May 15, Recoid, 4985. Butrows, Julius C, Michigan, April 25, Record, 344.5. Buiierworth, Benjamin, Ohio, May 15, Record, im. Butterworth, Benjamin, Oliio, June IT, Rec rd, 5506. Bul'.erworth, Boujamln, Ohio, July 17, Record, 7221 Byuum, William D., Indiana, April 25 Record, 3518, Oandler, Allen D., Georgia, ilay 10, Record, 4218. Cannon, Joseph G., Illinois, May lo, R.'cord, 4222 cannon, Joseph G , Illinois, June Recca. 5550 Caunf,n, .Joseph G.. Illinois, July 0, Record, 6522.' » arlisle, .John G., Kentucky, May 10, Roccrd, 4673. Caswcii, r,ucien B., Wiaconslr', May 4, Record, 3839. Cheadle, Josepii B., Indiana, May 18, Record, 4600. Chlpman, J. Logan, Michigan, May 8, Rocura, 407(i Olemouts, Judson C, Georgia, .May lo. Record 4873, Cowles, William H. H., North Car .lina. May 14, Record, i33J. cox, Samuel S., New ¥• rk, May IT. Record, 4541 Culcheon, Byron M., Michigan, July IT, Record, T085. XJalzo.l, John, Pennsylvania, May 16, Record, 45 >o. JJariington, Suiedley, Pennsylvania, May 15, RecOul, 44'>'. Dibble, Samuel, South Carolina, .May 11, Record, 5i,o4 Dkigl< y. Nelson, Jr , Maine, May 3. Record, 3919 Ulngley, Nelson, Jr., Maine, Julo 5, Record, .5029. Dockery, Alexander M., Ml<;sourl, April 25, Recrd, 3Ti,>. pcckery, Alexander M., Missouri, June 9, Record, 5534. Docker y, A:exander M., Missouil, July 3, Record. 0485 Dockery, Alexan^ler M., MNsouri. Dubois, F. T., Idaho, June 14, Record. 674.5. Kar-mhar, John M., New V(jrk, May 16, Record, 4481. *;eUou, Charles N., CalUorula, May 17, Record, 4.?v' Fitch. Aslibel P., New York, May 16, Record. UUT. eoran, Martin A., Ohio, May 1, Recoid, 3T50 tord, Melbourne H., Michigan, April 27, Record, 3t5'jy. h ullor, \Mlila:ii £ , Iowa, June 2, Record, 5210. nay, Edward J., Louisiana, July 9. Recoril, 6901. (ialllDger, Jacob H., Now Hampshire, April :iO, Record, oGfO. Oalllnger, Jac^b H , Now Hauipshlre, May 61, K -coiil, '.".".T. (rear, JoUn H., Iowa, May 11. Record, 4C81. (roar, Jolm H., Iowa, July l',>. Record, 7219. ' 'aCTTd, 03car S., Dakota, Juno 9, Record, 5790. Ctotr, Nathan, Jr., West Virginia, April 27, Reord. 301:;. (Tfosvenor, Charles H., Ohio, April :;o. Record, -1017. f'rosvenor, Charles H., Ohio, June 8, Roord, 5.559. I irosvenor, Charl'^s H., Ohio, July 14, Record. C9Ci. Urout, William W., Vermont, May 15, Record, 4401. • lueuther, Richard, Wisconsin, May 4, Record, 39ril. iiare, Silas, Texas, May 10, Record, 4216. Hatch, William H., Missouri, May 14, Record, 4571. Ifaugen, N. P., Wisconsin, May 12, Record, 4229. lldinphlll, John J., S)U-oh Carolina. Ap-11 26, Record, 3572. Henderson, Thomas J , Illinois, May 15, Record, Hi). Uenderson, David B., Iowa, April 3:) Record, :^G78. Hermann, Binger, Oregon, May 17. Reord, 17.59. Hitt, Robert R., Illinois, June 7, Record, 5411. Uog?, Charles E., West Virginia, June 28, Record, Gi5S. Holman, William S.. IivHana, Juno 1. Record, 0001. Holmes, Adonlram J., Iowa, May 17, Record, 7350. Hooker, Charles E., Mississippi. May 9, Record, 4094. Hopkins, A. J., Illinois, May 8, Record, 4032. Houk, Leonldas C, Tennessee, May 9, Record, 4100. Howard, Jonas ft., Indiana, June 5. Record, 5478. Howard, Jonas G., Indiana, June 15, Record, 5789. Howard, Jonas G , Indiana, June, Rec rd,635;). Howard, Jonas G., Indiana, July 7, Record, 6525. Hudd, Thomas R., Wlsciiusin, April 26, Record, 3582. Jackson, Oscar L., Pennsylvania, May 15, Record, 4703. Keau, Jolm, Jr., New Jersey, May 12, Record, 4205 Kelley, William D , Pennsylvania, April 17, Record, 3194. Kennedy, Robert P., Ohio, May 9. Reord, 4356 Kennedy, Robert P., Ohio, July 12, Record, 6836 Kerr, Daniel, Iowa, April 28. Record, 3637. La Follette, Robert M., Wisconsin, July 14, Record, 6853. La Follette. Robert M , Wisconsin, July 19, Record, 1250. Laird, James, Nebraska, May 16, Record, 4487. L-\n6, Edwa'-d. Illinois, May 10, Record, 4211. Lanham, Samuel W. T., Texas, May 2, Record, 3912. Lohlbach, Herman, New Jersey, May 12, Record, 4J61. Lodge, Henry Cabot, Massachusefs, June 7, Rec )rd, 5il2. Malsh, Lgvl, PoiinsylvaDla. May 17, Record, 5256 Mansur, Charles H., Missouri, May 8, Record, 4036. Marliu, William H , Texas, May 8, Record, 43)9. Mason, William E., lUinois, May 17. Record, 4829. McAdoo, Wll'iim, New Jersey, May 8, Record, 40.56. McClammy, 0. W., North Carolina, May 10, Reord, !661. McC'jmas, Louis E., Maryland, May 2, Record, 3837. MeC »rmlck. Hen 'y 0., Ponnsvlvanla, May 5, Record, 39.>4. McCreary, Jimes B., Kentucky, May 1, Record. 3742. MoDmald, J. L., Minnesota, M-.y3, Record, 3911 McKe"n'i, Joseph, Cillfornla, July 7, Record, "(253. McK'nley, William, Jr., Ohio, May 18. Re-ord, 4718. McKianoy, L. F., New Hampshire, May 3, Record, :!874. McMillln, Ronton, Tennessee, .Vprll 24, Record, 3592. McRae, Thomas C., .Arkansas, May 16, Record, 40 -S. Mlllikeu, Seth L., Maine, May 12, Record, 42.5; i, Mllllken. Seth L , Maine, July 19, Record, 7259. Mills, R. q., Texas, April 17, Record, 3323. INIllls, R. Q , Texas, July 21, Record, 7312. Moinit, John H , New York, June 5, Record, 5280. Montgomery, A. B., Koutueky, May 16, Record, 45.:3. l\Iooro, L W., Texas, May 5, R'cord, 4275. MOTOW, Win. W., California, May 8, Record, 4209. Morse, Leopold, Massachusetts, July 12, Record. 6742. Newton, Churubusc ), Louisiana.. May lo. Record. 4133. Nichols, John, North Carolina, May 17. Record, 1577. Nuttln?, Newton W.. New York, .luly 13, Record. 7( 89. O'Doniioll, James, Michigan, Julv 12, Record. 6810 O'Frrrall. Charles T., Virginia, May 1, Record. 3738. O'Neall, John H., Indiana, May 14, Record, 4129. Osborne, Edw'n S., Pennsylvania, April 26, Recjrd, :;579 Outhwa'.te, Joseiih H., Ohio, July 14, Record. 6X)8. Owen, William D , Indiana, May 15, Record, .5511. Parker, Abrah'>m D., Now Yo k, Junn 5, Record 5278. Pool, Samuel W , Arkaus.as. July 21, Record, 7i',)l. Peters, Samuel R., Kansas, May 17, Reiord, 47]:;. Plumb, Ralph, Illinois, May 18, Record, W?3. P i9t, Philip S., Illinois, May 10, KecorO, 4:143. Pugsley, Jacob J., Ohio, July 12, Record, G742. liaadall, Samuel J., Pennsylvania, May 18. Record, 4607. Uaynor, laidur, Maryland, April 3;J, Record, 3073. Reed, Thomas U., Maine, May 20, Record, 4Go7. RUhardson, James D., Minnesota, May 8, Record, 40oO. Rogers, John II., Arkansas, July 3, Record. 6450. K')mels, Jacot«, Ohio, May 17, Record, 4021. Ki.well, Jonathan H., Illinois, June 'M, Record, 5924. Uussell, John E., Massichusetis, May 16, Record, 4766. R/an, Thomas, Kansas, May 16, Record, 4823. Ityan, Thomas, Kansas, July 7, Record, 6016. fiawjer, John G , Now York, IMay 17, Record, 4561. Kayers, J. D., Texas, May 26, Record, 3586. Scott, William L., Pouusylvauia, May 11, Record, 416',. S-yniour, 11. W., Michigan, May 15, Record, 4412. Simmons, F. M., North Carolina, May 15, Record, 4300. Shaw, Frank T , Maryland, April 25, Record, 35-8. Shlveiy, Benjamin F., Indiana, May 16, Record, 6070. S{>ooner, Henry J., Rhode Island, May 17, Record, 5222. Springer, William M., Illinois, July 10, Record, 72 jO. S;ewrirt, John D., Georgia, May 2, Record, 3881 . Stewart, John W., Vormont, May 17, Record, 4537-. Sioi-kdale, Thomas R., Mississippi, May 5, Record, !58-j. Stockdale, Thomas R. , Mississippi, June 8, Record. 5 5s. Stone, William J., Kentucky, May 15, Record, 4402. Stone, William J , Slissouri, May 8, Record, 4062. Sfruble, Isaacs., Iowa, Jlay 15, Record, 4320. Syjnes, George G., Colorado, May 14, Record, 4305. Tarsney, Timothy E., Michigan, April 28, Record, 3G41. Tarsney, Timothy E.. Michigan, May — , Record, SJol. Taylor, Joseph D.,Ohlo, May 8, Record, 4042. Taylor, Joseph D., Ohio, July 12, Record, 7485. Thomas, George M., Kentucky, May 17, Record, 4557. Thomas, Ormsby B., Wisconsin, June 9, Record, 5508. Thompson, Albert C, Ohio, May 14, Record, 4317. Tracey, Charles, New York, May 10, Record, 4143. Townshend, Richard W., Illinois, May 12, Record, 4238. Turner, Henry G., Georgia, May 10, Record, 4568. Vance, Robert J., Connecticut. May 10, Record, 4156. ^veaver, J B., Iowa, May 16, Record, 4194. Weber, John B., New York, July 9, Record. 6558. Mheeier, Josepn, Alabama, May 4, Record, 5301. White, James B., ludiaua, June 5, Record, 6316. Whiting, William, Massa'.'husetts, May 10, Record, 4277. Wlckham, C. P., Ohio, May 16. Record, 4694. Wilkinson, T. S. Louisiana, May 10, Record, 4278. Wilkinson, T S.. Louisiana, July 9, Recoid, 7123. Wilson, Thomas, Minnesota, May 2, Record, 3828. Wilson, Thomas, Minnesota, July 17, Record, 71.)1. ■Wilson, Thomas, Minnesota, July 17, Record, 7131. Wilson, William L., West Virginia. May 3, Record, 4:;47. Wise, George D., Virginia, May 9, Record, 518G. Woodburn, William, Nevada, May 5, Record, 4000. Y'ardley, Robert M., Pennsylvania, May 10, Record, 4140. Yost, Jacob, Virginia, June 13, Record, 5743. Yost, Jacob, Virginia, July 17, Record, 7090. II^fTRODUCTIOX. MADISON S RESOLUTION. On the third day of the first session of the first Congress after the adoption of the Constitution of the Unitei]* States Madison offered a reso- lution affirming that specific duties should be levied on spirituous liquors, molasses, wines, teas, sugars, pepper, cocoa, and spices, and an ad valorem . duty on all other articles ; also a tonnage duty on American vessels in "which merchandise was imported, and a higher rate on foreign vessels. OUR FIRST TARIFF. In the spirit of this resolution a bill was prepared, the specific list largely increased, and passed the House May 14, 1789; and the Senate June 12, wdth some amendments. A conference was had and the bill finally passed in both Houses, and waa approved by the President July 4. It was to continue until June 1, 179G. It is this act which has the oft- quoted preamble : " Whereas it is necessary for the support of the Government, for the discharge of the debts of the United States, and the encouragement and protection of manufactures," &c. The ad valorem rates of this act ranged from 5 to 15 per cent. The specific rates were such as would now be considered enormous, as boots 50 cents per pair, tallow candles 2 cents per pound, coal 2 cents per bushel, cordage 75 and 90 cents per hundred weight (112 pounds), salt 6 cents per bushel, steel 56 cents per hundred weight, manufactured to- bacco 6 cents per pound, &c. Hamilton's reports. Under the act of September 2, 1789, Alexander Hamilton was appointed Secretary of the Treasury. January 14, 1 790, he submitted his first finan- cial report, stating the public debt to be: Foreign, $11,710,378, and do- mestic, $42,414,086 ; total, $54,124,464 ; and the annual interest charges, $2,239,163 ; and recommending some increase of duties. This was made to the extent of about 2V per cent., by the act of August 10, on wines, spirits, tea, and coffee. December 5, 1791, Mr. Hamilton made his famous report on manufact- ures, in which he says : " The expediency of encouraging manufactures in the United States, which was not long since deemed very questionable, appears at this time to be pretty generally admitted," and taking high ground for protection. Seven tariff acts were passed before 1800 and five more before 1812 , and from thence on tariff legislation has occupied a large share of the time and attention of Congress. 7 INTRODrCTION. TARIFF THE SurRCi: OF KEVENUE. From the first tariflF act to the present time the Government has col- lected the principal part of its revenues from duties on foreign importa- tions, and in every tariff act the principle of protection has been recog- nized. Internal taxes have only been resorted to as an emergen:'y, and those of the Revolutionary and war of 1S12 periods were repealed as soon as the needs of the Treasury permitted, and the propriety of repealing the present internal-revenue laws as soon as practicable has been taken, for granted. CONTROVERSY FROM THE r,EGINNIK(;. The controversy between tlie principles of protection and of free trade began with the First Congress, and has continued ever since. Mr. Madi- son laid down the maxim that " commerce ought to be as free as the policy of nations will admit." But this sort of " freedom " allows so much to " the policy of nations " that both sides readily accept it. Certainly Mr. Madison advocated protection before, during, and after his Presi- dency. No free-trader in this country has proposed to abolish the custom- house ; and no protectionist proposes tariff duties beyond the policy of the nation. The practical result has been a tariff for revenue, with dis- criminations for protection. TARIFFS ARE COMPROMISES. Our own tariffs have never at any time been in exact accord with either theory. Being passed by a legislative body derived from a wide constituency, representing very diverse opinions and interests, there have been mixed elements in them all. Conflicts of individual opinion, of sectional prejudices, and of diverse occupations have led to compro- mises and crudities as an inevitable result. Tendencies in particular acts have been towards one or the other theory, rs one or the other has predominated amongst the members of Congress. THE PARTY DIFFERENXE. What, then, is the practical difference between the parties as protection- ists and freetraders? It seems to be this: Protectionists say that tariff duties in such amounts as will provide necessary revenues shall be levied on foreign products, whether of field, mine, or manufactory, entering into competition with like products of our own country. They would admit without duty all foreign products which do not compete with home products, unless the demands of revenue require otherwise. Xot prohi- bition but revenue is the purpose ; but revenue derived from competing, not from non-competing foreign products. Free traders say that the tariff should be laid with sole reference to revenue, and that any discrimina- tion in favor of any product is to be avoided. Whether the tarifl^ shall be laid at an equal rate on all importations, or solely on such as do not compete with American products, or on a few specified articles />f general consumption and easily accessible, is not determined. England, the practical exemplar of the free-trade theory, adop'rs the last method. 8 INTRODUCTIOX. PARTY PKINCITLES UNDERLYING THE TARIFF. The attitude of the two parties on the tariff issue is not accidental nor arbitrary, but grows out of a fundamental dilierence as to the charactcr of the Government of the United States. Republicans hold that the United States is a nation, deriving its sovereignty from the people, an 1 hence that its Constitution and laws are the supreme law of the lam). They therefore believe in the constitutional right to make necessary in- ternal improvements, to provide a national currency, and to develop and protect the industries of the country. Democrats believe the United States to be a confederacy, that the Slates are the sovereign political powers, and hence that systems of internal improvements, of paper cur- rency, and of protective tariffs are alike unconstitutional. A tarjlf for revenue only is the limit of right in a confederacy. A tariff for protec- tion also is the right of a nation. Out of this doctrine of State sover- eignty came nullification, secession, and the Confederate constitutiou^ This constitution was the full flower of Democratic doctrine, and elin:- inated all those provisions of the Constitution of the United States v/hich were interpreted to constitute a nation. A Confederate Damocrat is a free-trader because he denies the constitutional right to protect. A Na- tional Republican affirms the constitutional right of protection. The final political issue is, therefore : Is the United States a Nation or a Con- federacy ? Is the Union or the State the sovereign ? THE MILLS BILL. As to the Mills biU and the present tariff controversy, the debates and the actions of parties clearly indicate aline of demarkation not to be mis- taken by any intelligent and candid person. Th.e bill is not a clean free- trade measure, because no such measure could have a hope of success. But all the tendencies of the bill are dominated by free-trade and sec- tional influences. All free-trade theorists, at home and abroad, accept it as a long stride in their direction ; all arguments in its favor are per- meated with free-trade maxims, and the heaviest concessions (o protec- tion are to consolidate in its favor a sectional and party vote. The Demo- cratic party, therefore, has planted itself on distinctly free-trade groun-!. On the other hand, the Republican party plants itself as distinctly ou protection ground? ; opposes the bill because of its free- trade, sectional, and party principles, and declares that any revision of the present pir- tective tariff required by the public interests shall be made by its frienc's and not its enemies. TARIFF DISCFSSION^. 1,254 SELECTIONS. ARRANGED IN' ALPHABETICAL AND NUMERICAL ORDER. Note. — Each selection has a 7i umber. A. Adams, J. Q. (Pi'cs.)» ^<»' protection. Xo. 1. — As yet no symptoms of dimiuution are perceptible in tne re- ceipts of the Treasury. As yet little addition of cost has even been ex- perienced upon the article burdened with heavier duties by the last tariff. Tne domestic manufacturer supplies the same or a kindred article at a diminished price, and the consumer pays the same tribute to the labor of his own countryman which he must have otherwise paid to foreign industry and toil. .4(1 valorem frauds. No. 2.— I ask the Clerk to read the extract from Secretary Manning's report to which I have referred. The Clerk read as follows : " Whatever successful contrivances are in operation to-day to evade the revenue by false invoices, or by undervaluations, or by any other means, under an ad valorem system, will not cease even if the ad valorem rates shall have been largely reduced. They are incontestably, they are even notoriously inherent in that system. "One advanta<:;e, and perhaps the chief advantage of a specific over an ad valorem system, is in the fact that, under the former, duties are levied by a positive test, which can be applied by our oflicers while the mer- chandise is in possession of the Government, and according to a standard which is altogether national and domestic. That would be partially true of an ad valorem system levied upon ' home value;' but there are con- stitutional impediments in the way of such a system which appear to be insuperable. But under an ad valorem system the facts to which the ad valorem rate is to be applied must be gathered in places many tliou.-nnd miles away, and under circumstances most unfavorable to the adminis- tration of justice. One hears it often said that if our ad valorem rates did not exceed 25 or oi) per cent. undervaKiation and temptation to undervaluation would di=y en- liblesitsfarmers virtually to export their raw materials.without agricultural ♦ xhaustion, in every article of manufactured goods exported. "A piece of line cloth, for example," in the words of Adam Smith, " which weighs only eighty pounds, contains in it the price not only of the eighty pounds weight of wool, but sometimes of several thousand weight of corn, the maintenance of the dillerent working *i)eople, and of their immediate employers." " The corn," adds this great man, " is in this manner virt- ually exported in the complete manufacture, and may easily be sent to tliu remotest corners of the world. — n. Carey Baikd. Atjricultiiro— Farm |>a'o«luc'ts— To free list. Xo. O. — More than one-ilurd of the free list is made up from the products of the farm, the forest, and the mine. Trom products which are now dutiable at the minimum rates, ranging from 7 to -'> per cent., and even this slight i)rolection, so essential, is to be taken from the farm- ers, the lumbermen, and the quarry men. The following are among the agricultural products put on the free-list by the bill: All wools, Beans and pease, ^'egetables (fresh), hinseed, ]\Iill; (fresh), Barks, beans, etc., (Garden-seed, Figs, Hemp, Tlempseed, Plums and prunes, Beeswax, J5 jibs and roots, Dates, Flax, Split pease, Currants, zantc, Manila. Rape and other oil seed, Meatp, game, and poultry, Other vegetable substances. The American farmer will appreciate tiie vicious character of the bill ?.s applied to him when he is ap[irised of the fact that while the proil- ucts of his land and labor are shut out from Canada by a protictive tariff imposed bj' the Canadian government, the Canadian farmer can 5fener family, the employment thus fiirniehed yielded a sup- port to ;J02,590 men, women, and children, who required for their suste- nance breadstutls and provisions during the year to the value of $15,- 129,500— just about the amount of our total exports of those produces to Great Britain during that year. Had this iron been produced at home, it would have furnished to the American farmer, near to his own door, an increased market for his products to the amount of $15,000,000, and at the same lime have relieved him from the cost of transportulion, and placed it in his power to restore to his sutTering soil all the con- stituents of wealth extracted. — II. Carey Baird. Agrionltnral interests. No 13. — But special eflbrt has been matle and is being persisted in to induce the American farmer to believe that a protective taritl is hostile to his best interest and his prosperity would be promoted by an abandon- ment of that policy. How far this effort may be successful it is impos- sible to forecast; but this much may be alhrmed with ahsolut** certainty, unless the results of established law are uncertain and experience is rio 15 AGR l.'ii^ir a t^HlV ^'iiidf, that any course which cripples or destroys our manu- iicuriiiK' inti'rests and deprive^^ labor of its employment therein will beiiuusly disturb autl iuijmir the pronpeiity of our agricultural interests. Andrew .Iiu kson was not mistaken when he said : •* Upon the succ-ess of our nuinufdctures, as the handmaid of agricult- ure and commerce, depends, in a great measure, the independence of our countrv." Among the advantages conferred upon the farmer by our prottctive t>Ariir is that derive«l froai a direct protection to tlie products of his farm and the iuduHtries incident thereto, as shown by the following: " Wool at ;1U cents ti pound or lefes, lu cents ; at over :;0 cents a pound, IL' cents. Beef and pork, 1 cent a pound. Hams and bacon. 1.' cents a l>i!nnd. Butter, 4 centa a pound, l^ird, 2 cents a pound. Cheepe, 4 cents a pound. Grapes, 2u per cent, ad valorem. Wheat. L'O cents a busiiel. Oats, 10 cents a bushel. Corn, 10 cents a bushel. Rye, 15 cents a bubhel. Barley, 1') cen's a Imsbel. Potatoes, lo cents a bushel. Hay, $1,* a tun. Live animals, -0 per cent, ad valorem. Beeswax, 20 per cent, ad valorem. Vinegar, 10 cents a gallon. Honey, I'O cents a gallon, l-'ruit. shade, and ornamental trees, shrubs, etc., '20 per cent, ad valorem. All ve;_'fctable8, nototherwi.se provided for, 10 per cent, ad valorem, nice, cleaned, -\ cents per pound. Wheat tlour, 20 per cent, ad valorem. Tobacco (unmanufacturec ), 3') cents per pound. Sugar, 1 ] to :;l cents per pound. Rice Hour and rice meal. 20 per cent, ad valorem. Extract of meat. 20 per cent, ad valorem. Barley, pearled or hulled, A cent per pound. Barley malt, 20 cents per bushel. Corn meal, 10 cents per bushel. Oat meal, A cent per pound. Rye flour, \ cent per pound. Potato and corn starch, 2 cents par pound. Pickles and sauce?, not otherwise provided for, ;;•"> per cent, ad valorem. Garden Feeds, 20 per cent, ad valorem. Hemp seed, ', cent per pound. Currants, 1 cent per pound. Apples, 10 per cent, ad valorem. Hops, S cents per pound. Mi'k, preserved or condensed, 20 per cent, ad valorem. Flax straw, $5 a ton. Flax, not dressed, $20 a ton. Flax, dressed, $40 a ton. Tow of llax or hemp, .*I0 a ton. Bristles, 15 cents, a pound. Tallow, 1 centa pound. Flax seed or linseed, 20 cents per bushel." That the farmer should still further be jirotected in some of these products there can be no question, and yet it is to bo observed that the bill now under consideration strikes down with merciless hand many of the most important agricultural interests of the country by placing them on the free list. When it is remembered that there was brought into this country la.st year, exclu.sive of tea, cofiee, and sugar, $57,000,000 of agricultural products in competition with our home interests, the policy propf^sed by this bill which would still further expose the farmer to foreign competition wfll not be ant to receive the approval of our agricult- ural interests. But while this airect protection is of importance to the farmer, the indirect benefits accruing to him from the diversification of our industries are much greater and beyond the possibility of calcula- tion. In this iies the chief advanlajje. Every farmer tills the soil for a ilouble purpose, lir.-*t, to supply the necessities for himself and his houae- liold ; and, secondly, to seiure a surplus with which he may obtain those articles of necestfity and luxury which cannot be produced from the soil. — BcRKOw.s, Record, 3452. .\^rii-iilliiral I.uikIm— Vailiio <»!'. how iiicroaNefl. \o. 1 I. — Where, then, on the face of the globe can the American faniif-r market bis surplus? At home or nowhere. This liome market, therefore, should be to him the object of his deepest solicitude and pro- tecting care, for upon it the future of agriculture in this country depends. But with a steady market at home, created and sustained by our diversi- 10 AGR Sed indiistriep, the demand is steady, and every farmer knowa that when he sows he can reap with prolit. Another advanta?;e to the American farmer from the eetabhshment and maintenance c f manufacturing indus- tries is the enhanced vahie of hia acre?. You cannot buihi up anywhere a prosperous mauufacturins industry without enhancing the vahieof the farm hinds adja<:ent thereto. Cast your eye over the map of tlio liepub- hc and indicate the localities where industries are the most diversified and the fewest people are engaged in agriculture, and there you will find the highest-priced farm lands. Mark the localities where farming is the •chief ©ccupation of tlie people and o;her industries are the least devel- oped ; there you will find farm lands of the least value. To demonstrate the truth of this assertion I will insert a table in which the States and Territories are divided into four groups, in the first of which is embraced that portion of the country having less than 30 per cent, of the people -engageil in agriculture; the second, over 30 and less than 50 ; the third, •overoO and less than 70, and the fourth having 70 per cent, and over ■engaged in agriculture : Classes. Acres. Value of lariDS. Value per acre. Per cent. In agrlculi- ute. First- ■Second 77,250,742 112,:<21,257 2:*7, 873,040 108,630.796 $2,985,641,197 3, »3(i,y 15,767 3,218,108,970 562,430,84-2 $38.63 30.55 13.53 5.18 18 42 Third r«iirlli 58 77 From this table it will be discerned that where 77 per cent, of the peo- ple are encaged in agriculture the average value of farm lands is only a tride over $5 an acre, while where only 18 per cent, are engaged in agri- ■culture farm lands average over ^oS per acre. What is true in the country at large is equally true in counties and States. The principal manufacturers in Pennsylvania are to be found in thirteen counties, and the average value of farm land within these counties is $80.73 per acre, w hile in the remaining counties it is only $42.02. The farm lands in the tweh'e chief manufacturing counties of Uhio average $07.85 pt-r acre, -Ahile in the balance of the State they are worth only $42.10. The farm lands of Ohio, with only 40 per cent, of her p€0|)le engaged in agriculture, are worth $46 per acre, while in Kentucky, separated only by the Ohio, but with 02 per cent, engaged in agriculture, they are worth only $14 per acre. The rugged land of Pennsylvania, with 21 per cent, of her people engaged in agriculture, is worth $50 per acre, while in Virginia, where 51 per cent, are engaged in agriculture, they are valuerotective policy has, in spite of the obstacles it has en- countered, most suggestive results in this regard, and these results have not all been absorbed by the manufacturing industries. Agriculture has gathered a part of the harvest to itself. In the ten States embraced in the foregoing table one effect is made apparent by the statistics of the census of ISSO, which should be studied by all, and especially by those engaged in agriculture. In all of tho.se States there are counties in which manufa<'turing industries have been established, and others in which this result had not been realized. Takinir the ten States together the average value per acre of land in the counties in which manufactures had been planted was $.35 80. In the other counties the average value per acre was $2l\41. This shows an average value per acre in favor of the counties in which manufacturing industries were yiresent of ^13.45. In a large majority of the counties embraced in the ten States named manufacturing industries did not exist. Ti'j -'1 ' '. -ts that the jiroper thing to do in the matter of promoting the i: agriculture is to multiply manufacturing plants, and to induce a ■ in of them amongst localities where they are not now present. This cannot be done by applying the methods recommended by the President in his message. If we follow his suggestions and give eflTect to IS them we will not multiply manufacturing plants and diptribute them to regions where they ilu not now exist. Un tiie contrary, we will embar- rass those now in operation and repress the tendency to invest capital in others. — Senator Wilson, of Iowa, Record, 2SG7. AjC^ricuIturo— >liirket at lioiue lii'Ips rariuor«() or 100 miles from manufacturing centers. And why so? Because not only the good housewife ha3 a market for her butter and chickens and eggs and cheese, and everything of that character that is produced up«jn the farm, but the farmer himself has a market for every bashel oi corn, wheat, rye, etc., and for every apple, peach, pear, melon, and everything of that character that he makes upon the farm when located near a manufacturing center ; and he gets the best price for his corn, flour, meat, and other necessary articles produced upon the farm. So, in every view of it no class of people In this country are more benefited by the increase of manufactures and the diversity of labor, thus putting down the price of manufactured articles and putting up t tie price of labor and the price of farm products, than the farmers themselves. — Senator Brown (Dem.), Record, 21. "»2. Affricnlture— Market lor f*arin produce— Wlieiicc coiiieM it ? No. 18. — That the shoemaker, the tailor, and the blacksmith find respectively a market for their various wares among those persons iwt en- gaged in the same pursuits with themselves is a truth which probably few will be found to question. With the farmer it is much the same. He has little or no occasion to sell to or buy from his fellow-farmer, and must therefore look for a market to those persons who, not being pro- ducers of agricultural products, have need to purchase them. This being the case it may be asserted as a fact so clear and unques- tionable as to need no proof that the interest of the farmer is to be pro- moted by increasing the proportion of the people engaged in other than agricultural pursuits. Every influence exerted to draw men from agri- culture into other employments not only tends to increase the market for farm produce, but becomes an advantage to the farmer by reducing the number oftho.se competing for the existing market for that produce. As, however, the people of a country live substantially off tiie products of that country, it is also for the interest of the farmer that as large a pro- portion as possible of those not engaged in agriculture should be 0(;cupied m i»roductive pursuits — the entire body of non-producers drawing their sustenance from the producers. It ia in view of these things, then, a matter of deep concern to the farmer that there should be adiversity of productive pursuits — that with a large and increasing number of miners, operators, artisans, mechanics, and engineers, there should be a large and ever-growing market for the products of agriculture. — H. Carby Baird. AKricnltiire— Near and distant markets. 3fo. 11). — The farmer who has a market close at hand carries the Eroduce there at a trifling expense. In selling directly to the consumer, e receives from him the full amount paid by that consumer. He who, on the contrary, is dependent upon a distant market, is either obliged to pay directly the cost of tran8ix)rtation to that market, or to 19 AGR sell his produce to ftie middle-man or trader, and receive therefor the amount paid by the consumer less the transportation, storage, nnd profits of the various parti' s who stind hdW'en producer and consumer. Hence is it that while the farmer near iSTew York or Philadelphia eells his corn at 70 cents per bushel, he in the interior of Iowa receives for his but 25 cents per bushel. These statements being susceptible of proof by the examination of the condition of the Eastern and Western markets almost any day in any year, it is clearly manifest that it is to the interest of the farmer to have the consumer brought to the side of the farm. When, then, he sees a mine opened, a furnace put in blast, the fires of a rolling-mill lighted, a foundry, or even a shop for the prosecution of the most trifling mechan- ical trade started in his neighborhood, it should be to him a cause for congratulation. — H. Carey Baihd. Agri(*iilturc— ^Market for small products. Xo. 20- — You go back into the portions of the country far distant from manufacturing establishments and you will find chickens selling at 10 to 12 cents apiece, butter at 10 to 15 cents, eggs at 10 cents a dozen, and everything produced on the farm or in the dairy at a price that is scarcely remunerative. Now change your location and go into the neighborhood of one or more large factories where there is a large number of officers, employes, and operatives engaged in manufacturing. They produce none of these things. They want to buy everything of the character mentioned that is made upon the farm, in the garden, or the dairy, and instead of chickens being 10 to 12 cents apiece frhey are from 20 to 30 cents; instead of eggs being worth 10 cents a dozen they are worth 20 to 25 cents; instead of butter being 10 or 15 cents a pound it is worth 40 cents a pound, and so with everything the farmers and the farmers' wives make for sale which is needed by the large number of persons engaged in manufacturing, who do not make these necessary articles. — Senator Brown (Dem.), Record, 2151. Agriculture— Products. ^'o. 31. — Wheat now bears a duty of 20 cents per bushel. India and Russia have become recently large producers of wheat, and from their competition in the London market wheat has fallen greatly in price. England, with her usual care for her own interests, has, at her own cost, constructed a vast mileage of railroads in India. The Indian farmer pays his ryots, or laborer:', from 8 to 12 cents per day, and he can put his wheat in London at a protit of 70 cents per bushel. For the year ending June '50, 1887, the United States exported to all countries 101,971,949 bushels of wheat. For the year ending March 31, 1887, India exported 41,558,250 •>uphels of wheat. The increase of this Indian competition and the competition from Russia must continue, as there remain In those countries yet rich tracts to be brought under cultivation. Our Eastern farmers, foreseeing this, have given attention to the production of other articles. But here, too, they find that the present protection is inadequate. I have here the "Summary statement of the imports and exports of the United States for the eleven months ending May 21, 1888."* From this official docu- ment I compile the following statement of imports of farm products for that period: -Vnimals, free $3,162,613 Animals, dutiable 4,401,145 Eggs 2,061,641 20 II AGR Farinaceous substances 852,280 Skins other than fur 21,48;»,912 Barley 8,0r>it.087 Corn 19,928 Oats 21,802 Oatmeal 3G,14G Eve .20 Wheat 314,979 Wheat flour 12 738 Another.... 113023 Bristles 1,138,299 Fiax 1,599 250 Hemp 195,057 Figs 490.740 Oranges 2,134,292 Plums and prunes 2057,418 Hay 850,220 Hops 1,C04 511 Barley malt 137,077 Prepared meats 300,032 All other meat products 148,409 Butter 24,549 Cheese 1,101,184 Milk, condensed 335,110 Flaxseed 1,380,535 Leaf tobacco 10 218,005 Beans and peas 2,128,110 Potatoes 3,550,572 All other vegetables 1,013,077 Wool 14,540,003 By this bill nearly all the above have already been put on the free- list, and now it is proposed to do the same wU'i wool. This line of policy is against the agricultarist of the Eist, and I must vote a;zainst it. — Buchanan, Record, 0931. Agriculture— Protection of. No. S3> — PETITION FOR MORE EFFECTUAL PROTECTION OF AGRICULTURE. " To Vie Speaker of the Hoiio' of Representatives : "The undersigned respectfully pray that agriculture may be more ef- fectually protected, by preventing fraudulent importations of cattle on pretense that they are for breeding only ; ''By a duty of 20 cents per bushel on barley, with proportionate in- crease of duty on malt ; " By duties of 25 cents per bushel on potatoes and onions, $2 per 100 on cabbages, $3 per ton on hay, 10 cents per pound on hops, 20 per cent, on beans and pease, 5 cents per dozen on ej'ge, 30 p'^r cent, on fowls and poultry, and on ' vegetables ia their natural state or in salt or brine, not otherwise provided for,' with no removal or reduction of duties on mar- ket garden products now dutiable ; " By such increased duties on flax and on linen goods as will effectually encourage the preparation of fiber and manufacture of goods ; "By abolishing all duties oq sugar, with a bounty to home producerr- ; " By preventing imports of leaf-tobacco suitable for wrappers at tlu* duty imposed on other leaf-tobacco, and repealing all internal taxes on tobacco ; " By restoring to wool-growing the substantial protection enjoyed un- der the tariff of 1807, so modified as to meet the later forms of foreign competition and of evasion. 21 AGR '' The undersigned further represent, respectfully, that they are prac- tical farmers of this loc.lity." liather, then, than repeal these duties and these direful consequences follow, let us grant these petitions and at the same time ful fill the pledges made to the people in 1884 and reiterated in 1888 by both political par- — Browne, T. H. B., Record, 7219. Agriculture— Protection or— Democratic Testimony. Xo. 'i'.t, — Between ISoO and ISGO the farmers of the country more than doubled their wealth, and between 1870 and 1880 they accumulated but 'J per cent, increase. I append an exact and verified table of the figures. 1850. 1860. 1870. i 1880. $3.271.575,4'26 5U,180.516 151,587,038 $6,645,045,007 1.089,329,915 246,118,141 $9,202,803,801 1,525,276,457 330,878,429 $10,197,056,776 Farm animals Farm Implements l,5r,'«l,384,707 400,52().(J55 Total 3,%7,a43,580 7,980,493,063 11,124,958,747 12,104,001.538 While I do not claim that the high tarift" since 1861 is the sole cause of this decay in the industry of more than half our people, I do most earnestly contend that in that fact is to be found the secret of one of the most potential causes of the terrible blight and depreciation of values which has befallen American agriculture. If this is not true, why is it that during the same decades, and fostered and protected by this system, the manufacturing districts have so enor- mously increased in wealth ? There is but one answer. Protection ben- efits the manufacturer alone, while it oppresses and levies tribute upon all other classes. [Why not multiply manufacturing districts? — Ed. ] — Hatch (Dem.), Record, 4572. Notp.— PRICES OF Agbicultobal Prodocts. Read carefully the following Nos. 24, 25, 25, 27, 28, by Ford, Burrows of Michigan, and Senator brown of Georgia. —Eu. Agricultural Products— Surplus fixes prices. Xo. 'i4.. — No tariir can help the farmer on his surplus production, be- cause the price at which it is sold is fixed by competition with all the producers of the world. We now consume at home about 70 per cent, of cur agricultural productions and export about 30 per cent, of them. Now, mark this: Whenever any country produces more than it con- sumes and has a surplus, the price of that surplus will fix the price of the whole product. Therefore, so long as our farmers produce a surplus (and this they will always do) the price of the agricultural productions in the United States will be the same as the world's price. There is no escaping this conclusion. You may pile tarilTson wheat, corn, beef, pork, and cotton mountains high and it will not increase the jjrice of thoee products in this country a penny — not a farthing. —Ford (Dem.), Record, 3009. AKricnlture— Surplus products, sale of. No. 25. — Tor the disposition of this surplus he requires a market, and that market which yields the best returns will be to him the most advantageous. There are but two markets open (o him, the home mar- ket and the foreign. Can it be popisible that the farmer can be deluded into a belief that a policy which destroys his home market and forces him into the distant markets of the world with his surplus products, with 22 AGR all the attendint,' and enormous cost of transportation, will redound to disadvantage? Every firmer understands that the nearer his market to his farm the more abundant his protits. Therefore, any policy which tends to diversify our industries and give employment to a large class of our people outside of agriculture, and who thus become consumers of the surplus products of the farm at home, must inure to the beneflt of the American farmer; and any policy which tends to diminish these indus- tries and force the capital and labor employed therein onto the farm, to become producer rather than consumer, must from necessity increase the ajrricultural product, while at the same time lessening the demand there- for. I can conceive of no calamity more appalling than that which would overtake our vast agricultural interests by the destruction of our manufacturing industries and the consequent annihilation of our home market. The importance to agriculture of a diversitication of our indus- tries and consequent creation of a home demand for the surplus product of the farm was strikingly set forth by Alexander Hamilton nearly a century ago : " This idea of an extensive domestic market for the surplus produce of the soil is of the first consequence. It is of all things that which must effectually conduce to a flourishing state of agriculture. To secure such a market there is no other expedient than to promote manufacturing establishments. Manufacturers, who coiLstitute the most numerous class after the cultivators of the land, are for that reason the principal con- sumers of the surplus of their labor." But the advantage of such a policy does not rest for its support upon a theory. It is affirmed by experience, and it may be well to again remind the President that " it is a condition that confronts us, not a theory." It is estimated that to-day our population is not less than (30,000,000, of which only 20,000,000 are actually engaged in any gainful occupation, 9.()00,C00 of whom are engaged in agriculture, leaving 11,000,000 employed in other pursuits. Nine million farmers are feeding a nation of (30,000,000 of people. How does this advantage the farmers? The estimated value of the products of our farms, exclusive of cotton and tobacco, is $3,000,- 000,000 annually, and yet 04 per cent, of this enormous product is taken in our own market and consumed by our own people. The farmers are compelled to export only G per cent, of their products. In this connec- tion it is worthy of note that while the value of our manufactures reaches the almost fabulous sum of $7,000,000,000 annually, yet more than UOper cent, of this is consumed within our borders. It is estimated that the value of our industrial products of farm and factorv will aggregate an- nually $ 11, OC 0,000,000, and yet nearly ?;i(i,000,000,000 6f this is disposed of in our market and consumed by our own people. And yet, with a home market of such absorbing capacity, built up and sustained by a diversiti- •cation of our industries, the advocates of free trade are constantly hold- ing up the phantom of the markets of the world as the one thing chiefly to be desired. — Burrows, Record, 3452. Agriculf lire— Tarifl' rai.scs prices. Xo. 20. — But there is another view of the farmer's interest that it would be well in this connection to present. The advocates of the whisky ring, in their zeal for reducing the tarilfantl retaining internal- revenue taxes, lay down the rule that the tarilf laws rai.se the price to consuraersof all articles imported and subject to duty the sum |)aid for such duties, and tliat this is not only true as to the imported article, but that it raises in the market the price of every article of like l:ind produced iu this country, and that the people pay not only the taritf on the im- 23 AGR ported article, but an additional sum as large as the tariflF on the price of every article produced in this countr}' of the name kind and quality as the imported article. — Senator Broayn (Dem.), Record, 2151. AKricultnro— Frotocfiou applied to the farmer. Xo. '-JT.— The rule must work both ways or it is not a good rule. To illustrate the manufa(;tnrers' side of it : We will say that the taritf on cal- ico is I'O per cent, ad valorem. The owner of a factory in Canada im- ports one thousand bolts of calico and pays the tariff of 20 per cent, on It. He adds the tariff to the price, and it ig paid by the consumer. This, according; to the rule, add? 20 per cent, to the price of all the calico man- ufactured in this country, and all purchasers of calico pay 20 per ceut_ more than they would have paid but for the tariff on every yard of cal- ico manufactured in the United States. Now we will test the rule by an illustration on the farmer's side. Sup- pose the tariff on wheat to be 20 per cent, ad valorem. A farmer in Canada imports into the United States 1,000 bushels of wheat, and pays a tariff of 20 per cent. He adds the tariff to the price of the wheat, and it is paid by the consumer. It follows, under the rule, that this at once raises the price of every bushel of wheat made in the United States, and all purchasers of American wheat must pay 20 per cent, more for it, and the farmers, as a protection under the tariff, get 20 per cent increase on. the price of every bushel of wheat raised by them. If the rule is correct when applied to the manufacturer, it must be correct when applied to the farmer. If it is a correct rule then no class of our citizens have anything like the amount of protection under our tariff laws that is given to the plant- ers and farmers of this country. — Senator Brown (Dem.), Record, 2151. Agriculture— TariJI" added to priee. A PRODIGIOUS SHOWING FOR THE FARMERS. Xo. 2S. — For instance there is a tariff of 10 cents a bushel on corn,^ and the official statistical report puts down the whole quantity of corn, produced in this country last year at 1,936,130,000 bushels. There were imported last year 30,530 bushels, which paid a tariff of 10 cents per bushel. In other words the taritf was added to the original price of the corn, and that raised the price of all corn produced in this country IQ: cents a bushel. Now, what was the result? Ten cents a bushel on the quantity of corn above mentioned amounted to a net income to the farmers, if the rule be correct, of $193,G17,G0O on account of corn alone for one year. I have a table here showing how much under that rule the farmers made net on corn, wheat, rye, oats, barley, potatoes, tobacco, cattle horses, and sheep, and other articles, showing the aggregate of net profit to the planters, farmers, and stock-r.iisers of this country under the rule above mentioned of twelve hundred millions of dollars in round num- bers in a single year. Now, who will say in the face of these figures, taken from the official reports, that the farmers are not well protected by the tariff? If the rule laid down by the tariff- reformers is correct, then there is no escape from the official figures, and there is no ques- tion that the farmers made last year by the tariff over a billion of dollars. — Senator Brown (Dem.), Record, 2151. .\Kri<-nlti]re and TariflT. So 20 — < >ae fart will show how wasteful American agriculture might have been. In 1770 nearly one-half of the value of all our exports con- AGR sisted of tobacco.^ And, had free trade continued, we would now be striving to monopolize the Piuropean markets, diverting all our land to the production of wheat, cotton, and tobacco. We would never have de- veloped those fourteen " principal vegetable productions " and those " orchard products " that we have to-day.* These advantages to agricult- ure could only proceed from the creation of a home market.' On account of the physical properties of the soil there is still another reason why the home market is more advantageous than the foreign. When agricultural products are consumed near the farm nitrogenous refuse may be returned to the soil. But when those products are shipped to foreign markets^ there can be no such return. The soil is practically transported, and lands lose their fertility. The tariff has prevented this "earth- butchery" in the United States. The advantages to agriculture of a market for the surplus is strongly affirmed by Mr. Mill. "A country," he says, "will sel- dom have a productive agriculture unless it has a large town population, or the only available substitute, a large export trade in agricultural pro- duce." It has, I believe, been thoroughly established that such a market never has existed, and does not now exist abroad. By a protective tarifi we have created such a market at home. "The arrival of manufacturers," to use Mill's expression, has enriched the farmers by the value of the food that would not have been produced had those manufacturers not been here to consume it, or which would have been produced only to rot iu granaries. Nay, more, the factory has stimulated the farm to still greater efforts to supply the constantly increasing demand for food. An incal culable advantage of the tariff to agriculture has resulted from the estab- lishment in this country of the mechanical arts. The methods of agri- culture have been vastly improved since the days when farmers plowed their lands with wooden "bull-plows," sowed their grain broadcast, cut it with a scythe, and thrashed it with a flail.* Had we not fostered the mechanical arts by a protective tariff, would the agricultural implement.s of Auburn and Chicago be now acknowledged the finest in the world '"^ Would American agriculture have undergone that great revolution pro- duced by American steam-plows and stone-cutters, and reapers and binders? In less than a century would the product per man have in- creased five-fold :^ The history of American agriculture negatives such conclusions. Colonial agriculture was rude and exhausting; for the fer- tilization of the soil and the rotation of the crops were never practiced.' A period of awakening followed the revolution, and as agriculture under the tariffs became more profitable, it gradually came to be studied as a science. > With the invention of McCormick thatscience began its extraor- dinary development, continually furthered by agricultural chemistry and agricultural machinery. Ti)e advantages of the tariff' to the agricult- ural industries may, therefore, be summed up in the two words of Mr. Mill — a "market" and "tools." The tariff' has, therefore, stimulated those industries, and enabled them to yield a greater product of wealth. — IIknning's Prize E.ssay, 1SS7. Agricnltiirc and Tarifir. IVo. ;jO — Supposing that our Democratic free-trade, tariff- for- re venue- only friends shall succeed in passing this bill, every industry it strikes must either reduce the wages of the people employed therein or else cloee 'Macpherson's Annals of Commerce, vol. in., p. 572. '(Compendium of the Tenth Census, vol. i., p. 7o8. 'Political Economy, book i , chap. viii. *McMaster'B History of the people of the Ignited States, vol. i., p. 18. ^Bolles' Industrial History of the United .States, p. 41. ^ Tenth Cen&U'?, Agriculture : History of American Agriculture. Holies' Ind\istrial History of the United States, p. 14. AGR— AL the shops, furnace?, and fairtories wliich give them employment. In either event we will witness increased "strikes," "lock-outs," and a mill- ion of wage-earners that are now finding work will be thrown out of em- ployment and of necessity be driven to tilling the soil. These men, who nave been cousumers of the products of the farm, will become producers. The farmer needs no more competition in his chosen pursuit. That which he produces to-day scarcely compensates him for his labor. If tliese people who are now engaged in other pursuits are to become tillers of the soiland producers of wheat, corn, and potatoes, where are the agri- culturists to lind a market for that which they produce? We shall not tind it in our own country, because by our over-production we have ruined our home market. We have increased producers and decreased con- sumers, and increased our productions beyond any foreign demand. We shall in fact become a nation of agriculturists, and no nation ever has been or ever will be prosperous where its people are wholly or chiefly en- gaged in agriculture. — Brewer, Record, .%05. A(;ri<*iiltiiriMtM vote taxes upon tlieuiselves for railro»(ls a 11(1 i'aetorieN. >o. HI. — It is our protective tariff which has largely built up our va- ried industries, and which has tended to make us the most prosperous nation in the world. A protective tariff tends to aid and build up ail our industries, to bring the producer and consumer nearer together, and thereby largely save the cost of transportation. This has made more valuable the farm and given a better market for its products. This is what has made lands near our large cities more valuable than those more distant. This is why the lands in rough and rocky New England and in sterile New Jersej' are more valuable than our fertile lands in Michigan and Minnesota. Every farmer knows well that he cannot send to for- eign lands his potatoes, vegetables, and many other things which he grows upon the farm, and that he must rely upon the home market for the same. Hence it is all important that he should feel a deep interest in the building up of manufacturing towns and cities near his home, where he can market his surplus productions. It is for this reason that we .see them often voting a tax upon themselves, or aiding by a volun- tary contribution to assist in building railroads and in the erection of factories. They understand perfectly well that it is to their advantage to build up these towns and bring the consumer of their products near to them, and to make distant markets more accessible. Every farmer who produces wool understands full well that he can not raise wool in competition with that which is produced in Australia or South America. The President of the United States and free-trade Congressmen may try to convince them that free imported wool will be to their advantage, but their own practical experience tells them otherwise. — Brewer, Record, 3G05. Alum. (See also Soda.) Alum— Soda. \o. Jlti. — There are about twenty-five firms and establi-shments en- gaged in the production of alum and soda of various kind/?. They con- etime a vast amount of material which is the product of labor. They consume salt to the extent of oOOjOSO tons, sulphuric acid 513,000 tone, lime and limestone 700,000 tons, coal 800,000 tons, nitrate soda 17,000 tons, alum clay 50,000 tons, sulphate of ammonia 25,000 tons, pyrites 5iM).000 tone, and packages 2,010,000 barrels. There is no industry in the whole country producing a manufactured article in which labor is more immediately concerned than it is in these 26 AI.-AMER industries. The es'ablishments are scattered over various sections of the country. The United States consume ."7 per cent, of the world's production, and in the United States at present we produce about 18 per cent, of the total consumption. We import, therefore, about as much as we produce. In my district there is one of these establishments. It employs between three hundred and four hundred men. It has strug- gled for a great many years to build up the industry, and it has finally succeeded, and there are other establishments in different States of the Union which have undergone the same struggle and have also succeeded. The accomplishments brought about by American production have re- duced the price of this commodity to the American consumer away below what it was before our home industry was established. — Burrows, of Michigan, Record, 6336. • Alum and Soda. Xo. 33.— The alum and sulphate of soda manufacture would cease entirely if those articles are placed on the free-list. The revenue from the other forms of soda would be greatly increased in consequence of reducing the duty one-half, as England is forwarding half our supply inder the present duty. Ten million dollars are invested in the alum and soda works and half as much additional in contingent and allied industries. Fifty thousand people are dependent upon them for support. The manufacturer, the laborer, the consumer, the mine owner, and the carrier would see their money drained out of the country, and their requisites would be vastly diminished. The alum clay deposits of Indiana, Alabama, South Carolina and Vir- ginia are now being developed, and this would cease with alum on the free-list. The British manufacturers are deeply concerned over the threatening evils to their alum, alkali, and soda industries by reason of the rapid development of those industries in this country. Mr. Weldon, in a paper read in London in 18S3, gave the soda production of the world at 710,000 tons, of which 432,000 tons were made in England. The United States, by long odds, is the heaviest consumer. — Farquhae, Record, 5735. Aniorica— Her hiilivark<$ protection. \'o. 31- — Sir, the higher and stronger you build the bulwarks of pro- tection to American industry the more eflioient and potential you make the American man and the more firmly you establish American liberty and equality ; for by protection only can you secure stability of prices at fairly remunerative wages to labor when subject only to the fluctuations incident to American competition uninterfered by cheap labor, the prod- ucts of cheap labor, cheap money, and the surplus dump of despotic and barbarous nations. Therefore, my cry is still for the American idea of protection for American labor, and against class legislation in the interest of cotton, whisky, and (freat Britain. — Brum.m, of Pennsylvania, Record, 5218. Aniorioa no dumping ii^round for Ensinnd. Xo. 3.>. — W^hy, sir, the question is not one even of what it costs. I wish to show from what I said before that the protectionists as a rule do not go half far enoueh when they say all we require is protection sufli- €ient to cover the ditTeren(;e in wages, as I'lnglish products are sent to this country and sold for less than they cost in England. They do this to keep their surplus product from lowering their home market. Therefore it is not forced upon their market, but is dumped down upon our market. 27 AMER America, •with its enormoue resources, with its industries of every de- Bcription. is the country which ICu^land^wisheB to preserve as a dumping- ground f jr its surplus productH, regardless of the price. — Bkumm, Record, 5219. AtiiericH not IIiikIsiikI iior China. \o. :{end- ence as we are in our political systems and geographical position. Sir, when our fathers created th^s Government they made such a radi- cal departure from old-established systems that even precedents and ex- amples of other nations became of but little value to us. — Brlmm, Record, 5218. Asucrioan ln. \o. U7. — Daniel Webster says: '■ 1 defy the man in any degree con- versant witii the history, in any degree acquainted with the annals of this country from 1787 to 1789, when the Constitution was adopted, to nay that protection of American labor and industry was not a leading, 1 might almost say the leading, motive, S)uth as well as North, for the lor- iriition of the new Government. Without that provision in the Consti- tution, it never could have been adopted." —Speech at Albany, N. Y., August 27, 1844. Ainorican labor an Factozmes.) Auiorioau inaiiiiructurcrM— Cau they coiupete witU Oreat Britain ? Xo. 10—En£;land. fifty years ago, with her advantage in machinery and skilled labc", had no fear of the competition of any couDtry, ho.vever .much cheaper its labor might be, while to day she admits that Germany, and Bel<:ijium, and France are sorely pressing her. Now, Mr. President, confronted with thelivingfactsof to-day, laying aside all fanciful theories, generally founded on error, can this Republic, with all her admitted ad- vantages, compete with Great Britain and the nations of the Continent, even in laer own markets, with labor abroad from one to two hundred per cent, cheaper than here ? It can in only two ways : First. By enacting into law the policy of protection ; that is, nearly equalizing labor by a duty. Second. By reducing the wages paid our laborers nearly to the level of European wages. The first method, fortunately, is now no experiment. It has been on trial for a quarter of a century and its fruits are known. During that time, though for four years millions of men were converted from pro- ducers to destroyers, though lives were sacrificed by the hundreds of thousands, thoufjh treasure was expended and property destroyed by the billions, yet we increased in population a million a year — more than Eng- land, France, Germany, and Austria combined in the same time. We increased in wealth from $17,000,000,000 to $43,000,000,000— a billion a year. Mulhall, the English statistician, no enthusiast in our favor, says that this Republic for a quarter of a century has laid up every year $885,000,000— almost half as much as the saving of the whole world. Gladstone says : " England's daughter beyond the seas is pa.ssing by the mother at a canter," and she passed by her long ago — almost distanced her in the race. Mulhall gives the value of the annual product of Great Britain manufactories, mines, and forestry, $4,500,000,0[)0, an increase since 1850 of 30 per cent. The same product in the United States, a.s ap- jvears by the census of 1880, was valued at $5,500,000,000, an increase since 1800 of 100 per cent. Since 18G0 our farms have doubled in number, increased in value from $6,000,000,000 to over $10,000,000,00.), while their product has increased •from $1 800,000,000 in 1800 to $3,600,000,000 in 1880. Mulhall gives the entire product of Great Britain, farms and all, in 1880. as worth $( J, 200,000,000, $172 to an inhabitant ; her exportations same year $1,3(X),000,000, leaving consumed at home $130 worth to an inhabitant. The entire product of the United States for the same year was valued at $10,000,000,000, $200 to an inhabitant, and, more tignificant of pro.snerity than any other statement, $9,170,000,000 of it were consumed at home. Our home r. arket consumed more than Great Britain's home cou.sunip- tion and exportations combined. Our home market disposed of double in value the combined exports of Great Britain, France, Germany, liuosia, Holland and Austria. Great Britain has 20,000 miles of railroad, while we have 130,000, reach- ing 2,300 counties of our 44 States and Territories. We have grown weak in but one direction, our foreign carrying trade, which, during this period, has been absolutely without protection ; but our coastwise lleet has grown to magnificent proportions, three times as large as Cireat Britain's, five times greater than that of any other country. This has been protectetl by our navigation laws, and yet the honorable Secretary of the Treasury can see no reason why they should not be repealed. These re.-ult^, Mr. President, are terrible blows to theoretical free trade, and yet, sir, we 20 AMER have not accomplished all that we ousrht the past year. The com- pleted returns show that we imported last year, notwithstanding the "vicious " tarill': Ironand steel and their manufactures $54,618,086 Wool and its manufactures 60,58(),()14 Flax, hemp, and jute manufactures 33,807, 2S:> Silk manuracluree 31,204.277 Cotton manufactures 29,50U,000 Total 209,777,100 The same returns show that the increased importations of these manu- factures over that of 1880 amounted to nearly $2."),000,000; that the in- creasKC came when the duties had been slightly reduced. Now nearly all of these manufactures might just as well have been produced at home, two or three hundred thousand more of our people employed, a million more supported, a larger market insured. The most of these goo'ls w^re those in the manufacturing of which labor was the most important element, its cheapness abroad enabling the foreign manufacturer to pay the duty and sell the goods in our market to the exclusion of ours. — Senator Frye, Record, 654. Ainerioau systom— Devclopmont. Xo. -41. — Mr. Chairman, I have listened to the lamentations of the other side, who forget that for eleven years they have controlled this House, and for three years past ruled this country. If the plain people, the working people of my country, can be diverted, by these querulous complaints, from the greatness of the American protective system and the splendor of its development as fashioned by the national Republican party during the recent twenty-five years, they indeed are our people — ■' Like the people," to borrow from an old philosopher, " who, when they went to Olympia, could only perceive that they were scorched by the sun, and pressed by the crowd, and wetted by the rain, and that life was full of disagreeable and troublesome things, and so they almost forgot the great colossus of ivory and gold, Phidias's statue of Zeus, which they had come to see, and which stood in all its glory and power before their perturbed and foolish vision." I believe rather that the vast majority of our people will, with our foremost statesman, again declare for " that policy which inspires labor with hope and crowns it with dignity, which gives safety to capital and protects its increase, which secures political power to every citizen, culture and comfort to every home. [Great applause.] — McCoMAS, Record, 3840. Aiuoricun l%'orkiu;;iuoii. (See also American Labcjr, Foreign Labor, Labor, Wagbs, and WORKINGMEN.) Ainorioan worliinf;inen, pictares for. Xo. 12.— Such are the utterances of British statesmen, and that is the feast to which the Democratic party invites the people of this country. But before accepting the invitation let us ask some of these same British statesmen what free trade has done for the people of Great Britain. Tfiomas ( 'arlyle declared only a few years ago that — " British in hntrial existence seems fa,st becoming one huge poison swamp of reckless postilence — physical and moral — a hideous living Grolgotha of souls and bodies buried alive. Thirty thousand outcast needle 30 AMER women working themselves swifcly to death. Three million paupers rotting in forced idleness; and these are but items in the sad ledger of despair." What a picture that is for American working men and women to con- template, and what a feast is that to which free trade invites them ? — Gallinger, Record, 3G88. Aincri4*iiu workiii};iiieii pclitioii in vain. Xo. l;i. — Bus Mr. Chairman, last evening I received such a petition from many hundieds of people in my district protesting against the pas- sage of this most unjust, unwi?e, and uncalled-for measure that I am im- pelled to say a word in presenting it to the American Congress. This petition, Mr. Chairman, is signed by many hundreds of people in my little city who know what labor is. They live by the toil of their own hands. Glad am I to eay that they are intelligent people. They under- stand the meaning of protection. They know what the passage of the Mills bill means to them, they know what it means to all American workingmen, and they raise their voices by this petition in solemn pro- testation against its passage. Thousands of laboring men in the district I have the honor to repre- sent are begging Congress to defeat this bill. They are workers of wool and of cotton, of iron and of glass, the mechanic and the farmer. Mr. Chairman, do they stand alone in making this request? Need I make answer? Why, sir, the terra of the trentleman from Texas is hardly long enough to enable him to count the number of names of those throughout this prosperous land who have invoked Congress by petition not to disturb our industries, not to cripple our manufactures, not to place our happy and contented and prosperous working people on a level with those less favored in other lands by the passage of the Mills bill. These petitioners are not conlined to any district or any State. Why, sir, I have received remonstrances even from the State of Texas. — Sherman, New York, Record, 4321. American workiiion— WIiou more degraded aud poorer paid tliau now? 'So. 4 1. — I heard a gentleman on the other side of the House, and I heard that great Democratic Senator from Indiana — that is, what is left of him [laughter] — I heard them ask, " When was the American work- man more degraded and poorer paid than now?" That is what we have heard. I will tell you when; why, every day the Democratic party was in power in this country. [Laughter and applause.] I remember in 1857, when my own father, who was a skilled mechanic and a builder of wagons, worked for seventy-tive cents a day. You remember the carpenter who went South and applied for a situa- tion aa a carpenter, about that time, of a planter, and the planter said, '' I am sorry I cannot give vou employment ; just bought two carpenters yesterday. [Apf)lause and laughter.] — Mason, Record, 4S31. American SiiippiiiK. Xo. 15. — A recommendation for the revival of American shipping would also have been appreciated by the people. The gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Mansur] said ttiat "tti'e tariff has destroyed our shipping, our merchant marine." It surely did not destroy the vessels captured and burned during the war. The truth i.'<. our shipping has not since revived because it is in direct competition with the ships of nations whii-h have by subsidies encouraged their merchants to exten-. > •; itii'. _ ^'-rn peraons live in 8,t)30 sinj^le rooms — ' hoveU'— with nothin,i to lie on but the bare floor, ami no cover- ing' but coarse burlap cloth, and that only occasionally ; that 74,ei74 men, women, and chiUiren occupy l"l.ls7 two-room houses, and that thus from extreme poverty, overcrowding' in 'these vile dens,' filth and neglect, thev are Mul)jert'ed to all kinds of wretchedness, infectious diseases, and immorality, with hardly a chance to raise themselves to the level of a decent manhood and womanhood, " Your petitioners respectfully sugjjest that provisions of law which subject us as wa^'e-workers to the alternative of such unhappy conditions as are shown in these ollicial reports cannot be in accordance with the wi^ilom of your honorable body, and humbly pray relief therefrom." CJentlemen, you may, nay, will turn a deaf ear to the the pleadinps of these and tens of thousands of other laborers of the country, but beware of the ides of November ; they will obtain a hearing then. — Waknkr, Record, GG95. Ila«KiiiK— l»ri<'c rc«lu€C«». 1!>. — Mr. Chairman, the cotton planter who uses the product of our American mills is not being oppressed by a high or unreasonable price for the bagging he purchases. Before these mills were established in the United States he paid the foreign manufacturer from 18 to 1*4 cei.ts for every yard of bagging he purchased. Now he gets American-made bagging for 7 cents a yard. Close these mills by unfriendly legislation, and in the near future he will be at the mercy of the English syndicate that controls the entire product of the mills at Dundee and Calcutta, and we will be sending to England $4,000,000 a year for foreign-made bag- ging that should be expended at home for the benefit of the wage-workers?- of America. — \V.\u.N'ER, Record, (JG05. Itnrley not u lariu product. (See No. 310). Itcaisis -i'roo list. \o. 50. — The district which I represent is very largely intere8te. ."5:5.— '■ The issue i [)rotection or free trade) which the Republicans maintained and the iJduiocrats avoided in 1S81, has been prominently and S(>erilically brou>;ht forward by the Democratic President and cannot be hidden out of sight in isss. The country is now in the enjoyment of an industrial system which in a (juartcr of a century has assured a larger national growth, a more rapid accumulation ar,d a broatler distri- bution of wealth tliau fr,r Itefore known to histori/. The American people will now be openly and formally asked to decide whether this HV:3tem shall be reckleasly abandoned and a new trial made of an oleinj? a difference of only 30 cents between the bids? Is there any gentleman on this floor who would send abroad to get a pair of blankets merely to save 30 cents on them, thus taking away from the American manufacturer and the American farmer and the American laborer that much bu=?ineBs? However that may be, that contract did go abroad. English labor made those 2,000 blankets for the use of our army. American labor was boycotted and they came in without paying any duty. The Government took advantage of a law that stands on the statute-book and admitted them in free of duty. There being so little revenue in the Treasury, it was necessary, of course, to save every penny, 80 they took advantage of that law which permits the United S:ate8 to bring in goods free of duty. Now let us look at the figures. The duty on blankets of that quality is 18 cents a pound and 3.3 per cent, ad valorem. Eighteen cents a pound upon 2,000 blankets, 4 pounds each, is $1,440; 35 per cent, ad valorem is .$1 ,570.40, making a total du'y upon those 2,000 blankets, which were bought from a foreign blanket maker, of $3 01G.40. The cost of those blinket.^.'therefore, with the duty added, would be $7,520.40. Now, if the President is right and if the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means is right in saying that this duty is added to the price to the American consumer, then $7,520.40 is exactly what the American price would be. Now, then, gentlemen, what was the American price? The American pr'ca was ■*5,120. That i", it was $2,400 less than the foreign cost, duty added. Without any duty, the ditl'erence between the cost of the Amer- can and the cost of the foreign blankets, the whole 2,000, was about$G00. Now you see the American manufacturer does not get the duty, and that, [ submit, is a euflicient reason why he does not give it to his workman. I am very sorry, Mr. Chairman, that the President of the United States did not know of this transaction, which had occurred under his own administration, so that he might have avoided making the blunder which he made in his message when he said that the diuty was added to the cost. And I do not know what those about me may think about it, but I am very sorry that our Government went abroad and bought those bl-inkets j ist to save ■'>> cents apiece on them. Mr. Chairman, I wish that this Government of ours, which is supported by its own people, would patronize its own people. I think that is an example of patriotism which it should set for its people. I wi- Kin-ley, K3Cord, 4756. 3'". BLA BlaiikotM— Poor inau's. 'So. >i^. — The cost of a pair of five-pound woolen blankets in England is $4 A'j. American blankets of precisely the fame weitiht and quality cost $5.20. The duty ia $4.2o and custom-houte fees Price of oi.o pair poor mau'a blankets with robber tariff repealed '-'j Gain to poorman 4 'J5 — Congressional Record, 3947. He would have you believe that under free trade a pair of blankets could be bought here for 2') cents. This is exactly the process of his deductions in dguring up the "gain " on necessaries under this bill. The proposition is too absurd for further comment. — Haugkn, Record, 4231. Blanketf4, Poor man's. Xo. 56. — Now, the gentleman had a lot of blankets here the other day. The very climax of the gentleman's speech wag reached when he came to a description of the American blankets, and the enormous bur- dens that the tariff laid upon the poor man's bed an<». tiT. — I was very murh interested the other day when I heard the distinguished chairman of the Ways and Means Committee [Mr. Mills] .'^peaking in regard to the great burden in the shape of a tax which was pla(X'd on " the poor man'n blanket." He talked so pathetically in regard to this subject that I wondered whether what he said could be true. I recollected that we had out in my State a woolen mill or two, and I con- Huded to send out to that State for a pair of blankets. 1 have those blankets here, and I ask that two of tne.se page-boys take (hose blan- kets out into the area in front of the Clerk'.s desk that members may see them. [The blanket.s were exhibitc;! in accordance with Mr. Gear's re- quest.] Sir, there is a pair of blankets as good as can be made in Eng- land or anywhere in America. They weigh 5 poundtiand 2 ounces, and it lequired for their manufacture 11 pounds of wool. They are made of Iowa wool in an Iowa mill t»y Iowa employes. The gentleman from Texas spoke of $2.50 as the cost in one case and $2.70 as the cost in another case of a pair of li ve-i)Ound blankets ; and re- BOO member each of these blankets is just 5 pounds. The gentleman from Texas said that the duty on those blankets would be $1.00 per pair, and that this was the amount which the manufacturer put in his pocket. Now, sir, to manufacture this pair of blankets which the House has be- fore it took 11 pounds of wool, at 27 cents a pound. Now, 11 pounds of wool at 27 cents per pound would be $2.07 ; to that add Gl cents, which the trentleman from Texas Bays is the costof making, and the amount will be $3.58; add to that the duty on blankets, $1 00, and the amount is $5.48. Now, if it be true that the amount of the tarifl'duty is added directly to the cost of the American blanket, the cost of these blankets should be $5.48 ; and allowing the retailer a fair profit, they should sell at $G per pair. But, sir, I have a certificate from the manufacturer certifying as to the ■fj lality and price. The wholesale price is $4-50, and the retail price at any store in Iowa is $5 per pair. I want to call attention to the fact that my friend from Texas in his illustration does not give the price at which the American blankets he talked about are sold — not at all ; and I want to call attention also to the fact that the majority of the Ways and Means Committee, when they revise the taritl', and, as they say, take ths tax off " the poor man's blan- ket," do not take oil' one penny in favor of the poor man. — Ge.\r, Record, 5548. Boots and Shoes. (See also Leather ) Boots and Shoes— New Eugland. ]Vo. 5H. — In the manufacture of boots and shoes the entire country employs forty-three million doliara in capital ; over one hundred and two million dollars are expended for material, and from it products are manufactured to the value of over one hundred and sixty-six millions of dollars. Of this industry, felt and known in every home of the nation, and marked in the foot-prints of the legislators from the Southern States, theHix New England States employ nearly twenty-five millions of capi- tal, considerably more than one-half of all; they pay seventy millions of djUarafor material, about three-fjurths of all, and yield a product of one hundred and twelve million dollars, slightly over two thirds of the w hole, and is the best customer for hides that the South has or will have in all time to come. — G.VLLiNGER, Record, 3G80. Boots vs. Corn, nudor a Democratic Tarifl', 1816. Xo. 59. — 1 was making a speech soon after that time in another part of the country to an immense crowd of farmers. I was making about the same sort of a speech that I am making to-day. I happened to refer, as I well remember, to the time when corn sold at 10 cents a bushel. At that point a prominent old farmer in the crowd whom I had known all my life — he was much older than myself, but we had been in the army together and 1 knew hiia very well — called out. "Hold on a moment 1 Under the Democratic tarill" of ]S4il I hauled 50 bushels of corn right across the river there and put it in Emmet Munday'n corn-crib for one pair of boots, the price being $5 for the bjots and lo cents a bushel for the corn." I then said, "Jake" — for down in my country I call people by their first names — " how many people will 50 bushels of corn shoe now under this rascally Republican policy of protection?" "By George! it would shoe a family of a dozen for at least two years." [Laughter and applause.] That is a fair illustration. — Hoik, Record, 4103. 39 BOR l.">, when a few hundred tons were placed on the market at about 2" cents per pound in San Francisco. At that time and for forty years pre- vious an importing firm in New York, representing a prominent English houFe, controlled the market of this country, receiving the supply either as refined borax or boracic acid, the latter being the essential ingredient in the borax of commerce. — Morrow, Record, 573»'5. Itorax— Bad faith ofroiuo^ ins the 2. — Mr. Chairman, there is another feature to which I wisli to call attention. The borax fieMs are located on lands designated in our land laws as "mineral lands," and the people who have taken up these fields have done so in good fai»h, supposing that the industry had the friendship of the Government. Tney have gone on and expended tlieir money, paving $2 50 an acre for the land; and the borax being a scatterei! product, they have found it necessary to take up quite a I'lrge quantity of land otherwise worthUs^, for which they paid the price for mineral land. Now, having made these purchases, I submit they had the right to suppose that the law would not be changed so as to destroy the vahie of their lands. — Morrow, Record, 5737. Borax— How tlio monopoly acted. \'o. <13. — In ls72 some important borax fields were discovered in the- desert reirions of California and Nevada from which borax was taken in considerable quantities. The result was, as I have just stated, that a large amount was placed on the market in 1873. This domestic product in- duced the foreign importer to come to Congress for a reduction of the 40 !• BOX— BRI tariff, in which he was successful ; and in 1874 borate of lime, crude borax, and boracic acid were placed on the free-list. The effect of the removal of the duty was to dif coura<;;e the producers, and the industry was accord- ingly restricted. But it must be remembered that at the time when the tariff of 1883 went into effect the importer holding? a monopoly of the foreign product iftported an immense quantity of boracic acid. I believe the amount was 4,178,737 pounds, as I find it reported. This large importation was in an- ticipation of the action of Congress in placing borax on the dutiable list, and the effect has been such that the market has been carrying a large surplus ever since, or until quite recently. The domestic producer hag been suffering from this unfortunate competition, designed as a means to Eecure his utter destruction. — Morrow, Record, 5737. Boxes— Orange or lemon. Xo. 04. — The exporting agent of the manufacturers writes me that he has paid as high as 5^5,000 for freight on these boxes in a single month, and that he has collected more than $1,750,000 for the shooks thus ex- ported from this country, all of which came from the foreign purchaser and was distributed among the manufacturers, workmen, and farmers of my section. « I would state, Mr. Chairman, that thisremifsion of duty will not stimu- late competition with California or Florida oranges, as the boxes are used for Mediterranean fruit that comes here at a eeason when it dots not in- terfere with the domestic product, as would be the case with Jamaica or Porto Rico oranges that are imported in barrels. Now, what is proposed by this amendment is not an increase of the revenue, but a decrease. It provides simply that when a cargo of oranges shall come from Sicily or Messina or other porta, bearing wiih it the veri- fication of the American consul that those oranges are in boxes manufact- ured in the United States — and I will say that all the regulations have been carefully made by the Department, under the old law, and carried out for years to prevent any difhculiies in this regard — thereupon there shall be a remission of duty to the extent of 5 cents for each full box and 3 cents for each half box, giving to that extent an advantage to the man- ufacturer of the American boxes and thereby inciting the foreign fruit- grower to use the American shooks instead of the foreign shcoks, t! U3 giving to labor on this Bide of the ocean the advantage of carrying on that industry. I say this was the law from 1875 to 1883. It was intended to be reincorporated in the law of 1883 ; was reported favorably by the TaritI Commission and by the Ways and Means Committee of this House, but was omitted by inadvertence. As no tariff bill was passed in either House during the previous two Congresses, since the passage of the act of 1883, it has been impossible until now to remedy the omission. I do not think there can be any valid objection by anybody to the amendment and I therefore hope it will be unanimously agreed to. The CiiAinMAN declared the amendment was rejected. Mr. BouTELT>E deminded a division. The committee divided ; and there were — ayes 54, noes 72. So the amendment was disagreed to. — BocTELLE, Record, 694S. Brick. No. 65.— There are made annually in the United States over 3,822,- 000,000 common brick, and in the State of New York over 576,000,000 <-.[" Buch brick. 41 liRI The capital inve8tes of AnorMENT. Boo Nos. CO, G7, C8,<;9, on Wealth.— Eu. Itritisli K<>I«1— ^VIktc is it ?— Doiuocratic luetliod.s ol'ar;;ii- iiiciit oxpoMod. \o. ^til tlie .\nieriian farmers have soM in iho lOuropean market bread- stulls, provisions, and cotton to the amount of over $l(),50U,00U,,000. The manufacturing State of New Hampshire has in her savings-banks $50,822,01)0, and the agricultural State of Michigan has farm mortgages to the amount of $129,220,55;5. The manufacturing State of New Jersey has pavings-banks deposits in the sum of $27,500,0(10, while the agricultural State of Wisconsin has farm mortgages to the amount of $175,000,000. Vermont, a manufacturing Slate, has in her savinijs-banks $15,587,000, while Ohio ha«» farm mort- gages to the amount of $350,000,000. — Wn.soN, Minnesota, Record, 3G19. lVli<>r<> is tlic iiionoy ?— .liiHwered. ,\«>. <17. — Sir, we have a .-system of banking in this country which we ca!' •' i'jnal-bank svHtem. Its capital is $578,462,7(55; its surplus fi; MIO; its undivided prolits are $71,450,107; making a total of . ,2. The general impression is that the^e banks are owned ami controlletroller's report showing the number of persons who own stock in these banks and who, of course, own the surplus fund and the undivided prolite. Outside of corporations there are 2.'53,i!s0; of corpo- 42 BRI ration", 7,492; total. 241,172. Of thi.s number ir,9,SV.) own $1,000 or less than $1,000 each. Thus? it can l)e .seen where the wealth of the country >ia3 ^one. Seventy-three thousand two hundred and live own over $1,000 and lesa than $5,000, and then the balance is divided between $.'),000 and $:30,000. —Senator Teller, Record, 2203. Whore is tin' iiioiiej ?— .Viiswero*!. Xo. <»S.— Our irovernmeut receijjts in l.%0 were $50,054,599. In 1887 they were $;;71,40.'!.277. Since I made these tipures I cut from a paper — the Boston Advertiser — this Btatement, whiih I desire to reatl : "The condition of the savinjrs-banks of New York i.s a standing refu- tation to the cry that the country ia heooming impovori.shed and the working p3ople growing poorer under tariff burdens. It i^ an admitted fact that the amounts on deposit with the savings-bank's of New York City are largely made up from the savings of the workin5-cla6se3 of people. '• Reports of the eleven banks of the city for January 1 show an in- <■rea.se of $12,000,000 in deposit over the amount of la^t year, while the whole number of banks in the State show an increase of $20,(100.00(1. These banks stte said to be in an unusually safe and prosperous condi- tion at the present time, owing to the stringent lawa regulating their business." That is in one State alone where the laboring people of this country have added to their wealth $2(),000,000 deposited in sAvings-banks alone, and nobody can tell how many millions they have added in other ways. TheSenator from Massachusetts tells me that the savings-banks of Massa- I'husetts hold over $300,000,000. The Senator from Connecticut the other day declared that in his State the savings-banks held more money owned by the laboring people than all the savings banks outside of the United S:ate8 — in the world. I have no doubt that he told the truth, and that he was informed whereof he spoke. — Senator Teller, Record, 2203. IVIioro iM tiK' moiK'.v •*— Viis%*«'r«Ml. A«. <»y. — Our industries are organized under the corporations laws of the State, by which the moileratesubscriptlons of individual stockholders are aggregated into the capital stock of the corporations, many of which have hundreds of stockholders. But we are a fairly prosperoits community, and the eleven millions and a lialf of deposits in our 8avings-l>anks prove that our workingmen Iiave their full share in our prosperity. Sir, I have listened with some impatience to the attacks which have repeatedly been made upon the State which I have the honor to represent in part here, but I know tliat she needs no defense from me or any one. Kor two hundred and fifty years iier career has been luminous in the pathway of history, and wouM grace and illustrate a ilistinct nationality "f a thon.'^and years. Within her limits are the historic spot:^ which the t ranger visit* to nmew his love of liberty, anil to awaken inspiring recol- ''•ctions of an heroic epoch. The sim})le nhaft which rises from Huiiker'a 1 leight tells its mute but glorious story of courage, devotion, and jvitriot- i^ra to every coming generation. The world knows by heart the namea f the patriots and statesmen which Massachusetts has given to the serv- iiv of their country and humanity. Her orators and men of letters grace the literature of our age, and her Hv.stem of education, her institutions of learning and charity, and her wise and liberal legislation are the pride of her children and the ex- ample of her bister States. And, sir, all that she is or has been is not 4.; r.Ki hers alone, and ehe does not eeek to appropriate it. It is an inseparable^ part of the common heritage and the common glory of the nation, and aa such ehculd be valued and cherished by every American. But, .'^ir, thi8 themo is too lofty to treat here and now, and I would not have vent- \ired to utter a v.ord relating to it were I a native son of Massachueetts but I owe something to the noble Commonwealth which has sheltef^d me from infancy and granted me favors and honors far beyond my deserts. [Applause.] — Davis, Massachusetts, Record, 3853. BritiMli policy in free-trade. \o. 70. — The nature of the competition on the part of Great Britain, against which our home productions and home labor have to contend, is oj)icial'y8ta.te«idcnt) stateiuont of suspeudcd Tactories. (See «0».) Butter and t'hoese— Xew l-2uKlaud vs. South. ]Vo. 72. — Again, of the seven hundred and seventy-seven million pounds of butter produced in the nation the Southern States furnished about one hundred and four million pounds from over three million cows, or about one-third of a pound to a cow, while the New England States furnished sixty-six million pounds from seven hundred and fifty thou- sand cows, or eighty -eight pounds per cow. The same discrepancy exists in regard to cheese, statistics showing Chat of the twenty-seven million pounds made in the country the Southern Statds furnished only four hundred and thirty-eight thousand pounds, while the output of the New England States was about five and a quarter million pounds, or about seven and a quarter pounds per cow, in addition to the butter product. Gallinger, Record, 3G91. Buy where you can buy the cheapest. iVo. 73. — Mr. Chairman, I never have been in favor of sending a man to the penitentiary for preaching free trade. I do not think that ii a good cause, but when a man like the chairman of the Ways and Means Com- mittee of this House stands up here and talks by the hour in favor of free trade, and then tells U3 that it is all for the benefit of the laboring men in this country, it makes me tired. [Laughter on the Republican side ] Here comes an American shoemaker, who says to the chairman of the Committee on AVays and Means : " Mr. Mills, I understand you are in favor of buying your shoes where you can buy them cheapest ? " " Oh, yes." " Why do you want to buy them where you can buy them cheap- est?" "Why, just to help you poor American shoemakers." [Laughter.] The next man is a spinner of yarn or a weaver of cloth, and he says : " Mr. Mills, you say we ought to have free trade ; that we oujht to be permitted to buy our clothes wherever we want to and wherever we can get them cheapest. You can bay vour clothing cheaper in England, I ba- lieve." "Oh, yes," says Mr. Mill^. "Won't you tell me," says the American clothman, " why you want to bay your clothing in England ? " "()i, yes; it is to help yoi pD:)r Aaadrioan clothiers," says Mr. Mills. [Renewed laughter] And here comes a man with swarihy brow and borny hand, an iron-worker, who says: " I understand, Mr. Mills, you want to buy your shovels and your hoes and all your ironware in England, where you can get them cheap." "Oh, yes," says ilr. Mills, "' but it ii all for the b3nefit of vou poor Am3rican iron-workers." Now, Mr. C;hairman,as I said before, while I do not believe in sending a man to the penitentiary for preaching free trade, yet when a man stands up here and talksfree trade, and says that hedjes itall f>r the benefit of American workingmen, I do think he ought to be sent down for six months twice a year for fifty years for hypocrisy. [Liughter on the Re- publican side.] [See also No. OJ-',*:-,.] — >L\soN, Record, 4S30. 0. Calhoun and Protection. No. 71. — It was then that Mr. Calhoun, the representative of South Carolina, appeared upon this floor as the earnest and able champion of the protective svstem. lie found the agricultural interests of his own 4o (JAN S'Jite suffering in competifion with India, and the fact was cited by a gjntlemaa speaking of that competition, that it wan iu vain for our country to successfully grow cotton and weave cotton fabrics in competi- tion witia India, where the raw material was 4 pence a pound and the wages of the laborer in weaving 4 pence a day. Against the destructive influence of competition with India, Mr. Cal- houn, standing in his place in the House of Representatives, advocated the imposition of a protective tariff; and a protective tariff was levied upon goods imported from the other side. One item in that sctiedule levied a duty of 3 cents a pound on cotton, which Wiis about 75 per cent, of the cost of its production by their Indian competitor. — BuTTERwoRTH, Record, 5392. Caii:i. 7.>. — ''Some of the specific counts in the indictment against Canada may be briefly mentioned. By an order of council a rebate of 18 cents per ton has been allowed on the tolls on grain passing through the Weliand and St. Lawrence canals, if shipment be made to Montreal. This is a premium offered for the diversion of American commerce from American seaports and transportation lines. This is an open infraction of article 27 of the treaty of Washington, and should be met by the im- mediate imposition of a tonnage tax on all Canadian vessels passing through the Sault Ste. Marie Canal. In like manner the international arrangements relating to the transit trade, which is of immense value to Canadian corporations, are violated in Manitoba, where the Dominion Government refuses to allow grain to be shipped in bond over American railroads to Montreal. For five years Canada has failed to place on the free-list various articles from which duty was entirely taken off in the United States when the tariff was revised ; and this neglect is in direct violation of an act passed by the Dominion Parliament in 1879 providing for reciprocity in this respect whenever the same articles should be ad- mitted from Canada without payment of duty. Other instances of bad faith are given in connection with a brief summary of the denial of com- mercial privileges to American fishermen in Canadian harbors. The conclusion of the whole matter is this : Canada has been allowed to impose upon the forbearance and good nature of the United States. The restraints of international law and the engagements of reciprocal com- pacts do not interfere with sharp practice by which temporary advan- tages may be secured for the commerce of the Dominion. The ambitious designs of Canada have been pursued in a particularly aggressive spirit since the present Administration has been in power in Washington. — Baker, New York, Record, 4480. CaiiatSa— Farm imports, 1880-'H7. \<>. 70. — The cheaper farm labor of Canada is even now largely able to overcome our taritf duties, which the Canadians pay on many products and then compete with us. For instance, the following imports for 1880 and 1887 will show the quantity and also the increase : Imports. Cattle bead... Horses do Bbeep _ do Barley bushels... Eggs dozens... Hay tuns... Potatoes bushels... Wool pounds... 4fJ 1887. 59,653 2.">,525 450,175 10.351,895 13,082.914 78,255 1,228,406 1,010,123 $1,080,645 3 4 tl>,594 1,215,437 6,170.660 1,930,844 789,129 339.163 357,142 1880. 7,126,436 7,662.008 600,056 In 1880 Canada sold into the United States nearly $14,000,000 in agri- cultural products, and in 1887 they had increased to $18,000,000. When the duty is removed let our farmers answer how much more these im- portations will cut the farmers' home market. — Hermann, Record, 4765. Canada, imports Tront. (See Xo. 335.) Canada— Imports to L'nited States— Fiirmcr's protection. Xo. 77. — Some sneeringly tell us that the farmer needn no protection, as his competitors are too faraway to become successful rivals. The follow- ing table disproves this assumption. In 1880 Canada alone, after pay- ing the tariff duties, sent into the United States agricultural products amounting to nearly $14,000,000, and in 1887 it was increased to nearly $18,000,000. Take off the duty which holds them in check and the prices for products of the farm would soon be forced down, running the loss to our farmers up to tens of millions of dollars. Statement showing the quantities and values of agricultural products imported into the United States from the Dominion of Canada during each of the years ending June 30, 1880 and 1887. Agricultural products. 1880. Quantity. Value. Quantity. Value, Animals : Cattle number... Horses do Sheep do Another 59,653 25,52.5 450,175 $l,f86,C45 H,430,594 1,215,437 114,837 (*) (*) (*) (*) Total animals I 5,847,513 j. Breadstuffs : B.irley bushels... Oats do Uvo do Wheat do All other breadstuCTs 10,3.51,895 8t5,2yw 10 cents per bushel 1"' cents per bushel 10 cents per bushel..... 30 cents per bushel 20 percent 1 cent per pound. 1 cent per pound.. 20 percent 2.5 per cent 20 per cent 2.5 percent 2.5 percent 25 percent, S20 per ton ; $20 per ton United States rate. 15 cents per bushel., 10 percent 10 to 20 percent , 10 percent 10 per cent 1 cent per pound Free. 1 cent per pound Free. 25 per cent | Free. Mills rate. Free. Free. Free. Free, Free, $40 per ton ' $40 per ton., $10 per ton $10 per ton. 25 per cent 20 per cent. 20 per cent I Free. 25 per cent I 20 per cent. ; 20 per cent, 1 Free. Free. Free. — OwioN, Record, .5551, Canada repudiates KuKliiiib i'roe trade. Xo. 81.— Why, even Canada, a dependency of free-trade England, is too wise to favor t'le false doctrines of her mother. and has rejected her teachings, and to-day is prosperous under a protective system which .she in the main borrowed I'rom us. I wish every citizen might read the budget speech of the minister of finance in Canada, and contrast it with that of my honored but misguided friend from Texas, On the 12th of May, 1887, in the Commons, Sir Charles Tiipper, in speaking of a pre- vious period in the history of Canada under free trade, said : iv 49 CAN "When the lan^,'niHhing in-lastries of Canada embarragsed the finance' minister of that day, when instead of lar^e surplus large. deficitB euc- ceeded year after year, the opposition urged upon that honorable gentle- man that he Hhould endeavor togive increased protection to the industries of Canada, which would prevent tnem from thus languishing and being destroved. We were not succesBful — I will not say in leading the hon- orable'genfleman himself to the conclusion that that would be a sound policy, for I have some reason to believe that he had many a misgiving on that question — but at all events we were not able to change the policy of the gentleman who then ruled the destinies of Canada. As is well known, that became the great issue at the subsequent general election of 1878, and the Conservative party being returned to power, pledged to promote and foster the industries of Canada as far as they were able, brou>4ht down a policy through the hands of my honored predecessor, Sir Leonard Tilley, * * * and I have no hesiiatlon in saying that the success of that policy thus propounded and matured from time to time has been such as to command the support and confidence of a large portion of tlie people of this country down to the present day." Under this system he proceeds to show that Canada has enjoyed a prosperity the like of which she never enjoyed before, and then, insteafl of recommending a reduction of duties, proposes the increase of duties upon certain foreign merchandise, to the end that Canadian industries mav be fostered thereby. — McKiNLEY, Record, 4757. Canada TarifTLiaws. Xo. 82. — Canada now collects duties upon a number of American- y)roduct8, while our tariff laws admit Canadian products of like kind free of duty. This she has been doing for many years, although by her tariff of 1878, chapter 83, section 9, it is provided : " That any or all of the following things — that is to say, animals of all kinds, green fruit, hay, bran, seeds of all kinds, vegetables, including po- tatoes or other roots, plants, trees, and shrubs, coal and coke, salt, hops, wheat, peas, and beans, barley, rye, oats, Imlian corn, buckwheat and all other grain, flour of wheat and flour of rye, Indian meal and oatmeal and flour, or meal of any otlier kind, butter, cheese, fish, salt or smoked ; lard,, tallow, meats, either salted or smoked, and lumber — may be imported into Canada free of duty, or at a less rate of duty than is provided by this act by proclamation of the governor-general in council, which may issue whenever it appears to his satisfaction that similar articles from Canada may be imported into the United States free of duty, or at a rate of duty not exceeding that payable on the same under such proclamation when'imported into Canada." Some of the articles above named are already on our free-list, and yet they are dutiable under Canadian laws, and no proclamation of reci- procity has yet been made by the governor-general • and it is proposed under this bill to increase the free-list with farm proQucta, upon which a high tariff is now levied by the Canadian law. llow long will the rate of agricultural wages be continued in tne United States under such legislation ? What sort of reciprocity is this ? This will be a direct benefit to the Canadian farmer and a most serious blow to the American. The whole bill has that tendency, and seems to be subject to the criticism that it was framed to benefit other countries rather than our own. —House Rep. 1496, 1-50 (Tarifl), p. 19. Canada vct;etublo*< and erain: Xo. s;i. — Cana'la sells o,OOo,() per yanf, while to-day you can buy the best Brussels from the finest looms, with the most delicate colors, the most original and charming designs, for $1.2'3 p-^r yard ; while for those who do not buy Brussels, but prefer the tasty ingrains, there has been the same advantage, and they buy to-day at 75 cents per yard what they paid $1.35 to $1.50 for but a few years ago. — Allen, Massachusetts, Record, 3842. Cement— Reduction in price. So, 81>. — The reduction in the price of foreign cement in the Ameri- can market, which fell from $4 in 1870, when American Portland began to be manufactured, to $1 85 and $2 in 1887, when American competition became stronger, is evidence of the fact that foreign makers with cheap labor are selling their goods here lower than at home to hold the mar- ket, and are driven even to undervaluation to maintain their hold in face of the American competition which, thougli but a small industr>', is slowly becoming established. 2so reduction of the duty can safely be made in this case without doing a great injury to a native industry, rep- resenting, in all its branches, many millions of dollars and some ten or twelve thousand laborers. — SowDKx, Pennsylvania, Record, 6323. Cereals. 1860--80. So. IMK— In 1800 the total production of cereals of all kinds in the United States was 1,'. 30,000,000 bushels; in 18S0, 2.700,('00,000 bushels. The Agricultural Report shows that the production in 18S7 amounted to 3,000,000,000 bushels of grain of various kinds. —Senator Telleb, Record, 2204. Cheap bn.vins not always best. (See No. 73.) Cheap, cheaper, vs. Ketter prices. So. iil. — Tlie Mills bill makes its chief assaults upon the farmer, and curiously enough scarcely one of its advocates has failed to pose as the champion of agriculture. It takes protection from his wools, his flax, and other proilucts he has to sell, puts them on the free-list, and makes dutiable all he has to buy. It cheapens what the former has to sell, but not what he has to buy. As in all history it is diilicult to tind tyranny, however brutal; nlavery, however wickerl ; crimes, however revolting; oppres.oion, however hide- ous, that did not exist ami were not maintained in the name of liberty ; so now agriculture is to be destroyed, niannfactures repressed, labor pauperized in the name of the public welfare. [Applause.] Manufacturers are told that the absence of protection will be more than compen<«ited by cheap labor and cheap raw material. Labor is told there will be an increased demand for it, cheaper food, cheaper clothing, and CHE cheaper shelter for it, and therefore marvelous advantages to it, even if Babjected to free and unrestricted competition with the ill-paid and de- graded labor of the Old World. The fartners are told tliat they will get more for their breadstuffs be- cause the markets of the world will be opened to them. —Ryan, Record, 4826. Cheap hiiyiuK uol our mission. Xo. «2.— I should like to know why, if the rule is that it is the func- tion of statesmanship to make it possible to sell where you can sell dearest and buy where you can buy cheapest, I would like to know at what point of time legislation has the right to interfere and say that the rroducer shall not hire his labor at as low a price as others are hiring it. conilemn without qualification the doctrine which the gentleman has announced. It is heterodox in the political church I belong to. I do not believe that it is the true mission of statesmanship in America to buy where we can buy cheapest and sell where we can sell dearest. I do not believe in that doctrine, because conditions that surround the laboring classes in this country are widely different from the conditions that sur- round the laboring men of other nations; and we should be false to the position we have taken if we did not draw a line of di.stinction between the men of other countries and the men of this country. The laboring men of America, whether farmers, miners, mechanics, or operators, are not to be judged by any standard of comparison brought across the water. (See also No. 73.) — Grosvenor, Record, 4G50. I'iioiip eoH'ee for five years antler tariff'. (See No. 1S8.) C heap Koods don't make people happy. >'o. 1)3. — The greatest advantage of protection, however, is to be seen in the condition of labor under its mantle. Wages are not only higher than in England, Ireland, Italy, Hungary, Poland, and other free-trade or semi-free-trade countries, but the condition of the laborer is infinitely more bearable and hopeful. He may live comfortably and respected, and he may educate his children and expect them to become worthy, useful, and leading citizens. They are eligible to all places under the Government, capable of any business enterprise, and m^y hold any social position. This state of things exists only where protection is general, an(f it is that only in the United States. Goods are cheap in Italy, in Hungary, and in Poland, but labor is cheaper, and the laborer cannot buy. The laboring man emigrates from free-trade countries to protective ones, not from protective countries to free-trade ones. —E. B. Taylor, Record, 6931. < heap RoodM— Free wool. \o. 1)1.— If this bill (the Mills bill) becomes a law, and such protection to wool as now exists is lost, it cannot be po.ssible that fine and medium wool-raising will continue in this country. It will cease to exist, and the vast capital employed in that business will be mostly lost. Foreign wool will come in at prices so low as to drive the sheep to the slaughter-house at any price of mutton. But, says the free-trader, " the consumer of woolen goods will buy cheaper." Ah I there's the ruls. Will he? When the wool syndicate of I^ndon, which controls all the wools of the world save that pnjduced in the United States, finds the markets of America in its hands, without competition, why should it sell at low i>rices? It will not, and wools and woolens will runge higher than now, and the '"science" of political economy will invent some new lie to cover the failure of its prophecy. — E. B. Taylor, Record, 6920. 5-1 CHE Cheap labor. ZVo. 95.— Cheap labor is a national curse. Nay, more, it is barbarism itself. Ill-paid labor means a degraded standard of life. Therefore, well- paid labor and its attendant consequences are to be desired and are not to be feared. (See also No. 132.) —From Wages Tract, Tariff, 11. Cheap laibor not our wish. Xo. 90. — The nation, largely through the efforts of American labor, repudiating the principle that you should buy or procure where you can buy or procure the cheapest, prohibited the introduction of cheap Chinese labor as destructive to the interests of our industrial classes and antagonistic to the genius of our civilization. The Chinese must go ; " cheap labor is not our shibboleth or belief " was the sentiment which crystallized into a statute, and has be- come a settled principle in our laws. Humanity has heart and soul in its movements, and the decree went forth that the cold and unfeeling rule of trade, buy labor or good.s where you can buy the cheapest, should be moderated by that more humane and Christian rule, "live and let live," Wealth under any conditions of government will not come to all, but comfortable living should be within the reach of each and the reward of reasonable and continued toil. — Seymour, Record, 4413, Cheap lauds make hi$;h wages. Ao. 97. — But, Mr, Chairman, brother Nelson says that the tariff has notiiing to do with high wages, but that cheap lands make high wages. How about Africa, South America, Texas, Canada, etc.? He wants wages dear and everything else cheap, including farm products or food, but how he is going to bring it about he does not explain. — Brumm, Record, 5220. Cheap Living. Xo. 98. — The cost of living is reduced to a common factor. The price fixes the condition. Barbarism is the condition. — Kd. ,Oi):),000. We paid in wages in 1850 a tritle over a million of dollars, but in 1880 the chemical industries of the United States paid nearly $12,000,000 to American labor entxaged in them. The material used iivthe chemical industries of the United States in 1850 was a tritie over eight millions, and in 1880 we -used seventy-seven millions of material in our chemical industries. We produced in 18")() a trifle over fourteen millions of chemical products, and in ISSO we pro- duced more than one hundred and seventy millions of products. And this industry embraced in this echedule the majority of this com- mittee propose to strike down, and the gentleman from Arkansas and others nave said that they do this because it is a tax on the consumers of these articles. I challenge them to name one single article in this schedule which cannot be purchased cheaper to-day by the consumer than before the tarifl' was imposed. I challenge them to name one sin- gle article in this schedule that is not now produced cheaper than before the tariff upon it was imposed. I claim there is not one. — BuKROws, of Michigan, Record, G3;34. Cliinosc labor is exclii4le.) Clay I*ipeN. >o. lOO. — Mr. Chairman, there were leas than $17,000 of duty col- lected on clay pipes last year, less than $48,000 worth of the articles having been imported. But that $4S,(t00 represented nearly the whole trade in clay pipes, and meant the taking of that much money from the pockets of the working people of this countrj'. More than 95 per cent, of the cost of clay pipes is paid for labor, and doubtlesfl for this reason the importations are estimated at OS i)er cent, of the whole consumption, leaving but 2 per cent, to be supplied by the domestic luarufacturer. In my district is a pipe factory capable of turning out .']0,0(0 pipes per day. It is operate on raw material, we shall live in the elysium of Bni«- piyin^ralltiurexpendvlurHS from the taxes on '' whisky, tobacco, and beer." though perhaps We may be driven back to )t:et '' ten millions of revenue from two cents a f>ound on coffee and half as much from tea." — Senator D.\wes, of Massachusetts, speech, December 13, ISSR. <°l<>v<>laii4l conipuri our couutry has ^iven it prosperity ; every era of tarilf for revenue han brou>:ht to it disaster. President Oleveland'H message is cited in this de- bate as worthy of our serious consideration, as a text from the political pospel from which to exhort. Let me cite you from the me6.sage8 of other Presidents. Likely they were not .,051,:;7.'; in iS.'iO, and to $21,S4S,(m.'', in ISo], with a strong probability, amounting almost to a certainty, of a still further reduction in the cur- rent year. * * * The policy which dictated a low rate of duties on foreign merchandise, it was thought by those who promoted and estab- lished it, would tend to benelit the farming population of this country by increasing the demand and raising the price of agricultural products in foreign markets. The foregoing facts, however, seem to show incon- testably that no such result has followed the adoption of this policy." Again do I quote from President Fillmore, from his message of Decem- ber (5, 1852: "Without repeating the arguments contained in my former meSvSage in favor of discriminating protective duties I deem it my duty to call your attention to one or two other considerations affecting this eubject. The first is the effect of large importations of foreign goods upon our currency. Most of the gold of California, as fast as it is coined, finds ita way directly to Europe in payment for goods purchased. In the second place, as our manufacturing establishments are broken down Ijy compe- tition with foreiguers, the capital invested in them is lost, thousands of honest and industrious citizens are thrown out of employment, and the farmer to that extent is deprived of a home market for tha sale of his surplus produce. In the third place, the destruction of our munufact- ures leaves the foreigner without competition in our market, and he consequently raises the price of the article sent here for sale, as is now seen in the increased cost of iron imported from England." Mr. Chairman, the inevitable result of a tariff for revenue followed. The condition of our country was most deplorable, sad beyond descrip- tion. If my friends on the other side take exceptions to my citations from President Fillmore, because he did not agree with them politically, nor believe in the doctrine that they now advocate, I beg them to re- member that I have also quoted Presidents Jackson and Polk to the like effect, and surely their testimony should be "gilt-edged " to my Bourbon friends of the Cleveland persuasion. But if they still demur, if they are not yet convinced of the error of their ways, I offer them the follow- ing, from one who moved for many years as a chieftain among the cap- tains in the camps of Democracy. They are also the words of a Presi- :uat:e? Nay, more ; there arethirty-seven Demo- crats sitting on that side of the Chamber. Will any one of them rise in his place and say the President of the United States is in his judgmenta protectionist? They dare not go to the country on any such issue. Tlipy are like the animal that is between the two bundles of hay. [ No one arose. — Ed.] — Senator Platt, Record, 1014. I'levoland and free Nnsar. \o. ll.'t. — President Cleveland does not suggest free sugar, and the Democratic Ways and Means Committee of this House do not suggest it. oh. no ! That would strike Democratic States. That might disturb the haimony of the solid South. They have their eyes on the wool industry of Ohio, the iron industry of Pennsylvania, the cottbn man'ifacturing in- dustry of New England, and the himb^r industry of the Pacific Slope, Michigan, and certain Northern States. In fact their notions of free tra]i. .It^UVrsoii. MudiNOii. 1|4»iiro«>. aii«l other 4>t'tli<> E'atiicr**. \o. 11<(. — There has been no Congressional t«rm 8ince \S(\G, when the Republican pa'ty has l)een in power in this House, that taxation has not been reduced, and that party to e necessary to meet the principal and inter- est UDon the public debt, pay the pensions provided for our soldiers, and the necessary and pn^per expenditures of tl:e (tovernment as provideelieving that such policy is for the best interest of our peo- ple. This policy has met with the approval of the Fathers of the Re-; public — of Washington, JetTerson, >iadison, Monroe, of Adams and G3 CLE JackBon, and of Webster and Clay ; of the mt-n who framed our C'jnsti- « in ion, as well as of men who have bince stood by and defended it. What- ever lan^ua^ethe DemmTatic party may use iu ita public utteranoes, wliether it be tarilf reform or tarilf for revenue only, the soiril and tend- ency of that P»rty upon that (juestion is one which shall pitnply raise revenue for the hupporl of the (iovorninent without takinir into con- titleraiion the ellect t)i»* saine may have upon our industries or our labor. ^ „ , „ „ — Brewer, Record, 3G04. 4lovelaiMl— Koiimrkable puMHU^c in nn'«*saKe. \o. 117. — Now listen to this n-nuirkable pa.s8aire : • lie receives at the de;k of his employer his wa;,'es, and i)erhap.s be- fore he reaches his home is obliged, in a purchase tor family use of an article which emliraces his own labor, to return in the payment of the increase in price which the tarifl" permita the hard earned compensation of mauv days of toil." I wish the President had told us what that article was, of family use, and the worker's own manufacture, which, as he went from his shop, where he had received his waj^es, compelled him to pay, in addition to what he would pav under free trade, 'many days' wa^'es." Mr. Presi- dent, if anybodv but the President of the United States halHiid*M wile luiKlit Kite liiiu iiif'oriiiatioii. ^o. Iiy. — The protectionist insists that whenever a duty is laid whicii j.rotecta the American manufacturer, competition among home praducers always has and always will bring down the price of the do- mestic article "approximately, at least," to use the President's language, to the price of the foreign article on which duty is laid, less the duty. The President ought to have known this, as it seems to me. Did he or his " better-half" ever buy calico. If he did he must know that while the tax, as he calls it, the duly, as the protectionist calls it, is cents per square yard ui)3n calico, he can buy the American article for less than that at retail stores here in the city of Washington. 04 CLO Has he ever heard of the manufacture of steel rails in this country and the price of steel rails here and abroad ? Does he know that the tiirilfupon steel rails is :>17 a ton, ami that tliey have been sold in this ■country as low as $2>..")(), and that if you deduct the tarill" duty of S17 from $J.S JO the price would be ^1 1.5U a ton, when steel rails can not be bought al)road for less than double that money? The statement is not true with regard to any single home-made article which has been so pro- tected by tiiritr duties that has been manufactured here to any consider- able extent, unless it be thft single article of sugar, as was suggested by the Senator from Maine [Mr. Fkye] the other day. Woolen clothing, which seems so much to trouble the Senator from North Carolina [Mr. Vance], he repeats over and over again to the Senate, bears a tax of ab'iutbU per cent. Not withstand in*' that duty, woolen clothing can be bought in this country, style, iiimlity, and durability considered, as cheaply as it can be bought in London. Even in the case of blankets — which seem to be the bugbear and nightmare of the free-trader — all medium quality blankets can be bought iu this country, notwithstanding the erroneous duty which it is said we lay upon the foreign article, as ckieaply as any where in the world. So with regard to cotton clothing. — Senator Platt, Record, 1014. C'lothOM— CoNt of a »>uit. \«. 1 19. — Here is another statement. Mr. Mills tells us of the cost of a suit of clothe-", and says: " Here is a coarse wool suit of clothes such as our working people wear in their daily toil in tne shop and lield. The whole cost is ^\'2. The labor coat \a'^'2. The tariff duty is 40 cents per pound and 35 per cent. ad valorem. As the weight of the suit is not given, we cannot get the exact tarilf, but the duty on woolen clothes imported last year averaged 54 per cent., and at that rate the tariff stands ^V) 4S to cover $L' of labor cost." I have, in re3p<^)nse to that statement, the exact cost of a suit of clothes made of identically the same material to which he refers, giving the cost of the material, which is as follows: 7 yards of material, at 7-') cents per yard $') 25 Trimming (which Mr. Mills omits) 1 50 Making (according to Mr. Mills) 2 00 Showing a total cost of S 75 In addition to thi.s must be added the l)Oxing,(lrayage, railroad freights, commissions, and the thousand and one addiiional expenses, w tiich re- stdt in leaving very little profit to the manufacturer and retail dealer. — Kknnkdv, lieioid, 4;!00. 4'l<>(!iiiiK, army. rlicnixT tliuii in I'.iiropp. \«. rj4K— * * * Tiie (clothing of the liiited States Army, ijuality considered. i.s cheaper than anv other army clothing in the world. (See report, ^^ M. (ient-ral, V. S. A.) duthiue— Kiiy where you ran buy <-lioii|»o»t. (Soe Xo. 73.) C'lotliinu. Clionp. Su. 121. — I/>'>k at any clothing-house advertisement, such as the fol- lowing : 500 Men's Heavy Winter Overcoats at $1 6o 501) Men's Heavy Winter Suits at 3 50 500 Men's Heavv Winter I'ants at 75 500 Boyn' Heavv Winter Oven-oats at 90 500 B^ys' Heavv Winter Suits at UO 500 Pairs Boys kneeP.\Tits .'^.i 10 CLO-COA Gentlemen, I have been lookinj; into the clothing business lately, and am prepared to show you sample suits at prices that will astonieh you when the style and quality are taken into consideration. You can really procure here in New York a serviceable suit of clothes for $o, and a very nood suit for $10, made of American goods— poods, too. that will wear and hold their color. I can alnio phow you blankets at S^2.10 per pair that lannot be beaten at 10^. (^--oO) a pair in England, and blankets at $o a pair that cannot be beaten in that happy free-trade country at £1 (?o) a piiir. In these days of cheap clothing and cheap blankets, that venerable chestnut of yours about the poor man's blanket haa lost its charrn, and the workiniiman gazes on shop windows tilled with excellent blankets, whiclj can be bought in New York as cheap and as good as in London. Not long ago, I was in a factory \«ere 2>,000 pairs of men's winter trousers, made of goods weighing fourteen ounces per yard, were being matle to be sold at the price $l.'>Oi>er pair. Strictly all-wool complete suits were held at Jo.oO per suit. Goo(i heavy full winter suits at $(j.5() and $7.50. Winter overcoats of satinet at $2 each. The prices of good and substan- tial garments, suflicient to supply a workingman for a year, were as fol- fows : A handsome suit for Sunday wear, $10 ; working suit, $7.00; extra pair of trousers, $2.00 ; overcoat, $5 ; total $24.00. A workingman earning two dollars a day can thus obtain his clothing for a year by the labor of two weeks. lie can do no better than this ii> England. I liave priced hundreds of workingmen's suits there, and found nothing tit to wear for less than $10 to $12. The commonest cor- duroy trousers cost, in England, $2.50, while machine-made boots and shoes are more expensive there than in this country. These facts in regard to our woolen industry refute effectually the gro- tesque statements made by the President, to the effoct that the masses of the people in this country are compelled to pay as a tax the duty, not only on imported goods, to the Government, but an equivalent amount, in in- creased cost, to the American manufacturer for goods made at home. — Selected. — Ed. Clot hiiiK. men's, inanuruotnro of. ]\o. lli'i. — In the manufacture of mens' clothing the country has in- vested a capital of eighty millions of dollars ; the value of materials used is one hundred and thirty-one millions, and the production aggregate* two hundred and nine millions. In this industry New England has a capital of eight millions, she invests over fifteen millions in materials,. and yields a product of about twenty- four millions of dollars. — G.\Li.iNGER, Record, 3690. C'onl— PoNNibilitioM of tlic South. \«. lill. — The entire coal area of (ireat Britain covers only 11,900 square miles, while West Virginia alone has 10,000; Kentucky, 1. '5,000 ;^ Alabama, 10,(>S0, ana Texas over :;o,( O'l pq-iare miles. Twelve years ago the total coal product of Alabama was lO.odO tons, while in 18.S5 2,225,000 tons were produced, and it is estimated in ten years her output will be 10,000,0 )0 tons. According to Poor's Ifailroad Manual the actual cost of railroads now in the South, and their eiiuipment, is over $1,300,000,000, against $. — Th»' clamor of the Southern people, the stern protests from the minewand the towns disconc('rte