Democratic Sentinel, Volume 15, Number 28, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 31 July 1891 — Lead Sme[?]ting and McKinleyism. [ARTICLE]

Lead Sme[?]ting and McKinleyism.

Mexican silver-lead ores were taxed by McKinley almost to a point of exclusion under the pretense of helping Colorado lead producers. Now the Mexican ores are being smelted in Mexico, largely by Amerh an capital driven out of the country by McKinley, and the product, in the shape of crude lead bars is being shipped direct y to England. Formerly the ore came, into this country free and gave employment to many laborers in our smelting establishments. Being used for smelting the “dry ore” of Colorado, the Mexican ore acted as a direct encouragement to the development of our numerous mines producing these •dry ores.” The owners of the:to-called

“carbon ore* mines In Colorado, however; had-the “pall” on the Republican tariff maker, and, since the carbon enfed did not need Mexican silver-lead ores to mix with their own in smelting, they demanded a high duty to practically exclude them. The result this protectionist jugglery is thus stated by the Now York Engineering and Mining Journal: “Everyone knows that the *dry ore’ minors have been paying for the exclusion of Mexican fluxing ores, and everyone knows that the only people who have gained are a few owners of high grade or ‘irony’ lead ores, and some of tho railroads. Our miners are worse off than before." In the meantime, what are the consumers paying for lead itself? The price of lead in the New York market is now 4.40 cents a pound, against 2.68 cents in London, the duty being 2 cents a pound. Early lasi year, berore McKinley got in his work, the of lead here was as low as 3.80 cents per pound: but as soon as his tariff bill passed the HOase “lead jumped to 4.4 ft ” These are figures which anybody can verify from market report) In the trade 'journals, however violently the protection organs may deny the existence of any such thing as “McKinley prices. * “I\ 1890," says the New York Fruit 'Trade Journal, “England paid the growers of the United States for products shipped to that country, $377,000,000. Apple shippers were no small factors in these figures, which are certainly large. Prominent English merchants have openly stated that no European country Is more entitled to reciprocity than England, and if the McKinley bill is not repealed in part in 1892 to favor their country, or concessions given to English exporters, Parliament will be appealed to to place duties on American products. Apples, grain, bacon, lard, cheese and other produce shippers would hardly be pleased with this, which they, hope will be avoided.”

“This country does not propose to lag behind," boasts the Dry Goode Chronicle, “and never has when her industries have been properly cared for. We have got all the elements within ourselves to compete with other nations. We make the best agricultural implements, the best cutlery and tools, the beit axes, the be3t steam engines, the sewing machines, the best sheetings and shirtings, and the best silks and gibbons np to a certain grade; the best carpets, the best blankets and the best watches.” And yet a country with all th'eSe “bests” needs a McKinley tariff wall tb protect it from less favored countries!